The URL can be used to link to this page

4. Frontier Trail Assessment Roll 1 4 CITYOF 1 CHANHASSEN 0. , ... 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 1 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager IFROM: Charles Folch, City Engineer��/ v� IDATE: September 4, 1991 SUBJ: Adoption of Assessment Roll for the Frontier Trail Project No. 89-10 I The public hearing for the adoption of the assessment roll for 1 the Frontier Trail Improvement Project No. 89-10 was opened at the August 12 , 1991 City Council meeting. The project consultant engineer, Bill Engelhardt, provided a brief chronological I history of the project and outlined the key points of the preliminary assessment roll . Following much discussion, the public hearing was continued to the September 9, 1991 City Council meeting in an effort to allow staff and the project 1 consultant engineer to review minutes of the public hearing and respond to pertinent questions and concerns accordingly. I Bill Engelhardt is preparing a written response to the relevant questions and concerns raised at the public hearing which I will formally present. Bill had a prior commitment scheduled and will I not be able to attend Monday' s meeting. I would like to briefly touch upon a few of the common questions raised concerning the assessment and the project as a whole. 1 First, there were questions raised concerning the quality of driveways that were constructed. Two driveways in particular (Differding and Luehr ) were planned to be replaced due to project 1 design constraints . The project inspector notified the contractor last fall that the initial replacement was not acceptable and would need to be redone. As such, the contractor has recently replaced both driveways to acceptable standards . It I was also mentioned that other driveways had problems . On Wednesday, September 4, 1991, Bill Engelhardt and myself visually inspected each written or verbal driveway complaint received. We I found no other problems related to work performed within the project limits under City contract. I There were also some concerns raised by homeowners with lots on curves related to longer footages being assessed. Staff has Don Ashworth September 4, 1991 Page 2 I reviewed this situation and has such developed a revised ' methodology which hopefully will accommodate the situation . One method of assessment practice to assess a corner lot, with two sides abutting roadway improvements, is to assess the full length ' of the short side and one half of the long side . A somewhat analogous methodology can be made to make it applicable for large frontage lots on a curve. ' From reviewing the assessment schedule, it was found that the typical lot width on the project is about 110 feet wide. Therefore, it is proposed that the larger frontage lots on a ' curve ( in excess of 190 feet ) would be assessed for the 110 foot typical width plus one-half of the remaining total front footage. This appears to be an appropriate solution to the question of fairness of the larger frontage lots on a curve. On the subject of lot frontage, Mr. Don King ( 7200 Kiowa Circle) testified that he wanted to have the straight or tangent distance ' to the road considered for his assessment frontage distance. As you may be aware, Mr . King ' s adjacent frontage to Frontier Trail abuts the old right-of-way frontage for Frontier Trail as per the ' original plat . It was my understanding that Mr . King had called staff to request that his platted frontage be considered for the measurement and as such, even though slightly longer, this distance was used. He now requests that the frontage be changed ' to the tangent distance to the road which amounts to a total decrease in assessable frontage of approximately four feet. Staff has no problems with this since this was the distance to be used initially. Last and certainly not least, I will respond to the question of ' the proposed project cost split. The current policy for funding a storm sewer improvement project of this type is a fifty-fifty split between assessment to benefitting properties and funding by the City. The storm sewer improvements that were constructed as a part of the project were considered to be an area-wide improvement and as such a "unit"assessment methodology has been established. For the street construction portion of the work, a forty-sixty cost split has been proposed whereby 40% of the street costs are proposed to be assessed and 60% of the cost is to be funded by ' the City. The rationale for this methodology was a logical and prudent one . In general, the 40% assessable share for the street construction represents the costs of new improvements which were not previously in place such as concrete curb and gutter, street widening and some of the roadway base and subgrade materials . These new improvement elements are proposed to be assessed accordingly. I 1 Don Ashworth September 4, 1991 Page 3 I The question of equality between the assessment proposed for the recently ordered Minnewashta Parkway project and this Frontier Trail improvement project has been brought up. The primary reason for this assessment differential is that these two roads differ in classification and the type of service they provide to the City as a whole . Minnewashta Parkway is designated as an urban collector State-Aid roadway and as such, nearly 50% of the roadway improvement costs are to be covered by state funds . This outside funding source greatly reduces the project financial commitments to be shared by the City and assessed properties . Frontier Trail is not a State-Aid street and thus cannot employ this type of funding source. There was also some question as to how much of a financial impact would a reduction of the street assessment to a thirty-seventy split have on the project. This was reviewed and found to be an amount of approximately $6, 000 per year or $50, 000 total including principal and interest for the duration of the bonds. This cost would have to be absorbed by the City in addition to the currently