2001 11 13 AGENDA
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
CHANHASSEN MUNICIPAL BUII.DING, 690 CITY CENTER DRIVE
8:30 P.M. - CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION, COURTYARD CONFERENCE ROOM
A,
2002 Budget Discussion
1. 5:30 p.m. - Finance Department
2. 5:50 p.m.- Fire Department
3. 6:10 p.m. - Capital Improvement Program
6:30 P.M. - REGULAR MEETING, CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CALL TO ORDER (PI.dee of Allegiance)
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS
CONSENT AGENDA
. . .
All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the. city council and
will be considered as one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items. If
discussion is desired, that item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered
separately. City council action is based on the staff recommendation for each item. Refer to the
council packet for each staff report.
.
Approve Construction Plans & Specifications for Arboretum Business Park 4m
Addition, Project No. 00-11.
be
Call for Assessment Hearing for Dogwood Road Sanitary Sewer Improvements,
Project 00-01-1.
Ce
Approval of Assessment Roll for Crestview Circle Utility & Street.Improvement
Project 00-05.
d.
Approval of Assessment Roll for Quinn Road Sanitary Sewer Improvement
Project 01432.
e. Call Outstanding Bonds.
f. Item Deleted **
g. Item Deleted **
h. Approval of Bills.
Approval of Minutes:
- City Council Work Session Minutes dated October 22, 2001
- City Council Minutes dated October 22, 2001
Receive Commission Minutes:
- Park & Recreation Commission Minutes dated October 23, 2001
j. Receive Feasibility Study and Call for Public Hearing for Kings Road Extension.
k. Approve Addendum to Telephone/Voicemail System Bid.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Vacation of a Landscape Easement and Drainage & Utility Easement; Lot 3, Block 1,
Park One 4t~ Addition.
3. Assessment Hearing for Trunk Highway 5 Improvements, Project 97-6.
.
Si
Assessment Hearing for BC7 & BC8 Trunk Sanitary Sewer Improvements, Project 00-01.
Consider Land Sale, Lots 2 & 3, Block 1, Crossroads Plaza Addition (550 & 570 West
79th Street).
1
Consider Approval of Tax Increment Financing District No. 8, Presbyterian Homes in the
Villages on the Ponds.
UNFINISHED BUSINES~S
7. Update on Roundhouse Renovation Project.
8. Consider Amendment to City Code to Permit One Driveway Access Per Lot.
NEW BUSINESS -- None
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS
9. Council/Commission Liaison Update
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS
CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION
AD JOiNT
A copy of the staff report and supporting documentation being sent to the city council will be
available after 2:00 p.m. on Thursday.' Please contact city hall at 937-1900 to verify that your
item has not been deleted from the agenda any time d/er 2:00 p.m. on Thursday.
The fol!owing items were published and then deleted from this agenda:
lf. Approval of Resolution Decerdf-ying Hennepin County TIF District.
lg.
Approval of Resolution Decertifying the National Weather Service TIF District.
GUIDELINES FOR VISITOR PRESBNTATIONS
Welcome to the Chanhassen City Council Meeting. In the intere~ of open communications, the Chanhassen City
Council wishes to provide an opportunity for the public to address the City Council. That opportunity is provided at'
every regular City Council meeting during V'u/tor Pr~enta//ons.
1. Anyone indicating a desire to speak during Visit~rr Presentations will be acknowledged by the Mayor.
When called upon to speak, state your taame, address, and topic. All remarks shall be addressed to the City
Council as a whole, not to any specific member(s) or to any person who is not a member of the City-
Council.
2. If there are a number o~ individuals present to speak on the. same topic,,' please designate a spokesperson that
3. Limit your comments t~ five minutes. Additional time may be granmi at the discretion of the Mayor. If
you have written comments, provide a copy to the Council.
4. During Visitor ~ons, the Council and staff listen to convnents and will not engage in discussion.
Council members or the City Manager may ask questions of you in order to gain a thorough understanding
of your concern, suggestion or request.
5. Ple~e be aware that disrespectful comments or comments of a personal nature, d/rected at an individual
either by name or inference, will not be allowed. Personnel concerns'should be directed to the C/ty
A-I
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
2002 BUDGET COMMENTARY
Mission and Current Services
The Finance Department is responsible for accounting, revenue collection, special assessment
recording, bill payment, budget monitoring, payroll preparation, and ulJIity billing. The department
is comprisad of the finance director and three full-time accounting clerks. The salaries of two of
the clerks are paid partially by other departments - one Is paid 50% by the Fire Department and
the other 60% by the Utility Department
Significant annual projects Include the audit preparetion (March through June), budget
preparation (June through November), Capital Improvements Program (September through
November), assessment and delinquent utility certification (September through November), and
financial monitoring year-round.
Budget Highlights
The 2002 budget reflects a decrease of $23,075 (8.1%) primarily due to the elimination of the
Accountant II position. The accountant left during April, 2000 and we have not replaced the
position. While It has increased the workload substantially for everyone in the department, we
have Identified a number of areas where our procedures were redundant and have simplified
many of our procedures. In order to cover some of the remaining duties of the accountant, we
have determined to that it is more cost effective to pay consultants to perform some of the work
and are increasing the training budget to make employees more effective at performing their
duties.
Future Activities
The Finance Department will be investigating new software in 2002. This process will require a
significant amount of effort from the staff, but we need to find software that makes it easier to
publish and report financial Information. This will be in conjunction to and grant access to
Significent annual projects Include the audit, Capital Improvements Program (ClP), and financial
trend monitoring.
~ B4z-r/~
113,748 187,000 187,000 109,686 146,000 146,000
................................................................................................................
14,069 :~1,,000 24,000 13,717 19,200 19,300
6,684 17,'000 X?,O00 9,655 11,700 11,?00 "'
700 0 0 0
190 300 300 350 400 400
3,35! 0 0 0
3,157 0 0 0
139,906 228,300 228,300 132,408 177,300 177,300
1,~4,1 0 0 0
0 800 000 37 800 800
1,300 0 0 0
?6 350 350 84, 400 400
................................................................................................................
................................................................................................................
3,217 1,150 1,1.50 121 1,200 1,200
12,560 16,100 16,100 ~S, 992 30,000 30,000
55,593 30,000 3 O, 000 SO, 344 32,000 3~, 000
87 25 25 14
29 0 0 0
......... ; ........... -. ............. ;'-r ............................. .~ .......... -. ..................... -. ......... .-.- . .
2,663 2,500 2, SOO 1,810 2, SO0 2,500 -
......................................... .: .............. -_ ..................... -_- .......................... J ......
150 300 300 145 300. 300
4,816 S,O00 5,000 1,43.3 17,000 17,000 -
................................................................................ - ....... : ................. : ...... - .
100 500 500 26S. SO0 500
.
76,006 5&, 425 54,425 89,983 82,3 O0 82,300
134 1,000 1,000 2,223 1,000 1,000
134 1,000 1,000 2,333' . . 1,000 1,000
· .
219,261 284,875 384,875 234,735 261,800 261,800
219,263 294,875 284,875 234,735 261,800 261,800
Qrm2d Total 219,363 284,075 384,875 224,735 0 261,800 261,800 0
FIRE DEPARTMENT
2002 Budget
As the city commercial and residential infrasma:mre grows, demand for fire and emergency medical services
increases proportionally. We are averaging approximately a 10% increase in call volume year over year from 2000 to 2001.
We expect this trend to continue in the foreseeable ftwam.
With. call volume increasing, "wear and tear" on facilities, equipment and vehicles drives costs up. Additionally,
more calls also cause "firefighter burn-out" which impacts turnover and training costs.
Our 2002 operating budget addresses the fiscal needs of the fire department as we look at and project our response to
projected demand for fire/rescue services.
Personal Services:
We are in the preliminary phase of discussions with Ridgeview Medical and the Sheriff's Office about changing the
role of the fire department as a primary responder to medicals. We anticipate saving money on call pay as we negotiate to
shift primary call response for medicals to the Sheriff's office and Ridgeview.
4010 Wages for full time people- Mark and Greg, and Betty ½
4020
Wages for firefighters paid on call
** Implemented priority medical dispatching prolxx:ols to reduce/minimize nuisance medical calls.
Reduced call volumes in current year by approximately 10%. Anticipate shifting additional call
volume during 2002 to Ridgeview paramedics now that they are located at Lake Ann Park.
** Current fire officers and staff's salaries'have been in place since 1999. No changes requested in 2002.
4O3O
Retirement Contributions
** Firefighter pension - in 2001 shifted allocation fi'om outd_,~ted (genen~ fund) $1.00hnan call program to
standard pension program - cost neutral. Annual city payment is made in 4th quarter.
4040 Insurance Contributions
4050 Workers Comp
Materials & Supplies:
An aging fleet, facilities and equipment increases maintenance and replacement costs.
4110 Office supplies (deleted in 2001) All goes to 1170-4110.
4120 Equipment supplies - firefighting supplies.
** Account receivables for haz mat supplies have not come in ($2875.00).
4130 Prognun supplies - first aid equipment - disposable equipment- replacement supplies
4140
4150
4170
4210
4240
Vehicle supplies requesting $1000.00 increase - new equipment for vehicles
** As fleet ages, replacement parts and equipment costs increase.
Maintenance materials - misc. maintenance supplies
Motor fuels & lubricants - fuels and oil for fire apparatus
Books & periodicals - materials needed by training officer- fire ed - fire marshal ~ books
Uniforms & clothing requesting $1500.00 increase - non-slrucaual ftrefighting clothing- uniform pants, shirt,
jacket, badges, hats
** Averaging i 5% turnover over the past four years. This drives up the costs of uniforms and clothing.
4260 Small tools & equipment- hand tools, small, special~ firefighfing tools, to replace lost or damaged tools
4290 Misc. supplies - small items not necessarily firefighting equipment, supplies for station, equipment, etc.
NOTE: Fire Department would like to combine 4260 - small tools and equipment, and 4290 - misc. supplies. Both line
items are similar in nature.
NOTE: Fire Department would like to add a line item for hazardou~ materials supplies and dive equipment. Both of these
items are becoming a significant part of our operation requiring very specialized equipment and training.
Contractual Services:
Demand for services and a need to be able to respond to more complex calls, along with turnover impacts costs in
this area. We have taken training programs "in house" and are traveling less to offset increased costs.
4300 Consulting & contractual services - requesting $1000.00 increase. This covers firefighter exams. Ridgeview
Business Health Service
psychological exams, Hepatitis B shots, diver's and haz mat physicals.
** Annual physicals for firefighters along with new hires have increased. Health protocols have been
modified to increase health surveillance to ensure firefightevs are fit for regular .duty.
·
4310 Telephone - Communications. Cell phones for Fire Chief, Asst. Chiefs, Fire Marshal and Fire Inapeetor.
Fire truck cell phones.
4320 Utilities - Electricity, water and heat.
4330 Postage.
4350 Cleaning & waste removal - Cleaning of both fire stations and garbage removal.
4360 Subscriptions & memberships - subscriptions to fi. refighting trade magazines, membership to Fire Chieff
Fire Marshal organizations.
4370
4375
Travel & training
** This is the most important part of the budget. Requesting an additional $2500.00 to maintain and
improve capabilities. In 2001 training costs have increased resulting from turnover. To save money over
the past four years we have brought a number of programs in house: Firefighter I and II, Dive training and
Haz Mat training. This saves the fire department $8000.00 to $10,000.00 a year. We did not s__nrn_ d FDIC,
IAFC, and MNFCA saving $6000.00 to $8000.00 in Iravel costs.
Fire Prevention - give-away material and fire department open house costs.
4410 Equipment rental - copier costs at fire station
~.a.~.O Vehicle license & registration
4483 General Liability Insurance
4510 Repairs & maintenance of building - light maintenance, misc. painting, plumbing, electrical, etc.
4520 Repair & maintenance of vehicles- rourine and emergen~ repair of fire apparatus.
4530
4531
Repair & maintenance of equipment - requesting an $800.00 increase ~- repair damaged fire equipment i.e., motor
fans, dive gear, turnout gear, etc.
** Maintenance costs of increasingly more complex equipment continue to "creep".
Repair & maintenance of radios - repairs of radios, pagers, mobile radios; replace lost pagers.
BOI~ IK~
Date, 2...2./08/01
'Z"A.m, 4 B09J;m
(xf~ (32azLbimmeo. ];'Ud]l, ~
........................................................................................................................................................
,,
Vob.'Lr. Zm
lb:x:dm mhd. ;rmz-J. odA~ Xi
Un.t.~m:m r, Clor.2d.ng
itmZm:Lx' & jmu.f,.,.- - Vmb. tclmm
Yea: C)rJ. gixiX Aamdod AcCua.1.
118,426 3.24,000 3.2&,000 98,895 . 133,000 133,000
153,269 145,000 145,000 106,886 14,S,000 :1.45,000
................................................................................................................
19,943 107,200 107,200 16,157 143,500 142,100 '
8,974 3.2,500 12,500 10,697 14,200 14,200
375 0 O 0
7,364 7,600 7,600 8,876 3,600 3,60d
0 0 O 0
308,3'/1 396,300 396,300 241,5// 438,300 438,300
2,028 0 O 0
7,727 6,000 6,000 8,747 6,000 6,000
4,202 s,ooo s,ooo 3,781 s,ooo s,ooo
6,62.2 6,000 6,000 5,554) 7,000 7,000
318 1,000 1,000 315 1,000 1,000
3,994 3,600 3,600 3,883 3,744 3,74,4,
355 400 400 536 400 400
10,273 10,0O0 lQ,000 8,403 13.,500 11,500
7,281 6,000 E,000 5,514 6,000 6,000
2,531 2,SO0 2,500 2,375 2,S00 2,500
45,401 40,500 40,500 39,104 43,144 43,144
15,965 15,000 15,000 14,000 16,000 16,000
3,676 4,000 &,O00 3,523 4,000 4,000
13,783 16,000 16,000 16,055 16,640 16,640
116 300 300 25 300 300
4,045 6,075 6,075 4,045 6,300 6,300
1,718 1,500 1,500 1,165 1,500 1,500
21,613 22,500 22,500 25,740 25,000 25,000
7,914 9,000 9,000 5,752 g,o00 g,o00
2,378 2,000 2,000 1,803 2,000 2,000
26 50 50 0 100 100
0 1,800 1,800 2~ 1,800 1,800
................................................................................................................
5,213 6,000 6,000 8,577 6,000 6,000
4,296 7,000 7,000 5,143 7,000 7,000
4,037 4,200 4,200 5,164 5,000 5,000
................................................................................................................
5,482 S,O00 5,000 3,606 S,O00 5,000
90,251 100,435 100,425 94,903 105,640 105,640
274 o o o
274 o o o
444,297 537,225 537,225 375,S18 587,064 587,084
·
444,297 537,225 537,225 375,518 587,084 587,084
444,297 537,225 537,225 375,518 0 S87,084 587,084 0
Department
Major Equipment
100tr. Aa'iai Ladder
F~ 0~: PPE (Tav~H~rnets)
~ Purchasm/Upgrades
Telecommun~ Pu mtn_-_ _,~,~U__ pg rades
Commun~ Dev.: Light Duty Trud~
Equipment Trak~
Tar Keme
Pul~c Wo~: Light Duly Trudm
Bol3cat ,~ow Bloat
Tmcl~'
Tractor Boom
Tmlta'
Gromcb Mowm Raplacement (10')
Upgrade 217 Grass Rig Pump/MoladWa~' Tank
D~ Team Equipmmt
Training Room Fumlbss and Equipment
Batlcat Trundler Atladl~
City of C~sen, MN
PROIECTS BY DEPARTMENT
2002 thru 2006
Project~ Priority 2002
EQ-001
EQ-002
EQ-003
EQ..005
EQ-IX)7
EQ-009
EQ.010
EQ-011
EQ.013
EQ-014
EC-015
EC-016
EC-017
EC-019
E¢ .021
EC..022
E¢-023
EC-024
EQ-025
EQ-026
EQ-027
EQ-028
EQ-02g
EQ-030
EQ-033
E(~-034
EC-035
EC.036
EC-03?
EC.038
EC-039
EC -042
EC-043
EC--045
2003 2004 2005 2006 Totnl
0 35,1X)0
0 10,000
0 100,0ffi 50,000
0 20,0(X)
0 2,000 1,000 1,000 1,000
0
0 15,000 15,01X) 15,000 15,000
0 66,500 48.200 62,200 62,g00
0 9,(XX) 9,000 9,000 9,000
0 22,(X10 24,ffi0 25,000
0
0 45J100
0
0
0 68.000
0
0 8,000
0 10,0ffi 10,000 10JX)0 10,ffi0
0 100JX)0 15,000
0
0 113~X) 113,0(I) 116,000
0
0 30,000
0
0
0 41 ,IIX)
0 60,000
0 6.000 6,000 6.000
0 12,000
4 8,50O
52O0O
140~0
21
115,000
342,000
5,000
6,000
7,0~
41
24,000
Pag~ ] of 4 ~, November 08, 2001
Department
RecraalJoa Centar Carpet Replacement
Carver County Community Demographic Partnership
Major Equipment Total
Municipal Buildings
Libra~ Exponslon
Firs SlalJon ~ Expansion
Public Works Facility Expansion
Enclosed Salt & Sand StDrage Fadlity
Fire SlalJon 1 and 2 Refurbishing
Municipal Buildings Total
Park & Trail Improvements
Improvomont~ 8andim~o Community Park
Development: City C,e~tsr Park
Playground Equipment Curt7 Farms Park
81gnage: Kerber Po~d Park
Improvement: Meadow Green Park
Roundhouse Renovation: Roundhouse Park
Troll: Ba,'xllmem Park ~ Chanhassen Hills
Trail: I-Iw7 101 (S. Shore Dr. to Townllne Dr.)
Road & Trail Reconstn.~: Lake Ann Park
Ma~h Glea Trail Connector
Tree Planting=
Park Shelter. Bandimere Community Park
Half Court Baakalba~: Bandlrnem HetglYe Park
Skate Pat Ramp
Trash Receptacles
Permane~ Park Benches a'td Tables
Sanitary Sewer Improvements
Sanllmy / LC-1
Sanreo/i BC-8
Sanltary i SC-9
Sanllm7 i BC-2 (Portion)
Sump Pump Ir, spectio~
Geaeral Repairs (Emergency/Unarmed)
TeleV~ Sewer Unes
Rel:elr I~anho~, Infiitra0on~nflow (I/I)
SCADA System Repair & Maintenance
Sazdta7 Sow~ ]mpmv~ts Tots]
ProJeet~ Priority 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
EQ-048 3 5,0OO
EQ-047 0 10,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 30,000
448.200 586,200 458,200 637,900 . 425,000 2,553,500
MB-00~ 0 s,ooo,ooo 6:~,ooo
MB-002 0 75,000 75,000
MB-003 0 200,000 1,700,000 1,900,000
MB-004 0 100,000 100,000
M8-005 0 200,000 200,000
MB-008 0 31,000 31,000
6,031,000 100,000 400,000 1,775,000 8,306,000
PK&T-001 0 25,000 40,000 65,000
PK&T-003 0 275,000 100,000 375,000
PK&T-O04 0 40,000 40,000
PK&T-005 0 10,000 10,000
PK&T-006 0 50,000 50,000
PK&T-009 0 30,000 30,000
PK&T-012 0 250,000 250,000
PK&T-013 . 0 850,000 .850,000
PK&T-014 0 485,000 485,000
PK&T-015 0 68,000 68,000
PK&T-~18 0 15,000 15,000
PK&T-021 ' 2 . 175,000 175,000
PK&T-022 3 15,000 15,000
PK&T-023 1 7,500 7,500
PK&T-024 1 20,000 20,000 40.000
PK&T-025 2 10o000 10,000
370,~00 1,715~)0 225,000 t 75,000 2,485,500
SS-002 0 200,000 200,000
SS-003 0 400,000 400,000
SS-004 0 315,000 315,000
SS-005 0 80,000 350,000 430,000
SS-007 0 50,000 50,000 60,000 60,000 220,000
SS4X)8 0 15,000 15,000 30,000
SS-009 0 120,000 120,000 1:20,000 360,0(X) '
SS-010 0 85,000 85,000 85,000 85,000 340,000
Page 2 of 4
695,000 690,000 370,000 520,000 120,000 2,395,000
Thurzdoy, No.tuber 08, 2001
Department
Street Improvements
Bitun'/no~ Ovata~. Saddlebmok Cuwe ST-(X)6
atuml~3m Ovata~. Lake Drive/Lake Da'va East ST-007
Blturrax~a ~ Audubon Rd. ST-008
Bltu~ ~ Coulter Blvd. ST-009
Bltumlrm~ Oeat~. West 78ffl St. ST-010
N'mual Slreet Impmvemeat Program ST-012
Street lmprovemems Total
Surface Water Management
~ Sman Wata,ahed
Lm m~wm,a~
Bluff Creek: Alia' ~
Blu~ Creek: Alta' Existing Ponds
Water System Improvements
Well ~ W-001
Well,lO W-4302
Wmr Tom~r (3~G): L~an avd. , W-m4
take Rley Trunk Ii W..0(~
Wata' ~ TH 41 WOO8
Warm' hllpmvmmma: Idaldlem' Dr. W.807
Warm' Impmveamn~ BC-1 (TC&W - Lyman) W-00g
Wmr ~mpnwemen~ Lyman, Audu'oee, Pewm W-010
Walm' Tl'eatme~ ~ 1 W-011
Genera Warm' Sy~e~ Re~e~ W-013
SCADA ~ Upgmde~V, aklt~mr~e W-014
Re~alnlk~: Wm~ 7Gib St. Water Tower W-015
Utmy Rm Study W-0~?
Weff#12 W-018
1N~ Tre~ Plant II W-Olg
Water ~ Improvemonta Total
ProJee
Priority 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
40,000
140,000
110,000
15o000
170,000
125,000
275,000 275,000 285,0O0
40,O(X)
3,900,000
95. ,OOO
18,0(]0
140,000
110.000
1,5,000
170,000
125,000
200,000
210,000
150,000
215,000
175,000
150,000
150,1XI0
175,000
200,000
210,000
215,CX)0
275,000
50,000
110,000
335,000
13o,a3o
70,000
400,000
370,00O 210,000
3,500,000
50,000 50,000 50,000
10,000 10,000 10,000
QO2,C)(X)
675,000 750,000
3,375,(XX)
110,0(D -
130,000
4J300,000
19~000
130,000
3,630,000 1,~)7,000 4,175,0(Kl 1,252,000 12,210,000
~ 3 of 4 ~, Novend~-08, 2001
Department ProJect~ Priority 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
GR~ND TOTAL
10,332,700 7,571,2.00 7,408,200 6,182,900 3,857,000
35,352,000
Page 4 of 4 Thursday, November 08. 2001
City of Chanhassen, MN
PROJECTS BY FUNDIN~ SOURCE'
2002 thru 2006
Source
Bond Proceeds
Roundhou~ Re~;nm~: Roum Pink
Bond Proceeds Total
ProjectO Priority 2002
IVE-001 0 6,000,000
PK&T~ 0
2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
6,ooo,ooo o 6,ooo,ooo
Pa~ l of 5 T/n~, Nowmber 08, 2001
~our~e
Capital Replacement Fund
100E Aerial Ladder Rdurbishlng
Fire Dept.: Them'al Rescue Device
Fire Dept.: 1 3/4 Inch Hose
Fire Del~.: L~ptop Computers
Fire Dept.: PPE (Turnout/Helmets)
Fire Dept.: C~de System Air Bottle RoflU
Telecommunk:al~ Purchase~pgrades
Community Dev.: Ught Duty Trucks
Dump/Plow Truck Replacemenls/Additlons
Vibrator/Ro~l Packer
Equipment Trailers
Tar Ketlle
Ford 555C Backhoe
Crack Sealer
Line Striper
Cop~ Rep,:enacts
Groundurastsr 580 Mower Replacement
Pubic Works: Light Duty Trucks
Bobcat Snow Blower
Tacks for Bobcat
Grounds Mower Replacement
Trac~
Tracax Boom
Trailer
(~roun~ Mower Rep,:emit (~03
Upgrade 217 Grass R~I Pum~ater Tank
Dive Team Equipment
Training Room Furniture and Equipment
l~at Trencher Attach malt
Carver County' Communlly Den'mgraphlc Partnemhlp
Public Worle Facility Expansion
Enclosed Salt & Sand Storage Facl~ty
Fire Slatk,11 and 2 Refurbishing
Capital Replacement Fund Total
ProJect~
EQ-O01
EQ-O02
EQ-O03
EQ-O05
EQ-O07
~¢-0~0
EC-011
EC-014
EC-015
EC-O1B
EC-01?
EC-Olg
EC-021
EC-022
EC-023
EQ-024
EQ-025
EQ-027
EQ-028
EQ-029
EQ-030
EQ-031
EQ-033
EQ-034
EQ.035
EQ..036
EQ-037
EQ..038
EQ.039
EQ-042
EQ-043
EQ-045
EQ..047
MB-O04
Priority 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
35,0O0 35,00O
10,000 10,000
100,00O 50,000 150,000
20,000 20,000
2,000 1,000 1,000 1,00O 5,000
15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 60,000
9,200 9,200
9,000 9,000 9,000 9,00O 36,000
22,000 24,000 25,0O0 26,000 97,000
252,000 140,000 133,000 525,0O0
140,000 140,0O0
45,0O0 45,00O
21,0O0 21,000
8,000 8,00O
100,000 15,00O 115,000
115,000 113,00O 116,0O0 3~4,000
5,000 5,000
0 0
20,000 27,0O0 47,0OO
30,00O 45,0O0 75,000
6,000 6,000
7,0O0 7,00O
41,0O0 41,000
6,000 6,000 $,000 18,00O
12,000 12,000 24,000
8,50O 8,50O
10,0O0 10,000
75,000 75,00O
200,000 1,200,000 1,400,0O0
100,00O 100,000
31,0O0 31,000
399,700 625,000 379,000 960,000 t,659,00O 4,022,700
Page 2 of $ Thursday, November 08, 2001
~ouree ProJeet~ Priority 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Totnl
General ]~und
Computer ~pgrades
RecmnGon Cen~ ~ R~
Oar~r ~ou~y Co~murity D~no~rn~ P~rtr~
Anntnl ~ I~ Progrnm
Gene~ Pnnd Torn1
EQ-013
EQ-046
EQ-047
ST-012
3 5,000 5,000
0 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 20,000
0 255,000 265,000 275,000 275,000 285,000 1,355,000
326,500 316,200 342,200 342,9(X) 290,000 .. 1,617,800
MSA
Lyman Bird 0Nest City Llmls to TH 101)
atttmax~ Oveday: Saddlaxook Curie
~ ~ West 78lh St.
MSA Tota]
ST-004
ST-005
ST..006
ST-007
ST-008
ST-009
ST-010
ST-011
95,000
18,000
140,000
110,000
15,000
3,900,000 3.90C),000
95,000
18.(X)0
140,000
110,000
15,000
170,000 170,000
125,000 125,(~X)
Park Dedication Fund
Impmvemen~ Bandimem Community Park
~ c~/Center Park
Playground Equipment: Cuny Farms Park
Signage: Kerber Prod Park
Roundho~e Renovation: RourKIho~e Park
Tral~ Bandirnere Pa~ to ChanhasBen His
'l'rat ~ 101 (S. Sh~m Dr. to Tmmim Dr.)
Mm~ G~ Tml Connac~
Tme Planlings
'rras~ Recaplad~
PK&T-O01
PK&T-003
PK&T~
PK&T-O05
PK&T-O06
PK&T-O08
PK&T-O09
PK&T-011
PK&T-012
PK&T-013
PK&T-014
PK&T.O15
PK&T-018
PK&T.021
PK&T.O22
PK&T-023
PK&T~
PK&T.O25
250,000
15~X)0
7Ax)
20,000
10,000
25,000 40,000
275,000 100,000
40,000
10,000
50,000
0
30,000
0
175,000
15,000
65,000
375,000
40,000
10,000
50,000
0
30,000
0
250,000
850,000
485,000
68,000
15,000
175,000
15,000
7,500
10,000
Pa~ 3 of 5 77~a~d=y, November 08. 2001
Source ProJect~ Priority
Sewer & Water Assessments
~nltary Sewer:. LC-1 8S4)02
Sanll~ Sewor: Be.,-8 88-003
Sanltery Sewer:. BC-9 S8-0O4
Sanltery Sewec BC-2 (PorlJon) SS-0O5
Lake. Riley Trunk II W-0O5
warm' Improvemeals: TH 41 W-0O6'
Water Improvements: Manchester Dr. W-0O7
Water Improvement: Mlnnewashte Loop W-0O8
Water Improvernen~: BC-1 (TC&W - Lyrnan) W-0O9
Water Improvement~ Lyman, Audubon, Powers W-010
Sewer & Water Assessments Total
Sewer & Water Expansion Fund
Public Works Fadlty Expansion MB-003 0
SC, ADA System Repair & Maintenance SS-010 0
Well ~9 W-001 0
Well #10 W-002 0
We~ #11 W-0O3 0
WaterTower (2MG): Lyman Blvd. W-0O4 0 '
Water Treatment Rant 1 W-011 0
RepaintS: West 76th St. Water Tower W-015 0
Sewer & Water Expansion Fund Total
Sewer & Water Utility Fund
Sump Pump Inspections SS-006
General Repairs (Emergency/Unplanned) SS-007
'l'etevlse Sewer Unes SS-0O8
Repair Manhola~, Inlitratlon/Inflow (I/I) 8S-0O9
General Water System Repalm W-013
SCADA Sy~em Upgrades/Maintenance W-014
Ut~ty Ra~ Study W-017
Wa~I #12 W-018
Water Treatment Plant II W-019
Sewer & Water UtiLity F~tad TotaJ
Street Assessments
Century B~. ST-002
Street Assessments Total
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Totnl
0 200,000 200,000
0 400,000 400,000
0 315,000 315,000
0 80,000 350,000 430,0o0
0 110,000 1.10,000'
0 130,000 130,0O'0
0 270,000 270,000
0 400,000 400,00O
0 370,000 210,000 580,000
1,245,000 51,5,000 8,50,000 S60,O00 3,170,000
75,000 675,000 750,0O0
75,0O0 .3,300,000 3,375,0O0
500,000 3,50O,0O0 4,00O,000.
40,00O .40,00O
625,000 3,655,000 862,000 3,990,000 1,175,000 10,307,000
25,000 25,000 25,0O0 25,000 100,000
50,00O 50,0O0 60,000 60,000 220,000 '
15,0O0 15,000 30,00O
120,000 120,000 120,0O0 380,C)00
45,0O0 50,0O0 50,0O0. 50,0O0 195,00O
100,00O 10,000 10,000 10,0O0 130,00O
380,000 150,000 285,000 145,000 697,000 1,~7,000
40,000 40,000
40,000 40,000
Page 4 of 5 77mrzday, November 08, 2001
Surface Water Utility Fund
I. aka Wlnnawaahla Walmshed
flk~ Cnmc Afar Ex~ Ponds
S~-face Water Utility Ftmd Total
Television (Cable) Fund
Atm3o/V~nl F=qt~pm~nt
Telerision (Cable) Ftmd Total
Youth Sports Ass'n Contribution
I~ Bandm C~mun~ Park
Youth Sports Ass'n Contribution
Total
VroJect~
EQ-026
Priority 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
200,000
210,000
150,000
175,000
215,000
275,000
50,000
150,000
150,000
175,000
2(X),O00
210,000
215,000
0 10,000 . IO,ODO 10,000 10,000 10,000 50,(X)O
10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 50,000
PK&T.O01 0 0 0
0 0
10,334,700 . 7,5'/1,200 7,408,200 6,182,900 3,831~00
ihl~ $ of 5 ~,.Now. mber 08. 2001
CAPITAI, PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
SOURCES OF RE~ SUMMARY
2002 thru 2006
Source
·
CapitaJ Replacement Fund
GeaeraJ Fund
Park DedlcalJoa Fund
Sewa' & Water
Sewa' & Water Expansion Fund
Sewer & Water Utility Fund
Surface Wata' Ulility Fund
Tetevt~on (Cable) Fund
Youth Sporls Ass'n Contrll~tion
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
6,000,000 0
399,700 625,000 379,000 960,000 1,659,000
328,500 316,200 342,200 342,900 290,000
378,000 170,000 4,025,000
370,500 1,715,000 225,000 175,000
1,245,000 515,000 850,000 560,000
625,000 3,655,000 882,000 3,990,000 1,175,000
380,000 150,000 265,000 145,000 697,000
560,000 415,000 450,000
10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000
0
Total
6,000,000
4,022,700
1,617,800
4,573,000
2,485,500
3,170,000
10,307,000
1,637,000
1,425,000
.0
Total 10,334,700 7,571,200 7,408,200 8,182,900 3,831,000 35,328,000
Page 1 of I Thursday, November 08, 2001
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
20O2
Project#
Project Name
v.O-ool
lOOft. Aerial Ladder Refurbishing
2006
Contact
Usefnl Life
Pdorlty n/a
upgrading the pump to handle 2000 gnllons per minute and class A foam, replncing ~ nxcls and suspension sysmns, sddln~ a second mast= steam and nddin~
SCB~ to thc Officer's scat.
1989 Simon LTl)
Thb vehicle b ~xpcc~ t~ last 30 years. Thc recommended ~u~rbi~hment will kccp thc ladd= vi~b~ flmction~ ~! saf~ o~ th~ ~d es well as in thc air. Thc
project is consistent with thc City Vehicle replacement schcdulc nnd ndvice ~ fleet mnintmnnce.
Leave as is - no clumgcs for 2002.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Maintenance Equipment 35J)00 35,000
Total 35,000 3s,o~
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Capital Replacement Fund 3~J)00 35,IXX} '
Total 3s,olm 3s. ooo
Ic~Ugiblc additional operating co~ am anticipated.
I
CAPITAL PLAN
2002 thru
City of Chanhassen, MN
I ProJect # EQ-002
I Project Nme Boat/Trailer/Motor Replacement
I
2006
Contact
Department Major Equipm~t
Type Equipmeat
Useful Life
Category Fire Equipment
Priority
Desa'iption I
Involves adding a dive/rescue boat, trailer and motor. This watercr~ is thc primary r~spons¢ unit for dive-rdated emergencies in thc lakes and thc Minnesota
River. It is used to transport rescuers and remove victims in near-drowning and drowning incidents, for fast water rescues in the Minnesota River, recovery
activities, dive team support, access to fllooded areas during high water emergencies, ctc.
-- :
i Sustifi~tion ;
[The dive tcarn needs a boat for thei~ operations.
~OTE: Fire Department recommends moving up schedule from 2003 at $10,000.00 to 2002. Justification - in water-related fatalities in year ending 2000 and 2001,
f ¢ Fire Department has initiated aggressive restructuring, training and certifying new divers. By yeaffs end the Fire Department will have 15 certified divers. Part
tl~ equipment for a safe dive operation is adding a zodiak boat, new motor and trailer. The estimated cost is $10,000.00
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Maintenance Equipment 10,000 10,000
Total t0,0o0 lO,0OO
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Capital Replacement Fund 10,000 10,000
Total t0,000 10,000
cgligiblc additional operating costs ar~ anticipated.
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chan~sen, MN
2OO2
Project #
Project Name
EQ-003
Fire Dept: 800 MHz Radio System
thru
20O6
Contact
Usefal Life
Priority n/a
Involves changing the Fire De~nmnent radios to 800 mHz when Carver County makes its county-wide conversion. The cx~ting systctn will beg~n to be pleased out
in 2002, continuing through 2004.
Justification
Tbe new system should improve radio coverage and provide additional ~nnnels for operations. R nllow~ ~ F~ ~ to continn~ to use tbe Cnrv~ County
Communication~ Center. Carver County is migrating to a new radio/communication platform. This will improve inter-agency communication, radio
and fun~onality. This one time expense is pmject~ at $150,000.00 to convut ~te existJn~ radio sy~om to 800 mHz.
Expenditure~ 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
MnlrCmnance Equipment 100JXi0 50,000 150,000
Total 100~00 50,000 150,000
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 200~ 2006 Total
Total 1oo0oo 50,0o0
Io ndditional oixt~ting corn are .nticipa~l.
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chsnhass~, MN
2002 t~-u 2006
EQ-00$
Fire Dept.: Thermal Rescue Device
Contact
Department Major Equipment
Type Equipment
Useful Life
Category Fire Equipment
PrloriP/
,Description
iInvolves purchasing one thermal imaging rescue device over a 3-year period (2000-2002).
l'hcsc devices arc used by firefighters while searching for victims inside of the building during a structure fire. The device enables the firefightcr to see clearly while
navigating it dark smoke-filled structure using infrared technology. Without this technology, fircfightcrs arc subject to dangerous zero-visibility conditions. This
'technology will speed up firefighting opcxntions significantly.
'Aecoum//400-4102-4705
I
' Su~tification
[This project will enhance firefighter safety significantly, improve firefighting operations and allow for fast and safc victim searches. This is consistent with the
',City's risk management policy.
1
Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
] 40,000 ] Maintenance Equipment 20,000 20,000
Total Total ~,000 ~,000.
Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
[ 40,000] Capital Replacement Fund 20,000 20,000
Total Total 20,000
J Oporation~ Im~ot~r J
IThis project may lower payroll expenses for paid on-call staffas a resuh of improwd and more cfficient fire fighting operations.
i
I
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chauhassen, MN
2002
ProJtt~ Name
EQ-007
Fire Dept.: 1 314 Inch Hose
t/wu
2006
C~mm~
Priority
Involves rcplacin$ thc existing 1 1/2' hose with a 1 3/4' hose. This hos~ is connect! to ~ fire Ixuc.~ and is used by th~ f~-iighlrr2 to exl~ou~_h fir~ Them am 2
itrucks rcnmining that need this conv~ion - one truck will bc converted in 2000.
I
I
Thc existing Imse is owr 1 $ y~ars old. The larger hos~ allows for significant impmwm~nt in ~ flow, which in turn, ~d~mc,~s fimfighting c~pabiliti~s.
,NOTE: $2000.00 to r~pl~o~ hos~ darrm~d du~ to fir~fightin&
Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
I 5~5001 Maintenance Equipment 2,000 1~00 1,000 I~XX) 5,000
Total Total
Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 200S 2006 Total
[ 5,500] Capital Replacement Fund 2,000 1,000 1,000 1,1X}O 5,000
Total Total 2j)oo t~x~o ~J~l ~.ooo s, ooo
o ~lhio~l opcming corn ~re mticip~d.
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
2002
Project Name
EQ-009
Fire Dept.: Laptop Computers
thru
2006
Contact
Department M~or Ecluipm~nt
T~I~ Equipn'~t
Useful Life
Category Offic~ F_.quipmmt
Priority n/a
Description
.Involves installing lapmps in ali front-linc vehicles to enable responding personnel to access building pre-plans, hazardous materials data, hydrant and other utility
:maps, address locations, etc. Pre-Plans and Address Locations ar~ planned for 2006 and defer remainder to 2006.
I
,
i Justification
project will enhance Fire Department operations, allowing for increased safety as a result of easy access to important information. It will also makc it easier to
!find best routes and/or alternative routes when responding to emergencies.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Office Equipment 50,000 50,000
Total . ~,000 .50,000
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Capital Replacement Fund 50,000
Total ~0,000 ~0,000
:10 tractional Impa~Othor --~]
o additional operating costs arc anticipntcd.
I
I
I
CAPITAL PLAN 2oo2
City of Chanhass~a, MN
~o~t# EQ-010
~rol~tsm~. Fire Dept: PPE (Turnou .t/Helmets)
thru
2O06
Con.ct
Department
Useful Life
Priority .n/a
D~ription
Replacement of 3-5 sets per Far as a result of damage received from fu~ghting activities. The City will also provide new meznbe~ with new ~ aftrr they
~m~plete their probationary period.
Account ~ 105-4705
Justification
Turnout g~r lasts approximately 5-7 y~ars on avon..
NOTE: Tumoverk~ircmcnt hav~ macIc it nc~'y to add mcxc flr~ghtlm~. Instrad of adding five to six w~ am now adding ~ight to nine additional p~r y~lr.
Additional new turnout goer needs to b~ oetl~:d to rcplnce damag~ or ~ out Cgluipm~nt. ~ of ~luipping on~ ~ f].r~ghi~r ia at)pl~ittm~ $1500.00.
Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
[ 20,0001 Maintenance Equipment 15,000 15JX)0 15.000 15,000 60,000
Total Total
..
Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
[ 20J3001 Capital Replacement Fund 15,000 15,000 15.000 15.000 - 60.000
Total Total t5.000 15,1X]0 15,000 15,000
[No ndd~ operating costs am anticipated.
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
2002 thru 2006
ProJect #
ProJect Name
EQ-011
Fire Dept.: Cascade System Air Bottle Refill
Contact
Depnrtment Major Equipment
Type Equipment
Useful Life
Category Fire Equiprncot
Priority tva
!Description
,The Cascade S~,~tem is used t~ refill the SCBA (air packs) used by fircfighters. The system is used frequently and it is anticipated that it will need to be refurbished
i
'.
I
!Justification
II) $5,000.00 ne~.ded for OSHA required blast containment system for filling air bot'fles (both firefighting and SCUBA tanks).
Aerial truck breathing air tanks and piping need m increase from our old 2500 psi breathing air system to our current 4500 psi. This would involve ins'tailing new I
ihigh pressured air lines and tanks - $1200.00.
Add additional breathing masks for new firefighters - $2000.00.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Maintenance Equipment 9,200 9,200
Total 9,200 9,200
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Capital Replacement Fund 9,200 9,200
Total 9~0 9~0
!
o additional operating costs are anticipated.
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chnnhassen, MN
20O2
Project #
Project Name
EQ-013
Computer Purchases/Upgrades
thru
2006
Contact
Useful Ltfe
Prlortt~ n/a
Funds the purchase of replacean~nt PCs, local area net~xx~rk equipment, ney. york and local printa~, po'iph~tal har&va~ and all n~,m~atc and common-us= software.
The n~laomu~ schedule wns reviewed by the I.T. Tnsk Force and is subject to rnodificaitons by the City Manager s.nd Department Heads.
Account # 101-1160=4703
1998, the l.S. Coordinntor deveoped a replacement schedule for this equipment. It was based on the following useful lif~ expectancies:
1.3-5 years - PCs, network servo's
..~uU~. and purclmsing PCs through this project allows the City grmter flexibility to direr equipment to where it is _n,':~__~ most, mth=- than using individual
Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
164.,500 [ Office Equipment 66.,500 46,200 62.200 62,900 237.800
Total Total ~00 ~ ~ ~ 237,~00
Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
78,100 [ C-mneml Fund 66,,500 46,200 62.200 62.900 237.800
Total Total ~00 4~00 ~ ~ ~a7~o0
qo ~ddifionnl operating costs nrc anticipated.
I
CAPITAL PLAN 2002
City of Chanhassen, MN
EQ-014
ProJect name Telecommunication Purchases/Upgrades
thru
2006
Contact
Department
Type
Useful Life
Category
Major Equipment
Equipment
Office Equipment
Priority. n/a
!
; D~sca'iption
ilnvolves the purchnse of replacement telephone equipment and transport utiliies required to interconnect City Hail, Public Works and the Recreation Center. Items
,wcr~ reviewed by the 1999 I.T. Tnsk Force. Phase I fiber build hns been recommended by both the Tnsk Force and the City's consultant. All project phases are
isubject to modifications by the City Manager and Department Heads. THIS PROJECT IS ON HOLD PENDING FURTHER REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE
·
~ccount g400-4101-4703
t
'Justification
!The City Hall phone system is operating at capacity. No additional ph~ can be added without a significant inv~tment to ~pand the already-outdated --
itechnology. Migrating the CiCa phone services to one central location over n private municipal fiber allows for consolidation of ail incoming lines, greater
fledbility in response to incoming calls and the eliminations of monthly line charges for both voice and data. Phone switching equipment in Public Works and
Recreation Center could be replaced with new equipment that operates directly fxom the City Hall switch a_ftcr ATM is implemented.
Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
2 3,oooI Office Equipment 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000
Total' Total 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 35,000 -
·
Prior Funding Sources 2002 . 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
I 233,000 [ Capital Replacement Fund 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 36,000
Total Total 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,oo0 36,000
City would in~r additional maintenanc~ charges on the ATM hardware.
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
2002
IProject #
Project Name
I
Community Dev.: Light Du~ Truck~
thru
2006
Contact
Priority n/a-
'Provides for scheduled replacements, starting in 2001. These purchases arc consistent with the Vchiclc Replacement Schedule. R~leccment units nrc gcnentlly
ipurchased early in the year to accommodate the time framm established by Hennepin County and the State of~ Cooperative Ptn'chnsing Progrnm.
h~a:o~t ~ 10'/4704
!
These vehicles are used to provide building inspection services throughout the community. The av~a~ replacement ng~ is I0 yvatrs.
Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Future
I 21,0001 Maintenance Equipment 22,000 24,000 =,ooo I
Total To'mi 22,0oo 24,000 25000 s2,000 123,000 Total
Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
] 21,000 ] Capital Replacement Fund 22,000 24,000 25,000 26.000 97,000
Total Total 22,000 24dX)O 25000 26000 07,000
I
:se purchnses will include a limited wnn'anty nnd will reduce the nnnual mnintcnnncc and rClmir co~s ns comtmmd to the vehide~ mplnced.
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
[ Proj~ # EQ-016
2002 t~u
I Project Name
Dump/Plow Truck Replacements/Additions
2006
Contact
Department M~jor Equipment
Type Equipment
U~eful Life
Category Street Equipment
PrloH~ n/a
] Doscripfion
'Th~se purchases anticipate $ scheduled replacements and 2 additional dump trucks in the Cit}~s inventory. Costs include chassis, dump box, h}~]raulic system,
'snow wing, snow plow and sander. Truck chassis costs are higher du~ to new federal mandated anti-lock braking re4uimmcnts effective since 2000. These vchiclas
!sr~ purchased using eihher the Hennepin County or State of MN cooperativ~ bid systems. Orders for truck chassis sr~ typically r~luir~l to be placed up to one year
!in advance at'delivay.
I
]Account/t400-4108-4704
I Sustificafion ~
,
rThcse vehicles are used to provide a variety of maintenance services throughout thc community including winjtcr emergency response for plowing and hauling
snow. The average replacement age is 16.5 years. Winter emergency service necessitates these vehicles be reliable and dependnblc, Growth in the community
creates an additional plow route approximntely every 3 years. The truck scheduled for replacement in 2000 is a 1984 model (57,000 miles), Due to this truck's
current value of $5,000, it will be kept in the fleet as n bnckup. These vehicle purchases nrc consistent with the Vchiele Replacement Schedule.
Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
233,000 [ Vehicles 252,000 140,000 133,000 525,000
Total Total 252,000 140,000 133,000 52~,000
·
.
Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2008 2006 Total
[ 233,000 [ Capital Replacement Fund 252,000 140,000 133,000 525,000
Total Total 2~.,o~ 14~ 133,000 52,%0~0
I
{ Operational Impa~t/Oth~ ,
These purchnses will include a limited wnrranty and will reduce thc annual maintenance and repair costs as compared to thc vehicles replaced.
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
20O2 thru
[r~oj~ # EQ-017
rroj~ Name Street Sweeper
2O06
Conm~t
U~3~d Ufe
PrloHt~
sm~t~
I
This project replaces the 1992 Athey Sweeper which is used to clean stre~ each spring and fail
q'his unit is subject to he'av~-d~-s-~ ~d~ dirt infiltration and needs regular maintenance to continue in running condition.
!
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 . Totnl
Vehicles 140,000 140,000
.
Total '!40,000 - 140,o~
.- ..
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 200~ .2006 Total
Capital I:~placement Fund 140,000 140,000
Total 140,000 140,000
CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006
Contact
City of C~.q~_s MN Department Major Equipment
[ Project # EQ-019 [ Type Equipment
ProJect Name Vibratory Roll Packer u~ Life
[ i Category Street Equipmeat
Priority n/a
IPurchase is scheduled to replace the 1987 Rosco Vibratory Roll Pack'er. The purchase is consistent with the Vehicle Replacement Schedule (lst Quarter of 2002).
Justification
.This machine is used extensively in the patching and overlaying of City streets. The existing unit will be 15 years old. :
I
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Vehicles 45,000 45,000
Total 45,000 45,000
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Capital Replacement Fund 45,000 45,000
Total 4,5,000 4,~000
I ·
Ol'~ TmpafflJOth~r I -
?ii~ purchase will include a limited warranty and will r~luce the mutual maintenance and repair costs as compared to the machine replaced.
,
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
2002 th~, 2006
~oj~t# EQ-021
Project Name Equipment Trailers
Conttct
U~ehfl L~
Priority n/a
Provides for replacement of an e~isting and and addition of a 20,000 lb (I0 ton) capacity tand~m axle trailer.
Fund
These trailers am used extensively in thc paving operation to mmsport the paver machine, mil packer and bobcat to each job site. Thc existing trailer is 20 years old
md c~nnot haul all of the equipment togelher. This is consistent with th~ Vehicle Rgp~t Schedule,.
Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
I 20~0 [ Maintenance Equipment 22,0OO 22,000
Total Total
22,OOO ~000
Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 200~ 2006 Total
I a'~l c,~t ~b~.~or~ Fur~ ,
Total Total 22,000 ~,0OO
Both purch~es includ~ a limited w~rmnty.
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
2002 thru 2006
Project# EQ-022
ProJect Name Tar Kettle
Contact
Department M~jor Equipment
Type Equipnmt
Useful Life
Category Street Fxluipment
Priority n/a
DesariptionI'
Provides for replacement of the existing tar kettle.
'Justification '
.The existing tar kettle is used extensively in the p~vemcnt m~inten~nc~ operations. Due to the n~tum of its u~e, the life expecteney is approximately 5-6 y~ars. This
.i~ consistent with the Equipment Rephw~ment Schedule.
I
;
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Maintenance Equipment 21,000 21,000
Total 21,000 2i,000
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Capital Replacement Fund 21,000 21,000
Total 21,000 21,000
~This purchase will include a limited warranty and will eliminate an expensive overhaul on thc existing unit.
.
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
~,,~t# EQ-023
]'rolm ~am~ Ford 555C Backhoe
'Provides for the replac~nent of ma existing 1989 Tractor Backhoe.
;
·
I
2OO2
thru
2006
The tractor backhoe is used extemively in mnintenmace operntiom. Thc existing machine cm'rently has 2,300 horns ofusa~ mad will be nearly 15 y~us old nt thc
:time ofsclmduled r~plac~n~nt Thi~ is ~on~i~nt with tbe Equipmmt Rq~l~aan~nt Sch~lulo.
·
I
I
·
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Maintenance Equlpmont 68,000 68,000
Total
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Capitnl F~q:)lecement Fund 68,000 ~.000
Total ~.__mO ~
is pmchas~ will include a Iimi~d ~ mad will rcducg thc nnntud tnnhi~-,nnce and repnh' cosls ns companxl to tim mae, hin~ r~plnced.
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
I
2002 thru 2006
ProJeU# EQ-024
Project Name Crack Sealer
C. ont~ct
Department M~joF F_,quipm~nt
Tyl~ Equipmmt
U~eful Life
Category
Priority fda
Description
Provides for the replacement of an existing crack sealing machine.
Justification
.The crack sealer is used extensively in the pavement maintenance operations. Due to the nature of its usc, the life expectency is approximately 6-8 years. This is
;consistent with the Equipment Replacement Schedule.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Maintenance Equipment 40,000 40,000
Total 40,000 40,000
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Capital Replacement Fund 40,000 40,000
Total 4o,000 4o,0o0
I Opol'afional Tm?sct/Othor
~Fhis purchase will include a limited warranty and will reduce thc annual maintenance and repair costs as compared to thc e~isting unit
I
I
I
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
2002
ProJ~t# EQ-025
ProJ~ N=me Line Striper
thru
2006
Contact
Department
Useful Life
Provides for thc replacement of an c~isting linc-striping machine.
-. .
!Justification
!This machine is used'~-i~aint pavement markings and stripe lanes on roads. This purchase will ensure timely and reliable pavement marL~g operations. It is
consistent with the Equipment Replacement Schedule.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 - Tohd
Maintenance Equipment 8,000 8,000
Total S,000 s,000
..
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
CnplMI Rsplacenmnt Fund 8,000 8,000
Total
purchme will include n iimiled warranty.
CAPITAL PLAN
C~ty of Chanhassen, MN
2002
[?roJ~ # EQ-026
, P~oJect ~ame Audio/Visual Equipment
thru
2006
Contact
Department Ivl~jor Equipment
Type Equipment
Useful Life
Category
Priority n/a
I Description
·
iProvides for thc s~tcmatic maintenance and upgrading of audio/visual equipment. Replacement will occur in the Ist Quarter of 2003.
Account #210-0000-4705
: Juafifi~fion
original A/V equipment was purchased in 19S9 with the remainder purchased in 1994 This project calls/'or the systematic maintenance and upgrading of the
'
equipment and additional equipment as new technology develops. Potential projects include: replacement of equipment including, but not limited to, replacing
spotlight syata'n in the Council Chambers and staff microphones. These r~placements will ensur~ the quality of official City m~:tinga and video productions.
Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
20,000 ] Maintenance Equipment 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 50,000
Total Total 10,000 10,000 t0,000 10,000 10,000 50,000
Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
20,0001 Television (Cable) Fund 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 . 50,000
Total Total I0,000 10,000 t0~)00 10~00 10,000 50,000
] Operational
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
Project#
Project Name
EQ-027
Copier Replacements
thru
2006
Contact
U~'ul Life
. Priority n/a
Provides for the purchase of replacement copiers for all City departments. Thc copiers sill b~ evaluated each year and replaced as necessary. The manufacturers
have stopped making replacement parts for some copiers in our inventory, so tt~'T ~ ~ed lo b~ ri:placed if pe'ts a~tbility becomes problematic.
Acctmm 0400-4109-4703
The project x~ll replace copiers as the)' become obsolete of maintenance costs escalate to unacceptable levels. The nmnuf~ have stopped making n.-placernent
.parts for some copiers in our inventory, so they will need to be replaced if parts availability becomes problematic. Copiers arc genearlly replaced on a 7 ~zar
Iscbedulc. Thc 2000 budget will replace one of thc five copiers Iocal~ in various City departments.
I
Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Totnl
I 12,0001 Maintenance Equipment 100,000 15.000 115J:)00
Total Total 100,000 15,000 115,000
Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
12,0001 Cspitel Replscet'nent Fund 100,000 15,CXX) 115,Q00
Total Total 100,000 l~X)e t15,000
01~'ntkm~ Tmpact/Ott~
These purchases will decrease annual maintenance costs becnuse equipment is gea=a~ mere mlinblc thnn ead]= rix)deb.
CAPITAL PLAN 2002
City of Chsnhsssen, MN
[VroJm # EQ-028
rroJectName Groundsmaster 580 Mower Replacement
thru 2006
Contact
Department
Type
Useful Life
Category
Priority.
Major Equipment
F. quipme~
Provides for 1 addition to and I replacement of an existing T--~ro 580, '15 foot, high volume grounds mower.
I
.Account ~u100-0000-4705
1
'Justification ----:
The City currently ~s~ high'-i~rod~:~i0~'~u~ds-m~,,:ers -that cut a 15' pass. Each r~achine is used daily during ~ g~,vi~g-~so-~'~n-d ia~ th~ place of 2 ia' ' ~:
smaller machines used by the City. Due to additional park developmenL an additional high-capacity machine is needed. The oldest machine is scheduled to be
replaced in 2002. This is consistent with the Equipment Replacement Schedule.
I
I
Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
72,042 ] Maintenance Equipment
Total
85,000 85,000
Total Total 85,ooo ~,ooo
Prior Funding Sources 2002 . 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
72,o421 Capital Replacement Fund 85,000 85,000
Totnl Total ~,000
iOperational Tmpact/Oflu~ [ . - ' -
~This ptur. Jutse will include a limited wnn'anty and reduce maintenance and repair expenses as compared to thc unit replaced. Also, cech of these machines takes thc I
~plnce of 2 1/2 smaller machines and makes thc mowing operation 150% more effici~L I
, I
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
2002
Project#
Project Nsme
EQ-029
Public Works: Light Duty Trucks
th~u
2OO6
Contstet
Usefal Life
Cat~gory
Prlorlt/. n/a-
Provides for 16 scheduled replacement Public Works light duty trucks, some with plows. Replacement uni~ are generally purchnsed early in the yem' in order to
iaccommod*~- the time frames established by Hennepin County and the Stale of MN Coopenlfiv~ Purchasing Program.
meet growth needs in the maintenance operations. These purchases are consistent with the Vehicle Replacement
·
I
Expenditures 2002 · 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Maintenance Equipment 113,000 113,000 116,000 342,000
Total 113,000 113,000 '11,,000 342,000
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Cnpitnl Replacement Fund 115.000 113,000 116.000 344,000
purchases will include a limited wammty and will reduce annual mnintennnce and repair costs ns ~ to the vehicles replaced.
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chauhassen, MN
2002
!erol~t # EQ-030
Project N. me Bobcat Snow Blower
thru
2006
Contact
Department
U~eful Life
Category
Priority
Major Equipment
Equipment
n/a
,'Description ·
Provides for r~placement of an existing Bobcat Snow Blower.
·
!Justification ]
:
"i:h"~'~ist~n~ unit ~.~il[{~ -i :i >tan old and is at the end of its useful life. Rebuilding is not cost effective. This purchase is consistent wilh the Equipment
Replacement Sch~ule.
·
:
:
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Maintenance Equipment 5,000 5,000
Total 5,000 5,000
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Capital Replacement Fund 5,000 5,000
Total 5,000 ~00
!
Operational lmpact~Other · }
This purchase will includ~ a limited warranty and will r~duce thi annual maintenance and repair costs as compared to the existin8 unit.
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
2002 thru 2006
EQ-031
Tracks for Bobcat
Contact
n~partment
Useful Life
Priority n/a
;Pmvidc~ for the replacement of rubber tracks for thc existing Bobcat.
1
I
I
....
~ curr~t wea~ on backs indi~at~"they will lsat only 2-3 more years. This project is consistent wibh the Eq~'x~at ReplBcemmt Schedu]e~
;
i
!
I
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Totnl
Maintenance Equipment 0 0
Total
.- ..
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Total
Capital Replacement Fund 0 0
Total o o
imrchase will not increase nmintmnnce or ~ expenses.
CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006
Contact
City of Chanhassen, MN Department Major Equipment
IPr°jest # EQ-033 I Type Equipment
Useful Life
Project Name Bobcat
Category
Priority n/a
Provides for replacement of an existing 1994 model Park Maintenance Dept. bobcat.
I
:
:
I
;
I
i Justification ...........
.Thc existing bobcat will be 8 years old in 2002,'Wi~ n~ estin~nted 2,750 hours of usage and a mnjor overhaul is needed. Improvcments to thc design mean that if is
ibetter operntionaily to purchase a new machine rather than overhnuling the old.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Maintonanc~ Equipmont 30,000 30,000
Total 30,000 ao,ooo
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Capital Replacement Fund 30,000 30,000
Total 30,000 30,000
This pmr, hnse will include a warranty and will reduce the annual maintenance.and repair costs ns compared to the existing uniL
Operating Budget Impact 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Maintenance 2,000 2,000
Total 2,000 2,000
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
20O2
ProJect#
]'roJ~ Name
EQ-034
Grounds Mower Replacement
thru
20O6
Col
Usefnl Life
Priority
Provides for replacement of 4 existing lawn mowers over five years.
With the anmunt ofpnrkland growing each yeau, there i~'incrensed w~ar and t~r on the City~ lawn mow~s. Timy am 12-16 years old and are not dependable.
Rebuilding is not cost e~ve. This is consistent with the Equipment Replacement Schedule.
Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
I 18,4521 Maintenance Equipment 20,000 2'/,000 47,000
Total Total 20J)00 27.000 47,1)00-
Prior Funding Sources 2602 2003 2004 200~ 2006 Total
20,0001 Capit. I Replacement Fund 20,000 27,000 47,000
Total Total 20,000 B',lm0 47,m)0
purclmse will include a limited wanan and will ~ducc the annual ~ and ~ah' cos~ m ~ m tho ~ uniL
I
CAPITAL PLAN 2002 t/~ru 2006
Contact
City of Chanha sen, MN Department
i ProJect # EQ-035 I Type
Project Name Tractor Usefnl Life
Category
-' Prtorlty -n/a
Major Equipment
Equipment
Provides for replacement of 3 existing tractors over a five year period.
iAc~a~mt g400-4111-4705
I
·
Justification
.'2000: Unit is 27 yeats old with an estimated 4,500 hours of usage. It is used for a variety of Park Maintenance activities, including fertilizing, spraying, grading,
etc. The n~v unit will be used for sweeping skating rin~. THIS WILL BE DELAYED UNTIL 2001 FOR A SIGNIFICANTLY REDESIGNED MODEL.
2002: Unit is 52 years old. It is smaller, used for seeding parks, raking beaches, grading and ballfield maintenance.
2003: Unit is 16 years old and is not dependable. Rebuilding is not cost effective. It is used for sweeping rinks and mills, grading/leveling parks, fextilizing mad
.weed control.
'This project is consistent with the Equipment Replacement Schedule_
Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
[ 43,900 J Maintenance Equipment 30,000 45,000 75,000
Total Total -30,000 45,000 75,000
Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
43,~00 [ Capital Replacement Fund 30,000 45,000 75,000
Total Total 30,000 45,000 7.%000 -
iThi~ purchase will include a limit~l win'rarity and will reduc~ the annual maint~mnce and repair costs as compared to thc existing unit.
!
,,
,,
i
CAPITAL PLAN
City of'Chanhassen, MN
20O2
I~]~t # EQ-036
Project Name Tractor Boom
thru
20O6
Contact
Deptrtment
Useful Ufe
Priority
!Provides for replacement of a Tractor Broom and head for the Ford tractor.
' Sustificstion
-Thc swcq~ broom for the tractor is used extensiveJy in fl~c street sweeping operation and typically has a useful life of 7-8 years. This is consistent with the
Equipment Replacement Schedule.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 ' 2006 Total
Maintenance Equipment 6,000 6,000
Total 6,ooo 6,ooo
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 200~ 2006 Total
Capital Replacement Fund 6,000 6,000
is purclm~ will not inc~a.~ maintmmnc~ and repair
i
I
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
2002
I
' r~o~m # EQ-037
Project Name Trailer
thru
2006
Contact
Department
Type
Useful Life
Category
.PHorlty
Major Equipment
Equipmeat
n/a
'Provides for addition of a trailer to the ~isting Park inventory.
!
_..
~ Justification
!Trailer is needed to U-ansport medium-sized mowers to neighborhood parks. This is consistent with the Equipment Replacement Schedule.
!
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Maintenance Equipment 7,000 7,000
Total ?,ooo 1,ooo
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Capital Replacement Fund 7,000 7,000
Total ?J~OO 1,0o0
e purcha~ will include a limited warranty.
CAPITAL PLAN
City of sen, MN
2OO2
ProJeet#
Project Name
EQ-038
Grounds Mower Replacement (10')
thru
Contact
Oepartment
Usefal Life
I
IPtovides for addition ora lO;~igh-volume grounds mower.
,
I
iconsistent with thc Equipment Replacement Schedule.
I
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 To~al
Maintenance Equipment 41,000 41,000
Total 41,000 41,000
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Capital Replacement Fund 41,000 41,000
Total 4t,000 4t,000
is~ would replace the transporting of 2 smaller mowe~ to srnalle~ neighbodxxxi patios and reduce mowing
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
2002 thru 2006
I
· Project #
I Project Name
EQ-039
Upgrade 217 Grass Rig Pump/Motor/Water Tank
Contact
Department M~or Equipn~nt
Type Equipment
Useful Life
Category Equipment
Priority n/n
jit sea-v~ its purpo~, but it will be 28 y~ars old upon replacement.
!Pa:count//400-4112-4705
· .
[Description
;Grass rig/rescue truck//217 is a 1977 Ford pickup. This truck runs as a backup rescue, grass fire rig, hose hauler, and utility truck and runs well. For its limited usc i
Justification
Upgrading the grass fir~-~ti~§'~:~p~bil-~[~',i'i~ ~-~e~v tank, pump, and pump motor to foam capabilities will cnhan~'~'re-~ii~'gu'ishment~ The new pump
assembly will be built as a "slide in" unit, so it could be utilitzed in a future Iruck. With these enhancements, a replacement may be pushed out for five years.
Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005
8,500] Maintenance Equipment
2006 Total
Total Total ~o,ooo 6o,00o
Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
[ 8,500[ Capital Replacement Fund 60,000 60,000
Total Total ~0~}00
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
2002
~'~Jec~ #
l~'~Ject Name
EQ-042
Dive Team Equipment
thru
2OO6
Comgt
Usefnl Life
Priority n/a
The Chanhassen Fire Department Dive Team is continuing its improvement of equipment on th~ dive t~am. In order to fully outfit thc dive team additional
equipmmt needs to be purchnsed. The equipment would be drysuits, Agn full-face piece with communications, cormntmicafion rope and control box, and snfety
'bec.~mp ~ bou~
iThis equipment will keep the dive team in complinnce with National tim Protection Associntion (NFPA) and Occupational Safety ande Health Adminis~t~Jon
)OSHA) standm'ds. This equipment will allow the dive t~nm to safely respond to ic~-r, ln~l~t~- wntn' hnznrds.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Maintenance Equipment 6,000 6,000 6,000 18,000
Total 6,000 6,000 6,000 18000
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Capital Replacement Fund 6,000 6,000 6,000 " 16J~00
Total ~ ~ ~ ts,ooo
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhaasen, MN
2002 thru 2006
,~ Project # EQ-043
'Project Name Training Room Furniture and Equipment
-
'Description
Contact
Department Major Equipment
Type Improvement
Useful Life
Category
.' Priority n/a
..
Thc tables and chairs in thc training mom at thc fire station are in dire need of replacement. This is thc original training room furniture. Most of the chairs are
missing parts and thc tables are failing apart. This project would include updating thc training equipment in thc room. Wc would lik~ to add a fixed multi-media
.projector and overhead projector.
Justification
The current furniture needs replacement and is not good--f'o~'-t~ini~g~-The' room is highly used by thc fire department. Thc current furniture is over 30 years old. --
I
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Maintenance Equipment 12,000 12,000 24,000
Total 12,000 12,000 24,000
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Capital Replacement Fund 12,000 12;000 24,000
Total 12,000 12,000 24,000
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
2002
! Project Nsme
EQ-045
Bobcat Trencher Attachment
thr~
Delmrtment
IJm~nl Life
l'rlorlty
This is a new tool that will attach to thc new Bobcat to allmv city crews to perform trenching,
I
.The current process is to rent a tnmcher to ~placc drain tile and help with utility work wh~ necessary. This purchase will eliminate thc lime la8 and staff effort
necessary to locate and pick up a trencher.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005' 2006 Total
Maintenance Equipment 8,500 8,500
Total ~o0 s,5oo
Fnnding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 - Total
Capital Replacement Fund 8j00 ILS00
Total ~00 ~
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
2002 t~-u 2006
ProJect #
Project Name
EQ-046
Recreation Center Carpet Replacement
Contact
Department
Useful Life
Category
Priority
Mnjor Equipment
Improvenmnt
5-10 years
Buildings
Description
This project provides new carpet in the reception area, meeting rooms 2 and 3 and the conference room.
;
'Justification
--..
'This cnrpet is six yenrs old, stained, and ratty.
I
I
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Construction/Maintenance 5,000 5,000
Total 5,000 5,000
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
General Fund 5,000 5,000
Total 5,000 5,OO0
I Operation~ Impa~Ot~
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
2002 thr~ 2006
Pro]~-t #
Project Name
EQ-047 I
Carver County Community Demographic Partner i
Contact
Type
U~fl
Priority n/a'
Demographic information for ~lanning community programs and services, managing re~trses and infrastru~ would be avallabl~ to thc city through a database
thnt is cnmt~l county-wide. The dambnse includes school districts, the county, census in.formnti~ health cam inform~on along with St~ of~tn and city
'd_qtn
Justification
IBecause the dntnhnse includes nil entities in the city, the npplicnlm~ will be the best source for studying lifc-.c~lc housing, needs assessmmts for trnnsportntio~
'..~nio~ ~'vi~, p~ & r~ ~ tr~ds in home ownmhip, and r~ident tum-m~.
I
;
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Planning/Design 10,000 10,000
Constructton~aintenance 5,000' 5,000 5,000 - §,000 - 20,000
To~al 10,ooo ~oo ~ooo .~ooo 5oo0 ao,ooo
..
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Capital Replacement Fund 10,000 10.(XX)
General Fund 5,000 5,000 5,000 5.000 20,000
Total 10,000
2002
t/wu
2006
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chmrdmssen, MN
--
:1 Project # M'B-O01
· Project Name Library Expansion
Contact
Department Municipal Buildings
Type Improvement
Useful Life
Category Buildings
Priority
!Description ,
'This project provides for thc expansion of the current library. Currently, the library has :5,800 sq. it. $chcduling to be determined as part of Needs Analysis.
Justification
.
.The ciW has hired a Libra~, consultant to review the needs analysis for the Library expansion.
;This work is consistent with the policy of providing timely and efficient preventative maintenance of the City's buildings.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Construction/Maintenance 6,000,000 6,000,000
Total 6,000,000 6,000,000
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Bond Proceeds 6,000,000 6,000,000
Total 6,000,000 6~)00,000
iThOpemtion~, impact/OILer. !
ese projects generally improve building efficiencies. However. with thc expansion, there will be a perccntagc increase based on thc expnnded footprint of thc
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chsnhassen, MN
2002 thru 2006
Project#
Project Name
MB-002
Fire Station 02 Expansion
Contact
Useful Life
0~ Bufldin~
PriorlD' n~a
!Upgrading of Firc Station #2. This project calls for a ncxv roof, lawn sprinkler system and interior rcmodcling.
!Station 02 was built in 1980 and has seen no major remodeling or updating since its original construction. This work is consistent with the policy of providing
.~imely mui efficient preventative maintenance of the Cit~/s buildings.
I
:
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Construction/Maintenance 75,000 75,000
Total ?.~o
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Capital Replacement Fund 75,000 75,000
Total ~ 75,o~o
project will have no effect on operutJns costs.
2002
thru
2006
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
,I Project # MB-003
· ' Project NamePublic Works Facility Expansion
~ Deseription I
Contact
Department ~uni¢ipal Buildin~
Type /mproycn~nt
Useful
~t~o~ Bufidin~
~lorl~
This project provides for the upgrade of the Operations and Maintenance Department facilities located at 1591 Park Road. The building layout will be reconfigured
~for increased efficient3' and centralized support. Plan development xvill begin in 2001. xvith construction starting in early 2002.
· irAc~unt #459 &//710
':Justification
:
.Currently, the Operations and Maintenance Depa_r~'nent needs additional sp~c for repa/rs, accessible motrin§ areas, file and plan storage, supervisory offices and
.equipment storage. This w/Il be accomplished by centralizing activities around the current truck garage.
:The project provides for increased fa¢iliw efficiency by centraliz/ng activities. This concept was supported by the City Council in 1998.
·
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Planning/Design 200,000 200,000
Construction/Maintenance !,7oo,ooo 1,700,000
Total 200,000 t,700,000 1,900,000
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Capital Replacement Fund
Sewer & Water Expanalon Fun
Total 2oo,ooo 1,7oo,ooo 1,90o,ooo
IOperational Impact/Other [
This project would increase operational co~ based on the percentage of the footprint expansion.
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
20O2
thru
~,~t # MB-004
Project Name Senior Center Expansion
2006
Conflct
Delmrtment Municipal Buildings
Uf~ai Life
Priority n/a-
'.This project provides for additional spac~ to our current Senior Center based on incrr,~sed usage of thc facility. It will bc dcv~lop~ in 2002, and cxmstru~on will
..
iBmed on inc3zsscd usag~ of the cun~nt Senior Ccnm'. This project is consistent with thc Comprchcnsiv~ Plan.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Constructiort/Maintenance 100,000 IO0,OCX)
Total loo~o lOO,OOo
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 . Totsl
Capital Raplncenmnt Fund 100,000 ' 100,000
Total 100,000 1~,000
project would incrm~ openttkmal costs bnsed on the percentn~ of the fi:z~ptint expnnsim~
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
2002
I Project #
Project Name
MB-005
Enclosed Salt & Sand Storage Facility
thru
2006
Contact
Department
Type
Useful Life
Category
PriorlB,
Municipal Buildings
Improvement
n/a
I Dosc~iPtion ........
'Provides for the construction of a building m house the winter salt/sand mix.
·
iAccount #459
'Justification
:It is anticipated that future EPA regulations may require enclosures for salt/sand storage. The project provides for an environmentally friendly facility and meet EPA
~uidelines.
·
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Construction/Maintenance 200,0(}0 200,000
Total 200,000 200,000
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Capital Replacement Fund 200,000 200,000
Total 2ooAoo 2oo~o0
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Clmnlmss MN
20O2
t/wu
ProJect#
Project Name
M]~008
Fire Station 1 and 2 Refurbishing
2OO6
Contact
Uaeful Life
· .
.Priority n/a
Involves refurbishing both Stations ! and 2 in 2002. We will replace carpeting and r.-paint wails as r~ded. We gill refurbish bay area floors and improve
landscaping by adding inigafion m Station 2. Station 2 also needs new lounge m'ea fiLmibJre and improved counters in thc dispiach mca.
:The historical five year plan had projected $105,000 to maintain existing fi~ stations. Thc revised c.~pital plan will save approximately $74,000.
i
·
i
:
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Construction/Maintenance 31
Total
.-
Fnnding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Capital Replacement Fund 31,000 31,{X)0
Total ~1~o
CAPITAL PLAN
2002 thru
City of Chanhassen, MN
I Project # PK&T-O01
i vrole~ Name Improvement~: Banflimere Community Park
2006
Contact
Department
Type
Useful Life
Category
Priority
Pnrk & Trail Improvements
Improvement
n/a
!Description '
'Bandimerer is a a 30-acre Community Park (9405 Great Plains Bh'd. - TH 101). The following improvements are recommended:
2003 - Silo l~st~on - $25.000
004 Play Equipment (Phase ID - $40,000
}Account #410-0000-4705
.
iThis project involves the implementation of recommendations set forth by the Park & Recreation Commission. It is consistent with the City's efforts to maintain its [
harm-al msmlrces and the public's investment in community parks.
.
!
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Construction/Maintenance 25,000 25,000
Maintenance Equipment 40,000 40,000
Total ~,000 40,000 ~,000
,
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Park Dedication Fund 25,000 40,000 65,000
Youth Sports Ass'n Contribuflo 0 0
Total ~,000 40,000 6,%0OO
These projects will increase annual operating costs by an cstimat~l $2,000.
I
[
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
20O2
Project
PK&T-003
Development: City Center Park
2006
Comet
U~al Life
Category
Priority
I ]~:ription
,City Center Park is a 10-acre Community Park - a collaborative effort between School District 112 and the City to provide an active park for elementary school
ichild~n and Chan~ r~id~nta. Th~ Mazt~ Plan develop~ by thc Park & Rtnm~on Commi~ion includes thc addition ora Park Sheller/Warming Honsc
lC2003) and Senior Gm'den (2004). The Senior Gardens is an ammtity reque~mt by many of the s~nims n:~idinE in ~ Hills. Major im~ include
3mtt g410-0(0)0-4701 and ~410=0000-4705 .
Justification
City C. ent~r Pntk is home to the largest outdoor skating venue in the City. The Shelter will replace a rentnl saI~llit~ buildh~. Thc im~ts nrc consistm~t with
the masler plnn.
Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 200~ 2006 Total
60,0001 Construction/Maintenance 275,000 100,1X}0 ' 375,000
Total Total 275,000 lOO~)0o 375~N)
Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Park Dedication Fund 275,000 100,000 375,000 '
Total Total 27~00 t0o,oo0
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chau~sen, MN
2002 thru 2006
I
I Project# PK&T-004
t' ProJext Name Playground Equipment: Curry Farms Park
Contact
Dep~rtment
Type
Useful Life
Category
Priority
·
·
Pnxk & Trail Improvements
Equipment
Improvements for Ctury Farms Park are par~ ofa five->~ar plan to provide playground equipment replacement in 2004 (gummer).
I
I
' Sustification
I
Original wood equipment was installed in 1989 and is expected to have a 15-year life span. Comprehensive Plans call for an active recreation site within 1/2 mile of '
every household.
I
I
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Maintenance Equipment 40,000 40,000
Total 4o,oo0 4o,ooo-
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 .2005 2006 Total
Park Dedication Fund 40,000 40,000
Total 4O,000 4O,OO0
[No additional operating costs arc anticipated.
!
i
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
2002
iProject Name
PK&T-005
Signage: Kerber Pond Park
thru
2006
~ontlct
Department Park & Trail Impmvmm~
U~Ul Life
~'Install signage for an existing interpretive trail around Kcrber Pond Park (summer).
i~Iot~: Four or five locations will be selcct~ for intmlarctivc sj?n~ and other appmpria~ sit~ nmmilics (benc, h/mblc). Th~ sign mst~rial will most lik~y be
~with aa appmpti~ frm~ ~nd mounting stmdards. The project would only be completed fftbe sign~ can complime~ their surroundings.
-.
Local history and its interpretation is an area in which thc Park & Recreation Commission would like to expand. This will improve the ovctull experience at this
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Maintenance Equipment 10,000 10,000
Total lO,Oeo lO,OOO
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006. Total
Park Decllcatlon Fund 10,000 10,000
Total lO,IX~O llLO~
CAPITAL PLAN 2002
City of Cha.mhassen, MN
IProlu~# PK~T-006
-ProJectName Improvements: Meadow Green Park
thru
2O06
Contact
Department Park & Trnil Improvements
Type Improvement
Useful Life
Category
Priority n/a
! Doscri~on I
'Provides for replacement of the existing Novo playground structure at the park.
iThe existing playground was installed in 1984 and is nearing the end of its useful life.
Prior Expenditures
6,000] Maintenance Equipment
2002 2003
2004 2005 2006 Total
Total Total 50,000 50,000
Prior Funding Sources
[ 6,000 ] Park Dedication Fund
2002 2003
2004 2005 2006 Total
Total Total
Iegligible addition~] opu'atin$ costs ~'anlticipate, d
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chsnhsssen, MN
20O2
thru
Pro]eet#
Project Name
PK&T-008
Play Area: Power Hill Park
2006
Contact
Delmrtment Park & Trail Impmveme~B
Useful Life
Priority
I
;Involv~ tl~ comtmction ora Ph~.~ II play area at Power Hill Park (Flamingo Drive).
D~ ~ BY PARK & RECREATION COMMISSION
Justification .......... ]
~ Power Hill Service Ar~ iT Im'~ and contains a high population of children. The playlpound was designed to accept a Phase H expansion. The project is
with plans for all neighborhood parks.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Maintenance Equipment 0 0
Total
Fnnding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Park Dedication Fund 0 0
Total 0 0
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhssscn, MN
2002 t~u
Project #
Project Name
I
PK&T-009
Roundhouse Renovation: Roundhouse Park
2006
Contact
Department
Type
Useful Life
Category
Priority
Park & Trail Improvements
Improvement
! Description,
'Involves building a neighborhood playground ns phase II of thc renovation.
~ Justification ,
!
· Thc Roundhouse is a local historic landmark and thc namesake for the pmk. Functions include use ns a ptak shelter, warming house nnd focal point.
:..
· Account #410-0000-4702
..
I
!
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Construction/Maintenance 30,000 30,000
Total 30,000 30,000
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Bond Proceeds 0 0
Park Dedication Fund 30,000 30,000
Total
These projects will inert, nm annual operating costs by an estin'mted $2.200.
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
20O2 thru
project#
ProJec~ Name
PK&T-011
Trail: Whitetail Ridge Ct. to Lake Lucy Ln..
2006
Con~
Department Pm, k & Trail ~
Useful Life
Priority n/a
Involves the construction of a trail segment from Whitetail Ridge Court to Lake Lucy Lane.
DPJ ~'ED BY PARK & RECREATION COMMISSION
Thc Gnlpin Blvd. Neighborhoods need a more direct link to Pheasant Hill Park. With thc trail, thc 1/2 mile service nrta radius of Pheasant I-r_dl Perk would be
pmly enterge~L
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Con~'uctlon/Malntenance 0 0
Total 0 0
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Park Dedication Fund 0 0
Total 0 0
op~monal
Eff~ on ~nual operations are estimaa:d m be $400.
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhass~n, MN
2002 thru 2006
Project # PK&T-012
Project Name Trail: Bandimere Park to Chanhassen Hills
Contact
Department Park & Trail Improvements
Type Improvement
Useful Life
Category
Priority
D6s~ption ~
Invoh, es development of a trail s)~tem fi'om Bandimere Park to Chanhassen Hills.
Sustification ~
The trail is the missing link in the South Highway 101 Trail System. It is identified in the Comprehensive Plan.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Construction/Maintenance 250,000 250,000
Total 250,000 250,000
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Park Dedication Fund 250,000 250,000
Total 250,000 2S0,000
lOperational .Impac~Other I
'hes~ projects will increase annual ol~afing costs by an estimated $1,000.
·
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
2002 thru 2006
Project #
Project Name
PK&T-013
Trail: Hwy 101 (S. Shore Dr. to Townline Dr.)
Col
Department Park & Trail Im~
Usefnl Life
PriorlW n/a-
In~lv~ ~~on ora pedestrian ~-ail concurrent with the r~construc6on of North Leg of'IH 101. Planning meetings nm being conducted. It is the City's desir~
:to complete this segment ns soon ns possible. It hns been delayed due to the reconsl~uction of TH 101.
,
trail segment ranks # 1 in the Comprehensive Plan.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Construction/Maintenance 850,000 850,000
Total ~o,0oo ~5o,ooo
Funding Sources 2002 2003 '2004 2005 2006. Total
Park Dedk:aflon Fund 850,000
Total
These projects will increase mmunl opersting costs by an estinu~d $3,000.
CAPITAL PLAN
2002 t~-~ 2006
City of Chanhassen, MN
!Project# PK&T-014
!Project Nam, Road & Trail Reconstruction: Lake Ann Park
I
Contact
Department
Type
Useful Life
Category
Priority
Park & Trail Improveanemts
Improvement
n/a
'Iavolvcs thc reconstruction of'Lake Ann Park streets, parking lots and trail (ofi§ina~ half of the park).
iAccotmt ~410-0000-4701
Justification .......
?M m~jority ofthc~ aspMIt s~ctions ar~ over 25 ycms old and display multiple signs of failure.
;
I
......
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Construction/Maintenance 485,000 485,000
Total 485,000 485,000
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Park Dedication Fund 485,000 485,000
Total 485,0OO 495,oo0
Maintonan~ co~s would dec, tease.
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chsn sen, MN
2002 thru 2006
-i P,-oj,~ # PK&T-015
ProJec~N,me Marsh Glen Trail Connector i.
Con~
Depsrtment
Useful Life
Prlorl~
~xmstmction of an eight foot wide pedestrian trail connecting Mission Hills Lane to the Lak~ Susan/Rice Ma~ Lake trail.
Identified in the city's comprehensive trail plan. Nees to be constructed with the developtnent ofMm~ Gle~ (approved July 24, 2000).
Expend itu res 2002 .2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Constructlon~aintenance 68,000 68,000
Total 68~0 88J}00
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 .2005 2006 Total
Park Dedication Fund 68,000 68,000 .
Total SS,mO SS,O00
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
2002 t/~-u 2006
..
Project # ]
PK&T-018
Prolect Name Tree Plantings
Contact
Department
Type
Use~l Life
Cntegory
Prtority
Park & Trnil Improvements
lmpwvement
! Des~iption
!This project funds tree plantings in various community and neighborhood parks. Playground and picnic nrens receive priority.
' Jusfifionfion i
;The best time to plant trees was 20 years ago - the second best time is today.
;
Prior Expenditures
5,0001 Construction/Maintenance
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
15,000 15,000
Total
Total 15,o0o
15,000
Prior Funding Sources
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
5,0001 Park Dedication Fund
15,000
Total
Total 15,000
CAPITAL PLAN
City of C~s~n, MN
2002 thru
PK&T-021
Park Shelter: Bandimere Community Park
2006
Conflct
Deim'tment htrk: & Treil lmprm, cmcnts
Useful Life 50 Years
Priority 2 Very Im~
iThc construction of a multi-purpose community park shelter. Locating centrally between thc ballficld and soccer fields, thc shelter will offer shade, seating and
;concessions. Comml systcm~ for thc pm'k's irrigation will bc housed here and storage arrm will bc included in thc design.
I
iBandin'~re Pek is the second busiest park in town and hosts thousands of users each ~a;. Prov~fl ofth~ scrvioc:s that a shel~ can offer will greatly increase the
llevel of safisfa~n of park users.
·
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Construction/Maintenance 175,000 175,000
Total
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Park Dedication Fund 175,000 .175,000
Total 175d~00 175.000
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
2002 thru 2006
Pr°]ect # PK&T-022
Project Name Half Court Basketball:
Bandimere Heights Park
Contact
Department Park & Trail Improvements
Type Improvement
Useful Life 25 years
Category Equipment
Priority 3 Impcrtnnt
Description
Construction of a half court asphalt basketball court with basketball assembly.
:Iustification ~
Introduction of a hard court play surfac~ in this neighborhood park will compliment thc existing amenities.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Construction/Maintenance 15,000 15,000
Total 15~000 15,000
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005- 2006 ' Total
Park Dedication Fund 15,000 15,000
Total 15,000 15,ooo
i Operations1 Tm~a. ct/~et
I
CAPITAL PLAN
City of'C sen, MN
Project #
Project Nam~
PK&T-023
Skate Park Ramp
[
This project provides an additional ramp at the Skate Park.
I
2002
thru
2006
Department Park & Trnil Impmvez~nls
usefnl Life 7-10 years
Pdority 1 U~gmt
..
:The s 'kat~ park is the busiest pnrk and r~.reation amenity in th~ city. This rnmp will provide ndded inten:st to the course and reduce conl~ztion.
·
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Construction/Maintenance 7,500 7,500
Total 7~oo 7~oo
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006. Total
Pad( Dedication Fund 7.500 7~500
Total
CAPITAL PLAN 2002 t~-u 2006
Contact
City of Chanhassen, MN ~ep.nme.~
eroJm# PK&T-024 ~ Type
Useful Life
!
i Project Nsme mrllsh Receptacles
I ..... Category
Priority
P~k & Trail Improvo~cnts
Equipmmt
10-15 years
Equipment
1 Ursemt.
i Deam'ipfion
~This project funds the purchase of 75 wast~ containers with concrete bases.
Juatification [
~Thc department/s in the second year of a three y~ar program to replace our existing unsightly blue plastic trash containers.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Maintenance Equipment 20,000 20,000 40,000
Total 20,oo0 20,o0o 40,000
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Park Dedication Fund 20,000 20,000 40,000
Total ~0~00 ~0,000 40~00
Opomfiomd lm.n~utOthor
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
2OO2
Project#
Project Name
PK&T-025
Permanent Park Benches and Tables
2006
Con~
Department Park & Trail Impmvcme~
Usefnl Life 10-15
Priority 2 yen, ~xm~t
.~ project funds the insmllatioo of pcrrmment park benches and picnic rabies.
I
I
....
~ofscating ar~ in city parks is one of the improvements most often requested by residents.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004
2005 2006 Totnl
Construction/Maintenance 10,000 10,000
Total ~o,ooo to,ooo
..
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Park Dedication Fund 10,000 10:000
Total lo,ooo lOJ}O0
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhass n, MN
2002
ProJeet# SS-002
Project Name Sanitary Sewer: LC-1
2006
Contact
Department
Type
Useful Life
Category
Priority
Sanitary S~ver Improvements
Improvement
n/a
Description
-LC-I Sub-district extension.
·
~ Justification
iNeeded to provide service to developing areas. Identified in thc 1998 Comprehensive Sewer Policy Plan.
I
,
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Construction/Maintenance 200,000 200,000
Total 2O0,000 2oo,ooo
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Sewer & Water Assessments 200,000 200,000
Total 2o0,0oo ~o0,oo0
~'h/s project will increase maintenance costs.
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
2OO2
~,r~j~# SS-003
Project Name Sanitary Sewer: BC-8
thru
2006
~ont~et
Priority
Tnmk ex'mnsion ftorn Point BC 3. ! to BC 4.2.
Petition ~ from developer desiring service in 2000. Howr-v~, TH 5/W'est 78th Street project and BC-7 project must be cx~nplemd first.
~drlcation I
Needed to provide service to developing m'e~. ldentifi~ in the 1998 Comprehex~iv~ Sewer Policy PLan.
_=
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Conatruction/Mnlntenanca 400,000 400,000
Total 4o0,o00 400,00o
Funding Soure~ 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Water Assessments ,1430,000 400,000
p~je~t will
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
: Project # SS-004
· Project Name Sanitary Sewer: BC-9
2002
thru
2006
Contact
Department
Type
Useful Life
Category
Priority
Sanitary Sc-wt, r Improvements
Improvement
n/a
'Description
Trunk extension from Point BC 4.1 to Point BC 5.1.
Development nmy require concurrent with BC-8 project.
