EDA 1994 01 13COPY
AGENDA
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AU-2~OR1TY
THURSDAY, JANUARY 13, 1994, 7:30 P.M.
CHANHASSEN CITY I-L&-T.T., 690 COULTER DRIVE
APPROVAL OF M~UTES
1. Approval of Decemb~ 16, 1993 Minutes
vISITOR PRESENTATION
OLD BUSINES,S,
2~
e
Status of Highway #5 Pedesu/an Design Selection
Consider approval of a Private Redevelopnznt Agreement with Charlie James
4. Hnnus Facih'ty Roof Repairs Update
NEW BUSINESS
5. 1994 Meeting Times
6. Approval of Bills
HR FRF~ENTATIQN
CHANHASSEN HOUSING AND
REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 16, 1993
Chaimmn Bohn called the meeting to ord~ at 7:~0 p.m. [Note: The recorder did not function
properly or was improperly configured in Todd Gegumtt's absence. Accor~-~ly, g~e following
minulr~s are not verbatim and ~ ~ from the Executive Direc~'s no~.]
MEMBERS PRE~ENT: Jim Bohn; Charlie Robbins, Gary Boyle, Don Chmiel, and Mike
Mason.
APPROVAL OF MIN~rE~; Mason moved, Boyle seconded to spprove the minutrs of the
Housing and Redevelopment Authority meeting dated November 18, 1993 as pres~ted. AH
vol~d in favor and the motion cauied.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS; No one requestrd to speak.
REQUF~T BY CHARLIE ,[AMES FOR SPECIAL A~$ESSMENT ~AN~E; The
Executive Director presented the slaff report noting that the ~ by Mr. James was exactly
the same as outlined in the HRA's Redev~~t Plan and exactly the same as given to most
businesses locating/expanding in the City of ~ i.e. Mr. James would be eligible to
receive up to 3 years worth of tax increment on a "pay as you go" basis as an incentive for
constructing an approrlmn__te 75,000 sq. ft. facility in (~2nhasa~n. Increment would not be
reimbursed to Mr. James until after he had made tax paynzmts in 1995, 1997, and 1998. The
amount of increment that would be reum~ed to him in each of those years would be exactly the
same as the taxes he pnid in each of those years. The Executive Director noted that Mr. James
had significantly higher special assessments against hi~ ~ than have gmeznHy exisu~ on
other projects and had incurred significant costs associsted With the renHgnment of West 78th
Street The initial indications were that the amount of specisl assessments and costs incurred for
the West 78th Street renH~t would probably exceed the total incentives being offered by the
city, i.e. the cost that we have placed against the Wotgn'ty approxinmtr the dollars now being
provided back to Mr. James. Finally, the Executive Director noted thnt the Assistant Executive
Director had ~ted to the HR the incentive ~ provided to Mr. James approximatrly one
year ago which outlined the HRA's policies in regards to our incentive program. The letter
notrd that Mr. James was anticipating bringing to Chanhassen a 75,000 sq. fL facility which
would meet the zoning, setbacks, and nH other ordinances of the City of ~ Although
current concerns have been raised in regards to Mr. James' tin,mt being Byedy's, which may
to the HRA's policies providing incentive to a developer ff he would be generating additional
taxes for the HRA/CIty. The cturent contract being considered by the HR is with Mr. James
and not with Byerly's. The Executive Director seriously questioned whether the lIRA could deny
the assistance to Mr. James as he was relying on the assurances given to him by the lIRA from
nearly one year ago. In addition, the HR's policies are clear in that the incentive program is
I-IRA Minutes
December 16, 1993
Page 2
a part of the Redevelopment Plan. Mr. James was in compliance with all portions of that
Redevelopment Plan.
Charlie lames and John Meyers presented the specific development proposal for the property.
Mr. lames relayed that Byerly's would be the primary tenant and that they had signed a multi-
year lease with him. The facility which is proposed to be built is the most expensive grocery
complex that he has had an opportunity to build after many years in the construction business.
He noted that Byerly's wants this project to be a top-notch project that both the community and
Byerly's can be proud of. Mr. James then graphically showed elements of the construction which
were not typical and why these elements had been added by Byerly's to ensure that this project
would be a highly attractive project. Alternative schematics were presented showing sight lines
from various locations, planting and landscaping plans, as well as market study information
showing the trade area that they would be drawing from. They showed statistics as to the
number of existing Chanhassen residents who are currently leaving Chanhassen to shop at Cub
and/or Rainbow. It has been their experience that stores have generally upgraded to ensure that
they can attain a higher percentage of the market to reasonably compete with Byerly's.
The following persons spoke in regards to the Charlle James development: Lyle and Bob King,
owners of Festival Foods; Bernie Hanson, Chanhassen Lawn & Sport; Tim Keane, Larkin-
Hoffman Law Firm/Gateway/Festival; Amie Prieve, representing Gateway Foods; Charlie James,
T.F. James Company; John Meyers, representing Byerly's; Tim Menning, representing owners
of Market Square Partnership.
Although the above speakers presented their concerns in their own words, there appeared to be
a great deal of similarity in all of the positions presented, i.e:
Viability of Festiva]/Other Stor~s: Each of thc owners admitted that they were aware of
the fact that at some point in time there would be competition for their facility.
Additionally they noted that they thought competition was good and that Byerly's was a
top notch operator which none of them would make disheartening comments about.
However, most of those speaking wished that the decision to build in Chanhassen could
have been held off for one additional year, and
Market Study: Although each of the speakers believed that Byerly's hsd conducted a
market study in advance of making the decision to locate in Chanhassen, speakers wished
to see the HRA conduct their own market study to determine what the effects of Byerly's
would be back to existing businesses; and
Necessity for Expansion: Mr. Prieve acknowledged that one of the options which may
be open to the existing Market Square development would be to increase the size of that
swre and to change the name from Festival to Rainbow. His question was whether or not
HRA Minutes
December 16, 1993
Page 3
the liRA would be able to help in that type of expansion so as to allow Festival Foods
to more reasonably compete with Byerly's.
General Assis~lmcc: Although most of the speakers acknowledged that ~ had received
assistance through the HRA, they questioned whether or not a store such as Byerly's
should receive a similar level of assistance. At issue was the fact that the mark~ was
very weak when they made the decision to commit to Chanhassen whereas currently
Byerly's would not need that similar form of assistance.
The Executive Dircctor repeated points brought out earlier in that the agreement is between the
HRA and Charlic James-not Byerly's; that Idr. James had presented his question as to whether
assistance would be available to him if he built a 75,000 sq. fi. facili~ in conformance with city
ordinances; that he had received assurances that he would; that those assurances did not place
exceptions as to who the tenants xnight be; and, finall~ the Exccntive Director noted that Mr.
improvements surroundiqg his property, i.e. major trunk and lateral water lines, mink and htnal
sewers, Kerber Boulevard upgrade, West 78th Street realist, etc. In each of those instances,
Mr. James stated that he could not afford the level of assessments being cons/dered by the
HRA/C/ty Council and that he would have to be opposed to each of those projects nn~css he was
reasonably assured that assistance would be available to him if h~ brought development to that
writing, that verbal acknowledgement of this fact was given to him at each of those hearings, and
that he was currently requesting that the HR solely abide by the commi~ts that they had
made to him in prior years.
After si.cmificant discussion and anguish over the HR's desire not to hurt anylexisting busines.%
but also to conform to the verbal contractual agreeanents entered into with Mr. 'James, the HRA
came to consensus that their hands were basically tied and that a reversal of their previous
position would probnbly not be upheld either legally or mmally.
HRA members discussed the fact that two enclosm~ showing two d/fferent assistance levels had
been included in thc packet. The Executive Director infimned HRA members that the two
assistance proposals were based on two diff~ potential building values for Mr. James' new
slructure. The approval being given by the HRA was really one as to the formula which would
be used to set the amount of the assistance; that that fonmfla is exactly the same as the standard
model wherein the county assessor would set the specific building value after having reviewed
the detailed building plans; and that Mr. James would agree that that value would represcnt the
minimum building value. The fonm~ of calculating the tax capacity, using that b~_iltllng valtle
and then multiplying that by the cra-rant total tax rate, would represent the incentive being
provided to Mr. James for any one year. That yearly amount would be .multiplied by 3 to
determine the total assistance. Commissioners reaf~um~ that it was the fommla that was being
adopted, not either of the two examples included in the packet.
HRA Minutes
December 16, 1993
Page 4
Gary Boyle moved, Charlie Robbins seconded to approve a development contract with Charlie
James which would include the standard assistance formula and that would conform in all other
respects with the typical requirements of a standard development contract between a developer
and the HRA. Motion was approved unanimously.
As noted above, the HRA did carry out significant discussion as it dealt with assistance which
should be provided to new projects. The conclusion reached was that Mr. James should
reasonably be allotted the assistance which had been stated to him over the past several years.
However, HRA members felt that with the expiration of the district being right around the corner,
that the HRA should limit future assistance to developers to no more titan one-half of the amount
paid from new development between now and the time the district ceased.
Chmiel moved, Boyle seconded a motion to direct staff to prepare a Redevelopment Plan
amendment which would limit assistance to developers to no more than one-half of the increment
that would be generated from full year tax collections between now and the year 2000 including .
collections in the year 2000. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
CONSIDER APPROV .AL OF ARCHITEi~URAL CQNTRA~T WITH JEA ARC .IHTE~"F$
FOR .ESTIMATING COSTS FOR ADA COMPLIANCE: This item was relatively clear.
Commissioner Robbins moved with Commissioner Mason seconding a motion to approve the
architectural comract with JEA Architects for estimating costs associated with ADA compliance.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
{Note: Executive Director Ashworth was unexpectedly forced to leave the meeting. As all of
the remaining items were associated with Fred Hoisington of Hoisington-Koegler Crroup, Inc.,
Mr. Hoisingwn agreed to take minutes for the remaining portion of the agenda as well as to
provide the staff reports.]
LEGION SITE/TRANSIT HUB: Fred Hoisington explained that he is ~g commitments
from a motel developer, Southwest Meu'o Transit Commission and the Legion to develop an
integrated motel/transit hub complex on the Legion/lVlor~nson property, but that Southwest Metro
has not made a commitment and that the access shown with a slip ramp from Highway 5 has not
been approved by MnDOT.
Mr. Hoisington indicated that commitments are expected on behalf of all parties, at least
preliminarily, by January 27, 1994. Hoisington further explained that the project is not in a tax
increment district, but the project itself will not generate tax increment to cover its own cost.
It was indicated that there would be approximately a $1.00 write, own for all ten acres of the
property which could amount to something in the range of $100,000 to $300,000. Hoisington
asked if the HRA would be willing to participate to that degree and it was indicated that he
should continue with the evaluation and come back to the lIRA at its January meeting to discuss
the financial details of a variety of alternatives.
liRA Minutes
~ber 16, 1993
Page 5
PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE PHOTO IMAGING; Fred Hoisington explained that this is at a
CO/NO GO point in the process and that the bridge is funded in part by ISTEA ($280,000). He
the end of 1994. Hoisington also indicated that SRF and Mayer, Scherer and ~ were
selected to design the project. He described the two different all,natives indicating that thc local
cost could be in the range of $300,000 to :r~X),O00.
sUucture, thc degree to which it is vandal proof, and whether the mesh could be extended to
cover the entire ~. Mr. Holslngton indicated that he would check with thc architect to
make that determina~'on and that the Planning Commission would review it on January 5, 1994.
HANU$ BUILDING; Michael Schroeder of Hoisington-Koegler Group briefly presented the
Hanus plans indicating that bids have already been takm for site improv~~ but that no bids
have been taken yet for structmal intprov~ts which include a new roof and painting of the
exterior of the building. He explained that the original cost estimate for bufld~g hnpmvements
would be exceeded by appro~y $60,000, vintmlly aH of which would include the
replacement of the existing roof before the new roof is added. There was a real concern on the
part of the t/RA that the cost differential is so gtmc The HRA suggesmt that Mr. Schroeder
evaluate alternatives, assess the rent ~ and negotiate with Gat3, Kin to see if he would
be willing .to pick up a large share of the cost. He will, needless to say, have to replace the
existing roof at a later date and he may be willing to fund all or a portion of it now in order to
get the other proposed improvements completed. The nltemative is to do nothing as far as the
roof is concerned. The liRA suggested that this item be rescheduled to the January meeting to
report on the status of the roof.
APPROVAL QF BILLS: The HRA questioned the billing from Hoknes and Oraven and asked
that a future staff report address that item. A second bill was qnestioned but not recorded. A
motion wns made by Mn.~n and seconded by Robbing to appwve aH the _~lls as pres~ted. All
voted in favor and the motion cazded.
A motion was made by Chmiel, seconded by Boyle to adjourn the meeting. 'All voted in favor
and the motion carried.
CITY OF
690 COULTER DRIVE · RO. BOX 147 · CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 · FAX (612) 937-5739
MEMORANDUM
FROM:
Housing and ~~lopm~t Authority
Todd Gerhardt, Assistnnt Executive Director~ '
DAT~:
Jaaua~ 14, 1994
SUBS:
Pedestrian Bridge Design
Attached please find a memo from Fred H~ outlining the co~t diff~~ of the two
design alummtives for the Highway 5 pedes~ ~ge. He also highlighted that the Planning
Commission wns supporting Scheme A which..~l~ the trelli.,,es and the.larger center pier, but
they did not support space between the beam~d the'-.'_h~'idge deck; thus the price diffe~oc~ would
be as follows:
Total Costs :~:_-' ;~.
Scheme A
Sch~nc B
$512,500 ~ithout the sp the beam nmi deck, but does
.-' include the larger cefil~r pier and the pop-up trellises)
:r~,67,vfl:~0''(Includes ~ a pier, no pop-up tretli~s, and no
space txlween the bean~md the deck)
1. M~no from Pr~ Hoi~~ d~t~d J~um7 12, 1994.
2. Bridge designs.
T
i ii
C.--":' " '-" '"'-' ~"~"~ ~ ~ ~': ?%. '-'" ~
.,I J~-~.~;. ~ .t~.~_.; . . ~ '=
.
. =
~"'.-'~ ~ ~. .x. . -, ........
~,T~ '. ..... ~ ~ ' -
.-
.,:~. .:.. · . ' . ....
..'[~ 55'. :" ~ ' " -
'.~'~2 ·
. -- .~ -~. ~.
· . .
. ',.~- .. ~:[ .'~
...
. . ~
m
. - y~'.: - ~ '~ ..... .
· ,~-. ~ .... .... ..
'i
?,.
:. ?% '.- ~.'. . .~ , , .~ ~
· . ....... .-
-.-~/..~-'.-.~.'.~.~,:~- ,.,'. - . : --
."-~.,~,.~ ~....~,' ~.' .'... ~ '.. ,.--. .
.. · ?~?:r ~'_~', ': '"~' ~ ~.:.. ~. ~" ~
.~t~...; ;.~:'.'..~'"'.~.~--.~..'" -'-.. ' ' ~' '~s'
· .- ' .4'.:'-,~ ~ ....
-:
...-~,.-. ~.....~ .--,,:.
-...
. . .
'. .... '~- ..~ ..~.. . . ~.-.. , . -.
- ~ · ~- ..
',I ' '""° ' "-" ~":~
..... -.: ..... ~".- .. :' ,...-.: .~,o · . .