proposed 60% amount . It should be noted that the 1990 bond issue which was approved by City Council last fall incorporated the financial obligations to this project as a part of that issue . A determination in the amount of bonding for this project needed to be made last fall . Mr. Dave MacGillivray of Springsted Group, Inc . and previous engineer, Gary Warren, developed a bonding format which incorporated the forty-sixty split for the street construction and fifty-fifty split for the storm drainage . Again, I would like to re-emphasize that the basis for this forty-sixty split is a very logical and prudent one. At the close of the hearing, if there are no outstanding issues or questions to be resolved, it would be appropriate for the Council to adopt the Frontier Trail Project No. 89-10 assessment roll (dated September 3, 1991 ) and that the assessment term be set for eight years at an 8% interest rate. jms/ktm 11 Attachments: 1. Revised Assessment Roll dated September 3, 1991. 2 . Assessment Objections . c: Dave Hempel, Sr. Engineering Technician , Bill Engelhardt, Engelhardt & Associates Allan Larson, Engelhardt & Associates 1 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA FRONTIER TRAIL UTILITY AND ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 89- 10 REVISED 9/3/91 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 7187 $2,395.21 $3 , 755. 42 187 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 7191 Frontier Trail $2,395. 21 $3 , 755.42 Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25-8270040 Jay & Rebecca Legler 100' $2, 360. 21 $2, 395. 21 $3, 755.42 7193 Frontier Trail Chanhassen , MN. 55317 25-8270050 William & Mary Ann Schepers 140 ' $1 , 360. 21 $3,353.29 $4 ,713. 50 7195 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25-8270060 Helen L. Loeb ! 78 . 84 ' $ 1 , 360. 21 $ 1 , 888. 38 $3 , 248. 59 7197 Frontier Trail Chanhassen , MN. 55317 25-8270070 Robert A. Uecker 31 . 94 ' $ 1 , 360. 21 $ 765 .03 $$2, 125. 24 7199 Frontier Trail Chanhassen , MN. 55317 25-8210010 Rolf G. Engstrom 167. 24 ' $ 1 , 360. 21 $4,005. 40 $5 , 365.61 7201 Frontier Trail Chanhassen , MN. 55317 I MI MOI MIN OM MI NM • • Mil I NM • • INN Mil • • • MO — NM MI = — OM ME — I/ MI MI I — NM MN MI MO MI 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 7207 $2,634. 73 $3 , 944. 94 207 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 7211 $2,634. 73 $3,994.94 211 Frontier Trail Chanhasen, MN. 55317 25-8210060 Donald D. & J. King 168. 50 ' $1 ,360. 21 $4 , 035. 58 $5 ,395. 79 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/UN1T $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 7210 Frontier Trail $2,634. 73 $3, 994 .94 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 7216 $2, 395. 21 $3 , 755. 42 216 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 • MN 1111111 MN NM Ell 11. NM INE MI NM MO INNI MN Mil NM 1.1 INN • NM I MI 111 MI III 111 II 0 I 1111 I 111 III 111 MO MI II UM 111 OM MOM NM IIIMM OM IIMM MOM MOO 1111 MOO 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 • 5 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 25-8220040 David J. Wollan & Susan K. Lippka 159. 35 ' $ 1 ,360. 21 $3,816.43 $5, 176. 64 7303 Frontier Trail Chanhassen , MN. 55317 25-8220050 Joel & Mary Jenkins 110' $1 ,360.21 $2,634. 73 $3,994.94 7305 Frontier Trail Chanhassen , MN. 55317 . 25-8230020 Robert & C. Scholer 151 . 23 ' $1 ,360.21 7212 Frontier Trail $3,621 . 96 $4 ,982. 17 Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25-8230030 Scott M. & Theresa Mercier Dever 97. 0 ' $ 1 ,360.21 $2, 323.35 $3, 683. 56 7220 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25-8200010 Edward C. Jordan 69. 5' $1 , 360. 21 $ 1 ,664. 53 $3,024. 74 7341 Frontier Trail Chanhassen , MN. 55317 25-8200020 Edward C. Jordan 135 ' $ 1 , 360. 21 $3,233. 53 $4 , 593. 74 7341 Frontier Trail Chanhassen , MN. 55317 25-8200030 Arlis A. Bovy 100 ' $ 1 , 360. 21 $2, 395. 21 $3 , 755. 42 7339 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 25-8200040 Richard & Jennifer Kedrowski 100 ' $ 1 , 360. 21 $2,395. 21 $3, 755. 42 7337 Frontier Trail Chanhassen , MN. 55317 25-8200050 Fred L. Cuneo, Jr . 100. 07 ' $ 1 ,360.21 $2,396. 88 $3 , 757. 09 7335 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN. 55317 M MI IIMM OM OM UM Mr MU OM MMO MO I OM MN 01111 ME 11.11 ME MO MO MO M OMM MO OM OM M 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 . 25-8200180 Wayne L. & K. Mader 146.61 ' $ 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 [+ *1 $4,095.29* Chanhassen, MN. 55317 * City added assessment $1 , 777 .00 for surge basin and sanitary sewer extension. IIIIIII MI • OM OM MN INIO IMIN il. I NM MON 1.0 MIN MI — ' INN M I ASSESSMENT OBJECTION LIST I FRONTIER TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 89-10 Parcel No. 25-8210210 Parcel No. 25-8200270 I Dr. Craig & Deborah Luehr Jim & Linda Mady 7226 Frontier Trail 7338 Frontier Trail IAssessment Amt. : $3,755.18 Assessment Amt. : $3,770.27 - Parcel No. 25-8210220 Parcel No. 25-8210060 Paul & Ellen Differding Donald King I 7228 Frontier Trail 7200 Kiowa Circle Assessment Amt. : $3,994.94 Assessment Amt. : $5,487.63 Parcel No. 25-8200180 Parcel No. 25-8200010 I Wayne & Kathy Mader Edward C. Jordan 400 Highland Drive 7341 Frontier Trail Assessment Amt. : $4,871.82 Assessment Amt. : $5,288.35 I ' Parcel No. 25-8220030 Parcel No. 25-8220050 Mrs. Leonor Zambrano Joel & Mary Jenkins I Adolfo Zambrano 7305 Frontier Trail 7301 Frontier Trail Assessment Amt. : $3,994.94 Assessment Amt. : $6,358.76 II Parcel No. 25-8210020 Parcel No. 25-8200060 Kathryn A. Pavelko Joel Wiens 7203 Frontier Trail 7333 Frontier Trail I Assessment Amt. : $4,473.98 Assessment Amt. : $3,755.42 Parcel No. 25-8200280 Parcel No. 25-8210180 I Thomas & Shirley Pzynski Gary Boyle 7430 Frontier Trail 7214 Frontier Trail Assessment Amt. : $6,812.18 Assessment Amt. : $3,994.94 I Parcel No. 25-8200250 Parcel No. 25-8220010 J. J. Waletski James Kraft 7334 Frontier Trail 7213 Frontier Trail Assessment Amt. : $3,994.94 Assessment Amt. : $3.994.94 Parcel No. 25-8200030 Parcel No. 25-8200240 Arlis Bovy Don Huseth I 7339 Frontier Trail 7332 Frontier Trail Assessment Amt. : $3,755.42 Assessment Amt. : $3,994.94 Parcel No. 25-8220040 Parcel No. 25-8210190 II David & Susan Wollan Harold Kerber - 7303 Frontier Trail 7216 Frontier Trail Assessment Amt. : $6,358.76 Assessment Amt. : $3,755.42 Parcel No. 25-8210110 Parcel No. 25-8210030 I Peter J. Huber Steven & Therese Berquist 7196 Frontier Trail 7207 Frontier Trail Assessment Amt. : $3,994.94 Assessment Amt. : $3,994.94 1 August 6, 1991 CITY OF CiiiinVT: IFRIPNIP i City Clerk AUG 0 6 1991 City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive P.O. Box 147 � GI! ` DEPT. Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 RECEIVED RE: Assessment of Improvement Number 89-10 AUG 0 6 1991 Dear City Clerk: CITY OF CHANHASSE�, We, Dr. Craig Luehr and Deborah Luehr, of 7226 Frontier Trail, Chanhassen, ' Minnesota 55317 (Parcel No. 25-8210210), are submitting this written notice to you regarding the improvement project #89-10. This is in ' response to the notice we received of the public hearing to consider the proposed assessments for the Frontier Trail Improvement Project for Street Reconstruction and Storm Sewer, in which the proposed assessment ' against our property is $3,755.18. We moved to 7226 Frontier Trail in May of 1990 after the initial meetings ' regarding the reconstruction project were held. After reconstruction was well underway, it became obvious that our drive would have to be redone in order to connect with the new roadway, properly. Merely, connecting the new apron to the existing driveway would have rendered the drive too steep to use. The city and the contractor agreed that our entire drive ' would need to be torn out, regraded, and resurfaced to produce an acceptable grade. We were told that this driveway would be as good as our old one and that we would have a two year guarantee starting the ' summer of 1991 after final approval of the project. ' The subcontractor, Mueller and Sons, put in a new driveway and within the first week it was obvious that our drive had severe problems. Before any vehicles drove over our drive, cracks had developed and there were ' soft areas that would give as you stepped on them. The subcontractor came back and poured a second coat on top of the first. This was all done by the end of August, 1990. During the winter we noticed a small problem ' where the concrete apron and the blacktop met. The blacktop had raised up and was chipping off. We avoided parking on it until this spring. In` May, 1991 after the blacktop should have cured quite adequately, we parked a car on our drive 1 and when we moved it, we had four dents in the drive. Our old driveway 1 • was parked on regularly without giving way. Subsequently, we parked our cars in several different places on the drive and had many dents occur. We also noticed an unevenness (hints of ruts) on the lower part of the drive which seemed to be caused from cars traveling up and down the drive. After contacting the city and the contractor's office, representatives of the contractor and subcontractor discussed the situation with us. Because the representatives were concerned about the quality of the surface material, they decided to take a sample of the driveway to determine its quality. A few weeks later a crew was at our door to oil the surface and put rock on it. We were not informed of this development in advance nor have we ever been told whether a sample was taken and what the results were if done. To date, the loose gravel has not been removed. Because the problem dents were torched out and the unevenness is now under tar and loose rock, we are concerned that our problems are being covered up. We feel that the problems with our drive go deeper than any surface treatment and fear that we still have subsurface and/or asphalt quality problems, in other words, a driveway much inferior in quality to the one it has replaced. Throughout this project, it seems we have had to deal with the contractors and have not had as much support from the City of Chanhassen as we needed. At this point in time, the future of our driveway is very much in question and we fear an unwarranted future expense on our part. There are several unanswered questions and we cannot agree to finalizing an assessment until they are answered to our satisfaction. Sincerely yours itOeittA4 tezzeii Dr Craig Luehr & Deborah Luehr 7226 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 t i I I �- August 6, 1991 'k¢"' CHANBA SSEP °,'E,r2riiim-p 91.61iiCity Clerk City of Chanhassen AUG 06 1991 690 Coulter Drive RECEIVED P.O. Box 147 ENGINEERING DEPT. ' Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 AUG 0 61991 RE: Assessment of Improvement Number 89-10 CITY Ur UnsNHASSEN Dear City Clerk: We, Paul Differding and Ellen Differding, 7228 Frontier Trail g g, Trail, Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 (Parcel No. 25-8210220), are submitting ' this written notice to you regarding the improvement project #89-10. This is in response to the notice we received of the public hearing to consider the proposed assessments for the Frontier Trail Improvement Project for Street Reconstruction and Storm Sewer, in which the proposed assessment against our property is $3,994.94. After reconstruction was well underway, it became obvious that our drive would have to be redone in order to connect with the new roadway, properly. Merely, connecting the new apron to the existing driveway would have rendered the drive too steep to use. The city and the ' contractor agreed that our entire drive would need to be torn out, regraded, and resurfaced to produce an acceptable grade. We were told that this driveway would be as good as our old one and that we would ' have a two year guarantee starting the summer of 1991 after final approval of the project. The subcontractor, Mueller and Sons, put in a new driveway and within the first week it was obvious that our drive had severe problems. Before ' any