.l'usti~cation ~
.Needed to provide service to developing areas. Identified in the 1998 C_~l~r~h'e~i~,e Sewer Policy Plan.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Construction/Maintenance 315,000 315,000
Total 31S,~0o 3~s,0oo
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Sewer & Water Assessments 315,000 - · 315,000
Totnl
315,000 315,000
Operational Impact/Other
I
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanlmss ,
2002
~ Prolect Nsme
SS-005
Sanitary Sewer: BC-2 (Portion)
thru
2006
Con~
Priority
:,Trunk e~.sion ~ Point BC 1.1 to BC 1.2.
I
1
!
:N___eec~__ to provide servicc to dcvcloping atom. Identified in thc 1998 Comprehensive S~:r Policy Plan.
..
·
I
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Totnl
Construction/Maintenance 80,000 350,000 430,000
Total ~o,ooo 3.~,o0o 430,0o0
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006. Total
Sewer & Water Asseaarnents 80,000 3~0,01X) 430,000
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chan s n, MN
2002 thr~ 2006
IProject # SS-006
· Project Name Sump Pump Inspections
Contact
Department Sanitary Sewer Improvcmcnts
Type Improvement
Useful Life
Category
Priority n/a
]Inspections required to minimize sump pump discharge to sanitary sexver system.
IAccount # 700-7701-4300
i Sustificafion I
iMCES Loan/Grant Agreement requires ongoing re-inspections to insure sump pump connections removed with 1996 project arc not reconnected. Identified in the
il 998 Comprehensive Sewer Policy Plan.
I
Prior Expenditures
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
[ 50,000 ] Construction/Maintenance
25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 100,000
Total
Total
25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 100,000
,
Prior Funding Sources
50,000] Sewer & Water Utility Fund
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 100,000
Total Total ~,000
· i
2~,000 25,000 ~000 100,000
Will minimize sanitary sewer treatment costs for sump pump (clean) water.
i
CAPrrAL PLAN
'City of Chanl~sen, MN
2002 thru 2006
rroJm# SS-007
Project Name General Repairs (Emergency/Unplanned)
Contact
Useful IJfe
Priority
~'ovide~ for emergency and unplanned repairs to thc sanitary sewer system.
Account #700-7702-4551
J'~on i
tScwcr system ~a~lurcs such as'pipe breaks, pump stm't=s, motors and electrical conffol problems nrc unpredictable, but incvirablc. T'ncsc fitfltucs nrc most often
emergenci~ in nm'ute and require immediate repair action. This program is ncccssm-y to expedite repai~ and maintain n high level of service.
Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 7,00~ 2006 Total
I 90,0(}0 1 Construction/Maintenance 50,000 50,000 60,000 60,000 220,000
Total Total 50,000 50,0oo 60,000 60,000 22o,000
..
Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
I ~0~ [ Sewer & Water Utility Fund 50,000 50,0(}0 60.000 60,0(}0 220J:}00 '
Total Total 9o,o0o ~0,ooo 60,000 6o,0oo 22o,oo0
Operational Tm?nct/Olhm'
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
! Project # SS-008
Project Name
Televise Sewer Lines
2002 t/~u 2006
Contact
Department
Type
Useful LJf~
Category
Priority
Sanitary Sewer Improvements
Impwvcment
n/a
Description ]
Pwvides for annual televising of sanitary sewer lines suspected of having leakages, rainfall infloxv and/or ground water infiltration.
Accoun~ #700-0000-4300
Justification :
This program is impoaant to verify thc integrity of the sanitary se~er piping s~tem. Leaking pipes can pose a health risk. Clear water inflow and infiltrations also
linc. rea.se the City's cost for treatment of sewer flow. The program is required to maintain a reliable and safe sanitary sewer piping system.
Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
[ 10,000 [ Planning/Design 15,000 15,000 30,000
Total Total 15,000 15,000 30,000
Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
lO,OOOj Sewer & Water Utility Fund 15,000 15,000 30,000
Total Total 15~00 15,000 30,000
~rhis pwgram will not increase operational costs. It could lower costs by reducing thc volume of sewer flow needing treatment.
CAPITAL PLAN
·
City of Chanhassen, MN
20O2
thru
ProJect #
Project Name
SS-009
Repair Manholes, Infiltration/Inflow (I/I)
20O6
Comet
Department Sanitm'y Sewer Imln~Ovements
Usefnl Ufe
Priority n/a
!Provides for planned repa~ and maintenance to thc sanitary se~r piping system.
Account #700-7702-4551
Justification
This program is developed based on information obtained from thc televising inspection program. Thc work is necessary to maintain the integrity of thc sanitary
,sewer system. It is required to maintain n reliable and safe system.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Con~d~ction/Malntennnce 120.000 120,000 120~00 :~0,000
Total 120,000 120,000 120,000 3~0,000
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Totnl
Sewer & Water Utility Fund 120,000 120,000 120~X}0 3~0~00
Total lZUO0 ~ lZO,O00 ~
will not increase operntionnl may
2002
thru
2006
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
[ Project # SS-O10
' Projut Name SCADA System Repair & Maintenance
Contact
Department Sanitary Sewer Improvements
Type Equipm~at
Useful Life
Category
Prtorl~
'Provides for thc updating 0fthc SCADA system control panels for thc City's 29 sanitary sewer pumping stations. Thc panels will be replaced over a 5 year period.
I
~:count #700-7702-4705
'Justification
;The sewer liR station control panels have a defined, reliable or useful life span. It is becoming more difficult each year to get parts for older panels that are no longer
!macfl: and/or th~ manufacturer is out of business. This replacement program ~511 be a proactive approach to ensure reliable
Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
[ 80,000 J Maintenance Equipment 85,000 85,000 85,000 85,000 340,000
Total Total 85,000 85,000 85,000 85,000 340,000
Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
[ 80,000 J Sewer & Water Expansion Fun 85,000 85,000 85,000 85,000 340,000
Total Total ~,000 ~000 ~000 8~,000 $40~00
I
!Operational rmpact/Oth~r
I
irrhis program will likely decrease annual repair and maintenance costs duc to reduced problems and failures with thc equipment.
I
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanh sen, MN
2002 thru 2006
· ! Project # ST-002
;,~ Project Name Century Blvd.
Contact
Depmment Strect ]mpmv~ents
Useful Life
Priority
Ymvides for consuuction of Cenmry Boulevard including wat~ (1039) and scw~ (BC 2.3) improvements from its current north terminus to appmximsIely 200 feet
i~uth of Trunk Highway 5.
:
!
: ~Iustific~on [
iProje~t is needed to provide service to developing areas. It is identified in the fi:asibility report for ti~ Arbomama Business Park Public Improveme~ - Projec~ No.
i97-1. The connection of C.~tt~ Bouk'vard to TH $ is included in thc THS/W~ 78th Strut Project. This project will comple~ the overall work SCOl~ id~tified in
.the feasibility study f~ Proj~'t No. 97-1.
I
I
Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
[ 825,0001 Construcilon/ldalntenance 40,000 40,000
Total Total 40,0o0 4o,000
Prior Funding Source~ 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
[ 825,000 [ Street Assessments 40,000 40,000
Total Total 40,OO0 4O,O0O
ia project will ina~ase maintenan~ cmt~.
CAPITAL PLAN 2002 tm 2006
City of Chanhassen, MN
ProJect# ST-004
Project Name Lyman Bird (West City Limits to TH 101)
Contact
Department Street Improvements
Type Improvement
Useful Life
Category
Priority n/a
D~cription
Provides for rec'o~it~tion of L y~im'i~ulevard from W~t CiW limit ~ TH 101. It ,~ identi~ ~-. ~'oini'~i~/C~nW p~j~t in a 1~ M~r ~ment ~ ~ ~
cons~ct~ in 1996. A joint po~ a~m~t w~ d~d, hm~v~, not ~ted due m lack of~ndin~ ~
: Justification
-_ .._.
with any county road project, there will be certain responsibilities borne by the City (e.g., stormwater, trail, lighting, sewer & water, etc.). Any MSA funds
lufilized for construction ora County State Aid Highway d/sa'nets from the City's ability to construct and maintain its Municipal State Aid Street System.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Construction/Maintenance 3,900,000 3,900,000
Total 3,900,000 3,900,000
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
MSA 3,900,000 3,600,000
Total 3,600,000 3,600,000
{ Operstiomd Impact/~ }
project will increase maintenance costs.
CAPITAL PLAN
2002 thru 2006
'City of'Chanhassen, MN
· .
'Project// ST-O05
~ Pr olin N.~ Bituminous Overlay: Lake Lucy Rd.
Contact
Department Street lm~ts
Type Impro~m~'nt
U~'ful Life
:Provides for a bituminous overlay o;~l~'~'LUcy Road between C-alpin Boulevard and ~ Bottlcvard. This project is consist~t with the 1999 ~t
[~t Study.
I
1
t. Appmpd~ routine maintenance technique based on 1991 Pavement ~t Study.
I
i
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Construction/Maintenance 95,000 95,000
Total ~o0 ~g}O0
..
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
MSA 95,000 9~000
To'mi ~00 ~
CAPITAL PLAN
2002 t/~ru 2006
City of Chanhassen, MN
· Project # ST-006
:
-Project Name Bituminous Overlay: Saddlebrook Curve
Contact
Department Street Improvements
Type Improvement
Useful Life
Category
Priority n/a
Description
__
.~ovides for a bituminous overlay of Saddlebr~k-C-u~e. Plans and specs will b~ prepared by Engineering Department for Spring 2002 bid ~'in&
Account #415-00004540
Justification
Appropriate routine maintenance technique based o~ -~'i'-P-avcment Management Stud)'. It is consistent with the 1999 Pavement Management Study.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Construction/Maintenance 18,000 18,000
Total 18,000 18,000
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
MSA 18,000 18,000
Total 18,000 18,000
,
iThis project may decrease mainte~an~ costs.
,
CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006
~City of Chaahassen, MN
, rroJttn # ST-007
rrolmSam, Bituminous Overlay: Lake Drive/Lake Drive East
Contact
Department Slr~t lm~ts
Useful Life
Priority
Provides for a bituminous overlay of Lake Drive and Lak~ Drive East. Plans and specs will be prepared by Engineering Departmmt f~' Spring 2002 bid opening
Account//415-0000-4540
:
i
Appropri~ murine maintenance technique bsscd on 1991 Pavement ~t Study. It is consistmt with the 1999 Pavement Msn%_orrr~t Study.
I
I
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Construction/Maintenance 140,000 140,000
Total 140,000 140~]00
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
M,~a~ 140,000 140.,000
Total 140,000 140,000
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
Prole~ tl ST-008
eroJect ~ame Bituminous Overlay: Audubon Rd.
......................................
2002 thru 2006
-.
Desaripfion
Contract
Department Street Improvemenls
Type Improvement
Useful Life
Category
Priority n/a
:Provides for a bituminous overlay of Audubon Road bev, men TH 5 and Lyman Boulevard.
Justification i
Appropriate routine maintenance technique based on 1991 Pavement Management Study. It is consistent with the 1999 Pavement Management Study.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Construction/Maintenance 110,000 110,000
Total . 1 lO,0O0, 110,00o
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
MSA 110,000 110,000
Total 110,000 110,000
· 'This project may decrease maintenance
I
I
I
CAPITAL PLAN 2002 t~-u 2006
'City of Chanhassen, MN
', t'roJm# ST-009
:
i rrolm Name Bituminous Overlay: Coulter Blvd.
.....................
Conmc~
Department Street ~
usefn] Life
Priority 'n/a-
iProvides for a bituminous overlay of Coulter Boulo~u'd between Audubon Road and Pillsbury.
!
iAppropriatc murine maintenance lechniquc based on 1991 Pavement Mmmgemcnt Study. It is coosistrnt with thc 1999 Pavcmmt ~ Study.
I
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Construction/Mainmnance 15,000 15,000
Total 15,000 15,(N10
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
MSA 15,000 15,000
T~ 15000 1~00
I'
!
CAPITAL PLAN 2002 t~-~2006
City of Chanhassen, MN
Project# ST-010
: ProJect Name Bituminous Overlay: West 78th St.
Contact
Department
Type
Useful Life
Category
Priority
Street Impwvernents
Improvement
n/a
. i .
· Description '
Provides for a bituminous ov~[l~y of West 78th Street betx~en l~owers Boulevard and TH 101.
._ _
i Justification :
Appropriate routine maintenance technique based on 1991 Pavement Management Stud}'. It is consistent with the 1999 Pavement Management Study.
!
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Gonstroction/Maintonanco q 70,000 q 70,000
' Total '170,000 qT0,000
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
MSA 170,000 170,000
Total 170,000 170J~0
This project may d~rea~ maintenance oos~s.
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chauhassen, MN
.; ~rol~# ST-011
2002 thru 2006
iProJe~ Name
Bituminous Overlay: Minnewashta Parkway
Contact
Department Street ~
U~eful Life
Priority n/a
~:Pmvictcs for a bituminous owrlay of Minncwashta Padcway between TH :5 and TH 7.
[~~ nmttn~ nufint~n~ t~:hniqu~ ~ on 1991 P~mmt h,~mg~t Study. Iti~ mnsi~ with th~ 1999 Pm'~a~nt ~ 8tndy.
·
!
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Construction/Maintenance 125,000 125,000
'I'o~1 1~100 ' '
Funding Sources 2002 -2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Total 13~000 llff~O0
CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thr~2006
Contact
City of Chanhassen, MN Department
i Project # ST-012 Type
I Useful Life
. ProJect Name Annual Street Improvement Program -
........ Category
Priority
Street Improvements
Improvement
fda
-Description
'.Provides for rourine senlcoaring, maintenance, and improvement of streets as recommended by thc Pavement Management System.
!
--
[Justification
Appropriate rourine maintenance based on thc Pavement Management System.
·
Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
470,000 [ Construction/Maintenance 255,000 265,000 275,000 275,000 285,000 1,355,000
Total Total 255,000 265,000 275,000 275,000 285,000 1,355,000
Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
[ 470,000 [ General Fund 255,000 265,000 275,000 275,000 285,OO0 1,355,000
Total Total 255~00 26UOO 275,ooo 275,0oo
is project may decrease rrmintennnce costs.
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
,
i rroj~t # SWMP-003
i ProJect Name Lnke Susan Watershed
i
2002 thru 2006
C.~m~
Del~rtment
Useful Life
Priority_ n/a
Sm~ wu=]~,,n,q~t
[SWMP Pmjecta 3.34, 3.2.
iPmvid~ for modifications to nn existing stonnwnm' pond. Feasibility Study in 2002.
i
:
i Jnstification
,'Ihese projects are identif~l, detailed and prioritized in the City's Surface Whim' Managem~t Phm to meet wain' qunlity goals fro' Lake Susan. Will achieve bet~
~l~ri~ ~d ~lim~t mno~.
I
i
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Totnl
Construc~on/Malntonanca 150,000 ~50,000
Total ~50~oo ~o.~
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Surfmce Water Utility Fund 150,000 150J)00
Total l~O,lxm
Thes~ projem will be financed with the annual opeming budget of the Smttce Warn' Managmm~ Plan, funded by the Siam W~m' ~.
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chauhassen, MN
Project# SWMP-004
Project Name Lake Riley Watershed
20O2
2006
Contnct
Department Surface Wat~ Management
Type Improvement
Ugeful Life
Category
Priority n/a
Description
SWMP Projects 4.1, 4.6.
Provides for the taxation ofstormwaler ponds at these locations. Feasibility Stud]5' in 2003.
i J'uatificafion
These projects are identified, detailed and prioritized in thc City's Surface Water Management Plan to meet water quality goals for Lake Riley. Will reduce the
isediment and nuuient loads into Lake Riley.
;
i
I
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Construction/Maintenance 150,000 ' 150,000
Total 150,000 150,000
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Surface Water Utility Fund 150,000 150,000
Total 150,000 150,000
!
Operational ImpacedOther I
These projects will be financed w/th the annual operating budget tithe Surface Water lvianag~ent Plan, funded by tile Storm Water Utility.
CAPITAL PLAN
' 'Ci_ty_...0fChsnhsssen, MN
,,
. ~ ~-o~ut # SWMP-O05
Irr°Ject Name Lake Winnewashta Watershed
2002 thru
2OO6
Contact
Department
Useful Life
Priority
Surf~ W~r ~t
.
.
~WMP Projects 3. ! 6, 1.9.
!Provides for thc creation ofstormwater ponds nt these locations. Feasibility Study in 2004.
!
l
i
,'l'h~e projects nrc identified, detailed and prioritized in thc City's Surface Writer Mnnngunent Plnn to meet warm- quality goals for Lake W'mncwnshtn W'fll reduce
~ ~din~nt and nutrient Io~ into ~
:
!
i
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Totnl
Construction/Maintenance 175,000 175,000
Total 17~,ooo 17~R)o
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 .2005 2006 Total
Surfaco Wator Utll~ Fund 175,000 175,000
Total t?~oo t~d~oo
Fhes~ projecl~ will be financed with the annual opernfing budget of the ~ Water Mmmgmm~ Plan, ftmded by the Skam Warn' Utility.
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
I Project # SWMP-006
Project Name Bluff Creek: Alter Existing Ponds
20O2
2006
Contact
Department Surface Water Management
Type Improvement
Useful Life
Category
Priority n/a
'Description
iSWMP Projects 4.7, 5.19
IProjects would altc~ existing ponds by excavation and outlet control. This project is scheduled for consideration in 2000. However, the actual project will be
irnanaged by the watershed district once their Feasibility Study is complete.
I
I
:Ac~unt #721M1000-4769
I
I J'ustificntion =-
.
Projects would increase pond storage capacity and water treamaent capabilities. These projects axe identified in the City of Chanhassen's Basic Water Management
;Project petition to the Riley, Purgatory, BluffCreek Watershed District. This project is consistent with both the Surface Water Management Plan and the Bluff
'Creek Natural Resources Management Plan.
·
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Construction/Maintenance 200,000 200,000
Total 2oo,000 ~00,ooo
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Surface Water Utility Fund 200,000 200,000
Tota] 200,0o0 200,000
The Watershed District will provide 100% funding for water resource-mlat~ projects. 50% for recreational trails and educational facilities and 25% of thc costs for
land acquisition. Thc City's contribution to these projects will be funded through thc Surface Water Management Program.
CAPITAL PLAN
ity of Chanhassen, MN
'. i ~o1~ # SWMP-OO8
i ~rolea ~.ae Bluff Creek: Alter Existing Ponds
20O2
2006
Contact
Department Surface
Type Improvcgncnt
Useful Life
Category
Priortty n/n
!Pmj~t~ w~uld ~lt~' ~xi~dng pond~ by ~xemattion ~t outkt control. This pmj~t is sch~lul~d for ~o~id~tion in 2002. Ho~-v~-, thc ~ pmj~'t will be
}manal~ by tbe water~l~ district once their Feasibility Study is complete.
I
I
I
·
Projects w~uld increase pond storag~ capacity and water l~atmcnt capabilities. These projects a~c identified in thc City of Chanlmssen's Basic Wa~' Management
Project petition to the Riley, Purgatory, BluffC. n:ek Watershed District. This project is comistent with both the Sm~cc Wnmr Manngnmnt Plan and the Bluff
k Nntuml Resourc~ Management Plan.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 200~ 2006 Total
Constmctlon~Vlalntenance 210,000 210,000
Total 210~00 ~10~0
..
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Totnl
Surface Water Utility Fund 210J~X} 210,000
Total ~1o,ooo zlo,ooo
Thc Watwsit~ District will provide 10(}% funding for water msmffce-mlal~ im~ec~ 50% for recrenfiotml ~ ~~ ~ ~d ~% ~ ~ ~
hind acquisition. The City~ contribution to these projects v-H! be funded through the S~ Water Mmmszmmt Pmlgmn.
CAPITAL PLAN 2002
City of Chanhasscn, h/IN
Project # SWMP-0O9
Project Name Bluff Creek: Create Stormwater Ponds
t/au 2006
Contact
Department Surface Water Management
Type Improvement
Useful Life
Category
Priority
Description
.SWMP Projects 5.11, 7.9. i
iProjects would create stormwater ponds at these locations. This project is scheduled for consideration in 2003. However, the actual project will be managed by the i
:watm'shed district once their Feasibility Study is complete.
I
I
i Justifi~fion
?rojects would reduce the sediment and nutrient loads into Lake Minnewashta. These projects are identified in the City of Chanhassen's Basic Water Management
IProject petition to the Riley, Purgatory, BluffCreek Watershed District. This project is consistent with both the Surface Water Management Plan and the Bluff
Natural Resources Management Plan.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 200S 2006 Total
Construction/Maintenance 215,000 215,000
Tota I 2'15,000 215,000
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Surface Water Utility Fund 215,000 215,000
Total ~5,000 215,0110
{Operational Imp~Othcr
IThc Wm~rshed District will provide 100% funding for ua~r rcsourcc-r~lated projects, $0~ for rccrc~onsl tmiis and educ~tionel f~cilitics and 25% of thc costs for I
iland acquisition. Thc City's contribution to these projects will be flmdcd through thc Surface Water Management lh'ogram. ;
2002 thr~ 2006
City of Chanl sen, kin
! ProJ~t# SWMP-OIO
:
i P~oj~t ~sne Bluff Creek: Crente Stormwnter Ponds
Contact
Department Surface Wn~zr Mnnnlgn~t
Type Impmvexn~
Useful Life
Priority n/a
'SWMP Projects 2.3, 3.1.
iPmjects would c~cate stormwntcr ponds nt these locations. This project is scheduled for c~nsi~ in 2004. However, thc ncttml project will bc mnnnged by the
~crshcd district ooce their Feasibility Study is complete.
i
I
!Projects would reduce the sediment and nutrient Io~ds into Lake Minnc~hta. These projects arc identified in the City of Chnnhnsseng Basic Watn' Managn~-nt
Pmj~:t i~dfim to tl~ Rilq~, ~, Blult~ W~r~ed Di.~'ict. ~ proj~ is ~ with both th~ Sm'fi~ W~a' M~l~ama~t Plan ~nd tl~ Bluff
~ N~m~! ~ ~t Plan.
I
I
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Construction/Maintenance 275,000 275,000
Total 27.~00
Fnnding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Surface Water Utility Fund 275,000 ' 275JX)0
Total 27~s~m) 275,0oo
Waawshed District will pro. de 100% thnding for water resourcc-rcl~ ptojec~ 5056 Rg recre~onul ~ nmi educational fitcfliti~ and 25% of thc costs
a~quisition. Thc City's contribution to these projects will be tim(kd ttu'ough the Sm'lh~ Wstcr Mnnnsnncnt ~
CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006
City of Chauhassen, MN
P~olec, # SWMP-O 11 ,,
· Project Name Lake Lucy (Lake Project) I
=- . ........ .~J
Contact
Department Surfac~ Water Management
Type Improvement
Useful Life
Category
Priority n/a
Doscription
Provides for alum treatment to Lake Lucy.
Justification
:These projects are identified, detailed and prioritized in the Cit:~s Surface Water Management Plan to mc'ct water quality goals for Lake Lucy. Will reduce the
icurrent phosphorus content in the lake and create a blanket which would prevent further loading of phosphorus from bottom sediments.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Construction/Maintenance 50,000 50,000
Total ~0,0o0 ~o,ooo
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Surface Water Utility Fund 50,000 50,000
Total 50,0~ 50,000
thc annual
IThese projects will be financed with opernting budget of the Sm-face Water Management Plan. funded by the Sk)rm Water UtiliW.
!
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhass n, MN
' r,-ol,~ # W-O01
-rroJect mine Well 09
!
2002 thru 2006
Department Water Syslzm Im~ovemen~
U~eful Life
Cat~gory
Priority n/a-
:Provide municipal water supply well. Well siting and engineering will begin in 2003, with construction in 2004.
:
I
:
· ~leeded to provide service to developing areas. Identified in the 1998 Comprehensiw Water Supply and Distribution Plan.
!
!
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Plannlng/Dealgn 70,000
Conatm~on/Malntenanc~ ~:},000
Total ro,ooo I~O,O00 700,000
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Sewer & Water Expansion Fun 70,IXX) 830,000 700,000
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
: Project # W-002
'Project Name Well #10
!
.
2002 thru
2006
Contact
Department
Type
Useful Life
Category
Priority
Water System Improvements
Improvement
n/a
.Provide municipal water su~l~' (veil. Well siting and engine~ing will begin in 2004, with construction in 2005.
:,
Justification
':Needed to provide service to developing arc. ss. Identified in the 1998 Comprehensive Water Supply and Distribution Plan.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Planning/Design 72,000 72,000
Construction/Maintenance 530,000 530,000
Total 72,000 530,000 602,000
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Sewer & Water Expansion Fun 72,000 530,000 602,000
Total , 72,000 5~0~00 602,0OO
is pmject will increase ~in~ce ~.os!
CAPITAL PLAN
'City of Chanhassen, MN
..
.: erole~# W-003
[ rrojec~ Name Well #11
2002 thru 2006
Contact
Delmrtment
Usefnl Life
Priority
iProvid~ municipal water supply well. Well siting, nnd e~gineering will begin in 2005, with construction in 200~.
I
I
;Needed to provide service to developing nrea~. Identified in the 1998 Compmhe~.siw Water Supply and Distribution Plan.
I
I
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Planning/Design 75,0(}0 75,000
Construction/Maintenance 675,000 675,000
Total 7~00 675~00 750~0
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
8m~mr & Water Expansion Fun 75,000 675,000 750,000
Total 7-~oo ~ ~,~
rl~ projm:t will incrense nmintennnce costt
CAPITAL PLAN
2002 thru 2006
City of Chanhassen, MN
ProJect # W-004
·
Vrojeet ~ame Water Tower (2MG): Lyman Blvd.
Contact
Department
Type
Useful Life
Category
Priority
Water System Improvements
Improvement
n/a
Doscripfion
iConstruct 2.0 MO elevated water storage reservoir. Tower siting and engineering will begin in 2004. with conslxuction in 2005.
:
·
, Justification
· Needed t~ provide service to developing areas. Identified in the 1998 Comprehensive Water Supply and Distribution Plan.
!
;
I
I
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Planning/Design 75,000 75,000
Constructlon/IVlalntenance 3,300,000 3,300,000
Total 75,0o0 3,300,000 3,375,000
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Sewer & Water Expansion Fun 75,000 3,300,000 3,375,000
Total 75,000 ~100,000 3,3'/5,000
is project will increase maintenance costs.
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Cham'~sen, MN
' i e~oi,~ # W-005
i Project Name Lake Riley Trunk H
!
2002 thru 2006
Conllct
Dew'tment Wa~:r Syr~ Improvmm~
Type
U~q'ul Life
Category
Priority
INode 641 to PRV-10 to Nod~ 602.
i
1
I
:~eeded to provide service to developing areaz. Identified in the 1998 Comp~hcnzive Wa~cr Supply and Distribution Plan.
I
I
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 200~ 2006 Total
Gort~truction~alntonance 110,000 110,000
Total 1'10,000 110,000
Funding Sources 2002 .2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Sewer & Water Assessments 110~) 110,000
Total 1t0,1100 tt0,1~0
b project will ino'e~e maint~mnce com.
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhass~n, MN
ProJect# W-006
ProJect Name Water Improvements: TH 41
2002 thru 2006
Contact
Department Water Systern Improvements
Type Improvement
Useful Life
Category
Prtorlty n/a
Description
.Node 1021 -Node 1022
Node 1021 - PRV=8
PRV-8 - Node 1023
Node 1023 -Node 501
Node 501 - Node 1024
~Node 1024 - Node 639
Justification
Needed to provide service to developing areas. Identified in the 1998 Comprehensive Water Supply and Distribution Plan.
I
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
¢onatruclionlMalntenance 3,35,000 335,000
Total ~5,000 335~00
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
·
Sewer & Water Aseesamen~ 335,000
Total
[Operational Impa~Other
;This project will increase maintenance costs.
,
I
CAPITAL PLAN 2002~ 2006
~ity of Clumhassen, ~
.- ~ol~ # W-007
i lh'ole~t Nnm¢ Writer Improvement~: Manchester Dr,
I .-
Con~
Department Warn ~
U~eful Life '
.
Priority n/n-
1031
· N__e~_~ to provide se~vic~ to dcveloping ate, as. Identified in the 1998 Comprehensive Wa~' Supply and Distribution Plan.
I
I
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Construction/Maintenance 130,000 13~,000
Total '1~.ooo '1~o,ooo
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Sewer & Water Asaeaaments 130,000 130,000
Total t3o,m]o t30,000
CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006
City of Chanhassen, MN
· Project # W=O08
i ProJect Name Water Improvements: Minnewashta Loop
--. -
Contact
Department
Type
Useful Life
Category
Priori.ty
Water System Improvements
Improvement
n/a
Description
Node 1022 to Node 3.
: Justi~cnfion
!
Needed to provide service to developing areas. Will also provide loop for wcst service area. Identified in thc 1998 Comprehensive Water Supply and Distribution
Plan.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Construction/Maintenance 270,000 270,000
Total 270,000 270,000
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Sewer & Water Assessments 270,000 2'/0,000
Tota] ~0~0 ~70,000
This project will increase maintenance costs.
CAPITAL PLAN 20o2 thru 2006
'City of Chanhassen, ~
, ~roj~t # W-O09
i P roJm ~an~ Wat_e__r- l_m_._p_ro_v_ements: BC-1 (TC&W = Lymnn)
Contn~t
Department Wn~r ~ Im~
Type lmprovcnle~
Usefnl Life
Category
Priority n/a
Node 510 to Node 612.
,N__eeded to provide service to developing areas. Identified in thc 1998 Comprehensive Water Supply and DisU'ibution Plan.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Totnl
Construction/Maintenance 400,000
Total 40~000
Funding Sources 2002 2003. 2004 2005 2006 Totnl
Sewer & Water Assessments 40(UX}O 400,000
Total
CAPITAL PLAN 2002 t/~ 2006
City of Chanhassen, MN
!Project# W-010
I
·
i Projm NtmeWater Improvements: Lyman, Audubon, Powers
Contact
Department Water Systt. m Improvements
Type Improvement
Useful Life
Category
Priority n/n
!Description
;Node 510 to Node 1012
!Node 1012 to Nod~ 1013.
I
I
t Susti~c~'ion
Needed to provi~ service to dcveloping areas. Id~mtified in the 1998 Comprehensive Water Supply and Distribution Plan.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Consb'uctlon/Malntenance 370,000 210,000 580,000
Total aT0,000 210,000 $80,000
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Sewer & Water Assessments 370,000 210,000 580,000
Total a't0,00o
II,is project will increase mnint~nnnce costs.
CAPITAL PLAN 20O2
City of sen, MN
Prol~ # W-O 11
Project Name Water Treatment Plant 1
thru
2006
Department
Type
Useful Life
Priority
~C. mm~ct Water Treatr~nt Plant with siting and cl~sign in 2002, and cx~'tru~on in 2003.
:Public d~nand and high maintrnanc~ costs may rcxluire water treatment to adch'~s high iron and mangan~s~ l~.As. Pot~tial need and sites ar~ id~fificd in the
1998 Comprehensive Water Supply and Distribution Plan.
I
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Planning/Design 500,000 5(X),000
Corm~ctlon/Malntennnce 3.500~00
Total ~OOAOO 3~oomo 4mo,ooo
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Totnl
Sm~,or & Water Expnrmlon Fun 500,000 3~.~X},000 4,000,000
Total ~oJ~o ~ 4~0~0
CAPITAL PLAN
2002 thr~ 2006
City of Chanhassen, MN
· ProJect# W-013 i
i Project Name General Water System Repairs
Contact
Department
Type
Useful Life
Category
Priority
Water System Improvements
Improvement
fl]Il
· 'Description
:- ~._-i ......
.Provides for emergency and unplanned repairs to the water system. This program is funded on an annual basis.
Account #700-7702-4550
J-u~tion --,
.Water ss~tem failures such as pipe breaks, vaiveJhydrnnt/pump/elcctrical control problems nm unpredictable, but inevitable. These failures nm most often
iemergmci~s in nature and require immediate repair action. This prosl'nm is necessary to expedite repairs and maintain Il hi~ level of service.
Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006' Total
{ 90,000 { Construction/Maintenance 45,0~ 50,000 50,000 50,000 195,0~0
Total Total 45,ooo 50,ooo ~,00o S0100o 1~,o00
Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
[ 90,0001 Sewer & Water Utility Fund 45,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 195,000
Total Total 45,000 ~0,000 ~0~00 ~0,000
iOp~'atlonal Impact/Other
~ ~-~s ~ ~ 7perafional costs.
CAPITAL PLAN 2002 t/~-u 2006
City of Chanhassen, MN
· i r~olm # W-014
:
I Project Name SCADA System Upgrades/Maintenance
........ ~ Category
Priority
..
IPmvides for the updntinl~ oft.he SCADA System control panels for n portion of the warn- system infi'nstractm~ (Wells 3,4,5,6,7 and ~ 1 & 2). The progmxn will
!be phased over 3 ye~-s.
Account #700-7702-4705
Existing control panels vary in ngc. Available parts for the oldcx units nrc dwindling Communication is based on a phone linc s3ztcm; rcphcexne~t upgrades would
clmngc to radio communications. This upsxnSc progrum will I~ a proactive approach m emure reliable ~ service.
PHor Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
I 200,0001 Construction/Maintenance 100,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 130,000
Total Total t00,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 130,000
,,
Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
I 200,0001 Sewer & Water Utility Fund 100,000 10,000 10,000 :10,000 130,000
Total Total 100,oo0 t0~0 lO,m)O lo,ooo 130,0oo
I~ogmm will 6ecamse ~nnual repair and mnintenmc= cog= due to Im~bl~m ~ with ~luipmmt ag~
CAPITAL PLAN
2002 thru 2006
City of Chanhassen, MN
ProJect# W-015
Project Name Repainting: West 76th St. Water Tower
Contact
Department
Type
Useful Life
Category
Priority
Water Sys~m Improvements
Improvement
n/a
Description
Provides for the recoating of the interior and exterior surfaces of the W. 76th St. Water Tower.
=Account # 710
Justification ~
.
'This type of infrastructure requires rccoating approximately ever3' 10 }'cars to protect thc life of thc metal structure and maintain healthy potable water. This project
will extend thc servic~ life of this water storage facility.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Construction/Maintenance 4O,000 40,000
Total 4o,o0o 40,000
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
Sewer & Water Expansion Fun 40,000 4O,000
Total 4O,0O0 4O.OO0
This project does not in~-eas~ operatiorml costs.
CAPrrAL PLAN
City of Chsnhassen, MN
~,~o~# W-O17
Utility Rate Study
2002 thru 2006
C~mm~
Department
U~id Ute
Priority
iPmvid~ f~' the review of current cost~ to provide sewer and w~r services ~nd needed revhions to the utility ra~J~
Account//700-770 !-4300
I
h is important to ensure that utility rates represent thc Cit3~s cost to prm'id¢ utility services. The Study ensures that the Utility Enterprise Fund is operated in a
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
P~annlng/D~sign 25,000 25/)00
Total ~ ,
..
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Totnl
8ewer & Water Utility Fund 25,000 25.000
Total 25,0o0 ~sO~O
This pmj~t do~ not increase operntionnl cosl~.
CAPITAL PLAN
City of Chanhassen, MN
: ProJect # W-018
[Project Name Well #12
2002 thru 2006
Contact
Department
Type
Useful Life
Category
Priority
Water System Improvements
Improvement
n/a
Description
,Provide municipal w~ter supply well. Well siting & design in 2006 with construction in 2007.
1
,
i Sustificafion i
Need to provide service to developing areas identified in thc 1998 Comprehensive Water Supply & Distribution Plan.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005
2006 Total Future
Planning/Design
77,000 77,000 [ s75,oooI
Total
77,000 77,000 Total
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005
2006 Total Fu(ure
Sewer & Water Utility Fund
:rotal
Total
f OperatJ. onal tmpact/Ofl:tm'
I
City of Chanhasscn, MN
:
i ProJect # W-019
i Project Name Water Treatment Plant H
.......
2002 thru 2006
Useful Life
Category
Priority
iCongn'uct Wnte~ T~t Plant with siting nnd design in 2006 nnd construction in 2007.
i
I
i
Public Demant & High maintenance costs. Potential need and sites identified in 1998 Comprehensive Water Supply & Distribution Plan.
Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Planning/Design 500J:}00
Total Future
Total
2}0,000 ~00,000 Total
Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Sewer & Water Utility Fund
Total Future
Tote]
Total
op~gio~ T .mpm/ot~
Project will incense mnintemnce cosls.
C 0F
~ M'ut~to~ 55317
952937.1900
95293Z5739
95293Z9152
952.934.2524
wu~ d. d~a n hauen, va~. us
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Teresa Burgess, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
DATE:
SUB J:
November 6, 2001
Approve Construction Plans and Specifications for the Utilities of
Arboretum Business Park 4m Addition- Project No. 00-11
The applicant, Steiner Development, has submitted detailed construction plans
and specifications for staff review and City.Council approval. Staffhas reviewed
the plans and specifications and finds the plans still need some minor modifications.
Staff requests that the City Cotmeil grant staff the flexibility to administratively
approve the plans afl~ working with the .applicangs ..engineer to modify the plans
acco~y. Staff has calculated the required financial security to guarantee
compliance with the installation ofthe public utilities at $160,636'.00. It is
therefore recommended that the construction plans and specifications for the
utilities of Arboretum Business Park 4th Addition dated October 17, 2001,
prepared by Schoell & Madson, inc., be approved conditioned upon the following:
1. The applicant shall supply the City with a cash escrow or letter of. credit in the
amount of $160,636.00.
2. The applicanes engineer shall work with City staff in revising the construction
plans to meet City standards.
Attachments: 1.
.
Consmacfion plans and specifications are available for
review in the Engineering Dapartment
Breakdown of financial security.
c: Fred Richter, Steiner Development
~ by C_.~.y Engineer
~ved by City Coun~l
C_~ o['~ A ~udne to,nmunit~ with dean laka. mtalit~ m~l~ a ~in~ ~ ~ b~,~ and beautiful t~k A ere~ ol,~e to l~ve. ~vrk, and
·
SECURITY
To guarantee compliance with City specifications, payment of special assessments, payment of the
costs of all public improvements, and construction of all public improvements, the Developer shall
furnish thc City with a letter of credit from a bank or cash escrow ("security*') for $160,636.00. The
amount of the security was calculated as 110% of thc following:
Watermain $ 31,994.00
Sanitary Sewer $ 32,106.00
Storm Sewer $ 69,379.00
Erosion control $ 3,000.00.
Engineering, surveying, and inspection
$ 9,554.00
TOTAL COST OF PUBLIC IMPROVEME~S
$ 146:033,.00 -
This breakdown is for historical reference; it is not a restriction on the use of the security. The
security shall be subject to the approval of the City. The security shall be for a term ending
December 31, 2002. The City may draw down the security, without notice, for any violation of the
terms of this Contract. If the required public improvements are not completed at least thirty (30)
days prior to the expiration of the security, the City may also draw it down. If the security is drawn
down, the draw shall be used to cure the default. With City approval, the security may be reduced
from time to time as financial obligations are paid, but in no case shall the security be reduced to a
point less than 10% of the original amount until all improvements are complete and accepted by the
Oty.
8:~8~proj~cts~tum 4thkq~mrity.doe
CT 0F
PO llax147
~ Minnnota 55317
952937.1900
952.93Z5739
952.93Z9152
952934.2524
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJ:
Todd Ger~ City Mmager --
November 7, 2001
Call for Assessment Heax/ng for Dogwood Road Sanitary Sewer
Improvements - Project No. 00-01-1
REQUESTED ACTION
It is recommended that the City Council call the assessment hearing for the
Dogwood Road Sanitary Sewer Improvements to be held on November 26, 2001.
DISCUSSION
State statute requires an assessment heating be held for all assessed projects. The .
intention of the assessment hearing is to allow property owners afl opportunity to
contest the assessment amount. .-
-.
Dogwood Road sanitary sewer improvement project was the result of a feasibility
study that was initiated by a property owner petition. This was the minimum
project required due to a f 'ailing City maintained mound system that sc~ves three
(3) homes.
c: Jay Rubash, HTPO
G :~iNG~TERF~A~ mport~ff r~q~t- 11-1~-Ol.do0
~ o~~ A ~udm, tommunitv with ~ ~ auality ~ a charm~ dou,ntount l~uim, bu. sineu~ and ~ oarlm A ~at ~te w ~v~ u~k
CITYOF
CHANHA EN
PO Booc I47
Minn~ta 55317
952.93Z1900
MEMORANDUM
FROM:
DATE:
Todd Ger~ City Manager
Teresa $. BurIc.~, Public Works ~/City Engin~
November 7, 2001 ~'
Approval of Assessment'Roll for Cmstview Circle Utility & Street
Improvement Project No. 00-05'
952.937.5739
952.93Z9152
952.934.2524
lreb Site
Requested Action
The Council is requested to approve the attach~ resolution approving tim assessment roll for
Crestvicw Circle.
Discussion
On October 22, 2001 the City Council held the assessment heating for the above-referenced
project. Three objections to the assessments were rec~vecL Slaff and the consultant have
reviewed the objections. Attached is a letter justifying the dollar amount of the assessments
from WSB.
Staff has discussed the ~ with each of the property owners and tins ~co~ed
adjustments to the t~rms of.the assessments but no adjustmmts to the principal amount of the
assessments. These terms are based on unique conditions of each of the property owners.
The assessment roll has been revised as follows:
David and Kristen Struyk
)~ 1941 Crestview Circle
~ 1951 Crestview Circle
Mary Trippler
)~ 1931 Crestview Circle
Shawn and Cherri Eugstmm'
~' 1950 Crestview Circle
No change to the developed parcel (1941 ~ew
Circle) asses~m~t.
The asse~ment to the undeveloped parcel (1951
Crestview Circle) is def~red until de~nflopmmt or 8
years whichever is sooner. The ~sses~n~nt will
The assessment amount remains the same, however,
the assessment shall be spread out over 20 years to
retain the affordability of the home.
The aime~sment is defma'ed based on a permanent
disability. The assesm~nt will contin~ to ~
intrust dnrin~ the def~m~nt
Attachments:
1. Revised assessment roll dated November 7~, 2001.
2. Letter from WSB.
3. Resolution.
c: Dave Hutton, WSB
Shibani Khers, WSB
Chris TNbodeau-F¢ist, Finance I)q~lmmt
o ~ ,,~ i~
'~'~ ~.:..
.:
~.: :"~
:~ '.-..'.:-
.
,.
-.-.
.
. ~. 2'.
...... ~_ ~ ~ ~ ~
...
.__.~. ~ . ~ . ~ . .
..
-~'-';:'.'..' ~ ~ ~
&
F~m:
Teresa Burgess, P.E.
Public Works Director and City Engineer
CEy of Chanhassen ~v~
WSB & Associates, In&
Memorandum
Date: October 31, 2001 NOV 0
Crestview Circle Improvements
WSB Project No. 1240-00
Re:
ENGlk~EERiNG DEPT,.
Inneso~
~422
;3.541-4800
FAX
We have been asked to comment on the letters received fxom the owners on Crestview
Circle regarding the proposed special assessments for the above-referenced project. Three
separate letters have been received from abutting proI~y owners.
A. Letter from David and Kristen Struyk
The Stmyks bring up three points:
.
They are requesting that the assessment on their undeveloped property be
deferred until it is developed. This is a policy decision that should be discussed
by the City Council and Legal Counsel.
.
They indicate that any cost overran as a result of error should not be attached to
the assessments, including additional inspection and engineering time. It should
be noted that the City is paying for all of the additional en~neering and
inspection costs and none of those costs are included in the proposed
assessments. Also, while the proposed assessments are 5% higher than
estimated, this is not related to any cost overruns during the project or any
problems with broken gas or telephone lines, re-paving, m-sodding or any other
construction difficulties. Actual construction costs are approximately $9,000
higher than was estimated in the feasibility repor~ but these are related to a
retaining wall that was not anticipated in the feasibility report ($5,000) and
additional Class 5 gravel ($4,000) that was needed due to the poor soils at the
end of the road. The total construction costs are approximately 16%. over what
was estimated in the feasibility report but the final proposed assessments are only
5% over what was estimated. As you can see, the full amount of the actual
construction costs is not being assessed. Any repairs or any reconstruction work
completed by the contractor was completed under warranty work and did not
result in any cost to the City or the prope~3~ owners.
.
They indicate that they feel that the assessments exceed the fair market value of
the parcels. The total proposed assessment for full sewer, water and street is
$13,236. This includes $6,502 for the street and $6,734 for the sewer and water
costs. The only true way to determine fair market value is to do appraisals on the
Minneapolis · St. Cloud · Equal Opportunity Employer
Ms. Teresa Burgess, P.E.
October 31, 2001
Page 2
property to determine the increase in value due to the improvements. During my
13 years of experience as Public Works Director for the Cities of Shakopee and
Savage, I conducted numerous benefit appraisals for public improvement
projects. Based on this experience and other appraisals that have been completed
itl those cities, it is my opinion that the increase in market value of full sewer,
water and paving does exceed the assessments that the City is proposing on this
project.
B. Letter from Shawn and Cherri Engstrom
The Engstroms indicate they do not feel that the street assessment of $6,502 benefits
them and are requesting that the assessment be withdrawn. They had existing sewer
and water prior to the project and therefore, were not subject to the sewer and water
assessment.
Again, the only way to really verify whether or not the assessment exceeds the market
value is to do a benefit appraisal on the parcel. This one is actually somewhat more
difficult to analyze because of the fact that sewer and water was not included in their
assessment. Therefore, the issue is does the street assessment of $6,502 equal the
increased market value by paving a gravel road. There are fewer examples of
projects where the improvement consisted of paving a gravel road with no utilities. It
would be my recommendation that the City discuss 'this with an appraiser to
determine the cost of homes of equal value that are being sold on paved streets versus
gravel streets to determine the tree benefit of having a paved street. My initial
reaction would be that the benefit would exceed the $6,502 proposed by the City of
Chanhassen.
C. Letter from Mary Trippler
Ii
Again, Ms. Trippler is indicating that she did not feel that the assessment equals
the benefit received by her property specifically as it pertains to the paving
portion of the assessment. She is okay with the sewer and water assessment but
feels that $6,502 for the roadway does not benefit her property to that extent.
Her total assessment was $13,236.
Please refer to my answer outlined in letter A. above. It is my opinion that
properties that receive full street, sewer and water assessment do benefit equal or
greater than the proposed assessment of $13,236.
,
She also indicated that the problems associated with the construction of the
project should not be passed on to the residents via the assessments. Again, my
analysis outlined in letter A. above indicates that those additional construction
problems did not result in any higher assessments for the property owners.
1
She also indicates that in her opinion the sewer and water assessments were
appropriately divided among the six lots. While there were six lots adjacent to
FA WP WIN~I ~ O31O I-tb lI. doc
Ms. Teresa Burgess, P.E.
October 31, 2001
Page 3
the project, only three lots received new sewer and water. The three additional
lots already had existing sewer and water and therefore cannot be assessed for.
sewer and water. The assessments were calculated on the basis of six lots for the
sewer and water and then only applied to the three lots that received the sewer
and water improvements. The other three lots of sewer and water assessments
were absorbed by the City as part of the overall City cost of the project.
Therefore, the cost of the'sewer and water was divided equally among all six 10ts,
but 0nly the three lots that received the improvements were then assessed for it.
Summary.
The above summarizes my responses to the relevant comments that were brought up by the
property owners in the three letters regarding the Crestview Circle assessments.
If you have any questions or comments: please do not hesitate to contact me at (763) 287-
7195. I will be available for the November 13"' City Council meeting
for
additiollal
comments.
sb
F A ~ 2 40-Ot3d O3101.tb ll. tioc
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
Date
Motion By
Resolution
Seconded By
RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT ROLL .
FOR CRESTVIEW CIRCLE UTILITY-& STREET. IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT NO. 00-05
WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Council has met
and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessments for Crestview Circle Sanitary
Sewer, Water, and Roadway improvements.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen,
Minnesota:
Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is
hereby accepted and .shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein
and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed
improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it.
.
Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of 8
years unless otherwise noted in the notes column of the attached assessment roll, the first of
the installments to be payable on or before the fa'st Monday in January, 2002, and shall bear
interest at the rate of 8% per annum fi'om the date of adoption of thia assessment resolution.
To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this
resolution until December 31, 2002. To each subsequent installment when due shall be
added interest for one year on all unpaid installments.
.
The owner of any property so assessed may, at .any time prior to certification of the '
assessment to the County Finance Director, pay the whole of the assessment on such
property with interest accrued to the date of payment to the City Finance Director, except
that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the
adoption of this resolution and the owner may at any time thereatler pay the City Finance
Director the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid with interest accrued to, .,;:
December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made'~
before November 30 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the next
succeeding year.
.
The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the County to
be extended on the proper tax lists of the County and such assessments shall be collected
and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes.
5. The total cost of the improvement assessed by this resolution is $98,401.00.
ADOPTED this day of
City of Chanhassen, Minnesota.
, by the City Council of the
ATTEST:
Todd Gerhardt, Clerk/Manager
Linda C. Jansen, Mayor
g:~ng~public~3-OS~esolufion 11 - 13-01.doc
CT 0F
PO Box147
Minnaota 55317
952.93Z1900
952.93Z5739
952.93Z9152
952.934.2524
,,u,utti.~.mn. us
MEMORANDUM
FROM:
DATE:
SUB J:
Todd Get, t, City Manager
Teresa $. Burgess, Public Works Director/City Enginj~.)
November 7, 2001
Approval of Assessment Roll for Quinn Road Sanitary Sewer
Improvement Project 01-02
Requested Action
·
The Council is requested to approve the attached resolution adopting the assessment roll
for Quinn Road.
Discussion
On October 22, 2001 the City Council held the assessment hearing for the above-
referenced project. One objection to the assessrmmts was received. Staff and the
consultant have reviewed the objection. Attached is a letter justifying the dollar amount
of the assessments from WSB.
adjustments to the terms of the assessments but no adjustments to the principal amount of
the assessments.
The assessment roll has been rmrised as follows:'
Amy Schuctte et al
P Ouflot A P
The assessment to the outlot is deferred until platting
or 8 yea~ whictm, er is sooner.. The assessment will
continue to accrue interest during the deferment. If
more than onc lot is created thc Ci.'ty will assess
lairral hook-up fees to the additional parcel(s) at time
of connecfiom
Attachments:
1. Revised assezsment roll dated Novemba- 7~, 2001.
2. Letter from WSB.
3. Resolution.
Dave Hutton, WSB
Shibani Khem, WSB
Chris Thfl~icau-Feist, Finance
From:
Teresa Burgess, P.E.
Public Works Director and City Engineer
City of Chanhassen
David E. Hutton, P.E. ~o ~
WSB & Assoc~tes, Ine.~ ~
Date: October 31, 2001 NOV 0 ~ 2001.
Quinn Road Sanitary Sewer Improvements
WSB Project No. 1339-01
Re:
ENGII',IE~RI~'~G DEPT
We have been asked to comment on thc October 22, 2001 letter from thc owners of
Oakwood Estates 2"d Addition, Ouflot A (PIN 25-5690030) regarding the proposed special
assessments for the above-referenced project.
Thc following two points were brought up:
The cost of the project was two to three times higher because it was such a
small project.
·
.
.
Response: "
In my opinion, this is not correct. Thc Femxibility Report had estimated thc cost
of the project at $25,000. The actual cost of. the project was $29,156 or 16%
higher than estimated. Additionally, based on a sewer length of 175 feet, the
assessments for the main line sewer were approximately $69 per linear foot. In
my experience, it is common to have sanitary sewer assessments in the range of
$50-$60 per linear foot for the total projects costs, 'including manholes, wyes,
pipe and indirect costs (engineering, surveying, etc.).
Therefore, I do not feel the sewer costs were two to three times higher than
normal. There may have been some slightly higher costs duc to the small size
of the project, but these are not substantial due to today's competitive bidding
climate. As a matter of fact, this project was bid twice, along with trying to add
it to a larger project by change order and the low price came in fairly close each
time, further verifying the reasonable cost of this project.
~00lsml
emorlai Highway
300
~neapolls
:innesota
i422
i3.541.4800
.
The project was diminished by the lack of watermain, which will be higher to
install at a later date.
Response:
While it is economical to install both sewer and water at the same time, the fact
that sewer is 20-30 feet deep and watermain is 7-8 feet deep reduces the overall
impact of doing them separately. Again, there may be some slight increase in
,3.541-1700 FAX Minneapolis · St. Cloud · Equal Opportunity Eml~lo~r F..~WPIFlI~JJg.0J%lO3101..tb.8oc
..
Ms. Teresa Burgess, P.E.
October 31,2001
Page 2
the waterman cost (for re-mobilization, etc.) by doing it at a later date, but
since waterman is so much easier and quicker to install due to its shallow
depth, any additional costs for constructing waterman in the future would be
minor, excluding inflation.
The only "additional" costs for Outlot A were for two sanitary services at $1,638 each' for
the potential two future lots. If the owners have no intention of developing Ouflot A into
two lots, the City could elect to defer one of the service line assessments ($1,638) until
such time as the lot is subdivided and developed. If such a deferment is considered, an
assessment agreement should be drafted and executed with the owners to address these
future costs if and when they subdivide the lot.
Please contact me at (763) 287-7195 if you wish to discuss this item further.
sb
F:\WP WINk13 39-O lkl O3101-tb.doc
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA.
Date
Resolution
Motion By
Seconded By
RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENTS
FOR QUINN ROAD SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS
CITY PROJECT NO. 01-02
WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Council
has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessments for the
sanitary sewer improvements on Quinn Road, City Project 01-02.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Chanhassen, Minnesota:
.
Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part
hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the
lands named therein and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be
benefited by the proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied
against it.
.
Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a
pedod of 8 years, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first
Monday in January, 2002, and shall bear interest at the rate of 8% per annum from
the date of adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be
added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until
December 31, 2002. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added
interest for one year on all unpaid installments. Differed assessments as noted on
the attached assessment roll shall continue to accrue interest at 8% dudng the
deferral pedod.
.
The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time pdor to certification of the
assessment to the County Finance Director, pay the whole of the assessment on
such property with interest accrued to the date of payment to the City Finance
Director, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid
within 30 days from the adoption of this resolution and the owner may at any time
thereafter pay the City Finance Director the entire amount of the assessment
remaining unpaid with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such
payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 30 or interest
will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year.
.
The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the
County to be extended on the proper tax lists of the County and such assessments
shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes.
5. The total cost of the improvement assessed by this resolution is $29,156.
ADOPTED this day of
the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota.
, by the City Council of
ATTEST:
Todd Gerhardt, Clerk/Manager
Linda C. Jansen, Mayor
g~nl~oubllc~ 1-02Vesoladoptlng assessments.doc
CrTYOF
690 City Center Drive
PO Box147
~n~ Minnesota 55317
Faerie
952.93Z1900
C, enerd Fax
952.937.5739
952.93Z9152
952.934.2524
Web Site
wu,mci, chacO, mn. us
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Mayor
City Council
-
Bruce M. De. Jong, Finance Director
November 8, 2001
Bond Call Resolution
As directed at the City Council meeting of November 1, I have prepared a
resolution calling the 1988 Fire Station and Equipment Bonds (Fund 316), the
1989C Corporate Purpose Bonds (Fund 323), 1991E G.O. Refunding (Fund 303),
the 1992A G.O. Improvement Bonds (Fund 310), and ~¢ 1993C G.O.
Improvement Bonds (Fund 331) on their respective duedates.. -'
The 1988 and 1989C bonds will require $236,786 and $181,264 to be transferred
fi'om the General Fund (1. 01) to their respective debt sm'vic~ funds. 'Those "
transfers will be performed at the end of 2001. The 1991E, the 1992A, and th~
1993C Bonds will make (or need) a transfer at the call date of $56,477, ~
($1,623,732) and $971,373 respectively. Those transfers will be to(or from) the
Historic Preservation Trust Fund
The early redemption of these bond humes will save the city money that would be
paid for high interest rates. The total amount of interest savings will bo.$250,487
(88 C,-O Fire - $21,525; 89C GO C0rp Pm~se -' $17,670; 91E C-O Re~- "
$73,452; 9ZA GO lmpr - $125,320; 93C GO Impr - $12,520) that would have
been paid over the rexnaining term of the bonds. It will also allow us to save some
of the tax levy (88 GO Fire - $70,000; 89(2 GO Corp Purpose - $101,472; 91E GO
Refunding - $220,000) that would otherwise bo. rocluired to fully fund tho bonds.
The net effect is to reduce the general fund bahmce to pay bonds that require
cmrent and future tax levies. This achieves the coundl goal of lowering cturent
tax levies while reducing the Gen~ Fund balance with a one-t/me appropr~on.
..
Stal~ recommends calling the bonds as of their next interest date.
attachment
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
DATE: November 12 2001 -RE SOL.ON NO:
2001-
MOTION BY: ~ SECONDED BY:
RF~OLUTION APPROVING CALL FOR
CERTAIN GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS OF THE CITY
WHEREAS, the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota (the "City"), has duly issued and
presently has outstanding $300,000 of its General Obligation Fire Station Bonds,
Series 9/1/1988 dated September 1, 1988 (the "Series 1988 Outstanding Bonds"),
$255,000 of its General Obligation Corporate Purpose Bonds, Series 1989C dated
Dee, ember 1, 1989 (the "Series 1989C Outstanding Bonds"), $930,000 of its
General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 1991E dated November 1, 1991 (the
"Series 1991E Outstanding Bonds"), and $1,360,000 of its General Obligation
Improvement Bonds, Series 1992A dated November 1, 1992 (the "Series 1992A
Outstanding Bonds"), $415,000 of its General Obligation Improvement Bonds,
Series 1993C (the "Series 1993C Outstanding Bonds"). They are herei~
collectively referred to as the "Refunded Bonds"), and have substantial asset
balances in the debt service accounts or debt service funds, as the ease may be, for
said Refunded Bonds; and
Be
WHEREAS, it appears that (i) the payment of these outstanding obligations is in
the best interest of the City of Chanhassen to reduce its total interest expense by
paying all principal and interest due on the Refunded Bonds as of the call date and
(ii) the payment of such fund balances and asset balances, together with .any
required cash transfers, will not materially reduce the financial flexibility of the
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Chanhassen, Minnesota, as follows:
.
Call for Redem tiow Notices. The Series 1991E Outstanding Bonds are hereby
called for redemption on January 1, 2002. The Series 1989C Outstanding Bonds,
Series 1992A Outstanding Bonds and the Series 1993C Outstanding Bonds are
hereby called for redemption on February 1, 2002. The Series 1988 Outstanding
Bonds are hereby called for redemption on May 1, 2002. The City Manager shall
give published and mailed notice as required by law.
1
Transfers of funds. The amount that each issue solely supported by taxes
requires to close the debt service fund shall be calculated as of year end 2001 and
RESOLUTION APPROVING CALL FOR CERT~ GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS
November 12, 2001
Page 2
any necessary fimds shall be transferred from the Gen~xl Fund. The amount that
each issue supported by taxes and assessments requires to close the debt s~wice
fund shall be calculated as of the date of call and any surplus or deficit funds shall
be transferred to or from the Historic Preservation Fund~ '
Adopted this 12tu day of November, 2001.
Attest:
City Manager
~ ~m~n
:: Clt7' z;~/1 ~
L-1170-4040
L- 1.1.70 -4110
L-1170-4110
L-1170-4,110
/.-/170-4110
L-1170-4110
/.-1170 -4110
/.-1170-4110
3. -1170 -4110
1-1170-4110
1-11'70-4110
1-1170-4110
1-1/70-4/10
1-1170-4140
1-/170-4,~60
1-/170-4300
1-/170-4300
1-1170-4310
1-1170-4310
1-/170-4310
.1-1170 -4310
,1-:/_170-4310
~1-1170-4320
11-1170-4~0
11-1170-4350
11-1170'-4350
11-/1"/0-4350
11-1170-4350
11-1170-4510
)1-1/70-4510
)1-1170-4510
)1-1170 -4530
~,.: l~:xllce/C~L'*vu~ C~o
D1-1210.-40~40
D1-1210-4040
D1-1210-40,10
pc: lfJ.L1 ~lon & Adln:l.n
01-/.220 -4040
01-1220 -4040
01-/.2:10-4040
01-1220-4130
01-1220 -4120
)1-1320-4130
~1-1220-'1140
11-1220-4140
~1-12.20-4140
31-1.220-4.150
~1-1220-4150
~1-1220-4170
11-1220-4240
01-3.2.20-4240
01-1220-4240
01-/.220 -4260
01-1220-4290
01-1220'4290
11-.1.220-4310
11-1220-4310
11-1220-4310
01-1220 '-4310
01-1220-4310
~1-1220-'1310
~1-1220-4310
11-1220-4320
01-12.30-4350
01-1220-4350
01-1220-4350
01-12.20-4370
01-/220.4370
01-1220-4370
~1-1220-4370
~1-1230-4370
,1-/220-4375
~1-1220-4375
,1-1320'4375
01-1220"-4375
01-/A20-'1375
.01-1220-&375
.01-1220-4375
.01-1220-43775
.01-1~20-4175
,01-1~20.4375
,01-1220 -4510
,01-1220-4510
01-/.220-4510
01-/.220-4520
01-1220-4520
BI. U11 TOO1
O'cll:Ltlel
O1:11J. I::L~i
n].dg I~ J.ut
B3.dg I~J. nc
Equip 14a:Lu
Xx~luw
XDiux'w
V~ ~
V~ ~ .
~int ~tl
~tlttiel
~ ~t
vm~o~ ~llm
11/13/01
~mtm~ 11/08/01
107074
107296
1077266
107209
107173
10~
10~
10~
10~
10~195
10~6
10~165
10~099
10~9~
10~335
10~3~
10~100
10~60
10~260
10~301
10~301
107277
107259
#X~ T.T~fB
102201
02..IX~299
11001095
000~8
100901
8Z02~7
26V3~106
2675~28
269~58]
~]16765
103101
75306~
105355
3413~3
10~01
10~01
102001
102801
10~01
10~501
6505
6504
0~5933
10615931
383~6~
920393~
9~5334
107082 BOV~.H~kX~B X]IBQE, MK~
1077085 ~:~m4]~RX,/]I1 ~
107074 ~I01/~EB~tXJ:MQ'I'BENDXB~%BZX~I~
10/2s/200 ].3.27
10/24/200 51.x4
09/22/200 68.30
10//1/200 65.08
09/18/200 63.90
10/09/200 42.00
10/17/200 386.75
10/~s/200 146.28
07/20/200 -83.95
10/22/200 98.86
09/26/200 103.48
10/26/200 20.21
11/05/200 61.80
10/31/200 52.29
10/16/200 59.33
11/01/200 695.00
10/29/200 444.79
10/11/200 0.22
10/19/200 2,094.46
10/20/200 27.4~
10/27/200 7.64
10/28/200 44.05
10/18/200 1,427.18
10/25/~00 48.80
10/31/200 93.32
10/31/200 2,076.75
11/01/200 0.00
11/01/200 177.08
10/29/200 10.05
10/30/200 141.34
/1/01/200 40.73
06/04/200 1.37
8,767.48
MIDZCR, 107082
#XM)II~TFA LII~ 107085
IfOSL"FX~ BIHKIfXT8 107074
RADXO~~IU:K 107259
D~O:)llKll~ff'l~ 107157
MKII:L*I'Im~ ACE ~ 10731/
~ 107285
Ki'9~IX:Q~.C~'/'~Ut.X3E~O:I49AIY 107309
BUkl~~RTOB~,IPKR 1077128
~ 107285
~ 107148
MI:D ~ ~ 10~3~
~ ~ ~Y 1072~
u~ ~ 107198
~~ 1O7172
~~~ 107~11
~ 1072~5
~~~ 107311
~~ 10~09~
~ ~ ~ ~vx~ 107081
~~ 107099
~-g~ 10710~
~~ 10~05
~~ 10~97
~ 107235
~~ ~ 1O7095
W~-~ 107301
~ ~-~ ~ 107301
~~ 107167
~ 107~8
~ ~ ~8 10~38
~ 10~98
~ ~ 107167
~ 107285
~ 107285
~ 10~85
· ~ ~ 10~51
~L~ ~07226
~ ~ ~ ~ 10~71
~ ~ 10~67
~~~ 10~73
~~~ 10~73
~~~ 107~11
~-~~Y~ 107~33
~ ~ 10~70
10130510 10/24/200 273.33
12880046 10/1~/200 8.10
102201 10/25/200 14.98
296.41
10130510 10/24/200 913.10
12880046 10/15/200 20.88
102201 10/25/200 ~.36
13&69 09/17/~00 9.54
~7523 x0/16/200 87.67
183181 ~0/3~/200 30.56
75~507 XO/~/2QO 33.58
103101 10/31/200 59.~
7524~ 10/16/~00 57.74
~76535 10/16/200 34.91
57800 10/26/~00 16.55
0~63869 10/16/200
10~01 10/24/200 20.01
102~01 10/2~/200 4.~6
103101 10/31/200 35.20
798~1 10/1~/200
103101 10/31/200 170.89
101001 10/10/200 1.~
10~01 10/~/200 7.68
1019~ 10/19/~00 110.19
101~001 10/~/200 169.59
101801 10/18/200 10.66
102001 10/20/200 32.43
502~ 10/27/200 100.96
101501 10/15/200 529.39
6505 10/31/200 79.87
087~933 ~/01/200 0.00
10~5931 11/01/200 93.75
100601 10/~/200 ~.15
509?8 10/06/200 103.09
28200076 10/~/200 795.00
10~01 10/~/200 15.00
102701 10/27/200 30.00
100601 10/06/~00 199.97
783~1 10/]3/]00 4~.~
809766 10/10/~00 8.50
716~8 X0/10/~00 1~9.95
10/31/~00 45.~
10/~/200 ~0.00
10~]01
1&~5 10/16/200 34.79
~1~ 10/21/200 11.89
- 45~3 10/~5/]00 ~.65
45199 10/~9/~00
X03ZOX X0/]1/200 ~0.95
4~7~]55 X0/24/~00 X05.)?
1~ 07/~6/200 20.00
~HVO~C~ ~PP~OVT~ r.~T BY
11113101 Date~ 111o6/ol
T:l.m~ ~ 1 ~
.............................................................................................................................................................
To1~1 FiL~ l~vent:Loll &~Jl:~Ln 6,783.37
De~,Cod~Bn~orce~m~
101-1250-4040 Inl~l ~ 107082 ~ ~ I~ 10130510 10/24/200 4,341.69
101-1250-4040 l~ H~A LZ~ 107085 ~ ~I~ l~ 12880046 10/15/200 79.92
101-1250-4040 Z~l ~18 ~ 107074 ~ ~ ~ DZ~Z~/~ 102201 10/25/200 150.29
101-1250-4130 ~ ~ ~~ 107243 ~ZT~ 5048204 10/31/200 149.57
101-1250-4140 V~ 8~ ~~ ~Y 107192 ~-~'~ 20011750 10/15/200 190.48
101-1250-4140 V~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 107166 ~T 11298195 10/22/200 23.75
101-1250-4140 V~ ~ B~ ~ B~ 10712~ ~1~ ~ZE8 103101 10/31/200 240.31
101-1250-4210 ~/~ 1~ 107189 2000 l~ 55600134 11/0~/200 36.00
101-~50-4310 ~1~ ~ ~I~88 107093 ~ ~ ~ 101001 10/10/200 27.44
101-1250-4310 T~1~ ~~ 107099 ~ ~ 101901 10/19/200 15.99
101-1250-4310 ~1~e ~ 107235 ~ ~ 50254 10/27/200 93.79
101-~50-4340 P~ ~ 107209 ~IT ~ 00034543 09118/010 31.95
101-1250-4340 ~gln~t~ ~ ~ ~ 10~11~ ~~ ~ ~ 6067 10/15/200 322.16
101-~50-4370 ~aln ~ ~ 107197 ~S ~E8 102901 10/29/200 137.00
101-1250-4370 ~av/~tn ~ ~ 107279 ~g ~8 110101 11/01/200 983.57
101-1250~0 V~ ~: ~B ~ 107125 ~Z~ ~ 110101 11/01/200 19.31
Code ~'t Eorcem~nt
Total An/m1 C~ntr~l 934.86
101-1310-4040 Z~e ~Z~ 107082 ~~ I~ 10130510 10/24/200 2,203.52
101-1310-4040 ln~e H~ ~I~ 107085 ~ LZ~ lN8~ 12880046 10/15/200 48.15
101-1310-4040 I~ce ~lS ~FI~ 107074 ~ ~ ~ DX~I~ 102201 10/25/200 70.62
101-1310-4300 ~1~t~ ~ ~ ~l~ 107123 ~ ~-99-20 89315 10/19/200 2,692.00
101-1310-4~10 ~1~ ~R~ffI~88 107093 ~t.t~~ ~8 101001 10/10/200 8.22
101-1310-4310 Tel~ ~T~ ~l~G8 8~1~ 107070 ~ ~ ~ 101701 10/lq/900 11.07
101-1310-4310 ~1~ ~~ 107099 ~ ~ 101901 10/19/200 4.56
101-1310-4310 ~l~e ~~Z~8 107105 ~.~~ ~ 101801 10/19/200 91.51
101-1310-43~0 ~av/~tn ~1~ O~ ~~ 10~294 ~ ~ ~-~ 102401 10/24/200 150.00
101-1310-43~0 ~av/~ain ~I~ O~ HI~ 107294 ~ ~ ~~-B~ 102301 10/~3/200 150.00
101-~10-43~0 ~v/~a~ ~ ~ 107230 ~E ~ 103101 10/31/200 43.87
101-1~0-4370 ~av/~a~ ~ 8~1~ 107223 ~g MI~ 103101 10/31/200 15.60
.................
To~al gr~neering 5,489.12
DepC: Street t4~J~tenm~e
101-1320-4040 Inl=ance ~I~ 107082 ~ ~ ~ 10130510 10/24/200 3,231.50
101-1320-4~0 /nB~e Ml~ LI~ 107085 ~ LI~ ~~ 12880046 10/15/200 63.36
101-1320-4040 lnl=nce ~X8 ~F~S 107074 ~ ~ ~ DI~IL~ 102201 10/25/200 118.72
101-1320-4120 ~P ~ ~ ~ 8~PLY ~ 107261 ~ 809401 10/30/200 55.28
101-1320-4120 ~tp ~ ~~ ~ 107134 ~/~/PIN 226410 10/30/200 49.77
101-1320-4120 ~lp ~ ~~~ 107221 ~K/FIL~/ 2017350 10/31/200 140.34
101-1320-4120 ~1p ~ ~P ~~I~ ~ 107309 ~ ~736750 10/22/200 -121.52
101-1320-4120 ~tp 9~ D.J.'B ~CI9~ 8~Y, ~ 107147 ~ ~B~ 4167 10/08/200 165.82
101-1320-4120 ~p Bu~ ~ ~R L~ 107133 2-4~ PL~ 384270 10/30/200 131.61
101-1320-4120 ~tp S~ ~I~ ~ ~ 107311 M~ 8~I~ 103101 10/31/200 541.29
101-1320-4140 Veh H~ B~ ~ 107281 8~I~ 191562 09/19/200 10.66
101-1320-4140 Veh ~ I~~ ~IT DI~L 107193 FIh~ ~ 00115563 10/29/200 263.85
101-1320-4140 V~ ~ BUZ~I~ F~ 107127 MIBC ~ ~ ~ 392325 10/23/200 276.59
101-1320-4140 Veh 8~ ~ ~ B~R 107128 ~I~ fl~IEB 103101 10/31/200 248.59
101-1320-4150 ~t ~1 MI~ ~T ~TI~ 107238 F~ MIX 6967~ 10/13/200 9,853.58
101-1320-4150 ~lnt ~1 MI~T~T ~~ 107238 F~ MIX 69645~ 10/06/200 12,027.60
101-1320-4150 ~ln= ~tl ~ M ~ ~C 107126 MI~ 101501 10/15/200 289.54
101-1320-4150 ~tn2 ~Cl MI~~T ~TI~ 107238 ~I~ ~ T~ 6925~ 09/29/200 307.69
101-1320-4150 ~ln~ ~tl ~ ~R & ~ ~ 107306 ~~ ~ DI8~ 50090 10/22/200 159.60
101-1320-4150 ~tnt ~tl ~ ~ & ~ ~ 107306 ~ OIL 49633 10/15/200 196.49
101-1320-4150 ~ ~21 ~ ~ · ~ I~ 107306 ~ OIL 50963 10/31/200 316.31
101-1320-4150 ~tnt ~tl ~ W~.n~ & ~ I~ 107306 ~ ~ 50436 10/25/200 235.64
101-1320-4150 ~tn= ~1 ~ ~T.T.~ & ~ ~ 107306 ~P 48840 10/03/200 257.21
101-1320-4150 ~tnt h21 ~.T.~ & ~S ~ 107306 ~P 49840 10/17/200 357.59
101-1320-4150 ~= ~1 ~ ~ & ~ l~ 107306 ~ 50962 10/31/200 178.66
101-1320-4150 ~2 ~1 ~ ~tY.~. a 8~ ~ 107306 ~ 50964 10/31/200 106.83
101-1320-4150 ~ln~ h=l ~ ~.T.~ a ~ ~ 107306 ~ 50880 10/31/200 ~66.93
101-1320-4150 ~tn2 ~ul ~ ~ & ~S ~ 107306 ~P 50743 11/06/200 167.87
101-1320-4150 ~tnt ~tl ~r.T.~ & 8~ ~ 107306 ~ 50626 11/06/200 117.23
101-1320-4150 ~tn= ~1 ~ ~R & ~ ~C 107306 ~P 50302 10/24/200 405.87
101-1320-4150 ~tnt ~tl ~ ~-T-~ & B~ ~ 107306 T~ OIL 49047 10/05/200 536.76
101-1320-4170 ~el & L~ MID ~ ~ 107237 DI~ ~ 57800 10/26/200 225.06
101-1320-4240 ~fom ~ ~ 107149 ~ ~ ~/~ 110601 11/06/200 75.81
101-1320-4240 ~tf~ ~ ~ 107151 ~-~ ~/~T~I~ 110501 11/06/200 310.42
101-1320-4260 ~11 ~1 ~RIE ~ &~ 107257 ~ 032022 10/29/200 830.69
101-1320-4300 ~t~ ~~ ~TI~ ~ ~ 107184 ~ ~l~ 693142 10/23/200 152.00
101-1320-4300 ~oul=~ ~-~ ~I~ 107155 DI8~ ~8 489 10/31/200 240.00
101-1320-4300 ~2t~ ~ ~ ~ 107311 MISC B~I~ 103101 10/31/200 13.62
101-1320-4310 ~1~ ~I~ WI~ 107093 ~ ~ ~ 101001 10/10/200 18.33
101-1~20-4310 ~1~ ATiT WI~H B~ 107070 ~ ~ ~ 101701 10/17/200 71.86
101-1320-4310 ~1~ ~ ~98 107297 ~ ~ ~ 102001 10/20/200 27.44
101-~20-4310 ~1~ ~ 107235 P~R ~ 50254 10/27/200 4.08
6,843.22
De~: Au/mal Control
101-1360-4040 Insurance H~DIC~ 107082 N~~I~ ~~ 10130510 10/24/200 273.33
101-1260-4040 I~e N~A LI~ 107085 ~LI~ 1~ 12880046 10/15/200 4.50
101-1260-4040 I~u~ce ~18 ~F~ 107074 ~ ~ ~ DI~I~I~ 102201 10/25/200 7.53
101-1260-4300 ~ult~ ~P~ ~ ~IC ~ 107156 ~ ~/~ ID'S 1001002C 10/15/200 390.00
101-1260-4310 ~1~ ~ ~P~.~8 107093 ~ ~ ~ 101001 10/10/200 90.54
101-1260-4310 ~1~ ~~ 107099 ~ ~8 101901 10/19/~00 7.37
101-~60-4~10 ~1~ ~ WI~S8 107297 ~ ~ ~ 102001 10/20/300 31.39
101-1260-4310 ~1~ ~ 107235 P~ ~ 50254 10/27/200 25.20
101-1260~370 ~av~ H~ ~ ~~ ~ 107339 ~ - ~I8~ 1029 10/12/200 105.00
of. rq'~n~m
11113101
11/08/01
1~2~
·
· -~ 8tzlmb ~
.-1320-4350
.-1320-4370
L-1320-4531
L-1320-4560
L-1320-&S60
L-1350-4310
L-1)50-4320
L-1350-4320
L-1350-4320
L-1350-4320
L-3-350-45~S
L-1370-4040
L-1370-4040
1-1370-40&0
1-1370-4120
1-1370-4260
1-1370-4260
1-1370-&260
1-1370-4310
1-1370-4310
1-2270-4310
1-1370-4310
1-1370-4320
1-1370-4320
1-1370-4320
,1-1370-4350
t1-1370-4510
~-1370-4510
~-1370-4530
Il-lA10-&370
t, ~lEnntng
1-1420 -4040
11-1&20-4040
1-1420-4040
1-1·20-4~10
1-1420-4310
1-1420-4310
1-1&20-4310
.-1420-&360
~: 8ea/o~J-ttty C~EmJJm/Cm
~-1430-·040
11-1430-4040
11-1430-&040
I1-1520-4040
I1-1520-4040
~-1520-&040
I1-1520-4310
~1-1520-4~10
~1-15~0-4310
~1-1520-4310
I1-1530-&040
31-1530-&040
~1-1530-&310
~1-1530-4310
31-1530-·310
~-1530-4410
31-1530-4510
-1532 -3631
11-1534-36~1
01-1534-3631
01-1534-3631
~1-1534-&130
g, mJ/o ~
8J. gn Na~
Otlltt/e~
Trav/T~&in
TZ/IU_~llZ~e
Z~II1J~&DC~
~lepho~
~Xdg H~Lnt
~ & HMI~"'Y'8 DBLZ
I,I~Drc&
FC)60'~ 8 9~ll~]rZ"~'9
M~DXOt
~ LZF~
8l~tl~rr ~
v~.z ~ MZ R~Y.,~SB
d-UDY BOLSTAD
107168 ~rmm~J~/JkC~/~BXIEZX) 103001 10/30/200 153.60
107294 ~X8'FER_~XC~-M~Q~ 102701 10/27/200 2·5.00
1073.15 ]~JU~J;~/Og.T]IQ/IlO~g/I~X~ 11281 ~/01/200 167.23
107162 ~BZ~ 437~5 10/~/200 980.97
107162 ~ B~ ~ 43746 10/~/200 2~.83
.................
~ 8~~ 34,858.20
107099 ~ ~ 10~01 10/19/200 46.33
107095 ~~ ~ 10~01 10/15/200 1,~8.86
107101 ~~ ~ 102201 10/22/200 414.33
10~0 ~~~ 102901 10/29/200 2,651.21
107307 ~~ ~ ~0201 ~/02/~00 25.02
10~4 ~~ 92043176 10/31/200
.................
~ ~ ~ G ~ 4,910.1~
107082 ~ B~LTAI~ ]]~OEAIC~ 10130510 10/24/200 1,484.i5
107085 ]IOV~4B~T.T]~ J~ULWa~K~ 12880046 10/15/200 26.91
107074 BOVBPEI~I 7.,C~o'r~0JDZBAB..T:L_TT~ 102201 10/25/200 67.35
107288 GU. LAL,D/IOUTt'U/(I,&SEE8 140925 10/26/200 33.91
107275 fj~T_.pB 12377918 10/17/200 13.98
107275 ~/Sm'Xps/~rfl~'rut'~ 12373599 10/15/200 57.17
107153 SC)c~s-x~/~G~ll* 2360,1,3 10/16/200 04.94
107087 C~LLOX,&R~C3nWQES 101901 10/19/200 51.73
107093 CIr.,XaJX,~9.~~ 1O1O01 10/10/200 8.44
107099 ~~ 101901 10/19/200 301.50
107232 'X'gX,I~rlI:BIE ~ 102801 10/28/200 19.80
107095 BLgCX'~TC/'X'Y ~ 101501 10/15/200 402.7·
107136 Ui.~SEIIZR ~ 991O1O31 10/31/200 257.64
107307 ELBCTSLTC~rYOli3~8 110101 3.1/01/200 463.71
1073O1 (~URIf2B Ur, AVXr'LIlOV 08715933 11/01/200 0.00
1O7301 G]WBIGI usxvxC:B-IWV 1O615931 11/01/200 119.73
107290 __m"~a~__/BR'Z'I"~::HI~/I~ 131781 10/18/200 133.29
107290 XXXIS~]LT,8/IKXEE~.C:0~D 131487 10/10/200 266.20
107250 Egl~kX]~) ~ ~XPlgS/(~lJUmJ 183536 10/26/200 5,100.16
.................
Total r'-Ik¥Gtrage 8,093.25
107271 Fa~IO~D/.P~UFI~T 5211 10/16/200 103.8·
~ 91m~ ~r~lllCm 103.04
10~0~2 ~~ ~ 101]0510 10/~/~00 1,~6~.09
107085 ~ ~ ~~ ~880~6 10/15/200 36.93
107074 ~~~~~ 102201 10/25/200 68.27
107293 ~ ~ ~~18 ~ ~0601 11/06/200. 75.95
107093 ~~~ 101001 10/10/200 7.75
107099 ~ ~ 101901 10/19/200 1.41
107297 ~~ ~ 102001 10/20/200 8.22
107114 ~-,~ 090301 09/03/200 1(8.00
.................
~ 91a~4~ ~t~ 1,609.62
107~ ~ ~ ~ 10130510 10/24/200 68.3]
107085 ~~ ~ ~880046 10/~/~00 ~.16
10707& ~~~DZ~ 102301 10/25/~00 4.01
.................
~ ~ ~11t7 ~m~ 7&.S0
10708~ ~~ ~u~ 10~0510 10/~4/300 1,006.~0
· 07~5 ~ ~ ~ ~880~6 ~0/~/~00 ~.06
107074 ~~~D~ 102201 10/~S/200
107090 ~~ ~ 101701 10/17/200 3~.79
~0?099
10710~ ~ ~ ~ 101~001 ~/19/300 ~.95
Z07297 ~~ ~ ~0~00Z z0/20/300 e.~2
.................
~ ~~a~ 1,140.78
X07085 ~ ~ ~ ~880~6 X0/15/200 5.40
107074 ~ ~~ m~--.~ z~20~ ~0/25/200 z~.23
107093 ~ ~ ~ ~0~00~ ~0/~0/200 0.22
107081 ~ ~ 10~01 10/11/200 2.85
107099 ~ ~ ~0190~ ~0/19/200 2~.~6
~0~ ~~~ 63206226 ~0/26/~00 2~4.08
~0~22 ~ ~ ~ ~03230 ~0/~/200 ~0.00
.................
107116 g~q~D ~ C~ED 57579 10/22/200 20.00
~ Pt~i 20.00
1072.54 ~ - ~ 57560 10/19/200 SS.OD
107229 R~lq~D~na]lC~ 57582 10/22/200 65.00
107203 EE]q~D-KZJlI~RDB~:~ 57484 10/15/200 65.00
107285 f~ 798042 10/10/200 134.32
~ Dm~c~ 329.32
INVOZC~ ~ ~.TB~ BY
11/13/01 D~te, 11/08/01
~M m 1 m
.............................................................................................................................................................
1:m~c: z,n.ke Am~ l'az'~
101-1540-4310 Telephone Q~Fd]T
101-1540-4310 T~leph~m ~MC ~
De~: Park Ma/n~enance
101-1550-4040
101-1550-4040
101-1550-4040 XnBurance
101-1550-4120 V~utp 8upp
101-1550-4120
101-1550-4120 F~p Sump
101-1550-4120 ~uiR 8u~p
101-1550-4120 Equ/p 8u~p
101-1550-4140 Veh
101-1550-4140
101-1550-4140 VehBu~
101-1550-4140 VebBu~p
101-1550-4140 Veh 8u~
101-1550-4140 Veh
101-1550-4140 Veh 8u~;~
101-1550-4140 Yah
101-1550-4150 ~int
101-1550-4150 Maine Hatl
101-1550-4150 Matnt Hatl
101-1550-4150 14atnt 14atl
101-1550-4150
101-1550-4150 Haint ~tl
101-1550-4151 Irrtg
101-1550-4170 ~u~l &Lub
101-1550-4170
101-1550-4240
101-1550-4260 Ba~ll Tool
101-1550-4310 T~le~
101-1550-4310 Tele~xme
101-1550-4320 Otilttie.
101-1550-4350
101-1550-4350 Cleaning
101-1550-4350 Cleani~
101-1550-4350 Cleani~
101-1550-4400
101-1550-4510 Bld~ 14a~t
101-1550-4520 Veh Hatnt
101-1550-4520 VehMa/nt
101-1550-4530
101-1550-4901 He2und~
De~, Downtown Maiu~enange
101-1551-4320 U~ilttie.
101-1551-4320 U~tlitte.
101-1551-4350 Cleant~
101-1551-4350 Clean/~c3
De~t, Be~io~ C/tt~ Ce~teg
101-1550-4130 Pro~
101-1560-4130
101-1560-4300 Co~ttltiru~
101-1560-4300 Co~u/ti~
:De.c, 1~cz~aticm
101-1600-4040 Insurance
101-1600-4040
101-1600-4040 ZnBur~nce
101-1600-4130
101-1500-4320 D'ctlitie.
101-1600-4320 OttlitieB
101-1500-4320 Ottlttie.
107088 ~ C~QB8
107099 'I~'T.~gROI~ ~
M~DXCA 107082
HIRNF~OTA LIFE 107085
~18 ~I~ 107074
81~40~ IHPL~MENT ~NC 107274
I,~NO~Q~T/PM~T 107214
~~ F~ 107182
~ F~ 8~Y 107300
~~ ~ 107311
8~ ~ 107281
9Z~R RIM &~ ~. 107255
B~ ~ 107281
~ ~ W TX~ 107177
F~~ P~ ~ 107166
~~B~ 107128
~ ~X~ 107179
8~ ~~ 107281
~~R a ~ INC 107306
~~R & ~ ~ 107306
~ ~R a ~ ~C 107306
~ ~R & ~ ~C 107306
~l~ ~ ~ 107311
~ ~ ~ 107311
MID ~ ~ 107237
~ ~ OIL 8~I~ 107206
~ F~ 8~Y 107300
~ 10~249
~~ 107099
~ 107102
CI~ OF ~8~ 107136
~ ~ & ~ I~ 107~06
~~ G S~ ~ 107306
~~-~ 10~301
~~-~ 10~301
lHP~ ~A ~ 107190
~~ & ~ 107276
NI~x~8 L~ INC 107302
NI~x'~B ~ INC 107302
~I DI~I~X~ ~ 107241
~ FIL~ DI~IB~X~ ~ 10~295
8cffi4rl'r H~XC ~
KAVA #Z CKENH~US~H
~I(7~m8 BU~ C~PANI~8
KAVA WZCK~ER
H~DICA
HXNI~ LIFE
~RT'r 8
[TNKOG
X(~L ~E~Y INC
I~ VAIJ~EY ELECTRIC COOP
~ V~/,LEY EL~XC COOP
~r~'c: Nallo~een
101-1614-4130 Prc~ Sump
101-1614-4130 Prog Supp TA~G~T
101-1614-4130 Prog
101-1614-4130
DI;g: l~z'emchool ~m
101-1710-3636 81fStlpPTog TYL~
101-1710-3636 812~pP~ ~ D~
101-1710-36~6 8128~
101-1710-3636 81f~p~
101-1710~300 ~ulti~ RI~
To~al lake Ann Park
100101 10/01/200 126.32
101901 10/19/200154.95
.................
281.17
NOV~MB~HEALTH ZN~N(~ 10130510
NOVBMB~ LIFE L~ 12880046
NOV~4B~L4]~~TE~M DX~ABZLITY 102301
~ 180962
~ 60008
~ 2285
~ILI~ 1~2
~8C ~IE8 103101
~ 19~301
R~ 395968
~ 8~ 198~12
TX~8 24109
~ 11300609
~I~ 8~IgB 103101
~SP~ ~/DI~ ~ 13791
~ 198400
~-~F ~[/~l~ 7567
M~ 48961
MI~ 49149
M~ 49253
MI~ 49048
HI~ 8~I~ 103101
~SC 8~X~ 103101
DI~BL ~ S7800
~~ 666291
~LY~/BIB P~ 5578
~XN~, ~~~ 82132239
~~ ~ 101901
~.~ ~ ~ 10192001
~8~ ~ 99201031
~~ ~n~; DIS~ 50090
DIS~E 0F ~P 49150
~ ~-~ 08715933
~ 8~-~ 10615931
~~I~8~I~ 5~5
I~ ~AT P~ 4948
~PAIE 8~T ~ ~415 935369
~PA~ 8~T ~416. 935372
M/SC P~ 10950200
PI~ 7816961
10/24/200 3,187.94
10/15/200 57.96
10/25/200 108.14
10/05/200 13.82
10/22/200 20.00
10/29/200 2,000.00
10/26/200 1,674.18
10/31/200 150.44
10/26/300 110.21
10/23/200 139.94
11/01/200 22.71
10/23/300 259.60
10/24/200 67.46
10/31/200 224.06
10/10/200 122.91
11/02/200 62.33
10/02/200 263.59
10/04/200 411.88
10/08/200 357.75
10/09/200 809.0g
10/05/200 820.47
10/31/200 507.81
10/31/300 45.63
10/26/200 42.69
10/26/200 7.02
10/18/200 132.91
10/18/200 380.16
10/19/200 45.30
10/19/200 359.20
10/31/200 28.26
10/22/200 120.00
10/08/200 132.00
11/01/200 0.00
11/01/200 -259.06
10/31/200 1,727.43
10/25/200 863.18
10/30/300 197.45
11/02/200 250.39
10/09/200 50.69-
10/03/200 43.43
15,556.96
107095 ELEC'I~.TCITY
107100 ~ CHA~F~
107301 GAR]tAGE 8~HV/C~-NOV
107301
107267 ~-0-~ ~IC 093001
107205 8~P~IBB ~ 8~ ~ 102401
107299 ~~ ~ ~~ ~F 10489
107205 ~~ ~X~ ~ 49951
107082 ~~ ~~ 10130510
1070~5 ~ LI~ I~ 128~0046
1070~4 ~R~~D/~Ih~ 102201
107209 ~ 00034465
10~095 ~~ ~ 101501
107101 ~I~ ~ 102201
107240 ~CI~ ~B 102901
101501 i0/15/200309.06
102501 10/25/20020.41
09715933 11/01/20040.96
10615931 11/01/2000.00
.................
