71-01 - Gedney SPR pt 1LE
REGUI CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL MEETING C.-JOBER 18, 1982
O
.1
Mayor Hamilton caned the meeting to order with the following members pesent:
Councilmen Geving and Horn. Councilwoman Swenson and Councilman Neve aux
were absent. The following staff members were present:- Russell Larson,
Scott Martin, and Bill Monk. Carol Watson, Planning Commission, -was also
present. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Horn moved to approve the agenda as presented
with the addition of the following discussion item: Chaska's HUD
Application. Motion seconded by Councilman Geving. The following voted
in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes.
Motion carried.
CONSENT AGENDA: The following items were removed from the consent agenda
for further discussion:
a. Accept and Approve Final Plat and Development Contract for Near
Mountain Development.
c. Lake Minnewashta Conditional Use Permit.
e. Set Special Meeting Date, Field Trip, Derrick Land Development.
Councilman Geving moved to approve the following consent agenda items
pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations:
b. Opus Corporation Industrial Revenue Bond Financing Applicaition,
Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, November 15, 1982, Public 'Hearing.
RESOLUTION #82-63.
Approval is granted contingent upon approval by the City Attorney.
d. Industrial Revenue Bonds Resolution, M. A. Gedney Company
RESOLUTION #82-64.
Motion seconded by Councilman Horn. The following voted in favor: Mayor
Hamilton, Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried.
MINUTES: Mayor Hamilton moved to amend Resolution #82-60 involving the
1983 Budget to remove from the resolution adoption of the revised 1982
Budget. Motion seconded by Councilman Geving. The following voted in
favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes.
Motion carried.
Councilman Horn moved to approve the October 4, 1982, Council minutes as
amended. Motion seconded by Councilman Geving. The following voted in
favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes.
Motion carried.
Amend the October 7, 1982, Council/Planning Commission/HRA minutes, page
2, BLOOMBERG COMPANIES STATUS REPORT by adding the following: Concerns
were raised about the perception that development was proceeding in
adjoining cities and in the business park but people are becoming
frustrated because nothing is happening in the downtown area.
Amend the October 7, 1982, Council/Planning Commission/HRA minutes, page
2, by adding a seventh paragraph under BLOOMBERG COMPANIES STATUS REPORT:
The general sentiment of the city officials in attendance at the meeting
was that the City should continue to support business redevelopment
activities as long as they are economically feasible.
Councilman Geving moved to approve the October 7, 1982, Council/Planning
Commission/ HRA meeting as amended. Motion seconded by Councilman Horn.
The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilmen Geving and
Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried.
,
Gedney
1881
M.A. Gedney Company
CHASKA, MINNESOTA 55318 / (612) 448-2612
July 26, 1982
Mr. Bob Wibel
690 Coulter Drive
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
Dear Bob:
We at Gedney's are looking at putting up cyclone fencing and
gates around the entire property line. This is being looked
at to stop vandalism and eliminate the chance of some tres-
passing person falling into our vats and being killed or
injured, also to eliminate possible loss of our raw product.
The proposed fence will be 6ft. high with 1 foot barbed wire
on top. We are also looking at using some material not decided
on yet to weave between the links to help eliminate visual
sight of our tank area. This webbing is being considered on
the south and west sides of the west tank yard.
Please advise me if this meets Chanhassen requirements.
Thank you.
Sincerely yours,
V f 1
4.106
R. L. McDonald
Maintenance Manager
M. A. Gedney Company
mb
7f—t
'�tte
PICKLES Af' PEPPERS )&r RELISH 'W CONDIMENTS `d!f VINEGAR A( SAUERKRAUT
CITY OF 7,
CHANHASSEN
7610 LAREDO DRIVEOP.O BOX 1470CHANHASSEN, MINK ESOTA 55317
(612) 474-8885
PLANNING REPORT
TO: City Council and Staff
FROM: City Planner, Mark Koegler
DATE: November 29, 1979
SUJB: M.A. Gedney Sign Variance
PLANNING CASE: P IZ,S-
Background
The M.A. Gedney Company is requesting a variance to the Sign
Ordinance for the construction of an identification sign on the south
side of the plant (see attachment). A variance from the ordinance
is required because in conjunction with the identification sign,
Gedney is also constructing a wall sign on the north side of the
building. The present ordinance allows only one sign per industrial
building and the applicant has requested two. Both of the sign
requests occurred as a result of plant expansion and entrance
modifications.
The proposed identification sign occupies 17.5 square feet and is
designed to be 7 feet in height. The wall sign occupies 80 square
feet and is in conformance to ordinance.
Sign Committee Recommendation
The Sign Committee was polled for an opinion on this request and
unanimously recommended that the application be approved.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the variance application be approved. The
two signs proposed will be on opposite sides of the structure and seem
to be designed in a manner which is appropriate to each of the
building facings. No significant impact is anticipated on the
residential neighborhood opposite the plant as a result of the
construction of the proposed identification sign. Staff would also
like to remind the applicant that under section 3.04 of Ordinance
36, shielded light sources are required should illumination of either
sign occur.
2. Development % /
No. or Facility Cost
Length
(i.e. 600' access road $2500)
22' P,ived .Rd_ $ 90QOO
Screenina 10.000 _
Dock 3,000
Possible 12.00_0
E-1 Subtotal $ 1 DredgingE-2 Subtotal $ 115,000.
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST (E-1 + E-2)
F. Indicate source and amount of local share. (Since the possibility exists that the local
share could be 50%, please anticipate a local share equal to 50% of the total cost.)
Park Bond Fund
G. Signature of person identified in B. I hereby certify that the unit of local government
identified in A. is wi 11 i ng a'i.� able b,,'n.,dertake the project described in this appl i cati of
Signed Date
PRELIMINARY APPLICATION
LAND AND WATER CONSERVATI, FUND AND LEGISLATIVE COMMISSI.. ON MINNESOTA RESOURCES
A. Unit of local government which will be responsible for the project.
City of Chanhassen
B. Person authorized to sion on behalf of C. Person to whom inquiries about applicatic
the local unit. should be directed_
Name Dcn�� warlh Name Francis Callahan
Title Cify Manager Title Community Services Director
Address 7610 Laredo Drive Address 7610 Laredo Drive
City Chanhassen Zip 55317 City Chanhassen 7ip5531;
Phone Area Code 612 / 474-8885 Phone Area Code 612 / 474--8885
(Indicate whether business or home
C. Name of project. Lotus Lake Park
D. Recreation facilities proposed to be developed in the project.
Access Road and Boatlanding
E. Type of project. (Check either or both) (Do not include land already owned or facilities
in existence.)
1. Acquisition
Parcel No. of Acres Cost
-2-
Attach a county, municipal or plat map on which the following
1 • The Project. has been shown:
2. The nearest access road.
3. Ownership of land ad'
4. The nearest Jacent to the project.
that park with similar facilities. List here
park Lake Ann the falcilities existing i
---�_--,�` g _ n
What is the distance between the —`
45 -~—
Proposed project and this park.
.
Distance in Miles
I • I • Land already owned —~---_--�—� --�
2 0+ and facilities in existence.
—,.acres. Indicate acres
a1 ready owned
2• (a) If acquisition:
1) Parcels to be acquired.
I2) A preliminary site plan showing the facilities
being acquired. ties for which the site is
2. (b) If development, a
preliminary site plan showing the location and type of
facilities to be
3. Any future acquisition or development bei
Developmet (i.e. Ball Diamon�S n
ng considered.
J• Attach a coot' of the 5 Courts, Etc.)
This is required b year recreation action
Y la4v and should he �o plan of the applicant unit of government_
acquisition, development and maintenance.
`--- the applicant's 5 year' financial plan for recreation
— -- --- —
K. Attach a copy of the a oronr L — - ---
p iaLe pages from the re
government which contain references to the
Of this project are creation Plan of the applicant if it has been adoptedr��cu]�arly important project. Maps and statements reaardinQnariorit,
Y the Plannin Indicate the year the 0 an
9 Commission and the governing body.vas Prepared and
1979 Capital Imps
_ovemenL plan
TO BE COMPLETE THIS APPLICATION -~ AND K ATTACHED. � rilJST HAVE ALL APPROPRIATE "--
PLEASE LABLE ATTACHP'=EATS ALL APPROPRIATE
BLANKS FILLS
-----
APPLICATIONS T0: DIN AND ITEMS H I
RIATE LETTER. P�AiL THREE (3) COMPLETE
(2 copies) 1. PARKS AND RECREATION GRANTS S
STATE PLANNING AGENCY ECTIOrJ
200 CAPITOL SOUARE BUILDING
ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101
(1 copy) 2. APPROPRIATE REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT
COr"9MISSION OR CLEARINGHOUSE AS
LISTED ON ATTACHMENT I.
WILLIAM D. SCHOELL
CARLISLE MADSON
JACK T. VOSLER
JAMES R. ORR
HAROLD E. DAHLIN
LARRY L. HANSON
RAYMOND J. JACKSON
WILLIAM J. BREZINSKY
JACK E. GILL
RODNEY B. GORDON
THEODORE D. KEMNA
JOHN W. EMOND
KENNETH E. ADOLF
WILLIAM R. ENGELHARDT
BRUCE C. SUNDING
R. SCOTT HARRI
DENNIS W. SAARI
GERALD L. BACKMAN
SCHOELL & MAOSON, INC.
ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS
1612) 938-7601 • 50 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH • HOPKINS, MINNESOTA 55343
City of Chanhassen
c/o Mr. Bob Waibel, Assistant
City Manager
P. 0. Box 147
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
Gentlemen:
OFFICES AT HURON, SOUTH DAKOTA AND DENTON, TEXAS
November 5, 1979
Subject: Gedney Site Drainage
Pursuant to receiving a site plan today concerning the above
named matter, we herein respond.
The plan does not show how the storm water storage is proposed
to be constructed nor the amount. It does imply in the notes
that some ponding will be available. I would not consider it a
working drawing on which a construction permit would be issued.
However, after walking the site I do not feel that there will be
a drainage problem depending upon how the site grading is
accomplished.
Perhaps we were not furnished all of the plans, but I would
not recommend approval without knowing what is specifically pro-
posed. Please advise.
Very truly yours,
SCHOELL & MA� N, INC.
JROrr:mkr
cc: Mr. Doug Renier
hOV 1979
RECENEL)
vn,LAaR OP
wn&
r5
x _ �
7610 LAREDO DRIVE*P.O. BOX 1479CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 474-8885
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 26, 1979
TO: Building Inspector, Jerry Schlenk
FROM: Asst. Manager/LUC, Bob Waibel
SUBJ: Gedney Company Occupancy Permit
PLANNING CASE: P-125
As you know, the City Council approved the Gedney warehouse
addition site plan and floor plan.with.the conditions
outlined in the planning report.of May 7, 1979, including installation
of certain landscaping, and traffic control measures. Under
these conditions, the applicant is not to utilize or occupy the
newly constructed structure until said conditions have been fulfilled.
In light of this, please withhold any occupancy permit for the
new structure until such requirements have been completed and
accepted by staff.
CITY OF
CHANHASSEF
7610 LAREDO DRIVEsP.O. BOX 147%CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 474-8885
October 22, 1979
M. A. Gedney Company
Attn: Gedney Tuttle
Chaska
Minnesota 55318
Dear Mr. Tuttle:
Your letter of September 10, 1979 regarding attorney fees
charged against your industrial revenue bond escrow account,
was forwarded to the City Council.. The discussion occurring
at the Council level involved the general policy of charges
from the City Attorney's office. After consideration, the
City Council did act to reaffirm the City's policy that City
Attorney's charges should be placed against and paid by the
applicant seeking Council approval of zone changes, development
proposals, industrial revenue bond financing requests, etc.
The attorney was instructed to continue itemizing his time for
such work including itemization of such time during Council and
other commission presentations. Any amounts so charged to
applicant would then not be additionally charged to the City.
I am sorry that the.above decision does not meet the request as
submitted by yourself. Of some consolation may be the fact that
the City now has a bound book, under your name as title, on file
at City Hall.
Should you have any questions in regards to the above letter,
please feel free to contact me.
Sincere lv i,
Don Ashworth
City Manager
DA:njo
cc: Russell Larson, City Attorney
Kay Klingelhutz, Treasurer
Bob Waibel, Land Use Coordinator
CITY OF x
CHANHASSEN
7610 LAREDO DRIVE*P.O. BOX 1470CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 474-8885
PLANNING REPORT
DATE: May 7, 1979
TO: City Manager, Don Ashworth
FROM: Assistant Manager/Planner, Bob Waibel
SUBJ: Gedney Pickle Plan Expansion, Site Plan Review
APPLICANT: Gedney Tuttle
PLANNING CASE: P-125
Based upon the attached planning material, and discussions with the
planning commission, I recommend that the city council approve the
development plans for M.A. Gedney Company with the following
conditions:
1). That the applicant receive grading plan and drainage
plan approval from the city engineer, and the Lower
Minnesota V&lley Watershed District.
2). That the applicant furnish the planning office and the
city attorney's office sufficient documentation regarding
the conformance of the new building to the high power
line regulations of the National Electric Safety Code.
3). That the fire marshal recommend approval of the planned
parking spaces within 10 feet of buildings.
4). That the ingress and egress for parking along Stoughton
Avenue be controlled and that a maintenance agreement
be drawn up to assure the city that any devices used
to control the ingress and egress are maintained in a
safe manner.
5). That the screened storage of gravity boxes, green stock
containers, pallets, and other production equipment, be
provided for when these items are not involved in the
production process.
6). That soil tests be carried out in the area between the
processing tanks and Stoughton Avenue west of the existing
buildings.for ability to support landscaping materials,
and that if said tests are positive, a landscape plan be
Mr. Don Ashworth -2- May 7, 1979
drafted by the city forester and be accepted by the
planning commission.
7). That the applicant furnish the planning department
with documentation of Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
approval of the proposed to be constructed holding
pond.
CITY OF
7610 LAREDO DRIVEeP.O. BOX 147*CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 474-8885
PLANNING REPORT
DATE: May 2, 1979
TO: Planning Commission and Staff
FROM: Assistant Manager/Planner, Bob Waibel;
SUBJ: Development Plans for Gedney Pickles, Inc.
PLANK NG CASE: P-123
As you recall from our past plan review of this proposal, there were
certain questions of staff regarding the displacement of sorie of
the parking spaces, and the materials presently stored outside and
around the new additions. The staff of the City of Chaska, Mr.
Tuttle, architect Ellen Luken and myself discussed these matters
in a meeting on May 1, 1979, and report the following:
Mr. Tuttle indicated that most of the outside storage presently
consists of several gravity boxes, green stock containers, and
pallets. The new warehouse addition requires extensive fill
material which will be taken from an area east of the easterly most
processing tanks thus creating a depression. With the natural
topography between this area and Stoughton Avenue, it should
sufficiently screen the gravity boxes and green stock containers,
during the off season, from Stoughton Avenue. The pallets which are
presently stored outdoors, are to be contained within the new
warehouse addition.
The applicant has removed the southerly -most tier, of parking spaces
along Stoughton Avenue and dispersed them along the northerly most
property line and the existing and proposed buildings. I had
advised the applicant that this proposal will be presented to the
fire marshal for his opinion on the ordinance requirements that
parking spaces must be setback 10 feet from any buildings. The
applicant should.be advised that any spaces that the fire marshal
removes from the buildings, must be accomodated for elsewhere within
the property. The applicant has proposed that the previously
discussed ingress/egress control measures for the parking along
Stoughton Avenue be constructed with anchored concrete wheel stops.
It is the opinion of this office, that if this is the method to be
used, a development agreement must be drafted which would insure that
these wheel stops are maintained in a safe manner.
Planning Commission_ -2- May 2, 1979
Also in yesterdays discussion, reference attached letter from Gary
Staber, it was agreed that soil testing be done to assess the ability
of landscaping along Stoughton Avenue by the processing tanks. Should
testing of these soils be positive, the city forester should':be
directed to develop a landscape scheme for planning commission.and
city council approval.
Representatives of the Public Service Commission, have indicated to
me that any construction beneath or around high powered lines must
meet the setback criteria setforth in the National.Electric Safety
Code. Any approval of this development plan must be conditioned upon
receipt of verifying documents that show the high power line clearance
to be sufficient as proposed, or being altered in a manner to meet
the requirements.
Recommendation
I recommend that the Planning Commission approve the plan marked
Exhibit A, Planning Coranission, May 2, 1979, conditioned upon the
approval of the city engineer, watershed district, the Public Service
Commission, the fire marshal and the satisfactory completion of the
concerns brought forth in this report.
d"W
_ Ch ka
May 1, 1979
Mr. Bob Waibel
City of Chanhassen
7610 Laredo Drive
Chanhassen, Mn 55317
Dear Bob:
As per our meeting of this 'date, I would like to elaborate on my
letter to you dated April 24, 1979. Apparently some confusion has
arisen concerning that portion of the letter which states "landscaping
would be desirable along County Road 10". In putting the situation into
perspective, I think it should be pointed out that we are discussing
landscaping and not screening. I think it would be a difficult if not an
impossible task to completely screen the pickle vats in question
because of both their heighth and their poximity to County Road 10. I
would think that plantings of a durable nature could satisfy any
landscaping requirements that may be imposed. As mentioned in our
meeting, it may be advantageous to require a chemical analysis of the
soil between the vats and County Road 10 to determine if there are
any chemical concentrations that would prohibit any plantings. Hope-
fully, if plantings are possible this would break up the rather
sterile visual image presently created by the pickle vats.
If I may be of any further assistance concerning the proposed M. A.
Gedney expansion, please don't hesitate to call.
SinLcpTely yo ,
Ga . Staber
Plann g and Zoning Technician
GTS/dm
R
e =..
izY 0f Oinnesota 1205 East Fourth Street 553181 Phone 612.448.2851
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7610 LAREDO DRIVE*P.O. BOX 147*CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 474-8885
PLANNING REPORT
DATE: April 23, 1979
TO: Planning -Commission, and Staff
FROM: Ass't. City Manager/Planner, Bob Waibel
SUBJ: Gedney Pickles Plant Expansion, Site Plan Review -
APPLICANT: Gedney Tuttle
PLANNING CASE: P-125
Petition
The M.A. Gedney Co. is proposing a 3-year facilities consolidation
and improvement project for their current facility located on
Stoughton Avenue in the southwest portion of Chanhassen. A copy
of the project description is attached hereto for your review.
Background
1. Community Location: As shown in enclosure 1, the subject property
is located approximately 3,500 ft. west of the intersection of U.S.
Highway 212 on Stoughton Avenue.
2. Existing zoning: The subject property is presently zoned I-1,
Industrial District and the property to the south of the subject
property in Chaska, is zoned R.-2, Medium Density Residential.