vehicles drove over our drive, uneven and soft areas developed. After a second coat of asphalt was poured on top of the first, the new elevation of the driveway was higher than the garage floor trapping water inside the ' garage. This was all done by the end of August, 1990. During the winter we noticed a small problem where the concrete apron and the blacktop met. The blacktop had raised up and was chipping off. ' In the spring of 1991 we observed several areas of settling,P g g, particularly where vehicles park for a period of time. Our old driveway was parked on regularly without giving way. Subsequently, we parked our cars in several different places on the drive and had many dents occur. We also noticed 1 I an unevenness (hints of ruts) on the lower part of the drive which seemed 1 to be caused from cars traveling up and down the drive. After contacting the city and the contractor's office, representatives of the 1 contractor and subcontractor discussed the situation with us. Because the representatives were concerned about the quality of the surface material, ' they decided to take a sample of the driveway to determine its quality. A few weeks later a crew was at our door to oil the surface and put rock on it. We were not informed of this development in advance nor have we ever been told whether a sample was taken and what the results were if done. To date, the loose gravel has not been removed. Because the problem dents were torched out and the .unevenness is now under tar and loose rock, we are concerned that our problems are being covered up. • We feel that the problems with our drive go deeper than any surface P g P Y treatment and fear that we still have subsurface and/or asphalt quality problems, in other words, a driveway much inferior in quality to the one it has replaced. Throughout this project, it seems we have had to deal with the contractors and have not had as much support from the City of Chanhassen as we needed. At this point in time, the future of our driveway is very much in question and we fear an unwarranted future expense on our part. There are several unanswered questions and we cannot agree to finalizing an assessment until they are answered to our satisfaction. Please find enclosed a copy of the original contract of 1983 for the installation of our prior driveway. Sincerely yours, P _ - 1 o aul Differding�llen Dii�ferdin g ' 7228 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 I j r I I • — ` Pro )age No. of Pages /. Proposal 1 BOX 175 Pa ,♦ �� YOUNG AMERICA, MINN. 55397 ! ♦ C (612) 467-3306 (METRO) 332-9096 • PROP SAL SUBMITTE O PHONE DATE III (AL RIFF D1u G _ 9 4 -7 28 .5/ �4 83 ST EET ` ,('�'� • �OB NAME f CITV,STA E ZIP CODE • (yll C ,C r t , 'D1 zeI2 01 N G feeS JOB LO ATION , 5531-4 _i - -' S _ - • ., l/I ARCHITECT DATE OF PLANS - • JOB PHONE '' We her eby Submit specifications and estim ates for: - W Va-o pcss . To ` c it rG ... --- � moo. ' .......__..t xc,p U TE.. ... 4 I i G 2.AA) u L A a. "Tr -1 Y ...lr . . _ C. „) 1..T.i-1. ..4.'`. Rep 'RacK Cc.ass C coM Ac ” �:-_ . 2 .o00 1 b5 .p<.2 SR. * i WG. T± GN.....propos To .._Ac1 :__ '3'.';...0 s 14 A el' IIp o Co r�c.2�T+�. C. p,�41, .1�l.1o.7c�T' s ----...-� -�-C.'c>mt rz - _......' o .-..off -r DR 1 vE w_ .A reeA (.A: ... . E.......6° XI 6, A5•ONDES/4.0 I Nc� _.. �..__..._.............. Coop.. .... .LE$ `7 5.; 15.. I { 5p- 17otvNZo 8 ... ... NOTICE OF LIEN: Persons or companies furnishing labor or materials for the improvement of real property may enforce a lien upon the Iimproved land if they are not paid for their contributions,even if such parties have no contractual relationship with the owner. Minnesota law permits the owner to withhold from his contractors so much of the contract price as may be necessary to meet the demands of all other lien claimants, pay directly such liens and deduct the cost thereof and the contract price, or withhold amounts from his contractor until the expiration of ninety[90] days from the completion of such improvements unless the contractor furnishes to the owner waivers of claims for mechanics lien signed by persons -who furnished any labor or material for the improvement and who provided the owner with timely notice. The owner hereby•wiives all"further requirements of notice under Minnesota Statute 514.011. I e /^� T We Propose hereby hherrebbyytto furnish material and labor—rccomplete in accordance with above cifiica/tiions,for the sum of: t I Ki e t 1- S H 1\) 1✓�4 1 U JE GO * ce Gia lays(S 1 . 4.8°° Payment to be made as follows: e 1 1. I J 5% Dow n) 6J2"° ) 1?__,(/iA1 J' G-(Z... V oN CCY a ..C77d 1� )3 I oc pa-07-1 . -i _ All material is guaranteed to be as specified.All work to be completed in a workman- like manner according to standard practices.Any alteration or deviation from above Authorized Alibi i specifications involving extra costs will be executed only upon written orders,and Signature -. - - _ will become an extra charge over and above the estimate.All agreements contingent �� upon strikes, accidents or delays beyond our control.Owner to carry fire,tornado Note:This proposal may be pensation Insurance.insurance.Our workers are fully covered by Workmen's Corn- withdrawn by us if not accepted within efay� • ( Accetance of Proposal-The above prices,specifications and conditions are satisfactory and are hereby accepted.You are authorized Signature to do the work as specified.Payment will be-made as outlined above. ,/`�, ` Date of Acceptance %I 'j X 3 Signature • VVV j IPROPOSAL AND ACCEPTANCE • I August 7, 1991 1 RECEWEI) Mr. Don Ashworth AUG 12 1 City Clerk/Manager 991 City of Chanhassen CITY Ur �NhNhAS$�R , Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Mr. Ashworth: ' This letter is in response to the Special Assessment Notice concerning the Improvement No. 89-10, in what pertains to Parcel No. 25-8220030 at 7301 Frontier Trail. We believe the City Council's policy for calculating the assessment is in dire need of revision to bring it to fairness. ' Our property was assessed $6,358.76. This same amount of money invested somewhere else in our house would have increased more substantially the value of the property. Other properties of equal value but with less front footage will be paying less while benefiting equally or substantially more from the improvement. Since service is the primary objective of these type of projects, the assessment should perhaps be ,calculated in proportion to the number of households, with some of the cost to be absorbed by the city's community service funds. We fail to see the benefit of paying this high assessment level when similar improvements in other cities are assessed at a significantly lower level. The sad part, though, is that after this improvement we still do not have satisfactory drainage in our property. I We hope the City Council finds a more equitable formula to redistribute the cost of this community improvement. 