Loading...
3. Assessment roll for Frontier Trail „,! ,,, w C 1 TY 7;: F 3 ...e 6 0 1 cHANBAssEN ,,.. 4 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 /' (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 Y a 4,1 � _ L ® /..... • A.,...4 Al. - 70 -30 I MEMORANDUM G /�Ja:, .... /J +N ! �j ,� �p • a”' -34 ` /� 't/WU Ire. TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager f N /1 S 1 FROM: Charles Folch, City Engineer AV,/ 4J4./ • DATE: October 9, 1991 o 0e/ L.. 1f.•..9 • Lett '�'4 gsit.rt..Jt 1 SUBJ: Adopt Assessment Roll for Frontier Frail Improvement Project 89 -10 .. The assessment hearing and the adr tion of the assessment roll for the Frontier Trail Street and Uti z ;K Improvement Project No 89 -10 I was first held at the City Counc `; regular meeting on August 12, 1991. In light of the type ,•"d umber of resident questions raised, the public hearing was •nt k, ued to the September 9, 1991 I City Council meeting in orde to low staff and the project engineer to review the minutes d pr a are formal responses to each of the relevant questions ra -d. ' At the September 9, 1991 ouncil m =sting, the responses were presented by staff. Howev= , at that m .ting a resident testified that the City Council ha. `irectedstaf 1 to conduct a neighborhood I workshop prior to coasts ing the assess t- nt hearing process. As s uc h, the public h ,ding and as ess u `; t adoption was again continued. 1 ., ' T he minutes •E res.ective Counc were reviewed and ; ... ,• . = ' u.,x, s " . . =' *; ? i '- " `.4 " ' 4 :. V , Y . s '< no such direc Nevertheless, notices were sent , tt. , u >,,. ` 3 . „ _ , - ,t-''. y. F ;.,' { x, �..il. I ' informal neighborhoo . hop was held on Thursday, Septe l . e • , 1991 to d iscuss specifi nts of the proposed as • • i -nt for the project. The prof ect�`' ." t ..•,,• n t en i - ' .ill Engelhardt, initiated the meeting by resen n• - - U g y p =a. ed explanation of the project costs and the rationa -hind the proposed assessment schedule. The informal discuss p r included the issues related to the rationale behind the forty/- Y y cost split, front -foot versus I unit method of assessment and the adjustment made for the long frontage pie- shaped lots on a curve. 1 Two individual issues which were brought up at the workshop involved Jim Madyls driveway at 7338 Frontier Trail and another resident who claimed that the outlots on Frontier Trail were not to 1 tit PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER ■ 1 ' Don Ashworth October 9, 1991 Page 2 be assessed. Concerning the Mady driveway, Bill Engelhardt and 1 myself met with Mr. Mady at his residence on Tuesday, October 1, 1991. Mr. Mady had stated that his car was scraping while backing out of his driveway with a passenger in the back seat. We observed the situation and it was concluded that only a low mud flap on one side of the vehicle was causing the problem. Upon viewing this, Mr. Mady had no further concern about this issue. On the matter of the outlots, I have reviewed the City Council minutes from all of the project hearings and it was found that the only discussion of record concerning this issue occurred at the feasibility hearing on September 11, 1989. No statement or formal ' action was found which would indicate that, in general, these outlots would not be assessed. Outlot 1 located adjacent to the Sunrise Hills Association Beachlot and Outlot 3 located along the north side of Frontier Trail, south of Sunrise Ridge Addition, are both very small and narrow (1 -foot wide and 6 -feet wide, respectively) outlots adjacent to the right -of -way and owned by the City. Both of the outlots are obviously unbuildable and according to the County Assessor have no market value. Properties with no market value cannot be assessed. It would be more appropriate to consider both of these outlots as an extension of the City's ' existing street right -of -way. In addition, the minutes in no way indicate that Registered Land Survey No. 16, owned by the Sunrise Hilts Homeowners Association, would not be assessed for the ' improvements. Outlot 2, which lies immediately north of Lot 9, Block 3 Sunrise ' Hills 2nd Addition, is apparently owned in fee title by Lot 9 and therefore has direct benefit of that particular lot. This outlot is more than 3,000 square feet and is contiguous with Lot 9. Thus, the frontage for Outlot 2 is included. It should also be noted ' that the assessable front footage for Lot 9, Block 3 including Outlot 2 has been reduced from 229 feet to 169.48 feet by implementing the revised methodology for the large frontage pie- shaped lots on a curve. On the matter of why the front foot versus the unit -method of assessment was being used for the street improvement costs, I have ' attached a petition which was received by the City on December 18, 1989 representing 33 of the 49 affected parcels in favor of the front foot method of assessment for the street improvements. 