Loading...
1n 2.2 Acres, Villages on the Pond CITY OF CHANHASSEN J City Center Drive, PO Box 147 JJanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Phone 612.937.1900 General Fax 612.937.5739 'ngineering Fax 612.937.9152 ublic Safety Fax 612.934.2524 Xfeb www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us it\ ; ~. '\tJi.,). MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Don Ashworth, City Manager DATE: April 8, 1998 SUBJ: 2.2 Acres, Villages on the Ponds A tentative settlement has beeb'reached with 8t. Hubert's regarding our purchase of approximately ten acres in the Villages on the Pond plat. It is recommended that the city council approve disbursement of $60,000 to 8t. Hubert's in consideration ofthem conveying to the city the 2.2 acre parcel as well as surrounding wetlands (approximately an additional 6-8 acres). I IJe City of Chanhassen. A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a charming downtown, thriving businesses, and beautiftl parks, A great place to live, work, and play. CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association Attorneys at Law Thomas J. Campbell Roger N. Knutson Thomas M. Scott Elliott B. Knetsch Suesan Lea Pace (612) 452-5000 Fax (612) 452-5550 . . . Joel J. Jamnik Andrea McDowell Poehler Matthew K. Brokl * John F. Kelly Matthew J. Foli Marguerite M. McCarron George T. Stephenson * Abo ["ensed in \'('isconsin Author's Direct Dial: 234-6215 :- .~ICUMr.."'" Of Cou",el: Gary G. Fuchs April 10, 1998 CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL Nancy K. Mancino, Mayor Mike Mason, Council member Steven Berquist, Councilmember Mark Engel, Councilmember Mark Senn, Councilmember RE: 2.2 Acres, VILLAGES ON THE POND Dear Mayor and Councilmembers: Item "N" on the consent agenda concerns acquisition of 2.2 acres in Villages on the Pond. I concur with Don's recommendation. Enclosed is Don's prior confidential memo on the subject. The memo was discussed in advance with me and I concur that we could not successfully require it dedicated to the City. Very truly yours, RNK:srn Enclosure SON --- ~ cc: Don Ashworth Suite 317 · Eagandale Office Center · 1380 Corporate Center Curve . Eagan, MN 55121 FROM CITY OF CHRNHR55EN -!,c .. 04.01.1998 15:58 P. 2 I 690 CifJCmtttDrijjr, P 11o,'(~47 CIJlmh4Jsrn, MinnrJfJt j S,U 7 PhDnt6J2.9J1.Jt, GtJltfltIFu6J2..~37. 739, Ettginming Far 6J~,91r: 9 rS~ PuMir Safity '-x 6~~,9:r: 2.s~4 wtb WWW/,i,ch.lII/",;,smrill./I/ I .',. r.... ., . M~NtO~DUM i . TO;: : Mayor and City Council CONFIDENTIAL FROM: DArtt: I I Don Ashworth. City Manager Aprill, 1998 ! . SUBa': 2.2 Acres. Villages on the Pond (Not~~ Slnc~ litigation has been threatened as means by wblch tbls Issue .' 1 , ca.n ~e rdolt.ed, the City Attorney has advlsedj tbat this memorandum be rc\'lc)fed by:hll office and forwarded to the el council using hts attot"ey/elJ~nt privilege.. Accordingly, the d council .hould consider this men)fr8n~utn as confidentla!.) BAC~GRO~ND AlthoUgh thete are 8 number of defenses as to wb the city can and should contijtl e to rdquire that the 2.2 aCres be considere as a conservation easement, there toe a~soltwo major hurdles that would have tr be crossed ifthis would proce ' into Utigation. i.e: . · ~~tlarid klt.nlloll Permit' Thote is 110 quo lioo Ih.t Ih. cily CO""cU..led to ~~ehide;a condition in the wetland alteration pormit that requires a co~servati~n easement over the 2.2 acre parcell The fallacy is that there is not~ing in:state statute that gives the city COUll it the authority to inscrlthBt tY~e ofcohdition. Specifically. the law speaks to methods by which miUgalfon;can