The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutJanuary 2, 1979 TENTATIVE AGENDA REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JANUARY 2, 1979 Mayor Harbeck presiding 11 Roll Call and Invocation at 7 : 35 P.M. 21 Approval of Minutes of December 19, 1978, Special Session and Adj . Regular Session 31 Communications : 41 Liaison reports from Councilmembers : a] Cncl .Hullander from Shakopee School Board b] Cncl .Lebens from Recreation Board c] Cncl .Reinke from Shakopee Public Utilities Commission d] Cncl .Ward from Joint Seven Man Committee e] Cncl .Leroux from Shakopee Fire Department f ] Mayor Harbeck from Scott County Board of Commissioners 51 RECOGNITION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ANYONE PRESENT IN THE AUDIENCE WHO DESIRES TO SPEAK ON ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA! 61 Old Business : a] Discussion on park dedication b] Ord. No . 16, Licensing & Regulating Scavengers c ] Res . No. 1351 , Amending the City of Shakopee ' s Employee Benefits - tbld 12/19 d] Engineering Department staff requirements - tbld 12/19 71 Planning Commission Recommendations : 81 Routine Resolutions and Ordinances a] Res . No . 1345 - Accepting Work on the 1977-1 Public Improve- ment Project No. 1 (Horizon Heights & Eaglewood Addition) b] Res . No. 1348 - Regarding Minnesota Department of Transportation Federal Aid Form No. 111 c ] Res . No. 1349 - Authorizing the City Engineer to Obtain Needed Engineering & Technical Services from the Minnesota Depart- ment of Transportation d] Res . No. 1352 - Authorizing Opening An Account With Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner & Smith, Inc . e] Res . No. 1353 - Authorizing the Transfer of Funds f ] Res . No. 1354 - Designating Official Depositories of City Funds 91 New Business : a] 8:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - K-Mart Tax Increment Project b] City Engineer ' s status report on public improvement projects c] Sanitary Sewer Project North of Valley Industrial Blvd. 11 Res . No . 1355 - Ordering Preparation of Report 21 Res . No. 1356 - Receiving Report and Calling Hearing d] Authorizing hiring of surveyor for Holmes St . Project e] Discussion on easement agreement with Wm. Pearson f] Discussion on voting machines g] 1979 Liaison Appointments h] Discussion on Legislative Liaison . i] Election of Vice (Acting) Mayor j] Discussion on upcoming vacancies on Police Civil Service Commission and Planning Commission k] Applications from VFW and American Legion for a 1979 Bingo License and Gambling License 101 Consent Business : Designating Shakopee Valley News Official Newspaper 111 Other Business : Approval of position bonds c+ n L C titit <_ 7- 12] Adjourn to Tuesday, January 16th at 7 : 30 P.M. Douglas S. Reeder, City Administrator TENTATIVE AGENDA SHAKOPEE HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ANNUAL MEETING SHAKOPEE.$ MINNESOTA JANUARY 2, 1978 11 Roll Call at 7: 30 p.M. 21 Approval of Minutes of December 19, 1978 31 Election of officers 41 Discussion of 1979 Community Development Applicants 5) Other Business : 61 Adjourn. Nancy Engman Executive Director OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY SPECIAL SESSION SHAKOPEE , MINNESOTA DECEMBER 19 , 1978 Chrm. Lebens called the meeting to order at 9 : SS P .M. Present were Comm. Ward, Leroux , Reinke , and Hullander . Hullander/Leroux moved to approve the December S , 1978 , Minutes , as kept . Motion carried unanimously . Hullander/Ward moved to authorize the appropriate officials to enter into an agreement with Suburban Engineering for the surveying and topographical work on the 4th and Minnesota Street Project , for a cost not to exceed $3 , 500 . 00 . Roll Call : Ayes - unanimous . Noes - none . Motion carried . Mr. Tom Hay from the Dorsey law firm was present and discussed the K-Mart Tax Increment Project - Redevelopment Plan with the Council . Hullander/Leroux offered Resolution No . 78-2, A Resolution Deter- mining to Undertake a Redevelopment Project , and moved its adoption . The City Adm. read the Resolution . Motion carried unanimously . Hullander/Leroux moved to adjourn at 10 : 40 P .M. Motion carried unanimously . Nancy Engman Executive Director MEMO TO : HRA Commissioners FROM: Nancy Engman, HRA Directcr SUBJECT: 1979 Community Development Program DATE: December 28 , 1979 The City has received notification from HUD that pre-applications for the 1979 Community Development Programs are due February 5 , 1979. Undertaking a project would require holding two public hearings in January. The regulations governing the program are the same as those which applied to the current 4th and Minnesota Street Program. The applica- tion categories are for either comprehensive or single purpose programs . Funding available for each of these sources is $2 ,544,000 for all comprehensive grants in the Metropolitan area and $1 ,023,000 for all single purpose grants in the Metropolitan area. Last year ' s program was a comprehensive program, and the City activities continue to years focused in that neighborhood The programs we outlined to undertake from 1979 to 1980 dealt with acquisition and clearance of the Chicago Milwaukee Tracks and installation of public utilities on Market Street . I feel these activities should be delayed a year because the abandon- ment of the railroad line has not been completed. There is a company in Lakeville that opposed the abandonment and this action could cause a full year ' s delay in a final action by the I .C.C. A rational develop- ment of Market Street would necessitate removal of the tracks . The second reason I feel these actions should be delayed is because the current project in the area will probably not be complete until the spring of 1980. There was opposition to this project in the area, and Ifurtherhdiscussionaofshousinge for cthat farea take e splace . before any I feel completion of a single purpose project during this one year delay would be feasible . I 've discussed this with the Engineer- ing Dep' t. and they suggested two areas for study for public facility projects . Y Y 1979 Community Development Program December 28, 1978 Page -2- The areas are as follows : a] Sanitary sewer replacement on 8th Avenue from Spencer Street to Prairie Street . The old system was layed at an improper grade and some sewer backups have resulted. b] Public sewer and water installation on 3rd Avenue from Pierce Street to Adams Street. Approximately 10 septic tanks have been located in this area. The number of private wells has not as yet been documented. Both areas require more study to determine the feasibility of applying for Federal funds . A serious threat to public health and safety would have to be documented by an outside agency and a principle benefit to low and moderate income persons would also have to be shown. The discussion Tuesday night should center on whether the public hearings should be scheduled for a program and which projects should be investigated further. NE/jsc MEMO TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: Douglas S . Reeder , City Administrator SUBJECT: Fark Dedication Ordinance DATE: December 28 , 1978 Attached is the material included with the last agenda . For your information, I have outlined my recommendations for park dedication for all land uses . Single Family: Land 10% of total Cash $250 per unit Duplex: Land 10% of total Cash $400 per unit Multiple : Land 1-% of total Cash $75 per bedroom Commercial : Land 5% of total Cash $1 .00 - $200,000.00 - 5% $200,000.00 - $1 ,000,000.00 - $10,000.CO plus 2% of value over $200,000 .00 $1 ,000 ,COO.CO or more - $26 ,000.CO plus 1% of value over $1 ,000,000.00 In required land donations the resolution stipulates that if the value of the land wanted for park use is valued greater than the average value of the plat , then the required land dedication will be only the amount of land equal to 10% of the average value . However, the City retains the option of purchasing additional property . If this formula is acceptable, I will prepare the ordinance for the next agenda . DSR/jiw ity Yes No Cash Dedication Lana Dedication Combination Dedication '_41 ,:noka X 10% of the total cash value of Amount of land equivalent to 10% Combination of land and cash land of value of land for Parks, equivalent to 10% of the Playgrounds , Public Open Space value of land or Storm water holdina areas . Arden Hills X Residential Residential No Provisions in Ordinance Cash Dedication according to Land Dedication according to value of land x percentage in same table as cash except per- table below: % centage of total land area being Gross Density/Acre Dedication subdivided 0-2 dwelling units 10% 2-3 11% 3-4 12% 4 or more City Council discretion of 12 to 15% Commercial or Industrial Commercial or Industrial No Provisions in Ordinance Dedication not to exceed 15% of Same as cash except 15% of land land value to be determined by area to be developed the council Blaine X RI, R2 and FR Districts RI , R2 and FR Districts No Provisions in Ordinance 15% of fair market value of land 10% of land to be subdivided to be subdivided. R3 and R4 Districts R3 and R4 Districts 12'x% of fair market value plus 12�% of land area to be subdivided equivalent amount of $50.00 apartment unit or residence unit B1, B2, B3, Il ,and J2 permitted 5% of total proposed area ,I ooklyn Center X No Policy or Ordinance No Policy or Ordinance No Policy or Ordinance ' =,�oklyn Park X Lot size 100 ' wide or larger 5%, Lot size 100 ' wide or larger 5%, No Provisions in Ordinance Lot size less than 100 ' wide 10% Lot size less than 100 ' wide 10% of fair market value of land to of total land to be subdivided be subdivided No Cash Dedication sand Dedication Combination Dedicatior. Burnsville x Residential % of Residential % of Combination of cash and t City Councils dis- cretion aa Units/acre Contribution/acre Units/acre Contribution/acre land land 1-6 10% 1-6 10% 7+ 7 .5% 7+ 7.5% of fair market value of land of total land area being sub- being subdivided divided Commercial/Industrial Commercial/Industrial 5% of fair market value of land 5% of total land area being de- beincr developed velo ed Coon Rapids X Residential Residential No Provisions in Ordinance Dwelling units/acre Percentage Dwelling units/acre Percentage 0-1 5% 0-1 5% 2-3 10%• 2-3 10% 4-5 12% 4-5 12% 6-7 14% 6-7 14% 8-12 16% 8-12 16% 13-16 18% 13-16 18% of fair market value of land to of total land to be subdivided be subdivided Industrial Industrial 5% of fair market value 5% of land area Commercial Commercial 3% of gross land area 3% of gross land area ,°ottage Grove X Residential Residential Any combination of land and Cash Dedication as per table be- cash subject to council ap- low: 10% of undeveloped land proposed proval Single family dwelling--$150/unit for subdivision plus additional Double family dwelling--$150/unit cash according to following table : Apartments and Townhouses- Single family dwelling $50/unit 1 Bedroom $35/Bedroom Double family dwelling $50/unit 2 Bedroom $35/Bedroom 3 Bedroom - $35,/Bedroom Apartments -and Townhouses- a" 1 Bedroom $10/Bedroom 2 Bedroom $10/Bedroom 3 Bedroom or more $10/Bedroom CltY Yes No Cash medication Land Dedication Combination Dedication Cottage Grove Commercial/Industrial Commercial/Industrial (Cont. ) X Cash Dedication equivalent to fair 10% of land to be subdivided market value of land to be sub- divided, dedication not to exceed 500 acre Eagan X Residential Residential Combination of land and Single Family $120/unit 10% of total area to be subdivided cash dedication at the Duplex/Townhouse $100/unit Councils discretion not Mobile Homes $100/unit Commercial/Industrial to exceed 10% of Land/ Apartment $ 75/unit No Provisions in Ordinance Cash value. Based on land value of 3000 acre Eden Prairie X Residential Units Fee Per Reasonable portion of land equiv- No Provisions in Ordinance Per Acre Unit alent to cash dedication Single Family Detached $275 . Other Residential Uses $200 . Commercial/Office/Industrial 1200 acre Edina X 5% of cash value of all land with- 5% of total land to be subdivided Combined dedication not to in subdivision or developed exceed 5% Golden Valley X 10% of fair market value of land 10% of total land to be subdivided No Provisions in Ordinance to be subdivided Hopkins X Subdivision Ordinance requires Same as Cash Dedication Same 5% dedication of staff and council discretion to obtain something they want. Inver Grove Proposed Residential Proposed Residential No Provisions in proposed Heights X Using formula for land dedication Amount of land to be dedicated Ordinance to determine area, then apply shall be computed according to fair market value to land for following formula: cash dedication (#units) (persons/unit) =persons 250 =acres of land to be dedicated Commercial Indus .r-al r Dedication City Yes No Cash Dedication Land Dedication Combination Dedication Maple Grove X No Provisions in Ordinance Residential No Provisions in Ordinance Land dedication according to fol- lowing table: Dedication Dwelling units/acre Requirement 0-3 5% 4-5 7. 5% 6-8 10% 9 - add 1% for each dwelling unit over 8 Commercial/Industrial ' % of total land area Mounds View X Residential Ded. Residential No Provisions in Ordinance Dwelling Units/acre Per Acre 10% Land Dedication 0r2 $100 Commercial/Industrial 2 . 1-3 $150 10% of total land area to be 3.1-4 $200 4. 1-5 $250 developed Over 5=10% of fair market value Commercial/Industrial 10% of fair market value of total lard area Rosemount X Council may require cash in lieu 4% of land/dwelling unit per acre No Provisions in Ordinance of lard at fair market of land to in subdivision. (0 . 4 x acreage x be dedicated number of dwelling units) Council may request more land if deemed necessary. : t. Anthony X X Only require dedication on P.U.D. Only require dedication on P.U.D. No Provisions in Ordinance which is 10% cash value of total which is 10% of total land area Land to be developed. City is being developed. 