042390 CC Reg AgP
.. . ~
.... .
.
-,
~.. f'
.
.....1,
CITY OF SHORE~D
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
MONDAY, APRIL 23, 1990
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
7:30 P.M.
AGENDA
1. CQNVENE
A. Pledge of Allegiance
B. Roll Call
Watten
Mayor Haugen
Gagne
Stover
Brancel
2.
C. Review Agenda tJ~A... --t;c2~ .
APPROVAL OF MINUTES ~
A. Regular Council Meeting - March 12, 1990 ;4fR-JL 30
(Att.No.2A-Minutes)
B. Regular Council Meeting - April 9, 1990 c--;:5:::ra1,
(Att.No.2B-Minutes)
3. CONSENT AGENDA
t;J/~
~
A. Resolution Approving Payment Voucher 3 and Final Payment
to Visu Sewer 1989 Sewer Inspection Project
(Att.No.3A-Memo and Resolution,
No.33-90)
B. Approve Purchase Order for Mn!DOT-MSA Computer Work
Station, Printer and Software
(Att.No.3B-Memo)
C. Approve Extension for Filing Simple Subdivision - Bruce
Prescher
""-.
Location: 6060 Lake Linden Drive'
(Att.No.3C-Memo)
D. Approve smithtown Road Street Signs on County Road 19
(Att.No.3D-Memo)
4. COMMISSION REPORTS
A.Planning Commission
B. Park Commission
-1-
AGENDA - MONDAY, APRIL 23, 1990
PAGE 2
5. RESOLUTION APPROVING C.U.P. FOR EXCELSIOR COVENANT CHURCH
(Att.No.5-Resolution) .
6. RESOLUTION APPROVING A C.U.P. FOR FILL AND GRADING FQRBOULDER
BOULDER BRIDGE HOMEOWNERS ~SSOCIATION .
(Att.No.6-Resolution)
8: OOpm 7. / PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED DESIGNATION AND ESTABLISHMENT
OF DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO.1, THE PROPOSED ESTABLISBMENT OF
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO.1, LOCATED WITHIN DEVELOP-
MENT DISTRICT NO.1, AND THE APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF THE.
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 1 AND THE TAX
INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
NO.1 (Att.No.7-Proposed Resolution 36-90)
A. Robert Thistle, Springstead - Introduce TIF
B. Public COmInents ( until 9:30 P.M.) 3 minutes individual and
10 minutes group representative
COUNCIL BREAK: 9:30P.M. - 9:35 P.M.
C. Council Deliberation
D. Consider Resolution on TiF District
(Att.No.7D-Resolution)
E. Consider Assessment Agreement
(Att.No.7E-Draft)
F. Consider Development Agreement
(Att.No.7F-Memo)
Applicant: Darlene Y. Dollmann
Location: 4830 Ferncroft Drive
5d~Jr k 1/J~tJO
f' 1~~uefflZ
(Att.No.8-Letter)
8.
APPEAL NOTICE TO REMOVE
9. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
10. STAFF REPORTS
A. Attorney's Report
1. Agreement for Water Service to De.ephaven
(Att.No.9A-1-Contractl
2. Connections of Water Service to:
a. Lot 2, Block 1, Sutherlin Addition; 4715 Old Kent Rd
(Att.No.l0A-2-Letter) ..../
3. ;(~~::r g~)~l Sher.QQ i\cr.-9 ~SrP~e71J Slll
B. planning Director's Report
1.
-2-
..
AGENDA, MONDAY, 'APRIL 23,1990
PAGE 3
lO. STAFF REPORTS CONTINUED
C. Enqineeris Report
1. Retainage/Erosion Control - NACON/CBI, S.E. Area
Water Tower
(Att.No.lOC-l-Memo)
2. Proposal to Update Comprehensive Water Plan
D. Administrator's Report
1. Proposals for Yard Waste Collection and Disposal
2. option for Public Works Site
.3, /V1, sCl-,
11. COUNCIL REPORTS
A. Mayor Haugen
B. Councilmembers
12. CONTINUE M.EETING TO APRIL 30, 1990, AND APPROVE THE CLAIMS
-3-
_-<:- ___.. __...,_._,~~,_,_';"_'_.'_'''~'___-__l'''-
.... .'
APRIL 30, 1990
MAY 7, 1990
WORKSHOP
Iv1AY 14, 1990
MAY 21, 1990
MAY 28, 1990
NOTE:
.'
CALENDAR
- CONTINUE BOARD OF REVIEW
- COMPLETE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF
APRIL 23, 1990
- WATER POLICY
- POLICY - SHORTEN MEETINGS, 11:00 O'CLOCK.
RULE
-REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
- (?) NOTHING SCHEDULED
- MEMORIAL DAY - NO REGULAR MBftl'IIG
Supposed to fit in Elderly Housing in .y
June Workshop on Comprehensive Plan Comme;r-
cial Development Land - use element was
planned
..
CITY OF SHOREWOO.'-
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
MONDAY, APRIL .9, 1990
....
~UNCIL CHAMBERS
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
7:30PM
. .
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Haugen called the meeting to order at 7:35PM.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Haugen opened the meeting with the pledge of allegiance.
ROLL CALL
Present: Mayor Haugen, Councilmembers Gagne, Stover, Brancel, and
Watten; Administrator Whittaker; Attorney Froberg;
Engineer Norton; Planner Nielsen; Public Works Director
Zdrazil; and Assistant Clerk Niccum
REVIEW AGENDA
Gagne moved, Brancel seconded, to approve the agenda with the following
addition: -
1lB3 - Attorney will report on pending lawsuits
Motion carried - 5/0.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Regular Council Meeting - March 12, 1990
Not available
Council Study Session - April 2, 1990
Gagne moved, Stover seconded, to approve the Council Study Session
Minutes of Monday, April 9, 1990, as amended:
Pa~ethree - 2nd para~raph above Council Break
Engineer Norton explained that when City water is installed, the water
line follows the contour. ...... ...... ......
Pa~e four - COUNCIL MINUTES - 2nd sentence
The Council then decided to advertise for two minute-takers,..........
Motion carried - 4 ayesll abstain (Brancel due to absence)
CONSENT AGENDA
Watten moved, Gagne seconded, to approve:
A sign permit for Norwest Bank, 23780 State Highway 7, allowing them
to change the face of the existing pylon sign (the size will remain the
same); install a 23.8 sq. ft. sign on the front, or east side, of the
building; and attachment of a 9 sq. ft. "instant cash" sign to the
existing pylon; with a reminder to the applicant that the message board
is limited to time and temperature only; and
-1-
~
REGULAR COUNCIL MEFA,G
MONDAY, APRIL 9, 191e"-
Page two
.
CONSENT AGENDA - continued
awarding the 1990 Roadside Noxious Weed Contract in the amount of $2000;
and the Park Spraying Contract for Badger Park, Manor Park ,Cathcart
Park, Freeman Park ballfields, and City Hall's yard in the amount of
$650, to Mahoney Home Services, Inc., P.O. Box 356, Excelsior, MN 55331.
Motion carried - 5/0.
Stover asked what would happen if Norwest Bank used the time and
temperature board for other messages. Planner Nielsen said they would be
directed to cease, and if they did not, it would be turned over to the
City Attorney for prosecution.
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT
Stover will report on items as they appear on the agenda, and will discuss
two other items later on.
PARK COMMISSION REPORT
None - no meeting has been held since the last Council meeting.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - ADDITION
Location:
Applicant:
19955 Excelsior Boulevard
Excelsior Covenant Church
Mr. Richard Lundahl, Architect for the Excelsior Covenant Church, was
present to state that they are proposing an addition for educational uses.
The 48' x 128', two-story addition will be located on the west end,
running north and south, and has been placed to conserve as many trees as
possible. They have put in a ring road, and added parking for 86 vehicles.
They have also asked to change the entry drive by moving it to the east,
on the other side of the hill. They have worked with Planner Nielsen and
Engineer Norton, and followed their direction in the location of the
driveway.
Stover said the Planning Commission voted unanimously to approve the
CUP, contingent upon the Planner's recommendations. Stover said the
new entry should align with Hooper Lake Road. Haugen questioned whether
people would think it was a direct route to Highway 7. Planner Nielsen
said it is accepted design practice to either line up the roads or spread
them far enough apart to avoid conflict. Lundahl said there will be a
sign indicating that the entrance is a church entrance.
Haugen asked if the slip-off ramp would be closed. Nielsen said MnDOT
may allow the slip-off ramp, but they will not allow the slip-on ramp,
because then people could slip off, go around the new light, and slip
back on. He said MnDOT has not yet made their final decision.
Watten expressed concern over a lack of vestibules, due to an energy
concern. Lindahl said these are only preliminary plans. Nielsen said
an energy review would be done later.
Attorney Froberg suggested the Council review item#5, relative to
performance security, of the Planner's Re.p_or_t before moving on this issue.
The Planning Commission felt no bond should be required as you could rely
on the church. Mr. Volling, the representative from the church who
attended the Planning Commission meeting, suggested withholding the
certificate of occupancy until all the required conditions have been met.
-2-
REGULAR COUNCIL MEE.G
MONDAY, APRIL 9, 1990
Page three
.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - ADDITION - EXCELSIOR COVENANT CHURCH - continued
Watten moved, Gagne seconded, to direct the City Attorney to prepare
Findings of Fact for the next meeting; such Findings to include the
recommendations from the March 27,1990 Planner's Report, and that
Item #5 of the report be changed to state "The City Council, in order
to ensure that landscaping and site improvements are completed, will
withhold the certificate of occupancy until the landscaping and site
improvements have been inspected and approved". Motion carried - 5/0.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - FILL AND GRADING
Location: 27975 Boulder Circle
Applicant: Boulder Bridge Homeowners Association
Clifford Reep, Minnetonka Portable Dredging, was present on behalf of the
Association.
Stover said this is a corner lot. The fill is intended to provide a
buffer space - with plantings on it - between the lot and Smithtown Road.
She said the Boulder Bridge Association had been under the assumption
that their dredging plan allowed them to do this because the fill was
taken from the pond and used on their own land. The buffer will be solely
landscaping, and will not be used as a building pad. The Planning
Commission recommended approval.
Planner NIelsen said the Planning Commission had recommended that the
Engineer look at the finished slope. Spellman felt that a 3/1 slope
was adequate. Norton recommended a 4/1 slope because of the nature of
the material.
Norton asked Mr. Reep about the consistency of the soil, if it was highly
erodible organic fill, or something that would work on a 3/1 slope.
Mr. Reep said it should be fine for a 3/1 slope. Norton said he had been
concerned because of the moisture, and the fact that there wasn't any turf
cover. He said he doesn't want to see the whole thing slide. He said
turf cover should be established as soon as possible.
Nielsen said the Planning Commission recommended that the owner be
required to provide a plan identifying how the buffer will be landscaped,
that a letter of credit be provided to cover the cost, and that the
planting be done by the end of the summer, and established and growing
by fall.
Gagne moved, Stover seconded, to direct the City Attorney to prepare
Findings of Fact; and to include the following Planning Commission
recommendations:
The City Engineer must approve the finished slope
The owner be required to provide a plan indicating how the buffer
will be landscaped
A letter of credit must be provided to ensure that landscaping is
complete
-3-
REGULAR COUNCIL MEE.G
MONDAY, APRIL 9, 1990
Page four
.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - FILL AND GRADING
BOULDER BRIDGE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
Motion continued
The planting must be done by the end of summer, and established
and growing by Fall
No use of the righ-of-way is allowed
Motion carried - 5/0.
SIMPLE SUBDIVISION
Location: 26025 Birch Bluff Road
Applicant: Jay Thompson
Jay Thompson was present to ask approval to divide the above-referenced
property into two lots. He presented the City Attorney with an up-to-date
title opinion.
RESOLUTION NO. 31-90
Stover said the Planning Commission had recommended approval.
Watten asked if they would be cutting into the east side of the site.
Thompson said yes, and reviewed the plan with Watten. Thompson said a
soil test has be ordered.
Watten expressed concern over cutting down trees. Thompson said they
will cut trees on the high side, and leave the back-half untouched.
Brancel moved, Gagne seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 31-90 - "A
Resolution Granting a Simple Subdivision to Jay Thompson of 26025 Birch
Bluff Road, contingent upon the Planner's six recommendations".
Motion carried by roll call vote - 5/0.
APPEAL OF NOTICE TO REMOVE
Location: 5605 Star Lane
Applicant: Bernie Eisenreich
Eisenreich asked for an extension until the middle of May. He did not
want to tear up his neighbor's lawn.
Watten moved, Stover seconded, to approve a 30 day extension of a "Notice
to Remove", for Bernie Eisenreich, 5605 Star Lane, until May 10, 1990.
Motion carried - 5/0.
Eisenreich said what he considered junk, and what the inspector considered
junk, may be two different things. Nielsen said if there is a difference
of opinion, Eisenreich has the right to appeal. and the Council will make
the decision.
-4-
REGULAR COUNCIL MEFAf{G
MONDAY. APRIL 9. 1~
Page five
.
REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF WEIGHT LIMITS ON WEDGEWOOD DRIVE
Applicant: Metropolitan Heartland Homes. Inc.
Kevin F. Leonard and Carl V. Brownfield, of Metropolitan Hertland Homes,
Inc., appeared before the Council to request a permit to allow them
to move 7 trucks, not to exceed 5tbns; ~er a~el along 330 feet on an
area of Wedgewood Road, a 4 ton road.
The Council, although sympathetic to this particular situation, informed
the gentlemen from Metropolitan Heartland Homes, Inc. that they have an
Ordinance to enforce. Other contractors have gone out of their way to
comply with the Ordinance. If they allow this, they would be setting
a precedent.
Gagne moved. Brancel seconded. to deny the waiver of weight limits on
Wedgewood Drive for Metropolitan Heartland Homes. Inc. Motion carried -
5/0.
MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
Robert Rascop - LMCD Plan
Mr. Rascop is out of town. Mr. Gene Strommen will appear later in the
meeting with an LMCD Report.
Reports
None
STAFF REPORTS
ENGINEER'S REPORT
Approve Plans and Specifications and Authorize Bids for project 90-1 -
1990 Street Project
Engineer Norton said the project will consist of
geo-fabric material. The streets' included in this
Manor Road, Yellowstone Trail, Howards Point Road,
Hillendale Road, and Bracketts Road.
a l~" overlay over
project ...iill be
Apple Road,
Watten moved. Gagne seconded. to approve the plans and specifications
for Project 90-1. and that bids be taken. deadline date to be 11:30AM
on Tuesday. May 8. 1990. Motion carried - 5/0.
ATTORNEY'S REPORT
Agreement for Water Services into Deephaven
Attorney Froberg said a draft of this agreement will be in the next
Council packet.
SLMPSD Resolution Amending Joint
Powers Agreement to Accept Grants
Attorney Froberg said the Joint Powers Agreement, as written, does
not specifically allow SLMPSD to accept grants from the State and
Federal Government. As a result of this, a Federal grant is being
held up. Froberg said an amendment is necessary.
RESOLUTION NO. 32-90
-5-
REGULAR COUNCIL MEE.G
MONDAY, APRIL 9, 1990
Page six
.
STAFF REPORTS - continued
ATTORNEY'S REPORT - continued
Stover moved, Brancel seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 32-90 _ "A
Resolution Approving Amendment to Joint and Cooperative Agreement
Relating to the Employment of Police Chief and Police Officers so as
to Provide Full-time Police Protection for the Cities of Excelsior,
Greenwood, Shorewood, and Tonka Bay". Motion carried by roll call
vote - 5/0.
Lawsuit
Attorney Froberg brought the Council up-to-date on the litigation
involving Lot 11, 5540 Shore Road.
Offer to City of Chanhassen - Assessments
Froberg said he contacted Chanhassen's City Attorney today, but the
call has not been returned. He will report on this when information
is available.
PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Update on "Junk Complaints"
Eccliasia Enterprise Inc. (Fred Shermanek)
5655/5665 Eureka Road
Public Works hauled 5 truck loads off the property last week. The cars
will be towed. The cost will be billed to the owner, and if not paid,
will be certified to taxes. Nielsen also said an accessary building at
5655/5665 Eureka Road may have to be condemned.
Steven Pahl
24860 Smithtown Road
Some progress had been made. Public Works hauled out what was left
this morning. Nielsen said Pahl was under the impression that he
would receive a second notice. Nielsen explained to him that this is
not the case. He had been given 30 days, and had also been given an
extra weeks grace period. Cost will be billed to the owner, and if
not paid, will be certified to taxes.
Dock License Renewals
Nielsen said he has completed the review of all but one or two. He
is advising the LMCD that none of the multiple dock licenses are
confirming in terms of our current zoning. They are grand fathered in
and as long as they do not increase the number of spaces or change the
configuration.
Stover mentioned the Shorewood Yacht Club advertising. The City
Attorney and City Planning Planner will review the ad.
Public Works Site Option
Cross accepted the City's offer, but asked to live in the house until 1995
-6-
REGULAR COUNCIL ME~G
MONDAY, APRIL 9, l~-
Page seven
.
STAFF REPORT/PLANNER'S REPORT/Public Work Site Option - continued
Stover moved, Gagne seconded, to send John Cross a counteroffer, stating
that they are interested in the back 6.24 acres, excluding the front acre
containing the house; to ~nclude ingress and egress to County Road 19;
and that $100,,000 be deducted from $250,000, to make the price $150,000.
Motion carried - 5/0.
ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT
Options for Yard Waste Collection/Composting/Fees
Administrator Whittaker presented two alternatives from R&W Sanitation.
He said these might be considered until there was a cheaper or more
satisfactory arrangement through Hennepin County. He said the price
is close to those assessed by neighboring cities. One proposal is to
have one waste nauler to pick up compost curbside, they would empty
the bags into a truck so they could be hauled to a composting site.
City Hall would have stickers available that residents could purchase
for $1.50 each. The resident would put a sticker on a 30 gallon
trash bag and place it curbside on specified days.
R&W would also pick up brush if the resident called and made special
arrangements.
The second proposal would be a 30 cubic yard roll-off container placed
at a certain site. Specified dates could also be set up to do this-
however the site would have to be monitored to make sure no unacceptable
material is brought in.
There are three questions here: Does the City want to contract with
one hauler, or leave it up to the individual to chose their own?
There are 10 haulers licensed in the City. If individual haulers are
chosen, this could mean 10 trucks on the same roads vs. one truck.
Haugen said she would be more comfortable if RFPs were sent out.
Stover said she liked the idea of the stickers on the bags. She felt
the bags would have to be collected in some way so they weren't re-used.
Stover also questioned whether collection should-he-optional because
of people that do their own composting.
Whittaker said that his second question was curbside pickup or bringing
the material to a central location? Council preferred curbside.
Whittaker said the compost would have to be debagged.
Council directed Administrator Whittaker to get estimates for curbside
service, using the stickers, from other haulers.
Spring Cleanup
Chipper
Last cleanup we had 9 30-yard dumpsters of crushed brush for $750.
This is approximately the equivalent of 20 30-yard dumpsters of
uncrushed brush. A low estimate is that it would take one week for
someone with a chipper to chip the brush at a cost of $90 per hour.
This is $3600. There is also a chipper that handles whole trees
but this would probably take one whole day at approximately $500 an
hour. The noise is a concern. People could be required to bundle
brush in 3' lengths. Gagne said he had thought the wood chips could
be used on the trails. Zdrazil said NSP has chips available free.
The Council agreed that chipping brush is not practical.
REGULAR COUNCIL ~NG
MONDAY, APRIL 9, 1990
Page eight
.
