7. Continuation of Public Hearing on West 78th St. Auth plans & Specis and Authorize condemnation for right of way 4
I , CITYOF 7,
I i
1 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
1 N.
I MEMORANDUM
TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager
1 FROM: Charles Folch, City Engineer 0
1 DATE: October 7, 1992
SUBJ: Continuation of Public Hearing on West 78th Street Detachment Project No.
I 92 -3; Authorize Preparation of Plans and Specifications; Authorize
Condemnation Proceedings for the Right -of -Way
I Due to time constraints associated with last minute revisions, the latest supplemental
feasibility report for the West 78th Street Detachment Project was not presented to the City
I Council until the public hearing held at its regular meeting on September 28, 1992. This,
coupled with public testimony given by the developer of the Target site, Ryan Construction
Company and adjacent landowners affected by the project, the City Council continued the
1 public hearing to Monday, October 12, 1992.
On Wednesday, September 30, 1992, staff and the project engineer, Strgar- Roscoe - Fausch
1 (SRF), met with Mr. Charles James, Mr. Jim Burdick and representatives of both Ryan
Construction Company and Target, Inc. The primary project issues which were discussed
I were the road alignment, access locations and potential assessments. Following a great deal
of discussion, a refined alignment more or less consistent with that proposed to the City
Council was established and generally acceptable to all parties. The issue of access
1 continues to be one of general disagreement. Staff continues to recommend a controlled
access scheme which is considered the safest scenario given the defined project constraints
and allows for equal access opportunities to adjacent parcels. The proposed project
I assessment methodology was also discussed in greater detail. Mr. Charlie James gave
testimony at the September 28, 1992 public hearing that the City had made previous
commitments related to future roadway assessments to his property. This contention is
1 being researched.
Most of the September 28, 1992 public hearing discussion focused on the improvements to
I the segment of West 78th Street between Powers Boulevard and Kerber Boulevard.
Therefore, the project consultant engineer did not have adequate opportunity to discuss in
1 "ti
t PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
1
Don Ashworth
1 October 7, 1992
Page 2
greater detail the proposed improvements to West 78th Street between Kerber Boulevard
and Great Plains Boulevard. I have asked Dennis Eiler of SRF to prepare a large -scale
1 drawing of the overall proposed improvements to West 78th Street which will be presented
to the City Council on Monday night.
1 Unfortunately, due to previous commitments, Mr. Charlie James will be out of town for the
October 12, 1992 City Council meeting. Since all of the parties involved are in mutual
agreement as to the alignment for the roadway, it would be staffs' recommendation that the
' City Council authorize preparation of plans and specifications for the overall improvements
to West 78th Street between Powers Boulevard and Great Plains Boulevard. The issue of
' access location is considered to be more of a detail design element of the project which can
be addressed further during the preparation of the plans and presented to the City Council
at a future date when Mr. James and all other parties involved could be present. The same
' can be said for the preliminary assessment roll which is basically a guide in determining
project financing. The official assessment hearing is not expected to be held until the
project is completed in late summer of 1993. This issue could also be discussed further at
' a future Council meeting when all affected parties could be present.
It is therefore recommended that the preparation of project plans and specifications for the
West 78th Street Detachment Project No. 92 -3 (formerly Project No. 87 -2) be authorized
and that authorization also be given to initiate the condemnation proceedings for the
acquisition of the needed right -of -way through the James property.
1 jms
Attachments: 1. Manager's memorandum recommending a contingency.
2. Letter from SRF dated September 28, 1992.
3. Staff Report dated September 23, 1992.
1 4. Letter from Charlie James dated September 30, 1992.
c: Dave Hempel, Sr. Engineering Technician
1 Dennis Eiler, SRF
Jim Dvorak, SRF
Charlie James, property owner
1 Jim Burdick, property owner
Dick Koppy, RLK
1
1
1
1
CITYOF 1
CHANHASSEN
0‘.
