CC 2011 03 28CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
MARCH 28, 2011
Mayor Furlong called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. The meeting was opened with the
Pledge to the Flag.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Furlong, Councilwoman Ernst, Councilman
Laufenburger, Councilwoman Tjornhom, and Councilman McDonald
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Kate Aanenson, Paul Oehme, Todd Hoffman and Roger
Knutson
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS:
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Good evening and welcome to those here in the council chambers
and those watching at home as well. We're glad that you all joined us this evening. At this time
I'd ask members of the council if there are any changes or modifications that they desire to our
agenda. Otherwise without objection we'll proceed with the agenda as published.
CONSENT AGENDA:
Mayor Furlong: If there's a desire by members of the council or others present in the audience
that would like to separately discuss any of the items 1(a) through (h) I would ask that you let me
know at this time. Members of the council?
Councilwoman Ernst: Mayor I would like to pull 1(e) just for a question.
Mayor Furlong: Just for a question. E as in Edward? Okay. Is that question that we'll pick that
up right after the consent agenda then?
Councilwoman Ernst: Okay.
Mayor Furlong: If that's okay. We can be ready, we'll be ready on that Paul?
PaulOehme: Yes.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Thank you. Any other items? Seeing none, is there a motion to adopt
items 1(a) through (h) excluding (e)?
Councilman Laufenburger: So moved.
Councilman McDonald: Second.
Councilman Laufenburger moved, Councilman McDonald seconded to approve the
following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations:
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
a. Approval of Minutes:
-City Council Work Session Minutes dated March 14, 2011.
-City Council Verbatim and Summary Minutes dated March 14, 2011.
Receive Commission Minutes:
-Park and Recreation Commission Verbatim and Summary Minutes dated February 22,
2011.
b. Approval of Three -Year Contract for July 4 th Fireworks, Pyrotechnics Display Inc.
C. Resolution #2011 -17: Approve Resolution Accepting Donation from K1einBank for
Summer Consent Series.
d. Resolution #2011 -18: 2011 Street Improvement Project 11 -01: Call Assessment
Hearing.
f. Approval of Arbor Day Poster Contest Winners.
g. Approval of Liquor License Renewals.
h. Approve Purchase Agreement, Riley Ridge Park, U.S. Home Corporation.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
le. 2011 SEALCOATING PROJECT 11 -04: AWARD CONTRACT.
Councilwoman Ernst: So the question really is to Paul. I'm curious. I know that we've
collaborated with some other communities in doing these sealcoating projects and I'm glad to see
that you know we're continuing to do that on a broader level and I'm curious to know if you
have any idea, now that we're doing this collaboration and partnering with these other
communities, how much money we have saved by doing these joint ventures like this?
Paul Oehme: Sure. Thank you Mayor and Councilmember Ernst. Based upon last year's bids
and this year's bids, these are the first, these are the years that we actually contracted and jointly
bid out a project with Cologne and Waconia and a few other communities in Carver County.
From last year's bids we, it was a little bit bigger project. We estimated about 12% savings as
last year so I think it was right in the range of about $8,00049,000 for that project. This year it's
a little bit tighter. We had two I believe communities drop out. One didn't have the budget to do
a sealcoat project this year and the other one elected not to join it again this year so it's a little bit
smaller contract than we bid out last year. I still think that it was definitely a benefit for us to do
that. We did look at a northern metropolitan community. They do also do a joint project too, a
larger project and you know our bids were fairly comparable to actually a larger bid project this
year so it's a little bit hard to say this year. I think it's probably in the order of maybe 2 % -3 %.
It's not as big as it was last year but I do definitely think there was some partnering with other
communities did help the contracts this year.
2
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
Councilwoman Ernst: Alright. Well I just want to thank you for your continued efforts. I know
it might not be a small, or it might not be a high percentage this year but the fact that we have
savings out there is significant so thanks for your efforts in that.
Paul Oehme: Thank you. Yeah, and we're always looking for other partners. I know we talked
to Minnetonka School Districts and some other communities this year and they're evaluating if
they want to join next year as well too.
Councilwoman Ernst: Great.
Paul Oehme: Carver County's another one too so still looking for opportunities out there.
Councilwoman Ernst: Great, thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Any other questions? Councilwoman Ernst, would you like to move the
proposed motion for 1(e)?
Councilwoman Ernst: Sure.
Mayor Furlong: Just want to move the proposed. So moved.
Councilwoman Ernst: What's that? Just so moved.
Councilman Laufenburger: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Motion's been made for 1(e), has been moved and seconded based on staffs
recommendation. All those in favor, is there any discussion on the motion?
Resolution #2011 -19: Councilwoman Ernst moved, Councilman Laufenburger seconded
that the City Council awards the following contracts for the 2011 Sealcoat Project:
1) Allied Blacktop Company for roadway sealcoating in the amount of $183,712.61.
2) Twin City Striping for pavement striping in the amount of $6,705.50.
3) Fahrner Asphalt Sealers, LLC for pavement cracksealing in the amount of $40,000.00.
4) Pearson Bros. Inc for street sweeping in the amount of $13,200.00.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None.
LAW ENFORCEMENT /FIRE DEPARTMENT UPDATE.
Sgt. Peter Anderley: Good evening council, mayor. Again you have last month's numbers. If
there's any questions I'd be happy to answer anything that you would have off those numbers. A
couple of things that I guess I want to address to the public. Hopefully here we'll continue with
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
a little bit of warming and get rid of some of our snow. I just want to remind everybody that a
lot more joggers, bicycles and things like that you're hopefully going to start seeing here coming
up soon and just to remind people in your neighborhoods to slow down. We don't want to have
any accidents or tragedies with you know pedestrians, bicycles, skateboarders, that type of thing
so. Another good reminder if parents, if they've got young drivers that maybe recently got their
drivers license over winter, they're probably not used to seeing a lot of pedestrian traffic. You
know we have a lot of trails and everything like that in the city so we really want to make sure
that they're paying attention, not only for other vehicles but other pedestrians and stuff The
other thing is, is I noticed we still have some people trying to enjoy some ice fishing on area
lakes and as that starts to warm up that's going to also start to deteriorate and just remind people
that, really be cautious of the ice as it starts to warm up and starts to come off our area lakes.
The last is the flood situation. The last is the flood situation, most of you have probably received
the updates. On Carver County's website they're updating it at least once a day, sometimes
twice a day on the area road closures. 101. 41. I know Minnesota DOT's done some more
traffic involvement as far as 169 and also down on Highway 25 to help with some of the volumes
of traffic that are coming through there. No anticipated opening for either one of those roads so
just something to keep in mind as you get ready to travel, if you have to travel on the other side
of the river.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Councilwoman Tjornhom.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: You just brought up the fact that the snow was melting and people
are getting out there on their bikes and walking around so would you want to remind residents
about our solicitation ordinance and what the rules are and the hours and what people should do
in case they feel that there is a solicitor that isn't licensed or should not be at their door.
Sgt. Peter Anderley: Yeah you know again, you know another thing is warm comes up, there'll
be people out maybe going door to door selling products and that type of thing. They are
required to register with City Hall. If they do come you can ask you know if they are registered
with City Hall. If they have any questions or if they feel threatened by the person or suspicious
of anything, have them call dispatch center or 911 and we certainly can check them out to make
sure that everything is fine. We will get an increase you know as the warm weather comes up
with the door salesmen. There's also you know if they have questions beforehand they can
certainly contact City Hall as they have some stickers and some placards that they can use for
their personal residences.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: And I believe the latest they can be selling door to door is 8:00, is
that correct?
Sgt. Peter Anderley: I believe that is 8:00, yes. If anybody does have any questions the City
Code is on the web site. They can look it up and like I said I'm not off hand for sure but I
believe it is 8:00 p.m. And also with that the warm weather, we haven't seen the increase yet but
you know it also entices the people to be out wandering around more on foot and again hide your
valuables. Don't leave them in your personal vehicles. We're starting to see a lot more foot
traffic and that's when we get a tendency to have some vehicle break -in's and kind of do
opportunities and stuff
11
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
Mayor Furlong: Another question Sergeant Anderley, winter parking rules. In spite of the snow
outside I think they officially go off on Friday. On the 1 st , is that correct?
Sgt. Peter Anderley: Yep. April 1 st
Mayor Furlong: If there is a snowfall in April. That's a big if I'm not predicting anything. Can
people park on the streets then during the snowfall, if it's over 2 inches and needs to be plowed
or should they clear their cars so the plows can still get by?
Sgt. Peter Anderley: The easiest thing is just try to get your vehicle off the street until it's
plowed. Not only for, to get it plowed curb to curb but just for safety reasons. You know people
going down the streets, they're going to, you know with the slow, or with the snow on the
ground there's obviously not going to get very good traction and we don't want them to run into
anything so. If we do have a snow event in April, do everything you can to continue to get the
cars off the street until it's plowed curb to curb.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Very good. Thank you. Any other questions for the Sergeant? Very
good, thank you. Chief Smallback with the Chanhassen Fire Department's here this evening.
Good evening Chief.
Chief Roger Smallback: Good evening. Start with the statistics. We ended February with 41
calls. The month to date as of today we're at 128 calls for service and the calls for March as of
today is at 36 calls for service. For the month of March there were no fires, significant fires in
Chanhassen. We did respond to two mutual aid fires. One in Victoria and one in Eden Prairie.
The fire department, as Sergeant Anderley just talked about the flooding a little bit. The fire
department is working with the City Emergency Management and the National Weather Service
and are monitoring the conditions pretty much daily. Carver County does put out multiple
updates every day and we are monitoring those and monitoring the conditions up in the city. So
far the only significant impact in the city is the 101 closing and that's kind of an annual event
anyway. The fire department officer's meeting is this evening and part of that meeting will be
reviewing water emergency procedures and protocols with the officer group but as of yet we
have had no incidents where the fire department has responded to anything flood related so we
hope it stays that way. Any questions?
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any questions?
Councilman Laufenburger: I do have one.
Chief Roger Smallback: Yes sir.
Councilman Laufenburger: Chief, I think it was, I believe it was earlier this month there was a
gas leak at the Chanhassen Elementary. Was the fire department involved with that?
Chief Roger Smallback Yes they were.
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
Councilman Laufenburger: Can you just talk about the final disposition on that?
Chief Roger Smallback: Yeah. There was a leak at Chan Elementary. I'm not sure what, who it
was at the school initially called over to Mark Littfin, the City Fire Marshall and Mark went over
and checked it out. They immediately they evacuated the school but Mark went over. Checked
it out and it was found to be a minor leak and I believe it was in one of the heating devices and
stuff in there. We have air monitors, gas monitors, very sensitive monitors that we can check the
levels within the school. The levels were never at a combustible or explosive level. They were
all fairly low. They did ventilate the school and got all of the gas odor out of the school and let
the kids come back in. But yeah, we were involved in that we did check the combustible levels
and kind of gave them the all clear to come back in once they secured the leak.
Councilman Laufenburger: Okay. Thank you very much Chief.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any other questions? Very good Chief, thank you.
UPDATE ON CHANHASSEN HILLS SEWER BACKUP.
Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, City Council members. At our last City Council meeting staff
announced that Travelers, the City's general liability insurance company was going to get a more
experienced adjuster to take a look at the claims that were submitted to see if the City had any
liability as a part of the sewer back -up's that affected 27 homes in the Chanhassen Hills
neighborhood. Last Friday I received a letter from Travelers in which they announced again
denial of all claims. Based on that staff is recommending that the City Council approve a $2,500
reimbursement to the homeowners affected by the February 23 event and that provided a sewer
back up into these individuals properties and the reason for this is staff feels is that there may be
a potential public health concern. The $2,500 is a portion that would go towards the clean up
and as a part of that offer we would expect those individuals that would accept the offer, that
they would sign a full waiver and release of all claims to the event.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Questions for Mr. Gerhardt. No questions?
Councilman Laufenburger: Not at this time.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Mr. McDonald?
Councilman McDonald Actually if I could, I do have some questions but I'd like to defer them
until after we've heard from everybody if that's okay. At that point I may have questions for Mr.
Gerhardt also.
Mayor Furlong: That would certainly be fine. Okay. Let's go ahead as I mentioned earlier we
received some public comment on this issue at our last meeting but I want to make sure that
there's an opportunity for interested parties to come forward and address the council this evening
based upon staff s recommendation or anything else related to this issue you'd like to address to
the council so at this time I'll open up the meeting for public comment. I would ask when you
come forward please state your name and address at the podium and for purposes of people
I
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
watching at home as well if we can keep comments at the podium as opposed to just from the
general audience, that would be helpful for our minutes as well as the people watching at home
so please come forward at this time.
Amy Powell: My name is Amy Powell. Good evening. Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Good evening.
Amy Powell: My address is 8581 Chanhassen Hills Drive South. I have read the text of the
letter. Thank you. While we are pleased to be getting some traction on this issue at last, I did
want to draw attention I guess to the part of the letter that says this is equal to a payment made to
a property owner affected by a flood in 2010. We discussed at length the last time that we were
here why this event was different or unique as compared to other watermain breaks. I believe
that the one that this is referencing was a clean water break that wet a basement and the
reimbursement was done to dry the carpet. In our case, this was not just the matter of drying
carpet. That is what my bathroom looked like when it was flooded. This is what it looked like
after the mitigation. There is nothing in it. All of my sheetrock was cut up a foot around the
entire basement. So this is not just plain water cleaning. Everything that that water touched
needed to be ripped up. Bagged up. Disposed of and nothing that the water touched was able to
be kept. So we had to essentially gut our basement in the event that they were you know a
finished basement, we lost everything. This was my carpet and everything else that was in the
basement and this is kind of, this is just a picture of what it looked like in process. Around the
entire basement we had to re- sheetrock everything. We had to get new carpet. We had to you
know re -sand. Re- texture the walls. Repaint. New trim. New doors. New door frames.
Everything had to be replaced. So this is not just a, it got a little wet and you dried it out and
everything was fine. I mean that's what we're saying here. What I'm saying is that this is a
unique case and it needs to be treated in a unique manner. We had emergency services out in the
middle of the night cleaning up sewage out of our home. That was you know the people showed
up at my house at 11:30 at night to start cleaning out water and carpet so these things are not
inconsequential and they are not just easily rectified with you know a carpet cleaner. But I think
I would like the council to take that into account. You know the $2,500 does cover some of the,
the majority of the damage in some of the cases where the people have a third or fourth level
basement with you know maybe storage down there. In my case I have a split level so that was
fully 50% of my house and all we've done for a month in all of our time when we're not working
is fix and clean and I would just like to ask that that be considered in any kind of settlement
offer.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you.
Amy Powell: Thank you.
Glen Gerads: Mayor Furlong, council members. My name is Glen Gerads. I live at 1071
Barbara Court. Of course one of the affected homeowners from what I like to call the event. As
a way of introduction I would like to mention that I have been employed in municipal water,
waste water field for over 30 years. I am presently the Assistant Utilities Superintendent for the
City of Bloomington. Needless to say I'm well versed in this subject matter. Water and waste
7
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
water is what I do. I have a few issues I would like to address and I'd like to start by saying
hopefully there's not a lot of redundancy here but if there is I apologize ahead of time. It's been
stated several times that what happened in the Chanhassen Hills development is unique.
Regardless of liability the event is a failure of both the water system and the waste water system.
