6. Plat for Murray Hill & Pleasant Hill Is
_ - b
CITY O F P.C. DATE: Jan. 3,' 1990 r"
I � ' C.C. DATE: Jan. 22, 1990
cllANBAssEN
! CASE N0: 89-23 SUB
Prepared by: Al-Jaff/v
I
STAFF REPORT
1 .
1 PROPOSAL: Preliminary Plat to Replat the South 110 Feet
of Lot 31, Murray Hill and Lot 1, Block 1, Pleasant
Hill Addition into One 1. 2 Acre Lot and an Outlot
Containing 0. 3 Acres Action by City Adm!nfst►atnE
Z
I °I LOCATION: Northwest of Murray Hill Road RetF:e, ,;
amii Dctc,_1. J4_:77
' Date Su5^;;�:cd to Commissar
PC
APPLICANT: City of Chanhassen `Date S......ted to Council
I
PRESENT ZONING: RSF, Residential Single Family
IACREAGE: 1.5 acres
IDENSITY:
ADJACENT ZONING
IAND LAND USE: N- OI, Office Instutional District
S- RSF; single family
Q E- RSF; single family ' •
I d
Q W- RSF; single family
II La WATER AND
SEWER: Available to the site. -
PHYSICAL CHARAC. : Heavily wooded with an existin g home with
the water tower to the north.
1 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Low Density Residential
II
f
i
I -8N D .
g g 0 o
N or N tV ts
_.�l► 1 I/..'N.� '- L - - ' _2.11:7„*.
. mor I 11/ Iv_ �Mnr E ; ErL rar-n.tom a ■ra PM 19-
X • 1= Mow — � � �•��� 10rja■ Tor:JIM _
- -■ 411017iiiifillit 111/4,0,ottivrilir: iliialiall likit - 1 AL - -4'
. ri .44r alud../a3. , „slave,:?.._„L. .,-;:ii ____ iink,, pi elt_ dji 41=1
IMI
1 WM 111111= Vii""i!1:411.Dt etir la ILI -I -mil iMaillaidiThil"Iii al -
1 • O' Jam,'■ -. 11%4y, ` .. . !TEAL S�
g .
a r� ih . ;KCL0CIRCL
�` 4KE t ' 'P! P
,1i - r EN
16! liwilip 111 PZ14 14411 :
-?ropot-A. NNW c° 1.) )
W I'S I O t�-�
.. ,■
(=
I RR 1 1E Ei
I' 1
N �,,
A
ril\LA E J�
\_,
HAPRISON LAKE£ LUCY B
it It'
�_ RD- - ir,
i
/all
� to,t? r..,,. ., -"I
1 ('
LAKE ANN 0
ii
- RD
Z
Jr. ■
__
'
I
I/
Pleasant Hill 2nd Addition
January 3, 1990
Page 2
ANALYSIS
The south 110 feet of Lot 31, Murray Hill contains the Murray
Hill water tower and is owned by the City (Attachment #1) . In
1987, the City met with the Murray Hill neighborhood with the
intention to subdivide Lot 31 and sell a portion of the lot which
was unnecessary for the water tower functions. The neighborhood
was opposed to subdividing the lot since it is heavily wooded and
should be preserved in its natural state.
After further meetings and discssions, the owner of Lot I, Block
I, Pleasant Hill agreed to merge a portion of Lot 31 with his
property (Attachment #2) . A trail easement shall be provided
over the northerly 20 feet of the City lot to provide access to
the Minnetonka Jr. High School (Attachment #3) . A public hearing
was held stating that the proposed parcel was for sale. Mr.
Kreidberg, owner of Lot 1, Block 1, Pleasant Hill was the only
interested party.
The City is proposing to replat Lot 1, Block 1, Pleasant Hill and
the southerly 110 feet of Lot 31, Murray Hill into Lot 1, which
will contain 50,133 square feet and Lot 2 which will contain
16, 623 square feet and is the site of the water tower. Lot 2 is
not a buildable lot since it does not have required street fron-
tage, therefore, staff recommends that it be shown as an outlot.
Park and Recreation
A 20 foot wide trail easement is requested on the outlot along
the northerly lot line.
Easements I
All of the typical sewer and water easements have been dedicated
on the plat.
RECOMMENDATION
Planning staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the
following motion:
"The Planning Commission recommends approval of Subdivision
Request #89-23 as shown on the plat dated December 29, 1989
and subject to the following conditions:
1. Lot 2 be shown as Outlot A on the final plat. '
2. The north 20 feet of Outlot A is dedicated as a trail ease-
ment. i
3. The property cannot be further subdivided or any new
residences be built on the site."
I
Plesant Hill 2nd Addition
January 3, 1989
Page 3
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
The Planning Commission unanimously agreed with staff' s recommen-
dation as proposed.
CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION
' "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Subdivision
Request #89-23 as shown on the plat dated December 29, 1989
and subject to the following conditions:
' 1. Lot 2 be shown as Outlot A on the final plat.
2. The north 20 feet of Outlot A is dedicated as a trail ease-
ment.
3. The property cannot be further subdivided or any new
' residences be built on the site. "
ATTACHMENTS
' 1. Map showing Lot 31, Murray Hill.
2. Map showing Lot 1, Block 1, Pleasant Hill and City Engineer
report.
' 3. Purchase agreement.
4. Map showing the trail easement.
I
1
I
•• .g ; , ' ' -• _ �. '„ •••.:` ♦�.:' Y! iiis��f/%r�iyiiii6(i�7l�d/�/'G%L � //5 :7zl•
5 4 t Ma 9•■1•53 :, • '
5. i.':1 •- _ - - OK- L M ISC� 4 MS' 1 .-
11114044, a C • - - -- ':-. . •
��z +�r �i t t`. . ou7L07 A , i - •23 -. f 6-_lam .
"��'��4 n� g SOMMER GATE .•• g- 'Q - - ; . . f_.•
I= .1) \ i.. _ 154 _ - 29 _ - . 22 • . • 5.•••;(.p x
u 3 ^ - . ' :. ..;-.rte ` E __ _'. 4 '; ,,\•\‘_-:------
• •LOT - - " - -. '.p• `. - • 30 tr. , �Ii�p ti•
- •• rr ,--- ; ' = ; 2t vpO -- -; ell
-:7 ------"!44_--}- • m MELODY -
-— 1 425.1 •
•• y No a •F . . i P p.
20' QQ` ': ' 3.
_ 0 . A , . - , , , ,,,, 2 ' • ..:' 1,,,,
- • /1.. --, ;D. i 14 er.".b.. ' 11111. ... N . ,
., ... , 7." - ... . - '1 - - t •..
,�� - �- 65TH - t,
• \\\ _ g t �_
DISTRICT NO_. 276 - • • 3 '
� Aa z. - .� :. -•
-. •y 4i6,! .A. •. 160117 j N ISO.
_ -- _ 4 i •3. 4.. '�•,s-:.: • -• '`"'_ •._-' .T <;.y ,i _.y _ .. �Ob ri •:� a
_ . , .1._-_ • . ... .. PAUL '•F. WQLF a:l�- it .4 a, *•,,•.'�• .
�I OK 4St.t to a 'r � '. r5
_ 7• tir-- . . . f O, TH0MAS A.SEHVEi.Y�_• - • �� • •• - - _ 4 m s ,� .
.- •;..- .. c� �,r MI, 1
_ .. .- • t ' •'t; t- -g STREET : 'APT Fw .
_ _ - • .... - _ - < - - .11123.4114 !pc
. - .- - �- - -! !O - JAMES •txLER t •
•
-- - - • • _ = • OK 113.4 303 t
4tt.9 37l.E EAST 64 1•
- ess.s-
•
. - - - i
•
to 4
a
i :.
CITYOF
I A , . CHANHASSEN
. . . „,
...
. . . . ,
. .
1 .. ,.
. ..
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
1 (612) 937-1900
MEMORANDUM
1 TO: Mayor and City Council
IFROM: Don Ashworth, City Manager
DATE: October 23, 1989
II SUBJ: Consider Land Sale for a Portion of Murray Hill Water
Tower Site, Gil Kreidberg
1 This item was tabled from the City Council meeting of September
25, 1989. Staff prepared a public hearing notice (this item did
1 not require public hearing, but has been treated as such pursuant
to Council action) and we have included property owners from
Hummingbird, Melody Hill and West 65th Street in that notifica-
tion.
1 Questions also arose during the September 25th discussion as to
legal requirements and the process being considered for the sale.
IIResponses to those points are as follows:
- Sale of Property: State statute does not establish any
I special procedures upon cities for the sale of property.
State law assumes that public processes will be used and
that special considerations will exist which need to be
addressed individually by the governing body. Disposition
1 of lands within the City during the last few years would
attest to this statement, i.e. the exchange of lands on the
north side of Lotus Lake for a boat access/park on the
1 south side of Lotus, the sale to NordicTrack on West 82nd
Street, the vacation of lands adjacent to or within various
subdivisions to accomplish different or modified
sewer/water extensions, etc; and
II - Sale Process Questions: Questions as to how the
water tower property would be used first originated
1 approximately one year ago when crews began readying them-
selves to install an alternative access driveway from
Murray Hill for access purposes. As a result of our ini-
1 tiating construction, the neighborhood (primarily new resi-
dents within the Ostrom development) approached the City
Council asking that assurances be given regarding non-
destruction of trees, the necessity for the access, and
II
II
II
Mayor and City Council
October 23, 1989 1
Page 2
future plans of the City regarding the property. The
Council tabled action on the item and directed staff to
meet with the neighborhood to explore issues that were pre-
sented. Staff was then invited by the neighborhood to
attend a meeting to discuss this issue (held at one of
their homes) . Mr. Ostrom was the primary person making the
initial inquiry. Staff believed that we had left that
meeting with the understanding that the neighborhood did
not wish to see the property subdivided/sold for a single
family home , had primary concerns as to the deforestation
that would likely occur if the property were subdivided and
wished to see a trail built across the property so as to
insure that pedestrian access could be achieved from Murray
Hill Road to Minnetonka Junior High. The option to poten-
tially sell a portion of the property to Mr. Kreidberg was I
a result of that meeting. Staff saw the opportunity for
the sale as a win/win situation in that the City would be
in a position to retain an alternative access to the water
tower while providing monies to construct a trail. The
issue of a sale of a portion of the propety had not been
considered prior to the neighborhood meeting. Staff asked
the City Attorney's office to have an appraisal of the pro-
perty conducted and to prepare a sale document to tr.
Kreidberg in the amount of that appraisal. Mr. Kreidberg
agreed to the purchase price and has subsequently agreed to
incorporate the proposed lot as a part of his current lot
so as to have a backyard. This item was advertised as a '
part of the September 25th City Council agenda.
- Summation: If an error was made, it was the assumption
that the neighborhood meeting which the Council directed us
to attend was truly not representative of the neighborhood. As II
to whether the proposed sale represents the best monetary
return for the City is debatable. Is a bird in the hand
worth two in the bush? From staff 's standpoint, the issue
was more than one of monetary return. Although the property
proposed to be sold to Mr. Kreidberg does represent a
buildable single family lot, introducing a home on to the
site would assuredly create future problems for the City.
