1981 06 08
I
I
I
SPECIAL CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL MEETING AND BOARD OF REVIEW MEETING JUNE 8, 1981
The Chanhassen City Council, acting as the Board of Review~ met in the Chanhassen
Municipal Building on June 8, 1981, at 7:30 p.m. Present at said meeting were Mayor
Hamilton, Councilmen Neveaux, Geving, and Horn. Councilwoman Swenson was absent.
There were approximately 30 property owners present.
Craig Zinter, County Assessor, and Assistant County Assessor Lana Larson answered
general questions of property owners present.
Maynard Happe - 25-36-000-0600-000 9.45 A in NW~ Section 36
Isn't a 27% increase in valuation a little high? I had a question
last year and I talked to the Council members and they told me at that
time they would look into my particular problem. I have got no response.
It's an old home about 65 years old. The Council has tied up my hands.
I have got ten acres I can not divide it. I can't do a thing with it.
All they do is increase my property value and increase my taxes.
It's up to the Council that they have tied up that nobody can change
any property. I can't divide it. I can't do a thing with it
because you have said I can't build on anything that's not on sewer and
water so there I sit. They (County Assessor) told me they have
assessed it the same way as all the other properties but I don't think
my property is the same as all the rest because I am tied up with
acreage.
Councilman Geving - Craig, when you respond to us give an idea of what the other
property owners in that area were increased this year.
Councilman Neveaux - Craig, you are saying that in a particular neighborhood valuation
formula has changed based upon sales that have taken place within
that neighborhood during the past year.
Craig Zinter - Within that neighborhood or that type of property somethings like lake
frontage or more or less a general trend even though it might not be
the same plat.
Councilman Geving - I don't believe that there has been any sales in that particular
area that I know of this last year.
Councilman Neveaux - That's what I am trying to get at. If in fact there were houses
or parcels of property selling around your place, even though
you did nothing to it, and they sold at values much higher than
they were on the tax rolls for then I see their job as trying
to equalize the actual value or market place in that area.
But if yours went up 27% when there were no sales in your area
then I wonder just what formula was used.
Councilman Horn - Take the average of farmland versus non farm land, what would your
percentage of increase be? What would you say percentage wise the .
average farm land increase would be versus the average home property?
Craig Zinter - I really can't give you a good honest answer on that. I am not well
acquainted enough with the numbers at this point to know just what the
percentage change might have been.
Councilman Horn - I would like to see a breakdown of what that is just to be comfortable
that farm property isn't increasing at a rate of 2% and city lots
20 or 30%.
Alan Gray - Sunnyslope Addition
Before I started to develop the property in 1978 we had an assessed
valuation of $14,000 on the entire parcel. Taxes due and payable in 1979
for each of the 12 lots, the estimated market value was $780. Taxes due
and payable in 1980 went from $780 to $8,000 and taxes due and payable
per lot for the estimate that you have come out with has gone now from
$8,000 to $15,000 per lot. One of the lots that we have is Lot 37
in Shore Acres. It's an unbuildable lot. It's been declared so by the
City Council. It has no value until people live on the property. This
Council Meeting June 8~ ~98l
unbuildable lot is worth $14,000 and really isn't worth anything.
This property has been on the market since the summer of 1978. Burmel-
Smaby has had it listed for over a year, from 1978 through a portion of
1979. Marv Anderson Realty has had it listed all of 1980 and Edina I
Realty has had it listed all of 1981. Your figures assume at the rate
of highly marketable and fast moving lots which is not true. With the
current market situation we aren't getting offers. We have instructed
all the real estate people to bring us an offer. We have one house on
the property which we worked out an agreement with the builder that he
could have that lot for $14,000 at no interest until he could get the
house up and sold. That house is presumable sold and it's supposed to
close sometime in the next couple of days. We have put in curb and
gutter. We have put in blacktop. We have landscaped. We have seeded.
We have a tennis court blacktopped. I borrowed $75,000 from the bank.
I am paying 2~% over prime for the use of that money in order to get
those improvements in. I am very, very anxious to get it sold. I
think it is valuable property. I think it is probably more valuable
that what you have estimated but it isn't worth a damn until somebody
buys it. I would seriously suggest that you give me a moratorium
of at least two years on this current $8,000 valuation which I think
I can live with or until the market turns around so that the property
can be sold. We are using every available tool to market this property.
