HomeMy WebLinkAboutMarch 16, 1992'IN N
CALL TO ORDER
1.
2.
3.
HERITAGE
8:00 p.m. 7.
COMMUNITY
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
AGENDA
Monday, March 16, 1992
7:30 p.m.
Pledge of Allegiance
Minutes of The Previous Meeting
Consent Agenda:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)
i)
J)
k)
Consider Approval of Invoices To Be Paid
Consider Approval of Animal Warden Report
Consider Approval of Building Report
Consider Approval of Fire and Rescue Report
Consider Approval of Election Judge
Appointments for Presidential Primary
Consider Approval of Electric Service
Agreements Peak Controlled With NSP
Consider Approval of Resolution 92-11
Establishing Compliance With Reimbursement
Bond Regulations
Consider Approval of Aerial Photography and
Mapping for Proposed Business Office Park and
Lakefront Park
Consider Approval of Registered Land Survey
for John Mahoney
Consider Approval of Temporary 3.2 Beer Permit
for Prior Lake Amateur Baseball Association
Consider Approval of Treasurer's Report
4. Recognition of Thanks and Appreciation to the
Prior Lake VFW
5. Recognition of Thanks and Appreciation to Little
Six Bingo, Inc.
6. Consider Administrative Plat and Variance
Application of Jeannie Robbins and Eric Davis
Continuation of Cable Television Franchise Transfer
Public Hearing
8. Consider Variance Appeal For Crown CoCo, Inc.
9. Conduct Economic Development Authority Meeting
Update on Business/Office Park Progress
a-
b' Consider Option Agreement For Land
Acquisition
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
10.
Affirm Economic Development Authority Action on
Option Agreement
11. Other Business
a)
b)
c)
Scott County Transportation Coalition Annual
Meeting, March 19, 1992
Equalization Meeting Scheduled for May 4,
1992
LMC Legislative Conference, March 24, 1992
*Ail times stated on the Counc%l Agenda,
Public Hearings, are approximate and
earlier or later.
with the exception of
may start a few minutes
HERITAGE COMMUNITY
1891 1991
CALL TO ORDER
1.
2.
3.
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
AGENDA REPORT
Monday, March 16, 1992
7:30 p.m.
Pledge of Allegiance
Minutes of The Previous Meeting - see attached.
Consent Agenda:
a) Consider Approval of Invoices To Be Paid - see
attached.
b) Consider Approval of Animal Warden Report -
see attached.
c)
Consider Approval of Building Report - see
attached.
d)
Consider Approval of Fire and Rescue Report -
see attached.
e)
f)
g)
h)
Consider Approval of Election Judge
Appointments for Presidential Primary - see
attached staff report.
Consider Approval of Electric
Agreements Peak Controlled With NSP
attached staff report.
Service
- see
Consider Approval of Resolution 92-11
Establishing Compliance With Reimbursement
Bond Regulations - see attached staff report.
Consider Approval of Aerial Photography and
Mapping for Proposed Business Office Park and
Lakefront Park - see attached staff report.
i)
J)
Consider Approval of Registered Land Survey
for John Mahoney - see attached staff report.
Consider Approval of Temporary 3.2 Beer Permit
for Prior Lake Amateur Baseball Association -
Attached is a letter from the Prior Lake
Amateur Baseball Association, Treasurer John
Murray, requesting a temporary 3.2 beer permit
for the Jays baseball season (April 26 thru
August 16, 1992). A motion as part of the
consent agenda to approve the Temporary 3.2
Beer License for the Baseball Season from
April 26 thru August 16, 1992 would be in
order. Before the permit is granted, staff
will ensure that all requirements have been
fulfilled.
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
e
8:00 p.m. 7.
k)
Consider Approval of Treasurer's Report - see
attached.
Recognition of Thanks and Appreciation to the
Prior Lake VFW - The purpose of this agenda item is
to recognize and thank Rich Davidson and the VFW
for their recent donation. The Prior Lake VFW has
been working with the Prior Lake Fire Department to
donate funds to acquire a rescue boat with
accompanying material and supplies. Over the past
couple of months Commander Rich Davidson and
members of the Fire Department have been working
out details of this donation. Fire Chief A1
Borchardt has informed staff that the details have
been completed and a recognition of appreciation is
in order. VFW officials will be present at the
meeting 9nd Fire Department officials will present
further Information on the donation. A Certificate
of Appreciation will be available to present to the
VFW at the meeting.
Recognition of Thanks and Appreciation to Little
Six Bingo, Inc. - The purpose of this agenda item
is to recognize and thank Leonard Prescott and the
Little Six Bingo, Inc. for their recent donation.
City staff has been working with Leonard Prescott
and Bill Johnson from Little Six Bingo, Inc. on a
donation for a Prior Lake police officer. In
January we agreed on funding details ($40,000: one
payment annually) and last week we received the
payment for 1992 which will enable us to begin the
hiring process. Leonard Prescott and possibly
other officials will be in attendance at the
meeting. Recognition of thanks and appreciation to
Little Six Bingo, Inc. is in order. Attached is
information and other details on this donation,
Little Six Bingo, Inc., and the Reservation in
General. A Certificate of Appreciation will be
available to present to Leonard Prescott at the
meeting.
Consider Administrative Plat and Variance
Application of Jeannie Robbins and Eric Davis - see
attached staff report.
Continuation of Cable Television Franchise Transfer
Public Hearing - The city Council heard a
presentation from David Rozelle, D. D. Cable
Partners, on Monday, March 2, 1992. After
discussion City Council tabled the Cable Television
Franchise Transfer public hearing until 8:00 p.m.
on Monday, March 16. The purpose of this tabling
was to receive the Municipal Request for
Information Report and Analysis from staff and
legal counsel. As of this writing, the Municipal
Request For Information Report has not been
received from D.D. Cable Partners. The Report will
be available on March 11. Staff will be meeting
with Legal Counsel on Monday, March 16, to discuss
(7) continued:
the Report and review preliminary findings. Upon
completion of this meeting, the Report Analysis
will be prepared and ready for discussion by the
next Council meeting. A motion to continue the
hearing until Monday, April 6, 1992 at 8:00 p.m. is
in order.
10.
11.
Consider Variance Appeal For Crown CoCo, Inc. - see
attached staff report.
Conduct Economic Development Authority Meeting -
see attached staff reports for the following:
a. Update on Business/Office Park Progress
b. Consider Option Agreement For Land
Acquisition
Affirm Economic Development Authority Action on
Option Agreement - It has been the policy of the
City Council to affirm actions of the Economic
Development Authority. For information on the
Option Agreement, see Agenda Report Item 9 b. City
staff recommends, based on Economic Development
Authority discussion and action in Agenda Item 9 b,
that the Option Agreement be affirmed by the Prior
Lake City Council.
Other Business
a)
b)
c)
Scott County Transportation Coalition Annual
Meeting, March 19, 1992 - The Scott County
Transportation Coalition will conduct their
annual meeting on Thursday, March 19 at the
Prior Lake VFW from 6:00 to 8:30 p.m. The
meeting will be held in the downstairs room.
All members of the Council are encouraged to
attend. Please see the attached most recent
Coalition Newsletter for more information on
the meeting.
Equalization Meeting Scheduled for May 4,
1992 - The purpose of this item is to inform
you that the Equalization Meeting has been
scheduled with Deputy Assessor LeRoy Arnoldi
for May 4, 1992 beginning at 8:00 p.m. No
action is required on this item.
LMC Legislative Conference, March 24, 1992 -
The annual League of Minnesota Cities
Legislative Conference is scheduled for March
24, 1992 in St. Paul at the St. Paul Radisson
Hotel. The purpose of the Legislative
3
(c) continued:
Conference is to bring city officials together
to discuss legislative issues and to lobby
local legislators. An aggressive agenda has
been prepared (see attached) including an
invitation to Governor Arne Carlson to speak
at a rally in the Capitol rotunda. Members of
the Council who are interested in attending
should contact Dee Birch.
*Ail times stated on the Council Agenda, with the exception of
Public Hearings, are approximate and may start a few minutes
earlier or later.
4
HERITAGE COMMUNITY
1891 1991
MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL
March 2, 1992
The Common Council of the City of Prior Lake met in regular
session on Monday, March 2, 1992 at 7:30 p.m. in the City Council
Chambers. Present were Acting Mayor White, Councllmembers
Fitzgerald, Kedrowski and Scott, City Manager Unmacht, Planning
Director Graser, Associate Planner Lucast, City Attorney Kessel
and Recording Secretary Birch. Mayor Andren was absent due to
being out of town.
Acting Mayor White called the meeting to order and asked everyone
to rise for the pledge of allegiance.
The minutes of the February
reviewed by Council.
18, 1992 Council meeting were
MOTION MADE BY FITZGERALD, SECONDED BY KEDROWSKI, TO APPROVE THE
FEBRUARY 18, 1992 COUNCIL MINUTES AS SUBMITTED.
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Fitzgerald, Kedrowski, and White, the
motion carried. Councilmember Scott abstained from voting due to
the fact she had been absent during the February 18, 1992
meeting.
The next order of business was approval of the Consent Agenda as
follows:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
Consider Approval of Invoices To Be Paid
Consider Approval of Resolution 92-10 - a Resolution
Supporting the Volunteers of America Week March 1 - 8,
1992
Consider Appr?val of the City of Prior Lake as the Local
Government Unit To Administer The Wetland Conservation
Act of 1991
Consider Approval of Executing a Quit Claim Deed for
Prior Lake State Bank
Consider Approval of Refuse Hauler License Application
of Mark Johnson
MOTION MADE BY KEDROWSKI, SECONDED BY
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS (a) THRU (e).
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Fitzgerald,
White, the motion passed unanimously.
SCOTT, TO APPROVE THE
Kedrowski, Scott and
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
Minutes of the Prior Lake City Council March 2, 1992
The next order of business was: Consider Approval 9f Precinct
Redistricting Plan and Resolution 92-09 Designating Precinct
Polling Locations. City Manager Unmacht summarized the process
used by staff to draft 9roposed 9recinct boundaries. An overhead
map of the proposed boundaries was presented and the proposed
boundaries consisting of five precincts were discussed by the
Council. An official precinct file map is on record in the City
Manager's office. (Note for the minutes, the City Council has
the statutory authority to redistrict local precinct boundaries
at any time.)
MOTION MADE BY KEDROWSKI, SECONDED BY FITZGERALD, TO APPROVE THE
REDISTRICTING PLAN CONSISTING OF FIVE PRECINCTS AS PROPOSED.
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Fitzgerald, Kedrowski, Scott and
White, the motion passed unanimously.
MOTION MADE BY KEDROWSKI, SECONDED BY SCOTT, TO APPROVE
RESOLUTION 92-09 DESIGNATING PRECINCT POLLING LOCATIONS WITHIN
THE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE.
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Fitzgerald,
White, the motion passed unanimously.
Kedrowski, Scott and
The next order of business was: Consider Approval of Robert
Mertens Subdivision Application. Associate Planner Lucast
presented details of the applicant's request and described the
measurement and layout of the property. Robert Preussler 16350
Park Avenue, inguired as to the correct measurements of the lot.
A short discussion occurred.
MOTION MADE BY FITZGERALD, SECONDED BY KEDROWSKI, TO APPROVE THE
SUBDIVISION APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED.
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Fitzgerald,
White, the motion passed unanimously.
Kedrowski, Scott and
A short recess was called.
The meeting reconvened at 8:00 p.m.
The next order of business was: Conduct Cable Television
Franchise Transfer Public Hearing. Acting Mayor White called the
Public Hearing to order at 8:01 p.m. and read_ the public notice
as it appeared in the Prior Lake American on February 17 and 24
respectively. City Manager Unmacht commented on the procedures
and review process for a cable franchise transfer as required by
law. Mr. Dave Rozzelle, Chief Executive officer, D. D. Cable
Partners, addressed the Council and gave them a summary
background of D.D. Cable Partners and its affiliates. Mr.
Rozzelle explained ownership, .a~quisition plans, operating
philosophy and listed several limited partners by name. Mr. Ken
Eells, 6240 150th Street asked questions regarding cable
technology, rates and cable boxes. Darin Helgeson, Chief
Technician for Star Cablevision, answered several ~uestions with
regard to the technical aspect of their service. Extensive
Minutes of the Prior Lake City Council March 2, 1992
discussion occurred regarding cable subscriber fees, franchise
fees, line extensions, time frame for financial information and
school district cable issues, which include staff reimbursement
and equipment acquisition and upgrade.
MOTION MADE BY FITZGERALD, SECONDED BY KEDROWSKI, TO CONTINUE THE
PUBLIC HEARING TO MARCH 16, 1992 AT 8:00 P.M. (Note: The
purpose of the continuation is to receive the Municipal Request
For Information Report from D.D. Cable Partners. The report
will be accompanied by a staff analysis.)
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Fitzgerald,
White, the motion passed unanimously.
Kedrowski, Scott and
A short recess was called.
The meeting was reconvened at 8:50 p.m.
The next order of business was: Consider Comprehensive Plan
Amendment and Rezone Application of Progress Land Company. city
Manager Unmacht reviewed the background and history of this
request. Warren Israelson, Progress Land Company, made a short
presentation to the Council regarding his request. Planning
Director Graser presented details of the application to amend the
land use map of the Comprehensive Plan from primarily Industrial
to Residential and rezone from I-1 to R-1 approximately 97 acres
of land east of County Road 21. Discussion occurred and the
following residents addressed the Council with their specific
questions and concerns:
Kathleen Abrams, 14877 Manitou Road
Marianne K. Whiting, 14897 Manitou Road
E. K. Whiting, 14897 Manitou Road
Jim Halek, 14869 Manitou Road
Obert Tufte, 14937 Manitou Road
Leo Vierling, 14091 Eagle Creek Avenue
City Councilmembers urged Mr. Israelson and the residents on
Manitou Road to hold meetings in order to work out their concerns
before the preliminary plat application is considered by the
Planning Commission and City Council. Further discussion
occurred.
MOTION MADE BY FITZGERALD, SECONDED BY KEDROWSKI, TO APPROVE
THE PETITION TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS REFLECTED IN THE
THREE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS AS FOLLOWS:
Change the land use map from industrial to low density
residential.
Incorporate a trail system from the natural feature in
the southeast to the north and south, thereby connecting
a future retail area to the north and an east-west trail
system to the south.
Make the existing conditions map an interim addendum to
the development constraints plate in the plan.
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Fitzgerald,
White, the motion passed unanimously·
Kedrowski, Scott and
Minutes of the Prior Lake City Council March 2, 1992
MOTION MADE BY SCOTT, SECONDED BY KEDROWSKI, TO APPROVE THE
REZONING APPLICATION AS APPLIED BY PROGRESS LAND COMPANY
CONTINGENT UPON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN APPROVAL BY THE METROPOLITAN
COUNCIL. IT WAS NOTED THAT AS PART OF THE MOTION THE REZONE
APPROVAL WILL SUNSET EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 1, 1992 UNLESS THE
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL HAS APPROVED THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
AMENDMENT ON OR BEFORE THAT DATE.
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Fitzgerald,
White, the motion passed unanimously.
Kedrowski, Scott and
Topics discussed under Other Business were as follows:
City Manager Unmacht announced that the Metropolitan Waste
Control Commission would be holding several budget meetings
in the metro area, the two nearest locations were St. Paul
and Hopkins on March 6 and March 19 respectively. Anyone
interested in attending should let him know.
-- It was noted that the
distributed to Council.
1992 Budget Document had been
City Manager Unmacht ~resented a request from the City of
Savage for consideration of a Building Inspector Services,
Joint Powers Agreement. A short discussion followed.
MOTION MADE BY SCOTT, SECONDED BY KEDROWSKI, TO APPROVE THE
BUILDING INSPECTOR SERVICES JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT FOR THE
CITIES OF PRIOR LAKE AND SAVAGE, MINNESOTA AS SUBMITTED.
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Fitzgerald, Kedrowski,
White, the motion passed unanimously.
Scott and
Acting Mayor White presented a request from Five Hawks Middle
School to the Council requesting that they approve a
Proclamation proclaiming the week of March 15 thru 21 as
National Middle Level School Week.
MOTION MADE BY FITZGERALD, SECONDED BY KEDROWSKI, TO
THE PROCLAMATION OF THE WEEK OF MARCH 15 THRU 21 AS
MIDDLE LEVEL SCHOOL WEEK.
APPROVE
NATIONAL
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Fitzgerald, Kedrowski, Scott and
White, the motion passed unanimously.
The next Council meeting will be Monday, March 16, 1992 at 7:30
p.m. '
There being no further business, the meet%ng adjourned at 10:35
p.m. by general consent of the Council.
D~vid ~J. ~/~mac~/
Cbty ~anag~er
Do'o Birch
Recording Secretary
4
THE FOLLOWING IS A LIST OF INVOICES SCHEDULED
FOR PAYMENT ON TUES. MAR. 17, 1992
MISC. DEPTS.
Blue Cross Blue Shield
Guarantee Mutual Life Co.
Delta Dental
C.H. Carpenter Lumber Co.
Carlson Hardware Co.
Prior Lake CarQuest
NAPA Parts Service
Coast to Coast
Scott Rice Telephone Co.
Cellular One
Shakopee Public Utilities
Northern States Power
Minnegasco
MN Valley Electric Co-op.
MN Pollution Control Agency
GENERAL GOVERNMENT
League of MN Cities
Metropolitan Council
Prior Lake American
Sterling Codifiers
Govt. Training Center
Craguns Conference Center
Bureau of Business Practice
Southwest Suburban Publishing
Royal Consulting Service
Career Dynamics
Prior Prints
Wally's World of Printing
Horst Graser
MN Planning Assn.
Command Computer Corp.
AlphaSoft Inc.
A Bulb Co.
Graybar Electric Co.
Deb Garross
Bernie Julkowski
Sprint
Bob's Personal Coffee Service
R & R Carpet Cleaning
American Linen Supply
Cooper & Associates
St. Paul Book & Stationery
Insurance
Insurance
Insurance
Misc. Supplies
Misc. Supplies
Misc. Supplies
Misc. Supplies
Misc. Supplies
Telephone Service
Telephone Service
Utilities
Utilities
Utilities
Utilities
Emission Inspections
8,484.64
456.90
1,204.00
200.99
64.96
907.01
391.52
341.00
1,329.98
383.39
78.07
7,467.16
618.57
1,747.87
64.00
Conference Registration
Conference Registration
Publishing
Ordinance Codification
Conference Fee
Conference Expense
Subscription Renewal
Subscription Renewal
Ad Renewal
Printed Supplies
Printed Supplies
Printed Supplies
Meeting Expense
Dues
Software Maintenance
Computer Maintenance
Building Maint. Supplies
Building Maint. Supplies
Reimb. for Bldg. Supplies
Reimb. for Bldg. Supplies
Telephone Service
Coffee Service
Building Maintenance
Building Maintenance
Equipment Maintenance
Cap. Outlay-Equipment
150.00
60.00
1,494.15
1,041.18
155.00
80.00
76.20
18.00
150.00
23.65
192.55
126.35
30.40
40.00
270.00
68.74
114.18
54.30
35.12
15.00
166.98
146.05
114.00
73.02
55.00
1,788.60
CONTINGENCY
Park Nicollet Medical Center
PUBLIC SAFETY
Noll's Hallmark Shop
R-Own office Supply
Goodyear Tire Dist.
Fairview
CSC Credit Services
Wall Street Journal
MN/SCIA
Fred Bock
MinnComm Paging
Reynolds Welding
Center
FIRE & SAFETY
Reynolds Welding
Prior Prints
R-Own office Supply
MN Conway Fire & Safety
General Safety Equipment
Emergency Medical Products
Postmaster 55372
MN Conway Fire & Safety
BUILDING INSPECTION
Gary Staber
ANIMAL CONTROL
Robert McAllister
PUBLIC WORKS
Franz Engineering
Strgar-Rosco-Fausch Inc.
STS Consultants
Prior Lake Aggregate
Shiely Co.
MacQueen Equipment
Metro Alarm
Wally's World of Printing
Professional Services
Supplies
S~pplies
Tires
Professional Services
Professional Services
Subscription Renewal
Dues
Education Reimbursement
Pagers (DARE)
Oxygen Supplies
Oxygen Supplies
Printed Supplies
Supplies
Repair Supplies
Repair Supplies
Medical Supplies
Postage
Cap. Outlay-Equipment
Conference Expense
Animal Warden
Engineering Supplies
Engineering Services
Engineering Services
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Repair Supplies
Alarm System Maint.
Supplies
329.80
42.30
3.71
1,648.92
68.00
7.30
139.00
15.00
201.15
311.98
340.00
356.00
29.08
26.57
231.50
17.58
189.98
668.41
358.00
58.30
463.12
442.23
1,033.12
3,398.91
150.33
151.18
1,058.33
109.65
89.70
PARK AND RECREATION
Nancy Thompson
Pauline Nelson
Dance Magic Inc.
Snyder Drug
R-Own Office Supply
Handy-Crafts Inc.
U.S. Toy Co.
S & S Arts & Crafts
Triarco
Hennepin County Parks
Skateville
Chaska Community Center
Prior Lake Charter Service
Diane Wikstrom
Lisa Conlin
Fiona Keel
Firestone Stores
Steve Tupy's Tire Service
Monnen's Supply
Radermacher Super Valu
M-V Gas Co.
Glenwood Inglewood
Metro Alarm Inc.