STAFF REPORT - ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT - Sprin~ Cleanup - continued
Council discussed the proposed fees and Spring Clean-up costs.
Stover moved, Gagne seconded, to accept the price list presented with
the following changes - tires and batteries will be free of charge.
Motion carried - 5/0.
MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR - continued
LMCD Report by Gene Strommen
Strommen presented Council and Staff with copies of a preliminary summary
of the "Long Term Management Program". He reviewed the history of the
plan and planning process. He said this is a guide, not an ironclad
Ordinance. He said it is also a 25 year vision of how Lake Minnetonka
is seen.
He said the plan is to brinQ all 14 cities involved together, and try to
work out a mutually acceptable set of rules with enough flexibility
within the rules so that all cities can live with it.
He said the LMCD is not planning to get into Shoreland Management.
Haugen asked if the DNR had given any indication that they would be findint
some funding? Strommen said he thought the DNR realized that there had
to be some openess to change the position on their part for some metro
funding. Haugen asked about boat licensing. Strommen said he thought the
licensing would be metro.
Stover asked if there was an Ordinance regarding personal watercraft.
Strommen said they are working on one. Strommen said the first reading
of one was held last Wednesday. He said there were some issues that may
create some problems; the 300 foot restriction from shore & operating thE
machine for a given period of time in the same space on the lake.
Attorney Froberg referred to the last paragraph on page one of the summary
where it says "A new property tax on the entire service region for Lake
Minnetonka is proposed". Froberg asked who this would affect. Strommen
explained the tier system.
Gagne asked how low the lake is now. Strommen said 3.7' low.
He brought the Council up-to-date on Eurasian Milfoil, and thanked the
City Staff for their help.
STAFF REPORT - continued
Council Reports
Councilmembers
Water Conservation
The City Council discussed their concern over water conservation. The
aquafier is low. There is a drought. Engineer Norton said the City
has the ability to supply water to the City at this time without imposing
a ban. The Council feels they should be thinking about resources, and
working on conserving them. They know that they can place a ban on City
water users. They would like to ask private well owners, as well as City
water users, to please use common sense. Think of the future and
voluntarily restrict your water use.
REGULAR COUNCIL ~ING
MONDAY, APRIL 9, 1990
Page nine
.
STAFF REPORTS - COUNCIL REPORTS - continued
Striping on Lake Linden Drive and Smithtown Road
Brancel expressed concern over the fact that the striping has not been
on these streets that long, and it has already disappeared. Engineer
Norton and Public Works Director Zdrazil will look into it and report
back to the Council.
11:00 Rule
The Council discussed putting the 11:00 Rule into effect, and several
different ways of dealing with it. Suggestions were:
Haugen suggested meeting 4 times a month. Along with this, she
suggested raising Council salaries from $150 to $200 monthly, and
the Mayor's salary from $200 to $250 a month to compensate for these
meetings. Another suggestion was $50 per meeting.
Stover felt this would place a heavy burden on the City Staff, causing
them to put out a packet every week, and drawing time from all their
other duties. She thought with all people have to go through to be
on a certain agenda, all these people should be dealt with at the
current meeting. If staff and Council wished to meet again, either
the next evening, or the next week, they should meet to discuss
matters that do not involve the people, but matters such as staff
reports.
Shortening the agenda.
The 11:00 Rule does not have to be used.
Brancel also felt it would be unfair to the public to make them
wait.
The 11:00 Rule will be discussed at a later meeting.
Vine Hill Road Intesection
Gagne asked when this would be discussed. It will be discussed at the
April 23 meeting.
Highway 7 Service Road by Shorewood Shopping Center - Pile of Rubble
Council asked Staff who is responsible for the service road, and
that whoever is, be instructed to clean up the broken blacktop in what
was the island in the center of the road.
MAYOR'S REPORT
TIF Seminar
Haugen asked for the information on this. She thought everyone would
benefit from it.
Recycling Luncheon
Haugen will attend a Recycling luncheon on April 18 1990.
SLMPSD
Haugen will leave the audit report at City Hall for review for a few
days. She complimented the SLMPSD on their work with drugs, and
cooperation with other cities. She said they volunteer their own time.
.
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
MONDAY, APRIL 9, 1990
Page ten
.
STAFF REPORT - MAYOR1S REPORT - continued
Legislature
Haugen encouraged everyone to contact the Legislature. Let them know
that the City is being frugal. Ask for their consideration regarding
state funding.
Dock Licenses
Gagne moved, Brancel seconded, to approve the dock licenses; and that
it be a matter of record tbat the dock configurations return to the 1988
configuration wben the water level returns to normal. Motion carried-
5/0.
APPROVAL OF CLAIMS AND ADJOURNMENT
Brancel moved, Gagne seconded, to approve tbe claims for payment and
adjourn the Regular Council meeting at 10:17PM.
GENERAL AND LIQUOR FUNDS - ACCOUNT NUMBER 00-00166-02
Checks No. 4054 - 4174
PAYROLL CHECKLIST
Checks No. 203927 - 203957
GENERAL
$ 56,112.05
LIQUOR
$ 43,412.00
11,987.80
2,948.09
TOTAL
$ 68,099.85
$ 46,360.09
Motion carried - 5/0.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Susan A. Niccum
Assistant City Clerk
Mayor Jan Haugen
Administrator/Clerk Laurence E. Whittaker
..
'. APR 19 '90 13:08 OSM MPLS,MN
.
P.2
os'U =&
~ WI. Associates,Inc.
.
2021 East Hennepin Av<em:e
Minneapolis. MN 55413
612-331-8660
FM.331-3S06
Engineers
Surveyors
Planners
April 19, 19iO
City of Shore.OOd
5755 Country CluG Road
Sh~re.QQd, Minnesota 55331
~e : SE~ER TElEVlSlN6 and REHABILITATION
Project No. 89-2
DS~ COIS. Ho. 4419
City Council :
Enclosed are lour (4) copies of Construction PaYlent .Voucher No. 3 & Final on the referenc&d project in the a.ount of
, 1,981. SO.
PUrsuant to our field observation, as perforled in accordance with our contract, we hereby certify that the
aaterials are satisfactory and the work properly perf or led in accordance ~ith the plans and specifications.
Upon receipt oi affidavit, State of Kinnesota Fori IC-134, and also Receipt and Waiver of lien Rights frol Visu
Service Clean & Seal,lnc., please aake payeent to Visu Service Clean & Seal, Inc., 2849 Hedbey Or., Hinneapolis)
nn 55343-9940 at your earliest convenience.
Very truly yours,
. .
ORR-SCHELEk-MAYERON
j:I:ES. f.C'1~
Jiles P. Norton,P.E.
Project Engineer
JPH:R6D
Enclosures :
cc: Visu Service Clean' Seal, Inc.
Phil lipka, 0511
3/t
. APR 19 '90 13: 09 OSM. MIS'MN
Estiaate Voucher No. 3 ~
CONSTRUCTION PAynENT ~ER
P.3
Date
April 19, 1990
For Period Ending;
April 15, 1990
----------------------------.
Project No.
89-2
--------------------------------------------~--------------_._----~-------------------------~--._-------
Class of ltiuri
SEWER TELEVrSrrlS and REHABllliAT!OH
-------------------------------------------------------------------------"------------------------------
------------------------------------------.------..-----
To: Visu Service Clean & Seal, Inc.
2a49 Hedberg Drive
Minneapolis, Mn. 55343-9940
(012) 593-1907
location
------------------------------------------------~-------
For
CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA
-------------------*-------~-----------------_._-------
~. Original Contract Aaount
:s
2~,006.90
------.-----------------'
B. Total Additions
$
0.00
C. Total Deductions
$
0.00
D. Total Funds Encusbered
$
24,006.9&
E. Total Value of Work Certified to Date
$
39,029.95
F. Less Retained Percentage
%
$
0.&0
S. Less Total Previous Pay.ants
$
37,648.45
I. Total Payments Including This Voucher
-_._---------_._---~~
$ ,/ 1,981.50)
------~~----~==~~~~~/
$
39,629.95
H. Approved for Payaent, This Report
J. Balance Carried Forward
$
-15,023.Q5
APPROVALS
=---;;---=================:===:~:===~=====~~=====;=;==-==;;================::==~~====~==:==;=======;:==~==:==:==========
ORR-SCHELEN-MAVEROM & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Pursuant to our field ooservation, as perforoed in accordance with our contract, we hereby certify that the materials
are satisfactory and the Norx properly perforled in accordance with the plans and specifications and that the total
work is 100 ~ cODpleted as of April 15, 1990 . We hereby retom~end paYlent of this voucher.
Construction Observer
Signed: . L f YI~
~-~-~~~-------~;'-~-----------
Signed
--------------------------------.-----------------------~-----~---------------------------------------------------------
This is to certify that to the ~e$t of IY kno.ledge, infor.ation, and belieT, tne quantitie; and values of work
certified herein is a fair approxilate estisate ior the period covered by this voucher.
Contractor Yisu Service Clean l Seal, Inc. Signed By
---------~-_._._-------------------
---------~------------------------------------
Date :
Title
------------------~---------------------------
=::;=;====::=====:=:==~=============::==:=::=:=::=:=~======;;=======-=:;======;;=================:~:==:=:==:=====:=:~===
City of Shorellood Approved for payeent
Voucher ------------------------------------ ---------------------------------------------
Checked By Authorized Representative
Date
Date
---------------------------------------------
Paqe 1 01 2 4.;19
APR 19 '90 13:09 OSM MPLS,MN
, E.~tini:e Voucher lto. :5 fl Finale
Da te : A9ri 1 19, 1990
---------------------------.--
SEHER TELEYISING and REHABILITATION
PROJECT NO. 59-2
for the
CITY OF SHOREWnOn, MINNESOTA
Contract Date :
~ork co.pIeted : April 15, 1990
!TEll
!I0. ITE/1
P.4
COeOR :
Visu Service Clean & Seal, Inc.
2849 H~dberg Ori~e
Hinnaapo!is, "no 55343-9940
(612) 593-1907
~ork Started
Co.pIetten Date : Septeloer 15, 1989
WORK COllPLETEii
CONTRACT THIS AllOUNT TOTAL TO DATE
QUANTITY UNIT UNIT FRiCE TOTAL PRICE MONTH iHIS nOHTH GJA!lT!TY TOTAL PRICE
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.--------------
Miin Line Jet Vacuu! Clearing and Television Inspection
1) 9" Die.eter Se~er 15000 L.F. 0.49 7,350.00 0.00 18122 8,879.7ij
2) Test 9" Joints 1000 EA. 10.00 10,000.00 0.00 1651. 10,510.00
3) Seal 9" Joints 690 EA. 0.01 6.90 0.00 17 0.17
4) Lateral Television 50 EA. 10.00 500.00 0.00 0.00
5} Inspection - Kanholi !nspaction bO EA. 100.00 0,000.00 0.00 92 9,200.00
b) Re.Television Inspection 3000 L.F. 0.25 750.00 0.00 0.00
------..---- ...----------- ------------
Total Bid S 24,606.90 $ 0.00 $ 34,589.95
7) Seal Manholes 315.00 0.00 16 5,040.00
...-......-.------- ------------ ...---------
Total to Date $ 24,606.91) '$ 0.00 s 39,629.95
Page 2 !)f 2 4419
.'
.>
.
.
MAYOR
Jan Haugen
COUNCI L
Kristi Stover
Robert Gagne
Barb Brancel
Vern Watten
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 · (612) 474.3236
MEMO
FROM:
AI. ROLEK
come ILMEMBERS
{J;L
TO:
MAYOR AND
DATE:
APRIL 19, 1990
RE:
CCMPUI'ER FOR MSA REPORTING
The Minnesota.Department of Transportation is offering a program whereby
MSA participating cities can receive a 60% discount on computer hardware
and software. MNDOT is proposing this computer equipment to cities for
MSA reporting purposes, and to facilitate the flow of informa tion be tween
the City and MNDOT, as well as other agencies. The Minnesota Department
of Transportation is strongly reccmmending cities take advantage of this
opportunity.
The City would own the equipment, and will be free to use it for other
city purposes. Since the MSA functions will not demand much computer
time, this equipment will be free for other city business a majority of
the time. This equipmn t would be compatable with other computer
equipment being proposed for the City offices and, in fact, could be a
part of the City's computer system.
The total cost of the computer hardware and software being proposed by
MNDOT is $8,313, 60% ($4,987.80) of which MNDOT would reimburse to the
City. The net cost to the city could be $3,325.20. Cost estimates for
this equipmnt received from other vendors far exceeded this amount. A
letter from MNDOT, which includes an itemized list of the equipment
proposed, is attached for your review.
The deadline for applying for this equipment in April 20, 1990; however, I
have spoken with Marilyn Remer at MNDOT and she said that this deadline is
somewhat flexible and that we could participate if the Council authorizes
the purchase. It is, therefore, recanmended that the City take advantage
of MNDOT's offer and place an order for this equipment as soon as
possible.
Should you have any questions relating to this proposal, please contact me
prior to Monday night's meting. I will be happy to address any questions
or concerns you may have.
At t achmn t
A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore
2A
'.oli
.
.
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
OFFICE OF STATE AID
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55155
December 11,lg89
Phone: (612) 296-7679
Subject: Addendum to City Engineer's Automation Package
(THIS MAILING WAS SENT TO ALL CITY ENGINEERS.)
We have been advised that WordPerfect Version 5.1 will replace Word-
Perfect Version 5.0 which was a part of the original $oftware for the
package. The new version offers the following enhancements:
-, a new table feature which allows the importing of spreadsheets
- improved definition of label formats
- easier to use merge codes
- an equation editor
- pull-down menus and mouse support
_ aCOPYFON~ utility for copying a font from one printer to another
To keep current with software development, we are recommending a change
to WordPerfect Version 5.1. The new version will be supported by ,the
State Aid Office and by Mn/DOT's software support staff.
The following procedures will apply depending on the circumstances of
your order:
A. If your computer system was delivered between October 1, 1989
and December l,19B9 the upgrade will be free. Do the following:
Send the Title page of . the software manual, the keyboard
templates, the Version 5.0 media (the 3.5 and 5.25 inch
diskett:es), and an indication of the printers to be used
to Word Perfect v5.1 Upgrade, 329 North State Street, Orem, Utah
84057 and your upgrade will sent to you directly.
B. If your order has been submitted to the State Aid Office but not
yet delivered, Ameridata will contact you for permission to
change the Purchase Order to Version 5.1 at an increased cost of
$85.00 of which $51.00 will be reimbursed from the state Aid
Administrative Account the same as will the balance of your
order of the standard package.
C. If your order has not been received by the State Aid Office,
please change your purchase order to reflect the new part number
(MCM-78813) for WordPerfect Version 5.1 at a cost of $312.-00 of
which 60.0 percent will be reimbursed from the state Aid
Administrative Account as will the balance of your order of the
1
".
.
.
standard package. Please refer to the revised listing of the
components of the automation package below:
All of the hardware and the majority of the software items can be
submitted on a single purchase order specifying:
-
Ameridata
10200 51st Avenue North
Minneapolis, MN 55442
ITEM NUMBER
IBM-PS2-8071
IBM-DIS-8513
IBM-PS2-F360
IBM-PS2-FD/A
OKI-391
c-180
S-IBMPcDOS33
S-ASI-PSA/2
HAY-SM-2400
C-107
McM-67829
*
MCM-78813
MCM-94443
A-SMRT+IN
AMERIDATA UPS
ITEM DESCRIPTION PRICE CHARGE
PS/2 Model 80, 80386 Processor, $4,550 $6
70 MB Hard Disk, 1.44MB Floppy
Drive, Video Graphics Array, 2 MB
Memory, 16 MHZ, Enhanced Keyboard
Color Display - Model 8513, 12"
IBM 360KB External Floppy Drive
IBM Floppy Drive Adapter for
Model 80
OKIDATA Microline 391 Printer
24 Pin, Wide carriage
Parallel Cable for Printer
IBM Disk Operating system,
version 3.30
Public Sector Administrator Menu
Hayes 2400 Baud External Modem
Cable - RS232 for Modem
Lotus 123 - Version 3.0
Word Perfect - Version 5.1
Procomm the Works - Version 2.42
on-site installation and 1 year
Warranty
Software - Menu Install
Customer Hotline support
(1-800-873-2827)
SUBTOTAL
2
$ 500
$ 398
$ 53
$ 700
$ 28
$ 80
N/C
$ 468
$ 28
$ 377
$ 312
$ 26
$ 250
$ 35
N/C
* $7,805
$4
$2
$1
$6
$1
N/C
N/c
$2
$1
N/C
N/C
N/C
N/c
N/C
N/C
$23
, '..
.
.
TOTAL COST (Ameridata)
*
$7,828
* = changes since September 20,1989 letter.
METAFILE and METAVIEW must be ordered from Metafile Information Systems,
Inc. Please include a purchase order addressed to:
Metafile Information Systems,
Attention: Bob Coon
8030 Cedar Avenue South
suite 215
Bloomington, MN 55425
Inc.
ITEM DESCRIPTION
PRICE
Metafile/Metaview
Shipping Charges
TOTAL COST (Metafile corporation)
$ 470
$ 15
$ 485
We will submit Y9ur purchase orders to the vendors. Delivery will be
made directly to each city. The vendor will set up the equipment and
warranty it for one full year. Once the items have been delivered and
payment made, submit a copy of your invoices along with the signed
Agreement form and a letter from the city- engineer requesting
reimbursement to the State Aid Office. We will then process the
reimbursement for 60% of the cost (0.60 times $8313 = $4987.80 if the
entire standard package is purchased). All requests for reimbursement
must be received by May 30, 1990. If you have any questions about the
procedure feel free to call John Wheeler at 612-296-9874.
Sincerely,
Gordon M. Fay
cc:
District State Aid Engineers
John Wheeler
Clint Sawinski - Ameridata
3
i
.
.
MAYOR
Jan Haugen
COUNCI L
Kristi Stover
Robert Gagne
Barb Brancel
Vern Watten
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 · (612) 474-3236
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: BRAD NIELSEN
DATE: 19 APRIL 1990
RE: PRESCHER, BRUCE - EXTENSION FOR RECORDING LOT DIVISION
FILE NO.: 405 (89.44)
It is recommended that Mr. Prescher be given an extension on the deadline for
satisfying the conditions of his subdivision approval until 10 May 1990. The
applicant should be advised that all the conditions listed in the original
gtaff report must be completed by 10 May. It is further recommended that he be
required to record the division no later than 25 May.
Failure to comply with these deadlines should void the original approval.
BJN:ph
cc: Larry Whittaker
Glenn Froberg
Jim Norton
Bruce Prescher
A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore
B.G.
,
PLUMBLlNE ..
, B~ILDERS, INC.
, "
.
\,
.
~
'APR _ 9 1990
9Q3 FIRST STREET NORTH
HOPKINS, MIN"fESOTA 55343
012/933-8493
, 4/4/90-
'~
City,'of Shorewood
5755 Coun~ry C14b Rd.'
Shorewood., MIl. 55331
h-
Attn.:. Brad Nielsen
r.- .
i", I
To the City of Shorewooa; I
, .
I~am~requesting ~n exstension of anotheF30 days from the date of
this letter to, the sub';';~ivision' fees 'requested fro~ the city. We ( Plumb-.
line Builders;-Inc;. ) have ~d a problem'getting (2) houses. to close due,.
to,some.title encumbJ;anc:es on the propertieil. Ourprevio~sex~pectations
, '
and assumptions was that'we would be closed two weeks ago, )5ut this has
. ,-' . -. - / -
not been the case..