We are not finding buyers.
-2-
John Ziegler - 25-05-000-0181-000 14.5 A in SE~ of SE~] 4.5 A in Lot 6
I think sometimes I am being robbed of my individuality and I hope I
am speaking for some of my neighbors as well. We live on Minnewashta
Parkway where within the limits of Chanhassen we still have some smalll'
farms. Now my new assessment statement tells me we are residential
and yet I have looked at the comprehensive plan which says this is
not a zoning map and it says this is only what we believe is going
to happen out in your area. Yet I go from agricultural to residential
in the description provided me by the county assessor's office.
I say I am concerned about being robbed of my individuality because
I don't think I could do, in fact I moved from a closer in suburb
to the City of Chanhassen so that I could raise some horses, give
my kids the chance to live on a farm, to be part of 4-H and to raise
rabbits, chickens, and heads of beef and sheep which they still
continue to do and to show which takes them on trips to state fair.
It gives them advantages they never could have had. I had four
rabbits in my garage in Edina and moved to Chanhassen because it
was against the law to do that there. I am real concerned about this
because I may not have 100 acres but the 18 I have produce hay
for my animals and the animals are in my freezer and I don't mind
eating "Hercules" the lamb because he tastes real good come December
and January. I am also concerned that the City of Chanhassen
talks about stable permits and fees and we are asked to send in
our applications and we do and I am granted permission to raise
these animals or the horses out there. I think the thing that I
am concerned about most of all is that I see the domino effect
coming into being here because there is a subdivision or addition
at the far end of our road that everything is supposed to tumble I
accordingly and every ten or 15 acre piece of land is supposed to
fall pray to residential development and I don't believe that's
fair. That says to me that people are telling me how I must live
because if my land is changed to residential and the taxes continue
to increase I'll not be able to afford to live here in that life
style to which I have committed myself and my family. I have
some very real concerns about just telling people what they must
do and how they need to spend their time, their money, and pretty
I
I
I
Council Meeting June 8, 1981
-3-
soon their property.
Jim VonLorenz 25-02-000-0075-000 1.84 A in NW~ of NW~ Section 2
I am here every year to talk. I have a whole raft of papers here that
says my assessments when I first bought my place in 1970 were $33,000.
The latest increase of $2,500 to $67,800 and I haven't done a thing
to the property. I have two lots. One is unbuildable. It's been
determined to be non buildable. I had put a new roof on, the old one
was leaking so bad, this last year. I mow the lawn. Plant trees.
Keep some chickens. I have to come back here every year. When I
retire in 10 years I don't know what's going to happen to me. The
taxes, thanks to the council and the City of Chanhassen, haven't
been increasing quite as fast. I have seen a three fold increase
in my property taxes but when my salary as a county employee in
Hennepin County is reduced at retirement in seven or eight years
from now and I still want to live in Chanhassen.
John Alden 25-44-500-0027-000 Lot 1, Block 2~ Colonial Grove
When you say estimated market value, does that mean when a piece of
property actually sells, a transaction made, automatically that property
will then be valued at the selling price?
Craig Zinter - No. That is the indication of the market value and that is the
ultimate goal for the assessment to be placed on that level but it does
not necessarily mean that we will or can immediately value that piece of
property at what it does sell for. We are running on a two year survey
as far as sales analysis so we are behind the current market.
John Alden What percentage of estimated selling price is the estimated market value
at today?
Craig Zinter - We are hoping to achieve 85% of todays selling price with this 1981
assessment.
John Alden How does that relate to other towns within the county and with other cities
throughout the state?
Craig Zinter - Carver County is shooting at that goal as is the majority of the state.
That is the directive given by the Commissioner of Revenue. I can't
answer for anything outside of Carver County at this point.
Bernie Schneider 25-78-000-0013-000 Outlot B, Trolls-Glen First Addition
I am President of Trolls-Glen Homeowners Association. We are the
owners of a lake shore frontage which is restricted to the members of
our subdivision. We have a piece of property which had in 1979
a limited estimated market value of $3,450 and we have received notice
that it will be increased to $5,200. The taxes are not significant
at this point. They were $85.86 last year. They have doubled to
$173 this year with the further increase next year I would imagine
that they will go up another 25 - 30%. The land is dedicated open
space and we object to the increase. We would like to know the
reason for the continuous increases in property that is open space
property. It does not increase in value because it can't be sold.
