Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/29/1993 TENTATIVE AGENDA ADJ.REG. SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JUNE 29, 1993 Location: Council Chambers, 129 Holmes Street So. Mayor Gary Laurent presiding 1) Roll Call at 7: 00 P.M. 2) Reappointment of Ms. Bonnie Featherstone To Met Council 3] Approval of 1993 Intoxicating Liquor Licenses 4] Approval of 1993 On Sale Wine License 5] Approval of 1993 Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor Licenses 6] Shakopee Rotary Premises Permit - Res. No. 3822 7) Other Business: 8] Adjourn Dennis R. Kraft City Administrator TENTATIVE AGENDA SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE JUNE 29, 1993 Mayor Gary Laurent presiding Joint Meeting with Planning Commission and Community Development Commission 1] Roll Call at 7 : 15 P.M. in Council Chambers at City Hall 2] Alternative Land Use Planning Strategies 3] Other Business: 4 ) Adjourn Dennis R. Kraft City Administrator MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Lindberg S. Ekola, City Planner RE: Reappointment of Ms. Bonnie Featherstone To the Metropolitan Council DATE: June 18, 1993 INTRODUCTION: Staff is requesting that a letter from Mayor Laurent, representing the City of Shakopee, be sent to Governor Carlson recommending the reappointment of Ms. Bonnie Featherstone to the Metropolitan Council. DISCUSSION: Although Ms. Featherstone will no longer be representing the City of Shakopee at the Metropolitan Council due to redistricting, staff is recommending her reappointment. As a member of the Metropolitan Council, she has worked hard to represent the southwest area's interests, as well as the City of Shakopee's on various issues on the past two years. She has worked hard to temper the Metropolitan Council's staff positions on development issues in the southwest area. Ms. Featherstone was originally considered an outsider for Scott and Carver Counties since she resided in the City of Burnsville. Over the past two years Ms. Featherstone has frequently attended the Southwest Coalition meetings on a regular basis and has actively pursued the southwest's interests at the Metropolitan Council. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that a letter be sent to Governor Carlson recommending the reappointment of Ms. Bonnie Featherstone to the Metropolitan Council. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer a motion to forward a letter to Governor Carlson recommending that Ms. Bonnie Featherstone be reappointed to the Metropolitan Council, and move its approval. e _ . 50 June fi, 1993 Honorable Governor Carlson RE: Reappointment of Ms. Bonnie Featherstone Dear Governor Carlson: ZK On , 1993 the Shakopee City Council passed a motion recommending that Ms. Bonnie Featherstone be reappointed to the Metropolitan Council. In working with Ms. Featherstone over the past two years, we have found her to have a strong commitment to both local and regional planning. She has provided consistent direction and vision in her tenure as a Metropolitan Council member. With several new appointments to the Metropolitan Council, we believe that her experience will be essential for the region. With this letter we strongly urge you to reappoint Ms. Bonnie Featherstone to the Metropolitan Council. Sincerely, Gary L. Laurent Mayor of Shakopee MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Renewal of Intoxicating Liquor Licenses DATE: June 23, 1993 Introduction The following applicants have applied for 1993-94 Liquor License (s) . Staff has checked for delinquent property taxes and utility bills . The building inspector has advised me that all premises are in conformance with the City Code. Renewals should not be delayed because of upcoming hearings on violations involving Cheers and Jerry' s bar. After the required hearings, Council may take appropriate actions . The following applications noted "approved" are in order for Council consideration. Those that are marked "table" are not in order and should be tabled if they are not in order by Tuesday. I will report on Tuesday. Recommended Action Approve the application(s) and grant an Off Sale, On Sale, Sunday, and/or Club Intoxicating Liquor License (s) to: Action Applicant On Sale Sunday Off Sale Club Approve Bretbecca, Inc . X X X (dba Pullman Club) 124 West 1st Avenue Approve Camgill, Corporation X X X (dba Rock Spring Supper Club) 1561 E. 1st Avenue Approve Clair' s Bar, Inc . X X X (dba Jerry' s Bar) 124 South Holmes Approve Dangerfield' s Restaurant X X Inc. 1583 E. 1st Avenue Approve J & D of Shakopee, Inc. X X (dba Cheers 2 Ya) 911 East 1st Avenue On Sale Sunday Off Sale Club Approve MIN Hotel Corp. X X (dba Canterbury Inn) 1244 Canterbury Road Approve Turtle' s Bar and Grill X X Inc. 132 East First Avenue Approve Corp - Tool, Inc. X X (Arnie' s Friendly Folks Club) 122 East First Avenue Approve Pablo' s Mexican Restaurant X Inc . 230 South Lewis Street Approve Family Dining X 6268 Hwy 101 Approve Riverside Liquors, Inc. X 507 E. 1st Avenue Approve Valley Liquor, Inc. X 1104 Minn. Valley Mall Approve Spirits of Shakopee, Inc. X 471 Marschall Road Approve The American Legion X X Club Post No. 2 1266 East 1st Avenue Approve Knights of Columbus Home X X Assn. , Inc . 1760 East 4th Avenue Approve VFW Post #4046, Inc. X X 1201 East Third Avenue JSC/trw • 91933 June 28, 1993 To : City Council Members As of June 28, 1993 J & D of Shakopee Inc. , dba Cheers 2 YA is withdrawing our application of renewal for our liquor license. I would like to express my strong feelings in regards to doing business in the city of Shakopee . As a tax payer of over one hundred-thousand dollars per year to the city and a resident of the city for over sixteen years . I feel we were treated unjustly for example ; I should not have to find out legal matters through word of mouth and the local paper. This should have been done in a legal manner. To continue on that same note how many times must I defend myself and my business on the same matters . I would like to point out a problem that you the city should have taken care of long ago . The so called private clubs in Shakopee, either they are private or not, If private they should fallow the private club rules and not serve to the pblic, if public they should have to do business just like the rest of us and pay the same to do so. I am entitled to an apology on the below subjects in print. A. After hours (found not guilty) B. Insurance policy (proof was given to the Cheif) C. Minor consumption (no one was ever produced and I was never charged) VGA, 9 With all the false publicity I have decided to discontinue doing business in the city of Shakopee. _ Sincerely, (11-1.ko__PZ Jerry Morehouse y MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerl(D RE: Renewal of On Sale Wine Licenses DATE: June 11, 1993 INTRODUCTION Cedar Fair L. P. has applied for an 1993-94 On Sale Wine License. The application from Cedar Fair L. P. is in order. ACTION REQUESTED Approve the application and grant an On Sale Wine License to Cedar Fair L. P. , One Valleyfair Drive. JSC/trw MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Renewal of Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor Licenses DATE: June 11, 1993 INTRODUCTION The following businesses have applied for a 1993-94 On and/or Off Sale Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor License . Staff has checked for delinquent property taxes and utility bills . The Building Inspector has advised me that all premises are in conformance with the City Code . All of the applications are in order for Council consideration, except those that indicate "table" . These should be tabled if they are not in order by Tuesday. I will place an update memo on the table . ACTION REQUESTED Approve the application (s) and grant an On Sale and/or Off Sale Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor License to: Approve/ Table Applicant