Prior Lake Rental Center
Chad Nohner
Deputy Registrar %160
Tile World
Park Program Refund
Park Program Refund
Dance Supplies
Supplies
Supplies
Park Program Supplies
Park Program Supplies
Park Program Supplies
Park Program Supplies
Park Program
Park Program
Park Program
Bus Charter
Park Program Instructor
Park Program Instructor
Mileage
Tires
Tire Mounting
Park Maint. Supplies
Concession Supplies
Utilities
Building Supplies
Alarm Service Maint.
Rentals
Property Damage Reimb.
License Plates
Library Maintenance
4.60
4.60
174.25
20.66
3.57
464.10
121.16
1,062.93
425.07
147.00
135.00
111.84
100.00
327.50
661.88
65.18
300.88
218.00
169.86
7.44
159.00
27.45
78.00
10.70
602.50
27.00
54.00
WATER UTILITY
Feed Rite Controls
Serco
Water Products Co.
Gopher State One-Call
U.S. West Communications
Raymond Johnson
MN Dept. of Health
Chemicals
Water Analysis
Pressure Reducers
State Terminal
Telephone Service
Meeting Expense
Seminar Fees
Virgil Schaaf Construction Co. Rentals
3,721.67
150.00
1,719.11
50.00
40.10
14.00
70.00
354.00
SEWER UTILITY
Viking Electric Supply
Tri-State Pump & Control
MWCC
MWCC
Supplies
Repair Supplies
SAC Charges
Installment
10.20
1,099.46
3,465.00
41,001.00
DEBT SERVICE - GENERAL FUND
Norwest Bank Minnesota
Debt Service
5,890.00
DEBT SERVICE FUND
Norwest Bank Minnesota Debt Service 164,045.00
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
Summary of Buitding Permits Issued
Month of ~ 1992
Single Family Dwellings
Other Dwellings
(No. of Units
Dwelling Units Removed 1
Net Change +3
Residential Garages
Indust rial-Cx~mercial
Structures other than
buildings
Additions, Alterations
1. Residential
2. Industrial and
Co~nercial
No. of Declared No. of
No. of Declared Permits Value Permits
4 472,127.50 2 153,889.44
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
1 15,000.00 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
7 48,704.36 3 15,200.00 13
1 48,000.00 1 21,000.00 3
2 6,500.00 0 0 5
Total 15 542,331.86 6 190,089.44 33
T°ta~)eclarvalue/to Ba~ed .~
Bu/ilding Of~f icial~
1,684,303.42_
DOG CATOtERS
M~NTHLY REPORT
TOTAL
Number of dogs pleked up
Number of hours within
Prior Lake arms
Number of unalalmed dogs ~.~
Reimbursement to City
*Include current month's total
~og C~teher
02 / 01 / 92
02 / 01 .." 92
(':'2 / 01 ,"' , =
02 / 04/' 92
¢) 2 / 04 / 92
02 / (:)5 / 92
02 ,/06 / 92
(:)2 / 06 / 92
(:.~2 / 07 / 92
02 / 07 / 92
02 / 08 / 92
)9 / 9.-'
02 / C
'::)2/09 / 92
02 / 1 -.', 9 ..'
02/15/92
02/15/92
02/16/92
n2/16/92
02 / 16, 9..'
':-:'2/16, ¢..'
02 / 16 / 92
¢ '~ 8 / 92
02 / 1 S / ~ 2
02/1S .' 9..-
oo,/' 18, 9--'
02 ./1 ~' / 92
02 / 20 / 92
02 / 21 / e 2
02 / 21 ./~ 2
-)o; ,":, ~2
-) .--, ,, ,--, ..-,
(-r-r. / -o'~/92
,:}2,/o'-r,,..._,/c~2
':"-' '23/92
C'2/'-' '-'
.. =4/9-.'
)--'/~4, 9.~.
02/26/92
A~./~.m/92
(-),o } "~. o
t ..-/29/92
T I ?':
7': ... T
(:)827
1239
185~
153C.'
2203
182(:)
0815
2245
0455
1725
0140
0 C) 34
1530
2155
0C)03
164(:)
0008
1700
1845
1830
2157
104 !
1225
1235
.. 130
230 C'
(:)927
173n
1401
18Z1
2205
1958
2040
2154
120~
1739
0158
0656
0745
1233
2115
(.')657
1914
2045
F'RIOR LAKE
F'~iIOR LAKE
SPRING LAKE
F'RIOR LAKE
F'RIOR LAKE
CREDIT RIVER
F'RIOR LAKE
PR IOR LAKE
F'RIOR LAKE
F'RIOR LAKE
SPRING LAKE
F'RIOR LAKE
SHAKOF'EE
PRIOR LAKE
F'RIOR LAKE
F'RIOR LAKE
PRIOR LAKE
PRIOR LAKE
F'RIOR LAKE
PRIOR LAKE
F'RIOR LAKE
P'RIOR LAKE
PR I OR LAKE
CREDIT RIVER
F'~'IOR LAKE
F'R I OR LAKE
SF'RING LAKE
F'RIOR LAKE
F'RIOR LAKE
F'RIOR LAKE
PR I OR LAKE
F'RIOR LAk:E
PR IOR LAKE
SRRING LAKE
RR I OR LAKE
CREDIT RIVER
F'RIOR LAKE
CREDIT RIVER
PRIOR LAKE
PRIOR LAKE
F'RIOR LAKE
CREDIT RIVER
F'RIOR LAKE
PRIOR LAKE
MEDICAL
MEDICAL
10/52
MEDICAL
FIRE
FIRE
MEDICAL
FIRE
MEDICAL
MEDICAL
10/52
MEDICAL
FIRE
FIRE
MEDICAL
MEDICAL
MEDICAL
FIRE
10/52
MEDICAL
MEDICAL
MEDICAL
MEDICAL
MEDICAL
FIRE
MEDICAL
MEDICAL
MEDICAL
MEDICAL
10/52
MEDICAL
MEDICAL
FIRE
MEDICAL
MEDICAL
MEDICAL
FIRE
10/52
10/52
FIRE
MEDICAL
MEDICAL
MEDICAL
FIRE
TRANSPORT ONE TO ST. FRANCIS
NO TRANSF'ORT
TRANSPORT ONE TO ST. FRANCIS
542 TRANSPORTED
FIRE UNFOUNDED, CANCELLED
COMBINE FIRE
TRANSPORT ONE TO RIDGES
CANCELLED F'ER 9200
ONE TO MF'LS. CHILDREN HOSP.
TRANSPORTED ONE TO RIDGES
CANCELLED
TRANSPORTED ONE TO ST. FRANCIS
CHIMNEY FIRE~ OUT ON ARRIVAL
DUMPSTER FIRE
542 TRANSPORTED
542 TRANSPORTED
542 TRANSPORTED
BRUSH FIRE
597 RIDGES, 598 ST. FRANCIS
542 TRANSPORTED
TRANSPORTED ONE TO RIDGES
TRANSF'ORTED ONE TQ ST. FRANCIS
RELEASED F'T. TO 542
TRANSF'ORTED ONE TO R~DGES
ALARM, CANCELLED PER 9200
542 TRANSPORTED
TRANSF'ORT ONE TO ST. FRANCIS
NO TRANSF'ORT
TRANSF'ORT ONE TC RIDGES
NO TRANSPORT
NO TRANSPORT
TRANSPOR? ONE TO ST. FRANCIS
CONTROLLED REC. FIRE
TRANSF'ORT ONE TO RIDGES
NO TRANSF'ORT
542 TRANSRORTED
GAS F'UMF' FIRE, OUT ON ARRIVAL
TRANSPORTED TWO TO ST. FRANCIS
NO TRANSPORT
CANCELLED, WOODBURNER
NO TRANSPORT
542 TRANSPORT
NO TRANSPORT
CANCELLED, FALSE ALARM
HERITAGE COMMUNITY
1891 1991
CONSENT AGENDA:
REQUESTED BY :
SUBJECT MATTER:
DATE:
3 (e)
RALPH TESCHNER, FINANCE DIRECTOR
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF ELECTION JUDGE
APPOINTMENTS FOR PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY
MARCH 16, 1992
INTRODUCTION:
Prior Lake will conduct three elections during
the course of 1992; the Presidential Primary
scheduled for April 7, 1992, the Primary on
September 15, 1992 and the General Election on
November 3, 1992.
The city is responsible for the first two
elections while the General Election will be a
joint effort between the City and the School
District, with City Staff coordinating the
process. The City Council must authorize the
appointment of election judges to conduct the
election day activities.
BACKGROUND
Earlier this month the Prior Lake City Council
approved a redistricting plan which increased
the number of election precincts within the
city from three to five. This plan was to
become effective March 31, 1992 as per statute
requirement but cannot be implemented until
the fall elections. Therefore, the present
alignment of three precincts shall be utilized
for the Presidential Primary.
DISCUSSION:
The Presidential primary is the first primary
in 36 years to be conducted in Minnesota since
1956. It also will be a closed primary whereby
the voter must declare their party affiliation
as either Democratic or Republican before
receiving a ballot.
The polling places for the three precincts are
located respectively at City Hall, Five Hawks
Elementary and Assembly of God Church. Staff
anticipates a fairly low turnout of less than
10% of the registered voters. Based upon this
projection, Precincts #1 & #2 will be staffed
with five judges and Precinct #3 with four
judges. Within the precincts there is relative
party balance as required by election law.
The polls shall be open from 7:00 A.M. to 8:00
P.M. The judges will report to their
appropriate precinct location one hour prior
to the polls opening for set-up preparation.
Also, the judges will be attending a training
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax {612) 447-4245
RECOMMENDATION:
ACTION REQUIRED:
session to be conducted by the Scott County
Auditor's Office. As in past years, the Judges
shall be paid $5.00 per hour.
Attached is a list of election Judges
indicated by precinct. Staff has contacted the
judges and each has expressed interest in
servigg this year's Presidential Primary
election. Staff would recommend approval of
those judges submitted.
Motion to approve as part of the consent
agenda is in order.
HERITAGE
1891
COMMUNITY
1991
ELECTION OFFICIALS
(P~esidential Primary)
PRECINCT ONE
NAME
Nellie Lannon
Mary Beth Onkka
Eleanor Gehlhar
Sarah Gottstine
Marlene Turner
ADDRESS
16233 Evanston Ave. S.E.
4363 Dakota Street S.E.
5220 Frost Point Circle S.E.
5942 Hidden Oaks Circle S.E.
16276 Franklin Circle S.E.
PARTY
Democrat
Democrat
Republican
Republican
Republican
PRECINCT TWO
NAME
Emily Amberg
Kathy Arnold
Donna Dupont
Kristine Hanson
Donna Story
ADDRESS
16349 Park Ave. S.E.
15683 Island View Rd. N.W.
16571 Northwood Road N.W.
4340 Hickory Hills Trail
4420 Colorado Street S.E.
PARTY
Democrat
Democrat
Democrat
Republican
Republican
PRECINCT THREE
NAME
Frances Dennehy
Lynn Hartman
Helen Ries
Diane Schroeder
ADDRESS
14450 Watersedge Trail N.E.
14279 Aspen Ave. N.E.
6781 Denese Street N.E.
14131 Timothy Ave. N.E.
PARTY
Democrat
Democrat
Republican
Republican
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
HERITAGE COMMUNITY
1891
AGENDA NUMBER:
PREPARED BY:
SUBJECT:
'DATE:
3(f)
BRUCE LONEY, ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF ELECTRIC
AGREEMENTS PEAK CONTROLLED WITH NSP
MARCH 16, 1992
SERVICE
INTRODUCTION:
BACKGROUND:
The purpose of this Agenda item is to approve
the attached agreements between Northern
States Power (NSP) and the City of Prior Lake
for Peak Controlled Electric Service on Well
Pumphouse #4 and #5.
NSP in their Load Management Program has a
Peak-Cogtrolled rate program available to
commercial or industrial customers in which
the City of Prior Lake is eligible for. This
program offers a reduced demand charge
throughout the year for customers who curtail
their electrical use during a peak demand
period. A peak demand period usually occurs
during the months of June thru September and
on hot, muggy days in which the electrical
usage is the highest. NSP considers off-peak
times to be 9:00 P.M. to 9:00 A.M. Monday
through Friday, all day Saturday and Sunday
and the following holidays: New Year's Day,
Good Friday, Memorial Day, Independence Day,
Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day, and Christmas
Day. The peak demand days usually occur
during the business days of Monday through
Friday. In past years with this program, the
highest number of peak demand days was in 1988
with 12 days and some yea~s there has been as
few as 2 days. Also in past years, the
typical peak controlled period during the day
has been from 12:00 P.M. to 6:00 P.M.
Staff has met with Steve Willaert, NSP
Electric Marketing Representative, to discuss
the program and implementation for the City's
well pumphouses. Currently the City has a
General Service Agreement with NSP ~n which
the demand charge per kilowatt is $8.08 during
the months of June through September and $5.82
per kilowatt for the rest of the year. With
the peak controlled program, the demand rate
charge would be reduced to $3.66 per kilowatt
for the entire year on the electrical
equipment placed into this program. Attached
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
to this Agenda Report is an illustration
showing the water pump electrical cost for
1991 and the amount that would have been saved
if each pump had been on peak controlled
service. The amount of money saved for
umphouse #3, #4, and #5 would have been
3,868.00, $1,782.00, and $3,186.00,
respectively.
From the meeting with Mr. Willaert and after
analyzing the City's water system, it was
concluded that two of the City's three
pumphouses could be placed on a peak
controlled system without affecting the
operation of the City's water system.
An Electric Service Agreement for Peak
Controlled rates has been prepared by NSP and
is attached for Council review.
DISCUSSION:
The City has recently installed a million
gallon storage tank at Crest Avenue and
Cedarwood Street and installed a 1100 gallon
per minute well and pumphouse. These
additions to the Municipal water system have
increased the City's water supply so that this
peak controlled program on our pumphouses is
possible. On heavy water usage days, the
water system has enough water stored in the
two tanks that only one well and pumphouse is
needed for much of the day. A second well and
pumphouse is usually necessary to refill the
storage tanks by 8:00 or 9:00 P.M. and will
run throughout the night. The electrical peak
controlled period for the peak demand day
usually runs from 12:00 P.M. to 6:00 P.M. The
water pumps on the peak controlled program can
be placed back on line as soon as the peak
controlled period is over.
There is a one year trial ~eriod in which the
City can notify NSP if this peak controlled
program is not working for whatever reason.
The City's electrical bills would be
recalculated using the previous rates as
currently exists with the General Service
Agreement.
In the Agreement there is a failure to control
clause in which the demand charge would be
$13.80 per kilowatt versus the peak controlled
demand charge rate of $3.66 per kilowatt. The
worst case scenario would be during a heavy
water usage day and a major fire occurred
during the peak control period whereas the
pumps on the peak controlled program are
needed. The extra cost for using a pump would
be approximately $1,000.00 per pump per
billing period. The savings per pump per yegr
with this peak controlled program
approximately $3(000.00 to $4,000.00. The
worst case scenario would have to occur at
least three or four times a year for ~he city
to break even on their electrical bills for
the water pumps.
RECOMMENDATION:
The recommendation is to approve the Agreement
and authorize the Mayor and City Manager to
sign the Agreements placing Water Pumphouse #4
and #5 on Peak Controlled Service.
ALTERNATIVES:
The alternatives are as follows:
Approve the Agreement authorizing the
Mayor and City Manager to sign the
Agreements.
Table this item for a specific reason.
Disapprove the recommendation.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The City has budgeted for the electrical cost
on the water pumphouses based on the General
Service rates. This budget item should have an
underrun based on the reduced demand charge
rates from the peak controlled program.
ACTION REQUIRED:
Make a motion, as part of the Consent Agenda,
approving the NSP Agreements and authorizing
the Mayor and City Manager to sign the
Agreements.
Account NO. lie Z~r72 05500 G4X)G 1/i
Electric Service Agreement
Peak Controlled
THIS AGREEMENT, Made this L7 day of )C,U[Cl[ . ,1g.,9~ by and between NORTHERN
STATES POWER COMPANY, a'Minnesola Corporallon, hereinaller called the 'Company," and
· czar or ~'i[o~ ~ . hereinafter called the
'Cuslomer, · engaged In the business et c~r co~ - um.z. .
WITNESSE'rH: Thai the parties hereto, each I.n consideration el the agreements o( the other, agree as Iollows:
1. KINO OF SERVICE: Company agrees Io supply and Customer agrees lo a~cel~ electric eewice In the Iorm el
3 Phase,.. ~ Wire, Allemaling Current at a nominal Irequenoy el 60 Hertz and al a nominal voltage el
~efl?/277vm.?~ , lot Customer's use solely lot the operallon of electrk=
equipment now Inslalled or to be Installed by Customer on Ihe property known as CZTT Or PlZO~. ~
~ p~[~ f Ioca(ed et 5500 ]~[m'~ s?. ~.~..
I~RIOR LAKE. KIIqI~OTA 55372 .
2. ANNUAL MINIMUM DEMAND CHARGE: In conslderallon el the capacity commilment by Company and ils
Investment In lacllities to serve Customer, Customer agrees that il the net demand cha~ge payments dudng any
conlracl year hereunder, In accordance wilh Ihe RATE below, amount Io less than a mlrdmum charge el
$ 202A.00 peryear, tile dllleronce between such minimum charge and said.net demand charge
payment shall be Included in the bill for the last month of said year and Cuslomer agrees to pay same as a charge
Ior service rendered.
3. TERM: This Agreement shall commence al 12:01 A.¥. on 18 FA,RCa ,19 92 . and shall
continue Ior a period ending at 12:01 A.M. 18 l,'d~Ca , ,19 97 . and il nol then lerminated by at
least slx months pdor writlen notice by eilher party, shall continue further until so lerminated.
4. RATE: Customer agrees to quality Ior and elects the rate schedule Ior pE.~ C01ft'~OLt. E~
'SLmV[CE . Customer agrees lo pay Company's eslablished rale schedule In ellecl Iro. m time Io
time in Ibis locality lot such Se~ice, the established tale schedule now In ellect being the one attached hereto.
Rale Code: ct, go4
S, TERMS AND CONDITIONS: The sewice hereunder shall be supp,ed for Customer's use subject to the
General Rules and Regulations el company on IIIo with the state regulatory commission as they now exist or may
hereafter be changed. A copy of such rules and regulations Is available from tho Company. This.agreement Is also
mJbJect Io Section(s) glA appearing under the heading 'Additional Terms and
Condillons' on the reverse side el Ihls Agreement. Cuslomer agrees Io use eleclr~cal sen,ice only as herein
slaled, and will nol assign this Agreement except upon writlen consenl el Company.
6. MINIMUM DEMAND Q.IARGE DIFFERENTIAL FOR EACH SEAS~: Company agrees that dudng the lerm el
this agreement, the minimum demand charge differential will be $4.42 per kW dudng the summer season
(June--Seplember),'and ~ per kW dudng the winler season (October-May).
7. MAXIMUM HOURS OF INTERRUPTION: Company agrees that Ihe Iotal intenlional inlen'uplions el conlrolled
demand will nol exceed. 80., hours per calendar year.
8. CONTROl. PERIOO NOTICE: Company will endeavor 1o give customer I hour(s) notice el
commencement of control period.
g. EXPECTED MAXIMUM DEMANDS: For the term el this agreement, customer's expected maximum ~
demand Is 92 kW. The expected maximum annual demand less Ihe predelen*rdned demand level
the expected maximun~ controlled demand. The customer's expected maximum GtU/3E[laCSaaffLOJ3.demand is
kW.
10. PREDETERMINED DEMAND LEVEL (PDL}: The PDL may be revised sublecl to approval by Company.
Customer may' elect either the standard or optioml arrangement as specilied below.
Standard: C. uslomer agrees Io Ilml! adJusled demand to 0 . kW dudng conlrol pedods.
Opllonah Cuslomer agrees lo reduce adjusted demand by #/A kW during conlrol periods.
Cuslome~'s PDL will be the monlhl¥ adlusled demand less Ihe agreed Io load reduclion. The PDt. In months
without a conlml period will nol be less Ihan Ihe grealest PDL ol all monlhs with a control pedod during the
preceding eleven months.
Any' cuslomer wilh generallng equlpme~ which Is operated In parallel wilh Company must comply wilh all
requirements assoclaled wilh Parallel OperalJom specllled In the General Rules and Regulations ol Company.
11. TRIAL PERIOD AND CANCELLATION CHARGE: Company agrees that the lira twelve months ol this
agreement will be a Irlal pedod. Cuslomer must noUfy' Company' In writing lo lerminale Ihis agreement dudng the
Irtal period. I! customer lerminates Ibis agreement during the ldal pedod, Customer's Peak-Conlrolled Service or
Peak-Conlrolled Time o! Day Service bills will be recalculaled using the corresponding finn tale (General Service or
General Time of Day Service). Customer will be charged the difference belween the recalculaled amount and the
ernounl charged under Ihe corresponding Peak-Controlled rale. Also, cuslomer will receive a refund for any
addiUonal charges which were assessed during Ihe Idal pedod due to customer failure Io conlrol load. A Idal
period for Peak-Conlmlled Service or Peak-Conlrolled Time o! Day Service will nol be available Io any cuslomer
Iha! has previously, received either service.
Customer will pay a cancellation charge after the twelve monlh trial pedod, It Customer lerminates this
agreement or this agreemenl Is terminated as a result ol any default ol Customer. The cancellation charge will be
Ihe difference belween the billing amounls described above, for the most recent 18 monlh$ ol Peak-Conlrolled
Servlco or Peak-Conlmlled Time ol Day Service. Cuslomer will nol receive a relund lot any addilional charges
which were assdssed during this 18 month pedod due Io cuslomer laJlure Io conlrol load.