3. Utilities: Currently the facility receives domestic sewage
treatment through the Chaska/Metro system and processing wastes
are carried to holding ponds southeast of the present
facility. Presently the plant utilizes its own well for water source.
4. Comprehensive Plan Proposal:
a. Land Use -.Pursuant to the adopted City�Comprehensive Guide
Plan, the subject property is to assume and maintain a general
commercial identity.
b. Transportation - Pursuant to the adopted City Transportation
and Thoroughfare Plan, Stoughton Avenue is to function as a major
collector.
Comments
Section II, Subsection A of the 3-year facilities consolidation program
outline , delineates the nature and phasing of the project. Before
writing this report, staff has consulted with the staff of the City
of Chaska and have received comments regarding the overall visual
improvement of the property. It was brought out from this meeting,
Planning Report
-2- April 23, 1979
that a landscape plan should be submitted that would utilize berming
and plantings, to screen as much as possible the facility operation
from Soughton Avenue.
Presently, the pickle sorting area is surrounded by assorted pallets
and produce containers that are arranged to provide a windbreak.
Also in the vicinity of the new warehouse addition, there are existing
processing tanks and openly stored produce containers and pallets.
The aforementioned landscape plan should indicate where these articles
are to be relocated after plant expansion, and the measures of screening
and berming that will be -.taken to diminish their visual impact.
Certain elements of the existing facility are nonconforming and the
following changes are being recommended: The southerly most row of
parking space on Stoughton Avenue and the parking spaces by the office/
lunchroom do not meet ordinance setback and a conforming relocation
should be provided.. Part of this relocation should include the
placement of curb cuts to better control the ingress and egress traffic.
Staff has requested that the applicant provide staff with a detailed
breakdown of employment by shift and by season and that information
should be used to plan for an adequate number of parking spaces
including the relocation of the aforementioned parking areas.
Section 12.05, Subsection lA requires that I-1 Industrial Facilities
shall have a frontyard depthof not less than 100 feet when adjoining
a residential district. According to this criteria, the scale house,
office/lab, pump room, boiler room, water tank, gas house, fuel oil
tank, and power line pole are presently nonconforming. There are
obvious cost prohibitions to the relocation of some of these facilities,
however I would recommend that at least minimally the fuel oil tank be
either relocated or buried.
Plans indicate a 230 killovolt overhead power transmission line strung
over the existing warehouse and the newly proposed warehouse. A
verbal report will be given to the planning commission regarding any
concerns that the public service commission has on construction below
such lines.
Other agency approvals needed for theseplans are PCA, permission for the
holding pond expansion, and lower Minnesota [watershed Districts approval
of a final drainage plan. Although this item is not directly related
to the proposal at hand, Chaska staff is requesting that the applicant
arrange for the discontinuance of their storage facilities on 6th Street
in Chaska. It is planned by the City of Chaska to change the zoning
of these properties in order to make them more compatible with its
surroundings. The applicant should prepare a plan narrative delineating
the use of the 6th Street storage buildings, and how a termination of
their use will be accommodated.
Section 12.08, Subsection 4C requires that all off street loading
facilities be located to the rear of the principal structure. Due
to the existing railroad spur track behind the warehouse facilities,
and the existing processing tanks on the east of the warehouse
facility, it is believed that the new loading facilities as proposed
is the only practical solution.
Planning Report -3- A :_1 23, 1979
The applicant should be advised, that exterior elevations, floor
plans, and employment data must be .furnished for any subsequent
additions, besides the new warehouse, for planning commission plan
approval.
Recommendation
T recommend that the planning commission approve the development
plans for M.A. Gedney Co. with the following conditions:
1. That the developer agree, in writing, to meeting development
plan conditions set forth in this report as a condition of industrial
revenue bond approvals and that a new development plan with plan
narrative be furnished that would address the landscaping concerns,
the parking area changes, structural relocations and the 6th Street
storage, brought forth in this report prior to submission of any
request for building permits.
2. That the subject proposal meets all the development criteria of
the Pollution Control Agency, the Public Service Commission, the
Lower Minnesota Valley Watershed District, and the City Engineer.
11;J Chaska
April 24, 1979
Mr. Bob Waibel
City of Chanhassen
Chanhassen, Mn 55317
Dear Mr. Waibel:
In reference to our conversation of 20 April, 1979, City of Chaska Staff
has reviewed plans for the proposed expansion of the M. A. Gedney Company
with Mr. Gedney Tuttle and Mr. Donald Perrenoud. The following items were
discussed at this plan review:
1. Screening - At present equipment is scattered about and visible
from surrounding land areas. It would be desirable to have all
equipment centrally located within some sort of screened facility.
2. Parking - At present parking is somewhat disorganized due to a
lack of traffic flow control. Curb cuts designating entrances and
exits would alleviate this problem.
3. Landscaping - Landscaping would be desirable along County Road 10.
4. Existing Buildings - The M. A. Gedney Company is presently using
two off site buildings for storage purposes. These buildings are located
on Sixth Street adjacent to an old town residential area. It would
be most desirable to have this area cleaned up and maintained so,as
not to detract from the residential area.
City of Chaska Staff feels confident that these improvements will enhance the
M. A. Gedney Company as well as the surrounding residential land areas.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank all those involved in the
Chanhassen Planning Department for the consideration that has been given
to Chaska in the planning of this industrial expansion. I hope this action
will set a precedent in the planning and development of all land areas
sharing our common boundaries. Thank you once again.
Si elO'ab,
s
�ry T.
�n ing and Zoning Technician r
APR 1979
cc: Gedney Tuttle
i cif/ JQF jq OF
i!t . M�N►� ASSEW' r
City 4f ChaSka Minnesota 1205 East Fourth Street 55318j Phone 612.448•
Three Year Facilities Consolidation
and Improvement Project for M. A. Gedney
Company, Chanhassen, Minnesota
April 13, 1979
Y .._ _ 7 r.T `7 r 1 ,_�7 7 _.r
_Ll __ FL ` - - - - I / �.-1 - - " " - .its Tat
fc) - - C�edne_7- Coc. -vj��_th the
e L'i 1 .7 1 f7, I 7� 1
e n y, e
2 7. tions set
a-oo-3-Tal and
re -ort a c a 0
U U thal wr_)uld a- ess
"ne r concens pn nre:7� c,,emerss4-.'-u-ra7 relocrMons anel
concern .3 the U_
t', e 1=r St -_Pet stora7e, b-ojj�rin' t',-;,
S 5 =1_ o to subrlis5ion of anv
re.
4- r OF' +IiC- p
-1-a I Fo7lutio_
rJ That- n'o-ec` --c-,os-_l_ me? -T tl-e rle-elo.-n-ent c,--
rl e i e c. a all ev
J -T
C -, — _ I
'.e-Jn
4 , I e. 0
-
_r 1� ., M '-. - - a, p �r e nt. i on , �i d b P "n e rl ev- e -1. n
J. . oVII
n -r-,
t1h
h7 e
- -.r 1. �- -P-'-,-ajl- T
_
-Lnlu
,0 0 h-'ve
1 7 -T79 a 'g, t
UIV� to -pla- tha sh-. the -Tareholase
I I•
P . . 4. ;'. C'� n p
on r3-�ces tbat -t-Tere "r.
U, �'. i, k m_ ..-,,.on o7- u__ in-' cqtes
s--eea lo-I -I- t Vh— 4- s _!n, r e v J_ _,s e d ed-I
4.11
at ee lren-r actua'__l_-,. r v Ili e rl l n tha U,
4- p -1� cl -VCt A on s o the 'I Q 7 0 ne-,�- --.`2 r e a--M ie
_-j 0
e 7 1
-.3-CM, TI., Ty e i e rece
a ne.t-T set of `Tr o-L
n7711M selr,� I Mle 53!7; res T-n are c �7- -zen T
P, -rl -n t -Te ; t proi,--em
Una
--e __rst ancl -ay v t' e
at e nn, -''mot', rl—In 1 t bern e
3 Z' in 01ir convers'. L,,- --n
-pl
.1-- UI-, h7ath-e n
.7,4T. 72 Lnik eve-,1-ody -,-ouldl. like
0 ave t,11 'Ce cr` er-
fliat7s a. reba5onle
�4 �-j an -.re 11 1!_
C� r Tl-er- -ere ,�lm-estions that i hear -I
4 Do d 4
m1l,o - 'f e do e a oiect of thi s
t p tl Lerolid be0. :e di rl not, 1-1dress '--e 1p.ndlsc)e -problem for
at aso"eson, 7.7e u il,-c -
I,Le -inditicin of ili-liere you think
C_ T' voln- to, lbe a ve--�;- e-oensive thing, at.
a` s b--; n- •+,-�.Iked -a'bout,
t'ne -a, T. -In-le-rf7tn.n
I -
on a ver S+ r4 C-L a-, l' ca'- 'on, e �-,,re not a -ar-l- of the
T at 1 t
-M _:ar,,on L :E .�; 1, .- U
r. r)r,,54- r1l C.-, fc,-1 1 0-
rcv.?-,mle ! I roya
c r e ni Stol `hton Axe.
f% Ij "le to do +,n ,
ver:.- e s
7-o of jr-lu.strlal reverme flands exe in'
.__ ___ I- - . --- - uo --hose areas,
—,.a].!. -:.f +11- ln6„strieal_ -re--. fl-m.cls :,.re oi -n g 1 nto
s not s.�,_ 9
-n-. as-)ect- of Vie !%'mld reqnir- =reen-•_..g.
4 - co--ald-nIt.
k4 hcen-e(l based
C e -:D!3r than- li-p T ob ho- i 7! the --)arldngc
,
-n
e, he h
nas -ot
14
S
j-
-:-4 7
road.-
e
-'-s ---e t'.Jhe tr,-,cic
7. t 4 )t
S C;-:D,-7n an
4 -
.rerl TM fo-n-1. t,-lm. 4 .3 r
ri; no' d~--ensioned
v- S fo i,,.-e have to
4- -IT n`rW, sn)ne park4 n;1,
�7- C f n 4 r7
—.t.ter nn T
cu- rr'l -b
Tin t-.
ri
.;on 7e-5-n
T-L -z
1, n n a, 4
therp, J-
In
7.' crj`re -;n r-�,!�Ce
J- 7 r. Vnere" can I n7. ?
4 -at .-e can y,
.J-m, c t. -L +1n
lmw ccni-rol- the traf-P-1c,
likel.17, 7-.e relocnte v
4 1 4 '74
Tr 7.1 o� 'L)U4 1ky 1Z the --^--V7 -1 ine.
-1
T4'
sc—c-e-5 bere.
�.T e w--' '-I
I1
to lb r e ak the
or som
V-?14- Or 4
r nc:-s-1 loTe. •The se are
'I'lon- h-1-
at
iUst
T) 0-�, 4 7 C11 r t C, e
You)r
7I,
-Nr-�-:r�,ns.- of -e
_nT.- -r.-p,-L_nnyj-L
or less e-xtend 1 -'s -p.erpetuity
4• 1 .1
S n :�c-r -Ir Te should
.,,-,4 4- 1 -1 -rn-r a 0-1-
-T r-�. -P _15e thi-- , 7,,
1- Ty as
--��e.-
I Inn— T --r— s be,,,- brol-e-..:l bv the o.-f that first
T don't think iTe should
ne-1. ---I t --i at wi te b-r-epk-* n� of the ordinance•
npqr,
Ft: - -n - tn-r-b fi.-St of parking
+
1 T ri
TT.-rn recnnnen-1 SCi Ony iy on the soith Side ot-t. e?
7 n -H.c:4-11-e if it
0
CIA- of !—.elf 4s
In r
J. --e 1—ve conc--,cl-e curbs `Utters?
a--d S`f` on?
-L recc:=end-
d -)T --ow There
-1 De 01, S 7`0„.
!or
cl, that
oi[' beh---
r
-10--crcte c-,jrb -117-7,'-r. th-.t. 15 rs-m' of mirs - it
a I the i.
c r shou air a T.- eresc-rest �u to con',
e C, :1 7 cur;
T
—Oci�ed _,e(, S be ri
h
4- -14 - ----- vEn—
T,
-S 'fit4 + or q to Llh1-1-
-0-1,Llt4
-E-.1,11-P.2, CO Cl ell
- 1� - 1 .1.1 6 -1 1 1--r- -, n 1, P no�� the on._� T
ob '-:7a-*1--e�- - -! I 7.-,,e
`
T thi-Ir er
-n
e: 1 7- be co:,,=,�` e 75
B - U
),)n sc,'--J C,
0-
—rb cuts on rin ~e st line to
A-
ou L. on r o A
P
74-
r ol.111 (11
c: -Iuo the
'en— --os•— and so e kin-' o -71 , , - - . - so
u "I n',
O.ne prc:7" Do 0
tn p.�jdres- .,,)u1-6 be P q t'-,-
_-p �-1 ril Ih t 'nndl ;:That 3
45 ree ct :-.o C.r a s,,.. 1:I t t e r
-D 4 n -I- Citv of -ce 4 , C) 'L
7--e he t at
-rc tt used t-o be our ---�-I-antll befoxe
:-
ie st-D.1 -ase !-.'-a,. buil.dl--)--_- for storage,
--e oa- to
T -pai nted, some
n- f lhaslca, it nee�ls c, b
J,h
need be re-;!-.-.ced, do alt]- S. '7:..'e will upgrade
it t+'h-)-�7h it is beilisp,!. se,!. I (ion't see how it
co -h-p, it TIE
!,�,Or '?CDC of f3 O<Tera
= .. - - I
AF * . I a�r i-tends to re-.•nc that
B-ob '.',�,,ibel o fL -:Ch ;1"'a
—:)ect -he T T)f--re. It i so:`ieth` n
-dl b,ck out to t-1 `-S f ac4
PU-
the n-.P-r lut,
4
-17-
t'-4. T w(,i-i be th fuel- trmk-
a 41
be either
edne:- e- C'a r I c' -r ,r
k.
j I 'C'n"In --Os - T ee n recr)—,rn`-Alm ton-In.ht based on
-,ha 7- e s :In ess you feel
that at t'- e s e no c-n-- c--.e lba,^I, i-irl-M-1- Fnd at !.east satisfy you
�n qcy go the-v i-o a-ea-� and finish the4-r
7�--n-j
Clark Ko--n - T th!--,,,- 7..-.e 'i tine to come 11 irtIn recommendation
e t in a t, j,1,1 e
f -�-- S:D,71* e -C D"� -fo tl.�,J- n �7 s o om 1 d 1-1-7,Te -th to
'Bob .:a-3-bel- T 4, 11 1 " .. - p 0 �,,�.,-t t ha C, 4 t S t r,
CjnCj-j a -4 -I-t n-T for
0-j
r e 7.+ 1, -11 fi ke
C 0 e t e U.) t,,)nl -:�-ht and). alcc 4-1 Vle
0
re--,m-t. hey -irm b n s e d 11-on our comp"eti n
of as s e
."11 to, see --or-ne c--)-crete agree-e-:-it new L,7;Te U-e
,-.omp- -,,o-0F,
tl,ree '-aIC"*-'!--' tI'_e:-: --,er)-ol Chps'�-a an -I -t-mi 1d, tIJ n,,-
t-rjj S -1 be t-,a-I -vo---7, ty, to d-) t-at as soon as
`hlr7- -o'u -----ar~ -ve- .7- sure w-e cf---- pick i t 11
on o,)." next -ne,:�t`-r7 ne-,:t an-.1 w can ha-.,,-e the reccmmen�lai n
kl�
on to -ether U
2 A n -4 ijr.
0,9--Itc.r to tab-- un-ILAI next, �.ed.n.- d '-,Totion sec,,-mrleby Jerry
i, unanlmn-,l s 7-,,
A"MD 3T -n `,', -D n:,r.TT-'- r(7J; -3 v.
•
Lan of +111-e --tition T d-U-11 not see but 9
a
-�-o jc� !n4 cz e-veni nf7 -.T,-3.S tn— dontt a It ani
ctriD, :-Tir-�:--,h-I-.--a-,?- 7 the----r concern', about- the r 9 s 4-,3e i 2
4 -' ,
as slich., t'n-- Cerirnalrc S - U-11a4- j �n
r C -,-I ? 1�7-; t!n -rsenr
c OL3. it ;=z J- 1 -1 - a r-
-ror fe�:,-ri n,�:�. that
sit ation. Thp-,,- call no L, -i-re a cor,--erc-7.a-
7t, o'�,,Ier I -and has purchased
-Inl s p -a Comp :n,-;- on U
4. 1)
— -,;-a T-3 imcro--e�nent on the.project.
I ard- av-ai I _f0ble around
n-je S-1- 4 11-1 et -her a! e�i;
p re t, 1 at i S r -,2 -7 e r 7.
A 4
--k.: be u suroe d -- cormercia-1-
t-n-,ct of, la -A In f 1.
Ci and I umderst-nrl it
11-4 n
dr)- so lbecause of the
is no. Can yoa call 4J- g U -L
it i-:7 7
:.one --o? 7;-hmott is gut-
Pat- 3-Ter-S-o1 .,-,,.ro-oertv
and T -tzr-erst =--d tha+, tne-,r Ih-ve- -plobler.— On the Ot`he-r hand, i
cpn riO or 0 1,0
)i-n!� tkn C�n,,:�sc e-qj 7 deny tlie vo` cas, 0-6
T --q
arl 1, Vi the th a'
tb2t, the_r could live ::tith thn -cresent
'e n Ton- r)-c-ri.od o�' time Vie 7saltic
3
-ia'- on or --mi
-wn
i'-Era- F, s :�ert-inne:! n1ld hooed &,
a- i mp-, �,T-q
-ir -.,- �,,ut
th, i T ess n.
very C 7, on tube spot 7 n a
to a rair-a-r-r 0- fvc, in Vne, nurser-
t(� be rei, 1,
I Outline description of project
A. Consolidate and improve present warehousing and distribution
functions - 1979
1. Build 41,500 ft2 warehouse addition to replace leased space
in Shakopee•
2. Develop more sophisticated order entry and inventory control system.
a. Convert present obsolete card type computer to disc type system.
1) Purchase and install IBM System 3, Model 10 4-disc computer.
2) Reprogram all existing programs and create new programs
necessary to the project.
3) Remodel office to accommodate improved computer facilities
b. Improve paper flow between office and warehouse.
1) Remodel office to accommodate this program.
3. ;Develop warehouse labelling program to accommodate increased
private label food service business.
a. Purchase and install appropriate labelling equipment.
4. Upgrade all warehouse equipment to improve storage and handling
efficiency.
a. Racks, lighting, lift -trucks, aisle relayout, floor surfacing, etc.