On Sale Off Sale Approve Birch Bru, Inc. (SuperAmerica) X A 1155 East 1st Avenue Approve Cedar Fair L. P. X One Valleyfair Drive Approve Holiday Stationstores, Inc . X 444 East 1st Avenue Approve Pizza Huts of the Northwest, Inc . X 257 Marschall Road Approve Retail Foods of Minnesota, X a division of Gateway Foods, Inc . dba Brooks Food Market #28 615 Marschall Road Approve Raceway Park Inc. X One Checkered Flag Blvd. Approve Shakopee Ballroom & X Banquet Center, Inc. 2400 East 4th Avenue Approve/ Table Applicant On Sale Off Sale Approve Polka Dot Dairy, Inc. Tom Thumb Food Markets X 590 So. Marschall Road Approve Fraternal Order of Eagles X Aerie #4120 220 West 2nd Avenue Approve Retail Foods of Minnesota, X a division of Gateway Foods, Inc. dba Brooks Food Market #42 1147 Canterbury Road Approve Sene' s Inc. X dba Imperial Wok 237 East 1st Avenue Approve Stonebrooke of Shakopee, Inc. X 2693 County Road 79 JSC/trw 6 MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Premises Permit for Shakopee Rotary Club DATE: June 25, 1993 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: The Shakopee Rotary Club desires to renew their premises permit to sell pull tabs at the Pullman. They meet the requirements of the city code relating to gambling. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Offer Resolution No. 3822, A Resolution of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Approving A Premises Permit for the Shakopee Rotary Club, and move its adoption. RESOLUTION NO. 3822 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, APPROVING A PREMISES PERMIT FOR THE SHAKOPEE ROTARY CLUB WHEREAS, the 1990 legislature adopted a law which requires municipal approval in order for the Gambling Control Board to issue or renew a premises permit; and WHEREAS, Shakopee Rotary Club is seeking a renewal of their Premises Permit at Bretbecca, Inc. , 124 West 1st Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, AS FOLLOWS: That the Premises Permit for the Rotary Club at Bretbecca, Inc. , 124 West 1st Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota, be approved. Adopted in Session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of 1993 . Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form. City Attorney MEMO TO: City Council Planning Commission Community Development Commission FROM: Lindberg S. Ekola, City Planner RE: Joint Meeting on Alternative Land Use Strategies Memo No. 4 DATE: June 25, 1993 INTRODUCTION: On Tuesday, June 29, 1993 a joint meeting will be held by the members of the City Council, Planning Commission and the Community Development Commission to discuss alternative land use strategies for the City of Shakopee. In order to complete the planning process for the East Shakopee Area Transportation Study, the Comprehensive Sewer Plan, the Comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan, and the overall Comprehensive Plan a revised land use plan must be developed. With the construction of the regional transportation projects, several new development pressures are facing the City of Shakopee. A major policy decision from a land use perspective is needed to guide the growth of the community. It will become increasingly important for the City to take a lead role in developing a land use strategy prior to the completion of the regional transportation systems. The East Dean Lake area, in particular, will become increasingly attractive to the development community with the construction of the new CSAH 18 . BACKGROUND: What Has Happened So Far? Three alternative land use plans have been prepared to facilitate discussions on the major land use issues facing the City. These alternative land use plans cover the area within the East Shakopee • Area Transportation Study only. A copy of each of the three alternative land use plans has been attached to the end of the memo. The following is a list of each alternative with its generalized strategy: Alternative 1 - assumes a west to east growth pattern. Alternative 2 - assumes a east to west growth pattern. Alternative 3 - assumes a shared growth between both the west and the east areas of the community. 1 is a list of meetings hich have been held at the The following level on the development ofw commission a land use planning strategy co for the City: Meeting Date Group, Topics March 25 PC Presentation of alternative land use plans April 21 CDC Presentation of alternative land use plans April 22 PC Presentation of requested research May 13 PC/CDC Review of growth management techniques Review land use/transportation relationships June 3 PC Recommendation of the Major North- South Streets Characteristics Map The regional sewer treatment plant in Chaska operated by the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (MWCC) does not provide adequate capacity at the present time. To correct this problem, the MWCC has proposed to construct a major sewer line along the Shakopee Bypass to connect the Chaska sewer service area with the Blue Lake Sewer Treatment Plant. The MWCC and the Metropolitan Council have suggested that the City of Shakopee should pay a major portion of this regional sewer interceptor if the City wishes to connect its sewer system to the proposed interceptor. The City Council strongly disagrees with this cost sharing concept since it is contrary to the regional policies. A series of meetings are being held to address the MWCC- Chaska interceptor cost sharing concepts as will as other issues including the 2 . 5 acre lot size the paving of the CSAH 18 ramps. At the June 3 , 1993 meeting the Planning Commission passed a motion recommending to the City Council the adoption of the Major North- South Streets Characteristics Map. Please see Exhibit A. This map is intended to be a conceptual guide for the further development of the land use strategies. It neither establishes a time frame or development intensities but rather a general land use character along each of the major north-south streets which have interchanges with the Shakopee Bypass. These streets or highways include TH 169, CR 15, CR 17 , CR 83 and CSAH 18 . 2 DISCUSSION: What Are We Trying To Accomplish With This Land Use Planning Effort? 1. To promote and guide orderly growth for the City of Shakopee over the next 15 to 20 years. 2 . To solve the regional transportation issue of paving the CSAH 18 ramps. 3 . To provide guidance for the development of the City's Comprehensive Sewer Plan, Storm Water Management Plan, and the East Shakopee Area Transportation Study. These plans will enable the City to make better decisions on the construction of future infrastructure systems. 4 . To protect the investments made in the existing developed areas of the City such as the downtown and the industrial park. 5 . To address other land use issues in the east Shakopee area such as the Racetrack District. Unanswered Ouestions The Planning Commission and the Community Development Commission have raised numerous questions, many of which have been answered with additional input from staff and/or representatives from the development community. The following is a discussion on the unanswered questions. 1. Impact on Public School Services City staff met with Shakopee School District 720 (ISD 720) staff to review the impacts of the alternative land use plans. Alternatives 2 and 3 would eventually result in a population base large enough to likely require an additional elementary school in the East Dean Lake area (4, 000-6, 000 people) . An elementary school would require approximately 15 to 20 acres of land and would be best located within a residential area. Pedestrian routes for children should be considered early in the land use. planning process. The cost for an elementary • school could range from $5. 