370.33
09/30/20056.09
10/24/300136.47
10/10/200214.39
11/06/200175.50
.................
582.45
10/24/200 437.33
10/15/200 12.10
10/25/300 31.96
09/0?/200 40.20
10/15/200 51.44
10/22/200 20.87
20/29/200 18.74
602.64
107143 i~IBO~,~B g~'~1~E8 102701 10/27/200 102.00
107285 HALLOWeeN CANDY 753982 10/23/200 88.14
107285 ~x~u~ SUPPLIES 1231189 10/30/200 -34.55
107285 8~I~ 743155 10/10/200 804.44
~1 ~11~ Vary 960.03
107082 ~~ ~~ 10130510 10/24/200 109.33
1070~5 ~ LI~ l~ 12880046 10/15/200 3.02
107074 ~~~ DI~IL~ 102201 10/25/200 5.49
.................
107292 ~ ~~B-~ 5777~ 11/01/200 35.00
107224 ~ ~~ B-~ 5~4~ 10/15/200 35.00
107152 ~ ~ B-~ 5~713 10/26/200 35.00
10~152 ~ ~~B-~ 57767 10/31/200 35.00
107262 T-~/~ ~Z~ 10/30/200 8,755.50
l~.~e, 11/o8/01
1.25pB
6
: 9TOIChOO/ Ac~43rlttel
-173.l-3636
-1711-]636
-1711-3636
.-1'~//-4130
.-1U11-4130
.-1711-4300
.-17304130
:: Yca~;igCtv4-tlof
.-1731-3636
.-1731-3636
L-1731-4130
L-1731-4300
L-1760-3636
L-1760-3636
L-1760-3636
L-1760-4130
L-1760-4300
L-1760-4300
L-1760-4300
: ~ '1~
0-0000-4040
0-0000-4040
0-0000-4040
1-2310-4040
.1-2310-4040
.1-2310-4040
.1-2310-4300
.1-2360-4040
.1-2360-4040
.1-2~0-4040
L: C~ ~1~
1-0000-4130
~ioooo-1185
0-0000-1155
0-0000-1155
0-0000-1155
0-0000-4300
0-0000-4300
~: ~ R~cLm:m~m:e
10-4001-4702
J0-4106-4705
s~s~
cc~ulti~
81~8upi~z~J
81tSupi~J
81tSupPL~
Oxm~lt/~j
CoGaultJ~g
D~v l~
D~v
D~v
oc~ ~quip
MBDTC~
lq~TIS R~KFZT8
M~DICA
M]3ml~33~ L/FI
X~)lOt
Iq~KI*ZB ~
B~IIHTU0O ~
BT8 C~MBOLTAIrTB LTD
BCK.,AMD G ASSCX:~ATBS
~ i~,'tl(~2m:)~ ~ 8,895.50
107207 B~FOHD-~qJwAJ.~ ~ 57658 10/25/200 16.00
107196 ~ll1~E)-];q)Gr~:/]l C]LEV/~Q 57659 10/25/200 e.oo
107161 i~BJq~iD-IRJq~k~e (]LRV/]I~ S7657 10/25/200 e.00
107251 ~ ~ 10/31/200 4.22
107250 AZ1~88 ~ 3209d-262 09/19/200 109.99
107169 I]0C~]SB3CSI~BGB8 TOTJm3iT C~ 186215 10/11/200 :180.00
~ i?L~.J2OO/~e4 326.21
107285 ll'K0rl'
Tm:al Youth BDOrCl
107216
107146 iUEIq~D-HOW TO
107285
107187 '~ ~ ~'~
107272 ~-~
~07242
10~85 ~-~
107308
10~63
107228 M ~~m-~ O~
107199
820051 10/15/200 13.14
13.14
57583 10/22/200 40.00
57771 10/31/200 36.00
751499 10/12/200 4.28
102301 10/23/200 128.00
.................
57601 10/23/200
57558 10/19/200
57494 10/15/200
8362 08/16/200
10/29/200
103101 10/32/200
103001 10/30/200
208.28
48.00
45.00
48.00
256.84
1,918.50
498.00
180.00
.................
2,964.34
150,157.03
107082
107085
107074
10130510 10/24/200 679.19
12880046 10/15/200 3-l.37
102201 10/25/200 20.92
711.48
]h~z~Ota.~ 711.48
107082
107085
107074
107182
~ Rocycl~n~
107082
107085
~07074
10130510 10/24/200 319.88
13080046 10/15/200 4.46
102201 10/28/200 8.40
2285 10/29/200 1,000.00
1,332.74
10130510 10/24/200 251.55
13880046 10/15/200 3.06
102201 10/28/200 5.94
260.55
l~ndToCa/ 1,593.29
107268 BZCYCL~~~
To~al
96446 10/31/200 685.00
.................
685.00
l~u2dTo~a/ 685.00
107123
107'J.23 JLer~ts3K~z~a4 ~ 01-06
107/]3 ~ ~ 01-06
107133
1O7280
107122
81463 09/19/200 516.00
81464 09/19/200 956.50
82314 10/19/200 2,775.00
82313 10/19/200 1,702.00
222736 10/10/200 5,200.00
110101 11/01/200 1,000.00
.................
13,151.50
107096 La~ZA~O~ PARXJ00~T ll'~b"l'r. TT~ B~J~ 09/11/200 38,128.43
TOCal ~ Ma/22cm21ngo Bu:L]~,~,_ 38,128.43
107256 CLV8 ~i~E~B 6825 09/14/200 29,113.28
T~Ca~ Eng211 ]~msTuc~ 29,2.~.28
l~und~ 79,393.21
XX/X~/0X ~te, X~/08/0~
T~, 1,25~
.............................................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................................
410-0000-4300 O~2~t~Z~ ](~OT~I~ g]l~~ 8~V
410-0000-4300 C~m_~_~t ~g ~
410-0000-4701 ~ & Im~ ~ ~ FAIU4
423-0000-4300 Co~ultt~
423-0000-4300 Co~ult~
423-0000-4300 Cgmmu/tt~
423 -0000 -4300 Conlu/flag
107210
107121
107182
~Otal
100109 10/01/200 41.35
0997578 09/28/200 585.00
2285 10/29/200 3,875.00
4,501.25
.................
~u~Ot~/ 4,501.25
107129 i~OF~BZONAL 8~rX?'m8
107129 FRoIrBsgZ011~T~ B~'VZC~8
107129 ~tO.~,gOZC~q.L B~WXC~,8
107174 HRETZI~28/~XCWZ'ZOMg
0930200109/30/200 250.20
103101 10/31/200 405.00
0831200108/31/200 108.00
13897 10/22/200 150.00
.................
913.20
.................
PU~]~O~i 913.20
445-0000-4300 Co~su.lti~
445-0000-4320 ~tlitiel
&45-0000-4320 U~tlttte~
Ftmd: TAE ZNCR I - DOWNTONN 1025
De~t:
460-0000-4040
CANPBgh~ ~ SCOTT
XCEL ENE~SY XNC
]~1~ B B~BFTT~
107129 PROFEJ~BZC~ 8KRVZCS;8
107095 EI~CT~.TC/TY C~A~GEB
107100 G~B CH~R~8
Total
107074 NOV~4BKR ~ T~RN DZS~BZLZTY
~ot~l
83101 08/31/200 1,095.00
101501 10/15/200 484.96
102501 10/25/200 43.72
.................
1,623.68
.................
~TotI1 1,623.68
102201 10/25/2000.00
.................
0.00
.................
Fu~dTot&l 0,00
Pm~: T~ Z~C~ 3 - ~;)~IBPI~ CO
490-0000-4040 X~Bu~a~ce
490-0000-4300 Co~tt~
107074 )~3V~4~g~ I~RG~g~4 DISJtBILZTY
107180 HXQHR~Y 101 ~E~XL C~PTDV~P
~ot&l
102201 10/25/200 0.00
7289 10/17/200 971.50
971.50
.................
Ptm~Total 971.50
FUrL~.: ~ ~ 4- ~TERT~T)~ 1028Dept,
491-0000-4350 C/~
491-0000-4350 Clean/~3
107301 G~RRN~ 8gRVXC~-HOV
107301 flM~BAQg 8~C~-~OV
Total
08715933 11/01/200 0.00
10615931 11/01/2000.00
.................
0.00
.................
~um~Total 0.00
?tmd, TAX ~ 7 - ~DDITRAC; 823
Dez;~c,
497-0000-4804
Fund: TIP 8 - P~e~l~
498-0000-4300
o~m,~ ting
Ftm~, gPECXALABS~SBM~NT DE~T~i~8
De~t, Ce~tu_T~ZvdRecortml~-uctton
600-6002-4300 CO~BUlt/~9
60D-6002-4751 AWA]U~D CO
2002 HBA 8treet Im~rov~nt.
600-6004-4300 COnlultt~g
X~md: 8~1~R & ~TE~ UTZL/TY ~
700-0000-4040 Irtmurance
700-0000-4040 Insurance
700 -0000-4040 Inlurance
700-0000-4120 ~quip 8upp
700-0000-4120 Eatutp SuP9
MCROX LLC
EHLRRB & ASSOCIATe8 IRC
XCeL ENRR~Y INC
KO~Szv C~XC~ O:IMPANY
HANSON THOi~P PELLINEN OLSG~
MEDXC~
MZNNBGOTA LIF~
~R~ZS BENEFIT~
C~J~ BU/LDINQ CENTER
CHASKA BUILDING C~rZ]~H
107234 2ND ~ PA~ 101501 10/15/200 15,024.20
.................
Total 15,024.20
.................
Pur~ ~o~1 15,024.20
107163 ~SI0~U~ 8~'VXC~ 18728 09/10/200 500.00
.................
Total 500.00
Pu~Total 500.00
107307 ~ LXQH~/~3 I~O~gCT ~11768 10/16/200 9,800.00
107212 C~11~Y B~VD ~T/O~lh X~P~V 971C04 10/31/200 77,079.59
.................
Total Century Blvd Reconstructio~ 86,879.59
107180 2002 I~A~I'REET IME~H)V~4~ 7282 10/16/200 4,906.00
Total 2002 I,(SA Street I~4;~vm~-tl 4,906.00
Fund Total 91,785.59
107082 NOV~4RB~H~J~ T3~BT~a~C~
107085 HOV~4R~ LIFB 11~U~J~(~
107074 HOV~4Bg~ ~ ~4 DIBABILXTY
107134 QT~3VE~
107134 hATH/PAIRT/HM~ER
10130510 10/24/200 3,237.40
12880046 10/15/200 62.87
102201 10/25/200 116.74
225627 10/22/200 61,38
226363 10/30/200 35.56
l:mt:e z 11/08/01
TXmmz 1,3Spm
1-0000-4140 Veh
1-0000-4140 V~h ~
1-0000-4140 YAh ~
1-0000-4,140 YAh
1-0000-4,140 VAh ~
1-0000-4140 Veh 8upp
1-0000-4130 !~1~C M~CX
1-0000-41S0 Ma~u~ ~atl
I-O000-4XSO Mm&nt Mat1
1-0000-4160
1-0000-4170 Fuml
)-0000-4250 Me~
)-0000-4250 ~
)-0000-4260 fJm~X
)-0000-4:300 Consult/rig
)-0000-4300
)-0000-4300
)-0000-4300
:)-0000-4310
~)-D000-4310 TulopbonO
D-0000-4310
D-0000-4310
0-0000-4310
0-0000-4:310
0-0000-4320 1~.111tlel
0-0000-4330 OtllXtlel
0-OO00-4330 ~ctlltiea
0-0000-4320
0-O000-4320 U~tlttiea
0-0000-4320
0-0000-4320 ~c111tlem
0- 0000-4330
0-0000-4520 YAh
4)-0000-4520 Veh
4)-0000-4530 EquXp Main
~0-0000-4530 ~qulp
10-0000-4550 trcz fJy8
10-0000-4550 Wtr 8y8
10-0000-4550 Ut~ 8yu
~0-0000-4550 trc~
10-0000-4550 1Itt 8lin
10-0000-4551 8evez
)0-0000-4551 8e~et
10-0000-4551 ~
10-0000-4705 0~h l:qu4p
)0-0000-4705 O~h ~Ltp
)0-7001-4753 Out I:~jlne
10-700/-4752 Out Engine
l; ~7-1B-1 M~ttF Tovlr
~C:
)6-0000-4752
Out BngLue
Vendee ~
107188
107309
107381
107~6~
107257
10~18
107311
10~83
~07237
10~5
107311
107~69
10~3
107~
10~
107087
107088
107069
107235
10~32
107095
10~00
107101
107240
107307
~07~36
107307
107103
107302
Z07302
10~g2
Z07ZT0
107170
10~70
~071~
1073~
X07~gX
107252
~07170
1071~2
h ~ ISCROM iq]ED
.5-8201-2024 EIC:Z'OW
.5-8201-20~i umcrow
L5-8201-20~4 U--cz'ow
kS-B201-2024 B~42rC~
LS-8201-A02& bC,g'O~
Ls-~Ol-2O34 ~c~ov
Ls-~ol-2o24 e.~
.5-8~01-2024 BlCgOw
q-8201-2024 EmCz'OW
42005 10/15/200 96.85
57916993 10/17/200 118.36
195067 10/1.2/200 78.00
17790 10/33/300 188.87
11296058 10/18/300 32.68
103101 10/31/300 176.33
31521 10/19/200 13.57
1660 10/29/300 15.98
103101 10/31/~00 23.65
57800 10/~6/300 6.10
~86~7 10/lg/AO0 ~.~
· 03101 10/31/200 5.0~
~ 80453 10/15/~00 ~1.35
~ ~43 10/31/~00 ~9.55
823~ 10/19/~00 58~.76
2001 80~ ~/05/~00 160.00
498058 10/~5/~00 ~3.75
· 0~01 X0/19/200 448.33
100101 10/01/200 52.00
~o18o~ lO/~4/2oo
· o~9o~ ~o/~0/2oo 3s8.~
so2~ ~o/27/2oo
· o28o~ ~o/28/2oo 0.49
101501 10/~/200 6,963.43
· 02so~ ~0/2s/200 2.~9
18220~ ~0/22/200 66.46
~oa90~ ~0/20/200 227.32
· oa60~ ~0/2s/200 149.00
99101031 ~0/3~/200 ~.42
110101 ~/01/200 115.93
~03~0~ ~0/3~/200 6~.16
935353
935362 10/18/200 291.93
10007613 0g/~/200 57.35
~71~ 10/~/200 360.00
~6e~08 ~0/~7/200 3,144.00
~so~o~ ~0/~7/200 637.56
~ 01~4932 09/28/200 s~.oo
7995 ~0/13/200 428.96
~220 08/29/200 600.00
01-196 ~0/04/200 2,~S.S0
10/~/200 1,856.00
~8107 10/~/200 4,886.40
~~~~ 8796C ~0/2S/200 6,107.00
107180
107315 BC'"J'
37,738.57
7279 10/16/300 29,256.50
101501 10/15/200 266,206.31
395,462.01
]~ndl~:~J~ 333,201.38
107311
1654 3_~/02/300 2,900.00
2,900.00
· LmdTOt~ 2,900.00
107303
107244
107231
107082
107085
107074
107209
3519800 11/03/200 65.22
1604400 11/05/300 9.43
3832401 11/05/300 1.64
10130510 10/24,/300 426.431
12080046 10/15/200 10.99
103201 10/25/200 20.6S
00034558 09/19/300 362.10
896.47
~mdTo~ll 896.47
107068
107076
10707~
107075
107079
107~
107~0
10~07
107106
10/23/200 15,000.00
10/23/300 2,500.00
10/23/200 1,100.00
10/23/300 8,000.00
3815~]~(B 10/22/200 4,800.00
3S0~n 11/02/200 500.00
4151urun 11/03/300 750.00
11/03/200 3,250.00
4100R]kT, L 11/03/300 750.00
11/13/01 Decal 11/08/01
Timai 1,25pm
_"i~'y of Chanhaseen Page: 9
Department (IL Number Check Invoice Due
A~c~ua~ Ab~rlv Vend~r N~ Ntm~oer Invoice Description Number Date Amo41Gt
Total LANDSCAPE 35,650.00
815-8202-2024 Recro~ Pay KROIB8 CCI~8'L'RI.~IOl; 107077 ~I~ ~ - 8481 HIBBl~ 10/24/200 500.00
815-8202-30~ Esc~ Pay ~IBG ~I~ 10707? ~I~ ~-8464 M188I~ 10/24/200 500.00
815-0202-2024 RIC~ Ply ~188 ~~~ 107077 ~I~ ~-8465 MlBBI~ 10/24/200 500.00
815-~02-2024 ~ Pmy ~IG8 ~Z~ 107077 ~I~ ~-8451 MlBBI~ 10/24/200 500.00
815-8202-2024 gecr~ Pay ~ ~8~I~ 107073 ~I~ ~-4~2 S~I~ 10/24/200 500.00
815-~02-2024 Bl~ Ply ~ ~I~ A FI~ 107072 ~I~ ~ - 3850 ~ 10/24/200 250.00
815-8202-2024 EIc~ Ply HI~ ~E 107083 ~I~ Z8~ ~ 10/25/200 250.00
815-8202-2024 R.c~ Pay ~ ~I~ ~ 107097 ~ ~ ~ 4020~ 20/30/200 500.00
815-8202-20~ Rl~ ~y ~ ~ 107109 ~l~ ~ ~ 350~ 11/02/200 500.00
815-8202-2024 Esc~ Pay 818~ 107110 ~~ 415~ 11/0~/200 500.00
815-8202-2024 Rich Pay ~ B~ INC 107106 ~ ~ 4100~ 11/02/200 500.00
815-8202-2024 ~1~ ~y ~ ~ ~~ 107219 ~I~ ~ ~ 11/06/200 4,000.00
815-e202-20~4 ~c~ ~y ~IN ~ 107158 ~I~ ~ ~ 560P~ 11/06/200 250.00
815-~02-2024 gsc~ ~y ~ ~~ & ~ 107304 ~I~ ~ ~ 7595~ 11/06/200 500.00
Dept ~ ~RCURITY
815-8221-3024 Escrow Pay
NIK~ DBGIGN 8~JDIO LTD
Ftm~: PAYROLL CI~J~t.TNG FUND
Dept:
820-0000-2005 Flex Plan
820-0000-2005 Flex Plan
820-0000-2005 Flex Plan
820-0000-2005 Flex Plan
820-0000-2005 Flex Plan
820-0000-2005 Flex Plan
820-0000-2005 Flex Flan
820-0000-2005 Flex Plan
820-0000-2005 Flex Plan
820-0000-2005 Flex Plan
820-0000-2005 Flex Plan
820-0000-2005 Flex Plan
820-0000-2009
820-0000-2009 De£ Comp
820-0000-2011 Life In~.
820-0000-2011 T,~l.~e Ins.
820-0000-2012 Health InB
~20-0000-2013 D~NTAL PAY
Total E~OSI0~ CCMTROL
107247
Total 8ECUR-TTy
9,750.00
63400~B 11/02/200500.00
.................
500,00
~ Total 45,900.00
BILL B~'4ENT 107120 FL~X=DAYC~R.~ 110201 11/02/200 316.00
BETTY EIII~M 107119 FLEX=B~LT~ 110601 11/06/200 313.67
~.T,~ ~ 107139 ~-~Y~ 110601 11/06/200 1,522.1g
~I~ B~i-r 107164 ~-~ 110601 11/06/200 538.03
KIM ~ZGS~ 107208 ~-~Y~ 110601 11/06/200 52.08
~ ~E 107181 ~-~ 110601 11/06/200 537.02
NI~I ~ 107246 ~-~ 110601 11/06/200 245.40
PA~ E~ 107253 ~-~Y~ 110601 11/06/200 217.39
S~~ 107279 ~-~ 110601 11/06/200 1,809.32
~B~88 107286 ~-~ 110601 11/06/200 30.05
~ ~ 107287 ~-~Y~ 110601 11/06/200 58.33
~ B~8 107286 ~-~Y~ 1106200111/06/200 178.28
~ ~ ~P 107104 ~D ~ ~-1~ PAY ;N~ 103101 10/30/200 5,611.42
I~ ~I~~~ 107098 ~ ~F ~-~ PAY ZN~ 1031200110/30/200 1,345.00
H~ LI~ 107085 ~ ~I~ 1~ 1288004610/15/200 338.56
383200-N~ G~ ~I~ ~ 107067 ~P ~I~ ~~ ~ 3~32110110/25/300 4~.00
~Z~ ~07082 ~R ~ I~ 1013051010/24/200 7,771.64
SE~I~ ~I~ ~~ ~ 107089 ~R ~ ~~ 102601 10/24/200 1,142.76
.................
~tal 22,075.13
.................
~tal 22,075.1]
Grand Total 752,832.41
Check
Date
St~t~
7065 00/00/0000 void
7066 00/00/0000 Void
7067 10/?.6/2001Rec~tLed
7068 10/26/2001 Printed
7069 10/26/2001 Printed
7070 10/26/2001 Printed
~71 10/~/2001 Printed
f707~ 10/26/2001 ReconciLed
C/O?3 10/26/2001 Printed
rTo?& 10/26/2001 Printed
~7075 10/26/2001 Printed
17076 10/26/2001 ReconciLed
170T7 10/26/2001 Printed
17078 10/?.6/2001 Printed
17079 10/26/2001 ReconciLed
17080 10/26/2001Prtnted
i7881 10/26/2001Prtnted
)7082 10/26/2001 ReconciLed
)7083 10/26/2001Prtnted
)7084 10/26/2001 Printed
)7085 10/?.6/2001 ReconciLed
)7086 10/26/2001 Reconciled
)7087 10/26/2001Prtnted
)7088 10/26/2001 Reconciled
37089 10/26/2001 ReconciLed
37090 10/26/2001 Printed
37091 10/26/2001 ReconciLed
07092 10/26/2001 ReconciLed
07093 10/26/2001 ReconciLed
07094 10/?_6/2001Votd
07095 10/26/2001 Printed
07096 10/?.6/2001 ReconciLed
07097 10/31/2001 Printed
07098 10/31/2001 Printed
07099 10/31/2001 Printed
07100 10/31/2001 Printed
07101 10/31/2001 Printed
07102 10/31/2001Prtnted
07103 10/31/2001Prtnted
0710~ 10/31/2001Prtnted
07105 10/31/2001 Printed
07106 11/02/2001Prtnted
07107 11/02/2001Prtnted
07108 11/07./2001 Printed
07109 11/02/2001Prtnted
.07110 11/02/2001 Printed
97111 11/02/2001Prtnted
07112 11/13/2001 Printed
07113 11/13/2001Prtnted
0711& 11/13/2001Prtnted
07115 11/13/2001Prtnted
~7116 11/13/2001 Printed
!07117 11/13/2001 Printed
07118 11/13/2001Prtnted
07119 11/13/2001 Printed
07120 11/13/2001Prtnted
07121 11/13/2001 Printed
07122 11/13/2001 Printed
0712] 11/13/2001 Printed
0717A 11/13/2001 printed
0717.5 11/13/2001Prtnted
07126 11/13/2001Prtnted
071Lrf 11/13/2001 Printed
0712B 11/13/2001 Printed
07129 11/13/2001 Printed
07130 11/13/2001 Printed
07131 11/13/2001 Printed
07132. 11/13/2001 Printed
07133 11/13/2001 Printed
07134 11/13/2001 Printed
07135 11/13/2001Prtnted
071~6 11/13/2001Prtntecl
CHECK REGISTER REPORT
BANK: CHANHASSEN BANK
Date: 11/08/01
Ttme: l:Z9pm
Page: 1
0.00
0.00
NCPER$ 383200-NCPERS GROUP LIFE %NS B~iP LIFE INSURANCE N~ER ~B.O0
APPLEB APPLEBEES LANDSCAPING SECURITY REFUND 15,000.00
ATT3 AT&T TELEPHONE CHARGES 14.62
ATTIL AT&T WIRELESS SERVICES CELLULAR PHONE CHARGES 82.93
AXELS AXEL'S #ECH. FENCZNG ESCROW REFUND 1,100.00
CREDES CREATIVE DESIGN & FINISH EROS%ON ESCROW - 3850 LESLEE 250.00
DEECON DEERBROOKE CONSTRUCT%ON ERDS%ON ESCROW-~32 SLI~IERFZELD 500.00
FORBEN FORT%S BENEFITS NOVE#BER LONG TERN DISABILITY 1,035.33
GUYPAY GUY PAYNE LANDSCAPING ESCROW REFUND 8,000.00
JEFHEL JEFFREY & EL%ZABETH HELSTRON GRADING/SEEDING ESCROW REFUND 2,500.00
I(ROCON KROISS CONSTRUCTION EROSION ESCROg-SJQ51 #ISSION 2,000.00
L%NJAN LZNDA JANSEN COIJNCIL DEDUCTION REFUND
LUNBRO LUNDGREN BROS CONSTRUCTION LANDSCAPZNG ESCROW REFUND 4,800.00
HARENG HARK ENGEL COUNCIL DEDUCT%ON REFUND 82.00
#CIWOR #C! gORLDCOH ~ SERVICE TELEPHONE CHARGES 10.~5
#EDICA NEDICA NOVE~IBER HEALTH INSURANCE 35,403.57
#%CKRA #%CHAEL I(RAUSE EROS%ON ESCROW REFUND ?.50.00
#IKNAS HIKE HASON ~_~CIL DEDUCTION REFUND 96.00
#NL%FE #%NNESOTA LIFE NOVEMBER LIFE %NStJRANCE 893.68
NANNAN NANCY PlANCZNO COUNCIL DEDUCTION REFUND 82.00
NEXTEL NEXTEL CELLULAR PHONE CHARGES ' 579.33
QWEST GIdEST TELEPHONE CHARGES 178.22
SECL%F SECURITY LIFE INSURANCE CO NOVENBER DENTAL INSURANCE 1,205.25
SPRPCS SPRINT PCS CELLULAR PHONE CHARGES 78.70
STEBER STEVE BERGUIST COUNCIL DEDUCT%ON REFUND '96.00
STELAB STEVEN LABATT COUNCIL DEDUCTION REFUND ~.00
VERIZO VERIZON WIRELESS CELLULAR'PHONE CHARGES 170.58
WILENG WILLIAN R ENGELHANDT ASSOC INC LAKE AN PARK HA%NT FACILITY 38,128.43
XCEL XCEL ENERGY INC ELECTRICITY CHARGES 11,597.06
WESCON WESTRA CONSTRUCTION INC LAKE ANN PARK#A%NT FAC%L%TY
ALLAHE ALL A#ERZCAN REC EROSION ESCROW REFUND 500.00
%(3dA ICHA RETIRENENT AND TRUST ENP DEF CONP-1ST PAY IN NOV 1,3Z~5.00
K~CTEL KNC TELECON TELEPHONE CHARGES
#INNEG #INNEGASCO'RELIANT ENERGY GAS CHARGES 115.21
HVEC #N VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP ELECTRICITY CHARGES 501.66
NEXTEL NEXTEL CELLULAR PHONE CHARGES 583.74
POST POSTHASTER UTILITY BILL POSTAGE 611.16
USCH US(34 DEFERRED C~I4P ENP DEF CO#P-1ST PAY IN NOV 5,611.42
VER%ZO VERIZON WIRELESS CELLUI./LR PHONE CHARGES 110.39
DONALA DON ALAN BUILDERS INC ESCROW REFUNDS 1,250.00
LUNBRO LUNDGREN BROS CONSTRUCTION ESCROW REFUNDS 2,250.00
POST POST#ASTER NEVSLETTER BULK HAILING 1,203.16
ROHLUN ROHAN LUND EROSION ESCROW REFUND 500.00
SISKA SISKA GROUP ESCROW REFUNDS 1,250.00
TONLUN TONY LUND LANDSCAPE ESCROW REFUND 500.00
A1ELE A'I ELECTRIC SERVICE gELL ~ A/C HOOK UP 4?.8.96
ACCCOH ACCESS CO#HUNICAT%ONS NETWORK WIRING 85.00
ANEPLA AHERICAN PLANN%NG ASSOCIATION #ENBERSHIP 1~8.00
ANCTEC ANCOH TECHNICAL CENTER BRACEETS/ORING/NUTS/KITS 167.23
ANNHAL ANN HALONE REFUND PUNCH CARD 20.00
ARAPlAN ARAHANK COFFEE/CREAH 61.80
BANFOR BANN FOPJ~S TECHNOLOGY BUILDING PERHIT FOPJqS 322.16
BETE%D BETTY EZDA31 FLEX-HEALTH 313.67
B%LBEH BILL BE~ENT FLEX'DAYCARE 316.00
BI(B# BI(BN ENG[NEER~ C~L~N SKATE PK IPlPROVP[CN[C SH 585.00
BOLAND BOLAND & ASSOCIATES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,000.00
BONROS BONESTRO0 ROSENE ANDERLIK PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 9,227.26
BORSTA BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY LIGHT BULBS 526.49
BROA~ BROgNms AHOCO VEHICLE gASHES 19.31
BRYROC BRYAN ROCK PROOUCTS INC #%NUS ?.89.54
BUIFAS BUILDING FASTENERS #ISC BOLTS FOR STOCK ~76.59
BURBUN BUNPER TO BUNPER AUTONOTIVE SUPPLIES 1,001.10
CAHKNU CAHPBELL KNUTSON SCOTT & FUCHS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,858.20
CARAUD CARVER COUNTY AUDITOR COPIES OF NAHE CHANGES 7.50
CDgGOV CD1/ COVERNNENT INC NETi/ORK INSTRUNENTS LINK 860.51
CENFEN CENTURY FENCE CO#PANY FURNISH/INSTALL CHA;N LINK FEN 6,107.00
CHCAR CH CARPENTER LLI~BER 2'4X8 PLYIWO00 131.61
CHABUI CHASKA BUILDING CENTER LATH/PAINT/HAP)IER 1/,6.71
CHRINC CHRISTIANS %NC REFUND VOIDED PE]~qIT 331.25
CHANHA CITY OF CHANHASSEN WATER/SEMER CHARGES 350.32
CHECK REGISTER REPORT
BANK: CHANHASSEN BANK Date: 11/08/01
Time: 1:29pm
;ity of Chanhassen Page:
:heck Check Vendor
Wurber Date Status Number Vendor Name Check Description Amount
107137 11/13/2001 Printed CHAPET CITY OF CHANHASSEN-PETTY CASH COUNCIL MEAL 102.9~
107138 11/13/2001 Printed MINNEA CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS RENT TRAINING FACILITY 795.00
107139 11/13/2001 Printed COLMAR COLLEEN MARTINO FLEX-DAYCARE 1,522.18
107140 11/13/2001 Printed CC)HINT COHPUTER INTEGRATION TECHN. SUPPORT-NETta:)RK, FIRE~ALL CONF 247.50
107141 11/13/2001 Printed CONFRE CONSOLIOATEO FREIGHTWAYS SHIPMENT OF PRV~S FOR SPRNGFLO 51.00
107142 11/13/2001 Printed CONAIR CONTROLLED AIR REFUND OVERPAYMENT 25.53
107143 11/13/2001 Printed CORHOE COREY HOEN REIMBURSE EXPENSES 102.00
107144 11/13/2001 Printed COREXP CORPORATE EXPRESS OFFICE SUPPLIES 292.88
107145 11/13/2001 Printed CURZIE CURT ZIERMANN FLEX-HEALTH 56.86
107146 1i/13/2001 Printed CYNDON CYNTHIA D(OS REFUND-HOW TO GET THE PART 36.00
107147 11/13/2001 Printed DJMUNI D.J.~S MUNICIPAL SUPPLY, INC SAFETY GLASSES 165.82
107148 11/13/2001 Printed DALCO DALCO GLASS CLEANER 34.91
107149 11/13/2001 Printed DALLAR DALE LARBEN REIMB SAFETY BOOTS/JEANS 75.81
107150 11/13/2001 Printed DAVCHR DAVE CHRISTIANSON REFUON VOIDED PERMIT 102.25
107151 11/13/2001 Printed DEASAB DEAN SABINSKE REIM-SAFETY BOOTS/COAT/BIBS 310.42
107152 11/13/2001 Printed DEBSHA DEBORAH SHAW REFUND PRESCHOOL B-BALL 70.00
107153 11/13/2001Prtnted DELTOO DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY SOCKETS/SOLDERING GUN 8~.94
107154 11/13/2001 Printed DELMAR DELL MARKETING LP POWER EDGE 9,872.62
107155 11/13/2001 Printed DEMCON DEM-CON LANDFILL DISPOSAL FEES 240.00
107156 11/13/2001 Printed DEPPUB DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY CONNECT CHARGES/TERMINAL ID'S 390.00
107157 11/13/2001 Printed DIECOH DIESEL COHPONENTS AIR CLEANER/BRACKET 87.67
107158 11/13/2001 Printed DOLPO0 DOLPHIN POOL EROSION ESCROW REFUND 250.00
107159 11/13/2001 Printed DONSAL DONALD SALVERDA & ASSOCIATES REGISTRATION 1,644.86
107160 11/13/2001 Printed DOUHOE DOUG HOESE FLEX-HEALTH 250.00
107161 11/13/2001 Printed DUAHAT DUANNA MATTHYS REFUND-PUMPKIN CARVING 8.00
107162 11/13/2001 Printed EARAND EARL F ANDERSEN INC PORTABLE SiGN BASE 1,265.80
107163 11/13/2001 Printed EHLERS EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,771.19
10716~ 11/13/2001 Printed ELIBUR EL%ZABETH BURGETT FLEX-HEALTH 538.03
107165 11/13/2001 Printed ESCTEL ESCHELON TELECC~, INC SUPPORT 444.79
107166 11/13/2001 Printed FACHOT FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY BATTERY 123.89
107167 11/13/2001 Printed FESFO0 FESTIVAL FOODS NlSC FOOD PURCHASES 1,262.75
107168 11/13/2001 Printed FIEDRE FIELD OF DREAMS RECYCLING CTR TIRES/REFRIG/BULBS/AC/DEHUNID 153.60
107169 11/13/2001 Printed FIRSTU FIRST STUDENT INC BUSING CHARGES TO TARGET CTR 180.00
107170 11/13/2001 Printed FIRSYS FIRST SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY SCADA COMPUTER LOCKUP 9,027.96
107171 11/13/2001 Printed FOCONE FOCUS ONE HOUR PHOTO FILM DEVELOPING 46,68
107172 11/13/2001 Printed GARSEE GARTH SEEMAN IST RESP PATCHES FOR EHT 4,26
107173 11/13/2001 Printed GECAP GE CAPITAL IT SOLUTIONS PRINTER CARTRIDGES 386.75
107174 11/13/2001 Printed GEOCON GEOMATRIX CONSULTANTS INC MEETINGS/COI~qUNICATIONS 150.00
107175 11/13/2001 'Printed GINCAR GINA CARLSON FLEX-HEALTH 75.68
107176 11/13/2001 Printed GLEFLO GLENROSE FLORAL JANES PLANT/MAINTENANCE 726.95
107177 11/13/2001 Printed BRARAG GOODYEAR BRAD RAGAN TIRE TIRES 259.60
107178 11/13/2001 Printed GREHAY GREG HAYES FOOD FOR CLASS 30.00
107179 11/13/2001 Printed HANCOI~ HANCE COHPANIES ROTOR/SPARK PLUG$/DZSTR CAP 311.78
107180 11/13/2001 Printed HANTHO HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON HIGHWAY 101 TRAIL CONCEPT DVLP 35,134.00
107181 11/13/2001 Printed HARBRO HAROLD BROSE FLEX-HEALTH 537.02
107182 11/13/2001 Printed HARTRE HARTMAN TREE FARM TREES 6,875.00
107183 11/13/2001 Printed HAWCHE HAWKINS CHEMICAL REPAIR OF CHLORINATOR 267.90
107184 11/13/2001 Printed HEAEVU HEALTHCC~IP EVALUATION SVCS COS DRUG TESTING 152.00
107185 11/13/2001 Printed HEATRA HEATHER TRAM REFUND-FALL YOGA 48.00
107186 11/13/2001 Printed HLBTAU HLB TAUTGES REDPATH LTD 2000 AUDIT 6,778.00
107187 11/13/2001 Prtnted HONBOU HOHEWARD BOUND THEATRE COMPANY THEATRE CLASS INSTRUCTION 128.00
107188 11/13/2001 Printed HOPTCN HOPKINS TOWN & COUNTRY DODGE U-JOINTS 98.85
107189 11/13/2001 Printed ICBO ICBO 2000 IRC 36.00
107190 11/13/2001 Printed IHPPOR IMPERIAL PORTA THRONES PORTABLE TOILET SERVICES 1,727.43
107191 11/13/2001 Printed INFRAT INFRATECH LOCATION SERVICES 600.00
107192 11/13/2001 Printed INTBAT INTERSTATE BATTERY BATTERIES 247.83
107193 11/13/2001 Printed INTDET INTERSTATE DETROIT DIESEL FILTER KITS 263.85
107194 11/13/2001 Printed IOSCAP IOS CAPITAL REC CENTER COPIER 214.08
107195 11/13/2001 Printed JLIND J & L INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY WRENCH/DRILL/WIRE WHEEL 59.33
107196 11/13/2001 Printed JANDOR JANE DORM REFUND-PUMPKIN CARVING 8.00
107197 11/13/2001 Printed JEFKEO JEFF KEOGH REIMBURSE EXPENSES 137.00
107198 11/13/2001 Printed JEFOCH JEFF OCH REIMBURSE EXPENSES 35.01
107199 11/13/2001 Printed JERCHA JERRY CHALUPSKY ADULT SOFTBALL UMPIRE 150.00
107200 11/13/2001 Printed JIMBRO JIM BRONN'S CULTURED SOD FARM SOD-BLUFF CREEK/BANDIMERE 263.59
107201 11/13/2001 Printed JOLDEV JOLEEN DEVENS REIMB-POSTAGE/PHONE/MILEAGE 73.10
107202 11/13/2001 Printed JTELE JT ELECTRIC SERVICE INC REFUND OVERPAYMENT 317.22
107203 11/13/2001 Printed JUDBOL JUDY BOLSTAD REFUND-KINDER DANCE 65.00
107204 11/13/2001 Printed JULGRO JULIE GROVE FRANKLIN PLANNER REFILL 42.00
107205 11/13/2001 Printed KARWIC KARA WlCKENHAUSER REIMBURSEMENT SENIOR PROG 311.97
107206 11/13/2001 Printed KATFUE KATE FUEL OIL SERVICE FUEL ADDITIVE 7.02
107207 11/13/2001 Printed KEVBEC KEVIN BECKER REFUND-PUMPKIN CARVING 16.00
107208 11/13/2001 Printed KIMMEU KIM MELMISSEN FLEX-DAYCARE 52.08
CHECK REGISTER REPORT
BANK: CHANHASSEN BANK Date: 11/08/01
Ttme: 1:29pm
! of Cher~lassen Page: 2
Check Venck~r
Date Statu~ NLmber Vendor Name Check Description Amo~t
)7209 11/13/2001 Printed KiNKDS KINKOS COPIES/FOLDiNG 498.15
37210 11/13/2001 PrJntecl KJOENV KJOLHAIJG ENVIROklqENTAL SERV PROFESSioNAL SERVICES 41.25
D7211 11/13/2001 Printed KL#ENG KL# ENGINEERING INC ~]tANTY INSPECTION 2,9OO.00
07212 11/13/2001 Printed ICUSCON IOJSSKE CONSTRUCTION CONPANY CERTURY BLVD ST/UTIL I#PROV 77,079.59
D7213 11/13/2001 Printed LABSAF LAB SAFETY SUPPLY LEVEL C HAZ HAT SUITS 1,270.70
D7214 11/13/2001 Printed LANED1 LANO EGUIPflENT TUBE 20.00
I)7215 11/13/2001 Printed LATCON LATOUR CONSTRUCTION INC BC7 & BC8 TRUNK UTiLiTIES 266,206.31
1)7216 11/13/2001 Printed LAUHAS LAURIE HASSENSTAB REFUND BABYSITTING CLiNiC 40.00
07217 11/13/2001 Printed LEANIN LEAGUE OF #i#NESOTA CiTiES REGiSTRATiON 570.00
07218 11/13/2001 Printed LOTLAI~ LOTUS LAk~I ANO GARDEN HARDI~)O0 HULCH 15.98
07219 11/13/2001 Printed LUNBRO LUNDGREN BROS CONSTRUCTiON EROSION ESCROU REFUNDS 4,000.00
07220 11/13/2001 Printed LY#CAR LYNN CARD C~IPNJY HOLIDAY CARDS 65.08
07221 11/13/2001 Printed HACL:~U HACGUEEN EGUIPflENT HOSE/FiLTERS/ 1~0.34
07222 11/13/2001 Printed HANI~AL HANIN-t~ALZ, I#C I~ALL BRACKETS REPLACED 440.00
07223 11/13/2001 Printed HAHStJE HAHHOUD S~IEIDAN REI#BURSE #ILEAGE 15.60
07?.24 11/13/2001 Printed HARDI# HARGARET OIHARCO REFUNO PRESCHOOL B-BALL 35.00
07225 11/13/2001 Printed HARUEL HARIAN#E I~ELL$ YOGA iNSTRUCTiON-FALL 01 498.00
072?.6 11/13/2001 Printed HARLIT HARK LiTTFiN FOCO FOR OFF. #EETING 91.35
07227 11/13/2001 Printed HARPLU HARTIN PLU~IBiNG & HEATING REFUND OVERPAY)lENT 20.00
07228 11/13/2001 Printed HARIJDA HARUDAS UTILITY BILL HAILERS - SHiP 19.55
~07229 11/13/2001 Printed HARPRO HARY PROSSER REFUND KINDER DANCE 65.00
107230 11/13/2001 Printed HATSAA HATT SAAH REII~URSE EXPENSES 43.87
107231 11/13/2001 Printed HATHOF HATTHEI~ HOFFHAN REFUND OVERPAY)lENT 1.64
107232 11/13/2001 Printed #Cf #CZ IKIRLDC~I TELEPHONE CHARGES 64.34
107233 11/13/2001 Printed HCHCAR HCHASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO UNIVERSAL JOiNT/BALL BEARINGS 105.37
107Z34 11/13/2001 Printed #CROI #CROI LLC ZND HALF PAY)lENT 15,024.20
107235 11/13/2001 Printed llETROC #ETROCALL PAGER CHARGES 249.93
107236 11/13/2001 Printed #I~R #ICRO ~J~EHCXJSE #EDiA VISZO PRO 2002 Z,039.5~
107237 11/13/2001 Printed HIDCOU HiD COUNTY ~ DIESEL FUEL
107238 11/13/2001 Printed HIDASP #ZD~EST ASPHALT CONPONATION ONITTED SALES TAX 22,188.87
107~39 11/13/2001 Printed HCPA #i#N CRI#E PREVENTION A$SN CONFERENCE - HOiSETH 105.00
]072~0 11/13/2001 Pr~ntecl HVEC ## VALLEY ELECTRZC ~ ELECTRZCITY CHARGES 2,897.27
107241 11/13/2001 Printed llTZDIS HTI DISTRIBUTING INC #iSC PARTS 50.69
107242 11/13/2001 Printed NANRO~ #ANCY ROS#EgY REFUND - STRETCH CLASS
1072~3 11/13/2001 P~ntecl HATBAG HATIONAL BAG PEI~IT BAGR 149.57
1072~ 11/13/2001 Printed NEIBAL #EIL BALIUS REFUND - OVERPAYNENT 9.43
1072~5 11/13/2001 Printed NETCLE NET CLERK INC REFUND - OVERPAYHENT 9.40
107246 11/13/2001 Printed NIKIXI! NIl(iii DLII~ER FLEX-HEALTH - 245.40
107247 11/13/2001 Printed N]I~)ES NIttA DESIGN STUDIO LTD GRADING ESCROU REFUND 500.00
107248 11/13/2001 Printed NORCOS NORCOSTCO ROSCO SI~)KE 103.09
107249 11/13/2001 Printed NORTHE NORTHERN CHAIN SA~I, GRINDING STONES 380.16
107250 11/13/2001 Prtnted OFFHAX OFFICE HAX ADDRESS LABELS 109.99
107251 11/13/2001 Printed PAPM~ PAPER ~IAREHOUSE NISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES 49.33
107252 11/13/2001 Printed PANCON PARROTT CONTRACTING INC ~IATER HAiN BREAK 2,446.50
107253 11/13/2001 Printed PAUEKH PAUL EKHOL# FLEX-DAYCARE 217.39
107254 11/13/2001 Printed PEDOTT PEDER OTTERS(IN REFUND - DANCE 65.00
107255 11/13/2001 Printed PIORIll PioNEER Rill & ~IHEEL CO. Rills 139.94
107256 11/13/2001 Printed PNELNA PNEUIV~ iNC CAFS SYSTEN PARTS 29,113.28
107257 11/13/2001 Printed PBALA~I PRAIRIE LAI~N & GARDEN CHAiNSAt~ 84~.26
107258 11/13/2001 Printed PUllET PUNP AND llETER SERVICES INC REPAIRED LEAKING PIPES/GROUND 5,100.16
107259 11/13/2001 Printed RADSHA RADIO SHACK FUSES 10.91
107260 11/13/2001 Printed RBIlSER RBI! SERVICES INC NIGHTLY CLEANING 2,249.94
107261 11/13/2001 Printed REY~EL REYNOLDS UELDING SUPPLY CO ARGON 55.28
107262 11/13/2001 Printed RIDYNC RIDGEDALE YNCA T-BALL/SOCCER iNSTRUCT]ON 8,755.50
107263 11/13/2001 Prtnted R]TDUN R[TA DUNGEY YOGA iNSTRUCTiON 1,918.50
107264 11/13/2001 Printed ROARUN ROADRUNNER TRANSPORTATioN INC DELIVERY CHARGE 23.75
107265 11/13/2001 Printed RONllEC RON'S llECHANICAL REFUND - OVERPAYllENT 16.28
107266 11/13/2001 Printed SAFPLY SAFETY PLUS iNC FIRST AiD SUPPLIES 68.30
107267 11/13/2001 Printed SCHllUS SCHllITT HUSIC CENTERS CHAN-O-LAIRES llUS]C 56.09
1072(~ 11/13/2001 Printed SCOTT SCOTT & ASSOCIATES, INC. BICYCLE SAFETY SLIDE GUIDE 685.00
107269 11/13/2001 Printed SEH SEN SPRiNGFiELD PRESSURE ZONE STDY 941.35
107270 11/13/2001 Printed SHAFTON SHAFTON iNC FAN PLUG 20.00
107271 11/13/2001 Printed SHANAN SHARON & NANCY'S DELi FRENCH DiP BUFFET 103.84
107272 11/13/2001 Printed SHEHAR SHELLY HARTIN REFUND-FALL YOGA 48.00
107273 11/13/2001 Printed SHOTRU SHONEU[X)O TRUE VALUE PHONE JACK PLATE 67.Z2
107274 11/13/2001 Printed S]EINP STEHON ]HPLEHENT INC KEYS 13.82
107275 11/13/2001 Printed SHATOO SNAP-ON TOOLS LIGHT/SNIPS/RETAiNER 71.15
107276 11/13/2001 Printed SOULOC SOUTH~IEST LOCI( & KEY iNSTALL LOCI( AT PARK SHED 8(~.18
107277 11/13/2001 Printed SPSCOH SPS CONPAN]ES INC UATER HEATER ELE)IENT 10.06
107278 11/13/2001 Printed STAHEA STANDARD NEATING & AiR COND. REFUND OVERPAYI4ENT 27.08
107279 11/13/2001 Printed STETOR STEVE TGRELL RE]HgURSE EXPENSES 2,7~2.89
107280 11/13/2001 Printed STSCON STS CONSULTANTS LTD GEOTECHN]CAL ENGTNEERING SVC 5,200.00
City of Chanhassen
Ch~-k Check
NLanber Date
Status
107281 11/13/2001 Printed
107282 11/13/2001 Printed
107283 11/13/2001 Printed
107284 11/13/2001 Void
107285 11/13/2001 Printed
107286 11/13/2001 Printed
107287 11/13/2001 Printed
107288 11/13/2001 Printed
107289 11/13/2001 Printed
107290 11/13/2001 Printed
107291 11/13/2001 Printed
107292 11/13/2001 Printed
107293 11/13/2001 Printed
107294 11/13/2001 Printed
107295 11/13/2001 Printed
107296 11/13/2001 Printed
107297 11/13/2001 Printed
107298 11/13/2001 Printed
107299 11/13/2001 Printed
107300 11/13/2001 Printed
107301 11/13/2001 Printed
107302 11/13/2001 Printed
107303 11/13/2001 Printed
107304 11/13/2001 Printed
107305 11/13/2001 Void
107306 11/13/2001 Printed
107307 11/13/2001 Printed
107308 11/13/2001 Printed
107309 11/13/2001 Printed
107'510 11/13/2001 Printed
107311 11/13/2001 Printed
Vendor
Number
S~CHE
SUHFIR
SUNCON
TARGET
TERBUR
TODGER
TOLGAS
TOPLIN
TWIGAR
TWICIT
TYLLOV
ULI
UNIMIN
USFDIS
LISOFF
VERIZO
VIICAUT
VOIBUS
WACFAR
WASMA2
WICLTD
WILAND
WILDEV
NH/4UE
XCEL
YOGAPR
ZEPMAN
BRUDEJ
MERACE
CHECK REGISTER REPORT
BANK: CHANHASSEN BANK
Vendor Name
Check Description
SUBURBAN CHEVROLET
SLINMIT FIRE PROTECTION
SUNSET CONSTRUCTION INC
TARGET
TERESA BURGESS
TODD GERHARDT
TOLL GAS & WELDING SUPPLY
TOP LINE CONST & ROOFING, LLC
TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO
TWIN CITY WATER CLINIC INC
TYLER LOVERIDGE
ULI-THE URBAN LAND INSTITUTE
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
US FILTER DISTRIBUTION GROUP
LIS OFFICE PRODUCTS
VERIZON WIRELESS
VIKING AUTONATIC SPRINKLER CO
VOIGTmS BUS CONPANIES
WACONIA FARM SLI~PLY
WASTE HANAGEMENT'TC WEST
WICHTERMAN'S LTD INC
WILLIAM & SHARON ANDERSON
WILLIAMS DEVELOPMENT & LLC
Wfl MUELLER & SONS INC
XCEL ENERGY INC
YOGA PRO
ZEP MANUFACTURING COHPANY
BRUCE DEJONG
MERLINS ACE HARDWARE
ABSORBER
REFUND OVERPAYMENT
WATER LEAK
Void Check
SUPPLIES
FLEX-DAYCARE
FLEX-DAYCARE
SHIELD/MARKER/GLASSES
REFUND OVERPAYMENT
DOOR SEALS/POWER CORD
BACTERIA ANALYSIS FOR OCT 2001
REFUND PRESCHOOL B-BALL
REAL ESTATE MARK ANALYSIS BOOK
REGISTRATION-WEGLER
WATER METERS
OFFICE SUPPLIES
CELLULAR PHONE CHARGES
REFUND OVERPAYMENT
TRANSPORT TO BAYRISCHER HOF
FERTILIZER
GARBAGE SERVICE-NOV
REPAIR SEAT ~16
REFUND OVERPAYMENT
EROSION ESCROW REFUND
Void Check
CONCRETE
ELECTRICITY CHARGES
MATS FOR RESALE
RETURN
TUITION REIMBURSEHENT
MISC SUPPLIES
Total Checks: 247 Bank TotaL:
Date: 11/08/01
Time: 1:29pm
Page: 3
Amount
283.91
61.20
1,856.00
0.00
1,315.78
208.33
622.61
33.91
18.75
399.49
160.00
35.00
75.95
545.00
1,425.80
51.14
170.80
7.34
214.39
1,807.09
172.36
877.09
65.22
500.00
0.00
6,053.18
10,553.66
256.84
56.01
6,000.00
1,558.14
752,832.41
Total Checks: 247 Grand TotaL: 752,8)2.41
CHANHASS~ CITY COUNCIL
WORK SF.~SION
OCI~BER 22, 2001
Mayor Jansen called the woFk session meeting'to order at 5:3S p.m.
MEMBERS PRF~ENT: Mayor Jansen, Councilman Ayotte and Councilman Boyle
Ii~I'AFF P~NT: Kate Aanenson, Todd Gerhardt, Bruce De,long, Roger Knutson, and Richard Rice
2002 BUDGET P~ATION~:
L (~QMMUNITY DEVI~.I~)PM~.NT.
Kate Aanenson gave a power point presentation on the 2002 budget proposal of the Community
Development department. Todd Gerhardt explained how the Community Development Block Grant
program money was available to subsidize affordable housing. Mayor Sansen asked about a city
comtx)sting site being re-instated in the city. Councilman Ayotte asked about building permit.revenues
and how code enforcement will i .mpact the budgeL
Sheriff Bud Olson, Sgt. Dave Potts and/eft were present from the Carver County Shefi~s office to
answer questions. Todd Gerhardt gave a power po.mt presentation on the administrative budget,
including the police contract. Sheriff Olson passed out information showing criminal and non-criminal '
activity from the previous year. The numbers show a need for increased investigation and follow-up and
the city needs to decide when and how they want to increase services to residents. Sgt. Ports pointed out
that there is insufficient staffmg at this point to meet all the demands being requested by the citizens, i.e.
speed control, vandalism, etc. Mayor Jansen ask~ if Project Leadfoot has helped. Sgt. Potts exphined
the schedule of officers assigned to Chanhassen, and that the residents are also asking for snowmobile
and water patrol services in the future. Mayor Jansen asked if more hours of patrol equated to preventing
more ~. Councilman Ayotte asked for a needs analysis asses~mnt on proactive vs. reactive.
· Sheriff Olson stated the national average is 1.4 deputies per 1,000 people of population. I-~ analysis for
adequate coverage, with the help of CSO officers, Crime Prevention Specialists, etc. to meet the needs of
the city should be completed within the next 60 days to begin dialogue with the city. He also stated the
need to have 2 year work plans.
The City Council ran out of time during the work session to address the MIS and Administrative portion
of the budget and will discuss it at the next work session. Mayor Sansen adjourned the meeting at 6:45
p.m_
~ by Nann Opbeim
CHANHASS~ CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
OCTOBER 22, 2001
Mayor Jansen cnlled the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting wn~ opened with the Pledge to
the Flag.
COUNCILMEMBER~ PRE,~NT:. Mayor lansen, Coundlman Boyle, and Cotmcilman Ayotte.
Councilman Labatt arrived afkr the Consent Agenda.
STAFF PRES~: Todd Gerhardt, Roger Knutson, Teresa Burgess, Kate Aane~son, Brace DeJong,
Matt Saam, and Mahmoud Sweidan
PI~LIC P~ FQR ALL ITEMS:
Deb Lloyd
lerry & lanet Paulsen
Alison Blackowiak
Shibani Khora
Dave Hutton
7302 Laredo Drive
7305 Laredo Drive
Planning Commi.~sion
WSB & Associates
WSB & Associates
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None.
Teresa Burgess: Mn~dnm Mayor. Item number l(b) requires a 4/5 and so if we could pull that and table
it. It's a vacation of easement
Mayor Jansen: We were just having a conversation about that as we were missing another council
person. If our city attorney could comment please.
Roger Knutson: Yeah, the question becomes, mine doesn't work either.
Mayor Jansen: I don't think our microphones are on.
Roger Knutson: The question is do we have a petition from the affected property owners requesting... If
we have such a request, then it's a simple majori~ vote. If we do not have such a request, it's 2/3 or 4/5
vote.
Teresa Burgess: It is a condition of the sale of property.
Roger Knutson: Who's making the request?
Teresa Burgess: The buyer. The buyer owns the other parcel that the easement is across.
Roger Knutson: The seller...
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
Teresa Burgess:
Roger Knutson:
Teresa Burgess:
Roger Knutson:
The city is the seller.
The city is the seller7
The city is the seller. The buyer has requested the easement vacation.
Since both parties are in agreement, I think a majority vote would be just fine.
Mayor Jansen: Okay. Thank you for mentioning that though Teresa.
Councilman Boyle moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to approve the following consent agenda
items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations:
a. Resolution #~A}01-~: Approve Resolution ~g Delinquent Utility Accounts.
b. Resolution g2001-66: Approve Vacation of Driveway Easement, 817:5 Hazeltine Boulevard.
c. Resolution #2001-~: Approve Resolution Establishing No Parking Zone on Brenden Court.
f. Approval of Bills.
g. Approval of Minutes:
- City Council Work Session Minutes dated October 8, 2001
- City Council Minutes dated October 8, 2001
Receive Commission Minutes:
- Planning Commission Minutes dated October 2, 2001
- Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated September 25, 2001
h. Award Consultant Services Contract for Trail Connector Feasibility Study; TH 5 at Bluff Creek,
TH 5 at Riley Creek, TH 101 South from Lake Susan Drive to Bandimere Park.
i. Request for Site Plan Approval for the Construction of a 20,785 sq. ft. Office Building; Located
on the Northwest Comer of Highway 5 and Dell Road; Dell Professional Building, Mount
Properties.
j. Resolution #2001-68: Call Assessment Hearing for Sanitary Sewer Extension for Dogwood
Road.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 3 to 0.
VISITOR PRF_~ENTATIONS: UPDATE ON SCHOOL DISTRICT 276 REFERENDI0'M.
Mayor Jansen: We have one presentation actually scheduled this evening, which is an update on the
School District 276 referendum. We have Tom Berge and one other present this evening to do that
presentation. If you would come forward to the podium please.
Bill Wenmark: Thank you very much Mayor and City Council members and guests here for this evening.
And a live audience as I understand too.
City Council Meeting- October 22, 2001
Mayor Jansen: Yes.
Bill Wenmark: My name is Bill Wenmark. I'm on the school board. Been on the school board for 2
years so I bring welcome greetings from our elected officials at the School District 276 to your City
Council. Thank you for this limited time. We won't tak~ much. We do represent about 12 to 14 percent
of your property owners in the Chanhassen area so some of those property values will be affected by our
referendum~ Our technology levy as well. And so that's what we're here to talk to you about tonight. I
can represent to you though, before I introduce Tom Berge, our F'mance I)irector, to briefly give you
some of the numbers but I can tell you that 2 years ago when I came on the school board I was coming
from a health care bac~uud and I thought that I had seen the most complicated way of paying for
things ever created by man or machine or technology. The RG's, RPG's, APG's, cffr's, ICP9's. That's
the way they reimburse us for practicing medicine and I thought I had seen the most complicated way. I
have now seen something to rival medicine. School financing and it's primarily because we don't really
have a whole lot of control over what we do. It's a booth of people over there in St. Paul that think that
they know best about our children's future and they try to play around with it a lot. Not only from a
financing standpoint but also from a curriculum standpoint. We'll only talk about the financing
standpoint now. As you are all facing as well some of the changes last year in the legislature, we too
have faced a property tax adjustment. And I thinlc the most exciting thing that I can say is in my 2 years
of looking at our school district, I went through the numbers in the books and thought that I'd find all of
these wonderful little places you know that there was money stashed away. There aren't dollars stashed
away anywhere. In fact I'm so proud of our district, we've got a AA, double or triple Tom?
Tom Berge: AA1.
Bill Wenmark: AA1, Moody's credit rating. We're the only one in the State of Minnesota to have thaL
We have a number of layers of supervision of our budget. Not only the administration, the school board,
but also totally independent group of CPA's and financial persons who are in our budget and audit
committee and that's chaired by Dan Severson who is the chairman elect of the Twinless Chamber of
Commerce. In addition to that, Lars and Alwisher does an audit of all our financ~ so I'm very confident
that when we look to do the referendum, our board considered the numbers and looked at the
authorization of the legislature given us to increase our levy, I can tell you that it's going for good reason.
The most important thing is, that all of these dollars stay home. That probably is more important than
anything else. When we do pass the levy referendum: the technology, all the dollars coming from your
homeowners in Chanhassen, 12 to 14 percent, will stay right here in the Minnetonkn School District and
go to their education. That's the most important thing. I need to say this and Tom will probably repeat
it. Will this be the cure all7 Will this be the last time that we'll have to come and ask for assistance from
the taxpayers7 Probably not because as you all know, this year is redistricting. That's going to end up in
the courts. We're not going to see anything of that map until probably February or March and then the
whole landscape changes. So there's a lot of change and who can ever predict what the legislature or in
this case a tri-partisan government will go when they get tinkering around with certain things so no
promises that it is going to be a cure all. Most i ,mportant thing is, it will be money that's permanent and
stays here in our district educating children. So with that, thank you very much. Let me introduce the
guy who puts all the numbers together. In fact let me give him an accolad~ that he is so embarrassed for
me to do this but he is recogniTed probably across the State as one of the best school finance people. In
fact he's testified many tirre, s at the state legislature to make some sense out of this complicated s~
of school financing. And may I add in the end, maybe his job will be made easier because the governor
did agree this year to have a tri-partisan commission appointed to study school financing. I thinlt it's
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
long overdue to look at the complicated way that we do this and maybe his job will be made easier but
Mr. Tom Berge, our Finance Director. Thank you.
Mayor Jansen: Wonderful, thank you.
Tom Berge: Thank you Mr. Wenmark.
Mayor Jansen: Welcome.
Tom Berge: Mayor Jansen, council members. I'm always a little I guess embarrassed with introductions
such as that. I guess all of us in the public sector try to do our jobs well and do the best we can. We have
a presentation we've been providing to our communities. It's a power point and this evening I'll give you
what I call the Reader's Digest version of it rather than the full length version. We have two questions
on the ballot on November 6'h. One question deals with operating referendum. A second more narrowly
defines the technology and classroom equipment referendum. Why now? Well, the main reason is the
legislature made some major changes in how public education is funded. That's one reason. Technology
referendum is there because we have a levy approved in '92 that's expiring in 2002 and so we're bringing
that back to the voters and looking for an increase in that particular referendum. The major change that
was put in place by the legislature was first of all a large reduction in school district property taxes.
Basically they did a lot of re-arranging in terms of how aid is paid to local political subdivision in the
city. I know that you folks are facing some increased levies because you lost some aids. On the school
side, our levy is going down 51%. A little bit over $19 million just for the Minnetonka School District.
And that's happening statewide in every district throughout the state. There's a major reduction in the
tax levy. The reduction in school tax levies, which is replaced with state aid came at a price and that
price was, there were a few dollars left in the state budget to increase K-12 funding. Our funding for
next, well for the year we're in right now, 01-02 on a per pupil basis is going up 7/lffh'S of a percent.
For the next year the per pupil funding is 2.2%. The strategy of the legislature was to make the increase
in taxes and school funding more accountable at the local level and they did that by increasing the
referendum authority. Our district has been capped at the amount that we've had as a referendum since
1994. And this increase that was permitted by the legislature is basically the pressure relief for public
school funding. The referendum itself, the operating referendum, will provide $304 per pupil or a total
of $2.7 million. And as an example of what's happening statewide. For November 6~h there is 178
districts having referendum elections this fall. About 80% of the metro districts. A lot of the metro
districts are facing the same kind of revenue increase that Minrtetonka is dealing with. The bottom line
is, we're facing an economic squeeze. Our costs are going up about 4 to 5 percent per year and the
revenue that's provided by state formula is going up by less than half of that amount. The important
thing to remember too in all of this is that the first rule in school finance is that the legislature makes the
rules. They're the ones that determine how much every district in this state has available for funding.
And the only exception to that rule is the voter approved referendum and they set the amount that local
school districts can request from their voters and also set the mix between property taxes and state aid.
So basically what we have as a school district, if the legislature permits the option, is to go to the voters
and that's what we're doing this November 6a. Without the referendum for our next fiscal year, we're
facing about a million dollar shortfall and the following year about a 2 million dollar shortfall. One of
the things that we like to point out in our presentations is that the majority of our budget does go to
instruction. There's a misconception out there that school districts are top heavy with overhead
expenses. 76% of our budget goes to instruction. About 8.7% goes to operation and maintenance. A
little over 5% for transportation. A little bit under 5% for support services and about 4.6% for
administrative costs. The second question deals with technology and the referendum covers four major
areas. Number one, let me back up a little bit. It's technology and instructional equipment so it's
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
broader than just technology. So it' s updating our regular classroom instructional equipment,. and that's
there because again the sram formula has not increased. In '91-'92 we received $65.00 per pupil. This
year we're receiving $68.00 per pupil so over 10 years it's gone up $3.00 per pupil. And as a result, the
replacement cycle of classroom equipment has fallen behind and so this referendum will allow us to
catch up with replacement of the non-technology equipment. The referendum also permits us to replace
existing technology equipment. To have some dollars to expand the technology program for students and
then finally to have dollars to fund the technology support for that equipment. The staff, the network
administrators, the equipment repair people and so forth will be fimded from this referendum. I think in
finishing up the one thing that we want to point out, in terms of the overall issue of school finance and
property taxes. If we take a look at where we were in 1995 on a $250,000 home. School property taxes
in our district were about $3300. A couple years later in '97, and assuming the value of that home
increased up to $283,000. School property taxes were about $3800. At that point the legislature started
putting money into increasing state aid and brining down property taxes. So this year, 2001, on this
same home that now has gone up to about $315,000 in assessed value, the school property taxes are
$2800. That compares to $3300 in 1995 when the home was at $250,0~. So it's a $65,000 increase in
the value, but yet the school property taxes have gone down. And for next year, with the buy down that
the legislature put in place, that home, again assuming an increase in value, will have property taxes of
less than $1500. School property taxes. And so that's where basically the state money has gone and the
legislature has enabled school districts to go to their voters and make their case to their voters. And so
that's what we're in the process of doing. We're visiting with city councils like this throughout the
district. We're having community meetings. I guess we're visiting wherever people are willing to listen
to our presentation and explanation so again thank you very much for allowing Mr. Wenmark and myself
a few minutes on your agenda just to talk about the issue that's i ,m!xa~ant to our 1Vfinnetonka public
school district. Thank you.
Mayor Jansen: Well we appreciate your coming in and sharing this information, with us. I'm sure that
we've all had numerous taxpayers inquiring of us as to what we know about the referendum so it is
helpful to have this information. And I don't know if you care to mention if there's a website that people
can actually access to get more information or if you have any other public open houses that you'd like to
mention that are scheduled?
Tom Berge: We do have a website. It's the 1Vlinnetonka School District website. Incl,~Ood with that
there' s an e-mail address that people can send questions to. There's a telephone number that people can
call. It's 401. It's area 952-401-5000 and we will get back to people. We have questions coming in
daily and we try and keep up with questions that people have so if people have questions, we encourage
them to send them in.
Mayor Jansen: ~ We'll pass those along. Thank you very much.
Tom Berge: Thank you.
Mayor Jansen: Appreciate your being here tonight
LAW ENFORCEMENT UPDATE: SGT. DAVE PO'I'I~ CARVER COUNTY S]:fERIFF'S
DEPARTMENT.
Sgt. Dave Potts: Good evening Mayor and council. Sorry or I apologize for my absence these past few
weeks but I am back full time. Will be back full time and full duty be~nnin~ next week.
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
Mayor Jansen: And we are glad to have you here so thank you.
Sgt. Dave Potts: Thank you. This is my September report. The Sheriff's office area report is in your
packet that I just got you earlier this evening. Again, the area citation listing is not something our records
division is yet able to generate with the new software package. They're still working on that. I've
attached the Community Service Officer highlights for September for your review, and then just quickly
regarding the miscellaneous items that I chose to bring to the council's attention tonight. I believe
council is aware that in September we had a rash of break-in's to vehicles that have been parked outside
overnight in some of our neighborhoods. That has continued into October. Our investigations division is
working pretty hot and heavy. They were however only able to charge one local youth with crimes
related to break-in's to vehicles. Identified several more suspects however so the investigation continues
and with these new break-in' s, we'll have more work but perhaps more leads to go on. In total,
September 1't through October 19th we had 51 reports of break-in's to vehicles and I know I've been in
front of council before so this is nothing new to you but for any of our citizens that are out there
watching, we remind them through articles in the Chanhassen Villager, which has been very good to us in
putting out information that we requested, as well as the Chanhassen Connection Newsletter, as well as
crime prevention program, Crime Watch Alerts that Beth distributes on a regular basis, encouraging and
letting people know, do not leave valuables in your vehicles parked outside overnight. We've had
everything from laptop computers to weapons being stolen from vehicles that people for one reason or
another make the time to bring those objects into their home overnight, So whatever means we can use
to encourage people not to leave valuables in their car, we will do that. What have we been doing?
Again, your Crime Prevention Specialist, Beth Hoiseth has put out numerous crime alerts to the
Neighborhood Watch groups trying to get everybody alerted to the problem that's been at hand. Again I
mentioned our investigation division is working pretty hot and heavy on it as well as our patrol division.
Our deputies out there even, been out there in unmarked vehicles trying to do a little more surreptitious
patrol of some of our neighborhoods in the city. Specifically some of the areas that were getting hit were
just north of the downtown area here. A few of the different neighborhoods. Down south-of Highway. 5
in the Chan Estates area. Mission Hills and down by Springfield. Those are some of the more specific.
areas that were hit and then scattered throughout the city would be an odd one here and there, but no
neighborhood or no area is safe from this type of activity. It:s a crime of opportunity so we try to let
people know to be on the lookout for it because the citizens are our eyes and ears out there. Had a fatal
accident on County Road 117, which is Galpin Boulevard near Brinker Street. 37 year old Chanhassen
man lost his life in that accident. County engineering is having a meeting just this week apparently a
timely meeting to talk about Galpin Boulevard, County 117. Both Teresa Burgess and I are going to be
attending that meeting for our input from law enforcement and city perspective regarding that roadway.
On the Amoco robbery, I believe council is aware that the Amoco was recently robbed. It was a strong
arm robbery. That's a robbery where force is used but no weapon is displayed or threatened.
Fortunately, unfortunately there were like 13 robberies in the metro area by this same perpetrator. Our
investigators were at a meeting in Burnsville 2 days after the Amoco robbery, and at that exact time the
same robber was in Bumsville committing a robbery and the call went out and he was apprehended that
very same day so the suspect from the Amoco robbery is in custody and will probably be charged in a
variety of communities for that activity. But that as you know was the fourth robbery this year we've had
in Chanhassen and robberies are a rather unusual thing in Chanhassen. Councilman Ayotte brought up
an idea possibly. Our Crime Prevention Specialist and the sheriff's office hosting a robbery seminar for
any local businesses that may be interested in something like that. So Beth Hoiseth is doing just that.
Looking into the viability and the interest out there amongst our business community to putting on that
type of seminar.
Mayor Jansen: Very good.
City Council Meeting- October 22, 2001
Sgt. Dave Potts: And the last item, on the lighter side I guess. American flag outside the main
Chanhassen fire station was stolen recently and you know very unusual and kind of disheatrtening act.
However, as our patrol deputies were discussing this incident with some local youth, the flag was
anonymously returned so.
Mayor Jansen: Oh that's wonderful. That's good news.
Sgt. Dave Ports: h was apparently a prank undone and we're happy for ~ That in a nutshell is my
report for this month. Any comments or questions from council?
Mayor Jansen: Council, any questions for Sgt Potts?
Councilman Boyle: No questions.
Councilman Ayotte: No.
Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you. And again, good to see you back.
Sgt. Dave Potts: Glad to be here.
Mayor Jansen: Moving on. We do not have a representative from the fire depaxtment here this evening,_
correct? Okay. So we will move onto our public hearings.
PUBLIC HEARING: SPECIAL ASSESSMENT I:W~ARING~ CENTURY BOULI~ARD~
PROJECT 97-1C.
Teresa Burgess: Thank you Msdsm Mayor. I believe the council has a copy of this in their staff report
and it's probably easier to read it than on the small screen, lust going to nm through real quick. -The
Century Boulevard project was recently nearing completion and if you look at the cost estimate, and I
believe it's page 2 of your's. It gives a rundown of t. he total cost of the project which is $546,554. This
amount includes the engineering as well as street and storm sanitary, Highway 5 storm and watermaim
As you can see that's higher than the original feasibility study estimates. The increases were due to a
number of issues including higher construction costs than expected and also the I-Ftghway 5 project.
Looking at the actual amounts assessed, this was intended to be an assessment project all along. As you
can see on the assessment role we have adjusted the assessments comparable to the price increase. The
street storm and sanitary reports them to be assessed 100% is $447,791. The watermain was oversized
on this project As you can see there's a city share to the watermain. What happened is, when the city
does a project like this, a lot of times we know of future development coming along so rather than put in
a pipe that's too small, we ask the developer to pay for his share of the pipe now. The city uses water
and utility funds to pay for the additional pipe sizing and when the new development comes in, they will
be charged trunk and lateral connection fees that will go back into that water utility fund and pay for this
pipe dollar amount that the city has put into this project. And the Highway 5 storm sewer, that was
something that was a city project. It just happened to be done under this project so it was paid for 100%
by city funds. As you can see, there are only two parcels that are proposed to be assessed under this
project. The property owner was informed by notice and we also spoke with him today again to confirm
because as you'll notice in your handout there was an error in the mailing. We confirmed with him that
he was still in support of the project and did not have any objections to the assessment and I'm not sure if
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
he' s here this evening or not. With that, if there' s any questions from the council. Otherwise I'll step
down and let the public hearing start and then do a closing statement.
Mayor Jansen: Any questions for staff at this time council? Okay, thank you Teresa. We will open this
for the public hearing. If there's anyone present who would like to comment on this project, please come
forward to the microphone. Seeing no one, we will then close the public hearing. Council, any
comments or discussion? With that, if there are no comments, if I could have a motion please.
Councilman Labatt: Move approval that we accept the .feasibility study. Rather the assessment hearing.
Councilman Boyle: Second.
Teresa Burgess: Madam Mayor. We need to approve the assessment roll. The final assessment roll.
Not the feasibility study assessment roll.
Councilman Labatt: Okay, so approve the assessment roll as dated October 15'h.
Mayor Jansen: Does that work?
Teresa Burgess: October 2"". That's my memo.
Mayor Jansen: Okay. If I might, we're going to be approving the recommendation that the final
assessment roll dated October 2, 2001 for the Century Boulevard. project Number 97-1C be adopted at a
term of 8 years and an interest rate of 8% is the motion I gather.. If I could have a second please.
Councilman Boyle: Second.
Resolution g2001-69: Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Boyle seconded to approve the final
assessment roll dated October 2, 2001 for the Century Boulevard project Number 97-1C be
adopted at a term of 8 years and an interest rate of 8 %. AH voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously 4 to 0.
PUBLIC HEARING: SPECIAL ASSESSMENT HEARING~ CRESTVIEW CIRCLE UTILITY &
STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 00-05.
Public Present:
Name Address
David Struyk
Mary Trippler
1941 Crestview Circle
1931 Crestview Circle
Teresa Burgess: Thank you Madam Mayor. This one needs a little bit more introduction. This one's a
little bit more confusing. This was a petitioned project by the neighborhood. The reason for the petition
was a failing septic system. A property owner came to us and requested sewer, sanitary sewer to address
that septic system failure. At that time it was determined in the feasibility study that we would also
install water and street. Two properties did not have sanitary sewer or water, and there was one
undeveloped property that did not have sanitary sewer and water. The remaining three properties on the
site that weren't assessed for this project did have sanitary sewer and water and so they were only
City Council M~ting - October 22, 2001
assessed for street. A seventh property is on the project, however did not gain benefit and was not
assessed anything for this project. The assessments were calculated in the feasibility study and as you'll
note in your staff report, when we went back and re-calc~ the assessments, we in~ the
feasibility study to cover the cost of this project by 5%. That left a substantial amount of the project
uncovered by the assessment roll. Approximst~-ly $39,200. The exact dollar amount is in your staff
report. That increase is due to construction problems, increases in cost between the time of feasibility
study and construction, and substantial increase in the amount of engin~ that was required for this
project. If you'll look in the overhead, and you do not have this in your pack~s, and I apologize for thaL
You can see the difference between the actual project cost and the feasi~ cost- As you'll see thi~
project was not completed on time and so the contractor was required to pay liquidated damages. In
addition to the liquidated damages the contractor was also required to pay damages to several private
property owners for damage to their private property. We had a number of bills that were submitl~l to
the city and were passed through to the developer. I'm sorry, the contractor. The total engineering for
this project was originally estimated at $59,180. The actual, I'm sorry I've got the wrong line...and so
that's how the assessments were established...en~neering above and beyond the original feasibility
study estimate. You can see the difference between the feasibility study and the actual cost. The
feasibility study had estimated at $75,634 and the total project came in at $95,863. The city picking up
the entire difference. And if you look at the assessment roll you can see that we looked at two, we
actually looked at 3 scenarios and totally disregarded the third scenario. We looked at actual lrroject cost
using the actual engineering cost and that would have come out with assessments, as you can see here, of
$55,166 and $9,808 and $11,921 for a total ofthe entire project cost, less the increase in. engineering.
We then looked at option 2, which was feasibility estimste-s plus 5%, which is still substantially lower
than the entire cost. Now those estimAt_e.s included the 30% indirect cost which the city typically uses for
estimating engineering on a projecL It does not include the actual engineering which was closer to 45%
for an actual total in the assessment difference as shown. We had the consultants supply two assessment
scenarios doing this and looking at it, the city's share difference between the two. If we had gone with
the original feasibility study plus 5% we come up with $39,187 that is the city's share. If we had passed
on the 100% of the project that were originally proposed to be passed on by the feasibility study, we
would have had a $23,000 share for the city. Looking at it we did not feel that the increase costs were
anything associated with the neighborhood. They did not gain benefit by those increased costs so we
chose not to pass those costs onto them. Instead of recording that the city take on the $39,187 of
increased assessments. I know that both Steve and Linda were on the council at the time it was
discussed. The other two council membem were not. One property owner had requested deferment of
assessment to a non-developed lot until the time of development. We are not recommending that
deferment because of the increased cost to thi~ project. The city has already taken on a substantial
amount of cost in this so we are recommending that that parcel be assessed at this time. The property
owner certainly has the fight to request an adjustment to that assessment and I know he's here this
evening. With that I'll step down if there's no comments or questions, and answer any questions from
either the council or the public.
Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you. Any questions for staff at this time council?
Teresa Burgess: I do have one that was a written that will not be here this evening that has submitted
their's in writing.
Mayor Jansen: Okay.
Councilman Labatt: Of the residents that had their property damaged by the contractor, were those bills
paid? Have they been paid up yet by the contractor?
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
Teresa Burgess: All of the bills that were received by the city were paid by the city and those amounts
were deducted from bills due to the contractor by the city. So we have ensured that they were paid.
They received a city check. And then we decreased the dollar amount we paid to the contractor.
Councilman Labatt: Okay.
Mayor Jansen: Good question. Any others?
Councilman Ayotte: With the, as you explained with the other scenario, is there any oversizing in the
sewer and water applications here?
Teresa Burgess: No.
Councilman Ayotte: Okay.
Teresa Burgess: We did have 6 properties that were proposed on this project but only 2 without sewer
and water, and then the undeveloped parcel without sewer and water. The city had in the feasibility
study proposed to take the assessments for the 3 properties that had hooked up through other property
lines. They had hooked up 2 lines that were constructed elsewhere and paid connection fees. So the city
was going to use those connection fees to pay for our share of the sewer and water. And that was our
contribution to the project.
Councilman Labatt: Help me just kind of pose this here. So when the contractor bid on this project they
gave us an estimate and we awarded it way back when. Now it's come in and it's been higher. Okay. So
what's to prevent some contractor from coming in and low bailing and then doing an end around on us
and saying well all these other project costs increased the price on us.
Teresa Burgess: They have to be able to show the change in scope of'the project. In this case we struck
materials that were unsuitable. There was no knowledge of those materials. There was no reason for the
contractor to have anticipated those materials so at that point it was a justifiable change order.
Councilman Labatt: So when you say material, you mean.
Teresa Burgess: They hit black dirt. Organic.
Councilman Labatt: So they didn't do any soil borings or?
Teresa Burgess: The city chose not to do soil borings on this project because of the length. We did not
believe we would have problems and we did nm into problems. A substantial amount of the cost, in fact
over $14,000 worth of the increased cost were engineering and they were related to the contractor did not
finish on time. The work was supposed to be completed in October of 2000. The project was completed
this summer. Because of that delay we incurred an increased engineering cost for inspection of the
project. Increased legwork trying to get the contractor to get the project completed. Our specifications
only have a dollar amount for liquidated damages. We could not collect the additional engineering fees.
We are in the process of revising our specifications so that if this were to occur in a contract that was let
under those specifications, we would be able to collect the entire amount of the increased engineering
fees related to delays by the contractor.
I0
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
Councilman Labatt: So I couldn't see that~ How much were liquidated damages on t. he~?
Teresa Burgess: $1,900.
Councilman Labatt: $1,9007 flit was 19, I couldn't tell flit was 1,000 or, okay. That's it.
Mayor Jansen: Okay, thanks. Thank you. With that we will open this to the public hearing. If there's
anyone present who would like to make comment on this item, please step forward to the microphone and
state your name and address for the record please.
David Stmyk: Thank you. My name is David Struyk representing myself and my wife from 1941
Crestview Circle. Of the project in question. It was our undemanding that we had to submit any
information or objections in writing so I've done that. I would assume that you would, am I just to read
Mayor Jansen: That would probably be appropriate, sure. Thank you.
David Struylc Okay.
Mayor Jansen: And then submit it.
David Stmyk: Council. The improvement project number 00-05 now appears to be complete and
assessments have been proposed. While this seemingly small project has most certainly had it's
challenges, and has been referred to locally as the project from bell, we do feel the city has done an
outstanding job. Teresa Burgess and her staff have been superb to work with, even in the midst of
contractor shortcomings and I see that WSB representatives are here.. Dave ~ and I thing it's
Shibani, is that right? They also did a great job.
Mayor Jansen: Well thanks for sharing that. We appreciate those connnents.
David Struyk: The problems we had really were with the contractor. In fact working with the WSB
folks, including people like Phil Tipka and their surveyors was a really good experience. We have the
following concerns regarding the proposed assessments. Number one. We r~y request that
assessments against Parcel Number 25-7500040, an undeveloped ~, be deferred until the property
is either developed or sold. This request was echoed by Ms. Burgess at both the previous council
meeting and in a memorandum to former City Manager, Scott Botcher dated August 14a~ and I have that
with me where she stated that this request was both reasonable and appropriate and recommeaded that
the council grant a deferment at the time of the assessment hearing. I understand whe~ Teresa was
coming from tonight, although I must say that that was a complete surprise. At the moment our proposed
assessments are $26,000 approximately. That's $13,000 for each parcel. Our front parcel is an
undeveloped parcel. We've always had the understanding and the expectation that that. particular parcel
would be deferred. The assessments would be deferred until it was either sold or developed and we still
request that that goes forward. It would not seem appropriate that cost overruns would have a bearing on
whether or not a deferment was granted. Those seem to me to be two very separate items. It's
unfortunate that it did cost more than the city expected but whether or not our deferment is granted, I
don't believe that that has a bearing on that cost. Item two. Which deals with cost overruns. Many of
these questions have been answered already in Teresa's comments and with comments to her prior. Any
cost overruns as a result of errors on the part of the contractor should not be attached to the assesmnents.
It appears that the proposed amount agrees with the original quote from the contractor. However, if them
11
City Council Meeting - October 22, 200!
are any cost overruns as a result of performance errors on the part of the contractor, these should not be
included in the assessments. There were many mistakes along the way which required repair and/or re-
work, including additional inspections and engineering time which should not be charged to the
assessments. These also include broken gas mains 3 times, cut telephone lines 5 times and cut television
cables at least 5 times. The unexpected re-paving of the neighbor's asphalt driveway as a result of
unauthorized use and multiple re-sodding attempts as a result of inadequate watering. These
inconveniences do not even take into account the multiple times our road and driveways were blocked for
days at a time against the rules and regulations of the city requiring all of us to carry our groceries and
children 2 blocks through ankle deep mud for many weeks. Any assessment amount above the value of
the actual completed work would be unfair. Any cost ovemms as a result of performance errors need to
be charged to the contractor or absorbed by the city. And like I say, I think that Teresa addressed a lot of
that already. Item three. Do assessments exceed increased to fair market value of parcels? It has not
been determined as to whether or not the proposed assessment mounts exceed the fair market value
increase to our parcels as a result of the improvements. We understand that under the laws of the State of
Minnesota, the assessment amount cannot be greater than the increased value to the parcel as a result of
the improvement. We are primarily concerned about the roadway improvements, $6500 per parcel and
not so much about the water and sewer, which are $3300 and $3400 respectfully. We are the ones who
originally requested the sewer and water but would have preferred that the road was left as gravel. It was
explained to us at that time it was a maintenance issue for the city and that we did not have the option.
Seeing the value and importance of the sewer and water improvements to the neighborhood, our
neighbors reluctantly agreed to sign the petition for improvements. However, they all noted at the time
that they would dispute the amounts of the road improvements at the time of assessment hearing, as that
was the only assessment that they would be faced with. Respectfully submitted, David and Krisfi Stmylc
Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you.
David Struylc So do I leave this?
Mayor Jansen: If you would, maybe go ahead and give that Teresa. Appreciate it.
Mary Trippler: And I'm another property owner on Crestview Circle. My name is Mary Trippler and I
live at 1931 Crestview Circle, and thank you for hearing us this evening. I received notice of the city's
intent to assess $13,326 against my property and I have four points which I'll cover quickly and then I've
got something to submit in writing. My first issue is whether indeed the amount of the assessment is
appropriate when calculated on my property. I purchased my home in July of 1994 and I paid
approximately $120,000 for it. The attached assessed value in 2001 is $125,500. The $13,326 that's
proposed to be assessed against my property is more than 10% of the tax assessed value and more than
10% of what I paid for it and I acknowledge that it's gone up in value since I did it but I question whether
adding sewer and water and paving the street indeed adds that much to the market value. And that
doesn't even include what the city has already obtained that I had to pay in cash to obtain a hook-up,
$3,000 and change to one fund and $1,100 to another fund and that means that through hook-up and the
assessments it would be 14% of the tax assessed value of my property and it just does not seem that
adding sewer and water and a paved street should account for that much. It's also my view that paving
the cul-de-sac doesn't add any value to the property. Our neighborhood always kind of took pride in the
fact that we had one of the last dirt roads in this area of Chanhassen and we understand that the road was
paved for the purpose of being able to better maintain or not damage the sewer and water, the manhole
covers or whatever was needed to maintain the sewer and water for our homes, but I don't see the paving
as being a benefit at all. I also question whether it's appropriate to assess the full amount given the
problems that we've had in the project, and I'm not sure whether legally this is something that should be
12
City Council Meeting- October 22, 2001
taken into account or not but it certainly is irr~, ortant to the neighborhood. I think Teresa and everyone
started referring to us as the project from bell on Crestview Circle because every day brought some new
problem. David's mentioned some of them but our roads were impassable for long periods of time from
mud in the fall. From runoff in the spring. I had to even drive my son across msd. ~ line to the
middle of the cul-de-sac so he could get just the school bus in the spring because the water was too deep
on any way around the cul-de-sac for him to ford the water. My dog fence was cut last fall and has been
inoperable until this July when finally, or pardon me, until September when I finally had it repaired
figuring that everything was finally done. And that repair statement hasn't beem paid yet Teresa. I don't
know what happened to that.
Teresa Burgess: That's on tonight's. I believe it's on tonight's agenda or the next agenda, but it is to be
paid.
Mary Trippler: The third point that I want to make is that the work I think is barely acceptable. For
example, when the contractor put in the sod they did it without filling in black dirt so in my proper~ for
example, when you try to mow it you take off big scarred areas because there's lumps over tree stumps
and so on and so it's on the city's fight-of-way and perhaps the city doesn't care but it, the work wasn't
well done. The paving in front of my house had to be ripped up within a week of the time it was done
because when the contractor laid the pavement be didn't have an appropriate area for runoff so now at
the end of the driveway there's a big square scar where it had to be redone just shortly after it was done.
And the last point that I would like to make to the council, and again I'm not sum that this is an
appropriate thing to consider legally but ! think that the city should be concerned about the issue of
affordable housing. What you're talking about is assessing an additional about $200 a month onto my
house payment, and that's a lot of money for a single parent and I think you know that's something that
people should be considering too wben they're considering how to assess, appropri~ly assess a
property. I agree with David and Teresa and Bill and everybody that the city has been wonderful.