Specifically, even though the property owner would be
buying it knowing that the City had an access drive to the
tower, we could almost be assured of future complaints
regarding late night maintenance, early morning checks,
etc. It was quite obvious from the statements of imme-
diate neighbors that a sale for single family purposes was
not desired. Such a sale would create major destruction to
a lot of major trees as well as potentially hindering an
access to the school property - a major initial objective
for those persons attending. Finally, the sale would
I
II
Mayor and City Council
October 23, 1989
Page 3
assure the City the monies necessary to build the trail y a 1 and
access drive without depleting other funds.
Recommendation Although the monetary issue can continue to be
debated, it is staff 's belief that the recommendation made on
' September 25, 1989 best meets the concerns of the neighborhood
and City. Sale of the property to Mr. Rreidberg with the con-
dition of making such a part of his existing lot and dedication
of the money for trail/access construction is recommended.
I
1
s
f
I
1
•City Council Meeting - !ptember 25, 1989
•
Councilman Johnson: Should we also say something about that City staff will 11
assist in talking?
Don Ashworth: I think just as the motion is. '
Councilman Hoyt moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to authorize drawing against I
the Letter of Credit and Condemnation effective December 1, 1989 for Curry Farms
Second Addition if no resolution has occured by November 30, 1989 and Curry
Farms will live up to progressing according to a time table established with the
City during that period. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
0. APPROVE PURCHASE AGREQMIENT FOR SALE OF PORTION OF MURRAY HILL WATER TOWER '
SITE TO GILBERT AND JILLENE KREIDBERG.
Councilwoman Dimler: I pulled item (o) because there is someone in the audience
that would like to address that and I wonder should they do it now or go to
visitor's presentation?
Mayor Chmiel: We can do it right now. Either now or later. I
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. Mr. Wayne Fransdal would like to speak to that
issue please. I
Wayne Fransdal: My name is Wayne Fransdal. I live at 6200 Murray Hill Road.
First of all I'd like to thank you for moving this from the consent to the
discussion agenda. I appreciate the opportunity. My primary concern is with
the procedure used for the proposed sale. First of all, was there a public'
offering or notice of the proposed sale? As far as I know, none of the
neighbors north of the property that was proposed for sale were informed or
aware that the property was for sale. Was a study completed over the future
use of the property and was the property deemed surplus? Has a public entity,
what is the procedure for selling public property or public goods? Now is the
price determined? If the property is sold, what is the adequate size to be
retained and what is it's purpose? In the past, many years ago, I attended
Council meetings when the school district has asked the City to discontinue use
of their easement on the city property for access to the water tower. Tb use
the access from the road. At that time the reason for not using the road was it
was a private road. It's now a public road and yet access is still from the
school property. The question from the school is, and rightfully so I would
think, is why should we provide access when they're going to sell off their own.
Why don't they use their own access from a public road? If the land is sold,
are there any restrictions or can there be any restrictions on the future use of
the land? Could there be a variance for a home for a small lot? Could it be
used or restricted for outlots? Cbuld it be restricted at all? As I said, my
primary concern is the procedure. I agree with delegating to the lowest
possible level. Let adminstrative people do what they need to do but there
should be due process so that everyone has an opportunity, so that everyone
knows what the City is doing with the people's resources.
Mawr Chmiel: Thank you.
15 1
1
II • City Council Meeting - Sep mber 25, 1989
Councilman Johnson: Mr. Mayor? I have to agree with the procedural aspects of
this and before I make a motion here I'd like to also say there's covenants in
' here that no building will ever be built on this. There's also access to be
given to the City on an easement so we can service the water tower from that
side. So for those two things, we are providing both of those so there will
never be able to be a house built on that small property plus the City will no
longer need the access from the school area. But procedurally, I'd like to find
out if we may have goofed up here because there may be same, we may have to do
public offerings and stuff like that for excess and I'd like to table it
until...
Mawr Chniel: Or can we address it now?
Gil Kreidberg: Maybe I could add samething because I'm the buyer. Would you
like to hear what I have to say?
Mayor Chmiel: Certainly.
Gil Kreidberg: Same of you are familiar with this situation. My name is Gil
' Kreidberg. I reside at 6444 Murray Hill Road. Sane of you who were on the
Council a year and a half, 2 years ago, we started this process and Roger
Knutson, the City Attorney, are familiar with this situation. It's a little
more involved than just an outright sale of the property on the part of the City
for excess land. A couple years ago the City wanted to build, put a road
through to the tower and those people in that area, south of the tower and same
to the north. Right at this time I don't know but other people objected'
strongly that they had the access and that they could possibly acquire an
access, a permanent access from the school district behind their... We were
concerned up there of changing the environment. Damage to the trees and taking
1 risk to the kids that play up there and so on and in the last 2 years I've
worked along with the Pleasant Hills Homeowners Association trying to work out a
compromise with the City so they could get what they want and we could be
satisfied where we are in terms of the net result at the end. I've spent the
' last year working very closely with Gary Warren, the City Engineer, trying to
work out a compromise which we felt we had here. I'm sorry that this
gentleman's concerned about the procedure and I understand that issue but
' essentially what was determined is that, I reside directly to the south of that
piece of property which means that what this is going to be is this piece of
land is going to became part of my yard. It isn't going to be built in
' anything. It's not going to be developed. Nothing's going to physically change
up there except now it will be a 10 foot wide gravel path with a gate that will
prevent snowmobiles and all the other stuff that will go through there if they
don't gate it, from going back to the tower but it will be locked and the City
' will be able to access the tower from the east side. I have agreed in kind to
build a fence along that pathway which will eliminate snow drifting and stuff
along their new road and it also will protect the cul-de-sac down to the south
' against the additional activity that will be generated not only by the fact that
more people living up there but by the fact that there will now be vehicles
entering in there that were not entering in there before. The lot was appraised
' as though it was a buildable lot. Okay? It is obviously not a buildable lot. I
have agreed to pay a buildable lot price which is more than what the City would
otherwise get with the covenants they put on it if they just put it up at
auction or whatever. The reason I'm willing to do that is obviously it becomes
part of my yard. Secondly, it's important to me in a sense to protect my
16
City Council Meeting - Member 25; 1989
II
investment and the homeowners around me to make sure that this thing is done
right. In a sense what I'm doing is funding the City's ability to put that road
in. I don't think that there's even an issue here that the citizens of
Chanhassen are not benefitted by what's taking place. I appreciate the
possibility that the procedure may have been different but the circumstances
that brought this whole thing about go back 2 years and they have to do with a
lot more than just me. We've been going through this for 2 years. I would
appreciate not tabling it and moving forward unless by chance you have same
strong objection knowing the background and circumstances that we do proceed
tonight. Otherwise I'd just like to go forward because it's taken a lot of
time, both mire and the city's and I'm sure... I
Don Ashworth: The points brought out are correct. The only thing I might add
is that it did involve a lot of people through that whole process and a lot of
people caning into the City Council again very concerned with the trees. Very
concerned with access to the school. Very concerned with how that property
might be used as it would relate again- back to the trail requirements and yet
still accomplish the City needs for that property. In terms of the procedural
question regarding the legality of publishing, etc. that is not there and I
think that the law understands issues such as this where the City looks at an
issue as to how it's going to best serve the citizens in that area as well as
the City itself.
Councilman Johnson: Can I hear from Roger on that one Don?
Don Ashworth: Sure.
i
Roger Knutson: Bidding is not required for the sale of property. Other stuff,
yes but not real estate.
f
Councilman Workman: Vat's the actual size of the lot?
Gil Kreidberg: Not even 2/10ths. About .445 of an acre. Buildable lots up
there go for, I mean it was appraised at the equivalent of about $32,000.00 on
the basis of a contract for deed assuming it's a buildable lot and I volunteered
to pay cash if they cut it to $30,000.00...
Councilman Boyt: Why isn't it a buildable lot? '
Gil Kreidberg: Because you're putting a covenant in there that tells me I can't
build a home structure on it.
Councilman Boyt: But otherwise it would be?
Gil Kreidberg: Otherwise in theory it could be but you know, when we went
through this discussion...you weren't on the Council at the time, the whole idea
was we wanted to keep it like it is and the City wanted to get their access but
we still had to work on a compromise and I think this is fair because
essentially what I'm going to do is get the City to put the road in and that
goes on the tax roll which means I'll pay taxes in the future, not to mention
what we're paying now. ,
Councilman Johnson: Is there anyway to combine this lot and your lot to where
it becomes one lot of record versus two lots?
17
11
IICity Council Meeting - Set Amber 25, 1989
Gil Kreidber : You know I've asked v
9 ed Gar, about that and I guess he wanted to
explore that. I don't know.
Roger Knutson: You get one PIN number for it, yeah.
Councilman Johnson: Because if it's one lot, then you'd have to subdivide.
You've have to came in and request for a subdivision in order to build the
second house on it.
Gil Kreidberg: I have no problem with if you want to set it up that way.
I just want it as a yard and I want it as a buffer against this road and I'm
going to... It will be a nice deal when it's all done.
Councilwoman Dimler: I have a question Mr. Kreidberg. You say that you want to
clean it up. Would you explain that a little bit more? I understand...
Gil Kreidberg: ...a couple of the Council members have. The City has let it go
downhill in the last 15 years and it's got barbed wire fences. It's got debris.
Its really a mess.
Councilwoman Dimler: Brush you mean?
' Gil Kriedberg: Not just brush. I'm talking about the land directly to the
north of this piece of property is a farm. It's a little horse farm. It's
about 2 1/2 acres and they keep horses out there and up until they actually -
developed the area where I am, which is about 4 years ago, this guy used to let
his horses and everything wander over there. He built, he put up barbed wire
fences and an old wood fence and I mean there's all kinds of debris that was
thrown there from whatever the sources are and I told the City that I would, at
my expense, clean that property up.
Councilwoman Dimler: You're not talking about clearing trees and stuff?
Gil Kriedberg: Oh, that is the last thing that I want to do. I mean there's a
long letter...
' Councilwoman Dimler: Alright, thanks.
Mawr Q niel: Any further discussion?
'
•
Councilman Workman: So he's basically paying $30,000.00 for less than an half
of an acre up there?
IIDon Ashworth: That he can't build on.
Councilman Workman: That he can't build on?
•
II Mawr Chniel: Right.
ICouncilman Workman: Might •samebody else be interested in this property?
Councilman Johnson: Only if they could build on it.
18
r
II
Don Ashworth: We could start the process over and advertise. I just find it
very difficult to believe who's going to buy it under similar conditions. I
Gil Rreidberg: Also remember there's a water tower directly behind it. It's a
nice monolith but it isn't an art form you would normally...
Councilman Workman: Is this kind of for the neighbor's, who voiced concerns, is
that bring things a little better into focus maybe as far as the purchase?