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Don Ashworth, City Manager 1
DATE: October 8, 1992
SUBJ: Continuation of Public Hearing on West 78th Street Detachment Project 92 -3;
Authorize Preparation of Plans and Specifications; Authorize Condemnation
Proceedings for Right -of -Way
As noted in the Engineer's report, a five hour meeting with the property owners concluded in the 1
agreement that the city should move ahead with authorizing the roadway project, that the city
should initiate the condemnation of the Charlie James property necessary for the roadway and
the remnant parcel to the south of the roadway, and that the issues of interim access points and
assessment methodology would be left to the October 26 Council meeting (see letter from Charlie
James requesting to be present to discuss these issues). 1
I should note that the negotiations regarding completing a redevelopment agreement between the
HRA and Target/Ryan is currently at an impasse position. I would hope that such can be
resurrected. All parties are in agreement that we should move ahead with authorizing the
roadway project to ensure that Target's timing for starting grading can still be met if current
disagreements are overcome. However, I would ask that the City Council, in acting to authorize ,
the West 78th Street Detachment Project, include in such authorization that such is conditioned
upon Target entering into a Development and Redevelopment Agreement within sixty days with
1 the city and HRA.
D 4rj dfr
1
I's
if PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
• s
• ST RGAR - ROO AUN
CONSULTING ENGINEERS SC & E PLANNERS FS
I TRANSPORTATION ■ CIVIL ■ STRUCTURAL ■ ENVIRONMENTAL ■ L I SUR
SRF No. 0921634
September 28, 1992
1
Mr. Charles Folch, P.E.
City Engineer
' CITY OF CHANHASSEN
690 Coulter Drive
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
1 RE: WEST 78TH STREET DETACHMENT/POWERS BOULEVARD
CITY PROJECT NO. 92-3 (OLD CITY PROJECT NO. 87 -2)
REVISED: UPDATED FEASIBILITY STUDY AND REPORT
Dear Mr. Folch:
In February of 1992, we were directed by the City Council to prepare an updated Feasibility
Study for the referenced project. After completion of the updated study, a major development
proposal was brought forward for the property on the south side of West 78th Street. Because of
' this proposal, the project has changed significantly. This revised study updates costs and
assessments based on the latest alignment of West 78th Street and Powers Boulevard and includes
costs for that portion of Powers Boulevard south of West 78th Street that was to be constructed
' by Mn/DOT.
Enclosed with this correspondence is a revised layout, a revised table of estimated costs, a revised
project financing table and a revised preliminary assessment roll. All of the project features
proposed in the original update are still included in this update ( lighting, signals, landscaping, etc.)
and an additional traffic signal has been added to the central entrance to the developments north
and south of West 78th Street.
1 Also included in the revised project cost and project finance tables are those costs associated with
the signal and roadway widening improvements proposed between Kerber Boulevard and Great
Plains Boulevard.
' The project proposed herein is feasible from an engineering standpoint. We would be pleased to
meet with the City Council or other interested parties to review any aspect of this report.
1 Respectfully submitted,
STRGAR- ROOSCOE- FAUSCH INC.
' es R. Dvorak, P.E.
Associate
' JRD:bba
Enclosures
1
Suite 150, One Carlson Parkway y North , Minneapolis, olis Minnesota 55447
1 612/475.0010 FAX 612/475 -2429
i •
1 �<c
to \ .
J / ,, J J / i /J i
s
\ �
\1
` - �\�0.
_ - - Qp
: 49\ 1 - . . ._ -.:
rio ( 1 ' i ` 1
i 1 , I 16 \
, .....„
' ( w • w w
..r. w
SRF S7RGAR- ROSCOE.FAUSCH, INC
mNwLr•IG ENGINEER! CITY OF CHANHASSEN FIGURE 1
awir.r.• • w ■ !mid • naM • i•ra.wp.s PROPOSED STREET
Suke150, One Carlson Parkway North W. 78TH STREET/ POWERS BLVD. IMPROVEMENTS
Minneapolis, MN 55447
(612) 475 -0010 CITY PROJECT NO. 92-3 SRF NO. 0921634
NM MN MI MI MI • MIIII MN IIM = IIMI I MN MI NM MI • N .'XIII
1
a
in
g i
1
1
-ft. ------__________„...... _ i ,, , 1 i
4/ \\,/ R.
