Admin Section ADMINISTRATIVE SECTION
' Letter from Sally Koenecke dated January 24, 1990.
Letter from the State of Minneaots's Office of Administrative Hearings
dated february 19, 1990.
Letter ro Mr. Dave Headla dated January 25, 1990.
Letter from Orlin H. Schafer, Carver County Assessor, dated February 26, 1990.
1 Letter to Bentec Engineering Corporation dated February 5, 1990.
Memo to Don Ashworth from James Chaffee dated February 8, 1990.
Letter to Hennepin Conservation District dated March 2, 1990.
Letter from the Metropolitan Council dated February 26, 1990.
11 Charitable Gambling Contributions from the Chaska Lions Club.
Memo to Don Ashworth from Vicki Churchill dated February 6, 1990.
Building Permit Valuation By Monthly Comparison.
Letter from the Transportation Study Board received March 5, 1990.
New York times Article on Prince's Sound Stage/Studio in Chanhassen, dated
February 28, 1990.
Letter to Mr. and Mrs. David Headla dated March 1, 1990.
I/ Letter from the Metropolitan Council dated February 28, 1990.
Budget and Revenue Report for February 1990.
Memo to Mark Cooney from Scott Harr dated February 8, 1990.
Letter form Smith-Fisher dated February 23, 1990.
I
I
I
I
I
De (-Y�
' 2381 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD
MOUND,MINNESOTA 55364
612/472-6394
TELECOPIER 612/472-7153
I
TRIAX
' CABLEVISION
January 24, 1990
Todd Gerhardt
City of Chanhassen
' 690 Coulter Drive
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN
Dear Todd:
Thank you very much for the recent check I received
11 from the City of Chanhassen and the nice letter
accompanying it.
I have enjoyed working with Chanhassen and helping
to get more programming on that is of interest to
your area. This year we have begun to get some
excellent programming and have had people call to
express their appreciation. This has been a result
of your efforts to pursue Chaska cable and funding
program production.
Triax Cablevision appreciates your involvement in
community television programming because you are
providing a valuable service to the Chanhassen
11 subscribers.
Thanks again.
Sincerely,
)41x-al eutwie__
' Sally Koenecke
Community Television Coordinator
I
I
JAN 2 61990
CLII OF CHANHASSEN
s:'• "�=) D e b.,ok/?-((h_
w FEB 211999
I STATE OF MINNESOTA CITY OF CHANHASSEN
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
I FIFTH FLOOR,FLOUR EXCHANGE BUILDING
310 FOURTH AVENUE SOUTH
MINNEAPOLIS,MINNESOTA 55415 February 19, 1990
(612)341-7600
Mr. Elliott B. Knetsch Mr. Patrick J. Nugent
Campbell, Knutson, Scott&Fuchs,P.A. Soo Line Railroad Company
I 3460 Washington Drive,Suite 202 P.O. Box 530
Eagan,MN 55122 Minneapolis,MN 55440
I Mr.Gary G.Warren
City Engineer Mr. Leonard W. Levine
Commissioner of Transportation
P.O.Box 147 411 Transportation Building
Chanhassen,MN 55317 St. Paul, MN 55155
iMr.Don Ashworth Mr. Ronald F.Mattson
City Manager Asst.Director,Railroad Administration
I P.O.Box 147
Chanhassen,MN 55317 Transportation Building,Room 810
St. Paul, MN 55155
Re: In the Matter of the Resolution of the City of
Chanhassen Petitioning the Commissioner of the
Department of Transportation to conduct a public
hearing to determine whether public grade crossings
I should be established on Trunk Highway 101 and the
West 78th Street Frontage Road which would traverse
the right of way and track of the Soo Line Railroad
I Company in Chanhassen,Minnesota.
OAH No. 70-3000-4118-2
Gentlemen:
I At the hearing held in the above matter on February 15, 1990,counsel for the City of
Chanhassen and counsel for the Soo Line Railroad indicated that the parties wish to proceed in
a manner that will resolve the issue of whether the Commissioner of Transportation has
I authority to allocate maintenance costs under Minnesota Statutes,Section 219.072,as
amended,before proceeding with an evidentiary hearing concerning such costs. Counsel also
advised that,with the exception of a few minor technical items,the parties have reached a
I settlement agreement covering all other issues. By stipulation,a copy of the most recent
version of the proposed agreement was included in the record. Counsel indicated their
expectation that the remaining matters would be resolved in the near future,and that the
agreement would be submitted to the Chanhassen City Council for consideration at its meeting
I on March 12, 1990. In the event that a final agreement is executed and approved by both
parties,they will submit the agreement for consideration by the Commissioner, in order that the
project might be approved and go forward. A copy of the agreement would also be submitted
I and made a part of the record in this matter. In the event that a final agreement is not reached,
the hearing will be and is continued to Thursday,May 3, 1990,at 9:30 a.m.at the same
location,continuing on the following day if necessary.
I
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
The parties have agreed to proceed separately and simultaneously to address the issue
of maintenance costs. Whether or not the Commissioner has authority to allocate such costs is
apparently a question of first impression under the amended statute. The administrative law
judge is to retain jurisdiction with respect to maintenance cost issues,irrespective of the
I probable resolution of all other issues pertaining to the crossings and anticipated approval by
the Commissioner. Opening briefs from the parties on the issue of authority to allocate
maintenance costs shall be submitted by posting them on or before March 16, 1990. The brief
of the City,which takes the position that the statute does not confer authority to allocate
maintenance costs,will be accompanied by a motion to dismiss, conditioned upon the parties'
reaching a final settlement agreement covering all other issues. The motion will serve to
document the conditional oral motion to dismiss made at the hearing on February 15th. Reply
briefs,if any, shall be posted on or before April 2, 1990,and the administrative law judge will
thereafter rule on the issue. The parties indicated that they will take such steps as may be
appropriate to obtain a ruling on the issue by the Commissioner. If the administrative law
judge, or possibly the Commissioner pursuant to certification,determines that no authority to
allocate maintenance costs exists,this proceeding will be closed. If the administrative law
judge,or possibly the Commissioner, determines that authority exists, a hearing will be
conducted on maintenance costs, followed by a report and recommendation to the
Commissioner.
The foregoing is an effort to set forth the basic manner of proceeding,as agreed to or
concurred in by the parties,without reiterating all points discussed at the hearing, for which
reference may be made to the record. Counsel for the parties are requested to advise the
undersigned promptly in writing of any disagreement with,or clarification of,the foregoing.
I
Very truly yours,
I
Please direct correspondence tic L.Olson
regarding this matter to: Administrative Law Judge
4700 Emerson Avenue S.
Minneapolis,MN 55409 (612) 825-0968
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
— __ .r_
a., t nlyvfAi, w C.
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147• CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739
I _ ,1 ru
�Ar e•- �7wKs s'..�♦ .,iLe TF
F 4,4.: t.4,7%"1 � a'1
Mr. David Headla
II 6870 Minnewashta Parkway
Excelsior, MN 55331
II Dear Dave,
This letter is to follow up on your complaint of 1-16-90
II regarding debris blowing from new construction in the Stratford
Ridge area. We had pursued this, and in talking with your wife I
understand that some of the debris had been cleaned up, but not
all of it.
III asked our Building Official, Steve Kirchman, to talk with the
developer and contractor, and understand that several follow ups
1/ have resulted in a commitment by Mr. Bob Pierce that the builders
will clean up the rest of the fence line. I hope that this will
remedy the situation, and would ask that you contact Steve Kirchman
or myself if it is not done. Thank you for bringing this matter
11 to our attention, Dave.
S iiir y, -
II Ce?7/C 714L______ ,
Scott Harr, Assistant Public Safety Director
II SH:lf
I
-�° ", - -- IR .61 flr N as.$ r Fe�.�-•W P
t�.u �, o e
'l c_# rr /14 4-4
it
Ip,e /vi---ce-A- A-C..-.....:..1 v:-:.r.)
I FEB 141990
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
I
I
Co 'L 1/
I
I Office of County Assessor \�ilk,e_
CARVER COUNTY COURTHOUSE
OR LIN H.SCHAFER ! 600 EAST 4TH STREET
448-3435 Ext.230 n'N E S� CHASKA,MINNESOTA 55318-2189
I COUNTY OF CKQVEQ
11 February 26, 1990
ITO: City and Township Clerks
IIFROM: Orlin H. Schafer, County Assessor
Re: Confirmed dates for local BOARDS OF REVIEW
11 Enclosed is the FINAL listing of dates for the local Boards of
Review for the various jurisdictions. These are now confirmed
dates, and no changes may be made.
IIOur office will be mailing out the packet for posting notices and
other documents in the near future. Each jurisdiction is
II responsible for taking the necessary action to conform to the
requirements of the notice of meetings as provided by law. This
office shall be mailing out the Assessment Notices for each
jurisdiction at least ten days prior to the individual meeting
II dates.
There have been no radical changes in values or procedures in this
II current assessment, so I do not anticipate a lot of action at any
of the Boards of Review. If for some reason an individual Board
feels strongly about an issue, we can address that at the meeting
as scheduled. If your Board would like some background information
I on a special issue, please contact my office well in advance so
that we can research and obtain as much pertenient data as
possible.
IILooking forward to being with all of you at your meetings again
this year.
IISincerely,
S*41/161")
IIOrlin H. Schafer SAMA
II Enc 1
I
_ FEB 2 7 1999
Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer CITY OF CHANHASSEN
1
I
1
I
1
I
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
EQUALIZATION MEETINGS SCHEDULED FOR 1990
APRIL 2 Mon----8 P.M. Dahigren Township
3 Tues--10 a.m. Hollywood Township
3 Tues---8 .m. Laketown Township
P
11 4 Wed----8 p.m. Watertown Township
5 Thurs--7 p.m. New Germany City
10 Tues---8 p.m. Camden Township
11 Wed----7 p.m. Cologne City
12 Thurs--8 p.m. Young America Township
16 Mon----7 p.m. Young America City
18 Wed----8 p.m. San Fransico Township
19 Thurs--7 p.m. Mayer City
20 Fri----9:30 a.m. Chaska Township
23 Mon----8 p.m. Hancock Township
24 Tues---8 p.m. Benton Township
25 Wed----7 p.m. Norwood City
26 Thurs--7 p.m. Hamburg City
30 Mon----7 p.m. Chaska City
MAY 1 Tues---7 p.m. Victoria City
2 Wed----7 p.m. Waconia City
3 Thurs 8 p.m. Waconia Township
7 Mon p.m.--Chaska final meeting
8 Tues---7 p.m. Carver City
15 Tues---7 p.m. Chanhassen City
22 Tues---7:30 p.m. Watertown City
30 28' Mon p.m.--Chanhassen final meeting ,4"
I
I
I i CITYOF cc. " '
I if .. ...-.? . CHANHASSEN
.. ,
. , , .. •
......, ..1 .:P. 690 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900• FAX(612)937-5739
I
February 5, 1990
I
I Bentec Engineering Corp.
Attn: Mr. John Benedict
13050 Pioneer Trail
IEden Prairie, MN 55347
Re: Utility System Telemetry Specifications
Project No. 90-3
IDear John:
I/ I spoke with Randy Redetzke today, 2/5/90, and it appears that he
is making good progress on completion of the technicial specifi-
cation for the utility telemetry system package. Randy anticipa-
tes getting together with us the end of this week or more
probably early the week of February 19 to review the specifica-
tion. .:
II I have been attempting to reach you to clarify a couple of minor
items on your January 5, 1990 proposal; . The following discussion
I believe reflects our understanding on this project.
II ,i
1. The supervisory specification being prepared is to include
supervisory controls for the water system as well as the
wastewater lift station network.
l<..a --_". -- x- :: r.:n-:-..gP- ---r»i,. 'P-_7:- .,
2. One of the reasons the City' has hired_your _firm to prepare
the technical specification ',is -to eliminate any.bias in the
11 selection process and to comply with the public bidding sta-
tutes. It is-understood that if Bentec Engineering is suc-
cessful in being the "low bidder-4r A °subcontractor to the low
II bidder for this system, that you would not be entitled to any
additional fees for reviewing submittals and shop drawings to
verify conformity with the specification and supervision and
inspection of the low bidder to guarantee compliance with the
II specifications, since this would be included in your bid
package. The discussion referenced in paragraph 4 of your
January 5, 1990 letter only applies if Bentec or its prime is
IInot awarded the construction contract for this project.
II
II
t
1
1
I
1
1
1
I
Mr. John Benedict
February 5, 1990
Page 2
3. The fee in paragraph 5 refers to the $3,500 lump sum.
It is understood that the City wishes to aggressively pursue this
project such that the system can be operational by late fall,
1990. I believe these clarifications accurately represent our
mutual understanding on this project. If not, please call.
Sincerely,
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
Gary Warren, P.E.
City En ineer
. tm
Attachment: January 5, 1990 proposal letter.
Ic: Jerry Boucher, Utility Superintendent
Don Ashworth, City Manager
1
I
I
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
I
1
I
1
I
C I T Y O F
CHANHASSEN
. . „ . •
t
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
612 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739
MEMORANDUM
TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager
FROM: Jim Chaffee, Public Safety Director
DATE: February 8, 1990
SUBJ: Lori Fahning's Resignation
11 Please find attached the memo to m regarding Lori Fahning's
resignation. As you are aware, Lori is getting married on March
17, and will be moving with her new husband, our former Plumbing
Inspector Jim Thompson, to Las Vegas.
In anticipation of Lori 's resignation we did proceed to interview
I/ replacements for the position. We went with our list of applicants
that we received when we advertised for this position previously.
In addition, we received an application from Beth Koenig who
came highly recommended by Lori . We checked with the City Attor-
ney and Roger indicated that Ire may accept an additional applica-
tion for the upcoming vacancy, especially in light of the fact
that the old list is less than 6 months old.
We interviewed our top candidates on the present list in addition
to Beth Koenig and it is our consensus that Beth would be the
best person to fill the position.
I have included Beth's resume for your reviewal and if you con-
cur, we would like to offer the position to Beth and have her
start on March 4, 1990. This would then -give us approximately a
week and one-half in which to train Beth in while still utilizing
the services of Lori Fahning.
We will need to know by February 16 so that we may notify Beth so
she may be able to put in her 2 week notice.
I
11
I
r
I
1
CITY OF
1 ;i - CHANHASSEN
....
. .
......
1
I : ' 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739
V
MEMORANDUM
I TO: Jim Chaffee, Public Safety Director
Scott Harr, Assistant Public Safety Director
IIFROM: Lori Fahning, Support Service
DATE: February 7, 1990
ISUBJ: Resignation
I t
This memo is to advise you of my`=.resignation effective March 16,
1990. My last working day willibe`March 15 and I will be taking a
II floating holiday on March 16 . As all are aware, I will be getting
married and moving to Las Vegas. =.
II It will be very difficult forme to \leave. I have had a wonderful 6
months here and have enjoyed,°working -:with everyone very much. I will
be taking some wonderful memories with me. Thanks to all for making
my time here enjoyable.
t
; --
I a � -' i
&: - _.,:. _ ., . I ', may
I fe
% -
I
I
1
I
.
I BETH ANN KOENIG
10219 Orleans Lane home: (612)424-2253
IMaple Grove,Minnesota 55369 work: (612)933-1604
I OBJECTIVE A challenging position where proven organizational and communication skills,
combined with my education,will make a substantial contribution to productivity.
1 EMPLOYMENT MINNETONKA POLICE DEPARTMENT,Minnetonka,MN
I Communications Specialist,January 1986 to Present
• Screen emergency and non-emergency calls. Assign calls and maintain status of
patrol officers and street activity.
I • Communicate data on the Criminal Justice Information System computer and
operate word processor.
• As Communications Training Officer,train and supervise new personnel.
