HRA 1986 03 06AGENDA
CHANHASSEN HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
THURSDAY, MARCH 6, 1986
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
1. Call To Order.
2. Approval Of Minutes - February 6, 1986.
3. Broadened Study Area Update - Fred Hoisington.
4. Review Community Development Block Grant Program -
Reallocation of Year XI
5. Consideration of Downtown Sign Removal Request
6. Feasibility Study, Discussion
A. Storm Water Management Plan
B. Street /Sanitary Sewer Improvements - Downtown Area
7. Old Business.
8. New Business.
9. Approval of Bills.
10. Adjournment.
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
FEBRUARY 6, 1986
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Whitehill called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
Present were Chairman Whitehill, Commissioners Horn, Bohn, and
Robbins.
ABSENT
Commissioner Swenson
Staff present were Don Ashworth, City Manager, Barbara Dacy, City
Planner, Fred Hoisington, Jim Benshoof, and Larry Smith.
CHADDA UPDATE
Larry Smith, Housing Alliance, reviewed the Downtown Concept
Plan. Smith explained that the south side of West 78th Street
f would contain the dinner theater and a hotel as major anchors.
[ The hotel would be located west of the bowling alley and would
also require the construction of a three level parking ramp.
f Smith stated that additional office spaces are proposed east of
the dinner theater. On the north side of West 78th Street, Smith
stated that a shopping center is proposed with a grocery store as
an anchor.
Smith stated that at the next regular meeting, the phasing and
construction costs will be prepared as well as any relocation
planning necessary for existing uses on the north side of West
j 78th Street. He stated that a model is also being prepared.
f Herb Bloomberg stated that communication has been good between
CHADDA and the downtown community. He stated that the contacts
with the merchants have been moving along well and Brad Johnson
seems to understand their particular needs.
Chairman Whitehill asked if the required improvements have been
identified and if any type of treatment for West 78th Street is
being proposed?
Smith stated that the West 78th Street "streetscape" has not been
addressed specifically, but the types of public improvements that
will be necessary will be included in the financial analysis and
as part of planning the priorities for each phase of development.
Robbins asked about the possibility of a skyway between the
_ dinner theater and the north side of West 78th Street.
L Smith stated that there may not be a significant amount of cross
traffic from the north side to the south side and vice versa.
The strip center is to contain commercial service and retail uses
while the south side will contain specialty retail.
L
HRA Minutes
February 6, 1986
Page 2
Bohn asked about the location of the old City Hall.
Smith stated that the new angled street from 101 will create a
nicer entry into the community and help enhance the historic
district with the old church across the street.
Bohn suggested that the street be vacated and a pedestrian area
be created.
Smith stated that this would add a street amenity and would eli-
minate through traffic.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Horn moved, seconded by Bohn to approve the minutes of November
7, 1985 and December 19, 1985. All voted in favor and the motion
carried.
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT REDUCTION REQUEST - OPUS CORPORATION
Ashworth stated that Opus has completed the replatting process of
the ten lots in the northwest area of the business park. He
stated that the feasibility study has also been completed which
indicates expensive costs for the construction of the improve-
ments because of the poor soil conditions. He stated that pro-
posed is a two tier structure whereby those special assessments
on a particular lot are below $30,000, the present 7% reduction
would be maintained; however, if the assessments exceed $30,000,
a 12% reduction would be triggered. Ashworth recommended approval
of the two tier structure subject to the City Attorney preparing
the necessary amendments to special assessment reduction
agreement resolutions for final action by the HRA.
Michele Foster, representing Opus Corporation, supported the
staff's recommendation.
Whitehill asked if approval would create a precedent?
Ashworth responded that if it is clearly written there should be
no confusion for future decisions.
Whitehill moved, seconded by Horn, to approve the Special
Assessment Reduction request by Opus Corporation, subject to the
wording be clear as to not serve as a precedent for future policy
and that the approval is contingent upon the City Attorney
obtaining approval from the City's bond counsel for this modifi-
cation and drafting the specific language which would incorporate
the two tier system into the formula and resubmitting such to the
HRA for final action. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
I
L
L
HRA Minutes
February 6, 1986
Page 3
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT REDUCTION REQUEST - SUNNYBROOK DEVELOPMENT
Ashworth stated that the applicant's have submitted a letter
requesting consideration of their proposed project for inclusion
into the special assessment reduction plan. Ashworth stated that
the present agreement limits the reduction area to only those
lands north of the railroad tracks. He stated that the
Sunnybrook site would be served by Lake Drive East which is to be
constructed in part with state aid funds. Because the improve-
ments are to be carried out as a public improvement project,
Ashworth stated that Sunnybrook is requesting the HRA include the
public improvement construction costs under the special
assessment incentive program. He stated that should the HRA con-
sider including the Phase Two improvements within the special
assessment reduction program, that it be conditioned upon suc-
cessful construction by Sunnybrook.
Whitehill moved, seconded by Horn, to conceptually approve the
request by Sunnybrook Development for inclusion into the special
assessment reduction program conditioned upon successful
construction by Sunnybrook and that the City Attorney's Office
draft the specific modifications to the special assessment reduc-
tion program for final action by the HRA.
Ashworth noted that the HRA would not be providing two forms of
inducement in reference to Lake Drive East being a state aid
road. He stated that the overall state needs are significantly
higher than monies available and it would be proposed that the
state aid dollars remain as a part of the overall system and not
be allocated unless duplicate reductions are eliminated.
Secondly, he noted that Outlot B should be excluded from the
special assessment reduction program. He stated that the parcel
is now landlocked and Opus is working with city staff to alle-
viate the problem.
BROADENED STUDY AREA UPDATE
Fred Hoisington reviewed Plan A, the concept plan chosen by the
HRA and Planning Commission to use as a basis for the traffic
analysis in the broaden study area. He stated that they have
discovered a discrepancy in the T.H. 212 study whereby population
projections have been made in the rural service area signifi-
cantly higher than that which would occur in the urban service
area. Hoisington stated that they will continue to work with
MnDOT to resolve this discrepancy.
Sim Benshoof provided a detailed review of the study methods
intended to be used for the traffic study. He reviewed the study
area boundaries and the procedure for determining the traffic
forecasts. Benshoof also reviewed the intersection alternatives
regarding T.H. 212.
BRA Minutes
February 6, 1986
Page 4
NEW BUSINESS
Bohn suggested that staff pursue submission of press releases to
"What's Happening" in the Star and Tribune.
APPROVAL OF BILLS
Whitehill moved, seconded by Bohn to approve the bills of January
27, 1986. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Bohn moved, seconded by Horn, to adjourn the meeting at 9:15 p.m.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
CHANHASSEN HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
'�' 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
-u• (612) 937 -1900
MEMORANDUM
TO: Don Ashworth, HRA Executive Director and
Housing and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Barbara Dacy, City Planner
DATE: February 28, 1986
SUBJ: Status of Community Development Block Grant Program Funds
Attached is the memorandum that was prepared for Council review
at their February 24, 1986 meeting. The CDBG program needs'HRA
consideration because the Year XI program funds which were
entirely reserved for the Bloomberg acquisition process is pro -
posed to be reallocated as follows:
$ 9,587.00 Total Remaining (XI)
-$ 2,163.00 Senior Center
-$ 2,400.00 Comprehensive Planning
$ 5,024.00
Approximately $5,000 will remain in the Land Acquisition account
to cover final expenses in the Bloomberg transaction. The sale ,
agreement acquiring the additional land from Bloomberg reserved
$5,000 as an escrow to review the title of the property. Upon
satisfactory completion of the title review, this amount will be
disbursed to Mr. Bloomberg.
