Loading...
HRA 1981 12 03AGENDA SPECIAL MEETING CHANHASSEN HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY THURSDAY, DECEMBER 3, 1981 Chanhassen City Hall, 690 Coulter Drive City Council Chambers 7:30 p.m. 7:30 p.m. - 1. Call to Order. 2. Approve Minutes of September 10 and October 6, 1981 meetings. 3. Approve 1982 Administrative Operating Budget. 4. Approve Joint Cooperation Agreement with Carver County for 1980 Community Development Block Grant Program. 5. Downtown Project Acquisition /Relocatjon Negotiations: Status Report. 6. Downtown Project: General Status Report ! a. Engineering and Surveying b. Developer Lease Negotiations 7. Adopt Resolutions #81-5 & #81 -6, Clarifying Expiration Dates of Kraus - Anderson and Bloomberg Co. Redevelopment Agreements. 8. Review W. 79th Street Realignment Study. 9. Old Business. 10. New Business. 9:30 p.m. -11. Adjournment. R C r i Chanhassen Housing Special Meeting September 10, 1981 Minutes Call to Order and Redevelopment Authority j- The meeting was called to order at 8:00 p.m. Present were Vice - Chairman Whitehill and Commissioners Bohn and Russell. Absent was Gullickson and Horn. Excecutive Director Scott Martin and Attorney Russ Larson were also present. Horn arrived at 8:25 p.m. Approval of Minutes Bohn moved, seconded by Russell, to approve the minutes of the August 20, 1981 meeting as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Havlik Property Acquisition (Parcel #30) John Havlik was present to request a clarification of the action taken by the BRA on December 18, 1980 when the appraised value of his property was adjusted from $200,605 to $246,105. At issue was the intent of the HRA when agreeing to adjust the appraised value. Attorney Larson interpreted the HRA's action to mean that the appraisal adjustment would be valid only if the Havlik business were relocated within the HRA tax increment district. Havlik believed that the adjustment was not related to rebuilding in the tax increment district. Havlik presented a review of the history of the acquisition negotia- tions with Larson. He added that he fully intends to rebuild in the tax increment district if the adjusted appraised value is agreed to by the HRA. (- Whitehill pointed out that Havlik's justification for the additional $45,500 over and above the original appraisal included $11,000 for additional costs to purchase land for a new building. He stated that a fair appraisal would be $235,105 ($246,105 less the $11,000 for i land included in the justification presented by Havlik). Havlik pointed out that he is presently faced with land costs of $3.50 /sq. r ft. He added that he may only be able to build a service repair garage with U -haul rentals, but without gasoline sales, due to costs of rebuilding a full gasoline service station. Russell asked if Havlik had a separate appraisal done for his property in order to substantiate his request for an increase in appraisal value. Havlik responded that he had not ordered such an appraisal. Commissioner Horn arrived at this point in the meeting. Bohn stated that he does not recall that the appraisal adjustment was r tied directly to relocation within the district. l Havlik said that he would not agree to rent his business from the HRA following acquisition. i HRA Special Meeting September 10, 1981 Page 2 C Larson suggested that he continue private negotiations with Havlik to attempt to resolve the remaining issues. No action was taken by the HRA on this issue at this time. Traffic Analysis Study for Highway 5 Intersections Russell moved, seconded by Whitehill, to authorize BRW, Inc. to conduct a traffic analysis study at a cost not to exceed $5,800 to determine if or when signalization of the Highway 5 /Co. Rd. 17 intersection is warranted due to traffic safety considerations and traffic volumes. The traffic study should also include present and future traffic operations at Park Drive and Old County Rd. 17. BRW shall use all data available from the Minnesota Department of Transportation and Carver County concerning recent traffic counts and roadway improvement plans when preparing the study. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Havlik Property Acquisition Russ Larson and John Havlik returned to the meeting at this time and presented a negotiated settlement for HRA consideration. Larson stated that Havlik agreed to enter into a purchase option agreement with the HRA that provides for the following considerations: 1). The purchase price of the real estate and immovable C equipment shall be $235,105. This is the total purchase price of the Havlik property to be paid by the HRA, regard- less of whether or not Havlik rebuilds within the tax increment district. 2). Following HRA acquisition of the land and building, Havlik will pay monthly rental to the HRA during the time he occupies the property before relocating. The monthly rental rate shall be equivalent to one - twelfth (1/12) of the real estate taxes due on the entire property in the year of closing on the purchase option. Havlik will also be responsible for paying in full all unpaid taxes and special assessments outstanding on the property as of the date of closing. Larson further advised the Commission that if Havlik relocates within the HRA tax increment district in a manner acceptable to the HRA and the City, the development contract governing improvement of the new site would provide for certain relocation cost adjustments not to exceed $11,000 over those relocation costs as initially appraised. Additionally, Havlik should qualify for a 15% land cost credit based on the new site land and building cost. John Havlik stated that the understandings reported by Larson and set out above were acceptable to him. Whitehill moved, seconded by Bohn, to accept the purchase option settlement covering acquisition of the existing Havlik site upon the terms outlined above, and to direct the attorney to draft the necessary legal document immediately for Havlik's signature. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The attorney was also instructed to work out a development HRA Special Meeting September 10, 1981 Page 3 61 _ contract with Havlik covering the Havlik relocation in the tax increment ' district when a new site has been selected. Old Business j Martin reported that Mike Sorenson has signed a purchase agreement to sell his property (Parcel #8) to the HRA at a total price of $25,000. The closing on the property is scheduled for September 15, (� 1981. Martin reported that proceeds from the first bond issue for the Downtown Project were received today. The closing date for the Instant Web building has been tentatively scheduled for September 16, 1981. Martin updated the Commissioners on progress regarding the Riviera acquisition. He said that staff was working with the owners to identify several viable relocation sites. The appraisal and purchase price offered by the HRA are acceptable to the Riviera. New Business Martin reported that the owner of Chanhassen Pharmacy had contacted l him concerning the possibility of early relocation. The owner was interested in relocating within the next month or two and wanted to know if he could receive relocation expenses at that time. The Commissioners all agreed that no early relocation payments should be made to any business (not owner- occupied) wishing to relocate substantially in advance of the time that the HRA requires possession of the property. (� Adjournment l Russell moved, seconded by Bohn, to adjourn the meeting at 9:40 p.m. All voted in favor and the motion carried. F F F F 6� Chanhassen Housing Special Meeting October 6, 1981 Minutes Call to Order and Redevelopment Authority 26 Ir The meeting was called to order at 7:40 p.m. Present were Vice- Chairman Whitehill and Commissioners Horn, Bohn and Russell. Absent was Gullickson. Executive Director Scott Martin, Attorney Russ Larson and City Manager Don Ashworth were also present. Instant Web Acquisition - Larson reviewed numerous legal documents prepared by the HRA and Instant Web, Inc. which are necessary for final closing on the Instant Web property. The Frank Beddor family and Attorney Jules Smith, representing Instant Web, Inc. were also present at the meeting. The Commissioners reviewed