It is not a routine sewer backup nor is it a routine watermain break. In my 30 years in
Bloomington we have had one similar event. Don't compare it to other watermain breaks. Don't
compare it to other sewer backup's. Frame it and treat this as a unique event that it is. I'd like to
talk about Travelers Insurance. Wow. They're inability to adequately review this case is just
mind boggling. The claims adjustment center in San Antonio is clueless to what really happened
as evident by their second rejection letter. Just a quick recap. Unhappy with the initial review a
second review is requested by Manager Gerhardt, and we appreciate that. I decided a more
experienced Travelers staff was going to take a look at the claim. When I received the second
letter rejecting the claim I was not surprised. What was surprising was the line near the end of
the letter which read, and I quote, this event occurred due to a pipe freezing and subsequently
thawing. The pipe in question is 8 feet deep and did not freeze. If Travelers wants to stand by
that statement then I suggest there's a major installation issue and hence there is liability.
Additionally I'd be concerned about all the other water pipes in Chanhassen and the entire water
system because we're in big trouble. Again the pipe did not freeze. At this point there is zero
confidence in Travelers' ability to adequately investigate this event, nonetheless mitigate it.
Third. In the community I work for the utility division on behalf of the City overall offers
Service Master service immediately after we identify a positive sanitary sewer main line backup.
This is not an admission of liability on the City's part but rather a good will gesture to help
residents deal with a difficult situation. A similar offer should have been made to the
Chanhassen Hills residents weeks ago. Fourth. The $2,500 amount being proposed is wholly
inadequate. Plain and simple it does not even cover the initial remediation costs for most of us,
and in my case it was $3,200 and I feel that the amount of damage I had was minimum compared
to some of my neighbors. The council should consider a dollar amount closer to the industry
standard up to $10,000 set by the Minnesota League of Cities Insurance Trust. I believe this
amount would make approximately 80% of the affected residents whole with respect to the clean
up and structural repairs. I have a copy of the League's coverage if anyone is interested.
Specifically in the document is a discussion regarding the argument supporting the distribution
of public funds to pay for damages sustained from events similar to the one which occurred in
Chanhassen Hills. You can legally pay out amount substantially greater than $2,500 if you
desire to do so. Fifth I ask you to look at what Edina did in a similar situation in 2002. I hope
that you've all been given Edina's resolution regarding that event.
Councilwoman Ernst: Yeah I think so.
Glen Gerads: If not I have a copy or I can read it to you, whichever you decide.
Mayor Furlong: If you have copies that's fine. I don't know that they've been distributed.
Glen Gerads: Well let me say that they have a similar event, almost identical. Same insurance
company. Everything. The initial proposal by staff was to pay $10,000. Up to $10,000. The
council decided that $10,000 wasn't adequate and they upped it to 15. Finally I would just like
to say the $2,500 reimbursement, if you decide that the $2,500 reimbursement is adequate, it
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
should be given without a waiver for full and final release of the claim. I feel the $2,500 is not
enough money to negate a person's ability to seek further compensation if desired. At this point
in the process the gesture feels less like good will and more like bribery, extortion, manipulation,
pick a term. It is not enough money, it is enough money to take note of but not enough to
compete for the loss and as such should be covered up with no strings attached. Council you
have the opportunity to do the right thing here. When collectively you come to some final
resolution on this issue ask yourselves, is this how a city ranked number 2 in small towns
nationwide wants to treat it's residents. Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you.
Veronica Scholz: Mayor Furlong, council members, City Manager Gerhardt. My name is
Veronica Scholz. I live at 1070 Lake Susan Drive and I addressed the council a couple weeks
ago at your meeting. I agree with everything that Glen just said, and he said it better than I could
have said and really knows the business. I have 3 concerns. I have a concern about fairness. I
have a concern about lack of due diligence and I have a concern about kind of the hidden costs
that we are all going to incur as part of this event. My first concern about fairness is, I appreciate
the work that the city staff has done in following up with Travelers and in coming forward with a
proposal for $2,500 and at face value that may seem fair but we all experienced different
amounts of damages. My home happens to have a full basement that is completely finished and
our damage to our home was over $20,000 not including personal property damage. That's just
the structural, carpet, sheet rock, ripping everything out. The pictures that you had up here
earlier could be my home except the sheet rock's up 2 feet. We had a bathroom that apparently
in hind sight served as a conduit for additional sewage to come up through the home so we have
more holes in our basement for the sewage to come up and although the $2,500 probably will
cover many of the homeowners costs for unfinished basements or smaller basements, it's not fair
that one homeowner may be compensated close to 100% of their cost and our compensation is
going to be more closer to 10% of our cost and the range is higher and lower inbetween. My
second concern I raised at the last City Council meeting and I continue to be concerned about
that and kind of the lack of what I'll call due diligence. I was disappointed that evening that the
city staff who were working in the streets did not come around to our homes and inform us about
it and in fact if our neighbor Humphrey's son had not come over we may not have known about
that for a day or two. We don't go into our basement every day. We work full time. We're busy
people so fortunately Mitchell came over and told us to go down into our basement. My other
concern about the lack of due diligence is related to the $2,500 being comparable to a clean
water event like Amy talked about in the other event in Chanhassen. We have not been
contacted by the City for our damage estimates. Nobody has come to look at our home to see
what is a fair amount. How much damage you know was involved there. Also I'm concerned
about the hidden cost that relates to all of this. I'm not asking for compensation for these things
but I'm asking for consideration. My husband and I worked from 8:00 p.m. until 2:30 in the
morning cleaning up stuff that was in our basement and then we took the day off of work the
next day so that we could have a crew come in at 8:00 that morning. We had 8 guys working in
our house for over 4 hours clearing out the carpeting. The sheet rock. Everything. I'm also
concerned about our loss of property value. All of the homes impacted by this event will need to
report this when we go to sell our homes and it's impossible to say how much that impact is but I
can say that's not going to be a selling point that we had sewage in our basement. Thirdly, you
7
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
know an additional point is a potential loss of insurance. We received this letter from our
insurance company that says that you know due to a Minnesota statute, because we had a claim
on our insurance. What?
Mayor Furlong: It's upside down.
Veronica Scholz: Oh sorry.
Mayor Furlong: That's okay. Sorry to interrupt.
Veronica Scholz: Because we had a claim on our insurance, we were fortunate that we had some
coverage for this. Because we had a claim on our insurance, our insurance may not be renewed
and I've been informed by our agent that our, if our insurance is not renewed due to the claim
that no other insurance company will likely want to insure us so we may have to go into a state
pool or go to the State of Minnesota and ask for help in getting insurance coverage. And no
doubt it will increase our insurance cost. There's also the potential for you know mold and
mildew, although we've done everything possible but when you have a water event you know or
sewage event to the extent that we had, you know possible future damages could happen so in
closing I'll just say that my husband and I have lived in Chanhassen for 18 years. We enjoy
living here. We contribute to the community and we're asking that the Mayor, asking Mayor
Furlong, you and the City Council come up with a fair resolution for ourselves and for our
neighbors. I mean I hear almost daily when I go to the grocery store or the bank or at work,
people cannot believe that this will not be covered. This, our community. People that I'm
hearing from and that my neighbors are hearing from cannot believe that we are going to have to
bear the cost of this event. So I would ask that the council ask the city staff to go back and come
up with a fair proposal that is based on the actual damages incurred by this event. Thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Could I ask you a question? Do you mind staying for a question?
You said that you did have some insurance coverage.
Veronica Scholz: Yes.
Mayor Furlong: Was it simply not enough to cover it or what were the limits on the?
Veronica Scholz: Yeah we have, we had $10,000 in coverage and we have over $20,000 in
structural damage and not including like personal property. We had a couch in the basement. A
piano in the basement. Electronic equipment. Other you know, other things like that so we did
get the $10,000 in coverage but that's not, that's not going to take care of the whole event for us.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you.
A.J. Dordel: Hello. I'm A.J. Dordel. I live at 1030 Lake Susan Drive. We were one of the, like
many of our closer neighbors living up here talking, one of the ones that were hit the hardest and
I guess I had sent a email around kind of copying on Amy's and forwarded onto you this
afternoon but it was very late in the day so I thought I would just reiterate a little bit and again
trying to get the sense of the type of loss that this is as a black water loss. Everything that the
10
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
water touches that is porous which means any wood, of course the sheet rock and whatever and
so you saw pictures of Amy's. I'll maybe, our basement looks the same. I don't have pictures
but you've seen my house in front of the Chan Villager with a big dumpster outside and my
bathroom was on the TV news so full of mud and whatever it was. So I guess you know our, a
couple other things. We had a fully furnished basement. It's not a split so it wasn't a half size
basement. It was a full basement underneath our entire house. The mitigation alone, just the
clean -up I estimate to be about $7,500 by the time everything is done. In addition to the people
who rip out the carpet and everything else, if you've got appliances and things down there, you
have to have people come out and check those. We happen to have a gas fireplace. I'm not sure
if it's going to continue to work. The mitigation crew talked about getting some, a specialist out
you know from the fire place company to get behind it. Make sure there's not water and that
type of thing still there with the bacteria in it. You know all the antimicrobial sprays that they do
as well as needing to paint you know because when they take their sheet rock out they also take
the insulation out so you have to replace the insulation and you can see the water line on even the
outside wood you know of the basement which needs to be painted over with an antimicrobial
paint and all that as well as the studs that were sitting in it. So again I just want to, want to just
make sure you understand the extent of this type of an event. Not to count of course all the
furnishings. The things that you were able to save aren't anything as maybe had metal legs or
something that can be cleaned off but anything wood, including you know TV stands and pool
table. Things like that that have absorbed the bacterial water that was in our basement so again I
just want to kind of reiterate that. Regards to the insurance we, like the last person who
presented Veronica, have $10,000 worth of insurance coverage. I believe that's as much or more
than probably anybody has. I had to, I actually paid extra to get $10,000. That's not, normally it
might be nothing or it might be $5,000 that's included with a typical insurance policy so thank
you.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Anyone else who would like to address the council this
evening on this? Not this evening? Okay. Very good, thank you everyone. We'll close for
public comment then. Let me bring it back to the council. There may be some questions that
have been raised or other questions that people have for city staff Councilwoman Ernst, do you
have a question?
Councilwoman Ernst: Yeah I do. Paul can you tell me did the adjuster go to the homes to
review the damage as well as any part of the structure that caused the damage?
Paul Oehme: I refer back to Todd Gerhardt but I don't believe that the adjuster from Travelers
came out to the site.
Todd Gerhardt: No.
Councilwoman Ernst: Okay.
Todd Gerhardt: City staff was out on the site. I think Kevin our Sewer and Water
Superintendent made it to about half of the homes and then he needed to deal with the press and
also the, getting the watermain fixed. So he only made it to about half the homes.
11
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
Mayor Furlong: That evening, is that correct?
Todd Gerhardt: That evening.
Mayor Furlong: And then was there contact made the following day I thought by city staff?
Todd Gerhardt: Yes. Laurie Hokkanen started processing claims and making contact with the
neighborhood.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Councilwoman Ernst: So just to clarify, Travelers did not go out to look at any of the damages.
Todd Gerhardt: No they did not.
Councilwoman Ernst: Okay. Thank you. We're going to do comments later.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Any other questions?
Councilman Laufenburger: Mr. Mayor I just have a comment for clarification if you don't mind.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Councilman Laufenburger: We've seen the reference to 27 homes. I don't think 27 homes is an
accurate number for either the number of homes that were affected or the number of claims that
were made. To the best of my knowledge I think it's, if we look at the footprint of where the
sewer backup occurred, I think that includes about 31 homes. 31 or 32. Now it's true some of
the homeowners had very minimal damage but there was some back up in some of the homes but
if you map out the coordinates and you map the addresses that are on the reference list there are
clearly some homes that are not on there and I earlier today I had conversation with city staff and
I'm comfortable that they have approached all of the homes that were significantly affected
enough. My only point in raising this is that I don't think 27 is an accurate number for either the
number of homes that were affected or the number of claims that were made.
Mayor Furlong: In terms of contacting Councilor Laufenburger I think, and Mr. Gerhardt, after
our meeting 2 weeks ago there was an additional attempt to make contact, was there not? By
city staff Mr. Gerhardt.
Todd Gerhardt: I think we added 2 additional homes to the original 25 list that was out there.
And then Councilmember Laufenburger mentioned 2 other homes. We made contact with them
and in both cases they did not want to submit claims.
Councilman Laufenburger: And that satisfied my interest Mayor. My only point is that, what
we should refer to is the affected homes and the homes that have chosen to submit a claim. I
think that's the relative, the relevant information. Okay?
12
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
Mayor Furlong: Alright. Any other questions for staff? Mr. McDonald.
Councilman McDonald: I actually have got a couple of questions but the first one I've got is
that, based upon staff's recommendations, if I look at this, what you have recommended is that
we pay out $67,500. Where is that money going to come from within the budget?
Todd Gerhardt: It would come from our sewer utility fund.
Councilman McDonald: And would that then necessitate us having to go back and look at rate
increases up on the sewer? Sewer and water.
Todd Gerhardt: I'm not sure. Typically in October - November we take a look at our rate study
procedures and see if there's a need for a rate increase or not and you know until we go through
that process I couldn't answer if it would be an increase or not. Speculation would be that there
would be some type of slight increase but based on other factors of what our expenses and how
revenues came in, that would have to be taken into account when we go through the rate study.
Councilman McDonald: Okay if we upped it to $10,000 a residence that's now $270,000.
Would that, would the money still come from the same fund or are we looking at a number of
funds does that also require that we now go back and that would necessitate a rate increase?
Todd Gerhardt: If you solely probably took it out of the sewer and water utility fund without any
other transfers you would probably be looking at some type of rate increase.
Councilman McDonald: Significant? Small? Medium? Your best guess. I know you can't,
I'm just looking for an order of magnitude.
Todd Gerhardt: I would say small. Based on the fact that you could stretch this out over a
period of time. This is a one time event so it's one payment. It's not something that is going to
be an expense from year to year so it'd be looked at as a one time expense. If you're going to
put in a lift station for $270,000, it's a one time installation and cost.
Councilman McDonald: Okay. Now Travelers turned down the claim and was that based upon
no negligence on the part of the City?
Todd Gerhardt: That's correct. Travelers uses the basis of were city staff out at the site in a
timely manner and did we have any knowledge of the potential of this pipe breaking. Was there
anything that we could have done to prevent it or know that it was going to break. You know
some situations when we flush hydrants, if you open up the valve on the hydrant too quickly you
could get a vibration. You could break a watermain that way. You know that's just one
example.
Councilman McDonald: Okay, and then because of the lack of negligence on the City's part
from a legal perspective, and maybe you can't answer this but maybe our counsel can, what's the
impact upon the City? What exactly does that mean by saying we have no negligence in any of
this?
13
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
Roger Knutson: It means that obviously Travelers denied the claim because they cover us for
acts of negligence. If there is no fault on the City's part they will not pay the claim.
Councilman McDonald: Okay so what they're saying is from their investigation and from their
review of the records and everything the City was not at fault for this event?
Roger Knutson: That's correct.
Councilman McDonald: Okay. That's all the questions I have for right now. I'm sure some
others will pop up as we talk about this but that answers what I had initially.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any other questions? Councilwoman Tjornhom.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Mr. Oehme could you maybe, in the staff report there was a list of
incidents that have happened. I think there was like probably 7 or 8 of them. Talk about really
our city and what you have seen as civil engineer as far as pipe breakage and are there any trends
or is this an anomaly?
