No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/06/1995 TENTATIVE AGENDA REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JUNE 6, 1995 LOCATION: City Hall, 129 Holmes Street South Mayor Gary Laurent presiding 1] Roll Call at 7 : 00 P.M. 2 ] Approval of Agenda 3 ] Recess for EDA Meeting 4] Re-convene 5] Liaison Reports from Councilmembers 6] Mayor' s Report 7] RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS 8] Approval of Consent Business - (All items listed with an asterisk are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. ) *9] Approval of Minutes of May 16, 1995 10] Communications: a] Mr. Norman Denstedt regarding signing waiver for P&V Addition improvements b] Auditor's report for 1994 11] 7 : 00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARINGS: a] Proposed assessments for the VIP Interceptor Extension CR-79 to the Westerly City limits, the Rahr Forcemain and the Rahr Malting Service Line, Projects 1992-9 , 1993-1 , and 1994-8 , Res. No. 4223 b] Appeal of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals denial of a request by Amoco oil Co. for a twenty foot variance to the setback for a new canopy at 804 East 1st, Res. CC-717 12 ] Recommendations from Boards and Commissions: *a] Final Plat of Arlington Ridge located at the west end of the existing 13th Avenue (aka Vierling Drive) , Res. 4199 TENTATIVE AGENDA June 6, 1995 Page -2- 13 ] Reports from Staff: *a] Application for 3 . 2 Beer License - Minnesota Valley Restoration Project *b] Application for Temporary 3 . 2 Beer License - St Mary's Church C] Amend City Code to Broaden List of Animals Allowed in the City - Ord. No. 416 *d] Supplemental No. 1 to Mn/DOT Agreement #72710 for the Bypass - Res. No. 4227 *e] Civic Center Project - Construction Testing Service Proposals *f] Civic Center Project - Proposals for Surveying Services *g] Civic Center Project - Vending Machine Proposals *h] Completion of Probationary Status - Shelly Baeyen *i] Bell on the Old City Hall *j ] Approve the Bills in the Amount of $1, 877 , 339 . 78 (of which $1, 500, 000. 00 is a funds transfer) *k] Tahpah Baseball Stadium Accessible Ramp 1] Ryan Wetland Replacement Plan - Res. No. 4229 *m] Authorize Purchase of Plow Wing and Sander *n] Jaspers Title Registration Proceeding *o] Shooting Range License *p] Burning Site License q] Civic Center Bid Package #4 - Masonry - memo on table r] Request for Trust Status of Former MWCC Property 14] Resolutions and Ordinances: *a] Res. No. 4222 - Amending Fee Schedule Relating to Recreation Non-Resident Fees - Prior Lake Residents *b] Res. No. 4224 - Revising City of Shakopee Standard Specs *c] Res. No. 4225 - Establishing A Fee for Connection to the VIP Sewer Interceptor *d] Res. No. 4226 - Designating Fuller Street as State Aid *e] Res. No. 4228 - Authorizing Execution of Contract with MnDOT for Signing at TH101 and TH169 15] Other Business: 16] Recess for an executive session to discuss matters permitted by the attorney-client privilege 17 ] Re-convene 18] Adjourn to Tuesday, June 20th, 1995 at 7 : 00 P.M. Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator REMINDER: June 19th, 5: 30 P.M. Committee of the Whole MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator RE: Non Agenda Informational Items DATE: June 2, 1995 1. Attached are the May 17, 1995 minutes of Community Development Commission. 2. Attached is correspondence from the Mayor to the Prior Lake Lions Club regarding contributions for the Civic Center. 3. Attached is the monthly project report for May from the Assistant City Administrator. 4. Attached is the June Business Update from City Hall. 5. Attached is the June calendar of upcoming meetings. 6. Attached are the June 8, 1995 agendas for the Board of Adjustment& Appeals and the Planning Commission. 7. Attached is correspondence from the Assistant City Administrator to the Minnesota Multiple Sclerosis Society regarding a contribution towards a ramp for handicapped accessibility at the grandstand. 8. Attached is correspondence from the Assistant City Administrator to the Minnetonka Youth Hockey Association regarding ice time for the upcoming 1995-96 season. 9. Attached is a memorandum from the City Clerk regarding 1994 Property Valuation Appeals. 10. Attached are the May 2, 1995 minutes of the Shakopee Coalition meeting. 11. Attached is a memorandum from the City Attorney regarding Lebens & Link v. City. 12. Attached is a memorandum from the City Attorney regarding real estate litigation. 13. Attached is a memorandum from the City Administrator regarding Local 320 Police Negotiations. 14. Attached is a memorandum from the Public Works Director regarding the River District Trunk Sewer Rehab Project Update. 15. Attached is a memorandum from the Public Works Director regarding the Mn DOT Construction Plans for the Shakopee Bypass. 16. Attached is correspondence from the Staff Engineer to Mr. Burl Zorn in response to his letter of May 12, 1995 regarding excessive speeds on Dakota Ave. 17. Attached is the monthly project report from the Engineering Department 18. Attached is the Police Newsletter for Council review. OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION Regular Session Shakopee,Minnesota May 17, 1995 MEMBERS PRESENT: Morke, Reinke, VanHorn, Miller, Amundson MEMBERS ABSENT: Albinson, Stafford, Dauenhauer, and Brandmire STAFF PRESENT: Paul Bilotta, Acting Planning Director Terrie A. Thurmer, Assistant City Planner I. ROLL CALL. Chrmn. VanHorn called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. The roll call was taken as noted above. II. APPROVAL OF THE APRIL 17, 1995, MEETING MINUTES. The minutes of the April 17, 1995, meeting were approved as presented. III. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA. The Acting Planning Director suggested that the Economic Development Update take place after the discussion with Lee Smith, Scott County Historical Society. The Commission agreed, and the agenda was approved as amended. IV. HISTORICAL PRESERVATION: Lee Smith, Scott County Historical Society. Lee Smith from the Scott County Historical Society was introduced to the Commission. He stated that Scott County has often neglected its history in the past, and that it's important that we pay attention to it. He added that the Historical Society is currently working on defining the role of the Scott County Historical Society, and has a task force working on defining both the long and the short range goals. Mr. Smith then provided a slide show regarding some of the more important historical issues within the county. Comm. Morke asked about the Strunk farm and the ferry that supposedly used to run there. Mr. Smith stated that the Historical Society is different from Murphy's Landing. The Historical Society is concerned with the whole valley, from its beginning to its current existence. He added that more research is needed, and that they can't do it all. Every building with the potential for historical significance needs to be researched and documented. They should not be demolished until this documentation is complete. Although they can't save every old building, they try to save some of the more unique ones. Mr. Smith also discussed possible themes that could be used in marketing the City. He said that the name "Shakopee" is Native American and could be a theme for research. Second is the use of the river. This is a river town, and the City could build on its ferry boat history. Third and fourth are farming and factories. These, too, could be used as historical themes. Official Proceedings of the Wednesday, April 19, 1995 Community Development Commission Page - 2 Comm. Miller said that Fort Snelling is the beginning of the proposed bike trail through the City. He asked whether the Historical Society is planning any signage along this trail to show the location of adjacent historical sites. Mr. Smith responded that a major portion of the St. Lawrence project is signage. Comm. Miller asked how the funding works for historic preservation. Mr. Smith responded that grant writing is about the only way right now to get funding. If grant requests are not funded, they may only be able to provide cosmetic improvements. He added that they do look at joint uses, for instance they rent the historic Evangelical Church in Belle Plaine for events (weddings, etc.) for $100.00. These additional funds also assist their organization. Comm. Miller questioned how they determine which structures to fund. Mr. Smith explained that there are certain criteria which determine what requests should be funded. He stated that both the church in Belle Plaine and the Stiles house in St. Lawrence had a high amount of local interest, and this also helped get these projects funded. Comm. Amundson asked Mr. Smith if he was aware of what is being proposed on Blocks 3 and 4 in downtown Shakopee. He responded that he was. Comm. Amundson then asked if he thought there was anything of historical significance within these structures. Mr. Smith responded, "Probably". He explained that some of the buildings may be worth saving for adaptive uses. A discussion on possible adaptive uses took place. Comm. Morke asked if the buildings would need to be restored in their original state. Mr. Smith responded that the finished structure should still be able to tell its story, but the amount it is restored to its original state depends upon how much of a purist you want to be. Modifications, tastefully and sensitively done, are acceptable. He added that State guidelines are available, too. The Acting Planning Director asked what steps need to be taken to determine what amount of historical significance the City has. Mr. Smith responded that the first step would be to consult the State Preservation Office, Mr. Charlie Smith, the State Architect. Discussion on getting a structure on the Historical Register took place. Comm. VanHorn asked if it was true that you cannot register a house if it has been moved to a new site. Mr. Smith responded that he thought that it may jeopardize the part of the research related to the site itself, but he really did not know the answer to this. Official Proceedings of the Wednesday, April 19, 1995 Community Development Commission Page - 3 The Commission thanked Mr. Smith for his time and expressed their appreciation. Mr. Smith provided brochures to the Commissioners regarding membership into the Scott County Historical Society. V. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT UPDATE (VERBAL). A. Civic Center. The Acting Planning Director stated that staff expects the City to break ground for the Civic Center within the next four weeks. He added that the opening date is November 1st for the proposed ice facility, but the remaining portion of the site will not be open until a later date. B. Presentation to Visitor's Bureau. The Acting Planning Director stated that on the previous Tuesday, he had provided a presentation to the City's Convention and Visitor's Bureau on the downtown. He added that they are concerned with marketing and tourism. The Acting Planning Director stated that marketing and tourism ideas for the city include the DNR Trail and a possible riverboat landing downtown. C. Marketing and Tourism. Comm. Morke stated that the City needs to do a better job of letting people know about the City. He stated that at the last meeting of the Economic Development Authority (EDA) discussion on the possibility of developing additional methods of marketing Shakopee. He added that it is unfair to assume that Valley Green will be doing all the marketing for the City. Comm. VanHorn asked for ideas to bring back to the next meeting of the EDA. Comm. Miller suggested that the City should focus on areas that don't already have special interest groups, and to possibly expand into these other areas at a later date. Comm. Reinke stated that the "AAA" magazine still does not have an ad for Shakopee in it. He added that he asked why a few years ago and was informed that the Bureau of Tourism does the advertising. He added that Shakopee is a Native American community, and suggested that the City ask the Dakota Community to help us promote our community. Comm. Morke stated that the City of Duluth publishes two brochures; one markets the benefits of bringing up a family there, and the other focuses on businesses. He commented on how positively their City Council works with the City's businesses. Chrmn. VanHorn suggested having an Economic Development booth in conjunction with the Bureau of Tourism to get across that, if they move their businesses and families here, it could be good. Official Proceedings of the Wednesday, April 19, 1995 Community Development Commission Page- 4 VI. BUDGET ISSUES. A. Comm. VanHorn asked where the CDC fits in on the budget. The Acting Planning Director responded that the CDC is a subset of the Planning Department. Discussion on the City's budget took place. VII. SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS. A. Scott County Economic Development Coalition. The Acting Planning director responded that the Scott County Economic Development Coalition met that morning. He added that the City of Shakopee is faring the best in Building Permits with $4.7 million in value for the St. Francis Medical Campus. He added that the new County Administrator for Scott County was at the meeting, and that he wants to work with the Cities in a cooperative fashion. Discussion on keeping the courthouse downtown and suggestions for handling its expansion took place. The CDC directed staff to pursue having a County representative at the next meeting to discuss the courthouse expansion. VIII. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS. A. Business Update from City Hall (April). B. April 1995 Building Activity Report. C. Warning Regarding Termination of VanPool (on table). Comm. Miller brought the attention of the Commissioners to a Non-Agenda Informational Item on the table regarding a copy of a letter that was to be mailed to the riders of one of the City's Commuter VanPools. The purpose of the letter was to inform the riders that their VanPool route is in jeopardy of being terminated due to repeated violations of Shakopee Area Transit (SAT) Policies by the driver. Comm. Miller asked if the CDC would meet again prior to beginning the termination process. The Assistant City Planner responded in the affirmative. Comm. Reinke stated that in the past he has commented to the driver that he may want to get some one else to do his reports. He added that it is difficult to get drivers, and that he used to be a driver, but paid part of another rider's fare in exchange for that person preparing the VanPool Report every month. Comm. Reinke added that he thought there was another problem though. He said that this driver is a former employee of the City of Shakopee, and that there are some personality problems between the driver and some of the City staff. He stated that, if a request is made from staff and this driver does not comply with it, there is retaliation from the City. He also stated that he did not see the VanPool or Dial-a-Ride Reports on the table. He added that he asked for the lists of the VanPool riders to be mailed to every driver a long time ago and they have never been provided. Official Proceedings of the Wednesday, April 19, 1995 Community Development Commission Page - 5 The Acting Planning Director responded by stating that, if there is any sort of retaliation going on, this should be immediately reported to the individual's department head or the City Administrator. He added that this type of prejudicial behavior, if substantiated, will not be tolerated. He also added that it is the policy of the CDC for the VanPool and Dial-A-Ride Monthly reports to be provided on a bi-monthly basis only, which is why it was not on this month's agenda. He also stated that City staff is just trying to follow the policies adopted by the City Council regarding VanPools. He added that lists of the riders of the VanPools have previously been provided. However, if information is not being provided in a timely manner, it should be reported so that the appropriate measures can be taken. Comm. Reinke responded that the biggest problem is between Mr. Spurrier (the VanPool Driver) and Mr. Dennis Kraft, the City Administrator. He added that Mr. Spurrier has already asked if another rider could take over the van due to his conflicts with the City. Comm. Amundson stated that she did not see what the issues between Mr. Spurrier and the City have to do with Mr. Spurrier's inability to comply with City policies. She added that in the banking business, they would have repossessed by now. If a relationship issue is going on, it should have nothing to do with the VanPool. Comm. Morke asked if the three NSF (non-sufficient funds) checks that were listed in the memo from the Accountant / Research Assistant were run through the bank twice or only once. The Assistant City Planner responded that the Finance Department handles NSF checks, and that she was unaware of how many times the NSF checks were presented to the bank. Comm. Miller stated that this problem has escalated from just a late reporting issue. He added that he felt that City staff has been "extremely lenient" with this VanPool driver, and reinforced to the Commission that there are policies in place that must be followed. He stated that if the Commission does not want to follow their policies, they would need to be formally amended. He encouraged staff to continue to follow the VanPool policies currently in place. IX. OTHER BUSINESS. A. Next Meeting - June 21, 1995. X. ADJOURNMENT. A. The meeting adjourned at approximately 7:07 p.m. (TERRIE\ENERGY\CDCMINUMA.Y95) pwtg SHAKOPEE May 30, 1995 Prior Lake Lions Club c/o David Velishek Gambling Committee Chairperson 7540 Credit River Blvd. Prior Lake, MN 55372 Dear Mr. Velishek: The City of Shakopee has recently embarked on an exciting project that will serve to enhance recreational opportunities for both youth and adults in the Shakopee service area. Earlier this week, groundbreaking ceremonies were held for the Shakopee Civic Center Project. The project will include the construction of a facility with the following components: ice arena, gymnasium, walking track, exercise area and multi-purpose meeting rooms. The Shakopee City Council has allocated a significant amount of funding from the tax increment trust fund balance to complete this project. However, there are a variety of facility equipment needs that will require additional funding. An opportunity exists for all service organizations and associations to contribute proceeds to make this facility all that it can be. Attached is a list of equipment that will be needed to offer a full range of recreational opportunities. I would request that your organization consider making a contribution to sponsor one or more of the items as listed. In return, your organization will be recognized as a contributor to the facility. Organizations selecting to contribute at this time will be recognized by having their name engraved in a plaque that will be permanently displayed in the facility. Additionally, your organization will become a part of a project that will enhance the quality of life for all residents in the Shakopee service area. Any contribution that your organization can offer will be used as directed by your organization. Please consider how your organization might be able to enhance this project. If your organization can see fit to become involved and/or would like additional information, please feel free to call Barry Stock at 445-3650. Any assistance that you can offer would be greatly appreciated. Sincerel , Gary L. u n Mayor C0'\'1.\TUNM'PR1DE SINCE 1557 i_"i ivil llC 5 L'«'I�U11tb -11dkor C,\111111CAUt,I Monthly Project Report - Submitted by Barry Stock May 31, 1995 Project Start Complete Status Comments 1. Clinic RFP's ? ? 0% Intern Project 2 . AWAIR Program ? ? 0% Intern Project 3 . Perform Employee 11/1 6/1 50% Evaluations 4 . City Residents Guide 12/15 7/1 40% 5. Complete Contract Negotiations a. Sergeants 11/9 ? 0% b. Police 2/8 ? 50% c. City Hall 12/9 ? 80% 6. Develop Employee Training 2/1 3/15 100% Program (Computers) 7 . Community Center Process 1993 1995 Bldg. Issues 25% Staffing Plan 25% Arena Scheduling 25% Equip. Needs/Purchases l0% User Fee Policies 25% Facility Schedule 25% Family Net Office 100% Vending Proposals 100% Arena Ad Sales 25% ISD 720 Facility Use Agreement 50% 8 . Blocks 3 and 4 3/15 6/15 Property and Fixture Appraisals 80% Acquisition/Relocation Proposals 50% 9. City Newsletter 6/5 6/25 0% Issue #2 10. Neighborhood Meeting 1/17 5/1 25% Concept 11. Admin. Policy RE: Common 12/21 4/15 10% Sewer/Water Line for Condo Units 12 . Non-Resident Fee Issues 4/1 6/1 100% 13 . 1995 Pool Maint. Issues 4/1 6/1 100% 14 . Planning Dept. Staffing 4/24 5/24 100% Interns 15. TIF Plan Amendments 6/1 8/5 10% _ LI BUSINESS UPDATE FROM CITY HALL Volume 9 No. 6 Dear Chamber Member: June 1, 1995 Administration Engineering/Public Works On May 30, 1995 the Shakopee City Council At their May 16th meeting City Council authorized initiated discussion on the 1996 Budget. City staff to advertise for bids for the construction of Council directed staff to begin the 1996 budgeting utilities and streets in the P & V Addition which process. Staff was directed to prepare a draft 1996 was annexed in 1994. Staff anticipates construction Budget that will result in no property tax increases. to begin around the first part of July. In complying with this request the staff will develop scenarios for possible structural reorganization of Construction is underway on the undergrounding of City departments. Over the course of the next three overhead electric, telephone, and cable T.V. in the months various City departments will be preparing downtown alleys. their budgets for discussion at subsequent Committee of the Whole meetings. The construction of Sarazin St. and Roundhouse Street between 4th Ave. and C.R. 16 is progressing City Clerk with approximately 80% of the utility work completed. At their regular meeting on May 16th, City Council The contractor on the Upper Valley Drainage approved liquor licenses for Babe's Place Inc., 124 Project has resumed work and will be correcting South Holmes Street (formerly Jerry's Bar). erosion problems throughout the project and repairing the bike trail. Community Development The City will be opening bids for the construction On May 16, 1995 the Shakopee Economic of sanitary sewer and watermain along C.R. 16 on Development Authority approved utilizing the June 1, 1995. services of Patchin Appraisers to complete fixture appraisals on the properties located within Blocks 3 Staff is presently working on the design of Fuller St. & 4, Downtown Shakopee. Fixture appraisals will from 10th Ave. to the South past the new Civic be needed if the City ultimately selects to proceed Center site and Vierling Drive between C.R. 79 & with property acquisition. The property and fixture 77. appraisals are expected to be complete within the next 30 day period. In a related matter, City Council directed staff to obtain proposals for consultant services for possible land acquisition and relocation assistance. Park & Recreation On May 16, 1995 the Shakopee City Council Other Business: approved funding to add a handicapped accessible ramp onto the grandstand at Tahpah Park. The The Planning Commission expressed appreciation project is expected to be complete by the end of to the assistance provided by Lindberg Ekola, and wished him luck in his new position in Madison, summer. WI. On May 22, 1995 the ground breaking ceremony for the Shakopee Civic Center Project was held. Site Paul or. has been appointed Acting Planning Director. grading is expected to commence on May 31 st. Several bid packages for construction have been awarded including the following: 1. Precast Police Concrete, 2. Masonry, 3. Structural Steel, and 4. Site Work. Thus far, all bids received and approved Officers are visiting local liquor establishments have been under the Construction Manager's project each evening as a matter of routine, and the cost estimate. response by both guests and property owners has been positive. In the past, 1st Avenue was a high Over the course of the next month, staff will be traffic area traveled often by police. The mini developing a staffing plan, facility operating plan bypass created a well-defined bar area, but we and fee schedule. realized the bypass also took us out of the loop, and we started losing touch with the downtown The Shakopee Hockey Association has offered to establishments. The purpose of"bar checks" is to purchase a new Zamboni for the Civic Center ensure a safe environment for citizens to seek Project. The estimated value of this contribution is entertainment, and to provide bar owners a safe $50,000. environment to do business. Bar checks also give us higher visibility during the night hours. Planning Another session of police academy has been completed. For the first time, participant were BOAA Meeting 05-04-95 introduced to F.A.T.S. computerized firearms Amoco Oil Co. Var.to frt yd setback Denied training, and as usual, they toured the police Fischer Agg. Amendment to CUP Cont. department, observed DWI testing and procedures, PC Meeting 05-04-95 and observed a presentation by the Special Incident Response Team. Shakopee Valley Utility Easement Vacation Rec. Printing Approval Canterbury Park PUD Rec. Approval Market Place 2nd Prel. Plat Rec. Approval 1995 June 1995 SUNDAY MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY SATURDAY 1 2 3 4 4:30 P.M. SPUC 5 7:00 P.M. City 6 7 7:30 P.M. Planning 8 9 10 Council Commission 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 5:30 P.M. 19 7:00 P.M. City 20 5:30 P.M. 21 22 23 24 Committee of the Council Community Whole Development Commission 25 7:00 P.M. Park and 26 27 28 29 30 Recreation s - TENTATIVE AGENDA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS Regular Session Shakopee, MN June 8, 1995 Chairperson William Mars Presiding 1. Roll Call at 7:30 P.M. 2. Approval of Agenda 3. Approval of May 4, 1995, Meeting Minutes 4. Recognition by Board of Adjustments and Appeals of Interested Citizens. 5. 7:30 P.M. Public Hearing: Continued from May 4, 1995, meeting. To consider an amendment to a Conditional Use Permit for Fischer Aggregates. Applicant: Fischer Aggregates Action: Resolution No. PC-713 6. 7:35 P.M. Public Hearing: To consider an application for a Conditional Use Permit for Universal Forest Products to allow the manufacturing of wooden I joists within one of their existing buildings, located at 1570 East Highway 101. Applicant: Universal Forest Products Action: Resolution No. PC-720 7. 7:40 P.M. Public Hearing: To review the application from Dangerfield's Restaurant for a 3 foot variance from the 20-foot sign height limitation at 1583 First Avenue. Applicant: Dangerfield's Restaurant Action: Resolution No. PV-719 8. 7:45 P.M. Public Hearing: To review the application from Urban and Geraldine Klein for a four foot variance to the ten foot side yard setback requirement at 605 East 3rd Avenue and located within the R-2 Zone. Applicant: Urban &Geraldine Klein Action: Resolution No. PV-718 9. Other Business a. b. 10. Adjourn Paul Bilotta Acting Planning Director/Economic Development Coordinator Note to the B.O.A.A.Members: 1. If you have any questions or need additional information on any of the above items,please call Terrie or Shelly on the Monday or Tuesday prior to the Meeting. 2. If you are unable to attend the meeting,please call the Planning Department prior to the meeting. 6:\plan\pc_boaa\1995\pc0608`agenda.boa) TENTATIVE AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Session Shakopee, MN June 8, 1995 Chairperson Terry Joos Presiding 1. Roll Call at 7:30 P.M. 2. Approval of Agenda 3. Approval of the May 4, 1995, Meeting Minutes 4. Recognition by Planning Commission of Interested Citizens. 5. Approval of Consent Agenda - (All items listed with an asterisk (*) are considered to be routine by the Planning Commission and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Commissioner so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda). 6. Preliminary Plat: To consider the preliminary plat of Market Place 2nd Addition, located west of Market Street and North of Fifth Avenue. (Public hearing closed at the May 4, 1995, meeting.) Applicant: Klingelhutz Development Company 7. 7:30 P.M. Public Hearing: To consider the Preliminary Plat for Meadows North, located east of CR 77, north and west of the proposed Fuller Street Extension. Applicant: Gold Nugget Development, Inc. 8. 7:40 P.M. Public Hearing: To consider an application for an amendment of the Public Mini-Storage Planned Unit Development for an automobile repair shop and an open sales lot for North Imports, located at 1885 3rd Avenue West. Applicant: North Imports *9. 7:35 P.M. Public Hearing/Continued: To consider amendments to the new Zoning Ordinance text (Ordinance No. 377) which was adopted on June 7, 1994. Applicant: City of Shakopee 10. 7:45 P.M. Public Hearing: To consider an ordinance amending City Code Chapter 12, Subdivision Regulations (Platting), by repealing Sec. 12.08, Minor Subdivision Process, and adopting one new section. Applicant: City of Shakopee *11. Final Plat: To consider the final plat of Meadows West 2nd Addition, located between CR 79 and CR 77, south of the upper valley drainage ditch. Applicant: Gold Nugget Development, Inc. 12. PUD Amendment: Westridge Lake Estates Applicant: Westridge Bay Co./Gonyea Land Co. 13. Concept Review: To consider the concept review for Pinewood Estates Planned Unit Development. Applicant: Dale Dahlke 14. Other Business a. R-2 Zoning Issues b. Private Lodges and Clubs Issues 15. Adjourn Paul Bilotta Acting Planning Director/Economic Development Coordinator Note to Planning Commission Members: 1. If you have any questions or need additional information on any of the above items, please call Terrie or Shelly on the Mondav or Tuesday prior to the Meeting. 2. If you are unable to attend the meeting, please call the Planning Department prior to the meeting. 0:\plan\pc_boaa\1995\pco608`agenda.pc) SHAKOPEE May 12, 1995 Minnesota Multiple Sclerosis Society c/o Lee Hoffman, Gambling Manager 2344 Nicolett Avenue, Suite 280 Minneapolis, MN 55404-3381 Dear Mr. Hoffman: Currently the Minnesota Multiple Sclerosis Society operates a pulltab operation within the Shakopee City limits. The Shakopee City Ordinance with respect to pulltab operations specifies that 75% of the pulltab revenues be spent within the Shakopee service area. It is my understanding that one of the missions of the MS Society is to make buildings and facilities handicapped accessible. The City of Shakopee is currently in the process of designing a handicapped accessible ramp for our outdoor stadium grandstand (See attached illustration). The grandstand has a seating capacity of nearly 500 and floor area for wheelchairs. Unfortunately, at this time the grandstand is not accessible. The estimated cost to make the grandstand accessible with the ramp is approximately $6,000.00. On behalf of the City of Shakopee, I would like to request that the MS Society consider making a contribution to the City of Shakopee to be used for the grandstand improvement outlined herein. Your consideration of this request would be greatly appreciated. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding this request. Sincerely, Ba A. Stock Assistant City Administrator/ Community Services Director Enclosure BAS/tiv C0\L\4LL-N11Y PRIDE SINCE 1S;7 129 Hc!mv}S:rcCf ',. -ZI ]2- F, 2 1 SHAKOPEE May 12, 1995 Mr. Ron Allar, Ice Coordinator Minnetonka Youth Hockey Association 5180 St. Albens Bay Road Greenwood, MN 55331 Dear Ron: I received your correspondence requesting ice time for the upcoming 1995-96 season. I have been receiving inquiries such as yours for over the past month. We intend to sell ice time based on a first come first serve basis. The following is the current list of priority scheduling: 1. Shakopee Recreation Skating Programs 2. Shakopee High School Girls Hockey Program 3. Shakopee High School Boys Hockey Program 4. Shakopee/Prior Lake Hockey Association 5. Chaska Figure Skating Club 6. Chaska/Chanhassen Hockey Association 7. New Prague Hockey Association 8. Minnetonka Youth Hockey Association From the list, you can see that there is plenty of demand for ice time for our facility. However, I am confident that we will be able to accommodate some of your needs. I will be in contact with you later this year when we begin to schedule ice time for our facility. At this time, we expect that the prime time rental rate will be between $100-$110 per hour. If you have any questions in the interim, please feel free to call me at 445-3650. Sincerely, Yry toc k Assistant City Administrator BAS/tiv COMMLNTTY PRIDE SINCE-18-57 129 Holmes Street South Shakopce,%Iinnc,ota __ ;1)-1,7)1 FAX 612-44 -6:1s �q MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: 1994 Property Valuation Appeals DATE: May 25, 1995 The City has received notification from Bob Schmitt, Deputy County Assessor, of the property owners who are appealing their 1994 market value for pay 1995 real estate taxes, thus far. They are as follows: Reed Peterson, Northstar Auto Auction, Marquette Bank National Association, Shakopee Medical Center, Norwest Properties, 200 Levee Drive Association, PM Realty Advisors, Happy Chef, Calvin Hotzler, Conklin Company, Progress Valley Park, and George Realander. Mr. Schmitt said that 14 properties appealed last year and all but two were dismissed or stipulated. He expects that some of this years appeals will probably be dismissed or an agreement reached also. OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE COALITION May 2 , 1995 The meeting was called to order at 4: 30 p.m. by Brian Norris. Members present: Judson Kenyon, CAP; DeDee Ordemann, American Red Cross; Brian Norris, Citizens State Bank; Connie Weber, Human Services; Barb Hegfors, Scott County Library System; Barry Stock, City of Shakopee; Claude Kolb, Lions/Knights of Columbus; Mike Beard, City Council; and Patrick Ottman, SACS. CAP AGENCY (Judson Kenyon) Annual Scouting Drive held received 10, 000 lbs. of food. Christmas in May Project is about to start of May 20, 1995. Will be doing six homes. Will have a picnic after at Valley Fair. SACS SCHOOL (Patrick Ottman) Can Drive - SACS will pickup your aluminum cans - call Pete Shutrop at 445-1373 . D.A.R.E. - Fifth graders involved in program will graduate on May 18th. City Clean-up Day - May 6th. AMERICAN RED CROSS (DeDee Ordemann) Contributions for disaster relief fund in memory of victims of the Oklahoma City explosion can be made at Scott County Branch - American Red Cross, 222 Lewis St. , Shakopee, MN 55379 . Bloodmobile - St. Mary's on Monday, May 8. Call 445-0155 for an appointment. Shakopee Bike Rally - Saturday, June 3rd lla.m. - 2 : OOp.m. Bike Safety and Registration, helmets are available. HUMAN SERVICES - (Eileen Moran) Presented information on County Re-Design Project. New family - net concept would assist families to be better served through a family - net coordinator. Additional work will be done before the concept is completed. CITY OF SHAKOPEE - (Barry Stock) Downtown alley project started. Will be putting all utilities underground. Community Center is progressing. Community Clean-up day this weekend. Derby Days (June 3 , 4, and 5) is going to have a parade; starting at the Courthouse and going through downtown. Taste of Shakopee, Street Dance, 5K run and water fight. Alot of new activities. LIBRARY - (Barb Hegfors) Summer reading program is coming up. Putting together a collection of year books. Check with library if you have one. CITY COUNCIL - (Mike Beard) Optimist club is forming in Shakopee. Fishing, biking and other youth activities. KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS - (Claude Kolb) Had tootsie roll sale. Next meeting of the Shakopee Coalition is scheduled for June 6, 1995 in the Citizens State Bank Building Community Room at 4 : 30p.m. Respectfully Submitted Brian M. Norris MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Karen Marty, City Attorney DATE: May 26, 1995 RE: Lebens & Link v. City On May 25, 1995, the City received a "Motion for New Trial" filed by Messrs. Lebens and Link. They are requesting the Court to reconsider two issues: (1) the impact of certain statutes on their claims, and (2) whether Mr. Lebens has standing. On May 26, 195, Mr. Link delivered a Notice setting June 14 , 1995 as the date for argument of this motion. I intend to argue against their motion on that date. This is FYI . Signed Karen Mar. y, City Attorney cc: Dennis Kraft Barry Stock Judy Cox NON-AGENDA INFORMATIONAL ITEM M E M O R A N D U M TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Karen Marty, City Attorney DATE : May 31, 1995 RE : Real Estate Litigation For your information, in the past two weeks we have received three different lawsuits to register or quiet title to property. These are for the Toro Property; parts of Lots 6, 7, and 8 in Block 31; and portions of the Milwaukee Manor plat . Staff still is researching our interest in the first two; a memo has been placed on the Council agenda to respond to the third. As a general rule, the City is named for many property registration and quiet title actions . We usually have easements, development agreements, or right-of-way within or abutting the property in question. Staff checks the property, and determines what interests we have. We then either file a formal answer to the lawsuit, enter into a stipulation approving the title so long as it is subject to our interests, or we simply get proof from opposing counsel that our interests will be identified in the final court documents and left alone . If you have any questions about this, please let me know. Signed Karen Marty, My,/Attorney [22CCL] CC : Dennis Kraft 6 MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor and Council FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator RE: Local 320 Police Negotiations DATE: June 1, 1995 The City's negotiating team and the Teamsters Local 320 unit representing police officers have been unable to arrive at a mutually satisfactory position on a contract for 1995. Therefore the next step in the process is to go into mediation. Teamsters 320 Business Agent will file for mediation and I would anticipate that we will be mediating in the next two to three months, depending upon the schedule of the mediators. I will keep the Council apprised of developments on this process. MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director ' SUBJECT: River District Trunk Sewer Rehabilitation Project Update DATE: June 6, 1995 NON-AGENDA INFORMATIONAL ITEM: The report for the River District Trunk Sewer Rehabilitation has been completed by Short-Elliott-Hendrickson (SEH) on May 5, 1995. In this report the inflow infiltration problems were identified on the River District Trunk Sewer line from approximately the Rahr Malting site to L-16 lift station for the Metropolitan Council Wastewater Services (MCWS). The major areas identified of inflow/infiltration (I/I) were the manhole lids, cone section areas and service pipe were below the 1993 high flood water elevation. On May 25, 1995, Bruce Loney and Dan Boxrud of SEH met with MCWS staff to discuss the report. The MCWS staff agrees with the report and has requested that the City move forward on implementing a project yet this year. Initially the City had budgeted $300,000.00 for the River District Trunk Sewer repairs this year to meet the Metrpolitan Council goals and objectives. At this time staff is projecting the cost of improvements will be less than $100,000.00 in order to correct the identified I/I problem areas on the River District Trunk Sewer line. Staff will be completing the feasibility report as soon as possible and asking Council for project approval to be completed this year. By completing the project yet this year, MCWS will remove all limitations on sewer permits to the River District Trunk Sewer line. BL/pmp RIVER MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director +;i Y' SUBJECT: Mn/DOT Construction Plans for the Shakopee Bypass from T.H. 169 to Point 4 Miles West of CSAH 17 DATE: June 6, 1995 NON AGENDA INFORMATIONAL ITEM: Mn/DOT engineers have indicated to staff that the June 23, 1995 bid letting is on schedule for the Shakopee Bypass 2nd segment and the Chaska Interceptor 2nd segment in the above described location. Per Timothy Johnson of Mn/DOT,the City of Shakopee will need to approve the plans by resolution in order for Mn/DOT to have the bid letting. The resolution and associated documents will not be ready for the June 6, 1995 Council meeting but will be ready hopefully for the June 20, 1995 meeting. Mr. Johnson also indicated that Mn/DOT has moved the grading and paving schedule for the Shakopee Bypass up in order that it may possibly have the Shakopee Bypass paved by November, 1996. This would be contingent upon acceptable bids, working conditions and any design changes that may occur during the course of the project. This memorandum is intended to update the Council as to what is happening with the Shakopee Bypass and the Chaska Interceptor. BL/pmp PLANS II SHAKOPEE June 2, 1995 Mr. Burl Zorn 910 East 8th Avenue Shakopee, MN. 55379 Re: Excessive speeds on Dakota Street Dear Mr. Zorn: Thank you for your correspondence of April 5, 1995 regarding traffic speeds on Dakota Street. This topic has been raised by others in the area, and I believe it deserves City Council action. I have discussed the traffic speeds on Dakota Street with the Police Chief, and we will be presenting alternatives to the City Council at their June 6, 1995 meeting. You are welcome to attend the Council meeting, but the agenda is quite long and this item will be toward the end. I will be contacting you after the meeting to discuss the Council direction and to try to resolve this situation. If you have any questions, please contact me at 445-3650. Sincerely, p✓n David M. Nummer Staff Engineer COmmuNTIY PRIDE SINCE 1857 1")H"11 11cs titrect5"'uth-Shakopec,A1innr,,,ta ?,l hi'-a; - j:\eng'uscr',dava\veorddocs\does,letler.doc BURL A. ZORN -V4 - 910 EAST 8TH AVENUE { -t��+ ���E 4 SHAKOPEE, MN 55379 ,p; TEL/FAX (612) 445-3330 5-12-95 ti SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL 129 S. HOLMES SHAKOPEE , MN 55379 RE: EXCESSIVE SPEEDS ON DAKOTA AVE PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT RESIDENTS RESIDING ON DAKOTA AVENUE BETWEEN 10TH AND 4TH AVENUE ARE EXPERIENCING AUTOMOBILE SPEEDS AKIN TO FREEWAY CONDITIONS . I REQUEST THAT YOU TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION TO SLOW TRAFFIC ALONG THIS STRETCH OF ROAD. MUCH AS I PERSONALLY DISLIKE STOP SIGNS AND SPEED BUMPS I WOULD SUGGEST THAT YOU INSTALL SOME HINDRANCE TO SPEEDING TRAFFIC ALONG THIS ROUTE. SUGGESTION; STOP SIGNS AT 8TH AND DAKOTA FOR NORTH AND SOUTH BOUND TRAFFIC. SINCERELY BURL A. t6RN � j9 BURL A. ZORN 910 EAST 8TH AVENUE s��� ��EE SHAKOPEE, MN 55379 TEL/FAX (612) 445-3330 5-12-95 SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL 129 S . HOLMES SHAKOPEE, MN 55379 RE: EXCESSIVE SPEEDS ON DAKOTA AVE PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT RESIDENTS RESIDING ON DAKOTA AVENUE BETWEEN 10TH AND 4TH AVENUE ARE EXPERIENCING AUTOMOBILE SPEEDS AKIN TO FREEWAY CONDITIONS. I REQUEST THAT YOU TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION TO SLOW TRAFFIC ALONG THIS STRETCH OF ROAD. MUCH AS I PERSONALLY DISLIKE STOP SIGNS AND SPEED BUMPS I WOULD SUGGEST THAT YOU INSTALL SOME HINDRANCE TO SPEEDING TRAFFIC ALONG THIS ROUTE. SUGGESTION; STOP SIGNS AT 8TH AND DAKOTA FOR NORTH AND SOUTH BOUND TRAFFIC. SINCERELY f BURL A. QN �i''; CITY OF SHAKOPEE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MONTHLY PROGRESS REPORT FOR MA Y, 1995 Respectfully Submitted Bruce A. Loney Public Works Director PROJECT START COMPLETE STATUS COMMENTS Category I- Projects Under Construction 1. Upper Valley Drainage 9/93 7/29/94 99% See Narrative Section 2. Pierce Street 6/94 7/94 50% See Narrative Section 3. 1994 Sidewalk Program 7/94 9/94 99% See Narrative Section 4. Vierling Drive,Adams St. 7/94 9/94 80% Asphalt Base and Curb Complete to Presidential Lane 5. Murphy's Landing Lift Stations 9/94 4/95 99% 6. Sarazin Street(Viking Steel Rd.) 4/95 50% See Narrative Section 7. Downtown Alley Reconstruction 5/95 20% See Narrative Section Category//- Projects In Design 1. County Road 16 Utilities 7/94 11/94 100% OSM Doing Design 2. Alley in Block 51 8/94 9/94 95% In-House Design 3. St. Francis Sewer Extension 10/94 3/95 50% In-House Design 4. P&V Reconstruction 1/95 5/95 75% In-House Design 5. Vierling Drive- C.R. 79 to C.R. 77 5/95 8/95 15% In-House Design 6. Fuller Street 5/95 7/95 35% In-House Design Category///- Projects Under Study 1. C.S.A.H. 18 Connection 11/93 7/94 100/0 See Narrative Section 2. Maras Street 6/94 10/94 15% See Narrative Section 3. River District Trunk Sewer 1/95 6/95 60% See Narrative Section 4. St. Francis Streets 6/95 8/95 15% and Storm Sewer 5. St. Francis Storm Sewer Outfall 3/95 8/95 15% Category IV Development Projects in Review 1. Arlington Ridge Preliminary Plat 2. Orrin Thompson Pre-Application 3. Hauer's 5th Addition Preliminary Plat 4. Chateau Ridge Final Plat 5. Meadows West 2nd Addition Final Plat 6. Market Place 2nd Addition Preliminary Plat 7. Meadows North Preliminary Plat 8. Pinewood Estates P.U.D. Concept illl PROJECT START COMPLETE STATUS COMMENTS Category V - Private Subdivision Construction 1. Maple Trails 6/93 9/94 99% Restoration Remaining 2. Dominion Hills 6/93 9/94 85% Wear Course Remaining 3. Stonebrooke 2nd Unknown Unknown 0% 4. South Parkview 2nd 6/94 5/95 90% Asphalt Base&Curb Completed 5. Homestead Ridge 1st 5/93 9/94 100% Warranty Period 6. Homestead Ridge 2nd 9/94 80% Utility Completed, Street Work Remaining 7. Minnesota Valley 8th 9/94 5/95 80% Asphalt Base and Curb Completed 8. Meadows West 1st Addition 9/94 80% Utilities&Curb completed 9. Prairie Bend 9/94 75% Grading and Utility Installation in Progress Category Vl - Special Projects 1. Pavement Management System 6/94 9/94 100% Proposals Under Review RFP's 2. CSAH 16 Scott County Plans 12/94 6/95 90% Plans Being Reviewed 3. Mn/DOT Shakopee Bypass 3/95 6/95 90% Plans Being Reviewed Segment 2 June 23, 1995 Bid Opening Date 4. MCWS Sewer Interceptor 3/95 6/95 50% Plans Being Reviewed June 23, 1995 Bid Opening Date Please refer to the attached narrative section for a more detailed discussion on several of the projects. 2 NARRATIVE SECTION Category 1 - Proiects Under Construction 1. Upper Valley Drainage Project - Phase II and Shakopee Bypass Drainage Facilities This project is essentially complete except for clean up and miscellaneous items. Work on the Upper Valley Drainage Project has begun again on May 25, 1995. Work on Jasper Road (vacated) is nearly complete with restoration items remaining. 2. Pierce Street Public Works crews have removed the existing pavement and are regrading the new alley. A City contractor has installed the new curb & gutter and patched the pavement on 4th Avenue. The alley paving has yet to be done. 3. 1994 Sidewalk Program The work on this project is mostly complete except for some minor punch list items. 6. Sarazin Street (Viking Steel Road) The sanitary sewer and watermain and storm sewer lines are nearly complete except in the area where easements have not been obtained. 7. Downtown Alley Reconstruction Relocation of gas, phone and cable TV lines are currently being done so that the concrete duct bank can be installed for the underground electric work. 3 Category No. 2 - ft ects in Design 1. County Road 16 Utilities Plans have been completed and bids were opened on June 1, 1995. The apparent low bidder was Barbarossa & Sons, Inc. at $1,079,143.80. Staff will review the bids and present the results to Council at the June 20, 1995 Council meeting. 2. Alley in Block 51 Utilities are being relocated before the alley paving will be done. 3. St. Francis Sewer Extension Staff has a preliminary design completed. Right-of-way acquisition determination and easement preparation is being worked on. 4. P&V Reconstruction Plans have been completed and bid opening scheduled for June 16, 1995. 5. Vierling Drive Plans are being prepared in conjunction with Meadows West 2nd Addition final plat approval. 6. Fuller Street Design is proceeding to coincide with Civic Center construction. Category 3 - ft ects Under Study 1. County Road 18 Connection This feasibility report is on hold due to the recent court decision which has prevented the County from bidding this project. 4 2. Maras Street A feasibility report has been ordered on this project. There are still two remaining properties that have not dedicated the street. The feasibility report will also identify future street alignment alternatives in order to determine all additional right-of-way needs. Also, the storm water drainage into Savage needs to be reviewed and addressed. 3. River District Trunk Sewer River District Trunk Sewer Rehabilitation Report has been completed and accepted by Met Council. The feasibility report is being prepared for Council review and approval. 4. St. Francis Streets and Storm Sewer The feasibility report will be prepared this summer for Sarazin Street and 17th Avenue. Storm sewer outfall study to Mn/DOT linear pond will be completed in conjunction with a study of Stormwater Trunk Charge. 5 � 1 City of Shakopee POLICE DEPARTMENT " 476 South Gorman Street SHAKOPEIi,, MINNESOTA 55379 Tel. 612/445-6666 Fax. 612/445-2313 The Police Report An inside look at police activity. June 2, 1995 Prepared by: Teri Van Cleve 8 Students Arrested in Connection Judges Now On-Call to School Vandalisms The First Judicial District implemented On the morning of May 26th, several an On-Call Judge pilot project. The on- public schools were vandalized, and 8 call judge is intended to supplement students were arrested. The Sr. High and compliment the availability of the School was toilet papered, windows other judges of the district. The project soaped, and liquid manure splashed involves a judge carrying a pager each around. The Junior High, Pearson weekend to insure that a judge is Elementary and Sweeney Elementary always available to consider requests were heavily toilet papered. Eight for 48 hour holds and other emergency Shakopee men were arrested, ranging matters. It is hoped that this project in age from 18 to 19 years old, and will improve the service provided by the charged with disorderly conduct and/or First Judicial District and make minor consumption of alcohol. contacting a judge on weekends more convenient. DARE Graduation Violent Felon Apprehended Graduation ceremonies were held for approximately 275 fifth grade students On 05-28-95, Shakopee officers who completed 17 weeks of DARE participated in a large scale operation course work. Mayor Laurent, Chief staged to apprehend James Cesario at Steininger and DARE Officers Barney a farmhouse in Prior Lake. Cesario, a Clark and Tom Crocker presented violent felon, left the house, and certificates and T-shirts to the officers were able to apprehend him graduates. Students also submitted from behind without incident. Cesario essays about DARE for special prizes. was arrested on charges of attempted (See attached) murder following an investigation on an incident in which he struck a female in the head with a hammer several times. To Serve To Protect Restraining Orders and Firearms 4th Annual Bike Rally The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, contains an The 4th annual bike rally will be held on important provision which prohibits the Saturday, June 3rd. Shakopee Police, subject of a domestic violence working with several l o c a l restraining order from possession of organizations, will register bicycles, firearms and ammunition. The law promote helmets and bicycle safety, covers all kinds of firearms and and have other safety related ammunition, not just assault weapons presentations. The rally will be held at and pistols. The ATF and U.S. Lions Park. Watch Cable TV for more Attorney's office are interested in information, or check with your investigating and prosecuting cases in elementary students f o r an which the subject of a restraining order informational flyer. has been advised of the federal law and knowingly violates it. Employment Anniversaries School Activities 06-01-74 Officer Crocker participated in Central Detective Russ Lawrence has Elementary's violence prevention completed 21 years of service. campaign, speaking with students about alternatives to violence. He has been invited to continue the program again next school year. (See attached) Officer Crocker worked closely with the Business Economics Education Foundation at the Sr. High School sharing real life experiences with students. (See attached) What D.A.R.E. Has Vaught Me t Drugs are not healthy for your body. Different binds of .-Is-••n-n .�n-r mn1-:+ �.�.. n•n�- nv.r1 :-n,.• nnv �N•+-•ten iY+-�t.�rnrNl•r- l. Ui -Z) hall 111aAQ V`VLL RCA. WIG VULL Lall JGG L11111�3 11111G1G11L1V than the-- really are. Dru s can make ph`Tsical changes emotional changes in a person.You can become addicted & IL, gets to the poilit that no longer have the power or eN"en care to be cured. I L--now that the time will come when I have to make a choice. Bv sati-ing " No" I maV be laug ied at_ called a chiclken. told I'm stupid and probabl-v the hardest of all ; ,O old be to lose my friends. W ell_ if I lose those friends I guess it's o.k. I need to find better friends then, people Lh L believ-e as I do, people that haN e the courage to say no. I just want to be myself. I want to be in sports, do in-- best in school & grow tip to be someone I'm proud of& make my parents proud too. D.A.R.E. has taught me how to sad- " No if in order to grow up and be the person I want to be. Bv: Jennifer Pauly i TAKING A STAND Valerie Grey Eagle promise to sav no to drugs. I will promise my grandma and everybody else that I will not do drugs. I will keep my promise by saving no to drugs. I will pick friends that do not do drugs. If someone asks me to do drugs I will turn them down and walk away. I have good friends and family that support me when I need it. have people to talk to when I have a problem. So when I grow up and they look at my record and see that I use to do drugs then I might not get the i want to have. So thats why it's good to be drug free. I D.A. R. E. to be drug free. By Valerie GrevEagle. 132 5th Ave. Central Elementary Shakopee. MN 55379 Mav 9. 1995 Shakopee Police Department 476 Gorman St. Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Officer Crocker, Nonviolence is an important issue in today's society. Our students continue to need assurance that violence is not the answer. You and your committee members play an important part in our campaign against these current problems. We are very grateful for your hours of preparation and thank you for your valuable expertise in presenting this program. We'd be interested in having this program presented again next year. Please contact me if you continue this project. Sincerely, r� Margaret Erickson Kathi Klein Barry Kirchmeier Sue Pratt BUSINESS ECONOMICS EDUCATION FOUNDATION School Year Programs Minnesota Business Venture Business Adventure Stock Market Program May 16, 1995 Officer Crocker Shakopee Police Department 476 Gorman St. Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Officer Crocker, On behalf of the Business Economics Education Foundation (BEEF), thank you for participating in the BEEF School Year Program. Your willingness to share knowledge and experience with students from Shakopee Senior High is greatly appreciated. Supplementing text book theory with "real world" experience enables students to better understand the business environment. Volunteers like you make this practical learning experience successful. Sincerely, Lynn F. Annis Business Education Liaison CC: Providing School Year & Summer Programs for Minnesota Students & Educators 123 North Third Street, Suite 504 Minneapolis, MN 55401 ( 61 2 ) 3 3 7-5 2 5 2 off association of metropolitan municipalities May 30, 1995 To: AMM Member City Officials Attached is a listing of AMM member city estimated LGA and HACA adjustments for 1996. Please take special note that these estimates are preliminary based on best data available at this time and have not been verified by the Department of Revenue. The HACA decrease in the next to last column is based on the 1995 Omnibus tax bill which cut$16 million HACA from cities, counties, towns, and special districts. This is a one time cut and should be restored in 1997. The estimated LGA increase/decrease in the third column of numbers is based on previously enacted law. The estimated implicit price deflater index was 3.1 percent. The calculation was made using previous population figures since updated population is not yet available. Once again, these are close estimates that may be used for planning purposes. 1995 numbers are actual current. There were no changes for 1995. 1995 AND ESTIMATED 1996 HACA AND LGA - AMOUNTS FOR A.M.M. CITIES Estimated 1995 LGA 1996 LGA Before Before LGA Percent Estimated Admin. Admin. Increase Increase 1995 1996 HACA Percent AMM CITIES Reduction Reduction Decrease Decrease HACA HACA Decrease Decrease Anoka 1,126,497 1,163,556 37,059 3.3% 718,834 688,775 (30,059) -4.2% Apple Valley 370,453 357,493 (1200) -3.5% 2,562,112 2,497,473 (64,639) -2.5% Arden Hills 0 0 0 na 100,243 87,607 (12,636) -12.6% Bayport 33,865 42,682 8,817 26.0% 168,723 159,086 (9,637) -5.7% Blaine 1,196,822 1,253,216 56,394 4.7% 1,645,132 1,596,328 (48,804) -3.0% Bloomington A " 0 0 na' 3,742,367 3,563,132 (179,235) -4.8% Brooklyn Center 1,801,689 1,877,734 76,045 4.2% 1,336,593 1,272,254 (64,339) -4.8% Brooklyn Park :1,607,622 1;704,105 96,483 6.0% 2,809,246 2,71,3,064 (96,182) -3.4% Burnsville 327,129 327,129 0 0.0% 2,946,905 2,851,902 (95,003) -3.2% Champlin 464,577 478,43.5 3.0% 920;429 895,944 (24,485) -2.7% Chanhassen 0 0 0 na 968,238 939,125 (29,113) -3.0% Chaska 332,320 362,220 29.9.00 9.0% 278,383 266,496 (11,887) -4.3% Circle Pines 250,750 252,938 2,188 0.9% 210,588 202,451 (8,137) -3.9% Columbia Heights 2,055,817 2,113,917 58,100 2.8% 978,510 939,638 (38,872) -4.0% Coon Rapids 2,367,324 21441,511 74,187 3.1% 2,424,606 2,353,247 (71,359) -2.9% Cottage Grove 960,695 971,227 10,5,32 1.1% 1,398,430 1,354,630 (43,800) -3.1% Crystal 1,813,481 1,870,420 56,939 3.1% 1,069,518 1,026,864 (42,654) -4.0% Dayton 29,765 33,461 3,696 12.4% 197,084 189,739 (7,345) -3.7% Deephaven 0 0 0 na 221,506 214,528 (6,978) -3.2% Eagan 0 0 0 na 1,697,723 1,606,017 (91,706) -5.4% Eden Prairie 0 0 0 na 692,056 587,741 (104,315) -15.1% Edina 0 0 0 na 1,002,263 916,892 (85,371) -8.5% Falcon Heights 186,197 196,492 10,295 5.5%0 168,054 162,026 (6,028) -3.6% Fridley 1,579,526 1,622,074 42,548 2.7% 1,083,779 1,040,168 (43,611) -4.0% Golden Valley 19,150 19,150 0 0.0% 1,756,770 1,701,088 (55,682) -3.2% Hastings 1,233,926 1,269,215 35;289 2.9% 1,002,622 963,950 (38,672) -3.9% Hopkins 794,335 797,840 3,505 0.4% 977,746 938,151 (39,595) -4.0% Independence 0 0 0' na 180,848 173,573 (7,275) -4.0% Inver Grove Heights 436,822 439,852 3,030 0.7% 970,525 929,066 (41,459) -4.3% Jordan 267,746 279,216 111470 4.3% 154,084 147,336 (6,748) -4.4% Mahtomedi 144,855 146,131 1,276 0.9% 286,069 276,690 (9,379) -3.3% Maple Grove 150,225 137,616 (120609) -8.4% 2,136,153 2,067,335, (68,818) -3.2% Maplewood 715,268 736,522 21,254 3.0% 1,593,415 1,529,433 (63,982) -4.0% Mendota Heights 0 0 !:0 na. 468,056: 447,842' (20,214) -4.3% Minneapolis 64,631,788 66,635,373 2,003,585 3.1% 30,000,060 28,788,738 (1,211,322) -4.0% Oak Park Heights 0 0 0 na 77,980 63,123 (9,377) -12.67% Estimated 1995 LGA 1996 LGA Before Before LGA Percent Estimated Admin. Admin. Increase Increase 1995 1996 HACA Percent AMM CITIES Reduction Reduction Decrease Decrease HACA HACA Decrease Decrease Minnetonka 0 0 0 na 2,112,433 2,013,112 (99,321) -4.7°° Mound 301,032 309,693 8,661 2.9% 499,463 484,934 (14,529) -2.9% Mounds View 615,440 645,379 29,939 4.9% 375,471 357,670 (17,801) -4.7% New Brighton 717,536 748,386 30,850 4.3% 832,651 803,676 (28,975) -3.5% New Hope 1,005,104 1,031,698 26,594 2.6% 940,234 902,005 (38,229) -4.1% Newport 172,114 175,700 3,586 2.1%; 257,956 248,735 (9,221) -3.6% North St Paul 715,184 745,988 30,804 4.3%° 273,694 259,793 (13,901) -5.1% Oakdale 618;538 624,634 6,096 1.0% 1 974,899 944,425 (30,474) -3.1% Orono 0 0 0 na 305,975 289,979 (15,996) -5.2% Osseo 66,035 75,925 9,890 .15:0% 135,957 130,855!' (5,102) -3.8% Plymouth 0 0 0 na 1,877,893 1,799,303 (78,590) -4.2% Prior Lake 27,273 27,273 0 0.0% 847,107 819,556 (27,551) -3.3% Richfield 3,186,423 3,241,512 55,089 1.7% 1,883,970 1,810,686 (73,284) -3.9% Robbinsdale 1,539,549 1,579,239 :39,690 `2.6% 911,278 881,890 (29,388) -3.2% Rosemount 385,447 379,500 (5,947) -1.5%° 562,494 533,760 (28,734) -5.1% Roseville 77;516 136;776 59,260 764% 1,784,864 1,731,384> (53,480) -3.0% Saint Anthony (Henn.) 135,413 133,443 (1,970) -1 5% 342,740 328,994 (13,746) -4.0% Saint Francis 32,888 37,778 4;$90 149°fo- ; 101,882 97,759 (4,123) -4.0% Saint Louis Park 1,859,668 1,859,668 0 0.0% 2,897,296 2,810,338 (86,958) -3.0% Saint Paul 42,006,864 43,309;077 1,302,213 3 1% .'-.20.292i966 19,528,061 (764,905) -3.8% . .