.... ;. -. ;-.' . ~ '~.*,.:.
· .X. ~-~;~'~ ~ :..-' :-:-...-: :..-".-'~
~ a · "-': -'. ---'- ~ ~'~ :".i,.
:.~.'. -~. '.~ .. ~. , - . ~,,
_, ' :~.-[' . .- ,r "-'7 - -
.'.~,,?.2~- i: ';' ~- ~.-- ,' 7
~,~! .. a .e.- ·
......... ~,, ~.: .~ · ~.,; .. · . ,~,..
.
. .~d'f .,~ ..,
,.,
% " '~';~ '-'" '"~. T." ".
. .' -. - ; ...- - ....---~.t~ .. ;_
..:
-..-:..::.: :.
- '~ -' 2.:'..-:.-:..-~_-.-..~:'-t.~--~,~,.~.~.~..-.-.
. :. · :..--..-...-: i<:-. 7-.--~. :::--- -:.:..::~i::~?~i....::i~.
~..-.. -~ ....... .~..-~-..~... .... ..~ .....; .~-~.-.~-~,~
.. ... . .'--. ::._-~.; :- .~:r_-___-~'~.~
.... . :.-~r .... :- ¢, ...... ,-~-.,~.~ '-'
_.. - .'-5 '. -': :' . ~['...~.:
...% ..
- ~ ,.- .~-""- :'.7~.:. L,..-.. ,:-:
.... -.- . --..~.-.
.... · '... .
..
-.! . ,
·
· . ., . .
--.I
:... '-.':'~[.~
:j
~ llr IIII IHI~Inl
.-612-~S5-~160
·
HOISI~-TON KDE~_ER
mH
~0
To:
F~om:
Subj.:
Date:
Don Ashw~ ami Todd Gerhardt
Fred Hoisin~. ~ Consultant
Status of Highway $ Ped~t:hn nridg~ Design Selectt~
1-12-94
At tl~ HRA's regular meet~ tm Dm:tmb~ 16, 1993, it expressed a pre.fence for '
the lessor of two bridge designs which c~!!~ for a smaller center pier, smaller
abutments, removal of the pop-up trellises and elimination of the space between the
beam and the bridge deck. The cons~on cost differential between the options is
approximately $80,000 (cost estima~m enclosed). The pop-up lrelHses add less than
$3,000, though the estimsU.,s do no refl~ that; the pier and abutments add $41,000
and the space requires a lars~ superstructure at an added cost of $30~.'
On January 5, the Planning Commission 8ave strong st~pport to Scheme A
including the trellises and large center pier. It was willing to forgo the air space
between the bridge deck and the beam as a means to reduce the cost of the bridge.
The Planning Commission's recommendation would reduce Scheme A by $30,~0-
35,000.
Also, in response to some of the concerns raised by the HRA in Decem~, I enclose
a letter from the architect, Thomas Meyer, addressing the issues of durability and
security. Please review this information as part of your deliberation.
As you are aware, we are under a very difficult schedule to get the bridge designed,
bid and under construction by July of 1994. SRF is continuing to process our
requests through lVlnlXYr and the Federal Highway Administration in antidpation
that the design of the bridge will commence as o/January 25, 1994.
HO I S ! ~3TON KOEGLER
po, t-it'
215 F~3 JAN 12 '94 14:2'2
MS&R
Summaz7 of ~tma~d Cost OL.'cl~ 1~ December 1993
South Abetment d: $40,000 =, $35,000
Not~ Abutment .+. $40,000 :!: S35,000
~ier ~ $63,000 ± $32,000
Supets~-uctGt¢ Steel. ± $160,000 & $130,000
Painting ~: $10,000 = $10,000
Deck i ~7,000 ~ $27,000
Railing ± $120,000 = $120,000
Treatments (A~uts an(/Piers) ± $2.$,000 ~: $21,000
Structure iExcavation = $10,000 ~: S10,000
Guardrail a: $5,000 :1:$$,000
__ ~,, ....
Subtotals :1: ,
! 0% Continl~u~cy .t. $50,000 :!: $42,$00
Grand Total .t. $$S0,000 :1:$467,500
HOISIN~-03~ KOE~LER
HIGHWAY { PL:D~ BRIDGB
ESTIMATE OF TOTAl, I'ROIF. CT ~
Scheme A 1)
!
'Scheme
Construction
l:'lennin$ 5,000 5,000
Land Acquisition
Total ProJect C.o~t
$628,100 SS08,600 '
~-tWA Contribution (ISTPA)
Total HRA ~
$4~100 $318~
w~ pop-up trellises, large center pier end air spece between bridge deck and beam.
Without these features.
612-8~5-3160
·
·
HOISINGTON KOEGLER
215 ~ JAN 12 '94 14:28
MS&R
December 23, 1993
Fred Hoisington
Hoisington Koegler Group
7300 M~tro Boulotard
Edina, Mi,-~esota 55439
Tel 612 37S.0336
F~x 612 342.2216
Re: Chsnhsssen Pedestrian Bridge
Dear Fred:
I'd like to respond to the two conce:ns raised in your meeting with the Chanl~ssen HRA
about pedestrian bridge. The two concerns, ss I uademand them, arc durability and
security. The design as it currently stands is a scheanatic design sad, after approval to
proceed further, developmmt of it will address In der. il the ~ du~ability sad ~'urity
within the constraints of the budget, MnDOT regulations, sad the ~th~ic concept
represeat~.d.
Durability: The typical chain link f~nc~ used on fi'aeway bridge~ is 9~~ m~. We
exper ~ u~ a 6- or 8~uge ~i~ for ~e w~ w~ ~ ~t ~ ~g ptop~.
This is ~bs~d~ly ~on~. ~1 ~e ha~g ~b~s which ~I1 rapport &e m~ are
su~d~dy s~ong to ~e ~y nor~ use ~d ~g~ ~ no~! ~ li~ ~ppon.
The fini~ of ~1 m~~ wi~ be a top qu~, fi~d~ppli~ ~nt ov~ ~v~igd s~l.
Normal main~an~ on ~idges is proj~d m ~ng
a~r i~fi~ insinuation and ~ery 10 ~s ~~. We ~~ ~ main~an~
~h~dule ~ b~ ~u~ br &is bridge ~ w~l, if not
Security: The level of enclosure required along highwaF~ varies ~rom cir~c~ ro
circumstance. The typical height of chain link fencing on any ~sy vehicular overpass
is eight f~ The pedestrian bridge crossing 14 lsaes of traffic at the Walke~ Art C~mter
Sculpture Garden has no chain link fence ~nd some pedestrian bridges have chain link ·
fences that go up the side and over the top. The proposal for Chanhassen to take the
mesh to a height of eight feet seems to me to be a common aens~ response. If it is deemed
desirable to fully enclose the bridge, there would be some added cost ss well as the
necessity to do some redesign. It is my opinion that fury enclosing the bridge will give it
a claustrophobic and fearful character which ia st odds with the c/ty's intentions.
sincerely,
cc Gere Seiger, SRF
¢:~empk93~41293.do~
CITY OF
690 COULTER DRIVE · P.O. BOX 147 · CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 · FAX (612) 937-5739
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Todd Oe~'hn~t, Assistant Executive
DATE:
January 14, 1994
SUB~:
Consider Approval of Privat~ Redevelopment with ~ames Comlm~y
Attached for the HRA's considerati~ is a ~~..~edevelopment Agreement between the lIRA
and the Sames Company (see Attac~t-" '~":" '#1)~~nme, s is asking to join the HRA's Special
Assessment Reduction Program and is req~~assisum~ in writing down the special
assessments against hi~ development of a n~:106,7~ sq. ft. xmail facility to be ~ on Lot
1, Block 1, West Village Hei~ Second ..A~tion (~Attachment ~f2). Mr. James is requesting
special assessment assistance to wri~lown ~ximately $343,871 worth of public
The ~tin~t~l mount of inc~ntiv~ '..~iil~l~ t~ $92~[_~r,?.00, ~ on tl~ I-IRA'~ ~li~ of
thr~ ~ worth of full t~x~ (~...:'~ttac~t ~). In ~ tl~ ~ conld wriU~ down ~11
of the ~l~i~ ($343,871) ~md...~'~g in~t of--'~[581,553.00 could I~ m~l for l~d
writ~ down. .. i. ' ~-~-.
Pending m~! ~g 8~_.~ ....... . '~ $ 34~,871
Total of .3_. Years. Worthof_..T, ..... .= .~ ~
Remaining'~t' to-..be:...used for Land Write Down
I have also attached the City Council's a~ed",~t~-plan report for the HRA's review and
~-~ . ~.:. ·
consideration for a~g thc ~-chi~-tmal ~{:ff Mr. J'~t~' d~l~
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the arcM~ style and the Privnte Redevelopment Agreement
with the James Company and their request for $925,425 in special assessment and land wri~e-
down assistance.
ATTACHMENTS
Ii
2.
3.
4.
Private Redevelopment Contract
Location Map
Estimate~ Taxes
Planning Report on Site Plan Request
Holmes & Graven, C~red
Draft
1113194
CONTRACT
FOR
PRIVATE u~EV~OPMENT
BY AND B~TWEEN
THE HOUSING AND Rj~;vmOPMEN? AUTHORITY
IN AND FOR
THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN
JAMES CCa~ANY,
a ~lnnmota ~tian
This document was dr~fted by:
Holmes & Graven, Cha~tered
470 Pfllsbu~ Center
P~n~eapolis, MN 55402
~T~M~47
CH:L30-28
TABLE OF CONTENTS
P.@
Section
Section
Section
Section 3,1.
Seol/on $.
Section 3.3.
Section $.4.
Section
Sec~on $. 6.
Section $.7.
Sec*don 3.8.
Section 3.9·
Section 3,10,
Section $. 11.
Seotion 3.~2,
Section 4.1.
Section 4.2.
Section 5.1,
Section 5.2.
section 5.3.
section 5.4.
Section 6.1.
Section 8.2.
sec*don 6,3.
Section 8.4.
Section 8.5.
Section 8.6,
Section 6,7.
Sect/on 6.8.
S~GNATURES
TESTIMONIALS
Defimltions - 3
ARTICT.~ II :
Representations by the Authox, lty . . · . 5
:
AIITICLE IIX
Acqutsi*dolx of Redevelopment ~~-ty ....
7
, · 7
~~Acqu~l~n~dConve~~ . . . . . . · . · · · · · 7
Ti~ . . · · . . · · . · . ..... , .......... . . . . . 7
5~Con~o~ . · . · · · , · · ,.. .............. 8
~~e ~ .' ..... ~
D~d T~ ' 8
Sm~ ....... · · .~ ...............
P~~ ~nve~d Aa Is ' 8
Te~~ ' 9
H~E ~0~ ~ ~ ....... · ..... . ......... . 9
~TI~.~ ~
.
Fo~of~b~c~~ . . , . . . , . · · , ..... . . , 10
. .
~TI~ V
T~ ~t
Re,pt ~ T~ In~ent; P~ ~ Pa~t . . . . . .-... 1~
Equal Employment Oppm, tuntty · 13
· . . · . · · ~1, · · · · · · · ·
ReatLdotlons on Use ' ...... 13
Notices and Demands ....... .;.. ............ . . 13
Dts~er of Rel~*donships ' · .... l S
Modifications ..,,,..., ................. IS
Counter-parts ' 13
' 9 · · · · · I · · ·! · · · . · . I · · · & · · ~ q*
SCHEDULE A
SCHEDULE B
SCHEDULE C
SCHEDUL~ D
REDEVELOPMENT PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION
ASSESSMENT AOI~EEMENT AND ASSE2BBOR'S CERTIFICATION
AGREEMENT TO PAY DEFICIENC.'IES
LiMIT SD R, EVENUE TAX INCREMENT NOTE
,,T~44147
CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE REDEVEr~)~
THIS AGREEMENT, made on or as of the day of November, 1992, by and
between THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY
OF CHANHASSEN (herotnAfter refem~d to as the ~Autho. rtty") and JAMES
COMPANY, a ]~tnnesota corporation (hereinafter. refem~l to as the "Redeveloper"),
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Authority was created ptu~u~t to Minnesota Statutes, Sections
469.001-.047 (the "Act") and was authorized to transact business and exm~[se its
power~ by a resolution of the City Council of the City of Chantmssen (her~_~_ halter the
"City") pursuant to Section 469.003 (formerly Section 462.425) of the Act; and
WHEREAS, in fur~he~ce of the objectives of the Act, the Authority _h~A
engaged in ca~ out a redevelopment project k~own as the Redevelopment plan
for the Downtown Chanhaasen Redevelopment Area (her~__tnA~'tsr refe~ to as the
"Project") in an area (her~dnafter referred to as the "PeoJect Area") located in the
City; and
WHEREAS, as of the date of this Agreement there has been pz~rpared a~d
approved by the Authority and the City Council of the City a redevelopment plan for
the preJect (whio. h Plan is hereinafter r~fem-ed to as the "Redevelopment Plan"); and
WHEREAS, in order to f~nance, in part, the public redevelopment costs of the
P~oJect the Authority and City have the created Tax Increment District for the
Downtown Chantmssen Redevelopment Area (the "Tax Increment Dlst~-lct"); and
WHEREAS, there has been presented by the Redeveloper to the City and the
Authority for their consider~tion a proposal for the development of an office-retail
facility within the Project on proper~y located within the Tax Increment District; and
WHEREAS, the Authority hA= reviewed the Redeveloper's development
proposal and has detez~ntned that such pl~osal Jf completed would, serve to
accomplish the lpg_l= and objectives for which the Project and the Tax In~t
District were created; and
WHEREAS, in order to achieve the objectives of the Redevelopment plan the
Authority will acquire certain ~ proper~y in the .Project A~ea, more particularly
described in Schedule A annexed hereto and made a pat-t hereof (which prope~ as
so described is hereinafter refem~l to as the "Redevelopment Prope~"), and is
p~epared to convey the Redevelopment Proper~y to the Redeveloper in order to bring
about redevelopment in accordance with the Redevelopment plan and this Agree~t;
and
WHEREAS, in order to achieve the objectives of the Redevelopment P!n~ the
Authority has determined to provide aid and assistance to the Redevelopment
Preper~y in the form of land w~ite down expenditures and othar redevelopment costs;
and
WHEREAS, the Authority intends to fund the land write down expenditures
and other redevelopment costs by using tax increments generated from the
Redevelopment P~ope~ty and the improvements to be constr~tcted thereon; and
C!~30-28
WHEEEAS ~ the Authot4ty believes that the redeveloDment of the P~Jeot Area
pursuant to this A~eement~ ~nd fulfillment ~ene~ally of this AEt~eement~ a~e in the
vital and best interests of the City and the health, safety, mo~/s, and welfare of its
~estdents~ and in acuord with the public purposes and provisions of the appltoable
state and lo~/laws and requirements under which the P~oJect has been undertaken
and is being assisted.
NOW ~ THERF. FORE~ in conside~-a~lon of the p~emtses and the mutual obligations
of the parties he~,eto ~ each of them does hereby covenant and aATee with tho other
as follows:
·
(~30-2s 2
ARTICr.]~ I
Daflnl~
Section 1.1. Definitions. In tht~ AEreement, unless a different mea~
cleamly appears f~om the ~ontext:
"Act" means minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001-459.047 (fo~aeriy Municipal
Houatn~ and Redevelopment Act, _Minnesota Statutes, Sections 482.411-462.711), as
amended.