1 In response to the continued driveway concerns raised by the Loebl's and Mr. King, I would propose that any corrective work ' needed to be performed on the portions of the driveways within the construction limits could be handled as warranty items under the two -year maintenance bond for the project. I have met with Helen and Bill Loebl and explained this option. The City has also 1 Don Ashworth October 9, 1991 Page 3 expressed its dissatisfaction with the way the subcontractor has P Y dealt with the residents on the private driveway work performed. Finally, concerning the matter of the proposed assessment split whereby 40% of the street costs are proposed to be assessed and 60% are to be funded by the City, the rationale for this methodology is based on the premise that costs for the new road improvements which did not previously exist, such as concrete curb and gutter, roadway base and subgrade materials should be assessed. These items represent approximately 40% of the total street construction costs. The City does not have a policy establishing a defined percentage to be assessed for reconstruction projects and I am not convinced that establishing a "single percentage" ratio would be appropriate and fair for all projects. It may be more appropriate to analyze each improvement project on a case -by -case basis whereby the new improvements which are added to a roadway, during its normal life cycle, are assessed back to the benefitting property owners. Thus, staff reaffirms their position on this methodology. The deadline for certification of special assessments to the County for inclusion with the 1992 property tax statements is November 30, 1991. Therefore, it is of great importance that the Council take action to adopt the assessment roll at the October 14 meeting in order to allow for the necessary administration of the assessment roll and the required 30 -day appeal /prepayment period prior to certification. It is recommended that at the close of the public hearing, if there 1 are no outstanding issues or questions to be resolved, it would be appropriate for the Council to adopt the Frontier Trail Improvement Project No. 89 -10 assessment roll dated October 9, 1991 and that the assessment term be set for eight (8) years at an eight (8) percent interest rate. jms ' Manager's Comments (10- 10 -91) The issue of the 60/40 split continues to resurface (no pun intended). I personally believe that the 60/40 split was agreed to in the early part of the project. Gary Warren had also believed that this had been agreed to and, accordingly, gave this percent to Dave MacGillivrary for the sale of the bonds this past year to finance the project. Rightly or wrongly, that repayment schedule has been certified to Carver County. A copy of the city levies which will be required to pay for our 60% of the project are shown on the attached sheet. The amount necessary for 1992 is $32,722, 1 Don Ashworth October 9, 1991 Page 4 with that amount increasing to $50,368 by the year 1999. The dollars necessary to fund the city's share of this project directly ' competes with dollars available for police officers, street maintenance, etc. For 1992, we are looking at a 61/2% decrease in our revenue base as a result of this past year's legislative actions. The Frontier Trail expenditures amount to approximately 11 %. Although I still have not received final growth percentages from the county, I am anticipating that such will approximate 9% to 10 %. Should the Council continue to maintain a position of "no property tax increase," we will be forced into adopting a budget with a similar property tax level as this past year - -such not considering how salary adjustments may occur, paying additional utility costs, higher police contract costs, etc. Changing the ' Frontier percentage to 70/30 could produce a tax increase for the city in 1992. 1 Two additional points need to be made regarding the 60/40 split- - fairness and precedent. From a "fairness" standpoint, residents are being asked to only pay for things they previously did not have, i.e. concrete curb, additional sub -base, etc. The policy seems reasonable and should ensure that future councils are not burdened with excessive costs; such leading to the next point -- ' precedent. Councilman Workman asked if there was a means by which the city could prepare a map which would show areas which are likely to be assessed in the future. The Mayor had additionally requested that our assessment policies should be placed in writing - -such making decisions such as Frontier Trail easier. Staff totally agrees with both of these points and believe we are at a point where we can truly implement such. The foundation for the new policies is proposed to recognize decisions of the past. Specifically, when ' Bill Monk had proposed instituting the sealcoat program in the early 1980s, he noted that nearly 85% to 90% of all city streets were relatively new and in relatively good condition. If an effective sealcoat program could be instituted (which it was), with ' each of the streets receiving a sealcoat once every five years, you could reasonably assure that these streets would be healthy into the long term future of the city. One of the most critical time frames for a street is the first four years after it is constructed. Establishing that initial sealcoat in the third or fourth year after construction is highly critical. It is for this ' reason that the Council may see sealcoat activities on a new street when an older street may seem more justified. Which leads to the question as to what was the city's plans in regards to the 10 % -15% of our streets which were not up to city standards and could not reasonably be put into the sealcoat program. Mr. Monk had identified streets in Chanhassen Estates, Frontier Trail, and a portion of the streets in the old town section as being beyond the 1 1 Don Ashworth 1 October 9, 1991 Page 5 point of salvageability. We have continued to pay relatively high costs to continue to repair "blow outs" in the Frontier Trail area and Chanhassen Estates. Spending these dollars is like pouring money down the drain. The new construction being completed on Frontier Trail can assure that we can bring that street into our long term maintenance program. However, we definitely need to consider a similar type of total reconstruction for the Chanhassen Estates area. Attached at the end of this packet is a