Loading...
4 MSA Street Improvement ProjecMEMORANDUM CITYOF 7700 Markd Boulevard PO Box 147 ,.,~ ~, ;, ~=~,~-cn. t,.,it.! 55317 Administration Pi'.c::e: 952.227.1100 ~-~... Building Inspections P?z~,~: 952.227.11~3 Ca'; 0~,7 1 ~',:: ..~,_ :,_,., Engineering F;:, ?'52 22,;.~ .... Finance :'- -:~: 952 227.1141; Park & Recreation ?:::,~: ~,? ?~71 ~ ........ iLL' ~-::',: }52227.i1!0 ~z,': b~Z.227.1404 Planning & Natural Resources >one: 952.227.i i39 Public Works 159i Pa';.', rio,a3 :ne: g~.2.227.i300 Fa,:: 952 227.i3i0 Senior Center Pnz,.e: 95,2 227i i25 Fa',:: 952.227.iii0 Web Site /,':, TO' FROM: DATE: SUB J: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager Teresa J. Burgess, Public Works Director/City Enginee~ July 2, 2002 Assessment Hearing for 2002 MSA Street Improvement Project 01-08 REQUESTED ACTION Hold the Assessment Hearing and Approve the Assessment Roll if appropriate. DISCUSSION The City has a;varded a contract for public improvements to' Lake Drive East Lake Drive Audubon Road north of Lake Drive Coulter Boulevard from Audubon Road to Pillsbury Saddlebrook Curve Steller Court The improvements include repair of failed areas, replacement of broken curb and gutter, milling of existing asphalt, and installation of nexv asphalt. The improvements are expected to extend the life of the road 20-25 years ;vith proper lnaintenance. This project is proposed to be financed through a combination of MSA, General Fund, and assesslnents dollars. The assessments have been adjusted as per the City's new assessment practice. A copy of that practice as well as the revised assessment rolls are attached. In addition, copies of the assessment contentions received to date are also attached. Staff is not recommending any revisions based on the contentions received to date. RECOMMENDED MOTION Move to approve the assessment rolls (as revised) for City Project 01-08. Attachments: 1. Assessments Rolls 2. City of Chanhassen Assessment Practice c: Tom Prew, TKDA \ g:\,eng\public\01-08 ,assessments ~staff report 7-8-02.doc The City of Chanhassen · A ?;'.lng communit/with clean lakes, quality schools, a cfiarming dov:ntown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautiful parks. A great place to live. work, and play. i i ! i i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 ~ ~0 C m o o ~ o o o o o~ ~ o ~ ~ >> > CC oz oo o~ Z Z Z Z Zm >~zmo -> ~~o ~o ~ < m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6666~666666 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m m m m m m m m m , , z z z z z'z z z z z ~ ~ ZZZZZZZZZZ~~~~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~0 0 ~ O0 0 0 O0~ ~~~~~o~ooooo~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 ~i~ ! ~ m m m m m m m m ~ ~; ~ ~,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ × > m!m m m m~ m mi~ m m m < < < m m ~ < ,_ ~ ~ m mmm ~ m z ~ mmm ~ ~ m m 0 © 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00i~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ > zzzzzzzzzzr~o~ ~ o~ <<<<<<<<<<>-- mmmmmmmmmm~m~omm 0 0 0 0 0 0~0 0 0 0 m zzzzzzzzzz q o ~~ Z ~ O~iZ m~ O0 Z~ ~ _ -- © oooooooobb,g g !oooooo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O_ mmmmm> m>>~ m~ - ~ >~ m~zz m~ i i ! II i i i i ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Oi ~ ~I~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0!010 0 0 C ~ ~ 0 0 ~ 0 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 mmmmmmmmmmmmmm~ ©0©©©000©00©©0~ ©©©0©0©000©000~ m~ ~mmz ~ oo ~o < CITY OF CHANHASSEN ASSESSMENT PRACTICE This Assessment Practice is intended to provide direction to City Staff in preparation of assessment roles to ensure fair and consistent treatment o fall properties within the City of Chanhassen. MAINTENANCE: (Pothole filling, Patching, crack sealing, seal coat) Maintenance costs are not assessed to abutting property owners. Maintenance costs are financed through the City's Annual Budget process. REHABILITATION: (Repair of problem areas to fidl depth, Milling of edge or fidl width of existing pavement, Repair to existing catch basins and/or curb and gutter, Pavement Overlay) Rehabilitation costs are assessed using the following formula: Total Project Cost = 60% Paid by City (City share may be MSA, General Fund, T[F, Federal or State Grants, etc.) 40% Assessed to abutting Property Owners Residential properties that abut collector or commercial streets shall be assessed using the same formula, however, the assessments shall be reduced to be equivalent to a typical 31' residential street section. RECONSTRUCTION: (Removal of existing street and construction of new street,. Ma), include sanitary sewer or watermain work, May recycle the existing asphah as gravel base) Reconstruction costs are assessed using the same fo~Tnula as Rehabilitation. NEW CONSTRUCTION: (Construction of new street or utilities or a significant upgrade from the previous facilities, i.e. a 4-lane street replaces an existing 2-lane. ) New Construction will be assessed 100% to the benefiting properties. NOTE: If a feature (sanitary sewer, water, curb and gutter, etc.) that did not previously exist is added during a rehabilitation or reconstruction, the cost of that item is treated as new construction with the remaining project costs being treated as rehabilitation or reconstruction. WORK DONE BY CITY CREWS: Work done by City Crews may be maintenance, rehabilitation, or new construction. This work is not typically assessed. Exceptions would include work associated with an assessment agreement signed by the property owner and approved by the City Council and work specifically authorized by the City Council to be done by City Crews and assessed to the abutting properties. g:\eng\forms\assesslnents~assessment practices.doc June 28, 2002 ALAN & MARY WEINGART 1685 STELLER COURT' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55331 Telephone Day: (952) 949-9091 Evening: (952) 474-6884 Facsimile (952) 949.2927 E/nail alweingart@visi.com TO' Todd Gerhardt City Manager / City Clerk City of Chanhassen, MN RE' 2002 MSA Street Improvement Project No. 01-08 Ct_~_..