The URL can be used to link to this page

4. Assessment Hearing for Minnewashta Pkwy Project 90-15 C ITYOF -- 4- 1 1 h .. 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 1 MEMORANDUM 1 TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager ,� • FROM: Charles Folch, Director of Public Works /City Engineer U � 1 DATE: October 4, 1993 SUBJ: Assessment Hearing for Minnewashta Parkway Improvement Project No. 90 -15 ' This is the assessment hearing for the Minnewashta Parkway Improvement Project No. 90 -15. This improvement project extended from Trunk Highway 7 south to Trunk Highway 5 and consisted of the reconstruction of the roadway to an urban section with concrete curb and gutter, 1 storm sewer, walkway/bike path and street lighting. To date, the majority of the proposed improvements have been completed with the exception of a small portion of the trail north of Trunk Highway 5, tree planting, boulevard restoration, and final wear course paving. These ' remaining work items are well - defined in terms of quantity and associated contract bid prices. Therefore, the project engineer has been able to extrapolate, within reasonable accuracy, the expected final project costs for this improvement. ' State Statute 429 for a public improvement project requires that a minimum of 20% of the project costs be assessed. For the Minnewashta Parkway project, this yields a per unit assessment levy 1 of $760. In essence, the proposed per unit assessment cost is the same per unit cost that was predicted and presented to the City Council at the feasibility hearing back in July of 1991. This per unit assessment rate was based on a 20% assessable cost of $2,014,000.00 and a total of 530 ' units to be assessed. The number of units calculated for larger parcels was based on the total net acreage (total acreage less wetlands and unbuildable slope areas and future road right -of -way) multiplied by a factor of 1.4 units per acre. Some of these properties also have pending concept or preliminary plats submitted to the City which have been implemented in determining number of units. During the time period since the assessment notices were mailed to property owners, the City has received approximately one dozen verbal or written questions or objections to the assessment. 1 The written objections have been included in the packet along with corresponding written responses to these letters and appropriate telephone inquiries on the assessment. Staff has reviewed and responded to all the assessment inquiries received prior to packet printing and has 1 made the necessary corrections or changes to the assessment roll. It should be noted that two 1 •1 .1 Don Ashworth October 4, 1993 1 Page 2 ' properties, PID Nos. 25- 410040 and 25- 8770020, were incorrectly notified of a one unit assessment instead of two units. Corrected notices have been sent. 1 A couple of property owners have requested that the larger homesteaded tracts of land which generate more than one unit assessment be assessed one unit at this time with the remaining units being deferred and collected in the future with subdivision of the property and that this deferment be adjusted by construction cost index rather than having interest accrual. The City has taken a similar position on recent trunk utility improvement projects so as not to financially force property owners off their land, particularly when laterals need to be extended to serve the property. Part of this argument could be implemented concerning the assessments for this project. (See City Manager's Memorandum) 1 There are also four properties (PID Nos. 25- 660330, 25- 6600500, 25- 6600510 and 25- 6600490) whose owners are contending that the parcel is not buildable. Planning staff has reviewed these ' properties and has determined that based on similar lots previously built on in the area, these lots would be buildable with a variance. Staff would recommend that if the property owner of each of these parcels is willing to sign an agreement that their lot is unbuildable, the assessment would then be dropped. If there are no questions or concerns brought up during the public assessment hearing process 1 which have not been addressed by the attached responses or need further information and research, it is recommended that the City Council approve the assessments levied for the Minnewashta Parkway Improvement Project No. 90 -15 with the unpaid balance of said 1 assessments to be repaid over 8 years. ktm ' Attachments: 1. Assessment roll. 2. Assessment hearing notice to newspaper. 1 3. Notice to property owner (representative sample). 4. Affidavit of mailing. 5. Assessment objection letters with corresponding responses. 1 6. July 22, 1991 feasibility hearing minutes. c: Jean Meuwissen, Treasurer 1 Bill Engelhardt, William R. Engelhardt & Associates 1 1 1 CITYOF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 MEMORANDUM 1 TO: Mayor and City Council I FROM: Don Ashworth, City Manager DATE: October 11, 1993 I SUBJ: Minnewashta Parkway Assessments I The Mayor and Council have received various letters requesting that changes be made to the original way that this project was proposed to be financed. The best way to understand current policies is to look at our past, i.e: Background: During the 1972/73 time frame, this same area was assessed for sewer and water as it dealt with what was referred to as the North Service Area Sewer and Water Project. The project was assessed on a basis very similar to what is being proposed by some of the residents I today - -only assess one unit to larger parcels with the knowledge that they would be further subdivided in the future providing the necessary funds to fully fund the project. The problem with the approach was that the larger parcels did not develop as anticipated and by the end of the 70's, nearly a $1 million deficit loomed as a potential general obligation debt. To avoid that type of tax increase, the City Council conducted a series of assessment hearings attempting to place the full assessment roll from the early 1970 feasibility study on to current property owners. The hearings were quite ugly. Property owner after property owner testified and presented evidence that they had purchased the property from the Andersons who had purchased the property from the Sorensons who had purchased the property from the original owner. In each instance, an assessment search had been conducted and, as they waived the sheets in their hands, pointed to the signatures of city officials certifying that there were no assessments pending against that property. The proposed assessments would destitute them, would drive them off their property, and this whole thing wasn't their fault. The City Council swore at that time that no future council should have to go through that type of process in the future. The council may wish to talk with people such as Al Klingelhutz, Dick Pearson, or John Neveaux. Some of the property owners took the issue to court and did prevail in their positions. In a somewhat different fashion than normal, the court came out stating that the method in which the city had carried the reassessment was illegal and went on to state that if the city would have simply assessed one unit against each of the parcels and deferred the remainder, future owners would .1 .1 Mayor and City Council October 11, 1993 Page 2 have been notified, and that when the financial plight that the city faced was unveiled, that the 1 reassessment process would in fact have been a legal assessment. As to the issue of estimating the number of future units and the wisdom of that, I would also 1 respond with the response, "Look to the wisdom of your previous decisions in considering your future." Specifically, the anticipated units that are anticipated on each of the larger parcels was set very conservatively. Virtually all developments coming into the city are reviewed in terms of whether pending assessments do exist against those parcels. Where pendings are found, they are adjusted to represent the current level of development. If an error is logically going to occur, it would happen where no pending assessments are found. A logical assumption would be that ' the costs of street improvements were paid for via a developer or had already been paid. If Jean were gone on the day that the development sheet was distributed at city hall, the likelihood of an unrecorded assessment being found would not be very likely. [Note: Sewer and water trunk ' charges and the assessment of those charges is a significantly different process than used for road improvement assessments. Unit charges are automatically calculated against any vacant parcel ' with the onus back on to the property owner to approve that somehow that property had been assessed those unit charges. Secondarily, the entire philosophy of those types of charges is different in that the current level of development in the Upper Bluff Creek area is sufficient to pay the trunk sewer and water bonds that are currently being issued. As additional infilling ' occurs in those areas, those revenues will then become available to pay for a future water tower on Highway 41 and 5, or a subtrunk extension in the year 2000.] 1 Recommendation ' It is recommended that the assessments for Minnewashta Parkway be levied as originally proposed. This recommendation also recognizes that the city must assess a minimum of 20% of project costs to have a valid special assessment project. The proposal to not assess larger units ' would drop us below that 20% level. It is also recommended that larger parcels having solely one residence only be assessed for the existing home with all other assessments being deferred. Further, that the deferment be granted on the condition that the assessments will reactivate 1 themselves if the property is sold, the current owners become deceased, or after a specific time frame (5 or 10 years is recommended). The latter requirement that a specific time frame be set recognizes that the city auditors will not consider that assessment as an asset if it has no specific time frame to be received - -this was also an error in the wisdom used during the 1972/73 project. The bonds of 1991 provided the construction funds to build Minnewashta Parkway. The net interest rate was approximately 6 %. Adding the typical 112% "administrative fee" for our servicing the debt over the next 8 years brings the total to 71/2%- -the amount originally shown ' in the feasibility study. Accordingly, staff continues to recommend that 71% be set as the interest rate for the proposed assessment roll. As it deals with deferred assessments, city staff will have only minimal work efforts so long as they remain deferred, i.e. the normal assessment process includes certifying the amount of the assessment to the county auditor; paying the county 1 1. Mayor and City Council 11 * October 11, 1993 Page 3 1 auditor fee for their including that with a part of the collection process; our receipting the monies once received to each of the individual assessment cards; and finally, verification of our 111 accounting process by our auditors including their fees for the various tables associated with special assessment levies /collections. Again, as these costs will not be incurred for those special assessments being deferred, staff would recommend that the interest rate on the deferred special assessments be set at 6% and calculated as "simple interest," i.e. after five years of deferment, 30% would be added to the original assessment and that new amount could be paid over the following eight year period. We feel that this amount is defendable as it approximates the construction costs index over the past several years, i.e. assuming that the deferred parcels had the option of having their part of the roadway delayed and not constructed for 3, 4, or 10 years, their costs of constructing the street would be very similar to the deferred balance that hypothetically would go on in 5 or 10 years. • tiro 1 am au ow = me — am um um I mg m � C /Va. .- ion 1 PROPOSED ASSESSMENT ROLL MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA C.P. NO. 90 -15 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Darcy L. Hanus & Dean A. Swanson 25.2510010 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3940 Country Oaks Dr. Country Oaks Excelsior, Mn. 55331 Lot 1, Block 1 Loren H. Beaudoin 25.2510020 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 133 Spring Valley Circle Country Oaks Bloomington, MN. 55420 Lot 2, Block 1 Sampson R. & Susan Mugrdechian 25.2510030 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3960 Country Oak Drive Country Oaks Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 3, Block 1 Loren H. Beaudoin 25.2510040 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 133 Spring Valley Circle Country Oaks Bloomington, MN. 55420 Lot 4, Block 1 Lynn D. & Nancy K. Simpson 25.2510050 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3980 Country Oaks Drive Country Oaks Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 5, Block 1 Loren H. Beaudoin 25.2510060 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 133 Spring Valley Circle Country Oaks Bloomington, MN. 55420 Lot 6, Block 1 Kevin & Kristen Marx 25.2510070 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 4000 Country Oaks Drive Country Oaks Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 7, Block 1 2 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Legend Homes, Inc. 25.2510080 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 21151 John Milles Drive Country Oaks P.O. Box 298 Lot 8, Block 1 Rogers, MN. 55374 Mark & Julie Grube 25.2510090 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3931 Country Oaks Drive Country Oaks Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 1, Block 2 Craig & Linda Mack 25.2510100 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3941 Country Drive Country Oaks Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 2, Block 2 Loren H. Beaudoin 25.2510110 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 133 Spring Valley Circle Country Oaks Bloomington, MN. 55420 Lot 3, Block 2 Loren H. Beaudoin 25.2510120 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 133 Spring Valley Circle Country Oaks Bloomington, MN. 55420 Lot 4, Block 2 Loren H. Beaudoin 25.2510130 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 133 Spring Valley Circle Country Oaks Bloomington, MN. 55420 Lot 5, Block 2 Loren H. Beaudoin 25.2510140 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 133 Spring Valley Circle Country Oaks Bloomington, MN. 55420 Lot 6, Block 2 Loren H. Beaudoin 25.2510150 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 133 Spring Valley Circle Country Oaks Bloomington, MN. 55420 Lot 7, Block 2 MI r 111. MI MN MI NM I MI MII OM NM MN MN OM NM MI WI POI ume am ow um N. INN NE Ea umm am = ma am ow = m gm UN i 3 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Bruce & Jennifer Linn 25.2510160 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 4001 Country Oaks Drive Country Oaks Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 8, Block 2 Todd & Francine Boyce 25.2510170 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 4011 Country Oaks Drive Country Oaks Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 9, Block 2 Loren H. Beaudoin 25.2510180 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 133 Spring Valley Circle Country Oaks Bloomington, MN. 55420 Lot 10, Block 2 Loren H. Beaudoin 25.2510190 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 133 Spring Valley Circle Country Oaks Bloomington, MN. 55420 Lot 11, Block 2 Loren H. Beaudoin 25.2510200 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 133 Spring Valley Circle Country Oaks Bloomington, MN. 55420 Lot 12, Block 2 Legend Homes, Inc. 25.2510210 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 21151 John Milles Drive Country Oaks P.O. Box 298 Lot 1, Block 3 Rogers, MN. 55374 Legend Homes, Inc. 25.2510220 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 21151 John Milles Drive Country Oaks P.O. Box 298 Lot 2, Block 3 Rogers, MN. 55374 Legend Homes, Inc. 25.2510230 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 21151 John Milles Drive Country Oaks P.O. Box 298 Lot.3, Block 3 Rogers, MN. 55374 4 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Scott Folsum & Sandra Schoebeck 25.2510240 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 6750 Country Oaks Road Country Oaks Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 4, Block 3 Loren H. Beaudoin 25.2510250 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 133 Spring Valley Circle Country Oaks Bloomington, MN. 55420 Lot 5, Block 3 Loren H. Beaudoin 25.2510260 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 133 Spring Valley Circle Country Oaks Bloomington, MN. 55420 Lot 6, Block 3 Loren H. Beaudoin 25.2510270 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 133 Spring Valley Circle Country Oaks Bloomington, MN. 55420 Lot 7, Block 3 Roy A. Leach 25.4100010 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3900 Red Cedar Point Leach Addition Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 001, Block 001 Richard H. & D. Comer 25.4100020 2 3800 Red Cedar Point Leach Addition $ 760.00 $ 1,520.00 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot Q02, Block 001 Timothy & Mary Colleran 25.4800010 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 6560 Minnewashta Parkway Minnewashta Creek 1 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 001, Block 001 Charles F. & Vicki L. Anding 25.4800020 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 6601 Minnewashta Parkway Minnewashta Creek 1 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 001, Block 002 NM NM MON NM OM MIN 10.1 Mil IIIIII 1111111 IM 10.1 1111111 NM 111111111 WI m i — um m um m me um me mg um m mu m um ma I km 5 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Thomas & Mary Allenburg 25.4800030 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 6621 Minnewashta Parkway Minnewashta Creek 1 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 002, Block 002 Terrance Thompson Sr. & S. 25.4810010 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3820 Linden Circle Minnewashta Creek 2 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 001, Block 001 Louis C. & Carol J. Vaneps 25.4810020 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3840 Linden Circle Minnewashta Creek 2 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 002, Block 001 Thomas Krueger 25.4810030 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3860 Linden Circle Minnewashta Creek 2 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 003, Block 001 Vincent & Janice Feuerstein 25.4810040 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3880 Linden Circle Minnewashta Creek 2 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 004, Block 001 David W. & Julie Ann Terpstra 25.4810050 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 6581 Joshua Circle Minnewashta Creek 2 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 005, Block 001 Billie Hague & Brian L. Windschitl 25.4810060 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 6591 Joshua Circle Minnewashta Creek 2 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 006, Block 001 Michael F. & Joan M. Skallman 25.4810070 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 6590 Joshua Circle Minnewashta Creek 2 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 007, Block 001 6 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Kenneth C. & Betty Hannemann 25.4810080 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 6580 Joshua Circle Minnewashta Creek 2 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 008, Block 001 Steven M. & Joann M. Swam 25.4810090 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 6576 Joshua Circle Minnewashta Creek 2 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 009, Block 001 Bryan W. & Nancy Huber 25.4810100 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3910 Linden Circle Minnewashta Creek 2 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 010, Block 001 Mark Ortner 25.4810110 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3920 Linden Circle Minnewashta Creek 2 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 011, Block 001 Alan R. & Diane Reuteler 25.4810120 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3930 Linden Circle Minnewashta Creek 2 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 012, Block 001 Richard E. & Bonnie G. Larson 25.4810130 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3940 Linden Circle Minnewashta Creek 2 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 013, Block 001 Marian J. Peck 25.4810140 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3950 Linden Circle Minnewashta Creek 2 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 014 Block 001 Stephen J. Undis 25.4810150 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3951 Linden Circle Minnewashta Creek 2 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 018, Block 001 MI — MN MI NM MN — MI OM — MI — MN MI OM O r am am ma m um EN um umm EN on m RN um ' — ' ir MN Ims 7 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Martha Heiberg & Julia Wallace 25.4810160 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3941 Linden Circle Minnewashta Creek 2 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 019, Block 001 Karen L. Nelson 25.4810170 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3931 Linden Circle Minnewashta Creek 2 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 020, Block 001 Thomas & Linda L. Sander 25.4810180 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3921 Linden Circle Minnewashta Creek 2 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 021, Block 001 Harry A. & Christine A. Drahos 25.4810190 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3911 Linden Circle Minnewashta Creek 2 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 022, Block 001 John W. & Nancy A. Nelson 25.4810200 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3991 Linden Circle Minnewashta Creek 2 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 023, Block 001 Lester & Cynthia Floyd 25.4810210 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 6570 Kirkwood Circle Minnewashta Creek 2 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 024, Block 001 Marion A. Olin 25.4810220 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 6540 Kirkwood Circle Minnewashta Creek 2 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 025, Block 001 James E. & Peggy A. Markham 25.4810230 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 6520 Kirkwood Circle Minnewashta Creek 2 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 026, Block 001 8 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT William D. & Connie Hardwick 25.4810240 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 6541 Kirkwood Circle Minnewashta Creek 2 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 030, Block 001 James C. & Luann R. Stewart 25.4810250 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 6551 Kirkwood Circle Minnewashta Creek 2 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 031, Block 001 Gene & Nancy Christensen 25.4810260 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 6561 Kirkwood Circle Minnewashta Creek 2 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 032, Block 001 Frank & Theresa Gustafson 25.4810270 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 6571 Kirkwood Circle Minnewashta Creek 2 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 033, Block 001 Michael L. & Rebecca McMillen 25.4810280 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3861 Linden Circle Minnewashta Creek 2 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 034, Block 001 Blake Bogema 25.4810290 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3841 Linden Circle Minnewashta Creek 2 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 035, Block 001 Thomas & Debra Modeen 25.4810300 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 12701 Pioneer Trail Minnewashta Creek 2 Eden Prairie, MN. 55344 Lot 036, Block 001 James C. & Lois M. Zaske 25.4820010 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3960 Linden Circle Minnewashta Creek 3 Chanhassen, MN. 55317 Lot 001, Block 001 • MI — ■i • • • • OM — I all r N M I i imm — m me so no m No so No EN m i No sism r miss os in Is 9 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Thomas & Julie Ann Flemming 25.4820020 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3966 Linden Circle Minnewashta Creek 3 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 002, Block 001 David & Tracy Lindquist 25.4820030 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3969 Linden Circle Minnewashta Creek 3 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 003, Block 001 Kenneth Wicklund & Andrea Goland 25.4820040 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3970 Linden Circle Minnewashta Creek 3 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 004, Block 001 Dana Nelson 25.4820050 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3967 Linden Circle Minnewashta Creek 3 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 005, Block 001 Scott & Caroline Mortensen 25.4820060 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3961 Linden Circle Minnewashta Creek 3 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 006, Block 001 Vincent Johnson 25.4820070 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 6510 Kirkwood Circle Minnewashta Creek 3 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 007, Block 001 Thomas & Michele Muelberg 25.4820080 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 6508 Kirkwood Circle Minnewashta Creek 3 • Chanhassen, MN. 55317 Lot 008, Block 001 J. D. Investments 25.4820090 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 15500 Wayzata Boulevard, #1029 Minnewashta Creek 3 Wayzata, MN. 55391 Lot 009, Block 001 10 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT J. D. Investments 25.4820100 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 15500 Wayzata Boulevard, #1029 Minnewashta Creek 3 Wayzata, MN. 55391 Lot 010, Block 001 Luann M Falenczykowski 25.482110 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3501 Xenium Lane North, Apt. 330 Minnewashta Creek 3 Plymouth, MN. 55441 Lot 011, Block 001 Luann M Falenczykowski 25.482120 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3501 Xenium Lane North, Apt. 330 Minnewashta Creek 3 Plymouth, MN. 55441 Lot 012, Block 001 Lee Anderson 25.6150010 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 Pleasant Acres Home Owners, Rt. 1 Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 001, Block 001 Lee Anderson 25.6150020 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 Pleasant Acres Home Owners, Rt. 1 Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 002, Block 001 Lee Anderson 25.6150030 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 Pleasant Acres Home Owners, Rt. 1 Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 003, Block 001 Lee Anderson 25.6150040 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 Pleasant Acres Home Owners, Rt. 1 Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 004, Block 001 Lee Anderson 25.6150050 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 Pleasant Acres Home Owners, Rt. 1 Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 005, Block 001 MI 11111 MI MIII NM NM NM M IIIIII • M M MI MIIII M MI MI INI m no EN um um mum ' um me No mu ® I mom rim me Wm km 11 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Edward & Elizabeth Lucas 25.6150060 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3941 Leslee Curve Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 006, Block 001 J. D. & A. M. Bennyhoff 25.6150070 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3931 Leslee Curve Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 007, Block 001 Mount Olivet Rolling Acres 25.6150080 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 c/o Theresa Stevens Pleasant Acres 7200 Rolling Acres Road Lot 008, Block 001 Excelsior, MN. 55331 Tod E. & Susan M. Schilling 25.6150090 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3911 Leslee Curve Pleasant Acres Chanhassen, MN. 55317 Lot 009, Block 001 Bruce F. Dreslow & Diane J. Yaeger 25.6150100 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3901 Leslee Curve Pleasant Acres Chanhassen, MN. 55317 Lot 010, Block 001 Dianne E. Bartz 25.6150110 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3901 Leslee Curve Pleasant Acres Chanhassen, MN. 55317 Lot 011, Block 001 Donovan Bulen 25.6150120 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3871 Leslee Curve South Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 012, Block 001 Vincent & B. Decker 25.6150130 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3861 Leslee Curve Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 013, Block 001 12 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Mark D. Rogers & Mary Knutson 25.1650140 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3851 Leslee Curve Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 016, Block 001 Part of Lot 15, Block 1 1 Dale F. Menten 25.6150150 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 6630 Minnewashta Parkway Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 014, Block 001 Part of Lot 15 Peter & Lola Warhol 25.6150160 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3831 Leslee Curve Pleasant Acres, Lot 16 Chanhassen, MN. 55317 Block 1, EXC that PT LYING NLY OF THE FOLLOW DESC LINE: BEG AT NWLY CORN LOT 16 TH ELY 195' TO PT ON ELY LINE LOT 16 50' SLY OF NELY CORN & THERE TERMINAT. LOT 17, BLK 1 & PT OF LOT 18, BLK 1 LYING NLY OF THE FOLLOW DESC LINE: COMM NWLY CORN LOT 18 TH SLY ALONG Donald & Betty Brandt 25.6150180 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3801 Leslee Curve Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 019, Block 001 Charles R. & Cynthia Hultner 25.6150190 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3900 Leslee Curve Pleasant Acres Chanhassen, MN. 55317 Lot 001, Block 002 Dana Nicholson 25.6150200 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3910 Leslee Curve Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 002, Block 002 MIN IIIIIII NMI MI MIMI MI N MINI MI Mill 1111111 ME INN MI INN MI IN UM r m um m— — me mu r— m m— um m um m um - 13 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Paul R. & Elizabeth A. Scheele 25.6150210 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3920 Leslee Curve Pleasant Acres Chanhassen, MN. 55317 Lot 003, Block 002 Leonard H. & S. Hein 25.6150220 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3930 Leslee Curve Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 004, Block 002 Ralph M. & C. Riddle 25.6150230 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 4000 Leslee Curve Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 005, Block 002 Brent & Kathy Davis 25.6150240 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 4010 Leslee Curve Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 006, Block 002 Betty A. Carlson 25.6150250 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 4020 Leslee Curve Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 007, Block 002 Clifford & Virginia Heinzen 25.6150260 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 4011 Crestview Drive Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 008, Block 002 Bradford Goar 25.6150270 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3224 Aquila Avenue North Pleasant Acres Crystal, MN. 55427 Lot 009, Block 002 Gary & Mary Nunally 25.6150280 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3921 Crestview Drive Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 010, Block 002 14 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Gary W. & Amy Bachler 25.6150290 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3911 Crestview Drive Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 011, Block 002 Craig R. & Mary L. Courtney 25.6150300 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3901 Crestview Drive Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 012, Block 002 Thomas R. & Karen Erdmann 25.6150310 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3900 Crestview Drive Pleasant Acres Chanhassen, MN. 55317 Lot 001, Block 003 Michael L. & Carol D. Cecko 25.6150320 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3910 Crestview Drive Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 002, Block 003 Richard & Beverly Kinsman 25.6150330 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3920 Crestview Drive Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 003, Block 003 Stephen & Mary Aldritt 25.6150340 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3946 Crestview Drive Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 004, Block 003 Michael D. Kammerer & Greg D. Kruse 25.6150350 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 4000 Crestview Drive Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 005, Block 003 Dan & Debra Ament 25.6150360 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 4010 Crestview Drive Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 006, Block 003 — MN ' NM MN 111111 11M1 111111 MN MN MI BM MN NM I MI N NM gm or am um r — me am um r um — as — — rr um — it is 15 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # CF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Vernon R. & Joan D. Isham 25.6150370 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 4030 Leslee Curve Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 007, Block 003 Lee R. Anderson 25.6150380 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 6651 Minnewahsta Parkway Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 008, Block 003 Patrick & Patricia Fauth 25.6150390 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 4011 Glendale Drive Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 009, Block 003 Floyd & Donna Larsen 25.6150400 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 4001 Glendale Drive Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 010, Block 003 Randolph C. Cole 25.6150410 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3931 Glendale Drive Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 011, Block 003 Randy & Lorna Hill Cuncliffe 25.6150420 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3921 Glendale Drive Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 012, Block 003 Charles & Mary Colleen Weber 25.6150430 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3911 Glendale Drive Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 013, Block 003 Jerry L. & K. Kortgard 25.6150440 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3901 Glendale Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 014, Block 003 16 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Barbara Murphy Denslow 25.6150450 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3860 Leslee Curve Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 001, Block 004 25615045001256300350880 Steven & Laurie Erickson 25.6150451 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3850 Leslee Curve Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 002, Block 004 J. J. & J. B. Froehling 25.6150460 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3840 Leslee Curve Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 003, Block 004 Lester C. Jr. & N. Anderson 25.6150470 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 6200 Beard Place Pleasant Acres Minneapolis, MN. 55410 Lot 004, Block 004 Harry M. Jr. & E. Dunn 25.6150480 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 P. O. Box 343 Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 005, Block 004 David & Susan Lockwood 25.6150490 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3810 Leslee Curve Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 006, Block 004 Warren C. MacFarlane III & Jeanne A. Macfarlane 25.6150500 • 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3800 Leslee Curve Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 007, Block 004 Larry P. & Lori Langsweirdt 25.6150510 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3811 Glendale Drive S.W. Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 008, Block 004 INS MB r M MN r NM NM — — w MB r— all NM — MB NI 1 MI M M M V • am — am — r am ma ma ma us i ■ - 17 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Lawrence & Terrie Sherman 25.6150520 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3821 Glendale Drive Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 009, Block 004 Patrick M. Rush & Robin Thompson 25.6150530 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3810 Maple Circle Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 010, Block 004 Charles W. Crosby Jr. 25.6150540 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3820 Maple Circle Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 011, Block 004 Dirk & Margaret Young 25.6150550 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3830 Maple Circle Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 012, Block 004 Bradley Brockpahler 25.6150560 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3840 Maple Circle Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 013, Block 004 Michael R. Ryan & Ellen J. Hem Ryan 25.6150570 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3850 Maple Circle Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 014, Block 004 Richard E. Bellert 25.6150580 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 6641 Maple Road Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 015, Block 004 Lee Anderson 25.6150590 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 Pleasant Acres Home Owners, Rt. 1 Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 001, Block 005 Part of Lot 2, Block 5 18 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Timothy & Teresa Sheridan 25.6150600 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 4020 Glendale Drive Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 003, Block 005 Gary R. Voight 25.6150610 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 4010 Glendale Drive Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 004, Block 005 Richard & Rosalee Sr. Awgelo 25.6150620 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 4000 Glendale Drive Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 005, Block 005 Steven & Jamie Knigge 25.6150630 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3910 Glendale Drive Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 001, Block 006 Nicholas & Rebecca Folwick 25.6150640 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3920 Glendale Drive Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 002, Block 006 Tbny J. Torntore 25.6050650 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3930 Glendale Drive Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 003, Block 006 Jerome H. & Alice R. Johnson 25.6050650 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3940 Glendale Drive Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 004, Block 006 Zoe K. Bros 25.6050670 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 6631 Minnewashta Parkway Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 001, Block 007 M .MI 1101 1011 11111 I 1011 IN In 11111 MI MS IN RN On M 11111 MI pa an WI O - -- i r MI • — r um mu M me — - - 19 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT James & Jean Way 25.6150680 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 6641 Minnewashta Parkway Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 N Part of Lot 2, Block 007 Lee Anderson 25.6150690 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 Pleasant Acres Home Owners, Rt. 1 Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 South 65 FT of Lot 2, Block 81.15 FT of Lot 3, Block 7 James P. & Barbara Larkin 25.6150700 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 6671 Minnewashta Parkway Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 SO 96.62 FT of Lot 3, Block7, NO 49.54 FT of Lot 4, Block 7 Robert M. & Patricia A. Joseph 25.6150710 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 6701 Minnewashta Parkway Pleasant Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 SO 148.33 FT of Lot 4, Block 7 David B & Lori J. Free 25.4450010 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3921 Maple Shores Maple Ridge Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 001, Block 001 Kirk Edwards 25.4450020 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3921 Maple Shores Drive Maple Ridge Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 002, Block 001 Robby & Susan Segal 25.4450030 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3901 Maple Shores Drive Maple Ridge Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 003, Block 001 20 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Bradley D. & Bonnie J. Straka 25.4450040 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3881 Maple Shores Drive Maple Ridge Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 004, Block 001 Scott D. & Pamela M. Howard 25.4450050 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3861 Maple Shores Drive Maple Ridge Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 005, Block 001 Gerald E. & Melanie Kelly 25.4450060 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 898 Wescott Trail Maple Ridge Eagan, MN. 55123 Lot 006, Block 001 Raymond Berry 25.4450070 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3830 Maple Shores Drive Maple Ridge Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 007, Block 001 Mark & Connie Stanley 25.4450080 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3850 Maple Shores Drive Maple Ridge Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 008, Block 001 Susan Jasin 25.4450090 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 425 Chan View, Suite 312 Maple Ridge Chanhassen, MN. 55317 Lot 009, Block 001 David & Barbara Scouler % 25.4450100 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3890 Maple Shores Drive Maple Ridge Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 010, Block 001 James Stewart 25.4450110 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 4650 Maple Street Maple Ridge Rockford, MN. 55373 Lot 011, Block 001 MB IIIIIII IIIIII MN SI NS A NM MI OM all MN 1=11 1111111 MI I MI 1M PS r am um w a um — r m— i r me am am um m lam Is 21 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Timothy J. & Laurie A. Jenzer 25.4450120 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3920 Maple Shores Drive Maple Ridge Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 012, Block 001 Thomas L. & Sandra M. Giesen 25.4450130 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3930 Maple Shores Drive Maple Ridge Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 013, Block 001 Joseph W. & Kirsten J. Stasney 25.7450010 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3840 Lone Cedar Circle Robert Buchheit Add. Chaska, MN. 55318 Lot 001, Block 001 Stephen & Jane Vonbevern 25.7450020 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 P. O. Box 874 Robert Buchheit Add. Chanhassen, MN. 55317 Lot 002, Block 001 Arnold Hed 25.7450030 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3860 Lone Cedar Robert Buchheit Add. Chaska, MN. 55318 Lot 003, Block 001 Peter Schissel & Jody K. Hill 25.7920010 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3851 Red Cedar Point Road Searles Addition Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 001, Block 001 Kevin & Michelle Clark 25.7920020 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3841 Red Cedar Point Road Searles Addition • Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 002, Block 001 Michael A. & Mary B. Jurewicz 25.8600010 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3890 Lone Cedar Circle Trolls Glen 1st Add. Chanhassen, MN. 55317 Lot 001, Block 001 22 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT John & Verna Peterjohn 25.8600020 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3892 Lone Cedar Lane Trolls Glen 1st Add. Chaska, MN. 55317 Lot 002, Block 001 Joel & M. Anderson 25.8600030 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3894 Lone Cedar Circle Trolls Glen 1st Add. Chaska, MN. 55317 Lot 003, Block 001 Jerome S. & I. Ahlman 25.8600040 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3896 Lone Cedar Lane Trolls Glen 1st Add. Chaska, MN. 55317 Lot 004, Block 001 Terrance M. & Pamela Johnson 25.8600050 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3898 Lone Cedar Lane Trolls Glen 1st Add. Chaska, MN. 55317 Lot 005, Block 001 John P. & Merianne Merz 25.8600060 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3900 Lone Cedar Circle Trolls Glen 1st Add. Chaska, MN. 55317 Lot 001, Block 002 David L. & M. A. Tester 25.8600070 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3897 Lone Cedar Lane Trolls Glen 1st Add. Chaska, MN. 55317 Lot 002, Block 002 Ivan & Mildred Underdahl 25.8600080 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7502 West 77th Street Trolls Glen 1st Add. • Chaska, MN. 55317 Lot 003, Block 002 John Ferm & Ann Cathcart 25.8600090 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3895 Lone Cedar Circle Trolls Glen 1st Add. Chaska, MN. 55317 Lot 004, Block 002 M MB M I I MO MN au am as sr no Ns am ma imi In In MI ma e m um m— m— m E r me m r r a■ m i Om 23 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Irene Schnieder 25.8600100 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7501 - 77th Street, P.O. Box 103 Trolls Glen 1st Add. Chanhassen, MN. 55317 Lot 001, Block 003 Gordon & J. Freeburg 25.8600110 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3891 Lone Cedar Lane Trolls Glen 1st Add. Chaska, MN. 55318 Lot 002, Block 003 Michael Cornelison & Linda Trainor 25.8610010 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7512 - 77th Street West Trolls Glen 2nd Add. Chaska, MN. 55318 Lot 001, Block 001 Levin Seacer 25.8610020 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7510 - 77th Street West Trolls Glen 2nd Add. Chaska, MN. 55318 Lot 002, Block 001 Joseph & Paula Epping 25.8610030 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7508 - 77th Street West Trolls Glen 2nd Add. Chaska, MN. 55318 Lot 003, Block 001 David B & Diane V. Zamjahn 25.8610040 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7506 - 77th Street West Trolls Glen 2nd Add. Chaska, MN. 55318 Lot 004, Block 001 Robert F. & Faye L. Corson 25.8610050 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7504 - 77th Street West Trolls Glen 2nd Add. Chaska, MN. 55318 Lot 005,, Block 001 Verona C. Gordon 25.8610060 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7511 - 77th Street West Trolls Glen 2nd Add. Chaska, MN. 55318 Lot 001, Block 002 24 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT David & Amy Busch 25.8610070 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7509 - 77th Street West Trolls Glen 2nd Add. Chaska, MN. 55318 Lot 002, Block 002 Craig & Vicky Anderson 25.8610080 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7507 - 77th Street West Trolls Glen 2nd Add. Chaska, MN. 55318 Lot 003, Block 002 Willliam $ & Lisa A. Dilley 25.8610090 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3890 Forest Ridge Circle Trolls Glen 2nd Add. Chaska, MN. 55318 Lot 001, Block 003 Craig A. & Pamela A. Lamb 65.4800010 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7514 - 77th Street West Trolls Glen 3rd Add. Chaska, MN. 55318 Lot 001, Block 001 Karen C. Peterjohn 6504800020 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 123 Waters Edge Drive Trolls Glen 3rd Add. Chaska, MN. 55318 Lot 002, Block 001 Nelson L. & Susan M. Oot 65.4800030 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7518 - 77th Street West Trolls Glen 3rd Add. Chaska, MN. 55318 Lot 003, Block 001 Peter J. & Linda N. Fichuk 65.4800040 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7513 - 77th Street West Trolls Glen 3rd Add. Chaska, MN. 55318 Lot 001, Block 002 Dennis J. 7 Ronda K. Zattera 65.4800050 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7515 - 77th Street West Trolls Glen 3rd Add. P.O. Box 190 Lot 002, Block 002 Chaska, MN. 55318 NI MB In SU M MI NM 111111 NM M 11111 NS MI MI 111111 MN I 111111 IIIII r as am NE r r as r ow am um mg my rr r um um it No 25 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Don Holman & Bonnie Pederson Holman 25.8630010 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3887 Forest Ridge Circle Tolls Glen 4th Add. Chaska, MN. 55318 Lot 001, Block 001 Willard & Rhoda Aneson 25.8630020 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3885 Forest Ridge Circle Tolls Glen 4th Add. Chaska, MN. 55318 Lot 002, Block 001 Gregory W. Bernhardt 25.8630030 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3883 Forest Ridge Circle Tolls Glen 4th Add. Chaska, MN. 55318 Lot 003, Block 001 Dirk O. Peterjohn 25.8630040 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 4076 West Kestral Drive Tolls Glen 4th Add. Chaska, MN. 55318 Lot 004, Block 001 Craig & Any Hagberg 25.8630050 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3884 Forest Ridge Circle Tolls Glen 4th Add. Chaska, MN. 55318 Lot 005, Block 001 Lyndell F. & Lori A. Frey 25.8630060 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3886 Forest Ridge Circle Tolls Glen 4th Add. Chaska, MN. 55318 Lot 006, Block 001 Robert E. & Delcie Frolund 25.8630070 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3888 Forest Ridge Circle Tolls Glen 4th Add. Chaska, MN. 55318 Lot 007, Block 001 James F. & Delores Lipe 25.1700070 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3880 Lone Cedar Circle Cedar Crest Chaska, MN. 55318 Lot 007, Block 001 26 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Gary & Janet Mecus 25.1700080 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3861 Lone Cedar Circle Cedar Crest Chaska, MN. 55318 Lot 001, Block 002 Daniel Hudson & Kristen Kohls 25.1700090 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3881 Lone Cedar Circle Cedar Crest Chaska, MN. 55318 Lot 002, Block 002 Harvey L. & Suzanne D. Sobel 25.6500010 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 13331 Hillside Drive Red Cedar Cove Reno, NV 89503 Lot 001, Block 001 Paul A. & Florence K. Bailly 25.6500020 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7596 Jurrell Avenue West Red Cedar Cove Lakewood, CO 80226 Lot 002, Block 001 Wendell & Jacqueline Schott 25.6500030 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7034 Red Cedar Cove Red Cedar Cove Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 003, Block 001 James B & Patricia A. Bixler 25.6500040 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7038 Red Cedar Cove Red Cedar Cove Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 004, Block 001 Auretha J. Smith 25.6500050 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7044 Red Cedar Cove Red Cedar Cove Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 005, Block 001 Gary B & Nadine N. Nelson 25.6500060 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7048 Red Cedar Cove Red Cedar Cove Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 006, Block 001 MN MI • 11111111 MN 1111111 M I • MI IIIIM • MI NM MN MS all PM am — ow am — ma ow m— me i Ns — um me — r a a 27 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Ralph & Patricia Karczewski 25.6500070 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7054 Red Cedar Cove Red Cedar Cove Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 007, Block 001 Warren & Janet Rietz 25.6500080 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7058 Red Cedar Cove Red Cedar Cove Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 008, Block 001 David & Adelaide Prillaman 25.6500090 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7064 Reci Cedar Cove Red Cedar Cove Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 009, Block 001 Coy & Sandra Shelby 25.6500100 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7068 Red Cedar Cove Red Cedar Cove Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 010, Block 001 Robert & Judy Royer 25.6500110 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7074 Red Cedar Cove Red Cedar Cove Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 011, Block 001 John & Sarah Maney 25.6500120 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7078 Red Cedar Cove Red Cedar Cove Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 012, Block 001 Bernard R. & Alyce Fuller 25.6500130 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7075 Red Cedar Cove Red Cedar Cove • Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 013, Block 001 Donald & Barbara Bittermann 25.6500140 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7085 Red Cedar Cove Red Cedar Cove Chanhassen, MN. 55317 Lot 014, Block 001 28 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Louis A. & Luann Guthmueller 25.6500150 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7095 Red Cedar Cove Red Cedar Cove Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 015, Block 001 Timothy J. Fisher 25.6500160 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7099 Red Cedar Cove Red Cedar Cove Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 016, Block 001 James H. & Deborah J. Hofer 25.6500170 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7098 Red Cedar Cove Red Cedar Cove Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 017, Block 001 Fred N. Gordon & Eleva McDonald 25.6500180 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7096 Red Cedar Cove Red Cedar Cove Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 018, Block 001 Edwin & Livia Seim 25.6600010 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 Trusteem, Seim Family Trust Red Cedar Point 292 Charles Drive Lot 001, Block 001 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Kathleen Lockhart 25.6600020 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3618 Red Cedar Point Road Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 002, Block 001 Steven E. & Marsha E. Keuseman 25.6600030 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3622 Red Cedar Point Road Red Cedar Point • Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 3 & 4, Block 1 Eric L. & Linda M. Bauer 25.6600040 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3624 Red Cedar Point Road Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 005, Block 001 MI MI — M MI r all MN • MO • — NM — MI MI In S um we r ow as EN ow am we ow m am m um Es m or r- is 29 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Samuel & V. Potts 25.6600050 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3628 Red Cedar Point Road Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 41, 7 & 6, Block 1 James & P. Moore 25.6600060 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3630 Hickory Drive Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lots 40 & 8, Block 1 Gary Peterson 25.6600070 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 1769 - 20th Avenue N.W. Red Cedar Point St. Paul, MN. 55112 Lots 378 38 & 39; Lots 11, 10, 9, Block 1 Gregory Boher 25.6600080 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3706 Hickory Drive Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 032 to 36; Lots 12 to 16, Block 1 exc NW'LY 20' of Lot 16 Alfred & C. Smith 25.6600090 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 37.14 Hickory Road Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 017 Block 001 NW'LY 20' of Lot 16, Block 1 Marvin York 25.6600100 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3716 Hickory Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lots 18, 19 & 20, Block 1 Timothy J. Nelson & Dana E. Cooke 25.6600120 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3716 Hickory Lane Red Cedar Point Chanhassen, MN. 55317 Lots 22 & 23, Block 1 • 30 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Joan E. Rask 25.6600130 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3728 Hickory Road Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 024, Block 001, BK 64 Misc PG 357 Michael & Susan L. Morgan 25.6600140 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3734 Hickory Road Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lots 27 & 28, 'Block 1 Timothy J. & Debra M. Raidt 25.6600150 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3715 Hickory Road Red Cedar Point Chanhassen, MN. 55317 Lots 29, 30 & 31, Block 1 Roger L. & Dorothy P. Downing 25.6600160 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7200 Juniper Road, P.O. Box 651 Red Cedar Point Chanhassen, MN. 55317 Block 002, Lots 1,2,3 & 7 L.O. & Margaret Parsons & John L. Parsons 25.6600161 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3732 Hickory Road Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lots 026, Block 001 John L. Parsons 25.6600162 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3732 Hickory Road Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lots 010, Block 002 Mark Kronholm & Brenda Blaha 25.6600170 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3733 Hickory Road Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 004, Block 002 E 40 FT of Lot 20, Block 2 -= MI I• MI I- MI - NM I i MI w N PM P am am ow mg = as am r m MN MI MMO alli MMO MI M WM NM IIIII 31 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Kevin D. & Leann L. Gutzke 25.6600180 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3735 Hickory Avenue S.W. Red Cedar Point Chanhassen, MN. 55317 Lot 005, Block 002 W 40 FT of E 80 FT Lot 20 Block 2 K & W Properties 25.6600190 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 P.O. Box 275 Red Cedar Point Chaska, MN. 55318 Lot 006, Block 002 W 40 FT of Lot 20, Block 2 Long Huyna & Pamela Smith 25.600200 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3720 Red Cedar Point Road Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lots 11 to 13, Block 2 Fredric B & Arlene K. Herndon 25.6600210 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3750 Red Cedar Point Road Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lots 14 to 17, Block 2 Elizabeth J. Novak 25.6600220 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7210 Juniper Avenue Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lots 8 & 19, Block 2 Lots 9 & 13, Block 2 Gregory G. & Joan S. Dattilo 25.6600230 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7201 Juniper Avenue Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lots 1 to 5, Block 3 Thomas A. & Kathryn Paradise 25.6600231 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3755 Red Cedar Point Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lots 16 & 17, Block 3 CRV #4713 Doc #80561 32 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Tab & Kay Erickson 25.6600240 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3720 Cedar Drive South Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lots 6, 7 & 8 Block 3 Thomas A. & Kathryn Paradise 25.6600250 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3755 Red Cedar Point Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lots 9 to 15, Block 3 Richard G. Schlener 25.6600260 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 200 Commerce Circle South Red Cedar Point Minneapolis, MN. 55432 E 295 FT of Lot 1, Block 4 Thaddeus Schwaba Jr. 25.6600270 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3603 Red Cedar Point Road Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 W 225 FT Exc 25 FT of Lot 1 J. Donald C. Knight 25.6600280 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3605 Red Cedar Point Road Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 W 25 FT of Lots 1, 2 & E1 /2 of Lot 3, Block 4 Part of Vacated Road Douglas B. & Jamie Anderson 25.6600290 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3607 Red Cedar Point Road Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 4 and W 20' Lot 3, Block 4 and PT of Govt Lot 2 Lying Between NLY Extensions of W line Lot 4 & E Line W 20' Lot 3, Block 4 and Lying NLY of NLY line of Lots 3 & 4, CRV #7055 I 111111 1111111 1.1111 M 1.111 /11. 11111111 111. 111111 111111 mis m — — — Ns um — m — — — ■■il — — as a r am Me 33 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Paul & Jean Larson 25.6600300 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3609 Red Cedar Point Road Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lots 5 & 6 Block 4 Part of Vacated Road Lumir C. Proshek 25.6600310 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 5704 Dewey Hill Road Red Cedar Point Edina, MN. 55435 Lots 7 & 8, Block 4 Emil & P. Souba 25.6600320 1 $. 760.00 $ 760.00 14025 Vale Court Red Cedar Point Eden Prairie, MN. 55344 Lots 9 & 10, Block 4 Kathleen Lockhart 25.6600330 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3618 Red Cedar Point Road Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 011 Block 004 East 10 FT of Lot 12, Block 4 Biruta Dundurs 25.6600340 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3627 Red Cedar Point Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lots 13 & 12 Block 4 Exc E 10' of Lot 12 Linda L. Johnson 25.6600350 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3629 Red Cedar Point Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 014, Block 004 Chas. & Ada Anding 25.6600360 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3631 Red Cedar Point Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 015,. Block 004 E 10 FT of Lot 16, Block 4 34 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Helen Marie Anding 25.6600370 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 1708 East 57th Street Red Cedar Point Minneapolis, MN. 55417 E 10 FT of Lot 17, Block 4 Exc E 10 FT of Lot 16, Block 4 Chester & J. Lobitz 25.6600380 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3637 South Cedar Red Cedar point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Exc 10 FT of Lot 17; Lot 18, Block 4 Larry Vanderlinde 25.6600390 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 211 Chestnut Red Cedar Point Chaska, MN. 55318 Lots 19 & 20, Block 4 Nicholas F. Hawley 25.6600400 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 1920 South First Street,•Apt. 1 Red Cedar Point Minneapolis, MN. 55454 Lot 021, Block 004 Andrew L. Jensen 25.6600410 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 Box 227 Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 022, Block 004 David & Jill Hempel 25.6600420 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3707 South Cedar Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lots 23 & 24, Block 4 Warren B Horton & Jane E. Torgeson 25.6600430 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 • 3711 South Cedar Drive Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 025, Block 004 Clifford Pederson 25.6600440 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3713 South Cedar Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 026, Block 004, Exc W 30' of Lot 27, Block 4 n 111111 NM 11.1 MI NM MB MS En NM 111111 an NE al MN 1111111 1111. 11111 N O I M - - - • MI MI MN M• - r - - - 35 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Richard B & M. Anding 25.6600450 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3715 Cedar Drive South Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 028 & E'LY 30 FT Lot 27, Block 4 Kevin & Ann Eide 25.6600460 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3719 South Cedar Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lots 29, 30 & 31, Block 4 Tim Schweizer 25.6600470 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3725 South Cedar Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lots 32 -34, Block 4 William & Renee Haugh 25.6600480 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3727 South Cedar Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 035, Block 004, Part of Vacated Kirkham St. Nicholas F. Hawley 25.6600490 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 1920 South First Street, Apt. 1 Red Cedar Point Minneapolis, MN. 55454 Exc E 5 FT of Lot 1, Block 5 Chas. & Ada Anding 25.6600500 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3631 Red Cedar Point Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 002, Block 005 Nicholas F. Hawley 25.6600510 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 1920 South First Street, Apt. 1 Red Cedar Point Minneapolis, MN. 55454 Lot 11; Lots 3 to 6, Block 5 Gregory G. Dattilo 25.6600520 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7201 Juniper Avenue Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lots 6 & 7 Block 5 • 36 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION j OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Richard & Marianne Anding 25.6600530 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3713 Cedar Drive South Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lots 9 & 10, Block 5 City of Chanhassen 25.6600540 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 690 Coulter Drive Red Cedar Point Chanhassen, MN. 55317 Lot 001, Block 006 Pamela D. Lindquist 25.6600550 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3902 Colgate Avenue Red Cedar Point Minnetonka, MN. 55345 Lot 002, Block 006 Gary & Karen Peterson 25.6600560 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 1769 - 20th Avenue N.E. Red Cedar Point St. Paul, MN. 55112 Lots 3 to 6, Block 6 Kevin C. & Cynthia L. Cuddihy 25.8060010 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3900 Stratford Ridge Stratford Ridge Chanhassen, MN. 55317 Lot 001, Block 001 Allin M. & Shirley J. Karls 25.8060020 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3920 Stratford Ridge Stratford Ridge Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 002, Block 001 Robert & Debra Pirdill 25.8060030 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3940 Stratford Ridge Stratford Ridge Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 003, Block 001 Gregory E. & Patricia A. Adams 25.8060040 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3960 Stratford Ridge Stratford Ridge Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 004, Block 001 — N MI 1111111 NIIII IIIIII MI MI MI MI MI MI • • • I MO MI PM In me r NE — NE I No um we ow um am am m ow EN In MI 37 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Scott Morrow & Cynthia Houle 25.8060050 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3980 Stratford Ridge Drive Stratford Ridge Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 005, Block 001 Barton Wells 25.8060060 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 4000 Stratford Ridge Stratford Ridge Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 006, Block 001 William Naegele & Patricia Bruns 25.8060070 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 4001 Stratford Ridge Stratford Ridge Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 007, Block 001 Terry & Bonnie LaBatt 25.8060080 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3981 Stratford Ridge Stratford Ridge Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 008, Block 001 Keith & Kathryn Bedford 25.80600090 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3961 Stratford Ridge Stratford Ridge Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 009, Block 001 William Munig 25.8060100 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3850 Stratford Boulevard Stratford Ridge Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 010, Block 001 Charles & Cecelia Cruickshank 25.8060110 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3921 Stratford Ridge Stratford Ridge Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 001, Block 002 Douglas & Janet Reichert 25.8060120 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 8707 Kilbirnie Terrace Stratford Ridge Brooklyn Park, MN. 55443 Lot 002, Block 002 38 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Stephen and Erin Dillon 25.8060130 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3881 Stratfor Ridge Stratford Ridge Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 003, Block 002 Harold & Elaine Taylor 25.8060140 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3861 Stratfor Ridge Stratford Ridge Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 004, Block 002 Kevin R. & Suellyn Tritz 25.8060150 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 18464 Maple Leaf Drive Stratford Ridge Eden Prairie, MN. 55346 Lot 005, Block 002 Leo Janus & Marie Matthews 25.3800010 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3980 Hawthorne Circle Kellynne Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 001, Block 001 Edward V. & Judith A. Oathout 25.3800030 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3940 Hawthorne Circle Kellynne Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 003, Block 001 Edward Monser & Kathryn Howard 25.3800040 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3920 Hawthorne Circle Kellynne Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 004, Block 001 John P. & Marianne Merz 25.3800060 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3900 Lone Cedar Circle Kellynne Chaska, MN. 55318 Lot 002, Block 002 David & Sally Peterjohn 25.3800070 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3921 Hawthorne Circle Kellynne Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 003, Block 002 a 1111111 MI NM MINI MN MI NM I MO 10111 111111 NM INE MI MI In MI IMO r um am i mu I EN we Ns No w ■m um um me ow as in Nil 39 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Kenneth C. Durr 25.7700010 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 4830 Westgate Road Schmids Acres Minnetonka, MN. 55345 Lot 001 Craig C. Miller 25.7700020 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 6450 Minnewashta Parkway Schmids Acres Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 002 (Exc Part Deeded City of Chanhassen) Howard S. Boley 65.0071100 29 $• 760.00 $22,040.00 Westview Acres, Apt. 318 Sect 07 TWP 116, Range Waconia, MN. 55387 23, 26.98 Ac, 26.93 Acres in SE1 /4 Jerold & Jeanette Boley 65.0071200 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7414 Minnewashta Parkway Sect 07, TWP 116, Range Excelsior, MN. 55331 23 .90 Ac, .9 Acre in NE1 /4 of SE1 /4 Timothy S. & Lisa M. Braff 65.0072400 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7410 Minnewashta Parkway Sect 07, TWP 116, Range Excelsior, MN. 55331 23, 1.10 Ac; 1.10 Acres N 84.3' of East 547' of NEl /4 of SE1 /4 Terrence W. Rixe 65.0072500 4 $ 760.00 $ 3,040.00 7456 Minnewashta Parkway Sect 07, TWP 116, Range Excelsior, MN. 55331 23, 5.06 Ac; 5.06 Acres Beg in Center of MPLS & Glencoe Rd a PT 314.22' S TH W 345.17' TH S 24 W 219.3' TH S 25 *W 455.5' TH S 31* W 71.5.' TH E 323' to Centerline MPLS & Glencoe RD now known as 40 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Bryan & Melia Pike 65.0072900 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7411 Minnewashta Parkway Sect 07, TWP 116, Range Excelsior, MN. 55331 23, .31 Ac, .31 Acres PT of NE1 /4, SE1 /4 CRV #9985 Kenneth C. Durr 25.005100 7 $ 760.00 $ 5,320.00 4830 Westgate Road SECT -05 TWP -116, RANGE Minnetonka, MN. 55345 23, 7.92 AC, 7.92 ACRES IN LOT 4 & IN NW1 /4 HOGUE- 2482 PINELLAS POINT DRIVE • SO ST. PETERSBURG FL. 33705 Martin J. Foy 25.0051200 2 $ 760.00 $ 1,520.00 1300 - 8th Street West SECT -05 TWP -116 RANGE Kirkland, WA 98033 23, 2.17 AC., 2.17 AC IN S PART OF LOT 5 James M. & Jeffrey W. Kertson 25.0051500 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 6810 Minnewashta Parkway SECT -05 TWP116 RANGE 23, Excelsior, MN. 55331 1.34 AC, 1.34 ACRES PT OF S 100' OF GOVT LOT 5 LYING E OF A LINE DESC AS FOLLOWS BEG AT A PT ON S LINE GOVT LOT 5 594.2' E OF SW CORN TH N TO S LINE 100' AND THERE TERMINATING. James & R. Boylan 25.0051600 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 6760 Minnewashta Parkway SECT -05 TWP 116 RANGE 23 Excelsior, MN. 55331 2.53 ACRES IN S PT OF LOT 5 NIB MI NM MI IIIII In MN NM MO NMI MI m m um m m limm MN WM OM IMI M MN I 11111 MI NM NB An EN 41 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Dr. John J. Ziegler, Jr. 25.0051900 3 $ 760.00 $ 2,280.00 145 Mission Hill Way SECT -05 TWP 116 RANGE 23 Colorado Springs, CO. 80921 5 ACRES COMM AT SW CORN LOT 6 TH N 11 RODS TH E TO W SHORE OF LAKE MINNEWASHTA TH SLY ALONG LAKE TO SE CORN LOT 6 TH W 15.40 CHAINS TO PT OF BEG CONT 2.50 ACRES 8- 116 -23 BEG AT NW CORN SECT 8 TH E 6 RODS TH S Dr. John J. Ziegler, Jr. 25.0052000 33 $ 760.00 $25,080.00 145 Mission Hill Way SECT -05 TWP 116 RANGE 23 Colorado Springs, CO. 80921 3.56 A IN LOT 6 6 116 23 14.5 A IN SE1 /4 OF SE1 /4 4 Barbara M. Headla 25.0060100 6 $ 760.00 $ 4,560.00 6870 Minnewashta Parkway SECT -06 TWP -116 RANGE 23 Excelsior, MN. 55331 10 ACRES 5.5 A IN SE1 /4 OF SE1 /4 115 23 4.5 A IN LOT 6 4 Nancy H. Wenzel 25.0060200 18 $ 760.00 $13,680.00 6900 Minnewashta Parkway SECT -06 TWP -116 RANGE 23 Excelsior, MN. 55331 10.5 ACRES IN SE1 /4 OF SE1 /4 5 116 23 4.5 A IN LOT 6 4 Joann Hallgren 25.0060300 28 $ 760.00 $21,280.00 6860 Minnewashta Parkway SECT -06 TWP 116 RANGE 23 Excelsior, MN. 55331 11.5 ACRES PT OF SE1 /4 SE1 /4 LYING N OF THE FOLLOW DESC LINE: A LINE PARALLEL TO A LINE AND 215' N THEREOF RUNNING FROM A PT IN W LINE SE1 /4 SE1 /5 510.0' S OF NW CORN TO E TO LINE QUATER SECT 604.4' S OF NE • 42 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Daniel & Brenda Lee Roy 25.0070100 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7400 Minnewashta Parkway SECT 07 TWP 116 RANGE 23 Excelsior, MN. 55331 .90 AC, .9 ACRE S 75' OF 547' OF SE1 /4 OF NE1 /4 Howard Boley 25.0070200 39 $ 760 $29,640.00 Westview Acres - Apt. 318 SECT -07 TWP -116 RANGE -23 Waconia, MN. 55387 40 ACRES IN SE1 /4 OF NE1 /4 & LOT 3 Jerry L. & K. Kortgard 25.0070300 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3901 Glendale SECT -07 TWP -116 RANGE -23 Excelsior, MN. 55331 15.62 ACRES LOT 2 EXC THE N 40 RODS CRV #11685 Kristin & Jerry Kortgard 25.0070400 5 $ 760.00 $ 3,800.00 3901 Glendale Drive SECT 07 TWP -116 RANGE -23 Excelsior, MN. 55331 4 ACRES IN GOV LOT 2 Linda Scott & Susan Morgan 25.0070500 4 $ 760.00 $ 3,040.00 4031 Kings Road SECT 07 TWP -116 RANGE -23 Excelsior, MN. 55331 8 ACRES IN LOT 2 COMM AT NE CORN LOT 2, TH WALONG N LINE 528' TO E LINE LOT 2, TH N ALONG E LINE 660' TO PT OF BEG. Lowell & J. Carlson 25.0070600 8 $ 760.00 $ 6,080.00 Route 1, Box 822A SECT 07 TWP -116 RANGE -23 Excelsior, MN. 55331 LOT 002 6 ACRES IN LOT 2 111111 MI MN MN IIIIII NM .1111 1111111 MI IMO MO r i r O ® MO MO MI S - A - i _ - MO - - 43 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT David & Margaret Borris 25.0070700 2 $ 760.00 $ 1,520.00 4071 Kings Road SECT 07 TWP -116 RANGE -23 Excelsior, MN. 55331 2 ACRES W 132' OF E 660' OF NE1 /4 NE1 /4 John P Baumtrog 25.0080400 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7141 Minnewashta Parkway SECT 08 TWP -116 RANGE -23 Excelsior, MN. 55331 .38 AC IN LOT 1 Daryl & Debra Kirt 25.0080600 2 $ 760.00 $ 1,520.00 50 Hill Street SECT 08 TWP -116 RANGE -23 Chanhassen, MN. 55317 6.27 ACRES BEG. AT NW CORN SECT 8 TH E 199' TO PT OF BEG TH CONTINUE E 471' TO CENTER CO RD 3 TH RUN S 6* W ALONG CENTERLINE OF RD 516.3' TH S 13* W 197.8' WHICH IS OPPOSITE THE RED CEDAR POINT RD TH RUN NWLY TO Louis & G Zakariasen 25.0080700 3 $ 760.00 $ 2,280.00 3861 Red Cedar Point SECT 08 TWP -116 RANGE -23 Excelsior, MN. 55331 2.66 ACRES 1 A IN LOT 1 & 1.66 A IN LOT 1 Horace & June Leach 25.0081000 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3840 Red Cedar Point SECT 08 TWP -116 RANGE -23 Excelsior, MN. 55331 .83 ACRES IN LOT 1 Bernard & Helen Leach 25.0081100 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3830 Red Cedar Point SECT 08 TWP -116 RANGE -23 Excelsior, MN. 55331 .83 ACRES IN LOT 1 44 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Mark & Donna Malinowski 25.0081400 3 $ 760.00 $ 2,280.00 7250 Minnewashta Parkway SECT 08 TWP -116 RANGE -23 Excelsior, MN. 55331 5.50 ACRES THE S 900' OF THE FOLLOW DESC TRACT: THAT PART OF GOV LOTS 1 AND 3 LYING N OF A LINE DRAWN PARALLEL WITH 726' N OF THE S LINE GOVT LOT 3 AND W OF THE CENTERLINE CO RD 3 EXC THAT PORTION LYING WITHIN THE R -O -W Peter M. Benjamin & Carla M. Campbell 25.0081500 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 6032 Xerxes Avenue South SECT -08 TWP -116 RANGE 23 Edina, MN. 55435 .40 AC SLY 100' OF THE FOLLOW DESC TRACT: PT OF GOVT LOTS 1 & 3 LYING S OF CENTER RED CEDAR PT RD E OF CENTER CO RD #3 N OF A LINE DRAWN PARALLEL WITH & 1093.4' N OF S LINE OF GOVT LOT 3 & W OF LINE DRAWN FROM PT IN PARALLEL LINE SAID PT James & Arlene Connor 25.0081600 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3901 Red Cedar Point SECT 08 TWP -116 RANGE -23 Excelsior, MN. 55331 .74 ACRE IN LOTS 1 & 3 Gary & Diane Cobb 25.0081700 2 $ 760.00 $ 1,520.00 3859 Red Cedar Point SECT 08 TWP -116 RANGE -23 Excelsior, MN. 55331 1.75 ACRE IN LOTS 1 & 3 Edward M Alderman 25.0081900 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3921 Red Cedar Point SECT 08 TWP -116 RANGE -23 Excelsior, MN. 55331 1 ACRE IN LOTS 1 & 3 all MN 11110 MOIN ® M 11= IIIIII WM 11011 Miii N MI OM OMM O WM MO M MI M M OM O M M MO O MI MO OM UN 45 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Thomas & Mary Mann 25.0082000 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7211 Minnewashta Parkway SECT 08 TWP -116 RANGE -23 Excelsior, MN. 55331 1.14 ACRE IN LOTS 1 & 3 Thomas & Mary Mann 25.0082100 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7211 Minnewashta Parkway SECT 08 TWP -116 RANGE -23 Excelsior, MN. 55331 .6 ACRE IN LOT 3 Robert C. & Ann Osborne 25.0082200 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3921 Red Cedar Point Drive SECT 08 TWP -116 RANGE -23 Excelsior, MN. 55331 1.5 ACRE IN LOT 3 Peter Moe & S. C. Fuhrman 25.0082300 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7141 Minnewashta Parkway SECT 08 TWP -116 RANGE -23 Excelsior, MN. 55331 .76 ACRE IN GOVT LOT 3 CRV #5952 James O. & Frances Borchart 25.0082500 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7331 Minnewashta Parkway SECT 08 TWP -116 RANGE -23 Excelsior, MN. 55331 1.20 ACRES IN LOT 3 BK 174 PG 433 Stephen & Sandra Bainbridge 25.0082600 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7351 Minnewashta Parkway SECT 08 TWP -116 RANGE -23 Excelsior, MN. 55331 1 ACRE PT OF GOVT LOT 3 DESC AS FOLLOWS: COMM AT A PT ON CENTERLINE CO RD 701' N OF S LINE GOVT LOT 3 TH E 146.2' TO A PT 465' E OF W LINE LOT 3 TH S 300' TH E PARALLEL TO AND 401' N 0 S LINE OF LOT 3 TO 46 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Wilmer & M. Larson 25.0082800 3 $ 760.00 $ 2,280.00 7380 Minnewashta Parkway SECT 08 TWO 116 RANGE 23 Excelsior, MN. 55331 5.05 ACRES PT OF GOVT LOT 3 DESC AS FP;PWS" COMM AT SW CORN LOT 3 TH N 11 CHAINS TH E TO MINNEWASHTA LAKE TH SWLY ALONG LAKE SHORE TO S LINE LOT 3 TH W TO PT OF BEG EXC THAT PT LYING ELY OF CENTERLINE OF CO RD • Donald & Colleen Linke 25.0082900 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7301 Minnewashta Parkway SECT 08 TWP -116 RANGE -23 Excelsior, MN. 55331 1.37 ACRES THAT PT OF THE N 175' OF THE S 726' OF GOVT LOT 3 WHICH LIES E OF THE W 520' OF GOVT LOT 3 AND SLY OF A LINE DESC AS FOLLOWS: COMM AT NE CORN OF S 726' OF W 520' OF GOVT LOT E TH S 11.91' ALONG A Kenneth W. & R. Smith 25.0083000 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3837 Red Cedar Point SECT 08 TWP -116 RANGE -23 Excelsior, MN. 55331 1.05 ACRES IN LOT 3 PT OF VACATED KIRKHAM ST Byran & Melia Pike 25.0083100 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7411 Minnewashta Parkway SECT 08 TWP -116 RANGE -23 Excelsior, MN. 55331 .66 ACRE PT OF GOVT LOT 4 CRVE #9985 Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran 65.20000010 2 $ 760.00 $ 1,520.00 Box 373 Cedar Crest Outlot 3 Excelsior, MN. 55331 a MI M -- In NM MI M— i — 111111 MN MI MI WS MI MN V' NM NM MI MS MI all MI MI i MI n MI e NI 47 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Jim & Susan Gulstrand 25.8770010 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3831 Red Cedar Point Drive Way Addition Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 1, Block 1 Michael & Cynthia Wenner 25.8770020 2 $ 760.00 $ 1,520.00 3801 Red Cedar Point Drive Way Addition Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 2, Block 1 Dana & Nancy Johnson 25.87440010 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 50 Pleasant Lane West Washta Bay Court Tonka Bay, MN. 55331 Lot 1 Kenneth & Diane Lund 25.8740020 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 395 Highway 7 Washta Bay Court Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 2 Joseph & Julia Paar 25.4980010 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 1393 Berkeley Avenue Minnewashta Highlands St. Paul, MN. 55105 Lot 1 Robert & Shelly Lenzen 25.4980020 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3920 Minnewashta Court Minnewasshta Highlands Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 2 Kenneth & Gladys Bloomquist 25.4980030 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 6216 Yukon Avenue North Minnewashta Highlands Brooklyn Park, MN. 55428 Lot 3 Mark Robinson 25.4980040 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 7371 Minnewashta Parkway Minnewashta Highlands Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 4 48 PARCEL #/ COST TOTAL NAME AND ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT ASSESSMENT Kenneth & Kelly Steinmetz 25.4980050 1 $ 760.00 $ 760.00 3931 Minnewashta Court Minnewashta Highlands Excelsior, MN. 55331 Lot 5 MI MN 11/11 MN IIIII 1.111 MI IIIIII NM IIIIII . IIIIII 1111111 all illil 111111 11111111 all al um . 6a), 90-Ic II NOTICE OF ASSESSMENT HEARING CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA II U NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Chanhassen City Council will meet at 7:30 p.m. on Monday, October 11, 1993 at the City Hall Council Chambers to pass upon the proposed assessment for the Minnewashta Parkway S.A.P. 194 - 111 -01, Street, Storm Sewer, and 1 Walkway Improvements, T.H. 5 to T.H. 7. Abutting properties and those properties deriving benefit from this project are proposed to be assessed. Specifically, properties to be assessed include: II 25- 2510010 through 25- 2510270 25- 7450010 through 25- 7450030 25- 4100010 through 25- 4100020 25- 7920010 through 25- 7920020 II 25- 4800010 through 25- 4820120 25- 8600010 through 25- 8610090 25- 6150010 through 25- 6150710 6514800010 through 65- 4800050 II 25- 4450010 through 25- 4450130 25- 8630010 through 25- 8630070 25- 1700070 through 25- 1700090 25- 7700010 through 25- 7700020 1 25- 6500010 through 25- 6500180 25- 8770010 through 25- 8770020 25- 6600010 through 25- 6600560 25- 8740010 through 25- 8740020 1 25- 8060010 through 25- 8060150 25- 4980010 through 25- 4980050 25- 3800010 through 25- 3800070 65- 2000010 65- 0071100 25- 0051100 25- 0052000 25- 0070200 II 65- 0071200 25- 0051200 25- 0060100 25- 0070300 65- 0072400 25- 0051500 25- 0060200 25- 0070400 II 65- 0072500 25- 0051600 25- 0060300 25- 0070500 65- 0072900 25- 0051900 25- 0070100 25- 0070600 II 25- 0070700 25- 0081100 25- 0081900 25- 0082500 25- 0080400 25- 0081400 25- 0082000 25- 0082600 II 25- 0080600 25- 0081500 25- 0082100 25- 0082200 25- 0082800 25- 0080700 25- 0081600 25- 0082900 25- 0083000 25- 0081000 25- 0081700 25- 0082300 II 25- 0083100 II The proposed assessment is on file for public inspection in the office of the City Engineer. The total project cost to be assessed is-$ 402,800.00 Written and oral objections will be considered I at the meeting, but the Council may consider any objections to the amount of a proposed individual assessment at an adjourned meeting upon such further notice to the affected property owners as it II deems advisable. Page 1 of 2 II x TT,9e'h/��t - 4/7 - o. � 2 1 1. An owner may appeal an assessment to the District Court pursuant to 1 Minnesota Statute Section 429.081 by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or City Clerk of the City of Chanhassen within thirty (30) days after the adoption of the assessment and filing such notice with the District Court within ten (10) days after service upon the Mayor or City Clerk. No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any assessment adopted unless a WRITTEN NOTICE signed by the affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing. Residents who are 65 years or age or older, or retired by reason of permanent and total disability may apply to have payment of the assessment deferred. The application shall be made to the City Clerk within thirty (30) days after the adoption of the assessment roll by the City Council. 1 Don Ashworth City Clerk /Manager 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Page 2 of 2 II S-::---A1-1(17-1—P— _ is II CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA SPECIAL ASSESSMENT NOTICE II IMPROVEMENT NO: 90 -15 The City Council will hold a public hearing to consider proposed II assessments for Improvement Project No. S.A.P No. 194 - 111 - 01, on Monday, October 11, 1993 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at 690 Coulter Drive, Chanhassen, Minnesota. The area to be assessed II includes Minnewashta Parkway, T.H. 5 to T.H. 7, Street, Storm Sewer and Walkway Improvements. The total amount of the proposed assessment is $ 402,800.00. your assessment has been calculated in accordance with the City Council's policy as follows: II Property Owner: Address: II Parcel No: Proposed Assessment Against Your Property as Described Below: 1 Specific Improvements Amount II Street, Storm Sewer and Walkway Improvements Assessment may be paid in full without interest or other charges within thirty (30) days after the assessment hearing date. These payments may be made in person or may be mailed to Chanhassen City Hall, 690 Coulter Drive, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317, Attention: Treasurer. Please indicate the parcel number on your I check. Partial prepayment of the assessment is permitted. If you elect not to pay the full amount within thirty (30) days II after the hearing date, the assessment will be spread over 8 years with installments appearing on your real estate taxes beginning next year. Interest will be included at the rate of 7 -112 II percent of the unpaid balance. The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk. Written and oral objections to the proposed assessment by any I property owner will be considered. No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any assessment adopted t unless a written objection signed by the affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing. II 1 Page 2 1 All written objections to the assessment not received prior to or at the assessment hearing in the above manner are waived, unless failure to object prior to or at the assessment hearing is due to a reasonable cause. An owner may appeal an assessment to the District Court pursuant to Minnesota Statute Section §429.081 by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or City Clerk of the City of Chanhassen within thirty (30) days after the adoption of the assessment and filing such notice with the District Court within ten (10) days after service upon the Mayor or City Clerk. Residents who are 65 years of age or older, or retired by reason of permanent and total disability may apply to have payment of the assessment deferred. The application shall be made to the City Clerk within thirty (30) days after the adoption of the assessment roll by the City Council. City staff will be available between the hours of 8 :00 a.m. to 1 4:30 p.m. weekdays until the time of the public hearing to answer questions about the proposed assessments. You may also telephone City staff at (612) 937 -1900. You will be notified by mail of any , Council in interest rates, prepayment h requirements d orr the of the adopted assessments from those contained in this notice. 1 Don Ashworth City Clerk /Manager 1 City of Chanhassen, Minnesota 1 1 1 1 1 1 I ,47 s-Air A/0. ii q0--1`-) il az)2x2-Jr - ' II CITY OF CHANHASSEN 1 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE II STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss II COUNTY OF CARVER ) II I, Karen J. Engelhardt, being first duly sworn, on oath II deposes that she is and was on SEPTEMBER 23 , 19 93 , the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chan- II hassen, Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR II MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT OJ CT N0. 90 -15 1 to the persons named on attached Exhibit "A ", by enclosing a copy 1 of said notice in an envelope addressed to such owner, and 1 depositing the envelopes addressed to all such owners in the United States mail with postage fully prepaid thereon; that the • II names and addresses of such owners were those appearing as such by the records of the County Treasurer, Carver County, Minnesota, 1 and by other appropriate records. II 2 II /------ K r J. g =lhar t Deputy Clerk Subscribed and sworn to II before me this 23RD day of SEPTEMBER , 1993 + � t �+ �� T. MEUWISSEP� � v %) 1 s NOTARY KIM P UBL;C— MINNESOTA 1 ' CARVER COUNTY 4 1 �� r }i CA t o `( : 'i %�� %ate 1 _,. N otary p L1�j l i C 4.! MY Commiss[on Expires MAY 29, 1998 + '' 1 2 5-2 510 010 25- 2510020 25- 2510030 DARCY L HANUS & LOREN H BEAUDOIN SAMPSON & SUSAN MUGRDECHI DEAN A SWANSON 13 SPRING VALLEY CIRCLE 3960 COUNTRY OAKS DR 3940 COUNTRY OAKS DRIVE BLOOMINGTON MN 55420 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 2510040 25- 2510050 25- 2510060 I LOREN H BEAUDOIN LYNN D & NANCY K SIMPSON LOREN H BEAUDOIN 133 SPRING VALLEY CIRCLE 2980 COUNTRY OAKS DRIVE 133 SPRING VALLEY CIRCLE I BLOOMINGTON MN 55420 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 BLOOMINGTON MN 55420 25- 2510070 25- 2510080 25- 2510090 1 KEVIN & KRISTEN MARX LEGEND HOMES INC MARK & JULIE GRUBE 4000 COUNTRY OAKS DRIVE 21151 JOHN MILLES DR 3931 COUNTRY OAKS DR EXCELSIOR MN 55331 PO BOX 298 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 I ROGERS MN 55374 25- 2510100 25- 2510110 25- 2510120 111 CRAIG & LINDA MACK LOREN H BEAUDION LOREN H BEAUDION 3941 COUNTRY OAKS DR 133 SPRING VALLEY CIRCLE 133 SPRING VALLEY CIRCLE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 BLOOMINGTON MN 55420 BLOOMINGTON MN 55420 1 25- 2510130 25- 2510140 25- 2510150 LOREN H BEAUDION LOREN H BEAUDION LOREN H BEAUDION I 133 SPRING VALLEY CIRCLE 133 SPRING VALLEY CIRCLE 133 SPRING VALLEY CIRCLE BLOOMINGTON MN 55420 BLOOMINGTON MN 55420 BLOOMINGTON MN 55420 _ 25- 2510160 25- 2510170 25- 2510180 1 BRUCE & JENNIFER LINN TODD & FRANCINE BOYCE LOREN H BEAUDOIN 4001 COUNTRY OAKS DR 4011 COUNTRY OAKS DR 133 SPRING VALLEY CIRCLE 111 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 BLOOMINGTON MN 55420 25- 2510190 25- 2510200 25- 2510210 1 LOREN H BEAUDOIN LOREN H BEAUDOIN LEGEND HOMES INC 133 SPRING VALLEY CIRCLE 133 SPRING VALLEY CIRCLE 21151 JOHN MILLES DR I BLOOMINGTON MN 55420 BLOOMINGTON MN 55420 PO BOX 298 ROGERS MN 55374 25- 2510220 25- 2510230 25- 2510240 , LEGEND HOMES INC LEGEND HOMES INC SCOTT FOLSOM & 21151 JOHN MILLES DR 21151 JOHN MILLES DR SANDRA SCHOENECK PO BOX 298 PO BOX 298 6750 COUNTRY OAKS RD I ROGERS MN 55374 ROGERS MN 55374 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 2510250 25- 2510260 25- 2510270 LOREN H BEAUDOIN LOREN H BEAUDOIN LOREN H BEAUDOIN 133 SPRING VALLEY CIRCLE 133 SPRING VALLEY CIRCLE 133 SPRING VALLEY CIRCLE BLOOMINGTON MN 55420 BLOOMINGTON MN 55420 BLOOMINGTON MN 55420 1 25- 4100010 25- 4100020 25- 4800010 ROY A LEACH RICHARD H & D COMER TIMOTHY & MARY COLLERAN 1 3900 RED CEDAR POINT RD 3800 RED CEDAR POINT RD 6560 MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 1 1 25- 4800020 25-4800030 5 800030 25- 4810010 CHARLES F & VICKI L THOMAS & MARY ALLENBURG TERRANCE THOMPSON SR ING 6621 MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY 3820 LINDEN CIRCLE 1 MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 1 25- 4810020 25- 4810030 25- 4810040 LOUIS C & CAROL J THOMAS KRUEGER VINCENT & JANICE II It VANEPS 3860 LINDEN CIRCLE FEUERSTEIN 840 LINDEN CIRCLE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 3880 LINDEN CIRCLE XCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 1 - 4810050 25- 4810060 25- 4810070 AVID W & JULIE ANN BILL HAGUE & MICHAEL F & JOAN M TERPSTRA BRIAN L WINDSCHITL SKALLMAN gp581 JOSHUA CIRCLE 6591 JOSHUA CIRCLE 6590 JOSHUA CIRCLE XCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 5- 4810080 25- 4810090 25- 4810100 NNETH C & BETTY STEVEN M & JOANN M BRYAN W & NANCY J NMANN SWAM HUBER 6580 JOSHUA CIRCLE 6576 JOSHUA CIRCLE 3910 LINDEN CIRCLE 1 XCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 4810110 25- 4810120 25- 4810130 11 1 ARK ORTNER ALAN R & DIANE REUTELER RICHARD E & BONNIE G 920 LINDEN CIRCLE 3930 LINDEN CIRCLE LARSON XCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 3940 LINDEN CIRCLE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 I 5- 4810140 25- 4810150 25- 4810160 MARION J PECK STEPHEN J UNDIS MARTHA HELBERG /JULIA WALLACE 11950 LINDEN CIRCLE 3951 LINDEN CIRCLE 3941 LINDEN CIRCLE RXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 5- 4810170 25- 4810180 25- 4810190 N L NELSON THOMAS & LINDA L SANDER HARRY A & CHRISTINE A 3931 LINDEN CIRCLE 3921 LINDEN CIRCLE DRAHOS I XCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 3911 LINDEN CIRCLE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 5- 4810200 25- 4810210 25- 4810220 HN W & NANCY A LESTER & CYNTHIA FLOYD MARION A OLIN NELSON 6570 KIRKWOOD CIRCLE 6540 KIRKWOOD CIRCLE 11 891 LINDEN CIRCLE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 XCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 4810230 25- 4810240 25- 4810250 III & PEGGY A WILLIAM D & CONNIE JAMES C & LUANN R AM HARDWICK STEWART 6520 KIRKWOOD CIRCLE 6541 KIRKWOOD CIRCLE 6551 KIRKWOOD CIRCLE I XCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 4810260 25- 4810270 25- 4810280 ENE & NANCY CHRISTENSEN FRANK & THERESA GUSTAFSON MICHAEL L & REBECCA 61 KIRKWOOD CIRCLE 6571 KIRKWOOD CIRCLE MCMILLEN XCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 3861 LINDEN CIRCLE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 1 1 25- 4810290 25- 4810300 25- 4820010 BLAKE BOGEMA THOMAS & DEBRA MODEEN JAMES C & LOIS M ZASKE 3841 LINDEN CIRCLE 12701 PIONEER TRAIL 3960 LINDEN CIRCLE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55344 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 4820020 25- 4820030 25- 4820040 I THOMAS & JULIE ANN FLEMMING DAVID & TRACY LUNDQUIST KENNETH WICKLUND & 3966 LINDEN CIRCLE 3969 LINDEN CIRCLE ANDREA GOLAND EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 3970 LINDEN CIRCLE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 4820050 25- 4820060 25- 4820070 1 DANA NELSON SCOTT & CAROLINE VINCENT JOHNSON 3967 LINDEN CIRCLE MORTENSEN 6510 KIRKWOOD CIRCLE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 3961 LINDEN CIRCLE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 I EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 4820080 25- 4820090 25- 4820100 I THOMAS & MICHELE J D INVESTMENTS J D INVESTMENTS MUEHLBERG 15500 WAYZATA BLVD 15500 WAYZATA BLVD 6508 KIRKWOOD CIRCLE #1029 #1029 I EXCELSIOR MN 55331 WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 25- 4820110 25- 4820120 25- 6150010 LUANN M FALENCZYKOWSKI LUANN M FALENCZYKOWSKI LEE ANDERSON I 6274 GINGER DRIVE 6274 GINGER DRIVE PLEASANT ACRES HOME EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55346 EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55346 OWNERS ROUTE 1 I EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 6150020 25- 6150030 25- 6150040 LEE ANDERSON LEE ANDERSON LEE ANDERSON I PLEASANT ACRES HOME PLEASANT ACRES HOME PLEASANT ACRES HOME OWNERS OWNERS OWNERS ROUTE 1 ROUTE 1 ROUTE 1 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 6150050 25- 6150060 25- 6150070 III LEE ANDERSON EDWARD & ELIZABETH LUCAS J D & A M BENNYHOFF PLEASANT ACRES HOME 3941 LESLEE CURVE 3931 LESLEE CURVE I OWNERS EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 ROUTE 1 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 6150080 25- 6150090 25- 6150100 1 MOUNT OLIVET ROLLING ACRES TOD E & SUSAN M BRUCE F DREBLOW & 7200 ROLLING ACRES ROAD SCHILLING DIANE J YEAGER EXCELSIOR MN 55331 3911 LESLEE CURVE 3901 LESLEE CURVE I EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 6150110 25- 6150120 25- 6150130 I DIANNE E BARTZ DONOVAN BULEN VINCENT & B DECKER 3881 LESLEE CURVE 3871 LESLEE CURVE 3861 LESLEE CURVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 I 25- 6150140 25- 6150150 25- 6150160 MARK D ROGERS & MARY DALE F & R MENTEN PETER & LOLA WARHOL KNUTSON 6630 MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY 3831 LESLEE CURVE 3851 LESLEE CURVE • EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 1 25-6150190 _ 1 25-6150180 25 6150190 25 6150200 DONALD & BETTY BRANDT CHARLES R & CYNTHIA DANA NICHOLSON 801 LESLEE CURVE HULTNER _ 3910 LESLEE CURVE XCELSIOR MN 55331 3900 LESLEE CURVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 1 25- 6150210 25- 6150220 25- 6150230 PAUL R & ELIZABETH A LEONARD H & S HEIN RALPH M & C RIDDLE CHEELE 3930 LESLEE CURVE 4000 LESLEE CURVE 920 LESLEE CURVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 XCELSIOR MN 55331 � 5- 6150240 25- 6150250 25- 6150260 RENT & KATHY DAVIS BETTY A•CARLSON CLIFFORD & VIRGINIA 4010 LESLEE CURVE 4020 LESLEE CURVE HEINZEN I XCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 4011 CRESTVIEW DRIVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 5- 6150270 25- 06150280 25- 6150290 RADFORD GOAR GARY E & MARY A GARY W & AMY BACHLER 224 AQUILA AVE NO NUNNALLY 3911 CRESTVIEW DRIVE CRYSTAL MN 55427 3921 CRESTVIEW DRIVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 1 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 6150300 25- 6150310 25- 6150320 RAIG R & MARY L THOMAS R & KAREN J MICHAEL L & CAROL D OURTNEY ERDMANN CECKO 901 CRESTVIEW DRIVE 3900 CRESTVIEW DRIVE 3910 CRESTVIEW DRIVE XCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 15-6150330 25- 6150340 25- 6150350 RICHARD & BEVERLY STEPHEN & MARY ALDRITT MICHAEL D KAMMERER & MCNSMAN 3946 CRESTVIEW DRIVE GREGG D KRUSE 11920 CRESTVIEW DRIVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 4000 CRESTVIEW DRIVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 I 5- 6150360 25- 6150370 25- 6150380 AN T & DEBRA AMENT VERNON R & JOAN D LEE R ANDERSON 4010 CRESTIVEW DRIVE ISHAM 6651 MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY IXCELSIOR MN 55331 4030 LESLEE CURVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 5- 6150390 25- 6150400 25- 6150410 I ATRICK & PATRICIA FAUTH FLOYD & DONNA LARSEN RANDOLPH C COLE 4011 GLENDALE DR 4001 GLENDALE DRIVE 3931 GLENDALE DR I XCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 6150420 25- 6150430 25- 6150440 ANDY & LORNA HILL CONLIFFE CHARLES & MARY COLLEEN JERRY L & K KORTGARD 921 GLENDALE DR WEBER 3901 GLENDALE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 3911 GLENDALE DRIVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 1 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 6150450 25- 6150451 25- 6150460 ARBARA MURPHY DENSLOW STEVEN & LAURIE ERICKSON JJ & JB FROEHLING 860 LESLEE CURVE 3850 LESLEE CURVE 3840 LESLEE CURVE XCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 1 25- 6150470 25- 6150480 25- 6150490 LESTER C JR & N HARRY M JR & E DUNN DAVID & SUSAN LOCKWOOD ANDERSON P 0 BOX 343 _ 3810 LESLEE CURVE 6200 BEARD PLACE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55410 25- 6150500 25- 6150510 25- 6150520 I WARREN C MACFARLANE III LARRY P & LORI LAWRENCE & TERRIE SHERMAN & JEANNE A MACFARLANE LANGSWEIRDT 3821 GLENDALE DRIVE 111 3800 LESLEE CURVE 3811 GLENDALE DRIVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 6150530 25- 6150540 25- 6150550 I PATRICK M RUSH & ROBIN CHARLES W CROSBY JR DIRK & MARGARET YOUNG THOMPSON 3820 MAPLE CIRCLE 3830 MAPLE CIRCLE 3810 MAPLE CIRCLE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 I EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 6150560 25- 6150570 25- 6150580 I BRADLEY BROCKPAHLER MICHAEL R RYAN & ELLEN RICHARD E BELLERT 3840 MAPLE CIRCLE J HEM -RYAN 6641 MAPLE CIRCLE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 3850 MAPLE CIRCLE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 1 25- 6150590 25- 6150600 25- 6150610 LEE ANDERSON TIMOTHY & TERESA GARY R VOIGHT I PLEASANT ACRES HOME OWNERS SHERIDAN 4010 GLENDALE DRIVE ROUTE 1 4020 GLENDALE DRIVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 I 25- 6150620 25-6150630 25- 6150640 RICHARD & ROSALEE STEVEN & JAMIE KNIGGE NICHOLAS & REBECCA FOLWICK ST ANGELO 3910 GLENDALE DRIVE 3920 GLENDALE DRIVE I 4000 GLENDALE DRIVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 6150650 25- 6150660 25- 6150670 1 TONY TORNTORE JEROME H & ALICE R ZOE K BROS 3930 GLENDALE DRIVE JOHNSON 6631 MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY • EXCELSIOR MN 55331 39 40 GLENDALE DRIVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 6150680 25- 6150690 25- 6150700 I JAMES A & JEAN WAY LEE ANDERSON JAMES P & BARBARA LARKIN 6641 MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY PLEASANT ACRES HOME OWNERS 6671 MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY EXCELSIOR MN 55331 ROUTE 1 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 1 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 6150710 25- 6150720 25- 4450020 ROBERT M & PATRICIA A DAVID B & LORI J FREE KIRK EDWARDS I JOSEPH 3921 MAPLE SHORES DRIVE 3911 MAPLE SHORES DRIVE 6701 MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 1 25- 4450030 25- 4450040 25- 4450050 ROBBY & SUSAN SEGAL BRADLEY D & BONNIE J SCOTT D & PAMELA M 3901 MAPLE SHORES DRIVE STRAKA HOWARD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 3881 MAPLE SHORES DRIVE 3861 MAPLE SHORES DRIVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 I -125- 4450060 25- 4450070 25- 4450080 GERALD E & MELANIE RAYMOND BERRY MARK & CONNIE STANLEY WELLY 3830 MAPLE SHORES DRIVE 3850 MAPLE SHORES DRIVE 841 MAPEL SHORES DR EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 It 5-4450090 25- 4450100 25- 4450110 USAN JASIN DAVID & BARBARA SCOULER JAMES STEWART 425 CHAN VIEW #312 3890 MAPLE SHORES DR 4650 MAPLE STREET 'CHANHASSEN MN 55317 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 ROCKFORD MN 55373 5- 4450120 25- 4450130 25- 7450010 MOTHY J & LAURIE A THOMAS L & SANDRA M JOSEPH W & KIRSTEN J NZER GIESEN STASNEY f 920 MAPLE SHORES DRIVE 3930 MAPLE SHORES DR 3840 LONE CEDAR LANE XCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55 331 CHASKA MN 55318 25- 7450020 25- 7450030 25- 7920010 TEPHEN & JANE VONBEVERN ARNOLD & C HED PETER SCHISSEL & JODY K BOX 874 3860 LONE CEDAR HILL CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHASKA MN 55318 3851 RED CEDAR POINT RD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 R5- 7920020 25- 8600010 25- 8600020 KEVIN & MICHELE CLARK MICHAEL A & MARY B JOHN & VERNA PETERJOHN 11 841 RED CEDAR POINT RD JUREWICZ 3892 LONE CEDAR LANE XCELSIOR MN 55331 3890 LONE CEDAR LANE CHASKA MN 55318 CHASKA MN 55318 1 5- 8600030 25- 8600040 25- 8600050 JOEL & M ANDERSON JEROME S & I AHLMAN TERANCE M & PAMELA 11 894 LONE CEDAR LANE 3896 LONE CEDAR LANE JOHNSON HASKA MN 55318 CHASKA MN 55318 3898 LONE CEDAR LANE CHASKA MN 55318 5- 8600060 25- 8600070 25- 8600080 HN P & MARION MERZ DAVID L & M A TESTER IVAN & MILDRED UNDERDAHL 3900 LONE CEDAR LANE 3897 LONE CEDAR LANE 7502 77TH STREET I HASKA MN 55318 CHASKA MN 55318 CHASKA MN 55318 f8 5- 8600090 25- 8600100 25- 8600110 HN FERM & ANN CATHCART IRENE SCHNEIDER GORDON & J FREEBURG 95 LONE CEDAR LANE 7501 77TH STREET 3891 LONE CEDAR LANE CHASKA MN 55318 PO BOX 103 CHASKA MN 55318 1 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 25- 8610010 25- 8610020 25- 8610030 CHAEL CORNELISON & LEVIN SEACER JOSEPH & PAULA EPPING INDA TRAINOR 7510 77TH STREET 7508 77TH STREET 512 77TH ST CHASKA MN 55318 CHASKA MN 55318 1HASKA MN 55318 15-8610040 25- 8610050 25- 8610060 DAVID B & DIANE V ROBERT F & FAYE L VERONA C GORDON I AMJAHN CORSON 7511 77TH STREET 06 77TH STREET 7504 77TH STREET CHASKA MN 55318 CHASKA MN 55318 CHASKA MN 55318 1 25- 8610070 25- 8610080 25- 8610090 DAVID L & AMY M BUSCH CRAIG & VICKY ANDERSON WILLIAM R & LISA A 7509 77TH STREET 7507 77TH STREET DILLEY II CHASKA MN 55318 CHASKA MN 55318 3890 FOREST RIDGE CIRCLE CHASKA MN 55318 65- 4800010 65- 4800020 65- 4800030 1 CRAIG A & PAMELA A KAREN C PETERJOHN NELSON L & SUSAN M ODT LAMB 123 WATERS EDGE DR 7518 77TH STREET I 7514 77TH STREET CHASKA MN 55318 CHASKA MN 55318 CHASKA MN 55318 65- 4800040 65- 4800050 25- 8630010 PETER J & LINDA N DENNIS J RONDA K DON HOLMAN & BONNIE FICHUK ZATTERA PEDERSON HOLMAN 7513 77TH STREET 7515 77TH STREET 3887 FOREST RIDGE CIRCLE CHASKA MN 55318 PO BOX 190 CHASKA MN 55318 VICTORIA MN 55386 25- 8630020 25- 8630030 25- 8630040 I WILLARD & RHODA ANENSON GREGORY W BERNHARDT DIRK 0 PETERJOHN 3885 FOREST RIDGE CIRCLE 3883 FOREST RIDGE CIRCLE 4076 W KESTRAL DR CHASKA MN 55318 CHASKA MN 55318 WEST VALLEY CITY UT 84120 1 25- 8630050 25- 8630060 25- 8630070 CRAIG & AMY HAGBERG LYNDELL F & LORI A ROBERT E & DELCIE I 3884 FOREST RIDGE CIRCLE FREY FROLUND CHASKA MN 55318 3886 FOREST RIDGE CIRCLE 3888 FOREST RIDGE CIRCLE CHASKA MN 55318 CHASKA MN 55318 1 • 25-1700070 0 25- 1700080 25-1700090 JAMES F & DOLORES LIPE GARY & JANET MECUS DANIEL HUDSON & KRISTEN KOHLS 3880 LONE CEDAR LANE 3861 LONE CEDAR LANE 3881 LONE CEDAR LANE I CHASKA MN 55318 CHASKA MN 55318 CHASKA MN 55318 25- 6500010 25- 6500020 25- 6500030 1 HARVEY L & SUZANNE D PAUL A & FLORENCE K WENDELL & JACQUELINE SOBEL BAILLY SCHOTT 1331 HILLSIDE DRIVE 4510 W LAKERIDGE ROAD 7034 RED CEDAR COVE 1 RENO NV 89503 DENVER CO 80219 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 6500040 25- 6500050 25- 6500060 I JAMES B & PATRICIA A AURETHA 1 SMITH GARY B & NADINE N BIXLER 7044 RED CEDAR COVE NELSON 7038 RED CEDAR COVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 7048 RED CEDAR COVE 1 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 6500070 25- 6500080 25- 6500090 RALPH & PATRICIA WARREN & JANET RIETZ DAVID & ADELAIDE 1 KARCZEWSKI 7058 RED CEDAR COVE PRILLAMAN 7054 RED CEDAR COVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 7064 RED CEDAR COVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 1 25- 6500100 25- 6500110 25- 6500120 CORY & SANDRA SHELBY ROBERT E & JUDY D ROYER JOHN D & SARAH H MANEY 1 7068 RED CEDAR COVE 7074 RED CEDAR COVE 7078 RED CEDAR COVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 1 1 5- 6500130 25- 6500140 25- 6500150 BERNARD R & ALYCE DONALD & BARBARA LOUIS A & LUANN NULLER BITTERMAN GUTHMUELLER 075 RED CEDAR COVE 7085 RED CEDAR COVE 7095 RED CEDAR COVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 5- 6500160 25- 6500170 25- 6500180 MOTHY J FISHER JAMES H & DEBORAH J ELLEVA JOY MCDONALD 7099 RED CEDAR COVE HOFER FRED GORDON IXCELSIOR MN 55331 7098 RED CEDAR COVE 7096 RED CEDAR COVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 5- 6600010 25- 6600020 25- 6600030 DWIN L SEIM KATHLEEN LOCKHART STEVEN E & MARSHA E USTEES, SEIM FAMILY TRUST 3618 RED CEDAR POINT RD KEUSEMAN 11 92 CHARLES DRIVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 3622 RED CEDAR POINT RD AN LUIS OBISPO CA 93401 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 6600040 25- 6600050 25- 6600060 RIC L & LINDA M BAUER SAMUEL & V POTTS JAMES & P MOORE 624 RED CEDAR POINT RD 3628 HICKORY ROAD 3630 HICKORY ROAD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 /5- 6600070 25- 6600080 25- 6600090 ARY PETERSON GREGORY BOHER ALFRED & C SMITH 769 20TH AVE NW 3706 HICKORY ROAD 3714 HICKORY ROAD T PAUL MN 55112 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 15- 6600100 25- 6600120 25- 6600140 MARVIN YORK TIMOTHY J NELSON & JOAN E RASK 1 716 HICKORY ROAD DANA E COOKE 3728 HICKORY ROAD XCELSIOR MN 55331 3724 HICKORY ROAD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 I 6600140 25- 6600150 25- 6600160 CHAEL & SUSAN L TIMOTHY J & DEBRA M ROGER L & DOROTHY P MORGAN RAIDT DOWNING 117 34 HICKORY ROAD 3715 HICKORY ROAD 7200 JUNIPER xCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 PO BOX 651 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 6600161 25- 6600162 25- 6600170 O & MARGARET PARSONS JOHN L PARSONS MARK KRONHOLM & JONN L PARSONS 3732 HICKORY BRENDA BLAHA 3732 HICKORY EXCELSIOR MN 55331 3733 HICKORY , XCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 6600180 25- 6600190 25- 6600200 VIN D & LEANN L K & W PROPERTIES LONG HUYNH & PAMELA SMITH UTZKE PO BOX 275 3720 RED CEDAR POINT RD 735 HICKORY CHASKA MN 55318 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 CELSIOR MN 55331 - 6600210 25- 6600220 25- 6600230 FREDERIC B & ARLENE K ELIZABETH NOVAK GREGORY G & JOAN S RNDON 7210 JUNIPER DAI FILO 50 RED CEDAR POINT RD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 7201 JUNIPER EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 1 25- 6600231 25- 6600240 25- 6600250 THOMAS A & KATHRYN TAB & KAY ERICKSON THOMAS A & KATHRYN PARADISE 3720 CEDAR DR S PARADISE 3755 RED CEDAR POINT RD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 3755 RED CEDAR POINT RD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 6600260 25- 6600270 25- 6600280 I RICHARD G SCHLENER THADDEUS SCHWABA JR J DONALD C KNIGHT 200 COMMERCE CIRCLE SOUTH 3603 RED CEDAR POINT RD 3605 RED CEDAR POINT RD MINNEAPOLIS MN 55432 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 6600290 25- 6600300 25- 6600310 1 DOUGLAS B & JAMIE JEAN & PAUL LARSON LUMIR C PROSHEK ANDERSON 3609 RED CEDAR POINT RD 3613 RED CEDAR POINT RD 3607 RED CEDAR POINT RD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 I EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 6600320 25- 6600330 25- 6600340 EMIL & P SOUBA KATHLEEN LOCKHART BIRUTA DUNDURS 14025 VALE COURT 3618 RED CEDAR POINT RD 3627 RED CEDAR POINT ROAD EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55344 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 1 25- 6600350 25- 6600360 25- 6600370 LINDA L JOHNSON CHAS & ADA ANDING HELEN MARIE ANDING I 3629 RED CEDAR POINT ROAD 3631 SOUTH CEDAR 1708 E 57TH STREET EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55417 25- 6600380 25- 6600390 25- 6600400 I CHESTER & J LOBITZ LARRY VANDERLINDE NICHOLAS F HAWLEY 3637 SOUTH CEDAR 211 CHESTNUT 3703 SOUTH CEDAR I EXCELSIOR MN 55331 CHASKA MN 55318 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 6600410 25- 6600420 25- 6600430 1 ANDREW L JENSEN DAVID & JILL HEMPEL WARREN B HORTON & BOX 277 3707 SOUTH CEDAR JANE E TORGESON I EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 3711 SOUTH CEDAR EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 6600440 25- 6600450 25- 6600460 I CLIFFORD PETERSON RICHARD B & M ANDING KEVIN & ANN EIDE 3713 SOUTH CEDAR 3715 SOUTH CEDAR 3719 SOUTH CEDAR EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 I 25- 6600470 25- 6600480 25- 6600490 TIM SCHWEIZER WILLIAM & RENEE HAUGH NICHOLAS F HAWLEY 1 3725 SOUTH CEDAR 3727 SOUTH CEDAR DR 3703 SOUTH CEDAR EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 1 25- 6600500 25- 6600510 25- 6600520 CHAS & ADA ANDING NICHOLAS F HAWLEY GREGORY G DATTILO 3631 CEDAR S 3703 SOUTH CEDAR 7201 JUNIPER EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 r 1 25- 6600530 25- 6600540 25- 6600550 CHARD & MARIANNE CITY OF CHANHASSEN PAMELA D LINDQUIST ING 690 COULTER DRIVE 3902 COLGATE AVE 713 SOUTH CEDAR PO BOX 147 MINNETONKA MN 55435 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 1 5- 6600560 25- 8060010 25- 8060020 GARY & KAREN PETERSON KEVIN & CYNTHIA CUDDIHY ALLIN M & SHIRLEY J KARLS 11 769 20TH AVE NE 3900 STRATFORD RIDGE 3920 STRATFORD RIDGE T PAUL MN 55112 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 5- 8060030 25- 8060040 25- 8060050 OBERT M & DEBRA D PIROLLI GREGORY E & PATRICIA A SCOTT MORROW & 3940 STRATFORD RIDGE ADAMS CYNTHIA HOULE IXCELSIOR MN 55331 3960 STRATFORD RIDGE 3980 STRATFORD RIDGE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 5- 8060060 25- 8060070 25- 8060080 ARTON WELLS WILLIAM NAEGELE & TERRY & BONNIE LABATT 000 STRATFORD RIDGE PATRICIA BRUNS 3981 STRATFORD RIDGE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 4001 STRATFORD RIDGE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 1 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 8060090 25- 8060100 25- 8060110 ITH & KATHRYN BEDFORD WILLIAM MUNIG CHARLES & CECELIA CRUICKSHANK 961 STRATFORD RIDGE 6850 STRATFORD RIDGE 3921 STRATFORD RIDGE 'XCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 /5- 8060120 25- 8060130 25- 8060140 DOUGLAS & JANET REICHERT STEPHEN & ERIN DILLON HAROLD & ELAINE TAYLOR .707 KILBIRNIE TERRACE 3881 STRATFORD RIDGE 3861 STRATFORD RIDGE ROOKLYN PARK MN 55443 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 5- 8060150 25- 3800010 25- 3800030 VIN R & SUELLYN TRITZ LEO JANUS & MARIE MATTHEWS EDWARD V & JUDITH A OATHOUT 3851 STRATFORD RIDGE 3980 HAWTHORNE CIRCLE 3940 HAWTHORNE CIRCLE I XCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 115-3800040 25- 3800060 25- 3800070 iNJAC_C) Muk. + loNTHOAN O JOHN P & MARIANNE MERZ DAVID & SALLY PETERJOHN 3920 HAWTHORNE CIRCLE 3900 LONE CEDAR LANE 3921 HAWTHORNE CIRCLE I XCELSIOR MN 55331 CHASKA MN 55318 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 7700010 25- 7700020 65- 0071100 I KENNETH C DURR CRAIG C MILLER HOWARD S BOLEY 4830 WESTGATE ROAD 6450 MINNEWASHTA PKWY 433 W 5TH STREET MINNETONKA MN 55345 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 #318 1 WACONIA MN 55387 65- 0071200 65- 0072400 65- 0072500 JEROLD & JEANEFIL BOLEY TIMOTHY S & LISA M TERRENCE W RIXE I 7414 MINNEWASHTA PKWY BRAFF 7456 MINNEWASHTA EXCELSIOR MN 55331 7410 MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY PARKWAY EXCELSIOR MN 55331 1 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 . 