1 Sincerely, Mrs. onor Z r- • CITY OF CliANHASSEN , • 0, worig,4/ o • ra AUG 12 1991 ENGINEERING DEPT. 1 II 11 • Thomas & Shirley Pzynski 7430 Frontier Trail 1 Chanhassen, MN 55317 August 8, 1991 ' City Clerk I City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Subject: Improvement Project No: 89-10 Proposed assessment for parcel # 25-8200280 We have received the special assessment notice and we are ' submitting our written objections to the proposed assessment amounting to $6, 812. 18 on parcel * 25-8200280. Our first objection deals with the method used to calculate the assessment. Although it did not state in the assessment notice, we understand that each property owner was assessed based on the amount of linear footage adjacent to the improved roadway. Any assessment should be based on a unit basis, not linear footage. ' No property owner benefits any more nor any less based on linear footage adjacent to the roadway. We have spoken to several professional real estate appraisers and ' real estate sales persons who share the same opinion. Street improvements do not affect any property based on linear footage adjacent to the roadway but rather affect the perceived value of the subject property together with the neighborhood as a whole. T. S. Forsythe, Forsythe Appraisals, Inc. , states, "Market analysis suggests there is very little correlation between assessments based on a linear front foot basis in the additional "contributory" value of the street improvements. " Therefore, any assessment for street improvements should be calculated on a per unit basis. Our second objection is the amount of the assessment itself. The assessment on our property, $6812. 18, amounts to 6. 26% of the assessed market value of $108, 700. 00 set by the county for 1991. It is not possible nor realistic to expect such an increase in the value of our property based on street improvements. At most, an increase of 1 to 2% could be expected. ' Again, the number of real estate appraisers and sales persons we have spoken to agree. One stated, "Buyers would typically pay only 1% to 2% more for a property with street improvements. " t1 I I I e 11 11 Our third objection is to the term of payment, 8 years, and the rate of interest, 87. of the unpaid balance. The term for payment should be longer, 10 to 15 years. The rate of interest is much too high. If the proposed term and interest rate is used our monthly expenses would increase by $96. 30. Given the present state of the economy and the struggle in starting a new business we just cannot afford such an increase. If the term and interest rate were changed to 10 years at 6. 5% the monthly increase in expenses would be $77. 35. A further increase to a 15 year term would mean a monthly expense increase of $59. 34, something we could tolerate. Our fourth objection covers the use of the roadway and who it benefits. Each property owner benefits from the use of the roadway as a matter of utility. Other citizens of Chanhassen also benefit from the use of the new roadway because Frontier Trail is one of the major streets through Chanhassen. Frontier Trail is very busy each day with commuters from the north and west using it as a preferred route to Hwy. 101 and points east. If this is the case, what is the split between the city as a whole and the property owner? Our fifth objection is the lack of information submitted by the city regarding this project. What portion of the proposed assessment is for the roadway and what portion, if any, is for the storm sewer? What was the total cost of the project? What was the total cost for each segment of the total project, roadway, curbs, water main, sanitary sewer, storm sewer? If any portion of the assessment is for the storm sewer? , Are we not already assessed on our sewer and water bill? Or is the fee only for the sanitary sewers? We will not be able to attend the special meeting on August 12, ' 1991 and would like our written objections be made part of the official record. We will appeal to the district court if the proposed assessments are passed as is. Sin relr urs/ ,241eve,. Thomas zfyns i Shirley Pzynski I/ :f 1 1 I/ � I--- ' ~ f� / / __-____ ' -' `tc�z� �� °,�� ___________________ __________ /7 ' ' 111— �/____-- _ — _ —___ �� °f0 ' ^ U� � � i / -- __----_--_-_--____'-�w�� _' / I ' el -l)16 -}3_^ á_ -_ t� --- __--_-_--~ _ -`_'�--__. '—.- Iff.__../ /i. _ _ - -' - '___--_ ��-��-__. ~� .2 / y ' 5c/e_ ' ' . I ' , , ---_---__- -' _ --°~.~ ~-__~~~. ~-._^~�~~ ~� ~^�°� -� I- - a_="=~ ~z~ � ~ <°~�A._=.3. ' _-_- de-ca-)-1>_'-.1~`~~~- Z-~A° _-=°=`^�== _-de7=`====-_� '- ~--_ ^_~-^ -____' ( 1'_-_--__. ,,e ._''-~- ~__'~_- ^�-~ ~.~-=~, 147442?(—_ _7, 14- -_--___- - - ,- ��_-___-'____'_-�-___- 11------- -' ~~ - ..----_-- .`' u��N�' _- V,'" -v/ ' ----'--- I / l?d'f_7...3 ,7t - V— -' -' 5 --8 \ O{D __'___-__-__ __ Lc17.. -, 13l ,S,,=( _5_3.5cuarLeAtlik and I_._. '____------__-___--_-__-_-___-_ � 0�------------- - '-----------------� ----' �� ' __---_-_-___--_-_- __-- . ----��U�0��' " xx�K��U�Q�U� -------- -- ------- -----'--- ----- -- -AUG-0-9�� " � .��, 1-.----.