Additionally, If at any time this agreemenl Is lerminaled In any above described manner, Customer will be
charged all inslallaUon and removal costs lot spedal equipmenl and facilllJes provided by Company lot Peak-
Conlmlled Service or Peak-Conlrolled Time o! Day Service.
12. CONTROL bY'STEM: Customer agrees !o control loads lo the In-its conlaJned in this agreement and upon
notice Imm the Company Io reduce load Io levels predelermined by' this agreement.
13. FAILURE TO CONTROL: Il In any monlh cuslomer falls !0 conlrol load Io predelermlned demandilevel when
requesled by Company, Ihe addllional charge specified in the Rules for Appllcalion o! Peak-Controlled
shall be applied Io lhe amount by which cuslomer's maximum adjusted demand during any conlrol pedod exceeds
predelermined demand. I! cuslomer Incurs three laJlures !o conlrol load Io predelermined demand level when
requested by Company, the Company resewes Ihe right lo renegotiate the predetermined demand level or
remove customer Irom Peak-Controlled Sen, ice. In a case where customer is removed Irom Peak-Conlrolled
Service, customer will be subjecl Io a cancellaUon charge spectlied In cuslomer's Elecl~ Servic. e AgreemenL
14. GENERATING CUSTOMER CHARGE: Customer choosing Ihe Optional Predetermined Demand Level
agrees Io pay Company' ti/& per nx~h Ior additional metering and billing expenses relaled Io the use
customer-operaled generallng equipment lo reduce adJusled demand during conlrol periods, as described in the
Rules Ior Application ol Peak-Controlled Service.
NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY
CIT~ OF PRIOR LA~
EI~ J. JORNSON DAY[i) J. UI~ .~ I.~-.ANDREN
Title S.E. REOZOti ~[,~;'t'alC &&Rlqrrlll~ ~ · Title _C.!TI' ~P:p., - ~Yom
Stoas ]t. Mills'art _
Mmketlng Representative
G/27/~9
Account No. ur PXCZ 00400 0000 1§
Electric Service Agreement
Peak Controlled
THIS AGREEMENT, Made Ihls 17 day of HA.RCa ,1992. by and between NORTHERN
STATES POWER COMPANY, a Minnesola Corporalion, hereinalter called Ihe 'Company,' and
¢1;TY OF PR[OR T.Ar~_ , hereinafter called the
· Customer, · engaged In the business el CITY co~ - u'~.~. .
WlTNESSETH: Thai the parties h'erelo, each .1~ consideration of the agreements el the other, agree as Iollows:
1. KIND OF SERVICE: Company agrees lo supply and Cuslomer agrees lo acoel~l electflc service In Ihe Iorm o!
3 Phase, 4 Wire, Altemallng Current at a nominal frequency o! 60 Hertz and at a nominal voltage of
ARO¥1277VI1LTR . lor Customer's use solely for tho operation el electrio
equipment now Inslalled or Io be inslalled by Cuslomer on the property known as C[TY OF PE:I:OR LAKE
IG'LL 1'I/I~ f Ioca[ed al 400 SI~qI, iER ST. S.lr.. ,
PR/OR T~I~. M/HNESOTA 5.5372 .
2. ANNUAL MINIMUM DEMAND CHARGE: In consideration of the capaclly commitment by Company and Ils
Investment In laclllUes to serve Customer, Customer agrees that il the net demand charge payments during any
contract year hereunder, In accordance with the RATE below, amount lo less than a rrdnimum charge ol
$187<),(~ per year, the dilference between such minimum charge and said.net demand charge
payment shall be incJuded in the bill lot lira last month of said year and Customer agrees to pay same as a charge
lot seflflce rendered.
3. TERM: This Agreement shall commence at 12:01 A.I~I. on 18 tqA-qCH ,19 92 . and shall
continue lot a period ending al 12:01 A.M. t8 HARCH ,19~7 , and il not then lermlnated by at
least six monlhs pflor writlen notice by either party, shall conUnuo further until so leflTdnaled.
4. RATE: Customer agrees to qualily lot and elects the rate schedule lot pEAl: ;O1[qTROLLED
'SERV:[C~. . Cuslomer agrees Io pay company's eslablished tale schedule In elfecl Imm time lo
time in this Jocalily lot such Service, the eslablished tale schedule now In ellect being the one attached hereto.
Rate code: GT004
5. TERMS AND CONDITIONS: The service hereunder shall be supplied lot Customer's use subject to the
General Rules and Regulations of Company on file with the state regulatory commission as they now exist or may
hereafter be changed. A copy of such fides and regulations Is available Irom the Company. This.agreement Is also
subject Io Section(s) #IA appearing under the heading 'Additional Terms and
Condillons' on the reverse side of this Agreement. Cuslomer agrees Io use electrical sen;ice only as herein
stated, and will not assign this Agreemenl except upon writlen consent of company.
6. MINIMUM DEMAND ~HARGE DIFFERENTIAL FOR EACH SEASON: Company agrees that during the lerm el
Ihls agreement, the minimum demand charge dillerenUal will be ~4.42 per kW during the summer season
(June-Seplember),' and ~L pa' kW during the winter season (October-May).
7. MAXIMUM HOURS OF INTERRUPTION: Company agrees that Ihe total inlenlioflal interruplions el controlled
demand will nol exceed 80 hours per calendar year.
8. CONTROL PERIOD NOTICE: Company will endeavor to give customer I hour(s) nolice el
commencement of control period.
9. EXPECTED MAXIMUM DEMANDS: Fro' the term of this agreement, cuslomef's expected maximum anflu~
demand Is 85 kW. The expected maximum annual demand less Ihe predetermined demand level Is
tho expected maximum controlled demef . The customer's expected maximum sumflMCS an.demand is
85 kW.
10. PREDETERMINED DEMAND LEVEL (PDL): The PDL may be revised ~ lo approval by Company.
Customer may' elect eilher the slandm'd or oplional arrangement as sped,ed below.
Standard: Customer agrees to limit adlusted demand to, 0 kW dudng control periods. '
Opllonal: Customer agrees to reduce adjusted demand by. "/& kW dudng control pedods.
Cuslomer's PDL will be the n~onlhly adlusled demand less Ihe agreed Io load reduction. The PDL In months
without a control period will not be less than tile greatest PDL ol all months with a control period during the
prec~ding eleven months.
Any customer with generalJng equipment which Is operated In paralel with Company must comply wilh all
requirements associated with Parallel Operations specllled in tile General Rules and Regulations ol Company.
11. TRIAL PERIOD AND CANCF[t&TION CHARGE: Company ~grees that the first twelve monlhs ol this
agreemenl will be a Irial period. Customer must notify Company In wriling Io lerminale Ihis agreement during the
trial period. II customer terminates this agreement during the trial pertod, Customers Peak-Controlled Service or
Peak-Controllod Time o! Day Service bills will be recalculated using the co~espondlng limt tale (General SeMce or
General Time ol Day Service). Customer will be charged the difference behveen Ihe recalculated amount and the
amounl charged under Ihe corresponding Peak-Conlrolled rale. Also, customer will receive a relund lot any
additional charges which were assessed during the trial period due to customer lallure to control toad. A trial
period Ior Peak-Controlled 8e~ce or Peak-Controlled Time ol Day Service will not be available to any customer
Ihal has previously received either sen~tce.
Customer will pay a cancellal]on change alter the twelve month ldal pedod, il Cuslomer terminates this
agreement or this agreement Is tem~lnated as a result ol any de{ault ol Customer. The canoellation charge will be
the dillerence belween the billing amounls described above, for lhe most recent 18 months ol Peak-Controlled
Servico or Peak-Conlrolled Time ol Day Service. Cuslomer will nol receive a relund lot any additional charges
which were assdssed during this 18 monlh pedod due Io cuslomer lailure Io conlrol load.
Additionally, II at any lime this agreement Is terminated in any above described manner, Customer will be
charged all Installation and removal costs lot special equipment and lacilities provided by Company lot Peak-
Controlled Service or Peak-Conlrolled Time ol Day Service.
12. CONTROL SYSTEM: Customer agrees to control toads to the limits contained In this agreement and upon
notice Irom the Company to reduce load to levels predetermined by this agreement.
13. FAILURE TO CONTROL: II In any month customer falls !o control load Io predetermined demandilevel when
requested by company, Ihe adclilional charge specified In lhe Rules lor Application ol Peak-Controll~:l Service
shall be applied to the amount by which customer's maximum adlusted demand during any control period exceeds
predelermined demand. I! cuslomer Incurs Ihree failures Io conlrol load Io predelermined demand level when
requested by company, the Company reserves the righl to renegoliate the predetermined demand level or
remove customer Irom Peak-Conl~olled Se~ce. In a case where cuslomer Is removed Irom Peak-Controlled
Service, customer will be subject to a cancellation charge specified In customer's Electric Servlc. e Agreement.
14. GENERATING CUSTOMER CHARGE: Customer choosing Ihe Opllonal Predelermlned Demand Level
agrees to pay Company #/A per month Ior additional metering and billing expenses related to the use of
customer-operated generating equipment to reduce adjusted demand during control periods, as described in the
Rules for Appllcalion o! Peak-Conts)lled Se~ce.
NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY Cl:'r~ oF PRZOR [J~
ED~IARD J. JOBNSOH D&VI~ J. UI~ACH~ . I~E ANDKEN
Tille S.l~. RE~IOll ELECTRIC llddEET:l[NG HALSA. GER . Title . CIl'Y. N.4~ - IqAYOR
Stev~l= D, #illa~rt
Mmketing Represenlalive
~27/80
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
Water Pumps, Pk. Cont. Elec. $$$ Saved
Ney,, ,..,~.,r-. E,ec.
Baaed on 1991 bill period.
Pie Chart la not FCA,
POSSIBLE ANNUAL SAVINGS · $8836,00
5 YEAR ENTENDED SAVINGS · $44180.00
HERITAGE COMMUNITY
1891 1991
CONSENT AGENDA:
REQUESTED BY :
SUBJECT MATTER:
DATE:
3 (g)
RALPH TESCHNER, FINANCE DIRECTOR
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION 92-11
REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH REIMBURSEMENT BOND
REGULATIONS UNDER THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE
MARCH 16, 1992
INTRODUCTION:
BACKGROUND:
Cities must establish a process and format, to
issue bonds for previously paid. project
expenditures as per new regulations instituted
by the Internal Revenue Service. Prior Lake's
bond counsel, Briggs & Morgan, has suggested
that these rules be incorporated into the
attached resolution for purpose of
compliance.
On January 30, 1992 the IRS published its
final regulations with respect to what it
refers to as "reimbursement bonds". These are
bond issues whose proceeds will be used to
reimburse the issuer for a project expenditure
which it paid before the actual date of
closing and settlement on those bonds. The
rules apply to all bonds issued after March 2,
1992.
They basically apply to all routine tax exempt
munlcipal borrowings. The intent here is to
control what the Internal Revenue Service
perceives to be an inordinate number of
payback bond issues by cities. The IRS
contends that cities are taking advantage of
their borrowing authority for cost recovery of
expenses that may precede an actual project by
a significant amount of time.
Their belief is that a substantial portion of
such costs are routine in nature and should be
funded as such and therefore should not
require bonding. The control factor is for
the IRS to limit how far back Cities may pick
up a qualified expenditure for bonding
reimbursement.
DISCUSSION:
Program compliance would involve establishing
procedures revolving around what is known as a
-- ' If .
Declaration of Official Intent This simply
states that on or before the date a project
expenditure is to be paid, the City declares a
reasonable intention and expectation to
reimburse itself from the proceeds of a future
borrowing. The kicker is that the City must
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
issue bonds and make the repayment within one
year of the initial payment. If not, the
expense becomes ineligible for payback.
The key components of the Declaration of
Official Intent are outlined below:
1.) Official intent declarations are one-time
declaratlons which cover an entire project.
2.) Declaration must contain a description
of the anticipated project.
3.) Declaration must state the reasonable
intent of the ~ity for reimbursement from
a future bond issue.
4.) Declaration must state the maximum amount
of bonds expected to be issued.
5.) Declaration must contain a statement that
the City has no other sources of funds
reserved, allocated or available for the
project.
A key exception to the rules are for such
preliminary expenditures defined as surveying,
engineering, soil testing, etc, which are
necessary to ascertaining project feasibility.
From a practical standpoint, Prior Lake rarely
incurs any of these capital expenditures other
than the preliminary sort. In fact, only one
project in the past would have qualified under
these regulations. Most of the time we bond at
a very early stage with respect to an
improvement project. The reason being is that
we normally do not have the financial
flexibility of excess construction funds on
hand prior to bonding.
Since these regulations DO NOT apply to bond
proceeds used to make direct payment of
roject costs after bonding, for the most part
t will be business as usual. However, in the
isolated case where it may become necessary to
expend from other funds on a preliminary
basis, it is important that the mechanics are
in place to avoid a situation of
non-compliance.
In summary, the resolution is a one time
designation of procedures to be followed in
the event the City incurs those expenditure
ty?es ~hat qualify for reimbursement
stipulation. While a Declaration of Official
Intent shall be filed for each improvement
project that requires bonding as a safeguard.
RECOMMENDATION:
Attached to your agenda material are two
forms of documentation which will implement
the regulation requirements for reimbursement
bonds. They are Resolution 92-11 Establishing
Procedures Relating to Compliance With
ACTION REQUIRED:
Reimbursement Bond Regulations and a standard
Declaration of Official Intent. Staff would
recommend that the Council approve both
forms.
Motion by the Council as part of the Consent
Agenda to approve Resolution 92-11 Establish-
in~ Procedures Relating to. Compliance With
Relmbursement Bond Regulations Under the
Internal Revenue Code and to adopt the
Declaration of Official Intent format.
HERITAGE
1891
COMMUNITY
1991
RESOLUTION 92-11
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES RELATING TO
COMPLIANCE WITH REIMBURSEMENT BOND REGULATIONS
UNDER THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE
MOTION BY:
SECONDED BY
WHEREAS, the Internal Revenue Service has issued final Treasury
Regulations Section 1.103-18 dealing with reimbursement bond
proceeds, which would include those proceeds of the City's bonds
to be used to reimburse the City for any project expendlture paid
by the City prior to the time of the issuance of those bonds; and
WHEREAS, the Regulations generally require that the City make a
prior declaration of its official intent to reimburse itself for
such prior expenditures out of the proceeds of subsequent bond
issues and that the expenditure be a capital expenditure; and
WHEREAS, the actual bonding and reimbursement allocation shall
be made from the proceeds of such bonds within one year of the
payment of the expenditure or not later than one year after the
project has been placed in service; and
WHEREAS, the City's bond counsel Briggs and Morgan has advised
the City that the Regulations do not apply to payments of City
project costs first made from bond proceeds; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to comply with the Regulations and to
establish certain procedures to ensure compliance.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Mayor and City Council that
the City Finance Director is hereby authorized to make the City's
Official Intent Declarations or to delegate from time to time
that responsibility to other appropriate employees.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT, each Declaration shall comply with
the requirements of the Regulations and are to include the
following:
(a) Each Declaration shall be made on or before the date the
City pays the applicable ~roject cost and shall state
that the City reasonably intends and expects to reimburse
itself with the proceeds of a future borrowing.
(b) Each Declaration shall specifically contain the following
statement: "This Declaration is a Declaration of Official
intent under Treasury Regulations Section 1.103-18."
(c) Each Declaration shall contain a project description and
shall identify the particular fund from which the expend-
iture to be reimbursed is paid.
(d) Each Declaration shall also contain a statement of the
maximum principal amount of debt expected to be issued
for the project.
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
(e) Each Declaration shall be made available for public
inspection at Prior Lake City Hall during normal business
hours.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT, the Finance Director shall make the
appropriate reimbursement allocations, being generally the
transfer of the bond proceeds to reimburse the source of
temporary financing used by the City to make payment of the prior
expenditure.
Passed and adopted this 16th day of March , 1992.
YES NO
Andren
Fitzgerald
Kedrowski
Scott
White
Andren
Fitzgerald
Kedrowski
Scott
White
(Seal)
David J. Unmacht
City Manager
City of Prior Lake
HERITAGE COMMUNITY
1891 1991
'INN E~O
DECLARATION OF OFFICIAL INTENT
The undersigned, being the duly appointed and acting City
Finance Director of the City of Prior Lake, Minnesota has been
and is on the date hereof duly authorized by the Prior Lake City
Council to make and execute this Declaration of Official Intent.
Furthermore the undersigned, pursuant to Treasury Regulations
Section 1.103-18 under the Internal Revenue Code hereby states
and certifies the following:
1.) The improvement project to which this Declaration relates
is generally described as follows:
2.) The specific fund or account of the city from which the
expenditure to be reimbursed will be paid is as follows:
3.) The maximum principal amount of the debt expected to be
issued by the City to which the Declaration relates is on
the date hereof reasonably estimated to be $ .
Each of the expenditures is a capital expenditure as
described in the Regulations.
4.) The City intends and reasonably expects to reimburse
itself for the payment of the expenditures out of the
proceeds of bonds issued after the date of payment of the
expenditures.
5.) As of the date hereof, there are no sources of City funds
which have been reserved or are reasonably expected to be
made available or allocated or otherwise set aside to
provide permanent financing for the above referenced
expenditures.
6.) This Declaration shall be made an official part of the
records available for inspection by the general public at
City Hall during regular business hours of from 8:00 A.M.
to 4:30 P.M. Monday thru Friday.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Declaration
and placed it on file in the official City records this day
of , 19 .
City Finance DireCtor
City of Prior Lake, Minnesota
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
HERITAGE COMM
1891 1991
AGENDA NUMBER:
PREPARED BY:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
3 (h)
BRUCE LONEY, ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY
MAPPING FOR PROPOSED BUSINESS OFFICE PARK
LAKEFRONT PARK
MARCH 16, 1992
AND
AND
INTRODUCTION:
BACKGROUND:
The purpose of this Agenda item is to consider
the authorization of aerial photography and
mapping service work for the proposed business
office park and Lakefront Park areas.
A City Council workshop was held on October 9,
1991 on the proposed business office park
south of the existing industrial park and CSAH
21. Attendants to this workshop heard
presentations from staff and financial
consultant, Ed Tschida, on the options and
strategies for development of business office
park in this area. Discussion at this meeting
centered on developing the first phase of the
proposed business office park located in
Section 1 which is within the City limits.
Staff did provide cost estimates for the
installation of sanitary sewer, watermain,
storm sewer and street improvements to the
various alternatives described in the business
office park report. Staff mentioned at the
workshop that the business office park is
planned to include area in Section 12 which is
currently in Spring Lake Township and the
Orderly Annexation Area. The proposed first
phase of the business office park has drainage
from Section 12 which flows through the
development.
The proposed business office park area in
Section 1 and 12 is located between the
Markley Lake and Cleary Lake drainage areas.
The City has 2 foot contour maps for Section 1
and only 10 foot USGS contour maps for Section
12. The land area in Section 12 is generally
flat in topography and the ten (10) foot
contour map does not provide enough accuracy
to adequately define the drainage areas for
analyzing the drainage flows in this area.
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
A two(2) foot contour map would enable staff
to better analyze the drainage needs for the
proposed first phase and ultimate full
development of the business office park.
This map will also be useful in analyzing the
drainage needs for the upcoming CSAH 21 road
project and for the development of Section 12
if this area is ever annexed into the city of
Prior Lake. This map will be a planimetric
(plan view) map as well which will depict the
roads, buildings, fences, swamps, tree
outlines, etc., to the extent that these
features are visible on the aerial
photography.
Included in the quoted proposal is the cost to
provide aerial photography and planimetric
mapping for the Lakefront Park area. This map
will provide the City a scale drawing (1 inch
= 100 feet scale) showing the locations of the
recently improved trails, sports facilities,
swamps, tree outlines, fences and other
features that are visible on the aerial
photography. This map will assist the Parks
department in planning the future development
of this park. An additional map at a smaller
scale can be provided at a cost of $35.00
each. Staff recommends that a 1 inch = 200
foot drawing also be acquired for planning and
design purposes.
The two proposals received from companies
performing aerial photography and mapping work
are summarized as follows:
COMPANY
SEC. 12 LAKEFRONT
(640 AC.) (160 AC.)
1.) HORIZONS, INC.
2.) MARTINEZ, CORP.
$3,970.00 $1,040.00
$4,225.00 $1,085.00
This described work was authorized by City
Council on November 4, 1991 and was to be
financed from the 1991 Contingent Reserve.
Much of the original Council Agenda
Report information is contained in this
Agenda Report and attached as Exhibit A is the
November 4, 1991 Council minutes approving a
motion which authorizes the work. The heavy
snowfalls during the months of October and
November, 1991 prevented the aerial
photography work from bein~ completed. The
1991 Contingent Reserve monies cannot be used
as the 1991 financial year has been closed as
DISCUSSION:
of March 1, 1992. Staff had hoped that a
winter thaw would have melted enough snow such
that the aerial photography work could have
been completed in December of 1991. The snow
cover was still too heavy for accurate mapping
of elevations, thus the work was not done in
1991. The 1992 budget was in process at this
time and staff did not include this work in
the budget since a ?urc~ase order was issued
already and a possibility existed that the
work could be completed in 1991.
The proposed aerial photography and
planimetric/topographic map work will assist
the Engineering department in estimating the
drainage needs and associated costs for the
proposed first phase of the business office
park and for the proposed CSAH 21 project.
Storm sewer and ponding costs have been
estimated without the benefit of a two (2)
foot contour map which can delineate the
drainage areas more accurately. Aerial
photography is flown in late fall or early
spring ~n order to acquire the ground
elevation data when the leaves are not on the
trees.