Paul Oehme: I would consider this event as an anomaly. There has been some valve issues
down in this area that were fixed back in 2006 and some other miscellaneous services. Issues in
this area as well. The City does look globally at our whole infrastructure. Watermain break
issues. We map it out annually. Update it and there are some areas in town that have received
more watermain breaks than others. Those are typically the older neighborhoods. The ones with
the cast iron pipes and the more corrosive soils. Typically clay soils. Those are the soils that
they would move around in the wintertime as well too so we've identified those areas and we
have entered those into our pavement management program too and those typically are
considered areas that we will propose for street reconstructions and at that time replace those
utilities, sewer, water infrastructure so. But you know again this is more of an anomaly. One
time. Never seen a break like this before since I've been here obviously but breaks do occur. I
mean we surveyed other communities in this area and they experienced this same level, volume
of watermain breaks as we do so it's kind of the nature of the area.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Anything else at this time? Councilwoman Tjornhom? No? Thank
you. Did you have a question?
Councilwoman Ernst: No I just have, when we're ready to make comments.
Mayor Furlong: Couple of the residents Mr. Gerhardt talked about the flooded basement, and it
was referenced in your staff report. Can you give us some background on what happened there
and what the situation was and the amount that the property owner was, that they were asking for
cost reimbursement?
Todd Gerhardt: Yes. That individual experienced a watermain break that, with minimal frost in
the ground so it came straight up and followed his driveway and went down his driveway into his
window wells to his basement and accumulated 2 to 3 inches of water in the basement. His
14
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
request for reimbursement was around $12,000. He had no homeowners insurance coverage for
this type of coverage and city staff decided to reimbursement him $2,500 to basically take out
the carpet and wet vac the moisture out of the floor of the basement.
Mayor Furlong: Homeowners insurance has been mentioned a few times tonight. Do we have
any sense of the number of properties that were affected by this? That had, property owners that
had insurance coverage for this type of incident.
Todd Gerhardt: Do not have an inventory of who had homeowners insurance and who did not.
Mayor Furlong: Alright. Okay. Any other questions at this point? I guess I have one other
question. We've heard some different comments this evening about the cost of clean -up. Do we
have any sense of what the cost range are from the information we received or people we've
talked to? And I guess I'm, maybe I'm differentiating between the cost to clean up and the cost
to repair or restore any other losses.
Todd Gerhardt: Yeah. I've had conversations with Service Master and they gave me ranges for
just a typical clean up would be somewhere between $2,000 and $2,500 and you know
depending on the magnitude of how much water is in the basement. If it's finished. Not
finished. Carpeted. Not carpeted, the range will go up dramatically if it is a finished basement.
But they typically say kind of a phase I clean up is anywhere around that $2,500 dollar amount.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Councilman McDonald: Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Furlong: Mr. McDonald.
Councilman McDonald: I have a question. I take it that because we're doing reconstruction in
these basements, permits are going to be required to be pulled in order to do that?
Todd Gerhardt: That's correct.
Councilman McDonald: Okay are we doing anything as far as waiving fees on those permits and
anything as far as being able to expedite any inspections that would be required?
Todd Gerhardt: City staff sat down and had a discussion on that and we believe that if they
pulled a permit to have a finished basement, that that permit could still be alive and they would
not have to pay a fee but we would go back in and inspect it based on that previous permit.
Councilman McDonald: Okay.
Mayor Furlong: Any other questions at this point? If not, thoughts or comments.
Councilwoman Ernst did you want?
15
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
Councilwoman Ernst: Yeah. My comments are going to be lengthy so bear with me. I know
we've heard many of the stories but I'm sure from many of you and I'm sure that it doesn't even
come close to actually living the experience. Aside from the communication issue that has been
mentioned several times which we need to address, we have a process in place whereas the City
submits a documentation based on the information that city staff has submitted to the insurance
company, i.e. the claim. The piece that is missing for me in this situation is the validation of the
claim. I know we don't want to think the City was at fault but in essence paying each
homeowner $2,500 basically says we own this to some degree so I do believe that there's more
work to be done. I'm not sure how much $2,500 will really cover in each situation. Obviously it
doesn't cover the majority of it for many of you. This money is not free money. It still comes
out of taxpayer's pockets. My concern is this. If we are making a payment to these residents
and we have not equally made payments to others, with the exception of the one mentioned in
our packets this evening, where we've had similar situations. Maybe not identical but very
similar. Where is the balance and the equality? We did not pay them and what about future
breaks? Are we setting a precedence here? Legally we may not be setting a precedence but what
does that look like in the eyes of others? At the end of the day I feel very strongly about the fact
that the residents definitely need to be compensated if the City is liable in any way, shape or
form for the damage that occurred and the insurance company should pay. That's why we, the
City, taxpayers pay for insurance. No different than those who pay for personal insurance. But
I'm not okay with making others pay for the damage when the conclusion up to this point is that
the City is not liable. I'm not okay with setting precedence for future situations similar to this.
We can call it a unique situation but I can tell you that it is perceived by others to not be so
unique. And again if we are responsible then let's pay but let's do it through the process that we
have in place, not at the expense of others. Having said all of this I would like to see the
information that was submitted to the insurance company and I would like to also see the data
that shows any watermain breaks in the same areas. We might even want to involve a third party
to evaluate the situation because it is so sensitive. And I want to make sure that we're not
missing any pertinent information so with that I will make a motion at this time that we table this
issue until we have more information to make a good decision.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. A motion's been made to table this issue. Is there a second?
Councilman McDonald: I think before we second I would like to continue to discuss this. I'm
not saying I would not go along with Councilman Ernst's motion but I do think there are issues
that should play out so if we can table her motion.
Councilman Laufenburger: As a point of order Mr. Mayor, we have a motion on the table. If it's
seconded there will be discussion about it but if there is no second there should be no discussion
at this time.
Mayor Furlong: Yep. I'm asking for a second. Actually a motion to table is not debatable so if
there is a second we go straight to the vote but I'll ask for a second at this time.
Councilwoman Ernst: For discussion right?
16
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
Mayor Furlong: No. The motion to table is non debatable but hearing no second then the
motion is not seconded and we'll continue with our discussion this evening.
Councilman McDonald: I would ask Councilman Ernst to withdraw her motion until we have all
had an opportunity to discuss this and then at that point if you want to bring it back, I would
probably second it.
Councilwoman Ernst: Okay.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Well at this point it hasn't been seconded. You withdraw?
Councilwoman Ernst: Right. Yep.
Mayor Furlong: So there'll be opportunities for motions later. Other discussion. Councilman
McDonald.
Councilman McDonald: Well first of all I am probably in a unique position in the fact that I did
suffer a loss such as this back in 1987 when we had the flood event in Chanhassen. The sewers
backed up on my street causing the water to back up in my yard. Causing my basement wall to
collapse at which point I lost everything in my basement so I understand exactly what you're
going through. I understand the emotional part of all of this. I went through a lot. Took me a
long time to get mine settled but I did not receive any money from the City in order to do that. I
do agree with Councilman Ernst in the fact that there is a process that we do need to go through
and I think paying any money at all at this point sets a very bad precedent for the City. It does
create a legal problem. Going back to the clean water clean up, that was before I was on the
council. I don't think that would have gotten my support just because of issues such as this. The
other thing that I wanted to say also is that I think this entire issue has been inflamed by citizens
within the community. There have been articles in the newspaper attributing council members of
certain positions whereas tonight is the first night that any one from council has actually spoken.
I think all those comments were meant to be inflammatory and to just be made for political gain.
We all feel your pain. We understand that this has been a very traumatic event to everyone out
there and we are not just sloughing it off and saying well it didn't happen to us. It happened to
you. Tough. You know shape up. But the other problem is that this is 27 to 32 homes. There
are 10, well there's at least 100 times that within the community. We take a responsibility to the
entire community and as Councilman Ernst has said this money comes from somewhere. It
comes from people's pockets. In December when we were going through the budget there were
fellow citizens in here raking us over the coals for taking money out of their pockets that would
equal the price of a slice of pizza. This clean up exceeds a slice of a piece of pizza. As a matter
of fact we could probably buy enough pizza for the entire community so this is a very sensitive
issue. We have a great responsibility I feel to not only you but also to the other members of this
community. Therefore you know I'm in agreement that the process must work. There is more
information that needs to be put out there and I'm afraid part of the process could be bringing
suit against the City and at that point if the City is found to be negligent, then the insurance will
pay. That's thee way the insurance is written but there must be a finding of negligence. Right
now that does not exist. I understand that lawsuits are not easy. That they're costly. I do this for
a living so I understand the problems you're going through but you will recover your legal fees if
17
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
you win. I'm sorry but you know that is the way the system works. That's the way the process
has to work or else you know we might as well just sit up here and everyone that can come to us
with any kind of a story where they think the City has wronged them, we just hand out money. I
don't think you want us doing that. I think you want us to go through each of these issues in a
very thoughtful and a very measured manner. That we look at all sides and we listen to all of the
information and make our decision based upon that. I think that this is a not a usual event. As a
matter of fact I think that's exactly the words used by Mr. Gerads.
Glen Gerads: Gerads.
Councilman McDonald Gerads. And he has experience in the business that you're right. There
were an unusual set of circumstances that came together here to cause this so I too would rather
wait before we go and do anything and to find out what happens. I mean at this point I do feel
$2,500 does not begin to approach the damage that you all have suffered or the emotional trauma
that everyone has been through so I think from that standpoint that's not even a viable offer.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Other comments.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: I'll go ahead.
Mayor Furlong: Councilwoman Tjornhom.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: After our last meeting I spoke with some of our residents and I think
one thing we all agree is that we're a community and that we love living in Chanhassen. I love
being a City Council member from Chanhassen and I don't think we wish any of ourselves any
harm so obviously what has happened is really, really bad. I mean it's a tragedy and we would
wish it upon no one else. What I'm angry about tonight is the fact that the insurance companies
are pitting us against each other because if the insurance companies had stepped up and done
what we had paid them to do, we probably wouldn't be having this conversation right now. And
that's what I truly believe and I think it's a shame that they are going to bring us to this next
level where you know people will probably have to be sued and this will continue and I don't
think that's right at all and so what I'm going to ask is that when this is over tonight, at some
point we meet as a council and we have a long discussion about Travelers Insurance and if they
really are providing us a good service and if they are protecting us and you because if we were to
write out the amount that you're asking us to, as the City of Edina did, or even more, that's the
whole budget of our Rec Department. Or that's 2 police officers or a CEO officer. I mean you
know if you're going to equivalent cash money to what we spend stuff on, it's a lot of money and
we do budget things and we look you know public safety is a concern for us and our parks are a
concern for us and we love those things and we wouldn't lose them but I'm just letting you know
that that's the equivalent of what we would have to pay out. And so I just think that if tonight if
you were to settle for $2,500 you're letting Travelers Insurance and even your insurance
companies get away with murder and I just don't think that's fair for you or for us and so I just
can't support either necessarily writing a check and making you guys still have to go back and
find money and find a way to pay for what has happened and then we have set a precedence and
I just don't think anyone wins in that case and so I also will not supporting the dollar amount that
I:
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
staff has proposed. I would support doing nothing and leaving it in the insurance company's
hands.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you Councilwoman Tjornhom. Councilman Laufenburger.
Councilman Laufenburger: Thank you Mr. Mayor. I'm the rookie here so I defer to the wisdom
of my fellow council members in many things but it doesn't prevent me from forming a view and
I will share that at this time. Just a point of clarification. I believe it was Mr. Gerhardt that
referenced the City of Edina and the amount that they had authorized. I think it's important to
recognize that the City of Edina did not write checks in the amount of $15,000 to their
homeowners. They stipulated an amount up to as long as it could be identified as expenses paid
for cleaning, sanitizing, things like that. They offered nothing in the replacement of personal
effects. And I'm absolutely convinced that we cannot satisfy everybody tonight or even in the
future. But just a couple of comments that I'd like to share with the residents. I understand that
the decision for remedy, that the citizens in Chanhassen Hills, Lake Susan Drive and Barbara
Court, and by the way that's my neighborhood. These are my neighbors. I walk my dog. My
wife and I walk our dog past them on a regular basis when there's no snow on the ground. I
recognize that what they were expecting and hoping for has taken much longer than they would
have liked. However, as elected representatives of the City we have a responsibility as council
members, a responsibility and an obligation to be patient allowing all the facts and the points of
consideration to be made clear so that we don't act haphazardly, if in fact we act at all. We now
know that the decision of Travelers is that the City is not guilty of negligence and therefore they
will not pay those claims made by the homeowners. We also have staff recommendation, not a
decision but a recommendation for a payment to be made to each homeowner that has made a
claim in the interest of public health and safety, and I understand that public health and safety is
a concern here. But I've also learned through wise counsel from our lawyer and Mr. Mayor and
other members that over the last 3 months I've learned that council can do anything we deem
appropriate. And though anything we do will be subject to legal, public and media scrutiny and
may or may not be acceptable in any of those courts of opinion. Now for my consideration there
are three important factors. Number one, this is a unique event for Chanhassen and I am hard
pressed to look at previous situations to gauge or temper my decisions or actions. A watermain
break that cracks a driveway or damages a basement is not the same as a break that fills a sewer
main, causes back up into 30 plus homes and poses a potential public health and safety risk to the
current and future inhabitants. Point number two. If we as a council act to direct payment of any
sort to these homeowners it must be done in a fair manner, and we have to decide what is fair
and appropriate in the public interest. And Mr. Gerhardt clarified earlier that payment for this
would come out of utility enterprise funds and as it's been stated this is the fund that receives
payment for usage of the utilities. If funds are taken out of these utilities, they must be
replenished. They would be replenished from all the citizens of Chanhassen that use those
facilities. It's our utility fund. It's our sewer system. It doesn't belong to somebody inside City
Hall. It's our's. We share in it. Point number three. I've lived in Chanhassen 16 years now and
I believe that Chanhassen is a community marked by character, vitality and caring compassion
for our fellow neighbors and I believe that the hardship that landed on these homes and families
could potential land one day on others in the community. And if it did no doubt that event would
be subject to the same scrutiny, just as this one has been and as Mr. Scholz commented in the
comments that she's receiving from people that she encounters, I believe that the entire
19
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
community is feeling some degree of pain and suffering when things like this occur. Whether
it's a watermain break. Whether it's a car accident in a neighborhood. We are a community that
shares the joy and pain of one another. There are roughly 7,500 water and sewer accounts in
Chanhassen. Roughly half the number that's in Edina by the way. And I believe that a good
decision in this unique circumstance is that the substantial burden of remedy for these
homeowners be shared by a small sacrifice of assistance across all the users of the public utility
so I would support a recommendation for payment up to a specified amount per household in
exchange for release of any liability on the part of the City for the purpose of cleaning and
sanitizing these homes in the interest of public health and safety. And one more thing Mr.
Mayor. I agree with the comments about Travelers Insurance but I, to a certain degree I feel
helpless about that so I think it's a very good suggestion as was pointed out in Mr. Gerhardt's
report. That the city staff explore the benefits, trade -off s and the cost associated with this no
fault sewer back up insurance that some insurance companies offer. This may be a way for us to
be better prepared to address the financial impacts of future events like Chanhassen Hills. And I
do have just one last comment. I have insurance on my home and the insurance on my home
covers the entire cost of my home. It doesn't cover 70% or 80 %. I make sure that that insurance
covers everything in my home including my personal property and I think as a minimum we
need to use this as a reminder to all citizens of Chanhassen to review the insurance policy for
which they are responsibility for and that is what's inside their home so that's my comments Mr.