' - w. 76 TH
L. •
. P i
__
\ 'Mal SSG
I
` 4' M - - M M
ST, STRGAR - ROSCOE FAUSCH, INC
conxn.,n�c ENGINEERS CITY OF CHANHASSEN FIGURE
SRF
s.......... • 04 •""'-• Mim •r"ls "'r"' PROPOSED STREET
Suite 150, One Carbon Parkway North W. 78TH STREET/ POWERS BLVD. IMPROVEMENTS
Minneapolis, MN 55447
(612) 475 -0010 CITY PROJECT NO. 92 3 SRF NO. 0921634
. - .
..
q
ga
Q �
R
u i W.78THS UI - -. +1
•
%, ,r g -_._ -- .__--------- --- - -- =mac` -^ — - -- - -- � `
) I(
,_
r ,
i i
, 1 .
1 1 .4.
N • N M
ww 4tl
•
SRF STRGAR ROSCOE4AUSCH, INC
mnwMICI IN U CITY OF CHANHASSEN FIGURE 3
lei'
'"r- - •°i'•am.•' .•'a"•" - PROPOSED STREET
Suite 150, One Carbon Parkway North W. 78111 STREET/ POWERS BLVD. IMPROVEMENTS
Minneapolis, MN 55447
(612) 475-0010 CITY PROJECT NO. 92-3 - SRF NO. 0921634
r
r
r
3
E i L_
. _....) ) 1 , W. 78TH =LT - - _ - �'\ _ _ W. 78TH NM
i .------' ---:-.--------_,.::. c 1 (-----
CHANIIMEH DM. Itittn ;
k l'
4, \ Iv
` \ `
I i
\ \‘
r ,.r
SRF SRF STRGA R 4FAUScH, INC CITY OF CHANHASSEN FIGURE 4
la.r....nwn !mod rwallb.•trangs•
PROPOSED STREET
Suite 150, One Carbon Parkway North W. 78TH STREET / POWERS BLVD. IMPROVEMENTS
Minneepolb, MN 55447
(612) 475 -0010 CITY PROJECT NO. SRF NO.0921634
1
CITY PROJECT NO. 92-3 1
WEST 78TH (POWERS BOULEVARD TO KERBER BOULEVARD)
I
POWERS BOULEVARD
PROJECT ESTIMATED COSTS 1
(Revised 9/92)
1
West 78th Street Powers Boulevard Total Project 1
Grading $ 116,700 $ 158,700 $ 275,400
Soil Correction $ 20,000 $ 0 $ 20,000 1
Paving $ 260,100 $ 198,500 $ 458,600 1
Drainage $ 145,700 $ 39,000 $ 184,700 i
Detention Pond $ 189,800 $ 0 $ 189,800
Sanitary Sewer $ 22,400 $ 0 $ 22,400 1
Watermain $ 33,000 $ 0 $ 33,000 1
Landscaping/ $ 340,600 $ 197,600 $ 538,200
Traffic Signal/
Miscellaneous
Construction Subtotal $1,128,300 $ 593,800 S1,722,100 1
Legal,
Administration, $ 394,900 $ 207,800 $ 602,700 1
Fiscal
(35 percent)
TOTAL ESTIMATED I
PROJECT COST $1,523,200 $ 801,600 $2,324,800 I
Note: 1
The estimated total cost for the first phase of roadway widening and signal improvements
between Kerber Boulevard and Great Plains Boulevard is $784,000.00. 1
1
1 September 28, 1992
I CITY PROJECT NO. 92-3
WEST 78TH STREET (POWERS BOULEVARD TO KERBER BOULEVARD)
1 POWERS BOULEVARD
1 REVISED (9/92)
1 PROJECT FINANCING TABLE
I General
Improvement Assessable Amount Obligation Amount Total
1 Grading, Paving,
Signals, Lighting $ 684,540.00 $ 1,059,930.00 $ 1,744,470.00
1 and Landscaping
Drainage and $ 124,680.00 $ 124,680.00 $ 249,360.00
1 Storm Sewer
I Detention Pond $ 0.00 $ 256,230.00 $ 256,230.00
Sanitary Sewer $ 30,240.00 $ 0.00 $ 30,240.00
1 Watermain S 44,540.00 $ 0.00 S 44,540.00
I TOTAL PROJECT S 884,000.00 S1,440,840.00 S 2,324,840.00
I The cost of the improvements proposed between Kerber Boulevard and Great Plains Boulevard is
proposed to be entirely funded by the City. $784,000.00 would then be an added General
Obligation amount.