They've listened to me cry because every time we turned around there was another $3,000 or another
$1,000 so, but that's a tough issue for me and Ijnst ask that the council, ask your consideration for
making these decisions. Thank you.
Mayor Jansen: Thank you. Is there anyone else here who would like to address this issue? Seeing no
one, I'll close the public hearing. Teresa, if we could maybe just have you address some oftbe points. I
don't know if you wrote down what some of the concerns were. I certainly appreciate your having
started your presentation preparing us for what some of these problems were. Again: I'm sure we're all
feeling for the neighborhood and everything that you did have to go through and we appreciate your
commenting that staff and WSB were there to try to belp you through it, but our apologies. It does sound
like you came up with a good solution as far as our picking up what we could of the extended
engineering costs. We've bom all of that and taken care of the contractor then picking up all of those
additional costs on the overruns.
Teresa Burgess: ff I can start with the one that I'm sure Mary will be pleased to know. The council did
approve the check for the dog fence repair this evening.
Councilman Ayotte: Teresa, could you speak up?
Teresa Burgess: That check will be cut tomorrow and we'll drop it in the mail for you.
Councilman Ayotte: I can't hear.
13
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
Teresa Burgess: The dog fence was approved by the council this evening. So that was approved with
the bills. It will go out tomorrow. It will be cut and the cheek will go in the mail. So her dog fence
been taken care of. That was an outstanding bill. And as far as the issues with the contractor, we did nm
into a lot of issues with this contractor. In hindsight we could have done a lot of things differently.
Unfortunately, we couldn't see it from that end. We kept seeing the issues of cutting the project and
trying to go in and cut our losses. If we had stopped this project list fall and tried to pull the bonds, my
.understanding from discussions with legal counsel was that in the process of pulling the bonds we would
not be able to go in and correct the problems they had left us with. At the time we were initiating that
process, we had a hole approximately 15 feet deep and about 30 feet wide, so we chose to continue with
the contractor. In hindsight we probably should have said, forget it. Forget the whole thing. Go on with
city forces and correct the problem. However we didn't see that as a viable option at the time. The
increased cost, and the reason the city did not pass on those substantial costs were that we did not feel
that the neighborhood was gaining any benefit by those increased costs. The 596 increase is in keeping
with the difference between the feasibility study estimate and the actual construction bid. Not the
construction cost. The construction bid, and the actual construction bid was higher than 5% more than
the feasibility estimates. But we felt that that was a reasonable request of the neighborhood. Given that
we do have 4 properties requesting, contesting their assessment, my recommendation to the council thi.~
evening is that we table the adoption of this assessment roll for review by staff and we will present the
responses to the conversations and the items that were brought up this evening at the next council
meeting for either adoption or for adjustments as appropriate. And that way we have a chance to look at
these in more depth and respond, and if necessary make adjustments.
Mayor Jansen: Okay. That sounds very reasonable, and then you'd be able to contact the property
owners and maybe answer some of the concerns and document those back to us.
Teresa Burgess: Right. And we will copy all of the property owners on the staff report. One thing if I
can clarify for the neighborhood. It would not be a public hearing. We've heard the concerns. We've
received the objections. Anyone not contesting this evening, they have missed the deadline for
contesting. We're not extending that. We are only extending the adoption of the assessment roll for
review. Just so the neighborhood, anybody that's watching at home understands that.
Mayor Jansen: Okay.
Mary Trippler: ...clarification.
Mayor Jansen: Certainly.
Mary Trippler: Does that mean, Madam Mayor and Teresa that you'll consider what David and I said
and the other person, and we'll respond to those?
Teresa Burgess: We'll respond specifically to those issues and any others that are discovered during
that review.
Mary Trippler: But we won't have another public hearing?
Teresa Burgess: There would not be another official public hearing. We'll review those and if
necessary we'll discuss them and come back with a response.
Mary Trippler: Thanks so much.
14
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
lVlayor Jansen: Oreat. Alright. Council, are there additional questions or direction to staff before we
table this?
Councilman Ayotte: I'd like to know, not at this time Teresa but even_,mlly, what the value of the
overrun is imbedded in these numbers, one. Two. I'd like to have irrespective of the reasons for it, what
was the original period of performance and what was the actual period of lx~f~ce. If I could have
those two points clarified. Number three. From a legality standpoint, how far out can the assessments be
pushed with respect to a timeline? 8 years? 10 years? 12 years? What are the constraints there? I'd
like to know that eventually.
Teresa Burgess: That is set by the council. We are proposing 8 years because that is the standard, but
the actual length of the assessment is set by the council. We can extend them longer.
Councilman Ayotte: So we don't have any constraint there legally?
Mayor Jansen: Why don't we pose that to the city attorney. Roger?
Roger Knutson: You have a statutory limit of 30 years. But I have never heard a council do a 30 year
assessment roll, but theoretically 30 years.
Councilman Ayotte: I've never heard of a screw up with this vendor before either.
Roger Knutson: No, you can go 30 years.
Councilman Labatt: I've got one more question for Roger.
Mayor Jansen: Okay.
Councilman Labatt: If we defer on that one lot, can we put a sunset or an end of deferment on it?
Roger Knutson: Yeah.
Councilman Labatt: Rather than say until he develops or sells it, I mean that may never happen so can
we say well we'll defer it up to x amount of years and then at that point?
Roger Knutson: Yes.
Mayor Jansen: Okay.
Councilman Boyle: One other question. Do we have any recourse to the developer? Or I mean the
contractor.
Teresa Burgess: We've already taken our legal recourse. We've levied the.
Roger Knutson: Liquidated damages.
Teresa Burgess: Liquidated damages, I'm sorry. I'm already onto the next one in my mind. We've
levied the liquidated damages. We have revised the specifications so that in the future we would have
15
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
more teeth in the specifications to avoid a similar problerm However, that change cannot be done
retroactively. We are stuck with what we' ve got. We could certainly have pursued more vigorously
higher liquidated damages. However our chances of winning that ease would have not been great and
our cost in legal fees would have been more than our liquidated damage that we would have gotten in that
argument.
Mayor Jansen: And again as I understand it, the city is bearing the cost of the overrun on the project,
correct?
Teresa Burgess: Correct. We're only asking for a 5% increase in the assessment, which is less than the
increase between the feasibility study estimate and the actual award of contract.
Mayor Jansen: So the overruns are being taken care of by the city and so we did pick those up versus
passing those on and that was the staff recommendation.
Councilman Boyle: Understand, thank you.
Mayor Jansen: So if I could have a motion to table the acceptance, or approval of the final assessment
roll.
Councilman Boyle: I'll make a motion to table the assessment roll dated October 1, 2001 for the
Crestview Circle Project gO0-05.
Mayor Jansen: And if I could have a second please.
Councilman Labatt: Second.
Councilman Boyle moved, Councilman Labatt seconded to table the assessment roll dated October
1, 2001 for the Crestview Circle Project g00-05. Ail voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously 4 to 0.
Mayor Jansen: Our next council meeting I assume is when this will appear?
Teresa Burgess: We will attempt to have it ready for the November 13th. If we cannot have it by that
date we will inform the neighborhood of the next time, but assessment rolls do have to be adopted by the
end of November if they're going to be assessed this year. Otherwise they will go on property taxes next
year.
Mayor Jansen: Okay, wonderful. So staff will be in touch with you as far as the issues that you raised
and the questions that you had and we will see this item again then at our November 13th meeting. Okay,
thank you.
Teresa Burgess: Madam Mayor, if I could just clarify for the neighborhood too. November 13th is a
Tuesday so that's not an error. It is the 13~.
PUBLIC HEARING: SPECIAL ASSESSMENT HEARING~ QUINN ROAD UTILITY AND
STREET IMPROVEMENT PRO~IECT 01-02.
Public Present:
16
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
Nme
Address
Amy Schuette
Tom Schrupp
SeffReitan
Quinn Road
Q~inn Road
8900 Quinn Road
Teresa Burgess: This is the last one this evening until the next council meeting when V~e get a few
more. The Quinn Road project was also a petitioned project. It was brought to us by the neighborhood.
Again for a falling septic system- In this case they had been given 3 years to correct the problem. They
were coming to the end of their 3 year period and also were selling their ~. The pmper~ owners
requested that we extend sanitary sewer. They had also requested water and street i .mpmve~. At the
same time as we discussed with the Crestview neighborhood, we felt that street was very i ,mportant when
you're putting in sanitary and as long as you have the trench in, you might as well put in water. This
neighborhood chose to fight street and water i .mpmvements. Unfommately, it was approved without
those items. Staff again still strongly feels that those were an i .mportant part of the project. However
they were not done. So in this case we are only assessing sanitary sewer. Street i .mpmvements and water
i .mprovements have been requested again by the neighborhood and we are currently looking at whether
those should be installed coming up next year. That is the reason that we put them all together. Also
because street improvements protect the sanitary and the watermain and allows better access for
maintenance of those items. In this case there's only 2 properties being assessed for proposed for
assessment and again the project cost did overrun the feasibility esfin~to~. In this case the contractor
was not the problem, it was.just a difference in the estimating due to increased costs with construction
between the time of feasibility and the actual bidding. If you remember this is the project that we did
have to reject bids because of an error with the bid form. We saw incre, acsed prices for that. However,
they were reasonable costs so we did award the contract. We are proposing 100% assessment of the
project. The city is not picking up the costs for the majority of that. However there is'a $'7,385. That is
for the :~a~dition of an extra sanitary manhole to correct an ali~t problem. That was discovered after
the assessment roll was already published and we cannot incav, ase assessments once the assessmem roll
has been published. So the city is picking up that increased cost That's a risk of trying to get this
project on the assessment roll. But it's a reasonable cost to the city and does aid in our maintenance of
the system so we still feel that's an i .mportant thing to be done. As you can see with the two properties
that are being assessed, one property is an undeveloped parcel that is proposed to be split and eventually
developed. However, the actual split has not been done yet. And the second parcel is the parcel with the
failing septic system- Now the parcel, you'll see there's a difference in the two assessment rolls. The
difference is one parcel only received one sanitary sewer stub. The other parcel received two. They
were charged for 50% of the construction of the main and for two sanitary sewer accesses for services.
The other parcel was charged 50% of the main and one sanitary sewer service .... I will step down and
answer any questions and open it up for the public hearing.
Mayor Jansen: Thank you. Any questions for Teresa at this time?
Councilman Ayotte: Not yet.
Mayor Jansen: Okay. Then we'll open this for the public hearing. If there's anyone here tonight who
would like to address this item, please step forward to the podium and state your name and _~_a_a_ress for
the record please.
17
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
JeffReitan: My name is JeffReitan. My address is 8900 Quinn Road. I'd like to thank you for the
opportunity to speak before you. I really have two issues and I'm not sure which you'd prefer to hear
first. One issue is regarding the project and the condition of the work. It does not appear to be finished.
And I have several recommendations for completing the project such that it can resemble pre-existing
conditions. The other item is a written objection to the assessment for the lot that I am part owner of and
that would be the Parcel 25-5690030 or the lot on the west side of Quinn Road.
Mayor Jansen: Wherever you'd like to begin, you justgo ahead.
Teresa Burgess: Madam Mayor, if I could answer the issue of the road not being completed. They have
not completed the construction. It is legal for us to do the assessment roll prior to the completion of the
project. It will not go on property taxes until after the project is completed and they are on schedule for
completion. It will be brought to as good or better than what it was before.
Mayor Jansen: And what is the completion date on that7 Do you know?
Teresa Burgess: October 31at, so that would be next week.
Mayor Jansen: Okay.
Jeff Reitan: If I can just wait on those issues to see what happens I guess. Alternatively I can submit
those in writing to the mayor and the council or the engineer. It's really up to you.
Mayor Jansen: Oh you can certainly submit them. That's fine and then if it isn't complete, then certainly
there can be some discussion around the issue, sure.
Jeff Reitan: Great. I haven't prepared those in writing so I will send those to the project engineer,
Mahmoud Sweidan. In that case I'd like to read a letter, written objection to the assessment for our lot.
We, the owners of Oakwood Estates 2"a Addition, Outlet A, Parcel No. 25-5690030, we're on record as
opposing this project, are of the opinion that this project was initiated because one residence had a failing
septic system and they did not want to replace it. Apparently they felt that sanitary sewer was their only
option. As such the project was approved against our wishes and we are now asked to pay for half of the
project. I'd like to interject that one neighbor petitioned that this project be initiated and we were not for
any of the improvements so I don't want to infer that we sanctioned the sewer improvement, despite the
fact that said improvement was made. There are two reasons supporting this supposition. Water was not
included. The project scope was limited to sanitary sewer only. And the project was limited in size to
providing only 150 feet of sewer tnmk to facilitate connecting the impacted residence. Two additional
connections were also installed in anticipation of future development of our property, despite our
indication of no intentions for development in the short term. We recognize that improvements will
happen in the next few years, but we feel unduly burdened by this project. One which was initiated to
serve the limited needs of another party. The cost of the improvements are excessive because of it's size.
The cost is 2 to 3 times higher than it should have been were it part of a larger improvement. We feel
that the cost would be far less. The improvement is diminished by the fact that water was not included in
this project. The addition of city water service, although of insignificant cost if included in this project,
now entails bringing up the very same earth that was removed to install the sewer mink. The cost to do
this later is now higher than if it were included in this project. It was suggested by a council member at
the last hearing that we would not be negatively impacted by this project since our lot would improve in
value an amount at least equivalent to the cost of this project. We disagree for the reasons stated above.
Additionally said value enhancement cannot be realized unless the lot is sold. As stated previously we
18
City Council Meeting- October 22, 2001
intend on subdividing the lot as follows: 18% to be annexed to the adjacent lot to the south. No plans to
develop further. 41% to be annexed to the adjacent lot to the north. No plans to develop ~. The
remaining 41% will stand as the remainder of Outlot A. We ask that the proposed assessment on Outlot
A be reduced by not less than 50% and withheld until or when our lot is developed. Because this project
served the interest of one party, we do not feel obligated to equally share in the cost In _~d~_i_tion, on
future improvements we ask that the city consider the best interest of all. impacted residents. We ask that
the city mitigate the cost of the future road and utility i .ml~'ovem~ts by not embracing spot solutions. It
is anticipated that development will soon take place to the north of Quinn Road, and that Quinn Road
will be extended to the east and then to the south to connect back to Lyman Boulevard. As such we ask
that any future improvements take place only when cost effective and in conjunction with said
development Thank you very much.
Mayor Jansen: Thank you. Is there anyone else here this evening that would like to ~0dress this item on
the agenda? Okay, seeing no one, I will close the public hearing and again Teresa, I don't know if you
want to be on the spot to answer some of these questions or what you would prefer to do on thi~ one this
evening.
Teresa Burgess: Cemfinly some of these questions will need to be answered. We'll need to spend some
time on it, but I can answer the question of why this project was authorized. The property with the
failing septic system was required by ordinance to hook up to sanitary sewer. However the pipe was not
long enough for them to hook up to it so we did have to do a project for them to connect. The ordinance
requires that if a home within, what's the distance? 150 feet of existing sanitary sewer has a failing
septic system, they are required by ordinance to connect to sanitary. They cannot construct a new septic.
That was part of the reason this project was approved. The water and street i .mpwve~ were
eliminated from the project and the original project did require sanitary and water to go down much
further to serve properties all the way to the end of the public road. Those were taken off the project
based on neighborhood dissention. Only one ~ owner, did support the project That was the
property owner that required it for their septic system so going back to the original, there was only the
one property owner. However, with the failing septic system we were forced into doing that minor
project. We will go through and review and wa~ a written recommendation to the council so again we'd
ask that the council table this assessment roll until the next meeting and again for the neighborhood, it
would not be a formal public heating. We will be in contact with them probably in writing to let them
know what our recommendation to the council is.
Mayor Jansen: Okay, great Thanks Teresa. Any questions for Teresa at this time? Okay. Seeing
none, if I could have a motion please.
Councilman Ayotte: I make a motion to table thi~ until the 13 November. Same date did you say?
Teresa Burgess: We will attempt to have it done by the November 13~ date.
Councilman Labatt: Second.
Councilman Ayotte moved, Coundlman Labatt seconded to table the adoption of the final
assessment roll for the Quinn Road Project No. 01-02. All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously 4 to O.
19
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
Mayor Jansen: The motion carries 4-0 to table this item and 'you will then be hearing from staff as
they're responding and making a recommendation to us that will hopefully be presented at that
November 13~ meeting. So thank you for bringing your concerns forward. Appreciate it.
C__QNSIDER AMENDMENT TO CITY CODE TO PERMIT ONE DRIVEWAY ACCESS PER
Kate Aanen~on: Thank you. This item came out of the private street issue. This map refers to the
private street. That's not what we're talking about tonight. We're talking about a specific individual
driveway for a lot. But this was included in your packet and what we're focusing in on is these two lots.
There was no attempt to misdirect anybody but we're focusing on these two lots. The revised item that
went to the Planning Commission included that. When we did the private streets, private drive we
recognized the failure of one way to convey property, which was if you could get an access through
adjoining property. This has two driveways on one lot. By having this ordinance in place it would
prevent this unless you requested a variance. The other reason we recommended this ordinance
amendment has been the proliferation of people that have accessory structures, by using them for
commercial businesses or renting out backs of garages. It causes a lot of concerns with adjoining
property and we don't have a took in place that says you only get one driveway. So based on the
outcome of this, private street, private driveway, we made and the concern that we've been recei~g
over the last few years, staff proposed an ordinance amendment. As it went through the process, the
Planning Commission had some concerns regarding driveway setbacks. Staff had recommended 0. The
reason being is, there's been an increasing number of accessory structures that are parked in the front
yards where the driveway hits the streets. As you recall recepfly we passed an ordinance that says you
can't keep a boat or an RV on the street for more than 24-48 hours. Right now the city ordinance
recognizes that if you want to pave your driveway and put your boat or your accessory structure, your
snowmobile on the side yard, that's where it belongs. That's the least intrusive to the neighborhood, and
that historically has been the way the ordinance has addressed that. What we"re concerned with is that if
you were to go this way, it' would create a lot of non-conforming situations and then we're back to the
problem of trying to relocate those boats. There are a lot of subdivisions in our community that have
only 2 car garages and this is how they address that. Even those with 3 car garages still have the other
uses, boats or whatever, or teenagers. Of the 2. So in this staff report you actually have two
recommendations. One, the staff deferred, has a separate recommendation than the Planning
Commission. The Planning Commission wanted to leave in the language regarding the 10 foot setback.
Staff had recommended that we not have that in place. There was also some concern about, on (g). ff
you follow on page 5, that we rake that out. All lots. We have a lot of circumstances where the city
actually had access to a lift station of such where actually over runs a property line because generally an
easement goes 5 feet on either side. We actually mn it down the middle of an easement so that would
make all of our easements that we have over property that we use for public purposes where we actually
have hard surface covers in violation of that too. So we recommended that come out. So there are some
differences there between the two. The City Manager has given his recommendation, but we believe this
is the way to go. The Planning Commission did table this. It did hear it twice and I'd be happy to answer
any questions that you may have.
Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you. I guess one of the issues that I started exploring with staff that maybe
would somehow meld staff' s recommendation and the Planning Commission's recommendation. The
key concern on staff's part that I'm hearing are these parking pads that people are putting next to the
garage space for the accessory vehicles. The concern on the Planning Commission's part is that they
don't want a functional part of the driveway running that close to the adjacent property, and that's where
they're coming up with wanting to do this 10 foot setback from the property line. There was an original,
2O
City Council Meeting- October 22, 2001
going back to where staff had begun, your original discussion had been around a 5 foot potential setbacL
correct?
Kate Aanenson: Let me comment on that. That was engineering's reconwrmndation. It was not the
planning staff.
Mayor Iansen: Okay. Alright. We'll pass the buck back over to engineering. Okay. An engineering
staff recommendation that a 5 foot might be acceptable, but in your discussion again it came down to
how many then non-conforming situations would we be creating.
Kate Aanenson: Right. What we did is we kind of went, there's some, again it's not, the world's not flat
and square and we've got some circumstances where they immedimely create non-conforming situations.
For example on Lake Lucy we've got the common driveways. We've just _recently given a couple of
variances showing for the driveway where we've got storm water ponds for example on this lot. This is a
large storm water. The driveway has to butt up against. You've got a 3:1 slope. This person hasn't
come in for the building permit yet. If we pass this ordinance, they would now need to come back and
get another variance.
Mayor Jansen: And let me maybe just explain to council what Kate is showing us is as I was then posing
the question of well what if we come down to say a 5 foot setback. What would that affect and what
she's showing us are projects that are in the system that would, that would then require a variance to be
proces~ in order to bring them in. This being one of them. And the Lake Lucy project is one that
would be a non-conforming use if we put that setback in, and there they were trying to combine access
points so that there would be less access points on Lake Lucy so it was.
Kate Aanenson: They're right on the property line. So they'.re too close, right. And this is another
example, the one we just approved.' Big Woods where we actually have our lift station and that's our
easement going down to the lift station and we're going to rebuild that one and it's on the property line.
It's into both easements on both sides. Actually kind of straddling the ~ line. Again, it's our
easement but it is straddling the property line.
Councilman Boyle: Well are there houses next to that Kate? I inea~
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, there will be. Sure, there will be houses on either side, sure. We've got them
throughout the community where we have driveways getting to our utility services.
Mayor Jansen: And what is the reason for putting it right on the property line?
Kate Aanenson: Well generally there's a topographic situation. For example when we do specific
subdivisions when the homeowner picks out, and we've had this discussion before, you don't know the
exact placement of the home until the home buyer selects where it's going to go. We talk about what the
elevation's going to be, but often we try to save a tree, so maybe we have to swing it to save a tree.
There's a wetland. There's an anomaly, we're trying to save grading. Too steep of a driveway. We're
trying to save grade so that's, you probably need that flexibility and so you won't know until what you're
holding up is an individual homeowner that's now put their money down, ready to go or doing some
modifications and saying now you're too close and we're saying, for the most part we don't have that
many problems. One of the issues the Planning Commi.~sion's had were side loaded garages. When we
have that. Generally we've required those now with some of those variances we've got the flag lots,
when those come through. Now that we, it's through the variance process that we can try to mitigate
21
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
that by adding additional trees or some of those sort of factors that those come into play. But we're
going to have some non-conforming situations of people that don't have permits yet to proceed.
Mayor Jansen: So then they would have to be coming through and looking for the variance to be able to
build.
Kate Aanenson: Correct, to put their driveway in and I'm not sure there's always appropriate way to, in
this gentleman's case, I'm not sure how else you get there. There's a storm water pond there. I mean it
has to abut the property line.
Cotmeilman Boyle: Well there will be exemptions I'm sure.
Kate Aanenson: Well I guess what, the rule I look at it, if you're giving a preponderance of variances
then maybe the rule doesn't work. You know, and we're saying there's going to be quite a few of them
out there. I mean that's where we want people to park their RV's and their boats is in their side yard and
to put it there and if you can't make your driveway closer than 10 feet, there's going to be a problem.
Councilman Boyle: I would have a serious problem if my next door neighbor wanted to abut my
property, and I go on my deck and have to make a decision if I'm going to sit in his boat or sit on my
deck, then having a cup of coffee. I mean that would bother me a great deal.
Kate Aanenson: That's what the ordinance says right now, right.
Mayor Jansen: That they can actually do that. There 'is nothing to stop that situation from their putting
the boat alongside the house and there's numerous of them in the community, and though we did have a
discussion, and Todd I don't know if you want to jump in and maybe share the perspective of how we
could actually modify this a little bit to not make those pads. Parking spaces or pads or whatever you
want to call that along the side of the garage non-conforming.
Todd Gerhardt: Yeah, you can definitely separate the two issues. The driveway is one of the issues and
.then the parking along side of the house is the second issue. And what we've talked about doing is, right
now the ordinance would allow your neighbor to put his boat alongside the house. The question i~,
would that be better to put the boat alongside of the house or put the boat alongside of the house on a
paved surface. I've got one in my neighborhood where the guy parks it along side of the house and he
didn't move it all summer. And he didn't mow it either and then I've got 2 neighbors that have paved
issues on each side of their house and it looks good. I mean they incorporated it with their driveway. So
one way, if you want to allow the paved surface alongside of the garage you can make a 20 foot or a 30
foot setback from the front yard before they can start to pave the side of their property. And then as the
driveway should go along side the lot line or not, you just have to understand if you go with that
ordinance, you're going to be processing quite a few variances that might go with that is what Kate's
telling you and she showed you at least 2 that will be coming to you fairly quickly if you pass that
ordinance tonight. If you put it on the lot line. I think engineering' s standpoint requesting the 5 foot is to
allow for drainage I would think is why you're making that request.
Teresa Burgess: For drainage and then also for, that is where we nm our utility easements.
Todd Gerhardt: So not always is the utilities through there and we let people know that if you do pave
over them and we need to get to those utilities, we're going to rip them out. And usually enter into some
type of agreement with people with that, right?
22
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
Teresa Burgess: Right. And we would still require an easement encroachment agreement with anybody
that was paving into that 5 foot. The purpose of that agreement is two fold. One, it informs us what's
going on out there and we have something in writing. And the other is it informs the neighbor or, not the
neighbor, the property owner that we do have some legal fights to that easement and they need to be
aware of what their, when they pave that section, what that means when they pave in that easement.
Mayor Jansen: And just so council understands, our current ordinance allows for those vehicles to be
parked alongside the garage and we've almost created the situation where people need to do that because
we've said you can't park them on the street. And so if that purpose is allowed for, and it's the fact that
they're paved that it became an issue as a part of this conversation as to the setback on those pads. So
those would end up needing to be an exception and what Todd is saying is that by having that front yard
setback, they would not be paving that right out to the curb. It would start as a turn up closer to the
garage so that they could make that turning motion. But we would provide for that setback so it wouldn't
come all the way out to the street is where he was going with that.
Councilman Ayotte: Is there, from what Fve heard and the e-mails that I've received, which have
primarily addressed setback. It's primarily the visual encroachment. It's the aeaheti. 'cs. It's, as
Councilman Boyle points out. It's a good thing he doesn't live next to me ~ he'd see my red boat.
Councilman Boyle: Well as long as it's 10 feet away.
Councilman Ayotte: But is design standards an option, standards an option to, if someone introduces
something next to their home, that we can in some fashion make anangemen~s .so it's not as distasteful?
I've done things to mine to ac. comm~ my neighbor and so fort~ Is that a reasonable consideration or
no7
Todd Gerhardt: I'd have to refer this over to Roger, but I'm not aware of any design standard that would
allow for a side yard screening of anything. Do you Roger?
Roger Knutson: I can't think, no. If you can articulate what you want done, we probably can accomplish
it. I mean if you want to require a fence or if you wanted to require some sort of screening, the only
reason I'm hesitating and this is really not my issue, is whether you'd have space under that
circumstances to do those sorts of things. I mean if you're putting your RV the~ and, or whatever you
put in there, do you have enough space to put in a fence or a row of trees? Probably not the trees but
maybe you have room for a fence.
Mayor Jansen: And I'm assuming that that' s a completely different issue than what we're actually
looking at here this evening.
Councilman Ayotte: Yeah, I understand, yeah. Yeah.
Mayor Jansen: So all that I was addressing with staff was that that seemed to be, at least one of the
issues that was coming up as far as if we put the setback in, we currently have that use in place and so
they were trying to remove the setback altogether. What I was trying to accomplish was how do we not
impact that particular use, because it is allowed for, and still include a reasonable setback. If the 5 feet is
something that the engineering department was thinking would be something they would like to see go in
or would be reasonable, it's still going to end up causing variances to come in on driveways on properties
23
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
where again, staff is trying to avoid or work with the topography of the lots and those are some of the
only options on those particular lots.
Councilman Boyle: You have to then ask the question I believe, what's the best route? What's it going
to affect? Are you going to have more non-conforming lots or are you going to have more lots where
you're going to have an unfavorable situation of having two lots right together and a boat or an RV fight
next to your property?.
Kate Aanenson: You have to separate the boat or the RV because it's going-to go there no matter what
If we tell somebody, your neighbors are complaining. They can't get to the mail because your boat's
parked in front of the mailbox. You've got to get it where it belongs and that's your side. You're going
to put it there. The question is, do you want them to throw rock down? They don't need a permit for
that. They're going to put rock down or they're going to pave it. So now they pave it and I'm going to
go out there and tell them, you're going to have to take the asphalt out because you can't go that close to
the side yard. Yes, you can put your boat there but you can't put a hard surface on there, whether it's
rock or pavement or something. That's what I'm saying. There seems to be a little bit, adjust the
position on that. Say what you know, if that's where you're supposed to store it so it's not a nuisance.
Mayor Jansen: And have it be the most visually appealing versus having it turn into weeds growing up
around a vehicle.
Kate Aanenson: The dead grass or...
Mayor Jansen: Yeah, or the boat.
Councilman Boyle: So we're saying, don't pave it or. don't put anything under it and you can go ahead
and park it there but the minute he puts some kind of permanent structure there, then you need a 10 foot
setback or a 5 foot or whatever it might be.
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Councilman Boyle: Maybe the need is not to do it there if there' s not a setback at all. I mean can you
approach it such that they can't put their boat or RV there?
Kate Aanenson: We'd have to amend the ordinance.
Mayor Jansen: That issue was actually addressed at one point.
Kate Aanenson: I think you'd fill the room if we did that.
Todd Gerhardt: That gets into the administrative nightmare is my comment.
Councilman Labatt: Well what about, I know in my neighborhood we have restrictive covenants.
Kate Aanenson: Sure. Some neighborhoods have restrictive covenants. Some of the newer
subdivisions.
Councilman Labatt: You're not allowed to store boats outside so as more and more neighborhoods are
coming in, obviously they're having covenants too. So how many of them are having these same
24
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
covenants that my neighborhood has that says you're not allowed to store your boat or camper trailer, RV
outside in your driveway alongside your house? So then if that's the question, fit. he answer is well 99%
of the new developments are having that, then you go back and say well, for all these people that have it
right now, do you have to grandfather them in? And say well, boy I've had this here for 20 years. Now
you're going to change your little rules on me.
Kate Aanenson: Does that include extra cars? Like could you put a car on the side?
Councilman Labatt: I don't know. I mean you could.
Todd Gerhardt: See, this is what I was afraid of is that you were going to go down this road. I mean how
can you tell one neighborhood that it's okay to park your boat in it and another neighborhoed you can't.
That's up to the neighborhood and your restrictive covenants. And you're creating the nighmmm that I
thought you would. How are we supposed to go out and enforce this? When you go into Carver Beach
where everybody has something in their side yard and one in my neighborhood that wants to do it and
you've already got 2 that are doing it and he can't, I just don't know how you do it.
Councilman Labatt: I agree Todd. I don't, I think you're opening up Pandora's box. When I bought my
house and they said here's your covenants. Read them and before I bought I knew I couldn't put my boat
in my driveway or on the side of my house so.
Todd Gerhardt: We tried doing it 20 years ago and the city employee was nm off the protmrty
physically. To tell the guy he couldn't park his camper in the side yard. It's, people take their ~
as their property and to go in there and tell somebody you can't park your camper or your boat there, they
take that very personally.
Councilman Ayotte: I still would like to, because I don't know if I got my question answered. Is it
doable to consider some sort of standard so that if someone does introduce a private driveway, that
they'd be held to some sort of standard so they are not i ,m!x~ing something negative to your neighbors.
Is there any way of researching that?
Teresa Burgess: There are some standards that are i ,reposed on that ~ owner. The ~
owner cannot change drainage onto their neighboring ~. So for instance they cannot direct more
drainage towards their neighbor. So that means they can't change the grades. They couldn't come in and
make a substantial change to install that driveway. They can't make substantial grading changes to their
property without applying for a grading permit. So those are things that we cain do already. They're
already existing in the ordinance. As far as putting a fence down the ~ line, that could be a
problem in a number of cases. If we have utilities in those areas, we're going to have to give those
people an exception so we're going to be back into that variance. We probably don't have room for trees
and we would not allow trees in those easements. If we were to...
Kate Aanenson: ...and I tell they've got to plant trees or put a fence in, they're not going to pave it.
They're just going to park their boat there. More than likely.
Councilman Ayotte: So the answer is it's not practical.
Kate Aanenson: Well I guess what I'm saying is what's the appropriate nexus to say if you're going to
make it aesthetically pleasing, then you have to do this much more. Right now you can park your boat
there. I mean that happens all over the city in the areas where there's not restrictive covenants. And as
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
far as the number of subdivisions that have restrictive covenants, there's a lot, probably equal that don't
have restrictive covenants, or more.
Mayor Jansen: And then the alternative is, you end up with these boats parked in back yards.
Kate Aanenson: Right, and there are some of those around the community too. It's in the back yard and
we get calls on that...
Todd Gerhardt: And that's what Jeff gets paid for,
Mayor Sansen: And that's even worst.
Kate Aanenson: Worst, yes.
Mayor Jansen: I guess where I was trying to go was, the inbetween. You know how do we address the
issue of not wanting that active driveway right on the property line, but not disallowing or making
difficulties parking areas next to the garages that are being used for a purpose that's allowed.
Councilman Ayotte: See I don't understand the advantage of a 5 foot versus a 10 foot versus a 3 foot
versus a 2 foot. If a setback is a setbacl~
Kate Aanenson: Well the 5 foot is a general utility easement. Generally the utility easement on a side
yard is 5 foot on either side. That's where the magic 5 foot comes fror~.
Teresa Burgess: That's where the magic 5 foot comes into. That is what is dedicated on the plat is 5
foot. I don't know where 3 foot or I foot comes from
Councilman Ayotte: That's just came out.
Teresa Burgess: 10 foot is a number that also comes out because that's a standard rounded number. It
seems like everything's a setback of rounded 10's, 20's, 30's, and so that's where the 10 comes from.
Mayor Jansen: So I can see where we could maybe justify the 5 foot. It will still cause variances to
come in for the driveways, but you could find a way then to put that 5 foot on there and make it exempt
on these parking areas with that 20 foot setback on the parking area to the front yard.
Councilman Boyle: If there was no setback could you feasibility have 2 driveways together? Run right
down the property line.
Kate Aanenson: That's what I'm saying. That's a circumstance we have right now and the city has
some, right. Right. And people do share common driveways. That's the ones I was pointing out,
correct.
Teresa Burgess: That is something we actually encourage in many cases. Commercial drive would be a
perfect example. We encourage a shared driveway in places where.
Councilman Boyle: I don't think I'm talking about a shared driveway. I'm talking about.
Teresa Burgess: Where we would have them put them side by side.
26
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
Councilman Boyle: Really?
Teresa Burgess: And that would be to limit access to the road. The number of access points. The more
access points on a road, the more points of potential conflict, potential accidents. And so we do
encourage that in some cases. But we usually try to narrow them down. We don't have 24 foot on either
side. We wouldn't have 48 foot of pavement in those cases. And most devel~ won't do that. It's a
cost savings to put the driveways together. You can save 24 foot of pavement and it's a decreased cost
Roger Knutson: My experience in some other cities, and it's not a commnn experience but when you
have residential property abutting directly on a high speed roadway and you want to minimiTe turning
moveam~ts on that roadway. I've seen cities require shared driveways.
Mayor Jansen: Which is what we did on Lake Lucy Road.
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Roger Knutson: Because you want to cut down on the points of access on that high speed roadway. I've
never seen that required on a local street but on the high speed collector or atteriais, cities have
conditioned approval of the plats on that.
Mayor Jansen: But the main concern that the Planning Commissioners were looking at again from
reading the verbatim minutes, their concern was the active part of the driveway and it was the side l~d~
garage that very much drove that discussion. And then the topography was raised as far as abutting
properties and how the driveway would affect an abutting property.-. But I don't believe-that you would
have, for instance staff driving a driveway off to the side of a property if it's going to be i ,mpacting an
enviro~tal issue or major trees. I think everyone tries to avoid those sorts of situations. But again,
the major issue seemed to be more that active part of the driveway and not wanting it right next to the
abutting properties windows if it's in fact going to be going right by the side of the house was more an
issue so the parking area wasn't so much the concern being that close. I do know that we have at least
one member of the public present this evening that would like to make comment on this issue. If council
is okay with my opening it up for a brief 5 minute presen~on from the resident, then I will do that. If
you would like to address this issue at this time to the council, you're certainly welcome to step forward
to the microphone and I'm just going to reiterate what we talked about earlier today. If we could just
keep the comments strictly to the issue that we're reviewing, it would cemfinly be appreciated and avoid
there being any derogatory comments.
Councilman Ayotte: We're going to do multi-media.
Debbie Lloyd: You betcha. Would you mind Todd putting your finger right them, holding that? Thank
you.
Councilman Labatt: Do you want me to hold that for you Debbie?
Dobbie Lloyd: Steve, would you mind just looking at that number and verifying that it's 10 feet.
Councilman Labatt: Yeah, it's 10. Sure.
27
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
Debbie Lloyd: Thank you. We'll just leave that there. I like visuals. I was never in education but I
think they can be helpful. My name's Debbie Lloyd. I live at 7302 Laredo Drive. And I'm going to try
to keep this short and succinct. You did receive the survey that I sent to you e-mail yesterday. Hem are
the pictures I was unable to send over e-mail. We just got a digital camera and I haven't figured out how
to do it. Some brief comments. A driveway needs to be at least 10 feet, to have at least a 10 foot side
yard setback for privacy. For preservation of trees. To separate impervious surfaces. To aid in the
absorption of runoff. Gary asked a question just a few moments ago about could 2 driveways run along
together on a lot line. With this ordinance allowing 36 feet of a paved surface, you could have
theoretically 72 feet of paved surface. It's like a parking lot running down a lot line. I really don't think
that's what we want for our community. I think we're getting a little side barred with parking areas
versus driveways. I have some pictures here. The first one's an example of two garages side by side
where there' s no setback. He took their parking pads for their boats and that' s it. Imagine if one of those
garages was your bedroom window. The second page is a neighborhood where you have the left one has
provided a buffer yard adjacent to the property line maybe 2 feet wide. The property owner on the right
has provided a buffer yard a little larger. Maybe 5 feet. They have tried to make it aesthetically a little
more pleasing. The next page is, if anyone's visited your fellow council members, this is Bob Ayotte's
house. Again he has adequate side yard setbacks and he has done a good job of trying to make it
environmentally friendly for his neighbors. That is a rock surface. On the issue relative to the survey I
did again, this is on an old neighborhood with 3 driveway access points. It's a curved driveway with
access points on 2 different streets, plus a third driveway into a garage. And the last page is in my
neighborhood. It's a home with a tuck under garage on one street and an access to an upper garage on
another street. When I surveyed 906 homes I found that only 18 of the homes had parking structures
within 10 feet of their lot lines. And another 7 were really questionable. I wasn't sure of the distance,
but really what surprised me is there were more homes with more one driveway curb cut into their
property than there were homes in violation either with a parking pad for a boat or a driveway running
next to each other. So if this is our existing community, there' s a 2% overall population, and of course
there can be error in this study, but I really tried to go into the entire community. I looked on a map and
kind of went in and around a circular drive. I think we have a method for the variance that Kate is
concerned about and I thought that's what variances were for. The unique situations. The topographic
situations. I think by and large most of our new development has a 10 foot side yard setback, if not
greater because most driveways go into the garage. The houses are constructed at least 10 feet from side
yard setbacks. Again, I'm most concern about RSF districts. PUD's have their own rules and the larger
lots, I don't know too much about but I think they're more like RSF. And I just would like to ask Jan to
come up here for a second because.
Mayor Jansen: And then I need you to wrap up pretty quick, thank you.
Debbie Lloyd: We will. A driveway needs to be just a driveway into and within one lot, not into and
through one lot to another lot.
Councilman Ayotte: Say that again?
Debbie Lloyd: Okay. A driveway needs to be just a driveway into and within one lot, not into and
through to another lot. And that's what Jan's going to address very quickly. Because code needs to be
really clear about that. Thank you.
Jan Paulsen: My name is Jan Paulsen. I live at 7305 Laredo Drive and I wish to address kind of the
unspoken driveway and that's called the cross access driveway. That's this one. Going up through one
lot, into another lot. This could be, it is essentially like a road. Ever since 1990 a driveway like this has
28
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
'had t6 be within a 30 foot easement like that. 30 feet across. In fact just this July you passed a
subdivision next door to us that requires a 30 foot cross access easement going down to the bottom lot.' I
would like to suggest that the solution to a landlocked lot is already available in code and it's called a
private street. It starts here. Runs right up through here and then it becomes a driveway lmm. I think
cross access driveways should not be allowed, especially in RSF districts and that's how you could solve
that problem. Private streets there for access for a landlocked lot and I suggest that if you don't have 30
feet for an access, the lot should stay landlocked, thank you.
. .
Mayor Jansen: Thank you. That issue was raised at the Planning Commission and having been given
that information we have been forwarded the recommendation as it is. So I'm hopeful that everyone
went through the verbatim minutes as this came up from the Planning Commission 'so that we don't
maybe have to re-hash that piece of it again. But as to some of the other issues, I mean you're seeing the
visuals on this. I'll bring this back to council as far as any additional comments or if you want any
clarification from staff at this point
Councilman Ayotte: Well I just want to ask you for your honest opinion, of all the pictures that are
shown here, which is the most aesthetically appealing?
Mayor ~ansen: You did a wonderful job Councilman Ayotte.
Councilman Ayotte: Thank you. I just wanted, but seriously though. I believe people who have a
concern about setback is more with the visual aspects of it. And in my personal situation what I did is I
went and talked to the neighbors before I did anything and I made sure that it was something that could
be altered if the next neighbor moved in and didn't like it, as what ha~ed by my flower bed in the
back yard which is another story. But I really think that I'd like, personally I'd like to look at other ways
of addressing this thing because, and I don't know, this first picture I don't want it to go on TV because it
does look bad, but it's exactly what I'm talking about That is what folks get upset about. They don't get
upset about something that's well maintained and taken care of so I'm still stuck on my standard and I'm
not exactly sure how to get off that one. The other part of it is, I don't know how we enforce this so I'm
trying to work that through because we can't give to staff something that is not enforceable. Cannot do
Mayor Jansen: And I heard the engineer say that were we to require that them be a fence or any
landscaping in that easement potentially, they're going to object to that sort of a ~ being placed in
the utility easement.
Councilman Ayotte: I understand and I'm not saying that's a standard. I'm saying I'mnot sure what that
would be, I don't know.
Mayor Jansen: And I don't know that that's something that we can actually address this evening.
Councilman Ayotte: I agree.
Roger Knutson: Mayor, just one last comment I think Councilman Ayotte what you said is excellent
advice for anyone who's doing anything is to go talk to your neighbors. But that's one thing we can't do
by ordinance. We can't delegate to the neighbors the right to approve something. We can establish
standards but the one you can't establish is getting your neighbor's approval. If you can develop
standards and enforce them uniformly, that's fine but that's one we just can't, one place we can't go.
29
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
Councilman Ayotte: I understand.
Mayor Jansen: Thank you for mentioning that. It does go a long way to just work out the common
courtesies between neighbors on issues like that. Can we arrive at any conclusions this evening? We
have a staff recommendation. We have a Planning Commission recommendation.
Councilman Boyle: Can I have just one mom question? We use, what was it Lake Lucy? Where was the
example you showed a little bit ago where they're going to develop some more lots that would, was that
Lake Lucy?
Kate Aanenson: Those have already been developed with shared driveways.
Councilman Boyle: They have been with shared driveways, okay.
Kate Aanenson: Yes.
Councilman Boyle: So if they want to do something, that would require variances there. What I'm
trying to get to is how many realistic variances are we talking about? Is it really a lot? Or could it be a
lot?
Kate Aanenson: Yes.
Councilman Boyle: Okay.
Kate Aanenson: Well the bottom line is, they can put their boat in the side yard. That's what we want.
Okay, that's where it goes. The question is, do you want to allow them to put a hard surface underneath?
That's really the question here. We're going to have some problems. If you want to take them all
through variances and plug up the system, that's fine. We can do that, but the bottom line is people are
going to put their boats in the side yard. That's where they belong.
Councilman Boyle: I agree.
Kate Aanenson: So the question is, do you want to give that flexibility for the people that yes, that pave
it. You have a 10 foot setbacL The pavement goes to the garage. Just exactly as was stated and as I.
showed in my example, but generally people tend to slip a little bit asphalt over. I think that's what the
mayor suggested was you get back past that point, make that extra turn to go over. You see that in 3 stall
garages. Generally a developer doesn't nm the full 3 car width all the way out to the street. Generally
they're tapered down. That's pretty much standard practice. I guess we were looking at the same sort of
thing when we get that request.
Councilman Boyle: Understand.
Councilman Labatt: How about a resident has a tuck under garage, it's accessed from the lower level.
You know behind the house. Back yard. And they want to nm a driveway back to there.
Kate Aanenson: That's what we're trying to prevent. That's where we've had the problems. This would
say I driveway per lot. That's the problem we've been having when people do access onto 2 streets.
Coming through the back. Putting a storage shed out in the back. Coming back and forth. That's what
causes the neighbors some problems too so everything, we try to maintain some uniformity and I think
3O
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
that's what Todd was getting at too. Is trying to treating people equally throughout the community. Now
if you live in an association and that's what you've chosen to have those rules in place, that's the lifestyle
or the thing that those people have chosen. Other people specifically pick neighborhoods that they can
do those. We get questions of people looking for property that specifically say, ~ are my needs. Can
I put an accessory structure out? What sort of things can I do because that mee~ their needs. Whether
it's a batting cage or a swing set, they ask those questions. What they can do.
Teresa Burgess: As it stands right now, engineering gets a n~ of requests for second and third
driveways. We have no legal authority to say no and that's what we're asking for is the legal authority to
say no. We could theorefica~y have 7 driveways into 1 parceL There is nothing we can do to stop them
as long as it's reasonable and not a significant grading change that they're making. And we want to be
able to control that. Every driveway onto a road is a potential conflict with the traveling public. It's a
potential place for an accident. It's a place that slows down traffic as you have people try~. g to figure
out where am I supposed to turn. And so we want to avoid that situation. I do have an alternative that
I'll just throw out for the council for considerafiom As it stands right now there is no easemen~ there is
not setback from the property line. If you'd like to have a setback without having to go through a
variance process, that would allow staff to review that, you could do that through the easement
encroachment agreement requiring that all driveways or pads within that 5 foot easement is required to
go through a review process and acquire an easement encroactunent ~reemenL 'At this point we try to
catch them all. We do try to get those easement agreements in but I'm not sure, correct me if I'm wrong
Roger, there's nothing that requires that easement encroachment agreement. It's really if the Nwperty
owner consents.
Roger Knutson: It's not required unless they are interfering with the present use, our present use of the -
Teresa Burgess: So if we don't have a utility in that easement, they don't have to sign an easement
encroachment agreement. You could require them to sign an easement encroachment agreement every
time they do it. Whether we are in there or not.
Councilman Ayotte: That'd he an additional workload for staff.
Teresa Burgess: Engineering would like to review those. We would be willing to do thaC It would he a
staff level, we would like to get easement encroachnm~t agreements on all those easements when they go
right up to the lot line. That is something that we try to ~tch those as it is.
Mayor Jansen: Is that because of drainage issues?
Teresa Burgess: Because of drainage issues. We would like to review those and so we do try to catch
them. When we see somebody working, we stop by. We ask what they're doing. We ask for plans so
that is not really an increase in staff effort. And it would eliminate the need to go through the variance
process. It would also allow us the teeth to say you have to have us review this. You have to stop and let
us take a look at it. It's a halfway inbetween.
Mayor Jansen: And so that would he bringing forw~ an amendment to a separate ordinance, not this
particular ordinance, correct?
Teresa Burgess: Roger?
31
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
Roger Knutson: An ordinance is an ordinance no matter where you tuck it. If you want to put it in hem,
you certainly could put it in here. You could put it someplace else. If you think it needs some more work
or more study, you could do this now and address that issue later. It's really your decision.
Mayor Jansen: Okay.
Roger Knutson: But if you want it here, you could put something. You could put it here. The only,
yeah. You could.
Mayor Jansen: Alright, thank you.
Councilman Labatt: So, let me just, Kate. I'm trying to decipher between the Planning Commission
recommendation and your recommendation, or staff's recommendation. Planning Commission wants a
10 foot side setback. Right? And you don't?
Kate Aanenson: Correct. Right.
Councilman Labatt: And then (g) has also been omitted from your' s. Can you explain that again?
Kate Aanenson: Well basically it just ties into the fact that if you don't have the, if you allow them to go
into that it's moot for the Planning Commission. The side yard setback. Because if you let them go into
the 5 foot you're in an easement so they would conflict with each other so we said, and like I said for
example we already have a driveway access that straddled the 5 foot. We have a 10 foot paved surface
going back to one of our utility structures. That's completely within that 5 foot so it doesn't meet that. It
fails that test. So that's why we would strike it out.
Councilman Labatt: Okay.
Kate Aanenson: That's why we have the utility easement. To use it to get through our stuff.
Councilman Boyle: Can I ask one more while you're thinking Steve?
Councilman Labatt: Sure, go right ahead. It might trigger me again.
Councilman Boyle: I'm a little, 6 people on the Planning Commission said they wanted 10 foot setback.
Side setback. Why? Primarily. What was their reasoning?
Kate Aanenson: One of it had to do with the fact that there was concern with the side loaded garage.
Councilman Boyle: Right, I remember reading the minutes. What was the primary, do you think,
reason?
Mayor Jansen: From what I gathered from the verbatim minutes, and Alison is here. She can certainly
address it but reading the verbatim minutes, their focus was more on the active use of the driveway going
next to a home.
Councilman Boyle: Okay. That's as I read it too. I just wanted to make sure that that was it.
Kate Aanenson: That was my understanding too.
32
City Council Meeting- October 22, 2001
Councilman Labatt: So they want to eliminate it by putting a sexback, they want to eliminate a person
using that side you know access driveway.
Kate Aanenson: Right.
Councilman Labatt: On the side to access another stmcun~.
Kate Aanenson: Well this ordinance, I mean it keeps it 10 feet away but it doesn't prohibit a side loaded
driveway. The way they have it structured, it gives it 10 feet
Councilman Ayotte: Personally I'd like the direction to staff to revisit the utility encroachment position
and to consider any other options other than setback that would possibly deal with encroachment.
Encroachrmnt doesn't have to be physical in terms of the distance. That's what I'd like to do. The
setback distance to me is too difficult to enforce but I understand completely Councilman Boyle's
position earlier of what it does to a neighbor and I'm just wondering whether or not we can introduce
something that is easily administered, yet sensible. And going towards the encroac~t business is a
step in that direction. But I don't want to go near this thing tonight because it has to be altered too
Mayor Jansen: Well what I'm hearing, if we were to go with Teresa's recommendation would be that we
would take the staff recommendation and add the point for your review.
Teresa Burgess: Then we would go back and look at the encroachment agreement and see if we can't
get some teeth into requiring those encroachment agroermuts.
Councilman Labatt: What are we doing as far as creating problems for existing homes already? Are they
going to have to come in and apply for a variance7
Teresa Burgess: They would have to come in and sign an encroac~t agreement with the city each
firm that they were to pave into that area.
Councilman Labatt: Okay. What about everybody's who existing right now?
Teresa Burgess: That would be with those existing homes. Properties that come in for new building
permits, we usually work with them to avoid that situation, but they would just need to do an
encroachment agreement if they were to be paving into the 5 foot easemem that's already out there. And
in that encroachment agreement we would have the ability to discuss how close can they get to the
property line. Should they do anything to address drainage issues? What happens if we need to get into
that easement? What happens to the pavement? Who's responsibility is it to repair it? Those issues
could be addressed in the encroachment agreement.
Councilman Labatt: Okay. So how do we as a council become proactive when we have new
developments coming in that aren't coming in as a PUD, don't have the covenants but want to have, can
we dictate to them so and to avoid having variances come up in the future on this, to push the building
pad over to accommodate for this in the future or do we have that authority?
Teresa Burgess: As the ordinance sits right now, if you were to force them to push that building over
further, they could park 2 boats or a boat and a motorcycle or, they could park up to that property line
33
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
and there's nothing to stop them If they have more space between their garage and the property line,
they can park mom vehicles. Or they can leave a space between their garage and the vehicle and park it
right up to that property line. There's nothing to stop them from doing that as it sits right now.
Kate Aanenson: Let me just answer it a different way. They show us an elevation approximate for
drainage. Lowest floor elevation and typical style of home. Whether it' s a rambler, lookout, walkout.
Exactly how it sits on the lot is not determined until the homeowner gets it. And they're going to make
that decision. Some people go with a 2 car garage assuming that down the road they're going to put 3 on
and site the house further to the side so there's so many variables. You can't, when it comes in for
subdivision, the ordinance says you can have that so we couldn't stop it at that time.
Councilman Ayotte: It's just avoiding the adversity of putting something there that will have an adverse
impact for drainage and that sort of thing.
Kate Am~nson: Right.
Councilman Ayotte: And it's not in the utility.
Teresa Burgess: They cannot impact that drainage. They are required to convey the drainage as it sits
when they came into the property. Now they can alter it within their property but when it leaves their
property it still has to be conveyed in the same manner. So they can't dam up what's coming in from
another property. At the same time they can't suddenly start dumping a lot more than what was being mn
off in their property.
Kate Aanenson: But they can park a camper or...and have the paved surface that goes, they're still going
to park the boats. That's where we want them to be. Not in the front yard. Not in the back yard.
Councilman Ayotte: That's why I don't like the setback at all. I would prefer to look at it in another
vein.
Kate Aaaenson: Right, well that's what I'm saying. And if people have to jump that hurdle, they're just
going to park it either on gravel, which they don't need a permit for. They're going to come in and get
some gravel. And/or something else and not do the paved surface. People do it every day and they don't
need a permit for it so that's...
Teresa Burgess: I know the one you're thinking of Councilmember Ayotte I'm sure is the one that's in
your neighborhood right now. He moved less dirt than is required to get a permit through the city. He
moved less than 50 cubic yards of dirt and so the only reason we were aware of it is one of our
employees drove by and noticed it and stopped by and said what's going on. And he is in compliance.
He's not changing the drainage patterns. It's one of those that we would approve. If it was to come
through, we would approve it. There's no reason not to and when he gets done it will, although not as
well screened as your's, it will fit into the neighborhood. And so that is a situation where the homes are
very close. There is no alternative. He doesn't really have a choice except to park in an area with no
paving or to pave it, make it look nice and put his boat there.
Mayor Jansen: So if as part of the motion we would like to direct staff to review the encroachment
proposal this evening and bring that back to us, it sounds like we could have that handled and move this
issue forward. Is what I'm hearing. With that, we've been on this for quite for a while. I don't know if
we're ready for someone to make a motion.
34
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
Councilman Ayotte: I'm not.
Councilman Boyle: Well I wouldn't.
Mayor Jansen: A motion to table also works. Fm just saying somebody make a motion.
Councilman Labatt: I move we table this to allow staff to look at making another condition of reviewing
encroachment agreement
Mayor Jansen: And you would like to see that be a part of this ordinance versus it being part of the
separate engineering ordinance.
Mayor Jansen: Alright. And a second?
Councilman Boyle: Second.
Mayor Jansen: Discussion of the motion. Teresa, is that enough direction for you as to what to come
back to us with as far as adding something to this addressing the encroachment issue?
Teresa Burgess: Kate and I will work on it and I'm sure it will get us started in the right direction.
Mayor Jansen: Okay, great.
Coundlman Labatt moved, Coundlman Boyle seconded to table an amendment to the City Code to
permit one driveway access per lot with direction to staff to address the encroachment agreement.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 4 to 0.
APPROVE CITY CODE AMENDMENT CLAR~YINC~ PROC'EDUR~'.,q FQR
ADMINISTRATIVE SUBDIVISIONS.
Kate Aanenson: This item came via the Planning Commission and the staff regarding administrative
subdivisions that get approved and aren't always recorded in a timely manner. Again, you asked for
housekeeping. We felt it was i~t. What caused some ambiguity, if you look on Section 18-37, as
Sharmin went through and re-codified the code regarding private streets. In Section (a) got new language
that was recently adopted within the last few months regarding the private streets up to 4 lots. Again,
administrative subdivision or a better term to call it would be a lot line adjustment does not require
.ap. proval from the city. There's a different exemption if it's 20 acres, agricultural and they want to split
it into 20 acres, that s exempt from the subdivision. What we're doing hem is, because it's exempt frc~
the subdivision, we can't put those rules in place, and that was our reco~on to the Planning
Commiasion. The Planning Commission felt like if that discourages somebody, we'd like to leave the
language in. Again staff's concern was that it created some ambiguity. There was some concern with
the Planning Commission that other communities have this language in, specifically the City of Plymouth
was stated and the fact that our city attorney also represents them. I did call the City of Plymouth the
next morning and they were advised by their city attorney, that they should amend their subdivision
regulations because they weren't consistent with the State law. So again our city attorney also advises
the sarm, so our language that the staff is recommending again differs from the Planning Commission
35
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
because we want to be consistent with thc legal aspect of that. And again what we're trying to do here is
if someone does do an administrative plat which is just transferring a line, buying property fi'om a
neighboring property, that we have that recorded in a timely manner. Generally our policy with the
County Recorder's office is they do not accept those unless they're stamped by the City of Chanhassen.
We stamp but it's been exempted from the subdivision regulations which means that we've reviewed it.
We do require a fee with administrative subdivisions. We do review the legal descriptions. We also
meet with the applicants. Advise them of any legal things that may be going on. Generally for the most
part we've had these when someone wants a variance, and they don't have enough side yard setback.
They may buy some property from their neighboring property. The other frequent is that there's a vacant
lot between two property owners. This happens frequently that the two neighbors decide to split the lot
and sometimes those lot lines can be convoluted but they'll split the lot between them and just bring it
into the existing description and then they do the description in and we do review those before they go
down. Again that's an administrative but what we're saying is after we've approved this we want to
make sure they're recorded in a timely manner. The other concern that came up was at the Planning
Commission was that what happens if someone creates a non-conforming lot. You know if you have a
15,000 square foot minimum and you sell some of your property so now you're under the minimum.
That rarely happens. I'm not saying it can't happen but generally if you have the bank is part of the
mortgage holder, the bank also has to sign off on if you're selling, disposing of some of your property so
that's kind of one of the catches there. We also as part of, when we review them again apprise them of
any problems that they may be creating. Whether it be a setback from the side yard. You can't sell that
much. Now you've got a side yard problem so they know because now they've got a problem themselves
that they can go to do something in the future is sell their property. Often when someone sells their
property the bank, the mortgager will ask if there's any issues with this property when they do the tire
search so most people don't want that cloud over their property. So we didn't see that as a problem, and
again the state law does allow you to create that situation, but historic in the city of Chanhassen have we
seen a lot of that? No. In my experience in my 10 years here I haven't seen one of those come through.
That created a non-conforming on the other side..Generally, they create a better situation. They're trying
to rectify it, make it better. So with that staff is recommending approval .of the language recommended
by the staff and I'd be happy to answer any questions that you have.
Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you. Council, any questions of staff at this time? Okay. Roger, if you
might just give us a little clarification since statute and the state statutes have come up as an issue as to
what we can have in our ordinance and how it's superceded by the state. If you might just give us a little
direction there as to why you've recommended that we take out some of the verbiage.
Roger Knutson: Yes Mayor. In contrast to the last issue, we had discussed whether a 10 foot setback for
driveways was appropriate. That' s within your discretion. You can, based on your own judgment and
reviewing planning issues you can decide whether 10, 5 or nothing is the right answer. The state law
gives you that authority. State law also enables you to adopt subdivision regulations. We can only do
what the state tells us we can do. What the state has done in this case is define term subdivision and it
says here's what the term subdivision means and here's, if you adopt regulations addressing subdivisions
as the state defines it. I won't read the whole thing to you but it defines it to mean separation of'an area
into two or more parcels with a few exceptions. And it says these exceptions are not subdivisions and
one of those exceptions is the adjustment of a lot line by the relocation of a common boundary. By state
law that is not a subdivision so if you're just, you're not creating a new parcel. You're just moving your
property boundary. Conveying some property to a neighbor. That is not a subdivision. Whether it's
wise or foolish, it is really not relevant. The issue is that's what the state law is. Just so we're clear. I
consistently gave, have given this advice to my clients for 25 years. It's not a new law. Including the
City of Plymouth.
36
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
Mayor Jansen: Okay. So basically what you're telling us is if we did have a property owner come in
who has shifted their boundaries, you couldn't do anything to enforce what we're requiring?
Roger Knutson: That is correct
Mayor Jansen: If you ended up taking this to court, we'd be spending fees and spinning our wheels and
getting no place because they'd hit us over the head with the state statute and say we can't do that.
Roger Knutson: And anyone who can read can point that out to a judge and say read this. And I would
say well, I don't know what I'd say.
Mayor Jansen: Okay. Mr. Gerhardt, did you want to make comments?
Todd Gerhardt: Yeah. Debbie Lloyd and I talked this aftem~ and I've talked with Roger. We both
kind of agree, it's not a good law. It's kind of a poor law really because it does allow for somebody to
create a non-conforming use. And has it ever ~ a non-conforming use in Minnesota? I don't know.
Roger doesn't know of any. Kate's saying she hasn't seen any in 10 years but I'm sum Representative
Workman would consider some special legislation if you added one section onto that sentence that said,
as long as this didn't create a non-conforming use, that would probably be a good law. And Roger
thought it was a good idea so I would offer that over to talk to Mr. Woricman. If he's want to introduce
something like that.
Roger Knutson: I would think that's a great idea but address the issue we have right now. Right now
someone has to come in and if they want to do this they have to meet with city staff and city staff would
point out you're creating a non-conforming lot or whatever you're creating. Non-conforming ~,
setback or something, and although they can do it now, let's not lose sight of the fact that they'd be
shooting themselves in the head. Because if they want to come in and do anything with that, they want to
add an addition, if they wanted to whatever they want to do, they've created a seN-created hardship so
they're not going to, they will not be of any entitlement to a variance. So they can ~ serious
problems for themselves. Now that could occasionally happen and again from my own personal
experience I'm not aware of any I can point out to you but it could ha~. But the potential in that,
someihing that for those of us who have been working at this for a long period of time have noted and
wondered what in the world they were thinking about when they adopted this, and I can't answer that for
you. But I think what Todd has suggested is an amendment makes a good deal of sense but it's not there
now.
Mayor Jansen: Certainly. And then one of the points that Kate touched on, and Todd you touched on
this earlier in a discussion with me about what mortgage companies reactions are to lots that are non-
conforming. Maybe speak to that a little bit.
Todd Gerhardt: Yeah, Kate has dealt with those issues more. Do you want to?
Kate Aanenson: Sure. Generally on a refinance often they'll send a letter over to the city to ask if
there's any variances or anything non-conforming on the lot. And again ffyou want to get sign off,
generally when someone does a lot line relocation, the bank would also have to sign off because they're
on the title. They're also part of the property owner so generally they would call too and say what's this
about. Is this going to create any problems? The bank also wants to secure their ~ too or the
mortgage company.
37
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
Mayor Jansen: Okay. I am not going to open this issue up for further comment this evening because I
think the points are made throughout the letter that is attached as well as the comments at the Planning
Commission meeting and the issue is whether or not those lines should stay in our code. Obviously the
Planning Commission is just suggesting that they stay in there so that it's more of a warning or whatever
to people coming in. And it's whether or not we're going to listen to the city attorney in what is
defensible or not as to whether .our code is brought into conformity to what he thinks he can actually
defend. So with that I'll open it up for comments from council. None? Okay. If I could have a motion
please.
Councilman Labatt: Move approval of the attached ordinance amending Section 18-37 and the
exemptions thereof.
Mayor Jansen: Clarification of the motion. Is that staff's recommendation?
Councilman Labatt: Yeah.
Mayor Jansen: Following staff's recommendation. If I could have a second please.
Councilman Ayotte: I second that.
Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to approve amending Section 18-37(a)
Exemptions consistent with state law. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 4 to
LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT.
Kate Aanenson: The two action items for tonight that staff is looking for is one, approval of the
resolution and then review of the goals. Back last winter staff went through the Livable Communities
Act and spent some time going through the history. I did attach all that and I updated some of the
numbers but I attached that again for everybody's edification. Kind of how they got started. Why we
participated and I hope that was helpful.
Mayor Jansen: It's great information. Thanks for including all of that.
Kate Aanenson: There' s a little bit of duplication but I also included in this packet then where we are to
date. The ISTEA scoring which is the Met Council will be using as far as looking at, or any other
agency, looking at grant applications. Where our ranking would be. And then also the ALOHA account
which is how much are we spending for affordable housing, which we are meeting our goals and I also
wanted to point out to you that our household tax capacity went up substantially. They're catching up on
some of the valuation of the homes that are in the community but we are currently meeting the goals of
what we should be spending per year and that is also documented in here. I also wanted to update you
too. We did hold the housing forums in April and May to communicate to the residents. Hear some of
their concerns and also educate them.. One of the things that staff will be working on, I mentioned earlier
tonight, is the land trust. Working with probably the city of Chaska because one of the concerns that has
come out is maintaining affordability. If you can look at for example where we are meeting our goals is
in the affordable housing but the problem is maintaining that work. They were coming in under market
but the problem is they're moving outside the market so fast. And that's really evident in the North Bay
project where we put in the assistance and were actually managing those. It takes up quite a bit of staffs
38
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
time~ Todd and Bob and myself, when you're actually meeting with people. Was a young couple that
wants to move in and has questions about how much they can recapture if they finish the basement and
looking at some of these other programs, specifically the land trust. Somebody else would own the
underlying property. We'd have someone else manage the program but they would just be taking out
mortgages on the property itself. And why we're in a good position to do that is we have a lot of
affordable housing coming on line in the next few years. And we can capture that at a certain rate and
maintain that affordability, which is our goal. To try to maintain aff~ty..We're doing a good job
of bringing it in but the maintenance is a problem. As valuations are continue to increase here. The
other thing we pointed out in here is, and everybody's aware of that, is the rental housing tends to be the
hardest to do. To make that affordable. We've done two si?ificant apax~:~mt projects. The Lakeview
Hills and the Powers Ridge Apartments. None of those were we able to accomp~ the affordable.
Presbyterian Homes which is coming in we're hoping to accomplish the 36 affordable within that project.
But again we're well on our way to the goals. I think again with not a lOt of brow beating, the projec-~
that come in, a lot of it's market rate. Working on some of that sort of thing so staffis recommending
that we leave the goals as they are in place. Again we use the yard stick of what we put in the report to
say that we're well on our way and again as a part of that would recommend adoption of the resolution.
And I'd be happy to answer any questions that you have.
Mayor lsn~n: Thank you. And I guess the other point that supports your recommendation is also the
community survey.
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Mayor Jansen: And we certainly heard from the residents their concern that we provide the affordable,
and I think key to what you just mentioned again, the mainten~ce of our affordable so that they can
remain in the community as well so that certainly was a loud and clear message from the survey for us.
And the one piece of an encouraging information that I would share with you is earlier this year we did
have a meeting with the Met Council had come out and met with staff and we were discussing affordable
and it was the affordable that we were trying to achieve in Villages on the Ponds, and one of our
concerns had been previously whether or not the Met Council would show us flexibility as we're trying
to achieve our goals, ff we can't hit a number, are they going to really hit us with the financial restraints
and would we be penalized. And in that particular meeting I would have to say I was extremely
encouraged at the amount of flexibility that they demonstrated to us as a community that they would have
with us. They were even suggesting that if we needed to swap affordable units, if we couldn't get them
in that particular complex and location, that we could in fact provide them elsewhere to meet the goal.
So I would share that with council to say that the Met Council certainly has worked very well with
Chanhassen and I think that that's commendable of staff's relationship with them and what they've done
to develop that kind of flexibility on behalf of the community. So with that, council if you have any
comments or questions for staff.
Councilman Labatt: Kate, so in reading the memo here. Our score is 48, correct?
Kate Aanenson: Yes.
Councilman Labatt: And that would be used in evaluation of the TEA 21 and Livable Communities
Demonstration Account. So just nm me through a scenario on how that is going to benefit in Chanhassen
in the next minute if you can.
39
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
Kate Aanenson: Sure. Actually I'll mm it over to Teresa because most of the ISTEA projects or the
TEA projects are going to go through engineering. Those are mostly road projects so I'll let.
Teresa Burgess: I'm sorry, I wasn't paying attention. You caught me in the one time I wasn't paying
attention.
Councilman Labatt: A little brain fade them, that's okay.
Kate Aanenson: I don't know if she's read the report but part of the scoring thing Teresa is that they're
going to rate us as far as points. Giving us extra points based on our TEA applications.
Teresa Burgess: What it means is we apply for ISTEA funding through the state.
Councilman Labatt: For what kind of funding?
Teresa Burgess: ISTEA. It' s an acronym. It' s Federal funding. And it's for transportation. If we
make an application, for instance the pedestrian bridge that everybody likes to talk about over Highway 5
was an ISTEA project. It was funded through federal funding. The tunnels that are currently being built
on Highway 5 as part of that project, and the trail along West 78'h Street is ISTEA. Highway 101 project,
if we are able to go forward, that will have ISTEA funding.
Kate Aanenson: It could be enhancement projects too for 212 maybe Teresa.
Teresa Burgess: Right. So those type of projects, when they go through, we get extra credit for certain
activities and one of those is the Livable Communities Act. We getextra credit as we're ranked against
other communities and if we have two equal projects going through, our's and somebody else that does
not have that Livable Communities, that they're not meeting their goals, we get funding and they don't is
what it comes down to.
Councilman Labatt: So a score of 48 is where in the spectrum?
Kate Aanenson: Right. Well what it does is it give you a point thing. You're getting 5 extra points I
think is what the bottom line is, and this came out of the Governor's policy as far as there was
communities that didn't participate in the Livable Communities Act and they were being treated the
same. Everything was getting pointed the same, so those that were participating said well there was
supposed to be some teeth to this. So what they did is they came back and put together a score and I
believe that's what the letter said. Is that you'll be getting 5 to 10 points for your ranking. Which I
think, except for the affordable renting, affordable rental, we're just doing fine. I think the Met Council
would concur with that.
Mayor Jansen: And it's 48 points out of 100, correct?
Kate Aanenson: Correct, right.
Mayor Jansen: Yeah, okay.
Councilman Labatt: Thanks.
Mayor Jansen: Any other questions or comments for staff7
40
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
Councilman Boyle: I'd like to make a motion that we adopt the resolution to continue participation in the
Livable Communities Act and the LCA goals.
Mayor Jansen: We have a motion. Do we have a second?
Councilman Labatt: Go ahead Bob.
Councilman Ayotte: Fll second.
Mayor Jansen: We have a motion and a second. Any discussion of the motion?
Resolution 02001-70: Councilman Boyle moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to adopt the
resolution to continue participation in the Livable Communities Act and the LCA goal~ Ail voted
in favoF and the motion carried unanimously 4 to 0.
Mayor Jansen: Again Kate, thanks for providing us with all that inf~on. It was a very detailed,
thorough packet. Thanks.
COUNCIL PRES~ATIONS: COUNCH. ffCOMMISSION LLALqON UPDATE.
Mayor Jansen: The Planning Commission had their work session with Kate this past meeting and so I
did not attend so that they could have their open communications at that point with Kate, but f___~c~ck
that I received, Gerhardt went on the tour. And Kate took. the Planning Commission on a thorough tour
of some of the projects. Maybe share with council, Steve wasn't at the work session, just some of the
highlights of the things that you did with them that you may end up doing with us.
Kate Aanenson: Sure. Actually we got on West 78~, the new road and that's corning along fantastic.
Excellent views. I think once we get that project underway, Pulte came in. The first permits are on my
desk. They've been through building department already so they'll he pulling their permits but it's going
to be nice the way that's all shaping up. We went down and went through the business park, Arboretum
Business Park. Looked at the buildings through there. We did go into, took a tour of the apamnents.
The Lake Susan Apammuts. There was a lot of concern, as you recall, on the EA when that went in.
The neighbors concerned about the height and the pond so we actually got out and walked around the
back of that and even when you're on the top of the third floor, the u'ees are still taller than that building.
And when you're on the other side, the lake side, which I think people were.~ .happen so it's beaufifid
views. Very nice so it's good to get out and see what we've done and kind of measure ourselves and see
what we did right and what we can do better and i ,m!~'ove on that so.
Mayor Jansen: Thank you for taking them on that tour and as I just mentioned, maybe we as council
would benefit with going out on a similar tour with staff to just see some of the projects and how things
have progressed. Any other commission updates?
Councilman Ayotte: Well the Enviromnental Commission met and they re-worked their by-laws.
They've had legal review of those by-laws. There is some reslxucturing and so it will take council a close
scrutinized look at what they're doing. They're increasing their standard for participation in the
environmental commission. And then they also offered through Jill Sinclair approaching other staff,
specifically engineering and public works, to use them as an educational tool to address some of the
41
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
water issues on a positive note. Doing some of the re-write that was suggested in the community
assessment.
Mayor Jansen: Very good.
Councilman Ayotte: They really did, they're stepping out.
'Mayor Jansen: Very good, that's great. Anyone else?
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: WATER TREATMENT PLANT DI~CI, ISSIQN, CITY
ENGINEER.
Teresa Burgess: And I apologize. This is what I was thinking about when Steve caught me. I can say
that's the fa'st time you've caught me though. Since I've been here. I do usually pay attention.
Mayor Jansen: Daydreaming about water treatment plants though, I'm a little concerned.
Teresa Burgess: The pictures I've handed out, I won't put these up on the screen because they are
difficult to see as it is, they're very dark, but these were taken on September 5~ from the inside of our
water tower that's located down by the Arboretum on Highway 41.
Councilman Labatt: The new one?
Teresa Burgess: The new one. What you can see in them is.a manganese deposit and the red is an iron
deposit. And if you page through you'll find one that looks like it's got a blotch on it. A white blotch.
That is where somebody took their hand and wiped away the material, just so you could see color
comparison. When manganese is first exposed to the air, it'is kind of, you're still able to remove it with
just wiping your hand across it. Once it's exposed it does chemically react with the air and harden
against a surface. This tank will be eventually taken down and cleaned. As you'll notice the date
September 5*~. September 11~ was the World Trade Center and so at that point we locked down our
water tower. Our intention was to clean this tank on September 15th. But because of the issues that are,
that were occurring at that time and are continuing to occur, we have chosen to delay that until next
spring when we can do it with better security and not expose ourselves to having a tank out of service at a
difficult time. This tank is currently locked up. The people that were in this tank, just for anybody that's
at home, our consultants that we do have their resumes. We did check who they were. We checked all
their references and they are properly bonded to do this type of work so just so people who at home
wondering, we do check all of those people that are up on water towers. We appreciate the help we've
gotten from the public on keeping track of what's going on out on those public facilities and encourage
people to continue to call us with concerns. We'd be happy to answer those. With that side bar, going
into water treatment. We are scheduled to begin the process for water treatment. We are scheduled to
study and design a plant in 2002 with construction in 2003. Our intention is to hit that as hard as
possible while still taking reasonable steps to make sure we're spending the city's money in a financially
conservative and responsible manner. That is why we do need to do such a substantial study is to make
sure we're installing what's best for the city of Chanhassen. At this time we have two complete zones of
water pressure. We have what we refer to as the high pressure zone, and what we refer to as the low
pressure zone. Within those zones there are additional zones of pressure, water pressure, however they
can be served within the existing zones. The two zones do not go back and forth very well at all and so
they are something that needs to be modeled as part of the study. What we're proposing is that as it's
time for us to select a consultant, we use a qualification base selection process. I do have a graphic of
42
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
that. I don't know how this will show up on the ova. It's a little bit small. If we can zoom in. Sust
to step 1. The first part of step 1 is you establish the evaluation criteria Our evaluation criteria as it's
proposed right now by staff is that we receive references and resumes showing what work has been done
by a firm. We are proposing that we would advertise nationwide for firms. For engineering firms to
come in and present themselves for possible work. At this point it would be strictly written. There
would be no contact directly. We would not be selecting but we would be reviewing resumes and short
listing so that we could have a committee look at... The next step would be statement of qualifications.
We would then develop the short list of 3 to 5 firms for an interview with the committee. We're
pmtx~ing that committee be made up of staff, possibly 1 or 2 experts that would be consullmats that
would not be proposing on the project but do have the qualifications to assist us in that review, and then a
number of water utility customers within the city. Both business ~ private citizens. We are looking for
those people. We have included in the next newsletter a request for volunteers. We are looking for
people that would not have a conflict of interest. Obviously we don't want to put anybody in a bad
situation. But we'd like to have a group of people come in and help us select the consultant for thi~. Tell
us what your issues are. Take an interest and assist us with thi~. We get a lot of people saying what can I
do to help. Here's your chance. So if they want to contact me here at city haH, we're looking for
probably 4 to 5 people to sit on that committee at this point. As we move through the process we may be
asking for additional people to assist us. The next phase of the project as you go into Step 2 is we ask
that consultant that we've selected through that interview process to assist us in defining the rscope of
work. They actually come in and work with city staff, with that committee that we'H be working with
and talk about what are we actually looking at? Are we looking at one treatment plant? Two treatment
plants? How should they be configured? Should we be doing softening? Shouldn't we? All of those
issues. They would be defining that What exactly are they going to do for our money? They would
then, at that point, tell us what's it going to cost. We would negotiate with them and say, is that
acceptable or not? It's very similar in how we handled selecting an architect for the library process. If
we cannot come to an agreement, we go back to our step one and we go to our second selectiom The
second ranking of a consultant. We go through the scooping and the contract terms again. We do that
until we find a consultant that we can work with, that we can hammer out an agreea~znt with that's
reasonable. We then ask for, we sign the agreement and we start the work. So that's the process we're
proposing to use for selection of a consultant. It means that we'll be selecting a little bit different than
we normally do for Chanhasseo consultants. Normally we go out and we say, okay. Here's our scope.
We tell them what are you going to do. And after we've told them what to do, we ask what's it going to
cost us? In this case we will not know what it costs until we've gotten to a point of selection already.
Now obviously if they come to us and say $3 million, we're going to say no. We're not interested in you
and we'll go find somebody that can do it for a reasonable price. But if they come to us and they say
okay, it's going to cost this much. This is the work you need to do, we're going to turn to our technical
experts and say is that reasonable? We're going to look at it as a staff and say, are the services that we're
asking for there and under the services that are being proposed reasonable. At that point we'H come to
the council with a recommendation for approval of an agreement. As we put this committee together,
one of the reasons I'm here tonight is to ask the council first of all, is there an interest to have a cotmcil
liaison? And if so, who would be that person? We do need to get thi~ process up and running in the next
month and so at this point I don't have a recommendation on whether it's necessary or not. I'm asking
the council what your position is. If you want someone on that committee or not. Or if you prefer to
have them act as an advisory committee to the coulxfiJ and we will keep you as staff will act as liaison
and keep you updated with what's going on on that committee. With that I'll answer any questions.
Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you. At this point any questions for Teresa? Okay, thank you.
43
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
Councilman Labatt: Maybe I'm way ahead of the cart here but have you forecasted locations within the
city? Without naming a certain street or comer or intersection.
Teresa Burgess: Our water treatment, our water plan that forecasts our 20 year plan names possible
locations. As we' ve talked with different consultants, talking about getting started on this process, it's
amazing the consultants are coming out of the woodwork as we get closer to doing this work. They're
showing up on our doorstep wanting to discuss a potential water treatrr~nt plant. They've all had some
interesting ideas and we've been listening to them as they come forward and we're kind of taking notes
and thinking well, when we get down it, now we kind of know where we're going. Looking at it, the city
currently has land for a well field and we've looked at that. We've always looked at that site as a
potential water treatment plant because we already own the land. That makes it a good site. It has 3
wells on it. It has capacity for additional wells, which is an important thing to be looking at. So that
one's a very viable site. However we don't want to tie a consultant into that site and say you have to go
here. We may be able to have cost savings that we're not aware of by looking at another site. The
second site would be dictated by how we configure that high pressure zone and how we address that high
pressure zone. We've talked about everything from on-site treatment, which would mean we'd have a
small treatment plant at every well. That may be cost effective. At this point we don't know. The
alternative would be to pump that water to a central location and treat it at that location. At this point
that location has not been determined. One of the big problems is finding a piece of land large enough in
that neighborhood, and we're looking at the Lake Minnewashta/Longacres, that area of the city. It's very
difficult to find a parcel that's in the right location, has the right size and is not going to cause other
problems. And so at this point we haven't looked at that one too close for where is the best site.
Councilman Labatt: Okay. So as you look at, as I look at other cities, what they have for water treatment
plants, you know like Eden Prairie. How they put their's in a building.
Teresa Burgess: We would be looking at a building. It would definitely be contained in a building.
Councilman Labatt: I think Minnetonka put a hill over their's.
Teresa Burgess: Minnetonka has on-site treatment. They have treatment at each well. It would be a
building. The question is how is it landscaped? What's the architectural amenities and that is something
that that committee will be assisting us with. What does the city of Chanhassen want our's to look like?
If you go through the city of Savage you'll see a building that is very much a landmark. They view it
much like a water tower. They have it out there with big letters on it. They say City of Savage Water
Treatment Plant. And they're out there showing it off. You go to Minnetonka, they have it landscaped
into a hill. It depends how we want to view our water treatment. If we want to proclaim it and be proud
of it and show it off and do the architecture to do that, or if we want to say let's not do brick face and
split rock and do those type of things. Instead we want to do landscaping to screen it from view, we're
still proud of the fact that we have water treatment, but we don't necessarily want to show off the
building. And so it will really come into, a lot of it will come into what neighborhood do we end up in.
If we end up in a neighborhood that is more industrial setting or more commercial setting, we're going to
be much more like the City of Savage where we're going to be out front with that building and not doing
the screening type. If we're into a residential type neighborhood, we're going to be screening that thing
pretty heavily so it's not real visible.
Mayor Jansen: I think staff s recommendation to provide a committee and then as you mentioned here,
project advisory committee to stay with the project. To explore a lot of those issues is an excellent
recommendation. Just my opinion. But I thought that at least provided, or would provide council to a
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
similar set of opinions as we sought on making our city manager decision, on the library. Having a
library building committee involved on forwarding that project. I think it's excellent to be suggesting
that we involve as many different perspectives on this project as possible. So certainly appreciate that.
The only comment that I would make as to the proposal would be the selection of the public leaders and
citizens. I would ceminly want to see a staff recommendation on the city staff memtn~ that would be a
part of this committee as well as the outside technical experts. I would then like to see the applications
for the other positions really reviewed by council so that we're putting together with staff the full breadth
of what this committee would be as far as the representatives fxom the community, and designate what
we are looking for as far as areas of expertise. As you mentioned, people in the business corrmmnity who
are currently users that may be able to bring the perspective from the business conummity and whether or
not we have an application form that would put together. I know you mentioned that you already put a
letter, an article of solicitation in the newsletter.
Teresa Burgess: We have not put together an application. And actually what we're looking for is that
person who's just a normal citizen of Chanhassen. Business owner in Chanhassen. We have technical
people. We have staff members who have, those people that will be doing some of that and we do have a
couple members in our community we will be directly soliciting and contacting and saying you have this
background. We want you to come forward as a civic leader and take this role because of your technical
expertise. But what we're really looking for from the community is not the technical. We're not asking
them to come forward and advise us. Should it be a gravity or a pressure? Should it be a softening plant
or should we be doing? We're not asking them to review those technical issues. What we want them to
come forward is really to give us issues like, well softening is a bad example of the technical because
softening is an issue we want them to discuss. Should we be building a softening plant'/ Does the benefit
equal the cost'/ That's something we want the public tO really be advising us on. Talking about things
like location when we start to talk about, we might come into a si_,,~tion where we say if we put the plant
here it will cost us this much. If we put the plant here it will cost us a little bit more but we have less
i .mpact to developable property. So it doesn't have a direct i .m!xact cost wise to us now for savings, but
we may see a savings in the furore that is more aesthetic than it is dollar wise. We are looting for those
types of input. We're also looking for people that can act as link~ back to the community. As people we
get a lot of comments about people calling us and saying we have a rush problem. Okay, we know that.
We need to have people going back and saying okay, thi~ is what's proposed to address that. This is how
far we are going to do that. Is that far enough? We need that public link with those people. What we
found is sometimes that people are uncomfortable calling me as a city engineer and saying, this is my
comment on this project. This is where I think we should go but they may contact a local representative
in their neighborhood and that person will come forward and say okay, thig is what our neighborhood
feels about this project. We see it very often in street projects where they won't come forward to a
council meeting and make a public statement in a public hearing, but they'll go to the petition carrier and
say, okay this is what's i .mportant to me on this project and I bear that second hand from that petition
carrier. We're looking for those type of people that are willing to go out and be that link back to the
community both directions. Bringing us information from the community. Bringing information back to
the community from this project and keeping them updated. So we can ~y put together an
application process and bring that to the council for approval. We would try to keep that relatively
simple and the biggest thing we would be looking for is conflict of interest We do not want to have
somebody that would have a perception of conflict of interest from the public. We want thia process to
move forward and any decision made to not be mired in controversy based on one or more individuals.
Mayor Jansen: Sure, absolutely. Great. Any questions for staff7 Okay. Alright. Any other comments?
Okay, if council would like to, I don't know if you want to discuss whether we're appointing a council
45
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
member or a couple or wait until we see the breadth of how the committee will be pulled together. We
can certainly discuss one or.
Councilman Boyle: I think we should wait personally. See what it looks like and then decide whether or
not to have a councilman.
Councilman Labatt: I'd nominate Bob tonight.
Councilman Boyle: Well Bob is probably going to nominate Craig because Craig's not here.
Councilman Labatt: That's what Bob does in the military. He's got the, so we might as well use him. If
he'll take the nomination and accept it.
Councilman Ayotte: I'll leave it up to you. I'll step in and work with Teresa because I like Teresa. But
if you have something else in mind.
Mayor Jansen: I don't have anything in mind as far as what the whole consistency of the committee
would be. I just assumed that you would definitely be an excellent representative on the committee.
Councilman Labatt: ...second it so one and two and you're on.
Mayor Jansen: I will second the motion but the discussion of the motion would be, I don't know that it
should only be one council representative and whether or not anyone else is interested in serving on the
committee. I certainly consider this to be a significant project. But if someone else wanted to be present
on the committee and we can certainly throw it out to Councilman Peterson when he comes back as
we're pulling together the entire consistency of the committee, if there should be one other
representative.
Councilman Labatt: Craig may want to. I don't have the time.
Mayor Jansen: Sure, understood.
Councilman Boyle: I'm not, I appreciate the importance of it but I question the need for, I mean we've
got a great liaison I feel that's going to be coming to council so one representative should probably,
unless somebody else wants to be on it.
Councilman Ayotte: Why don't we start with one and if we need more we'll get another one.
Mayor Jansen: We can certainly go forward with this motion this evening and then discuss the entire
make-up of the committee then as we're reviewing the different citizens and the public leaders. I would
just like to make as a part of our discussion here this evening, clear that the other appointments to the
committee will be determined by the council versus that being a recommendation that's coming up. We
should be reviewing the applications and having a full discussion in review of the committee members.
Okay, so with that we have a motion and a second.
Councilman Labatt moved, Mayor Jansen seconded to appoint Councilman Ayotte to serve as the
City Council liaison on the Water Treatment Plant committee. All voted in favor and the motion
carried unanimously 4 to 0.
46
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
Mayor Jansen: The motion carries. We'll make it a 4-0 and Bob Ayotte will be one of the
representatives on the committee. Thank you. We appreciate that.
Councilman Labatt: On these pictures, is this normal I mean after 2, that's what 2 years of service on the
tower.
Teresa Burgess: TMs is not normal. If it was normal I wouldn't have supplied these.
Mayor lan,sen: Is it normal for our water?
Teresa Burgess: We were shocked.
Councilman Labatt: It's only been up for 2 years now right? It's the second year.
Teresa Burgess: It's only been up for 2 years. And our intention on September 9a, we were scheduled
to drain down the tower completely. We were not able to do that because of the hardenin~ of manganese
when it's exposed to air. We had to fill that tank up before it had a chance to do that so that we did not
incur an additional cost to remove it. We will he cleaning this off. But we did not anticipate nearly this
level of manganese deposit on this.
Councilman Labatt: What's it cost to clean that tank? Just shoot me a rough estimAto..
Teresa Burgess: We're considering a couple of options. And at this point we don't have a cost
Councilman Labatt: So I mean if we do this next year, obviously you're going to have to do this again in
2 years until we get a treatment plant.
Teresa Burgess: We've asked that KLM Engineering, who actually was already on retainer for doing
the inspection, give us some recordations to avoid this, or at least slow it down~ We can't stop it
until treatment comes in, but we may be able to slow it down. And so we've asked them to review our
current operations and make any recommendations for binding up that manganese and imm There are
some things we can do. If they're cost effective we will implement as appropriate.
Councilman Labatt: Okay.
Mayor Jansen: Okay. Any other issues under administrative presentations Todd?
Todd Gerhardt: No. We will have a volunteer fireman here at our next City Council meeting to update
you. They had a special anthrax training tonight that they needed to get done so everybody was involved
Mayor Jansen: Okay, great. Anything else from council? Anything in the carrospondence packet?
Okay, if I could have a motion to adjourn.
Jerry Peterson: Mayor, would you permit a short comment?