Mayor.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Alright, thank you. Thank you. First of all let me start by thanking
the residents that have been involved this evening and spoke this evening as well as those before
and those that have sent emails and other correspondence and have been involved. This has been
a situation that I think everybody can empathize with. I know that I can't think of a single
person that I've spoken to over the last 4 weeks that didn't immediately recognize the difficulty
that the homeowners in this case that were affected by this must be going through. There is that
sense, common sense of connection that I think has been spoken about here tonight. There's
been a lot of discussion about insurance as well. Both insurance for the City standpoint to cover
our liabilities and from the homeowners standpoint to cover their possessions and property. My
sense is, while we don't have the specific numbers. In fact we heard tonight here that some of
the homeowners had some insurance, it may not have been at the level necessary to cover their
complete loss. We don't know that everybody did and my sense is from just hearsay comments
that likely not everybody did have insurance. The homeowners which has caused part of the
frustration and angst that I'm sure that they're going through and I think Councilor
Laufenburger's comments about for the 27, 30 people that were affected, you know I'm guessing
that they became very aware of what was and wasn't covered by their insurance policy very
quickly the next day but I think it is something that everybody else can look at. That being said I
think that there are, you know if the City has liability in a situation we carry insurance for that.
Our current insurance is Travelers. Everybody knows that and if we are liable then we have
coverage for that and that's a responsible position for us to take. The challenge comes up
obviously when, when if there is no liability for payments to be made. I think there's generally
I've heard comments from everybody here this evening about the, or the recommendation from
staff is well received it probably doesn't meet anybody's position as to what would be
appropriate. If there's payments to be made by the part of the City, if there's an issue from a
public interest standpoint I think that issue lies with public safety. Public health. From a clean
20
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
up standpoint but I think there are some limits there. Bottom line I think that you know unless
there's liability on the part of the City here it's difficult for us to cover costs for property owners
which was insurable by the property owners. We can talk about where the fault or liability is.
At this point from information that I've received it has not been the City's fault or liability. If
there was anything that we could do, and if it makes sense to look for more information as
suggested earlier, whether or not the cost of the clean up or participation in the cost of the clean
up might be something from a public health standpoint again but I don't know that we're at that
point this evening to pursue that so at this point you know I don't know that we're going to give
an answer here tonight that the residents were hoping to hear. In fact I'm pretty sure we're not
based on the comments that I've heard, and to the extent that there is additional information that
council members would like, if this issue comes back before us, I think we can address that to
staff so they can gather that information. If indeed it comes back before us again. Unless there
are other events though I don't know what we necessarily would change in terms of bringing the
issue back at a future meeting, unless there's updates or other information that we receive. So
Councilwoman Ernst you had suggested some additional information you'd like to receive.
Councilwoman Ernst: Yeah I personally would just like to see that information and again.
Mayor Furlong: Specific, I'm sorry could you repeat what information you were looking for?
Councilwoman Ernst: Oh. So I'd like to see what was submitted to the insurance company as a
part of, as the claim and I'd like to see any data that shows any watermain breaks that were in the
same area. I mean as I said earlier we may have to involve a third party in this situation to
evaluate truly what it is so.
Councilman McDonald: If I could. I think that I would like to see all the reports too that have
been submitted to Travelers. What went in? What did Travelers write back? What's the basis
for their decision making so that we know exactly what's going on. At this point we as council
have really not seen any of this and I think because of the magnitude of this it is incumbent upon
us to understand fully what's going on here so I think there may be issues that need to come
back. I would echo and support that at some point down the road once we get past this we do
need to review our insurance policies. We need to go through that in probably pretty fine detail
so that's the type of information that I think Councilwoman Ernst is talking about and I would
support her in that. I think we need to be informed. Instead of just sitting back the way that we
are now, we either independently gathering our own information or you know being fed
information as, well some of what I've learned tonight came from the residents and I think I
should have known it before then so that's the type of stuff I would like to see.
Mayor Furlong: And Mr. McDonald if I could ask, by the claim information, cost for clean up.
Cost for restoration. Cost for repair.
Councilman McDonald: Well I'd like to see cost for clean up. I'd like to see something, what
damages did every house suffer? What is the claim? What's the magnitude of what we're
talking about? What was submitted to Travelers? What's the written description of that claim?
What did they say in there that says the City's not at fault? What did they base that upon?
We've already heard tonight that obviously they didn't go to the site so what was that based
21
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
upon? Is it based upon case law that says well because of that there is you know immunity based
upon the City being a sovereign? That's fine. I'd like to know what they based it on so as I
make future decisions upon all this I have something to go from so I think we need to get more
educated.
Mayor Furlong: Councilwoman Tjornhom.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Mr. Mayor if I may. I think Councilwoman Ernst and McDonald
both wanted to see a history of the back up's in our city. On page 149 of our report there is a
sewer back up history from 2002 to 2011.
Mayor Furlong: Right.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: That was submitted by staff so that is there.
Councilwoman Ernst: So it, sorry.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: No, that's okay.
Councilwoman Ernst: Is that everything? That includes every watermain break that has
occurred in that area?
Paul Oehme: No, this is city wide for just sewer back up's.
Councilwoman Ernst: Okay. Right. So I was talking about all watermain breaks in those areas.
Just for clarification.
Councilman Laufenburger: Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Furlong: Mr. Laufenburger.
Councilman Laufenburger: As Councilman McDonald has discussed, I think there are two
groups of information that could be relevant. First of all is the claims submitted to the City and
then to Travelers by the homeowners. Do they go directly to Travelers or do they go first to us
Mr. Gerhardt?
Todd Gerhardt: I believe what we did is created an inventory of names that submitted a claim
and at this point Travelers did not ask for a detailed list being of expenses that homeowners
incurred. They looked at each, not each of the claims but the incident itself. What did the City
do that may have made them liable to cause the sewer back up to occur in each of the homes?
And that's what their investigation was based on. The incident report that we prepared basically
was a verbal discussion that staff had with Travelers about when did we arrive on scene. How
quickly did we have the water shut off? What are our maintenance records? Was the pipe
installed properly? So we provided that information to Travelers and based on that information
they made the decision that the City followed proper protocol in maintaining the system.
Arriving on scene in a timely manner.
22
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
Councilman Laufenburger: Okay so, the first piece of information that Travelers received is the
Chanhassen incident report and from that they would make the decision in their view did
Chanhassen do anything wrong. And if their decision was yes they did do something wrong,
then they would look detail at all of the claims I would assume. Does that make sense Mr.
Gerhardt?
Todd Gerhardt: That is correct.
Councilman Laufenburger: So there's two bodies of information. First is what did we submit to
Travelers. I would agree. That's something that I would like to see because I think I'm not an
insurance person by any means but I would like to see the basis for which Travelers made that
decision. And then on the detail of the home, I think that's worthwhile but I can tell you, based
on discussions that I've had with the homeowners, some of them incurred zero expense. Some
$500. Some $2,000 and some in the realm of $20,000 - $25,000- $30,000 including personal
effects so I can't say with honesty or with specific precision what the cost of cleaning, the total
cost of cleaning for those homes but I can assure you this, it's not the same for all of them and
the total expense is not the same for all of them. But even if we have the information that
Travelers received, it sounds like Councilman McDonald that you're advocating that we
challenge Travelers' decision that the City didn't do anything wrong. Is that correct?
Councilman McDonald: No I'm not necessarily saying that. What I'm saying is we need to get
out ahead of this. One of the things that bothers me the most about being on council is the fact
that I come to these meetings and then I find out something and I'm asked to make a decision. I
can do that. That's not a problem but in this particular instance, this is more than what I've ever
been asked to do and in order to come back at some future point, and this will come back and
everyone knows it will, we are going to be asked to again pay off To make some people whole
because will tell you right now based upon what I've heard legally we're not negligent. Court
case the odds are against anyone. It's going to come back to the City at some point. We're
going to have to make a decision. At that point we need to understand the magnitude of this
damage and if you wait until this goes all the way through, by that time people's memories have
faded. What were my expenses? I'm saying right now the City needs to tell all the residents,
you need to come in and make a claim to us. How much money are we talking about per home
so that we understand how much everybody's loss is so that we can deal with it down the road
because one size is not going to fit all. If we have to look at something that says what's fair and
equitable here, some of that's going to be based upon what was your loss and if we try to you
know figure out how much money are we talking about? Where's it going to come from? You
need to know those damage figures and that's why I'm saying we need to start doing our work
now. Not wait until this is played out. Maybe we won't have to make that decision and
everything will be taken care of but I'm saying that odds are we're going to have to make that
decision so I think we should be prepared.
Mayor Furlong: And let me ask for clarification. At this point Mr. Gerhardt, Travelers as I
understand it has made a decision twice that the City was not negligent.
Todd Gerhardt: That's correct.
23
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
Mayor Furlong: On this issue. On this matter. So absence negligence, I mean we can gather
information. I don't want to, I don't want to raise expectations falsely because.
Councilman McDonald: No, I'm not trying to.
Mayor Furlong: Because some of the comments made that I heard earlier with regard to lack of
negligence you know then there's no justification for payment, I think that's the insurance
companies pay that. My thought is simply, as I think I mentioned before is, if we were negligent,
whether Travelers made that decision ahead of time or whether it's decided by someone else, our
liability then is covered by insurance.
Councilman McDonald: Right.
Mayor Furlong: To the cost. Less our deductible so I think, I guess you know, we can gather
more information. I'm concerned about raising expectations beyond you know, continue to drag
this along unless there is a sense that, that there's a reason to come. I don't know what facts are
going to change. Maybe that's my question.
Councilman McDonald: I'm not trying to raise expectations.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Councilman McDonald: I'm just saying that this is an issue that is not going to go away. We are
going to be asked to make another decision at some point in time. Liability at that point will
probably not be an issue. What will be the issue is the fact that citizens of this community have
suffered a loss. What are we going to do about it and we need to provide an answer. Tonight
we're not going to give that answer. I think the residents and the citizens out here want an
answer. It is incumbent upon us as the political leadership of this community to give an answer.
Whether it's thumbs up or thumbs down, that's the answer but we need to give an educated
answer and that's why I'm saying before I can go in and say whether or not $2,500's the right
number. Zero's the right number. $10,000's the right number, I need to know what am I dealing
with? I have no idea.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Then as specific as possible, what additional information would you like
staff to gather? You've mentioned the information submitted to Travelers.
Councilman McDonald: Right.
Mayor Furlong: And details about the claims.
Councilman McDonald: Right. I would like the residents to provide to the City what their claim
is. What is their loss?
Councilwoman Ernst: Can I just add to that?
24
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
Councilman McDonald: Yep.
Councilwoman Ernst: So I heard Mr. Gerhardt talk about the verbal conversation that took place
with Travelers. I would like to also see that documentation from Travelers as to what they
documented in the verbal communication.
Mayor Furlong: Councilwoman Tjornhom.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: I am, I, this is I think all happening because we probably haven't had
a work session or we haven't had just a time to really talk about what we want to know or what's
happening and maybe that's because in my view Travelers has said no. Even though you can
gather all the information you want, they still said no and so by us reviewing it and not agreeing
with them, I'm not quite sure what that's going to change when it comes to what has happened
and how we get everyone's lives back on track. As a council member, and this is like my
seventh year and this is the first time where I've felt really helpless. If you come to me with a
neighborhood issue, public safety, a new development coming in, anything like that, I can help
you. I could say you know let's figure this out. Let's make it work for everybody. But I'm
dealing with an insurance company right now that won't even go to your house and look and see
what's happened and that's my frustration with the whole thing and so for me I understand
wanting more information and to understand what has happened but delaying this for another
two weeks I just think is going to keep everyone still in limbo and you're not going to have now
a chance to move on and figure out what your next step is.
Councilman McDonald: Well I guess I don't understand that.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: And maybe I'm understanding you Councilman McDonald.
Councilman McDonald: I'm saying the process has got to go forward and I think that's what
Councilwoman Ernst has said.
Mayor Furlong: And by process, if I can.
Councilman McDonald: The process is someone may have to sue somebody.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Councilman McDonald: Okay? That's the process. That's the way it works. That's going to
have to go forward. What I'm saying is, is that down the road once the process is played out, if it
doesn't play out to the satisfaction of the residents and my feelings are that it's not, it's going to
come back before this council. This is not going to go away. And I want to be prepared for that.
Councilwoman Ernst: And to Councilwoman Tjornhom's point, when she was referring to
Travelers not even going out to the site, I mean we're missing some information here and I want
to see the information that Travelers has because I think, and Councilman McDonald can
probably speak more clearly to this but I want to see what's been submitted so that I can kind of
25
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
get an idea of what they even have at this point because if they haven't even visited the site to
evaluate the damage, we're missing some huge factors here.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: I think they haven't gone out to the site because they determined they
weren't guilty or they weren't responsible for what happened.
Councilman Laufenburger: No, excuse me.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: The City.
Councilman Laufenburger: They determined the City is not responsible.
Mayor Furlong: Is not responsible.
Councilman Laufenburger: Not liable.
Mayor Furlong: And they are our insurance carrier.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Correct.
Councilwoman Ernst: But we've already talked about the fact that we're going to be evaluating
Travelers based on the decision that they came back with. Really all it comes down to in very
simplified forms, I just would like to see the information.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Councilman McDonald: And I would second that. I think it's incumbent upon us as the City
Council to be informed as to what's going on.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. I think if what I'm hearing is request for residents to provide detailed
information on their claims and cost of clean up. Cost of restoration repairs. I think at the same
time it would be helpful if they're willing to provide it, have the residents indicate whether or not
they had insurance coverage for this and to what amounts so we have a sense of how many of the
27, 32, the affected homes.
Councilman Laufenburger: The affected homes.
Mayor Furlong: The affected homes had coverage for their property and for their potential loss,
if they're willing to provide it.
Councilman McDonald: Right.
Mayor Furlong: Any other issues or information that people would like to know?
Councilman McDonald: I think at this point if Councilwoman Ernst wants to put her motion
back on the table.
26
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
Mayor Furlong: There's no reason to table an item. We don't have to take action on it, to my
knowledge. I mean there's a recommendation but there's nothing to table.
Councilman McDonald: Okay.
Mayor Furlong: If there's nothing else to come before the council on this matter tonight. No?
Okay. Then why don't we go ahead and just take a, we'll complete this item for this evening and
we'll go ahead and take a 5 minute recess subject to the call of the Chair. Thank you. Without
objection.
(Glen Gerads submitted Minutes from the Edina City Council meeting dated February 11,
2002 as Exhibit A and League of Minnesota Cities Risk Management Information
regarding Optional "No- Fault" Sewer Backup Coverage as Exhibit B.)
The City Council took a short recess at this point in the meeting.
Mayor Furlong: At this point I'll reconvene the Chanhassen City Council and we'll move on
with our next item on our agenda.
TH 101 & PLEASANT VIEW ROAD INTERSECTION PROJECT 11 -05: RECEIVE
FEASIBILITY STUDY; AUTHORIZE PREPARATION OF PLANS &
SPECIFICATIONS.
Councilman McDonald: Excuse me Mr. Mayor. I need to recuse myself from this one so I will
leave now.
Mayor Furlong: I'm sorry, thank you. Okay. Mr. Oehme. Thank you Mr. McDonald.
Paul Oehme: Thank you Mayor, City Council members. Before we get going here tonight just a
little bit of house cleaning. I did hand out the revised background. The only change into that
background is the proposed motion which should be in front of your, in front of you for your
consideration so.
Mayor Furlong: And what was the change?
Paul Oehme: It was basically the only change from the background that was in your packet to
this one is the proposed motion. The box up in front so.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you.
Paul Oehme: So with that staff thought it'd be appropriate at this time to review the
101/Pleasant View intersection and trail improvements with staff, with the council at this time.
