Loading...
1979 06 11 I I I SPECIAL CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE II, 1979 PUBLIC HEARING PROPOSED CARVER BEACH DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 79-1 Mayor Hobbs opened the hearing at 7:30 p.m. with the following members present: Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, Geving, and Matthews. The following interested persons were present: Barb Paradis, 6853 Iroquois Andrea Patterson, Route #7, Box 698 Renee Johnson, 6890 Huron H. E. & Lulu Sampson, 6940 Huron Elizabeth LeTendre, 6900 Huron Bruce and Sarah Lantz, 7030 Carver Beach Road Carl W. Johnson Steven Blom, 6800 Carver Beach Road David Wollan, 631 West 69th Street C. W. Koerner, 621 West 69th Street Dick Gilbert Crea Frank, Maple Grove Phyllis Pope, 7055 Carver Beach Road Karen Vavrichek, 6745 Nez Perce Beth Schanbel, 784 Ivy Road Art Graikowski, 6931 Redman Lane Andy Borash, 6725 Nez Perce Jim Frerich, 651 West 69th Street Jim Cranston, 678 West 69th Street Bill Janich, 6777 Carver Beach Road Scott Reinertson, 6721 Utica Lane Joyce Moore, 845 West 68th Street Dan Welsh, 825 West 68th Street Lee Pillatzki, 806 West 68th Street Mr. and Mrs. Hiller Hibbard, Lots 3030-3035 Ted Coey, 7021 Carver Beach Road Arden Krueger, 6810 Huron Randy Schlueten, 610 West 70th Street Jim Knop, 6800 Nez Perce John Johnson, 6690 Laredo Drive Keith South, 7025 Carver Beach Road Arnold Chulik, 410 Chan View Vernon Kerber, 7241 Powers Blvd. AdelIa Kerber, 7241 Eowers Blvd. Roger and Donna Smith, 6750 Mandan Ray Jackson Rodney Gordon It was announced that written comments will be received by the City for one week after this hearing. The City Attorney rèad the official notice as published in the Carver County Herald. The estimated cost of this project, not including easement acquisition, is $133,062. This improvement will consist of channel improvement of the existing drainageway (Carver Beach Creek) including modification of the channel sections to reduce the velocity of the water, modification or elimination of bends in the creek to minimize turbulence and the lining of the channel with material to provide stability. This proposed improvement also includes the installation of a reinforced concrete culvert under Powers Blvd. and the installation of a service road along the realigned drainageway (Carver Beach Creek) from Carver Beach Road Council Meeting June ll, 1979 -2- to Lotus Lake. Ray Jackson, City Engineer, explained the proposed improvement. The study area includes approximately 288 acres, tributary to the Carver I Beach Creek. Only 82.5 acres are presently developed single family residential. New Horizon Homes - Chaparral I and II and Hansen and Klingelhutz Construction - Western Hills III are proposing to develop an additional l42 acres. The remaining 64 acres will remain farmland and forest land in the immediate future. At the present time there is considerable erosion occurring in the south Carver Beach Creek. This is most noticable east of Carver Beach Road or the private road extension thereof. Erosion will take place at relatively low flows. Given the existing channel slopes alignment, it is not practical to eliminate erosion in this creek through upland retention alone. The Engineer feels that the control of the creek erosion should be done through a combination of retention in the upland areas and through improvements to the existing channel. Proposed improvements to the channel include modification of the channel section by widening and straightening to reduce velocity, lining the channel with natural rock material that would provide stability to the bend of the creek. In combination, this will handle the flows that can be expected from the future developments. At the present time there is an 18 inch corrigated metal pipe under Powers Blvd. that presently drains approximately 21 acres from the Greenwood Shores area. This pipe does not have adequate capacity. The Engineer recommended, to alleviate the problem of flooding, a I second pipe be installed under Powers Blvd. The estimated cost of installing the second culvert is $11,461.00. The Engineer recommended that the cost for the channel improvement be specially assessed on an area basis in proportion to the run-off generated by a particular area. The estimated cost to a 10,000 square foot residential lot would be $78.00. The culvert under Powers Blvd. would only benefit the area in Greenwood Shores. The approximate cost to a 15,000 square foot lot would be $190.00. A service road along the creek is proposed to serve an existing lift station. The approximate cost for this road is $13,283.00. Staff proposed that this not be assessed as part of the drainage project but possibly as a part of the sewer improvement or trunk sewer funds. Hibbert Hill - Mrs. Hill and I live right at the exit of that creek so we are directly affected by the creek on one side. We approve the general improvement of the creek to reduce