Mayor Jansen: No. We can have a conversation after the meeting certainly. If I could have a motion to
adjourn please.
47
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Boyle seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor
and the motion carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:50 pan.
Submitted by Todd Gerhardt
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
48
CHANHASSEN PARK AND
RECREATION COMML~SlON
REG~
OCTOBER 23~ 2001
Chairwoman Lash called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
MEMBERS P~: Jan Lash, Rod Franks, ~ Howe, Dave Moes, Tom Kelly and Frank Spizale
MEMBERS ABSENT: Jay Karlovich
STAFF PRESEt: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Director and Serry Rue .gen~, Recreation-
Superintendent
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None.
APPR0¥AL QF MINUTFS: Howe moved, Moes seconded to approve the Park and Recreation
Commission Minutes dated September 25, 2001 as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously.
ROUNDHOI~E RENOVATION UPDATF~
Hoffman: Thank you Chair Lash, me~ of the commission, rve handed out, there should be some
. .
correspondence from Deanna Bunke~ and it's pretty in-dep& If you had a chance to page through,
there's sorr~ 14 odd questions there, rveresponded andMs. Bunkelmsn and I have not spoken since
that time. It will be back to the City Council on the 12~ of Nove~tber,.which is a .Tuesday evening to
present her report to the City Council. And they will hand down a decision at that'time whether or not
they will approve an extension of the project into next season~ She's got some good questions and I think
she did a fine job in her presentation~
Lash: Michael, you were at this, were you not?
Howe: I was.
Lash: Anything you want to share?
Howe: Yeah. We all talked at the meeting about how, well how the one of us. We tallmd about how a
little disappointed we might have been and I think she did have some, for a better word, issues over the
summer but she came in spitting fire and I was glad that those pico. nw, they had some renditions of what
this thing might look like and very nicely done. That showed me that they had put ~nne thought into this
and I think the council was i .repressed with that And I thought it went tgetty well and I'm i .repressed to
see this laundry list here of questions so I think they're gearing up. and they've got all winter to do the
planning and I think she's up to the task and should be making, some cxmmcts so I have a pretty good
feeling about it. I can't say what the council might do in 3 weeks but I think this is going to be a pretty
decent looking report, I would guess. So that's all I had but maybe we should plan to be here on the 12~.
I didn't speak at the meeting publicly so those are my i .mpressious, thank you.
Lash: Okay, thanks Mike. Todd, so you'll be responding to all of her questions he~?
Park and Rec Commission - October 23, 2001
H~ffinan: Back page.
Lash: Oh! I haven't got that far. Okay. Did you, oh San~ Carlson. That was the woman I was, because
she's the one that lived there, correct?
Hoffman: No. As a child.
Lash: Yeah. Okay. Do people want time to keep looking through this or can we look at it later?
Alright~ So we don't really need to do anything with this at this time, do we Todd?
Hoffman: No.
Lash: Okay, thanks.
Howe: Do you know who's up for the 12~? The rep from the Park Commission.
Hoffman: That person will be so notified. Through the mail. It's automatic.
Lash: I'm fairly confident if David is the appointed one, that he would represent the view of the
commission.
Moes: Absolutely.
Lash: I have total confidence. But I may try to be there just to make sure.
Howe: I'll put it on my calendar.
Lash: What's the date on that again?
Hoffman: Tuesday the 12~.
Franks: Tuesday, November 13t~.
Hoffman: Yeah, that's it..
Lash: Is what?
Franks: The 12a is Monday.
Hoffman: Because the Monday is a holiday. That's Veteran's Day.
Lash: Oh, so it is Tuesday. So it's Tuesday the 13'~.
Hoffman: Excuse me.
Lash: Okay.
PROGRAM REPORTS:
Park and Rec Commission - October 23, 2001
A. TREE LIG G CEREMONY.
Ruegemer: The tree lighting ceremony is coming up Saturday, Dece~ 1". It's going to be right out
front again. We'll have to find out kind of next year what's going to happen with the library. Where that
will be held but this year it's going to be fight down hi:mu. Comy's working on that again with Nancy
Lipinski with the Chanhassen Chamber of Commerce and doing kind of a joint effort on that again so the
Chamber helps with certain components of that and Corey coordinates a lot of the event as well so it's a
fun event and it's traditionally been kind of a fun weekend with a lot of activities going on down at
Market Square. We have the tree lighting ceremony here, and also that's the weekend of B~ with
Santa out at the Rec Center so. Real fun evening. ~lust an Fir[ for you.
Howe: Do we have that same Santa guy corning?
Ruegemer: Was it Brian Beniek? For the tree lighting? Yes. Anyone have any questions?
B. 2002/2002 ICE ~KATING SEASON.
Ruegemer: Much is the same as last year as far as the number of hours. Kind of time frame when the
rinks will be flooded. Same type of operations again this year with portable satellite trailers at certain
locations. A noted change is that we are not going to be doing a warming house at Chanhassen Hills this
year. Low numbers. We had kind of talked about that last kind of late winter, early spring. We will be
doing a pleasure rink at that location so there still will be a skating option there but it just dictn't pay to
have a, pay a warming house attendant at that location. So we will be having 4 sites. The Rec Center,
City Center Park, North Lotus and Roundhouse this year. Attached is a warming house kind of'locations
on the map and also the addresses and kind of featured amenities at the rest of the sites.at the mc center.
Does anybody have any questions on that at all or any changes that the commission would like to see?
Franks: The only thing is I know in years past when we've had the site map of the ice rinks we've had
the service areas for those parks circled. And it just helps to give a little bit better idea of the coverage.
That's just a little thing.
Ruegemer: Would you like to see one?
Franks: Well not this year but just for the future. It just I think is more helpful.
Ruegemer: Okay.
Hoffman: When was Pheasant Hill cut Jerry, last ye~q
Ruegemer: I think there is one at Pheasant I-Fill. I didn't know that it was on this. I think it was in the
newsletter. Is it not on this?
Hoffman: So there's one missing here for Pheasant Hill, so you're aware.
Franks: There is a Pheasant Hill one as well?
Park and Rea: Commission - October 23, 2001
Hoffman: Yeah, so that's a big void up.
Franks: Yeah, that's one reason that made we think of the circle thing. That is a pretty big void.
Ruegemer: I think that was a typo on here but it is advertised in the newsletter.
Lash: Okay. Anybody have anything else about ice?
Hoffman: No indoor ice yet. Sust outdoor. Certain bankers still ask for it on a weekly basis in town.
Lash: Okay, well speaking of ice we'll move onto the February Festival.
C. 2002 FEBRUARY FESTIVAL.
Ruegemer: This year' s event again is more of an FYI for the commission to put on their calendars. It's
coming up again. It's always the first Saturday in February so February 2~ this year. Corey's already
working on the event. We already did get approval from the Chamber of Commerce to kind of sponsor
the fishing contest again so he's in the process of getting the appropriate permits for the Minnesota
Gambling Board and getting that information kind of put together so he's working very hard on trying to
get dog sled rides again. So if anybody knows contacts. I know that' s the weekend now of Beargrease
and some other events in the state. It's kind of been hard to find dog sled people to do rides and such but
we are still trying very hard to find those so if anybody's got contacts, send them our way.
Spizale: You know Mound had that big winter festival with dog sleds, which they don't have now but do
you know anybody from Mound that you could contact to get a hold of.
Ruegemer: I know some people over at Community Ed over there.
Spizale: Yeah I mean they had a ton of people with the races and everything so that might be a good spot
to get a hold of some people.
Kelly: Just curious, whatever happened to the ice golf7 I know that was an event a couple years. Was it
just lack of a turnout or?
Ruegemer: A little bit of both. The Jaycees are the ones that coordinated that event. They have since
disbanded for lack of interest and that' s kind of where that is. That was. I think we did it for like a year
or two.
Kelly: I remember that being fun because it was different.
Ruegemer: Yeah. I think their thought was it was going to be the next Chilly Open but it never got to
that point.
Kelly: Are there any other events you're thinking about? Any non-fishing related, like maybe I don't
know...hockey puck shooting contest or something. Something non-fishermen people can do besides
playing bingo or whatever else. Besides the past events, something more active out there. I don't know,
just a thought. I don't fish. I know I'm in a huge minority but I'm just trying to be.
Park and Rec Commission - October 23, 2001
Ruegemer: Well if you have some ideas let us know. We'd be happy to, we do have the skating. The
sliding. Down there. The medallion hunt was there last year.
Franks: Is the library going to be involved this year?
Moes: How about the bonfire and s'mores too. Cub Scouts.
Ruegemer:. So beyond that please let us know.
Kelly: How about the, what happened to the scuba people? Was that just not a very popular family
event? Watching someone go.
-.
Ruegemer: The diving team?
Kelly: Yeah.
Ruegemer: Well kind of through 3 or 4 years ago Carver County was having some issues with their dive
team and with budget cuts, that sort of thing, that was disbanded and it kind of was put back on the local
entities. And to this, I don't know that they have formed another dive team.
Kelly: I was just trying to think of events that I've seen in the past.
Ruegemer: Yeah.
Hoffman: Tom's got the history in this event. ..
Ruegemer. That goes to Lake Susan.
Lash: Back in the day when there was no fish.
Franks: Yeah, didn't they have like cross country skiing and snowshoeing and stuff going on at Lake
Susan too?
Ruegemer: That was out at the Arboretum.
Lash: We have talked about having a ski through Lake .Ann though, didn't we? Back in the trail. Is that
a possibility or don't you think, did it die for lack of interest?
Ruegemec. For that particular event? It'd be in coordination with finding the grooming.
Hoffman: It had good support, the event at the Arboretum at the time and so they put all they could into
it for probably 4 years and it never made a go of it so. They had their own committee chair and their own
committee and the Arboretum backing it and what happened was the weather would never cooperate.
They were skiing through slush a couple times.
Howe: I believe, isn't February 2"a Ground Hog's Day?
Park and Rec Commission - October 23, 2001
Lash: Yes it is.
Ruegerner: Is it?
Lash: It is every year.
Howe: I know, I mean yeah...
Ruegemer: Have Mikey come out of his hole, see if he sees his shadow.
Hoffman: We'll have to get the ground hog in there.
Howe: Just a thought you know. Someone dress up like a ground hog. Get that Goldie Gopher out here
to walk around.
Lash: Get animal control to get their live traps out there. Find something. It could be a raccoon.
Hoffman: We can put the Hoffman kids in that. They'll...
Lash: Are you interested in recruiting a guest announcer?
Hoffman: You know somebody?
Lash: Well I might know someone who might be interested.
Ruegemer: Big beard.
Franks: Looks like Santa.
Lash: Yeah, a burly fellow with a very warm hat.
Ruegemer: We would welcome that.
Lash: Well could somebody send a nice invitation. Besides me. Somebody besides me. Thanks.
Ruegemer: Can do.
Lash: Okay. Anything else on February Fest?
SELF SUPPORTING PROGRAMS:
A. 2001 ADULT SOFTBALL EVALUATION.
Ruegemer: Does anybody have any specific questions on softball? We did gain a couple team~ this year
which was good, and most notable was probably the Thursday night league again. We were up to really
Park and Rec Commission - October 23, 2001
capacity and Friday night we added some team~ too. That was from the Excelsior League that folded. A
lot of people gravitated down this way, which was nice. Very nice. Adding some teams. A couple years
ago we had 4. This year we had 9 so.
Lash: I'll ask this question since Jay's not here, because I figure this would be Jay's question. Where
does the money that, if we do generate revenues on something, and I know that's not very common that
we actually ever come out money ahead on anything, but where does that money go?
Ruegemer. That goes to help pay, that goes back to the self supporting programs and that pays, well a
portion of my salary and it should, if there is any money left over from that, it will go into pay all the rest
of the expenditures in self supporting. And it's.
Lash: So like the/ec programs and things like that that we host that wi end up not making money at?
Ruegemer: Yeah, there's a little leeway within that bndget.
Hoffman: If there's any left over it goes right to the general fund.
Lash: That's kind of what I was thinking but I knew Jay would want to know. Well once you take your
salary out of that $7,000, there probably isn't a whole lot left.
Ruegemer: We're in the hole.
Hoffman: 20%.
Lash: Okay. Anybody have anything for Jerry on that?
B. 2001 ADULT FALL ~OFTBALL EVALUATION.
Lash: Oh, there's another $1200.
Ruegemer: C-etting close to my salary. 20%.
Lash: Anybody have anything for Jerry on that one?
Hoffman: That's a big money maker.
Ruegemer: Minimal effort. Big money.
Lash: You ought to have about a hundred of those.
Ruegemec We're always working on it.
ADMINISTRATIVE:
A. 2001 GOOSE REMOVAL ANNUAL REPORT.
Hoffman: The goose report is interesting. The goose numbers are down across the melropoU~ area,
which means when numbers are down, our cost per goose removed goes up. So in 2001 the City of
Park and R~c Commission - October 23, 2001
Chanhassen paid $5450 to get rid of a single goose in Chart. 60 of them. They removed from 3 sites.
Lake Minnewashta, Lotus Lake and up on Near Mountain Boulevard. A couple of factors. The goose
removal program itself is holding down numbers. The metro goose season, which was extended from 5
days when it started about 10 years ago to 3 weeks now, so people shoot geese in the metro for 3 weeks
in September. And then the fact that we had a wet and cold spring. Geese nested first time around and
then waters rose and drown out many of those nests. And then young geese that they found out their first
nest typically don't re-nest. The old geese will re-nest so they're holding numbers down. Very few
complaints this year. And I think if you noticed, just fewer geese around town in general.
Lash: I remember back in the day when we were taking large, large quantifies.
Hoffman: 180-200.
Lash: Yeah, quantifies of these geese and from other sites too. What do you think would happen if we
skipped a year?
Hoffman: We skipped a year in the past.
Lash: We have?
Hoffman: Yes. I don't think it'd be a bad recommendation.
Lash: Just see what happens.
Franks: I couldn't remember if we were in a term contract or whether it was year by year.
Hoffrnan: Year by year. We just let them know after the first of the year if we want to participate. They
may see a number of communities drop out actually. I'll call him and talk to him about that and I' 11
report back to you next meeting. See if you need...
Lash: Yeah, if we should have some kind of radical shift next year or the population doubles or triples or
something, then.
Hoffman: I just want to make sure he doesn't have a waiting list so once you're out, you're out.
Lash: Yeah, that's probably a good idea.
H0ffman: So I'll call him and then report back next meeting.
Franks: And the decision would need to be made, then our recommendation to the City Council before
the first.
Hoffrnan: Yeah. There's time even after that.
Lash: Okay. Anybody else have anything on the geese?
B. CITY DIRECTORY UPDATE.
Lash: Anybody need to make corrections to your.
Park and Rec Commission - October 23, 2001
Kelly: Just on my e-mail address, h's f. It's f 'mrisaac, not salrisaac.
Hofflnan: Not an s. An f. Thank you.
Moes: Yeah for mine Todd, and I may have communicated this. Just take the work and fax numbers off.
And then it's a different e-mail. Which is djmolO60@aol.conx
Hoffman: Thank you.
Lash: Anybody else? Okay.
COMMISSION M~MBER COMMI'I'I'KE REPORt. None.
COMMISSION MIg~ER PRESF2qTA~O~. None.
ADMINISTRATIVE PACKI~T.
Hoffman: The item in here on tobacco free recreation, there was a cover letter that was not included
from a resident and she's requesting that the city consider tobacco free at youth athletic arenas or fiekts.
Events. Those type of things. I think the 2 cities that are noted in here, Rochester and Bloomington.
Bloomington made all city parks and ballfields in Bloomington. That's Rochester and Bloomin_.r~ton did
youth athletic facilities tobacco free. One thing I'll be recommending that once the skate park is fenced
and we have the skate park formed, we should chat about lmre before we leave Rmight, that that entire
area be smoke-free. Tobacco free. So that's our first location and then we would go from there and
outdoor spaces.
Lash: I have a quick question for you Todd on the Lake Susan Revegetation, whatever you. call that
thing. Is that just to, if you're facing the lake, is that just to the fight of the boat launch of the right of
where the little beach area was kind of made?
Hoffman: To the left of the boat launch.
Lash: To the left of the boat launch, okay.
Franks: Between the dock and the boat launch?
Hoffman: All the way around it's side. Where the trail is. You'll see some pretty aggressive erosion
going on there.
Lash: Okay, I'm really turned around then.
Hoffman: Is the map goofy?
Lash: Yeah. Because if you look at where Iatke Drive is, you come in from Iatlm Drive going south,
fight? Isn't that big area the park? And then the black thing would be to the right of the launch,
wouldn't it?
Park and Rec Commission - October 23, 2001
Hoffman: Yeah, the proposed location shows from about the beach, and all the way around to past the
fishing pier.
Lash: Where's the access? Is this it?
Hoffman: Access is just near the arrow.
Lash: Okay, never mind. Okay, I get it. Thanks. I'm assuming we'll get an update on.
Hoffman: Whether or not we're successful.
Lash: Okay. And then under the doggy park, I thought that was very interesting.
Hoffman: That's a good news letter in that.
Lash: Yeah, it had a lot of good ideas. And of course I got my wheels spinning and I'm trying to figure
where in the world we could put one of these, and I think we talk about it almost every meeting now and
we can never come up with any good spot. How about, and I'm just throwing this out and I know it's
probably a goofy idea but I'm desperate. What about the Fox property? Is there some area there that we
could, because isn't there a pond there and could we do something right off of 1017 Does it go out to
101 ? No, it doesn't go out to 101 ?
Hoffman: In the future when access is there, there could be a location.
Lash: I mean it's not very centrally located in the city by a long shot but it's not by a residential area.
It's big. It's open. It's got water. It's got some of those things we're looking for. It's not ex~c. tly what
people envisioned for there but maybe we could do something in a way that wouldn't be too disruptive to
the site.
Hoffman: Yeah. It's probably, well there won't be access for 10 years. And I think the reasoning
behind the acquisition was for open space and wildlife preservation and putting a dog park in the middle
of it is probably not going to be that well received. The horse people are also going to be lobbying the
park commission when the time comes to develop a management plan. There is a group of residents
down there have that horses and currently they have ridden on trails within the Fox property for the last
20 years and are continuing to do so today. And so they will talk to the commission about that continued
use. So that's something to think about. Marry Walsh is also out at the regional park is going throu~
the master plan redevelopment process for the regional park and he'll be addressing the dog park as a part
of that. And a golf course. And all sorts of other potential amenities out at the regional park so. That' s a
tough one to find a spot for. It really makes you think, there's a couple of things. Dog park. Frisbee
golf. A couple of the things that have come up over the years and we don't have a location to put them
in. BMX track and all those type of things.
Spizale: How much space do you need for a dog park?
Hoffman: 3 acres.
Spizale: 3.
Hoffman: Yeah. Someplace accessible with parking.
10
Park and Rec Commission - Octot~ 23, 2001
Franks: So when the city combines with the DNR to purchase the Seminary Fen ~, some of that
upland grass area around the old seminary building itself, would that be?
Hoffman: Sure. When you buy something like that you'd have plenty of locations to look at. Long term.
It's also a tough place to get to Ixal:fic wise. Meadow Green Park would be a great location~ Just take out
the ballfields. Put the fence up.
Lash: How about Pheasant I-lill. That's got water.
Hoffman: Trying to put one of these in a neighborhood park would be.
Lash: A political nightmare.
Franks: ff you had a situation like that triangle of land on the, to the east of Chart I-rills Park. Inbetween
101 and Lyman there, that's probably about 2 acres. And what you'd have is the neighborhood park
would be the buffer between the neighborhood and, if you ever get your hands on a piece of ~ like
that.
Lash: How about when 212 comes through? There's going to be a bunch of odd little parcels here and
there aren't there? Again, it's not going to be very centrally located buC
Hoffman: There's a lot of questions surrounding 212 acquisition. They're currently talking to a
landowner who has considered giving the city 22 acres of excess land or MnDot wants it so they're
considering the tax benefits for giving it to the city and MnDot is offering them a cash offer so those
things are underway. We're making it as attractive as possible. We offered to pay for the appraisal so
the appraisal will be getting back to the pro~ owner and if it works out with their...give it back to the
city. ..
Lash: Well I think this is one of those issues that's kind of right up in everybody's mind, so when
something happens, people will jump right on it and try and make it happe~ I think it's something
people have been asking for. Quite a few people.
Hoffman: Pretty popular. The other thing I didn't mention was Tue~y, yesterday. Monday, a group of
athletic, private athletic club investors came in to meet with the city and talk about a Crosstown or what's
the one in Eden Prairie, Flagship type of a club on the Highway 5 frontage road. On the south side near
the recreation center. So they're considering 130,000 square foot facility, about $20 million and so
watch for that in the upcoming news.
Lash: Whatever happened to the YMCA?
Hoffman: Still out there.
Lash: Has anybody heard anything new?
Franks: Do they have a new contact person?
11
Park and Rec Commission - October 23,2001
Hoffman: Yeah. I know most of ther~ We met with John Foss, Foss Swim School. He would like to
build an athletic pool, a competition pool in town. We haven't heard from Lifetime in quite some time.
...but I think the type of club they're talking about is going to appeal to only a certain market.
Howe: That's not cheap, Flagship.
Hoffrnan: Yeah, so there's still going to be a large percentage of the Chanhassen, especially family
market that is not satisfied by that facility so they're still going to be asking in the future for a community
center type of a facility. This group would not like a Y. There's long standing baffles across the country
between private clubs and YMCA's and so if you get one, you're pretty much setting yourself up
for...baffles in the future to construct another one.
Lash: Okay. Anybody have anything else in the packet? Just, I'm going to double check on the skate
park forum. Is that supposed to be right before our meeting, is that your plan?
Hoffrnan: Right before our mee~g.
Howe: I can't make that meeting. I won't be here that night.
Hoffman: For the whole thing?
Howe: Whole thing.
Hoffman: This comes about as, the city manager' s office. Staff continues to manage a variety of issues
basically litter and conduct and those type of things that people walk in our front door and say, this is
inappropriate. Cities should not be involved in sponsoring an environment such as that environment. Or
certain portions of that environment. And so to allow those folks who have a chance to discuss with the
community, we want to host this and talk about the successes and the challenges there and use that
feedback to talk about future management. I think the one way, or the one management change that
would be looked at is hiring a CSO type of individual and then charging to pay for that person's salary
we would have to charge at the gate. Have operating hours. Have closed hours. And then that person
would be responsible for monitoring the conduct at the skate park. That brings a whole other set of
issues along with it. You certainly aren't going to pay for that person's salary with just charging and it
changes thc whole environment there so is that a good thing or a bad thing? Those are some of the issues
we want to talk about that evening. We'll post this at the skate park so we have some of the users present
and parents. I'll also, I'll finish the flyer off with letting people know that they can send written
comments or e-mail comments so if they choose not to attend, they can still get that feedback.
Lash: Okay. Anybody have anything else? No?
Ruegemer: If I can bring up the Halloween party real quick. That's this coming Saturday out at the
Recreation Center. Jan, Mike and David, I know you have confirmed with Corey that you're going to be
out there that evening. If you could be out there at 5:00, that'd be wonderful. And then I have to put the
screws to, I know Jack' s out of town.
Franks: I will be out of town too now.
Ruegemer: Rod.
12
Park and Rec Commission - October 23, 2001
Kelly: We have our neighborhood Halloween party that aria'noon.
Ruegemer: Okay. Okey dokey.
Lash: Do you have anything Todd? Okay. Should I wrap it up? Okay, is there a motion to adjourn?
Spizale moved, Franks seconded to adjourn the Park and Recreation Commi~don meeting. Ail
voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned.
Submitted by Todd Hoffman
Park and Recreation Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
13
CITYOF
P011~147
7.fianfiauen, Minnao~ 55317
952.93Z1900
C, eneral Fax
952.937.5739
95Z93zgI52
952.934.2524
w~w ci ~d~uu,~ ~. mn. ~s
TO: Mayor
City Coun~
FROM: Bruce DeJong
DATE:
November 8, 2001
SUBJECT: Addendum to Telephone / Voicemail System Bid
As staffha~ worked through thc pmce~s of installing the telephone system, two items
requiring contract change orders have come to our attea~om We are asking for a
change order to add an additional card cab/neC This is necessary in order to provide
12 additional analog telephones in the emergency command center of Fire Station l,
which is part of the Emergency Plan. The cost of this change is $4,192.26. The
second change order is to allow our fax machines the abih'ty to' use the new digital
lines that are part of this upgrade. This change will allow them to use both digital
and analog .lines and answer multiple phone numbcrs. The cost of adding this
capability is $1,951.39. Both of the amom~ts include aU'necessary equipment, wiring
and labor to add the requ/red fimctionality.
Including this additional $6,143.62 with the initial bid of $77,376.31 equals
$83,$19.93. TJais is still sub~y below the budget in the 2001 CIP of $115,000.
Staff recommends the approval of the change orders.
[CLBOD ~001/002
5929 B~ax Read, Suite 4'75
~Jnnetonka, MN 55345
Phone.: ~5/,..930-44~
Fax: 952-930-4455
To: Richard ~ From'. Bob Lyke
City of Chaahassen
Fax: (952)937-,57,[ia3 ~
Pages: Cover plus
Phone: (952)937-I900
Dale:. 11/07101
Re: Adds to system CC:
Bob Lykc
Z].~08/01 '08:4~
FAX
9529304455
MCL~OD
002/002
Addendum ~:
1~12./01
11 82223883
ADDENDUM TO PURCHASE AGREEMENT
FOR
City of Chanhmen
rum Into the orJglrml purchase agreement and shall be mubJe~ to tho Mime farms and ¢:c~'~llflon~ 08 gt.t~d Jn the oflglnaJ ~reomonf.
Adds for 12 additional analog phone8
Truck Add Equipm~ EXtmld~d Price
Qum~flt~ Itm. ~t~ck? Dele~ Unit Prloe Equipment Lebor
I 550,9036 - AXXF~$ CPU i~12 SLAVE ~--J Add $1,974.38 $1,97'4,~8 $21.17
1 815.1828 - Axx~ Fiber ~ Cable
Add :r20,76 $60.75 $0.00
I 550.1300 - INTER-TEL AXXESS CARD CABINET I'-I Acid
$212.63 $18g.00
I 550.0110 - INTER-TEL AXXESS POWER SUPPLY 9-A [-~ Add
1 55021 le - INTER-TEL AXXE~ SLC16 SL STA 16CK I--I Add
$1,123.88 S1,123.68 $21.17
1 550.0110 - Pov~r $upply 7"2V
l--I ,~:ld $182.25 $182.26 ~0.00
2 770.3{Xi0 - AXXE~ INTEI;~ PROTOCOL IPSl_,4,SI ~--I Add
$633.26. $176.26
1 550.2260. AXXESS INTERNET PROTOCAL. KEYS CJ Add
s'~,00~o0 $1,oo~.c~ s14~.88
Total Adds Eclulpm~nt '"
labor
Tol~l Deletea Equipment $0.00
Addendum Tot~! S6,143.62
CITYOF
CHANHASSEN
69o 09 Co)m D~
pO Box l47
~~55317
952.93Z1900
952.93Z5739
952.937.9152
WebSite
M~OR~U~
TO:
Teresa J. Burgess, Public Works Director/City Engineer
FROM:
DATE:
November 7, 2001
SUBJ:
Recaive Feadbility Report for Kings Road; Call for Public Hearing
Project No. 99-20
The City Council is req~ to receive the feas~ility report and call a public hearing on
November 13, 2001 for the extension if Kings Road from Country Oaks Road to the west
city limits.
The project includes the construction of street and'utilities westward appro, ximat~ly 800
feet f~m the end of the existing pavement The total estimated cost for this pwject is
$304,800.00 including both co--on and indirect costs. Lundgren Bros.
Construction, who is developing the property to the west in Victoria, will have a cost
share of $104,650.00. The remaining cost of $200,150.00 is proposed to be assessed
100% to the adjacent prope~ies.
Item
Sanitary Sewer
Water Main
Street Improvements
Services
Total Estimated Project Cost
Lungren Bros. Cost Share
Property Owners 100%
Assessed (Re~R)
Total Cost (~ .
41,900.00
43,500.00
209,300.00
10,100.00 -
304,soo.oo
104,650.00
200,1~0.00
This report is the result of a petition for street and utility improvements from Lundgren
Bros. Construction. City Council authorized preparation of a report on August 13, 2001.
The feasibility report is on file in the En~neering Department
Attachment: Map showing area m bo assessed.
c: Phil Gravel, Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderl~, & Associates
Mike Burton, Lundgren Bros. Consmmfion
Matt Saam, Project Engineer
I
,. ~ ~ - I : : $cole in feet
I i '
uo'
! o ~oo
,
25.00704.00
AREA TO BE ASSESSED
I ·
CITY OF CHANHASSEN - PROd.
KINGS ROAD IMPROVEMENTS
99-20
I
FIGURE
5
CITYOF
C~SE~
,~ Bonestroo
Rosene
~ Anderlik &
~ A$$oclates
39301121WOS.dwg 1 O- 10-01 CC~Uu ~
C1TYOF
CHANHAI EN
690 0.~y ~ur D,~
PO Box147
'.hanhau~ Minnesota 55317
Phone
952.937.1900
C, eueral Fa~
952.93Z5739
952.93Z9152
952.934.2524
MEMORANDUM
FROM:
Sharmin Aid'afl, Semior Planner
DATE:
Vacati~ of a t.andscape and Drainage and Utility
Nasemon~, located North of Hwy. 5, West of Dell Road,
Lot 3, Block 1, and the nodhefly 7:5 feet of Lot 2, Block 1,'
Park One 4th Addition, Mount Pmpedies
BACKGROUND
On October 22, 2001, the City Council approved Site Plan Review/g)l-12 for a
20,785 square foot Office Building, Detl Professional Building, as shown on the site
plan dated August 31, 01, subject to conditions. Two of the conditions read as
follows:
Site Plan approval shall be contingent upon the city council approving
vacation of the landscape and the drainage and utility easements.
The existing drainage and utility easement along the northerly ~
line of Lot 3, Block 1, must be vacated. New easements along the new
This item has been published and notice of the public hearing has been sent to
property owners within 500 feet. "
ANALYSIS
Drainage and Utility Eas~un~t:
The site plan was originally proPOsed on 1.75 acres of land. The applicant needed
to readjust some parking spaces and shift the building to meet ordinance
requirements. In the process, the applicant purchased, additional acreage from the
lot located north of the subject site, for a total of 2.12 acres. Moving the property
line to the north is an action that can be processed odministratively. There is an
existing drainage and utility easement along the northerly property line of Lot 3,
Block l, which must be vacaIed. ~tly,:this easement serves no public
interest and staff is recommending approval of the vacation. New easements
along the new property line must be dedicated.
Todd Gerhardt
October 23, 2001
Page 2
Iamdscaping Ease~t:
The city has a landscape easement over the south, east, and southeast comer of the site. The
applicant is requesting the city vacate their interest in this easement. Staff reviewed surrounding
properties to see if landscape easements existed on similar sites. CSM, located at the opposite
comer of Highway 5 did not provide a landscape easement. The applicant will provide adequate
landscaping that meets ordinance requirements. This can be achieved without the landscape
easement. Staff is recommending approval of the vacation of the easement.
"The City Council approves the vacation of the landscape easement shown on the existing
conditions survey and as described in attachment #1."
'~he City Council approves the vacation of the drainage and utility easement with the following
conditions:
.
The applicant shall provide a legal description of the drainage and utility easement
proposed to be vacated.
2.
The applicant shall dedicate a 5 foot wide drainage and utility easement along the new
northerly property line.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Plan showing location of the landscape and drainage and utility easement.
· i-~1-~1 :].b; ~
----31.L,31.,3ggl--. 4:95PM - - ....
E~12 333 2111
_ -,0._, _c-,,~_
-----r-------I-
_PROP~ ',,LAN~_ ~,~m'r
L~t-~
Fot. IR'TTI ADDITION° according th I II;t~ . --I. 1
Mrrmeaoto, I)lng =outn~y m · ,ne ""'~ \ '~1 I
,,**,~,,' o.'-0".~,,,' ',* *"'"'"
of o fine 75,00 feet ne~chmd¥ of
30.00 ~ north wemtarly of <md L)~dd ~lth '-- ' _ ' "' I
no~the~,.,rly along tim lamt d _~a'll:~d_..1~._1~ ~;i;~ ~ ~ --~i~ ~;i. "~11 .
line ~o It's Itlteraaetlgn With q me
.w~.ly of_and parallel with me
m' ~alcl Lot 3~ thelloe .emtrl). parpafldloul~_
to todd ~:mt fine of Lot
=old II~, th.r. I~mlnat~g.
517",-o T ',! 4-'
~,7+_
~36 IBmE
S, Ul~ ON' LOT
STATr' TRUNK I~l~ld'""~';, '"' --'=
If%ti1 i %lml I~mkll I Ilia
C OF
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
T~e.~sa J. Burghs, Public Works DimvtoffCity Bngin .c~<~
November 7, 2001
SUB J:
Assessment Hearing for Trunk Highway 5 Improvements
Project No. 97-6
Requested Action
The City Council is requested to hold the assessment hearing for the Trunk Highway
5 Improvement Project No. 97-6.
Discussion
The City has prepared the final assessment roll for the above-referenced improvement
project The assessments were modified from the preliminary assessment roll in the
feasibility study to clarify the assessment roll and future trunk connection charges at
time of connection to service. The per-foot assessments were eliminated to reduce
confusion.
To date, one (1) writ~n objection has been received to the aforementioned
assessment roll. The objection does not indicate the reason.or justifimtion for the
objection. A copy of the objection is attached. The assessment for this parcel is
recommended for defen~ for Green Acres stares both in the preliminary and final
assessment roll.
Deferred assessments continue to accrue interest during the period of deferral.
Recommended Action
At the close of the assessment heating, if there are no further relevant questions or
issues which would require further investigation, it would be staff's recommendation
that the final assessment mil dated October 16, 2001 for the Trunk Highway 5
Improvement Project No. 97-06 be adopted at a term of 8 years and an interest rate of
8% except as outlined on the attached assessment roll.
1. Ass~~ mil dated October 16, 2001.
2. Az~ssment notices to residcms with affidavit of mailing.
3. Written objection letter.
4. Resolution_
c: Chris Thibodeau-Feist, Finance Depamnent
CITY OF CH~ASSEN
AFFIDAVIT OF MAII.ING NOTICE
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
) SS.
COUNTY OF CARVER )
I, Karen J. Engelhardt, being first duly sworn, on oath deposes that she is and was on
October 31, 2001, the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chanhassen,
Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of Special
Assessment for the Trunk Highway 5/West 78th Street Improvement Project No. 97-6 to the
persons named on attached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy of said notice in an envelope
addressed to such owner, and depositing the envelopes addressed to all such owners in the United
States mail with postage fitly prepaid thereon; that the names and addresses of such owners were
those appearing as such by the records of the County Treasurer, Carver County, Minnesota, and
by other appropriate records.
. // -
Subscribed and sworn to before me
this ]~+ dayof/h/G4~'rvlher'- .2001.
Notary l>ut)lic
g:.~gag~onns~'k]~vk..do c
Use template for 5t60®
MID AMERICAN BAPTIST SOCIAL
SERVICES CORPORATION
2600 ARBORETUM BLVD
EXCELSIOR MN 55331-8003
PULTE HOMES OF MINNESOTA
CORP
1355 MENDOTA HEIGHTS RD
SUITE 300
MENDOTA HEIGHTS MN 55120-1112
MICHAEL J GORRA
1680 ARBORETUM DR
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9416
STATE OF MINNESOTA- DOT
395 JOHN IRELAND BLVD
631 TRANSPORTATION BLDG
ST PAUL MN 55155-1801
STATE OF MINNESOTA - DOT
395 JOHN IRELAND BLVD
631 TRANSPORTATION BLDG
ST PAUL MN 55155-1801
LARRY DEAN VANDEVEIRE &
BETTY MARGARET VANDEVEIRE
4890 CO RD 10 E
CHASKA MN 55318-9303
THEODORE F & MARLENE M BENTZ
7300 GALPIN BLVD
EXCELSIOR biN 55331-8011
J P'S LINKS INC
CIO JOHN PRZYMUS
642 SANTA VERA DR
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9773
·
LUNDGREN BROS CONSTRUCTI
935 WAYZATA BLVD E
WAYZATA MN 55391-1899
CITY OF ~SSEN, MINNESOTA
SPECIAL ASSESSMBNT NOTICE
TRLrNK HIGHWAY 5FW'EST 78TM STREET
EvI-PROVEM. ENT PROJECT NO. 97-6
The City Council will hold a public hearing to consider proposed assessments for Improvement
Project No. 97-6 on Tuesday November 13, 2001 at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers at
690 City. Center Drive, Chanhassen, Minnesota. The area to be assessed includes those
properties along the new ali~mn'nent of West 75m Street fi.om Powers Boulevard to Highway 41.
The total amount of the proposed assessment is S1,424,218. Your assessment has been
calculated in accordance with the City Comucil's policy as fol!mvs:
Property. Owner:
Address:
Parcel No.:
MID AM. ERIC.%N' BA.PTiS? S OCL-kL
SERVICES CORPO1L-kTiON
2600 .kR.BO~TL3i BLVD
EXCELSIOR M'N 5532 i-8003
25-0091611
The proposed assessment against your property is as described below:
Water: $25,410.00
Sanitary: SO.O0
TOTAL: $25,410.00
City Share of Project:
S209,165.39
(does not include Assessments,
Federal A/d, or State Share)
Assessment may be paid in full without interest or other charges within thirty (30) days aRer the
assessment heafimg date."These payments may be made in person or may be mailed to
Chanhassen City Hall, 690 City Center Drive, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, Mirmesota, 55317,
Attention: Treasurer. Please indicate the parcel number on your check. Partial prepayment of
the assessment is permitted during the 30 days after the assessment hearing date.
If you elect not to pay the full amount within thirty (30) days after the hearing date, the
assessment will be spread over 8 years with the installments appearing on your real estate taxes
beginning next year. Interest will be included at the rate of 8 percent of the unpaid balance.
The proposed assessment mil is on file with the City Clerk. Written and oral objections to the
proposed assessmmx by any property owner will be considered.
No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any assessment adopted unless a written obiecfion.
signed by the affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the a~sessment hem'ing
or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing.
CITY OF CHANI-IASS~, MINNESOTA
SPECIAL ASSESSME~ NOTICE
TRLLNK HIGHWAY 5/WEST 78TM STREET
~ROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 97-6
The Ciw Council ~vill hold a public hearing to consider proposed assessments for Improvement
Project No. 97-6 on Tuesday ..November 13, 2001 at 7:00 PM in the City Co,.mcil Chambem at
690 City Center Drive, Chanhassen, Minnesota. The area to be assessed includes those
properties along the new ali~ment of West 78m Street from Powers Boulevard to Highway 41.
The total amount of the proposed -assessment is $1,424,218. Your assessment has been
calculated in accordance ~vith the City Council's policy as follows:
Property, Owner:
Address:
Parcel No.:
PUI, TE HONLES OF MIN%-~SOTA CORP
1355 N~N-DOTA HEIGHTS _RD
SUITE 300
MENT)OTA _HEIGHTS N~' $5120-i ! 12
25-0091700 & 25-0092800
The proposed assessment against your property is as described below:
Water: $579,348.00
Sanitary.: 5;0.00
TOTAL: $579,348.00
City Share of Project:
S209,165.39
(does not include Assessments,
Federal Aid, or State Share)
Assessment may be paid in full without interest or other charges within thirty. (30) days after the
assessment healing date.' These payments may be made in person or may be mailed to
Chanhassen City Hall, 690 City Center Drive, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, ,.Minnesota, 55317,
Anention: Treasurer. Please indicate the parcel number on your cheek. Partial prepayment of
the assessment is permitted during the 30 days after the assessment hearing date.
If you elect not to pay the full amount within thirty (30) days a.f~er the hearing date, the
assessment will be spread over 8 years with the installments appearing on your red estate taxes
be~nning next year. Interest will be included at the rate of 8 percent of the unpaid balance.
The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk. Written and oral objections to the
proposed assessment by any property owner will be considered.
No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any assessment adopted unless a written objection
signed by the affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing
or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT NOTICE
TR.U~ HIGHWAY 5F~VEST 78TM STREET
~IPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 97-6
The City Council will hold a public hearing to consider proposed assessments for Improvement
Project No. 97-6 on Tuesday November 13, 2001 at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers at
690 City Center Drive, Chanhassen, Minnesota. The area to be assessed includes those
properties along the new alignment of West 78th Street from Powers Boulevard to Highway 41.
The 'rot. al amount of the proposed assessment is S 1,424,218. Your assessment has been
calculated in accordance with the City Council's policy as follows:
Property Owner:
Address:
Parcel No.:
MICHAEL 3 GORRA
1680 ARBORETU~i DR
CFL~.N'F~ISSEN ~' 55317-9a. 16
25-0100900
The proposed assessmenz against your property is as described below:
Water: 5452,298.00
Samtary:.. S0.00
TOTAL: $452,298.00
City Share of Project:
$209,165.39
(does not include Assessments,
Federal Aid, or State Share)
Assessment may be paid in full without interest or other charges within thirty (30) days after the
assessment hearing date. These payments may be made in person or ma.y be mailed to
Chantmssen Ci~ Hall, 690 City. Center Drive, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, Minnesota, 55317,
Attention: Treasurer. Please indicate the parcel number on your check. Partial prepayrnent of
the assessment is permitted during the 30 days after the assessment hearing date.
If you elect not to pay the full amount within thirty (30) days after the hearing date, the
assessment will be spread over 8 years with/he installments appearing on your real estate taxes
beginning next year. Interest will be included at the rate of 8 percent of the unpaid balance.
The proposed assessment mil is on file with the City Clerk. Written and oral objections to the
proposed assessment by any property owner will be considered.
No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any assessment adopted unless a written objection
signed by the affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing
or presented m the presiding officer at the hearing.
CITY OF CHANI-IASSEN, MINNESOTA
SPECIAL ASSESSMEN-r NOTICE
TRUNK HIG~AY 5/WEST 78TM STREET
~iPROX,,'F.~NT PROJECT NO. 97-6
The City Council will hold a public hearing to consider proposed assessments for Improvement
Project No. 97-6 on Tuesday November 13, 2001 at 7:00 PM in the City. Council Chambers a~
690 City Center Drive, Cha.uhasse~ Minnesota. The area to be assessed includes those
properties along the new ali~ment of West 78'h Street from Powers Boulevard to Highway 41.
The total amount of the proposed assessment is 5;1,424,218. Your assessment has been
calculated in accordance wi~h ~ City Council's policy as follows:
Prooertv Owner:
Address:
Parcel No.:
STATE OF .'vi~ ~LNESOYA- DOT
395 J'OI-~' iRELA~ND BLVD
631 TR.~NSPORTATION BLDG
ST PAUL ~LN' 55155-i$01
25-0101000
The proposed assessment against your property, is as described below:
Water: Sl 1,858.00
Sanitaxy: S0.00
TOTAL: $11,858.00
City Share of Project:
8209,165.39
(does not include Assessments,
Federal Aid, or State Share)
Assessment may be paid in full without interest or other charges within thirty. (30) days after the
assessment hea~ring date." These payments may be made in person or may be mailed to
Chanhassen City Hall, 690 City Center Drive, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, .,Minnesota, 55317,
Attention: Treasurer. Please indicate the parcel number on your check. Partial prepayment of
the assessment is permitted during the 30 days after the assessment heating date.
If you elect not to pay the full amount within thirty (30) days afmr the hearing date, the
assessment will be spread over 8 years with the installments appearing on your real estate taxes
beginning next year. Interest will be included at the rate of 8 percent of the unpaid balance.
The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk. Written and oral objections to the
proposed assessment by any property owner will be considered.
No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any assessment adopted unless a writteg 917[ection
signed by the affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing
or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing.
CITY OF CHANHASSBN, MINNESOTA
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT NOTICE
TRUNK HIGHWAY 5/W'EST 78TM STREET
~[PROVEMEN~r PROJECT NO. 97-6
The City Council will hold a public hearing to consider proposed assessments tbr Improvement
Project No. 97-6 on Tuesday November 13, 2001. at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers at
690 City Center Drive, Chanhassen, Minnesota. The area to be assessed includes those
properties along the new aligrnnent of West 78~h Street from Powers Boulevard to Highway 41.
The total amount of the proposed assessment is S1,'424,218. Your assessment has been
calculated in accordance with the Ciw Council's policy as follows:
Property. Owner:
Address:
Parcel No.'
STATE OF M_LN~-ESOTA - DOT
395 JOHN' [RELA.ND BLVD
631 TR.~NSPORTATION BLDG
ST PA.U-L NEN 55155-!S0!
25-0101100
The proposed assessment against your property, is as described below:
Water: $23,716.00
Sanitary: $0.00
TOTAL: S23,716.00
City Share of Project:
S209,165.39
(does not include Assessments,
Federal Aid, or State Share)
Assessment may be paid. in full xvithout interest or other charges within thirty (30) days after the
assessment healing date.' These payments may be made in per~on or may be mailed to
Chanhassen City Hall, 690 City Center Drive, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen. Minnesota, 55317,
Attention: Treasurer. Please indicate the parcel number on your check. Partial prepayment of
the assessment is permitted during the 30 days after the assessment hearing date.
If you elect not to pay the full amount Within thirty (30) days a.Ser the hearing date, the
assessment will be spread over 8 years with the installments appearing on your real estate taxes
beginning next year. Interest will be included at the rote of 8 percent of the unpaid balance.
The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk. Written and oral objections to the
proposed assessment by any property owner will be considered.
No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any assessment adoptect unless a written ol~iection
signed by the affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearLug
or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing.
CITY OF CHANt{ASSr, MINNESOTA
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT NOTICE
TRUNK I-[[GHWAY 5/WEST 78TM STREET
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 97-6
The City Council will hold a public hearing to consider proposed assessments for Improvement
Project No. 9%6 on Tuesday November 13, 2001 at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers at
690 City Center Drive, Chanhassen, M{nnesota. The area to be assessed includes those
properties along the new alignment of West 78"' Street from Powers Boulevard to Highway 41.
The total amount of the proposed assessment is $1,424218. Your assessment has been
calculated in accordance w(th th~ City Council's policy as follows:
Property Owner:
Address:
Parcel No.:
L-~ILRY DE.4aN V.~NDEVEIR.E
BETTY bL-kKGAKET V.~N-DEYZLKE
4890 CO RD 10 E
CH_-~KA :N ,~' 55318-9303
25-0101400
The proposed assessment against your property, is as described below:
Water: $27,104.00
Sanitary: 520,800.00
TOTAL: $47,904.00
City Share of Project:
$209,165.39
(does not include Assessments,
Federal Aid, or State Share)
Assessment ma~ be paid_in tull without interest or other charges within thirty. (30) da.vs after the
assessment hearing date. These payments may be made in persbn or may be mailed to
Chanhassen City Hall, 690 City Center Drive, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, M. innesota, 55317,
Attention: Treasurer. Please indicate the parcel number on your check. Pardai prepayment of
the assessment is permitted during the 30 days after the assessment hearing date.
If.vou elect not to pay the fi.ill amount wi~h{n thirty (30) days after the hearing date, the
assessment will be spread over 8 years with the installments app~g on your real estate taxes
beginning next year. Interest will be included a~ the rate of 8 percent of the unpaid balance.
The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk.' Written and oral objectiom to the
proposed assessment by any property owner will be considered.
No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any assessment adopted unless a v~'itt~ objectiont
signed by the affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing
or presented to the presiding o~cer at the hearing.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MhNNESOTA
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT NOTICE
TRUkNK HIGI-DVAY 5/WEST 78TM STREET
DviPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 97-6
The City Council will hold a public hearing to consider proposed assessments for Improvement
Project No. 97-6 on Tuesday November 13, 2001 at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers at
690 City Center Drive, Chanhassen, Minnesota. The area to be assessed includes those
properties along the new alignment of West 78~h Street from Powers Boulevard to Highway 41.
The total amount of the proposed assessment is S1,424,218. Your assessment has been
calculated in accordance with the City Council's policy as follows:
Property, Owner:
Address:
Parcel No.:
THEODORE F &
. . _ :,l BE.X;TZ
/.~00 G~P~' BLVD
EXCELSIOR N~' 553~'
25-0101700
The proposed assessment against your property, is as described below:
Water: S22,022.00
Sanitary.: $16,900.00
TOTAL: $38,922.00
City Share of Project:
$209,165.39
(does not include Assessments,
Federal Aid, or State Share)
Assessment may be paid in full without interest or other charges within thirty (30) days after the
assessment hearing date. These payments may be made in person or may be mailed to
C~sen Ci['y Hall, 6~}0 City Center Drive, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, Minnesota, 55317,
Attention: Treasurer. Please indicate the parcel number on your check. Partial prepayment of
the assessment is permitted during the 30 days after the assessment hearing date.
If you elect not to pay the full amount within thirty (30) days after the hearing date, the
assessment will be spread over 8 years with the installments appearing on your real estate taxes
beginning next year. Interest will be included at the rate of 8.percent of the unpaid balance.
The proposed assessment mil is on file with the City Clerk. Written and oral objections to the
proposed assessment by any property owner will be considered.
No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any assessment adopted unless a .wftu. eh obje. ction
signed by the affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing
or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing.
CITY OF CHANHASS~, MINNESOTA
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT NOTICE
TRUNK HIGHWAY 5FWEST 78TM STREET
~IPROVENfENT PROJECT NO. 97-6
The City Council will hold a public hearing to consider proposed assessments for Improvement
Project No. 97-6 on Tuesday November 1.3, 2001 at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers at
690 City Center Drive, Chanhassen, Minnesota. The area to be assessed includes those
properties along the new alignment ofWemt 78m Street fi.om Powers Boulevard to Highway 41.
The total amount of the proposed assessment is $1,424518. Your assessment has been
calculated in accordance with the City Council's policy as follows:
Property. Owner:
Address:
Parcel No.:
J' P'S LDIKS _~C
C/O ~IOt~' PRZY~-S
642 SANTA VEIL& DR
CH.~N2-La~SS~q'. 3k-N 55317-9773
25-0101800
The proposed assessment against your property is as described below:
Water: S47,432.00
Sanitary: S36,400.00
TOTAL: S83,832.00
City Share of Project:
$209,165.39
(does not include Assessments,
Federal Aid, or State Share)
Assessment may be paid..in full without interest or other charges within thirty (30) days after the
assessment heaYmg date. These payments may be made in persbn or may be mailed to
Chanhassen City Hall, 690 City Center Drive, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, Minnesota, 55317,
Attention: Treasurer. Please indicate the parcel number on your check. Partial prepayment of
the assessment is permitted during the 30 days after the assessment heating date.
If you elect not to pay the full amount within thirty (30) days after the hearing date, the
assessment will be spread over 8 years with the installments appearing on your real estate taxes
be~nning next year. Interest will be included at the rate of 8 percent of the unpaid balance.
The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk. Written and oral objections to the
proposed assessment by any property owner will be considered.
No appeal may be taken as to the amotmt of any assessment adopted unless a writteq obiectiqn
si~ned by the affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the assessment h~
or presented to the presiding officer at the heating.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT NOTICE
TRLrNK HIGHWAY 5/WEST 78TM STREET
~[PROVEN~N'r PROJECT NO. 97-6
The City. Council MI1 hold a public hearing to consider proposed assessments for Improvement
Project No. 97-6 on Tuesday November 13, 2001 at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers ar
690 City Center Drive, Chanhassen, Minnesota. The area to be assessed includes those
properties along the new alignment of West 78m Street from Powers Boulevard to Highway 41.
The total amount of the proposed assessment is $1,424,218. Your assessment has been
calculated in accordance with thd City Council's policy as follows:
Property Owner:
Address:
Parcel No.:
LD~'NDGREN BROS CONSTRUCTION
935 WAYZATA BLVD E
WAYZATA MN 55391-1899
25-4530490
The proposed assessment against your property, is as described below:
Water:. S 160,930.00
Sanitary:.. $0.00
TOTAL: S160,930.00
City Share of Project:
S209,165.39
(does not include Assessments,
Federal Aid, or State Share)
Assessment may be paid in full without interest or other charges within thirty (30) days after the
assessment hearing date. These payments may be made in person or may be mailed to
Chanhassen Ci[y Hall, 6~0 City. Center Drive, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, Minnesota, 55317,
Attention: Treasurer. Please indicate the parcel number on your check. Partial prepayment of
the assessment is permitted during the 30 days after the assessment hearing date.
If you elect not to pay the full amount within thirty (30) days after the hearing date, the
assessment will be spread over 8 years with the installments appearing on your real estate taxes
beginning next year. Interest will be included at the rate of 8 percent of the unpaid balance.
The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk. Written and oral objections to the
proposed assessment by any property owner will be considered.
No appeal, may be taken as to the amount of any assessment adopted unless a written 9bjection
signed by the affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing
or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing.
Special Assessment Notice
Tmprovement Project No. 97-6
Page2
All written objections to the assessment not received prior to or at the assessment hearing in the
above manner are waived, unless failure to object prior to or at the assessment heating is due to a
reasonable cause.
An owner may appeal an assessment to the District Court pursuant to M{nr~esota Statute Section
§429.081 by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or City Clerk of the City of
Chanhassen within thirty (30).days after the adoption of the assessment and filing such notice
with the District Court ~vithin ten (10) days after service upon the Mayor or City Clerk.
Residents who are 65 years of age or older, or retired by reason of permanent or total disability
may apply to have payment of the assessment deferred. The application shall be made to the
City Clerk within thirty. (30) days after the adoption of the assessment roll by the City Council.
City staff will be available bettveen the hours of 8:00 .SM ~d 4:30 PM weekdays until the time
of the public hearing to answer questions about the proposed assessments. You may also
telephone ciE,' staff at 952-937-1900.
You will be notified by mail of any changes adopted by the City Council in interest rate,
prepayment requirements or the amount of the adopted assessments fi'om those contained in this
notice.
Teresa ~'. Burgess
Public Works Director/City En~neer
City of Chanhassen, Minnesota
G:'~V~IG~PUBLIC'$?-6~ASSESSMents~'ial assessm~t notice, doc
CITY OF CHANHAS~F-N
NOV 0 2 2001
ENGINEERING DEPT.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND lcIF.~P~ COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
Date
Motion By
~esolufion
Seconded By
RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSME~
FOR TRUNK I:iIGHWAY 5/W. 78~lt STREET WATERMAIN
CITY PROJECT NO. 97-6
WItEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Council has met
and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessments for extension of watermain as
part of the Trunk Highway 5/W. 78~ Street Improvement done by MnDOT, City Project 97-6.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLED by the City Council of the City of
Chantu~sen, Minnesota:
Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made fi part hereof, is
hereby accepted and shall constitute the special asse,~nent against the lands named therein
and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed
improvement in the amount of thc assessment levied again~ it
2~
Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of 8
years, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January,
2002, and shall bear ~t at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of adoption of this
assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire
assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 2002. To each subsequent
installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. Except
those assessments noted as deferred on the attached assesmnent mil for Green Acres. Those
assessments shall be deferred until a change in status; however, interest shall continue to
accrue at 8% during the time of deferment
.
Thc owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the
assessment to the County Finance Director, pay the whole of the assessment on such
prope~y with interest accrued to tho date of payment to the City Finance Director, c~ccpt
that no interest shall be charged if the entire assesmnent is paid within 30 days from the
adoption of this resolution and the owner may at any time thereatler pay the City Finance
Director the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid with interest accrued to
December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made
before November 30 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the next
succeeding year.
97151.01
RNK:I0/31/2001
The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the County to
be extended on the proper tax lists of the County and such assessments shall be collected
and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes.
The total cost of the improvement assessed by this resolution is $1,276,795.25.
ADOPTED this day of
City of Chanhassen, Minnesota.
, by the City Council of the
ATTEST:
Todd Gerhardt, Clerk/Manager
Linda C. Janserh Mayor
g:~eng~publiek97-O'~sol adopting as~sm'~-nts.doc
97151.01
RNK:I0/31/2001
CITYOF
CHANHA EN
PO lhz147
~ ~mn~ 55317
952.937.1900
952.937.5739
952.937.9152
952.934.2524
u~madd~nha~n, mn. us
TO:
Todd Gerhardt, City Mauager
FROM:
DATE:
Teresa J. Burgess, Public Works Director/City Enginej~
November 7, 2001
SUBJ:
Assessment Hearing for BC 7 & 8 Trunk Sanitary Sewer
Improvements, Project No. 00-01
Requested Action
The City Council is requested to hold the assessment hearing for the BC 7 & 8 Trunk
Sanitary Sewer Improvements, Project No. 00-01.
Discussion
The City has prepared the final asse~ent roll for the above-referenced improvement
project. The assessments were modified from the pre~ assessment roll in the
feasibil/ty study to clarif~ the assessment mil and future think connection charges at
time of connection to service. The per-foot assessments were el/m/u~ted to reduce
confusion. Two properties have signed assessment agreements for the project These
agreements are attache. The agreements were negotiated at the same time that
easement acquisition was negotiated.
To date, one (1) written objection has been received to the aforementioned
assessment roll. A copy of.the objection is attached. The assessment for this parcel
is recommended the assessment be forgiven until the time of connection at which
time lateral and trunk connection fees will be collected as per the City ordinance.
No assessments are proposed for deferral at thin.time. Deferred assessments continue
to accrue interest during the period of deferral.
Recommended Action
At the close of the assessment hearing, if there are no further relevant questio~ or
issues which would require further investigation, it would be staff's recommendation
that the final assessment roll dated November 7, 2001 for the BC 7 & 8 Tnmk
Sanitary Sewer 1 ,mprovements Project No. 00-01 be adopted at a term of 8 years and
an interest rate of 8% except as outlined on the attached assessment roll.
Attachments:
1. Assessment roll dated November 7, 2001.
2. Assessment notices to residents with affidavit of mailing.
3. Written objection letter.
4. Resolution.
5. Assessment Agreements
c: Chris Thibodeau-Feist, Fimmc~ Depamnent
C)
CITY OF CF[ANH~SSEN
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
) SS.
COUNTY OF CARVER )
I, Karen $. Engelhardt~ being first duly sworn, on oafla deposes that she is and was on'
October 31, 2001, thc duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chauhassen,
Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of Special
Assessment for the BC 7 & 8 Sanitary Sewer and Water Utility Extension Improvement
Project No. 00-01 to the persons named on attached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy of said
·
notice in an envelope addressed to such owner, and depositing the envelopes addressed to. all
such owners in the United States mail with postage fully prepaid thereon; that the names and
addresses of such owners were those appearing as Such by the records of the County Treasurer,
Carver County, Minnesota, and by other appropriate records.
Subscribed and sworn to before me
~s ~ d~y of /4c ve,~ b~ r .200~.
Notary Public "
,~~~ i~,ryPu~e- Minnesol~ ~
~ CAm~ COU~
8:.k'ng~forms~affidavit. doe
MPLS COUNCIL OF CAMPFIRE
GIRLS
2610 UNIVERSITY AVENUE WEST
ST PAUL MN 55114
WESTWOOD COMMUNITY CHURCH
7801 PARK DR
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9200
MERALD A & ELAINE A KROGSTAr
7460 HAZELTINE BLVD
EXCELSIOR MN 55331-8037
JACOB O CROOKS &
MICHAEL A & RENATE E CROOKS
7450 HAZELTINE BLVD
EXCELSIOR MN 55331-8037
PULTE HOMES OF MINNESOTA
CORP
1355 MENDOTA HEIGHTS RD
SUITE 300
MENDOTA HEIGHTS MN 55120-1112
CHARLES W & SUSAN MARKERT
7461 HAZELTINE BLVD
PO BOX 311
EXCELSIOR MN 55331-0311
BYRON A & MARY M OLSON
7331 HAZELTINE BLVD
EXCELSIOR MN 55331-8038
REGENTS OF UNIV OF MINNESOTA
CIO REAL ESTATE OFFICE
319 15TH AVE SE
424 DON HOWE BLDG
MINNEAPOLIS MN 55455-0118
MID AMERICAN BAPTIST SOCIAL
SERVICES CORPORATION
2600 ARBORETUM BLVD
EXCELSIOR MN 55331-8003
BRUCE A & YVONNE M GESKE
7325 HAZELTINE BLVD
EXCELSIOR MN 55331-8038
WALTER A & MELBA D WHITEHILL
7250 HAZELTINE BLVD
EXCELSIOR MN 55331-8035
MPLS COUNCIL OF CAMPFIRE
GIRLS
2610 UNIVERSITY AVENUE WEST
ST PAUL MN 55114
ROBERT D & LINDA J BERGAN
3241 TANADOONA DR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331-8048
LUNDGREN BROS CONSTRUCTION
935 WAYZATA BLVD E
WAYZATA MN 55391-1899
.J
.[
CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT NOTICE
BC 7 & 8 SANIT.ad~Y SEWER AND WATER u'rILITY EXTENSION
DvtPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 00-01
The City. Council ',viii hold a public hearing to consider proposed assessments for Improvement
Project No. 00-01 on Tuesday November 13, 2001 at 7:00 PM in the City. Council Chambers at
690 City. Center Drive, Chanhassen, Minnesota. The area to be assessed includes those
properties along the new alignment of West 784 Street and Tanadoona Drive from Hi~,,vay 41
to Do=~,vood Road. The total amount of the proposed assessment is $1,056,983.45. Your
assessment has been calculated in accordance with the City Council's policy as follows:
Prooertv Owner:
Address:
Pa:cci No.'
LU~-DGREN BROS CONSTRUCTION
93fi WAYZATA BLVD E
WAYZATA ~EN' 55391-1899
25-4530490
The proposed assessment against '.,'our property is as described below:
Lateral Sanitary Sewer:
Lateral Water:
Total Assessment:
571,500.00
S0.00
S71,500.00
Total Project Cost: $1,322,656.37
City Share of Project: 5.265,672.92
.~sessment may be paid in full without interest or other charges within thirty (30) days aRer the
assessment he.axing date. These payments may be made in person or may be mailed to
Chanhassen City Hall, 690 City Center Drive, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, Minnesota, 55317,
Anenrion: Treasurer. Please indicate the parcel number on yo.ur check. Partial prepayment of
the assessmenris permitted during the 30 days after the assessment hearing date.
If you elect not to pay the full amount with/n thirty (30) da.vs after the hearing date, the
assessment will be spread over 8 years with the installments appearing on your real estate taxes
beginning next year. Interest will be included at the rate of 8 percent of the unpaid balance.
The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk. Written and oral objections to the
.
proposed assessment by any property owner will be considered.
No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any assessment adopted unless a written objection
signed by the affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing
or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing.
All written objections to the assessment not received prior to or at the assessment hearing in the
above manner are waived, unless failure to object prior to or at the assessment hearing is due to a
reasonable cause.
CiTY OF CHANHASSEN, MhNNESOTA
SPECIAL ASSESS~ NOTICE
BC 7 & 8 SANrrARY SEWER AND WATER UTrf.n'Y EXTENSION
Ev[PROVEM2ENT PROJECT NO. 00-01
The City Council will hold a public hearing to consider proposed assessments for Improvement
Project No. 00-01 on Tuesday November 13, 2001 at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers at
690 City Center Drive, Chanhassen, Minnesota. The area to be assessed includes those
properties along the new ali~ment of West 78~ Street and Tanad0ona Drive from Highway 41
to Dogwood Road. The total amount of the proposed assessment is $1,056,983.45. Your
assessment has been calculated in accordance with the City. Council's policy as tbllows:
Property. Owner:
Address:
Parcel No.:
ROBERT D & LIN'DA J BERGA.N
3241 T.~MADOONA DR
EXCELSIOR ~ 55331-8048
25-0092700
The proposed assessment against your properzy is as described below:
Lateral Sanitary Sewer:
Lateral Water:
Total Assessment:
ss,200.00
$6,776.00
$11,976.00
Total Project Cost: 51,322,656.37
City Share of Project: $265,672.92
Assessment may be paid in full without interest or other charges within thirty (30) days after the
assessment heating date. These payments may be made in person or may be.mailed to
Chanhassen City Hall, 690 City Center Drive, P.O. Box 147, Clmuhassen, Minnesota, 55317,
Attention: Tre.asurer. Please indicate the parcel number on your check. Partial prepayment of
the assessmenris permitted during the 30 days after the assessment hearing date.
If you elect not tO pay the full amount within thirty (30) days al°cer the hearing date, the
assessment will be spread over 8 years with the installments appearing on your real estate taxes
be~nning next year. Interest will be included at the rate of 8 percent of the unpaid balance.
The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk. Written and oral objections to the
proposed assessment by any property owner will be considered.
No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any assessment adopted unless a written objection
signed by the affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing
or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing.
All written objections to the assessment not received prior to or at the assessment heating in the
above manner are waived, unless failure to object prior to or at the assessment hearing is due to a
reasoneble cause.
CITY OF CHANI-{ASSEN, NKNNESOTA
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT NOTICE
BC 7 & 8 SANITARY SEWER AND WATER UTILITY EXTENSION
RviPROVEM. ENT PROJECT NO. 00-01
The City Council will hold a public hearing to consider proposed assessments for Improvement
Project No. 00-01 on Tuesday November 13, 2001 at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers at
690 City Center Drive, Chanhassen, Minnesota. The area to be assessed includes those
properties along the new alignment of West 78~h Street and Tanadoona Drive from Highway 41
to Dogwood Road. The total amount of the proposed assessment is S1,056,983.45. Your
assessment has been calculated in accordance Mth the City Council's policy as follows:
Property, Owner:
Address:
Parcel .No.'
lvlPLS COL~'CIL OF Cz~/I. PFIR GIXLS
2610 Io~II'v~RSITY AVEN-U-E WEST
ST PAUL NLq' 55114-
25-0092600
The proposed assessment against your property is as described below:
Lateral Sankary Sewer:
Lateral Water:
Total Assessment:
$1,300.00
$1,694.00
$2,994.00
Total Project Cost: $1,322,656.37
City Share of Project: $265,672.92
Assessment may be paid in tull without interest or other charges within thirty (30) days after the
assessment hearing date. These pa.vments may be made in person or may be mailed to
Chanhassen City Hall, 690 City Center Drive, P.O. Box 147, Cha.nhassen, Minnesota, 55317,
Attention: Tre~lsurer. Please indicate the parcel number on yo.ur check. Partial prepayment of
the assessment'is permitted during the 30 days afker the assessment hearing date.
If you elect not to pay the full amount within thirty (30) days after the hearing date, the
assessment will be spread over 8 years with the installments appearing on your real estate taxes
beginning next year. Interest will be included at the rate of 8 percent of the unpaid balance.
The proposed assessment mil is on file with the City Clerk. Written and oral objections to the
proposed assessment by any property owner will be considered.
No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any assessment adopted unless a written obiectior~
signed by the affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the assessment heating
or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing.
All written objections to the assessment not received prior to or at the assessment hearing in the
above manner arc waived, unless failure to object prior to or at the assessment hearing is duc to a
reasonable cause.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT NOTICE
BC 7 & 8 SANTrARY SEWER AND WATER UTIX. n'Y EXTENSION
IMPRO~~~ PROJECT NO. 00-01
The City Council will hold a public hearing to consider proposed assessments for Improvement
Project No. 00-01 on Tuesday November 13, 2001 at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers at
690 City Center Drive, Chanhassen, Minnesota. The area to be assessed includes those
properties along the ne~v alignment of West 78u~ Street and Tanadoona Drive from Highway 41..
to Dogwood Road. The total amount of the proposed assessment is $1,056,983.45. Your
assessment has been calculated ~ accordance with the City. Council's policy as follows:
Property, Owner:
Address:
Parcel No.:
WALTER A & MELBA D WHITEI-Trr_L
7250 HAZELThNE BLVD
EXCELSIOR .MN 55331-8035
25-0092500
The proposed assessment against your property'is as described below:
Lateral Sanitary Sewer:
Lateral Water:
Total Assessment:
$5,200.00
$6,776.00
$1'1,976.00
Total Project Cost:
City Share of Project:
$1,322,656.37
$265,672.92
Assessment may be paid in full without interest or other charges within thirty (30) days after'the
assessment hearing date. These payments may be made in person or may be mailed to
Chanhassen City Hall 690 City Center Drive, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, Minnesota, 55317,
Attention: Tre0s. urer. Please indicate the parcel number on yo.ur check. Partial prepayment of
the assessmenris permitted during the 30 days after the assessment hearing date.
If you elect not to pay the full amount within thirty (30) days after the hearing date, the
assessment will be spread over 8 years with the installments app~g on your real estate taxes
beginning next year. Interest will be included at the rate of 8 percent of the unpaid balance.
The proposed assessment mil is on file with the City Clerk. Written and oral objections to the
proposed assessment by any property owner will be considered.
No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any assessment adopted unless a written objection
signed by the affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the assessment heating
or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing.
All written objections to the assessment not received prior to or at the assessment hearing in thc
above manner are waived, unless failure to object prior to or at the assessment hearing is due to a
reasonable cause.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN, ~¥fINNESOTA
SPECIAL ASSESSN[E~ NOTICE
BC 7 & 8 SAxNITARY SEWER .~uND WATER UTILITY EXTENSION
.12vI~ROVEME~ PROJECT NO. 00-01
The City Council ,,vill hold a public hearing to consider proposed assessments for Improvement
Project No. 00-01 on Tuesday November 13,200I at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers at
690 City Center Drive, Chanhassen, Minnesota. The area to be assessed includes those
properties along the new alignment of West 78th Street and Tanadoona Drive from Highway 41
to Dogwood Road. The total amount of the proposed assessment is $1,056,983.45.. Your
assessment has been calculated in accordance with the City. Council's policy as follows:
Property Owner:
Address'
Parcel No.:
BRUCE A & YVONNq5 M GESKE
7325 HAZELTLN'E BLVD
EXCELSIOR z-¥LN 55331-8038
25-0092000
The proposed assessment against your property, is as described below:
Lateral Sanitary Sewer:
Lateral Water:
Total Assessment:
$2,600.00
S3,388.00
S5,988.00
Total Project Cost: $1,322,656.37
City Share of Project: 5265,672.92
Assessment may be paid in full without interest or other charges within thirty. (30) days after the
assessment heating date. These payments may be made in person or may be mailed to
Chanhassen City Hall, 690 City Center Drive, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, Minnesota, 55317,
Attention: Tre.asurer. Please indicate the parcel number on your check. Partial prepayment of
the assessment-is permitted during the 30 days at~er the assessment hearing date.
If you elect not to pay the full amount within thirty (30) days after the hearing date, the
assessment will be spread over 8 years with the installments appearing on your real estam taxes
beginning next year. Interest will be included at the rate of 8 percent of the unpaid balance.
The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk. Written and oral objections to the
proposed assessment by any property owner will be considered.
No appeal may be taken as to the mount of any assessment adopted unless a written objection
signed by the affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing
or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing.
All written objections to the assessment not received prior to or at the assessment hearing in the
above manner are waived, unless failure to object prior to or at the assessment heating is due to a
reasonable cause.
CrlW OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT NOTICE
BC 7 & 8 SANTrARY SEWER AND WATER. UTHXrY EXTENSION
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 00-01
The City Council will hold a public hearing to consider proposed assessments for Improvement
Project No. 00-01 on Tuesday November 13, 2001 at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers at
690 City Center Drive, Chanhassen, Minnesota. The area to be assessed includes those
properties along the new alignment of West 78m Street and Tanadoona Drive from Highway 41
to Dogwood Koad. The total amount of the proposed assessment is $1,056,983.45. Your
assessment has been calculated in accordance with the City. Council's policy as tbllows:
Property. Oxvner:
Address:
Parcel No.:
,MID AMERICAN BAPTIST SOCI:-kL
SERVICES CORPORATION
2600 ARBOKETUM BLVD
EXCELSIOK .x/Eq 553314003
25-0091611
The proposed assessment against your property, is as described below:
Lateral Sanitary Sewer:
Lateral Water:
Total Assessment:
$9,100.00
$0.00
$9,100.00
Total Project Cost: $1,322,656.37
City Share of Project: 5265,672.92
.Msessment may be paid in full without interest or other charges within thirty. (30) days a~er the
assessment heating date. These payments may be made in person or may be mailed to
Chanhassen Ci~ Hall, 690 City Center Drive, P.O. Box 147, .Chanhassen, Minnesota, 55317,
Attention: Treasurer. Please indicate the parcel number on your check. Partial prepayment of
the assessment is permitted during the 30 days after the assessment hearing date.
If you elect not to pay the full amount within tkirty (30) days after the hearing date, the
assessment will be spread over 8 years with the installments appearing on your mai estate taxes
beginning next year. Interest will be included at the rate of 8 percent of the unpaid balance.
The proposed assessment roll is on fife with the City Clerk. Written and oral objections to the
proposed assessment by any property owner ~ be conside~xi.
No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any a.ss~ent adopted unless a written objection
signed by the affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the assessment heating
or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing.
All written objections to the assessment not recdved prior to or at tho assessment ~g in the
above manner are waived, unless f. ail~ tO object prior to or at the assessment hearing is due to a
reasonable cause.
CITY OF CHANI-IASS~, MINNESOTA
SPECI&L ASSESSMENT NOTICE
BC 7 & 8 SANRTAKY SEW'ER A~ND WATER UTILITY EXTENSION
RVIPROVEMBNT PROJECT NO. 00-01
The City Council will hold a public hearing to consider proposed assessments for Improvement
Project No. 00-01 on Tuesday November 13, 2001 at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers at
690 City Center Drive, Chanhassen, Minnesota. The area to be assessed includes those
properties along the new alignment of West 78'h Street and Tanadoona Drive from Highway 41
to Dogwood Road. The total amount of the proposed assessment is $.1,056,983.45. Your
assessment has been calculated in accordance with the City. Council's policy as follows:
Property Owner:
Address:
Parcel No.:
REGENTS OF UNIV OF MPqNESOTA
C/O REAL ESTATE OFFICE
319 15TH AVE SE
424 DON HOW'E BLDG
M_hNNEAPOLIS MN' 55455-0118
25-0090500
The proposed assessment against your property is as described below:
Lateral Sanitary Sewer:
Lateral Water:
Total Assessment:
$1,300.00
$.1,694.00
$2,994.00
Total Project Cost: $1,322,656.37
City Share of Project: $265,672.92
Assessment may be paid in full without interest or other charges within thirty (30) days after the
assessment heating date.. These payments may be made in person or may be mailed to
Chanhassen City Hall, 690 City Center Drive, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, M. innesota, 55317,
Attention: Treasurer. Please indicate the parcel number on your check. Partial prepayment of
the assessment is permitted during the 30 days after the assessment hearing date.
If you elect not to pay the full amount within thirty (30) days after the heating date, the
assessment will be spread over 8 years with the installments appearing on your real estate taxes
beginning next year. Interest will be included at the rate of 8 percent of the unpaid balance.
The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk. Written and oral objections to the
proposed assessment by any property owner will be considered.
No appeal may be taken as to the mount of any assessment adopted unless a written objection
signed by the affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing
or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT NOTICE
BC 7 8:8 SANITARY SEWER AND WATER UTILrrY EXTENSION
DdPROVEME~ PROJECT NO. 00-01
The City Council will hold a public hearing to consider proposed assessments for Improvement
Project No. 00-01 on Tuesday November 13, 2001 at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers at
690 City Center Drive, Chaahassen, Minnesota. The area to be assessed includes those
properties along the new alignment of West 78u'' Street and Tanadoona Drive from Highway 41
to DoDvood Road. The total amount of the proposed assessment is $1,056,983.45. Your
assessment has been calculated in accordance with the City Council's policy as follows:
Property. O~vner:
Address:
Parcel No.'
BYRON A 8: MARY M OLSON
7331 HAZELTINE BLVD
EXCEI~IOR M2q 55331-8038
25-0090400
The proposed assessment against your property is as described below:
Lateral Sanitary. Sewer:
Lateral Water:
Total Assessment:
$5,200.00
S6,776.00
$11,976.00 '
Total Project Cost: 51,322,656.37
City Share of Project: $265,672.92
Assessment may be paid in full without interest or other charges within th/try (30) days after the
assessment hearing date. These payments may be made in person, or may be. mailed to
Chanhassen City Hall, 690 City Center Drive, P.O. Box 147, ~sen, Minnesota, 55317,
Attention: Tre.asurer. Please indicate the parcel number on your check. Partial prepayment of
the assessment'is permitted during the 30 days after the assessment heating date.
If you elect not to pay the full amount within thirty (30) days after the hearing date, the
assessment will be spread over 8 years with the installments appearing on your real estate taxes
beginning next year. Interest will be included at the rate of 8 percent of the unpaid balance.
The proposed assessment mil is on file with the City Clerk. Written and oral objections to the'
proposed assessment by any property'owner will be considered.
No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any assessment adopted unless a wri.'tten objection
signed by the affected property owner is fried with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing
or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing.
Ail written objections to the assessment not received prior to or at the assessment hearing in the
above manner are waived, un/ess failure to object prior to or at the assessment hearing is due to a
reason~le cause.
CITY OF CHA_NHASSEN, MINNESOTA
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT NOTICE
BC 7 & 8 SANITARY SEWER AND WATER UTILITY EXTENSION
~iPROVENLENT PROJECT NO. 00-01
The City Council will hold a public hearing to consider proposed assessments for Improvement
Project No. 00-01 on Tuesday November 13, 2001 at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers at
690 City Center Drive, Chanhassen, Minnesota. The area to be assessed includes those
properties along the new alignment of West 78'h Street and Tanadoona Drive from Highway 41
to Dogwood Road. The total amount of the proposed ~issessment is $1,056,983.45. Your
assessment has been calculated i'n accordance with the City. Council's policy as follows:
Property. Owner:
Address:
Parcel No.:
CH.AXLES W & SUSAN MARKERT
7461 HAZELTLNE BLVD
PO BOX 311
EXCELSIOR MN 55331-031 !
25-0090310
The proposed assessment against your property is as described below:
Lateral Sanitary Sewer:
Lateral Water:
Total Assessment:
$7,800.00
$10,164.00
$17,964.00
Total Project Cost: S 1,322,656.37
City Share of Project: $265,672.92
.~sessment may be paid in full without interest or other charges within thirty (30) days after the
assessment hearing date. These payments may be made in person or may be mailed to
Chanhassen Ci~ Hall, 690 City Center Drive, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, Minnesota, 55317,
Attention: Treltsurer. Please indicate the parcel number on your check. Partial prepayment of
the assessment is permitted during the 30 days after the assessment hearing date.
If you elect not to pay the full amount within thirty (30) days after the hearing date, the
assessment xvill be spread over 8 years with the installments appearing on your real estate taxes
beginning next year. Interest will be included at the rote of 8 percent of the unpaid balance.
The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk. Written and oral objections to the
proposed assessment by any property owner will be considered.
No appeal may be taken as to the amount of' any assessment adopted unless a written objection
signed by the affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing
or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing.
All written objections to the assessment not received prior to or at the assessment hearing in the
above mariner are waived, unless failure to object prior to or at the assessment hearing is due to a
reasonable cause.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT NOTICE
BC 7 & 8 SANITARY SEWER .~ND WATER UTILITY EXTENSION
~vlPRO~~~ PROJECT NO. 00-01
The City Council will hold a public hearing to consider proposed assessments for Improvement
Project No. 00-01 on Tuesday November 13, 2001 at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers at
690 City Center Drive, Chauhasserh Minnesota. The area to be assessed includes those
properties along the new alignment of West 78~ Street and Tanadoona Drive from Highway 41
to Dogwood Road. The. total amount of the proposed assessment isS1,056,983.45. Your
assessment has been calculated in accordance with the City. Council's policy as follows:
Property. Owner:
Address:
Parcel No.:
PULTE HOMES OF ~SOTA CORP
1355 MENDOTA HEIG~S RD
SUITE 300
MENDOTAHEIG~S ~ 55120-1112
25-0090300, 25-0091700, 25-0092800
The proposed assessment against your property is as described below:
Lateral Sanitary Sewer:.
Lateral Water:
Total Assessment:
$~.,!. ~.,600.00
SO.O0
$444,600.00
Total Project Cost:
City Share of Project:'
$1,322,656.37
5265,672.92
-
Assessment may be paid in full without interest or other charges within thirty (30) days after the
assessment hearing date. These payments may be made in person or may be mailed to
Chanhassen City Hall, 690 City Center Drive, P.O. Box 147, Ch. anhassen, Minnesota, 55317,
Attention: Treasurer. Please indicate the parcel number on your check. Partial prepayment of
the assessment is permitted during the 30 days after the assessment hearing date.
If you elect not to pay the full amount within thirty (30) days after the hearing date, the
assessment will be spread over 8 years with the installments app~g on your real estate taxes
be~nning next year. Interest will be included at the rate of 8 percent of the unpaid balance.
The proposed assessment mil is on fi~e with the City Clerk. Written and oral objections to the
proposed assessment by any property owner will be considered.
No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any assessment adopted un/ess a written Qbjectiou
signed by the affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing
or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing.
All written objections to the assessment not received prior to or at the assessment hearing in the
above manner are waived, unless failure to object prior to or at the assessment hearing is due to a
reasonable cause.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA
SPECIAL ASSESSMEN~ NOTICE
BC 7 & 8 SAoNITARY SEWER AND WATER UTILITY EXTENSION
RvIPROVEM. ENT PROJECT NO. 00-01
The City Council will hold a public heating to consider proposed assessments for Improvement
Project No. 00-01 on Tuesday November 13, 2001 at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers at
690 City Center Drive, Chanhassen, Minnesota. The area to be assessed includes those
properties along the new alignment of West 78th Street and Tanadoona Drive from Highway 41
to Dogwood Road. The total amount of the proposed assessment is $1,056,983.45. Your
assessment has been calculated in accordance with the City. Council's policy as follows:
Property, Owner:
Address:
Parcel No.:
JACOB O CROOKS &
MICHAEL A & RENATE E CROOKS
7450 HAZELTE'qE BLVD
EXCELSIOR Nfi'q 55331-8037
25-0090200
The proposed assessment against your property is as described below:
Lateral Sanitary Sewer:
Lateral Water:
Total Assessment:
$1,300.00
$1,694.00
$2,994.00
Total Project Cost: S 1,322,656.37
City Share of Project: $265,672.92
Assessment may be paid in full without interest or other charges within thirty (30) days after the
assessment hearing date. These payments may be made in person or may be mailed to
Chanhassen City Hall, 690 City. Center Drive, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, Minnesota, 55317,
Attention: Tre~urer. Please indicate the parcel number on your check. Partial prepayment of
the assessment is permitted during the 30 days after the assessment heating date.
If you elect not to pay the full amount within thirty (30) days after the hearing date, the
assessment will be spread over 8 years with the installments appearing on your real estate taxes
beginning next year. Interest will be included at the rate of 8 percent of the unpaid balance.
The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City. Clerk. Written and oral objections to the
proposed assessment by any property owner will be considered.
No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any assessment adopted unless a written objectior~
signed by the affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing
or presented to the presiding officer at the hea~ng.
All written objections to the assessment not received prior to or at the assessment hearing in the
above manner are waived, unless failure to object prior to or at the assessment hearing is due to a
reasonable cause.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN', MINNESOTA
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT NOTICE
BC 7 & 8 SANITARY SEWER AND WATER UTIL~ EXTENSION
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 00-01
The City Council will hold a public hearing to consider proposed assessments for Improvement
Project No. 00-01 on Tuesday November 13, 2001 at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers at
690 City Center Drive, Chanhassen, Minnesota. The area to be assessed includes those
properties along the new ali~ment of West 78d' Street and Tauadoona Drive ~om Highway 41
to Dogwood Koad. The total amount of the proposed assessment is $1,056,983.45. Your
assessment has been calculated in accordance ~vith the City Council's policy as follows:
Property. Owner:
Address:
Parcel No.:
MERALD A & ELAINE A K_ROGST~
7460 HAZELT~ BLVD
EXCELSIOR MN 55331-8037
25-0090100
The proposed assessment against your property is as described below:
Lateral Sanitary Sewer:
Lateral Water:
Total Assessment:
$1,300.00
$1,694.00
$2,994.00
Total Project Cost: S1,322,656.37
City Share of Project: $265,672.92
Assessment may be paid in full without interest or other charges within thirty (30) dayS after the
assessment hearing date. These payments may be made in person or may be mailed to
Clmahassen City Hall, 690 City Center Drive, P.O. Box 147, Chauhassen, .Minnesota, 55317,
Attention: Treasurer. Please indicate the parcel number on your check. Partial prepayment of
the assessment~ permit/ed during thb 30 days after the assessment hearing date.
If you elect not to pay the full amount within thirty (30) days aider the hearing date, the
assessment will be spread over 8 years with the installments appearing on your real estate taxes
beginning next year. Interest will be included at the rate of 8 percent of the unpaid balance.
The proposed assessment mil is on file with the City Clerk. Written and omi objections to the
proposed assessment by any property owner will be considered.
No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any assessment adopted unless a writter[ 9biectio~
signed by the affected property owner is flied with the City Clerk prior to the asses,maent hearing
or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing.
All written objections to the assessment not recdved prior m or at the assessment hearing in the
above manner are waived, unless failure to object prior to or at the assessment hearing is due to a
reasonable cause.
CITY OF CI4_A/WHASSBN, MINNESOTA
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT NOTICE
BC 7 & 8 SANITARY SEWER AND WATER UTYLITY EXTENSION
5MPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 00-01
The City Council will hold a public hearing to consider proposed assessments for Improvement
Project No. 00-01 on Tuesday November 13, 2001 at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers at
690 City Center Drive, Chanhassen, Minnesota. The area to be assessed includes those
properties along the new alignment of West 78~ Street and Tanadoona Drive fi:om Highway 41
to Dogwood Road. The total amount of the proposed assessment is 51,056,983.45. Your
assessment has been calculated in accordance with the City Councirs policy as follows:
Property Owner:
Address:
Parcel No.:
WESTWOOD CONh-¥fL.rNITY CHURCH
7801 PARK DR
CHANHASSEN ~ 55317-9200
25-0083310
The proposed assessment against your property is as described below:
Lateral San_itary Sewer:
Lateral Water:
Total Assessment:
$145,600.00
$189,728.00
$335,328.00
Total Project Cost: $1,322,656.37
City Share of Project: $265,672.92
Assessment may be paid in full without interest or other charges within thirty (30) days after the
assessment heari'ng date. These payments may be made in person or may be mailed to
Chanhassen City Hall, 690 City Center Drive, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, Minnesota, 55317,
Attention: Treasurer. Please indicate the parcel number on yo.ur check. Partial prepayment of
the assessment is permitted during th~ 30 days af[er the assessment hearing date.
If you elect not to pay the full amount within thirty (30) days after the hearing date, the
assessment will be spread over 8 years with the instalknents appearing on your real estate taxes
beginning next year. Interest will be included at the rate of 8 percent of the unpaid balance.
The proposed assessment mil is on file with the City Clerk. Written and oral objections to the
proposed assessment by any property owner will be considered.
No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any assessment adopted unless a written 0b~ectior~
signed by the affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing
or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing.
All written objections to the assessment not received prior to or at the assessment hearing in the
above manner are waived, unless failure to object prior to or at the assessment hearing is due to a
reasonable cause.
CITY OF CHANHASS~, lv[INNBSOTA
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT NOTICE
BC 7 & 8 SANITARY SEWER AND WATER UTIL~ EXTENSION
IM?ROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 00-01
The City Council will hold a public hearing to consider proposed assessments for Improvement
Project No. 00-01 on Tuesday November 13, 2001 at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers at
690 City Center Drive, Chanhassen, M{,~r, esota. The area to be assessed includes those
properties along the new ali~ment of West 78~' Street and Tanadoona Drive from Highway 41
to Dogwood Road. The total amount of the proposed assessment is $1,05(5,983.45. Your
assessment has been calculated in accordance ~vith the City Council's policy as follows:
Property Owner:
Address:
No.:
MPLS COb'NCr[. OF CAMI:'FIKE GIRLS
2610 UNIVERSITY A~ WEST
ST PAUL MN 5511,$-
25-0083200
The proposed assessment against your property, is as described below:
Lateral Sanitary Sewer:
Lateral Water:
Total Assessment:
$1,300.00
$1,694.00
$2,994.00
Total Project Cost: $1,322,656.37
City Share of Project: $2(55,672.92
Assessment may be paid in full without.interest or other charges within th{rty (30) days al[er the
assessment hearing date. These payments may be made in person or may be mailed to
Chanhassen City Hall, 690 City Center Drive, P.O. Box 147, Ctmuhassen, M{,mesota, 55317,
Attention: Treasurer. PI.ease indicate the parcel number on yo.ur check. Partial prepayment of
the assessment-is permitted during the 30 days a.f[er the assessment hearing date.
If you elect not to pay the full amount within thirty (30) days ~ the hearing dale, the
assessment will be spread over 8 years with the installments appearing on your real estate taxes
be~,~,~ir, g next year. Interest will be included at the rate of 8 percent of the unpaid balance.
The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk. Written and oral objections to the'
proposed assessment by any property'owner will be considered.
No appeal may be taken az to the amount of any ass~ent adopted unless a written obiection
signed by the affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing
or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing.
All written objections to the assessment not received prior to or at the assessment he~.ug in the
above manner are waived, unless failure to object prior to or at the assessment ~ is due to a
reasonable cause.