1
1
1
1
1
p *gyp ?,p1
S g O g o 0 0. I� 4 1
1111111 111111
11111111M11111 1E1 1
g 9 S S 7 9
�� A 1
r
g
ms Qo5b5n55
y .... p r
1
a y jjjj yy ! sQN
a i O B 0 0 0 E 6 O O O a �Y O O m
111111111iisfli l i 11 1 1
a!iaaei!!! =aaei! 1 1
A 1 1
1 8888888888888188 a i
i 1
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!101 1 1 1
�c H
* � i @ 1
Q o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 o C o o T
8 i R
i !E EEE�Sd1EE Ea E li
13 811111111;11$888 u 1
8818 ;; ;88888 ;888 1 1 1 •
01 1
1
1;111111111MM 10
N
1111111$11111111 1 1 1
111 iliii.
1
11111111111111ill N 11
w w w w• w• S = s 1
88818118188888888 1 ; 8
1
M6
• i 6 y O i ..... 1000100 4 8
1
1
11;
11041111 1 ° 1
1 :HU 1
1
CITYOF 3
i it444 CHANHASSEN
' f-- 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
I Acton by City Adminishstb!
Endorsed ✓ 1uPt
vied
II MEMORANDUM Roc e
Rejeca
pat. 9 —.4 -411.°'
TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager Date submitted to Commission
1 FROM: Charles Folch, City Engineer Or note su5T" to Coun4
1 DATE: September 23, 1992
1 SUBJ: Public Hearing for West 78th Street Detachment; Authorize Preparation of
Plans and Specifications
Project No. 92 -3 (formerly Project No. 87 -2)
At e i '
th Ci,� tY, s regular nagg on March 9. 1992, a public hearing was held
concerning the supplemental report to the feasibility study for the West 78th Street
I Detachment Improvement Project No. 92-3 (former City Project No. 87 -2). WI both
public and City Council discussion, it was apparent that there were a few issues that
I warranted further study and discussions with adjacent property owners, particularly as it
related to access control and locations along the proposed roadway. Therefore, the Council
acted to co nntinue h public 'c he aring until these issues could be resolved.
' Durin the time period that followed the ublic he ' sbecame aware that Target was
interested in eve °ping at a site imme late v south of the detachment roadway. Due to the
I pore_ n lag o m aior retail development such as this, staff concluded that the
feasibili stud could not reahsticall be co .. .feted • ; :let hao ficiall chosen a site
location and su • matted conceptual site pl ans to the Ci ► for ew. Ti have
I since transpired ann on , uncu ay..t...-----P a co tual hese PUD submittals
approval for
the Target site plan. �dAf�Q �e„� ,,.r�,�.��
I During the planning and development process for the Target site, specifically as it relates
to the acquisition of the Burdick property and a portion of Charlie James property, a
proposal was made to revise the West 78th Street Detachment intersection with County
1 Road 17 approximately 120 feet south. There were a number of issues involved which led
to the proposed alignment change. Thus, staff and SRF were charged with the task of
investigating the potential impacts.
1
t 4 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
1 .
1
Don Ashworth 1
September 23, 1992
Page 2
1
From the City's standpoint, the revised alignment provides some advantages in terms of
eliminating the reverse curve along the roadway, reducing impacts to the wetland west of
County Road 17 when the future extension of the road occurs, and improving the financial
negotiating aspects of the land acquisition. During this very limited time period, contact has
been made with the Minnesota Department of Transportation and with the Carver County
engineer to discuss the revised alignment. Both MnDOT and Carver County have given
preliminary indications that this revised alignment would be approved with appropriate
design considerations on County Road 17 at Trunk Highway 5 and submittal of supporting
traffic analysis documentation.
A large scale drawing of the proposed West 78th Street Detachment alignment and overall
improvements between Great Plains Boulevard and Powers Boulevard (County Road 17)
will be presented to the Council at Monday night's meeting. The plan proposes to
reconstruct West 78th Street along the revised alignment as a four -lane divided urban
roadway section with left and right turn lanes. This roadway segment will incorporate turf
medians and landscaping consistent with the theme east of Market Boulevard. In addition,
the northerly segment of Monterey will be realigned to match the Kerber Boulevard
intersection.