6 to $7 .0 million (without land) . Additional transportation and other operational costs would likely be incurred by the School District with increased residential growth in the east area of the City. 2 . Impact on Police Services The Police Department staff has reviewed the alternative land use plans and has provided some comments on preliminary financial impacts. Alternatives 2 and 3 would require an increase in personnel and equipment. A second police station 3 site would likely not be required with either alternative 2 or 3 . Police Department staff have estimated that an additional police sector with five officers would be required at a cost of approximately $250, 000 per year. An additional squad car and support services would cost approximately $30, 000 to $40, 000. The roxim approximately $300impact result ind 000 of additional costs year year to the City (in today's costs) . 3 . Impact on Fire Services The Fire Department staff has provided a memo (dated April 21, 1993) on the alternative land use plans (Exhibit B) . Since the memo was prepared, additional discussions have occurred on the location of a second fire station along or near CR 83 rather than CR 17 . The Fire Department staff feels that fire stations should be placed approximately 1. 5 miles apart in urbanized areas. The urbanized portion of the City of Shakopee is 7 . 5 miles wide (east to west) . As development occurs a second and eventually a third fire station will likely need to be constructed. Staff will present a large City map with fire station locations and 1. 5 mile radii. 4 . Impact on Public Works The Public Works Department staff has reviewed the alternative land use plans for cost impacts. The estimated annual maintenance costs for alternatives 2 and 3 would be as follows: Street $200, 000-$300, 000 Park $ 60, 000-$100, 000 Sewer $ 20 , 000-$ 30, 000 Total $280, 000-$430, 000 In terms of the Public Works facility, a second site would probably not be needed but rather a relocation to a more centralized site in the future urbanized area of the City may be more cost effective. Public Works staff will review their operations in more detail over the next several years and submit recommendations as appropriate. The cost to construct the various streets, sewers, water lines, etc. will generally be paid for by the development community. Developing an estimate for the construct costs of these facilities is not feasable until the specific land uses have been established. 4 5. Impact on Parks Based on the ratio of 3 acres of neighborhood park per 1, 000 population, approximately 12 to 18 acres of park land should be provided in the east Dean Lake area. This ratio and other park system standards have been established in the 1990-2020 Comprehensive Plan. The future park land can be acquired by the City through the subdivision platting process if it is properly planned. This type of acquisition (park land dedication) would be one of the benefits of the land use planning effort being undertaken. Another park has been proposed in the Comprehensive Plan to be located south of 4th Avenue and east of CR 17 along the Upper Valley Drainage Way. The land use plan has designated this area (south of the KC Hall) for multi-family residential uses. A 5 to 8 acre park is needed to serve these future residences. The cost to equip the future 20 to 25 acres of neighborhood park land could range up to $500, 000. 6. Impact on School District Boundaries One of the issues discussed in previous meetings has been the school district boundaries. The Burnsville/Eagan/Savage School District No. 191 crosses into the City of Shakopee and covers a portion of the Shakopee 500 property. The ISD 720 staff has commented on the history of the school district boundaries and the difficulty in changing these boundries. ISD 720 staff feels that the impact of the tax base has less effect on the school districts due to the State's equalization or redistribution of funds for education purposes. In addition, the Shakopee tax base is already very strong from the amount of commercial and industrial businesses in the community. A map of the district boundaries will be presented at the June 29 meeting. 7 . Impact on the Existing Commerical Areas The development of a regional shopping center on the east end of Shakopee would create both positive and negative impacts on the existing commercial ares in the City. To properly assess these impacts, staff would suggest defining the range of existing commercial uses in the City. A list of the major commercial areas in Shakopee includes the following: 1. Downtown 2 . East and West 1st Avenue 3 . Marschall Road corridor 4 . Shakopee Town Square 5 5. East Highway 101 (Valleyfair to the Stagecoach) 6. CR 83 corridor (near Canterbury Downs) 7 . 3rd Avenue West (frontage road) Clearly, these areas have a different character and would be impacted by a regional commercial center differently. Staff would encourage additional discussion on these impacts. The mix of specific uses in prescribed areas of the City can be guided in the zoning process. In the existing zoning ordinance for example, the City has already created three different commercial districts (B-1, Highway Business; B-2, Community Commercial; B-3 , Central Business District) . The permitted and conditional uses for each of these zoning districts were established to provide a complimentary mix of commercial uses across the withentire the City. addition The of same concept regional would need to be applied shopping center on the east end of the community. 8 . Vacant Land Inventory/Land Absorbtion Management of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) involves two basic research efforts. These research efforts are essential to the administration of the regional government policies. The first research effort needed is to determine the amount of vacant developable land within the existing MUSA. City staff is currently working with the Metropolitan Council staff to establish the current inventory. The Met Council policies allow for certain vacant lands to be excluded from the inventory of developable land. Areas with wetlands, floodplain, and/or bedrock may be excluded under certain circumstances. Staff will present results of this research at the June 29 meeting. The second research effort requires the development of land absorbtion rates for the major land uses (residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, and public) . The absorbtion rates are based on population, household, and employment projections. The land absorbtion rates should be provided in significant time frames such as the years 1995, 2000, 2010, 2020, etc. Staff will provide the most current absorbtion rates at the June 29 meeting. The three alternative land use plans represent three different generalized growth patterns. The discussion on June 29 should focus on these alternative land use strategies and their impacts on the community and its future. From this dicussion a recommendation to the City Council on one land use plan representing the selected growth strategy should be recommended to the City Council. 6 • ALTERNATIVES: 1. Recommend land use plan alternative No. 1. 2 . Recommend land use plan alternative No. 2 . 3 . Recommend land use plan alternative No. 3 . 4 . Provide specific changes to the land use plans and recommend a revised land use plan. 5. Direct the Planning Commission and the Community Development Commission to continue further studying the issues and request additional information from staff and/or the property owners. ACTION REQUESTED: Review and discuss the three alternative land use plans and the supplementary information. Forward a recommendation to the City Council on one land use plan. LSE/jms LANDUSE 7 EXHIBIT B SHAKOPEE FIRE DEPARTMENT Department Memo To: Shakopee Planning Commission Lindberg S. Ekola, City Planner From: Frank Ries, Fire Chief Date: April 21, 1993 Subject: Proposed Land Use Plan, East Shakopee Area Thison as Memt, on is a 2 number of the East Shakopee Area Transportation to the Ruest for additional l Study per quessta dated March 25, 1993 . An increase in population in this area would dictate more calls to the Deans Lake Area. The average response time from our present station is over 12 - 15 minutes. This response time and mileage to a call is usually not considered adequate. Therefore additional station(s) , equipment and fire fighters will be required. Several factors should be considered in determining the placement and number of station(s) . * What is the acceptable response time to a call? We believe stations should be approximately 1. 