Special Assessment Notice
Improvement Project No. 00-01
Page 2
An owner may appeal an assessment to the District Court pursuant to Minnesota Statute Section
§429.081 by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or City Clerk of the City of
Chanhassen within thirty (30) days after the adoption of the assessment a.nd filing such notice
with the District Court within ten (10) days ~er service upon the Mayor or City Clerk.
Residents who are 65 years of age or older, or retired by reason of permanent or total disability
may apply to have payment of the assessment deferred. The application shall be made to the
City Clerk within thirty (30) days after the adoption of the assessment roll by the City. Council:
City staff will be available between the hours of 8:00 AM and 4:30 PM weekdays until the time
of the public hearing to answer questions about the proposed assessments. You may also
telephone city staff at 952-937-1900.
You will be ~otified by mail of any changes adopted by the City Council in interest rate,
prepayment requirements or the amount of the adopted assessments fi.om those contained in this
notice.
Teresa J. Burgess
Public Works Director/City Engineer
City of Chanhassen, Minnesota
G:~ng~pub LIC',O0-.O 1 ~assessrnents~ecial assessment notice, doc
11/2/01
CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA
I APPEAL AND OBJECT TO THE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT No. 00-01
AND THE PROPOSED ASSESSMENT AGAINST OUR PROPERTY. JUST ONE
YEAR AGO I MET WITH CITY OF CHANHASSEN ENGINEERING AND PLANNING
DEPARTMENT REQUESTING INFORMATION ON IMPROVING MY SEPTIC SYSTEM.
I WAS TOLD A LETTER HAD BEEN MAILED TO ME OR WOULD BE MAILED TO
ME IN THE NEAR FUTURE STATING THEY WOULD HAVE TO INSPECT MY SEPTIC
AND IF' IT DID NOT MEET CURRENT CODE I WOULD HAVE TO HAVE IT REPLACED.
THE INSPECTION TOOK PLACE AND I WAS NOTIFIED TO REPLACE IT. I ASKED
WHETHER OR NOT SEWER AND OR WATER WAS GOING TO BE EXTENDED NORTH
·
ON HWY 41, OR EVEN IF IT COULD IF I REQUESTED IT, RATHER THAN
REPLACING MY SEPTIC SYSTEM. I WAS ASSURED THAT IT WAS NOT PLANNED,
AND THE ONLY WAY I MIGHT GET IT EXTENDED WOULD BE TO GET A PETITION
SIGNED BY ALL (EVERYONE) OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS IMMEDIATELY NORTH
OF ME, REQUESTING SEWER. I TOLD THEM IT WOULD COST ME NEAR $10,000
FOR ME TO REPLACE MY SEPTIC SYSTEM AND I CERTAINLY WOULD NOT WANT
TO PUT THIS IN AND THEN A YEAR OR TWO LATER THE CITY CHANGE IT'S
MIND AND ASSESS ME. I WAS ASSURED THIS WAS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN,
OTHERWISE I WOULD NOT HAVE GONE AHEAD WITH PUTTING IN A NEW SYSTEM.
THE CITY WENT ALONG WITH THIS, EVEN RECOMMENDED SWEDLUND AS A
RELIABLE CONTRACTOR, WORKED WITH SWEDLUND ON SIGHT LOCATION AND
APPROVAL, AND FINALLY INSPECTED AND PASSED THE SYSTEM WHEN COMPEETED.
NOW THE CITY IS GOING BACK ON THE ASSURANCES IT GAVE TO ME AND THIS
JUST IS NOT RIGHT. LETS GO BACK TO THE REQUIREMENT THE CITY GAVE
ME THAT EVERY PROPERTY OWNER WOULD HAVE. TO APPROVE THE EXTENSION
· ~. i ~ -. ~. ..
OF SEWER. WELL NOW I'M OBJECTING AND ACCORDING TO WHAT ASSURANCES
AND INFORMATION YOU GAVE TO ME LAST YEAR, I WILL NOT APPROVE THIS
PROJECT AND THUS BLOCK THE ENTIRE PROJECT. PLEASE LET ME HEAR FROM
YOU IN WRITING ON THIS MATTER. THANK YOU.
YOURS TRULY,
7250 HAZELTINE BLVD
EXCELSIOR, MN 55331
PARCEL NO: 25-0092500
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
Date
Motion By
Resolution
Seconded By
RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENTS
FOR BC 7 & 8 TRUNK UTILITIES EXTENSION
CITY PROJECT NO. 00-01
WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Council
has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessments for
extension of trunk utilities in the BC 7 & 8 utility district, Project No. 00-01.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City .of
Chanhassen, Minnesota:
Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part
hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the
lands named therein and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be
benerrted by the proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied
against it.
,
Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a
period of 8 years except as otherwise noted on the attached assessment roll, the..
first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January,
2002, and shall bear interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of adoption
of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the
entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 2002. To
each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all
unpaid installments.
1
The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time pdor to certification of the
assessment to the County Finance Director, pay the whole of the assessment on
such property with interest accrued to the date of payment to the City Finance
Director, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid
within 30 days from the adoption of this resolution and the owner may at any time
thereafter pay the City Finance Director the entire amount of the assessment
remaining unpaid with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such
payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 30 or interest
will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year.
.
The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the
County to be extended on the proper tax lists of the County and such assessments
shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes.
.
The total construction cost of the improvement assessed by this resolution is
$1,265,673.
ADOPTED this day of
the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota.
, by the City Council of
A'I-I'EST:
Todd Gerhardt, Clerk/Manager
Linda C. Jansen, Mayor
g:~eng~oubllc~3-Ol~esoladop~ng assesarnents_.doc
City. ln.utalled Improvements
THI.q AGENT datc. d thc~h day of ~ c~-rt,,,,h~, ,", 2001, by and between
the City of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporaficin ("City") and Byron A. Olson and
Mary M. Olson, husband and wife, ("Owners").
RECITALS
Owners own tt~ subj~t property de. scribed as follows:
Beginning at the c~nter of Section 9, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County,
Minnesota; thence West along the North line of. the Southwest Quarter of said
section a distance of 228.05 feet; thence ckflecting to the left 49 clegr~.~s 15
minutes a distallce of 514.80 feet along tim Easterly fight-of-way line of State
Highway No. 41'; thence clefleaing to the left 130 de~ 45 minutes to a line
p.arallel with tl~ North line of said Southwest Quarter of said section a distance
of 571 feet more or less, to a point on th~ East line of tl~ Southwest Quarter of
said section a distant of 390.00 feet South of tl~ center of said section; tl~nce
North 390.00 feet to the point of beginning, according to tim Unite~ States
Government Survey thereof and simu~te in Carver County, Minnesota.
('Subject Property").
Owners have rexlUested the City tn install sanitary sewer and water to its property (City
Proj~ 00-00.
Owners have agreed to convey to the City as part of this agreement the easement over
their property necessary for the project. Owners are entitled to compensation for the
easement, which is being offset against the proposed assessment.
Owners understand that in addition to the assessments set forth herein, Owners will be
charged standard sewer and water hook-up charges and Metropolitan Sewer Area
Charges (SAC) upon hookup to public sewer and water, respectively.
Owners understand that this Assessment Agreement relates to the current use of the
property for one single family home. If the property is subdivided, each of the future
lots would be obligated to pay lateral connection and trunk hookup charges for.both
.
sanitary sewer and water at the rates in place ~it the time the subdivision occurs.
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:
1. Upon construction of Improvement Project 00-01, the City shall assess a portion
of the cost o~' the improvements against the property owned by Owners described herein. The
assessments for trunk and lateral water and sewer will be in the total amount of Ten Thousand
Nine Hundred Seventy-sLx and No/100 ($10,976.00) Dollars for the Subject Property. The
assessments shall be spread over a fifteen (15) year period with interest on the unpaid balance
calculated at eight percent (8 %) per annum.
2. Owners waive any and all procedural and substantive objections to the
assessments, including but not limited to, hearing requirements and any claim that the
assessments exceed the benefit to the Subject Property. The Owners waive any appeal rights
otherwise available pursuant to MSA § 429.081.
3. Owners will execute and deliver to the City contemporaneously with this
agreement the project easement, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A".
.
Tree replacement will be in accordance with current City policy.
5. Required notices to the Owners shall be in writing and shall be either hand
delivered to the Owners, or mailed to the Owners by certified or registered marl at the
following address:
Byron A. Olson and Mary M. Olson
7331 Hazeltine Boulevard
Excelsior, Minnesota 55331
Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall be either hand delivered to the City
Administrator, or mailed to the City by certified or registered mail in care of the City
Administrator at the following address:
Teresa Burgess, Public Works Director/City Engineer
City of Chauhassen
690 City Center Drive
P. O. Box 147
Chauhasseu, Minnesota 55317
IN WITNF~S WHEREOF, the parties have executed this 'Agreemen~ effective the day
aud year first above wriueu.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
-- Lindz C. lansen, ~or -
Todd Gerhardt, Acting City Mamger
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) $8°
COUNTY OF CARVEa )
.tT~. foregoing insmunent was acknowledged before me this~'day of
., 2001, by Linda C. lansen and Todd Gerhardt, the Mayor and Acting City
~a~ager of the City of Chanhass~fl, a Miunesota municipal corporation, pumm~ to the
authority granted by its City Council
94318
STATE Or MINNESOTA
COUNTY Or
)
The forego' imm.tment w ~ ·
,K,/,. _~,.¢g__ ~ as acknowledged before me this ~ day of
~,~c o',J., , 2001, by B~on A. 0hon~ ~ M. 0~9~b~ ~d wife.
~t~ ~bSc
h5 I'-?~'~ ;~ ~,~t,~vo~,c~',- ,,,V,,-~-~ ~
THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFrED BY:
Campbell Knutson
Professional Association
Suite 317
1380 Corporate Center Curve
Eagan, Minnesota 55121
TMS:cjh
94~18
Document No.
T 120020
OFFICE OF THE
REGISTRAR OF TITLES
CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Check# 7387 Fe~ S 19.50
cart. # 26514 Vot. 81 Page 143
Certified and filed on 06-22-2001 at 09:.00~. ,~1_.1 PM
Carl W. Hanson, Jr.
A~$~NT AGI~EEMENT
City ln.qailed Improvements
TI-US AGREE1VIF2qT dated the c~/ day of ~-~ ., 2001, by and between'
the City of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation ('City") and Westwood
Community Church, a Minnesota non-profit corporation ('Developer").
RECITALS
1. Developer owns the subject property described on Exhibit "A" hereto which is
being developed with a church facility.
2. The Developer has petitioned the City to install ssnitary sewer and water to its
property (City Project 00-01).
3. The City ordered the project, prepared the necessary plans and specifications
and is prepared to award a contract to construct the project.
4. Developer has requested the City to construct Project Alternate 'B" at an
estimated additional project cost of $375,251.90.
5. Developer has agreed to pay the additional project cost for ~a~ate 'B" in
order to obtain this preferred alignment relative to its property.
6. Developer has agreed to convey to the City as part of this overall agreement the
temporary and permanent easements necessary for the project.
7. Developer understands that in afldifion to t. be assessmeats set fortla herei~
Developer will be charged standard sewer and waiL-r hook-up charges and Metropo~ Sewer
Area Charges (SAC) at the time a building permit is issued for construction of the church
building.
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:
1 Upon construction of Improvement Project 00-01, the City shall assess a portion
of the cost of the improvements agaimt the property owned by Developer described in Exhibit
A attached hereto ("Subject Property"). The assessments are estimated to be $738,431.90 for
the Subject Property and include administrative, plam,J~, engineeri~, eapitalizext interest,
legal, land acquisition, bonding costs and the additional project cost for Alternate "B"..The
assessments shall be spread over a fifteen (15) year period with interest on the unp~d balance
calculated at eight percent (8 %) per annum. The actual assessment may vary based upon any
increase of decrease ~ actual project and easement costs compared to estimated costs.
2. Developer waives any and all procedural a~ substantive objections to the
assessments, including but not limited to, hearing requirements and any claim that the
assessments exceed the benefit to the Subject Property. The Developer waives any appeal
rights otherwise available pursuant to MSA § 429.081.
3. Developer will execute and deliver to the City contemporaneously with tiffs
agreement the project easements, copies of which are attached hereto as Exhibits "B, and "C".
4. Required notices to the Developer shall be in writing and shall be either ha~
deliv, ered to the Developer, its' employees or agents, or mailed to the Developer by certified or
registered mail at the following address:
Westwood Community Church
7801 Park Drive
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
Attn:
Notices to the 'City shall be in writing and shall be either hand delivered to the City
Administrator, or mailed to the City by certified or registered mail in care of the City
Administrator at the following address:
Teresa Burgess, Public Works Director/City Engineer
City of Chanhassen
690 City Center Drive
P. O. Box 147
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
93628
IN WITNESS WtiBREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement effective the day
and year first above written.
crr~ o~ ~ .
Lintla_ C. lanscn,~or
Todd 9srhardt, Acting City Managsz·
//~S INSTRUM]ENT WAS DRAFTED BY:
Campbell Knutson
Professional Association
Suite 317
1380 Corporate Center Curve
Eagan, Minnesota 55121
TMS:cjh
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
A. ss'
COUNTY OF )
..-.. The foregoing insmmaent was acknowledge~lb_efor, e~ri~e, this /0~ day of
· Os.}~ ~)~ ~q ~)=t' '
~ ,2001, by Lmda C. Jansen an~.e~ A. 5~~ the Mayor and, City
Mo~aager of the City of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation pursuant to the
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
COUNTY OF ~'~ft,' d~L )
The foregoing instnm~ent was ackno, wledge~ before me this ~ / day of
~'td, Fl-{. ,2001, by '~rTrlt~/_. /~. J~/-~ -'~the
._ - (~? ~,~r~,4,-- of West-wood Commumty Church, a Minnesota non-
profit corporation, on behalf of said corporation, Grantor.
No~tary'Public
E~IT "A"
TO
ASSF_~SMENT AGREEMENT
That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter and the Southwest Quarter of the
Northwest Quarter of Section 9 and that part of Government Lots 8 and 9 of Section 8, all in
Township 116 North, Range 23 West of the 5"~ Principal Meridian, Carver County, Minnesota,
described as follows:
Beginning at the southeast comer of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence
North 69 degrees 42 minutes 15 seconds West, assuming the west Line of said Northwest
Quarter of the Southwest Quarter has a bearing of North 0 degrees 32 minutes 39 seconds
West, a distance of 978.50 feet; thence South 36 degrees 06 minutes 16 seconds West a
distance of 18.77 feet; thence South 38 degrees 21 minutes 19 seconds East a distance of 40.00
feet; thence North 69 degrees 13 minutes 44 seconds West a distance of 638.58 feet; thence
North 87 degrees 00 minutes 49 seconds West a distance of 822.99 feet; thence South 1 degree
58 minutes 09 seconds East a distance of 206.39 feet; thence South 28 degrees 11 minutes 51
seconds West a distance of 368.57 feet; thence South 41 degrees 10 minutes 18 seconds West a
distance of 410.76 feet; thence South 7 degrees 50 minutes 18 seconds West a distance of
350.24 feet; thence South 13 degrees 35 minutes 53 seconds East a distance of 397.22 feet;
thence South 8 degrees 05 minutes 03 seconds East a distance of 38.84 feet; thence North 89
degrees 43 minutes 07 seconds West about 385 feet, to the shoreline of Lake Minnewashtai
thence Southerly, along said shoreline, to the south line of said Government Lot 8; thence
North 89 degrees 40 minutes 46 seconds East, along said south line of Government Lot 8 about
1756 feet to the southeast comer of said Government Lot 8; thence South 89 degrees 32
minutes 26 seconds East, along the south line of said Northwest Quarter of the Southwest
Quarter, a distance of 1054.74 feet, to a point 248.27 feet westerly from the southeast comer
of said Northwest Quart~. r of the Southwest Quarter; thence North 0 degrees 34 minutes 36
.
seconds West a distance of 281.21 feet; thence South 89 degrees 40 minutes 26 seconds East a
distance of 225.90 feet; thence North 0 degrees 23 minutes 47 seconds West a distance of
17.74 feet; thence North 89 degrees 05 minutes 22 seconds East a distance of 20.56 feet, to the
east line of said Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter; thence North 0 degrees 54
minutes 38 seconds West; along last said east line, a distance of 1046.12 feet to said point of
beginning.
EXCEPT:
That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter and the Southwest Quarter of the
Northwest Quarter of Section 9, Township 116 North, Range 23 West of the 5~' Principal
meridian described as follows:
5
Commencing at the southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter;
thence North 69 degrees 42 minutes 15 seconds West, assuming the west line of said
Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter has a bearing of North 0 degrees 32 minutes 39
seconds West, a distance of 978.50 feet; thence South 36 degrees 06 minutes 16 seconds West
a distance of 18.77 feet; thence South 38 degrees 21 minutes 19 seconds East, a distance of
40.00 feet; thence North 69 degrees 13 minutes 44 seconds West, a distance of 283.38 feet;
thence South 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds West, a distance of 492.43 feet; thence South
71 degrees 39 minutes 26 seconds East, a distance of 131.14 feet to the point of beginning of
the land to be described; thence continuing South 71 degrees 39 minutes 26 seconds East, a
distance of 486.30 feet; thence North 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds East, a distance of
451.81 feet; thence North 71 degrees 39 minutes 26 seconds West, a distance of 486.30 feet;
thence South 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds West, a distance of 451.81 feet to the point of
beginning.
ALSO EXCEPT:
That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter and the Southwest Quarter of the
Northwest Quarter of Section 9 and that part of Government Lots 8 and 9 of Section 8, all in
Township 116 North, Range 23 West of the 5~ Principal Meridian, described as follows:
Commencing at the southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter;
thence North 69 degrees 42 minutes 15 seconds West, assuming the west line of said
Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter has a bearing of North 0 degrees 32 minutes 39
seconds West, a distance of 978.50 feet; thence South 36 degrees 06 minutes 16 seconds West
a distance of 18.77 feet; thence South 38 degrees 2i minutes 19 seconds East a distance of
40.00 feet, to a point hereinafter referred to as "Point A"; thence North 69 degrees 13 minutes
44 seconds West a distance of 283.38 feet; thence South 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds
West a distance of 492.43 feet; thence South 71 degrees 39 minutes 26 seconds East a distance
of 115.18 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence continuing South 71
degrees 39 minutes 26 seconds East a distance of 15.96 feet; thence North 10 degrees 46
minutes 16 seconds East a distance of 451.81 feet; thence North 71 degrees 39 minutes 26
seconds West,'a distance of 131.14 feet; thence North 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds East a
distance of 40.62 feet; thence North 69 degrees 13 minutes 44 seconds West a distance of
355,20 feet to a point distant 638.58 feet northwesterly from the above referenced "Point A";
thence North 87 degrees 00 minutes 49 seconds West a distance of 822.99 feet; thence South 1
degree 58 minutes 09 seconds East a distance of 206.39 feet; thence South 28 degrees 11
minutes 51 seconds West a distance of 303.66 feet; thence South 63 degrees 31 minutes 20
seconds East a distance of 1266.35 feet, to the intersection with a line bearing South 26
degrees 28 minutes 40 seconds West from the point of beginning; thence North 26 degrees 28
minutes 40 seconds East a distance of 390.62 feet to the point of beginning.
ALSO EXCEPT:
All of ZIMMERMAN FARM 1sr ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof,
including Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, and the roads dedicated to the public in said plat.
6
ALSO EXCEPT:
That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter and the Southwest Quarter of the
Northwest Quarter of Section Nine (9), Township One Hundred Sixteen (116) North, Range
Twenty-three (23) West of the 5* Principal Meridian, described as follows:
Commencing at the southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; ..
thence North 69 degrees 42 minutes 15 seconds West, assuming the west line of said
Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter has a bearing of North 0 degrees 32 minutes 39
seconds West, a distance of 978.50 feet; thence South 36'degrees 06 minutes 16 seconds West
a distance of 18.77 feet; thence. South 38 degrees 21 minutes 19 seconds East a distance of
40.00 feet; thence North 69 degrees 13 minutes 44 seconds West, a distance of 283.38 feet;
thence South 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds West a distance of 492.43 feet; thence South
71 degrees 39 minutes 26 seconds East, a distance of 617.44 feet; thence North 10 degrees 46
minutes 16 seconds East, a distance of 451.81 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be
described; thence continuing North 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds East, a distance of 56.31
feet; thence North 69 degrees 42 minutes 15 seconds West, a distance of 131.82 feet; thence
South 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds-West, a distance of 60.84 feet; thence South 71
degrees 39 minutes 26 seconds East, a distance of 131.14 feet to the point of beginning.
ALSO EXCEPT:
That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, Section Nine (9), Township One
Hundred Sixteen (116) North, Range Twenty Three (23) West of the 5~ Principal Meridian,
described as follows:
Commencing at the southeast comer of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter;
thence North 69 degrees 42 minutes 15 seconds West (based on a bearing of North 00 degrees
35 minutes 15 seconds West for a straight line between the northwest comer and the southwest
comer of said Section 9) a distance of 750.15 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be
described; thence continue North 69 degrees 42 minutes 15 seconds West a distance of 228.35
feet; thence South 36 degrees 06 minutes 16 seconds West a distance of 18.77 feet to the
northerly comer of the easterly end of Field Lane, dedicated in SUNSET HII.L ON LAKE
MINNEWASHTA, according to the found monumentation of the recorded plat thereof; thence
South 38 degrees 21 minutes 19 seconds East, along said easterly end of Field Lane, a dismace
of 40.00 feet to the southerly comer of said easterly end of land as monumented; thence North
69 degrees 13 minutes 44 seconds West, along the southerly line of said Field Lane as
monumented, a distance of 283.38 feet; thence South' 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds West a
distance of 40.62 feet; thence South 71 degrees 39 minutes 26 seconds East a distance of
486.30 feet; thence North 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds East a distance of 60.84 feet to
said point of beginning.
EXHIBIT
(Reserved for Recording Data,)
GRANT OF PERMANENT EASEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT made this al day of ~'"~J~ ~ ,2001, by and'
between WESTWOOD COMMUNITY CHURCH, a Minnesota non-profit
corporation, hereinaRer referred to as "Grantor", and the CITY OF CHANI-TASSEN, a
municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota, the Grantee,
hereinafter referred to as "City".
WITNESSETH:
The Grantor in consideration of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and
valuable consideration to it in hand paid by the City, the receipt and sufficiency of which
is hereby acknowledged, does hereby grant and convey to the City, its successors and
assigns, forever, a permanent easement for public drainage, ponding and wetland
restoration purposes over, on, across, under and through the land situated in the County
of Carver, State of Minnesota, legally described on the attached Exhibit "A".
INCL~ING the rights of the City, its contractors, agents, servants, and assigns,
to enter upon the easement premises at all reasonable _times to instal[ reinstall, inspect,
repair, and maintain said public drainage, ponding and wetland restoration over, across,
on, under, and through the permanent easement premi~qes, together with the right to grade,
level, fill, drain, pave, and excavate the easement premises, and the ftmher fight to
remove trees, bushes, undergrowth, and other obstructions interfering with the location,
construction, and maintenance of said public drainage, ponding and wetland restoration
easeme~.
The above named Grantor, for itself, its successors and assigns does covenant with
the City, its successors and assigns, that it is well seized in fee title of the above described
permanent easement premises; that it has the sole right to grant and convey the easements
to the City.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Grantor hereto has signed this Agreement thc
day and year first above written.
GRANTOI~
WESTWOOD .COMMUNITY CHURCH
By:
Its:
2
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF CAKVER
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 0 / day of
~ ~ &mm~ . ofWes~ood Co~~i~ ~h~ch, a Minn~om non-
profit co~orafion, on behalf of s~d co~oration, Gr~tor.
Not~ Public
THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY:
CAMPBELL KNUTSON
Professional Association
317 Eagandale Office Center
1380 Corporate Center Curve
Eagan, Minnesota 55121
Telephone: (651) 452-5000
v S/cjh
3
~IT
TO
EASEMENT AGREEMENT
Parcel No. 6
Alternate Two
Own~ Westwood Community Church
PID: 25-008-3310
An area of land, for drainage, ponding and wetland restorstion pta'poses over, under ~cl across
the following described property:
That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter and the Southwest Quarter of the
Northwest Quaxter of Section 9 and that part of Government Lots 8 & 9 of Section 8, all in
Township 116 North Range 23 West of the 5~ Principal Meridian, Carver County, Minnesota,
described as follows:
Be~i~'nning at the southeast comer of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarte~, thence
North 69 degrees 42 minutes 15 seconds West, assuming the west line of said Northwest Quarter
of the Southwe~ Quarter has a bearing of North 0 degrees 32 minutes 39 seconds West, a.
distance of 978.50 feet; thence South 36 degrees 06 minutes 16 seconds West a distance of 18.77
feet; thence South 38 degrees 21 minutes 19 seconds East a distance of 40. 00 ' feet; thence/qorth
69 degrees 13 minutes 44 seconds West a distance of 638.58 feet; thenco North 87.degrees 00
minutes 49 seconds West a distance of 822.99 feet; thence South 1 degree 58 rninute~ 09 seconds
East a distance of 206.39 feet; thence South 28 degrees 11 minutes 51 seconds West a distan~ of
368.57 feet; thence South 41 degrees 10 minutes 18 ~econds West a distance of 410.76 feet;
thence South 7 degrees 50 minutes 18 sec, o~ West a distance of 350~24 feet; thence South 13
d~ 35 minutes 53 seconds East a distance of 397.22 feeg thence South 8 degrees 05 minutes
03 seconds East a distance of 38.84 feet; thence North 89 degrees 43 minutes 07 seconds West
about 385 feet, to the shoreline of Lake Minnewssbta; thence Southexty, along said shoreline, to
the south line of said Government Lot 8; thence North 89 degrees 40 ~ 46 seconds East,
along said south line of Government Lot 8 about 1756 feet to the south~ comer of said
Government Lot 8; thence South 89 degrees 32 minutes 26 seconds East, along the south line of
said Northwest Quarter ofthe Southwest Quarter, a distance of 1054.74 feet, to a point 248.27
feet westerly from the southeast comer of said Northwest ~ of the Southwest Quarter,
thence North 0 desrees 34 minutes 36 seconds West a distance of 281.21 feet; thence South 89
degr~ 40 minutes 26 seconds East a distance of 225.90 feet; thence North 0 deixees 23 minutes
47 ~ West a distance of 17.74 feet; thence Nol~h 89 degrees 05 ~ninutes 22 seco~ East a
distance of 20.56 feet, to the east line of said Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quart~, thence
North 0 degrees 54 minutes 38 seconds West; along last said east line, a distance of 1046.12 feet
to said point ofbeginn~.
That part of the Northwest Qumer of the Southwest Quarter md th~ Southwest Quarter of the
Northwest Quarter of Section 9, Township 116 North, Range 23 West of tho 5* Principal
4
meridian described as follows:
Commencing at the southeast comer of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence
North 69 degrees 42 minutes 15 seconds West, assuming the west line of said Northwest Quarter
of the Southwest Quarter has a bearing ofNorth 0 degrees 32 minutes 39 seconds West, a
distance of 975.50 feet; thence South 35 degrees 06 minutes 16 seconds West a distance of 18.77
feet; thence South 38 degrees 21 minutes 19 seconds Frost, a distance of 40.00 feet; thence North
69 degrees 13 minutes 44 seconds West, a distance of 283.38 feet; thence South 10 degrees 45
minutes 16 seconds West, a distance of 492.43 feet; thence South 71 degrees 39 mi-utes 26
seconds Fast, a distance of 131.14 feet to the point ofbeginning ofthe land to be described;
thence' continuing South 71 degrees'39 minutes 26 seconds East, a distance of 485.30 feet;
thence North 10 degrees 46 minutes 15 seconds East, a ~ce oi~451.81 feet; thence North 71
degrees 39 minutes 25 seconds West, a distance of 486.30 feet; thence South 10 degrees 46
minutes 15 seconds West, a distance of 451.81 feet to the point ofbeginning.
ALSO EXCEPT:
That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter and the Southwest Quarter of the
Northwest Quarter of Section 9 and that part of Government Lots 8 and 9 of Section 8, all in
Township 116 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, described as follows:
Commencing at the southeast comer of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter;' thence
North 69 degrees 42 minutes 15 seconds West, assuming the west line of said Northwest Quarter
of the Southwest Quarter has a bearing of North 0 degrees 32 minutes 39 seconds West, a
distance of 978.50 feet; thence South 36 degrees 06 minutes 16 seconds West a distance of 18.77
feet; thence South 38 degrees 21 minutes 19 seconds East a distance of 40.00 feet, to a point
hereinaRer referred to as "Point A"; thence North 69 degrees 13 minutes 44 seconds West a
distance of 283.3 8 feet; thence South 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds West a distance of
492.43 feet; thence South 71 degrees 39 minutes 26 seconds East a distance of 115.18 feet to the
point of beginning of the land to be described; thence continuing South 71 degrees 39 minutes 26
seconds East a distance of 15.96 feet; thence North 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds East a
distance of 451.81 feet; thence North 71 degrees 39 minutes 26 seconds West, a distance of
131.14 feet; thence North 10 degrees 45 minutes 16 seconds East a distance of 40.62 feet; thence
North 69 degrees 13 minutes 44 seconds West a distance of 355.20 feet to a point distant 638.58
feet northwesterly from the above referenced ''Point A'; thence North 87 degrees 00 minutes 49
seconds West a distance of 822.99 feet; thence South I degree 58 minutes 09 seconds East a
distance of 206.39 feet; thence South 28 degrees 11 minutes 51 seconds West a distance of
303.66 feet; thence South 63 degrees 31 minutes 20 seconds East a distance of 1266.35 feet, to
the intersection with a line bearing South 26 degrees 28 minutes 40 seconds West from the point
of beginning; thence North 26 degrees 28 minutes 40 seconds East a distance of 390.62 feet to
the point of beginning.
ALSO EXCEPT:
All of ZIMMERMAN FARM 1sr ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof~ including
Lots I and 2, Block 1, and tlao roads dedicated to the public in said plat.
5
ALSO EXCEPT:
That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter and the Southwest ~ of the
Northwest Quarter of Section N-me (9), Township One H-~ared Sixteen (116) North, Range
Twenty-three (23) West of the 5~ Principal Meridian, described as follows:
·
Commencing aI the ~OI.Ithe/LYt c, orller of' 8~id Sotlthwest (~lart~ of'the Northw6~ ~ th6lic,6
North 69 degrees 42 minutes 15 seconds West, assuming, the west line ofsaid Northwest Qusrter
of the Southwest Quarter has a beating of North 0 degrees 32 minutes 39 seconds West, a
distance of 978.50 feet: thence South 36 degr',,,~ 06 m/nutes 16 seconds West a distance of 18.77
feet; thence South 3 $ degrees 21 minutes 19 seconds East a' distance of 40.00 feet; thence North
69 degrees 13 minutes 44 seconds West, a distance of 283.38 feet; thence South l0 degrees 46
minutes 16 seconds West a distance of 492.43 feet; thence South 71 degrees 39 minutes 26
seconds East, a distance of 617.44 feet; thence North 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds East, a
distance of 451.81 feet to the point ofbeginning ofthe land to be described; thence com/nuing
North 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds East, a ~ce of' 56.31 feet; thence North 69 degrees
42 minutes 15 seconds West, a dist/mce of 131.82 feet; thence South 10 degrees 4~ minutes 16
seconds West, a distance of 60.$4 feetl thence South 71 d~ 39 minntes 26 seconds Eas~ a
distance of 131.14 feet to the point of beginning.
That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Qusrter, Section Nme (9), Township One
Hundred Sixteen (11~) Nortk .Range Twenty Three (23) West ofthe 5~ Prindpal Meridian,
described as follows:
Commell~l~ al; the southeast c, orller of said Sollthwe~ Quart~ of the N~ ~ .then(lo
North 69 degrees 42 minutes 15 seconds West (based on a bearing of North 00 degrees 35
minutes 15 seconds West for a straight line between the northwest corner and the souIhwest
comer of said Section 9) a distance of 750.15 feet to the point ofbeginning ofthe land to be
described; thence continue North 69 degrees 42 minutes 15 seconds West a ~listance of 225.35
feet; thence South 36 degrees 06 minutes 16 seconds West a distance of 18.77 feet to the
northerly comer of the easterly end of Field Lane, dedicai~ in SUNSET ~ ON LAKE
MINNEWASHTA, ac, cording to the found monumeniafion of the recorded plat thereof; thence
South 38 det/rees 21 minutes 19 seconds East, along said easterly end of Field Lane, a distance
of 40.00 feet to the southerly comer of said easterly end of land as momimented; thence North 69
degrees 13 minutes 44 seconds West, along the southerly line of said Field Lane as monum~
a distance of 283.35 feet; thence South 10 degrees 46.mimltes 16 seconds West a distance of
40.62 feet; thence South 71 degrees 39 rnim~es 26 seconds East a distance'of .486.30 feet; thence
North 10 de~ 46 minutes 16 seconds East a distance of 60.84 feet to said point ofbegimfing.
Said area lies southerly of a strip, 60 feet wide, the cemerline of said strip bein~ descn'oed as
follows:
Commencing at the southeast comer of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said
Section 9; thence northwesterly at an angle of 19 desrees 50 minutes 44 seconds with the
west~y extension of the north line of tho Northeast Quaner of the Southwest Quarter of said
6
,,
Section 9 a distance of 1232.82 feet; thence southwesterly deflecting to the left 90 degrees O0
minutes O0 seconds a distance of 30.00 feet to the point of beginning of the centerline to be
described; thence southeasterly deflecting to the left 90 degrees O0 minutes O0 seconds a distance
of 1235.50 feet to a point on a line 30.00 feet south of and parallel with said north line of the
Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter; thence easterly deflecting to the left 19 degrees 50
minutes 44 seconds along said parallel line a distance of 4 lg.15 feet and there said centerline ·
terminates.
And lies northeasterly of the following described line:
Commencing at the northeast comer of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of said
Section 9; thence southerly along the east line of said Northwest Quarter of the Southwest
Quarter a distance of 385.58 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence
northwesterly deflecting to the right 124 degrees 30 minutes 03 seconds a distance of 145.00
feet; thence northwesterly deflecting to the right 24 degrees 02 minutes 05 seconds a distance of
273.00 feet; thence northeasterly deflecting to the right 52 degrees 53 m~nutes 18 seconds a
distance of 161.14 feet and there said line terminates.
~37~
(Reserved for Recording Data)
GRANT OF TEMI~ORARY AND PERMANENT EASEMENTS
TltlS AGREEMENT made this OI day of -J"~r~ e ,2001, by mad
between WESTWOOD COMMUNITY CHURCH, a Minnesota non-profit
corporation, hereinaf~r referred to as "Grantor", and the CITY OF CI:IANHASSEN, a
municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota, the Graatee,
·
hereinafter referred to as "City".
WITNESSETH:
T~M~ORARY F,A~EM~NT
The Grantor, in consideration of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and
valuable consideration to it in hand paid by the City, the receipt and sufficiency of which
is hereby acknowledged, does hereby grant and convey to the City, its successors and
assigns, a temporary easement for construction purposes, including the construction of a
temporary road access, over, on, across, under, and through the land situated in the
County of Carver, State of Mirmesota, as .legally described on the attached Exhibit "A".
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same, unto the City, its contractors, successors
and assigns, commencing upon execution of this Agreement and expiring June 30, 2002.
The City will restore the easement property to as near as poss~le to its current condition
·
including removal of the temporary road-bed.
PERMANENT EASEMENT
FURTlq'ER, the Grantor in consideration of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and
other good and valuable consideration to it in hand paid by the City, the receipt and
sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby grant and convey to the City,
its successors and assigns, forever, a permanent easement for public roadway, utility and
drainage purposes over, on, across, under and through the land situated in the County of
Carver, State of Minnesota, legally described on the attached Exhibit "A".
INCLUDING the rights of the City, its contractors, agents, servants, and assi~s,
to enter upon the easement premises at all reasonable times to install, reinstall, inspect,
.
repair, and maintain said public roadway, public utilities and drainage over, across, on,
under, and through the permanent easement premises, together with the fight to grade,
level, fill, drain, pave, and excavate the easement premises, and the further fight to
remove trees, bushes, undergrowth, and other obstructions interfering with the location,'
construction, and maintenance of said public roadway easement.
.
The above named Grantor, for itself, its successors and assigns does covenant with
the City, its successors and assigns, that it is well seized in fee title of the' above described
permanent easement premises; that it has the sole fight to grant and convey the easements
to the City.
IN TESTIMONY WltEREOF. the Omntor hereto has signed thi. Agreement the
day and year first above written.
G~OR:
~E~OOD COlOr.trinITY CHURCH
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF CARVER
~)_ The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 0 1 day of
~ Iq ~ .2001, by ~D t~ r~ ~ ¢ [ /~ '~D ~ -g , the
~/a ~4 ~m ,,~ra of Westwood Community Church, a Minnesota non-
profit corporation, on behalf of said corporation, Grantor. .
Notary' Public
TI-HS INS~~ WAS DRAFTED BY:
CAMPBELL KNUTSON
Professional .dssociation
317 Eagandale Office Center
1380 Corporate Center Crowe
Eagan, Minnesota 55121
Telephone: (651) 452-5000
TMS/cjh
3
EXHIB IT "A"
TO
EASEMENT AGREEMENT
Parcel No. 6
Alternate Two
Owner: Westwood Community Church
PID: 25-008-3310
A strip, 60 feet wide, for road purposes over, under and across the following described property:
..
That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter and the Southwest Quarter of the
Northwest Quarter of Section 9 and that part of Government Lots 8 and 9 of Section 8, ail in
Township 116 North, Range 23 West of the 5~. Principal Meridian, Carver County, Minnesota,
described as follows:
Beginning at the southeast comer of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence
North 69 degrees 42 minutes 15 seconds West, assuming the west line of said Northwest Quarter
of the Southwest Quarter has a bearing of North 0 degrees 32 minutes 39 seconds West, a
distance of 978.50 feet; thence South 36 degrees 06 minutes 16 seconds West a distance of 18.77
feet; thence South 38 degrees 21 minutes 19 seconds East a distance of 40.00' feet; thence North
69 degrees 13 minutes 44 seconds West a distance of 638.58 feet; thence North 87 degrees 00
minutes 49 seconds West a distance of 822.99 feet; thence South 1 degree 58 minutes 09 seconds
East a distance of 206.39 feet; thence South 28 degrees 11 minutes 51 seconds West a distance of
368.57 feet; thence South 41 degrees 10 minutes 18 seconds West a distance of 410.76 feet;
thence South 7 degrees 50 minutes 18 seconds West a distance of 350.24 feet; the.rice South 13
degrees 35 minutes 53 seconds East a distance of 397.22 feet; thence South 8 degrees 05 minutes
03 seconds East a distance of 38.84 feet; thence North 89 degrees 43 minutes 07 seconds West
about 385 feet, to the shoreline of Lake Minnewashta; thence Southerly, aiong said shoreline, to
the south line of said Government Lot 8; thence North 89 degrees 40 minutes 46 seconds East,
along said south line of. Government Lot 8 about 1756 feet to .the southeast comer of said
Government Lot 8; thence South 89 degrees 32 minutes 26 seconds East, along the south line of
said Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, a distance of 1054.74 feet, to a point 248.27
feet westerly from the southeast comer of said Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter;
thence North 0 degrees 34 minutes 36 seconds West a distance of 281.21 feet; thence South 89
degrees 40 minutes 26 seconds East a distance of 225.90 feet; thence North 0 degrees 23 minutes
47 seconds West a distance of 17.74 feet; thence North 89 degrees 05 minutes 22 seconds East a
distance of 20.56 feet, to the east line of said Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter; thence
North 0 degrees 54 minutes 38 seconds West; along last said east line, a distance of 1046.12 feet
to said point of beginning.
EXCEPT:
That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter and the Southwest Quarter of the
Northwest Quarter of Section 9, Township 116 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal
meridian described as follows:
4
Commencing at the southeast comer of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, thence
North 69 degrees 42 minutes 15 seconds West, assuming the west line of said Northwest Quarter
of the Southwest Quarter has a bearing of North 0 degrees. 32 minutes 39 seconds West, a
distance of 978.50 feet; thence South 36 degrees 06 minutes 16 seconds West a distance of 18~77
feet; thence South 38 degrees 21 minutes 19 seconds East, a distance of 40.00 feet; thence North
69 degrees 13 minutes 44 seconds West, a distan~ of 283.38 feet; thence South 10 degrees 46
minutes 16 seconds West, a distance of 492.43 feet; thence South 71 degrees 39 minutes 26
seconds East, a distance of 131.14 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described;
thence continuing South 71 degrees 39 minutes 26 seconds East, a distance of 486.30 feet;
thence North 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds East, a distance of 451.81 feet; thence North 71
degrees 39 minutes 26 seconds West, a distance of 486.30 feet; thence South 10 degrees 46
minutes 16 seconds West, a distance of 451.81 feet to the point of beginning.
ALSO EXCEPT:
That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter and the Southwest Quarter of the
Northwest Quarter of Section 9 and that part of Government Lots 8 and 9 of Section 8, all in
Township 116 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, described as follows:
Commencing at the southeast comer of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence
North 69 degrees 42 minutes 15 seconds West, assuming the west line of said Northwest Quarter.
of the Southwest Quarter has a bearing of North 0 degrees 32 minutes 39 seconds West, a
distance of 978.50 feet; thence South 36 degrees 06 minutes 16 seconds West a distance of 18.77
feet; thence South 38 degrees 21' minutes 19 seconds East a distance of 40.00 feet, to a point
hereinafter referred to as "Point A"; thence North 69 degrees 13 minutes 44 seconds West a
distance of 283.38 feet; thence South 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds West a distance of
492.43 feet; thence South 71 degrees 39 minutes 26 seconds East a distance of 115.18 feet to the
point ofbeginnlng of the land to be described; thence continuing South 71 degrees 39 minutes 26
seconds East a distance of 15.96 feet; thence North 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds East a
distance of 451.81 feet; thence North 71 degrees 39 minutes 26 seconds West, a distance of
131.14 feet; thence North 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds East a distance of 40.62 feet; thence
North 69 degl~es 13 minutes 44 seconds West a distance of 355.20 feet to a point distant 638.58
feet northwesterly from the above referenced "Point A"; thence North 87 degrees 00 minlltes 49
seconds West a distance of 822.99 feet; thence South 1 degree 58 minutes 09 seconds ~ a
distance of 206.39 feet; thence South 28 degrees 11 minutes 51 seconds West a distance of
303.66 feet; thence South 63 degrees 31 minutes 20 seconds East a distance of 1266.35 feet, to
the intersection with a line bearing South 26 degrees 28 minlltes 40 seconds West from the poilll;
of beginning; thence North 26 degrees 28 minutes 40 seconds East a distance of 390.62 feet to
the point of beginning.
ALSO EXCEPT:
All of ZIMMERMAN FARM lST ADDrrION, according to the recorded plat thereof, including
Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, and the roads dedicated to the public in said plat.
ALSO EXCEPT:
93762 5
That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter and the Southwest Quarter of the
Northwest Quarter of Section Nine (9), Township One Hundred Sixteen (116) North, Range
Twenty-three (23) West of the 5t~ Principal Meridian, described as follows:
Commencing at the southeast comer of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence
North 69 degrees 42 minutes 15 seconds West, assuming the west line of said Northwest Quarter
of the Southwest Quarter has a bearing of North 0 degrees 32 minutes 39 seconds West, a
distance of 978.50 feet; thence South 36 degrees 06 minutes 16 seconds West a distance of 18.77
feet; thence South 38 degrees 21 minutes 19 seconds East a distance of 40.00 feet; thence North
69 degrees 13 minutes 44 seconds West, a distance of 283.38 feet; thence South 10 degrees 46
minutes 16 seconds West a distance of 492.43 feet; thence South 71 degrees 39 minutes 26
seconds East, a distance of 617.44 feet; thence North 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds East, a
distance of 451.81 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence continuing
North 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds East, a distance of 56.31 feet; thence North 69 degrees
42 minutes 15 seconds West, a distance of 131.82 feet; thence South 10 degrees 46 minutes 16
seconds West, a distance of 60.84 feet; thence South 71 degrees 39 minutes 26 seconds East, a
distance of 131.14 feet to the point of beginning.
ALSO EXCEPT:
That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, Section Nine (9), Tosvnshil5 One
Hundred Sixteen (116) North, Kange Twenty Three (23) West of the 5t~ Principal Meridian,
described as follows:
Commencing at the southeast comer of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence
North 69 degrees 42 minutes 15 seconds West (based on a bearing of North 00 degrees 35
minutes 15 seconds West for a straight line between the northwest comer and the southwest
comer of said Section 9) a distance of 750.15 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be
described; thence continue North 69 degrees 42 minutes 15 seconds West a distance of 228.35
feet; thence South 36 degrees 06 minutes 16 seconds West a distance of 18.77 feet to the
northerly corn. er of the easterly end of Field Lane, dedicated in SUNSET HILL ON LAKE
MINNEWASHTA, according to the found monumentation of the recorded plat thereof; thence
South 38 degrees 21 minutes 19 seconds East, along said easterly end of Field Lane, a distance
of 40.00 feet to the southerly comer of said easterly end of land as monumented; thence North 69
degrees 13 minutes 44 seconds West, along the southerly line of said Field Lane as monumented,
a distance of 283.38 feet; thence South 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds West a distance of
40.62 feet; thence South 71 degrees 39 minutes 26 seconds East a distance of 486.30 feet; thence
North 10 degrees 46 minutes 16 seconds East a distance of 60.84 feet to said point of beginning.
The eenterline of said strip being described as follows:
Commencing at the southeast comer of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said
Section 9; thence northwesterly at an angle of 19 degrees 50 minutes 44 seconds with the
westerly extension of the north line of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of said
Section 9 a distance of 1232.82 feet; thence southwesterly deflecting to the left 90 degrees 00
minutes O0 seconds a distance of 30.O0 feet to the point of beginning of the centerline to be
described; thence southeasterly deflecting to the left 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds a distance
of 1236.50 feet to a point on a line 30.00 feet south of and parallel with said north line of the
Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter; thence easterly deflecting to the left 19 degrees 50
minutes 44 seconds along said parallel line a distance of 418.16 feet and there said centerline
terminates.
Together with a strip 10 feet wide, for permanent drainage and utility easement, which lies
southerly of and adjoining the above described road.
Together with an area for permanent drainage and utility easement, which lies southerly of and
adjoining the above described strip 10 feet wide, for permanent drainage and utility easement
and northerly of the following described line:
Commencing at the southeast comer of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said
Section 9; thence northwesterly at an angle of 19 degrees 50 minutes 44 seconds with the
westerly extension of the north line of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of said
Section 9 a distance of 360.00 feet; thence south deflecting to the left 90 degrees 00 minlRes 00
seconds a distance of 70.00 feet to the point ofbe~nning of the line to be described; thence
southeasterly to a point on the east line of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of
said Section 9 distant 110.00 feet south of the Southwe,~ Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of
said Section 9 and there said line terminates. '
Together with aa area, for temporary construction easement purposes, which lies southerly of
and adjoining the above described permanent drainage and utility easement and northerly of a
line which lies 250.00 feet southerly of the above described strip 60 feet wide, for road purposes.
Together with a strip 60 feet wide, for temporary construction easement purposes over the above
described property. The centerline of said strip being described as follows:
Commencing at the southeast comer of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said
Section 9; thence north .wes~ly at and angle of 19 degrees 50 minutes 44 seconds with the
westerly extegsion of the north line of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of said
Section 9 a distance of 1232.82 feet; thence southwesterly deflecting to the lei~ 90 degrees 00
minutes 00 seconds a distance of 30.00 feet; thence southeasterly deflecting to the left 90 degrees
00 minutes 00 seconds a distance of 1236.50 feet to a point on a line 30.00 feet south of and
parallel with said north line of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter; thence easterly
deflecting to the left 19 degrees 50 minutes 44 seconds along said parallel line a distance of
130.39 feet to the point of beginning of the centerline to be described; thence westerly on a
tangential curve concave to the southeast having a radius of 250.00 feet, a central angle of 45
degrees 02 minutes 06 seconds, a distance of 196.50 feet; thence south~ly tangent to said
curve a distance of 242.81 feet; thence southwesterly along a tangential curve concave to the
northwest having a radius of 300.00 feet, a central angle of 38 degrees 50 minutes 14 seconds, a
distance of 203.35 feet; thence southwesterly tangent to said curve a distance of 216.01 feet;
thence westerly along a tangential curve concave to the north having a radius of 300.00 feet, a
central angle of 24 degrees 01 minutes 49 seconds, a ~ce of 125.82 feet; thence
northwesterly tangent to said curve a distance of 276.83 feet; thence northwesterly along a
~JT(a 7
tangential curve concave to the northeast having a radius of 200.00 feet, a central angle of 44
degrees 57 minutes 55 seconds, a distance of 156.96 feet; thence northwesterly tangent to said
curve a distance of 26.35 feet; thence northerly along a tangential curve concave to the east
having a radius of 200.O0 feet, a central angle of 47 degrees 42 minutes 20 seeoncls, a distance of
166.52 feet to the point of reverse curve; thence northerly along said reverse curve concave to
the west having a radius of 200.O0 feet, a central angle of 30 degrees 55 minutes 50 seconds, a
distance of 107.97 feet; thence northwesterly tangent to said reverse curve a distance of 43.89
feet; thence northwesterly along a curve concave to the southeast having a radius of 200.00 feet,
a central angle of 23 degrees 48 minutes 39 seconds, a distance of 83.12 feet to the point of
reverse curve; thence northerly along said reverse curve cone, ave to the east having a radius of
125.00 feet, a central angle of 54 degrees 05 minutes 01 seconds, a distance of 117.99 feet;.
thence northerly tangent to said-reverse curve a distance of 56.:58 feet and there said centerline
terminates.
93762 8 .
C OF
690 Cul Ctnur Drive
PO Box147
~ RFmnesota 55317
95293Z1900
952.93Z5739
~g Depa~;~t Fax
952.93Z9152
952.934.2524
Web Site
TO: Mayor
City Council
FROM:
Todd Geflaardt, City Manager
DATE:
November 8, 2001
Public ~g Regarding the Potential Sale of Lots 2 & 3,
Block 1, Crossroads Plaza 3~d Addition
Under state statutes, the City of Chanhasscn must hold a public heating when
considering the sale of city owned land. Attached you will find a proposed
purchase agreement with Kraus-Anderson, Inc. proposing to build a $1.2 million
mixed use retail building with 16,210 square feet.
The significant terms and conditions of the purchase agreement are as follows:
1. Pureluue Price: $8.80 per square ft. (80,175.20 sq. fL x $8.80) =
$705,000 ..
-.
2. Earnest Money: $10,000
m
Closing: Scheduled for June 15, 2002. Kraus-Andcmon has until
March 1, 2002 to get a signed lease agreement with Northwestern Book
Store. If they do not have a signed lease, they can either move ahead on
closing by June 15, 2002, or te~minat~ the purchase agreemenL Site Plan
submittal must be accomplished by April 1, 2002.
4. Real Estate Commission: To be paid by the buyer. '
Listed below is thc 'Tx, onomic Status Report" which highlights the city's
holding costs compared with the proposed revenue derived from thc sale of the
property based on development of a 16,210 sq. ft. mixed use ~ building.
HOLDING COSTS
Economic Status Report
$1.50 per scI. foot X 80,175.20 sq. feet = I $120,262.80
The I-IRA purchased the property approximately 11 years ago at $1.50 per
sq. foot X 80,175.20 sq. feet
Special Assessments:
$2.12 X 80,175.20 sq. fee.t = I $169,971.421
· Special Assessments against the site are $2.12 X 80,175.20 sq. feet
I SUB'TOTAL I $290,234,22 1
Misc. Expenses
$.60 X 80,175.20 sq. feet = [ $48,105.12
· Miscellaneous expenses include detention pond land, wetland relocation,
platting costs, soil borings, etc. X .60 per sq. foot
TOTAL FOR HOLDING COSTS
I $338r339.34 I
REVENUF~
Proposed Selling Price
$8.79 per sq. foot X 80,175.20 sq. feet = I $705,000.00
I Taxes
Income generated annually I $48,360.00
Building Permit Fee
Permit fe,.~, park/trail fees, hook-ups, etc. I Est $35,000
I $783r560.00 [
Summary Assumption #1
REVENUE Taxes, building permit fees, utilities, etc. $783,360.00
HOLDING COSTS -$338,339.34
TOTAL $450~020.66
Summary. Assumption
REVENUE ~.and only) $705,000.00
HOLDING COSTS -$338,339.34
TOTAL $366~660.66
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the Economic Status Report, staff would'recommend approving the
purchase agreement with Kraus-Anderson for the sale of Lots 2 and 3, Block 1
Crossroads Plaza 3~d Addition.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Public Hearing Notice
2. Purchase Agreement
3. Concept Plan
NoTICB OF PUBLIC HEARING
CHANHASSI~I ECONOMIC
DE~PMBNT AUTHORITY
CITY OF CHANHASSF_~I
Notice is hereby given that the City of.
Chanh~ Economic Development Au'-.
thofity will h01d a public heating on Thfirs-
day, November 1, 2001 at 6:30p.m., 690
City Center Drive. The purpose of this
hearing is to r. onsider the disposal of a
certain tract of land to wit:
Lot 2, Block 1, Chanhassen Mall (PID
25-1950020 and 25-19:50021)
The heating is being conducted in
cordance with the provisions of Minne-
sota Statutes Section 469.029. A plan
showing the location of the proposal is
available for public review at City Hall
during regular business hours.
All interested persons are invited to
attend this public hearing and express their
opinions in regard to this pwposal.
Todd Gerhardt,
Executive Difecto. r
· ":,,.. :: ..... (952)93"/-1900 ext. 119
(Published in Se Chaska Herald on Th~ii'~;~
day, October' 18~ 2001;'No.. ,~$?0) -'
Affidavit of Publication
Southwest Suburban Publishing
State of Minnesota)
)SS.
County of Carver )
Start Rolfsrud, being duly sworn, on oath says that he is the publisher or the authorized agent of
the publisher of the newspapers known as the Chaska Herald and the Chantmssen Villager and
has full knowledge of the facts herein stated as follows:
(A) Thesc ncwspapers have complied with the requirement~ constituting qualification as a legal
newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 331A.02, 33 lA.07, and other applicable laws, as
amended.
(B) The printed public notice that is attached to this Affidavit and identified as
was publi.~hed on thc date or dates and in the newspaper stated in the attached Notic~ and said
Notice is hereby incorporated as part of this Affidavit. Said notice was cut from the columns of
thc newspaper specified. Printed below is a copy of thc low~ alphabet from A w Z, both
inclusive, m'ut is hereby acknowledged as being the kind an~s~ze/ty~e~ used in the co~position
and publication of the Notice:
alx:def~ijld mnopq rstu v,,~..~/~/~" "
By:
Subscribed and sworn before me on
/ .
-- 'day of :-~ ~ ~ ., 2001
Notary Public ~'
or his designated a~nt
RATE INFORMATION
Lowest classified rate paid by commercial users for comparable space .... $16.00 per column inch
Maximum rate allowed by law for the above matter ................................ $16.00 ~ column inch
Rate actually char~ed for the above matter ................................................ $9.'75 Net column inch
]~tCK-LII~D 11-05-01 [
REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AGREEMENT
TIllS AGREEIVIENT (the "Agreement") made and entered into this~ day of
,2001, by and between KRAUS-ANDERSON, INCORPORATED,. whose
address is 4210 West Old Shakopee Road, Bloomington, Minnesota 55437-2951 (referred to
herein as the "Buyer"), and the CITY OF CHANHASSEN, a municipal corporation under the
laws of the State of Minnesota, with offices at 690 City Center Drive, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen,
Minnesota 5:5317 (referred to herein as the "Seller").
IN CONSIDERATION of the mutual covenants and agreements herein, it is hereby
mutually agreed by Seller and Buyer as follows:
SECTION 1.
SALE AND PURCHASE OF LAND .
1.1) Seller shall sell to Buyer and Buyer shall purchase from Seller, upon the terms and
conditions hereof, the following property (all collectively referred to as the "Subject Property"):
1.1.1) The land in Carver County, Minnesota, leg~ly described as-follows:
Lots 2 and 3, Block 1, Crossroads Plaza 3~ Addition, according to the plat
thereof on file and of record in the Office of the County Recorder and/or the
Office of the Registrar of Titles of Carver County, Minnesota.
SECTION 2.
PURCHASE PRICE
2.1) The purchase price for the Subject Property (the "Purchase Price") shall be the sum
of Seven Hundred Five Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($705,000), and shall be payable by Buyer
to Seller as follows:
2.1.1) Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00) earnest money ("Earnest Money"), to
be deposited with the Seller and held by the Title Company (hereinafter defined) in an
interest-bearing account reasonably acceptable to Buyer. The Earnest Money and all
interest accrued thereon shall be applied (i) against the Purchase Pdce at Closing, or (ii) as
liquidated damages and as Seller's sole remedy, in the event the Seller performs all of its
obligations under this Agreement and Buyer fails to close as required in this Agreement.
The Earnest Money and all accrued interest thereon shall be returned to the Buyer in the
event of (i) refusal of the Seller to perform its obligations under this Agreement, or (ii)
Buyer's termination of this Agreement within the Contingency Period, as hereinafter set
forth.
2.1.2)The balance of the Purchase Price in cash on the date of Closing.
2.1.3) In addition to the foregoing, Buyer shall pay at Closing the amount set forth
in the "Amendment to Declaration of Restrictions to Revise Exhibit A" as set forth in
4.6.4 hereof.
SECTION 3.
TITLE MATTERS
3.1) Seller shall caused to be furnished to Buyer within twenty (20) days hereof a
current commitment for the issuance of an ALTA Form B (1990) owner's policy of title insurance
(the "Commitment") issued by Chicago Title Insurance Company by its agent Carver County
Abstract and Title Company, Inc. ("Title Company") in the proposed amount of the Purchase
Price, committing to insure that Buyer will have good and marketable title to the Subject
Property, subject to the following easements, declarations, restrictions and encumbrances
affecting the Subject Property: (a) "Declaration of Cross Access, Utility and Parking
Easements"; (b) "Declaration of Restrictions"; (c) "Parking and Access Easement Agreement";
(d) permanent and temporary easements currently of record; (e) standard exceptions to title; (f)
zoning and all other governmental ordinances, regulations, requirements and laws; and (g) except
matters to which Buyer may consent in writing. Buyer shall have twenty (20) days after Buyer's
receipt of the last of (1) the Commitment, and (2) the Survey defined in Section 3.3 hereof, to
make any objections to the matters disclosed in the Commitment and/or Survey. Such objections
to be made in writing or deemed to be waived. The Commitment shall show all matters affecting
94790 _0 _
title to the Subject Property, with copies of all instruments referenced therein, and shall bind the Title
Company to issue to and in favor of Buyer at Closing an owner's policy of tire insurance insuring
marketable title to the Subject P .r0perty, ~tively insuring any appurtenant easements, deleting
the standard exceptions upon receipt of the Survey and the tire affidavit, and containing such
endorsements as Buyer requires, including, without limitation, 3.1 zoning (including parking)
endorsement, comprehensive endorsement, separate tax lot endorsement, access endorsement, usury,
and survey endorsement. Copies of the restrictions, covenants and declarations referred to in (a),
(b) and (c) are aRachcd he, to.
3.2) In the event any exceptions are listed in the Commitment other the items listed in
Section 3.1(a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f) and (g), ff the same results from any voluntary action by the
Seller, or if the same relates to any lien or encumbrance of a monetary nature, which can be
removed by payment of an amount up to the Purchase Price at closing, the Seller shall cause the
exception to be removed on or before the Closing Date.- With regard to any other exceptions or
objections to tire or the Survey, if the Seller fails to remove the same within the time allowed for
closing on the Subject Property, the Buyer shall have as its sole remedy the right to terminate this
Agreement and receive a full refund of the Earnest Money. Notwithstanding anything herein to the
contrary, Buyer shall have the right to object to all of the matters listed in Section 3.1(a) through (g),
inclusive.
3.3) Seller shall furnish to Buyer a copy of any boundary survey that Seller has in its
possession (if any) within fit~en (15) days of the execution of this Agreement. In addition,
within a reasonable period of time after the date hereof, Seller shall provide, at Seller's expense, an
ALTA Survey of the Subject Property (the "Survey") prepared by a surveyor reasonably acceptable
to Buyer, and certified to Buyer, the title company and Buyer's lender, and meeting the minimum
standard detail requirements for an ALTA/ACSM Land Title Survey for Urban Surveys (1997)
standards, including items l, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, I l, 13, 14, 15 and 16 of Table A. The Survey shall
show and/or certify, without limitation, the total area of the Subject Property, the location of all
improvements, recorded easements and encroachments, if any, located thereon and all building and
set back lines and other matters of record with respect thereto.
SECTION 4.
CLOSING
4.1) The closing (the "Closing") shall be at a location designated by Seller in the Twin
Cities metropolitan area, and shall occur on or before ~ne hundred twenty (! 20) days
from the date of full execution and delivery of the Agreement ("Closing Date"). Notwithstanding
any other provision herein to the contrary, Buyer may extend the Closing Date for an additional
ninety (90) days if all of the contingencies set forth in Section 7 (Buyer's Contingencies) have
not been satisfied, provided Buyer is diligently pursuing the satisfaction thereof. If the Closing is
not completed prior to .~!ar:h June 15, 2002, this Agreement may be cancelled at the election of
Seller or Buyer by the party canceling this Agreement giving the other party fifteen (15) days
written notice. In the event of such cancellation by either Seller or Buyer, the Earnest Money ' '
shall be returned promptly to Buyer and neither party shall have any further fights under this
Agreement.
4.2) On the Closing Date, Seller shall deliver to Buyer possession of the Subject
Property free of any trash, debris or refuse.
4.3) On the Closing Date, Seller shall execute and deliver to Buyer:
4.3.1) A duly executed warranty deed, subject only to any exceptions consented to
by Buyer;
94790
4.3.2) A customary title affidavit that there are no unsatisfied judgments, of reeor~
no actions pending in any state or federal courts, no'tax liens, and no bankruptcy
proceeding filed against Seller, and no labor or materials have been furnished to the
Subject Property for which payment him not been made, and that to the best of Seller's
knowledge there are no unrecorded interests relating to the Subject Property;
4.3.3) A non-foreign affidavit, properly executed, containing such information as is
required by Internal Revenue Code Section 1445(b)(2) and it~ regulations; and
4.3.4) A Certificate signed by Seller warranting that there are no "Wells" on the
Subject Property within the meaning ofMinn_ StaL § 103I or if there are "Wells", a Well
Certificate in the form required by law.
4.4) Seller shall pay at Closing all general real estate taxes levied against the Subject
Property due and payable for all years prior to the year of Closing, together with the unpaid
balance of all special assessments levied or pending on or before the date of Closing. Seller and
Buyer shall prorate, as of the date of Closing, general real-estate taxes due and payable in the year
of Closing. Buyer shall be responsible, for payment of all assessments'levied against'the. Subject -
Property after the Closing. Such assessments shall in¢lude~' but not limited to, assessments-
associated with Buyer's anticipated development of the Subject Property. Buyer shall pay for all
general real estate taxes due and payable in years subsequent to the year of Closing.
4.5) Seller shall pay at or before Closing: -
4.5.1) state deed tax;
4.5.2) all costs associated with obtaining a title insurance commitment, including
name searches, tax searches, bankruptcy searches, and property inspection fees;
4.5.3) recording fees for corrective instntments required to remove encumbrances
and place marketable title in Buyer's name;
4.5.4) one-half of the Closing fee charged by the Title Company; and
4.5.5) the cost of the Survey desen~bed in Section 3.3 hereof.
4.6) Buyer shall pay at Closing:
4.6.1) all recording fees and charges relating to the filing of the deed;
4.6.2) title insurance fees and premiums;
4.6.3) one-half of the Closing fee charged by the Title Company;
4.6.4) all sums due to Tires Plus Groupe, Ltd. or its assigns under the Declaration
of Restrictions or Declaration of Cross Access, Utility and Parking Easements
encumbering the Subject Property which obligates a purchaser of the Subject Property to
share the cost of utility installation and road construction. As of September 1,
2001, the sum of approximately $112,000.00 is due. The actual amount owing shall be
determined as of Closing.
SECTION fi.
COVENANTS, REPRESENTATIONS: AND WARRANTIES OF SELLER
5.1) Seller, as an inducement to Buyer to enter into this Agreement, and as part of the
consideration therefor, represents, warrants, and covenants with Buyer and its successors and
assigns that:
5.1.1) There are no leases, options, purchase agreements, rights to redeem,
tenancy agreements, written or verbal, and no person or party has, or will have any rights
of adverse possession, regarding the Subject Property;
5.1.2) Seller will maintain in force insurance against public liability from such risk
and to such limits as in accordance with prudent business practice and suitable to the
Subject Property from the date hereof to the Closing Date;
5.1.3) To the best knowledge of Seller, no entity or person has, at any time:
"released" or actively or passively consented to the "release" or
"threatened release" of any Hazardous Substance (as defined below)
from any "facility" or "vessel" located on or used in connection with
the Subject Property or adjacent tracts; or
ii)
taken any action in "response" to a "release" in connection with the
Subject Property or adjacent tracts; or
iii)
otherwise engaged in any activity or omitted to take any action
which could subject Seller or Buyer to claims for intentional or
negligent torts, strict or absolute liability, either pursuant to statute
or common law, in connection with Hazardous Substances (as
defined below) located in or on the Subject Property or adjacent
94790
tracts, including the generating, transporting, treating, storage, or
manufacture of any Hazardous Substance (as defined below). The
terms set within quotation marks above shall have the meaning
given to them in the Comprehensive Environmental Response and
Liability Act, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 9601 et seq., as mended ("CERCLA")
and any state environmental laws.
5.1.4) Seller, or any other person or entity, has not, at any time, ev. er installed,
used, or removed any underground storage tank on or in connection with the Subject
Property; and
5.1.5) There are no wells located upon the Subject Property.
5.1.6) Seller has the present full authority and power to execute this Agreement
and to close the sale of the Subject Property.
5.2) The covenants, representations, and warranties contained in Section 5 shall be
deemed to benefit Buyer and its successors and assi_,£,n.~ and shall survive any termination or
expiration of this Purchase Agreement or the giving of' the Deed. All of' Seller's covenants,
representations and warranties in this Agreement shall be true as of the date het~.f and of the
Closing Date, and shall be a condition precedent to the performance of Buyer's obligations
hereunder. Subject to the liability limits set forth in Minn. Stat. Chapter 466, Seller indemnifies
Buyer from any breaches of the covenants, warranties and representations set fot~h in this Section
5. If Buyer discovers that any such covenant, representation, or warranty is not true, Buyer may
elect prior to Closing, in addition to any of its other rights and remedies, to cancel this
Agreement, or Buyer may postpone the Closing Date up to ninety (90) days to allow time for
correction.
SECTION 6.
ENVIRONMENTAL/SOIL INVESTIGATION AND TESTING
6.1) Buyer and its agents shall have the fight, at the sole option of Buyer and at Buyer's
cost and expense, to enter upon the Subject Property without charge and at all reasonable times
from the date of the execution of this Agreement to perform such environmental investigation
and soil tests as Buyer may reasonably deem appropriate. If Buyer investigates and tests the
Subject Property pursuant to this section, Buyer shall pay all costs and expenses of such
investigation and testing and shall hold Seller harmless from all costs and liabilities arising out of
Buyer's activities, except that Buyer shall have no liability with respect to the investigation, clean up,
removal or remediation of any existing hazardous substances which are encountered or discovered
upon the Subject Property in connection with Buyers inspections. Subject to the exception in the
immediately preceding sentence, if the purchase and sale contemplated by this Agreement is not
closed, Buyer shall, at its own expense, repair and restore any damage to the Subject Property
caused by Buyer's investigation and testing, and shall remm the Subject Property to substantially
the same condition as existed prior to such entry. Buyer shall contract for any environmental
investigations and soil tests within twenty (20) business days from the date of execution of the
Agreement by the Seller and complete all testing within seventy-five (75) days of the execution
of this Agreement by the Seller and shall inform Seller within ninety-five (95) days after the
execution of this Agreement by Seller whether or not Buyer is satisfied in its sole discretion with
the results of the environmental investigation and/or soil test and whether or not Buyer waives
this contingency. If Buyer does not object to the environmental condition of the Subject Property
or the soil condition within said ninety-five (95) day period, Buyer will be deemed to have
waived its fight to object thereto. If Buyer is not satisfied with the environmental condition or
the condition of the soil as it relates to construction of the improvements contemplated by Buyer,
Buyer may terminate this Agreement and shall be entitled to a refund of the Earnest Money.
94790
SECTION 7.
BUYER'S CONTINGENCIES
The obligations of Buyer under this Agreement are contingent upon each of the following:
7.1) Seller providing Buyer with the Survey of the Subject Property at Seller's sole cost
and expense, on or before Oc~r 29, 200 !*.-h_i..rtv (30~ ds_.vs af~ the date hereof ("Survey")..
7.2) Buyer, Buyer's lender and the Title Company shall determine on or before
seventy-five (75) days after the date hereof, that they are satisfied with the results of the matters
disclosed by the Survey of the Subject Property and the Commitment, both as referenced in thi.q
Agreement, in accordance with the terms of Section 3.1 hereof, and Buyer receiving, on the date of
Closing, an owner's policy of title insurance in the form described in such Section 3.1.
7.3) On or before sixty (60) days after the date of this Agreement, Buyer shall have
obtained a written financing commitment from the Lender of Buyer's choice for a first mortgage
loan in the amount of not less than seventy-five-percent (75%) of the value of the Subject
Property upon completion of Buyer's proposed development.
7.4) The use of the Subject Property as contemplated by the Buyer shall have been
approved by the City of Chanhassen on or before December 1,2001. Such approval may require
the re-platting of the Subject Property and all costs associated with the replatting and the
obtaining of the approval by the City of Chanhassen shall be paid by the Buyer.
7.5) Buyer shall have determined whether all necessary governmental or quasi-
governmental permits, licenses and approvals for the'construction of the intended improvements
can be obtained on or before ninety (90) days a/~r the date'of this Agreement.
7.6) Buyer shall have determined, on or before thirty (30) days aria' the date of this
Agreement, whether utility services, surface water disposal and/or drainage required for Buyer's
intended use of' the Subject Property as a restaurant will be available and in a size and capacity
reasonably acceptable to Buyer.
7.7) Buyer shall have determined in its sole discretion, on or before thirty (30) days
after the date of'this Agreement, whether reasonable access and adequate parking are available to
the Subject Property.
7.8) On or before ~-5' (~0)ninetv (99) days a_~er the date of this Agreement, Buyer
shall have entered into a fully-signed and binding, non-contingent lease agreement, in form
acceptable to Buyer in Buyer's sole discretion, with Northwestern Book Stores or other anchor
tenant leasing at least 17,000 square feet in the building to be constructed on the Subject
Property.
If any of the contingencies have not been satisfied on or before the dates listed above, the
Buyer may, at Buyer's option, terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to Seller on or
before the Closing Date or Buyer may extend the period of time for the satisfaction of the
contingencies set forth above for an additional period of ninety (90) days by giving written notice
to the Seller on or before ninety (90) days from the date of the execution of this Agreement by
Seller. If Buyer elects to terminate this Agreement, neither party shall have any further rights or
obligations under this Agreement and the Earnest Money shall be returned to Buyer and the
Buyer shall execute and deliver to Seller a Quit Claim Deed at the time of the delivery of the
Earnest Money, which Quit Claim Deed shall memorialize the termination of this Agreement.
SECTION 8.
MISCELLANEOUS
8.1) The covenants, warranties and representations made by Seller shall survive the
Closing of this transaction.
94790 - ! n.
8.2) Any notice, demand, or request which may be permitted, required or desired to be
given in connection herewith shall be in writing and sent by certified mail. Any notice shall be
deemed effective when delivered to the party to whom it is directed. Unless other'addresses are
given in writing, notices shall be sent to Seller or Buyer at the applicable address stated on thc
first page of this Agreement.
8.3) Time shall be of the essence in this Agreement. If any date or time prescribed by
this Agreement falls on a Saturday, Sunday or holiday, such date or time shall automatically be
extended to the next normal business day.
8.4) Each party hereto shall promptly, on the request of the other party, have
acknowledged and delivered to the other party any and all further in.~a-uments and assurances
reasonably requested or appropriate to evidence or give effect to the provisions of this
.
.
· .
Agreement.
8.5) This Agreement represents the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the
Subject Property and all prior agreements, understandings, or negotiations between the parties are
hereby revoked and superseded hereby. No representations, warranties, inducements, or oral
agreements have been made by any of the parties, except as expressly set forth herein, or in other
contemporaneous written agreements. This Agreement may not be changed or modified except
by a written agreement signed by Seller and Buyer.
8.6) If Buyer defaults under any of the terrn.q hereof, Seller shall have the right to retain
the Earnest Money but shall not have a further right to other damages or specific performance.
8.7) If Seller defaults under any of the terms hereof, including, without limitation, the
delivery of marketable title to the Subject Property as set forth in Section 4 hereof, then Buyer
shall promptly receive a full refund of all Earnest Money, and, in addition, Buyer shall have, as its
94790 _1 1 _ :
sole remedies, the right to either (i) seek specific performance of this Agreement, or (ii) recover
from Seller, in an amount not to exceed $10,000, all out=of-pocket costs and expenses incurred by
Buyer arising out of this Agreement.
8.8) If any provision of this Agreement is declared void or unenforceable, such
provision shall be deemed severed from this Agreement, which shall otherwise remain in full
force and effect.
8.9) Failure of any party to exercise any right arising out of a breach of this Agreement
shall not be deemed a waiver of any right with respect to any subsequent or different breach, or
the continuance of any existing breach.
8.10) This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties hereto
and their respective heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns. Buyer shall have the
right to assign its rights and obligations under this Agreement at any time; provided, however, that no
such assignment shall relieve Kraus=Anderson, Incorporated of its obligations under this Agreement.
8.1 l) Seller and Buyer represent and warrant to each other that they have not engaged or
dealt with any broker or agent with respect to the SubJect Property. Seller shall not under any
circumstances be liable for any brokerage fee. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Buyer and Seller
shall each defend, indemnify and hold the other harmless from and against all clairns, losses and
liabilities incurred by the indemnified party in connection with any claim or demand by any
person or entity for any brokers, f'mders, or other fee or compensation in connection with the
indemnifying party's entry into this Agreement.
94790 . ! '9.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the
day and year first above written.
BUYER:
KRAUS-~E~ON, INCORPORATED
SELLER:
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
By:.
Bruce W. Engelsma, CEO
By:
By:
THIS INSTRUME~ WAS DRAFTED BY:
CAMPBELL KNUTSON, P.A.
317 Eagandale Office Center
1380 Corporate Center Curve
Eagan, MN 55121
Telephone: (651) 452-5000
[JFK]
C YOF
PO lhr147
~ M~ 55317
952.93Z1900
Gt~tral Far
952937.5739
"~ng DeIm~neut Fax
952.937.9152
952.934.2524
Web Site
wwm ci. &a nhau~ ~ m ._ us
lVlEMOIL~UM
TO:
Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Todd CJexhard~ City Manager
DATE: November 8, 2001
SUB J:
Public ~g;, Consider Approval of Resolution Adopting the
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan and Establishing TIN
District No. 8
Under Minnesota Statute, the City Council m~st hold a public hearing when
approving a tax increment financing district (see Attachment #1). The purpose of
this district is to promote the development of a residential apartment project
containing a total of 161 rental units in the Villages on the Ponds development.
Thirty-three of the units will be made available to persons whose income does not
exceed 50% of median income (see Attachment g3). The plan's Statement of
Objectives are to provide the following:.
1. Encourage affordable residential development in an area of the community
which has not been utilized to its full potential;
Chanhassen, where services and facilities are available through past public
efforts;
3. Improve the tax base of Chanlm~-'n and the general economy of the city
and state;
4. Provide employment opportunities within the communitT,
5. Implement relevant portions of the ComFrehensive Plan;
J
Affordable rental housing would not reasonably be expected to occur
within Development District No. 8 solely through private investment
within the reasonably foreseeable furore and, thcrefore, the use of TIF is
deemed necessaxT,
0
The TIF Plan will afford maximum oppommity, consistent with the sound
needs of the community as a whole, for development of the District by
private enterprise; and
Mayor and City Council
November 8, 2001
Page 2
8. The TIF Plan conforms to general plans for development of Chanhassen as a whole as
articulated in the Comprehensive Plan.
Listed below are the estimated project costs:
City's Estimated Project Costs
USES OF FUNDS
TOTAL
Land/Building Acquisition
Site Improvements/preparation
Public Utilities
Parking Facilities
Streets and Sidewalks
Housing Improvements
Administrative Costs (up to 10%) ' '
$500,000
$200,0O0
$100,000
$110,000
$500,0O0
$490,0O0
PROJECT COSTS TOTAL
$2,900,000
Loan/Note/Bond Interest
Ixmn/NotedBond Principal
$2,500,00O
TOTAL FINANCING AND PROJE .CT COSTS
$7,400,000
The Planning COmmission reviewed the plan at their November 6, 2001 meeting and approved
the plan consistent with the overall 'development of Chanhassen and the Comprehensive Plan.
Staff has also provided notice to both Carver County and School District 112 (see Attachment
~4).
RECOMMENDATIO.~~.
Staff would recommend approving the resolution (Attachment #5) adopting the modification to
the Redevelopment Plan and Establishing Tax Increment District No. 8.
Xm
2.
3.
4.
5.
Public heating notice
Development District Program and Plan
Median Income Information
Letters to Carver County and School District
Resolution
gAadmin~6li f 8-e.doc
NOTICE O1~ PUBLIC HEARING
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Chanhasson, Carver County,
State of Minnesota, will hold a public hearing on November 13, 2001, at approximate~ 7:00 PM. at the
Clamha.s~en City Council Chambers in City Hall, 690 City Cesta' Drive, ~ Minnesota, relating
to the Chanhassen Economic Development Authority's (the '~EDA~) proposed adoption of a Mod/fi~on
to the Redevelopment Plan to the Downtown Chanhassea Redevelopment Project Area, the proposed
adoption of a Modification to the Tax Inc~t Financing Plan for the Downtown Chanhasson Tax
Increment Financing District, and the proposed establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 8
(a housing tax ~nt fmanc~ district) both within the Downtown Chanhat~n Redevelopment
Projoct Area, and the adoption of the Tax Increment Fina~ing Plan (collectively, the 'q~Iodifications and
Plan") therefor, pursuant to Mhmesota Statutes, 469.090 through 469.1081 and Sections 469.174 to
469.179, all inclusive., as amended. Copies of tho Modifications and Plan am on file and available for
public inspection at the office of the City ~ at City HaIL
The property to be included in Tax Increment Financing District No. $ is located within the
Downtown Chanhassen Redevelopment Project Area and the City of Chantmum~ The property included
in the Downtown Chanhassen Tax Increment Financing District is located within the Downtown
Chanbassen Redevelopmeat Project Area and the City of Chanhassen. A map of the Downtown
Chanhass~n Redevelopment Project Area and the Downtown Chanhassen Tax. Increment Financing
District and Tax Increment Financing District No.$ therein is set forth below. Tax increment from Tax
Increment Financing District No. 8 may be spent on eligible uses ouIside.of-the TIF District boundaries.
'11% p,o~me m! I'~]mo~g D ~t. tic~! 1
Ta~ Inor~m~rd: Fin anolng Dis'blot Et
All interested persons may appear at the hearing and present their views orally or prior to thc meeting in
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CHANHASS~, MINNESOTA
City Manager
Publish in the Chanhassen Villager on November 1, 2001.
OCT. 12. 2001
12'49PM
EHLERS & ASSOCIATES
I
I
!
NO. 1168
3731
As of Octobsr 12, 2001
Draft for Fa, al Impltcattons
MODIFICATION ;TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE
DOWNTOWN CHANHA$SEN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
' ! and the
i
MODIFICATI~IN TO THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING
PLAN FOR THE DOWNTOWN CHANHASSEN TAX INCREMENT
FINANCING DISTRICT
and the
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN
I
. fo~' the establishment of
T~0~ INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 8
(a housing district)
.,
I
both within
I
THE DOWNTOWN CHAN~SSEN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
CHANHASS~ ECONO~ C DEVELOP~ AI.rI'HO~ TY
i
CITY OF CHANI-IASSEN
CARVER COUNTY
~TATE OF MINNESOTA
Public Hearing: November 13. 2001
This docu,n~nt i~ tn t~ form for distribution to the County and the School District. Th~ Plan
contains the estimated~, cal ~ economic impltcatloro of tht propoz~ TIF Dlstrtct. The Ctty
and the ED,4 may make mtnor changes to this drtoti document prior to the public heartng.
I
EHLERS
& A/SOCI&TIr/
I
I
I
Pmpm'ed by: EHLERS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
3060 Centre Polnte Drive, Roservllle, Minnesota 55113-1105
651-897-8500 fax; 651.897-8555 www.ehlers-inc, c0m
ERS & ASSOCIATES NO. 1168 4/31
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(for reference purpo~e~ only)
i
SECTION I- MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DOWNTOWN
CHANHASSEN REDEV~SLOPMENT PROJECT AREA ............................ 1-I
Foreword ............ , ...................................................... 1-1
,
SECTION !i - MODIFICATION TO THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR THE
DOWNTOWN CHANNASSEN TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT ............ 2-1
SECTION III . TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING
DISTRICT NO. 8 .............................................................. 3-1
Subse~on 3-1. Foreword ................................................... 3-1
Subse~on 3-2. Statutory Authority ........................................... 3-1
Subsection 3-3. Statement o~ Objectives ....................................... 3-1
Subsection 3-4. RedeVelopme' nt Plan Overview ................................. 3-1
Subsection 3-6. Description of Property in the District and Property To Be Acclulred ....3-2
Subsection 3-6. Classification of the District .................................... 3-2
Subsection 3-7. Dumtlbn of the District ........................................ 3-3
Subsection 3-8. Origin.al Tax Capacity, Tax Rate and Estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity
VaJue/Inorement and Notification of Prior Planned Improvements ................... 3-3
Subsection 3-9. Sources of Revenue/Bonded Indebtedness ....................... 3-4
Subsection 3-10.
Subsection 3-11.
Subsection 3-12.
Subsection 3-13.
Subsection 3-14.
Subsection 3-15.
Subsection 3-16.
Subsection 3-17.
Subsection 3-18.
Subsection 3-19.
Subsection 3-20.
Subsection 3-21.
Subsection 3-22.
Subsection 3-23.
Subsection 3-24.
Subsection 3-25.
Subsection 3-26.
Subsection 3-27.
Subsection 3-28.
Subsection 3-29.
Uses of Funds .............................................. 3-5
State ,Tax Increment Financing Aid (Local Contribution) ............. 3-6
Fiscall Disparities Election ...................................... 3-6
Business Subsidies ........................................... 3-6
County Road Costs ........................................... 3-7
Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions .... .- ............... 3-7
Supporting Documentation ..................................... 3-8
Definition of Tax Increment Revenues ............................ 3-8
ModifiCations to the District ............. · ....................... 3-8
Administrative Expenses ...................................... 3-9
Limitation of Increment ....................................... 3-10
Use of Tax Increment ........................................ 3-11
Exce~s Tax increments ............................... ~ ......3-11
Requirements for Agreements with the Developer ................. 3-12
Assessm ent~ Agreements ..................................... 3-12
Administration of the District .................................. 3-12
Annual Disclosure Requirements ............................... 3-12
Reas(~nablelExpectations .................................... 3-13
Other Limitations" on the Use of Tax Increment .................... 3-13
Summary ................................................. 3-14
APPENDIX A- PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................... A-1
APPENDIX B -
APPENDtX C -
APPENDIX D -
APPENDIX E -
APPENDIX F-
MAPS OF T~E PROJECT AREA AND THE DISTRICTS .................. B-1
;
DESCRIPTION OF PROPER'i'~ TO BE INCLUDED IN THE DllSTRICT ...... C-1
I=$TIM^TI=D'~ CASH FLOW FOR THE DI$TRIC'[. ........................ B-1
!
HOUSING O[JAtJF!¢AT~ON$ FOR mE
I
!
BUT/FOR O~^UF~gAT~ONS .........................................
I
1
,
0CT. 12.2001 12'50PM EHLERS & ASSOCIATES N0.1168 P.5/31
I
I
!
!
!
SECTION ! ,4 MODIFICATION TO THE REDEV'r. LOPMENT Pl..AN
FOR THE DOWNTOWN ~,HANHASSEN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
'
!
!
·
The follow/ns tcxt represents !a Modification to tho Rcdevolopment Plan 'for the DownWwn Ch,tab--sen
Redevelopment Project Ares.. This modification represen~ a confimm~on of the goals and objectives set
forth in the Redevelopment P]bn for tho Do~ Cba~hassen Redevelopment Project Arc~ Oenerally,
tho substantive e2mnges include the Modification of the Tax Increment Fimmoing Plan for the Dowrm3wn
Chanhas.~n Tax lmu~ment Fix~ncing D/m/~t and the adoption of fl~e Tax I~:rement Fhumdng Plan for Tax
Increment Fimmcing Distriot ~Io. 8.
I
I
For further information, a review of the Redevelopment Plan for the Downtown Ch~ fbxlevelopment
Project Area is recanunended.: It is _~ailable/b3m tl~ City Manager at the City. Other mlevan~ information
/s c, onmined in the Tax Increment Financing Plans for the Tax I~cmment Financing Districts located within
the Downwwn Chanhassen ~vel~pm~nt Project Area.
I
I
:
!
1-1
~'50P~
EHLERS & ASSOCIATES
,
I
I
$~riON tt- ~O0(Ft~A TION rO rt-t~ TAX tNCR£M£NT FI~A~Ct~O ~1.~
POR Ti-I~ OOWl~ro~ ~HANH~$$£N T,~O( IN~t~£NT FINAN¢INO OISTRICT
~ded In the: o t wn C cin strl
N0.1168 P. 6731
I
(As Mod~td on November 13, 200.1)
!
Th, following proporty and a~I adj~oent right,-of-way identified by tho pardi number listed bolow is
c~'tifiod in the Downtown Ch~mh~.~n T~: Inorement Finanein$ Dt~rlct. Thi, pam,l i~ b,in~ removed from
the Downtown Chanhassen ~ Increment Financing Di~rict and will be includ~ in Tax Increment
Financing District No. 8. ,
25.8680080
!
m
I
I
'
,
:
:
City of Chanha~sea Mod[rice. ion m the lax Inc, r,;m~nt Flnanoln8 flan For thc Downtown Cbanhatt, cn Tax lnea'um~nt Financing Db~ot 2-I
OCT. 12. 2001-12' 50PM
EHLERS
I
I
I
& ASSOCIATES
SECT[ON I!1- TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN
NO. 1168 P. 7/31
Ci~, o.r~ Ts
woloper's plan r~latin~ to the project and completion crt'the
EDA or City may sell to a developer selected properties that they
District or may lease land or facilities to a developer.
lnmlm~t Finm]olnS' Pla~ for Tax Intmm~ Ffn~nci~ I:~,~l;got No. I!
3-1
3~
Upon approv~ of a
lc,~al r~quiremcnts,
may acquire within
!
Within the City, thcr~ ~x.i,sti~ ~wh~re public involvement is neoossmy to cause development or
redevelopm~t to occur. To this ~nd, the EDA and City have c~rmin mm~to~ powers lmrpaaat to
~ ("M..S. "), 469.090 thr".ough 469.1081, inclusive, as amended, and 3~K,~, ,,~c~o~ 469.174 through
469.179, lnclusiv% as amendid (the :"lax Increment Finan;ing Aot" or 'el'IF Aot~, to assist in financing
public costs related to this pro~ect.
This Section contains tho Tax ~crement Flmmc;,,~Phm (the "Plan") for Tax Increment Fhumcing District
No. 8. Other relevant infor~atio- is contained in the Modification to the Redevelopm~xrt Plan for the
Do~ Chanhassen Re~lopm~t Project Ama.
,.
Su~on !1-3. Statsm6nt of ObJ~-tlvss
I
The District currently consist~, of once parcel of land and adjacent az~d ~ rights-of-way. The District
is being cresmd to fi~cllimm a ~uior ~ousins project to bo owned by a local ~on.-proflt orl~mi~rtlon and will.
include 8.000 s.f. ofretail, 90 units fei' indel~nd~ living, 56 units ofassisted living, and 18 units ofmemory
care in the Clmzd~um. Co~ ~ this have not been eml~4 ~ at the time ofpr~aration of this Plan,
but the date when dovolopm~ is b'kely to occur is the Sprin$ of'2002. This Plan is expeclm:! to achieve
many of the objectives outlht~l in the Redevelopment Plan fi~r tho Down~wn Chanha,~en Redevelopm~,-~t
_,
I
The activities contemplated in the Modification to the Red~'elopm~nt Plan and the Plan do not preclude thc
uncler~kln[ of other qualified develbpment or redevelopment a~[vities..Th~se activities are anticipsted to
occur over lhe life of'the D~ Cbantmss~n Redev~l~~ Project Area and the District.