the Attorney's letter of October 2, 1981 which outlined the various documentation completed in preparation for the closing. `I Russell moved,. seconded by Horn, to adopt Resolution #81 -4 approving all necessary documents associated with the closing for the HRA's acquisition of the Instant Web Building, as required under the terms of the Contract for Acquisition and Development, dated May 20, 1981, as amended August 13, 1981, between the HRA and Instant Web, Inc; _ and authorizing the Vice - Chairman and Executive Director to execute F said documents on behalf of the HRA. All voted in favor and the motion carried. j Downtown Project Update Martin advised the Commissioners that Super Valu has decided not to - locate in the Downtown Project. Kraus - Anderson is presently negot- iating with another supermarket chain for lease of space in the project, but a final decision by the supermarket is not anticipated until December, 1981 or January, 1982. II The Commissioners agreed to pursue purchase option agreements with John Havlik and the Riviera regardless of possible project delays resulting from the loss of Super Valu from the project. The Attorney was instructed to negotiate an option renewal clause with these two owners to protect the interests of the HRA should the project be delayed beyond Sept. 1, 1982. The Commissioners also instructed the Attorney !p to proceed with acquisition of the John Huber property as expeditiously as possible. W I� HRA Special Meeting October 6, 1981 Page 2 Business Park Development Ashworth reported that resolutions implementing the so- called 78 development incentive program for the Business Park were being prepared for HRA consideration at the regular HRA meeting in November. Adjournment Horn moved, seconded by Bohn, to adjourn the meeting at 9:00 p.m. All voted in favor and the motion carried. R CHANHASSEN HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Im690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN. MINNESOTA 55317 -� ■■ - (612) 937 -1900 Staff Report TO: Chanhassen Housing and Redevelopment Authority FROM: Scott A. Martin, Executive Director DATE: November 24, 1981 RE: 1982 Administrative Operating Budget Attached for your review and approval is the City Council approved HRA administrative operating budget for 1982. I must apologize for not presenting this to you earlier, since the Council acted on the budget back on October 13, 1981. You will note that the "Housing Assistance" and "Historic Preservation District" budgets were not funded for 1982. The reason for this is that tax increment revenues may not be legally expended for programs not directly related to a tax increment redevelopment project. A total of four (4) City employees are being partially funded by the HRA in 1982, with my position being 75% funded by the HRA and 250 by the City. In 1981, my position was funded with a 50/50 split between the City and HRA. I will be prepared to go over the budget figures in more detail with you at the upcoming meeting. FINANCIAL RESOURCES HOUSING, AND REDEVIIAPYFNT AUTHORITY Fund Code: 460 CODE MAJOR CATEGORY AND ACTUAL ESTIA'ATFD BUDGET NO. TPEN1 1980 1931 1982 General Property Taxes 3011 Delinquent Property Taxes 343.16 -0- 8,000.00 3012 Tax Increment Receipts 53,531.25 160,000.60 250,000.00 Cpl, GML. PROP= TAXFS 53,874.41 160,000.00 258,000.00 I<NTERGOVEISIfgTITAL REVENUE 3510 Grants, State -0- -0- -0- 3520 Grants, County -0- -0- -0- 3530 Grants, Federal -0- 4,800.00 -0- 3522 Grants, Other -0- -0- -0- TOTAL aUERGOVEIMMAL REV, -0- 4,800.00 -0- Other Revenue 3601 Sale of Documents 10.00 50.00 50.00 3613 nisc. -0- -0- -0- 3801 Interest Earnings [2,358.96] 3,000.00 3,000.00 3803 Building Rental -0- -0- -0- 3807 Donations -0- -0- -0- TOTAL MIER REVETIUE [2,358.96] 3,050.00 3,050.00 TOTAL RECEIPTS 51,525.45 167,850.00 261,050.00 TRANSFERS - IN 2,700.00 TRANSFERS - OUT 23,710.49 7,500.00 10,000.00 TOTAL REVENUE 27,814.96 163,050.00 251,050.00 Br•,GLNNING CASH BALANCE 365.43 1,849.00 81,419.00 LESS RE2UIRED RESERVE 28,180.39 164,899.00 332,469.00 TOTAL RESCURCFS 26,331.71 83,480.00 67,345.00 MIM HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FINANCIAL RESOURCES 1981 BUDGET Revenue - 3.00. a 2* Il�N iII I, I r l l I �T `T p e HOUSING AND REDE=pM qT AtM1ORITY EXPENDITURE SWAARY Fund; 460 ACTUAL ESTIMATED 1980 1981 BY FUNCTION ,150 Downtown Redev. Dist. 26,331.71 65,600 155 Housing Assistance 7,913.74 13,020 158 historic Preservation 5,136.40 4,860 TOTAL 39,381.85 83,480 BY CIASSIFICATIC4 Personal Services 7,718.56 26,670 Cormdities 68.40 450 Contractual Services 22,599.16 28,360 Capital Outlay 8,995.73 28,000 TOTAL 39,381.85 83,480 IL-M ■ FWD 460 HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY DEPARPMFNT: 150 DagNTC7AN REDEVELOPP'fiM DISTRICT 1982 BUDGET iACTUAL ESTIMATED BUDGET 1980 1981 1982 PERSONAL SERVICES 4010 Salaries & Wages, Reg. -0- _. 12,400 35,678 4020 Salaries & Wages, Temp. -0- -0- -0- 4030 Contrib., Retire. -0- 1,240 4,255 L. 4040 Contrib., Ins. -0- 260 1,460 4050 Alorkmens Corp. -0- 200 302 TOTAL PERSCNAL SERVICES -0- 14,100 41,695 CON2�DZTIES 4110 Supplies, Office -0- 300 450 4120 Supplies, Equip. -0- -0- -0- 4210 Books And Periodicals -0- 100 -0- TOTAL 002MMITIFS -0- 400 450 CCNTRACTUAL SERVICES 4301 Fees & Counseling -0- 23,000 25,000 4310 Telephone -0- 200 200 4340 Printing & Publishing 565.99 3,300 -0- 4360 Subscript. & NLemberships -0- -0- -0- 4370 Travel & Training -0- 600 -0- 4300 Fees, Service 18,265.72 -0- -0- TOTAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 18,831.71 27,200 25,200 CAPITAL OUTLAY 4701 Land Purchase & Imp 7,500.00 22,000 -0- 4703 Office Equip. -0- 1,960 -0- TOTAL CAPITAL OUTTAY 7,500.00 23,900 -0- TOTAL EXrnTDITURES 26,331.71 65,600 67,345 -90- ( FIND 460 HOUSINC AND REDEV�APMEITI' AUTHORITY DEPA=TT: 155 HOUSINC ASSISTANCE i ACTUAL ESTISIVTED BUDGET 1980 1981 1982 5,930.17 10,300.00 -0- jPERSONAL SERVICES -0- 4010 Salaries & Wages, Reg. -0- 4020 Salaries & Wages, Temp. -0- 4030 Contrib., Retire. -0- 4040 contrib., Ins. F4050 -0- Workmen's Corp. FTOTAL 269.01 400.00 -0- PERSONAL SERVICES CO1, M7DTSIES i 4110 Supplies, Office 1� TMAL COM"IODITIE; ccNTRACTUAL SERVICES 4300 Fees. Service 4310 Telephone 4340 4370 Printing & Publishing Travel & Training 4530 Rep. & Maintenance, Equip. 4590 Misc., Contractual Services TOTAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES CAPITAL OUTIM 4703 Office Equipment TOTAL CAPITAL OUrr.nv IFTOTAL EXPENDITURES IF IT ACTUAL ESTISIVTED BUDGET 1980 1981 1982 5,930.17 10,300.00 -0- -0- -0- -0- 689.70 1,250.00 _ -0- 574.97 1,000.00 -0- 8.89 20.00 -0- 7,203.73 12,570.00 -0- -92- 66.67 50.00 -0- 66.67 50.00 -0- -0- -0- -0- 197.51 -0- -0- -0- 50.00 -0- -0- 30.00 -0- 71.50 220.00 -0- -0- 100.00 -0- 269.01 400.00 -0- 374.33 -0- -0- 374.33 -0- -0- 7,913.74 13,020.00 -0- FUND: 460 HOUSINC AND REDEVELOPM= ALTHOPTTY 760 DEPT: COMMUNITY DEVELOPNIENTT CAPITAL OUTLAY FUNCTION - 158 - HISTOPIC PRESERVATION DISTRICT I I 1,121.40 ACTUAL ESTIMATED BU= 1,121.40 1980 1981 1982 PERSONAL SERVICES III 4020 Salaries, Temp. 514.83 -0- -0- TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 514.83 -0- -0- CONTRACTUAL SERVICES TOTAL EXPENDITTJRES 5,136.40 4,860 4300 Fees, Service 170.00 -0- -0- 4310 Telephone 317.94 260 -0- I� 4320 Utilities 2,962.00 500 -0- 4481 Insurance, Bldgs. -0- -0- -0- 4510 Rep. & maint., Bldgs. 