90% developed. '�es No crash Dedication Land Dedication Combination Dedication z Shoreview x Residential 10% of total area to be sub- No Provisions in Ordinance Cash Dedication according to divided residential , commercial, following table : Ded./acre or industrial as fair market val- Dwelling units/acre ue of land 0 3% 2.1 4% 3.1 5% 4. 1 6% 5 .1 or more 10% Commercial/Industrial 10% of fair market value of total land area to be subdivided. Woodbury X Residential Residential No Provisions in Ordinance 10% of fair market value of tot- 10% of gross land area al subdivision or $300/lot which Commercial/Industrial ever is greater. Commercial/Industrial 10% of gross land area 10% of fair market value of the undeveloped land. Duplex-$400/lot Multiple Dwellings-$100/unit or a percentage of fair market value according to the following table , which ever is greater. % of gross area or fair Dwelling Unit/Acre market value 0-2 D.U./Acre 10% 2 .1 -3.0 D.U./Acre 11% 3. 1-4 .0 D.U./Acre '12% 4 . 1-5 .0 D.U./Acre 13% 5. 1-6 .0 D.U./Acre 14% 6. 1-7.0 D.U./Acre 15% 7. 1-8.0 D.U./Acre 16% V cat ion City Yes No Cash Dedication Land Dedication Combination Dedication • % of gross area or fair Woodbury Market (Cont. ) X Dwellin�LUnit Acre Value 8. 1-9 .0 D.U./Acre 17% 9. 1-10 .0 D.U./Acre 18% 10 . 1-11.0 D.U./Acre 19% 11 .1-12 .0 D.U./Acre 20% 12 . 1-13.0 D.U./Acre 21% 13.1-14.0 D.U./Acre 21% 14 . 1-15 .0 D.U./Acre 23% Fridley X Residential Residential Option of land dedica- 10% of gross area to be subdi- 10% of gross area to be subdivid- tion or cash payment is at discretion of the vided ed City Council Commercial/Industrial Commercial/Industrial 3% of aross area to be subdivided 3% of aross area to be subdivided Maplewood X Acre Demand (AD) = No Policy in Ordinance No Provisions in Ordi- # of Dwelling Units x Pop./D.U. nance Population Standard of 100 Park Charge : This Project= AD (A.C.+D.C. ) No. of D.U. A.D.-Acre Demand for the project A.C.-Currently adopted/acre Acqui- sition cost D.C.-Currently adopted/acre De- velopment cost Project : Subdivision of 25 single family lots Population Standard: Single fam- ily dwelling 4 people/unit Currently Adopted Acquisition Cost : $6 , 000/acre Currently Adopted Development Cost : $6 , 000/acre Dedi cati ur p do City Yes No Cash Dedication Land Dedication Combination. Dedication. Maplewood (Cont . ) X A.D.=25 units x4 people/unit=100 100 100 =1 Acre Park 1 ($6, 000+ $6 , 000 _ 12.000 Charge= 25 Units 25 Park Charge :$480 .00 collected at the time of building permit issuance I PARK DEDICATION QUESTIONNAIRE `i By : Shakopee , Minnesota December 12 , 1978 WHAT IS THE REQUIRED DEDICATION FOR: Industrial Property - City Cash Land Comments Burnsville 5% of the current 5% market land value Chanhassen $1000/acre 100 people/ The cash formula is a proposed formula . acre City Admin. would prefer the cash formula be based on density. Chaska 5% of the raw land 5% value Eagan No charge No required City Council feels the high taxes paid should dedication satisfy park dedication. Eden Prairie $1200/acre No land City buys park land needed . Per chance develop- accepted ment is in proposed park site , acreage is determined on type of proposed dwellings . Prior Lake 10% of raw land value 10% Savage 10% of current 10% market land value Park Dedication Questionnair (cont . ) Page 2 WHAT IS THE REQUIRED DEDICATION FOR: Commercial Property City Cash Land Comments Burnsville 5% of the current 5% market land value Chanhassen $1000/acre 100 people/ The cash formula is a proposed formula . acre City Admin. would prefer the cash formula be established on density . Chaska 5% of the raw land 5% value Eagan No charge No required City Council feels the high taxes paid dedication satisfies all park dedication requirements . Eden Prairie $1200/acre No land City buys park land needed . Per chance develop- accepted ment is in proposed park site , acreage is determined on type of proposed dwellings . Prior Lake 10% of raw land value 10% Savage 10% of current market 10% land value Park Dedication Questionnaire (cont . ) Page 6 v WHAT WOULD BE THE REQUIRED PARK DEDICATION IN CASH/OR LAND FOR: Example #2 40 acre plat with no sewer and water 13 22 acre single family lots Assessors current market value - $4000/acre Sale price of lots - $20,000 each City Cash Land Comments Burnsville 10% ( $4000) 10% (4 acres) Density has no variance . Chanhassen $235/unit ($3 ,055) No land No platting is allowed in. areas not having accepted sewer and water . Chaska $3000/acre ($6000) 5% (2 acres) Cash is figured on a straight $3000/acre which is considered raw land value . Eagan $240/unit ($3120) 10% (4 acres) Platting would under current practice be unapproved. If approved , cash in lieu of would be $3 , 120 with the understanding that when lots would be subdivided , additional cash would be received at the current land rate . Land dedication would be carefully looked at , if even approved . Eden Prairie $275/unit ($3 ,475) Little over Land dedication would not be accepted unless 2 acre land was very desirable such as shoreland or scenic vista . This acreage would be considered "reasonable" per City Ordinance . Prior Lake 10% ($400) 10% (4 acres) A $100/dwelling fee is also charged at the time of building permit issuance . Savage -0- -0- No platting is allowed in areas having no sewer and water . Park Dedication Questionnaire (cont . ) Page 5 WHAT WOULD BE THE REQUIRED PARK DEDICATION IN CASH/OR LAND FOR: Example #1 40 Acre plat with water & sewer 120 single family lots (11 ,000 sq. ft . average) Assessors current market value - $4000/acre Sale price of lots - $15 ,000 each City Cash Land Comments Burnsville 10% of current market 10% (4 acres) land value ($16 ,000) Chanhassen $235/unit ( $28 , 200) $235/unit x 120 Land dedication would be on the equivalent $4000 = 7 acres raw land value - Chaska $6 ,000 ($3000/acre) 5% (2 acres) Would not be figured on the $4000/acre ; instead on a raw land value of $3000/acre Eagan $240/unit ($28,800) 10% (4acres) The 4 acres would not be enough for a neighbor- hood park. Therefore , land dedication would only be accepted if next to another plat which could provide the needed additional land for park or if the 4 acres were the only available last park site within area . Eden Prairie $275/unit ($33 ,000) 4-6 acres This formula is under change . Prior Lake 10% ( $16 ,000) 10% (4 acres) A fee of $100/dwelling is charge at the time of building permit issuance . Savage 10% ($16 ,000) 10% (4 acres) Land would only be accepted if it were in the City' s Park Development Plan. A fee of $100/dwelling would be charged at the time of building permit issuance . 