We do exspect to c{os~ this time~ b4t we-re asking the ~lty's in-
dulgence on the f~me frame~ ' We ~lJ.,:come up'with the $1,00.0.00 'ne~4ed
one way or the olher.~y no later than 5/10/90. This has been very dis-:-'
heartening' ~~ougn t~is housing o~dealfor_us'~ndto incure an additional
$250.00 for filing fees would only ~dd to everyone'~ fru~trations.,
Again, Plumbline Builders d~ pian on ge~ting 'this whole matter
re;olved as- quickly as possible." We only ask f~r the'citY's,pat~ence,
in this mater. , ThanK-You for yolir consider'ation.
,~
"
Bruce . Prescher
Plumbline Builders" Inc.
"',
(
.-
~
. ,
r
ARC HIT E C, T 5
.
8 U I~ >L D' E R 5
.
D E VEL OP E R 5
4-
.
.
MAYOR
Jan Haugen
COUNCI L
Kristi Stover
Robert Gagne
Barb Brancel
Vern Warten
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 · (612) 474-3236
r4EMORANDUM
TO: MAYO~ AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: BRAD NIELSEN
DATE: 19 APRIL 1990
RE: REQUEST FOR STREET SIGNS - SMITHTOWN ROAD
FILE NO.: 405 (STREETS)
Mr. Schultz's request is considered very appropriate. The properties located
along the portion of County Road 19 which coincides with Smithtown Road have
Smithtown Road addresses.
We checked with the Hennepin County Department of Transportation. They do not
mark cross-streets at all, leaving it up to individual municipalities to do so.
It is recommended that the Public Works Department be directed to order and
install signs designating Smithtown Road at all cross-streets between Country
Club Road and the ShorewoodjExcelsior border.
BJN: ph
cc: Larry Whittaker
Glenn Froberg
Jim Norton
Don Zdrazil
Robert Schultz
A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore
3.0.
*
.
.
.
,1 PP --!:;' 1000
April 4, 1990
Brad Nielsen
City of Shorewood
5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood, MN 55331
Re: Street Identification for Smi thtotm Road
Dear Brad,
1'd like to request that the City install some Street Identification Signs for
Smi thtotm Road.
ilirrently, when traveling westbound, Smi thtotm Road is not identified until
you reach Country Club Road. We have had people confused or not sure what
street they are on when looking for our home. The only identification now is
"Country Road 19" or "Oak Street" in Excelsior.
I am requesting that Shorewood install "Smithtotm Road" signs at Wood Duck
Circle, Timber Lane and possibly even Minnetonka Drive.
I feel this would be beneficial to westbound motorists.
Thank you for your help in this matter. If I can be of any assistance J please
don't hesitate to contact me.
~~Ih1i:
Robe
23780 Smithtotm Road
Shorewood J MN 55331
474-8355 (H)
935-9595 (W)
BDSII/srb
.
.
RESOLUTION NO. 34-90
A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
TO EXCELSIOR COVENANT CHURCH
WHEREAS, the Excelsior Covenant Church (the Applicant)
is the owner of real property located at 19955 Excelsior
Boulevard, in the City of Shorewood, County of Hennepin,
legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a
part hereof; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant has applied to the City for a
Conditional Use Permit to construct a 48' x 128' two story
addition to the west end of their existing church building;
and
WHEREAS, the application was reviewed by the Shorewood
Planning Commission at a public hearing held on 3 April
1990, and approval was recommended by the Commission; and
WHEREAS, Applicant's application to construct an
addition to a church building within a residential district
requires the granting of a Conditional Use Permit; and
WHEREAS, the subject property is located in an R-2A
single and two-family residential zoning district; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant's application was considered by
the City Council at their regular meeting held on April )e,i
1990, at which time the Planner's memorandum was reviewed,
the minutes of the Planning Commission were reviewed,
comments were heard from City Council members and staff, and
the City Attorney was directed to prepare a resolution
setting forth findings and conclusions approving the
application;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of
the City of Shorewood as follows:
5
.
.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. That the proposed addition complies with all
applicable provisions of the Shorewood City Code, and no
variances are required.
2. That land use and zoning in the area surrounding the
subject site are as follows:
north: single-family residential in Deephaven;
zoned residential
east: single-family residence and wetland;
zoned R-2A
south: State Highway 7, then Water ford Phase III
(commercial); zoned PUD
west: single family residence (capable of further
development); zoned R-2A
3. That the proposed use will be compatible with
present and f~ture land uses of the area, and is consistent
with the official City Comprehensive Plan.
4. That the proposed use will not adversely affect the
general welfare, public health, and safety of the community.
CONCLUSIONS
That the application of Excelsior Covenant Church for a
Conditional Use Permit as set forth hereinabove be and
hereby is granted, subject to the following conditions:
1. That the site plan for the project shall include
continuous poured concrete perimeter curbing around all
parking areas and driveways.
2. That the Applicant shall submit a plan for
relocation of the proposed driveway for review and approval
by the City Engineer.
3. That the Applicant shall submit plans for grading,
drainage, and erosion control for review and approval by the
City Engineer.
.
.
4. That the Applicant shall submit a detailed landscape
plan for review and approval by the City Council.
5. That the Certificate of Occupancy for the addition
shall be withheld unt~l such time as the landscaping and
site improvements have been inspected and approved by the
City.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this
23rd day of April, 1990.
Jan Haugen, Mayor
ATTEST:
Laurence E. Whittaker
City Administrator/Clerk
Roll Call Vote:
Ayes -
Nays -
.
.
.
'.
OneAIPlIOles
Th.t ,.,1 .f loll 2' an4 30. Auellhr'. Subelhhlon "ulllb,r On, Hvndr.4 .n. forty
On. (141). fltnn.,I" C.,,,,t,. "Inn.IOU. l,ln, "'.., ., . lIn. rUM'n, Iro" , poln\
on lh, So"th,rI, IIn. 0' l" 30. lI'stann 618.1 lut lforth.lIl.rly fro. the
Southto1lt co,,,,, ., ht JO, t. I ,.tnt ,,, th, unter l'n. ., th, "'nn..polll ad
Cllnco. ~oad. d's"nu 550.4 fut ...terl, alon, "" unh, IIn. f,o- th. Wilt
llnl ., the Southu.' 114, Stcll." U. Toton.hlp 111. Ran., U, un,,,,,,
",hwI,'. '.
, , ..
"
. .
...
EXHIBIT A
,.
.
.
RESOLUTION NO. 35-90
A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
FOR FILLING AND GRADING TO BOULDER BRIDGE FARM, INC.
WHEREAS, Boulder Bridge Farm, Inc. (Applicant) has
requested a permit to fill and grade the east side of Lot 2,
Block 5, Boulder Bridge Farm, all in the City of Shorewood,
County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, Applicant's request proposes that fill be
placed on the subject site in the amount of approximately
1,200 cubic yards; and
WHEREAS, Section 1201.03 Subd. 8 of the Shorewood City
Code provides that any fill or grading which exceeds 100
cubic yards shall require a Conditional Use Permit; and
WHEREAS, the application was reviewed by the Shorewood
Planning Commission at a public hearing held on 3 April
1990, and approval was recommended by the Commission; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant's application was considered by
the City Council at their regular meeting held on April 9,
1990, at which time the Planner's memorandum was reviewed,
minutes of the Planning Commission were reviewed, comments
were heard from City Council members and staff, and the City
Attorney was directed to prepare a resolution setting forth
findings and conclusions approving the application.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of
the City of Shorewood as follows:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. That the Applicant proposes to create an earth berm,
partly to dispose of spoiled dredge from the Boulder Bridge
Lagoon and partly to enhance the site by buffering it from
Smithtown Road.
o
f
.
.
2. That the primary issues to be resolved in
considerating Applicant's application are:
a. Drainage
b. Site lines at the corner of Smithtown
Road and Boulder Circle
c. Filling and grading in accordance with
perameters set by the City Engineer and
which will be without a detrimental
impact to abutting public or private
property.
CONCLUSIONS
That the application of the Applicant for a Conditional
Use Permit as set forth hereinabove be and hereby is
granted, subject to the following conditions:
1. That the Applicant shall submit a revised site
grading plan conforming to the standards set forth in the
memorandum from the City Engineer dated March 26, 1990
attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit A, said
plan to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer.
2. That the Applicant shall submit a proposed plan for
landscaping the buffer area, together with a bid from a
certified nurseryman for accomplishing the proposed plan.
3. That a Letter of Credit in the amount of 150% of the
bid amount shall be posted by the Applicant to insure that
the landscaping plan is properly completed.
4. That all platting be done by the end of summer,
1990, in order that such planting be established and growing
by fall.
5. That no use of the public right-of-way shall be
included in Applicant's plans for grading and filling.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this
23rd day of April, 1990.
Jan Haugen, Mayor
ATTEST:
Laurence E. Whittaker
City Administrator/Clerk
Roll Call Vote:
Ayes -
Nays -
I In.' '-J
. ,
.~
. Q'~U ~y~~n&
~ Via Assodar.es,lnC.
.
20211::a5[ H~nnepin Avenue
MinneapolilS. MN 55<113
612-331-8660
FAX 331.3-~OO
fngin~ers
Surveyors
Plannc;ns
HEHORANDUK
TO: Brad Nie1sen, city of Shorewoo4
FROM: John A. Harwood, P.E., OSH , Associates, Inc.
DATE: Karch 26, 1990
SUBJECT: Conditional Use permit, Fill Placement
Lot 2, lUock 5, Boulder Bridge, Case 90.0S
I have reviewed the data submitted with the referenced application.
The purpose of the fill is to enhance the aesthetics and usability
of the lot. The placement of fill on this site is appropriate and
can be performed without detrimental impacts to abutting public or
private property.-
At this time, a significant amount of fill material has been placed
on the site. The material has not yet been spread or compacted.
The applicant should be requested to provide a revised site grading
plan incorporating or addressing the fOllowing three questions. In
addition, due to the nature of the fill material there is potential
for significant problems during material hauling and placement.
Approval should not be granted until problems related to haul and
placement are addressed.
1. The grading plan shows fill placement to and beyond the
property lines on both Smi thtown Road and Boulder circle.
This places fill in the existing ditch drainage ways for both
roads. A revised grading plan is required showing fill
limited so as to not impact drainage~
The revised site grading plan should show a typical section
for each road, show the edge of pavement, show the width of
shoulder and show the location of existing ditches or a
location for a newly graded ditch. The location of the
proposed fill limits should be dimensioned from the edge of
pavement.
:It is noted that the fill operation now underway does not
appear to extend onto the right of way for smithtown Road and
will not impact the Smithtown Road ditch or drainage. The
limits of fill along smithtown Road, that are defi~ed by the
hay bales now in place as erosion control, would be
appropriate. The existing ditch along Boulder Cra~Jr: is not
C. \ ('C, k,...
EXHIBIT A - page one
I
/
. ..
. .
well defined nor is it deep enough. It is recommended that
the applicant, coincident to the proposed fill placement and
grading operation, improve the existing Boulder circle
drainage by grading a minmum 1.0 feet deep ditch section
located approximately 5 feet easterly of the edge of pavement
or Boulder Circle and match the proposed fill to that ditch
section.
2. The proposal is .to utilize material dredged from the lake,
placed as fill, with 3:J. slope. The site plan should be
revised to show a maximum 4:1 slope. The material is likely
to be a highly erodible organic silt that will not be stable
at a 3:1 angle of repose. The flattened slope is intended to
minimize future possible erosion into roadside ditches.
3. There is an issue related to maintaining sight distance for
vehicles approaching smithtown Road from Boulder circle. It
is b~lieved that the revised plan that limits fill placement
to not encroach on the smithtown Road ditch and incorporates
the 4:J. slopes as described above will provide adequate sight
distance. '
There may be a major problem with the hauling and fill operation
for material of this sort unless the material is properly dewatered
prior to use. The applicant should be requested to submit data on
anticipated "consistency" and water content of the fill material as
it is being transported and placed.
Any review of this proposal as "fill placement" is conditioned on
the material being relatively dry prior to being transported over
city streets or placed on the sites as fill.
For transport, the material should not be "muck". A reasonable
definition for transport purposes would be material having a voids
ratio .not greater than 0.95 (i.e. minimum 5% air voids). For
placement, the material should be relatively dry. For the
anticipated organic silt a moisture content not more than 115% of
optimUDl would be appropriate. It is noted that the fill material
that is on the site is a black to grey organic silt, likely dredge
material. It appears to have been relatively dry during transport
as evidenced by it being dumped in piles and not as muck and that
the material now on site is very dry.
JAH/c:mw
03/90-cos.bn
EXHIBIT A - page two
.
eFT
4/23/90
In the event the Council determines to approve the proposed TIF
Plan, the following resolution should be adopted by motion.
RESOLUTION NO. 3(-90
RESOLUTION DESIGNATING AND EST ABLISHING DEVELOPMENT
DIST RIC T NO.1; EST ABLISHING TAX INC REMENT FIN ANCING
DISTRICT NO.1 LOCATED WITHIN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
NO.1; AND APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE DEVELOPMENT
DISTRICT PROGRAl--I FOR DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 1
INCLUDING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR TAX
INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO.1
WHEREAS, it has been proposed that the City designate and
establish Development District No.1, establish Tax Increment Financing
District No.1, and approve and adopt the Development District Program For
Development District No. 1 Including Tax Increment Financing Plan For Tax
Increment Financing District No. 1 (the "Plan"), all pursuant to and in
accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.124 through 469.134,
inclusive, and Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 through 469.181,
inclusive; and
WHEREAS, the Council has investigated the facts and has caused to
be prepared a Development Program for Development District No.1, defining
the property to be included and the project costs to be included in
Development District No.1, and the proposed Tax Increment Financing Plan
for Tax Increment Financing District No.1; and
WHEREAS, the City has performed all actions required by law to be
performed prior to the designation and establishment of Development
District No.1, the establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No.
1 and the adoption of the Plan relating thereto, including, but not
limited to, notification of Hennepin County and Independent School
District No. 276 who have taxing jurisdiction over the property to be
included in Tax r'ncrement Financing District No.1, a review by the City
Planning Commission of the proposed Plan and the holding of a public
hearing upon published and mailed notice as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the City is prepared for the relocation of individuals,
families and businesses that may be displaced as a result of carrying out
the project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City
of Shorewood, Minnesota, as follows:
7
.
.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The Council hereby finds that the designation and
establishment of Development District No. 1 and the establishment of Tax
Increment Financing District No. 1 and the approval of the Plan relating
thereto, is intended and, in the judgment of this Council, its effect will
be, to provide an impetus for commercial and industrial development in the
City, to increase employment, and otherwise promote certain public
purposes and accomplish certain objectives as specified in the Plan.
2. The Council further finds that the proposed development in
the opinion of the Council, would not occur solely through private
investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and, therefore, the
use of tax increment financing is deemed necessary; that the Plan conforms
to the general plan for the development or redevelopment of the City as a
whole; and that the Plan will afford maximum opportunity consistent with
the sound needs of the City as a. whole, for the development of Tax
Increment Financing District No. 1 by private enterprise.
3. The Council further finds, declares and determines that the
City made the above findings stated in Section 2 and has set forth the
reasons and supportipg facts for each determination in writing, attached
hereto as Exhibit A and made a part of this Resolution as if fully set
forth herein.
CONCLUSIONS
1. The Council hereby designates and establishes Development
District No. 1 and Tax Increment Financing District No. .1 and approves and
adopts the Plan therefor. A copy of the Plan is attached hereto as
Exhibit B and is made a part of this Resolution as if fully set forth
herein.
2. The City staff, the City's ad visors and legal counsel are
authorized and directed to proceed with the implementation of the Plan and
for this purpose to negotiate, draft, prepare and present to this Council
for its consideration all further plans, resolutions, documents and
contracts necessary for this purpose.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this
day of , 1990.
Jan Haugen, Mayor
ATTEST:
Laurence E. Whittaker
City Administrator/Clerk
Roll Call Vote:
A yes -
Nays -
.
.
EXHIBIT A
TO RESOLUTION NO. 3~-90
T he reasons and facts supporting the Findings for the approval
and adopting of the T ax Increment Financing Plan for T ax Increment
Financing District No.1, as required pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
Section 469.175, Subd. 3, are as follows:
1. Finding that Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 is an
"economic development district" as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section
469.174, Subd. 12.
It has been determined that Tax Increment Financing District No.
1 will not meet the requirements of a redevelopment district, mined
underground space development district or housing district. Establishing
Tax Increment Financing District No.1, will result in the preservation
and enhancement of the tax base in the municipality as well as iI1:creasing
employment in the municipality. Therefore, it has been determined that
Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 meets the requirements of an
economic developmen~ district as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section
469.174, Subd. 12.
2. Finding that the proposed development, in the opmlon of the
Council, would not occur solely through private investment within the
reasonably foreseeable future and, therefore, the use of tax increment
financing is deemed necessary.
City staff has reviewed the available financing costs for the
development and the need to upgrade public improvements to provide
adequate access and other public services to make the project viable. Due
to the high costs of the public improvements, the project would not be
financially feasible without the City's assistance.
3. Finding that the Tax Increment Financing Plan conforms to the
general plan for the development or redevelopment of the municipality as a
whole.
The City of Shorewood Planning Commission reviewed the Tax
Increr~nt Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 on
April""', 1990, and determined that the Tax Increment Financing Plan for
the foregoing district conforms to the Comprehensive Plan of the City.
.
.
4. Finding that the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment
Financing District No. 1 will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with
the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development of Development
District No. 1 by private enterprise.
The proposed projec:t in Tax Increment Financing District No. 1
consists of the construction of 54 tvlin home residential lots and an
approximately 50,000 square foot retail/office space development. The
project will preserve and enhance the tax base of the City, increase
employment within the City, and provide the residents with convenient
access to retail shopping and office facilities in a high demand area.
EXHIBIT A
.
EXHIBIT B
.
10 RESOLUl'ICN 00. 34-90
THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA
Development District Program
For
Development District No.1
Including
Tax Increment Financing Plan
For
Tax Increment Financing District No.1
Adopted
.
.
SECTION I
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO.1
Subsection 1.01. Definitions. The terms defined below shall, for purposes of this
Development Program, have th~ meanings herein specified, unless the context otherwise
specifically requires:
"Caotured Tax Caoacitv" means the amount by which the current tax capacity of a tax
increment financing district exceeds the original tax capacity as set forth in the Tax Increment
Financing Plan pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 4.
"Citv" means the City of Shorewood, a municipal corporation and political subdivision of
the State of Minnesota.
"Comorehensive Plan" means the City's comprehensive Plan submitted to the
Metropolitan Council p~rsuant to Minnesota Statutes, 473.173, which contains the objectives,
policies, standards and programs to guide public and private land use, development,
redevelopment and preservation for all lands and water within the City.
"Council" means the City Council of the City, also referred to as the governing body as
defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.002, Subdivision 5.
"County" means the County of Hennepin, Minnesota.
"Develooment District Act" means the statutory provisions of Minnesota Statutes,
Sections 469.124 through 469.134, as amended from time to time.
"Develooment District" means Development District No.1 in the City, which is created
and established hereto pursuant to and in accordance with the Development District Act, and is
geographically described in Section I, Subsection 1.06 of the. Development Program.
"Develooment Proaram" means this Development Program for Development District
No.1, as modified from time to time. As defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.125,
Subdivision 3, a development program is a statement of objectives of the City for improvement
of a development district which contains a complete statement as to the public facilities to be
constructed within the district, the open space to be created, the environmental controls to be
I - 1
.