- - - - - - '-------'-- ---CITY OFCHAK> ----- eoitt ' ,¢vii 40, 0.80_4) &ii/ i �-la -Q/ I, 7301 F,eo1Trt2 T;�� • . ��«'" , �"` . X11 CITY OF C SSEN. MINNESOTA i ,SPECIAL ASSESSMENT NOTICE CORRECTION I FRONTIER TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 89-10 Please be advised as to a correction to the Special Assessment I Notice which you have recently received for the above-referenced project. The correction relates to the issue of partial prepayment I of the assessment. Partial prepayment of the assessment is permitted during the 30-day period after the assessment has been levied and before it has been certified to the County. Therefore, I the last sentence of the third paragraph on page 1 of your special assessment notice should read as follows: "Partial prepayment of the assessment is permitted during I the 30 days after the assessment hearing date." Please be advised of this correction. I 4/0 LO2 Don Ashworth City Clerk/Manager -/c - �,, /., Q .e.ej SrGcc J %/ / t / . J tex / '-I ed-e,t, (74--‘..4 a4.424.44.4e 44.0.~...-7 se- 0.44.077e7 1 ,s/43(44-1-, __,.4.r. . A... "-or_re4 .4145.11-e-- . 7 afil":"`A/Alte ‘144 --etsf. e.st- (P.u•vAsZt- Xel I /A yee..e4 "..44.,621 dis4-411141 V.744.44.4eZ eel y4 • % ✓1 4 a-vJ ,,Gofe 10-"i 7� 2 Gam' - �/ / e.e.4.-,, reeted-e ii ei .,,./04/0"/ ,et.pot.$444 4 e,..;:4-o � 'a o-1-c_ �j�t 4 -r -may fr . 400 .e.3 o i.0&-144:4 4,, ikei Ave,44 Y14. ei 44`4(-e--€.4.41/4:"1 (....._74.j_r_51.:c. ici4,,,,,.iiiie-el)cfzei-44,_ 41f-e4,11 1 - RECEIVE() AUG 12 1991 CITY OF CHANHP:SEN, 1 City of Chanhassen August 11, 1991 690 Coulter Drive ' Chanhassen, MH 55317 Attn: Don Ashworth, City Clerk/Manager ' Ref: Improvement project Ho. 89-10 Parcel # 25-8200180 ' We are writing with objection to the assessment of our property for the reference project. Having attended public hearings prior to this assessment we have not been informed about the percentage shared by the city as promised. We first ask what was this ' percentage that determines the homeowners share? By not being open with the homeowners regarding a breakdown of cost of each segment of the project and the city's share, we feel that the ' City is trying to put something past us. These items will become public knowledge anyway, why not be up front with them? Also, regarding the City's share, Frontier Trail has become a benefit ' to many homeowners west of Sunrise Hills since it was opened up. Put yourself in our shoes. Suppose you own a piece of property along a street that used to end a few blocks down the road. Then the City opens it up to several hundred new homes. Now you get more traffic, cars traveling faster, and a big assessment. Doesn't seem fair, does it? Secondly, we object to the City Council's policy of ' assessment by property frontage. This is a very unfair method of assessment because each homeowner along the roadway benefits equally from its improvement. This method would be fair if like ' in the inner city property lots are equal in size (lineal frontage). We believe this was where this method of assessment began. In typical suburban areas where developers lay out streets with curves and cul-de-sacs, the lots have irregular ' shapes. Many end up with a pie shape. Some of the lots have the center of the pie at the roadway, some have the circumference of the pie at the roadway. The latter are unfairly assessed if the frontage method is used. In such a situation if the lots are of the same square footage and the homes of the same value, how can it be considered fair if the lot with the center of the pie for frontage is assessed considerably less that the other? They both ' have equal benefit of the improved roadway. The Frontier Trail project consists of several of these situations. We therefore contend that this assessment should be on a unit basis rather ' than a lineal footage basis. CITY OF fiN ASSE ' 7 r-.-+r r r LLOISI 1E1 AUG 1 2 1991 ENG DEPT. 1 Lastly, we object to the rigid policy regarding payment of the assessment. Why can't we make a partial payment after the 30 days in order to bring the monthly financed amount down? We also feel that 8% is a little high, particularly since prime is down and expected to go down further. In conclusion, we object to our *4871. 82 assessment. We expected our assessment to be about *3000. This comes to us at a time in our life that is quite difficult financially. I started my own business a year ago in a very unfavorable economy. The county assessor informed us that our real estate taxes will double next year. In December we will be in our home for 17 years. Due to these tax increases it may regrettably be our last year in Chanhassen. Sincerely, , /dal . ,4/-7/r(1-e0-,W-4-de-‘1 Wayne Mader Kathy Mader 1 1 1 1 August 12, 1991 Attn: Don Ashworth and/or City Council ' City of Chanhassen PO Box 69 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 ' Dear Don: 1 In receipt of the announcement of public hearing concerning Frontier Trail street, sanitary and storm sewer improvements, please accept this letter as our formal complaint as to the amount ' of the assessment allocated to those properties involved in the assessment. We believe your communication was unclear as to the percentage ratios per the home owner and city allocation. Gary Warren, City Engineer, and other staff members informed us at the last formal meeting that no decision had been made as to the percentage ratios and that further hearings would need to be held after the project was completed to determine those ratios. Your communication is also unclear as to the total cost of the project and we believe that there is still to be a skim coat applied before fall of '91 to ' minimize the effect of the soft asphalt which makes up the base and the current finish coat currently surfacing the road. ' Therefore, we would suggest that all properties adjacent to the improved roadway be assessed equally. In addition, we feel home owners who only have access from their property to other parts of the City via the improved roadway should be assessed an equal proportion, specifically counsel member Dimler and others living on Kiowa Circle [similarly to what I understand is the City's