The proposed aerial photography and
planimetrlc map for Lakefront Park will
provide the City with an accurate map showing
the features of the park and assist in the
future planning of this Park's development.
The City has a two (2) foot contour map for
the Lakefront Park area, however, this map was
done before the improvements such as sports
facilities, trails, hockey rinks, park
buildings were completed in the park.
The cost of producing maps for large areas
such as the 640 acres and 160 acres for
Section 12 and Lakefront Park, respectively,
can be done more cost effectively by aerial
photography than by manually surveying the
areas.
ALTERNATIVES:
The alternatives are as follows:
Approve a motion to authorize the aerial
photography and mapping work for Section
12 and Lakefront Park as outlined in the
attached proposal to Horizons, Inc. in
the amount of $5,010.00.
Approve a motion to authorize the aerial
photography and mapping work for either
Section 12 or Lakefront Park
in the amount of $3,970.00 or
respectively.
separately
$1,040.00,
3. Do not authorize the aerial photography
and mapping work.
4. Table this item for a specific reason.
RECOMMENDATION:
The recommendation is to authorize Horizons,
Inc. to perform the aerial photography and
mapping work for Section 12 and Lakefront Park
to assist in the future planning of these
areas.
BUDGET IMPACT:
This study was not budgeted. Financing of the
work would be from contingent reserve. The
current balance in contingent reserve is
$100,000.00.
ACTION REQUIRED:
As part of the Consent Agenda, make a motion
to authorize the aerial photography and
mapping service work to be done by Horizons,
Inc. for Section 12 and Lakefront Park areas
and funding of this work to be from contingent
reserve.
HERITAGE COMMUNITY
1891 1991
EXHIBIT "A"
MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL
November 4, 1991
The Common Council of the City of Prior Lake met in regular
session on Monday, November 4, 1991 at 7:30 p.m. in the City
Council Chambers. Present were Mayor Andren, Councilmembers
Fitzgerald, Larson, Scott, White, City Manager Unmacht, Assistant
City Manager Schmudlach, City Attorney Kessel and Recording
Secretary Birch.
Mayor Andren called the meeting to order and asked everyone to
rise for the pledge of allegiance.
The minutes of the October 21, 1991 Council meeting were reviewed
by Council.
MOTION MADE BY WHITE, SECONDED BY LARSON, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES
AS SUBMITTED.
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Andren, Fitzgerald, Larson, and White,
the motion carried. Scott abstained due to being out of town
during the meeting.
The next order of business was approval of the Consent Agenda as
follows:
a)
b)
,c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
Consider Approval of Invoices To Be Paid
Consider Approval of Eurasian Watermilfoil
With DNR
Consider Approval of Woodview Tax Abatement
Consider Approval of Joint Prosecution
Expenses
Yrtvo£ce~
Agreement
~oodv i e~
Agreement Tax
Consider Approval for Final Payment on Project 91-14, P~oJec.
Lakefront Park Trail Improvements Lake/~zor~
Consider Approval of Aerial Photography and Mapping for
Proposed Business Office Park and Lakefront Park
Consider Approval of Participation in the Southwest
Metro Drug Task Force
MOTION MADE BY WHITE,
AGENDA ITEMS (a) THRU (g).
Upon a vote taken, ayes by Andren, Fitzgerald, Larson,
White, the motion passed unanimously.
The next order of business was: First Consideration of
Shoreland Management Ordinance Amendments 91-12 thru 91-14.
SECONDED BY SCOTT, TO APPROVE CONSENT £o~ce
Scott and
Selected
4629 Dakota St. S,E.. Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
HERITAGE COMMUNITY
1891 1991
CONSENT AGENDA:
PREPARED BY:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
HORST GRASER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF REGISTERED LAND
FOR JOHN MAHONEY
MARCH 16, 1992
SURVEY
INTRODUCTION:
DISCUSSION:
ALTERNATIVES:
RECOMMENDATION:
ACTION REQUIRED:
Mr. John Mahoney, the applicant, has
petitioned the City Council to approve a
registered land survey ( the number to be
assigned upon filing with County Registrar) in
accordance with Section 6-8-1 (attached), of
the Prior Lake Subdivision Ordinance.
The applicant has constructed a two family
home at 4065 Pleasant Street and intends to
convey each unit in fee simple title rather
than the entire building and lot. To
accomplish the sale of each unit requires the
division of the entire parcel along the common
wall of the structure resulting in Tracts A
and B (see attached Registered Land Survey).
The applicant initially tried to divide the
registered parcel via a meets and bounds
description. However, the County Examiner of
Titles rejected the split and required a
registered land survey whereby eliminating two
lengthy legal descriptions.
Approve the Registered Land Survey
presented.
Deny the Registered Land Survey.
Continue the item for more information.
as
Alternative 1.
Motion as part of the consent
approve Registered Land Survey
be assigned by County Registrar).
agenda to
(number to
4629 Dakota St. S.E, Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO.__
SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Sou~ I~ne of Pleasant A,~flue
S S9o 29 ' Z6' E
-.-I0000---
'- --46 ?o -
TRACT
- 5.~ $0-
4.] 05 .... 56 ~5--
--- I00 O0 .....
N89~ zg'26'W
TRACT A
Avenue a~so ~e Mm'th ~ of SECOND
ADDITION TO LAK£$1D~.ESTATES
o 30 6O
SCALE IN FEET
D~K)Iel L/~ in~ x 14 ~ltCh ~ron
The norm line of SECOND ADDITION TO
LAKES/DE ESTATES,~It~_
!
REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO. ,,
SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
By:
S=ott do~ty iceasure£ ry: =~ ~t/
RLGISIRAh OF IlTLh'
I nereoy certify rna% this lnstr~;ent was filed in the cf:'~ze ~! the Registrar of rifles i~r r=~orz ~:. tn~ a~,
, 19 at o'cicca, .M., anG =elf recorded ds bocuz,ent No.
File Volu~,e Page.
Paul ~. ~ermerskircnen, Registrar of title&
Scott County, Minnesota
Certifica%e
by:
SCOTT CCUNTY SURVE)OR:
Purauant to Chapter 7, Minnesota Laws of 197~, this ~egistered Land Survey ~a$ been approved tn2s
of , 1992. ·
Scott County S~rveyor By:
Volley Survevino Co..PA
C~APTER 8
REGISTERED LAND SURVEYS
Section:
6-8-1:
6-8-1:
Registered Land Surveys
REGISTERED LAND SURVEYS: All registered land
surveys shall be presented to the City Council in
the form of a final plat to be processed in
accordance with standards set forth in this chapter
for final plats. Registered land surveys shall
only show existing property lines and easements and
other existing features as may be appropriate.
PRIOR LAKE
AMATUER BASEBALL
ASSOCIATION
3 March 1992
John Murray
16411 Mandan Ave. S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372
City of Prior Lake
Attn: Mr. David Unmacht, City Manager
4629 Dakota Street SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
Dear Mr. Unmacht:
The Jays and the Mudcats, Prior Lake's amateur baseball teams, are getting ready for
another exciting season. The Jays will again compete in the Cannon Valley League against
the strongest Class B teams in the state. The Mudcats begin their second season as a
Class C team in the always tough DRS League.
Once again, the Prior Lake Amateur Baseball Association would like to apply for a beer
license in order to sell beer at all home games. We are in the process of finalizing both the
Jays and the Mudcats home schedules, and I will be sending the final schedules to
Bill Mangan as in prior years. I anticipate a total of 32 home games, the same as last year,
and am including a check in the amount of $160 ($5 per game). The lb'st home game will
be April 26th and the season will end by August 16th. Again this year we will be obtaining
the required insurance, through Speiker and Company. I hope the above information is
sufficient for a favorable response to our beer license request.
The Jays and the Mudcats would like to thank the City Council and the City Administration
for their past support. We hope you can join us at Memorial Park to see the Prior Lake
amateur baseball teams in action. A special thanks to Bill Mangan and the Parks and
Recreation Department for providing and maintaining the finest field in the state for our
home games.
Sincerely,
Prior Lake Baseball Association
Treasurer
INTER-OFFICE MEMO
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Dave Unmac~t/City Manager
Laurie Davis/License Clerk
March 6, 1992
3.2 Beer Permit for Prior Lake Jay's Baseball Association
Attached is a letter from the Prior Lake Jay's Baseball
Association requesting a 3.2 Beer Permit for the 1992 baseball
season (April 26th through August 16th). Also attached is a
receipt for $160.00 and the 3.2 beer permit.
Insurance will be through Speiker and Company and is currently in
the process as is the game schedule.
Please consider approval on the March 16, 1992 Council Agenda.
HERITAGE COMMUNITY
1891 1991
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Ralph Teschner, Finance Director
DATE: March 6, 1992
RE: March 1, 1992 Treasurer's Report
02/1/92
FUNDS BALANCE RECEIPTS DISBURSEMENTS
General 1,483.55 215,042.41 230,744.42
Sewer & Water (25,611.90) 167,660.22 70,315.60
Capital Park 26,069.05 2,100.00 0.00
Debt Service 67,546.54 99,934.97 157,266.76
Construction 3,001.76 10,699.29 3,862.44
Tax Increment 33,591.41 81.59 0.00
Equip. Acquis. 18,857.80 41.38 17,409.00
Trunk Reserve 17,123.69 2,143.12 0.00
03/1/92
BALANCE
(14,218.46)
71,732.72
28,169.05
10,214.75
9,838.61
33,673.00
1,490.18
19,266.81
INVESTMENTS
1,200,000.00
785,980.16
5,594,000.00
297,000.00
325,000.00
TOTAL 142,061.90 497,702.98 479,598.22 160,166.66 8,201,980.16
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
HERITAGE COMMUNITY
1891 1991
"AP01CC"
AGENDA NUMBER:
PREPARED BY:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
6
DEB GARROSS, ASSISTANT CITY PLANNER
CONSIDER ADMINISTRATIVE PLAT AND VARIANCE
APPLICATION FOR JEANNIE ROBBINS & ERIC DAVIS
MARCH 16, 1992
INTRODUCTION:
BACKGROUND:
The Planning Department has received
administrative land division and variance
applications from Jeannie Robbins and Eric
Davis of 2950 Terrace Circle, Prior Lake. The
applicants propose to divide Lot 6, Block 2,
North Shore Crest and add each half to
adjacent Lots 5 and 7. See attached survey
reduction for reference to this issue. The
applications have been filed pursuant to
Section 6-1-3: Administrative Land Division
process, outlined in Prior Lake Subdivision
Ordinance 87-10. A variance application has
been filed with the administrative land
division requesting a fifteen foot front lot
width variance for each proposed tract. The
required front yard lot width is ninety feet.
The proposed lot width is seventy-five feet,
which requires a fifteen foot, lot width
variance for Tracts A and B.
The subject site contains three fifty foot
wide lots that are approximately three hundred
feet long containing fifteen thousand square
feet each. Lots 6 and 7 are developed with
existing cabins, sheds and a garage. A cabin
has been removed from Lot 5, which is
currently vacant. The site is relatively
flat, with the exception of a steep bluff
located adjacent to the lakeshore. The
neighborhood is developed along the shoreline
with a mixture of cabins and single family
homes. There is a tract of land located north
of the subject site that is currently vacant
and will likely be subdivided into single
family lots within the next five years. The
subject site contains limited tree cover
located in the vicinity of the bluff and
surrounding the cabins.
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
DISCUSSION:
This application is similar to the "Hedberg"
property, where three substandard lots were
combined to create two lots, for the purposes
of building two single family homes. The
"Hedberg" site was located within the plat of
Red Oaks. In that situation the Council found
that it was reasonable to issue a variance
under circumstances where the density of homes
is proposed to be reduced and the size of
substandard lots, increased. The variance
process serves as an interum measure to meet
the objectives of the shoreland management
ordinance and results in lots that are
consisent with the character of the
neighborhood.
The existing lots are each of record and are
large enough in area and width to be eligible
for a building permit. The applicants desire
to create two lots that contain 22,500 and
22,966 square feet. It is the intent to
remove the existing structures on the tracts
in order to build two new, single family
homes. The proposed tracts are large enough
to accommodate new structures built compliant
with setback requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance.
Staff has reviewed this application and
submitted the proposal to the DNR, utility
companies, and neighbors within one hundred
feet of the subject site. The DNR has no
objection to the lot split and variances as
requested, provided that all existing
structures on the lots be removed. See
attached letter from Joe Richter, dated March
4, 1992. It should be noted that there is no
statutory authority for the DNR to have cabins
removed. The Prior Lake Zoning Ordinance
permits only one principle structure per lot.
Staff recommeds that all non-conforming
buildings be removed and that the applicant be
advised that only one principle
structure will be permitted on each tract.
No comments have been received by the public
on the proposed application. Utility
companies that responded to the proposal
indicated that they had no objection to the
subdivision as proposed.
The Engineering Department indicated that the
existing service lines to the cabin on Lot 6,
encroach onto proposed Tract A. The
recommendation from the Engineering Department
is that the lines be abandoned and new lines
installed, entirely on Tract B. An
alternative would be to provide an easement
over Tract A for the existing lines. There
are no dedicated easements on site, therefore
the Engineering Department recommends that a
five foot drainage and utilit~ easement be
granted to the City as a condition of approval
of the subdivision. One additional note is
that the driveway for the cabin on Lot 4,
Block 2, North Shore Crest, encroaches upon
the west side property line of proposed Tract
A. The applicant should consider granting an
easement to the owner of Lot 4, for driveway
access or require that the driveway be
relocated entirely upon Lot 4.
COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN IMPACT:
The Comprehensive Plan indicates low density
residential land use for this area.
Therefore, the application has no impact with
respect to the plan and is consistent with the
Land Use Plan.
ALTERNATIVES:
Approve the administrative land division
and variance as requested.
Table the item for further discussion.
Deny the application for specific
reasons.
RECOMMENDATION:
The recommendation from staff is to a~prove
the administrative land division and variances
subject to the following conditions:
Ail existing non-conforming buildings on
site be removed.
A utility easement be granted for service
lines to Tract B, that encroach over
Tract A or; the lines be abandoned and
new lines installed entirely on Tract B,
at the expense of the applicant.
Five foot drainage and utility easements
be granted adjacent to all boundaries of
each Tract, as required by the City
Engineer.
The applicant grant an easement to the
owner of adjacent Lot 4, for driveway
access or re.q~.ire that the driveway be
relocated entirely upon Lot 4.
The rational for granting approval is that the
proposed tracts contain three existing lots of
record, each of which, could be developed with
ACTION REQUIRED:
a single family home. The subdivision creates
larger tracts and will result in larger
lakeshore lots, which is a fundamental
objective of the shoreland management
ordinance. The variance can be ~ustified in
this case because the applicant Ks creating
two large lots out of three existing legal
non-conforming lots. The variance and
subdivision observe the spirit and intent of
the shoreland regulations and will not be
contrary to the public health, safety, welfare
or compromise the adjacent neighborhood.
Depends upon the outcome of Council
discussion. If it is the intent of the
Council to approve the administrative land
division and fifteen foot front lot width
variances for each tract, a separate motion
for each approval is requested.
"SBLI~"
HItINI~IVE I2t~) DIVISI~
API~X~XC~ FOISt
SUBMISSION RBQUIREMENTS: A. Cc~leted application form and Property Identification Number (PID).
B. Cc~lete Legal description of existln9 and p~oposed parcels.
C. ~ilin9 f~.
D. Survey prepared by a qualified person who ts a registered lamt
surveyor in tl~ State of Minnesota.
E. 15 copies of the application, survey and supporting data ar~ i set
reduced to 11" X 17".
F. Total square footage and or acreage of existing and proposed parcels.
G. Names and addresses of owners who c~n property contiguous to the
subject site.
GNLY ~ APPLICATIC~ SHALL BE ACXiEPTED FOR REVI~;.
To the best of "N kn~ledge the information presented on this form is correct.
In addition, I have read Section 6-1-3 of the Prior Lake Subdivision Ordinance
which specifies the requirements and procedures for Administrative Plats.
agree to provide information and follc~ the procedures an outlined.
rote'
Date
TglS SBCTI~ TO BE FILLED IN BY THE KANND~ DIRECTOR
DISPOSITION OF APt%ICATION: AP~ DS~IED
c~ ~~. (~,)
(I)NDITIONS:
.' 12~"~ OF HEARX~
Signature of the Planni.~ Director Date
CITY Ot· PKIOR LAKE
APPLIO~TION FOR ~
~r~s~
~ of ~ership: F~ ~ntra~
~~/~n~ra~o~ ~
~o~k Phone:
~ Phone:
,~ork Phone:,
Purchase ~j reagent
Phone:_
isting use
of Property:
Proposed Use
of Proper y:
Leg~ ~scri~ion
of Vari~
vari ce
Present Zoning :~
Has the applicant pre~iously sought to plat, rezone, obtain a variance
use permit on the subject site or any part of it? Yes ~ No
What was requested:
When: Disposition:
or conditional
Describe the type of improvements proposed: ........ -. - _: :
s3t~ISS~ON REO~~:
fA)Completed application form. (B)Filing fee. (C)Property Survey. (D)Certified from
abstract firm, names and addresses of property {miners within 100 feet of the
exterior boundaries of the subject property. (E)Cc~plete legal description &
Property Identification Number (PID). (F)Deed restrictions or private covenants, if
applicable. (G)A parcel map at 1"-20'-50' showing: The site develo~ent plan,
buildings: parking, loading, access, surface drainage, landscaping and utility
service.
ONLY COMPLETE APPLICATIONS S{ALL BE REVI~ BY THE PLANNING CCMMISSION.
To the best of my kn(~ledge the information presented on this form is correct. In
addition, I ~ave read Section 7.6 of the Prior Lake Zoning Ordinance which specifies
procedures. I agree_to provide~formation and;ollow the
procedures as outlined in
-A~licants Si~hature / . - ' '
THIS SPA~ IS ~0 BE FILLfD OUT BY THE PLANNING DIP4~'ff)R
PLANNING ~ISSION
CITY COUNCIL APPEAL
GO~DITIONS ..
Signature of the Plami~Director Date
Wiley Surveyin~ Co., RA.
i'
PHONE NO.
STATE OF
EPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
METRO WATERS - 1200 WARNER ROAD, ST. PAUL, MN 55106
772-7910 roLE NO.
March 4, 1992
Deb Gaross, Assistant City Planner
City of Prior Lake
4629 Dakota Street S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE:
VARIANCE REQUEST, LOT SUBDIVISION, JEANNE ROBINS, PRIOR LAKE
(70-26P), CITY OF PRIOR LAKE, SCOTT COUNTY,
Dear Ms. Gaross:
I have reviewed the above-referenced variance request (received
February 26, 1992) and approve the project with the following
conditions:
The existing structures on the lots be removed, and no more
than one residential structure should be allowed on each lot.
New structures erected on the lots should conform as nearly as
possible to the State Shoreland Standards adopted in 1989.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment. I would also like to
commend Jeanne Robbins and Eric Davis for converting three
nonconforming lots into two conforming lots. Should you have any
further questions regarding this matter, please call me at 772-
7910.
Sincerely,
' Joe Richter
Staff Hydrologist
¢¢:
City of Prior Lake Shoreland File
Prior Lake Spring Lake WMO
Scott County SWCD
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
HERITAGE COMMUNITY
1891 1991
"APO 1PN"
NOTICE OF PROPOSED ADMINISTRATIVE LAND DIVISION
DATE MAILED: February 25, 1992
The Prior Lake Planning Department has received an application
from Jeanne Robbins and Eric Davis of 2950 Terrace Circle, Prior
Lake, to consider an administrative land division within the
existing plat of North Shore Crest. The proposal is to divide Lot
6, Block 2 and add each half to Lots 5 and 7 as indicated on the
attached survey reduction.
Section 6-1-3 of the Prior Lake Subdivision Ordinance allows the
City Manager or representative to authorize subdivision approval
without a public hearing under the following circumstances:
1. The division of property will not result in more than three
parcels.
2. The property to be subdivided is a lot of record in the
office of the County Recorder of Scott County.
3. The resulting parcels generally conform to the sha~e and
area of existing or anticipated land subdivisions in the
surrounding areas.
4. The division will not cause any structure to be in violation
of setbacks.
5. Any easements which may be required by the City must be
granted.
6. The owners of land contiguous to the parcel must be notified
in writing and no written objection received within ten days
following notification.
7. Any written objection shall constitute an appeal. Such an
objection shall be forwarded to the City Council who shall
hear the objection and decide the matter.
A copy of the proposed administrative land division and location
map are attached. Please accept this as official notification of
this proposed administrative division. Written comments or
objections regarding this matter should be submitted to the
Planning Department by Monday, March 9, 1992. If the Planning
Department receives no written objections, this proposal will be
processed. If you have questions regarding this matter, contact
Deb Garross at 447-4230.
Sincerely,
Deb Garross, Assistant City Planner
Enclosure
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
HERITAGE
1891
COMMUNITY
1991
"VA24 PN"
NOTICE OF HEARING
FOR
VARIANCE
YOU are hereby notified that a hearing will be held by the City
Council in the Prior Lake Council Chambers at 4629 Dakota Street
S.E. on:
Monday, March 16, 1992
at Approximately 7:30 P.M.
PURPOSE OF HEARING:
SUBJECT SITE LOCATION:
REQUESTED ACTION:
To consider a variance application for
Jeannie Robbins and Eric Davis of 2950
Terrace Circle, Prior Lake, MN 55372.
5425, 5435 and 5445, Shore Trail.