The attached memorandum also explains proposed projects for Year
XII funding. The City Council considered the matter as an
administrative presentation item and offered no adverse comments
regarding the attached memorandum.
BD:v
C
" 1
L
L
L
CITY OF r
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900
MEMORANDUM
TO: Don Ashworth, City
FROM: Barbara Dacy, City
DATE: February 19, 1986
Manager
Planner
SUBJ: Status of Community Development Block Grant Program Funds
The City's allocation for Community Development Block Grant funds
has been reduced by approximately 338 for Program Year XII due to
the large spending cuts occurring at the federal level. The
reduction makes it difficult to conduct a redevelopment project
or acquisition project. As a comparison, Chanhassen's Year XI
allocation was $38,532 whereas the Year XII Program funds are
scheduled to total $25,816 (see last page of Attachment #1).
However, several projects need to be considered by the City
Council and HRA.
The City must update its Comprehensive Plan in conjunction with- -
the Metropolitan Council's Metropolitan Development and
Investment Framework process and in compliance with the proposed
Lake Ann Sewer Facility Agreement. Because of the magnitude of
the revision and because it will occur during the busiest time of
the year for Planning staff, it is necessary to hire a con-
sultant. Mark Koegler, from VanDoren Hazard Stallings, is a
logical choice because of his prior involvement with the City's
plan. Estimated costs for Koegler's work is $10,000 to $15,000.
As you know, the South Shore Senior Center has requested that
$2,163.00 be allocated from the City of Chanhassen to help pay
for the Center's Coordinator salary for the last six months of
1986. Because there is enough funds remaining in the Year XI
account, the City can simply reallocate Year XI funds to meet the
South Shore Senior Center's request.
The city received $37,000 in block grant funds in 1983 to
establish a housing and rehabilitation grant program administered
by the Hennepin County staff. Since that time, the County has
Processed ten applications that have upgraded existing homes in
northern Chanhassen (primarily the Carver Beach area).
Approximately $8,000 remains from the original amount and there
Still appears to be continuing interest in the program from area
residents. Continued funding of the program with Year XII monies
would continue this service to the community.
Don Ashowrth
February 19, 1986
Page 2
A public hearing regarding funding of these projects is required
and is scheduled for the March 17, 1986 Council meeting. Because
some of the funding will require reallocation from the Land
Acquisition project, the HRA will consider these proposals at
their March 6, 1986 meeting.
The following will be proposed at the public hearing, unless
otherwise directed:
Year XI Reallocation
$2,163 Senior Center
$2,400 Comprehensive Planning
($5,100 to remain in Land Acquisition
account to cover final expenses in
Bloomberg transaction)
ATTACHMENTS
Year XII
$10,000 to $15,000 Comp Plan
$10,000 Housing Rehabilitation
1. Urban Hennepin County CDBG Program - Background and Directions.
2. Letter from Jack Hiczorek, Program Administrator, Suburban
Community Services, dated July 29, 1985.
3. Letter from Benjamin Withhart, Executive Director, SCS, dated
July 26, 1985
BD:v
r
URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY CDBG PROGRAM
BACKGROUND AND DIRECTIONS
Hennepin County has been an entitlement recipient of Community Develop-
ment Block Grant funds from the effective date of the program estab-
lished in the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974. Hennepin
became an entitlement recipient pursuant to the provision for Urban
Counties in the Act. In order to qualify as an Urban County, Hennepin
had to demonstrate that it possessed sufficient housing and community
development authority to be an effective participant in the program.
This was accomplished through the execution of a joint powers agreement
with other units of local government within the County.
Early in 1975; a Joint Cooperation Agreement was drafted, approved by
the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and executed with
twenty -two municipalities whose aggregate population exceeded the
qualifying threshold of 200,000 people. This initiated the Urban
Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program for the
first program year beginning with Fiscal Year 1975 and provided the
basis for participation in the program every year since.
As shown in Figure I., the Urban Hennepin County CDBG program began in
1975 with a total of 23 participants (Hennepin and 22 municipalities)
receiving an entitlement of $738,000. Currently there are 44 partici-
pants with a total population of 502,000 who shared $3,101,000 in FY
1985 (Program Year XI). Figure 2. shows that the preponderance of
activities programmed for Year XI are under $10,000 each. This con-
figuration is typical of the total number of activities undertaken
annually and their individual budgets.
Program dollars peaked in FY 1980 at $4,379,000 when Urban Hennepin
County consisted of 42 participants. In total, the Urban Hennepin
County program has been allocated $34,975,000 from regular CDBG appro-
priations plus $1,051,000 in a special appropriation from the Jobs Bill
of 1983. Table 1. lists the total number of participants in the Urban
Hennepin County CDBG program by year, the total amount received and the
allocation provided to each participant for use in the development of
the Urban Hennepin County program.
Opportunity was provided through the Act for communities to
Urban County program each year through 1977. Beginning in
pation was on a three year basis, locking communities in or
period. Currently, all eligible communities participate in
except Long Lake, who dropped out in 1981 to accept a one -t
tionary CDBG from HUD. Minneapolis and Bloomington do not
because they are entitlements onto themselves by virtue of
as metropolitan cities (cities with over 50,000 inhabitants
in a SMSA).
join the
1978 partici-
out for that
the program
ime discre-
participate
their status
and located
1� 67,; �j
Through 1985; $31 ;538;344 has been spent; representing 88 percent of
total dollars allocated. Figure 3. summarizes the type of activities
funded with the CDBG through calendar 1985; including funds from the
special appropriation to the program from the Jobs Bill of 1983.
Initially; the CDBG was viewed as a community development "revenue
sharing" measure and used as a public facility /improvement program
targeted to low and moderate income neighborhoods. It began as a means
to implement a national change in urban policy which in the mid 70's
moved away from an array of categorical grant programs sought on a
competitive basis to block grants made directly to qualifying units of
local government to use as they believed would best meet their needs.
The list of eligible activities was extensive and their selection guided
by a rather broad range of national and locally established objectives.
Since its enactment in 1974; the Housing and Community Development Act
has been amended four times! 1977; 1981, 1983 and 1984. With each of
the first three amendments to the Act, the Community Development Block
Grant program was reauthorized for three year periods. With each
authorization of the CDBG have come changes in program emphasis.
The 1977 amendments shifted the direction to activities which benefitted
low and moderate income persons; and made it increasingly difficult to
undertake projects within developing communities; or projects aimed at
addressing the commercial revitalization needs of older communities. It
was during this period that housing rehabilitation grants and the
acquisition of land for assisted housing development became program
activities; and the regulations governing the use of CDBG funds for
public (human) services began to be relaxed.
It was the 1977 amendments that also required a three year commitment on t
the part of all participants. The eligibility of split places; those
communities located in two or more counties, was expanded which provided
for inclusion of all of Chanhassen, Hanover; Rockford and St. Anthony as
eligible program areas. In addition; it became necessary to establish a
formal citizen participation plan.
In 1982, HUD began using 1980 Census data in determining the entitlement
allocation of funds to jurisdictions. This was the principal reason for
a 14% decrease in the Hennepin County entitlement.