5. Remove unrelated activities from warehouse where economically
feasible.
a. Transfer condiment operations to manufacturing area.
Page 2
1
B. Improve company capability of accommodating growing condiment business - 1979
1. Build new condiment department in existing manufacturing space.
a. Release present space for needed warehousing consolidation.
2. Expand capacity of current facilities.
a. Replace equipment
b. Add new equipment
c. Provide more space for more efficient operating.
3. Improve quality and reduce spoilage and waste.
a. Upgrade operating environment
1) Requirements:
a) Positive air pressure environment
b) Better drainage for daily scrub -down
c) Improved cleanability of facilities
d) Improved appearance of facilities
1) Plant tours important part of marketing and
public relations.
b. Replace obsolete equipment with more precise, less "leaky"
equipment.
4. Develop computerized production control programs for condiments.
C. Improve capability of supplying customer and company vinegar
requirements - 1980
1. Move generating facilities from Minneapolis to Chanhassen
a. Eliminate freight costs.
b. Alleviate supervision problems.
2. Expand generating capacity to meet rising vinegar requirements.
a. Overhaul existing generators
b. Increase cooling and circulating capacities of same.
1. Purchase and install necessary equipment (chillers, heat
exchangers, pumps, etc.)
Page 3
c. Build and install fume recovery equipment.
d. Purchase and install additional generators if necessary.
3. Expand storage capacity.
a. Purchase and install storage tanks.
D. Improve present pickle products manufacturing function - 1980-81.
1. Relayout and improve all pickle production functions.
a. Tank yard and receiving.
1) Purchase and install new pump type tank unloading system.
2) Purchase and install other equipment necessary to reduce
costs of tank yard handling.
3) Build refrigerated storage building for green stock.
4) Make mechanical and structural changes and improvements
of manufacturing building to accommodate above.
b. Processing and packaging.
1) Replace obsolete and worn out equipment used in or
related to packing and processing functions.
2) Purchase "and install other equipment necessary to reduce
costs of tank yard handling.
3) Make mechnaical and structural changes and improvements
of manufacturing building to accommodate above.
c. Relish manufacturing.
1) Purchase and install equipment necessary to increase
relish production capacity.
2) Make mechanical and structural changes and improvements
of manufacturing building to accommodate above.
Page 4
2. Develop computerized production control programs for pickle products.
E. Integrate sauerkraut operations - 1981. %�-
1. Build cabbage cutting and kraut manufacturing building.
2. Purchase and install equipment necessary for above.
3. Contract with local growers for cabbage.
F. Expand and improve waste treatment facilities as approved by
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency - 1979.
1. Construct additional holding lagoon.
2. Purchase and install additional equipment necessary to handle
increased loads.
a. Aerators, pumps, piping, electrical controls, and other
necessary equipment.
Page 5
II Summary of Buildings and Equipment necessary to complete project.
A. Buildings and Improvements
1. New 41,500 ft2 warehouse addition by September 1979.
2. New 6,000 ft2 sauerkraut manufacturing plant by Spring, 1982.
3. New 1200 ft2 refrigerated storage building by Spring, 1980.
4. Remodelled condiment production area by May, 1979.
5. Remodelled vinegar generator area by January 1980.
6. E�tpanded waste treatment facility - July 1979.
7. Remodel warehouse and administrative offices - 71;a-r.ch 7.979
8. Expand production office space -
9. Replace roof on manufacturing building
10. Upgrade lighting in present warehouse t
B. Equipment.
1. Warehouse equipment - Racks, labellers, pallets, conveyors,
and other equipment necessary or related to this project.
2. Office equipment - New computer, files, desks and other equipment
necessary or related to this project.
3. Condiment equipment - Slurry tanks, pumps, cookers, coolers,
premix equipment, mills, mustard mixers, mustard grinders,
vinegar cutting tanks, case conveyors, jar unscramblers,
dressing fillert vinegar filler, cappers, labellers, case -off
equipment, case sealers, and other equipment necessary or related
to this project.
4. Vinegar generating equipment - beechwood shavings, recirculation
pumps, air blowers, mash cooling equipment, tanks, fume recovery
equipment,=rd other equipment necessary or related to this project,
and labor and equipment related to moving generators from Minneapolis.
A I-1
Page 6
5. Pickle manufacturing equipment - Tank unloading pumps, tanks,
conveyors, jar cleaners, brine pumps, meters, packing machines,
and other equipment necessary or related to this project.
6. Relish manufacturing equipment.
7. Sauerkraut equipment - Tanks, deleafers, coring machines,
cabbage cutters, conveyors, salters, and other equipment
necessary or related to this project.
8. Waste treatment facilities - Aerators, switch gear, valves,
discharge pumps, and other equipment necessary or related to
this project.
6 OLS
71Z
.4
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7610 LAREDO DRIVE9P.O BOX 147$CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 474-8885
PLANNING REPORT
DATE: May 2, 1979
TO: Planning Commission and Staff
FROM: Assistant Manager/Planner, Bob Waibel:
SUBJ: Development Plans for Gedney Pickles, Inc.
PLANNING CASE: P-125
As you recall from our past plan review of this proposal, there were
certain questions of staff regarding the displacement of some of
the parking spaces, and the materials presently stored outside and
around the new additions. The staff of the City of Chaska, Mr.
Tuttle, architect Ellen Luken and myself discussed these matters
in a meeting on May 1, 1979, and report the following:
Mr. Tuttle indicated that most of the outside storage presently
consists of several gravity boxes, green stock containers, and
pallets. The new warehouse addition requires extensive fill
material which will be taken from an area east of the easterly most
processing tanks thus creating a depression. With the natural
topography between this area and Stoughton Avenue, it should
sufficiently screen the gravity boxes and green stock containers,
during the off season, from Stoughton Avenue. The pallets which are
presently stored outdoors, are to be contained within the new
warehouse addition.
The applicaftth-as removed the southerly -most tier of parking spaces
along Stoughton Avenue and dispersed them along the northerly most
property line and the existing and proposed buildings. I had
advised the applicant that this proposal will be presented to the
fire marshal for .his opinion on the ordinance requirements that
parking spaces must be setback 10 feet from any buildings. The
applicant should be advised that any spaces that the fire marshal
removes from the buildings, must be accomodated for elsewhere within
the property. The applicant has proposed that the previously
discussed ingress/egress control measures for the parking along
Stoughton Avenue be constructed with anchored concrete wheel stops.
It is the opinion of this office, that if this is the method to be
used, a development agreement must be drafted which would insure that
these wheel stops are maintained in a safe manner.
Planning Commission -2-- May 2, 1979
Also in yesterdays discussion, reference attached letter frori Gary
Staber, it was agreed that soil testing be done to assess the ability
of landscaping along Stoughton Avenue by the processing tanks. Should
testing of these soils be positive, the city forester should Abe
directed to develop a landscape scheme for planning commission and
city council approval.
Representatives of the Public Service Commission, have indicated to
me that any construction beneath or around high powered lines must
meet the setback criteria setforth in the National Electric Safety
Code. Any approval of this development plan must be conditioned upon
receipt of verifying documents that show the high power line clearance
to be sufficient as proposed, or being altered in a manner to meet
the requirements.
Recommendation
I recommend that the Planning Commission approve the plan marked
Exhibit A, Planning Commission, May 2, 1979, conditioned upon the
approval of the city engineer_, watershed district, the Public Service
Commission, the fire marshal and the satisfactory completion of the
concerns brought forth in this report.
'�a'lO
rI *WrIM40
May 1, 1979
Mr. Bob Waibel
City of Chanhassen
7610 Laredo Drive
Chanhassen, Mn 55317
Dear Bob:
As per our meeting of this 'date; I would like to elaborate on my
letter to you dated April 24, 1979. Apparently some confusion has
arisen concerning that portion of the letter which states "landscaping
would be desirable along County Road 10". In gutting the situation into
perspective, I think it should be pointed out that we are discussing
landscaping and not screening. I think it would be a difficult if not an
impossible task to completely screen the pickle vats in question
because of both their heighth and their poximity to County Road 10. 1
would think that plantings of a durable nature could satisfy any
landscaping requirements that may be imposed. As mentioned in our
meeting, it may be advantageous to require a chemical analysis of the
soil between the vats and County Road 10 to determine if there are
any chemical concentrations that would prohibit any plantings. Hope-
fully, if plantings are possible this would break up the rather
sterile visual image presently created by the pickle vats.
If I may be of any further assistance concerning the proposed M. A.
Gedney expansion, please don't hesitate to call.
Sin1 1c ely yo ,
Ga "-T. Staber
Plann g and Zoning Technician
GTS/dm
City of Chaska Minneso* 205 East Fourth Street 553181 Phone 612.448.2851
VILLAGE OF CHANHASSEN
RESOLUTION
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF THE CITY OF CHASKA, CARVER COUNTY,
MINNESOTA, TO ANNEX CERTAIN LAND IN THE TOWN OF CHASKA, CARVER
COUNTY, MINNESOTA.
WHEREAS, The City of Chaska, Minnesota, had heretofore filed a petition
with the Minnesota Municipal Commission to annex certain lands more fully described
in the attached stipulation, which stipulation is incorporated herein by reference
thereto; and
WHEREAS, a portion of such land, as more fully described in said stipulation,
is presently owned by American Crystal Sugar Company, and which said land may be
acquired by the M. A. Gedney Company; and
WHEREAS, it appears to the Council of the Village of Chanhassen and to the
Council of the City of Chaska that it would be to the best interests of all concerned
that said property, if the legal title thereto is acquired by the M. A. Gedney Company,
be in the Village of Chanhassen in view of the fact that the M. A. Gedney Company
plant site adjacent to said property is located within said Village,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Village of Chan-
hassen, Minnesota, that the Village take such action as shall be necessary to
accomplish the mutual detachment and annexation of said land if title thereto vests
in the M. A. Gedney Company at anytime in the future.
ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF CHANHASSEN THIS
DAY OF j(4A// . 1968.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
Villag Clerk
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF THE CITY OF
CHASKA, CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA, TO ANNEX
CERTAIN LAND IN THE TOWN OF CHASKA, CARVER
COUNTY, MINNESOTA.
STIPULATION
WHEREAS, the City of Chaska, Minnesota, has filed a Petition with
the Minnesota Municipal Commission to annex all the lands situated in Sections
Two (2) and Three (3) , Township One Hundred Fifteen (115) , Range Twenty
Three (23) , Carver County, Minnesota, presently under the jurisdiction of the
Town of Chaska, Carver County, Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, the record title to a portion of such land, a description of
which land is attached hereto as Exhibit A and is hereby made a part hereof, is
presently vested in American Crystal Sugar Company; and
WHEREAS, the M. A. Gedney Company may purchase the land as
described in said Exhibit A from American Crystal Sugar Company, and
WHEREAS, it appeared to the City Council of the City of Chaska and
to the Village Council of the Village of Chanhassen that inasmuch as the M. A.
Gedney Company plant site adjacent to the land described in Exhibit A is lo-
cated within the Village of Chanhassen, it would be in the best interest of all
concerned that said property described in Exhibit A, if the legal title thereto
vests in the M. A. Gedney Company, be in the Village of Chanhassen, in order
to avoid multiple jurisdiction over one plant site; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Chaska, on October 11, 1967,
and the Village Council of the Village of Chanhassen have agreed to adopt the
necessary Resolution to accomplish mutual detachment and annexation of said land
if the title thereto vests in the M. A. Gedney Company;
NOW, THEREFORE, it is stipulated and agreed between the under-
signed as Follows:
In the event the record title to the land described in Exhibit A hereto
attached vests in the M. A. Gedney Company, and such land is within the
corporate limits of the City of Chaska, Minnesota, then, upon written request
therefor, the City Council of the City of Chaska will take such action as is
necessary to detach said land, which is described in Exhibit A, from the City
of Chaska for merger with and annexation to the Village of Chanhassen, Carver
County, Minnesota.
Dated: October 17, 19 67 .
/s/ Julius C. Smith _
Julius C . Smith
Attorney for the City of Chaska
Chaska, Minnesota
/s/ Larry Vickre-,
Larry Vickrey
Attorney for M. A. Gedney Company
/s/ Russell H. Larson
Russell Larson
Attorney for the Village of Chanhassen
Tha: part of the Northwest Quarter (NW4) of Section Three (3), Township One Hundred
Fifteen (115) North, Range Twenty Three (23) West, Carver County, Minnesota, de-
scribed as follows: Commencing at a point in the West Line of said Section Three (3)
distant 1795.7 feet due South of the Northwest corner thereof, said point being in the
Southeasterly right-of-way line of the Minneapolis & St. Louis Railroad; thence
running i`Tortheasterly along said right-of-way line 997.8 feet to the point of beginning
of the tract of land to be described; thence running due South parallel with the West
Line of said Section Three (3), 272. 18 feet to a point in the centerline of the industry
spur track, said point also being in a curve having a radius of 694.69 feet, the radius
point of said curve being South 460 57' East, 694.69 feet from said last described 'point;
thence running Northeasterly along the centerline of said industry spur track and along
the arc of said curve to the right a distance of 89.72 feet to the end of said curve;
thence running North 50' 27' East tangent to said curve and along the centerline of said
industry spur track 1270. 56 feet to the beginning of a curve to the left having a radius
of 599.39 feet; thence running Northeasterly along the arc of ,said curve* to the left and
along the centerline of said industry spur track,. a distance of 307.21 feet to the end
of said curve; thence running North 21' 05' East tangent to said curve and along the
centerline of said industry spur track, 151. 69 feet to the beginning of a curve to the
right having a radius of 532.18 feet; thence running Northeasterly along the arc of said
curve to the right and along the centerline of said industry spur track 142.42 feet to its
intersection with the Southeasterly right-of-way line of the Minneapolis & St. Louis
Railroad, said point being 48.93 feet Southwesterly from the North Line of said Section
Three (3) as measured along said Southeasterly right-of-way line; thence running South-
westerly along the Southeasterly right-of-way line of the Minneapolis & St. Louis
Railroad right-of-way line to the point of beginning. Also a strip of land 8.5 feet in
widih lying immediately South of and adjacent to the centerline of the industry spur
track, said 8.5 foot strip of land being the right-of-way of said industry spur track.
F or the purpose of this description the West Line of Section Three (3), Township One
Hundred Fifteen (115) North, Range Twenty Three (23) West is considered to be'a due
North and South Line.
"EXHIBIT A"
VILLAGE OF CHANHASSEN
RESOLUTION
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF THE CITY OF CHASKA, CARVER COUNTY,
MINNESOTA, TO ANNEX CERTAIN LAND IN THE TOWN OF CHASKA., CARVER
COUNTY, TvIIINNESOTA.
WHEREAS, The City of Chaska, Minnesota, had heretofore filed a petition
with the Minnesota Municipal Commission to annex certain .ands more fully described
in the attached stipulation, which stimulation is incorporated herein by reference
thereto; and
WHEREAS, a portion of such land, as more fully described in said stipulation,
is -aresently fawned by American Crystal Sugar Company, and which ;aid land may be
acquired by the IV. A. Gedney Company- and
WHEREAS, it appears to the Council of the Village of Chanhassen and to the
Council of the City of Chaska that it would be to the best interests of all concerned
that =aid rorierty, if the legal title thereto is acquired by the M. A, Gedney Company,
be in the Village of Chanhassen in view of the fact that the M. A. Gedney Company
-,lant site adjacent to said property is located within said Village,
NOI�V , THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Village of Chan-
hassen, Minnesota, that the Village take such action as shall be necessary to
accomplish the mutual detachment and annexation of said land if title thereto vests
In the M. A. Gedney Company at anytime in the future.
ADOPTED BY T14E COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF CHANHASSEN THIS /0
DAY OF JL,(" t'g-- , 19 6 8.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
ViIIamp ,lark
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF THE CITY OF
CH SKA, CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA, TO ANNEX
CERTAIN LAND IN THE TOWN OF CHASKA, CARVER
COUNTY, MINNESOTA.
STIPULATION
WHEREAS, the City of Chaska, Minnesota, has filed a Petition with
the Minnesota Municipal Commission to annex all the lands situated in Sections
Two (2) and Three (3) , Township One Hundred Fifteen (115) , Range Twenty
Three (23) , Carver County, Minnesota, presently under the jurisdiction of the
Town of Chaska, Carver County, Minnesota: and
WHEREAS, the record title to a portion of such land, a description of
which land is attached hereto as Exhibit A and is hereby made a. part hereof, is
-3resently vested in American Crystal Sugar Company; .:nd
WHEREAS, the M. A. Gedney Company may purchase the land gas
described in said Exhibit A from American Crystal Sugar Company, and
WHEREAS, it appeared to the City Council of the City of Chaska and
to the Village Council of the Village of Chanhassen that inasmuch as the M. A.
Gedney Company plant site adjacent to the land described in Exhibit A is lo-
cated w�thin the Village of Chanhassen, it would be in the best interest of all
concerned that said property described in Exhibit A, if the legal title thereto
vests in the M. A. Gedney Company, be in the Village of Chanhassen, in order
to avoid multiple jurisdiction over one plant site; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Chaska, on October 11, 1967,
and the Village Council of the Village of Chanhassen have agreed to adopt the
necessary Resolution to accomplish mutual detachment and annexation of said land
If the title thereto vests in the IV. A. Gedney Company;
NOW, THEREFORE, it is stipulated and agreed between the under-
signed as follows;
In the event the record title to the land described in Exhibit A hereto
attached vests in the M. A. Ge►dney Company, and such and is within the
corporate limits of the City of Chaska, Minnesota, then, upon written request
therefor, the City Council of the City of Chaska will take such action as is
necessary to detach said land. which is described in Exhibit A, from the City
of Chaska for merger with and annexation to the Village of Chanhassen, Carver
County, Minnesota.
Dated: October 17, 1967,
/ �/ Julius C. Smith
Julius C . Smith
Attorney for the City of Chaska
Chaska, Minnesota
/si Leam Vickrey
Larry Vickrey -
Attorney for M. A. Gedney Company
/sf Russell H. Larson
Russell Larsen --
Attorney for the Village of Chanhassen.
