6. Receive Grandview Sewer & Water Study I t ' CITY OF
1 \, . ‘, AN EN
/N, F .
� ,.. 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
I '...• ` (612) 937-1900
MEMORANDUM '/
ITO Don Ashworth, City Manager ,sc*.e' ---- - 0.
FROM: Gary Warren, City Engineer (... 14) Y.J to JuL.mt d to Cc^-T•«:m
1 DATE: October 20 1988 M�" Sub:,�itted lu Lrancij
II SUBJ: Feasibility Study for Grandview Road Sewer and Water '°'
0-..24-et a
File No. 88-23
1 Attached is the feasibility study for Grandview Road sewer and water improve-
ments as authorized by the City Council on October 10, 1988. The report was
received on Friday morning and staff has therefore not had much time to digest
1 its contents. In the interest of time, however, I thought that the Council
would still wish to see this on the October 24 agenda.
The City's consultant, Bud Osmundson of OSM, will be present at Monday night's
1 meeting to review the report. He is to be congratulated for compressing what
otherwise would have been a four-week work effort into one week. The report
contains further specific information concerning some of the on-site septic
1 systems and wells. I believe the feasibility study adequately addresses the
question of how best to service this area with public sanitary sewer and water-
main. It also has addressed alternative funding sources which unfortunately do
not appear available to these residents. The cost estimate for the project is
1
$63,800 which includes a 27% administrative burden. Based on the current
bidding climate, I believe this estimate to be high.
1 The question that is more difficult to answer and which is placed before the
City Council is, is this the right time for public sewer and water. Whether or
not the Council chooses to go ahead with this project at this time I believe the
Ieffort expended in the preparation of this report will not be lost.
There is no question that to get past the immediate crisis concerning water ser-
vice for the Bernier property, that the most expeditious route is for the
1 Bernier's to have their existing well upgraded or a new well installed. On the
other hand, State statutes do allow cities to react to emergency needs such as
this and allow us to expedite the public bidding process and negotiate with a
1 contractor for installation of utilities of this kind. I believe if the Council
would take action at Monday night's meeting to accept the feasibility study and
authorize installation of these improvements under the emergency provisions of
State statute, that these improvements could be installed by the end of
1
November. It is my recommendation that the latter course of action more
appropriately addresses the needs of this area and the inherent unknowns as it
relates to the future on-site system failures which may present themselves.
1
1
J t 1
Don Ashworth II October 20, 1988
Page 2
Attachments I
1 . Feasibility Study. 1
2. October 7, 1988 Staff Report.
3. October 6, 1988 Staff Report.
4. October 10, 1988 City Council minutes. I
II
II
II
II
1
1
II
II
II
II
I
r
II
t
' , - - .--__ Y
I
is �1...J '14>.. �._4""�-
.,
1 ,...
CITYOF
, • i CHANHASSEN
• , ‘ ,,
i
1
1 '
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
1 (612) 937-1900
MEMORANDUM .,.%_:_!!--- -
I TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager \ ---
TO:
1 r�k� c1417-__!
FROM: Gary Warren, City Engineer
date `0 `'`` co
I
DATE: October 7 , 1988 Gate St,,..,: � tor'J cii
1 SUBJ: Feasibility Study for Grandview Road Sewer and Water
File No. 88-23
1 The attached memo from Larry Brown presents the results of the
"mini" feasibility study for Grandview Road. It should not be
I too surprising to any of us that the property owners felt that
these costs were not acceptable. I would imagine that any cost
over what the property owners envisioned their septic system and
well replacement costs to be would be considered unacceptable.
1 This is a common issue that the Council has dealt with before in
projects such as Crestview and West 65th Street and on Church
Road where the Frizzell and Kerber properties were deleted from
Ithe connection obligation for the Church Road improvements.
I think we all are a bit frustrated at trying to move this pro-
ject forward because I believe all parties concerned, staff ,
1 Council and property owners , recognize that the private septic
and well systems are living on borrowed time. These homes were
built between 1958 and 1960 ( 28 to 30 year ago) according to the
1 County Assessor. We have specific examples such as the Bernier
and Will property of failing systems . In my opinion, these sep-
tic systems pose a threat to their own neighborhood which is the
I only area left on private wells. What concerns me even further
is that contrary to our rural standards, the septic systems were
installed prior to the City ' s requirement for having a reserve
septic site on the property.
1 While no one likes to see property owners incur additional
expense, I am compelled to petition the Council to reconsider
I their motion on this matter. I believe while costs cannot be
ignored, the health hazard to the area and the facts to date must
take precedent in that municipal sewer and water be provided for
this area. The fact should not be overlooked that these lots do
Ihave potential for subdivision and while I have not specifically
calculated the additional units available ( such would be done in
a feasibility study) , I would estimate that there are at least an
1
II
,� T
Don Ashworth 1
October 7, 1988
Page 2
additional 4 to 5 units which ultimately would be sharing in the
cost of the sanitary sewer and watermain and thereby reducing the
current per unit estimate prepared by Larry Brown for unit
hookups. The $57 ,600 estimated cost , which by the way does not
include any road improvements for the area , I believe is a con-
servatively high estimate yet compares reasonably to similar pro-
jects such as North Lotus Lake and Church Road as far as unit
assessment rates .
It is therefore my recommendation that the Council reconsider its '
original motion on the Grandview Road feasibility study and
authorize preparation of this report at this time. Information
which staff has generated to date will be utilized by our con-
sultant in the preparation of this report . I believe that on
closer scrutiny by our consultant in the feasibility , the $57 ,600
estimated cost can be reduced. '
Attachments '
1. Larry Brown ' s memo dated October 6 , 1988 .
2 . Map.
3 . Ownership/Age Listing.
4 . City Council minutes dated September 26 , 1988.
I
I
1
I
._
I 0:
CITYOF it N . AssEN
_, .
.‘,:, . t t
\ 1 .