In 1983; through the Urban Rural Recovery Act, the 1974 Act was again
amended. The CDBG program regulations resulting from these amendments
expanded the eligibility of such program activities as public services
and economic development. This expansion of program eligibility was due
partly to offset Federal budget reductions in other domestic programs,
although another reduction in the CDBG appropriation was made, con -
tinuing a trend begun in 1981.
The 1984 amendments continued the funding flexibility for public
services, further limited the eligibility of activities designed to
prevent or eliminate slums and blight, required that all economic
2
development activities result in the generation of jobs for low and
moderate income persons; and increased pressure on the program through
further funding reductions.
Allocations from the 1986 appropriation to the CDBG Program have yet to be
made, although a substantial reduction will occur due to the following
factors: (1) ten percent reduction in the Federal appropriation; (2)
several new Urban Counties (including Ramsey) have been designated; (3)
the Gramm- Rudman Bill will probably impact the CDBG appropriation by about
five percent; and (4) a Presidential deferral of funds earmarked for the
program as a technique to reduce the 1986 deficit without making a like
reduction in Defense spending is expected to amount to $500;000,000;
resulting in another reduction in the program of 16 percent. In total, a
33% decrease is projected in the 1986 Urban Hennepin County allocation
over 1985 ($2,078,000 compared to $3,101,000).
Our best current information suggests that the Administration's intent is
to extend the program through 1991 at approximately the 1986 funding
level. The program must be reauthorized in 1987; however; and several
program changes are being discussed which could have major additional
consequences for Urban Hennepin County. These potential changes include
(1) a restructuring of the allocation formula to target recipients in
greatest need, and (2) splitting the funding set aside for entitlements
and small cities discretionary recipients (States) 65 -35 rather than the
current 70 -30. Both of these program changes, if enacted, would further
reduce the Urban Hennepin County entitlement. Introduction of the needs
formula would be hard - hitting for urban counties and under the worse
scenario could result in Hennepin's allocation being reduced to zero.
Figure 1 shows the "worst case" (and most probable) funding projection
for 1986 and the probable range for 1987 and beyond. Table 2 shows how
the projected 1986 entitlement would be distributed among participating
communities pursuant to the Cooperation Agreement and how these amounts
would compare with 1985 allocations.
Reductions of this magnitude suggest that a restructuring of the
Hennepin planning allocation to each cooperating unit for individual use
may be appropriate. In essence, with drastically reduced funding and a
rather large number of low budget activities, it is increasingly
difficult to program dollars in an effective manner and is no less
demanding in an administrative sense. Although the present Joint
Cooperation Agreement with each cooperating unit assures a proportionate
allocation to use in program development, it may well be possible to
effect a distribution system and /or program development process to
better meet the challenges being faced.
There are a variety of program development alternatives which have
potential for achieving the necessary consensus among participating
communities. Some of these include:
I - Using the existing formula with no changes.
h
L
I
Using the existing formula with the understanding that the Citizens
Advisory Committee may recommend that some activities not be funded
based upon their small grant amount; individual projects or types of
project.
Voluntary agreement among some cooperating units that their planning
allocations be pooled to allow for a limited discretionary account
competitive process. Only those cities releasing their planning
allocation would compete for the available pool of funds. Approval
of requests for funding would follow the established process for
funding activities from the discretionary account. A minimum
project budget threshold would be established.
- All participant communities voluntarily forgo their Year XII
planning allocation in favor of a total discretionary program. The
funding recommendation would be the responsibility of the CAC
(perhaps with greater municipal participation in the program
development process).
There are undoubtedly other possible approaches that should also be
considered by Urban Hennepin County participants in an effort to derive
maximum benefit from declining CDBG revenues, ensure their equitable
distribution and minimize the costs of administration.
ml
OPD 1 -15 -86
„ = 4.5
ro
i =
4.0
b=
c.
a = 3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
ro
0 1.5
0
0
1.0
.5
Figure 1.
NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS AND GRANT AMOUNT BY PROGRAM YEAR
URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY CDBG PROGRAM
1 II III IV V VI VII VIII
FISCAL YEAR
PROGRAM YEAR
1 N
1 �
I C
v- ro
40
I E i
� ro
z n.
a
20
10
IX X XI XII XIII and
beyond
ll^
`1
i
R
0
0
w
0
c
R
O
z
v
m
m
100+
95-100
80 -85
75 -So
7o--75
65-70
60 -65
4s -so
't0 -4s
35- to
30 -35
25 -30
ZO -25
IS-20
10 -15
5 -10
O -E)
Number of Activities
Figure 2.
Number of Activities by Budget
Year XI Urban Hennepin County CDBG Program
I
2
I
2
I
I
i
6
5
II
9
35
3Z
127
r- r-7 r_— r,..-..
Land Acquisition
Housing Rehab
Public Facilities
Diseased Tree Removal
Architectural Barrier
Removal
Economic Development
Human Services
Local Planning
Administration
Millions of Dollars
- - ,o
c m
r�
� x
m v
�
a m
c
zz
�
o
r7
M C=
z c
w
z �
m m
v to
zm
O 3
C A
z c.