!
;
Subs~on 3.4. R~l~v~loprr~.~nt Plsn Overview
I
!
1. Propc~ to be Acqui~l - Selected propertb' lo0at~ within the District not e~ to but
may be acquired by ~e EDA or City and is furflzer described in this Plan.
!
2. Relocation - Relocatlon services, to the exlm~ required by law, are available pursuant to
~,~, Ckrt~ter l I 7 and other relevant stat~ and federal laws.
·
FOR TAX' INCREMENT FINANCINEI DISTPJCT NO. 8
Subse~on 3-1. Forewo~]
·
,
Tho Chanhasscn Economic D~I~~ Autho~ (tho "F.,DA"), th~ City of Chanhass~ (the "City"), stab-
and consultants have pre~ the followin~ informalion m =xpedim the estab~;_,hment of Tax Increment
Financing Di~m'ict No. 8 ('~he IN.strict "), · housing tax increm~t flnancin~ district, ~ i~ tho Downtown
Chanhassen ~elopm~nt Proje~-t Ar~.
I
8ubso~on 3-2, b'tatutor~ Authority
ubs. IZ.~UU1 17"~UYM P. 8/31
I-HLI-I(~ & ASSOCIATES NO. 1168
!
I
I
4. The EDA or City aim/ p~rt'orm or provide for some or all nec, ess~ acquisition,
oonstmotion, relocation, demolition, and required utilities and public ~r~q:s work within the
Distriot i
Subsection 3-5. Descript(on of Property in the District end Property To Be Acquired
The District encompasses all p,roperty and adjacent righls.of-way identified by the parcel listed below. See
the map in Appcadix B for furthor information on the location of the Di~-i~
~, Pm--~l Number
; 25.8680080
I
The EDA or City may acquire pny parcel within the District including interior and adjacem street rights of
way. Any properties identifi?d for acquisition will be acquired by the EDA or City only in order to
accomplish one or more of the f/ollowiiag: storm sewer improvements; provide land for needed public streets,
utilities and facilities; carry out land aoquisition, site improvements, ¢learanoe and/or development to
accomplish the uses and objectives set forth in this plan. The EDA or City may ac. quire property by gift,
dedication, condemnation or direct p ,erohase from willing sellers in order to achieve the objectives of this
Plan. Such acquisitions will be undert~en only when there is assurance of funding to finance the acquisition
, ;
and related costs, i
,
,
Subsection 3-6. Classification of the District
!
I
The EDA and City, in determining the need to create a tax increment finanoing district in accordance with
3~tS., Sections 469.174 to 469.179, as amended, inolusive~ find that the Dimict. to be established, is a
housing dieu-itt purauant to 3~., Section 469.174, Subd. II as def'm~:[ lmlow:
tt - ti I .
'Housing district me~ q ORe of taz Inorement.fin,m¢lng dtalrict whi~h ~onsls~s of ~ £roject, or
a j~ortIon o~ proje, r.:l. inte{/de~r occl{patlcy, ln.l~rt, l~ per$ona or falnllles of io~ ~ moderate
income, as defined In chagter 4f12d, Title 1~ of the National Housing Act of 1934, the National
Hausing Act 0f1959, the Ut~ited ~tates Hausing ~et of 1937, as amendea~ Title Y of the ttoustng /lct
of 1949, as amended, any other' s~ntlar pr~ent or. fu~e federal, stat~, or municipal lagislation, or
the regulattonspromulgatad under any_ of those acts. ~ district does not qualtfy as a housing district
under this subdtvtsion if the fair market valu~ of the improvements whlch ar~ constructed in the
dislrict for commercial u~ or for us~s other than low and moderate income houstng consist~ of
more than 20percent of the total fart market value of the planned Improvements in the development
plan or agraement. The fair marl&t value of the tmprovemems may be determined u~tng the cast of
construction, capttaltred tncomeo 'or other approprlat~ rn~thod of estimating market value, ttouslng
project means aproJaat, or~artton of aproject, that me~ts all the qualifications ora houstng district
undar this subdivision, whether or not actually established a~ a houstng district.
:
In meeting the statutory criteria the EDA and City rely on the following fao~ and findings:
,
I
The Distri~ consists of one parcel.
12 The development will eorisist of:approximately 150 units of multi-family senior r~ntal housing and a
small amount of retail '
[] 20% of the units will be o~oupied by penon with incomes less than 50% of median income
I
Ci~ of Chanha~:n Tax Ineaement Finmdng Plan for Tax Ins.remain Financing Dl~tfl~t No, 8 3-2
! ,
·
I
I
I
OCT. 12. 2001 12' 50PM
EHLERS & ASSOCIATES NO. 11{58 P.9/31
!
i
lhnat~n~ to 469.176 SuM. 7, th[ Di~rit~ do~ n~ ~~ ~y ~I
· ~ ~1~ of S~fion ~. 111 ~ 273.112 ~~ 473H for ~ ~1~
~ ~ ~e fil~g ~ ~~ f~ ~fi~ of~e Di~
Su~~on 3-7, Dum~on ~f ~e Di~
.
PummmtolVZS., Section 469.175, Subd. 1, andSectton 469.176, 8ubd 1, the duration of thc District must
be indicated w~thin the Plan. Pursuan~ to 3~,~, Section 469.176. Subd. lb, the duramen of the District will
be 2:5 years after receipt of the first in~remeat by the F. DA or City (a total of 26 years). The da~e of _recap!
by the City ofthe first tax inoren]nent is expected to be 2004. Thurn it is ~ tb~t the Dis~ including
any modifi~ions ofth~ Plan ~ s~ueat phases or other changes, would terminate after 2029, or when
the Plan is satisfied. If increment is received in 2003, the term of the District wjU be 2028. The EDA or City
reserves the right to deccrtify ~ District prior to the legally requitcd dam.
Subsection 3-8. Original fax Capacity, Tax Rata and Estlm~d Captured Net Tax Capacity
Value/Increment and Notification of Prior Planned Improvements
,
Pursuant to M. S., Section 469.1~4, Subd. 7 and M. S., Station469.177, Subd. l, the Original Net Tax Capacity
(ONTC) as certified for the D~ will be bmr! on the market valuea plaoed on the property by the asse~aor
in 2000 for taxes payable 2001'.
I
Pursuant to M.$., Section 469.1..77, ~ubds. I and 2, lhe County Auditor shall Certify in each year (beginning
in the payment year 2002) the amount by which the original value bas incres/ed or dooreased as a result of:
1. change in tax exempt/tatus of property;
2. reduction or enlargemeut of'the geographic boundaries of the district;
, I
3. c~ge due to adjuatnlents, negotiated or court-ordered abalealents;
4. change in the use of Ge property .and ¢laaslfleatlou;
5. change in state law go{'eming class rates; or
6. change in connection .with pr/viously haued buildin8 permits.
I
In any year in which the outre~ Net'l~ax Capacity value of the District declines below the ONTC, no value
will be captured and no tax indrem~, will be payable to the EDA or City. - '
,
·
The original local tax rate forlthe District will be the local tax rate for taxes payable 2002, a,~xnning the
request for certification is ma~ befoi'e June 30, 2002. The Oril~ml Tax Capacity and the Original Looal
Tax Ra~ for the District appear io tim table on the next page.
I
I
/
Pursuant to &iS., Section 469t174
Captured Net Tax Capacity (CTC) of~e Dislrict, within the Downlown Cb, nh--~*en Redevelopment Project
Area, upon completion of the l~ject, .~viU annually approximate tax increment revenues as shown in the table
below. The EDA and City request 10D percent ofthe available increase in tax capacity for repaym.ent o, fits
obligations and current expen~tures, bel~inning in the tax year payable 2004, The project tax capamty listed
is an estimate of values when/he project is completed_
I
I
I
I
i
City ~Chsnhassm T~x
3-3
OCI. 12. 2001 12:51PM EHLERS & ASSOCIATES
I
I
mi ! Ii ......
Project Estimated Tax C~paci~ upon Completion (PTC)
I
Original Estimated Net Tax Ca~acity(ONTC)
Estimated Captured Tax .~apaclty (CTC)
Ori~nal Local TaX Rate , '
I
167,730
t0 90
t57,240
1,20
NO. 1168 P,
~P~t2002
10/31
Eatimated Annual Tax In~rement(CTC x Local Tax Rate) 188,688
~.~ercent Retained b~ the E~DA 100%
_mm .... mil - --
i
Pttrsuant to M.$.. Section 469j177, Sub~ 4, the EDA shall, aftra' due and diligent search, a~company its
request for certification to the~County Auditor or Its notice of'he Diswict enlargement pursuant to M.$.0
Section 469.175, 8ubd. 4, with ~ listing of all propcrt, ic~ within tho District or area of enlargement for which
building pm'mi~ have been issued du~ the oight~n (18) months immediately preceding approval of the
Plan by the municipality pursuant to ~.$., Section 469.175, Subd. $. Tho County Auditor shall increase the
original net tax capacity of the.District by the net tax capacity of hnprovaments for which a building permit
i '
was issued.
,
The City Is reviewing the are~ to b~lncluded in the District to determine if any building permits have
been Issued during tho 18 mbntl~ i~nmedlately preceding approval of the Plan by the City,
Sutmactlon a-9. $ouroes. of Ravmnue/Bon~lod Indsbtmdnama
i
I
Public improvement costs, a~uis~tioo, relocation, utilities, parking facilities, streets and sidewalks, and site
preparation costs and otl~r cOStS outl~ed in the Uses of Funds will be financed primarily through the annual
collection of tax increments. The ED~ or City reserves the tight to use other sources of revenue legally ap-
plicable to Ge EDA or City extd the P .l~x, including, but not limited to, special asScssm~ts, general property
~axes, state aid for road maintenance and co~tructlo~ proceeds from the sale of land, other contributions
from the dcvelol~r and investment income, to pay for the estimated public costs.
The I~A or City reserves the right to h~u- bonded indebtedness or othor indebtedness as a result of the Plan.
As presently propose, d, the p~oject will be financed by a pay-as-you-go note. Additional indebtedness,
including O.O. Tax Increment Ben .ds, may be required to fmau~ other authorized a~tiviti~s. The total
principal amount of bonded ln,debtedhess or oth~ indebtedness related to the use of tax increment fmtmctng
will not exceed $2,500,000 wi(hour a modification to the PI~ pursuant to applicable statutory requirements.
This provision does not obligate the EDA or City to incur debt. The EDA or City will issue bonds or incur
other debt only upon ',he detemainati~n that such action is hn tho best interest ofth~ City. The EDA or City
may also financ~ the activitie~ to b~ ~mde~ pursuant to tho Plan throu~ loans from funds of the EDA
or City or to reimburse the de6elope~ on it "pay-as-you-go" basis for eligible costs paid for by a developer.
Thc c~timatcd sources of fund, s for the District arc contained in the table on the next page.
_,
,.
i
i
CRy of Ch~h~n Tax[Inc~m~t Flnan~lnB Plan/bt Tax Inmos'merit Financln8 District No. 8 3-4
I
I
OCT. 12. 2001 12'51PM EHLERS & ASSOCIATES NO. 1168P.
'
I
!
~_ _m_m
i ii ....
Tax lnoromont I I $4,900,000
11/31
i
TOTAL PRO~ ,AND 1711~ANC'II~G la~I?ENUg.8
s?,4oo,ooo
!
CI~ of Ctamhasa~
!
i
Plml flat Tl~x lnommmlt lltnanci~ Dlsuqot lqo. 8
3-5
Subsection 3-10. Uses of Funds
,,
considea~ion ~br tho Distriot is a proposal to facilitate a aenior housing project to be owned
Currendy
by a local non-profit otg~ization" and will include $,000 s.f. of retail, 90 units for independent living, 56
units of assisted living, and 18: traits pf memory care Tho FDA and City have deten3~ecl ti~ it will bo
necessary to provide assistanc~ to th~proje~t for oct'mia oom. Tho F_..DA has studied the feasibiJity of the
development or redevelopmeat of pmport7 in and arotmd the District. To titoilita~ the establishment and
development or todevelopmen~ of the District, this Plan attthoHzes the use of tax increment financing to pay
for the cost of certain eligible expenses. Thc eatimato of public oosts and uses of funds associated with the
District is outlined in the following table.
i · i · .
~;s~s oF zff~-N~s' , X~rxL.,
Land/Building A~tulsi~.'on $1,000,000
Site improvemen~~o~ $500,000
Public IJtiliti~ ~ ~200,000 '.
P~r, inl~ F~ilifl~ .. $100,000
S~r~ ~! Side'k, $110,000
,
Homing Improvom~nt~. $500,000
Admi~tr~w ~om (up to 10%) ~90,000 .
I
~om/IBonci' ~tere~ $2.,000,000
I
~~o~d: Prlr~dpal ~,500;000
! .
I _
The above bad,et is ori~iizcd ~i~ to the OSA reporti~ ~orms
!
~at~ c~'ts a,r~x:iat~! with the Dina-itt are a~bject to
m this ?ina. The co~t ofall ao{'iviti~ to be co~tdcrc~ for tax ~crement f'u-~ac~ wUl not exceed, w~out
formal modificatioa, ~o bud~ abo~e pursuant to the applic~le statutory requirements. 'l~e EDA may
cxpa]d flurd.~ for qualLfied ho .usin8 ..a~ti~ outside of tile District botmdnries.
UCl. 12. 2001 12'51PM
EHLERS & ASSOCIATES NO. 1168
!
I
I
Subsection 3-11. State Tlax Increment Financing Aid (Local Contribution)
I
Thc 2001 Legislature elimindted the provisions for a reduction in state tm increment financing aid
(RISTI~A) or the alurmative q~alifying local contribution,
Subsection 3-t2. Fiscal I~lsparltles Election
P. 12/31
It is not anticipated that the I~istrict will contain commercial/industrial property. Therefore, the fiscal
d/spafities provision does not ~pply to the District.
I
Subsection 3-t3. Business 8ubaidles
Pursuant to M.S. Statutes 11~.993, 'Subdivision 3, the following forms of financial resistance are not
I
considered a business subsldy:j
(1) e business subsidy of less than $25,000;
(2) assistance that is generally available to ail businesses or to a general ol~s of similar businesses,
such as a line of bus!ness, siz% location, or similar general criteria;
(3) public h~provements to buildings or lands owned by the state or local government that serve a
public purpose and do not pr~ncipally benefit a single business or defined group of' businesses at
the time the improve~ments are made;
(4) redevelopment prop~ polluted by contaminants as del'mod in section 116~'.552~ suixiivision 3;
($) assistance provided for the sole purpose of renovating old or decaying building stock or brir~ing
it up to code and assistance provided for designated historic preservation districts, provided that
the assistance is equal to or less than 50% of the Wtal c0sq
(6) assistance to provide job readiness and training services if the sole purpose of the assistance'is to
provide those services;
(7) assistance for housin, g;
(8) assistance for pollution coritrol or abatement, including assistance for a tax increment financing
hazardous substance subdistrict as defined under 469.174, subdivision 23;
(9) assistance for energ~ conservation;
(10) ~ reductions resulting from conformity with federal tax law;
(1 !) workers' compensation and unemployment compensation;
02) benef~ derived fro& regulation;
(13) indirect benefits derived frgm assistance to educational institution;
(14) funds from bonds allocated under chapter 474A, bonds issued to refund outstanding bonds, and
bonds issued for th~ benefit of an oqimaization described in section $01 (c) (3) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1~,86, as amended through December 31, 1999;
(15) assistance for a collaboration, between a Minnesota higher education institution and a business;
(l 6) assistance for a tax i~crement financing soils condition district as defined trader section 469.174,
subdivision 19;
(17) redevelopment when the re~oipient's investment in the purchase of the site and in site preparation
is 70 percent or more of the assessor's current year's estimated market value;
(18) general changes in tax in~ent financing law and other general tax law changes ora principally
teetmlcal nature, i '
(19) Federal assistance until the assistance has been repaid to, and reinvested by, the state or local
government agency~
(20) Funds from dock and wharf bonds issued by a seaway port authority;
City of C3nmh~oa T~x ~'~m~t Fin~cln~ Plan for T~x Inc~ment Fln~ncln~ Dbtr/~ No, 8 3.6
...
OCT. 12. 2001 12'51PM EHLERS & ASSOCIATES NO. 1168 P. 13/31
I
(21) Business ]oa~ and Il/mn ~rante~s of $75,000 or )~ ~d
(~) F~ 1~ ~ ~mvid~ ~mu~ ~ Uni~ S~ ~t of Comm~, ~nomic
~l~mt Adm~~on.
~A or CIW is not pm~8 ~ ~~~ ~~ ~r ~ ~ of~~e d~ol~ or job
~~t ~~g ~~ ~i~ W a ~ss for ~n~o ~el~~ or job
~lud~ ~ ~~~t fi~~ m~ ~li~ ~~ ~i~ ~ ~ ~~ a b~~ ~u~i~
a~~ ~ ~ b~~ ~v~ ~ ~ do n~ a~.
Su~~on 3-14. Cou~'R~d C~ ;
~,~t ~ ~., ~ti~ 4~.1,7~, ~. la, ~o ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~A ~ C~ m ~y ~r ~1 or
of ~e ~ o~u~ ~ ~p~v~~ i~e ~~ d~elo~ to bo ~~ ~ ~ in~e~t .
~1~ in &= j~mont ~&o ~~, ;u~~ly &~o ~e u. of~ ~ ~~g ~n~on of
~ ~~~e~ or ~ m~ ~ ~d if~e ~ im~mo~
li~o or no im~ u~n ~un~ ~s. ~&. co~ ~1~ m u~
noti~ ~e EDA or C~ ~in fo~-~e ~ of~i~ ~
,
Su~ec~on 3-16. E~mat~ Im~ on ~er Taxing JuHsdi~ons
~m~d ~ on o~=~~~i~ ~um. ~t~o
wo~d ~ ~o~ ~e ~~ of ~e D~ HoW~, ~e ~A ~ ~ ~ d~;n~ ~at such.
~clopment or ~=lopmo~ ~u~ n~ ~ '~ for" ~ ~n~ent
~ ~p~t on ~ ~ j~i~ons h $0. ~ ~im~
follo~ ff~ %ut f~, t~ w~ not m~: ·
Carv~ County
Chanh~s~n
Chsslm ISD No. 112
; IMPACT ON TAX BASK
mm _m · ·
!
i2o00/2001 ]r~timated Captured
'To~d N~t T~ Ca~ (~
T~ Ca~ U~n Comu~on
53,706,184 157,240
19,599,946 157,240
28.758.564 ! 57,2~,0
Percent of CTC
to Entity Total
0.2928%
0.8022%
0.5469%
Ciiyof~
Taxb
,crement l:lnnnci~ IRan f~x Tsx ~ Fltmnci~ Dbtrict No. 8
·
I
ut,~. ~,z. zuu~ 12'97FM ~-HLEI~$ & ASSOCIATES NO, 1168
I
i
I
]2VlPACT ON TAX RATES
I
! 2000a001 Percent ~
~ F.~x~ Rat~ ~ CTC Taxe~
Carver County .: 0.443290 32.33% 157,240 69,7~
CiW of~hasson ~ 0~89790 21.14% 157,240 45,567
~~ ISD ~o. 112 ~ 0.608050 44.35% 157,240 95,610
I
~hor ~ Co~cil, ~1~ Pg .
W8~2. T~ & Mosquito DI~I~) 0.030010 2A~ ~ 4.719
T~! ;~ 1.371140 100.00% 215~
14/31
The estimates listed above display the capmr~ tax capacity when all construction is completed. The tax rate
used for calculations is tho 2000/Pay 2001 rate. Tho total not capacity for the entities listed above are based
on Pay 2001 figures. The District will be ~ertified under the actual 200J/Pay 2002 rates, which were
unavailable at the time this Pla~ was prepared.
l
$~bsectlon 3-'16. Suppo~ing I~o~umentaflon
·
Pursua~ to 3~$. Section 469.1'~$ Sub~ Ia, claus~ 7 the Plan must contain identification and d~cription of
studies and analys~ used to make the determination sot forth in M.S. Section 469.175 Subd 3, clause (2).
Following is a list of r~ports arid studies on file at the City that support th~ authorlty's findings:
I
,
1. Metropolitan Council Livable Communities Application
2. City ofChanhass~n A~ordable Housing Goals and R~lat~d Documemts
I
Subsection 3-17. Deflnltl~. n of Tax Increment Revenues
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.1~74, &tbd. 25~ tax incromem rownuea derived from a tax increment financing
district include all of the folio ..&ins p~ltmttial r~venue sources:
I
1. taxes paid by the captu.~ed not tax capacity, but excluding nay excess taxes, as compute~l under M~S.,
Section 469.177;
2. the proceeds from the ~.ale or lease of propmty, tangible or intangible, purchased by thc authority
with tax increments; :
3. r~payments of loans or other advances made by thc authority with tax increments; and
4. inter, st or oth~r investment earnings on or from tax inor~ments.
I
Subsection 3-18. Modifications to the District
!
,
In accordance with M.$., Section 469; 175, Sub& 4, any:
,,
1. reduction or ~nlarge~¢nt of tho geographic area of' the Downtown Chanhassen Redevelopment
Projccrt Ama or the District;
2, increase in amount of bonded indcbtecln~ss to be inourrcd, including a determination ~o capitaliz, c
interest on debt ifthatldctcrmjnation was not a part et the original plan, or to increase or
the amount of interest'on the debt to b~ capitalized;
Tax !nt.t~mont Flnan~ins Plan fbi Tax Incrcracnt Plnanaing DiStrict No. 8 3-1]
Ciw ofC. hanhM~n
OCT. 12. 2001 12'52PM EHLERS & ASSOCIATES NO. 1168
P. 15/31
3. inore~e ~ ~ ~~
4. increase in total e~tim
5. deslga~on of'additio
shall be approved upon the not
of the original Plan.
of the ~ net tax capa=~ to be n~tn~! ~ the EDA or City;
~! propea-ty to be ac, quixed by the F_.,DA or City,
and ai~ ~tm disoussion, pabll¢ heating a~d findings mqnir~ for approval
Pursuant to MS. Section 469.175 ~ubd 4Co), the geographic area oftho District may be reduced, but ahall
not be enlarged a/b= fiveyeaz3, follqwi~ the date of certifi~on of the oH~.,d net tax onpaelty by the
county auditor. Ifa housing diatrict is enlarge~ the teason~ and supporting facls for the detenoinntion that
the addition to the district mee~ the criteria of M:S., Sect/on 469.174, Sub~ 11 must be documetrmd. Tho
requirements oftlxis paragrap~ do not apply if(l) the only modification is elimination of parcel(s) from the
Downtown Chanhazsen _R~_ ~elopment Project Area or the District and (2) (A) the current net tax capacity
of the pardi(s) el/minated fro~ the District equals or exceeds the net tax oapacity of those parcel(s) in the
District's original net tax capacity or(B) the EDA ~ that, notwRhstanding M~$., Section 469.177, Subd.
1, th~ original net tax capa~it~ will be reduc~l by no more than the current net tax capacity of the pardi(s)
eliminated from tim District..
,
Tho EDA or City must notify t/~ County Audiim' of any modification thai reduc~ or enlm'ges the geographic
area of the Downtown Chanhalsen Redevelopment Project Ara~ or the Dtstriot. Modifioaiions to th= District
in the form of a budget modificalion or an expansion of the boundaries will be recorded in tho Plan.
!
!
Sub.se~on 3-19. Adml~strati've ~xlmns~s
la accorda~= with b/R, Sec'~o, 469.174. Subd. 1'4, and ~$., Section 459.176, Subd. 3, administrative
expenses m~ans all expendi~, of thc IgDA or City, other than:
i
i
,
1. mounts paid for the ~rchase of land;
2. amounts paid to con--rs or oltgrs providing'materials and servioes, including ar~~ and
ev~neefing servioes, ~ connected w/th the physic~al development of the real pwlg~ in the
proje~-t; :
3. relocation benefits p~.'d to ~ services provided for persons residing or busin~sse~ loc, a~ in the
proj~'t; or ~ ' .
4. mounts used to pay l~rmclpa[ or interest on, fired a reserve for, or sell at a discount bonds muexi
pursuant to .~/$.. Sezt~on 459.178; or
5. amounts used to pay .dther fmanoial obligations to the extent those obligations were used to finance
costs d~fibod in st~ons 1 to 3.
For disiricts for which the req$ost for certifioafion were made befor~ August 1, 1979, or ag. er June 30, 1982,
administrative expenz~ also iflolude amounts imid for servioes prey/deal by bond counsel, flsoal consultants,
and planning or economic dev~ lopme~ consuliants. Tax inorem~ may be used to pay any aatharlzed ~nd
docamented administrative ~ for the Distrig up to but not to e0weed l0 perceat of the total tax
inorement eXl~nditures authdr, izod ~ tho Plan or the total tax ~ent ~xpendimr~ for tbe Dow~itowa
Cha~h~en Redevelopment Project Area, whiohever is less.
I
administrative expenses incu ,r~ in conn~ion w/th rig Distri~ The county may gquir= paymant ofthos~
exp~nses by F~bruary 15 of tho year following the year the expenses worn incurr~.
Ck'y of Chtnhas~sn T~, lnen~meat Pinnnd~ Plan for Tax ln~enem Pinanc/~ Dlm'l=t No, 8 3-9
UC1.12.2001 12'52PM EHLERS & ASSOCIATES NO. 1168 P. 16/31
i
Pursuant to M;$., Section 46~. 177, Subd. 11, the county ~u~ shall d~u~ ~ ~ount ~ual to 0.25
~t of ~y iae~mt di~i~ to ~e EDA or C~ ~d ~o co~ ~s~ shall pay ~e ~ount
~uc~d w ~o ~ ~u~ f~ do~sR in the s~ ~i ~d ~ ~ a~m~iated w ~e S~ Auditor
f~ ~e co~ of f~ci~ ~~g of ~ ~~~ ~ing info~aion ~d
~d~g au~flfi~' u~ of~ in~~t f~ing.
· ~e~flon 3-20. Elml~tlon ~f
~rs~ m ~S., Section 4ff9.176, lS~ 1~ no ~ in~~t shall be p~d
Di~ ~ ~ (~) y~ ~m ~e ~ ~ ~fl~on of ~o Origin& N~t T~ Capaei~ value of
~~ pmp~ in ~ Dis~.~ ~ ~e Cou~ Au~r ~ss wi~in ~e ~ (3) y~ period:
(a) ~Ms have b~ is~ in aid of~o proj~ con~ing ~e dis~i~ p~u~t to ~S., Secg~
459.178, or ~y ~er law, exit ~u~ bonds ~su~ p~su~t to ~S., Sectio~ 4~9.152
to 469.15~, ~ '
(b) ~e ~A or Ci~ h~ ~cquimd pmpe~ wi~n ~e Di~ic~
'
(c) ~e EDA ~ Ci~ h~s ~~ or ~ m bo ~n~c~ public im~wmen~ wi~in
the DiVot. J
~e ~ds mua ~ issued, ~r ~e EDA or Ci~ must ~ui~ pmpe~ or ~ns~ot or ~use publi~
improvemen~ to be ~n~~ by ap~ximaely November, 20~ ~d ~po~ such a~ions to
Auditor.
Th~ ~ in~~t plodg~ ~e pa~t of~nds ~d inca ~e~on may be'dtscha~ and the Dis~i~t
may be ~i~ if ~ffiai~nt ~s have been i~o~bly d~osi~d in ~ de~ s~ice fund or o~
e~mw a~t held in ~ for ~1 ou~~t ~ndz ~ p~i~ for ~e paymen~ of~e bonds a~ mamriW
~ r~~ da~. ,
tf ~er fo~ ~s fiom ~ d~e'of cert~catlon of t~ ortg~al ~t ta ~ie of the ~ increment
financing d~lctp~su~t to ~, 8ecaon 469.177, no de~lit~n, re~btltt~ion or renovatlon of
pro~r~ or other site p~~lon, lncl~tng ~l~ t~~ment of a s~eet ~j~ent to a ~cel
but not ~tallation of ~t~i~ s~tce t~lud~g s~er or wat~ syste~, b~ been commen~d on a
~rcel lo,ted within a ~ t~re~t fln~alng d~ict by the ~t~ri~ or by the ~er of the
~d tn a~or~ce wi~ the t~ ~ment fl~c~g pl~ ~ ~Ittonal t~ l~rement m~ be
~ pom that ~cel a~ t~ original net t~ c~i~ of that p~cel shall be excluded flom
orlg~al net ~ ~aai~ bf the t~ ~~nt fln~etng d~tct. ~the authori~ or the ~n~ of t~
~l subsequant~ co~e~ ~moltaon, r~habiH~tion or renovation or other stte pre~aaon
on that panel ~cl~ing ~ed imp~vement ora s~eet ~Jacent to t~t ~el, ~ ~aord~ce
with t~ t~ i~re~t ~ci~ plan, the ~h~i~ shall cen~ to t~ co~ ~ditor that the
~t~i~ h~ commenced ~ t~ co~ ~ditor shall cert~ t~ net t~ c~at~ thereof ~ m~t
rec~t~ cert~ed by t~ ~omm~ston~ of r~enue ~d add ff to the origi~l net ~ c~l~ of the
t~ increment fln~ctng ~lct. ~e co~ ~ditor mint e~rce the provlslons of thts subdiv~ton.
~e ~thori~ m~t subm~ to th~ co~ ~itor otdence t~t t~ requir~ act~i~ ~ tarn place
1
I
Citg of~~ ' T~ In~ Fl~n$ ~ ~r T~ In~ gin~aln~ Di~ No. 8 3-10
OCT. 12. 2001 12'52PM EHLERS & ^SSOCZATES NO. 1168P. 17/31
!
I
for ~..h~ In th~ dl, t~t. ~ ~~~r a~l ~t b~ ~~t~ ~ F~~ 1 of t~
a ~ s~t, ~) rel~ ~fa s~ ~ ~) ~~~~~ ~ ~bull~g ~ ~t~g
~ ~A ~ C~ or a ~ 6~ ~u~ ~~o ~~ ~ ~ D~ ~ ~~ly Nov~,
2~5 ~d ~n ~h ~ons ~ ~e ~~ A~{~.
I
I
8u~on ~2t. U~ of ~ Inomma~
I
~e ~A ~ C~ ~ ~~ ~ it ~1 ~ 1~ ~ of~ ~ ~ ~iW of ~Im
I
1. to pay thc principal of~md int~r~ on honda immd to finan~ a proj~n:t;
2. to finance, or oth~'wi~ pay thq cost ofr~l~vel~ ~the Down~wn Chaahassen gedev¢lo~t
Project Area pursuant to the .~S., $~ctions 469.090 to 469.1081;
3. to pay for project cost~ as ideatifiM in the budset set forth in the Plan;
4. to financ~ or othmwd~, pay for other pmlmsea aa provided in 3~$., Section 469.176, Subd. 4;
5. to pay principal and ~ on any lotms, advances or other paym~s ma~ to or on I~alftl~ EDA
or City or for th~ I~ae~ ofti~ Downtown Chanhaaam ~elopmgat Project Area by a develops,
6. to finance or otherwi~ pay premiums and other costs for insurance or other security gumanteeing
tho payment when duo bfprincipal ofand interest on bonds pummnt to tl~ Plan or pursua~ to
Chapt~ 462C. 3~$., ,Veattons 469.152 through.469.165, and/or M.~, &cttons 469.178, and
7. to accumulate or m~ a reservo securiag the paylxleat whcll duo of the priocipai and i~ On
the tax increment bonds or bonds issued pummnt to 3~$., Chapter 462¢, M.$., Sections 469.152
through 469.165, and/or MS., ~lectimu 469.178.
!
Those rm~au~$ shall not be u~l to circumvent any levy limitations applic~l¢ to 1he City nor for other
purposes prohibited by 34~$., ~ction 469.176, Sub& 4. Reven~m derived from tax lacrement f~om
be~tng dittrict must be u~. ~olely to flmmee the cost of housing projects a~ defined ia M.~, Section
469.174, sub& 11. The co~t of public improvcmon~ dirtctly rtlatmi to the hon_alng projects and the
I
:J~l[of~tsd :idminl~ti~ttVe exp~llSe~ ofthe F2~A or City m~ !~ alduded in the cost of a houing project.
These revenues shs!! nor be u~ed m circumvent any levy ]JmttRtiolls applicable to the City nor for other
purposea prohibit~i by 34~, bet/on 469.176, ~ntb& 4.
!
Tax incr~nents g~nerated in th~ Distri~ will b~ paid by Carve~ County to tho EDA for ~he Tax Iaa~maent
~, or C~y will pay to the d~velope~(s) am~ually an amount not m ~ an
telol~'S ~~t to rotmbut~ tho ~ of land acq~on, public
mlooaiion, sito ~on, and administr~on. Remaining inca~aont ftmds
afinistration (up to 10 percaat) and the costa of public improvement activities
Fund of said District. The ED
amount as specified in a de
imgrovcments, demolition and
will be used for BDA or City ad
outsid~ the District.
SutmectJon 3-22. Exce~ Tax Increments
I
I
Pursuant to 3~S., Section 4694176, Subd. 2, in any year in whiah th~ tax inca~n~t ~ abc amount
necessary to pay the costs authorized by thc Plan, including li3o amount n _ece~__sary to cancel any tax levy as
ctty of Ct~b~s~m T~x ~nctem~ Finandng fl~n It~ T~x lacmnmt Fhtmdag Dlm~ No. 8 3-11
1
I
I
!
~2001 12'~)2PM EH
provided in M.$.. Section 47,
following:
& ASSOCIATES
I
NO, 1168 18/31
r. 6I, ~ubd. 3, the £DA or City shall use the excess amount to do any of the
lJ
2.
3.
4.
In addition, the EDA or City
order to f'manco additional pt
District.
Subsection 3-23. Requl
prepay any outstanding bond~;
discharge the pledge ~ftax Increment therefor;
pay into sa e~crow a~count dedicatmt to the payment of such bonds; or
return the excess to the County Auditor for redistributiou to the respective taxing jurisdictions in
proportion to their 1o ',al ts~ rates.
may, subject to the limitations s~ forth her~in, ohoos~ to modify the Plan in
blio cost~ in the Downtow~ Chanhassen Redevelopment Proj~-'t Area or the
foments for Agreements witl~ tho Dsvslol~r
/
The EDA or City will revtexVlany proposal for private development to determine its conformance with the
Redevelopment Plan and wi~h applicable municipal ordinances md codes. To facilitate this effort, the
following documents may b~ r~luested for r~view and approval: site plan, construction, mechanical, and
eleetri~ system drawings, lahdscaping plan, grading and storm drainage plan, signage system plan, and say
other drawings or narrative d. ecmed necessary by the BDA or City to demonstrate the conformance oft. he
development with City plans .Ind ordinances. The EDA or City may also uso the Agreements to address other
issues related to the development.
I
Pursuant to 3,16'., Sectlon-469.176, ',~ubat 5, no more than 10 p.ercent, by acreage, of the property to be
acquired in the District ss set ~'orth in the Plan shall at any time be owned by the EDA or City as a r~ult of
acquisition with the proceed~ of bonds issued pursuant to M.S., Section 469.178 to which tax increments
from property acquired is plec}ged, unless prior to acquisition in excess of 10 percent of the acreage, the Ii;DA'
or City concluded an agreement for the development of the property acquired and which provides recourse
for the EDA or City should tile development not be completed.
I
Subsection 3-24. Asseq:smen. t Agreements
I
Pursuant to M.$., Section 46~ 177, ~/ubd. 8, the F. DA or City may enter into a written assessment agreement
in recordable form with the d~velop? of property within the District which establishes n' minimum market
value cfi'the land and completed improvements for the duration of the District. The assessment agreement
shall be presented to ~he asses~sor who shall review the plans and specifications for the improvements to be
constructext, review the marktn valu= previously assigned to the land upon which the improvements are to
be constructed and, so long ~ the minimum market value ~ontained in the sss~ssment agreement appears,
in the judgment of the assesior, to be a 'reasonable estimate, the assessor shall also certify the minimum
i
market value agreement.
Subsection 3-25. Administration of the Distr]~!
I
Administration of the Distric~ will bis handled by the City Manager.
Subse~lon $-25. Annu~! '
Disclosure Requirements
,
Pursuant to M.$., Section 469J175, Subal 5, 6 and6a the EDA or City must undertake financial reporting for
City of Chanhaston Tw: ln~t Flnancln$ Plan for Tax lno~nrnnt l:lnanoin/Dirat~t No. 8 3-11l
I
.._
OCT. 12. 2001 12'53PM EHLERS & ASSOCIATES NO. 1168 P. 19/31
!
all tax inommeat fmanoing di~riots to the Offi~ of the State Auditor, County Board, County Auditor and
School Board oa or before Au~ I of each year. ~$.. S~ct/oa 459.175. Subd. 5 oJso provides that an
annual st~_t_,~a~nt shall be publ~hed in a newspaper of general oirculation in tho City oA or before August 15.
I
I
If the City fails to make a disclosure or submit a report ~ the information required by M;$. Sec,on
469.175 Subd~ .~ andSubd 5, ~e Office of the Slate Auditor will direot the County Auditor to withhold the
distribution of tax inc~ement from the District.
8ul~-tion 3-27. R~monable Expectations
i
I
As required by tho Tax lnoro~at Financing Aot, ia establ~ing the District, the detennin~oa has been
mad~ that tho anticiinm~ devotopmoat would not reasoaab~ be expeot~ to occur solely through privag
investment within tho reasonably fomseeabl~ future and tlmt the increased markzt value oftho site that could
reasonably b~ expected m octW without the u~e of tax increment flmm¢~ would be less thaa the lnav. ase
in thc mark~ value ostimamd t~ r~uit from tho ~ devel~ ara' subtm0tiag thc pre,at valu~ of
th~ projeCa~ tax increments fo~ tho maximum duration ofthe Dim-itt penaitmd by the Plan. la making said
determination, reliance haz ~ plae, od upon written ~es mado by tho devel~ to such effects
!
and upon EDA and City staff awareuoss of tho feaai~ of developing tl~ projeot site. A eamparafive
analysis ofostim~mxl market values b}oth with and without establizhmoat of the Distriot ami tho uae
increment~ has been performodlas des4nq~d above. Such analysis is included with tho oashflow in Appendix
D, and indicates that tho increa~ in edfimated market value oftho propoaed development 0e~ the indicated
subtractions) exceeds the csthrau~d market value ofth~ site absent the establislunent 0fthe District and tim
u~ of tax ~ncrement~.
I
I
Sub--on 3-~11. Other I~lmlta{iorm on the Ua of Tax Incremmnt
I
I. Oenml Cimttation.~..4.1! =zh/eDue de~-~ved ~3rorn tax increment ~b,ll 1~ treed iD 8ceoManGe ~th the
_
Thc reve~ue~ shall be u~ed~ fiaApce, or othef~i~ pay tl~ co~t o£mdevolopment of thc the ]Downtown
[evenua ~haJ ] not be used to ciz~-umvm exJsl:in~ levy ib~Lit law. No reveau~ derived ~rom tax incmm~ot
shall bo ~ for tho acquisition, c~?~ nstmction, maovation, ~on, or malntonan~ of a building to be
used primarily and regularl~ for conducting the business of a municipality, coumy, school district, or any
othor Ioc, xi unit of govern,meat or tho stat~' or fidmal govammeat or for a commons area u~t as a public
park, or a facility used for ~o¢ial, reor~tional, or conforeace ~. This provision shall not prohibit
th~ use ofmvenues derived from tax incrom~t~ for the coasmzcfioa or renovation of a parking stngture
or of a priv~ely owned facility for ~ purpose.
l
·
i
2. Restriction o_n_ Poolin~ Five Yea' Limit. Purs,=ntto MS., Section 459.1753. (1) At l~ast 80% of the
tax inc. r~nent derived finn{ tho District mug Ig egponded on Public ~ incurred w~thin aaid distri~-'t,
and up to 20% of said tax fncrem~mts may be spont on Public Costs inctm~d outside of tho District but
within tho Downmwa Chanhazsei~ Redevelopmeat Project Area; provided that in tho case of a housing
diaxict, a houling proJeot, i~ defined in ~S., Section459.1?4, Subd. 11 ia deemed to be an aetivity in
the District, at~d (2) publjo .e~3st~ w~thin the District shall Im limitod to reimbursement of public c. om paid
before or within f]vor years ~ certification of c, ald diz~ot by tim County Auditor and inmrest on all
C~ of~ T~x 1~ Fln~ml~ mm ~arT~ ~ Fla~g~i D~m~ No. $ 3-13
UCl. 1~2. ~001 1~'53PM
EHLERS & ASSOCIATES
!
I
I
I ,
Subs. ctlon 3-29. Summlary ,
!
I / '
The City is establishing the Dilmtri~t ~ provide an impetus for residential d~velopment and provid~ safe and
decent life cycle housing in th~ City~ The Tax Increment Financing Plan for the District was prepared by
Ehlors & Associates, Inc., 3060 Ceuttl ?otn~ Drive, Ros~viile, Minnesota SS 113-1105, telephone (651) 697-
8500. :
I
I
Ci~ o~Chantm~n
T~x ] r~cmm~at Financin~ Plan for Tax Inc,~rn~t Fir~ancin$ District No. 8
!
NO. 1168 P. 20/31
OCT. 12. 2001 12'53PM EHLERS & ASSOCIATES NO. 1168 '"P.
I
·
!
APP~IDIX A
I
PROIELT DF.~CRIPIION
I
I
21/31
The Distri~ is being crea~ to fa~iliiam a s~nior housing projob-t to be owned by a looal non-profit
orgaaization and will include .tl,O00 s.f. of retail, 90 an~ for in.dent living~ 56 units of assisted livinlg
and Ii units ofm~rnory care in tho Chsnha_~L Contra~ for this hive not beeil ~ into at the time of
preparation of this Plan, but tlie fl_at-_- whe~ development is likely to ooout ia the Spring oi~ 2002.
Tho proposed agrooment with khe non-lxof~ housing devel~ is to provid~ assistanez on a pay-as-you-go
basis for a period of approximamly $ to 10 ymrs. The City may use tax increments from this development
~ assist other affordable housi,hg propo~s includh, g both owner-occupied or rental housing projects outside
of the boundaries of Tax Inor~rnont Financing Distriot No. 8.
:
It is not expect~ that business subsidy regulatory agreements will b~ ~ because ~h¢ aesis~cc is
intended to provide a.ffordablo housing for the co_mmunity.
A-!
12. 2001 1168 22/31
12'53PM EHLERS & ASSOCIATES
I
!
I
!
I
I
!
I
I
APPENDIX B
bF TH~ PP, O~ AKEA ~ Tim DISTRICTS
I
I
I
B-I
OCT. 12. 2001
12'53PM EHLEES & ASSOCIATES
I
NO. 1168
_._
P. 23/31
,~.
IIIIlIIIIIlIIL[I~
iiiiiiiiiJllllll-(
llllllllll~k
IIIIIIIIII1~'
0o
u~,~.~x, xuu1 12'54PM NO. 1168 P. 24/31
EHLERS & ASSOCIATES
I
I
Dawn~oum Chnnha~$en Redevelopment Project Area
Cit~, of Chanh~sen, Cm~r Count, Minneso~
I
,,_~ .....~.~ ~ ~ · . . ..~..
.,. ~' . ~..,~ ~,~ ,~,~.'~, ~ . ~.~ ~ *.,?.~ · ~...
~. _ ~ ,. ,~:,m~.~~.~ . ~'~ ~ ~lt' ' ' ..I~ .
~.t~., '~.~ ~c'~;~,~ .... ' .. ~ %,. ~ ~.'~. · '?. ' ' '"
~....;.~. ~. .... ,~:~.a,,~,,~.~ . -~.. ,, ...,. .......
..... .--..:,~~,~.. · ~ .'...~. ~; ·
~ .- L'. ,'
.,, .
,_--_. ....... · .... ~ =~,; ...~,
~ r .' . ,
....
.~.
.._
· ..~ , ,=
..-.~s~~__~.~ ': ~ .... ,' ...... ,~ ~,:'~.::..~
~:~t~ ....... ~ ....... . .....
~ .., ...... · . , · .~.:.~'l · ' : .
I ' %~ · ; '-..
.... ~ .~=.~s'-[t:" ' '."
'i "'"~""~:'/"~ :' ' ' :''~ ';~~' ~""' "~' :" '~"
.... · . ~ ~' ::~5~ ~ .[ ....... ~ ~ ;...~ .~ .~ ? ....
"?'~ ~ ~ ~:., . ., , %. ~.}~...'~.'. · ~ ,
.>.~*.... x · ~. .
· ~" ......~ .... ' ' · ~ ~i~'~'
2&...-~'~' ~. .: .'r.... ~ '~
· .~ - ~.
:.. ·
?.,' ,'
; ; 4"~ ,..,,,,. '; · m '
..
.,~ '-- .. L.~,,..) ..... , ,-.,
"
~,~~,. ....
_
,
I
m',
F;na~
O;mCdcL No. I
CI-IANHASSEN
DOWNTOWN
REDEVE[,OPMEHT
P~AN
CmNd,~"~& 2rll ~ ~, NC N~llllm It¢&
--
OCT. 12. 2001
12'547M EHLERS & ASSOCZATES N0.1168 P.
I ~
·
I
DF_.~CRIF~oN OF PROPF:RTY TO BE INCLUD1/,D IN THE DISTRICT
!
,
25.8(;80080
:
..
AU~R. DEVF.,LOI~VLE~qT CO. L,LC
Tax_ Par~, 1
Block: 000
Township: 116
Name: VILLAOES ON THE PONDS
25/~1
C-!
OCT. 12. 2001
12'54PM
LERS & ASSOCIATES
APPtiNDIX D
ESTIMATED CASH FI~W FOR THE DISTRICT
I
NO. 1168-'-P,
26/31
I
I
i
i
D-1
T. 12. 2001-12'54PM
1OfB/O'i
ITa. C..apaoltv (E~na~) ~ - .~UCiEA Vlr'IOF_ rt~,'rE
ITm (::~eeo~[, [~e~lim) ~ - ~
I
EHLERS & ASSOCIATES
'
I
INO. 1168~P.
FID , VAJ.UE ~ C.,~k°A(~TTY
Dinmn~ 18 1~ : $1ADO.~ 21,~]0 80.000 18.000 1.2E~ 1.440.000 2004
~ . .. ~ _~:4~ ~ 21~ 110 17,~ 1~ ~
i
TAX lilt:RElENT ~ IMLL DEPi)il~ ~I~IEIIC, ANI]-Y UPON ~ TAX I~ATEI, VALU~ EI]at_A~ Ct3e181'l~l~ TIM]N~ B'ro,
Tax ~ .
I
,
1BB.~B
27/31--
i
vv~. iz. ZVVI I/'3~KM
I:MLI:KU &
i
I
I TAX INC:ff~MBNT CA~H ~
PmJ~ ~ ~, ~ ~n ~~ C~I,
~ T~ N~ ~ N~
I
o.D
0,0 05.01 20O2
O~ ~2-0t
O~
1.0
~.0
4,0
;; ~ 2010
6.5 ~ 2010
?,;
10.0 02~I ~14
10,6 QO~ ~14
11.0
11.6 O~ ~1~
12,0 0~1
~Z6
13.0 0~ ~17
13.5
1S.0 ~ 2019
16.0 ~ ~0
16,5 ~1
17.0 ~1 ~1
1~.0
19.0
~,~
~.O
21~ 0~1
25~ 0~I
23~
~.0
10,480 10,4i0 m
10,4~0
lo,~o t0.4~
10~ 167,~ 1~7,~
~O&O0 167,~ : 1~,~0
1oMo 167.~ t~,~O
10.~ 1~,7~ ' lS7,~0
10~ t~,730 , 167~
10,4~ ~,7~0 , 157,~
loM9o
10~0 157,~0 ' 167,240
10~0 I~7.~ ' t$?,~0'
10A90 167,1~ 1~,~
10~90 1~7.~0 : I~,~
1~4~ 1~7,7~0 .
10.4~ 1~.7~ ~ 1~,~
1~4~ l~,TaO
1~4~ 1~,7~0 , 1~.~
10,4~ 167,?~0 ~ t57~,
10,490 167,?~0 ~ 157,~
10,4~ 157,7~0 157.~
10,4~
10,490
~0,490 I~.~0 '~ 1~,240I
10A~ 1
lOAM 1~,7~ 1~1,~'
10~ leT,7tO I I~,~'
10,~ la7,730 :
10.4~ 1~,7~0 ' 1~7~
10,4~ 187,730 157,~
10,4~ 1~,7~0 167~$,
10,4~ 1~,730 I 1~,
10.4~ t~.730 167~
10,490 I~,7~0 167~
10A90 187,~0 : 167~0
10~90 167.~ . t87~O
1~,7~
.... I~NT VA[,UE '
Paymlm
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 a 0 0
0 0 0 0
94,344 -~.K)6 84,4M 72,16g
~M4 ~,e~ ~4al 1~,I07
~,~ ~,~ ~88
~.~ ;~e ~6 ~.eT1
N~ ~ 14.438
~.~4 ~,a~ e4~ae 782~
~ 4,9~ ~,~ ~1,B63
~,~ ~,9~ ~,436 ~B,~
~,3~ -6,MO ~6 1,~B,726
~,~ -B.~ ~9
~,~ -0.~ M~ 1
M~4 -O.~ M~8 1~3~.~
M,~ ~.~ ~,430 1~,8~
~,~ -~ 84A~ 1,~,587
~.~ ~,9~ 64,4~ 1
~.~ -0,J06 ~8 1,8~1,0~
M,~ ~,e~ ~l 1 .SM,e91
~,~ -e~e ~.~e
~4 -9,~ ' M~B 1~,039
~,~ ~ e4.~e I~I,G
~,~4 -e.~ ~4.~ ~,eoo,~
N,~4 ~.~ ~ ~,?~0,17~
~4 4,~ ~4,4ae 1,748,1M
~,~4 4,~ ~,4~ 1 ,~,~
~,~ 4,~ ~
~,~ ~,906 ~,~1 1~.~1
2~M~eM -2~6 1.678~ ,.
NO, 1168
P, 28/31
_Y_~ Mth._ _yr.
0.0 08-Ol 2O02
O.0 02-01 2003
o,0 O&-01 2~0~
0.0 02.01 2OO4
~01 ~0~
0~1
2~ M~I 2~
3.6 06~1 2007
4.0 0~1 20M
4.~ 0~
8.0 ~I
~1 2~1~
~.0 ~1 2013
~8 0~1 20t3
10.0 ~
10.5 0~1 20t4
11.~ O~ ~1~
12.0 ~1
12~5 0~01
0~1 ~18
D~t
~1
17.0 ~1 2~1
17.5 ~1 ~021
~6.0 03~
t8.~ ~I
19,0 02~1
20~ 0~0~ ~24
2t.0 ~I
21.8 ~1
2[0 ~1
24.0 0~1
~1
0~1
02-01
OCT. 12. 2001
12'55PM
EHLEES
I
I
I
I
I
I
& ASSOCIATES
NO. 1168
APPt/NDIX 1/
HOI~.SING QUALIFI~TION$ FOR THE DISTRICT
No. of~ 50~4 of Median Income 60% of Median Income
2-personi ~9.000 $35,880
I
3-1~3on, $33,600 $40,320
4-~' $37~350 i $44~820
Soui'ce: Dopamnent of Housing and Urban Development
29/31
The three options for income limits on a standard houshl~ d[sirlot are 2094 of the units at 50% of median
income, 4(P/~ of the units at ~ of median income, or 50% of thc units st 80% of median income. At the
time a distr~/s established, ti~ projgvt needs to c, hoo~ one of the optioas and meet those requiremeats for
the lifo of the district. Tho City eloots that 20% of the u~it~ will be at 50~ of tho median income.
I
I
!
i
!
(JCl. 12. 2001 12'55PM ERS & ASSOCIATES NO. 1168 30/31
APPENDIX F
BUT/FOR QUALIFICATIONS
!
APPE~IX
OCT, 12. 2001 12'55PM
....... NO. 11~i8'-"-P.
31/31
Pa~3
October 2, 2001
I EHLERS
& ASSOCIATES INC
Commissioner Julianne Ortman
Carver County Board of Commissioners
600 East 4th Street
Chaska, MN 55318
BY FAX AND BY REGULAR MAIL
City of Chanhassen/Chanhassen EDA and the proposed Modification of the Downtown
Chanhassen Tax Increment Financing District and the Establishment of Tax Increment Financing
District No. 8
Dear Commissioner Ortman:
The City ofChanhassen (~City") and the Chanhassen Economic Development Authority ("EDA") are considering
a proposal to modify the Downtown Chanhassen Tax Increment Financing District ("Downtown Chanhassen
District") and to establish Tax Increment Financing District No. 8 ("District No. 8"). Parcels certified in the
Downtown Chanhassen District will be removed and District No. 8 will be established to include those parcels.
District No. 8 will be a housing tax increment financing district, which has a maximum life of 25 years (or a
shorter period as determined by the City Council). Tax increments collected from District No. 8 are proposed
to be used to facilitate the construction of a senior housing project to be owned by a local non-profit organization
and will include 90 units for independent living, 56 units of assisted living, and 18 units of memory care. At least
20% of the units will be at affordable rent levels. The proposed location of District No. 8 is located within the
Downtown Chanhassen Redevelopment Project Area and is indicated on the attached map.
The City Council has scheduled a public hearing on this matter, pursuant to the Minnesota Tax Increment
Financing Act, on November 13, 2001, at approximately 7:00 P.M. The Act requires the City notify the County
Board member representing the affected area at least 30 days prior to publishing the notice of public hearing on
the establishment ora housing or a redevelopment tax increment district.
A complete ch'aR of the tax increment financing plan for District No. 8 will be sent to the County and School
Board no later than October 12, 2001. We would like to solicit your comments and offer to meet with you at your'
convenience if you so desire. In addition, we invite you to attend the public hearing on the modification of the
Downtown Chanhassen District and the establishment of District No. 8. Please direct any comments or questions
that you may have to Todd Gerhardt (City Manager) at 952-937-1900 or to me at 651-697-8505.
Sincerely,
EHLERS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Mark Ruff
Financial Advisor
Acting for and on behalf of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota
RECEIVED
OCT 0 3 2001
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
Enclosure
CC:
LEADERS IN PUBLIC
Todd Gerhardt, City of Chanhassen
Ron Batty, Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
.-
FINANCE
Equal Opportunity Employer
Charter Member of the National Association
of Independent Public Finance Advisors
3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, MN 55113-1105 651.697.8500 fax 651.697.8555 www.ehlers-inc.com
OCT. 1:2. 2001 12'49PM
EHLERS
I
I
& ASSOCIATES
NO. 1168-~P. 2/31'
Octobar 12, 2001
600 East 4a Street
Cha.q~ MN 55318-2158
EHLERS
& ASSOCIATE3 INC
Caroline Ness, School Board Vi~ Chair/Clerk
Chns~ $ohool Disu~ No. 112
I I O6OO VHhlgo
Chaslal, MN55318-1394
Re:
City of Chanhnmsn/Chan~~ EDA and the proposad ModiSen~l~n of the Downtown
Chanhassen Tax Inere~uent lrmnnelng Dlatriet and the Kstnbll~hmont of Tax Ineremznt Financing
District No. 8
'i'ne city of'~ ("City,and th~ Ch,-,h.,,sen Economic Development Authority ("EDA") are consida'i~
a proposal to modi~ the Downtown C~~en Tax Increment Flnnnclng ~ict ("]Dowuto~ Chnnhamseu
Disuict") and to establish Tax lncrem~ Fmancln{ District No. $ ("District No. 8'). Parcels certifi~ in thc
Downtown ~efl District will ~ removed and District No. $ will be e,~tnb~ to include those pnfcels,
DisWict No. 8 will be a housing tax increment financing district, which has a maximum life of 25 years (or a
shotmr period ns d~tetmined by th~ City Cornel). Tax increments eollec~ from District No. 8 nrc proposed
to be used to facilitate the ~on ora senior housing project to be owned by a local non-petit orgnni~_on
nad wm tncludo approximately 8,400 s.fofmmil, 90 unila for inck~ueodeni living, 56 units ofassisu~ living, and
18 units of memory care. At lea~t 20% of{~ units will be at affordable rent levels. The proposed location of
District No. 8 is locmted within ~ Do--wu Chanhassen ~mlopmont ProJect Ar~t and is indica/~ on the
i
As required by State Law, we hereby .f~nvard admtt of tim Tax Inoremerat Financing Plan for Tax In~rement
Financing District No. 8 and the Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plm for ti~ Dowraowu
Chn-h~,~n Tax Financing District. Ploase note th,t the Plans are in drait form for disUibufion to the Counly
and tim School DistricL The Plans ooninin tho ostimai~ ~ and economic' implioations ofthe modified TIF
DistH~ and proposed TIF District. The City may make c{,nnges to this draft document prior to ti~ public
heatriug, however the authorized costs will not ~.
· !
The City Council les schedutod a puSlic hearing on this mnttm-, pursunnt to the Minnesota Tax .Incrmnem-
Finnncing Act, on November 13, 2001 nt approxima~ly 7:00 P.M. We iIlvite you to att~ the public hearing
on the modification of the Downtowa Chm2hassen Dlstriot and t[~ establlshmont of District No. 8. Please dtme, t
any comments or queations that you may have to Oerhardt (City Manager) at 952-937-1900 or to me at 651-697-
8505. Thank you for your eonsideattion in rovi~ th~ enclosed mntm'inJs.
~ & ASSOCIATe, INC.
lviark Ruff
]F'umncial Advisor '
Ac6nE for and on behalf of the City of Chnnhassen, Miramso~
Enclosure
· eADERS IAI PUC,lC FINANCr.
cc: Todd Gerhnrdt, City of(~~
3060 Centre Pointa Drive, Rosovllle, MN 6ff113-1105 651.697.8600
!
I
Equal Opportunity Employor
¢ltmrler M&ml)ee o! tho NI~lonal
e! Indq*pondOqt Pul)lie flaanoe
fax 651.697.8695 www,ehltrJ-lnc,¢om
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER COUNTY
STATE OF MINNF_3OTA
Council member
introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE MODIFICATION TO THE
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DOWNTOWN CHANHASSEN
REDEVELOPMENT PROJEC'~ AREA; AND ~ MODIFICATION TO THE
TAX INCREMENT FrNANCING PLAN FOR THE DOWNTOWN
CHANHASSEN TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT; AND
ESTABLISIHNG TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 8 (WITHIN
DOWNTOWN CHANHASSEN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA) AND
ADOPTING THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN THEREFOR.
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota
(the "City"), as follows:
Section 1. Recitals.
1.01. The Board of Commissioners (the "Board") of the Chanhassen Economic Development
Authority (the "EDA") has heretofore established the Downtown Chan~sen Redevelopment Project
Area and adopted a Redevelopment Plan therefor. It has been proposed by the EDA and the Council that
the City adopt Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Downtown Chanhassen Redevelopment
Project Area, and a Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Downtown Chanhassen Tax
Increment Financing District, and establish Tax Increment Financing District No. 8 (the "District") and
adopt the Tax Increment Financing Plan therefor, (collectively, the "Modifications and Plan"); all
pursuant to and in conformity with applicable law, including Minnesota Statutes, 469.090 through
469.1081 and 469.174 through 469.179, all inclusive, as amended, (the "Act") all as reflected in the
Modifications and Plan, and presented for the Council's consideration.
1.02. The EDA and City have investigated the facts relating to the Modifications and Plan and
have caused the Modifications and Plan to be prepared.
1.03. The EDA and City have performed all actions required by law to be performed prior to
the establishment of the District and the adoption and approval of the proposed Modifications and Plan,
including, but not limited to, notification of Carver County and Independent School District No. 112
having taxing jurisdiction over the property to be included in the District, a review of and written
comment on the Modifications and Plan by the City Planning Commission, and the holding of a public
hearing upon published notice as reqtfired by law.
1.04. Certain written repons (the 'Reports") relating to the Modifications and Plan and to the
activities contemplated therein have heretofore been prepared by staff and submitted to the Council and/or
made a pan of the City files and proceedings on the Modifications and Plan. The Reports include data,
information and/or substantiation constituting or relating to the bases for the other findings and
determinations made in this resolution- The Council hereby confirms, ratifies and adopts the RepoaU,
which are hereby incorporated into and made as fully a part of this resolution to the same extent as if set
1.05. The City is not modifying the boundaries of the Downtown Chanhassen Redevelopment
Project Area.
Section 2. F'mdings for the Ad~pfio~ ..and A_ _opmval of the Modifications and Plan.
2.01. The Council hereby finds that the Modifications and Plan, are intended and, in the
judgment of this Council, the effect of such actions will be, to provide an hnpems for development in the
public purpose and accomplish ~ objectives as specified in the Modifications and Plan, which are
hereby incorporated herein.
Section 3. Fmdings for the Establishment of Tax In ~erement Financing
3.01. The Council hereby finds that Tax Increment Financing District No. 8 is in the public
interest and is a "housing district" under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subd. 11.
3.02. The Council further finds that the proposed development would not occur solely through
private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and that the increased market value of the site
that could reasonably be expected, to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than
the increase in the market value estimated to result from the proposed development ~er subtracting the
present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the District permitted by the
Tax Increment Financing Plan, that the Modifications and Plan conform to the general plan for the
development or redevelopment of the City as a whole; and that the Modifications and Plan will afford
maximum oppommity consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development or
redevelopment of the District by private enterprise.
3.03. The Council further finds, declares and determines that the City rrmd~o, the above findings
stated in this Section and has set forth the reasons and suppofling facts for each determination in writing,
,~ttaehed hereto as Exhibit A.
3.04. The City elects to calculate fiscal disparities for the-District in accordance with
Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.177, subdivision 3, clause a, which means the fiscal disparities
contribution would be taken from outside the District.
Section 4. Public Purpose
4.01. The adoption of the Modifications and Plan conforms in all ~ to the requirements
of the Act and will help fulfill a need to provide housing oppommities, to i ,reprove the tax base and to
improve the general economy of the State and thereby serves a public purpose.
Section 5. Approval and Adoption of the Modifications and Plan.
5.01. The Modifications and Plan, as presented to the Council on this date, including without
limitation the findings and statements of objectives contained therein, are hereby approved, ratified,
established, and adopted and shall be placed on file in the office of the City Manager.
5.02. The staff of the City, the City' s advisors and legal counsel are authorized and directed to
proceed with the implementation of the Modifications and Plan and to negotiate, draft, prepare and
present to this Council for its consideration all further plans, resolutions, documents and contracts
necessary for this pm'pose.
5.03 The Auditor of Carver County is requested to certify the original net tax capacity of the
District, as described in the Modifications and Plan, and to certify in each year thereafter the amount by
which the original net tax capacity has increased or decreased; and the City Manager is authorized and
directed to forthwith tranamit this request to the County Auditor ia such form and content as the Auditor
may specify, together with a list of all properties within the District, for which building permits have been
issued during the 18 months immediately preceding the adoption of this resolution.
5.04. The City Manager is further authorized and directed to file a copy of the Modifications
and Plan with the Commissioner of Revenue.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council member
, and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted ia favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
Dated: November 13, 2001
ATTEST:
Mayor City Manager
(Seal)
EXHIBrr A
RESOLUTION #
The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the Tax Increment trmancing Plan for
Tax Increment Financing District No. 8, as required pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Secti~ 469.175,
Subdivision 3 are as follows:
I. Finding that Tax Increment Financing District No. 8 is a housing district as defined in M.$., Section
469.174, Subd. 11.
The District will consist of one parcel. The development will consist of multi-family senior rental housing
and a small amount of retail At lea~ 20 percent of the units/homes receiving assistance will have incomes
at or below 50 percent of statewide median income. The market value of non-assisted housing or
commercial ~ will be less than 20 percent of the total fair rmarke~ value of the planned
i .rn~vements. Appendix E of the TIP plan contains detailed analysis for the above finding.
2.
Finding that the proposed development, in the opinion of the City Council, would not reasonably be
expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and that the
increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax
increment financing would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from the
proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the ~
duration of Tax Increment Financing District No. 8 permitted by the Pla~
The proposed development, in the opinion of the City, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely
through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future: Tl~ finding is supported by the fact.
that the development proposed in this plan is a housing development that meets the City's objectives for
development and redevelopment. The cost of land acquisition, site and public i .mpmve~ and utilities
makes this houaing development with the expected affordability infeasible without City assistance. The
developer was asked for and provided a proforma as justification that the developer would not have gone
forward without tax increment assistance (see a_n:~__chment in Appendix F of the TIF plan).
The increased market value of the site that could reasonable be eapected to occur without the use. of tax
increment financing would be less than the increase in market value estimated to result from the proposed
development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration
of the TIF District permitted by the P/an: The City supported thiR finding on the grounds that the cost of
land acquisition, site and public i .mpmvements and utilities add to the total'development cost. ~Yastofically,
site development costs in this area have made development infeasible without tax increment assistance.
Therefore, the City reasonably determines that no other development of similar scope is anticipated on this
sim without substantially similar assistance being provided to the development
A comparative analysis of estimz_ted market values both with and without estab~ of the Disu'ict and
the use of tax increments h~s been performed as ~cfibed above. If all development which is proposed to
be assisted with tax increment were to occur in the District, the total increase in market value would be up
to $12,084,800. The present value of tax increments from the District is estimated to be $2,098,808. It is
the Council's finding that no development with a market value of greater than $9,985,992 would occur
without tax increment assistance in this district within 25 years. This finding is based upon evidence from
general past experience with the high cost of acquisition and public i .mprovements in the general area of the
District (see Cashflow in Appendix D of the TIF plan).
3. Finding that the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 8 conforms to the
general plan for the development or redevelopment of the municipality as a whole.
The Planning Commission reviewed the Plan and found that the Plan conforms to the general development
plan of the City.
Finding that the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 8 will afford
maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development or
redevelopment of Downtown Chanhassen Redevelopment Project Area by private enterprise.
Through the implementation of the Plan, the EDA or City will provide an impetus for residential
development, desirable or necessary for in~ population and increased life-cycle housing with the
City.
CITYOF
CHANHA
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Kathryn Aml~ Community Development Director
Teresa Burgess, City Engineer t~~
October 29, 2001
SUB J:
Amendments to Chapter 20
BACKGROUND
On October 22, 2001 the City Council tabled this item for additional information.
The Community Development Director and City Engineer met and have ~
changes based on the input from the City Council. The changes are in summary
the driveway will be allowed in the side yard to the pmtnmy line if there is an
encroachment agreement. The setbacks for dri.'veways without an encroachment
agreement shall be a minimllm setback of 5 feet beginning at the 20-foot yard
setback. Staff is also recommending a fee for the cost of recording the
encroachment agreements.
STAFF REVISED RECO~ATION (All- changes are shown in bold
or strikeout)
The Planning Commission recomme~led approval of the following am~ndme~ to
Chapter 20:
Section l. Section 20-1122 of'the Chanhasm City Code is tree, by mmaded as
follows:
Sec. 20-11~. Aeee~ and Driveways.
The purpose of this subsection is to provide minimum design critmfa, setback and slope
easements by providing setback standards; reduce erosion by requiring a hard surrm~ f~r
all driveways; to limit the number of driveway access points to public streets and to direct
drainage toward the street via establishment of minimum driveway slope standards.
Parking and loading spaces shall have proper access from a public right-of-way. The
number and width of access drives shall be located to minimize traffic congestion and
abnormal traffic hazard. All driveways shall meet the following criteria:
Todd Gerhardt
October 29, 2001
Page 2
Driveways shall be setback at least 40 5 feet from the side property lines, beginning at 20
feet from the front yard setback unless an encroachment agreement is received from
the city.
bi
Driveway grades shall be a winirnum of 0.5% and a maximum grade of 10% at any point
in the driveway.
In areas located within the Metropolitan Urban Services Area (MUSA).as identified on
the Comprehensive Plan, driveways shall be surfaced with bituminous, concrete or other
hard surface material, as approved by the City Engineer. In areas outside the MUSA,
driveways shall be surfaced from the intersection of the road through the right-of-way
portion of the driveway with bituminous, concrete or other hard surface material, as
approved by the City Engineer.
d,
On comer lots, the minimum comer clearance fxom the roadway right-of-way line shall
be at least 30 feet to the edge of the driveway.
For A-2, RSF, and R-4 residential uses, the width of the driveway access shall not exceed
24 feet at the right-of-way line. No portion of the right-of-way may be paved except that
portion used for the driveway. Inside the property line of the site, the maximum
driveway width shall not exceed 36 feet. The minimum driveway width shall not be less
than 10 feet.
For all other uses, the width of the dr~vgway access shall not exceed 36 feet in width
meas~ at the roadway right-of-way line. No portion of the right-of-way may be paved
except that portion used for the driveway.
g,
........... ~ .... ~vay
~veway setbac~ ~y ~ ~u~ subj~t ~ ~ following ~~:
1. The ~veway will not ~d~ wi~ ~y existing ~e~nt; ~d
2. ~ ~~ ~ ~ment ~c~~~t a~ent ~m ~e En~~g
Depa~ent; ~d
3. T~ l~afion of ~e ~veway must ~ appmv~ by ~e Ci~ ~~r ~ ens~ ~t it
w~l not cause ~oK onto Mj~nt ~~.
h. One driveway access is allowed from a single residential lot to the street.
A turnaround is required on a .driveway entering onto a state highway, county road or
collector roadway as designated in the comprehensive plan, and onto city streets where
this is deemed necessary by the City Engineer, based on traffic counts, sight distances,
street grades, or other relevant factors. If the engineer requires a un'naround, this
requirement will be stated on the building permit.
j. Separate driveways serving utility facilities are permitted.
Requires an
Encroachment
Agreement
feet
Does Not'Require an
Encroachment
Agreement
Three Streets in Lake Susan Hills
Subdivision
snowmobile trailer on gravel on side of garage
asphalt on side of home
concrete on side of home for basketball
hoop
asphalt driveway with gravel on
side of garage with boat on grass
on neighbor's property
City Council Meeting- October 22, 2001
Mayor Jansen: The motion carries 4-0 to table this item and you will then be hearing from staff as
they're responding and making a recommendation to us that will hopefully be presented at that
November 13"' meeting. So thank you for bringing your concerns forward. Appreciate it.
CONSmER AMI~.NDMI~NT 'IQ CITY (~DF. TO PERMIT ONE OlHVE~AY AC~ PER
LOT.
Kate Aanenson: Thank you. This item came out of the private street issue. This map refers to the
private street. That's not what we're talking about tonight. We're talking about a specific individual
driveway for a lot. But this was included in your packet and what we're focusing in on is these two lots.
There was no attempt to misdirect anybody but we're focusing on ~ two lots. The revised item that
went to the Planning Commission included that. When we did the private streets, private drive we
recognized the failure of one way to convey ~, which was if you could get an access through
adjoining property. This has two driveways on one lot. By having this ordinance in place it would
prevent this unless you requested a variance. The other reason we recommended this ordinance
amendment has been the proliferation of people that have accessory smmmms, by using them for
commercial businesses or renting out backs of garages. It causes a lot of concerns with adjoining
property and we don't have a took in place that says you only get one driveway. So based on the
outcome of this, private street, private driveway, we made and the concern that We've been receiving
over the last few years, staff proposed an ordinance amendment.' As it went through the process, the
Planning Commission had some concerns regarding driveway setbacks. Staff had reconm2mded 0. The
reason being is, there's been an increasing number of accessory stmcu~.~ that are parked in the front
yards where the driveway hits the streets. As you recall recently we passed an ordinance that says you
can't keep a boat or an RV on the street for more than 24-48 hours. Right now the city ordinance
recognizes that if you want to pave your driveway and put your boat or your accessory ~, your
snowmobile on the side yard, that's where it belongs. -That's the least intrusive to the neighborh~ and
that historically has been the way the ordinance has addressed that. What we're concerned with is that if
you were to go this way, it would create a lot of non-conforming situations and then we're back to the .
problem of trying to relocate those boats. There are a lot of subdivisions in our community that have
only 2 car .garages and this is how they address that. Even those with 3 car garages still have the other
uses, boats or whatever, or teenagers. Of the 2. So in this staff report you actually have two
reconanendations. One, the staff deferred, has a separate recommendation than the Planning
Commission. The Planning Commission wanted to leave in the language regarding the 10 foot setback.
Staff had reconumnded that we not have that in place. There was also some concern about, on (g). If
you follow on page 5, that we take that out. All lots. We have a lot of circumstances whe~ the city
actually had access to a lift station of such where actually over hms a property line because generally an
easement goes 5 feet on either side. We actually mn it down the middle of an easement so that would
make all of our easements that we have over property that we use for public purposes where we actually
have hard surface covers in violation of that too. So we recorded that come out. So there are some
differences there between the two. The City Manager has given his recommendation, but we believe this
is the way to go. The Planning Commission did table this. It did hear it twice and I'd be happy to answer
any questions that you may have.
Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you. I guess one of the issues that I started exploring with staff that maybe
would somehow meld staff's recommendation and the Planning Conwni~sion's recommendatiom The
key concern on staff's part that I'm hearing are these parking pads that people are putting next to the
garage space for the accessory vehicles. The concern on the Planning Commission's part is that they
don't want a functional part of the driveway running that close to the adjacent property, and that's where
they're coming up with wanting to do this 10 foot setback from the property line. There was an original,
20
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
going back to where staff had begun, your original discussion had been around a 5 foot potential setback,
. correct?
Kate Aanenson: Let me comment on that. That was engineering's recommendation. It was not the
planning staff.
Mayor Jansen: Okay. Alright. We'll pass the buck back over to engineering. Okay. An engineering
staff recommendation that a 5 foot might be acceptable, but in your discussion again it came down to
how many then non-conforming situations would we be creating.
Kate Aanenson: Right. What we did is we kind of went, there's some, again it's not, the world's not flat
and square and we've got some circumstances where they immediately ere, ate non-conforming situations.
For example on Lake Lucy we've got the common driveways. We' ve just recently given a couple of
variances showing for the driveway where we've got storm water ponds for example on this lot. This is a
large storm water. The driveway has to butt up against. You've got a 3:1 slope. This person hasn't
come in for the building permit yet. If we pass this ordinance, they would now need to come back and
get another variance.
Mayor Jansen: And let me maybe just explain to council what Kate is showing us is as I was then posing
the question of well what if we come down to say a 5 foot setback. What would that affect and what
she's showing us are projects that are in the system that would, that w~uld then require a variance to be
processed in order to bring them in. This being one of them. And the Leke Lucy project is One that
would be a non-conforming use if we put that setback in, and there they were trying to combine access
points so that there would be less access points on Lake Lucy so it was.
Kate Aanenson: They're right on the property line. So they're too close, right. And this is another
example, the one we just approved. Big Woods where we actually have our lift station and that's our
easement going down to the lift station and we're going to rebuild that one and it's on the property line.
It's into both easements on both sides. Actually kind of stmdd!, ing the property line. Again, it's our
easement but it is straddling the property line.
Councilman Boyle: Well axe there houses next to that Kate? I mean.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, there will be. Sure, there will be houses on either side, sure. We've got them
throughout the community where we have driveways getting to our utility services.
Mayor Jansen: And what is the reason for putting it right on the property line?
Kate Aanenson: Well generally there's a topographic situation. For example when we do specific
subdivisions when the homeowner picks out, and we've had this discussion before, you don't know the
exact placement of the home until the home buyer selects where it's going to go. We talk about what the
elevafion's going to be, but often we try to save a tree, so maybe we have to swing it to save a tree.
There's a wetland. There's an anomaly, we're trying to save grading. Too steep of a driveway. We're
trying to save grade so that's, you probably need that flexibility and so you won't know until what you're
holding up is an individual homeowner that's now put their money down, ready to go or doing some
modifications and saying now you're too close and we're saying, for the most part we don't have that
many problems. One of the issues the Planning Commission's had were side loaded garages. When we
have that. Generally we've required those now with some of those variances we've got the flag lots,
when those come through. Now that we, it's through the variance process that we can try to mitigate
21
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
that by adding additional trees or some of those sort of factors that those come into play. But we're
going to have some non-conforming situations of people that don't have permits yet to proceed.
Mayor Jansen: So then they would have to be coming through and looldng for the variance to be able to
build.
Kate Aanenson: Correct, to put their driveway in and I'm not sure there's always appropriate way to, in
this gentleman's case, I'm not sure how else you get there. There's a storm water pond there. I mean it
has to abut the property line.
Councilman Boyle: Well there will be exemptions Fm sure.
Kate Aanenson: Well I guess what, the rule I look at it, if you're giving a pr~l~ondemnce of variances
then maybe the rule doesn't work. You know, and we're saying there's going to be quite a few of them
out there. I mean that's where we want people to park their RV's and their boats is in their side yard and
to put it there and if you can't make your driveway closer than 10 feet, there's going to be a problem-
Councilman Boyle: I would have a serious problem if my next door neighbor wanted to abut my
property, and I go on my deck and have to make a decision if I'm going to sit in his boat or sit on my
deck, then having a cup of coffee. I mean that would bother me a great deal.
Kate Aanenson: That's what the ordinance says fight now, right.
Mayor Jansen: That they can actually do that. There is nothing to stop that situation from their putting
the boat alongside the house and there's numerous of them in the community, and though we did have a
discussion, and Todd I don't know if you want to jump. in and maybe share the perspective of how we
could actually modify this a little bit to not make those pads. Parking spaces or pads or whatever you
want to call that along the side of the garage non-conforming.
Todd Gerhardt: Yeah, you can definitely separate tim two issues. The driveway is one of-the issues and
then the parking along side of the house is the second issue. And what we've talked about doing is, right
now the ordinance would allow your neighbor to put his boat alongside the house. The question is,
would that be better to put the boat alongside of the house or put the boat alongside of the house on a
paved surface. I've got one in my neighborhood where the guy parks it along side of the house and he
didn't move it all summer. And he didn't mow it either and then I've got 2 neighbors that have paved
issues on each side of their house and it looks good. I mean they incor~ it with their driveway. So
one way, if you want to allow the paved surface alongside of the garage you can make a 20 foot or a 30
foot setback from the front yard before they can start to pave the side of their property. And then as the
driveway should go along side the lot line or not, you just have to understand if you go with that
ordinance, you're going to be processing quite a few variances that might go with that is what Kate's
telling you and she showed you at least 2 that will be coming to you fairly quickly if you pass that
ordinance tonight. If you put it on the lot line. I think engineering's standpoint requesting the 5 foot is to
allow for drainage I would think is why you're making that request.
Teresa Burgess: For drainage and then also for, that is where we nm our utility easements.
Todd Gerhardt: So not always is the utilities through there and we let people know that if you do pave
over them and we need to get to those utilities, we're going to rip them out. And usually enter into some
type of agreement with people with that, right?
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
Teresa Burgess: Right. And wc would still require an easement encroachment agreement with anybody
that was paving into that 5 foot. The purpose of that agreement is two fold. One, it informs us what's
going on out there and we have something in writing. And the other is it informs the neighbor or, not the
neighbor, the property owner that we do have some legal rights to that easement and they need to be
aware of what their, when they pave that section, what that means when they pave in that easement.
Mayor Jansen: And just so council understands, our current ordinance allows for those vehicles to be
parked alongside the garage and we've almost created the situation where people need to do that because
we've said you can't park them on the street. And so if that purpose is all6wed for, and it's the fact that
they're paved that it became an issue as a part of this conversation as to the setback on those pads. So
those would end up needing to be an exception and what Todd is saying is that by having that front yard
setback, they would not be paving that right out to the curb. It would start as a turn up closer to the
garage so that they could make that turning motion. But we would provide for that setback so it wouldn't
come all the way out to the street is where he was going with that.
Councilman Ayotte: Is there, from what I've heard and the e-mails that I've received, which have
primarily addressed setback. It's primarily the visual encroachment. It's the aesthetics. It's, as
Councilman Boyle points out. It's a good thing he doesn't live next to me because he'd see my red boat.
Councilman Boyle: Well as long as it's 10 feet away.
Councilman Ayotte: But is design standards an option, standards an option to, if someone introduces
something next to their home, that we can in some fashion make arrangements so it's not as distasteful?
I've done things to mine to accommodate my neighbor and so forth. Is that a reasonable consideration or
no?
Todd Gerhardt: I'd have to refer this over to Roger, but I'm not aware of any design standard that would
allow for a side yard screening of anything. Do you Roger?
Roger Knutson: I can't think, no. If you can articulate what you want done, we probably can accomplish
it. I mean if you want to require a fence or if you wanted to require some sort of screening, the only
reason I'm hesitating and this is really not my issue, is whether you'd have space under that
circumstances to do those sorts of things. I mean if you're putting your RV there and, or whatever you
put in there, do you have enough space to put in a fence or a row of trees? Probably not the trees but
maybe you have mom for a fence.
Mayor Jansen: And I'm assuming that that's a completely different issue than what we're actually
looking at here this evening.
Councilman Ayotte: Yeah, I understand, yeah. Yeah.
Mayor Jansen: So all that I was addressing with staff was that that seemed to be, at least one of the
issues that was coming up as far as if we put the setback in, we currently have that use in place and so
they were trying to remove the setback altogether. What I was trying to accomplish was how do we not
impact that particular use, because it is allowed for, and still include a reasonable setbaclc If the 5 feet is
something that the engineering department was thinking would be something they would like to see go in
or would be reasonable, it's still going to end up causing variances to come in on driveways on properties
23
City Council Meeting- October 22, 2001
where again, staff is trying to avoid or work with the topography of the lots and those are some of the
only options on those particular lots.
Councilman Boyle: You have to then ask the question I believe, what's the best mute? What's it going
to affect? Are you going to have more non-conforming lots or are you going to have more lots whewe
you're going to have an unfavorable situation of having two lots right together and a boat or an RV right
next to your property?
Kate Aanenson: You have to separate the boat or the RV because'it's going to go there no matter what.
If we tell somebody, your neighbors are complaining. They can't get to the mail because your boat's
parked in front of the mailbox. You've got to get it where it belongs and that's your side. You're going
to put it there. The question is, do you want them to tluow rock down? They don't need a permit.for
that. They're going to put rock down or they're going to pave it. So now they pave it and I'm going to
go out there and tell them, you're going to have to take the asphalt out because you can't go that close to
the side yard. Yes, you can put your boat there but you can't put a hard surface on them, w~ it's
rock orpavement or something. That's what I'm saying. There seems tobe alittle bit, adjust the
position on that. Say what you know, if that's where you're supposed to store it so it's not a nuisance.
Mayor Jansen: And have it be the most visually appealing versus having it turn into weeds growing up
around a vehicle.
Kate Aanenson: The dead grass or...
Mayor Jansen: Yeah, or the boat.
Councilman Boyle: So we're saying, don't pave it or don't put anything under it and you can go ahead
and park it there but the minute he puts some kind of permanent ~ there, then you need a 10 foot
~k or a 5 foot or whatever it might he.
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Councilman Boyle: Maybe the need is not to do it there if there's not a setback at all. I mean can you
approach it such that they can't put their boat or RV there? "
Kate Aanenson: We'd have to amend the ordinance.
Mayor Jansen: That issue was actually addressed at one point.
Kate Aanenson: I think you'd fill the room if we did that.
Todd Gerhardt: That gets into the administrative nightmare is my comment.
Councilman Labatt: Well what about, I know in my neighborhood we have restrictive covenants.
Kate Aanenson: Sure. Some neighborhoods have restrictive covenants. Some of the newer
subdivisions.
Councilman Labatt: You're not allowed to store boats outside so as more and more neighborhoods are
coming in, obviously they're having covenants too. So how many of them are having these same
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
covenants that my neighborhood has that says you're not allowed to store your boat or camper trailer, RV
outside in your driveway alongside your house? So then if that's the question, if the answer is well 99%
of the new developments are having that, then you go back and say well, for all these people that have it
right now, do you have to grandfather them in? And say well, boy I've had this here for 20 years. Now
you're going to change your little rules on me.
Kate Aanenson: Does that include extra cars? Like could you put a car on the side?
Councilman Labatt: I don't know. I mean you could,
Todd Gerhardt: See, this is what I was afraid of is that you were going to go down this mad. I mean how
can you tell one neighborhood that it's okay to park your boat in it and another neighborhood you can't.
That's up to the neighborhood and your restrictive covenants. And you're creating the nightmare that I
thought you would. How are we supposed to go out and enforce this? When you go into Carver Beach
where everybody has something in their side yard and one in my neighborhood that wants to do it and
you've already got 2 that are doing it and he cam't, I just don't know how you do it.
Councilman Labatt: I agree Todd. I don't, I think you're opening up Pandora's box. When I bought my
house and they said here's your covenants. Read them and before I bought I knew I couldn't put my boat
in my driveway or on the side of my house so.
Todd Gerhardt: We tried doing it 20 years ago and the city employee was run off the property
physically. To tell the guy he couldn't park his camper in the side yard. It's, people take their property
as their property and to go .in there and tell somebody you can't park your camper or your boat there, they
take that very personally.
Councilman Ayotte: I still would like to, because I don't know ifI got my question answered. Is it
doable to consider some sort of standard so that if someone does introduce a private driveway, that .
they'd be held to some sort of standard so they are not imposing something negative to your neighbors..
Is there any way of researching that?
Teresa Burgess: There are some standards that are imposed on that property owner. The property
owner cannot change drainage onto their neighboring property. So for instance they cannot direct more
drainage towards their neighbor. So that means they can't change the grades. They couldn't come in.and
make a substantial change to install that driveway. They can't make substantial grading changes to their
property without applying for a grading permit. So those are things that we can do already. They're
already existing in the ordinance. As far as putting a fence down the property line, that could be a
problem in a number of cases. If we have utilities in those areas, we're going to have to give those
people an exception so we're going to be back into that variance. We probably don't have room for trees
and we would not allow trees in those easements. If we were to...
Kate Aanenson: ...and I tell they've got to plant trees or put a fence in, they're not going to pave it.
They're just going to park their boat there. More than likely.
Councilman Ayotte: So the answer is it's not practical.
Kate Aanenson: Well I guess what I'm saying is what's the appropriate nexus to say if you're going to
make it aesthetically pleasing, then you have to do this much more. Right now you can park your boat
there. I mean that happens all over the city in the areas where there's not restrictive covenants. And as
25
City Council Meeting- October 22, 2001
far as the number of subdivisions that have restrictive covenants, there's a lot, probably equal that don't
have restrictive covenants, or more.
Mayor Jansen: And then the alternative is, you end up with these boats parked in back yards.
Kate Aanenson: Right, and there are some of those around the community too. It's in the back yard and
we get calls on that...
Todd Gerhardt: And that's what Jeff gets paid for.
Mayor Jansen: And that's even worst.
Kate Aanenson: Worst, yes.
Mayor Jansen: I guess where I was trying to go was, the inbetween. You know how do we address the
issue of not wanting that active driveway right on the property line, but not disallowing or making
difficulties parking areas next to the garages that are being used for a purpose that's allowed.
Councilman Ayotte: See I don't understand the advantage of a 5 foot versus a 10 foot vexsus a 3 foot
versus a 2 foot. ff a setback is a setback.
Kate Aanenson: Well the 5 foot is a general utility easement. Generally the utility easement on a side
yard is 5 foot on either side. That's where the magic 5 foot comes from.
Teresa Burgess: That's where the magic 5 foot comes into. That is what is dedicated on the plat is 5
foot. I don't know where 3 foot or 1 foot comes from.
Councilman Ayotte: That's just came out
Teresa Burgess: 10 foot is a number that also comes out because that's a standard rounded number..It
seems like everything's a setback of rounded 10's, 20's, 30's, and so that's where the 10 comes from.
Mayor Jansen: So I can see where we could maybe justify the 5 foot. h will still cause variances to
come in for the driveways, but you could find a way then to put that 5 foot on there and mak~ it exempt
on these parking areas with that 20 foot setback on the parking area to the fi'ont yard.
Councilman Boyle: ff there was no sexback could you feasibility have 2 driveways together7 Run right
down the property line.
Kate Aanenson: That's what I'm saying. That's a circumstance we have right now and the city has
some, fight. Right. And people do share common driveways. That's the ones I was pointing out,
Teresa Burgess: That is something we actually encourage in many cases. Commercial drive would be a
perfect example. We encourage a shared driveway in places where.
Councilman Boyle: I don't think I'm talking about a shared driveway. I'm talking about.
Teresa Burgess: Where we would have them put them side by side.
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
Councilman Boyle: Really?
Teresa Burgess: And that would be to limit access to the mad. The number of access points. The mom
access points on a road, the more points of potential conflict, potential accidents. And so we do
encourage that in sornecases. BUt we usually try to narrow them down. We don't have 24 foot on either
side. We wouldn't have 48 foot of pavement in those cases. And most developers won't do that. It's a
cost savings to put the driveways together. You can save 24 foot of pavement and it's a decreased cost
and an increased green space.
Roger Knutson: My experience in some other cities, and it's not a common experience but when you
have residential property abutting directly on a high spe.~ roadway and you want to minimize turning
movements on that roadway. I've seen cities require shared driveways.
Mayor Jansen: Which is what we did on Lake Lucy Road.
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Roger Knutson: Because you want to cut down on the points of access on that high speed roadway. I've
never seen that required on a local street but on the high speed collector or arterials, cities have'
conditioned approval of the plats on that.