.11")
That part of the Northwest Quarter (NWT) of Section Three (3), Township One Hundred
Fifteen (115) North, Range Twenty Three (23) West, Carver County, Minnesota, de-
scribed as follows: Commencing at a point in the West Line of said Section Three (3)
distant 1795.7 feet due South of the Northwest corner thereof, said point being in the
Southeasterly right-of-way line of the Minneapolis & St. Louis Railroad; thence
running northeasterly along said right-of-way line 997.8 feet to the point of beginning
of the tract of land to be described; thence running due South parallel with the West
Line of said Section Three (3), 272.18 feet to a point in the centerline of the industry
spur track, said point also being in a curve having a radius of 694.69 feet, the radius
point of said curve being South 16" 57' East, 694. 69 feet from said last described point;
thence running Northeasterly along the centerline of said industry spur track and along
the arc of said curve to the right a distance of 89.72 feet to the end of said curve;
thence running North 50' 27' East tangent to said curve and along the centerline Of said
industry spur track 1270.56 feet to the beginning of a curve to the left having a radius
of 599. 39 feet; thence running Northeasterly along the arc of .said curve to the left and
along the centerline of said industry spur track, .a distance of 307.21 feet to the end
of said curve; thence running North 21" 05' East tangent to said curve and along the
centerline of said industry spur track, 151. 69 feet to the beginning of a curve to the
right having a radius of 532. 18 feet; thence running Northeasterly along the arc of said
curve to the right and along the centerline of said industry spur track 142.42 feet to its
intersection with the Souuheasterly right-of-way line of the Minneapolis & St. Louis
Railroad, said point being 48.93 feet Southwesterly from the North Line of said Section
Three (3) as measured along said'Southeasterly right-of-way line; thence running South-
westerly along the Southeasterly right-of-way line Of the Minneapolis & St. Louis
Railroad right-of-way line to the point of beginning. Also a strip of land 8.5 feet in
width lying immediately South of and adjacent to the centerline of the industry spur
track, said 8.5 foot strip of land being the right-of-way Of said industry spur track.
z or the purpose of this description the West Line of Section Three (3), Township One
Hundred Fifteen (115) North, Range Twenty Three (23) West is considered to be a due
North and South Line. l
"EXHIBIT A"
TMS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this _ dap of It
1972, by and between the City of Chaska, a Minnesota municipal copporstion,
hereinafter referred to as Chaska; the Village of Chanhas"n, a Minnesota municipal
corporation, hsrsoinaaf4er referred to as Chanhassen; and the Metropolitan Sewer
Board, a duly constituted agency of the Metropolitan Council created and organized
pu nuent to Minn"ota Laws 1969, Chapter 449, hereinafter referred to as MBS
WITNESSET'H
W8EWS , a portion of Chanit esan It" within a natural drainage are* which
n can at present bout be served for sanitary sower purposes by gravity flow into
Chaska sewer lines; and
WHEUpS, the general limits of said drainage area outlimd in red on that
certain map hereto attached as Eathl At A and cads a part hervW., that said drainage
area is hereafter referred to as the area; and
WHEREAS, Chaska hats a await-vy soww system, including a sanitary sever line
on Stoughton Avows, which system has the ability to co;%vey sewago from said
area to the Mad trestm lent plant located in Ch"kal and
WHEREAS, Chanhassen desire* to dischams, its domestic and induatrial
sewage effluents into and through the Cheeks sswsr Lines to the USE treatment
plant; and
WHEREAS, Chaska is willing to permit Chanhassen to discharge "' effluents
i
into and through the Chaska litres provided thart such discharge shall be governed by
the tome set forth harein;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises, and the covenants and
agreements herein contained, and pwsvant. to the authorlty of Minnesota Statute
471. 59, it is hereby agrood by end between the parries hereto as followat
1. Chask2 hereby grants to Chanhassen the right roc! privilege to discharge
all domestic and induBtrial savage effluent generated in said
wa into and through the Chaska sanitary sewer lines commencing at a point on
Stoughton Avenue at the east municipal boundary of Chaska. The discharge of all
said effluent Into the Chaska lines shall be governed by the MOON. and Chanhassen
and Chaska mares to be bound by all rules and regulations of US$ governing said.
discharge"
3. All sewer lines in Chaska governed by We agreewest shall be and remain
ttrs property of Chaska as a part of its sanitary &sewer system, it being understood
and agreed that Chanhassen is merely reating the use of the sane yr+aoe Chaska.
3. In corwidwatlea for the ws of the ewdtary sewer lines of Chaska as pro-
vided in Paragraph I above, Chanhassen agrees to pay an annual rental fee of
$400.00 per stile, computed to the newest I of a stile. Paysrsnt of sold
rental atoll be made annually by Chanhassen to Mae which shall to tears deduct
the amount of ouch rental hues Mff charges billed to Chaska. It is expressly tmder-
stood and agroed drat such sewer rental psymeats &ball include all saintensnae and
conveyance costs, and that no etion ahetpo or otbw payment shall be required
by Chaska. Chaska further agmses to malntsain said 9ev ar list in good opersung
ecndition.
4-
W
i
4. Chanhassen agrees to pay MSH charges f0i all sanitary t;ewttge
generated in taid area which is discharged into the Cnaskn
lines and treated at the MSB Chaska treatment plant, said charges to be bas+.d on
the amount of said effluent actually generated within said I aava.
Chanhassen agrees to Install, at its expense, such metaring devises as may be
required by MSB to accurately measure the flow of said effluents into the Chaska
lines. The parties further agree that the maintenance, metering and inspection of
paid motoring devises shall be performed by MSB forces; provided that the parties
hereto shall have tho right at all reasonable times to inspect said metering devices
and all records of flowage measured thereby. All MSB charges for sanitary sewage
effluent generated in said
area shall be Billed directly to
Chanhassen, and shall not be included in any MSB charges billed to Chaska.
6. The Chaska sower linos to be used by Chanhassen pursuant to this agree -
want shell be used for sanitary sewer and industrial .caste purposes only. Chan-
hassen shall not permit surface run-off water, gravel, sand, dirt or other heavy
materials, Asa° any explosivea, corrosive, flammable or other hazardous substances
to wash into or collect in said sewer lines. either directly or indirectly. In the
event any of the foregoing substances eater said lines, ChaWwasen agrees to
remwft the same at its expense Upon the written request of Chaska.
S. This agreement contemr1atss Chaska granting to Chanhassen the right,
permission and priviiego of discharging the domestic and industrial sewage Qano-
rated in said area into the sanitary sews lines of Chaska.
This right, pwmission and privilt,ge #hail oonUnue bola year to Year tireless earlier
terminated upon reasonable notice by the happening of any of the following events:
-3 r
aj Chanhassen has constructed its a sanitary sower aystem with
capability cf somir►g the sa.ld — area.
b) Any other goasremeatal agency having jurisdiction Over saALMry
sower mattery has constructed sanitary sayer faci.Utlea capabl.^
of serving the said area.
C) , its s+acoessors or asslems, prohibits the disobamo cd effluent
frost "Id mue Into its sewage treatment
factilues.
dj Any swbetatttial violation at the Ml s and regWatfon of Mn. in
the event of any t►uch violation, Chaska shall cause written
notice tberaof to be served upon Chanhassen stating the nature of
ewh violation and shall provide a reasoeablo time for the cottactian
thereof. In the everu said violation is not corrected to the satis-
faction of ld8i within tla Una stated In Bald notice, Chaska stall
have the Eight to terminate this agreement.
�� of This agreement may be terminated by Chanhassen an ;wmary 1 of
any year by written notice of termloation served upon Chaska not
Lose thew 90 days prior to the date of terminstion.
7. Upon execution c9t this agreement, aiay and all sower- emnection or
MVW agreements betwom Chaska nand 34. A. Gedneey Company steep be
to mieated.
IN WI'P MS WB MOt, the mapeotivie pertLas berets have aamsed this agree -
mast to be emecuted In trlpUcate by UmAr proper oiiSoers dully sudwdsed, and tbolr
respective eormate seals to be heramto atllnerd, mml said agreement shall be
-4-
n
equally binding upon. the respective parties, and mach of their sir r;s -r nvie
assigns.
In presence of;
STATE OF MINNESOTA 3
� ss
COUNTY OF CARVER
Clr. OF CHASKA
Mayor
Clerk
VIUAGE Of CHANHASSEN
aY
Mayor
Clark
METROPOLITAN SEWER BOARD
By
Its
On this day of 197 . befom rao appvA4ild
and to me personally know,:,
:who being by me duly sworn, did s air that they an respeeUvely the Mayor and City
Clerk of the City of Chaska, a Minnesota municipal corporation. and th• forogoing
Instrument was executed by them in beh*U of said municipal corporation by authority
of its City Counall and the said and
acknowledgod said instrument to be the free act and deed of the City at Chaska.
Notary Public
11
-6-
n
STATE OF MIN2Ql"SfYTA
COUNTY OF CARVER ►
On this _may of , 187, before sae appeared
and to me personally k:.owri,
who being by me duly sworn, did say that they are respectively the Mayor and
Clark of the Vil.lave of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, and
the foreqoing Instnummt was exscuted by them in behalf o( said municipal
corporation by authority of its Village Council and the said
and acknowledged said Instrument to be :he tree act and
deed of the Village of Chanhassen.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA }
} as
COUNTY OF
On this _ day of , 197 ._, before me appeared
to mae personally known, who being by roe duly sworn,
did say that he its the of the Metropolitan Bawer Board, and that
said instrument was signed in boh&lf of Wd Metropolitan Sower Board by authority
of its Board and said acknowledged said instrument to
be the free act and deed of the Metropolitan Sower Board.
Notary Public
-i -
a
n
M. A. QTDM COWANY hwaby =Uflea sad affitAa that upon
OXWUt1Od of the for"Oft agreement betwoon fte City of CMaskm. Vijlag*
ci Ciun mmm mud dw kftbopalltas Sewer hoard aW and au mewor
110- OU r 6 W MIST •gr...eaa lwtw 0, CM4k% a►ad M. A. Cwdnep C+owtp*W
shalt be tonsivated.
Dated dais day of , 1972.
In promos cfc
M. A. QWNW COMPANY
h
Its .�
BUTZ OF A IDMISM �
j as
COVN Y OF CARvn
On thLo � day of . 1972. b F. sse, • no"
publfo within as/ for said Coomy pmcmaUy •Awrd
to are pas onalty knows, who, being by wo duly swam did say that !e is ow
sit U. A. Gadnsp Carpany, the corponttom sensed in
the fOMottq k►atrnNW, NW that the seat aftoed to sand insert !a do
caKpocatO seat of s•1d carrporatioa, and that " tas0=094et was signed and
**,sled in bob&U of said corporation by eadwrity of its kwd of Dimc%rt and
�aLd man *am said iwat�rtias�at co se tie 4w act
ancidssd of said cacpa atlas.
Nobsry fthiic
-7-
SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES RE WASTE TREATMENT
at
M. A. GEDNEY COMPANY, CHASKA, MINN.
May.201 1964 Chaska disposal plant unable to cope with Gedney waste.
July 24, 1964 Gedney describes situation re above to Board of Health, to the
effect that Chaska is at fault for issuing contract to Gedney
for use of sewer plant not designed to carry Gedney load.
Dec. 5,.1964 Gedney retains Valley Engineering to study problem and submit
engineering report. Report submitted to Board of Health.
Feb. 12, 1965 Preliminary waste treatment system presented to Board.of Health
for their comments and questions.
Feb. 17, 1965 Valley Engineering submitted answers to Board of Health questions
regarding work hours, flow rate, I completion dates, metering
method, communication with Chaska.
Apri 15, 1965 ,More detailed plans for waste treatment system presented to
-Board of Health. Board of Health inspected site and approved it
June 23, 1965 Plans approved and construction permit granted by Board of Health.
Nov,, 1965 Pond "A" completed.
Nov. 30, 1965 River Class. Stds. adopted (WPC 5 & 7)•
Dec. 10, 1965 Request for operating permit submitted to Board'of Health.
Jan. 3, 1966 Board of Health sent permit application forms to be completed
and returned only after Pond "B" had been completed and working
satisfactorily.
May 3; 1966 Final drawings and plans for Pond "B'+'submitted to Board of Health.
Jan. 6, 1966 Board of Health informs us that we are in violation of Sections
10 and 11 of -WPC 5 & I. (Liquid storage, and discharge into
Chaska creek.) Applies to salt.stock storage areas in two locations.
(Sept.14, 1966) _(Permit for use of Liquid Storage Site granted by Board of Health.)
Jan. 28, 1966 Application for permit to operate waste treatment system by Valley
and Gedney.
Sept. 9, 1966 City of Shakopee complained to Bd. of Health re odor.
Gedney took corrective measures.
Sept. 19, 1966 Gedney informed Shakopee and Bd. of Health of corrective measures.
No further complaints.
Feb. 28, 1967 Federal WPCA conference with Minn. WPCC regarding Summary and
Pollution abatement recommendations for Upper Mississippi and
major tributaries. -
Required 50:PPM B.O.D. in our reach of river.
w
°• page 2 .
M. A. Gedney C6.
Apr. 27, 1967. Statement before WPCC hearing re outline of our activities to
construct waste treatment. facilities, and supporting contention
that required expansion of our facilities had taken place.
:.May 5, �967
Sumner; 1967.'
Aug. 41 1967
Jan: 9, 19.68
Jan. 16, 1968
Monitoring data of system'submitted to Bd. of Health, supporting
approval of application for use permit.
WPCC abolished and.MPCA (Minn. Pollution Control Agency) -created
by legislature.
MPCA (Smith) pointed out sections 3, 11 and 12. No inference
that we were in violation, but we did, -not have copy of "recommendations.'
There was misunderstanding on our part as to what the letter meant.
MPCA (Badalich).sent follow-up on Aug. 4 letter.
.Meeting between Gedney'arid MPCA re Jan. 9. letter.
Feb. 28, 1968 Hearing on Effluent Stds. Gedney presented statement urging
retention of variance clause.(See Jan. 26 letter) WPC 19 - 25 PPM
B.O.D. for our reach of river.
May 28, 1968 Conference with MPCA re conformance with WPC 19. Three alternative
plans suggested (see Gedney letter June 14y 1968).
Summer, 1968 Aeration equipment installed to reduce odor and B.O.D. Lab
experimentation to explore biodegradability of our waste performed
in our lab in conjunction with P.P.-I.
Oct. 19,
Nov. 30 Gedney on strike.
.Nov. 6, 1968 Gedney received draft copy of abatement order, along with unnecessary,
adverse newspaper publicity. 15-day deadline for objecti-ons.
Nov. 27,. 196V .'Gedney calls in H. Orin Halvorson to help design degradation system.
Nov. 29, 1968
Dec. 6, 1968
Dec. 31, 1968
Request for 15-day extension of time granted by MPCA.
Gedney submitted plan for research and development resulting in
Federal.Grant to build demonstration plant. Requests variance from
standards of effluent while plan is being carried out (Dec. 31, 1973)•
Meeting with MPCA (Koonce) re plan. Koonce will prepare the
variance permit to be submitted to MPCA for approval.
Abatement Order Issued by MPCA.- Deadlines June 17, 1971.
Jan. 9, 1969 Request for variance re -submitted.
Jan. 15,.:1969 Bio-degradation experiments begun in special laboratory under the
advice and guidance of Dr. H. 0. Halvorson.
• ` i Y.
f
page 3
Mar. 12; 1969
Mar. 18, 1969
M. A. Gedney Co.
Notice of.hearing re variance permit requests. scneautea ror
10:00 A.M., April 17, 1969.
Phone discussion with Koonce rejamount of discharge to be allowed
in variance permit. Koonce requests letter, supporting amount requested.
CONTINUATION OF SUMMARY OF POLLUTION CCNTROL ACTIVITIES
at.
M. A. GEDNEY COMPANY, CHASKA, MINN.
April ?, 1969 Meeting with PCA staff, including counsel for M. A. Gedney-
Company (Horace Hitch) and PCA, discussing possible "stipulations"
arising out of request for variance which PCA might impose.
George Koonce, who had stated privately, prior to the meeting,
that the request for variance was prepared in draft form, said
in the meeting that no such draft or statement had yet been pre-
pared.
April 17, 1969 PCA he on requests for variances. M. A. Gedney Company
stated that it intended to be in conformance by the due date.
(Withdrew its request as "prepared" by George Koonce, because
it didn't know what was going to be put in the request.)
1969 - 70 Continuation of biodegradation studies and preliminary design
of aeration ditch.treatment facility by Dr. Halvorson.
Informal discussion with American Crystal Sugar Company on pos-
sibility of joint facility. Additional biodegradation experi-
ments made on American Crystal waste mixed with our waste. Re-
sults positive.
Feb. 5, 197Q
Informal discussion.with Richard Dougherty re Metro Sewer Board
handling Gedney waste. He suggested pre-treatment in our lagoons,
then constant discharge to Chaska Treatment Plant. He informed us
that this plant will be taken -over in September by Sewer Board.
April 2, 1970
"Preliminary Report on Waste Treatment for M. A. Gedney Company".
submitted to MPCA.for approval prior to applying for Federal
Grant. It was approved.
May 15,' 1970
Application for R & D grant from Government submitted to MPCA
for final approval.
Cost.- approximately $290,000. Grant requested - $160,000
June -
Discussion and meeting with Dr. Stewart of American Crystal
July, 197Q
Sugar Company, resulting in our proposal to share $10,000 re-
search.cost to assure feasibility -of joint treatment facility
on August 3, 1970.
June 22, 1970 Grant application .submitted to FVJQA.
Aug. 28, 1970 Received indication of turndown on R & D grant.
Sept. 4, 1970 American Crystal Sugar Company notified us that they didn't
want to pursue joint treatment. ;
page 2
M. A. Gedney Company
Sept- 18, 1970
Meeting with M1ICA staff:
MPCA - George Koonce, Mr- Kabel, one other person
Gedney - Gedney Tuttle, Dr. H. 0. Halvorson, Floran Peters
They want to know whether we will make the June 17, 1971 dead-
line. Also, if we will get the R & D Grant. We said we can't
meet the deadline in any case. They want us to establish a new
schedule and deadline - also alternatives if R &,D grant is turned
down. This would involve signing a legal agreement called a
"Stipulation". They claimed we had waived our right to request a.
variance from.the standards by not requesting one in the beginning.
Our position was that our statement to the MPG at the hearing was
made in good faith, based on reasonable expectationsP and that
failure to realize these expectations through no fault or neglect
of ours should not bar us from requesting a variance.
A meeting was set for October 9,';1970. By then we should have a
new timetable for them.
Sept. 25, 1970
Kenneth Dostel, FWQA, called to say that R & D grant would not be
approved.
11
CCINTINUATION OF SUMMARY .OF POLLUTICST CONTROL AVJL_rITIES AT
M. A. GEDNEY CCWANY, CHASKA, MINNESOIA
July.31;, 1969
Sept. 2, 1969
May 7, 1970
Oct. 5, 1970
Octw. 9.,, 1970.
Chaska. requests u'a- to give them our sewer line. Request was
denied.
City requested that we sell the line to them for reasonable
cost to be negotiated.
Council agrees to buy acwer line from Gedney for $120300 less
$4,086 back assessment to Gedney as benefitted user.