Mrs. Fransdal: ...no one knew anything about this. We had no idea this was
going on. Even the Woida's directly, they had no opportunity to bid on the
property...I just wonder how the City...and what does he mean by a locked gate? I
Gil Kreidberg: No, no. %bat the City is going to do, this is for your best
interest. The City is going to build a 10 foot wide gravel path that allows
than to get their vehicles back to the tower. They will also provide pedestrian
access to the middle school and the fields and so on back behind there somewhat
to satisfy the trail pattern here in Chanhassen.
Mrs. Fransdal: Will the children be able to get... I
Gil Rreidberg: Oh absolutely. The reason for the lock is to prevent these
bozo's who run these snowmobiles out across there from going across Murray Hill
and shooting right down that path where the kids are. The gate will allow
pedestrians through. It will be locked. The City will be able to unlock to
take their trucks down in there and relock it when they leave so we don't have a
road in there that will have traffic. Only the one's we're supposed „to have.
Mayor Ctmiel: It's basically for the access of the City to get to there? '
Gil Kreidberg: That is correct and for the pedestrians to get back and forth.
Mrs. Fransdal: This is our only legal walkway to MIS. I
Gil Rreidberg: That's right and you're going to still...
Mayor C'tmiel: Right and that still will be because the City will still awn that '
10 feet.
Gil Rreidberg: 20 feet. I
Mayor Chniel: Or excuse me, 20 feet.
Mrs. Fransdal: And now maintain it so the children can walk?
Mayor Chmiel: Right. ,
Gil Kreidberg: That's the whole idea.
Councilman Johnson: That was the whole purpose of this was to get that now. ,
The other part is how are we going to get the trail from 65th Street over. That
hasn't been resolved yet. That's another one. A thorn in my side. After 2
years we haven't resolved. ,
19 1
city Council Meeting - Se caber 25, 1989
II
Mayor Chmiel: That's not the issue.
Oouncilman Johnson: But this will be even better, right now they have to walk
through that lot and it's not in any good condition. They have to climb the
barbed wire fence and everything to get back there I guess.
Mrs. Fransdal: There's a little path now.
Gil Kreidberg: Right. Have you noticed the logs that are in front of the path
now that NSP cut down and left in the middle of the path. You will have a
better access back there because you'll literally have a 10 foot wide gravel
' path. It will be easy for people to get...gate so you don't have snowmobile
traffic or small motor vehicles who might decide it'd be a good time to go
shooting through there.
' Mrs. Fransdal: Our main objection was to the procedure and not...
Gil Kreidberg: It's my intent to inform Mr. Woida and Mrs. Woida what's going
' on but it's only been a few days that I've known about it and I just haven't had
a chance to visit with then.
' Councilman Boyt: I have just a quick question. &plain to me how kids are
going to get through the fence but snowmobiles aren't going to get through the
fence?
Gal Kreidberg: Apparently, as Gary has described it, and I have not seen a
picture of the kind of gate. It's the kind of gate that they can lock Hilt it
allows pedestrian traffic. He said they're used it on one other entryway. I
' don't know if it's to a water tower or another facility here in Chanhassen. He
said there was one like that but the idea was, whatever the use, I've seen these
before. Not here in Minnesota but elsewhere where the gate locks and so on...
1 A snowmobile, you might be able to marginally get through that. I don't know.
Councilman Boyt: Okay, but the intent is to allow the walking path to...
' Gil Kriedberg: Absolutely. Absolutely. It's a two prong thing. One, so you
can get the truck back and two, so that people can get back and forth. It'd be
self defeating if the people can't get back and forth.
' Councilman Hoyt: I think the neighbors have brought up an awfully good point. I
hope we've learned something from it and I'd like to see us move on this now.
Councilman Workman: What I'm trying to get at is there the slightest chance,
and maybe the FYansdal's can answer this right now, would somebody else be
interested in this property? Again, it is all of our property and we are
' selling it and it appears to be a good deal and you appear to be doing us good
by this transaction but could there be somebody ody out there that might b 9
e
interested in also owning this property and that seems to be the issue? Or in
' what is going on with it.
Don Ashworth: I'm not sure. The issue originated when, well not only were we
Ilooking at the trail but I'believe we had a public improvement in the process.
Gil Kreidberg: You wanted to put a road in there and the...
' 20
1
City Council Meeting - ..aptembez 25, 1989
II
I
Don Ashworth: The neighborhood had cane out and we had 20 people who were here
talking on the issue and that's really where the issue had started. You know,
if I would have believed that the neighborhood had not supported this entire
transaction or there was anyone else who was interested or there was any
question that this had not originated from the neighborhood itself, I guess we
would have gone through a different advertisement process than we did but I
really had believed this was kind of a grass roots process that they themselves
were starting and finally a year and a half later we finished.
Gil Kreidberg: I'm sorry. I thought everybody who was party basically was
aware of the net results. They may not have all been aware of that this was
going to be decided here this evening because as I said, I just found out on
Friday so.
Wayne Fransdal: My convent is regarding the availability of the information.
We telephoned the three neighbors closest on the north side of this and none of
then were aware. If it's grass roots, it came from a very small group within
the development or people on the south who had an interest in it. The people on
the north who have equal interest and access from this property to the school
were not informed.
Gil Kreidberg: They were informed. They were informed all along up until
tonight. They were party. They signed a petition they objected to the road to
begin with. Mr. Woida did and so did Mr. MacFarlane and the other people on the
opposite corner of the MacFarlane's...
K
Councilman Johnson: Could you tell me what your objection is? What are you
trying to gain by stopping this tonight? Would you like to purchase this?
Would you like to make us an offer? I'm trying to understand where you're '
coming fran?
Wayne Fransdal: Where I'm coming from is the frustration with the adminstration
in dealing with a lot of issues in the city. We can cane in, developers can '
came in, make a proposal as an example, and they get an approval and they go out
and do whatever they can negotiate with the staff. This is a case that has been
negotiated with the staff and there was not public input from a lot of the
people in the area. Maybe is a frustration on my part that we have things in
our neighborhood that if I individually came in and asked to do, they would not
be approved but when negotiations with staff, they end up being built and there
they are.
Councilman Johnson: So are you objecting to the roadway? Are you objecting to
the City trucks going through there? ,
Wayne Fransdal: No. I think the City should have access to the water tower
from the public property which they own. I do not believe that a complete study
has been made on the future use of this property. When we looked at all things
that are being done from digging a pipe in or installing public easements, we
had studies. We had environmental impact studies. We have future use studies
and I don't believe they have been done and for me to say there's someone else
that is interested in the property, I certainly don't know and no one in here
can answer whether saneone else is interested unless you ask. I'm not against
the sale. I'm against the procedure. I may be all for the sale. I
21 1
City Council Meeting - Ser' -'mber 25, 1989
II
' Mayor Chmiel: I agree with the concept and the idea that you have.
Conncilwanan Dimler: What should have been done?
' Councilman Johnson: I can see staff's point of view. It's a little matter
that's been going on for a year and a half, two years since before I was on the
Council when this was originally approved there. This thing has been going on
' and on and the developer caused same of the frustrations when he didn't give us
the trails he was supposed to give us and everything else and this is staff's
way of coming to a conclusion on about half the problem now so we maintain that
open, it was kind of Council a few years ago, 2 years ago, whatever we were on
this, Council directed to reroute that trail through this property. I guess
that's...
Mayor Chmiel: I think that's very true.
Councilman Johnson: I think it could have been handled better.
Mayor Chmiel: I'd like to make a suggestion to staff that all adjacent
properties be notified on any transaction of sale of property within the city.
That way at least that procedure would be taken care of. Notifying the adjacent
' neighbors. Making then aware of what's transpiring and then proceed from that.
Councilman Boyt: This has been sort of in limbo for at least a year. I don't
' think we, maybe we do, I'm not aware that we lose anything by publishing that
this property is for sale as a non-buildable lot and 2 weeks from now resolve
it. It seems like we're following a better procedure to do that. w
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, I'm speaking in the future with any other transactions that
we do. As I look at this particular piece of property Bill, if the road is
going to be on the far end adjacent to that Lot 1. No no would, in my opinion,
' want to own that property with a road going through with an easement. What he
has is his land is abutting the property here and of course the road would be
on, if we're looking at a northerly direction, it would be to the north of that
' segment where the road would go.
Gil Kreidberg: It gives me a little buffer from all the traffic is really what
II it canes down to. I was willing to pay a premium because I live right next door
to it. The chances that somebody will pay you what I'm paying you, they'd have
to be, you can't build on it. If you could build on it, that's something. You
know I'll leave it up to your judgment. We spent a lot of time trying to work
' up something that was amicable.
Councilman Johnson: Another thing we should have done, instead of having it 90
feet wide, we should have had it 89 feet wide because at 90 feet it doesn't need
a variance to build on it. Because it has the covenant it does but at 89, it
would need a variance to build on it at all so we couldn't even put it on
without a variance and the covenant on top of that. We'd have two ways of
' telling then, if somebody came in 10 years from now trying to build there, we'd
say you can't.
' Don Ashworth: As long as it's considered a lot of record though they could
build on it. If you bought a lot in the downtown and it's 60 feet in width, as
long as you meet setbacks.
22
r
City Oamcil Meeting - ptember 25, 1989 1
1
Gil Kreidberg: What about my original suggestion of making it part of my
particular lot?
Don Ashworth: That's something that should be looked at. The covenant is good
but as long as it's a separate legal lot of record, it could be built on.
Counci]inan Johnson: Well if it's a separate legal lot of reference, they still
have to have a variance to build on it even though it's a legal lot of record.
Mayor Chniel: They can make it contiguous though can't they Roger?
Roger Knutson: If they legally split it, once you have a legally split lot, I
don't know how they'd get it legally split if it were only 89 feet but if they
were somehow to manage to accomplish that and they cane in for a variance, and
they own 89 foot lot, met all other ordinance requirements, you'd probably be
hard pressed to turn down a request for a variance. 1
Councilman Johnson: Unless there was the covenant?
Roger Knutson: Unless there was a covenant, correct. 1
Councilman Johnson: I mean you'd still want both. You wouldn't get rid of the
covenant. What would it take to combine it to one lot?
Roger Knutson: Is your existing lot a meets and bound description or.is it a
lot in block? 1
Gil Kreidberg: You see what happened is they platted 6 lots in what they call
Pleasant Hills okay and this of course is not part of Pleasant Hills. Gary %gas
telling me scything and I'm not sure that there's two ways. One is to keep
this separate and the other was to kind of redo it and I think they had to
survey it and then there were sane fees in filing but I think it could be done
and like I said, I have no problem with that. I'm not going to build anything.
I can't build it. It's going to be a yard.
Councilman Johnson: I think the City should pay those fees and make it as a
single lot.
Roger Knutson: Your property that you presently own is a lot in block, is that
right?
Gil Kreidberg: Pardon me.
Roger A utson: You have a lot in block legal description?
Gil Kreidberg: Yes I do. As a matter of fact I think I have it here.