48.50 -0- -0- TOTAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,498.44 760 -0- CAPITAL OUTLAY I�I' 4702 Buildings & Structures 1,121.40 4,100 -0- I� TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY 1,121.40 4,100 -0- II Ccn¢nodities III 4150 Maint. Materials 1.73 -0- -0- TOTAL CONWDITIES 1.73 -O- -0- TOTAL EXPENDITTJRES 5,136.40 4,860 -0- I, -94- i �I a W u CHANHASSEN HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612)937 -1900 Staff Report TO: Chanhassen Housing and Redevelopment Authority FROM: Scott A. Martin, Executive Director�ft DATE: November 24, 1981 RE: Joint Cooperation Agreement with Carver County HRA The Carver County Housing and Redevelopment Authority approached the Chanhassen HRA on July 10, 1980 (see attached minutes) in order to determine whether Chanhassen was interested in participating in a Housing Rehabilitation Grant Program funded by the U.S. Department of Housing Urban Development (HUD) and operated by Carver County. The Chanhassen HRA expressed interest in such a program, and gave tentative approval to entering into a "Joint Cooperation Agreement" with the Carver County HRA, with the stipulation that certain modifications be made in the agreement, and that the Attorney General render an opinion that such an agreement may pertain only to this specific grant program so that it would not reduce the Chanhassen HRA's ability to carry out other housing programs and redevelopment efforts during and following the grant program period. The revised agreement, attached for your review and formal approval, has been found to be acceptable to our attorney. The Attorney General's opinion, although not included with this report, concluded that the signing of the joint cooperation agreement will not constitute a transfer of the Chanhassen HRA's powers to the County. Although the agreement was never formally the Carver County HRA proceeded with thre projects this past summer involving homes projects were funded under the assumption Agreement would be executed by Chanhassen were resolved. Recommendation executed by either party, (3) housing rehabilitation in Chanhassen. These that the Joint Cooperation once the legal questions In light of the HRA's action of July 10, 1980, the results of the Attorney General's opinion, conversations and correspondence with HUD officials, and our attorney's findings, I recommend adoption of a resolution authorizing the Chairman and Executive Director of the HRA to execute the Joint Cooperation Agreement on behalf of the HRA. Report Attachments 1. Letter from Carver Co. HRA dated 10/16/81. 3. Copy of Joint Cooperation Agreement. 2. Note from Attorney dated 11/12/81. 4. Minutes of July 10, 1981 HRA Mtg. r Hou °sing & Redevetopme(.. Authority of Carver Coul_,� 5th & Oak Carver, Minn. 55315 (612) 448 -2302 October 16, 1981 r Scott Martin, H.R.A. Director City of Chanhassen Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Mr. Martin: District 1 - James Sulerud - Vice Chairman District 2 - Roland Pavek District 3 -Brant Ball - Chairman District 4 - Norman Paul District 5 - Robert Borak - Sec.-Treas. Exec. Dir. - Judson Kenyon Enclosed you will find a revised copy of the Cooperative Agreement. In discussing the necessary changes with Kurt Stertz, Assistant County Attorny he preferred to verbally give me information regarding the necessary changes and not draft the changes himself. The reason for this is the uncertainty about whether the County Attorny's office should do this type of work for the H.R.A. He had no reservations about the necessary changes. The changes are not to extensive. You will note on page 1 under I. Parties, I have included the grant number; under II. Definitions I added part "e "; and under III. Purpose, I added the last sentence of the paragraph. One other suggestion Mr. Stertz had was a hold harmless agreement and I believe that is adequately covered under Part VI. Special Provision. I did not fill in the date and will leave that up to you, however, since the first home rehab project was approved by the County H.R.A. Board on June 9, 1981 it would probably be best if the Chanhassen H.R.A. could make it retro active prior to that date. Your assistance on facilitating this contract will be greatly appreciated and once I receive the two signed copies back I will get the county signature and forward a copy to you. I have not heard anything yet from H.U.D. on the other issues but will be in touch with you soon. _ Sincerely, Qds Kenyon`�� Acting H.R.A. Director Gi-NOF G -NO CHANHASSEN a.._ ou 1 1981 C01RMUN i f DEVELOPMENT DEPT. r An Agency Created to Plan, Develop and Administer j Equal Opportunity Housing for Carver Countv t RUSSELL H. LARSON CRAIG M. MERTZ 1900 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING -MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 + PHONE 612 335 -9565 .... .._ .. _ ... DATE DATE G)fO�n/ T��¢. .G�Nrt�V.t�. L�-.c- c3Ys• =.;�c. `���crnciR.�.�_ .. _ _. _..._ .._ .._ ._._ ....._. _....__. C- �iwlhrsle eJ O _ _ BY ��. _ .. _ . SIGNED calm NNR i T^^ 011 -119 Ild, IN: So. 505.0 0 i. To— 75221 I g TIONS T 0 I.ElT RUOTION9 TO RECEIV[R: I. KEEP YELLOW COPY. 2. RENO WHITE AMC PINK COPIES IRIwCT. I. WRITE REPLY. 3. DETACH STUB, KEEP PINK COPY, RETURN WHITE COPY TO SENOER. s .'�_., ix.G'. :YJ?a•�,.:',.,�t�"K','y lfiy: ""ir`�i.�'B`?hvS4.i::.` Y.,.!i.rt r.... 'k� 'T ti. i�` ..`yI x:_; a .>, ,� r^ ' f i F COUNTY OF CARVER, MINNESOTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM 1980 JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT I. PARTIES 1. The parties to this agreement are government units of the State of Minnesota. This agreement is made pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59, as amended by Laws 1973, Chapter 431. j— 2. The parties to this agreement are the County of Carver and the VV Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Chanhassen. ,� 3. In consideration of the mutual covenants and promises contained fl in this agreement, the parties mutually agree to the terms and conditions contained herein. 4. Each of the parties; hereto understands and agrees that Carver County is the applicant under the 1980 Small Cities Community Development Block Grant Program and will be responsible for all the work to be performed under said grant #B- 80 -DS -27 -0010 and will be the i recipient of all administrative fees arising under said grant program, #B- 80 -DS -27 -0010. II. DEFINITIONS 1. For purposes of this agreement, the terms defined in this section have the meanings given them. a. "The Act" means the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended. l b. "Regulations" means the rules and regulations promulgated pursuant to the act. C. "HUD" means the United States Department of Housing and R Urban Development. II d. "Cooperating City" means any unit of general local government in the county which has entered into a cooperation agreement j which is substantially identical to this agreement. e. Community Development Block Grant activities means those I T activities funded by CDBG grant #B- 80- DS -27- 0010. 2. The definitions contained in Section 102 of the Act and Section 590.420 (c) of the Regulations are incorporated by reference in T this agreement and made a part thereof. %I Joint Cooperation Agreement III. PURPOSE The purpose of this agreement is to authorize Carver County to cooperate 7 with the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the Cities of Chaska, Chanhassen, Waconia, Victoria and Watertown in the submission of a pre - application and full application for Federal grants under Sub -part F of the Regulations, and in undertaking or assist in undertaking essential r community development and housing assistance activities, specifically pursuant to Community Development Block Grants as authorized by the Act and the Regulations. Those activities to be undertaken in this agreement are to be only those activities which are funded by CDBG grant #B- 80 -DS -27 -0010. 5. Nothing in this Article shall be construed to lessen or abrogate Carver County's responsibility to assume all obligations of an applicant under the Act, including the development of the Housing j Assistance Plan, the Community Development Program, and certification to be signed by it; provided, however, that the Housing Assistance Plan so developed shall relate to each Cooperating City in which J� activities are to be carried out, shall be adopted by the governing tl body of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of each Cooperating City, and shall be consistent with any other Housing Assistance Plan applicable to Carver County and Cooperating Cities. V. ALLOCATION OF BASIC GRANT AMOUNTS T1. Up to thirteen percent of the total grant received under the Act shall e be retained for the purpose of defraying administrative and other ; -2-I IV. SCOPE OF ACTIVITIES 1. Carver County agrees and will contract to undertake, and contract to carry out within the terms of this agreement, certain projects involving one or more of the essential activities eligible for funding under the Act. 2. Carver County agrees in the undertaking of such essential activities to provide the following services: a. Carver County will have prepared a grant pre - application, and, if invited by HUD, a grant application for funds in a behalf of the Cooperating City in accordance with the provisions of Sub -part F of the Regulations. �- b. Carver County will submit, or have submitted, its pre- applications and, if invited by HUD, its application for funds in behalf of the Cooperating City to HUD in such form and with such certifications as are required. 