5 miles apart. This is based on ISO (insurance service office) . * Where should the placement of these station(s) be? The place of these stations must be based on needs (people and structure to protect) and a supply of fire fighters living in the area to support the station in a short response time. A station in the area of Vierling Dr. and East of County Rd. 17 would be within the 1. 5 mile radius and a number of fire fighters already reside in the area to man the station. This station is already in the he planning stages. ( See Shakopee Capital Improvement Plan) . growth occurs an additional station my be necessary in the area east of Deans Lake near the NSP peaking plant. The speed at which this area grows will dictate when this station will be required. Summary: An additional fire station, equipment and personnel may be needed for the Deans Lake Area in addition to the proposed station. iiktiiip : 0 o§ .10---iliosiniMalb .41. ii / DoE1,:i ' Alt. itY> 4 _.. ..1___„..__.1._ ... ..fflivaimml k rarki. .._1. ' , \\ A,...-lit '< iii ji izza ,..7" ,,‘, I1111I I +111 ''' .- .i. -:.0. . I ,,:.1 M • • Hall.' JIB ,,,,- ,ii. _, aim . -- , , ___,_ ; ,, ,..,.„.;.,... " .., ... i , _ n i ,, 1._ , N , ILE 1.,ril Itaill i .I A S �I� C ,i -- P'P ��egpis in . (n g . r— . MMS W rr4s i�. = „ ,,i ws i tt"Id I. .., r q 1/4” i'cwAP . I, t4w, I i ....- i. 0 , E. ^ lir .r:J w ''� l 1 l r...16 A� Nit j n c oo ., s !bra '1 CI) `� c 11 9 a :� . p.areM ., 1-0 sID o • -.., .. 5.2.: - no ,.f.. F- ;"3 : c§, r.,' - (t) (-h. f-4-. gra _ AIL , WWI. 9' g' - AD -:<(-) fT,' gr. L wa , „6. - B R. .? ', p (..... \C fv, m.•. r w C7 ,,, v� r* mn ' b Iç 'F \ yI WPM' I. CD )1 Caqiiir F.; 11 I / PZJ • a i= ,.., s i , sm in [ , , - °C) 11 • •iff I v" , J r`P '� C -- - -� Iyr A Ell ! 6,-. jg' _!� , 4., 431 -3 Mil r _ 4111 • ,c),A , , ir . „. .:, . . ____. :,,, , ....... , .. -- ;;;* _ �1-r lel / . ": ‘ .0-, M M 11 I / Itl, „ , / ....., . .mrmi Nr I ..: - ' -1.--_____ P, ,..., ----- !1.-----....- ' .;:i 4 .::. 1., E. ......_,... , , , ,,. ...„ ,,, ,,, .. . /. „ic.1,,.,..!,,.. , ---p_ re, , rg. 11 710 I__ ,/c, . . A 2,...,2.! 4 lii N. ilF,Dv p.m= __,, _ g E ro to 1. NW' .. 111.1011. I (9: NM , ; Li) 4. ).1.4 i!At ,,., J. , ,/ irt..)' ,' _ � j' Fr ,tr.!Aal I M �o�ll 1 �I ./' f l \ •, .- ." '.'��•�`t / '° �1� �.2, :i,., i Ihilt !ri' IM _ N• - V IIaIHX1 Q w • (n Q 1— w CC U Z ›- er C Y - W J W CY W p Ld F- (7 < J " U Li 0 cn Z — o I— L'- U (n Q Q Q LJ W p L W F- F- N J p - OC (� I = > Z D w Y Z OD Z C--) U O W D p U < w < c (n 5 I U 1 co Z IX < 0 ce to `:� ti� \ �N \ 6. ��• 6il, < \ 71 \ \� `\`\ j\ \\ \ \ \ 2 ` i &\ \ : \ , •• %. ''..7/1 ji \• \\\ 0 .--- - . :. . 6. fir:. !,r — . . ..y ss. ,,t. • ,,,, .. ,.. .. ,A._ ,, ,_ _ ., . .).. ,),., , .. ,.,. . . .,... ..7 I: ,z,) •N\ \ 1: I -(C tO ilIM f , ' 1 k 3 (s , .,....„ :-.,--/ 'N• .'s `',, \ i n1 ,. i c=4 E-4 < -e L, rzcYD ca) › <(--\-\ . ,‘„.. s, \� .v\ i� ;s , \ :-.oma. .; I t: '471 g t.,c-) < 0 t :\,, , §,-, , .. Z o- -1- 'i ;i . : *-1 ...•:- _ It ci, , r .,— ., ..) . - : . ''' 0_ -,=,. . CID C) --\ '1 L 8\ ;,' ..- —1 / \li—' l\ < 7---- '-•. N'''i ‘\\\ \ _-..% \(-0 N ..'. .,y,\ v N- n-k7:: .41-ii4. 1.1t '''`-,' \ I l'i N'VAi A6 Li;Mill 111 § .1\ , •+.. \r 44-11- 1111114114 F`\�1\ � '��\: o`tam"\1I � U pi p Imo) �e _ i_ , i...�„ 1.: Ifll Pll �'n �x .,a nz i a - n S1 1 w... . 4 $,,r,1.1 ;,,,...-•-.. L i -1i■`II, so.. ., o. ., v ,6 , Ih. •��S1��!il7�fJ�� rS \��\\\\ ...... IN/ „� � ro ASS \ ,l • A Eli �;"''r -.�� \\� ��--7-.-...., ♦ iiii -r a.. .\\\\\\\1\ e„.,/,..g.i./'..,i.). i ..11..;Nr5. •‘ s.,_ ?i Arki , .\. , Ci) i , ' > :- ,:;:,\ '\ ,t.,\ 1 is V."1 i@ � • mow \ \ \\� r"'"1 .,: -,:•/ i/ •-, ilk, •,..-\,,•,.,„•,,,k. 'V ,;,,, ‘,,1,,,„ i.: \ .: / / ,z, : / N (” l'N IN • ,O� �. .sem„\N-, c� i\ ` \ CO titi 7 .0070 I -y,,-\� � \ ;\• \`\ V J U 1 ,IAN .- ,, N k ' ' � \mo i .�,I'\\ \ N`\.. NJ ,..,L., . : ?..' \ ....._‘..\ ‘ 1; i' k - v (......\! \_- C'3 i 4'4-1 ' *.k • ,11 ;;r5-, N ' ".',\' w�oaoo�ana�asww t -. D D Z C m O T 6 N C 2 C K = v c) ;,..3 _ . 70 Z 2CC m N Z < r (7 -< I v r vi xi--I A N 0 pi m Z mi M r D D N t') m —i D n r r D cn -4 ;211/ N .7) --- - m D r m m m 7) -C z n 73 m -I D N N m r r V ) Q- w • (ii Q F- CC W CC U Z > czY Lu J ?- w c cc p m F— --� c w cn— J U U D w Q cn Q< Z U O v) Q Q Q I w 0 U Li U w H- H- c/) J p E cc 0 I = m > Z D w Y Z (..D D Z p U O w D ° U w Q CC (7) 5 2 U 2 m Z cci.. 0 At V 7 M Q %.\ . -t, r i k' . : '--------"-- 1\ 0 ec likAl I � � ��\� • 1'rj \�\ tea v `+ o� i .. \ : E, "& NZ `.\\ , Ik' .7, I ,t4C\ . CD 1 111104, 0(\ s:, 9fr'`S\' \ ss‘'-'‘ 'I I' ..' et- ZS ts \ \. L - Icy _,,:'s \ ' i 0) CI_/ •K 1 (1) -,\\'''''i,' 1, 7'-I's.-4-'''''' ..•-,„ --N ' \;77\.:*; :k\';"-s\s'd&-- ").ciri oil/ 1 1% 1 f:4 r.. \ \` \V' '4ki Ai eww\ \ ; osili Icopp ."-:- ' \ --- : s ',.\• ik -- \k \\\\1 N ..Fc A. i 7.". 02 .t . pa •fie III fifr i. ---? .\II k -\In ••N i- ......, r,..N1 III ; .1,, 1 ),,,,....,14 . -..:,, -u ‘,..2nti Lil it . ''''',,- \ __L) `•' { Ifi : li Vii',c, pp •• lir 6 e - - —fit .. Gg -,, , A e 1 D .n ,-i 2 N 1 MEMO TO: City Council FROM: Lindberg Ekola, City Planner RE: Shakopee 500 Submittals DATE: June 25, 1993 NON-AGENDA INFORMATION ITEM: The Shakopee 500 property owners group has been an active participant at the previous Planning Commission meetings. They have submitted documents for review and consideration. Since these items were not a part of the agenda packets, staff is providing them to the City Council for their review. The following is a list of items submitted by the Shakopee 500: 1. April 16, 1993, letter from Betty O'Shaughnessy. 2. April 20, 1993, letter from RLK. 3. March 25, 1993, presentation outline. BETTY L. O'SHAUGHNESSY 1000 Hesse Farm Road, Chaska, MN 55318 (612) 496-1707 April 16,1993 Gary Laurent, Mayor 2415 Lakeview Drive Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Gary, Thanks for visiting with me this afternoon with regard to the paving of the access ramps for the T. H. #101 /1 69/CSAH 18 Interchange. I do empathize with you, the county and city staff, for the frustration you have experienced over this issue. As per your request, I'm enclosing copies of correspondence between Daniel McElroy, Mayor of Burnsville, and Dottie Rietow, Chair, Metropolitan Council. Sorry for the highlighting and notes that appear on this copy. I hope it sheds some light on a possible new path to take. Good luck rescheduling the meeting with Dottie and Bonnie. Please keep me posted and feel free to call upon me if I can be of assistance in any way. Regards,/ 11 , i 4 i g; ty ? ' aughnes �. Shako' - ;= 'artner IAA AAMETROPOLITAN COUNCIL ,Clears Park Centre. 2.30 East Filth Street. 