1 65- 0072900 25- 0051100 25- 0051200 BRYAN & MELIA PIKE KENNETH C DURR MARTIN J FOY 7411 MINNEWASHTA 4830 WESTGATE RD 1300 8TH STREET WEST PARKWAY MINNETONKA MN 55345 KIRKLAND WA 98033 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 0051500 25- 0051600 25- 0051900 I JAMES M & JEFFREY W JAMES & R BOYLAN DR JOHN J ZIEGLER JR KERTSON 6760 MINNEWASHTA 145 MISSION HILL WAY I 6810 MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY COLORADO SPRINGS CO 80921 PARKWAY EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 I 25- 0052000 25- 0060100 25- 0060200 JOHN & G ZIEGLER BARBARA M HEADLA NANCY H WENZEL 145 MISSION HILL WAY 6870 MINNEWASHTA 6900 MINNEWASHTA COLORADO SPRINGS CO 80921 PARKWAY PARKWAY I EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 0060300 25- 0070100 25- 0070200 I JOANN HALLGREN DANIEL & BRENDA LEE HOWARD BOLEY . 6860 MINNEWASHTA ROY 7340 MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY 7400 M1NNEWASHTA PARKWAY 111 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 PARKWAY EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 0070300 25- 0070400 25- 0070500 KRISTIN L & JERRY L KRISTIN L & JERRY L LINDA A SCOTT & I KORTGARD KORTGARD SUSAN E MORGAN 3901 GLENDALE DRIVE 3901 GLENDALE DRIVE 4031 KINGS ROAD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 I 25- 0070600 25- 0070700 25- 0080400 LOWELL E & J CARLSON DAVID J & MARGARET JOHN P BAUMTROG I ROUTE 1 BOX 822A L BORRIS 7141 MINNEWASHTA PKWY EXCELSIOR MN 55331 4071 KINGS ROAD EXCELSIOR MN 55331' EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 0080600 25- 0080700 25- 0081000 DARYL L & DEBRA A LOUIS & G ZAKARIASEN HORACE & JUNE LEACH KIRT 3861 RED CEDAR POINT ROAD 3840 RED CEDAR POINT ROAD 1 50 HILL STREET EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 25- 0081100 25- 0081400 25- 0081500 I BERNARD & HELEN LEACH MARK A & DONNA M PETER M & CARLA M 3830 RED CEDAR POINT ROAD MALINOWSKI BENJAMIN EXCELSIOR MN 55331 7250 MINNEWASHTA 7231 MINNEWASHTA I PARKWAY PARKWAY EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 0081600 25- 0081700 25- 0081900 I JAMES & ARLENE CONNOR GARY & DIANE COBB EDWARD M ALLERMAN 3901 RED CEDAR POINT ROAD 3859 RED CEDAR POINT ROAD 3821 RED CEDAR POINT ROAD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 0082000 25- 0082100 25- 0082200 THOMAS & MARY MANN THOMAS P MANN ROBERT C & ANN II 7211 MINNEWASHTA 7211 MINNEWASHTA PKWY OSBORNE PARKWAY EXCELSIOR MN 55331 3815 RED CEDAR POINT ROAD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 I 1 25- 0082300 25-4980010 800 0 25- 4980020 PETER MOE & S C JOSEPH & JULIA PAAR ROBERT & SHELLY LENZEN FUHRMAN 1393 BERKELEY AVE 3920 MINNEWASHTA CT 7141 MINNEWASHTA PKWY ST PAUL MN 55105 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 1 25- 4980030 25- 4980040 25- 4980050 KENNETH & GLADYS MARK ROBINSON KENNETH & KELLY BLOOMQUIST 7371 MINNEWASHTA PKWY STEINMETZ 6216 YUKON AVE N EXCELSIOR MN 55331 3931 MINNEWASHTA CT BROOKLYN PARK MN 55428 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 0082500 25- 0082600 25- 0082800 JAMES 0 & FRANCES STEPHEN & SANDRA WILMER & M LARSON BORCHART BAINBRIDGE 7380 MINNEWASHTA 7331 MINNEWASHTA 7351 MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY 1 PARKWAY PARKWAY EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 0082900 25- 0083000 25- 0083100 DONALD & COLLEEN LINKE KENNETH W & R SMITH BRYAN & MELIA PIKE 7301 MINNEWASHTA 3837 RED CEDAR POINT ROAD 7411 MINNEWASHTA PKWY PARKWAY EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 I EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25- 8740010 25- 8740020 25- 2000010 DANA & NANCY JOHNSON KENNETH & DIANE LUND WISCONSIN EVANGELICAL 1 50 PLEASANT LANE W 395 HWY 7 LUTHERAN SYNOD TONKA BAY MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 BOX 373 . EXCELSIOR MN 55331 1 25- 8770010 25- 8770020 JIM & SUSAN GULSTRAND MICHAEL & CYNTHIA WEHNER 1 3831 RED CEDAR POINT RD 3801 RED CEDAR POINT RD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 October 10, 1993 1001 Lake Lucy Road Chanhassen, MN 55317 Mayor Don Chmiel Councilman Mike Mason I Councilman Richard Wing Councilwoman Colleen Dockendorf Councilman Mark Senn I Re: Nez Perce Extension /Tower Heights Dear Mayor and Councilmembers: I I again want to ask for your continued support to complete the extension of Nez Perce Drive to Pleasant View Road via I Peaceful Lane and the approval of Tower Heights with access from Pleasant View Road. Karol and I continue to oppose any additional connections to Lake Lucy Road. I We have heard that some residents of Nez Perce are claiming that residents of Lake Lucy Road are no longer united in our position. While I can not claim to know what is in the mind I of others I have not heard one person along Lake Lucy Road waiver in opposition to another Lake Lucy Road connection. If positions have changed, and a change would be required, I earlier meetings showed complete unity, the people who have allegedly changed have not expressed their change to those of us who have been active in this issue. I We received a copy of William R. Engelhart Associates report to the City regarding street alignments. It was gratifying to see that the report is a professional affirmation of what I we have been claiming these many months. I noticed that a connection to Pleasant View will not noticeably reduce traffic on Lake Lucy. We will not experience benefits by the I connection, only avoid further negative effects. I also noted the distinction of Pleasant View as a city collector roadway and Lake Lucy east of Powers as a medium density residential street. This is a difference we have tried to I point out for some time. Even though not designed as a collector, our street has been functioning as one. Please help us minimize the problems of this situation. I Thank you for your time and support. , c Brad & Ka, Johnson i Dustin & hane w� ,A7p2) tO. CITY OF it:043,„ CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 1 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 October 8, 1993 i 1 Joann Hallgren 6860 Minnewashta Parkway Excelsior, MN 55331 Re: Proposed Assessment Against PID No. 25.0060300 Minnewashta Parkway Improvement Project No. 90 -15 Dear Ms. Holgren: Subsequent to our discussion yesterday, I have contacted the project engineer at Engelhardt & Associates to obtain ' information on the basis for 28 units of assessment against your property of 11.5 acres in size. The engineer informed me that the 28 unit determination was based on a concept plat which had been submitted to the City a few months back that included your property. Review of the latest preliminary plat or development in this area, • however, no longer includes your property. Therefore, the proposed assessment against your property has been corrected to reflect the 1.4 unit per acre rate which is being implemented on nondeveloping large parcels. Attached please find the revised assessment notice in the amount of $12,160.00 based on 16 assessable units at $760.00 per unit. Please disregard my letter to you dated October 6, 1993 as it was based on incorrect information. ' This property is listed under green acre status for 1993, therefore, any levied special assessments against this property would go deferred until the green acre status is dropped and/or subdivision of the property occurs. I should J also note that if subdivision of this property occurs in the future which generates more than 16 units, the additional unit charges would be collected as a part of the subdivision and development contract process. ' If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, CITY OF CHANHASSEN Charles D. Folch ' Director of Public Works/City Engineer CDF:jms ' c: Jean Meuwissen, Treasurer Bill Engelhardt, Engelhardt & Associates Allan Larson, Engelhardt & Associates 1 1 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA SPECIAL ASSESSMENT NOTICE IMPROVEMENT NO: 90 -15 The City Council will hold a public hearing to consider proposed assessments for Improvement Project No. S.A.P No. 194 - 111 -01, on Monday, October 11, 1993 at 7 :30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at 690 Coulter Drive, Chanhassen, Minnesota. The area to be assessed includes Minnewashta Parkway, T.H. 5 to T.H. 7, Street, Storm Sewer and Walkway improvements. The total amount of the proposed assessment is $ 402,800.00. Your assessment has been calculated in accordance with the City Council's policy as follows: Property Owner: Joann Hallgren 1 Address: 6860 Minnewashta Parkway Excelsior, MN. 55331 1 Parcel No: 25- 0060300 i Proposed Assessment Against Your Property as Described Below: Specific Improvements Amount 1 Street, Storm Sewer and Walkway Improvements $ 12,160.00 Assessment may be paid in full without interest or other charges within thirty (30) days after the assessment hearing date. These payments may be made in person or may be mailed to Chanhassen City Hall, 690 Coulter Drive, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317, Attention: Treasurer. Please indicate the parcel number on your - check. Partial prepayment of the assessment is permitted. 1 If you elect not to pay the full amount within thirty (30) days after the hearing date, the assessment will be spread over 8 years with installments appearing on your real estate taxes beginning next year. Interest will be included at the rate of 7 -1/2 percent of the unpaid balance. The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk. Written and oral objections to the proposed assessment by any property owner will be considered. 1 No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any assessment adopted unless a written objection signed by the affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing. 11 0 October 11, 1993 City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Attention: Don Ashworth, City Clerk/Manager Charles Folch, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Re: Improvement No: 90-15 Improvement Project ' No. S.A.P. No. 194 - 111 -01 Dear Sirs: 1 I own three parcels of property on Red Cedar Point. Each parcel has been assessed $760.00 for the above referenced improvements. ' Parcel No. 25.6600400 is located on Lake Minnewashta. I use the old cottage located on the lot in the summer. I believe the assessment of $760 on this parcel fairly represents the value of the benefit received from the improvements.. However, I do not believe that the assessment of $760 on each of arcels No. 25.6600490 and 25.6600510 fairly represents the value of the benefits they 1 received from the improvements. These two parcels are across the street from the cottage. Neither one has any ' structure that could be used as a residence. One of them has a small old garage which is usable for storage but is not even large enough to hold a compact car. The other has a canopy (which I remove in October and replace in May) to keep ' the sun off of my car in the summer and a small storage shed. These two parcels are currently classified as unbuildable by the city (one because of its dimensions and one because it is wetland) and are valued for tax purposes at $2,600 and $2,400, respectively. I do not believe that the improvements for which they are being assessed have increased the value of either of these parcels by $760. I believe the benefit received by each parcel would be more fairly assessed at approximately $100, and request that the members of the City Council reduce the assessment to this amount. 1 I thank you for your consideration. 1 Yours very truly, ( ' CITY ut WOMEN OMMMEN r,%/ 7::e?:, - ,.,rte - Rove Nicholas F. Hawley 1 1920 South First Street #1004 OCT 1 Minneapolis, MN 55454 1 1 993 � � �� 'Ri 't DEPT. 1 1 (DC 4 3 1x.93 1 : Qom - P e c �.ed Div. S.A. P. N D iii' -� — I l 1--41 1 P J -Pi c . (95 — (e1500°10 1 ■ f I h ►5 i s UL l te c-- - f'kQ 1 1 ao,ouzaavr&A\k" ob 4t%0, ,c) O�'� awl �► ' ± 4 --a- Ortiv, riu)Ac uop-Lo. fLork c Lacia-y, 1 d usA-r) SeJn; l ; 3u Lis 1-e- Cu < 1 g-)%C,LJS■a- MN 5533 1 1 CITY T� 0 r umillASSEN NOM 1 OC► i 00 1993 1 ENGINEERIt G DEPT. 1 1 1 10 -10 -93 1 City of Chanhassen 1 Chanhassen, MN. 55337 Reason : Special Assessment , Improvement no. 90 -15 From : Scott Folsom 6750 Country Oaks RD. Excelsior , MN. 55331 Parcel no. 25- 2510240 Attention : Treasure & Chanhassen City Council This is in reference to your proposed property assessment of $760.00 for improvements to Minnewashta Parkway. 1 We find this Assessment to be extremely excessive particularly when we are just off of highway seven and our use of Minnewashta Parkway is very , very limited. Yes, we do have lake access through our association on Minnewashta , but ,.to the best of our knowledge, our lake association must also pay a assessment which will come out of our yearly dues. Additionally , we understand the fire station is on this road and that cost ' should be distributed to all those who are served . Please, tell us, when the time comes for our road to be re -done will everyone on Minnewashta Parkway participate in our costs ?? 1 We are willing to participate and pay a portion , but we feel approximately $300.00 is much more appropiate . Thank you for hearing our position on this highly sensitive matter. incere1y ? • �.; - -_ _� i - CITY of GhA: r � . S.. Scott & Sandy Folsom [31R OCT 1 " ��. ENGINEERin DEPT. 1 1 0 CITY OF I 0 ..., iii CHANHASSEN I 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 1 October 8, 1993 I Ms. Linda Scott & Ms. Susan Morgan I 4031 Kings Road Excelsior, MN 55331 Re: Proposed Assessment Against PM No. 25.0070500 1 Minnewashta Parkway Improvement Project No. 90 -15 Dear Ms. Scott & Ms. Morgan: Subsequent to our meeting of yesterday, I have been able to discuss your property with appropriate Planning department staff. It has been confirmed that there is a 150 foot nonbuildable setback zone from the ordinary high . water elevation boundary of Lake St. Joe. Lake St. Joe and this nonbuildable zone encompassed more than half I of the total eight acres of you property. Based on the zoning requirements for riparian lots, the location of your existing home and the fact that your property is in the urban service area, it has been determined that in all likelihood, only two more additional lots could be dated on your property. Therefore, the number of assessable I units for your property has been revised from four units to three units. Based on $760 per unit, your corrected assessment is 52,280.00. Attached please find a corrected notice of assessment for your property. I If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN Charles D. Folch I Director of Public Works/City Engineer CDF:jms 1 Attachment: Revised Assessment Notice : t ; c: Jean Meuwissen, Treasurer I Bill Engelhardt, Engelhardt & Associates Allan Larson, Engelhardt & Associates 1 1 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA SPECIAL ASSESSMENT NOTICE 1 IMPROVEMENT NO: 90 -15 The City Council will hold a public hearing to consider proposed j assessments for Improvement Project No. S.A.P No. 111 -01, on Monday, October 11, 1993 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at 690 Coulter Drive, Chanhassen, Minnesota. The area to be assessed includes Minnewashta Parkway, T.H. 5 to T.H. 7, Street, Storm Sewer and Walkway Improvements. The total amount of the proposed assessment is $ 402,800.00. Your assessment has been calculated in accordance with the City Council's policy as follows: I/ Property Owner: Linda Scott & Susan Morgan Address: 4031 Kings Road Excelsior, MN. 55331 . 1 Parcel No: 25- 0070500 Proposed Assessment Against Your Property as Described Below: 1 Specific Improvements Amount Street, Storm Sewer and Walkway Improvements $2,280.00 1 Assessment may be paid in full without interest or other charges , within thirty (30) days after the assessment hearing date. These payments may be made in person or may be mailed to Chanhassen City Hall, 690 Coulter Drive. P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317, . Attention: Treasurer. Please indicate the parcel number on your check. Partial prepayment of the assessment is permitted. If you elect not to pay the full amount within thirty (30) days 1 after the hearing date, the assessment will be spread over 8 years with installments appearing on your real estate taxes beginning next year. Interest will be included at the rate of 7 -1/2 percent of the unpaid balance. The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk. Written and oral objections to the proposed assessment by any property owner will be considered. No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any assessment adopted 1 unless a written objection signed by the affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing. 1 1 1 Linda Scott Susan E. Morgan 4031 Kings Rd Excelsior, MN 55331 October 7, 1993 Dear Council Members, We are writing to voice our objection to the proposed property tax assessment for the Minnewashta Parkway road project. We object specifically to the city's policy for assessment allocation. We own 8 acres of land ' on a natural environment lake with only one homestead on it Our assessment notification indicates that the city assumes that our property can be divided into four separate parcels. Based upon the following facts the land cannot be divided into four parcels: 1. Approximately half of our property is unbuildable due to marsh and lake. See figure 1. 2. As stated in the 1989 DNR Standards for management of shoreland areas the setback for all single residences must be at least 200 feet from the ordinary high water level. See figure 2. 3. As also stated in the DNR Standards, lot area size for single family residence without city sewer is 80,000 sq. ft. See figure 3. 4. Again as stated in the DNR Standards lot width without city sewer must be at least 200 feet. See figure 3. • 5. Our existing home, outbuildings. and septic system, which was built in 1990, occupies approximately 250 feet of frontage on Kings Road. See figure 4. Based on the above facts it is evident that the city's assumption that this property is divisible into four parcels is incorrect. After subtracting our 250 feet from the 517 feet of road frontage we own, there is only 267 feet of width _ left According to fact 4 there is enough lot width left for only one additional parcel. We met with the city engineer today to discuss our concerns, and he seemed in agreement that this property would not be divisible into four parcels. We hope you will consider this information and re- evaluate our proposed assessment Sincerely, Linda Scott & Susan E. Morgan 1 1 t: 199 • ' Ui k \ h,.tSS Olive Tremble � /�vea 47 119 -77 Or. 1259-B F. C. JACKSON 1 LAND SURVEYOR REGISTERED UNDER LAWS OF STAYS OF MINNESOTA 1 LICENSED SY ORDINANCE OF CITY OF WNNEA/OLIS 3018 EAST S5TN STREET PA. 4 -4081 1 iburbepor'% (Certiticatt • 1 i_3ol;Q- ; Wrl & o q d _ , ' A .- _ ...s.-149.1a /'doe. '' /Y VY . or: „re 1 4 Z Z . 8' /y. Z C ern r 1 G o of /of 2 ( /r" « ra Te .I ad ;rf I 1Sec.7 , 0 1 4 1 •a 1 . v. V V b1 A '.• v 1 r I 1 -, j f , sAt. n D � I Scc7 /e: Pi. ZOO' k - . 2 . E3 ' . = Iroe 1 1 HSRESY CEkTIPY T►tAT THE ASOVE IS A TRUE AND CORRECT RAT Or A SUS OF 1 1 The North 40 rods of the Last 4/5 of the i aat 1/2 (haat 32 rodsof the I Last 40 roda)of Government Lot 2, Section 7,Townahip 116,Range 23, according to the Government Surey 1 thereof. As SURVEYED SY ME THIS- 0th DAY OF April A.D. 1964 1 ste ED- -- f 1• F. C. J KSON. MINNESOT Ea TIUT10N. No. 3000 1 i ,, , . _ - 6°C --- / 1 See TeX/ 400760 14. STATEWIDE STANDARDS FOR 1 «MANAGEMENT OF SHORELANDAREAS i Effective Date: July 3, 1989 1 MIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIMIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIMIIIII a ; 1 ?.` `it • ys 1111.11111111111.1111111111111110V - t ''''',., . ' ,.. lit li;;:,' **i V :., : " . .-, . : :,::#1k4kr ,....-4., 111101......../P. -41 4` 116 44 t O. T .: 6t - V. p . . , • .,, ate s .. r'"C- �G S � r � S _ �� r. -I - 4 ,. . 4 A. . ,;. - p.,,t , \:....: i 3A 4 i 1 A "A till f q m aitir 1111111111.1111111111111111111111111111111.11111111 ,,i.:;:, 1 1 klINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF V ri NATURAL RESOURCES 1 Division of = _ aters I SHORELAND MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (612) 296 -9226 1 5'&v #2 shorelands and adjacent water areas, shoreland controls must II regulate lot sizes, placement of structures, and alterations of shoreland areas. ". (ubp. 2. Reside ial All single, duplex, II trip l rest ential lots created after the date of enactment of the local shoreland controls must meet or exceed the dimensions presented in subparts 2a and 2b, and the I following: - A. Lots must not be occupied by any more dwelling units than indicated in subparts 2a and 2b. Residential I subdivisions with dwelling unit densities exceeding those in the tables in subparts 2a and 2b can only be allowed if designed and approved as residential planned unit developments under part I 6120.3800. Only land above the ordinary high water level of public waters can be used to meet lot area standards, and lot width standards must be met at both the ordinary high water I level and at the building line. The sewer lot area dimensions in subpart 2a, items D to F can only be used if publicly owned sewer system service is available to the property. I B. On natural environment lakes, subdivisions of duplexes, triplexes, and quads must also meet the following standards: II (1) Each building must be set back at least 200 feet from the ordinary high water level II r (2) Each building must have common sewage treatment and water systems that serve all dwelling units in the building. II (3) Watercraft docking facilities for each lot must be centralized in one location and serve all dwelling units I in the building. (4) No more than 25 percent of a lake's shoreline I can be in duplex, triplex, or quad developments. C. One guest cottage may be allowed in local controls on lots meeting cr exceeding the duplex dimensions presented in I subparts 2a and 2b if the controls also require all of the following standards to be met: I (1) For lots exceeding the minimum lot dimensions of duplex lots, the guest cottage must be located within the smallest duplex -sized lot that could be created including the I principal dwelling unit. (2) A guest cottage must not cover more than 700 square feet of land surface and must not exceed 15 feet in II height. ) II J • 19 '�' 1 ti: 0 ovom - _ f. /6-vez _ ,,o, 301 -400 10 Greater than 400 5 II (2) They must be jointly owned by all purchasers ,,r of lots in the subdivision or by all purchasers of nonriparian lots in the subdivision who are provided riparian access rights on the access lot. 1 (3) Covenants or other equally effective legal instruments must be developed that specify which lot owners have 1 authority to use the access lot and what activities are allowed. The activities may include watercraft launching, loading, storage, beaching, mooring, or docking. They must also include other outdoor recreational activities that do not II significantly conflict with general public use of the public water or the enjoyment of normal property rights by adjacent property owners. Examples of the nonsignificant conflict II activities include swimming, sunbathing, or picnicking: The covenants must limit the total number of vehicles allowed to be parked and the total number of watercraft allowed to be 1 continuously moored, docked, or stored over water, and must require centralization of all common facilities and activities in the most suitable locations on the lot to minimize topographic and vegetation alterations. They must also require 1 all parking areas, storage buildings, and other facilities to be screened by vegetation or topography as much as practical from view from the public water, assuming summer, leaf -on conditions. 1 Subp. 2a. Lot area and width standards for single, duplex, v triplex, and quad residential development; lake classes. The . II lot area and width standards for single, duplex, .triplex, and quad residential developments for the lake classes are: A. Natural Environment, no sewer' 1 Lot area (square feet) II Riparian Nonriparian lots lots arlIIIUM C 80,000 II Dup ex 12�'� 160,000 Triplex 160,000 240,000 Quad 200,000 320,000 I Lot width (feet) Single_ 00 200 • • '0 400 Triplex 400 600 Quad 500 800 I B. Recreational Development, no sewer: Lot area (square feet) 1 Riparian Nonriparian II 21 ._/....Cro/eEd ‘2_,t) 1 LOT SURVEYS COMPANY, INC. LAND SURVEYORS 1 REGISTERED UNDER LAWS OF STATE OF MINNESOTA 7601 - 73rd Avenue North 560-3093 I Minneapolis, Minnesota 55428 rg ors Ot ualt Cl Denotes woe 1 U Denotes exi s a � " t' Ce,e.a Denotes pre ' "h , //_,-* ; Z $'° u Q� mien/soot., —arc - D%nr)tes pr( P �y� , y �oi�� u b dL 1, - - - T - abl s > . ..' P ` _ Novsq, „i,.-1 fiooeSN•T ecsr I Yei• w 111 -1 `' s Z ' "\ _ - - - . r i - - t i - , - ,f • J:\;'\..... �, ti e N I ' i j c \'' / i �, �- Not - 40 e I i ,�( v ' - — ' =r— 2 —.-c--- 1- + 1 y ij` 'i.; / ' ., 1own !- ` l I ‘; t h l loll o1•' : - - , i orr,t•r o s;.id ` i 1 . north line • '`I '- at right - .'t ri it angIr'•- siI in Ot ..; , 1 i ; :Il 4( — --- It16& toMIRMA/2,K .N Q1 iii; � - - - - -- - aoc e set back 1 i U \ . t : ill v . 0k+�tyo (.S agcSl�dpJ 4 . eXet-L-tet-dee-i" _ eRtA 1 J ,?<.,,L.--fiJ -7 Gie.,c-e,t1L-4-1 442 JiL A-v- ,i4rec4e I 6L e 1 4-0 _ 1 fi "4 • 1 1 1 1 _RECEIvra - OCLO 1993 CITY Y LhAivrtASSEt\ 1 10/10/93 DON ASHWORTH CITY CLERK/ MANAGER CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MN RE: SPECIAL ASSESSMENT IMPROVEMENT 1 90-15 ' PLEASE ENTER THIS AS OUR FORMAL OBJECTION TO THIS SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. OUR OBJECTION IS NOT SO MUCH THE AMOUNT AS IT IS PAYING BEFORE THE PROJECT IS COMPLETED. THE WALKING TRAIL WAS STILL BEING WORKED ON ON SATURDAY, OCTOBER 9 AND THE ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT IS STILL NOT COMPLETE. ' OUR SPECIFIC OBJECTION RELATES TO OUR PROPERTY LINE. WE HAD A SHRUB ROW AT THE BEGINNING OF THE PROJECT WHICH WAS 80% REMOVED WITH THE PROMISE THAT UPON COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT WE WOULD HAVE A SHRUB ROW TO REPLACE WHAT WE LOST AND TO ALSO BE ASTHETICALLY PLEASING FROM BOTH SIDES OF THE SHRUB LINE. SINCE THAT INITIAL PROMISE AND SUBSEQUENT REMOVAL OF SHRUBS AND TREES WE HAVE HAD NO CONTACT AS TO THE PROGRESS AND PLANS OF REPLACEMENT. UNTIL THIS HAS BEEN COMPLETED SATISFACTORILY WE OBJECT TO PAYING ANY SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. PARCEL # 65- 4800010 CRAIG St PAM LAMB 7514 W 77TH ST 1 CHASKA, MN 55318 CITY Of iHANHASSEN MOWER ' OCT 111993 ENGINEERING DEPT. 1 L 3885 Forest Ridge Circle Chaska, Mn. 55318 Oct. 11, 1993 ),I Don Ashworth RECEIVED t City Clerk /Manager City of Chanhassen, Mn. OCT 1 1 1993 i i Dear Sir: CITY0F CHANHASSEN II With this letter we wish to object to the amount of our assessment for Improvement Project No. SAP 194 - - on Minnewashta Parkway. We do believe that we have some obligation toward the project. II Our name and address is: Willard and Rhoda Lnenson 3835 Forest Ridge Circle <, Chaska, Mn. 55318 Parcel No. 25 8630020 1 Our objections are for the following reasons: -We do not need to use Minnewashta Parkway for access II to Highway 5 and 7. Ninety eight per cent of the time, we use Lone Tree Circle (Lane) to access to Highway 5 and then Highway 41 or Rolling Acres Road to Highway 7. II -To use the walking on the Parkway, we would have to walk approximately one -half mile round trip to get there and back. • 1 -We do not have any lake front rights, other than the public access locations. 1 We do, however, feel obligated to support the road surface improvement because of the Fire Station location on the Parkway. II Thank you. 1 Sincerely, '-e.......+6-- ae-- 1 cIrroF�. , I oc r 11 1 993 I WRIT li rar. II 1 OCT 11 '93 02 :53PM LUNDGREN BOS. CONST. - P.E'3 1. . . ., , , . , . , dig. . , ,. , , 1 LUfDGPEll B k05. 1 CONSTRUCTION October 11, 1993 • INC. , . Mayor Don Chmiel and Members of t he City Council ,. , City of Chanhassen ' I 690 Coulter Drive , ri e . P,O, Box 147 . ' 1 935 t_ Wayzata 1314, Chanhassen, MN 55317 , , ' ' Wayzata Re: Special Assessments City Project 90 -15 , I M nesota 55391 For parcels 65- 0071100 and 25- 00'70200, Boley Property , (612)4731231 Dear Ladies and Gentlemen: 1 . , . • . The purpose of this letter is to formally object to the assessments for the , following parcels: , I Parcel NO, ' o proposed Assesssiaent. 1 Victoria 65- 0071 100 $22,040.40 Chanhassen • 25. 0070200 $29,640.00 Total Proposed Assessment ` $51,680.00 . , I On July 12, 1993 the Chanhassen City Council approved the preliminaryplat Boley property. The preliminary plat for the Chanhassen property includes . 32 lots and an outlot, that eventually, will be another 2 1/2 lots in Chanhassen, for a 1 total of 341/2 lots., Part of that submission shows an additional 21 1/2 future hats on the adjoining parcel in Victoria. The total of all the lots equals 56 lots. Lundgren Bros. would have preferred to obtain a larger number, of lots but,City of , 1 ' Chanhassen codes and City ordinances would,not allow it.' , ' According to discussion with the City Engineer, the proposed assessment I was based upon Lundgren Bros. receiving 39 lots on the Chanhassen 'parcel and 29 lots on ,the Victoria parcel for a total of 68 lots. Because Lundgren Bros. only ' , received 56 lots, we are being assessed for 12 lots we did not receive, ' 1 • I OCT 11 "93 ©c :53PM LUNDGREN BOS. CONST. ' P./ 1 Mayor Don Chmiel and Members of the City Council • I October 11, 1993 Page 2 Based upon the City's assessment formula, the assessment per lot should be p ty $760 /lot. (Proposed assessment of $51,680, divided by the alleged number of lots 1 by City, (68) _ $760/lot.) Therefore we believe the assessments on these two parcels for project No. 90 -15 should not exceed $42,560 (56 lots x $760 /lot = $42,560). Please amend the assessments and enter into the record our opposition to the • proposed assessment. I Thank You, 1 Sincerely, 1 Ter , or ord 1 Vice President ' TMF /pm 1 . . . , . . 1 , . , 1 . , , , , , 1 • . , . , . . , , , . . , , , 1 , . , . , . , 1. • • , , . , . , , , 1 • - 1 . , , 1 . . . , .1 //TTY'// Ale. .1 C ITYOF 1 CHANHASSEN ' 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Paul Krauss, Planning Director FROM: Bob Generous, Planner II 1 DATE: October 6, 1993 1 SUBJ: Red Cedar Point on Lake Minnewashta Subdivision As part of the Minnewashta Parkway assessments, four property owners contend that their ' properties are unbuildable. Three of these properties do not have the required minimum frontage or lot area for RSF, Residential Single Family District lots. The fourth property contains a Type A wetland area which occupies most of the property. ' Several of these lots are significantly below the normal area standards. While this is not uncommon in Red Cedar Point, their development could impact adjoining parcels. In one 1 instance, there is a wetland that could be impacted. While the City would not encourage the development of these properties, it may be possible to develop them through the variance process. Other properties in this neighborhood in similar circumstances have been built upon or have 1 received variances. The following variance requests would be necessary to develop these lots. 1 1. Lot 11 and east ten feet of Lot 12, Block 4: Area variance of 7,500 square feet, lot frontage variance of 40 feet and setback variance to permit a garage. 2. Lot 2, Block 5: Area variance of 11,360 square feet, lot frontage variance of 50 feet, lot depth variance of 45 feet, side setback variance of 6 feet for each side, and front setback variance to permit a garage. 3. Lots 3 -6 and Lot 11, Block 5: May require a wetland setback variance, would most likely 1 require wetland mitigation to permit filling of some of the wetland area. 4. Lot 1, Block 5: Area variance of 9,140 square feet, front setback variances (double 1 fronting lot), and lot depth variance. Assembly with lot 2, while still requiring variances, would create a lot nearer to the minimum lot area. This lot currently has a shed located on it. 1 1 1. Mr. Paul Krauss October 6, 1993 1 Page 2 These variances would permit the minimum house area required by code (960 square feet). As an alternative, these property owners may wish to enter into an agreement with the city stating that these lots are undevelopable. This agreement would then be recorded. Should this happen, 1 the city may agree to exclude these properties from the assessment roll. Another option would be to have the property owners grant to the city a conservation easement over these properties. The properties on Block 5 may be useful as part of the city's storm water master plan. The property on Block 4 may provide the neighborhood with lake view or even lake access. Any easement agreements would need to be recorded. Exclusion of the properties from the assessment roll could be used by the city as a valuable consideration for these easements. We need to discuss these options with the City Engineer to see how we should proceed. Either option would require the City Attorney to draw up agreements. If we decide to pursue either of these options, the shed on lot 1, Block 5 and the concrete slab on Lot 2, Block 5 should be removed as part of the agreement. If you have any questions, please let me know. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7N 6 ON` i / ] / t l 1 J '� 24 2.3 ' / / / qG KEN CTF T NO 8357 41 y.,Z .b N ��4, J 3��,� 1 • • L A DDIT�ON 1 i o K{kKHA ROAD o \ w mi co iv O Cpl Os y CD {p N O N - ,........ 1....................47 7 to iv -�� to N \ I i _ O N O 1 w \ u g JUNIPER _ g N �� N 1 ., � F • N n Pi S s � � , p a m 1 \ 0 "ER_ , ,, . —I: /0 s 1 ♦ \ \ - 2111 6:1 / \ 0 \ . \ 11 m illa ii 4Z 1 at \ - .....•••••" 0 ki,"*.. __......._ ,,,„„„,..„ 0. _ ..,., , .1. 4,„„ __ ,• 1 _ _ Ut \ \ kir 1 kt4 i lisk , t 1 - : w 1 t WWI . . -. ..r- O o "' -4 I W ''. P• ::. ( 1 / .47_,_._.1 . 1 r (//c„.:(7,,,,. ♦ r h 1 • 1 j.: _ _ . • ..j• ....--.....72...) 1111 . - ■ /ter✓ 1. September 27, 1993 1 1 Mayor Chimiel City Council Members City of Chanhassen Minnesota Re: Street, Storm Sewer and Walkway Improvements Assessed against Parcel No: 25- 6600500 Red Cedar Point We wish to register an objection to the assessment against this property. It is an unbuildable lot. It also has one of the main sewer lines running through it. The lot is used only for storage of RV vehicles and 1 miscellaneous equipment. We respectfully ask that this parcel be taken off ' the assessment rolls. Sincerel ours, r AP : ' � Charles H. Anding ar 3631 S. Cedar Drive Excelsior, Minnesota 55331 CITY 1 SEP 2v y ENGINEERI DER 1 4 C ITYOF .,t CHANHASSEN : '4 `" 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 October 6, 1993 Charles ar es and Ada Anding 3631 South Cedar 1 Excelsior, MN 55331 Re: Minnewashta Parkway Improvement Project No. 90 -15 Assessment Inquiry PID No. 25- 6600500 Lot 2, Block 5 (Red Cedar Point) Dear Mr. and Mrs. Anding: ' You have recently submitted a letter objecting to the proposed assessment for Minnewashta Parkway Improvement Project No. 90 -15 to be levied against PID No. 25- 6600500 (Lot 2, Block 5) with the contention that it is an unbuildable lot and the City has one of the main sewer lines conning through it. From review of the City's utility maps, it is not confirmed that a sewer main runs through the property of reference. Planning staff has also made a review of this lot to determine whether it is buildable within ' City Codes and Ordinances. From their review they have determined that this lot would need to obtain a variance to be buildable and therefore a 1 unit assessment of $760 is proposed to be levied against the property. However, if you are willing to sign an agreement that this lot is not buildable, staff will ' recommend to the City Council that this assessment be dropped. If you should have any further questions or comments on this or any other matter, please feel free to ' contact me. Sincerely, CITY OF CHANHASSEN Charles D. Folch, P.E. ' Director of Public Works /City Engineer CDF:ktm c: Bill Engelhardt, William R. Engelhardt Associates Allan Larson, William R. Engelhardt Associates 1 1 ..., C ITYOF 1 .. i_ lki - ',` F ti .' CHANHASSEN 1 V. : : ;�. 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 1 ` (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 October 6, 1993 1 Ms. Kathleen Lockhardt 1 3618 Red Cedar Point Drive Excelsior, MN 55331 • Re: Assessment Inquiry Y P for Minnewashta Parkway Improvement Project No. 90 -15 I PID No. 25- 6600330 Lot 11, Block 4 (Red Cedar Point) I Dear Ms. Lockhardt: You have recently inquired on the proposed assessments to be levied against your property in I conjunction with the Minnewashta Parkway Improvement Project No. 90 -15. For PID No. 25- 6600330, it has been determined that a variance would need to be obtained for this lot to be buildable. Therefore, a 1 unit assessment of $760 is proposed. However, if you are willing to I sign an agreement that this lot is not buildable, the City Council may consider dropping this assessment as per staffs recommendation. I If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, CITY OF CHANHASSEN 1 Charles D. Folch, P.E. I Director of Public Works /City Engineer CDF:ktm I c: Bill Engelhardt, William R. Engelhardt Associates 1 Allan Larson, William R. Engelhardt Associates 1 1 1 .3P73 - 1 [ ( 1 ' 1 _ OCT 07 1993 6% SI�3 ENGINEERING DEPT. 1 2 44„7--e_wt , /- 1 , I d 1 1 c _ 3 4____ (// / 7 3 1 /z.4. 1 CITYOF 1 CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 1 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 1 October 6, 1993 • 1 Wilmer and Marilyn Larson 7380 Minnewashta Parkway Excelsior, MN 55331 1 Re: Minnewashta Parkway Improvement Project No. 90 -15 Assessment Inquiry - PID No. 25- 0082800 1 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Larson: You have recently inquired uired as to how many units are proposed to be assessed against your property, PID No. 25- 0082800, in association with the Minnewashta Parkway Improvement Project No. 90 -15 and whether or not these assessments could be deferred. In reviewing the supportive data for the assessment roll, I have determined that your property totals approximately 5 acres. Approximately 1 acre of your property is designated as wetland and this area has been credited yielding approximately 4 net acres for assessment calculations. Implementing a factor of 1.4 units per net acre, your property could have been assessed for a total of 6 units. However, given the location of your existing home, it has been determined that 3 units, including your existing home, should be assessed against the property. If your property is subdivided in the future and yields a higher number of units, the additional costs will be collected at that time. Given the assessment rate of $760 per unit, your assessment notice showed an amount of $2,280 total for the 3 units. In response to your deferment question, special assessments levied against a property can be deferred based on the following requirements: You must be 65 years of age or older or you are unable to be employed due to permanent and total disability and a hardship would exist if you were required to pay the special assessments because the average annual payment would exceed 1% of your adjusted gross income. The City Treasurer has application information for any of the above deferment criteria. As for 1 a general deferment for all of the property owners receiving more than 1 unit assessment, this decision would rest on the City Council based on written and verbal testimony presented at the assessment hearing on October 11, 1993. 1 1 .1 .1 Wilmer and Marilyn Larson October 6, 1993 Page 2 1 I hope I have addressed your questions thoroughly. If you should need additional information, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, CITY OF CHANHASSEN Charles D. Folch, P.E. Director of Public Works /City Engineer ' CDF:ktm 1 c: Bill Engelhardt, William R. Engelhardt Associates Allan Larson, William R. Engelhardt Associates 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -;. i 1. • I. .., tlz:AsEill&L= . CITY OF CHANHASSEN 1-23EM Cis 1 0 .-_ 1993 I v v Lff i,t jaCI N2 3r /A ci, 6/ 10/n A aoae,r1, ENGINEERING DEPTI I 6-Le... &<.. L',Th of &a/7 CZooeoo4-7-2.e/reh). 1 364 L27 n?th-vriew.aa/1,ifk. 1 'Pi<&- cpizec/c. 1 tz fe y oz44, , chvo-ed 6-64.7 c.--iff Derif 7/a r at4 o . A,L•e_ ca (fe - 1 LL Liz/us/xi t 3 Li ) ci,n7d (—etaa& 61/2-ce_ 011 ut 1 to '& 6 ctit 1EJ LC` aid (:'0-jeti I 0) C../LeC c..- yaLt Z et X . - -- tivag:ftmtk,k8i o t - tnei ,a --- j , 60 u2._ • (Lx_c..--(x a-z_z! c_170- )gz-e-e-wa-elz.:-Q .<2-e/bela -e co U') (f cc/oe;zzy , I ,U--c cc t -/I-a.- ,Jc-7-t, ( cc I u , - a - te- e_26oac-4,3' qra.e-r ( Cac.'2 p-ztc/(1'<i/ Ccci-r Cc-- I 1 al td ( nd tfi,Czket(t( L- 1/1 :- 4:3 (-70-LE .----, . • /6q--r) ----a-vaiica-P. 1 'Pea (ecilt 5 3 ) Chi I ha._ Ssi->r) . • 56 / 1 . , • 1 •1 1 1 ■ .., 1 f 1 6 5 , /99$ ,,.. II .‘ . Ci 696 6/laynilezooerr) ,_ .. , .,. 4/2. . e . : /Wa ? doziezza/ine-i&< . 1 L O ,6 c,c,L-cat (,1- , --e 7 rige/r2wu I 6 1 14/Lie'.° 7 i - C - reei - ) 6-n / &leo_ .(96 5 /993 (_.(41 ?.._u_lioit ,..zz C222/r (f.kez/n ceonoedeizi 1 a_ ,_,E,1-64Lediaz-e ,Aft , I .zin /596 C. &Le a00-0.46/ cY-6 c--t/t-e- (? - C ban att 6e d L-71zi) ‘271_aa.._- 1 n AS ( 6-7 c-t-x-e- . ' 7 V 6.2ffet.- OtAii0;8WWW4 (-4-lit(' oi.)(E ,-(i ,,,_?i-2(?-- - /-: --e- v 6,1 ay (-4Js.24-._) L' . 6/71C-C Sti41 _,-- L, I , c p ittLtt- - 1' -) Lt t i (tK-/ 1 c../ L._,,.-._' 1 , ./., ,. ,_ ) t ), c. L le t.-11--.L.- L- 6 ' / . / .i , / 79 -, C - 1) - 1 - ' . . , 4 't 1 / ;.z' 12 _../ • 933 1 17- / a " • - fArrrrilf cc '4 ( ihWtantb . - 1- Ylvr) 5- 1 1 1 1 CITYOF 1. N�._ r 1 1= ` :,, 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 1 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 1 • June 6, 1990 I II Mr. Scott Winter Carver County Courthouse 600 East 4th Street 1 Chaska, MN 55318 Dear Scott: 1 On June 5, 1990, I visited 3755 Red Cedar Point Road with Kathy Paradise. She and her husband own Lots 9 -17, Red Cedar Point. Lots 9 -13 contain a pond with open water. The City would not 1 consider this area buildable since it is a Class A wetland and is protected by the City's Wetland Ordinance. In fact the original plat for Red Cedar Point illustrates a wet area on Lots 9 -13 (attached) . IL • Mr. and Mrs. Paradise will be appealing the assessment of Lots 9 -13. I hope this letter helps in your determination that the 1 property is unbuildable. If you need additional information, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, 1 Jo Ann Olsen 1 Senior Planner 1 JO:v cc: City Council 1 Mr. and Mrs. Paradise 1 1 1 of - •�L�� -p? � -ZZ' -�:/ • - --: " � -_ _ .. _ _ • 4 �- W --- 1- : \ I _ � . �i�?�°�' i-_ s�ti ° __ ice: -_ - "' ?.!: o-. _ Rte. `• ^r,'�� !n. ,,,,,i..-- \ �" T...,-,- • - _� ` .� -- ^ +:+•.'- ^_ I .f' /.♦i(11 V. P��_ • ` I I'` , �i � �. ` e �__4a. xj •�� ^ .. k. .. 0 0 . r . ' ' . 7 • - ~ . t t _ n' -1 I. Y ��` �" Syr A . =• _ 1 IT /z 0 t i• • r C -, !2 • '\ �' 1 — }. i k 4 ° � ' rig \ . + ■ g , �r�'- ' ° ^ �- // 0' • � ' _ %. * • • ( ° fi r • - • / k r r . + Y.' • Al �. _ } • .,..cec A 1 1 3 s ..241. - � 3 n • 1 Y � � �- ' •. . * `t . 1 : • -r =A• _ \ . - V � ' Tt' - • ..: - � ' ° }- `t' _ • r° %., s � et • \ • 1- 1 .L E'� Carl �014I� 4t4.i ‘...4• P' y 4 y ' . ' l 1` Ck \ . \ "` a 4_z ^ I . • • 1 .. .Y - • r 1� - L . _ • � . 1 ` N� rf ♦ i 0 .. ` . /k . � � 7 7 fr • 1 ' 1 1 rT � • ■ . rr::- '!_ - -- L' 1 • ~ `• +• I ••. ,, t)'' I •' gl . II P t3 ` 12 ., 1 , V; `' f .., • \1y � J • V l.• `, •. •' f ft.... "I- I6 � t5 � 1 ti 1 � „ � ^ (�1 � � \ � I ,� � q r 1 � . , I - ` \ U q + s. f :;I rs t� l a � , I ti„ ,. s ° i'41--•7 - , f t y f 1� ".: i.. _i_. r_i____;. _, 2 i .! .., n • t� 5 . "r tr ^ _ ♦t lei: ti _ .� ' .• t f O ` ! 7 i r i r - 1 . • o L \ LI LR •7 ,y Cwl�(T I .. \ ♦ � ` r te\' \ r , lati� 11 Ala nrr es. t. J \ T • --- 1 elriV7 friat - the arr•r( j1.1.f/FEO Cze iKkt / . .. i - \ c 7 - . > °� ` \ ` .. aee0r ?id aril ay>>e.•ea 1y the a0ard •y CL:nly ( .r.t T71% •I •-ri .• a '-'J /hrn es, ta w� mttfin,tt�rrl f la3.{}ti✓ V a 7 (y.` ♦ [. 4 ' Vt - y. F 11 ey Ax lit . r, Cosrrr r Tv /•41 - \ \ mo o: ▪ _ �� f•.... dr `- �.vrrt r im er• r t K ti► ' `�" - - _ - ^ f . - _. Slap . /ern:1 ' r ) - 1 ' i1t - :.a; l• - - _ _ ..L Arr..; y se 4.•tr: 7 4' iha I t _ + e 'ais 7 .7. r .1 .PED no'/ /iC.. - CA f i•• t L i C -..nt 1 h+ v• lire e. >te•re za IFrsf i r, t "IR 11) 15 • • • • G...fi .'y el Cor+.0 1 . :- - X. a d%%Ty•rs- CY e4ad � +Cf!3°0.-11 ` f • /ff /f Y./ 0 1,� \ - :fir ' •4-- le•at•T ter , L a• ;n A ti y ... o t� s t - : p C� L�^cL • / { i . • • *1 .A • I, l. , ? r. rt V. P. i r>aR %•{' - = " . 7 .. _ ac .,2 - - , -. Xs ' I - ; � -+a * / - . - - _ ..-•. - ... Y• ,; .- le ...to, , . ihR .i: - . 9 „lrir ../ 42.-,...., C� • y rn v / r 1 /� J tr7 l - s J - 1 . \ cir.."" i I/ .; I .: R Co ' t I JO ANN HECKLIN :�: CARVER COUNTY COURTHOUSE County Auditor \ 600 EAST 4TH STREET. BOX 1 e l f CHASKA. MINNESOTA 55318 -2184 �N E $° PHONE 448 -3435 EXT 221 COUNTY OF OIWEQ i 1 June 29, 1990 PID # 25- 660 -0250 1 Dear Tom Paradise, At the meeting of the Carver County Board of E ualizati 1 o June 26, 1990, the board voted to change your Estimated Market Value for the 1990 Assessment from $ 20,000 to $ 2,000 _ 1 Sincerely, 1 /.— I � f ✓lr e� kl oAnn Hcin Carver County Auditor 1 1 1 1 I i Ar,- a(rq Act , nr;%Foucl Opportunity Employer 1 .1 µ CITYOF f 4 CHANHASSEN ' _ 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 1 October 6, 1993 ' Ms. Kathy Paradise 3755 Red Cedar Point Drive Excelsior, MN 55331 Re: Assessment Inquiry for Minnewashta Parkway Improvement Project No. 90 -15 PID No. 25- 6600231 and 25- 6600250 Dear Ms. Paradise: You had recently inquired on the proposed assessments against the two referenced properties that you own. From review of the assessment roll data information, it has been determined that your • 1 existing home is located on the northerly parcel, PID No. 25- 6600231. A 1 unit assessment is proposed against this parcel in the amount of $760. For your other parcel, PID No. 25- 6600250, a portion of this property contain: a wetland. However, it has been determined that there is enough area outside the wetland to yield a buildable lot. This property is of separate tax record from your other parcel and could be sold and/or built upon in the future. Therefore, a 1 unit assessment in the amount of $760 is proposed to be Levied against this property. I hope that I ' have addressed both questions adequately. If you should have further questions or need additional information, please feel free to contact me. ' Sincerely, CITY OF CHANHASSEN ' Charles D. Folch, P.E. Director of Public Works /City Engineer ' CDF:ktm c: Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer Jean Meuwissen, Treasurer Bill Engelhardt, William R. Engelhardt Associates ' Allan Larson, William R. Engelhardt Associates 1 IL 1 1 September 29, 1993 1 TO: Mayor Chmiel and Council Members RE: Minnewashta Parkway Assessment Dear Mayor Chmiel and Council, Let this letter by my written objection to the manner of calculating the number of "units" and the amount of the assessment against my property, Parcel No. 25- 0060300. I refer you and the Council to the minutes of the July 22, 1993 Council meeting regarding Mr. Englehart's recommendation for assessing owners of larger parcels. (See attached). 1 Aay I also suggest that you and the Council take time to review the assessed totals for those few who have acreage. The inequities are unacceptable and someone needs to equate logical unit numbers and assessment figures before a legal problem arises. The bottom line is that expecting one resident to pay for someone's ballpark unit total for NON- EXISTING use is discriminatory and unjust. Sincerely, 1 JoAnn Iiallgren 1 6860 Minnewashta Parkway Excelsior, MN 55331 474 -8315 1 Copy: Don Ashworth 1 1 1 - 4' _ Cr;vPC r.VJT ' res id ents but it • comes from trucks 'a nd it • comes from corporat • all pay the � gas tax into the system and it's divided according to the formulas for State Aid iliv) again where each city over 5,000 receives their proportionate share based on their population. Mr. Dave Headla commented on assessment policy. Would like /- to see deferred assessments for the raw land area r The City could defer I assessments. They would have to be levied but deferred/ But we suggest that large property owners that are not ready for development, they be assessed a minimum of 1 unit at this time with any additional units assessed when the . property is developed through developer's agreements and when the exact number, II of units can be calculated based on their development: However we feel very • strongly that developers in the area should not have deferred assessments at t this time.o• Mr. Terry Forbord of Lundgren Bros. questioned the benefit. My only II answer to that question is the City could not allow development to take place until the collector street system is in place to accommodate the additional traffic that might be generated by the development. He also questioned the unit method of calculation. We feel very strongly and we still recommend that we I maintain the 1.8 units of raw land area. We did deduct out of this land area for wetland. We also deducted for any additional street widths. The 1.8 units per acre would leave each lot created at 24,200 square feet. me. Tom Allenburg. II The street is 25 feet in front of his house. Will it increase to 44 feet? - Again, the proposed width is 32 feet wide. 16 feet on center. The walkway is proposed at 6 feet with a 5 foot boulevard as maximum boulevard where allowable where it can be constructed. Again this boulevard will vary to accommodate . II specific property needs such as trees, driveways and slopes. Total right -of -way is 66 feet. The roadway with a 5 foot boulevard, a 6 foot walkway, would encompass 43 feet of the 66 feet leaving 23 feet of right -of -way split between I both sides or 11.5 feet of right -of -way on each side of the road. On the road side where the trail is not being constructed, more green area would be maintained on that side than on the side that the walkway will be on. Mr. Rich II Commer suggested an overlay. Placement of an overlay does not solve the inherent problems of this roadway. That is drainage, subgrade, sight distance and alignments. In fact, a 3 inch bituminous overlay would create a multitude. of problems on this roadway where drainage is concerned. Court MacFarlane II questioned taking trees. We've done our best to save trees wherever possible. Some trees have to go. We can't avoid that. As part of the project design we incorporated the 170 replacement trees. He also commented on the sheet drainage II of the roadway. Sheet drainage does not, let me step back a moment. Sheet drainage is when it hits the road and goes directly off the side of the road. Sheet drainage does not provide for adequate erosion control. Does not provide . '� for adequate erosion control of the natural slopes along the roadway. We have II steep slopes along there. Those slopes are eroding today. By use of the curb and gutter erosion can be stopped and controlled in those areas of slopes and • where the driveways are adjacent to the lake. These areas are now eroding and II would be prepared as part of the project. We also have several culverts that are discharging into the lake. They are also eroding. Those erosion problems at the culverts are causing the slopes to erode and weakening the vegetation of I the slope. Mr. Arnie Head questioned the need for another north /south collector. Minnewashta Parkway is a north /south collector and will carry more traffic whether improved or not. Traffic will increase or accelerate the unsafe L conditions. We felt very responsible when we were preparing this report that it's our responsibility to point out safety concerns for all property owners. Mr. Kevin Cuddihy who's question was additional cost will be incurred in the future. That's very true. We did a present value of the future worth of the II 13 7 f 7 1 II 1. CITYOF CHANHASSEN 1 °. 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 1 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 October 6, 1993 1 • Joann Hallgren 1 6860 Minnewashta Parkway Excelsior, MN 55331 Re: Proposed Assessment Against PID No. 25- 0060300 for the Minnewashta Parkway Improvement Project No. 90 -15 Dear Ms. Hallgren: You have recently submitted a letter of objection to the manner of calculating the number of units and the amount of the assessment against your property, PID No. 25- 0060300. A review of the assessment roll information concerning your property has been made. The proposed assessment to be levied against your property is based on a total of 11.5 acres of land containing no wetlands. This assessment roll has implemented a 1.4 unit per net acreage assessment factor at a rate of $760 per unit. Based on these criteria, your property could generate at least 28 units upon development. Therefore, a $21,280 assessment is proposed against your property. If your property is subdivided in the future generating more than 28 units, the additional charges will then be collected. I should also note that your property is listed under green acre status for 1993. Under green acre status, any levied special assessments against this property would go deferred. If you should have any further questions or comments, please feel free to contact me. ' Sincerely, CITY OF CHANHAS EN Charles D. Folch, P.E. Director of Public Works /City Engineer 1 CDF:ktm 1 c: Bill Engelhardt, William R. Engelhardt Associates Allan Larson, William R. Engelhardt Associates 1 1 I 1 Calf Or illiANIIKNAP, Pti ng57F To: Chanhassen Mayor City Council Members Ov U 1 i99 From: Louis & Gladys Zakariasen � f 3861 Red Cedar Point �+ Excelsior, MN. 55331 Re: Proposed Assessment We wish to express our objection to the proposed assessment of $2,280.00 against our property. Parcel #25- 0080700. ' We have one dwelling with two retired people living in said dwelling. Our extra lot is landlocked and we have been told by former council mem— bers that it is not possible to build on said property. We cannot afford to develop said property with the cost of streets, sewer, water, utilities and storm sewer. If we ever sell it most likely would have to remain single dwelling. 1 Thank you for your consideration. 1 • CITYOF 1 0 043r 690 COULTE DRIVE . BOX 4 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 1 (612) 937 P.O-1900 1 • 7 FAX (612 937 - 573 9 October 6, 1993 Louis and Gladys Zakariasen I 3861 Red Cedar Point Excelsior, MN 55331 Re: Proposed Assessment to PID No. 25- 0080700 for Minnewashta Parkway Improvement Project No. I 90 -15 1 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Zakariasen: The City has recently received your objection to the proposed assessment of $2,280 against your property, I PID No. 25- 0080700, based on the contention that your extra lot is landlocked and therefore not buildable and, in addition, that being retired you are not financially able to develop the property. From review of the assessment roll information, it has been determined that your parcel could be subdivided into a ' . minimum of two more lots which could be served through a private driveway as per City ordinance. Therefore, as you were notified, a total of 3 units including your existing home has been established at a rate of $760 per unit for a total assessment of $2,280 against your property. I I should note that the City does have procedures allowing for deferment of special assessments for persons age 65 years or older who would incur a hardship if required to pay the special assessment, with hardship being defined as the average annual payment for the assessment exceeding 1% of your adjusted gross income. If this may be of interest to you, please feel free to contact me or City Treasure Jean Meuwissen for further information. Sincerely, 111 y, CITY OF CHANHA 1 Charles D. Folch, P.E. 1 Director of Public Works /City Engineer CDF:ktm 1 c: Jean Meuwissen, Treasurer Bill Engelhardt, William R. Engelhardt Associates Allan Larson, William R. Engelhardt Associates 1 1 IZ II Dear Mr. Mayor: September 29, 1993 ' I would like to cover two subjects with you, and both are related to the Minnewashta Parkway improvement. Although the progress has been slow, it was a needed improvement. The first subject is the potential assessment against each unit, and the other is the deferred payment consideration. In the council minutes of July 8, 1991, page 17 about 1/3 down. To summarize, I asked that the assessment be levied against each unit as opposed to an assessment guessing at what total development may ' occur. My point being : A. One does not know how many lots will be developed.If the road goes on my property I certainly will have less 11 lots than if the road goes on the neighbors property. It is impossible to be fair and equitable to try to interpret the future. - B. There are several potential "extra lots" along the roadway that can be developed, maybe in 1998 or maybe 2005. How would you judge which places will never be developed? C. It appears to me that if it is assumed I have "x" number of square feet available that can be extrapolated into so many lots. That could be correct, however it could be a ' gross error. I have many significant trees on my property well over 50 years old and want to keep them. Thus the number of lots will be less than optimum. ' I suggest that the only realistic way to determine equitable assessments is to pay your assessment at the time of plot approval or a building license is issued. This approach is mentioned by Mr. ' Engelhart at the July 22, 1991 council meeting, page 13 near the top. ' The other issue is deferred payment, and paying interest on the deferred amount. Why should interest be paid? No one extra is using the improvement. Let me list some situations that I believe have not been addressed: A. Suppose 1 choose not to sell half of my land, and I live ' for another 25 years. Now you would be charging me for _ longivity! Am I suppose to pay interest on something I would use less and less? ' B. What is the precedence of new homes going up in this area, does each one of these homes pay interest on the unit assessment we had to pay for water and sewer? Why not, what is different than me paying interest on an assessment for - - 1 the parkway improvement? I feel I should be paid interest `* - a••3 -3 ": _i on my two unit charge I received. I haven't used the second assessment and don't plan to use it. 1 1 1 C. If I have to pay interest on the deferred assessment, my I interest charge would be something like $100 /month. I am not ready for a $100 /mn penalty like that. Again I ask that our assessment be against one unit, if we sell and 1 any building is done, that effort should pay their assessment. I would also suggest that a modification be made and the cost of living increase be factored into the calculation. I look forward to our open hearing. 1 Sincerely, David R. Head] a # �5 004,0ip° a.� 1 cc: Cit Council Mr. Ashworth Mr Engelhart 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 CITYOF ,v CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 October 6, 1993 Mr. David R. Headla ' 6780 Minnewashta Parkway Excelsior, MN 55331 Re: Proposed Assessment to PID No. 25 -0060100 for Minnewashta Parkway Improvement Project No. 90 -15 r Dear Mr. Headla: ' The City has recently received your letter with questions and concerns for the proposed assessment to be levied against your property, PID No. 25- 0060100. From review of the assessment roll supporting information, it was found that the number of units your property contains a total of 10 acres. A unit rate of approximately 1.4 uriits per net assessable acre has been implemented with this assessment roll to estimate the number of units and undeveloped property could potentially generate. However, the proposed number of units to be levied against your property has been based on a concept preliminary plat submitted for development which contains your property, the Ziegler property and the Wenzel property. Based on this preliminary plat, the 6 assessable units charged at S760 1 per unit would generate a $4,560 total assessment against this property. You also raised a question as to the possibility of deferring all but 1 unit against the property without interest. You r had suggested that the total number of units established be delayed until an approved development plan is made and that instead of interest accrual on a deferment that some sort of cost -of- living increase be factored into the calculation. I certainly agree that no one knows for sure what the future will hold; however, it is staffs contention r that the improvements made to Minnewashta Parkway benefit all the properties defined within the assessment area. Your assessment is based on a concept preliminary plat which is the best available information we have to date on potential development of yours and adjoining the property. In terms of interest clock, typically the benefit basically begins with the completion of the project irrespective of whether the property owner chooses to subdivide the r property or not. The final decision on the matter of assessment deferral and associated interest does rest with the City Council. If you should have any further questions or comments, please feel free to contact me. ' Sincerely, CITY OF CHANHASS Charles D. Folch, P.E. 1 Director of Public Works /City Engineer CDF:ktm 1 c: Bill Engelhardt, William R. Engelhardt Associates Allan Larson, William R. Engelhardt Associates 1 1 0A�� - '^�u �/TyUF�r`�h��h��xBV m� SEPTEMBER 29, 1993 MR. DON ASHWORTH N� |� CITY CLERK/MANAGER 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 N� l� DEAR MR. ASHWORTH, I AM RESPONDING TO YOUR NOTICE OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENT IMPROVEMENT NO. 90-15, PARCEL NO. 25-0060200, COPY ATTACHED. WE WERE UNDER THE IMPRESSION FROM THE MEETINGS HELD IN JULY 1991 BY THE CIPT COUNCIL THAT OPEN ACREAGE WOULD NOT DE ASSESSED UNTIL IT WAS PLOTTED. THIS PARCEL CONTAINS 10.5 ACRES WITH TWO HOMES ON THE EAST END. THE 7.11 ACRES FROM THE SECTION LINE TO THE WEST IS UNDER A SALES CONTRACT WHICH IS INCLUDED IN THE LAND N� DEVELOPMENT PROJECT THAT THE CITr IS NEGOTIATING FOR A PARf WITH HERRITAGE HOMES. THE BALANCE OF THE LAND IS TWO HOME SITES WITH 3.39 ACRES. IT WOULD SEEM LOGICAL THAT WE SHOULD BE �56E6EED FOR HE TWO E'Ic:TING HOMES AND THE ASSESSMENT ON THE BALANCE WOULD BE OFF UNTIL THE CIT'T COMPLETES ITS NEGOTIATIONS AND APPROVES THE NEW DEVELOFMENT AS TO THE NUMBER OF HOUSING L OTS' IF IOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS REGAGDING OUR PO US AT 474-3b10 OF WRITE TO ME. SI NCEREL Y, 4 P4C'HENZEL CC: MATOR CHMIEL ��rg _.�� Z ' 0 �Y�� OCT - 6 .93 �� -`'"^ ' ^,vwIl urV~f~ 1 (. 1 - October 6 1993 City of Chanhassen, Special Assessment , Improvement # 90 -15 1 Attached is our notice advising us of the share of this project that we will be expected to pay. It seems reasonable. We have planned to leave for the West Coast for a few weeks, missing_the Meeting you planned ' for October 11 1993. 1 We have been informed be phone that upon further study, we will be expected to carry TWO assessments. We object. 1 This letter is in compliance with request made in your notice(which is not dated) Attached, requiring a written notice of objection prior to the hearing date of October 11 . Reasons for appeal have not been formalized nor assembled. Principal among the reasons will be our unwillingness to re -visit the anguish that was brought upon us in the City's handling of Project # 71 -1 during the 1973 - 1980 time frame. We will be discussing this with you a►:some future date. 1 Respectfully yours, Ricahrd H. Comer, 1 3800 Red Cedar Pt. Drive, Excelsior, Minn. 35331 1 1 1 1 4 C ITYOF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 I (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 3 October 7, 1993 ' Mr. & Mrs. Michael Wenner 3801 Red Cedar Point Drive Excelsior, MN 55331 Re: Minnewashta Parkway Improvement Project Assessment Notice for PID No. 25- 8770020 Lot 2, Block 1 Way Addition - Project No. 90 -15 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Warner: This City has recently discovered an error in the assessable unit determination associated with your property, PID No. 25- 8770020 (Lot 2, Block 1 Way Addition). Carver County records indicate that this property has a net area of 1.21 acres. Given it size and topography, this parcel could feasibly yield two buildable sites. Therefore, the correct assessment for this parcel is two units at $760.00 per unit for a total assessment of $1,520.00. You were incorrectly notified previously of only a one unit assessment totaling $760.00 for the property. Enclosed please find a corrected assessment notice for your records. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. , Sincerely, CITY OF CHANHASSEN , Charles D. Folch Director of Public Works/City Engineer ' CDF:jms Attachment: Revised Assessment Notice ' c: Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer Jean Meuwissen, Treasurer Bill Engelhardt, William R. Engelhardt Associates Allan Larson, William R. Engelhardt Associates • 11 11 CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA SPECIAL ASSESSMENT NOTICE I IMPROVEMENT NO: 90 -15 II The City Council will hold a public hearing to consider proposed assessments for Improvement Project No. S.A.P No. 194- 111 -01, on Monday, October 11. 1993 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at 690 Coulter Drive, Chanhassen., Minnesota. The area to be assessed I includes Minnewashta Parkway, T.H. 5 to T.H. 7, Street, Storm Sewer and Walkway Improvements. The total amount of the proposed assessment is $ 402,800.00. Your assessment has been calculated in II accordance with the City Council's policy as follows: Property Owner: Michael & Cynthia Wenner 1 Address: 3801 Red Cedar Point Drive Excelsior, MN. 55331 II Parcel No: 25- 8770020 1 Proposed Assessment Against Your Property as Described Below: Specific _:narovements Amount II Street, Storm Sewer and Walkway Improvements $1,520.00 1 1 - Aessmet may be paid i full without interest or other charges *wi th X 30) days aft t he assessment hearing date. These payments may be made in person or may be mailed to Chanhassen City Hall, 690 Coulter Drive, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317, II Attention: Treasurer. Please indicate the parcel .number on your check. Partial prepayment of the assessment is permitted. 1 If you elect not to pay the full amount within thirty (30) days after the hearing date, the assessment will be spread over 8 years with installments appearing on your real estate taxes I beginning next year. Interest will be included at the rate of 7 - 1/2 percent of the unpaid balance. The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk. II Written and oral objections to the proposed assessment by any property owner will be considered. I No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any assessment adopted unless a written objection signed by the affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing or II presented to the presiding officer at the hearing. 1 ,/' 11 Michael D. & Cynthia H. Wenner II 3801 Red Cedar Point Drive Excelsior, MN 55331 II 1. Legal description calls it one lot - - Lot 2, Block i - Not 2 and.... I 2. No public road or right of way serves the back of lot - No legal access II - Our driveway only serves to the front of our garage 3. Law states that no more than four homes can be served by a private easement, in this case it already serves five. II 4. Lot size is approximately 1.2 acres II less current home 0.6 acre less West easement 1/3 acre less Pond - Wetland 1/10 acre II Sub Net .15 acres 80' x 80' less North, South, East Setbacks 1/10 acre Remaining Net .05 acres 45 x 45 2178 sq. ft. II 5. Remaining area is covered by mature maples, lindens and boxelder trees and is used by us as privacy. II 1 II ; j8 �e,_ $£ Y , 1 CDT 0 . 1993 i:iisvrim:i:p p 1 1 _ . . 1 , SLPTION• Rid EI:'v•t' .r - r..lu t0 S invert o MH 9- 7 -1- ; rir , rhOnF10 HS'LVlit PIOR ,lock 1, WAY ADDITION, according ed ,l r on file and of record, thereof, 1- Pr) „}I�"� ' :o ty, Minnesota. ° � 6)00,-,/ � M' � v S6° No 3 �� O 3e� 4F J o . s o h ` -.,,,, V�� • n aus 96 C es 3enotes Existing Eleva 8g ° tes Proposed Elevation d� �� 9/ 2 4 3 ' 04 ∎, tes Surface Drainage wa i U j ? ; , 7 t Q . 1 - 3E8 <H ° ^Q E ^\ / Q' ' A, w 10 i 5 1 f / \, 6` - -: `-- 15 9C•t* h / Z• .43 1 S ' r b V, 5; 965' / , h u i > ., 33 (o I I ' Not P r1 A o, 0 /O r� H, �� , � 11 N' I li d 0 0 _a '2 in a ge and Ave • til / ,,F` ,, 0 1 inge and 0,..) e cement ad�oir,in� ri,,ao co line of Lot 2 / j et been vacated. / -the house as S78 °14'04' E / j .Des not Meet 12 07 I ""-. -�f k equirement s and O until said �! n built u.: ; an easement are , i the proposed i s ow loacatPd I Y I / 9 easement. 3 2 s d / co / tr Q / y 1 \7 3 o ti r a I 1 co o / `c I L / z z O Y w VED .' • k,/ / `I 3 / "<g 1 5 _ I ...7, ' . t 2Q / I P • �� pON �� 27-�� ' /42 2 \ \ _ - - / `Il4 10 Wares E iev :94 3 I z 5 32° 50'04 „F N 7 5 J 16 50 I 1 11 Chanhassen City Hall 690 Coulter Drive P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, Mn. 55317 Dear City Council, Yes we do protest the proposed assessment for Improved , Project # S.A.P. No. 194- 111 -01 that includes Minnewashta Park- way. We believe that we shouldn't be assessed any amount for the following reasons. 1) We live one half mile away from Minnewashta Parkway. 