> a. Saint Paul Park 445,994 457,925 11,931 2.7% 210,515 202,570 (7,945) -3.8% Savage 55,001 50,650 (4,351) -7.9% 532,531 511,298 (21,233) -4.0% Shakopee 151,085 147,228 (3,857) -2.6% 456,586 433,071 (23,515) -5.2% Shorewood 0 0 0 na 426,970 413,631' (13,339) -3.1% South St Paul 2,456,776 2,541,504 84,728 3.4% 1,185,082 1,138,566 (46,516) -3.9% Spring Lake Park 218,600 225,423 6,823 3.1% 193,945 184,448 (9,497) -4.9% Spring Park 7,005 11,717 4,712 67.3% 96,831 93,515 (3,316) -3.4% Stillwater 808,928 856,453 47;525 »'5.9% >1,005,068 971,772 (33,296) 3.3%' Sunfish Lake 0 0 0 na 45,275 43,820 (1,455) -3.2% Watertown 178;789 193,757 14;968 8 4°fo 53;938 > 60,682, (3,256) -5.1% :.;:. Wayzata 0 0 0 na 283,195 271,070 (12,125) 4.3% West St Paul 1,107,925 1,137,543 29,618 27% 998,310» 961,465 (36,845) -3.7% White Bear Lake 800,382 831,391 31,009 3.9% 868,508 839,738 (28,770) -3.3% Woodbury 0 0 0 na 1,334;768 1,284,609 (50,159) 3.8%' Woodland 0 0 0 na J, 32,540 , 31,394 , (1,146) -3.5% `rO 44,5 ,1 5'3T149,044,785 1 4,453 1 3.1%j 4,M,95 5 1 110,306,8931 ,5 0 6,0621 -3.9�oT Association of Metropolitan Municipalities,5/26/95;Van Wychen aid%ammmk4 r Antismoking rally seeks teens' su pp o r t l By Ingrid Middleton A 1994 Minnesota survey found support and training young people Anderson said that while he doesn't Stafl'W riter that 22 percent of teenagers under in grass-roots actions such as letter- disagree with the anti-smoking 18 reported using tobacco.Another writing to advertisers and sentiment,he thinks such action is Hoping to finite young people in study,in which underage youths legislators. misplaced."We're a small link in the crusade against tobacco w/;re sent into Minnesota stores to this chain,"he said. He said that advertising that targets their hay cigarettes,found that they were In addition to several speakers,the protesters should confront tobacco communities,two groups rallied able to buy them illegally more than late-afternoon rally included a drill companies and advertisers,not Wednesday afternoon for the Third 60 percent of the time. team performance against smoking retailers.According to Anderson, Annual World No Tobacco Day. and tobacco and other youth- retailers sell tobacco more as a Nationwide,more than 3 million centered activities. service to customers than for a ' About 100 people gathered at the teenagers are regular smokers. profit. Martin Luther King Center in St. Although every state bans tobacco Earlier Wednesday,in an act Paul,one of 100 national sales to minors,more than half a unrelated to the No Tobacco Day He said no one has complained celebration sites. billion packs of cigarettes and 26 celebration,the front door of a about the store's tobacco million containers of chewing. convenience store was defaced with. advertising.The only time tobacco "We have a disproportionate tobacco are sold illegally to people anti-smoking graffiti.The door advertising has been an issue in the amount of tobacco advertising in younger than 18,according to the displayed a large cigarette store,Anderson said,is when low-income communities and report. advertisement. middle schools have asked to bring cormunities of color,"said Robert students there to learn about Taylor,project coordinator for No Tobacco Day is a project of the Doug Anderson,who co-owns the tobacco advertising."I encourage tobacco prevention at the Urban National Association for African Bryn Mawr Market at 412 S.Cedar them,"he said. Coalition.The Urban Coalition American Positive Imagery,based Lake Rd.with his brother, Paul, cosponsored the event with in Philadelphia.Taylor said the said he doesn't know who covered The Urban Coalition's Taylor said Minnesota,ASSIST,a joint project rally is a way to help attract the store with paint. he had heard about the graffiti at of the Department of Health and members and provide a broader the store but that he doesn't the National Cancer Institute. audience for the association's cause. "At first I thought it was kids,"he support that kind of anti-smoking said.He said that when he realized protest."We support tobacco We don't want to be targeted,and He said the Urban Coalition wants cigarette advertising was targeted, prevention,but we don't condone we don't want our children to be to eliminate the message that he began to believe that adults graffiti,"he said."It's just another targeted,"he said. smoking is"cool and sexy."The opposed to smoking were ill in our community." goal is to do it through community responsible. jjj��7fff L .r t:'l TENTATIVE AGENDA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA Regular Session June 6, 1995 1. Roll Call at 7:00 P.M. 2. Approval of the May 16, 1995 EDA minutes 3. Resolution No. 95-3 -Bank Account 4. TIF Legislation Status - Tom Hay Correspondence 5. Other Business a) b) 6. Adjourn Dennis R. Kraft Executive Director OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ADJ. REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MAY 16, 1995 Chrmn. Beard called the meeting to order at 7 : 05 P.M. with Comm. Brekke, Laurent, Sweeney, Lynch, VanHorn, and Morke present. Also present: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator; Barry Stock, Assistant City Administrator; Karen Marty, City Attorney; Bruce Loney, City Engineer; Paul Bilotta, Economic Development Coordinator; and Judith S. Cox, City Clerk. Items added to the agenda: Investigating the feasibility of involving the E. D.A. in marketing opportunities in Shakopee for business and commercial purposes. A correction was made to the Minutes of May 2 , 1995 in terms of the vote count for E. D.A. President; changing Mr. Beard' s vote for Mr. Laurent to a vote for himself, and Mr. Sweeney's vote for Mr. Beard to a vote for Mr. Laurent. Lynch/Sweeney moved to approve the EDA Minutes of May 2 , 1995, as modified. Motion carried unanimously. Brekke/Lynch moved to approve the HRA Minutes of April 4 , 1995. Motion carried unanimously. Dennis Kraft gave an update on the TIF Plan Amendments. Mr. Kraft stated that he had spoken with Tom Hay, Bond Council Representative, regarding the amendments to the State Statutes on TIF Plans. Mr. Hay recommended doing nothing but monitor the actions of the legislature at this point because if the original language is adopted nothing can be done now, and if the proposed language is adopted there are several months in which to take action to amend it. Mr. Kraft explained that the legislature will adjourn on May 22 and at that time more information will be known as to what has or has not been done and staff will be able to move forward. Barry Stock explained that appraisals are currently being obtained for the properties located within Blocks 3 & 4 in Downtown Shakopee. Because of the need to amend the TIF Plan they have been working to clearly define actual costs associated with the possible acquisition of those properties. He stated that in order to proceed there is a need for fixture appraisals and he gave a cost estimate of between $10 , 000-15, 000 . Mr. Stock recommended Patchin Appraisals since they have established a relationship with the property owners. In addition, Mr. Stock explained that relocation is also an issue and requested E. D.A. approval to seek proposals for acquisition and relocation assistance . He added that the moratorium (on precluding development within these blocks) expires in September. Official Proceedings of the May 16, 1995 Shakopee Economic Development Authority Page -2- Brekke/Laurent moved to utilize the services of Patchin Appraisers Inc. to complete the fixture appraisals for the properties located within Blocks 3 & 4 OSP. Motion carried unanimously. Laurent/Brekke moved to direct the appropriate E.D.A. officials to obtain assistance proposals from firms that specialize in land acquisition and relocation. Motion carried unanimously. Lynch/Laurent moved to direct the appropriate E.D.A. officials to move ahead with the development of the E.D.A. seal as proposed. Motion carried unanimously. Barry Stock stated that the E.D.A. has a fund balance of approximately $291, 000 . Gary Morke explained that the E.D.A. needs to become more proactive in letting people know what Shakopee has to offer. He suggested looking into the possibility of marketing and advertising outside of Shakopee. Mr. Morke stated that he would like to present this idea to the C. D. C. for review and have them develop some proposals, then to bring the proposals back to the E.D.A. with some suggestions. A discussion regarding the duties of Paul Bilotta in terms of marketing the City ensued. It was the consensus of the E.D.A. to have the C.D.C. look into the effectiveness and cost, and whether it is germane to proceed with Mr. Morke's proposal. Mr. VanHorn stated that currently there are no funds for advertising in the E.D.A. budget. Chrmn. Beard stated that if action, discussion, and direction regarding a dollar amount and job description for advertising and marketing takes place over the next few months it could be included when finalizing the E.D.A. budget for 1996, which must be submitted to the auditor by September 1, 1995 . Having no other business to come before the E.D.A. Chrmn. Beard adjourned at 7 : 25 P.M. until the first meeting in June. Ju ith S. Cox EPA Secretary Esther TenEyck Recording Secretary TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Executive director FROM: Gregg Voxland, Assistant Treasurer RE: Bank Account DATE: May 31, 1995 Introduction The Shakopee EDA needs to adopt a resolution designating a depository. Background The attached resolution needs to be adopted to establish a bank account and related items for the EDA. It is a standard form resolution for the bank. Action Requested Offer Resolution No. 95-3 A Resolution Designating A Depository, Authorizing Persons To Transact Business And Directing Certification Of Signatures, and move its adoption. Resolution No. 95- 3 A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING A DEPOSITORY, AUTHORIZING PERSONS TO TRANSACT BUSINESS AND DIRECTING CERTIFICATION OF SIGNATURES BE IT RESOLVED, that Norwest Bank N.A. (herein called the "Bank" ) be and is hereby designated as a depository of Shakopee E.D.A. (herein called the "Depositor" ) with authority to accept or receive at any time for the credit of the Depositor deposits by whomsoever made, of funds and other property in whatever form or manner transferred or endorsed , whether made as demand deposits, savings deposits, or time deposits; and that Treasurer or Assisstant Treasurer of the Depositor be and is hereby authorized to open or cause to be opened one or more accounts with the Bank on such terms, conditions and agreements as the Bank may now or hereafter require and to make any other agreements deemed advisable in regard to any of the foregoing. RESOLVED FURTHER, That checks, drafts or other orders for the payment, transfer or withdrawal of any of the funds or other property of the Depositor on deposit with the Bank shall be binding on the Depositor when signed, manually or by use of a facsimile or mechanical signature or otherwise authorized, by any 2 (two) of the following named individuals : President Michael L. Beard, Treasurer Cole D. VanHorn, Assistant Treasurer Gregg M. Voxland, and the Bank is hereby authorized to pay and charge to the account of the Depositor any such checks, drafts or other orders so signed or otherwise authorized, including those payable to any other person for application, or which are actually applied to the payment of any indebtedness owing to the Bank from the person or persons who signed such checks, drafts or other withdrawal orders or otherwise authorized such withdrawals . In particular, and not in limitation of foregoing, such persons may authorize payment, transfer or withdrawal by oral or telephonic directions to the bank complying with such rules and regulations relating to such authorization as the bank may communicate to the Depositor from time to time . RESOLVED FURTHER, That the person (s) so authorized to sign be and are hereby authorized and empowered, on behalf of the Depositor, to transact any and all other business with and through the Bank which such person (s) may at any time deem to be advisable, including, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, authority to purchase certificates of deposit and to enter into deposit agreements, safe deposit agreements, lock-box agreements, night depository agreements, freight payment service agreements, payroll service agreements and other electronic data processing service agreements offered by the Bank, and, in reference to any such business, to make any and all agreements and to execute and deliver to the Bank any and all contracts and other writings which such person (s) may deem to be necessary or desirable . Further Provisions RESOLVED FURTHER, That the Shakopee EDA Secretary shall certify to the Bank the names and signatures (either actual or any form or forms of facsimile or mechanical signatures adopted by the person authorized to sign) of the persons named above and such certifying officer shall from time to time hereafter, upon a change in the facts so certified, immediately certify to the Bank the names and signatures (actual or facsimile) of the persons then authorized to sign or to act; the Bank shall be fully protected in relying on such certificates and on the obligation of the certifying officer (set forth above) to immediately certify to the Bank any change in any facts so certified, and the Bank shall be indemnified and saved harmless by the Depositor from any claims, demands, expenses, loss or damage resulting from or growing out of honoring or relying on the signature or other authority (whether or not properly used and, in the case of any facsimile signature, regardless of when or by whom or by what means such signature may have been made or affixed) of any officer or person whose name and signature was so certified, or refusing to honor any signature or authority not so certified. RESOLVED FURTHER, That these resolutions shall continue in force until express written notice of their rescission or modification has been furnished to and received by the Bank. RESOLVED FURTHER, That any and all transactions by or in behalf of the Depositor with the Bank prior to the adoption of this resolution be, and the same hereby are, in all respects ratified, approved and confirmed. Adopted in session of the Shakopee Economic Development Authority held this day of , 1995 . President, Shakopee EDA ATTEST Approved As To Form Secretary City Attorney DOI3SEY & WHITNEY PROFESSIONAL LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP NEW YORK PILLSBURY CENTER SOUTH SEATTLE WASHINGTON, D. C. 220 SOUTH SIXTH STREET ROCHESTER, MN MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402-1408 DENVER ((312) 340-2000 BILLINGS ORANGE COUNTY, CA FAX (612) 340.28(38 GREAT FALLS LONDON MISSOULA BRUSSELS (6 S.HAY DES MOINES (6=4 343-796.5 HONG KONG FARGO May 30, 1995 Mr. Barry A. Stock City of Shakopee 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee, MN 55379-1376 Re: 1995 Tax Increment Legislation Dear Barry: Enclosed herewith is a copy of Article 5 of the Omnibus Tax Act passed by the 1995 Legislature. Article 5 seems to contain all tax increment legislation adopted this year. After reviewing Article 5 I think its safe to say that the provisions contained in earlier versions or predecessor of Article 5 which would have adversely affected the City's ability to finance planned projects with tax increments have been eliminated. However,some new provisions,such as new reporting and enforcement provisions,will apply to and have to be complied with by the City. These provisions will make it more important than ever that the Redevelopment District program and relevant tax increment financing plans are properly amended to permit desired tax increment expenditures. In view of this we should proceed with a current review of and amendment to these documents in the next few weeks. After reviewing Article 5 please call me to discuss any questions you may have. Very tru ours, Thomas S. Hay TSH/pmh Enclosure cc: Dennis Kraft Karen Marty OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL ADJ. REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MAY 16, 1995 Mayor Laurent called the meeting to order at 7 : 03 P.M. with Cncl. Brekke, Beard, Sweeney, and Lynch present. Also present: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator; Barry Stock, Assistant City Administrator; Karen Marty, City Attorney,; Bruce Loney, Public Works Director; Dave Nummer, City Engineer; Paul Bilotta, Acting Planning Director; and Judith S. Cox, City Clerk. Items added to the agenda: 15b) Pawnbroker's Employee License, 15c) Non-Resident recreation fees for Prior Lake residents, 15d) KC Hall Property Acquisition update, and 15e) Executive Session. Brekke/Sweeney moved to approve the agenda. as modified. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Laurent recessed for an E.D.A. Meeting at 7 : 05 P.M. The Adjourned Regular Session of the City Council re-convened at 7 : 25 P.M. Liaison reports were given by Councilmembers . Mayor Laurent gave the Mayor's report. Mayor Laurent asked if anyone present wished to speak on any item not on the agenda. There was no response. Items added to Consent Business: 13e) Authorization of Planning Department Personnel, 13g) Civic Center Ground Breaking, and 15b) Pawnbroker's Employee License. Items removed form Consent Business: 12a) Canterbury Park PUD - Ordinance No. 417 , and 131) CR-77 Cooperative Agreement. Beard/Lynch moved to approve the Consent Business as modified. Motion carried unanimously. Beard/Lynch approved the Minutes of April 18 , 1.995 . (Motion carried under Consent Business) . The Public Hearing on the proposed vacation of a portion of the drainage and utility easement between Lots 1 & 2 , Valley Park 6th Addition was opened. Paul Bilotta reported that Shakopee Valley Printing would like to expand their building across the lot line. They are requesting the vacation of the 90. 03 foot of a 40 foot wide drainage and utility easement in Valley Park 6th Addition. Mr. Bilotta stated that Shakopee Utilities has requested that a 10 foot wide by 17 foot long portion of the proposed easement be reserved and that Shakopee Valley Printing has agreed. Official Proceedings of the May 16, 1995 Shakopee City Council Page -2- Mayor Laurent asked for comments from the public. Roger Bauer, representing Shakopee Valley Printing, approached the podium and stated that he would be available for any questions. There being no further comments from the audience, Mayor Laurent closed the public hearing. Beard/Sweeney offered Resolution No. 4218 , A Resolution Of The City Of Shakopee Approving The Vacation Of A Portion Of The 40 Foot Wide Drainage And Utility Easement Located 99 . 97 Feet South Of The Northern Point Of The Lot Line Between Lot 1 And Lot 2 , Block 1, Valley Park 6th Addition, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Laurent passed the gavel to Vice Mayor Sweeney for discussions relating to the proposed improvements to Fuller Street between 10th Avenue and Vierling Drive due to a conflict of interest. Vice Mayor Sweeney opened the public hearing on the Proposed public improvements to Fuller Street between 10th Avenue and Vierling Drive. Bruce Loney reported that the proposed improvements include Sanitary Sewer, Watermain, Storm Sewer, and Sidewalk and Street improvements. He stated that the feasibility report previously ordered has been completed. Mr. Loney gave a brief report of the main issues involved which include: 1. The relocation of a collector from C.R. 77 to Fuller Street. 2 . Proposed sidewalk installation on both sides of Fuller Street. 3 . Sanitary sewer assessment to Meadows North. Mr. Loney stated that regarding item No. 1, that a County collector road is not necessary as the spacing of County roads is too close to warrant three roadways, and that the County would propose to turnback C.R. 77 to the City. Relating to Item No. 2 , Mr. Loney stated that staff is proposing sidewalks on both sides of the street due to pedestrian traffic that will be generated by the Civic Center and ballfields. Relating to Item No. 3 , Mr. Loney stated that the sewer line will be located on the Civic Center site and that the Sewer line is being assessed to Meadows North only as a benefitting area. He also explained that the developer of Meadows North, Gold Nugget Develop- ment, feels that the Civic Center site should be required to extend the sewer throughout the site as per City's development policy. Official Proceedings of the May 16 , 1995 Shakopee City Council Page -3- Mr. Loney explained that the developer and staff have tentatively agreed that a 50%-50% cost split of the sewer line for assessment purposes is appropriate due to the obligation of a development to extend sewer from plat line to plat line and because of the criteria to assess improvements to benefitting property. The estimated cost of the project is $892 , 000 and the proposed assessments are $64 . 39 per foot for a 36 foot wide street; and, $16 . 07 per foot for the reconstruction from 10th to 11th. In conclusion, Mr. Loney stated that the feasibility study and the proposed funding sources indicate that Fuller Street will be both technically and economically feasible. A discussion regarding the 50%-50% sanitary sewer cost split ensued. The sidewalk is proposed to be inside to preserve the trees. A discussion regarding the width of the street and easements back to the proposed sidewalks ensued. Vice Mayor, Sweeney asked if anyone present wished to speak on the proposed Fuller Street improvements. John Tieben Sr. , 1008 S. Fuller, approached the podium and stated that he does not want a sidewalk in front of his house. John Iten, 1016 S. Fuller, approached the podium and stated that he does not feel a sidewalk would serve any purpose and asked the .following questions: 1. Why weren't sidewalks constructed on Lewis and Holmes, which were recently rebuilt? 2 . Why are sidewalks only on one side of Vierling? 3 . Why did the residents of Fuller Street get involved late? 4 . What are the plans for the future of Fuller Street? 5. Is there any way to avoid sidewalks on Fuller Street? Mr. Iten stated that with the exception of the sidewalk issue he was comfortable with the proposed improvements. He stated that a 36 foot wide street with sidewalks on both sides is not sufficient room to drive on. He explained that he does not want the liability or responsibility of maintaining a sidewalk, that there is not need for one. Vice Mayor, Sweeney explained that there is currently a sidewalk policy and that streets with high volume traffic or the likelihood of it are scheduled to have sidewalks as they are reconstructed or constructed. He also explained that Lewis Street was reconstructed prior to the policy. John Iten asked why there were not sidewalks on 11th Street. Official Proceedings of the May 16, 1995 Shakopee City Council Page -4- Vice Mayor, Sweeney replied that 11th Street is not designated as a collector street. John Iten asked why sidewalks weren't constructed on both sides of Vierling Street. Cncl. Beard explained that the developers agreed to hold the sidewalks in abeyance until the development was completed. John Iten asked what the City's plans are to construct sidewalks on Holmes, Lewis, and Sommerville. Vice Mayor, Sweeney explained that the City is in the process of doing so. Joann Tieben, 1008 S. Fuller Street, approached the podium and stated that if there is a sidewalk there should also be a 4-way stop where people could cross over to get to the Civic Center. Horest Grazer, representing Gold Nugget Development, 8057 Zealand Ave. N, Brooklyn Park, approached the podium. He stated that the 50%-50% cost split was acceptable and requested that the storm sewer contribution be based on volume rather than area. He also requested that they not be assessed for the 100 foot right of way due to pending improvement to Vierling Drive. Bruce Loney stated that the right of way will be dedicated in Meadows West and will be handled in an assessment hearing. He also stated that the volume cost request was reasonable and would also be taken care of. Mr. Grazer also stated that they were in favor of the sidewalk. Denny Anderson, 11650 Cooper Avenue, approached the podium and stated that he was unable to sell his home due to the proposed assessments, and stated that apparently staff has not been out to his property to see it. Vice Mayor Sweeney explained that assessments can only be upheld to the extent of benefit and encouraged all who feel there is no benefit to their property to challenge it, that it is their responsibility. Denny Anderson stated that the County has taken 18 ' and the sidewalk will take another 181 . He said that if staff were to visit his property they would see that 35 feet is not sufficient room. Dave Nummer approached the podium and stated that he was not aware that the City was asking for a right of way acquisition for Mr. Anderson's property. He also stated that staff would visit the property. Mr. Nummer explained that the City plows sidewalks along Official Proceedings of the May 16, 1995 Shakopee City Council Page -5- all collector and arterial streets within the city limits, which includes Fuller Street. Carol Armstrong, 1044 , S. Fuller Street, approached the podium and asked for a compromise in constructing sidewalks at the street, outside of the trees, with a half-moon cut out for certain trees in order to save them. Harold Armstrong, 1044 S. Fuller Street, approached the podium and asked whether there has been any decision as to the alley way between Atwood and Fuller in terms of the termination or extension. Mr. Bilotta stated that any decisions relating to the alley way will be dealt with by the Planning Commission. He explained that in reviewing proposals of Meadows North staff is looking at bringing the alley way to the street but not continuing it. Harold Armstrong asked how staff would get input from the residents along Fuller Street and Atwood Street regarding the alley. Vice Mayor, Sweeney replied that the affected property owners would be notified prior to the Planning Commission meeting on June 6, 1995, at 7 : 30 P.M. Harold Armstrong asked if there was a percentage in which the estimated assessments could vary. Bruce Loney explained that they attempt to be as close as possible but that assessments can vary anywhere from 15-20% . Harold Armstrong asked what the plans are for Fuller, Apgar, and the C.R. 77 intersection, whether a "y" access to Apgar was discussed. Paul Bilotta explained that this issue would be part of the platting process but the proposal is not to extend Apgar all the way to Fuller Street. Howard Armstrong asked if there has been an estimate for traffic flow on Fuller without the extension of Apgar. Bruce Loney stated that he would need to see the County' s plan. Howard Armstrong stated that small children need to go to 10th to a stop sign crossing in order to get to Stans Park, that this is not reasonable for very young children. He suggested a stop sign on 11th for a crossing to access Stans Park. Vice Mayor, Sweeney stated that stop signs or traffic signals require warrant studies and suggested the likelihood that 10th and Official Proceedings of the May 16, 1995 Shakopee City Council Page -6- Fuller would support a warrant study resulting in some type of traffic device. Howard Armstrong stated that he did not feel properties on Fuller would benefit with increased traffic flow, a sidewalk that would limit parking in his driveway to one car rather than two, and suggested that the City pay the assessments for Fuller residents because the Civic Center is the reason for the improvements. Leroy Menke, 1185 Shumway, approached the podium and stated that he has a shop that will be assessed. He explained that currently he walks 50 feet to get to the shop, however, that distance will increase to 3/4 mile when improvements are completed. He stated that he did not develop his shop because there was no chance of having sewer. Mr. Menke stated that he had donated 45 feet of right of way on the West side of CR-77 and that he could only have two streets connect to CR-77 (when he platted his property adjacent to CR-77) . He asked if Fuller was built on City property. Bruce Loney replied that it was all on City property. Mr. Menke stated that he could not get sewer to develop his shop and referred to the 50%-50% split with Gold Nugget Development stating he had to donate 45 feet of right of way. He stated his assessments would be $5600 and that he could sell his shop for that. Mike Menke, 1060 Oak Road, approached the podium and stated that he has a shop in the same area as Leroy Menke, North of Denny Anderson, and that he must go out of his way in order to get to his shop if Apgar is discontinued. He stated that he would also have no sewer but would have a sidewalk with the improvements. Cncl. Beard asked whether the allegation of now sewer was correct. Bruce Loney explained that service will be available but not at this time. Cncl . Beard stated that any discussion relating to Apgar is a June 8th issue. Kevin O'Brien, 1020 S. Fuller, approached the podium and stated that the ideal situation would be not to have a sidewalk at all on the west side of Fuller. He asked how close could a sidewalk be constructed to mature trees without damaging them, and stated that sidewalks constructed on the street side of the trees would be more acceptable. A discussion as to whether or not there was room to put a sidewalk on the east side of the trees ensued. Official Proceedings of the May 16, 1995 Shakopee City Council Page -7- John Iten stated that Apgar should remain as it is and would result in less traffic on Fuller. A discussion regarding half-moon cut outs for trees ensued. Bruce Loney stated that he would like to have an informational meeting with the residents of Fuller and Apgar prior to bringing a plan back to council on where to place the sidewalk in relation to the trees. Beard/Lynch offered Resolution No. 4219, A Resolution Ordering An Improvement And The Preparation Of plans And Specifications For Fuller Street, From 10th Avenue To Vierling Drive Project No. 1995- 8 , and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously with Mayor Laurent abstaining. It was the consensus of Councilmembers that staff will research constructing sidewalks at the curb and bring plans back to Council . Vice Mayor Sweeney recessed the meeting at 9 : 27 P.M. Mayor Laurent re-convened the meeting at 9 : 41 P.M. Cncl. Sweeney explained that he would like to see more specific language relating to the PUD for Canterbury Park as far as the number and type of musical events. The language should give the City more control, and give future councils negotiating room on musical issues. He suggested setting a limit on the number of musical events. Stan Bowker, General Manager, Canterbury Park, approached the podium and stated that there have been concerts both in and outside of the facility and that all sound requirements have been met. A discussion regarding decibel levels and types of music ensued. Bruce Malkerson, Piper Jaffray, approached the podium and explained that an expert had studied the noise levels relating to the snowmobile race and that his estimate of the noise level was higher than the level actually was. A discussion regarding noise and limiting the number of outdoor concerts ensued. Cncl. Beard suggested a limit of 10 outdoor concerts with an anticipated attendance of 700 or more. Brekke/Lynch moved to amend the PUD to require Canterbury Park to request City approval for outdoor concerts with an expected attendance of 2 , 000 or more, starting with the sixth concert of each calendar year. Official Proceedings of the May 16, 1995 Shakopee City Council Page -8- Stan Bowker stated that most concerts are tied into racing, that he was not comfortable with 2 , 000. A discussion as to whether the number of concerts was related to racing or not ensued. Beard/Brekke moved to amend the motion by adding, "outside of the regularly scheduled racing season" . Motion carried unanimously. Stan Bowker stated that an estimated attendance of 5, 000 was more reasonable. Sweeney/Brekke moved to table the motion as amended. Motion carried unanimously. With respect to the use of space within the Civic Center, Barry Stock stated that he had met with Mary Riley and Eileen Moran of the Inner Agency Service Council, to discuss the possibility of a lease within the Civic Center for a Family Net Office. A lease in the amount of $2700 a year, including utilities was proposed. If The Family Net Office lease is entered into it would decrease the size of the meeting room; therefore, staff would like the City Council to determine whether or not it is more valuable to have a larger meeting room. Mary Riley approached the podium and explained the scope of the Family Net Office, stating that their goal is to ensure that families in need of any kind of support and help will be able to access information and register or apply for services at any one of several Family Net offices located throughout the county. The belief is that families are more likely to seek out information and assistance in a more neutral community setting. Cncl . Lynch asked how the Family Net office would benefit the community. Mary Riley explained that with a neutral site services are more easily accessed and more direction to the correct services can be given sooner. A discussion regarding a time and design commitment ensued. Lynch/Beard moved to direct the appropriate City officials to prepare a lease for the Family Net office space within the Shakopee Civic Center, which would provide for a one-year term and a month- to-month lease thereafter, with a 90 day cancellation provision available to either party. Motion carried unanimously. Beard/Lynch moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to sign the agreement with the Hockey Association to accept the zamboni. (Motion carried under Consent Business) . Official Proceedings of the May 16, 1995 Shakopee City Council Page -9- Beard/Lynch moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to execute the Youth Employment Program Worksite Agreement by and between Scott County Human Services and the City of Shakopee. (Motion carried under Consent Business) . Beard/Lynch offered and passed a motion granting the developer of Westridge Lake Estates an extension of the 12 month time period for approval of the Preliminary Plat by an additional 12 months. (Motion carried under Consent Business) . Beard/Lynch moved to authorize the appropriate City staff to hire two additional planning interns. (Motion carried under Consent Business) . Beard/Lynch moved to approve the applications and grant on sale, off sale, and Sunday intoxicating liquor licenses to Babe' s Place, Inc. , 124 South Holmes Street, upon surrender of the existing licenses. (Motion carried under Consent Business) . Beard/Lynch moved to select Monday, May 22nd at 6 : 00 P.M. as the date and time for the Civic Center groundbreaking ceremony. (Motion carried under Consent Business) . Beard/Lynch Moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to utilize the services of Homework Remodeling and Construction to facilitate the construction of an accessible ramp and stairway for the Tahpah Park Baseball Stadium grandstand at a cost not to exceed $6, 000 from the Park Reserve Fund and waive the building permit fees accordingly. (Motion carried under Consent Business) . Beard/Sweeney moved to remove the tabled motion regarding the PUD for Canterbury Park from the table. Motion carried unanimously. Karen Marty stated that the concerts and live music uses under No. 7 (Theatre, dance, concerts, live music, and other entertainment) could be pulled out and numbered separately and be allowed only if incidental to items 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , and 8 of the permitted uses; and, limit the outdoor events to ten events per year with over an actual 10, 000 attendance and more events must be approved by the City Council based on four criteria. The four criteria would be as follows: 1) substantiated noise complaints, 2) nuisance, 3) an adverse recommendation by the Police Chief, or 4) health, safety and welfare concerns. A discussion regarding the number of concerts and anticipated attendance ensued. Cncl. Brekke and Cncl . Sweeney withdrew their motion. Brekke/Sweeney moved to amend the PUD for Canterbury Park in the manner just described by Ms. Marty and limit concerts and live Official Proceedings of the May 16, 1995 Shakopee City Council Page -10- music, if not incidental to uses numbered 1, 2 , 3 , 4 , and 8 , to five outdoor events in a calendar year with over 5, 000 people. Brekke/Sweeney moved to amend the motion to five outdoor events in a calendar year with an actual attendance of over 10, 000 people. Motion carried unanimously. Motion carried unanimously on main motion as amended. Sweeney/Lynch offered Ordinance No. 417 , Fourth Series, An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending the Zoning Map Adopted in City Code Sec. 11. 03 by Rezoning Land Commonly Known as Canterbury Park From Race Track District to Planned Unit Development Overlay Zone No. 3 , as amended, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Barry Stock stated that despite the argument that Prior Lake residents pay a good portion of their property taxes to the City of Prior Lake but reside within the Shakopee School District, staff recommends that the City Council consider reducing the fee from $21. 00 to the previously adopted rate of $5. 00 per activity for the Prior Lake residents who reside within the Shakopee School District. A discussion regarding Sand Creek and Prior Lake residents ensued. Brekke/Beard moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to draft a Resolution amending the 1995 Fee Schedule to reduce the non-resident fee from $21. 00 to $5. 00, retro-active to January 1, 1995, for Prior Lake residents living within the Shakopee School District boundaries and present the resolution at the next City Council Meeting. Motion carried unanimously. Barry Stock reported that bids for site work on the Civic Center Bid Package #3 have been received and stated that the low bidder for site work for the Shakopee Civic Center was Imperial Developers, Inc. in the amount of $647 , 800 . 00, and the low bid for Cast In Place Concrete was Jesco, Inc. in the amount of $203 , 800. 00 . Mr. Stock stated that staff recommend both Jesco, Inc. and Imperial Developers, Inc. for the site work contract and the Cast In Place Concrete work. Brekke/Beard moved to award Civic Center Bid Package #3 - site work to Imperial Developers and authorize the appropriate City Officials to execute contract documents accordingly ($647 , 800 . 00) . Motion carried unanimously. Brekke/Beard moved to award Civic Center Bid Package #4 - Cast-In- Place Concrete to Jesco Inc. and authorize the appropriate City Officials to execute contract documents accordingly ($203 , 800 . 00) . Motion carried unanimously. Official Proceedings of the May 16, 1995 Shakopee City Council Page -11- Beard/Lynch moved to approve the payment of $76 , 426 . 28 to P.A.C.T. Investment, Inc. for Easement No. 's 94-16 and 94-17 on Project No. 1994-10, for Sarazin Street, Roundhouse Street and 4th Avenue Improvements. (Motion carried under Consent Business) . Beard/Lynch moved to waive the Zoning Ordinance Fee for future rezoning of remnant R-4 parcel west of Roundhouse Street. (Motion carried under Consent Business) . Beard/Lynch moved to direct the appropriate City Officials to execute the First Amendment to the Twin Cities Water Quality Initiative Technical Project Agreement between The Metropolitan Council And The City Of Shakopee. (Motion carried under Consent Business) . The Cooperative Agreement from Scott County which address the construction of Fuller Street and County Road 77 states that the County will reimburse the City for its share in the cost of the project in the amount of $277 , 000. Karen Marty explained that it is unclear whether the City of Shakopee will receive $277 , 000 or $277 . 000 minus in-kind expenses and did not recommend signing the contract until this is clear, and stated that paragraph (F) will be rewritten to make it clear that nothing will be deducted from the $277 , 000. Brekke/Beard moved to direct the appropriate City officials to execute the Cooperative Agreement with Scott County for the construction of Fuller Street. Motion carried unanimously. Beard/Lynch moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to extend the consultant contract with Orr-Schelen-Mayeron & Associates, Inc. until January 1, 1996 . (Motion carried under Consent Business) . Beard/Lynch moved to authorize Orr-Schelen-Mayeron & Associates, Inc. to prepare easements for St. Francis Sanitary Sewer Project No. 1995-2 for a cost not-to-exceed $750. 00 and to perform construction staking for the Downtown Alley Reconstruction Project No. 1993-9 for a cost not-to-exceed $7 , 000 . 00 . (Motion carried under Consent Business) . Beard/Lynch moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to take the necessary action to hire M. Albert Koester as an Engineering Technician II with the following actions: 1 . Hire Mr. Koester at Step 1 of the 1994 Pay Plan with salary adjusted to 1995 Pay Plan once approved by Council . Official Proceedings of the May 16, 1995 Shakopee City Council Page -12- 2 . Authorize a pay and performance review after six months employment with the provision that Mr. Koester be moved to Step 2 of the Pay Plan provided that he satisfactorily completes six months of employment. (Motion carried under Consent Business) . Beard/Lynch moved to approve bills in the amount of $577 , 335. 55. (Motion carried under Consent Business) . Beard/Lynch offered Resolution No. 4220. A Resolution amending Resolution No. 4136 Adopting the 1995 Budget and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under Consent Business) . Beard/Lynch offered Resolution No. 4221 . A Resolution Approving Plans And Specifications And Ordering Advertisement For Bids For P & V Addition and P & V 2nd Addition Project No. 1995-5, and move its adoption. (Motion carried under Consent Business) . Mayor Laurent excused himself from the Council table due to a conflict- of interest relating to the Vierling Drive Project. Brekke/Beard moved to remove from the table the motion directing staff to prepare a policy for assessing box culvert crossings of the Upper Valley Drainageway utilizing option #2 (assess the 36' local street equivalent for the box culvert to the developer and the additional length of culvert needed for collector street oversizing to be paid by the City) . Motion carried unanimously with Mayor Laurent abstaining. Bruce Loney reported that after further review on the City's policy on assessing box culverts, it was concluded that the City has paid for the Upper Valley Drainage Way with 100% City funds and that the cost for crossings will be borne by the developer, as per City policy. He stated that this is considered the City's contribution to a box culvert crossing. Mr. Loney requested the adoption of Resolution No. 4193 and the adoption of a policy for box culvert crossing as there are two crossings left. He stated that he would then come back to the City Council with an official resolution for a box culvert assessment policy. Brekke/Lynch moved to amend the motion to add an "s" in the event there are two developers impacted by a street segment involving a box culvert. Horest Grazer, representing Gold Nugget Developers, approached the podium and stated that it is not a fair distribution of the improvement cost, and that option No. 3 is more equitable, distributing the cost over a larger area. He concluded, stating Official Proceedings of the May 16, 1995 Shakopee City Council Page -13- that they have conceded going along with the City because Vierling Drive is necessary for their future development, and would sign the needed waivers and provide the necessary easements for right of way. Motion carried unanimously with Mayor Laurent abstaining. Motion carried unanimously on amended main motion with Mayor Laurent abstaining. Brekke/Lynch offered Resolution No. 4193 . A Resolution Ordering an Improvement and the Preparation of Plans and Specifications for Vierling Drive, from County Road 79 to County Road 77 , Project No. 1995-6 , and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously with Mayor Laurent abstaining. Mayor Laurent returned to his seat at the Council table. After discussion the next Committee of the Whole Meetings were scheduled for May 30th at 7 : 00 P.M. , and June 19 at 5 : 30 P.M. Bruce Loney gave an update on the KC Hall Property Acquisition for Sarazin Street. He explained that he had spoken with their attorney and that negotiations are continuing at this time. Mr. Loney requested that another staff person be involved in the negotiations and discussions. Council agreed that Mr. Kraft could select another staff person to continue the negotiations with Mr. Loney and the KC Hall representatives. Mayor Laurent recessed the meeting at 11 : 19 P.M. for an Executive Session for the purpose of discussing labor negotiations. Mayor Laurent re-convened the meeting at 11 : 53 P.M. and stated that Council just completed an executive session to discuss labor negotiations and that no action was taken. J dith Si1ox ity Clerk Esther TenEyck Recording Secretary '­01 95 16:5 7 F.AA Z002 s'r 9r CI 1 D JUN N 2 1995 Doug Bell BBB Pawn May 36 , 1995 6845 So. Fourteenth Ave . Richfield MN. 55423 1612) 869 5906 To The Mayor of Shakopee City Council Members City Staff I in August of ! 994 presented to council and staff information that I had Gathered from YN.state ofices that chalenged if all the information in their aplications for lisc.of the two other pawn shops.Was in fact,-not conplete and containing false information contrary to City Code Sec. 6.02 "Any false statement in such application, or or willful omission to state any information called for on such application form, shall upon discovery of such falsehood' work an automatic refusal of license, if alreadv issued, shall render any license or permit issued pursant thereto, Void, andof no effect to protect the applicant from prosecution for vi&lation of this Chapter, or any part hereof. " I wish to know what your discussion and you decision on this matter was? IF I do not hear from you I will be at the June 6 meeting of council to hear yozr action Please placcit on the agenda for Public discussion the June 6 1995 Shakopee City Council meetingif you chose nut to respond to me. Sincerely, Doug Bell NOTE: This item was received too late to be put on the agenda - Mr. Bell will most likely be at the meeting and want to be heard under recognition of interested citizens. EMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk ,, RE: P & V Additions Waivers - Norman Denstedt DATE: May 30, 1995 INTRODUCTION: Mr. Denstedt has submitted a letter asking that he be permitted to sign a waiver for his property for the improvements. BACKGROUND: Mr. Denstedt is asking to sign a waiver agreeing to the $8,000.00 assessment per lot for his property located in the P & V Additions. You may remember that property owners were given a chance to sign the waivers agreeing to a maximum assessment of $8,000.00 prior to annexation. Property owners were given another chance to sign the waiver at the January 3, 1995 public hearing on the proposed improvements. At the January 3rd public hearing, City Council specifically gave property owners until 7:50 P.M. that night to sign a waiver. In the attached letter, Mr. Denstedt indicates that he went to the meeting at Jackson Township Township Town Hall concerning the annexation and installation of City water, street and curbing and that he voted for the improvements. He also indicated that he was not able to attend the public hearing at City Hall on the improvements. When Mr. Denstedt stopped into City Hall last week to talk about the proposed improvements for the VIP sewer interceptor extension, he indicated that he had not signed a waiver and that he was unaware of any waiver. He stated that he had been in support of the annexation and the improvements and asked if he could sign a waiver. Because City Council had set a time limit on accepting waivers at their meeting on January 3rd, Mr. Denstedt was invited to write a letter to City Council explaining his situation. ALTERNATIVES: 1] Allow Mr. Denstedt to sign a waiver 2] Do not allow Mr. Denstedt to sign a waiver RECOMMENDATION: Discuss and direct staff whether or not to allow Mr. Denstedt to sign a waiver on the proposed improvements to the P & V Additions. (Lot 4, Block 2, P & V 2nd Addition) Official Proceedings of the January 3 , 1995 Shakopee City Council Page -3- Mayor Laurent opened the public hearing for the proposed public improvements for the P & V Addition and- P & V Second Addition. Dave Nummer spoke briefly on the proposed public improvements for the P & V additions and stated that 31 property owners of the 34 parcels on the assessment roll have signed the waivers. He explained that the improvements consist of sanitary sewer, watermain, 36' urban section and that the estimated cost is $11, 500 per lot. Sweeney/Lynch moved to give the 3 parcels that have not yet signed i/ the waivers until 7 : 50 P.M. tonight to do so, or to be assessed an estimated $11, 500 . 00. Motion carried unanimously. Ms . Cox stated that she did have waivers with her. Mayor Laurent asked if anyone present wished to speak on the proposed improvements for the P & V Additions. John Collins, 109 E Mound St. , Shakopee, Mn. approached the podium. Mr. Collins stated his concern about the Harcy property, which the state bought and is currently renting out. He asked whether the state was going to pay the assessments. He also wanted to make sure he would not be assessed for a vacant lot which has no street access. Dave Nummer stated that Mr. Collins would not be assessed for the vacant lot but that there would also not be any sewer or water installed. In answer to Mr. Collins other question, he stated that the State would pay the assessments for the Harcy property. Mayor Laurent closed the public hearing for the P "& V Additions. Lynch/Sweeney offered Resolution No. 4150, A Resolution Ordering an Improvement and the Preparation of Plans and Specifications for the P & V Addition and P & V 2nd Addition, Project No. 1995-5, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Cncl . Lynch stated her concern for taking the time to seek qualified candidates for police officers. Cncl . Sweeney reiterated Cncl . Lynch's concerns for the record. Cncl . Brekke also had the same concern and wanted it noted on the record. Lynch/Sweeney moved to authorize the hiring of Chris L. Dellwo as a police officer with the Shakopee Police Department at a monthly rate of $2 , 463 . 00 subject to the satisfactory completion of pre- employment medical and psychological testing and the customary 12 month probation period. Motion carried unanimously. �%���-'�.,►+�/ ,r,,�,-- r�zr YL�(�- ,c:� lt/�,o .•.�/ s��/�i �1 /'IG .� 6t/ �1� S��.c�� �.�.�'�-tom-•-. �.�-w,z� �--�-- /�� ow, �,�.r-�+�,,-�� p eve 2� �s CITY OF SHAKOPEE MAY 3 0 1995 F /0 TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director SUBJ: 1994 Annual Financial Report DATE: May 31, 1995 Introduction The City Council has retained the Firm of Deloitte and Touche LLP. to perform the audit of the City' s annual financial report . Background The City is required to have an audit of its annual financial report . Council has retained the firm of Deloitte and Touche, LLP to perform the audit . Their letter to Council and their report will be under the communications part of the agenda. Cliff Hoffman will be present to make their report . Attached is material from Deloitte and Touche . The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the City is attached. Staff will not make a separate presentation on the data contained in the report . Council should feel free to call myself or Vernice Takumi with any questions that may arise . Action Move to accept the auditors report and the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for 1994 . Deloifte & TouchO LLP /\ 400 One Financial Plaza Telephone:(612)397-4000 120 South Sixth Street Facsimile: (612)397-4450 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402-1844 April 21, 1995 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council The City of Shakopee,Minnesota We have audited the general purpose financial statements of the City of Shakopee,Minnesota(the City) for the year ended December 31, 1994 and have issued our report thereon dated April 21, 1995. Our professional standards require that we communicate with you concerning certain matters that may be of interest to you in fulfilling your obligation to oversee the financial reporting and disclosure process for which management of the City is responsible. We have prepared the following comments to assist the Mayor and City Council in fulfilling that obligation. Our Responsibility under Generally Accepted Auditing Standards: Our responsibility under generally accepted auditing standards and Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States,has been described to you in our engagement letter dated November 3, 1994. As described in such letter,those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable, rather than absolute, assurance about whether the general purpose financial statements are free of material misstatement. Those standards also require that we obtain an understanding of the City's internal control structure sufficient to enable us to properly plan our audit. We have previously issued a separate report to you, also dated April 21, 1995,containing our comments on the internal control structure. Significant Accounting Policies: The City's significant accounting policies are disclosed in the notes to the general purpose financial statements. There were no significant changes in these policies during 1994,except for the change in the method of accounting for depreciation on contributed assets as discussed in Note 1 to the general purpose financial statements. Management Judgments and Accounting Estimates: Accounting estimates are an integral part of the financial statements prepared by management and are based upon management's current judgments. Those judgments are normally based on knowledge and experience about past and current events and assumptions about future events. All of the significant management judgments and accounting estimates in the 1994 general purpose financial statements were normal and recurring and were determined on basis consistent with those used in prior years. Other Information in the Annual Report: When audited financial statements are included in documents containing other information, such as the City's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, generally accepted auditing standards require that we read such other information and consider whether it, or the manner of its presentation, is materially inconsistent with the Deloittebuche Tohmatsu International Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council The City of Shakopee,Minnesota April 21, 1995 Page 2 information, or the manner of its presentation,in the general purpose financial statements audited by us. We have read the other information in the City's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and have inquired as to the methods of measurement and presentation of such information. If we had noted a material inconsistency, or if we had obtained any knowledge of a material misstatement of fact in the other information,we would have discussed this matter with management and, if appropriate, with the Mayor and City Council. Disagreements with Management: We had no disagreements with management regarding the application of accounting principles,the basis for management's judgments about accounting estimates,the scope of our audit,disclosures to be included in the general purpose financial statements, or the wording of our report on the 1994 general purpose financial statements. Consultation with Other Accountants: Management informed us that there were no consultations with other independent public accountants regarding accounting or auditing matters during 1994. Major Issues Discussed with Management Prior to Retention: We discussed no major accounting or auditing issues with management in connection with our engagement as the City's auditors in 1994. Difficulties Encountered in Performing the Audit: We experienced no difficulties in dealing with management relating to the performance of our audit. We received the full cooperation of management and staff. Our audit scope was essentially the same as reviewed with you in our November 3, 1994 engagement letter. We believe that we have direct and unrestricted access to the City's senior management and to the Mayor and City Council. This report is intended solely for the use of the Mayor and City Council and should not be used for any other purpose. This restriction is not intended to limit the distribution of this report which,upon acceptance by the City,is a matter of public record. We will be pleased to further discuss this report with you at your convenience. Yours truly, � Deloifte & buche LLP 400 One Financial Plaza Telephone: (612)397-4000 /Ow 120 South Sixth Street Facsimile: (612)397-4450 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402-1844 April 21, 1995 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Shakopee,Minnesota In planning and performing our audit of the general purpose financial statements of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota(the City) for the year ended December 31, 1994 (on which we have issued our report dated April 21, 1995),we considered its internal control structure in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the general purpose financial statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control structure. In connection therewith, we submit this report containing our comments, observations,and recommendations concerning reportable conditions and administrative and operating matters which resulted from our audit of the City's 1994 general purpose financial statements. Our observations and recommendations are presented under the following main captions: Section I - Independent Auditors'Report on the Internal Control Structure Based on the Audit of the Financial Statements Section H - Current-year Administrative and Operating Matters Section III- Follow-up on Prior-year Administrative and Operating Matters This report is intended solely for the information of the Mayor and City Council members,management, and others within the City. This restriction is not intended to limit the distribution of this report, which is a matter of public record. We will be pleased to discuss these recommendations with you and, if desired, to assist you in implementing any of them. Yours truly, Deloittebuche Tohmatsu International Deloifte & SECTION ToucheLLP 0400 One Financial Plaza Telephone:(612)397-4000 120 South Sixth Street Facsimile: (612)397-4450 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402-1844 INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT ON THE INTERNAL CONTROL STRUCTURE BASED ON THE AUDIT OF THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Shakopee,Minnesota We have audited the general purpose financial statements of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota(the City)as of and for the year ended December 31, 1994 and have issued our report thereon dated April 21, 1995. We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and Government Auditing Standards,issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the general purpose financial statements are free of material misstatement. In planning and performing our audit of the general purpose financial statements of the City for the year ended December 31, 1994, we considered its internal control structure in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the general purpose financial statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control structure. The management of the City is responsible for establishing and maintaining an internal control structure. In fulfilling this responsibility, estimates and judgments by management are required to assess the expected benefits and related costs of internal control structure policies and procedures. The objectives of an internal control structure are to provide management with reasonable,but not absolute, assurance that assets are safeguarded against loss from unauthorized use or disposition and that transactions are executed in accordance with management's authorization and recorded properly to permit the preparation of general purpose financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Because of inherent limitations in any internal control structure, errors or irregularities may nevertheless occur and not be detected. Also, projection of any evaluation of the structure to future periods is subject to the risk that procedures may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or that the effectiveness of the design and operation of policies and procedures may deteriorate. For the purpose of this report, we have classified the significant internal control structure policies and procedures in the following categories: cash receipts,cash disbursements,receivables, payables, payroll, and general ledger. DeloitteTouche Tohmatsu International 2 For all of the internal control structure categories listed above, we obtained an understanding of the design of relevant policies and procedures and whether they have been placed in operation, and we assessed control risk. Our consideration of the internal control structure would not necessarily disclose all matters in the internal control structure that might be material weaknesses under standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. A material weakness is a reportable condition in which the design or operation of one or more of the specific internal control structure elements does not reduce to a relatively low level the risk that errors or irregularities in amounts that would be material in relation to the general purpose financial statements being audited may occur and not be detected within a timely period by employees in the normal course of performing their assigned functions. We noted no matters involving the internal control structure and its operation that we consider to be material weaknesses as defined above. This report is intended for the information of the Mayor and City Council members, management,and others within the City,and officials of applicable state agencies. However, this report is a matter of public record and its distribution is not limited. &.e�l r T L April 21, 1995 3 SECTION II CURRENT-YEAR ADMINISTRATIVE AND OPERATING MATTERS Securities and Exchange Commission View on Disclosures by Municipal Security Issuers: The City issues timely audited financial information and has maintained a Certificate of Achievement of Excellence in Financial Reporting for the last ten consecutive years. In 1994, when the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued Financial Reporting Release(FRR)42,Statement of the Commission Regarding Disclosure Obligations of Municipal Securities and Others, the City was well-positioned to conform with the SEC's recommendations. Currently, only annual financial information is prepared for the secondary market. FRR 42 provides the SEC's views with respect to disclosure obligations of participants in the municipal securities markets under the antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws. FRR 42 is an interpretive release that"suggests disclosure practices that address and minimize the risk of misleading investors". FRR 42 indicates that within six months of the fiscal year end,municipal issues should provide the marketplace with the following: ® Financial statements that are audited in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and that are prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP)or are accompanied by a quantified explanation of material departures from GAAP o Other pertinent financial and operation information • A narrative discussion that analyzes financial condition, results of operations, and facts that are likely to have a material impact on the issuer FRR 42 indicates that, in the case of some conduct financing, information should be provided to the secondary market on a more frequent basis than annually. The above information is provided to inform the City of a substantial change in the SEC's involvement in municipal financing. Investment Policy: As the City is aware, recent news reports have highlighted significant problems experienced with the use of "derivative" securities (i.e., Orange County, California) as part of a governmental unit's investment strategy. Derivatives are contracts that derive their fair value from the performance of underlying assets,interest,or currency exchange rates, or a variety of other indices. Although derivatives have the potential for significant returns, they also expose the investor to a greater risk of loss. The City's investment policy does not specifically address the derivative investment option nor restrict their purchase by investment managers. We recommend that the City review their current investment policy and ascertain whether the derivative investments should be restricted. 