IRecords Specialist,September 1983 to January 1986
• Processed police records. Answered emergency and non-emergency calls.
• Performed typing and filing,and handled public contact.
I
LEADENS INVESTIGATIONS AND SECURITY,Hopkins,MN
I Security Officer,August 1982 to September 1983
• Monitored incoming traffic to businesses.
• Secured buildings and their premises and escorted guests to their destinations.
IK-MART,Brooklyn Center,yn +MN .
I Store Detective,September 1981 to June 1982
• Coordinated store's Loss Prevention program.
• Trained and supervised new personnel.
I • Developed and implemented a store emergency program.
THRIFTY SCOTT MOTEL,St. Cloud,MN
IFront Desk Receptionist,June 1979 to July 1981
• Greeted guests,assigned rooms,made reservations,prepared bills and handled
I correspondence.
• Scheduled and supervised housekeeping staff. •
11 EDUCATION SAINT CLOUD STATE UNIVERS RECEIVED
TTY, Saint Cloud,MN
Bachelor of Arts in Criminal Justice,1981 JAN 2 91990
IElective courses in Business Administration
CHANHASSEN PUBLIC SAFETY
1 INTERESTS Enjoy fishing,skiing,bicycling,music,camping and reading.
IReferences Available Upon Request
1
i - CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
li .. .
. .:. \ :. ■ f: '
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147• CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900• FAX (612) 937-5739
1
March 2, 1990
I
I Hennepin Conservation District
Attn: Mr. Sever Peterson
Supervisor
205 Ridge Plaza Building
12450 Wayzata Boulevard
Minnetonka, MN 55343
I Re: Erosion and Sediment Control Standards
File No. PW168A
IDear Mr. Peterson: .
In response to your February 8, 1990 correspondence, this is to
II notify you that the City of Chanhassen is in the process of
formulating its stormwater management practices on a
comprehensive level leading to the City's overall watershed
management plan. As a part of this effort we will be closely
II reviewing the three documents recently received from the
Conservation District, namely the Erosion Manual, Inspector's
Manual and model ordinance. _
As you are no doubt-aware, the City has taken a very proactive
and protective attitude towards erosion Control and development
impacts as well as wetland protection-. I anticipate this to
II continue in the future on a more -comprehensive basis utilizing
documents such as _mentioned :above .eta the upgrading of-our current
wetlands ordinance and preparation of our overall watershed
IImanagement plan: -.4,4 , . `;yam"
We will keep you appraised o'f"pi= brogress- and we certainly
I compliment the Conservation Distrfct for its efforts in
attempting to unify the standards of practice. • If agreeable, I
would like to include the Conservation District in our referral
II agency roster in order to obtain your input as we refine our City
documents and plans.
II
II
11
.
Mr. Sever Peterson
March 2, 1990
Page 2
Sincerely,
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
I
ito
r- Warren, P.E.
gineer
GGW:ktm
c: Don Chmiel, Mayor
Don Ashworth, City Manager
Paul Krauss, Planning Director
11 Bob Obermeyer, Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek WMO
Ron Quanbeck, Minnehaha Creek WMO
Larry Samstad, Lower Minnesota WMO
File No. PW201
City Council Administrative Packet (3/12/90 )
I
I
I
I
i
1
1
i
t
I
11
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Mears Par*Centre, 230 East Fifth Street, St. Paul, MN. 55101 612 291-6359
I
I
February 26, 1990
1 Paul Krauss, AICP
Director of Planning
City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Dr.
P. 0. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
1 Dear Mr. Krauss:
Enclosed is a copy of Metropolitan Council Resolution 90-9,which approves
Chanhassen's request for an extension of the time period to complete your
review of your comprehensive plan and make amendments in response to the
Council's 1988 Systems Information Statement.
' Please feel free to call Anne Hurlburt of the Council staff if you have
questions or need further information (612 291-6501).
' Sincerely,
1
Steve Keefe
Chair
1 Sip
' Enclosure
FEB B 7 123
ITY OF CHANHIt,5EN
1
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
Mears Park Centre, 250 E. 5th Street, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
612-291-6359
RESOLUTION NO. 90-9
RESOLUTION APPROVING REQUESTS FOR r;x1x:NSION OF TIME
TO MEET REQUIREMENTS OF THE METROPOLITAN LAND PLANNING ACT
WHEREAS, on April 10, 1989, the Metropolitan Council transmitted to all
local governments in the region its annual statement of changes
• in the metropolitan system policy plans, including the policy
plans for wastewater treatment and handling (sewers) and for
transportation adopted in 1988, pursuant to Mimi. -Stat. Sec.
473.856; and
WHEREAS, the 1976 Metropolitan Land Planning Act (Minn. Stat. 473.856)
states that within nine months after receiving an amendment to a
metropolitan system plan, each affected local governmental unit
shall review its comprehensive plan to determine if an amendment
is necessary to ensure continued conformity with metropolitan
' system plans. If an amendment is necessary, the governmental unit
shall prepare the amendment and submit it to the council for
review; and
WHEREAS, the law provides a procedure for granting extensions of the time
for fulfilling these requirements; and
WHEREAS, resolutions of the governing bodies of a number of local
governments, with a description of the activities previously
undertaken to meet the requirement, and the reasons necessitating
and justifying the request have been received by the Council; and
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council has made a finding of exceptional
circumstances or undue hardship as required by Minn. Stat. Sec.
473.869, that justify the requests;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,
' that the Metropolitan Council hereby approves the following requests for
extensions to the time for fulfilling the requirement to respond to the
1988 Metropolitan Systems Information Statements, with the condition
that approval of an extension shall not exempt the community from
submitting all information necessary to determine the potential impact
of any plan amendment or project on metropolitan systems plans. Whether
or not an extension has been granted, if the Council determines that a
local plan amendment or project submitted for review is inconsistent
with the metropolitan system plans, it may not receive Council approval
or favorable comment.
I
I
focal GovernmentExtension Approved,
Burnsville 12/31/90
Chanhassen 9/1/90 •
Coon Rapids 1/10/91
Hugo 7/10/90
Lakeland Shores 7/10/90
Savage 10/1/90
Victoria 12/31/90
Adopted this 22nd day of February, 1990.
i="-/-c=ft-
//ice i // �i
Steve Keefe, C
Saudi Li•41rt - , Secretary
1
1
1
1
1
1 a
1
1
1
1
I
I
il . 1 %
n_
, 104- tio ,'
1 f l*Ar- .la Oat
il Cl ai/ja
% u .'pa A. .1 " " V
LIONS CLUB
&z `'(0 tE °d* C!:¢ska, siiinn. 55318
II
CHARITABLE GAMBLING
IICONTRIBUTIONS
II PERIOD ENDING 12-31-89
11 CURRENT TOTAL
I City of Chaska:
I.S.D. #112 Endowment Fund $ 16,000 $ 115,127
Park & Recreation 14,500 107,195
II
ICity of Chanhassen:
II I.S.D.#112 Endowment Fund $ 9,700 $ 81,250
Park & Recreation 8,700 76,150
II
City of Victoria:
IIPark & Recreation $ 1,050 $ 12,500
II
II #112 ENDOWMENT FUND TOTAL FROM THE CITIES OF CHASKA AND CHANHASSEN:
$196,377.00
II
II
II
I ,
•
I -
1 690 COULTER DR.•P.O.BOX 147
RECEIPT CITY OF CIINII:SEH PHONEA(6S2)937,!.x.55317 N�. 30186
E r/7a),J►K) J/,-+3 DATE 0
I k�i r RECEIVED Of
S
PERM/LIC. AMOUNT FUND_,SOURCE OBJ. PROG.
DESCRIPTION 76//
' -'
&4 ,/s,
I r jj
•I
I a
[1-217 ).
�� TOTAL AMOUNT CHECK CASH 0
--
DEPUTY TREASURER
I
I
I
- : -_: -==:. .`:- -•-CARVER COUNTYSTATEBANK _
_ : -•_ .
-CNA SKA•MINNESOTA - - ° "_: _-:- 022051 Chaska Lions C. G. F. --. =-__._- ';= -. _-: , :;:: -:: 7a-21arola - -0• IP GENERAL FUND -<.: . ::.::-:_- _ -:. - -
Chaska, Mi n so U 55 - - -
—
•
DA_TE ` . BcEK R
HMO" -
-
Eight thousand seven hundred �2205i: : =:
TO TN
ORDER OF -
Chanhassen ..Park &-Recreation-:-: . �_._._`: -=-.:-:.: := . .- - - -
----:-.,;.:..- " :-., .::--,-,....-,: _r:-..---z,-:-.,0„-:,-,±,-;_.7-1:.:---,-, T,:,-_ti.--k--:i4..-i7S2'-'i--1.77-- -4.--aft --,,-;;:-'1;'- -7-------'',---,- - _
de B <
2 20510 40 9190 213 31: :. 5 ::--55=9 :30 :V V.. : =_.-:
I
1
4 ..___ _.---------';'--
I CITY O cz.E —.— .�
I
1 CHANHASSEN
. . .
. ,.. , : .!" ,
1 . . • a: . .. : ,
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739
I
MEMORANDUM
1 TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager
FROM: Vicki Churchill, Secretary
IDATE: February 6, 1990
ISUBJ: 1989 Building Permits
The following is a breakdown of the type of construction, number
Iand estimated value of building permits for 1988 and 1989.
1988 1989
Type No. Valuations No. Valuations
IISingle Family 352 $35,223,400 311 $31,382,900
1 Twinhome/Duplex 15 1,397,500 -0- -0-
Townhome/Quad 2 144,000 14 898,000
IIApartments 32 1,664,000 62 3,382,900
Commercial/ 18 . 7,821,800 8 31,985,000
IIIndustrial Residential 190 924,200 -254 3,564,400
I Addn./Alter. .• - . � :. ..
(decks)
Commercial/ 21 525,200 - 46 - 1,689,656
I Industrial
Addn./Alter.
Garages 22 241,00U.._.- "
I 18
213,000
Miscellaneous 49 133,981 81 717,225
II (pools, fences,
sheds, etc )
TOTAL 701 $48,075,081 794 $73,833,081
II
*Above numbers taken from permit applications.
II
II
Don Ashworth
February 6, 1990
' Page 2
1989 Fees Collected
Building Permits $ 313,112.10
Plan Check 196,375.52
Heating Permits 63,623.42
' Plumbing Permits 36,550.90
State surcharge 20,243.22
SAC retainer 4,162.50
$ 634 ,067.66
The average single family home in Chanhassen was approximately
' $101,000.
Attached is a copy of the non-residential construction report
that will be returned to the Metropolitan Council.
r
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
NE MI NE MI i MN — In MN n NM EN MO i I — — NS
• 1989 NON-RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION REPORT
/ .■/.. ee") '
MUNICIPALITY L_ e .
LIST ONLY THOSE NEW BUILDINGS OR ADDITIONS HAVING A VALUE GREATER THAN $50,000.
NAME OF FIRM USING ADDRESS BUILDING APPROX. AREA .VALUE OP • NEW OR
WA BUILDING OR BUILDER USED FOR OF BUILDING BUILDING ADDN
Istilshor e, E prase4- 7851 rk brtuG _/ , 7, loo F0, 000 /U.I.0
Zed Irl, /,Zs bui &re. 1430 air-k COur+- c tarp eru.>�. 1 400 Ai La)
1 0tr'i PeL 'Igo( k 1 riu °f`
,4 e ow 5 cc., 5)000 /10'000 V
q
M d_G 1 y n n i��a.k a.r y • 1 O O e�laaty n�, W u e_, /� etw,, 1 4.,, co 6),0 0 0/0 0 a /tJ-e .9
3110
ik- HO/17641_, Cram .310 �.ke_ ,Drive =a-.7J- d ct °are_ zo,pp 0 3 Zt/,Coo /�l>z�..r
e rn R-�.. eor' ra it on R 5O L a.e_ Dr I ie, b rocke.C4 r o,... l
f�. � �° �- `�5,.�;�0 I,550 oco Al at)
y�.Cham has-ct4‘ PrcrF ss,oi aJ 8/dg. 1470 & 5.�.. ,1�-c.l�.,YF( 'c'-+' f ,e r'f i t e. 17, 000 9'410 OD C9 ifieJ,
35 , . r
I •��e Iret.. r e r-1 rt okra. r`� 54,0 f. \:t !-%. 7C t-3f`',"e/ y 'ciu VcL,.4 koc-C ea-tt/
S'3,Ocn /� --�
35`f 3 - - 4 .
Harr.' Li►Ao(_(re j I'7 3 ell yiKtj. dad Guilt, 51-0m.t `Igo ara lieu.) • .
L'ou Ili ry-1 Ic?.3 --I ri,.144 ;tit„ , hq I u e.,�' '70k , ,..•--f- 1,•,-1 e_ i `:•5,3g4- A 500i OW AAO
" fr1A-111100-s�."–.. 1,:,9t.) 12 . r•„.1.�..,:1 �n.d rf r,�� /00,06'0 . 43.c. In_oe.e.c e •
1 //��f ,, r �.<. no n r r
Co 1 et - I 4 ' 'A_ goo . �.w..L.0 T c_CCLC ..C.... I:?000 / L i t t
iiiii2 t,069. ..., . 134,5 /:?.).r l', 4c4 patA s&:a..f . 75i , �� x �sD.e Q
it oa4ec i 0 e)CYa ss i es .67/ 10.1,:..,.‘. 5410-' •
Please use additional pages if needed.
1989 NON•RESIDENTIAL. CONSTRUCTION REPORT . •
MUNICIPALITY 7/44thia '/!C C e / ••
LIST ONLY THOSE NEN BUILDINGS OR ADDITIONS HAVING A VALUE GREATER THAN $50.000.
NAME OF FIRM USING ADDRESS BUILDING APPROX. AREA .VALUE OP NEW OR
BUILDING OR BUILDER USED FOR OF BUILDING BUILDING 1 ADDN
1_ o+u.S � &u ? C rcle-rte., 18 w, ?? ' 6fref� . ,, g, 000 b.°, 0:4 ) /(/.euJ
atAA±tro Gadtacjit. ACUL 0'4;8D Q uattrb Aive,.. 1U�#�e.. , 920 ad, 000 / cEc
I
I /14 -
I BUILDING PERMIT VALUATION
(BY MONTH COMPARISON)
I 1988 1989 1990
# of Permits Value # of Permits Value # of Permits Value
January 21 1,447,900 27 2,019,000 30 3,583,000
IIFebruary 30 2,232,700 34 2,095,800 42 10,265,400
ilMarch 47 2,819,600 49 12,460,200
April 71 3,842,880 51 16,238,000
IIMay 86 3,827,000 106 7,447,552
June 108 7,578,700 94 4,419,325
IIJuly 59 2,683,450 75 3,905,600
IIAugust 59 3,139,200 71 4,560,900
September 54 3,467,500 64 4,159,700
IIOctober 61 3,836,000 57 3,589,400
November 49 4,465,000 49 3,568,950
IIDecember 55 6,563,600 45 2,419,100
II TOTAL 700 45,903,530 722 66,883,527
IIThese figures include all construction, i.e. commercial/industrial,
new residential, decks, fences, etc. -
II
II
II
1
II
II
II
I ,,
TRANSPORTATION STUDY BOARD
"' Tom L. Johnson, Executive Director(612)296-7932
-s - Mary Beth Davidson, Administrative Assistant•
I '? G-24 State Capitol, St. Paul, MN 55155
I Executive Committee C C Pt�1r1�1 1 V • k / .
�i
Sen.Keith Langseth ' I Cit
Chair,Glyndon
Rep.Henry Kalis A cool 0E- t;�
t s
I Vice-Chair,Walters •
Kerry Van Fleet
Secretary,Fridley 9.13015pA WS e'll✓ L.