1 Park Dedication Questionnaire (cont . ) Page 4 v WHAT IS THE REQUIRED DEDICATION FOR: Multiple Family - City Cash Land Comments Burnsville 10% of current market 10% land value Chanhassen Three or more dwelling units 100 people/acre occupying independent floor levels - Efficiency = $63/unit 1 bdrm. = $80/unit 2 bdrm. = $143/unit 3 bdrm. = $190/unit 4 bdrm. = $230/unit Chaska 5% of raw land value 5% Eagan $150 - $200/unit 10% Land dedication would only be accepted if it were in the proposed park site plan . Eden Prairie $200/unit Land would not Land dedication would only be accepted if be accepted in Park Development Plan and then based upon unit built not land value . Prior Lake 10% of raw land value 10% Savage 10% of current market land 10% ` value =ar°k Dedication uestionnaire (cont . )) Q Page 3 WHAT IS THE REQUIRED DEDICATION FOR: Single Family - City Cash Land Comments Burnsville 10% of current market 10% land value Chanhassen $235/unit 100 people/acre Chaska 5% of raw land value 5% Eagan $240/unit 10% Cash fee would change each year according to the market value . Land dedication would only be accepted if in proposed park site plan. Eden Prairie $275/unit Acreage according Land dedication would only be accepted if to unit built in proposed park site plan. City buys park land needed . Prior Lake 10% of raw land 10% value Savage 10% of current market 10% land value MEMO TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: Douglas S . Reeder, City Administrator SUBJECT: Employee Health Benefits DATE : December 28, 1978 My recommendation to you at the last meeting was that the City should pay $80 per month for health and life insurance premiums for non-union City employees . In addition, I recommended that departments heads receive free health and life insuance. I still believe that a difference in compensation for depart- ment heads is appropriate and that the original recommendation is also appropriate. However, I have also available for your consideration an alternative which I think would be attractive to the employees and advantageous to the City. As an alternative for department heads, I would recommend that the City pay the cost of an annual physical exam for each department head . This is something which most people do on their own and therefore, this would be an incentive to do it once a year. The department heads are all old enough that a physical exam each year is important . From the City' s stand- point, we have a big investment in each department head in terms of experience and training and anything we can do to keep them healthy and working is to the City ' s advantage . I would require that a copy of the physical be submitted to the City but would allow the individual to get the physical from his own doctor. We could put a maximum cost cn the physical , but I don' t think that is necessary for this group of employees . DSR/jiw .,� CITY OF SHAKOPEEW' m . 129 East First Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 * '7 MEMO To: _Douglas Reeder, City Administrator FROM:Bo__Spurri.eri Gib Engineer SUBJECT: Engineering Department Staff Requirements DATE: December 12 , 1978 Anticipating design work the City will perform during 1979 and in the future , it is necessary to hire an Engineering Aide II as soon as possible . An Engineering Aide II would be a person with two years training beyond high school at a vocational school or college in drafting, roadway construction or civil engineering. Experience in drafting would be considered in lieu of formal training. Responsibilities would include office and field work. In the office , the person wculd -make project drawings and maps and perform some calculations . In the field the person would perform inspections and other semitechnical work. Starting salary for an Engineering Aide II should be $10,000 to $13 ,000 annually . It is estimated that 75-85 percent of the new employee ' s time will be billed to projects . W f. I CITY OF SHAKOPEE INCORPORATED 1870 129 E. FIRST AVE. 55379 �l CERTIFICATE OF MiPLETION T0: Common Council City of Shakopee Shakopee , 1. inn. Date : October 30, 1978 Contractor: Northwest Bituminous Completion Date : October 10, 1978 The above named contractor has completed a construction contract for: Street Construction in Horizon Heights and Eaglewood Contract dated : June 12 , 1977 Wo-k coiin,ancc(`.I : June 20, 1977 V11er'_: coninlet,�d : October 10, 1978 k,'!ork o.eeepted : October 17 , 1978 Init=o.?_ contract estimate : $112 ,443 .28 Total cn-cArLa t complete in place (incl. cnaii e orders) : $127 , 530.87 Less wi thou�_ng 0 -A:�__ L,�ss prey".oL :. $104, 365 .20 Charges and Deductions '- T:1Y1:!LP1T PYjj` T 7 PST. $18, 317 .34 T BITUMINOUS CO., INC i 'y Ln i er C o a t r a c t 0 Y its -I S 7 O Da.i;,� r Date The Heart of Fr , press i � ' ey December 29, 1978 TO: Governor-elect Albert Quie Chairman and members - Metropolitan Council Legislators, County Commissioners, Local Elected Officials - Precinct H Other interested agencies FROM: Gayle M. Kincannon Metropolitan Transit Commissioner - Precinct H This memorandum is to inform you of my intent to apply for a full term as transit commissioner and to ask for your consideration. Most of you will recall the circumstances surrounding my appointment 18 months ago. The 1977 legislature , less than satisfied with the direction of the Metropolitan Transit Commission, terminated the appointment of four commissioners, legislated new transit goals, and established the performance funding concept. The Metropolitan Council, responding to that legislative direction and hoping to improve their own relationship with the MTC, appointed four new commissioners. Since that time , good progress has been made in meeting those legislative goals as exemplified by: - a marked increase in ridership; - the lowering of the per passenger trip subsidy requirement; - the establishment of per route and per trip subsidy limits; - elimination of unproductive service and fare zone adjustments; and - significantly, this will be the first time since public ownership of the system that the MTC will not ask for an increase over the previous biennium for regular route subsidy. During this time I have been actively involved on behalf of the commission and this precinct having : - authored a commission policy that no community presently served will be denied service until a suitable alternative is found; - been elected chair of the MTC Operations Committee; - been elected to represent the MTC on the Transportation Advisory Board; - been the mover and primary policy maker in the development of an area-wide transit plan for the elderly and handicapped, and - actively lobbied for the additional funds provided by the 1978 legislature, an essential part of which was obtaining $500 ,000 for handicapped transportation in the metropolitan area for public, non-profit providers (i .e. , county programs) believing they could provide good service at a cost this area could afford and cheaper than could the MTC; -2- - been the only commissioner invited to testify at Senate Transportation Committee public hearings on transit, paratransit and E & H matters; - represented the commission in meeting and discussing the MTC ' s 1979 legislative program with the Senate Sub-committee on Transit ' s chairman and staff; - moved an addition to the 1979 MTC legislative program requesting the legislature to rethink the Metropolitan Tran- sit Taxing