Roger Knutson: See if you had a meets and bounds then you '
could make one meets
and bounds description. This accomplishes it. This says non buildable but you
can carbine them for tax purposes. Have one PIN number by working with the
County and if you ever wanted to divide a PIN number, you've got to cane back to
the City.
23 ,
IICity Council Meeting - Se. saber 25, 1989
' Councilman Johnson: The covenant is strong enough to where they'll never be
able to build on there.
' Councilman Boyt: That's the best way to do it. Otherwise, they can subdivide
the lots someday and build.
'
Councilman Johnson: Well the covenant would still stay there no matter what we
did.
' Councilman Boyt: Let's table this for 2 weeks.
Councilman Workman: Second.
' Mayor Chniel: It's been moved to table for 2 weeks to come up with a conclusion
and with a second.
' Councilman Johnson: TO talk to the neighbors and inform the neighbors.
Councilman Workman: Inform the neighbors and set up a policy that we can follow
each and every time we have a situation like this.
Don Ashworth: It will be short notice that will occur in the We
do it but we turn it in for this Friday and it would then appeaarwinatthe� can
' following Wednesday which then would be heard by the City Council on Monday.
Councilman Workman: Is once enough? {
Don Ashworth: You potentially would have a challenge that I only saw this.
Mayor Chmiel: Can we notify those adjacent property owners by letter?
' Don Ashworth: Yeah. I'm just saying that we still have really the same list
from the last time.
' Mayor C1miel: That would process it and make it move just a little faster.
Councilman Workman: If I could bring up one other thing while the motion hangs
' here also and sane frustration up there. It's a different sort of a hill up
there as I'm told by the neighbors. It was going to maybe be Carlton College up
there possibly way back? I don't know how we lost Carlton College but I would
' like the Engineering staff and Dave, if you're listening, I believe it's called
Saaerset Circle there off of Mkarray Hill Road. There's a large, very large
ditch there. I guess I'd like a little bit more information. Neighbors
claiming that perhaps that ditch is something that it never was intended to be
in the development contract. Can we check out what the circumstances are with
that? It's the north ditch off of Somerset.
Councilman Johnson: That's a different subdivision.
Councilman Workman: Right. But again, adjacent to.
IC'il Kreidberg: That'd be to the north about a block and a half or so.
24
City Council Meeting - -eptember 25, 1989 1
•
Councilman Workman: But again; it's a unique area up there and there's some I
frustrations.
Councilman Bout moved, Councilman Workman seconded to table approving a Purchase
Agreement for sale of a portion of Murray Hill Water Tower Site to Gilbert and
Jillene Kreidberg so staff can notify neighbors. All voted in favor and the
notion carried.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: There were none. ,
PUBLIC HEARING: ASSESSMENT HEARING AND ADOPTION CF ASSESSMENT ROLLS:
A. DER BOULEVARD IMPROVEMENT PROTECT NO. 87-9. ,
Bill Digelhardt: Your Honor, members of the Council, this is the assessment
hearing for the Kerber Blvd. improvement project. The total cost of the project
was $444,840.12. The project was covered by 55% tax increment funds and general
obligation with the balance of the cost to be spread against the benefitted
properties along Kerber Blvd.. The developers of than Vista, Saddlebrook, the
James property, all had development agreements where they agreed to the
assessment and those assessments have been collected as the lots have been sold.
The lots that have not been sold, those assessments are on the assessment roll.
The project cost was slightly under the original bid amount which showed up as
about a $2,700.00 reduction in the feasibility study cost for the tax increment
and general obligation. With that I'd be happy to answer any questibns you
might have on the project. ,
Mayor Camel: Anyone have any questions at this time? Is there anyone wishing
to address this for the public hearing? If so, this is your opportunity to came
forth and address it and if you do, please state your name and your address.
Councilman Johnson moved, Cbuncilwanan Dimler seconded to close the public
hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was
closed.
Resolution #89-104: Councilman Johnson moved, Oouncilwaman Dimler seconded to
adopt the Kerber Boulevard assessment roll as modified dated Septamstiber 11,
1989 with a payback term of 8 years with an established with interest at the
rate of nine percent (9%) of the unpaid balance. All voted in favor and the
motion carried.
B. MINNEWASHTA MEADOWS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 88-2. ,
Public Present:
Name Address
Cary Carlson 3831 West 62nd Street
I
25
CITY OF / a
I I .. CHANHASSEN
•
t.
, „
' 690 COULTER DRIVE • HAN P.O. BOX 147 •
CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900
- - .--r) Ad•nir 1 tntc,(
MEMORANDUM
ITO: Don Ashworth, City Manager
FROM: Gary Warren, City Engineer(��\ = •'
IDATE: September 20, 1989
9Ar?'4'
SUBJ: Approve Purchase Agreement for Sale of Portion of Murray
I Hill Water Tower Site to Gilbert and Jillene Kreidberg
File No. PW158B
IIAs a part of the Pleasant Hill subdivision trail issue, and water
tower site access concern, Mr. Gil Kreidberg who resides at 6444
I Murray Hill Road had expressed interest in acquiring the easterly
portion of the City's lot. A catalyst to this issue was the
City's interest in providing auxilliary access to the Muray Hill
I water tower site from Murray Hill Road. This is especially
important during the wintertime since it is a more sheltered
route and not as likely to be snowbound as is the case with our
westerly access over the school property (see January 21, 1988
IIstaff report) .
Much discussion with the neighbors and Mr. Kreidberg have been
i carried on over the past year. We appear to have reached an
agreement with Mr. Kreidberg and the neighbors whereby the City
would agree to sell a portion of the water tower site as shown in
I Attachment #2 with the understanding that the northerly 20 feet
of the City's parcel would remain in City ownership and would be
utilized as a multi-purpose trail and gravel drive access for the
II City's water tower site. Mr. Kreidberg is interested in cleaning
up this parcel of property and likewise the City would place
appropriate control gates to prohibit the unauthorized access of
vehicular traffic onto this drive. One of the pine trees within
I the City's 20-foot frontage would in all likelihood require remo-
val in order to construct the 10-foot access drive and trail.
The City had an appraisal done on the easterly portion of this
I property. The appraisal cost of $39,000 has been proportionately
scaled down to reflect the City retaining ownership of the north
20 feet of this parcel. The $30,000 purchase price is based on
IMr. Kreidberg's interest in paying cash for this transaction.
II
II
Don Ashworth
September 20, 1989
Page 2
The contingencies section of the purchase agreement contains the 1
specific terms of our agreement which Mr. Kreidberg, as it rela-
tes to the trail/water tower site access which he has personally
communicated to his neighbors. It is therefore recommended that
the attached purchase agreement be approved for execution and
staff be directed to implement the plan as specified therein. A
portion of the proceeds of the sale should be dedicated to cover
the City's costs for the access.
Attachments 1
1. Staff Report dated January 21, 1988.
2. Location Map.
3. Letter from Gilbert Kreidberg dated May 9, 1989.
4. Memo to Roger Knutson dated September 14, 1989 .
5. Purchase Agreement.
c: Mr. Gil Kreidberg
Jerry Boucher, Utility Superintendent
File No. PW159
•
•
I
1
I
1
1
1
I
J
i
I
CITY OF
` N' ,,
I41.- 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA OTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 .._., , .
MEMORANDUM
I TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager s, .., .
:w :f ji.I%P__
FROM: Gary Warren, City Engineer
rte.:, w
IDATE: January 21, 1988 :.-:It
II SUBJ: Propose- • o Water Tower off Murray Hill Road
File No PW024
The City owns and operates a 200,000 gallon elevated water
I storage tank on the south 110 feet of Lot 31, Murray Hill sub-
division. The elevated tank was constructed in 1972 and serves
as the only water resevoir supply for the northwest portion of
I the City. As shown on Attachment No. 2 from the tower construc-
tion plans, the City acquired the total width of Lot 31 in order
that the service access to the water tower could be tak' n off of
IIMurray Hill Road from the east.
In 1984, the Pleasant Hill subdivision road construction was ,
completed with the extension of Murray Hill Road south of Melody
1 Hill Road dedicated as a public street. In addition, the
Development Contract called for the developer (Curtis and Kathe
Ostrom) to donate to the City a perpetual 10-foot wide easement
I for a pedestrian trail system along the east line of Lot 5 and
the south lines of Lots 3 and 4 (Attachments No. 3 and 4) .
II Prior to the construction of the extension of Murray Hill Road in
1984, the only access to the site was from the west, across the
Minnetonka School District property. Utility personnel have
experienced difficulties, particularly during the winter with
II this route, since snow drifts into this open area quite readily.
At present we only have a verbal agreement with the School
District for use of their property.
IOn the average, our service personnel visit the water tower two
to three times per week to see that everything is working pro-
perly. The most critical time for being able to access the ele-
' vated tank is during the winter months when equipment
malfunctions are more likely and the freezing temperatures can
pose potentially hazardous tank operating conditions.
IIt is therefore our intent to utilize City property as originally
planned, to construct a "driveway" access from Murray Hill Road
II
II
r •
I
Don Ashworth
January 21, 1988
Page 2
to the water tower site. The driveway location would be selec-
tively placed such that none of the living 50-foot pine trees
would be disturbed. Our intent would be to favor the northerly
side of the City's lot as proposed in the original construction
plan (Attachment No. 2) . Installation of this access would be on
City property, thereby releasing us from the vulnerability of the
verbal agreement with the School District. The east access also
is more sheltered and as a result does not encounter such extreme
snow conditions. If this access is not allowed, I would suggest
that the City consider selling the east 200 feet (U acre) of this
property and use these funds to acquire a formal roadway easement
for the westerly route and improve this access road as best as
possible to facilitate better winter access to the water tower.
In a related matter, the pedestrian trail easement which was to
be provided by the developer along the east side of Lot 5 and the
south side of Lots 3 and 4 (see Attachment No. 3) has not been
provided to date. Mr. Ostrom has indicated a desire to instead
provide the easement along the east and north side of Lot 6 since
this lot has not been sold as of yet. If the City were to
accept Lot 6 trail easements in lieu of Lots 3, 4, and 5, this
would not provide a through trail to the school property as
planned unless it continued across the City's water tower site.
Without the access through Lot 31, the City should hold to the
requirement for trail easements along Lots 3, 4, and 5 which in
all praticality provides the most direct route to the school ,pro-
perty and buildings. 1
To briefly address the other comments raised in Mr. Ostrom's
letter of December 7, 1987 (Attachment No. 5) , the water tower is
a permitted use in the RSF single family residential district and
falls into the category of utility services [Section 20-612(5) ] .
City service truck "intrusion" would be limited to a pick-up
truck visiting the site on the average of two to three times per
week and would be no more intrusive than the City snowplows which
I am sure are a welcome site when they visit the area. The mix
of motorized traffic with pedestrians is no different than any
other traveled street in the residential community and, in fact,
our current access may pose more of a safety hazard for children
since we travel across Melody Hill Road and a portion of the
soccer playfield for the school. Lastly, the Development
Agreement cited by Mr. Ostrom applies specifically to his deve-
lopment. Our intentions are however to limit the width of our
access driveway to the bare minimum to accomodate our utility
vehicles and avoid removal of any of the 50-foot pine trees.