position on the Minnewashta Parkway project] . ' We have concerns about the fact that Frontier Trail is the first street to be redone in the City and that policy was to have been ' made to set precedent on all future rebuilding of City streets. It appears to us that no policy has yet been set, however, the Minnewashta Parkway project similar in nature is setting home owner ' assessments at a cost significantly lower than those proposed for the Frontier Trail project. We would encourage the City Council and Staff to establish a street rebuilding tax fund so that assessments are equally established throughout the City on all tax I • rI I Mr. Don Ashworth II August 12, 1991 Page Two I payers and that Frontier Trail be included in that special tax I funding. In reading your correspondence, it appears there is a penalty for prepayment of the amount due. We would appreciate clarification as II to the law concerning prepayment of assessments at any time during the repayment spread out period. We also would appreciate clarification as to if the interest paid on the spread out option II is income tax deductible or considered a personal interest item. Furthermore, we would want to know if bonds are being let to fund this project if there is a call or put option prior to the maturity II such that the interest rate may be lowered. And, if those cost savings will be passed through to the home owner. Thank you for your cooperation and response. II Best r garde, .et le--d--67-74-/q%14-"e At (Ife-:47/ II The undersigned Frontier Trail home owners involved in this II assessment district submit this as their contestment of assessment. Z ,<e-z-- ) 333 fry. /e7 /re -� 1 1�: Via., 7�3 �i� ,T bde 304mow, '— �, 1 4.,..:(0,,::4)Y,a.4._ hjejeit„.,b cc- 4.42tr 4 614t91611 ( /9L2 1 __. NcinglA 1-, ,, ,t_\ (-), _w 1 6).,a.v...,...... ,e 7.g ifs , , ., 1 40, H 4,2,4 7.33A_ r ` lc VfLAt-e,-- 7-4 -64-w -7,P., /6 I I 2-9- /� I I August 12, 1991 Attn: Don Ashworth and/or City Council City of Chanhassen ' PO Box 69 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 ' Dear Don: In receipt of the announcement of public hearing concerning Frontier Trail street, sanitary and storm sewer improvements, please accept this letter as my formal complaint as to the amount of the assessment allocated to my property and those properties ' involved in the assessment. I believe your communication was unclear as to the percentage 1 ratios per the home owner and city allocation. My memory indicates Gary Warren, City Engineer, and other staff members informed us at the last formal meeting that no decision had been made as to the ' percentage ratios and that further hearings would need to be held after the project was completed to determine those ratios. Your communication is also unclear as to the total cost of the project and I believe that there is still to be a skim coat applied before ' fall of '91 to minimize the effect of the soft asphalt which makes up the base and the current finish coat currently surfacing the road. I also believe that the front footage allocation is not fair to all property owners. Even though this would mean an increase in my assessment, I do not feel that the shape of a person's lot or if ' they are located on a cul de sac minimizes or maximizes their usage of the road or improves the value of their property disproportionately. Therefore, I would suggest that all properties adjacent to the improved roadway be assessed equally. In addition, I feel home owners who only have access from their property to other parts of the City via the improved roadway should be assessed an equal proportion, specifically counsel member Dimler and others 1 t P AUG. 2 1991 1 Mr. Don Ashworth II August 12, 1991 Page Two II living on Kiowa Circle [similarly to what I understand is the City's position on the Minnewashta Parkway project] . I I have concerns about the fact that Frontier Trail is the first street to be redone in the City and that policy was to have been II made to set precedent on all future rebuilding of City streets. It appears to me that no policy has yet been set, however, the Minnewashta Parkway project similar in nature is setting home owner II assessments at a cost significantly lower than those proposed for the Frontier Trail project. I would encourage the City Council and Staff to establish a street rebuilding tax fund so that assessments are equally established throughout the City on all tax payers and II that Frontier Trail be included in that special tax funding. In reading your correspondence, it appears there is a penalty for II prepayment of the amount due. I would appreciate clarification as to the law concerning prepayment of assessments at any time during the repayment spread out period. I also would appreciate clarification as to if the interest paid on the spread out option II is income tax deductible or considered a personal interest item. Furthermore, I would want to know if bonds are being let to fund this project if there is a call or put option prior to the maturity II such that the interest rate may be lowered. And, if those cost savings will be passed through to the home owner. Thank you for your cooperation and response. I 2:5 Best regar II -10110", , 41, / imok-ff yo-4#4--;(-4) • oel and Mary - kins II 7305 Frontier •ail Chanhassen, MN 55317 934-6866 II II 1 II II i __ i 1 l/i1"/711 1 i I I , ,/• ';----C ::-.7 ""f -- 2-'-,(—,r--)=-i i5 K:1 /0. 4,..- 141.:_ 75:1,,,, ‘r. ._ I i 1 I . ,/'-- 4'7 f,,;.--17'•=4---3:, 7:7 -C--)-N- if 14'1- '-.-//1 .f C "----rt:-- / /, I ,-, . / ;,-._ , v.--, .-../ ir ct,/ _-/ -(-- 6.--, —1/ f-A_ c----. .,- 7:-"' -7t p,<2.)/ / 7..,,,,,--, ,..... I /-,---. ... ,/ 7 .e.------- — ) —Z)6)e:)./..--- 4,... . .) <4,, i:-..: A cV7Ar-- i--i t 7---, //.1"--,,- I7/._ '/i,/-- e / -..2 / —E-t--_71. - / i -1 /' ''' :..': ./ 6/. -1.--‘./1 ci.„..7.1-7:-/r t.-_,cl I , , ,, .. _ J 1-A :I -e / / t-- e_X_.-32,/,, _., L.--..:. • , ,-7..../..4,—.:77- -,:...v.-.---> ,..--,,--,_ t ...27`.-2- ---i. z -c-- it A€--,..1" 1/1.-47-.) ."-- ":"""'.- // -9.