.
applied, the proposed reuse of private property and the proposed operations of the district
after the capital improvements within the district have been completed. .
"Orioinal Tax Caoacitv" means the tax capacity of all taxable real property within a tax
increment financing district as m~st recently certified by the Commissioner of Revenue. as set
forth In the Tax Increment Financing Plan, as of the date of the request by the City for
certification by the County Auditor under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 7.
"Orloinal Tax Caoacitv Rate" means the sum of all the local tax rates that apply to
properties within a tax increment financing district, as established at the time of the initial
certification of the original tax capacity, as set forth in the Tax Increment Financing Plan.
"Proiect" means Development District No.1, the public costs associated with and the
public Improvements and facilities to be constructed within Development District No.1, as more
fully described in the Tax Increment Financing Plan of this Development Program.
"Proiect Area" means the real property located within the geographic boundaries of
Development District No. 1 and described in Section I, Subsection 1.06.
"Public Costs" means the costs of land acquisition and other costs set forth in the Tax
Increment Financing Plan, and any other costs eligible to be financed by tax increments under
Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.176, Subdivision 4.
"State" means the State of Minnesota.
"Tax Increment Bonds" means any general obligation or revenue tax increment bonds
issued and to be issued by the City to finance the Public Costs associated with Development
District No.1 as stated In the Development Program and in the Tax Increment Financing Plan
for the Tax Increment Financing Districts within Development District No.1. The term "Tax
Increment Bonds" shall also include any obligations issued to refund the Tax Increment Bonds.
"Tax Increment Financino District" means any Tax Increment Financing District presently
established or to be established In the future in Development District No. 1.
"Tax Increment Financino Act" means the statutory provisions of Minnesota Statutes,
Sections 469.174 through 469.179, inclusive.
1-2
.
.
"Tax Increment Financino Plan" means the respective Tax Increment Financing Plan for
each Tax Increment Financing District located within the Project Area.
Subsection 1.02. Statement and Findino of Public Puroose. The Council of the City of
Shorewood, Minnesota (the "City~) has determined that there is a need for the City to take
certain actions designed to encourage, ensure and facilitate development by the private sector
of underutilized, Inappropriately utilized and unused land located within the corporate limits of
the City in order to provide additional employment opportunities for residents of the City and
the surrounding area, to improve and expand the City's housing stock and to improve the tax
base of the City, the County and Independent School District No. 276 thereby enabling them to
better utilize existing public facilities and provide needed public services, and to improve the
general economy of the City, the County, and the State. Specifically the City has determined
that portions of the property within the Development District are undeveloped and, as a result,
the property Is not providing new housing opportunities, is not providing adequate employment
opportunities, and is not contributing to the tax base and general economy of the City, the
School District, the Cou.nty and the State to its full potential; and, therefore, that it is necessary
for the City to exercise its authority under the Development District Act and the Tax Increment
Financing Act to develop, implement and finance a program designed to encourage, ensure
and facilitate the development of the property located in the Development District, to further
and accomplish the public purpose specified in this paragraph.
The Council has also determined that the proposed developments will not occur solely through
private investment in the foreseeable future; that the Tax Increment Financing Plan proposed
herein is consistent with the Development Program for Development District No.1; and that the
Tax Increment Financing Plan will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound
needs of the municipality as a whole, for the development of Development District No. 1 by
private enterprise.
Subsection 1.03. Statutorv Authoritv. The Development District Act authorizes the City,
upon approval and certain public purpose findings by the City, to establish and designate
development districts within the City and to establish, develop and administer development
programs therefore to meet the needs and accomplish the public purposes specified in
Section I, Subsection 1.02. In accordance with the purposes set forth in the Development
District Act, the City has established the Development District comprising the area described in
Section I, Subsection 1.06 and has adopted this Development Program therefore.
1- 3
.
.
The Tax Increment Financing Act authorizes the City, upon certain findings by the City,
to establish and designate tax increment financing districts within the Development District and
to adopt and implement a tax increment financing plan to accomplish the objectives
established for the Development District. In accordance with the Tax Increment Financing Act,
the City has adopted herein a :Tax Increment Financing Plan delineating a Tax Increment
Financing District In the Development District, which provides for the use of tax Increment
financing to finance the cost of qualified public activities and improvements In the Development
District, as specified in the Development Program and the Tax Increment Financing Plan.
Section 1.04. Statement of Goals. The Council determines that the
establishment of Development District No.1 and of Tax Increment Financing Districts herein will
provide the City with the ability to achieve certain public purpose goals and objectives not
otherwise obtainable in the foreseeable future without City intervention in the normal
development process. These public purpose goals include: (a) the improvement of the tax
base and tax revenue generating capacity of Development District No.1; (b) Increased
employment opportuni~ies and employment in the City; (c) safe and efficient traffic circulation
system for the community; (d) increased supply and variety of safe, healthy housing for all
residents in the City; (e) maintain desirable community character and economic health by
ensuring that development which takes place in the City of Shorewood is of premium quality
and blends well with the natural and suburban atmosphere of the community; and
(1) realization of comprehensive planning goals.
Section 1.05. Statement of Obiectives. The City seeks to achieve the following program
objectives in Development District No.1:
1 . Encourage the prompt development of certain property in Development District
No.1, which property is not now in productive use or in its highest and best use, in a manner
consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and with a minimum adverse impact on the
environment, and thereby promote and secure the development of other land in the City.
2. Secure additional employment opportunities within Development District No. 1
and the City for residents of the City and the surrounding area, thereby improving living
standards, reducing unemployment and the loss of skilled and unskilled labor and other human
resources in the City.
3. Supplement the financial and property tax base of the city.
1- 4
.
.
4. Provide for the financing and construction of public improvements within
Development District No.1, necessary for the orderly and beneficial development of
Development District No. 1 and adjacent areas of the City. (See Subsection 1.08 listing of
Improvements.)
5. Encourage local business expansion and improvements in Development District
No.1 and the City.
6. Encourage and provide maximum opportunity for private development of
existing areas and structures which are compatible with the Development Program.
7. Provide sound residential neighborhoods with a variety of housing types which
are aesthetically developed. well located, and adequately serviced with municipal utilities and
amenities.
8. Balance land use allocations with economic market demands. Land which is
available will be developed with proper consideration for such demands.
9. Encourage a creative approach (as opposed to "traditional" subdivision design)
to land use and related residential development in Development District No.1.
10. Provide safe, convenient, attractive, and accessible commercial development for
City residents.
11. Maintain balanced commercial activity which is viable and responsive to the
needs of the community and surrounding market area.
12. Promote commercial, office, and other appropriate development in Development
District No.1 so as to maintain the area in a manner compatible with its accessibility in the City.
13. Provide safe, convenient, direct, economical and environmentally sound
accessibility to businesses and residential developments within Development District No.1.
14. Maintain and improve existing public services and facilities in Development
District No. 1 by planning and providing for such services and facilities in a comprehensive and
economic fashion.
1- 5
.
.
15. Continue to provide public Improvements within Development District No. 1 to
the extent existing public services and facilities become fully utilized by development within
Development District No. 1 and the surrounding City.
Subsection 1.06. Boundaries of Development District No. 1 as Established on
(See Exhibit I-A for Boundary Map.) The property which comprises Development District No. 1
is legally described in Exhibit l-B:
Subsection 1.07. Parcels to be Acquired in Whole or in Part Within Development District
NO.1. The City does not anticipate the acquisition of any property at this time.
Subsection 1.08. Public Improvements and Facilities within Development District No.1.
Public improvements which will be financed within Development District No.1 include: (a)
improvements to the State Highway 7 frontage road; (b) upgrading of the intersection of State
Highway 7 and Old Market Road; (c) improvements to Old Market Road; (d) installation of
watermains; and (e) the closing of slip ramps onto State Highway 7.
Additional public improvements which may be financed within Development District No. 1 if
sufficient tax increment income is available, include: (a) further road and utility construction;
(b) sidewalk construction; (c) park improvements; (d) trail construction; and (e) construction of
a City water treatment facility.
Subsection 1.09. Environmental Controls. The proposed development projects in the
Development District do not present any permanent environmental problems. All municipa.l
actions, public improvements, and private development shall be carried out in a manner that
will enhance, rather than detract from the natural environment. All necessary environmental
permits and clearances will be obtained.
Subsection 1.10. Open Space. Located within Development District No. 1 is
Silverwood Park, an 8-acre undeveloped open space area. Pursuant to Subsection 1.08 of this
Development Program tax increment income, if available, may be used to construct
improvements to Silverwood Park. The City does not anticipate the need for the creation of
additional open space in Development District No.1.
Subsection 1.11. Rehabilitation. Owners of properties within Development District No.
1 will be encouraged to rehabilitate their properties to conform with the applicable state and
local codes and ordinances, as well as any design standards. Owners of properties who
1- 6
.
.
purchase property within Develop!1lent District No. 1 from the City may be required to
rehabilitate their properties as a condition of the sale of the land. The City may provide such
rehabilitation assistance as may be available from federal, state or local services.
Subsection 1.12. Reloc~tion. The City accepts its responsibility for providin~ for
relocation pursuant to Section 469.133 of the Development District Act.
Subsection 1.13. Administration and Maintenance of Development District NO.1.
Maintenance and operation of the public improvements in Development District No. 1 will be
the responsibility of the City Administrator of the City. The City Administrator will administer
Development District No. 1 pursuant to the provisions of the Development District Act;
provided, however, that such powers may only be exercised at the direction of the Council. No
action taken by the City Administrator pursuant to the above-mentioned powers shall be
effective without authorization by the Council.
1-7
! DEEPHAVEN.
J~
EXHIBIT I-A
.J
~rl'J-\
{ ,
\:. tI . _-----
-"--1 . .._..__n
I
CHRISTMAS LAKE
I
,- 8
I ,
.
.
EXHIBIT 1-8
That part of Section 25 and 36, Township 1~7, Range 23, (platted
and unplatted) in the City or Shorewood, Hennepin County, Minnesota
lying within and bounded by the following described line:
Commencing at the intersection of the east line of said
Section 25 and the centerline of state Trunk Highway No.7;
thence south along the east line of said Section 25 and
Section 36 (said line also being the centerline of Vine Hill
Road "and the easterly boundary of Shorewood) to the
southwesterly right of way line of Covington Road extended;
thence northwesterly along said southwesterly right of way
line extended and said southwesterly right of way line to the
south right of way line of said Highway No.7; thence westerly
and southwesterly along said south right of ':.lay line of
Highway No. 7 and the southeasterly right of way line of
Radisson Road to the southeasterly extension of the
'southwesterly line of Lot 24, Radisson Inn Addition, according
to the record plat thereof; thence northwesterly along said
southwesterly line and its extensions to the north right of
way line of said Highway No.7; thence northeasterly along
said north right of way line to the east line of the west half
of the southeast quarter of said Section 25 and the Shorewood-
Deephaven boundary line; thence southerly along said boundary
line to the centerline of said State Trunk Highway No.7;
thence northeasterly along said centerline to the point of
beginning.
./
.
SECTION II
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT NO 1
Subsection 2.01. Statement of Ob/ectlves. See Section I, Subsection 1.05 of the
Development Program for Develo.pment District No.1.
Subsection 2.02. Development Proaram. See Section 1, Subsection 1.02 through 1.13
of the Development Program.
Subsection 2.03. Parcels to be Included in Tax Increment Financino District No.1. Tax
Increment District No.1 Is a 27.6968 acre site located south of State Highway 7 and east of Old
Market Road. A map showing the boundaries of Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 is
included in the boundary map of Development District No. 1 in Exhibit I-A. The parcel
constituting said District is legally described in as follows: That part of the Southwest Quarter
of the Southeast Quarter, Section 25, Township 117, Range 23, lying South of a line extending
from a point on the West line of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter distant 591.42
feet North from the Southwest corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter to a
point on the East line of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter distant 1236.14 feet
North from the Southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter,
according to the Government survey thereof.
Subsection 2.04. Desionation of Tax Increment Financino District No. 1 as an Economic
District. Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 qualifies as an "economic district" pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 12. The Tax Increment Financing District is
existing vacant land.
Subsection 2.05. Parcels to be Acouired. The City has the authority to acquire and
reconvey any or all of the parcels of property located within Tax Increment Financing District
No.1. The City does not anticipate acquiring any of the parcels in Tax Increment Financing
District No.1.
Subsection 2.06. Reauirementfor Aareements. Pursuant to Minnesota Statues, Section
469.176, Subdivision 5, no more than 1 0 percent by acreage of the property to be acquired by
the City within a project which contains an economic development district shall be owned by
the City as a result of acquisition with the proceeds of bonds Issued pursuant to Section
469.178 without the City having, prior to acquisition of in excess of 10 percent of the acreage,
II - 1
.
.
concluded an agreement for the development of the property acquired and which provides
recourse for the City should the development not be completed.
The City anticipates entering into an agreement for development.
Subsection 2.07. Assessment Aqreements. Pursuant to Minnesota Statues, Section
469.177, Subdivision 8, the City may, upon entering into a development agreement pursuant to
Minnesota Statues, Section 469.176, Subdivision 5, enter Into an Assessment Agreement in
recordable form with the developer of property within Tax Increment Financing District No. 1
which establishes a minimum market value of the land and completed improvements for the
duration of the Tax Increment Financing District. The Assessment Agreement shall be
presented to the county assessor who shall review the plan and specifications for the
improvements to be constructed, review the market value previously assigned to the land upon
which the improvements are to be constructed and so long as the minimum market value
contained in the Assessment Agreement appears in the judgment of the County Assessor, to
be a reasonable estimate, the County Assessor may certify the minimum market value
agreement.
The City anticipates entering into an Assessment Agreement.
Subsection 2.08. Specific Development Expected to Occur Within Tax Increment
Financino District No.1; Need for Tax Increment Financina. It is expected that the property
within Tax Increment Financing District NO.1 will be developed into 54 twin home residential
lots and an approximately 50,000 square foot retail\office space development. Irnprovement of
the 54 twin home residential lots are expected to be completed and assessed as of January 2,
1991. Construction of the commercial development is expected to begin in 1990 and be
completed and fully assessed as of January 2, 1992.
The proposed development, in the opinion of the City, could not reasonably be
expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future,
and thus the use of tax increment financing to assist the proposed development is necessary.
Various reports and analyses have been prepared by the City's consulting engineer
demonstrating the existing need for additional traffic capacity and signalization in certain areas
of the City including the intersection of State Highway 7 and Old Market Road and the State
Highway 7 frontage road which will provide access to Tax Increment Financing District NO.1.
The City Council has therefore determined that developrnent of Tax Increment Financing
District No. 1 cannot occur without improvements to existing intersections and roadways in and
11-2
.
.
adjacent to Tax Increment Financing District No.1, which are necessary to ease traffic
congestion and improve traffic safetY.
Subsection 2.09. Estimated Public Costs. The estimated principal amount of Public
Costs to be financed from tax ~ncrements from Tax Increment Financing District No.1 Is
$1,575,000. The Public Costs will be incurred primarily to finance costs associated with
improvements to the intersection of State Highway 7 and Old Market Road, including the
installation of semaphores, the upgrading of the frontage road along State Highway 7, the
upgrading of Old Market Road, the installation of watermains and the closing of slip ramps onto
State Highway 7.
Public Improvements
Road Construction
State Highway 7 Frontage Road
Intersection of State Highway 7 and Old Market Road
Old Market Road
Slip Ramp Closures
Utility Construction
Watermain Across State Highway 7
Watermain in State Highway 7 Frontage Road
Watermain to Residential Deveiopment
$ 920,000
$ 115,000
Other Public Costs
Administration
Engineering
Capitalized Interest*
Bond Issuance
Contingency
$ 59,500
160,000
170,000
45,500
105.000
Total
$1,575,000
*
Capitalized interest is a function of market conditions at the time of sale and may change
significantly depending upon actual interest rates received on the tax increment bonds.
The Public Costs set forth above are estimates and the amounts allocated to pay any item may
be reallocated among any of the other items set forth above.
11-3
.
.
Subsection 2.10. Estimated Amount of Bonded Indebtedness. Pursuant to Section
469.175, Subdivision 1 of the Tax Increment Financin~ Act, general obligation tax increment
bonds In an amount not exceeding $1,575,000 are to be issued to amortize the eligible costs
identified in Subsection 2.09. The debt service cash flows are shown in Exhibit II-A.
Subsection 2.11. Sources of Revenue. The revenues to be used to pay the Public
Costs in Development District No.1 and Tax Increment Financing District No.1 are tax
increments from Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 and excess tax increments from other
City Tax Increment Financing Districts which may be established within the City's Development
District No. 1 in the future. In addition, the City expects to enter into a cooperative agreement
with the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MNDOT), whereby MNDOT would contribute
up to 50% or approximately $250.000 of the cost of the State Highway 7 frontage road
improvements. An agreement between the City and MNDOT to share costs for improvements
to the State Highway 7 frontage road would reduce the estimated project costs identified in
Subsection 2.09.
A schedule of projected tax increment revenue is shown in Exhibit II-B.
Subsection 2.12. Orioinal Tax Capacity Value. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section
275.08. the Original Tax Capacity Value of all taxable property in Tax Increment Financing
District No. 1 as most recently certified by the Commissioner of Revenue of the State of
Minnesota. being the certification made in 1989 with respect to the tax capacity value of such
property as of January 2. 1989. for taxes payable in 1990, is $346.000.
The County Auditor will add to the Original Assessed Value for the preceding year
multiplied by the. average percentage increase in the assessed value of all property included in
the District during the five years prior to certification.
The estimated market value of the property within Tax Increment Financing District No.1
has increased an average of 13.76% from January 2. 1984 to January 2. 1989. based upon the
difference of the January 2, 1984 estimated market value of $205.000 and the January 2. 1989
estimated market value of $346.000.
Subsection 2.13. Oriainal Tax Capacity Rate. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes. Section
275.08. at the time of certification of the original tax capacity for Tax Increment Financing
District No.1, the County Auditor will certify the Original Tax Capacity Rate that applies to Tax
Increment Financing District No.1. The Original Tax Capacity Rate is the sum of all the tax
II - 4
.
.
capacity rates that apply to the properties in Tax Increment Financing District NO.1 for taxes
payable in 1990.
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.1 n, Subdivision 3(b)(2), "the County
Auditor shall exclude the retained .captured tax capacity of the authority from the taxable value
of the local taxing district in determining local taxing district tax capacity rates. The tax capacity
rates so determined are to be extended against the retained captured tax capacity of the
Authority as well as the taxable value of the local taxing districts. The tax generated by the
extension of the lesser of (A) the local taxing district tax capacity rates of (B) the original tax
capacity rate to the retained captured tax capacity of the Authority is the tax increment of the
Authority.- The maximum Tax Capacity Rate to be applied to Tax Increment Financing District
No.1 for the duration will be for levy year 1989/taxes payable in 1990. The Tax Capacity Rate
for Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 for taxes payable in 1990 is 107.114%.
Taxing Jurisdiction
1989/90 Tax Capacity Rate
City of Shorewood
Hennepin County
Independent School District 276
Special Districts.
20.299%
27.916
52.555
6.344
Total Tax Capacity Rate
107.114%
.
Special Districts include the Metropolitan Council, Metropolitan Transit District, Mosquito
Control District, Hennepin Park, Park Museum, Hennepin County Regional Railroad
Authority, Technical College 287 and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District.