the discharge. This is evident over the last few years, large elm trees particularly right beside the creek is going over. Those trees are 100 years old or so and have been affected. I hope attention will be given to preserving the wildlife along the creek. I written comments were received from Phyllis Pope and Mr. and Mrs. Hibbert Hill. These are on file with the City Manager. I I I Council Meeting June 11, 1979 -3- General comments were given by various citizens present inc¡uding Mr. Hiller Hibþard and Mr. Coey noting their concern for the natural environment in Carver Beach and that this type of improvement project would remove the natural character of the property. The City Engineer answered various questions in regards to the design of the creek bed, i.e. comparisons between the proposed finished drainage bed and side slopes versus the existing creek. Mr. Mike Niemeyer was present noting that, as President of the Carver Beach Association, would like to call a special meeting of the neighborhood association to prepare a recommendation to the City Council. In advance of such meeting, however, it would be reasonable if the City Engineer could answer certain questions posed that were not answered such as those posed by Phyllis Pope and Hibbert Hill. Additionally, if there were imput in regards to easement acquisition, such would be appreciated. . After discussion by the City Council~ it was determined that a special meeting date of June 25 would not provide reasonable time for the Engineer to answer questions, submit those to the Carver Beach Assn. and other interested parties, and to then receive comments back from these groups. It was determined that a special meeting of July 9th should be considered and that such should be a continuation of this meeting, rather than closing the public hearing portion of the meeting this evening. The City Manager noted that responses from the Engineer should be available within the next few days for those persons interested. Additionally, anyone wishing to make comments, who are not being represented through the Carver Beach Assn. or other groups, should submit such comments to the City within the next two weeks. Councilman Pearson moved to continue the hearing to July 9, 1979, at 7:30 p.m. in the ChanhassenElementary School. Motion seconded by Councilman Neveaux. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, Geving, and Matthews. No negative votes. Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING SOUTH LOTUS LAKE DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 7B~1 Mayor Hobbs called the hearing to order with the following interested persons present: Mr. and Mrs. Bernard Kerber Morlais Hughes, 7343 Frontier Trail Bob Navarro, 516 Laredo Lane Dick Sult, 515 Laredo Lane Dave Roalstad, 513 Laredo Lane Jim Killian, 52l Laredo Lane William Hensley, 504 Del Rio Drive C. Kubitz, 7492 Saratoga W. F. Meyer, 7499 Saratoga Mr. and Mrs. R. L. Whipperman, 403 Del Rio Drive George and Dianne preiditis, 7401 Frontier Trail Richard Bruesehoff, 7607 Laredo Drive Council Meeting June 11, 1979 -4- Marcia rroeÞl, 502 Laredo Lane Mark and Julie Taintor, 7481 Saratoga Drive Barbara Ryan, 512 Laredo Lane Richard and Kathy Gavert, 7701 Frontier Trail John and Karen Engelhardt, 517 Del Rio Drive I The City Attorney read the official legal notice. The Mayor requested the City Manager to present a short chronological history of the project to date. The City Manager noted that this project is basically the same as the project considered one year ago. At that time, the City Council had acted to order the project. After completion of plans and specifications, notice was received that the City had received a grant application for the project approximating $22,000. That grant application is still valid if the project is constructed prior to December of this year. At the time that the project was bid, bids significantly exceeded the Engineer's estimates. Factors contributing to the increased costs included design changes required by the watershed district as well as construction cost increases exceeding the engineer's estimate when prepared in October of 1977. The Council acted to reject all bids at that point in time and to reschedule a new public hearing. At this point in time, the project is back to the initial point of'requiring a new hearing, ordering of plans, and retaking of bids - all assuming that the City Council desires to proceed. Additionally, since the date of rejection of bids, the City Council had requested the Engineer to prepare a supplementary feasibility report including the Mattson drainage into the project. I The City's Consulting Engineer, Ray Jackson of Schoell and Madson, reviewed the plans and specifications, estimated costs, and previous assessment practices of the City as well as the estimated assessments against parcels within the improved project, assuming the City Council were to approve the project as