4 Civic Center Construction: Currently,the City is in the process of building a new civic center near the high school. The project is proposed to include an ice sheet,two gymnasiums,a wrestling and gymnastics area, and associated spaces at a cost of around $5.5 million. We are aware that the City has done extensive research into the cost of constructing and operating the new facility. However, since this is the first venture of the City to operate such a civic center,care should be taken to ensure that significant overages do not occur in the construction of the building and that fees charged for services cover the costs of operating the facility. Also, once construction has been completed,the civic center operations should be established within the enterprise fund type. Refuse Collection: During 1994,the refuse collection, included within the enterprise fund type, experienced an operating loss of approximately$13,000. During 1993 and 1992, when the operations were included within the general fund of the City,operations broke even since it was the City's intent to try to cover its costs and not to provide a profit to the City. However,now that the City has separated the operations of refuse collection within its own fund, the charges for services and costs associated with the program should be monitored throughout the year to ensure that fees charged are appropriate and costs incurred are reasonable. As the City continues to expand its population and number of households,the need for refuse collection will also increase, and it is imperative that costs and fees charged for these services be monitored. State of Minnesota Property Tax Initiatives: The City's tax capacity for the 1995 property tax payable increased 9.2%over the 1994 property tax payable. The State of Minnesota(the State) mandated an across-the-board 7%increase in residential property values for the 1995 property tax payable which,because of the City's large commercial and industrial tax base, resulted in a significant shift in tax burden from commercial to residential taxes. The City,in an effort to minimize the impact of increasing property taxes on residents, has kept the gross property tax levy for 1995 the same as that for 1994. In addition,the State had a proposal before it to freeze property taxes for the 1996 payable and is also discussing reducing state aid to the State's cities. The City will face the usual pressure for an increase in its future operating budgets due to the growth in the City's population and the probable operating subsidy for the operation of the new civic center. The City's revenue source from the State for the 1995 budget is approximately 16% of its total general fund revenue. Since the State will probably continue to review its role in providing aid to the State's various cities, the City should continue to monitor the State's initiatives, review its policies of obtaining additional revenue from other sources, and continue to monitor city spending to ensure that the needs of the City are met into the future. I I 5 Accounts Receivable -Shakopee Public Utilities Commission: The City bills the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission (SPUC) for its share of street and sewer construction projects undertaken by the City(i.e., watermain portion of construction costs) at the completion of a project. As construction projects can span over a number of years, the City is often not reimbursed for expenditures incurred on behalf of SPUC until after the project is completed. It would be more advantageous to the City if they bill SPUC for its portion of construction costs based on the percentage-of-completion method. That is, as projects are in progress, SPUC should be billed for their estimated portion, with final payments due after completion of project. By receiving SPUC payments as expenditures are made by the City to finance a project, the City can better manage the cashflow needed to pay contractors and other associated personnel throughout completion of the projects. Long-term Disability Insurance: Federal income tax rules provide that if an employer pays the premium for disability insurance as a tax-free benefit for an employee, the disability payments received by a disabled employee are taxable. Conversely, if the employee has such premiums included within their respective taxable income, the employee, if disabled, would receive benefits without paying income taxes. The City's employees currently are not taxed on the long-term disability premiums the City pays on their behalf. In the event of a long-term disability in which an employee becomes disabled, the employee's benefits are fully taxable. If the City was,to change its program for disability insurance and possibly include the premium paid within the employees' taxable income,it would make a significant difference in the benefits received and the protection of all employees. The"average"employee typically would have a less than$100 increase in annual compensation if such a change was made. Deloitte&Touche tap's tax department could help the City in revising their current disability insurance program to account for this change. Fixed Asset Capitalization Policy: Currently, the City maintains detailed fixed asset records on all items with an original cost greater than $500. In recent years, as promoted by Governmental Accounting, Auditing, and Financial Reporting, issued in June 1994, many governments have come to reexamine their capitalization thresholds. When a government decides to apply a new threshold, it should also remove all existing fixed assets that no longer qualify under the new threshold. The City should consider increasing their threshold limits for capitalization from $500 to$2,000. This would help in alleviating the record-keeping time required for maintaining detailed fixed asset records for those items currently capitalized which would not be under the new policy. 6 SECTION 111 FOLLOW-UP ON PRIOR-YEAR ADMINISTRATIVE AND OPERATING MATTERS In our prior-year report,we commented on the following areas: General Fund Program: The general fund of the City has a positive fund balance of$2.2 million as of December 31, 1994, which is approximately 39% of the 1995 budgeted general fund expenditures. As discussed in the prior-year's comments, state revenue sources continue to be decreased,and the State is looking at its cities' financial conditions as it cuts state spending. During 1994,the City moved the refuse collection activities previously recorded within the general fund into an established enterprise fund. In addition, as of January 1, 1995, the City has established an internal service fund for equipment management whereby the ultimate users of the City's fixed assets are being charged for their use to fund future purchases. We recommend that the City continue to monitor its general fund balance and identify any additional programs that could be transferred to other fund types to reduce the general fund balance to better reflect the City's financial position. Comment is not repeated in the current year. Sewer Charges: Since activity in the sewer fund has increased significantly in the past couple years,with the reconstruction of the City's sewer lines and an increase in population, the City Council adopted a 13% increase in sewer rates in 1994. With this increase,the sewer fund experienced operating income of approximately$109,000 in 1994, which is an increase over the operating losses experienced in 1993 and 1992 of$162,000 and$94,000, respectively. The City should continue to monitor the rates charged to its customers. Comment is not repeated in the current year. Popular Reporting: The City did try a form of a popular report several years ago,but the interest in the product did not justify the effort and the cost of producing the report. However,the City is currently releasing a summary of the City's financial position within the city newsletter. Comment is not repeated in the current year. Depreciation on Contributed Assets: In the past, the City closed out depreciation expense to retained earnings. During 1994, the practice was changed so that depreciation taken on contributed assets is now going against contributed capital. Comment is not repeated in the current year. 7 CITY OF SHAKOPEE City Council Presentation June 6, 1995 Presented by: Cliff Hoffman, Partner CITY OF SHAKOPEE Operating Fund Status December 31 , 1994 Special General Revenue Enterprise Fund Fund Funds Total Fund balance at December 31, 1994 $ 2,227,747 $ 301,420 $ 33,015,509 $ 35,544,676 Less: Reserved/designated (650,000) (301,420) (1,657,064) (2,608,484) Property, net (26,386,286) (26,386,286) Liquid fund balance at December 31, 1994 1,577,747 - 4,972,159 6,549,906 Fund balance at December 31, 1993 1,565,800 2,330,195 29,011,543 321907,538 Less: Reserved (2,330,195) (2,889,220) (5,219,415) Property, net (22,997,237) (22,997,237) Liquid fund balance at December 31, 1993 1,565,800 - 3,125,086 4,690,886 Net increase $ 11.947 $ $ 1.847.073 $ 1.859.020 2 CITY OF SHAKOPEE Productivity Measures 1994 1993 1992 A. Population 13,277 121732 12,166 B. Number of households 41755 4,559 41451 C. Number of full-time employees (excluding enterprise funds) 66 64 62 D. Population per employee 201 199 196 E. Households per employee 72 71 72 3 M MM M M M M M M M M wow am M � CITY OF SHAKOPEE Enterprise Funds 1994 1993 1992 Operating income (loss): Electric (SPUC) $ 1,080,000 $ 685,000 $ 297,000 Water (SPUC) 242,000 1531000 146,000 Sewer 10900 (162,000) (94,000) Storm Drainage 5,000 92,000 Refuse collection (13,000) Total $ 1.423.000 $ 676,000 $ 441.000 4 MM mmm now M " Mm MW CITY OF SHAKOPEE Selected Performance Ratios December 31 , 1994 Shakopee Excluding Overlapping National Debt Median* I. DEBT MEDIANS: Net debt per capita $612 $639 Ratio of net debt to estimated full value 1.5% 1.5% II. ENTERPRISE MEDIANS - Operating ratio: Water 42.9% 63.4% Sewer 82.4% 63.7% Water and sewer 68.1% 66.1% Electric 42.3% 87.9% Refuse collection 102.5% Not available Storm drainage 45.8% Not available *Per 1995 Moody's Selected Indicators of Municipal Performance 5 rr rr rw .r r�rt r r�s r r� rt ar �. ,rr r r r r r r CITY OF SHAKOPEE Performance Definitions I. DEBT MEDIANS: Gross bonded Debt service Net debt per capita = debt - funds on hand Estimated population Ratio of net debt to Gross bonded Debt service estimated full value = debt - funds on hand Estimated market value II. ENTERPRISE MEDIANS - Operating ratio = Operating expenses (without depreciation) Operating revenues 6 Nam, CITY OF SHAKOPEE General Fund Revenues (000's) 56.4% 48.6% 9.0% 14.9% 9.9% 4 ° 15.9% 3.8% 14.1°/O — 23.1% 4.3% 1994 1993 Total Revenues 1994 - $5,239 Total Revenues 1993 = $5,535 56.2% Am" ° v14.8% 10.0/° 16.2% 2.8% 1995 Total Revenues 1995 Budget = $5,075 Taxes Fines, Forfeits, Intergovernmental Licenses, Permits Miscellaneous Charges for Services CITY OF SHAKOPEE General Fund Expenditures (000's) 44.5% 12.3% 30.9% i 12.0% \ 23.2% 19.4% 24.1% -- 33.6% 1994 1993 Total Expenditures 1994 = $5,370 Total Expenditures 1993 - $5,168 37.0% 11.8% 27.1% / 24.1% 1995 Total Expenditures 1995 Budget = $5,668 Public Safety Recreation General Government Public Works and Miscellaneous r CITY OF SHAKOPEE General Fund Revenues/Expenditures Per Household 1 ,400 1,214 1 ,200 1,104 1,133 1,101 1,129 1 ,010 1 ,000 800 I 600 400 I i 200 0 1992 1993 1994 ® Revenues M Expenditures I� i q i e CITY OF SHAKOPEE Unreserved General Fund Balance Compared to Annual Expenditures Next Year Percentage Year Ending Unreserved Annual of December 31 Fund Balance Expenditures Expenditures 1991 $ 1,858,000 $ 419121000 37.8% 1992 11728,000 5,168,000 33.4 1993 1,566,000 5,370,000 29.2 1994 21228,000 5,668,0001' 39.3 (1) 1995 Budgeted expenditures 10 CITY OF SHAKOPEE National General Obligation Bond Ratings Aaa 2% Aa1 2% Aa 12% Al 19% A • • - - 34% Baal 14% Baa 15% Ba and below 2% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% Per March 29, 1995 report obtained from Moody's Investor Service. Ii CITY OF SHAKOPEE Debt Service Schedule (excluding Revenue Bonds) (Principal and Interest) 8,000,000 7,000,000 6,000,000 5,000,000 4,000,000 3,000,000 2,000,000 I 1,000,000 0 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 General Obligation Bonds Tax Increment Bonds 12 rr err �Ir �r rr rr rr r r� rr rr r r r r r r rr r CITY OF SHAKOPEE Public Debt of the U.S. Federal Government Interest % of Fiscal Debt Per. Cap. Paid Federal Year (billions) (dollars) (billions) Outlays 1977 $ 698.8 $ 3,710 $ 41.9 10.2 1978 771.5 3,463 48.7 10.6 1979 826.5 3,669 59.8 11.9 1980 907.7 3,985 74.9 12.7 1981 997.9 4,338 95.6 14.1 1982 1,142.0 4,913 117.4 15.7 1983 1,377.2 5,870 128.8 15.9 1984 1,572.3 6,640 153.8 18.1 1985 1,823.1 7,598 178.9 18:9 1986 2,125.3 8,774 190.2 19.2 1987 2,350.3 9,615 195.4 19.5 1988 2,602.3 10,534 214.1 20.1 1989 2,857.4 11,545 240.9 21.0 1990 3,223.3 13,000 264.8 21.1 1991 3,665.3 14,436 285.4 21.5 1992 4,064.6 15,846 292.3 21.1 Source: Bureau of Public Dept. U.S. Department of Treasury and the World Almanac and Book of Facts, 1994 13 ww r� rw w wr wr w �w ww ww rw ww r ww was s iwr r�r ww CITY OF SHAKOPEE U.S. Federal Government - Maturity Distribution of Securities Held by Private Investors for 1993 (millions of dollars) Amount outstanding privately held 21562,336 Maturity class: Within 1 year 858,135 1 to 5 years 978,714 5 to 10 years 306,663 10 to 20 years 94,346 Over 20 years 3241479 Average length: Years 5 Month 10 14 +ter r� a� �r r r r r r r nr r r l�sr rs >• s �■r rn� CITY OF SHAKOP€€ U.S. Federal Government - Deficit in Billions of Dollars -*-Without OBRA - - With OBRA 400 300 ��•�'� 200 100 0 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 The deficit will decrease with the implementation of the 131-2s1dcnt's new budget biii but will not disappear. Even with Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 (OBRA 93), the deficit may resume its upward trend after 1997. 15 err r� � � r� � w � rr ■w r� � r r� ■� � rr r s CITY OF SHAKOPEE U.S. Federal Government - Debt as a Percentage of GDP -*- Without OBRA - - With OBRA 60% 40% 20% —` 0% 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 As the graph shows, OBRA 93 will put only a small dent in our debt problem. Regardless of the spending cuts and tax hikes, our debt will still remain we'll above 400 of our gross OM estic product and we will likely still remain the world's biggest debtor nation. 16 �r +r rl rr r � r o rr rs r� rlr �Ir r� r s r rr r CITY OF SHAKOPEE U.S. Federal Government - Net Income The money that the government collects. Most of this money comes from taxes of which there are many kinds. Millions of Dollars Actual Estimates 1993 1994 1995 Individual income taxes $ 509,680 $ 549,901 $ 595,048 Corporation income taxes 117,520 130,719 140,437 Excise taxes 48,057 541550 71,888 Social insurance taxes 428,300 461,923 490,393 Custom duties 18,802 191198 20,856 Estate and gift taxes 121577 12,749 13,885 17 rr Ir Ir ® Ir Ir Ir r I/I r r� r r IrA r rr Irl r Ir CITY OF SHAKOPEE U.S. Federal General Fund Spending 1993 Social Security, Medicare, and Other Retirement 35% Law Enforcement and General Government 2% Social Programs 17% Physical, Human, and Community Development National Defence, 8% Veterans, and Foreign Net Interest on the Affairs 24% Debt 14% Source: Department of Treasury, IRS, 1994 Tax Return Instruction Booklet ) 2 Iw Iw Iw Iw w w w M = w = Iw r Iw Iw Iw Iw w w CITY OF SHAKOPEE Minnesota State General Revenues and Expenditures - Fiscal Year 1994 All other 6.3% Corporate franchise tax 6.8% State operations 8.0% - Motor vehicle excise tax 4.0% All other 5.8% Liquor and tobacco taxes 2.5% Health care 15.8% State institutions 4.7% Other taxes 5.5% Family support 3.6% Sales tax 31.3% I / I Local aids,credits, and grants 18.0% j K-12 eduation 31.7% Individual income tax 43.6% Higher education 12.40/6 Revenues Expenditures Source: State of Minnesota, 1994 Tax Return Instruction Booklet. �9 .r +�■� r ® r r r M r = r a r r r r r r CITY OF SHAKOPEE Comparisons of Selected State Statistics Difference Rank on Between State and Education Rank on Local Taxes Spending Rank on Total as a and Rank on Average Government Rank on Percentage Taxation State/Local Pay of Units per K/12 of Personal Favorable Spending State/Local 10,000 Spending Income (Unfavorable) Per Capita Employees Population Minnesota 20 5 (15) 11 10 9 Wisconsin 9 6 (3) 19 11 16 Massachusetts 8 28 20 10 13 34 Michigan 13 16 (3) 18 6 30 Maine 14 10 (4) 22 29 11 New Jersey 1 20 19 5 5 34 California 36 8 (28) 7 2 42 20 CITY OF SHAKOPEE State Fiscal Problem: The Future Looks Bleak FY98/99 FY98/99 FY98/99 Optimistic Conservative Cap Ga View' Growth Closed Beginning balance 352,000 352,000 (440,000) Current revenues 19,158,000 18,9981000 18,998,000 Current expenditures 19,419,000 20,197,000 20,866,000 Current deficit (261,000) (1,199,000) (1,863,000) Ending balance 91.000 (847.000) (2.303.000) i Optimistic view (1) We inflate revenues per projected economic growth (2) We ignore Cambridge Bank payment that we know is owed (3) We do not inflate expenditures 2 Conservative growth. Same as optimistic view except acknowledge Cambridge Bank and inflate expenditures at 3.5% per year 3 Cap gap closed. Same as conservative growth except assume do not do property tax recognition shift and do spend gap and inflate it 21 �r ■r r� rr rr r rr r rr rr �r rr rr r r �r rr rr rr CITY OF SHAKOPEE State Fiscal Problem: The Future Looks Bleak It gets worse, per Governor's budget book: "Minnesota state and local governments will [I'd say, are projected to] face deficits averaging $624 million every two years [much worse if build in cap gap spending] through at least the year 2005. This "structural" gap between revenues and expenditures is not a cyclical problem that will disappear during economic good times. It is structural and will recur, unless corrected, due to demographic changes and a slowing growth in personal income, slowing state and local government revenue growth and increasing numbers of people served by government programs and services." 22 RESOLUTION NO. 4223 A Resolution Adopting Assessments For The V.I.P. Interceptor Extension From County Road 79 To The West Corporate Limits, Rahr Forcemain And The Rahr Malting Service Line Project No.'s 1992-9, 1993-1 And 1994-8 WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the City Council of the City of Shakopee met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessments of. For the V.I.P. Interceptor Extension from County Road 79 to the West Corporate Limits, Rahr Forcemain and the Rahr Malting Service Line, Project No.'s 1992-9, 1993-1 and 1994-8. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1. That such proposed assessment together with any amendments thereof, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named herein and each tract therein included is hereby found to be benefitted by the proposed improvements in the amount of the assessments levied against it. 2. Such assessments shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of ten years, the first installment to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 1996, and shall bear interest at the rate of 5.75 percent per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added the interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 1996 and to each subsequent installment when due shall be added the interest for one year on all unpaid installments. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property,with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within thirty (30) days from the adoption of this resolution; the owner may thereafter pay to the County Treasurer the installment and interest in process of collection on the current tax list, and may pay the remaining principal balance of the assessment to the City Treasurer. 4. The Clerk shall file the assessment rolls pertaining to this assessment in her office and shall certify annually to the County Auditor on or before November 30th of each year the total amount of installments and interest on assessments on each parcel of land which are to become due in the following year. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: 1. Rahr Malting Co. shall reimburse the City for its expenses in constructing the service line on Rahr's property. The City shall specially assess the cost of the service line to Rahr Malting Co., and agrees to defer the special assessments until Rahr Malting Co. constructs its own waste water treatment plant, or until December 31, 2003, whichever occurs first. 2. The deferred assessments will be subject to the same conditions and interest rate as listed above in this resolution except that the first installment is payable on the first Monday in January of the year following the date assessments cease to be deferred. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 1995. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form: City Attorney ll � MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director SUBJECT: V.I.P. Interceptor Sewer from C.R. 79 to the West Corporate Limits and Rahr Service Line Assessment Hearing DATE: June 6, 1995 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 4223, a resolution adopting special assessments for the V.I.P. Interceptor sewer from County Road (C.R.) 79 to the West Corporate Limits, Project No.'s 1992-9 and 1993-1 and the Rahr Sewer Service Line, Project No. 1994-8. BACKGROUND: The V.I.P. Interceptor sewer, Rahr forcemain and Rahr sewer service line projects have been completed and all project costs identified. The project consists of the following: 1. Installation of a trunk sewer main (V.I.P.) from C.R. 79 to the West Corporate Limits. 2. Installation of a forcemain/gravity sewer from Rahr Malting site to V.I.P. sewer line. 3. Sewer service line on Rahr Malting site. The total project cost for all three areas is $714,318.05 with each project breakdown as follows: Project Area Project Cost ♦ V.I.P. Interceptor $237,421.53 ♦ Rahr Forcemain/Gravity Sewer $357,005.44 ♦ Rahr Service Line on Site $119,891.08 The V.I.P. Interceptor sewer project cost is the total cost to install the sewer main from C.R. 79 to the West Corporate Limits minus the oversizing cost for the Rahr forcemain/gravity sewer line flow. The oversizing cost of the V.I.P. sewer due to Rahr Malting is $52,240.13 and is included in the Rahr forcemain/gravity sewer project cost which is a City cost per an earlier agreement with Rahr Malting. 1 The Rahr sewer service line cost is $119,891.08 and this special assessment is deferred until Rahr constructs its own waste water treatment plant or until December 31, 2003 whichever occurs first as per the agreement dated May 3, 1994 between Rahr Malting and the City. The total benefitted area for the V.I.P. Interceptor sewer extension is 457.97 acres. The cost of this trunk sewer line is $237,421.53 making the sewer assessment rate at $518.42 per acre. The feasibility study had estimated the assessment rate to be $667.19 per acre. The proposed assessment roll is attached to this memo. Included in the assessment area for the City of Shakopee is Lions Park, Tahpah Park, Outlet E, South Parkview 1st Addition and the Civic Center site. These areas total 106.97 acres and total assessments of$55,455.86 to the City of Shakopee. Additionally at the May 4, 1995 Council meeting, the City will pick up the assessed cost of the P&V Addition's lots which have signed an agreement for limiting assessments up to $8,000.00 per lot. The P&V sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer and street improvement project later this year will have assessments exceeding the $8,000.00 limit. In the P&V Subdivisions, 35 out of 38 lots have signed the assessment agreement. These 35 V.I.P. assessments for the P& V area total $9,544.15 in which the City will fund out of the Capital Improvement Fund per the Finance Director. The funding breakdown for the project is as follows: Project Description Funding Source Amount V.I.P Assessed (Non City Property) Bond $172,421.52 V.I.P. Assessed (City Property) CIF $ 55,455.86 Rahr Forcemain/Gravity Sewer SSF $357,005.44 and V.I.P. Oversizing costs * Rahr Sewer Line Deferred Assessment SSF $119,891.08 P&V subdivisions Lots (City Cost) CIF $ 9,544.15 TOTAL PROJECT COST $714,318.05 Funding Summary Bond $172,421.52 SSF (Sanitary Sewer Fund) $476,896.52 CIF (Capital Improvement Fund) $ 65,000.01 TOTAL PROJECT COST $714,318.05 2 Rahr sewer line on site is deferred until December 31, 2003 or until Rahr constructs its own waste water treatment plant. The initial assessment roll, prepared earlier for the May 2, 1995 Council meeting, had an assessment area of 495.57 acres and an assessment rate of $479.08 per acre. Staff had inadvertently miscalculated the wrong areas for the proposed Meadows North site and Civic Center property. The mailed notices with assessment amounts were based on the incorrect assessment area. The proposed new assessment roll is different than the mailed notices and if adopted by Council will require notices to be mailed to the property owners. A public hearing has been scheduled for June 6, 1995 to consider the proposed assessments associated with this project. Attached is Resolution No. 4223, which adopts the special assessments on the project for City Council consideration. Staff has receive one written obejction to the assessments and this objection is attached to the memo. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 4223. 2. Deny Resolution No. 4223. 3. Table for additional information. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1, to adopt the proposed assessments as contained within the memorandum. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 4223, A Resolution Adopting Assessments for the V.I.P. Interceptor Sewer Extension, from County Road 79 to the West Corporate Limits, Rahr Forcemain and the Rahr Malting Service Line, Project No.'s 1992-9 and 1993-1 and 1994-8 and move its adoption. BL/pmp MEM4223 3 May 22, 1995 City of Shakopee 129 Holmes Street South r Shakopee, MN 55379-1351 City Clerk Judith S. Cox This shall serve as written objection to the proposed special assessment I� for parcel number 27-912050-0 in the amount of $11,646.45. &'ej��L Calvin Haasken, Christy/,' . Haasken _��1'�CL2ch1 d�'•(': � a" Sharon A. Haasken Chad M. Haasken i CITY OF SHAKOPEE i MAY 2 4 1995 FQ I TV ERA CHESTNUT R_. ._. . 413 Chestnut Street 1 Chaska, MN 5-53108 0 _ 1.i 1!_"46-3511 tacn otnce independently owned and operated This appeal is taken by the above-named Appellant pursuant to the pro- visions of Minn. Stat. §429.081 as amended and is made on the following grounds: 1. That the special benefit received by Appellant is less than the amount of said assessment levied against the land and the general assessment policy is arbitrarily and unlawfully applied to Appellant's property and not in accordance with past assessment policies. 2. That the assessments, individually or collectively exceeded the special benefit and therefore is an unconstitutional taking without ccanpensation. 3. Statutory assessment procedure not complied with by failure to provide timely notice of the total amount of the proposed assessment within two weeks of the assessment hearing. City lacked jurisdiction because property was not in City of Shakopee at time of Public Hearing. 4. Formula for determining the amount of land and calculation of the amount of land assessed is in error and is arbitrary and capricious. 5. Farm land when classified to residential use will not be beneffited by the improvements without direct access to County Road 15 and the assessment denies Appellant equal protection of the law as guaranteed by State and Federal Constitutions. r Calvin Haasken Christy Haasken / /11z7-,--" 1 Sharon A. Haasken Chad M. Haasken M, 1tl1: 71�er r►►►7 •-� t+u dl • rr�.11 S r e r�� Ui17 °-►- ]1117 7?ue011a � :, 7u17 Iu�� .,,I S►;u �n►� ��I. e.1., � 71EIC 71"1' • 9u►=1� Ire►; Sr�ts I►�i :t!�: �i 1�.1- .►�: :f►►: cur: ►y�� err ruhe1111?. 1►'►`. . 11: � . IIH9 71i;,1 +111- w 71117 71E>;� 101 �:. ��►� ;Er110�r?'r• w: � •1117 ►jll 1113 • •1111 ►- 1t 111''• ••.: 71117 r , S:]I?• Il-IS � Slll. • ••1111 � 71111 • . 11117 71117 1111� SI:1: 1.11 11111 71:.17 r I1i1- Ir 71117 . SIi1. 7►'1 11117► r% ?�� INII 11117 11111 1 @�1 SIi1+ SI119 7111� p141? I►,1s y7 71111 :1111 :IN7_`�1 � /aH� SIN'eir��. upllN►11 SWs 11,17 Su]. 7u►: ��1�,1 11.►: 91117 a /71d1 71u1 7uma , e1i11 71x17 1.9H ® 71117 71u: 7W�■CUl oao �/ CIIII�►,d, Slrled►rle 7p/� ,1: a16]eirla �� 11 .01111. 1iN7 Su17 11117 � 11:]r ►! •IE11 ' 71114 �� ►li]: n0 � . � SW� 11:]1 1111• � �tl111� / � 1x.]7 •H1I �itiis' aria 1►�r. .u17 :►,+; :!: �ar�le �1 1� / aun: crr]. lull • . 41t1c t ,' ,!!IIr1: 11111 SUI! 11:17 Slr]4 71111 :1�1'! jjr11 0►+17 71'1'1 ri`� 'SIIIIY i�117 !I : 71111. S`]I, SHI� 1111! 71117 �]7 1t..11 .1•� 71117 •�� "IGi ' �; 4:]I•. 71117 11:]7 EI+77 1► 71117 71!11 7 1� ,,1: �'• • v0��,,,�� _., �IL74 111 !)r7W9 11x14 � .r1, :1111!! 11111 11 u u ugm ;1 I I C !I I I I: :1111: ■111 1111 .... a',r floc nu nu ■xis n uo una ue, �::. cars rsm u�l:• .11:1•. .II:I:: :ILH n rc� 1 '' u no nn rs_ � � � �� It rrn ot♦ pn nn ura or■ ■r -� �o Rr nn n nn nn .. �!� ♦� �♦ Q +. . Op r �. �. .� err �� � nu, Bran• 1�u no °inn �A '•� •wiu�Q � �1iniY�iAa \ r•n un ran nn On �� nn .. n y rs �IC�1�0 �pe�Ir111 ., oo ran uo u r ,x11111 .••• •� �� �. �. .. .. v L 1111{Ir11C vliiiil n. nab .. nw r�. .■. rr n n. Me. I7a: Ori �w a]a'• nr to , ea ur nrt nr ns�. •a• nr; .s. o-. n Iliiiilill! 1 ��' na+�aa na: Co nr nF n nC oeoels iii.' 0 \m no can au nn nn nn .. • n ...,.,.,a�° na R a'= u v osr nu nn nn un nn r•la n.an pct Im no nn no r °pO04g 12 nn oa nnu■I n nnn�- ^ 0 �n nT OFQ 1.n■a n7. oA . n III'f�G�%��"Id rGil nCp0�0 oit.�" sn no IYIIt� -an I, ■ �ruudme 1/611 CE WINE 69-- ■■��: all 1`�F ■rt���1 MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director SUBJECT: V.I.P. Interceptor Sewer from C.R. 79 to the West Corporate Limits and Rahr Service Line Assessment Hearing DATE: June 6, 1995 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 4223, a resolution adopting special assessments for the V.I.P. Interceptor sewer from County Road (C.R.) 79 to the West Corporate Limits, Project No.'s 1992-9 and 1993-1 and the Rahr Sewer Service Line, Project No. 1994-8. BACKGROUND: The V.I.P. Interceptor sewer, Rahr forcemain and Rahr sewer service line projects have been completed and all project costs identified. The project consists of the following: 1. Installation of a trunk sewer main (V.I.P.) from C.R. 79 to the West Corporate Limits. 2. Installation of a forcemain/gravity sewer from Rahr Malting site to V.I.P. sewer line. 3. Sewer service line on Rahr Malting site. The total project cost for all three areas is $714,318.05 with each project breakdown as follows: Project Area Proiect Cost ♦ V.I.P. Interceptor $237,421.53 ♦ Rahr Forcemain/Gravity Sewer $357,005.44 ♦ Rahr Service Line on Site $119,891.08 The V.I.P. Interceptor sewer project cost is the total cost to install the sewer main from C.R. 79 to the West Corporate Limits minus the oversizing cost for the Rahr forcemain/gravity sewer line flow. The oversizing cost of the V.I.P. sewer due to Rahr Malting is $52,240.13 and is included in the Rahr forcemain/gravity sewer project cost which is a City cost per an earlier agreement with Rahr Malting. 1 The Rahr sewer service line cost is $119,891.08 and this special assessment is deferred until Rahr constructs its own waste water treatment plant or until December 31, 2003 whichever occurs first as per the agreement dated May 3, 1994 between Rahr Malting and the City. The total benefitted area for the V.I.P. Interceptor sewer extension is 457.97 acres. The cost of this trunk sewer line is $237,421.53 making the sewer assessment rate at $518.42 per acre. The feasibility study had estimated the assessment rate to be $667.19 per acre. The proposed assessment roll is attached to this memo. Included in the assessment area for the City of Shakopee is Lions Park, Tahpah Park, Outlet E, South Parkview 1st Addition and the Civic Center site. These areas total 106.97 acres and total assessments of$55,455.86 to the City of Shakopee. Additionally at the May 4, 1995 Council meeting, the City will pick up the assessed cost of the P&V Addition's lots which have signed an agreement for limiting assessments up to $8,000.00 per lot. The P&V sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer and street improvement project later this year will have assessments exceeding the $8,000.00 limit. In the P&V Subdivisions, 35 out of 38 lots have signed the assessment agreement. These 35 V.I.P. assessments for the P& V area total $9,544.15 in which the City will fund out of the Capital Improvement Fund per the Finance Director. The funding breakdown for the project is as follows: Project Description Funding Source Amount V.I.P Assessed (Non City Property) Bond $172,421.52 V.I.P. Assessed (City Property) CIF $ 55,455.86 Rahr Forcemain/Gravity Sewer SSF $357,005.44 and V.I.P. Oversizing costs * Rahr Sewer Line Deferred Assessment SSF $119,891.08 P&V subdivisions Lots (City Cost) CIF $ 9,544.15 TOTAL PROJECT COST 5714,318.05 Funding Summary Bond $172,421.52 SSF (Sanitary Sewer Fund) $476,896.52 CIF (Capital Improvement Fund) $ 65,000.01 TOTAL PROJECT COST $714,318.05 2 Rahr sewer line on site is deferred until December 31, 2003 or until Rahr constructs its own waste water treatment plant. The initial assessment roll, prepared earlier for the May 2, 1995 Council meeting, had an assessment area of 495.57 acres and an assessment rate of$479.08 per acre. Staff had inadvertently miscalculated the wrong areas for the proposed Meadows North site and Civic Center property. The mailed notices with assessment amounts were based on the incorrect assessment area. The proposed new assessment roll is different than the mailed notices and if adopted by Council will require notices to be mailed to the property owners. A public hearing has been scheduled for June 6, 1995 to consider the proposed assessments associated with this project. Attached is Resolution No. 4223, which adopts the special assessments on the project for City Council consideration. Staff has receive one written obejction to the assessments and this objection is attached to the memo. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 4223. 2. Deny Resolution No. 4223. 3. Table for additional information. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1, to adopt the proposed assessments as contained within the memorandum. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 4223, A Resolution Adopting Assessments for the V.I.P. Interceptor Sewer Extension, from County Road 79 to the West Corporate Limits, Rahr Forcemain and the Rahr Malting Service Line, Project No.'s 1992-9 and 1993-1 and 1994-8 and move its adoption. BL/pmp MEM4223 - I i i May 22, 1995 ' City of Shakopee 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee, MN 55379-1351 i 1 City Clerk Judith S. Cox I This shall serve as written objection to the proposed special assessment for parcel number 27-912050-0 in the amount of $11,646.45. I j Calvin Haasken Christy/,R. Haasken Sharon A. Haasken Chad M. Haasken Mi I i I I CITY OF SHAKOPEE MAY 2 4 1995 ERAO' CHESTNUT RF4!-ry 413 ChestnUt Street Cillci:,l, ,�}ti 5l)1 O �.i_ - vi' .i i4- i 1 7' 111 AP This appeal is taken by the above-named Appellant pursuant to the pro- visions of Minn. Stat. §429.081 as amended and is made on the following grounds: 1. That the special benefit received by Appellant is less than the amount of said assessment levied against the land and the general assessment policy is arbitrarily and unlawfully applied to Appellant's property and not in accordance with past assessment policies. 2. That the assessments, individually or collectively exceeded the special benefit and therefore is an unconstitutional taking without compensation. 3. Statutory assessment procedure not complied with by failure to provide timely notice of the total amount of the proposed assessment within two weeks of the assessment hearing. City lacked jurisdiction because property was not in City of Shakopee at time of Public Hearing. 4. Formula for determining the amount of land and calculation of the amount of land assessed is in error and is arbitrary and capricious. 5. Farm land when classified to residential use will not be beneffited by the improvements without direct access to County Road 15 and the assessment denies Appellant equal protection of the law as guaranteed by State and Federal Constitutions. Calvin Haasken Christy Haasken znl A , _ Sharon A. Haasken Chad M. Haasken 11! 71117 �/�� ••ij1711 71,1``�LI: "�1•• � illy 7l/1ll�1i17 �� 11117^71 � 11 fig !1317 71117 11 /� 711' Inr�, ti►+u !1 u t 5i, :ISIS :►�!a 7ur: p..., deal li 11.1- �� 71..17 91+►? 9► 71!U t3 .1!!! lip 1 1441' 7 x'!11 'IEI i 01:17 �'� •Illt '►Sr 1!1!,t°Ilr . ,1111 � 1 7117 51 . 7H►4, !1'.S 71117 7111 11 ,.. � 5 7111 �� 1411` 7471. 51117 71117 • 71Y1: 7111'. 1 rll•I:•IS •• 7111! SL• � !li * ® � 717/- ,Ily 1117► `�� 1111 11".11 51117 tl!�E 7171. 5117 1141= 71'.0 71111 �1i17 %�47E_� 1 eld` ell! 711 L 71!!9 E/4� 11171 SIIIea�IS�ji,E 71477 7!1!7 71'7 7111: 711!.1 Elil. . 7111��a1]7 0110 '// X11 7 Ilb,�17 714104�t�� 7111 7.11 A 71+17 Q�7N1; a14iJi�1C J� �� .01117 tl� 1017 51117 !i! 0147: !1711 :IE1! 1111: . SI:75 7 71117 !11 O1i17 ! 7 01111. 71410 5111! 5117 114E 01!,!10 71117 .1•: •�• �SI�IE � 1. !!IIdE a 71111 7111 1471. 11717 1177E 7111E 1 717 Will 01717 11!1 '11111M i ll! SI 5�0� 111 71117 X77 1l.11 � • 71117 •1. i � j O:i1• 71117 9 11, 1. � .• �1Gi111 7:!11 !i �iE 77 711 Ef7111S 11N5 71675 11:77 51119 ?!1:. :.r• �• .•11111 1111 11 ,;. �/'17717 .,ao 16711 71El7 7�11� �4i: � � �� ar ��a o.. .- A4 tt►9n. --� ■� i� 7E�� il� ' ;�i 'per w ■ �� p\t• q � �o �� -��• / 111Q �, ld ■t• ca :� : ■ ��'1A `�� I>fan �ii ccino ■ .c �� 11111 `tQ�9 111 1 de °" � •_ ° � g■ "" ..■. ,■.. '�,,,'�_ :IJ11. 1111_: .1111. X111 1111 � .1 d a0►sl,'n 'G �� a : ' _ e5 n_ nn ��l♦ � � �� 'S ••� oO 4n .tea �a .a.■ • _� �° also ICU�� �]� ���� i�0 u �O Y ■ �Y�01\.� ,1�/ ♦111 ran A ' s� A Ow 90-W-111-SO 1w in ■���, ° 1 Otis d �,��� •*���' 07 0[p�' I food • n ���ll�� Lt w !+ d n.... ■ �uu�iu IIIDII��' ��■i.Y � n ��u!)►O Q' IS �/111 NONE �� RESOLUTION NO. 4223 A Resolution Adopting Assessments For The V.I.P. Interceptor Extension From County Road 79 To The West Corporate Limits, Rahr Forcemain And The Rahr Malting Service Line Project No.'s 1992-9, 1993-1 And 1994-8 WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the City Council of the City of Shakopee met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessments of: For the V.I.P. Interceptor Extension from County Road 79 to the West Corporate Limits, Rahr Forcemain and the Rahr Malting Service Line, Project No.'s 1992-9, 1993-1 and 1994-8. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, NHNNESOTA: 1. That such proposed assessment together with any amendments thereof, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named herein and each tract therein included is hereby found to be benefitted by the proposed improvements in the amount of the assessments levied against it. 2. Such assessments shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of ten years, the first installment to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 1996, and shall bear interest at the rate of 5.75 percent per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added the interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 1996 and to each subsequent installment when due shall be added the interest for one year on all unpaid installments. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property,with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within thirty (30) days from the adoption of this resolution; the owner may thereafter pay to the County Treasurer the installment and interest in process of collection on the current tax list, and may pay the remaining principal balance of the assessment to the City Treasurer. 4. The Clerk shall file the assessment rolls pertaining to this assessment in her office and shall certify annually to the County Auditor on or before November 30th of each year the total amount of installments and interest on assessments on each parcel of land which are to become due in the following year. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 1995. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form: City Attorney PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR V.I.P. APRIL 1995 EXTENSION FROM C.R. 79 TO JEFFERSON STREET PROJECT COST= $237,421.53 P.I.D. PROPERTY LEGAL ACRES TOTAL OWNER DESCRIPTION ASSESSMENT , 27-116002-0 Catholic Cemetaries of S 643.3' of Outlot 7.050 $3,654.89 I % James Schoenberger A Marymark Cemetary I 535 Lewis Street Shakopee, MN. 55379 27-121026-0 CLETUS J & HELEN C LINK OUTLOT A 6.120 $3,172.76 1217 MONROE ST. SOUTH PARKVIEW SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379 1ST ADDITION 27-121029-0 CLETUS J & HELEN C LINK OUTLOT D 3.940 $2,042.59 1217 MONROE ST. SOUTH PARKVIEW SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379 1ST ADDITION 27-121030-0 CITY OF SHAKOPEE OUTLOT E 3.380 $1,752.27 129 E. 1ST AVE. SOUTH PARKVIEW SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379 1 ST ADDITION 27-188001-0 Darrol K & Elizabeth A Lalim LOT 1 BLOCK 1 0.233 $120.95 1747 13th Ave. W MINNESOTA VALLEY SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379 8TH ADDITION 27-188002-0 LAURENT BUILDERS INC. LOT 2 BLOCK 1 0.233 $120.95 128 S. FULLER ST. MINNESOTA VALLEY SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379 8TH ADDITION 27-188003-0 Todd E & Vicki M Martinson LOT 3 BLOCK 1 0.233 $120.95. 1727 13th Ave. W MINNESOTA VALLEY SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379 8TH ADDITION ! 27-188004-0 jDion D & Amy J Muchow LOT 4 BLOCK 1 0.233 $120.95 11717 13th Ave. W MINNESOTA VALLEY jSHAKOPEE, MN. 55379 8TH ADDITION 27-188005-0 LAURENT BUILDERS INC. LOT 5 BLOCK 1 0.233 $120.95 128 S. FULLER ST. MINNESOTA VALLEY SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379 8TH ADDITION i 27-188006-0 LAURENT BUILDERS INC. LOT 6 BLOCK 1 0.233 $120.95 128 S. FULLER ST. MINNESOTA VALLEY !SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379 8TH ADDITION PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR V.I.P. APRIL 1995 EXTENSION FROM C.R. 79 TO JEFFERSON STREET PROJECT COST= $237,421.53 P.I.D. PROPERTY LEGAL ACRES TOTAL OWNER DESCRIPTION ASSESSMENT 27-188007-0 Val G Pink LOT 7 BLOCK 1 0.233 $120.95 1774 Presidential Lane MINNESOTA VALLEY SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379 8TH ADDITION l i i 27-188008-0 Thomas P & Brenda K Schleper LOT 1 BLOCK 2 0.233 $120.95 1779 Presidential Lane MINNESOTA VALLEY SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379 8TH ADDITION 27-188009-0 LAURENT BUILDERS INC. LOT 2 BLOCK 2 0.233 $120.95 128 S. FULLER ST. I MINNESOTA VALLEY SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379 8TH ADDITION 27-188010-0 LAURENT BUILDERS INC. LOT 3 BLOCK 2 0.233 $120.95 128 S. FULLER ST. MINNESOTA VALLEY I SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379 8TH ADDITION 27-188011-0 DEAN J &JANICE WALDEN LOT 4 BLOCK 2 0.233 $120.95 13741 JOHNSON MEMORIAL DR. MINNESOTA VALLEY SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379 8TH ADDITION 27-188012-0 DEAN J & JANICE WALDEN LOT 1 BLOCK 3 0.233 $120.95 13741 JOHNSON MEMORIAL DR. MINNESOTA VALLEY SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379 8TH ADDITION r a 27-188013-0 DEAN J &JANICE WALDEN LOT 2 BLOCK 3 0.233 $120.95 13741 JOHNSON MEMORIAL DR. MINNESOTA VALLEY j SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379 8TH ADDITION 27-188014-0 DEAN J &JANICE WALDEN LOT 3 BLOCK 3 0.233 $120.95 13741 JOHNSON MEMORIAL DR. MINNESOTA VALLEY SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379 8TH ADDITION i i 27-188015-0 DEAN J & JANICE WALDEN LOT 4 BLOCK 3 0.233 $120.95 13741 JOHNSON MEMORIAL DR. MINNESOTA VALLEY SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379 8TH ADDITION i 27-188016-0 DEAN J & JANICE WALDEN LOT 5 BLOCK 3 0.233 $120.95 13741 JOHNSON MEMORIAL DR. , MINNESOTA VALLEY SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379 8TH ADDITION i i PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR V.I.P. APRIL 1995 EXTENSION FROM C.R. 79 TO JEFFERSON STREET PROJECT COST= $237,421.53 P.I.D. PROPERTY LEGAL ACRES TOTAL OWNER DESCRIPTION ASSESSMENT 27-188017-0 Leonard B Laxen LOT 6 BLOCK 3 0.233 $120.95 13211 Oaklawn Dr. MINNESOTA VALLEY SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379 8TH ADDITION 27-188018-0 DEAN J &JANICE WALDEN LOT 7 BLOCK 3 0.233 $120.95 13741 JOHNSON MEMORIAL DR. MINNESOTA VALLEY SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379 8TH ADDITION 27-192001-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 1 BLOCK 1 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192002-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 2 BLOCK 1 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192003-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 3 BLOCK 1 0.369 $191.45 j 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192004-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 4 BLOCK 1 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192005-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 5 BLOCK 1 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION j 27-192006-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 6 BLOCK 1 0.369 $191.45 p' 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION k i t 27-192007-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 7 BLOCK 1 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192008-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 8 BLOCK 1 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1ST ADDITION PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR V.I.P. APRIL 1995 EXTENSION FROM C.R. 79 TO JEFFERSON STREET PROJECT COST= $237,421.53 P.I.D. PROPERTY LEGAL ACRES TOTAL OWNER DESCRIPTION ASSESSMENT 27-192009-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 9 BLOCK 1 0.369 $191.45 I 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192010-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 10 BLOCK 1 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1ST ADDITION 27-192011-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 11 BLOCK 1 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION { 27-192012-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 12 BLOCK 1 0.369 $191.45 1 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192013-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 13 BLOCK 1 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1ST ADDITION 27-192014-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 14 BLOCK 1 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST f BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192015-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 15 BLOCK 1 0.369 $191.45 f 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192016-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 16 BLOCK 1 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1ST ADDITION i 27-192017-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 17 BLOCK 1 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 24-192018-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 18 BLOCK 1 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION i PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR V.I.P. APRIL 1995 EXTENSION FROM C.R. 79 TO JEFFERSON STREET PROJECT COST= $237,421.53 P.I.D. PROPERTY LEGAL ACRES TOTAL OWNER DESCRIPTION ASSESSMENT i 27-192019-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 19 BLOCK 1 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192020-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 20 BLOCK 1 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192021-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 21 BLOCK 1 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 1 1 27-192022-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 1 BLOCK 2 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192023-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 2 BLOCK 2 0.369 $191.45 II' 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192024-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 3 BLOCK 2 0.369 $191.45 ` 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION i I 27-192025-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 4 BLOCK 2 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1ST ADDITION 27-192026-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 5 BLOCK 2 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192027-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 6 BLOCK 2 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192028-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 7 BLOCK 2 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1ST ADDITION PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR V.I.P. APRIL 1995 EXTENSION FROM C.R. 79 TO JEFFERSON STREET PROJECT COST= $237,421.53 P.I.D. PROPERTY LEGAL ACRES TOTAL OWNER DESCRIPTION ASSESSMENT 27-192029-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 8 BLOCK 2 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192030-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 9 BLOCK 2 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192031-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 10 BLOCK 2 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192032-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 11 BLOCK 2 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1ST ADDITION 27-192033-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 12 BLOCK 2 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192034-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 13 BLOCK 2 0.369 $191.45 l 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST j BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1ST ADDITION I i 27-192035-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 14 BLOCK 2 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192036-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 15 BLOCK 2 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION j I 27-192037-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 16 BLOCK 2 0.369 $191.45 j 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION i 27-192038-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 17 BLOCK 2 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1ST ADDITION PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR V.I.P. APRIL 1995 EXTENSION FROM C.R. 79 TO JEFFERSON STREET PROJECT COST= $237,421.53 P.I.D. PROPERTY LEGAL ACRES TOTAL OWNER DESCRIPTION ASSESSMENT 27-192039-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 18 BLOCK 2 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1ST ADDITION 27-192040-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 19 BLOCK 2 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1ST ADDITION 27-192041-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 20 BLOCK 2 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1ST ADDITION 27-192042-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 21 BLOCK 2 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192043-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 22 BLOCK 2 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1ST ADDITION 27-192044-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 1 BLOCK 3 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION C 27-192045-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 2 BLOCK 3 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192046-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 3 BLOCK 3 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION s 27-192047-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 4 BLOCK 3 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION Ic 27-192048-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 5 BLOCK 3 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR V.I.P. APRIL 1995 EXTENSION FROM C.R. 79 TO JEFFERSON STREET PROJECT COST= $237,421.53 P.I.D. PROPERTY LEGAL ACRES TOTAL OWNER DESCRIPTION ASSESSMENT 27-192049-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 6 BLOCK 3 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO, MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION I 27-192050-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 7 BLOCK 3 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192051-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 8 BLOCK 3 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1ST ADDITION i 27-192052-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 9 BLOCK 3 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192053-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 10 BLOCK 3 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1ST ADDITION 27-192054-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 11 BLOCK 3 0.369 $191.45 a 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192055-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 12 BLOCK 3 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. f MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 1 ST ADDITION 27-192056-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 13 BLOCK 3 0.369 $191.45 j 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1ST ADDITION i J i i 27-192057-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 14 BLOCK 3 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST j BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION I 27-192058-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV, LOT 15 BLOCK 3 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR V.I.P. APRIL 1995 EXTENSION FROM C.R. 79 TO JEFFERSON STREET PROJECT COST= $237,421.53 P.I.D. PROPERTY LEGAL ACRES TOTAL OWNER DESCRIPTION ASSESSMENT 27-192059-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 16 BLOCK 3 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192060-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 17 BLOCK 3 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192061-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 18 BLOCK 3 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192062-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 19 BLOCK 3 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192063-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 20 BLOCK 3 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192064-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 21 BLOCK 3 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192065-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 22 BLOCK 3 0.369 $191.45 4 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1ST ADDITION 27-192066-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 23 BLOCK 3 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192067-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 24 BLOCK 3 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192068-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 1 BLOCK 4 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1ST ADDITION I , PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR V.I.P. APRIL 1995 EXTENSION FROM C.R. 79 TO JEFFERSON STREET PROJECT COST= $237,421.53 P.I.D. PROPERTY LEGAL ACRES TOTAL OWNER DESCRIPTION ASSESSMENT 27-192069-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 2 BLOCK 4 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192070-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 3 BLOCK 4 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADNTION 27-192071-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. LOT 4 BLOCK 4 0.369 $191.45 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1ST ADDITION 27-192072-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. OUTLOT A 8.940 $4,634.72 ' 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-192073-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. OUTLOT B 15.070 $7,812.66 i 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1ST ADDITION 27-192074-0 GOLD NUGGET DEV. OUTLOT C 13.000 $6,739.52 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. MEADOWS WEST BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 1 ST ADDITION 27-195001-0 Lloyd R Olson &Wife Lot 1 Blk 1 0.526 $272.69 *** 301 E Mound Street P & V Addition Shakopee, MN. 55379 27-195002-0 Jeanne M Marnoff Lot 2 Blk 1 0.526 $272.69 — 249 E Mound Street P & V Addition Shakopee, MN. 55379 27-195003-0 Minnegasco Inc. P &V Addition 0.526 $272.69 '** 201 S 7th Street Outlot Mpls, MN. 55402 27-195004-0 Philip J & Charlotte M. Lot 1 Blk 2 0.526 $272.69 *" Hespenheide P & V Addition 312 E Mound Street Shakopee, MN. 55379 PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR V.I.P. APRIL 1995 EXTENSION FROM C.R. 79 TO JEFFERSON STREET PROJECT COST= $237,421.53 P.I.D. PROPERTY LEGAL ACRES TOTAL OWNER DESCRIPTION ASSESSMENT 27-195005-0 Bruce L. Biermann & Wife Lot 2 Blk 2 0.526 $272.69 "" 302 E Mound Street P & V Addition Shakopee, MN. 55379 27-195006-0 Thomas E & Carrol A Muelken Lot 3 Blk 2 0.526 $272.69 — 245 E Mound Street P & V Addition Shakopee, MN. 55379 27-195007-0 Michael J & Roxanne Rowan Lot 4 Blk 2 0.526 $272.69 253 Sand Street P & V Addition Shakopee, MN. 55379 27-195008-0 Gordon L & Deborah K Lot 5 Blk 2 0.526 $272.69 Pehrson P &V Addition 301 E Sand Street Shakopee, MN. 55379 27-195009-0 John M & Kathleen A Boegeman Lot 6 Blk 2 0.526 $272.69 311 E Sand Street P &V Addition Shakopee, MN. 55379 27-195010-0 State of Minn. Dept of Trans Lot 1 Blk 3 0.526 $272.69 R J Dinneen P & V Addition Transportation Blgd St. Paul, MN. 55155 27-195011-0 Stanley C. & E. Jeanne Miles Lot 2 Blk 3 0.526 $272.69 '"" 312 E Sand Street P & V Addition Shakopee, MN. 55379 27-195012-0 Michael E. & Susan R. Boyd Lot 3 Blk 3 0.526 $272.69 302 E Sand Street P & V Addition Shakopee, MN. 55379 27-195013-0 John A. & Sandra J. Vollmer Lot 4 Blk 3 0.526 $272.69 246 E Sand Street P & V Addition Shakopee, MN. 55379 27-196001-0 Travis P. & Denise L. Estes Lot 1 Blk 1 0.526 $272.69 229 E Mound Street P & V 2nd Shakopee, MN. 55379 j PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR V.I.P. APRIL 1995 EXTENSION FROM C.R. 79 TO JEFFERSON STREET PROJECT COST= $237,421.53 P.I.D. PROPERTY LEGAL ACRES TOTAL 4' OWNER DESCRIPTION ASSESSMENT 27-196002-0 Kent D. & Sandra L. Sanders Lot 2 Blk 1 0.526 $272.69 — 213 E Mound Street P & V 2nd i Shakopee, MN. 55379 27-196003-0 Oren W Lindholm &Wife Lot 1 Blk 2 0.526 $272.69 183 E Mound Street P & V 2nd Shakopee, MN. 55379 27-196004-0 Lynn M. Gylland King Lot 2 Blk 2 0.526 $272.69 165 E Mound Street P & V 2nd Shakopee, MN. 55379 27-196005-0 Myron E. Anker & Wife Lot 3 Blk 2 0.526 $272.69 i 145 E Mound Street P &V 2nd f Shakopee, MN. 55379 27-196006-0 Norman L Denstedt Lot 4 Blk 2 0.526 $272.69 129 E MOund Street P &V 2nd Shakopee, MN. 55379 S 27-196007-0 John W Jr & Bernice Collins Lot 5 Blk 2 0.526 $272.69 109 E Mound Street P & V 2nd Shakopee, MN. 55379 27-196008-0 John W Jr & Bernice Collins Lot 6 Blk 2 0.526 $272.69 109 E Mound Street P & V 2nd Shakopee, MN. 55379 l 27-196009-0 Leroy D Hanson & wife Lot 1 Blk 3 0.526 $272.69 180 E Mound Street P & V 2nd Shakopee, MN. 55379 27-196010-0 Richard M & Shirley Coleman Lot 2 Blk 3 0.526 $272.69 179 E Sand Street P & V 2nd Shakopee, MN. 55379 27-196011-0 Donald B Wruck &Wife Lot 3 Blk 3 0.526 $272.69 166 E Mound Street P & V 2nd Shakopee, MN. 55379 s PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR V.I.P. APRIL 1995 EXTENSION FROM C.R. 79 TO JEFFERSON STREET PROJECT COST= $237,421.53 P.I.D. PROPERTY LEGAL ACRES TOTAL OWNER DESCRIPTION ASSESSMENT 27-196012-0 Ronald F Arnett & Wife Lot 4 Blk 3 0.526 $272.69 146 E Mound Street P & V 2nd Shakopee, MN. 553769 27-196013-0 Jeril W Romine &Wife Lot 5 Blk 3 0.526 $272.69 *'* 130 E Mound Street P &V 2nd Shakopee, MN. 55379 27-196014-0 Thomas A Doll & Wife Lot 6 Blk 3 0.526 $272.69 — 110 E Mound Street P & V 2nd Shakopee, MN. 55379 27-196015-0 WM C & Dorothy A Sensibaugh Lot 7 Blk 3 0.526 $272.69 144 E Sand Street P & V 2nd Shakopee, MN. 55379 `i i 27-196016-0 James & Bernice Schaak Lot 8 Blk 3 0.526 $272.69 152 E Sand Street P &V 2nd Shakopee, MN. 55379 I 27-196017-0 Carol Soldo Lot 9 Blk 3 0.526 $272.69 *** 166 E Sand Street P & V 2nd t Shakopee, MN. 55379 27-196018-0 Mark D & Maria B Hawes Lot 10 Blk 3 0.526 $272.69 *'* 184 E Sand Street P & V 2nd Shakopee, MN. 55379 27-196019-0 Chris W & Sherri L Thompson Lot 1 Blk 4 0.526 $272.69 **' 234 Mound Street P & V 2nd Shakopee, MN. 55379 27-196020-0 Kurt L & Patti A Drewelow Lot 2 Blk 4 0.526 $272.69 214 E Mound Street P & V 2nd Shakopee, MN. 55379 i 27-196021-0 James M & Renae J Barsness Lot 3 Blk 4 0.526 $272.69 213 E Sand Street P & V 2nd Shakopee, MN. 55379 PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR V.I.P. APRIL 1995 EXTENSION FROM C.R. 79 TO JEFFERSON STREET PROJECT COST= $237,421.53 P.I.D. PROPERTY LEGAL ACRES TOTAL OWNER DESCRIPTION ASSESSMENT 27-196022-0 Dale E Bahr Lot 4 Blk 4 0.526 $272.69 *** 233 E Sand Street P &V 2nd j Shakopee, MN. 55379 I 27-196023-0 Gregory L & Diane M Merker Lot 1 Blk 5 0.526 $272.69 *** 230 E Sand Street P & V 2nd i Shakopee, MN. 55379 27-196024-0 Rose M Stemmer Lot 2 Blk 5 0.526 $272.69 *** 214 E Sand Street P & V 2nd Shakopee, MN. 55379 I 27-196025-0 John Vohnoutka & Wife Outlot A 0.526 $272.69 *** 1503 W 6th P & V 2nd Shakopee, MN. 55379 i 27-197001-0 CLETUS J & HELEN C LINK LOT 1 BLOCK 1 0.30 $154.88 1216 JEFFERSON ST. S SOUTH PARKVIEW Shakopee, MN. 55379 2ND ADDITION 27-197002-0 CLETUS J & HELEN C LINK LOT 2 BLOCK 1 0.30 $154.88 1216 JEFFERSON ST. S SOUTH PARKVIEW Shakopee, MN. 55379 2ND ADDITION 27-197003-0 CLETUS J & HELEN C LINK LOT 3 BLOCK 1 0.30 $154.88 1216 JEFFERSON ST. S SOUTH PARKVIEW Shakopee, MN. 55379 2ND ADDITION 27-197004-0 CLETUS J & HELEN C LINK LOT 4 BLOCK 1 0.30 $154.88 1216 JEFFERSON ST. S SOUTH PARKVIEW Shakopee, MN. 55379 2ND ADDITION 27-197005-0 CLETUS J & HELEN C LINK LOT 5 BLOCK 1 0.30 $154.88 1216 JEFFERSON ST. S SOUTH PARKVIEW Shakopee, MN. 55379 2ND ADDITION I 27-197006-0 CLETUS J & HELEN C LINK LOT 6 BLOCK 1 0.30 $154.88 j 1216 JEFFERSON ST. S SOUTH PARKVIEW i Shakopee, MN. 55379 2ND ADDITION PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR V.I.P. APRIL 1995 EXTENSION FROM C.R. 79 TO JEFFERSON STREET PROJECT COST= $237,421.53 P.I.D. PROPERTY LEGAL ACRES TOTAL OWNER DESCRIPTION ASSESSMENT 27-197007-0 CLETUS J & HELEN C LINK LOT 7 BLOCK 1 0.30 $154.88 1216 JEFFERSON ST. S SOUTH PARKVIEW Shakopee, MN. 55379 2ND ADDITION 27-197008-0 CLETUS J & HELEN C LINK LOT 8 BLOCK 1 0.30 $154.88 1216 JEFFERSON ST. S SOUTH PARKVIEW Shakopee, MN. 55379 2ND ADDITION 27-197009-0 CLETUS J & HELEN C LINK LOT 1 BLOCK 2 0.23 $120.53 1216 JEFFERSON ST. S SOUTH PARKVIEW Shakopee, MN. 55379 2ND ADDITION 27-197010-0 CLETUS J & HELEN C LINK LOT 2 BLOCK 2 0.23 $120.53 1216 JEFFERSON ST. S SOUTH PARKVIEW Shakopee, MN. 55379 2ND ADDITION 27-197011-0 CLETUS J & HELEN C LINK LOT 3 BLOCK 2 0.23 $120.53 1216 JEFFERSON ST. S SOUTH PARKVIEW Shakopee, MN. 55379 2ND ADDITION 27-197012-0 CLETUS J & HELEN C LINK LOT 4 BLOCK 2 0.23 $120.53 1216 JEFFERSON ST. S SOUTH PARKVIEW Shakopee, MN. 55379 2ND ADDITION 27-911016-0 Norbert N & Corrine Theis 11 11523 24.630 $12,768.80 12466 Marystown Road SW1/4 SE1/4 & S 10' Shakopee, MN. 55379 of SE1/4 SE1/4 Ex MnDot Plat 70-15 & 70-21, #49 27-911017-0 Davies Properties 11 11523 17.260 $8,948.01 927 Lewis St. S. SE1/4 SW1/4 lying N Shakopee, MN. 55379 i of Hwy ROW 27-911025-0 CITY OF SHAKOPEE SE 1/4 SE 1/4 EX. 39.700 $20,581.45 129 E. 1 ST AVE. S. 10' SECT 11 SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379 T115 R23 27-912007-0 Norbert N & Corrine Theis 1211523 7.440 $3,857.08 12466 Marystown Road S1/2 of SE1/4 SE1/4 Shakopee, MN. 55379 Ex MnDot Plat 7-15 & 70-20, #49 PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR V.I.P. APRIL 1995 EXTENSION FROM C.R. 79 TO JEFFERSON STREET PROJECT COST= $237,421.53 P.I.D. PROPERTY LEGAL ACRES TOTAL OWNER DESCRIPTION ASSESSMENT I 27-912015-0 Ronald Pieper 1211523 33.630 $17,434.62 RR 1 Box 76B SW1/4 SE1/4 Belle Plain, MN. 56011 Ex MnDot 70-3 27-912020-0 Ronald Pieper 1211523 52.070 $26,994.36 RR 1 Box 76B S1/2 of NE1/4 SW1/4, Belle Plain, MN. 56011 SE1/4 SW1/4 EX Com SE Cor, N along E line 990.58' to POB, W 554.50' N 400', E 554.50' to point on E line 400' N of POB, S 400' to POB 27-912027-0 City of Shakopee 1215523 32.950 $17,082.09 129 Holmes Street S. NW 1/4 SW 1/4 Ex 7.05a f Shakopee, Mn. 55379 i { y 27-912030-0 Robert N & Roxanne M Pieper 1211523 5.090 $2,638.78 11780 Koeper Avenue S1/2 NE1/4 SW-1/4 & Shakopee, MN. 55379 SE1/4 SW-1/4 Com SE COR SW1/4, N along E Line 990.58' to POB, W 554.50', N 400', j E 554.50', S 400' , to POB i i 27-912035-0 Jim R Monnens 1211523 4.740 $2,457.33 j 1006 Dakota Street E 798.32' of N1/2 Shakopee, MN. 55379 NE1/4 SW-1/4 EX N 375' l Ex .1 la M nDot 70-2 Plat, #51 i i PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR V.I.P. APRIL 1995 EXTENSION FROM C.R. 79 TO JEFFERSON STREET PROJECT COST= $237,421.53 P.I.D. PROPERTY LEGAL ACRES TOTAL OWNER DESCRIPTION ASSESSMENT 27-912039-0 INDEP SCHOOL DIST 720 27.5A 17.5A IN NE 10.000 $5,184.25 505 S. HOLMES 1/4 NE1/4 & P/O S1/2 SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379 NE1/4 BEG SE COR J & SMITH ADDN S 382.2', E PARALLEL W 10TH AVE 1416.3', N 232.95', W 1424.9' TO BEG. SECT. 12 T115 R23 27-912045-0 GOLD NUGGET DEVELOPMENT S1/2 NE-1/4 EX 10A 17.260 $8,948.01 8857 ZEALAND AVE. NO. & N1/2 SE1/4 SECT 12 BROOKLYN PARK, MN. 55445 T115 R23 i t 27-912045-1 CITY OF SHAKOPEE See Attached 30.940 $16,040.05 129 E. 1ST AVE SHAKOPEE, MN 55379 27-912045-2 I.S.D. 720 See Attached 31.61 $16,387.40 505 HOLMES ST. S. SHAKOPEE, MN 55379 1 27-912046-0 Jim R Monnens 1211523 5.000 $2,592.12 I 1006 Dakota Street N 522.48' of N1/2 Shakopee, MN. 55379 NE1/4 SW1 14 Lying W of W line of S'ERLY EXT of Pierce St I 27-912047-0 David L & Nancy J Phillips 1211523 4.450 $2,306.99 2077 W 12th Ave #2 N1/2 NE1/4 SW1/4 EX Shakopee, MN. 55379 N 375' OF E 581' & EX E 798.32' LYING S OF N 375' & EX N 522.48' LYING W OF W LINE OF S'ERLY EXT OF PIERCE ST EX N 173.35' OF W 166.38' OF N1/2 NE1/4 SW1/4 LYING E OF S'ERLY EXT OF E LINE OF PIERCE ST PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR V.I.P. APRIL 1995 EXTENSION FROM C.R. 79 TO JEFFERSON STREET PROJECT COST= $237,421.53 P.I.D. PROPERTY LEGAL ACRES TOTAL OWNER DESCRIPTION ASSESSMENT I i 27-9112048-0 Rich M & Laurel M Myers 1211523 0.660 $342.16 1205 Pierce Street N 173.35' OF W Shakopee, MN. 55379 166.39' OF N1/2 NE1/4 SW-1/4 LYING E'ERLY OF THE S'ERLY EXT OF E LINE OF PIERCE ST i 27-912049-0 Dennis R Anderson &Wife 1211523 5.000 $2,592.12 11650 Koeper Ave N 375' OF E 581' OF Shakopee, MN. 55379 N1/2 NE1/4 SW-1/4 27-912050-0 Cal L & Sharon A Haasken 12 115 23 24.310 $12,602.90 413 Chestnut St. SW 1/4 SW1/4 lying Chaska, Mn. 55318 N & E of ROW Total Acrage = 457.967 Total Assessment= $237,421.53 Cost per Acre $518.42 *** These Assessments to be Paid by the City of Shakopee out of the Sanitary Sewer Fund. PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR RAHR FORCEMAIN SERVICE LINE MAY 1995 LEGAL TOTAL PID # OWNER DESCRIPTION ASSESSMENT 27-001115-0 RAHR MALTING COMPANY LOTS 1-5 & P/O 6-10 BLK 14 $119,891.08 567 GRAIN EXCHANGE BLVD. LOTS 1-5 & P/O 6-10 BLK 15 MINNEAPOLIS, MN. 55415 P/O LOTS 1-5 BLOCK 16 i V / a . 