Subsection 2.14. Estimated Captured Tax Capacity Value and Computation of Tax
Increment. Each year the County Auditor will measure the amount of increase or decrease in
the total tax capacity value of taxable property in Tax Increment Financing District No.1 to
calculate the tax increments payable to the City. In any year in which there is an increase in
totai tax capacity value in Tax Increment Financing District No.1 above the Original Tax
Capacity Value, tax increments will be payable to the City. In any year in which the total tax
capacity value in Tax Increment Financing District No.1 declines below the Original Tax
Capacity Value, no tax capacity value will be captured from Tax Increment Financing District
No. 1 and no tax increments will be payable therefrom.
11-5
.
.
The County Auditor shall certify In each year after the date the Original Tax Capacity
Values were certified, the amount the Original Tax Capacity Values have increased or
decreased as a result of:
1. changes in tax exempt status of property;
2. reductions or enlargements of the geographic boundaries of Tax Increment
District No.1; and
3. changes due to stipulations, adjustments, negotiated or court-ordered
abatements.
Upon completion of the development expected to occur in Tax Increment Financing
District No.1, the City estimates the tax capacity value of all taxable property in Tax Increment
Financing District No.1 will be approximately $281,880, based on an estimated market value
upon completion of $5.872,500. This value, after subtracting the original tax capacity, will
produce a net tax increment of $280,021 in 1993.
Subsection 2.15 Fiscal Disparities Contribution. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
Section 469.1 n(3), the City Council elects the method of computation under paragraph (a),
whereby the fiscal disparities contribution associated with the private commercial development
which occurs within Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 will be borne by properties outside
of Tax Increment Financing District No.1.
Subsection 2.16. Duration of Tax Increment Financina District No.1. The Tax
Increment Financing Act allows economic development districts to remain In existence eight
years from the date of the receipt of the first tax increment, or ten years from approval of the tax
increment financing plan, whichever is less. Therefore, Tax Increment Financing District No. 1
may remain in effect until December, 1999, or until such earlier date as all Public Costs have
been paid in accordance with the Tax Increment Financing Plan.
Subsection 2.17. Estimated Impact on. Other Taxina Jurisdictions. Pursuant to Section
. 469.175, Subdivision (6) of the Tax Increment Act, Exhibit II-C shows the estimated impact of
Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 on taxing jurisdictions other than the City. There will be
no adverse impact on other taxing jurisdictions during the terms of Tax Increment Financing
District No.1 since the development would not have occurred without the creation of Tax
Increment Financing District No. 1 and the provision of public assistance. A positive impact on
11-6
.
.
other taxing jurisdictions will occur when Tax Increment Financing District No.1 is decertified
and the development In Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 becomes part of the tax base of
all affected taxing jurisdictions.
Section 2.18. Use of Tax In~rement. The City hereby determines that it will use 100% of
the Captured Tax Capacity of taxable property located in Tax Increment Financing District No. 1
for the following activities.
1. To pay principal and interest on Tax Increment Bonds.
2. To finance or otherwise pay Public Costs set forth in the Tax Increment
Financing Plan.
3. To accumulate or maintain a reserve securing the payment when due of the
principal and interest on the Tax Increment Bonds or other bonds to pay Public Costs.
4. Return the excess to the County Auditor for redistribution to the respective
taxing jurisdictions in proportion to their tax capacity rate.
Tax Increments shall not be used to circumvent levy limitations applicable to the City or
for other purposes prohibited by Section 469.176, Subdivision 4 of the Tax Increment Financing
Act.
Section 2.19. Prior. Planned Improvements. The City shall,after due and diligent
search, accompany its request for certification to the County Auditor or its notice of district
enlargement with a listing of all properties within the Tax Increment Financing District for which
building permits have been issued during the 18 months immediately preceding approval of the
Tax Increment Financing Plan by the City. The County Auditor shall increase the original tax
capacity value of the Tax Increment Financing District by the tax capacity value of each
improvement for which the building permit was issued.
Section 2.20. Modifications of Tax Increment Financino Districts. In accordance with
Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 4, any reduction or enlargement of the
geographic area of the Development District or the Tax Increment Financing District, increase in
amount of bonded indebtedness to be incurred, including a determination to increase the
amount of capitalized interest on debt to be paid on Tax Increment Bonds or to increase or
decrease the amount of interest on the debt to be capitalized, increase the portion of the
11-7
.
.
captured tax capacity to be retained by the City, increase in total estimated Public Costs or
designation of additional property to be acquired by the City shall be approved upon the notice
and after the discussion, public hearing and findings, required for approval of the Tax
Increment Financing Plan. The geographic area of the Tax Increment Financing District may be
reduced, but shall not be enlarged after five years fOllowing the date of certification of the
Original Tax Capacity by the County Auditor. If a development district is enlarged, the reasons
and supporting facts for the determination that the addition to the district meets the criteria of
Section 469.174, Subdivision 12, must be documented. The requirements of this paragraph do
not apply if (1) the only modification is elimination of parcels from the project or district and
(2)(A) the current tax capacity of the parcels eliminated from the district equals or exceeds the
tax capacity of those parcels in the district's original assessed value or (B) the City agrees that,
notwithstanding Section 469.177, Subdivision 1, the original tax capacity will be reduced by no
more than the current tax capacity of the parcels eliminated from the district. The City must
notify the County Auditor of any modification that reduces or enlarges the geographic area of a
district or a project area.
Section 2.21. Limitation of Administrative Expenses. In accordance with Minnesota
Statues, Chapter 469, administrative expenses means all expenditures of an authority other
than amounts paid for the purchase of land or amounts paid to contractors or others providing
materials and services, including architectural and engineering services, directly connected
with the physical development of the real property in the district, relocation benefits paid to or
services provided for persons residing or businesses located in the district or amounts used to
pay interest on, fund a reserve for, or sell at a discount bonds issued pursuant to Section
469.178. Administrative expenses includes amounts paid for services provided by bond
counsel, fiscal consultants, and planning or economic development consultants. No Tax
Increment shall be used to pay any administrative expenses for a project which exceed 10% of
the total expenditures authorized by the Tax Increment Financing Plan or the total Project
Costs, whichever Is less.
Section 2.22. Limitation on Duration of Tax Increment Financina Districts. Pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.176, Subdivision 1,.... no tax increment shall be paid to an
authority three ye.ars from the date of certification by the County Auditor unless within the three-
year period (1) bonds have been issued pursuant to Section 469.178 or in aid of a project
pursuant to any other law, except revenue bonds issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
Section 469.152 to 469.165, prior to the effective date of the Act; or (2) the Authority has
acquired property within the district; or (3) the Authority has constructed or caused to be
constructed public improvements within the district..:
11-8
.
.
Section 2.23. Limitation on Qualification of Property in Tax Increment Financina Districts
Not Sublect to Improvements. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.176, Subdivision 6,
-If, after four years from the date of certification of the original tax capacity of the tax Increment
financing district..., no demolition. rehabilitation or renovation of a parcel or other site
preparation Including improvem~nt of a street adjacent to a property but not installation of
utility service including sewer or water systems, has been commenced on a parcel located
within a tax increment financing district by the Authority or by the owner of the parcel in
accordance with the tax Increment financing plan, no additional tax increment may be taken
from that parcel and th~ original tax capacity of that parcel shall be excluded from the original
tax capacity of the tax increment financing district. If the authority or the owner of the parcel
subsequently commences demolition, rehabilitation or renovation or other site preparation on
that parcel including improvement of a street adjacent to that parcel, in accordance with the tax
increment financing plan, the. authority shall certify to the county auditor in the annual
disclosure report that the activity has commenced and the county auditor shall certify the tax
capacity thereof as most recently certified by the commissioner of revenue and add it to the
original tax capacity of the tax increment financing district.-
Section 2.24. Excess Tax Increments. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section
469.176, Subdivision 2, in any year in which the Tax Increments exceeds the amount necessary
to pay the Public Costs authorized by the Development Program and Tax Increment Financing
Plan. including the amount necessary to cancel any tax levy as provided in Minnesota Statutes,
Section 465.61, Subdivision 3, the City shall use the excess amount to:
1. prepay the outstanding Tax Increment Bonds;
2. discharge the pledge of Tax Increments thereto;
3. pay into an escrow account dedicated to the payment of the Tax Increment
Bonds;
4. return the excess to the County Auditor for redistribution to the respective taxing
jurisdiction in proportion to their tax capacity rate.
In addition, the City may choose to modify Tax Increment Financing Plan No.1 in order
to finance additional Public Costs of the Development District.
11-9
.
.
Section 2.25. Administration of Tax Increment Financino Districts. Administration of the
Tax Increment Financing District will be the responsibility of the City Administrator
The tax Increments received as a result of increases In the tax capacity values of the
Tax Increment Financing District No.1 will be maintained in a special account separate from all
other municipal accounts and expended only upon municipal activities identified in the
Development Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan.
Section 2.26. Annual Disclosure Reauirements. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
Section 469.175, Subdivision 6, the City must file with the State Auditor on or before July 1, an
annual financial report for Tax Increment Financing District No.1. The report shall also be filed
by the City with the School Board and County Board. The report shall:
1. make full disclosure of the SOurces and uses of public funds in Tax Increment
Financing District No.1;
2. permit comparison and reconciliation with the City's accounts and financial
report~;
3. permit auditing of the funds expended on behalf of the Tax Increment Financing
District No.1, including a single district that is part of a multi-district project or that is funded in
part or whole through the use of a development account funded with tax increments from other
Tax Increment Financing Districts or with other public money; and
4. be consistent with generally accepted accounting principles.
In addition, the report shall contain the following information:
1. the original tax capacity value of Tax Increment Financing District No.1;
2. the Captured Tax Capacity of Tax Increment Financing District No.1, including
the amount of any Captured Tax Capacity shared with other tax districts;
3. the outstanding principal amount of Tax Increment Bonds issued or other loans
incurred to finance project costs in the Tax Increment Financing District No.1;
11-10
.
.
4. for the reporting period and for the duration of the Tax Increment Financing
District No.1, the amount budgeted under the Tax Increment Financing Plan, and the actual
amount expended for, at least, the following categories:
a. acquisition of land and buildings through condemnation or purchase;
b. site improvements or preparation costs;
c. Installation of public utilities or other public improvements; and
d. administrative costs, including the allocated cost of the City;
5. For properties sold to a developer, the total cost of the property to the City and
the price paid by the developer;
6. The amount of tax-exempt obligations, other than those reported under clause
(3), that were issued on behalf of private entities for facilities located in Tax Increment Financing
District NO.1.
11-11
City 01 Shorewood, Minnesota
EconoMic Tax IncreMent District No.1
Prepared March 14, 1990
By SPRINGSTED Incorporated
Dated: 7- 1-1990
Mature: 2- 1
Total Capital- Net Projected
Year 01 Year 01 Principal ized Levy TlF Annual CUMulative
Levy Mat. Principal Rates Interest & Interest Interest Required IncoMe Surplus surPlu.
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) ( 10) (11
1990 1991 0 0.00% 57,846 57,846 57,846 0 0 0 0
1991 1992 0 o . 00t6 99,165 99, 165 99, 165 0 0 0 0
1992 1993 125,000 6.00% 99, 165 224,165 0 224,165 230,505 6,340 6,340
1993 1994 185,000 6.00% 91,665 276,665 0 276,665 280,021 3,356 9,696
1994 1995 190,000 6. 15% 80,565 270,565 0 270,565 273,861 3,296 12,992
1995 1996 200,000 6.20% 68,880 268,880 0 2613,880 270,431 1,551 14,543
- 1996 1997 205,000 6.30% 56,480 261,480 0 261,480 266,529 5,049 19,592
,
..... 1997 1998 215,000 6.40% 43,565 258,565 0 258,565 262,090 3,525 23, 117
N
1998 1999 225,000 6.50% 29,805 254,805 0 254,805 257,040 2,235 25,352
1999 2000 230,000 6.60% 15 , 1 80 245,180 0 245,180 251,296 6,116 31,468
TOTALS: 1,575,000 642,316 2,217,316 157,011 2,060,305 2,091,773
Bond Years: 10,088.75 Annual Interest: 642,316 .
Avg. Maturity: 6.41 Plus Discount: 17 , 325
Avg. Annual Rate: 6.367% Net Interest: 659,641
N.I.C. Rate: 6.538%
Interest rates are estimates; changes may cause significant alterations of this schedule.
The actual underwriter's discount bid may also vary.
~
:J:
i
=i
-
i:
City of Shorewood, Minnesota Prepared: 031Z1/90
Economic Tax Increment District No.1 By SPRIKGSTED I ncorpora ted
Fiscal DlsparltlesfrCll1l Outside the District
levy Year I Collect Year: 1989/1990 1990/1991 1991/1992 1992/ 1993 1993/1994 1994/1995 1995/1996 1996/1997 1997/1998 1998/1999
Cert I f Ica-
TV1N HOME RESIDENTAIL lOTS tlon Year
Number of Lots 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54
Market Value Per lot $40,ODO $40,000 $40,DOO $40.000 $40.000 $40.DOO $40.000 $40.000
Total Market Value $2.160.000 $2.160,DOO $2.160.000 $2.160.000 $2.160.000 $2.160.000 $2.160.DDO $2.160.000
Property Class Ratio (see note I) 5.06% 5.00% 4.90% 4.80% 4.75% 4.75% 4.75% 4.75% 4.75% 4.75%
---------- ---..----...- ---------- --...------- ---------- -----...--...- ---------- .....--------
Net Tax Capacity $105.840 $ID3.680 $102.600 $102.600 $102.600 $102.600 $102.600 $102.600
COMMERCIAL
Market Value $2.598.75D $3.712.500 $3.712.500 $3.712.500 $3.712.5DO $3.712.500 $3.712,500 $3.712.500
Property Class Ratio (see note 1) 5.06% 5.DO% 4.90% 4.80% 4.75% 4.75% 4.75% 4.75% 4.75% 4.75%
-----...--..- ---------- ---------- ---..------ ---...------ ---------- ...--------- uiii6:;;; .
Net Tax Capacity $127.339 $178.200 $176.344 $176.344 $176,344 $176.344 $176.344
Total Net Tax Capacity $233,179 $281.880 $278.944 $278.944 $278.944 $278,944 $278,944 $278.944
less: Original Tax Capacity (see note 2) $13,896 $15.808 17.983 20.457 23.272 26.474 3D.117 34.261 38,975 44.338
Fiscal Disparities Contlbutlon 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0
---------- ---------... ......_---...--- --.-------- -..-------- ---------- ----....---- ----------
Total Captured Tax Capacity $215.196 $261.423 $255,672 $252.470 $248.827 $244,683 $239,969 $234.606
local Tax Rate (1989/90 frozen) (see note 3) 107.114% 107.114% 107.114% 107.114% 107.114% 107.114% 107.114% 107.114% 107.114% 107.114%
---------- ----......---- --......-..---... --..-..---...- ---------- --...-................ ------....--- -----..-.....-
ProJected Tax Increment $230.505 $280,021 $273,861 $270.431 $266.529 $262.090 $257.040 $251.296
I NOTES
.....
~ 1. Per Laws of Minnesota 1989 SpeCial Session No.1. Section 8, it Is the Intention of the State Le91slature to phase in a reduction of the class rate
for properties currently assessed at a class rate of 5.06%. This reduction is expected to begin for taxes payable in 1991. The property class rates
shown here represent Springsted's view of how the reduction In propety class rate might occur.
2. The original tax capacity was determined as follows: The 1989/90 [MV of the property within Tax Increment Olstrlct No.1 of $346.DOO divided by 43,560
square feet per acre renders a price per square foot of $0.29. The price per square foot multiplied by the total acreage of the proposed development.
consisting of twin home residential lots (no buildings!. comnerclal property and a vacant outlot. of 946,973 square feet equals an original EMY
of $274.622. The original EMY of $274.622 multiplied by a property class ratio of 5.06% yields an original tax capacity of $13.896. That portion of
Tax Increment Olstrlct No.1 which Is expected to be platted as public right-of-way (259,000 square feet) will be tax exempt and therefore has..a.......
excluded in calculating the original tax capacity of the District. The original tax capacity is Increased 13.76% annually based upon the difference
In the [MV of the property within Tax Increment District No.1 of $205.000 as of January 2, 1984 and $346.000 as of Janurary 2. 1989.
Total
20.299%
27.916%
52.555%
6.344%
107.114%
.
3. The local tax rate was determined as follows:
City of Shorewood
Hennepin County
ISD 276
Special Districts
~
~
OJ
=i
-
;-
OJ
City of Shorewood. Minnesota Prepared: 03/09/90
Impact of Economic Ta. Increment District No.1 By SPRINGSTED Incorporated
On Other Major Taxing Jurisdictions
Without Project With Project
1989/90 1989/90 1989/90 1989/90 Projected 1989/90 Adjusted Tax Projected Negdlve
Tax Ad Va lorem Tax Tax Captured New Tax Ad Va lorem Tax Capac It y Captured Impact On
Capacity Taxes Capac It y Capacity Tax Capacity Capacity Taxes Capac Ity Rate Tax Capacity Other Tax ing
Value Lev led Rate * Value Value Value lev led Rate Impact Value Jurlsd Ict Ions
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11)
City of
Shorewood $6.B24.699 $1.3B5.258 20.298% $6.824.699 $280.021 $7.104,720 $1.3B5.258 19.498% 0.800% $280.021 $54.598
Hennepin County $930.558.371 $253.007.808 27.189" $930.558.371 $280.021 $930. 838.392 $253.007.808 27.181" O.ooax $280.021 $76.1_
ISO 276 $32.074.219 $19.331.548 60.271" $32.074.219 $280.021 $32.354,240 $19.331.548 59.750% 0.521" $280.021 $167.31
Other 6.224% $280,021 6.2241 $280,021 $17.429
Tota Is 113.982% 112 . 653% 1. 329% $315.453
I
....
~
Statement 1:
lhe 19H9/90 la. capaclly value lImes lhe 1989/90 la. capaclly rale produces 1989/90 taxes generated. If the captured tax capacity value was
available 10 ..~h u.,nCj JurlSdICllon. lhe result ..auld be a lower or adJusled I.. capacity rate which would produce the same amount of taxes.
Thus, wllh the addlllon of captured value of $ZHO.021 Ihe ta. capaclly rale for the above selected major taxing Jurisdictions
would be reduced by a rale of 1.329'110 an adjusted la. capaClly rate of \12.653%. The captured tax capacity value times the
adlusted tax capaClly rale or 112.6531 would generate $315,453 In increment Income. which represents the loss of new tax
revenues If the development had not occured without inclusion in a tax increment district.
Statement 2:
If no captured tax capac Ity va lue is ava Ilab Ie to each of the tax ing jurisdict ions. there is no Impact on the taxes heretofore lev ied and
therefore no Impact on tax capacity rates.
* The 1989/90 tax capacity rate for the city. county and school district are ca lculated by dividing the 1989/90 taxes levied Into the 1989/90 tax
capacity value. This value will vary slightly from the County Auditor's tax capacity rate which Is adjusted because of the fiscal disparities tax rate.
.
Note: The Impact on other tax Ing jurlsdict Ions Is negllgab Ie since those jurldlctions represent approximate Iy
of the overa 11 tax levy.
5.5%.
m
><
::J:
-
m
=t
-
.
o
.' ';
\
.
.
ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT
and
ASSESSOR'S CERTIFICATION
By and Between
CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA
and
SHERMAN-BOOSALIS INTERESTS, INC.
This document was drafted by:
DRAFT
1E
.
.
THIS AGREEMENT, dated as of this day of ,
1990, by and between the City of Shorewood, Minnesota (the City), a
public body corporate and politic, and Sherman-Boosalis Interests,
Inc. or assigns, the developer of property in question, (the
Developer): .