5r. Paul. tl.V !.5101-:6.7-1 6l: 291-6:59 F-IX 612 291.6.550 M. 61-' 291.0904 1.)i oje� March 30, 1993 Daniel C. McElroy, Mayor City of Burnsville 100 Civic Center Parkway • Burnsville, MN. 55337-3817 Dear Mayor McElroy: This letter is written in response to your letter requesting that the Metropolitan Council reconsider its action on County State Aid Highway 13 (CSAH 18), south of the Shakopee Bypass in Scott County. In April 1991, the Metropolitan Council approved the location and design of CSAH 13 between the Shakopee Bypass and I-494 with the exception of paving the access ramps to and from the rural area south of the Shakopee Bypass in Shakopee. Council denial of direct access ramps to and from the rural area south of the bypass in Shakopee was based on Council's plans in the Mer,opplitan Development and Investment Framework (MDIF) relating to rural area policies. Shakopee's comprehensive plan designates the area in the CSAH 18 corridor as rural service area. The Council concluded that the proposed high-level of transportation service provided by a direct connection south of the bypass would encourage urban levels of development and, therefore would be inconsistent with the area's planned status as a rural service area. Indirect highway 18 access to the proposed new bridge via highway 101 would continue to be provided as part of the construction project. ;In its recommendations, the Council indicated if at some future date the City of ShakoPee would amend,its plan_and justify that direct access,was.necessary to serve an . urbanizing area; then Scott County may resubmit the controlled access request for Council reconsideration(summary of Council action attached). Since April oft-199LCounciLmem_bers and staff have met numerous times with officials from Scott County and the City of Shakopee to make them aware of the Council's concern regarding premature development of the rural service area south of the Shakopee Bypass and to help identify options for revising local plans that would address this concern. ;The focus to date has been on protecting the status.of the rural service area by having local plans control the level of accessibility and the land use densities in the Highway 18 corridor in Shakopee. The premise has been that if the county and city provide strong controls, they w-iIl prevent any premature urbanization and demand for other costly urbansces that might occur if the direct connecting roads is controlled by Scottaccess ramps were paved. The level of land access andnew County, and land use densities are controlled by the City of Shakopee. While much new data and information has been made available since the original Council action on CSAR 18 access in April 1991, the Council needs policy commitments in the form of revised Recycled Paper Mayor Daniel C. McElroy Page 2 March 30, 1993 local plans from bot Scott County :nd the City of Shakopee that address Council concerns about premature urbanization in - • al County Road 18 corridor. The Council has two upcoming opportunities to reconsider its action regarding the CSAH 18 direct access ramps. The first- opportunity will be the Scott Transportation Plan review which has just begun.' The second • opportunity will be the Shakopee Comprehensive Plan review which depends upon the city's schedule for submitting a completed plan document to the Council for review. am also anxious to resolve this issue, but as you can see the Metropolitan Council can not act t, �3 I "2i until we have reviewed the Scott County plan and until Shakopee submits plan documents; and, tt that both these plans address� e Pearlyext licy concerns onth to discuss progress made toward addressing,County and Shakopee officials transportation/land use conflicts raised by the Highway 18 interchange. Thank you for your interest. Sincerely, Dottie Rietow Chair Attachment cc: Bonnie D. Featherstone Council District 14 City of 121SAIII BURNSVILLE 100 Civic Center Parkway • Burnsville..Minnesota 55337-3817 (612) 895-4400 March 16, 1993 M PO IAN CCUNCIc Metropolitan Council MAR 2 4 093 Mears Park Center 230 East 5th Street St. Paul , MN 55101 Attn: Dottie Rietow Re: T.H. #101\169\CSAH 18 Interchange in Shakopee Dear Ms. Rietow: Th"e—City=of Burnsvi°1'le monitors transportation improvements in the entire southern metropolitan area. The City has. supported and watched with.interest-.the �� County. proposed Bloomington Ferry Bridge :: replacement project.. in _Scott Burnsville has a vested interest in this project, inasmuch as it is felt to be a potential alternate to trips that would otherwise utilize" I-35W.* We all know that I-35W is the region's most critical transportation issue. It is because of that interest that we feel compelled to offer some testimony to you regarding the above matter. Specifically, we have learned that the Met Council has opposed the construction of two of the ramps at the above referenced interchange. Apparently these ramps are the ramps that would facilitate the movements of traffic from the new bridge to CSAH 18 south of T.H. 4101/159. These ramps-- Burnsville-Burnsv.i.11e since omitting _ th'em(would reduce the full utilization of this interchange: 'Dakota and Scott :Counties have long discussed the need for east/west traffic corridors between the two counties. There is a significant amount of traffic from western Dakota County that needs to move to the western Minneapolis suburbs . This trip destination :can_.be -more: readily served for western Dakota County .residents if they can utilize Dakota County 42, Scott. County 42 and Scott CSAH 18,..and from that_ point then crossing the Minnesota River at the new Bloomington Ferry Bridge. :The omi:ssi.on of thee:.two important ramps will preclude that movement, and be detrimental ' to the City of Burnsville`-and all of western Dakota County. ,We 'understand that the rationale for_ this is a rule that concerns the location of - an interchange outside of the Metropolitan-Urban Service Area. This. interchange is very near the Urban Service Area and it seems somewhat arbitrary to strictly apply this rule when there is a drastic regional transportation need that is being met by the project. We respectfully request that the Met Council reconsider this matter and work with Scott County officials to provide for a plan that will allow complete utilization of this interchange. Sincerely, C;IL Daniel C. McE roy Mayor c: Scott County Highway Dept. Cities of Savage/Shakopee/Prior Lake Bonnie Featherstone • Bob Mazanec - Director of Metro Systems _922 Mainst e ` e. KIK �~ Hopkins, Mn. 55343 (612) 933-0972 ASSOCIATES LTD. fax: (612) 933-1153 / April 20, 1993 Mr. Lindberg Ekola City Planne • r • '' City of Shakopee - 129 South Holmes Street Shakopee, N. 55379 Dear Mr. Ekola: At the March 25, 1993 Planning Commission meeting, testimony was heard regarding the proposed amendment to the Shakopee Comprehensive Plan. After completion of the discussion by the Commission members, the item was continued to the April 22 meeting for further consideration. Additional material was requested on several items. This document has been prepared by the members of the RLK Associates staff, representing the Shakopee 500 property owners group, to provide discussion material for the Planning Commission members. It is requested that this document be distributed to the members on Thursday evening prior to accepting further public input. The items are arranged in a categorical fashion with no particular emphasis on priority. Data principally is focused upon the Shakopee 500 property south of the Shakopee BypassICSAH 18 interchange area on the eastern perimeter of Shakopee. Figure 1 of this document demonstrates the land area in relation to the Shakopee Bypass highway system. We will be in attendance on Thursday evening to provide a more thorough discussion on this material. Park land Area: There are approximately 535 acres of property in the Shakopee 500 property land mass on the south edge of the Shakopee Bypass and County 18 interchange. Figure 1 proposed land use plan identifies the allocation of park land area within this acreage. Between County 18 and County 21, there are approximately 32 acres of park land; approximately 50% is designated as active recreation area and 50% is passive. Active recreation area relates to land used for ball fields and open play areas. This use is suggested for land which has fewer natural forested areas. In comparison, the passive recreation area, covering the other 50%, is suggested for the natural forested areas. Approximately 20 acres of land is shown as a buffer and trail area near the power lines running east-west near the center of the