occur. standards, and replacem t requirements. There is no~hil1g in :the statute that basically says you ca alter a wetland if you give us a ppt of g~ld. piece of land, or first born; and - . · Pt1>> A~ro.cment: Without question, the wet! d issue was extensively dis~ussed .t the Planning Commission and that' their agreement to the wetland d~s'tructjo~ was solely based on being able to c nserve the 2.2 acre parcel. Unfortut1afcly. when those recommendations g t to the city council, the cou:ncil spd,cifically deleted them. . I . i OPPOliTUNITY FOR SOLUTION i! . In revid~ing tl~e entire file, I discovered B phenorn occur h):deveI9pments. i.e. it is my belief that St. chBrges'lwice. ;Byerly's/TargetrrCF rep~esent mor on that does not typically b~rt'8 paid stonn water typical developments. In I I I I I I :; · en, 'fa...b"",,,, A L'Ilg "mm"/I] .tlh riM" ,,~, tJrI,lil] Ikols. , ""''''';Ilg ',w._ ,krioi"t ~IU "...., .., 1mIU/fiII/'fd. Al"" "'" " Ii", ..,k. ,iii J!4} .....J&......~... .... j 1~, ~.. ... ....11... I L . FROM CITY OF CHRNHRSSEN 04.01.1998 1~5::59 P. 3 ~ I M!' , or I8n~ City Council AP 1111~ J~98 P. e2 1 , . I. cac~ of thore cases,. they paid a storm water clse. and the city used those monies to b~y a ']aIJe pondmg area on the Eck8nk8r p erty and paid for the construction oft'Jtllt Nu8,.P pond. In this case, S1. Hubert's p id approximate]y $62,000 in storm waitet charges and built a NURP pond on their property. The existing pond wil1:accom~odate all of the development in the Villages plat with the exception oftJ1~ resid,ntial area which will pay its own fe s. Additionally, the eventual locaHon for[the pond currently on St. Hubert's p operty is in the low area by the brids~ whicfl is currently] 01. When 101 gets routed, it will go through the:: pon4 :buiIt b~ St. Hubert's and the:: state will be r sponsible for relocating that pond ~11 the iower area. All of'these facts, again, lead me to the conclusion that St. Hub~h's ha~ paid twice. i: , ST.ItVDEAT~SIWARDS POSITIONS 1110 #ards a~c contractually obligated to convey he 2.2 acre parcel to Sf. Hubdtt's. T~ey do not see that they are a part of ny negotiations with the city. 81. H~bert's ~as 8 budgetary problem and feel th1 receiving no monetary payment from ~~e city, for a piece of high and dry land is u reasonable. Some comp_nSalion is beller than nothing. Accordingl ,thoy have agreed that they will deed lba 2.2 .era parcal plus tha approximata six ~cras or surrounding watlands to the cifY if lh~y could be reimbursed the approximrte $60,000 in stonn water fe::es that t~"y h.av~ paid. To them, money is money a d it really doesn't make a whole lot of~ifl'ereqce how it got to them. ! ~ ~ MANAeJtRis RECOMMENDATION , ' ;: 1 1 would recoJ'(llucnd that the city council approve he disbursement of $60,000 to St. Hu~erl 's i6 consideration of them conveying t the city the 2.2 acre parcel liS well a~:suriou~lding wetlands (approximately an a ditional 6-8 acres). I am recOrht1tcndin~ B flat $60,000 amount as ,I do not lJeJieve it would be in our best int~res't: to tie he repayment directly to a reimburs;m"nt of st~rm water charges ($61,9 8). At hough ByerlY'lrrargetffCF may te resent typJcal developments where ~a.. ar~ paid and pond. ara bullt off-.lle. th fa .vary wall may ba in.tances where ~i is logical that the city accept the charges s well as requires the constru~tioi1 of a pond on site. I would rather be i a position to look at that future ~nstahc~ without having this decision being een 8S a precedent. . , , I, : 8:\mgr\2.2rlllllle',d~ I' ! I' i i . I ! . I U.........l~..'.... ;"11 II....... ."~I..I, I ... ... ... END 'l"t"l<