11 ; 77 - t . Kb- Memo To: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator From: Terrie A. Thurmer, Assistant City Planner Date: June 2, 1995 Re: Appeal of the Decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals regarding PV-717, Variance: 20 Foot Variance to the 30 Foot Front Yard Setback Requirement within the Highway Business(B-1)Zone. Introduction Amoco Oil Company requested a variance to Section 11.36, Subd. 5.1 (C), regarding the 30 foot front yard setback requirement within the Highway Business (B-1) Zone, in order to construct a 32 foot by 50 foot canopy over four new gas pump islands on the north side of the principal structure. At the May 4, 1995, meeting of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals, the applicant redesigned the canopy and reduced the variance request from 20 feet to 7 feet. The Board denied this request, and the applicants have appealed this decision to the City Council. On June 1, 1995, City staff received a copy of a letter dated May 31, 1995, from Michael S. Ryan of Mumane, Conlin, White, & Brandt, Attorneys at Law. Mr. Ryan represents the applicant in regard to this appeal. A copy of this letter was included in the June 2, 1995, City Council Agenda Packets. The purpose of this memo is to respond to the items discussed in this letter. Discussion 1. Allegation that there is a "Prior Precedent for Service Station Canopies". Mr. Ryan cites the following existing service station canopies: 1) ICO, 2) SuperAmerica, and 3)Holiday. Staff has the following comments: a) The ICO canopy was constructed in 1964, prior to the adoption of the 30 foot front yard setback requirement that is in place today. b) The canopy for SuperAmerica was granted a 23 foot variance to the 30 foot setback in 1976. This was 19 years ago and, at that time, the criteria required for the granting of variances was not as strict as it is today. In addition, the Planning Commission only made recommendations to the City Council, and the Council made the actual decisions. C) The canopy for the Holiday station was constructed in 1980, and there appears to have been a staff error in allowing its construction within the 30 foot setback. However, there was not a site plan with the approved application, so it is difficult to determine where the canopy is located in relation to the lot line. 4. Allegation that "The Board of Adjustment and Appeals erred in Denying Amoco's Request for a 7-Foot Variance' Listed below are the appellant's assertions of errors or omissions of the Board's finding(s) with respect to City Code Sec. 11.89, Subd. 2, "Criteria for Granting Variances", and staffs responses to the appellant's comments. Criterion 1 The strict enforcement of the ordinance provisions would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration. Undue hardship means the following: I.A. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls; Applicant Comments: The appellant did not provide a response to this Board finding. Staff Response: A variance to the provisions of the Zoning Chapter may be issued to provide relief to the landowner in those zones where the Chapter imposes undue hardships or practical difficulties to the property owner in the use of the land. The subject site is currently being used as an automobile service and gas station without the aid of a variance. This appears to be a reasonable use of the property. This site could also be used for other retail uses that do not involve canopies extending into the required setback. Section 11.90, Subd. 2, states that an appeal of the decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals, `§hall include a statement of the alleged errors or omissions of the Board". No errors or omissions have been provided for this Board finding. A variance may be granted only in the event that all of the criteria can be met. Staff is of the opinion that the proposal is in conflict with this Criterion. I.B. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property; Applicant Comments: The appellant stated that the "location of the existing service station building on the site prevents the installation of a canopy that would provide shelter and lighting over the prmtp island and still be more than 30 feet back fi°ont the front property line. In addition, due to traffic movement considerations, the pimrp islands cannot be relocated". Staff Response: The site is larger than many of the platted lots within East Shakopee. It measures 135.02 feet wide by 110 feet deep, and is .34 acre(14,852.2 square feet) in size. The majority of the lots platted with Shakopee Plat measure only 60 feet by 120 feet in size. Lighting can be accomplished without a canopy, or a smaller canopy could be constructed. I.C. The circumstances were not created by the landowner; Applicant Comments: The appellants stated that the, "circumstances were not created by the land oivner. they are simply a function of the lot size, tall c movement / flow considerations, and the intended purpose of the pump island canopy". Staff Response: Staff disagrees. The variance request is a direct result of the applicant's desire to erect the canopy within the 30 foot setback. Again, a smaller canopy could be erected without the need for a variance. 1.D. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality; and Applicant Comments: The appellants "disagree that a 7-foot variance would significantly expand the degree of non-cot fornnity"'. Stuff Response: The First Avenue corridor currently contains many properties that are not in conformance with current City standards in respect to setbacks and signage. Urban Design Objective 1.1 of the 1995 draft Comprehensive Plan states that the City will work to `improve the appearance of entry points in major corridors in the community" Although this request may or may not alter the existing character of this corridor, it will expand the degree of nonconformity which is contrary to the City's plans for major corridors as stated in the Comprehensive Plan. I.E. The problems extend beyond economic considerations. Economic considerations do not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. Applicant Comments: "The problem created by the setback requirement is that it frustrates the desire of the land owner and station operator to improve the overall appearance of the station, provide protection and shelter to the customers, and add additional lighting which will also improve the safety of the site. These are not 'economic considerations', but are common courtesy considerations which customers have come to expect". Staff Response: The subject site is currently being used as an automobile service and gas station without the approval of a variance. Denial of the 20 foot variance would not hinder the applicant's ability to put the property to a reasonable use since it is already a viable business. In addition, other design alternatives may exist for constructing within the required setbacks. Although the applicant stated that the islands could not be relocated due to traffic movement requirements, a smaller canopy could be constructed to cover the gas pumps, and lighting can be accomplished without the use of a canopy. Criterion 2 It has been demonstrated that a variance as requested will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this Chapter. Applicant Comments: `A structure which will allow for additional lighting on the premises is certainly not in conflict with a desire to provide adequate lighting on the property. " The appellants also state that, "the improvements to he made to the Amoco station oil East First Avenue will improve the overall appearance of this commercial corridor, and is not inconsistent ►►pith the Comprehensne Plan". Staff Response: Adequate lighting can be accomplished without the approval of this variance request. The purposes of the Zoning Chapter are stated in Section 11.01, Subd. 2. Staff is of the opinion that the approval of this variance request would be in conflict with the purposes of the Zoning Chapter, and is in agreement with the findings of the Board. Criterion 3 The request is not for a use variance. Applicant Comments: The appellant agrees with this Board finding. Criterion 4 Conditions to be imposed by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals will ensure compliance and to protect the adjacent properties. Applicant Comments: The appellant agrees with this Board finding. 3. '"Variance' Defined' Mr. Ryan stated that, "Under Subd. 11.02, Subd 143 of the Zoning Code, a 'variance' is defined as follows: A modification or relaxation of the provisions of this Chapter where it is determined that by reason of special and unusual circumstances relating to a speck lot, that strict application of this Chapter would cause an undue hardship, or that strict con ormitX with the provisions of this Chapter would be unreasonable, impractical, or unfeasible under the circumstances. " He goes on to say that, "If the setback requirement is strictly enforced, it effectively prevents Amoco from installing a canopy at the suNecl service station. " A variance to the provisions of the Zoning Chapter may be issued to provide relief to the landowner in those zones where the Chapter imposes undue hardships or practical difficulties to the property owner in the use of the land. A variance may be granted only in the event that all of the criteria can be met Both staff and the Board of Adjustment and Appeals are of the opinion that this application is in conflict with Criteria 1 and Criteria 2. Alternatives 1) Uphold the decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals and affirm the denial of the variance request. 2) Overturn the decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals and approve the variance request. 3) Continue the public hearing and table the decision to allow the applicant and / or staff to provide additional information. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends Alternative No. 1. Action Requested Offer Appeal Resolution No. CC-717, A Resolution (Upholding or Overruling) the Denial of a 20 foot variance to Section 11.36, Subd. 5.C, and move its adoption, with findings. (NOTE: If the City Council concurs with the recommendation of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals, the City Council should offer a motion TO UPHOLD the decision of the Board TO DENY the variance request, with findings, and move its adoption.) I CITYCOLTMAPAMOMEb1.695} Memo To: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator From: Terrie A. Thurmer, Assistant City Planner Date: May 22, 1995 Re: Appeal of the Decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals regarding PV-717, Variance to the 30 Foot Front Yard Setback Requirement within the Highway Business(B-1)Zone. Introduction Amoco Oil Company requested a variance to Section 11.36, Subd. 5.1 (C), regarding the 30 foot front yard setback requirement within the Highway Business (B-1) Zone in order to construct a 32 foot by 50 foot canopy over four new gas pump islands on the north side of the principal structure. At the May 4, 1995, meeting, the Board of Adjustment and Appeals denied the request for the Variance. The applicants have appealed this decision to the City Council. A copy of the May 4, 1995, Board of Adjustment and Appeals staff memo has been attached for your reference. Please refer to this Staff Memo, as well as the May 4, 1995, meeting minutes, for background information regarding this variance request. Discussion The Shakopee Board of Adjustment and Appeals held a public hearing regarding this request at their May 4th meeting. At this meeting, the applicant presented an alternative design to the Board which would reduce the amount of the variance requested to seven (7) feet, instead of the twenty (20) feet originally requested. This variance request was denied. The applicant has submitted the attached application requesting an appeal of the decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals. Section 11.89, Subd. 6, regarding appeals, states that, "Any person aggrieved by a decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals regarding a variance may have such decision reviewed by the City Council if a request for review is submitted to the Zoning Administrator within 10 days of the date of the decision. The appeal shall be in writing and shall inchide a statement of the alleged errors or omissions of the Board " Alternatives I) Uphold the decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals and affirm the denial of the variance request. 2) Overturn the decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals and approve the variance request. 3) Continue the public hearing and table the decision to allow the applicant and / or staff to provide additional information. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends Alternative No. 1. Action Requested Offer Appeal Resolution No. CC-717, A Resolution Upholding the Decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals to Deny a Request for a Variance to Section 11.36, Subd. 5.C, and move its adoption. (NOTE: If the City Council concurs with the recommendation of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals, the City Council should offer Resolution No. CC-717, and move its adoption. However, if the City Council overturns the decision of the BOAA, the City Council should offer a motion to overturn the decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals and approve the Variance, and direct staff to prepare the appropriate resolution with corrected findings as specified by the City Council.) {C[TYCOUNUPAM0006.695) APPEAL RESOLUTION NO. CC-717 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, UPHOLDING THE DECISION OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS TO DENY A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO SECTION 11.36, SUBD. 5.C. WHEREAS, Amoco Oil Co., the applicants and owners, have filed an application dated April 10, 1995, for a variance under the provisions of Chapter 11, Land Use Regulation (Zoning), of the Shakopee City Code, Section 11.89, Subd. 3, for a variance to the 30 foot front yard setback requirement (Section 11.36, Subd. 5.C); and WHEREAS, at the May 4, 1995, public hearing, the applicant altered his request and proposed a design for the canopy which would reduce the amount of the variance required from 20 feet to 7 feet; and WHEREAS, this parcel is presently zoned Highway Business (B-1); and WHEREAS, the property upon which the request is being made is legally described as: The north 110 feet of Lots 9 and 10, and the north 110 feet of the west Li feet of Lot 8, Block 10, East Shakopee plat; and WHEREAS, notice was provided and on May 4, 1995, the Board of Adjustment and Appeals conducted a public hearing regarding this application, at which it heard from the Planning Director and invited members of the public to comment; and WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the public hearing, the Board of Adjustment and Appeals voted to deny the application based on the following findings with respect to City Code Sec. 11.89, Subd. 2, `Criteria for Granting Variances." Criterion I The strict enforcement of the ordinance provisions would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration. Undue hardship means the following: I.A. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls; The Board finds that the subject site is currently being used as an automobile service and gas station without the aid of a variance which appears to be a reasonable use of the property. The Board further finds that this site could also be used for other retail uses that do not involve the use of canopies extending into the required setback 1.B. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property; The Board finds that this lot is not unusually shaped, nor does it have any other unique circumstances I.C. The circumstances were not created by the landowner; The Board finds that the circumstances creating this request were created by the landowner's desire to erect a new structure within the required setback. No actions by an outside party have created the need for this request 1.D. The variance, if granted,will not alter the essential character of the locality; and The Board finds that the granting of this variance would expand the degree of nonconformity along one of the City's commercial corridors in direct conflict with the provisions of the draft 1995 Comprehensive Plan and 1990 Comprehensive Plan I.E. The problems extend beyond economic considerations. Economic considerations do not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. The Board finds that the circumstances creating this request do not appear to extend beyond the economic considerations of the applicant Criterion 2 It has been demonstrated that a variance as requested will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this Chapter. The Board finds that this variance request is in conflict with the Zoning Chapter's stated purposes of encouraging the planned and orderly development of commercial land; providing adequate light to the property; preventing overcrowding of land with undue concentrations of structures; and encouraging development in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. Criterion 3 The request is not for a use variance. The Board finds that this request is not for a use variance and therefore this criterion is satisfied. Criterion 4 Conditions to be imposed by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals will ensure compliance and to protect the adjacent properties. The Board does not propose to impose any additional conditions as part of this variance request. WHEREAS, a written appeal was filed with the City Administrator within ten days of the action of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the application, the record before the Board of Adjustment and Appeals, and the Board of Adjustment and Appeal's action and found no substantial errors or omissions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, as follows: , That Appeal Resolution No. CC-717 hereby upholds the decision by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals to deny a variance to Section 11.36, Subd. 5.C. Passed in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 1995. Mayor of the City of Shakopee Attest: City Clerk Approved as to form: City Attorney Applicant: Amoco Oil Company Memo To: Shakopee Board of Adjustment and Appeals From: Terre A. Thurmer, Assistant City Planner Meeting Date: May 4, 1995 Re: PV-717, Variance: 20 Foot Variance to the 30 Foot Front Yard Setback Requirement within the Highway Business(B-1)Zone. SITE INFORMATION Applicant Amoco Oil Co. Location 804 East First Avenue Current Zoning Highway Business, (B-1) Comp. Plan Designation 1980- Commercial Draft 1995 - Commercial Municipal Utilities Site is served by municipal utilities. Adjacent Zoning Zone Title North (B-1) Highway Business South (B-1) Highway Business East (B-1) Highway Business West (B-1) Highway Business CASE HISTORY The legal description of the subject site is recorded as the north 110 feet of Lots 9 and 10, and the north 110 feet of the west 15 feet of Lot 8, Block 10, East Shakopee plat. East Shakopee was platted in 1856, and City records indicate that the existing structure was constructed around 1965. INTRODUCTION The applicant is requesting a 20 foot variance from the 30 foot front yard setback requirement within the Highway Business(B-1)Zone in order to construct a 32 foot by 50 foot canopy over four new gas pump islands on the north side of the principal structure. Exhibits are attached as follows: Exhibit A, Zoning Map; Exhibit B, Cover Letter; and Exhibit C, Site Plan. The applicant requests a variance from the following section of the City Code: Section Subd. Subject Section 11.36 Subd. 5 Design Standards within the Highway Business(B-1)Zone, Item C. Lot Specifications. Although the applicant has provided information regarding proposed signage, this proposal has not been approved. Signage must comply with the provisions of the Sign Ordinance (Section 11.70) and will require the approval of a sign permit. 1 City Code Section 11.36, Subd. 5, Design Standards within the Highway Business (B-1)Zone, Item C, regarding Lot Specifications, states: 'Minimum front yard setback: 30 feet" This setback regulation was adopted in 1979, and was carried over into the current regulations for the Highway Business (B-1) Zone. The variance request is for a corner lot, and the "front yard" is defined as the shortest of the two frontages. Section 11.81, Subd. 1, regarding development standards, states that on corner lots, the required front yard setback shall be provided on both streets. Although this setback may be reduced by 10 feet within most of the of the residential zones, this reduction is not available within the B-1 Zone. Therefore, the required setback from the lot line adjacent to both 1st Avenue and Minnesota Street is 30 feet. FINDINGS Section 11.89, Subd. 2, of the City Code contains provisions for the granting of variances only if all of the following circumstances are found to exist. Staff has provided draft findings on each criterion. The Board of Adjustment and Appeals may use or modify these draft findings as it sees fit: I Criterion 1 The strict enforcement of the ordinance provisions would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration. Undue hardship means the following: I.A. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls; Finding I.A. The subject site is currently being used as an automobile service and gas station without the approval of a variance. Gas stations are listed as a Conditional Use within the Highway Business (B-1) Zone. Denial of the 20 foot variance would not hinder the applicant's ability to 'put the property to a reasonable use"since it is currently a viable business. In addition, other design alternatives may exist for constructing within the required setbacks. A lthough the applicant stated that the islands could not be relocated due to traffic movement requirements, a smaller canopy could be constructed to cover the southern two gas pumps or the operation could be downsized. I.B. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property; Finding 1.B. The lot is not unusually shaped, and there are no circumstances unique to the property. The site is larger than marry of the platted lots within East Shakopee. The site measures 135.02 feet wide by 110 feet deep, and is.34 acre (1-1,852.2 square feet) in size. The majority of the lots platted with Shakopee Plat measure only 60 feet by 120 feet in size. 2 C. The circumstances were not created by the landowner; Finding 1.C The request for the variance is being created by the applicant's desire to construct a canopy over the gas pumps located in front of the structure. No actions by an outside party have created the need for this request. D. The variance, if granted,will not alter the essential character of the locality; and Finding I.D. The First Avenue corridor currently contains many properties that are not in conformance with current City standards in respect to setbacks and signage- Urban Design Objective 1.1 of the 1995 draft Comprehensive Plan states that the City will work to `Improve the appearance of entry points in major corridors in the community. Although this request may or may not alter the existing character of this corridor, it will expand the degree of nonconformity which is contrary to the City's plans for major corridors as stated in the Comprehensive Plan. E. The problems extend beyond economic considerations. Economic considerations do not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. Finding I.E. It appears that this request is being made primarily for marketing purposes, which is only an economic consideration. There are no problems stated that extend beyond the economic considerations of the applicant. Criterion 2 It has been demonstrated that a variance as requested will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this Chapter. Finding 2 The purposes of the Zoning Chapter are stated in Section 11.01, Subd. 2, as follows: "This Chapter is enacted to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare of the City of Shakopee through the following: A. Encouraging the planned and orderly development of residential business industrial, recreational, and public land; B. Providing adequate light, air, and convenience of access to property; C. Limiting congestion in the public right-of-way; D. Preventing overcrowding of land and undue concentration of population and structures; E. Providing for the compatible integration of land uses cnrd the most appropriate use of land; F. Encouraging development in accordance with the City's comprehensive plan; G. Conserving the natural beauty and environmental assets of the City; H. Protecting water resources cntd water quality; 3 I. Facilitating the provision of water utilities and sewage disposal to property as appropriate; J. Protecting the population from fire and other hazards to public safety; and K Providing for the administration of this Chapter and amendments to it, defining the powers and duties imposed by this Chapter and prescribing penalties for violation of its provisions." This variance request is in conflict with purposes A, B, D, and F. Criterion 3 The request is not for a use variance. Finding 3 The request is not for a use variance. Criterion 4 Conditions to be imposed by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals will ensure compliance and to protect the adjacent properties. Finding 4 This criterion is not applicable in this situation. There are no conditions being recommended at this time. Staff Recommendation A variance to the provisions of the Zoning Chapter may be issued to provide relief to the landowner in those zones where the Chapter imposes undue hardships or practical difficulties to the property owner in the use of the land. A variance may be granted only in the event that the above criteria can be met. This application appears to be in conflict with Criteria I and Criteria 2. Therefore, staff is recommending the denial of the application for a 20 foot variance from the 30 foot front yard setback requirement. Action Requested Offer Variance Resolution No. PV-717, A Resolution (Approving or Denying) a 20 foot variance to Section 11.36, Subd. 5.C, and move its adoption , with findings. (NOTE: If the Board of Adjustment and Appeals concurs with the recommendation of Staff, the Board of Adjustment and Appeals should offer a motion TO DENY the variance request with findings and move its adoption.) (TERRIE\PLANCO\ihI\VARAMOCO.MAY) 4 i VARIANCE RESOLUTION NO. PV-717 i A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, APPRt7VLNG/DENYIN(:A 20 FOOT VARIANCE TO THE 30 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENT, SECTION 11.36, SUBD. 5.0 WHEREAS, Amoco Oil Co., applicants and owners, have filed an application dated April 10, 1995, for a variance under the provisions of Chapter 11, Land Use Regulation (Zoning), of the Shakopee City Code, Section 11.89, Subd. 3, for a twenty (20) foot variance to the thirty (30) foot front yard setback requirement(Section 11.36, Subd. 5.C); and WHEREAS, this parcel is presently zoned Highway Business (B-1); and WHEREAS,the property upon which the request is being made is legally described as: The north 110 feet of Lots 9 and 10, and the north I10 feet of the west 1 5 feet of Lot 8, Block 10, Fast Shakopee plat; and WHEREAS, notice was provided and on May 4, 1995, the Board of Adjustment and Appeals conducted a public hearing regarding this application, at which it heard from the Planning Director and invited members of the public to comment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, as follows: That the application for Variance No. PV-717 is hereby APPRt7EQ2 / 12FNLE , based on the following finding(s) with respect to City Code Sec. 11.89, Subd. 2, "Criteria for Granting Variances." Criterion 1 The strict enforcement of the ordinance provisions would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration. Undue hardship means the following: I.A. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls; The Board finds that the subject site is currently being used as an automobile service and gas station without the aid of a variance which appears to be a reasonable use of the property. The Board further finds that this site could also be used for other retail uses that do not involve the use of canopies extending into the required setback. I.B. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property; The Board finds that this lot is not unusually shaped, nor does it have any other unique circumstances._ C. The circumstances were not created by the landowner; The Board finds that the circumstances creating this request were created by the landowner's desire to erect a new structure within the required setback. No actions by an outside party have created the need for this request. A The variance, if granted,will not alter the essential character of the locality; and The Board finds that the granting of this variance would expand the degree of nonconformity along one of the City's commercial corridors in direct conflict with the provisions of the draft 1995 Comprehensive Plan and 1990 Comprehensive Plan. E. The problems extend beyond economic considerations. Economic considerations do not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. The Board finds that the circumstances creating this request do not appear to extend beyond the economic considerations of the applicant. Criterion 2 It has been demonstrated that a variance as requested will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this Chapter. The Board finds that this variance request is in conflict with the Zoning Chapter's stated purposes of encouraging the planned and orderly development of commercial land; providing adequate light to the property; preventing overcrowding of land with undue concentrations of structures; and encouraging development in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. Criterion 3 The request is not for a use variance. The Board finds that this request is not for a use variance and therefore this criterion is satisfied. Criterion 4 Conditions to be imposed by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals will ensure compliance and to protect the adjacent properties. The Board does not propose to impose any additional conditions as part of this variance request. Adopted by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota this 4th day of May, 1995. Chair of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals ATTEST: Planning Director AFFIDAVIT STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) SS. OFFICE OF CITY CLERK COUNTY OF SCOTT ) I, Judith S. Cox, City Clerk for the City of Shakopee, do hereby certify that I have compared the attached copy of Variance Resolution No. PV-717 with the original record thereof preserved in my office, and have found the same to be a correct and true copy. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my hand at City of Shakopee, NEmesota, in the County of Scott on the_day of 119_. Judith S. Cox, City Clerk Prepared by: THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE 129 South Holmes Shakopee,MN 55379 a��1©/ �tio did a Sara ��a vv o© �©_ aim - know �d � : �© - o MTi Sip —m t -®R ® 0/I�O� alllt HS- 1111 0110 Q�ioi�111� On11 ■ � I �`1�1C �ilil� so-It �GI - � '' . '�,,� 111► - �• �:llt�d-�— . .r�/�-a111ti Q v�DI' , ��tllt; ��Gtl1� !!!IG 0_l;Ity X110 �1�/G t� ►�� �i11ty �� .�vQ1111t1C j!!il 1 � �' It11G dl �ii 1� 1111 TF 1 oII 1114i11G h - _ EXHIBIT B AMOCO Amoco Oil Company _I- Twin Cities Region Southgate Office Plaza,Suite 801 5001 West 80th Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55437-1135 Maintenance/Administrative Department 612-831-1384 APR 1 0 April 7, 1995 City of Shakopee Planning Department 129 South Holmer Shakopee, Minnesota 55337 Re: Request for Canopy Setback Variance 804 East First Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota Dear Gentlemen and Ladies: Amoco Oil would like to make site improvements at 804 East First Avenue. The major concern is the age of the underground storage tanks and their effect on the environment. The tanks are approximately twenty-five years old. We would remove the existing storage tanks, product lines, dispensers, and islands. They would be replaced with double-wall tanks and lines. The system would have the latest monitoring devices installed. We would install four new islands directly in front of the station building. The islands would be placed to allow adequate traffic flow through the site. The canopy would be fifty feet long. This canopy would extend to ten feet from front property line. In viewing other properties in the same area, it would appear other properties have set backs of structures less than thirty feet as required. I would ask the City of Shakopee to grant a variance to Amoco Oil Company to accommodate this canopy. I believe the canopy addition will modernize the site, provide shelter for customers while fueling, allow better traffic flow through the site for safety, and increase on-site lighting for security. Thank you for your prompt consideration for this variance request. Sincerely, Richard R. Larsen -Maintenance Supervisor - ----- S' CLAY - EXHIBIT C - I--� tt:9TH Li'-E. LOTS 8. s. a re — ��— ROCC ----- ----------- �° \ 10' t 30'Setback \ ......... ::::.;:.;:.:.;.; f ::-- Setback Line FIVE PARKING S T � >: .; :::«:•>:.2:::;::>::;.::::;;::;:::>.::'•:::::;:;::...:.... FIVE PARKING STALLS :r v » ><<> >'> back OfSetback :..;..; .:.:.. ::.:.:.:.,::.:::... :.:...;.::.:. 30 Set 1 fi I Existing Striccture i i iSetback Line I 20' Setback I �Bb--•o f I \ f i G°'QGMBIJC PL` AH tuy i = — ------------------- — - - ---------- ----- — — ------------------�-------- ---------- - > K LL' I � HLL❑ \� - -- _ - - - - -- —•---------------•-------•--- 3-Nn iv OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS Regular Session Shakopee,Minnesota May 4, 1995 MEMBERS PRESENT: Mars, Joos, Madigan, Bladow, Link, DuBois MEMBERS ABSENT: Christensen STAFF PRESENT: Paul Bilotta, Acting Planning Director Terrie A. Thurmer, Assistant City Planner Dave Nummer, Staff Engineer Bruce Loney, Public Works Director L ROLL CALL. Chairman Mars called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Roll call was taken as noted above. H. APPROVAL OF AGENDA. The agenda was approved as submitted. III. APPROVAL OF APRIL 6, 1995,MEETING MINUTES. The minutes were approved as submitted. TV. RECOGNITION OF INTERESTED CITIZENS. Chairman Mars recognized anyone in the audience wishing to speak on any item not on the agenda. There was no response. V. PUBLIC HEARING: TO CONSIDER AN APPLICATION FOR A TWENTY FOOT VARIANCE TO THE THIRTY FOOT SETBACK FOR AMOCO OIL COMPANY FOR A NEW CANOPY. Chairman Mars opened the public hearing regarding this request. The Assistant City Planner stated that the applicant is requesting a 20 foot variance from the 30 foot front yard setback requirement within the Highway Business Zone to construct a 32 foot by 50 foot canopy over four new gas pumps. She added that a variance to the Zoning Chapter may be issued to provide relief to the landowner in those zones where the Chapter imposes undue hardships or practical difficulties in the use of the land. Staff is of the opinion that other design alternatives exist for constructing the awning within the required setbacks, or that a smaller canopy could be constructed to cover just the southern two gas pumps. Minutes of the May 4, 1995 Board of Adjustment and Appeals Page No. 2 The Assistant City Planner reinforced that a variance may be granted only in the event that all of the criterion required for the granting of a variance can be met. She added that staff has provided draft findings for each criterion, and that the application appears to be in conflict with Criteria 1 and Criteria 2. Therefore, staff is recommending the denial of the request. She added that just prior to the meeting, the applicant proposed to staff the construction of a smaller canopy in which only a seven (7') variance would be required. However, the criteria for the approval of a seven foot variance would remain the same. Commissioner Joos asked if the revisions to the plan would change the staffs recommendation for denial. The Assistant City Planner replied that the findings regarding the criteria would remain the same. Richard Larson, Amoco Oil Company noted that a 24' wide by 76' long canopy is now proposed. The new proposal would have three fuel dispensers rather than four. He noted that the size of the new canopy cannot be adjusted anymore because it is direct relation to the distance between fuel dispensers. He discussed fighting for the canopy, and stated that double wall tanks and dispensers are proposed. Comm. Joos asked if they considered what they have now to be a canopy. Larson replied that it considered a marker; and that the lighting is poor. Comm. DuBois asked if the posts will be moved closer to the highway. Larson replied that they will be moved back 10-12' from their current location. Motion: Comm. Joos/ DuBois offered a motion to close the public hearing. Vote: Motion carried unanimously. Comm. DuBois asked if we are still dealing with the 20' variance or the 7' variance. Mars noted that both would still require the criteria to be met. All criteria must be approved no matter what the size of the variance request. Chairman Mars reviewed the criteria which must be met in order to have a variance application approved, and the draft findings provided by staff Criterion 1: The strict enforcement of the ordinance provision would catise undue hardship beccntse of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration. Undue hardship means the following: LA. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used tinder conditions allowed by the official controls: Minutes of the May 4, 1995 Board of Adjustment and Appeals Page No. 3 Draft Finding: The Board finds that the subject site is currently being used as an automobile service and gas station without the aid of a variance which appears to be a reasonable use of the property. The Board further finds that this site could also be used for other retail uses that do not involve the use of canopies extending into the required setback. Comm. Joos stated that he felt that this could be a subjective issue and suggested moving on to the other criteria and coming back to this one later. 1B. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property. Draft Finding: The Board finds that this lot is not unusually shaped nor does it have other unique circumstances. Chairman Mars stated that there doesn't seem to be anything unique with this corner lot. Comm. Joos agreed that it is not unusually shaped or has topographic constraints. Comm. DuBois stated that the building is a"grandfathered in" parcel which conformed at the time it was constructed. She agreed that it was not unusually shaped. Chairman Mars asked how the grandfathering applied to this site. Comm. DuBois replied that the setbacks at the time were in conformance, and she was unaware if that was even relevant. Comm. Joos asked staff what setbacks were in place at the time. The Assistant City Planner noted that the front yard setback has been 30' since 1979. This site was constructed around 1960, and she believed that the setback at that time was also 30'. Joos asked what the status for the site is now. The Assistant City Planner replied that the structure is not in compliance with the rear yard setback, but it is in compliance with the front and side yard setbacks. Comm. DuBois asked if a canopy would be considered an accessory structure and how staff would treat an actual building addition vs. a canopy. The Assistant City Planner replied that there is no distinction between the two. DuBois asked if permanence would make a difference. The Assistant City Planner replied that it would not. It was the consensus of the majority of the Board members to agree with this draft finding. 1C. The circumstances were not created by the Icnrdowner. Draft Finding: The Board finds that the circumstances creating this request were created by the landowner. No actions by an outside party,hcn e created the need for this request. Minutes of the May 4, 1995 Board of Adjustment and Appeals Page No. 4 Comm. Madigan stated that it seems clear that this situation is being created by the landowner, and that there are no circumstances being created externally. DuBois discussed the fact that the customers' need for lighting and safety are the actions of outside consumers to prompt this need. The Assistant City Planner noted that outside lighting could be accomplished without the use of a canopy. Bladow believed that the reason for this request is to keep up with the competition. Comm. DuBois stated that she disagreed with the finding. She believed that the statement referring to no actions by outside parties is subjective. She stated that lighted canopies are seen throughout Shakopee. She believed that not having one would be out of compliance. The Acting Planning Director explained what type of actions outside parties can take that would prompt the need for a variance request. It was the consensus of the majority of the Board members to agree with this draft finding. ID. The variance, if granted, would not alter the essential character of the property. Draft Finding: The Board finds that the granting of this variance tivauld expand the degree of non-conformity along one of the City's commercial corridors in direct conflict of the Comprehensive Plan. Comm. Link stated that he did not agree with this finding and asked if all other uses were in conformance. The Assistant City Planner indicated that this site is the one being considered for a variance. She added that it is likely that the others were in compliance prior to the creation of setback requirements. Comm. Joos agreed with the findings and has always been a proponent of correcting non- conforming sites and uses. He believed that further expanding the nonconformity would not be appropriate. Comm. DuBois stated that it would appear that if the applicant is going to look the same as other similar uses, he would be more in conformance with what is there than he would be expanding the degree of non-conformity. She didn't agree with the findings. She noted that the pumps are being moved back 8-10'. By doing that, the sight lines along First Avenue will be improved. Comm. Bladow agreed with the draft finding. Minutes of the May 4, 1995 Board of Adjustment and Appeals Page No. 5 It was the consensus of the majority of the Board members to agree with this draft finding. IE. The problems extend beyond economic considerations. Economic considerations do not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. Draft Finding: The Board finds that the circumstances creating this request do not appear to extend beyond the economic considerations of the applicant. Comm. Madigan agreed, noting that it appears to be economic. DuBois disagreed with the finding, believing that it is more of a safety improvement on the property. Bladow believed that it is an economic consideration of the applicant. It was the consensus of the majority of the Board members to agree with this draft finding. Criterion 2: It has been demonstrated that a variance as requested will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this Chapter. Draft Finding: The Board finds that this variance recnrest is in conflict with the Zoning Chapter's stated purposes of encouraging the planned and orderly development of commercial land;providing adequate light to the property,preventing overcrowding of land with undue concentrations of structures; and encouraging development in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan Comm. DuBois did not agree with the finding. She believed that the lighting is an improvement to the property and stated that the current lighting is inadequate as compared to other stations in Shakopee. She noted that improving the building and moving the pumps are improvements to the site. It was the consensus of the majority of the Board members to agree with this draft finding. Criterion 3: The request is not for a use variance. Draft Finding: The Board finds that this request is not for a use variance and, therefore, this criterion was satisfied. It was the consensus of the Board members to agree with this draft finding. Minutes of the May 4, 1995 Board of Adjustment and Appeals Page No. 6 Criterion 4: Conditions to be imposed by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals will ensure compliance and to protect the adjacent properties. Draft Finding: The Board does not propose to impose any additional conditions as part of this variance request. It was the consensus of the Board members to agree with this draft finding. Criterion 1 revisited! Comm. Joos stated that he felt that discussion regarding Criterion 1 was no longer necessary for consideration due to the fact that all of the criteria must be met, and other criteria have been found not to apply to this request. Motion: Comm. Joos / Madigan offered Resolution No. PV-717, A Resolution Denying a 20 Foot Variance to the 30 Foot Front Yard Setback Requirement, and offered a motion to deny the request for the 7 foot variance also requested by the applicant. Vote: Motion carved 5-1, with Comm. DuBois voting in opposition to the denial. Chairman Mars informed the applicant that the decision could be appealed to the City Council within the next seven days. VI. PUBLIC HEARING: CONTINUED FROM APRIL 6, 1995 MEETING. TO CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR FISCHER AGGREGATES. Chairman Mars reopened the public hearing regarding this request. The Assistant City Planner stated that staff is not in a position to make a recommendation on this request without further information from the applicant, and is recommending that the public hearing be continued to the June meeting. Motion: Comm. Joos /Bladow offered a motion to continue the public hearing to the June 8, 1995, meeting of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals. Vote: Motion carried unanimously. Y VII. OTHER BUSINESS No other business was on the agenda for discussion. VIII. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Mars adjourned the meeting at 8:24 p.m. {c:\TEMF\i\ITNU ESSBO.a494AY4.95) _ EXHIBIT LEGEND I � a CATCil BASIN L------- - - - -- - ° LIGHT POLE o POWER POLE 1 GUARD POST 1 + SIGN I t --. -R-•--try-� t ��� NUE -- SUPPORT POST 1 m FILL PIPE ..,,,,..,.„..,., • GATE VALVE \I •• �� STEEL COVER i �!° CONCRETE ! )~ r. ,. 0 20 - '0_ 60 - iP.O B GAS PUMP J �-- -------- ---- -- Lw,I ° m] - --- L._, ! UNDERGROUND WATER MAIN SCALE IN FEET a e1 G G CF) K I R i -<•- UNOEP,GROUND SANITARY SEWER I •� / $ C nld 1 f I �_- `—_ _ -•- UNDERGROUNO GAS MAIN 33 �� a� W oo SERVICE STATION NO. 5531 • ■ P ..y wow wr.nu �� '^ ��� i SURVEY FOR:i M o AMOCO OIL COMPANY - f • ✓� I sro..eoe. i Cn I j® ®4 '•Y 5SE-11a sr.em..a m1 PROPERTY ADDRESS, (Furnished by Client) ' ± • - �"�`` ! '\1 804 East 1st Avenue, Shakopee. Minnesota 1 - 1;?'�; LEGAL DESCRIPTION, ! ,'� 1! o Lots 9 and 10: and the, north 110.00 fee+ r.l me ! 7 ! • �. Thp north 110.00 Feet f rca.�- T4'• �•�- F' west 15.00 feet of Lot 8. Block 10. EAST SHAKOPEE. Scoff County, Minnesota. 0 i I ! rr �� ... I...,...,....!.... i �� I �' ' '• J -•! -_i i hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the ! boundarins of the land lbeve descrfbed and of the location of all butldings. If any. thereon, and ail vlsfble PnZroachments. If any, from or on said land AL LEY — — — _ - -- — Dated this 231n day of March, 1995 i A- — - - I i Jack Solke Minnesota License No. 20281 I i NOTES: 1. The orientation of this bearing system Is based on he west line of Lot 10. which Is assumed to have a bearing of North 0 degrees 24 minutes 52 seconds West i 2. Erlsrfng utilities, services and underground srrucru�es shown hereon, were � located either physically, from existing records made available to us or by t resident testimony. Other utilities and services may be present. Verification I ! and location of a!1 utilities should be obtained from the owners of the respective utilities prior to any excavation I 3, No Title work was furnished for the preparation of this survey to verify the legni de Ion or the existence of any easements or encumbrances. 4. Area of the property shown hereon Is 14.851 souare feet or 0. 4 1;[r(t�.`�4�f ,j",'� 4. No Information was available regarding water and sanitary set v pqJ to this site. APR 1 01995 1 EGAN, FIE'_D 9, N01-.AK INC. ZSu:, b 7-1 15 '.Jauzata 2•ouleva-d l'IrneapoORStinnesora 55426 t1 par, 45 229658- 6' CLAY iop .2 _ - - -INV_ 718 - - - << _--- << _ - -- —--- ( ----'6, CAST-IRON W - --— - - V 0 NORTH LiNE, LOTS S. 9, d 10 Co ul —C U_RB r ONC. CURB CONC_ ----- D ROCK ROCK — - --- TfF'--111.9 INV- 7�'8 o J NORTH 135.02 TOP-777.91 _- TOP-738.4 INV- 7328 -. CONC:--CURB A. O w U I INV- 732.7 ] INSTALL NEW 37 x'sR CnNON`Y � • AP.EA LIGHT R LLi re I ' W O --- ------ ----- PTL IN SIGN u W 60 REMOVE EXISTINi ISLANDS �'.lI1L_. .. a _ l Q -------- ............................. ..... PIPING AND OISP. --_— - e �: !Si !ST- p APSA LI T O O - .. .. .. .... .. Lgl D OQ ��.... L� � j v INSTALL TANKS ANO PIPING .000ROINC LLLJJJ r.....-- O v i0 AMOCO SPECIFICAT;ry /FCR FOUR NEW 1x4 ISLANDS AMOC SPEC OOUOLE WALL FIBEROLA_ TANXS AND PiP(`G > VERIFY ANV OISCREN'ENCt 5 WITH AMOCO WITH FOUR NEW PROs 6 OlSP u I ' I WITH CARD READERS• 1 !n co BEFORE PROCEEOINC. NEW B'REINFCPCEO CONCRETE'SLAB OVER NEW TA NXS MID UNDER �AwrY N OE a�R I ry 1 W Z U CD q THREE NEW OOUBLE WALL n '�:��T o.R'-i,1 , (n C:OERy ASS TANKS BY AMOCO ' i,:'4, •i?* 1 £ j 1-14.808 GALLON I _ I 2-89108 GALLON I °' INSTALL NEW OOL E WALL FIBERGLASS --- _---- -_--•-- ' •O []Q ,INSTAL OIL EP .Y O SPP I y JZW _ INSTALL C PER o SPECIFICARSNS av I ' I 1YERIFT LOCATION WITH RICHARa LARSEN m r-r- . �TERH(NATE 3'PRIMARY AT N W m c3 I T N ( i I m FIRST OISP.CONTINUE 1 3 t 1 WITH 7 PRIMARY AS PER SPEC.1 I lU 01 ° I ; ( 4, I BEHOVE ExISTR WAISTE OIL TASK W 5 I L VERtFT SIZE LOCATION WITH ANgC 0 13 1 ! u U —If tl• 1l SunrS I-__ _ _-_ A _____ C� W J ---- ----- c a m v+ v CV i ® 32 8 N n0Oa0w Nov O 6&27 j m p 5) I I CD I a n { Z I I FLOOR ELEV. 740.6 I N 0 H I `n �uN �\ 1 '\,, ,•__-_-_.__-./•,_.•,••_•-_,____,• � 1 STORY CONC. SLOG. N0. 804 j b- ` SERVICE STATION NO. 5531 :U P , REMOVE EXISTING TANKS it VERIFY SIZES WITH AMOCO. 24.13 > 4 v ry FLOOR ELEV. 740.3 I a o I N W Im II C U S j G�SCMETER-.a: CL 1 tGwT l t U v AI E VE-ft ------...— 41.09 1[[[ IaIA�. ., LL N ig WFST i 15.0 elruhilrious Q ` I-_.._.... :�ELEC.BOX' G P SERV�` .5 WOOD FE E* - j 2.1 CONC. WALL LiNE TE p L Q H u ` °-0 Z I I - Q f m LA II a I I SOUTH LINE. N. 11000 FT, LOTS!B. 9, S 10 I a- N I Ld 3b I I I CT I I TOP-7435 N I Z --. ..—._—._...__. —.—.—_—.---.—.—..—.—.-------------I•------- ---------.I _.7ni------- w Ld fI �O_� �►, � ALLEY f d J Qf G J r —c—�-- --- -- - c — c c A O (66 moco U N o p EAST & WEST CANOPY ELEVATION �o co O W �— U) CL U- L A tea < o 5rnfr1+i0 TO EYTEv? APOIBA ENTIRE �f L.tJ l51 vF Fa01A CK7'-'N 11U+r1N1 OaNpvr An000 0'+ TFe!EE SIDES ON TWEE SIDES OF CANOPY � °"'e az Q 00 _ morn 'CEQTI6A2E'ILLUMNATED 516N p 15' X 26' X-12-DEEP N 2ED ALUCABOND 5T21PE i- T&O DECAL5 Ar A hm _ zz NORTH CANOPY ELEVATION a�Qgs EXISTING FRONT ELEVATION N ° g Q J p N7F v\ 0 37 ILLUI TINATED 6E2TICA2E L040 W > h y in i� /.a� A MU I \=/J w L SELF SERVE IVEQF. T CN SITE. EXISTING SIDE ELEVATION � Q Vl W G W pd LA P � o _jer�icerc Q m o m w z - ---- --- .. -- -- _1-- z W EXISTING PYLON SIGN X W w= I� i i i I I — —— -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- — — I- — -- — —I N S TR EE 9m\ I j I I ----- << << 8' CLAY << << -- I I r� E —- -1, SEav \ T � j n N �I H 3 � �'1�� I ---Fi Z 0 O I j h I I m i i r i ------ --- - - j I � i j -o I — i I i D j i I F------------- -- -� — — — -1 - — — — I - m S I I I Cam-, i n I i Iv z a I r u >I � I i I I ' n - PA2KIN6 PLAN TWs MAWN6 IS MOPEeTY OF Q ©�O O O o coe.TIai— AMOCO OIL W. , SHAKOPEE 5545331 004 EAST F125T AVE. AND 15 ISSUED A5 CONFIDENTIAL 5001 x* a ccNTAcT D15LLOSUeE,LOPY Oe DUPLICATION a EST 80TH ST. . IS NOT ALLCUED WITHOUT WeITTE 2EVI5I0N 4/0/95 SewE _ r.v•a PEen55I0N MINNEAPOLIS MR SOUTHGATE OFFICE PLAZA SUITE 801 �\ THOMAS M.CONLIN• MURN,*E CONLIN WRITE >� *ANDT THOMAS A.GILLIGAN.JR. _ ROBERT W.ML'R.NANE DAVID C.ANASTASI ROBERT T.W-Hi E - P R O F E S S ION 4 L A i S O C I A T 1 0 N JOEL D.HEDBERG JOHN E.BRA-,DT• THOMAS) NORBY JOHN D.HIRTE ATTORNEYS AT LAW ANNE F.BAKER STEVEN 1 KIRSCH KAMMEY M.K.MAHOWALD•' ANDREW T.SHERN 1800 PIPER!AFFRAY PLAZA NICOLE B.SURGES MICHAEL S.RYAN• 444 CEDAR STREET PETER B.TIEDE JAMES F BALDWIN JANE M HILL C.TODD KOEBELE SAINT PALL,MINNESOTA 55101 MARK D.COVIN MICHAEL P.TIERNEY KERRY 0.ATKINSON JOHN R.SHOEMAKER•• TELEPHONE:(612)_=T-9111 •ALSO ADMITTED IN DANIEL A.HAWS. WILLIAM L MORAN TELECOPTER(61 2)"_3-5100 WISCONSIN ••ALSO ADMITTED IN May 31, 1995 NORTH DAKOTA CITY OF E.WILLARD MURNANE Stijl'\` 11907.19761 TO THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND FrHARLES R.MUPNANE CITY COUNCIL OF THE D JUN 1 1191319821 CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 1995 C/O JUDITH S. COX, CITY CLERK 129 HOLMES STREET SOUTH L5 SHAKOPEE, MN 55379 Re: Amoco Variance for Koehnen Amoco Station Amoco Station #5331 Dear City Council: We represent Amoco Oil Company (Amoco) in connection with its application for a variance from the 30-foot front yard setback requirement contained in § 11. 36, subd. 5. C, of the Zoning Code of the City of Shakopee. The purpose of this letter, in part, is to provide a statement of alleged errors or emissions of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals as required by § 11. 89 , subd. 6 of the Zoning Code. The subject property is located at 804 East First Avenue, and is legally described as: The north 110 feet of Lots 9 and 10, and the north 110 feet of the west 15 feet of Lot 8, Block 10, East Shakopee plat. The subject Amoco service station is operated by Mike Koehnen. Before him, Mike ' s uncle, Lester Koehnen operated the service station. The station has been operated by the Koehnen family since 1963 . Amoco' s application for a variance was filed on April 10, 1995. See Exhibit "A" attached hereto. The variance application was denied by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals by Resolution dated May 4 , 1995. See Exhibit "B" attached hereto. An appeal to the City Council was filed on May 12 , 1995 . The purpose of the variance request is to erect a canopy over the pump island at the subject Amoco service station in connection with other improvements scheduled to be made to the station. It should be noted, however, that while the initial request was for a 20-foot variance, that request was modified at the hearing before the Board of Adjustment and Appeals on May 4 , 1995 . As modified, Amoco ' s request is only for a 7-foot variance from the 30-foot front yard setback. City Council of Shakopee c/o Judith Cox May 31, 1995 Page 3 property line (i.e. a 15-foot invasion of the 30-foot setback) . The city approved the Building Permit for the Holiday canopy knowing that the structure would be 52 ' x 551 . See Exhibit "E-1. " In summary, in the immediate vicinity of, and on the same street as, the subject Amoco service station, three other service stations have either been granted a variance, or have otherwise erected a pump island canopy which invades the 30-foot setback requirement. The benefits of such canopies are obvious: it enhances the physical image and appearance of the station, it provides the customer with shelter and protection from the elements, and it allows for additional lighting on the premises, thereby increasing safety on the premises. In view of the precedent already set by three other service stations on East First Avenue, and in view of the fact that the Amoco 7-foot variance request is minimal in comparison to the variances historically allowed for service station canopies on East First Avenue, the Amoco variance request should be granted. THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS ERRED IN DENYING AMOCO'S REQUEST FOR A 7-FOOT VARIANCE The Board' s adverse findings were as follows: 1.B. The plight of the land owner is due to circumstances unique to the property. " The board finds that this lot is not unusually shaped, nor does it have any other unique circumstances. " Response: The location of the existing service station building on the site prevents installation of a canopy that would both provide shelter and lighting over the pump island and still be more than 30-feet back from the front property line. In addition, due to traffic movement considerations, the pump islands cannot be relocated. Therefore, circumstances unique to the property do contribute to the problem of complying with the 30-foot setback. l.C. The circumstances were not created by the land owner. "The board finds that the circumstances creating this request were created by the land owner ' s desire to erect a new structure within the required setback. No actions by an outside party have created the need for this request. " Response: The board ' s finding that the "circumstances creating this request were created by the land owner ' s desire to erect a new structure" are not the "circumstances" contemplated by § 1 . C. The "circumstances" are those circumstances unique to the property, as City Council of Shakopee c/o Judith Cox May 31, 1995 Page 2 This matter will be before the Council at its meeting on June 6, 1995. ISSUE AT HAND The question before the Council is whether a 7-foot variance should be granted in favor of Amoco pursuant to § 11. 89 of the Zoning Code. We submit that the variance request should be granted because the request is less intrusive than other service station canopies currently existing on First Avenue, the request meets with the variance criteria set forth in the Zoning Code, and because the request is not inconsistent with the City ' s 1990 Comprehensive Plan and the draft 1995 Comprehensive Plan. PRIOR PRECEDENT FOR SERVICE STATION CANOPIES ICO Service Station The ICO service station located at 807 East First Avenue, across the street from the subject Amoco station, has had a canopy since 1964 . The setback requirements in 1964 called for structures to be "set back from the front line lot at least a distance equal to 50% of the depth of the lot. " The ICO canopy extends to within several feet of the front property line of the service station. This canopy was in violation of the 1964 setback requirement, and is in violation of the current setback requirement. See Exhibit "C" attached hereto. SuperAmerica Service Station The SuperAmerica service station located at 1155 East First Avenue sought, and was granted, a 23-foot variance in 1976. The purpose of the variance request was to "install a canopy over pump island 30 ' X 71 ' with face of canopy 17-feet from front of property line. " See Exhibits "D-1" through "D-3" attached hereto. Research reveals that the setback requirement in 1976 was identical to the current 30-foot setback requirement. Nevertheless, the variance was granted. See Exhibit "D-3 . " SuperAmerica sought to install the canopy because "said canopy is needed to protect customers during purchase at pump island. " See Exhibit "D-3 . " Holiday Service Station The Holiday service station, located at 444 East First Avenue, installed a new pump island canopy in 1980 . See Exhibits "E-1" and "E-2" attached hereto. According to our research, no variance was requested or granted. Nevertheless, the Holiday service station canopy extends to within approxirately 15-feet of the front City Council of Shakopee c/o Judith Cox May 31, 1995 Page 4 discussed in the preceding section. These circumstances were not created by the land owner. They are simply a function of the lot size, traffic movement/flow considerations, and the intended purpose of the pump island canopy. 