-1 o
C") A
v n
w -1
G
o<
• c�
3
a
TN61e
WE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
FUNDING
WY COOPERATING UNIT AND PROGRAM YEAR
UNIT
1/1975
11/1976
111/1977
[W1978
U11979
V1 11980
V11 11981
V111/1982
f
1111993
111984
11/1985
ill /1986 TOTAL
BROOKLYN CENTER
-
325193
346029
32914S
282356
332575
211592
240240
2097420
BROOKLYN PARK
74807
154952
255106
261181
279686
291534
309863
270619
395374
352218
354165
3006510
CHAMPLIN
t CHANHASTE
34380
56792
59680
64133
60162
70990
61632 17911
17765
38177
539642
13918
38099
41632
38300
38532
261191
EORCGkAN
10096
20656
34571
' 34140
36700
39017
399
-35531
]9131
7)]65
37689
366698
CRiSTkL
85534
177214
292748
20B942
309543
329082
303826
258212
202906
142759
140736
253662
BAITGN
15642
25792
25810
27433
29165
27559
26157
33190
29730
30020
276,95
BEEPhAVEN
10096
20856
34297
33860
36330
39017
37394
30651
24918
19017
19019
305,85
EDEN PRAIRIE
19210
39919
65571
66890
71916
76158
78000
93225
85455
69638
72350
738234
ELINA
72561
151205
249391
211306
268394
205336
279383
233732
214049
169513
167005
2331914
EICELSION
8413
17271
28535
28589
30769
32712
31259
26492
20558
16974
16664
258136
GOLDEN VALLEY
42206
87023
111062
139335
149167
159221
147433
1260BS
115109
86512
B5379
1263735
BREW IELD
15543
15940
16947
16811
15090
12116
9311
9313
111170
GREENNDOO
1542
3096
5213
4996
5561
5912
5715
5030
3337
3750
3717
47929
HANDVEA
3569
3886
3707
3941
7206
6371
7727
6696
6375
49478
HASSAN
15365
14988
16311
17341
16600
16096
16169
11163
14257
143590
HOPKINS
113291
113293
IKLEFENDENCE
28589
30398
32318
32135
1 26167
16169
17945
11856
203511
LONG LIEF
8230
8049
0526
9065
33870
LOkEITO
1052
2118
3569
3886
3707
3941
3993
3353
3611
1075
1934
31102
MAPLE GROVE
16579
38453
63377
66614
71547
76064
89005
83161
106667
95619
99961
849050
MAPLE PLAIN
11523
11180
11121
11821
13633
11737
11779
8303,
0092
99392
MEDICINE LAKE
11861
12612
11606
10060
3337
1875
1825
53258
MEBINA
16457
27162
26616
26545
30347
30090
26157
20896
16070
16150
238520
MINNETONKA
76210
158018
261194
261184
261369
299130
295938
230266
196490
145970
146711
2360512
ITNNETONKA BEACH
7411
7217
7705
8277
6569
1712
1618
1071
1017
50707
MTNNETkISTA
19389
32498
31642
34105
36259
34180
30181
31027
23836
23851
296570
MOUND
26151
53769
89115
89929
91126
103257
105155
89200
92822
76870
76581
900905
NEW HOPE
52162
108190
179804
175973
188321
200208
190183
160963
183996
137670
136577
1713127
ORONO
33091
55698
51102
58943
62664
61252
51978
37112
28123
27894
472287
OSSEO
24115
39783
39111
42632
45123
43042
37556
28325
22766
22286
345211
PLINOUIR
12741
68107
112489
121016
129748
137939
135066
125417
170826
142759
148055
1324163
RICHFIELD
98855
206114
338842
32BO76
352174
371105
354950
299323
288001
209450
206839
3057029
k06GINSDALE
39121
61142
133690
_ 129343
139387
111792
139645
119716
ID1979
79011
77917
1191911
kOCY.FOkO
13925
12741
1120B
22766
22826
91468
RLGERS
9603
9437
10380
11036
10225
9719
6114
8035
0093
82232
St. ANTHONY
25255
41976
42189
45227
18082
64271
52313
46560
34019
-34061
434751
51. BDNIFACIUS
4725
1661
7494
8156
6672
0277
6707
7727
8303
0391
76139
$1. LOUIS PARK
30,943
407114
383288
322026
324133
253611
251661
2324809
SHLRfWOGO
13181
27210
11994
11132
47451
50447
40300
42253
29676
23102
21180
394326
SPRIM6 PARK
4818
10493
16463
17209
18535
19706
17021
16096
13805
11517
11430
157913
TOWA BAY
5399
11243
16303
18041
19648
20888
18600
15761
8402
6160
6200
148725
WAYlhlk
0113
17271
28535
28589
31140
33106
32622
26257
25286
20356
20097
211592
IWOOLAND
4440
4730
4382
3769
5025
4285
4066
30725
0
HENNEPIN CTY
36900
122736
271350
300400
411900
137900
432600
372600
375200
302600
310100
3382186
BRAND TOTAL
718000
175206D
3015000
3084000
4119000
4379000
4320000
3126000
3752000
2981000
3101000
341)SuuD
1/86
1
_7
Table 2.
Projected Entitlement and Allocation to
Cooperating Units, 1986
Urban Hennepin County COBS Program
LTOTAL 3101000 2077670
a
Unit
'85 Alloc
Less 33X
BROOKLYN CENTER.
240240
160961
BROOKLYN PARK
354365
237425
CHAMPLIN
38177
25579
CHANHASSEN
38532
25816
CORCORAN
37689
25252
CRYSTAL
140736
94293
DAYTON
30020
20113
DEEPHAVEN
19019
12743
EDEN PRAIRIE
72349
48474
EDINA
167005
111893
EXCELSIOR
16664
11165
GOLDEN VALLEY
85379
57204
GREENFIELD
9314
6240
GREENWOOD
3747
2510
HANOVER
6375
4271
HASSAN
14257
9552
HOPKINS
113293
75906
INDEPENDENCE
17656
11964
LORETTO
1934
1296
MAPLE GROVE
99961
66974
MAPLE PLAIN
8092
5422
f
MEDICINE LAKE
1825
1223
I
MEDINA
16150
10821
MINNETONKA
146713
98298
MINNETONKA BEACH
1017
681
IMINNETRISTA
23851
15980
MOUND
76581
51309
NEW HOPE
136577
91507
ORONO
27894
18669
OSSEO
22286
14932
PLYMOUTH
148055
99197
RICHFIELD
206839
138582
ROBBINSDALE
77917
52204
ROCKFORD
22826
15293
ROGERS
8083
5416
I
SHOREWOOD
23380
15665
l
SPRING PARK
11430
7658
ST. ANTHONY
34061
22821
LL
ST. BONIFACIUS
ST. LOUIS PARK
8397
251661
5626
168613
TONKA BAY
6200
4154
WAYZATA
20087
13458
WOODLAND
4066
2724
SUBTOTAL
2790900
1869903
HENNEPIN COUNTY
310100
207767
LTOTAL 3101000 2077670
a
SUBURBAN COMMUNITY SERVICES
1001 Highway 7, Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 933-9311
<
Jj
LA Q
Z
—Ilk
C
-Ar
4-1
ry� /ul t
�),
Gll' r
A United
Agency
k7/7 � -1 i 6'r � 6; -1/1 -,* (-
SUBURBAN COMMUNITY SERVICES
1001 Highway 7, Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 933 -9311
r July 26, 1985
I
Mayor Thomas Hamilton and Council
City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive
Chanhassen MN 55317
Dear Mayor Hamilton and Council Members:
Suburban Community Services (SCS) is requesti g $2,163 Yom the
City of Chanhassen to support the Southshore Se ter during
the last half of 1986.
The Southshore Senior Center - which serves the communities of
Chanhassen, Deephaven, Excelsior, Greenwood, Shorewood, and Tonka
Bay - has grown from an average daily attendance of 13 seniors in
its first year of operation to 49 at the end of the second year
in June. The center is a focal point for a broad range of
services and activities. During the past year, more than 3,000
meals were served through the congregate dining program;
transportation to medical appointments, grocery shopping, and the
center was provided to 257 unduplicated individuals through use
of Mount Calvary - Lutheran Church's van and SCS volunteer drivers__
and in cooperation with Interchurch Community Association; and
over 50 SCS senior volunteers contributed 2,800 volunteer hours
at the center. The center also offered a wide variety of
educational programs, opportunities to take monthly trips to
local places of interest, and a place to be with old friends and
make new acquaintances. A fuller description of Southshore's
second year of operation is attached.
Southshore's funding has come from a variety of sources. United
Way provides support for administration and program operation;
Volunteers of America, Inc. funds the congregate dining meals;
the West Metro Coordinated Transportation Program provides
Partial support for transportation; the Metropolitan Council's
Aging Program has funded the center since its opening; and
Suburban Community Services and Southshore seniors raise some
funds through self - support activities.
L We feel it is important to note the support Southshore cities
have shown in funding some of the initial capital costs with
CDBG funds.
L
L
L
i
CIE A United Way
Agency
W
Mayor Thomas Hamilton and Council
Page 2
July 26, 1985
Southshore's grant from the Metropolitan Council is now in its
third year - the maximum length for grants for senior centers.
The grant ends on June 30, 1986. Funding is requested from area
cities for the period beginning July 1, 1986.
Amounts requested of the six cities are based on their respective
shares of the total senior population in the area. The combined
amount requested from the cities is $12,500 out of a total budget
of over $53,000. (A total budget is attached.)