WITNESSETH, that
WHEREAS, on or before the date hereof the City and the Developer
have entered into a Contract for Tax Increment Finance Private
Development dated as of , 1990 (the TIF
Development Agreement), regarding certain real property located in
City of Shorewood Development District No. 1 in the City of
Shorewood, Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, it is contemplated that pursuant to said TIF
Development Agreement the Developer will undertake a project called
Water ford Phase Three; and
WHEREAS, the City and Developer desire to establish a minimum
market value for ~he Development Property and the improvements and
buildings to be constructed thereon pursuant to the TIF Development
Agreement (the Facilities), (cumulatively, the assessed property) for
the calculation of real property taxes, or taxes in lieu thereof
pursuant to Minn. Stat.~272.01 or any successor statute pursuant to
the provisions of Minn. Stat. ~469.177, subd. 8; and
WHEREAS, the city and the Assessor for the County have reviewed
the preliminary plans and specifications for the Project which it as
contemplated will be erected;
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties to this Agreement in consideration
of the promises, covenants and agreements made by each to the other,
do hereby agree as follows:
1. Upon substantial completion of construction of the Project
by the developer but in no event later than January 2, 1992, the
minimum market value which shall be assessed with respect to the
Assessed Property shall be $ amount. The Developer has
agreed to commence construction of the above referenced improvements
within thirty (30) days following the date of this agreement and to
diligently and in good faith prosecute said improvements to
completion within a reasonable period of time thereafter.
Notwithstanding the foregoing the Developer has agreed, whether or
not the improvements have been completed or not, that the fair market
value which shall be assessed with respect to the Assessed Property
shall be $ amount.
2. The minimum market values herein established shall be of no
further force and effect and this Agreement shall terminate upon
.
.
December 31, 1999.
3. Nothing in this Assessment Agreement shall limit the
discretion of the Assessor for the County to assign a market value
to the Assessed Property in excess of $ amount nor prohibit
the Developer from seeking through the exercise of legal or
administrative remedies .a reduction in such market value for property
tax purposes, provided, however that the Developer shall not seek a
reduction of the market value of the Assessed Property below $____
amount for the year 1990 or any year thereafter so long as the
Assessment Agreement shall remain in effect.
4. Neither the preamble nor provisions of this Agreement are
intended to, nor shall they be construed as, mOdifying the terms of
the TIF Development Agreement between the City and the Developer.
5. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be binding
upon the successors and assigns of the parties.
THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA
By:
Its Mayor
By:
Its Administrator-Clerk
SHERMAN-BOOSALIS INTERESTS, INC.
By:
Its Chief Executive Officer
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____
day of 1990, by and
the Mayor and the Administrator-
Clerk of the City of Shorewood, Minnesota.
Notary Public
..' 4
.
.
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____
of , 1990, by George Sherman, Chief Executive Officer, of
Sherman-Boosalis Interests, Inc.
Notary Public
CERTIFICATION BY ASSESSOR
The undersigned, having reviewed the plans and specifications
for the improvements to be constructed and the market value assigned
to the land upon which the improvements are to be constructed, and
being of the opinion that the minimum market values contained in the
foregoing Agreement appear reasonable, hereby certifies as follows:
The undersigned Assessor, being legally responsible for the
assessment of the above described property, hereby certifies that the
market value assigned to such land and improvements upon completion
of the improvements to be constructed thereon, and in no event later
than January 2, 1991, shall not be less than $ amount
prior to termination of this Agreement.
Assessor for the County of Hennepin
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
day of , 1990, by the
Assessor in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Notary Public
<-
.
.
CONTRACT
FOR
TAX INCREMENT FINANCE
PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT
BY AND BETWEEN
THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA
AND
SHERMAN-BOOSALIS INTERESTS, INC.
This document was drafted by:
DRAFT
7r
.
.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
page
Introduction. . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . -e . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . 1
ARTICLE I
ARTICLE II
section 2.1
Section 2.2
ARTICLE III
Section 3.1
Section 3.2
Section 3.3
section 3.4
section 3.5
Section 3.6
Section 3.?
Section 3.8
ARTICLE IV
Section 4.1
Section 4.2
ARTICLE V
Section 5.1
Section 5.2
Section 5.3
ARTICLE VI
Section 6.1
Section 6.2
section 6.3
Section 6.4
Section 6.5
Section 6.6
Section 6.?
Section 6.8
Section 6.9
Section 6.10
Section 6.11
Definitions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 3
Representations and Warranties
Representations and Warranties
of the City........ e- . . . . . . . -. . . eo . . . . . . . . . . ._. . . . . ..5
Representations and Warranties
of the Developer............................... 5
Construction of the Project; Financing and Liens
Construction of proj ect. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ?
Commencement and Completion of Construction....?
Construction Done by City......................?
General Restrictions...........................?
Notice of Default..............................8
Destruction of Facilities......................8
Insurance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Condemnation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
Assessment Agreement
Execution of Assessment Agreement..............9
Real Property Taxes........... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Tax Increment Bonds
Issuance of Tax Increment Bonds...............ll
Use of Tax Increments.........................ll
Developer's Guaranty..........................ll
General provisions
Restrictions on Use........................... 13
Conflicts of Interest...............~.........13
provisions Not Merged With Deed...............13
Titles of Articles and Sections...............13
Notices and Demands...........................13
Counterparts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . -e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Law Governing-................................. 14
Partial Inval idi ty. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Assignment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14
Rights Cumulative............................. 14
Amendments, Changes, and Modifications........14
.
.
Signa t ure s. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Acknowledgements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .15
.
.
CONTRACT FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCE PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made on and entered into as of the day of
April, 1990, by and between the city of Shorewood, Minnesota, a
municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the
State of Minnesota (the City), and Sherman-Boosalis Interests, Inc.,
a corporation licensed to business in the State of Minnesota (the
Developer) .
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the City has all the powers of a municipal corporation
under Minnesota law; and
WHEREAS, as of the date of this Agreement there has been
prepared and approved by the City Council a Development District No.
1 and the Development Program relating thereto (which plan as it may
be amended, referred to as the "redevelopment plan"); and
WHEREAS, as of the date of this Agreement there has been prepared
and approved by the City Council a Development Program for
Development Distrlct No. 1 (which plan as may be amended is referred
to as "the Tax Increment Financing Plan"), providing for the use of
tax increment financing in connection with the Redevelopment Project;
and
WHEREAS, the prompt development of the certain area in the
development district which is not now in productive use or in its
highest and best use, encouragement of business expansion and
improvements, maintenance of balanced commercial activities, and the
securement of additional emploYment opportunities are some of the
stated objectives of the Redevelopment Plan and the Tax Increment
Financing Plan; and
WHEREAS, in order to achieve the objectives of the Redevelopment
Plan and particularly to make the land in the Project Area available
for development by private enterprise in conformance with the
Redevelopment Plan, the City has determined to provide aid and
assistance in connection with the Redevelopment Plan through the tax
increment financing of improvements to the State Highway 7 frontage
road, upgrading of the intersection of State Highway 7 and Old Market
Road, improvements to Old Market Road, installation of watermains,
and the closing of slip ramps onto State Highway 7; and
WHEREAS, the City believes that the construction of the
development called Waterford Phase Three, consisting of 54 twin homes
and approximately 50,000 square feet of retail/office space is in the
best interests of the City, and the health, safety, morals and
welfare of its residents, and in accord with the public purposes and
provisions of the applicable state and local laws and requirements
under which the Redevelopment Plan has been undertaken and is being
assisted; and
- 1 -
.
.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein
contained, it is hereby agreed by and between the parties hereto as
follows:
- 2 -
.
.
ARTICLE I
Definitions
section 1.1 Definitions. In this Agreement unless a
different meaning clearly appears from the context:
"Agreement" means this Contract for Tax Increment Finance
Private Development by and between the City and the Developer, as the
same may be from time to time modified, amended or supplemented.
"Articles and pections" mentioned by number only are the
respective Articles and Sections of this Agreement so numbered.
"Assessor's Minimum Market Value" means the agreed minimum
market value for property tax purposes certified by the Assessor for
the City of Shorewood for the Project pursuant to the Assessment
Agreement.
"Assessment Agreement" means the assessment agreement to be
executed by and between the City and the Developer, and certified by
the Assessor for the County, pursuant to the provisions and
requirements of Minn. stat. ~469.177, subd. 8, establishing the
Assessor's Minimum Market Value.
"City" means the City of Shorewood, Minnesota.
"Council" means the City Council of Shorewood, Minnesota.
"County" means the County of Hennepin, Minnesota.
"Developer" means Sherman-Boosalis Interests, Inc.
"Development Property" means the real property described in
Exhibit A of this Agreement.
"Party" means either the Developer or the City.
"Parties" means the Developer and the City.
"Project" means the Development Property and the completed
improvements and buildings.
"Project Area" means the real property located within the
boundaries of the Redevelopment Project.
"Redevelopment Plan" means the City of Shorewood Development
Program for Development District NO.1, as amended and as it shall be
amended.
- 3 -
.
.
"Redevelopment Project" means the City of Shorewood
Development District No.1.
"state" means the state of Minnesota.
"Tax Increment" means the tax increment generated by the
Project, calculated as provided in Minn. stat. ~~ 469.174 - .179.
"Tax Increment District" means the city of Shorewood Tax
Increment Financing District No.1.
"Tax Increment Financing Act" means the statutes located at
Minn. stat. ~~ 469.174 - .179.
"Tax Increment Financing Plan" means the Tax Increment
Financing Plan for the Tax Increment District.
"Tax Official" means any City or County Assessor; County
Auditor, City, or County or state Board of Equalization; the
Commissioner of Revenue of the state; or any state or Federal
District Court, the Tax Court of the state or the state Supreme
Court.
"Termination Date" means the date of expiration of the
Assessment Agreement as provided in section 5.4.
"Unavoidable Delays" means delays, outside the control of the
Party claiming its occurrence, which are the direct result of
strikes, other labor troubles, unusually severe or prolonged bad
weather, acts of God, fire or other casualty to the Project,
litigation commenced by third parties which, by injunction or other
similar jUdicial action or by the exercise of reasonable discretion,
directly results in delays, or acts of any federal, state or local
government unit (other than the city) which directly result in
delays, or the failure by [date 90 days prior to latest date on which
the Project is to commence] to secure City approval of the
Construction Plans for the Project.
- 4 -
.
.
ARTICLE II
Representations and Warranties
Section 2.1. Representations and Warranties of the City. The
City makes the following representations and warranties:
(1) The city has all the powers of a statutory city under the
laws of the State. The City has the power to enter into this
Agreement and carry out its obligations hereunder.
(2) The Tax Increment District is a "tax increment financing
district" within the meaning of the Tax Increment Financing Act, and
was created, adopted and approved in accordance with the provisions
of the Tax Increment Financing Act.
(3) The Project contemplated by this Agreement is in
conformance with the development objectives set forth in the
Development Program and Tax Increment Financing Plan.
(4) To finance the Public Redevelopment Costs of the Project,
the City promises, subject to the further provision of this Agreement
to use its best efforts to issue the Bonds and use the proceeds
thereof to finance, 1) improvements to the state Highway 7 frontage
road, 2) upgrading of the intersection of State Highway 7 and Old
Market Road; 3) improvements to Old Market Road, 4) installation of
watermains, and 5) the closing of slip ramps onto state Highway 7
and to pledge tax increments generated by the Tax Increment District
for the paYment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds.
(5) The City has authority, but does not anticipate acquiring
property within the development district.
Section 2.2. Representations and Warranties of the Developer.
The Developer makes the following representations and warranties:
(1) The Developer is a corporation under the laws of this
state, has power to enter into this Agreement and to perform its
obligations hereunder.
(2) The Developer will cause the Project to be constructed,
operated and maintai~ed in accordance with the terms of this
Agreement and the Am~nded Development Agreement of August 12, 1985,
between the City and !the developer's predecessor. The Developer
shall also comply wi~h all local, state and federal laws and
regulations (includiqg, but not limited to, environmental, zoning,
energy conservation, ibuilding code and public health laws and
regulations) . .
(3) The Develo~er has or will obtain, or cause to be obtained,
all required permits,l licenses and approvals, and has met all
requirements of all ~pplicable local, state, and federal laws and
I
i
- 5 -
.
.
regulations which must be obtained or met before the Project may be
lawfully constructed.
(4) Neither the execution and delivery of this Agreement, the
consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby, nor the
fulfillment of or compliance with the terms and conditions of this
Agreement is prevented, limited by or or conflicts with or results in
a breach of, the terms, conditions of provision of any contractual
restriction, evidence of indebtedness, agreement or instrument or
whatever nature to which the Developer is now a party or by which it
is bound, or constitutes a default under any of the foregoing.
(5) The Developer will cooperate fully with the City with
respect to any litigation commenced with respect to the Project, and
reimburse the City for any expenses incurred by it, including
attorney fees.
(6) The Developer will cooperate fully with the City in
resolution of any traffic, parking, trash removal or public safety
problems which may arise in connection with the construction and
operation of the Project.
(7) The Developer would not undertake the Project without the
financing provided by the City pursuant to this Agreement.
- 6 -
.
.
ARTICLE III
Construction of the Project; Financing and Liens
Section 3.1 const~uction.of Project. The Developer agrees
that it will construct the Project, called Waterford Phase Three,
including 54 twinhomes and retail/office space, and all necessary
public improvements associated with the Project on the Development
Property in conformance with the Developer's plans and specifications
as the same have been submitted to and approved by the City.
Section 3.2 Commencement and Completion of Construction.
Subject to unavoidable delays, the Developer shall commence
construction of the project:
(a) within thirty (30) days ~f the signing of this agreement;
or
(b) on such other date as the Parties shall mutually agree in
writing.
The Developer, for itself, its successors and assigns,
acknowledges and "agrees that, for the purpose of determining the
fair market value of the Development Property for real estate tax
purposes, the value ascribed to the Development Property as of
January 2, 1992, shall be $ amount, as provided for under the
Assessment Agreement, notwithstanding the fact that the Developer
Improvements contemplated by the Developer, and further,
notwithstanding the fact that the commercial district may not then be
in operation or the houses occupied. The Developer agrees for itself
and every successor in interest to the Development Property, or any
part thereof, that the Developer, and such successors and assigns
shall, in good faith, construct the Project in accordance with this
agreement and during such construction, designated representatives of
the City shall be allowed to enter upon the Development Property to
inspect any and all such construction.
Section 3.3 Construction done by City. The City agrees to
construct the intersection at highway 7 and Old Market Road and
other improvements as specified in section 2.1 (4).
Section 3.4 General Restrictions. The Developer agrees for
itself, and its successors and assigns, and every successor in
interest to the Property, that the Developer and its successors and
assigns shall:
(a) not discriminate on the basis of sex, color,
creed, national origin, in the sale, lease, or rental,
or in the use or occupancy of the Property or the
facilities, or any part thereof;
(b) not cause the propety to be removed from the
public tax rolls or to become exempt from assessment
- 7 -
.
.
for general ad valorem real estate taxes by reason of
any conveyance, lease or other action.
Section 3.5 Notice of Default. Whenever the City shall
deliver any notice or demand to the Developer with respect to any
breach or default by the Developer in its obligations or covenants
under this Agreement, the City shall at the same time forward a copy
of such notice or demand to each holder of any permitted mortgage,
lien or other similar encumbrance at the the last address of such
holder shown in the records of the city.
section 3.6 Destruction of Facilities. So long as any of
the Bonds are outstanding under this Agreement, in the event of
destruction of any Facilities upon the Property which reduces the
Assessor's Market Value of the Property below $ amount , the
following shall apply:
(a) the Developer shall as soon as reasonably
possible, and in any event on or before the second
succeeding December 31 following such destruction, time
being of the essence, repair, rebuild or replace the
damaged Facilities to such extent as will cause the
Assessor's Market Value of the Property and the
Facilities to equal or exceed the Assessor's Market Value
thereof as finally determined most recently prior to such
destruction; or
(b) If such repair, rebuilding or replacement is
not completed by such date, the Developer shall be liable
to the City for damages in an amount equal to the
difference between the Tax Increment received by the City
in each subsequent year and the Tax Increment that would
have been received by the City had such repair, rebuilding
or replacement been completed by such date.
Section 3.7 Insurance. During the term of this Agreement,
until the bonds are paid in full, the Developer shall maintain (or
cause to be maintained) with reputable insurance company or
companies licensed to do business in Minnesota, such insurance
covering the Property including all buildings in such amounts as are
customarily carried on such properties.
The Developer shall annually file with the City a schedule
describing all such policies in force, including the types of
insurance, name of insurers, policy numbers, effective dates, terms
of duration and any other information the Developer deems pertinent.
Section 3.8 Condemnation. In the event of condemnation of
any or all of the Property or the Facilities, other than by the
City, which reduces the Assessor's Market Value of the completed
Project below $ amount, the Developer shall take the action
specified in Section 3.6 (a); or if such actions cannot be
performed, the Developer shall pay to the City, an amount of the
condemnation proceeds thereof equal to the amount outstanding on the
bonds.
- 8 -
.
.
ARTICLE IV
Assessment Agreement
section 4.1 Execution of Assessment Agreement. The
Developer shall agree to and execute with the City an Assessment
Agreement pursuant to Minn. stat. s469.177, subd. 8, specifying the
Assessor's Minimum Market Value which shall be established with
respect to the Project for calculation of real estate taxes.
Specifically, the Developer shall agree that as of January 2, 1992,
all improvements to the project with respect to which any real
estate taxes are levied or assessed and payable by the Developer,
shall be assessed based on a market value of not less than $
amount (the Assessor's Minimum Market Value). Nothing in the--
Assessment Agreement shall limit the discretion of the assessor to
assign a market value to the property in excess of such Assessor's
Minimum Market Value, nor prohibit the Developer from seeking
through the exercise of legal or administrative remedies a reduction
in such market value for property tax purposes, provided however,
that the Developer shall not seek a reduction of such market value
below the Assessor's Minimum Market Value in any year so long as the
Assessment Agreement shall remain in effect. The Assessment
Agreement shall remain in effect until December 31, 1999 (the
Termination Date)~ The Assessment Agreement shall be certified by
the Assessor for the County as provided in Minn. Stat. s469.177,
subd. 8, upon a finding by the Assessor that the Assessor's Minimum
Market Value represents a reasonable estimate based upon the plan
and specifications for the improvements to be constructed on the
Development Property and the market value previously assigned to the
Development Property. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. s469.177, subd. 8,
the Assessment Agreement shall be filed for record in the office of
the county recorder or registrar of titles of Hennepin County, and
such filing shall constitute notice to any subsequent encumbrancer
or purchaser of the Development Property, whether voluntary or
involuntary, and such Assessment Agreement shall be binding and
enforceable in its entirety against any such subsequent purchaser or
encumbrancer.
Section 4.2 Real Pro~erty Taxes. The Developer shall pay
all real property taxes payable with respect to the Development
Property and pursuant to the provisions of the Assessment Agreement
and any other statutory or contractual duty which shall accrue
subsequent to the date of its acquisition of title to the
Development property and until the Developer's obligations have been
assumed by any other person with the written consent of the City and
pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement.
The Developer agrees that prior to the Termination Date:
(a) It will not seek administrative review or
judicial review of the applicability of any tax
statute relating to the taxation of real property
contained on the Development Property determined by
any tax official to be applicable to the project or
the the Developer or raise the inapplicability of any
- 9 -
.