feasibility study conducted in 1980 which showed that the streets in the Chanhassen Estates neighborhood were dead then. Now they are morbid. The concept of placing into writing the city's position that once a street is brought up to city standards that it would be maintained by the city is reasonable. The "road rater" program instituted this past year gives us the ability to identify streets which will require major reconstruction during the next five to ten years and thereby alert owners in those areas as to these future costs. Finally, by placing into writing that the property owner will be assessed for any new items, i.e. curb and gutter, street lighting, storm sewer, etc., will reasonably assure that the city's costs stay at a reasonable level. For example, my street (Longview Circle) is in reasonable condition. At some point in the future, the existing deteriorating asphalt curbs will need to be replaced with concrete curb and gutter. Major reconstruction of the street itself is not anticipated. At that point in. time, it is logical that a major portion of that future cost will be borne by the abutting property owners. 1 The points raised above represent perfect "winter work goals ". Approval of the attached assessment roll is recommended. Attachments: 1. Revised Assessment Roll dated October 9, 1991. 2. Project Cost Summary. 1 3. Workshop Notice. . 4. Attendance Roster from Neighborhood Workshop. 5. Petition in Favor of Front Footage Method. 1 • c: Bill Engelhardt, Engelhardt & Associates Al Larson, Engelhardt & Associates 1 1 1 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA FRONTIER TRAIL UTILITY AND ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 89 -10 REVISED 10/9/91 STORM SEWER STREET ASSESSABLE ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT FRONT BASED ON BASED ON TOTAL P.I.D OWNER FOOTAGE $1,360.21 /UNIT $23.95/F.F. ASSESSMENT 25- 8270010 Malcolm A. & L. MacAlpine 100' $1,360.21 $2,395.21 $3,755.42 7187 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8270020 Kevin T. Daniel & Debra A. Freseth 100' $1,360.21 $2,395.21 $3,755.42 7189 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8270030 John C. & S. Reger 100' $1,360.21 $2,395.21 7191 Frontier Trail $3,755.42 Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8270040 Jay & Rebecca Legler 100' $2,360.21 $2,395.21 7193 Frontier Trail $3,755.42 Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8270050 William & Mary Ann Schepers 140' $1,360.21 $3,353.29 7195 Frontier Trail $4,713.50 Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8270060 Helen L. Loebl 78.84' $1,360.21 $1,888.38 7197 Frontier Trail $3,248.59 Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8270070 Robert A. Uecker 31.94' $1,360.21 $ 765.03 7199 Frontier Trail $$2,125.24 Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8210010 Rolf G.-Engstrom 167.24' $1,360.21 $4,005.40 7201 Frontier Trail $5,365.61 Chanhassen, MN. 55317 OM MI R r N MO MN MO M NM 1M MI I • • NM OM MI - NM MUM OM M- MOO MOO MOO r OM r O MO M- 2 STORM SEWER STREET ASSESSABLE ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT FRONT BASED ON BASED ON TOTAL P.I.D OWNER FOOTAGE $1,360.21 /UNIT $23.95/F.F. ASSESSMENT 25- 8210020 Patrick & Kathryn Pavelko 130' $1,360.21 $3,113.77 $4,473.98 7203 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8219939 Steven & Therese Berquist 110' $1,360.21 $2,634.73 $3,944.94 7207 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 ' 25- 8210040 Walter & H. Bielski 110' $1,360.21 $2,634.73 $3,994.94 7209 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8210050 William C. & B. Arons 110' $1,360.21 $2,634.73 $3,994.94 7211 Frontier Trail Chanhasen, MN. 55317 25-8210060 Donald D. & J. King 155' $1,360.21 $3,712.25 $ 5,072.46 7200 Kiowa Circle Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8210070 Robert Downs & Susan Hanson 118.08' $1,360.21 $ 0.00 $1,360.21 7202 Kiowa Circle Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8210080 Barry & Katrina Trent 105.03' $1,360.21 $ 0.00 $1,360.21 7204 Kiowa Circle Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8210090 Charles H. & Ursala Dimler 156.03' $1,360.21 $ 0.00 $1,360.21 7203 Kiowa Circle Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8210100 Donald K. & C. Sueker 115' $1,360.21 $2,754.49 $4,114.70 7194 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 3 STORM SEWER STREET ASSESSABLE ASSESSMENT ' ASSESSMENT FRONT BASED ON BASED ON TOTAL P.I.D OWNER FOOTAGE $1,360.21 /UNIT $23.95/F.F. ASSESSMENT 25- 8210110 Peter J. Huber 110' $1,360.21 $2,634.73 $3,994.94 7196 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8210120 Jack D. & F. Barnes 110' $1,360.21 $2,634.73 $3,994.94 7198 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8210130 Evelyn L. Bakke 178.46' $1,360.21 $4,274.12 $5,634.33 7200 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8210140 Dave W. & B. Halverson 169.48' $1,360.21 $4,059.05 $5,419.26 7206 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8210150 Robert & Threse Thielges 110' $1,360.21 $2,634.73 $3,994.94 7208 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8210160 Joseph & Kathleen Witkewics 110' $1,360.21 $2,634.73 $3,994.94 7210 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8210170 Robert A. & C. Scholer 110' $1,360.21 $2,634.73 $3,994.94 7212 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8210180 Gary D. & Kay L. Boyle 110' $1,360.21 $2,634.73 $3,994.94 7214 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8210190 Harold & Leona Kerber - 100' $1,360.21 $2,395.21 $3,755.42 7216 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 OM MI M MN M • N E MIll E 1101 • = OM MI M = NM MI MI — r MS r MI — 1111 MI r alle MN — WM — MU PM 4 STORM SEWER STREET ASSESSABLE ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT FRONT BASED ON BASED ON TOTAL P.I.D OWNER FOOTAGE $.1,360.21 /UNIT $23.95/F.F. ASSESSMENT 25- 8210200 Michael H. Roberts & Pamela A. Galas 100' $1,360.21 $2,395.21 $3,755.42 7218 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8210210 Craig & Deborah Luehr 99.99' $1,360.21 $2,394.97 $3,755.18 7226 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 210220 Paul & Ellen Differding 110' $1,360.21 $2,634.73 $3,994.94 7228 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8210230 Thomas & Kathleen O'Leary 110' $1,360.21 $2,634.73 $3,994.94 7230 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 553177 25- 6780010 Sunrise Hills c/o Marilyn Holter 50.17' $1,360.21 $1,201.67 $2,561.88 7201 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8220010 James R. & L. Kraft 110' $1,360.21 $2,634.73 $3,994.94 72113 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 _ 25- 8220020 Bruce K. & S. Savik 110.09' $1,360.21 $2,636.88 $3,997.09 7215 Frontier Trail • Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8220030 Adolfo & Leonor Zamerano 159.35' $1,360.21 $3,816.43 $5,176.64 7301 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 I N N N N N N N N N -p ■t VI VI VI V) VI VI ■t Vi I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • I 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 co . . N N N N N N N N N p O O O O O W W N N O O 0 O O O 0 O O O 0 O O O O O O O In -P• W N - W N Vi -0- O O O O O 0 0 0 0 ()-.jr '1 n--47J ( > Ovrn nvrn n-,1 .4 nv,TJ (")--4,-. n-..., o O = W '1 7-w• -• 7.w., =wa 7 a SN --j() SNO 7 Sw P. I o wo own owe- w •p-E w •A-E w NS0 w -o woo w O(n< z = VI a. 7vw SAD-• 7 •--w 7 •- 7 0o r. 7 No 7 VI- 7 WC •-• rn S ^+ S S N Cl. riJ w - n r" w '71 -1 w ' w '11 a w ~r1 a w 'Z7 (D w - r1 w M R• W M W N .1 • co -T a N -1 > o ^1 (1). N -1 N N -1 N -1 N -1 7 U I v 7 ° v o 7 • ( 7 On 0o w• 7R• CD 7 0 n (b=k. 7R• 07 0 0 0 7 0 o 7 w o7X 7 r+ C 7, -. 7 r. CO 7 ,-. 7 r+ 7 r. K R• 7 r-4- n 7 ,-r -1 7 ,-.1) . •-• 7 -. U .-• 0 •-• U •-• (_1 '. (D •• .-..< VI 0 (D (D (D (D (D < (D O (D O (D ^1 (D (D (D P -- -1 0 -1 7 .-1 -1 -1 K -1 -1 .-In -1 (n - (J • -1 - I Z 7 Z Z a Z a n Z 1 (D Z "0 w • ,...1 • --1 •- --1 • -i w • '-4 w • -1 0 • -1 7 -1 7 • -j'0 7 -1L4 ..-.«. -i -1 7 -1 7 -1 -1 -1 O -1 T. -1 T, w - 1 wo w w w w w- w•-• ww VI ••• • tn •-• -1 VI .-• VI •- • u< •-• V) •-• 0 v, .-• (D VI •-• 7 • �n I .-- ^ 0 (D - - -. - < - - - 0 V a v v v v -1 v v v 0 I N r• 11 (n - I - )-- - - - -L] (n Ch 0 0 o w \D v • V, v+ --1 O (n 0 0 0 o >Z (n O - - - VI - • - W rn --3 W V w Vi 1- I - - rn v cn v> y r Y -I — t�. to <n w > (n O '_ �' — — (n Y cn o Cnrn W W W W W W w w W •rn (n ON I O O 0 0 0 O 0 ON 0 N Cn CA CT • • • O O ` t rn iv iv N N N N N N C O Z Z rn - ^ - Z --IX 1 -I tv W N W N W W CC) (/1 • > VI Iv W W W N (T .• (n L.) s m 00 .p (n rn --1 sD VD \.D W CT N N W VI rn (n X CT V, VI w .0- W � m - 0 (n rn • ' O0 - _ u' v1 U.) • v T J Z Z --I • 00 W W Vi Q\ W W • -1 W W W W W W In Cn V V v VI 0 0' _ N �0 rn VI 1.n D N D V VI � 00 00 � CA O ' V VI VI W •P W N 0• CT (n -1 • o v v VI �D O\ C r • �D N N R Q\ V . •R 2 ' VI MOO . MI MI OM MI MN MI OM M I MI r M MI I M O O W 6 STORM SEWER STREET ASSESSABLE ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT FRONT BASED ON BASED ON TOTAL P.I.D OWNER FOOTAGE $1,360.21 /UNIT $23.95/F.F. ASSESSMENT 25- 8200060 Joel & Wendy M. Wiens 100' $1,360.21 $2,395.21 $3,755.42 7333 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8200070 Susan L. Johnson 100' $1,360.21 $2,395.21 $3,755.42 7331 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8200080 Kenneth R. & Lois J. Groen 100' $1,360.21 $2,395.21 $3,755.42 7329 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8200170 Richard & G. Pearson 140' $1,360.21 $3,353.29 $4,713.50 7307 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 / 33_a3 /z fl o 25- 8200180 Wayne L. & K. Mader —fit' $1,360.21 $3,511.61 $4,871.82 400 Highland Drive Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8200240 Donald M. & D. Huseth 110' $1,360.21 $2,634.73 $3,994.94 7332 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8200250 James J. & R. Waletski 110' $1,360.21 $2,634.73 $3,994.94 7334 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8200260 John P. & R.C. Spalding 110' $1,360.21 $2,634.73 $3,994.94 7336 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 8200270 James & Linda Mady 100.62' $1,360.21 $2,410.06 $3,770.27 7338 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 7 STORM SEWER STREET ASSESSABLE ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT FRONT BASED ON BASED ON TOTAL P.I.D OWNER FOOTAGE $1,360.21 /UNIT $23.95/F.F. ASSESSMENT 25- 8200280 Thomas R. & S. Pzynski 168.81' $1,360.21 $4,043.00 $5,402.21 7340 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25- 0800320 Robert & Sally Horstman* 40' $1,360.21 $ 958.08 $2,318.29 7343 Frontier Trail [+ *] $4,095.29* Chanhassen, MN. 55317 * City added assessment $1,777.00 for surge basin and sanitary sewer extension. i - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - • W.P. ENGELH11PL1T 1-r:::,01... TEL Ilo . 61 448- :=;:=:Ci5 Sep 27,91 8 : 41 No .001 P.03 1 . 