District so as to make it consistent with the area transportation policy plan thereby allowing communities contributing to the operating subsidy through property tax to contribute based on the service they receive and will receive in the future; - attempted to obtain paratransit demonstration funds for this precinct (a project in the Lake Minnetonka area was accepted while one in the Burnsville , Apple Valley, Eagan area was rejected) ; - actively promoted and participated in ridership promotions in Scott, Carver and Dakota counties; - inaugurated new service as well as cut back when ridership did not warrant continued subsidy; - have essentially been a full-time commissioner attending over 275 meetings. This is almost a necessity since this precinct contains over half of the metropolitan area com- munities. I have the time and the commitment to continue my involvement at this level. Regarding the appointment - I have always been candid about my own political activity, knowing that without it there would be little opportunity to serve at this level, but further , having demonstrated my ability and been appointed, my efforts have never been partisan. My goal and personal satisfaction have always come from "making it work for everyone . " There is much more to be done, but I feel by performance during a short time merits re- appointment. However , I want you to know that I do not view the political appointment process as patronage, but rather , the party elected has responsibility to develop its own leadership. Since I believe that I have exhibited a level of participation and leadership superior to my predecessor , I will trust that your support and/or appointment of someone else means that individual has the time , potential and qualities that will serve this area even better . Again, I ask for your consideration. Ay RRes ctfully, roe �M. Kincannon �ECEr Metropolitan Transit Commissioner t� Precinct H 110709 Kings Lane ,�°�� Chaska, Minnesota 55318 3 RESUME of GAYLE M. KINCANNON Address: 110709 Kings Lane Chaska, Minnesota 55318 Phone : (612) 448-4736 Born: St. Paul , Minnesota Age - 44 Married: James C. Kincannon, Ph.D. Associate Professor - School of Public Health University of Minnesota Program Director - Hennepin County Residential Center Education: St. Paul Public Schools Graduate of Murray High School , St. Paul - 1951 Macalester College - 1951-52 University of Minnesota - B.S. in Occupational Therapy with Distinction 1955 Employment: Therapist, supervisor , teacher University of Minnesota Hospitals, 1955-62 Public Service: 1968-70 Director - United Cerebral Palsy of St. Paul Board Chairman - Daytime Activity Center of UCP of St. Paul 1973-76 Director and officer - Jonathan Association (Homeowners group) 1974-77 Member - Mental Health Advisory Board , Carver County Since 1972 Officer or Director - Chaska League of Women Voters Delegate - Metropolitan Area Council, League of Women Voters Since 1974 Director and Vice-Chairman - District 112 School Board (elective) Since 1976 Member - Land Use Advisory Committee, Metropolitan Council (Chair - Sub-committee on Metropolitan Significance; member - Grants Subcommittee) Since 1977 Metropolitan Transit Commissioner - Precinct H Since 1977 Member - Inter-Agency Liaison Commission Region 11, Educational Cooperative Service Unit Since 1978 Member - Transportation Advisory Board CITY OF SHAKOPEE � . 129 East First Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 L t W Ga. 11 MEMO TO: Douglas S . Reeder, City Administrator FROM: Gregg M. Voxland, City Treasurer SUBJECT: Merrill Lynch Authorization DATE: December 28 1978 A resolution has been prepared authorizing an account with Merrill Lynch. The purpose of the resolution is to officially designate to Merrill Lynch City officials who are authorized to give the company directions concerning investments . Merrill Lynch provides the investment service and also monitors the market with specialists in government securities and provides advice about upcoming issues . I consider having the option of investing through Merrill Lynch an important part of our cash management program. DMV/jiw +r CITY OF SHAKOPEE FEASIBILITY REPORT Sanitary Sewer Service North of Valley Industrial Boulevard County Road 83 to Valley Park Drive 1�1 2��v�-�,r, l�/z e 1-78 -Pifepared by: 28/7 Approved 7 or Subm' ttal December, 1978 INTRODUCTION Valley Industrial Park was annexed to the City of Shakopee in October, 1971 , from Eagle Creek Township . Water, sanitary sewer and roadway construction took place when Valley Industrial Park was part cf Eagle Creek Township . Development plans and an engineering analysis were prepared in November, 1967 , by Midwest Planning and Research, Inc . , and Schoell and Madison, Inc. The Valley Industrial Park, County Road 83 and Valley Park Drive were bid in 1969 . Schoell and Madison were the engineers and Don Parrot Construction was the general contractor . Construction included watermain and sanitary sewer. The "as built" plans follow very closely the construction plans . All construction plans received approval from the Valley Industrial Park Planning "group" before any work was done . The location and direction of flow for the existing sanitary sewer was requested by Jerry Bylund of VIP to limit divisions of property.* Scottland, Inc . has proposed using the north side of Valley Industrial Boulevard for lots that require rail service . In order for these lots to have rail service, the building floor elevation must be at an elevation four feet above the rail . At that elevation, the proposed builcings will not be able to use the existing gravity sanitary sewer. The attached exhibit outlines in red the property that can not be served by the existing sanitary sewer and rail . This area amounts to approximately 26 .17 acres . The area is divided into lots A-G. Lots A-F are 3001x 500' and Lot G is approximately 400' x 600' . ' Design_Criteria Design criteria for the sanitary sewer was based on a peak flow rate of 5000 gallons per acre per day . That waste water would be pumped or flow by gravity to the Shakopee Interceptor, which in turn flows to Blue Lake Treatment Facility . *See Appendix To serve Lots A-G several alternatives have been analyzed. Different alternatives considered are : 1 . Public lift stations . 2 . Individual Private Lift Stations . 3 . Gravity Sanitary Sewer System . Alternative I : Public Life Stations would serve more than one lot . By serving more than one lot, the maintenance and operation responsibilities and all other control elements of the pressure sewer system would have to be placed with the City. The City of Shakopee would not accept the maintenance and operation responsibilities as this problem was not created by the City and the need for the lift stations stems from the desire of being able to use railroad service directly . A public lift station concept would require four different pumping locations . The type of pump would be a duplex pumping system. These units should have some type of emergency energy source . A generator for these units would increase the cost substantially. Construction cost of four public lift stations : Item Quan tity Unit Price Cost Duplex Pumping System (3 hp) 4 10,000 $40,000 Generators 4 6 ,000 24,000 Installation 10,000 Construction Cost $74,000 Contingencies 10% 7 ,400 $81 ,400 Estimated construction cost of $81 ,400 does not reflect operation and maintenance costs. Assuming no inflation, operation and maintenance costs for a twenty (20) year life expectancy would have a present worth of $70, 700 at 7 . 