.
such tax statute as a defense in any proceedings,
including delinquent tax proceedings;
(b) It will not seek administrative review or
judicial review of the constitutionality of any tax
statute relating to the taxation of real property
contained on the Development Property determined by
any tax official to be applicable to the project, or
the Developer, or raise the unconstitutionality of
any such tax statute as a defense in any proceedings,
including delinquent tax proceedings;
(c) It will not seek any tax deferral or
abatement, either presently or prospectively
authorized under Minn. stat. s270.07, or any other
state or federal law, of the taxation of real
property contained in the Development Property
between the date of execution of this Agreement and
the Termination Date.
- 10 -
.
.
ARTICLE V
Tax Increment Bonds
Section 5.1 Issuance of Tax Increment Bonds. The City agrees
to exercise its best efforts to take all steps necessary to issue its
Tax Exempt Bonds to finance the Project. The City shall exercise
its best efforts to issue the Tax Exempt Bonds at such time as shall,
in the judgment of the City, be necessary and desirable 'to finance the
construction of the Public Improvements described in section 2.1
(4) .
section 5.2 Use of Tax Increments. The City shall be free to
use any Tax Increment received from the Tax Increment District for
any purpose for which such increments may lawfully be used pursuant
to the provisions of Minn. Stat. ~~469.174 - .179, and specifically:
1. To pay principal and interest on Tax Increment Bonds.
2. To finance or otherwise pay Public Costs set forth in the
Tax Increment Financing Plan.
3. To accumulate or maintain a reserve securing the paYment
when due of the principal and interest on the Tax Increment bonds or
other bonds to pay Public Costs.
4. Return the excess to the County Auditor for redistribution
to the respective taxing jurisdictions in proportion to their tax
capacity.
The City pledges and agrees to collect from the County Auditor
of Hennepin County, Minnesota, the entire Tax Increment derived from
the Project. For purposes of this Agreement, Tax Increment is
received "with respect to" a particular calendar year if the Tax
Increment was generated by ad valorem real property taxes (or taxes
in lieu thereof pursuant to Minn. Stat. ~469.176) first becoming due
and payable in such calendar year, irrespective of when such tax
Increment is actually paid to the City.
To the extent Excess Tax Increments exceed in any year the
amount necessary to pay the Public Costs authorized by the
Development Program and Tax Increment Financing Plan, including the
amount necessary to cancel any tax levy as provided in Minn. Stat.
~465.61, Subd. 3, the City shall be free to use such Excess Tax
Increments for any purpose, consistent with any covenants made with
respect to the Bonds, for which the Excess Tax Increments may
lawfully be used as provided in Minn. Stat. ~469.176, subd. 2; and
the City shall have no obligations to the Developer with respect to
the use of such Excess tax Increments. The City shall use the
excess amount to:
1. prepay the outstanding Tax Increment bonds;
2. discharge the pledge of Tax Increments thereto;
3. pay into an escrow account dedicated to the paYment of the
Tax Increment Bonds;
4. return the excess to the County Auditor for redistribution
to the respective taxing jurisdiction in proportion to their tax
capacity rate.
In addition, the City may choose to modify Tax Increment
- 11 -
.
.
Financing Plan No. 1 in order to finance additional Public Costs of
the Development District.
Section 5.3 Developer's Guaranty. If for any reason the tax
increment anticipated to be generated from the Development Project
is insufficient to pay the annual principal or interest due on said
tax increment bonds, th& Developer agrees to pay to the City such
amounts as will be necessary so that the City is able to pay the
debt service on such bonds, as such payments come due. Any such
payments by Developer shall be applied first to accrued interest.
The Developer shall provide the City with a letter of credit in
the amount of one million, five hundred thousand dollars ($1.5
million) for this purpose.
- 12 -
.
.
ARTICLE VI
General provisions
section 6.1 Restrictions on Use. The Developer agrees for
itself, its successors and assigns and every successor in interest to
the Development Property, or any part thereof, that the Developer and
such successors and assigns shall devote the Development property to,
and only to, and in accordance with the uses specified in the City
Code or in this Agreement.
section 6.2 Conflicts of Interest. No member of the
governing body or other official of the City shall have any financial
interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement, the Project, or any
contract, agreement or other transaction contemplated to occur or be
undertaken thereunder or with respect thereto, nor shall any such
member of the governing body or other official participate in any
decision relating to the Agreement which affects its personal
interests or the interests of any corporation, partnership or
association in which it is, directly or indirectly, interested. No
member, official or employee of the City shall be personally liable
to the Developer or any successors in interest, in the event of any
default or breac~ by the City or for any amount which may become due
to the Developer or successor or on any obligations under the terms
of the Agreement.
section 6.3 provisions Not Merged with Deed. None of the
provisions of this Agreement shall be merged by reason of any deed
transferring any interest in the Development Property, and any such
deed shall not be deemed to affect or impair the provisions and
covenants of this Agreement.
section 6.4 Titles of Articles and sections. Any titles of
the several parts, Articles and Sections of the Agreement are
inserted for convenience of reference only and shall be disregarded
in construing or interpreting any of its provisions.
section 6.5 Notices and Demands. Except as otherwise
expressly provided in this Agreement, a notice, demand or other
communication under the Agreement by either party to the other shall
be sufficiently given or delivered if it is dispatched by registered
or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or
delivered personally; and
(a) In the case of the Developer, is addressed to or
delivered personally to the Developer at
(b) In the case of the City, is addressed to or delivered
personally to the City at 5755 Country Club Road, Shorewood,
Minnesota 55331.
(c) Either party may upon written notice to the other
party change the address to which such notices and demands are
made.
- 13 -
.
.
section 6.6 Counterparts. This Agreement is executed in any
number of counterparts, each of which shall constitute one and the
same instrument.
section 6.7 Law Governing. This Agreement will be governed
and construed in accordance with the laws of MInnesota.
section 6.8 Partial Invalidity. If anyone or more of the
covenants, agreements or provisions of this Agreement shall be
determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the
invalidity of such covenants, agreements, and provisions shall in no
way affect the validity or effectiveness of the remainder of this
Agreement and this Agreement shall continue in force to the fullest
extent permitted by law.
Section 6.9 Assignment. Neither the City nor the Developer
shall have the right to assign its rights or obligations hereunder
without the written consent of the other party, except that the City
may assign all or any part of its rights and duties under this
Agreement (except its obligation to issue Bonds) to any governmental
unit.
Section 6.10 Rights Cumulative. The rights and remedies of
the parties of this Agreement, whether provided by law or by this
Agreement, shall be cumulative, and the exercise by either party of
anyone or more of such remedies shall not preclude the exercise by
it, at the same or different times, of any other remedies for the
same default or breach or of any of its remedies for any other
default or breach of the party. Delay by a party instituting or
prosecuting any cause of action or claim hereunder shall not be
deemed a waiver of any rights hereunder.
Section 6.11 Amendments, Changes and Modifications. This
Agreement may be amended or any of its terms modified only by written
amendment authorized and executed by the City and the Developer.
- 14 -
.
.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City has caused this Agreement to be
duly executed in its name and behalf and the Developer has caused
this Agreement to be duly executed in its name and behalf, on or as
of the date first above written.
THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA
By
Its Mayor
And
Its Administrator-Clerk
Sherman-Boosalis Interests, Inc.
By
Its Chief Executive Officer
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledge before me this
day of , 1990, by and
, the Mayor and Administrator-Clerk,
respectively, of the city of Shorewood, Minnesota, a municipal
corporation and political subdivision of the state of MInnesota, on
behalf of the City.
Notary Public
- 15 -
.
.
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
)ss
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
day of , 1990, by George Sherman, Chief Executive
Officer of Sherman-Boosalis Interests, Inc.
Notary Public
- 16 -
III(
.
.
-;6, ~,/ .p. f7/,e.,< '" /
------~L(...J.J---~/7-0-Ul1t-l.eLLt{)lJd __
.-- -. ----.------- .------.---.-..- -- ._-" .-- .--.-.-------- - --....-..-.- .-.,. - ~_ ________m
---- ----hm:--))CJ!!-L~-',-'----i .!-)j~! (JJaI.U~_ ___________ __________ __ ___
- ---------------------'lr:~__~/7~~r::2M~i_'.J:~________ _____ __M _ _ ___________ ____ __ _____
-...5:AC?r.4e/C?KI-/__1JJ IL65::}3L_____________________________________
H'e_ !
4dfiZ-rtr-11.1&I7(y:!!fr)).T' i ~-e---L...~c:lb--=l-P'1-=o.7.3:::Li -d_tJ b-6-
------------~-"*-'Jl4~~/Bd----Yfle--_4Jon<U:_..TC)_ __d!<Cm~~_ea?:'/a) /J _?z!~2135____ __
-------.(},iJ.n?-<tdJt--Ke.--m-'YJ-~d72dyrCJf'lj'~~--7ilt2.5:a.d;.,g//?.5--<:9/'e...-------- __ __ __ .
-----------.~;o;*----~s; t~t2----<9m-O'?l_fRO ~ -$ ~ .6.szLOi')7a~~;___~_ey_ 02/'._6 ____ _________ ___ __
Y-/J"" (..LJJA1~A--..r. II ( .LJ n o-n <h / 1/ d ~A' 0.4.- /J--::lr n <-14- ..:.?
- .. .'<-----I~-C. ...."/.0 -7V':"'r-<Z-J:7J'"'.--.-C:-)7r... //.-<:'0776 1_ -=.J> ,..1/1(/ '-'<---___~
~ &o;t. 1/( (// - 'J/
---'-7/:/]0-- . ---j'7!,r--douf/:.k-r t2:--/"?c1_--A~_x/.!I5.AC!ro!._?V/lO______
-- --------&U/eL.r.~ _-oaao/&n/~-_o-:n.~~~-, ,?fOP4j"?;:/__4~e. _Br,~
.. -d~.,~iC()'IdVlf'~ Yfc,f.ls0__h;Le.- _/:Lc:/_~/&:/;L _u _ _ _ ~_ ____
_de)~Vbe.f'_ .>1 elJh.b~r--Clo{;o.t:?C-,z~T..--~-Y-"_~__~_fi~~---- _ ______,_____ __ _____
--- ;, );l1~.iP _~<2. ,; ~~ m~; :atr;j J-a:fr. -:::f~~r ~tlf?in:nf5 .___n~
-~Ot.J't;;L1.e!..- ma.ct~._~C /7 - 777-2.- :::>1'.!/7V--------lj-e.lr 'Yrdn-:;~ .
.~_777r2-i r71.e,.t!.t/_ .~ntJ /Jl Q.... .. _. _ 1~__7z.e uJ __7/.0ma.-._jG___!'''~~_ _ ___
. . --'- nw,,,,-A>c~fn"8dJ?Ol?nk'f-_f. _~_.&.. .o!Jd__6.-Yf ()C/ c_ CI:r~J/ e.-
/!nO>>:; -Y1f~ 1O"J//J e/~l;.;;-s, ~e...:---dr/t'4'a'Clr/S a2,j~C?/b
- -- --./7,7/ /4- --/ore- Cl7!.d. -~ _7JO i_'I.I2_~27.v:()flcJ.:6I4--07--->fea.!(r--
- ___u_ - __"7./ ':f!-h !..'(!.jp _$._--) .s.O___G 6-__/'.;:7___ a.f:? ...y.d_ -/ar cz;6lJJ~__ --/z:J n'16 7' ~
. --._-- ----.-V:lJ_..e._$cg.-_L.kl77~..__ --*--~~-~---/J-eW _L<25j 'o!. V:2-7!a-_fZ........
-- --- --0 ~. ---___~~C_/:!>..__ Z~(f --r:k~~~ l/~ ~----_4..V-.c:~h!:'i--fqnt'-(F- _ UJ ;_U.-I._ _ __ _ -____. -
v -k.d-~ V I) ;j -
--- -----~'" _,sYr..9Ql aJ~-~jJck.<..::n/--- (L-1---..t.-~'n -g.../:2 e..__-6D____?r61:..C!.-:...-.____ -- ----- ---
)4?.zsa.... ~.Lra-"fJ~77!..e":;L-I<:. - )t-/7~~€-'._l.o'?_~ ~q..~__C;.ll'..t '%~t-u~:::-- ____________..
fN'l.- 't{. ~~-& cJo Ar~a4-'j:lJ&f."c t_.. ~____~___.n._
8
~ ~...._c_...__--__....__..~_..'.
.
DATE: 29 March 1990
.
.
MAYOR
Jan Haugen
CO UNCI ::.
Kristi Stover
Robert Gagne
Barb Brancel
Vern Wanen
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . SHOREWOOD. MINNESOTA 55331 · (612) 474.3236
TO: Arvid M. Dallmann
4815 Ferncroft Drive
Shorewood, MN 55331
PROPERTY LOCATION:
PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION NO.:
4830 Ferncroft Drive
26-117-23-14-0066
NOTICE TO REMOVE
Offensive and Unhealthy Substances
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that there exists a condition on the above referenced
property which is in violation of Chapter 501, Section 501.01 of the Shorewood
City Code, a copy of which Section is enclosed. The offensive matter to be
removed from the property includes the following:
vi)) Tractor with loader
J2) Fish house
J 3) Yard shed
J4) Dog house and kennel
J 5) Deck lumber
J6) Two (2) oil tanks
./7) Tires
vl8) Approx. 5 cubic yards miscellaneous debris:
wood, bricks, toys, lumber, etc.
..
You are hereby required to remove the above-described matter and any other
offensive matter located on the property and in violation of Chapter 501,
Section 501.01 within ten (10) days from the date hereof. In the alternative,
you may file a written notice of appeal at the Shorewood City Hall within ten
(10) days, in which case your appeal will be set for hearing at the next
regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council.
If you do not respond to this Notice within ten (10) days, the City shall take
whatever action as may be necessary to have the offensive matter removed. The
costs incurred by the City for such removal shall be charged to the property
owner and become a lein against the property
***PLEASE GIVE THIS MATTER YOUR IMMEDIATE ATTENTION***
BY ORDER OF THE SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL.
A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore
,
'". #'::.-'
.
..
DATE TIME
CIT'( OF SHOREWOOD CALLED-IN
-INS-PECTlON NC1TICE SCHEDULED #f'j;'19~
PERMIT NO. COMPLETED J
ADDRESS L/730.F;~ j;}?,
OWNER/CONTR. #~";'d ])A-.~
TEL. NO. OCCUPANT USE
o SITE INSPECTION 0 PLUMBING FINAL 0 EXCAV/GRADING/FILLlNG
o CONC. SLAB 0 BUILDING FINAL JJ. REINSPECTION
o FOOTING 0 SEPTIC MAINT. ~ FOLLOW-UP
>: 0 FRAMh'lG 0 SEPTIC INSTALL. E;ZCOMPLAINT
I- 0 PLUM91NG RI 0 SEPTIC F'INAL 0 ROUTINE
~ 0 MECHANICAL 0 PROGRESS 0 FIREPLACE ",.. 0 I S 3
q:: 0 INSULATION 0 DE MOL. 0 /Iv/ - '//_'
CJ) 0 WALL BO 0 FIRE PREV 0 . I
C
<:
q::
:I:
I-
...J
q::
UJ
:I:
...J
q::
<:
o
CJ)
a:
UJ
Cl..
a:
:::>
o
>-
a:
o
u...
UJ
a:
q::
CJ)
I-
~ 1::
:E
UJ
a:
:s
o
UJ ~ 'R!:NSE". -7 15/l.19-t) SJ'j-IO Ifc H"'~ ~ fU.tJU~
a: FURTHER CORRECTIONS MAY BE REQUIRED . FoR- ~~TlEfV~Y'I
UJ
c OWORK SATISFACTORY: PROCEED o PHOTO TAKEN
o 0 CORRECT WORK & PROCEED
(J 0 CORRECT WORK. CALL FOR REINSPECTION BEFORE COVERING
o CORRECT UNSAFE CONDITION WITHIN HOURS. INSPECTOR WILL RETURN.
o STOP ORDER POSTED. CALL INSPECTOR.
o INSPECTION REQUIRED. CALt. TO ARRANGE ACCESS.
t9r
,/
COMMENTS:
l-r(J\A~ ON Nonc.~
,.,...,. ~~
Tt) ~ NTf.)!/~
J.:J a.e: .5 n i-L
Pe.E:VIOt/S ~II) Atvi.t'J~ ~u~~ ri-lH"r B~lf!.NtJ];J
i'vJ w ^" WftS /'J-r ~/7i!!"" ~ :5A-1 a #, 11</110 <.:
NOT' /IIar/p.Ier; of::- /vtJr/cfr m ~t:"H"I/IS) #,€"
lINJVf!r$ <"ME t!:).J; 7He" /77!:"/">'f( ,IN rHIf:: LJ5r
ItNf) r~ )JE W II L TA-tAt. w 1m TH~
PIUJ~-t ~N~ L)/V :?!t..I../II/(" J9./V /I/Pt:J4L #
7Dl..O ~ J.hM ~ Tr};4-T" ITe:M5. ~.N N(J7/t....!r
"1f!::) I!.EJ'-1"dVe- JIJ.,eE .SClPd,t;rr 7?:;;. ~tJv H-L
13'1 . Pa.f?:l.lL w,,~.s ;+.or P4"~ crvJNI!::JeS
call for the next inspection 24 hours in advance
Ownor/Contr. ::l.t";t;:.~ ~l:1-
Inspector ~
(J
IIY
tvJW
474-3236
phone
.'
.
.
AGREEMENT FOR
WATER SERVICE
DEEPHAVEN - SHOREWOOD
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of
, 1990, by and between the City of Deephaven, a
municipal corporation under the laws of the State of
Minnesota ("Deephaven"), and the City of Shorewood, a
municipal corporation under the laws of the State of
Minnesota ("Shorewood").
WHEREAS, Deephaven and Shorewood are municipal
corporations located in the County of Hennepin, State of
Minnesota, having a common boundary line between the two
ci ties; and -
WHEREAS, Shorewood has installed a water system in the
City of Shorewood to serve the development known as
"Amesbury" ("the Amesbury Water System"); and
WHEREAS, Deephaven and Shorewood deem it proper, for a
public purpose, in the public interest, and within the scope
of the municipal authority vested in them, that an agreement
for the sale of water by Shorewood to Deephaven be
consummated;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants
and agreements herein contained, it is hereby agreed by and
between the parties as follows:
1. Shorewood will furnish and supply potable water to
Deephaven continuously (except for temporary interruptions
for repairs and maintenance) from the Amesbury Water System
as extended into Deephaven, in an amount required to service
the needs of Deephaven and in compliance with applicable
state and federal regulations.
IDA - J
.
.
2. Deephaven shall at its own expense construct all
necessary watermains in the City of Deephaven to extend the
Amesbury Water System only after authorization by the City
of Shorewood. Deephaven agrees that upon completion of the
construction of its watermains, it shall provide Shorewood
with as-built plans and the necessary measurements to all
valves and service connections.
3. Permits for a Deephaven owner to connect to the
Amesbury Water System shall be obtained from Deephaven. A
non~refundable cash payment in the sum of $4,000.00 shall be
paid to Shorewood as a connection charge for each
residential connection made to the Amesbury Water System,
except that said connection charge shall be waived for an
owner of property located within the plat of Amesbury
North. Said payment shall be in addition to any permit fee
prescribed by the Shorewood City Council. Deephaven shall
inspect the connections and each service to make sure they
conform to all applicable laws and ordinances. Shorewood
shall be contacted for a final inspection and turn-on of the
curb service. .
4. Shorewood will read the meters and will supply to
Deephaven at least quarterly a listing of the readings and
the dollar amount charged by Shorewood for each user.