Unless the Council chooses to act otherwise, we will proceed with
installation of the water tower access driveway from Murray Hill
Road as planned.
I
I
I
Don Ashworth
January 21, 1988
page 2
' Attachments: 1 . Site Map
2. Construction Plan Excerpt
3 . Feature Map
4. Page 8 of the Pleasant Hill Development Contract
5. Letter from Curtis Ostrom dated December 7, 1987
1
1
1
1
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
•
� • O O O O
Ls) , ,
°,Z. . .2? p. to 10 N $ 8 O
N. N ril3a•• N N N' ca N ! Os m
: ham �'c'../.
EF allki,e-k' -
ipit*V-- •-lar,ork, li ; Ir •Imw = --44 • 'Not WI I
`, '`/ �`t-r,/�'T. .�_ I�.i,,TA JA TM ST 1 AILIblirm,,1112 � •��,���'
�f/ �' ♦ .Eft ( iIi; iIt.Sr. r��_
NM
41
S= ��1c'Lr'r� I"
c � ■� X11►
. ,Ir _ .
..„, ., .•
4 .
In
3/ _: ,t•
i..J
2
1 is W
j P W 67 TM STREET I
A,
L ,. .
MI
li
h
, .
.......
_ i _ c'4
I E
N�cRR/SON Z.al
•ikt cot I
W i
v, Ov ir
J j
m
i 1
.. .
0
1
RE
y • .
0 .
E _ . _ ! r_____
ll
ArrAcH in a-s 1
. :-.. ,, .:.-:. .
,. .__,:_r..- A !
4411:fr I 1
p I
1 i rte-
I
/ I ......N.......,a....
s
-rixvi lAnovoAti
— — ■
1
— �
;-3 .
I oft ,
. s V
I �•.• N th in 1 I� ..
• L r W I
7' ~ f ' I. I I •
I
'xi
i
I
i V . I I �
Li t
I ..
I
I 1
o
'ICI
IC
I LP
Si �a
I _
I ; 1 J ri I {
fit N0 I 1
I �_..; I 2 •
1 . t; \
a .. . ii 1 1 : ,
L I z I. °I b
.4.f..:;7
t A�� s•r s
V •E
s is r !i r IA
I t• z Z S ,E,„N..k „Agg
a . -14 ANL.. le'.
•:
0'..s... -4 .
to .. L E ./ •IE. 44. :. -
•
a IF
-- ' ,.P°``°. •
it-
_1_14-,°— Y pa dslr AV 3k11- sump oviiasno
.11/ i�m•.■ �• ice-it Ml��r d 1, i ' m s C
` �, OY~O
=M
.. O Y O ,,Q
an.....""1"..111.11111.1101111111:731111k 47TAC la( in 04 t
r• 41, sip: A • \
22 u
■
siF�oo LOT ,�\ D e
• a, y`. 21 vP
r GAt� -- -- 80 ��� 2 80 i
n SUTER MASSES \�`._ /_"
�� 9 , P 406 s' __-- ____ HILL __i �,, R '. �1av m MELODY HILL
fee K 11 t Vii ■
, " ' Awn miet 31
.. Er/S P 7
�` y.:__ SocCep- �Q` p A o I Q-1 P
o J� 3 19
.,mi�ll .. O
W01°51' _ a
f �� ��� J p,/ !� 2 2 K. F. wAU RIP
n CTF NO. btl'6
7%\ P r C 44e z3 4411 " 3e
I
P-1 6 M g1 4 3 i i
Jc� IA ; S 2 1
2
•
65TH
�-- , ST.
5 :
)NKA SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 276
6K 751 P 181 �Q.SP� q I 4 ! 3 ( 1pR, 2
.‘, ! App1�2
--- - -4I6 9*--- -- 160,67 N tls S2 E 257 0
1AtL 'l f+ Www —
W
tn—w • : E.,/ MATTSON
1,,1•• paf .j m
4t.. Aw��..� 40 f N ). • PAUL J. WOLF 2 s • w,c 8K 62,P 533
I loin ,,, JAMES McMULLOUvN sK Ilss, P. 74 PPr'r :
I
aping said streets because of snow plowing operations if
they are requested.
5.07. Street Sians. All street name and traffic signs
required within the plat at the time of City acceptance shall be
furnished and installed by the City at the sole cost of the
Developer.
5.08. Covenants and Restrictions. Covenants or
I restrictions to be placed upon the lots in the subject plat shall
be prepared by the Developers and shall be approved by the City
prior to recording with the County Recorder. The Covenants and
I Restrictions shall be approved if they are consistent with the
requirements of this agreement. The zoning ordinances and regula-
tions of the City shall govern if inconsistent with said covenants
and restrictions to the extent actually inconsistent; but if not
1 inconsistent therewith, the standards contained in said covenants
and restrictions shall be considered as requirements in addition
to said City ordinances and regulations. The City shall be held
I harmless in the event any disputes occur involving covenants and
restrictions.
5.09 . Setting of Lot and Block Monuments. Developer shall
1 place iron monuments at all lot and block corners and at all other
angle points on boundary lines . Iron monument placements shall be
verified after construction of improvements has been completed
Iin order to preserve the lot markers for future property owners.
5.10 Trail System. 4
I a. p The Developer shall donate to the City a perpetual
ten (10 ) foot wide easement for a pedestrian trail system
I along the east line of Lot 5 and the south lines of Lots 3 and 4.
Trail construction shall be limited to the area directly abutting Y
K the property lines of the plat and only deviate as required to �`
save mature trees. The obligation to furnish and install the
I surfacing and to maintain the system shall be solely that of the
City. In no case shall the trail be constructed to a width
exceeding six feet.
II' SECTION 6 RESERVED.
SECTION 7. ENFORCEMENT PROVISIONS.
I7.01. Reimbursement of Costs. The Developer shall
reim-
burse the City for all costs, including reasonable engineering,
legal, planning and administrative expenses incurred by by City
1 in connection with all matters relating to the administration and
enforcement of the within agreement and the performance thereby by
the Developer. Such reimbursement shall be made within fourteen
II (14) days of the date of mailing of the City's notice of costs.
-8-
1 4T-Ok CAA • ► N 'tt'
4
I .
•
•.. - • • P
w . . . - 1
-Z..:2-;.;. :',•!-':—Ist',..:,..,.. ! . --ir-AT 0.,Aexpvgatt 84. c*,9y i
`t`�':+ '1:; '` ' • '`• 6480 Murray
,M .. , . .%-` Hill Road .•
• - i..'*-V...7: .4 4=•�::•' =:';,'• Excelsior, MN 55331-
Curtis R.Ostrom "' '.-•: - ,-:. _• _
•
Kathe An ""rt ..'. -: .
n Ostrom` `� `� •• 61
_ *: 2)474-9541
�• . - ,•4.-y . -.. I
. December 7, 1957
- TO: City of Chanhassen Council
- FROM: Curtis R. Ostrom 1
SUDJ: Proposed access to water tower off Murray Hill Rd.
!ackeround
II
We bought our property because of the dense woods and privacy. II
This is a very unique parcel of land with huge specimen maple
trees and 50' pine trees lining the driveway into our property.
The Council meeting of October 19, 1981 stated, " The applicant II
shall design access to the north, (the driveway to our property),
in a manner that will preserve as much of the existing vegeta- 1
ti on as possible."
We have maintained control so trees and vegetation were not cut '
down except for the residential buildings. Each building site
II
was carefully designed to create desirnb1e building sites. We
removed as few trees as possible to ;aaintain the special chernc-
ter of this property. 1
We requested control of the road so netters such as t:li: could
not become a problem, but we were forced to give the road and
improvements to the city at our ex?ense.
II
Zoning ordinance A7 section 7
R-1 single family residential district.
II
7.02 Permitted uses - no building or land shall be used except
._: _ - « for the following use; single family dwellings.
7.04 Uses by conditional .use permit
• _ - ` ' 1. parks and recreational areas - II
.-_ _., 2..son profit schools
- 3. administration offices, libraries, _public safety buildings
II
__ ._and pieces of assembly.
. Pedestrian Way is a public or private right-of-way within or
: - across a block to provide access for_pedestrians and which may be
II
.- ° used for utilities.
=• -L' ,t - •-`,: r., g -Construction-Remodel
. ..::. ..__. . 4 =i Residential I
•�►�,; .F°• : ;•�'-• •,�"� :_::.. ,;�:��. �;t,.:J! Resi -Commercial �•�
- . :d -- " •w1..t+ s"'i—FtrOf�+i '.j'`"•..•.!•�1-a .•-4. :.:'•fir.1La
• . •• :1 ; •• •„''.4 . ,. Via;!' .:_:.. ?,��. ....s'...'i';. .••` • y r. :• .. . • • • •- r <'.e }j . alit.
Development agreement states;:' The developer shall donate to the -4'.=:.'": • ' ,
II city s perpetual ten foot wide easement for a•pedestrian trail `i. ' -
system. Trail conctruciion shell be limited to the area directly- ..4_ ". !'''
abutting the property lines of the plat and only 'deviate as re- _ '_
• quired to save mature trees. In no case shall'the trail be con-
' - ••. -' _ .• K..•structed to a width exceeding six feet. r _ ,r ,•
Co: manta : ; .
We have built six homes'ir. the $]00,.,00 price ra e. Every ' _••'
n .. � Y Person s!:°-•...
in the area objects to this proposed access, even the homes we ' '•`a"?1•.
did net build. We object to the proposed access to the water '°t •
II tower from Murray Hill Road for the following reasons] •. •a ''._ -f='' =•''
1. Non-conforming use for a R-1 moping _ --?'
' .
2. Pres Qnt access is through school property, a'non residential • .''
area.
II j. Dat.age to existing trees and vegetation
4. City service trucks intruding; on a private residential area
on a daily oasis when it's not necessary
I ,. t•:ixinr motorized traffic with a pedestrian way is a safety
hazzer a non-conforming to the ordinance
6. The intent of the development agreement for the area limits
the pedestrian path to aix feet.
II
ihani:vou for your consideration in this matter.
II
II :::r
•c rf.ly, '
RGF721.7--
1.1 an
II ;::veioper/rcf.ident
II
I
II
II . . : .
I • .
sr f� r ` '
• • \ rnJ z u— _ _ _ - - - - - � `•
r..•••■.4 '' . -. ► 2 I 1 1 •
I
e, ' y 41
II C
I
2 21 Z
'• j -_; 1.4 ff K ti PI 01
�� ,P... g ; ;
I
_ en
_
.r* :\- '1 SA •
CN ° >.... 4
01 r =• g0 >
•
C w ` `F E 110 1 ,<„
•
O ;
± IJ 1• 1
�y I I• tN 1
1 y
2/O
I N1 W Z
1 1 >
at
1 !m1 w•as ='. :. .. : :::` 1 r;
1
11 , `•• • 1 I
I
•
n01 PI
I<
a
1.
i a.