I TO: City and County Engineers 1143 �.sC I i 3
Legislative Members
Sen.Clarence Purfeerst Fes: Torn L. Johnson
Ben Marilyn t Director, Transportation Study Board
St.Paul n 612If
Sen.Lyle Mehrkens SUBJECT: Interim Report lio
Red Wing
I Rep.Tim Rice
Minneapolis
Rep.Bernie Lieder Yesterday,y, February 28th, the Transportation Study Board
' Rep. Sidney Pauly adopted the attached final edition of our Interim Report.
Eden Prairie This is an important document as it lays out direction for
the Study Board in moving toward campletion of its final
report due to the Governor and Legislature by January 15,
I Public Members 1991.
Warren Affeldt
Fosston
Paul Bailey Please review this report and feel free to contact me any-
' Minneapolis time with questions or catments.
Fred Corrigan
Prior Lake
Jack Fitzsimmons
I Waseca
Bernie Montero Thank You
St.Paul
Gladys Johnson
I Duluth
Bill Koniarski
Belle Plaine
Sherm Liimatainen
I Cloquet
Bruce Nawrocki
Columbia Heights
Ale Rosenthal CITY OF CHANHASSEN
1 Robe aT @IIoTIn
Pheene Zak MAR� �� 1990
Little Falls MH
ENGINEERING DEPT.
1
I
Printed on recycled paper
1 'nnce s tudiO �akeS . G N...4-
1 A Star of Hometown_____________
- . _
I By EBEN SHAPIRO
.. ,.....„
____ ,
tone New York Woes
MINNEAPOLIS — The entertahf ,
ment realm of the pop-music super-
1 star Prince is radically•altering the
reputation of a city whose main con-
tribution to the movie industry used
lobe industrial training films. ,40.. i �c
I 'Since the 3l-year-old singer built a
$10 million studio amid the farms and '
,ranch houses of the southwest Min-
'oeapolis suburb of Chanhassen three 1
years ago, the likes of Boy George, ,'t; 'w �
'the Fine Young Cannibals and Paula ' .:.• _ ' .. '�`,:
I Abdul have flown in to use its three '` file music star,who is
sophisticated recording. areas. Art- ,i".;4i ' Prissce,. nev
fists have used the studo to produce 1 : said tQ be he even better business-
not only records but also music ": - ,� titan than he is an artist.
I videos, feature films and television r`k # # ,
Commercials.
with a cavernous sound stage for ff :,,`"•••snaking films, Prince; whose real •- e
I name is Prince Rogers Nelson, is
stepping up his effort to attract corn- 2tk
mercial film and video production ;
work for his studio,known as Paisley > 4, :-
Park.
"Legitimized the Whole State'
The New York Tunes/Gary Reins Genhoft -
Riding on Prince's ttylish coattails
•
is Minnesota's film and recording ini- /.. �.
' °dustry. Prince's decision to base his °- ' �'*•
operations in his hometown of Min- \':, x'"'• ti, 1`
neapolis instead of a more traditional _______ �, i µaz.
,location has given that industry a ,"<
.considerable boost. "It has legiti- y
mined the whole state," said Harry ,._
1 Grossman, the vice .president of !
Walt Disney f - > '4 .`` -.
studio operations for z a'
Pictures and Television, the Disney 1. '
?' <r. :�> % t- >:.
production company, who used to ... - '1,....4, k„'y.
I work at Paisley.
Prince rarely talks to the press • ! s f•
I --5'and, through a spokeswoman, de- � ��
.St FS F
dined to be interviewed. His de- r l b{ -,,„ ''ik 4 y si
oases are private and his represent- , £ r” ,� `„ h C J:
atives would not disclose any finan- �x f;
vial information. Forbes magazine .' > f
.f
Continued on Page C5 ; a= m
, .c, i .., 1,-; .--,,c;-.: , -.- 7 ,:a.„,', --- - - -..'- (', --"k.i, .,„,-,5.
_ mss , m t'.,.
2 s T
I
y
- _ may, fr �
Ems-- 3 - ,- .-'',,-,,, :',.,..-7.--x
xd & is i' •• s 8 �� ;
' e x '-••>M:,, raw. � z .,r..:-x- ,,ids I
• The Nee/York Times/Steve W-
cdt
A set for Princes new irtovie,"Graffiti Bridge::under construction on
1 -the sound stage at Paisley Park,Prince's studio m Minneapolis.
t —
Stork
_. . . ro ..................
cc.
1 . . ,.. • , N -
..
1 _ : .
, • WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 1990 i
•
L • • • f,.,,,,,,•07.-., ,... xYm.j 4, 3,u ^_-.,-,:.'m`. zw, §mss.,vn as .r mlivo F stets-`--':-.4.2`_ '
111 er_S Studio Em Ire _ Prince's'Multimedia`Em re =7, -,;"1-';:---'
akes Minneapolis a Star
__ , : PAISLEY PARK ENTERPRISES
II
"Purple Rain,"filmed in Minneapolis _ _ _._.
Continued From First Business Page in 1989.That film grossed more than -
F_
Iliti $75 million,and the sound track was a r;,-;',. _ .�7ilDIOS - , >�PiR0113tJCTit1�I5
mated that his"various holdings .best seller.' g • Operates the film and re 3 •Produces Prince's music
reed$20 million in pretax profit in The studio,which has 35 full-time :,
1989. That includei earnings on his cording studio complex. .videos and others,including
albums; nine of his 11 have and 13 part-time employees,has also k<;-p, • Rents studio space to per- "Yo'Mister"by Patti LaBelle
Id more than a million copies. been busy with a steady stream of formers,includin the Fine and the"Batman"video.
commercial work, including corn- 9
mercials for Buggies diapers and ,a":. Young Cannibals,Paula Ab- •Is producing the prototype of
enown for Business Acumen 1.
Comet cleanser. Minneapolis's vital. .aw dui and Madonna. 'The New Power Generation,"
The success of the 85,000-square- advertising community, with firms -, • Rents studio for production Prince's new syndicated radio
studio has polished Prince's re- like Fallon McElligott and Campbell- 24-
.. of TV commercials,including < grow.
for business acumen."As good Paisley-Esty, has made good use of _ H ies and Comet ads. ; : „.
as he is artistically, he is a better Paisley Park u9g - ,=J
businessman," said Randy Adam- _ r . r Mme'""°:.. :.
the executive director of the Gains for Minneapolis s - R ECORDS
• to Film Board,a state office rs µ�- jl.ILMS _
rged with luring film production Local video production companies • the music of George
business. have benefited from the activity at ,, , rge
Not on does Prince write and Paisley Park. They are getting Develops ideas for moves, Clinton,Mavis S es,the
rd his own hit records, he also spill-over work,"Mr.Adamsick said. which are then produced by r Time and Jill Jones,among
x
off songs for singers including Minneapolis now ranks fourth in ,e- separate ._._ _ •.
song g �r paste Prince companies. others.
Easton, Patti LaBelle and film and video production revenues, ,,,,,,,,•,,„„.„„„.....,_ ,' .-...s . ,
Kenny Rogers. In his spare time,he behind Los Angeles, New York and '- , . . `..<. • t- --•�. °
is performers to sign to his own Chicago,Mr.Adamsick said. `
rd label,and writes and stars in According to a 1989 study-by the i- GRAFFITI BRIDGE PRODUCTIONS INC.
es produced by his own film pro- Minneapolis Office of Film,Video and
action company. Prince's various Recording,film and video production x: ny+established to nce's stew film,
companies are controlled by the urn- generated 1137 million in revenue for y.
la corporation Paisley Park En- the state in 1987,the most recent year „1--- PRN PRODUCTIONS INC.
tone point last summer, four of for which figures are available.About 5,000 people work in the film industry >;,,
the top 10 albums on the charts had in Minnesota. :_ apll opera. eS._.Ptir1d88 worldwide-
►ltd: - _ .,' '
been produced or partly produced at
iim
sley Park. They were "The Raw One Minneapolis rock critic who CONTROVERSY MUSIC
asked not to be identified said bI
the Cooked by the Fine Young g
ibals, "Like a Prayer" by Ma- record companies send artists to
�• Paisley Park to record a song or two rights to fIneea�s ra=» , ` E
donna,,'Forever Your Girl"by Paula y 8 ;,,e . h
iiif
ul and"Batman,"by prince him- in the hope that the prolific Prince t x ,-
might wander by the session and con- s '`A. � r-�� �" ti <tSamos ,es
tribute a song. f v .. to
Recent Pais Park Projects Prince's staff uses the region's Pro a
' jj� isolation as a selling point for the me
Among the recent projects at- studio."If someone wants action and considerably heightened the city's Terry Lewis as finalists in a a
ted to Paisley Park have been a an exciting,dynamic night life,they musical profile. - . Entrepreneur of the Year rre` '
ring high-definition television are probably going to be disappoint- Partly following on Prince's repu- They operate Fiyte Tyme
ect intended for viewing at this ed," said John Dressell, manager of Cation,practitioners of"the Minneap. tions,one of the mast po
year's Osaka World Expo in Japan, the recording studios. "For people oils sound," an aggressive style of and prod. ucing teams in wo„,,
0441 i
i :jug
the feature film"Old Explorers," who are serious about making rhythm and blues,have gained inter- At one point in 1986,M s„�c
Jose Ferrer and James records, this is a great place to •national acclaim. Mr. Lewis had produ =�rs+k�sN"'
more. • come." And Prince is not the only success- songs on Billboa, r N
ooting began Feb.15 for Prince's Prince's presence means that local ful artist/business executive in Min- top 10 list, Janet Jackisat,'"ca,i
fourth feature
ge." The plot of the new"Graffiti artists no film is .*aye omelonger
to make a mark.compelled a the counting less an
firm Ernst authority& pert, George Mi Pips ' L„ _��
r to his successful first movie, bona fide superstar in residence has selected Jimmy Jam Harris and Knight and the Pips RKuitsa;
e• y former clients. •
. _ a. ' '1*I1
I � OF CITY
1 isfr,
\ii,, -,_ ipli, 1 ,c.,
.t T . ,tre,et.f. CHANHASSEN
r441
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739
I
I
IMarch 1 , 1990
Mr. and Mrs. David Headla
6870 Minnewashta Parkway
1 Excelsior, MN 55331
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Headla,
1 Just a quick note to thank you for taking the time to let City
Manager Don Ashworth know that _.ou appreciated our efforts.
Seldom do people take the time a. let us know things went well .
II appreciate it.
Also, 1 noticed on that letter' that, debris is again accumulating.
1 I have asked our Building Insection Department to get on this. I
would appreciate your keepl us ad"` ised. Again, thank you for
your kind note.
IISin ly,
Scott Harr, Assistant`Public Safety Director
I SH: lf
. _ '.,,. ,
cc: Don Ashworth,': Ci°ty:Manager
; ..a, �. 4 ?? * i:'2,,:_X;;.. so `��' `ms's
< F-
f,3
1 r_
I
I
I
COMPLAINT FORM
IDATE RECEIVED 1-16-90
RECEIVED BY SH
REVIEW DATE
11 COMPLAINANT
IILAST I Headla ( FIRST I David I MIDDLE DOB I
STREET NUMBER I 6870 I STREET NAME I Mirmewashta Parkway ( APT# I I
IICITY I Excelsior I STATE I MN I ZIP 1 55331 I PH# HOME I I
PH# WORK I
1 TYPE OF COMPLAINT Debris blowing frail new construction
IIAnimal X Debris Storage Bldg. Code Fire Code Noise
I Criminal Complaint Parking Traffic Nuisance, Misc.
Other
IILOCATION OF COMPLAINT Stratford Ridge area
IISUBJECT
LAST Pierce Homes FIRST I I MIDDLE DOB I
' STREET NUMBER STREET NAME I I APT# I
ICITY I ( STATE I I ZIP PH# HOME I (
PH# WORK I
IACTION TAKEN/COMMENTS (INCLUDE DATE) Steve Kirdmen: Would you please follow up
on the attached. Apparently, more debris accumulating.
II
I
IACTION TAKEN: DISPOSITION:
1. ADVISORY LETTER 9 . REFERRED TO: A. VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE
2. CERTIFIED LETTER a . CCSO B. ACTION PENDING
11 3. CERTIFIED NOTICE b. Eng. Dept. C. NO FURTHER ACTION
4. PHONE CALL c. Utility Dept. D. COURT REFERRAL
5. IN-PERSON MEETING d. Street Dept. E. OTHER
16. WARNING TAG e. Other
7. CITATION ISSUED 10. OTHER .
8. REFERRED/CITY ATTY.
II (date) entered into computer
I A4111A4f C /14,
' r METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Mears Park Centre, 230 East Fifth Street, St. Paul, MN. 55101 612 291-6359
' February 28, 1990
Mr. Bob Obermeyer, Engineer
Barr Engineering
' 7803 Glenroy Road
Minneapolis, MN 55435
' RE: Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed Districts
Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 14996-1
Dear Mr. Obermeyer:
At its meeting on February 22, 1990, the Metropolitan Council considered the
Riley-Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed plan. This consideration was based on a
report of the Environmental Resources Committee. A copy of this report is
attached.
I The Council approved the following recommendations contained in the following
report:
' 1. The RPBCWD prepare one plan containing the essential elements
prescribed in M. 473.878 Subd.4.
2. The Board of Water and Soil Resources require Riley-Purgatory-Bluff
Creek Watershed District to commit to an assessment of the impacts of
' nonpoint source pollution on the Minnesota River and to plan for the
abatement of nonpoint source pollution.
r -
MAR 0 2193
' CITY OF CHANHASSEN
I
Page 2
IBob Obermeyer
' 3. The Board of Soil and Water Resources not approve the RPBCWD plan
until the deficiencies identified here have been corrected, and
further that they direct RPBCWD to resubmit the plan to the
' Council for review.
Sincerely,
V
' Steve Keefe
Chair
SK:11
Attachment
cc: Mel Sinn, MN Board of Water Soil & Resources
Larry Smith, US Fish & Wildlife
Sheryl Zaworski, Program Development Section, MPCA
Tan Balcanb, Office of Planning, DNR
Raymond Haik, Popham, Haik, Schnobrich & Kaufman
James F. Miller, Manager, City of Minnetonka
Wendy Anderson, Clerk/Treasurer, City of Deephaven
' Larry Whittaker, Administrator, City of Shorewood
Donald Ashworth, Manager, City of Chanhassen
Carl Jullie, Manager, City of Eden Prairie
' Larry Lee, Director of Community Development, City of Bloomington
Shirley Bruers, Director, Community Development, City of Chaska
Dick Osgood, Metropolitan Council Staff
I
I
II Metropolitan Council Meeting of January 22, 1990 Business Item: E-2
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
I Mears Park Centre, 230 East Fifth St., St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
291-6359
I REPORT OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE
REFERRAL REPORT NUMBER 90-15
IDATE: February 22, 1990
TO: Metropolitan Council
ISUBJECT: Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District 509 Plan
IBACKGROUND •
IThe Committee at its meeting of February 7, 1990 reviewed the above referenced report.
IISSUES AND CONCERNS
The Council members were hesitant about forwarding such negative comments and wondered why
the watershed district managers or staff did not want to discuss the Council's specific concerns. A
111 letter submitted by the watershed district attorney indicated substantially increased funding and
statutory authority was necessary in order for the district to be able to manage water resources in
their watershed according to the Council's direction. The staff recommendation was adopted.