Lots 5, 6, and 7, Block 2, North
Crest.
Shore
The applicants are requesting that Lot 6,
Block 2, North Shore Crest, be divided
into two, approximately equal halves.
The west half of Lot 6 is proposed to be
added to Lot 5, Block 2, North Shore
Crest. The east half of Lot 6 is
proposed to be added to Lot 7, Block 2,
North Shore Crest. The resulting Tracts
will contain 22,500 and 22,966 square
feet respectively. Each Tract is
proposed to be 75 feet in width. The
Zoning Ordinance requires that newly
subdivided, lakeshore lots have a front
yard width of 90 feet. The applicants
are requesting approval of 15 foot,
front yard variances for proposed Tracts
A and B. See attached survey reduction
for reference to this item.
If you desire to be heard in reference to this matter, you should
attend this meeting. Oral and written comments will be accepted
by the City Council. For more information, contact the Prior
Lake Planning Department at 447-4230.
Prior Lake Planning Department
February 25, 1992
4629 Dakota St. S.E, Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
LEONARD, STREET AND DEINARD
PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
SUITE 2300
150 SOUTH FIFTH STREET
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402
March 16, 1992
MICHAEL G. TAYLOR LAWRE:NCE R, SCHAEFER
JOHN t/I/. GETSINGER CAROLYN V WOLSKI
THOMAS P SANDERS STEVEN R. LINDE:MANN
WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL NUH~ER
(612) 335-1671
The Honorable Lydia Andren and
Members of the City Council
City of Prior Lake
4629 Dakota Street S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372
Re:
Crown CoCo/EZ Stop
16735 Franklin Trail S.E.
Dear Mayor Andren and Members of the Council:
Our office represents Crown CoCo, Inc., which owns the EZ
Stop property located at 16735 Franklin Trail S.E.
Crown has owned and operated this facility for many years.
In 1983, the City of Prior Lake adopted a sign ordinance that
established a number of different regulations and restrictions.
Crown's pre-existing signage did not meet all of these new
regulations, so the signs were--and are--regarded as legal
nonconforming uses.
We wish to emphasize that while the signs were indeed
nonconforming, they were legal nonconforming uses. Crown has a
vested legal right to continue using these nonconforming signs.
The City Planning Department, however, has apparently taken
the position that Crown lost or surrendered whatever rights it
had, when it installed its new corporate logo (in place of the
old corporate logo) on the signs. We submit that City staff
fails to understand the protected nature of nonconforming uses.
The staff's position is misplaced and unlawful for the following
reasons:
The Honorable Lydia Andren and
Members of the City Council
Page 2
March 16, 1992
Crown had a vested, legal right to use its
signs--as nonconforming uses--to display its
corporate logo and gas prices, since such use pre-
dated the adoption of the City's sign ordinance.
That fundamental use has not changed in any way.
The Minnesota Supreme Court has explained that so
long as the original nature and purpose of the
original nonconforming use is unchanged,
subsequent modifications in the specific manner of
the use do not destroy its status as a legal
nonconforming use. See, e.g., Hawkins v. Talbot,
248 Minn. 549, 80 N.W.2d 863 (1957).
City staff argues that Crown improperly "changed"
its signs without a permit in violation of Sign
Ordinance 83-5, § 5-7-7. Crown's licensed sign
contractor, however, did not feel that merely
replacing the corporate logo required a permit.
The ordinance itself does not even define the term
"change." We believe this provision would be
voided by the courts because of its inherent
vagueness and ambiguity. For example, could the
city contend that changing gasoline prices on the
sign is a "change" that requires a permit? In any
event, § 5-7-7 of the Sign Ordinance has nothing
whatsoever to do with nonconforming uses. Even if
Crown violated this section (which we deny), such
a violation would not affect its vested rights to
maintain its nonconforming use. At most, Crown
would be required to pay a fine, or to obtain a
permit retroactively, or even to reinstall the
original corporate logo; it cannot be required to
remove the sign itself.
The actions by City staff are an attempt to take
or damage Crown's private property, without
payment of just compensation, in violation of the
Minnesota Constitution. Crown has a vested,
legal, and valuable right to maintain its signs.
We will not permit this important right to be
"administratively" taken without due process of
the law or just compensation.
City staff's efforts to eliminate Crown's sign
appears to be arbitrary, capricious, and contrary
to law. There is DQ provision in law for the City
to eliminate the sign or signs in the manner
The Honorable Lydia Andren and
Members of the City Council
Page 3
March 16, 1992
contemplated by City staff. On the contrary, the
City's sign ordinance does contain a procedure for
eliminating nonconforming uses, but City staff has
not attempted to proceed under that section.
Se
We believe that Crown has, for some unknown
reason, been singled out for "special treatment"
by City staff, in violation of the fundamental
constitutional right to equal protection of the
laws. Crown and its lighting consultant have
sought to comply with the procedures of the sign
ordinance, but they were told, in effect, that
their only options were to eliminate the
nonconforming uses or face criminal charges. In
fact, the City actually commenced criminal charges
against Crown, which have been dismissed pending
the outcome of this appeal. We cannot help but
wonder if the City treats all of its businesses in
this manner if they dare to change their corporate
logo.
In summary, we do not believe that Crown is even required to
go through this variance process in order to maintain its signs.
In the interests of trying to resolve this matter in a fair and
reasonable manner, however, and without resort to litigation, we
are now bringing this appeal. We respectfully request that Crown
be granted the three variances now at issue.
Very truly yours,
LEONARD, STREET AND DEINARD
Bradley J. Gunn
BJG:clp
xc:
Robert Mack
David Miller
Deb Garross
HERITAGE COMMUNITY
1891 1991
AGENDA NUMBER:
PREPARED BY:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
INTRODUCTION:
BACKGROUND:
8
DEB GARROSS, ASSISTANT CITY PLANNER
CONSIDER VARIANCE APPEAL FOR CROWN COCO, INC.,
MARCH 16, 1992
The Planning Commission held a hearing on
February 20, 1992 to consider a variance
application for Prior Lake EZ Stop. The
representative for EZ Stop is Mr. David
Miller of Crown CoCo, Inc. The applicant
requested the Planning Commission to approve
the following variances: An eight foot front
yard variance from S.T.H. 13 right-of-way; a
twenty-one square foot sign area variance to
allow continued display of a ninety-six square
foot, freestanding sign and a request for
variance from Sign Ordinance 83-5, Section
5-7-4B3 to allow two freestanding signs on the
site where only one freestanding sign is
permitted. The Planning Commission denied the
variance application, finding no hardship
present to justify granting variances. See
attached Planning Commission minutes for
reference to this item.
This application is the result of a fifteen
month long process to bring the signs located
at the EZ Stop site, into compliance with the
Prior Lake Sign Ordinance. In January of 1991,
two sign faces, a wall sign located on the
building, and the EZ Stop, freestanding sign
located adjacent to the intersection of S.T.H.
13 and Franklin Trail, were changed without an
approved sign permit from the City of Prior
Lake. See attached Exhibits A and B which
illustrate the signs as of May 5, 1989 and the
new sign faces which are currently being
displayed.
On January 22, 1991 a letter was mailed to
Crown CoCo and EZ Stop advising that a sign
permit is required by Sign Ordinance 83-5, any
time a sign is "erected, changed, or
relocated", and that the two signs were in
violation of the Ordinance. See attached
Exhibit C, letter from Deb Garross to Crown
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
CoCo, Inc. The letter identified that the
signs should be removed or a permit approved
for their continued display. The letter also
discussed the possibility that the
freestanding sign was located within the
required 10' foot setback from S.T.H. 13 and
that the Ordinance allows only one
freestanding sign with a maximum area of
seventy-five square feet. The appli?ant was
advised that in the event that the signs did
not com~ly with the Sign Ordinance, an
application for variance would need to be
submitted to the City.
Staff met with Ray Roemmich of Suburban
Lighting Inc., to discuss the sign violations
and permit process. Suburban L~ghting Inc.,
has submitted four sign permit applications
for changes to the wall and freestanding signs
located at EZ Stop, which date back to 1977.
See Exhibits D, E, F, and G for previous sign
permit applications at the subject site.
Mr. Roemmich determined that the EZ Stop
freestanding sign located closest to the
intersection, encroached within the required
ten foot setback from the S.T.H. 13
right-of-way line. Mr. Roemmich also
indicated that the sign standard appeared to
have been damaged and that he questioned it's
structural integrity. Mr. Roemmich suggested
that the "Kerr McGee" freestanding s~gn be
removed and that the EZ Stop freestanding sign
be relocated to that standard. Staff advised
Mr. Roemmich that the plan would comply with
the required setback standard and the Sign
Ordinance regulation which allows one
freestanding sign. However, the EZ Stop sign
contained two illegal, sixteen square foot
"gas price" panels that had been added without
sign permits. The EZ Stop sign area is
ninety-six square feet which exceeds exceeds
the seventy-f%ve square foot maximum area,
therefore a s~gn area variance would have to
be granted to retain the sign in its entirety.
Mr. Roemmich stated that he would contact
Crown CoCo Inc., to explain the relocation
plan. On April 16, 1991 staff met with the
applicant to discuss the violations, the
proposed relocation pla9, required permit
procedures and the variance process. Mr.
Miller was given variance application
materials at that time.
DISCUSSION:
On May 21, 1991, staff again, submitted a
letter to Crown Coco Inc., and EZ Stop
identifying the outstanding sign violations,
and advised that if sign situation was not
rectified by June 21, 1991, the file would be
turned over to the City.Attorney for possible
prosecution. See Exhibit H for reference to
the letter from staff. On July 8, 1991 staff
received a letter from David Miller stating
that he did not agree with the Ordinance and
according to his interpretation, the signs
were not illegally altered. Mr. Miller also
stated the responsibility to comply with the
Ordinance should be the responsibility of the
"sign hanger." See Exhibit I, letter from
David Miller of Crown Coco, Inc. The file was
turned over to the City Attorney upon the
decision of the City Manager, for prosecution.
The City submitted a formal complaint to the
District Court in December of 1991. See
Exhibit J, copy of the formal complaint filed
with the District Court. The status of this
issue is that the City has dismissed the
complaint in order to allow the applicant the
opportunity to pursue the variance process.
In the event that the variances are denied,
and the signs are not brought into compliance
with the Ordinance, the prosecuting attorney
will recharge the applicant.
Records on file with the Planning Department
indicate that the EZ Stop building was
constructed in 1963, prior to annexation of
the site into the corporate limits of the City
of Prior Lake. The earliest sign permit on
file is for the freestanding sign located
closest to the intersection of S.T.H. 13 and
Franklin Trail. Exhibit G, permit 1977-11
indicates that an existing "Gas" sign was
replaced with an eighty square foot "Gas &
Price" sign. Exhibit F, permit 1979-15,
indicates that the "Kerr McGee" freestanding
sign was erected in 1979, and contains
approximately seventy square feet of sign
area. Exhibit D, permit 1979-14 indicates
that the "Gas & Price" freestanding sign was
replaced with a sixty-four square foot "EZ
Stop Stores" sign. Exhibit E, permit 1979-24
indicates that a forty-eight square foot wall
sign was placed on the building in 1979.
Please note that all permits were taken out by
Suburban Lighting Inc., and that all of the
signs were erected prior to the adoption of
Sign Ordinance 83-5, adopted by the Prior Lake
City Council on May 11, 1983. The
significance is that the freestanding signs
located on site are classified as
legal-nonconforming signs. The wall sign,
erected in 1979 conforms with current Sign
Ordinance requirements. A second point
that historically, sign permits have been
obtained at this site, when the sign faces
have been changed.
In 1989, the City undertook an active sign
control enforcement campaign whereby Sign
Ordinances, permit a~plicatlons and written
notification were g~ven to all businesses
within the community. Staff took pictures of
all business signs and began to keep an
inventory of sign permits and to conduct
periodic inspections to enforce the Sign
Ordinance. The Ordinance contains an
amortization schedule indicating the dates by
which all non-conforming signs are to be
brought into compliance with the Ordinance.
However, all dates indicated in the schedule
had expired by the time that the active
enforcement campaign began in 1989.
Therefore, the Ordinance requirements are
enforced at the time that the property owner
chooses to remove or change signs. Staff has
successfully implemented the Ordinance to
remove legal non-conforming signs for the
Prior Lake Pet Hospital, Holiday Station
Stores, and Prior Lake Floral, to name a few.
All signs require a permit according to the
Ordinance. The fee owner of the property is
ultimately responsible to comply with
Ordinance requirements of the City of Prior
Lake.
The applicant is requesting several variances
from the Sign Ordinance to continue display of
illegal signs that have been expanded and
changed without permits approved by the City
of Prior Lake. In addition, the EZ Stop
freestanding sign was enlarged at some point
between 1979 and 1989 to add two, sixteen
square foot, gas price signs. This addition
was done without obtaining a sign permit and
increased the total sign area to ninety-six
square feet. The total sign area maximum for
freestanding signs is seventy-five square
feet. The EZ Stop has twice the amount of
permitted freestanding sign space for
businesses within the community. The intent
of the Zoning Ordinance, of
Ordinance is a part, is to
non-conformities to achieve
current regulations:
consideration for variance
the hardship tests found
which the Sign
eliminate legal
compliance with
The ?rincipal
applications are
in the Zoning
Ordinance. Staff contends that there is no
hardship in this case. The signs have been
changed without the necessary permits and
approvals from the City of Prior Lake. The
hardship has been caused by the owner, who has
changed signs with disregard to the Ordinance
and notifications from staff. An additional
note, as of March 9, 1992, Prior Lake EZ Stop
had continued to display three additional
signs on site, that do not have approved sign
permits. There are no circumstances that are
unique to this site whereby setback or sign
area variances should be granted. The
variances requested do not observe the spirit
and intent of the Ordinance, but rather,
request validation of the situations that Sign
Ordinance 83-5 was enacted to prevent.
ALTERNATIVES:
Uphold the decision of the Planning
Commission to deny the variance
application due to lack of a demonstrated
hardship.
Table this item for
information or research.
additional
Find that the hardship tests
Zoning Ordinance can be met, by
circumstances, and approve the
application.
of the
specific
variance
RECOMMENDATION:
The recommendation from the Planning
Commission is to deny the variances as
requested. An alternative was developed by
the sign contractor for Crown CoCo Inc., that
conforms to the Ordinance requirements. Mr.
Roemmich, indicated that the structural
integrity of the EZ Stop freestanding sign
standard is questionable.and may pose a safety
hazard. This standard is located two feet
from the S.T.H. 13 right-of-way, close to
overhead electric utilities and has been
increased in area, without permits, to a size
that exceeds the seventy-five square foot
maximum area allowed by the Ordinance. There
are no other businesses within the community
that have two freestanding signs on site.
ACTION REQUIRED:
Granting a variance to allow EZ Stop to
maintain two freestanding signs would give
them unfair advertising advantage over other
businesses in the community and potentially
create a negative precedent. The variances
requested provide a convenient resolution of
the issue for the applicant. However, it is
not the intent of the variance process to
provide convenience, but to provide a degree
of relief for hardships that are caused by
unique property characteristics. The
variances requested by the applicant do not
observe the s?i~it and intent of the Ordinance
and in the opinion of staff, are contrary to
the public interest.
Will vary based on Council discussion.
City Manager's note attached.
See
HERITAGE COMMUNITY
1891 1991
DATE: March 16, 1992
TO:~AIl0 ~yor and Councilmembers
FR~%~David Unmacht, City Manager
RE:~/ Agenda Item #8
Agenda Item #8 deals specifically with a variance appeal for
Crown Coco, Inc. The variance appeal is the result of a denial
of several variance applications by the Planning Commission.
It is relevant for your consideration to receive an update on the
sign ordinance review process. The most recent formal
correspondence which you received on the sign ordinance review
process occurred in Notes and Updates from February 10 through
14, 1992. In that issue it was noted that on Monday, February 3,
Deb Garross and I met with Jim Gibbish and Helmut Ohl~art to
review the proposed sign ordinance. Deb is currently in the
process of researching issues and drafting new language as a
result of the discussions. Staff is anticipating a meeting in
early April with Gibbish and Ohlgart to review the new changes to
the proposed ordinance. We anticipate that the proposed sign
ordinance will be submitted to the Planning Commission and City
Council in May or June of 1992. It is our intent to work with
the business community on all components of the proposed sign
ordinance. As you know through previous correspondence we have
worked hard to obtain and incorporate their input in this
process.
As the proposed ordinance is drafted now, none of the conditions
of Crown CoCo, as applied for in their variance applications,
would be in compliance. That is not to say however, that the new
ordinance, when adopted, may be different than currently drafted.
Nonetheless, staff recommends that action be taken on these
applications independent of the proposed ordinance process and
results.
4629 Dakota St. S.E. Prior l~ke, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
DIVISION OF CROWN COCO, INC.
Mr. David UD_macht
City Manager
City of Prior Lake
4629 Dakota Street
Prior Lake, MN 55372
Re:
EZ Stop, 16735 Franklin Trail S.~.
Planning Department Decision to Deny Variance
Notice mf ADD,al.
Dear Mr. Un~acht:
Please consider this to be Crown Coco, Inc.'s Notice of Appeal
pursuant to Section 5-6-3(A) of the Planning Department's decision
to deny Crown Coco, Inc. a variance to maintain an existing 96
s~uare foot sig~ on its property.
The grounds for this appeal are as follows:
Crown Coco, Inc. has not "erected, changed or relocated"
its sign within the meaning of Section 5-7-7(A) of the
Prior Lake Sign Ordinance 83-5, and, therefore, the sign
continues to be a legal non-conforming sign.
The denial of the variance violates the Equal Protection
Clause of the Minnesota and United States Constitutions.
Each of the four variance standards are met in this case.
Literal enforcement of the ordinance would result in
undue hardship to Crown Coco, Inc. in that it would be
required to remove a valuable advertising sign if the
Yar~.ce is not granted. This works a unique hardship
on Crown Coco, Inc. because other property owners who
have existing non-conforming signs are not required to
remove their sig~s whe~ the signs have not been changed
or relocated. The hardship has been caused by the
ordinance and not by any actions taken by Crown Coco,
Inc. The sign was located within the 10 foot set-back
prior to the enactment of ~he ordinance and the owner
has taken no action to relocate the sign within the 10
foot set-back. The intent of the 10 foot set-back is to
protect the safety of the public traveling on the
highway. The variance would observe ~he spirit and
intent of the ordinance because the sign has never caused
anyone, harm, and %he sign poses no threat to public
safety.
· 319 ULYSSES STREET N.E. · MINNEAPOLIS, MN. 55413 · (6]2) 331-9344 ·
Pleess provide me with a notice of the City
on this appea !.
Thank you very much for your cooperation.
Council
hearing
DLH:cd
Very truly yours,
CROWN COCO, INC.
David L. ~tller
Ms. Deb Garross, Assistant City Planner
PLANNING COMMISSIONS MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 20, 1992, PAGE
available for construction possibilities and the proposed
application is the moat logical. The variance would not be
detrimental to the community and would observe the intent of the
ordinance.
Consensus by the Commissioners were in support of the variance.
MOTION BY ROSETH, SECOND BY ARNOLD, TO APPROVE THE 40 FOOT EAST
SIDEYARD VARIANCE FOR THE PRIOR LAKE PET HOSPITAL LOCATED AT
16680 FRANKLIN TRAIL. RATIONALE BEING THE APPLICATION IS
CONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED CHARACTER OF THE AREA, THAT THE
SPIRIT AND INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD BE REALIZED, AND IT
WOULD NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE HEALTH AND WELFARE OF THE
COM~dUNIT¥.
Vote taken signified ayes by Roseth, Arnold, Wells,
MOTION CARRIED.
and Loftus.
ITEM V - EZ STOP/CROWN COCO - FRONT YARD SETBACK & SIGN
ORDINANCE VARIANCE
David Miller represented Crown CoCo Inc. 319 Ulysses Street,
Minneapolis. The subject site in question is the EZ Stop Station
located at 16735 Franklin Trail, Prior Lake. Mr. Miller stated
that over a year ago Crown CoCo had contacted a sign company to
change the face of two signs but had neglected to pull a sign
permit. He is now requesting the variances needed to allow
continued display of the signs that are already in place.
Deb Garross presented the information as per memo of February 20,
1992. The application is for an 8 foot front yard variance from
S.T.H. 13 right-of-way, a 21 square foot sign area variance to
allow a continued display of a 96 square foot free-standing sign,
and a variance fromSi. gn Ordinance 83-5, Section 5-7-4B3 to allow
2 freestanding signs on the site where only one is permitted.
In January of 1991, 2 sign faces, a wall sign and a freestanding
"EZ Stop" sign were changed without an approved sign permit. On
January 22, 1991, a letter was sent to Crown CoCo and EZ Stop
advising them of these violations. Staff met with Mr. Ray
Roemmich of Suburban Lighting to discuss the sign violations and
permit process and a solution was recommended by Mr. Roemmich.
After the meeting, M~. Roemmich stated he would advise Crown
CoCo of the relocation plan. Staff met with Mr. Miller on A)ril
n aprx~
16, 1992, at which time he received the variance application
materials. On May 21, 1991, Staff again, submitted a letter to
Crown CoCo and EZ Stop regarding the outstanding sign violations.
They were advised if this was not rectified by June 21, 1991, the
file would be forwarded to the City Attorney for possible
prosecution. On July 8, 1991, Staff received a letter from Mr.