T 1 A
i
1
1�
- 1
AO a
: , PI P
I
Yt:Y; 4•••••'::::•:::::.:::':'•:::-:.;i::-..;:::::7;..::::?::
s s
110.,..: . ....:..• 1 !10I A a a
;I 1 f2-_-. • _L___ _
r ' LL _ _ - -' _
1
:L- - ------- _a
1
TJ –,
1 .•
GILBERT H. KREIDBERG
6444 MURRAY HILL ROAD
EXCELSIOR, MN 55331
(612)474-9129
'
May 9, 1989
Mr. Gary Warren y
City Engineer ?us) CITY OF CHANHASSEN
City of Chanhassen r�?r� �^I�r
' 690 Coulter Drive �-Ai+?(����iu'/�{ri
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 MAY 0E89
Dear Gary, `j� � 13± DEPT.
This letter is a follow-up to our conversation of
May 4, 1989 regarding the Cities' property in front ( to
' the east ) of the water tower off Murray Hill Road.
Now that the issues concerning the trail system and
the need for alternative access to the water tower ( Lake
1 Lucy Road pipeline ) appear to be resolving themselves,
it seems appropriate to review my interest in acquiring
this property. As you know, the Cities' property directly
adjoins my lot. I am proposing purchasing the property
from the City of Chanhassen at a mutually agreed upon price
with some very favorable terms from the Cities' standpoint:
1 (1 ) At the time the purchase is consumated I would
gift ( deed ) to the City the northern 10 feet
( or what is needed, within reason ) of the
' property to allow continued public access from
Murray Hill Road to the MIS School as well as
emergency eastern access to the water tower.
(2) I also would accept that no house could ever
be built on the property. It would simply be
part of my yard.
This transaction would allow the City to meet the
needs of the public, add to its Treasury by the purchase
price and increase the tax roles as I am sure my property
taxes would increase as a result of the purchase.
During recent years, the property has been neglected
' and needs to be cleaned up. If I acquire the property
it saves the City the clean up expense.
The above proposal meets with the approval of the
Pleasant Hill Homeowners association.
' If the City Fathers are in agreement in principle,
I am sure we can come to a satisfactory meeting of the
1
. a
I
GILBERT H. KREIDBERG
6444 MURRAY HILL ROAD
EXCELSIOR, MN 55331
(612)474-9129
II
minds on the price. I appreciate your assistance, and II
the Mayor and City Councils serious consideration of my
offer. If you have any questions or if you would like
II
me to be present at a City Council meeting, etc. , please
give me a call.
I look forward to hearing the Cities response to my I
proposal. Thank you.
Best Regards, I
I
I
is
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ALA
CITY ' OF PG,., _
4'f CHANHASSEN 9/2 rin
"� 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
I _ (612) 937-1900
MEMORANDUM
ITO: Roger Knutson, City Attorney
WIJ
FROM: Gary Warren, City Engineerl \ '
IDATE: September 14, 1989
11 SOW: Murray Hill Water Tower Site Land Transaction
File No. PW159
I After several discussions and a meeting with Mr. Gil Kreidberg, I
believe we have reached an agreement concerning the sale of the
easterly 210 feet of the City's water tower site located on Lot
I 31, Murray Hill Addition. Please prepare a purchase agreement
for the parcel described as follows:
I The southerly 90 feet of Lot 31, Murray Hill Addition, lying
east of a line described as follows:
Starting at the southeast corner of Lot 31, Murray Hill
I Addition, thence west along the south lot line of Lot 31,
210.00 feet to the point of beginning, thence north on a line
parallel to the easterly boundary of said Lot 31.
IPurchaser: Gilbert and Jillene Kreidberg
6444 Murray Hill Road
Excelsior, MN 55331
IThe special terms of the purchase agreement should be as follows:
I 1. Purchase price equal to $30,000 cash; $31,980 if purchased
with contract for deed or other term arrangement.
2. Sale of the property is with the understanding that the City
Iintends to and will construct a 10-foot wide driveway/trail
access within the City's 20-foot utility easement which
currently abuts the northerly portion of this subject parcel.
I This will in all likelihood require the removal of one of the
mature pine trees.
I 3. The City agrees to construct a controlled access gate to pro-
hibit unauthorized vehicular access but which can be unlocked
by the City for routine servicing of the water tower site.
I
II
II
•
Roger Knutson
September 14, 1989
II
Page 2 -
4. Purchaser agrees to clean subject parcel of debris and to II
build a fence complying with City ordinances along the
westerly and northerly boundary of this parcel. I
5. Purchaser will be allowed to remove the existing split rail
fence on City property located east of the water tower.
6. The City and Purchaser agree to split the platting cost II
- required for this transaction which is in addition to the
purchase price stated above. i
7. Purchaser certifies that he has reviewed this lot split with
- -the residents of the Pleasant Hill subdivision and has
obtained their concurrence with said proposal of the City to
II
eliminate one tree and construct a controlled access
driveway/trail for routine use by the City for maintaining
_ the Murray Hill water tower and appurtenances. . Said trail is
II
to be for the enjoyment of the public.
Please add 'appropriate legalese to these conditions and purchase
II
agreement and call me if you need any clarifications. I am par-
ticularly concerned about Items #2 and #7 above as to how we
might strengthen our position for constructing this driV'eway-once
the land transaction has been completed as this is the sole
II
justification in my mind for entertaining this transaction.
4
My desire is to have this completed as soon as possible. and II placed on the Council agenda for the October 9, 1989 meeting.
Attachment: Map . . I
c: Don Ashworth, City Manager
File No. PW158B 1
II
1
II
'me=.. ..
. .... _ ;4_ - — —
v fd■.
.
‘ a''''' t elm •■■• •••
• 1
4... /0...0: C
O... •■••■•■L
II ;.
-
a 1.... t.
rw..C: • •
-e ,.
9.2.rs• &- :
- - • ..— ---
r- --- ---- --- — .......-., ..■P.• &
: . .
‘NN%
I g'
ii ;•
• .
1111 '....
.... •
N./ •., ..- I I.. * f•••
S• r• C'
• \ .1 Co .•
a al
el lc
a s
"*DAZ.,, • :. .) \, g •
I 54 a 2
1.....4. -,,,... ,,..: ...• 21
a• m
N.M.
././#.'"%rt-. 4.4'-'4:;_%4- la/ •.. • z
•f4
I
... f v.
en M
0 0
PI 141
04:- 1 „ , „ \ r• 71, . s_
NiZ4f.1 ,fte, . 8 g g
PI III
• • Ar
Z Z
I
67• /
. °g
' 0,.. ;*\ ,\- / ••• ..1
. ED
<
-.,
Ss
. -
• .. '3. g ,
4 +.1
• r
IR 0
4.r• •-:,',:i' = 2,- .4 x 1 -8
I
0 t
I 31.
0
pi
Ocb outs
2
.,,,, ■1191 1 a •
" V':;.. PI fn:4 gR Fi •.1 s•
es "
< .
2 r
Joes rn
ile ' rn
r " - -04 . zlo 1 Pc
1
i -. -0
.....
,- ,:•...
:. • • .... . :0- ••• - •--:::::.••:•::•-:.::::•:::....:::.•:.:
.........ir:.:- I f A
i 6;
I ''
i I 3:111 .•::.:::-.---:::;:::::..-'::-::::**:,:ie•-':••••::::;:::::::;;:.:::::...:::::i:.:.:::::.::•:.::...:... 1
III I
.-••:..-:•.:-::::.:-::::.:::..5..:..::•,::.::.,::::.. ; :•:.:::::.::.1;i::•::::::::.:::::.. 1
I
I •Fo-
:::::::J.:::: :::-:::4:-.ii.:::*::::::„....: -:..:;:ui:im.::...*: 1 •
•
e m
•:•-*- •-':-:%:*::::::?::::'''''':*:.:•::%.*:".::•..:.::::•:::.:::::::::::;.. i 1 ...•v
•..• ;:..;:..:•::..,:.•;;;:•-::'....'-.;:•:;:;?.;.;...... •;•....:.::...:::.......,.. 1 A z
"•••
z 0
- •.• ' •:- -:•-:: -'•.-...••••:-::•:..:.:: .-::::::::.:::::::::::.:.,••• 0 et
st
I . .:. ':•••"'. '-•::,'••-:.-,......:::::.:' ff.;:.:.....%:..:.:: 1 _1 in
es
et
I 0
0
:.'" • ''..*••••':"' : *':.'•::.:••••••:•'..:.:I 1 .91,li ZI
I - . '...:.' *.'.• :'......**...• ..*' ':::::.::• ...:.:.:*: 0
II•
0 • . ■
X/•
' ....... ..•• *°I •*..•••.' . •'::::::.::::•.:'::•:..,: I 0 1
■
I •••••• ...."••••••:.::::":. %SI'... :**•• .•• •• ••••*•.%••
0 :-:-.• :* "'• :• • ...' ......::::•::::.i:.• ...: I
..•ft- ..... :•: la• I I
.' ...::,...:."...-'•:. :ti,'....:::::•:.•:*: ...: :::::::::•:.:....
. . :::•:.. ••lk"....'.::::'•:...Cf.%...::;5:.',.:7'•:,. f
' ..• :....5:: ':••....ill: '::.•:.:':.:::..........,.:..S..:.::•:::: I
. .....::::.::::••::.:....:::-e.•.....:•:•••••••••:.::.::•:51.X..:*:.*::...••:.':••••• I ....
III
. •— ....' " . .. .......,............. I
' .".:'.• '--. ':. *........-:,.:.:,.:..:::.•':.:•.•::.,::.::..;.*.,::•::::...• 1 I 1 o•
\
* • . *. •...•..' •;••••:•'.*::•:••.*::::.:**•:::;:i'..i...*:*,:•::•:.:•:•%::::1 I
IZ Cr) - •-• . •••••••••-.-*:-.-::::::::•::•:::*:::::•.t....t.;.:„.:::::.i ..:... ,
D • - •,. .......•....::::::::.:.:::::::„:::::::::::::::::::::.:.:.:..-;....................:.::.::::-.::::::::[:•.1:::::::::::::::::."........i:.::...........:::::.::::::::::.::.:::.::::::::::.:•:01::::::::::::,.....
1 -1 IN
a Pt
a
• g -
' *.'.::::**::*x:.::::•:•::::.:.:.x.::::::.;.:.
