Loading...
3. Lake Ann Interceptor Assessment Roll 3 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager FROM: Charles Folch, City Engineer / DATE: August 28, 1991 1 SUBJ: Adoption of the Assessment Roll for the Lake Ann Interceptor Project No. 87-35 The public hearing for the adoption of the assessment roll for the Lake Ann Interceptor Sewer Project No. 87-35 was opened at ' the August 12, 1991 City Council meeting and following much public discussion was continued to the September 9, 1991 City Council meeting. This continuance was employed in an effort to 1 allow staff to review the minutes of the public hearing and respond to these concerns accordingly. Following this meeting, you and I had the opportunity to discuss some specific aspects of this assessment with Mayor Don Chmiel. It was the Mayor's 1 recommendation that a revised assessment plan be developed that would relieve the immediate financial burden imposed on property owners, address other relevant concerns raised, and most ' importantly, satisfy the financial obligations of the City for this project. 1 I have had the opportunity to review the City Council minutes and it is apparent that, unlike many other public hearings, the concerns raised by property owners appear to be focused on three primary aspects: 1) Several residents stated that they would not 1 be able to connect -to city sewer immediately and questioned their benefit; 2) Some stated that the assessment schedule would be a financial burden and would potentially force them to sell or 1 develop their property prematurely; and 3) Many questioned the total amount of "buildable acreage" on their parcels. In an effort to meet the previously discussed objectives and address the relevant concerns raised by property owners, staff has formulated a revised assessment proposal. The key factor of this proposal would be the replacement of the per acre assessment 1 rate with a single trunk assessment of $850 per existing dwelling on a parcel. This amount has been derived based on two separate methodologies. First, the current sewer connection charge for a If ILO PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER I Don Ashworth August 28, 1991 Page 2 I ' residential, single-family home is $600. Of this charge, it would be fair to estimate that approximately 50%, or $300, of this charge is used to provide repair and maintenance operations of the system facilities such as sewer lines, lift stations, etc. 11 The remaining portion is commonly used to offset costs associated with trunk facility improvements. ' The previously presented assessment rate was established at $539 per acre of "usable land" area. Given the deletion of the recently sewered properties on Crestview Drive and recognizing that the Ches Mar Farm properties west of Highway 41 are outside ' of the MUSA, the per acre assessment rate would need to increase to approximately $550 to balance the project costs incurred. Allocating $300 of the normal $600 sewer connection charge to pay ' for trunk installation costs would cover all but $250 of the proposed $550 assessment rate. The remaining $250 is considered a special direct interceptor benefit cost to the service area. Therefore, it is proposed that the assessment amount be revised to $850 per existing dwelling unit comprised of a $600 portion analogous to the system installation and maintenance revenue derived from a typical sewer connection charge and a $250 share representing the special interceptor benefit. Parcels with no existing dwellings would not be assessed at this time. At such time that a parcel is subdivided, the $850 per dwelling charge 1 would be imposed. This assessment rate does not negate future hook-up and SAC charges for connections made to the City sewer system. It should also be noted that the City's current sewer connection charge of $600 has not be revised or updated since the mid- 1980 's. If this $600 connection charge is adjusted by 1 incorporating the increase in the construction cost index for these years, the change in today's dollars would approximate the $850/unit assessment rate proposed. Given this fact, it appears that the current sewer connection charge, in terms of today's dollars, is short of the dollars needed to adequately construct, repair and maintain today's system facilities. It would, therefore, seem appropriate for the Council to also take separate ' action to increase the City's sewer connection charge from $600 to $850 per unit. It is believed that this proposal for assessing a cost of $850 per existing dwelling unit throughout the established assessment area for the Lake Ann Interceptor would address the ' aforementioned primary concerns including the reduction of the initial financial impact to affected property owners. Existing dwellings with functioning septic systems will not be immediately required to hoop up to City sewer unless the septic system fails. I I Don Ashworth August 28, 1991 Page 3 I This method also eliminates the debate over how much buildable land actually exists on a parcel since only each existing dwelling unit would be assessed and only at such time in the future that a subdivision occurs, will the additional charges be incurred. This method addresses the equality question for areas outside of the MUSA that may potentially benefit from this system as their charges would be reflective of this rate. Finally, this plan is based on the premise that residential subdivision will occur within this service area over the next few years. As sewer connection charges are collected for each of the created dwelling units, revenue will be generated to help reduce the financial obligations incurred by the City for this project. In conclusion, this project has provided trunk sewer availability to a sizeable service area. It is not uncommon that these facilities are constructed some time in advance of lateral construction reaching all of the given service area. Trunk sewer facilities are considered an area-wide benefit and are assessed ' as such. While some septic systems in the assessment area may have been constructed recently, this project is not unlike previous sanitary sewer projects such as along Lake Riley, Greenwood Shores, etc. where septic systems in a variety of conditions from fairly new to failing existed. It was not surprising to see property owners with functioning septic systems connecting to city sewer once it became available. 1 The revised assessment roll will be distributed the night of the meeting. If the City Council is in agreement that this is an acceptable modification of the assessment proposal, it is recommended that each dwelling unit within the revised Lake Ann Interceptor Service Area be assessed a cost of $850 at 9% interest. The term of the assessment is recommended to be three to four years given the substantial reduction in the assessment to property owners. However, the decision of the term for this assessment is left open for Council action. It is also recommended that the City Council take a separate action to approve a sanitary sewer connection charge increase to $850 per residential unit effective January 1, 1992. jms/ktm Attachment: 1. Additional Assessment Objections not included in previous packet. c: Dave Hempel, Sr. Engineering Technician Bill Engelhardt, Engelhardt and Associates i 4 I II ASSESSMENT OBJECTION LIST LAKE ANN INTERCEPTOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 87-35 I Parcel No. 25-0110300 Parcel No. 25-4070030 Ray and Lisa Notermann Christopher and Sandra Ramsey 1450 Arboretum Blvd. 6681 Galpin Blvd. 1 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Excelsior, MN 55331 Assessment Amount: $ 704.10 Assessment Amount: $ 1,353.50 1 Parcel No. 25-0035100 Parcel No. 25-0040500 Reinhold and Lorraine Guthmiller Dennis and Beverly Jacobson 1801 Lake Lucy Road 6841 Hazeltine Blvd. Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 IIAssessment Amount: $ 6,182.79 Assessment Amount: $6,767.50 Parcel No. 25-0033600 (1) I Parcel No. 25-0024000 (2) Alan and Kathleen Peterson Al and Carolyn Krueger 1831 Lake Lucy Lane 1600 Lake Lucy Road Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 II Assessment Amount: $ 1,461.78 Assessment Amount (1): $ 704.10 Assessment Amount (2): $ 1,846.17 Parcel No. 25-4070080 1 Merle and Diane Steinkraus Parcel No. 25-2050020* 1800 Lake Lucy Road Geri Eikaas Excelsior, MN 55331 2763 Ches Mar Farm Road 1 Assessment Amount: $ 1,331.84 Excelsior, MN 55331 Assessment Amount: $ 1,272.29 Parcel No. 25-0025820 Joe and Gayle Morin Parcel No. 25-4070020 1 1441 Lake Lucy Road Steven Buresh and Wendy Lam-Buresh Chanhassen MN 55317 6651 Galpin Blvd. Assessment Amount: $1,651.27 Excelsior, MN 55331 I Assessment Amount: $ 1,353.50 Parcel No. 25-6900010 (1) Parcel No. 25-6900020 (2) Parcel No. 25-0025500 I Parcel No. 25-6900030 (3) Hugh C. Price Prince R. Nelson Wildlife Heritage Foundation, Inc. 2121 Avenue of the Stars 5701 Normandale Rd. - Suite 325 c/o BJR & S, Suite #1700 Minneapolis, MN 55424 1 Lcs Angeles, CA 90067 Assessment Mount: $704.10 Assessment Amount (1): $ 8,808.58 Assessment Amount (2): $62,196.03 Parcel No. 25-0025810 1 Assessment Amount (3): $ 4,872.60 Brian and Nancy Tichy 1471 Lake Lucy Road Parcel No. 25-0092100 (1) Excelsior, MN 55331 Parcel No. 25-0092200 (2) Assessment Mount: $ 2,041.08 II David and Karen Weathers 7235 Hazeltine Blvd. Parcel No. 25-0092500* Excelsior, MN 55331 Walter A. Whitehill 1 Assessment Amount (1): $ 704.10 7250 Hazeltine Blvd. Assessment Amount (2): $ 2,165.60 Excelsior, MN 55331 Assessment Amount: $1,396.81 I -1- 1 a II Parcel No. 25-4070010 Parcel No. 25-4070150 1 Breck and Marliese Johnson John and Jacqueline Lowry 6621 Galpin Blvd. 1665 Steller Court Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 II Assessment Amount: $ 1,385.98 Assessment Amount: $ 1,331.84 Parcel No. 25-0100100 Parcel No. 25-5590020 Robert C. and Penelope Arneson Nancy and Sam Mancino II 6921 Galpin Blvd. 6620 Galpin Blvd. Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Assessment Amount: $ 2,030.25 Assessment Amount: $12,712.07 II Parcel No. 25-0091800 Parcel No. 25-0101510 Donald and Betty Roy Douglas and Theresa Bentz 7205 Hazeltine Blvd. 7280 Galpin Blvd. II Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Assessment Amount: $ 704.10 Assessment Amount: $ 2,365.92 Parcel No. 25-0022900* Parcel No. 25-0091300* I Elizabeth Ann Glaccum William and B. Johnson 1510 Lake Lucy Road 7060 Ches Mar Drive II Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Assessment Amount: $ 1,212.74 Assessment Amount: $704.10 Parcel No. 25-4070090 Parcel No. 25-0032800 I Jerry and Cynthia Gill The Greenery Company 1760 Lake Lucy Road c/o Don Mezzenga Excelsior, MN 55331 P.O. Box 748 II Assessment Amount: '$ 1,337.26 Neskowin, OR 97148 Assessment Amount: $6,740.43 Parcel No. 25-0100500 (1) Parcel No. 25-0100600 (2) Parcel No. 25-0101520 II Parcel No. 25-0100700 (3) Darleen and Thomas Tmarcotte Parcel No. 25-0100800 (4) 6430 City West Parkway, #5314 Parcel No. 25-0100900 (5) Eden Prairie, MN 55344 I M. J. Gorra Assessment Amount: $ 2,707.00 1680 Arboretum Blvd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Parcel No. 25-4070050 Assessment Amount (1): $23,962.36 John Waldron II Assessment Amount (2): $10,178.32 1900 Lake Lucy Road Assessment Amount (3): $ 1,829.93 Excelsior, MN 55331 II Assessment Amount (4): $ 4,672.28 Assessment Amount: $ 2,149.36 Assessment Amount (5): $28,358.53 Parcel No. 25-0025800 Parcel No. 25-4070160 Ted R. Coey Clarence and Phyllis Haile 1381 Lake Lucy Road 1675 Steller Court Chanhassen, MN 55317 Excelsior, MN 55331 Assessment Amount: $ 7,287.24 II Assessment Amount: $ 1,840.76 Parcel No. 25-6930010 (1) Parcel No. 25-0091500 Parcel No. 25-6930020 (2) Paul and Roxanne Youngquist Martin and Beth Ruder 7105 Hazeltine Blvd. 6831 Galpin Blvd. Excelsior, MN 55331 Excelsior, MN 55331 Assessment Amount: $13,535.00 Assessment Amount (1): $ 4,358.27 II Assessment Amount (2): $ 3,129.29 -2- 1 Parcel No. 25-0034810 Edward and Mary Ryan 6730 Galpin Blvd. Excelsior, MN 55331 Assessment Amount: $17,427.67 Parcel No. 25-6930030 Earl C. Gilbert, III 6901 Galpin Blvd. Excelsior, MN 55331 Assessment Amount: $ 4,466.55 Parcel No. 25-0101530 (1) Parcel No. 25-0101700 (2) Theodore and Marlene Bentz 7300 Galpin Blvd. Excelsior, MN 55331 Assessment Amount (1): $ 1,099.04 Assessment Amount (2): $ 3,183.43 Parcel No. 25-4070180 Eric and Norma Rivkin 1695 Steller Court Excelsior, MN 55331 Assessment Amount: $ 2,143.94 Parcel No. 25-0033800 ' Melvin and Janet Babatz 1650 Lake Lucy Road Excelsior, MN 55331 Assessment Amount:. $ 704.1U 4�I, Q. -11D. 1 `'rY\p„4_1_. 1 I I i *Parcel has been removed from the assessment roll. -3- MARK SANDA oe, ter 71 9 168.5 STELLER COURT, EXCELSIOR, MINNESOTA 55331 i I A ` I 9/ /q cox August 30, 1991 Mr. Charles Folch , City of Chanhassen Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Mr. Folch: I We have not had too much luck getting in touch with one another by phone, so I thought I would try the mail! My purpose in reaching you was to schedule an appointment to review the process by which "buildable acreage" was determined for the Lake Ann Interceptor Project assessments. My wife and I were out of town on the 20th, so we missed your earlier workshop. , Because of the large amount of money involved, it is obviously very important to us to understand the process that was used. As of today, I would be able to meet with you or your staff Thursday, September 5th in the AM, the 6th in the AM, Monday the 9th PM, anytime the 10th, or the 11th in the PM. Please call me at 1 work at 828-6730 and leave a message as to what time would work best for you. Thank you! 1 Mark Sanda CM OF MANASSEH I R !E�`2��PI�llil SEP031991 ENGIVIERIKO DEPT. 1 1 „. I itA ia.„-Aaar2.4,) /046. ez-±LeIi , Qj _ Po . 7.0 14-7 lifc/ r1).77)/(y) 55 3 /7 0-11-CrYILr-)t -741 e7-35 Take- ak-n JotLA P_A-t-ye,ct 1 _._ ZLJ ceA,c boA.c•rt2.77 _. 66-24 Ch cyu i/* J Lc OZA p),o,00-a,z_d adat,(2.0_,ty-kt_en-&- azyl/J-& PA-bRO A tzeTh . 1°)al azDy-e . __ 0 W\ o_tAbc - pmck___( _ 6/ /03oLD clou c ei A.cYr) • _ _se/ a( 0 . J,r_) ci/A, • (,?J °Lb /nit -1-404L _ of keto-e c_Acr3 yoo,k k ±idTh ) a. d c 1 0.)-141)\_32. eyuA ,4JA 2beci ) d _ o cat. Lag wtil 1021_ tb,t'L L*\ 67)-y) mio A o-vemq ) lj and 12.03/) L-150 ttum I ' 161xt,r) 4._&.vJs_n_J-7171 h Pan. c0 46 05 - 61 I 0360 Date r1ue, 12 1(1 q1/ I To: City Clerk,City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Dr. PO Box 147 Chanhassen,MN 55317 Property Owner: to )cf cam►cl Lo r ra,�,s�,� Q y�i v►��11�.r Address / 'O/ 1-4k L.cc-Y Ee (cif.. a s s 1 7 ru St 6xee/s Ior- 11 Parcel No: 2 — 0 0 3 S/O O Subject: Objection to J Ake A nn JnterceptorA ssessment 1 Whereas,it is the City's policy in the Comprehensive Plan to ensure that lots developed recently with newer septic systems"would not be unduly burdenedby new local utility lines and related assessments", Whereas,the availability and right to use an alternate drainfield site was also imposed by the City in case the original drainfield site failed, Whereas, there is no absolute certainty that an original or alternate septic site could potentially harm the environment, given the imposed stringent City standards,education and monitoring program to insure long term use and environmental protection, Whereas,there is no absolute certainty that even if the septic system did fail and could potentially harm the environment,that hookup to the Lake Ann Interceptor would be necessary or the most publicly beneficial way to solve the problem,given the liklihood there will be alternative methods more environmentally and financially viable ready to correct problems in the future, 1 Whereas,it was understood from previous public meetings that in the event assessments might be levied, that wouldn't occur at least until the year 2000,according'to the original I Ake Ann Interceptor agreement discussions, ' Whereas,the Lake Ann Interceptor levy amount seems incorrect,given the fact the registered survey for this parcel shows buildable acres and the levy amount was previously mentioned in various public meetings at about$460 per acre of buildable land( x$460=$ ), Whereas,there is evidence of vehement public objection to this project by existing residents who feel they would not receive benefit from this project through the year 2000,or feel they would be forced to sell their homes due to a premature and unnecessary assessment burden, Therefore, (I,we) , object to the assumption that we would receive benefit from this project and object to the proposed Lake Ann Interceptor Project A ssessment Sincerely, ' , ' • _4 _ _ _. ..y , �fy ,property owners) 1 Date — 1/_ 9/ To: City Clerk,City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Dr. PO Box 147 Chanhassen,MN 55317 f� ' Property Owner: 'Q/cI 4 / e,7 ig/e.'5o/7 Address 14 S/ Izz e h /4./7e ' Parcel No: a5:-4/07007.0 ' Subject: Objection to Lake Ann Interceptor A ssessment Whereas,it is the City's policy in the Comprehensive Plan to ensure that lots developed recently with ' newer septic systems "would not be unduly burdenedby new local utility lines and related assessments", mo by the City Whereas,the availability and right to use an alternate cu-aii►neiu Jim: was iu;;,i.,,p;3cu��u,:,City case the original drainfield site failed, Whereas,there is no absolute certainty that an original or alternate septic site could potentially harm the environment, given the imposed stringent City standards,education and monitoring program to insure long term use and environmental protection, Whereas,there is no absolute certainty that even if the septic system did fail and could potentially harm the environment,that hookup to the Lake Ann Interceptor would be necessary or the most publicly beneficial way to solve the problem,given the liklihood there will be alternative methods more environmentally and financially viable ready to correct problems in the future, Whereas,it was understood from previous public meetings that in the event assessments might be levied, that wouldn't occur at least until the year 2000,according to the original J Ake Ann Interceptor agreement discussions, Whereas,the Lake Ann Interceptor levy amount seems incorrect,given the fact the registered survey for this parcel shows I buildable acres and the levy amount was previously mentioned in various public meetings at about$460 per acre of buildable land( I x$460=$ 4-60 ), Whereas,there is evidence of vehement public objection to this project by existing residents who feel they would not receive benefit from this project through the year 2000,or feel they would be forced to sell their homes due to a premature and unnecessary assessment burden, Therefore, (I,we) We object to the assumption that we would receive benefit from this project and object to the proposed Lake Ann Interceptor Project A ssessment. Sincerely, 1 7ac_4 _) roperty owner(s) I I StcJiiIrius Ffrinti.i 1800 Lake Lucy Rd • Excelsior, MN 55331 Telephone: (612) 470-1208 d 1- C /e(-- �i ' kyfex, l/lr uz C3 b e c 71-a e irOpQ Se IY\rtev eepto P 0 ( c-e_ (y 7231..e.A.g r / 36a 40- 1e-e Lucy ' ' L 1 1 r I I I 1 I 1 I City of Chanhassen August 9,1991 690 Coulter Drive P.O.Box 147 IChanhassen,MN 55317 Letter to: I Don Ashworth City Clerk/Manager Dear Mr. Ashworth, IThe purpose of this letter is to file a written objection to the proposed assessment against my property for the Lake Ann Interceptor Project. IPer my July 29, 1991 discussion with Mr.Alan Larson of Inglehart Associates(Chanhassen's consultant),the calculation of my assessment was performed as follows: ITotal acreage 5.48 acres Buildable land 3.05 acres Less wetland 2.43 acres Times assessment per acre $541.40/acre Buildable land 3.05 acres Total assessment $1651.27 IMy objections to this assessment are as follows: I 1. The value used for Total acreage is incorrect. Per my last tax bill (and in accordance with the stipulations on the deed to my property)the total acreage as surveyed is 4.90 acres. Based upon this number,the calculation should be as follows: ITotal acreage 4.90 acres Buildable land 2.47 acres Less wetland 2.43 acres Times assessment per acre $541.40/acre Buildable land 2.47 acres Total assessment $1337.26 I2. The "Buildable land" is not actually buildable. My existing home occupies the only buildable site on the property. Because of the way the wetland areas are located relative to the lake, I do not believe that there is I any way to build another home on this property and meet the setback requirements imposed by the lake,the wetlands,and the existing property lines. Therefore the assessment should be based upon a single unit. 1 I A look at the comprehensive plan shows that for single family residential acreage, the number of allowable units per acre ranges from 4.0 units per acre to 1.2 units per acre. The assessment calculations should be done as follows: I Assessment per acre $541.40/acre Assessment per acre $541.40/acre Divided by units per acre 4.0 units/acre Divided by units per acre 1.2 units/acre Assessment per unit $135.35 per unit Assessment per unit $451.17 per unit ITherefore,my assessment(for a single unit)should be calculated to be somewhere in the range between$135.35 to$451.17 total. A$300.00 assessment would probably be fair(assuming that we will derive a benefit from the project some day... which we will not,see items below). I3. We have a brand new septic system. Our septic system was installed shortly after we moved into our home(in May or June of 1989). Modern systems are far more reliable than older systems. They last for 30 years and I more. Alternate drainfield sites can be used if our system does fail... which it will not... new technology and maintenance procedures will assure that it will not fail. For this reason we will not derive a benefit from the project. Therefore,we should not be assessed for it at all. I I I 4. It is not feasible for us to ever hook up to the Lake Ann Interceptor. To hook us up to the interceptor would t require digging through miles of swamp and wetland. The cost would be prohibitive. Destruction to the environment would be catastrophic. It would make far more sense to hook up to the east should it ever be necessary(which it will not),or connect to the north via a lift station. Note that the proposed development of the Ortenblad property directly east of our home is planned to connect to the east... not to the lake Ann Interceptor. For this reason,also,we will not derive a benefit from the project. Therefore,we should not be assessed for it at all. Our protests against this project(and those of our neighbors)are a matter of public record ever since the project was undertaken. It seems to us that this project was done without proper notification to people affected by this assessment,that it was done more to connect two areas of the city than for our specific benefit,and that it ought to be funded from the general tax fund rather than from special assessments. These and other objections were also voiced during discussions of the comprehensive plan last winter. We have received assurances from time to time that we would be excluded from this assessment,that it would not be levied until the year 2000,etc. We told the city on several occasions that we do not intend to develop our property,and received assurances that that assessments would not be made against undeveloped property until it is developed. The section of the comprehensive plan that pertains to our situation (and to two of the residential developments in the area is attached to this letter). So, I am reasonably confident that the city officials are sensitive to the concerns of the people in our area. I am hopeful that we can reach a resolution of this matter without our appealing to the District Court (as outlined in the assessment notice),or through a class action appeal. ' I hereby request that the proposed assessment against our property be eliminated,and that our money which is held in escrow for this purpose be released. ' Sincerely, KA X(24/ • Joe and Gayle Morin 1441 Lake Lucy Road I Chanhassen, MN 55317 • 1 1 I I I 11 I 1 The impact of the MUSA line on large lot residential developments constructed prior to 1987 is a concern of the City. A number of I these