Plans submitted by Halvorson for two alternative treatment so-
lutions:
1. Pump to Metro Sewer Plant in Chaska
20 Treat ourselves utilizing ponds for pre-treatment
Meeting with Dick Miller, MPCA. He said we should request
extension of abatement deadlin. Also, no PCT approval required
to hook into Metro Sewer Plant.
Dec. 1970
City of Chaska notified informally of proposal to divert in-
dustrial waste to Metro Treatment Plant and asked if they had
any comments to make regarding line capacity. They answered
that engineering survey was being made of City system and
capacity of line in question would be included in the report.
At no time was ever a request made to the City for permit or
approval since we already had a contractual right to use the
system.
Jan.`18, 1971
Sewer Board approved of plan to discharge to their plant in
Chaska subject to 8 conditions, which did not include requirement
that we receive a permit from the City of Chaska.
Feb. -!, June, 1.71
Plans prepared for install$,fig forcemain from lagoons to pipeline -
to Chaska Treatment Plant.
June 4, 1971
City requests to petition for detachment from Chanhassen then
annexation to Chaska in connection with its use of Chaska Sewer
line..
June 1971
Informal meeting with City Council, Ivan D, ICi.ttel present,, where
we were told we should. annex. to City for "ethical" .ri asons'.
Aug. 20, 1971
City of Chaska letter saying no connection can be made until
we are annexed to the City.
Aug. 25, 1971
Construction of forcemain begun.
Sept. 29f 1971
Construction completed and all Sewer Board conditions complied
with. Pumping into system commenced.
Oct,. .19, 1971
Chaska files legal action to stop us from using their system.
Oct. 26, 1971
Meeting in Gedney offices with Chaska, Sewer Board, and
Chanhassen represented. Chaska agrees to dismissal. of legal action
pending peaceful resolution of dissppute. Gedney agrees to 30-day
discontinuance of discharge plus 30-day extension tf negotiations
are proceeding satisfactorily..
Oct. 28, 1971
Stipulation -of dismissal filed, --•-..:
'�l EXHI 8I T "A
AGREEMENT
CHASKA - CHANHASSEN - METROPOLITAN SEWER BOARD
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of ,
1972, by and between the City of Chaska, a Minnesota municipal corporation,
hereinafter referred to as Chaska; the Village of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal
corporation, hereinafter referred to as Chanhassen; and the Metropolitan Sewer
Board, a duly constituted agency of the Metropolitan Council created and organized
pursuant to Minnesota Laws 1969, Chapter 449, hereinafter referred to as MSB,
WITNESSETH ,
WHEREAS, a portion of Chanhassen lies within a natural drainage area which
can at present best be served for sanitary sewer purposes by gravity flow into
Chaska sewer lines; and
WHEREAS, the general limits of said drainage area are outlined in red on
that certain map hereto attached as Exhibit A and made a part hereof; that said
drainage area is hereafter referred to as the County Road 10 area; and
WHEREAS, Chaska has a sanitary sewer system, including a sanitary
sewer line on Stoughton Avenue, which system has the ability to convey sewage
from said County Road 10 area to the MSB treatment plant located in Chaska; and
WHEREAS, Chanhassen desires to discharge its domestic and industrial
sewage effluents into and through the Chaska sewer lines to the MSB treatment
plant; and
WHEREAS, Chaska is willing to permit Chanhassen to discharge said effluents
into and through the Chaska lines provided that such discharge shall be governed by
the terns set forth herein;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises, and the covenants and
agreements herein contained, and pursuant to the authority of Minnesota Statute
471. 59, it is hereby agreed by and between the parties hereto as follows:
1. Chaska hereby grants to Chanhassen the right and privilege to discharge
all domestic and industrial sewage effluent generated in said County Road 10 area
into and through the Chaska sanitary sewer lines commencing at a point on
Stoughton. Avenue at the east municipal boundary of Chaska. The discharge of all
said effluent into the Chaska lines shall be governed by the MSB, and Chanhassen
and Chaska agree to be bound by all rules and regulations of MSB governing said
discharge.
2. All sewer lines in Chaska governed by this agreement shall be and remain
the property of Chaska as a part of its sanitary sewer system, it being understood
and agreed that Chanhassen is merely renting the use of the same from Chaska.
3. In consideration for the use of the sanitary sewer lines of Chaska as pro-
vided in Paragraph 1 above, MSB agrees to pay to Chaska an annual rental fee of
$600.00 per mile, computed to the nearest — of a mile. Payment of said
rental shall be made annually by MSB by deducting the amount of such rental from
MSB charges billed to Chaska. It is expressly understood and agreed that such
sewer rental payments shall include all maintenance and conveyance costs, and
that no connection charge or other payment shall be required by Chaska. Chaska
further agrees to maintain said sewer lines in good operating condition.
-2-
9
4. Chanhassen agrees to pay MSB charges for all sanitary sewage effluent
generated in said County Road 10 area which is discharged into the Chaska lines
and treated at the MSB Chaska treatment plant, said charges to be based on the
amount of said effluent actually generated within said County Road 10 area.
Chanhassen agrees to install, at its expense, such metering devices as may be
required by MSB to accurately measure the flow of said effluents into the Chaska
lines. The parties further agree that the maintenance, metering and inspection of
said metering devices shall be performed by MSB forces; provided that the parties
hereto shall have the right at all reasonable times to inspect said metering devices
and all records of flowage measured thereby. All MSB charges for sanitary sewage
effluent generated in said County Road 10 area shall be billed directly to Chan-
hassen, and shall not be included in any MSB charges billed to Chaska.
S. The Chaska sewer lines to be used by Chanhassen pursuant to this
agreement shall be used for sanitary sewer and industrial waste purposes only.
Chanhassen shall not permit surface run-off water, gravel, sand, dirt or other
heavy materials, nor any explosive, corrosive, flammable or other hazardous sub-
stances to wash into or collect in said sewer lines, either directly or indirectly.
In the event any of the foregoing substances enter said lines, Chanhassen agrees
to remove the same at its expense upon the written request of Chaska.
6. This agreement contemplates Chaska granting to Chanhassen the right,
permission and privilege of discharging the domestic and industrial sewage gene-
rated in said County Road 10 area into the sanitary sewer lines of Chaska.
This right, permission and privilege shall continue from year to year unless earlier
terminated upon reasonable notice by the happening of any of the following events:
-3-
a) Chanhassen has constructed its own sanitary sewer system with
capability of serving the said Countv Road 10 area.
b) Any other governmental agency having jurisdiction over sanitary
sewer matters has constructed sanitary sewer facilities capable
of serving the said `Count Road 10 area.
c) MSB, its successors or assigns, prohibits the discharge of effluent
from said amount-,- Road 10 area into its sewage treatment
facilities.
d) Any substantial violation of the rules and regulation of MSB. In
the event of any such violation, Chaska shall cause written
notice thereof to be served upon Chanhassen stating the nature of
such violation and shall provide a reasonable time for the correction
thereof. In the event said violation is not corrected to the satis-
faction of MSB within the time stated in said notice, Chaska shall
have the right to terminate this agreement.
e) This agreement may be terminated by Chanhassen on January 1 of
any year by written notice of termination served upon Chaska not
less than 90 days prior to the date of termination.
7. Upon execution of this agreement, any and all sewer connection or
rental agreements between Chaska and M. A. Gedney Company shall be
terminated.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the respective parties hereto have caused this agree-
ment to be executed in triplicate by their proper officers duly authorized, and their
respective corporate seals to be hereunto affixed, and said agreement shall be
equally binding upon the respective parties, and each of their successors and
assigns.
In presence of:
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ss
COUNTY OF CARVER )
CITY OF CHASKA
By-- ____ _ _
Mayor
Clerk
VILLAGE OF CHANHASSEN
By
Mayor
Clerk
METROPOLITAN SEWER BOARD
By_______ --
Its
On this day of 197 , before me appeared
and _ to me personally known,
who being by me duly sworn, did say that they are respectively the Mayor and City
Clerk of the City of Chaska, a Minnesota municipal corporation, and the foregoing
instrument was executed by them in behalf of said municipal corporation by authority
of its City Council and the said and
acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of the City of Chaska.
Notary Public
-5-
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
ss
COUNTY OF CARVER }
On this day of , 197 , before me appeared
and to me personally known,
who being by me duly sworn, did say that they are respectively the Mayor and
Clerk of the Village of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, and
the foregoing instrument was executed by them in behalf of said municipal
corporation by authority of its Village Council and the said
and acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and
deed of the Village of Chanhassen.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
ss
COUNTY OF
On this day of , 197 , before me appeared
to me personally known, who being by me duly sworn,
did say that he is the of the Metropolitan Sewer Board, and that
said instrument was signed in behalf of .said Metropolitan Sewer Board by authority
of its Board and said acknowledged said instrument to
be the free act and deed of the Metropolitan Sewer Board.
Notary Public
RATIFICATION
M. A. GEDNEY COMPANY hereby ratifies and affirms that upon
execution of the foregoing agreement between the City of Chaska, Village
of Chanhassen and the Metropolitan Sewer Board any and all sewer
connection or rental agreements between Chaska and M. A. Gedney Company
shall be terminated.
Dated this _ day of
In presence of:
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
ss
COUNTY OF CARVER )
, 1972.
M. A. GEDNEY COMPANY
go
Its
On this day of , 1972, before me, a notary
public within and for said County personally appeared
to me personally known, who, being by me duly sworn did say that he is the
of M. A. Gedney Company, the corporation named in
the foregoing instrument, and that the seal affixed to said instrument is the
corporate seal of said corporation, and that said instrument was signed and
sealed in behalf of said corporation by authority of its Board of Directors and
said _ _ acknowledged said instrument to be the free act
andcbed of said corporation.
Notary Public
-7-
'SOLI
7610 LAREDO DRIVE®P.O. BOX 1470CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 474-8885
December 7, 1978
Mr. Gedney Tuttle
Box 8
Chaska, MN 55318
Dear Mr. Tuttle:
As you well know, the Chanhassen City Council on November 27, 1978,
voted to preliminarilly approve: the expansion proposal of your
facility on Stoughton Avenue. However, site planning review must
now be carried out, through the Planning Commission before any further_
approvals by the City Council. I estimate that this process will
take at least two months with possible additional time for staff
input from the City of Chaska.
Should you so desire to make arrangements for site plan review, please
feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,,
Bob Waibel
Assistant City Planner
BW:k
Upw
RAN & MOODY,
TELEPHONE 298-1500
AREA COOE 612
MUNICIPAL BONDS EXCLUSIVELY
SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101
January 9, 1979
Co inissiorrer
Securities Division
Minnesota Departrnent of Ca,n- rce
500 Metro Square Building
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
RE: CITY OF CIA 1LASSEN, MHnNESOTA
$1,500,000 INDUSTRIAL DEVELO Er U REVENUE BONDS
(111I. A. GED'TTEY COMPATY PRDJECT)
Dear Cormissioner:
114 EAST SEVENTH STREET
Fr-oi : City Rii rimi0ra!a-p
Refs,%rmd To:
Mayor
�o;t!1CIi
"Oui�$in
�ii�!ltii2f
�alicg
P13��s� 'sec,
via�3� Is3d�l}37{. �ar�lW
i 1'Ti.7i
6orw•iwiyi�.nyygitcawtli
Oats
I am enclosing three completed application forms together with three certi-
fied copies of the preliminary resolution adopted by the City Council.
The proceeds of the proposed bond issue are to be used to finance the construc-
tion and equipping of plant _expansions and modernization in Chanhassen,
1,Hnnesota. We have ex.--nined the stater nts of the Corrtpany and proceedings
to date and based upon such analysis, it is our opinion that the project is
financially feasibile and the proposed bonds to be issued pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 474, as amended, are saleable under existing
market conditions subject to the unqualified legal opinion of Dorsey,
jTind-iorst, Hannaford, Whitney and Halladay and mutual agreement of all
parties as to maturity, price, interest rate and doementation.
We understand that the full faith and credit of the City of Chanhassen,
Minnesota, is not pledged to the payment of principal and interest on these
bonds.
Very truly yours,
JUMN & MODY, INC.
f JAN 1979
CE-WED
VILL.AGI; 0;;
GHANHa SS,--y,
'�a
�T
yA§ i�.: � •,r f X'.' � f s, � ,�..: { � 3ir.. b jR
h
7610 LAREDO DRIVE®P.O. BOX 1470CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 474-8885
j "L�
P-.- I
December 7, 1978
Mr. Gedney Tuttle
Box 8
Chaska, MN 55318
Dear Mr. Tuttle:
As you well know, the Chanhassen City Council on November 27, 1978,
voted to preliminarilly approve! the expansion proposal of your
facility on Stoughton Avenue. However, site planning review must
now be carried out, through the Planning Commission before any further
approvals by the City Council. I estimazte that this process will
take at least two months with possible.additional time for staff
input from the City of Chaska.
Should you so desire to make arrangements for site plan review, please
feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
Bob Waibel
Assistant City Planner
BW:k
f
(l INNESOT I��JL���`ri''I a��.� '�����1=i�L AGENCY
/ 717 Delaware Streoi S.E./ Niti6r eapo!i► , Minnesota 55440
(612) 296 5534
October 29, 1973
tir. James R. Cook, Technical Director
M, A. Gedney Company
Box 8
Chaska, Minnesota 55318
Dear Mr. Cook:
This will serve to confirm my recent visit to your plant.
The investigation revealed that sanitary and pretreated process waste—
water are discharged into the 1-letropolitan Sewer Board plant for further
treatment.
The pretreatment system is in good working condition. There is no odor
from the storage lagoons.
If you have any questions, please let us know.
Yours very truly,
/ y1_
Donald K. PenTlen, Staff Enginaer
Section. of Industrial c�w Other Wastes
Di -vision of Water Quality
Chanhassen Council, c% Mayor Al Kl.ingelhutz
Chaska Council, c/o Mayor Dr. Edgar F. Ziegler
Gedney Tuttle, President, 114, A, Gedney Company
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDEN6,E
CHASKA, MINNESOTA
To: City of Chanhassen
FROM Harry A. Tuttle III
Replacement Costs to Build and Operate Sewage Ponds and Systems
DATE: 3/13/73
81, sewer line 10-12, deep 1400 L.F.@ 8.00
$ ll,200.00
4 manholes 10-121 deep Q 450•00
1 '800.00
Cost to build A & B ponds:
.27,240.00
Cost to build sewer line to pond:
17,400.00
V pump to pump sewage from plant to ponds:
15500.00
15,000.00
2-15 H.P. Aerator
113000.00
2-.10 H.P. Aerator
to pump from pond into city 3�� pump y sewer line:
22272.00
Cost to build sewer line from pond to city sewer:
15,222.00 $ 102,634.00
2,255.00
Electrical cost per year:
700.00 $2,955.00
Cost to maintain system per year:
WILLIAM D. SCHOELL CARLI'
SCHOELL & MAOSON, INC.
ENGINEERS ANO SURVEYORS
7601 • 50 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH • HOPKINS, MINNESOTA 55343
March 24, 1973
Mr. Adolph Tessness, Clerk -Administrator
P. 0. Box 147
Chanhassen, Minn. 55317
Subject: M. A. Gedney Company Sewage Charges
Dear Mr. Tessness:
In response to your request, we have reviewed the situation respecting
the Gedney Company's proposed sewage charge, and Mr. Harry Tuttle's memo dated
March 13th outlining his estimate of the cost of replacement for the company's
ponds and system.
Reference is made to the Metropolitan Sewer Board Rules and Regulations
dated December 1, 1971, Section 5-4, "Exclusion of Waste", which describes
types and characteristics of sewage which require pretreatment prior to dis-
posal to the metropolitan system. We have not made an independent study of
the waste characteristics of the Gedney waste, but presume by the fact that
pretreatment has been required in the past that this waste falls within these
regulations. Reference is also made to various information assembled during
early 1972 in connection with the negotiation with the City of Chaska to re-
ceive and treat Gedney waste in the Metro plant there.
We conclude the following: Gedneys is required to provide pretreatment
substantially similar to that now existing by regulations of the Metro Sewer
Board; pumping from the treatment ponds owned and operated by Gedneys is at
the rate of about 35 GPM for ten hours per day and 25 GPM for the remaining
fourteen hours per day, so that total daily flow is about 42,000 gallons; it
also is our understanding that Gedneys has been repaid for the cost of the
lateral sewer serving them lying within the City of Chaska, originally con-
structed by Gedneys.
The remaining lateral sewer, lying within the Village of Chanhassen,
was built and paid for by Gedneys. To our knowledge, no other user is con-
nected to this line. For that reason, it appears that this portion of the
lateral has been and is Gedneys exclusive responsibility, except that any
cost of maintenance on this line should be paid for or done by the Village of
Chanhassen.
Based on the estimate of 42,000 gallons per working day, Gedney's sewage
volume would total about 10.5 million gallons per year for 250 working days.
This is equivalent to 105 single-family residential equivalents, based on the
average flow used by the MSB of 100,000 gallons per year per residence. Taken
another way, peak flow of 35 GPM from the Gedney installation is equivalent
to the peals flow from 30 residences.
SCHOELL & MAOSON, INC.
Mr. Adolpb Tessness -Page 2
March 24, 1973
The Village of Chanhassen is billed for interceptor use on the basis of
measured flow, as measured at the pumping station below Chanhassen Estates.
The Gedney flow does not pass through this station, but rather flows by
gravity, after being pumped by Gedneys, into the Chaska collection and trunk
system and is treated at the Chaska plant, operated by the MSB. The MSB
charges to Chanhassen for interceptor flow, based on measurements, should
exclude the flows generated by Gedneys, since they do not need or use the
MSB interceptors.
That portion of the Chanhassen billing from the MSB pertaining to treat-
ment plant operation and maintenance, however, should include the Gedney meas-
ured volume.
We recommend that Gedneys by billed for sewer service, based on the
multiple resulting from the Gedney flow divided by 100,000 gallons per year
(equivalent to one residence's sewage generation) for the treatment portion
and that the Gedney bill (and the MSB bill to Chanhassen) not include any
portion pertaining to interceptor use by the Gedney waste.
In practice, this may be accomplished by billing Gedneys for the sewage
metered at a rate equal to 50fi '(the standard Chanhassen rate) less the rate
charged for interceptor usage by the MSB (about 15(�) per thousand gallons;
this method is more accurate and equitable than any rate based on estimated
flows or equivalents.
We will be glad to discuss this further with you, at your convenience.
Very truly yours,
SCHOELL & MADSON, INC.
WDSchoell:sd
cc: M. A. Gedney Company, Attn: Mr. Harry A. Tuttle III
SCHOELL & MAOSON.INC.
ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS
WILLIAM D. SCHOELL CARLISLE MADSDN IYPHONE 938-7601 - 50 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH - HOPKINS, MINNESOTA 55343
March 24, 1973
Mr. Adolph Tessness, Clerk -Administrator
P. 0. Box 147
Chanhassen, Minn. 55317
Subject: M. A. Gedney Company Sewage Charges
Dear Mr. Tessness:
In response to your request, we have reviewed the situation respecting
the Gedney Company's proposed sewage charge, and Mr. Harry Tuttle's memo dated
March 13th outlining his estimate of the cost of replacement for the company's
ponds and system.
Reference is made to the Metropolitan Sewer Board Rules and Regulations
dated December 1, 19715, Section 5-4, "Exclusion of Waste", which describes
types and characteristics of sewage which require pretreatment prior to dis-
posal to the metropolitan system. We have not made an independent study of
the waste characteristics of the Gedney waste, but presume by the fact that
pretreatment has been required in the past that this waste falls within these
regulations. Reference is also made to various information assembled during
early 1972 in connection with the negotiation with the City of Chaska .to re-
ceive and treat Gedney waste in the Metro plant there.
We conclude the following: Gedneys is required to provide pretreatment
substantially similar to that now existing by regulations of the Metro Sewer
Board; pumping from the treatment ponds owned and operated by Gedneys is at
the rate of about 35 GPM for ten hours per day and 25 GPM for the remaining
fourteen hours per day, so that total daily flow is about 42,000 gallons; it
also is our understanding that Gedneys has been repaid for the cost of the
lateral sewer serving them lying within the City of Chaska, originally con-
structed by Gedneys.
The remaining lateral sewer, lying within the Village of Chanhassen,
was built and paid for by Gedneys. To our knowledge, no other user is con-
nected to this line. For that reason, it appears that this portion of the
lateral has been and is Gedneys exclusive responsibility, except that any
cost of maintenance on this line should be paid for or done by the Village of
Chanhassen.
Based on the estimate of 42,000 gallons per working day, Gedney's sewage
volume would total about 10.5 million gallons per year for 250 working days.
This is equivalent to 105 single-family residential equivalents, based on the
average flow used by the MSB of 100,000 gallons per year per residence. Taken
another way, peak flow of 35 GPM from the Gedney installation is equivalent
to the peak flow from 30 residences.
SCHOELL & MADSON.INC.
Mr. Adolph Tessness
Page 2 March 24, 1973
The Village of Chanhassen is billed for interceptor 'use on the basis of
measured flow, as measured at the pumping station below Chanhassen Estates.
The Gedney flow does not pass through this station, but rather flows by
gravity, after being pumped by Gedneys, into the Chaska collection and trunk
system and is treated at the Chaska plant, operated by the MSB. The MSB
charges to Chanhassen for interceptor flow, based on measurements, should
exclude the flows generated by Gedneys, since they do not need or use the
MSB interceptors.
That portion of the Chanhassen billing from the MSB pertaining to treat-
ment plant operation and maintenance, however, should include the Gedney meas-
ured volume.
We recommend that Gedneys by billed for sewer service, based on the
multiple resulting from the Gedney flow divided by 100,000 gallons per year
(equivalent to one residence's sewage generation) for the treatment portion
and that the Gedney bill (and the MSB bill to Chanhassen) not include any
portion pertaining to interceptor use by the Gedney waste.
In practice, this may be accomplished by billing Gedneys for the sewage
metered at a rate equal to 50p (the standard Chanhassen rate) less the rate
charged for interceptor usage by the MSB (about 15(,%) per thousand gallons;
this method is more accurate and equitable than any rate based on estimated
flows or equivalents.
We will be glad to discuss this further with you, at your convenience.
Very truly yours,
SCHOELL & MADSON, INC.
WDSchoell:sd
cc: M. A. Gedney Company, Attn: Mr. Harry A. Tuttle III
-0�,,sz $ems
O
o� 4°
350 Metro Square Building, 7th & Robert Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101
?4. . "'3=77' " Cook
A"•? r''�t rra e'er -+
{ YntSu. l.rl aal 4easte i scharg:'.
Y•, Na t .. ... r :l 7 ..
R ) CT "
'>
r
n
cCHAN.
a•
Area 612, 222-8423
cur 13, 11972 r':" f-,ue s w +i f: f 3 c.,'.�.sc he raft -,,of c C. i °rL."2?. 'yE?
pre t r a a -, inji1r;trial wi,,3tS t�' w71t, �,.i^?�i7\ti tiri fi i'•t' �1��' ,� :,�r'Ifj,. t=Si�l.
4 !:V! .i.iy !-1)f]f t. .�1. ..:�i. .,lr Y "v t(:i� fi.w {i-•:VIrir. L1�:l�r:►l4, liilJ.
1. This aFtin?" ovi i is for P. t,!:lf orary pees ad riot to exceed
3 P-ri ?.;is).
2. The rats a- ndustri a viastC"arl owes
e (totai 6,is.C3:arrie iiCi;dfl3nq
:3. The discharge late is to L--- unlforr, .,;i h no Peaks.
A -eekl `...a -;Aas 5;wll bF i.c. e ia`iU anrr i ;,rZor.
CJ !ai' s a!! 3foe r(;1tl.:.i
5. The cewe;. "oar d reserves the rig-Y to 1-t1 L d� this
ra}� �til
temporary rie iss'lon at any tim-i If the increased
flow Jr or o.13 / f 1. ,%,.,f disdhargc, is 1-oundY.. be (A" v:;
nrsaiy
aff,' ctinc- onr)-i.'a--Ams at Ile '"has! %,rasa':.u.:ater Treatiii`.''nt
PI an*..
6. The January 18, 1971 letter o= neraissinn, still holds
and will oonti:.v� aftA�� ti;Nn:or:r, ;reraserita.
An Agency of the Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities Area
Anoka County 0 Carver County 9 Dakota County 9 Hennepin County 0 Ramsey County • Scott County • Washington County
Mr. James R. Cook
M. A. Gedney Company
If you have any questions, please contact our staff.
Yours very truly,
Richard J . Dougherty
Chief Administrator
rah L . U. . ��nnRM:
A
cc: ?Wney Tattle, X. A. redney Co.
Ivan Kittel , 1. r . Ce iney Co.
Patrick Warvey, City of Chaska
Adol oh Tessness, Village of Chanhassen
L. E. Dye, �ASB
G. W. Lusher, nS3
R. H. Wag, 'SSG
October 6, 1972
Page 2.
Phone; 448-2612
4.
I i r M. A. 6EDNEY COMPANY
Chaska, Minnesota 55318
September 13, 1972
Don Madore
Metropolitan Sewer Board
350 Metro Square Building
7th & Robert Street
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
Dear Don:
01
`fin GNP'
This letter will serve as a reminder of our conversation
yesterday during your visit.
Will you please send me'written notice that the 35 GPM
average which we are allowed to pump, as stated in your
January 18, 1971 letter and your August 22, 1972 letter,
refers only to industrial waste, and that the additional
domestic waste from the plant which goes through the
same meter is not included in the 35 GPM. This additional
domestic waste averages between 5 and 10 GPM.
Also, I would appreciate a copy of your findings on the
sample you took from the sample pipe of wastewater from
our second pond.
I would also like to reiterate our need to pump at a higher
rate than the current 35 GPM we are allowed, until the level
of our second pond is such to allow transfer of treated
material from our receiving pond. As you will ascertain,
the B.O.D. of the pond we are pumping from is quite low,
and doubling or tripling of the current rate should have
no adverse effect on the Chaska Treatment Plant. Would you
please take action on this request as soon as possible,
since time is now our biggest enemy.
I look forward to your response.
Yours tru ly�
/'Jame/s R. Cook
Technical Director
cc: Gedne Tuttle
Ivan �Kittel
0�►�'"� $ems
o
of
Tk'rrt crfl�� NOD
RG o� oa
350 Metro Square Building, 7th & Robert Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 tccl�
August 28, 1972 � tAirtta-
Mr. Adolph Tessness
Village Administrator
Village of Chanhassen
Box 147
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
Re: M. A. Gedney Company Industrial Waste
Dear Mr. Tessness:
Transmitted to you under separate cover was a copy of a letter, dated
August 22, 1972, from the Sewer Board to the M. A. Gedney Company
regarding industrial waste disposal problems.
This letter is a suggestion that you could exercise your influence to
insure that the M. A. Gedney Company does resolve the bypass problem
to the satisfaction of all concerned. You may agree that protection
of the metropolitan disposal system is the responsibility of your
Village as well as the Sewer Board.
If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact me.
Yours very trul ,
Richard . Dougherty
Chief Administrator
RJD:DRM:em
cc: Milton Honsey, Chairman, MSB
Julius Smith, MSB Precinct No. 1
Area 612, 222-8423
An Agency of the Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities Area
Anoka County 9 Carver County • Dakota County • Hennepin County • Ramsey County 0 Scott County • Washington County
350 Metro Square Building, 7th: & Robert Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101
August 22, 1972
Area 612, 222-8423
M. A. Gedney Company R of
ask, a,,-Ni--nnP,;nta-567 8 VIA NHASS�N' AU
Attention: Mr. Gedney Tuttle, President 6
Subject: Present Industrial Waste Disposal Practice
Bear Mr. Tuttle:
Investigations into recent operational problems experienced at the Sewer
Board's Chaska Treatment Plant indicate that your Company discharges
inadequately pretreated industrial waste to the sewer system. In addition,
your Company discharges higher flows than previously agreed upon.
The Sewer Board imposed certain discharge conditions in a January 18, 1971
letter permitting your Company to discharge to the Chaska Treatment Plant.
The following conditions were included in said letter of permission:
1. The waste water discharge will consist of treated effluent
which has passed through both ponds presently operated by
M. A. Gedney Company.
2. All treated process waste water will be discharged to and receive
treatment at the Chaska Treatment Plant.
3. The average daily flow shall not exceed 35 GPM without obtaining
prior approval from the Board. Peak flow shall not exceed 70 GPM
and shall be restricted to those hours when the flow at the treat-
ment plant is of such magnitude that it can receive this peak flow
rate.
4. The present treatment system employed by the M. A. Gedney Company
will be continued in operation and will be operated and maintained
to optimum efficiency. At no time shall the effluent from the
present Gedney plant have a strength exceeding 800 mg/l of 5 day
BOD. Additional pre-treatment may be required by the Board should
it be found that the high strength waste from M. A. Gedney Company
is having a deleterious effect on the treated process.
An Agency of the Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities Area
Anoka County * Carver County a Dakota County * Hennepin County a Ramsey County e Scott County * Washington County
M. A. Gedney Company - 2 - August 22, 1972
5. Monthly records of the waste volume and strength shall be submitted
to the Village of Chaska and the Metropolitan Sewer Board.
6. The flow will be discharged into the Chaska system at a uniform
rate with facilities provided for metering the volume. The metering
equipment shall provide indicating, recording, and totalizing
capabilities and of a design to provide a permanent record of the
flaw.
7. The discharge of the industrial waste shall be subject to the rules
and regalatiors of the "^etropolitan Sever Board to be adopted in
1971 and as may be amended from time to time.
8. The Metropolitan Sewer Board reserves the right to terminate its
permit and/or require additional pre-treatment as may be required
and to impose a reasonable surcharge if the inclusion of this waste
imposes an unusual additional cost in the operation and maintenance
of the treatment facilities.
Condition No. 1 states that wastewater which has passed through both ponds
is acceptable. Absolutely no bypassing of the ponds will be allowed. This
matter has previously been covered. Attached is a copy of a letter, dated
May 10, 1972, from the City of Chaska to the Village of Chanhassen which
states that one condition of the joint use rental agreement is that your
company plug the bypass openings in your internal sewer system. Also
attached is a copy of a letter, dated May 22, 1972, from the Village of
Chanhassen to you which states that the bypass problem must be resolved
to the satisfaction of the Sewer Board. Your Company must seal the internal
bypass to prevent untreated industrial waste from entering our interceptor
sewer system.
Your letter of August 2, 1972 states that you are -assuming an average flow
of greater than 35 gallons per mimite is satisfactory. Such is not the case'
Condition No. 3 stipulates that the average daily flow.shall not exceed
35 gallons per minute without obtaining prior approval from the Board.
Monthly records of volume and strength were to be submitted to the City of
Chaska and to the Sewer Board. To date we have received no such reports.
Per Condition No. 5, please begin submitting the reports regularly.
Enclosed for your applicable actions is a copy of the Sewer Board's "SEWAGE
AND WASTE CONTROL RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE METROPOLITAN DISPOSAL SYSTEM".
This ordinance is presently in effect and compliance is mandatory.
Please inform the Sewer Board in writing within ten (10) days whether you
wish to continue utilizing the Chaska Treatment Plant for disposal of
M. A. Gedney Company - 3 - August 22, 1972
pretreated industrial waste, and if so, what corrective actions, including
a schedule, are being taken to prevent the discharge of inadequately
pretreated industrial waste and flows in excess of those permitted by our
stipulation. Your failure to provide and undertake satisfactory corrective
measures will leave the Board no alternative but to cause your discontinuance
of the use of the metropolitan disposal system.
Yours very truly,
Richard J. Dougherty
Chief Administrator
RJD:DRM:em
Enclosures
cc:v1dolph Tessness, Village Administrator, Chanhassen
Patrick McGarvey, City Administrator, Chaska
Ivan Kittel, Production Manager, M. A. Gedney Co.
Milton Honsey, Chairman, MSB
Julius Smith, MSB, Precinct 1
Maurice Robins, Deputy Chief Administrator, MSB
Lonnie Dye, Chief Engineer, MSB
George Lusher, Chief of Operations, MSB
Russell Susag, Manager of Quality Control, MSB
2335 Zf/. `13u" Aliylk&Aa. f 36 FLL M Otto G. Boeestroo. P.E.
NCO/N� A0SO Robert W. Rosene, P.E.
91 P44 Mi mega 55113 '6 NINrH Rs a SURvey N, 1NCE) Joseph C. Anderlik, P.E.
Hpp AV N ON9
/�lta*m 6364600 KfNs, Alf � �� so. Bradford A. Lemberg, P.E.
C NMC'BprA sour
Robert A Frigaard, P.E.
�B �%k;' r $S�J��- Richard E. Turner, P.E.
'` O V 4 a� James C. Olson, P.E.
P �7 MEMO: Chanhassen -Gedney Sewer g7� Lawrence F. Feldsiee, P.R.Glenn R. Cook, P.E.
TO: Pat McGarvey, Leon Schmidt, Chaska
dolph Tessness , Russ Larson, Chanhassen Charles A. Erickson
Richard W. Foster
Ivan Kittel, Gedney Co. Krith A. Gordon
Wilber Blaine, Metro Sewer Board Donald J. Groner
William Schnell, Schoell & Madson Thomas E. Noyse
FROM: James Olson, Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Assocs., Inc.
Following is a summary of discussion on Wednesday, November 10, 1971 at the
City Hall of Chaska relative to the Chanhassen - Gedney sewage discharge through
the Chaska Sewer System.
McGarvey: Introduction and brief review of past agreements and present situ-
ation.
Olson:
Position of City of Chaska, summarized as follows; two approaches
that
could be used to compute maintenance and conveyance costs
through Chaska Sewer System.
1. a)
Gedney Co. be treated identical to other industries within
City limits of Chaska relative to sewer rental.
%b)
City would bill Chanhassen for sewage flow based on0fotaL
`
twat _r pumpedN at Gedney plant Tl__e s outside_ sa1e--s at the
current rate charged to other industries in Chaska.
c)
Such charges would include conveyance, maintenance of lines
and treatment� No deduction at Sewer Plant.
d)
Company would be required to rcha_nge__metering devicesi Also
to revise discharge of industrial wastes to preventdzrect
,bass -into Chaska sewer lines.
e)
Company would be required toLpay�any extra costs relative
to rastrengtTi,or strong characteristics of sewage
-
f)
Any agreement -between Chaska, Chanhassen and Gedney Azrclu
iio her.-_areas_-:i-.xcept Gedney Co.
g)
Metro Sewer Board requirements_be -incorporated
agreement.
2. a)
I
Deduct Gedney flow at Chaska treatment plant and bill
directly to Chanhassen by Sewer Board.
b)
Compute, y._ ar y mai.n �Eor, sewer lines within
�j
Chaska.
c)
Compute conveyanceyco`sts-;through; Chaska lines in which ;
Gedney does not have permanentjcapacity, ie. 2640 lin.ft.
d)
of 21" RCP and 2300 Lin; ft. of 8" VCP on Stoughton Ave. .
µ
Compute or distribution on
X
,cwsZ-""sh.aring -e
.' 1
patfon of lines within Chaska.
City
of Chaska
prefers approach No. 1.
'Q"t ��
Page 1.
MEMO: Chanhassen - Gedney Sewer --- Continued
Kittel: Total water pumped is unfair and unacceptable. Considerable amount
of water is shipped out with product (up to 40%). Suggested billing
be an actual metered flow of sewage discharge.
Schoell: Different type of meter could be very expensive. Does meter have
to be replaced with a different type?
,z
Olson: City of Chaska must have confidence to reading. The reparder., I w�ft�
hoGlde._moved�to a new,location�'�and calibrated periodically. r
- _
Tessness: Chanhassen has some other areas hat will probably need sewer
service near the Gedney plant.
Olson: City of Chaska isi�eluctant to discuss any other area then Gedney
at this time. Lines on Stoughton Ave. May ge_enough-_-Lfor
potential future development within Chaska.
Blaine: Reviewed how Sewer Board could handle billing by deducting :=from
Chaska bill and adding to Chanhassen bill. _.
Larson: Asked for summary of Chaska position from Olson.
Tessness: Will take summary and review and discuss with Council.
Will have another meeting later to continue negotiations.
JCO:li
Page 2.
W
SCHOELL & MAOSON, INC.
ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS
WILLIAM D. SCHOELL CARLISLE MADSON I PHONE 938-7601 • 50 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH • HOPKINS, MINNESOTA 55343
May 5, 1972
Mr. Adolph Tessness, Administrator
P. 0. Box 147
Chanhassen, Minn. 55317
Subject: Gedney Pickle Sewage Disposal
Dear Adolph:
For the record the following items we have been discussing about the
subject situation:
Gedney's contract with the City of Chaska provides for a -maximum flow
of 35 GPM. On the basis of individual residential areas disposing _of
400 gallons per day, with a ratio of four times that to provide for peak
flow rates, the 35 GPM is equivalent to 30 homes' flow. We understand
there are 160 mobile homes connected to this line and ten or twelve res-
idences. On the basis that mobile homes generate one-half the sewage
that single family residences produce, this would equate to 80 + 10 =
90 residential equivalents, plus Gedneys at 30, or 120 residential
equivalentstotal.