"AE~ament" m_a~ns this AEr~m~nt, as the ~me -~y be Feom t~me to t~me
modified, amended, or supplemented.
"Assessed Market Valuer or "Assessed Market Valuation" _m_~._ ns the mariret
value of ~ prope~ u determined by the county useasor of the county in
aeco~lance with l~tnnesota Statutes, Section 273.11 (or as finally adjusted by the
assessor, board of equalization, commissioner of revenue, or ~nlr court).
"Authority" m_a--s the Houst-E and Redevelopment Authority in and for the
City of Cb~h~_~sen, or any successor or assignee.
"City" means the City of Chanhaasen, a ~--esota municipal co.rpomtton and
statutory city auuo~ling to the laws of the State of MinneSOta.
"Closing" means the completion of the transaction contemplated in tht~
AEreement between the patties hereto.
"Caast~uetion Plans" means the plans, specifications, dm~ And related
documents on the construction work to be performed by the Redeveloper on the
Redevelopment PToper~y which shall be at least as detailed as the plans requtred to
be submitted to the building inspector of the City.
"Deficiency AEreement" means the Redeveloper's obltEation to pay ~
propez~y taxes aceordtn~ to the ter~-s of the document attached hereto as Schedule
D.
"Limited Revenue Tax Increment Note" or "Note" _.~_ nA the lt-gted, special
obligation of the Authority to pay to Redeveloper, from tax increments ~enerated
f~om the Redevelopment P~ope~, an annual dolla~ amount, as provided in Section
4.2 of this AEreement and the Note attached as Schedule D.
"Minimum Imprevemente" means the lmp~ovemente desc~bed in the
Construction Plans, which include a 7,000 square foot office building, ~5,000 sq~
feet of retail space and a 60,000 square foot supe~na~ket.
"Project" means Redevelopment plA, for the Downtown Chanlmssen
Redevelopment Area.
"l~oJect Area" means the ~1 p~oper~, located witl~tn the boundaries of the
PruJect.
~BD64147
cm~o-;a 3
"Redeveloper" means James Company, a Minnesota corporation, or its
successors and assigns.
"Redevelopment Property" means the real property, a lelp~l description of
which property is contained on the attached Schedule A.
"Redevelopment Plan" means the plan for the Downtown Chanhassen
Redevelopment Area as amended as of tho date of this AKreement.
"Tax Increment" means that porilon of the real property taxes paid with
r~spect to the Tax Increment District which is remitted to the Authority as tax
increment pursuant to the Tax Increment Act.
"Tax Increment Act" means l~tn,~esota Statutes, Sections 469.174-. 179, as the
same may be amended from time to time.
"Tax Increment District" means the Authortty's Tax Increment District for the
Downtown Chanhassen Redevelopment Area as sm_ended as of the date of tht~
AKreement.
"Termination Date" means the date when the Authority has paid the full amount
due under the terms of this A~eement and the l,tmtted Revenue Tax Increment Note.
"Tax Official" means any city or county assessor; county auditor; city, county
or state board of equalization, the commissioner of revenue of the state, any state
or federal district cout-t, the tax court of the state, or the State Supreme Cout-t.
"Unavoidable Delays" means delays whiah are the direct result of-acts of God,
unforeseen adverse weather conditions,, fire or other casualty to the Minimum
Improvements, litigation commenced by third parties which, by injunction or other
similar Judicial action causes delays, acts of any federal, state or local gove~mmental
unit (other than the Authority in enforcing its rights under this AKreement),
Authority defaults as to the Redeveloper's delays, Redeveloper defaults as to ttm
Authority's delays, or other matters which are not within the contr~)l of the
Redeveloper as to the Redeveloper's delays or not within the control of the Authority
as to the Authority's delays.
,,T~D64147
C~:1,30-28 4
ARTIC~.~ H
Repreaantatians and Waemntiea
Section 2.1. Representations by the Authority. The ,~uthority ml~s the
following representations as the basis fo~ the unde~-tak~ on its pa~ herain
contained:
(a) The Authority has the right, powe~ -nd authority to execute, deliver
and perform its obligations accora~g to this Agreement and all other documents to
be executed by the Authority purser hereto. The Authority will take all
apprepriate actions to previde or obtain from the City Council or other entities the
required approvals in order to complete the transaction contemplated aeco~ttn~ to
this AKreement. The Authority assures the Redeveloper that the lndtvidlml- who
execute tht~ AKreement and all other documents executed by the Authority or on
behalf of the Authority ar~ duly authorized to sign the same on behalf of the
Authority and to bind the Authority thereto.
(b) The PeoJect is a "redeve!_~pment project" within the meanin~ of the ACt
and was created, adopted and approved in aceordanco with the terms of the Act.
(c) The Tax Increment I)istetct is a "~leve~ment tax incr~nent flnanein~
district#, whiah was created, adopted, cer~df~d and appreved pursuant to the Tax
Increment Act.
(d) Subject to satisfaction of the reruns and conditions of
the Authority will convey the Redevelopment Proper~y to the Redeveloper for
development in accordance with the terms of this Agreement.
(e) Neither the Authority, nor, to the best of the Authority's knowledge,
any entity or person has, at any tim (i) "l~deased" or actively or passively
consented to the "release" or "threatened release" of. any Hazardous Substance (as
defined below) on or under or that would siTect the envieonmental condition of the
Redevelopment lh*ope~; or (ii) taken any action in "response" to a "~alease" in
connection with the Redevelopment Proper~y; or (iii) othe~ engaLmd in any
activity or omitted to take any action whiah could' subject the Authority or
Redeveloper to c~_a~ms for intentional or negl~nt tom, strict or absolute liability,
either pursuant to statute or common law, in connection with Hazardous Substances
(as defined below) located in or on the Redevelopment l~erty, including the
generating, transport, treatin~, storage, or manufacture of any H~ous
Substance (as defined below). The terms set within quotation ma~ks above shall
have the meanin~ given to them in the Comprehensive Environmental Response and
Liability Act, 42 U.S.C. ! 9601 et seq., as amended (~CERCLA') and any state
envi~o~en~ laws. ~Haza~tous Substances# means hazaedous waste, toxic
substances, fo~naldehyde, urea, polychlo~n~ted, biphenyls, asbestos, petroleum,
natural gas, synthetic gas usable u fuel or mixtures thereof, any ,TU~te~A_l,~ related
to any of the fore~oin~, and substances defined as ~hazaedous substaneea~, "toxic
substances", ~~ous waster, ~pollutant~, or "contaminant~ in CERCLA 42
U. S.C. ! 9601 et seq., the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act as amended,
the Hazardous Materials Transpo~,tation Act, 49 U.S.C. ! 1801 et seq., the Clean
Water Act, 3S U.S.C. ! 1251 et seq., any state laws reEardtn~ environmental
matters, or any reKulations promu~ted pursuant to any of the foreKoing statutes.
C~130-28 5
(f) Tho Authority does not know of any wells on the Redevelopment
Property within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes, Section 1031.
Section 2.2. Represent, ations by the Redeveloper.
represents that:
The Redeveloper
(a) The Redeveloper has the right, power and authority to execute, deUver
and perform its obligations according to this Algreement.
(b) If the Redeveloper, constmlcts the Minimum Imprevements on the
Redevelopment Property, it will do so in accordance with the terms of this
Agreement, the Redevelopment Plan and all local, state and federal laws and zon~,~g,.
building code and public health laws and regulations.
(c) If constructed, the l~n~mum Improvements will be constmlcted at a cost
to Redeveloper of not less than $5,000,000 inclusive of the value of the
Redevelopment Property. Whether or not the Redeveloper constructs the l~tr~mum
Improvements, the Redeveloper agrees to the terms and conditions of the Deficiency
Agreement attached hereto as Schedule C.
(d) The Redeveloper has received no notice or communication from any
local, state or federal official that the activities of the Redeveloper or the Authority
in the Project Area may be or will be in violation of any environmental law or
regulation. The Redeveloper is aware of no facts the existence of which would cause
it to be in violation of any local, state or federal environmental law, regulation or
review procedure. In the event that the Authority is required to take any action to
obtain any necessary permits or approvals with respect to the Redevelopment
Property under any local, state or fede~ envtrot~mental law or regulation, the
Redeveloper will cooperate with the Authority in co~r~ectton with such action.
(e) If the Redeveloper constructs the Minimum Improvements, it will do so
in accordance with all applicable local, state or federal energy conservation laws or
regulations.
(f) Neither the execution and delivery of this Agreement, the consummation
of the transactions contemplated hereby, nor the fulfillment of or compliance with the
terms and conditions of this Agreement is prevented, limited by or conflicts with or
results in a breach of, the terms, conditions or provisions of any restriction or any
evidences of indebtedness, agreement or instrument of any evidences of
indebtedness, agreement or instmiment of whatever nature to which the Redeveloper
is now a party or by which it is bound, or constitutes a default under any of the
foregoing.
u'BD64147
CH130-2e 6
AE?ICL~
Acquisition and Conveyance of lh~ope~
Section S.1. Acquisition of Redevelopment P~ope~. The Redeveloper
~presents that it has as of the date of thin Ag~enmut obtained title to or options to
acquire title to the Redevelopment ~r~y. Subject to the reruns of thin
Agreement, the Autho~-lty agrees that it will, subsequent to the Redevelope~ts
acquisition of title to the Redevelopment ~o~-ty, aeq-I~e the Redevelopment
Proper~ frem the Redeveloper. The conveyance fl, om the Redeveloper to the
Authority SBA1! be by a standard quit olAtm deed. Imme~tely after the Authority's
acquisition of the Redevelopment Pr~per~y, the Authority shall, by quit ~_],tm deed,
reconvey such prope~y to the Redeveloper for development in aeeo~ee with the
tmvns of this Agreement. The cost to the Authority of aecl~ the Acquisition
~ls and conveyinE such pr~pe~ to the Redeveloper shall be paid in aoco~lance
with the te~ms of Section 3.8 of thin AE~ement. Redeveloper shall pe~lodtmlly
tneorm the Authority of the status of its acquisition activities.
Section 3.2. Conveyance of the Redevelopment Peopertlr. The Authority shall
reconvey title to and possession of the Redevelopment Pl, opel-ty to the Redeveloper
under a quit cl_a~m deed. The conveyance of and the Redev~rts use of the
Redevelopment ~e~ty ShA~ be subject to all of the conditions, covenants,
restrictions and limitations imposed by the Redevelopment Plan and tht= Agreement.
The conveyance of flue to and the Redeveloper's use of the Redevelopment ~r~y
sh~11 A!~o be subject to building and zoning laws and o~/inances And all other
applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations.
Section 3.~. Time of Acquisition and Conveyance. (a) The Authority shall,
subject to all applicable previsions of law and preconditions to alosin~ contained in
this AKreement, if the Redeveloper is not then in default under the te~ms of this
AL, reement, acquire the Redevelopment Peope~y from the Redeveloper and
simultaneously reconvey the Redevelopment Peoper~ to the Redeveloper within ten
(10) days after (i) the Authority's appreval of the Consteu~n Plans and the
Redeveloper's obtaininE evidence of a commitment for f~nm~aln~ reasonably
acceptable to the Authority; and (fi) the Redeveloper havin~ obtained all
i~ove~-mental pe~nits and apprevals, neceesaey to be obtained in o~der to permit
conveyance of the Redevelopment Prepe~ to Redeveloper and construction of the'
Minimum Imprevements, or on such other date as the Authority And the Redeveloper
shall mutually ~ in writinE. The Redeveloper shall take possession of the
Redevelopment Prepe~ the day of execution and deltve~j, of the Deed by the
Author/ry.
(b) Unless otherwise mutually agreed by the Authority and the
Redeveloper, the execution and deliver~ of all deeds shall be --,de at the prinaipal
office of the Authority.
Section 3.4. Title. (a) Prior to and as a condition to the Authority's
obliL~ation to acquire the Redevelopment ~~-ty, the Redeveloper shall obtain and
fur~_ ~sh to the Authority a commitment for the issuance of a policy of title insurance.
The Authority shall have twenty (20) days f~om the date of its reeaipt of suah
commitment to review the state of title and to provide the Redeveloper with a list of
weitten objections to such title. No objection may be made by the Authority to any
defect or encumbrance on the title unless and to the extent that such defect or
J~64147
C~130-28 7
encumbrance would, if uncured, have the effect of precluding Redeveloper's request
to convey marketable title or the construction of the Minimum Improvements. Upon
receipt of the Authority's list of w~tten objections, the Redeveloper shall proceed
in good faith and with all due diligence to attempt to cure the objections made by the
Authority. Within ten (10) days after the date that all such objections have been
cured, to the reasonably satisfaction of the Authority, the Authority shall preceed
with its acquisition and reconveyance of such Acquisition Parcel. The Authority
shall have no obligation to take any action to clear defects in the title to the
Redevelopment Property.
(b) The Authority shall take no actions to encumber title to the
Redevelopment Property between the moment the Authority acqtth~s to the moment
on which the Authority's Deed is delivered to the Redeveloper, it being under'stood
that such conveyances will occur simultaneously.
Section 3.5. Soil Conditions. The Redeveloper acknowledges that the
Authority makes no representations or wam~anties as to the condition of the soils on
the Redevelopment Property or its fitness for construction of .the Minimum
Improvements or any other purpose for which the Redeveloper may make use of such
proper~y. The Redeveloper further a~ees that it will indemn~¢y, defend, and hold
harmless the Authority and the City, their governing body members, officers, and
employees, fr~m any c!a~r~s or actions arising out of the presence, if any, of
hazardous wastes or pollutants on the Redevelopment l~repe~ty.
Section 3.6. Purchase Price. (a) The Authority shall pay the Redeveloper
as purchase price for the Redevelopment Pr~per~£y the aggregate principal amount
of $581,533. Such payment shall be ~de enfl~ly ~d exclusively in accor~~ ~th
the te~s of a M~ted Revenue Note ("Note") ~ subsidy the fo~ ef the
attached Schedule D. TMs Note is to be executed by the Autho~ty ~d de~ve~d
to Redeveloper at Clos~g.
(b) The purchase price to be paid by the Redeveloper for the reconveyance
of the Redevelopment Property from the Authority shall be $1.00.
· ! Section 3.7. Taxes and Special Assessments. Redeveloper shall pay all ~
~ estate taxes and installments on special assessments due and payable in the y~ar of
closing, thereafter and theretofore.
Section 3.8. State Deed Tax. Redeveloper shall pay any State Deed Tax,
Library or miscellaneous fee required in connection with the deeds, and all fees and
charges required in connection with the recording of such.
Section 3.9. Other Costs. No cost, fee or other payment relating to any
estate transaction of any nature shall be payable by the Authority to any person or
entity; and the Authority's entire obligation in connection with the purchase and sale
of the Redevelopment Property shall be payment of the purchase price as prevtded
in this Agreement.