While this request covers only the last six months of 1986,
SCS does plan on submitting a full year's request for 1987 at
approximately twice the level requested for the six months of
1986. Requests after that are expected to reflect only cost -of-
living increases. Other sources of Southshore's funding are
expected to remain stable.
We very much appreciate Chanhassen's support of the Southshore
Senior Center. Cooperation among SCS, area cities, local
organizations, and senior volunteers has made available to
Southshore seniors much - needed services and opportunities for
continuing growth.
If you have any questions, please call either JoAnn Kvern at the
Southshore Center (474 -7977) or Jack Wieczorek, Suburban "
Community Services Program Administrator-(933-9311). We would
welcome the opportunity to present our proposal to the City
Council.
Sin(zerely, (
Be& in F. Withhart
Ex utive Director
0
Enclosure
WK
QW -rWti�
J U�
Grocery Store
Fj
\ I �Illlllllllllfl l IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII F-
f��fffff O
Clock Tower Hotel
Specialty Shops T—I.
Dinner Theatre
� I i
Puking Ramp
� � � tll 11111 ll ll�
Bowwng Center i I „L„ I i Arena
0 ffiTf Tlillill� 0
GIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIL
T r—
Retail
0 l
Remodeled Retail \C`I Church
I
/ V
\ \ VIIU
\
i
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
City Hall
Fast
Food
CHANHASSEN HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
- - 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
.' ®'
(612) 937 -1900
MEMORANDUM
TO: Housing and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Don Ashworth, City. Manager
DATE: February 28, 1986
SUBJ: Consider Recommendation of Chamber of Commerce Regarding
City Identification Sign
This item is being presented to both the City Council and the
r Housing and Redevelopment Authority. The Housing and
{i Redevelopment Authority obtained the easement where the existing
sign is located. The City constructed the sign.
Approximately one year ago, the City Council asked the Chamber of
Commerce for their input as to what should be done with the City
identification sign to make it more readable. Hopefully, they
would take on this project and carry out any renovations.
Attached please find a letter received from the Chamber stating
that their Sign Committee is moving ahead with initial design for
a business identification sign to be located adjacent to Brown's
Standard. The proposed Chamber sign is anticipated to contain
several panels which could be leased by merchants as a means to
identify their business while simultaneously providing funds to
the Chamber for construction.
F Staff would recommend that a letter similar to the attached be
C forwarded to the Chamber of Commerce.
DA:v
L
L
February 28, 1986
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900
Chamber of Commerce
Attn: Donn Andrus, President
P.O. Box 241
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Dear Donn:
I have received Jerri Martin's letter of February 10th stating.
the Chamber's intent to move forward with a business iden-
tification sign to be located adjacent to Brown's Standard
Station. I have shared this letter with both the City Council as
well as the Housing and Redevelopment Authority.
Both the City Council and the Housing and Redevelopment Authority
are encouraging your efforts and recognize the readability
problems associated with the current city sign. Staff has been
instructed to work with the Chamber Committee in developing final
design standards. 'By looking to a separate location for the
business identification sign we will be eliminating legal issues
such as using public property for private purposes. Additionally,
by locating the business identification sign adjacent to Brown's
Standard will allow the City to coordinate and compliment the
work efforts of the Chamber, i.e. potentially design a
flower /rock design for the area currently occupied by the city
sign and /or prepare a low profile sign welcoming travelers to
Chanhassen. Once final designs are agreed to, the general con -
census of both the HRA and City Council was that the current city
identification sign would be removed concurrent with the
installation and that the City would commence reconstruction to
compliment the Chamber's sign.
Congratulations again on
forward to working with
design stages.
LSincerely,
L
Don Ashworth
LCity Manager
DA:v
L
the efforts of the Chamber and I look
the Chamber Committee during the final
February 10, 1986
Ms. Barb Dacy
City Planner
Chanhassen City Hall
690 Coulter Drive
Chanhassen, MN $$317
Dear Barb:
This is to confirm our telephone conversation concerning the
information sign for the City at the corner of Highway $ and
101 by the Holiday Stationstore.
The Chamber voted at its January 28 meeting to have the City
take down this sign. You said you would discuss this with
Don Ashworth and see if you could schedule it for a City Council
meeting.
The Chamber's plan is to put an information sign up on the
Brown's Standard property, across Highway 101 from where it
is currently. Gary Brown has been working with Amoco and
we will proceed from there.
If you have any questions, please contact me.
Sincerely,
Si
/1 MAI .j
J rri Martin, Secretary
hanhassen Chamber of Commerce
JNM:ms
cc: Donn Andrus, Chamber President
Ted Korzenowski, Treasurer
FEB 11 4 1986
CITY OF GHANHHAS,F I
February 17, 1986
I Mr. Don Ashworth
f City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive
f Chanhassen, MN 55317
Dear Don:
L
I have enclosed a couple of drawings of signs which the Chamber
is considering to use for an informational sign to be put up at
the intersection of 101 and 5• At least, that is where we are
thinking we will want it. It may be possible we might want it
closer to the boundary line on Highway S.
If you have any questions, please give me a call.
Si cge(reely,
Y
J rri Martin
S cretary
JNM:ms
Enclosures
CCITY
FEB 191986
OF CHANHASSEN
L
I
/ ! C;
'12
M
POL
I
L
L
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900
MEMORANDUM
TO: Housing and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Don Ashworth, City Manager
DATE: February 28, 1986
SUBJ: Feasibility Studies, Discussion
- Stormwater Management Plan
- Street /Sanitary Sewer Improvements - Downtown Area
The work schedule adopted in July, 1985 included preparation of a
stormwater management plan and street /underground utility impro-
vements within the downtown area. The studies were to commence
as the Broadened Study Area plans were being completed. The
State Highway Department's release of the Highway 212 plans
delayed completion of the Broadened Study Area plans. Additional
elements of the original work program were modified when CHADDA
asked for time to demonstrate their ability to carry out a down-
town project. _
The first run of the Broadened Study Area is on this evening's
agenda as well as the concept plan prepared by CHADDA. I believe
the HRA /City Council will be pleased with both.
If we are to maintain any consistency with our original time
schedule, initial work in determining the scope of services for
both the stormwater management plan and street /utility plans must
be started. As both the HRA and City Council have expressed con-
cerns over the number of studies completed over the years, staff
is presenting both of these items for discussion. I remain a
strong advocate as to the necessity to complete the studies for
both of these work functions; however, I could not see completing
extensive work detailing the proposed scope of work, engineering
selection processes, etc. without knowing that both the HRA and
City Council remain supportive.
Secondary factors supporting the position to move ahead with the
two studies are anticipated changes in federal /state laws.
Currently, the federal debate over taxable bonds has not impaired
a city's ability to complete projects such as the two proposed.
The current law ends in 1986 and some financial advisors are
Housing and Redevelopment Authority
February 28, 1986
Page 2
predicting that restrictions will occur in 1987. Similiarly, our
state government is considering amendments to the tax increment
laws which could significantly affect Chanhassen. Provisions
having the greatest affect include:
- Fiscal Disparities - Chanhassen is but one of a handful
of cities being able to exclude paying into the
Metropolitan fiscal disparties pool. Chanhassen's district
paralleled districts being created by Minneapolis and basi-
cally piggy- backed with their exclusion rights. Without
the exclusion, $400,000 per year would be lost from the
district. Minneapolis has now switched from a winner to
a loser. Their political clout will surely reverse this
law; and
- Allowable Projects /Delete Unimproved Properties - Allowable
tax increment projects are likely to significantly change.
