3. Continuation of Public Hearing on Watermain and Sanitary Sewer Improvement in Lake Riley Hills Authorize Plans & Specs 3
r CITY OF _______
i _
cY, 1 CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
,, (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 Actior by tiry PA— , ^.-;.;,,..,
,/TWA'
1 MEMORANDUM PEi : `, _ __
TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager pee F..---. -e
1 I`�
FROM: Charles Folch, City Enginee Vj`'
t
- (0 i y Y
I DATE: February 4, 1992
SUBJ: Continuation of Public Hearing on Watermain and Sanitary
ry
Sewer Improvements in Section 24 and Lake Riley Hills;
11 Authorize Preparation of Plans and Specifications
Project No. 90-10
At their regular meeting on Mon - . ° February 10, 1992, the City
Council is scheduled to cont: e 'the public hearing on the
feasibility study for trunk wa . rmain and sanitary sewer
I improvements in Section 24 and use La., Riley Hills area. You will
recall that the impetus fort ,4,1 proz.ct was a petition from
Mr. John Klingelhutz, the de loper > the proposed Lake Riley
I Hills Addition in the northeast corner ' . ;f Section 24, northwest of
Lake Riley. The initial dy area "' ,1 compassed the properties
north and west of Lake Ri � y, south o � the proposed State Trunk . �
I Highway 212 corridor, ea qt-'of State Tru,, Highway 101 and bounded
to the south by the Mun'" pal Urban Serve e Area (MUSA) limits.
The original feasibtty study was receiv by the City Council on
1 October 10, 1991 public hearing was h d on November 4, 1991.
At both the • •• •• a 1,- ,• • . lic hearing for this
proposed proje , ¢ " ` ' . '.. ` • ` - " "` A thin the project area
I voiced thei 4o .ppo� � .. s ° _ 1 __, - � ` 't relates
• to the cost tha , ,would be incurred to them since "7 � are not
ready to develop or " statement was very . .. •I li. w ost + , _'�� of 10 -acre or
:.
less) properties within the stdy - Hearing the testimony
given, the City Council directe s ff and the project consultant
engineer to reevaluate the scop - . the project and the associated
I costs to determine if there we -` any potential alternatives that
would provide the needed utility services for the Lake Riley Hills
subdivision and not adversely impact, from a financial standpoint,
I the small acreage properties.
Over the past few months, staff and the project consultant engineer
I have reevaluated this project and its specific elements as it
a "
i4i PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
1
I
1
1..
1
11
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Don Ashworth
February 4, 1992
Page 2
relates to the completion of the comprehensive study for the MUSA
expansion area. You will recall that the time the initial public
hearing for this project was held, it was not known whether a joint
Lower Bluff Creek /Lake Riley Hills forcemain along Trunk Highway
101 north to the Lake Ann Interceptor would be allowed by the MWCC
due to capacity restraints in the downstream Red Rock Intercepter.
With the assistance from Bonestroo & Associates, the City has
recently received approval from the MWCC granting an additional
' flow allocation of 3 MGD in the Lake Ann Intercepter (see MUSA
study report in packet). This additional flow allocation makes
this combined trunk facility for the Lake Riley and Lower Bluff
11 Creek Districts very plausible.
As was presented in the initial feasibility study, the existing
sanitary sewer Lift Station No. 17 located at the intersection of
11 Lyman Boulevard and Lake Riley Boulevard would have sufficient
capacity to serve the entire proposed Lake Riley Hills development.
However, the lift station would then be operating at full capacity.
In a sense, trunk watermain is the key infrastructure improvement
needed at this time for the proposed Lake Riley Hills development.
' Therefore, two alternatives for trunk utility infrastructure
improvements have been developed as potential solutions to meeting
the needs of the defined service area. Alternative number one
involves both trunk sanitary sewer and watermain improvements for
' the services area while alternative number two involves only a
trunk watermain facility improvement.
' Alternative No. 1
This alternative proposes to provide 16" and 12" watermain along
Trunk Highway 101 and Lyman Boulevard, respectively, connecting to
the existing system at the Chanhassen Hills development. The mains
would be constructed through the Lake Riley Hills development to
provide future looping capabilities through adjacent properties.
Trunk sanitary sewer is proposed to be provided via gravity lines
leading to the location of the existing lift station which would be
reconstructed to provide increased capacity for the entire service
area and then pump via forcemain to the west along Lyman Boulevard
to the intersection with Trunk Highway 101 and then pumped via
forcemain north along Trunk Highway 101 to the Lake Ann
Interceptor. This improvement alternative would provide capacity
for ultimate development of the entire Lake Riley district.