The majority of this improvement project will occur on the segment between Kerber 1
Boulevard and Powers Boulevard (County Road 17); however, the plan also proposes to
construct street widening and median nose improvements to the portion of West 78th Street
between Kerber Boulevard and Great Plains Boulevard. These improvements would yield
a four -lane divided roadway segment between Kerber Boulevard and Laredo Drive and
along the westbound segment between Great Plains Boulevard and the entrance to the
Riviera parking lot. This plan also shows future widening improvements which could be
implemented to the segment between Great Plains Boulevard and Laredo Boulevard at
sometime in the future when traffic volumes warrant a four -lane, divided facility. In effect,
this is a master plan which would ultimately yield a four -lane divided urban roadway section
from Great Plains Boulevard to Powers Boulevard (County Road 17) and still maintain the
landscaped median treatments. 1
During the past few months, the City's consultant engineer for the project and central
business district downtown traffic study, Strgar- Roscoe - Fausch (SRF), completed a
downtown traffic signal analysis and justification report for the primary intersections along
West 78th Street between Great Plains Boulevard and Powers Boulevard (County Road 17).
At their regular meeting on July 13,1992, the City Council acted to authorize signals within
the downtown area and asked that public informational meetings be held prior to awarding
bids for the signals. These public informational meetings were advertised in The Villager
and held on August 24 and September 14, 1992. Although public participation at these
meetings was very limited, relevant, pertinent information received from downtown business
1
1
1
Don Ashworth
September 23, 1992
Page 3
•
representatives, the Public Safety department and the general public have been incorporated
into the revised feasibility report and plan for the overall improvements to West 78th Street
between Great Plains Boulevard and Powers Boulevard (County Road 17).
The plan displays the installation of traffic signals on West 78th Street at the intersections
with Great Plains Boulevard, Great Plains Boulevard, Laredo Drive, Market Boulevard,
' Kerber Boulevard, Powers Boulevard and at the primary access shared by the Target site
and Outlot B. These traffic signals are proposed to be interconnected and operated by a
master controller unit which could be programmed to efficiently move traffic in and out of
the downtown area and control speeds along West 78th Street. It should also be noted that
a master control switch is proposed to be installed at the Fire Station to control both the
' signals at Laredo Drive and Great Plains Boulevard. The switch would turn the signal at
Laredo green (stopping West 78th) while simultaneously giving east and south movements
a green light by the clock tower. This should allow traffic to clear West 78th Street before
the fire truck(s) get to West 78th Street. The project also includes installing remote control
units in all police and fire vehicles to activate all signals within the downtown and on
Highway 5.
' Due to time constraints, revised cost schedules and relimin assessment p ary ss ent roll for this
overall West 78th Street Improvement Project will not be available prior to packet
' distribution. I would anticipate that this information could be given to the City Council at
the public hearing during the formal presentation of this improvement project. The special
assessment methodology for the roadway improvements is proposed to be consistent with
' that implemented for the previous West 78th Street improvements east of Market
Boulevard.
At the close of the public bearing, if there are no further, relevant questions or concerns
that warrant investigation, it is recommended that the City Council approve the
supplemental feasibility report for the revised West 78th Street Detachment Project No. 92-
3, authorize the preparation of project plans and specifications by the consultant Strgar-
Roscoe-Fausch and authorize the condemnation of the right -of -way needed for the revised
alignment east of Powers Boulevard (County Road 17).
jms
c: Dave Hempel, Sr. Engineering Technician
Dennis Eiler, SRF
Jim Dvorak, SRF
1
1
Don Ashworth
September 23, 1992
Page 4
.' 1
Manager's Comments: As noted by the City Engineer, we met with the County Engineer, Roger
Gustafson. Although wanting to review Strgar's traffic counts /projections, Mr. Gustafson is
prepared to ask the County Board to endorse the revised project plans. Although he did not state
that he would deny the project if a right - in/out (for Ryan) or a left - in/out (for James) was
included, he was clear in stating that neither of these would be preferred and both had the 1
potential of increasing traffic accidents for motorists coming off of County Road 17.