Deephaven shall pay to Shorewood the total amount of said
water use charges within 30 days. Water used shall be
billed to Deephaven at the prevailing Shorewood rate.
Shorewood shall have the authority to enter properties
served by Shorewood water to read and maintain the water
meters.
5. Deephaven shall make no additional extension of the
watermains connected to the Amesbury Water System unless
specifically authorized by Shorewood. Unless an emergency
situation arises, valves shall not be shut down without
first notifying Shorewood. Hydrants shall not be used or
operated by anyone except the fire department personnel or
personnel of the Deephaven Public Works Department or the
City of Shorewood. If Shorewood is to make any repairs to
that portion of the system located in Deephaven, it shall be
done on a time-and-material basis if requested by Deephaven.
-2-
\
.
.
6. Deephaven will abide by and enforce in Deephaven all
reasonable, nondiscriminatory rules and regulations of
Shorewood for lawn and other sprinkling during dry seasons
imposed upon Shorewood water users and users of the
Shorewood Water System. Shorewood shall have the right to
turn off the mains for reasonable lengths of time to repair
or service its mains and if practicable will notify affected
users prior to the shutoff.
7. If Deephaven elects to construct a water system
capable of serving the area covered by this agreement at any
time five (5) years after the date hereof, Deephaven shall
have the right to terminate this agreement upon three (3)
years' prior written notice to Shorewood. Shorewood shall
have no right to terminate this agreement without
Deephaven's prior written consent.
8. It is understood and agreed that if Deephaven
constructs a water supply system capable of serving all or
part of the area covered by this agreement, Deephaven may
elect to levy. special assessments against the affected
properties as if they were not served by the Shorewood Water
System. It is understood that if this agreement is
terminated by Deephaven in accordance with paragraph 7
herein, and service to Deephaven is terminated, Shorewood
will be under no obligation to refund any connection charges
paid pursuant to paragraph 3 herein.
9. Deephaven shall have no obligation or liability to
Shorwood or to the water users in Deephaven for the
continued availability of water from the Amesbury Water
System, nor for the maintenance, repair or replacement of
any well or other portion of the Amesbury Water System,
except the public water lines in Deephaven. All costs,
expenses and obligations relating to the Amesbury Water
System or any additional wells or other facilities in
Shorewood shall be the responsibility of Shorewood, except
that Deephaven shall be responsible for the maintenance of
the public water lines in Deephaven at Deephaven's expense.
-3-
, \
.
.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this
agreement to be executed by their respective officers
through proper authorization by their respective councils.
CITY OF DEEPHAVEN
By
Its Mayor
And
Its City Clerk
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)SS
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing
this day of
and .
City Clerk of the CITY
corporation, on behalf
instrument was acknowledged before me
, 1990, by
, respectively the Mayor and
OF DEEPHAVEN, a Minnesota municipal
of the corporation.
Notary Public
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
By
Its Mayor
And
Its City Clerk
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) 5S
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
and
City Clerk of the CITY OF
corporation, on behalf of
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
day of , 1990, by
, respectively the Mayor and
SHOREWOOD, a Minnesota municipal
the corporation.
-4-
#.-"
.
.
M.l\R - 1 19ro
DEEIl-LA.1/EN
March 6, 1990
Larry Whitaker
City Manager
City of Shorewood
5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood, MN 55331
Dear Mr. Whittaker:
In accordance with the "Agreement for Water Service" between Deephaven
and Shorewood I am requesting authorization to provide additional water
service to a lot that lies adjacent to Old Kent Road in Amesbury North.
The lot is "Lot 2, Block 1 Sutherlin Addition". The address is 4715
Old Kent Road. The lot borders Old Kent Road cul-de-sac on the North.
A home is under construction at present, so you can imagine, your
earliest consideration will be greatly appreciated.
If you have any questions please call me at 474-4759.
Sincerely,
?~ ~'
// ;q~!-:/
~~e A. Ro olt
Public Works Director
City of Deephaven
cc: Mayor Roberts
Dick Brown
10 A ~
City Offices: 20225 Cottagewood Road, Deephaven, Minnesota 55331 (612) 474-4755
.
r0~
O::u I
(")0
l>e-.
::Jfi
0-1
Z
- .. ~
a._ a
" .
"
-- .
.. :".
.. ~.
.j
...a;
. !.,c
.
Q'~U &l~~& .
~ WI. Associates,lnc.
2021 CaSt tlennepin Avenue
Minneapolis, :'1N 55413
612-331-8660
FAX 331-3806
April 19, 1990
City of Shorewood
5755 Country Cub Road
Sborewood, MN 55331
Enginec:rS
Surveyors
PI,lC:ncrs'
Attn: Mr. Larry Whittaker
City Administrator
Re: S.E. Area Elevated Water Storage Tank
Project No. 86-1D
OSM Comm. No. 3707.40
Dear Mr. Whittaker:
Over the past couple months, I've had discussions with CBI Na-Con, the Contractor on the
S.E. Area Elevated Water Storage Tank. We've discussed finalling out this project by
withholding money from the final payment to cover the cost of restoring the site as a result
of erosion damage from tank overflows.
Currently, we have a price from Fury Contracting Co., 6197 Eagle Lake Drive, Maple
Grove, Minnesota 55369 to restore the site for $2,500. From previous emergency temporary
site work the City has incurred costs of $1,140.32 on its public works crew and equipment
and $192.50 for Cat work by Mr. Don Kerber. The total cost of these items is $3,832.82.
At this time, I recommend the City withhold $3,832.82 from the final payment to CBI to
cover the cost to restore the site at the elevated tower. The current amount of retain age
is $8,461. Final payment would be $4,628.18.
If you have any questions, please let me know.
Respectfully,
ORR-SCHELEN-MA YERON
& ASSOCIATES, me.
eJ--. -P.1~
James P. Norton, P.E.
Project Manager
JPN/cmw
04/90-coslw
cc: Mr. Don ZdraziL City of Sborewood - Mr. Bill Cherniwchan, CBI Na-Con
Mr. Phil TIpka, Resident Inspector
'0 C \
\. 'lo
.
Orr .
Schelen
Mayeron&
Associates, Inc.
April 17, 1990
2021 East Hennepin Avenue
Minneapolis. MN 55413
612-331.8660
FAX 331-3806
Engineers
5U1veyors
Planners
City of Shorewood
5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood, MN 55331
Attn: Mr. Larry Whittaker
City Administrator
Re: Proposal to Update Comprehensive Water Report
OSM Comm. No. 0107-90
Dear Mr. Whittaker:
Attached please find our proposal for updating the Comprehensive Water Report. The
proposal identifies the Scope of Work, Task Descriptions, and associated hours we estirilate
are required to do the work. Our engineering cost estimate to do the Scope of Work as
identified is $3.300.00.
This Comprehensive Water Report update would be more directed towards updating the
costs to install the remaining. system and identifying the number of future connections to
that system. Comparing the two numbers would provide the estimated assessment for the
future user if all the remaining system was installed.
In addition to updating the cost estimates and the assessments, we will compare the several
separate water systems as to why some areas experience more water quality problems than
others. While we will not discuss treatment methods or costs we will investigate the raw
water chemical makeup of each well and discuss methods of utilizing the better quality wells
on a completed water system.
I hope this description of our proposed scope of work coincides with. the information the
Council is looking for. If additional information is required, please let me know.
Respectfully,
ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON
& ASSOCIATES, INC.
~ f? 1~
James P. Norton, P.E.
Associate/Senior Project Manager
JPN/cmw
04/90-cos.lw2
10
~-2
"
. ..
.
.
PROPOSAL TO UPDATE WATER REPORT
APRIL 16. 1990
SCOPE OF'WORK
HOURS
ENG. TECH.
2 4
1 8
3 6
3 6
TASK DESCRIPTION
Compare 1984 Water Report with existing system.
Update water distribution map.
Update water system cost estimates.
Compare proposed number of users to existing, verify
projections.
4
4
Update typical assessment costs.
4
4
Prepare updated report
17
32
TOTAL HOURS
EN GIN E E R I N G CO S T EST I MATE $ 3,30 O. 0 0
CHECK APPR. LISTING FOR APRIL 23, 1990 +IL MEETING
CHECK NO. TO WHOM ISSUED PURPOSE
~
AMOUNT
CHECKS ISSUED SINCE APRIL 6, 1990
4175
4176
4177
4178
4179
4180
4181
4182
4183
4184
4185
4186
4187
4188
4189
4190
4191
4192
4193
4194
4195
4196
4197
4198
4199
4200
4201
4202
4203
4204
4205
4206
4207
4208
4209
4210
4211
4212
4213
(L)
(L)
(L)
(L)
(L)
(L)
(L)
(L)
(L)
(L)
(L)
(L)
(G)
(G)
(G)
(G)
(G)
(G)
(G)
(G)
(G)
(G)
(L)
(L)
(L)
(L)
(L)
(L)
(L)
(L)
(L)
(L)
(L)
(L)
(G)
(G)
(G&L)
(L)
BELLBOY CORPORATION
BOYD HOUSER CANDY & TOBACCO
DAY DISTRIBUTING CO.
EAST SIDE BEVERAGE SOMPANY
GRIGGS, COOPER AND COMPANY
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO.
MARK VII DISTRIBUTORS, INC.
NORTH STAR ICE
POGREBA DISTRIBUTING INC.
QUALITY WINE & SPIRITS CO.
RYAN PROPERTIES, INC.
THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY
AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOC.
U. S. POSTMASTER
BRADLEY J. NIELSEN
THE BANK EXCELSIOR
COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT
ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST
AFSCME LOCALL #224
CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT
CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION
ALL-AMERICAN BOTTLING CORP.
BELLBOY CORPORATION
FRANCK'S TRUCKING
GRIGGS, COOPER AND COMPANY
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO.
MIDWEST COCA-COLA BOTTLING CO.
MINNEGASCO
MINNESOTA VICTORIA OIL CO.
PEPSI-COLA COMPANY
ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO.
QUALITY WINE AND SPIRITS CO.
WASTE MANAGEMENT-SAVAGE
ALAN ROLEK
PETTY CASH
COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE
VOID
COlT DRAPERY & CARPET CLEANERS
LIQUOR PURCHASES $
MISC./CIGARETTE PURCHASES
BEER/MISC. PURCHASES
BEER/MISC. PURCHASES
LIQUOR/WINE/MISC. PURCHASES
WINE PURCHASES
WINE/BEER PURCHASES
MISC. PURCHASES
BEER/MISC. PURCHASES
WINE PURCHASES
APRIL RENT FOR LIQUOR STORE II
BEER/MISC. PURCHASES
2 REPORTS FROM PLANNERS BOOKSTORE
POSTAGE FOR POSTAGE METER
DEPENDENT CARE DISBURSEMENT
FEDERAL/FICA/MEDICARE WITHHOLDING
STATE TAX PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS
PERA PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS
ICMA PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS
UNION DUES PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS
CHILD SUPPORT PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS
CREDIT UNION PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS
POP PURCHASES
BEER PURCHASES
LIQUOR/WINE PURCHASES
LIQUOR/WINE /MI SC..i-, _PURCHASE S
WINE PURCHASES
POP PURCHASES
UTILITIES
UTILITIES
POP PURCHASES
LIQUOR/WINE PURCHASES
LIQUOR/WINE PURCHASES
WASTE REMOVAL
HEALTH CARE REIMBURSEMENT
MILEAGE/PARKING/SUPPLIES
MARCH 1990 SALES TAX
CLEANING OF TRAFFIC AREAS-LIQUOR II
TOTAL GENERAL
TOTAL LIQUOR
TOTAL CHECKS ISSUED
- 1 -
3,080.59
1,845.60
3,790.25
8,788.85
5,423.18
693. 72
5,715.88
161.46
800.90
163.03
1,922.58
10,565.30
40.00
750.00
130.00
5,130.06
896.92
1,570.93
543.46
117.90
165.00
45.00
25.80
3,033.20
314.40
4,415.17
1,265.20
671.87
41.08
83.00
309.26
1,922.82
734.18
10.00
121. 00
17.82
7,866.43
128.00
9,607.33
63,692.51
73,299.84
/~
CHECK APPRe LISTING FOR APRIL 23, 1990 .IL MEETING
CHECK NO. TO WHOM ISSUED PURPOSE
AMOUNT
CHECKS FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL
4214
ABDO, ABDO & EICK
4215
4216
4217
4218
4219
4220
4221
4222
4223
4224
4225
4226
4227"
4228
4229
4230
4231
4232
4233
4234
4235
4236
4237
4238
4239
4240
4241
4242
4243
4244
4245.
4246
4247
4248
4249
4250
4251
4252
4253
4254
AIRSIGNAL, INC.
BROWNING-FERRIS INDUSTRIES
BOYUM EQUIPMENT, INC.
CHAPEL CONSULTING, INC.
CONSOLIDATED TYPEWRITER, INC.
CROSSTOWN OCS
ELK RIVER CONCRETE PRODUCTS
ROLF E. A. ERICKSON
FEED-RITE CONTROLS, INC.
HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER
KAR PRODUCTS
LONG LAKE FORD TRACTOR, INC.
MAC QUEEN EQUIPMENT
METRO WASTE COMMISSION
METRO WASTE COMMISSION
MIDWEST MAILING SYSTEMS, INC.
MILLER POWER
MINNEGASCO, INC.
MINNESOTA STATE TREASURER
MN SUBURBAN NEWSPAPERS
MINNETONKA PUBLIC SCHOOLS
NAVARRE HARDWARE
NEENAH FOUNDRY COMPANY
BRADLEY J. NIELSEN
NORTHERN STATES POWER
NORWEST BANK
JOE PAZANDAK
PEPSI-COLA COMPANY
PITNEY BOWES
PRAIRIE LAWN AND GARDEN
RED WING'S MOBIL SERVICE
SO. LAKE MTKA. PUBLIC SAFETY
SO. LAKE MTKA. PUBLIC SAFETY
TIMBER PRODUCTS
CITY OF TONKA BAY
WASTE MANAGEMENT-SAVAGE
WITT FINANCIAL
WOODLAKE SANITARY LANDFILL
YOUNGSTEDT'S, INC.
WAYZATA LAWN MOWER
SERVICES RELATED TO AUDIT THRU $ 4,500.00
3/23/90
PAGER RENTAL-PUBLIC WORKS
SATELLITE FOR CHRISTMAS LAKE PARK
MICRO SWITCH/BOLTS-PUBLIC WORKS
MARCH 1990 COMPUTER CONSULTING
MAINT. CONTRACT FROM 5/90 TO 4/91
COFFEE AND PAPER TOWELS-CITY HALL
MANHOLE MATERIAL-PUBLIC WORKS
APRIL ASSESSING FEE AND SUPPLIES
DEMURRAGE CHARGE
'90 BEGINNING YEAR HARD COPY TAX BOOK
MISC. NUTS, BOLTS, ETC.-P.W.
PARTS-PUBLIC WORKS
GUTTER BROOMS-PUBLIC WORKS
MARCH SAC CHARGES
MAY SEWER CHARGES
MAILING MACHINE MAINT. AGREEMENT
5/90-4/91
FABRICATE BRACKET FOR HOIST-P.W.
UTILITIES
BLDG. PERMIT SURCHARGE ENDING 3/90
PUBLISHING
MTKA. COMMUNITY SERVICES PROGRAM
NYLON ROPE & PAINT-PUBLIC WORKS
MANHOLE CASTING-PUBLIC WORKS
MARCH AND APRIL MILEAGE
UTILITIES
PAYING AGENT FEES ON SEW IMP
MARCH AND APRIL MILEAGE
POP PURCHASES-CITY HALL
RENTAL CONTRACT FOR POSTAGE MACHINE
5/90-8/90
PARK UTILITY TRACTOR/SPREADER
TIRE REPAIR-PUBLIC WORKS
JANUARY-MARCH COURT O.T.
MAY 1990 BUDGET
POSTS FOR FREEMAN PARK PARKING LOT
1ST QUARTER 1990 SEWER AND WATER
APRIL WASTE REMOVAL
FINANCIAL SERVICES
DUMPING FEE (ICO CLEANUP)
UNLEADED GASOLINE
BACK PARK BLOWER-PUBLIC WORKS
9.09
50.00
26.45
1,000.00
110.00
171. 00
188.18
2,725.21
50.00
66.03
53.28
6.67
184.00
3,564.00
22,793.64
180.00
40.00
566.10
2,312.89
32.45
2,090.00
50.29
257.00
77.76
1,279.92
11/1/72 200.00
75.27
51.78
63.75
4,211.00
8.50
337.42
29,512.50
1,476.00
302.50
179.54
374.35
58.11
81.90
310.00
TOTAL CHECKS FOR APPROVAL
79,626.58
TOTAL CHECK APPROVAL LIST
152,926.42
- 2 -
CHECK NO.
CHECK APPRe LISTING FOR APRIL 23, 1990 C.IL MEETING
TO WHOM ISSUED HOURS
AMOUNT
PAYROLL REGISTER FOR APRIL 11, 1990 PAYROLL
203958 VOID $
203959 LEONARD WATTEN COUNCIL 147.82
203960 JANICE HAUGEN MAYOR 178.50
203961 BARBARA BRANCEb- COUNCIL 147.82
203962 ROBERT GAGNE COUNCIL 150.00
203963 KRISTI STOVER COUNCIL 150.00
203964 LAURENCE WHITTAKER 80 REG HOURS 1,040.73
203965 SANDRA KENNELLY 80 REG HOURS 756.14
203966 SUSAN NICCUM 80 REG HOURS 599.60
203967 ANNE LATTER 80 REG HOURS 529.87
203968 ALAN ROLEK 80 REG HOURS 929.19
203969 WENDY DAVIS 80 REG HOURS 571.61
203970 BRADLEY NIELSEN 80 REG HOURS 836.47
203971 PATRICIA HELGESEN 64 REG HOURS 409.93
203972 VIRGINIA SMITH 80 REG HOURS 585.39
203973 JOSEPH PAZANDAK 80 REG HOURS 814.07
203974 CHARLES DAVIS 80 REG HOURS 411.82
203975 DENNIS JOHNSON 82 REG HOURS 690.36
203976 DANIEL RANDALL 82 REG HOURS 698.59
203977 HOWARD STARK 80 REG HOURS 541.11
203978 RALPH WEHLE 80 REG HOURS 541.96
203979 DONALD ZDRAZIL 80 REG HOURS 1,004.46
203980 JOSEPH LUGOWSKI 80 REG HOURS 676.83
203981 LAWRENCE NICCUM 40 REG HOURS 280. 11
203982 RUSSELL MARRON 32 REG HOURS 153.49
203983 CHRISTOPHER SCHMID 80 REG HOURS 430.05
203984 BRIAN JAKEL 51. 50 REG HOURS 233.57
203985 MARK KARSTEN 61 REG HOURS 271.87
203986 WILLIAM JOSEPHSON 80 REG HOURS 598.00
203987 SUSAN LATTERNER 12 REG HOURS 58.16
203988 DEAN YOUNG 80 REG HOURS 551. 76
203989 SCOTT BARTLETT 33.50 REG HOURS 168.77
203990 KELLY MICHELSON 19 REG HOURS 86.06
203991 KEVIN FOSS 13.50 REG HOURS 69.18
203992 JOHN FRUTH 31 REG HOURS 134.45
203993 NOEL NICHOLS 22 REG HOURS 98.15
TOTAL GENERAL 12,.692~38
TOTAL LIQUOR 2,853.51
TOTAL PAYROLL 15,545.89
- 3 -