1.D. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. "The board finds that the granting of this variance would expand the degree of non-conformity along one of the city' s commercial corridors in direct conflict with the provisions of the draft 1995 Comprehensive Plan and the 1990 Comprehensive Plan. " Response: Amoco agrees that there is non-conformity with respect to the application of the 30-foot setback requirement to service station canopies on East First Avenue. However, Amoco disagrees that a 7-foot variance would significantly "expand the degree of non-conformity. " Nor will it alter the essential character of the locality, since three other service stations within six blocks on either side of the Amoco station have pump island canopies. Further, the proposed Amoco canopy is consistent with the 1990 Comprehensive Plan for First Avenue. Under the 1990 plan, Land Use Goal LU-k provides: "The appearance of the First Avenue corridor should be improved through private development, enforcement of maintenance standards, reasonably tight design standards for signage, and improved public landscaping and lighting. " The improvements to be made to the Amoco station, including a new pump island canopy, will improve the appearance of First Avenue, and will provide additional lighting on, and in the immediate vicinity of the subject premises. Amoco has modified its original request for a 20-foot variance to a 7-foot variance. To the extent that the canopy may be viewed as signage, it certainly is a "reasonably tight" design for the premises. Therefore, the variance request is not at odds with the City ' s Comprehensive Plans. I. E. The problems extend beyond economic considerations. "The board finds that the circumstances creating this request do not appear to extend beyond the economic considerations of the applicant. " Response: The "problem" created by the 30-foot setback is not an economic one. Indeed, it would be more economical not to install a canopy at all. The problem created by the setback requirement is that it frustrates the desire of the land owner and station operator to improve the overall appearance of the station, provide protection and shelter to the customers , and add additional City Council of Shakopee c/o Judith Cox May 31, 1995 Page 5 lighting which will also improve the safety of the site. These are not "economic considerations, " but are common courtesy considerations which customers have come to expect. Criterion II. It has been demonstrated that a variance as requested will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this chapter. "The board finds that this variance request is in conflict with the Zoning Chapter ' s stated purposes of encouraging the planned and orderly development of commercial land; providing adequate light to the property; preventing overcrowding of land with undue concentrations of structures; and encouraging development in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. " Response: A 7-foot variance is certainly not in conflict with the planned and orderly development of commercial land. A structure which will allow for additional lighting on the premises is certainly not in conflict with a desire to provide adequate lighting on the property. The scaled-down version of the pump island canopy eliminates the concern for overcrowding of the land with structures. As previously noted above, the improvements to be made to the Amoco station on East First Avenue will improve the overall appearance of this commercial corridor, and is not inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. As to Criterion III and IV, the board found that the request was not for a use variance, and considered no additional conditions necessary as part of the variance request. Amoco does not disagree with either of these Board findings. "VARIANCE" DEFINED Under § 11. 02 , subd. 143 of the Zoning Code a "variance" is defined as follows: A modification or relaxation of the provisions of this Chapter where it is determined that by reason of special and unusual circumstances relating to a specific lot, that strict application of this Chapter would cause an undue hardship, or that strict conformity with the provisions of this Chapter, would be unreasonable, impractical , or unfeasible under the circumstances. City Council of Shakopee c/o Judith Cox May 31, 1995 Page 6 The special circumstances existing at the subject Amoco service station require a "relaxation" of the 30-foot setback requirement. Strict conformity with the setback requirement would be "unreasonable, impractical, or unfeasible. " If the setback requirement is strictly enforced, it effectively prevents Amoco from installing a canopy at the subject service station. Given the existing building location, traffic movement and flow considerations, pump dispenser locations to accommodate traffic flow, and the close proximity of East First Avenue to the front of the station, strict conformity with the setback requirement would render unfeasible (i. e. impossible) the installation of a canopy. Slight relaxation or modification of the zoning setback provision is appropriate under the circumstances. Amoco has demonstrated its willingness to compromise by modifying its original plan. The original plan called for a 32 ' x 50 ' canopy. The revised canopy is 24 ' x 761 , and requires only a 7- foot variance. This small variance would hardly be noticeable from the street, would have no adverse impact on adjacent property owners, and is consistent with the spirit and intent of the land use at that location. A full-sized blueprint of the Site Plan drawing for the subject Amoco service station has also been provided to the city clerk's office with this letter. Amoco Oil Company respectfully requests that the city council overrule the decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals, and grant its request for a 7-foot variance in order to erect a canopy in connection with other improvements to be made at the subject Amoco service station. 6,Reslrectful submitted, Michael S. Ryan MSR: bes cc: Amoco Oil Company Att: Rich Larsen Amoco Exhibits Exhibit A Amoco Variance Application March 13 , 1995 Exhibit B Variance Resolution No. PV-717 May 4, 1995 Exhibit C ICO Property Plan 1965 Exhibit D-1 Superamerica Application for Building Permit November 11, 1976 Exhibit D-2 Superamerica Property Plan 1976 Exhibit D-3 Variance Resolution No. C-130 November 23 , 1976 Exhibit E-1 Holiday Application for Building Permit July 9, 1980 Exhibit E-2 Correspondence from City Planner Keane to Holiday January 7, 1981 Return ConrPlete APPlication To The Shakopee Planning Department - FART.-kNCE APPLICATION Part I: APPLICANT INFORMATION CITY OF SHAKOPEE For Office Use Only: 129 South Holmes Street Date Filed: Shakopee, NIN 55379 Filing Fee: (612) 445-3650 Receipt No.: Applicant/Developer. A' 0&6? e�/& �- //�/G�i`f Z4f 'e'y Street Address: 84 City, State, Zip: , MN. S—S-37�P Phone: Current Property O%vner:l!�Yk D&O O/G (ffep- Street Address: a / ZO City, State, Zip: AW. Ss54.37 Phone: Consultant/Enmrieer: Street Address: City, State, Zip: Phone: Application Fees: CHECK FEE ONE Single Family Residential S S5.00 A11 Others S150.00 Appeal to the City Council S 55.00 I Applicant is also responsible for all administrative costs and consultation fees incurred by the i City, as established in the Citv's Fee Schedule. Submitted this day of 19 7z -,OZ - Applicant's Signature roperty Owner's Signature trn �tdlh^s t!u:._ 'i,an ;L�:rr..!:c;u;un!�: !li..�'u r� .•. �„i.i,��t: r,; ,., ��r, _:�:.�,; L; !t ...,, , i�.. i:�..... ... ..... VARIANCE APPLICATION Part II: SITE INFORMATION I. Current legal descriptions of all parcels (attach on separate sheets 8 1/2" x I I" if too lengthy) Parcel A 7#F— /Vo4T7y' //0 "e,15 1_4z y .47yd is TM- 2. PID Numbers: 27- 27- (current) 27- 27- 3. Property Present J Torrens Size: Zoning: Property ( noj 4. Variance Request from which Dimension Provision of the Requested Zoning Ordinance: f. Proposed Improvements: /yam Existing Use of Property: �r�SOG/�✓� K /if>L SG•ES T,. Proposed Use of Property- S. Project Permits Required: (Please mark appropriate blanks.) Planning Permit Approval Building Permit Approvals t_ `onditional Use Permit _Principal Building Permit _Variance Accessory Building Permit _Rezonin« Deck and Fence _Comprehensive Plan Amendment ign _MUSA A-mendment _Septic (On-site sewer) _Major Subdivision ,storage Tank _Vacation t _Moving Permit Environmental Assessment Worksheet _Environmental Impact Stat Engineering Permit Appi-ovals _DNR Approval _Work- in the _Scott County Environmental Health _Grading and Drainage _iMPCA \PDES SPUC Permit Approvals Utility Review 9. Has the applicant or property owner sought to plat, rezone, obtain a variance or conditional use permit o the subject parcel or any portion of it? No Yes r� If so, when? //3 Request for: ,60147VCe— TD 10. Briefly describe %vhy you believe an undue hardship exists based upon circumstances unique to the site. (Please refer to the five criteria for Granting Variances, City Code Section 11.59.) Describe: /�f'Ll'l�(�O �u� G,�,� To /NS�iI�!il'�� 7�1�� l/�✓�5 , �tyYO 1�.5�'N��S T � COL 7 W14 AY.6 A f 7. T 5*me 7TH Zy �f/�TE�2. Liu /Dr�HE.25 �i+l.D G�E°t.�U6�fTf� o �//� S�f•T�. I L. Additional information that you feel would assist the Shakopee Board of Adjustment and Acpeals in understanding and evaluating your request: �rEiY/o�i�S iJL,ver— EXI-51 s . aA6 -4::�E--1ZF metro �o,e �io,.PE S '� oG VARIANCE APPLICATION Part III: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST Your submittal must include the following information in order to be considered an Application for Variance. Chec bONes under the "Applicant Submitted" column indicating completion of the corresponding requirement. If the listed requirement is not applicable, please note reason(s) in the left hand margin. Applicant City Submitted Received 1. Completed Variance Application (three parts) and paid fee. _A. Application: Application for Approval of the Variance. B. Paid Fee. 2. A cover letter describing the variance request, and addressing each of the six .criteria necessary for the granting variances (City Code Section I I.S9). 3. A list of the names and addresses of property owners within 350 feet of the exterior of the site of the proposed variance from a Certified Abstract Firm, 4. Complete legal description of the site on which the variance is being requested. F 7I 0 5. Evidence of ownership or an interest in the property. - QF-1 6. Twenty (20) copies of a scaled site plan including, but not limited to, the followin,2 items: _A. The location and dimension of the applicant's property lines. Adjacent property lines within 100 feet must also be shown. _B. All setbacks as required by the Zoning Ordinance. Indicate with dashed line and provide required dimensions (front, interior sides, rear, street, side yard setbacks, etc.). C. All existing and/or proposed rights-of-wav and easements adjacent :e or within the site. D. All existing and/or proposed public improvements, inc!tudin. adjace^t streets, alleys, curbs, sidewalks, curb cuts. driveways, utilities, etc. E. All existing and/or proposed buildings, structures, and fences on the site, and all those within 100 feet of the site. _F. All septic tanks, draintields, water wells, and other on-site systems. it applicable. G. All signage (freestanding or wall mounted) on the site _H. Existing and/or proposed landscaping. Include ail trees over Six 11161,e,� in diameter. _I. All off-street parking spaces and vehicle maneuverinL, areas. Include dinensions of stalls and isles. J. An,, additional information as required by the Manning Depaiznnew F7. If the site plan is drawn on a sheet size larTer than. i i " x 1 or.e copy must be submitted on an I I' x 17" page. _ ❑ S Other :.nCbmr..a:foi as required by Planning Stat: Y SS# 5331 804 E. First Ave Shakopee, MN ATTACHMENT #1 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: The North 110' of Lots 9 and 10, and the North 110' of the West 15' of Lot 8, Block 10, East Shakopee, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the Office of the Register of Deeds, Scott County, Minnesota. VARIANCE RESOLUTION NO. PV-717 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, .i DF_NYINC.A-9 FOOT VARIANCE TO THE 30 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK REQUEREMENT, SECTION 11.36, SUED. 5.0 WHEREAS, Amoco Oii Co., applicants and owners, have filed an application dated April 10, 1995, for a variance under the provisions of Chapter 11, Land Use Regulation (Zoning), of the Shakopee Cirr Code. Section 11.89, Subd. 3, for a twenty ty (20) foot variance to the thirty (30) foot front yard setback requirement (Section 11.36, Subd. 5.C); and WHEREAS, this parcel is presently zoned Highway Business (B-I)-, and WHEREAS, the property upon which the request is being made is legally described as: the north 110 feet of Lots 9 and 10, and the norrh 110 feet of the west 13 feet of Lot 8, Block 10, Eav Shakopee plat, and WHEREAS, notice was provided and on May 4, 1995, the Board of Adjustment and Appeals conducted a public hearing regarding this application at which it heard from the Planning Director and invited members of the public to comment_ :NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, NUNNESOTA, as follows: That the application for Variance No. PV-717 is hereby / Q2 . 'IEn, based on the following 6nd:ng(5) with respect to City Code Sec. 11.89, Subd. 2, `Criteria for Granting Variances." Criterion 1 The strict enforcement of the ordinance provisions would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individunJ property under consideration. Undue hardship means the following: I.A. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls; The Board finds that the sub' er Ands 44M fi-�s gife for other retail uses that do not involve the use of cano 'es I.B. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the propertv; The Board finds that this lot is not unusually shaped, nor does it have any other unique circumstances.. C. The circumstances were not crested by the landowner; The Board finds that the circumstances creating this request were crcated by the landowner's desire to erect a new structure within the required setback. No actions by an outside p", have created the need for this request. D. The variance, if granted,will not alter the essential character of the locality; and The Board finds that the granting of this variance would expand the degree of nonconformity along one of the City's commercial corridors in direct conflict with the provisions of the drat 1995 Comprehensive Plan and 1990 Comprehensive Plan.__ E. The problems extend beyond economic considerations. Economic considerations do not constitute an undue hardship it reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. The Board finds that the circumstances creating this request do not appear to extend beyond the economic considerations of the applicant. Criterion 2 It has been demonstrated thHt a variance as requested will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this Chapter. The Board finds that this ,variance request is in conflict with the Zoning Chapter's stated purposes of encouraging the planned and orderly development of commercial land; providing adequate light to the property, preventin overcrowding of land with undue concentrations of structures and encouraging development in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. MAC'-_�-1995 11: 5 x.05 Criterion 3 The request is not for a use variance. The Board finds that this request is not for a use variance and therefore this criterion is satisfied. Criterion 4 Conditions to be imposed by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals will ensure compliance and to protect the adjacent properties. The Board does not propose to impose any additional conditions as part of this variance request. Adopted by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals of the City of Shakopee, Vfirmcsota this 4th day of May, 1995. II � Chair of the Board of A justment and Appeals Planning Director LUBRICATION WASH / wimbm - . •i5' _ � I ��-�! � � 1 ' r• � , � /� f � \ ,� d•; p Gott CANOPY FOR: ! ?<( D rEv7 / Rt1w j�EtMF. I (1 3p FR-5-201 .. U 7 \ - - .-. -J•`' ' / / `Gp�.CJtETE GOt.f.AET E i oftvE _ Ass= LT' ;q- \ -- `1 It °= -- V REwo \ L17"A• 1 GoncRETE oRrvE AS PHA IV • - -- • J t, t AS�HAtT cT1 C I 1 / vi ASF'N LT Re, \ I ..4V 74 lZ P–.G4i – .—_.– •. – .\� 1r Y.\ 43 4 Q5 7 aL 2 X /. — E 7;7- ' f JC 94.3 — y;n—�---- — -- - ,•-- —X v*.e Ex1. 159Ev L� �' _-, E�f+Sr. S _:wA;k —� :c►'Ali+ - ~ t• ?. 3 RG`eec - S e [` -ALL \ AQ T r Qr.► 1 ,I \fit T- _ —r --- toncRETi i "� \ -�— t :•3 3 L 3 GDR r _ REMovg t:oVt. t.OrD 95.9 EYi jT :+r C. Cvf6 :u 7 t.�.Tt X 'S. g 8AA, TOP OF FUZE HY',: vAl S W. CORUC2 SF !K!—Vt%ECT+Oti of FIRST Ati'E j r--1 I .P,;S.`.'� ST. -7 y �G. ' a6.�3 96. 3 yt� 9 '�,• .v_ 4G. 7 X— /F—-- ——-- --- — ------ S T Z T _ �� 'r J l . . _ r��v E. 30 �EV1910N BY OAT E J + + _' -a' ✓? limminionmoo-onsc- soft 43 •3 q3 4 r /. ST xrgv•+c,. t> FE�ICt 1 _ TT } .may. ., �' E :cr.•�� 5- �-..z�•:; - - �•� � (c"6.'itJ S►-1C b R G G'i� QQ �3 ! q4 c X �. /• ' CG2 SHLD R0�K TO? OF TANK -1:,v ct �• B ,ai� • � ' � `� /,I Z S VH^N CAP org ? e y�,4 X �.S•Si � oo v) P TRASH — �? 1 — -- --a _ � ( _ — ! 1y1 vG`tJT_ PEA ETA''E \\ ` Lj � io STORAGE 19 4.9 'wOf2FC Y y , 4 z LADIES : AR EA PHfLLtPS 66 FIR-S-201 - } RIGHT HAND — L � - _ ►l� G_ •�F..'y o— ,E�` � _ 111.... 11 � �� :--- - — 1 3 f MEN OFFICE — /• +; ` LUBRICATION WASH i \ v) 1 -_ / I _ ' _ _ 1 `1 X 9. y !, `\ Y _ iCfVGP.E'�E J ' �. .7.• /� L Lj ' CANOPY FOR- , S 2O1 CrINCpETE FR APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT X99 SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379 612-445-3650 B.P. No. ';O f� APPLICANT TO COMPLETE NUMBERED SPACES ONLY I APPLICANT' �..+•+.'••�•-•-�•L/7L�.✓c"i�N ✓I1 L; [-[ /=�L--�Ci,�,.� �!�/S' =' T l�iE l / •�) NAME /-�L^`�C V Al) C. I ADDRESS 2 PROJECT ADDRESS J OWNER OF LAND L/?.'✓C[t.,/ / •nYr _ y NAME ADDRESS A DESCRIPTION OF LAND BY. LOT. BLOCK ADDITION. PARCEL NO. ,_�/�/1_ �) METES AND BOUNDS. PLAT. C. 4J 1 C, l_) l _i / 5 CONTRACTOR ev I C-C( 1 NAME ADDRESS 6 CLASS OF WORK I;-ADDITION)CALTERATION [3-REPAIR [)-MOVE []-RAZING Cl-HOUSE ❑-SIGN l]-PATIO I'I-PORCH G-STORAGE BLDG. CI-TANK (A-DRIVEWAY ❑•FENCE ❑-GARAGE 7 DLSCRIPTION OF PROJECT ✓1 Z/ I C'[/L/ C 8 BLDG WIDTH BLDG. LENGTH. BLDG. HEIGHT. 9 ESTIMATED COST OR VALUE: S 2 O�('7 -_ SPACE BELOW FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY TYPE OF CONST TOTAL SO FEET FIRE ZONE NO DWELLING UNITSI OCCUPANCY GROUP NO OF STORIES US! ZONE DIVISION MAX OCC LOAD FIRE SPRINKLERS -STREET PARKING SPACES RED 0 1 1 YES I I NO COVERED UNCOVERED LIMITING CONDITIONS APPLICATION APPROVALS y. T U R OF ON N ADMINISTRATOR iL COMMENTS ATURE OF E GINEERING DEPARTMENT SIGNATURE F BU DING INSP CTION/DEPARTMENT APPROVED DISAPPROVED APPLICATION FEES NOTES PERMIT S it PLAN CHECK S L�J 1 SEPARATE PERMITS ARE REQUIRED FOR ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING. MECHANICAL. SEPTIC GRADE CHECK S TANK. AND WELL INSTALLATIONS SURVEY CHECK S 2. THIS PERMIT BECOMES NULL AND VOID IF PARK AND LANG S WORK OR CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZED IS NOT COMMENCED WITHIN 60 DAYS. OR IF CONSTRUCTION IS SUSPENDED OR WATER CONNECTION S ABANDONED FOR A PERIOD OF 120 DAYS SEWER CONNECTION S AT ANY TIME AFTER WORK IS COMMENCED. PENALTY OR APPEAL S J. A COLORED PHOTOGRAPH MUST ACCOMPANY ALL RELOCATION PERMIT APPLICATIONS. STATE SURCHARGE 4 TWO SETS OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS TOTAL $ )"f, 76 MUST ACCOMPANY EACH PERMIT APPLICATION FOR THE FOLLOWING. A. COMMERCIAL PROJECTS B. INDUSTRIAL PROJECTS C. RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS X ``'L(��"� �/ L"� L� 1 N•S %"//�J SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT (OVER) �I DATE WHITE INSPECTOR YELLOW - APPLICANT PINK FILE I -----`-�:..��4 .. ..- �—:'.,•.;;a..i_ � . 111n cy L �d^ ;� - _ .+..... . �- -` - � '-- - - ;--_.__ __ ..-> . ,.. . . _ � - ��. ��. •tea-. _ _� .�, �^ rh'• >. /'r. :. :v...:L--•-.� .u•, ..-J•-• - v. C'S-'� = �" `� i � o: _ /_ •� j .0..•7� r •-1 -g. _ '' -it J 114".14 1!1 1�•� r iYr- dam, -- y� �'+,..' b�.•'1�.,_ /3v :i-77 9f� 11r _a):.ry —_�� ! C --�� ..0.g: ..� .�2 a _ _ � .�( ,�- ��`\ �s• _ - _. <i�a�r�•,: L,r yr•-vs von Ja.7bG �•i:.:�r.��..-�a 7.! a.wc+e •7-z.-rc�.r Jv.G'+S i .LPL y+ a � _ t =� 1. •• a �-, , • ^^ter. -+-ss-LLti _ r.ti.c�n: zv as CIA- ".Lc:. c i •7 fv 1-i niO(c'1 S s;1 '---- �!"�-- T - • QYY 1/:/ .� /. �� ' �'Yr Z i fJWCiv, -- vr:-7 CT= owl .� i~_ Q 1 •� �� ? ,' :, •�.: , '1 IT S•r �73r.r r.o0 a OJ S3'.�OL :�er:.cj 2t o-1 r •---- = � � �` ; � T- � - 1 ! r _ Yr "' �O d3 -..H7 ;aBnJ ar�O:.: grC�s __ �._ .- - — — ;. � -• . • �to y1 ^.- - - �--"'—• T• �;�„ _ - - ` p�e _ VARL NCE RES LUTION NO. c-130 having first filel an application Afar E building permit and '.P—ins; duly filed sn appeal to the Ccrrrncn Count it icr a •,;ar once fr-era the strict application of the pzovisiens of file Shakcpee Coning Ordinance, to wit: 'fo install a canopy over pump island 30X71 with face of c.,nopy 17 fc-et—from front of property line ^_ 2•_.1, Said canopy is needed to protect customers dur•in,Q� purchase at_pum island. _ +1,-; T;Cc P.FOR.P., Upon [_:•rin the advice and reco, nindarion Cf the CiLj 1'�..f�.2tlE, Commis is-, C[,Dil dCte-r,a7ain t1-1.'t the gr an t ir.,, of this _ariance is necessary ic_• the ..lid aapl.icant, and will not repair n.n adequate supply of lit;_it and`air to adjacent property, or unrc3sc7rably increase c:,e cenga;tion in the puhlic str<<cts, or increas3 n-• rublic l:acard ner dimini.^.•h prop,arty values in tiie surroun-lio- area, nor is it in any other respect contrary to tale into n%. i�,,irp3c'e, Gr Sha1•.cp,.e Zoning (.Odin?nce or t'-,c Co;cprehensiv2 Gi_i 'e Plan: '-;'r. --T VZSCLVED BY T :E CON1111•0 '::UNC KL OF :ELF C:':`!:T Ci, S! AKO:%5, MINK SCTA, ',:hr.t the afar m3nticn d building p^rmit ,-3- 1cat-ion is hereby gr3n�----d, subject to the f llocring special con3:0-:;.a13: oed in Adj •R g• session of the Coma^n Council held this — ;,Ir•d day of n vemher , 19 76 ATTEST, -MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE �` X?3' ti[:f ' ' E:'f% CITY CLE fC -t,pp roved=ttlis dajr_af-L__-� _ 19__— -Flayo -df-the~City-of--Shakopce, f �•�, APPLICATI N FOR BUILDING PERMIT SH KOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379 612-445-3650 B.P. No. APPLICANT TO COMPLETE NUMBERED SPACES ONLY 1.PROJECT ADDRESS: L-t y Y "e C­ 2.OWNER OF LAND T A ( .1 G` sfc­r . O - f J 6/O�✓•L� f. r� V V h AM ADDRESS 7 DESCRIPTION OF LAND BY:LOT. ` -- BLOCK.ADDITION,PARCEL NO: METES AND BOUNDS.PLAT L �' A APPLICANT v L J"`iii N AMEI ADDRESS S CONTRACTOR -`,/C F — AMIE ADDRESS 6 CLASS OF WORK 14ADDIT ON ALTERATION -REPAIR -MOVE ;-RAZING . ,-HOUSE -SIGN ((( -PATIO .PORCH -STORAGE BLDG. .-TANK,(.-DRIVEWAY _,-FENCE !.:-GARAGE DLSCRIPTION OF PROJECT B BLDG WIDTH S 2_ LDG LENGTH S J, BLDG. HEIGHT. 9 ESTIMATED COST OR VALUE S J O SPACEf BELOW FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY T\PF OF CONST TOTAL $0 FEET FIRE LONE NO DW E L LING UNITS(OCCUPANCY GROUP NO OF STORIES USE ZONE 13IV1510N MAX OCC LOAD FIRE SPRINKLERS OFFSTREET PARKING SPACES REG D Y15 . NO COVERED UNCOVERED LIMITING CONDITIONS APPLICATION APPROVALS CITY-ZONI ADMINISTRATOR DATE J COMMENTS d,,wV, CITY EN I OAT CITY OU1LDINC P►ICIAL DATIE APPLICATION FEES NOTES PERMIT s 1_ SEPARATE PERMITS ARE REQUIRED OR 1 -- PLAN CHECK S - GRADE AND SURVEY CHECK S ' PARK AND LAND S JEROME JENSEN FIRE NUMBER s ReW Esiw. w Village WATER CONNECTION S /RYA SEWER CONNECTION S WELL AND SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM S 4561 W EOIh SI.,M.u,rapu4E,Mn.55477 612.WO8 1 PENALTY OR APPEAL S STATESURCHARGE 5 i ACCOMPANY EACH PERMIT APPLICATION F im Inc FOLLOWING TOT A 5 —lll1_ A COMMERCIAL PROJECTS 8 INDUSTRIAL PROJECTS X C RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS SIGNA TUBE L APPLICANT (OVER) 7- —�v UATL WHITE INSPECTOR YELLOW-FILE PINK APPLICANT CITY OF S H A K 0 P E INCORPORATED 1870 S 129 E. First Ave. • Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 (612) 445-3650 January ; 1981, .� _ Nr . Jerome Jensen Holiday Station Stores , _:-:c . 4567 'rl. 80th Street I'linneapolis , MIN 55437 Dear iir . Jensen : unclosed i:, of the BLI 1I d 1.hj; Permit i s.3ued for the construction of a pump island car,upy at the Holiday Station in Shakopee . At the tirr,e of issuance <� the Hermit , the three following were condition:, of i'uildin ; i er-mit 11)1)r•ov.11 : - Construction of a drrmpster en losure . - Planting of a Lree on thy_ ' il .more Street side of the station. - Removal of the non-conforming cigarette advertising sign . The canopy is now constructed , ut the conditions of permit approval are still outstanding. I r aline that it is not a good time of year to plant troes , but i w uld hope that you could see that the other conditions are met as soon as possible . if you have any questions , please feel free to contact me at 445-3650 . cereiy , TK/j iw Friclosure P. q') CONSENT Memo To: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator From: Terrie A. Thurmer, Assistant City Planner Date: May 30, 1995 Re: Final Plat for Arlington Ridge Introduction Ralph Schmitz of James Development is requesting approval of the Final Plat for the proposed Arlington Ridge development. The subject site is located in the western portion of the City of Shakopee, at the west end of the existing 13th Avenue (fka Vierling Drive). A copy of the April 6, 1995, Planning Commission staff memo has been attached,for your reference. Background and Discussion Final Plat The subject site is unplatted land. The applicant is requesting the approval of the plat in order to subdivide the 11.33 acre site into 3 lots. The Final Plat is in substantial conformance with the Preliminary Plat, and the Planning Commission recommended the approval of the Final Plat at their March 9, 1995, meeting, subject to conditions. Conditional Use Permit In addition to the plat for the site, the applicant also requested and received approval of a Conditional Use Permit from the Board of Adjustment and Appeal$ in order to construct two, 3-story, multiple family structures on each of the three lots. The Board approved the Conditional Use Permit subject to the following conditions: 1. Each lot shall remain under the ownership of one individual, partnership, or corporation; and the ownership of each of the two structures upon each lot shall remain under the ownership of same to ensure that each of the two structures upon each lot are owned, maintained, and operated under unified control. 2. The applicant shall install a minimum of 318 trees and shrubs on the three lots in accordance with the Landscaping Plan submitted by the applicant. Appeal of the Decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals On Friday, March 17, 1995, the City received an request for an Appeal of the Decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals from Sandra McNellis, Gene Steinhaus, Shirley Dahl, Dave and Irma Regan, Kay Ely, and Tom Handrich. The public hearing regarding this appeal was held at the April 4, 1995, meeting of the City Council, and the City Council unanimously upheld the decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals.. Site Plan Prior to the public hearing regarding the Appeal of the Decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals, the applicant had been in the process of redesigning the site plan for Lots 1 and 2. Instead of two, 24 unit apartment buildings, the applicant is proposing two, 16 unit structures on these lots. These would be two story townhome units, and each unit would have a separate entrance. The new site plan has been reviewed by City staff and meets the requirements of the City (i.e. drainage, parking, setbacks, etc.). The revised site plan does not affect the lot lines proposed within either the Preliminary Plat nor the Final Plat. Alternatives 1. Approve the Final Plat for Arlington Ridge. 2. Do not approve the Final Plat for Arlington Ridge, stating the reasons for denial. 3. Table the decision, and request additional information from the applicant and/or staff. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission has recommended the approval of the Final Plat for Arlington Ridge (Alternative No. 1), subject to conditions. Action Requested Offer Resolution No. 4199, A Resolution Approving the Final Plat for Arlington Ridge, and move its adoption. {TERRMCITYCOUNTFPARLINGT.606} it I RESOLUTION . 4199 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF HAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT FOR ARLINGTON RIDGE. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Shakopee did review the Final Plat for Arlington Ridge on April 6, 1995, and has recommended'its approval, and WHEREAS, all notices of the public hearing for the Preliminary Plat were duly sent and posted and all persons appearing at the hearing have been given an opportunity to be heard thereon. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA,as follows: That the Final Plat for Arlington Ridge, described on Attachment 1, attached hereto and incorporated herein, is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: 1. Approval of the Final Plat is contingent upon the following: a) The developer shall dedicate a permanent access easement agreement to ensure access to Lot 2 from Taylor Street. This document shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to being recorded by the Scott County Recorder's Office. b) Final construction plans for all public improvements shall be approved by the Engineering Department. If a portion of Taylor Street is constructed by the developer, the approval of these Final Construction plans by the Engineering Department will also be required. 2. The following procedural actions must be completed prior to the recording of the Final Plat: a) Approval of title opinion by the City Attorney. b) Execution of a Developer's Agreement fbr construction of required improvements: i) Street lighting to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. ii) Electrical system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. iii) Water system to be installed to accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. iv) Installation of sanitary sewer and storm sewer systems in accordance with the requirements of the Design Criteria and Standard specifications of the City of Shakopee. V) Construction of streets in accordance with the requirements of the Design Criteria and Standard specifications of the City of Shakopee. The developer shall end the construction of Taylor Street 100 feet before the southwest edge of the plat, and the City will construct this remaining portion of Taylor Street. The developer shall be responsible for their share of the assessments for Vierling Drive, as per the City's Assessment Policy. vi) Street signs will be constructed and installed by the City of Shakopee at a cost to the developer of$250.00 each per sign (2 signs x$250=$500). vii) Park dedication fees shall be collected in lieu of the dedication of park land. 3. The following actions shall be completed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy: a) A Certificate of Occupancy shall not be issued for structures on Lot 2, Block 1 until the developer constructs the proposed private road to connect Lot 2 to 13th Avenue, or until Taylor Street is constructed and the connection to Taylor Street is completed. b) A Certificate of Occupancy shall not be issued for Lot 1, Block 1 until Taylor Street is constructed and street connections to both 13th Avenue and Taylor Street are made. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute said Plat and Developer's Agreement. Passed in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,Minnesota, held this day of , 1995. Mayor of the City of Shakopee Attest: City Clerk Approved as to form: City.Attorney i ATTACHMENT 1 ` PROPERTY DESCRIPTION That part of the North half of the Southwest Quarter (N Vi of SW V4) of Section 11,Township 115, Range 23, Scott County, Minnesota, described as follows; Commencing at the Northwest corner of MINNESOTA VALLEY 3RD ADDITION,also being the Southwest corner of MINNESOTA VALLEY 1ST ADDITION, according to the recorded plats thereof; thence South 1 degree 04 minutes 43 seconds East along the West line of said MINNESOTA VALLEY 3RD ADDITION, a distance of 108.11 feet; thence South 88 degrees 55 minutes 17 seconds West along the North line of said MINNESOTA VALLEY 3RD ADDITION, a distance of 130.00 feet to the point of beginning of the tract of land to be described; thence South 1 degree 04 minutes 43 seconds East along the West line of said MINNESOTA VALLEY 3RD ADDITION a distance of 380.00 feet; thence South 88 degrees 55 minutes 17 seconds West along the North line of said MINNESOTA VALLEY 3RD ADDITION,a distance of 245.00 feet; thence South 25 degrees 25 minutes 17 seconds West along the Westerly line of said MINNESOTA VALLEY 3RD ADDITION, a distance of 380.00 feet; thence South 26 degrees 04 minutes 43 seconds East along the Westerly line of said IOTA VALLEY 3RD ADDITION,a distance of 204.23 feet to the South line of said North half of the Southwest Quarter; thence South 86 degrees 56 minutes 16 seconds West along said South line of the North half of the Southwest Quarter, a distance of 724.91 feet; thence North 0 degree 08 minutes 24 seconds West, a distance of 266.52 feet to the intersection with the Southwesterly extension of the Southeasterly line of VALLEY MALL FIRST ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof; thence North 38 degrees 30 minutes 05 seconds East along said Southwesterly extension and the Southeasterly line of VALLEY MALL FIRST ADDITION, a distance of 1008.70 feet; thence South 51 degrees 29 minutes 55 seconds East, a distance of 60.00 feet; thence South 42 degrees 09 minutes 03 seconds East, a distance of 120.63 feet; thence North 38 degrees 30 minutes 05 seconds East a distance of 85.00 feet; thence North 88 degrees 55 minutes 17 seconds East a distance of 226.00 feet; thence South 1 degree 04 minutes 43 seconds East a distance of 50.00 feet to the point of beginning. EXCEPT: That part lying South and West of a straight line drawn between a point on the South line of the North Half of Southwest Quarter of Section 11,T115,R23, distant 400 feet East of the intersection of said Southline with the West line of East half of Southwest quarter of Section 11,T115,R23, and a point on said West line distant 600 feet North of said intersection. CONSENT Memo To: Shakopee Planning Commission From: Terrie A. Thurmer, Assistant City Planner Meeting Date: April 6, 1995 Preparation Date: March 27, 1995 Re: Final Plat for Arlington Ridge SITE INFORMATION Applicant: James Development Firm, Sauk Rapids, MN 56379 Location: Western End of 13th Avenue Current Zoning: Multiple Family Residential (R-�) (See Exhibit A.) Adjacent Zoning: North: Highway Business (B-1) and Old Shakopee Residential (R1-C) South: Urban Residential (RAB) East: Multiple Family Residential (R-3) i West: Highway Business (B-1) Comp. Plan: 1980: Multiple Family Residential Draft 1994-5: Multiple Family Residential Area: 11.33 Acres WSA: The site is within the MUSA and can be served by all municipal utilities. INTRODUCTION Ralph Schmidt of James Development firm has submitted an application for approval of the Final Plat for the proposed Arlington Ridge development. The subject site is located in the western portion of the City of Shakopee, at the west end of the existing 13th Avenue (fka Vierling Drive). BACKGROUND Preliminary Plat The subject site is unplatted land. The applicant is requesting the approval of the plat in order'to subdivide the 11.33 acre site into 3 lots. The Planning Commission recommended the approval of the Preliminary Plat at their March 9, 1995, meeting, and the City Council will be discussing the Preliminary Plat at their meeting on April 4, 1995. Planning Department staff will provide the Planning Commission with the City Council's decision,regarding the preliminary plat at the April 6th meeting. 1 Conditional Use Permit In addition to the plat fob-the site, the applicant also requested and received approval of a Conditional Use Permit from the Beard of Adjustment and Appeals'in order to construct two, 3-story, multiple family structures on each of the three lots. Opposition to the approval of the Conditional Use Permit was expressed in two letters that were included in the March 9, 1995, BOAA Agenda Packets. The Board approved the Conditional Use Permit subject to'the following conditions: 1. Each lot shall remain under the ownership of one'individual, partnership, or corporation; and the ownership of each of the two structures upon each lot shall remain under the ownership of same to ensure that each of the two structures upon each lot are owned, maintained, and operated under�unified control. 2. The applicant shall install a minimum of 318 trees and shrubs on the three lots in accordance with the Landscaping Plan submitted by the applicant. Appeal of the Decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals On Friday, March 17, 1§95, the City received an request for an Appeal of the Decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals from Sandra McNellis, Gene Steinhaus, Shirley Dahl, Dave and Irma Regan, Kay Ely, and Tom Handrich. The public hearing regarding this appeal has also been scheduled for the April 4, 1995, meeting of the City Council. Planning Department staff will provide the Planning Commission with the City Council's decision regarding this appeal at the April 6th meeting. Since the approval of the Conditional Use Permit, the applicant has been redesigning the site plan for Lots 1 and 2 due to market considerations. Instead of two, 24 unit apartment buildings, the applicant is proposing two, 16 unit structures on these lots. These would be two story townhome units, and each unit would have separate entrance. The new site plan proposed by the applicants does not affect the lot lines proposed within the Preliminary Plalt. CONSIDERATIONS Context 1. The Final Plat is in substantial conformance with the Preliminary Plat. The developer is proposing to pl�t 3 lots on the 11.33 acre site. Each of the three lots meets the minimum lot size required within the Multiple Family Residential Zone of one acre. Lot 1 is proposed to be approximately 3.04 acres in size; Lot 2 is proposed to be approximately 3.02 acres in size; and Lot 3 is proposed to be approximately 2.98 acres in size. 2. The draft 1995 Comprehensive Plan has designated this area for Multiple Family Residential development. 'his land use category allows detached housing at densities of approximately 10 units per acre. With the revised site plan (two 24-unit structures and four-16 unit townhome st ctures), the applicant is proposing a density of 9.88 units per acre. The proposed plat�s in compliance with the draft 1995 Comprehensive Plan. 2 I i I Major Consideration 3. The phasing for�he project has recently been determined by the developer. The applicant is proposing to be in construction on the two, 24 unit apartment buildings to be located on Lot 3 as soon as tlhe applicable approvals are received. Construction of the two 2-story townhomes on Lot 2 would begin within approximately 4 to 5 months. The timing for construction on�of 1 has not yet been determined. Staff is concerned about the traffic that would be generated on the local streets if the entire site were to be completed prior to the construction of the extension of Taylor Street (along the west edge of the plat) and Vierling Drive (along the southwest edge of the plat)which are not scheduled for construction until 1996. Staff has discussed this issue with the applicant, and recommended to the City Council that Conditions 4.A and 4.B (listed below) be added to the approval of the Preliminary Plat. These conditions are also being recommended with the Final Plat. 4. The following actions shall be completer)prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy: A. � Certificate of Occupancy shall not be issued for Lot 2, Block I until the developer constructs the proposed private road to connect Lot 2 to 131h venue, or until Taylor Street is constructed and a second connection to aylor Street is constructed. B. Certificate of Occupancy shall not be issued for Lot 1, Block 1 until Taylor ,Street is constructed and connections to both 13th Avenue and Taylor Street S made. 4. The City will not be constructing Taylor Street and Vierling Drive within this area until 1996, and the developer has informed staff that he will be petitioning the City to construct these streets. However, if a portion of Taylor Street will be constructed by the developer, this will require the apprfoval of the Final Construction Plans by the Engineering Department prior to the approval of the Final Plat by the City Council. 5. The developer is intending to dedicate a ten foot wide drainage and utility easement along the perimeter of each of the lots, and a 20 foot wide utility easement beneath portions of the proposed private roadway and parking areas, They are also proposing to dedicate two drainage easements to allow for stormwater management ponding. In addition to these drainage and utility easements, a permanent access easement needs to be dedicated and recorded to ensure access to Lot 2 from Taylor Street. Staff has recommended a condition req *ring the document to be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to being recorded by the Scott County Recorder's Office. This document is to be recorded following the ecording of the Final Plat. 3 Other Considerations' 6. The Fire Chief has commented that the entrance to the site from 13th Avenue needs to be wider, the first turn to the right needs to be straightened, and a fire lane will be required on the south side of the south building to be located on Lot 3. Also, the Police Chief has commented that the 28 foot wide private street's that are proposed within the site seem too narrow to allow sufficient access for emergency vehicles. Staff suggests that the applicant discuss these site plan issues with the Fire Chief and the Building Official prior to the submittal of an Application for a Building Permit. 7. The Engineering Department has commented that the Final Construction Plans are substantially complete. They have recommended approval of the Final Plat contingent upon the approval ofithe Final Construction Plans for the public improvements. 8. With the proposal for the Preliminary Plat, City staff determined the alignment for the portion of Vierling Drive near the Arlington Ridge Plat. The City will be constructing Vierling Drive in this area in 1996. The construction of Vierling Drive adjacent to this plat is necessary fors Taylor Street to avoid becoming an over-length cul-de-sac. With the Final Plat submittal,the applicant has provided the proposed right-of-way dedication required for Vierling Drive. The alignment runs along the southwest edge of the plat, and then curves to the east. 9. Shakopee Public Utilities has commented that they will be unable to complete their review of the Final Construction Plans until the applicant has submitted another set of plans, along with the set of marked up preliminary construction plans. The Preliminary Construction Plans were reviewed)by Shakopee Public Utilities with the preliminary plat, and comments were provided at that time. 10. The applicant has not provided a signature block for the County Surveyor. The applicant should provide this signature block on the mylar prior to the recording of the Final Plat with the Scott County Recorder's Office. 11. The developer has submitted an Application for a Wetland Regulation Permit for the Wetland Conservation Act of 1991. Staff is in the process of issuing a Certificate of Exemption to the Wetlands Act of 1991 to the applicant. 12. The developer is proposing to install four play ateas for children (with swings and slides), that would be appr ximately 40 feet by 40 feet in size, for a total of 6,400 square feet (.14 acre) of play area. I addition, impervious surface coverage ranges between 45% to 60% for each of the lots, an the maximum allowed by ordinance is 60%. Therefore, a minimum of 406/0 of each lot will be available as open space for recreational uses. In addition to this on-site recreational space, the site is located within 11/4 of a mile of both Tahpah Park and Lion's Park. 4 a i 13. This area is not identified as a future park site in the City's draft Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, staff its recommending that a park dedication fee be collected in lieu of land dedication. The dedication of land for park purposes is made at the time of the platting of the land, and cash payments are due prior to the approval of the Final Plat by the City Council. Using the assessed value from the Scott County Assessor's Office, the Park Dedication Requirement would be$ 3,800.00($ 1,267.00 per lot / $26.40 per unit). Based on these low calculations, the City Council may wish to authorize the hiring of an appraiser to perform an appraisal of the parcels within this phase. ALTERNATIVES 1. Recommend to the City Council the approval of the Final Plat. 2. Recommend to the City Council the denial of the Final Plat, stating the reasons for, recommending denial. 3. Table the decision, and request additional information from the applicant and/or staff. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the Final Plat for Arlington Ridge, subject to the following conditions; 1. Approval of the Final Plat is contingent upon the following: A. The developer shall dedicate a permanent access easement agreement to ensure access to Lot 21 from Taylor Street. This document shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to being recorded by the Scott County Recorder's Office. 2. The following must be completed prior to the approval of the Final Plat by the City Council: A. Final construction plans for all public improvements shall be approved by the Engineering Department. If a portion of Taylor Street is constructed by the developer, the approval of these Final Construction Plans by the Engineering Department will also be required. I 3. The following procedural actions must be completed prior to the recording of the Final Plat: A. Approval of title opinion by the City Attorney. B. Execution of a Developer's Agreement for construction of required improvements: 1) Street lighting to be installed 'in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. 5 2) Electrical system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commis'''sion. 3) Water system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. 4) Installation of sanitary sewer and storm sewer systems in accordance with the requirements of the Design Criteria and Standard specifications of the City of Shakopee. 5) Construction of streets in accordance with the requirements of the Design Cpteria and Standard specifications of the City of Shakopee. The developer shall end the construction of Taylor Street 100 feet before the southwest edge oithe plat, and the City will construct this remaining portion of Taylor Street. The developer shall be responsible for their share of the assessments for Vierling Drive, as per the City's Assessment Policy. 6) S�reet signs will be constructed and installed by the City of Shakopee at a cost to the developer of$250.00 each per sign (2 signs x $250 = $500). 7) Park dedication fees shall be collected in lieu of the dedication of park land. C. The applicant shall submit verification that the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency has approved the NPDES Stormwater Permit for the proposed subdivision. D. The applicant shall provide the following revisions to the Final Plat: 1) signature block shall be provided for the County Surveyor's signature. ACTION REQUESTED Offer a motion to recommend to the City Council the approval of the Final Plat for Arlington Ridge, and move its approval. (IERRIEVLANCOM MIPPARLINGAPR) 6 EXI-IIBIT A � r LATH l DM�C[ N H ivrrt t ouo I � r ■ t ° • . a tt M • t t a ■ o raaty raa I • 1t�IX 1 1 t . t t t t t . H t •t cK 2 - t 8 e 7 t � • ,6 ". ®� ► t : o- SUBJECT SITE > .�,.. ® ■ a ■ ■ 16 :VIERLM DRIVE t t I �-- -- - - R1B AG AGR�CULTUR= A ' PR RUDE P=S'D=`.'—t H '—� P.1A LO'!d DENSITY RESIDE! T P.1 B U?3AN' R:-SID=r; IAL u-7 RIC OLD SIHAXOPEE RESOENT P,2 PIED Ub' 'DENSITY ESIDzN`- L� R3 MULTIPLE FA,,_, (RESIDENT =.L O B1 HIGHWAY BUSINESS D B2 OFFICE BUSINESS O 83 CENTRAL BUS'N=SS O 11 LIGHT INDUSTR"' D 12 HEAVY INDUSTP.:.=._ I O N R tit;=JOR RECREA-iG.l u S SHORE LAN D F r LOODPLA: D;S- ,C T _ oning Map ViN'ING O,;ERL.A" t. C; tt.y of SHAKOPEE ARLINGTON RIDGE FIRST ADDITION - - - - - - - - - - - N s 4� /&- °-- - - - - - - - - - -� { 60.00 /l� / W.'ESOTA VALLEY { I 5 51.29'1 E/ ai / / T20.6f3 54h A00 Yom., 50 100 200 300 400 \Y / 5 42'09 03" E WEST LINE OF ( —I _• BS00 MINN. VALLEY /4 N 38'30'05' E 3RO ADDITION -226.00--- NORTHWEST CORNER OF SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF / / // 1 / S 010443• t31 164140HESOTA VALLEY 3RD ADDITION VALLEY MAU FIRST ADDITION AND SOUTHWEST CORNER • DENOTES MOHL4ENT FOUND / / / ''• l f 13000 ^ OF MNNESOTA-VAiLLEY ST. ADOIT)ON 0 DENOTES 3/4 NCH BY 16 WON W"AEIR SET MARKED BY REGISTRATION NO. 12277 LINE OF MINN. WEST LINE OF I Y 3RO ADOITIOH MINN. VALLEY ( ( � ORIDITATION OF THIS KARNC SYSTEM IS A33UN D IN, / a OJ 3F.O ADDITION SOUTHEASTERLY EXTENSION Z I {{ {I OF ORMMGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS ARE SNOw T1U5�RYI E� FlaL AOOrt>o► / C2 / BBLOC 1 �/ H 4 WEST LINE OF T- I 110 7+1 I 10 10 V V�./ I/ = 47H ADDITION – J / /^b �! 36.93 �' I EXISRdG LMLITY EASEMENT // / N 51-9'55•w I ACCOROVIG TO DOCUMEM // / •`` 4 uznu°n T I IAJ &Noo 10;W M wwfDroTMIN AND SOE�WAR 110.-154830.> _. _ _. _ _. 0 _. - - - I_ -i -. - LOT LINES. UNLESS Oi1ERwt5i Sigw/ON M MCAT. _. to/ '� 40.55 – I N { -C N 16-15'3Y w S sa sa 17T w �c / h -245.00 0 EASEMENTS FOR INSTALLATION AND MANTEXANCE OF UTILITIES APO NORTH H. VALLEY I I & STRIPS MARKED"UTLITY EASEMENTS. 11lOQt Mr0 AL°Nf.THE 19.19 �� 20.00 FT.wOE / NORTH LINE OF 4TH ADDITION / °� S u54'29'w I UTtutt EASEMENT / FlRST A�DOITION { { 1 I / 41.75 I WESTERLY LINE OF —30.30 'r 79.33 I { / / \ N 5456'35'E cY yv 5 4454'29•w EVERGP.EEN FIRST AOD/T10N E:'...R'.�i£E:. 1. FIRST; , I ;µ \ 20.00 FT. wOE / r4ia i AOCC a= UTLITY EASEMENT 56.66 WEST LINE OF E 1/2 OF 1 \ s of S 66719'17-E� SW 1/4 Of SECA I. T115. R23 .31h AIVDA.Z � - s l 1 \\ s nal 10•��\ .�' 13th — — —' — — — — — -- - — — , EXCEPTION AVENUE g�soe3 { S I I VIEWNG \\ %t?� .Y-° �:iam3,°•zr e.�r,;�: Z II DRIVE �'� 8� uTlltt „ FAST I I h R 350.00 EASEMENT `�� i L- 53.46 I I /A-06'45'07- �i00-0O-___ \\- \ X16 W —_ _. — i>✓{�l�/jiC i -' \� ------ 260.42 _–�/ u ul� S as-'01V III MAR I 1 1995 I SOVTH UK OF NORTH HALF OF wu*"IEST QUARTER OF INC-11,T.115,R.23 SOUTMEST DORMER OF NE 1/4 OF SW 1/4 OF SEC.11,T.115•R23 DATE OF PREPARATION : MARCH 6, 1995 ARLINGTON RIDGE FIRST ADDITION KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That Watson Investments Incorporated, a Minnesota corporation, owner and proprietor, I hereby certify that I have surveyed and platted the property described on this plat as ARLINGTON RIDGE FIRST ADDITION; that the and James Development Firm, Incorporated, a Minnesota corporation, as contract purchasers of the following described plat is a correct representation of the survey that all distances are correctly shown on the plat in feet and hundredths of a foot; that property situated in the County of Scott, State of Minnesota, to wit: all monuments will be correctly placed in the ground as shown, in accordance to Minnesota Statues, Section 505.02,Subd. 1; that the outside boundary lines are correctly designated on the plat and that there are no wetlands as defined in Minnesota Statues, Section, 505.02, Subd. 1 or public highways to be designated other than as shown. LeRoy Grewe, Land Surveyor, MN Reg. No. 12277 State of Minnesota That part of the North half of the Southwest Quarter (N 1/2 of SW 1/4) of Section 11, Township 115, County of Sibley Range 23, Scott County, Minnesota, described as follows: The forgoing instrument was acknowledged before me this — day of 19 —, by LeRoy Grewe, Land Surveyor. Commencing at the Northwest comer of MINNESOTA VALLEY 3RD ADDITION, also being the Southwest corner of MINNESOTA VALLEY 1ST ADDITION, according to the recorded plats thereof; thence South 1 degree 04 minutes 43 seconds East along the West line of said MINNESOTA Notary Public, Sibley County, Minnesota VALLEY 3RD ADDITION, a distance of 108.11 feet; thence South 88 degrees 55 minutes 17 seconds No No Commission Expires West along the North line of said MINNESOTA VALLEY 3RD ADDITION, a distance of 130.00 feet ---- to the point of beginning of the tract of land to be described; thence South 1 degree 04 minutes 43 seconds East along the West line of said MINNESOTA VALLEY 3RD ADDITION a dldenre of - - - - - 380.00 feet; thence South 88 degrees 55 minutes 17 seconds West along the North line of said State of Minnesota MINNESOTA VALLEY 3RD ADDITION, a distance of 245.00 feet; thence South 25 degrees 25 City of Shakopee minutes 17 seconds West along the Westerly line of sold MINNESOTA VALLEY 3RD ADDITION, a distance of 380.00 feet; thence South 26 degrees 04 minutes 43 seconds East along the Westerly line f Approved by the Planning Commission of the City of Shakopee, this -- day of 19 o acid MINNESOTA VALLEY 3RD ADDITION, a distance of 204.23 feet to the South line of sold North half of the Southwest Quarter; thence South 86 degrees 56 minutes 16 seconds West along said South line of the North half of the Southwest Quarter, a distance of 724.91 feet; thence North 0 degree 08 minutes 24 seconds West, a distance of 266.52 feet to the intersection with the Southwesterly extension of the Southeasterly It" of VALLEY MALL FIRST-ADDITION, according to the recorded - --- --- plat thereof; thence North 38 degrees 30 minutes 05 seconds East along said Southwesterly extension By —_ —__------ and the Southeasterly line of VALLEY MALL FIRST ADDITION, a distance of 1008.70 feet; thence Chairman South 51 degrees 29 minutes 55 seconds East, a distance of 60.00 feet; thence South 42 degrees 09 minutes 03 seconds East, a distance of 120.63 feet; thence North 38 degrees 30 minutes 05 seconds East Approved by the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, this _— day of 19_ a distance of 85.00 feet; thence North 88 degrees 55 minutes 17 seconds East a distance of 226.00 feet; thence South 1 degree 04 minutes 43 seconds East a distance of 50.00 feet to the point of beginning. EXCEPT: By Attest: That part lying South and West of a straight line drawn between a point on the South line of the North Mayor Clerk Half of Southwest Quarter of Section 11, 7115, R23, distant 400 feet East of the intersection of said Southline with the West line of East half of Southwest quarter of Section i1, T115, R23, and a point on said West line distant 600 feet North of sold intersection. I hereby certify that I have examined the Abstract fo T Us of this pl-f and hereby, recommend this plat for approval. By -- — - City Attorney Have caused the same to be surveyed and platted as ARLINGTON RIDGE FIRST ADDITION and do hereby donate and dedicate to the County of Scott public for public use forever the streets, alleys, and other public areas shown on this plat and not heretofore dedicated to public use. Office of County Auditor In witness whereof said James Development Firm, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, has caused these presents to be signed by its proper No delinquent taxes and transfer entered. officer, and its corporate seal to be hereunto affixed this —__ day of 19 _—, and said Watson Investments Inc. of Minneapolis, a Minnesota corporation, has caused these presents to be signed by its proper officer, and its corporate seal to be hereunto affixed this — day —, 19 _—. Date: — _--- _ _ SIGNED: Scott County Auditor James Development Firm, Inc. By: County of Scott Ralph Schmitz, President Office of County Treasurer I hereby certify that the taxes payable for the year 19 —, for land described on this plat as ARLINGTON RIDGE FIRST Watson investments Inc. By. -- ADDITION have been paid on this day of 19 _ Douglas Watson, President — - State of Minnesota County of Benton Scott County Treasurer The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ — day of __— 19 _—, by Ralph Schmitz, President County of Scott of James Development Firm, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, on behalf of the corporation. Office of County Surveyor Pursuant to Chapter 7, Minnesota Laws of 1976, this plat has been reviewed and approved this —_ day Notary Public, Benton County, Minnesota of —___---_—, 19_—. My Commission Expires State of Minnesota Scott County Surveyor County of Hennepin County of Scott The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ _ day of — 19 —, by Douglas Watson, President Office of County Recorder of Watson Investments Inc., a Minnesota corporation, on behalf of the corporation. I hereby certify that this instrument was filed in my office for record on this — day of 19 _ at oclock —.M. and was duly recorded in book on page _--_ of Notary Public, Hennepin County, Minnesota My Commission Expires _ Scott County Recorder MMMIMMEEMMMIll Sheet 1 5/12/95 k ARLINGTON RIDGE FIRST ADDITION —h AVSNUE 2� ivilNv NvLS- -VALLEY- -- ` - v S 56'029 55- E// j S 4209 03" E ` rvulTl^NV WEST LINE OF I I 50 100 200 300 400 / 85.00 MINN.VALLEY _ IN 38'30'05" E 3RD ADDITION — Now EMISSION! 1 - 226.00 i,r I / N 8 '5517° 50.00 = NORTHWEST CORNER OF SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF �/ I / _ -______� S 01'04'43" EI MINNESOTA VALLEY 3RD ADDft10N r ------------- VALLEY MALL FIRST ADTNTION t' \ 1 \�� AND SOUTHWEST CORNER e DENOTES MONUMENT FOUND i OF MINNESOTA VALLEY ST. S Syr WW o DENOTES 3/4 INCH BY 18 INCH MONUMENT J, SET MARKED BY REGISTRATION NO. 12277 WEST LINE OF i 1 I NORTH UNE OF MINN. G MINN.VALLEY i 1 I VALLEY 3RD ADDITION ORIENTATION OF THIS BEARING SYSTEM IS ASSUMED \ 000 / `�`,1,si�6.F j a•�, 3RD AMMON 49 �� w SOUTHEASTERLY EXTENSION OF--,, /� ^ •./sZ `. N ' i o M I I .. SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF / ,` / NSj 7 ` `\ p`� �'i g1 A i o y DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS ARE SHOWN THUS VALLEY MALL FIRST ADDITION i 44v / ' ?9 so W �� < 1T' ` 3 C o 61.77 WEST LINE OF ' 10 'I 10 MINN.VALLEY 4TH AMMON - EXISTING UTILITY EASEMENT 1* ACCORDING TO DOCUMENT NO. 154830 y0 �P/ Q� 5129 W "$ v N '55' �.��.MIOE I r_ lIJ BEING 10 FEET IN WIDTH AND ADJOINING STREET LINES UJ AND 10 FEET IN WIDTH AND AJOINING SIDE AND REAR �i''/ \ UTILRY FJ1SE11QNT I I UJ ' LOT LINES, UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ON THE PLAT. pd 2 L <<<S _ so .�11 --------_ _----------� r- r- ��, N I815'32-N 1 245.0 Y h�:3 S 88'55'1 W NORTH LINE OF 1 C5 I C� C EASEMENTS FOR INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF UTILITIES AND 20.00 FT.HIDE , �" O[3 DRAINAGE FACILITIES ARE RESERVED OVER,UNDER AND ALONG THE ., X27.71 , / MINN.MINIVALLEY STRIPS MARKED"UTILITY EASEMENTS". UTILITY EASEMENT , ( I ! 3.01 i NORM LINE OF 4TH ADDITION r 1 41.15 /R-230.00 N 4T 50'50'W\\i' E`-' N i EVERGREEN ._ L=88.00 /�`;�Y ;\`� tjr�9r/� FIRST ADDITION I I 1626'30' 71.78 `. \` ``rS, N 36 46.41'w a w 3 EVERGREEN FIRS°FADDrraN sN '�—+'39.30 \ \ ?i %' N 54'58'35'E 20.00 Ff.WDE- �\ �\��J!J)`\ 00^ UTUTY EASEIENT f \" `� ' X047 - ENV rvriNvNVEJVTn N4746'WW �7`� .\i ry'V' `r-v�F R`- „i1i. I �y ADDITION: ( ° 84.59 .s I ADDITION; 5 45'31Y E \ r r^ 'Oi 1 WEST LINE OF E 1 2 OF SW / / ° —r 57.40 / ` \r 15.02 / S 8819'17'E 1/4 OF SEC.11,T115,R23 I 2 � L=95.W 7`f lYI-- / I \\``�'S! 0-97'33'16'\ , — — — I L-18.77" 32.77 o=17 56 17* 13TH AVENUE °o 33.90'A' - - - - - - - - - - - - EXCEPTION �9>���.?e _ z1.66 Zva ao c„ERGREEN' DERIVE G ��?