subdivisions were platted immediately prior to the adoption of ordinance changes eliminating the potential of 2i-: acre subdivisions in the rural residential area . These developments , II which are still being built out at the present time , contain homes that are equipped with on-site wells and sewage disposal systems . The on-site sewage disposal systems are built to required standards and an alternate drain field is provided for future use if I necessary . These systems represent a substantial investment on the, part of the homeowner and are currently an environmentally acceptable method of dealing with waste generated from this type of II development . Two of these developments are located within the proposed MUSA expansion The Timberwood subdivision was discussed above and the other is the Lake Lucy Highlands plat which is II located north of Lake Lucy along Lake Lucy Road . In light of the factors that were described , it is City policy that these areas be given special consideration when utilities are extended past them to surrounding parcels . It is the City' s position that these Ar'' ,subdivisions-4f11 not be required to hook into City utilities nor. pay local utility asses$ments until such time as utility extensions are required to serve them. Given the standards employed in, t,he II design of these on-site utilities , it is not anticipated that municipal sewer service will be required during the life of this,- plan and will only be considered in the future if environmental IIproblems become evident . I II II II I • II FROM FF'ECRIt:SON B''RUN1 8. 12. 1991 17: 39 P. 2 r HMI Intuntimm.cl ('cntic I(() 4ecnnd enuc youth FREDRIKSON & BYRON i.rii,n�,,,, - MN “40)-3=y7 reortss,antt nsavc:tArtoN FAX. (6121 347-7077 II Direct Dial No. (612) 347-7168 HAND-DELIVERED August 12 , 1991 NOTICE OF ,OBJECTION TO SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS Mr . Don Ashworth , City Clerk/Manager City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive Minnesota , Minnesota 55317 11 RE: Prince R . Nelson 2121 Avenue of the Stars C/o BJR & S #1700 Los Ang« s , CA 90067 Parcel Nos . 25-6900010; 25-6900020; 25-6900030 , Dear Mr . Ashworth: Fredrikson & Byron, P,A. , represents Prince R. Nelson regarding the specie ' assessments proposed to be levied against his above-refei .2nced properties for Improvement Project No . e7-35 . Pursuant to Minn . Stat . § 929 , 061 (1987) , Mr . Nelson hereby states his objection to such special assessments . The bases of the objection are that the amount of each of the proposed assessments exceeds the special benefit conferred; the assessments are arbitrary, capricious , and unreasonable; and the assessments deny equal protection of the laws and constitute a taking of property without due process and without just compensation therefor . Very truly yours, oseph G. Springer JCS:djm/5262e I/ FROM FREDRII =ON F. ES'RON1 8. 12. 1991 17:39 P. 3 1 1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT OF NOTICE OF OBJECTION TO SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS Received of Fredrikson & Byron on August 12 , 1991 , was ' Prince R. Nelson's Notice of Objection to Special Assessments for Parcel Nos , 25-6900010, 25-6900020 and 25-6900030 regarding Project No. 87-35 . ay p I Vet a 11 Fir"1111■ • r 1 1 1 1 • 1 1 1 i 1 1 0035e - 1 - Date -u,s t 12 , 1991 1 • To: City Clerk,City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Dr. PO Box 147 Chanhassen,MN 55317 Property Owner: Prince R. Nelson , Address 2121 Avenue of the Stars , c/o: BJR&S 1700, LA, CA 90067 Parcel No: 25-6900030 ; 25-6900010 ; 25-6900020 Subject: Objection to T Ake Ann Interceptor A ssessment 1 Whereas, it is the City's policy in the Comprehensive Plan io ensure that lots developed recently with newer septic systems "would not be unduly burdenedby new local utility lines and related assessments", Whereas,the availability and right to use an alternate drainfield site was also imposed by the City in case the original drainfield site failed, Whereas,there is no absolute certainty that an original or alternate septic site could potentially harm the environment, given the imposed stringent City standards,education and monitoring program to insure long term use and environmental protection, Whereas,there is no absolute certainty that even if the septic system did fail and could potentially harm the environment,that hookup to the Lake Ann Interceptor would be necessary or the most publicly beneficial way to solve the problem,given the liklihood there will be alternative methods more environmentally and financially viable ready to correct problems in the future, Whereas,it was understood from previous public meetings that in the event assessments might be levied,that wouldn't occur at least until the year 2000,according to the original T ake Ann Interceptor agreement discussions, i Whereas, the Lake Ann Interceptor levy amount seems incorrect,given the fact the registered survey for this parcel shows buildable acres and the levy amount was previously mentioned in various I public meetings at about$460 per acre of buildable land ( x $460=$ ), /au; 4641.*e 541.40 Whereas,there is evidence of vehement public objection to this project by existing residents who feel they would not receive benefit from this project through the year 2000,or feel they would be forced to sell their homes due to a premature and unnecessary assessment burden, Therefore, (I,we) object to the assumption that we would receive benefit from this project and I object to the proposed Lake Ann Interceptor Project A ssessment. Sincerely, ' 0°P. AINIa10.81111" ,property owner(s) , Prince R. Nelson I i iDate r /Y / To: I City Clerk,City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Dr. PO Box 147 Chanhassen,MN 55317 1 Property Owner: Da' U c °� �a t°� 4..}-ece..---- 7 Y Y I'Pe Y , IAddress ' ? 3.S ,4' z ,c i rl ñ22, / Parcel No: ,2 S= 9,2 ©O __6....,2_ ,&2 2.2 0_______ __2,5--- ISubject: Objection to Lake Ann Interceptor ssessment Whereas,it is the City's policy in the Comprehensive Plan to ensure that lots developed recently with I newer septic systems "would not be unduly burdenedby new local utility lines and related assessments", I Whereas, the availability and right to use an alternate drainfield site was also imposed by the City in case the original drainfield site failed, I Whereas,there is no absolute certainty that an original or alternate septic site could potentially harm the environment, given the imposed stringent City standards,education and monitoring program to insure long term use and environmental protection, - I Whereas,there is no absolute certainty that even if the septic system did fail and could potentially harm the environment,that hookup to the Lake Ann Interceptor would be necessary or the most publicly beneficial way to solve the problem,given the liklihood there will be alternative methods Imore environmentally and financially viable ready to correct problems in the future, Whereas,it was understood from previous public meetings that in the event assessments might be I levied, that wouldn't occur at least until the year 2000,according to the original Lake Ann Interceptor agreement discussions, imi t , . . __ �1 _ s • -ect,giv fac - — t � 4• bl' °,r- : • et . • _. :. a ' b � ----"-_ I Whereas,there is evidence of vehement public objection to this project by existing residents who feel they would not receive benefit from this project through the year 2000,or feel they would be forced to sell their homes due to a premature and unnecessary assessment burden, I Therefore, (I,we) object to the assumption that we would receive benefit from this project and object to the proposed Lake Ann Interceptor Project A ssessment. ISincerely, I '6,e4A-,---"Ae __4—„,,Z..... I (e rn ` / ,;_ 4: f ( 2—— ,property owner(s) I /41e- _./i,er,‘. ..4,, ,J-72 --1 .f—erz' 6`/'°. `-t W—Ze"-e4-42-- - 9 • Ls„--- ' I - — . Date $ -1 t 9( I To: City Clerk,City of Chanhassen I 690 Coulter Dr. PO Box 147 Chanhassen,MN 55317 111 Property Owner: (�t r iS1-0 r 6 \c)1.9, ems, Address toLI ( .7c 1 _ a 6 ■eesiac cc1r' 5S2a,2-1 1 ' Parcel No: n93_ 4161 pD3b Subject: Objection to Lake Ann Interceptor A ssessment , Whereas,it is the City's policy in the Comprehensive Plan to ensure that lots developed recently with newer septic systems "would not be unduly burdenedby new local utility lines and related assessments", Whereas, the availability and right to use an alternate drainfield site was also imposed by the City in case the original drainfield site failed, Whereas,there is no absolute certainty that an original or alternate septic site could potentially harm the environment, given the imposed stringent City standards,education and monitoring program to insure long term use and environmental protection, Whereas,there is no absolute certainty that even if the septic system did fail and could potentially , harm the environment,that hookup to the Lake Ann Interceptor would be necessary or the most publicly beneficial way to solve the problem,given the liklihood there will be alternative methods more environmentally and financially viable ready to correct problems in the future, I Whereas,it was understood from previous public meetings that in the event assessments might be levied, that wouldn't occur at least until the year 2000,according to the original I ake Ann Interceptor agreement discussions, Whereas,the Lake Ann Interceptor levy amount seems incorrect,given the fact the registered survey for this parcel shows buildable acres and the levy amount was previously mentioned in various public meetings at about$460 per acre of buildable land( x$460=$ ), I Whereas,there is evidence of vehement public objection to this project by existing residents who feel they would not receive benefit from this project through the year 2000,or feel they would be forced to sell their homes due to a premature and unnecessary assessment burden, Therefore, (I,we) object to the assumption that we would receive benefit from this project and object to the proposed Lake Ann Interceptor Project A ssessment. • Sincerely, I atvl 4A 1 �•�.��- - ls. .._ ,property owner(s) , Dace C,/ kil To: City Clerk, City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Dr. PO Box 147 Chanhassen,MN 55 1 Property Owner: F Address Q r t4Z�T L-= Parcel No: S -- 2 �4�d 500 Subject: Objection to Lake A nn Interceptor A ssessment • Whereas,it is the City's policy in the Comprehensive Plan to ensure that lots developed recently with newer septic systems"would not be unduly burdenedby new local utility lines and related assessments", Whereas, the availability and right to use an alternate drainfield site was also imposed by the City in case the original drainfield site failed, Whereas,there is no absolute certainty that an original or alternate septic site could potentially harm ' the environment, given the imposed stringent City standards,education and monitoring program to insure long term use and environmental protection, Whereas,there is no absolute certainty that even if the septic system did fail and could potentially harm the environment,that hookup to the Lake Ann Interceptor would be necessary or the most publicly beneficial way to solve the problem,given the liklihood there will be alternative methods 1 more environmentally and financially viable ready to correct problems in the future, Whereas,it was understood from previous public meetings that in the event assessments might be levied, that wouldn't occur at least until the year 2000,according to the original Jake Ann Interceptor agreement discussions, Whereas, the Lake Ann Interceptor levy amount seems incorrect,given the fact the registered survey for this parcel shows 10 buildable acres and the levy amount was previously mentioned in various public meetings at about$460 per acre of buildable land( 10 x$460=$ 4(0 C0 ), Whereas,there is evidence of vehement public objection to this project by existing residents who feel they would not receive benefit from this project through the year 2000,or feel they would be forced to sell their homes due to a premature and unnecessary assessment burden. Therefore, (I,we) object to the assumption that we would receive benefit from this project and object to the proposed Lake Ann Interceptor Project A ssessment. Sincerely, •- ,property owner(s) 1 1 Al & Carolyn Krueger 1600 Lake Lucy Road Excelsior, MN 55331 474 7869 I Partial #'s 25-0033600 & 25-0024000 August 12, 1991 1 Don Ashworth ' City Clerk, City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55371 Re: Objection to Lake Ann Intercepter Sewer Project 87-35 1 Dear Don , As I understood the City's policy it was to ensure that lots developed recently have an adequate septic system. It's my understanding that this would not be unduly burdened by new local utility lines or any related assessments. i I understand I have the availability and right to use an alternate drainfield site was also imposed by the City in the original drainfield site failed. When I built my home in 1982, I was required to build a septic system adequate for my property. I did that at the expense of $9000.00. The Interceptor line was projected for the year 2000, which seemed ok for the expense involved in my system. I built 1 to code then and I don't feel It fair that I be assessed for something I have no plans on using for at least another 10 years. When the city first started talking about this project, it was ' understood that there would be no assessment to existing residents if they didn't connect to the system. What changed your mind? It's not fair to assess the 15 home on Lake Lucy for something the all of them won't even use. This whole system is being projected for further development West. Let them assume the cost as part of their development. We have to live with the I I I page 2 i construction again. We have experienced 2 construction projects so far. My wife & I object to the assumption that we would benefit from ' the project and object to the levied amount for the proposed Lake Ann Interceptor Assessment. I feel that the added assessments would force me to sell. Our taxes in Chanhassen have risen every 1 year due to the City's expansion. That in itself is a big burden. Thank You I Sincerely 1 Al Krueger 1 7,4A.tp.41(Caroly ueger I I I I I I City Clerk I City of Chanhassen RE: Special Assessment Notice Lake Ann Interceptor Project Parcel No 2050020 1 . I object to the inclusion of my property in the aboVe assessment proposal. According to your records I reside outside of the MUSA line. I am not allowed to hook up to a sanitary sewer because I am outside the MUSA line so askin ou are y asking me to pay for some- thing I cannot legally do. 2 .You are assuming that people who have septic systems should pay double for sewer and water. I have purchased a new soft water(' system and I pay for any upkeep or repair needed on septic tank and water pump. Certainly, the people who have city sewer and water would not be asked to pay for my water pump or septic tank. 3 .Extending the MUSA line promotes urban sprawl and forces individ- I uals, who do not want to live in housing developments,out of their home because of prohibitive costs. 4.Your assessment charge is calculated on "buildable acres" but in fact I live in an area where you need ten acres to build one home so you in fact are basing your calculation on something that is not possible to get permission to do. >44%2,-c ' 1 Geri Eikaas 2763 Ches Mar Farm Road Excelsior MN 55331 t • I I I I August 11 . 1991 11 City Clerk City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive N� Chanhassen . MN 55317 - Lot 2. Block 1 Lake Lucy Highlands I Parcel No. 25-4070020 Dear tir: 0� This is to notify you (the city of Chanhassen) of my objection to the Lake Ann Interceptor Assessment. I object on the grounds that : * Violates city policy to not put undue burden on Chanhassen property owners. � * Based on current description area in question my property is not included assessment area. My property does not border Lake Lucy Road on the north and is north of N� described assessment area. * When I purchased my property the proposed assessment was 0� not expected until post year 2000. There has been no � significant building in this area since 1987, when I built my residence in this area. All of the lots in this N� area are large lots (2. 