Section 3.10. Property Reconveyed As Is. Redeveloper acknowledges that
the Authority shall have no obligation to per~orm any site work in connection with
the proposed transaction or othemvise. The Authority's only obligation hereunder
is to reconvey the Redevelopment Preperty to the Redeveloper in the condition in
which it was conveyed to the Authority. All site work, including, without limitation,
i ,]'1:~1',1.14 '94 12:E5 ~ & ~ P.4
· :
·
·
,
I
:
· ·
...' done by the Redeve!~_p~ at Redeveloper. 's oo~t.
ii' Seotion s.~. ?emination. tu the event that ~ t~ p~adittons to ~
" ~ve ~t ~ ~~ ~ ~v~ by " , ~~ ~ m~ ~ ~
In the Further event that the ~ domm not oceu~ on o~ be~o~e
, unlmm much date t~ e3~mz~led by ~ written ag~mment el' tim
'this As, reesmnt shaU'automat/oally become ~null and void and ~pon
Seotton 3.12. ~ to Sale. Aa ~ further precondition to the
Aut~*s obligat~ona' laweund~, the ,~,yrlt7 ehall hold ,.!! _h__~_ _-lngs and make
p~ovided for in the _~tmmmut. ·
,:
....
~.. Assesm~'s ~oation in subStantJally the fozm of tim attached Sehedulm B. At the
,:. 5motion 3.13. t t. At Clo~, ap_d as a pt*emon~~ to
, tim Authorlty's oblJga~, the partf~ shall exempted, an Ass~ssnmnt Agr~mm~nt and
contemplated
ARTICLE IV
Public Assistance
Section 4.1. Constr~tction of the Minimum Improvements. Subject to the te~ns
and conditions of this A~reement, the Redeveloper aL,'rees to purchase the
Redevelopment Property and to construct the M~n~mum Improvements on the
Redevelopment Property in accordance with the Construction Plans; and to maintain,
preserve and keep them in ~ood repair and condition, subject to r~asonable wear and
tear and casualty excepted.
Section 4.2. Form of Public Assistance. In order to facilitate the flnaneisl
feasibility of the redevelopment of the Redevelopment Property and in consideration
for the Redeveloper's fulfillment of its covenants and obligations under this
Al~'eement, the Authority will previde to the Redeveloper a land-write down and a
payment of special assessments from the tax increments. The public assistance will
be payable by the Authority as indicated below.
(a) Land-Write Down. The Authority aL~-ees to provide the Redeveloper a
land-write down in an amount of five hundred and eighty-one thousand five hundred -
and fifty-three dollars ($581,553) which shall be paid to the Redeveloper out of tax
increments ~ener~ted by the Minimum Improvements constructed on the
Redevelopment Property. Payments of the land write down shall be made solely in
accordance with the terms of Schedule D.
(b) Special Assessment Write-Off. The Authority al~es to provide a write-
off of special assessments to be assessed a~dnst the Redevelopment Pt, operty for
public improvements in the amount of three hundred forty-three thousand eight
hundred seventy-two dollars ($343,872). The wr~te=off of special assessments is to
be achieved by the Authority's collection of the total annual tax increment ~enerated
by the Redevelopment Property and Minimum Improvements and withholdtn~ a po~cion
thereof to pay for the special assessment write=off of $343,87o.. Tax increment
committed to the Authority from the Redevelopment Property shall first be allocated
to the Special Assessment Write-Off as provided in paraL~raph (c) of this Section 4.2.
(c) Allocation of Tax Increment Public Assistance. The allocation of the tax
increment public assistance to be provided by the Authority to the Redeveloper
pursue, nt to Section 4.2(a) and (b) above is estimated as follows:
Total
Year Estimated Annual
Payable Tax Increment
Total Annual
Tax Increment
Payable to
Redeveloper as
Land-Write Down
Total Annual
Tax Increment
Payable
as Special
Assessment
Write-Off
1995 0
1998 308,475 193,851 114,6~4
1997 308,475 193,851 114,624
1998 308,475 193,851 114,824
In any year commencing with the year 1996 and ending in the year 1998, in
which the tax increment is not greater to or equal to one hundred fourteen thousand
six hundred and twenty-four dollars ($114,624), the Redeveloper agrees to pay the
dtt'ference between the actual tax increment amount and $114,624 to the Authority
0~D6&147
cm~o-2a 10
u a deficiency within thirty (30) days of z'eeeipt of w~itten notice f~om the
Authority.
In the event any tax inaeement is payable in 1995, this Rmmmt shall be
credited by the Authority to the account of Redeveloper and be used to z~luce the
speaial assessment which is payable in 1996 with the ~ tax inez~ment amount
paid to the Redeveloper.
FB:)S&147
cm3o-~. 11
ARTICLE V
Tax In~n~t
Section 5.1. Tax Increment Certification. The Authority has established the
Tax Increment District pursuant to the Tax Increment Act.
Section 5.2. Real Property Taxes] Special Assessments. The Redeveloper
shall pay, in accordance with Section 3.7 herein, all ad valorem taxes and special
assessments on the Redevelopment Property which are payable subsequent to closing
on the sale of the Redevelopment Property. This is a cot-porate obligation of the
Redeveloper which shall continue even if the Redeveloper sells the Redevelopment
Property, unless the Redeveloper is released of its obligations --der this
Agreement.
Section 5.3. Real propez-t¥ Assessment. The Redeveloper shall not cause the
Redevelopment Property to be removed from the public tax rolls or to become exempt
from assessment for general real estate taxes by reason of any conveyance, lease,
abatement or other action until the Termination Date.
Section 5.4. ReceiDt of Tax Increment} Proof of Payment. The Redeveloper
shall receive its annual tax increment payments from the Authority no later than
December 31st of each year upon the Redeveloper's submission of proof of payment
of real property taxes to the Authority.
c~.3o-~8 12
ARTICLE VI
A~ lh~visions
Section 6.1. Equal EmploFment O~po~nity. The Redeveloper, for itself and
its successors and assigns, agrees that in the event the _M~-~mum Improvements are
constructed as provided for in the A~nt, it will comply with all applicable
federal, state and local equal employment and nondiscrimination laws and
Section 6.2. Restrictions on Use. The Redeveloper ~ for itself, and its
successors and assigns, and evm-y successor in interest to the Redevelopmant
lh. opm-ty, or any part ther~f, that the Redeveloper, and such successors and
us~, shall devote the Redevelopment Propm-ty to, and only to and in accordance
with, the land use regulettons of the City of ChAnhs,sen.
Section 8.3. lh~ovisions Not Mer~red With Deed. None of the provisions of this
Agreement at~ intended to ox' SBA11 b~ nwrg~d by r~ason of any deed tr,mseemdn~
any interest in the Redevelopment Prope~.
Section 6.4. Notices and Dem~-ds. Except as othm~dse expreasly provided
in this Ageeement, a notice, dem~,d, or other eommu-~_~tton under the A~t
or the Redevelopment Deed by either party to the other shall be sufflciently given
or delivered only if it is dispatched by registered or cer~dfied marl, postage prepsid,
retur~ receipt requested, or delivered personally; and
(a) in the case of the Redeveloper, .is addressed to or delivered personally -
to the Redeveloper at . ; and
(b) in the case of the Authority, is addressed to or delivered personally to
the Authority at 690 Coulter Drive, Box 147, Chanhassen, M~--Asots 55317, or at
such other address with respect to either such party as that paety may, from time
to time, designate in writtnE and fo~wmrd to the other as provided in this Section.
Section 8.5. D'isclAtmer of Relationships. The Redeveloper ael~n0wledKes that
nothtn~ contained in tht, Agreement nor any act by the Authority or the Redeveloper.
shall be deemed or const~-ued by the Redeveloper or by any third person to curate
any relattollship of tht~.d-pal~ beneficiar~, principal and a~ent, l~m~ted
partner, or Joint venture between the Authority and the Redeveloper.
Section 6.6. Covenants Runnin~ with the Land. The ter~ns and prov/-~ons of
this AKreement shall be deemed to be covenants lmnntn~ with the Redevelopment
P?ope~y and shall be bindinE upon any successors or us~ of the Redeveloper
and any future owners or enc-,mbranoes of the Redevelopment Prope~¥.
Section 6.7. Modifications. This AKreement may be modified solely threuEh
wett~ Amendments hereto exeauted by the Redeveloper and the Authority.
Section 6.8. Counte~l~m. Th~, A/reement m~y be executed in any number
of counterparts, each of which ahA1! constitute one and the same !--teument.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Author/ty has caused th1. AKreement to be
executed in its corporate name by its duly authorized offlcer~ and sealed with its
cm.~o-,,8
corporate seal; and the Redeveloper has caused this Agreement to be executed in its
corporate name as of the date first above written.
(SEAL)
THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY IN AND FOR
THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA
By:
And
Its Chairperson
Its Executive Director
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) SS.
COUNTY OF CARVER )
On this day of , 1994, before me, a Notar~y Public within and
for said county, appeared and to me pereonally
known, who being by me duly sworn, did say that they are respectively the
Chairperson and Executive Director of The Housing and Redevelopment Authority
in and for the City of ChanbAssen, Minnesota, a public body, corporate and politic,
known as the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of
Chanhassen, under the laws of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority.
Notary Public
J~)64147
cm~o-~. 14
REDEVELOPER:
JAMES COMPANY
By:
Its
Attested By:
Its
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) SS.
COUNTY OF CARVER )
Notaey Public
J~D64147
SCHEDUL~ A
to
CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE REDEVEr~PMENT
REDEVELOPMENT PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
[ to be supplied prior to execution]
J~D~4147
~130-28
A--1
!
HOUSING AND _U__lm._ __wFm/__~ AUTBD~TY
This Doeument wu dml'ted by:
HOLMES & GRAVEN, ~
· 470 PI~. ~' Cent,'~
~.n.nea~:xl:lm, W.n.nimol:i. 6S402
,33BDt4147
SCHEDULE C
to
CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE REDEVELO~
AGREEMENT TO PAY DEFICIENCIES
THIS AGREEMENT, made as of the , day of , 1994, by and
between THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY
OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA, a Public body corporate and politic created in and
for the City of Cb-nh-ssen ("Authority") and JAMES COMPANY, a Minnesota
Corpo~'ation ("James").
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, James has on , 1994, entered into an
agreement entitled Contt, act for Private Development ("Development AL~-eement")
with the Authority pert-~,~ng to the development of certain r~al property (the
"Redevelopment Property") described in the Development AL~eement and situated
in the City of Chantmssen, County of Carver and State of Minnesota, such property
being described in Exhibit A as the "Redevelopment Property"; and
WHEREAS, the Authority has established Tax Increment Finan~g District No.
("District") pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Sections 469.174 through 469.179,
and a Municipal Housing and Redevelopment District pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
Sections 469.001 through 469.047, which includes the Redevelopment Property; and
WHEREAS, the Development A~Teement addresses constzatction by James of
certain improvements ("Minimum Improvements") on the Redevelopment Property
described in the Development AL~eement; and
WHEREAS, the Development Agreement addresses the ownership, oper~tion
and maintenance by James of the Minimum Improvements on the Redevelopment
P~operty; and
J~D64147
a~30-26 C-!
WHEREAS, the Authority is unwllltn_~ to undertake its obligations contained
in the Development Agreement unless James agrees to per~orm and be bound by the
covenants and p~omises Set cut below:
NOW, THEREFORE in consideration of the pr~mdses and other good And
valuable consideration paid by the Authority to James for the put-pose of induaing
the Authority to ~ cut the aforementioned t~mnsaetion to JAm~s, the patties
hereto ~ u foUows:
Section 1.01 Oblation of James.
If the tax increment generated and actually paid fl~om the Redev~_!crpment
Proper~y and M~n~mum Improvements described in l~htbit A bereto payable in any
calenda~ yea~ commencin~ in ~995 and endin~ at the end of ~997 is less than the
amount contained in Exhibit B hereto for that ym~; the Authority shall notify James
in wr~ttn~ of the difference (Difference) and in such wri~ shall notfl~ James of the
amount of the deficiency which is the Dtfl'erence between $114,$~4 and the aot~A1 tax
inorement. James shall~ within ~0 days e_t~er ~x~tpt of suoh w~tten notioe pa~ the
deflaiencs, to the Authority.
Seotion 1.02. If JAm~s b~hes tht~ Al~reement and should the Authority
incur attorneys £ees or other coste to en~o~ the previsions of tht~ ~ment, then
the Authority shall be entitled to recover £rom JAm~s All reaso~ble atto~ fees
and costs of enfo~in~ t~t~ AL~reemant.
Seotion 2.01 Co~porete Obligation.
(!) The obligetions imposed on James by t~t~ AL,~eemant s~A~ ~m~tn the
co~po~te obltgetion of James until the end of 1888 and suoh coz~o~te
obligetion sl~ not be affeoted by an~ da~ to, dest~tetton of, failure to
construot~ sale or t~n~t'er of the Impre?ements.
,T~64147
C112,30-~8
C-2
Section 3.01 Execution in Counterparts.
This Agreement may be simultaneously executed in any number
counterparts, all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument.
THE HOUSING AND REDEVEI~PMENT
AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
By
Its Chairperson
By
Its Executive Director
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
, 1994, by and , the Chairperson and
Executive Director of The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City
of Chanhassen, Minnesota, a public body, corporate and politic, known as the
Housing and Redevelopment Authority in .and for the City of Chanhassen, under the
laws of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of the Housing .and Redevelopment
Authority.
NStary Public
JAMES COMPANY
By:
Its .
Attested By
Its
J'~D~4147
~n3o-~e C-3
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss
COUNTY OF )
The for~Koin~ inst~unent was aeknowledEed befor~ me this day of
, 1994, by and , the
and of James Company, a _~nnesota corporation, on behalf
of the corporation.
Nota~ Public
~D64147
~o-~. C-4
EXHIBIT A
YF, AR
1995
1996
1997
1998
ESTIMATED
TAX INCREMENT
$ 114,624
$ 114~624
$ 114,624
C-5
SC~ULR D
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
STATE OF tfr~INESOTA
COUNTY OF H~NNEPIN
THE HOUSING AND RIf~v~OPMENT AUTHORITY
IN AND FOR THE CITY OF CHANItASSEN
TAX INCRemENT NOTE
The Houain~ and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Chanhassen
(the ~Authority'), heroby aaknowied~s itself to be indebted and, for value
received, promises to pay to the order of JAms Company, a _.~nn~sota co,potation,
or its asail/ms, (~James") , solely from the Available Tax Inm, ement Eene~ated by the
Redevelopment Prope~ And _P.~ntmum Improvements, to the extant and in the manner
hereinafter provided, the princ/pal Amount Of th~ Note, bein~ Five Hundr~l ~ty-
one Thousand Five Hundrod Fifty-throe DollArs ($581,553), on the Payment Dates
(as heratnafter defined) or suah L~eeater amount, if any, which the Authority is
reqtflred to pay in aeeo~ee with the terms of tht~ Note.
Each payment on this Note is payable in any coin or eureeney of the United
States of America which on the date of such payment is legal tender for public and
private debts and shall be made by check or draft made payable to JAmes and marled
to James at its postal address within the United States which shall be de--ted from
time to time by JAmes.
The Note is a special and ltr~ted obl~ation and not a Eaneral obligation of the
Authority, which has been issued by the Authority to aid in flnanain~ a ~proJectw,
as defined in l~tnnesota Statutes Section 469.174, of the Authority eonaistin~
Kenerally of defrayin~ cer_t~_ tn capital and administration costs ineum~l and to be
incum-ed by the Authority within and for the benefit of its Redevelopment PtmJect
(the 'lh. oJect'), and Tax Inar~nent Ftnanctn~ District (the 'Distrtct').