1 1989 FRONTIER TRAIL PROJECT II CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA TOTAL PROJECT COST 1 II Construction $ 505,145.63 Legal Fees $ 1,049.35 II Engineering Fees $ 75,070.12 Publications $ 341.05 II Financial Consultants $ 7,942.87 Capitalized Interest $ 17,176.46 Miscellaneous $ 748.77 II Administration $ 32 TOTAL PROJECT COST $ 640,418.70 II 1 CONSTRUCTION COST INDIRECT COST TOTAL PROJECT COST II Storm Sewer Construction $116,183.49 $ 30,719.19 $146,902.68 II Street Construction $277,830.09 $ 74,814.32 $352,644.41 in Sanitary Sewer Construction $ 75,711.84 $ 17,932.93 $ 93,704.77 II Watermaln Construction $ 35,360.19 $ 11,786.65 $ 47,146.84 $505,145.62 $135,273.08 $640,418.70 II II ASSESSMENTS II Storm Sewer Construction $146,902.68 50% Assessed = $ 73,457.34 II Street Construction $352,644.41 40% Assessed = $141,065.76 Sanitary Sewer Construction $ 93,704.77 CIty Trunk Fund 1 Watermaln Construction $ 47,146.84 City Trunk Fund II 1 11 W.P. ENGELHHF DT ASSOC. TEL No . 612 -44 - _ 05 y ep "27-91 : 41 No . 001 P.02 1 COST /FT. TO UPGRADE EXISTING FRONTIER TRAIL TO IT C Y STANDARDS ' Concrete Curb /Gutter = 5, $ 3U /FT. 1 -1/2" Wear Course $ 6.69/FT. 2" Bituminous Base Course = $ 8.03 /FT. 12" CL. 5 Rock Base - $16.86/FT. Common Excavation = $10.92/FT. $47.80/FT Upgrading Cost PROPORTIONATE SHARE OF COST TO CITY STANDARDS ' FOR VARIOUS PERCENTS 1 Project Cost ; $352,644.41 Street Construction Length of Street = 3,354.75' Centerline Length COST F . F' RATE ' $352,644.41 / 5,890 = $ 59.87/FT. (100%) ' $264,483.31 / 5,890 44.90 /FT. (75 %) $211,586.65 / 5,890 = $ 35.92/ft. (60 %) 1 $157,337.78 / 5,890 = $ 26.71/ft. (45 %) 1 $141,057.76 / 5,890 = $ 23.95/ft. (40 %) 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 1. ,r 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 1 September 10, 1991 1 Re: Notice of Workshop Frontier Trail Improvement Project No. 89 -10 Dear Resident: You have been previously notified of the public hearing on the assessment for the Frontier Trail improvement project. From . discussions at the September 9, 1991 City Council meeting, it was decided to hold an informal workshop to allow affected parcel owners the opportunity to discuss any outstanding issues or concerns related to the project or assessment roll: This workshop has been set for Thursday, September 26, 1991 at 7 :00 p.m. in the City Council chambers. The project consultant engineer, Mr. Bill Engelhardt, will be present at the meeting to discuss any relevant questions or concerns that you may have. If you cannot attend this meeting and wish to discuss any issues, please feel free to contact me at 937 -1900 or Mr. Engelhardt at 448 -8838 and we would be happy -to answer any questions. Sincerely, 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN Charles D. Folch, P.E. City Engineer CDF:ktm c: Bill Engelhardt, Engelhardt & Associates Don Ashworth, City Manager City Council Administrative Packet (9/23/91) 1 1 • 1 1 1 I . 7 //-9/raidz II 6 P 9- /0 1 __ 57 i 99/ 1 -- .4.--- /)&7V ---- c ,.? _ iicl ., ) e-. 2. -- 7,_ - ;> /-ci,,,,„ c,;•-,./r 7 I /- 3k ? I ? 7 ti\V--4 1 93 - 13 0 / 1 , _ SA40 / 1 .41-e/ 2 - _ 7 t/ ‘ 4. 4 ,,Ze;,- g/i...= z ,,9- 8/1 A in 5,_ (47(-1:2224,-1,1, o /1-1:4-7< ) C/ . 1 t o - ._.,7 o-'10- i/g 7 - 0 . • - tip'? C)c\7 7-7-1±- 7A/,f F/c.‘./z,,,E. 1 7 Ipfelfo -,,n)-14/z;o20 7 i - F7 - 0 n -7 Q r 77-ci L 7.3,t_67,,F--- — - 1 _,,_ /4.e.„,„1/e-e- 7 2-12 e%/1--/7.t...2.2. 7--L. 93 --(7 2 _ 1 /1 ( 2 j / c 7Z_ A / , .72' - _ 9 34 -s'op./ 1 _ /2, _ _ /_ L IA '' 17 -4 1 4.- i - 2 7 3 5- l:ei - 3 V' 6 I -/ - --:/, l7 / C 'q ' ' : -44-del-- 7.03 szA - t■t r _ R r __IL J 7 IV /1 64---z-i 2 ?3 a rizontryd-p_7>e, , 7, 73 1 1 1 - -- - -- - -- - - - - - -- - - -- - -- -- - i . 11 7 p F✓1 }b y 7 S S F w k Cam- i, q / .S y -- i `7' 2._ 1 - -- - - -- -- -- - - - - -- - - - 1 -y s -, F() /Z V !!n___!b0e34.8Alfei"' PETITION " �� ru.rh4A-A, it-16-z A- W ITH REGARD TO THE PROPOSED REBUILDING OF FRONTIER TRAIL, CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA "WE THE UNDERSIGNED, ALL RESIDENTS OF THAT AREA OF FRONTIER TRAIL INVOLVED, SUPPORT THE FRONT FOOTAGE METHOD TO DETERMINE WHATEVER ASSESSMENT IS NECESSARY IITHE HOMEOWNER: NAME ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER DATE I - 1 , 1 ' If • -- 7(g> r �' - 3 - 1361 -9--P _7,„,_,,,,,,..,,,, 4 , 4/ ii ( -7 _ -3 , L. ,,„ „:„,:ibti2A .. iyq/ ( 3 0.0 t/ rc, 937- //-5z-f I Oki WG d/ ..___*c.),._„. ��..-� _\L\ ,,, , � 3- 3 �� � TSTn01 1) — \ A- - fig ��, nd i ��i ro i"l r,�, 7 il Y L / _ � �� /�- �.� y -e s 0 / / - V 7 a1- . 3 JYLI- 6 i1d aJ 1 64 7 1-_,.„ -7 1--,z___ _ 73c/- 7aa -1/-9-Y 7 ' ?-7 6 J ed2111tA1 ' cc.)-- i a llt 73-_?* fr/,/? T ..._ 1 �1 7> �' 1 o J/ ( /Y 7 10- is ' t t ' . 7f - 1 3 3 X ��en .,-()/.. 9 ! 3 `/ - .Y99 I - Y ' �9 6c� -7 �t r� vt..`n f- -I r a 6 4- cf C 11 - C1--- vi s to � 1 , . — 73.E /?� g3 4 /-S/0 6 l /- / -� _ 8 -- 1 , 1 �, / j- AV47- 4 7LZ- 6 . -• C%n . zz 93 6 SG C //- V- P7 l 44/ / tj ),..e.— t l _ A , 1,,e) i .... ) 7- /4 / ‘ 3 r-r.Z. °R- ‘4 "ese //- -, 7 e mP r. ri A r�c� Z li; ;Ore nn r I ` :r% .]L - (nv vio -...., J , n n - i-- 1- on V 1 -1 o/i 1 PETITION 1 WITH REGARD TO THE PROPOSED REBUILDING OF FRONTIER TRAIL, CHANHASSEN, MINNESOT WE THE UNDERSIGNED, ALL RESIDENTS OF THAT AREA OF FRONTIER TRAIL INVOLVED SUPPORT THE FRONT FOOTAGE METHOD TO DETERMINE WHATEVER ASSESSMENT IS NECESSARY" THE HOMEOWNER: NAME ADDRESS 1 PHONE NUMBER DATE '�-: CY4e-9 — L 71 11 . , , . 9M it _, U 1 A t 1:01 /I IV14/1/ ' ie'lAA--' Of/(A/( +-If; _i-r ?if 9'3 V ///da .41./rt i 93z1-75-,31 j,,,,,,d,„ /2 a rig/ f visr;11 3--1 �t OA tz)4'0 G i ' t -- Ncll MI, 4.4)i 7 ? .77 2 . --- t ;T;it '/3 L 1L J 0 l i)zi ill 1 , 9/R7 ( / / '' r . 93 ///07 e ja.z ,- * 7/ 71 L 7 1.E - - �'y y� = e - // /7/ 4,11 ixt.,,,Q. _ . -mac z 9`" ?37 /OVA /, 3 Y �'1/ /G` 1/I,A.a i3.4-d-4, r ,d,,,,„,„:„. 7i,:12.6 at/0Q_ ii ,i2„,.,//addc_L 7 2 _,, 2 ,, 2.-t_ 1 &I C-c:0(2yLici-a,a._ vilz-T-p:ti.O.„7----01,..,,z_ci i� q gy, 1 )1 � � -� /, -7Z- // - 1 ,45L z5Zit,e/4-2 „ 3_3' 02 -Y // /07. . 