5% interest . Total cost of the four public lift stations would have an estimated total cost of $152 , 100. -2- Alternative II Individual private lift stations for each of the lots is a possibility. This alternative utilizes private packaged lift stations which pump sewage from individual lots to the existing sewer system in Valley Industrial Boulevard . The size of each of these individual lift stations would depend on the type of industry that is built . Maintenance and operation of the lift station would be the responsibility of each individual industry. The type of pump required would be a duplex pumping system. Each one of these units should have a generator as a back up energy source . Con- struction cost of seven (7) individual private lift stations : ITEM QUA14TITY UNIT PRICE COST Duplex Pumping system (2hp) 7 $7000 $49 ,000 Generators 7 $5000 $35 ,000 Installation 173500 Construction Cost $101 , 500 Contingencies 10% 10, 150 Estimated Construction Cost $111 , 650 The estimated total construction cost of the seven ( 7) individual private lift stations would be $111 ,650. This cost does not include operation and maintenance . Alternative III A new gravity sanitary sewer system across the north side of Lots A-G would have to connect into one of three locations . These three locations are located at M.H. 11 on Valley Park Drive, M.H. 3 located on Valley Industrial Boulevard or the Shakopee Interceptor along Highway 101 . Connection to M.H. 11 can not be accomplished as the sanitary sewer would be higher than the railroad tracks at Lot A by 6 feet . The connection at M.H. 3 is also ruled out due to the elevation of M.H. 3 . The final alternative connection for a gravity sanitary sewer would be across the north side of Lots A-G and then North to the Shakopee Interceptor. This alignment is feasible . The estimated cost of gravity sewer is as follows : -3- ITEM QUAN TITY UNIT' PRICE COST 10" VCP 2900 ft . 15 .00 $43 , 500 M.H. 9 1000.00 $ 9 ,000 Rock Excavation 1300 c .y. 22 . 50 29 , 250 Services 10 200 .00 2 ,000 Bedding Material 1000 C .Y . 4.00 45000 Construction Cost $87 , 750 Contingencies 10% 83775 $96 , 525 The estimated construction cost is approximately $96 , 525 . This estimate could be increased by; ,a significant amount due to variations in rock. In order to establish a better estimate , rock borings will have to be taken. Slope and Drainage Lots A-G are presented with some unique problems if rail service is to be provided four feet below proposed building elevations . Valley Industrial Boulevard will vary from 7 ft . to 15 . 86 ft . higher than the building elevations . This will create driveways to range from 14C ft to 317 ft . , if a slope of 5% is to be maintained from the building elevation to Valley Industrial Boulevard. Lots A-G are also presented with a drainage problem if they are built for rail service . Drainage flows North across this property and with slopes that steep, some type of storm water drainage plan will have to be designed to accomodate this land use . Recommendations Through the research of past correspondence , it is evident that rail service was not one of the priorities in the design of the sanitary sewer. The main consideration in the design was to provide sanitary sewer to the property at the lowest cost , which was accomplished . In order to provide service off the existing line , some earth work will have to be done . If rail service is necessary, it is the recommendation of this report that the gravity sanitary sewer line be installed. This line would service Lots A-G and might be used for property North of the railroad tracks . A gravity flow sanitary sewer has the -4- following advantages over the lift station concept : 1 . Lower true cost . 2 . More dependable . 3 . Property values retained . The disadvantages of the gravity sewer line 1 . Additional cost added to lot ($13 ,000 plus per lot if there are 7 lots) . 2 . Easement acquisition required north of railroad tracks . -5- A P P E N D I X DR\VEW A1� LENGTH - SLOPE S �� F�Oc� �Ot�D �0 QU�L01� � ELV. A \yo ;4 b 2.0 tq iA C zs6�4 D a:-(0 r4 E 290 �4 F 31l 14 G 300 f+ c LOT A LOT 0 DoT C �-UT D LOT' E LOT F LOT G 2510 21 O V O 311 300 b wo vALLF� zNowS � �L j30vX LEA/ K 'c-1 �`N E PROFILES Y,o LOT A 1-OT Q LO'T G LOT D LOT IE LOT F LOT C� 165 lbo i c ITS S LLD GL -157's, i - IS? l50 A ly5 0 300 boo 900 %200 %S00 two �w E Eagle Creek Town Board Page 3 June 12, 1969 A recap of the above costs is tabulated below: STRUCTURE ASSESSABLE ASSESSMENT REQUIRED AREA RATE ADDITIONAL MILL LEVY Sanitary Sewer Laterals 401 A. $758/A. - Water Tank and Well 1,178 A. Ult. $227/A. - Water Tank and Well, (alternate) 321 A. $227/A. 8k Mills Initially Water Laterals and Oversizing 401 A. $583/A. 0.6 Mills Water Laterals and Oversizing 321 A. $583/A. 2.6 Mills (Alternate Method) We have reviewed the_Profiles for the san�itary an$ storm sekr„g,�nd find that we can delete the north-south line through the center of Area I, on aTpr_oposed easement, and substi5ute a little more„caUa ityin.,the�llne running north on Count Road 83,_ without additional cost. this was SUR- �este�1Jerryw_BZlund of VIP_inorder not to require a division.-....along the easement line. .. _..............�.�......._...r. �... _.. If there are any further questions about this project, we will be glad to discuss them with you. Very truly yours, SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. 