I \ I \ ' czt_ __ .\ 1 1
.... ,..., 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
I �, (612) 937-1900
IMEMORANDUM
TO: Gary Warren, City Engineer
1 FROM: Larry Brown , Staff Engineer 1&,,,
DATE: October 6 , 1988
' SUBJ: Feasibility Study for Grandview Road
Sanitary Sewer and Watermain
IIFile No. 88-23
Ion September 26 , 1988 , the City Council authorized the feasi-
bility study for the Grandview Road sewer and water project con-
tingent upon the engineering department preparing a rough cost
I estimate for the project and reviewing the proposed costs with
the neighborhood. It was further conditioned that 60% of the
affected property owners should agree to this preliminary cost
estimate before authorization of the feasibility study be given
Ito OSM Associates .
On Wednesday, October 5 , 1988, the Engineer ' s estimate was tabu-
' lated and presented to each one of the affected property owners.
The total cost of the installation of sanitary sewer and water-
main with the engineering fees included was $57 ,600. My previous
' memorandum for the September 26 , 1988 Council meeting had origi-
nally included Mr. Harvey Will into the study area under the
assumption that the northerly portion of his lot could be split
off and serviced by sanitary sewer ( refer to Attachment No. 1 ) .
1 The files on record would indicate that to service the northerly
portion of his lot the sanitary sewer depths would have to be in
excess of 30 to 35 feet deep. Since that time, staff has pre-
' pared an engineering cost estimate with only four homeowners
involved since Mr. Will has sanitary sewer and water service via
the Hidden Valley subdivision. The cost per lot owner for the
four residences for sanitary sewer and watermain would then
I become $14, 400 each. After reviewing these figures with the four
affected owners , each resident informed me that the $14, 400
amount is not acceptable and that they would rather stay on their
I present septic system and wells versus the assessment . All four
residents indicated that if the costs were cut to approximately
2/3 of that amount that this may be acceptable.
I
II
Don Ashworth 1
October 6 , 1988
Page 2
Therefore, if the City Council holds to its criteria that 50$ of 11
the property owners agree to the proposed assessments as esti-
mated in this "mini" study, the feasibility study should not
proceed.
Attachment 1
1. Concept Map.
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
11
II
it 4,,,,,....‘ 4.,....
L.
'" • • ,/� or
10 .-- -- -4 I
c0, /
1 r u --
....., ■ rerlk -—ISE...77-...". . ..1.,. 10, _
1 -� - _ 4xit Q1.`'' -,
..--AllkiS
1 } W `
1 a CC
IL
.1 1 cc VI et Altt a. .s co:„.. iiik ,itib___..
IV".---... -00401 ,
\s -1
. i. i NIL
I -1 • i
___)T4-000111■0.09 _
IF•
: W cc
��� W r t CC ill
4 100. .0-- Villetir 4 -
wz
. . • ' _-.'"--...:-.-------------1.----- -\ Z -Ill :-.-
r. ` m -;►11/ 1111101
I K
1 - W . r •
re. t� on •*4 op�un'��
l �0 i k o /gat ii-II
._ . tilikvilN, . ,_.01 a••••
' .1...V0b... -.0.Rio %Was. ---::
...., _..iiii ilirrcmioi....._. lotrgio011111, : .,.. ___.
1111.111111° 441111" zo,a,1 in 10...411 1111111.4 tt,:...
•
,01, --:7■0"'"•2■: -: — ----1:i■IMI_ .
:4 _
."--J -.) ) ,) ) ..) ) ..) -) ) _) )
--! ) 411
„. ,_0 , •
.. .
-
0 a _
-:':,• e"----- — - ' ' ' - - , ,
_ „ ,
"..„. . . v . .. ,. _
•
, 1
,
,
21
C)
, . I
1 I
. 0 „.., ,
LI 0
. I
U.
lli
Z 1:
W ,
CD
*
-. ID
`-.` g
' . .; C',.. E0
; '
1
---1 0 --I
-
W
,t
. ,- 01
•••••••... , 1- • ••••„ I co.,
•' ..: < W W
..-, , •-.. ,-, if
Z i -...
LI
;
111
'
•-,
3 --,
W .
* X
Z ' W Z I 3
,..._ ...if::!t,;;•
iZ .
01 0 i Ei
12. , ' IL
Z -
0 u. .
0 I 0
Z CD , o5
0
-7- -,Yi ....1 4 - -
•4
i < . , o
I ,t
io
,; 10
• : - ' . . 0,."
I- 0 0 .-4 I,- . ■... 1 . 1..
7
I
CO i E'
.17N:W* Cc41W eil , o)
. 01 4
'''.1:1 Z '[:.; ..... CO I t4 I C4 L
':41.7i1
ei E n °14 i W
1 , 4
•••••03 IL . 0 WI. (-9 ' CO . 0 CO 0 WI
;:••••••".'::
..t N 0 1 Z ••• Z 0 Z LL. Z ■ W Z - Z ; LL. Z 1 LL. 2! :
>- 0 . < , < '1 c) < ! 0 < (.4. < ' 0
.-
--
3 t- • CC * ‘f CC =t
.,
!
■
-,
WO. .. ....
-
! - , -
. •i" 1 2 21 ; -.0 .-4 N5 ,-, ,C1 C') -0 1 CD ND ,i 11 CO NO I 0 \0 ,
F ,0 ! . . 3 •-• 0 ..-1 ..0 ..-. .... ...4 0 ,,., , 1,._.i.
-.-i b
i - ,-, En .-■ . ro
,-, i C9
':
%;;.. 1 1,,k) I 0 i
i ■ I 3 1 1 I
-
If Z
0 •••4 - ft ^
t LOU) < ' 0 i :3 ' 0.. :3
2 CL I :3
:3 I 0. 2: 0_ 3
1 i 0... i to W
3 1 Z
3
..3 ... W CD , tJ I--01 CD I 1-- I- L.L. ,', I. • 1.1. l-,-- ±`'' I--(43 U. I- • Li..
J ••Y:1 I• I-0 N W .4 1 W ILI 0 C\I 1-1.1 0 ,-r• WO Lil 0 14.