How are these increases put into effect.
Craig Zinter - The open space, dedicated area within a covenant such as Trolls-Glen,
would have an increase in value in the same respect as what your
and whan your market indications analysis would indicate the same as
the balance of the property in that it is an enhancement to the value
of the rest of the property.
Bernie Schneider - Aren't the rest of the property values increased as a result of
having the access to a lake?
Craig Zinter - They sell with the aspect of having access to the lake, that is true.
That many times does increase the market value of that piece of property
versus one that does not have access but there is also the aspect that
----..
Council Meeting June 8, 1981
-4-
piece of property that the g1v1ng that access it has value as well.
Mayor Hamilton - It seems like that's charging them twice for the same thing. You
are raising the assessment on their house because they have access I
to the piece of property and then you also charge them for the piece
of property because it increases the value of their house. You
already charged them for the increased value on the house because
they have the property. You are charging them both ways.
Craig Zinter - It's a lot like a street or sewer assessment. When a street is in
the value of the property increases but you also have to pay for the
street or the sewer. It does have value to this group as an
individual piece of property in that it can be controlled by that
group.
Bernie Schneider - Is an increase of 25%, is this common for open space property?
Councilman Neveaux - Because it's a beach lot?
Lana Larson - It has a greater value
Councilman Neveaux - It has a greater value and hence a higher percentage equalizer
factor was applied as compared with their houses within the
subdivision that may have gone up 8%. How about the homeowners
that have beach lots, did they go up 8%7
Craig Zinter - I don't know. I can check that.
Jerry Paulsen 25-64-000-0001 RLS 16, Lot A
We have a situation similar to Mr. Schneider. I represent Sunrise
Hills and our assessment valuation went up 33%. It does sound high.
Councilman Geving - What were previous increases?
Jerry Paulsen - I don't remember now what the previous year was, maybe 20%.
Russell Larson - In 1980 my residential taxes went up 16.8% and this year another
10%. I am a member of that association and have the benefits of I
that lot so that the argument that was made earlier by the Mayor :
is very sound that we are being taxed apparently for the use of
the beach lot.
Mayor Hamilton - Jerry, did the assessed valuation on your home-, do you know what
that increased?
Jerry Paulsen - Mine went up almost 7% but someone said 20% on another home.
Roman Roos 25-48-100-0029-000 Outlot A, Hesse Farm 2nd Addition
25-48-100-0031-000 Outlot C, Road, Hesse Farm 2nd Addition
I am very confused in terms of a outlot when we talk about ponding for
example. Here we have a lot that is a ponding area, unbuildable, of no
benefit to the homeowners other than for ponding and yet the tax increase
on that has been something like 26% or an estimated market value of
$15,000. I can understand if the lot has some benefit for the people
in the Hesse Farm Addition, however, that outlot has no value other
than a ponding area. I find great difficulty understanding how assessment
on that property can be made at that kind of value. When you contrast
that directly to another outlot on the property which happens to be a
private road, there is a value of which the road is being used by the
homeowners is setting at $100. I don't understand the disparity between
these two situations. The outlot has an estimated market value of
$100 which refers to the road itself.
Gene Fuss
25-08-000-0217-000 1.20 A in Lot 3 I
I am also a 25 percenter. I would like to request a reassessment on
the basis of (1) no basement, (2) quality of neighborhood, and (3)
distance from the road. My neighborhood and I maintain a 150 foot
driveway which by the way when the sewers were put in a culvert at the
top of the road was not put back in place. I called that to the attention
ofl the County and they said they would put in some gravel for us and take
I
I
I
Council Meeting June 8, 1981
-5-
care of it. Well the gravel keeps washing out and I have to keep reworking
the road. It's a very steep incline down to my property. It went from
74,000 to 94,000 in one year. I just don't understand that. I would like
a reassessment if that's fitting and proper at this time.
Charles Lawson 25-05-000-0179-000 7.56 A in Lot 6
I have lived there for 65 years. I will go back six years and give
you my total taxes. 1976 - $93.00, 1977 - $100.52~ 1978 - $325.36,
1979 - $788.46, 1980 - $1394. 1981 - $2756. I think that kind of
speaks for itself. I live in a substandard house. I've got about
seven acres. I am disabled.