We're at the point in the process now where we'd like to have the council consider approving
the, authorizing us to prepare the final plans and specs for this project and move forward with
this and, so again the improvements are at the intersection, mainly at the intersection of Pleasant
27
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
View Road and 101. Kind of the upper northeast quadrant of the city. For tonight's discussion
these are kind of some of the topics we'd like to cover or the background information to go over
what has been done up to this point. Status of what's completed to date. A review of the
preliminary drawings we did have, we do have preliminary drawings at this time and talk about
what's next. Next steps. Review the budgets and the construction costs with you. Updated costs
and then if you have any questions or concerns at that time we can definitely run through those
so background. Staff has been monitoring this intersection for several years now. We did have
several concerns from area residents with this intersection and how it functions. There has been
some accidents at this intersection and delays getting onto 101 from Pleasant View because of
the amount of traffic on 101. And also the park and rec department has been looking at installing
a trail in this area on 101 in this area to connect to a regional trail on Highway 62 so. And then
in the last year council did authorize staff to apply for a State grant through the Minnesota
Department of Transportation for improvements to trunk highway systems so with that work in
progress. Since we've been working on this project council did authorize staff to proceed with
the project back in January 10 of this year. A neighborhood meeting was held on March 3 rd in
this area. 100 and I believe 34 notices were sent out for that meeting. The council did approve a
permit for a future trail in MnDOT right -of -way back about a month ago now. Survey for this
area to gather needed topographic information has been completed and preliminary design is
completed at this time as well. About a 30% design. Currently this is a aerial photo of the
intersection of 101 and Pleasant View. There is basically 101 is a rural section roadway. One
lane of traffic in each direction. There is right turn lanes at the intersection of Pleasant View on
101 but no left turn lanes. Pleasant View does have, Pleasant View is a local collector roadway
with no turn lanes on that section of roadway as well so, and there is a trail extension up to this
point on 101 on the west side of 101 where it currently dead ends so. Proposed improvements.
We are proposing to add left turn lanes at Pleasant View Road at 101 in each direction. North
bound and south bound. Add a right turn lane on Pleasant View Road for traffic wanting to head
south on 101. Widening the shoulders of this area. The shoulders are very narrow in some
spots. Trying to widen that shoulder out a little bit. Need a little more safety. Place curb and
gutter on the west side of 101. Capture drainage and delineate the traffic from where the trail is,
separate the trail from where the through lane of traffic is. Extend the trail from Pleasant View
Road to the regional trail on Highway 62. Also drainage improvements on 101 and Pleasant
View and then we're planning to extend the trail on Pleasant View Road west to the trail
crossing by Near Mountain and then also in conjunction with that, adding the curb and gutter on
the north side of Pleasant View Road. We did check with MnDOT and, on this intersection.
Again we have been monitoring like I said and signal warrant for this intersection is not met at
this time by their standards. So right now we are again like I mentioned, we are at the point of
preliminary plan set. There has been a few changes to the scope that we'd like to have
considered included based upon MnDOT's review to this point and what we've gathered,
information in the field. The scope of change is a larger pavement section on 101 in the turn
lanes and the through's. MnDOT has requested that we match the existing pavement section
that's currently out there. Additional turn lane and reconstruction of Fox Hollow Drive. I'll
show a drawing on that. There's some geometrics associated with turning in the left turn lanes
on 101 to, we need a little bit more space at the intersection of Fox Hollow Drive to
accommodate that design. And then additional pond over sizing and clean out along, and storm
sewer throughout the area and then a little bit more retaining wall too then we had anticipated so
this drawing is what is proposed at the intersection of 101 and Pleasant View. North is to your
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
right here so intersections 101 and Pleasant View is here so again we're looking at widening out
the intersection. Pushing out the right turn lanes farther. Getting the through lanes to match up
again and then adding the left turn lane as shown here in each direction, north bound and south
bound lanes. Adding curb and gutter along the west side of 101 here. Kind of urbanizing this
area. Right now it's a ditch section. We'd like to smooth out that area a little bit. Pick up the
storm water. Place it into our current storm water ponds here. Realign the intersection of, or
widen out the intersection of Fox Hollow and, to accommodate a little geometrics that we need
to improve the through movements here and then adding some shoulder here which is shown in
blue. To the north again adding the trail as shown in pink here. Adding this trail along the west
side of 101 at this intersection. Shoulder work on the east side of 101 as well and then some
striping work. These lines here show where the storm sewer's proposed to be constructed. The
blue at this location shows where the approximate pond expansion would take place to
accommodate the additional impervious surface and try to match the existing rate of runoff from
this area. Moving to the north now, intersection is to the Pleasant View and 101 is to the, is to
the left here and Town Line Drive is up in this location so basically all I'm showing here is that
we're extending the curb and gutter along the west side of 101 again. Blue again is shoulder
work that we're proposing. Additional storm sewer. Capturing the local drainage as it comes off
the back of lots and 101 road and treating it in the existing storm sewer pond. I don't know if
you can see this but there is a retaining wall that's proposed at this location here to capture, or to
hold back the earth at this location where the grades necessitate about a, between a zero and a 6
foot high retaining wall at this location here and then tying into the existing trail at the north by
62 so. This drawing shows Pleasant View Road. Proposed improvements. Again north is up at
this time so extending the trail from 101 over here to the west about 1,600 feet of trail adding
again curb and gutter the length of Pleasant View Road here where the trail exists. Trying to
delineate, separate the trail movements from the traffic as best as we can. Approximately about a
4 foot boulevard separating the back of the curb to the trail and then we did have to add a little
retaining wall at this location here to hold back the grades. We did have a little retaining wall
there just so we don't encroach on the existing properties to the north there. And then adding
some storm sewer again to capture the runoff from the trail and from the roadway. So with that
that's pretty much the trail project as proposed. So moving forward, the schedule. Tonight, the
28 proposed to, the council to propose to approve the plans and specs. From here on out we'd
like to start talking, working with the property owners on easement acquisitions. There's several
properties that we need to acquire easements from to basically facilitate the construction of that
trail easement. Or construct the trail mainly. In April we plan to have the plans and specs
completed and submit to MnDOT and again have another neighborhood meeting in June. Later
in June. At that point in time if everything matches up, it looks like we have identified all the
issues on the design. We propose to have the plans and specs out for bid and award a contract
sometime in August. End of August and start construction hopefully beginning of September so
very tight timeline to get this project done. There's a lot of work that still has to be done and due
to the tight constraints right now that we're under to get the project going and to start a large
project like this late in the year, you know we really need to start in September. If we can't make
that start date in September we might have to push it back til next spring. The money, the grant
money still will be available but schedule wise we just have to wait another construction season.
So in funding, right now the construction estimate right now is $759,000 for all the trail and turn
lane improvements to the intersection of 101. There is, the grant dollars that are currently
available are $594,000 which includes some dollars for engineering as well. This covers a
29
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
majority of the improvements on 101. The State will not pay for any improvements off their
trunk highway system so in order to pay for the trail improvements on Pleasant View Road the
funds that have been budgeted for this project at this time come from park dedication, street
pavement management fund and the surface water fund as shown here so. And then with that if
you have any questions regarding the project be more than happy to try to answer them for you.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Questions for staff.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: I have one Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Furlong: Councilwoman Tjornhom.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Paul would you mind going back to one of the first slides where it
showed the trail.
Paul Oehme: Sure.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Right there. Is there going to be a barrier on 101 when you're going
to go west on Pleasant View between the trail and the turn lane? Or what's going to happen with
that?
Paul Oehme: A median?
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Something, yeah.
Paul Oehme: No. There is basically a striped center median here.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: I'm talking about where the trail is.
Paul Oehme: Oh guard rail.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Or what is going to be there if anything.
Paul Oehme: Yep. Yeah, there's going to be curb and gutter. Concrete curb and gutter there
and then at this location I think there's about a 4 foot boulevard behind the curb to the trail so it's
going to be elevated at 6 inches from the curb.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Okay.
Paul Oehme: So there is going to be some separation there.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Okay. And that's on the other side too?
Paul Oehme: That goes for the other side too as well. There is a space there.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Or across.
30
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
Paul Oehme: There's a boulevard there that separates the trail from the edge of curb.
Todd Gerhardt: So there's no plans for guard rails anywhere?
Paul Oehme: Not at this time. We haven't identified any need for guard rails.
Todd Gerhardt: MnDOT's done their review?
Paul Oehme: Well MnDOT will do their final review in June but we've submitted our plans
already, preliminary plans. Not the final plans. They have not indicated the need for guard rail
at this time.
Todd Gerhardt: Okay.
Mayor Furlong: Any other questions at this time?
Councilman Laufenburger: Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Furlong: Councilman.
Councilman Laufenburger: You mentioned there was a community meeting. What were
comments from the 13 property owners who attended? Any comments?
Paul Oehme: I would say the majority if the property owners that attended were in favor of
making these improvements. I think the realization is that you know what we're doing right now
is not you know going to solve all the problems at this intersection. Really I think the whole
corridor has to be reconstructed and realigned and looked at entirely to really make it a safer
corridor but I think again the comments that we received I think were positive. I think
everybody support, most people are supportive of it. I know there's one or two that had some
concerns. Are there going to be, I mean is the cost associated with the improvements really
going to make it that much safer I guess. They kind of a safety analysis kind of review but
MnDOT's already done that. I mean that's the reason why we received the grant dollars is
because we met their threshold for meeting that. For meeting the grant dollars.
Councilman Laufenburger: Okay. Couple other questions. You mentioned acquisition of
easements. Does the acquisition of those easements from the impacted homeowners or property
owners, does that cost us money?
Paul Oehme: It will. It will have to be tied back into the cost of the project.
Councilman Laufenburger: Cost of the project.
Paul Oehme: Cost of the project right.
31
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
Councilman Laufenburger: So will you identify the cost of those easements before you actually
acquire them?
Paul Oehme: We will, yes. And we're going through that process right now. The engineer is
drafting up what the needed easement areas are plus the descriptions to go with that. We've
already been in contact with an appraiser so we'll get individual appraisals for each of the parcels
that we need to acquire easements from. Permanent easements so we'll identify all of that and
then.
Councilman Laufenburger: That will come back to council?
Paul Oehme: That will come back to council and make those offers.
Councilman Laufenburger: Alright.
Todd Gerhardt: But your construction costs already include some acquisition costs in there.
Paul Oehme: The construction, the construction cost is mainly just for the construction, yeah.
So we're talking easements. There's basically at this property here at the southwest corner of
101 and Pleasant View, that's the only property that we've identified that we need a permanent
trail easement for and right -of -way for the roadway. All the other ones are just basically trail
easements which are a lot less costly than say permanent right -of -way.
Councilman Laufenburger: So like for example, where you're putting in blocks to retain the
ground, that will require a little bit of easement is that correct?
Paul Oehme: No. At that specific location on Pleasant View, that's the reason why we're
building that wall is to stay out of personal properties.
Councilman Laufenburger: Oh.
Paul Oehme: That's, we're building it in such a location that we do not anticipate any easements
at that location.
Councilman Laufenburger: Okay.
Paul Oehme: I'll show you here. This is north. This is north of 101. The main easements that
we're going to be needing are at this location right here where the construction of that retaining
wall, that bigger, larger retaining walls necessitates us to get in there and need an easement for
construction and then also if you look on, at this location. These are the property lines as they
currently exist right now so basically the property line or the trail encroaches maybe 2 or 3 feet
onto their existing property right now so.
Councilman Laufenburger: So we don't acquire the property. We acquire an easement to use
the property, is that correct?
32
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
Paul Oehme: That's the intent.
Councilman Laufenburger: Okay. Alright. One last question. There was comment about or
you made comment about the potential of delaying the construction to 2012. My question is
here, would a delay to spring change the costs of the project?
Paul Oehme: It may. I mean right now we, the City's still, or staff still feels like the bidding
climate is, is very good.
Councilman Laufenburger: Attractive.
Paul Oehme: Attractive for these type of projects, especially later in the year. With oil prices in
such flux right now and other commodities who knows what next year will hold too so I think to
bid it out this year it potentially will save some costs and probably some engineering costs too
and some, yeah so.
Councilman Laufenburger: Okay, thank you Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Furlong: Any questions?
Councilwoman Tjornhom: I have one quick question. Did we receive municipal consent from
Eden Prairie?
Paul Oehme: Municipal consent. We don't need municipal consent for this project. Basically
we've talked to Eden Prairie several times about this project. They have allowed us to work with
them in terms of their storm water system. Basically all the runoff from this area ends up in
Eden Prairie's storm sewer system so as long as meet their threshold for storm water quality and
quantity and rates and those type of things, they're willing to go along with the project basically.
Mayor Furlong: Couple questions Mr. Oehme. Some of my project questions have already been
answered. Questions on funding. In the grant process, the grant approval process, you had
mentioned a little bit about some of the criteria that the State considers in whether or not to
approve the grant. What are the public benefits in the State's mind to this? This intersection
project. And trail project.
Paul Oehme: I think, if I can go back to that same slide of the intersection. I think the main
benefit is the conflicts that are currently occurring right now with the traffic trying to get onto
Pleasant View north bound and the delays associated with the traffic coming south bound and
those conflicts where you know there's vehicles in the through lane and vehicles trying to make a
left hand turn and vehicles behind them trying to go north bound and the congestion that that
conflict causes which basically delays, clogs up that intersection and potentially causes accidents
to occur and we've kind of documented some of those cases where maybe some of these, with
the left turn lane that some of these accidents could be avoided.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
33
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
Paul Oehme: There is you know a lot of, there are some accidents that occur when there's traffic
waiting on Pleasant View trying to get on 101 more or less north bound. There's such a delay at
that intersection, at periods during the day that you know drivers have a tendency to rush and try
to get onto 101 and not be patient and maybe that's where some of those conflicts occur so under
this design you know trying to get as much traffic through that intersection to clear so those
delays on Pleasant View are reduced. You know that's the intent of the project. It's basically
the same design that the County looked at when they made the improvements on Powers
Boulevard by Lake Lucy Road so same concept.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. And couple follow up questions on the same issue. Has the County seen
some improvement or have we seen some improvement on Powers Boulevard with the left turn
lanes being added in terms of safety and mobility?
Paul Oehme: I haven't checked with the County but I can definitely do that this week.
Mayor Furlong: If you would. I'd expect to see that we had some but it would be nice to see if
they have any information.
Paul Oehme: Sure.
Mayor Furlong: I got to believe that residents are receiving less illegal passing tickets since they
don't have to pass illegally anymore so at least there's been an improvement there. The other
question I had back to the MnDOT grant approval process, is there a minimum level of or a
qualifying level of safety or mobility improvement that needs to be achieved before these grants
are provided or are they competitive process or both?
Paul Oehme: Yeah, it's both. It's competitive and there's kind of a level threshold that you put
together with number of accidents. It looks at MnDOT actually did some traffic analysis out
here. They were out here last year looking at the turning movements and delays and counting the
turning movements, especially during peak hours so based upon that information the accident
reports and the daily trips, that met their minimum threshold.
Mayor Furlong: And the reason I'm asking, I don't want to get into comments but we're being
asked to authorize and move forward with a project that will be spending City resources.
Financial resources but essentially we're also utilizing State resources and so to the extent that
they are looking at it from a safety and mobility standpoint as well as we are, not only from
safety and mobility for our standpoint but the trails I think they will provide safety for
pedestrians which is also going to provide quality of life enhancement in this area too. Going
back to the City's portion of funding for this, of the three funds that you mentioned, were those
included in the CIP this last year so they were planned for and prioritized as part of our planning
process?