�'� �' o-16IL10zr o FIRST DRIVE=I I A r2, <�R=350.00 URITY ADD1TivN .f t L=53.46 EASEMENT /D=08'4507' _ 40D.00 _� 200.37 — — 49- — — — — 260.42 / — — S 86'56'16” W \ ——724.91—— �IS 86'58'16'W SOUTH LINE OF NORTH HALF OF SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SOUTHWEST CORNER OF NE 1/4 OF SEC.11,T.115,R.23 SW 1/4 OF SEC.11,T.115,R.23 DATE OF PREPARATION MAY 15, 1995 =1 rlulk assadntes rc 400PLAT 5/19/95 PLOT100 Jn ONSENT MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Application for Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor License (3.2 Beer) by Minnesota Valley Restoration Project DATE: June 1, 1995 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: The City has received an application from Minnesota Valley Restoration Project for a beer license for the balance of the year, until July 1, 1995. They will also be renewing the license along with all other licensees later this month. Their application is in order. They are under contract with a catering firm to run the restaurant and sell the beer. The liquor liability insurance will include both the catering firm and MVRP. The certificate of insurance has not yet been delivered to the City. If it is not in order by Tuesday night, the application will need to be tabled or approved with a condition that the applicant provide proof of insurance. ALTERNATIVES: 1] Grant a license 2] Deny a license 3] Table the application for additional information RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to approve the application and grant an on sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license to Minnesota Valley Restoration Project, 2187 E. Hwy 101 for the restaurant, pavilion and town hall, conditioned upon proof of liquor liability insurance coverage. CONSENT MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Application for Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor License (3.2 Beer) by Church of St. Mary's DATE: June 1, 1995 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: The City has received an application from St. Mary's Church for a temporary beer license for their annual festival scheduled for June 25, 1995. Their application is in order. They meet the State requirements for a temporary license and they qualify for the exemption from carrying liquor liability insurance. (Both State law and the City allow an exemption from carrying liquor liability if the expected revenues from the sale of beer are less than $10,000.00 within the license period.) ALTERNATIVES: 1] Grant a license 2] Deny a license 3] Table the application for additional information RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to approve the application and grant an on sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license to the Church of St. Mary's, 535 South Lewis, for June 25, 1995. EXPLANATION TO ORDINANCE 416 ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: Law Department PURPOSE: To broaden the list of animals allowed in the City. REMARKS : In 1993 the City Council adopted an ordinance restricting animals within the City limits, in response to concerns raised regarding a cougar. The new ordinance prohibited essentially all animals other than domestic dogs and cats, farm animals, rodents, and caged birds . In 1994 the owner of a pet shop indicated concerns that many of the animals in his inventory had become illegal under the new ordinance . He requested that the ordinance be broadened to include the various animals he sells, and provided a list of the animals . The attached draft ordinance allows all the animals identified by the pet shop owner, except ferrets . The City' s Pound Master (also known as the Dog Catcher) previously has expressed serious reservations about ferrets, and has recommended that they not be allowed. The pet shop owner disagreed, and requested that they be included. I forwarded the draft ordinance to both the Pound Master and the pet shop owner for comments on April 28, 1995 . To date I have not received any comments from the pet shop owner. The Pound Master has recommended that we modify paragraph A.4 to eliminate skunks, raccoons, hedge hogs, prairie dogs, and primates . He indicated that skunks are illegal at this time, regardless of whether they are game farm raised. He recommends against raccoons, hedge hogs, and prairie dogs, because they cannot be vaccinated against rabies . If they bite someone, they must be killed in order to test them for rabies . This can be very hard on a child owner of such a pet . He also recommends deleting primates, because a federal license is needed to sell them, and he does not think that anyone in town has such a license . The Pound Master indicated he planned to be present at the Council meeting to address any questions . The Pound Master also suggested that the City Council consider whether it wants pot bellied pigs and pygmy goats in the City. Half-breed pot bellied pigs are common, and will grow up to the full pig size, about 300 pounds . (The pure bred pot bellied pigs should stay around 40 pounds . ) Both pigs and goats will smell and act like their farm relatives . To restrict these and other farm animals, Council may want to amend Subd. 2 to add the following sentence : "Farm animals, pot bellied pigs, and pygmy goats may be kept only in that portion of the City zoned for agricultural purposes . " ALTERNATIVES : 1 . Adopt the ordinance as drafted, to allow the many different animals identified. 2 . Amend the draft ordinance in paragraph A. 4 , by deleting skunks, raccoons, hedge hogs, prairie dogs, and primates; amend the draft ordinance in Subd. 2 , by adding a sentence restricting farm animals, pot bellied pigs, and pygmy goats to agricultural areas; and then adopt the ordinance as amended. 3 . Amend the draft ordinance in other ways to add or delete some of the animals or restrictions, then adopt it as amended. 4 . Leave the existing ordinance in place without amendments . ACTION REQUESTED: 1 . Move to amend Subd. 1 .A.4 of draft Ordinance No. 416 by deleting skunks, raccoons, hedge hogs, prairie dogs, and primates . 2 . Move to amend Subd. 2 of draft Ordinance No. 416 by adding the following sentence : "Farm animals, pot bellied pigs, and pygmy goats may be kept only in that portion of the City zoned for agricultural purposes . " 3 . Offer Ordinance No. 416 as amended, an ordinance amending City Code Chapter 10, Public Protection, Crimes and Offenses, by repealing Sec . 10 . 22, Other Animals, and adopting one new section in lieu thereof, and move its adoption. Submitted by: City Attorney [22CCL] -2- ORDINANCE NO. 416 , FOURTH SERIES AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOt, AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 10, PUBLIC PROTECTION, CRIMES A.NP OFFENSES, BY REPEALING SEC. 10 . 22, OTHER ANIMALS, AND ADOPTING ONE NEW SECTION IN LIEU THEREOF, RELATING TO THE SAME SUBJECT. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOT�, ORDAINS : Section 1 - That City Code Chapter 10 , Public Protection, Crimes and Offenses, is hereby amended by repealin Sec. 10 . 22, Other Animals, and adopting one new section in lie thereof, which shall read as follows : SEC. 10 .22 . OTHER ANIMALS. Subd. 1 . Definitions. A. The term "domestic animal" means any of the following animals : anifaal-ether- than a wild—� marl 1 . domestic dogs, excluding hybrids wiill wolves coyotes, or jackals, 2 . domestic cats excluding hybrids with ocelots or margays, 3 . farm animals, 4 . the following other mammals : skunk ame farm raised only) , raccoons (game farm r ised only) , hedge hogs (game farm raised only) , rairie dogs (game farm raised only) , chinchilla primates domestic raised only) , of bellied i s and pvvgmy goats, 5 . the following rodents : rabbits, guinea -pigs , hamsters , gerbils , mice, and rats , 6 . the following re tiles : iguanas, moles , chameleons, non-venomous snakes, to raQins, turtles, tortoises, 7 . the following amphibians : frogs, tads, newts, 8 . the following birds : captive-bred �T)ecies of common cage birds including parakeets, finches love birds, doves, parrots, cockati ls, cockatoos, 9 . non-poisonous spiders, 10 . hermit crabs, and 11 . fish. B. The term "wild animal" means any animal other than a domestic animal the fellewing: _ ddeffiestie degs (exel,dding hybrids--with--`otelves, eeyetes erjaekals) 3:S Part rw-1d and--eeptive-bred speeies of __..._..___ __7_ b e ,. �QT Subd. 2 . Keeping. It is unlawful for any person to keep any wild animal in any part of the City. It is unlawful for any person to keep any animal which is not approved by the United States Department of Agriculture , or the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, in any part of the City. It is unlawful f— any persen te keep any demestie animal ether than deffiestie degs, demegt i e-eats;redent-s, and-eaged-h e:, s e ads in any part ef the Gity, emeept farfR aniffials fnay be kept in that jaeictien elf tZhe Git-yeened€ei—agrieultic ral r==r=--- . Subd. 3 . Housing. It is unlawful for any person to keep any domestic or wild animal in any structure infested by rodents, vermin, flies or insects . Subd. 4 . Treatment. It is unlawful for any person to treat any domestic or wild animal in a cruel or inhumane manner. Subd. S . Restraint and Confinement. It is unlawful for any person to permit any animal to run at large . Subd. 6. Trespasses. It is unlawful for any person to herd, ride or drive any animal over and upon any grass, turf, boulevard, City park, cemetery, garden or lot without specific permission therefor from the owner. Subd. 7 . Biting Animals. A. Animal Bites Human Being. 1 . Whenever any animal within the corporate limits of the City has bitten any human being, and such animal is of a species which can carry rabies, the City shall impound such animal for a period of ten (10) days separate and apart from other animals until it is determined whether the animal had or has rabies . If the animal is found to be rabid it shall be destroyed. If it is found not to be rabid it shall be returned to the owner provided the owner shall first pay for the cost of keeping said animal . If the owner does not claim or retrieve his animal, the animal may be disposed of as provided in the City Code . 2 2 . Whenever the City can determine the person owning, possessing or harboring the animal that has bitten the human being, the City may permit the owner to impound such animal for a period of ten (10) days separate and apart from other animals under the supervision of a licensed veterinarian until it is determined whether the animal had or has rabies . If the animal is rabid, it shall be destroyed. In all cases the City shall make the determination of how the animal shall be impounded, and shall base its decision upon the owner' s ability to properly impound the animal, and the current rabies vaccination status of the animal . B. Animal Bites Animal. Any animal known to have been bitten or exposed to rabies shall be impounded or destroyed, provided, however, that such animal may be immediately destroyed, if with reasonable effort it cannot first be taken up and impounded. If such an animal is impounded, it shall not be destroyed if the owner makes provision for suitable quarantine for a period of not less than six months, or proof of immunization is furnished and booster injections are given by a licensed veterinarian at the expense of the owner. Note : The sti-ieken language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted. Section 2 - General Provisions . City Code Chapter 1, General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty For Violation, and Section 10 . 99, Violation a Petty Misdemeanor, are hereby adopted in their entirety by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 3 - Effective Date . This ordinance becomes effective from and after its passage and publication. Passed in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of 1995 . Mayor of the City of Shakopee Attest : City Clerk Approved as to form: ���?� �'�i City Attorney Published in the Shakopee Valley News on the day of 1995 . [22CCL) 3 COIVSENT MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: David M. Nummer, Staff Engineer I?Mrj SUBJECT: Supplement No. 1 to Agreement No. 72710 DATE: June 6, 1995 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 4227, a resolution entering the City of Shakopee into Supplement No. 1 to Agreement No. 72710 which allows the use of Tax Increment Financing (TIF) for satisfying the City's financial obligation under said agreement. Also attached is Supplement No. 1 to Agreement No. 72710 which facilitates the use of TIF for this project. BACKGROUND: Recently, the City Council has been reviewing alternatives for the use of TIF dollars. The attached agreement facilitates the use of TIF funds for the Linear Ponds and cost sharing associated with the TH 101 Bypass Project. The agreement and resolution have been reviewed by the City Attorney, and have been approved as to form. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 4227, a resolution entering the City of Shakopee into Supplement No. 1 to Agreement No. 72710. 2. Deny Resolution No. 4227. 3. Authorize the appropriate City Officials to execute Supplement No. 1 to Agreement No. 72710. 4. Table for additional information from staff. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No.'s 1 and 3. cAdos\mndotmem.doc ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Offer Resolution No. 4227, a Resolution Entering the City of Shakopee into Supplement No. 1 to Agreement No. 72710, and move it's adoption. 2. Authorize the appropriate City Officials to execute Supplement No. 1 to Agreement No. 72710. cAdos\mndotmem.doc 72710-1 CITY OF SHAKOPEE RESOLUTION BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Shakopee enter into Supplement No. 1 to Agreement No. 72710 with the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation for the following purposes, to-wit: to allow the City to use Tax Increment Financing to pay the State for the City's share of the costs of pond, swale and drainage facilities construction and other associated construction to be performed upon, along and adjacent to Trunk Highway No. 101 (Shakopee Bypass) from Engineer Station 329+30 (0.4 of a mile west of County State Aid Highway No. 17) to Engineer Station 622+00 (at the junction of old Trunk Highway No. 101 approximately 0.4 of a mile east of the junction of old Trunk Highway No. 101 and County State Aid Highway No. 18) within the corporate City limits under State Project No. 7005-53 (T.H. 101=187). BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the proper City Officers are hereby authorized and directed to execute such agreement. CERTIFICATION State of Minnesota County of Scott City of Shakopee I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution is a true and correct copy of the resolution presented to and adopted by the Council of the City of Shakopee at a duly authorized meeting thereof held on the day of , 1995, as shown by the minutes of said meeting in my possession. City Clerk (Signature) (Type or print name) DESIGN STATE OF MINNESOTA AMENDMENT TO SERVICES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AGREEMENT NO. SECTION COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT 72710 SUPPLEMENT NO. 1 S.P. 7005-53 (T.H. 101=3.87) Fed. Proj . NH 5407 (29) Supplement No. 1 to AMOUNT ENCUMBERED Agreement No. 72710 between The State of Minnesota (None) Department of Transportation, and The City of Shakopee Re: City cost pond, swale and ESTIMATED AMOUNT drainage facilities construction RECEIVABLE by the State along proposed T.H. 101 (Shakopee Bypass) from $1, 061, 765. 00 C. S.A.H. 17 to old T.H. 101 approximately 0. 4 of a mile east of its junction with C. S.A.H. 18 I I THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation, hereinafter referred to as the "State" and the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, acting by and through its City Council, hereinafter referred to as Ithe "City" . 72710-1 WITNESSETH: WHEREAS the State and the City did enter into Cooperative Construction Agreement No. 72710 dated December 21, 1994 , providing for payment by the City to the State of the City' s share of the cost of the pond, swale and drainage facilities construction and other associated construction to be performed upon, along and adjacent to Trunk Highway No. 101 (Shakopee Bypass) from Engineer Station 329+30 (0. 4 of a mile west of County State Aid Highway No. 17) to Engineer Station 622+00 (at the junction of old Trunk Highway No. 101 approximately 0. 4 of a mile east of the junction of old Trunk Highway No. 101 and County State Aid Highway No. 18) within the corporate City limits under State Project No. 7005-53 (T.H. 101=187) ; and WHEREAS, after Cooperative Construction Agreement No. 72710 was fully executed, the City requested that the agreement be supplemented to allow the City to use Tax Increment Financing to pay for the City's share of the construction costs associated with this agreement; and WHEREAS the State and the City desire that Cooperative Construction Agreement No. 72710 be supplemented so that the agreement reflects that the City will be allowed to use Tax Increment Financing to pay for the City' s share of the construction costs associated with this agreement. IT IS, THEREFORE, MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: I I ARTICLE III OF COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT NO. 72710 DATED DECEMBER 21, 1994, IS HEREBY AMENDED AND MODIFIED TO INCLUDE THE IFOLLOWING: 2 72710-1 Section F. Source of Funds The City's promise to pay is secured by the revenue from its Tax Increment Districts, as well as by other revenues of the City. The Tax Increment Districts securing this include District No. 1, K-Mart; District No. 2 , the Senior Highrise; District No. 3 , Downtown; and District No. 6, the Motel; which districts have pooled revenue sources with projected increment over and above the amounts pledged for debt service. In addition, the City may use revenue from District No. 6, MEBCO, and District No. 9, FMG, which have projected revenues over and above the amount pledged to developers. II EXCEPT AS AMENDED AND MODIFIED HEREIN, ALL OF THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT NO. 72710 DATED DECEMBER 21, 1994, SHALL REMAIN IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT. III BEFORE THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT SHALL BECOME BINDING AND EFFECTIVE, IT SHALL BE APPROVED BY A CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION AND RECEIVE APPROVAL OF STATE AND CITY OFFICERS AS THE LAW MAY PROVIDE IN ADDITION TO THE COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION OR HIS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE. I 3 72710-1 IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF the parties have executed this agreement by their authorized officers. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CITY OF SHAKOPEE Recommended for approval: By By � Mayor ����/ �• S�B! s Director T� Design Services Section Date By By Division Engineer City Administrator Approved: Date By Attest: State Design Engineer City Clerk Date DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION (Date of Agreement) Approved: OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Approved as to form and execution: By (Authorized Signature) By Date Assistant Attorney General DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE Approved: By (Authorized Signature) Date 4 1 r7,4 / 5-0 N ' U MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Barry A. Stock, Assistant City Administrator RE: Civic Center Project - Construction Testing Service Proposals DATE: May 30, 1995 INTRODUCTION: Proposals have been obtained for construction testing services for the Shakopee Civic Center Project. It would be appropriate to select a provider at this time. BACKGROUND: In conjunction with the Civic Center Project, construction testing will be needed for a variety of services including soil tests, compaction test, weld and bolt inspections, concrete testing, etc. Attached is a correspondence from Greystone Construction summarizing the proposals received. Greystone Construction is recommending that GME Consultants, Inc. be selected to perform the construction testing services at a budgeted cost not to exceed $15,000. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Authorize the appropriate City officials to execute documents as necessary with GME Consultants Inc. for the construction testing services at a cost not to exceed $15,000. 2. Select a different contractor to perform the construction testing services. 3. Table action pending further information from staff. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative #1. ACTION REQUESTED: Authorize the appropriate City officials to execute documents as necessary with GME Consultants Inc. for the construction testing services at an estimated cost of$15,000. k1Kr.,Y �3 1 U11 r., May 30, 1995 CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Mr. Barry Stock City of Shakopee 129 S. Holmes St. Shakopee, MN 55379 Re:Testing Civic Center Shakopee, MN Dear Barry: We have received the attached proposals for Construction Testing from Braun Intertec Corporation, GME Consultants, Inc. and STS Consultants Ltd. Based on a review of the proposed unit costs and estimated testing quantities, we recommend awarding the testing contract to GME Consultants, Inc. The budgeted amount for testing is $15,000.00. Should you have any questions regarding this item, please call me. Sincerely, Mikl J. Parsons cc: Rob O'Brien Paul Dahlberg MJP/sb :e 1221 East Fourth Avenue, Suite 110 Equal Opportunity Telephone: 612-496-2227 Shakopee Minnesota 55379 Employer/Contractor Fax : 612-445-4191 c - 11F. CONOC' -ITI 1 MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Barry A. Stock, Assistant City Administrator RE: Civic Center Project - Proposals for Surveying Services DATE: May 30, 1995 INTRODUCTION: Surveying services are needed for the Shakopee Civic Center Project. The services include construction staking for the project in accordance with the grading, drainage, utility and erosion control plans. BACKGROUND: Attached is a correspondence from Greystone Construction regarding the proposals that were received for the surveying services associated with the Shakopee Civic Center Project. Because the expected costs for the services was under $25,000, proposal quotations were obtained rather than formal bids. This is consistent with state statute requirements. Three proposals were obtained for the surveying services. Greystone Construction is recommending that the surveying services proposal submitted by Orr-Schelen and Mayeron Associates Inc. (OSM) be accepted at a cost not to exceed $12,500. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Move to authorize the appropriate City officials to execute documents as necessary to facilitate the selection of OSM to complete the surveying services for the Shakopee Civic Center Project at a cost not to exceed $12,500. 2. Select a different provider to perform the surveying services. 3. Table action pending further information from staff. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative#l. ACTION REQUESTED: Move to authorize the appropriate City officials to execute documents as necessary to facilitate the selection of OSM to complete the surveying services for the Shakopee Civic Center Project at a cost not to exceed $12,500. May 19, 1995 CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Barry Stock Assistant City Administrator City of Shakopee 129 Holmes Street Shakopee, MN 55379 Re: Shakopee Civic Center Building and Site Staking Dear Barry: Bids were received for Building and Site Staking on May 19, 1995. Copies of all proposals are attached. The budget for this work was $15,000.00. The low bid was submitted by OSM Associates, Inc. for $12,500.00. We recommend the Building and Site Staking contract be awarded to OSM Associates, Inc. Please call me with any questions. Ouotes Received Sincerely, HansenThorp Pe.1 1 i nen $15 ,150 Allan' s Land Surveving $14 , 430 nsm $12 , 500 Robert W. O'Brien r +' 1 1221 East Fourth Avenue, Suite 110 Equal Opportunity Telephone: 612-496-2227 Shakopee Minnesota 55379 Employer/Contractor Fax : 612-445-4191 CONSEN 13 MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Barry A. Stock, Assistant City Administrator RE: Civic Center Vending Machine Proposals DATE: May 30, 1995 INTRODUCTION: In anticipation of the Civic Center opening, staff has solicited vending machine proposals for the following: 1. Cold drinks and 2. Hot beverages, snacks and video machines. BACKGROUND: The Civic Center facility will be equipped with a concession stand. However, the concession stand which is located in the ice arena portion of the building will only be open during major sporting events. (High school hockey games, tournaments, etc.) Typically Civic Center facilities are equipped with a variety of vending machine options. With the recent opening of the swimming pool and staff's desire to reduce pool operating costs, staff felt it would be beneficial to pursue vending proposals for not only the swimming pool facility but also the Civic Center at this time. Separate proposals were received for the following two categories: 1. Cold drinks (pop and juices) and 2. Hot beverages, snacks and video machines. Cold Drink Proposals Vending proposals for cold drinks were submitted by the following four companies: 1. Midwest Coca Cola Bottling Company 2. Midwest Vending 3. M & M Vending 4. Jimmy Jingle The proposal submitted by Midwest Coca Cola provides for exclusive sale of Coca Cola products at the Civic Center facility and municipal pool over a six year period. In exchange, Midwest Coca Cola will provide to the City of Shakopee a commission schedule that provides for a 35% commission rate on a 12 ounce soft drink with a vend price of 75a. Midwest Coca Cola will also provide to the City of Shakopee at no charge all pre-mix/post mix equipment and a cooler for the concession area. Finally, Midwest Coca Cola will donate an additional $20,000 in cash up front or divided out evenly over the duration of the agreement. The next closest proposal was submitted by Midwest Vending Inc. who agreed to provide a similar commission schedule and premix/post mix equipment. Midwest Vending Inc. made no mention of a free cooler for the concession stand. Additionally, Midwest Vending was offered to donate $2,200 annually to the City of Shakopee in exchange for a ten year agreement. The proposal submitted by Midwest Coca Cola Bottling Company is superior to all other proposals received. Staff is recommending that the appropriate City officials be authorized to enter into a six year cold beverage vending service agreement by and between the City of Shakopee and Midwest Coca Cola Bottling for the Shakopee Civic Center and Municipal Pool consistent with the terms outlined in this memorandum. Staff is also recommending that the $20,000 donation offered by Midwest Coca Cola be submitted to the City in equal payments over the six year contract period. This will have a positive impact on the annual operating budget. Hot Beverages, snack and video machine Vending proposals for the second category for hot beverages, snacks and video machines were submitted by the following vending companies: 1. Midwest Vending 2. M & M Vending 3. Jimmy Jingle. The commission schedule for this category was fairly consistent between the vending companies. However, the proposal submitted by Midwest Vending provided the highest commission rate (30%) in exchange for a seven year agreement. Additionally, Midwest Vending agreed to donate to the City of Shakopee the sum of$7,000 up front or to be evenly divided out over the duration of the agreement as determined by the City. Staff is recommending that the appropriate City officials be authorized to execute a seven year hot beverage, snack and video machine vending agreement by and between the City of Shakopee and Midwest Vending for snacks, coffees and games. Staff is also recommending that the $7,000 donation be submitted to the City in equal payments over the seven year contract period. Summary It should be noted that both Midwest Coca Cola Bottling Company and Midwest Vending have impressive references. Additionally, it should be noted that the proposed vending services are for full service vending. In other words, Midwest Coca Cola Bottling Company and Midwest Vending provide their own personnel to install, operate and maintain the vending machines. Staff is seeking authorization to execute agreements for the two vending service options as noted herein. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Authorize the appropriate City officials to execute a six year full service vending agreement by and between the City of Shakopee and Midwest Coca Cola Bottling Company for cold beverage vending services at the Shakopee Civic Center and Municipal Pool. 2. Authorize the appropriate City officials to execute a seven year vending service agreement by and between Midwest Vending and the City of Shakopee for snack, coffee and video machines at the Shakopee Civic Center Project and Municipal Pool. 3. Direct the appropriate City officials to accept the financial donations in annual equal payments over the duration of the agreement. 4. Direct the appropriate City officials to accept the financial donations in year one of the agreements. 5. Select different companies to provide the vending services for the Shakopee Civic Center and Municipal Pool. 6. Table action pending further information from staff. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternatives#1, #2 and#3. ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Authorize the appropriate City officials to execute a six year full service vending agreement by and between the City of Shakopee and Midwest Coca Cola Bottling Company for cold beverage vending services at the Shakopee Civic Center and Municipal Pool. 2. Authorize the appropriate City officials to execute a seven year vending service agreement by and between Midwest Vending and the City of Shakopee for snack, coffee and video machines at the Shakopee Civic Center Project and Municipal Pool. 3. Direct the appropriate City officials to accept the financial donations in annual equal payments over the duration of the agreement. CONSEN-1 MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: V. Paul Bilotta, Acting Planning Director/E.D.Coordinator DATE: May 25, 1995 RE: Completion of Probationary Status INTRODUCTION: On December 5, 1994, Shelly Baeyen was appointed to fill the Planning Secretary position. BACKGROUND: Every original appointment is subject to a probationary period of six months after appointment. Ms. Baeyen has successfully completed her probationary period. During the past six months, Ms. Baeyen's performance has met and/or exceeded the required work standards. ALTERNATIVES: �I 1. Terminate Ms. Baeyen's probationary status. 2. Take no action. RECOMMENDATION: Move to terminate Ms. Baeyen's probationary status. To : Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator CONSENT From: Mark Huge, Fire Chief RE: Bell on the old City Hall Date: May 8, 1995 Introduction Since city hall has moved to its present location of 129 South Holmes it has been the wish of the Members of the Shakopee Fire Department to have and maintain Shakopee's "Fire Bell" at the fire station.. Several of our fire fighters have attempted to track the history and research its use. Background Members doing the research used several resources such as, taking to city historians, reading texts like The Shakopee Story by Julius Coller and The Shakopee Scrap Book by the Hubers. The team also contacted Mr. Lee H. Smith, Ph.D., Executive Director of the Scott County Historic Society, who was helpful in verifying the data. An over view of the Bells history follows: * Purchased in 1885 as directed by the common council and the bell was placed on top the "new City Hall" where it called firefighters to duty for approximately the next 3 5 years. * In the early 1920's the fire bell was superseded by an eclectic siren. The bell was retired to a semi-active state, calling firefighters to meetings (which included training) and ringing the curfew. * In September of 1958 it was determined to demolish that building. The Bell was removed and stored in the new and current fire station. * At some point the bell was removed from the fire station and placed on display in front of the"old city hall" at 129 East First Avenue. Discussion The members of the department believe the bell is best portrayed ringing out a call to gather. Gathering at any time or condition to help their fellow citizens is what the department has done for the last 112 years. The Fire Bell is one of few, if not the only physical artifact the members have to symbolize the fellowship and team work which needs to be carried onto the next generations of fire fighters. It is our goal to see the bell displayed where it will remind our fire fighters and the public of the job and dedication given by the members present and past. We request the department be allowed to remove the bell from 129 East First Ave. The bell will then be fitted with a display fixture and be stored and displayed in the main meeting room of the present fire station. As plans for a new fire station develop, we will incorporate the display of the bell into those plans. Action Requested Motion to allow the Shakopee Fire Department to remove the Bell from the building at 129 East First Ave. and display it at the present fire station until such time its display will be incorporated into a new fire station. CONSENT 13T Attached is a print out showing t e division budget status for 1995 based on data entered as of 6111 S . CITY OF SHAKOPEE EXPENSES BY DEPARTMENT 05/01/95 CURRRN,r YRAR ANNUAL MONTH TO PERCENT DEPT DEPT NAME BUDGET ACTUAL DATE EXPENDED 11 MAYOR & COUNCIL 69,450 0 25,993 37 12 CITY ADMINISTRATOR 220,940 5,827 75,533 34 13 CITY CLERK 121,170 2,779 44,666 37 15 FINANCE 299,780 6,442 105,099 35 16 LEGAL COUNSEL 212,090 6,408 80,378 38 17 PLANNING 464,430 7,206 136,192 29 18 GENERAL GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS 148,120 1,183 42,648 29 31 POLICE 1,495,760 42,81S 564,545 38 32 FIRE 410,240 88 97,389 24 33 INSPECTION-BLDG-PLMBG-HTG 197,780 5,114 71,752 36 41 ENGINEERING 357,100 8,838 115,699 32 42 STREET MAINTENANCE 759,180 5,733 183,836 24 44 SHOP 112,120 2,413 39,834 36 46 PARK MAINTENANCE 292,420 8,624 94,893 32 61 POOL 136,580 34 8,355 6 64 RECREATION 239,580 5,586 87,204 36 91 UNALLOCATED 129,570 0 16,390 13 TOTAL GENERAL FUND 5,666,310 109,090 1,790,406 32 17 PLANNING 467,160 385 124,645 27 TOTAL TRANSIT 467,160 385 124,645 27 19 EDA 119,080 1,017 39,930 34 TOTAL EDA 119,080 1,017 39,930 34 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER Fri Jun 2 1995 08:21:39 Page 1 CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT # INVOICE PO NUM. MANUAL ---- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1995/05/24 $1,500,000.00 MARQUETTE BANK SHAKOPE 9850-1010 000197 TR 040501 $1,500,000.00* 1995/05/26 $10,850.00 LICHSINN MOTORS INC 9780-1640 000198 TR 040502 $10,850.00* 1995/05/30 $737 .25 DPTY REGISTRAR #135 9780-1640 000200 TR 040503 $737 .25* 1995/06/01 $.00 FLYNN, JOHN 9990-4430 000199 TR 040505 $.00* 1995/05/17 $544.44 AFLAC CANCER INS. PAYABLE 0912-2177 002749 IP 048726 $544.44* 1995/05/17 $11,655.88 MARQUETTE BANK SHAKOPE FIT PAYABLE 0912-2171 243 IP -__ - 1905117 ___�10, 947.54 MARQUETTE BANK SHAKOPE FICA/MEDICARE PAYABL 0912-2173 243 IP 048727 $22,603 .42* 1995/05/17 $11,729.15 P E R A 7578-00 0912-2183 243 IP 048728 $11,729.15* 1995/05/17 $215.67 SCOTT CO COLLECTIONS C062936 0912-2181 002751 IP 048729 $215.67* 1995/05/17 $298.68 SANDBECK, TERRIE OTHER DEDUCTIONS 0912-2181 002750 IP 048730 $298.68* 1995/05/17 $6,492.36 USCM CLEARING ACCOUNT 23109 0912-2178 243 IP 048731 $6,492.36* 1995/05/17 $235.72 USCM CLEARING ACCOUNT 2344 OBRA 0912-2178 243 IP 048732 $235.72* 1995/05/24 $2 .57 A T & T TELEPHONE 0731-4321 002752 IP 1995/05/24 $3 .46 A T & T TELEPHONE 0411-4321 002752 IP 1995/05/24 $3 .86 A T & T TELEPHONE 0161-4321 002752 IP 1995/05/24 $1.11 A T & T TELEPHONE 0151-4321 002752 IP COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER Fri Jun 2 1995 08:21:39 Page 2 CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT # INVOICE PO NUM. MANUAL ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1995/05/24 $10.11 A T & T TELEPHONE 0121-4321 002752 IP 1995/05/24 $.66 A T & T TELEPHONE 0331-4321 002752 IP 1995/05/24 $.20 A T & T TELEPHONE 0131-4321 002752 IP 1995/05/24 $2 .55 A T & T MISCELLANEOUS 0131-4430 002752 IP 1995/05/24 $5.80 A T & T TELEPHONE 0171-4321 002752 IP 1995/05/24 $88.66 A T & T TELEPHONE 0311-4321 002752 IP 048736 $118.98* 1995/05/24 $5,972 .61 CONVENTION & VISITORS PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 0176-4310 002753 IP 048737 $5,972 .61* 1995/05/24 $384.04 MARQUETTE BANK SHAKOPE FICA/MEDICARE PAYABL 0912-2173 244 IP 048738 $384.04* 1995/05/24 $221.00 P E R A 7578-51 0912-2183 244 IP 048739 $221.00* 1995/05/24 $76,426.28 P.A.C.T. INVESTMENTS I LAND 6626-4510 94-10 IP 048740 $76,426.28* 1995/05/24 $109 .13 U S WEST COMM SERV INC TELEPHONE 0151-4321 002755 IP 048741 $109 .13* 1995/06/01 $155.16 AIR PRODUCTS & CHEM IN EQUIPMENT MAINTENANC 0321-4240 570240 IP 048745 $155.16* 1995/06/01 $65.00 AL'S AUTOMOTIVE DETAIL EQUIPMENT MAINTENANC 0311-4240 002757 IP 048746 $65.00* 1995/06/01 $100.00 ALEXANDRIA TECH COLLEG PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 0311-4310 002756 IP 048747 $100.00* 1995/06/01 $311.17 AM GLASS & MIRROR EQUIPMENT MAINTENANC 0441-4240 002758 IP 048748 $311.17* 1995/06/01 $16.50 ANCHOR PAPER CO OPERATING SUPPLIES 0911-4210 002759 IP 1995/06/01 $9.00 ANCHOR PAPER CO OPERATING SUPPLIES 0311-4210 002759 IP 1995/06/01 $54.59 ANCHOR PAPER CO PRINTING/PUBLISHING 0911-4350 002759 IP COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER Fri Jun 2 1995 08:21:39 Page 3 CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT # INVOICE PO NUM. MANUAL ----=------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 048749 $80.09* 1995/06/01 $19.00 ASSN/METRO MUNI OPERATING SUPPLIES 0311-4210 002760 IP 048750 $19.00* 1995/06/01 $104 .95 ASTLEFORD INTER EQUIPMENT MAINTENANC 0441-4240 T23406 IP 048751 $104.95* 1995/06/01 $44.58 BAUER BUILT TIRE & BAT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANC 0441-4240 002761 IP 048752 $44.58* 1995/06/01 $540.00 BFI TIRE RECYCLERS INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 0742-4310 002762 IP 048753 $540.00* 1995/06/01 $7 .35 BILOTTA, PAUL OPERATING SUPPLIES 0191-4210 002763 IP 048754 $7 .35* 1995/06/01 $155.00 BOHN WELL DRILLING INC EQUIPMENT MAINTENANC 0631-4240 7161 ZF 048755 $155.00* 1995/06/01 $1,074.62 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS MATERIALS 0427-4215 002764 IP 048756 $1,074.62* 1995/06/01 $56.97 BUTTERWORTH SUBSCRIPTIONS/PUBLIC 0161-4435 002765 IP 048757 $56.97* 1995/06/01 $1,825.00 C & C MASONRY INC BUILDING MAINT 0611-4230 002766 IP 048758 $1,825.00* 1995/06/01 $60.00 C & E AUTO UPHOLSTERY EQUIPMENT MAINTENANC 0312-4240 002767 IP 048759 $60.00* 1995/06/01 $65.98 CANTERBURY INN PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 0311-4310 002768 IP 048760 $65.98* 1995/06/01 $145.00 CAREERTRACK SEMINARS M CONFERENCE/SCHOOL/TR 0311-4390 002769 IP 048761 $145.00* COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER Fri Jun 2 1995 08:21:39 Page 4 CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT # INVOICE PO NUM. MANUAL ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1995/06/01 $10.76 CELLULAR ONE TELEPHONE 0641-4321 002770 IP 1995/06/01 $28.56 CELLULAR ONE TELEPHONE 0321-4321 002770 IP 1995/06/01 $24.22 CELLULAR ONE TELEPHONE 0121-4321 002770 IP 1995/06/01 $21.52 CELLULAR ONE TELEPHONE 0411-4321 002770 IP 1995/06/01 $89.89 CELLULAR ONE TELEPHONE 0311-4321 002770 IP 048762 $174.95* 1995/06/01 $351.50 CLAREY'S SAFETY OPERATING SUPPLIES 0321-4210 002771 IP 1995/06/01 $259.00 CLAREY'S SAFETY EQUIPMENT MAINTENANC 0321-4240 002771 IP 048763 $610.50* 1995/06/01 $58.00 COMMUNICATIONS WORLD I TELEPHONE 0181-4321 002772 IP 048764 $58.00* 1995/06/01 $86.38 COMPRESSAIR & EQ CO EQUIPMENT MAINTENANC 0321-4240 40067 IP 048765 $86.38* 1995/06/01 $52.34 COPY EQUIP. INC. OPERATING SUPPLIES 6633-4210 002773 IP 1995/06/01 $52.33 COPY EQUIP. INC. OPERATING SUPPLIES 6622-4210 002773 IP 048766 $104.67* 1995/06/01 $135.00 CORPORATE LEARNING CTR CONFERENCE/SCHOOL/TR 0312-4390 002774 IP 048767 $135.00* 1995/06/01 $20.00 CULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER OPERATING SUPPLIES 0183-4210 002775 IP 048768 $20.00* 1995/06/01 $5,600.00 DELOITTE & TOUCHE PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 0151-4310 002776 IP 1995106101 $1,300.00 DELOITTE & TOUCHE PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 0711-4310 002776 IP 1995/06/01 $1,300.00 DELOITTE & TOUCHE PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 0731-4310 002776 IP 1995/06/01 $1,800.00 DELOITTE & TOUCHE PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 0191-4310 002776 IP 048769 $101000.00* 1995/06/01 $147 .50 DOOR WORKS BUILDING MAINT 0628-4230 002778 IP 048770 $147 .50* 1995/06/01 $269.95 DRESSEN OIL CO EQUIPMENT MAINTENANC 0441-4240 28889 IP 048771 $269.95* COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER Fri Jun 2 1995 08:21:39 Page 5 CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT # INVOICE PO NUM. MANUAL ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- 1995/06/01 $9.45 DeMers, Stephen OPERATING SUPPLIES 0311-4210 002777 IP 048772 $9.45* 1995/06/01 $247 .50 EVERGREEN LAND SERV CO PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 9439-4310 002779 IP 048773 $247 .50* 1995/06/01 $10.00 FIRST STATE BANK ENGINEERING FEE 0411-3435 002780 IP 048774 $10.00* 1995/06/01 $12.00 FULLER, CHARLES CONFERENCE/SCHOOL/TR 0181-4390 002781 IP 048775 $12.00* 1995/06/01 $415.00 GFOA PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 0151-4310 002782 IP 048776 $415.00* 1995/06/01 $68.00 GOV TRAINING SERV CONFERENCE/SCHOOL/TR 0161-4390 002783 IP 048777 $68.00* - ---_ 1995/06/01 $11.28 GREGG VOXLAND/PETTY CA PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 0172-4310 002784 IP 1995/06/01 $1.82 GREGG VOXLAND/PETTY CA MISCELLANEOUS 0111-4430 002784 IP 1995/06/01 $.23 GREGG VOXLAND/PETTY CA POSTAGE 0131-4320 002784 IP 1995/06/01 $12.06 GREGG VOXLAND/PETTY CA PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 0311-4310 002784 IP 1995/06/01 $2.00 GREGG VOXLAND/PETTY CA TRAVEL/SUBSISTENCE 0311-4330 002784 IP 1995/06/01 $11.15 GREGG VOXLAND/PETTY CA OPERATING SUPPLIES 0311-4210 002784 IP 1995/06/01 $7.11 GREGG VOXLAND/PETTY CA OPERATING SUPPLIES 0441-4210 002784 IP 048778 $45.65* 1995/06/01 $22 .75 GSOC INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 0421-4310 002785 IP 048779 $22 .75* 1995/06/01 $25.00 HEALTHSPAN TRANS SERV CONFERENCE/SCHOOL/TR 0321-4390 633 IP 048780 $25.00* 1995/06/01 $40.00 IND.SCHOOL DIST. 720 PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 0820-4310 002786 IP 1995/06/01 $30.00 IND.SCHOOL DIST. 720 PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 0850-4310 002786 IP 048781 $70.00* COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER Fri Jun 2 1995 08:21:39 Page 6 CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT # INVOICE PO NUM. MANUAL ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1995/06/01 $121.79 INST. TESTING INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 6626-4310 002787 IP 1995/06/01 $740.43 INST. TESTING INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 0411-4310 002787 IP 048782 $862.22* 1995/06/01 $1,437.00 J R'S APPLIANCE DISP I PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 0742-4310 10109 IP 048783 $1,437.00* 1995/06/01 $117.25 JILCRAFT INC OPERATING SUPPLIES 0311-4210 002788 IP 048784 $117 .25* 1995/06/01 $11.00 KES, STEVE NON-RESIDENT FEE 0802-3481 002789 IP 1995/06/01 $20.00 KES, STEVE YOUTH ACTIVITIES 0802-3477 002789 IP 048785 $31.00* 1995/06/01 $6,242.00 KILLMER ELEC CO INC IMPROVEMENTS 9421-4530 31840-2597 IP 048786 $6,242.00* 1995/06/01 $114.44 KRAFT, DENNIS TRAVEL/SUBSISTENCE 0121-4330 002790 IP 048787 $114.44* 1995/06/01 $85.20 KREMER SPRING EQUIPMENT MAINTENANC 0441-4240 60770 IP 048788 $85.20* 1995/06/01 $929.60 KROMINGA, TERRY PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 0331-4310 002791 IP 048789 $929.60* 1995/06/01 $182.77 LEECO DISTRIBUTION LAND USE ADMINISTRAT 0171-3414 002793 IP 048790 $182.77* 1995/06/01 $394.71 LMC INS TRUST INSURANCE 0911-4360 002792 IP 1995/06/01 $481.84 LMC INS TRUST WORKERS COMPENSATION 0311-4151 002792 IP 048791 $876.55* 1995/06/01 $1,311.32 LOGIS RENTALS 0152-4410 002794 IP 1995/06/01 $954.97 LOGIS RENTALS 0153-4410 002794 IP 1995/06/01 $22.63 LOGIS RENTALS 0731-4410 002794 IP 048792 $2,288.92* COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER Fri Jun 2 1995 08:21:39 Page 7 CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT # INVOICE PO NUM. MANUAL ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1995/06/01 $86,262.87 MACQUEEN EQUIP. EQUIPMENT 9780-1640 002795 IP 1995/06/01 -$229.70 MACQUEEN EQUIP. EQUIPMENT MAINTENANC 0733-4240 002795 IP 048793 $86,033.17* 1995/06/01 $122.48 MAINSTREAM CNSLTG GROU OPERATING SUPPLIES 0311-4210 002796 IP 048794 $122.48* 1995/06/01 $700.00 MCALLISTER, ROBERT PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 0361-4310 002797 IP 048795 $700.00* 1995/06/01 $25.00 MEMA TREASURER DUES 0311-4433 002798 IP 048796 $25.00* 1995/06/01 $42.93 MID-CITY COLUMBIA INC OPERATING SUPPLIES 0311-4210 002799 IP 048797 $42.93* 1995/06/01 $170,.36 MIDWEST_ENGINE SERVICE OPERATING_SUPPLIES 0421-4210 6903 IP 048798 $170.36* 1995/06/01 $116.59 MINNEGASCO UTILITY SERVICE 0628-4380 002800 IP 1995/06/01 $431.42 MINNEGASCO UTILITY SERVICE 0421-4380 002800 IP 1995/06/01 $136.13 MINNEGASCO UTILITY SERVICE 0321-4380 002800 IP 1995/06/01 $25.75 MINNEGASCO UTILITY SERVICE 0182-4380 002800 IP 1995/06/01 $73.59 MINNEGASCO UTILITY SERVICE 0611-4380 002800 IP 1995/06/01 $755.46 MINNEGASCO UTILITY SERVICE 0181-4380 002800 IP 1995/06/01 $215.71 MINNEGASCO UTILITY SERVICE 0311-4380 002800 IP 048799 $1,754.65* 1995/06/01 $76.17 MINNESOTA'S BOOKSTORE OPERATING SUPPLIES 0331-4210 002802 IP 048800 $76.17* 1995/06/01 $26.65 MN CONWAY FIRE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANC 0183-4240 002801 IP 1995/06/01 $38.90 MN CONWAY FIRE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANC 0181-4240 002801 IP 048801 $65.55* 1995/06/01 $25.00 MN DEPT OF LABOR & IND DUES 0421-4433 002803 IP 048802 $25.00* COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER Fri Jun 2 1995 08:21:39 Page 8 CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT # INVOICE PO NUM. MANUAL ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1995/06/01 $142.00 MN SUPREME COURT DUES 0161-4433 002804 IP 048803 $142.00* 1995/06/01 $354.30 MTI DIST CO EQUIPMENT MAINTENANC 0625-4240 002805 IP 048804 $354.30* 1995/06/01 $8, 003.40 NATL SCH BUS SERV INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 0142-4310 002806 IP 048805 $8, 003.40* 1995/06/01 $55.31 NEXT CENTURY TECH INC EQUIPMENT MAINTENANC 0172-4240 002807 IP 1995/06/01 $3, 877.67 NEXT CENTURY TECH INC EQUIPMENT 0321-4550 002807 IP 048806 $3, 932.98* 1995/06/01 $134.75 NORWEST BANK MN FISCAL AGENT FEES 9311-4620 002808 IP 048807 $134.75* 1995/06/01 $76.87 NSP UTILITY SERVICE 0427-4380 002809 IP 048808 $76.87* 1995/06/01 $270.65 OWENS SERV CORP BUILDING MAINT 0181-4230 002810 IP 048809 $270.65* 1995/06/01 $61.09 PAPER SERV CO BUILDING MAINT 0181-4230 002811 IP 048810 $61.09* 1995/06/01 $420.68 PIONEER MANU CO OPERATING SUPPLIES 0423-4210 002812 IP 048811 $420.68* 1995/06/01 $16.50 POOLE,JERRY PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 0311-4310 002813 IP 048812 $16.50* 1995/06/01 $180.00 PUBLIC SAFETY EQUIP CO EQUIPMENT MAINTENANC 0312-4240 6266 IP 048813 $180.00* 1995/06/01 $11.82 R & R MARINE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANC 0441-4240 5749 IP 048814 $11.82* 1995/06/01 $335.48 REAL GEM AWARDS OPERATING SUPPLIES 0641-4210 002814 IP COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER Fri Jun 2 1995 08:21:39 Page 9 CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT # INVOICE PO NUM. MANUAL ----=------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 048815 $335.48* 1995/06/01 $2,543.42 SCHOELL & MADSON INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 6620-4310 14821 IP 048816 $2,543 .42* 1995/06/01 $71.90 SCOTT CO COLLECTIONS OPERATING SUPPLIES 0411-4210 002815 IP 1995/06/01 $106.00 SCOTT CO COLLECTIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 0311-4310 002815 IP 1995/06/01 $92.70 SCOTT CO COLLECTIONS OPERATING SUPPLIES 0156-4210 002815 IP 048817 $270.60* 1995/06/01 $97.50 SCOTT CO RECORDER FILING FEES 0131-4316 002816 IP 048818 $97.50* 1995/06/01 $5,145.99 SHAKOPEE ACCESS CORP PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 0125-4310 002818 IP 04881.9 $5,145.99* 995/=WOl ,- - _=$=7_.40__SHAKOPEE BAKERY OPERATING SUPPLIES 0311-4210 002817 IP 048820 $7.40* - - - 1995/06/01 $1,500.00 SHAKOPEE CUB SCOUTS #2 PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 0621-4310 002819 IP 048821 $1,500.00* 1995/06/01 $122.40 SHAKOPEE VISION CLINIC OPERATING SUPPLIES 0321-4210 002820 IP 048822 $122.40* 1995106101 $1,036.50 SHAKOPEE, CITY OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 9438-4310 002821 IP 048823 $1,036.50* 1995/06/01 $1,575.00 SHAMROCK DECORATING BUILDING MAINT 0617-4230 002822 IP 048824 $1,575.00* 1995/06/01 $37.01 SNAP-ON TOOLS CORP OPERATING SUPPLIES 0441-4210 002823 IP 048825 $37 .01* 1995/06/01 $55.65 SOUTH METRO OFFICE EQ EQUIPMENT MAINTENANC 0311-4240 2743 IP 048826 $55.65* 1995/06/01 $2,811.90 SOUTHWEST METRO TRANSI UTILITY SERVICE 0144-4380 SMTC-1164 IP COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER Fri Jun 2 1995 08:21:39 Page 10 CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT # INVOICE PO NUM. MANUAL ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 048827 $2,811.90* 1995/06/01 $566.40 ST FRANCIS REG MED PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 0321-4310 804358-0 IP 048828 $566.40* 1995/06/01 $290.00 ST PAUL, CITY OF CONFERENCE/SCHOOL/TR 0312-4390 037889 IP 048829 $290.00* 1995/06/01 $201.02 STAR AMMUNITION INC OPERATING SUPPLIES 0312-4210 47520 IP 048830 $201.02* 1995/06/01 $188.76 STAR TRIBUNE SUBSCRIPTIONS/PUBLIC 0311-4435 002824 IP 048831 $188.76* 1995/06/01 $54.32 STEMMER FARM SUPPLY IN OPERATING SUPPLIES 0622-4210 002825 IP 1995/06/01 $46.81 STEMMER FARM SUPPLY IN OPERATING SUPPLIES 0422-4210 002825 IP 048832 $101.13* 1995/06/01 $15.05 STOCK, BARRY TRAVEL/SUBSISTENCE 0176-4330 002826 IP 1995/06/01 $35.70 STOCK, BARRY TRAVEL/SUBSISTENCE 0121-4330 002826 IP 048833 $50.75* 1995/06/01 $91.36 STREICHERS OPERATING SUPPLIES 0311-4210 002827 IP 048834 $91.36* 1995/06/01 $16.49 SUPERAMERICA MOTOR FUELS & LUBRIC 0312-4222 002828 IP 1995/06/01 -$2.76 SUPERAMERICA OPERATING SUPPLIES 0312-4210 002828 IP 1995/06/01 $7.43 SUPERAMERICA OPERATING SUPPLIES 0311-4210 002828 IP 048835 $21.16* 1995/06/01 $17,284.00 SUPERIOR FORD INC EQUIPMENT 9780-1640 7101 IP 048836 $17,284.00* 1995/06/01 $23.00 TRUTNAU, PATRICIA YOUTH ACTIVITIES 0823-3477 002830 IP 048837 $23.00* 1995/06/01 $52.00 U S DEPT OF COMMERCE OPERATING SUPPLIES 0411-4210 002831 IP 048838 $52.00* COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER Fri Jun 2 1995 08:21:39 Page 11 CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT # INVOICE PO NUM. MANUAL ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1995/06/01 $62 .72 UNITOG RENTAL SERV INC BUILDING MAINT 0311-4230 002832 IP 1995/06/01 $37 .44 UNITOG RENTAL SERV INC BUILDING MAINT 0421-4230 002832 IP 1995/06/01 $172.68 UNITOG RENTAL SERV INC OPERATING SUPPLIES 0421-4210 002832 IP 1995/06/01 $78.40 UNITOG RENTAL SERV INC OPERATING SUPPLIES 0441-4210 002832 IP 1995/06/01 $150.40 UNITOG RENTAL SERV INC OPERATING SUPPLIES 0621-4210 002832 IP 048839 $501.64* 1995/06/01 $685.52 VOGEL PAINT & WAX CO OPERATING SUPPLIES 0423-4210 002833 IP 048840 $685.52* 1995/06/01 $35 .94 VOSS LIGHTING BUILDING MAINT 0181-4230 002834 IP 048841 $35.94* 1995/06/01 $6, 010.00 VPSI INC UTILITY SERVICE 0143-4380 002835 IP 048842 $6, 010.00* 1995/06/01 $4, 966.43 WASTE MANAGEMENT INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 0742-4310 002837 1995/06/01 $691.00 WASTE MANAGEMENT INC UTILITY SERVICE 0741-4380 002837 IP 048843 $5,657 .43* 1995/06/01 $56.00 WEST PUBLISHING CORP SUBSCRIPTIONS/PUBLIC 0161-4435 002836 IP 048844 $56.00* 1995/06/01 $544.44 AFLAC CANCER INS. PAYABLE 0912-2177 002838 IP 048848 $544.44* 1995/06/01 $16, 907 .18 BLUE CROSS & BLUE SHIE CM519 WO 0 0912-2176 002839 IP 048849 $16, 907 .18* 1995/06/01 $929.99 FORTIS BENEFITS HEALTH & LIFE PAYABL 0912-2176 002840 IP 048850 $929.99* 1995/06/01 $10,503 .26 MARQUETTE BANK SHAKOPE FICA/MEDICARE PAYABL 0912-2173 245 IP 1995/06/01 $11,199 .40 MARQUETTE BANK SHAKOPE FIT PAYABLE 0912-2171 245 IP 048851 $21,702 .66* 1995/06/01 $112 .85 MBA CANCER INS. PAYABLE 0912-2177 002841 IP COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER Fri Jun 2 1995 08:21:39 Page 12 CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT # INVOICE PO NUM. MANUAL ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 048852 $112.85* 1995/06/01 $552 .00 MINNESOTA MUTUAL LIFE HEALTH & LIFE PAYABL 0912-2176 002842 IP 048853 $552.00* 1995/06/01 $15.00 NORTHSTAR CHAPTER-APA CONFERENCE/SCHOOL/TR 0153-4390 002843 IP 048854 $15.00* 1995/06/01 $285.36 NSP UTILITY SERVICE 0427-4380 002844 IP 048855 $285.36* 1995/06/01 $12,172.69 P E R A 7578-00 0912-2183 245 IP 048856 $12,172.69* 1995/06/01 $215.67 SCOTT CO COLLECTIONS C062936 0912-2181 002845 IP 048857 $215.67* 1995/06/01 $6,477.36 USCM CLEARING ACCOUNT 23109 0912-2178 245 IP 048858 $6,477.36* 1995/06/01 $1.42 USCM CLEARING ACCOUNT 2344 OBRA 0912-2178 245 IP 048859 $1.42* $1,877,339.78 COUNCIL CHECK SUMMARY Fri Jun 2 1995 08:21:51 Page 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- FUND'# 001 GENERAL FUND $146, 686.17 FUND # 114 TRANSIT $16,825.30 FUND # 115 EDA $1,807 .35 FUND # 311 1988B GO TIF $134.75 FUND # 421 CAP IMPROVE FD $6,294.33 FUND # 437 94/95 IMPROVE $79,143 .83 FUND # 438 CIVIC CENTER $1, 036.50 FUND # 439 BLKS 3 & 4 $247 .50 FUND # 710 SANITARY SEWER $1,300.00 FUND # 730 STORM DRAINAGE $1,095.50 FUND # 740 REFUSE FUND $7, 634.43 FUND # 780 INTERNAL SERV FD $115,134.12 FUND # 850 INVESTMENT TRUST $1,500,000.00 FUND # 990 DEFAULT $.00 $1,877,339.78 UONSENT Memo to: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator From: Mark McQuillan, Recreation Supervisor Re : Tahpah baseball stadium accessible ramp Date : May 31, 1995 INTRODUCTION At its May 16, 1995 meeting, The Shakopee City Council authorized City staff to utilize the services of Homewerk Remodeling and Construction to construct an accessible ramp and stairway for the Tahpah Park baseball stadium at a cost not to exceed $6, 000 . When the contractor came to secure the permit for the project, the Building Inspector discovered the plan showed an insufficient pitch ratio for the ramp. The design used a pitch ratio of 1 : 12 which is appropiate for an indoor ramp but not for outdoor ramps which requires a 1 : 20 ratio. In this case, an additional 40 feet of ramp is needed to meet the State Building Code for outdoor ramps . Thus, the cost for the project will be increased by $1, 533 . 00 bringing the total cost for the project to $7, 533 . BACKGROUND In all fairness to the contractor, he is not to be blamed for the miscalculations . In the Request For Proposals sent to each contractor, the photo-copy of the specifications for accessible ramps from the State Building Code Book apparently did not show two critical sentences showing the correct pitch ratios for outdoor ramps . The original pages were not centered correctly on the copying machine. Regrettably, I simply did not catch the error before sending the RFPs out . The pitch ratio submitted by both contractors were based on the indoor specifications . Rather than delaying this project any further, staff is recommending a change-order be approved and additional funds be released for this project . Funding would be allocated from the Park Reserve Fund. The project will still be within budget . ALTERNATIVES 1 . Allocate an additional $1, 533 . 00 from the Park Reserve Fund bringing the total project cost to $7, 533 . 00 for the Tahpah Park Baseball Stadium Ramp Project . 2 . Table the project and request that staff obtain new estimates . 3 . Do nothing with this project for 1995 . RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends alternative #1 . ACTION REQUESTED Move to allocate an additional $1, 533 . 00 from the Park Reserve Fund bringing the total project cost to $7, 533 . 00 for the Tahpah Park Baseball Stadium Ramp Project . �? �'U [' Sz-- i3 � RESOLUTION NO. 4229 A Resolution Lifting The Stay Of Resolution No. 4170, And Approving A Wetland Replacement Plan WHEREAS, on February 7, 1995, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 4170, A Resolution Approving a Replacement Plan for Ryan Contracting, Inc.; and WHEREAS, on April 4, 1995, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 4202, staying Resolution No. 4170, to allow additional time for comments; and WHEREAS, the City Council now desires to take action on the Wetland Replacement Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1. Based on the replacement standards in Minn. Rules part 8420.0630, and on the recommendation of the Technical Evaluation Panel, the Wetland Replacement Plan is hereby approved, contingent upon the Applicant submitting proof of ownership of sufficient wetland banking credits. 2. Approval of this Wetland Replacement Plan shall become effective 30 days after mailing of a copy of this decision to the Environmental Quality Board Monitor for publication. 3. A copy of this decision shall be mailed to all interested parties and to the applicant. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 1995. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form: City Attorney 13� MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: David M. Nummer, Staff Engineer SUBJECT: Ryan Wetland Replacement DATE: June 6, 1995 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 4229, a resolution lifting the stay of Resolution No. 4170 and approving a Wetland Replacement Plan for 0.34 acres of wetland located in the southwest 1/4 of the southwest 1/4 of Section 12, Township 115, Range 22. BACKGROUND: The Wetland Replacement Plan proposed by Thomas and Debra Ryan (Ryan Contracting Inc.) involves filling a 0.32 acre Type II Fresh Meadow Wetland and a 0.02 acre Type I Seasonally Flooded Wetland in a primarily heavy industrial area. The wetlands to be filled are proposed to be replaced at a 2:1 ratio with Type IV Deep Freshwater Marsh Wetlands through the State of Minnesota Wetland Banking Program. As of the writing of this memo, the applicant has not provided proof that the wetland banking credits are in their possession. If the verification of ownership cannot be provided prior to the June 6, 1995 City Council Meeting, staff will recommend denial of the replacement plan due to lack of replacement. The applicant has verbally confirmed ownership, and has indicated that the documentation necessary will be provided to staff prior to June 6. The following staff recommendation assumes that verification can be obtained. Staff will update the Council on this issue at the meeting. The replacement plan has been reviewed by the Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) and has been recommended for approval based on the following comments: 1. The existing wetlands have been significantly disturbed by fill predating the Wetland Conservation Act. (Reference aerial studies 1980-1993 and aerial photos from 1940, 1964, 1970 and 1980). 2. The land uses adjacent to the wetlands will greatly reduce the function and value of the wetlands in the future. 3. Adjacent development has isolated these wetlands from other natural areas (woods, wetlands, grasslands, etc.). cAdos\ryanmem.doc 4. The proposed replacement wetlands are of greater value than the wetlands being filled. On February 7, 1995, a resolution was adopted by the City Council approving the replacement plan for these wetlands, however, that decision was later stayed on April 4, 1995 due to a procedural error where notification of the replacement plan was not printed in the newspaper. Proper notice has now been provided, and the comment period as prescribed by law has elapsed. The only comments received on the replacement plan came from a representative for Trout Unlimited. Those comments, as well as a point by point response from staff are attached for Council review. The main issue as stated in the summary comments is that the landuse (industrial) in not compatible with the adjacent wetlands. Staff feels that this is a zoning issue and should be addressed as such. There is no mechanism in the Wetland Conservation Act for addressing adjacent landuse or property rights. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 4229, a resolution lifting the stay of Resolution No. 4170 and approving a Wetland Replacement Plan for 0.34 acres of wetland located in the southwest 1/4 of the southwest 1/4 of Section 12, Township 115, Range 22. 2. Deny Resolution No. 4229. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative No. 1. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 4229, A Resolution Lifting the Stay of Resolution No. 4170 and approving a Wetland Replacement Plan for 0.34 acres of wetland located in the southwest 1/4 of the southwest 1/4 of Section 12, township 115, Range 22, and move it's adoption. cAdos\ryanmem.doc RESOLUTION NO. 4229 A Resolution Lifting The Stay Of Resolution No. 4170, And Approving A Wetland Replacement Plan WHEREAS, on February 7, 1995, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 4170, A Resoltuion Approving a Replacement Plan for Ryan Contracting, Inc.; and WHEREAS, on April 4, 1995, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 4202, staying Resolution No. 4170, to allow additional time for comments; and WHEREAS, the City Council now desires to take action on the Wetland Replacement Plan. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1. Based on the replacement standards in Minn. Rules part 8420.0630, and on the recommendation of the Technical Evlauation Panel,the Wetland Replacement Plan is hereby approved. 2. Approval of this Wetland Replacement Plan shall become effective 30 days after mailing of a copy of this decision to the Environmental Quality Board Monitor for publication. 3. A copy of this decision shall be mailed to all interested parties and to the applicant. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 1995. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form: City Attorney 1313 5th St . SE . Suite 214B Minneapolis , MN 55414 May 3 , 1995 City of Shakopee Dennis Kraft 129 South Holmes St . Shakopee , MN 55379 Dear Mr . Kraft , This is to reiterate our comments , which were not considered before the Shakopee City Council approved , prior to the end of the legal comment period , the Wetland Conservation Act Wetland Replacement Plan Application , for Thomas J . & Debra A. Ryan, for the project located at T 115N R22W Sect . 12 SE 1/4 in Scott County; the Ryan Contracting , Inc . corporate headquarters . We realize our previous comments stand , in regard to the application. But we want to update our comments , to reflect your subsequent actions . 1 . Sensitive surface waters ( e . g. DNR designated trout waters ) , ARE a factor applicable at the impact site . The applicant incorrectly marked "no" under Special Considerations , ( 6 ) on the replacement plan application. This project site is in the watershed of Eagle Creek , a state designated trout stream. a. See attachment "A" , the proposed Shakopee comprehensive stormwater plan, done by OSM. . . the project would fill the wetland shown in subwatershed "Eagle Creek 2" (EC2) . b. See attachment "B" , the OSM Eagle Creek Watershed Study, Alternative 3 . This is the alternative the City of Savage chose for its Eagle Creek Storm Water Management Plan on September 8, 1994. It denotes the Ryan project as being in subwatershed ' 2' , which is shown taking in stormwater from ' 1 ' and sending it to ' 3 ' , '4 ' etc. until it reaches Eagle Creek. ) c. The application also fails to note the project is in a groundwater sensitive area. According to the 1982 Scott County Geologic Atlas , Map C-1 , Plate 4 , Figure 3 , Susceptibility of Bedrock Aquifers to Contamination , this is in a "Highly Susceptible" area . 2 . The application fails to note that the filling of these wetlands requires a U. S . Army Corps of Engineer ' s individual permit . The Corps has jurisdiction over all wetlands in the `.linnesota River Valley . a . The district engineer ' s regional conditions for Minnesota do not allow the issuance of a Nation Wide Permit (NWP) for small wetland impacts , if "the project involves a discharge of dredged or fill material into the following area( s) : TROUT STREAMS - the head waters (and adjacent wetlands ) and the tributaries (and adjacent wetlands ) of these streams . " ( See attachment "C" , from Corps permit 92-01784- NW-92 as an example . It lists regional conditions for another project . That project DID qualify for an NWP, because it DIDN'T affect trout streams . ) b. The NWP from the COE, for small wetland impacts , only covers projects which fill less than 10,000 square feet . The applicant ' s preferred alternative, Alternative A, fills 14, 794 square feet . 