--".
la- n 0 i CO CC CO 1 1 0 Cr A) Cr ND CO CC CO I 0 X 0 CC 0 , 0 •
- 0. i-...I:4 74O'' '? CO I--,i) Q- , 7 '‹E) 7 r.7.) <E 0
..„1 - 0-
-
!ii ‘t
,
C.) - ' , LU 4 f- ■ CD I t- I-- ,C, , 1-- t- t-0 t- ,E, I.- t._.,
_ .1 CO e",>- 1: !<.) - '0 ; 0 ,-,
W 65 z .-. t Lt.'.'rt t.- r ! : 7Q -
LI CT, ,4:>. I 0 Ct.- 0.7
W Ch CC 1 W Ci, 7 IC11
Li -4E
W : 0 a% ...
id 0, C.) CN tJ,-.
W Cif 2 IL-)I .
W
-.2 ' -J 07 ''.7 1 CL Cr, I 0) , E0 x W 0 I En 'r 0) 0) ,. CO ,W L0 , 2E CO 03 !
1 .
n i
CD i 0
;3( ;
n
it I : . • 1 ...-. .'S ..-^, i A , 0 ' 0
1
1 ' Co r, , ;:-...1 • 03 i 1- I In
.- * I '"..
* 1 cri u) Co I r9 1 0 1 cc, 1
0 1 I
Z < i ' 1 1
:-.. 0- 0 I 0
• 1 04 : (,-.1 i C.`
I-
1 I C4 • C4 CJ CA I
: i 1
--7": 0
:-..
1 ,
1 1 f
i 1
ii
0% I
Z 3
i -4--- og 00 0 <s--
c,_ *
I J: tii ift lf) .9 \A
,'-
r
I
-,, CO CO 1 ,......1 •-••■ ••••••• ...MI
:= W
1 .
al. i I f
; I
I
i !
-. ,-;-
<
I
:-..:..
I 1 i 1
:-,- N
03 i- N 1 c4 1 NJ
IA i r..I ; N l N
0 < 1
1 .
1 1 ,
a o .
■
• < o , 1 C4 ; pj
I ;.--, 1 •-• 1 ,_, -, ,-, i ... ,. .
---. 0 ;,-. I '-' ' -• ..e.1 ! .-1 i ...i 1.4i .,.,
. .
. w .
.. w
1 !
. ,
I I
. ;
. .
* S
i N i CJ 04 1 CJ I Fl i t4 I C-- I
i 1 I
. 3
1 ; ,
H 1 i
......, I ,
, ...z
i ; 1 1
,
, ,
i
q I I
i 1
z.. - .
'
I I.- ! > IL. ft- Z I
-.-•.:
« , 0 « a
;-.• 0 v
I r9 > 0 > 0 0 , 0 0 1 0 cc
, -... .
ii) . f- J 0 10 113 2: I 10 .: 11.1 0 -cE 10
I
Li)-,
.
I
-,
' 0 10 < 0
D Z 1 0 1: CI 0
• 0 I jE ' xi V
ri I . , W 1 0 i *IC
' W i Q
ll I CI i CO ' 0
iii z I x --) I it , ci izA c.-ii
I > 1 03 1 0
I 0 1 CC
. 0
I.0 ...:•3 i 1.4 . 1- 1 3 1 CC CC 1
, W I • • 0 1 <C 1W 1 < 2 1 I 1 1
! a
1 I
LU If —II Z ' Z Z W Z ' 1- 1 •-• Z 2j LUZI 1- 1 Z : 03IWZ
- E E EU)•-•Ej CL1 >E1 01 .4E 01 El s-•z
- ;', •-•.4 cl A ,-,
> W , z '
i
.
<
/4 z t[ , i--2:
• : <C W I CC I <r W CC <o Z ; CO 1 C:1 2! 1 CC C)2! ' .--. ' 2! LU • CI Z
hi , 2!LLI I J 2:W : - 1:W I 7-- • DJ 1 2> i 2!Eu
, LU 0 W W 07 t- <C <C 07 <C I <C LO Z <C En , • 1 01 ' CC • ‹C CO
: w
-'
W • CC co
a co ‹ 1—, cz co
-\ 0 < w ..... cc Co7
0- X 0<C - ' CC E0 I CD 1 6 v 1 W i i;v 1 < if
cc En
z I (u a U3
: 0 E
- c I : W , I , Ce . I . ; 2
CO
12 \,-.1
< W -1 Z i 0 /- •-,Z Z ' OZi W • OZi Z ! Z
• Z _J • • < < '1 < , Z ; 0 < • 0 I ••-•< ' CC ' << -4 ; ID<
(A Ct .
>- < 2 _I 1 2 LU •-4 e 1 2 . . .... m Z . NI ' W 01 ... • ..:C <
I-•
(3 COO U 0. L) 2 > CO L) 0 ' CO E.) : <C 1 CO L) ' ca NO :3 I CO() 2
I--k j ,
,
I ,
•
# t-- I- I- I I- , L... i I-- 1
i ,
. . I
'
,
',..LI CC
,.. , z _. U CO ill .
..4 ..-4 ; 0 ! Cq
r.-- I < . CO >- . 01 41 1 n ' CO
.1C .7...1 ON
• ''7.1 ' Ni c4 . ' CO I r
LC Q U I<
■•••k..1 0_ . 0 ...........Th U) 0 0, 1 0 ; t.-
)• cr LC < <
,
'
..ie•
.
N4:I. AG
Iht 1 INC .
....
I
- ■
-----
_ . . - _ - • n n N . . T." ^ 7 _ ----7.V 7.--•----' 77:, .--- i-,----,"----, g -.-----; .7 r',:,- r ,?.. ; ; 7 7 • .1'; ^ ° .1 .9, ;i tt . t, . tn ..v
;i1--* AIEV MA an
.....
0 it e__, _el _v___.0_____0__. ___10 • _____•_____•_____ii_____,___A
.6.—_
9 3
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
' REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 26, 1988
' Mayor Hamilton called the meeting to order.r. The meeting was opened with the
Pledge to the Flag.
' COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Councilman Boyt, Councilman Horn, Councilman Geving and
Councilman Johnson
' STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Roger Knutson, Barbara Dacy, Jo Ann Olsen, Larry
Brown, Todd Gerhardt and Jim Chaffee
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Geving moved, Councilman Horn seconded.to
approve the agenda as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
I
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Horn seconded to approve
the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's
recommendations:
a. Final Plat Approval, McGlynn Bakery.
b. Zoning Ordinance Amendment to A-2, Agricultural Estate District, Final
Reading.
c. Resolution #88-98: Accept Utilities for Carver Beach Estates Project #84-9.
f. Authorize Preparation of Plans and Specifications for Sidewalks/Trails along
' Laredo and Carver Beach Road.
h. Resolution .#88-99: Accept Feasibility Study/Authorize Plans and
' Specifications for Audubon Road, Phase I.
j. Approval of Liquor License for City of Chanhassen.
•
k. Approval of Liquor License for Anh-Le Restaurant, 566 West 78th Street.
1. Approval of Accounts.
' m. City Council Minutes dated September 12, 1988
Planning Commission Minutes dated September 7, 1988
Park and Recreation Comniission Minutes dated September 13, 1988
Public Safety Commission Minutes dated September 15, 1988
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
(E) AUTHORIZE FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR GRADVIEW ROAD SEWER AND WATER PROJECT.
' Councilman Boyt: I had a concern as I looked at item (e) which is the
feasibility study. It appeared to me that staff was saying we don't have
' existing side yard easements. The terrains doesn't lend itself to this sewer
and water project and all...signs, it's going to be very expensive. I would V
like to get some reaction from the public that are going to be assessed for this V
1
City Council Meeting - September 26, 1988
I
as to their interest if it proves to be quite expensive before we invest in a
feasibility study. I think we can make a reasonable estimate of cost without a
feasibility study and see if they're still interested in putting this project
in. A feasibility study is going to cost us something around $2,000.00. I
think we should find out how serious this area is about the system before we put
it in.
Mayor Hamilton: $2,000.00 for this feasibility study seers out of line. What
would you guess?
Larry Brown: That was the number that I had thrown out to Bill just off the top
of my head before the meeting. I have no idea. Somewhere between $1,000.00 and
$2,000.00... One of the key issues with the topography is obviously going to be '
locating trees by getting the tree removal...
Councilman Horn: What percentage of variation do you think we'd get? '
Larry Brown: I'm sorry, what? --
Councilman Horn: If you were to use the estimated method that Bill suggested
before we do the feasibility, what percentage would you give it for coming up to
a number?
Larry Brown: I'm not prepared to answer that. I don't know.
Councilman Horn: There's no way to answer that?
I!!
Larry Brown: No.
Councilman Geving: Let me ask you this question. Have you had any other ,
requests for this other than Mrs. Bernier?
Larry Brown: Yes. Several. I
Councilman Geving: Who else?
Larry Brown: Mr. Harvey Will. Mr. Albert Sinnen and I'm not sure if Mrs. '
Anderson.
Councilman Geving: So 3 of the 5 definitely have said they want it? '
Larry Brown: Correct.
Councilman Boyt: They didn't say they wanted it at any cost.
Larry Brown: That's correct.
Councilman Boyt: Larry, if you talked to some people, do you think you could
come within 25% of the actual cost on a rough estimate?
Larry Brown: Yes. If we did the mini-feasibility in-house, we could pull out a
[I:
rough estimate, yes.
Councilman Boyt: I don't have anything else. I'm ready to make a motion.
2
)0
City Council Meeting - ptember 26, 1983 '-
II
Mayor Hamilton: I have a couple comments. Mary Bernier is here I know, ,she may
I ant to make a comment. She's been before the Council before. I know that she
has talked to the staff previously about doing this and was hopeful that this
project could be moved ahead without doing a feasibility study. Now to get to
II this point and now we're talking about making a rough estimate, coming within
25% without doing a feasibility study, I don't know why these things have to get
this far down the road before somebody on the staff figures out they can do
something without doing a full blown study. I know that the Berniers have a
I serious water problem. Other people down there have problems with their septic
system. Here's an area within our MUSA line within the City which does not have
sewer and water and they should have it. They're going to, I would guess,
I they're going to have problems or they do have problems with their water and
sewer and now and they're going to have additional problems so if they don't do
this, almost at any cost, it's going to be a reasonable cost. As reasonable as
I it can be done for. It's probably going to save them money in the long run
because they're going to have to have additional things done to their sewer and
water if we don't put in city sewer and water. It's a little frustrating for me
to get to this point now to find that staff could have done and come up with
Isome figures that would have helped us at this point, but I think we ought to
move ahead with it as quickly as possible. Those people do not have water.
ICouncilman Horn: How long is a feasibility study good for?
Don Ashworth: One year.
ICouncilman Johnson: How long will it take to do it?
Larry Brown: Depending on the demand on the firm, I'm guessing probably about 2
Iweeks time.
Mayor Hamilton: Bill, you wanted to make a motion.
IICouncilman Boyt: I will make the motion that staff presents a close estimate
without the feasibility study and receive approval from the residents prior to
initiating a feasibility study. The intent would be, if the residents approve
I from the rough estimate, that the City would go ahead and fund a full blown
feasibility study that we have to have. That's my motion. .
II Councilman Geving: I want to question in it. Are you asking that all five of
the neighbors agree before we proceed with the feasibility? Are you willing to
accept 4 out of 5 or 3 out of 5? This is very important because I agree with
I the Mayor that we have to do something in that area. They're only a few blocks
from an area that is not being serviced by sewer and water. I think we have to
be, you mentioned that the residents, I think we should have at least a majority
and to me 60a is a pretty good figure. If we have 3 out of the 5 that already
Isay they want it, they need it, to me that's a good percentage.
Councilman Boyt: I'll accept 3 out of the 5. I want people to go into this
realizing that this is an expensive project and as Tom said, if it's worth it,
fine but I would think we could very quickly give them that information and if
they say I won't spend $15,000.00 for the system, then we don't have to invest
$1,000.00 of the City's money.
1 -
1 3
1jC
. City Council Meeting - Sej1/4 tuber 26, 1988 ?
Mayor Hamilton: Then how long do we need to wait when their septic systems fail
to tell them they have to put it in, which has happened in other areas of the
community? It's no different than other areas Bill where people had not put in
city sewer if they could. Their septic systems are failing as they are here.