Paul Oehme: Yes they were and they were budgeted for. I think I included those in the packet
too so those had been identified and budgeted for this year so.
34
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
Mayor Furlong: Okay. And Mr. Hoffman, Park and Rec Director, in terms of the trail and trail
connections, I know the council hears this but for people watching at home. Why do we see
these type of connections as priorities for this city and from a park and recreation trail
standpoint?
Todd Hoffman: Absolutely. Thank you Mr. Mayor, members of the council. These two
segments, we talk, speak to them individually. The one, the gap on 101 is the last remaining
section of the trail on 101.
Mayor Furlong: Is that the section going north?
Todd Hoffman: Going north.
Mayor Furlong: Okay.
Todd Hoffman: Between the existing trail that was constructed over 10 years ago and the trail
system to the north on 62 and then north on 101 into the Minnetonka and then east into Eden
Prairie so that's an important section of trail and then the Pleasant View is the last really
remaining link between that intersection and then North Lotus Lake Park. There's a trail
connection where this terminates at the west. This new section of trail that goes into the
neighborhood to the north but then the trail also crosses the road at that point and is on the south
side of Pleasant View Road and then makes it's way down to North Lotus Lake Park. So both
those, those are two important links. They provide safety. They provide a convenience to the
residents in this area to have the same type of public trail improvements that we have in other
areas of the community. People will be able to make a better, safer trips and more opportunities
for loops in their neighborhood. The Park and Recreation Commission studied this as an
independent trail project about 18 months ago and the cost as an independent project was over
$400,000 and so they again reviewed this proposal as brought forward by Paul and his staff and
at a $95,000 investment for those two sections of trail the commission really thought that was a
great value and were excited about the opportunity to be involved in the project. And in fact
they made a recommendation to the council, this, the $400,000 was not included in their CIP and
so this was wiped clean out of their CIP but they did review this and made a recommendation to
the council to include the $95,000 as a part of the project and to support the project.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any other questions for staff on this? Thank you. Let's bring it to
council for discussion. Comments. Thoughts. Snide remarks.
Councilwoman Ernst: None at this time.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: I probably will.
Mayor Furlong: The comments, thoughts or snide remarks?
Councilwoman Ernst: Both.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, all. All of the above. Okay. Councilwoman Tjornhom.
35
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
Councilwoman Tjornhom: I just living in this area I just want to speak on, you know from my
family and everyone's family that this is really going to be something that we all look forward to
and have been wanting for a long, long time. It's a dangerous intersection. The whole road is
dangerous and I agree with Mr. Oehme that it would be nice if the whole thing could just be
fixed and I still have that as a goal or a wish as a council member to go through that whole
intersection, that whole road and make it safe for everybody but until then I guess I'll start with
Pleasant View Road.
Mayor Furlong: Start with what we can.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Yep. And move from there.
Mayor Furlong: Yep. Thank you. Other thoughts. Comments.
Councilman Laufenburger: My comment is, I share Mr. Hoffman's view that connecting us to
other community trails is just a great asset for the community. I know there's some people in the
community that want to go you know town hopping from one to one to the next and the next and
anything we do to make that possible for Chanhassen citizens I think is a good thing so I support
this.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Well and to add to that as an interesting note. My supervisor where I
work, she lives in Brooklyn Park and she went biking this summer and ended up at the end of the
trail at 101. You know where it stops and so she was at my house one day and said you know
I've been here for some reason and to and behold it was you know and she probably could have
made it all the way to Chanhassen had the trail continued but it ended and she stopped so.
Mayor Furlong: So it's an economic development opportunity.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: It really is. It really is.
Councilman Laufenburger: So here's the snide remark. We may not be able to connect
communities in Chanhassen but we certainly can connect our community to other communities.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: There you go.
Mayor Furlong: We have, and I was going to tell you about this under council presentations but
I made a presentation to the Chamber of Commerce last week I guess it was.
Todd Gerhardt: Last week.
Mayor Furlong: Time flies when you're having fun.
Todd Gerhardt: It was a good time.
36
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
Mayor Furlong: It was. I'll just comment on this one. The, I mentioned this project to the
people letting them know that it was coming. Very well received. Very well recognized on the
need for improvements and the, and Mr. Oehme you mentioned the Powers Boulevard
improvements with adding in the turn lanes and separating traffic from turning. With that
example it was very clear to people because people have experienced the improvements that
we've seen there and I think we'll see those same improvements here and we're looking at
similar types of improvements over in Highway 5 and Lake Minnewashta Parkway of trying to
do what we can. Take those steps forward where we can make incremental improvements to
improve safety and mobility and I think this is an intersection that I'm very pleased that we're
going to make some improvements there and again our thanks collectively and personally to Mr.
Oehme and to everyone involved. Mr. Hoffman and everybody else that came together and
found ways to get this done because I think it will be a benefit to everyone that goes through that
intersection or walks on those trails. Whether they live nearby or in Brooklyn Park.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: That's right.
Mayor Furlong: So very good. The motion before us this evening is to, was distributed to
approve the feasibility study and authorize preparation of plans and specifications. Is there,
would somebody like to make a motion?
Councilwoman Ernst: Sure.
Mayor Furlong: Councilwoman Ernst.
Councilwoman Ernst: I make a motion we approve the feasibility study and authorize the
preparation of plans and specifications for the 101 and Pleasant View road intersection and trail
improvement project #11 -05.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a second?
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Any discussion on the motion?
Resolution #2011 -20: Councilwoman Ernst moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded
that the City Council approve the feasibility report and authorize the preparation of plans
and specifications for TH 101 and Pleasant View Road Intersection and Trail
Improvements Project 11 -05. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with
a vote of 4 to 0. (Councilman McDonald recused himself from this item.)
Mayor Furlong: When are we going to, will we see it back then, it looks like in April? I'm
sorry, council approve plans back in June.
Paul Oehme: June.
Mayor Furlong: So if we're on schedule. Very good. Thank you.
37
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
APPOINTMENT TO PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION, ENVIRONMENTAL
COMMISSION AND SENIOR COMMISSION.
Mayor Furlong: Over the last 3, I guess this evening, two weeks ago and four, two weeks before
that City Council met in work session and interviewed a number of highly qualified candidates
for our commissions. Each year our commissions, which number 7 in members, have a few
positions that come up for rotating position. At our last meeting we made appointments to our
Planning Commission for the vacancies and the terms that were coming due. This evening we're
going to consider appointments to Park and Rec, Environmental and Senior Commission. As I
mentioned I'm going to open up for comments and discussion by members of the council in just
a minute. Great, very enjoyable. Great people that are interested in serving on these
commissions. That have served and want to continue to serve or others that want to get
involved. These interviews are always enjoyable on my part and we realize what a great, great
group of people. Great group of residents that we have that live in this area that want to be
involved. We don't have enough room for everyone and that's the unfortunate part of having to
choose but from our discussions and from our interviews I can say that for those who are not
appointed to anything I would certainly encourage you to stay involved or find ways to be
involved in the community through civic organizations or seek appointment in the future when
vacancies occur or every year we have a number of positions that come up and so we do these
every year. For the Senior Commission the names that I would recommend to the council would
be for Carol Buesgens for a 3 year term, Terry Grathen for a 3 year term and Tom Wilson for, to
fill the 2 years remaining on a vacant term. For the Environmental Commission recommend
appointing Kathleen or Katie Mahannah and Matthew Myers both to 3 year terms. And for the
Park and Rec Commission, I'm trying to read my notes here. Steve Scharfenberg, Peter Aldritt
and Brent Carron. Did I pronounce those correctly? Thank you. Would be for the positions on
the Park and Rec and I believe if I'm not mistaken those are all 3 year terms, is that correct?
Todd Gerhardt: Yes.
Mayor Furlong: For the Park and Rec. All 3 year positions. So those would be the candidates to
nominate or that I would nominate. Is there a second?
Councilwoman Ernst: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Any discussion on the process, the candidates or the
nominees? Mr. McDonald.
Councilman McDonald: Mr. Mayor I would just like to echo I think what you said before. It
can't be said enough. I was just really impressed with the quality of the people who came
forward and I really would encourage them, you know we can't put everybody on the
commission and I'm sorry for that but again you know please don't just forget us and walk away
because each year I know we go through this. There's always appointments. There's
appointments during the middle of the year and I would hope that they would continue to stay
involved in, and really do appreciate every one that comes out and puts themselves forward to
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
serve on one of these commissions so I just wanted to recognize everybody that did that so thank
you.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any other comments? Nope? If not, motion's been made for
appointments to the Senior, Environmental and Park and Rec Commission and it's been
seconded.
Mayor Furlong moved, Councilwoman Ernst seconded that the City Council appoint the
following commission members:
Senior Commission: Carol Buesgens, Terry Grathen -3 year terms, Tom Wilson -2 year term.
Environmental Commission: Katie Mahannah, Matthew Myers -3 year terms.
Park and Recreation Commission: Steve Scharfenberg, Peter Aldritt and Brent Carron -3 year
terms.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS:
Councilman Laufenburger: I do have a couple comments Mr. Mayor and council members.
Mayor Furlong: Yes.
Councilman Laufenburger: It's interesting for me that Chanhassen Dinner Theater is currently in
production of Jesus Christ Superstar and consistent with the production of Superstar, Chanhassen
Dinner Theater is opening up a contest for, and they are receiving nominations for Community
Superstars. They are very interested in receiving nominations for people in the community who
are enhancing the life of the community. Whether it be young people who are visiting a senior
home or maybe somebody who's shoveled a driveway or something like that or maybe it's a
senior citizen who's working with young people in the community. Anyway, I applaud
Chanhassen Dinner Theater in doing that. Nominations will be taken through April 3 rd and for
those of us that are watching at home if you simply go to Chanhassendt.com, that's the Dinner
Theater web site and scroll down to nominations for Community Superstars, I would, I think
there's a lot of superstars. We just can't nearly recognize all of them but I think it's a great
opportunity for the community to be recognized for it's efforts. People in the community. And
second of all, the Chanhassen Red Birds are starting their second season this year. There was an
article in the Villager about it last week and I'm excited to do the public address for the Red
Birds again this year and I'm even more excited that next Saturday evening, April 9 th at the
Chanhassen Legion from 7:00 til 9:00 we will have the First Annual Red Bird Rally and this is
for the community to come out and, our desire is to raise fun and funds for the Red Birds
organization. We've got a great schedule for games this year and our manager, Chris Revers
tells us that we're going to have a lot of people interested in playing so Red Bird Rally next
Saturday, April 9 th at the Chan American Legion. Tickets available at the door. Appetizers, cash
bar. We'll have silent auction items. Some very valuable items will go for some very small
dollars probably and we'll have a raffle as well so come on out and support the Red Birds.
Thank you Mr. Mayor.
39
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Other council presentations. Just as I mentioned earlier, just a
word of thanks on my part to the Chamber of Commerce for inviting to speak to their group at
Breakfast with the Mayor last Thursday. Again I'm trying to remember when it was. So much
going on. Great event. Good turnout. Just an engaged group and it was, the tough part of those
presentations is always is figuring out what not to say because there just isn't time to talk about,
to talk about the, it wasn't Thursday. Don't tell me it was Wednesday. Was it Wednesday?
Todd Gerhardt: No it was Thursday. I said Wednesday, sorry.
Mayor Furlong: Thursday morning, thank you. But it was, I know Ms. Aanenson and Mr.
Gerhardt were there and they would concur, it was just an engaged group out at the Chamber and
just very well received so again thank you for the Chamber, to the Business Council, to the Buy
Chanhassen. We met with a number of their representatives just 2 weeks ago but just a great
group. The other thing I would mention, and I think Mr. Gerhardt will be distributing this is the
Chanhassen Council's ballot for the Rotary Club's Distinguished Service Award. The
Distinguished Service Award is given annually by the Rotary Club to a member of the
community that has really excelled in terms of volunteerism and service over the years and so
that will be coming out the.
Todd Gerhardt: Tomorrow.
Mayor Furlong: Tomorrow? Process is to get your ballot back to Mr. Gerhardt. He'll tabulate
them and turn them in. What that does is, we're not going to know who each of us voted for and
we can do it in such a way that council can participate without having to do it this process.
We're one vote of 45 so. But every vote counts right? Just like in an election. So thank you to
that. Mr. Gerhardt, administrative presentations.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS:
Todd Gerhardt: I just want to extend my appreciation to Mayor Furlong for his presentation,
Breakfast with the Mayor and he does a fantastic job and what a great way to start off kind of the
new year and informing the public of some of our accomplishments in 2010 and things to look
forward to in 2011. I know all the people that attended are usually regulars. They really enjoy
hearing what's going on in their community. Something that they can share with their neighbors
and friends and people that come to the community so thank you for taking time out of your day
and I know it's a busy time for you at work and I appreciate your dedication to doing that on an
annual basis so thank you.
Mayor Furlong: You're welcome. Any questions for Mr. Gerhardt or his staff?
CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION.
Councilman Laufenburger: I have just a question about that Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Furlong: Mr. Laufenburger.
M1
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
Councilman Laufenburger: Yeah there's a letter to City Manager Mr. Gerhardt from the
Redistricting Committee.
Mayor Furlong: Yes.
Councilman Laufenburger: I'm just wondering, just for my edification, what role does the City
Council of Chanhassen play, if any, in the redistricting as a result of the census.
Todd Gerhardt: The City Council will determine where the new precinct lines will be if they
need to be changed based on population. Each district needs to have an equal amount of
representation.
Councilman Laufenburger: Each precinct?
Todd Gerhardt: Correct.
Councilman Laufenburger: Okay.
Todd Gerhardt: And so staff, once we receive the information from the State we'll be looking at
that data and then look at changing the lines if they need to change and then bring it back for
your final approval.
Mayor Furlong: Can I have a follow up to that?
Councilman Laufenburger: You sure can.
Mayor Furlong: I was going to ask a question about that same letter. Do we have a sense,
they're asking for public input. I know that this group has been having a number of meetings
across the state and they're asking for public input. Do we have a sense of what the timing is on
that input? And the reason I would ask is we haven't had a discussion. I don't see it in the letter.
It would seem to me.
Todd Gerhardt: The public hearings have been completed and what they are looking for is any
feedback to the individual Chairs between now and, boy I want to say next couple of weeks.
Mayor Furlong: That's what I'm wondering and I think it would be, we haven't discussed it with
issues and if we have time at our next work session maybe we could bring it up and get the
council up to date on redistricting. In terms of a comment back to here, the one that immediately
jumps to mind, having read this is I think as a council we may want to consider providing a
comment. At least that our city be contained within a single House district. From, but we should
talk about that as well. Whether or not that's important to us. It would be those type of
statements that we would, or comments that we would provide to the, to this committee and also
some comments that we may want to be thinking about as we look at redistricting. The
population, as Mr. Gerhardt said may, or the census may dictate that some of the precincts need
to be realigned or redrawn or you know this is the opportunity to do that so I think this letter may
41
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
suggest we should do that sooner rather than later. At least have a work session discussion on
the process. Some of the issues to consider and then we can think about if there's some overall
policies that we'd like to think about or have staff think about as they're looking at options
within the city for the precincts.
Councilman Laufenburger: I think that will be important that we make our views known
because based on the conversation I had just briefly with Representative Joe Hoppe, there is a
possibility that Chanhassen could be two different districts.
Mayor Furlong: Well and I think Representative Hoppe is on this committee so.