Additionally, several of the proposals before the legisla-
ture include deleting parcels from an existing tax incre-
ment district for which no direct expenditures have
occurred during the past three years, i.e. only parcels
which have been acquired, where demolition has occurred,
or where public improvements have been completed and for
which bond payments are still outstanding would be allowed
to remain within the district. Any parcels not meeting the
above tests, would be removed from the tax increment
district. In the case of our downtown area, nearly every
parcel would be deleted from the district.
No one can predict what a legislature will do in any one year.
However, given the state's current financial dilemma, it is a
reasonable assumption that work functions, such as analyzing
changes to tax increment financing, will be placed on the back
burner. As many cities are concerned with tax increment
financing, it is doubtful that a bandaide approach will be con-
sidered as a part of this legislative session. However, members
acknowledging that change will probably not occur in 1986 are
also cautioning that major changes are likely in 1987.
Again, it is because of these potential changes and a desire to
see the downtown concepts realized that this office recommends a
detailed work schedule for preparation of improvement reports be
given concept approval. Staff would then come back with specific
recommendations on the scope and preparation of those studies for
the utility, street and drainage improvements on next month's
agenda.
DA:.v
L
L
L
.Xase IC,
year or not, operational expenses will be incurred for the
remaining portion of the Instant Web building, etc. The
major overages occur in the personal service area and costs
associated with the sale of the Instant Web building. The
personal service cost overage represents payment of
unemployment benefits for Mr. Martin (not budgeted). Cost
overages within the professional service category relate to
higher than anticipated costs associated with the sale of the
Instant Web building.
- Tax Increment Financial Model -
_•� ru �4 =u uvv �rowrn): Exhibit 2 represents the financial
model for tax increment district if the HRA /Council decide
not to pursue Phase II (HRA ceases as an organization). All
costs associated with the HRA (outstanding bonds, developer
incentive agreements (special assessment reductions], and
debt service payments for capital expenditures made by the
HRA) would be totally paid in 1994. During the period of
1986 through 1994, an administrative service fee would be
charged to the HRA to carry out the bond payments, receipting
of tax increment monies, etc. At that point, approximately
$1.5 million /year in tax revenues would be distributed to other
taxing authorities including the City, i.e. 40% of the taxes
going into the fiscal disparities pool with the remaining 60%
distributed to county, school and city. As with previous
models, the model takes the conservative position that no new
structures are - built. _
Exhibit 3 - Tax Increment Financial Model - Assuming Phase II
Not Pursued, Alterate II: This Exhibit is exactly the same
as the last Exhibit with the exception that the development
during the past five years continues during the next five
years. Similar to the previous model, this model assumes that
the HRA ceases to exist in 1985. Again, operational costs
associated with servicing the existing assets /liabilities of
the HRA is included as an administrative charge by the city
to the HRA account until all debt is paid. This model
reflects that all costs associated with the HRA will be
totally paid in 1991.
Exhibit 4 - Recommended Phase II Ob'ectives, Brauer &
Associates: Fred Hoisington will be present to discuss acti-
vities proposed as a part of Phase II. Exhibit 4 represents
a synopsis of his presentation. Regardless of whether the
HRA /City Council decide to pursue Phase II objectives or not,
major elements of this proposal will need to be addressed
within the next 2 to 3 year period of time. Specifically,
the plans for improving Highway 5 will be completed within
the next 2 years. If the City is to be successful in
influencing the design of Highway 5 to best accommodate our
present and future.traffic needs, we must be in a
1f. e., -,,/ /HIP%) m7'J
.�qoS Q tQ
tA. 1 u.J f:au
's.�.../d 7V-L
Mayor and Council /-/RA
cea /e
e� mev<
:.a /e 2r4cit of
Housing
& Redevelopment Authority ,wr
d �
��g
7 7X4 ,t 0i'l,
July 3,
1985
Page 3
bn /aw
c�ef <.It K
.Xase IC,
year or not, operational expenses will be incurred for the
remaining portion of the Instant Web building, etc. The
major overages occur in the personal service area and costs
associated with the sale of the Instant Web building. The
personal service cost overage represents payment of
unemployment benefits for Mr. Martin (not budgeted). Cost
overages within the professional service category relate to
higher than anticipated costs associated with the sale of the
Instant Web building.
- Tax Increment Financial Model -
_•� ru �4 =u uvv �rowrn): Exhibit 2 represents the financial
model for tax increment district if the HRA /Council decide
not to pursue Phase II (HRA ceases as an organization). All
costs associated with the HRA (outstanding bonds, developer
incentive agreements (special assessment reductions], and
debt service payments for capital expenditures made by the
HRA) would be totally paid in 1994. During the period of
1986 through 1994, an administrative service fee would be
charged to the HRA to carry out the bond payments, receipting
of tax increment monies, etc. At that point, approximately
$1.5 million /year in tax revenues would be distributed to other
taxing authorities including the City, i.e. 40% of the taxes
going into the fiscal disparities pool with the remaining 60%
distributed to county, school and city. As with previous
models, the model takes the conservative position that no new
structures are - built. _
Exhibit 3 - Tax Increment Financial Model - Assuming Phase II
Not Pursued, Alterate II: This Exhibit is exactly the same
as the last Exhibit with the exception that the development
during the past five years continues during the next five
years. Similar to the previous model, this model assumes that
the HRA ceases to exist in 1985. Again, operational costs
associated with servicing the existing assets /liabilities of
the HRA is included as an administrative charge by the city
to the HRA account until all debt is paid. This model
reflects that all costs associated with the HRA will be
totally paid in 1991.
Exhibit 4 - Recommended Phase II Ob'ectives, Brauer &
Associates: Fred Hoisington will be present to discuss acti-
vities proposed as a part of Phase II. Exhibit 4 represents
a synopsis of his presentation. Regardless of whether the
HRA /City Council decide to pursue Phase II objectives or not,
major elements of this proposal will need to be addressed
within the next 2 to 3 year period of time. Specifically,
the plans for improving Highway 5 will be completed within
the next 2 years. If the City is to be successful in
influencing the design of Highway 5 to best accommodate our
present and future.traffic needs, we must be in a
Mayor and Council
Housing and Redevelopment Authority
July 3, 1985
Page 4
position to accurately define traffic volumes at 184th
Street, Dakota Avenue, Highway 101, potential new access to
the downtown area, CR 17, and old CR 17 (Audubon Road). The
design of these intersections (closing /opening of such) must
be geared to overall circulation patterns, traffic volumes
and land uses. The Brauer proposal, encompassing the
broadened study area /specific traffic analysis, has been spe-
cifically defined by the City Engineer and myself so as to
provide the tools necessary to work with MnDOT during the
next two year period of time. The secondary element included
within the Brauer proposal which will be required to be
implemented whether Phase II is pursued or not, is the
drainage and utility study. The City of Chanhassen has a
severe problem in this area. Specifically, we do not have an
overall stormwater management plan. All of our current plans
carry water through a storm sewer system to the boundary of
our downtown area. The plan quits at that point.