%~c.r.~,J Proposed Steiler Court Improvements Dear City Clerk, This letter is in response to the Special Assessment Notice, Revised 6/17/02, and recently received by us regarding Parcel No. 25-4070170, our homestead. The purpose of this letter is to express our concerns regarding this proposed project. They are as follows: I , It is our understanding that the proposed Lake Lucy Road improvements under Project 01-08 have been "postponed indefinitely" in order for the City to study the feasibility of putting sewer, and possibly water, under the roadbed. , We were under the impression that with the postponement of the Lake Lucy Road improvements that the Steller Court improvements would have also been postponed for the same reasons. Logically, if sewer and water werb to be provided to Lake Lucy Road residents, why would it not also be offered to Steller Court residents? 3. We would like to have city sewer and water service brought to our home. Why would the City completely reconstruct our street now IF there is a good chance of having to rip it up again in a few years to place sewer and/or water underneath it? We do not want to be assessed TWICE for the reconstruction of our street within a relatively short span of time, i.e., 5 to 10 years. , Should the City proceed to reconstruct our street, we would insist upon some assurances that should sewer and water be placed under Lake Lucy Road within the next 10 years that we would not be assessed once again for the placement (not hook- up) of sewer and water under our street. . Our street is a short cul-de-sac, receives very little traffic and appears to be in very good condition. We believe it was resurfaced last year and has no significant cracking or potholes currently. We cannot understand why it would not last in its current condition, with annual resurfacings, for another 5 to 10 years, or at least until the Lake Lucy Road issue is resolved. Additional resurfacings would appear to be the most inexpensive way to prolong its current condition. . We would urge you, along with the Council Members, to take a drive up our cul-de-sac to witness for yourselves the condition of the roadbed. Despite what the engineering report says, it isn't in bad shape. , This piece of Project No. 01-08 is relatively minor, and elimination of it from the current contract would not appear to be all that material. All of the other residential streets, referenced as Sheet No. 7 of Appendix A of the Exhibits to the Feasibility Report already have city water and sewer underneath the roadbeds. . The cost of the proposed project appears to have increased from that set forth in the Feasibility Report, i.e., from $2,671.57 to $3,790.00 per residence. We have not received any explanation for this increase. From our perspective, this is less about the assessment than it is about the logic and foresight that needs to be employed in determining whether Steller Court should be reconstructed now or until the decision has been made whether or not to place sewer and/or water underneath Lake Lucy Road. Thanks for your thoughtful consideration of this issue. Should you have any questions of us, please do not hesitate to call us at the numbers noted above. Thanks again for your time and energy that you give to our City. Sincerely, A! & Mary Weingart cc via email' City of Chanhassen City Council Members Theresa Burgess, City Engineer Residents of Steller Court Bur~less, Teresa From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: erivkin @ mindspring.com Monday, July 01,2002 3:28 AM tburgess @ci.chanhassen.mn.us; Ijansen @ ci.chanhassen.mn.us; slabatt@ci.chanhassen.mn.us; cpeterson @ci.chanhassen.mn.us; robert.ayotte@ usarc- emh2.army, mil; gboyle @ ci.chanhassen.mn, us wasplin @ usinternet.com; abfinstad @ aol.com; alweingart@visi.com; mancino @ inet-serv.com; editor@chanvillager.com; Thiesse's @ mindspring.com Steller Court Road Improvements BottlegentianBEEerrPrairieSmoke3email Butterfly_3,]PG ail,jpg jpg Dear City Council and City Engineering, ! am against the proposed Steller Court improvement project and proposed assessment for several reasons. i feel that the notification process has been a farce, and may be in vie!etlon ef rules. Besides the name ef the street net even spelled correctly on city documents, I do not find any evidence that we had proper notification identifying the project en our road since the beginning as the "Steller Court !mprevement Project" Don't expect me ~o read your minds and assume that it should be buried in a "Lake Lucy improvement" project title. The Lake Lucy Road project is on hold and I also feoiishly assumed