5 acres plus) with plenty of land for adequate, safe septic systems. The large lot requirement ensures that this area will have very little by the year 2000. * The city has imposed stringent monitoring of private well water usage and time between septic tank maintenance. All N� the steps have been carefully taken to insure that the private septic systems are environmentally safe. The city went through great pains and stringent requirements for' our N� septic systems to meet modern specifications for safe and effective septic systems. Each lot owner was also required to submit an alternate secondary drainfield site in case of failure of the primary drainfield. * The assessment amount is higher than previous figures given to the area owners and the project has been completed for N� nearly five years. What cost overruns could there possibly 1� be on a already completed project. * In these unsure economic times, with many of us losing our N� jobs and the already unfair tax burden that area and new property owners currently carry, the unwarranted and unnecessary assessments will force lower middle income 0� people out of Chanhassen. Sincerely, �� m� ^�3~m4�w�� ~�^' 3,4,„zat L^9441 H` " 6411-1 , property owners r0 I r" -/ Hono-able Mayor August 22, 1991 City Council Chanhassen, Minn, Re: Special Assesment project # 87-35. , Honorable Mayor: Thank you for the informative hearing and meeting on the above special assessments. ' In defense of the City of Chanhassen and the "old Council" , I think the decision to construct the Lake Ann interceptor I was the correct choice. I also t;,ink, however, that assessing a few landowners for a interceptor that benefits a great number ' of people, including some not assessed that may be able to hook up in the future is not the correct choice. 11 I feel that the City should pay the carrying cost of the I interceptor. I also feel that all those likely to hook up in the future should be assessed pronorti.on:atly when they hook up. I The payment when hook up plan would also benefit the City in that this plan would neither encourage or discourage develop- ment. ' Sincerely, M.J. Gorra 1680 Arboretum blvd. Chanhassen, Minn. - AUG N9 1991 MERU DEPT. AUG 2 6 1991 ' ';!TY OF CHANHASSE' I ' Clarence L. Haile 1675 Steller Court Excelsior, MN 55331 1 August 12, 1991 City Clerk City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive PO Box 147 11 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Property Parcel No. : 25-4070160 Owners: Clarence L. and Phyllis L. Haile Address: 1675 Steller Court, Excelsior, MN SUBJECT: Objection of Lake Ann Interceptor Assessment Whereas, the City's Comprehensive Plan contains the provision that lots developed recently with new septic systems "would not be unduly burdened by new local utility lines and related assessmentp , Whereas, each new lot recently developed has been required by the City designate an alternative drainfield site to protect the environment in the event that the original drainfield site should fail, ' Whereas, many properties, including the subject parcel, contained in the area designed to be served by the Lake Ann Interceptor are not suitable for subdivision and further development, Therefore, we object vehemently to the Lake Ann Interceptor project and the subject assessment. Plainly, we and many other property owners in the affected area, feel strongly that the project is not beneficial and that the assessment imposes and unnecessary financial burden. Sincerely, CITY 0i,CHANHASSEN ' Clarence L. Haile R �L,l�fljV11.: C AUG 1 :,' 1991 Phyl is L. Haile ENGINEERING DEPT. 1 1 Late h)6 .1 , tell filvni v " ua y np 4hia1;i r Wsc 'Ein;:i11.0eL,1a&i: mi-t7preriiRreFi RECEIVED lb: ullis*Vihlii.gt1.,_; City Clerk,City of Chanhassen vyii Coulter a-. AUG PO Box 147 AUG��� � `' '�'�' hUtn � � 1x91 Chanhassen,MN 55317 _R,�ggFF�e } CI t v. UrifiivHAS EN; � :� it: ig��� it:ak{� ' Property Owner: PAUL P.1>A�roe f aN cbawtST Address -11 05 to ZE LTA F &N-wt). EX G e-t. M 8- . s 534 _- Parcel No: 2 5 - O o °t 15 OO Subject: Objection to lake Ann Interceptor A ssessment ' Whereas,it is the City's policy in the Comprehensive Plan to ensure that lots developed recently with newer septic systems "would not be unduly burdenedby new local utility lines and related assessments", Whereas,the availability and right to use an alternate drainfield site was also imposed by the City in case the original drainfield site failed, Whereas,there is no absolute certainty that an original or alternate septic site could potentially harm the environment, given the imposed stringent City standards,education and monitoring program to insure long term use and environmental protection, Whereas,there is no absolute certainty that even if the septic system did fail and could potentially harm the environment,that hookup to the Lake Ann Interceptor would be necessary or the most publicly beneficial way to solve the problem,given the liklihood there will be alternative methods more environmentally and financially viable ready to correct problems in the future, Whereas,it was understood from previous public meetings that in the event assessments might be levied, that wouldn't occur at least until the year 2000,according to the original 1 alcP knn Interceptor agreement discussions, Whereas,the Lake Ann Interceptor levy amount seems incorrect,given the fact the registered survey for this parcel shows buildable acres and the levy amount was previously mentioned in various public meetings at about$460 per acre of buildable land( x$460=$ ), - Whereas,there is evidence of vehement public objection to this project by existing residents who feel • they would not receive benefit from this project through the year 2000,or feel they would be forced to sell their homes due to a premature and unnecessary assessment burden, j Therefore, (I,we) object to the assumption that we would receive benefit from this project and object to the proposed Lake Ann Interceptor Project A ssessment. s', : eIy, WE 44E No p 5 / .. 1 p It.opE4"T le ucsunL -rm. ;% V iI/�� ,_�r . �GtOt ARC 6eaE. �D�abEi L . _ ,property owner(s) , 1 _ C t LB IS '7 ' 1 4US WE PLAO tb (Ave ow butt • pMR--EL- 64.146 Dtviow tT Fog. (aT 15 /its, 5CE BP�GK 1 - I 1 1 0� 5ep�. , �4I4o wE StialaTED 16 00 110 A ks v to aN bvti t7t1 S'Tr,4 1 . r A^ {46 vs s, , -f t!' t 4+�► (� 14O E vs 1 1N$TA-G- A NEW S9pTt c sgte,v 1 Co= w os �f N t A Ll1w f.0 `{� tire e 1 7T4G 1 sy ! t J AT r9 Gorr o 326 1 VS 4 Sewell- S '(tcNA G& of 1 7 c , O uR -tvt`PA. k)el-ittit LOST tAms ge 2 4 F9.1 8 1 1 efiv svIt% tPi 1 1 W DOA f t wT G 1 whip a t,A, p(244)e P-f w lbtt. ?END 1 .� Date k. 9 . 61 1 I To: RECEIVED City Clerk,City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Dr. A PO Box 147 AUG 12 1991 Chanhassen,MN 55317 CITY ur CNr11�iN All' I 1 l Property Owner: ii;/4-1J 3 Z.Dudezi -4 A EL/AJ f- /�t)k ,ej Address hot.S 57--- e e - eKCft.Sloe_ /',v 553 1 I Parcel No: k ZS. 4070 t 5D Subject: Objection to Lake Ann Interceptor A ssessment I • Whereas,it is the City's policy in the Comprehensive Plan to ensure that lots developed recently with • newer septic systems "would not be unduly burdenedby new local utility lines and related assessments", Whereas,the availability and right to use an alternate drainfield site was also imposed by the City in case the original drainfield site failed, Whereas,there is no absolute certainty that an original or alternate septic site could potentially harm I the environment, given the imposed stringent City standards,education and monitoring program to insure long term use and environmental protection, Whereas,there is no absolute certainty that even if the septic system did fail and could potentially I harm the environment,that hookup to the Lake Ann Interceptor would be necessary or the most publicly beneficial way to solve the problem,given the liklihood there will be alternative