Councilman Laufenburger: I think he is too, yeah.
Mayor Furlong: So we can certainly get some comments to him as well whether we want to
make formal comments to the Chair or not but I think there is, there are pros and cons but it's
something to discuss and think about what those options are. Most likely as I understand
because of population changes right now in our current senate district, it includes all of Carver
County and then three precincts in Scott County. Some townships. Because of the population
change Carver County will likely be too large to be in a single senate district going forward so
Carver County will likely have at least two senate districts which means there'll be at least three
House representatives for Carver County. The question is how those lines are drawn. Where
they're drawn so. I think it's worthwhile that we as a council start having a discussion and if we
can find time on one of the April work sessions I think I would suggest that we do that. Unless
there's objections to.
Councilman McDonald: No objection but if we're looking at the House districts, do we have
any say as far as the County Commissioner districts are drawn up or is that strictly the County?
Mayor Furlong: I'll defer to that. To my knowledge we don't.
Todd Gerhardt: The County makes that decision but we can provide input similar to the House.
We determine our precincts. Once we determine our precincts we send that down to the County
and then they determine the County boundaries.
Councilman McDonald: Okay.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you Mr. Laufenburger for bringing that letter up. Appreciate that. Any
other questions or comments on the correspondence packet? No? We have one item of our work
session agenda that we'll be picking up immediately following the meeting in the Fountain
Conference Room and I'm sorry.
Councilwoman Ernst: We don't.
Todd Gerhardt: It's 101 south.
42
Chanhassen City Council - March 28, 2011
Mayor Furlong: The other end of 101. This is the part south of 5. Okay. If there's nothing else
to come before the council this evening, is there a motion to adjourn.
Councilman McDonald moved, Councilwoman Ernst seconded to adjourn the meeting. All
voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. The City Council
meeting was adjourned at 9:25 p.m.
Submitted by Todd Gerhardt
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
43
Feb. 11, 2002 Edina City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 4
MINUTES ji f ►
OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE
EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL
FEBRUARY 11, 2002
6:00 P.M.
ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Housh, Hovland, and Mayor Pro Tern Kelly.
Member Masica entered the meeting at 6:05 p.m.
Mayor Pro Tern Kelly stated the purpose of the special meeting was for the Council to consider
the resolution offering up to $10,000 in reimbursement for structural damage and sanitization
to the homeowners who experienced damage from the January 6, 2002, watermain break that
surcharged the sanitary sewer system.
Manager Hughes noted that as directed by Council staff had prepared and sent a resolution
allowing up to $10,000 in reimbursement for structural and sanitization repairs for the
homeowners affected by the watermain break. Mr. Hughes reported he had met with an
indepencdent adjuster who was ready to start work just as soon as ire was given the go ahead.
Member Hovland asked if there was a need to address the type of adjustment standard used.
Member Housh said that he thought it was clear that homeowners' coverage would be utilized
first. The City would then reimburse losses up to $10,000 including homeowners' deductibles.
Member Hovland asked the other members of the Council if they felt that $10,000 was
adequate in light of the amount of loss some homeowners suffered. He added he felt it
worrisome that some people had no coverage at all. Member Hovland said if a natural
disaster happened FEMA would be available to assist people. However, in this tragic
unfortunate accident that was no fault of either the City or homeowners, there was no place to
go for help.
Mayor Pro Tern Kelly agreed, but added that according to the City Attorney there was a fine
line of what the city would be allowed to reimburse. He added that he would be worried that
homeowners would not pursue their own option (insurance and litigation if necessary) if the
City offered a dollar for dollar reimbursement. Mayor Pro Tem. Kelly added it would be
difficult to depart from the industry standard of $10,000 set by the League of Minnesota Cities
Insurance Trust.
Member Masica stated she would like to know if the proposed $10,000 would cover the cost of
structural repair and sanitization. If not, then she said she would consider increasing that
amount.
Member Housh asked how many times this type of incident has happened. Mr. Hughes
outlined the following occurrences:
• 1987 after severe rains about 1000 homes were damaged;
• 1994 - 70' S watermain be s rchaffec� theanitry sewer, 15 to 20
homes involve ; i gation s owe e ciy no e neg igen ;
• 1997 after severe rains caused surcharging of sanitary sewer approximately 75-
100 homes were affected and none litigated.
Mr. Hughes added that on an on -going basis between three and five homes are affected
annually. Usually the cause is a service line plug, but sometimes there is a plug in the main.
He noted that Mr. Gulbronsori s incident was a plug in the main.
Member Housh said he was comfortable with the $10,000 reimbursement. However, he
expressed concern with linkage of this occurrence with any future incidents. Member Housh
said he knew authorizing the reimbursement could be brought up as a precedent. If a larger
reimbursement were to be offered now, there would be a greater issue in the future.
http: / /www.ci. edina. mn. us/ citycouncil/ CityCouncil_ MeetingMinutes /20020211Spec.htm 1 3/8/2011
Feb. 11, 2002 Edina City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 4
Member Kelly agreed with Member Housh, adding he was very concerned about adhering to
the statutory authority as outlined by the City Attorney.
Member Masica stated she felt the reimbursement met the public purpose test especially when
restricted to sanitization and structural repairs. She stated the City must strongly market to
our homeowners and businesses, the need for them to insure themselves against this type of
damage.
Member Hovland stated while he was mindful of the City Attorney's concern, he was still
worried about the $10,000 cap on the proposed reimbursement. He said he viewed the
Interlachen break as a unique incident. Member Hovland stated he felt that a communication
campaign would keep the policy from being precedent setting He said he would be
comfortable with a $10,000 limit for any long -term policy, but at the current time he still felt
the needs were greater.
Member Masica suggested increasing the limit to $15,000 for this unique situation while still
requiring the funds e spent on sanitization and structural repair.
Public Comment
LeeAnn Gustafson, 1 Cooper Avenue, stated she had been through the process of adjusting
with her insurance company. Ms. Gustafson said that the adjuster used a software program
that allowed so much for each damaged item based upon size, style, age, etc. Her contractors
use the same program in estimating costs. Ms. Gustafson pointed out that $10,000 may be
inadequate to cover structural and sanitization costs because the homes that have sustained
damage are large.
Karen Wermager, 3 Cooper Avenue, referred to the letter she had submitted offering an
amendment to the proposed draft resolution prepared by the City Attorney. Ms. Wermager
said her estimated clean up was approximately $24,000. She added as a homeowner she had
done the best she could and urged the Council to consider a larger amount of reimbursement.
Terrie Rose, 5001 Interlachen, said she appreciated the Council's sympathy and concern. She
asked how the reimbursement would be delivered, meaning how would residents document
their expenses. Continuing, Ms. Rose expressed her concern over damaged landscaping. She
pointed out her home was only two years old. Mr. Hughes explained the City would hire an
independent adjuster who would work with the homeowners. Member Housh suggested Ms.
Rose provide the City with copies of her invoices. Ms. Rose concluded that when she
previously asked for an emergency response team, that even a brochure handed out to
residents telling them where to call to begin the clean -up process, should be available.
Carl Gulbronson 5 Cooper Avenue expressed concern that the language in the proposed
resolution "Section 3" would exclude him from recovering the cost of his lost boiler. Council
discussed the issue and directed City Attorney to amend Section 3 to reflect this area of
concern.
Tom Wesley, 5633 Interlachen Circle, explained he also supported increasing the maximum
amount of reimbursement. Mr. Wesley stated he has a lift station in his front yard that was
damaged and needed replacing and the current language in Section 3 would not help him with
that expense. Council directed the City Attorney to include sanitary sewer systems in Section
3.
Mayor Pro Tern Kelly declared the hearing closed at 6:40 p.m.
Members Housh, Masica and Hovland all stated they would agree to increase the maximum
reimbursement to $15,000. Mayor Pro Tern Kelly concurred with this suggestion. He told the
http: / /www.ci.edina.nm.us/ citycouncil/ CityCouncil_ MeetingMinutes /2002021ISpec.htm 3/8/2011
Feb. 11, 2002 Edina City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 4
residents he felt the Council was being extremely generous with them and noted that it
probably would be rare to receive this same treatment in another city.
Member Hovland introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-15
PROVIDING FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR DAMAGES TO
RESIDENCES AS A RESULT OF BACKUP OF SANITARY
SEWER SYSTEM BY A SURCHARGE FROM WATER MAIN
BREAK
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, as follows:
SECTION 1. RECITALS. The City owns and operates a water utility and a sanitary sewer
utility. On January 6, 2002 a break in a water main located on Interlachen Boulevard in the
vicinity of Cooper Avenue resulted in a backup in the sanitary sewer system in homes in
the vicinity due to "surcharging" caused by the water main break (the "Event "). Owners of
homes damaged by the Event have submitted claims to the City seeking reimbursement
from the City for their damages. The City's liability insurance carrier has reviewed the
Event and denied the claims because of an absence of showing of negligence on the part of
the City. On January 15, 2002 and on February 5, 2002 the City Council took testimony
concerning the Event and the damages to homes caused by the Event. Many of the
homeowners damaged by the Event do not have insurance coverage for sewer backups or, if
they have insurance coverage, have incurred damages in excess of coverage limits.
SECTION 2. FINDINGS The City Council believes that the Event is a unique event that
has resulted in a hardship to the owners and residents of homes in which the sanitary sewer
backup occurred, and that there is a potential public health and safety hazard to the City if
the damaged homes are not properly cleaned, sanitized and repaired. Because of either a
lack of insurance coverage or being underinsured, certain homeowners do not have the
financial means to properly clean, sanitize and repair the damage. The City Council
believes that because of the uniqueness of the Event and the potential health and safety
hazard, some form of City assistance to the owners of the residences damaged by the Event
is appropriate.
SECTION 3. COSTS ELIGIBLE FOR REIMBURSEMENT The City Council hereby
approves reimbursement to homeowners for damages caused by the Event not covered by
the homeowner's property insurance in the amount of up to $15,000 per home. Such
reimbursement shall cover costs of clean up and sanitation of the home, costs of the
disposal of damaged items, losses from damage to carpets, heating and air conditioning
equipment, plumbing and sanitary sewer systems, hot water heaters and water softeners,
and losses from damage to sheet, rock, wall board and paneling. Costs of replacement or
sanitizing of rugs and furniture and of other contents damaged by the Event shall not be
reimbursed. Homeowners whose property insurance provided coverage for damages from
the Event shall be eligible for reimbursement for any deductible amount paid by the
homeowner subject to the conditions established herein.
SECTION 4 ADJUSTMENT AND PAYMENT OF CLAIMS The City Manager is
authorized to retain an independent adjuster to evaluate claims to determine losses to be
reimbursed by the City within the conditions set forth in Section 3 hereof using the same
standards that would be used by an insurance company in adjusting claims for property
damage. The costs of any reimbursement and of the independent adjuster shall be paid
from City utility reserves.
SECTION 5 REIMBURSEMENT PROVIDED ON NO FAULT BASIS; NO ADMISSION
httn: / /www.ci. edina .nm.us /citycouncil/CityCouncil MeetingMinutes /20020211 Spec.htm 3/8/2011
Feb. 11, 2002 Edina City Council Special. Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 4
OF LIABILITY The reimbursement for damages caused by the Event authorized to be paid
is being provided on a "no fault" basis by the City and it shall not be a condition of such
reimbursement that homeowners receiving reimbursement provide a release of liability to
the City. Any reimbursement for damages caused by the Event paid by the City shall not in
any manner constitute an admission of liability for such damages on behalf of the City and
such reimbursement shall only apply to this Event and not to any other damage caused by
other sanitary sewer backups in the City.
Dated: February 11, 2002. Member Housh seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Housh, Hovland, Masica, Kelly
Resolution passed.
There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Pro Tern Kelly declared the
meeting adjourned at 6:45 P.M.
City Clerk
http: / /www.ci. edina. mn. us / citycouncil /CityCouncil_MeetingMinutes /20020211 Spec.htm 3/8/2011
ca
OF CONNECTING & INNOVATING
MINNESOTA SINCE 1913
1,ITIES
RISK MANAGEMENT INFORMATION
OPTIONAL "NO- FAULT"
SEWER BACKUP COVERAGE
The League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) offers property /casualty member cities
"no-fault" sewer backup coverage. This optional coverage will reimburse a property owner for
clean -up costs and damages resulting from a city sewer backup or from a city water main break,
irrespective of whether the backup was caused by city negligence.
The "no- fault" sewer backup coverage option is intended to:
• Reduce health hazards by encouraging property owners to clean -up backups as quickly as
possible.
• Reduce the frequency and severity of sewer backup lawsuits (i.e. property owners may be less
inclined to sue if they receive conciliatory treatment at the time of the backup).
• Give cities a way to address the sticky political problems that can arise when a property owner
learns the city and LMCIT won't reimburse for sewer backup damages because the city wasn't
negligent and therefore not legally liable.
Many cities and their citizens may find this coverage option to be a helpful tool. However, it's
also important to realize it's not complete solution to sewer backup problems, and not every
possible backup will be covered.
Which sewer backups are covered?
The "no- fault" coverage would reimburse the property owner for sewer backup damages or water
main breaks, regardless of whether the city was legally liable, if the following conditions are met:
• The backup must have resulted from a condition in the city's sewer system or lines. A backup
caused by a clog or other problem in the property owner's own line would not be covered.
• It's not a situation that is specifically excluded in the coverage.
• The coverage limit has not been exceeded.
Which situations are excluded?
The "no- fault" coverage will not apply in several "catastrophic" type situations. Specifically,
these are:
This material is provided as general information and is not a substitute for legal advice.
Consult your attorney for advice concerning specific situations.
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 145UNIVEMITYAVF.WEST nicwe (651) 281-1200 FAx: (651) 281-1298
INSURANCE TRUST ST. PAUL. MN 55103 -2044 TOLL FREE: (800) 925 -1122 WEB: W`WW.LMC.URG
Sewer Toolkit
Other Resources - 14
Any event, weather - related or otherwise, for which FEMA assistance is available;
Any interruption in the electric power supply to the city's sewer system or to any city sewer lift
station which continues for more than 72 hours; or
Rainfall or precipitation that exceeds the amount determined by the National Weather Service
to constitute a 100 -year storm event.
What costs would be covered?
The coverage would reimburse the property owner for the cost of cleaning up the backup, and for
any damage to the property, up to the coverage limit. For purposes of the city's deductibles,
claims under the no -fault coverage are treated as liability claims, so the same per - occurrence
and /or annual deductibles will apply.
However, there are certain costs that would not be reimbursed under the no -fault coverage:
• Any costs which have been or are eligible to be covered under the property owner's own
homeowner's or other property insurance; and
• Any costs that would be eligible to be reimbursed under an NFIP flood insurance policy,
whether or not the property owner actually has NFIP coverage.
What is the coverage limit?
The basic limit is $10,000 per building per year. The city also has options to purchase additional
limits of $25,000 or $40,000 per building. For purposes of the limit, a structure or group of
structures that is served by a single connection to the city's sewer system will be considered a
single building.
Only true "no- fault" claims are counted toward the limit. Claims for damages caused by city
negligence, for which the city would be legally liable in any case, are not charged against that
limit.
What does it cost?
The premium charge is a percentage of the city's municipal liability premium:
• 8.5% for the $10,000 limit;
• 10.0% for the $25,000 limit; or
• 12.5% for the $40,000 limit.
Because the LMCIT Board's intent is that this coverage be self - supporting, charges will be
continually monitored and, if necessary, adjusted in the future.
Is every city automatically eligible?