Miller stating he felt the signs were not illegal and said the
permit was the responsibility of the sign hanger. The City
submitted a formal complaint to the District Court in December of
1991. As a result of that action, Court has granted a
continuance to allow the applicant the opportunity to come before
the Planning Commission with the variance application, therefore,
an on-going legal situation does exist.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 20, 1992 PAGE 6
Staff recommends denial of the variance application as rec~uested.
An alternative had been proposed by the s~gn contractor but was
not implemented. The application ~oes not observe the epirit and
intent of the Ordinance and is contrary to the public ~nterest.
The variances would provide a convenient resolution of the issue
for the ~plicant. However, the circumstances that the sign
ordinance intended to prevent would be validated.
Comments from the Commissioners were, signs too close and too
m~ny~ unfair advantage for EZ Stop causing hardship to other
s=ations who have comDlied, negative precedent would be set,
ordinances are to be enforced, and all were in agreement for
denial.
MOTION BY ARNOLD, SECOND BY ROSETH, TO DENY THE VARIANCE
APPLICATION OF AN EIGHT (8) FOOT FRONT YARD VARIANCE FROM S.T.H.
13 RIGHT-OF-WAY; A TWENTY'ONE (21) SQUARE FOOT SIGN AREA
VARIANCE, AND A REQUEST TO ALLOW TWO (2) FREESTANDING SIGNS FOR
CROWN COCO INC. FOR EZ STOP STORE AT 16735 FRANKLIN TRAIL SE.
RATIONALE BEING HARDSHIP HAS NOT BEEN DEMONSTRATED, A NEGATIVE
PRECEDENT WOULD BE SET, IT WOULD NOT OBSERVE THE SPIRIT AND
INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE, WOULD NOT BE IN THE BEST PUBLIC
INTERESTS OF THE COMMUNITY AND WOULD NOT PRODUCE SUBSTANTIAL
JUSTICE.
Vote taken signified ayes by Arnold, Roseth, Loftus,
MOTION CARRIED.
and Wells.
MOTION BY ARNOLD, SECOND BY WELLS, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING.
Vote taken signified ayes by Arnold, Wells, Loftus, and Roseth.
MOTION CARRIED.
Meeting adjourned at 10:17 P.M.
Hall.
Tapes of meeting on file at City
Horst Graser
Director of Planning
Rita M. Schewe
Recording Secretary
EXCERPTS FR~M SIGN ORDINANCE 83-5
8-7-4
5-7-4
B 2)
a. Multiple occupancy buildings shall submit a sign plan conforming
with this Section which will coordinate signage for the entire project.
b. Said sign plan shall address the following items: height, location, size,
.number, type, basic decorative theme, design, decor, color and material of the
signs to be placed on the building.
c. The sign plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner or
designee prior to the issuance of a sign permit for the building. An approved
permit will be issued to the owner of the building.
d. The owner of the building is responsible to obtain the sign permit,
prescribe the approved sign criteria to all tenants and insure that signs erected
are in compliance with the approved sign plan. lOrd. 88-11, 4.18-88)
3. Freestanding Signs: Where a building does not cover the full area of the
property, signs may be freestanding; 0r~ ~c~ sign per building. The
maxFr~J-~g-i~'-~f such sign shall be twenty feet (20') in B-1 and B-2
Districts and thirty feet (30') in B-3 Districts. In no case shall such sign be
located closer than forty feet (40') to one another. Maximum size of such
sign shall be seventy five (75) square feet. No sign shall extend beyond a
property line, building restriction line or right-of-way line. Such sign must be
located ten feet (10') from the street right-of-way line, with the exception of
B-2 Districts where such sign may have zero setback.
4. Area Identification for Shopping Center: An area identification sign,
stating the name of the center and the major tenants shall be allowed. The
maximum size shall be one hundred (100) square feet per side with a
maximum height of thirty feet (30').
5. Marquee Signs: Signs may be placed on the roof of a covered walk or
marquee in a building complex on the vertical face of a marquee and may
project from the lower edge of the marquee not more than twenty four
inches (24"), but the bottom of a sign placed on a marquee shall be no less
than eight feet (8') above the sidewalk or grade at any point. No part of the
sign shall extend above the top of the roof line for a covered walk or above
the top of the vertical face of the marquee. Signs shall not be permitted
anywhere on a marquee which projects over a public right of way, with the
exception of B-2 Districts.
6. Portable Signs: Such signs may be used for a period not to exceed ten
(10) days and no more than three (3) times per year at one location or for
one use. The maximum size of such sign shall be forty (40) square feet and a
maximum height of ten feet (10') and fifteen feet (15') from the street right
of way.
7. Building overhangs in B-2 Districts may have one nameplate per business.
Such sign Ihall be no larger than five (5) square feet. All signs shall be
homogeneous for buildings containing more than one business.
5-7-5 5.-7-~
(E)
(Fi
Announcements of concerts, plays, lectures and club activities and the like
placed in the windows of consenting business. Such announcement~hell be
removed no later than seven {7) days after the event. (Ord. 83-05, 511.83)
Election Signs: Political advertising of public elections are permitted on
private propery in any zoning district with the expressed consent of the owner
or occupant of such property. Such signs may not be posted more than sixty
(60) days prior to the election and must be removed by those responsible for
the erection of the sign or the property owner within seven (7) days following
the election. Such sign must be no larger than sixteen (16) square feet. No
election sign shall be erected in any street or in the right of way of any public
road. (Ord. 88-19, 5-16-88)
No Trespassing Signs: No trespassing and no dumping signs shall not exceed
two 12} square feet in area per side and not to exceed four (4) in number
per lot in 'R" Districts. In "A" and "C" Districts, such signs shall not be
lass than three hundred feet (300') apart.
Interior Window Signs: Temporary signs in the show window of a business
which are part of a display of merchandise or display relating to ~ales on
the premises; provided such signs are not to be displayed for a period
exceeding thirty (30) consecutive days. Such sign will not exceed ~eventy
five percent (75%) of each individual window area facing the street.
On-Premises Directional Signs: Where one-way access and egress drives are
incorporated in a site plan, a sign indicating traffic direction no more than
four (4) square feet may be placed at a driveway within five feet (5') of the
street right of way and no more than four feet (4') from the average grade
level. A directional sign indicating the entrance to a two-way driveway may
be ~proved or required where the Zoning Administrator deems it is
necessary to safely direct the traveling public.
5-7-6: NONCONFORMING SIGNS: Any sign that is nonconforming to the
........... re~t~i~ie~t-~-o~ this-~l~t-er, -w~ether by variance previously granted
or by conformance to existing sign regulations at the time the original permit for
iaid sign was issued, shall either be removed or brought up to Code reouirements
within the time period prescribed herein, dating from December 8, 1980, the
~ffactive date of this Chapter.
Amortization Schedule
Actual Cost of Sign
Period for Removal
$ 500.00 or less 2t/a years
501.00 to 1,000.00 37~ years
1.001.00 to 2,500.00 4½ years
Over $2,50~00 5'/= years
5-7-7
5-7-7
~-7-7: PERMIT REQUIREMENTS:
(A)
No ~ign shall be erected, changed or relocated without a permit i~ued bY the
.Zoning Officer. Any sign involving electrical comoonents shall be wired bv a
Iicena~d electrican.
The permit application shall be signed by the applicant. When the applicant
is any person other than the owner of the property, it shall also be signed by
the owner of the property. The application shall contain the following
information:
1. Name. address and telephone number of the property owner, sign owner
and erector.
2. Location of the sign or structure.
3. Scaled drawing showing position of the sign in relation to the nearest
buildings, structures, public streets, rights of way and property lines.
4. Plans and specifications and methods of construction or attachment to
the building or in the ground, including all dimensions, showing all light
sources, wattage, type and color of lights end details of any light shields or
5. Other information as may be required by the Zoning Official. (Ord.
83-05, 5-11-83)
(B) Fees:
1. The City Council shall establish fees for the following categories of sign
perm its:
a. Forty (40) square feet or less in area;
b. Greater than forty (40) square feet in area;
c. Signs which need a conditional use permit must pay the
established sign permit fee, plus such additional fee as may be required for
the conditional use permit.
2. No fee shall be required for signs exempted by Section 5-7-5.
3. Fees may be waived by the City Council for signs containing a religious,
civic, school or public interest subject. {Ord. 84-06, 3-12-84)
5-.7-8 5-7-12
5-7-8: CANCELLATION: A sign permit shall become null and void if the
work for which the permit was issued has not been completed within
· period of six (6) months after the date of the permit, A permit may be renewed
one time and no additional fee shall be collected for the renewal.
5-7-9: REMOVAL OF SIGNS: The Zoning Officer shall order the removal
of any sign erected or maintained in violation of this Chapter. Thirty
(30) days' notice in writing shall be given to the owner of the building, structure or
premises on which such sign is located, to either bring the sign into compliance with
this Chapter or effect its removal. (Ord. 83.05, 5-11-83)
5-7-10: ENFORCEMENT AND ENFORCEMENT PENALTIES:
iA)
In enforcing lfle provisions of this Title. the City Manager. Assistant City
Manager, City Planner, Assistant City Planner, Building inspector and City
Engineer shall have the power to issue citations for violation of this Title
in lieu of arrest or continued detention.
(B)
In addition, any violation of this Title may be enjoined by the City Council
through proper legal channels.
{c)
Any person, firm, partnership or corporation who violates this Title shall be
guilw of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof, be punished by a fine
not to exceed seven hundred dollars ($700.00) or by imprisonment for a term
not to exceed ninety (90) days, or both, for each offense, Each day a violation
is permitted to exist shall constitute a separate offense. (Ord. 8813, 4.1888}
5-7-11: APPEALS: To provide for a reasonable interpretation of the
provisions of this Chapter, a permit ·pplicent who wishes to ·ppeal
an interpretation by the City Zoning Officer may file a notice of appeals with the
Planning Commission and request · hearing. The Commission shall hear appeals or
requests by the following cases:
(A)
Appeals where it is alleged that there is an error in any order, requirement,
decision or determination made by the Zoning Officer in the enforcement of
this Chapter.
Request for variances from the literal provisions of this Chapter in instances
where their strict enforcement would cause an undue hardship.
5-7-12: SEVERANCE CLAUSE: If any section, clause or provision or portion
thereof of this Ch~ter shall be found to be invelid or
unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not
affect any other section, clause, provision or portion thereof of this Chapter.
C~TY OF PRIOR LAKE
AP~I(t?IO~ FOR VARIANCE
Applicant: E-Z Stol)_ Crowrl CoCo Inc.
Address: 16735 Franklin Trail
Property Owner: Crown CoCo~ INC ...
Address: 319 Ulysses St NE Minneapolis, MN..55413
Type of Ownership: Fee xx Contrac~
Consultant/Contractor: Suburban LithCint,.INC .
~me Phone: 447-5~Q~ .
Work Phone: 331-9}~4 .
Home Phone:.
Work Phone: 331-9344 x124 /
urch se a re ent
Phone: 439-7440
Existing Use
of Property: Convenience ~re with lasoli~
Proposed Use
of Property: Same as existi~
Legal Description
of Variance Site: , See attached ~rvey ,,
Present
Variance P~ested: M~!R~ain. si~n in existing location which ia within ~he 10' ROW
Has the applicant previously sought to plat, rezone, obtain a variance or conditional
use permit on the subject site or any part of it? .Yes xx No
What was requested: ..
When: Disposition: ,.,
Describe the type of improvements proposed: Leave as,.exiscinR--w~th differgnc (aces
in thg.siKn c~n
SU~4!~ION REOUI~S: ~ -~%5' OO
(A )~Com~l et ed application fora. (B)~ilin~ fee. (C)ProDert¥ Survey. (D).C ti_~_~f~~om
~bstract firm, na~es and addresses of property o~n. ers within 100 feet of the
exterior bo~daries of the .subject property. (E)Co~plst~-legal descriptio.n &
~rtv Identification Number (PID). (F)Deed restrictions or private covenants, if
applicable. (G)A parcel map at 1"-20'-50' shying: The site development plan,
buildings: parking, loading, access, surface drainage, landscaping and utility
service.
ONLY COMPL~ APPLICATIONS E~J~L BE REVID~ED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
To the best of my knowledge the information presented on this form is correct. In
addition, I have read Section 7.6 of the Prior Lake Zoning Ordinance which specifies
requirements for variance procedures. I agree to~provid~ informatign and follow the
procedures as outlined in the Ordinance. ~~~, ~,/ff~
Appl icants/Sig~at~ re
Sut~itted this ,7_. day of ~'~ . 19~_~- p~.$ p
fee Owners Signature
THIS SPACE IS TO BE PILLED OUT BY THE PIANNING DIP3~'~OR
PLANNING (I~H SSION APPROVe) DENIED
CITY COUNCIL APPEAL .... APPROVI~ DENIED
DATE OF HEARING
DATE OF HEARING
Signature of the Planning Director
Date
~ OF PRIOR LAKE
APH,IOU"'ION I~OR VARIANCE
Applicant.. E-Z Stop. Crown CoCo loc.
Address: 16735 Franklin Trail S.E.
Property Owner.. Crow~ CoCo) INC.
Address: 319 Ulysses St NE Minneapolis~ MN 55413
Type of Ownership: Fee. xx Contract.
Consu/tant/Contractor:. ,Suburban LiKhtinK, INC ,
Existing Use
of Pro~rty: Convenience store with ~a$oline
Proposed Use
. of Pro~e~: Same as'existtnK-
Legal'Description .... .
of Variance Site-~ =
~ Phone.. 447-5408
Work Phone: 391-9344
florae Phone:
Work Phone.- 331-9344 x124
Purchase ~gree~ ent'
· Phone: 439-7440
Pres t Zo,m .. ;B-5
Varxance~lk~uested:_ -.,, - Mai.rain ~Xis~in~ Sl~g~r~l[;~ .'-' :' ~. :" ,.~ ,. ~e~'-<~.~, . . ,:,~,'4~' ....
Kn wnfc]¥ ~6xceeds square' f6ot-a~_e'allowe'~
~ ~ a~li~t pr~io~ly ~ht to plat, rezone, ~ta~ a vari~ or ~iti0~
~e ~it ~ t~ s~j~ site or ~ ~ ~ it?~ - Yes ~ ~
~t ~ r~est~: ' ~ '~- ~
Whe~: Disposition:
Describe the type of h~prov~ments proposed: Leave si=ns as exist~nE
(A)_Cx~leted application form. (B)Filin~. fee. (C)P. ropertw_Survey. (D)Certi~ied from
~bstract firm, names and addresses of propert~ c~n. ers within 100 feet_ of the
exterior boundaries of the subject property. (E)Complete legal description &
.Pr _o_perty identification Number (PID). (F)Deed restrictions or private covenants, if
applicable. (G)A parcel map at 1'-20'-50' showing: The site development plan,
buildir~s: parking, loading, access, surface drainage, landscaping and utility
service.
ONLY (I)[PLEI~ APPLICATIONS E~ALL BE REVIEWS) BY THE PLANNING CC~MISSION.
To the best of my knowledge the information presented on this form is correct. In
additi~, I have read Section 7.6 of the Prior Lake Zoning Ordinance which specifies
requiremm~.s for vari.an~e, procedures. I agree to provide information and follow the
Applicants Signature
T~IS SPACE IS ~O BE FIILfD OUT BY THE ~ DIRfL~K)R
~ (D~tISSION__ APPrOVeD __ DENIED
CITY ~ APPEAr APPHI~D DENIED
Signature of the Plannisg Director Date
CITY (F PRIOR LAKE
FOR VARIANCE
Applica~-- E-Z Stop Crown CoCo Ine, f~ Phone: 447-5408
Address: 16735 Franklin Trail S.E. .Work Phone: 331-9344
Property Owner: Crown CoCo~ INC Hc~e Phone:
Address: 319 Ulysses St NE Minneapolis~ MN 55413 Work Phone: 331-9344 x12~
Type of Ownership: Fe~.. xx Contract Purchase A~ree~nt.
Consultant/Contractor: Suburban Lighting, INC Phone: 439-744Q
El~sting Use ...... ·
Of Property: Convenience s=ore with ~asqline Present
Proposed Use
· of Property: Same as existinE ..... -'- '" ~"
Legal Description ;:':.: - ~--. ~
of Variance Site-]':~.' S~e attached s~rve¥'.: :-~.. ~ ......
~ the applicant previously sought to plat, rezone, obtain a variance or conditional
use pemit on the subject site or any fart of it? Yes xx
What was requested:. '~
When: Disposition:
Describe the type of improvements proposed: Leave signs as existing
SD~iISSION R~QUI~S: ~-~.OO
(A)Cx~upleted a~plication form. (BkFilin~ fee. (C)Property Survey. (D) ti_~cm
~bstract firm, names and addresses of property c~ners within 100 feet of the
_exterior boundaries of the subject property. (E)Complete legal description &
Property Identification Number (PID). (F)Deed rest-~--ctions or prlvate covenants, if
applicable. (G)A parcel map at 1"-20'-50' showing: The site development plan,
buildings: parking, loading, access, surface drainage, landscaping and utility
(]~Y fDMPLETE APPLICATIONS R~ALL BE REVIf~D BY THE PLANNING C[I~MISSION.
To the best of my knowledge the information presented on this form is correct. In
addition, I have read Section 7.6 of the Prior Lake Zonin~ Ordinance which specifies
requir~nents for variance procedures. I agree to prc~ide information and follow the
Applicants Signature
Fee Owners Signature
THIS SPACE IS ~D BE FWZ.~n OUT BY THE ~NG DIRBC1DR
Sk3nature of the Planning Director
Date
CROWN COCO., INC.
DISTRIBUTORS OF
FUEL OILS - GASOLINES - GREASES - MOTOR OILS
331-9344
3 ! 9 ULYSSES N.E
MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55413
Planning Commission
City of Prior Lake
4629 Dakota St. SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
Planning Commission Members,
In January of 1991 we contracted with Suburban Lighting Inc, a licensed
sign manufacturer and installer to update our signs at several locations. We
relied upon their expertise in this industry to get the work done in the proper
manner. In a letter from Deb Garross dated January 22, 19911 was notified that
by changing the wording and colors on our main sign without an approved sign
permit we had violated sign ordinance 83-5. To rectify this situation we are
asking for three variances. We believe that it would be an undue hardship to
require us to remove one of the two existing free standing signs and relocate
and redesign the other free standing sign. I have bee with Crown CoCo for over
twelve years and don't believe these signs have harmed anyone during that time.
Due to the lay of the land these signs don't obstruct vision of the traffic in
any way. The area between these signs and out pump island is used as a type of
frontage road by many and by moving the main sign toward the pump island it might
be detrimental to site lines for those vehicles.
These signs have been as they currently are for over twelve years and we
request to be granted these variances to leave them as they are with the new
wording and colors.
Thankyou for your time and consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
David L. Miller
Director of Maintenance
MARKETERS OF QUALITY PETROLEUM PRODUCTS
PRIOR LAKE EZ STOP
Photo taken 5-26-89
EXHIBIT A
PRIOR LAKE EZ STOP
Photos taken 7-31-91
EXHIBIT B
PRIOR LAKE EZ STOP
Photo taken 5-26-89
PRIOR LAKE EZ STOP
Photo taken 7-31-91
EXHIBIT C
"CELEBRATE PRIOR LAKE'S CENTENNIAL - 1991"
January 22, 1991
Crown Coco Inc.
319 Ulysses NE
Minneapolis, MN 55413
To Whom This May Concern,
This letter is in regard to a freestanding sign which was
recently altered at the Prior Lake EZ Stop Convenience Store
located at 16735 Franklin Trail. I regret to inform you that the
sign was altered without an approved sign permit from the City of
Prior Lake and is in violation of Sign Ordinance 83-5 which
requires sign permits for all signs erected, changed or relocated
within the City. An active sign control enforcement campaign was
undertaken during the summer of 1989. City staff has documented
the signs in existence as of that time and also keeps track of
sign permits which are issued throughout the community. Please
be advised that violations of the Sign Ordinance constitute a
misdemeanor and if not rectified, the City has little alternative
but to seek compliance through the ordinance violation
notification process.
Attached find official notice that the freestanding sign is in
violation of City Code. The sign must be removed or a sign
permit approved by the City of Prior Lake, in order to be
compliant with the Sign Ordinance. It is your responsibility to
make application for a sign permit any time that an exterior sign
is proposed to be altered or added. A copy of a sign permit
application is attached. The City requires that a scale drawing
of the freestanding sign be submitted with the application and
that the location of the sign in relation to the front property
lines and right-of-way for S.T.H. 13 and Franklin Trail be
indicated. I suspect that the freestanding sign may be in
violation of the ten foot setback requirement from road
right-of-way. If this is the case, it will be necessary to
relocate the freestanding sign or apply to the City of Prior Lake
for a variance to allow the sign to be located closer than ten
feet to the right-of-way line.
The Sign Ordinance stipulates that there may be only one
freestanding sign per property that may not exceed seventy-five
square feet in area, be taller than thirty feet and such sign
must be located at least ten feet from street right-of-way lines.
If it is your intent to submit a sign permit application, the
aforementioned requirements must be demonstrated in the
application. In addition, it would be necessary to bring all
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447.4245
An Equal Opportunitw Af/irrnatiue Action Employer
other exterior signs into conformance with the Sign Ordinance.
At a minimum, ~his would require removal of the other
freestanding sign that exists on the property.
Enclosed find also, a copy of Prior Lake Sign Ordinance 83-5 with
the appropriate sections highlighted. A review of the records on
file for EZ Stop indicates previous Sign Ordinance violations
have occurred at this site. It is my hope that this situation
can be rectified. Please be advised that the freestanding sign
must be removed or a sign permit approved prior to February 25,
1991. A site inspection will be conducted on that date to
determine compliance with the Sign Ordinance. If the violation
is still outstanding on that date, this matter will be turned
over to the City Attorney for legal action.