site and on appendages running north and south from that trail. These trail systems will serve a linear park design condition with buffer characteristics, as well as allowing pedestriarvbicycling activities to naturally occur through the area. A natural progression of this trail area could be extended through the site and further to the west through the East Dean Lake area of Shakopee. These acreage's for park land are considerably in excess of the minimum standards contained in the 1990 Comprehensive Plan document of 3 acres of park land per 1,000 population. Civil Engineering .Transportation . Infrastructure Redevelopment Landscape Architecture .Construction Management Shakopee Comprehensive Planning Process April 20, 1993 Page 2 Police. Fire and Public Works Services: It is estimated that upon complete development of the Shakopee 500 property, S7 to S8 million of annual tax revenue may be generated. Of this amount, approximately S1 million will be available to support domestic City services. City staff should study the needs of the area, determine the budgetary impact of new development and compare the costs against the revenues. It seems highly probable that the services that are needed for this newly developed area could be supported annually with these revenues. Public Schools: Figure 2 indicates the Shakopee and Burnsville School Districts joint boundaries. The Shakopee 500 property is split between the two districts as shown. The City of Savage is also in the Burnsville School District. With the anticipated growth that is occurring in this area, the Shakopee and Burnsville District will be providing facilities to handle the increases in the school age population. It is important to note that this area will impact the Shakopee School District and the Burnsville School District. Due to the long range development anticipated over the next 5 to 10 years, the current school system should be able to absorb the increase in the number of children. Shakopee Image: Figure 1 demonstrates the poised position the County Road 13 river bridge crossing and interchange area will have as the eastern gateway to Shakopee. An opportunity to plan this area with the image the City wishes to portrait is available. There is virtually no development in the immediate area of the Shakopee 500 property. The land use plan presented in Figure 1 attempts to take advantage of this opportunity. One of the Planning Commission members mentioned that the character of the downtown area of Shakopee must be preserved so as not to be in competition with the outlying areas. In other words, the City may wish to limit competition with the downtown retail component. Because of the signnificant distance between the interchange area and the downtown area, these areas should have minimal competition. Other cities in the metro area have attempted to exclude retail development in the outlying areas of their communities, only to have the retail occur in neighboring communities. The City of Shakopee can make a conscious planning decision to solidify their downtown area and to allow orderly development of outlying retail uses. It seems especially appropriate to allow a high density retail use in the high volume/capacity area as the Shakopee Bypass interchange area with the County Road 18 river crossing. East Dean Lake Residential Area: One of the primary objectives of the Shakopee 500 plan was to provide a transition from the commercial/retail property to single family residential property as you move from County Road 18 towards the East Dean Lake area. The Shakopee 500 Land Use plan maintains the natural amenities of the land in the residential area including the preservation of naturally occurring wetlands and the maximization of groves of trees with few highly traveled roadways or paved parking lots. A conscious planning decision has been made to highlight the existing residential neighborhoods in the East Dean Lake area; in fact, the value should be significantly enhanced with homes being proposed on the Shakopee 500 property in the price range from S150,000 to $300,000. Shakopee Comprehensive Planning Process April 20, 1993 Page 3 Growth Rates in the Development of Shakopee: It is recognized that it is difficult to agree on the prospective growth rates of the area when the marketplace is constantly going through dynamic change. An example is the rapidly changing landscape of the City of Savage during the past few years. The City has partial control on this phenomena with land use density regulations. The Shakopee 500 property owners are cognizant that any growth rate disagreements should be resolved by the City, County and Metropolitan officials with the appropriate responsibilities for short and long range planning. They are willing to work with these officials and plan for the orderly development of their property in accordance with the development conditions of the regional area. However, a proactive comprehensive planning process is essential at this time because of the imminent completion of the construction of the CSAH 18 river bridge and interchange complex and the rapidly progressing westward development phenomena. Currently, the Shakopee Comprehensive Plan designates the area owned by the Shakopee 500 group as a rural service area. The Metropolitan Council recognizes this and has concluded that a direct connection ramp system to the area south of the Shakopee Bypass would encourage urban levels of development and be inconsistent with the area's rural service area designation. Before the Metropolitan Council will reconsider its' decision on this direct access matter, the Council needs policy commitments in the form of a revised local plan from the City of Shakopee. Based upon population growth, infrastructure investment, and general traffic growth, the property owners of the East Dean Lake area are in unity that comprehensive land use plans similar to City alternative 42 should be adopted. Sincerely, RLK ASSOCIATES, LTD. bt iistKpf Dick Koppy and John Dietrich Attachments: Figure 1 -- Shakopee 500 property and Land Use plan Figure 2 -- Shakopee/Burnsville School District joint boundaries • • ---- / ' /•.% ly►'1 r /1 oi \ • A) .. ,,,:,.. • D LI • • . .91\ ti I 7 .7 - .. ... ..1111 I 6c.:;-1. t„ :-... •r:-...... .5S 1... �" u W� .•'• /4 /i 0 d i I!, 0/ N ik 7 . ,if \ \\_. ::111(;,?-:-_-• :4* • , . 'i\ 4 • ' ...Ncrlifit: ji ' . r.i .. , I / ri I..""1 t.f;4. 1('. ‹.1..i: 1 \ I ...g ':' ,.—. . g 13 gN 14. ' .... !�. i*r /i 1 • .. ,.._ ..„.„,,,O 8... i.. ... .—.r• 1MII I' Win 1 N L7 :""�_�+uo ~ <ifVI ii < 1 .1' )._4 0E, mi 0 —.-* . 444 fai r. GI ---- c �• W4L r z•! r1:r1:2.. - N ^^. y • .� •Ch • mio l' W I 1 t G A t V Z 4 c- A. 2 11 I W to Oa 2 Ar-]74 �ii :: m 1<En d u C/) V a_- U nuc �1•wg .3 ° OO r > Ul 22C 0# -: 0 0 "2 [ i O Z F•O vl O a. 04 Ct) < 1 . " . ..; ,' I?..I .E. Ei it_ I C ./ •,e•-•••• ii •./ 'A-1-i- .• , .. :....:, • e • (::.'r.. r, i. ,:.,- ,.., •< • .- - .,.I" 1 'k I t., • 3 110 ' > — ..... a, --- — E - ,.. e.4 • / I .." , , • s 1 ',;‘, VI • $ - ) i•( ..„:;;:-. / /„.• 1,1 6 p.---.. --.. ' .... .., :j1. . I... li '....,4.a: •/ 11110'. n Z U 2. u •...f.:-.T.:.''''- 1.- tli I Apiiitl-J .< ... c., r. . cif 7; V• Fir C.: • - , I I I, li 1 iii '< ril 5i N a 1 •',.:., lc 4 f •,_, - . 1A. _ ;:,41,_, ; •i),--. 1, 4 i • •,.., iy. •• ,‘ • .... 7 ,,_ , „,,iii • i • ,. . • .: ,.,...„..m. t'..:::. 1 't\I 4 • ,:6 . ..v...• • ..,• • ,.. :M.o... .,... Ar,.Li/...,.:..sj n : \......_ .T.''. • 4.7'ir!:'•f:e " i./..V.'.:,:-.*>-• , ; ; . L,) V. • - 1......1 $. :IX..: r.',i....1i. 7,.• .. !'...-..:-. - ". . +. I. • )1.......s .' • i P !..3-: c12: :Pt, ------------------4:1 I 11.1 .61.------j// ..„- ... V ,:,,8„: ;.:.---,--01.- --,..) ,•- ----, - A:etc...4 t••• . • gg-4 .2 -= ..4„.. 1-• -c -•••• 4- ' '•...4. ,• ..,...,_ .... fi.• --. 1.11\ ..., I.,S N i t .I i i 1 ...... IMMI I i ma .orpie t-t 1/4N sy 7• .. .2 -... 1 : 1 • -c .. .......""mr.".811', -1 ..