They must put in city sewer.
Councilman Boyt: Tom, does that mean that we're going to say to these people, 1
you're going to take city sewer whether you want it or not?
Mayor Hamilton: That is exactly what has been the case previously. When you '
have failing septic systems, you don't have any choice. In this case they also
have failing wells.
Councilman Boyt: I would say, if a majority of the Council is in a position
where you're going to say, we're going to require you to have sewer and water,
then let's start the feasibility study. I would rather have them know what it's
going to cost before we do that and that's why I made a motion the way I did. ,
Mayor Hamilton: The only problem I have with your motion is that it simply
delays it longer. It's going to take two weeks for Larry to come back with the I
figure, approximately what it might be. Then it's going to take 3 more weeks to
do a feasibility study. Now we're probably looking at spring before the project
could be started. ,
Councilman Boyt: If Mrs. Bernier says that she's going to take this at any
cost, I'll withdraw my motion.
Mayor Hamilton: Mary, would you have any comment?
Mary Bernier: I don't want to talk for my neighbors...I don't know what it
costs.
Mayor Hamilton: What's exorbinate in your opinion?
Mary Bernier: I don't know. I have an idea that we do need it.
Mayor Hamilton: If you had to have a new well put in and a new septic system '
put in, what is that going to cost?
Mary Bernier: $4,000.00.
Mayor Hamilton: For both?
Mary Bernier: No, for the well. '
Mayor Hamilton: Okay, then if you had a failing septic and you had to put in a
new septic field, that's probably another $4,000.00. ,
Mary Bernier: Probably.
Mayor Hamilton: How soon can you have an estimated figure Larry? I
Larry Brown: I'll have that for the next Council meeting.
4 ,
' . City Council Meeting -f- ptember 26, 1988
Mayor Hamilton: Can you have it sooner than that?
II IT Larry Brown: Sure.
Councilman Boyt: We can pass this so that all it requires is, as Dale said, 3
out of the 5 property owners and it never needs to cane back to us.
Mayor Hamilton: That's true. I think if Larry comes up with a figure, a
reasonable estimate and comes to you folks and say this is what we feel, within
reason, it's going to cost and you agree to it, then I see no reason to bring it •
back here. Larry can go ahead with a feasibility study and the project can
begin. Would that be acceptable to you Mary?
' Mary Bernier: Yes.
Don Ashworth: The feasibilty step stage is one required under State Statute so
if you were to do that, you should authorize the feasibility study this evening
subject to the Engineer getting data.
Councilman Boyt: I'll accept that.
Councilman Geving: I agree.
' Councilman Horn: I have another question. How much extra time will this take
for Larry? We make the assumption that the staff time is something that we have
plenty of and I don't believe that's true. How much of your time is this going
to take to do this?
Larry Brown: We're looking at about 15 hours worth of work to do this.
Councilman Johnson: ...half a week.
Mayor Hamilton: Is your motion then Bill to do. ..
' Councilman Boyt: As Don proposed.
Councilman Geving: I'll second that motion.
Councilman Johnson: Could we right underneath, if our staff, if their time
crunch after they look at all their schedules and everything else we give them
the rest of the evening tonight, works out to where it'd be best that they go
off and have a mini-feasibility be done by OSM in the same timeframe, under the
same criteria, would that be...
' Councilman Horn: Only if the data can be used on the final. If it's going to
end up costing us more money, more time.
Councilman Johnson: But see if he does it, the data may not be useable for the
final feasibility study and it would be a duplication where if OSM does it, the
data may be useable where we may save money in the long run.
Mayor Hamilton: I think that's a decision that the City Manager and the staff
should make. It's not as if we've never assigned them work to do in the past
• that's going to take hours.
5
9-L
City Council Meeting - Sepi .tber 26, 1988 II
I
Councilman Horn: So we're not limited to the staff doing a mini-feasibility
study?
ii
Mayor Hamilton: I don't think that was part of the motion.
II
Councilman Boyt moved, Councilman Geving seconded to authorize the feasibility
study for Grandview Road sewer and water project subject to the Engineer getting
the data. All voted in favor except Councilman Horn who opposed and the motion ,
carried. A
VISITORS PRESENTATION: II
Albert Dorweiler: My name is Albert Dorweiler and I live along Bluff Creek I
there. They raised the road 4 feet on the highway there. I cane out of my
driveway when I go out. They raised it 4 feet and its like that.
me to get off in the wintertime and also, it's very dangerous to came overr the
or
hill, there's a blind hill there. I feel it's very unsafe for me to drive out II
of my driveway. ...I called Bill Engelhardt. He says, I'll take a look at it.
I've been fighting with him for a month and a half now about this. I also told
Bill Engelhardt about, I've got Vine Hill there and I'd like to have a sign put '
up, blind driveway. You told me that I could see the road. There's nothing
that they can do. I also called the City of Chanhassen and Gary, he's the City
Engineer, he told me that it's a State road. There's nothing they can do. Is
that true? It's a State road? I
Don Ashworth: It's a State Aid road meaning that the City has to comply with
State Aid requirements. Whether or not there's been a request to the State II
asking if we would be able to put blind intersection. Normally that is
considered by the State. I'd like to have both of these issues researched and
brought back to the Council. I
Mayor Hamilton: We'll look into them for you Al.
Councilman Geving: Let us know if you don't get this resolved.
II
PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST TO VACATE A PORTION OF LONE CEDAR CIRCLE, RALPH KANT. I
Mayor Hamilton called the public hearing to order.
Councilman Geving moved, Councilman Horn seconded to close the public hearing. II
All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Jo Ann Olsen: The property is located south of Lake Minnewashta. It has I
...right-of-way just to the south of it and adjacent to TH 5. The applicant is
requesting to vacate a portion of the Lone Cedar right-of-way. The City does
not have any intention to improve that road to the south. The two lots and to
the east have direct access to TH 5. The lot further east is mostly wetland and
will not be developed. The current applicant has a driveway onto Lone Cedar
Illi
which does have direct access onto TH 5. The applicant has conferred with the
engineering department and also with MnDot and the applicant has spoken with the
6
II
I.. + --J
IICityCouncil Meeting - October 10, 1988
II
Resolution #88-107: Councilman Horn moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to award
the bid for the downtown redevelopment project, Phase II to Midwest Asphalt
Corporation in the amount of $643,428.33 conditioned upon the property owners
involved deeding the property to the City and upon their executing a special
II assessment waiver which would provide them with no right to object to special
assessments or the completion of the project. All voted in favor and the motion
carried.