Unfortunately, the water running through the pipe (or
proposed pipe) does not quit. The recent concerns raised by
the Metropolitan Council regarding the Hidden Valley residen-
tial development is a perfect example of this point. The
developer has adequately addressed the stormwater runoff as a
part of his development. The runoff rate will equal or be
less than currently exists. The questions raised by
Metropolitan Council and our ability to respond to those are
not questions related to the specific - development, but in
fact result because the City empties a major stormwater pipe
at the boundary of the Hidden Valley development. The con-
cern raised is not insurmountable. It simply requires that
the City develop the plans and upstream ponding areas
necessary to insure that overall stormwater management is
achieved. The City will face the same questions as the Ward
property is brought into the market place, as well as to
document the improvements which have already taken place as a
part of projects such as the Business Park. The related
issue - sanitary sewer - is also of vital interest to the
City of Chanhassen. Specifically, the physical stormsewer
and sanitary sewer pipes within the downtown area are ex-
tremely old and undersized. Again, the City Engineer has
spent significant hours with Brauer /Benshoo and Associates in
relaying our concerns and attempting to insure that such
would be a part of the Phase II proposals presented by Brauer
and Associates.
A new north /south street to serve the Chanhassen Retail
Center /Bowling Facility has been discussed at significant
length. I do not feel it necessary to restate the importance
of this feasibility study /actual improvements as a part of
the proposed Phase II objectives.
The remaining portions of the proposal from Brauer &
Associates, i.e. update market study, imaging study, and
Ii N
l
4
L d
M
M
Exhibit 4
RecommendeL Phase II Objectives
Brauer & Associates �1
A, ere ;.7J o $0
MEMORANDUM
TO: CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL AND BRA
FROM: FRED HOISINGTON
SUBJECT: DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY PROPOSAL
DATE: JUNE 28, 1985
At its May 30 meeting, the HRA requested Brauer & Associates to
prepare, for discussion at the June meeting, a proposal for Phase
II of the Downtown Redevelopment program. Based on discussions
with staff, it was decided that a preliminary proposal be presented
instead and, depending on the City's intent to proceed with a
second phase, that a detailed proposal be presented at a subsequent
meeting.
As indicated in the final report of the Concept Planning phase,
several activities must be undertaken over the next two years and
many of those are proposed to begin in 1985. A refinement of the
tasks to be completed, are shown on the next page. I will be
prepared to discuss each of these on Thursday.
The major task, the Broadened Study Area Program including a ,
traffic analysis, has been broken down into work assignments (see
sheets 5 and 6). In addition, the City Engineer will prepare a
detailed scope of services for the storm water /sanitary sewer study
(drainage and utility study). It is anticipated that one of the
engineering firms currently working with the City of Chanhassen
will be selected to complete this task.
It is essential that we go after
there are still many unanswered
utilities in the downtown area.
whether a developer can even be
upgrading the storm and sanitary
a developer(s) ASAP, however,
questions regarding drainage and
We do not know at this time
accommodated without first
sewer systems.
L7901 Flying Cloud Drive, Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 ❑ (612) 941 -1660
Furthermore, we believe it is necessary to lay the groundwork for
developer solicitation. This work will include the updating of the
McComb and Associates Market Study and the development of a plan
which illustrates land use relationships and architectural images
(Imaging Study). Both of these will be used to promote Chanhassen
with developers. The revised timeline would be as follows:
1. Adopt Concept Plan Summer 1985
2. Plan For The Broadened
Study Area (including
negotiations with MnDOT
and the RR, vis —a —vis
STH 5 access) Summer 1985
3. Update Market Study September 1985
4. Drainage and Utility
Study
5. Imaging Study
(based on Market Study)
6. Developer Selection/
Project Feasibility Study
7. Street Feasibility
Study
September 1985
September 1985
January 1986
Spring 1986
In addition, there is a continuing need to keep members of the
business and development communities appraised of the Chanhassen
program and schedule and progress. toward implementation. Periodic
reporting sessions and written communications will be required to
satisfy this need. This could be either a Staff or Consultant
responsibility.
The following is a general outline of the objectives, scope and
benefits of the Broadened Study Area services. The primary
emphasis of this study will be transportation (street and access)
planning.
OBJECTIVES
1. To develop a land use and circulation plan that
provides for functional linkages between downtown
and the community as a whole.
2. To develop justification for and assume a pro-
active role in the pursuit of another Highway
5 access to downtown.
3. To work with and acquire the concurrence of all
agencies regarding Highway 5 accesses.
4. To reevaluate land uses in the general vicinity
of downtown in light of recent downtown plan
revisions.
SCOPE /PRODUCTS
1. Analysis of the transportation system for the ex-
panded downtown area from Eden Prairie to Old 17.
2. Development of a recommended land use and trans-
portation plan for the entire study area including
the resolution of existing concerns, road align-
ments, lane requirements, and intersection loca-
tions.
3. Development of preliminary cost estimates, sources
of funding, and implementation program for the re-
commended plan.
I4. Involvement /Concurrence among affected agencies
(MnDOT, Hennepin and Carver Counties) with recom-
mended plan and implementation program.
` 5. Computerized roadway network and traffic forecast
data base for use on a continuing basis.
BENEFITS
1. Provide effective solution to current issues in-
cluding STH 5 access, STH 101 and Co. Rd. 17/78th
Street intersecttions.
L2. Development of a definitive land use /transportation
plan which is realistic and acheivable in meet-
ing long term needs.
L
L
i
3. Concurrence among involved agencies regarding
transportation system, improvements and implemen-
tation.
4. Stimulation and streamlining of development
review process.
5. Ease and reduced cost in assessing future changes
in the.land use and transportation system.
6. Reduced time and cost in the implementation
of needed transportation improvements.
Since transportation is such an important part of this effort, the
consultant team will include Benshoof & Associates, Inc. and Brauer
& Associates, LTD.. Benshoof & Associates has computer capabilities
that provide for the ultimate in traffic analysis and planning.
Such a study could be completed by January 1986.
If the City concurs with this course of action, the appropriate
next step will be to request a detailed proposal from B &A including
a work program, timelime and associated consulting fees for 1)
Broadened Study Area Services, 2) Market Study Update, 3) Imaging
Study, and 4) Continuing Services. A more general proposal could_
also be requested, for budgeting purposes, for the Developer
Selection /Project Feasibility Study. Though a bit premature, the
City could also authorize the City Engineer to take a proposal for
the sanitary and storm sewer feasibility study.
We look forward to being of continuing service to the City of
Chanhassen.
��I L
QWMVWIM '1�!
Grocery Store
Retail
WI U
I I �
I i Remotleled Retail
I i
1
\
7TTnTl 0
*9 Rffff"+*H+ffffl
MUffiffiNH
Hall
Fast
Food
e
e
7
r'
r
r
r
r
O
O
n
r
r
r
r
r
O
O
r
r
r ,
VIM
MPIMNr0uN .wm... =r ^Ir n. rkpWn�nnlNalW�iRAtAPi�IRA�f hiq'RJA .. ......,....
CHANHASSEN M.B.A.