Respectfully,
Deb Garross
Assistant City Planner
Enclosures
cc EZ Stop Convenience Store
16735 Franklin Trail
Prior Lake, MN 55372
cc Dave Unmacht
City Manager, Prior Lake
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
ORDINANCE VIOLATION NOTICE
ADDRESS:
PHONE NO.
VIOLATION OCCURRED AT:
ADDRESS: ','
DESCRIPTION OF VIOLATION:
ORDINANCE NtPMBER:
If this violation is not corrected or remedied within ( ) days
upon receipt of this Notice, this matter shall be turned over to the City
Attorney's Office for investigation and possible prosecution. If you have
any questions concerning the violation or this Notice, contact the Director
of Planning at 447-4230.
CITY OF PKIOR LAKE
Date
(612) 447-4230 4629 DAKOTA STREET S.E. P.O. BOX 359 PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 6637'2
EXHIBIT D
I* ...... ;-'"-~""-~-'~-":. ::~. ,~/ . :. n0:......~ .................. ...~
~t~tt of ~tnnt~ot~, ~ ...,._,?..o~ ..... ~,~..~.~.~ ............ ..~
~erm{t~, ,, ~. "~
~n .... :t~:~... application therefor duly filed ~n th~s o~ce, wNch appl~cadon~ hereby made a part hereof,
to ..... ~.~_~.~...>. ..... ~~....~:--~ ..... L~.: ...... ~..~_~. ................ :- ............. ~ ......................................
upo~ tha~ trac[of land de[cribed as follows: Lot ........ Block...~ ............. ; plat or addition .....................
~d&~. ....... 2-~-~-~:.--~ ..... u_m.%_,.~._~_..g~--.~, .....................................................
which tract is of the size and .ar&I specified ~ said application.
This permit is granted upon the express conditions that said owner and his contractors, agents,
workmen and employees, shall comply in all respects with ~e ordinances,of the ....................................
~ .,. ............ o~ .......... ~,;~ .... t- ~.~ ..........................
Given under the hand~f the~. ~.~.-. ~.~~,- of said ...... ~.~, ...... a~its corporate
~eal and attested by it, . ~J'.~?.~o_~~. this . ~J~ ...... day of .......... ~~ ....... 19..~.~
EXHIBIT E
No. ;:94 Miller. Davi~ Co.. Minne~ rmh-
~tate of ~mne~ota, ~ ..... /~....o/ ....... ~-~¢a ..............................
................. ~.i.a.~ ......................... ~er ~ tt
~ IN CONSIDERATION OF The ,tate~,nt~ made by .............. ~2~ .........J.~I.l.~.m ....................
in ..~.,~ ....... application therefor d~ly filed in this office, which application is hereby made a part hereof,
Address ......~/~ .... ~.~ ....... ~( .........J:~L~.~. .........................................................
which tract is of th~ize and.area ~pecified in said application.
This permit is granted upon the express conditions that s~id owner and his contractors,
workmen and cmployees,.s~ll comply in all respects with th~ ordinanccs 9f the
;",x~ Given under,, the han~ the ~. ~o~0 of said . .~ and its corporate
Attest:
....... B.~ ....
, ~, ,,...' . ~., ~";~,..~ .... .,. ,
" ."'-~,,:,:;,., .,..,~',~3~i:'..'~ .:.:'~::.; ',,,¢.-~.::- I....
;".-:' ,' ;'" ~:,."~"" ""~,:! "!
. ': ' -i., ' ' '"'-'"...- ' "~'~'Il' '
,, . . ~ ?,... ',%...,, ,, ; .
i
_:; . ..".¢: ,.~ ;~, '.,- .
' '1 !
~a : .., ..':-:-. ~ 2~.:~, ' . ' '.:'
: ,;:f., ~..'-:,...,.'.-..,
EXHIBIT F
'40. Z~4 MiDer.~lv~t Co.. Min,f~poh.
$ ...... ~t.~.~.~ ........ ,. -- . no. ........ /~ .......................
~tat~ oi ~inne~ota, t ~ ...c~,: .... o/ ....... f~ .... Z.~..~ ..............
o, .................................................. 7" o, ....... .......
................. ~..~ ........................ ~rmtt ,
IN CONSIDE~TION OF The statements made by ...... ~~.~ ...... ~-~.~~ .......
in...~~.., application therefor duly filed in this ~ce~ whic.h applica~i~9 i~ h~re~y made a part hereof,
PERMISSION IS HEREBY G~NTED To said.._,'-,e,~.g~ ~.~.~ ..... as owner
~o_._ ~:~.~..:= ..... .~~ .... D,.k ...... ~, ....... ~,'(,-.~et~ ....................... ~ .................... ~ ........................
which tract is oft'he size and .area specified in said application.
This permit is granted upon the express conditions that said owner and his contractors, agents,
workmen and employees, shall c.orinply in all respects with t}}lj ordinances of the .............................
, ................................................. ~x~ .................... of .......... ~.a.5, .... t. ~r~%_. .........................
~ 'v n er the hand of t ~'~_t~.' ' tt~.~o of said '~ and its. cor orate
[ seal and attested by its
~ Attest' . ....
,,~ · . . ,
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
August 9, 1979
Conditions of sign permit #14 and #1S, issued to Suburban
Lighting are as follows:
The sign stating convenience store shall be removed
The portable reader board shall be removed
Ail other protable bill boards shall be removed
(612) 447-4230 4629 DAKOTA STREET S.E. PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372
TYPE "A" STANDARD 6'-8" x 10'
INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED PLASTIC SIGN ON 13'-6" SLANT TWIN POLE.
KERR
7;
[S/-~L! - I/4" ·
STANDARD TYPE
ON 13'6 SLAb
,~ "~'FEB ~5,'7~
KERR. McGEE CORPORATION
KERR.,%~:GEE BL.HLDH'.,~G, OK~,.A CITY, OKL. A
P M P R DIVISION
STANDARD TYPE 'A" 6'.8"X IO' SIGN
ON 13"6' SLANT TWIN POLE
EXHIBIT G
No. :~4 Mtlle~.Dav4s
~ P[~[ssIoN Is ~BY G~N~ ~To s~id ~.', '. /..' ,'~=
~ / ' /,..~..' ,',,, - , - ',. , , ,',, ".,'.'/,..','"/," .,,,,,~ :~,
~ w~ch tract i~ of ~e ~ize xd area specified ~ ~aid application.
~I ~k pemit is granted upon tM expr~s conditions that ~aid owner ~d
~ workmen and ~ploy~, shill comply ~ fll r~pec~ ~th~$he ordinances
~ ........ "t ~ - '"/ . · '
~1 · ' ,'t · / / '~, "
~ sefl and attica by t~ . , ',, y r ~ ..... day of
,!
TO'
SUBURBAN LIGHTING
6077 LAKE ELMO AVE. NO.
STILLWATER, MN ,55082
Phone {612) 439.7440
INC.
I
DATE
/-',,/ ~._/~-'~ //
I//,~..-~/ /-:~. -~, ......
SIGNED /,:/~;.'.~:~/ ~ ~ /:~. ( /
l'HI5 COPY FOR F[]SSO; D[~hlSS~D
EXHIBIT H
~lay 21, 1991
Crown Coco Inc.
Mr. David Miller
319 Ulysses N.E.
Minneapolis, MN 55413
Dear Mr. Miller,
This letter is in regard to the outstanding sign violation that
exists at the Prior Lake EZ Stop Convenience Store located at
16735 Franklin Trail. In a letter dated January 22, 1991, Crown
Coco Inc., was notified that a freestanding sign and wall sign
had been illegally altered without an approved sign permit from
the City of Prior Lake. Since that time City staff have been in
contact with yourself and Ray Roemmich, Suburban Lighting Inc. in
an attempt to resolve the outstanding sign ordinance violations.
The last contact that staff had with a representative for the EZ
Stop Convenience Store was a meeting with you on April 16, 1991,
where a variance application packet and the process to rectify
the outstanding sign violations was explained by staff. Since
that time, staff was requested by Mr. Ray Roemmich to return a
check Suburban Lighting Inc., had submitted for a sign permit
application. Staff has had no further contact from Crown Coco
Inc. since April 16, 1991. In addition, banner signs and other
temporary signs have continued to be displayed without prior
approval of required sign permits, which leads staff to believe
that Crown Coco Inc., does not intend to expedite a remedy for
the outstanding violations.
Please be advised that this is the final ordinance violation
notice that will be issued for the sign violations outstanding at
Prior Lake EZ Stop Convenience Store located at 16735 Franklin
Trail. Altering signs without an approved permit is a violation
of Section 5-7-7 (A) of Prior Lake Sign Ordinance 83-5, enclosed.
Be advised that staff will conduct an inspection on June 21, 1991
to determine compliance with the requirements of the Sign
Ordinance. If at that time, the signs are not removed or the
appropriate variance and sign permit applications submitted to
the Prior Lake Planning Department, staff will have no
alternative but to forward this file to the City Attorney for
possible prosecution.
4629 Dakota St SE.. Prior Lake. Minnesota 55372 ' Ph _~2' 447-4230 Fax ~612) 447-4245
Questions pertaining to this letter or provisions of the Sign
Ordinance should be directed to Deb Garross, Assistant City
Planner at 447-4230.
Sincerelyy
Deb Garross
Assistant City Planner
Enclosures
cc EZ Stop Convenience Store
16735 Franklin Trail
Prior Lake, MN 55372
cc Dave Unmacht
City Manager, Prior Lake
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
ORDINANCE VIOLATION NOTICE
NAME:
ADDRESS:
PHONE NO.
>ir. ])avid Miller, Crowr. Ccco Inc.
319
Ext. 124
VIOLATION OCCURRED AT: Prior Lake EZ Stop
ADDRESS: I6735 F~at,].:lin Trai~.
Prior Lake, 54\ 55372
DESCRIPTION OF VIOLATION:
.:~ wall ~_~!gn auJ fr,~,':cm,,,iin~ si~n were altered without the
:'equz. za:i ..ik..x ,~,.~rmi:s a~; '-~quired by Si:'n Crdinance
S~:c C:~c, 5--7- i (A) .
ORDINANCE NUMBER:
If this violation is not corrected or remedied within fhir:v (20) days
upon receipt of this Notice, this matter shall be turned over to the City
Attorney's Office for investigation and possible prosecution. If you have
any questions concerning the violation or this Notice, contact the Director
of Planning at 447-4230.
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
!,FII[I ~ ~ "
Assistant City ~la:mer
.~- ~ 1-91
Date
(612) 447.4230 4629 DAKOTA STREET S.E. P.O. BOX 359 PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 553]'2
Ms. Deb Garross
Assistant City Planner
City of Prior Lake
4629 Dakota Street S.E.
Prior Lake, Minnesota
EXHIBIT !
CRO N COCO., INC.
OI$?RIBUTORS OF
FUEL OILS - GASOLINES - GREASES - MOTOR OILS
331-9344
3 lg ULYSSES N.E
MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA $$413
55372
Dear Ms. Garross:
I am in receipt of a warning tag issued for an "outstanding sign
violation that exists at the Prior Lake E-Z Stop convenience store
located at 16735 Franklin Trail S.E. in Prior Lake". According to
your letter dated January 22, 1991, you stated that our sign was
altered without an approved sign permit. At that time I contacted
you on the phone to see if I could gain a clearer understanding of
your interpretation of Section 5-7-7(A) of Prior Lake Sign
Ordinance 83-5.
In that conversation I stated that I read the words "erected,
changed, or relocated" as having to do with something different
than your interpretation of this wording. I do not, according to
my interpretation of this section, find where we "illegally
altered" a sign. It seems to me that information requested was not
"altered".
We did not change any of the items requested by Section 5-7-7(A) 1.
We did not change the location of the sign or structure. We did
not change the position of the sign in relation to the nearest
buildings, structures, public streets, right of ways and property
lines. We did not change any plans and specifications and method
of construction or attachment to the building or in the ground.
We did not change any dimensions or light sources or wattage or
type of color of lights.
I stated in our conversation that the words "erected, changed, or
relocated" pertain to construction, size or location. You believe
that these words pertain to copy that is on the face of a sign.
I then contacted the licensed sign contractor we use for all of our
signs and asked them to handle what should have been taken care of
beforehand. According to Suburban Lighting, they had gone so far
as to submit a check with the Sign Permit Application in an effort
to comply with your requirements.
MARKETERS OF QUALITY PETROLEUM PRODUCTS
Ms. Deb Garross
Assistant City Planner
City of Prior Lake
Page 2
Please understand that we are not attempting to violate any of your
ordinances. We simply do not believe that we should be asked to
relocate or remove any sign which has been as is for years. I am
in continual contact with our management at several of our stores
to control their apparent overwhelming desire for banners and other
temporary signs. It is a never-ending battle.
I really do not know what steps to take next. Our Company believes
it should be the responsibility of the sign hanger to obtain ALL
necessary permits for the work they perform. To be advised after
the fact of a sign violation and asvised that we must remove an
existing sign and relocate another existing sign somehow does not
seem right to us.
Your response to my comments regarding our alleged violation would
be appreciated and I want to thank you for your patience in this
matter.
Sincere~ ly,
David L. Miller
Director of Maintenance
DLM:mjh
cc: Mr. David Unmacht
City Planner, Prior Lake
EXHIBIT J
STATE OF MINNESOTA
DISTRICT COURT
COUNTY OF SCOTT
FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
CRIMINAL DIVISION
STATE OF MINNESOTA,
Plaintiff,
COIEPI.~%I NT
Court File No.
Crown Coco, Inc.
319 Ulysses N.E.
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55413,
Defendant.
The Complainant, being duly sworn, makes complaint to the
above-named Court and states that there is probable cause to
believe that the above-named Defendant committed the offense
described below. The Complainant states that the following
facts establish PROBABLE CAUSE:
Deb Garross, your Complainant, is-Assistant City Planner for
the City of Prior Lake, Scott County, Minnesota, and states that
she is familiar with persons submitting reports to her in this
matter, and that she believes these persons to be reliable and
their reports to be true and accurate.
On January 23, 1991, Ms. Garross issued a notice of a Prior
Lake City ordinance violation to Crown Coco, Inc. for a wall
sign and a freestanding sign which were altered without an
approved sign permit from the City of Prior Lake at the EZ Stop,
16735 Franklin Trail in the City of Prior Lake, Scott County,
Minnesota.
On May 21, 1991, Ms. Garross wrote a letter to Crown Coco,
Inc. advising them that they had not conformed to Prior Lake
City Code, Sec. 5-7-7(A), regarding sign violations at the EZ
Stop location in Prior Lake and that they had continued to
display banner signs and other temporary signs without the prior
approval or required sign permits. Ms. Garross further advised
that another inspection would be conducted on June 21, 1991, to
determine whether they had complied with Prior Lake City Code
Sec. 5-7-7(A).
Photos taken on July 31, 1991, at Prior Lake EZ Stop showed
a Pepsi temporary banner displayed without an approved sign
permit. In addition, two freestanding signs were on the
property. Prior Lake City Ordinance 83-5 permits only one
freestanding sign per property not to exceed 75 square feet in
area, height not to exceed 30 feet, and such sign must be
located at least ten (10) feet from street right-of-way lines.
The above facts constitute the Complainant's basis for
believing that the above-named Defendant, on the 31st day of
July, 1991, at Prior Lake, Minnesota in the above-named County,
committed the following described offenses:
COUNT I
CHARGE:
NO MORE THAN ONE FREESTANDING SIGN PERMITTED
In violation of Prior Lake City Code Sec. 7-7-4(B)(3)
PENALTY: 90 days imprisonment and/or $500 fine
Crown Coco, Inc., in the City of Prior Lake, Scott County,
Minnesota, did display more than one freestanding sign on
property of EZ Stop, in violation of Prior Lake City Code Sec.
7-7-4(B)(3), a misdemeanor.
COUNT II
CHARGE:
CONSTRUCTION AND DISPLAYING OF SIGNS WITHOUT A PERMIT
In violation of Prior Lake City Code Sec. 7-7-7(A)
PENALTY: 90 days imprisonment and/or $500 fine
Crown Coco, Inc., in the City of Prior Lake, Scott County,
Minnesota, did erect, change or relocate signs without a permit
issued by the Zoning Officer, in violation of Prior Lake City
Code Sec. 7-7-7(A), a misdemeanor.
THEREFORE, Complainant requests that said Defendant, subject
to bail or conditions of release where applicable,
(1) be arrested or that other lawful steps be taken to
obtain Defendant's appearance in court; or
(2) be detained, if already in custody, pending further
proceedings;
and that said Defendant otherwise be dealt with according to
law.
Complainant
Deb Garross
Being duly authorized to prosecute the offense charged, I
hereby approve this Complaint.
Dated: November 7, 199! /~'
Terrance W. Moore, #194'7~8
Patrick R. McDermott, #207822
Prosecuting Attorneys for the
City of Prior Lake
1800 IDS Center
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
(612) 339-8131
- 2 -
HERI TA O E C O MMUNIT Y
189! 1991
"VA 03 PN"
NOTICE OF HEARING
FOR
FRONT YARD SETBACK AND SIGN ORDINANCE VARIANCE
You are hereby notified that a hearing will be held by the City
Council in the Prior Lake Council Chambers at 4629 Dakota Street
S.E. on:
MONDAYe MARCH 16e 1992
PURPOSE OF HEARING:
at APPROXIMATELY 7:30
To consider a variance appeal for
Coco. (Prior Lake EZ Stop)
P.Mo
Crown
SUBJECT SITE LOCATION: 16735 Franklin Trail S.E.
REQUESTED ACTION:
The applicant is requesting that the City
Council overturn the decision of the
Planning Commission to deny several
variances related to non-conforming signs
on the property. Approximately one year
ago, an existing freestanding and wall
sign were changed on this site, without
an approved sign permit. The applicant
was advised that a permit is required to
alter existing signs. The applicant
would like to continue to use the
existing freestanding sign located
adjacent to Franklin Trail and S.T.H. 13.
However, that freestanding sign no longer
complies with the current Prior Lake Sign
Ordinance. A sign permit cannot be
granted unless the variances outlined in
this notice are approved by the City
Council.
The applicant is requesting an eight (8')
foot front yard variance from the S.T.H.
13 right-of-way line to allow continued
use of a freestanding sign, which is
located two (2') feet from the
right-of-way line. The required
setback is ten (10') feet from the
right-of-way line of S.T.H. 13. The
applicant requests that the Planning
Commission grant a twenty-one (21) square
foot sign area variance to allow
continued display of a ninety-six (96)
square foot freestanding sign. The
applicant also requests a variance from
Sign Ordinance 83-5, Section 5-7-4B3 to
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake. Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
allow two freestanding signs on the site
where only one (1) freestanding sign is
permitted by the Ordinance.
If you desire to be heard in reference to this matter, you should
attend this meeting. Oral and written comments will be accepted
by the city Council. For more information, contact the Prior
Lake Planning Department at 447-4230.
Prior Lake Planning Department
DATE MAILED: March 9, 1992
HERITAGE COMMUNITY
1891 1991
AGENDA ITEM:
PREPARED BY:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
9 (b)
DAVID J. UNMACHT, CITY MANAGER
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY - CONSIDER OPTION
AGREEMENT FOR LAND ACQUISITION
MARCH 16, 1992
INTRODUCTION:
BACKGROUND:
DISCUSSION:
The purpose of this item is for the Economic
Development Authority to review the proposed
Option Agreement between the Authority and the
land owner's representative. Enclosed is a copy
of the Option Agreement as negotiated by City
officials and Frank Muelken. Please review the
documents carefully. A copy of the Option
Agreement has been provided to Muelken. Staff
is awaiting receipt of an executed document.
City of Prior Lake is active in developing a
business/office park along County Road 21.
Several months ago a consensus of workshop
participants directed Bob Barsness, John
Fitzgerald and staff to begin option
negotiations with the property owner. With the
assistance of staff and the City Attorney's
office, Fitzgerald and Barsness have developed
an Option Agreement to be presented to the
Economic Development Authority.
The essence of the Option Agreement is based on
the financial and planning assumptions presented
to the City Council, Planning Commission and
Economic Development Committee on December 11,
1991. The Option Agreement calls for an
appraisal to be conducted by the buyer
(City/EDA) on the ?roperty to be acquired.
After the appraisal ls completed, the option
Agreement provides for a 60 day period for
negotiations between the seller and the
City/EDA. Contingent upon the Economic
Development Authority and City Council's action
at the meeting staff will begin the process to
obtain the appraisal on the property.
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
RECOMMENDATION:
ALTERNATIVES:
The recommendation of Bob Barsness, John
Fitzgerald and staff is for the Economic
Development Authority to approve the Option
Agreement as prepared. The Option Agreement
incorporates the ~irection of the City Council,
Planning Commission and Economic Development
Committee as discussed previously.
The alternatives are:
Approve the Option Agreement as drafted.
Table the Option Agreement for further
research.
3. Do not approve the Option Agreement.
ACTION REQUIRED: Action required will vary based upon Economic
Development Authority discussion.