IICouncilman Horn moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to table item
3, TH 101
update, until Fred Hoisington arrives. All voted in favor and the motion
II carried.
IAUTHORIZE FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR GRANDVIEW ROAD SEWER AND WATER PROJECT.
Acting Mayor Geving: We had this item before us several weeks ago. We put it
II in the hands of our Assistant City Engineer, I believe. Larry took this matter
and we do have an update on the Grandview Road sewer and water file #88-23. I
see residents here from that area. Could we have your report at this time Gary.
I Gary Warren: As you referenced Dale, Larry has spent some time here trying to
refine the cost estimate as directed by the Council at the last meeting.
Subsequently then has met with the neighbors, those that he could make contact
with, which I think was a majority of them, to present them on our preliminary
estimate that we were looking at assessments of approximately $14,400.00 each
for sanitary sewer and watermain connections to the properties. The test that
Council had directed staff to apply to this then was if 60% of the property
I owners were in favor of proceeding with the project with that cost in mind, that
it. ..feasibility. I guess maybe it shouldn't be a surprise to anybody that
since that cost is more than the cost of replacing a septic and well, that the
11 residents were not in favor of proceeding with that. I believe all of them were
against that cost. I felt I wanted to get before the Council since I was out of
town for the last meeting. Very sensitive obviously to the cost here to the
neighborhood and I don't mean to underplay them. I feel however we also have an
IIobligation from a health standpoint to the neighborhood. We did a little
research on the age of the properties out there. They're are all from the 1958
to 1960 construction era. It's not to say that some of the residents maybe
II haven't upgraded their septic systems. We don't have any records on that but in
my perspective, I think that we've got examples here of system are failing. The
area is within our Urban Service Area which are standard is to have public sewer
II and water available to it. I really think that Council should seriously
consider looking at this to see if, it could be next week or it could be 10
years from now when the next system fails. I'm very concerned, I guess, the way
that the systems lay out out there, that we could get piecemeal requests for
II connecting into the Hidden Valley system and then if you get further
subdivision, which there is a potential with the size of the lots up there,
we're going to have a real can of worms on our hands in trying to efficiently
IlL run in a system for that area. My perspective, although it's not popular, I
really believe that we need to grapple with putting in the municipal sewer and
water and look at other alternates maybe. Nobody likes deferred assessments but
II maybe stretching out the assessment amortization period. Things like that
possibly to help with the financial burden. I think we've got enough evidence
1 7
8 0
City Council Meeting - October 10, 1988 I
to say that this is the time that public sewer and water ought to be out there. II
Acting Mayor Geving: Let me ask you, in your discussions and negotiations with
iii
the homeowners, there's five of them apparently, they did indicate that if the
cost were approximately two-thirds of $14,000.00 which is roughly $10,000.00,
that they might go along with it. Now is there any possibility that this
project could be done for $10,000.00 per person which would be $50,000.00? II
Gary Warren: I'd say we're applying our 30%s overhead factor to the criteria
which is, some projects run 22%. Changes like that could be costs now plus the
II
full feasibility really you would be looking very hard to try to shorten up
lengths of sewer and water with the design.
Acting Mayor Geving: Let me ask you this question also because this was posed II
at one time by a single homeowner in the area. Then it just kind of snowballed
to the Council and then it took on the era of a mini-feasibility study and so
forth. Had this homeowner not brought this to our attention and requested city II
sewer and water because maybe if you have a failing system yourself we might not
have known about this?
Gary Warren: Well we knew about it from the Will property when we did that II
connection out there. We did have it on our list as far as an area that we
wanted to get to. With other pressing matters, it didn't come to the forefront
until we had another system with problems. I would say that that accelerated II
our interest.
Acting Mayor Geving: How does the Council feel about this item? Clark? I
Councilman Horn: I have a couple of questions. If we went through a full blown
feasibility study, would we get more of a contingency out of this? Would we I
arrive at a more accurate figure?
Acting Mayor Geving: I would say yes, we would feel more comfortable with a
full blown feasibility to know really what the system is that needs to be put in II
out there.
Councilman Horn: I think last time we talked about this the Mayor estimated
II
that a new well and new septic system might in the range to $10,000.00 if you
had to put it in yourself. Has anybody run through what it would be in real
dollar terms of spending $10,000.00 today versus spending the $14,400.00 over
II
say a 10 year period with the type of interest we would apply?
Gary Warren: I have no present worth analysis on it.
Councilman Horn: It would seem to me that that would be a feasibile thing to II
try because I think that would make it much more in line. I think the other
thing to keep in mind is what making these changes at some later point would
II
cost. It might be $10,000.00 today to upgrade but it might be $20,000.00 in
five years when the system would actually fail. It seems without a full
feasibility study, we haven't gotten any further than we would have had we
started two weeks ago except we clouded the issue a little bit.
Gary Warren: I think that the financial aspects of it certainly are the one
factor. The other is potential for subdivision out there and while we don't
8 1
City Council Meeting - October 10, 1988
want to encourage subdivision, I believe people have a right to stay with their
existing properties. If you compare this on a per unit basis to say a Church
I Road or North Lotus Lake unit assessments, are very reasonable what we're
showing here. Recognizing this does not include a permanent street surface.