:••::::..,:•-..--::::•-•.:::•::•:.:;•;.::-.::--;.....:,:;.....;:•:;;:;;;;;;::::..;..;;;;;;•.;.::::::::. 2
•:•:.:.:••-•„:::::-:.:?::::,:::.:.:.::.::::i::::.„:4;;;..:•:: l
a IR
• a z
•:::•:i..-::::::::::.::•:•:::::::::i::::.:::i.::.:„.:::i:,..:?....:,:::::,:::::„.„.:.,.*:„...:. , 1
•- •• - •:-.-:-::::.F....::•::.:.::::::::...:.:.:::::. :.:.:,,,-:::::::.••;::::::::: :: 1,
- :•::::.:,•■: ,:t.:.::••::::::.:::::::.„.....::::,::::::::::::::::::, 1 1 pi 0,
a. to
'.: :':':::'-::-::::-:::-:-::.• ::.::::::•:::::::::.:::::;:........::„::::::::.:.:::::
0
i.:::....:•:.:::•::::::::::.:.i::::::::•:•:::::i-:::::.i:?i:.::i*::•:•::.:::::i::.:::...:.:...,.....:::::i,:::.: .,i ,
en X
111 0 :.:.:::::;....:ii:iii::::::ii.:::i:::::.:i.ife•:::::::::::::-::::*::::':%:*:::::::*::::.*:...:%:..... 1
'•:::i :.•• ::: :*:::':' **:•::::::.:.::-..,;:i.:,...:•:•.-.%:,.:... 1 A A
g g
.-1 ••■
••.......•••••••••• -... .• .......•••••••..•••.
.:::::::i::::: :- --- -- ••
•:..„, -::::::::::::•.----••••.41, • .. . i 2 0 1
111 M 1,— ,..7-;—_,_7_,, ,„7 ...
... •
• •
I r
_
II
1
1 .1110 011.■ 611111111••
r . .
..
I, 1,__. _ .
,...._ mwsw.ilimona•■■•amilm INI■
I . ,
I
/
Ir ..........
I
LAW OFFICES
GRANNIS, GRANNIS, FARRELL & KNUTSON
DAVID L.GRANNIS- I874-1961 PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
TELECOPIER:
DAVID L Gums,JR.- 1910-1980 Pon OFFICE Box 57 (612)455-2359
VANCE B GRANNIE 403 NOLWEST BANK BUILDING EwOTT B.KNETSCH I
VANCE B.GRANNIS,JR.• 161 NORTH CONCORD EXCHANGE MICHAEL J.MAYER
PATRICK A.FARRELL SOUTH ST. PAUL,MINNESOTA 55075
DAVID I..GRANN>s,III I
Bocuu N.KNVrsoN TELEPHONE(612)455-1661
DAVID L HARYER
Moo Ammo To September 19, 1989
IIPuma IN Wocoomo
Mr. Gary Warren II
Chanhassen City Hall
690 Coulter Drive, Box 147
II
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
RE: Murray Hill Water Tower Site Transaction
Your File No. PW159
II
Dear Gary:
Enclosed please find draft Purchase Agreement with Gilbert II
and Jillene Kreidberg concerning the above transaction. Please
call if you have questions or comments. {
I
Very truly yours,
GR NIS, G IS, FARRELL 1I
& KNUTSON A.
BY
it-oWEN. Knutson II
RNK:srn
Enclosure
II
P.S. - If the property is going to be platted, I suggest the I
platting process be completed before closing.
RNK I
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
MPH I
SEP '01989
ENGINEERING DEPT.
1
I
I
' PURCHASE AGREEMENT
' AGREEMENT made this day of , 1989, between
' THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, a Minnesota municipal corporation (hereinafter
"City") , and GILBERT KREIDBERG and JILLENE KREIDBERG, husband and wife
' (hereinafter °Buyer") .
RECITALS
A. City is the owner of certain real property in the City of
Chanhassen, Carver County, State of Minnesota, (hereinafter "subject
property") , legally described as follows:
The southerly 90 feet of Lot 31, MURRAY HILL ADDITION, lying
east of a line described as follows: Starting at the south-
east corner of Lot 31, MURRAY HILL ADDITION, thence west along
I the south lot line of Lot 31, 210.00 feet to the point of
beginning, thence north on a line parallel to the easterly
boundary of said Lot 31.
4
' B. Buyer desires to purchase the subject property, and City is
willing to sell the same to Buyer, subject to the terms hereinafter set
forth.
IN CONSIDERATION OF THE FOREGOING, AND IN CONSIDERATION OF THE
' MUTUAL COVENANTS HEREIN CONTAINED, IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
' 1. Sale of Subject Property. City agrees to sell and convey to
Buyer by general warranty deed, and Buyer agrees to purchase the subject
property, subject to the following encumbrances:
a) Building, zoning, and subdivision ordinances, and state
and federal regulations;
b) Reservations of minerals or mineral rights to the State
of Minnesota;
c) Public roads, highways, utilities or rights-of-way;
' d) Real estate taxes payable in the year of closing and
subsequent years, together with all installments of special
assessments payable therewith and thereafter, whether heretofore
09/19/89
II
or hereafter levied or assessed, subject to the provisions of II
paragraph 5 herein;
2. Payment of Purchase Price. Buyer shall pay to City as
consideration for the purchase of the subject property the sum of Thirty le
Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($30,000.00) , payable as follows:
a) Three Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($3,000.00) earnest '
money in cash, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged by City;
b) Twenty-seven Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($27,000.00)
in cash, which is the balance of the purchase price, payable on I
the date of closing.
3. Title and Examination. City shall, within a reasonable time 1
after acceptance of this Agreement, furnish an Abstract of Title or a
Registered Property Abstract, certified to date to include proper ,
searches covering bankruptcies, state and federal judgments and liens.
Buyer shall be allowed twenty (20) business days after receipt for
examination of title and making any objections, which shall be made in
writing or deemed waived. If any objection is so made, City shall be
allowed 120 days to make title marketable. Pending correction of+ title,
payments hereunder required shall be postponed, but upon correction of
title and within ten (10) days after written notice to Buyer, the partied'
shall perform this Agreement according to its terms. If title is not
corrected within 120 days from the date of written objection, this
Agreement shall be null and void, at option of Buyer, neither party shall !'
be liable for damages hereunder to the other, and any monies paid shall
be refunded to Buyer. 1
4. Closing. The closing of this transaction shall take place
on or before November 1, 1989, at such location and at such time as may II
be mutually agreed upon by the parties. '
11
-2-
I - . •
a
' S. Real Estate Taxes. Buyer agrees to pay all real estate
taxes and special assessments due and payable in the year 1989 and
' thereafter. City makes no representation concerning the amount of future
real estate taxes.
6. Contingencies. This Agreement is subject to the
following:
' a) The City intends to construct a 10-foot wide
driveway/trail access within the City's 20-foot wide parcel
' which currently abuts the northerly portion of the subject
property, which will in all likelihood require the removal of
one of the mature pine trees.
b) The City intends to construct a controlled access gate
to prohibit unauthorized vehicular access, but which can be
unlocked by the City for routine servicing of the water tower
' site.
c) Buyer agrees to promptly clean the subject property of
' debris and to build a fence complying with City ordinances along
the westerly and northerly boundary of the subject property.
s
d) Buyer will be allowed to remove the existing split rail
' fence on City property located east of the water tower.
e) The City and Buyer agree to split the subdivision cost
' required for this transaction which is in addition to the
purchase price stated above.
f) Buyer certifiesa'that they have reviewed this lot split
with the residents of the Pleasant Hill Subdivision and have
obtained their concurrence with the City's proposal to eliminate
one tree and construct the controlled access driveway/trail for
' routine use by the City for maintaining the Murray Hill water
tower and appurtenances. The trail is to be for the enjoyment of
the public.
7. Default. If Buyer defaults in any of the agreements herein,
City may terminate this Agreement, and on such termination all payments
' made hereunder shall be retained by Buyer as liquidated damages, time
' being of the essence hereof. This provision shall not deprive either
party of the right of enforcing the specific performance of this
' Agreement, provided this Agreement is not terminated and action to
-3-
I
•
. • �� . i
enforce specific performance is commenced within six (6) months after
such right of action arises. In the event Buyer defaults in his
performance of the terms of this Agreement, and notice of cancellation is
served upon Buyer pursuant to M.S.A. 559.21, the termination period shall ,
be thirty (30) days as permitted by Subdivision 4 of M.S.A. 559.21.
8. Notices. Any and all notices required by this Agreement ' 1
shall be made in writing and delivered personally or by prepaid,
certified mail to the parties as follows:
As to Sellers: City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive, Box 147
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
Attention: Don Ashworth
As to Buyer: Gilbert and Jillene Kreidberg
6444 Murray Hill Road
Excelsior, Minnesota 55331 1
9. Miscellaneous. This Agreement shall be binding upon and
inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective personal
representatives, heirs, successors, and assigns, and the provisions of
this Agreement shall survive the closing.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands the
day and year first above written.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN ,
BY:
Donald J. Chmiel, Mayor
AND I Don Ashworth, City Manager
I
GILBERT KREIDBERG
i
JILLENE KREIDBERG
-4-
i
t --
,-
I , - -
.
HILL 2ND ADDITION ,
1 PLEASANT
THE NORTH UNE OF LOT I, BLOCK 1, PLEASANT HILL HAS AN ASSUMED BEARING OF N.89°59.27"E-
°DENOTES V2—INCH X 14—INCH SET IRON PIPE MARKED BY LICENSE NO. 17253.
I SCALE Mt FEET:miMmill.imm "11MMIIIII MM"11"1
DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS ARE SHOWN THUS:
o 40 80 120 160 200
1 o
fr--6.00 2 6.00–.1
—_ ——— _i_. _
_
I I
BEING 6.00 FEET IN WIDTH AND ADJOINING LOT LINES. UNLESS I
OTHERWISE INDICATED ON THE MAP AND BEING 12.00 FEET IN WIDTH
AND ADJOINING RIGHT OF WAY LINE, AS SHOWN ON THE MAP. I;
I
• Pc f-c ,,,-rizzi.
E.,..., K.-- 1
s 0 I
I CI
I •
/North fine of the South 110 ft. Let 31,MURRAY HILL
.•--x.erss.zrr.
322.02 ---------.4t •—•
Er.: .
....;
''•••
•••?..:
r Fr-
i r--,7-7.717.4:// ,.-YiDrainage and Alfilify Easement;if/ 'Sy/ AP't
ea e
• 114 ill A t).6 9}e•C 1------ ------?7-‘. .; I
77)r\t l'e,r".c' I 1.3 C:C • 1 Er-..... --... -....-..-.1k...-
I I • + • • / /I. .
■ WI.65- - 1
4.41.09.5927"E. I g „...,,...
-.....i-co 1 :T. I
2
. d.
t- I ...• 18
I ; -;--
I •i 1
*.i!.. 1
... .4 ....:
i .-1.1.89.59.27•E. I
t__ _113.78_ __I I
: SO
I -j ------=f
'' 1 N-- ..... 11TMP 1 .
1 i ---
•., i 0 (..) -....e
/
•%.. ,
\ :i• ...
/ c'f.at
I
N x
-...
.44. i 0 ..Z.... •,..ti)*
I NI 16
4 114!
••At
X i ..'
N.,
/ i
Ts,..„.:4,„.9 N
/ , ,
I 0,,,:i. 'N ?
/
....