Of the total, Gedneys would then account for 25% of the flow. The
8" pipe 'carrying this flow has a capacity of about 240 residential equiv-
alents, so Gedneys actually account for 122% of the pipe capacity.
During our discussion with Pat McGarvey, he assumed that the Gedney
flow would occur at the above rate throughout the full 24 hours. On
that basis, Gedneys would produce 18,4 million gallons per year. Pat
figured Chaska ought to get $1,200 per mile per year rental for the line.
At 1.3 miles'length, this would be $1,560 per year. At the 18.4 MMG,
this would be a rate of 8.5c/thousand gallons. Pat didn't seem to care
whether Chaska received the lump sum or the unit charge. Because the
Gedney plant probably wouldn't be pumping at the 35 GPM rate for 24 hours
per day 365 days a year, the unit rate would be a better deal for them,
or Chanhassen, or the MSB, whoever pays.
Pat felt that this figure of $1,560 was the least he could reasonably
put before his council.
Very truly yours,
SCHOELL & MADSON, INC.
WDSchoell:sd
-7.
J
PHONE: (612) 448-2851
City ®f CHASKA, f infies®ta
205 E. FOURTH ST. 55318
April 25, 1972
Mr. Gedney Tuttle
President
M. A. Gedney Company
Chaska,•Minnesota 55318
Dear Mr. Tuttle,
It is our understanding that the pre—treatment ponds of
M. A. Gedney Company are rapidly reaching capacity.
Therefore, in order to prevent any dispute with the
P.C.A. or further concern for your company. This letter
can be considered notice that your Company may commence
discharging of its pre—treated industrial sewage into
the Chaska municipal system for conveyance to the
Metropolitan.Treatment facilities based upon the 1963
agreement.
The City of Chaska will consider the 1963'agreement to be
effective.
The City of Chaska and the Village of Chanhassen have
agreed with the Metro Sewer Board to continue negotiating
in order to resolve this problem.
Respectfully yours,
Dr. gar F. �Y gl D.D.S.
May 9
Phone: 448-2612
M. A. GEDNEY COMPANY
Chaska, Minnesota 55318
April 17, 1972
Mr. Adolph Tessness
Village of Chanhassen
Chanhassen, Minnesota
Dear Adolph:
The enclosed inter -office memo from Jim Cook, our Technical
Director, points up the need and. our concern for an early resolu-
tion as to the disposition of our impounded wastes. We can only
speculate on the manner in which we can achieve and maintain
satisfactory control of odor and. B.O.D. reduction in our new
system. I suggest that this system is new because it is the
first time that we have operated this system as a closed loop.
In the past, we have begun treatment of accumulated wastes in
late June or early July, supplying enough aeration horsepower
to achieve an aerobic system, and at pond levels much below
those that now exist.
Our plan for operating this system in its present con-
figuration was to use Pond A as a primary treating facility.
In A we wanted to achieve a reduction of B.O.D. to below
sanitary waste levels under aerobic conditions and then through
the use of gravity, transfer this treated liquid to Pond B
to be received by our pumping facility, using B in effect, as
a non -treated settling pond.
In the proposed system, it is imperative that Pond B be
at a lower level than A - in sufficient differential to allow
flow (gravity) from A in such amounts --- and at such time as
,A has been determined to be sufficiently aerated and treated
to be released to Pond B.
Our best estimates would indicate that we have already
passed. a time where pumping at 35 gpm would allow us to
"Phase out" with our projected treatment of Pond A as
outlined due to pumping time that has already been allowed
to pass.
(I Page -2-
With this treatment plan in mind, we did., last summer,
increase our aeration from 20 to 50 H.P. of aeration. This
we feel, from the results of last summer, is sufficient horse-
power to do an adequate job if we are allowed to follow the
plan. The matter of depth is of concern to us. We are not
in a position to judge whether the increased depths imposed
on us will cause this horsepower to be inadequate. Loss of
surface to depth ratio and mixing efficiency in the increased
depth situation cause us much concern.
It is a stated objective of the M. A. Gedney Company to be
a good citizen as regards our environment.
We do not want telephone calls and bad publicity on this
matter nor do we feel that we should be further penalized by
being forced to buy additional equipment that might be required
because of a gross accumulation that has been imposed upon us
at this time and that very well may not be required in the
future.
We feel that we have been patient on this matter, but
please realize our genuine concern on an ever increasing
problem. We are willing to discuss this matter at any
time with any one concerned.
Sincerely yours,
M. A. G dney Company
Iran D. Kittel
=roduction Manger
Enclosure - 1
cc: Gedney Tuttle
METROPOLITAN SEWER BOARD
350 Metro Square Building, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
222-8423
MEMORANDUM
TO: Milton C . Honsey Vernon S . Stenseng
Warren Sh ultz
r
FEUM: Kenneth E. Robins
Subject: Background Material for Meeting Monday, April 24, 1972
Regarding Chaska Joint Use Rental Agreement
I. HISTORY
A. In the mid-1960's, the Township of Chaska and the Township of
C:han::asson wore div ided up 'Jvitll parts al each being annexed either
to the City of Chaska or the Village of Chanhassen. The M. A. Gedney
Co,,which had been located in the Township. of Chaska, was annexed
into the Village of Chanhassen,
B. The Gedney Co. had an agreement with the City of Chaska whereby they
discharged their domestic waste through the Chaska Sewer System to the
Treatment Plant in Chaska. The industrial wastes were held in ponds
and discharged to the Minnesota River during the high spring flows,
C. The Gedney Co., in the summer of 1970, indicated that it desired to
discharge industrial waste from their stabilization ponds to the treatment
plant. The MPCA ordered Gedney to be in compliance with WPC-19 by
June ,19 , 1971 and asked the Sewer Board staff to evaluate the problem.
D. The MSB staff investigated and on January 18, 1971, sent Gedney Co. a
letter" (copy attached) outlining the conditions that the discharge must
meet to insure adequate treatment at the plant.
E. Facilities were constructed during the summer of 1971 that would enable
the industrial discharge from Gedney Co. to meet the conditions set by
the MSB staff and on September 29, 1971, the Company discharged from
its stabilization ponds to the Chaska Plant. Authority for use of the Chaska
Sewer System was based on the original contract between the Company
and the City of Chaska.
' M . Honsey
W. Shultz - 2 -
Y - V. Stenseng
F. The City of Chaska obtained a court injunction preventing futher
discharge of industrial wastes. As a result of the injunction, the
parties established a 30 to 60 day negotiating period to resolve the
problem.
G. A number of meetings have been held since that time with representatives
of the City of Chaska, Village of Chanhassen, M . A. Gedney Co., and
Sewer Board staff attending. The latest meeting was March 29, 1972 in
the Sewer Board offices. No agreement has been reached to date.
H. The situation is becoming critical as the Gedney Co. ponds are filling
and discharge will be necessary in a short time. Attached is a letter
from the Company to Mr. Adolph Tessness, Administrator, Village of
Chanhassen, dated April 17, 1972, expressing their concern.
II. ALTERNATE SOLUTIONS
To resolve the treatment of the industrial waste from the M. A. Gedney Co.
in Chanhassen, the following represent possible solutions:
A. M. A. Gedney Companv Agreement with the City of Chaska.
This agreement between the City and Company was effective .on the 1st
of April, 1955. The agreement was used to originally begin discharging
the industrial wastewater through the Chaska System. However, Chaska
contends the agreement is not applicable to the industrial wastewater and
obtains a court injunction to prevent use of their system on the basis
of the agreement. Agreement appears to represent a cost to Gedney Co.
of $200 per year for use of Chaska sewer system. Reinstitution of this
agreement would solve the problem if the agreement is made between
Chanhassen and Chaska.
The Sewer Board would bill Chanhassen for the Gedney flow treated at the
Chaska Treatment Plant.
B . Agreement between Chaska and Chanhassen.
Under this solution, the City of Chaska would bill the Village of Chanhassen
for the M . A. Gedney Co. wastewater flow as if the Company was actually
in Chaska. Rates would be those applicable to residents of the City of.
Chaska. Chanhassen would then collect charges to pay Chaska. The
MSB-would bill Chaska for the flow contributed by this area of Chanhassen.
M . Honsey
W. Shultz _ 3
V. Stenseng
Under this solution Chaska would receive about $4300 per year from
Chanhassen. About $2100 of this amount would have to be paid to
the MSB for treatment plant charges,
C. Joint Rental Agreement,
under this solution the MSB would enter a Joint Rental Agreement with
the City of Chaska to allow use of the Chaska Sewer System.by the
Village of Chanhassen. The length of sewer involved is 1.30 miles,
Under the normal rate of $600 per mile, the MSB would pay Chaska
$780 per year for use of their lines , Chanhassen would be billed for
the M. A. Gedney Company flow to the Chaska Plant,
D. Acquisition of Chaska Sewers,
Under this solution the MSB would acquire the necessary Chaska sewer
lI nes to convey the Chanhassen flow to the Chaska Treatment Plant,
The 1.30 miles of sewer that must be purchased under this approach
consists of about 4200 ft. of 8-inch line and 2640 ft. of 21-inch line,
The estimated cost (a more accurate figure would have to be developed
from Chaska records) of the acquisition would be about $85,000, or a
credit of $4900 per year for 30 years at 4% interest. The increased cost
to the City of Chaska under this approach would be about $66,900 per
year based on present S.A. #4 interceptor costs. As a result, Chaska
would pay the MSB about $62 , 000 (net after $4900 current value credit
for line) in additional annual charges since they would be made part. of the
S. A. #4 interceptor pool by the acquisition,
E. Use of Metropolitan Sewer Act Provisions,
Under this solution the MSB would require Chaska to allow the Chanhassen
flow through their system on the basis of authority provided in provisions
of Section 7, Subd. 3 of the Sewer Act, The City of Chaska would then
be Compensated for the use of their system by part of Chanhassen using
the standard rental agreement compensation of $600 per mile ($780 per
year)
KER:kb
Attachments
cc: Ri hard J. Dougherty
Znnie E. Dye
Wilbur A. Blain
350 Metro Square Building, 7th & Robert Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101
March 6, 1972
Mr. Patrick McGarvey, Administrator
City of Chaska
205 E. 4th St.
Chaska, Minnesota 55318
Re: Joint Use Rental Agreement - 1972
Dear Mr. McGarvey:
Enclosed herewith are five (5) copies of the Joint Use Rental
Agreement for 1972 between the Metropolitan Sewer Board and the
City of Chaska.
You will note that we have included our Contract Number and
ask that you refer to this number when billing us or in any other
correspondence regarding this agreement.
Area 612,222-8423
Please review this agreement with the proper officials of your
community, and if it meets with their approval, return five (5)
signed copies to us. The Sewer Board will then execute the agreement
and return two copies to the City for their records.
Yours very truly,
Kenneth E. Robins
Administrative Assistant
KER: jw
Enclosures (5)
cc: R. J. Dougherty, Chief Administrator, MSB
AoAIToTph Tessness, Admin. -Clerk, Chanhassen
G. W. Lusher, Chief of Operations
An Agency of the Metrepolitan Council of the Twin Cities Area
Anoka County • Carver County • Dakota County s Hennepin County o Ramsey County a Scott County 9 Washington County
CONTRACT NO. 161
JOINT USE RENTAL AGREEMENT
CITY OF CHASK.A
This Agreement, made and entered into by and between the Metropolitan
Sewer Board (hereinafter called the Board), and the City of Chaska
(hereinafter called the Municipality):
WITNESSETH T1LAT, in the joint and mutual exercise of'their powers and
��. l Vllalul Ldt1V11 Ui Liie MULuai c:uVe11duL6 ile.relrl C:U11Ca1nUU, Lne- parties nereto
recite and agree as follows:
Section 1. Recitals. The Board has assumed the ownership of all
interceptors and treatment works in the metrop.olitan area needed to implement the
Metropolitan Council's comprehensive plan for the collection, treatment and disposal
of sewage in the metropolitan area, as determined by the Council. The Board has not
assumed the ownership of certain interceptors (or segments thereof) which are jointly
used by two municipalities but which serve 75 acres or less in the upstream munici-
pality, including the interceptor (s) located in the.11unicipality and described in
Exhibit A, which is jointly used by the Village of Chanhassen Contracts
between municipalities requiring payments by the upstream municipality to the
.downstream municipality for the use of its interceptors were terminated on
January 1, 1971 by Minnesota Statutes, Section 473C.05, Subdivision 5. Thus the
municipalities involved, unless other action is taken, will have to negotiate new
contracts providing. for such payments. The Board has determined that in order to
'avoid the necessity of having municipalities negotiate such contracts,'" that in
the case of a joint use interceptor not taken over by the Board it should enter
into a contract with the downstream municipality whereby the Board would acquire
capacity in the interceptor sufficient, to continue such joint use during 1972
(and later years if the contract is renewed) and would pay to the downstream
municipality a rental charge.
Section 2. Board Use of Interceptor.
2.01 Use Permitted. The Municipality agrees that during the period from
January 1, 1972 through December 31, 1972 , and during any period for. which this
contract is renewed as provided in Section 4, that the Board may cause all sewage
originating in the area of the Village of Chanhassen described in Exhibit B
to be discharged into and through the interceptor described in Exhibit A. The.
Municipality shall continue to own the interceptor.
2.02. Operation and ;Maintenance. During such period the Plunicipa.Lity agrees
to operate and maintain*the interceptor described in Exhibit A in good operating
condition and to pay all costs thereof.
l_
Section 3. Board Payment For. Use. The Board hereby agrees to pay to
the f•:unicipality the total sum of $ 780.00 for the use, operation and maintenance
of the interceptor described in. Exhibit A during 1972 and any subsequent year for
which this contract is renewed. Such amount shall be paid in 4 equal quarterly
installments, April, July, October 1972 and January 1973. The municipality will
submit a quarterly billing to the Board equal to one-fourth of the total sum shown
in Section 3.
Section 4. Renewal of Contract. On or before November 1 in any year,
the Board may give the Municipality written notice of its intention to renew -this
contract for the following calendar year. Within 30 days after receipt of such
notice the Municipality shall notify the Board in writing whether it will renew the
contract. If the ;Municipality fails to give such notice within such period the
contract shall be renewed for the following calendar year without modification,
except by consent of both parties. If the Board fails to. give the Municipality.
notice of its intention to renew by November 1, the contract shall be renewed only
by consent of both parties.
a
II WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this agreement as of
January 1, 1972
in the presence of: Metropolitan Seiner Board
By
Chairman
And
Chief Administrator
City of. Chaska
By
Mayor
And
EXHIBIT A
INTERCEPTOR COVERED BY RENTAL AGREEMENT
CITY OF CHASKA
From Chaska Boundary at Stoughton Avenue
South Westerly to Hazeltine interceptor at
Stoughton Avenue and Bolt Street and then
4JV lA LL1C 11y LV Vlld bltd 1 i-C GL L111C114 .i 1dY1.L1. 90 lvilies
l-,",
?7 e
F7 1 l
f2 L_t�
s Fl_llf
-f---' " L
007o''!
—JONATIVIAN
INTERCEPTOR'
11
V
SE-6
F�
HAZELTlfi\
i SE-3
4A-
/x-
4
?
SE-2
wl
I — Sr A c, h
)
SE-8
`At_T5RNATE
TO/ HAZELTINE
INTERCEPTOR
4-
A
9ESOTA
Cn, %dKA, M
IA S�'IITARY SEWER TRUNKS
TREATMENT
PLANT
' \ .. ��t`� _.f ` FIGURE 4
7,7.�; 9 ..EXIST. TRUMP: SEWERS
'EX I ST SANITARY LATERALS
LI
OPSED - .-:rRUNK SEl,,AJERS
I - WATER S�iE__D- BOUNDARIES
MAJOR --DISTRICT BOUNDARIES
SUBDISTRICT BOUNDARIES ---------
DISTRICT DESIGNATIONS S-2
POINT DESIGNATIONS (o
350 Metro Square Building, 7th & Robert Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101
February 23, 1972
Mr, Adolph Tessness
Administrator -Clerk
Village of Chanhassen
Box 147
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
Dear Adolph:
Area 612, 222-8423
We have received a copy of your proposed draft agreement between
Chanhassen and Chaska regarding the discharge of flow in Chanhassen
to the Chaska treatment plant. Over the past year we have had several
discussions regarding sewer service to this section of Chanhassen and
the comprehensive sewer plan adopted by the Board provides that this
part of Chanhassen would be served through Chaska,
Ken Robins of our staff is preparing a Rental Agreement which provides
for the Board to pay the City of Chaska for use by Chanhassen of the
interceptor sewer serving that section of Chanhassen. The flow from
Chanhassen will be deducted from the Chaska flow and will be charged
to Chanhassen. Chaska will not be billed for the interceptor or treatment
works cost of that flow. The Board will then pay to Chaska, under the
terms of the Rental Agreement, an amount of money each year for the use
of that sewer by the upstream community. The draft Rental Agreement will
be sent to Chaska within the next week or so. We will be glad to sit down
with Chanhassen and Chaska to discuss the final terms of the proposed
agreement to provide the necessary sewer service to Chanhassen through
Chaska
An Agency of the Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities Area
Anoka County • Carver County • Dakota County • Hennepin County • Ramsey County • Scott County • Washington County
Mr. Adolph Tessness
Page Two
February 23, 1972
We appreciate very much your efforts and cooperation in working out this
problem and hope it can be resolved in the very near future. In the mean-
time, if we can be of any additional assistance, please don't hesitate
to call u s .
Very truly yours,
Maurice K. Dorton
Administrative Assistant
Metropolitan Sewer Board
MKD:kb
cc: Mr. R. J. Dougherty, Chief Administrator. , MSB
Mr. K. E. Robins, Administrative Assistant, MSB
Mr. Patrick McGarvey, City Administrator, Chaska
Mr. Julius Smith, MSB Member, Precinct 1
R.USSELL H. LAIRS ON
ATTORNEY AT LAW
1900 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402
TELEPHONE
335 - 95G5
Mr. Adolph Tessness
Clerk -Administrator
Box 147
Chanhassen, Minnesota
Dear Adolph:
February 1, 1972
55317
Re: Chaska Sewer Matters
Please substitute the attached page 4 of the Chas ka-Chanhassen-
MSB contract for the one sent you on January 31st. The old page 4
should be destroyed.
Also add the attached new page 7 to the agreement.
As you know, this agreement will require a separate contract between
Chanhassen and Gedney, but this should present no problem. Please
set down a list of terms whie1"shou1d,,be included in such an agreement.
Ve
Russell H. La son
Chanhassen Village Attorney
RH L: b
Enclosures
cc John D. Levine
Gedney Tuttle
Wm. Schoell
Wil
M
SCHOELL & MAOSON, INC.