Jim Cranston 25-42-000-218-000 Lots 3012-30l7, 2964-2968 Carver Beach
25-42-000-0225-000 Lots308l-3087 Carver Beach
25-42-000-0226-000 Lots 3088-3092 Carver Beach
I have talked to the assessor about one of my parcels. The square footage
has been improper for about six years by 350 square feet.
Fourteen years ago I went to get a building permit from the Council and
they said it was unbuildable. Four years ago when we got sewer and water
it became buildable. I invested $11,000 to make a buildable site over
and above the assessment. I started building a home a year ago last
November. January 1, 1980, the tax assessor came out, the home was
roughed in, just the walls, no heat~ no wiring, no nothing. I paid
last year in taxes on that home $1,200. We moved in December 15. That
comes to $600 a week plus the assessment. I don't think that's right.
Howard Hallgren 25-06-000-0184-000 11.50 A in SE~ of SE~
I just want to be included in Mr. Ziegler's objection to the change
from agricultural to residential because it really is going to be
quite costly. I received this notice last Monday and I called the
courthouse and talked to Catherine Diethelm who said there were no
changes in the market value and no changes in the property class.
This afternoon Ms. Larson called me to say that there had been
changes. That the estimated market value went from $75,000 to
$129,000 for 1982 and that the property class had changed from
agricultural to residential.
Councilman Horn - Did we request the definition of when property becomes residential
and when itrs agricultural, what the criteria are.
Lana Larson - I look at the use of the property.
Mayor Hamilton - You don't look at what it's zoned.
Lana Larson - It has bearing. There is a guideline.
Norman Grant 25-13-000-0387-000 1.53 A in Lot 3
When I bought my home two years ago the market value at that time was
right around $48,000, taxes $450.00. Last year market value $64,000
taxes $800.00. Now I get a notice market value $78,400. Really I am
flattered my home is that valuable but the taxes are getting to the
point that I am sure they will be over $1,000. We are talking about
better than a 100% increase in two years. Dale, you remember a
conversation we had last year, we had $64,000 basic market value
with the idea that this year it would be about a 10% increase. Obviously
I was exceeded by about 12%.
Councilman Geving - In your case, that lakeshore is probably what's really driving
the market value of your property up, actually it's a very small
home.
John Ziegler
I hope that the assessors are taking into account that there are kinds
of lakeshore and kinds of lakeshore. Our property, for example,
Council Meeting June 8, 1981
-6-
has lakeshore on Lake Minnewashta but County Road 15 separates
the bulk of my land from my lakeshore and when I talked to Jerry
about the possibility of doing something with that piece of land
I found out that the setback from the lake and the setback from the
road means I would have to build a house four feet wide. So the
lakeshore is ok. It's nice to look at. I keep it mowed so it doesn't
look like a weed patch, etc. , but it's also used by the public
who use Lake Minnewashta as a parking lot even though it's posted
IIno parking" I don't see the county coming along with Sheriff's
cars and getting them to move their cars or ticketing them for
doing so. I don't have a back yard that slopes out to a lovely
lake. I think there is a difference here. A disparity that needs
to be looked at.
I
Roland Lownsbury 25-43-000-0001-000 Lot 1, Block 1, Chanhassen Estates
We came here with a complaint, I am totally disabled and
our value went up $4,000 this year. What has gotten me more
than all is that we come here and we look at the county
assessors and everything and we stand in awe. Whatever happened
to the old days when the county was subject to the people?
Now they come up and they say well the goal is to raise
the taxes 85% and all of this. It just gets to me when
we bow and crawl to the county. Maybe we are due to come
in like they did in California and tell them to live within
their means like we have to live within our means and that
means decreases every year because of the taxes that they
put on us. If those taxes keep going up on my property
I can't afford to pay them. I can't afford to rent because I
rent is higher, so what do we do. I'll make another suggestion
that you visit all the places that you assess. Maybe you do
but I don't think so.
Barbara Headla 25-06-000-0182-000 4.5 A in Lot 6, 5.5 A in SE~ of SE~
We have lived out there 20 years and we have all been agricult~ral
for all this time and I just question can one person come in and
decide that no, this is going to change now when we are all doing
identically the same thing that we have been doing for 20 years.
Roman Roos - Will there be a response to those that have direct questions?
Mayor Hamilton - There will be a direct response from Craig Zinter and I also
want Craig to give us a date when he can have those responses.
Councilman Horn - Some of our lakeshore property has conservation easement around it
so the property owners don't have true raparian lakeshore rights.