presented. The following general questions were noted from the public. Bill Kirkvold, 7423 Frontier Trail - Have you got a time schedule as to when you are proposing to do the project? Ray Jackson - It would be out intent to do the work as soon as the project is ordered in by the Council because portions of it have been bid previously. The plans and specifications are essentially complete. Bill Kirkvold - I think everybody is aware that we went that route before and got to the point where the contractor was ready to go and we said stop, how many additional approvals are we still lacking here? Ray Jackson - We have the grant from the Soil Conservation Service signed in hand as of about a week ago. The project is essentially ready to go. Ray Jackson 516 Laredo Lane - Has there been another thorough study made throughout, saying that there may be some other I potential problems that are ari.sing after this particular work has been done? - I think we have to the best of our ability at this time. There may be some imput from the audience here tonight. If they feel they have additional problems we want to hear about it right now. That's not to say there won't þe another problem. Bob Navarro, I I I Council Meeting June 11, 1979 -5- Don Ashworth, '"" ¡t Ìp, true that, tþ'e ent;i,J:;'e~PJ?e;¡:;. area. has·Þeen ~torm sewered. There may be some isolated areas. Any new development is required to extend that storm sewer and pay those costs. Bob Robinett, 40l Cimarron Circle - I think it's in the plan to have a holding pond right at the corner of our property which is to the west of Mattsons and I would like to have this question answered, what does that holding pond consist of? Ray Jackson - The pipe and ditch improvement that is proposed there is sized to take the water that runs off from that area. It would carry the water that runs off at the present rate that it runs off and éÔhvey it to the Lot 12 drainageway. Bob Robinett - Is that all going to be underground? Ray Jackson - Not all of it. It will be a combination. Bob Robinett - Ten or fifteen years ago when H. & K. (Hansen and Klingelhutz) were developing this land, did the City miscalculate the type of drainage that they were going to be getting and do they now feel the responsibility for that miscalculation a number of years ago? Mayor Hobbs - I don't think anyone up here tonight could speak to what the City Council that was sitting lO or 15 years ago felt. They looked at a storm sewer proposal at that time and they elected to take a cheaper route. Bob Robinett - I just wondered if H.& K., since they are the developers of that area, felt any sense of responsibility for sharing in the costs that are not going to be accrued. Mayor Hobbs - I can't really answer your question. I think any time that we have looked at projects such as this we have looked at benefitted area. Tom Hamilton, 224 Chan View - I just have a question on the holding pond that you are going to put in on Erie and West 77th, I believe that was a part of the street and sewer project of last year and that pond was supposed to have been built at that time so I am paying for that pond now and it still isn't there. Now you are going to assess me again for the same thing and attempt to do it over again. What assurance do I have this time that whoever is going to do it knows what they are doing and are going to be able to do it right so it will work? Mayor Hobbs - I don't think anyone has been double assessed. Ray Jackson - The costs for the pond have been estimated separate from the rest of the project. It's not intended to have a pond sitting there all the time full of water. It is basically a storage area or a damming area that will retain the run off and discharge slowly. The pond was not assessed last year. Wayne Hagman, 7602 Erie Avenue - My property abuts the north d~ainage ditch of the pond that you are talking about and I agree it is not working. The ditch is full of water. I would like to know what has to be done yet? Ray Jackson - There is some restoration work left from that project and I am no~ familiar with the specifics exactly what it is but I willceitainly find out as soon as possible and will get clarification. If that's not functioning we will find out why it isn't and what has to be done. council Meeting June 11, 1979 -6- Larry Anderson, Lot 11, Block 2, Western Hills First - Concerning the Mattson improvement and your assessment by square feet, according to Don, I understand that the improvements are normally assessed as the property I I is subdivided and developed, has there been any thought given to assessing that property since it has probably paid for zero storm sewer improvements and yet will be the primary benefit of that additional project and I understand that none of the grant that we are receiving has anything to do with that project. The $22,000 applies to the $54,000 down on Lot 12 only. Mayor Hobbs - If we adopted the historical method