1 WDSchoell:sd att sketch SCHOELL & MAOSON, INC. J f ENGINEERS ANO SURVEYORS WILLIAM D. SCHOELL CARLISLE MADSON ( PHONE 938-7814 50 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH • HOPKINS, MINNESOTA 55343 Dec. 21, 1970 Mr. John H. B. Martin IDS Properties, Inc. Baker Building J Minneapolis, Minn. 55402 Subject: Valley Industrial Park Spur Track Extension Dear Mr. Martin: In regard to your memo of December 15th, our files indicate that the proposed grades for "D" Street and 3rd Street received verbal approval from the 'Valley Industrial Park Planning "group" before the street grad- ing and surfacing job went ahead. We might say parenthetically that if the grade of 3rd Street had been lowered 7k' where the railroad suggests, the track would have been about 15 ' below the present level of ground on the south side of 3rd Street, the property it is to serve. Also, at no time during our Mr. Leer's conversations with the railroad was a maximum grade of 1.75% mentioned. We suggest that if the railroad feels it can not operate on a grade greater than 1.75%, the location of the proposed track extension be changed to some other location where it can be worked into the topog- raphy and the area it is to serve more feasibly. Very truly yours, SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. WDSchoell:sd cc: Jim Hawks 3 ex cc w/orig. 1A x, MEMORANDUM -e 4 December 15, 1970 TO: Charles F. Hall FROM: John H. B. Martin RE: Valley Industrial Park Spur Track Extension I have completed my review of the portion of newly proposed platting at Valley Industrial Park as it relates to the possible future extension south- erly of the railroad spur track immediately west of the Twin City Tile tract. It appears that the planning on the road grades for the new road installed this past summer was not coordinated with the railroad spur track grading. Having reviewed the situation with Mr. George Nick of the Chicago North- western Railroad, Industrial Department, we find that the street was graded and paved at least seven feet too high to permit a spur track crossing in the area previously designated. Mr. Nick stated that a l-1,% grade is all their policy permits but that in a difficult situation like this , he could possible stretch it to 1 .75% grade. The 1 .75% grade leaves the street seven feet too high. The sanitary sewer in this area appears to be placed at approximately 758 feet having 111-, feet of cover. It may be that the street could be lowered but there does .not appear to be any reasonably feasible way of maintaining the proposed alignment in this area. I am sending copies of this memo to Mr. Bill Schoell of Schoell & Madson , Inc. , Township Engineer, and to Mr. Jim Hawks of Midwest Planning, and request their advisement as to their thoughts in this matter. JHBM/kan cc: 8r. Schoel I J. Hawks R. Hovelson W. Durfee D. Sherman �+ IrATE HIGH W Ai VAi ILf dOULLVAHO NORTH Y ny O II 0 6 1 yl ad v P r' EXISTING CHICAGCv fl NORTHWESTERIk RAILROAD TRACKS - v m- v Q Z Ez Z Q= +Y +•i'.H a•k.S a•i'+.4 al.. •. +°,:,;; •t.16 ',! aF.47 ■b56 af,f 8 •fi/8 ,AB9 •+,e�. ..Be, f1YG -- - - -- - -. _ HYD - - - - .. .. HYD- - - - - - - - -- --HYD- --- ------ -HYU HYU H)1) VALLEY INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD SOUTH 1 ! CITY OF SHAKOPEE 129 East First Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 MEMO TO Douglas S . Reeder , City Administrator 'PROM, H. R. Spurrier, City Engineer � '� SUBJECT: Holmes Street Feasibility Study DA'Z'E: December 26 , 1978 Pursuant to the requirements of Resolution No . 1346 , ordering preparation of a report for improvements along Holmes Street from First Avenue to Tenth Avenue, we must collect certain survey information so that we may prepare the report . We have received three proposals for that work and these proposals are as follows : Valley Engineering Company, Inc . Suburban Engineering, Inc . Schoell & Madson, Inc . I am interested in determining the particular qualifications of firms in this area and, therefore , recommend that Valley Engineering be authorized to perform the work. HRS/jiw Y , E,,a.:... CITY OF 129 East First Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 MEMO TO: _ Mayor & City Council FR0M:__Dw4&las S . Reeder , City Administrator SUBJECT: Easement Agreement DATE:___ December 26 , 1978 The attached agreement was entered into by the City and William Pearson at the time an easement was granted to the City of Shakopee for the construction of the sewer and watermain for Cretex and School Bus Sales . The agreement failed to address the question of who would pay the sewer and water hook-up and availability fees . I believe it was an .oversight by both parties . The following fees are now due in order for Mr. Pearson to get water meter and hook-up . Water Connection - $200.00 \, Water Inspection - 10.00 �? n Water Meter - 57 .00 Sewer Availability Charge 400.00 Sewer Inspection Charge 10.00 State Surcharge . 50 TOTAL $410. 50 I made the offer to Mr. Pearson that the City will pay the cost of all the charges for the water if he will agree to take care of all the sewer charges , or at least not fight the City for these but fight the Waste Control Commission if he wants . He has agreed and I have told the Utility Commission to issue the meter and the City would pay $267 .00 and charge it to the project I believe this is a fair disposition of this apparent misunderstanding. Recommendation: Council authorize the payment of the water fees for this property owner and charge the cost to the project . DSR/jiw City of Shakopee BP# BUILDING DEPARTMENT 129 E. 1st Ave. 55379 445-3650 PLUMBING AND HEATING PERMIT SITE ADDRESS --_____ ___Y — LEGAL DESCRIPTION OWNER/CONTRACTOR _ PLUMBING COMPANY HEATING COMPANY Permission is hereby granted to the above Licensee to perform the following work in strict accordance with the Shakopee Ordinances: DESCRIPTION OF PLUMBING WORK: Sewer Connection Y� Water Connection Meter � Plumbing Other Number, Kind and Location of Fixtures W air, Halh Wash Ftour Wal Dish lose ~bower IAs His-, SuiAs e, Water Gas Other Fixtures Drinking (rays Drains Healer Washer Disposal Soflner Urinals Outlets in Basement Fuunlams 1st Slur* - -- lnd Slur* lyd Slor* DESCRIPTION OF HEATING WORK: Kind of building Used as No. of Burners to be installed _ New Replacement Type of Equipment: Conversion Firm Gas Dual Fuel Gas Pressure Gas Design: GA HW Space Heater Unit Heater Direct Fire FA Steam Wall Heater Floor Furnace Othr Type Trade Name_ -- Model# Max. Input ration of equipment BTU. Heat loss of area to be heated -- — BTU. Input set at _ BTU. Piping to be installed: Size Length_ feet. Supply Pressure Air Conditioner Units Model# Water Meter$- rI. z')L Heating$ State Sur Charge$ 1 11�29 Water$ �h, �> > Plumbing$ Penalty$ Sewer$ • C�:� Gas$ '34(f ,/o l) c� Cj Other$ Lc'a.-_U"'"J�.,('� - .[- Total Fee$ Water Location at Curb DIG AND LOCATE ALL SEWER AND WATER Sewer Location at Curb CONNECTIONS BEFORE DIGGING DITCH TO HOUSE. Permit Restrictions: MAKE APPOINTMENT FOR INSPECTION NO LESS THAN FOUR WORKING HOURS BEFORE INSPECTION IS DESIRED. umbing aild Heating Inspector, ity of Shako pee !NSPECTION HOURS: MONDAY - FRIDAY 9:OOA.M. to 4:OOP.M. 7 Shakopee, Minn. 7Ji White-Inspector Yellow-File Pink,-Alp icant I ;, i G GN 2 0 •rl N ca CU .-+ EASI-34:111' IV o r-+ P a 1+N .�.+ o o 'HIS TAS11�1h:1V1 made this ! d<iy of Jule, 1978, by WI1d.IAM G. PEARSON cc►�+ .