3. The parties mutually agree to cooperate fully in the preparation of the pre - applications and the application for a grant. 4. The parties mutually agree to comply with all applicable requirements T of the Act and the Regulations in the use of grants, the Community Development Program and the Housing Assistance Plan submitted pursuant to the Act and the Regulations. 5. Nothing in this Article shall be construed to lessen or abrogate Carver County's responsibility to assume all obligations of an applicant under the Act, including the development of the Housing j Assistance Plan, the Community Development Program, and certification to be signed by it; provided, however, that the Housing Assistance Plan so developed shall relate to each Cooperating City in which J� activities are to be carried out, shall be adopted by the governing tl body of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of each Cooperating City, and shall be consistent with any other Housing Assistance Plan applicable to Carver County and Cooperating Cities. V. ALLOCATION OF BASIC GRANT AMOUNTS T1. Up to thirteen percent of the total grant received under the Act shall e be retained for the purpose of defraying administrative and other ; -2-I Joint Cooperation Agreement costs in performing services for Cooperating Cities, in undertaking essential activities as such terms are defined by the Act and the Regulations. 2. The balance of the basic grant amount received under the Act shall be allocated as described in the application. VI. FINANCIAL MATTERS 1. All funds received by Carver County under the Act shall be deposited in a special fund. 2. Carver County agrees to maintain, or have maintained, financial and other records and accounts in accordance with the requirements of the Act and Regulations. Such records and accounts will be in such form as to permit reports required by the Act or Regulations to be prepared therefrom and to permit the tracing of funds to final r expenditures. 3. Carver County agrees to make available at all reasonable times to City and County authorized personnel, and authorized Federal officers, r all records and accounts with respect to matters covered by this agreement. Such records shall be retained as provided by law, but in no event for a period of less than three years from the effective date of this agreement. r- 1 4. Carver County agrees to perform, or have performed, all necessary audits of funds received from HUD and to make available such audits to HUD at such times as may be necessary to comply with audit requirements under the Act and Regulations. VII. TERMINATION 1. The term of this agreement is for a period commencing on its effective date and ending one year after the awarding of the grant by HUD, or until the grant is expended, whichever occurs later. 2. If no grant is awarded by HUD, this agreement shall immediately terminate. VIII. EFFECTIVE DATE 1. This agreement shall be executed by the appropriate officer of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Chanhassen,:and Carver County pursuant to authority granted them by their respective governing bodies; and a copy of the authorizing resolution and executed agreement shall be filed promptly by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in the Office of the County Administrator. 2. This agreement is effective on the date when the cooperation agreement has been filed as provided in Section I of this article. -3- Joint Cooperation Agreement r -IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this agreement to be executed by its duly authorized officers and delivered on its behalf, this day of 198 Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Chanhassen By Chairman And Executive Director -4- COUNTY OF CARVER, STATE OF MINNES09 By Chairman of County Board/ State Governor And County Auditor I Minutes Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 10, 1980 h The Chanhassen Housing and Redevelopment Authority was called to order on July 10, 1980, at 7:40 p.m. by Chairman Bill Gullickson. Members present were: Commissioners Gullickson, Whitehill, Niemeyer, Bohn and Russell. Also present were City Manager, Don Ashworth; Assistant City Attorney, Craig Mertz; Jerome Carlson, Instant Web; Ted Teglin and Judson Kenyon, Carver HRA; Don Ringrose and Peter Jarvis, BRW; and John Przymus. Cliff Whitehill Reappointment: It was noted that.the City Council unanimoulsy approved the reappointment of Commissioner Whitehill to another term expiring May 31, 1980. The Assistant City Attorney, Craig Mertz gave the Oath of Office to Commissioner Whitehill. MINUTES OF JUNE 5, 1980: The minutes of the previous meeting were read and approved as submitted. Carver County Community Development Block Grant - Joint Powers Agreement: r. Judson Kenyon and Ted Teglin representing the Carver' County HRA explained the impact on the Chanhassen HRA should the Joint Powers Agreement be signed by the Chanhassen Authority, i.e. that the City of Chanhassen will not be jeopardizing their ability to carry out other Metropolitan /State /Federal activities by signing (- this agreement nor is the City transferring authority to Carver ! ' County for other programs. Commissioner Whitehill moved to execute the Joint Powers Agreement subject to the following conditions: 1. That the authority being transferred be limited to the present project (Grant BSD92700100). j 2. That such authority is not transferred until we receive an opinion of the Attorney General that such is a limited t transfer which completely lapses at the conclusion of that project. 3. That it is the opinion of the Attorney General that all aspects of the amended Joint Powers Agreement are noted and r 4. That the Joint Powers Agreement be amended to delete the Hold Harmless Clause. he motion was seconded by Commissioner Russell. Vote - 4 ayes, 1 negative vote by J. Bohn. Motion carried. Ins a Web: Jerome Carlson appeared before the HRA in a continuing e or toTeep the Authority informed of their wishes regarding Park _ I. It was the concensus of the Commission that development like the Park I project is in the best interest of the City and while the HRA's concern is primarily for the Tax Increment District, the commission looksfavorably on other development within Chanhassen. STAFF REPORT TO: Chanhassen Housing and Redevelopment Authority FROM: Scott A. Martin, Executive Director DATE: November 24, 1981 RE: Downtown Project Status Report At the upcoming meeting, the HRA Attorney and I will be prepared to update you on the current status of all acquisition /relocation negotiations, as well as other progress being made towards implementation of the Downtown Redevelopment Project. rAt this point in time, negotiations are still in progress for the acquisition of the Huber, Havlik, and Riviera properties, although no final agreements have been executed by any of these property owners. If necessary, the Attorney will deliver a written report to you under separate cover in advance of our December 3, 1981 meeting. I^ RUSSELL H. LARSON otl] CRAIG M. MERTZ LARSON & MERTZ ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1900 FIRST BANK PLACE WEST MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 Dear Scott: December 1, 1981 Redevelopment Authority TELEPHONE (612) 333 -IS" Re: HRA Acquisition, Parcel #26 John H1.1ber In reviewing the appraisal report covering the captioned acquisition parcel, including relevant maps and legal descriptions it came to our attention that the "saleable" portion of the property contains only 88,000 square feet (s.f.) not 99,590 s.f. as reported in the appraisal. The legal description for the parcel is "The Solith 295 fee!