EXCEPT AS TO THE OBLIGATION TO MAKE PAYMENTS FROM TAX
INCREMENT, THE NOTE IS NOT A DEBT OF THE AUTHORITY, THE CITY OF
CHANHASSEN, OR THE STATE OF MINNESOTA (THE ~STATE~), AND NEITHER
THE AUTHORITY, THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, THE STATE NOR ANY POLITICAL
SUBDIVISION THEREOF SHALL BE LIABLE ON THE NOTE, NOR SHAr.~. THE NOTE
BE PAYABLE OUT OF ANY FUNDS OR PROPERTIES OTHER THAN AVAILABLE TAX
INCREMENT, AS DEFINED BI~OW.
Any payments on this Note which a~e due on any Payment Date shall be
payable solely from and only to the extent that the Authority shall have reoaived as
of such Payment Date 'Available Tax Inm'ement.~ For the purpose of this Note,
~Avatlable Tax Increment~ means any Tax Inar~nent z~atved durin~ the twelve (12)
month period proceding a Payment Date, after deducting thin. from the followh~
Amounts:
(i)
$114.624 speaial usessments accordtn~ to the attached schedule
and
D-1
(ii) any payment made to -rake payments to James previously due
hereunder, and
(iii)
any amounts used to pay any amount pledged for the payment of
tax increment general obligetion bonds issued by the City prior
to the date hereof.
For the purposes of this Note, "Tax Increment" means the pot-Lion of the real
property taxes generated with respect to the said Redevelopment Propet-ty and
Minimum Improvements which is remitted to the Authority commencin~ in 1994, as Tax
Increment pursuant to Minnesota Statutes ! 469.174-469.179.
For purposes of this Note, a "Payment Date" shall mean each of the Scheduled
Payment Dates set fot~th on Exhibit A attached hereto, and each additional Payment
Date required in connection with any extension of the term of this Note as set for~
below, because of changes made in l~tnnesota Statutes I! 469.174-469.179.
Notwithstanding anything to the contrm~ in this Note, on each of the Payment
Dates, the Authority shall pay to James all of the Available Tax Increment up to the
amount of the Scheduled Payment; but in no event shall the aggregate of all such
payments be in excess of $581,553. To the extent that on any Payment Date the
Authority is unable to make a payment from AvAilable Tax Increment at equal to the
Scheduled Payment due on such date as a result of having received, as of such date,
insufficient Available Tax Increment, such failure shall not constitute a default
under this Note and, except as provided below, the Authority shall have no
obligation under this Note, or othetw~lse, to subsequently pay any such deficiency.
If, and only if, on any Payment Date there is insufficient Available Tax Increment
to make the Scheduled Payment due on such date and such insufficiency is a result
of changes made in Minnesota Statutes I! 469.174-469.179 subsequent to the date of
the Contract for Private Redevelopment dated between the Authority and
James (the "Redevelopment Contract"), the amount of such deficiency in the
Scheduled Payment shall be deferred and shall be paid on the next Payment Date on
which the Authority has Available Tax Increment in excess of the amount necessat-y
to make the Scheduled Payment due on such Payment Date, and if such deficiency
has not been paid in full by the final Scheduled Payment Date set for~ on Exhibit
A attached hereto, then the term of this Note shall be extended to include additional
successive Payment-Dates on which any Available Tax Increment will be applied to
the payment of such acctmed and unpaid deficiencies in the Scheduled Payments to
be made hereunder. In no case, however, shall the term of this Note and the
Authorityts obligation to make payments hereunder, extend beyond the last date
upon which the Authority receives tax increment based upon constt-uction of the
Minimum Improvements or the expiration of the Tax Increment District (December 31,
gO00), whichever comes first.
This Note shall not be payable from or constitute a charge upon any funds of
the Authority or the City of ChAnhAssen, and the Authority shall not be subject to
any liability hereon or be deemed to have obligated itself to pay hereon from any
funds except the Available Tax Increment, and then only to the extent and in the
manner herein specified.
James shall never have or be deemed to have the right to compel any exez, ctse
of any taxing power of the Authority or the City of Chanhassen or of any other
public body, and neither the Authority or the City of Chanhassen nor any director,
commissioner, council member, board member, officer, employee or agent of the
Authority or the City of Chanhassen, nor any person executing or rel~tsterin~ this
c~.3o-:8 D-2
Note shall be liable personally hereon by reason of the issuance or registration
he~f or othe~v~e.
This Note shall not be t:~nseemble or assignable, in whole or in pa~, by
James without the prior written consent of the Authorit~y.
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED AND RECITED that all acts, conditions, and things
reqtflred by the Constitution and laws of the State of ~n~esota to be done, to have
happened, and to be perfm~ned precedent to and in tim issuance of this Note have
been done, have happened, and have been performed in regular and due fo~n,
and manner as required by law; and that this Note, together with all other
indebtedness of the Authority or the City of Chanhassen outstanding on the date
herself and on the date of its actual issuance and delivery, does not cause the
indebtedness of the Authority or the City of Chantmssen to exceed any constttutionA!
or statutory limitation thereon.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Board of Commlssionsre of the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Chantmssen has caused this Note to
be executed by the m~nual signatures of the Chair, n~a and the Executive Director
of the Authority and has caused tht= Note to be dated as of .
Executive Director
D-3
EXHIBIT A
Scheduled Payment Dates
and Amounts of Sched~ Pa]nnents
Scheduled
Payment Dates
December 31, 1995
December 31, 1996
December 31, 1997
December 31, 1998
Scheduled
Payments~
Spe~el
Assessment
W~lte-Off
Amount
$ 193,851 $ 114,624
$ 193,851 $ 114,624
$ 193,851 $ 114,624
~Scheduled payments are to be made up to these amounts but
only from Available Tax Increment.
J~64147
c~3o-:e D-4
Redevelopment
[ to be supplied pz-lo~ to execution]
u'lD64147
D-5
Z
o ~
I
I I ,
I
_J
r ..............
oao $
%~
Novomben', 1993
Development Prof~al For
JAMES COMPANY
Estimated Taxes for 1994
+ 3,100
Market Value
(3.1% of thc nrst
$100,000 of ~
Vahation)
$ 228,500
$ 308,475 Tota] Estimated Taxes
Total
~ Values
$ 800~
TOTAL INCENTIVES AVAILABLE:
TOTAL ESTIMATED SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS:
Years Payments
Wguld Be Made
Proposed
Estimated Taxes
~ Pm'tion
]~or Specials
1996 $308,475 - $114,624
Taxes Rebated
Back for land Wf~te down
$193,851
1997 $308,475 - $114,624
$193,851
1998 $3Q8.475 $114.624
8193.851
$925,425 $343,872
$581,553
* To be used only for special assesmnents and land writ~lown
CITY OF
690 COULTER DRIVE · P.O. BOX 147 · CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 · FAX (612) 937-5739
January l l, 1994
T. F. James Company
Suite 500
6640 Shady Oak Road
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Dear Mr. James:
At the December 13, 1993, meeting the City Coundl a~rmved Site Plan/6}3-7 dated December
7, 1993, and the Conditional Use Permit/623~'1 to permit the grouping of buildings on one
building lot, subject to the following conditions: '"
lo
The applicant shall be required to provide a ~-vised landscape plan for City approval.
The plan shall include the following:
ao
be
The applicant shall provide interior landscape islands in the parking lot areas. In
particular, landscape islands measuring approximately 15 feet by 38 feet (two
parking stalls wide by two deep) shall be provided for every other aisle of face-to-
face parkinl~ (minimum of three interior planting islands). These islands i shall
contain a minimum of three overstory trees and they shall be alternated with the
lrce groupings to be provided at the t~ of the site. An aeration/'migation
system consisting of perforated PVC pipe or other flexible robing in a looped
system with at least two risers 'extending above the planttns surface shall be
designed and installed as pan of these planting islands (see attached Figure 11-3).
· ~ - . · ...: ' .: ·
replaced with oak trees (either VFnite Oak, scientific name Qucrcus alba, or Bur
Oak, scientific name Qucrcus macrocarpa) in order to continue the tree planting
thorne begun in the Oak Ponds townhouse development located north of this
development. In order to more effectively screen thc development from residmces
to the north, the trees should be placed closer to the top of the slope, as opposed
to near thc bottom of thc slope where they have virtually no effect on screening.
Spacing of conifers should be ten (10) feet to allow them to grow togethe~ in a
more solid mass at a younger age. As at other areas of the site, these trees should
Mr. Charlie James
January 11, 1~4
Page 2
be placed strategically in groupings to increx~ tl~ effecfivenen as a buff~ and
to lend a mo~ natural feel to the planting. Tlne use of mom planting mnmrhls
(such ns day 'hl~) in ~t al~as of the ~ These plants ~ be used ns
accents at site entries or pedesutan areas.
do
fac, adc of the sm~-tu~ Addi-g ornamental .trees (crabapple, hamtmms or
japanese tree lilacs) in planting nzeas near the building Would add int~ and
color to the expanse of wall. especially at the fx~mt of the building. ~ should
building would benefit fx~n the introduction of more colorful planting ma~
All landscaping areas shall have the proper soil preparation to ensure the viability
of the vegetation to survive. The lancls~al~Ug plan shall provide st~ons for
l~oper soil ~tion.
Consideration should be ~ven to placins plant materials to~J~r to create a
bolder, more in~g ~ without excessive alternation. Flantin~ shah
~m~n~. C~m'~tion ~ be ~n m tmintalnin~ ~ t~ th~ ~
when placing tree groupings in the ~ areas.
The plan docs not recopize the street .ute plantings at West 78th Sucet and
Kerber Boulevard where the City has installed, or has planned, for trees at 50 feet
Mr. Chaxlie lames
January 11, 1994
Page 3
on center (West 78th Street) and 35 feet on cenl~r (Kerber Boulevard). The City's
plans for West 78th Street show a pernument land,ape easement (eight foot
typical) at several locations along West 78th Street. The landscape plan for the
project should start with the pattern of street tree plantings at the streets, allowing
for this project can rhea be placed in groupings within the setbacks or berm areas
of the site.
j~
The more formal placement of trees along the entry drives works to continue the
feeling established by the City's uee plantin~ at the meec Ti~h .ter spacing of
trees along the entry drives is desirable. Shrubs along the entry drives would
reinforce views of the building and obscure bumpers and hoods of cars.
Entries could be ~ at the streets with more colm-hzl plantings, creating a
break in the rhythm of street tree plantings and providing emphasis for site entry
points.
Care should be exercised in spacing shrubs to ensure that complete cover of the
planting bed is achieved at maturity.
il
At the perimeter of the parking .areas, the large expanses of sod from the ~ of
thc curb to the property line should be planted with trees and shrubs in significant
groupings. This should also occur between the wes~ly entry drive and the cast
side of the detached co~ building and at the area west of the retail
building. Conifers in these areas would be useful for the winter landacape.
Financial guarantees shall be provided to insure installation and maintenance of
landscaping.
o. All planting areas must have an irrigation system installed.
pe
Benches and picnic tables shall be provided in the landscaped area west of the
q,
Additional tree islands be added to the lines that do not have them currently in the
parking lot. All the southern facing shrubs, or anything hbeled RC, SC be
changed to overstory and that also gives Bob authority to talk to the Tree Board
to make adjustments out on the boulevard to cluster or reduce those numbers of
trees to improve sight lines.
Thc screen wall located at the eastern rear of the building shall be extended to the
beginning of the radius of the curb.
Mr. Charlie James
January 11, 1994
Page 4
e
A sidewalk shall be ~ from West 78th Street m the retail oenttn' along the wesm~
entry drive, east of the conann~offu:e bnildins, into the develolnnem.
1
m
m
Bouleva~l. The spplicant will also be teSlxmible for adjuting the ~ sanitary
manholes to the new grades.
m .
The applicant shah remove the fonmsen Imddng stalls in front of the retail si~ directly
west of the Snl~nm~k~ In ord~ to mak~ up for lost pazkin~ stalls as a result of ~
Thc applicant will be responsible for f'm'nishing and
conffol signs and pavement ma~~ thron~ tl~
The turning radii at the driveway access points along K~rbe~ Bonlevard should be
expanded to 20 feet. The mining radius for the semite drive located in the northwest
with a wheelbase of 50 feec
10.
The applicant's engineer shah supply City staff with detailed storm drainage calcnlations
for the entire sit~ Storm sewers shall be designed to handle a. 10-yenr storm event.'
11.
12.
Thc applicant shall provide the City with a $10,000.00 fmam:ial se~n'ity to gumnt~
inmHafion of the mrb ~nts and bouk'vatd tesmmion. 'l'ne security may be included with
the security l~l~ts for the stt~ !snd~ng.
13.
City's Best Management Practice Handbook for thc plan design as weft as site
restorations. The norflim'ly back slope behind the building should bc restored with an
Mr. Charli¢ Jarr~
January 11, 1994
Page :5
erosion control blanket. Plans should also employ erosion control measures around
proposed catch basins with hay bales or silt fence or other N~roved measures in
accordance with thc City's Best Management Practice Handbook.
14.
The final site grades shall be compatible with tl~ final ~ of tbe Osk Pond
development directly north of this deve, lopment.
15.
The entry drive from West ?8th Street in front of Byerly's shall be revised t5 a boulevard
type separating thc major uaffic aisle from the parking area.
16. The applicant shall work with SW Metro Transit to locate a uansit stop area on-site.
17. There shall be no outdoor storage of goods or materials after consmtction is cm~leted.
18. There shall be no trash pick-up between the hours of 6.'00 P.M. and 6:30 A.M.
19. No overnight parking of refi~exafion unit mtcks and/or trailers.
20. No usc of trash compaction equipment between 10:00 P.M. and 6:30 A.M.
21.
A sidewalk is to be provided from West 78th Street to the detached 'building. Thc
appropriate location of this sidewalk is to be worked out with staff.
22.
Thc applicant shall be required to match detailing work for the detached commercial
building with that of the main building. Prior to development of the outbuilding, the
applicant shall come back to the Planning Commission for awhi~ review of the
building's design.
23.
Applicant shall work with staff on the site lighting. Parking lot fighting may be no
higher than the main building.
4e
The signage package for the development shall come back to the Planning Commission
for approval.
25.
Thc Public Safety Director is to provide specific comments to the City Counctl on the
curb cuts and truck traffic on Kcrber Boulevard. Particular mention should be made of
thc track impacts on park use between the hours of 4:00 and 9:00 P.M.
26.
The applicant is requested to revisit the handicapped parking with staff. Specifically, the
applicant is to look into the opportunity of providing sixteen (16) foot handicapped
parking stalls.
Mr. Otarlie James
January 11, 1994
Page 6
27. No semi truck Uaffic be allowed to travel north on Kerbcr Boulevard,
Should you have any questions, please feel fi'ce to contact me.
Sincerely,
Bob Generous
Plann~ H
Dave Hcmpel, Asst. City ~
Steve ~ Building Official
CITY OF
PC DATE: 12/1/93
CONTINUED: 12/4/93
CC DATE: 12/13/93
CASE #: ~
STAFF
REPORT
I ·
I I
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
APPLICANT:
Site plan aPlwoval for a eomm~ development consisting of a 64,132 sqtmre foot
Byerly's, a 35,700 square foot retail center, and a selmrate 7,000 squnm foot
c~m~n:l~/~ building; ~mi ~ m pennit ~ pursuant to Section 20-
West Vtil~oe Center.