A C C 0 U N T S P A Y A B L
E 02 -24_86 PAGE 1
CHECK f
A M 0 U N T
C L A I N A N T
P U R P O S E
026182
3,839.25
BRAUER 6 ASSOCIATES
-�p
PEES, SERVICE Pg
026183
280.00
GRANNIS, CAMPBELL,
PEER SERVICE
026184
146.50
AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOC
RAVEL ♦ TRAINING
J
4,265.75
CHECKS WRITTEN
I'C�
TOTAL OF
J CHECKS TOTAL
6,265.)5
�- V
—1
1
^v
r
r
r
r
r
e
0
n
r,
r
r
r
r
0
0
r
r
r
r
:1H1v:14�.a, I"w ntgv!*", M'On<,.OIW 1M-'.1,4,:IN:IMEp%".IltI Roo , ..
CHANHASSEN H.R.A. A C C 0 U N T S P A Y A B L E 0244 -86 PAGE I
CHECK I A M O U N T C L A I M A N T P U H
026302 10,500.00 HOUSING ALLIANCE ACCOUNTS PAYABLE
1 10,500.00 CHECKS WRITTEN 1
( VVV
n
1
1
� 1
n ''
P � INVOI(,E �
If Bill To:
4 Date: 1/25/86
Ms. Barbara Dacy Invoice No: 1986199
City Planner
Chanhassen HRA B &A Job floa 85 -41
690 Coulter Drive Broadened Study Area
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
erns tlE U P 11 RtC PT
For professional services including;
* Population revisions
* Completion of Eden Prairie population and employment
[ projections (west of CR 4 is in the Chanhassen Stuoy Area
[ * general
* project coordination
Traffic engineering assistance including:
( + definition of development /roadway alternatives
+ meetings with Metropolitan Council and MnDOT staff
concerning traffic forecasting
r interrelationships with dand
I + preparation
road the regional model
�on of the
'Puter roadway network including
g points y links, and travel
time
FEES; measurements
f Senior Pro - - - - - -_
Pro III ----- 26.50 hrs. @ 6U. 00 hr.
15.00 hrs. 0 45. 1,590.00
Pro ----------------- 00 hr. 675.00
Tech III 31.50 ors. 0 35.00 hr.
TOTAL FEES 9.50 hrs. @ 25.00 hr. 1.12.50
..,7.50
Expos: 3,r )0— 5,00
Delivery Service
Copies - --- t
--- ------ --- ----
Mileage -------- ---------- --- -- -..00
Prints
n -------------------
-----------------
29.25
---- --- -- ---- _ 1.75
TOTAL EXPENSES
3 54.25
TOTAL 1/25/86 INVOICE
S 3,659.25
Bill To:
Ms. Barbara Dacy
City Planner
Chanhassen HRA
690 Coulter Drive
P,U. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
C.
IrJVUICE
Date: 1/G5/86
Invoice No: 198,6110
B &A Job NO: 85 -20
Continuing Services
For professional services including:
* Meeting with Barbara Dacy on 1 -8 -86
* Meeting with Don Ashworth and Barbara Dacy on 1 -25 -86
regarding Sunnybroo�
* ordinance vis -a -vis downto'in
Peview of proposed sign
FEES: -
itlU.;n
Senior Pro ------ ----- 3.00 hrs• ;a 60.'lil hr.
TOTAL 1/25/86 INVOICE
� ®ice
®1 i 710« singAlliance
f
1
I
1
�I
I_
t.
L
L
L
L
C
L
Housing Redevelopment Authority
City of Chanhassen
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Reimbursement for Market Research
NET DUE
igeq �
INVOICE #0030
January 24, 1986
$10,500.00
JAN :? 9 1085
CITY OF CHANHA.SB-' I
oh
\Iimu:gnnu. \luuuonm .lL lu;
C
�K ' b
ON �1
December 31, 1985
Statement Number: 117/10/5196
Mr. Brad Johnson
Housing Alliance
200 Butler North
510 1st Avenue North
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55403
Statement
AND
COMPANY
For completion of preliminary analysis of retail and hotel potential
for downtown Chanhassen per 11/12/85 contract.
Contract Amount
$15, 000. 00
Expenses
copies
26.00
data
- 110.00
mileage
25.75
graphics
80.00
Sub Total
241.75
Total 15, 241. 75
Less Retainer 4, 500. 00
Amount Due $10,741.75
JAN 2 9 198
CITY OF CHAiNnAb-
Terms. Net 15 days. Interest at the rate of 1.5 percent per month will
be charged on all balances outstanding at the end of the month.
620 KICKERNICK, 430 FIRST AVENUE NORTH
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55401
612- 338 -0012
>hworth -
f , of Chanhassen - HRA
J. Box 147,E
.nanhassen, MN 55317 U
Professional services rendered in re:
L
L
C
L
t�f _ 1aRV
C'i ?y Oe CHp NNpcc7..i
01/06/86 MCR
Instant Web - conference with
Mary Vujovich.
.10
01/06/86 MSV
Chanhassen Mall - Instant Web - telephone
call with Barb Dacey re: County Road 16
.40
01/06/86 MSV
easement; research.
Bloomberg land exchange - telephone calls
2.00
- �
with Barb Dacey and Attorney Jim Penberthy;
revised agreement; telephone call to Carver
County Recorder's Office re: status of South
Lotus Lake.
01/07/86 MCR
Instant Web - telephone call to Bill Monk
re: Chanhassen Mall plat placement of
.10
01/09/86 MCR
County Road 16 easement.
Instant Web - draft of letter to Barb
1.60
Dacey, City Planner, re:.status of
research on title to County Road 16
01/09/86 MSV
property; conference with Mary Vujovich.
Chanhassen Mall
- County Road 16 right-
of -way - revised letter to Barb Dacey;
1.00
conference with Cecelia re: further title
investigation.
01/10/86 MCR
Instant Web - telephone call to Carver
County Surveyor; background research re:
.20
Schutrops.
01/10/86 MSV
Bloomberg Land Exchange - telephone calls
to Attorney John Rice and abstract company
.40
01/13/86 MSV'
re: South Lotus Lake abstract.
Bloomberg Land Exchange -- telephone
- - --�
calls.-
John Rice.
.40 --
(01/14/86 MSV
Bloomberg Land Exchange - telephone call
from Bill Monk; review correspondence
.40
from Attorney Rice.
01/14/86 MSV
Chanhassen Mall - County Road 16 - review
01/15/86 MSV/
research and letter to Barb Dacey.
Bloomberg Land
.30
Exchange - telephone call
01/16/86 MSV
from Barb Dacey re: closing.
Bloomberg Land Exchange
.20
F - correspondence
1.10
rom Bill Monk; review of file as to
necessary closing preparations.
01/17/86 MCR Telephone call to Chanhassen City Hall
re: location of Arnold Schutrop heirs.
01/21/86 MCR Instant Web - telephone conference with
-- Karen Gydhort of City re: Schutrop heirs.
01/22/86 MSV' Bloomberg Land Exchange - telephone call
from Bill Monk and review of correspondence
;from John Rice.
01/23/86 MSV/ Bloomberg Land Exchange - review agree-
! BloombergeLandt�onhfor closing.
.20
.10
i
7.00
28 .00
140.00
7.00
112.00
70.00
14.00
L l 28 0. 0 I
r
28.00
28.00
21.00
14.00
77.00
C.
14.00
7.00
.60 42.00
We
xc ange - completed review 3.90
of Lawcon forms; development contract;
telephone calls to Lori Sietsma, and
Bill Monk; drafted closing checklist;
conference with all parties in Chanhassen.
L 42.00 j
273 00