2) We never use the Parkway. If we want to go to Mpls. we use Highway 7. If we go to Chanhassen we use Highway 7 to 41 and then continue on Highway 5 to Chanhassen. If we travel west, we again use Highway 7. As you can see the Parkway is • of no use to us. ' In one of your letters this past year you stated that improving Minnewashta Parkway would benefit or enhance our 1 property. How can that benefit our property when we live a half mile away? That was the biggest pile of crap we have heard in a long time. We didn't vote for that project. Why don't you assess the people for the entire amount who voted for it? 11 With real estate taxes due Oct. 15th and now this ass- essment, how do you expect retired people to come up with this amount of money. To have it put on our real estate tax state- ment won't help us either because we can't afford the interest ' either. We hope this protest will be evaluated and that common 1 sense will prevail. Sincerely, L Leonard H. & S. Hein 1 Parcel No. 25- 6150220 1 CITYOF 1 ,0:4)„ CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 1 October 6, 1993 1 Ms. Kris Kortgard 3901 Glendale Drive ' Excelsior, MN 55331 Re: Minnewashta Parkway Improvement Project No. 90 -15 Assessment Inquiry PID No. 25- 0070300 and 25- 0070400 Dear Ms. Kortgard: You have recently inquired as to wetland area and number of assessment units proposed to be levied against your two referenced properties. I have reviewed the assessment roll information and have determined that for PID No. 25- 0070300, the property contains a total of 15.62 acres; however, approximately 14.5 acres is designated as wetland. Therefore, 1 unit of assessment is proposed against this property in the amount of $760. For PID No. 25- 0070400, the property totals approximately 4 acres. It has been determined that the wetland area and potential future Kings Road right -of -way area totalling nearly '/2 acre should be credited yielding a net area of approximately 31/2 acres for the property. Based on a rate of 1.4 units per net acreage, a total of 1 5 units at $760 per unit is proposed to be assessed against your property totalling $3,800. I hope I have addressed your questions thoroughly. If you should need additional information, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, CITY OF CHA : SSEN Charles D. Folch, P.E. ' Director of Public Works /City Engineer CDF:ktm c: Bill Engelhardt, William R. Engelhardt Associates Allan Larson, William R. Engelhardt Associates 1 1 1 C ITYOF CHANHASSEN ;•c v'. 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 October 6, 1993 1 Mr. Nick Hawley 3703 South Cedar Excelsior, MN 55331 and 1920 1st Street South, Apt. 1 Minneapolis, MN 55454 Re: Assessment to PID No. 25- 6600510 and 25- 6600490 Minnewashta Parkway Improvement Project No. 90 -15 Dear Mr. Hawley: You have recently inquired to the proposed special assessment levied to the above - referenced parcels in association with the Minnewashta Parkway Improvement Project No. 90 -15. You had raised a concern that assessments were being levied against these properties when they are not buildable properties. I have asked the Planning Department to make a review of these lots to determine whether or not they are in fact buildable parcels. From Planning staff review, it has been determined that both of these lots would need to obtain a variance to be buildable. Staff will recommend to the City Council that if you are willing to sign an agreement stating that these lots are unbuildable or grant a conservation easement over their entirety, that the assessments be dropped. The Council will consider this at the assessment hearing on October 11, 1993. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. 1 Sincerely. CITY OF CHANHASSEN Charles D. Folch Director of Public Works /City Engineer CDF:jms c: Bill Engelhardt, William R. Engelhardt Associates Allan Larson, William R. Engelhardt Associates 1 1 ii . City Ceur Meeting - - uly 22, 1991 / p / rhie / 410. 6 Don Ashworth: I think so. II Mayor Chmiel: Alright. Any other discussion? If not, can I have a motion? II Councilman Workman: I would move approval of the award of bids, City Center Park Handicapped Accessible Playground Equipment. Councilwoman Dimler: Second. II Councilman Workman: I would add that that would go to Flanagan Sales. 1 Resolution #91 -69: Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to award the bid for the handicapped accessible playground equipment for City Center Park to Flanagan Sales in the amount of $19,500.00. All voted in favor I and the motion carried unanimously. MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY FEASIBILITY; AUTHORIZE PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, PROJECT 90 -15. 1 Public Present: I Name Address Julie Flemming 3966 Linden Circle Jim & Lois Zaste 3960 Linden Circle I Ken Smith 3837 Red Cedar Point Gordon Freeburg 3891 Lone Cedar Lane Jim Connor 3901 Red Cedar Point Drive II B. Fuller 7025 Red Cedar Cove Nancy Nelson 3891 Linden Circle Harry & Chris Drahos 3911 Linden Circle II Zoe Bros Jim & Susan Gulstrand 6631 Minnewashta Parkway 3831 Red Cedar Point Road Steven Erickson 3850 Leslee Curve Jeanette Boley 7414 Minnewashta Parkway II Jim Borchard 7331 Minnewashta Rarkway Jim Josin 7301 Minnewashta Parkway Peter Benjamin 7231 Minnewashta Parkway II Al H. Klingelhutz Doris Hanson 8600 Great Plains Blvd, 6210 Cypress Drive Edwin & Leivia Seim 3616 Red Cedar Point Drive I Robert G. Schunight Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik Peter Moe 7141 Minnewashta Parkway Pam Smith 3714 Hickory Road Al & Carla Smith 3706 Hickory Road II Marcia Rowland Ed Oathout 3921 Glendale Drive 3940 Hawthorne Circle Alice Johnson 3940 Glendale Drive U Don & Barb Bittermann 7085 Red Cedar Cove Louis Guthmueller 7095 Red Cedar Cove David L. Tester 3897 Lone Cedar Lane II Jery L. Kortgard 3901 Glendale Drive Jim & Ruth A. Boylan 6760 Minnewashta Parkway i 7 II City Council Meeting - July 22, 1991 1 Name Address _ 1 Kevin Cuddihy 3900 Stratford Ridge Tim Fisher 7099 Red Cedar Cove Dave Headla 6870 Minnewashta Parkway Dave Hempel 3707 South Cedar Drive JoAnn Hallgren 6860 Minnewashta Parkway Lura Genz 7096 Red Cedar Cove Deborah & Janet Hofer 7098 Red Cedar Cove Charles H. Anding 3631 South Cedar Drive Ric & Marianne Anding 3715 South Cedar Drive Charles & Vicki Anding 6601 Minnewashta Parkway Ada Anding 3631 South Cedar Drive Jill Hempel 3707 South Cedar Drive Michael David Kammerer 4000 Crestview Drive Christi Monette 4000 Crestview Drive Scott Kalash 4000 Crestview Drive Linda Baner 3624 Red Cedar Point Mayor Chmiel: What I'd like to do at this particular time, we had several questions that were asked of the City. Council, staff and anyone else who had questions were directed to Bill. What I asked Bill to do was prepare some answers back for each of those questions. I would like to go through that process first and have him address those. Then what I'd like to do as well, in sitting down with Bill last week, Monday and this Monday as well. I would also like him to go over the State Aid, extending that for some additional dollars plus taking out approximately $91,000.00 for the walls which would bring, if the project were to go through, would bring the total assessments down. So with that I'd like Bill to take it from there and address those issues. Bill Engelhardt: Thank you your Honor. Members of the Council. My name is Bill Engelhardt, Engelhardt and Associates of Chaska. As the Mayor indicated, I've spent the past 2 weeks going through the Minutes of the previous meeting, • the July 8th meeting. I've attempted to address the concerns that the property owners spoke of the night of the July 8th meeting. In general the questions focused on six major issues. I think what I'd like to do is summarize those six major issues and then I have each individual property owner that spoke. I've pulled out of the Minutes again their comments and to the best of my ability I'll try and answer them for you. The six issues that I focused on that I think are the major concerns with this particular project is number one safety. Number two, proposed new road width. Number three, the walkway. Number four, project environmental concerns and drainage. Number five, the cost of the project and number six, the method of funding of the project. Now to clarify each of those six issues, safety. Minnewashta Parkway in our opinion is deficient in about every category of design for a safe roadway as it exists today. We have poor sight distances. The roadway width is inadequate. We have problems with vertical alignment as well as horizontal alignment. That means the hills that you have to go over, the curbs that you have to go around. We have poor slopes and alignment of access points on the major arterial highways. Specifically TH 7 and TH 5. We have no shoulder areas. There are no clear zones. Clear zones is the traffic terminology for the distance from the edge of the road to obstructions. When you have a rural section under your State Aid standards, which the road exists today, that's generally considered a safe zone 8 1 City Council Mccting - 'uiy 22, 1991 or clear zone is generally considered to be 40 feet. Now that's quite a bit different if you use the barrier curb which we're proposing on the proposal. The barrier curb allows those obstructions to be within 1 to 2 feet. Structural strength of the roadway is very questionable and there's no separation of pedestrian or vehicle traffic at this time. Second issue was of the proposed new roadway width. The reconstruction of the roadway is proposed to be 32 feet back of curb to back of curb. The right -of -way in this particular area is 66 feet and the existing roadway, as it's constructed today varies from 28 to 22 11 feet with the 22 foot section being on the southerly end closest to TH 5. In general the roadway is about 28 feet throughout the length. The new design adds approximately 6 inches of bituminous to the present edge and 18 inches of gutter line or concrete gutter. In most areas the new width we feel will not encroach on the manicured lawns. We're going to be working pretty much within the disrupted area adjacent to the existing bituminous mat. The reduced width keeps the tree clearing to a minimum but we have also incorporated replacement trees 11 as part of the project. The pedestrian separation would be provided by the use of a barrier curb and boulevards wherever possible. Proposed walkways 6 feet in width in conjunction with a maximum boulevard of about 5 feet. We'd have a ' total construction width of 43 feet. The boulevard width will vary under certain circumstances where we're going to be trying to save trees. Work with driveways and the close proximity of residents. Again the proposed walkway is 6 feet in width. Construction of the walkway alone is not recommended. With a clear defined separation is barrier curb. You have the possibility and the potential of vehicle directly accessing the walkway. In addition to that, future reconstruction of the roadway along with drainage facilities will require removal of any walkway constructed today. We also feel that the cost of the walkway is estimated at 10% to 20% less if bid with the overall project so the State Aid funds would provide funding for the retaining walls, tree removal and tree replacement. Fourth issue, drainage and storm sewer facilities. Present drainage patterns do not provide for erosion control or storm water treatment. There's uncontrolled drainage to the ditch sections or the side of the road ' which increases with every heavy storm. The uncontrolled drainage in the ditch results in the contamination throughout the entire street. From vehicles. From salt, sand, snow and even from the lawn and weed control and the fertilizers. The utilization of curb and gutter and storm sewer control drains from the streets and the adjacent areas conveys the storm water to retention ponds where the heavier particles are settled out. Floating material is skimmed prior to discharge. With the use of these types of facilities you can control the rate of discharge and regulate your discharge. The City is presently undertaking a storm water management program for the entire city and I feel that this area will require work in the future even if the street construction is not undertaken. The proposed design will require both the approval of the DNR and the Watershed Districts. We'll be working very closely with them to coordinate and provide for the best methods of treatment for the storm water. Fifth item was cost. The estimated project cost in the original study was $2,112,738.00. That cost included a reduction of approximately $100,000.00 due to reducing the road width from 36 feet to 32 feet. That reduction in the roadway width came about after the neighborhood meetings and discussions with MnDot where MnDot allowed us to go down to 32 feet. The shifting of the walkway as discussed at the last meeting from the east side of the road to the west side of the road from TH 7 and Kings Point Road will also result in the savings of approximately $95,000.00. We will not have to construct as much retaining wall as originally anticipated. Therefore the estimated project cost is $2,017,738.00. The 1 9 • 1 City Council Meeting - July ?, 1991 ' • funding for this project will be provided by four sources. Number one, 1 municipal State Aid Street Funds. Number two, General Obligation Bonds. Number three, Special Assessments and number four, the Trunk Water Funds. Under funding, Minnesota State Aid Fund for designated streets, the City of Chanhassen has an annual allotment of $274,378.00. This amount will increase each year and is estimated at $323,000.00 for future years. The annual allotment of Minnesota State Aid Street Funds depends on the population and future needed road construction dollars. These are all taken into account and added together for cities that are over 5,000 and allocated each year. As the City expands and the population grows, a proportionate share of dollars assigned to Chanhassen increases. It also should be noted that monies that aren't encumbered does have the effect of reducing your allotment of your State Aid dollars. This is very rare though. This money must also be used only in Municipal State Aid streets that are designated by the City and approved by MnDot. The general obligation funding as part of the project will be used for various items of the project including storm sewer and walkway construction. This is in keeping with past policy for projects previously undertaken. The special assessments for this project was originally proposed at $1,250.00 at an interest rate of 8% over 8 years. The annual cost would be $256.00 the first year and reduced to $165.00 in the last year. Calculation for the assessments was based on a unit•method where raw land is calculated at 1.8 units per acre after reductions for wetland and streets. In some cases developers had submitted sketch plans for several areas where previous discussions had been held with the City and they developers or property owners to determine the units of assessment. Now the City Council requested an additional one year of State Aid funds be applied to this project. The effect of adding additional State Aid funding will be a reduction in the assessments to $758.55 per unit. We have to be very careful that this amount equals 20: of the project because under State Statute 429 for public improvements, a minimum of 20% of the project must be assessed. The $758.55 meets that test. The present MSAS fund balance would be used including the 1991 funds plus 2.5 years of encumbered funds. This along with the general obligation bonds, the assessments and trunk water funds would finance the • .- project. Trunk water funds will be used for a very small •amount of realignment of some watermains to accommodate the construction. Now that's a summary of the project. Some of the notes and comments that we heard during the meetings. I've taken the Minutes of the July 8th meeting and folks in each individual property that spoke. The first one that I have is Arlene Herndon and please excuse me if I don't pronounce your names right. I'll do my best. Her comments focused on the loss of property value and no benefit to the property. My answer to that is a very general answer. I've been experienced in projects of this nature for about the past 20 years. Numerous projects of this nature have been undertaken by both the City of Chanhassen, cities throughout the country, throughout the metropolitan area. The test is benefit and I feed very strongly In this particular case that we could sustain the benefit if challenged-in court. I also believe that the improvements do tend to increase property values and that your assessment would be sustained. Mr. Jim Boylan had several area of concern. Number one was street width. He questioned whether the 32 foot street was verified by MnDot. The MnOot standards for a low density collector, which this is designated as, allow for a 32 foot width and this has been verified by MnDot. He was concerned with six maple trees that would be probably taken during the project. We asked the DNR Forester to go out and examine those trees. Look at them and render an opinion on those tree. I've attached the letter from the 10 ', City Council Meeting - J• 22, 1991 II . DNR Forester. If you'd like, I can read it or summarize it. It's up to the Council. Mayor Chmiel: I wish you would. Y Y 11 Bill Engelhardt: Okay. This is addressed to Bill Engelhardt from Alan Olson, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Subject: Sugar Maple trees at the Boylan residence, 6760 Minnewashta Parkway. The description of the trees found is as follows: Starting with the northerly most tree in the row. Tree #1. 45 inch DBH. DBH stands for diameter of the tree where it's measured and it's measured 4 feet off the ground. So the diameter of that tree is 45 inches 4 feet off the ground. His comment is it's hollow. He says multiple rot pockets and forks 6 and 1/2 feet above the ground. The significance of the forks in the tree at that width is that he feels that healthy trees need to have their structures or their forks at 16 feet or above. It supports the canopy better. Tree #2 is 29 inch DBH. It's hollow. Forks 5 feet above the ground. Tree #3, 30 inch DBH. Shows rot and forks at 8 feet. Tree #4, 26 DBH. Shows rot and forks at 10 feet. Tree #5, twin tree rot at point of forks, 16 inches and 14 inch DBH. Tree #6, 6 foot stump. Tree #7, 23 inch DBH. Forks at 12 '•= feet. Trees are from 52 to 56 feet tall and have multiple leaders with large crowns. He goes on to say all these trees were planted at approximately the ' same time. The estimated age is 100 years. I did not take a core sample to more accurately determine their age. There are signs of rot in all the trees but the two trees north of the driveway having the most extensive rot. These trees are a potential hazard to the road from splitting during stormy weather. It is always difficult to accurately determine how much longer a tree will live. These trees are certainly mature and showing signs of damage to the main stem of the tree. The vigor that these trees once had to outgrow problems is no longer a part of these trees. As with anything living the growth slows down. �. The tree reaches the later stages of it's life. This is where this group of trees is at this time. The next item that Mr. Boylan spoke about was concern for his next door neighbor not aware of the location of the new trail. I met with Mr. Jeff Kristen of 6810 Minnewashta Parkway on July 18, 1991. I explained the location of the roadway and the trail. He was concerned with the saving of his large maple tree. I feel that we will be able to save that tree. We will have to make some adjustments in the walkway alignment. Mr. Kirsten was very reasonable. We will review the final drawings with him prior to bidding. He felt very comfortable with the proposal. Next item was the Eastern Carver County Traffic Study was in error. I guess the best I can say is the Eastern Carver County Study was prepared for a coalition of cities along with Carver County to plan for future traffic volumes of the area. The study was conducted using traffic models which incorporate TH 7 and TH 5 corridors within these cities and Chanhassen. I do also feel that the traffic modeling that was done had slightly higher numbers than what I think we're going to see out there from a personal opinion. That's why in the designing of the roadway we used the low density collector and the low volume of traffic. If we could have used modeling at the higher rates that was suggested by the study, you would see an excess of a 30 foot road. He questioned State Aid. This may be somewhat repetitive but I think the confusion surrounding this term is mainly due to the recent legislative session where State Aid to cities was a commonly used term. The correct terminology for this project is Municipal State Aid for Street Construction. Cities with a population of 5,000 or greater share in a pool of money set aside from the gas tax user fee. This money is proportionated to the 1 11 • City Council Meeting - July ', 1991 1 cities on an annual basis and it's based on the calculated cost or needs of the City to rebuild or construct designated street. The annual allotment incorporates a city's population. The greater the population the greater the need the greater the proportionate share of money. Again the City of Chanhassen has an annual allotment of $274,378.00. Based on the needs that have been calculated for the City of Chanhassen, next year's allotment should be in the range of $323,000.00. The next person who spoke, I'm going to say Lettia Seim. Okay, it's misspelled. I'm sorry for that. Her question basically centered on why is the proposal changing? One day I come in and tell you one thing and the next day I'm telling you something else. The street width was reduced through the discussion with MnDot and this is very common practice. As the project goes on you keep defining and redefining your concerns. The homeowner meetings were 11 very helpful. We took note of the comments from the homeowners and we tried to address those and when we did address them, we needed to make changes. The drainage was discussed with the DNR. That was another issue. Why does that keep changing? One time it goes to Minnewashta. One time it goes to Lake St. Joe. Again, through discussions with the DNR, these items change. They need to be defined and even to this date we don't have a conclusive answer on this. Most of these projects, review agencies will not give answers or comments without a full set of design drawings to review. They will only comment in a general way of proposals which does leave the impression that we're - changing constantly. This can't be avoided without a complete final set of drawings submitted for their review and comment to the various agencies. Harvey Sobol's question was, will Minnewashta Parkway become a TH 41. Proposed roadway design will not turn Minnewashta Parkway into a highway 41. In fact a standard Chanhassen residential street is 28 feet in width. The collector, as this is being designed, carries traffic from a large area which increases the traffic volumes which dictates a wider street design to meet the MnOot safety design standards. The proposed roadway of 32 feet is only 4 feet wider than a typical residential street for the city of Chanhassen. Peter Benjamin. Will Minnewashta Parkway be 4 lanes? The answer is very simple and straight forward. No. Mr. Ed Oathout. What is the design speed? The design speed for the highway is 30 mph by State Statute. He feels that enforcement is the key to speed control. In most cases and we found this time and time again when speed studies have been done, that a lot of times the residents who are driving the road daily tend to speed slightly on the road. Basically because they're very familiar with the road. Familiar with the hazards of the road and they'll tend to increase their speeds somewhat. He also questioned the residential trips per day. In the study we indicated that for design of roadways, traffic planning utilizes 10 trips per day for residential area. This is a traffic planning model number. It's been studied throughout the country and it's a well documented number. It includes the number of trips that a resident or the residents will make from their residence. It also includes deliveries and those types of things. For traffic planning and traffic design, the 10 trips per day is found to be a very accurate number. Omar Proshek questioned the increased traffic. The only answer I can give to that, as the Metro area grows the traffic volumes have grown. The traffic on the parkway will increase. State Highway 41 and CR 13 we feel will carry the majority of the traffic traveling north or south between the two arterial state highways of 7 and 5. Those two particular roadways the speed limit is 50 -55 versus a speed limit of 30 mph of the Minnewashta Parkway proposal. He also questioned where does State Aid come from? We the taxpayers. Mr. Proshek is correct. It comes from the taxpayer. It comes from the gas tax that you pay on your gasoline. Not only from the 12 1 City Council Meeting - lily 22, 1991 residents but it comes from trucks and it comes from corporations all paying the as tax into the system and it's divided according to the formulas for State Aid again where each city over 5,000 receives their proportionate share based on their population. Mr. Dave Headla commented on assessment policy. Would like to see deferred assessments for the raw land area. The City could defer assessments. They would have to be levied but deferred. But we suggest that large property owners that are not ready for development, that they be assessed a minimum of 1 unit at this time with any additional units assessed when the ' property is developed through developer's agreements and when the exact number of units can be calculated based on their development. However we feel very strongly that developers in the area should not have deferred assessments at this time. Mr. Terry Forbord ^ of Lundgren Bros. questioned the benefit. My only answer to that question is the City could not allow development to take place until the collector street system is in place to accommodate the additional traffic that might be generated by the development. He also questioned the unit method of calculation. We feel very strongly and we still recommend that we maintain the 1.8 units of raw land area. We did deduct out of this land area for wetland. We also deducted for any additional street widths. The 1.8 units per acre would leave each lot created at 24,200 square feet. Mr. Tom Allenburg. The street is 25 feet in front of his house. Will it increase to 44 feet? Again, the proposed width is 32 feet wide 16 feet on center. The walkway is proposed at 6 feet with a 5 foot boulevard as maximum boulevard where allowable where it can be constructed. Again this boulevard will vary to accommodate specific property needs such as trees, driveways and slopes. Total right-of—way is 66 feet. The roadway with a 5 foot boulevard, a 6 foot walkway, would I encompass 43 feet of the 66 feet leaving 23 feet of right -of -way split between both sides or 11.5 feet of right -of -way on each side of the road. On the road side where the trail is not being constructed, more green area would be maintained on that side than on the side that the walkway will be on. Mr. Rich Commer suggested an overlay. Placement of an overlay does not solve the inherent problems of this roadway. That is drainage, subgrade, sight distance and alignments. In fact, a 3 inch bituminous overlay would create a multitude of problems on this roadway where drainage is concerned. Court MacFarlane questioned taking trees. We've done our best to save trees wherever possible. Some trees have to go. We can't avoid that As part of the project design we incorporated the 170 replacement trees. He also commented on the sheet drainage of the roadway. Sheet drainage does not, let me step back a moment. Sheet drainage is when it hits the road and goes directly off the side of the road. Sheet drainage does not provide for adequate erosion control. Does not provide for adequate erosion control of the natural slopes along the roadway. We have • steep slopes along there. Those slopes are eroding today. By use of the curb and gutter erosion can be stopped and controlled in those areas of slopes and ' where the driveways are adjacent to the lake. These areas are now eroding and would be prepared as part of the project. We also have several culverts that are discharging into the lake. They are also eroding. Those erosion problems at the culverts are causing the slopes to erode and weakening the vegetation of the slope. Mr. Arnie Head questioned the need for another north /south collector. Minnewashta Parkway is a north /south collector and will carry more traffic whether improved or not. Traffic will increase or accelerate the unsafe conditions. We felt very responsible when we were preparing this report that it's our responsibility to point out safety concerns for all property owners. Mr. Kevin Cuddihy who's question was additional cost will be incurred in the future. That's very true. We did a present value of the future worth of the 1 13 1 City Council Meeting - Jl' 22, 1991 1 project. Today's dollars of $2,017,738.00. Assuming an inflation rate of 5% over the next 5 years as an annual rate might be a little bit high but it's an average. Future worth of the project is $2,575,200.00. Mr. Lowell Carlson, the status of maintain the walkway. This particular walkway is considered a walkway the City does maintain. It provides pedestrian transportation, not just for one street but a general area of the Minnewashta Parkway area. His question also was, is the City reducing the minimum lot size? What Mr. Carlson is referring to is unsewered areas. When we commented about the 1.8 units per acre. The minimum lot size for this area is 15,000 square feet. The 1.8 units for raw land allows for single family lots of 24,200 square feet. We think is a very conservative estimate for single family homes. This is a resident and the 11 question was, will utility lines be buried. NSP will consider bury a power line but may charge the City for this work. During final design we submit these plans to NSP for their review and comment. If they find that it would be less expensive to bury the lines at this time versus relocate the poles, they would consider burying the power lines. However you have to remember that when you put in an underground power where the overhead now exists, connections from the homes to the underground has to be born by the property owner and that cost for these particular homes up there could be in the range of $800.00 to $1,000.00. That's generally how NSP operates on their underground power. It's the responsibility of the homeowner to bury their power and convert their system to their house to underground power. And with that your honor, I think that addresses most of the concerns that I might have and I think with the six questions that we focused on in the beginning, should give us a pretty good basis for the discussions tonight. Mayor Chmiel: Very good. Thank you Bill. I might add I think that was well done addressing all the respective questions that were brought forward at the 1 previous meeting. As I mentioned, even though the public hearing was closed, that I would allow anyone who wishes to speak tonight to address any specific questions. They may so do at this particular time. The only thing I ask is that it not be repetitious of what it was when we discussed it'previously. That there's something new, I'd like this to be brought up as well. At this particular time I would be more than happy to have you come up. Please state your name and your address and we'll go from there. 1 James Boylan: James Boylan, 6760 Minnewashta Parkway. Before I even begin I would like to thank Councilwoman Ursula Dimler for coming out to the house. She is the first one that I've seen since this thing has begun. I guess I don't really know what to say to you other than I don't want to belabor the fact about the trees but there are some issues here that I just don't quite understand myself. Nobody has come to me and talked to me about it except Ursula herself. While she was out there Sunday, I had found out from my 15 year old daughter that somebody had been out to examine our trees. The report that Bill has differs from what my 15 year old daughter told Ursula and I herself about what the guy said about the trees. So you know, I guess if this becomes an issue where we have to go to court over the value of those trees, then I guess I have to spend the money but I'm a property owner. I'm a homeowner. I'm a resident of Chanhassen. It's not my job to get involved with valuing my property and deciding whether or not you're doing damage. A simple city plot map will show that my family and I own both sides of the road on that piece of property and either the developments originally proposed or the new one does a certain amount of damage to our property that I guess I'm having a hard time seeing where it's 14 1 City Council Meeting - 2 22, 1991 really a property evaluement and enhancement. I guess I have to say that Bill has done some of his homework in the respect of evaluating the condition of the roadway and that's absolutely true. I guess last time that we were sitting here talking about this and Rich Comer was up here, I have to say that from my part he did a better job of explaining what he thought needed to be done with that roadway than I did. I kind of had a personal ax to grind with my property and I'd like to put that aside tonight and just talk about the road itself and what he was trying to say and he's not an engineer. I have some traffic engineering but it's more from traffic control and I'd kind of like to address these points from my point of view too. I think we talked about safety last time and Mike and Tom, I am not anti - safety but I also have to look at the fact that as a 20 year resident on that road, there hasn't been a great deal of problems that have been documented. I mean we thought there was a death on the road and to the best of my ability to find out what that was, it was like 25 years ago. An ' alcohol related incident with a single vehicle where a man rolled his car off the road and killed himself. That was a bad deal. It's unfortunate but those things happen. There was another incident where a young man hit a tree down by Leech's Resort in that area. He was being chased by the Sheriff at 11:00 at night. Another alcohol related incident and he was violating speed laws and lost control of his car. The other two incidents that I personally know of on that road occurred where Leslee Curve comes down into Minnewashta Parkway. One was during the wintertime when there was a high piled snowbank and the car couldn't see far enough and went out into the intersection to look and was, two high school aged boys and one T -boned the other because he pulled out too far ' and the other one was going too fast and couldn't stop under the conditions. No injuries. Just damages to cars. The other one that I know about was a 13 year old boy riding his bicycle down that hill on Leslee Curve, ran the stop sign and was hit by a car. Very unfortunate and he was very lucky. He bent the front wheel on his bicycle and went home with a couple of strawberries and a good lesson and it was very fortunate that there wasn't more damage. There have been some serious accidents on both intersections on the end and that's I understandable. TH 7 and TH 5, high traffic areas. High rates of speed. Poor visibility. The State already is addressing this with the possibility of stop signs so I'd like to separate that from the road because the stop signs at those intersections will do a lot to control those types of incidents so we're not talking about the road itself. But let's focus on the road a bit and talk about the condition of the actual road. 20 years ago this city elected to put in sewer and water on that street. At that point in time I'm a little confused as 1 to who's jurisdiction this really was because it was Carver County 15 and was kind of owned by the County and kind of in the City of Chanhassen and I'm not sure who was responsible for that project particularly. Whether it was joint or the City and the County together. Whether the State was involved or whatever but whoever inspected that really didn't do his work. I mean what Rich gave to me the other day is a copy of Braun's Engineering test report on this road. It basically shows about a dozen test borings that were done along the side of the road. I guess I have to say Bill, you're absolutely right. I'm surprised, you know you said something about if we don't do anything today the road will have to be fixed within 5 or 10 years. It isn't going to last that long in most cases and part of the problem is that the bituminous overlay varies from 4 inches to 11 and in most cases it's either on what they call silty sand or right on the clay base itself. Sandy lean clay which means that when they went 11 through in early 70's and did this, and you can't tell me that technology didn't exist at that point in time to understand how to put in a road bed, they tore up 15 1 City Council Meeting - July . 