IRECOMMENDATION
IThat the Metropolitan Council recommends that:
I. the RPBCWD prepare one plan containing the essential elements prescribed in M. 473.878
ISubd.4. E
2. the Board of Water and Soil Resources require Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District
I to commit to an assessment of the impacts of nonpoint source pollution on the Minnesota River
and to plan for the abatement of nonpoint source pollution. E
I 3. the Board of Soil and Water Resources not approve the RPBCWD plan until the deficiencies N
identified here have been corrected, and further that they direct RPBCWD to resubmit the plan V
to the Council for review. I
Respectfully submitted, . ..,..i
N
IPatrick Scully, Chair TSAR 0 219;33
ICIII OF.CHANNASSEN
I
I - METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
. Mears Park Centre, 230 E 5th St., St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 •
DATE: January 31, 1990
TO: Environmental Resources Committee
FROM Dick Osgood, Natural Resources Division
SUBJECT: Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District 509 Plan
' Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 14996.1
Metropolitan Council Districts 13 and 14
' INTRODUCTION AND AUTHORITY
The Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District (RPBCWD) covers 47.3 square miles and
includes the following communities: Minnetonka, Deephaven, Shorewood, Chanhassen, Eden
Prairie, Bloomington and Chaska (Figure 1).
' The RPBCWD prepared a comprehensive watershed management plan in response to the
Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act (Chapter 509, Laws of 1982) embodied in Minn.
Stat. 473.875 to 473.883. Section 473.878 subd. 6, provides for Metropolitan Council review of
' proposed watershed plans. The Council reviews the plans after the county(s), soil and water
conservation district(s), towns and cities, and before the Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and Minnesota Board of Soil and Water
Resources.
The Council prepared plan content guidelines and notified watershed management organizations
' that it would use them in reviewing plans. With these guidelines as a model, the Council may
provide advisory comments on aspects such as technical adequacy, completeness and internal
consistency. The Council is required to review the plans in the same manner as it would local
' comprehensive plans for three specific things:
1. Consistency with Metropolitan system plans.
' 2. Consistency with adopted chapters of the Metropolitan Development Guide.
3. Anticipated amendments to local comprehensive plans that may have a substantial
' impact on or contain a substantial departure from metropolitan system plans.
The Council, as the Area wide Water Quality Management Planning Agency under section 208
' - of the federal Water Pollution Control Act, has a responsibility to insure that water quality
management policies and programs are implemented.
I
I
I - Figure l
RILEY-PURGATORY-BLUFF CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT
I
I .._
° ..� ��� �` ` \fit
II Boundary shown is the watershed- ; district legal boundary v
- `\� \\\\ ` � \` ^mac\ \\\� \�\\\A
I
\; : ;.- Purgatory Creek �� �� ;�
- - ,..„. ` Subwatershed
■
`` y Creek Eden Prair' - &_--,-------<----__-_---Z %
Subwatershed
uff Creek _ �� _ ,
� „ - = _ \ �
-- Subwatershed �` =��' - � - - - - -
Source: Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek
li 0 2 4
I Watershed District Management
Plan, Barr Eng., 1989 Miles
I
I - --- Subwatershed Boundary
11 Area Outside Year 2000 MUSA
I
I
ANALYSIS
" PLAN CONTENT
The 509 plan submitted for our review makes implicit reference to the Watershed District
Overall Plan, last revised in 1973. It appears that RPBCWD intends to manage its water •
- resources using two planning documents which I found to be confusing. In addition, the
confusion is compounded because the two plans do not appear to complement each other in
any logical way. Throughout my review, I have been frustrated by the many implied references
in the 509 plan to the overall plan, and still being unable to find what I thought had been
referenced. Most importantly, the authority and review processes are different for both plans,
which leaves the possibility that one could be amended under one authority in ways that may be
inconsistent or incompatible with another authority. The Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek
I Watershed District must prepare gm plan which contains all the elements prescribed in 473.878
Subd. 4.
' The second major concern is that the RPBCWD plan deals only with water quantity. This is a-
flood control plan to the exclusion of water quality protection. For example, the plan identifies
lakes as ponding and stormwater storage basins. Lakes cannot serve both functions! There are
' no effective means to manage the water quality of surface waters in the watershed. For
example, neither plan (overall plan and 509 plan) identifies or protects wetlands; neither plan
identifies areas that are planned for urbanization; neither plan makes use of the extensive data
that the District has collected for the last two decades; and neither plan contains standards,
criteria or any management strategies for improving water quality in the watershed. These are
essential elements of the plan and are particularly important, especially in light of the concerns
' of the degraded water quality of Lake Riley (further discussion below) and the continued
degradation of the Minnesota River (see below).
' There are several other troublesome aspects to the plan. The policies are found in a
descriptive text. While this may be technically satisfactory, it is difficult to understand just what
the intentions of the RPBCWD are in the plan. Without simply listing the policies, the reader
' is left to guess the managers' intentions in many parts of this section. This section should be
re-written as a service to anyone who needs to clearly understand the intentions of the
managers in managing the water resources in the district.
IThe District has a long record of data collection. While we agree that it is impractical to
include these data in the plan, it would be useful to include summaries of the data in order to
define the resource that is to be managed. In addition, the plan does not propose a specific
' data collection plan....:The Council recommends that the Council's report "An-evaluation of lake -
and stream monitoring programs in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area' MC Publ. No. 590-89-
128, be used as guidance in designing a data collection program.
111
The implementation plan contains cumbersome legal language that I read to say that the
managers intend to initiate no projects. This section of the plan should be re-written so that
non-technical and non-legal readers can understand the intentions of the managers. More
importantly, the managers should take a proactive role in the management of water resources in
the watershed, rather than wait for communities or individuals to initiate projects at the risk of
' not fitting into a comprehensive plan.
In summary, the plan adequately manages water quantity, particularly flood control, and the
' district's record demonstrates their ability to do this. However, the plan is substantially deficient
in most of the required elements. The result is that the plan provides nc effective means to
manage the quality of the water resources in the watershed.
r
I
METROPOLITAN AND LOCAL PLAN COMPATIBILITY
Consistency with Metropolitan System Plans
Transportation (Connie Kozlak)
( )
' Construction of TH 212 from I-494 to CSAH 4 in Eden Prairie is proposed to begin in January
1993. However, there are no impacts on the transportation system.
IAirports (Chauncey Case)
The nearest aviation facility to the watershed is the Flying Cloud Airport. Portions of the
' airport property are within the legal watershed boundaries; however, these same portions of the
airport are outside the hydrologic watershed. The north side building area and runway 18
approach appear to drain to the Staring Lake subwatershed. The south/western portion of the
airport drains to the Minnesota River or to the Riley Creek subwatershed.
The current airport development/operation has not documented any surface water problems for
portions of the airport draining to the adjacent RPBCWD subwatersheds. However, the
Metropolitan Airports Commission is in the process of preparing a Long-term Comprehensive
Plan for Flying Cloud, which proposes an extension to runway 9R 26L and the development of
' additional aircraft hangers. The runway extension and south/west building area would involve
substantial fill and increase of impervious areas. In addition, extension of the runway could
affect land use types and densities (and extension or non-extension of MUSA boundaries) in
' areas west and south of the airport property line.
It is anticipated that a final plan for Flying Cloud would be submitted for Council review and
' approval by mid-1990. The RPBCWD should keep in touch with the City of Eden Prairie
regarding the possible comprehensive plan amendment reflecting the airport/community
development plans.
Sewers (Jack Frost)
The Council's Water Resources Management Development Guide/Policy Plan which was
approved by the Council in September 1988 states in Policy 1-1 the following:
L._ Treatment levels required for wastewater treatment plants in the metropolitan
system should clearly recognize the need to control both point and nonpoint
- sources of pollution from within and outside the Metropolitan Area.
' As part of the implementation activity for this policy, watershed management organizations and
municipalities are required to do the following:
tWatershed management organizations and municipalities should provide for
prevention and abatement of nonpoint source pollution in their watershed plans
and their local plans and regulations, respectively. They should also vigorously
implement these plans and regulations.
I do not find evidence that the RPBCWD has addressed the abatement of nonpoint source
' pollution in the watershed nor have they made an assessment of the impacts of nonpoint source
pollution on the water quality in the Minnesota River.
When the Council and Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (MWCC) were negotiating
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits for both Blue Lake and
I Seneca wastewater treatment plants with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the issue of
. nonpoint source abatement was a significant discussion item because of the impact of nonpoint
source pollution on the water quality of the Minnesota River. As part of this negotiation
process the Council, MWCC and Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) entered into a
Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), stating in part
' The objectives of this Memorandum of Understanding include:
1. - The identification of joint efforts to undertake a 40 percent reduction in
• - nonpoint source pollution on the Minnesota River.
2. The establishment of a coordinated statewide nonpoint source program.
3. The advancement of nonpoint source management activities in the seven-
county metropolitan area .
1 " The nonpoint source pollution reduction in the Minnesota River is based on the MPCA's 1985
Waste Load Allocation (WLA) for the Minnesota River. The WLA examined a number of
alternative treatment scenarios and effluent limits for both the Blue Lake and Seneca WWTPs.
It was determined that a 40 percent reduction in all headwater/background pollutants and a 40
percent reduction in benthic oxygen demand and a benthic ammonia source in all reaches of the
' river was needed in order for the river to meet state established water quality standards.
The outlet of Bluff Creek into the Minnesota River is at river mile 22.5, the outlet of Riley
Creek is at river mile 22.3 and the outlet of Purgatory Creek is at river mile 18.3. In the WLA
model the Bluff and Riley Creek discharge points are in Reach 1 and the Purgatory Creek
discharge point is in Reach 2. For Reach 1 the benthic oxygen demand rate that needs to be
met is 33 mg/ft=/day and the benthic ammonia source needs to be 2.2 mg/ft=/day. For Reach 2
the benthic oxygen demand rate that needs to be met is 158 mg/ft=/day and the benthic
ammonia source needs to be 10.5 mg/ft=/day. These values are based on a reduction of 40
' percent from the values that were measured during the 1980 low flow survey. Benthic oxygen
demand is made up of organic matter that settles to the bottom of the river and exerts an
oxygen demand on the water column above the sediments. The source of this organic matter is
volatile suspended solids that are contributed by both point sources and nonpoint sources of
pollution. The benthic ammonia source is contributed by both the point sources and nonpoint
sources of ammonia that settle to the river bottom and is released into the water column over
' time.
We anticipate that when the NPDES permits for Blue Lake and Seneca WWTPs are reissued in
1992, the effluent limits for each of these plants will be greatly reduced if methods to reduce
nonpoint source pollution by 40 percent are not identified. Therefore, the Council will be
directing each watershed organization discharging to the Minnesota River to plan for reducing
nonpoint source pollution by 40 percent. The RPBCWD does not address this issue in its plan.
The Council has two alternate courses of action. First, the Council can comment on the plan
on what is lacking and recommend that the Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) not
' approve the plan until the Watershed District makes a commitment to plan for the reduction in
nonpoint source pollution. Second, the Council can find a substantial system impact as a result
of implementing this plan and require that the plan be modified to assure conformance with
system plans. Since we are uncertain exactly what RPBCWD would need to do in order to
I - meet the 40 percent reduction goals in benthic oxygen demand and benthic ammonia sources,
we cannot find a system impact. The impact on downstream waters of reducing headwater
pollution sources and point source reduction needs to be made before a load allocation for
' Riley, Purgatory or Bluff Creeks can be determined. Under these circumstances it is prudent
that the Council not declare a substantial system impact at this time. However, it is imperative
that the District begin planning for nonpoint source pollution reduction and assess the impacts
of nonpoint source pollution on all surface waters.
r
1
The MWCC is monitoring both Bluff and Riley Creeks near the confluence with the Minnesota '
I River. The District should be advised that on one occasion Bluff Creek was in violation of the
MPCA's proposed water quality standard for lead and may have been in violation of the
cadmium limit. This information is based on a composite sample that was taken on May 26,
I 1989.
Water Quality limits .
IThe waste load allocation model is based on worst case conditions in the Minnesota River,
which occur during the summer low flow conditions. Very little runoff is generated during the
summer and the water quality of most creeks is good because most of the flow in the creek is
1 coming from groundwater. This is reflected in the good water quality of Nine Mile Creek that
was measured during the summer of 1989. Most benthic material that is deposited in the river
is generated during high runoff events in the spring and can cause water quality problems later.
IThe average low flow summer discharge conditions that need to be met by Nine Mile Creek are
- as follows:
IDissolved Oxygen 7.4 mg/1
Ultimate CBOD 6.0 mg/1
I Total Nitrogen 1.52 mg/I
Chlorophyll 10.0 ag/1
Organic nitrogen 0.66 mg/1 -
I Ammonia-N 0.18 mg/I
• Nitrite-N 0.05 mg/I
Nitrate-N 0.63 mg/I
IOrtho Phosphorous 0.10 mg/I
It has not been determined what water quality conditions need to be met the remainder of the
Iyear in order to satisfy the 40 percent reduction in nonpoint source pollution.
After an assessment of nonpoint source pollution impacts is completed, methods to control this
source of pollution will need to be developed. In December 1983, the Council published
several reports, Surface Water Management: Evaluation of Nationwide Urban Runoff Program
and Surface Water Management: Management Practices Evaluation. These reports examined
various management practices to control nonpoint source pollution. The District may find these
reports beneficial when developing its program for controlling nonpoint source pollution.
Parks (Grant Scholen)
I The Hyland Lake rtion of the Hyland-Bush-Anderson Lakes Park Reserve is
Po Y in RPBCWD.
I There appear to be no negative impacts on the park system as a result of implementing this
plan.
In light of our concerns regarding nonpoint source pollution impacts on the Minnesota River
I (detailed below), there is a possible impact on Grass Lake in the floodplain of the river. Since
Grass Lake is in the Minnesota National Wildlife Refuge and Recreation Area, impacts on its
quality would affect the refuge, an element of the Recreation Open Spaces system.
IConsistency with Other Guide Chapters
IMetropolitan Development and Investment Framework (Tori Flood)
I
1.. MUSA Line and Correspondence to MDIF Policies
1 +
The plan states that the entire district is within the MUSA. This is incorrect. The southern
- . parts of Chanhassen and Eden Prairie in the RPBCWD are outside the year 2000 MUSA (see
•
Figure 1)
The plan summarizes the types of land use within the district, but does not include a land use
' map. Future land use maps should be included to indicate the type and intensity of
development plan for the watershed.
I2. Consistency of Local Plans with the MDIF
The Council has reviewed the plans of the local governments in RPBCWD. These plans were
found to be consistent with the MDIF.
Water Resources Management (Dick Osgood)
' There are several lakes in the RPBCWD that are important recreational resources to the
region. Perhaps the most significant lake in terms of size, quality and recreational use is Lake
Riley. The watershed district apparently agrees that this lake, as well as those tributary to it
(Lucy, Ann, Susan), deserve focused protection. The district prepared a work plan which
addressed the protection and management of these lakes and the watershed, in connection with
' a federally funded restoration project. Unfortunately, due to local disagreement regarding the
public access to Lake Lucy, the grant was withdrawn. But has the concern disappeared? The
district's position, as stated in their implementation plan, is to go forward with projects Qnly
when they have been initiated at the local level through the petition process. I would conclude
' that since the federal funding was withdrawn due to lack of local support, it is unlikely that this
project will be re-initiated. This is clearly inconsistent with the RPBCWD policy which states:
I "The District considers the enhancement of water quality of public waters within
its boundaries a high priority. The District is interested in maintaining and
improving water quality because of its effects on human health, fish and wildlife,
and the general aesthetic value of the resources within the watershed"
' The Metropolitan Council believes that the RPBCWD ought to take a leadership role in the
management of water resources in the watershed, rather than one that allows the management
directions to be dictated at the local level. Anything different is short-sighted and ineffective.
' The Council is concerned that the water quality impacts observed at Lake Riley are occurring
generally. Therefore, the Council believes that it is urgent to manage surface water quality in
more effective ways.
' Comments from Local Communities
' No comments regarding anticipated changes to the local comprehensive plans were received
from the local communities.
' - FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
1. The RPBCWD has prepared a 509 watershed plan which appears to complement its existing
1 Overall Plan. The relationship between the two plans is unclear, thus it is difficult to follow.
2. The RPBCWD has successfully managed water quantity and protected tloodplains for many
1 years. Nothing in this plan should limit the RPBCWD from continuing to protect areas in the
I watershed from flood damage.
•
3. There are no effective means in the plan to manage water quality, especially in lakes. This
Iconclusion stems from the lack of required elements in the plan.
4. The policies in the plan are difficult to read. This section should be re-written to simply list
Ithe policies so that the managers' intentions are clearly communicated.
5. The plan contains no specific data collection program. Based on their past data collection
I programs and on their 1990 program, the Council recommends that a more intensive monitoring
program be instituted. The Council's publication, "An evaluation of lake and stream monitoring
programs in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area," be used for guidance.
1 6. The implementation program indicates that the intention of the managers is not to initiate
any projects. This appears to be inconsistent with their policies as well as the Councils. The
I Council believes that the RPBCWD ought to take a leadership role in the management of
surface water quality in the watershed rather than allowing the management directions to be
dictated at the local leveL
7. Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District should commit to an assessment of the
impacts of nonpoint source pollution on the Minnesota River and to plan for the abatement of
Inonpoint source pollution. We have found that:
-The watershed plan does not adequately address the impacts of nonpoint source
Ipollution in the watershed.
-The Council has committed to a goal of identifying efforts needed to reduce nonpoint
Isource pollution by 40 percent in the Minnesota River.
- If efforts to reduce nonpoint source pollution to the Minnesota River are not
identified, there may be a substantial impact on the wastewater treatment system and the
I effluent limits for both the Blue Lake and Seneca wastewater treatment plants may be
reduced.
-It is the Council's policy to control both point and nonpoint sources of pollution in the
most cost effective manner to achieve the Council's overall objective having fishable and
swimmable water within the Metropolitan area.
111---_- -An overall assessment of the impact of nonpoint source pollution on the Minnesota
River has not been completed.
I -The exact impact of the discharge of Riley, Purgatory and Bluff Creeks on the water
quality of the Minnesota River is not known. However, Riley, Purgatory and Bluff
ICreeks do contribute to the nonpoint source loadings.to the Minnesota River.
-The RPBCWD should work with the Council, Metropolitan Waste Control Commission
I and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency in establishing a program for the control of
nonpoint source pollution.
I & The plan states that the entire district is within the MUSA. This is incorrect. The southern
parts of Chanhassen and Eden Prairie in the RPBCWD are outside the year 2000 MUSA (see
Figure 1).
I9. The water quality of Lake Riley is a serious concern. This is evidenced by the fact that the
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
RPBCWD sought and subsequently received a restoration grant. The grant was subsequently
' ! - withdrawn due to lack of local support, but the concern still exists. The plan should be
amended to include the necessary measures to restore and protect the quality of Lake Riley.
' 10. There appears to be no impacts on other metropolitan systems as a result of implementing
this plan.
11. The lack of basic required elements in the plan as well as the identified threats and
degradations of the watersheds surface waters indicates that the plan is incomplete. The plan
should not be approved until the basic concerns, as summarized in the memorandum, are
' addressed.
12. Since the plan lacks many of the required elements, especially with respect to water quality,
' the Council is unable to comment on the effectiveness of the plan in managing water quality.
Thus, the Board of Soil and Water Resources should require an amended plan to be re-
submitted to the Council for further review.
RECOMMENDATIONS
' That the Metropolitan Council recommends that: -
1. the RPBCWD prepare one plan containing the essential elements prescribed in M.S.
' 473.878 Subd. 4.
2. the Board of Water and Soil Resources require Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed
' District to commit to an assessment of the impacts of nonpoint source pollution on the
Minnesota River and to plan for the abatement of nonpoint source pollution. .
' 3. the Board of Soil and Water Resources not approve the RPBCWD plan until the
deficiencies identified here have been corrected, and further that they direct RPBCWD to re-
submit the plan to the Council for review.
•
1
1
. .
. A
I : ,
. -
. .
:
. :
. , .
I
I
•
I ... . -
_ .
I . .
1• 1 , . . ,
. ' • .:‘ :., '
... -
. .
- -
. • -, .. : :..r.i,. ' ,
_ .
- ,
I . . • UAL
UAL UJUJ
LULU
LULU UAL LULU ,
. --
LULU UAL LULU ,.
LULU LULU
!ualLIUJLIJ WTI WI
I #.4....
0 00 50
0-4- M300 300 ,
1-4-1-0.4.0-1.0.• =3 ,
0.1.4-1.4-1-1.-1-1- 03 . ' •
II-1-
Omiloo 0 0.5 000 ,
I 0.0. 0 33pzz '
LULU WU, 00••00 2222222 .
LULL I.LJLI -00000 1 Z Z
Lou maul u., 00 OD
LULU LOU I UJ U.1
u.r.11 u.a.0 1 Luta
wuuu.a.0 iucuui w
UJUJUJUJILILLIGULULU 00
MO I 00
Oa 000.00:
000000000 L
I 222zrz
222222222
222222222 ..
I I
II LULU
ZZ 2 Z.Z.ZZ'
z;=:;;2P
330 00(3
I
00
f..V..9
00 0 0<3
0
0 2
2 2
LLILLI UJUJ
LULU 14.14JJ
0003.31300 0 2 2; 2.222 1.1JUJI.LI JJUJLLILLI
0001,00 Z z,z;zz,z TUJIALILLIIIAILLILLI • .
111 000100 4 4 4 44 2.'3.31 ..a. .
0,20=,12Cagez ..r lit 14'44 ,
03 3 I 00 •C 4 4 .03. - . .
30 1 30 .4
30-10200 00 4444 4.44 .
000001300.3 ile.444c 44 ,II'S..}.
I li uma
, -
. .
, -
03333 030
[
0
3
00 • LIJUJ
LLI'ULLI LLJUILIJ
USJJ LULU UAL ,
' -
•
- '
II 00000 00 ' la UJ:JJ
330 2.3r= - , - LLIUJUJ 41UJLIA . • •
• . . . '
.
1`1213 311 W S at0 •
00 00000•32 , at ce at 23C .'
I 0 01 0 4 VIX
i
00 .1rb di 9
S -ICY
.
1)1:113 Tra WO Oil 2%40002 '
00 00.430000 ap0ogaVit 2200 --,....
i
. .
. . -
. -....
, .
, .
I
. t
. .
- ..
- ,
•
. .-
. ,
, . • .
. .
I
I 1
I - .
. ., i
• . ,
I . . .
. .
I .
. . . . .
I .
, .
•
-. - - - - . ... _I n .- I■1 P I V I, . ■■ en 1 O n I n .. N ,-,, .r0 0 .. m 0 0 I.- e i i n . e min L a o - PIN a tt, al I, ta LO .■ Pin e 113 a N.
1111 11111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111
FENROAk/ 1990 CITY OF CHANHASSEN SUMMARY BUDGET REPORT • CUNPUSITE FEBRUARY 1990
i 16.66 PERCENT OF YEAR EXPIRED)
CITY SUMMARY
R E—V—6-4-0-10---
BUDGETED COLLECTED COLLECTED :!:PERCENT PERCENT UNCOLLECTED - -
•
REVENUE THIS MONTH TO—DATE TO—DATE LAST YR BALANCE
' OPEkATING FONDS 8,596,700.00 109,055.63 284,834.57 3.31 8.311,465.43
100.00 63.82 55.97 102.77
. -
NON—OPERATING FUNDS .00 107,176.27 224,062.34 224,062,34CR
36.18 44.03 q
2.71
. , . .
. • _ . . . .
3 TOTAL REVENUE 8,596,700.00 296,231.90 508,896.91 5.92 8,087,803.09
2 .
i . • . , . _________ __ ____
. .. ......... io.4....eminwpasr....... ........ .. ............
. .• . . . .
•
S E S IP E N 0 I T U it E t " — ' . .i • - .
5
BUDGETED EXPENDED EXPENDED PERCENT PERCENT UNENCUMBERED
[
7
EXPENDITURES THIS MONTH YEAR—TO—DATE ENCUMBRANCES TO-DATE LAST YR 8ALANCE
I
. . . .. .
a OPERATING FONDS 60547,080.00 : , 263,088.28 527,923.45 8.06 ' 6,0190156.55
3
• , 52.96 23.38 140.34
.. . • •
. .
2 NON•O _PERAT1NG FUNUS .00 233,710.32 1,730,089.88 1,730,089.88CR
.
47.04 76.62 40.34
._ . .- . . . .
56. TOTAL EXPENDITURES . ' 0547000.00 , 494,79800 2,258,013.33 ' " ' 34,49 4,289,066,6?
.,
.,..... ,' . . .
7 , .
•• ' . . -„.. . , . .. , . . . ,. .. ,
• ' , .,•, . .... . . .. .. . _ . .. , . .. -
9
0 -
. ,. , • . .
. .., . .. . •-•-- • -• • ' . . ..
1 '' • • .
• . ' ;.;••
3 t• ..;'• ', , •••5,
\
. . .
. . .. .-
4
5
6
. . _ . . • . ., .. , • .
. . .
. .,,
13
;•. ,• ^` .
a
o
1
2
. . .. . „ • ----- -- . —---- ,
3 , ,
, ..... .;
4.
5 '
. . . , .. . -..,. . . . . . .
. .
.. .. . .
7
9 ,
. .. . . .
• . . . ... , . . . .,.. .
., •,' ,
3
I
. • .. .. . , . . ... ... .• .. • . . . . . ' ___,,
3
4
. . . . . . ,
-._ MI NM OM = NM IIIIN MI Nal lla lal all an Oa Illa IIII. all aill all
FEBRUARY 1990 CITY OF CHANHASSEN SUMMARY BUDGET REPORT -REVENUE FEBRUARY 1990
16.66 PERCENT OF YAK EXPIRED/
1 C t--T--Y----'-a--U-M-44-4-4-4 -- - --
a OPERATING FUNDS -^^--
3 BUDGETED COLLECTED COLLECTED PEk�ENT PERCENT UNCULIECTEO
4 --- REVENUE TH44-404-TH -TII-DAT-E TO-DATA--L•AST�-YR MAL-AN
5 101 GENERAL FUND
5 2,958,550.00 91,112.40 132,741.41 4.49 3.05 2,825,808.39
-� --- -41 41___ 34.41 44.}.9 _ 46.60_, .
--_-__-- 4
i8 203 FIREMENS RELIEF ASSN. 44,500.00 .00
t0 .00
.84 44,500.00 1
r54 '
,z 205 PIONEER CEMETERY 3,700.00 .00 .00
-- .04 19.79 3,700.00 1.
is ____034.______,-
14 208 ADNINISTRATIVE TRUST 242,000.00 .00 .00 '
's 2 42,000.00 1'
•16 a.B� 4141 4141,.: 2
_ 2.43 - -z
17 209 MOTOR VEHICLE DEPREC. 212,290.00 2,327.98 3,585.91
to 2
15 --_ .,. -412..4E 23 141.2!. 1.69 208,664.09 ?-
2.tit
z
20 210 CATV 30,500.00 2b,952.82 26,952.82
21 88.37 3,547.18 z
zz •35 14.2b-_ ----9.46 9.46 .04 2-
2,
23 211 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 139,200.00 .00 .00 3-
24 139,200.00 3
25 1. 2 • 1.47-- 3
27 401 SEWER EXPANSION 180,500.00 15,636.79 22,836.79 . 12.31 8.38 162,663.21 3'
ie �� 27 8 02 •.9r 3:.
3
30 402 WATER EXPANSION 120,000.00 1,557.07 6,594.57
3O h.50 6.59 113,405.43 '
31 1.40 .42 2.32 4
1.34 4
a3 410 PARK ACQUISITION C DEV. 245,000.00 22,667.64 31,360.64 12.80 5.56 213,639.36 4•
34 11.111 t 2.57 4
4,
36 415 MUNICIPAL STATE AID 380,000.00
38 .01 379,969.00 a
22.50 31.00 4.
37 4142. . ,. , .01, .01 , . . , 4.57 4_
38 .i i 4'
'f 5i
39 ,t.. . 5
.. . 41 41...
•40 .... 5.
•41
5:
42 5.
5'
43 • _"- .. . . - • • • • -,- - 5t•
44 5:
6:
45
,4141 4141 .� _
4141 4141 4141.,... 4141 . . 6.
47 61
6'
48 6-
49 4141 . . 6.
_-
50 6E
66
51 67
52 ... i ,. . 68
53
69
70
54 71
55 . . _41--41. - __ 7Z
56 4-3 74
7 N 7.
•
1 1 1 1 11111 1 1 1 r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0111 1
FEBRUARY 1990 CITY OF CHANHASSEN SUMMARY BUDGET REPORT -REVENUE FEBRUARY 1990
I 16.66 PERCENT OF YEAR EXPIRED)
C .1-.7--Y---S--U-N-M_.A R_I
' OPERATING FUNDS
2 BUDGETED COLLECTED
COLLECTED PERCENT PERCENT UNCOLLECTED
REVENUS THIa-NON-TH T2-DATE TO-OATS LAST-4R BAi.AMCi
4 6
8 460 H.R.A. 2,454,900.00 1,000.00 1,500.00 .06 .48 20453,400.00 7
4144-56 .54 _ --.-53 • Z9.4-52- 0
is
8 467 ECONOMIC DEVELOP. GIST. 559,b00.00 .00 .00 559,600.00
11;
u 6.51 6.73
" 700 UTILITY FUND 1,021,000.00 27,778.43 59,231.43 ` 5.80 5.32 961,768.57 1.
12 -_ 11.48 ia.av - �..-z.o.eo .11.57 1
13
14 +_
15 2'
2
17 TOTAL UPERATING FUNDS 8,596,700.00 189,055.63 284,834.57 3.31 2.38 40311,865.43
1e
20 2
2
21 ^ 2
2'
23 ,
24 3
2
• 3=
9
30 ,.
elt
31 4
4
32 4
33 •
4
4.
35 4.
36 • 0.
a,:t 5,
39 ' ,t S
41 5_
42 5=
5
44 6i
45 5'
e
47 8.
48 6=
6
49
6,
51
6.
Ei
52
6i
5
7t
53
54 71
72
-13
56 74
7 75
.7
MN - �■■ ■■N i - - MI r MI N IMw = - - MN w r -
FEBRUARY 1990 CITY OF CHANHASSEN SUMMARY 8000ET REPORT -REVENUE FEBRUARY 1990
t 16.66 PERCENT OF YEAR EXPIRED!
____ - _ __ _ - _...._ ..,.__
2 UPERA1ING FUNDS
BUOGETED COLLECTED COLLECTED PERCENT PERCENT UNCOLLECTED
1 ---- ---- MATH THIS MTH TO-"DATE-- -- TO■DATE LAST_.YR BALANCE --
6 BY REVENUE SOURCE
6
GENERAL PRUPERTY TAXES 5,116,950.00 26,952.82 26,952.82 .53 .34 5,089,997.18
9 59.52 14.26 9.46 61.24
'o SPECIAL ASSESMENTS 45,900.00 2,702.98 4,898.41
11 _ 10.67 12.59 41,001.59
12 .53 1.43 1.72 .49
" BUSINESS LIC/PERM 53,850.00 333.75 711.75 1.32 .27 53,138.25
14
15 , .b3 •18 .25 .64
•
16 NON-BUSINESS LIC/PERM 945,400.00 72,485.33 119,370.43 12.63 7.93 826,029.57
17 11.00 38.34 41.91
18 9.94
" FINES 4 FORFEITS 24,100.00 2,804.08 3,236.83
so 13.43 5.86 20,863.17
21 .28 1.48 1.14 .25
za INTERGOVERNMENTAL REV. 491,100.00 6,907.50 6,907.50 1.41
•92 484,192.50
24 5.71 3.65 2.43 5.83
zs CURkE*T SERVICES 1,341,000.00 28,808.42 62,414.69 4.65 3.55 1,278,585.31
27 15.60 15.24 21.91 15.38
28 OTHER REVENUE 578,400.00 48,060.75 60,342.14 10.43 5.45 518,057.86
30
6.73 25.42 21.18 6.23
31 -
37
33 . .