Northwest corner of Ketber Boulevard and West 78th $1reet
Lot 4 and pm of Lot 3, Block 1, West Vtlin..oe HeiSts 2nd Addition
T. F. James Company (612) 828-9000
664O Shady Oak ~
Eden Prairie, Minnemta 55344
-~ ~ S~bm~ 6 Counc~-
Ld
PRESENT ZONING: Ow. eral Buaineu, BO
ACREAGE: 13.1l ~
Hoot Areal Ratio 0.19
INTENSITY:
ADJACENT ZONING
AND LAND USE:
S ·
R-12, High Density l;t~Identinl, Proposed Oak Prod
Townhouses md West Village To~mhous~
BO, Oenmtl Business; Tnrget Sm; West 78th Strut
OI, Office & Institutional; City Hall; ~ Boulevard
BO, Oeneml Business, vw. ant lots; Powers Boul~vnrd
WATER AND SEWER: Avnilnhle
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS:
Thc site is being graded pursuant to Interim Use Permit ~3-2. This gm&ns will cm~ a grsdual 'slope frmn the
northeast to thc south and west. A steep slope (2~: 1) npproximately $0 feet in depth separates this property
from the properties to the north. The project is bcs~wed on the east and south by collector roadways. An
abandoned farmstead exists on the eastern third of the sit~.
2000 LAND USE PLAN: Commercial
West Village Center
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993
Page 2
The site is located at the northwest com~ of West 78th 5~eet and ~ Boulevm'd and has
an area of nppmxima~ 13.11 acres. 'This lot is one of four platted lots on Block 1, West
Village Heights 2nd Additio~ The devel~ consists of a 64,132 square foot Byerly~s, an
attached 35,700 square foot comme~OJ/~ center, and a detached 7,000 square foot
bnilding anticilmed to be leased to a setvico-type company with primarily ~ uses. 'l'ne
total development consists of 106,832 square feet of bm'lding which represents 19 percent of
is provided to the rear of the site away from the pedestrinn and pazking areas. Pedestrian
areas and small "gathering places" are provided along the entire length of the center.
The overall design and arcMtectm'al theme for the development is est~ by By~rly's and
consists of brick exterior wails with "classical'* uses of axcbes, axcndes, barrow vaults, radius
windows, recessed areas, and varied tmilding hcedes. Soldier courses win accent an vaults,
recesses, and arches. The applicant proposes ~ incorlmrate design ~ to the
Chanhassen gateway monuments and towers to integrate this project as part of the clownmwn
area. Thc development embodies many of the design elmm~ts specified in the t6ghway 5 '
Corridor Study including a well designed and varied building facade, appropriate building
scale and proportion, harmonious colors and bnilding accents, appmprim screening, screening
This site serves as an gateway for people entering the cenu'al business district from thc north.
As such, its acstbetic and architectural.f~amres are an hnpomnt component of thc image the
in thc downtown area, and it is i?ortant that an anchor for the d~opment be of a high
quality, and have an exceptional design. In desi~g the proje~ the app~t has
specific~y, the dock tower inc~ in the retail section of the main building and the use
developments relationship to City Hall, the applicant has held discussim~ with the city
regarding the potential use of Lots I through 3; Block 1, West Village Heights 2nd Addition.
Lot ~ is be/ng discussed as an expanded post ~ locatio~ Lots 1 ami 2 ~ ~
discussed for a po~ntial senior housing development. Included in the paS~ is a ~
conceptual plan for how these elements would fit into the design of this pmjeot. This pmjeot
West Village Center
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993
Page 3
is within thc Downtown Redevelopment Distric~ and the applicant has at~'oa~hed thc HRA
requesting tax increment funding revenues.
Access to the site is provided via twc~ collector roadways, West ?Sth Street and Kerber
Boulevard. West 78th Street has recently been realigned and expanded m a four-lane cross
section. Curb cuts have been established as pan of the reconslruction of West ?Sth Street and
are being utilized for the project entrances. A total of five driveways ate provided to the site
as discussed under the access/parking section of this rept~ Drainage for the site is. pwvided
through the city's storm drainage system; therefore, no on-site pretreatment is required of the
development However, the developer has been assessed for his share of these' improvements.
The proposed final grading of the site suggests m/sing the building pad for the detached
commercial/office building approximately 10 to 15 feet higher than the existing ground
elevation. This will result in the first floor elevation of the building being 18 feet higher than
the intersection at West 78th Sue~ directly to the west. Staff is concerned about this
elevation and is proposing that the building pad be lowered.
The landscaping plan submitted, while generally meeting code requirements, was only
preliminary in nature. Staff has enlisted the advice of a registered landscape architect,.
Michael $chroeder, to review the landscape plan and provide appropriate recommendations to
enhance this development. Staff has included these recommendations as pan of the
conditions of approval.
Staff is recommending approval of the conditional use permit and site plan for the West
Village Center with the condition that the landscaping plan be revised to include landscape
massing, perimeter and boulevard median shrubs, the use of alternate ground cover for the
steep slopes to the north, and interior parking lot landscape islands. The open area west of
the retail center shall be provided with picnic rubles and benches to enhance the enjoyment
opportunity of site visitors and workers. The grading and building elevation shall be reduced
by a minimum of five (5) feet for the detached commercial/office building in order to be less
significantly elevated from ~ roadway and to improve site lines and development massing.
Finally, a sidewalk shall be required u) connect the retail center to West 78th Sue, et along the
western access boulevard into the site.
BACKGROUND
In November 1986, this property was approved as part of a mixed use subdivision (West
Village Heights 2nd Addition) including five commercial lots, one multi-family lot, and the
realigned right-of-way for West 78th Street In addition, this property was rezoned from R-
la, Agricultural Residence, to C-3, Service Commercial. In 1987, the lot was rezoned to
General Business District, as pan of the revisions to the Zoning Ordinance. Prior to the
West Village Center
November 23, 19~3
Update December 7, 1993
Page 4
redevelopment of the downtown and thc finalization of the West 78th ~ th~ westm'n
portion of Block 1, West Village Heights 2nd Addition was xou~ graded in anti~fmion of a
residential acreage noxth of thc project has either been dmre. loped or is currently being built
out. 'l'ne West 78th Street alignmunt was modified and a revised road section employed
con~t with the approval of Target. Roadway improvements are nearing completion.
FINDINGS
In evaluating a site plan and building ~ the city shatl consid~ the deveZopn~nts
compliance with thc following:
(~)
Consistency with the elements and o~ of thc city's deve. lofrmg~t guides,
including the comprehensive plan, cr~ficial road mapp~ and oth~ plans that
Finding: The property is designated for commercial development in the
City of Chanhnssm 2000 l~md Use Pb~ Devdopmmt of the site heip~ to
achieve n mixture of lnnd uses which will assure a Idgh quality of lire nnd
a rellaMe tax base, Thts development Is Iocnted at the fringe of the central
business district and promotes the eeonomleal and efficient
development of the comnmnlty.
(2) Consistency with this division;
Finding: The propomd is consistent with the requi~ts of City Code.
(3)
developing areas;
Finding: Except for the trees Immedlate~ surroun~g the farmstead,
there are no significant natural features present on the site worth
preserving. The proposed devdopment should make the site more
aesthetically pleasing as well as being compatible with the commerdai
coFi*Jdor developing along West 78th Street. The steep grade separation to
West Village Center
November 23, 1993
Update December ?, 1993
Page 5
(4)
(5)
the north and the proposed hndscaping of the site should minimize off-site
impacts of the development.
Cteafion of a harmonious Felationship of building and ope~ space with natural
site features and with exis~g and futttre bttildings having a visual.~~p
to the development;
Finding: The proposed development logically and efficiently utilizes the
site to accommodate buildings, open spaces, and vehicular circulation and
parking. The Layout of the development should effectively match any
future commercial devdoprnent to the east. The steep slope and extensive
landscaping along the perimeter of the rite provides a transitional buffer
to other uses and developments.
Creation of functional and harmonious design for suucmres and site feamr~,
with special attention to the following:
aa
An intm-nnl sense of order for the buildings and use on the site, and
provision of a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and general
Finding: The site design provides an internal sense of order and place by
creating vistas and entrance ways to the interior of the site. Pedestrian
ways, landscaping, and architectural features provide a pleasing
environment for users of the site.
b. The amount and location of open space and landscaping;
Finding: Open spaces are provided internally and around the perimeter of
the site. The development complies with city standards for the provision
of non.impervious surfaces.
Ce
Materials, textures, colors and details of construction as an expression
of thc design concept and the compatibility of the same with adjacent
and neighboring structures and uses;
Finding: The brick exterior with its many architectural details provides a
conservative yet comfortable sense of place. The extensive use of
landscaping, walkways and the interplay of height and building lines create
an inviting identity for the site.
West V'Lllage Cen~
November 23, 1993
Update Decemb~ 7, 1993
Page 6
do
Finding: The two main entrances into the die flrmn West 78th Street
provide a reeling of arrival through the use or intmml, treed bodevurds
and the dmred accem with lot 3 along with a Mpamte truck entrfmce
provide sufficient and coast accem fo the project. Pedestrian accem
is provided to the site from Kerber Boulevard and internal wuikways and
small plans are provided immediate~ adjacent to the buildhg.
(6)
which may have substantial cffem on neighboring land uses.
'.
Finding: The site b serviced by the recently comi~eted drainage
improvements on West 78th SfrmL The steep grade separation to the
north should maintain some of the views for the nndti.randly development.
Extensive perimeter hnd~_m~n_ p~a. [nclud~ tiered nd massed trees provide
natural buffering around the site,
When approving a conditiomtl use permit, the City nmst detmnine the capability of a
proposed development with existing and proposed uses. The Seining issuan~
conditional use Secgon 20-232, includ~ lt~ followin8 12 ii, ms:
Will not be detrimental to or enhance the public health, safety, comfort, convenience
or general welfare of the neighborho~ or the city.
Finding: The proposed devdopment is located in a planned commercial area
serviced with urban inrrut~cture and shall not be detrJ~ to the public
h~th, safety, comtort,'convetdence or wdhre or the commune. The
development enhances the appearance and convenience of community residents
through the provision or shopping and employment oppoFtunifles.
e
W'ttl be consistent with the objectives of the city's ~hensive plan and this
chapter.
West Village Center
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993
Page 7
Finding: The site is designated for commercial use and is located in the
commeFcial center of the City. This development proposes an upecal~ quality
shopping center for community residents. This development will enhance the
City's tax base. The steep dope and extensive landscaping provide a transition to
the multi.family development to the north,
Wili be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so to be compatible in
appearance with the existing or intended charac~ of the sefleral vicinity and will not
change the essential character of that area.
Finding: The proposed development provides a varied and well designed
appearance and it is consistent with the existing and proposed development in the
area. The character of the area is commercial and is the commercial core of the
community. This development will provide a quality addition to the downtown.
4. WiLt not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses.
Finding: The development is located in the central business area and is consistent
with existing and proposed development in the area. A transition to the multi-
family to the north is provided by a landscaping and sloped buffer area.
Sa
Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including slreets,
police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse .disposal, water and sewer
systems and schools; or will be served adequal~ly by such facilities and services
provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed
use.
Finding: This development is located in the commercial center of the city and is
served by adequate urban Infrastructure and services.
Will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not be
delrimental to the economic welfare of the community.
Finding: The development of the site as a commercial use has been anticipated
and planned by the city in the design and construction of pubfic improvements.
In modeling of West 78th Street traffic, it was estinmted that the West Village
Heights 2nd subdivision would have approxlnmtely 125,000 square feet of
commercial uses as well as office uses. This development is well below this
estimate and will permit additional commercial development on the remainder of
West Village Centcr
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993
Page 8
o
o
o
10.
the properties, The commerdal development of' the rite will improve the dty's
economic welhre ns weft ns provide for the eonvenJenee and ~ or residents,
Finding: With the appropriate eoutrds and amditimm, as recommended by staff,
the devdopment or the site win lave minimal impacts to ~ property, and
the ~enend wdrare or the commntty. Th,. area has been panned and dedsned
·
Finding: With three main entrances, a fourth shared entrance and a separate
truck entrance, the development provides ample opportunity to adequately move
traffic. The devdopment of the site as a eom~ me has been anfleipate~d and
plnnned by the city in the design and construction of lmbHc Improvements. In
modeling of West 78th Street traffic, it was estlmatod that the West VHiqe ·
Heights 2nd subdlvMon would have approshnately 12S~ sqnnre feet of
commercial uses as wall as office uses. This development b well below this
estimate and will permit additional commercial development on the remainder of
the properties. Appropriate traffk controts will be employed for the
devdopment.
Will not result in thc ~on, loss or damage of solar accen, nnmral, scenic or
historic features of major sisnificance,
Finding: There are no significant natural, semic, or historle features present on
the site.
Finding: The bdck exterior with Its many architectural details provides a
conservative yet comfortaMe sense of phc~ The extrusive use of hmdscaphrd
walkways and the interplay of height and building lines create an inviting
identity for the site. Perimeter and internal landscaping will provide a m~tening
of the commercial aspects of the development.
West Village Center
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993
Page 9
11. Will not depreciate surrounding property values.
Finding: This area is plann.ed and zoned for commercial development.
Surrounding property values should be enhanced with the completion of this
development.
12. Will meet standards prescribed for oertain uses as provided in this article.
Finding: The developer has complied with all requirements of City Code and will
comply with any conditions of the development approved by the city.
COMPLIANCE TABLE (~EN.ERAL BUSINESS DISTRICT
~rctin~nce W~g VRI~o Center
Building Height
3 story/40 ft 2 story/40 ft
Building Setback
N-50', E-25' N-85', E-115'
S-25', W-10' S-42', W-60'
Parking Stalls 532 ~t2
Parking Setback
N-50', E-25' N-50', E-25'
S-25', W-0' S-25', W-75'
Hard Surface Coverage 70 percent 70 ~t
Interior Parking Lot
Landscaping
8 percent 8.5 pewent
Lot Area
20,000 sq. ft. 13.11 acres
Variances Required
NA None
GENERAL SITE PLAN/AR(~HXTECT~RE
Thc site is located at the northwest corner of West 78th Street and Kerber Boulevard and has
an area of approximately 13.11 acres. The development consists of a 64,132 square foot
Byerly's, an attached 35,700 square foot commercial/office center, and a detached 7,000
square foot building anticipated to be leased to a service-type company. The total
West Village Center
November 23, 1993
Update ~ber 7, 1993
Page 10
development cou_~m of 106,832 square feet of Imflding which ~ts 19 ~ of the
total site area. Thirty percent of the sim will be open space ~g landscaped troffers,
perime~ hndsc~ped areas, inu=ior parking lot ~ s~i an open ~a w~ of th~
retail center. Entrance boulevards are provided from West 78th Street into the si~' These
is provided to the rear of the site away from the pedestrian and p~ldng nreas. ~
areas and sman "gathering phces" me provided along the entire length of tbe center. "
The overall design and archi~m, unl theme for the developtnmt is established by Byerly's and
consists of brick ext~or walls with "~" uses of arches, arcades, ~ vaults, radius
windows, recessed areas, and varied building hca/rs. Soldier courses will accent an vaults,
ACCESS/PARKING
The enti~ site proposes five access locafi~ three existing off of West 78th Street, and two
new ones off of Kerber Boulevard. Information from a unffic review complet~ by Strgar-
Roscoe-Fatisch (SRF) dated November 18, 1993, indicated that the proposed developmmt is
consistent with the land use assumed for this area in there most recent traffic forecasts and
therefore should not represent a sign/ficant increase in traf~ hnpacts to the subject area. The
recent roadway improvements made to West 78th Street should accommodate this
development proposal
The site plan proposes a parking area where ve2ticles would be requited to back ont into the
main circulation aisle, pnrti~ly in front of the ~-tafl space west of the ~mm'ket This is
not a desirsble condit/on. These fourteen stnlh should be removed.