3 . Because the proposed fill is greater than 10, 000 square feet , it is ineligible for the "streamlined application and decision notification procedure" passed by the legislature last spring. This project must follow the complete notification process required by the WCA Rules , which generally entails between 70 and 120 days of review. Also , under amended MS 103G. 2242 , Subd . 6 , Notice of Application , within 10 days of receiving the application , " . . . the local government unit must give general notice to the public in a general circulation newspaper within the area affected" . That would be the Shakopee Valley News , in this case . You did not , until we filed an appeal ; and when you finally did publish notice , you told the public comments would be accepted . You did not , however , tell the public how long the comments would be accepted . You should also note amended Subd . 7 regarding the required methods and timelines of publishing notification of eventual approval or denial of the application in question , in the same newspaper . And , please note the language in amended MS 103G. 2242, Subd. 1 (b ) : " . . .a replacement plan must be approved by a resolution of the governing body of the local government unit , consistent with the provisions of the rules" . Your initial approval of the replacement plan , well in advance of the end of the comment period required by the rules , shows the action you took was inconsistent with this statute . 4 . All tributaries and springs of Eagle Creek are protected public trout waters . A check with the Scott County Auditor should confirm that the DNR Public Waters protection for such waters has been clarified , to reflect the statutory protection that was wrongly left off your maps , despite assertions by Trout Unlimited . A December 1994 court order cleared up any dispute , well before your approval decision , which did not take the clarified status into consideration . 5 . The submitted alternatives fail to provide information on overflow provisions or outlet structures to show how the water will flow from this site into a tributary of Eagle Creek , as shown on both Shakopee and Savage ' s stormwater plans . 6 . Filling the wetlands is inconsistent with watershed plans of both local government units regarding Eagle Creek . Therefore , the application is incorrect in marking "yes" , the action is consistent with local plans . a. See Attachment "D" , Hydrological Summary for Subwatersheds Within the Eagle Creek Subwatershed, prepared for the City of Shakopee by OSM last fall . It calls for an allowable peak discharge of 1 cfs from this watershed; yet the applicant doesn' t show where the discharge will occur. b. The same document says approximately 3 acre feet of on-site storage is required in the event of a 100-year, 24 hour duration storm. . .and that this subwatershed has that storage available in the property' s present form. However, the property will NOT have that capacity, under the wetlands replacement plan you approved. Where will the additional storage capacity come from, that is needed to protect the fragile public resource of Eagle Creek, the last trout stream in Scott County? 7 . The existing conditional use permit is not transferable from the previous owner . The proposed conditional use will be detrimental to the health of the wetlands , and subsequently to the health of Eagle Creek , a protected public water . The alternatives offered to allow for the proposed conditional use , are inadequate . a. The applicant admits in the letter accompanying the application, that if he can' t completely fill both wetlands under Alternative 1 , then under Alternative 2 , " It is questionable if the viability of Wetlands No. 1 & 2 could be preserved. " This , DESPITE a proposed stormwater detention pond that ' s supposed to handle the runoff of oil , diesel fuel , gasoline , and other contaminants that commonly leak from construction equipment and machinery now being stored on the graded site under a conditional use permit . This is a permeable surface leading to a shallow water table . This use should not be allowed. If the designed detention basin won' t perform well enough to protect the water quality and function of on-site wetlands , then how could one argue it will do enough to protect the highly susceptible groundwater, or the trout stream which it feeds? Moreover, if Alternate A is followed, and the wetlands are filled, that means even GREATER dependence on the ability of the sole detention pond to clean pollutants from the site ' s runoff. Alternate B' s narrative makes it abundantly clear that the detention pond can ' t adequately perform this function; if it did, then the unfilled wetlands should be able to survive. The applicant admits they will not ! Likewise, in Alternative 3 , the applicant says even by filling wetland 1 , and building another detention pond, "It is questionable if the viability of Wetland No. 2 could be preserved" . Since the applicant offers no way to preserve the integrity of the wetlands on-site , or replace them within the watershed, a feasible and prudent alternative is to refuse to allow the non-conforming conditional use of this property. . . especially in light of the certain loss of wetland values in the sensitive and already burdened Eagle Creek watershed, under all three proposed alternatives. b. Even more chilling, the siting of two 10,000 gallon fuel storage tanks on top of a filled wet land 2 (as seen in Alternate A) , over saturated soils that drain through the watershed of a sensitive trout stream, fails to take into consideration the devastating impacts that would occur if a spill or leak happened. . . even though the tanks comply with requirements for double walls . Why tempt fate? Even if the tanks maintain their integrity, filling the tanks and pumping from them still results in spills , creating cumulative pollution impacts . The stormwater runoff will transport it . c . An analysis of the thermal pollution impacts of the proposed alternates is also lacking. Traditional best management practices , relied upon in the supporting documentation showing how the alternates were arrived at , are not designed with thermal impacts in mind . Heat is a pollutant , as defined under state law. And state water quality regulations set a thermal pollutant standard for trout streams : Actions ( including land use) cannot create any material increase in temperature . Trout die if the water gets too warm. So even if a detention basin successfully filters pollutants like sediment , spreading out of the water in a shallow pond will result in thermal pollution. . . it is not "clean" water. Studies (Galli 1990) show wet detention ponds like these can result in a 4 to 12 degree increase in water temperature . The engineering firm of SEH in Vadnais Heights provided a report to the City of River Falls , Wisconsin, outlining better alternatives for stormwater management , including on-site "Y" infiltration designs . . .which are not even considered in this application . Above all , land use is what matters to the viability of a trout stream. Galli ' s studies show that once watershed imperviousness reaches 12-15%, there is a high likelihood of losing all cold water plants and animals . So stormwater systems MUST be designed to meet the thermal results you would find if land use were kept to that imperviousness percentage. 8 . It appears from the paperwork , that the wetland offered as a "banked" replacement may not be eligible . a. WCA Rules 8420.0740 Procedures Subpart 1 . C. "After July 1 , 1993 , wetlands restored or created without PRIOR government unit approval as specified in this part are not eligible for deposit into the wetland bank. " Subpart 1 . G. " . . . in order to deposit wetland acres into the wetland bank, the depositor must notify the local governmental unit in writing, before restoration or creations , that the proposed wetland is specifically designated for deposit into the wetland bank. " The LGU also has to mail the notification to others , including the public , and based on the LGU technical panel and comments received , the LGU determines the likelihood restoration will be successful . Then, the LGU advises the applicant whether to proceed. Lacking any evidence to the contrary in the packet you mailed out , it appears there has been back- dating of paperwork, to allow for retroactive approval of this wetland for banking. On Mesenbrink' s Wetland Banking Plan Application, he wrote the restoration project will begin on 4/1/93 , and be completed on 6/1/93 . Then he signed and dated the application 8-4-94. John T. Kane signed as the LGU official on the form, and dated it 8-16-94 . On the bottom, "FOR LGU USE" , under "Date Banking Plan Approved" , he dated it "8-16- 94" , then scribbled it out , and wrote in "4-1-93" . That would imply that the application Mesenbrink dated on 8-4-94 was submitted, considered, and approved, more than a year before he filled it out ! On the Wetland Bank Request to Deposit form, Kane wrote that the deposit was given preliminary approval on 8-16-94 . Perhaps there' s a logical explanation. . . some missing preliminary paperwork? Otherwise , it appears like an attempt to circumvent the state ' s wetland banking rules , with retroactive approval , which makes it ineligible. b. If it was approved on 4-1-93 , the only way the wetland is eligible for banking credit is if it meets the criteria in Rules 8420.0740 , Subp. B. "Wetland replacement credits approved before July 1 , 1993 , are eligible for deposit into the state wetland banking system if the wetland replacement credit was authorized by a public agency specifically for a wetland bank that has been approved by the commissioner. Also, wetland replacement credits that have been deposited in a local government unit bank before July 1 , 1993 . . .are eligible for deposit . . . if the deposit meets all the criteria in parts 8420. 0700 to 8420.0760 based on a site inspection and review by the Board of Water and Soil Resources and the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources . " 9 . Under 8420 . 0720 , Principles of Wetland Banking , Subp. 2 , it says the state wetland banking system may only be used for replacement of filled wetlands when the LGU determines the applicant has complied with all the sequencing requirements of 8420 . 0520 . It ' s not clear that ' s been done . And because it is a wetland adjacent to , or within a thousand feet of , a state designated trout stream , written documentation is required of an on- site sequencing determination . We 've seen none . Wetland banking is the last option under sequencing. Also , under 8420 . 0540 , subp 4 , Location of replacement wetlands : "Replacement wetlands should be located as close to the impacted wet land as possible , preferably in the same watershed" . The replacement you approved is not in the same watershed . . . the Eagle Creek watershed . It is in the Credit River watershed . The plan you approved will fill the existing wetlands , destroying the crucial groundwater recharge and filtering function of these natural sponges , which are so important to the continued health of this increasingly burdened stream . 10 . Under 8420 . 0720 , Subp. 4 Eligible wetlands for banking, it says : "Modification or conversion of nondegraded naturally occurring wetlands from one type to another are not eligible for enrollment in a statewide wetlands bank . " The Mesenbrink application says it converts a PEMC Type 3 wetland to a PEM-F Type 4 wetland. 11 . The applicant failed to follow 8420 . 0520 , Subp. 3 C( 1 ) , which says that the alternate plans submitted should include the no-build alternative . Alternate 2 is not really a "no-build" alternative at all . The applicant would still grade and build a 151 , 480 SF outside storage area to surround the wetlands , and build a detention pond . How could you consider this a "no build" option? The applicant also failed to consider alternate sites that could be used to accomplish the stated purpose of storing construction equipment and machinery. It is feasible and prudent to do so , since the company must be storing its equipment elsewhere at the present time , while this replacement plan is being considered. Surely the owner was aware of the limitations of this site when it was purchased ; why should the People of Minnesota degrade the value of their resources to make the owner ' s investment more profitable to him? Perhaps it would be cheaper to store the equipment here . But that ' s not a good enough reason. Please review WCA Rules 8420 . 0105 SCOPE : " In addition to the provisions of this chapter , governmental decisions on draining and filling of wetlands are subject to Minnesota Statutes , chapters 116B and 116D, which provide that an action which is likely to have material adverse effects on natural resources must not be allowed if there us a feasible and prudent alternative consistent with the requirements of the public health , safety, and welfare and the state' s paramount concern for the protection of its natural resources . Economic considerations alone do not justify adversely effective actions . " 13 . Beckius reported in his wetland delineation that there is already filling of wetlands occurring . The applicant should be forced to remove the illegal fill , which is a violation of Sec . 404 of the Clean Water Act . 14 . The LGU should reject the proposed Alternates as unacceptable . and return them to the applicant for more work , which should , at least , incorporate protection for the sensitive water resources in the project area . . . including thermal protection . . . and specify how stormwater impacts will be addressed in relation to Eagle Creek . The LGU should also reject the offering of the wetland replacement , because it is ineligible for banking in the first place . In summary; the applicant argues that the proposed use of the wetlands for a parking lot and storage area is the "highest and best use" of the property. But that use conflicts with, and will likely degrade , the existing "highest and best use" of Eagle Creek, which has been designated already by the state . The state designated use is Class 1B and Class 2A, under State Water Quality Rules Chapter 7050 . . .meaning the stream and its tributaries must meet federal drinking water quality standards , and maintain a coldwater fishery environment , respectively. "Private property rights" may not be an issue . In May 1994 , the U. S . Supreme Court affirmed "states ' rights" to protect the value of a state designated use of a water resource . The court ruled 7-2 that Washington state was within its right , when it mandated that a company must comply with both state water quantity and water quality requirements , so as not to degrade the value of the designated use of a waterway. In the particular case before the court , the value was that of a coldwater trout fishery. The wetlands aren ' t ' encumbering ' the site , as the applicant states . . . the inappropriate proposed use , as submitted , will be an encumbrance on the existing value of the public natural resources of Eagle Creek. . . unless shown otherwise . It is not even addressed by the applicant , let alone mitigated in some way by assurances of protection for the public ' s water resources , both in the ground , and in the stream. Under statute , " the waters of the state" belong to the public . . . in this case , the groundwater , and the trout waters . It is on behalf of the public , that we are involved . We agree with water law, which says landowners have a right to fair use . . . just so long as the landowner ' s use doesn ' t degrade the quality, or the availability, of the water , or degrade the value of its state designated use . Increasing imperviousness in the watershed of Eagle Creek will probably be the single most important factor in its death . Filling wetlands in the watershed , without at least replacing them in the same watershed , will certainly hasten it along . Studies we 've gathered from scientists and county surface water management specialists in Ontario , British Columbia , Washington state , Wisconsin , Georgia , Maryland , Virginia , and from the Minnesota River Assessment Project , show urban development and increased imperviousness in the watersheds of small urban streams and wetlands will measurably degrade their aquatic function , even at low levels of increased imperviousness . The Savage AUAR shows the minimum level of imperviousness under its AUAR plan will be 27%! Please re-read the comments we submitted to the Shakopee Planning Commission last fall , on the Shakopee Comprehensive Stormwater Plan , for more details on the other impacts of the proposals . The state Board of Water and Soil Resources says Scott County has already lost more than 80% of its wetlands . In Shakopee , there used to be trout below the Dairy Queen , and in the Mill Pond , and even behind what is now Murphy' s Landing. Those places don' t have trout now, because urban development degraded the water quality. You 've only got one more chance . We have to work together to save this last , best place . Thank you for your consideration in this matter . Sincerely, Richar Foushee , Twin Cities Trout Unlimited (h) 645-4945 (w) 379-3829 ,a k � J Lij LD I ✓ I ' <L Sr INGS LA. fT, ,,� I '',►111 w_ -F 00 Lij 5 IUIII��4:1� Till, W m �)� ''�1•� ` i,,I II it � �{i^3° 4., •- � �1• LLJ a S •y. �._- "' oll� YT �.;til1l_ffl�Ii� [ - J i f •1 V ���;�iy. 4111,,. �k �Itn s �R __ 1 �11A�� O �r„�y� ii 4a •'�iih�'�•� 1 L(L:.`r 1 I��/pp;1.:.,-m_i`. -T{►�---_— � I Y:i.i'��� �� e � I .��II,III�'.�.�I(K�4i,'h `,f ��ill,(Itjy'` l,j,,,,/ •� A1,UIH L1.1 N (-�lulp I m +' Ni, e mr Siva I 1, • 11I`�8. � I ;,'•�;�' t' N ', 7�IIIIIIII�I{' _ CID ' 2 :�III:IM1 A M , • 1 N + I�;�p//yp ti I �q ;I �II*I1� I'' h� �� •!u�fl;arq��, , � �1lII 1/ ly ' � 1 ,'I, T �J�j;��1l�I, I � 1,.�y�, 7,,� •`�..> 1I �'',�i; �, 1��t� ,1�(�a I I iii>=tio�— / 2� 'M1' '��M1III1�, 6i'''C:,.I��,�,{•! '�hhaA•1161i. :.h141j(•�Adiplll„u'I,II� - I ,'I IG _ I � W 4��,y��� "�4.�•llldlll..'b'IV �y '�V`uN ��'��� � � 'a�I �h� ul� �y, �� , � 2- �' ,_hy,.Il J •� !h; h,.': \ t i, �'yi�l I A�i> " �"e�al� / � i � 11 ia�fii fir'%1R+•,_ %`-�x�Ri •w: `'`ti(ti Iy;y:.� -,g INIII �IfI��' IIII � V�y',�' `J f CO " RCP 131h AVE 6 42" RCP 1 2 5 ° STORAGE ED C71AMIEL 3 ,01 t 21 N TJ�TA / w ST \ W19 30" RCP c rl5rnct sr i 6 n URT B01(ING SPRfNGS 18 TWO STAGE OUTLET = 24-W 01souF66 TV OtSMAACK TO STOW rV W ittw,w 7f3T01 EAOU oa21t 8 so T 27 eff I6 ef: Ss tee— i5 1!.f to t.: 4 eft 4% is eft% SPR/NGS � 15 1 6 Ro. SHAKOPEE 1990 POP . 11 , 739 0 0 ' SAVAGE a ra 1990 POP . 9906 tJ y�GUIgE 11` Er PO 16 f13ilh ST. NtCO(( OR R ' oR 14 LEGEND 0 e � a�S� SUHrATERSHED BOUNDARY z W L ✓ 12 SUBTATERSHED IDENTIFICATION 77 \� \ '77� � CORPORATE BOUNDARY DIRECTION OF FLOW �j ID+O REOUMED STCRACE PEAR 013OIARCE MR 1.0. ( sl 2 ]•3 EOUAMIES •tTt1 1 L 7 T7T.0 , 3 0•3 1 137.0 1 T.1 1 771.] f i 7 6.2 EQUALIZES •IT14 t 771•] 1 IS.i 4 710.0 10 771.1 +e• n• • x. .me 1�// a S.s 1 776.1 it 0.2 1 155•5 t2 ]T-T 15 T37.7 K+c '• r'„ 1] fi.] 21 773.0 1S 71.0 26 T77.S I1 12.6 73 727.3 20 2.1 56 721 21 2.0 S• 716.1 w.'.•�• . EAGLE CREEK WATERSHED STLUT - - � ..� e - _ -• ALTEPNATIYE -- The following MA?IAGEIIENT PRACTICES shall be followed, to the maximum extent practicable. in order to minimize :he adverse effects of these discharges on the aquatic environment. Failure to comply with these practices may be :ause for thu District Engineer to recommend, or the Division Engineer to take. discretionary authority to regulate activity on an individual or regional haais puraunnt to Section 330.8 of thin part. 1. Discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United Statea sha114be avoided or minimized through the use of other practical alternatives. 2. Discharges in apowning arena during spawning aeaaona shall be avoided. 3. Discharges shall not routrict or impede the movem&nt of aquatic apeciea indigenous to the waters or the passage. of normal or expected high flown or cause the relocation of the water (unless the primary purpose of the f i l l is to iwpound watera). 4. If the discharge creates an impoundment of water, adverse impecta on the aquatic system caused by thu accelerated passage of water and/or the reatrietion of -its flow ahall be minimized_ 5. Discharge in wetland areas .ahall be avoided. _1� 6, Heavy equipment worsting in wetlands shall be placed on mats. 7. Discharge into breeding areas for migratory waterfowl shad be avoided. 8. All temporary fills shall be removed in their entirety. z Z --------------- ------------------------------- ---------------------- Nationuide permits do not obviate the need to obtain other federal, state or local authorisations required by low, do not grant any property righta or excLuaive privileges, do not authorize any injury to Chu property or rights of others, nor do they authorize Interference with any existing or proposed federal project. --------------------------------------------------- ------—_ ------------------------------------------------ Hodification. Suspension or Revocation of Hati.onwide Permital The Chief of Engineers may modify, auopend. or revoke nationwide permits in accordance with the relevant procedures of 33 CF11 325.7. Such authority includes, but is not limited to: .adding individual,• regional. or nationwide conditions; revoking authorization for a category of activities or a category of waters by requiring individual or regional perwita; or revoking an authorization on a case—by–case basis. This authority is not limited to concerns for the aquatic environment a is the discretionary authority in section MO. 1 � •sa��5 Pao?njl asp, �o ssaosr> z o asaE ano ust,z ssaZ ;o uoTa a�'":poa as.:a�pE 7e�t sgrs .o ssol sL� sasn,� Dst}� (sptreT�an $�-Fn?auF) sao�^S paazvII aty� o s.:a�En L- ZZ? Sa=m=ot;znw r7lp •anoga pads?L ssasE st;z 30 OZU7 j1--paarm -CL? xo paSr- o a2=mlz5?p ;VaCo--d at,, asnQOag a?T'47 d_ a0 -aHcu Sq P7+3 s�'�''► Dam asat `ss:.?.'i�•'l►.p=�•zto=� ate.;. °� 2—.�Sa-�•7j t �p ae;a71+ — SAY 0 t RYE= » st�- Y� cC08a �Y:s C^� •saris "cJrc2� .��niz�a�=� 00 Ta�a- �o l3,'2Q'ri Set 'PoT�rZ�P'L a.=s �.s'e o�.� _sp�Yjsa.r,.p•av �n� sosu+ P'�R a�sy a� S � , rP�►�a++ 'CTt Ste"-,Y--.�.15 'I -sst� ata 30 (r¢ Taman aaa02 z?Y paw) '=S) DYh3?3 axy a" + '1Y?C'aa � off. Rc"�ori ;7"30L" prC) a.27w�h �$ a — sx•-r--=S S .=0= ID V'� o9St '�FTp ---.�— ., ut�aS •sb 'TI73 •uTaJ•P p7non S�]':sao�o3d 000'01 HY3= $r'Z Jo S�Jt Qt a-TP 7Lc r; �T. .:ad opjnDO;]zB =T .11=0 nolTt 1�] HBO}7T'i IIo0 TYBOSB?� C� +0D�4 zoo �anuTavoo ) 01] yuaZ]ZPuoO iYua, / I 'All 7 �? HYDROLOGIC SUMMARY FOR SUBWATERSHEDS WITHIN THE EAGLE CREEK SUBWATERSHED SUBWATERSHED EC-1 This subwatershed is 7.4 acres in area with a composite curve number of 70 and the time of concentration is 15 minutes. The allowable discharge rate from this subwatershed is 1 cfs. For the 100-year, 24-hour duration storm event, approximately 1 acre foot of storage is required. This subwatershed has approximately 1 acre-foot of storage available within the borders in the form of natural wetlands or depressions. SUBWATERSHED EC-2 This subwatershed is 12.4 acres in area with a composite curve number of 70 and the time of concentration is 20 minutes. The allowable peak discharge from this subwatershed is limited to 1 cfs. In the event of a 100-year, 24-hour duration storm, approximately 3 acre-feet of storage is required. This subwatershed has approximately 3 acre feet of storage available in the form of natural wetlands or depressions. SUBWATERSHED EC-3 This subwatershed is 73 acres in area with a composite curve number of 70 and the time of concentration is 15 minutes. The allowable peak discharge limit from this subwatershed is 9 cfs. For the 100-year, 24-hour duration storm event, the required storage is OS acre-feet. The available storage within the subwatershed in the form of natural wetlands or depressions is approximately OS acre feel SUBWATERSHED EC-4 This subwatershed is 6.6 acres in area with a composite curve number of 85 and the time of concentration of 15 minutes. The allowable peak discharge rate from this subwatershed is limited to 4 cfs. For a 100-year, 24-hour duration storm event, approximately 4 acre feet of storage will be required. This subwatershed has approximately 4 acre-feet of storage available in the form of natural wetlands or depressions. SUBWATERSHED EC-5 This subwatershed is 28.1 acres in area with a composite curve number of 70 and the time of concentration is 25 minutes. The allowable peak discharge rate from this subwatershed is 3 cfs. The discharge limit for this subwatershed will be maintained for a 100-year, 24-hour duration storm event with 4.4 acre-feet of storage required. This subwatershed has approximately 4.4 acres of available storage in the form of natural wetlands or depressions. Note: Discharge rates of Subwatersheds EC-1 through EC-8 are established in the "Joint Powers Agreement between the City of Shakopee and the City of Savage related to stormwater management planning within the Eagle Creek Watershed," which is pending approval. 34 Memo To: Wetland File From: Dave Nummer, Staff Engineer Date: June 1, 1995 Subject: Response to Trout Unlimited Letter Below are responses to the concerns raised in the letter from Richard Foushee, Trout Unlimited dated May 3, 1995 (see attached). 1. a) Yes, this area is labeled subwatershed 2 in the stormwater report. b) Yes, this area is labeled subwatershed 2 in the stormwater report, however, a site inspection reveals that this subwatershed has no natural outlet, and does not naturally drain to other subwatersheds, nor does it accept runoff from other subwatersheds. C) This area is listed as"highly susceptible" in the geologic atlas, however, all of the area below the bluff line from Savage to Belle Plain is included in this category. The rating is based on the sandy, permeable soils in this area, and not on the location of the Trout Stream. 2. The approval or denial of a wetland replacement plan does not relieve a property owner from acquiring other permits (such as Corp of Engineers). Our approval process does not supersede other jurisdictions, nor does it disallow activities which are under the permitting authority of other agencies. 3. Staff agrees that the application does not qualify for the streamlined application process. This application was processed under the normal procedure with the timelines as identified in the WCA rules. a) In regard to the legal notice in the Shakopee Valley News, the City Attorney has indicated that a specific timeframe for the comment period is NOT required by law, and that the notice which was published meets the requirements of a general public notice. b) The statute requires a 30 day comment period. The decision by the City Council was made more than 30 days after the publication in the EQB Monitor. 4. Waiting to hear from DNR 5. There is no natural outflow from this subwatershed, hence no overflow provisions or outlet structures are needed. 6. a) The wetland replacement plan is in conformance with the Stormwater management plan because less that I CFS will be discharged since this is a landlocked area that has no natural outlet. b) The grading plan for the Ryan site includes a stormwater detention pond which will provide rate control for a 100 year storm event, in accordance with the Stormwater management Plan. 7. The approval of a CUP is ongoing with the property for which it is issued, regardless of ownership. In addition, the need for or the lack of a CUP does not impact the decision on a wetland replacement. If a CUP is needed for the intended use of the property, then the property owner will be required to obtain appropriate approvals. The approval of the wetland replacement plan does not relieve the property owner from the requirements of other permits or approvals. a) As previously stated, the detention pond is adequate for a 100 year storm, and has been designed in accordance with the Stormwater Management Plan. b) The wetland Conservation Act does not control the location or number of outside storage tanks. This issue should be reviewed in the CUP process for allowing outside storage in this manner. Since a CUP has already been issued for this property, there is no mechanism in the wetland conservation act for denying a replacement plan based on the future construction of storage tanks. C) Since the subwatershed does not have a natural outlet, thermal pollution should not be a problem. d) The landuse has been established by the Comprehensive Plan, and is not possible to change within the confines of the Wetland Conservation Act. 8. Staff has confirmed with the Board of Water and Soil resources that the wetland bank credits do exist, and are ample for this replacement. If the credits were improperly obtained, that issue should be taken up with the BWSR. 9. Sequencing was reviewed by the Technical evaluation Panel, and the TEP felt that sequencing was adequately addressed. a) The WCA states that replacement within the same watershed is preferable, but not required. The approval of the replacement in the Credit River watershed is in compliance with the law. 10. See comment number 8. 11. Option #2 is a no build option insofar as there would not be any building above and beyond that already approved. 12. There is no comment #12. 13. Any fill already placed in the wetland would require either restoring the wetland, or obtaining an approved replacement plan. Since the replacement plan is being pursued, no restoration action has been ordered. 14. No comment needed. ONSENT MEMO TO: DENNIS KRAFT, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: BRUCE LONEY, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR SUBJECT: 1995 DUMP TRUCK DATE: JUNE 1, 1995 INTRODUCTION Staff is requesting authorization to purchase a snowplow, wing and sander attachments for the 1995 Ford L8000 Single Axle Dump Truck. BACKGROUND On January 17, 1995 the Shakopee City Council authorized the purchase of a new single axle dump truck. The purchase was through Hennepin County Purchasing contract and the low bid was awarded to Lakeland Ford Truck. The total price for the dump truck was $45,220.47. Also, on March 21, 1995 the Shakopee City Council authorized the purchase of the Dump Body Hoist Assembly for the above truck for$10,930.10. This was also purchased through Hennepin County Purchasing. Low bid was awarded to Crysteel Tuck Equipment. These purchases come to a total of$56,150.57. The 1995 Public Works Street Department budget contains $70,000 in the Capital Equipment Fund for this purchase. The budgeted amount included the snow plow, wing and sander attachments, which are not included in the Hennepin County bid. Staff has obtained quotes from 2 main suppliers for this equipment and quotes are summarized in Attachment No. 1. The low quote for the plow and wing is MacQueen Equipment of St. Paul for a total of $13,152.75. And Cyrsteel Truck Equipment of Fridley had the low quote on the sander for$2,086.20. Crysteel was also the low bid for the box on the Dump Truck (Hennepin County Bid). The Dump Truck is currently at the Crysteel facility getting the box and hydraulics, etc., installed. It would be to the City's advantage to have Crysteel install the sander at the same time. In regards to the plow/wing attachments, MacQueen Equipment handles Falls Equipment. This is the type the City has bought in the past for the last 3 trucks. Staff recommends buying Falls because of their proven strength and ability to remove both light and heavy snow falls. Falls Equipment's was also the low bidder. Adding the total quotes, tax included, from MacQueen Equipment for$13,152.75 for the plow/wing attachments, the spinner type sander from Crysteel Truck Equipment for $2,086.20, truck and box for $56,150.57 results in a total expenditure of$71,389.52, compared to the budgeted amount of$70,000.00. Reasons for being over budget are 1) adding Anti-lock brake system(ABS) brakes at the cost of$1,600.00 and 2) auto leveling system at the cost of$710.00 both of which were requested by staff and authorized purchases by Council at previous Council meetings. Staff requested these options for the following reasons: 1) ABS (safety) when driving in all weather conditions. Taking advantage of today's technology. In the future, ABS will probably be mandatory on all large trucks. 2) Auto leveling system is replacing added leaf springs that would have been installed, as they were on our previous bought trucks. Auto leveling will keep the truck level with an air bag system when wing assembly is on or off the trucks right side. It keeps the truck balanced for safer year round operation and will reduce the wear and tear on the braking and suspension systems on the truck. ALTERNATIVES 1. Purchase the plow/wing and attachments from MacQueen Equipment for the total of $13,152.75 and the spinner type sander from Crysteel for the total of $2,086.20 (total $15,238.95). 2. Obtain additional quotes. 3. Reject all quotes and do not authorize any purchase. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 because the bids received are acceptible for the types of equipment bid. ACTION REQUESTED Move to authorize the purchase of the snow plow/wing assembly from MacQueen Equipment for the price of$13,152.75 and the purchase of the spinner type sander assembly from Crysteel Truck Equipment for the price of$2,086.20 for a total of $15,238.95 including sales tax. ATTACHMENT NO. 1 MacQueen Equipment Make - Falls Falls 312R Plow Falls 41B Hitch Falls TAH9 Patrol Wing $12,350.00 802.75 $13,152.75 LOW BID Crysteel Make - Monroe MP-41R-12-1 Set Husting Hitch#46B DFPW- 9'H.D. Patrol Wing $12,400.00 806.00 13,206.00 SANDER MacQueen Equipment Make - Hiniker Tailgate spinner type sander and control $1,993.00 129.55 tax $2,122.55 LOW BID Crysteel Make - Monroe MS-966-RF-DD Tailgate Spinner type sander and control $1990.00 96.20 tax $2,086.20 Total wing/plow and sander: MacQueen Equipment $13,527.75 Crysteel 2,068.20 $15,238.95 CiONSENT M E M O R A N D U M TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL A FROM: Karen Marty, City Attorney'/w DATE: May 31, 1995 RE: Jaspers Title Registration Proceeding BACKGROUND: The City has been served with papers in a title registration action relating to portions of the property within the Milwaukee Manor plat . As a result of the recent plat, the City has drainage and utility easements, a Planned Unit Development Agreement, a Developer' s Agreement, and an Escrow and Payment Agreement on the relevant property. We also have an older watermain easement over a portion of the property. These interests of the City need to be retained when the property is registered. The applicants for the title registration have agreed to this . Their attorney has prepared an acceptable Stipulation for signature by the City. It provides that the title to the property shall be subject to our listed interests . In return, the City agrees not to contest the registration. ALTERNATIVES : 1 . Approve the Stipulation. 2 . Decline to approve the Stipulation, and file an answer to contest the title registration. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the appropriate City officials to enter into a Stipulation regarding the title registration for certain land within the Milwaukee Manor First Addition. [22CCL] 3 M E M O R A N D U M TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Karen Marty, City Attorne, ' DATE : May 30, 1995 RE : Shooting Range License BACKGROUND: The Police Department shooting range is located on land owned by Valley Green Business Park. The City has had a lease on this land since 1983 . The lease has expired, and Valley Green has asked the City to enter into a new license . The City Attorney drafted the attached License, which has been approved by counsel for Valley Green. This License will allow us to continue the shooting range in the same location through September 1, 1997, at no cost . ALTERNATIVES : 1 . Enter into the License . 2 . Recommend changes in the License, and direct staff to negotiate the changes with Valley Green. 3 . Stop using this site for a shooting range . RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the appropriate City officials to enter into a License with Valley Green Business Park for a shooting range site . [22CCL] SHOOTING RANGE LICENSE THIS LICENSE made this day of 1995 , by and between Valley Green Business Park Limited Partnership, a Minnesota Limited Partnership (the Licensor) , with offices at 5240 Valley Industrial Boulevard South, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379, and the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, a municipal corporation (the Licensee) , with offices at 129 S . Holmes Street, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 . 1 . Grant . In consideration of the payment of One Dollar and the agreements herein contained, Licensor grants Licensee the exclusive right, privilege and permission to use the land described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof (the Premises) . 2 . Use . Licensee shall use this land solely for a police shooting range, and related uses . 3 . Term. The term of this License shall begin immediately and shall terminate on September 1, 1997, unless sooner terminated or extended as hereinafter provided. 4 . Maintenance . Upon commencement of this License, Licensee acknowledges that the Premises are in good order, condition and repair. Licensee shall, at Licensee' s sole cost and expense, maintain the Premises during the term of this License . Upon the expiration or sooner termination of this License, Licensee shall remove all waste materials and debris, including spent bullets, other ammunition, casings, and empty cartridges . At that time Licensee shall restore the Premises to the same condition as they were in as of January 7, 1983 , the date when the Licensee began to lease the Premises as a shooting range, reasonable wear and tear and damage by the elements excepted. S . Permits and Approvals . Licensee shall obtain all permits and approvals required by local, county, state, and federal laws and regulations applicable to the operations of Licensee on the Premises, and shall conduct its operations on the Premises in full compliance with such laws and regulations . 6 . Insurance . During the term of this License, Licensee shall maintain, in full force, comprehensive general public liability insurance covering its use of the Premises, in the amount of $600 , 000 . Licensee shall name Licensor as an additional insured under Licensee' s insurance policy. 7 . Environmental Compliance . Licensee covenants, represents and warrants to Licensor, that it will not use or permit the Premises to be used for the generating, transporting, treating, storage, manufacture, emission of, or disposal of any hazardous materials except as a direct result of Licensee' s use of the premises as authorized in paragraph 2 above; and that its operations on the Premises will not violate any federal , state, or local law, regulation, ordinance, or requirement governing hazardous materials . Licensee shall commit no waste upon the Premises and shall not permit any nuisance to exist upon the Premises . 8 . Indemnity. Licensee hereby indemnifies and holds harmless Licensor from and against any and all losses, claims, suits, damages and liabilities of any kind arising out of the operations of Licensee on the Premises, including the environmental compliances required above . 9 . waiver of Liability. Licensee, as a material part of the consideration to be rendered to Licensor under this License, hereby waives all claims against Licensor for all damage or injury to persons or property of any kind in, upon or about the Premises from any cause whatsoever arising at any time except for claims arising from the gross negligence or willful misconduct of Licensor, its partners, and the officers, agents, employees, contractors, licensees (other than Licensee) and invitees of Licensor or its partners; and Licensee will defend, indemnify and hold Licensor harmless from all damage or injury to persons or property arising from the use of the Premises by Licensee, or from the failure of Licensee to keep the Premises in good condition and repair, as herein provided. 10 . Compliance with Laws . Licensee shall not commit or permit any act to be performed on the Premises or omission to occur which will be in violation of any statute, regulation, or ordinance of any governmental body or which will be in violation of any insurance policy carried on the Premises by Licensor. Licensee agrees to defend, indemnify and hold Licensor harmless against all costs, expenses, liabilities, losses, fines, penalties, claims, and demands arising out of any violation or act of default of Licensee in the conditions and covenants of this License . 11 . Condemnation or Sale. During the term of this License, Licensor may continue to develop the Premises for sale, including the platting or other subdivision of the Premises and the granting or dedication of public or private easements for any purpose . If all or a portion of the Premises is condemned, sold, or made subject to an easement incompatible with the use by the Licensee, Licensor shall give 90 days written notice of such event to Licensee and this License shall terminate as to that portion of the Premises at the expiration of said 90 days . If the remainder of the Premises is not sufficient to support Licensee' s use, in the sole determination of Licensee, Licensee may terminate this License upon 30 days' written notice . 2 12 . Termination . Either party may terminate this License, with or without cause, by giving written notice thereof to the other party, specifying the effective date of such termination, which shall not be less than 90 days after the date of such notice . 13 . Holding Over. Should Licensee continue to occupy the Premises after expiration of the Term, or after termination of the Term under the provisions hereof, such occupation shall be from month to month on the terms and conditions of this License appropriate to a monthly term, and in no event from year to year or for any longer term without Licensor' s written agreement . Any holding over after the expiration of this License shall not operate to renew this License . 14 . Access by Licensor. Licensor, or its duly authorized agents, or Licensor' s mortgagee, or its duly authorized agents, may enter the Premises upon prior notification of Licensee, at all reasonable times for the purpose of inspecting the Premises, showing same to prospective purchasers or tenants, or making any repairs, alterations or improvements which Licensor, in its sole discretion, deems necessary. 15 . Transfer. Licensee shall not sell, assign, or in any way transfer any of its rights in this License, or permit this License to be transferred without the prior written consent of Licensor. 16 . Default and Remedies . a . Events of Default . The occurrence of the following shall be considered an event of default under this License : Licensee defaults in any of the covenants, agreements, stipulations or conditions herein contained, and such default is not cured within ten (10) days after written notice from Licensor to Licensee describing said default and the required remedy. b. Remedies in Default . Upon the occurrence of an event of default as set forth in this Section the Licensor may, at its option at any time thereafter, give written notice to Licensee specifying such event of default and stating that this License shall expire and terminate on the date specified in such notice, which shall be at least ten (10) days after the giving of such notice; and Licensee shall thereupon cease its use of the Premises and remove all of its property from the Premises; provided that if the default cannot be cured within said ten (10) days and Licensee is using its best efforts to cure the default then this License shall not terminate but the rights of Licensee under this License shall be suspended until the default is cured, and such suspension shall not extend the Term. 3 C . Cumulative Rights . No right or remedy herein conferred upon or reserved to Licensor is intended to be exclusive of any other right or remedy herein or by law provided, but each shall be cumulative and in addition to every other right or remedy given herein. d. Effect of Waiver or Forbearance . No waiver by Licensor of any breach by Licensee of any of its obligations, agreements or covenants hereunder shall be a waiver of any subsequent breach or of any obligation, agreement or covenant, nor shall any forbearance by Licensor of its rights and remedies with respect to such or any subsequent breach constitute such a waiver. No waiver, change, modification or discharge by either party hereto of any provision in this License shall be deemed to have been made or shall be effective unless expressed in writing. 17 . Subordination. Licensor warrants that as of the date hereof there are no liens on the Premise other than for real estate taxes and special assessments . This License shall be subordinate to any mortgage or mortgages which at any time hereafter may be placed upon the Premises by Licensor, its successors or assigns, and to any replacements, renewals, or extensions thereof, and Licensee agrees, at any time, on demand, to execute and deliver such documents as may be required to subordinate this License to the lien of any such mortgage or mortgages . Licensee further agrees to modify provisions of the License as reasonably required by Licensor' s mortgage lenders, provided that no such modification will materially increase Licensee' s obligations under this License. If Licensee objects to the modifications, then this License shall terminate 30 days after such written objection. 18 . Miscellaneous Provisions . a. Entire Agreement . This License and the exhibits attached hereto embody the entire understanding between the parties and supersede all prior understandings and agreements related to the subject matter. This License cannot be amended, altered or modified, and no provisions can be waived, except by a written instrument executed by the party affected. b. Benefit . This License shall bind and insure to the benefit of the parties and their respective successors and permitted assigns . C . Notices . Except as otherwise provided in this License, all notices to be given under this License shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given, if mailed, certified mail , postage prepaid, United States mail, to the party to be notified at its address as follows : 4 To Licensee : City Administrator City Hall 129 S . Holmes St . Shakopee, MN 55379 To Licensor: Valley Green Business Park Limited Partnership c/o Allianz Investment Corporation 55 Greens Farm Road P.O. Box 5160 Westport, CT 06881-5160 Attn. : Real Estate Department with copies to : Richard Peterson Best & Flanagan Suite 4000 601 Second Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55402 Valley Green Business Park Limited Partnership 5240 Valley Industrial Boulevard South Shakopee, MN 55379 Any party may change its address by giving notice in the aforesaid manner to the other party, and ten (10) days after giving such notice, such party' s address shall be deemed to have been changed. d. Heading and Captions . The headings and captions of the paragraphs and subparagraphs of this License are inserted for convenience of reference only and shall not constitute a part of this License or a limitation on the scope of any paragraph or subparagraph. e . Severability. Whenever possible, each provision of this License shall be interpreted in such manner as to be effective and valid under applicable law, but if any provision of this License is held to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable under any applicable law or rule in any jurisdiction, such provision will be ineffective only to the extent of such invalidity, illegality, or unenforceability, without invalidating the remainder of this License in such jurisdiction or any provisions hereof in any other jurisdiction. f . Counterparts . This License may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same document . 5 g. Governing Law. This License shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have to set their hands on the day and year first above written. VALLEY GREEN BUSINESS PARK CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MN LIMITED PARTNERSHIP By By Mayor By City Administrator By City Clerk [22CCL] 6 u I° M E M O R A N D U M TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL I FROM: Karen Marty, City Attorney''r �� DATE : May 30, 1995 RE : Burning Site License BACKGROUND: The Public Works Department needs a new site for burning diseased wood and other burnable debris . Valley Green Business Park has offered the City a site at no cost, and asked that the City enter into a license . The City Attorney drafted the attached License, which has been approved by counsel for Valley Green. This License will allow us to use the site for a burning site through September 1, 1997, at no cost . ALTERNATIVES : 1 . Enter into the License . 2 . Recommend changes in the License, and direct staff to negotiate the changes with Valley Green. 3 . Direct staff to find another site for a burning site. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the appropriate City officials to enter into a License with Valley Green Business Park for a burning site . [22CCL] BURNING SITE LICENSE THIS LICENSE made this day of 1995, by and between Valley Green Business Park Limited Partnership, a Minnesota Limited Partnership (the Licensor) , with offices at 5240 Valley Industrial Boulevard South, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 , and the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, a municipal corporation (the Licensee) , with offices at 129 S . Holmes Street, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 . 1 . Grant . In consideration of the payment of One Dollar and the agreements herein contained, Licensor grants Licensee the exclusive right, privilege and permission to use the land described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof (the Premises) . 2 . Use . Licensee shall use this land solely for a burning site, and related uses . 3 . Term. The term of this License shall begin immediately and shall terminate on September 1, 1997, unless sooner terminated or extended as hereinafter provided. 4 . Maintenance . Upon commencement of this License, Licensee acknowledges that the Premises are in good order, condition and repair. Licensee shall, at Licensee' s sole cost and expense, maintain the Premises during the term of this License . Upon the expiration or sooner termination of this License, Licensee shall remove all waste materials and debris, and restore the Premises to the same condition as they were in at the commencement of this License, reasonable wear and tear and damage by the elements excepted. 5 . Permits and Approvals . Licensee shall obtain all permits and approvals required by local, county, state, and federal laws and regulations applicable to the operations of Licensee on the Premises, and shall conduct its operations on the Premises in full compliance with such laws and regulations . 6 . Insurance . During the term of this License, Licensee shall maintain, in full force, comprehensive general public liability insurance covering its use of the Premises, in the amount of $600, 000 . Licensee shall name Licensor as an additional insured under Licensee' s insurance policy. 7 . Environmental Compliance . Licensee covenants, represents and warrants to Licensor, that it will not use or permit the Premises to be used for the generating, transporting, treating, storage, manufacture, emission of, or disposal of any hazardous materials except as a direct result of Licensee' s use of the premises as authorized in paragraph 2 above; and that its operations on the Premises will not violate any federal, state, or local law, regulation, ordinance, or requirement governing hazardous materials . Licensee shall commit no waste upon the Premises and shall not permit any nuisance to exist upon the Premises . 8 . Indemnity. Licensee hereby indemnifies and holds harmless Licensor from and against any and all losses, claims, suits, damages and liabilities of any kind arising out of the operations of Licensee on the Premises, including the environmental compliances required above . 9 . Waiver of Liability. Licensee, as a material part of the consideration to be rendered to Licensor under this License, hereby waives all claims against Licensor for all damage or injury to persons or property of any kind in, upon or about the Premises from any cause whatsoever arising at any time except for claims arising from the gross negligence or willful misconduct of Licensor, its partners, and the officers, agents, employees, contractors, licensees (other than Licensee) and invitees of Licensor or its partners; and Licensee will defend, indemnify and hold Licensor harmless from all damage or injury to persons or property arising from the use of the Premises by Licensee, or from the failure of Licensee to keep the Premises in good condition and repair, as herein provided. 10 . Compliance with Laws . Licensee shall not commit or permit any act to be performed on the Premises or omission to occur which will be in violation of any statute, regulation, or ordinance of any governmental body or which will be in violation of any insurance policy carried on the Premises by Licensor. Licensee agrees to defend, indemnify and hold Licensor harmless against all costs, expenses, liabilities, losses, fines, penalties, claims, and demands arising out of any violation or act of default of Licensee in the conditions and covenants of this License . 11 . Condemnation or Sale . During the term of this License Licensor may continue to develop the Premises for sale, including the platting or other subdivision of the Premises and the granting or dedication of public or private easements for any purpose . If all or a portion of the Premises is condemned, sold, or made subject to an easement incompatible with the use by the Licensee, Licensor shall give 90 days written notice of such event to Licensee and this License shall terminate as to that portion of the Premises at the expiration of said 90 days . If the remainder of the Premises is not sufficient to support Licensee' s use, in the sole determination of Licensee, Licensee may terminate this License upon 30 days' written notice . 12 . Termination. Either party may terminate this License, with or without cause, by giving written notice thereof to the other party, specifying the effective date of such termination, 2 which shall not be less than 90 days after the date of such notice . 13 . Holding Over. Should Licensee continue to occupy the Premises after expiration of the Term, or after termination of the Term under the provisions hereof, such occupation shall be from month to month on the terms and conditions of this License appropriate to a monthly term, and in no event from year to year or for any longer term without Licensor' s written agreement . Any holding over after the expiration of this License shall not operate to renew this License . 14 . Access by Licensor. Licensor, or its duly authorized agents, or Licensor' s mortgagee, or its duly authorized agents, may enter the Premises upon prior notification of Licensee, at all reasonable times for the purpose of inspecting the Premises, showing same to prospective purchasers or tenants, or making any repairs, alterations or improvements which Licensor, in its sole discretion, deems necessary. 15 . Transfer. Licensee shall not sell, assign, or in any way transfer any of its rights in this License, or permit this License to be transferred without the prior written consent of Licensor. 16 . Default and Remedies . a. Events of Default . The occurrence of the following shall be considered an event of default under this License : Licensee defaults in any of the covenants, agreements, stipulations or conditions herein contained, and such default is not cured within ten (10) days after written notice from Licensor to Licensee describing said default and the required remedy. b. Remedies in Default . Upon the occurrence of an event of default as set forth in this Section the Licensor may, at its option at any time thereafter, give written notice to Licensee specifying such event of default and stating that this License shall expire and terminate on the date specified in such notice, which shall be at least ten (10) days after the giving of such notice; and Licensee shall thereupon cease its use of the Premises and remove all of its property from the Premises; provided that if the default cannot be cured within said ten (10) days and Licensee is using its best efforts to cure the default then this License shall not terminate but the rights of Licensee under this License shall be suspended until the default is cured, and such suspension shall not extend the Term. C . Cumulative Rights . No right or remedy herein conferred upon or reserved to Licensor is intended to be exclusive of 3 any other right or remedy herein or by law provided, but each shall be cumulative and in addition to every other right or remedy given herein. d. Effect of Waiver or Forbearance. No waiver by Licensor of any breach by Licensee of any of its obligations, agreements or covenants hereunder shall be a waiver of any subsequent breach or of any obligation, agreement or covenant, nor shall any forbearance by Licensor of its rights and remedies with respect to such or any subsequent breach constitute such a waiver. No waiver, change, modification or discharge by either party hereto of any provision in this License shall be deemed to have been made or shall be effective unless expressed in writing. 17 . Subordination. Licensor warrants that as of the date hereof there are no liens on the Premise other than for real estate taxes and special assessments . This License shall be subordinate to any mortgage or mortgages which at any time hereafter may be placed upon the Premises by Licensor, its successors or assigns, and to any replacements, renewals, or extensions thereof, and Licensee agrees, at any time, on demand, to execute and deliver such documents as may be required to subordinate this License to the lien of any such mortgage or mortgages . Licensee further agrees to modify provisions of the License as reasonably required by Licensor' s mortgage lenders, provided that no such modification will materially increase Licensee' s obligations under this License . If Licensee objects to the modifications, then this License shall terminate 30 days after such written objection. 18 . Miscellaneous Provisions . a. Entire Agreement . This License and the exhibits attached hereto embody the entire understanding between the parties and supersede all prior understandings and agreements related to the subject matter. This License cannot be amended, altered or modified, and no provisions can be waived, except by a written instrument executed by the party affected. b. Benefit . This License shall bind and insure to the benefit of the parties and their respective successors and permitted assigns . C . Notices . Except as otherwise provided in this License, all notices to be given under this License shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given, if mailed, certified mail, postage prepaid, United States mail, to the party to be notified at its address as follows : 4 To Licensee : City Administrator City Hall 129 S . Holmes St . Shakopee, MN 55379 To Licensor: Valley Green Business Park Limited Partnership c/o Allianz Investment Corporation 55 Greens Farm Road P.O. Box 5160 Westport, CT 06881-5160 Attn. : Real Estate Department with copies to : Richard Peterson Best & Flanagan Suite 4000 601 Second Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55402 Valley Green Business Park Limited Partnership 5240 Valley Industrial Boulevard South Shakopee, MN 55379 Any party may change its address by giving notice in the aforesaid manner to the other party, and ten (10) days after giving such notice, such party' s address shall be deemed to have been changed. d. Heading and Captions . The headings and captions of the paragraphs and subparagraphs of this License are inserted for convenience of reference only and shall not constitute a part of this License or a limitation on the scope of any paragraph or subparagraph. e . Severability. Whenever possible, each provision of this License shall be interpreted in such manner as to be effective and valid under applicable law, but if any provision of this License is held to be invalid, illegal , or unenforceable under any applicable law or rule in any jurisdiction, such provision will be ineffective only to the extent of such invalidity, illegality, or unenforceability, without invalidating the remainder of this License in such jurisdiction or any provisions hereof in any other jurisdiction. f . Counterparts . This License may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same document . 5 g. Governing Law. This License shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have to set their hands on the day and year first above written. VALLEY GREEN BUSINESS PARK CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MN LIMITED PARTNERSHIP By By Mayor By City Administrator By City Clerk [22CCL] 6 kxmr...Y �3 1 U11 E June 6, 1995 CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Barry Stock Assistant City Administrator City of Shakopee 129 Holmes Street Shakopee, MN 55379 Re: Shakopee Civic Center Dear Barry: We recommend the award of contract for Unit Masonry work to Jesco, Inc. Bids for bid package No. 5 - unit masonry (rebid) were received on Friday, June 2, 1995. The low bid was submitted by Jesco, Inc, in the amount of $247,900. The projected budget for masonry work was $ 144,446. A bid tabulation sheet is attached. A project cost status report is also enclosed. In our opinion, several factors contributed the difference between the bid amounts received and the budgeted dollar amount for this work. First, the quantity of burnished and glazed block was not established when the budget was developed. The bid documents now establish the limits of the interior and exterior decorative units. Second, the local bid market volume for masonry work is currently very strong,. In a strong market markups for overhead and profit are higher. In a strong market, bidders are also more selective when pricing work. On the original bid date, fifteen firms were invited to bid, no bids were received. Subsequently during this rebid of masonry work, over thirteen firms were contacted, four firms indicated that they would bid and, as you know, three firms actually submitted bids. Please call me with any questions. ACTION REQUESTED; Sincerely, Move to award the Shakopee Civic, Center Bid Package #5 - Unit Masonry to ,Jesco, Inc, and authorize the appropriate City officials to execute contract documents accordingly. Mikl J. Parsons Project Manager cc: Rob O'Brien \bp5recap 1221 East Fourth Avenue, Suite 110 Equal Opportunity Telephone: 612-496-2227 Shakopee Minnesota 55379 Employer/Contractor Fax : 612-445-4191 SHAKOPEE CIVIC CENTER BID PACKAGE NO. 5 - UNIT MASONRY BID TABULATION SHEET JUNE 2, 1995 10:00 AM Company Bid Bond Addendum 1 &2 Base Bid Voluntary Voluntary Sales Tax Acknowledged Masonry Alernate No. 1 Alternate No.2 Breakout Amount Crosstown 5% Yes $317,960.00 None None $ 6,250.00 Masonry Jesco,Inc. 5% Yes $247,900.00 Deduct $10,000 Deduct $7,573 $ 4,269.00 (see below) (see below) Construction 5% Yes $272,000.00 None hone $ 4,914.00 Concepts,Inc. Notes: Jesco,Inc. voluntary alternate #1 -Furnish all burnish block as standard in lieu of 50%premier and 50%standard finish. Jesco,Inc. voluntary alternate#2-Delete burnish and rock face sealer from masonry contract. Cost Status Report-Shakopee Civic Center Page 1 616195 WITHOUT CONTINGENCY Greystone Construction Company-Construction Manager BUDGET Fees 8 BP Ice arena Gym Gymnastic Commons Site eirob. Budget Cmtd C.O:s Eat. Est. r No Section Description Firm Job 3 Job 4 Job 5 Job 6 Job 7 Job 8 Jobs 3-9 to date Committe Uncmld, Total De-bon Note. a.....:: , at 100 ...,:.'i„ 0 101 Project superintendent - - - - 62,400 62,400 62,400 62,400 0 102 Mobilize/demobilize labor 6,000 6,000 _ 6,000 6,000 0 103 Site trailer rental 2,000 2,000 2,000 29000 0 104 Project tele hone service 31800 31800 3,800 3,800 0 105 Dumpster 9,600 91600 9,600 9,600 0 106 General/final cleanup - - 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 - 0 107 Site office FFBE 2.500 2.500 2,500 2.500 0 108 Portable toilets 7,680 7,680 7,680 7,680 0 109 Temp.utility usage - 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 - 0 110 Shipping,freight&postage - 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 - 0 111 Project vehicle - 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 - 0 150 Building permit - - 85,000 85,000 85,000 85,000 - Carry under bu 7 0 151 Survey/building staking OSM - - 15,000 15,000 10,000 51000 151000 - 0 152 Testi ng/special inspection GME - 15,000 151000 12,500 2,500 15,000 - 0 153 Document reproduction - - 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 - 0 154 Subsurface investigation - - 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 - 0 155 Design fee - - - 276,000 276,000 276,000 276,000 - 0 156 C.M.fee 138,000 138,000 138,000 138,000 0 230 Temporary elect,service - 2500 2,500 2500 2,500 - Transfered bu from Job 7 to 8 0 1 320 Precast walls a Boors Fa bc in 276,279 112,401 54,879 39,339 482,898 445,470 445,470 37,428 1 2 500 Struct steel a roof deck Danny's Constr. 