34 ** T U T A L S ** 8,596,700.00 189,055.63 284,834.57 3.31 2.38 8,311,865.43
35
36
-- -_-
38
39
40
41
42
44
46
45
47
48
49
50
61
62
53
64
55
66
.7
Mill MI IIII 1110 1111 MIMI MI IIIII 1111 Oill - Ell 0111 MI 1111 11111 MI 1115 MI
FEBRUARY 1990 CITY OF CHANHASSEN DETAIL BUDGET REPORT -REVENUE FEBRUARY 1990
4 16.66 PERCENT OF YEAR P1RED)
FUND 101 GENERAL FUND
AUDGgYPA ENLiFciEu ent.„LECT EIL____.----1LIEKTPERCENT____118CDLLEC-1-1-0---
,
REVENUE THIS MONTH TO-DATE TO-DATE LAST YR BALANCE
9 ENERAI--PR0PEA-T-1..4AXES----
a 3010 CUMNENT PRUPEKTY TAX 1,471,000.00 .00 .00 1,471,000.00
6
3011 DELINQUENT PROPERTY TAX 25,000.00 .00 .00 53.97 25,000.00
6 304.1.---KME-S-T-E4111--Cittalt 420.04...011___ _on -oo 32....0a1saa
7 3090 OTHER PAJPERTT TAXES 500.00 .00 ' .00 500.00
a
......- .... 0•0•40•111.0.•
g
E44.4*--PROP-ERTY TAXES 1,418,500.00 .00 .00 .96 1,8144-5-00-,00 -
o
1 .
bUSINESS LIC/PERM
2 3203--DU4-KLN4LL--- 200.00 .00 .00 ' '
3204 CIGARETTE 400.00 75.00 388.00 97.00 12.00 12.00
4 3205 DUG OK CAT 2,000.00 , 88.75 88.75 4.44 .95 1,911.25
6 321-3---40444- 20.00 40.,04
6 3223 3.2 OFF AND OA SALE 1,000.00 .00 .00 1,000.00
7 3226 LIQUUk UN XNU UFF SALE 47,000.00 .00 .00 47,000.00
a
--CLU4-440-SUI4041 ',AG a a ' a a a na-nn
9 3284 ROddlSh 1,200.00 , 170.00 215.00 17.92 1 11,67 985.00
.. ...
'3 NON-BUSINESS LIC/PERM '
'UILDIA6 , 330,11.00,00 30.692.00 49.022ADD 1407 8.26 2801921.00
'5 3302 PLAN CHECK , 210,000.00 / 19,748.71 31,256.30 ' 14.88 8.38 178,743.70
'5 3305 HEATING 6 A/C ' , , , 100,000.00 . , 4,926,12 10,518.38
, 10.52 6.31 89,481.62
'5 3307 TRENCHING 10,000.00 72.00 92.00 .92 3.84 9,908.00
:5. 3308 GUN 1,000.00 .00 .00 1,000.00
09.--SP-RINKLEa „f.,500.00 217.00 314.00 4.81
,
-=
" 3311 SIGN , '1,000.00 " 25.00 25.00 ' 2,50 16.67 975.00
" 3316 SEPTIC TANK 4,000.00 .00 .00 5.00 4,000.00
.00 . . 200-110 -- -
LS
15
16 •
18 ei
19
10
II
12
12
II
, ,„ _
16
17
ts .
19 , -----
0
.2
A
14
iil , •-■-.-----
A
57 .......„..... - - - _
MN ' MN In V EMI flall 0111 EN 1 NM M NM 11111 MI NM In 1
FEBRUARY 1990 CITY OF CHANHASSEN DETAIL BUDGET REPORT -REVENUE FEBRUARY 1990
1 16.66 PERCENT OF YEAR EXPIRED/
FUND 101 GENERAL FURO
----- 1141044460 COLL64460 COLLICT8D PERCENT--RERC-E-$T------U4440L4•f.C4EO==--- . ,:-
REVENUE THIS MONTH TO-DATE TO-BATE LAST YR BALANCE
3 SNON- 4S-3Sr-4.4 IP�•i t- - _._.... ._ -.._----- ----- ------ ------ --=--------- ' ..
' 3328 WETLANU ALTERATION 600.00 .00 .00 8.33 600.00 I
5 3390 M1SC PERMITS 1,000.00 •00 •00 12.80 1,000.00
7 TOTAL NUN-BUSINESS LIC/PERM 739,300.00 59,242.33 97.184.43 T . 13.15 8.28 642,115•57
6 •
PIKES--+-F044-FELTS --
3401 TRAFFIC + ORD. VIOLATION 22,000.00 2,454•83 2,479.83 _ 11.27 6.44 19,520•17
is
12 3404 UJG 2,000.00 349.25 757.00 ' 37.85 1,243.00
340-5,--OTHER 100.0.0 .00 +00 100.00-
14 TOTAL FINES t FORFEITS 24,100.00 2,804.08 3,236•83 13443 5.86 20,863•17 <
16 ,
16 INTERGOVERNMENTAL REV.
17 3501 LOCAL GOVERN. AID 65,600.00 •00 •00 65,600•00
la 3502--MSA-MA•LN.T.---*--C1JN-S•.14, 13,000+00 6,907.50 . -----6.907,50 N}92-.-5u--_=_
M 3509 OTHER SHAKEU TAXES' 28,000.00 .00 •00 28,000•00 �'
m 3510 GRANTS, STATE 8,500.00 .00 ! •00 8,500•00
21
:2 TOTAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL REV. 115,100•00 6,907•50 6,907.50 6•00 1.82 108,192•50
m CORRE :I- E-RV-&C _._ __ _ ___ _.--_.
m 3601 SALE OF DOCUMENTS 2,000.00 107.50 240•00 12•00 17.03 1,760.00
n 3602 USE + VARIANCE PERMITS 12,000.00 585.00 985•00 8.21 8•18 11,015•00 .
ze---3603---RE- 0M4444-F 4S -..:.... -.:----500-.00 • .. _00- to - ----- - - Aiin,nn
n 3604 ASSES. ROLL SEARCHES 9,500•00 360•00 1,060•00 11.16 9.22 0,440.00
30 3613 MISC. - GENERAL GOVT. 1,000.00 24.34 94•86 9•49 35•13 905•14
3615 A0V4M-.CHG.-..H . . i l l • o 1 1 1 aO00�0II--_,_-
71 3623 ANIMAL CONTROL 30,000.00 •00 •00 30,000•00 •
17 3629 MISC.- PUBLIC SAFTEY ' _ •00 40.00 10.00 10.00CR` '
13 3b32-PARR--AD*,- FE6i• DAILY' 11,000.00 . . . 2•50 2•50 .02
34
36
36 .
37
`1' 1J.
38 39 •krt%.
40
41
42
44
46
48
47
48
49
50
61
52
53
54
66 '
66 ,
7
I US W
00
00 00 0l + 00 .4 - 1 a 01 O O•
11W ao O $ ■ - oO1yOa - 1t11 O o 1 u1
Y .s1 • • • 1 s • • • • 1 • • • 1 •
M U 0 0 0 N - 00 0.. • I0 CO - - ,-
s Z 0 0 A + - 00 a 0 - 1 i1'► O
00,10 4
W J1 4 s, ft
t�j<
N•41.4 A
• + M/ f A
2 at ci -I -•
IC N
<4 2 1 9
OW 4It s
I all
U.C F O[ 14' I a N P. M
C. 2 Y CD in O• - 1 O
2 W • • • • 1 •
W 1• ." to .4 en
I 1P +.
ae w< 1
W d 1 4 O.
a W . a •• 1n + 1 A a
a f- s. - . • CO N 1 N +
• yt< • • 1 •
.4 1 • --4 fN 1 1
.. FO- 1 1
•
•
1
1
IuJ s '
I W 1 .•
W
YI ~
OG
O
6 00 . 0 • - 00 O ? - + O 0 .41
W 001:k0 - 0 0 O n • a O O
4
Y • • • • •I. 4m • 4.
ti 0 .4 a .4 "4 4
0 N M
0
9 Ik•
W Z 00110 • - 00' 00 - - Y1 : :'
O
2 irZ 00 7 O O O 10 ' I i O
Z Lig W O O 0 - - 0- 0 O o • 1 CO
< 3Z 00 O - - A• 1, 0 1A 1 .sR -
z Y . . . . . i •. 1 •
O a OL N•11' N ' - .,q .r 1 1R F _-
N ,
s .. .
1_
J W
>At J • N
J.4 4' F
•
I.419011• W
a ( Y J Y' N [
Z t4 . .J' at
41...1 W flC 1
u. W W ti = i X1-• -•• us at 1
a .uJ1t+ WZ W40 9 C
a -1 U.u. .) - x u W H C Z .4 .W
I a 4 A 9-• Y Cusp. W W a . '
.4 ' t u1 . •av.4 a F .4 Y^� .. OL Z
us U- C% a a¢20 - 4 ilft W • us
4. .499 9 ua u1Z t.* at N ! i
4.1 444- a. 342-4.11W4 le Y O 1!.44 .1 9 W9�JO10►< Ot4 ►. Cu.W O .
< .4 e.a.Nt. tt vHW9 NN a aW Z.
9 9 Laf1T.T-O� 4 W•4Nim 00 .4 IM 4
us 9 90.0.0+0 M} 4-,WJomet/a0oa • o va O
I au u1nenento •. Oointoirnn1 - . zen «• a. ,
• N n • tl O P O " O - N ° 4 tl tl n C ' N N N n N a tl N m g O N N n'• 2 tl n m 2I0 - N ',4 f m Q O tl N 2 f O 0 .
NM NS - MI .- - MI NM r SR M NS - r - r NM I NM
FEBRUARY 1990 CITY OF CHANHASSEN SUMMARY BUDGET REPORT —EXPENDITURES FEBRUARY 1990
i 1 16.66 PERCENT OF YEAR EXPIRED!
' NON-OPERATING FUNDS
is BUDGETED EXPENDED EXPENDED PERCENT PERCENT UNENCUMBERED
3 E,1c 4,40-1-TUBES THIS MONTH YEAR- ATE E
5 BY TYPE OF EXPENDITURE
6
7 MATERIALS • SUPPLIES .00 2,201.50 2,201.50
e .94 .13 2,201•13�R ;
9
200969.10CR : .;.
10
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES •00 7,96B.91:1 20,969.10
II 3•41 1•21 1•21
12
CAPITAL OUTLAY 00 222,595.59 512,392.64
,4 • '999.99 512,392•64CR
,5 95.24 29.62 29.62
.
18 DEBT SERVICE •00 944.25 1,194,526.64 1s1940 526.6401
18 .40 69.04 69.04
•
1s
20 ,
21
22 .00 233,710.32 1,730,009.88
23
** TOTAL S •*• 999.99 1,730►OB9.88CR
24
26 .. • ,
28
.29
30 •
32
33
34
35
36
37 r .. ,. . .. . . r ..
35 1,'"1P'
39 .
40 .... ..
41
42
44
45 "
4G ,• .,
47
49
49 • - : . .
50 I 51
52
53
54
55 _._•
56
'g7 .
MI N M - M NM NM MI r MN r M = r • MO N MI MIN
FEBRUARY ' 1990 ' CITY OF CHANHASSEN SUMMARY BUDGET REPORT -EXPENOITURES FEBRUARY 1990
� 1 16.66 PERCENT OF YEAR EXPIRED/
C .1-T-4..----..--.,-u-.11-M A R Y I
�� NON•OPERATING FUNDS 2
BUDGETED EXPENDED EXPENDED PERCENT PERCENT UNENCUMBERED 3I
3 k #440-1-TUBES T-NIS-MUNTH YEAR-TO-DATE ENCUM8RA$C&;-»-:-0-ATE---4A5-T-YR +1A1-*LA 4
4 6
0a 305 CITY HALL BUNUS .00 .00 46,495.63 46,495.63CR 7
6 _..2.69 _ ----, '� a�
2.b9
16 309 MI 110 REF bUS - 1983 .00 .00 340,223.00 9
9 340,223.0008 1+
. ------19.67 19.6 7- 12
10 13
011 314 1987 EQUIPMENT CERT. .00 .00 54,200.00 54,200.000A 16
12
13 3.43------ • ' .^^^^-----3.13 16
17
)14 315 1987 GO Ti BONDS .00 .00 111,259.38 • 111,259.38CR , lol
16 1••,a 6.43 6_,43 ,.
1
221
17 411 LAKE ANN PARK EXPANSION .00 46,830.25 46,830.25 46,830.25CR 23!
to
19 20.04 .2.-71 2.71
1 25I
120 412 LAKE SUSAN PARK. .00 .00 .00 .00 z
29
)23 413 SOUTH CHAN PARKS .00 1,116.00 3,316.00 3,316.000R 31 0
25 - . s 4+1------. .19 -44 32
33
127 456 PUBLIC MKS. EXPANS.-1989 .00 .00 .00 ) .00 3
28 36
'28 457 FIRE STATION EXPANSION .00 .00 .00 • 36
3 01 .OD ;
'32 458 CITY HALL EXPANSION , .00 13,0'74.16 18.504.16 43
33 1 ,
. '.5.59 .... 8 50L.U7 43
. .. � ... 1.07
34 45
'36 466 ROSEMOUNT T.I.D. .00 .00 .00 .00 46
36 �_.-.._ 48
138 5
39
57
40 53
141 54
42 -- 56
fi
43 7
144
58'
46 I
48 .. , .. 61]
,47 62
49 63
G
50 66
61 67
62 69
53 70
64 71
-.- ..�...... ._ .�.�...._._,_ �- 72�
515 .66 . 74
. '
7
,`6 7 ., 75
en IIII E MN NB NI 11111 IIN MI all n M NS INII IIIII MI 1118 I -
FEBRUARY 1990 CITY OF CHANHASSEN SUMMARY BUDGET REPORT -EXPENDITURES FEBRUARY 1990
I 16.66 PERCENT OF YEAR EXPIRED/
C i-T-11----4-4.--14-M * R Y
' NON•OPERATING FUNDS
2 BUDGETED EXPENDED EXPENDED PERCENT PERCENT UNENCUMBERED �3
GXPENDITURES THIS RURTH YEAR•7040 ST YR aA�.A$-E `
4 .
5 468 MC GLYNN T.L.U. .00 2,123.50 2,123.50 7
e_9t .12 2,123.50CR
9
8 469 COMMUNITY OEV BLOCK GRNT .00 1,000.00 2,000.00 2,000.00CR 11
9
10 _ .. 44 -12 . •44. . 12
13
" 471 OLD VILLAGE HALL .00 12.20 95.32 •
14.
12 95.32CR 15
.01 .O1 t•. .01 • 18
14 474 SUPER. VALU T.I.D. • .00 .00 51,700.00 51,700.00LR ' 19
15
2_99
19 ., l_,4 -- 20
21
22
513 BUNGS OF 1983 .00 .00 37,891.88 • 37,891.68CR 23
18
20 514 ADV S/A REF BADS • 1983. • .00 ., ` '944.25 275,069.25
28
21 275,069.25CR 27
„ ..
29
23 30
24 517 1987 GO 1MPROV BONDS .00 .00 329,387.50 329,381.50CR 3+
19.04 19.04
32
25 .. 33
26
27 615 ' LAKE DRIVE EAST .00 ' . 290.00 290.00 :. 290.000R 35
28 <, .02 . .