Lommen, Nelson, Cole & Stageberg, EA.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
LEONARD T. JUSTER
HENRY H. FEIKEMA
ALVIN S. MALMON
RONALO L. HASk'V1TZ
PHILLIP A. COLE t
MARK N. STAGEBERG
ROGER V. STAGEBERG
GLENN R. KESSEL
THOMAS R. JACOBSON
JOHN M. GIELIN
JOHN IL McBRIDE
THOMAS F. DOUGHERTY
STACEY A. DelCALB
KAY NORD HUNT
RICHARD L. PLAGENS
MICHAEL P. SHROYER
EHRJCH L. KOCH
MARGIE R. BODAS
I Certified Civil Trial Specialist
· Certified Real Estate Special/st
18~ IDS CEHTER
SOUTH EIGHTH ~ · MINNEAPOL~ MINNESOTA 55402
TELEPHONE (612) 3~-8131
Minne~oea WATS Lir, e 1-~0.752-42~7
FAX (612) 339-80~
SOUTHSIDE OFF1CE PLAZA. SUITE 2~
1810 CRF. STVlEW DR/V~ · HUDSON. WISCONSIN 54016
TELEPHONE (715) 3~8217
~ C~ I~e (612) 4.16=80~
FAX (715) 386-&219
REPLY TO: MINNEAPOLIS OFFICE
WRfTER~ DIRECT DIAL NUMBEI~
336-9338
March 9, 1992
STEPHEN C. RATHKE
X)EL W. LAVINTMAN
LINC & DETER 1
SHERRI D. ULLAND
MARLENE S. OARVIS
REID IL UNDOUIST
JAMES C. SEARLS
JAMES R. JOHNSON
TERRANCE W. MOORE
UNDA O. AXELROD
MARC a. X)HANNSEN
ANOEL,A W..~1 J ~N
PATRJC~ IL MeDERMOTT
ADAM ~Y
STEVEN I~ THEESFELD
BARRY A. O'NF~L
OF COUN~F! -'
V. OWEN NELSON
JOHN P. LOMMEN (1927.19~8)
WYIvL~N SMITH (R~)
~RK SU~AN (Reur~)
Frank Mue~
15685_Pf~hpoint Road
~riOr Lake, Minnesota 55372
Dear Frank:
Enclosed please find an original and three copies of a revised
Option to Purchase Real Estate Agreement for the business office
park property. I have also enclosed a lined copy which shows the
changes to the draft of the Agreement previously forwarded to
you. These changes were made after a meeting with Dave, Bob
Barsness and John Fitzgerald.
If the revised Option to Purchase Real Estate Agreement with the
attached exhibits meets with your approval, please contact Dave
Unmacht directly to arrange a time to have the Agreement signed
by Marilyn Adelmann and LeRoy Adelmann, Co-Conservators of the
Conservatorship of Anthony Adelmann. Dave wishes to place this
on the agenda for Council approval for Monday, March 16, .1992.
Very truly yours,
LOMMEN, NELSON, COLE & STAGEBERG, P.A.
Glenn R. Kessel
GRK:sjf
Enc.
cc: David Unmacht w/enc.
OPTION TO PURCHASE REAL ESTATE AGREEMENT
This Agreement, entered into as of the day of
, 1992, by and between Marily--6--~delmann and LeRoy
Adelmann, Co-Conservators of the Conservatorship of Anthony
Adelmann, Conservatee (hereinafter referred to as "Seller") and
Economic Development Authority, an agency of the City of Prior
Lake, Scott County, Minnesota, a municipal corporation
(hereinafter sometimes referred to as "Buyer" and sometimes
referred to as "EDA").
RECITALS
WHEREAS, Sellers are the duly appointed Co-Conservators of
the Conservatorship of Anthony Adelmann, Conservatee, dul~
appointed by the Scott County District Court, Probate Division,
by Court Order dated March 5, 1990, Court File No. 89-12774; and
WHEREAS, Anthony Adelmann, Conservatee, is the fee title
owner to certain real property located in the City of Prior
Lake, Scott County, Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, the EDA is in the process of establishing a
business office park and is interested in acquiring a portion of
Anthony Adelmann's property, a sketch of which is attached
hereto as Exhibit A (the "Real Property"), the true and correct
legal description of which shall be determined by a survey in
the event Buyer exercises its option granted herein; and
WHEREAS, Seller, on behalf of the Conservatee, is desirous
of granting EDA an option to purchase said Real Property;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises,
commitments and agreements of Buyer and Seller pursuant to the
terms of this Agreement, the receipt and adequacy of which are
hereby acknowledged, Buyer and Seller agree as follows:
1. Qption Price. The total price for the Real Property,
in the event Buyer exercises its option granted herein, shall be
determined pursuant to negotiations between the parties after a
written report of appraisal(s) has been received by the parties.
Buyer intends to obtain an appraisal upon execution of this
Agreement and shall furnish a copy of said appraisal report to
Seller upon its receipt. In the event Seller elects to obtain
their own written appraisal of the Real Property, a copy of the
written appraisal report shall be furnished to Buyer upon
receipt of it by Seller. Said price shall be determined by
mutual agreement in writing and attached as an addendum to this
Agreement within 60 days after receipt of said written report of
appraisal(s) by the parties. In the event the parties cannot
reach agreement as to the option price within said 60 days, this
Agreement shall become null and void.
2. Method of Exercise of Option. This option may be
exercised by giving written notice thereof to Seller's attorney,
Frank Muelken at 15685 Fishpoint Road, Prior Lake, Minnesota
55372, at any time during the period of six months following the
date that the agreed price is attached as an addendum to this
Agreement.
3. Terms of Payment. The purchase price of the property
upon exercise of the option shall be payable by Buyer pursuant
to the terms of a Contract for Deed to be executed at a closing
to be held within 60 days of the written notice of Buyer's
intent to exercise its option granted herein. Said Contract for
Deed shall provide for zero dollars down at the closing with the
balance to be paid with interest only payments at the rate of 8%
payable semi-annually on January 1 and July 1 of each and every
year after execution of the Contract. After the closing, Buyer
shall subdivide the property and shall make principal payments
toward the Contract balance then owing as the subdivided lots
are sold by the Buyer. The principal payments shall be on the
basis of the square footage of the lot to be sold divided by the
total s~uare footage of the entire Real Property subdivided by
Buyer times the principal balance then owing to Seller. Seller
agrees to release lots as portions of the Contract price are
paid pursuant to the lot sales. The Contract shall further
provide that when 80% of all lots have been sold, the entire
Contract balance shall have been paid in full. All real estate
taxes due and owing as of the date of closing shall be pro rated
to the date of closing. All special assessments levied or
assessed shall be pro rated to the date of closing. The Contract
shall further provide that both parties shall cooperate in the
rezoning of the Real Property, and such additional property of
Seller as needed, the legal descriptions of which are set forth
on Exhibit B attached hereto, from the present zoning
classification to one of business type use. Both parties shall
execute any and all petitions and furnish such documents as are
reasonably necessary to accomplish the rezoning of the Real
Property. The Contract shall further provide that Seller shall
execute and deliver such easements as Buyer shall deem necessary
for sewer, water, storm sewer or other utilities required to
develop the business office park on the Real Property and such
temporary cul-de-sac or other roadway easements as Buyer shall
reasonably require. The Contract sl~all have attached to it as
exhibits copies of the temporary and permanent utility and
roadway easements required by Buyer for the subdivision of the
Real Property.
4. Title. If Buyer exercises its option granted herein,
Seller shall, within 30 days after the delivery to Seller of the
notice of exercise, secure and submit to Buyer for examination
by Buyer's attorneys or agents evidence of good and marketable
title in the property. Within ten days thereafter, Buyer shall
give notice in writing to Seller of any defects in or objections
to the title as so evidenced. Seller shall be allowed 120 days
to make title marketable. Pending correction of title, Buyer's
obligations hereunder shall be postponed, but upon correction of
title and within ten days after written notice to Buyer, the
parties shall perform this Agreement according to its terms. If
title is not corrected within 120 days from the date of written
objection, this Agreement shall be null and void, at the option
of Buyer, and neither party shall be liable for damages
hereunder to the other.
-2-
5. ~. Ail claims, disputes and other matters in
question between Buyer and Seller that arise out of or relate to
this Agreement or the breach of any representation, warranty or
covenant hereof, shall be decided by arbitration in accordance
with the rules of the American Arbitration Association. Any such
arbitration shall be held in Minneapolis, Minnesota, and the
results of such arbitration shall be binding upon the parties to
this Agreement, shall not be subject to appeal and shall be
specifically enforceable under applicable law.
6. Termination. This Agreement may be terminated under
the following circumstances:
(a) By mutual agreement of Buyer and Seller at any
time an writing;
(b) If the parties cannot agree as to the purchase
price in writing on or before 60 days after the written
report of appraisals has been received by both parties;
(c) If Buyer fails to exercise its option in writing
during the period of six months following the date that the
agreed price is attached as an addendum to this Agreement;
(d) By Buyer if Seller fails to perform any of its
covenants or commitments hereunder; or
(e) By Seller if Buyer fails to perform any of its
option or Contract payments or commitments hereunder.
Any termination pursuant to this section shall be effective only
by delivery by the party seeking termination of written notice
of such termination to the other party.
7. Notices. Any notice hereunder shall be given in
writing to the party for whom it is intended in person or by
registered or certified mail at the following address, or such
future address as may be designated in writing, or to any
successor or assignee of either party, at the address stated in
the notice of succession or assignment:
If to Buyer:
Economic Development Authority
4629 Dakota Street S.E.
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372
If to Seller:
Marilyn and LeRoy Adelmann
c/o Frank Muelken, Esq.
15685 Fishpoint Road
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372
8. Assignment and Succession. This option and the
Contract resulting from the exercise thereof shall bind and
inure to the benefit of the heirs, administrators, executors,
successors and assigns of Seller. This option may not be
assigned by Buyer without the prior written consent of Seller,
except that Buyer may assign its option granted herein to the
City of Prior Lake, Minnesota, or its affiliate.
-3-
~. M£s¢~ll~neou~.
(a) Governin~ Law. This Agreement shall in all
respects be governed by and enforced and interpreted in
accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota.
b) E~tire Agreement and Counterparts. This Agreement
sets forth the entire agreement betweeh the Buyer and Seller
relating to the property and all prior oral or written
agreements or understandings between them pertaining to the
transactions contemplated by this Agreement. This Agreement
shall be amended or modified only by a written instrument
signed by Buyer and Seller. This Agreement may be executed
in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original,
and all of which, taken together, shall constitute one
agreement.
(c) Headings. Section headings used in this Agreement
have no legal significance and are used solely for
convenience of reference.
d) Fees and Expenses. Except to the extent otherwise
provi ed in this Agreement, each party shall pay for their
own legal, accounting and other similar expenses incurred in
connection with the transactions contemplated by this
Agreement. All legal, brokers, accounting or other similar
expenses incurred by either party for the purpose of
facilitation this transaction shall be borne by the party
incurring such expenses.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Seller and Buyer have executed this
Agreement as of the date first above written.
Marilyn Adelmann
LeRoy Adelmann
Co-Conservators of the
Conservatorship of
Anthony Adelmann, Conservatee
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
By
Its
-4-
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing was acknowledged before me this day of
, 1992, by Marilyn Adelmann and LeRoy A-~lmann,
Co-Conservators of the Conservatorship of Anthony Adelmann,
Conservatee.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) SS.
COUNTY OF SCOTT )
The foregoing was acknowledged before me this __ day of
, 1992, by
of the Economic Development Authority.
Notary Public
Drafted By:
Lommen, Nelson, Cole & Stageberg, P.A.
1800 IDS Center
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
sally/pi/option
-5-
EXHIBIT A
SKETCH OF REAL PROPERTY
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TO BE REZONED
Ail that part of the Southeast Quarter and the Easterly 710 feet
of the Southwest Quarter, Section 1, Township 114 North, Range
22 West, lying South of the Southerly right-of-way of Credit
River Road (CSAH 21), Scott County, Minnesota, containing 42
acres, more or less.
HERITAGE COMMUNITY
1891 1991 2o o/
'1,%.N E$O
CONSENT AGENDA:
PREPARED BY:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
9(a)
KAY SCHMUDLACH, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY - UPDATE ON
BUSINESS OFFICE PARK PROGRESS
MARCH 16, 1992
INTRODUCTION:
BACKGROUND:
The Economic Development Committee and City
staff have been actively working on the
development of the proposed Business Office
Park. Staff has prepared a proposed timetable
for completion of the initial work involved in
the Business Office Park. Many of the
elements include coordination and
implementation by the City Council, Economic
Development Authority, City staff, Planning
Commission, and Economic Development
Committee. This agenda item is being prepared
to update the Economic Development Authority
on the progress of the Business Office Park.
Part (b) of this agenda item will be a request
by City staff for Economic Development
Authority action on an option agreement.
In 1991 the City Council directed staff to
continue its progress with the Business Office
Park project. Since the last workshop in
December of 1991, City officials have worked
diligently to implement those features
necessary to complete the Business Office
Park. The initial key element in the project
was the availability and acquisition of the
land. A subcommittee of John Fitzgerald and
Bob Barsness have negotiated with Frank
Muelken on an option agreement. A proposed
agreement is available with agenda report 9
(b).
The elements of the Business Office Park have
all been contingent upon the availability of
this land. Because of the positive progress
of the negotiations, the other elements have
been pursued by staff. Attached to this
agenda report is a list of 11 goals identified
for implementation by City staff and the
Economic Development Committee. Under each
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
DISCUSSION:
goal is a series of i to 10 strategies
necessary for the implementation of the goal.
City staff meets bimonthly to update each
other on the progress of these elements, and
the Economic Development Committee is updated
twice a month at their regular meetings on the
progress of the elements.
The 11 elements listed on the timetable for
completion of the Business Office Park include
a coordinated effort by many groups.
Informational Meeting - The second
informational meeting will be conducted
by staff and is necessary to p~ovide
information to the property owners in the
existing park. A decision to proceed
with extending infrastructure to the
existin~ park will be decided after the
second informational meeting.
Grant Research - Staff has completed
research with the state and with private
foundations to identify grants that are
available for economic development. It
appears that private donations are given
almost entirely to activities that could
be defined as cultural, artistic and
human service related. The majority of
public grants are project orientated and
can be pursued only when a project is
anticipated. Currently there are two
businesses that staff is working with to
determine if they are qualified and/or
meet the criteria for a grant under the
Economic Recovery Program. If the
b~sinesses do qualify, and the timing is
right, these businesses may be possible
for our new Business Office Park.
Tax Increment Plan - City staff has
drafted, with the assistance of the
consultant, a Development District Plan
which is being finalized by staff. The
plan will be presented for approval at an
upcoming Economic Development Authority
meeting in April.
Property Negotiations - The second part
of this agenda item is the progress of
Number 4 (C) Option Agreement Approval.
Final approval of a purchase agreement
will come after an appraisal and when an
agreed upon price has been reached with
the land owner representatives .
Se
Zoning Code Amendments - The Planning
Department is leading the research for
drafting new I-2 Standards and a
Landscape Ordinance which will be
im?ortgn~ element? to creating and
maintaining a quality business/office and
industrial park development. Staff
anticipates Council will be introduced to
these documents sometime in April. The
Economic Development Committee and
Planning Commission will be reviewing
them in March and in April. Along with
the zoning change and the I-2 Standards,
the map identifying zoning districts will
have to be modified. This action will
take place later in the summer.
Marketing Alternatives - The Economic
Development Committee has designated a
four member Marketing Subcommittee which
is working to identify who our market is,
how we will target the market and our
anticipated success. Along with the
marketing alternatives, there is a
communication program that the
subcommittee is recommending Council
distribute as public information to our
residents and neighbors.
Planning - City staff is working with 2
private developers to revlew our
tentative plat to see if we are
consistent with what is being
successfully built in the market. After
a series of reviews internally and by the
private sector, the preliminary plat will
be prepared and forwarded to the Planning
Commission and City Council later this
spring.
Engineering - Due to the recent
legislation on wetlands, engineering
staff has had to postp?ne some of their
action with the feasibility study until a
wetlands inventory is taken. Following
the wetlands inventory and the analyzed
impact of the wetlands on our Business
Office Park, staff will continue with the
feasibility study and bring the documents
to Council discussion and public hearings
later this spring.
Financing - The financing will all be
determined on a timetable consistent with
3
the implementation of items 1-8. It is
anticipated that financing can happen
late summer.
The last two elements, 10 and 11, are not
necessarily part of the timetable for
implementation of the Business Office Park but
are important key factors that all parties
involved should be cognitive of.
10.
County Road 21 Construction - At the last
discussion with the County it appears
that an optimistic goal would be to look
at plan approval in September 1992 with
possible construction p~ased in 1993 and
1994. .Although this is not the best
scenario for the Business Office Park,
staff believes it will continue to work
in our favor. In recent discussions with
several neighboring industrial park
representatives, they shared that
anticipated good transportation networks
can sell the property when businesses
know that there's only a short period to
wait until those improvements are made.
County Road 21 construction to be
completed within 2 years, although not
ideal, does not have to be a negative.
Aggressive Economic Development
Authority, Council and citizen lobbying
on this roadway is important.
11.
Business Inquiries - Staff incorporated
this section in order to keep the
Council, Planning Commission and Economic
Development Committee up-to-date on
what's happening with requests. The one
listed, Office Warehouse Assembly, is a
business currently leasing space in
Burnsville and is interested in building
in Prior Lake, closer to both business
owners homes. Their anticipated date for
relocation would be fall. We may not be
able to meet this timetable depending on
the progress of the Business Office Park,
however, it is important to note what
types of businesses would be interested
and are inquiring about locating in our
Business Office Park. This is one of the
businesses that we are doing research on
to see if there are grants available.
4
RECOMMENDATION:
ALTERNATIVES:
ACTION REQUIRED:
This agenda was prepared to update the
Economic Development Authority on the progress
of the Business office Park. There is no
action necessary. However, q~.estions can be
addressed at the Economic Development
Authority meeting.
Staff has proposed no alternatives since there
is no formal action necessary.
None at this time.
5
Iorch ~. l~Z
~llfl$[! Ttl[Til~! rOI {iIPLiTIII OY IISZl[$S IFYlC~ flit
I. IIFIII&TIIliL t[[Tlli
Ca) lost loitial lnformationa~
industrial Park
property ovnors (LA)
Completed - Omc. Id, lggl
{h) loot FoJlovup laforoationai
lotting vith froport[ lute
~rovidlog more SpeCiTiC
Cc) Follov up vith Council
on property ovflors
interest - Workshop (LA)
Cd) Formal approval - EDA (IS)
Jam Fok Ior tpr lay June July Aug Sept
rs,
lot
Apr
Apr
2. tIAIT IESEAIC#
(o) Iosearch iront Funds
available (iS)
Completed - Jan. lgg2
Cb) Pursue irate vith
Project (KS)
CC) Ilsllrch Private Funds
(Grants)
3. TAX IICAENENT PLAN
(o) Prepare Draft for
Development District
Plan (IS)
Completed - Jan. 24, 1292
Cb) Staff tevieu Complete (IS)
CC) Forlal Approval from (DA
(Is)
4. PIOPEDTY IEGOTIATIOIS
Ca) Stratogize vith
Staff on Property
legotiat~ons (IB:JF)
Colpletod
Cb) Itgotiato vith Property
lvnero (DB:JF)
(c) Option Agreement Approval
Cd) Complete Appraisal (DI:JF)
Ce) hgotiote Purchase
igreeaeflt (UB:JF)
Cf) [Dl Confirmation of
Agreement (BI:JF)
(g) Court Approval (BI:iF)
3afl ...... Feb
hr ........................................... Sept
Feb ..... lar
Jan
Feb
Jla .............. Nor
lot
Apr
Apr .... Nay
Apr .... lay
lay
lay ............. July
S. Zlllll ell!
(o)
())
Pllnning lope. Iroft lev
Laudocaps Ordinance (Al)
Iutornal Ioviev
and I.toids lessurcs
tsvlev
(c) ElClPisnnLn9 Commission
levilv (IS)
ed) Council Approval of I-2
Standards & Landscape
Ordinance
(,)
Iodify lap to Represent
lOP l-2 Zone
(ii Create Rarketing Plan
(EOt)
(bi Public Information
Plan/residents
Tovflship (IS)
(c) Complete Package to
(CS)
7. PLANIIlt
(fi Arrange Private Developer
levio~ of Plot (NG)
(c) Select Surveyor to
Prepare Plat (HE)
ed) Prepare Preliminary
Plat (Hi)
(ti Preiilinary PLot Approva!
Planning Commission (NS)
(fiCouncilPreiiminar(ls~iat Approval
(g) Finn! Plat Approval
I. EIiI
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(f)
(g)
(k)
(l)
I[[IIIG
#otiands Inventory
Authorize Feasibility Study (LA)
Ipprove Feasibility Study (LA)
Aerial Photo Contour laps (LA)
Authorize Preparation of
Plans (LA)
Approve PLans I Advertise
for Aids (LA)
tvord lids (LA)
Construct (LA)
Feb
Fei ..... lot
Nor
Apr .... lay
3afl ......................
Feb ............. Apr
Feb
Feb
Fib ..... lit
&pr
lit ..........
Apr
Apr
Apr .... lay
June
Jul ..... Aug
July
July
Jmly
t. P|lllCllt
ldo,tiP! tther Projects
Chis lend (IT)
lend Sole (IT)
(c) Publish Notice of land
Sale (IT)
(d) late of land Sale (IT)
(el land Closing and Proceed
to City (BT)
Il. COUNTY NOAO 21 CONSTIUCTZOI
(a) Plan Approval
(h) First Phase Construction
to County toad 27
(c) Second Phase Construction
County Road 27 to 3SU
Office/.arehouso/Assenbly
- il,Ill - IS,Ill
- Fall Construction
ler .....
Aug
Aug
Sept
Sept
Oct
1994
'BOPTZ'