1(.444 —.25 .42'4:g — -a-- -7- 4, 1 -:-?T az-tA-t-t-cja-JEJ a' ci ' 9 ' ((" t ti vtrii / c �/ �`� f v im. 5 OM' of ■ A n ` ,.1°/( `{� J 33 -7/9 - , z--'-' 9 /q -/ 33r `�S�S'9 �i 1 /(/5--,c; il ,LitZ414_27A0r7 gkol,Iltd_fiC g37 44ft. i I PETITION WITH REGARD TO THE PROPOSED REBUILDING OF FRONTIER TRAIL, CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA II WE THE UNDERSIGNED, ALL RESIDENTS OF THAT AREA OF FRONTIER TRAIL INVOLVED, f SUPPORT THE FRONT FOOTAGE METHOD TO DETERMINE WHATEVER ASSESSMENT IS NECESSARY 7 II THE HOMEOWNER: "NAME ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER DATE IV C jej /i..)i g„,.1 r 3 V i, 3- y 1 -- r 1 J a _v_--70.1. --- A_ (43,i -7,,,s- i i kwud ,,,,, f1 v ,2o � � -� 9)7-- 7/. ,L2it4s7o6 4 ,,,_ * - 73-)./ ,,,,y)t-,6-,;:„ 7 P.,_ v w 4 1.3 3 9 .7-,u -n-- ;AJ�, e 6 13Y -5- S 7 7 - --73 ‘ 7 .,J 9 3/ - s /1 - • 7, y „.„„,* _ 7.-, ,,,,_ iz71 ?3 y: 3Z A.? // - 5 �h l v o 7l • . . i . . , q3 (v 7 q / t - s r ‘ 1P----\2-s2- : 3 •lzi(-{ ci _ �� - 7 � ,,, , �,. q3 ([ - (,..s i s i _ � - 1)01/ t - � - I F-�o /ei-- � �-�/ 6 1 3 7 -�' �/ ///7 , ( 7 c2 / - 1 7� /S 1....,( 73 - -)?? '� 7 O f, i r /a/ / �2 q 3 y 4 S Y/ • 1 f 0,A j ro i : 1 * 7 0 /;2 729 6 6 _., 7 / (. 1 /‘;---4 <. _ _ , "I „Re-fin,,‘"\._ 3 '-/?°°'- Za a 1 . 2 1,-(.- LA 4 7 _s � 6„ t. ' T 4 q3 4 � 7 �- 7 1 PETITION WITH REGARD TO THE PROPOSED REBUILDIN 1 G OF FRONTIER TRAIL, CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA, WE THE UNDERSIGNED, ALL RESIDENTS OF THAT AREA OF FRONTIER TRAIL INVOLVED, 1 SUPPORT THE FRONT FOOTAGE METHOD TO DETERMINE WHATEVER ASSESSMENT IS NECESSARY 1r THE HOMEOWNER: NAME ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER DATE' ey -3 g - c _.z Uilf _l_t_c_t_. (----' ,,k,,,,.,_ 4 . 7..-_-,-.:37 V.z.,;--t-zze-ik l ;94G l am - / ,IL I7? . G�c.0i7,�- "7333 /2 z----- 9 -- Y1� 7 lr /� q , z 1- - 7.33 3- /1-4 .. - ,1 ;C I , qj cli- ° \c-s\C:4 /°/ it4,/ t-t---..L. LI - 1 5- I :5.?,,,,de.Y4 /Set �� Ti Ai.., 3 473 31 (A f 742J3 ,s7� 1/4..._ ..- - - -)„..,k 4. 733 - n 6 L �i 7 --S // 7/ A -73-.. /L l'(f✓ -k 7/99 1; /� 991— 7 7/ 6 / `" 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 _ .___ ... 1 . 11 . f 1 * �& .. \ $ $ @$ S k • Ps s • II i I. . 2 1 SI . § i I • l ■ • & § § ■ ■ c E § £ . @ § § § Ft § le _� § &- IV iN a. k | I ■ ■ ■ § ■ PI $ £ £ §@§ I an Oft ■ ■» 3 _'_ �£ law NP • IV _ - ID A. § s = ■ DA @ $ $ ■ & . I MI ''' _ ■a : AV D. MP 2 2x V ' ��� §■ § ON, — ■ $ � _ § §§ f § f S $ $ ■— ki § ■■ _ - - ir, ■ ■ ■ -■ E § § , f 7g § $� § � � k al _ • _ 3 � a 2 a_ eV I I la AA Dli INI § ■ i 8 : ■* $ § ■§§ X PA �S - © § � £ i�� A ■ & & § § § S II E rl � § ■ ■� « �® ) 4 �.■ R § ■ § § § § It 31Z 2 2 » # § - © ■ ■ _� I .. E §2 D. ■ §�§ III O. VD 11 II __ 2 PI Pil y r I N | • II .9"E £__ - - -- fi. � � WI s a � E as _ 1 ] § § § §�� 222 .I E_ § E &E § el li . & §' $ 3 ■■ § � � � I■ • 'I�k ma — - — ■ § i . • 1 1 r • FEASIBILITY STUDY i FOR 1 STREET UPGRADING IN THE CHANHASSEN ESTATES FIRST ADDITION 1 �.; 1 1 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 1 1 1 i E.3 'a SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. 1 ENGINEERS & SURVEYORS 50 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH 1 hereby certify that this plan, HOPKINS, MI_NESOTA specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that 1 am a duly registered Professional Engineer under the laws o\ the State of Minnesota. MARCH, 1980 ar Date , f ' ' / j Rep. No. ,: WILLIAM D. SCHOELL CARLISLE MADSON JACK T. NOBLER JAMES R. ORR I HAROLD E. DAHLIN LARRY L. HANSON SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. RAYMOND J. JACKSON JACK E. GILL ENGINEERS ANO SURVEYORS RODNEY 8. GORDON THEODORE D. KEMNA JOHN W. EMOND KENNETH E. ADOLF (612) 93 8-7601 • 50 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH • HOPKINS, MINNESOTA 55343 WILLIAM R. ENGELHARDT BRUCE C. SUNDING OFFICES AT HURON, SOUTH DAKOTA AND DENTON. TEXAS R. SCOTT HARRI DENNIS W. SAARI GERALD L. BACKMAN March 13, 1980 City of Chanhassen 1 c/o Mr. Donald Ashworth, Administrator 7610 Laredo Drive l' Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 1 Subject: Feasibility Study for Street Upgrading in the Chanhassen Estates First Addition, Our File No. 10570. T Gentlemen: 1 11 " Pursuant to Council request, we have studied the feasibility of upgrading the existing streets within the Chanhassen Estates ' First Addition. The impetus for this study stems from numerous complaints from area residents concerning the condition of the streets, particularly Cheyenne Avenue, due to frost breakup in the spring of each year. The scope of the study will encompass an in- vestigation of the causes of the deteriorated section of Cheyenne 1 Avenue, upgrading all streets within the First Addition to meet 1 current City Standards and the presentation of cost information and recommendations. GENERAL CONDITIONS: Currently the streets within the First Addition are a 26 foot wide bituminous travel surface with an extruded bituminous curb placed during original construction (1966). Subsequent snow • i / SCHOELL & MADSON.INC. ' City of Chanhassen March 13, 1980 c/o Mr. Donald Ashworth, Administrator Page Two plowing and seal coat overlays have reduced the height of the curb to a point where it is nonexistent in most areas. The intersection radiuses are also substandard which is indicated by vehicle travel 1 across the boulevards at every intersection. Dakota Avenue, Dakota Circle and Cheyenne Circle appear to be in reasonable condition with only minor cross - cracking in a few locations. However, the bituminous on the edges of these i streets is becoming frayed and brittle, and the gravel base is exposed in some isolated areas. Cheyenne Avenue from Dakota Avenue to Cheyenne Circle has deteriorated to a condition where the sub- base soils are exposed at the surface and a significant amount of alligator cracking is apparent. South of Cheyenne Circle the ' street is in fair condition but shows signs of wear and age similar to those previously described. The streets adjacent to the First Addition are constructed to City Standards or are under construction as in the case for the new South Frontage Road and the section of Dakota Avenue between High- way 5 and the frontage road just north of this area. This construc- t tion is part of the East Highway 5 Improvement Project No. 78 -5. CHEYENNE AVENUE ANALYSIS: The cross - hatched area on Drawing No. 10570 -1 best shows the area of Cheyenne Avenue which has deteriorated. Five shallow power auger borings were obtained in this area to assist in / / ✓ o • r / 0°* ,....;9.9--.