-• 7..: ; .;•1 . ........//'I .! • kit •' . I ..,2 .... 1.1 •..,.11 - 2.4)416"4. ••,-4. =S ti',.... ..ki4.44.7f,i•ui '''';g ______ 1:.; 1 f ,.,:. v•-• 2 ..•, -, e4 ... :.•• pl..... 1 I I • . s. C f.t v7.:.." '..7.,..,1 •\ ', p ZoLow•ILLINA• t\\ = .4 t-:1•.0 S ..J ••••. • i 1;......2 i i \I . 1I. ; 1 )". ..: u, a = * •-•:-• . i ,,,= ,...,...,: c e4 N . •N'T . w \81( .044 e t P fa 1. • tAl . i -4•4 v't• 1...s a• • 1••• ... t-- —I ... 1 1 ..1-' _, I. ••rti :ttj P 7. Cn • i: -.4 r. i'•4 )..." ba t ! W Cil -a I 7 •< ...% 7; at: A. - • ..... •,-I TA. E." ::: . . :-- c4 — n cfl (4, f • \ • • 4 ,- :-., 0 g 1.•=1 Z 1. ; • 1 . .... -, 7 • 53. • t u J L. VI 0 .....! .4\• 1 I ik Z F 0 •:;' %• . -. MI I/In I . sa • I l I a b w r A 0 4 C., r4 Jr li if Ca VE ii 1 ••:- • E-4 0 cr= ta a La 7,- I . . . . • . '. _ _ .. • . . . •- S%may, L Sty C% CITY OF SHAKOPEE PLANNLNG COMMISSION MEETING MARCH 25, 1993 OUTLLNE OF PRESENTATION SHAKOPEE 500 DEVELOPMENT GROUP L LNTRODUCTION OVERVIEW BY BOB MOREHOUSE A. Shakopee 500 Introduction of the developer's team B. Description of the 530 acres of property, Hanson Ranch VISUAL >Aerial of the property in the eastern region of Shakopee C. History of the site D. Regional characteristics E. Goal for tonight's meeting • Informational meeting • Commencement of the Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Plan amendment process • Need the City's help to set the future development framework F. Mention the meeting with staff in December on the site development options and the meeting in February with the City's Transportation consultant and Scott County on the Transportation study. G. Introduce Dick Koppy,RLK Associates, Ltd. II. PRESENTATION OF i HE SHAKOPEE 500 LAND USE PLAN BY DICK KOPPY I A. Current Comprehensive Plan Designation for the property VISUAL > 1980 land use map for the City of Shakopee Page 1 B. What has changed in the area since the acceptance of the 1980 Land Use plan? • 1990 Comprehensive Land Use Plan changed land designation to Agricultural Was not approved by the Metro Council; slated for re-study by 1995. • Development of the City of Shakopee...PopuIation 1980...10,000 1991...12,000 2000...17,000 • Development of the City of Savage...Population 1980...4,000 1991...11,000 2000...19,000 • Development of Scott County...Population 1980...44,000 1991...60,000 2000...77,000 • Market value of property in Shakopee: 1980...S300,000,000 1992...S500,000,000 •Shakopee Bypass • CS AH 18 River Bridge Crossing • Change in the CSAH 18 interchange plan; alignment during the detailed design process C. Basis of the Shakopee 500 plan: Population growth, infrastructure investment, and general traffic growth. D. Presentation of the Shakopee 500 Land Use Plan (staff report alternative #2) VISUAL >Shakopee 500 Land Use Plan 1. Refer, in general to the changes from industrial to a mixed-use development 2. Demonstrate highlights of the plan. • Shakopee Bypass and CSAH 18 interchange area • CSAH 18 Minnesota River Bridge Crossing, controlled access highway to I-494 • Industrial development to the south and east r*.c 2 • Dean Lake residential development to the west • County Road 21 developed through the center of the 530 acres • Power line towers through the development area, major physical obtrusion • Buffer area as a part of the land use plan in relation to property to the south • Mixed land uses on the site • Multi-family residential buffer to the west between the commercial and the single family • Soil type is conducive to development rather than agricultural • Trees on the western area of the site conducive to residential development LII. DEMONSTRATED DITEREST Lei 1"H];. AREA AND THE SHAKOPEE 500 LAND USE PLAN A. Single Family residential development • International residential developer who has met with City staff • 2.5 units per acre, range of home development from moderate to executive housing • Mid-density town homes (referred to as multi-family on the land use map) • Beautiful landscaped areas with areas of trees and ponds preserved B. Commercial property developer VISUAL >Refer to the Ryan Development Company letter dated 3/19/93 VISUAL >Refer to the site plan presented in December, 1992 to City staff • Major discount department store • Major supermarket complex P2;e 3 • Various retail stores • Restaurants • Approximately 350,000 square foot retail center will be the focus of the Highway 18 Shakopee Bypass interchange area IV. PRIMARY BENEFITS TO THE CITY FROM THIS LAND USE PLAN A. Capture of business trade • Drive bys from CR 18 and CR 21; Shakopee and Prior Lake residents • City of Savage residents • Shakopee Bypass traffic B. Additional Market Value and Tax Base VISUAL >See Market Value and Tax Base table attachment C. Additional Employment D. Increased traffic volumes will not adversely impact Shakopee's residential base E. Enhanced residential property in the East Dean Lake area • Single Family homes in the $150,000 to $300,000 value range • Multi-family buffer from the commercial area F. Wetlands and natural features, trees, etc. will be maintained G. Minor infrastructure cost impact, assessable to the land; no cost to taxpayers • Water is in place, system will need to be extended • Sanitary sewer will need to be constructed, capacity is available in the existing treatment plant _ - - H. Enhanced P.U.D. planning process that is contemporary and associated with the community planning values will be used for the development of this acreage. Page 4 • Pro-active stance on planning of this area will be demonstrated • Opportunity to enhance a Gateway position to the eastern border of Shakopee on a major highway facility will be created V. SU`LMIARY A. The land owner requests support of Alternative #2 of the staff report • A concept plan approval is needed to give direction to the planning process B. Infrastructure in the area supports the plan C. Shakopee 500 Land Use plan reflects reality in the marketplace • Property owner is working with residential and commercial developers D. Enhanced tax base and market value will be realized. p2_c S • _1 C Y-1 A H 0. 1 s--t q g vi i4 7 • `��( • pa�� i � aZa a9 ` :11; _ _... 2 al .. 7: y . . a \ a 7. i : LI . ICI i(ty ,./../c.) .- ----.– - • 1 I , .f5 --la. :,/.1. ..a__ • ra /*:-/-71N; . )7": 5 i rd i a :-',= r• '' i •--•c__ w 9- 1,.. : cz `s> )./—\- . , a) Q �f If I LAI z % 1 'fi r! ' �.�1 .� c ' W ��; t =v `� t`i I 1 )- • c S Vii ' ( I I Q p m w l'."-1), :/ ! 1-1..- 1 .. i'12 111 • I ' =- .7, , ,„ �C tti` —J L�.1 Z Ch 41 0 '; i.:.,_{...:____,Li . •!.__--uu,r---....:::----I u '0 .a) * ... I 'f',T i n /•2 C 03 r / 's c< f N s_ O •2 I. • Z . _ onianneas •try < < as • i 'ii*. I X43. '- •0s . t.. nano: •c o eases -z' 1— clLli f; �_�.a 1L/L->eifl-A., 141 )UVJ '',./t 1 • u) ,.....V.,;.1\-_,"-ri:1:7.i1;i: 4 in \ 114V.1-7.;::_L---1 tc 1: O Q Ot ��a-j I —a"• l t LLTh - t k � t LI >- il 1— = vI - --- / _ / e § _/ 5 a ^I_ U §_ j \ \} 1fir2' \\ §\\ _ \}\ ,k n§ 22§ 2 g bO es=_ / /§ «/§ $k 2 J g \\ «\ / z G § G< U» • < < �� ¥\k f \ � k 2 2 \ \ 2 r I, , ,/ §/ ~< & G\ e \ ®/ \ 2 z 3 z K VIq / / z in H\ 9 4. '< , Z ,,. .: \ : < ® = - t) \ E _ §$ ¢¢ z 2 n l \ \ f \ d « > u - - \ 0 7 z w / \ Rt- / � 2 � : 2 •< G �; > z \ \ > Q 6 \ ' _ � pg � 2 �. � 2 ��� \ } z , eo __ la YANcoYwyAN March 19, 1993 Mr. Bob Morehouse SHAKOPEE 500 PARTNERSIIIP ' do Morehouse Realty 4410 Highway 25 • Watertown, MN 55338 RE: SHAKOPEE Dear Bob: Per our conversation, this letter will express our interest in the proposed shopping center site Iocated at the new Shakopee bypass and the new County Road 18 for a community shopping center. As I previously indicated to you, a prospective tenant's major concern prior to their agreeing to go ahead on this project would include: 1. An acceptable agreement with you and your partners. 2. Acceptable access to the site as per our meetings with you, your partners and RLK Engineers. 