- of the East 433 feet of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 12, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota. ", but if we look at the half- section map attached, you will note that the description includes 32,475 s.f. (pink) of West 78th Street right of way (75' x 433') and 7260 s.f. (orange) of Laredo Drive right of way (33' x 2201). After deducting the street rights of way from the legal description, the lard area available for development purposes is 88,000 s.f. If we use the $1.85 s.f. valuation of the appraiser (which this office feels is on the high side), the 88,000 s.f, parcel has a �.i value of $162,800, rather than $186,000 as reported by the appraiser. These facts were reported to the property owner at a recent meeting, II at which I offered $132,000 for the 88,000 s.f. parcel ($1.50 /s.f.), pointing out that he had.it for sale at $90,000 some eighteen months ago. His demand remains at $186,000, which equates to $2.11 per s.f. He had earlier demanded an inflation adjustment of 1% per month over the $186,000, but waived it after I advised him of the HRA policy against such adjustments. r_ L' I, I^ Ii OF COUNSEL HARVEY E. SKAAR MARK C. MCCULLOUGH Mr. Scott A. Martin Executive Director Chanhassen Housing & Chanhassen, MN 55317 k Dear Scott: December 1, 1981 Redevelopment Authority TELEPHONE (612) 333 -IS" Re: HRA Acquisition, Parcel #26 John H1.1ber In reviewing the appraisal report covering the captioned acquisition parcel, including relevant maps and legal descriptions it came to our attention that the "saleable" portion of the property contains only 88,000 square feet (s.f.) not 99,590 s.f. as reported in the appraisal. The legal description for the parcel is "The Solith 295 fee!- of the East 433 feet of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 12, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota. ", but if we look at the half- section map attached, you will note that the description includes 32,475 s.f. (pink) of West 78th Street right of way (75' x 433') and 7260 s.f. (orange) of Laredo Drive right of way (33' x 2201). After deducting the street rights of way from the legal description, the lard area available for development purposes is 88,000 s.f. If we use the $1.85 s.f. valuation of the appraiser (which this office feels is on the high side), the 88,000 s.f, parcel has a �.i value of $162,800, rather than $186,000 as reported by the appraiser. These facts were reported to the property owner at a recent meeting, II at which I offered $132,000 for the 88,000 s.f. parcel ($1.50 /s.f.), pointing out that he had.it for sale at $90,000 some eighteen months ago. His demand remains at $186,000, which equates to $2.11 per s.f. He had earlier demanded an inflation adjustment of 1% per month over the $186,000, but waived it after I advised him of the HRA policy against such adjustments. r_ L' I, I^ Ii F F I F F F 17 ll �I fr T F F 0 Scott A. Martin -2- 12/1/81 At this writing, it is my impression that the property owner's demand will come down to a more reasonable figure. Should he remain at $186,OOo, it will be my recommendation that eminent domain proceedings be commenced f e acquisition. ery t my s, RUSSELL H. LARSON RHL:mep Chanhassen City Attorney Encl. 4 Q: 3 2 20/ p A \� -� _. 3 .W. n v Qom` So 2 10 13 SARATOGA i q o 17 f 14 /O 5 Oo 2 4 \ I 2 3 Y IF DEL c, . Lli 5 — < t 2 4 5 3UI u, CAP—, IF 3:4 I 2 3 4I 5 N ~ W. - W. iq So _ �I I IND. SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 112 BK 6 MISC, P 528 - _ I 2 12 12 3 II 11 4 4 O IC x 10 5 g rI I a VILLAGE OF CHANHASSEN a N 13K 9(),;, 43 I 8K 96,P 350 w IFSK 115, P 204 } n o'j 7 7c l - -- -- - -- I _. ... RICHARD STLINER UK 120, P 33 p .n � CHAN ; ... 3] —.___ U SCHNEI AGENCY, INC L //1 vl GK 2 3 4 rJ �. 97, 97, P 722 4 J I I rr- - �+ 139.90 — -- ozo �I0of _ ?o-00W4 Z-10 JOHN r? RRO,LE�� SK 39, P 300 i %ZGO SF n mm tiary H N N BE3,000 SF .IURN NAVLIK,JR, THOMAS KRUI.GEP BK 126, P. 529 q O 11S PRUI (O FUm ti I' GU, %l ' 11 77 3 z yyS s 9 ('' CARVER COUN7 Y . BK 113, P 26 ',` 1 ✓ _ l __.___ ^_ 230 - '� —"' —'— -N0- LARsoN & MXRTZ ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1900 FIRST BANK PLACE WEST RUSSELL H. LARSON MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 CRAIG M. MERTZ t OF COUNSEL December 3, 1981 r HARVEY E. SKAAR MARK C. MCCULLOUGH l r Board of Commissioners i Chanhassen Housing and Redevelopment Authority _ 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen MN 55317 I Gentlemen: TELEPHONE (612) 333 -1511 CONFIDENTIAL Re: Riviera Club, Inc. Acquisition Parcel 31 Negotiations for the Riviera Club property have resulted in agreement with Tom and Lou Kruger that the HRA appraised value of $391,606 is a fair price and one which they will accept. Additionally, the form of the option agreement has been approved by their attorney. (The option form is identical to the Havlik option, but with the right of first refusal deleted). The following two issues are still open for negotiation: A. Montly rental after HRA acquisition. This office feels that a uniform HRA policy on rental should be established, and we believe Scott Martin shares this view. In the Havlik case, the rental was set at 1 /12th of the annual real estate taxes, exclusive of special assessments, on the property payable in the year of closing. This rental approach will provide the HRA with funds to pay taxes in the event the unpredictable county assessor denies a tax exempt status to the HRA. Subject to the direction of the HRA Board and the recommendation of the Executive Director, this office is of the opinion that the rental should equal the real estate tax obligation,at a minimum. i I I r i I r F r Board of Commissioners Chanhassen Housing and Redevleopment Authority December 3, 1981 Page Two B. Option Term Extension Price. The property owner objected strenously to the $500.00 option price for each quarterly renewal. His argument was that the City /HRA has kept him "dangling" for several years, as a consequence of which he has not been able to remodel his present facility to include private dining rooms for party and banquet use and expansion of his kitchen facilities,with a resultant loss of gross income, both past and that which could be earned during the option term (to 9/1/82 or 9/1/83 , as the case may be). Further, he argued that during the "delay" time construction prices have increased, thereby dimming his relocation possibilities. After some negotiation as to the amount of payment for quarterly option renewals, the property owner tendered the following two alternatives, which he stated was his final position: 1. $5000 payment by HRA for each quarterly option term extension with the option extension money paid to be deducted from the total purchase price upon HRA acquisition, or 2. $3000 payment by HRA for each quarterly option term extension with no deduction of the option extension money paid from the total purchase price upon HRA acquisition. At this stage of the negotiations this office is not prepared to make a recommendation as to which, if any, of the two alternatives should be accepted by the HRA. LAurs, -, ery RUSSE N Chanhassen City Attorney RHL:ner OR OF CHAN[,IASS J e° _rIMI E DEC 0 3 9991 COMMUNITY C'EVE Oa-MENT LLE; T. r October 21, 1981 CITY 0 CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 Mr. Don Ringrose, P.E. BRW, Inc. 2829 University Avenue S:-E. Minneapolis, MN 55414 RE: Field Survey work for Chanhassen Downtown Redevelopment Project r Dear Don: r rr- F I II As we discussed during our telephone conversation today, the Chanhassen Housina and Redevelopment Authority has authorized BRW, Inc. to proceed immediately with the minimum field survey work necessary to provide you with the detailed field data required to prepare final plans and specifications for construction of all public improve- ments associated with the Chanhassen Downtown Redevelopment Project. This authorization is granted under the terms of Phase 2, work Task 2.1 of our project implementation agreement, with the under- standing that field survey costs are not to exceed $10,000. Please let me know when you anticipate having your survey crew. begin work in the project area, and keep me abreast of any problems you encounter as work proceeds. If you have any questions concerning this matter please contact me . . � �r- Sincerely, Sott A. Martin Executive