I would like to know if that is taken into account for the assessing
of those properties. If there is a difference between the
conservation easement property and a normal ownership of property
on lakeshore. The other thing I would like to know and get a
response is that we have an apparant discrepancy between the
taxes in the City of Chanhassen versus the City of Eden Prairie
and I would like to have some kind of a description why that
happens. It seems like when I moved to Carver County one of I
the big selling points was well Carver County has a lower tax
rate than what Hennepin County does so you are better off out
here. In talking with people in Eden Prairie I find out that is
not the case and I would like to know if it's just the city
property within Carver County that gets taxed at a higher rate
or how that's set up.
I
I
I
Council Meeting June 8,. 1981
-7-
Councilman Geving - We were advised by our attorney that we have the authority to
change the values on parcels in an aggregate amount not to exceed
l%, could you tell me what that dollar value is?
Craig Zinter - Not exactly but it will be some place in excess of $1 million.
Charles Crompton
25-78-000-0005-000 Lot 5~ Block 1, Trolls-Glen First Addition
My market value was raised 25~% which is a larger increase than
any other resident in Trolls-Glen. My tax rate both this year and
last exceeded all other properties even though the property is
not valued as high nor do I have as much lakeshore.
Keith South 25-01-000-000l-000 2.67 A in Lot 8
Our valuation was raised from $102,800 to $111,300. Why?
Craig Zinter was instructed to prepare responses to the questions raised and deliver
same to the City Manager by June 23, 1981. The Council will finalize valuations on
June 29, 1981, at 7:30 p.m.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REVIEW: Mark Koegler reviewed the chronology of plan development
over the past four years. Council members reviewed the Metropolitan Council informal
plan review issues. Councilman Neveaux suggested using a staged growth approach
from 1990 to 2000. Councilmen Horn and Geving raised concerns about the excessive
administrative costs for continually changing the comprehensive plan to accommodate
the requirements of the Metropolitan Council. The City Manager stated that Metropolitan
Council guide plans have a way of evolving into concrete inflexible policies.
Mark Koegler reviewed possible changes in the MUSA Line to address Metropolitan
Council requirements. Councilman Neveaux felt that it would be difficult to
substantiate our population forecast of 17,000 by 1990, but also felt that the
Metropolitan Council forecast of 11,000 population is too low. He added that both
numbers represent only the best guess by each party.
Councilman Geving felt that the city should do whatever is necessary to accommodate
Minnetonka, Inc. development plans.
Mayor Hamilton agreed that the city should revise the comprehensive plan to meet
Metropolitan Council requirements, with a 1990 and 2000 MUSA Line showing staged
growth of population from 11,000 to 17,000 population. He felt that the city staff and
Planning Commission should work to revise the plan to accomplish this and expedite
the plan review by the Metropolitan Council.
Jim Orr suggested a concurrent request to amend the city's systems statement when
the comprehensive plan is submitted to the Metropolitan Council. The Council agreed
with this approach.
Councilman Geving asked about plans for the property just east of the Legion.
Mark Koegler said that this property is planned for high density residential.
Councilman Geving said that a possible commercial development proposal may be
submitted in the near future. Mark Koegler said that a simple local plan amendment
could probably accommodate such a request.
Mayor Hamilton noted that the County Road 18 extension to State Highway 41 in
Chaska was not shown in the plan. Mark Koegler stated that the Planning Commission
decided not to include this extension in the plan.
Councilman Horn requested a more extensive review by the Council before further
consideration by the Planning Commission.
Council Meeting June 8, 1981
-8-
Mayor Hamilton wanted to be certain that the
with the issue of a hazardous waste disposal
additional study would be given to this area
criteria.
plan section on soils is adequate
site in the City. Mark said that
based on hazardous waste disposal
Councilman Neveaux felt that the collector status of County Road 17 could create
problems with the Metropolitan Council, since the county plan designates it as a
minor arterial.
The Council agreed that another review by the Council should be scheduled to review
other elements of the plan not discussed tonight. Staff was instructed to schedule
another such review as soon as possible.
Councilman Geving moved to adjourn. Motion seconded by Councilman Horn. The
following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilmen Neveaux, Geving, and Horn.
No negative votes. Meeting adjourned at 10:50 p.m.
Don Ashworth
City Manager
to deal
site
I
I
I