of assessing, that whole area would be assessed. Larry Anderson - The problem is it wipes out his driveway every time it rains but there is nothing that H. & K. has done or that any of the property owners have done to change the water flow that's going down that hill since God created it. In fact maybe the things the property owners have done by putting lawns in certainly reduce the flow. The rate of run off should be better than it was 20 years ago, certainly no worse. Ray Jackson - From an agricultural area it would be about the same. Larry Anderson - This is a local problem that a private citizen has got on his own estate and I am not sure that all of the rest of us should even be involved in. When we get to Lot 12, that's a whole area. Mattson's is a one person, it's his driveway. He didn't put in a big enough culvert, it's his own problem. Are we I going to maintain culverts on-'private driveways? Don Ashworth - That is true the $16,000 cost figure is not part of the grant portion. It is up to the City Council as far as whether or not that supplemental portion of the project should be included or not. The question that will come back to the Council will be one of, has the additional water from the upper area increased the problems occuring across that property? That could be split from the standpoint of the creek portion versus the driveway itself so potentially that might be divided as a portion back to Mattson for the driveway and costs representing the uphill problem in maintaining a creek bed through the property. With the development of Western Hills there is additional run off which is occuring which could be contributing to the creek portion through his property. The driveway itself could be contributable solely to his own design of that driveway. George Preiditis, 7401 Frontier Trail - I live next to Hughes' way. I would like to challenge you, you say is not much water running out of that drain, you ever been there during a thunderstorm? Ray Jackson - That is not a substantial quantity coming in to two catch basins when you compare it to Lot 12. George Preiditis - I hope I can convince the Council to approve this project as fast as you can. We have got a lot of kids coming through there. We are not home a lot of times to keep them out of there. drainage there have I I I I Council Meeting June 11, 1979 -7- Bill Hensley, 504 Del Rio Drive - I have heard two alternatives here I think one of them was to either rip rap it or else underground. The third alternative is to do nothing. Nobody has even addressed that. As I recall looking at the specs that you issued, the rip rap price was quoted at $30.00 a cubic yard. How many tons are in a cubic yard? Ray Jackson - 2800 lbs. in a cubic yard generally. Bill Hensley - I did a quick phone call this afternoon and a quarry in Burnsville quoted me one-half tone in a cubic yard. He said he would sell me a cubic yard or a ton for $6.50. I said, how much is 30 cubic yards? He says that's 45 tons and I would let you have it for $4.00 a ton. How much would it cost to have taken to Chanhassen? He said, I would sell it to you for $35.00 a truck load. $30.00 a cubic yard is $900.00 versus $285.00, there is a discrepancy somewhere and I don't know where it is. $l,500 an acre to seed, that's a little excessive isn't it? What does it cost to plant grass seed? Ray Jackson - That includes the work of installing it, accessibility to it so there is a variation in that. These are estimates based on what bidding prices what we hope they will go for. I just sincerely hope the bids would come in somewhere close to this estimate because I think in view of the market as it is today, the construction industry, we are seeing prices, we are not seeing monthly or bi-monthly we are seeing weekly increases in costs and they are just skyrocketing because of the present situation. Bill Hensley - What you are saying is what is pictured there is not truly what the total story is. Mayor Hobbs - This is an estimate. Councilman Neveaux moved to continue the public hearing to July 2, 1979, at 7:00 p.m. Motion seconded by Councilman Matthews. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, Geving, and Matthews. No negative votes. Motion carried. CONSENT AGENDA: Mayor Hobbs asked if any council member wished to discuss the item on the consent agenda. As no additional comments were received, Councilman Pearson moved to accept the consent agenda as recommended by the City Manager. a. 1979 Diseased Tree Bids, Award of Contract, Lutz Tree Service. Motion seconded by Councilman Neveaux. The following voted in favor: Mayor HObbs, Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, Geving, and Matthews. No negative votes. Motion carried. Councilman Matthews moved to adjourn. Motion seconded by Councilman Geving. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, Geving, and Matthews. No negative votes. Meeting adjourned. Don Ashworth City Manager