Director -•' Chanhassen HRA SAM: bf CHANHASSEN HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 ' (612) 937 -1900 STAFF REPORT TO: Chanhassen Housing and Redevelopment Authority FROM: Scott A. Martin, Executive Director DATE: November 24, 1981 RE: Redevelopment Agreement Expiration Dates Dennis Spalla, Kraus - Anderson, Inc. has contacted me concerning an apparent ambiguity in their Redevelopment Contract expiration date. Section 7.1 of both the Kraus - Anderson and Bloomberg Co. Redevelopment Agreements establishes the expiration date of each agreement as being "one year after execution of this Agreement by the Redeveloper. . . " Kraus - Anderson executed their agreement on March 25, 1981, and Bloomberg Co. signed their agreement on May 4, 1981. However, the HRA did not execute either agreement until May 27, 1981. I believe that it was the intent have an agreement with a term of parties executed the agreement. agreements until some time after fair and logical to clarify the as the expiration date. Recommendation of the HRA and each redeveloper to one year from the date that both Since the BRA did not execute the the other parties did, it seems only agreements by establishing May 27, 1982 I recommend adoption of BRA Resolutions #81 -5 and #81 -6 clarifying the expiration dates of each Redevelopment Agreement by establishing May 27, 1982 as the expiration date. Report Attachments 1. Letter from Dennis Spalla dated 11/12/81. 2. Letter from Craig Mertz dated 11/18/81. 3. Section 7.1 of Kraus - Anderson Agreement. 4. Resolutions #81 -5 and #81 -6. MINNEAPOLIS 2510 Minnehaha Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55404 r Telephone: (612) 721 -4877 HAWAII r Suite 1502 Financial Plaza of the Pacific a 130 Merchant St. Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 Telephone: (808) 537 -6127 l November 12, 1981 Mr. Scott Martin Chanhassen BRA City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Steve: As we discussed recently, the one year period for financing does not expire at the end of 1981; however, it does seem to - be rather confusing in Section 7.1 of the Development Agreement. I The contract seems to have contemplated one full year from date of execution, but there is a gap of two months between our signing and yours. We believed the year should have begun l when the document became effective; namely, May 27, 1981, and not the day Mr. Engelsma signed it for Kraus - Anderson, Inc. We need your clarification on this point, and if necessary, letter of understanding. Thank you for your cooperation. rVe truly yours, Dennis DJS:rm `_/ cc: L. Knott CITY OF CHANHASSEN PdOV 131981 Cn,M, MUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. KRAUS ° ANDERSON DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION I I r- I II� I r RUSSELL H. LARSON CRAIG M. MERTZ OF COUNSEL HARVEY E. SKAAR MARK C. MCCULLOUGH Scott A. Martin Executive Director Chanhassen HRA Box 147 Chanhassen MN 55317 Dear Scott: LARSON & MERTZ ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1900 FIRST BANK PLACE WEST MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 November 18, 1981 TELEPHONE (612) 333 -ISII Re: Downtown Redevelopment Agreement I have received a copy of Mr. Spalla's letter to you asking for a clarification of the exact date on which his company!s redevelopment rights expire. The unexpected time gap between the dale of signing by Kraus - Anderson (and by Bloomberg) and the date of signing by the HRA have created an ambiguity. I believe that it was the intent of the parties that the one -year period expire on May 27, 1982, which is the first anniversary of the signing of the contracts by the HRA. It would be unfortunate if this inadvertent ambiguity were to hinder the redeveloper's attempts to secure financing. I enclose for your approval the text of two possible resolutions which would resolve the ambiguity by "extending" the expiration date to May 27, 1982. CMM:ner enc Very truly yours, CRAIG M. MERTZ Assistant Chanhassen City Attorney CITY OF CHANHASSEN NOV 19 1981 COMMUNPY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 12/22/30 FGA Rev. 1 -8 -81 ARTICLE VII ��(�- Private Construction Financing Section 7.1 Private Construction Financing Within one year after execution of.this Agreement by the Redeveloper and,— in any event, before the date of issuance or sale of the Bonds, the Re- developer shall submit to the Agency evidence of a commitment for financing sufficient for construction of the Mandatory Minimum Improvements. If the Agency finds that the financing is suffi- ciently committed and adequate in amount to provide for the con- struction of the Mandatory Minimum Improvements then the Agency shall notify the Redeveloper in writing of its approval. Such approval shall not be unreasonably withheld and either approval or rejection shall be given within thirty (30) days from the date <a when the Agency is provided the evidence of financing. If the Agency rejects the evidence of financing as inadequate, it shall do so in writing specifying the basis for the rejection. In any 4 event the Redeveloper shall use its best efforts to submit ade- r quate evidence of financing within thirty (30) days after such rejection. In view of the present 2W 27 19 9V money market generally and the availabil'tyncing specif- . ic ally it is agreed that all obligations of both parties to pro - ceed under this Agreement shall abate until Redeveloper's financ- ing is approved pursuant to the terms of this Section 7.1, and that if said financing is not approved within the said one year period -above provided, then this Agreement shall be null and void thereafter unless said one year period is extended by mutual agreement. It is further understood and agreed that the Redeveloper's financing may be by a joint venture with a lender. Section 7.2 Limitation Upon Encumbrance of Property. Prior ` to the completion of the Mandatory Minimum Improvements, as certi- fied by the Agency, neither the Redeveloper nor any successor in interest to the Redevelopment Property or any part thereof shall engage in any financing or any other transaction creating any mortgage or other encumbrance or lien upon the Redevelopment i Property, whether by express agreement or operation of law, or suffer any encumbrance or lien to be made on or attach to the Redevelopment Property, except: (a) for the purposes of obtain- ing funds only to the extend necessary for developing the Minimum i Improvements and such additional funds, if any, in an amount not j� to exceed the costs of developing the Minimum Immprovements and (b) only upon the prior written approval of the Agency. For the -34- CITY OF CHANHASSEN HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY I RESOLUTION Dated: 1981 Resolution No. 81 -5 Motion by Commissioner Seconded by Commissioner RESOLUTION CLARIFYING EXPIRATION DATE OF REDEVELOPMENT CONTRACT WHEREAS, Kraus - Anderson, Incorporated, as Redeveloper, j and the Chanhassen HRA, have entered into a contract in connection with the Chanhassen HRA Downtown Redevelopment Project, and WHEREAS, said Redeveloper executed said contract on March 25, 1981, and WHEREAS, the Chanhassen HRA executed said contract on May 27, 1981, and WHEREAS, Section 7.1 of said contract provides that said Redeveloper must submit a certain commitment for financing within one year of the date of execution of said contract by the Redeveloper, and WHEREAS,.it was the intent of this body that the one - year period specified in Section 7.1 expire on May 27, 1982, rather than on March 25, 1982. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Chanhassen Housing and Redevelopment Authority as follows: ` That the Chanhassen Housing and Redevelopment Authority hereby extends the date of expiration of the one -year period set forth in Section 7.1 of the above - described I Redevelopment Contract from March 25, 1982 to May 27, 1982. That this Resolution is adopted not of making any substantive change in Contract, but rather than for the p the intent of this body. Passed and adopted this day of by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Chanhassen, Minnesota. rman Attest: _ Executive Director for the purpose said Redevelopment arpose of clarifying 19 the City of Yes No Absent I r I r 9 r -2- CITY OF CHANHASSEN HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY RESOLUTION Dated: Resolution No. 81 -6 Motion by Commissioner Seconded by Commissioner RESOLUTION CLARIFYING EXPIRATION r DATE OF REDEVELOPMENT CONTRACT I WHEREAS, Bloomberg Companies, Incorporated, as Redeveloper, and the Chanhassen HRA, have entered into a contract in connection with the Chanhassen HRA Downtown Redevelopment Project, and WHEREAS, said Redeveloper executed said contract on May 4, 1981, and WHEREAS,.the Chanhassen HRA executed said contract j on May 27, 1981, and l + WHEREAS, Section 7.1 of said contract provides that r said Redeveloper must submit a certain commitment for financing within one year of the date of execution of said contract by the Redeveloper, and r WHEREAS, it was the intent of this body that the one - year period specified in Section 7.1 expire on May 27, 1982, rather than on May 4, 1982. Y NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Chanhassen Housing and Redevelopment Authority as follows: That the Chanhassen Housing and Redevelopment Authority hereby extends the date of expiration of the one -year period set forth in Section 7.1 of the above - described Redevelopment Contract from May 4, 1982 to May 27, 1982. That this Resolution is adopted not for the purpose of making any substantive change in said Redevelopment Contract, but rather than for the purpose of clarifying the intent of this body. Passed and adopted this day of 19 by the housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota. airman Attest: Executive Director r I^ i i l r i I Yes No Absent 9 -2- 8_ CHANHASSEN HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 101 u (612) 937 -1900 STAFF REPORT TO: Chanhassen Housing and Redevelopment Authority FROM: Scott A. Martin, Executive Director DATE: November 24, 1981 N RE: W. 79th Street Realignment Study Attached for your review is the W. 79th Street Realignment Study prepared by BRW, Inc., as authorized by the HRA on August 20, 1981. Upon closer examination of this area and the various legal descriptions, easements, etc., it became less feasible to reconstruct the roadway and utilities serving the area, and more sensible to work with the existing roadway alignment. I concur with the conclusions reached by the consultant in this study, and recommend that no action be taken at this time. Improvements in individual driveway accesses and turning lanes on Highway 101 (Great Plains Blvd.) will be addressed when the final design work for the Downtown Project is underway. Development of the Kurvers property will also be closely monitored by City Staff in light of this study. iF SENNETT. RINGROSE. WOLSFELD, JARVIS, GARDNER, INC. • 2829 UNIVERSITY AVENUE SE FNovember 17, 1981 r I i I I I l f I f l MEMORANDUM PLANNING TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING ARCHITECTURE MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55414 • PHONE 812/379 -7878 TO: Chanhassen Housing and Redevelopment Authority Attention: Scott Martin FROM: Arijs Pakains, AIA, AICP RE: 79th Street Study The purpose of this study is to conduct a site specific evaluation of the 79th Street area east of Highway 101 1n order to establish the optimum street align- ment and parcel configurations. A preliminary analysis for the Highway 101 entrance area was completed early in 1980 and was documented in the Memorandum dated March 14, 1980. For reference, that Memorandum is attached to this study as Appendix A. The principal recom- mendations of the 1980 study were to eliminate two of the access points to Highway 101 by closing one of the entrances on the west side and by relocating 79th Street and by combining it with one of the driveways on the east side of Highway 101. That study also recommended the reconfiguration of the parcels on the east side of Highway 101 in order to improve site circulation and parking. This study, as requested by the HRA, examines in greater detail the alternatives for developing more workable parcels and for resolving the existing conflicts in the 79th Street area. EXISTING CONDITIONS Figure 1 illustrates the existing conditions including th approximate parcel areas, and the 79th Street alignment. provements were installed in 1978, and they include an 811 along the centerline of the street. The improvements are petual easement granted to the City by Donald and Darlene title owners of the right -of -way property. property boundaries, The 79th Street im- watermain located constructed in a per - Hanus, who are the fee Parcel A, the former Sorenson property, has been acquired by the HRA in order to permit the reconfiguration of the parcels, the development of appropriate setbacks, and the minimizing or preventing of traffic conflicts such as addi- tional direct access to Highway 101 and insufficient parking. MINNEAPOLIS CHEYENNE DENVER f MEMORANDUM November 17, 1981 Page 2 PLAN ALTERNATIVES The two options considered were to relocate 79th Street to the south or to leave 79th Street in its present right -of -way. Alternatives Al and A2 (Figures 2 and 3) illustrate two different site plans for the relocation option. Both of these schemes are evaluated as one alternative. Advantages of Alternative A are: 1. It minimizes the access points to Highway 101. 2. It provides good parcel access and internal circulation. 3. It provides good access to Parcel C from 79th Street. It also could permit closing one of the access points to Parcel C from Highway 101. _ 4. It permits ample turn lanes on Highway 101 as indicated in Figure 2 of f the Appendix. 1 Disadvantages of Alternative A are: 1. The City would have to acquire new right -of -way for the relocated street. (The existing right -of -way would revert back to the fee title owners.) 2. The cost of demolishing the existing street, constructing the new street, and relocating the existing watermain could be between $60,000 and $80,000. ` The second option, Alternative B, would be to leave 79th Street in its present alignment but to reconfigure the parcels south of it. Figure 4 illustrates one possible site configuration. Advantages of Alternative B are: 1. It does not require any right -of -way acquisition. 2. It permits the creation of one large parcel by combining Parcels A and B. 3. It does not require major capital expenditures f6r street and utility rreconstruction. Disadvantages of Alternative B are: 1. The 79th Street access point is very close to the railroad tracks. 2. The left -turn lane into 79th Street from Highway 101 would be minimal with a stacking space for only one or two cars (Figure 5). r3. Access to Parcel C would be only from Highway 101. t F MEMORANDUM r November 17, 1981 ll Page 3 l ALTERNATIVE EVALUATION l In evaluating the two basic options, the following issues were considered: 1. Although the overall circulation is better in Alternative A, none of the circulation problems are serious enough to absolutely require the relo- cation of 79th Street. 2. Access to and internal circulation for the parcels is better in Alternative A, however, satisfactory circulation patterns could be developed for Alternative B, especially if Parcels A and B are combined into one parcel. 3. Relocation of the roadway would require capital expenditures not only for reconstruction of the roadway, but also for acquisition of new right -of -way, since the existing right -of -way would revert back to the r fee title owners. Il 4. Additional access to Parcel C is really not a significant issue since Parcel C has adequate access from Highway 101. If Parcel C is ever redeveloped, only one access point from Highway 101 should be permitted. CONCLUSIONS In view of the above issues and, especially, because of the relatively high r expenditures required to accomplish Alternative A, Alternative B is the recom- mended option. r The two existing parcels should be either combined into one large parcel or reconfigured into two better proportioned parcels. Ideally, the determination of the parcel size(s) and dimensions should be based on actual plan proposals by the developer(s). In addition to the above recommendation, the recommendations suggested in the earlier memorandum are still valid and should be implemented, when feasible. j" The driveway access on the west side of Highway 101 should be closed and the l service station islands and /or driveway which are located in the Highway 101 right -of -way should be relocated. r AP:aI l F t qIM �5v. 4,4so ST IN CR-C.ZYI AC, a o. �I Poca'A- i i 45�45o S.T• CjC 1.09 - AcF66 Parcel C Figure 1 o -19'14' S7gPF-r STUD*-' IrHc. i �. ,600 5.T- 21 . �.. m 0.5 AGREE kV$1 43,65C? ST �� oR I.oAG�t:6 i Co, oft O. �i AGUES 2'1,400 °_ OR O. G41- Figure 2 -19" STf!