DWA (9- 24 -92) 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4,
1
d
J AMES
1
September 30, 1992
Mayor Don Chmiel
7100 Tecumseh Lane
1 Chanhassen, MN. 55317
Ursula Dimler
7203 Kiowa Circle
Chonh z wn, MN. 55317
Mike Mason
833 Woodhill Road
Chanhassen, MN. 55317
Richard Wing
3481 Shore Drive
Excelsior, MN. 55331
1 Tom Workman
7233 Pontiac Circle
Chanhassen, MN. 55317
1
Dear Councilperson:
I will be unable to attend the City Council Meeting scheduled for October 12 as I cannot realistically change my
itinerary, appointments, and the five airline tickets that I purchased earlier this summer in anticipation of a resolution
' of the Target/West 7 &h Street matter by September 28th. 1 will be out of the country on a combined business and
pleasure trip until October 22. At this late juncture, it is impossible for me, in the next twelve hours, to bring either
a member of my firm or my legal counsel up to speed on all of the manifold, complex inter - related and byzantine
issues that have informed my various discussions with staff and the representatives of Target over the last two years
1 and more particularly over the last 90 days.
This morning I attended the first meeting at which representatives from Target, RLK SRF, Don Ashworth, Charles
U Folch, Jim Burdick and I were all in the same room at the same time to discuss matters of mutual concern. I felt
that I was being pressured from all sides to quickly accede to terms and conditions that would have an immediate
benefit for Target (and the HRA) but which had the potential for long tem: negative impacts on that remaining
' portions of my property that would not be acquired by the City through condemnation.
After nearly five hours of discussion, it was agreed that the alignment of West 78th Street and the location of the
signal were items that could go on to review by Council on October 12th: I allowed Target, RLIiy and SRF to select
' the road alignment that, in their opinion, best suits the needs of the HRA, Target,and Carver County.
I also acquiesced in the determination of a signal location to serve common driveways to be located along the
property line between Target and Outlot B on the South, and along the property line between Lots 3 & 4 on the north
( which property line 1 gave RLK & SRF some license to adjust as might be necessary to achieve the best design
geometries).
:
T F James Company P.O. Box 24137 Minneapolis Minnesota 55424 (612) 828 -9000
REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT
A,1
JAMES
i
September 30, 1992
Page -2- 1
I was told by Mr. Ashworth that the outstanding unresolved issue of full access to Lots 1 & 2 of the James property
(as provided in the Developers Agreement of 1988) would be a matter for council review and consideration on
October 26 as a special agenda item.
Further, I was told that on October 26th, I could speak to the issue of assessments as currently proposed and as
1 originally contemplated in the Developer's Agreement of 1988.
It was explained that the key matter to iesolve on October 12 is the legal description of the exact alignment such that
a notice of condemnation can be given and an appraisal ordered on the described area. 1
My wish to address the Council on October 26 should not delay or impair resolution of the alignment; the right of
way contains adequate width to provide a left turn lane if such an accommodation Ls granted by the City Council.
As 1 have previously stated, my concerns are as follows :
1. A fair price for my land that reflects the costs I expended for engineering soil tests and corrections, site
grading utility plans, architectural plans, loss of business opportunity, and possible diminution of access
to my remaining property. This issue cannot be solved by Council on October 12, this will take some
patience and trust on my part and goodfaith on the part of the HRA. 1
2. Fair and reasonable access to my property. I am told by SRF that the right of way and alignment will
accommodate almost any plan so the Council can approve the alignment on the 12th without committing
to the issue of access to the James property.1 would ask that we resolve this matter, as it pertains to James
access only, on October 26 when I can be present to answer your questions.
3. Fair and reasonable assessments that acknowledge the costs incurred by James in correcting the soil forte 1
the old and the new proposed alignment; and that acknowledge the Developer's Agreement of 1988. I am
told that the proper time to question assessments is at the assessment roll hearing next year, so I do not
think this issue should constrain the Council on October 12th. I would however, appreciate the opportunity
to briefly review my concems with you on October 26th, if you deem it appropriate.
4. An expeditious resolution of the condemnation so that I can finally, after over 4 years of uncertainty, begin
to market my property.
I very much appreciate your careful consideration of these issues; and 1 thank you for your patient understanding. 1
Sincerely,
Charles Wm. James 1
1
1
1