- t I .... /'' tf- //:)./ / l.i/,'1/ .--f-- /21-/!..,*".% .c, / /A--7 <-,s-1-t c.--if c,...///="-- l',.." 12 I )' .'''1(.41., 1 7 , : 1,.:__ ' i 1,>14 ''C'.6k?La- /2,/,i, e-N- --t 4,/-'i 74 ---<--- .. . • I --12 /---'-///2, , ,/,-;i:.-,: /71- 111 , ....._----, , ; ,./--- /,,e'l--7` e-..:,7 /,./.. fr,,-)7"--e"-,.. -/c)A,i-t- //A--, / -....,4"-l— I , /4 ci 4.,. eArt, c ...-- L./ G 4---- I 7:7; 4/ A.:4-e 1 -774 'ef,..-- -7;---Z-'1 1 1 I I , I : Z )i \ -- fr 6\-;\A ....a)--1=L3t- C,A3<vr., '\ ° -.--\ ", 't''' ,skp, c.2, ec`?"'s: t‹,e.,,,,_,, C:Y..., \ 1-\. r� c" VIZ.-3 2 Z C S = Q I Z-j 4'2- \ x' \ :-. , is4 8ct c. 3709 c. � r I r ,- \ \ I � • c v, , .k.o - ; 1 S4.Sa 6,t c\i V ax \el o. 0,.��'(1 10... -'pub;■ 0`\, ,,. \k`■,S,\\',\ j■( \rNN.K,V. -Y\r*A\ \ t)(a) -3-rfvt-j .'(. N,-sz- -\ \') (\>:) -tti I ilA...t.-A->,...),_ ‘1:,... . CfKk_it.1. .9 - -Ct.s. ._% 'V...)0.3 .. St 0 %'2-1\g3 Ot , 7:1:7f>---\-11.k.),zi.,) :\\\\f_'\;' ''S:tC.;\CY M2f.rei■E,...- (..0.3St. \R) Ck-,i-st___\\C"Cis•\ 5.)c.0 I .) 1),. c,c,„. -\_%- s-- Cik \r‘....\•o,-. 6t0\60 -I-(:).-,- ,` �,� \ \Z; ,-- O� �� `nom .3Js2w-Q.c�• C� \ ' 1"i`N .>.-1 -%A_N. ("\,N-npr.l.y.,,,,3A..._ (A-0 k_.,4-\ S4■.N.. ,4.„.??.., -1. ,\x,r.i„ 0..\),,. 1 VD-‘,-.. y'1'1 Ct\\\s/\ fA\ k\-.3, Zin ri.`vii -, �` Y X AiI 1 ,` i i_________:„.... v,TA, ), ..,. ■6zxu...)-> "su\ ( c,\`\�C'\ I,_4 at4 %"'"o\'4\c".. w∎tY►\. ■ wu. 1-0 ..e,'yl P,,, o v1,1,K c\o 1. \i`i) \ e& 0\01z,v1.%A..)LNI\ 1 \7_&\., ,:,.,.,._,IL, k\IN.I., 1--ekkj.p .14,VA \P C , NA-Cet '. -:tec7t. 0-Aida.)3._ ` i r \f ,, \01 � _ Q W `jJ e o\\ G. c. .1.0Sg r `L.c tc�„ I- JCS \'e-J`� 'G.. To,c.L.-ICNO.Ak) 'c•N -c-c.f.i... 4T\AA, V`•-- Dtl, c.-\ t- cl C-3\-0\, 1 \1<, _ i I 1 Aug...tit 12 . _ 9 _ City Cler - ICity v e , 690 Coulter O._cult r Dri F. 0. Box 147 Chanhassen , Mn 5E:317 Re: Improve:rierit #80-10 Parcel #25-8200270 As required by law, this letter serves as our official objection to the I above referenced assessment in the amount of $3 , 770 . 27 . Objections to the proposed a_ssessrrlerit are as follows : Work:,:,_nshiy quality of materials , etc . a . Curb an g. .r at 7338 Frontier Trail already is cracked Iand see_'ra-t--j fr- ..t to back . Repaired in the spring of 1991 by caulking the crack . Is this a long term solution? J b . As,;ho_ ret_.ir to driveway uneven with depressions ; driveway uneven with ,,,(fprr,J Zr)Lli� and poor I graf �L ' V . � scrapes road y: s� -ir Jai ap ro,- ,a surface while slowly backing out i' - y I n , As ph ,lt u._.=_: in driveway of poor quality and in_of f icent thi hn€- 7 1 L :r_ and mushrooms growing t�iroLig}-, new surface . d . F( Dr L _ rk: ti;ii._hil- cii roadway/manhole covers . Virtually every mi;nho at a height either higher or lower than the roaf. surf - _ , 1 2 t of ss..._ _ '_ , Assessment ; s . annual citywide fee paid into a street improvement fund ' Neighborhood requested ested it the city i 1 t,y �ool at�• Eden Prairie's m e t h o d. cf street improvement payment . Setting up a fund based on estimated road needs for a 5 to 10 year period along with an estimate of the mills needed based on estimated tax receipts would give the city an idea of the amount of money that would be needed to be set aside . Ib. Assessment to property owners along Frontier Trail does not fairly s.prea' cost to everyone benefiting from project. Some - neighbors have no access to their property without Frontier Trail ye.t, pay no cost of the road improvement . I c . Why different assessment with all neighbors? We equal need/benefit + � all have yet t some pay more than others . Although our I assessment tin_ cne ',If the lower, it is no a en my ; not fair it whv.l conLpar ed to ifl riF��-',i.'_t _ t;1_thD }iaVE'. the same need/benefit and are paying more . I d. Assesti:: ont. _ _ st tt_ hone,_wners different than t•hat. being II charged. other residents (Minnewashta Parkway) . Frontier Trail II was reconstructed to a 28 foot road with curb and gutter. Propose.. reconstruction of Minnewashta Parkway also Proposed reconstruction Minn wa„ i ..� �. ,wa;, i� al_ � a 28 foot roadway with curb and gutter. Cost on Frontier Trail approximately $4000 . 00/homeowner vs . proposed cost on II Minnewasht• Parkway of $750 . 00/homeowner. Why does one resident pay over 5 times as much fDr the exact same road? The issue seems to be fairness to all residents of Chanhassen. 3 . Payment options . a. No flexibility in options . Either pay all now or annual set 1 payments with interest . No option to pay additional amounts to pay off quicker . b. How is interest calculated? Simple annual or compounded? I 4 . Finally, Chanhassen City Council approved the project without II answering. a2.y1 of the questions outlined in #2 and 3 above that the neighborhood had raised approximately } years .� 1 honest Y. rY `.'� tt y two S L•tnl u ago . Open, ji o1lC ATt and fair discussion was needed then and is still needed now . = r Thank v� .. f+_ . _ iir consideration. II Sincerely , II �► T Ma- 1 Linda t_Q'- 73 8 Fr.n tire_ Trail T,?n 5 5 3 1 7 .r.i.5.2S iiAti •F'•2i , i�ti �v,: II I . 1 . 1 II II I 1 II I Peter J. Huber 7196 Frontier Trail ' Chanhassen, MN 55317 August 12, 1991 Don Ashworth ' City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Mr. Ashworth, This is to register my formal protest about the Frontier Trail special street assessment. As the homeowners on Frontier Trail have helped to pay for all streets laid in ' Chanhassen for at least the past 17 years, it is only fair that the homeowners who have benefited thus help with the cost to complete Frontier Trail. ' May I remind you, Frontier Trail was never finished to the standards of the newer streets, so a special assessment is ' not merited. Sincerely, 1 .00.1 Peter J. uber 1 1 1 ,____ ` - Y / 1- r-_ - -(-/1 t--41..--' ,At',- '7337 7 ,e'>-?-1:-/9 -- I /4' (._ n : ,_,,l_A-sz--- e---- )•--f,,,--e,L;e-d--/- )---)--y. )_,--,/_„/_.-e... ‹..a-ex-z.. 51:_---3-..-e-e-cA__(--e,____,/ I c-- ._ -) . 7-r� ` / // / 1 a _ __ _ I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I cc)e•tt,._I—.—, c.ta qua tfi 4.4-04-1-f ,52p,1 • 1