=r STOW lo/14181 11-4 Cl. i Figure 3 o,150 , sTr-o4?:I- SHAY to/t4161 5KW, NC. f.. #d.J S ACP,S i $4, sPAcES rrAL -= 45,490 s -T. oK I.04 A4-ES O I / X b i 26 or- O.GO Ac -M T / Figure 4 ��J D O 10 go, "19'M 5'IRMIET STUP'T to /l't /bl 5KWI I C. r � a 0 , o 0 Figure 5 -1 Oil" STImiaT STUDY o io So 7 BRw itltC. I Q Il Il 0 0 ti i� Il 0 z r W— irp�OOIOWOWP F I F F I I I F I D PLANNING /TRANSPORTATION I ENGI N EERI NG /ARCHITECTURE March 14, 1980 MEMORANDUM Appendix A TO: Chanhassen Housing and Redevelopment Authority Attention: Don Ashworth FROM: Arijs Pakains, AIA RE: Highway 101 /S.E. Entrance This memorandum, as requested by the HRA, examines conditions and forces affecting the S.E. Entrance corridor and presents design recom- mendations for the Entrance and surrounding developments. The initial purpose of this study was to assess the request for devel- opment of the Sorensen property east of Highway 101 and south of 79th Street. However, because the S.E. Entrance is a key element of the overall CBD Project and because development of the Sorensen property would affect the Entrance as well as adjacent properties, a more comprehensive evaluation encompassing the whole corridor from State Highway 5 to the Loop Road was required in order to assure appropriate design of the total circulation system and new development in the area. The first task consisted of assembling base information to reflect existing conditions. Although a sufficiently accurate basemap for this study was prepared from existing development plans, unresolved issues remain regarding the exact right -of -way width of Highway 101 and the alignment of the roadway within the right -of -way. Also, it is not completely clear where the service station islands and drive -ways are located in relation to Highway 101. It appears that the most westerly service island was constructed close to the property line and part of the service drive is located in the Highway 101 right -of -way. These questions will be answered by additional research of existing L BATHER. RINGROSE. WOLSFELD. JARVIS, GARDNER. INC. 2829 UNIVERSITY AVE. S.E. MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55414 PHONE 612 1 3797878 Memorandum March 14, 1980 Page Two Appendix A data from the County and the State Highway Department and through field surveys as the project is developed. For the purposes of this study, it was assumed that the existing Highway 101 right -of -way is 661 and that the proposed roadway can be centered in the right -of -way. lI The second task was to evaluate the functional and design requirements of the new Entrance /Highway 101 roadway. The S.E. Entrance will serve (- two functions: it will be the access route from the southeast to the core area and it will provide access to the commercial developments between State Highway 5 and the C.M. St. P. $ P. R.R. tracks. The anticipated traffic volume for Highway 101 in this section is approximately 10,000 vehicles /day. A two -lane roadway would be suf- ficient to carry this traffic. However, because of the turning move- ments required at State Highway 5, the Loop Road, and for the commercial developments, an extra lane should be provided for left - turning traffic. Therefore, the recommendation is to construct a 401 r three -lane roadway with the middle lane to be a left -turn lane. L The next task was to evaluate the current development proposals. Figure 1, Preliminary Analysis A, illustrates the configurations of the S.E. Entrance, which is to be a three -lane roadway, and the current proposal for the Sorensen property, which is to be developed as a liquor store. The Sorensen property proposal has been slightly modified to include a one -way circulation system through the site thus gaining more space for landscape screening along Highway 101. Following is a discussion of the key issues relating to this scheme: 1. Primary Turning Movements. r- i There would be too many access points to the S.E. Entrance/ Highway 101 in the short distance between Highway 5 and the r railroad tracks. The access drive between the liquor store Il and the service station would virtually serve as a street thus duplicating 79th Street. Also, the turn -lanes for the liquor store entrance, 79th Street on the east side, and the ring -road north of the railroad tracks are minimal, at best. 2. Secondary Turning Movements. There would be too many secondary turning movements into and out of the liquor store and service station sites. These r turning movements are extremely close to Highway 101 and should any delay occur in any of the parking areas, traffic could back up onto Highway 101. Ir 6 Memorandum March 14, 1980 Page Three Appendix A 1. 3. Parking. Although the liquor store may have sufficient parking most of the time, at certain periods on the busiest days of the week and especially around holidays the parking indicated would be I insufficient and lacking any overflow areas, customers would l� start using Highway 101 for stopping and /or parking. T 4. Relationship to Adjoining Properties. Il Access to and development of adjoining properties is not clearly defined and would have to be resolved on a parcel -by- Fparcel basis. r^ Preliminary Analysis B, Figure 2, presents recommendations and design solutions that respond to the issues listed above and resolve overall area circulation. The key element of this concept is the relocation of the 79th Street access on the east side of Highway 101 further to I the south. The exact access location and 79th Street configuration would be worked out later as the plan is implemented. This alter- native would resolve all the access, turning, and parking overflow I issues and it would_ provide generous turn -lanes for the S.E. 1, Entrance /Highway 101. In addition, this alternative recommends combining the service drives from 79th Street on the west side of Highway 101 for the two commer- cial establishments in the northwest quadrant and closing the service access at Highway 101. The net result of all the modifications would be the reduction of access points to the S.E. Entrance /Highway 101 from 5 to 3 with vastly improved circulation and turning movement Ir characteristics. i1 The plan also calls for relocating one of the service islands in the service station and the development of a boulevard buffer along (' Highway 101. Alternative B, besides improving overall circulation, would also provide direct access to the remaining properties on the east side and it would create a larger, more usable parcel in the northeast quadrant. (I I 1 T i i 1 J: ews*w� ccwxnrlcnr.�_ , i — W ya s J {n tcw " ti Appendix A G Figure 1 Preliminary Analysis A 6.1 'ENTRANCE a,geo 7111 f!tl t ,17 7 FT T CDMMPRCML ...... ... .... ..... . 77 1 (rN., Figure 2 Preliminary Analysis B L a'�L [ENTMANCE C"AMMMI CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE i P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 September 15, 1981 Mr. Scott A. Martin, Executive Director Chanhassen Housing and Redevelopment Authority 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Mr. Martin: At the City Council meeting of August 17, 1981, the Council reviewed the 1981 Attendance Record of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority Commissioners. Since the members of the HRA are appointed by the Mayor upon concurrence of the City Council, the Council has concerns about the overall attendance record j of individual commissioners. I would appreciate you relaying our concerns to the HRA at their next meeting. We believe that it is very important that commissioners do everything possible to be in attendance at all regular HRA meetings in order to provide for timely, educated decision- making by the Board. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, I� _ Jo Neveau Ac ing Mayor JN:k Ir l