156,245 67,797 24,140 34,400 282,582 265,700 265,700 16,882 2 3 200 Building earthwork Imperial Developer 21,500 6,519 2,400 4,700 - 35,119 3 201 Grubbing Imperial Developer - - 21,000 21,000 3 205 1 She excavafion a gracling Imperial Developer 218,000 - 218,000 3 210 Water service Imperial Developer 71,100 - 71,100 3 215 Sanitary service Imperial Developer - 9,800 - 9,800 3 220 Storm water Imperial Developer - 37,700 - 37,700 3 235 Concrete curb a gutter Imperial Developer - - - 42,250 421250 3 240 Bituminous paving a base Imperial Developer - 150,450 150,450 3 250 Seeding S sod Imperial Developer 30,000 301000 3 255 Seed ball fields Imperial Developer 8,000 8,000 3 270 Ag lime ball fields Imperial Developer - - 12,000 12,000 3 subtotal BP l3 635,419 647,800 647,800 12,381 (30,000) (30,00) (30,000 Note 1 3 4 300 1 Footings Jesco,Inc 1 24,257 5,370 1 3,470 4,312 37,409 4 310 Conc floors a aprons Jesco,Inc 111,203 26,076 9,600 33,024 179,903 subtotal BP i4 $ 2171312 2031378 P247 13,934 4 (9,500 (9,500)Note:transfer$9,5808rom track 5 400 Meson Jesso din 58,848 10,598 75,000 144,446 247,900 103,454 6 600 Rough carpentry 6,870 61506 1,580 7,000 21,956 21,956 - 6 (10 Countert 7,120 7,000 14,120 14,120 6 620 Misc.ca en 5,000 5,000 5,000 6 720 Building insulation - 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 6 800 Doors&windows 55,540 16,900 12,300 62,500 147,240 147,240 147,240 6 960 Gyp ceilings(fire rate 8,300 - 8,300 8,300 8,300 6 970 Gyp walls a framing 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 6 7 700 Roofing-single ply 97,291 37,810 13,920 21,900 170,921 170,921 170,921 - 7 8 520 Frarrin -at.aeam roofing 13,500 1 13,500 13500 13,500 81 730 1 Standing seam roofing 84,000 84,000 84,000 84,000 - 8 9 510 Misc steel 20,200 21,000 41,200 41,200 41,200 - 9 10 O.H.doors a operator - Separate out budget from BP/6 10 11 1,500 Plumbing 60,000 12,000 4,000 35,000 - 111,000 111,000 111,000 11 1,510 Fire protection 33,000 13,036 1 4,800 181864 - 69,702 69,702 69,702 11 1,520 HVAC 351000 130,380 38,400 133,620 - - 337,400 337,400 337,400 11 1,530 Dehumidlfice6ot 90,000 - - - 90,000 90,000 90,000 - it - 12 225 Permanent electr.service BP 12 electr 6,001) 6,000 (1 6,000 1 - 12 245 Site lighting BP 12 electr - 45,500 - 45,500 45,500 45,500 - 12 1,600 Electrical 120,000 84,747 39,360 94,320 - - 338,427 338,427 338,427 - 12 13 1,400 Elevator 30,000 - - - 30,000 30,000 30,000 13 14 940 Carpet 2,000 - 16,250 - 18,250 18,250 18,250 14 950 Sheet vin concessions 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 - 14 15 910 Ceramic file 15,572 39,832 55,404 55,404 55,404 - 16 620 Wood flooring - 106,911 - - 106,911 106,911 106,911 16 1,300 Wood flooring- mnastics 31,200 - - - 31,200 31,200 31,200 - 16 17 900 Painting a staining 35,000 18,322 7,300 23,000 831622 83,622 83,622 - 17 18 930 Acoustical ceilin 1,764 9,600 11,364 11,364 11,364 - 18 19 Aluminum entrances Separate oW budget Bom BP 86 19 20 710 Caulking 3,500 2,500 1,500 2,000 9,500 91500 9,500 - 20 21 1 Exterior stucco a EIFS No budget amount 7 21 22 1,110 1 Basketball hoops a sbucture6 28,000 28,000 28,000 28,000 22 1,130 Partition net - 22,000 - 22,000 221000 22,000 22 23 11010 Rinkspecial es 162,000 1 162,000 162,000 - RFP 1,100 Refrigeration a rink floor Rink-Tac(pending)1 330,000 - - - 330,000 303,977 303,977 (26,023 TBD 260 Lawn irrigation - - 20,000 - 20,000 20,000 20,000 TBD 265 Landscaping - - - 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 TBD 920 Wrestlin nn.floor 10 584 - - 105" 10,584 10,584 - Job 3-Ice areana w/wresfling Job 6-Commons Job 4-Gymnasium Job 7-Sitework Job 5-Gymnastics File CSRBACK.XLS Job 8-Fees reimbursables Cost Status Report-Shakopee Civic Center Page 2 616195 WITHOUT CONTINGENCY Greystone Construction Company-Construction Manager TBD 1,000 Buildings eciatfies 14,500 2,700 1,000 32,060 50,260 50,260 50,260 TDB 1,010 Walking track 190,000 - 190,000 190,000 190,000 In $22000-Donn yk CO$1 TOTALS $ 5,141,098 1,779,473 889,977 260,447 849,021 696,800 865,380 5,141,098 2,550,725 2,572,441 5,123,166 17,932) Budget total,Job 3 1,779,473 Budget total,Job 4 889,977 Budget total,Job 5 260,447 Budget total,Job 6 849,021 Budget total,Job 7 696,800 Budget total,Job 8 665,380 Bub et total,Jobs 3-8 5,141,098 a• .__ :. � 1• : SUMMARY „W :, f ?.!. t t;„. 3 33 • (vathout wntin en added to commded costs .- _ �` -- 9 cy ) ,w,° W..n-.. Commited 49.61% (Cam mBed Total / Project Bu ae a%) 2,550,725 Commited C.O.'s Estimated uncommitted 215721441 Total projected @ 100% 5,123,166 Estimated Deviation -0.35% (17,932 Note:1)830-850K amount to be assessed to 'olning pr oparty,airom sewer A and detention pond gre n,50%of coat Job 3-Ice areana w/wrestling Job 6-Commons Job 4-Gymnasium Job 7-Sitework Job 5-Gymnastics File CSRBACKALS Job 8-Fees reimbursables Cost Status Report- Shakopee Civic Center Page 1 6/6/95 WITH CONTINGENCY Greystone Construction Company-Construction Manager BUDGET Fees& BP Ice arena Gym Gymnastic Commons Site r eimb. Budget Cmtd C.O's Est- Est. No Sectlon Description Firm Job 3 Jab 4 Job 5 Job 6 Job 7 >. Job 8 Jobs 3-9 to date Committe Uncmtd. Total Deviation Notes .,,.at 100% 0 101 Prajectsuperintendent 6240[' 62,400 62,400 62,400 1 0 102 Mobilize/demobilize labor 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 0 103 Site trailer rental 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 0 104 Project telephone service 3,800 3,800 3,800 3,800 0 105 Dumpster 9,600 9,600 9,600 9,600 0 106 General/final cleanup 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 0 107 Site office FF&E 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 0 108 Portable toilets 7,680 7,680 7,680 7,680 0 109 Temp.utility usage 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 0 110 Shipping,freight&postage 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 0 111 Project vehicle 2,400 2,400 21400 2,400 0 150 Building permit 85,000 85,000 85,000 85,000 1 Carry under project budget 7 0 151 Survey/building staking OSM - - 15,000 157000 10,000 5,000 15,000 - 0 152 Testing/special inspection GME 15,000 15,000 12,500 21500 15,000 0 153 Document reproduction - 5,000 5,000 51000 5,000 - 0 154 Subsurface investigation 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 0 155 Design fee 276,000 276,000 276,000 276,000 0 156 C.M.fee 138,0W 138,000 138,000 138,000 0 230 Temporary elect,service 25001 2,500 2500 2,500 Transfered beget from Job 7 to 8 0 1 320 Precast wells&floors Fabcon 276,279 112,401 54,879 39,339 482,898 "5,470 22,274 467,744 15,155 5%contingency 1 2 500 Struct steel 6 roof deck Danny's Constr. 156,245 67,797 247140 34,400 282,582 265,700 13,285 278,985 ,59 5%contlngenuy 2 Need to transfer$22,000 to track 3 200 Building earerwork Imperial Developer 21,500 6,519 2,400 41700 35,119 3 201 Grubbing Imperial Developer 212000 21,000 3 205 Site excavation&grading Imperial Developer 218,000 218,000 3 210 Water service Imperial Developer 71,100 71,100 3 215 Sanitary service Irnparial Developer 9,800 9,800 3 220 Storm water Imperial Developer 37,700 37,700 31 235 Concrete curb&gutter Imperial Developer 42,250 42,250 3 240 Bituminous paving&base Imperial Developer 150,450 150,450 3 250 Seeding&sod Imperial Developer 307000 30,000 3 255 Seed ball fields Imperial Developer 8,000 6,000 3 270 Ag lime ball fields Imperial Developer - - 12,000 12,000 3 subtotal BP$3 635,419 647,800 32,390 680,190 12,381 5%contingency (30,000) (30,000) 30,000 Note 1 3 4 300 Footings Jesco,Inc 24,257 51370 3,470 4,312 37,409 41 310 Cone floors&sprorrs Jesco.Inc 111,203 26,076 9,600 33,024 179,903 subtotal BP 44 $ 217,312 203,378 10,169 213,547 (3,765)5%contin enry 4 (9,500) (9,500) (9,500 Note:transfer$9,580 from track 5 400 Masonry Jesco,Inc(pending 58,848 10,598 75,000 - - 144,446 247,900 12,395 260,295 115,849 5%contingency 6 600 Rough carpentry 6,870 8,506 1,580 7,000 - 21,956 21,956 21,956 - 6 610 Countertops 7,120 7,000 14,120 14,120 14,120 6 620 Misc.carpentry 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 6 720 Building Insulation 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 6 800 Doom&windows 55,540 1 16,900 12,300 62,500 147,240 147,240 147,240 61 960 Gyp ceilings fire rated) 8,300 - 81300 8,300 8,300 - 6 970 G walla&framing 20,000 - - 20,000 20,000 20,000 - 6 7 700 Roofing-single ply 97,291 37,810 13,920 21,900 - 170,921 170,921 170,921 - 7 8 520 Framing-at.seam roofing - - - 13,500 - 13,500 13,500 13,500 - 8 730 Standing seam roofing 84,000 - 84,000 84,000 84,000 8 9 510 Misc steel 20,200 21,000 41,200 41,200 41,200 9 Et 101 10.1-1.doors&operators I I Separate out budget from BP fl6 10 11 1,500 Plumbing 60,000 12,000 4,000 35,000 - - 111,000 111,000 111,000 - 11 1,510 Fire protection 331000 13,038 41800 18,864 - - 69,702 69,702 69,702 - 11 1,520 HVAC 35,000 130,380 38,400 133,620 - 337,400 337,400 337,400 - 11 1,530 Dehumidification 90,000 - - 90,000 90,000 90,000 - 11 12 225 Permanent electr.service BP 12 electr 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 12 245 Site lighting SP 12 electr 45,500 1 45,500 45,500 45,500 12 1,600 Electrical 120,000 1 84,747 39,360 94,320 - 338,427 338,427 338,427 12 13 1,400 Elevator 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 - 13 14 940 Carpet 2,000 - 16,250 18,250 18,250 18,250 - 14 950 Sheet vin (concessions 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 - 14 15 910 Ceramic file 15,572 39,832 55,404 55,404 55,404 - 16 620 Wood flooring - 108,911 106,911 106,911 106,911 - 16 1,300 Wood flooring-gymnastics 31,200 31,200 31,200 31,200 - 16 17 900 Painting&staining 35,000 18,322 7,300 23,000 - - 83,622 83,622 83,622 - 17 18 930 Acoustical ceilings 1,764 - 9,600 - H,364 11,364 11,364 18 19 Aluminum entrances Separate out budget from BP 4'8 19 20 710 Caulking 3,500 2,500 1,500 2,000 - 9,500 9,500 9,500 - 20 21 Exterior stucco&EIFS 1 No budget amount 7 21 22 1,110 Basketball hoops&structures 28,000 1 28,000 28,000 28,000 - 22 1,130 Partition net 22,000 - 22,000 22,000 22,000 - 22 23 1,010 Rinkspecialties 162,000 - - - 162,000 162,000 162,000 - RFP 11100 Refrigeration&rink floor Rink-Tec(pending) 330,000 - - - - 330,000 303,977 303,977 (26,023 TBD 260 Lawn irrigation - 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 TBD 265 Landscaping - 25,000 25,000 1 25,000 25,000 - TBD 920 Wresdino mi.floor 10,584 - - 10,584 10,584, 10,584 Job 3-Ice areana w/wrestling Job 6-Commons Job 4-Gymnasium Job 7-Sitework Job 5-Gymnastics File CSR10.XLS Job 8-Fees reimbursables Cost Status Report- Shakopee Civic Center Page 2 6/6/95 WITH CONTINGENCY Greystone Construction Company-Construction Manager TBD 1,000 Building specialties 14,500 2,700 1,000 32,060 50,260 50,260 50,260 TDB 1,010 Walking track 190,000 190,000 190,000 190,000 TOTALS $ 5,141,098 1,779,473 889,977 260,447 849,021 696,600 665,380 5,141,098 2,550,725 2,662,953 5,213,678 40,190 Budget total,Job 3 1,779,473 Budget total,Job 4 889,977 Budget total,Job 5 260,447 Bud et total.Job 6 849,021 Budget total,Job 7 e96,800 Budget total,Job 8 665,380 Bub et total,Jobs 3-8 5,141,098 SUMMARY (wdh contingency added tocommited costs) Commited 1 49.61%1 Commited Total/Project Bud et,as a%) 2,550,725 _ Commited C.O.'s Estimated uncommited 2,662,953 Total projected Q 100% 5,213,678 Estimated Deviation 038% 40,190 Note 1) $30,000 to 550,000 to assessed adjoin in roe for storm sewer W 6 pond excavation,50%of cost Job 3-Ice areana wl wrestling Job 6-Commons Job 4-Gymnasium Job 7-Sitework Job S-Gymnastics File CSR10.XLS Job 8-Fees reimbursables MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor and Council FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator RE: Request for Trust Status of Former MWCC Property DATE: June 1, 1995 INTRODUCTION: The City has received a letter from the United States Department of Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs indicating that the 580 acre tract formerly owned by the MWCC and currently under the ownership of the Shakopee Mdewakanton Dakota Community is being considered to be put into trust. The letter specifically requests information about property taxes, special assessments, zoning, and other governmental services being provided by the County (the letter actually went to Pat Boeckman,the Scott County Recorder). In that the property is located within the City limits,the majority of governmental services, as well as the zoning, are actually provided by the City of Shakopee, not Scott County. If the City Council wishes to raise questions about this land being placed into trust status, or if the Council desires to comment on whether this should happen it is appropriate that it be done at this time. The letter which was dated May 12, 1995 indicates that there is a 30 day notice period. Therefore action needs to be taken by June 1 Ith, or the City could request an extension if further action needs to be taken. Both the Planning and Legal Departments have also reviewed this correspondence. RECOMMENDED ACTION: If recommended that the City Council evaluate this request and provide staff with direction relative to the policy position the City Council may wish to take on this request. ACTION RECOMMENDED: Move to direct the City Administrator to correspond with the Bureau of Indian Affairs Minneapolis Area Office on the position of the City Council on this requested action. r ---- SCOTT COUNTY REGISTRAR OF TITLES SCOTT COUNTY RECORDER COURTHOUSE 113 428 HOLMES STREET SOUTH SHAKOPEE, MN 55379-1392 (612) 496-8143 FAX: (612) 496-8138 PAT BOECKMAN CONNIE DUNWELL Recorder/Registrar of Titles Chief Deputy M-M 15 1995 County Treasurer. Auditor. PIE and Administrator City of Shakopee and Prior T,tj- Dear Sirs: Enclosed you will find a letter from the United States Department of Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs . Also a map that I have outlined the legal description of the property referred to in this letter. Please take the appropriate action as needed and direct your comments a-v stated in the letter . Sincerely, Pat Boecn:aan County Recorder/Registrar of Titles enc: CITY OF SHAKOPEE D MAY �, 6 1995 An Equal Opporturiity/Affirmative Action/Safety Aware Employer -. encl ou uv5 'lie .K ltal rr , �..�.,•a.r "' f l •`.� n� 1)x212 •oar jz +^•9i�� s°'>b .. .•S � i�I w °r°°1J r.~ '.� +!•7� w,L....t � ) .n.� i>..u� ..uJ•I. w- !N � > ` :'.Ib ill ..J V -Z +....+h t�»c S'IL -` `. �,... i<•.- w, ;� SL r� � v�a r+�..w w•i _'� .""�µ.J ..�.> 6+..s,••.y i .. .,y X LII _ • ti Iy� >J^r1•r. >op Ytl� � � _r sr _s' -^- 08 ..vs .a i � i •.>, ..s.l .a '2101+bdx- � .._ .'°ra •n�..ti ��ti -,.,. ni r«.. ''n - •o saes�� - _ >• ~ - � �� i. ` '> 81£ oral •�oO � IT '°....> �> +ro > .� .y. ..'...."p It 3 JI 1 V�J 11>°� •'y .>n.W sway I - .. Yff� .r.•.•� �.•W ......a{•W «g G _ .�.... � •o�+.. ref ^ ``� t t} > - ..,s �i 0 d 08 t!. Lev+ `w`.'° +e 4 *sr-ifl - 1 eafLL i''M r 371tl1 ^ ^ ." •�r••9 e.J >L r._ .:.r..s ( 1^9"H :_f� Hss ;_ >z>,. ':Mu, .----r� .>.> • , \ , �a V CP .K....n C C. uos>NQ':'t > '.. '/ JJ4..6.. ..a 10 L�Jr'C I' .. .y > O!/ L.yZ n wu sT zf .svf y ITS s .ra ...f..r Ir Y ( "' ,srool >,q°�O fr.•gt c' o or Y 08 Lf a,�r .«�a> „'...s' +vN v > rW . ro r� Y '7�YWA OB ..>+L'r's i'+ Lk � ..J � ,.�:.e,.� � .•s:4•p '.^° � LLgq •�K t »'lsl ..L,>r •..7 s 1• .--�,-h� - >..,i ..,.r,W a�L, oM of ....M ^.'C o E y > r -it rn�,i '+ •°r: I'o£Z C F it wr-.c a+•si•'� .. >>•".4 � ^ 4 .+.•p '1, ^-+a L<>�nys �r li .� Lfl OB `..ar .p ,I•.> _ L'4 I i w,.•o'J �� — N ~sir\ o•If _ >.'°¢�..-.>n \ n�z OL .,..e n.o•ti A ? L. L v a>�y tii ��� L Z D11 r'>� r—•'•J ..r i3 � ".1 aliwK` .w....... '•^.a.m r.�^� OB I..t J,..-s. �In •s...i ��s. >••meI°I,. -P—'s ...�,i :a•L Ik�BI �'_ I f •B'orl S"'c...-r ( Kt w.q.>.A� S� - ..r fa }I'B01 M~ ♦TO_ a.. .I .,r crCF �.�..,.. .r >ro CS .+nJ i�ar J(r, BII SIZ ,•J pJDM. OLI t,,,>.,..:,,:c 3 3 d 0)1 'H Br w. I •...vJ,•>5 KLL �... Rxl 1 > 4 fr,.L, aTTB �a..d v.TT I.S�^•..a_a Si :'- Y iK �_ R`rB'IB nL+Sr�.. ..eh O. `r>rn'r..� >•r. L.....,,i _ � :el.,... ^rJ s? `.,J:•s • BC k7 � .,s•+S �L.n•t ` rre � �. ..w[> '1 f'. t>w.{� ....r +J`'•+0 CP rs �......,� . 'tf '.r W"Grl sr lL bf `,....y•mr.> �uy.r� rz>..K ..: :.l 1 1T 3 .>n. ' ..F •.rro :I OF r�^s r•tr•.i L.,ti1•• .... rz 912 .9 n.b _ hyv r.C� � G?UUDrI ENT OF United States Department of the Interior a BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS ' MINNEAPOLIS AREA OFFICE m Z 0 q0„ ,Ee 331 SOUTH 2ND AVENUE MINNEAPOLIS,MINNESOTA 55401.2241 IN REPLY REFER TO. Reap Proper-y Management MAY 1 2 1995 Pat Boeckman , Scott County Recorder 428 South Holmes Street , Rm = 113 Shakopee , Minnesota 55379-1392 Dear his . Boeckman: The Bureau of Indian Affairs , U. S . Department of Intericr , has under consideration an application for acquisition of land by the United States of America to be held in trust for the benefit of the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux_ Community. The property to be acquired and placed into trust is legally described as follows : The West Half of the Southwest Quarter and that part of the Northwest Quarter lying south of the centerline of County Road 16 , all in Section lo , Township 115 , Range 22 ; the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter , the South Half of the Northeast Quarter , the North Half of the Southeast Quarter , and the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter all in Section 16 , Township 115 , Range 22 ; the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 21 , Township 115 , Range 22 ; the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 22 , Township 115 , Range 22 ; the South three-fourths of the East one-half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 15 , Township 115 , Range 22 ; and the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 22 , Township 115 , Range 22 , all located in Scott County, Minnesota. EXCEPTING , the following described tract : Commencing at the northeast corner of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter ; thence South ( assumed bearing ) along the east line thereof , as distance of 621 . 16 feet to the point of beginning of the tract of land to be described ; thence continuing south along said east lire a distance of 349 . 75 feet ; thence North 89 degrees , 48 ' , 10" West , a distance of 501 . 20 feet ; thence North 04 degrees , '_S ' , 10" West , a distance of 326 . 00 feet ; thence North 87 degrees , 29 ' , 43" East , a distance 526 . 17 feet to the point of beginning , according to the United States Government survey thereof and situated in Scott County, Minnesota . r The determination of whether to acquire this land in trust will- be made in the exercise of the discretionary authority that is rested in the Secretary of the interior . To assist us in the exercise of that discretion, pursuant to the regulatory requirements under 25 CFR Part 151 , Land acquisitions , we invite your comments on the proposed land acquisition. Information and comments are particularly requested on the following : 1 . The annual amount of property taxes currently levied on the property. 2 . Any special assessments , and amounts thereof , which are currently assessed against the property. 3 . Any governmental services which are currently provided to the property by your jurisdiction. 4 . if subject to zoning , how the property is currently zoned , and potential conflicts of land use , if any , which may result . Information and comments should be addressed to this office , to the attention of the undersi-,ned . Any comments received within 30 days of the date of this letter will be considered in our recommendations for trust status . A coPy of your comments will be made available to the applicant . Please direct any further questions to the Branch of Real Estate Services of this office , at ( 612 ) 373-1163 . Sincerely, Area Director MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Barry A. Stock, Assistant City Administrator RE: 1995 Fee Schedule Amendment - Resolution No. 4222 - Recreation Non-Resident Fees - Prior Lake Residents DATE: May 30, 1995 INTRODUCTION: On May 16, 1995 the Shakopee City Council moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to draft a resolution amending the 1995 Fee Schedule to reduce the non-resident fee from $21.00 to $5.00, retroactive to January 1, 1995 for Prior Lake residents living within the Shakopee School District boundaries. BACKGROUND: On May 16, 1995 the Shakopee City Council discussed the recreation non-resident fee for Prior Lake residents who live within the Shakopee School District boundaries. It was the sentiment of City Council that since the residents in Prior Lake pay a good portion of their property taxes to the City of Prior Lake for recreational services that some consideration should be given for a reduction in the non-resident fee. Attached is Resolution No. 4222, A Resolution Amending the 1995 Fee Schedule reducing the non- resident fee for Prior Lake residents living within the Shakopee School District boundaries from $21.00 to $5.00 retroactive to January 1, 1995. The resolution has been drafted consistent with the direction provided by the City Council at the May 16, 1995 meeting. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Offer Resolution No. 4222, A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 4143 establishing a $5.00 non-resident fee for Prior Lake residents living within the Shakopee School District boundaries retroactive to January 1, 1995. 2. Amend the 1995 Fee Schedule establishing a$5.00 non-resident fee for Prior Lake residents living within the Shakopee School District boundaries effective July 1, 1995. 3. Do not establish a separate non-resident fee for Prior Lake residents. 4. Table action pending further information from staff. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative #L ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 4222, A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 4143 establishing a$5.00 non-resident fee for Prior Lake residents living within the Shakopee School District boundaries retroactive to January 1, 1995. RESOLUTION NO. 4222 A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 4143 ADOPTING THE 1995 FEE SCHEDULE WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a Fee Schedule for the fiscal year, and WHEREAS, changing conditions and circumstances warrant amending the Fee Schedule. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the 1995 Fee Schedule is hereby amended by adding the following: The non-resident fee for Prior Lake residents living within the Shakopee School District boundaries shall be $5.00 per activity. This fee shall be retroactively applied to January 1, 1995. Adopted in regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this 6th day of June, 1995. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form City Attorney �ONSE b NT MEMO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Amendment to City of Shakopee's Standard Specifications DATE: June 6, 1995 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 4224, amending Resolution No. 3041 which adopted the City of Shakopee's Standard Specifications. BACKGROUND: The City has adopted a Design Criteria and Standard Specifications for public works construction in the City of Shakopee. These manuals were adopted initially in 1979 by Resolution No. 1514 and last awarded by Resolution No. 3041 in 1989. Staff is requesting modifications each of the Design Criteria and Standard Specifications for this year's construction season. These proposed changes are as follows: 1. Design Criteria - Under Section 2.02.7, Storm Sewers and Storm Inlets, Paragraph A, to change the minimum allowable pipe size to be used in storm sewers to be 12 inches. The current Design Criteria is an 18 inch storm sewer minimum. It is common in the construction industry to use 12 inch diameter pipe for storm sewer pipe. This change allows the City as well as developers to realize cost savings of material while still receiving a quality product. 2. Standard Specifications - Under Section 208 of the Supplemental Specifications to Standard Utilities Specifications for Sanitary Sewer Installation. Amend the specification to allow the use of Poly Vinyl Chloride (PVC) for sanitary sewer service pipe. In the last few years, PVC pipe has emerged as the standard for sewer pipe in the construction industry and in many Cities. The cost of the PVC sewer pipe material is less costly than ductile or cast iron and has superior flow characteristics. This change will allow the City to realize cost savings of material and labor costs on its public improvement projects. Attached to Resolution No. 4224 is Attachment No. 1 which contains the changes to the Design Criteria and Standard Specifications as outlined above. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 4224. 2. Deny Resolution No. 4224 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 4224, A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 3041, Which Adopted City of Shakopee's Standard Specifications and move its adoption. BL/pmp MEM4224 �jO SENT i1h MEMO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator 'r FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director J1/ SUBJECT: Amendment to City of Shakopee's Standard Specifications DATE: June 6, 1995 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 4224, amending Resolution No. 3041 which adopted the City of Shakopee's Standard Specifications. BACKGROUND: The City has adopted a Design Criteria and Standard Specifications for public works construction in the City of Shakopee. These manuals were adopted initially in 1979 by Resolution No. 1514 and last awarded by Resolution No. 3041 in 1989. Staff is requesting modifications each of the Design Criteria and Standard Specifications for this year's construction season. These proposed changes are as follows: 1. Design Criteria - Under Section 2.02.7, Storm Sewers and Storm Inlets, Paragraph A, to change the minimum allowable pipe size to be used in storm sewers to be 12 inches. The current Design Criteria is an 18 inch storm sewer minimum. It is common in the construction industry to use 12 inch diameter pipe for storm sewer pipe. This change allows the City as well as developers to realize cost savings of material while still receiving a quality product. 2. Standard Specifications - Under Section 2.08 of the Supplemental Specifications to Standard Utilities Specifications for Sanitary Sewer Installation. Amend the specification to allow the use of Poly Vinyl Chloride (PVC) for sanitary sewer service pipe. In the last fe,.v years, PVC pipe has emerged as the standard for sewer pipe in the construction industry and in many Cities. The cost of the PVC sewer pipe material is less costly than ductile or cast iron and has superior flow characteristics. This change will allow the City to realize cost savings of material and labor costs on its public improvement projects. Attached to Resolution No. 4224 is Attachment No. 1 which contains the changes to the Design Criteria and Standard Specifications as outlined above. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 4224. 2. Deny Resolution No. 4224 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 4224, A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 3041, Which Adopted City of Shakopee's Standard Specifications and move its adoption. BL/pmp MEM4224 RESOLUTION NO. 4224 A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 3041, Which Adopted The City Of Shakopee's Standard Specifications WHEREAS, the Shakopee City Council adopted Design Criteria and Standard Specifications for construction of roadways on April 18, 1989 by Resolution No. 3041; and WHEREAS, the City Council now desires to revise the City of Shakopee's Standard Specifications to reflect current construction practices and new technologies; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: that it hereby approves and adopts the amendments to the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction in Shakopee as described on Attachment No. 1. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that copies of the Standard Specifications Manual , as amended, shall be kept in the office of the City Engineer and open for reference at all times. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 1995. Mayor the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form: City Attorney ATTACHMENT NO. 1 TO RESOLUTION 4224 WHICH AMENDS RESOLUTION NO. 3041 AND RESOLUTION NO. 2186 THE STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION IS AMENDED AS PER THE FOLLOWING SPECIFICATION AND STANDARD DETAIL: 2.08. SERVICE PIPE 2.08.03 PVC materials (Ploy vinyl-Chloride) pipe may be used as an alternative service pipe for gravity sewer services with a maximum cover of 21 feet, unless otherwise specified. Polyvinyl Chloride Pipe (Non-Pressure); Pipe and fittings for non-pressure gravity sewer services shall conform to the requirements of ASTM D 1784 and D 3 03 4, with SDR of 26, AST F 789 and D 3034, and have push-on joints with elastomeric gaskets. Nominal Size Outside Diameter Minimum Wall Thickness in Inches in Inches in Inches 4" 4.215 .162" 6" 6.275 .241" 8" 8.400 .323" 4.00 SEWER SERVICE INSTALLATION (2621.3E) Section 4.01 PVC Sewer Installation. Installation of PVC pipe shall conform to ASTM D 2321 and to the following specifications and standard detail plates: Excavation shall be extended below the bottom of sewer grade as necessary to accommodate required granular bedding material as per the standard detail plate for PVC sanitary sewer service. Granular bedding and encasement for PVC SDR 26 services shall meet the requirements of ASTM 2321 and CEAM Standard Specifications for sanitary sewer and service line installation. Granular material for bedding and encasement of PVC SDR 26 sewer services is to be installed in unit bid price of PVC services. Pipe Clearance in Rock - Ledge rock, boulders and large stones shall be removed to provide a clearance of at least 6 inches below outside barrel of the pipe of fittings, and to a clear width of 12 inches on each side of all pipe and 'I appurtenances for pipe 18 inches or less in diameter; for pipes larger than 18 inches or less in diameter; for pipes larger than 18 inches, a clearance of 9 inches below and clear width of 12 inches on each side of inside diameter of pipe shall be provided. Adequate clearance for property jointing pipe laid in rock trenches shall be provided at bell holes. Excavations below subgrade in rock or in boulders shall be refilled to subgrade with approved material, thoroughly compacted. Backfill at Pipe zone - Backfill material at pipe zone shall be free from rock, boulders or other unsuitable substances and shall be deposited into the trench simultaneously on both sides of the pipe for the full width of the trench in 6 inches lifts thoroughly compacted to a minimum elevation of 12 inches above the top of the pipe. Compaction shall be accomplished by mechanical tamping. DESIGN CRITERIA FOR STORM DRAINAGE DESIGN AND TECHNICAL CRITERIA IS AMENDED AS PER THE FOLLOWING SPECIFICATIONS: Section 2:00 MINIMUM DESIGN CRITERIA: Paragraph 2.02.7 STORM SEWERS AND STORM INLETS a. Storm Sewers 1. The minimum allowable pipe size to be used in storm sewers shall be 12 inches in diameter. All storm sewer conduits shall be of sufficient structural strength to withstand a minimum H-20 design load. b. Storm Inlets. Standard storm inlets shall be combination curb & gutter inlets conforming to City of Shakopee Standard Specifications. Curb inlets may be used only with prior approval of the City Engineer. The theoretical capacity and spacing of storm inlets will be analyzed using the criteria set forth herein and in accordance with approved numerical or theoretical analysis. The allowable capacity will be determined using the reduction factors listed in Table 2-6 below. These reduction factors compensate for debris plugging,pavement overlaying, variations in design assumptions or other factors which decrease inlet capacities. The size of outlet pipes from stormwater inlets shall be based upon the theoretical capacity of the inlet, but shall not be less than 12 inches in diameter. TABLE 2-6 INLET REDUCTION FACTORS FOR INITIAL STORM Condition Allowable Percentage of Inlet Type Theoretical Capacity Allowed Sump Combination Curb & Gutter 65% Grade Combination Curb& Gutter 65% Sump Curb 100% Grade Curb 100% Computations for storm sewer design and storm inlet designs shall be submitted on forms similar to those included in these specifications for approval. Adequate details of the proposed storm sewer system, including plan and profile, details of inlets, manholes and ,other appurtenances shall be included in the overall drainage plan submitted for approval. 0.D. + 2 /I- GRANULAR O.D ENCASEMENT =I I -I 12" MIN. 1/2 O.D. GRANULAR BEDDING MATERIAL - I ) - 6" MIN. GRANULAR MATERIAL BEDDING METHOD FOR PVC ( SDR 26 ) SANITARY SEWER SERVICES SHAKOP E]E i "'1 0 N S E N T TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director RE: VIP Connection Charge DATE : June 1, 1995 Introduction Council has decided to implement a connection charge to recoup deferred charges for the VIP Interceptor that benefit property that was not benefitted at that time . Background The original assessment for the VIP Interceptor did not cover property outside of the city limits and certain other property. There was $112 , 661 . 90 of costs not assessed. Council has decided to include interest in the amount to be recovered. Interest is $135, 715 . 15 to June 1, 1995 is for a total of $248 , 377 . 05 . Resolution No. 1891 provides for no additional interest or change to the connection charge after it is set (see attached page) . Engineering has calculated the acres involved at 458 acres . The amount to be recovered is $248, 377 . 05 divided by 458 is $542 . 31 per acre . For unplatted property, the charge is proposed to be collected with the Final plat . For plats already approved/filed, the charge is proposed to be collected with the building or plumbing permits . For those parcels where the permit is already issued, it is proposed to forgo the collection of the fee . In view of prior Council action, it is proposed that the parcels in P & V Addition that have signed waivers would not be charged. The alternative for those parcels that have permits already issued would be to send an invoice to the owner and if necessary, pursue collection through legal action. Attached is a map of the area to be covered by the connection charge . Council should note that Tahpah Park and Lions Park are included in the area impacted and the cost to the City for the park land acreage of 72 . 65 acres is $39, 398 . 82 unless Council wants to exempt the park land. The rational to support this exemption is that the City has already paid the total costs under review and is seeking to recoup the applicable costs from other property owners . Action Requested Offer Resolution No. 4225 A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 4143 Adopting The 1995 Fee Schedule and move its adoption. RESOLUTION NO. 4225 A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 4143 ADOPTING THE 1995 FEE SCHEDULE Whereas, the Shakopee City Council has adopted an annual fee schedule, and Whereas, it is deemed necessary to amend the fee schedule to include a connection charge for property to be served by but not assessed for the VIP interceptor sewer, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, that Resolution No. 4143 Adopting The 1995 Fee Schedule is amended to include the following: VIP Connection Charge The connection charge for the VIP Interceptor Sewer is $542 . 31 per acre . For unplatted property this is to be collected with the final plat . The charge will be collected with the building/plumbing permit for previously platted property. the area to which the charge applies is shown on the attached map. City park land in Lions and Tahpah Park is exempt . Adopted in session of the Shakopee City Council held this day of June, 1995 . Mayor ATTEST Approved As To Form City Clerk City Attorney —� 111a 7N►� �1. ``�� � Gill: 71�e� 0{11+ •=1 nn,l>•�•- . . • :1119 "gill 5111: j1711'S1d:,� :1117 7th{! 'iii 51d+ 11115 9lIID�111 U 5 5111: 51.1'1 . . 71:1: :II 9111?`1H1•. � . 7p11 115 t 7:.1- -•' ' „ . .1 1. nA=11111' 7111`- _�� 7117 lil: 7l 7►t,7 1!11 :►',: '1►�1 �tiG1 P►E" �� „ ;,�1: 1k�,�-� slli= 711{ , t 17.1'.1• � � .,, 5111. t.i :1:1. �• ,.,• ! ► :. ,,dl: � ,ply:►IU :111! 7�A` 51.15 f1 ' .111 5111: :til: �►11: 51it::'.•►N 71117 • 5171- . . 1' :{�19 5:i►' .1119 [ 51[ • 1: • .� •111"• :11/� ..: 51.1: 11.1- . , :111: 1117 51�1� 5►r1. 111( . ( 51117►�1.'1.... VIII: 111 • �Id• 11 . t .It1. � Ali,► ,►119 .111. �r �+ 5115��id- • IInO►117 •111 5l•,9 71;7: (1':' 91:1: :111: ;1H•_ta 1 ,�Itt1- 51117 7111l1� , ni,i7 111. 511.1 ;111: 41 "pp� N7, • 51HO0W4101:i9 51115 5:515 ° �►.►: 1■cu: Ci10 1t:►. 71117 ,I:Y. !!�I' r ,1115 :Id; 1471iri5 5l 1 9111 .plld, 111 !1115 7111 5,115 • •It17 5111 . X01117 Al I - . •1'i: .11. Vilna10 = �Il(1: _ 51111 5111 !:i{'. 51119 7i: � 5111: �P,S � C1�19 71•. . 7:11' 111 71119 51:19 1!!11 /►'ll , . 5111: .1,�0111� ir117 51 oi 55a„1115 :1117 t1;7. .,l,9 5t.. . :,. .,..111 .•!!1 1. Oil- 7e■�, 1:5, � �`1lu9 ttfa7 00 /7:: o 0170 w �G �:•• �0�� ■111 1 _ , . MW 122 �� _— _- -_ —__ - ;1111' :1111: :1111: X1111111 1111111 ON e - W, 1111111- - -- -- -� -r- -- ■,r -■ - d� - u nn ■-ao un. ui: ," [-ate ra s (i�1:• :11:{ :11:1 :11:1, -■u1- --_R _��� .�� I 'd �q !gyp �� nA __ �� -, ^w r. —■. w -- -- -- -- - - u-X. .o,n _l- -u d —_ -- rte[" .•'� (•O OD � �1iYZis.� ..•.• ��'■ • •+'SIC///� ��711/11 ��.• ..n nn nn O— -- -- �- - I r 111111KI we Ims. 010111f, 2111 =a,�ww" �m W11 1rLN nn W, ou n— -- -- -- . w.. - -• �. x MM on nn ['. nr cc.■ nu nn nn r a0�0 =^=�00x067 Ov n�n p air--0. �aoav�� 'Lw n sa Avi.1, ,1 5"UTtf �tu■s"i. I/11110 iii W. �iLfl,v IL • CQ�l�,y/f•�� pAd �:� r i 1/1E ■����t Willi RESOLUTION NO. 1891 Page 4 2 . That when such areas are designated for a service and/or connection charge interest from the date of this resolution , at the rate of 8 3/4 percent per annum , shall be added to the initial ; , service and/or connection charge . After this point , no additional interest shall be charged. 3 . That the time when areas are designated in the future as being benefited by the interceptor, service and/or G'onnection charges shall be set by the City Council . Adopted in session of the Shakopee City Council. of Shakopee , Minnesota , held this - day of 1981 . s Mayor of the City of Sha opee ATTEST: C' ty Jerk' Approved as to form this day of 1981 . City Attorney `CONSENT MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator / FROM: David M.Nummer, Staff Engineer'/�AN SUBJECT: Fuller Street State Aid Designation DATE: June 6, 1995 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 4226, a resolution designating Fuller Street from 10th Avenue to Vierling Drive as a State Aid Highway. BACKGROUND: On May 16, 1995, the City Council of the City of Shakopee ordered the improvement of Fuller Street from 10th Avenue to Vierling Drive. This project was ordered based on the conclusions of a feasibility report. The feasibility report recommended designating Fuller Street as a Municipal State Aid (MSA) Highway, and designing and constructing the roadway to State Aid Standards. Designating Fuller Street as a MSA highway will allow the City to utilize funds from the State Aid construction fund to build the roadway. Staff has contacted the Metro Division State Aid office, and has received preliminary approval for designating Fuller Street as an MSA Highway. The next step in the process is for the City Council to adopt a resolution making the designation. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt Resolution No.4226, a resolution designating Fuller Street from 10th Avenue to Vierling Drive as a State Aid Highway. 2. Deny Resolution No. 4226. 3. Table for additional information from staff. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1. j Aeng\user\pat\mem4226.mo ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No.4226, A Resolution Designating Fuller Street from 10th Avenue to Vierling Drive as a State Aid Highway, and move its adoption. j:\eng\user\pat\mem4226.mo RESOLUTION NO. 4226 A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING MUNICIPAL STATE AID HIGHWAYS FOR FULLER STREET, FROM 10TH AVENUE TO VIERLING DRIVE WHEREAS, it appears to the City Council of Shakopee that Fuller Street, from 10th Avenue to Vierling Drive hereinafter described should be designated a State Aid Street under the provisions of Minnesota Law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Shakopee that the road described as follows, to-wit: Fuller Street, from 10th Avenue to Vierling Drive be, and hereby is established, located, and designated a Municipal State Aid Street of said City, subject to the approval of the Commissioner of Transportation of the State of Minnesota. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to forward two certified copies of this Resolution to the Commissioner of Transportation for his consideration, and that upon his approval of the designation of said road or portion thereof, that same be constructed, improved and maintained as a Municipal State Aid Street of the City of Shakopee, to be numbered and known as Municipal State Aid Street 166-117. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 1995. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form: City Attorney �ONSENT MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: David M. Nummer, Staff Engineer SUBJECT: Mn/DOT EVP Agreement DATE: June 6, 1995 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 4228, a resolution authorizing execution of a contract with Mn/DOT for traffic signals at TH 101 and TH 169. BACKGROUND: Recently, City Staff was contacted by Mn/DOT regarding the signalized intersection at TH 101 and TH 169 on the Shakopee Bypass. Mn/DOT plans to install an Emergency Vehicle Pre- emption System (EVP) for future use by the City. The signal and EVP system will be paid for with 80% Federal funds, 15% State funds and 5% County funds. The City will not be responsible for and construction or operating costs. The agreement referenced in the resolution is between the State, County and City. The agreement basically states that the City will not misuse the EVP System, and that the state has the right to remove the system if it is used for unofficial purposes. Mn/Dot sent the agreement and resolution to the City on June 1, 1995, and has requested that the City Officials execute the agreement at the June 6, City Council meeting. They need the agreement executed prior to bid letting this month. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 4228, a resolution authorizing execution of a contract with Mn/DOT for traffic signals at TH 101 and TH 169. 2. Deny Resolution No. 4228. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1. j Aeng\user\pat\mem4228.mo ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 4228, A Resolution Authorizing Fxecution of a Contract with the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation for Traffic Signals at TH 101 and TH169, and move its adoption. j:\eng\user\pat\mem4228.mo RESOLUTION NO. 4228 A Resolution Authorizing Execution Of A Contract With The State Of Minnesota, Department Of Transportation For Traffic Signals At T.H. 101 and T.H. 169 BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Shakopee enter into an agreement with the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation for the following purposes, to wit: To install a new traffic control signal with street lights, advance warning flashers, emergency vehicle pre-emption and signing on Trunk Highway No. 101 (Shakopee Bypass) at Trunk Highway No. 169 - County State Aid Highway No. 69 in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth and contained in Agreement No. 75377, a copy of which was before the Council. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the proper City officials be and hereby are authorized to execute such agreement, and thereby assume for and on behalf of the City all of the contractual obligation contained therein. Adopted in regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held the 6th day of June, 1995. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form: City Attorney #1So� MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor and Council FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator RE: Authorization to Advertise for the Filling of the Management Information Systems (MIS) Coordinator Position DATE: June 1, 1995 INTRODUCTION: The City's MIS Coordinator has resigned and will be accepting another position in the metro area. In that this is a integral position in City organization it is requested that authorization be granted to advertise for the filling of this position. It is possible that following department head review, some alterative means of providing this service will be recommended. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Administrator to take the necessary steps to determine current management information system needs and to advertise for the filling of the MIS Coordinator position in the Planning Department. ACTION REQUESTED: Move to authorize the City Administrator to advertise for the MIS Coordinator position at a salary not to exceed the third step of the approved 1995 pay plan. MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft. Cite Administrator FROM: Steve Hurley, MIS Coordinator SUBJECT: Resignation DATE: June 2. 1995 CC: Barn• Stock. Paul Bilotta This is my fourteen day notice of termination. I will be leaving the City of Shakopee to take another position. My last day Neill be June 16. 1995. Stephei Hurley RESOLUTION 4216 A RESOLUTION CHANGING THE JULY 5, 1995 COUNCIL MEETING DATE WHEREAS, the Shakopee City Code has set the first Tuesday of each month as the regular meeting date for the City Council, and WHEREAS, the Shakopee City Code allows the City Council to change the meeting date by adopting a resolution at least one week prior to the regularly scheduled meeting. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the July 5, 1995 regularly scheduled City Council meeting be changed to July 11, 1995 at 7 : 00 p.m. Adopted in regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this 6th day of June, 1995 . Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form. City Attorney MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor and Council FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator RE: Rental of Space at 200 Levee Drive for Senior Nutrition Program DATE: June 6, 1995 INTRODUCTION: The City has received a response from Mr. John Bergstad of Levee Drive Associates for the leasing of property at the Senior Highrise at 200 Levee Drive. In that this lease expires in 1995 the City Council should provide direction to staff as to how we want to deal with this question. BACKGROUND: The lease between the City and Levee Drive Associates stipulates that the City can lease the space for the Senior Nutrition Program for 70%of the fair market value of the property for a five period. Mr. Bergstad has indicated that he believes the current fair market value for rental property in Shakopee ranges from $7.00 to $11.00 per sq. ft. Mr. Bergstad is proposing that the $7.00 per square foot figure be used. 70% of$7.00 would be a lease amount of$4.90 per sq. ft. With the total area of 2,343 sq. ft. this would result in an annual rent of approximately $11,500. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council provide staff with direction on this subject. OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO THE COUNCIL INCLUDE: (1) Accept the $4.90 per sq. ft. amount. (2) Attempt to negotiate a lower amount. (3) Direct the staff to look else where for space for this nutrition program. Council members may also wish to have the staff evaluate other conditions of the lease including the provision of telephone service and the cleaning of the facility. ACTION RECOMMENDED: Provide direction to the staff on the negotiation of the lease between the City of Shakopee and Levee Drive Associates. 44 Bergstad Properties, Inc. 32 Tenth Avenue South Hopkins, MN 55343 (612)935-2635 FAX(612)935-6283 May 3, 1995 Dennis R. Kraft City Administrator City of Shakopee 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee, Mininesota 55370-1351 Dear Mr. Kraft: In response to your letter of April 4, 1995 regarding the renewal of the lease between the City of Shakopee and Levee Drive Associates, we submit the following: Current Fair Market Value for Rental Property in Shakopee: $7.00 to $11.00 per square foot. Persuant to the lease agreement, 70% of fair market rental shall be paid as rental of this space. We therefore propose a rent equal to 70% of the lower figure of $7.00 per square foot, an amount of $4.90 per square foot of space. The total area consists of 2,343 square feet of space identified on the floor plan (enclosed) and attached to the original lease agreement as Exhibit B. This totals to an annual rental of $11,480.70. The current agreements regarding payment of utilities, outlined in the original lease agreement, remain in effect. If youbaveany questions regarding the above terms, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sinc reI , J n e g�a A� { _ AM IL -_-- PJRK our TENANT ` µ I-IBULE OFFICE CONFERENC 1 I18 118 - e. CORRIDOR o -5f F.e. b m� COMMUNITY ro bit 2 2c ROOM 123 — 12t 12Z ct�T`01 e ;OBBY 17 MEN WOMENJ STOR. --- _ fl l2 12 mK i --� ---- 1241 ,)24- UP VEST -ro e*- e",r vn-+eK7 - i 11 Tr-xITCHEN ., Wr. . 1 I �i 126 _ ,ZLA 2-4 H �'��" { ki VESTIBULE '-\4�: MECH. STORAG { COATS _. - ci cp All cam. c.�. on ,,. � ti. •.� Lo�.T_R�K PLAN OF CITY LEASED SPACES MEMORANDUM TO: Karen Marty FROM: Mark Ericksc�r �� 93 q--7l ?-> DATE: June 6, 1995 RE : Sarazin Street Project Attached is the proposed agreement on the condemnation of the Knights of Columbus property. It is contemplated that the Knights of Columbus Board will approve the agreement tonight . A member of the Board will bring three executed agreements to the Council tonight . If the City approves the agreement it was my anticipation that the agreement could be executed tonight . Originally the City offered $10, 900 based on the appraisal by Patchin & Associates . There was an impasse based on the KC' s offer of $41, 000 ($37, 600 for the permanent easement, and $3 , 500 for the temporary) . This agreement provides for a total of $22 , 500 ($15, 000 and $7, 500) . Staff recommends that the City pay $15, 000 for the permanent and temporary easement . The City can easily justify the offer based on the cost of further litigation and the risk of a higher compensation award. (If the hearing took one day we would have to pay the appraiser, and an attorney and the City Engineer would have to be present . Add preparation time and miscellaneous costs it would easily equal $4000 . ) In addition, there is a risk the KC could make a case that the property was like commercial property, even though it is zoned residential and if the property was ever sold it could not be used as it is now. (Commercial property is about $1 . 00-2 . 00 $/sq. ft . , compared to the appraisal price of . 54) In addition, Sienna Corporation has agreed to pay the KC $7, 500 if they agree to the easement as soon as possible . The amount represents Sienna' s costs to build a temporary road to meet their needs if a public road is not completed. The City has aisc agreed to the following: 1 . Relocate sign and power poles at no cost to the KC. 2 . Maintain appropriate signs showing the access to the KC. 3 . Replace existing parking stalls at no cost . (Initially gravel, but it will be paved when the City does the street . ) 4 . City will construct a new access on Fourth Ave . (Access will be 25' in width, which is usual for commercial property) Once this agreement is executed, the contractors will have a right of entry to the property to start the work (See, page 4, #5) . The KC will also execute the documents for the easements . As discussed in prier council meetings, the KC does not waive the issue of proposed assessments . AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, Made this day of June, 1995 , by and between City of Shakopee, a Municipal Corporation ( "City" ) , Shakopee Council # 1685 Home Association, Inc. of Knights of Columbus ( "Home Association" ) and Sienna Corporation, a Minnesota Corporation ( "Sienna" ) ; Recitals A. City seeks, as part of City construction and improvement of Sarazin Street and Roundhouse Street, City Project No. 1994-10, a permanent easement for roadway and utility purposes over, under and across the West 40.00 feet of the North 499 . 7 feet of that part of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 5, Township 115, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota, which lies westerly of the easterly 975.00 feet thereof. Subject to the rights of the public for 4th Avenue. And a temporary construction easement over, under and across the East 20.00 feet of the West 60. 00 feet of that part of the North 499.7 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 5 which lies westerly of the easterly 975.00 feet thereof. Subject to the rights of the public for 4th Avenue. g Said permanent easement contains 18 ,668 square feet more or less. Said temporary easement contains 9334 square feet more or less. Said temporary easement to expire December 31, 1995. B. City, on the basis of its appraisal, originally offered $10,900.00 as compensation to Home Association for the taking of the permanent and temporary easement. C. City commenced an eminent domain proceeding in District Court, Scott County, seeking, in part, to obtain a judgment that public use requires the condemnation of the above described Home Association property; that City is entitled to take and hold such property; that City is entitled to early possession under Minnesota Statutes Section 117.042, and appointing appraisers to ascertain compensation to be made to Home Association. D. In contemplation of reaching an agreement, Home Association, at the May 30 , 1995 , initial eminent domain hearing before the District Court, Scott County, stipulated that the taking proposed by the City was for a lawful, public purpose; with the further stipulation by the Home Association and the City that if the City and Home Association were unable to reach an agreement which would 1 permit the City to take the proposed easement, City and Home Association would each be entitled after June 6, but by June 9, to nominate five persons to serve as commissioners and alternates from the Scott County List of Condemnation Commissioners, with the Court to select commissioners and alternates from the nominees and with the Court to schedule a first meeting of commissioners no earlier than 15 days following appointment of commissioners but within 30 days of such appointment. E. Sienna, a developer of Prairie Bend which is within City Project 1994-10, is desirous that City secure possession of the property proposed to be taken from Home Association (that property described in A above) as soon as practicable, to avoid the necessity of constructing temporary roads and potential construction delays. F. Sienna, to facilitate resolution of the issues relating to the taking of the Home Association property, is willing to pay the Home Association $7,500.00, in addition to the sums otherwise payable by the City. G. Home Association is willing to grant City the permanent and temporary easements desired by City, provided Home Association receives a total of $22,500.00 in compensation, subject to the further terms and conditions set forth in this agreement. H. City and Sienna are willing to compensate Home Association in the total sum of $22,500.00 ($15,000.00 from City and $7,500.00 from Sienna) and City is willing to accept the other terms and conditions set forth in this agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, FOR GOOD AND VALUABLE CONSIDERATION IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED TO AS FOLLOWS: 1. Home Association shall grant to City the following easement: A permanent easement for roadway and utility purposes over, under and across the West 40.00 feet of the North 499.7 feet of that part of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 5, Township 115, Range 22 , Scott County, Minnesota, which lies westerly of the easterly 975.00 feet thereof. Subject to the rights of the public for 4th Avenue. And a temporary construction easement over, under and across the East 20.00 feet of the West 60 . 00 feet of that part of the North 499.7 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 5 which lies westerly of 2 the easterly 975.00 feet thereof. Subject to the rights of the public for 4th Avenue. Said permanent easement contains 18, 668 square feet more or less. Said temporary easement contains 9334 square feet more or less. Said temporary easement expires December 31, 1995. 2. In consideration of said grant of the above described permanent and temporary easement: a. City shall pay the sum of $15 ,000 .00 to Home Association. b. Sienna shall pay the sum of $7,500.00 to Home Association. 3 . As further consideration, the grant of said permanent and temporary easement by Home Association shall be subject to the following terms and conditions: a) All sign and power pole relocations are to be completed at no cost to Home Association, with Home Association to have reasonable input with respect to location of signage and power poles. b) Appropriate signage and access to Home Association building shall be maintained throughout construction so as to minimize disruption to Home Association and Knights of Columbus activities, to include appropriate highway and street signs indicating access to Knights of Columbus Hall. c) All parking stalls which are to be removed pursuant to the now approved project plans are to be replaced by City, in equal number, at no cost to Home Association on South side of existing parking lot. It is understood and agreed that the City shall initially have the new parking area covered with a gravel surface initially, which surface shall be subsequently paved and marked during 1995, at cost of City. d) In addition to the new access from Sarazin Street shown in the present approved plans, City will provide for and cause to construct a new driveway access to Home Association parking lot off Fourth Avenue to replace the access being taken by the construction of Sarazin Street; such additional access off Fourth Avenue to be located so as to be directly across the 3 drive through area between the first and second set of parking stalls to the west of the KC Hall building, the driveway access to be not less than twenty-five ( 25) feet in width. It is understood and agreed that the existing service access off Fourth Avenue on the northeast side of the Home Association property shall not be affected by the construction project. 4. Home Association shall execute and deliver to City a document conveying the permanent and temporary easement hereby granted upon full execution of this agreement in exchange for the sum of $22,500.00 to be paid pursuant to this agreement. 5. Upon full execution of this agreement, City, its contractors and agents shall be entitled to immediate possession (Right of Entry) of said permanent and temporary easement area, subject to the terms and conditions of this agreement. 6. City shall be responsible for issuing such project change orders as may be required to implement the terms and conditions of this agreement. 7. City and Home Association hereby stipulate to the dismissal of the eminent domain action against Home Association, and agree to execute such other and further documents, if any, as may be required for purposes of such dismissal. 8. Home Association expressly reserves it right to object to any and all proposed assessments relating, directly or indirectly, to the Sarazin Street and Roundhouse Street Project No. 1994-10, including but not necessarily limited to sanitary sewer, water main, street and storm sewer; and, Home Association hereby affirms its objection to all such proposed assessments on the grounds that the Home Association property is not benefited, in increased value, by such project work. 9. By executing this agreement, each party represents to the other parties that the party executing the agreement has secured such approval of the agreement as may be legally required. Specifically, the persons executing this agreement on behalf of the City of Shakopee represent that the agreement has been properly approved by the City Council of the City of Shakopee. The Home Association represents that this agreement has been properly approved by its Board of Directors and Officers. Sienna Corporation represents that the persons executing this agreement have authority to execute this legally binding document on behalf of the corporation. 10 . This agreement is intended to be a legal, binding contract, enforceable against the parties hereto, their successors or assigns, 4 ry to the full extent set forth herein, and shall be governed by Minnesota law. CITY OF SHAKOPEE SHAKOPEE COUNCIL #1685 HOME ASSOCIATION, NC. OF GHTS OF US By: Its Mayor By: Pre ent And: Its Clerk s etar , And: Its City Administrator SIENNA CORPORATION By: Its President Its Secretary 5