Thc city assumes that the developer will also be furnishing and inmlling the appropriate
u'affic control signs and pavement rrmrklngs throughout the site. Stops signs and stop bars
should be provided at each exit onto a pub~ right-of-way.
In the furore, Coulter Drive may be dosed or relom~ in conjunction with furore City Hall
expansion. The northerly access on Kerber Boulevard would most lik~y line up with furore
proposed street alignment to City Hall 'l'ne proposed turning radii ~t each driveway access
along Kerber Boulevard, in staffs' mind, appears to.be too narrow (15 feet). 'l'ne turning
radius along Kerber Boulevard is recommel~ded to be a minimum of 20 feec To
accommodate large semi-trail~ combinations, the turning radius for the service drive aronnd
-.
West Village Center
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993
Page 11
the building in the northwest comer of the site should be expanded to account for a 50-foot
wheelbase.
The parking lot is proposed to be graded in a southwesterly direction. The parking lot grade
is approximately 4%. Thi~ is the maximum grade that dry staff tec~
Access to the site is provided from We~t ?8th Stre~ and Kerber Boulevard. Both streets are
shown as collector struts on the City's Comprehensive Plan. The driveways on West 78th
Street were established as pan of the mad widening and realignment project. The most
easterly driveway shall permit only fight in/right out turning movements. The second
driveway is aligned with a median opening on West '/8th Street and will be _si_onnll _~4 when
fie/ftc warrants are met. The conduit for the signalization is aheady in place for this light. A
shared access with Lot 3, Block 1 is proposed at the existing signal/zed intersection which
services the Target Center. An access easemeat between these two lots will need to be
recorded. Additional access is provided from Kerber Boulevard. A lruck access is provided
in the northeast comer of the site providing separate access to the loading and docking areas.
A customer access is provided directly in front of the buildings via Kerber Boulevard.
Access aisle boulevards are utilized to separate-heavy traffic areas from the main parking
areas. Four distinct parking areas are provided including an employee parking area east of
Byerly's, two customer parking areas to the south of the building, and a separate self-
contained area for thc outbuildings.
Municipal water service for the site is proposed to be extended from an .existing 18-inch
watermain located along the west side of Kerber Boulevard via a 6-inch waterline through the
site and reconnect to the existing 18-inch watermain along West 78th Street. It is assumed
that the utilities witl~ the subject property will be owned and privately maintained. Fire
hydrant spacing and location requirements shall be determined by review of the City's fire
marshal. Since these improvements will be private, the City's Building Department will be
performing thc necessary plan and specification review as well as inspections. The applicant
will be responsible for applying for and obtaining the necessary building permits through the
City's Building Department.
Sanitary sewer service to thc site is proposed to be constructed along thc southerly side of the
main building and the proposed retail office space. The main building will connect a 6-inch
sanitary sewer to an 8-inch sanitary sewer on site. The 8-inch sanitary sewer will then be
connected to thc city's existing 8-inch sanitary sewer at the southeast comer of the site
adjacent to Kcrber Boulevard. The retail office space will connect a 6-inch sanitary sewer to
West Village Center
November 23, 1993
Update Decem~ 7, 1993
Page 12
that these utilities will be privately owned and main~
Thc applicant is proposing canhberms and landscaping along ~ Boulevard over the
City's sanitary sewer. Staff ~ that the app~t be x~qt~ to enter into an
encroachment agreement with the city to tndemn~ and hold the city hntmle~ from any
damages caused to the property including landscaping as a rmtlt of pn'fom]h~ nt~asa~
manholes which the applicant should also be zesponn, t~ for.
LAND~CAP~G
lot area contains approximately 8_q percent lanclsc~ areas. However, the uniform spacing
docs not account for boulevard plantings c. ompiel~! or planned ax~ond the 1~ of the
site that are being done by othc~ nor does the 1~ design provide sufficient interior
parking lot landscaping; nor is pe~imet~ low level scr~ provided in the form of shrubs
or bushes; nor arc tx~e mas~ or groupings included to provide definition and ~ to
thc development. Staff is proposing that thc landscapi~ plan be revised to incm~orate the
massing of plant materials in appropriate locations throughout thc site to add to the visual and
aesthetic quality of the development. To this end, the city has contracted with Michael
Schrocdcr, RLA, of the Hoisington-Koel~ Group, Inc. to perform a landscat~ design
analysis for this development. Thc ~ecommendafions of this analysis are included as
recordations for approval
The applicant shall be reqnired to provide interior landscape islands in the parking lot areas.
In particular, landscape islands meastn~g at a mininmm 15 feet by 38 feet (np~y
two parking stalls wide by two deep) shall be provided for every other aisle of face-to-face
parking (minimum of three interior planting islands). These islands shall contain a minimmn
Quos alba, or Bur Oak, scientific name ~ maca'ocarpa) in order to continue the tree
planting theme begun in the Oak Ponds townhouse development located north of this
development. Tree spacing for buff~ evergreens along the nm'th perimeter shall be reduced.
Perimeter and parking lot boulevard medians shah be provided with low level shrubs to help
soften the appearance of the parking area. Almna~e ground cover such as smmc shnll be
West Village Center
November 23, 1993
Update Decem~ 7, 1993
Page 13
used along the steep grade to the north. The steepness of the grade precAudes the mowing of
a sodded area. Ornamental trees should be interspersed within the landscaping boxes located
in front of the building to provide architectural highlighting and to enhance the facade of the
structure. Finally, a landscape box with shrubs shall be provided to the north of the trash
enclosure located adjacent to the detached commercial building to ~ this enclosure from
view.
GRADING/DRAINAGE
The applicant was previously granted an interim use permit ((hding Pennit No. 93-10) for
grading the entire site. Thc entire site is proposed to be regraded to create the deahed
development topography. The building pad located in the southwesterly corner of the site is
proposed to be raised approximately 10 to 12 feet higher than the existing ground elevation.
This will result in the first floor elevation of the building be approximately 18 feet higher
than the intersection at West 78th Street directly to the west. Staff believes that this portion
of the site can be lowered to improve sight lines. If the building is left at this elevation, it
may look similar to the Rapid Oil Change building located on Highway 5.
The site is proposed to drain to three separate ..drainage basins. The easterly portion of the
site will drain to the southeast corner of the site and connect to the existing storm sewer at
the intersection of Kerber Boulevard and West 78th Street. This swrm sewer eventually
discharges into the city's stormwater retention pond south of Market Square. The central
portion of the site will drain into two existing l$-inch storm sewer lines which then connect
to an 18-inch line along the southern portion of West ?Sth Street. This storm runoff
eventually discharges into a NURP basin behind the Target site. The western portion of the
site will drain into a 1/i-inch line and discharge the storm sewer runoff into the newly created
stormwater pond located west of Powers Boulevard on the Eckankar site. The site's
stormwater is being pretreat~ in the City's stormwater retention basins theref~ no on-site
stormwater retention ponds are being required. The parcel has been or is being assessed for
these storm drainage improvements.
h appears that additional catch basins may be necessary to accommodate the stormwalm'
runoff from thc expansive parking area. The double catch basins near the West ?Sth Street
access points may be more efficient if they are moved north near the landscaped islands. A
small drainageway may have to be cut through the southern corner of the access road islands
to effectively drain the stormwater runoff that could potentially pond within the L-shaped
curbed island.
The developer's engineer shall provide the city with detailed storm sewer drainage
calculations and discharge rates for the entire storm sewer system on the site. The storm
West Vilhge Center
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1~3
Page 14
drainage calctthttions should verify that the existing storm sewer system will a/~m~nedate the
additional runoff from thc site. The main drainage area in question is the ~ of the
Target pond. All storm sewer lines shonld be designed for a 10-year storm event.
MIS~LL~OU~
The development nfilizes a pan of Lot 3 and all of Lot 4, Block 1, West V'fllage Heights
2nd. The west line of Lot 4 is proposed to be al~ The.westerly access to the site will be
across Lot 3. A cross access or driveway easement should be ~ to matnts/n ingress
and egress to both lots. .
Staff recommends that the app~t provide the tit7 with a secugty deposit in the ammmt of
$10,000.00 to gnanntee boulevard restoration as well as the cmo cms onto the city street~ -
another note, the retaining walls along the tear of the bnilding will most likely need a
separate building permit.
~Ro$ION CQNTRQL
An erosion control plan is required and should ~e ~ on the site plan and submitted
to the city for review and approval prior to construction commoner Staff recommends'
the applicant use the City's Best Management Practice Handbook for erosion control
All disturbed areas are to be seeded and mulched or sodded immediacy after grndlng to
prevent erosion and sedimentation. The back dope of the s/re lying north of the betiding
appears to be approximately 3:1. Staff' teconunends a wood fiber blanket to inttibit erosion
wlfile the seed is behg established. Protection around catr. h badns such as bay bales or silt
fence is also rcquired until the pavement is instaned. If at aH poss/ble, ~nstn~/on of the
site in stages is highly recommended to help reduce sedimentation into the city's
LIGHTING/SI(~NAGE
shall usc shielded fixtures and be directed away from public right~-~y and ndja~nt
rcsidcntial property. Suffident lighting shall be provided to ilhnpin_n~ aH areas of the
parking lot to provide adequate levels of safety. To ~ off-site hnpacts, light levels as
measured at thc property line, shall not exceed one-ball foot candle.
West Village Center
November 23, 1993
Update December ?, 1993
Page 15
The development shall comply with City Code (section 20-1303) in the installation of
development signage. One ground or pylon sign shall be permitted per street frontage. One
wall business sign is permitted per street frontage. Wall signs shall not exceed fifteen percent
(15%) of the total area of the building wall on which it is located and shall not exceed a
maximum of eighty (80) square feet. The applicant is proposing that they come back for city
review and approval a complete sign package for the development to be incorpom~ into a
sign covenant to include such items as size, type, and lighting of signs and any deviations
from Code.
I~.,~G COMMISSION ~&TE
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on December I, 1993. Af~ dosing the
public input section of the hearing, the Planning Commission continued its discussion to '
Saturday, December 4, 1993. After discussion of the item, the Planning Conmfission
recommended approval, with modifications and additions to staff recommendations, of the
Site Plan and Conditional Use Pcrmit for the T. F. lames Company by a vote of four (4) in
favor, zero (0) opposed, and one (1) abstention. The Commission was very impressed with
the design and incorporation of so many architectural details. They were also impressed with
the willingness of the developer to work with the city in the final design of the project.
Planning staff prepared a review of the issues brought out at the December 1, 1993, Plaonin~
Commission meeting and has prepared the following:
Issue: View of the project from the north.
Staff has requested that the applicant provide additional cross sections of the view of
the project from the property to the north. This detail, as well as examination of the
site plans and building elevations, should assure the Planning Commission that all
efforts have been taken to minimize visual impacts of this project from the property to
the north including the screening of roof appurte~~ and dumpsters. The developer
has provided parapet walls to help screen roof elements from view, providing
landscape screening compatible and complementary to landscaping proposed for the
townhouses to the north, and enclosing some mechanical equipment completely within
the building. To further reduce'potential negative impacts from this development on
the townhouses to the north, staff is adding conditions regarding the parking of
refrigeration vehicles overnight, trash collection hours, and trash compaction
equipment use.
I~sue; Relationship of development plan to Vision 2002.
West VRlage Center
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993
Page 16
Vis/on 2002, curt'early in its initial stages, is nn ~ to provide a sense of
community and d/rection for the f-arum developm~t of downtown __r~nh~:
Elements of this Vision include the desire to develop a sense of identity and
frien~y, and relating the various uses and pmjec~ togeti~ in a cohesive manner
~ All would agree thnt the most ' .~mnt desi~ is to assm~ that ~~
in C~~sen is d the highest quality. ~com/ly, we c~u a/~ee that ~ ~us
Finally, we can agree that de~~t in downtown C~mflmssen should m~wer to
The West VRlage Center developtmmt, we be2i~e, responds to this ditec~ 'l'ne
requiremen~ inclusion of pedesuian walkways from the pedme~ of the site,
separation of b~_ildi~gs to bring the developuznt closer to West 78th ~reet, and the
screening of undesirable but neces~ry features of the devel~t,' e.g. loading areas,
dumpsters, roof fixunes.
The development orients itself to the downtown and incotporn~s many design re. arums
found in downtown devel~t. If the buildings were moved adjacent to West 78th
Street, while meeting some goals of the Vision 2002 suc~ as breaking up th~ expanse
of parking lots, ~iding in pedestrtnn nccess (at least from West 78th Street), snd
providing greater identification with West 78th Street. There are also some negative
consequences such as orienting the rear of the su-actum to the rest of downtown,
crea~g long blank views to the east, creating a "dead zone" from Keflxsr wl~n
increasing traf~ directly in front of the building, posing greater pedestrian and vehicle
Issue: Relationship to Highway 5 Con/dor stndy and piw. hed roofs.
mare/als, colors and bu~_'~i-g accents, varied building hcade, hammnious bu/lding
relationships and unified site design, extendve landsca~ treaunent~ and nppmpria~
screening. The one ~t that is mi_~ng is the use of "one or more pi~ roof
elements."
West Village Center
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993
Page 17
While pitched roofs are important to the City and are an element of the Highway $
study, there is no standard design theme in the central business district nor is it the
intent of the City to require every development to incorporate all the same design
features. It is even more imporlant that development in Chanha~ea be of high
quality. This development is definitely a quality development. There have been other
cases within the corridor where it has been infeasible or impractical for the use of
pitched roofs, especially on large buildings. In these instances, the City has permitted
minimal pitched roof elements. The question that needs to be answered in this case is
whether the quality and design of the development as proposed is such that the use of
a pitched roof element is not necessary, or is it more important that the City require
every development to incorporate pitched roofs, whether they work in the design or
not.
Issue: Bus shelters.
The applicant has proposed a transit drop-off~ick-up area. However, this was not
highlighted at the meeting. Staff will be adding a condition that the developer work
with Southwest Metro Transit in determining the location for the bus stop.
..
Issue: Pedestrian and traffic circulation, parking.
The developer has agreed to many of the concerns that staff has raised regarding these
issues. Separate pedestrian access is provided from both Kerber Boulevard and West
78th Street The sidewslb location from West 78th Street was chosen because this
driveway serves as an entrance for this development and for Target and because it will
be signalized. The developer has also revised his plans to create an entrance
boulevard from West 78th Street into the project directly in front Of Byerly's. This
change eliminates backing movements from a major drive aisle. Parking areas are
being proposed that provide convenience and accessibnity for site users and customers.