' This trunk sewer and watermain improvement project is estimated to
cost approximately $1.5 million. This improvement cost is proposed
to be paid via special assessments to properties within the defined
service area. The proposed assessment rate is defined based on the
1
Don Ashworth
February 4, 1992
Page 3
1
residential equivalent unit (REU) whereby 1.7 REU per raw acre of
residential single - family zoned property could be developed as
determined in the recently amended comprehensive guide plan.
Properties with a higher density or use classification zoning have
an impact factor which is multiplied to the 1.7 REU for
residential - single - family to determine the equivalent REU as
follows:
Zoning Impact Factor 1
Low Density (SF) 1.0
Medium Density 1.5
High Density 3.0
Mixed Use 3.0
Commercial /Industrial 2.0
The large lot and hobby farm properties with 10 acres or less are
proposed to be assessed one unit per existing dwelling structure on
the property. The unit assessment rate proposed is $970 per REU
for sanitary sewer and $1,275 per REU for trunk watermain. This is
consistent with the unit assessment rates being proposed for the
utility improvements in the MUSA expansion area. In fact, these
project costs were evaluated cooperatively with those improvements
to the MUSA expansion area in order to develop an appropriate
uniform trunk sewer and water assessment rate applicable to all
properties within the Upper Bluff Creek, Lower Bluff Creek and Lake
Riley Districts to adequately fund needed utility infrastructure
improvements.
Each property has been evaluated based on its total raw acreage and
building classification to determine the potential residential
equivalent units. The large lot and hobby farm properties with 10
acres or less are proposed to be assessed at 1 unit per existing
dwelling structure. Applying these criteria to the service area
yields approximately 463 REU for sanitary sewer and 789 AEU for
trunk watermain. The difference between these two numbers results
from the sanitary sewer units previously assessed to the Lakeview
Hills apartment complex. You will notice that I have used the
adjective potential REU's for those number totals. This is due to
the fact that approximately 137 REU are associated with the
property which is currently under "Green Acre" status. Assessments
levied to these parcels would have to be deferred until such time
that the "Green Acre" status is removed. 1
With the initial deferral of 137 units under "Green Acres ",
approximately 326 sanitary sewer REU's and 581 water REU's remain
for the initial assessment revenue. Applying the appropriate REU
rates for sewer and water would yield a total initial assessment
revenue of $1,116,995 including a $60,000 lateral benefit
Don Ashworth
February 4, 1992
Page 4
assessment to the Lake Riley Hills Addition. The net result is
that approximately $310,000 in potential assessment to "Green Acre"
properties would have to be deferred. Any future subdivision
within the large lot and hobby farms with 10 acres or less or
development of the high- density or mixed -use properties higher than
those units assessed would be collected at these current rates via
the hook -up charge.
1 • The bottom line of Alternative No. 1, from a financial standpoint,
would be an initial assessment revenue shortfall of approximately
$400,000 until such time that some or all of the "Green Acre"
property status changes. It should be noted that a large portion
of the Lower Bluff Creek service area which is currently designated
as the 1995 study area, will share the common trunk sanitary sewer
facility along Trunk Highway 101 and provide assessment revenue in
L the future for a portion of the cost associated with this
improvement project.
Alternative No. 2
This alternative proposes to provide trunk watermain facilities to
the Lake Riley Hills development by constructing 16" and 12" trunk
watermain along Trunk Highway 101 to the north from the Chanhassen
Hills development and east along 86th Street, respectively, to the
1 Lake Riley Hills Addition. As mentioned in the initial feasibility
study, the existing sewer system located along Lake Riley Boulevard
would have sufficient capacity for full development of the proposed
Lake Riley Hills development; however, the lift station would then
be operating at full capacity. Therefore, sanitary sewer
improvements would not be proposed at this time. The primary
reasons for developing this alternative stem from the fact that
this proposed watermain improvement would function as the north
half of the overall trunk watermain looping system for this service
area and would have less financial impact on large -lot, small -
acreage hobby farm -type parcels. Each of the Tigua Lane properties
are proposed to be assessed one unit per parcel with an existing
dwelling structure.
The total project cost for this improvement is estimated to be
$328,000. Applying the 1.7 units per raw acre of residential land
potential and the appropriate aforementioned unit impact factors
for the higher use zoning classifications yields 174 REU's for
t trunk watermain assessment. Applying the $1,275 per unit trunk
watermain assessment rate nets approximately $410,000 in assessment
revenue including $60,000 for lateral benefit assessment to the
proposed Lake Riley Hills Addition. However, approximately 67
REU's are currently under "Green Acre" status. Therefore, as
mentioned previously, any levied assessment would be deferred until
1
C44-4ac JIM CURRY INVESTMENT COMPANIES
4617 Upper Terrace
o
c p Edina, Minnesota 55435
L( 612/927 -9351
/1/ /Fin
AW CAVA!