Councilman Boyt: Since the mini-feasibility study was my recommendation a few
weeks ago, I think it found exactly what I was looking for which was it gave
them a reasonably cost estimate and we got what I anticipated would be their
' response. They don't want this. I think the question is one of community'
safety and their own personal safety. I think if they can find safe septic
system sites given the criteria that the City uses now for those, and they can
find a safe well site, that this is something that truly should be their
decision. We can't take decisions away from everybody in this town. Especially
not when, if they have the opportunity to have a safe septic and well situation,
then I think they're in the perfect position to make a decision. They can look
at the potential increased value of being attached to the City's water and sewer
system. Increase value to their property and weigh that against the cost, both
now and in the future of the system they choose. I don't think it's a decision
' that the City has to make because they're the ones that are impacted by it and
unless you can show me otherwise Gary, they're not, if they can find safe
systems, safe sites, they're not impacting on the City. So I think this
decision, we've got enough information to know that they don't want to pay this
' kind of price and I don't think you're going to be able to sharpen your pencil
enough to make it significantly different. That's what the mini-feasibility
study was supposed to do. Show us what's the ballpark figure. I think they
ought to have the right to make that decision themselves.
Acting Mayor Geving: I think you have to understand another thing here too.
Those 5 homeowners sat there for many, many years with their own systems and it
was only because of the Hidden Valley development this all came to light that it
became available to them. Sewer and water is now available and certainly were
impacted and they might have said to themself, gee, it would be sure nice if we
' could hook up to the system rather than replace it ourselves. Let's find out
what it would cost. Well, we did that. I've talked to several developers.
They're telling me that $14,000.00 is not unreasonable for city sewer and water
' to be placed on a lot in a development. I think that the figures that we have
already got are about as good as we're going to get. I have to agree with you
on that Bill. Sure we could do the feasibility study, go through the expense of
doing that. I think the figures are going to hold out. The only problem I have
is that there could possibly be other areas within our city where service is
available and to suggest that Bill might have an idea here of going ahead with
service on their own when city water and sewer are available, and in fact I
' talked to the Held's this evening and they did hook up to the city sewer.
They're already connected so the question they have is, do they have to connect
to water too? They're perfectly content with their water system. So we've got
a little bit of both. We've got some people who are not hooked up at all and
several people, at least the Held's are hooked up with City sewer. How about
the Will's, what are they hooked up to Gary?
Gary Warren: City sewer.
Larry Brown: And water.
I
1 9
V s
City Council Meeting - October 10, 1988 ,
Acting Mayor Geving: They've got both so we've got all three combinations here.
We've got some with none. We've got several with sewer and we've got, obviously
some that don't have either sewer and water and that would be Mrs. Bernier. I
don't think we're going to get 5 people to agree on this subject. I do have a
question for the Attorney however. I understand Roger that when the Held's put
in the city sewer service, they were given a piece of paper that said that when
service was available to the entire area and was installed, that they would have
to pay their fair share of that assessment. Would that be a proper statement?
I can't believe that someone could tell them that because the City Council makes
those kinds of decisions on assessments.
Roger Knutson: As I understand the situation, you're saying they were not
assessed for the sewer they have right now so they have not paid anything.
Acting Mayor Geving: I'm not sure. Is that true Mr. Held?
Mr. Held: Yes, we did pay. '
Gary Warren: They paid for their own connection into the city system and there
was an agreement, a letter of agreement drafted by the City Attorney's office
that said that, our concern here is that the more piecemeal that the system
gets, as we're already talking here, the more difficult it is to service a
property that is maybe further out and can't get into Hidden Valley. So we said
okay, because there was a problem there with a failing system and there was an
ownership transfer on the sale of the property and all, they needed to clear up
the septic problem. They entered into an agreement with the City that said that
they would agree to pay their appropriate lateral benefit if City sewer and
water were run into the property even though we were allowing them on an interim
basis to connect into our system.
Acting Mayor Geving: Okay, so they made a connection to the City system to hook '
up to sewer.
Roger Knutson: And they weren't charged for the trunk and lateral costs. I
Gary Warren: They were charged for the connection charge but not what we would
call the lateral benefit.
Roger Knutson: But not the regular lateral assessment.
Acting Mayor Geving: How do you feel about that Roger, now that you know the I
facts?
Roger Knutson: That's not that unusual a situation...
Councilman Johnson: I think we've got a potential situation here
that if we
continue piecemeal on it, it's going to be a disastrous situation. I see we've
got 30 year old systems. The next system is going to fail. The life expectancy ,
of septic systems are in the neighborhood of 30 years. Some of the property is
fairly heavily wooded from what I take it there. $14,000.00 is not that bad if
we can spread the payments. It's kind of like the old commercial. Pay me now '
or pay me later. The oil commercial. If this comes in later and the property,
his system fails and we've already done piecemeal on a couple other properties
and this one person may end up with a $30,000.00 or $40,000.00 to connect. It's
10
,'-,'7 s1
II ,City 'Council Meeting - October 10, 1988
III within our sewer area. They should be connected to the sewers. I think if
you're going to live within the urban service area, you should be on urban
services. It should not be completely optional. Forcing of it, it's going to
have to happen in the future. I can't see putting another 30 years. If the
system fails, if they put in a new system and it fails another 30 years from
I now, it's going to really be expensive to do this and we'll be saddling a future
council with even worse problems. I'm really leaning towards authorizing the
feasibility study. I'd also like to look into the possibility of any kind of
I State or Federal monies to help then alleviate this problem. If we can review
the septic systems to see what condition they are in. If we have failing septic
systems, I think there's been other areas where we've been able to obtain some
federal or state money to help defray some costs of failing septic systems.
IActing Mayor Geving: he had the 201 on 96th Street. That's gone.
I Councikian Johnson: Yes, that's probably gone but there may be something out
there. It's amazing what's out there, it's just hard to find sometimes. People
make livings just finding that information. That's my basic position on it. I'd
like to find whatever help we can for these people to pay the $14,000.00. I'd
1 like to do, how much is the feasibility study going to cost us?
Gary Warren: $2,000.00. We've done some effort here on it. $1,500.00 maybe.
IIActing Mayor Geving: Would it be done in-house?
III Gary Warren: We've got some basic information as far as the properties are
concerned but we'd want some cost estimates and some concepts as far as the
alignment of the sewer hook-ups. It's just a matter of refining some topography
and putting together some more numbers and financing opportunities.