that all elements ef the project were then on hold. A~ a minimum the project should be stopped until proper nesification is issued and hearing is conducted en the · "Stei!er Court Road Improvement Project", and we are accorded the opportunity te discuss this matter with the authorities at a later time. Secondly, i haven't found anyone who lives here that feels that the proposed work to our street is needed or warranted. The read is adequate for current usage, there is good drainage with ne erosion, the storm sewer works as planned, there is no parking problem, the curb is working, and the road surface was reEarred very recently. Ne high tech or other fancy schmancy evaluation can convince me that within 1-2 years, this read will be marginal. Thirdly, ! don't believe that in the near term, that any ef our SB-2 double capacity septic systems will be faulty te warrant sewer coming in the street, it may be 10 mere years before any ef us experience septic failure. ! was told by City engineers 13 years ago when I installed my SB-2 that an average lifespan ef an average septic system is 25 years. Since all our systems were forced te be double capacity with state of the art SB-2, that lifespan certainly can be expected. The newest home is only 15 years old on Steller Court. We have mandatory pumping and inspections. Se I am net in favor of putting sewer in until someone can shew me that our systems are in impending doom. When sewer line comes in, this seems to be the best time to repair the read. I agree that coordination of utility and read work seems te me a hallmark efa well planned project. Don't you think that makes sense? Lastly, two parcels including mine on Steller Ct. also have some of the City's best examples of restored prairie up to the curb. This is an amenity always in bloom all spring and summer, with native wi!dflewers and prairie grasses. Come and see for yourself in the mornings when the fields of rare bottle gentian and purple spider wort are in bloom. If you take 4' of prairie out by putting new curbs in, and not restore the prairie to its original condition, you will have wiped out years of building up a no-maintenance beautiful asset that the whole neighborhood enjoys. You should also show your appreciation that we don't strain the city's water supply because our prairies don't require watering during droughts. So I think you owe it to our citizens to show you SUPPORT this type of beautification and respect the condition of the easement as it stands. As I go to the Chanhassen Villager with this letter, I can show them what potentially GOOD environmental stewards you can be, and hope you WILL be. I took pictures of the flowers in the easement, attached. Will sure look good in the paper that you are saving swallowtail butterflies from environmental destruction. If at all possible, could you put on the agenda for public debate for a rule that states the city must respect prairie restorations within easements, and replace them to as close as possible to original condition after construction disturbance? At least this small gesture will go a long way to show you are thinking about the environment. Thanks to Steller Ct. neighbor Bill Asplin for his research and providing good words. Sincerely, Eric Rivkin 1695 Steller Court 952-470-9726 June 21,2002 GRACE DEVELOPMENT, LLC 250 Lake Drive East Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 (952) 294-5000 Mr. Todd Gerhardt City Manager/City Clerk City of Chanhassen Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Re: 2002 MSA Street Improvement Project In~provemeil[ ~ ' " rroject ~'qo. 0i-08 Dear Todd: This is to fom~ally notify the City of Chanhassen that Grace Development, LLC objects to the proposed assessment of Grace Development, LLC for Parcel No. 25-3451110. The reason for this objection is this road is a frontage road feeding neighborhoods to the east, west, and south of our property and that it is unfair for us to be assessed for the cost of improvements to a road that benefits properties not directly on the road. More specifically, we understand that the City is following its standard policy of paying for 60% of the total cost while having the abutting property owners pay the remaining 40%. Although we applaud the City's payment of 60% of the street maintenance costs, we believe it is unfair to apply this stct~tdctrd 60/40 polio): to ct Collector street like Lake Drive East. As a collector street, Lake Drive East is wider and larger than most other Chanhassen streets. This design allows it to handle traffic that is traveling from one destination to another, such as the morning and evening commuters who use Lake Drive East as an alternative to the Highway 5 congestion. Yet this wider and larger design of Collector streets also makes their improvement projects, such as Project No. 01-08, more exr~ensive for the abuttin~ r~ror~ertv owners. Simr~lv stated, \ye believe it'is unfair for the City to apply its standard 60/4~0 }°or~ul~ to a non-st~nc~l project, such as a project that involves a collector street. Again, this is because the costs of an improvement to a collector street are higher, the improvements have a less-direct benefit on the abutting property owners, and the improvements more directly benefit all Chanhassen citizens (and others). Sincerely, Lucius L. Fowler Chairman and CEO LLF:bh