- —' x`0 -S 6‘ i- • 0+ L �VIA� • • • / 1 1 P , II 4 Q ` '•ro OUTLOT I OUTLOT 2 Q -Y / • CO a . ' « - / 3 , 2 1 :0k _ - 11A11 4 1; r - - -- • — . — ----1- -T_ ' -xlo-- - -‘ — j o ,i— — 1 I 2 3 4 5 1 / CHANHASSEN O I \ OK III, R. 103 5 1 1 . 2 OUTLOT 3 1 _ — T I y 22 3 I 4.1 —`� n' • 20 10 / 3 " 1 1 - 20 /• 0 18 T 4:t 0 s Q , 13 N 11 —._� — V 15 9 } 17 g ♦� 14 f5 _2 12 — ICY :u ' 'y- — g II 0 16 — 0 16 e / • 13 _ • 12 f3 -2' / Q I. :' '. 50 15 10 IT 280TH ST • . - 11 • — LL,, 12 % ..e 18 r_., O so `T� 13 J I W \ la 19 ' E e R *00 / 1 I 411111 -I 0 II / / 2.. v r: W A 2 / / 2 3 / 4 10 J ot 4 3 / � 5 \ s n r ao �/ % 4 \ / / �, R 6 . 10 so i 5 6 T k ii 8 8 6 o / ' 7 \Y \I Y \\ / -_ C i_ J - i 12 g 15 1 14 13 \ 10 . O �v f. — —. w .: 3 5 \ 12 1 g 13 — CITY OF CHANHASSEN 4 W 14 MINNESOTA CHANHASSEN ESTATES FIRST ADD. 3 STREET UPGRADING I O DENOTES EXISTING MANHOLE — O DENOTES EXISTING CATCH BASIN 2 I w DENOTES EXISTING GATE VALVE __ — EXISTING STREETS W /CURB B GUTTER PROPOSED STREETS W /CURB B GUTTER . MEM PROPOSED ASSESSMENT AREA - vw■ PROPOSED ALTERNATE ASSESSMENT ARE 0 0 � o ��� SCHOELL a MADSON , INC. Engineers 8 Surveyors Hopkins , Minnesotd 55343 SCALE I 200' DATE MARCH,198 ' SCHOELL & MADSON.INC. City of Chanhassen March 13, 1980 c/o Mr. Donald Ashworth, Administrator Page Four determining the causes of the street breakup. The results of the ' borings indicate there are two factors contributing to the street breakup. Another factor is obviously the age of the street. The first and primary factor is the frost susceptible soils which lie directly beneath the existing bituminous. These soils are moist to wet sandy clays and traffic loads tend to pump the finer particles to the surface thus creating an unstable condition. The breakup along the east -west portion of Cheyenne Avenue including the bubble in the northeast corner can be attributed to this condition. Also, in this area, the storm sewer cross culvert to ,- the west side of the bubble shows signs of frost heaving due to ice lenses forming in the sandy clay under the pipe invert. The heaving of the pipe can be corrected by replacing the sandy clay ' with a clean sand (less than 10% passing the No. 200 sieve) to a depth of approximately three (3) feet below the pipe. The street breakup in the north -south section of Cheyenne Avenue by Cheyenne Circle is of a less severe nature. The alligator cracking ( "mat cracking ") through this area could be the result of a weak base course or a resilient sub -base soil. It appears that both conditions are present. 1 3± SCHOELL 8L MADSON. iNc. City of Chanhassen March 13, 1980 c/o Mr. Donald Ashworth, Administrator Page Five STREET IMPROVEMENTS: The scope of the proposed street improvements is best shown , on Drawing No. 10570 -1. It is intended that Dakota Avenue be up- graded from the South Frontage Road under construction southerly to Cheyenne Avenue, Cheyenne Avenue from Dakota Avenue to the 1 existing curb and gutter on Cheyenne Avenue in the Chanhassen Estates Second Addition, Dakota Circle and Cheyenne Circle. The 1 typical section of the proposed streets is shown on Drawing No. 10570 -2 and includes a 26 foot wide bituminous street with B618 concrete curb and gutter and concrete driveway aprons. B618 , curb and gutter is proposed in lieu of the City's Standard sur- mountable type curb for the following; nearly all curb openings 1 have been established (the exception being Lot 7, Block 3, which is vacant) and there is no cost difference between the two types of curb. Also, the capacity of storm runoff flow in the street ' is greatly increased and the boulevards are better protected from L snow plows and other vehicles. All existing driveways show signs it of alligator cracking in varying degrees. It is proposed to re- place all driveways from the street to the right -of -way line such 1 that all properties would benefit equally. The exception is where it is necessary to slope the driveway further to obtain proper drainage. , The subgrade on Cheyenne Avenue in the area shown on Drawing No. 10570 -1 along with the storm sewer cross culvert would be 1 r r- 13 B618 CONCRETE CURB a GUTTER • I t ►_______________+_� \____4 :46 _ f t I . , r ,.. ` • CHEYENNE AVENUE I' /2" BITUMINOUS WEARING COURSE (2341) 3 BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE (2331) 18 GRAVEL BASE (CL. 5 M) r� 3 Y r CHEYENNE CIRCLE EE DAKOTA AVENUE - DAKOTA CIRCLE CHEYENNE AVENUE (So. 300 L.F.) W cr 11/2" BITUMINOUS WEARING COURSE (2341) 21/2" BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE ( 2331) ` 10" GRAVEL BASE (CL.5M) is CITY OF CHANHASSEN 9, MINNESOTA CHANHASSEN ESTATES FIRST ADD. TYPICAL STREET SECTIONS SCHOELL & MADSON , INC. { ' Engineers a Surveyors Hopkins , Minnesota 55343 SCALE? NONE DATE: MARCH , 1980 — Page 6 — 10570 — 2 //5.4 B �, 2 0 ,r� Addreri:z Front Storm 11 Street Total Street Total 2 Change Street % Change 2 Change Footage Sower F1s..5esment HszesL9:ment Aza:o.Kzment Asse:zmont 8s$ez..sment Per Unit Per FT 51350.21/Unit $23.95/FT 5111057%76/51 Units Per Unit 70/30 Per Unit 718? Frontier 100 $1,360.21 52,395.00 $3,755.21 52,765.81 51,126 . 