IIActing Mayor Geving: The problem that I have is placing something on the 5
homeowners without knowing exactly how long it's been since they upgraded their
I system. There could be some systems out there that have been upgraded and are
virtually new and will last another 20 years. We don't know that because we
don't have the facts in front of us. I think the proper way to go with this,
rather than moving ahead to the project, charging each of these people
I $14,400.00 without a lot of information, is to get the information we need. I
think we need the feasibility study. I think that's the only way we can defend
a position, if the City Council were to take it and go ahead with this project,
I is that the feasibility said it's feasible. This is what it's going to cost. I
suspect we're not going to beat the price. I hope we do but we won't know that
unless we do the feasibility study. Do you agree with that Gary?
IGary Warren: Yes.
Acting Mayor Geving: We're dealing with nothing here at this time. We have no
II intelligence. We do not have information as to how this project should proceed
and to be arbitrary and make the decision tonight I think would be false. I
think it'd be wrong because you've got to remember one thing. This all started
IF when one person came to the City Council and asked if there was some way that
they could get city service. Now there's 3 or 4 other people out there that
didn't want it and don't need it. I know the Held's don't need it. They've got
it. So let's do the intelligent thing here, the smart thing and move ahead with
Ithe feasibility study. I agree with what you're saying Bill. I think there are
I 11
City Council Meeting - October 10, 1988
II
people out there who would probably do this job for less than $14,000.00 but I'm II
not convinced of it.
Councilman Boyt: That's not what I said.
ii
Acting Mayor Geving: Well say what you mean. What did you say?
Councilman Boyt: I'll try it again. What I said was, I think we have an II
intelligent report here that says that the ballpark price on these is
$14,000.00. In going out there, it wasn't even close to what they wanted to li
II
pay. To came back and say we're going to force than to take sewer and water, if
they can find an acceptable site for that well and septic system, I don't think
it's our responsibility to force than to pay to connect. Those lots have a
septic system now. It's failing. At least one of them. They want to come back
and do something about it. I think we give than the option and I don't think we II
want to spend $2,000.00 or $1,500.00 more dollars of the City's money to find
out something that isn't going to move this any closer to the decision because
the decision is really are you going to force them to take it or not. Because II
if you're not going to force than to take it, we're wasting our money and if
you're going to force them to take it, then let's deal with that right now and
tell than in the opinion of the majority of this Council, we're going to force
II
you to take it.
Acting Mayor Geving: There is an indication in here from the City Engineer that
II
that price, $57,000.00 can be reduced. I asked him how and I suspect do
have some answers to the how but more importantly, I think though atywe have
to have the feasibility study in our hands. That doesn't take us away from the
decision point. It just gives us more information so at the next meeting we can '
make the right decision.
Councilman Horn: I think we should all keep in mind too that this is not purely
an issue that the City does not have liability in. If it were purely the II
liability of the residents, I might go along with Bill's thinking. However, in
the last few years we've found that cities do have a certain liability on all
systems. Whether they're city systems or whether they're individual systems. I II
think maybe the Council needs to be reminded again what that liability is. The
other point I'd like to make is that when we have five individual people in this
type of situation, there's never been a time in the past when we've gotten II
everyone to agree that they wanted the project. Many times these people don't
come back to us until 3 or 4 years later and say yes, that was the right
decision. I've never heard an assessment hearing yet that when the bill first
comes up, that people agreed with it. As far as taking the decision away from
people, there are certain things that are inevitable when a city grows. One of
them is that you're going to have city sewer and water. I think that's a risk
you take by living here and I think it's up to us to be responsible enough to II
make sure that safety is brought about in these systems. Maybe they're not
politically expediate decisions but I think we have to make them.
Councilman Boyt: I'd like to make one final comment. At no time am II
I suggesting that we compromise safety of the community or the people involved
here. We have a very good system of determining whether or not there's a septic
system and well site. That's all I'm saying we should be doing. Is giving the
people that option.
Y
II
12
' , City Council Meeting - October 10, 1988
II _ Acting Mayor Geving: I'm ready to call the question.
tCouncilman Johnson: I move that we perform a feasibility study and that we
include a review of the existing systems and whether sites are available,
acceptable sites for new wells and septic systems are available on these
properties as part of that feasibility study.
Councilman Horn: I'll second that.
Resolution -
#88 1P18: Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Horn seconded to
' authorize a feasibility study for Grandview Road sewer and water project. Also,
to review the existing systems and whether acceptable septic and well sites are
available on those properties. All voted in favor except Councilman Boyt who
voted in opposition and the motion carried with a vote of 3 to 1.
Acting Mayor Geving: I would like to direct staff however, to get this back to
us as soon as possible. It's getting late in the year. Regardless of how the
feasibility study should cane out, if there's any potential for building it this
year or as early as possible, we'd like to see this back to us in the next
couple of weeks.
Councilman Horn: I'd like to reinforce what Jay said. Explore all means Y ou
can for support on it...
STOP SIGN REQUEST Q ST FOR NEAR MOUNTAIN BOULEVARD, JIM WEHRLE.
' Acting Mayor Gevi.ng: This is an item that we brought back onto the agenda. It
had been deleted and it's a request, I don't know if we've got the staff report
on this however.
Councilman Johnson: There is none.
11 Acting Horn: There's something in the back in the administrative section.
Acting Mayor Geving: Okay, maybe we could pull that from the administrative
section. There's a number of letters back and forth from Mr. Wehrle, the
' president of the Homeowner's Association for Near Mountain and we have several
other comments from staff and from the manager so there's quite a bit of
discussion on this item. It all revolves around a subject, a stop sign request
' at Near Mountain Boulevard. But it's more than that. We agreed to put that
back on the agenda. It is a new business item.
' Councilman Johnson: Dale, I suggested we put it back on the agenda. I do not
believe that at this time we have adequate information to make decisions on stop
signs and a few other things but I did want to air some opinions and have the
Council a chance to air their opinions and Jim and some of the homeowners to air
their opinions at this point in the process versus after the study. They have
put up the traffic counters today and they were counting traffic leaving the
subdivision. There will be more traffic counts going on over the next few
weeks. There is one item that I feel fairly strong about is the speed limit in
13