No. To be eligible, the city must meet these underwriting criteria:
Sewer Toolkit
Other Resources - 15
• The city must have a policy and practice of inspecting and cleaning its sewer lines on a
reasonable schedule.
• If there are any existing problems in the city's system which have caused backups in the past
or are likely to cause backups, the city must have and be implementing a plan to address those
problems.
• The city must have a system and the ability to respond promptly to backups or other sewer
problems at any time of the day or week.
• The city must have in place an appropriate program to minimize stormwater inflow and
infiltration.
• The city must have in place a system to maintain records of routine sewer cleaning and
maintenance, and of any reported problems and responses.
When establishing these criteria, the goal of LMCIT was to focus on reasonableness rather than on
creating specific standards. The intent isn't to set an arbitrary requirement that sewers be
inspected and cleaned every six months, every three years, every five years, etc. What makes
sense in one city with some older and sometimes sagging
clay lines probably wouldn't make sense in a city with. More Information
newer plastic lines, and vice versa. From the underwriting For assistance in developing sewer .
standpoint, the real concern is that the city has considered policies, practices, and schedules,
its own situation and developed policies, practices, and please see the Sewer Toolkit
schedules that make sense for its own situation. IL
How would the "no- fault" coverage work if a sewer backup was caused by city
negligence, and where the city was legally liable for the resulting damages?
If the situation isn't one where the "no- fault" coverage applies, the city's LMCIT liability
coverage would respond just as it does now. That is, LMCIT would investigate and if necessary
defend the claim on the city's behalf, and would pay the resulting damages if in fact the city is
legally liable for those damages.
The same would be true for damages that exceed the $10,000 no -fault limit, or for a subrogation
claim against the city by the homeowner's insurance company. The city's existing LMCIT
liability would respond just as it does now.
What's the legal basis for this coverage? Wouldn't it be a gift of public funds to
pay for damages the city isn't legally liable for?
First, as noted earlier, one goal is to help reduce health hazards by encouraging prompt clean -ups
That's clearly a public purpose and in the public interest.
Second, the law and facts surrounding most sewer backup claims are rarely so clear that the
liability issue is entirely black and white. There's virtually always a way that a claimant's attorney
can make some type of argument for city liability. Having this coverage in place should help
eliminate the need to spend public funds on litigation costs in many of these cases.
Sewer Toolkit
Other Resources - 16
Finally, part of the process.for putting the coverage in place is for the city council to pass a formal
resolution that makes this no -fault sewer backup protection part of the agreement between the city
and the sewer customer. The idea is that by paying their sewer bill, the sewer user is purchasing
not just sewer services but also the right to be reimbursed for certain specified sewer backup costs
and damages. In other words, the basis for the no -fault payments to the property owner would be
the contract between the city and the sewer user.
How do we put coverage in place?
Contact your LMCIT underwriter for an application. If the
city qualifies for coverage, we'll send the city a formal
quote, along with a model resolution. To put coverage in
place, the city council must formally pass that resolution,
and send a copy to LMCIT.
If the city decides to add this coverage, it will also be
important to make sure citizens know about it. LMCIT can
Your League Resource
Contact your LMCIT underwriter at
651 - 281 -1200 or 800 - 925 -1122 for
more information about the "no-
fault" sewer backup coverage.
also provide models for a press release, newsletter article, utility bill insert, etc.
Pete Tritz 06/10
Sewer Toolkit
Other Resources - 17
COMPREHENSIVE MUNICIPAL COVERAGE
No -Fault Sewer Back -up and Water Main Break Coverage Endorsement ($10,000 Limit)
Section I, Coverage A, Municipal Liability Coverage, is amended to include no -fault sewer back -up and
water main break coverage as outlined below.
1. No -fault sewer back -up coverage
a. If all of the following four conditions are met, LMCIT will pay for claims presented by the city for
sewer back -up damage to property of others which was not caused by city negligence:
(1) The sewer back -up resulted from a condition in the city's sewer system;
(2) The sewer back -up was not the result of an obstruction or other condition in sewer pipes or
lines which are not part of the city's sewer system or which are not owned or maintained by the
city; and
(3) The sewer back -up was not caused by or related to a catastrophic incident.
(4) The date of the occurrence giving rise to the claim for damages must be on or after the
retroactive date shown on this endorsement.
b. However, LMCIT will not pay for any damages or expenses:
(1) Which are or would be covered under a National. Flood Insurance Program flood insurance
policy, whether or not such insurance is in effect; or
(2) For which the property owner has been reimbursed or is eligible to be reimbursed by any
homeowners' or other property insurance.
2. No -fault water main break coverage.
LMCIT will pay for claims presented by the city for water main break damage to property of others
which was not caused by city negligence. But LMCIT will not pay for any damages or expenses for
which the property owner has been or is eligible to be reimbursed by any homeowners' or other
property insurance.
3. Definitions
For purposes of this endorsement, the following definitions apply.
a. Catastrophic incident means any of the following:
(1) Any weather- related or other event for which FEMA (Federal Emergency Management
Administration) assistance is available;
Sewer Toolkit
Other Resources - 18
(2) Any interruption in the electric power supply to the city's sewer system or to any city sewer lift
station which continues for more than 72 hours; or
(3) Rainfall of precipitation which exceeds the amount determined by the National Weather
Service to constitute a 100 -year storm event.
b. Sewer back -up damage means damage to property, including removal and clean-up costs, resulting
from a sewer back -up.
c. Water main break damage means damage to property, including removal and clean-up costs,
resulting from the rupture of a city water main, line, or pipe.
4. Limits
a. LMCIT will not pay more than $10,000 for sewer back -up damage to any building under this
endorsement, regardless of the number of occurrences or the number of claimants. For purposes of
this limit
(1) A structure or group of structures served by a single connection to the city's sewer system is
considered a single building.
(2) If a single structure is served by more than one connection to the city's sewer system, the
portion of the structure served by each respective connection is considered a separate building.
b. LMCIT will not pay more than $10,000 for water main break damage to any claimant, regardless
of the number of occurrences or the number of properties affected.
c. LMCIT will not pay more than $250,000 for water main break damage resulting from any single
occurrence. All water main break damage which occurs during any period of 72 consecutive hours
is deemed to result from a single occurrence.
If the total water main break damage for all claimants in a single occurrence exceeds $250,000, the
reimbursement to each claimant will be calculated as follows:
(1) A preliminary reimbursement figure is established for each claimant, equal to the lesser of the
claimant's actual damages or $10,000.
(2) The sum of the preliminary reimbursement figures for all claimants will be calculated.
(3) Each claimant will be paid a percentage of his or her preliminary reimbursement figure, equal
to the percentage calculated by dividing $250,000 by the sum of all claimants' preliminary
reimbursement figures.
5. Deductibles
The amount LMCIT pays for sewer back -up damages or water main break damage under this
endorsement is subject to the Municipal Liability Deductible shown in the Municipal Liability
Declarations or the General Annual Aggregate Deductible if any shown in the Common Coverage
Declarations.
Sewer Toolkit
Other Resources - 19
For purposes of the Municipal Liability Deductible, all claims for sewer back -up damages which are
covered under this endorsement, which occur within a 72 hour period, and which result from or are
related to the same condition or conditions in the city's sewer system are deemed to be a single
occurrence; and water main break damage which is covered under this endorsement and which occurs
during any period of 72 consecutive hours is deemed to be a single occurrence.
6. Retroactive Date
The retroactive date for this endorsement is
All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.
Sewer Toolkit
Other Resources - 20
COMPREHENSIVE MUNICIPAL COVERAGE
No -Fault Sewer Back -up and Water Main Break Coverage Endorsement ($25,000 Limit)
Section I, Coverage A, Municipal Liability Coverage, is amended to include no -fault sewer back-up and
water main break coverage as outlined below.
1. No -fault sewer back -up coverage
a. If all of the following four conditions are met, LMCIT will pay for claims presented by the city for
sewer back -up damage to property of others which was not caused by city negligence:
(1) The sewer back -up resulted from a condition in the city's sewer system;
(2) The sewer back -up was not the result of an obstruction or other condition in sewer pipes or
lines which are not part of the city's sewer system or which are not owned or maintained by the
city; and
(3) The sewer back -up was not caused by or related to a catastrophic incident.
(4) The date of the occurrence giving rise to the claim for damages must be on or after the
retroactive date shown on this endorsement.
b. However, LMCIT will not pay for any damages or expenses:
(1) Which are or would be covered under a National Flood Insurance Program flood insurance
policy, whether or not such insurance is in effect; or
(2) For which the property owner has been reimbursed or is eligible to be reimbursed by any
homeowners' or other property insurance.
2. No -fault water main break coverage.
LMCIT will pay for claims presented by the city for water main break damage to property of others
which was not caused by city negligence. But LMCIT will not pay for any damages or expenses for
which the property owner has been or is eligible to be reimbursed by any homeowners' or other
property insurance.
3. Definitions
For purposes of this endorsement, the following definitions apply.
a. Catastrophic incident means any of the following:
(1) Any weather - related or other event for which FEMA (Federal Emergency Management
Administration) assistance is available;
Sewer Toolkit
Other Resources - 21
(2) Any interruption in the electric power supply to the city's sewer system or to any city sewer lift
station which continues for more than 72 hours; or
(3) Rainfall of precipitation which exceeds the amount determined by the National Weather
Service to constitute a 100 -year storm event.
b. Sewer back -up damage means damage to property, including removal and clean-up costs, resulting
from a sewer back -up.
c. Water main break damage means damage to property, including removal and clean-up costs,
resulting from the rupture of a city water main, line, or pipe.
4. Limits
a. LMCIT will not pay more than $25,000. for sewer back -up damage to any building under this
endorsement, regardless of the number of occurrences or the number of claimants. For purposes of
this limit
(1) A structure or group of structures served by a single connection to the city's sewer system is
considered a single building.
(2) If a single structure is served by more than one connection to the city's sewer system, the
portion of the structure served by each respective connection is considered a separate building.
b. LMCIT will not pay more than $25,000 for water main break damage to any claimant, regardless
of the number of occurrences or the number of properties affected.
c. LMCIT will not pay more than $250,000 for water main break damage resulting from any single
occurrence. All water main break damage which occurs during any period of 72 consecutive hours
is deemed to result from a single occurrence.
If the total water main break damage for all claimants in a single occurrence exceeds $250,000, the
reimbursement to each claimant will be calculated as follows:
(1) A preliminary reimbursement figure is established for each claimant, equal to the lesser of the
claimant's actual damages or $25,000.
(2) The sum of the preliminary reimbursement figures for all claimants will be calculated.
(3) Each claimant will be paid a percentage of his or her preliminary reimbursement figure, equal
to the percentage calculated by dividing $250,000 by the sum of all claimants' preliminary
reimbursement figures.
5. Deductibles
The amount LMCIT pays for sewer back -up damages or water main break damage under this
endorsement is subject to the Municipal Liability Deductible shown in the Municipal Liability
Declarations or the General Annual Aggregate Deductible if any shown in the Common Coverage
Declarations.
Sewer Toolkit
Other Resources - 22
For purposes of the Municipal Liability Deductible, all claims for sewer back -up damages which are
covered under this endorsement, which occur within a 72 hour period, and which result from or are
related to the same condition or conditions in the city's sewer system are deemed to be a single
occurrence; and water main break damage which is covered under this endorsement and which occurs
during any period of 72 consecutive hours is deemed to be a single occurrence.
6. Retroactive Date
The retroactive date for this endorsement is
All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.
Sewer Toolkit
Other Resources - 23
COMPREHENSIVE MUNICIPAL COVERAGE
No -Fault Sewer Back -up and Water Main Break Coverage Endorsement ($40,000 Limit)
Section I, Coverage A, Municipal Liability Coverage, is amended to include no -fault sewer back -up and
water main break coverage. as outlined below.
1. No -fault sewer back -up coverage
a. If all of the following four conditions are met, LMCIT will pay for claims presented by the city for
sewer back -up damage to property of others which was not caused by city negligence:
(1) The sewer back -up resulted from a condition in the city's sewer system;
(2) The sewer back -up was not the result of an obstruction or other condition in sewer pipes or
lines which are not part of the city's sewer system or which are not owned or maintained by the
city; and
(3) The sewer back -up was not caused by or related to a catastrophic incident.
(4) The date of the occurrence giving rise to the claim for damages must be on or after the
retroactive date shown on this endorsement.
b. However, LMCIT will not pay for any damages or expenses:
(1) Which are or would be covered under a National Flood Insurance Program flood insurance
policy, whether or not such insurance is in effect; or
(2) For which the property owner has been reimbursed or is eligible to be reimbursed by any
homeowners' or other property insurance.
2. No -fault water main break coverage.
LMCIT will pay for claims presented by the city for water main break damage to property of others
which was not caused by city negligence. But LMCIT will not pay for any damages or expenses for
which the property owner has been or is eligible to be reimbursed by any homeowners' or other
property insurance.
3. Definitions
For purposes of this endorsement, the following definitions apply.
a. Catastrophic incident means any of the following:
(1) Any weather - related or other event for which FEMA (Federal Emergency Management
Administration) assistance is available;
Sewer Toolkit
Other Resources - 24
(2) Any interruption in the electric power supply to the city's sewer system or to any city sewer lift
station which continues for more than 72 hours; or
(3) Rainfall of precipitation which exceeds the amount determined by the National Weather
Service to constitute a 100 -year storm event.
b. Sewer back -up damage means damage to property, including removal and clean-up costs, resulting
from a sewer back -up.
c. Water main break damage means damage to property, including removal and clean-up costs,
resulting from the rupture of a city water main, line, or pipe.
4. Limits
a. LMCIT will not pay more than $40,000. for sewer back -up damage to any building under this
endorsement, regardless of the number of occurrences or the number of claimants. For purposes of
this limit
(1) A structure or group of structures served by a single connection to the city's sewer system is
considered a single building.
(2) If a single structure is served by more than one connection to the city's sewer system, the
portion of the structure served by each respective connection is considered a separate building.
b. LMCIT will not pay more than $40,000 for water main break damage to any claimant, regardless
of the number of occurrences or the number of properties affected.
C. LMCIT will not pay more than $250,000 for water main break damage resulting from any single
occurrence. All water main break damage which occurs during any period of 72 consecutive hours
is deemed to result from a single occurrence.
If the total water main break damage for all claimants in a single occurrence exceeds $250,000, the
reimbursement to each claimant will be calculated as follows:
(1) A preliminary reimbursement figure is established for each claimant, equal to the lesser of the
claimant's actual damages or $40,000.
(2) The sum of the preliminary reimbursement figures for all claimants will be calculated.
(3) Each claimant will be paid a percentage of his or her preliminary reimbursement figure, equal
to the percentage calculated by dividing $250,000 by the sum of all claimants' preliminary
reimbursement figures.
5. Deductibles
The amount LMCIT pays for sewer back -up damages or water main break damage under this
endorsement is subject to the Municipal Liability Deductible shown in the Municipal Liability
Declarations or the General Annual Aggregate Deductible if any shown in the Common Coverage
Declarations.
Sewer Toolkit
Other Resources - 25
For purposes of the Municipal Liability Deductible, all claims for sewer back -up damages which are
covered under this endorsement, which occur within a 72 hour period, and which result from or are
related to the same condition or conditions in the city's sewer system are deemed to be a single
occurrence; and water main break damage which is covered under this endorsement and which occurs
during any period of 72 consecutive hours is deemed to be a single occurrence.
6. Retroactive Date
The retroactive date for this endorsement is
All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.
Sewer Toolkit
Other Resources - 26