•02
37
29 616 PKNG. LOT CONST. 76TH NJ .00 31,523.29 32,550.19 32,550.1901 39
30
31 .. .,� ,. .�.r, .., 13-49 .. 1-8A 1 E1
32 618 DOWNTURN IMP. TID }' .00 ' .00 224,005.85 224,005.85CR 43
34 .. •. _. ,.+_ .y ..,.. - 12-95 .. . ., .. ll• 8 . 44
45
35 620 84•4/88•22 LK DRIVE EAST .00 88,234.67 91,510.67 91,510.6/CR 47
38
37 37•75 5.29 .2.9 48
49
38
39 51
.
52
40 .. ., ,
53
41
54
42 55
, 57
•
44 68
4G 59
46'4 61
47 62
48
63
64
4, . . 65
50 G6
5+ 67
68
62 69
53 70
54
4 71
i3
aE
56 * 74
c7, 7
7 I
.. . .•r._� FlKFN 04-PaFNN7-r5 - itr1Te7 t• Flt-TQFtUO O Q Q Q f Q.Q.n m If1 Yf IflbNmam min-to-W-o)'m O to a 5 n n n w i7..-7.:r
I o at I at at at at
a fa u cI u a 14
vo O o 0 • 0 oo •. a O OA o0 OHO so
+.4 1.1J w 0 0 • 0 00 M0 0 0-I N4 00 CO
GC at IyMl • • • • • • • • • , • • • r •
D. W a
m 2 a .4
: 4 A 0
• 7 N A ft• O o a O•
.41
0 so .4 a 4•1 O o 0 3 aD 0
at
Y0 Z0 0 .O °
...4 ni
3
us Z A
' o C
WU. •U.,0 f
I sa 1 1
Z W • !
W V
tJt
DC
at W 0 f
O
W d f
IL 11
.D 1.•
I .p Zit
• w
LIP
W
i. 1
. 1
1
r
1
W •
1�
o
2 �
W 3 I
a.
It W y
1 I-
•
. `
f 0 E I
W O7 O • O O Olei O OA O . O4 0
or W h� m O - O • in d O CD roll N O O 0 .
• • r
W o O .O N .p 7 .1 •
A O - 0 0 o m !
N 2 A P 1 O� O tel O O I
W W • •
O d ♦ .t eel O .4 O
i en
P.
Is
_ I
0 O as O N 0 O O• O O? O O 4 N -
N O A 311 O .7 O
W • • • • •
1 N .i
� O♦N to•d a• CO N O
P. • 1 • .
O..i O,
• •
O en•O
W O
o 41 7 O O A .
1•• N
W L
1 N yr O O O O O O O O ' O 0
n I W o o a o o - o 0 0 0
Z io.! . .
• 1
ill 2 .. ' I ., .
•
I
N
L
-
ct
as I f(D W V = Z W V O I O t Y 1•n 0 at
.. ? W +W O
tott AL
a +]
7 at N ►• W
• <
Q 0 W
de
J w• L 1 ~O s as I..z . <
lac
II
0 0
0 41.
e 2 I
G. I C us Y f m 2 .a 0 La :n 3
a GO 2 I at
7 •Y A 2 0 W W
Z s I u 2 , W s f. v • : . =d H
I
{ r- h• I u. 1 as �n 2 1 1
` < Z fi ttt O' N 1 N • LC H 1Z
ti ( at s 0 i t 1 1 1 *r 0 1
Z I W O J A A
CD
A O. ae O =
< >: S m ( co as O I aD 0 W N
F 1
I 4
4 W r O 0 0 1 CD 7 O 14 an .1. O ~ _ •
I Y. I Z N nl eA eA .1 t 4 O A {f 1 H
Li 0 • 0 .D A . 0 .O O P ° 0. { 1
111
. rf • m m n s m o :2!:". • m m n '22;22 o �� i2 m m m w O n o u m m a o N� e m n m f• o a n •f m m w
IF t I I - I • a 'n.ev a r. a ,a =�l w a a e +n�o a a � ;• v a n,m 11 AA •
IN•TW . . NNNF.Nnrinn Nhn CInnVf QQQ QWV./ V VINO mammas 10ommID u..D..0 4:1F.ri:irrrr
1 O
P—
PO a I 4 OA 0.•1 NA P.t
.4W W N./ PA •A10 .4-4 P.43 sn' "
• _" at • • • • • • • • • • • -
I
.4
6 ft W W m -
= N O P 41 a-n .O? 54-1
Pen m
51♦ -1 a ht 0
0 • 0
• a n.a
311 a a 11.4
a<GC Z 11 .4 w .i ie1 0 •4 I
IC 0 - W m . 0 41 A 0
' O W
aC Z ♦ a a
1• O .q N a
0
WY. I
Y.O
p•N N A /n to A m
P. Z a 0 0 m P CO
II Z W • • • • • •
W u ra N
0 o .4
0 u at •
.4 N W
W 6 --
0. .
a P. 0 K1 N " a a _ a
I a• Z
W
a u-
.4 et 0
.4
.a• •m t ' N
• •
N. .4 .-•r O m•
• '
W-
,
.• d 1.
N
W ._ F>. F
N
O
2
d I
W 1
1
k
O
a. .111 44 ON 0 S 10 4. .ea Y1 .
W Aen ./a 111A men NP ♦ - .
1 13C W 0 i e • • • • • • • • • •
A.1 O 111 M P to../ m.•s en
H 2i 111 111 a
P a A en d
m O a en N
P
US ea O a. O P eT N O A
O K A N O .1 N
0 W 1 N N 111
Z
IC
O N O 05 NT O m S5 54 O
O aA▪N 1e1 INN P Om.4a A3D N O m N m
'
41 .1 a en -d m O z 1 .
10 P +4 m O - - .43 tw
W NI N P a
.{ N
A ON 7A 0.4 • 04. 00 • O
�.
0 311 00 aN 0111 Om , o
4 o•- • • • • • • • • .
Z W i•a• 011 *en ox oo , o �" "
Z P. 111/11 41 en•' 11 0 r4 m
I Z W eel a P o A o
z 0 ♦ ♦ a a • a
o - en .r m ` P A • i
O a ,0 N t11 .•" �"
W m o . 111 a St P. a1
D a ♦ • a
N- N a • -
-
t ■ f
1 W
Y
.101 h
•
•
t• y W
a O A J .4
P J11 Z W d
3.O W J S at 9 •/!
us a-
> >'C a.M %I • J
J/W W W 4 J • I.■ V
t IO>• F W t t V J W
Y 1••GC > O at at 1•5 15. .
0 W H II W N.' H /•• _ .
IW Q Y W t O t W - •
tt s 0. z u u Ct
. N off n 'd r' o alo w n I' ' ala o N N h f j N N n m a ;1; N n f n n n m g j o f ;13 f Ql3 i w a o 0 N n Q a a_
.Nnnnnnnnn.Nn•tltlntlalolI N N 2 Q tlN nN tlimo 7 N n n tl tl•nma o• f 2 2 Qtltln 4;Q oN NnW tl a n m mSIGNne tlmY 21 27.PPXtl
n
D ,
P.I.
PO O P•4 06 O•4 •O.1 06 06 O1.► • as 06 -ON oP!
.4 111 W .4.• GSM DO as co 04. ON nA WA OaD Of!
y • ♦ •
w O
6 K as to
Z 4 Si 0 • • • •
0 O • • • • • •
41 AO O� 0
N1 0 0 O • • • 1 • . •
0 •?
O N O IA a a AN A N!
D- P N o
..1 P. O
P
W • . • • • • • • - w" •
1. eP4 •0 +A P. 0 Or a N .o P co.
at Y Z 0 do A 0 P. N 41 N P.* .O . a
<W< W
Z 0 N N .4 4.1 N .� .•a
Y 7 N
m
tL O
►• z I. 0 Pt .a4 • .4
= W
LI
eg ••
w v P .+
et
W •
W 6 - ..
a.
I - Z
0 O O .mo "
t• . A O .d 161- N P.
• •
O .7 • dh a O O '
.4 CC .! ,
W .
•
W .
M
D
Z
W
G. ,
K
W .
III 1
t.
Y
0
d .i • O O 4'6 O 06 0YF- .0A 00 Or O r
w CD • O O 111 O OO 00 146 NP.. O•A O -
• • • • • • • . • • • r • • • -. •
at W i P •O.4 O O .-1.•a r A 1r
F Z m 1L 61 O i .3 P∎ P
W W • it • ♦ •
O O 04 " in 1!1 0 N
•
' O W N _ ..
m
Y
•
C .
7 H D W a O•
O.4 E •• O O• DPN O s • •aD A Oe1 O.4"0•- w s PI " oA se en _ :7 44
• •
•
•
•
IZ W Jt - o♦ O0 O:A ON O,O. OA O = ON 0.4 04 0.4 00 ON 04 0
< O• • • • • 4 • • • • • 1 • • • r • 40,. ., • • •
_ +t• O O O O trl O a 0 ON OA 04 O N O
I z r o at o o a o 0 0 . o o o
'I 111
a� O a vs N o O P N O c O • O •
0 N A , 04 1• to m .A r CD --' P4--/. UN
ut N F:
I as s ,
O s .
• • f— W at
•
AA
LIJ
at
FL Y I... O O Z Z O W
I vs
O Z O J .L •4 J < N N •4 4 " •
P
P Z W = P. • Lt M• 4 Z . N N
V1 O Y W t Z t < .•a
-a D u. u ae x " w d d 0 ,
3 a z v N . i Z uut :ii .0 d
•1 < 'W W .y O < •-•
GO C W z at at UJ J
r Z 6 0 I = F• 1•4 0 It ' F• Og Z
•
OL .•i W *4 M 0 0 < ' Z W t < D
t h 0 11. 0 < t tJ W :N = d , t
Y Pi., K
•
W d ./ as 11 to P O .•.. .•1 N O let
Y. C O O O O O .d .1 - O O 441 44
V .4 N - N •N N f N N a 4 a • a
. N n f s' c' N n e tl tl n mIa N N N n ftl m n tl m o• A N n f tl u n n 2Io ; NIn f tl O ; !a o tl N n f tl o` =
MI_MI __INII NM OM MO MI NMI • Oil aill MN MO all iii ME aili MN all
FEBRUARY 1990 CITY OF CHANHASSEN SUMMARY BUDGET REPORT -EXPENDITURES FEBRUARY 1990
I 16.66 PERCENT OF YEAR EXPIRED)
1 C 1-T--7- -S ti-8- 41--A --Y
2 OPERATING FUNDS
•
3 BUDGETED EXPENDED EXPENDED PERCENT PERCENT ONENCUMBERED I3
iX.0404fiW24S 141•14-44014•14.4---YEAR-TO-0ATE----ENWM6MANCiS- --B0AT-R LAST YR IiAlANCii
4 5
n5 460 H.R.A. 956,800.00 8,849.06 24,213.80
e 2.53 16.04 932,586.20—** 1.463 3.36 4.59 -45,,49 e
7 —
9
18 467 ECONOMIC DEVEi3P. 01ST. 134,400.00 9,782.56 11,929.13 ,"
9 8.88 6.68 122,470.87
10
2.-05 3.42 • -----2.2b- 2.03 1
.11 .. 1-
700 UTILITY HMO 909,900.00 74,321.35 171,700.71
12 18.87 18.95 738,199.29 +
13 - --.. 13_90 28.23 ---3-2.52-.• -___ •-•-•--1?-.•26 +`
14 1c
15 r 1'
2
`17 TOTAL UPERATLNG fuNOS 6,547,080.00 263,088.28 527,923.45 8.06 8.88 6,019,156.55 2
18
19
2-
' 2
20
2,
21 2
22
2•
123 3,
24 3
3
i .. ., .. .. —..13,
3,.
3•
4
132 4
4.
34
33 4-
4-
135 4(
36 4
4.
S 4'
p38 .`• 5.
39 5
40 ..
5'
41 5-
42 5'-
43 ._ 5:
5
44 5-
46 5.
. .. ., , .. , - .,.. .�.. .„ , ..,, • .. 6.
47 6
48 6-
6,
49 _.-._.__.... —_— g.
50
6.
6
8.
51
6:
52
6C
63 7C
64 71
C.5 ... _ _ 72
-. ......-.-......------
56 74
7 75
Y
• a;W OM WI°b.."na m o��m oNHNf•y_��i ru. VAs!Annn ne••)neAs c�A n 41;a v e v o v a'e°';I�1I °N g;'1! il Q 1 140u: u 4 a A 1°w r °nnh
0
cp.4 W d ti a N Pll 0 O ^•1 n .4 ,
as W • • • • ■ •
-r v P. el-- 0 .4 441 o
j a. z a ? •• N 0
VC V< O P. M ti 0
W 7 .1
P. ♦ ♦ ♦
Y Si s 0 0 .r rn 0
' Y a 4 •?..b N N.4 to el .0 el
i :tl t N O• a
�W ZZ ♦
0
et s.. 1 -4 N
W
LL
W O
1••at ,n 1 a O in 1 N
II Z 2 Y • N .� .-1 t 0
= W • • • • t •
W 4~ N r r, P. P
Iti VC
se W< .4
W J , '
G.
,
a 0 m 0
0
•
a M a 0 sr
0
01 1 .4 .4 .4 • •
✓ H
S. . ,
h H .
W W
at if
3 Z
■ s
-. Y
O 0
Z =
W
a. u
ne z
I 1▪ W
F .
at �.
0
a. W es 1 o a - o 1.4
W F. 0 a a • as a 3 0
at < • • • l • •} •
ttt O N�'1 0 .a Or o.0 0' {
1 In N to 0 N I .i tl
P. O IA O• a 0 1 at
� i a .n 0 a en
0 at N ./ ,n N
� 4, N N
9 W
Y
aL
s
H H R1 • t+ • .4 • O•L•a O
2 • • • • •
O O • 0.. 0• -- '0 O•
'��!s -'"i • 0O0 v.1 P. 0
N M O !�1 O• is P. .' ', _
N sn
I Z 1
n .n a • 0 0 0 • + o
Dolt o 0 0• a { O
z WO O •/-t- o se) o In o -
vW en R1 O + 1N .
v. a O. a N O 1 O• .
Y
O
Z
u.
Z et Li W W
a J t •o J! J .4 *
O i W a. a
.a Y c.s a. Y N
a i W 4 J 1-• < .
.r ti. N
Y N 7 0 Ee 1..
3 i -r - .4 41t •C , -
at o at aL 1•• 1..
111 W Z I.• 'Y M. Z 0. ••
U. o 4 W i U.I O < •
tl. s s v u
1
•
• p el• . . -. o "I o .. 14r O • W O nitY H • n W n m a PI ; N Af n W W I n � W,
o v n • • W•iW n m;• O IT; n •I W g w
MI - • E MI OM MN MI - - an N NM an r - - NM Mil
FEBRUARY 1990 CITY OF CHANHASSEN SUMMARY BUOGET REPORT -EXPENDITURES FEBRUARY 1990
FUND 101 GENERAL FUND
1 16•66 PERCENT OF YEAS, EXPIRED)
----7.-------- -----BUDGETED- FYPENU-D_ EXPENDED PERCEN.T�RERENI jIHENCiJllBE 9. ---____-
EXPENDITURES THIS MONTH YEAR-TO-DATE ENCUMBRANCES TO-DATE LAST YR BALANCE a
3 11-1-4--LE-G-1-$4,-44-14/4 81.440,00 2-,8ti6.44 -6,89 3..43 8.49 10.06 740257--11- �4
4 2.77 1.81 2.35 s
6 2•x!2 6
7
6 14.2�._•.AOA114141KAT4K _.UE.F.1C.E_ 178,aO.O..AO 14,991..21---- 29,.235.25-. 16•4? 12.Oh . 14&.Thh4-7S_ 0
7 6.09 9.53 9.95 1.