Mayor Jansen: But the main concern that the Planning Commissioners were looking at again from
reading the verbatim minutes, their concern was the active part of the driveway and it was the side loaded
garage that very much drove that discussion. And then the topography was raised as far as abutting
properties and how the driveway would affect an abutting property. But I don't believe that you would
have, for instance staff driving a driveway off to the side of a property if it's going to be impacting an
environmental issue or major trees. I think everyone tries to avoid those sorts of situations. But again,
the major issue seemed to be more that active part of the driveway and not wanting it right next to the
abutting properties windows if it's in fact going to be going right by the side of the house was more an
issue so the parking area wasn't so much the concern being that close. I do know that we have at least
one member of the public present this evening that would like to make comment on this issue. If council
is okay with my opening it up for a brief 5 minute presentation from the resident, then I will do that. If
you would like to address this issue at this time to the council, you're certainly welcome to step forward
to the microphone and I'm just going to reiterate what we talked about earlier today. If we could just
keep the comments strictly to the issue that we're reviewing, it would certainly be appreciated and avoid
there being any derogatory comments.
Councilman Ayotte: We're going to do multi-media.
Debbie Lloyd: You betcha. Would you mind Todd putting your finger right there, holding that? Thank
you.
Councilman Labatt: Do you want me to hold that for you Debbie?
Debbie Lloyd: Steve, would you mind just looking at that number and verifying that it's 10 feet.
Councilman Labatt: Yeah, it's 10. Sure.
27
City Council Meeting- October 22, 2001
Debbie Lloyd: Thank you. We'll just leave that there. I like visuals. I was never in education but I
think they can be helpful. My name's Debbie Lloyd. I live at 7302 Laredo Drive. And I'm going to try
to keep this short and succinct. You did receive the survey that I sent to you e-mail yesterday. Here are
the pictures I was unable to send over e-mail. We just got a digital camera and I haven't figured Out how
to do it. Some brief comments. A driveway needs to be at least 10 feet, to have at least a 10 foot side
yard setback for privacy. For preservation of trees. To separate i~ous surfaces. To aid in the
absorption of runoff. Gary asked a question just a few moments ago about could 2 driveways nm along
together on a lot line. With this ordinance allowing 36 feet of a paved surfar~, you could have
theoretically 72 feet of paved surface. It's like a parking lot running down a lot line. I really don't think
that's what we want for our community. I thinlt we're getting a little side barred with parking areas
versus driveways. I have some pictures here. The first one's an .example of two garages side by side
where there's no setback. He took their parking pads for their boats and that's it. Imagine if one of those
garages was your bedroom window. The second page is a neighborhood where you have the left one has
provided a buffer yard adjacent to the ~ line maybe 2 feet wide. The property owner on the right
has provided a buffer yard a little larger. Maybe 5 feet. They have tried to make it aestheti~y a little
more pleasing. The next page is, if anyone's visited your fellow council membem, this is Bob Ayotte's
house. Again he has adequate side yard setbacks and he has done a good job of trying to make it
environmentally friendly for his neighbors. That is a rock surface. On the issue relative to the survey I
did again, this is on an old neighborhood with 3 driveway access points. It's a curved driveway with
access points on 2 different streets, plus a third driveway into a garage. And the last page is in my
neighborhood. It's a home with a tuck under garage on one street and an access to an upper garage on
another street. When I surveyed 906 homes I found that only 18 of the homes had parking smlctures
within 10 feet of their lot lines. And another 7 were really questionable. I wasn't sure of the distance,
but really what surprised me is there were more homes with more one driveway curb cut into their
property than there were homes in violation either wi/h a parking pad for a boat or a driveway running
next to each other. So if this is our existing community, there's a 2% overall population, and of course
there can be error in this study, but I really tried to go into the entire community. I looked on a map and
kind of went in and around a circular drive. I think we have a method for the variance that Kate is
concerned about and I thought that's what variances were for. The unique situations. The ~hic
situations. I think by and large most of our new development has a 10 foot side yard sethadk, if not
greater because most driveways go inw the garage. The houses are constn,wted at least 10 feet from side
yard setbacks. Again, I'm most concern about RSF districts. PUD's have their own rules and the larger
lots, I don't know too much about but I think they're moro ~ RSF. And I just would like to ask Jan to
come up here for a second because.
Mayor Jansen: And then I need you to wrap up pretty quick, thank you.
Debbie Lloyd: We will. A driveway needs to be just a driveway into and within one lot, not into and
through one lot to another lot.
Councilman Ayotte: Say that again?
Debbie Lloyd: Okay. A driveway needs to be just a driveway into and within one lot, not into and
through to another lot. And that's what Jan's going to address very quickly. Because code needs to be
really clear about thaL Thank you.
Jan Paulsen: My name is Jan Paulsen. I live at 7305 Iauedo Drive and I wish to address kind of the
unspoken driveway and that's called the cross access driveway. That's this one. Going up through one
lot, into another lot. This could be, it is essentially like a wad. Ever since 1990 a driveway like this has
28
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
had to be within a 30 foot easement like that. 30 feet across. In fact just this July you passed a
subdivision next door to us that requires a 30 foot cross access easement going down to the bottom lot.
would like to suggest that the solution to a landlocked lot is already available in code and it's called a
private street. It starts here. Runs right up through here and then it becomes a driveway here. I think
cross access driveways should not be allowed,.especially in RSF districts and that's how you could solve
that pmblera. Private streets there for access for a landlocked lot and I suggest that if you don't have 30
feet for an access, the lot should stay landlocked, thank you.
Mayor Jansen: Thank you. That issue was raised at the Planning Commission and having been given
that information we have been forwarded the recommendation as it is. So I'm hopeful that everyone
went through the verbatim minutes as this came up from the Planning Commission so that we don't
maybe have to re-hash that piece of it again. But as to some of the other issues, I mean you:~e seeing the
visuals on this. I'll bring this back to council as far as any additional comments or if you want any
clarification from staff at this point.
Councilman Ayotte: Well I just want to ask you for your honest .opinion, of all the pictures that are
shown here, which is the most aesthetically appealing?
Mayor Jansen: You did a wonderful job Councilman Ayotte.
Councilman Ayotte: Thank you. I just wanted, but seriously though. I believe people who have a
concern about setback is more with the visual aspects of it. And in my personal situation what I did is I
went and talked to the neighbors before I did anything and I made sure that it was something that could
be altered if the next neighbor moved in and didn't like it, as what happened by my flower bed in the
back yard which is another story. But I really think that I'd like, personally I'd like to look at other ways
of addressing this thing because, and I don't know, this first picture I don't want it to go on TV because it
does look bad, but it's exactly what I'm talking about. That is what folks'get upset about. They don't get
upset about something that's well maintained and taken care of so I'm still stuck on my standard and I'm
not exactly sure how to get off that one. The other part of it is, I don't know how we enforce this so I'm
trying to work that through because we can't give to staff something that is not enforceable. Cannot do
it.
Mayor Jansen: And I heard the engineer say that were we to require that there be a fence or any
landscaping in that easement potentially, they're going to object to that sort of a structure being placed in
the utility easement.
Councilman Ayotte: I understand and I'm not saying that's a standard. I'm saying I'm not sure what that
would be, I don't know.
Mayor Jansen: And I don't know that that's something that we can actually address this evening.
Councilman Ayotte: I agree.
Roger Knutson: Mayor, just one last comment. I t3ink Councilman Ayotte what you said is excellent
advice for anyone who's doing anything is to go talk to your neighbors. But that's one thing we can't do
by ordinance. We can't delegate to the neighbors the right to approve something. We can establish
standards but the one you can't establish is getting your neighbor's approval. If you can develop
standards and enforce them uniformly, that's fine but that's one we just can't, one place we can't go.
29
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
Councilman Ayotte: I understand.
Mayor Jansen: Thank you for mentioning that. It does go a long way to just work out the conmmn
courtesies between neighbors on issues like that. Can we arrive at any conclusions this evening? We
have a staff recommendation. We have a Planning Commission recommendation.
Councilman Boyle: Can I have just one more question? We use, what was it Lake Lucy? Where was the
example you showed a little bit ago where they're going to develop some more lots that would,, was that
Kate Aanenson: Those have already been developed with shared driveways.
Councilman Boyle: They have been with shared driveways, okay.
Kate Aanenson: Yes.
Councilman Boyle: So if they want to do something, that would require variances there. What I'm
trying to get to is how many realistic variances are we talking about? Is it really a lot? Or could it be a
Kate Aanenson: Yes.
Councilman Boyle: Okay.
Kate Aanenson: Well th~ bottom line is, they can put their boat in the side yard. That's what we want.
Okay, that's where it goes. The question is, do you want to allow them to put a hard surface underneath?
That's really the question here. We're going to have some problems. If you want to take them all
through variances and plug up the system, that's fine. We can do that, but the bottom line is people are
going to put their boats in the side yard. That's where they belong.
Councilman Boyle: I agree.
Kate Aanenson: So the question is, do you want to give that flexiNlity for the people that yes, that pave
it. You have a 10 foot setback. The pavement goes to the garage, lust exactly as was stated and as I
showed in my example, but generally people tend to slip a little bit asphalt over. I think that's what the
mayor suggested was you get back past that point, maim that extra mm to go Over. You see that in 3 stall
garages. Generally a developer doesn't run the full 3 car width all the way out to the street. Generally
they're tapered down. That's pretty much standard practice. I guess we were looking at the same sort of
thing when we get that request.
Councilman Boyle: Understand.
Councilman Labatt: How about a resident has a tuck under garage, it's acces~ from the lower level.
You know behind the house. Back yard. And they want to nm a driveway back to there.
Kate Aanenson: That's what we're trying to prevent. That's where we've had the problems. This would
say I driveway per lot. That's the problem we've been having when people do access onto 2 streets.
Coming through the back. Putting a storage shed out in the back. Coming back and fort~ That's what
causes the neighbors some problems too so everything, we try to maintain some uniformity and I think
30
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
that's what Todd was getting at too. Is trying to treating people equally throughout the community. Now
if you live in an association and that's what you've chosen to have those roles in place, that's the lifestyle
or the thing that those people have chosen. Other people specifically pick neighborhoods that they can
do those. We get questions of people looking for property that specifically say, these are my needs. Can
I put an accessory structure out? What sort of things can I do because that meets their needs. Whether
it's a batting cage or a swing set, they ask those questions. What they can do.
Teresa Burgess: As it stands right now, engineering gets a number of requests for second and third
driveways. We have no legal authority to say no and that's what we're asking for is the legal authority to
say no. We could theoretically have 7 driveways into 1 paine1. There is nothing we can do to stop them
as long as it's reasonable and not a significant grading change that they're making. And we want to be
able to control that. Every driveway onto a road is a potential conflict with the traveling public. It's a
potential place for an accident. It's a place that slows down traffic as you have people trying to figure
out where am I supposed to mm. And so we want to avoid that situation. I do have an alternative that
I'll just throw out for the council for consideration. As it stands right now there is no easement, there is
not setback from the property line. If you'd like to have a setback without having to go through a
variance process, that would allow staff to review that, you could do that through the easement
encroachment agreement requiring that all driveways or pads within that 5 foot easement is required to
go through a review process and acquire an easement encroachment agreement. At this point we try to
catch them all. We do try to get those easement agreements in but I'm not sure, correct me if I'm wrong
Roger, there' s nothing that requires that easement encroachment agreement. It' s really if the property
owner consents.
Roger K_nutson: It's not required unless they are interfering with the present use, our present use of the
property.
Teresa Burgess: So if we don't have a utility in that easement, they don't have to sign an easement
encroachment agreement. You could require them to sign an easement encroachment agreement every
time they do it. Whether we are in there or not.
Councilman Ayotte: That'd be an additional workload for staff.
Teresa Burgess: Engineering would like to review those. We would be willing to do that. It would be a
staff level, we would like to get easement encroachment agreements on all those easements when they go
right up to the lot line. That is something that we try to catch those as it is.
Mayor Jansen: Is that because of drainage issues?
Teresa Burgess: Because of drainage issues. We would like to review those and so we do try to catch
them. When we see somebody working, we stop by. We ask what they're doing. We ask for plans so
that is not really an increase in staff effort. And it would eliminate the need to go through the variance
process. It would also allow us the teeth to say you have to have us review this. You have to stop and let
us take a look at it. It's a halfway inbetween.
Mayor Jansen: And so that would be bringing forward an amendment to a separate ordinance, not this
particular ordinance, correct?
Teresa Burgess: Roger?
31
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
Roger Knutson: An ordinance is an ordinance no matter where you tuck it. If you want to put it in here,
you cer~nly could put it in here. You could put it somep~ else. If you think it needs some more work
or more study, you could do this now and address that issue later. It's really your decision.
Mayor Jansen: Okay.
Roger Knutson: But if you want it here, you could put something. 'You could put it here. The only,
yeah. You could.
Mayor Jansen: Alright, thank you.
Councilman Labatt: So, let me just, Kate. I'm trying to decipher-between the Planning Commission
recommendation and your recommendation, or staff's recomrm~dation. Planning Commission wants a
10 foot side setback Right? And you don't?
Kate Aanenson: Correct. Right.
Councilman Labatt: And then (g) has also been omitted from your's. Can you explain that again?
Kate Aanenson: Well basically it just ties into the fact that if you don't have the, if you allow them to go
into that it's moot for the Planning Commission. The side yard setback. Because if you let them go into
the 5 foot you're in an easement so they would conflict with each other so we said, and like I said for
example we already have a driveway access that str~_ddled the 5 foot. We have a 10 foot paved surface
going back to one of our utility structm~. That's completely within that 5 foot so it doesn't meet that. It
fails that test. So that's why we would strike it out.
Councilman Labatt: Okay.
Kate Aanenson: That's why we have the utility easement. To use it to get through our stuff.
Councilman Boyle: Can I ask one more while you're thinking Steve?
Councilman Labatt: Sure, go right aheaui. It might trigger me again.
Councilman Boyle: I'm a little, 6 people on the Planning Commission said they wanted 10 foot setback.
Side setback. Why? Primadly. What was their reasoning?
Kate Aanenson: One of it had to do with the fact that there was concern with the side loaded garage.
Councilman Boyle: Right, I remember reading the minutes. What was the primary, do you think:
reason?
Mayor Jansen: From what I gathered from the verbatim minutes, and Alison is here. She can ~y
address it but reading the verbatim minutes, their focus was more on the active use of the driveway going
next to a home.
Councilman Boyle: Okay. That's as I read it too. I just wanted to maim sure that that was it.
Kate Aanenson: That was my understanding too.
32
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
Councilman Labatt: So they want to eliminate it by putting a setback, they want to eliminate a person
using that side you know access driveway.
Kate Aanenson: Right.
Councilman Labatt: On the side to access another structure.
Kate Aanenson: Well this ordinance, I mean it keeps it 10 feet away but it doesn't prohibit a side loaded
driveway. The way they have it structured, it gives it 10 feet.
Councilman Ayotte: Personally I'd like the direction to staff to revisit the utility encroachment position
and to consider any other options other than setback that would possibly deal with encroachment.
Encroachment doesn't have to be physical in terms of the distance. That's what I'd like to do. The
setback distance to me is too difficult to enforce but I understand completely Councilman Boyle's
position earlier of what it does to a neighbor and I'm just wondering whether or not we can introduce
something that is easily administered, yet sensible. And going towards the encroachment business is a
step in that direction. But I don't want to go near this thing tonight because it has to be altered too
much.
Mayor Jansen: Well what I'm hearing, if we were to go with Teresa's recommendation would be that we
would take the staff recommendation and add the point for your review.
Teresa Burgess: Then we would go back and look at the encroachment agreement and see if we can't
get some teeth into requiring those encroachment agreements.
Councilman Labatt: What are we doing as far as creating problems for existing homes already? Are they
going to have to come in and apply for a variance?
Teresa Burgess: They would have to come in and sign an encroachment agreement with the city each
time that they were to pave into that area.
Councilman Labatt: Okay. What about everybody's who existing right now?
Teresa Burgess: That would be with those existing homes. Properties that come in for new building
permits, we usually work with them to avoid that situation, but they would just need to do an
encroachment agreement if they were to be paving into the 5 foot easement that's already out there. And
in that encroachment agreement we would have the ability to discuss how close can they get to the
property line. Should they do anything to address drainage issues? What happens if we need to get into
that easement? What happens to the pavement? Who's responsibility is it to repair it? Those issues
could be addressed in the encroachment agreement.
Councilman Labatt: Okay. So how do we as a council become proactive when we have new
developments coming in that aren't coming in as a PUD, don't have the covenants but want to have, eau
we dictate to them so and to avoid having variances come up in the future on this, to push the building
pad over to accommodate for this in the furore or do we have that authority?
Teresa Burgess: As the ordinance sits right now, if you were to force them to push that building over
further, they could park 2 boats or a boat and a motorcycle or, they could park up to that property line
33
City Council Meeting- October 22, 2001
and there's nothing to stop them. If they have more space between their garage and the property line,
they can park more vehicles. Or they can leave a space between their garage and the vehicle and park it
right up to that property line. There's nothing to stop them from doing that as it sits right now.
Kate Aanenson: Let me just answer it a different way. They show us an elevation approximate- for
drainage. Lowest floor elevation and typical style of home. Whether it's a rambler, lookout, walkout.
Exactly how it sits on the lot is not determined until the homeowner gets it. And they're going to maim
that decision. Some people go with a 2 car garage assuming that down the road they're going to put 3 on
and site the house further to the side so there's so many variables. You can't, when it comes in for
subdivision, the ordinance says you can have that so we couldn't stop it at that time.
Councilman Ayotte: It's just avoiding the adversity ofputting something there that will have an adverse
impact for drainage and that sort of thing.
Kate Aanenson: Right.
Councilman Ayotte: And it's not in the utility.
Teresa Burgess: They cannot i ,mpact that drainage. They are required to convey the drainage as it sits
when they came into the property. Now they can alter it within their tn'operty but when it leaves their
~ it still has to be conveyed in the same manner. So they can't damup what's coming in from
another property. At the same time they can't suddenly start dumping a lot more than what was being nm
off in their property.
Kate Aanenson: But they can park a camper or...and have the paved surface that goes, they're still going
to park the boats. That's where we want them to be. Not in the front yard. Not in the back yard.
Councilman Ayotte: That's why I don't like the setback at all. I would prefer to look at it in another
vein.
Kate Aanenson: Right, well that's what I'm saying. And ifpeople have to jump that hurdle, they're just
going to park it either on gravel, which they don't need a permit for. They're going to come in and get
some gravel. And/or something else and not do the paved surface. People do it every day and they don't
need a permit for it so that's...
Teresa Burgess: I know the one you're thinking of Councilmember Ayotte Fm sure is the one that's in
your neighborhood right now. He moved less dirt than is required to get a permit through the city. He
moved less than 50 cubic yards of dirt and so the only reason we were aware of it is one of our
employees drove by and noticed it and stopped by and said what's going on. And he is in compliance.
He's not changing the drainage patterns. It's one of those that we would approve. If it was to come
through, we would approve it. There's no reason not to and when he gets done it will, although not as
well screened as your's, it will fit into the neighborhood. And so that is a situation where the homes are
very close. There is no alternative. He doem't really have a choice except to park in an area with no
paving or to pave it, make it look nice and put his boat there.
Mayor Jansen: So if as part of the motion we would like to direct staff to review the encroachment
proposal this evening and bring that back to us, it sounds like we could have that handled and move thi~
issue forward. Is what I'm hearing. With that, we've been on thi~ for quite for a while. I don't know if
we're ready for someone to make a motion.
34
City Council Meeting - October 22, 2001
Councilman Ayotte: I'm not.
Councilman Boyle: Well I wouldn't.
Mayor Jansen: A motion to table also works. I'm just saying somebody make a motion.
Councilman Labatt: I move we table this to allow staff to look at making another condition of reviewing
encroachment agreement.
Mayor Jansen: And you would like to see that be a part of this ordinance versus it being part of the
separate engineering ordinance.
Councilman Labatt: Right.
Mayor Jansen: Alright. And a second?
Councilman Boyle: Second.
Mayor Jansen: Discussion of the motion. Teresa, is that enough direction for you as to what to come
back to us with as far as adding something to this addressing the encroachment issue?
Teresa Burgess: Kate and I will work on it and I'm sure it will get us started in the right direction.
Mayor Jansen: Okay, great.
Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Boyle seconded to table an amendment to the City Code to
permit one driveway access per lot with direction to staff to address the encroachment agreement.
Ail voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 4 to 0.
APPROVE CITY CODE AMENDMENT ~LARIFYING PROCEDIJRE~ FOR
ADMINISTRATIVE SUBDMSIONS. '
Kate Aanenson: This item came via the Planning Commission and the staff regarding administrative
subdivisions that get approved and aren't always rea:ordeal in a timely manner. Again, you asked for
housekeeping. We felt it was important. What caused some ambiguity, if you look on Section 18-37, as
Sharmin went through and re-codified the code regarding private streets. In Section (a) got new language
that was recently adopted within the last few months regarding the private streets up to 4 lots. Again,
administrative subdivision or a better term to call it would be a lot line adjustment does not require
approval from the city. There's a different exemption if it's 20 acres, agricultural and they want to split
it into 20 acres, that's exempt from the subdivision. What we're doing here is, because it's exempt from
the subdivision, we can't put those rules in place, and that was our recommendation to the Planning
Commission. The Planning Commission felt like if that discourages somebody, we'd like to leave the
language in. Again staff's concern was that it created some ambiguity. There was some concern with
the Planning Commission that other communities have this language in, specifically the City of Plymouth
was stated and the fact that our city attorney also represents them. I did call the City of Plymouth the
next morning and they were advised by their city attorney, that they should amend their subdivision
regulations because they weren't consistent with the State law. So again our city attorney also advises
the same, so our language that the staff is recommending again differs from the Planning Commission
35
C1TYOF
Minnesota 55317
95293Z1900
General Fax
952.93Z5739
952.93Z9152
l~ing Det, an~t
952.934.2524
TO:
Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
FROM:
Sharmin A]-Jaff, Senior Planner
Matt Saam, Project Engineer
DATE: October 8, 2001
SUB&
Amendments to Chapter 20
MANAGER'S COMMENTS: I support the Planning staff's
recommendation that "no driveway side yard setbacks should be required."
If we establish a setback requirement, we also will create numerous non-
conforming situations throughout the community.' For example, every
boat, car, or RV that is currently parked in a paved side yard would
become a non-conforming use. It would be an administrative nightmare if
thc city had to tell each individual homeowner that they can no longer park
their recreational vehicle in their side yard.
The i~tent of this ordinance is to regulate how many private driveways a
single family home can have--not if they can park their boat in a paved.
side yard. I strongly recommend that the City Council not include a paved
driveway side yard setback when considering the number of driveways for
residential use.
BACKGROUND
The city has been experiencing a proliferation of msid~ts u~ing acces~
structures accessed by second driveways. This is resulting in lots with two
driveways within residential low-density districts. These driveways are ~g
problems in some neighborhoods.
Also, the issue of landlocked parcels which are able to gain access through cross
access agreements remain uncontrolled under the current ordinances. In order to
give the city some discretion in denying such uses or approving them with
conditions, staff is recommending the attached ordinance amendment be
approved.
One significant point that staff must clarify is that this amendment pertains to
private driveways, which are defined in the ordinance as "Driveway means a
private access from a street to an individual lot." The driveway in question serves
a single home. This is not a private street which is defined as "Private street
1oo~ 08
tunu~!u!lAI
[3
~loeq~s
~oo~ OS
cuncu!u!~
Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
October 8, 2001
Page 2
means a street serving as vehicular access to two (2) or more parcels of land which is not
dedicated to the public but is owned by one (1) or more private parties."
A driveway and a private street should not be confused as being the same. A driveway serves
one home and is a permitted use. A private street serves up to four homes and is only permitted
as a variance, under the subdivision ordinance.
At the August 21, 2001 Planning Commission meeting, some issues were raised regarding the
ordinance amendment. The Planning Commission tabled action on this amendment and directed
staff to respond to them.. They are as follows:
a) "Code currently requires a 10' side yard setback for structures. A driveway is a structure.
Why reduce it to 5'?"
Answer: See Sec. 20-908 subpara. 5(e). Driveways are exempt from the structure setback
requirement. Staff initially proposed a 5 foot setback on all driveways. A number of in-house
discussions between the Planning and Engineering departments concluded that there will be
greater ramifications if a setback was required on driveways 1) create nonconforming uses,
2) most homeowners pave a driveway along the side of their garage, within the side yard setback
to park recreational vehicles, and 3) and approving a setback will create conflicts within the city
code.
The city has some control over the location of driveways. There are utility and drainage
easements that nm along the interior parameter of a lot. These easements can be as narrow as 5
feet. If there are utilities within these easements, they are typically wider. In order for a
homeowner to pave over the easement, they must enter into an encroachment agreement. This
allows the city to evaluate these driveways on' individual basis. This has rarely created a
problem in the past and we have always been able to work with homeowners to find agreeable
solutions.
The Planning Commission recommended a 10 foot setback. Staff is recommending no setback
be required.
b) "Code already requires a 10% maximum grade for a driveway."
Answer: True. See Section 18-60 (e) Lots. This requirement is in the subdivision ordinance.
Staff is amending the zoning ordinance to be able to regulate building permits.
e) "No minimum widths are required? The right-of-way is undefined, no minimum widths for a
right-of-way?"
Answer: We've added a minimum width of 10' for driveways. We are not dealing with fight-of-
way widths for this ordinance.
f) "If private driveways are to be used in Chanhassen, they should be excluded from RSF
zoning...It is inappropriate to permit private driveways in RSF."
Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
October 8, 2001
Page 3
Answer. The intent of this proposed ordinance is to regulate private driveways used for every
single family home. We cannot exclude private driveways from RSF zoning. It would simply
deny homeowners access to their property.
PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE:
On August 21, 2001, the Planning Commission reviewed and tabled action on this item. Some
issues were raised regarding the difference between a private street and a private driveway. Staff
clarified the difference and presented the ordinance amendment again to the Commission.
On September 18, 2001, the Planning Commission reviewed and approved this ordinance
amendment unanimously. The Planning Commission required a 10 foot side yard setback on all
private driveways. We need to remind the City Council that this ordinance amendment will
create nonconforming uses in the city and conflicts within the City Code. We also must point
out that home owners park their recreational vehicles within the side yard after extending their
driveway to that area. Staff strongly recommends that there be no side yard setback required.
PLANNING COMMISSION I~ECOMMENDATION(Aii sh.a__~_ lanmm_oe has been added)
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the following ~nts to Chapter 20:
Section 1. Section 20-1122 of the Chanhassen City Code is hereby ~ as follows:
Sec. 20-1122. Access and. '.D~i.'.vew~...ys.
setback standards; reduce erosion'bYstreetsrequm~.~_sn, d..to~: '
driveway access poinis to public ......
minimum driveway slope standards. Parking and loading spaces shall have proper access from a public
fight-of-way. The number and width of access drives shall be locat~ to minimize ffaf~¢ collgestioxl and
h .ard. AU ww,y,,
a.
b.
v w,,y grade
in the .driveway.
C.
por on of ....
approved by the City Engineer.' 3.
d.
On comer lots, the minimum ~ C..1.~~~~~~¢~
be at least 30 feet to the edge. O.f... '.the..:
Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
October 8, 2001
Page 4
For A-2,.RSE and R-4 ~'esidential. uses, the 'width.' Of..the'dri:v. ,ewayi.' .aC~.?s~_not e~
24 feet at the. dght'.-0f-way line.. ,NO porti'on of the ri.gt!t-of-Way.~ay.:be pav~ ex~pt-.'fi!at
p0r!i.,'on Used for the driveway..Inside.the property.line Of the. site., ..the ~
.driveway Width shall not ex.c .ged 36 feet, The ~ driveway:width shall.not be 1~
than 10 feeC
Nor all other, u~s: ~ width, of..th~ drivewaY':ac~.." .shall'~0t~exce~ a6[f.'~ '__m. wi~.th
meas~ a.t .the roadway, right .~f-w..ay line;. No ~on
exc~pt'~ portion- used foithe dd.'~eway;-
g* .
On lots nptm~ 'ting the minimum width requirements at-the fight~, f-w~ line,
driveway setback may bereduced subject tolhe f011o..~g c~
I. The driveway' wi!l..notjnte .rfere.with any existing.easement;'and
2, The location of the'driveway must be approved.by..the._CivjEn~'to .ensue_ .....that.it
will not cause mn0ff onto. adjacent :properties.
h.
One dri'veway access'is allowed from a single residential, lot..:tO the:stre~
A .umm~und is required:on.a driveway entering onto a S .rote'highway, cp. un~.road'or
collecto~'roadway as-designated in the comprehensive' plan, and onto ~'iiy's .tr~.ts where
this'is d~med :necessary by the City Engineer., based on'uaffic counts, sigh..tdistances~
street grades, or other relevant factors. If a turnaround is required by the engin .eer~ this
requirement.will be stated on the building permit.
j. Separate dri'veways serving utility facilities are permitted..
.S. TAFF RECOMMENDATION(Staff's Amendment to Planning Commi~ion's
.Recommendation-The difference between the two recommendations is the language that
has been struck though) All shaded laneuaee is the same as the Planning Commission's
recommendation;
Staff recommends the City Council approve the following an~ndrn~nts to C~pter 20:
Section 1. Section 20-1122 of the Chanhassen City Code is hereby amend~ as follows:
Sec. 20-1122. Access and. Driveways.
The purpose of this subsection is to provide minimum design Criteria, ~ md slope ~andards for
~t?~k ~'",,~nd,~"~,,~; reduce ,erosiqn-by requiring a hard surface for_al!drive_waYs; to'limit the nn'm.!~eriof
driveway ~s points to Public-_streets and to 'direct drainage mwaid.the street via ~tabiishm~. t Of
minimum driveway slope standards. Parking and loading spaces shall have proper access from a public
right-of-way, The number and width of access drives shall be located to minimize traffic congestion and
abnormal traffic hazard, All driveways slm!l .m~t the following criteria:
b.
'Driveway grades shall be a minimum of 0.5% and a maximum grade of'i0% at any point
in the driveway.
Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
October 8, 2001
Page 5
C.
driveways ~l.:t~
portion of the driveway'.~.',~.if."",£ ~.'~:'.__
approved'by ~ city .m.g~.'"/~
d.
t~ a~ ~e~t 3o feet' ~'~: ~~'d -
e=
F~ A-2, RSF, "..~.R'.4
..
than 10 feec
g.
Sepante driveways ~.g.~ ~...¢ :.'a~..:~~:
A'I'FACHMENTS
,.
2.
3.
4.
Illustration.
Planning Commission Minutes doted August 21, 2001.
Planning Commission Minutes dated September 18, 2001.
Letter from Janet and Gerald Paulsen dated Cetob~r 3, 2001.
Planning Commission Meeting - August 21, ~001
Blackowiak: There's been a motion. Is there a second?
Feik: I was not here for the long discussion you had in June so I'd feel...making a second.
Blaekowiak: Well I can't second so it's up to you. You don't want to second this?
Sacchet: Motion doesn't fly, alright.
Blackowiak: Okay then will you please withdraw your motion.
Saechet: I withdraw my motion.
Blackowiak: Okay. I'll entertain another motion.
Slagle: Motion to table this, I'll make a motion that we table the proposed Section 18-37, Exemptions
until further information from staff, Further, help me out,
Feik: That works.
Slagle: Okay. Further information from staff.
Blackowiak: Okay. There's a motion. Is there a second?
Feik: I'll second.
Slagle moved, Feik seconded that the Planning Commission table action on the amendment to City
Code Section 18-37, Exemptions until further informRflon is received from staff. All voted in
favor, except Sacchet who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 3 to 1.
Blackowiak: And comments.
Sacchet: I would have liked to pass this through.
Blackowiak: Okay. And I would like to make one comment as well. I will direct staff to respond in
writing to the comments made by the Paulsen's and to attach that to our next packet when we see this
again and also I want that attached to council's packet when it goes to council so they have a written
copy of what's been happening this evening so, okay.
P. UBLIC HEARING:
CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO .THE CITY CODE TO PERMIT ONLY ONE DRIVEWAY
ACCESS PER LOT.
Sharmin AI-Jaff presented the staff report on this item.
18
Planning Commission Meeting - August 21, 2001
Blackowiak: Okay commissioners, do you have any questions of staff?
Feik: Fve got a few. How often does this issue come up?
Aanenson: Maybe I could address that too. It's been an issue lately. We've had a proliferation of
people using accessory structures for other uses and the way they can get those is through an additional
driveway. That would curtail some of that. It's caused a lot of problems in some neighborhoods. Some
bad feelings. So that was one of the criteria driving this. The other is as Sharmin indicated, the cross
access agreement was, is a way to subdivide property. And this would make it a criteria that we have the
ability to review so it would give some level of control for the city to review that.
Feik: This would be applicable to any size residential lot though, whether it's rural residential or
otherwise?
Aanenson: Right. We spent a lot of time trying to exempt what would and wouldn't work. And as I
indicated to you before we have a variance request for a very, very large accessory structure and having a
separate driveway makes it a lot easier. And those sometimes turn into ~ uses. Again those
are big rubs for neighborhood uses. We have quite a few of those that we're working on trying to
eliminate. So certainly if they want to come to the Planning Commission and say I store my RV or
whatever and it seems appropriate, it works well with the neighborhood,, if the lot's large enougIL We try
to develop some criteria that says gosh, if it's this big of a lot, it just became too difficult so we felt we'd
leave it up to you as through the process to say, because it's a large enough lot that would work,
depending on how the accessory structure, you got access to it. It seemed to make some sense.
Feilc Okay.
Blackowi_aic Any other questions right now7 No7 Rich.
Slagle: Just a quick question. How do we define a utility facility7
Al-Jaff: We talked about that earlier. It would be.
Aanenson: A cell tower.
AI-Jaff: Cell tower.
Slagle: Okay. Water tower.
Al-la_fi: Correct. Lift station.
Aanenson: Sometimes there are large utility boxes. We have some of those too. 'For example like Sprint
or some of those have those accessed to at the tower locations.
Slagle: So it'd the obvious ones that one would think7 There's no way to get around that?
Aanenson: Yeah. It's intended to be a public utility, yea[L
Slagle: Alright.
19
Planning Commission Meeting- August 21, 2001
Blackowiak: Okay, Uli.
Sacehet: Yeah I've got a few questions. In the cover to this, which is a very brief introduction, the
bac~und, you're talking about landl6cked parcels and then the need that it needs a variance for this
second driveway situation. Access, cross access agreement variance. And I understand a little better
how the landlocked picture Come in, but the proposed language that you put in front of us for this
ordinance doesn't really state variance per se. That's implied or?
A1-Jaff: I'll give you a different example. Our ordinance says front yard setback is 30 feet.
Sacehet: And then if you want more or less.
A1-Jaff: If you want less. It doesn't say if you want less you have to go before the Planning Commission
to apply for a variance.
Sacchet: That's a given, okay. Okay. Okay, that answers that question. I just want to make sure that we
have this properly correlated. Another similar thing in the introductory paragraph that you're proposing,
it talks about establishing the minimum driveway slope standards. I don't know where I ever looked it
but I don't really see it talking about slope standards in the.
A1-Jaff: It would be the 10% grade.
Sacchet: It doesn't say that .... you sort of touched on it already with the numbers we put in there in
terms of how wide can it be, or narrow. To not exceed 36 feet. Where does the 36 come from?
A1-Jaff: Three car garage.
Sacchet: Three car garage and...
Aanenson: And people parking RV's and boats and that's again code enforcement tends to be an
increasing problera~ Some people want to pave to get that.
Sacchet: So if they have a 3 car garage they make it full width, that's basically 36 so that's where that
comes from?
Aanenson: Yeah.
Sacchet: Okay. And then we're talking about inside the property, like under clause (e) we're talking
about access maximum and then also the inside width. Under clause (f) we don't talk about the inside
limit. They can do whatever.
AI-Jaff: Please keep in mind that you always have to meet the 25% hard surface coverage.
Sacchet: So we count that impervious surface clause would keep that in check?
AI-Jaff: Absolutely.
2O
Planning Commission Meeting - August 21, 2001
Sacchet: Okay. That answers that question. Now we're talking about the minimm~ or the maximum of
how wide these things can be. We don't feel there is a need to define a minimum because we figure that
people, if they have a little car and they want a small driveway, I mean we basically trust people have
some common sense. Is that where we're at? Which is good. I mean if we don't trust the people we
might as well close shop. Alright. Could you define turn around? Is that, that probably is Saam
question. Where it says turnaround is required in ~ cases. I just want to make sure I understand
what we mean by saying turnaround.
Saam: Sure. Thank you commissioners. Turnaround, acceptable turnaround area for such things as if
you're backing out of your driveway, just an area so you can turn around and pull back out. Similar
situation, access for emergency vehicles. We require sufficient turnaround areas and shared driveways,
things of that nature where a fire truck or something may need to get to more than one lot. $o a
turnaround, just an acceptable area where a person doesn't have to back out 100 or 200 foot long
driveway if you're, you know abutting a highway in a rural setting.
Aanenson: Maybe I could add to that too. If you look at the lots on Lake Lucy, they have turnarounds on
the property so they're not backing out onto that collecWr street. They have shared driveways, they also
have a turn area so they can make that turn movement on the property before coming out. That's a
different type of turn. Turn about.
Saam: That's a good point. It's a traffic concern too. Like Kate said, you don't want to be backing out
onto a 50 mph collector roadway.
Sacehet: I do understand the rationale. I just wonder how defined we are.
Aanenson: Yeah, we have different examples.
Saam: I think we do say in there we'll review it deemed necessary by the.. city engineer so we'll work
with that.
Sacchec ...basically you'll work with the resident, okay.
Saam: Yep, let them come up with something and we'll review it.
Sacchet: Okay. That's the questions I have for right now, thank you.
Blackowiak: Okay. I just have a couple questions. As I look through these conditions Sharmin or Kate,
I see that there are a couple that are addressed elsewhere. 10% slope, I mean isn't that already in the
code? I mean aren't there some of these items are in the code?
Aanenson: Yes. Yes.
Blackowiak: And why are we addressing them again?
AI-Jaff: It's under a private street and not private individual driveway. And these are standards that we
already implement but we just wanted to...as part of the ordinance.
Blackowiak: So you're saying then in what went before council last month, we talked about private
driveways and private streets.
21
Planning Commission Meeting - August 21, 2001
Alqaff: The 10% grades that we have in our ordinance.
Blackowiak: Are only private.
Al4aff: I' ve only been able to find them under private streets.
Saam: They're for driveways also.
Blackowiak: I thought so.
Saam: There is one spot in the code where it says maximum driveway grade is 10%, and that's the only
requirernent which it specifies for driveways. We're trying to get all of the driveway requirements in one
spot so you don't have to be flipping through the code, because that's what I have to do. I flag my code
for all these different things. Well it'd be nice to just turn to this and see oh, it's got to be this wide.
That's the maximun~ This is the maximum slope. You know this is the setback from a corner. We're
trying to get them all in one spot. We should probably strike that one if this is approved, remove the
other one so we don't have redundanee.
Biackowiak: Okay, great. Thanks. Next question. We have no minimum driveway width and I know
you just said that if a car wants a smaller driveway, that would be fine. However this just brought me
hack to what we said in our work session Kate where there was a house plan that came in without a front
sidewalk because they were right at that 25% impervious. What if we have the same problem where
we've got a house that's at their 25% impervious and they come and say well we're doing a 3 foot wide
driveway to meet our impervious surface. That sounds pretty ridiculous. What can we do to fix that? I
mean I think that there should be some sort of minimum,
Saam: Sure, sure. That's a good point. 'We could add a minimum. 12 foot wide, that's our standard
lane width. That would be acceptable to me.
Blackowiak: That would be like a single car garage?
Saam: A single driveway.
Blackowiak: Okay, a single driveway, 12. I'm just saying that you know...
Aanenson: That's fine, I agree with you. That is a good point. I'm not sure if 12 or 10.
Blackowiak: And I don't know what the number is but I'm just saying that.
Aanenson: But I think that's a good point, we should put something in.
Blackowiak: And I only thought of it because of what you said before.
Aanenson: But to calculate impervious surface, right. Someone said well I'm only going to do 8 foot.
Most people don't do single car garages because, but right.
Blackowiak: But I think that we should have some sort of minimum in there.
22
Planning Commission Meeting- August 21, 2001
Aanenson: Or neck it down at that drive.
Blackowiak: Just a reasonable, you know a reasonable width so that cars can drive on it without going
off the edge. Okay, and my final question has to do with what happens when you have a big landlocked
parcel that you know is going to be subdivided in the future. Okay. We're talking about a single
driveway and a second.driveway is a variance. Have we thought that through? Are we comfortable
doing that?
Aanenson: Yes.
Blackowiak: And what would happen to that larger parcel that eventually will be subdivided7 It would
just have to come in through, tell me the ~s. What would happen7
Slagle: Isn't there one over by Westwood perhaps? That's going to be landlocked.
Blackowiak: Well I think the parcel you're talking about.
Slagle: I thought there was one that was going to.
Blackowialc Not landlocked but.
Aanenson: It has access onw a street.
Blackowiak: He has access but he wants the church to, right.
Saam: Addressing your question Ma_dAm Commissioner, if you have one single parcel say in a rund
setting right now and your question is alluding to well what happens when this develops? Is that correct?
Blackowiak: Correct, yes.
Saam: Where you'll need multiple driveways. Well we'll require platting at that point so we'll have
separate lots. Multiple lots all with their individual driveway access. We'll have interior streets. Is that
getting to your.
Feik: Assuming they can get there. You could have wetlands. You could have other issues that you
could not access a large lot behind an existing rural residential.
Saam: Okay, yeah. I'm following you. So then we wouldn't have a plat, right? So we wouldn't have
another lot. So you can't subdivide.
Feilc Well you would have another lot. What you do is there'd be no access potentially other than going
up this existing driveway.
Aanenson: Right, and that's a variance criteria which we want to control.
Feik: Is the minimum length on this private street, driveway...
Aanenson: For one home, no.
Planning Commission Meeting - August 21, 2001
Feik: A minimum length. So could they in your example you show.
Aanenson: On length. Your house has to be set 30 feet from the street.
Feik: What I'm saying is in your example where you show the private street here, is there a minimum
length of that street from the time it leaves the curb to the point where it can break off. Could it break off
within 5 feet of the curb there? I mean where does, how long does this private street need to be?
Saam: Edge of the right-of-way. We'd want it to the edge of the right-of-way and then they can break it
off.
Feik: So they could break it off immediately once they get through the right-of-way easement?
Feik: So it doesn't need to be.
Saam: Provided there's sufficient turnaround, again like I spoke of before. That's something we'd look
at.
Blackowiak: Comfortable?
Feik: No. But that's okay.
Blackowiak: Alright tell you what, I'll open this up for a public hearing and we'll have time to comment
later. This item is open for a public hearing so if anybody would like to comment on this issue please
step to the podium, state your name and address for the record.
Jerry Paulsen: Jerry Paulsen, 7305 I_m'edo Drive. We take tums. I'd like to question item (b). We're
talking about a vertical profile of our driveway not exceeding 10%. As Matt brought up, a driveway
can't exceed 10%. When I brought a plat up to Teresa here months ago, I said does this driveway now
exceed 10% and she took the ruler and measured that much and she said yes. Is a vertical profile 150 feet
of driveway and it can have 20% up hem and 5% down here? Or is this ambiguous by saying, using the
term vertical profile as opposed to just saying the driveway can't exceed that 10%. I guess that's just a
question. It seems kind of strange to put this under, this whole thing about driveways under parking and
loading. It' s kind of a hidden way back. More proper might be addressed under streets and so forth I
think. Thank you.
Blackowiak: Thank you.
Janet Paulsen: Janet Paulsen, 7305 Laredo Drive. As Jerry said, I think it's placed in the wrong spot in
code. Private driveways have always been in 18-57 so why in parking and loading? Private driveway
easement does provide access but it serves the same purpose as a street and has nothing to do with
parking and loading. We're not really talking just about a driveway. We're talking about a driveway
easement. It serves the same purpose as a private street. It's a duplication. So why do we need a
duplication? It has less rules on it, has less width. That's why you can cram more into a smaller space.
It's a danger to my neighborhood and I object. Second amendment proposed makes no mention of a
variance. When you talked about private streets, you made sure that the word variance was put in there.
It should be put in there. That's the only way we can be sure. There are no stated minimums. When we
Planning Commission Meeting - August 21, 2001
had the private driveway ordinance before 1990 and it changed again in '94, they had a ~
easement of 30 feet and it had on the common section of it, it had to be 20 feet wide. Nothing's said
about that in this. And of course they finally addressed the setback. But again a private driveway allows
a street to be going, essentially a street to be going pretty close to a person's house. If it's a 10 foot
setback that'd be 20 feet from your bedroom window. So why are we lowering the stan~? This issue
was almost discussed at the City Council meeting because I brought it up and I just wanted to show you.
The planning depamnent really didn't want to address private driveway easements at this meeting, as you
can see. But they almost discussed except that Roger interfered. He changed the subject to just talk
about a plain driveway. That's not what we're talking about. I think it's really i~ to make the
distinction. Reminds me of a movie video we saw recently called The Practice and it said lawyers never
lie, they just use the truth judiciously to totally confuse. Well that's what I think was done. I think you
should forbid private driveway easements. You've got private streets to provide an access to a
landlocked lot. It has to be in a 30 foot easement and that protects ~y neighbors. They crowd
private drive easements would crowd, and in 20 years they deteriorate and who's going to keep them up?
It's going to be a big mess in Chanhassen. A bad infras~. A private street serves the same
purpose, and by the way Lake Minnetonka, or Minnetonka forbids private streets but they do have private
driveway easements and they make the stipulation. You have to have 25 feet all around in order to put a
home in there. We're ending up with a home I0 feet from our, it will be their back yard. I0 feet f~om
our property line because of what happened with the Igel thing. ! object to private driveways.
Blackowiak: Thank you.
Debbie Lloyd: Debbie Lloyd, 7302 Laredo Drive. I can't tell if you can still see this.
Blackowiak: I see Matt. Oh, yep we can.
Debbie Lloyd: When Sharmin pointed this out she pointed out, I mean this is essentially what we've
talked about as a flag lot. And she called this the cross access easement. But essentially this driveway,
as we're calling it tonight I guess, from the private street to this landlocked parcel, that is also a cross
access easement. And that's .what I tried so hard to point out at City Council and I think Rich, you might
have gotten that. This is a cross access easement.' The other thing about a driveway 5 feet from a
~ line. I just kind of drove around. I thought 5 feet from a property line. Where can I find that? I
don't see that anywhere. Most people's driveways come off the street into their garages. Their ~
has a setbaclc It' s not 5 feet. I appreciate that we're trying to clarify some of this but again I think more
work needs to be done and I ask you to look at this with a fine tooth comb. Thank you.
Blackowiak: Thank you. Come on up. We're not limiting you to 5 ~nutes.
Debbie Lloyd: I forgot one thing. 5 feet from a property line. We talk about tree i .mlmcts. Well a tree
i .mpact zone I believe, correct me if Fm wrong, these numbers are starting to fade. I think the i .rnlxact
zone on a tree is about 20 feet.
Aanenson: It depends on the tree.
Debbie Lloyd: Okay. But if you put a driveway 5 feet from a ~ line, you're not affecting just
your property. You are affecting the property next to you. You're affecting their tree line, and that was
another environmental point I want to make. Thanks.
Planning Commission Meeting - August 21, 2001
Blaekowiak: Okay, thank you. Unless there are any more comments, I will close the public hearing.
Staff, I'm just going to give you a chance to ~ any comments or clear up anything you'd like to fight
now before we commissioners make our comments.
Aanenson: No comment.
Blackowiak: Okay. Matt?
Saam: I've got one. The driveway slope. I think, well Mr. Paulsen spoke to it I believe. Yeah, the way
it's worded there in (b), we could change that. The driveway grade maybe shall not exceed 10%
maximum slope. We're just talking about the vertical rise. If that was confusing to anybody.
Feik: At any point or over the.
Saam: No, that's overall. 10% max anywhere. It can't go 20% you know for 5 feet and then.
Slagle: From beginning to end.
Feik: Right.
Saam: ' 10% max anywhere. I guess we look at the contours between each one and make sure it's not
10%.
Sacchet: Basically no portion of the driveway will have more than 10%.
Saam: Correct. I guess unless you have any specific questions for me, they spoke about a lot of stuff
but the driveway grade was the main one that I wrote down. Setback issue. Sharrnin and I talked about
it. From an engineering standpoint our only concern was our easement. And the way we looked at it
was, well we pave our streets and we have utilities under there so we would allow them to pave over an
easement. If we have to go in there it will be ripped up but, so that was, and from an engineer standpoint,
that was our issue with the setback. I really don't have any issue with it.
Blackowiak: Thank you. Okay, commissioners. Time for comments.
Feik: I've got a few.
Blackowiak: Go right ahead.
Feik: As long as you're up, by the way, is there currently a minimum length that a driveway needs to be
paved?
Saam: A minimum length?
Feik: I mean you've got in your item (c) you've got in areas outside the MUSA they must be 100 feet.
What is the background of that?
Saam: We looked, we got information from a lot of different cities for this. About 10 different cities.
Neighboring towns around the Minnesota River Valley. The 100 feet number, that could be decreased.
Our point is, we don't want to have gravel driveways that could wash out into a drainage ditch and cause
26
Planning Commission Meeting - August 21, 2001
erosion problems. Plug up culverts, that sort of thing. So that's why we're seeing outside of the MUSA
where typically that's an agricultural setting, we'd like to see the first 100 feet offthe roadway paved to
minimize that washing out of the gravel, dirt, that sort of thing. I could go, if we want to minimiTe that,
we could go with the edge of the fight-of-way. ~t's got to be paved to the edge of the fight-of-way at
least.
Feik: Thank you. Continuing my comments. As it relates to locating thi, in the parking and loading
space section. That's up to staff if they can manage it there, that's where it needs to be. I don't have any
concern with where this is located. I do have a concern with how this will be enforced in a rural
residential area wherein someone might have bought a number of acres years ago. At thi~ point would
like to subdivide their 10 acres or whatever they've got lef~ and would ~ to get some additional access
to the areas in the back without giving up their frontage or that may be c~mtined by wetlands or trees
or other things. So I had a concern how this would be construed in the mm1 residential areas. Tm not
sure it's really appropriate.
Aanenson: Okay, can I address that? This is going in Chapter 20 because it's the standards for existing
lots. This is checked when someone comes in for a building permit, this is where you check to make sum
that the driveway' s in the right spot. ~f someone' s subdividing, that' s Chapter 18. Those are the
different standards.
Feik: So this wouldn't be applicable to someone with a 10 acre lot that.
Aanenson: if they're going to put 1 house on there, yeah.
Feik-' Well no, he's got I house on the front 2 ½ acres.
Aanenson: Then he goes through a subdivision, that's a different process.
Feik: And he will be able to do a cross easement to get to the back?
Aanenson: He would still need a variance if he needs a cross.
Feik: But via a variance he could get a cross easement to get to the back.
Aanenson: Correct. Correct. That's what this would require, yep.
Feilc Okay. Then in that case, thank you for addressing that. ! guess ! do agree with one of the
commenters that said, in a more urban area 5 foot setback on the side of a lot, considering we ! think, the
setback of a home is fairly short on the side.
Aanenson: The problem with that is, that's where most people park their boats and their RV's.
Feik: ! understand.
Aanenson: And when you have a 10 foot side yard setback, that's where we prefer that they be is on the
side.
Feik: Could we require screening though? Could we require them to put a fence up? If they're going to
put this street in, or driveway or whatever anybody wants to call it, and ! am a homeowner and my
Planning Commission Meeting- August 21, 2001
neighbor wants to do this and I do not have, I'm not benefiting from this at all other than I'm going to
have a driveway 5 feet from my shrub line and my swing set in the back yard, could we require them to
put a fence up along?
Aanenson: You're saying if someone wants to go closer than 5 feet to put their camper.
Feik: No, at 5 feet. You've got 5 feet in there, right?
Aanenson: No, we took that Out.
Feilc So what is the?
Aanenson: There is none. There is none right now. There are situations where people have side loaded
garage that back right close to the property line. Within 3 feet, 5 feet on side loaded garages. Or people
that park their campers or.
Feik: I guess I'm more interested in addressing it in that if we were doing this to approve, in your
example of another dwelling in the back, that I don't think it would be unreasonable to require, to
develop some sort of a fencing screen.
Aanenson: Right, and that would require a variance. When they come in for a variance you can attach
whatever condition you deem reasonable to mitigate that impact. That would be one...
Feik: So this really has nothing to do with the flag lots anymore then?
Aanenson: No.
Feik.' Never mind.
Blackowiak: Yeah I was going to say, this is not. This picture ba~k here, I guess refer to the upper left
hand comer lot, that is not a flag lot.
Feik: It's confusing.
Blackowiak: It is a landlocked parcel with a cross access agreement. Flag lot would actually own...
Feik: But we're splitting hairs here as it relates to the neighbor who's next to this sees no difference
between a landlocked lot and a flag lot.
Blackowiak: Right.
Feilc In their minds it's the same thing.
Aanenson: Right, and that's why we're adding the thing that would be require the variance to meet that.
So then you could attach, put a condition in. If you wanted landscaping or fencing, whatever. Or greater
setbaclc
Feik: Okay, thank you.
28
Planning Commission Meeting - August 21, 2001
Blackowiak: Okay, Rich.
Slagle: I have to say this. I'm getting really confused. And it's getting to the point where, how should I
say this. I really want to ask for help on this. And let me preface it by saying, you guys do an awesome
job. Day in and day out, you know that I feel this Way. These folks back here who I don't know other
than seeing them here, seem to have good point. Seem to have a passion about this area, and I commend
them for that. I get frustmt~ when I see comments being made by some of us, the staff, other guests and
then in the back shaking their head no, like it can't, it's not in them. It can't be, whatever.. I'm just
wondering is it, you know just an observer sort of, how can two groups have such different ideas about
what is being said. So my request is this, can you guys get together and talk about ~ things? Get
Roger involved if there's questions about his interpretations of what you think it should say or you guys
think it should say, and I only would ask this in this case because these folks are here all the time. If it
was just someone who came off the street and threw out a comn~mt, I wouldn't say it. But I just don't
want to be listening to a lot of this anymore, just because I'm getting confused. Every day.
Aanenson: In every code amendment I guess we could deliberate with them.
Slagle: Well as an example, Roger in the notes throws out well wouldn't you, we wouldn't want
everyone to go through the process of getting I hope a variance for every single family driveway in town.
It seems to me a very good point. Yeah, I mean bu~ I'm just wondering from your point, does that malta
sense? I mean is that a laborious, bureaucratic thing.
A1-JatT: That is exactly what we're talking about.
Slagle: Okay, then what's wrong with that? You know I want to be like this mediator but what's wrong
with that comment which seems to make sense?
AI-Jaff: We're talking about individual driveways. One person using that one driveway accessing their
home off of the street.
Slagle: Correct, and are you asking, if I can interject, you're asking, or suggesting we put a variance
clause in there to protect the citizens.
Aanenson: So people can't put 2 driveways on 1 lot without a variance.
Slagle: Is that okay?
Aanenson: That's what we're trying to prevent.
Saam: If I could add something Commissioner Slagle. We do have design criteria for private streets or
driveways, whatever the. I'm sorry, whatever the correct verbiage is. We already have that. $o this is,
as Sharmin said, separate.
Slagle: Okay. Then I'll just once again reiterate my request. Can there be some convening of a sit down
session with the Paulsen's and Ms. Lloyd, just to address these as a courtesy to our citizens who are our
clients, and just let's hopefully be done with what I consider to be some gaps in interpretation of what's
going on. Is that fair Madam Chair to ask?
Blackowiak: You can ask anything you like.
29
Planning Commission Meeting - August 21, 2001
Slagle: Okay. I'mdone.
Blackowiak: Uli, comments?
Sacchet: Yeah, I have comments. Well first of all I do want to again thank our permanent guests as We
call them for all their support in our work and unlike with the previous item that was before us where I
said I had a little hard time correlating it, I do believe that, and I got the letter that relates this item. I
didn't get the letter for the previous item from you and I do think your points relate very much to this
item. And I think they should be lookext at and put .into the context. On the other hand, it really, I have
to say that too, I sincerely regret to feel like there is some sort of an antagonism a little...
(Taping of the Planning Commission meeting ended at this point in the discussion.)
Submitt~ by Kate Aanenson
Community Development Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
30
CHANIIASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
RF_~ULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 18, 2001
Chairwoman Blackowiak called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Rich Slagle, Uli Sacchet, Lu.&nn Sidney, Alison Blackowiak, Deb Kind, and
Craig Claybaugh
MEMBERS ABSENT: Bruce Feik
STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director, Sharmin Al-laff, Senior
Planner; and Matt Saam, Project Engineer
PUBUC PRF~ENT FOR ALL ITEM~:
Ianet & ~erry Paulsen 7305 Laredo Drive
Debbie Lloyd 7302 Laredo Drive
CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO THF~ CITY CODE CLARIFYING TFIF. PROCEDURF, S FOR
AOMn~S~u~~ ~r~DIV~IONS.
Kind moved, Sidney seconded to table this item to get further clarification from the City Attorney.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 6 to 0.
CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY CODE TO PERMIT ONLY ONE DRIVEWAY
ACCESS PER LOT.
Slmrmin Al-Jarl presented the staff report on this item.
Blackowialc Okay, thank you. Commissioners, we did see this before. Does anyone have any new
questions based on what we see before us tonight? Lu.Ann; why don't you go ahea&
Sidney: Yes Madam Chair. Sharmin. In, I guess is it part (h), or whatever, it says one driveway
approach. I'm wondering if approach is the term we want to use or should we use access point? Or
could you clarify that please? Because that's a word that's been thrown out but not clarified.
Al-Jaffi Okay. We can use access.
Saam: Madam Chair, Planning Commissioners. Access would be fine with me, unless planning has an
issue with the word approach.
Al-la/f: Either or.
Saam: We were struggling I think with what word to use so we're looking kind of for some feeling from
you.
Sidney: Yeah, I'd suggest saying one driveway access. That's consistent with the rest of the
amendn~nts. And the one other point that I noticed, and this is grammatical. In the first section there,
Planning Commission Meeting - September 18, 2001
access from driveways. The intent is, and then...so it should be a semi-colon to reduce and then it's
consistent throughout that paragraph. That's all I saw but it's well clarified and I understood when I read
it what the intent was.
Blackowiak: Uli any questions?
Sacchet: Yes, it'd be real clear at this point we're not going into the setback issue at all with this?
There's no setback requirement? We're not reducing one, we leave that alone?
Aanenson: Right. That's our recommendation, correct.
Sacchet: Okay. And then you made a point that the first 100 feet of a driveway need to be bituminous or
concrete. And that could possibly reduce to just cover the easement stretch. Matt can you give us a little
more context for that please.
Saam: Sure. At the last Planning Commission meetings one of the commissioners raised that point. We
left it in. At a minimum I would like to see it at least to the edge of the fight-of-way. What we're trying
to get at here or avoid is erosion from, this is dealing with areas outside the MUSA so typically they're
agricultural type lots or parcels. We're trying to avoid a gravel driveway which you see commonly in an
agricultural setting from eroding into the dminageway. Putting sediment in ditches. Getting in the
culverts, that sort of thing. The ditches are out in the right-of-way so I would be okay with the minimum
going with driveway surface to the fight-of-way.
Sacchet: And a detail question; Is there reason why when we talk about that 100 foot stuff, you're
saying concrete...don't saying bituminous. Why don't we say both or?
Saam: No. No reason.
Sacchet: Okay. Just wanted to clarify that.
Saam: We could add bituminous there.
Sacchet: Okay. That's my questions.
Blackowiak: Alright. Deb, any new questions?
Kind: Yes Madam Chair. I'd like to touch on the side yard setback issue that was discussed at the last
meeting. Staff originally suggests the driveway should be setback at least 5 feet from the side property
lines and after the last meeting that was taken out. I'm interested in maybe putting that back in because
this is our opportunity to address this issue and that is an issue that happened in my neighborhood which
someone on a straight street wanted to put a side load garage and proposed to put the driveway fight on
the property line in order to achieve that. And that put the driveway 10 feet from the neighbor's window.
And this is a situation that I would like to avoid and I would like to see us consider putting a side yard
setback for driveways. And this is our opportunity to do it. We don't, fight now we don't have anything
that prohibits that.
Slagle: Why did we take it away7 I was trying to remember. The setback. Why was it7
Planning Commission Meeting - September 18, 2001
Aanenson: Well some of the issues that staff had is that is boats and trailers in yards is a big
neighborh~ issue and the place that you can put it is in your side yard. The most commnn place,
acceptable place is next to your garage. And most people put some sort of sm'face next to their garage to
park their boat or their camper. If you e 'hminate that, you're causing another problem'by forcing
someone to put their boat in the back yard which tends to cause more neighborhood concerns so.
Kind: My question would be, I believe we allow patios so if it wasn't going out to the street, I think you
could call it a patio. And then you don't have to have a pemumem driveway to get your boat back there,
as long as, I mean we drive our boat across the grass all the time. ~Iust one at a time, not daily. But this
would preclude somebody from having an end load garage that's used daily with ~ghts ~hining into
neighbor's windows. Just throw it up as consideration. This might be our oppommiF to do something
about that.
Blackowialc Okay. Any other new questions or any other questions I should say? Deb.
Kind: Well actually one other and maybe it comes more under directing staff for futm~ ame~ but
I think Section 20-908, if we do decide to allow driveways to encroach only 5 feet, I think we would need
to amend that ordinance. So it kind of depends on what we decide here tonight but I want to brinE that
up.
Blackowiak: Okay. Any new comments? Or new questions, sorry. Not comments.
Claybaugh: This is for Matt. The definition of access, is that determined by the curb cut or what are
you?
Saam: Well yes.
Clayhaugh: Essentially people come.
Saam: Yes, the access from the street. The curb cut, correct
Claybaugh: And this is aimed at basically scattered lots like you're already regulating subdivided lots
but what Fd considered a scattered lot. Where I left most the acreage in there is 4 ½ to 10 acres so
there's a purpose for people living on 4 ½ to 10 acres. So they can have some of those accessory
buildings so on and so forth so.
Saam: C_x)rrect
Claybaugh: It doesn't do them much good if they can't get back to them but, is there any distinctions
whatsoever made between the subdivided and scattered lot in this ordinance?
Saam: I believe, and maybe Kate can help out too. We brought this up before on the larger lots. How
they could get back to their accessory suucutms. Yes, we are trying to limit the amount of street access
that one lot has to a street. Whether you be in an agricultural setting or a suburban setting, a quarter acre
lot size. You're concerned with getting back to accessory stmclxu~.
Claybaugh: ...is the purpose of living on a larger lot. If you're living on something and you have
accessory out buildings on the rest of it, it makes it very logistically difficult to get to them under some
circumstances. Certainly not all, but under some circumstances and isn't really conducive to why people
Planning Commission Meeting - September 18, 2001
occupy those properties. I'm just trying to mn through my mind how restrictive that would be in some
circumstances.
Saam: Kate, we had talked about this the last time this was here. About the bigger lots getting back to an
accessory structure or another house back there. I think we talked about, it would have to be platted if
they wanted to do another lot. So then you'd need a private. Yeah, then you'd need to come in for a
variance. Then we'd look at it separately from this and we could put any conditions you wanted.
Claybaugh: And then subdivide. If you're platting another lot that's subdividing. What I'm talking
about is, there's a lot of properties.
· Saam: You want to put a barn in the back.
Claybaugh: Well maybe a ham. It may just be that you want to access the back of your property to store
your boat or your trailer or whatever. It isn't.
Aanenson: A lot of people do that without a driveway. They take it in once and out and they don't use a
driveway approach.
Claybaugh: Right, but most the people that live, that ! know that live on 5 to l0 acres at some point in
time put up an accessory structure and use it for substantially more.
Aanenson: And that's the problem because they become other than accessory structures and that's
prgbably one of the biggest problems facing the city right now is the illegal use of some of the outdoor
structures because they have a secondary driveway, and our recommendation is we want control over
that. If they want to come in for a driveway, we want to know how they're being used.
Claybaugh: What kind of illegal?
Aanenson: Running businesses out of them and neighborhood complaints.
Claybaugh: Okay.
Aanenson: That's what we talked about last time.
Claybaugh: And you feel this is the best vehicle to deal with it?
Aanenson: Correct, because then if they're coming in for a variance we can attach a condition that says
if you want a secondary driveway you will not be running a business out of that. We're reviewing cases
right now, that is a big problem. Or people that end up ranting sometimes there's an accessory garage
that tums into a rental property and we have a few of those that are causing a lot of problems right now
too in some neighborhoods so, what we're trying to do is, for those neighborhoods it's a big concern so
we're saying...
Claybaugh: Okay, so for the person that genuinely wants a use, a structure, a barn, whatever in the back
of their property, it's purchased that way and the out accessory structure's already there and wants to use
it purely for their own purpose, they still have raeans to.
Planning Commission Meeting - September 18, 2001
Aanenson: And most of them do. I mean we just approved a stable permit today that already has access.
I mean they come in pretty regular. People buy horse property and get stable permits. They go through
the process but they use an existing driveway. It's pretty rare that scamone had an agricultural ~
needs to come in based on the way their ~'s laid out and topography. If you're looking at the
southern end of the city there's not a lot of secondary access points that come in. If you look even in the
Hesse Farm neighborhood, those son of things. Most of those already kind of have existing driveways.
If them is an anomaly them and they want to come in, I think we also want to look at it for grading
purpose, etc. We kind of went through that exercise internally in stall to say you know what, we don't
want to make it punitive but looking at the number of cases that we think that variance is probably the
best way to go. If there's something really unusual that they can't get at their ~, and they need a
secondary access, we maybe want to look at it.
Saam: If I could add something. In most agricuitural settings you're abutting county roads, maybe even
state highways sometimes. You'll have to get a driveway permit from the county and the state to access
the road so. I don't have a problem with if you own 10 acres and your house is here and you have a barn
way out here, accessing off another road. From an engineering standpoint but I know planning's been
seeing these as Kate said, accessory structures being used for other purposes so.
Claybaugh: Okay.
Blackowiak: Did you have another question? Uli?
Sacchet: Yes. I want a point of clarification that you're suggesting that we keep in the minimun_setback
of :5 feet for the driveway. Would we then also want to keep in the letter (g) that says on lots not meeting
the minimum width requirement at the right-of-way line, driveway setback may be reduced subject to the
following criteria. One, the driveway will not interfere with any existing easement. And two, the
location of the driveway must be approved by the city engineer. Are you thinking to put that back in as
well or how do they correspond?
Kind: I don't see that they necessarily correspond. I think we can still leave (g) out.
Sacchet: Okay. What's staff's position on that? Do you have an idea w~ther the two kind of go hand
in hand? Does this seem to be correlated?
Saam: Yeah, yeah. That was the intent of (g) with (a) initially. Because they're tied in with the setback
reference so if you're going to limit or set a minimum for a setbacL we might want to consider putting
(g) back in.
Sacchet: Okay. And then one more real quick point. In (b), driveway grades shall be a minimum of .5%
and a maximum grade of 10%. I think we talked about that briefly last tim~. That you may want to
clarify that that's anywhere in the driveway. If we would want to say at any point or in any portion of the
driveway, something to that effect. I think that.would be consistent with other statements last time.
Blackowiak: Alright, any other questions?
Kind: Yes Madam Chair, I thought of another one for staff. Would you object to including language in
the intent statement that clarifies that this is for single parcels? I know that our driveway definition
includes that but I think it behooves us to be really clear in the ordinance itself. For instance the first
Planning Commission Meeting - September 18, 2001
sentence could say, the purpose of this sub-section is to provide a minimum design criteria and slope
standards for driveway construction on single parcels.
Aanenson: I guess I'm looking at individual lots'and if we can.
Kind: Individual lots?
Aanenson: If we can get a legal opinion. I know what you're trying to say. You want to clarify the
intent. This is for a multi-family, we're bringing this in the code just to make sure it'.s not ambiguous.
that what you're?
Kind: Yes, which is just for clarification. If you feel that the driveway definition covers it, and this may
be something we could actually get, get half this on tonight and get the opinion before it goes to council
and then give them the option of adding or not adding that based on the attorney's opinion.
Blackowiak: Okay. Alrighty, this item is not open for a public hearing but I see we have people here
tonight so if anyone wants to get up and briefly add any new comments to what we're seeing before us,
feel free to come up. State your name and address for the record.
Janet Paulsen: My name is Janet Paulsen. I live at 7305 Laredo Drive in Chanhassen. I feel like a
broken record up here, but I want to clarify. The difference between driveway and a driveway cross
access easement, whatever they want to call it. A driveway that allows a homeowner access to his
property from a street. Like this. That's a driveway. It goes into, you turn around and you come out.
This driveway has a private street accessing it. It goes into, through, out, into another lot, turn around,
come back out. It's like a Bernstein Bear book. Into, through and out. This driveway goes through
somebody else's property. It goes out and then into the lot that it's support to serve. It's unnecessary
because a private street already accomplishes that. In the recent past this type of driveway was called a
private driveway and it was described in 18-57 and regulated in 20-615. It had a.20 foot easement along
it's length or a piece of land 30 feet wide. It could serve 2 to 4 homes. It had to be 20 feet wide at the
common section and then 10 feet for the uncommon section. And a 10% grade. The common section
had to be built to a 7 ton construction. Now there's nothing in this code that they're proposing that says
anything to do with that. It is going to be going through somebody's property. It's only 10 feet wide and
it doesn't have an easement covering it over. You step off the 10 feet, you're in somebody else's
property. That doesn't make sense. Also, the former private driveway was governed by Chapter 20-615
which says that in order to have it the lot had to have 100 foot frontage. And they determined the front of
the lot by how it faced the public street. Now that code was all changed to be the private street. The
language wasn't changed, only they changed the word driveway to street. So now that is their private
street. But now we have nothing mentioned in this proposal to determine what is the front of the yard,
access via a private driveway easement, or how wide the yard should be for frontage. Why are we
lowering our standards here? The purpose of it was to have access to a landlocked lot. A private street
does that. It only requires a 30 foot width and a 10 foot pavement, or 20 feet at the common section.
Why don't we want to stick with that? You're crowding our properties together. Another question. Can
this access driveway go through a front yard setback parallel to the frontage of the lot? If this is a private
street and here's the f'trst driveway and here's the second driveway, can it go into this 30 foot front yard
to access this house back here? That's not a driveway. We'll have driveways winding all over. It just
permits the kind of infill lots in established neighborhoods. A developer can buy a lot with a home and a
larger back yard and throw in a 10 foot cross access driveway to a house built in the rear and ruin the
privacy of the neighbors and make an ugly situation. Why would you want to permit this? Now as to the
fact that you don't need a 10 foot setback, a driveway is, what they're quoting here in Chapter 20-908, it
Planning Commission Meeting - September 18, 2001
says it can be allowed to go into any required front, rear or side yard, driveways, sidewalks, and stand
wire agricultural fence. Into. It doesn't say through and out. It says into. A driveway can go into a front
yard, into a side yard or into a back yard, but that doesn't have anything to go with going tln~ugE
Kind: Madam Chair. I hesitate to ask but I just want to clarify for Mrs. Paulsen, we're not talking about
private streets tonight.
Aanenson: Thank you.
Kind: This is driveways for single lots. Every example you showed me, that I saw tonight, involved
more than one lot and this is just for single, individual lots and that's why I'd like to include the lsn~s~
in the intent statement that clarifies it's for individual lots and that would be my recomme~_d~tion.
Saner Paulsen: If they state it the way it is, they're saying there's a variance to have 2 driveways.
Kind: They still show this, this is 2 driveways. That's a private street example.
Janet Paulsen: This is a private street. This is a driveway.
Kind: That would be a private street as well.
Janet Paulsen: Well you're calling it a driveway. ' '
Aanenson: It requires a variance.
Al-Jarl: You will have control over it. You will decide whether you want to approve it or not. Whether
such a lot should be created or not.
Kind: And then that would be a good reason to approve, my other suggestion which is they must, a
private drive must stay at least. Not private drive. A driveway must stay at least 10 feet away from the
side.
Aanenson: 5 feet.
Kind: 5 feet for the side yard setback.
Debbie Lloyd: Debbie Lloyd, '/302 Laredo Drive. Deb, I love your idea about a side yard setback. I
think that setback should be 10 feet. 10 feet is what a setback is. If you look at the definition of structure
in our city code, a concrete slab is a structure. So I think 10 feet from a neighbor's property line is
reasonable. It's what a structure setback currently is. To make it 5 feet, we're reducing our standards.
Thank you.
Blackowialc Kate, could you clarify. Is a concrete s~.
Kind: A patio?
Blackowialc A patio, or is a concrete slab a ~?
Planning Commission Meeting- September 18, 2001
Aanenson: The city attorney already made an interpretation on the definition of the driveway structure
when we reviewed the previous ordinance. A driveway doesn't meet the structure setbacks. If you had
to maintain the setback you'd have to maintain the 30 foot setback approaching the street .... 30 foot
setback. If you're interpreting it the same way they are on the side yard, you'd have to have a 30 foot.
Well then how would your driveway touch the street? It doesn't work that way.
Debbie Lloyd: The side yard has a 10 foot setback.
Aanenson: And a front yard has a 30 foot setback.
Debbie Lloyd: But the street, the driveway comes from the stxeet into the house. Into the front yard
setback and typically would nm into a house, ff you were moving that to the side...
Blackowiak: I think what Kate' s point is, if I am hearing you right Kate, is that if we enforce the front
yard setback, which is 30 feet, then your driveway could never go through that.
Aanenson: Right.
Debbie Lloyd: Well then you could clarify and say the' 10 foot side yard setback... And on page 11, 58-
4, Chapter 20, definition of structure it says, anything structure means anything...or erected which is
normally attached to or positioned on...would be temporary or permanent in character including, but not
limited to buildings.., hard surface parking areas, boardwalks...concrete.
Aanenson: I would concur with that and also exempt in Section 209, which the city attorney gave a legal
opinion on that driveway's are exempt from setback requirements.
Blackowiak: Okay. So we're comfortable with the city attorney's opinion that the driveways are exempt
from that.
Aanenson: Right.
Blaekowiak: Okay.
Sacchet: Point Of clarification, since we're talking about setback numbers. What's the minimum
frontage of a lot7
Aanenson: 90.
Sacchet: How much?
Aanenson: 90 in RSF.
Sacchet: In RSF, okay. Thank you.
Blackowiak: Okay, any other new comments?
Aanenson: I was going to clarify that. Just if you're on a cul-de-sac you can measure it at the 30 foot
setback line. If you're on an elbow, it could be a little bit narrower if you take the radius. Just for
clarifications so I'm not misquoted.
Planning Cowmission Meeting - September 18, 2001
Sac, chet: That's why I'm asking.
Aanenson: Yes, you could be maybe 80 at the street and 90 at the 30 foot setback or something like that~
Blackowiak: Aldghty.
Saam: Madam Chair, if I could add one point. One thing I noted was mentioned, a comment that we
were possibly lowering standards. I think as staff our point here was to make the standards a little more
strict so we'd have more control. Right now we don't have any control. You can put 4 driveway
accesses off a street if you want to and we can do nothing about it. And our city attorney couldn't
believe it. That we didn't have control so we're, I think: trying to make this a little more structured.
Blackowialc Okay, thank you. Alrighty. Let's move on with this. If anybody has any new comments to
add before we go for a vote Rich.
Slagle: I just wanted to throw out, I think Matt I agree with that and I think probably the group here
agrees that we're taking the right steps. I think the concern becomes that, and I don't know if it was
driven by Roger's legal opinion to whether it requires a setback or not but if there's a desire on this group
to have a setback for more what I'll just call gractical reasons, seeing two lots with a driveway right next
to it coming close to someone's house, we probably don't want it. And so what I would like to throw
out, and I do think we should have a setback for side yard. I don't know if it's 5 or 10 feet but we should
have it and we would then I think by enacting that, or proposing that, take care of Matt's desire, the
staff' s desire to control it and then hopefully make it easier for neighborhoods to manage. So I'm in
support of that.
Blackowiak: Okay, thank you. Any other new co~ to add before we go for a vote? You weren't
here last time I know so go ahead.
Sidney: I think if we do talk about setbacks we have to look at that first paragraph and incl-de setback in
slope standards for driveway construction as part of the verbiage. I do agree with Deb's ~ts and if
we're talking about driveways that are used for vehicular traffic.
Kind: Oh yes.
Sidney: Not just parking of trailers and boats or something. We are talking about a driveway which is
used, and not just a method to access a spot. And I think that really makes me think that we should have
consider a setback of at least 5 feet, which had been struck before but 17. d include that. And that sounds
like that if we do that, and include point (a) again, then (g) should be included. But we're talking about
an active driveway which I think is the concern.
Blackowiak: Okay, any more new comments?
Sacchet: Real quick. I do believe the comments were well taken by Deb and also our visitors that it's
good to have a setback. It's definitely making this requires more stringent because right now there's
none. I feel comfortable with 5 foot setback. I would want to leave in (,g). I would want to say that at
any point the grade is within the restrictions. I personally would be comfoRable reducing the
Planning Commission Meeting -September 18, 2001
requirement of what has to be surfaced to the easement portion of the driveway in the rural area. I think
that would suffice. I want to emphasize once more that we're talking about driveways, not private
streets. It seems like there's still some confusion about that. That's my comments.
Blackowiak: Okay, thanks. Deb?
Kind: Madam Chair, I think I'll probably just say no comment. I think I did enough commenting all
along here.
Blaekowiak: Okay, Craig anything to add7
Claybaugh: Yeah, I likewise would be in favor of a greater side yard setback for the road. I'm a little
concerned about how tedious the process is for someone who genuinely wants to just access or put up an
accessory structure, not for the purpose of business but for the purpose of their own convenience and
whether it be a hobby shop or whatever, what the process is for them. Or what it will entail in the furore.
Saam: IfI could. I would be fine with just reviewing those on a case by case basis. That's what we had
talked about. Maybe it's not spelled out in here. If you would like to have some...
Claybaugh: ...contradiction and if there's a number of places down there that have structures to the
back that are used for the intended purpose, that we're well within the city ordinances and as you come
off Powers Boulevard, I believe it'd be the second property to the north there where you've got that
private street. That highlights exactly what Ms. Paulsen was describing where someone come in and
drop the property right in the back of another two there, split the lot up. So now that's the least desirable
outcome, but at the same time I'm just concerned that for people that want to pursue it for the means that
I described previously that then it's not too labor intensive for them to try to navigate that process. They
can still do that in the furore. That's kind of one of the driving purposes for owning a larger lot.
Blackowiak: And Kate, that would just be a variance process, correct?
Aanenson: Right.
Blackowiak: And that's already in place. We're not re-inventing the wheel here. No, okay. Alright.
Well with that, I'd like a motion please.
Kind: Madam Chair, I move the Planning Commission approves the attached amendment to Chapter 20
with the following changes. The first paragraph should read the purpose of this subsection is to provide
minimum design criteria, setback and slope standards for vehicular use. The intent is to reduce erosion,
and then it continues on as it's shown in the staff report. I would like item (a) added back in, and
changed to state, driveway shall be setback at least 10 feet from the side property lines. And I would like
item (g) added back in and item (h) changed to read one driveway access is allowed from a single
resident lot to the street. And item (i), add a period at the end of that paragraph.
Blackowiak: Okay, there's been a motion. Is there a second?
Sidney: Second.
Blackowiak: It's been moved and seconded. Any comments?
10
Planning Commission Meeting - September 18, 2001
Sacchet: Yes, please. In the first paragraph, that double strike out part, did you leave that out or?
Kind: I left it out.
SaccheC Since that is relating to setback I wonder what anybody thinks to put that back in also. It
doesn't make that much difference to me.
Blackowiak: Is it relating to setbacks or is it relating to neighbor? I mean I think the 10 feet is more of
Sacch~ Okay, that's fine.
Blackowiak: I could be wrong.
Kind: Yeah. I mean that adds more substance to the rationale by leaving that in.
Sacchet: I think since we put back in setback, since this is somewhat related, it makes sense to ~d_d that
back in as well.
Kind: I would accept that friendly amendment.
Sacchet: And then (b), I would like to clarify that this is at .any point or in any portion of the driveway.
Kind: Sounds frae. I'll take them one by one.
Sacchet: And (c), yeah that makes sense. (c) I'd like to, in order to be consistent, like to add bituminous
Kind: With concrete or bituminous7
Sacchec Yeah because.
Kind: Or other hard surface material7
Sacchet: Yeah.
Kind: Last sentence.
Sacchec. Just to be consistent with how it's worded before in the other context.
Kind: 1'11 accept that.
Sacchet: And then the one you may not accept, I would feel going 100 feet is encroaching a little bit on
these property owners. I'd like to take that down. The right-of-way's usually 30 feet7
Saam: Yeah, in the agricultural settings those county road right-of-way's are sometimes 80 feet and
wider so if you say to the right-of-way edge then it's irrelevant.
11
Planning Commission Meeting -September 18, 2001
Sacchet: Okay. So I would like to propose that we say instead of for the first 100 feet of the driveway,
that we say at least to the right-of-way portion of the driveway.
Kind: I would accept that with the caveat that I Would like Matt to research what other cities do and have
rules before going to council.
Saam: Okay. I'll just mention that we did gather information from roughly 6 to 10 other cities. 100 feet
is what we found in a couple of them. I can't guarantee it's in every city but that's where that number
came from From other cities data.
Kind: I don't feel strongly about it either way. I just think the council should have that information.
Blackowiak: Do you accept those amendments?
Kind: I do.
Blackowiak: Okay, it's been moved and seconded.
Kind moved, Sidney seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of the
following amendments to Chapter 20:
Section 1. Section 20-1122 of the Chanhassen City Code is hereby amended as follows:'
Sec. 20-1122. Access and Driveways.
The purpose of this subsection is to provide minimum design criteria, setback and slope standards for
vehicular use. The intent is to reduce interference with drainage and utility easement by providing
setback.standards; reduce erosion by requiring a hard surface for all dri'veways; to limit the number of
driveway 'access points tO public streets and to direct drainage toward the street via establishment of
minimum driveway slope standards. Parking and loading spaces shall have proper access from a piiblic
right-of-way. The number and width of access drives shall be located to minimize traffic congestion and
abnormal traffic hazard. All driveways shall meet the following criteria:
a. Driveways shall be setback at least 10 feet from the side property lines.
b.
Driveway grades shall be a minimum of 0.5% and a maximum grade of 10% at any point
in the driveway.
C.
In areas located within the Metropolitan Urban Services Area (MUSA) as identified on
the Comprehensive Plan, driveways shall be surfaced with bituminous, concrete or other
hard surface material, as approved by the City Engineer. In areas outside the MUSA,
driveways shall be surfaced from the intersection of the road through the right-of-way
portion of the driveway with bituminous, concrete or other hard surface material, as
approved by the City Engineer.
d.
On comer lots, the minimum comer clearance from the roadway fight-of-way line shall
be at least 30 feet to the edge of the driveway.
12
Planning Commission Meeting - September 18, 2001
ee
For A-2, RSF, and R4 residential uses, the width of the driveway access shall not exceed
24 feet at the right-of-way line. No portion of the right-of-way may be paved except that
portion used for the driveway. Inside the property line of the site, the maximum
driveway width shall not exceed 36 feet. The ~ driveway width shall not be less
than 10 feet.
For all other uses, the width of the driveway access shall not excx~ 36 feet in width
measured at the roadway right-of-way line. No portion of the right-of-way may be paved
except that portion used for the driveway.
g.
On lots not meeting the minimnm width requirements at the fight:of-way line, the
driveway setback may be reduced subject to th~ following criteria:
lc 1. The driveway will not interfere with any existing easement; and
h.2. The location of the driveway must be approved by the City Engineer to ensure that it
will not cause runoff onto adjacent properties.
One driveway access is allowed from a single residential lot to the street
A turnaround is required on a driveway entering onto a state highway, county road or
collector roadway as designated in the comprehensive plan, and onto city streets where
this is deemed n .ecessary by the City Engineer, based on Iraffic counts, sight distances,
street grades, or other relevant factors. If a turnaround is required by the engineer, this
requirement will be stated on the building permit.
j. Separate driveways serving utility facilities are permitted.
All voted in favor and the motion carried ummimou~ly 6 to 0.
PUBLIC HEARING:
CONSIDER AMENDMENT TO ~ CITY CODE CLARIFYING THAT ~M~NTS
REZONING PARCEI~ REQIjlRE A TWO-TmRD~ (2f3) MAJORITY VOTE OF ALL
Blackowialc This is something we saw before and we did ask for the opinion of the city attorney as to
whether or not we were required to do this. Bob's not here tonight so Kate, are you going to be taking
this one or is Sharmin?
Aanenson: Fll be covering this one.
Blackowiale Okay, thank you.
Aanenson: Thank you. The way our current city ordinance reads is that for a zoning ordinance
amendment requires a 445 vote. As you know we have changed the zoning ordinance. The way our
zoning map is set up is that areas that are outside the current MUSA are left in agricultural. We do have
a comprehensive plan so the way it's set up is that if we were to amend the zoning ordinance we have to
make it consistent with the comprehensive plan or also amend the comprehensive plan, which we've
done in some circumstances. For example, Pulte Homes we had to change the low density in order to get
the twin home attached on that northern side. So we have used that process in the past. What this new
13
Chanhassen Fire Department Fire/R~me Call Sheet dated October 15-21, 2001.
Chanhassen Fire Department Fire/Rescue Call Sheet dated October 22-28, 2001.
Telephone message from IJinda Kmmer dated October 22, 2001.
Men
Men
Men
Men
Men
Men
Men
Tues
Tues
Tues
Weds
Weds
Weds
Weds
Thurs
Fri
Sat
Sat
Sat
Sat
Sun
Oct
Oct
Oct
Oct
Oct
Oct
Oct
Oct
Oct
Oct
Oct
Oct
Oct
Oct
Oct
Oct
Oct
Oct
Oct
Oct
Oct
Oct
15 2:32 AM
15 3:00 AM
15 8:45 AM
15 10:28 AM
15 12:14 PM
15 6:54 PM
15 10:53 PM
16 5:30 PM
16 7:15 PM
16 8:4I PM
17 4:56 AM
17 10:58 AM
17 11:06 AM
17 7:00 PM
18 9:01 AM
18 11:04 AM
19 9:26 AM
20 12:26 AM
20 11:04 AM
20 12:06 PM
20 5:39 PM
21 4:38 PM
CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT
FIRFdRESCUE
WEEK OF OCTOBER 15 - OCTOBER 2 I, 2001
West 78~ Street
Chanhassen Road
Minnewashta Parkway
Coulter Boulevard
Stoughton Avenue
Highway 5 & Highway 41
Fawn Hill Road
Lakeridge Road
Frontier Trail
Brenden Court
Hazeltine Boulevard
Lake Drive East
Audubon Road
Heron Drive
Del Rio Drive
Market Boulevard
Market Boulevard
Lake Susan Hills Drive
West 79th Street
Gray Fox Curve
Highway 5 & Gaipin Blvd
Pleasant View Road
Fire alarm - false ahtrm, no fire
Carbon Monoxide alarm
Medical - severe abdominal pain
Medical - seizures
Unknown problem
Car accident with injuries
Carbon Monoxide alarm
Medical -leg injury
Fire alarm - false alarm, no fire
Medical - broken ann
Fire alarm - broken sprinkler head
Fire alarm - false alarm, no fire
Medical - person foil from mol
Possible chimney fire
Medical- possible heart
Medical - chest pains
Medical - pregnancy complications
Fire alarm - false alarm, no fire
Medical- person collapsed, cancelled
Medical - person fell
Car accident with injuries
Garden tractor on fire
Thurs
Thurs
Thurs
Fri
Sat
Sat
Sat
Sat
Sat
Sun
Sun
Oct
eot
oct
oct
oct
oct
oct
oct
oct
oct
oct
oct
23 5:14 PM
25 12:13 PM
25 2:46 PM
25 7:41 PM
26 11:38 AM
27 12:43 AM
27 9:41 AM
27 10:35 AM
27 7:01 PM
27 8:58 PM
28 5:16 AM
28 9:53 PM
CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT
FIRE/RESCUE
WEEK OF OCTOBER 22 - OCTOBER 28, 2001
Highway 5 & Highway 41
W,st 78~ Stre~
Hwy 7 & Minnewashta Pkwy
Highway 7
Saratoga Circle
Red Cedar Point Road
Chanh~r~n Road
Cascade Circle
Lake Susan I-Iill.~ Drive
Bretton Way
Lake Drive East
Alisa Court
Medical- person hit by backhoe
Fire alarm - false alarm, no fire
Power line down
Fuel spill
Possible electrical fire
Carbon Monoxide alarm
Smell of natural gas - unfounded
.
Medics] - abdominal pain
Medical - person choking
Fire alarm - false alarm, no fire
Fire alarm - lhlse ~ no ~
Medical- seizures
Hi Todd,
This is Linda Kramer calling and I wanted to mention that I read in the paper
that the Chanhassen Recreation Center may be closed on Sundays and I was just
wanted to put in my 2 cents worth. I hope that it can stay open on Sundays, at
least Sunday afternoons, because I do use it. I work full time and a lot of times
Sundays are a good time for me to go in the afternoon.
10-22-01