3. Approval from all necessary governmental authorities for land use, utilities, etc., for the construction of a community shopping center. If these issues can be resolved, I feel very good about our being able to put together many of the prime tenants that Ryan has been able to attract to many of its recent projects. Let me know what we can do to move forward on this project in determining its feasibility. Since ely, , j‘ 1 \ , ..,< William J. ale Vice President • tti'J M24.68\dnJd 700 INTERNATIONAL CENTRE, 900 SECOND AVENUE SOUTH, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 TELEPHONE 6121339.9847 FAX 612/337.5552 _. . .' .• . • . •. . . . • . '. ' ..-...,_. ...:.:. . . 4------*---- . _______,D.-.. .. • .... . • -. . . . . . • . • • 1--------11. ' ... • . • . -• .• . • . .. .• • . . . , . ,_. I . _ .. . : . , • 77' ,:•• ii . P. , . .. . 1 i i . • . . I .0 • H i I . . • I I 1 • . 1 1 .. .,... 1 I. • . ! • 0 I 1 . • 1 I 1 ! I •••i. 1 . • 1 I • : 7--,._ i i ! • •-;. - i 1 • i , • [, . 1 i . , - I I1=1. = •" .., LI .. i . I. • . • . . i 113 rm ca - . - • i -* 1E1 M I ' • ,. =1 = .. 1 t' . f . . . - - ---. - - : ( _ . ... RLK Associates, Ltd. 3/25/93 SHAKOPEE 500 LAND USE PLAN MARKET VALUE AND TAX ESTIMATE SHEET MARCH, 1993 1 I 1 I I I 1 I I (ANNUAL I DEVELOPMENT (TAX (TAX (Million S PARCEL (LAND USE TYPE VALUE IRATE 'VALUE 'taxes I I I I I 1 I A !Multi-family resident. $40 million 1 4.50%1 51.80 !million I i ! B (Commercial $20 million 6.00%1 51.20 !million I I 1 I C !Commercial 518 million 6.00%1 51.08 (million I I I I D ICommerciaUOffice I58 million 6.00%I $0.48 1million 1 I I i E 'Light Industrial ;510 million ! 6.00%I $0.60 !million 1 I i ! i F !Light Industrial IS12 million I 6.00%! 50.72 !million I I I I G ICommerciat/Office 1$8 million 6.00%I $0.48 !million 1 I ! H 'Single Family Resident j570 million 1.60%1 S1.12 (million I I I 1 1I 15186 million $7.48 ( TOTAL million I ( total annual taxes i I I Current taxes on 534 acres: I I I I Market Value 51,028,800 I X 2.5% I I I i1 S25,720 I I I I less Agricultural credits > Total estimated 1993 taxes = 520,700 ✓ 12 941 9220 P. 02 HOFF & ALLEN, P. A.• • HOFF & ALLEN PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION • GEORGE C.Hort TED A.ALLEN TEl EPHONE(612)941-9220 PATRICIAG.BAxxv, 1R. I-800-989-9220 PATt E.KtinERER FAX(672)941.•7968 DAVID R.KxAG'L'Et PAtIA A.CALI•UES PETER M.SO LNA June 28, 1993 Ms. Karen Marty • Shakopee City Attorney 129 E. First Ave. • Shakopee, MN 55379 RE: NBZ Enterprises v. City of Shakopee Court File No: 91-09739 GAB File No: 56527-21797 Our File No: 2266-040 Dear Karen: eal's Decision App Please find enclosed with this, the Court Of affirming the summary judgment granted to us in the $BZ case. The Court overturned the determination on res judicata, but affirmed that there was noa taking with respect e toproperty. The Opinion is hardly a thoroughalYts It' s evident: tothat d once the Court saw that BZ, property a roughly h threefold without the mining permit, their analysispretty muc stopped there. In any event, with this affirmance and the Plaintiff's d .smissal of the remaining Trial Court claim, this should end the above litigation, absent an appeal to the supreme Court. Sincere { 1 Ge HOFF & AL EN •A • GCH:baj Enclosure • cc: Mr. Mark Rossow Mr. Bob Weisbrod Mr. Doug Gronli •G.',W?DATM2266-030'.MA R7362R.LTR 7901 FLYING CtovD DRIVE..,N260•EDFN PRAIRIE.,MINNESOTA 55344-7914• • RED WINO OYHCE•608 MAIN STREET•RED WING,MINNESOTA 550660(612)388-3867 + ^R_ _.._ HOFF & ALLEN, P. A. 612 941 9220 P. 03 w.-- :NOTICE: MEDIA AND COU �• .I. ARE FFt .;rt�ITED FROM MAKING 2$. 1993 THIS OPINION 0'I �Oi;;.)fR ?U 12:01 A.M. ON THE FILE DATE i ; T. ' s o inion tAPt'_ e i aL�•:. i . hed and may not be cite. e . - .imrr-■=� - -= Minn . Stat . § 480A. 08 , subd. 3 (1992) . i i STATE OF MINNESOTA j IN COURT OF APPEALS CO-93-256 1 Klap1 ake, Judge Scott County j • • District Court File No. 91-09739 i r • 1 i Timothy R. Thornton • NBZ Enterprises, Inc . , i . the successor in interest Jack Y. Perry 1 . of Scott County Lumber Briggs and Morgan, P.A. Company and Bert Noterman, 2400 IDS Center • et al.. , 80 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, I 55404 • Appellants, • vs . lj City of Shakopee, George C. Hoff 1 , Hoff & Allen i Respondent . 7901 Flying Cloud Drive Suite 260 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 !I . .• Filed June 29, 1993 • Office of Appellate Courts and decided by Klaphake, Presiding Judgel Forsberg, Cons i,.ered j ' Judge, and Holtan, Judge .' I UNPUBLISHED• OPINION � KLAPHARE, Judge ; NBZ Enterprises, Inc. (NBZ) appeals summary judgment dismiss- ing its claim that a denial of a conditional use permit (CUP) by . the City of Shakopee (city) constituted a taking of property for i 'Retired judge of the district court, serving as judge of the • Minnesota Court of Appeals by appointment pursuant to Minn. Const . art . VI , § 10 . s if • HUFF & ALLEN . P. A. 612 941 9220 P. 04 which it was entitled to compensation. We affirm summary judgment • because the evidence clearly shows that the NBZ was not denied all E . reasonable economic use of its property. DECISION • 1 . Res judicata bars a claim where there has been a final judgment on the merits in a previous action, where the! same cause .of action is involved, and where the parties are identical . Beutz v. A.Q. Smith Harvestore Prods „ Inc. , 416 N.W. 2d 482 , 1484 (Minn. App. 1987) , aff'd and remanded, 431 N.W.2d 528 (Minn. i1988) . In this case, NBZ' s taking claim is identical to the taking claim which Scott County Lumber Company, NEZ' s predecessor, alleged in a prior complaint filed in 1985 . Res judicata does n t bar the taking claim because there was no final judgment on the merits in the prior litigation. See id. As the pretrial order shows, the • court considered only whether the city properly exercised its discretion in denying the CUP application, without reaching the • issues of denial of due process and unconstitutional! taking of property. See Smith v, Smith, 235 Minn. 412, 418, 51 N. W. 2d 276, 279-80 (1952) (res judicata does not bar claim which waS withdrawn or dismissed before trial on related issues) . • 2 . Where the facts in the record are viewed it the light most favorable to NBZ, we agree that as a matter of law no taking occurred because NBZ continued to enjoy a reasonable and economi- cally viable use of its property after the CUP was denied. See Hubbard Sroadcastina, Inc . v. City of Afton, 323 N.W. 2d 757, 766 (Minn. 1982) ; Czech v. City of Blaine, 312 Minn. 535., 529, 253 -2 f�i p i... 612 941 9220 P. 05t;.- • HUFF & ALLEN . P. A. i i 1 1 N.W. 2d 272 , 274 (1977) . Although a taking analysis may be more readily applied to a property interest in a mine, the applicable • legal standards are the same. Regardless of the type of property, the owner must show that the government action has reiulted in a =r ! deprivation of "all reasonable" use or "all economically beneficial uses" of the property. See, Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal U.S. 112 S . Ct . 2886 , 2901 (1992) ; lubbard Council , , Broadcasting. Inc . , 323 N.W. 2d at 766 . NBZ' s predecessor purchased the property for $143 , 790 . NBZ' s appraiser determined1that prior • to the issuance of a CUP for mining operations in April 1988, the ved property could have been sold for $415 , 000 for residen- • animpro • tial or commercial development with the proper zoning. ! i 1 The evidence supports the trial court' s determination that there was no taking because NBZ was not deprived of alllreasonable • or economically viable use of its property. Therefore, iwe need not address the issue of whether NBZ' s interest in theiCUP was a private roperty interest subject to a taking under 'the United States Constitution or the Minnesota Constitution. j Accordingly, we affirm summary judgment dismissing NBZ' s i . takings claim. j Affirmed. fi \ili\ i (�1 . I •_1j t � � I ! V 1 i f 1 -3- i i I