>-hs W-ARET PEARSON, husband and wife, Parties of the First Part, to the CITY EPEE, a nwlicipal corporation situated in Scott County, Minnesota, Party of the Secoi,d Part. In consideration of Five 'lhou.5�uid (;5,l)OU.00) Dollars in hand paid by the Party of the Second Part, the receipt and sufficiency of which the Parties of the First Part do hereby acknowledge, the Parties of the First Part hereby grant, convey and sell to the Party of the Second Part, its successors and assigns, [he C-AStVk'nt described in Exhibit "A" hereto attached and made a part hereof, over and across the land described in said Exhibit "A" together with the right to install, maintain, repair, use, enlarge, modify and service said installation for the purposes therein described. IT IS FURTHER nJTL -LY AGREED BY AND 852 the parties hereto, as follows: I. That the Parties of the First Part, their successors and assigns, shall have all the rights of usage of the easement area for such Purposes, but not necessarily limited to, parking, fencing, and Planting of trees or shrubbery; provided, however, that no permanent structures or trees shall be placed directly over the utilities installed in said easement area. Parties of the First Part, their successors and assigns, shall have the further right to pave or blacktop tine easement area. 2. There shall be no restriction of the right of access over and across the easent-,nt area, for any purpose, and specifically there shall be no limitation on the weight of the vehicles crossing or parked within the easement area. 3. The easement herein shall be used to measure any required setback distances for structures or buildings which are now or nay hereafter "be proposed for the abutting sites. 4. Party of the Second Part agrees to allow a mi.nin in of four service connections for the abutting; sites as to any utility located within said easenunt area. 5. if aly (191rtge is done to the property described ill said easeiient t area, or abutting property, during the installation, or subsequent construction or maintenance of these facilities, the Party of the Second Part agrees that it will be responsible for said damage, and will proiq)tly ;old at its expense hike repairs to the damage-1 ?roperty inC1LU11E1�„ but not necessarily lilnitc'd to, the rcplaccm=nt of any parking lot and its appurtenances. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunto set their hands the day and year first above written. PARTIES OF 111E FIRST PART: 4il =n G. Pearson R Mar are Pearson PARTY OF THE SECOND PART: City of Shakopee AND BY STATE OF MINNESUFA) ) ss COUNTY OF 1iIMMITIN) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of June, 1978, by William G. Pearson and Margaret Pearson, his wife. Don R. BundIie Notary Public, Hennepin County, Minnesota My C vuiission Expires : June 3, 1981 UONALD R 13"DLIE 4 t• NOTARY PUBLIC - MINNESOTA { 11 NC�yNLNiN COI�NTY '`' kit Cu,m.11n k.y,.• lna ). IYBI ■vWVW`�v a Y�VV ..a y CITY OF SHAKOPEE / } . 129 East First Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 MEMO TO: City Council FROM: Douglas S . Reeder, City Administrator SUBJECT: Voting Machines DATE: December 27 , 1978 The City of Crystal is selling their voting machines and going to the punch card system we had suggested would be best here . Other cities in the Metropolitan area have done the same thing probably because of the high cost of these machines , the large size , and the maintenance requirements . These are probably the type of machines you learned how to use in high school . Big booth with little levers . The cost new is about $300 . It is my recommendation that we not buy these machines , but wait and eventually buy the punch card system. DSR:nae Phone: 537-8421 CityV # A cRV AL M N1 L sUaDN 41 "1 DOLUG S DRIVE NORTH CRY TAL OTA 55422 ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE December 21 , 1978 Mr. Doug Reeder, Administrator City of Shakopee 129 East First Street Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Doug: Enclosed is a list of voting machines which are available from the City of Crystal . I have indicated those which in number have been set aside for other communities. The particular machine may not be set aside for that community, but I did want to indicate how many machines had been reserved. If you are interested in purchasing machines from the City of Crystal , the price per machine is $325. This would include the tools and materials that go with each voting machine. If you have questions about this, please call me. Yours truly, John A. Olson Administrative Assistant JAO:pjr Enclosure REM pGC 2 2 CITE( OF S�►�OP�E �r Voting Machine Numbers Protective Counter Number 1064 0 106451 5, 938 7 ,263 106452 06453 5, 740 6 , 384 106455 5, 794 106456 6 ,581 106457 5 ,631 106458 5 ,943 106459 6 ,101 106460 Cl i" 0_' GOLD_':; 7:-L J-;r' 8 ,057 106461 5 ,563 106462 6 , 944 106463 6 , 474 106464 6 ,267 106465 6 , 325 106466 7 ,589 106467 7,598 106468 5 ,581 106469 6 ,592 106470 7 ,573 110499 8 ,100 11613 5 ,954 111614 7 ,926 111615 111616 _' 1,;C,;;,;aI;�' 5 , 794 111617 6 ,905 111618 8 , 157 5 , 341 124011 4 ,011 124012 4, 371 124013 4 , 175 124014 5 , 408 124015 3 ,964 124016 4 ,278 124017 4 , 290 124018 3 ,473 i • 1978 COUNCIL LIAISON APPOINTMENTS 1/3 Shakopee School Board Cncl . Hullander 1/3 Shakopee Recreation Board Cncl . Lebens 1/3 Public Utilities Comm. Cncl . Reinke 1/3 Joint Seven Man Committee . Cncl . Ward 1/3 Shakopee Fire Department Cncl . Leroux 1/3 Scott County Board Mayor Harbeck Planning Commission 1/3 League of Metro . Municipalities Cncl .Hullander 1/3 Shakopee Bypass Committee Mayor Harbeck 11/21 Community Education Douglas S. Reeder Advisory Council qj6 Police Civil Service Comm. Mayor Harbeck r • CITY OF SHAKOPEE G 129 East First Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 'L _[M * ' MEMO Mayor & City T O: y X Council FROM: Douglas S . Reeder, City Administrator SUBJECT-1979 Legislation .DATE: December 28 , 1978 In order to keep Shakopee informed cn legislative matters and to help the League of Minnesota Cities, I have volunteered my services to be a legislative contact person for the 1979 legislation. This will involve some time on my part , but I think time well spent . As part of this program, I am requested to meet with the legislators now just to discuss our concerns and needs . I plan to set up such a meeting and in addition, would think it may be appropriate to invite them to a future Council meeting to discuss the City ' s needs . If you want to do this, I will meet with the legislators and invite them to a future Council meeting at which I will suggest some discussion topics. DSR/jiw w • �r�I� CITY OF SHAKOPEE �1 s,1" 129 East First Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 MEMO TO: City Council FROM: Douglas S . Reeder, City AdmiEistrator SUBJECT: Towing Contract DATE: December 29 , 1978 It is recommended that the towing contract for the City of Shakopee be awarded to the lowest bidder, Leverae Vassar & Co . , Division of State Wide Auto Salvage , Inc . , 285 Flying Cloud Drive . DSR: nae CITY OF SHAKOPEE TOWING CONTRACT BID OPENING DECEMBER 29, 1978 , 2 :.00 P. A. TOWING CHARGES TOWING CHARGES VOWING CHARGES LARGE VEHICLE TYPE I TYPE II TYPE III TOWING CHARGES INSIDE STORAGE OUTSIDE STORAGE BIDDER DAY NIGHT DAY NIGHT DAY NIGHT 1st 24HRS ADD"L 1st 24HRS ADD' L Tri-S Towing 15 .25 20.25 20.75 25 .75 35 .00 35 .00 35 .00 4. 50 4 . 50 3 .25 3 .25 Steve M. Hentges Co . Total Points 22 .5 7 .5 10 5 Cy' s Standard 312 West First Ave . Total Points I LeVerne Vassar 14.5 19 . 50 24 . 50 24 . 50 29 .00 29 .00 35 .00 5 .00 5 .00 2 .00 3 .00 285 Flying Cloud Dr. Total Points 72 . 5 15 15 7 . 5 5 5 , 15 10