1991 1 the old road. Put in the sewer and water and all the rest of the stuff. Put the clay back down. Never put in any drainage. Never put any aggregate on. Just laid the bituminous back on it and screwed us in the deal. They didn't give us our money's worth for that road at that point in time. Now that puts the road in the present condition that it's in but I have to agree with my friend Rich Comer in his assessment of this. In most cases that road bed's been there for 100 years and there are yes, a few places where there's some real problems and it's easy to see from these test boring results why. I mean here's one down by Leech's old resort that's 11 inches of bituminous on 2 feet of sandy silt and then the sandy lean clay goes down to about 5 feet and then there's another 5 feet of peat. I mean it's a swamp. Now why didn't somebody look at that back in 1970 and say this is potentially a bad deal. Let's put a culvert in here and put in some proper drainage. How come the City could approve back in 1971 a situation where they lay 9 inches of bituminous on top of sandy lean clay or 7 inches of bituminous on top of silty sand or even 4 inches of bituminous as the road bed. That's 4 inches. I mean is that what we paid for? Is this kind of stuff? I'd like to give you the guys the benefit of the doubt of knowing what's best for us from an engineering standpoint and the rest of the •• stuff but the last thing I'd like to bring up to you is something that Bill mentioned in one of the earlier meetings. Not in front of the Council but when we had the public meetings about the Stratford Ridge development. Somehow this City allowed Stratford Ridge to put in a settling pond in front of their housing development that's about 6 feet wide and about 20 feet long that's just a mud hole with a drain that goes straight into Lake Minnewashta. Now how in the hell you ever got that by the DNR or anybody else I'll never know but even Bill said that that needs to be redone. That's 3 years old guys. 3 years old. Get with it. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Unfortunately some of those things have happened. I agree with you, they should not have happened. We watch what's happening now. Three years ago none of these people sitting here were on the Council. Unfortunately but we are watching roads that presently we're having moisture coming up through. Those are being addressed and taken care of because we picked out two different areas that that's happening now. It's within that guaranteed time and we will have it done and taken care of. I just thought I'd mention that. Terry Forbord: Your honor, members of the City Council, my name is Terry Forbord, Lundgren Bros, 935 East Wayzata Blvd., Wayzata, MN and I would just like to enter into the record or clarify for the record. I don't have a copy of the Minutes but Mr. Engelhardt was speaking from the Minutes about some statements that I made and I would like to clarify that one item that he did not mention and I have not had clarified to me was the discussions between the City of Chanhassen and the City of Victoria. We would like very much to be a part of that and if that is not in the Minutes of I believe the July 8th meeting, I , would like to have the Minutes amended because I did make statements relative to that. That's the first item. The second item is that I know Mr. Engelhardt personally. I have worked with him. He's extremely competent as an engineer and so I do not challenge any of his credibility with that. He's a very competent person. I've worked with him well before. I would like to just at this present time share with you two exhibits. If I may approach the audio visual equipment. As I mentioned to the Council before, Lundgren Bros. has secured the opportunity to develop approximately 50 acres, a portion of that 16 1 1 City Council Meeting - Ju'v 22, 1991 11 being in the city of Victoria and a portion of that being in the city of 11 Chanhassen. I have asked our consulting engineering firm from Sathre - Berquist, Mr. Rick Sathre to conceptualize what I would describe to you as an aggressive site plan. In other words by that to try and get as many lots on that particular piece of land as possible to see how the proposed assessment formula would effect this particular piece of property. This is a copy of an overhead of a memorandum from Mr. Sathre, Consulting Engineer to Lundgren Bros., to me and the subject would be the Boley property. The piece that .is in the city of ' Chanhassen. Okay now I have a copy of a sketch that I'll put on here as soon as we walk through this. They are connected as far as the material they represent. It states that the attached sketches do reflect new information. The OHW which 11 is the ordinary high water mark in this case would be Lake St. Joe is 945.2 feet as located in the field by a survey. The wetland edge on the plan which I will show you is also field located. The riparian lots on the concept plan which are ' lake lots must be 40,000 square feet with 150 foot width at the building and at the lake OHW. That's in the City ordinance in the shoreland district of the City of Chanhassen. The non - riparian lots which are non lake lots must be 20,000 square foot with 100 foot width at the building. Now this is under II standard subdivision regulations in the city. This is the best of my information and maybe I have some inaccurate data and I hope I do and I hope the City can show me if I am wrong. Okay, Lots 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8 and 9 and 10 are riparian. The rest aren't. The wetland setback for buildings is 75 feet by city code and the lakeshore setback from the OHW is 150 feet. Now I will put on here a copy of this plan. I have asked the consulting engineer, I said try to get as many lots on there as possible so we can see if the assessment formula ' works and that's the only reason I asked him to do it. Okay, what we have here is Lake St. Joe. The ordinary high water mark as field located here. The edge of the wetland as field located here. This is Boley property. The area that is net of the road and the wetland which I believe is how the proposed assessment formula policy is formulated, is 23.5 acres. There is a total of 35 lots. 8 of the lots are riparian which are 40,000 square feet and I already detailed for you. 27 lots are non - riparian and they're 20,000 square feet so what we have here is 1.4893 dwelling units per acre as the City Code allows. Now you can see it's a fairly aggressive site plan. You may end up pulling some of those lots out of there•if you really wanted to have a nice site plan. This is in concept only. The only reason that I'm pointing these things out to you is we're talking about a small amount of difference from a 1.8 assessment to a 1.4 and I'm not trying to quibble about small amounts but what I think makes more sense from a city standpoint is what is equitable. And whether it be Lundgren Bros. or anybody here in the audience who happens to own a piece of property, I personally don't feel that it's appropriate to assess somebody for something that the City ordinance prohibits you in doing. And so what I would recommend 1 as far as an assessment policy, that it could be at 1.8 if that is what is deemed to be prudent. However, there should be a rider on that that if city ordinance prohibits for whatever reason a property owner meeting that density, that the assessment formula will revert to whatever the city ordinance allows them to do. The question relative to benefit of this particular project or any assessment project or city project really comes down to in my opinion who's money's at stake. When one puts their money on the line, whether it be a homeowner or whether it be a developer, what it really comes down to is how much benefit was there when one goes to try to sell the property and would somebody be willing to pay them more money if a particular road was any different than other. In my 25 years of real estate experience, I certainly have noticed that 1 17 1 City Council Meeting - Ju'" 22, 1991 there is benefit to certain road projects. If you live on a gravel road and you pave that road in front of the particular property, the majority of people would probably be willing to pay more for that particular piece of property. Whether a road has a pothole in it or whether it does not, I have yet to find a customer come to me and be willing to pay more money for a particular lot or a particular home if a road does not. And so I think it becomes a subjective thing. I'd be happy to answer any questions relative to the information that I've given you this evening or any of the exhibits that I've put before you. Thank you. Councilman Workman: Terry? Terry Forbord: Yes sir. 1 Councilman Workman: I would disagree with your last point. I am in the housing market and it does make a difference to me. Somebody told me that it wouldn't make a difference and we spent a lot of money on a big report when a certain church was built in here and that wouldn't make a difference and it makes a big difference to my wife and I. , Terry Forbord: That's entirely possible. Councilman Workman: Okay. I don't know the accuracy of this but Lot 34 we wouldn't even approve up there. So I don't know the accuracy of this and we wouldn't approve a pie shaped lot like that. Just to name one point so there's all sorts of ways to shave a point through here. Would we approve a? 1 Terry Forbord: We have in the past. We have many of them in our subdivisions now. This is for concept purposes only. I'm not saying this is the way. Councilman Workman: What I'm just saying, you're talking about our city code and what we do and we would not do that and it's just a minor thing and I wanted to. , Mayor Chmiel: Paul would you just like to address that. Paul Krauss: Well a couple of points. We haven't been able to review, this is 1 the first we've seen this so we haven't been able to review this. Whether or not this number is right, you know it's in the same ballpark that Bill was using but I would point out that number, if it's correct. If Terry's number is 1 correct specific to this site, the deciding factor here is the shoreland ordinance and Lake St. Joe is a natural development lake and has the stiffest development restrictions of any lake in the city. All that vacant land or not fully developed land if we use that terminology, north of Lake St. Joe. North of the street, isn't subject to that same criteria. So even if this is accurate and I can't verify it or not until we look at it closer, this is only appropriate for this particular site and doesn't apply elsewhere. Mayor Chmiel: Good point. Thank you. Terry Forbord: Mr. Mayor, that's why I've suggested that you could keep the 1 same formula. I'm not suggesting that that is unfair. However, there may be specific sites that are within what you're calling the assessment district that would be impossible to meet that test and so all one would need to do is part of 18 1 1 City Council Meeting July 22, 1991 the assessment formula is say, if there is a specific site, that that would be adjusted to the number of building, home sites that would be allowable under city ordinance. Thank you very much for your time. I appreciate it. 11 Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Bill, would you like to? Bill Engelhardt: Can I just comment briefly? The purpose of proposing a method I of assessment, the actual assessment policy will not be set down until the assessment hearing which is after the project is completed and all the numbers are arrived at. The general policy is that when we get to that point and we have a developer in the area or property owner, we'll sit down with them. We discuss their property with them and find out how many units can that property accommodate and that's what goes into the assessment roll. So those are details that are taken care of at the time of the assessment hearing. ' Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Jim Jasin: My name is Jim Jasin. My address is 7301 Minnewashta Parkway. I'd like to speak in favor of the parkway and the walkway. I think you've all done an excellent job of listening to the people. You've taken the assessments from $2,300.00 to $1,200.00 to $750.00. You've given away two years of funding on the State roads. You've done an awful lot of things right. I haven't been at all the meetings but I heard Bill talk tonight and I think Bill has done just an super job of investigating the whole thing from beginning to end so I'd like to ' see the Council approve it because I think you've done everything you can do. You're giving as much as you can back to the people here. So I'm all in favor of it. Thank you. ' Resident: Amen. Harry Drahos: Honorable Mayor and Council, I'd like to, first of all my name is Harry Drahos. I live at 3911 Linden Circle and I want to express my thanks to Councilwoman Ursula Dimler for visting our picnic. Our Minnewashta Creek Association happened to have a picnic on the 13th and she came and listened to us and I'm sure she heard both sides of the story from quite a few people. I objected and again I'm not against progress but I objected to the way this was being funded for the simple reason I live on Linden Circle and if you're going to do something to Linden Circle, assess me. That's fine. But for being ' assessed for Minnewashta Parkway, that kind of turned me off because there's. more people using it than the 307 families that are living there now. But the fact that Ursula Dimler was there and as I understand the assessment went down ' from $1,250.00 to $758.00, maybe we should have another picnic and you can drop it some more. But I want to thank you very much. Again, this was my main objective to the way it was being funded and the fact I know there's going to be ' more people using Minnewashta Parkway than just the 307 families or 532 eventually that are going to be there. And when you hear comments that gee that's good you're going to get repaired or a walkway, I'm going to use it too but I don't have to pay. That kind of smarts a little bit so that's all I want ' to say. Thank you. Leidia Seim: My name is Leidia Seim. I live at 3616 Red Cedar Point. I ' guess I'm not in a congratulatory mood tonight. It seems to me that the fact that from $3,500.00 assessment we are down $750.00 gives me some doubt as to the 19 City Council Meeting - Ju 22, 1991 1 efficiency and to the way things are done in government. If we did not squawk, if we were not here all asking why and when, we probably would have been stuck with the $3,500.00 assessment so I question government. Big government and how it goes. After that I have a question for the engineer. Last time we mentioned that we had to have 30 mile speed limit because it was a State regulation. Now in going around Kenwood and Lake of the Isles and that area, I have seen 25 speed limit. 25 miles. Why is that? Mayor Chmiel: Basically in some of those areas it warrants that type of speed. MnDot, State of Minnesota, people will allow or not allow that speed to happen. It has to have some real given problems of concern and sight lines and the road itself. So oftentimes that happens. I have been in discussion with Mr. Bill Crawford from MnDot who is the Chief Engineer for the entire State and he and I are going to be having some discussions regarding that 25 mph speed within the city. I don't know whether we can have MnDot accept that but I feel too with the entirety of the city I think we have roads that are just driven too fast. If they're marked 30, they're 35 and 40. Those situations are happening but whether they would allow it or not, that's another question but that's something I'm going to have discussions on. • Jim Borchard: Jim Borchard, 7331 Minnewashta Parkway. I think we all agree the road has to be repaired some way soon. It's tearing our vehicles apart. It is becoming dangerous because it's hard to maintain control of a vehicle when you . hit a bump that shakes your teeth. Another situation that exists on my property is the drainage. We have the drainage out of Maple Ridge coming off of the Parkway and we are washing hundreds of tons of silt and nutrients into the lake each year. The holding pond at Maple Ridge was filled by many developers. About 4 times the City finally did repair that and here we are getting good 1 water but something has to be done. Bill Engelhardt has been out. The City Engineer's been out and everybody has agreed upon this. I do have one concern. It was mentioned that the road may have to be closed for a short time in portions and my concern is not having to walk to one to the other but what about fire and ambulance protection? Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Jim. Yeah, those are concerns also by the Council. 1 When we worked Frontier Road, we took that into consideration and in most instances they did have accessibility through that particular site. I think the intent is when they say it may be closed for a short period of time and I'm going to look for some divine guidance here. Can someone clarify that point? In my opinion a short time is maybe an hour or two or something of that nature. Bill Engelhardt: Well I don't know Mayor. You're putting a lot of pressure on 11 me. I'll tell you what we did on Frontier Trail. We had basically the same circumstance. Not quite as long but basically the same circumstance. We had approximately 50 residents in that particular roadway. We specified in the specifications and had it bid with the big documents so that all the contractors are aware that they're to keep on site and on call 24 hour basis heavy equipment to pull any vehicles out. In addition with that vehicle being on site, if there's a fire, no matter how muddy it is, we're going to get the fire truck into you. Now we may take a little time getting it out but we're going to get it in there. That's how we accommodate it. The other thing we did on Frontier Trail is that we worked half the roadway and in this particular case I really haven't decided which half or how I'm going to start it. That comes with the 20 11 City Council Meeting - 'ily 22, 1991 final design but we work half of the roadway and actually paved the upper half 11 before we even open cut the second half. So we had a blacktop bituminous surface almost through the entire roadway through the entire construction except for a very limited time of maybe 2 days to 3 days when we were tearing down the road and lying down the rock and curb. So there's no question that there's going to be inconvenience. We try to accommodate you as much as we can. We also provide in the inspectors with their vehicles to help carry groceries and that may sound like a small point but very important to a lot of people that have to walk any distance. So to make it real short, those points are all considered in a project of this nature. We've done it before and we know how to do it. We can do it again. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. ' Tim Fisher: My name is Tim Fisher. I live at 7099 Red Cedar Cove. I've lived there for 3 years. For the 10 years previous to that I lived barely a quarter of a mile down the road at 7371 Minnewashta so I've lived on the parkway for about 13 years. For almost every day of those 13 years I've run up and down II that street at least once. Sometimes more and I've biked it quite a bit too. I'd like to say on the issue of safety, first of all I'd like to say for me it's a sad day to see it happen. I think it's a fore gone conclusion you're going to ' do it. But on the issue of safety, I've listened to the experts opinions but in the 13 years I've certainly seen an increase in traffic and as I said, it's a daily routine with me. I don't see how it's possible that by increasing the ' condition of the road and the width of the road that we're not going to see increased traffic between TH 7 and TH 5. And on the issue of safety there's two points. Basically as far as I'm concerned and I would think anybody who's on the roadway and I know you're going to stick in a sidewalk, I certainly won't use it when I run. Never have when I've been around but there's the issue of speed and there's the issue of how many cars. Now it may be that local people drive a little fast at times but they also are aware of the habits of the people 1 and their neighbors that are on the parkway. Those people that come zipping from TH 5 to TH 7 aren't and won't continue to do what they do and if you want to reduce speed there's two ways you can do it. You can drop the speed. I know 1 when I drive to work I go through around Lake Minnetonka and through a few local streets and there are 3 or 4 of them are in the 20 mph range and there's one in 25 mph range. If you want to do something about speed for us, stick in speed bumps. There is something you can do about speed. The other thing I want to 1 say is that I spend, I am grateful to see that the amount you're going to assess us has gone down quite a bit. I'm a little guy. I spend over $3,000.00 a year on real estate taxes which I consider to be a pretty generous allowance to the ' County and the City for them to do their projects. I certainly think for myself, given what services I use, the amortization of road repair and upkeep ought to be included in what I spend. Now admittedly for the 10 years before the past 3 and my previous property I was about a third of that but nevertheless 1 I consider that amortization of road repair and upkeep ought to be included in that. And I know that given where I've moved is someplace real new that I'm one of those who's causing the need for greater use but I think it does make a point ' that those who move in and add to the amount of traffic that's being caused are probably those who really are the ones who should be bearing the cost since those that were there first really didn't cause that to happen. Therefore the ' services that are being demanded now are those that are being demanded by people coming in. One last point I'd like to make. I have a 11 year old son who lives 21 1 City Council Meeting - Jul' 2, 1991 1 with me and I thought about the safety issue a lot because I didn't want to say anything against this knowing that you know heck is someday somebody got run over there, I'd feel terrible if I had said something against it. But I can tell you straight out that I don't care if you build a new road, 36 feet or 42 feet, if you have a sidewalk on the side of it, I wouldn't feel any less or more 1 safe. I'd be a fool to think that my son riding up and down there, running up and down there, walking up and down there, hitting a ball out in the street. Whatever he's doing, would be one iota safer. We're fooling ourselves and I'd be fooling myself. Thank you. Ed Oathout: My wife wanted to join me tonight. She was unable to so we wrote a letter. Before reading that letter though I'd like to say, is the $758.00. 1 Mayor Chmiel: Could you please state your name and your address? Ed Oathout : - Yes, I'm sorry. My name is Oathout, 3940 Hawthorne Circle. Earlier tonight you mentioned, somebody mentioned that the $758.00 per unit number was what the residents would be assessed for this project. Is that number a hard number or is that number one that's subject to go south or north? Mayor Chmiel: To the best of my knowledge, we've looked at that and that's quite realistic. 1 Ed Oathout: Realistic? Because there are some things that I wanted to go through in my letter that I just didn't know, I know what estimates are and I know that usually engineers are pretty close but I know that there's a lot of issues on this particular project that haven't been even addressed, let alone settled or that are impossible to deal with right now and I just wanted to know 11 what the possible bottom line was. • Mayor Chmiel: I think where we did start with was roughly $2,500.00. It was brought down to $1,250.00. We sat down a week ago last Monday.' I asked Bill to look at that and see if we could afford to go with the additional State Aid. We did only because of the fact that we've done this in other locations. I feel what's just for one is just the other and that's why it's down to that , particular figure right now. Ed Oathout: Thank you Mayor. The letter goes, we, Judy and I are in opposition to the proposed revision to Minnewashta Parkway. Although we believe that the , design of the parkway is unsafe as it exists, we respectfully suggest that the danger is to pedestrians, not to automobiles traveling the legal speed. Danger exists because both motor vehicles and pedestrians are using the same path. Logic suggests that to create a safe situation we must separate wheel traffic from foot traffic. We propose the following. Repair the cracks and potholes. Restructure the small area of unsuitable soils and build a sidewalk. All this can be done on the existing right -of -way without widening the roadbed, polluting Lake Minnewashta, cutting down trees or expending over $2 million very precious tax dollars. Safety issues. Personal safety. We've neither seen nor been informed of any study by any traffic safety engineer recommending any changes to Minnewashta Parkway at all. Unfortunately, we residents of Chanhassen have a questionable history of safe road design. A recent example our downtown main street. Councilman Wing during the public hearing said that he was unaware of ' any serious injuries on Minnewashta Parkway during his long term residence in 11 22 1 City Council Meeting - fuly 22, 1991 11 the area. During the public meeting prior to the public hearing the engineer Bill Engelhardt stated that the actual traffic counts were far below those predicted and that only one traffic ticket for speeding had been issued in the recent past. A resident stated that he had seen a child playing in a puddle. We suggest that this is criticism of the child's parents, not a residential street. There are over 12 roads connecting TH 5 and TH 7 between Waconia and 494 shown on regional maps. We residents, because of TH 5 traffic know of several others. People wishing to avoid the TH 5 bottleneck traveling from west ' to east will quickly find out that the new Minnewashta speedway is the shortest and most scenic route between the two major highways. Minnewashta Parkway is a residential collector street, not a shortcut between highways. We residents, our children, our grandchildren travel on and across Minnewashta Parkway between the neighborhoods and between hom and the lake. There's no park to use. There's no sidewalk area to use for walking for exercise. If residents safety is a primary concern of the Council, we propose the rather unusual option of ending thru traffic by deadending the parkway from each end somewhere near the center. Providing cul -de -sacs and using the resulting spaces as a land bridge safe zone between the lake and the neighborhoods. Modern technology can certainly supply several ways to allow emergency fire and rescue traffic through the blocked cul -de -sac area. Environmental safety. We are unaware of any environmental impact study addressing the proposed Lake Minnewashta Parkway changes. The fact is that Lake Minnewashta was judged to have the finest water quality in the area 1 according to a very recent article in a Chanhaseen paper. Changing the filtering action of the absorbent areas between the parkway and the Lake to runoff through a sewer from a wetland to Lake St. Joe was proposed by the ' engineer at the last public hearing. That engineer also stated that Lake St. Joe was the primary concern of the DNR. We don't feel that way. The issue of water quality on Lake Minnewashta is absolute. The method of insuring safe water, it's environmental and monetary costs have not been presented to either the DNR or the City Council. Minor erosion issues mentioned during the public hearing are easily solved without building an entire new $2 plus million dollar road sewer system requiring the planning of several hundred whips to replace the ' mature trees now holding the soil in place and helping to establish the high property valuation for the benefitting properties. Cost issues. Without knowing the requirements of the State regulatory agencies concerning water safety and the impact of changing a residential collector street into a connector between two major highways, this Council risks the embarrassment of authorizing issuance of a planning check. The ultimate cost 1 will be paid by every single resident of the City of Chanhassen. I heard during the public hearing that the over $2 million dollars in cost was a good deal and that unless quickly spent, the State may force us to spend more money in the future. We disagree. Minnewashta Parkway is a residential collector street. ' Not a State Road. Not a County Road and hopefully not a speedway between major - highways. If the State needs to change this residential collector street into a highway, they must compensate the effected property owners and bill it at State ' expense. We do not believe that the majority of residents of the affected area want the proposed change. We realize the State funds exist to do part of a job. These funds would serve Chanhassen better is expended on TH 5 widening, TH 101 straightening or even creating needed shoulders on existing collector streets. If these projects are not worthy of State funding, we would vote to return or delay spending the money. State funding is not free. These taxes were forcefully removed from all motorists pockets as they purchased gasoline. We, the affected residents will be triple dipped taxed. We will pay for the 1 23 1 City Council Meeting - Jul' '2, 1991 1 remaining portion of as an assessment on top of increased property and sales taxes. And also join the rest of Chanhassen to pay the principle and interest on the general obligation bonds proposed for this unneeded and wanted good deal. I have a copy of you Mayor and anybody else. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Ed Seim: Mr. Mayor, my wife has already spoken but I think there's one underlying point which has not been brought out. Has been woven through everyone's thoughts but they have been anxious to point out the cost features. I think it was one of those concerns which was brought out last week but I don't think it was adequately addressed by Mr. Engelhardt. Now I need to go back 30 years or so and point out that I was one of the first members of the Park Commission of this town when we first came in. When Minnewashta first became a part of Chanhassen and we labored many long hours to try to save our lake system and to try to develop a system of parks and trails connecting those lakes. Dick Lyman was on that and several others. One of the Reverends. And you have pictures around the room and in the hallway pointing out what a valuable resource we really have. And you have a maple leaf of the Chanhassen tree behind you and yet what I hear very often in the deliberations is let's become more Edinish. Let's become a big suburb. Now I live in California and we say let's become Orange County. If you know Orange County. And there seems to be a plan to develop rapidly, fast and to change the whole nature of the community. Most of the old residents moved out here. We didn't have sewer. We didn't have streets. We came because we liked the sylvan nature. And we still like it and we come back as often as we can .because of that. And we've hung onto our property even though the taxes have tripled and escalated and we'll continue to come back as long as it has that sylvan nature and so it gives us that respite 11 from the hubble and bubble of the city life. Otherwise we could go down and live downtown. Anytime. Or we could live in downtown LA or downtown San Francisco. This is real resource. It was interesting this week driving around the lake to see that in order to save the Lake of the Isles and Lake Calhoun the city has narrowed the streets and made them one way and put in little parking diversions and things like that to cut down traffic and to cut down the speed. We ought to be protecting this resource rather than straightening it out and making it a big collector. Think about the park system. Think about what you had. I think perhaps this speech is 20 years too late. I understand that parks is also recreation but I was reflecting this evening. I remember the first year we saved $5,000.00 from our budget to buy land. At the end of the year the City Council took away our $5,000.00 because the fire department had gone in the red. So we had to start over the next year. It was interesting to find that now you had $19,000.00 to spend from someplace on recreation equipment. That would have been a big plus in our day to buy a piece of parkland. Thank you. Dave Headla: My name is Dave Headla. I live at 6870 Minnewashta Parkway. I must admit I've changed my mind. I used to be quite an outspoken critic of City Hall as Don and some of the staff well remember. In fact at one time I got so outspoken that the deputy visited me. Hauled me in here and lo and behold I was in the kangaroo court and who's the judge. One of the Council people. You know they had the gall to charge me an extra $50.00 because I lived in Western Chanhassen. Couldn't believe it. Okay, if I had my druthers I would like to see us go back to early 60's and go back to Minnewashta Parkway into Yellowstone Trail but that's ludicrous. That isn't going to happen. Things have got to 24 1 it Louncu Meeting - July 22, 1991 1 change. I think you've looked at many alternatives. The proposal you're ' working on I think is the way to go but I've got some questions. Bill, I'm very concerned about the traffic. Are we going to put stop signs somewhere along the parkway? Now if we can have one or two sets of stop signs, that's going to ' knock out that semi traffic. Mayor Chmiel: Dave we're going to have to. Dave Headia: You are? Okay, what about parking? Are you going to allow parking on the parkway? 1 Mayor Chmiel: I think riot. Only on specific situations where people are having a party and they can't accommodate enough cars. On a one time basis. Dave Headia: That's fine. If we were going to allow parking, then we're ' probably in a worse...because kids can dart in and out. Then the last thing is, what about street lights? I really would like to see street lights and I would guess now would be an opportune time to put it in. Has any thought gone into that? Bill Engelhardt: We have not looked at street lights. You could look at them. ' We'd have NSP probably that supplies the street lights for the city look at it. That would be a policy decision as to whether or not you wanted to do that. They're not part of this proposal. ' Dave Headia: I guess if it's easier to put them in now rather than later, I'd like to see you do it. Then finally if we could project ourselves into 1995 or the year 2000 and look back at this meeting tonight, I can't believe anybody 11 wouldn't say, what in the world are we talking about? The decision is easy. We've got to go through with what you've proposed. Thank you. ' Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Yes sir. Peter Moe: My name is Peter Moe. I live at 7141 Minnewashta Parkway. Bill mentioned six points this evening. I think it really still comes down to two. ' Safety and cost. I an positive that the children are going to be safer walking on the sidewalk when they're going to the bus stop, going to a future park or whatever than they are on the side of the road. It doesn't make sense to build ' a sidewalk and not take care of the drainage problems we have and so I think for that reason we should go ahead and also for the cost issue. Even though it's • going down now this spring and summer, waiting another couple of years, the costs are going to go up very much more. I think we've got a good financing package here and we should go ahead with the project. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Yes sir. Jim Hofer: Jim Hofer, 7098 Red Cedar Cove. I heard Bill answer a whole bunch of concerns and questions of the citizens tonight and I've never worked with him. I have no idea whether he's being honest or not. There's some things I did not hear him say. I did not hear him say that his fees would go down if the cost went up. No, they'd come out of our pockets. All of our pockets. I did not hear them say he'd reimburse homeowners if their home value went down. He says they're going to increase. I'm not convinced of that. That's going to be ' 25 1 City Council Meeting - Jul '2, 1991 1 born by us the homeowners. I also didn't hear him say why the City Council is still considering this despite the many objections, many of them empassioned objections of the residents of the area. I object to this project. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Thanks Jim. Yes Ma'am. 1 Ruth Boylan: My name is Ruth Boylan. I live at 6760 Minnewashta Parkway. Or possible Six Rotten Maple Tree Way. This is really tough. I've lived out here since 1953. My great, great uncle bought 55 1/2 acres from the government. He was the first private owner. My husband, my two children and I now own the last of my great, great uncle's 55 1/2 acres and we have a little under 3 acres. I believe in safety. I do believe in progress. I do not believe in destruction. I do not believe in having meeting upon meeting where your people have said to you time and time again that they do not want this. We have already voted down twice a walkway. We have voted it down twice. Now we are the same people that voted you in. We are also the same people who can vote you out. I do not say this lightly. I have talked to some of you Councilpeople before you were Councilpeople and I voted for you because I had your assurance that you would do everything you could that Minnewashta Parkway would remain a parkway for it's people and not for it's government. Not for it's developers that are going to take a few acres of land and put 35 proposed houses on it. This is a land that was created by many of the people that now live on it. We bought it for a reason. To raise our family...This is very serious to us. This is my heritage. This is something that my 10 year old daughter said to me last year as we stood out on the deck and looked at our 6 rotting maple trees. And she said, mom. Someday I hope God will enable me to buy this from you and dad and I said I hope so too because it's been in my family for over 100 years and those trees were planted by my uncle. I believe in safety. I have walked that road. I have riden my bike. I have ran on that road. I've hopscotched on it. Years ago. I've walked hand in hand with my husband. My father. My mother. My grandparents. My children. My sisters. My former brother. There has been no incident. I have a family of 3,000 that visit us about every weekend, right honey? There's never been an incident. We the people have to be responsible also when we're walking a road. We need to be responsible. We do not need to talk a private parkway of residents and make it into a speedway from TH 7 and TH 5. There's no need for it and I don't understand how come after the 3 meetings you have already had with your constituents, that you haven't just said, hey our people don't want it. Lowell Carlson: Lowell Carlson, 4141 Kings Road. I guess some of this stuff I • don't quite understand. For instance, from Victoria line out to TH 5, is that only a 22 foot road? I mean is that all they're got for right -of -way? 1 Bill Engelhardt: The existing bituminous surface is around 22 feet. There's a 66 foot right -of -way. Lowell Carlson: There is a bigger right -of -way to make this road what you're saying, 22 foot then? Okay then secondly, is there going to be any additional enlarging of the sewer and water? I've been hearing a little bit about it but I really don't quite understand whether there is or there isn't. Bill Engelhardt: There is not. ' 26 , City Co.:'c_1 Meeting - ''ly 22, 1991 Lowell Carlson: So it isn't going to be like buying a car? 23 to 12 to 7 and now we're going to come to the accessories and start putting it up the other way so basically we can go by the $700.00? So the accessories they're going to put on there, basically there ain't going to be none right? Bill Engelhardt: You've got it. Lowell Carlson: Okay. I'll stay with it if it stays there. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Is there anyone else? Seeing none, we'll bring it back to Council and come up either with a conclusion or whatever. ' Councilwoman Dimler: Or no conclusion huh? ' Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Michael. Would you like to start? Councilman Mason: You picked on me first last time Mr. Mayor. ' Mayor Chmiel: That's why I did it again. Councilman Mason: Well since I've been elected this is certainly the toughest issue I've had to deal with. Just going down some comments from some people. I appreciated what Mr. Boylan said about the past. I wonder if what we're doing now isn't trying to rectify some of those problems as Don said earlier. On a real specific level, Mr. Forbord mentioned the subjectivity of a good road /bad road. I think of Frontier Trail and riding my bike on Frontier Trail before it was fixed and what Frontier Trail is like now and boy I sure like riding my bike on Frontier Trail now. I really do. I disagree a little bit with whether ' government is being efficient or not. We could have, at least my understanding of the process is that we could have just said this is your assessment at $2,500.00 and been done with it. I think on the contrary. By listening to all ' of the opinion out there and by what the Mayor's been able to do and what we've all been able to do, by continuing to take a look at the situation, we've been able to come up with some more appropriate figures. I wish I could remember who said this but I know some political pundant did say, if you ever get elected to ' office, in order to do your job you should never take office with the intent of getting re- elected. This may happen after whatever comes up here. We'll see. I don't see fixing the road up, turning it into a speedway. I spend a fair ' amount of time on Frontier Trail, both in a car and on a bike. I haven't noticed an increase in speed and good grief, with the shape Frontier Trail was in prior to what it's like now, if there would be an increase you'd think that would happen. I see two main issues here. Safety and environment. I understand that within the last 25 years 2 or 3 people have been hurt. That's a very good record. Clearly as developers come in, as more people come into this area, there will be more traffic on that road and I think the safety issue becomes paramount. I do have two kids. In terms of getting to a bus and what not, I would not be comfortable with them walking on the parkway the way it is now. I'm not going to put our Public Safety Director on the spot here but last ' week we drove up and down the parkway a number of times. There was an elderly gentleman with two canes walking along the side of the road. Certainly his right to do that. Had we not crossed the double yellow line, there would have been a very serious problem. Now crossing a double yellow line in a situation like that is no big deal but yet should it be done. Shouldn't it be done. In 11 27 City Council Meeting - July , 1991 1 that same drive there was someone jogging down the road and I'm not sure of the corner but again, we had to cross the double yellow line. I'm very troubled by that. There hasn't been a problem yet. At what point will there be a problem? That's something, that's real tough for me. The environmental issue is another real tough one. Without proper drainage, where is all this stuff going that's , running off the road? With our surface water utility management plan, something will have to be done eventually anyway with that situation. We have the tools in hand now to do something about it. I know clearly there are a lot of people out there who think let well enough alone. Clearly tonight there are a number of you who feel that we should do something about it. One last point here, I've only lived in Chan for 5 years and someone who lived here about a year said, well you must be an old timer then. I said no. No, no, no. Not at all. Partly I think this is an issue of old versus new too and I believe some people addressed that. An area such as Chanhassen that is growing as rapidly as we are, these are issues that the Council, constituents, all of us I think constantly have to grapple with. I think it's very difficult for both sides. I think it's very difficult, it's more difficult for the people that have been here a long time. What are these upstarts doing? Coming in here trying to 11 change our land and that's a very, very difficult issue. Do I need to say now whether I'm going to aye or nay? Mayor Chmiel: No. Not at this particular time. 1 Councilman Mason: Okay. This is very difficult. That's enough. I'll stop. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Only because you're bringing up the safety and the speed limit issues, I'd like Mr..Wing to possibly expound on that with some of his studies that he's done on that particular road with speed over the last 4 days or however many days you were out. Plus whatever else you have. Councilman Wing: I made a comment at a prior public hearing where people kept bringing up the comments of speed and traffic and by our actions it was going to increase traffic and it was going to increase speed. And the same arguments have come through tonight and I would ask everybody that's brought up speed and traffic issues, is this something you've done a study on or engineers like Bill have commented on or is it just your personal opinion and I can offer my own. The comments are well taken but I guess I'm not convinced that this road is going to increase or decrease speed and I think speed can be controlled by the City. I think we have a very proficient Public Safety Director that would be more than happy to do what has to be done to protect the residents should that occur. Whether it was speed bumps or stop signs or whatever. Both the traffic and the speed issue, they're kind of moot points to me because no one's proven to me they're going to go up or down nor is traffic going to increase or not increase. I've lived there long enough to know that the progress is here and I hate progress. I discouraged about growth but it's reality. There's no sense fighting it. We don't live in the rural areas anymore. We're very closely coming an inner ring suburb if you will. At any rate, on the street issue, because there's so many questions I asked Mr. Harr, our Public Safety Director if he would assist me in a traffic study over the last week and both the Sheriff's Department, the Highway Patrol, Community Service Officer and myself were out with radar on the Minnewashta Parkway. Of course I was just in my private car monitoring and I came up, just for those of you that are interested and Mr. Mayor where this is appropriate you can just pick out these numbers. 28 ' .._ , _�•�. •__� �;; - JU1y , 17:.: The average speed on the road as a whole p o le was 32.6 mph. That was from end to end and I was out from 7:00 in the morning until 9:00 at night at sporaic times. An 11 hour at a time and I averaged during the day about 60 cars an hour which surprised me and then in the evening it was reduced to about 40 cars an hour So the traffic was consistent. The highest speed limit I found was about 34.5 ' mph at Red Cedar Point Road on Minnewashta Parkway. The interesting thing is that I noted every car turning into Red Cedar Point and you know it's the old routine, if you can slow the locals down we'd reduce half our problem. But the average speed of the cars turning into Red Cedar Point along that stretch of road was 35 mph. They were the highest. The people that had the highest speeds were the cars that turned into Red Cedar Point. The list went on and on. The one area that really did concern me greatly was the traffic count and the speeds ' directly in front of the beach, the Minnewashta Creek Homeowners at Linden Circle and is it Kirkwood and Linden on Minnewashta Parkway. I found the sight line to be non- existent. Steady stream of children crossing in the blind curve and the average speed there was 33.3 mph with cars either decelerating right at that point or accelerating just after they passed it so I almost felt I should call the Association and say, wave a red flag or put up a red alert because those of you from that particular area that are using that beach, if there's a problem on Minnewashta Parkway, that's the one I think that I identified and I don't know how Scott Harr would refer to this as Public Safety Director but if there was a blind corner with high speeds with heavy children's useage, that ' was the corner. The other one was the Boley curve down towards the Boley property on 7300 Minnewashta Parkway. Roughly in that area where it comes around very strong, steep vegetation. The average speed going around there was ' 33.6 mph. A completely, totally blind curve and then to tell there's no safety issue on that road is absurd. I run it every day. I never run on that side nor do I ride my bike on that side because any car coming across there that's not paying attention is going to hit me. Is going to find me in their way awful fast. The highest speed I found on that curve was 41 mph. And interesting, ' every speed over 38 mph, with the exception of one city vehicle, was a young man. I'm afraid they just have a habit of driving kind of fast. The highest ' speed on the parkway was 41 that I found the entire week. The lowest speed was 22. Again, the average Mr. Mayor I believe was 32.6. I think that's specific enough. Mayor Chmiel: Good. Is there anything else you'd like to expound on besides that? ' Councilman Wing: Well, as long as I have the floor. You know being from that area and having lived there for 26 years, I've seen the changes occur. A lot of the comments brought up, emotional or not...whether they're founded or not, I'm very sympathetic for. Obviously I have a responsibility to the City as a whole, including this project. Whether it's best for the locals in short term or long term is a very difficult decision but I am very sensitive. I am very sensitive to the issue of the local input and control of the locals and more than once this Council has listened to the local individuals. Whether it's been Bluff Creek or even more recently the Kurvers Point project, we've listened to the input from the locals and we've sided with that or let the project ride as such. I think it's a good project. I think it's an improvement to the community. I've looked at the new road at the Arboretum where there used to be a road similar to Minnewashta Parkway. Now they've curbed it and I think it looks classy. The environmental issues are very difficult for me. We're not to free to pollute i 29 1 City Council Meeting - Jul '2, 1991 1 as we will. We're not free to let drainage go as we will into Lake Minnewashta. It's a Class A lake, so far. That water quality is going down yearly. I live on it. I've watched it. I've disked it every year. It's not improving. It's getting worst. Boat pressures. Pollutants from our yards. Gasoline from the roads. Within the next few years, and there's a gentleman tonight who could probably address it. Within the next few years we're going to have to address storm water control on Lake Minnewashta and Minnewashta Parkway and it's not going to be free. There's going to be something done so what's happened is the Mayor has worked diligently to come up with a path to try and solve the safety issues which has really been almost unanimous as I've seen it. The path issue. But to do a path and the grading without fixing up the road and the road is an issue. I mean here's where somebody wants the road fixed and somebody doesn't. Somebody wants the path but some don't. Some say there's a safety problem and some don't. Some say there's a drainage problem and some don't. So now what? I'm trying to be sensitive to the local needs. I think it's an excellent project for a very, very effective cost. I think that the people that are concerned are very short term in their thinking and that as a Councilmember representing your area and living in your area and using that road on a daily ' basis, even putting myself into the assessment, it's hard not to be supportive of this. On the other hand, two issues come up. Local control and listen to the local desires which is extremely important to me and I am so setback and disheartened by what the County Assessor did to us this past year and what they did to our taxes that I don't care if this assessment was.$30.00, I have a hard time putting it on anyone. So Mr. Mayor, at the present time I'm vacilating and it's a very emotional issue for me. Safety. The trees. There's going to be some victims. The roadway, I won't support patching it or overlaying it. That's a waste of money. Environment. That's a big one to me and Mr. Mason has spoken to that. Appearance. I think it's going to greatly enhance the appearance. Speed. I think it's going to, it's not going to increase the speed. I think we can control it. Traffic. We can control that. Property values. I think it's going to be a classy operation if the Council chooses to approve it this evening. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Ursula. Councilwoman Dimier: Thank you. From the information that I could gather, I'm 11 going to give you a few facts here and I hope that, some of . you will like them and other won't but I guess I can't please everyone. At the public hearing on July 8th there were 87 people. 20 of those spoke publically at that time. 13 were against the roadway improvement. 5 were in favor of the entire project and 2 just asked questions but voiced no opinion as far as I could see at that time but they may have asked the questions because they were negative on the project. I don't know. Out of the 13 no's, only one was opposed to everything and I think most people favored a walkway. At least that's my assessment of that meeting. Since then I have done a survey of my own. I spoke to 31 people eyeball to eyeball and out of those 31 people there were 23 who were not at our public hearing on July 8th. Out of those 31, and that's the sector that I wanted to reach. If you'll recall, I wanted to reach the silent sector. Out of those 31 people, 25 favored the upgrade and the walkway and 6 did not want it. And in further talking with the residents, those that I did talk to, I didn't find anyone who opposed the storm sewer. Most acknowledged that there was a drainage problem. Most also expressed safety concerns and acknowledged that something needed to be done with the road in the future, whether it be done now 30 1 Lily LoilrnCli Eer irg - July c2, _ 9i ' or 10 years from row. And again, most wanted the walkway. In addition to that then, 4 parties called me on their volition by telephone this week. Again, 2 were for and 2 were against. I received 8 letters prior to the July 8th meeting. All 8 of those were against, although 1 has since changed his mind and ' now favors the project. One of the others that were against though stated that they were willing to accept the majority opinion of the neighborhood as long as the Council made every effort to get an accurate assessment of the neighbors and ' that was what I was attempting to do. I received 4 letters here tonight and there were 2 for and 2 against. That does include the letter we received from the Oathout's. This leads me to the conclusion that the silent sector does have an opinion and that there are some that are for the project but I don't have a handle on the percentages as yet. I think that seeing that the cost per unit is now down to $758.55, I think that's a positive because that does answer the concerns that I had for those residents that expressed financial concerns. To me an 80/20 split with 20% going to the benefitted properties, that's a pretty good deal and I do want to compliment Engelhardt and Associates again and the City Staff and the Council for continuing to bend to the concerns of the people as we gather more information and gain new insights. And I guess several of the ' people here tonight asked why do we continue? I know it's frustrating. We continue but I think those are the reasons we do continue is because we are gathering more information and gaining new insights as we go along. I do continue to be grieved over the proposed loss of the trees on the Boylan property and I have experienced with the DNR people coming on my property without permission to assess some trees and I know how you feel. It's not a ' comfortable feeling. I would have liked to have been included in the process instead of just having them knock on the door later on and tell me what they found. So I'm thinking that maybe as is now popular with the Medical profession, they get a second opinion. Maybe we can get a second opinion by a tree expert and that would be of the Boylan's choice. James Boylan: The one that they sent out there, you heard what my daughter said about what he said to her. Councilwoman Dimler: Yes. I don't have that documented though and I think the ' rest of the Council. James Boylan: That's the problem... Councilman Wing: Before we get off the trees. Bill, you know they may be 300 years old and they may be kind of rotten but they are classics. Is there any way those can be saved as long as we're around the issue of those trees? Can we ' go around those and project them? Bill Engelhardt: No. As I said all along, we're not in the business of trying to cut your trees. I don't have a grudge against your trees. If I could save ' those trees, I would save them. Like Mr. Kirsten's trees, the neighbor to the Boylan, his maple tree, we're going to have to pull the path tighter to the back of the curb and that will work there. In the case of the trees on the Boylan ' property, even if we have to build a little retaining wall, I don't know if that will help to save the roots but we could do that. We can try it. 'j James Boylan: Bill, Mr. Mayor, I'm sorry to interrupt and we're kind of out of line here but how come in all of this that the only one who has ever come to ' 31 -.r Lounci1 neeting - July 22, 1991 1 talk to us is Ursula? When we seem to have. Mayor Chmiel: That was Ursula's choice to do that. We have been out there looking. I've been out there 3 dozen times. I drove past your house. I've parked out at your house. I was waiting for you to look out the window. You never came out. But the point being. James Boylan: Well I'm sorry Mr. Mayor. I guess I should have stayed home and , watched for you. Mayor Chmiel: Well you were looking out the window. James Boylan: How the hell do I know it's I've ' you out there. I've got people driving by all day long... Mayor Chmiel: That's besides the point. I will ask you to be in proper decorum in this Council chamber. James Boylan: I apologize Mr. Mayor. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. You will continue. You're done speaking Bill? Bill Engelhardt: We'll do whatever we can to save them. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Appreciate that. 1 Councilwoman Dimler: I do too. I guess my feelings still is like I don't have a handle on the percentages but I know there's some support out there and I know the percentages could very well be 50/50. I don't know. So my opinion is that I would favor to get an accurate assessment and that I would invite the rest of the Council to come out with me and we could finish it up in one day by canvasing the neighborhood like I did over the weekend. It was•fun. I enjoyed talking to everyone and I think then we can all come to a conclusion that we're comfortable with. Mayor Chmiel: I think maybe most of us can come up with a conclusion this evening one way or the other. Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, if you've done your own surveys. I do have two areas of concern though that I would like to address and that is that I've heard practically nothing about the land swap with Victoria and apparently Mr. Forbord indicated that that land was in their control and he indicated that they hadn't been approached. I'd like to have that answered and see if there's any extra cost involved in that. Mayor Chmiel: Can I just address that? That is a decision between the City of Victoria and the City of Chanhassen. I think Mr. Forbord could be there but that decision making is between the two cities. Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, and have we decided on which land it is? Mayor Chmiel: My understanding is the parcel to the west of Minnewashta Parkway , will stay within the City of Victoria. Those on the east will be brought into 32 ' 1 City Council Meeting - J 22, 1991 the city of Chanhassen. Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, and what land are we swapping for those then? Mayor Chmiel: Don? Don Ashworth: No decision has been made. We have met with Victoria. The ' Council was supportive of working with the City. We have some options. We could go in and take the roadway only and not take any of the properties on either side. That would put some stiff financial burden on Victoria as well as the owners on either side because that section does not have municipal State Aid and then in that case those owners would be faced with the full brunt of the cost. I don't think that the Victoria Council wishes to impose that kind of cost on them and so I anticipate that their statements that they would like to ' work with the City in completing the project at the comparable cost to the section in Chanhassen is a true statement. We have not stated that we're going to give away any particular parcels. I think that that's an issue that we should be open minded on but I see that we probably have, we're probably holding more of the cards at this point in time than Victoria. Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, but do you anticipate any extra costs to be addedd ' to this project as a result? Don Ashworth: No. Not to the project. Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, thank you. And then the other concern is that Jo Ann Hallgren's concern about her 17 units. It's my understanding that she has an easement on an unpaved road that really belongs to a resident in Stratford Ridge and this easement is for only one single family. And therefore when the rest of her property is developed they will have to gain access from TH 7 so I'm wondering why we are proposing to assess all of her units. Bill Engelhardt: I guess we're not aware of the easement situation. The property was laid out and sketched as how many units could be accommodated in II that with access to Minnewashta Parkway. In the case of the Hallgren property, it is green acres and those assessments could be deferred until development takes place and the exact number of units are determined and I think that would... Councilwoman Dimler: Okay but if she only has access for one unit from Minnewashta Parkway, then I can't see why we're. Bill Engelhardt: I guess that would be something. Councilwoman Dimler: Because that is an easement from a private property owner. Bill Engelhardt: ...consider her as only one unit until it's developed and I'm sure 17 acres in that area is going to at some point in time. ' Councilwoman Dimler: But they won't have access to Minnewashta Parkway from TH 7. I mean from Minnewashta Parkway. They'll have to come in from TH 7. Bill Engelhardt: If that's the case, you would only have one unit. ' 33 • City Council Meeting - Jul '2, 1991 1 • Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, that was the concern. That's all I have. 1 Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Tom? Councilman Workman: I think this project comes down to either doing the job 1 correctly or not doing the job at all. I think we know what doing the job correctly is and by not doing the job, as I mentioned earlier, we will just simply be putting this decision off to a not too far in the future Council. Future residents. Older residents or other residents. It needs to be done. 1 am a little concerned about how the assessment kind of came down and I'd like to write that off as effective community involvement in the political process to where we got it to where it's supposed to be. It seems to me it's a little bit like we should have maybe attempted to give our best shot a little earlier. I'm reminded of a sales person who said I can do this for this price. And when another sales person was brought into the scene as a competitor, he suddenly is able to reduce the price further and it did more for mistrust for the buyer than anything. I guess I'd like to address why maybe just Ursula was out there and I have been out there and I've talked to people and I think I've spent an awful lot of time out there. This Council is human beings and I'm reminded of the time on the other side of the lake when a gentleman, there was a lot split. .20 acre lots. Had to have 10 acre lot minimums and it seemed to me the situation was, a younger couple coming into town is going to have 10 acres and the older gentleman is going to have the other 10. We're trying to figure out where to put the easements and the easements could go anywhere. On either of the two lots. The Council listened to both sides. The younger couple and the older gentleman. The older gentleman - looked us in the eye from that podium and basically called us a bunch of jerks for even thinking we could do that. If anybody dollars to donuts as to where the easements went. It ain't going on the ' younger couple. We enjoy being respected and at least somewhat appreciated for some of the time that we put in and quite frankly I think some of the comments have done the argument against this parkway more damage than good. I as a human being do not tend to go where number one I already know what that person's thinking. Number two, they don't respect me and that's what I've been told, in so many words. So I go where I know I'm going to maybe get some differing opinions and some open mindedness but not closed mindedness. This Council is trying to manage the growth. I don't know that we're trying to promote it or trying to manage the growth. The sewer, the water and the growth that's coming to Lake Minnewashta is not spurned on by this Council I can tell you and we who operate on the minimum staff level, I don't think staff has all the time in the world trying to promote and urge people to grow. It's happening naturally. I'm going to vote for this project because I do think it is a good deal, if this roadway project can be termed that. Looking at all roadway systems and how that system operates and again, we don't create that system. We attempt to operate within it and you either do it or you don't and you wait for the consequences later on. I don't believe in doing that in this situation. If I were voting on , this project solely for re- election or for votes, I may not and probably wouldn't vote on it. If I were counting heads in here, who's going to vote for me and who's not, I'd probably vote against this project. And that is not why I was elected. This is an unfriendly moment for this Council who is at this moment in time have to make, have to make the decisions and so I am doing that. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thanks Tom. I know exactly a lot of the feelings that you ' people are going through because of the assessments and because of the change. 34 ' City Council Meeting - luly 22, 1991 I've gone through it and I've probably sat in the same position that you're in. Getting on this Council gives us a position that we have to look at the overall good for the city and I don't want to quote. I'm not God by any stretch of the imagination. I'd like to spell God backwards and have it be as a dog. Just wag my tail rather than my tongue. But I feel that there are several issues here that needs to really be addressed. One of those that directly points to us is a fact of safety. Safety is an issue to me for every resident of this community. Not just Minnewashta Parkway. Environmental concerns are the other concerns that I also have within this city. We as a Council have adopted some strong stringent requirements as far as the City's concerned. Whether it be trees or runoff water or whatever the situation is. We look at that and we practice basically what we preach. There are a lot of concerns. I look here tonight and I see a couple of youngsters and it's sort of nice to have them here so they know exactly what's happening too. But as I look at this I feel that by putting ' some stop signs in the area, those two areas that we had looked at was Kings Point and Linden Circle, will be sort of a deterrent. We're not putting them in for the fact of that stop signs are put in to control traffic and flow. But there is a need for those signs I feel and there is a safety issue along with that. I don't expect to see that road be a 45 or a 55 mph speed limit. I want it as a 30. And if it can be less, that's all well and good. I think the residents of that area will probably be the first ones in uprising and saying ' keep it at 30. Don't put it down to 25. Many times we find ourselves moving and going from one point to another and find ourselves going a little too fast than what we should be. Time is what's needed and to allow for that time. 1 think that over the period of time I was out there when Richard was out there doing his calculations on speed with the radar. I ran into a couple of the other Council people as well. I've had people stop and talk to me as I sat out there on a Saturday for almost an hour and a half just to see what was ' happening. I've tried it during the week. I've tried it early mornings and there is a lot of traffic. There's no question and it's generated from within. I wanted to do a study to find out where people were coming and going from. ' Whether they were using Minnewashta Parkway as an access from TH 5 to TH 7 or from TH 7 to TH 5. I don't think you're going to find that because of TH 41 keeping it at 55 mph speeds. They're in a hurry. They're going to be going to ' work or coming from work so they're not going to go back down to a 30 and making stops as well. If it presents a problem, we'll enforce that. We'll enforce that 30 mph speed and I think we're going to have to. So with that I think I at least feel I know where I'm coming from. I wanted to make sure that when we ' brought these figures down that everyone has been treated equally in trying to determine how we came up with that. We had to do some review back into other projects that had happened and how did we treat those people and I wanted to ' make sure that how we treated them was the same way we were going to treat you. So with that I'll just sort of close. I will call for a motion on this project. If someone would be willing to make that motion? And by the way we do need a 4/5 majority for this to go through but I'd still sort of question that portion ' but. Councilwoman Dimler: Mr. Mayor, I'm still really uncomfortable. Is there any reason why we couldn't survey one more time those who are not here? I really would like to see. They're not here tonight to have a say. ' Mayor Chmiel: I received calls, 2 for and received a letter this evening, another one for. ' 35 1 City Council Meeting - July ?, 1991 Councilwoman Dimler: Right, yeah. 1 Mayor Chmiel: And I don't think if we went through that again, I don't think we're going to come up with a conclusion. 1 Councilwoman Dimler: I don't have a feel for the Trolls Glen area or you know towards TH 5 because I was working from the south going from TH_7 towards TH 5 and I didn't get to that area on TH 5 towards TH 5 at all and I have no feel for them. I did try to call a few neighbors out there that I know and see how they feel and they didn't get back to me so. I mean that's a large section of people there that are unrepresented then. Councilman Mason: Mr. Mayor, there were a number of meetings before this. We've had one official public hearing and one unofficial public hearing on this 1 and I guess I, at this point I don't see the point of delaying the vote any longer. Councilwoman Dimler: Yes, I can understand but 1 did have some people say that 1 I called today in that Trolls Glen area, . this was the first they'd heard of it. I know that's unbelieveable but it's true. Councilman Mason: At that point I'm not sure that that's our problem. Mayor Chmiel: Right. This has been in the paper. Front page and everyone receives it. Councilman Workman: Mr. Mayor, I'd make a motion to approve the feasibility study for upgrade to Minnewashta Parkway, authorize preparation of plans and specifications, Improvement Project 90 -15. Councilman Mason: Second. 1 Mayor Chmiel: It's been moved and seconded. Any other discussion? Resolution #91 -70: Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the Minnewashta Parkway Feasibility study and authorize preparation of plans and specifications for Improvement Project 190 - 15. Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Workman and Councilman Mason voted in favor. Councilwoman Dimler and Councilman Wing were silent. The motion carried unanimously. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT REGARDING THE FENCE SCREENING HEIGHT FROM 8 FEET TO 15 FEET, 7851 PARK DRIVE, LAKESHORE EQUIPMENT, STEVE WILLETTE. Sharmin Al - Jaff: Mr. Mayor, City Council. The applicant is not present. He's not here to represent himself. He's aware of the item being scheduled on the agenda. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, if he's not here I would suggest that we possibly table 1 this and put it onto our next agenda and make sure that he's notified so he can at least be here to discuss it. Paul Krauss: We'd be happy to do that. He was notified several times but things come up so yes. We will make sure. 36 1