methods more environmentally and financially viable ready to correct problems in the future, I Whereas,it was understood from previous public meetings that in the event assessments might be levied, that wouldn't occur at least until the year 2000,according to the original Lake Ann Interceptor ' agreement discussions, 2 Whereas,the Lake A nn Interceptor levy amount seems incorrect,given the fact the registered survey for this parcel shows buildable acres and the levy amount was previously mentioned in various public meetings at about$460 per acre of buildable land(gdg±x$460=$ , Whereas,there is evidence of vehement public objection to this project by existing residents who feel they would not receive benefit from this project through the year 2000,or feel they would be forced I to sell their homes due to a premature and unnecessary assessment burden, Therefore, (I,we) tvr4._object to the assumption that we would receive benefit from this project and I object to the proposed Lake Ann Interceptor Project A ssessment. CITY OF CliANHASwr Sincer- y, I / .:+ --.4 RAW.OMP, AU G 1 ti 1991 ..4 `t i ,c_, ,property owner(s) ' p ENGINEERING OFPT I • 1 RECEWED 1 AUG 1 2 1991 August 12, 1991.., Mr. Don Ashworth ' Chanhassen City Hall RE: Special Assessment Notice - Lake Ann Interceptor Project " = ' Parcel No: 25-5590020 Dear Mr. Ashworth, ' r, The purpose of this letter is: ` NSIN = =_T•2 1. To file a written objection 2. To otain a clear understanding of this assessment and future ' assessments. 3. To communicate how insensitive and uninformative the Special Assessment Notice is and how it needs to be changed. Written Objection We received a Special Assessment Notice/bill for $12,712.07. There was no written explanation and/or description - only how much and when to ' pay it. We are objecting to not knowing what we am paying for - how it will benefit us and the community? Clear Understanding of this Assessment and Future Assessments These are the questions we need answered: II. How did you arrive at $ 12,712.07 for our property? 2. Did you assess every property owner using the same formula? 3. How many property owners are being assessed? 4. How does the Lake Ann Interceptor Project benefit us in the short term - next 3 years? In 5 years? In 10 years? ' 5. If the Lake Ann Interceptor does not benefit us in the next 3 years than why do we have to pay for it? 6. Can we hook up to the Lake Ann Interceptor now? Does our assessment pay for the hook up? If either answer is "no", please give a full explanation? • ' 7. Are there any other "associated" costs with the Lake Ann Interceptor? Any possible scenarios that may happen? 8. What other special assessments do you see occurring in this area in the ' next 3 years? In 5 years? In 10 years? 9. Is this the total assessment for the "proposed" extension of the MUSA line that will affect our property? page 2 I 1-0. How is Chanhassen serving the needs of its long-time g g time citizens (not Senior citizens) that cannot afford special assessments and want to stay living on their property? Please be specific about the programs and how they work. Insensitive & Uninformative Special Assessment Notice You may have followed the "letter of the law," but it wasn't enough. No one deserves to receive a bill for $12,712.07 and have approximately 30 days to pay it, with no explanation. And what about the property owners that are on vacation or those that travel for business. We would suggest to you that a more timely letter would help residents develop a budget that would help them either save to pay the special assessment in full or in semi-annual property tax payments. People need some planning time. For example, we may not have made that major ' purchase a month ago, if we had known about the timing and severity of this assessment. We feel we are not alone in asking basic questions that should have been anticipated in your Special Assessment Notice. We'd like to help you in any ' way that we can in positively informing other property owners. Though we will be in attendance in tonight's meeting, we would like 1 written response to this letter so that we may make an intelligent decision about an appeal (within 30 days). Please contact us at 474-3861 ' if you have any questions. Sincerely, ' a .� CC: City Coundil Members 1 1 r To: II City Coulter Clerk,City of Chanhassen RECEIVED 690 1?r PO Box 147 AUG 12 1991 Chanhassen,MN 55317 I CITY OF CHANHASSEN Property Owner: ,e < /2 s �OUGL,9o4 L �E,vr� IAddress 7aYO /4/-/i1 Al ,_L 1/1) Parcel No: O..,- (911)/C/tt ISubject: Objection to Lake Ann Interceptor A ssessment Whereas,it is the City's policy in the Comprehensive Plan to ensure that lots developed recently with I newer septic systems "would not be unduly burdenedby new local utility lines and related assessments", 1 Whereas,the availability and right to use an alternate drainfield site was also imposed by the City in case the original drainfield site failed, I Whereas,there is no absolute certainty that an original or alternate septic site could potentially harm the environment, given the imposed stringent City standards,education and monitoring program to insure long term use and environmental protection, Whereas,there is no absolute certainty that even if the septic system did fail and could potentially harm the environment,that hookup to the Lake Ann Interceptor would be necessary or the most publicly beneficial way to solve the problem,given the liklihood there will be alternative methods Imore environmentally and financially viable ready to correct problems in the future, , Whereas,it was understood from previous public meetings that in the event assessments might be levied, that wouldn't occur at least until the year 2000,according to the original Lake Ann Interceptor 1 agreement discussions, Whereas,the Lake Ann Interceptor levy amount seems incorrect,given the fact the registered survey I for this parcel shows .1 d? buildable acres and the levy amount was previously mentioned in various public meetings at about$460 per acre of buildable land e/.3? x$460=$ 02O111,I ), I Whereas,there is evidence of vehement public objection to this project by existing residents who feel they would not receive benefit from this project through the year 2000,or feel they would be forced to sell their homes due to a premature and unnecessary assessment burden, •L, I Therefore, (I,we) t,JE object to the assumption that we would receive benefit from this project and object to the proposed Lake Ann Interceptor Project A ssessment. ISincerely, . ! ( / • '4 CITY OF C I?WSE 1 — —l%% _/.f J 1 ,property owner(s) 2 9 1 AUG 12 1991 I V ENGINEERING DEPT. I ,_ _, • .,--- - -.'Livvuluc-c4 662An 6-6ALj'd'AA1z-'4 6e4H I _ray OF CUMULI' RECEWTV /I i_ trania '' -AuG "T i"1 I AUG 1_2_1991 cli Y °F enr--.. EN RGINERING-DEPT .. I • I --g . 2 I / 2 c, 0 "7s-' I .t4z- -e:-je,- b W/I --04e I ....„ ../..,..„,_.e.,„ , z.„....„ J., I ,Zi _,.,. -%.) _ _-z-r-7:!--c.,c..$3-. -e...,- _ _4 c e, /_L I _,.__:0, .„-z:7e, ...)74...._,..._e_____..1-4-,72-4-. o tL)_,r-lef ------r-- t _ ,e2-4,A-ek__ --4-.,---4-.. • _ I -t-e-r- 0_,...ee---- .---/-----' ) ---- --) I ____Cet Ic-e,rue-t,L--t_ ___& (-52c,..yeeie4 V _ Za‘deeeet. eh . . I il /474/Y-0-- (Id .:2-/eni 3 • 1 1 ILAKE ANN INTERCEPTOR ASSESSMENT ROLL ( September 9 , 1991 ) I EXISTING DWELLING ASSESSED AT ASSESSED P. I .D . OWNER $850 . 00/UNIT AIv1OUNT 1 25-0024000 Almond & $ 850 . 00 1 Carolyn Krueger Y 1600 Lake Lucy Road IExcelsior , MN. 55331 25-6850050 Dale Hiebert 1 d $ 850. 00 I 6510 Yosemite Avenue Excelsior , MN. 55331 K. •1 25-0021600 Richard & B. Ortenblad 0A1 $ 850 . 00 1351 Lake Lucy Road Excelsior , MN . 55331 1 25-0025800 Theodore Coey 1 $ 850 . 00 1381 Lake Lucy Road Excelsior , MN. 55331 I25-0025820 Joseph & Gayle Marin 1 $ 850 . 00 1441 Lake Lucy Road Excelsior , MN. 55331 II25-0025810 Brian & Nancy Tichy 1 $ 850. 00 1471 Lake Lucy Road 1 Excelsior , MN. 55331 25-0025700 Robert & E. Christensen 1 - $ 850 . 00 I 1511 Lake Lucy Road Excelsior , MN . 55331 25-0025600 Warren & A. Phillips 1 $ 850. 