...: x / .$,;i‘4"4...it..'
I::: ..... -, \ /
Il
.4' V.• . /
.......
45'7 is d'e /
I . 1 4410.°C11' 1
--...--(
.
':::. •;*.-?.
'.:
I ::'s% .
)
.
I
\•••.... --.../ : ".:".•'
,...:,:
1...?
------
I
I
I
1
Planning Commission Meeting
II
January 3, 1990 - Page 20
Conrad: Jim, your reasons for your negative vote?
Wildermuth: I don't like the existence of Outlot A and I 'd like to give
the adjacent property owners as well as the adjacent property owners
to Outlot A as well as the applicant for the subdivision an opportunity to
either work out some kind of a land swap or some kind of an arrangement.
Conrad: I basically agree with Jim's comments because I think it's a real
strange parcel but I 'd also, even if it does exist in the end, I'd prefer
to have the wording on it's use to be as restrictive as possible and I
didn't notice that the motion for item 7 really provided that restriction
and maintained the character of that particular outlot. This will go ahead II
though to City Council. Would be up there what? Did we say the 22nd of
January? We left the record open for comments so the neighbors can make
their comments and get them in for City Council review. I thank you all
for coming in. Thanks very much.
PUBLIC HEARING: I
PRELIMINARY PLAT TO REPLAT A PORTION OF LOT 31, MURRAY HILL AND LOT 1,
BLOCK 1, PLEASANT HILL ON PROPERTY ZONED RSF AND LOCATED ON MURRY HILL
ROAD, JUST SOUTH OF MELODY HILL ROAD, CITY OF CHANHASSEN. i
Public Present:
Name Address '
Gilbert Kriedberg 6444 Murray Hill Road
Sharmin Al-Jaff presented the staff report. Chairman Conrad called the
public hearing to order. ,
Gilbert Kreidberg: I am Block 1, Lot 1. I'm the one with a vested
interest. In fact. . .that trail access to the tower. Part of that process
is the acquisition of that portion of. . .and make sure that the activity is
staying per agreement. . . I think it's probably pretty straight forward. . .
so unless you have any questions. I guess the engineers don' t come to
these meetings. ,
Conrad: They do occasionally but not usually. Okay, any other public
comments?
Erhart moved, Emmings seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in
favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. I
Conrad: Joan at your end. Any comments?
Ahrens: I have no comments about this. I
Wilderruth: Where is the fence going to go? There' s some elusion to a
fence here with a gate.
I
IIPlanning Commission Meeting
January 3, 1990 - Page 21
I .
' Gilbert Kreidberg : Yes, that will go across the roadway there or the
pathway going back to the tower. What it will do, it will provide
pedestrian access but preclude vehicle access with a locked gate to it. . .
' we had problems with snowmobiles running through there at speeds well in
excess. . .kids playing out there and going back and forth to the school .
It's designed as a safety factor and part of the neighborhood. . .
Wildermuth: So the City is going to construct the fence?
Gilbert Kreidberg: . . .and that is part of all of this thing.
' Wildermuth: And the area is so wooded that they can't get around the fence
readily? Is that the idea?
Gilbert Kreidberg : Yes . They would on, at that point they would be going
on private property and both of them will be fenced off so that will be the
access. . .The City I guess wanted to service the tower from the easterly
' side even though they've been servicing it for 15-16 years from the
westerly side. . .
' Wildermuth: Sounds good to me. I'm impressed that somebody' s willing to
pay that kind of money for that.
Gilbert Kreidberg : You're telling me. . .
' Batzli: Two questions. One was, if I understand it, you're going to build
a fence along the easement?
Gilbert Kreidberg: Yes. That is correct.
' Batzli : Is that in the purchase agreement as well?
Gilbert Kreidberg: The City has requested that I build a fence on what
would be the northern border of the easement over. . .fence it up 10 feet and
' the yard directly behind my house is all wooded. . . The City property,
while it is wooded, it's not particularly heavily wooded in the area that
I'm going to be acquiring. It's pretty much open with some trees along. . .
and mostly between the property line. . .
Batzli: Is there any reason Paul or anyone else to put a requitement
regarding cutting down of trees or anything else in this parcel?
Krauss: Mr. Batzli, I'm really not certain as to whether we need anything.
We didn't give it any consideration. This has been in discussion with so
' much activity between the property owner and the City Council that we
basically just process the subdivision at this point. There was no intent
to build on the property. There may be some use, recreational use of the
property at some point in the future, some facility like that. If you'd
feel more comfortable with some sort of a tree preservation element.
Batzli: Well it's just interesting because there's a no building clause on
' it already so they can't ever build on it so what would you ever use it for
1
Planning Commission Meeting I
January 3, 1990 - Page 22
I
except as a backyard?
Gilbert Rreidberg: Maybe I could put a pool in. '
Wildermuth: Right. I wouldn't want to preclude him putting a swimming
pool back in.
Gilbert Rreidberg: Yeah, that's really what it is. The big trees, the
last thing I want to do is take them down unless they die. There's a lot I
of little trees. The City has let this thing go for 16 or 17 years. I
mean it's a mess. There's all kinds of dead foliage on it. There's junk
all over. If I hadn' t done this, they sure would have had to clean it up.
There's a whole lot of little trees planted in bunches that had no sense to'
protect the trees. . . The one thing I might do is clean that up so
everything survives because that's all there is. The real big trees are
along the part for which the easement would involved. . . 11
Batzli: Would you object to having the City review if you were to make a
plan of what you were going to do with cleaning it up? I
Gilbert Rreidberg: I think it makes it kind of cumbersome on me because
what I'm going to do to clean up, pick up all the junk that's there and the!'
dead trees and weed out some of the garbage that's there. I would never
cut a trees that's probably more than 2 inch spread but you know some
places you have to clean up because, I mean you don't have a picture of it
but along the northerly portion there' s parts where there's like maybe 40
trees with 20 feet of width and 10 feet of length. I mean they're just all,
bunched together. In order for those to survive, some of those have to be
cleaned up. I
Batzli: No, I'm familiar with the area. I know what it looks like and
I imagine that you're going to be going in there and cutting down some
trees is my only point.
Gilbert Kreidberg : Oh, just little stuff. I'm not going to take anything
down that stands taller than I am except for where they're so bunched 1
together.
Batzli: Well I don't know. I'll see if anybody else jumps on the band
wagon.
Elison: I thought this was a happy ending. I think it's nice to see that
we got what we wanted as the City out of it and usually we get
neighborhoods that say don't do anything there yet they don't want to go
and get the property to do anything else with it and I'm really pleased to
see this guy's taking it upon himself to make it a better looking place.
Gilbert Kreidberg: I think it will be a lot nicer when I'm done.
Elison: And I agree. I think it would too after I looked at it. I was
confused on what you wanted number 3 to be.
1
II ' Planning Commission Meeting
January 3, 1990 - Page 23
Al-Jaff: That there would be no further subdivision in the future and no
new residences would be built.
Ellson: Okay. I got the subdivision part but I wasn' t sure about, okay.
I don't have anything else.
' Emmings: I think it's, like Annette says, it's just a good thing for
everybody. As far as Brian's concerned about the trees, I like Tim am not
happy about imposing much on individual landowners on a deal like this. I'm
more concerned when we have a developer coming in on a larger area to worry
about protecting the trees. I think what's appropriate to do it in the
' last one because the land that you were doing it on was closer to the lake
but I think of myself on my lot. If I want to cut down a tree, I don't
want to go to the City to tell them I want to cut down a tree. I 've got 15
or 20 oaks that are 100 feet tall and I don't want to cut them down but by
' God if I do want to cut them down, I'm going to cut them down and I don't
+
want any crap from the City about it.
Ellson: We're trying to preserve our nature and natural beauty.
Batzli : This might be a little bit different because the owner of the lot
is going to go on there with the intention of cleaning it up and cutting
' things down.
Emmings: I worry about people like the developers back here who came in
' and showed us a nice plan and said how much he liked trees and then went
through with a bulldozer and just took everything down. That's the part
that scares me but anyhow, I think that should be left up to his discretion
' but I have a more important reservation about this. You have a son that
plays soccer .
Gilbert Kreidberg: I certainly do.
'
Emmings: His name is Nathan isn't that right? And when his team P layed my
son's team last summer, his team won didn't it? I'm opposed to this.
Unless I can have some guarantees about next summer. Okay, I'm interested.
Erhart: I have nothing additional to add other than I think it looks like
a reasonable subdivision and I think Steve pretty much his words reflected
my thoughts on tree removal things.
Conrad: I have nothing to add. I don't feel the tree issue- is an issue
that I am concerned with. Is there a motion?
Ellson: I'll move the Planning Commission recommend approval of
' Subdivision Request #89-23 as shown on the plat dated December 29, 1989 and
subject to the conditions listed here with one additional one that would
not allow further subdivision and no additional residences would be
' allowed.
Erhart: I'll second it.
•
I
Planning Commission Meeting I
January 3, 1990 - Page 24
I
Elison moved, Erhart seconded that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of Subdivision Request #89-23 as shown on the plat dated December 11'
29, 1989 and subject to the following conditions:
1. Lot 2 be shown as Outlot A on the final plat.
2. The north 20 feet of Outlot A is dedicated as a trail easement.
3. The property cannot be further subdivided or any new residences be
built on the site.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
ZONING ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CITY CODE WITH REGARD TO ESTABLISH THE
MAXIMUM LOT SIZE FOR CHURCH DEVELOPMENTS AT 15 ACRES.
Paul Krauss presented the staff report on this item.
Conrad: So basically you're saying that somebody could come in, subdivide II
a parcel and basically get around the ordinance that way?
Krauss: Yes, that's correct. In fact there was a related question. If II
you recall we processed a conditional use permit or a site plan for a
church in the Frontier building. The City Council didn't have a problem
with the church going in there but they were concerned what would happen
a church purchased the building and made it tax exempt. Roger basically
said there's absolutely nothing you can do about that. Whether or not a
church is occupying the property, they could purchase it and put some kind
of a function in it and make the whole thing tax exempt. There' s virtually,
nothing a community can do to stop it. The practicality of it is is that
it's not going to happen very much because it's expensive property but
that's the question that he left us with. 1
Conrad: So what we've got on the books here is an ordinance that can' t
really, or we've got a proposal of an ordinance that really doesn't achieve
what the City Council intended. There's a way to get around it. Would it '
accomplish anything? The way I read it right now, it's probably more
restrictive in other areas because we went from church to, didn't he draft
the ordinance to really say any tax exempt which actually in concept I'm
more in favor of than signifying church but I don't know if it harms the
City more in terms of restricting something that we may want.
Wildermuth: I don't know if it's a problem of adjacent parcels is such a
II
big issue. Do you think it is?
Elison: I wonder if there'd even be another church that would come in. Well
all know it's an afterthought kind of thing to what's been happening and
it's a way to show the citizens that they're trying to put something in to
prevent it from happening again. '
Batzli: It's not a knee jerk reaction is it?
I