6 5.69
,
9 113 FINANC-E--•- . - • 116,550.00 . - 11,549.-b6 -1-6,-518.b9 • 14.17 16.67 100,031•31 '-
10 3•99 7•34 5.62 ',
It
,
•
12 114----LEGAL - 48,000.00 .00 -- •00 48,.00000 !°
,3 1•64 111,.4 1.82
,'
's 115 ---P ERT-Y---A-5$E5SM-E$T 40,000.00 -.00 .00 40,000YBC
,6 1.37 -
n • 1.52
16 1-17 CITY-Y-HAW. 1301- 0.00 . 5,-094'72 9,96-5.•03 7----
„ x.42 1; 47 120,7x4.-9. -
20 4.47 3•81 3•39 4.59 2,
T 118 EL-ECM-US$ - - • 34,800.00 • • .40-x- •00 2
:z 34,800.00 '
:3 1.19 1•32 3.•
3
74 121-0;4ICE 402,100_00 80081.52 ---16,-05.1.84 - .1•.99 . 3.24 386,048- 6 3-
�,6 13•75 5•13 5.46 14.67 ;
3,
127 123" FIS, 0 5052-6.16j 9,154•91 5•02 5.64 151,795_09 3:
28 5.5 7 3.51 3.12 5.8 5 ;
�
30 123 . -P I8t-Li-4AE-E.T1 COMMIS • .. 11 11 1 1 I I �.. 304.00 :'•31
.04 4
X32 - •05
q:
3.---125•---CLWE -NF•UR q-
3< 12•25 16•23 16.52 11.78 4`
{35 4.
36 4
4:
X38 ,. .'�i yr', 5,
39 f � 5
. .. .. 6-•
40 5-
141
42 5=
5.
p14 5,
5
45
6•
46 6
47 6
6-
6-
50 6:
81 8.
52 W
163 71
64 71
7-
166 ,, 7-
7 7-
•••N e,v.D.P.."*"."V V VV"V CV11. Nr4 7. 3 3 P.3 3 3;3 A A A 3 r':',fg Pr 3;3-3 3 33-3 3;3 tf;'-;3 rg g 2 2 i;1'2 3';3 3 3 3 2 3 121 p.--,". •
. r. .
•
I 0 ' . • i ' .
0 0 0 0 0 42 0 0 0 on 0 aa +es ea el o ea ea 1,-.a) ne ea .4.s.
.4 UJ 0 VI 0 P. 0 0 0 A N N• 0 0 f.N 0 1...- cob.... .1 co ,..4 im
I ac
" 41/
LI
Z
it i 4 e • •
NI .41 0 41 4 01: 0..., .... 0. • • • 4 • • • 4 •
' ..• 0
lei 0
a, e.
0 f.
N .4 NI 4 N S
f'4
0 4
eu o o
o
44 ,
, -
,■ ft • Si • • ■ •
1.• 0 ir r• 0 0 o oa .o .
o et 40
,... i ac). a .r. P.
- N 0 . *0 a 1
111 z
. 0 I.,
es ere
ac
f-1" . .
IN
.• •
NI
14 .
•
41
••• ■
41 ■•
IN
. . 4
CM
At d
; .
a.
I a
4
I.•
• I 4
4 0 • . e. . I
1
... 4' .
. 4
•
.4 .1
*
eN IN
•
NI
‘IP
w4 * I .4 -.4 v4 ., . -4 .4 . • .
v. 1 11.• ,, ., ,, , - .
. ,
II Y• V1 .
- - •
. „
. '
. .
. :
• ;
. .
- -
11/ Ma t-
at 0 . 1. , •. , .
II •
us a
• .
- .
at 2 • .
. ,
i - • -
I •••■ . .
0
a. cut •0 ao a 0 0 0 f41 N 0 et•• 0 I. , f
I MI
ac
11.• b■ 0 4 4 N C N 4 lb.
14,04 1 • • • 4 • • •
1 M .
IA P.... NI N .. N C, f. 02..4 - fel
.. .0 • • .. A
.- o • -it
et e4 ••
let
CY _ to
. .
0 1 IT 1'• . 4.,
IP • . IN
0 Z .4 - ..
0 U4 .
-
2.
•
0 . .
. ,
lie . .
C .
I es 4 ' 3 - 2 L',- ;',4 0
ea to • NI
NJ qr • al CP erl • 0
ft/ - 0 • 0 4 43 • UN
Z • 4 • V • • •• • • r• • .
..- t111 .0 0 N Nt A . 0 A ..4 0•-II , . ..
. ,
I •.•
Z
II.. • •
1.4 ' •
. ,. • , . •
N
. .
. . , •••'
. '
' , . • .
. • .
. . .
2 • . ,
III Ua
in • N. ..• NT . 4:1 rof - ID - 41 - 0 - Nt - 0 0 0 - A - ,, - , . .
tai - nl - CP. .-4 P.- ■ 0, CO - 0■1 ... et - RI 0 0. - N . :
4 • • • • • I • • „
,
1 OR .•
I 3 i 0
- z -
.0
. .,..... -
. •
AL a. -4 • " 7:-.
. .
. . •
•-•4,
t• .; -
. -
i•• , ..,
I LAI
I .
. .
. . . .
. col
SC •
- • _
. .. .
I
• . 41C
I -
..
A. ..
. .
. — ' •
. : .
Z i
n r
1 z -
. a
4
.4 * 5 1...
ac
= - •
- -
4
:
1
la
v. 1
i
i 1
..r
4 1 :41!
< . ; 4. . toll :
i
4 . . .
ID 0 I •
IV
elo on
en o
.4
. . ... . * ° .. "I''' .1 mil' " *Y" 37. 33 :1133 .3 ; 333 .13.333.3 : 3333'33333 ; 323.33 '7
-
______
hnemm"ofao"r""°° °gZ,gi"n'it:gFev!ng;n nncii nnna°Iavaolaeac'du>mzg.rit4;;zineac'umiom mioomunnn'nnnn∎
O O - N Q
•i W u� 1.•
W •
24 f-I t.W
3<1
=Wx
Ys 1 N
DI
M.O
M K N
w
W v!-
K i0ylfj• ty IC
W J
d us
43 ai I-
• W s
.4 01 1 .4
yo
itO) N , .•
W W tt
at e.s z
N et
W =
a. 1es
x z
W W
a
o ,
d W 1 0`
W H N
W O
CI I
H It O CD
tW9 r-
1
O Y < N
0 us
< 1
Z
us a 1
O • 1 ;
s
1
N O {
col us .4
= ao i
V W X N
u.o it ft
W N '
y
a.
w
es
O t
1
Z •1
E
O ' o
-41 I
i f , 1
1i x •
le
T
W Z 1 •
1 + '
7
O • N " 0 n n n ° a G r of ♦ n IG a a 0 e1 e7 0 n n! -
� mig � rr�n • n � N a o n n
- n n • m m � m a rr iv'v e+ n�a n n n n nay n � � n �'n n n o n n n n n
I CITYOFH ±-
690 I . te-
4 CHANIIASSEg
1 . ..„, ' : .,-,41(
COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147• CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
* ' ,,. (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739
MEMORANDUM
ITO: T. Mark Cooney, Building Inspector
IFROM: Scott Harr, Assistant Public Safety Directo
DATE: February 8, 1990
ISUBJ: Commendation
IThis memo is to recognize the excellent work accomplished on
2/7/90 at 7767 South Shore Drive. Fire Marshal Mark Littfin
I has advised me that your discovery of a propane leak at this
address and your subsequent prompt action in all probability pre-
vented an explosion. On behalf of the Fire Department and the
Public Safety Department, we commend you for your actions .
cc: Don Ashworth, City Manager
II Jim Chaffee, Public Safety Director
Dale Gregory, Fire Chief
Personnel File g
I ¢:..
‘.a
..°YZ'r -fig;:» . 4„.9"afifr 1..,.
^;
we
I
I
I
I SMITH • FISHER
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
IJoel pother Market Plaza
Barbara L Jones 732 West 66th Street
I Douglas F.McGuire - Richfield, Minnesota 55423
Joel C.Monke
Steven C.Smith (61:48614556
February 23, 1990
/6.,.....-
I City Clerk d
City of Chanhassen J bo-c `A .41 690 Coulter Drive •
I Chanhassen, MN 55318 6 7x41 /61 44.` 9'
RE: Western Area Fire Training Academy/Minnegasco /,4. "I r
Proposed Termination Agreement of Use Agreement ;,.� "
IDear Clerk: 0 40-,,-1' N •-�""1-
Enclosed is a letter addressed to your Mayor and City C °�ouncil as °Tr' '
1 well as attached document. Please present at your next Council
meeting. Pt
I If you have any questions, you can reach me at my office at 6,
861-4556.
ISi -rely, /
A /li Of
I eve Smith
SS:kr
IEnclosures
cc: WAFTA/Michael Savage
I
11
I
I
i.f_...:.I.v_.J
I FEB 2 81990
en.OF CHANHASSEN
I
SMITH • FISHER
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
' Joel Fisher Market Plaza
Barbara L Jones 732 West 66th Street
Douglas F.McGuire
' Joel C Monke Richfield, Minnesota 55423
Steven C Smith (612)861-4556
February 23, 1990
Mayor Chmiel and Council Members
' City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive
Chanhassen, MN 55318
' RE: Western Area Fire Training Academy Lease/Minnegasco
' Dear Mayor Chmiel:
Enclosed is an additional copy of the WAFTA Lease previously acted
upon by your Council. Please have yourself and city clerk sign
where indicated and return to our office.
Also, your Council should be informed, if it is not already, that I,
' WAFTA's attorney in this lease termination matter, Steve Smith, am
also the Mayor of the City of Mound and have been since January 1,
1987.
WAFTA is an entity separate from your city, and each of the cities
involved. Nevertheless, your city is a signatory of the Joint
Powers Agreement, or "Use Agreement" (the lease being terminated) .
I have informed my client - WAFTA - that in the event of dispute
between members comprising WAFTA (cities involved) that I would
withdraw from continuing representation. WAFTA understands this and
has consented to this particular term of our attorney/client
relationship.
' If your Council has any questions, please contact me or if any
objection to my representing WAFTA in this lease termination
negotiation, please contact me immediately either by correspondence
or at my office, 861-4556.
Sinc- ely,
X11 i/A04
t-ve Smith
Mayor of Mound
SS:kr
' Enclosure
I
f
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
TERMINATION AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT made this day of , 1989,
between WESTERN AREA FIRE TRAINING ACADEMY, a Minnesota non-profit
' corporation, hereinafter referred to as "THE ACADEMY" and MINNESOTA
GAS COMPANY, a Delaware corporation, licensed to do business in the
State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to -as "THE COMPANY" .
RECITALS
1. "THE ACADEMY" and "THE COMPANY" have entered into a
'- Use Agreement dated January 1, 1979, by which the "THE ACADEMY" and
"THE COMPANY" agreed to certain terms and conditions for the use by
' "THE ACADEMY" and "THE COMPANY" of property described and known as
the Launch Area, Nike Battery #70, in the County of Carver, St.
' Bonifacius, Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as "THE SITE" by
which "THE ACADEMY" and "THE COMPANY" agreed to the terms and
' conditions as stated in the Use Agreement. "THE SITE" shall include
' not only the said property but also any buildings, storage
facilities, equipment, and any physical improvements thereon.
' 2. The parties desire to terminate and cancel the Use
Agreement, and to release each other from their respective
' obligations under said Use Agreement except as hereinafter stated. k.
3. In consideration of the mutual covenants contained
herein, the parties agree as follows:
' The Use Agreement shall be and is hereby terminated
and cancelled and the term thereof is brought to an
end as of the date of the signing hereof, subject to
the terms and conditions set forth below.
"THE ACADEMY" and "THE COMPANY" are released and
' discharged from their respective obligations to
observe the terms and conditions of the Use Agreement
on their respective parts to be observed, unless
hereinafter otherwise stated.
-1-
I
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
"THE COMPANY" vacated "THE SITE" sometime in 1988 and
hereby abandons and vacates "THE SITE" effective the
1 - date herewith.
"THE COMPANY" hereby vacates its easement to use such
' areas within "THE SITE" as "THE ACADEMY" and "THE
COMPANY" have mutually agreed upon hereinbefore either
for any remodelling or alteration or for use in
' related training programs.
"THE ACADEMY" herein terminates its right to receive
any yearly rental, or training fees due "THE ACADEMY"
' from "THE COMPANY" pursuant to said Use Agreement.
"THE COMPANY" hereby vacates its easement or use of
' any of the existing buildings or property above or
below ground on "THE SITE".
"THE ACADEMY" hereby terminates all expectancy to
receive any costs or expenses due it or claimed due
from "THE COMPANY" for the filling, grading, fencing,
building remodelling, providing of any fuels and
' materials and storage materials and any equipment
previously supplied and the use of any and all
buildings and areas on "THE SITE" .
"THE COMPANY" terminates its use of "THE SITE" either
in its own stead or by any of its designated agents or
' any other organizations as may have contracted with
"THE COMPANY" for use of "THE SITE" .
"THE ACADEMY" and "THE COMPANY" hereby agree that any
' costs whatsoever associated with environmental
liabilities incurred on "THE SITE" as a result of use
by "THE ACADEMY" and/or "THE COMPANY" shall remain the
' sole liability of "THE ACADEMY" and "THE COMPANY".
Further, it shall be an overriding provision herein
that any said liabilities directly attributable to
' "THE COMPANY" shall be the sole obligation of "THE
COMPANY" . Said environmental liabilities include, but
shall not be limited to, the following: any costs
associated with regulatory compliance review; soil and
• ground water assessment; structual inspection;
industrial hygiene assessment; identification of
PCB's, asbestos, other hazardous materials; testing
' and investigation of underground storage tanks;
testing and cleanup of soil; assessment of hazardous
material/waste handling and storage areas; also any
other costs incurred to investigate potential problems
and correct same, which may include but not be limited
to collecting insulation material for analysis;
collecting surface soil samples from visually
contaminated areas; drilling soil borings for
analysis; installing ground water monitoring wells and
collecting ground water samples; collecting other
i
-2-
i
types of samples such as wipe samples from floor or
wall surfaces, samples from drums or transformers or
storage tanks, and samples of sludge or other waste
materials; and leaking, testing underground storage
tanks. Said liabilities shall also include, but not
be limited to: compliance with any and all federal,
state and local regulations with regard to
environmental assessment, analysis, testing, and clean
up liability for any environmental problem or natural
resources damages caused by use of "THE SITE".
"THE COMPANY" hereby represents and warrants that it has
caused no natural resource damage by its - use of "THE SITE" .
Further, that any and- all required federal, state or local permits
concerning or relating to environmental protection and regulation at
"THE SITE" during the Use Agreement have been secured and are
current. Further, "THE COMPANY" warrants that it has been in full
compliance with any and all environmental permits, and any other
requirements under federal, state or local law, regulation or
ordinance. Further, "THE COMPANY" warrants there are no pending
actions against it under any environmental law, regulation or
ordinance, and "THE COMPANY" has not received notice in any form of
such an action, or every possible action, relating to its use of
"THE SITE" . Further, "THE COMPANY" warrants there are no past or
current releases of hazardous substances on, over, at, from, into or
onto any facility at "THE SITE" . Further, "THE COMPANY" warrants
that it is not aware of any environmental condition, situation or
incident on, at or concerning . "THE SITE" that possibly could give
rise to an action or to liabilty under any law, rule, ordinance or
common law theory.
"THE COMPANY" warrants that if a representation or warranty
is breached, "THE COMPANY" is responsible for all resulting
liability, and will indemnify and hold harmless "THE ACADEMY"
-3-