Truck traffic has been segregated from the main customer parking area.
Issue: Interaction of truck uaffic with park users.
While there is always some potential for tracks to impact park users, this inlm'action
should be minimized due to primary times of Iruck deliveries, primarily morning and
evening hours, and the fact that trucks will generally access the site from the south
and west. No matter what is developed on this site, commerc~ users will generate
lruck traffic that may impact the park use.
West Village Center
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993
Page 18
(Note: Reco~tions added by staff for the 12/4/93 meeting are in Md, addilkmal
recommendations by the Planning ~_~n are in bold and nn~ed.)
Staff tecomnm~ the City Council adopt the following motion:
"'l'ne City Council appwves the $i~ Plan//93-7 dated December 7, 1993, and the Conditional
Use Permit ~3-1 to permit the ~ of buildinp on one Imilding lot, subject to the
following conditions:
le
aisle of face. to-face parking (nfininmm of three lntmior planting islnnds).
An aeration/hrigation system consisting of perforated PVC pil~ or other
flexible tubing in a looped sysmn with at least two risers extendin~ above the
(see attached Flgnre 11-3).
b~
Oak, scientific name ~ macaxatpa) in order to continue the tree planting
theme begun in the Oak Ponds townhouse development located north of this
development. In order to mote et~ciively sm~.a the development from
effect on screening. Spacin~ of conifers should be Im (10) feei m allow titan
to grow together in a more solid mass ~ a ~~ ~. As at other n~as of
effectiveness as a buffer and to lend a more natttral feel to the planting. The
use ~ more ~-'-i --'-?..=~%- phngng ma~hls may be warran~ m ~ be~r
long-te~m ~g f~r the ~opmmt.
West Village Center
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993
Page 19
C.
Perimeter and parking lot boulevard medians shall be provided with low level
shrubs and other plant materials to help soften the appearance of the parking
area. Evergreen shrubs are great for winter and also add to summer landscape,
but use of more flowering shrubs in combination with the evergreen shrubs
would be appropriate. The plan should consider the use of more shrubs and
perennials (such as daylilics) in important areas of the site. These plants'could '
de
Alternate ground cover such as sumac shall be used along the steep grade to
the north. Thc steepness of the grade precludes the mowing of this sodded
Ornamental tte~ should be in~ within thc iaud~aping boxes located
in f~ont of the building to provide archttecttt~ high~ghting and to ~ the
facade of the structure. Adding ornamental trees (ctabapple, lmwthor~ or
japanese tree LLlacs) in planting areas near the building would add intet~t and
color to thc expanse of wall, especially at the front of the building. Care
should be exercised in selecting plants that do not set fruit (which can be very
messy in the case of some crabapples) for areas close to pedestrian ways.
Areas near the building would benefit from the introduction of more colorful
planting materials in the form of flowering shrubs and perenniah.
f.
A landscape box with shrubs shall be provided to the north of the uash
enclosure located adjacent to the detached commercial building to screen this
enclosure from view.
ALl landscaping areas shall have the proper soil preparation to ensure the
viability of thc vegetation to survive. The landscaping plan shall provide
specifications for proper soil preparation.
h~
Consideration should be given to placing plant materials together to create a
bolder, more interesting landscape, without excessive alternation. Plantings
shall be massed, creating a more diverse and dynamic landscape. Within
massings, similar species should be used to ensure the greatest effect from the
individual specimens. Consideration shall be given to maintaining views to the
building when placing tree groupings in the pea'imeter areas.
The plan does not recognize the street tree plantings at West ?8th Street and
Kcrber Boulevard where the City has installed, or has planned, for trees at 50
feet on center (West ?Sth Street) and 35 feet on center (Kerber Boulevard).
West Village Center
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993
Page 20
3,
The City's plans for West 78th Street show a lmtznanent landscape easement
(eight foot typical) at several locations along West 78th Stxeet The landscape
plan for the project should start with the pattern of street tree plantings at the
j~
Th~ mor~ forrml p~t of ~ sl~ng th~ retry driv~ m~cs m c~ntinu~
drives would reinforce views of the building and obscure Immpen and hoods
lc
significant groupings. This should also occur between the westerly entry drive
and the east side of the detached commem::~l bn_~ldlng and at the area west of
the retail bnildlng. Conifers in these areas would be useful for the winter
Financial gusran~ shah be provided to insure insmllafion and maintenance of
landscaping.
o. All planting areas must have an ~oa system installed.
pe
A sidewalk shah be provided from West 78th Street to the retail center along the
western entry drive~ east of the eommerclal/offlce bulidin& Into the developmenL
West Village Center
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993
Page 21
4,
e
,
!
10.
11.
12.
13.
As a condition of site plan approval, the applicant shall be required to enter into a
development contract with the City and provide the necessary finan~ security to
guarantee compliance with thc conditions of approval.
The applicant shall be responsible for applying and o~g the necessary permits for
the City's Building department for the installation of the site improvements.
The applicant shall enter into an encroachment agreement with the City for berming
and landscaping over the City's drainage and utility easement along the west side of
Kerber Boulevard, The applicant will also be responsible for adjusting the existing
sani~ manholes w ~ new grades.
The applicant shall remove the fourteen parking stalls in front of the retail site directly
west of the supemmrket In order to make up for lost parking stalls as a result of
changes to the site plan, compact parking spaces may be used.
The applicant will be responsible for furnishing and installing the appropriate traffic
control signs and pavement markings throughout the site.
The turning radii at the driveway access points along Kerber Boulevard should be
expanded to 20 feel The turning radius for the service drive located in the northwest
comer of the site should be expanded to accommodate large semi-trailer
accommodations with a wheelbase of 50 feet.
The applicant's engineer shall supply City staff with detailed storm drainage
calculations for the entire site. Storm sewers shall be designed to handle a 10-year
storm event. Additional catch basins may be needed after review of the storm water
calculations.
The retail building site located in the southwest comer of the site plan should be
lowered by a minimm of five feet
The applicant shall provide the City with a $10,000.00 financial security w guarantee
installation of the curb cuts and boulevard restoration. The security may be included
with the security requirements for the site landscaping.
An erosion control plan shall be developed and incorporated into the site plan and
resubmitted for City staff review and approval. Staff recommends implementing the
City's Best Management Practice Handbook for the plan design as well as site
restorations. The northerly back slope behind the building should be restored with an
Wes~ VLHage Cen~
Noveml~ 23, 1993
Update Decem~ 7, 1993
Page :22
14.
16,
17.
l&
19.
development cHre~y north of this developmmt.
The entry drive from West 78th ~ in front of Byerly's shah be revised to a
boulevard type separating the smjor traffic aisle from the parking area. (Note:
The developer has already ~ to this and revised the plans, however, dnce
they are different from the ones inith submitted and provided to the
Corem ~tmi_ on, I thought that I should add this as · condition.)
The appflcant shall work with SW Metro Transit to lomte a bas transit stop arm
on-site,
There shall be no outdoor storage of goods or matmflab after ~ is
completed.
..
There shall be no trash pick-up between the hours of 6:00 P.M. and 6:30 AM.
No overnight parking Of refrigeraflou mdt trncks and/or trailers,
No use of trash compaction equipmestt between 10:.00 P.M. and 6:30 A.M.
~ sMewalk is to be provided from West 78fll Str~ Ix) the qlq~.clled Ipm'lqlinf.
The auurouriate location of this sidewalk is to be worked out with q~r,
The applicant shall be reouired to match detalllnf work for the de~q~l
~omrnercial buildine with that of the main buildine. Prigr to dq~pimqmt
outbuiidine, the applicant shall come back to the Piannine C~.m..i~.~ for
~r~hitq~p~rpl r~vi~w of the buff(line's desinn.
Aot)licant shall work with staff on the site ilfhth~ Paridne JOt li~~ ~ be
no hi_~her than ~he main buJldinL
The si~na~e DnckS~ for the devdoDm_f~_t.slm_!! cor~ ~hn~r~lt_ .tO the P~..rm.~..t~
Commission for auuroval.
West Village Center
November 23, 1993
Update December 7, 1993
Page 23
The Public Safety Director is to provide specific ~omments to the City Council on
the curb cuts and truck traffic on Kert~f Bo#i~var~, plirtlcular mention should
be nmde of the truck imuac'~s ~ i~rk g~e between the hours of 4:00 and 9:00
P~M.
The avDlicant is reouestlnt, g) r~it tl~e himdicauDed Darkint~ with mfr.
Specifically. the applicant is.g) look inlg~ ~q~ ~)DDOrtunltY of Drovidint~ sixteen
foot handicapped oarkinf
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
Development Review Application
General Location Phn
Site Plan B, Preliminary Concept PLan for Block 1, West Village Heights 2nd Addition
West Village Center Site Plan
West Village Center Landscape Plan
West Village Center Grading and Utilities Plan
Memo from Dennis R. Eyler, P.E. dated November 18, 1993
Memo from Dave Hcmpel and Diane Desotelle dated November 22, 1993
Memo from Michael Schroeder dated November 23, 1993
Tree Planting Plan for West 78th Street
Tree Planting Plan for Kerber Boulevard
Landscape Plan for the southeast comer of Oak Pond Towrthouses
Figure 11-3, diagram for aerationftrrigafion system for tree islands
Letter from B.C. (Jim) Burdick dated December 1, 1993
Letter from L.A. Beisner dated Decem~ 3, 1993
Response to L.A. Beisner dated December 6, 1993
Letter from Bradley C. Johnson dated ~ber 2, 1993
Memo to Charles Folch & Scott Harr dated December 8, 1993
Planning Commission Minutes December 1, 1993
Planning Commission Minutes December 4, 1993
J
i
J
ii
Il
..:-. :-....-......
,. .
· . ..
I
i
I
_ .
CITY OF
690 COULTER DRIVE · P.O. BOX 147 · CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 · FAX (612) 937-5739
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Housing and Redevelopment Authority
FROM:
Todd Gerhardt, Assistant Executive ~r
DATE: January 14, 1994
SUBJ:
H_anus Building Roof
At our last HRA meeting, staff was directed
interested in paying for a new roof on the
12, 1994 to discuss this problem. The
roof designs (mansard roof). Attached you
if the HRA constructed the mansard roof
metal roof screen, and that Mr. Kirt
have
with Mr. Gary Kirt to see if he was
~. Staff met with Mr. Kirt on January
was for staff to look at alt~'aative
memo from Fred Hoinlngton stating that
more exgemive than the proposed
problem.
Mr. Kirt showed some intt~rest in
interest rate on the loan for the
that the HRA would be paying
the roof
of the
roof.
but wanted the liRA to lower the
In my mind, this is just another way
Staff is in agreemeat with
roof screen but let Mr.
and
with the roof problem
the HRA not instntl th~ metnl
mad.
ATTA(
dated January 13, 1994.
DD
~0
To:
From:
Subject:
Date:
Todd Gerhardt, Assistant City Manager
Fred Hoisington, Planning Consultant
Hanus Building Roof
1-13-94
I talked to Tim Stefan this morning (January 13) regarding roof alternatives and
construction scheduling. Tim indicated that he has explored a wide range of options
including a mansard roof which would suspend the roof on the outside of the
existing building walls. He indicated that the proposed roof is by far the least
expensive and most efficient way to deal with a new roof structure and that the
number of penetrations should not be a problem. If Gary Kirt must see the other
options considered, Tim has drawings of them.
Regarding schedule, the current schedule is to build the roof before the parking lot is
completed. Tim indicates that a certain amount of damage to the parking lot can be
expected if the roof project is delayed. This will most certainly increase the bid of the
roofer to reflect the potential parking lot damage and repair.
It is my feeling that we should make every effort to resolve this matter this week
and either proceed with the roof or abort it. My feeling is that Gary Kirt should pay
for the existing roof improvements or we should leave the roof alone (not build the
new roof) and let him deal with the problem after repurchase.
~ Use I Environmental · Planning/Design
7300 Metro Boulevard/Suite 525 · Minrmpolis, Minnesot~ 55439 · (612) 835-9960 ' Fax: (612) 835-3160
H~UILDING IMPROVEMENTS 1 - 1 1 - 9 4
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS COSTS
1. Site (Bid)
a. Parking lot
b. Landscaping
c. Irrigation
d. Dumpstcr
$159,820
1,300
Total Site
$161,120
2. Building (Estimates)
a. Paint Exterior
~ b. Remove/Reroof
c. Metal Canopies (7)
~ d. Metal Roof/Structure
e. Repair Transformer
500
550
Total Building
$148,550
3. Signage Total (Estimate)
$15,000
SCHEDULE
.$324,670
t.a?,
- ~St
1. Site ...................................................................... May 15-$ul 29
2. Building ............................... Bidding ........................ .Feb 1-25
Construction ..... Mar 8-Apr 22
Completion ...................... Apr 30
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
CITY OF
690 COULTER DRIVE · P.O. BOX 147 · CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 · FAX (612) 937-5739
TO:
Housing and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Todd Gerhardt, Assistant Executive Dimctm' .:.'~/ff,~,
DATE:
.la~ual'y 14, 1994
SUBJ:
1994 Mccl/ag Schedule
Listed below you will find a tentative 1994 meeting schedule for the HRA. Prior to Thursday
niSht's meeting, please review thc proposed
schedules (birthdays, vacations, etc.). HRA
each month with the exception that if thc
Council meeting, thc HRA shall meet on thc
Thursday falls on Thanksgiving Day and
therefore I would recommend that we meet
times for conflicts with yo~ own personal
ar~ scheduled for the third Thursday of
night falls in the same week as a City
However, in November the fourth
we try to avoid the holiday season;
Thursday in November and December.
Approval of thc ~g schedule as is
..
·
JANU .ARY FEBRUARY MAnCH.
' I 12345 12345 12
,I)~11'12131415 13( 1617 la le 13 151617 la le 10~1213~1516
'~31 ~ ,. -
~Y ~E ~Y
1 234567 I 234 1 2 1 23456
8~1011~131418~ 5676 '1011 3~15 ' 7 ' ' 7~1110111213
17 21 12~14151617 la 10 21314
'-
123 1 IZ345 1~3
,&,,, ,,o ,,,
~ 31 .
-~ lmm m I I I mi ~ -
[] = HRA Meetings O = City Conncfl ~gs a = Holidays
i
!
I
·
I
I
i
:
I
I
.,
I
!
!
i
I
I
.
I
!
!
I
i
.i
..
.
;
I
·
'i ~ I
' i
CITY OF
690 COULTER DRIVE · P.O. BOX 147 · CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 · FAX (612) 937-5739
MEMORANDUM
PROM:
DATE:
SUBJ:
Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Todd C-~rha~t, Assistant Executive
~lnnuary 14, 1994
Previo~ HRA Bill~
Lisl~l below are staff findings for the foHo~ks:
048672 Tom Chaffee $ 400 the City Manager's comput~ and paid
-!~.~ that,.bill out of his own pock~
· '...:_, '.~:-;' , '
053357 Holmes & Grav~.:::~,029.02 Work ~._~let~ on the following projects:
..; '.i': ' 2. Outl~.~, Target with Ryan Cons~
· , 3. ~~. Tax Abaft Petition.
.'--,. -:'_.;.:. '.
ANN
RD 4
I
[RR R12
IOULEVA
lOP
L A K£ SUSA
A2
UD-
i !
LYMAN