•
1
X -
.IA47vx y 1
®ate
A ,u �
tea.. S e- D Avb41.4Q i
14_ Pt/
7C4714 A lefr (AA') 4 ,W/N)■
' 1
,(;), ( ei 1
1
1
1
1
1
1 IJi■ itAILY\ %
JIM CURRY INVESTMENT COMPANIES
4817 Upper Terrace
Edina, Minnesota 55435
612/927-9351
l ea;A:k / — eta Am4441 alt,‘ PA#A.u:i 6 - 7 Y
Ib rato."44 aott Aw )7, .4t.•% 4 1 C r;a4 f
1 /4 RUT_ "' - .y,t4A ittfe-A
-1- - kromArlox AAA,
I S o Craa-m". AmNA '? 3
1 erA/r444/A&- f x;fA-4)t- 1" -v " v% A/T-- h 9 5
1 1,&.X .24 Au.,4-4 1, -7-cx it
°(AA4
•
1
111 ra
II N
r
mm .I O
fA xl y
s 1 0
z m rn 1 111
_I v
Z m
%9 z
1/1 0 $7,-(W 7 7 . " - v
M II N ® °1
j , of , 1 ,- .....
i N Z 51
ig V. - it .:14,11, ....
.4, Nohrailiall =EN
N N -a, < 21 7. -< 0 IN`k xi : 1 \ �� � ��►► - \1 11 1`1 1 110, ■
v Z121 ; m z v 1��• n��
M T. as _ z � ^ �1�11I / �' •
,...._MMIIIIIN 4: I■ /4 I M
lib . ° ---- 1- lA
\■ I /
"I il .
0 V , I /
Ali it
V r 1 / /41i7 \\
I /is 0 is \ II. i A
■
........ ; 114•••• - ,, ... 6,
„k \ IF/ ...,,, . ,,
..
1 A ,
•
iTat,____Sillmi Pa t ) 11"
\. ■ ek. \ 1 . 11/
41'I
.. '- l' 1*■ 1
li, , . 14
OliiIITI.*
- - --Va.—) s..
I I
. A i i
I ' :►�•• / / `I I „ 1 1 / �1 1 , 1 1�► ► 1 1 / 1 1 � ► 1 1 � 1 / ► 1 / 1 1 � ►V 1 J. ► IO e u 1 /` � ��/ r� r
• 11' !• A ��
" / /� _ 1 i ►•1 111 1. - .- �_- .__
' `�nl l II , 1 11 ; Wet. ',01 :1 x'41/ C. a A /".f./411 '' I�
� - ►1 11 <111N1A 1AN
V90" 4 �++ +��� I �i1r , .r . VA W I:c.►.e:1A.111/►►:4 ���r�1►'' .
♦/'`�' 1 11 1.1�. A G1.1.•..�1■•11♦ 4',;..IN111N •111•
I. ` / f
Its P °, ..N .10..1►= ,�.f.•
,.
♦ / ► 1 1151.1' •44 1W..4r•.wri.. 4.:1'1 "1'
• �44 %, oo ► � !' 11 1 �1 /r
• `�' +.; � ` ` , 1 44411 •N11114 N1 ►1111!
!a ^+ \ 1 ► ^ 1 1 ••••441\1/11N1► ,►l W.N1
♦ r L 1'1�� ♦A 4.11/11�11.1 :11
1 ` . I�� /�' ` � — _ ...,•9‘,9 i ►1 4 v!.......4 .4 949.9
, - ,,, ...44, < .11 >1N.i. `1/N1f,.., ...111 • ' 1 t ' 'L� ''
� , A, ` 4 '`. ••-* / 1 i 1 4 1 o 1 /*11, ' 1 1 i • • c • i i i �►��A
• . .:e+4. , 4 iv1'1 `1 1 ► 1 1 i�,
•
44111 4 1111 11111 .4 •••••••••••••
1 ` 1 /
/111P 111111/11111111111 /1
••••1 •' '•• 1V,111►11111111111i
•/11.` ..#
• :
1111 ....111•••••••••1111
111 /i
• 1 \ ,
i • • 111.111 •111111!111111111111 1 1-/1111111111
►1�W11 1
•
P 11 4 1►rt.11111111/1N _,
,,,
.0.,,,
,oie ,
. IN.: \
li
1 N
1
W. 0 04.5114a Rgolan DRAWING NO. 4 CITY OF CHANHASSEN
1 As ar i
Anoofatas.Ino.
i.e ASSESSIENT AREAS
.,.,.. �......,.. M....,. PROJECT NO. 90-10
at a.. a••.•• .�... �.,.res leaf ••••••111•1