00 I 1571 Lake Lucy Road Excelsior , MN. 55331 I 25-0025500 Minnesota Wildlife Heritage Foundation 0 $ 0 . 00 c/o Hugh Price 5701 Normandale Road ISuite 308 Minneapolis , MN . 55424 I 25-0030100 Mark & Kathryn Sanda 0 $ 0 . 00 1685 Stellar Court Excelsior , MN. 55331 I 11 . I2 I 9/9/91 EXISTING DWELLING ASSESSED AT ASSESSED P. I .D. OWNER $850 . 00/UNIT AMOUNT I25-0033600 Almond & Carolyn Krueger 0 $ 0 . 00 1600 Lake Lucy Road IExcelsior , MN . 55331 25-0033700 Myrna M. Johnson 1 $ 850 . 00 I 1630 Lake Lucy Road Excelsior , MN . 55331 25-0033800 Melvin & J . Babatz 1 $ 850 . 00 I 1650 Lake Lucy Road Excelsior , MN . 55331 I 25-0033200 James & Cecelia Palmer 1 $ 850 . 00 1670 Lake Lucy Road Excelsior , MN . 55331 1 25-0033300 City of Chanhassen 0 $ 0 . 00 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN. 55317 I25-4070010 Breck & Marliese Johnson 1 $ 850 . 00 6621 Galpin Boulevard IExcelsior , MN . 55331 25-4070020 Steve & Wendy Lamburesh 1 $ 850. 00 6651 Galpin Boulevard IExcelsior , MN. 55331 25-4070030 Christopher & Sandra Ramsey 1 $ 850 . 00 I 6681 Galpin Boulevard Excelsior , MN . 55331 25-4070040 Norwest Mortgage , Inc. 1 $ 850 . 00 II Attn : Mary Fernholz 1021 - 10th Avenue S .E. Minneapolis , MN . 55414 I25-4070050 John & Mariellen Waldron 1 $ 850 . 00 1900 Lake Lucy Road IExcelsior , MN. 55331 25-4070060 John & Melanie Gorczyca 1 $ 850 . 00 1850 Lake Lucy Road IExcelsior , MN . 55331 25-4070070 Alan & Kathleen Peterson 0 $ 0 . 00 I 700 West Village Road , Apt . 106 Chanhassen , MN . 55317 I I3 I 9/9/91 EXISTING DWELLING ASSESSED AT ASSESSED P. I .D. OWNER $850 . 00/UNIT AMOUNT I25-4070080 Merle & Diane Steinkraus 1 $ 850 . 00 c/o Pillsbury Company I 1800 Lake Lucy Road Excelsior , MN . 55331 25-4070090 Jerry R. & Cynthia M. Gill 1 $ 850 . 00 I 1760 Lake Lucy Road Excelsior , MN . 55331 I 25-4070100 Patrick Johnson & Mary Cordell 1 $ 850 . 00 1730 Lake Lucy Lane IExcelsior , MN. 55331 25-4070110 Paul McAllister 0 $ 0 . 00 7510 Erie Avenue IChanhassen , MN. 55317 25-4070120 Mark & Chanda Riddersen 1 $ 850 . 00 I 1811 Lake Lucy Lane Excelsior , MN . 55331 25-4070130 Scott & Kathy Gavin 1 $ 850 . 00 I 1851 Lake lucy Lane Excelsior , MN. 55331 I 25-4070140 Mark & Tracy Williams 1 $ 850. 00 1655 Lake Lucy Road Excelsior , MN . 55331 I25-4070150 Bruce & Rebecca Plowman 1 $ 85'0 . 00 1665 Stellar Court Excelsior , MN. 55331 I25-4070160 Clarence & Phyllis Haile 0 $ 0 . 00 1675 Stellar Court IExcelsior , MN. 55331 25-4070170 Mark & Kathryn Sanda 1 $ 850 . 00 I 1685 Stellar Court Excelsior , MN . 55331 25-4070180 Eric & Norma Riukin 1 $ 850 . 00 I 1695 Stellar Court Excelsior , MN . 55331 I II II 4 I9/9/91 EXISTING DWELLING ASSESSED AT ASSESSED P . I .D. OWNER $850 . 00/UNIT AMOUNT II 25-4070190 Allen & Barbara Finstad 1 $ 850. 00 1701 Stellar Court IExcelsior , MN . 55331 25-4070200 Judith Dirks 0 $ 0 . 00 I 1205 West Ash Olivia, MN . 56277 25-0032700 James & D. Mielke 1 $ 850 . 00 I 1645 Lake Lucy Road Excelsior , MN . 55331 I 25-0032800 The Greenery Company 1 $ 850 . 00 c/o Don Mezeenga 5816 Dickens Avenue IMinnetonka , MN . 55345 25-0035100 Reinhold & L. Guthmiller 1 $ g50. 00 1801 West 67th Street IExcelsior , MN . 55331 25-6930010 Martin & Beth Kuder 1 $ 850 . 00 I 6831 Galpin Lake Boulevard Excelsior , MN . 55331 25-6930020 Martin & Beth Kuder 0 $ 0 . 00 I 6831 Galpin Lake Boulevard Excelsior , MN . 55331 I 25-6930030 Earl C. Gilbert III 1 $ 850. 00 6901 Galpin Lake Boulevard Excelsior , MN . 55331 I25-6900030 Prince R. Nelson 0 $ 0 . 00 2121 Avenue of the Stars c/o BRJ&S #1700 ILos Angeles , CA. 90067 25-0034820 Jerome & Linda Carlson 0 $ 0 . 00 I 6975 Galpin Lake Road Excelsior , MN. 55331 25-0040300 Jerome & Linda Carlson 0 $ 0 . 00 I 6975 Galpin Lake Road Excelsior , MN . 55331 II II 1 5 II 9/9/91 EXISTING DWELLING ASSESSED AT ASSESSED P. I .D. OWNER $850 . 00/UNIT AMOUNT I 25-0034810 Edward & Mary Ryan 1 $ 850 . 00 6730 Galpin Boulevard Excelsior , MN . 55331 11 25-0034800 Brian Klingelhutz & D. Gestach 0 $ 0 . 00 I 8407 Great Plains Boulevard Chanhassen , MN. 55317 I 25-5590010 James & Linda Ring 1 $ 8,50 . 00 6640 Galpin Boulevard Excelsior , MN . 55331 I 25-5590020 Sam & Nancy Mancino 1 $ 850 . 00 6620 Galpin Boulevard Excelsior , MN. 55331 I 25-0041210 Westside Baptist Church 0 $ 0 . 00 1455 Park Road IChanhassen , MN . 55317 25-0040500 Dennis & Beverly Jacobson 1 $ 850 . 00 6841 Hazeltine Boulevard IExcelsior , MN. 55331 25-0091800 Donald & Betty Roy 1 $ 850 . 00 II 7205 Hazeltine Boulevard Excelsior , MN. 55331 I 25-0092100 David Weather & Karen Edelmann 1 $ 850. 00 7235 Hazeltine Boulevard Excelsior , MN. 55331 I25-0092200 David Weather & Karen Edelmann 0 $ 0 . 00 I 7235 Hazeltine Boulevard Excelsior , MN. 55331 25-0091500 Paul & Roseanne Youngquist 1 $ 850 . 00 I 7105 Hazeltine Boulevard Excelsior , MN. 55331 I 25-8860010 John & Frances Dassett 1 $ 850 . 00 c/o Val Wirtz 19380 Highway No . 7 IExcelsior , MN. 55331 II • I6 I 9/9/91 EXISTING DWELLING ASSESSED AT ASSESSED P. I .D. OWNER $850 . 00/UNIT AMOUNT I25-8860020 John & Frances Dassett 0 $ 0 . 00 c/o Val Wirtz I 19380 Highway No . 7 Excelsior , MN. 55331 25-8860030 John & Frances Dassett 0 $ 0 . 00 I c/o Val Wirtz 19380 Highway No . 7 Excelsior , MN . 55331 I25-0090700 Dean & Jacqueline Simpson 1 $ 850 . 00 7185 Hazeltine Boulevard Excelsior , MN . 55331 I25-6910010 Charles & Irene Song 0 $ 0 . 00 7200 Galpin Boulevard IExcelsior , MN . 55331 25-6910020 Charles & Irene Song 1 $ 850 . 00 I 7200 Galpin Boulevard Excelsior , MN . 55331 25-6900010 Prince R. Nelson 1 $ 850 . 00 I 2121 Avenue of the Stars c/o BRJ&S #1700 Los Angeles , CA. 90067 II25-6900020 Prince R. Nelson 0 $ 0. 00 2121 Avenue of the Stars I c/o BRJ&S #1700 Los Angeles , CA. 90067 25-0100200 Marvin & Judith Janicke 1 $ 850.00 I 7021 Galpin Boulevard Excelsior , MN . 55331 I 25-0100400 Partnership Investment , Inc . 0 $ 0 . 00 730 - 2nd Avenue South Suite 281 Minneapolis , MN . 55402 II25-0100100 Robert & Penelope Arneson 1 $ 850 . 00 6921 Galpin Boulevard IExcelsior , MN . 55331 25-0101540 David & Anga Stockdale 1 $ 850 . 00 I 292 Ryan Avenue St . Paul , MN . 55102 Ia , . I 7 I9/9/91 EXISTING DWELLING ASSESSED AT ASSESSED P. I .D . OWNER $850 . 00/UNIT AMOUNT I25-0101500 David & Anga Stockdale 0 $ 0 . 00 292 Ryan Avenue ISt . Paul , MN . 55102 25-0101530 Theodore & Marlene Bentz 0 $ 0 . 00 I 7300 Galpin Boulevard Excelsior , MN . 55331 25-0101520 Darlene Turcotte 0 $ 0 . 00 I4400 West Arm Road , Apt . 127 Spring Park, MN . 55384 I 25-0101510 Douglas & Theresa Bentz 1 $ 850 . 00 77 Thomas Lane Chaska, MN . 55318 I25-0101700 Theodore & Marlene Bentz 1 $ 850 . 00 7300 Galpin Boulevard Excelsior , MN . 55331 I25-0101300 John & Rengers Hennessy 0 $ 0 . 00 7305 Galpin Boulevard IExcelsior , MN . 55331 25-0101600 John & Rengers Hennessy 1 $ 850 . 00 7305 Galpin Boulevard IExcelsior., MN . 55331 25-0100500 Michael J . Gorra 0 $ 0. 00 I 1680 Arboretum Drive Chanhassen , MN . 55317 I 25-0100800 Michael J . Gorra 0 $ 0 . 00 1680 Arboretum Drive Chanhassen , MN. 55317 I 25-0100900 Michael J . Gorra 1 $ 850 . 00 1680 Arboretum Drive Chanhassen , MN . 55317 I25-0101000 Leander & P. Kerber 1 $ 850 . 00 1620 Arboretum Boulevard IChanhassen , MN . 55317 25-0101100 David & Juliann Luse 1 $ 850 . 00 14358 Golf View Drive IEden Prairie , MN . 55344 I ' , . 8 1 9/9/91 EXISTING DWELLING ASSESSED AT ASSESSED P. I .D. OWNER $850 . 00/UNIT AMOUNT I25-0101200 Michael Klingelhutz 0 $ 0 . 00 8601 Great Plains Boulevard ' Chanhassen , MN . 55317 25-0101210 Conway Lars 0 $ 0 . 00 4952 Emerson Avenue South ' Minneapolis , MN . 55409 25-0101220 Brett Davidson 1 $ 850 . 00 7291 Galpin Boulevard Excelsior , MN . 55331 ' 25-0100600 Michael J . Gorra 0 $ 0 . 00 1680 Arboretum Drive Chanhassen , MN . 55317 I 25-0100700 Michael J . Gorra 0 $ 0 . 00 1680 Arboretum Drive Chanhassen , MN . 55317 I25-0110200 City of Chanhassen 0 $ 0 . 00 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen , MN. 55317 I25-0110300 Raymond Notermann 1 $ 850 . 00 1450 Arboretum Boulevard Chanhassen , MN. 55317 25-0034830 Daniel & Linda Murphy 1 $ 850 . 00 ' 6651 Hazeltine Boulevard _ Excelsior , MN . 55331