05 9.88% $3 -16.75% -0.512 7189 Frontier 100 2 $2,395.00 5 795 '1_ 52,765.81 $1,126.05 9.887. $3,131.59 -16.76% -8.512 ?191 Frontier 100 ;1,36C'.21 52,189 on 53,755.21 $2,765.01 $1,126.05 9.88% 53,131.59 -16.75% -8.51% ?193 Frontier 100 51,360.21 . 189 00 $3,755.21 52,765.01 $1,126.05 9.98% 53,131.59 -16.76% -8.512 7195 Frontier 110 51,360.21 53,353.00 51,713.21 52 51,126.05 -12.16% 53,131.59 -16.76% -2?. 13 ?19? Frontier r8.81 $1,360.21 $1,808.22 $3,218.13 $2,765.01 51,126.05 27.02% $3,131.59 -16.752 5.732 7 Frontier 31.91 51,360.21 $761.95 52,125.17 52,765.81 51,126.05 91.15% 53,131.59 -16.767; 61.61% 7201 Frontier 157.21 51,350.21 $1,005.10 55,365.61 $2,755.81 51,126.05 -23.10:2 $3,131.59 -16.762 -35.99% 7201 Frontier 130 51,360.21 53,113.50 51,173.71 $2,755.81 $1,126.05 -7.777, 53,131.59 -16.75% -23.23% 1 20 Frontier 110 51,360.21 52,631.50 $3,991.71 52,765.01 $1,126.05 3.29% 53,131.59 -15.75% -11.02% 7209 Frontier 110 51,360.21 $2,631.50 $3,991.71 $2,765.81 $1,126.05 3.29n 53,131.59 -16.752 -11.02% 7211 Frontier 110 51,360.21 52,631.50 53,991.71 52,765.81 51,126.05 3.29% 53,131.59 -16.76;2 -11.022 719• Frontier 115 $1,360.21 $2,751.25 51,111.16 52,765.81 51,126.05 .28% $3,131.59 -16.75% -16.52% rls6 Frontier 110 51,360.21 52,631.50 $3,991.71 52,755.81 $1,126.05 3.29% 53,131.59 -16.75% -11.02% •1911 Frontier 110 513611.21 263l. 15i) 5:3, 991.71 52,765.81 S1,126.05 3.29% 53,131.59 -16.761-'.: -1.1.022 ?200 Frontier 17'8.16 $1,360.21 $1,27.1.12 55,631.33 $2 $1,126.05 -26.7?% $3,131.59 -16.76% -39.012 7z Frontier 169.18 51,360.21 51,059.05 55,119.26 $2,755.81 $1,125.05 -23.85% $3,131.59 -16.76% -36.52% 7209 Frontier 110 51,3611.21 52,631.50 53,991.71 52,765.81 51,126.05 3.29% $3,131.59 -16.75% -11.02% 7210 Frontier 110 51,360.21 5.2,631.50 '53,991.71 $2,765.81 51,126.05 3.29% $3,131.59 -16.76% -11,022 ?21; Frontier 110 51,360.21 $2,631.50 53,991.71 52,755.81 $1,126.05 3.29% $.3,131.59 -15.75% -11.022 7211 Frontier 110 51,360.21 52,631.50 $3,991.71 52,765.81 51,126.05 3.29% $3,131.59 -16.75% -11.02% 7215 Frontier 100 51,360.21 52,399.00 53,755.21 $2,765.91 51,126.05 9.88n 53,131.59 -16.75% -8.512 ?219 Frontier 100 51,360.21 $2,395.00 53,755.21 52,765.81 51,126.05 9.88% 53,131.59 -16.76% -8.512 ?226 Frontier 88 88 51,160.21 S2,391.76 $3,751.97 $2,71E45.81 51,126.05 9.88% 53,131.59 -16.75% -8.532 e2213 Frontier 110 51,360.21 52,531.50 53 891 71 $2,765.81 51,126.05 3.29% 53,131.59 -15.75% -11.02% T230 Frontier 1111 51.360.21 52,631.50 $3.991.71 52,755.81 51,125.05 3.29% 53,131.59 -16.76% -11.02% 7'201 Frontier 50.17 51,360.21 $1,201.57 52.561.78 $2,765.81 51,126.05 61.06% $3,131.59 -16.76% 31.072 ?213 Frontier 110 51,360.21 52,631.50 . 53,991.71 52,765.81 51,125.05 3.29% 53,131.59 -16.76% -11.02% ?215 Frontier 110.09 51,360.21 52,636.66 53,996.87 52,755.81 51,126.05 3.232 53,131.59 -16.762 -11.072 7301 Frontier 159.35 51,360.21 53,815.13 $5,175.61 52,765.01 51,126.05 -20.292 53,131.59 -16.762 -33.652 1 Frontier 159.35 51,360.21 53,816.43 55 17A 61 52,765.81 51,126.05 -20.292 53,131.59 -16.762 -33.65% 7'305 Frontier 110 51,360.21 52,631.50 53,991.71 52,765.81 51,126.05 5.29% 53,131.59 -16.752 -11.022 ?21,.' Frontier 151.23 51,360.21 53,621.96 51,982.17 52,755.81 51,126.05 -17.18% 53,131.59 -16.752 -31.062 ?220 Frontier 97 51,360.21 52,323.15 53,683.36 52,765.81 51,126.05 12.022 53,131.59 -16.752 -5.752 ?311 Frontier 69.50 51,360.21 51,661.53 53,021.71 52,765.81 51,125.05 a6.112 53,131.59 -15.762 13.552 7?..11 Frontier 135 51,360.21 53,233.25 51,593.16 $2,765.81 51,126.05 -10.18% 53,131.59 -16.76% -25.232 7339 Frontier 100 51,36C1.21 52,395.00 53,755.21 52,765.81 51,126.05 9.88% 53,131.59 -16.75% -8.512 T33? Frontier 100 51,360.21 52,395.00 53,755.21 52,755.81 51,126.05 9.882 53,131.59 -16.752 -8.512 ?335 Frontier 100.07 51,360.21 52,396.613 53,756.89 52,765.81 51,126.05 9.832 53,131.59 -16.752 -0.582 in33 Frontier 100 51,360.21 52 185 on 53,755.21 52,765.81 51,125.05 9.882 53,131.59 -16.75% -8.512 ?331 Frontier 100 51,360.21 52,395.00 53,755.21 52,765,81 51,126.05 9.882 53,131.59 -16.752 -8.512 7329 Frontier 100 51,.360.21 52,395.00 $3,755.21 52,765.81 51,126.05 9.88% 53,131.59 -16.752 -8.51% 7307 Frontier 110 51.360.21 53 , 353.00 51.713.21 52,765.81 51,126.05 -12.16% 53,131.59 -16.767-4 -27.132 100 Highland 116.51 51,360.21 $3,511.31 $1,871.52 52,765.81 51.126.05 -15.302 53,131.59 -16.762 -29.502 Frontier 110 51,360.21 52,631.50 53,991.71 52,765.81 51,126.05 3.292 53,131.59 -16.762 -11.022 ?331 Frontier 110 51,360.21 52,631.50 53,991.71 52,765.81 51,126.05 3.29% 53,131.59 -16.752 -11.022 M35 Frontier 110 51,360.21 52,63.1.50 53,991.71 52,755.81 $1,126.05 3.292 53,131.59 -16.752 -11.022 7339 Frontier 100.62 51,360.21 52,109.85 53,770.06 52,765.111 51,126.05 9.11% 53,131.59 -16.75% -0.902 7310 Frontier 158.81 51,350.21 51,013.00 55,103.21 52,765.81 51,126.05 -23.612 53,131.59 -16.762 -36.132 7313 Frontier 10 51,360.21 5950.00 52,318.21 52,765.81 51,126.05 77.982 53,131.59 -16.752 18.162 7200 Kiowa 166.513 51,360.21 51,035.58 '55,379 52,765.81 S1,126.05 -23.532 53,131.59 -16.752 -36.352 ?202 Kiowa 0 51,360.21 5.00 $1,360.21 0 51,360.21 .007: 51,350.21 .00% .00% 1'201 Kiowa 0 51,360.21 5.00 $1,360.21 0 51,360.21 .002 51,350.21 .002 .00% 7203 Kiowa 0 51,360.21 5.00 51,360.21 0 51,360.21 .002 51,350.21 .002 .002 lotal 5767 573,151.31 5139,125.61 5211,576.98 $111,057.75 52 11,509.10 1.392' 5179,211.65 -16.112 -15.2132 NM MO MEI OM • NM MN MI ME OM MI MN MB NM WM MB MI I= MI ------.--