ENGINEERS ANO SURVEYORS
WILLIAM D. SCHOELL CARLISLE MADSON i PHONE R;:Bfi 2J*lr 50 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH • HOPKINS, MINNESOTA 55343
938.7601.
Mr. Russell H. Larson
Attorney at Law
1900 First National Bank Building
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Dear Russ:
February 1, 1972
�1 Z 34
VILLAGE OF
CHANHASSEM
Subject: Chaska -Chanhassen Sanitary Sewer Ser-
vice Contract -
I have reviewed the proposed contract accompanying your letter
of January 31st and recommend the Village's acceptance of it.
The blanks left to insert a description of the area in Chan-
hassen about which the contract is concerned could be filled in
with the descriptive term, "Gedney" unless that might be too in-
flammatory to Chaska, in which case you might use "County Road 10"
as being somewhat descriptive.
I note that the agreement does not specify any exact sewer cap-
acity to be provided for through the Chaska sewer system. Think
this is satisfactory, since the capacity has been shown on Chan-
hassen's overall comprehensive sewer plan and approved by the MSB;
who can exert some avuncular suasion over the good City of Chaska.
Very truly yours,
A�I�e
VILLIAGE ENGINEER
WDSchoell:sd
cc: Adolph Tessness
15
' 3.73
212
- 34 40
GP/
—�' 30.21
1.20
AREA "A0.
" - Z
0.0
POND 36
11 NOTE: 29.01 C.F.S. PEAK FLOW
ACCUMULATED FJOM r,HASKA,�-
29.01 o�
� N"
a a
lam.—�+• -.
EXHIBIT "A1' i
i
• 1
j ,. a
R u s s E L L H. LA R s ON
ATTORNEY AT LAW
1900 FIRST NATIONAL BANH BUILDING
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402
TELEPHONE
335--9565
January 31, 1972
Mr. Adolph Tessness
Clerk -Administrator
Box 147
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
Dear Adolph:
On Friday last I met with Mr. Gedney Tuttle and Mr. John Levine concerning
the Chaska -Chanhassen contract for sanitary sewer service in the south-
western portion of Chanhassen, including the Gedney areas.
As a result of this meeting I have prepared the enclosed draft of an agree-
ment between the two municipalities and the Metropolitan Sewer Board
covering all of the points which seemed pertinent in this matter.
As the Sewer Board is being asked to be a party to this agreement, we
recommend that you submit this contract first to Wilbur Blaine at the
Sewer Board for his review, comments and editing. I believe this should
be done prior to submitting the agreement to Chaska for its review as we will
be in a much better position to deal with Chaska if we can advise them that
the Sewer Board has approved the contract.
I am sending a copy of the agreement and this letter to Mr. Tuttle, Mr.
Levine and Bill Schoell, and they may have further comments to make
concerning the draft as they-4ave nojsn in the form enclosed.
Very Tu
ssell H. T arson
RHL:b Chanhassen Village Attorney
Enclosure
cc John D. Levine
Gedney Tuttle
Wm. Schoell
MELCHERT, MELCHERT & HUBERT
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
PAUL A. MELCHERT 420 CHESTNUT STREET
LUKE MELCHERT CHASKA, MINNESOTA 55318
DAVID P. HUBERT AREA CODE 612
44S-3121
THOMAS R. HOWE
December 2, 1971
Adolph Tessness
Village Hall
Chanhassen, Minnesota
Dear Adolph:
WACONIA OFFICE
FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING
442-2154
WATERTOWN OFFICE
0 5 5-1404
Re: M. A. Gedney Company
Enclosed herewith please find one copy of a rough draft
of a proposed agreement between the City of Chaska, Village
of Chanhassen and the M. A. Gedney Company regarding the
discharging of domestic and pretreated industrial waste of
Gedney into the sewer lines of the City of Chaska.
To paragraph 3 should also be added language as follows:
"in the event that the Metropolitan Sewer Board shall deter-
mine that the industrial sewage effluent of Gedney comes with
in any guidelines or rate structures of the Metropolitan Sewer
Board commanding a higher rate for treatment costs, such add-
itional cost shall and will be paid by the Villa§e of Chanhassen
to Chaska in addition to the rates above stated. Also, an
additional section should be added stating in affect that 11 In
the event the Metropolitan Sewer Board makes any capital improve-
ment to its treatment facilities located in Chaska for which
payment must be made in a manner other than through -normal treat-
ment costs, and same is billed to Chaska, Chanhassen hereby
agrees to pay its proportionate share of said cost, including
reserve capacity, if any, to Chaska upon the same basis that
Chaska is required to pay."
We would appreciate it if you would review same with your
attorney and your council. We would appreciate hearing any com-
ment you may have thereon as soon as possible. Please direct
your reply to myself or Pat NicGarvey, City Administrator.
Very°'truly yours,
Luke Melchert
cc: John Levine, Attorney for M, A. Gedney
PAUL A. MELCHERT
LUKE MELCHERT
DAVID P. HUBERT
THOMAS R. HOWE
MELCHERT, MELCHERT & HUBERT
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
420 CHESTNUT STREET
WACONIA OFFICE
CHASKA, MINNESOTA 55318
FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING
442-2154
AREA CODE 612
WATERTOWN OFFICE
44 8-3121
9 $ s-1404
November 2, 1971
Dorsey, Marquart, Windhorst, West & Halladay
2400 First National Bank Building
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Attention: John D. Levine
Re: City of Chaska vs
M. A. Gedney Company
Dear John:
►._ :EIVID
Nov 3) 1971
Enclosed herewith please find one executed copy of the
Stipulation of Dismissal and one copy of your letter signed
by me acknowledging conditional terms of the Stipulation .
I will be filing the original Stipulation sometime today.
I trust that you will immediately contact your client regarding
the discontinuing of the discharging of its industrial waste to
the Chaska hewer lines.
Very,truly yours,
Luke Melchert
LM/bmw
encl,
UORSrx.
MARQUART, WINDHORST, WEST P
HALLADAY
DONALD WEST
E.J. SCHWARTIBAUEB
JAMES H. OHAGAN
WILL" R WOSS
WALDO F. MAROUART
THOMAS M. BROWN
LAW OFFICES
MICHAEL W. WRIGHT
JOHN D KIPBT
JOHN W WINDHORST
CORNELIUS D MAHONEY
LARRY L VICKREY
PHILIP F WLTER
HENRY HALLADAY
THOMAS S. ERICKSON
LOREN R KNOTT
WILLIAM B PAYkE
JULE M. MAN NAFORD
WILLIAM C. BABCOCK
P 4 O O FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING
PHILLIP M. MARTIN
BRUCE W BJRTCN
ARTHUR 0. WHITNEY
MICHAEL E. DRESS
REESE C. JOHNSON
JAN D. STuUANAMS
RUSSELL W. LINDOUIST
PAUL G. ZERSY
M I N N E A P O L I S, M I N N E S O TA 55402
JAMES i. HALVERSON
ROBERT A S�>.*ARTZSALE.
DAVID R. BRINK
RAYMOND A. REISTER
CHARLES J. HAUENSTEIN
DAVID N FOMEK
NORACE HITCH
JOHN J. TAYLOR
CHARLES A DEER
JOHN F TUTTLE
VIRGIL H. ILL
G. EN
t
_
RONE
OBERT VXTARBOX
WILLIIAM J HEMPELARD
TELEPHONE: 333 - 2151 • ��
•EKED JOHN R. WICKS
ROBERT A. HEIBERG
DEFOREST SPENCER
JOHN S. HiBBS
EUGENE L JOHNSON
EMERY W BARTLE
ROBERT J. JOHNSON
M. B. HA53ELOU15T
ROBERT O FLOTTEN
JOHN 0.lE1RNE
AREA CODE:612
NOV)n`'
���� ROBERT O. KNUTSON
JOHN W. WINOHORST.
MICHAEL J RADOER
PETER DORSEY
ROBERT J. STRUYK
CABLE ADDRESS;DOROW
JR.
MICHAEL PRICHARD
CURTIS LSTINE
MICHAEL TROC NO
GEODE P. FLANNERY
MICHAEL A OLSON
R. S
J.
CURTIS L ROY
LARRY W. JOHNSON
T14OAM
AN
THOWS R NAN TH EY
JAMESWILLIA
RACER
JAMES A FLACEA
ARTHUR E. WEISBEAG
THOMAS 5, HAY
RICHARD G. SWANSON
WILLIAM A JOHNSTONE
DUANE E. JOSEPH
G. LARRY GRIFFITH
FAITH LONMAN
Mk tA BOVEM
FREDERiCK E LAMGE
CRAIG A. BECK
DAVID A RANHEW
OFF C COUNSELSEL
JAMES B. VESSEY
DAVID L McCUSKEY
ROBERT J. SILVERMAN
DAVTO E BRONSON
WILLIAM A WHITLOCK
THOMAS O NOE
October 28, 1971
JAMES M. KLEBDA
LEAVITT FL BARKER
Luke Melchert, Esq.
Melchert, Melchert & Hubert
First National Bank Building
RTaconia, Minnesota 55387
Re: City of Chaska v M. A. Gedney Company
Dear Luke:
I enclose an original and two copies of a Stipulation of Dis-
missal, -all of which I have signed. Please sign them on behalf of Chaska.
As we discussed, you told me that you would file the original and return
a fully executed copy to me. The other copy is for your file.
Part of the Stipulation as we discussed on Tuesday with our cli-
ents, and as we discussed during our telephone conversation of yesterday,
are the following terms and conditions. Upon notification from you that
the Stipulation has been fully executed, our client will discontinue put-
ting its industrial waste through the Chaska sewer lines, except for that
small amount of industrial waste that it has been putting through those
lines since 1965, for a period of 30 days from the date it first discon-
tinues this. During this period of time your client is not to initiate
any legal action in connection with this dispute. Both of our clients have
agreed to extend the commitment on their part as just stated in this letter
for an additional 30 days after the first 30 day period expires in the event
that both clients are satisfied that negotiations to solve this dispute are
proceeding in good faith. I did not feel that this should be part of the
Stipulation which is filed. Therefore, please sign the enclosed copy of
this letter at the bottom to indicate that your client agrees to the addi-
tional terms of the Stipulation as set out in this letter.
JDL:rw
Enclosures
Luke Melchert
Phone: 445-4350
M. A. GEDNEY COMPANY
Chaska, Minnesota 55318
December 10, 1965
Chas'ke City Council
Cha s1ka
Tinresota
Gentlemen:
N�
�x� 6if
As of December 1, all industrial waste from our operations has
been diverted throui,,h our own wa to di.soo,-al system into our
recently col.1pIcte(I Int;oon, located nrijacent to the Minnenotc
river. lhic facility has been inspected by n representative of
the .iinresot& Wai2r Pollution Control Conbmission, and found to
be acceptable. Official written notificatio:_, of this approval
will be forthcoming shortly. The only waste from, our plant that
is now going to the Chaska sever system is sanitary waste, and
some bacicaash water from our water filtrati on Sj7Ste?1. We feel
that the time has now come for an adjustment to be made in the
man er of deterrlining our sewer rental. T. invite you, the
Council, or a committee thereof, to sit down with us at the
earliest convenience to accomplish this objective.
On bealf of the Company, I would like to express our appreciation
fcr the patience and cooperation: which to City of Chaska and its
officials have demonstrated to us during the period in which,
despite a host of deterrents, we were able to complete the construc-
tion_ of cur facilities. i:re will certainly do everythint' we can in
.he future to coo_erate with the city on this and other matters,
as bell as to earn your cooperation.
Sincerely yours,
M. A. Gedney Compar,5y
Gedney Tuttle `
Vice -President - Treasurer
GT: js
Copies to: Cite Engineer, City of Chaska
Richard. ?tiller, :,iin,,.. Board of Health
Torli F latebo, Valley E'nLdneering
DONALD WEST
THOMAS M. BROWN
2400 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING
LARRY L. VICKREY
BRUCE W. BURTON
WALDO F. MAROUART
CORNELIUS D. MAHONEY
LOREN R. KNOTT
JAN D_STUURMANS
• JOHN W. WINDHORST
THOMAS S. ERICKSON
M I N N E A P O L I S
PHILLIP H. MARTIN
R.A. SCHWARTZBAUER
HENRY HALLADAY
WILLIAM C. BABCOCK
, M I N N E S O TA 8 5 4 O 2
REESE C. JOHNSON
DAVID N.FRONEK
JULE M. HANNAFORD
MICHAEL E.BRESS
JAMES T. HALVERSON
THOMAS W. TINKHAM
ART HUR B.WHITNEY
PAUL G. ZERBY
CHARLES J. HAUENSTEIN
JON F TUTTLE
RUSSELL W. LINDOUIST
RAYMOND A. REISTER
(612) 333-2151
CHARLES A. GEER
EARL L.DEVINE
DAVID R_ BRINK
JOHN J- TAYLOR
JOHN C. ZWAKMAN
ROBERT A. HEIBERG
HORACE HITCH
BERNARD G.HEINZEN
CABLE: DOROW
JOHN R. WICKS
EMERY W. BARTLE
VIRGIL H.HILL
WILLIAM J. HEMPEL
EUGENE L.JOHNSON
MICHAEL J- RADMER
ROBERT V. TARBOX
JOHN S. HiIBBS
JOHN W. WINDHORST, JAL
CURTIS L. STINE
DEFOREST SPENCER
ROBERT O. ROTTEN
1432 W-FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING
MICHAEL PRICHARD
MICHAEL TRUCANO
ROBERT J.JOHNSON
JOHN D_LEVINE
ST. PAU L,MIN NESOb6101
WILLIAM R.SOTH
WILLIAM J. KEPPEL
M. B. HASSELOUIST
ROBERT J. STRUYK
(6I2) 227-8017
THOMAS R. MANTHEY
JAMES A. FLADER
PETER DOpSEY
MICHAEL A_OLSON
RICHARD G.SWANSON
WILLIAM A. JOHNSTONE
GEORGE P. FLANNERY
LARRY W. JOHNSON
FAITH L.OHMAN
WILLIAM E. BRWEN
CURTIS L-ROY
THOMAS S. HAY
DAVID A. RANHEIM
STEPHEN A. GODDARD
ARTHUR E.WEISBERG
G.LARRY GRIFFITH
JONATHAN VILLAGE CENTER
ROBERT J. SILVERMAN
DUANE E.JOSEPH
CRAIG A. BECK
CHASKA, MINNESOTA 6631B
JAMES M KLEBBA
FREDERICK EAANGE
DAVID L. McCUSKEY
(612 ) 448 -4O12
WILLIAM R HIBBS
JAMES B.VESSEY
THOMAS O.MOE
JOHN D. KIRBY
OF COUNSEL
WILLIAM A.WHITLOCK
JAMES H.dHAGAN
PHILIP F. BOELTER
DAVID E. BRONSON
E.J.SCHWARTZBAUER
MICHAEL W. WRIGHT
October 27, 1971
WILLIAM B.PAYNE
LEAVITT R. BARKER
Russell H. Larson, Esq.
First National Bank Bldg.
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Re: City of Chaska v M. A. Gedney Company
Dear Russ:
I enclose two copies of the following documents. One copy is
for your file and, if you agree, the other copy is for you to forward to
Mr. Tesness for his file.
Letter dated January 18, 1971 from Richard Dougherty to
Ivan D. Kittel
Letter dated September 2, 1969 from Luke Melchert to
W. M. Carl
Letter dated July 31, 1969 from Luke Melchert to W. M. Corl
Letter dated August 20, 1971 from Patrick E. McGarvey to
Gedney Tuttle
Letter dated June 4, 1971 from Dr. Edgar F. Ziegler to
Gedney Tuttle
5 'ncerely yours,
John D. Levine
JDL:rw
Enclosures
...,ter-..
o �
apitol Square Building, Cedar Street at loth Street, Saint Paul. Minnesota 65101
January 18, 1971
5..
M. A. Gedney Company
Chaska, Mirmesota 553.18
Attention: Mr. Ivan D. Kittel
Production Manager
Gentlemen:
Area 612, 227-9421
We have completed our review of the information which you submitted con-
cerning the waste discharged from your plant. It appears, that the quality
of the waste is highly variable Mich is of concern in the* treatment process
at the Chaska plant. In order that we could provide adequate treatment
at all times for this waste, it will be necessary to establish certain
conditions as follows:
1. The waste water discharge will consist of treated effluent which
has passed through both ponds presently operated by M. A. Gedney
Company.
2. All treated process waste water will be discharged to and receive
treatment at the Chaska treatment plant.
3. The average daily flow shall not exceed 35 GPM without obtaining
prior approval from the Board. Peak flow shall not exceed 70 GPM
and shall be restricted to those hours when the flow at the treat-
ment plant is of such magnitude that it- can receive this peak flow
rate.
4. The present treatment system employed by the M. A. Gedney Company
will be continued in operation and will be operated and maintained
to optimum efficiency. At no time shall the effluent from the
present Gedney plant have a strength exceeding 800 mg/l of 5 day
BOD. Additional pre-treatment may be required by the Board should
it be found that the high strength waste from M. A. Gedney Company
is having a deleterious effect on the treated process.
5. Monthly records of the waste volume and strength shall be submitted
to the Village of Chaska and the Metropolitan Sewer Board.
An Agenoy of the Metropolitan Coundil of the Twin Cities Area
Anoka County 0 Carver County o Dakota County 0 Hennepin County 0 Ramsey County 0 Soott County o Washington County
M. A. Gedney Company - 2 - January 18, 3971
I •
6. The flow will be discharged into the Chaska system at a uniform
rate with facilities provided for metering the volLmn . The meter-
ing equipment shall provide indicating, recording, f" ' totalizing
capabilities and of a design to provide a permanent record of the
flow.
7. The discharge of the industrial waste shall be subject to the rules
and regulations of the Metropolitan.Sewer Board to be adopted in
1971 and as may be amended from tirre to time .
8. The Metropolitan Sewer Board reserves the right to teriminate'its
permit and/or require additional pre-treatment as may be required
and to impose a reasonable surcharge if the inclusion of this
waste imposes an unusual additional cost in the operation and
maintenance of the treatment facilities.
We appreciate the cooperation of the M. A. Gedney Company in supplying us with
the information necessary to make a judgment concerning the discharge of their
waste into the Metropolitan disposal system.
f
Very truly Yours,
Richard J. ughertY
Chief A trator
RJD:LED:sil
CC: City Manager, Chaska
State of Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
o x
MELCHERT, MELCHERT & HUB,!-RT
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
PAUL A. MELCHERT FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING
LUKE MELCHERT WACONIA. MINNESOTA 55387
DAVID P. HUBERT AREA CODE 612
442.2154
September 2, 1969
is
M. A. Gedney Company
Chaska, Minnesota 55318
Re: Sanitary Sewer Line ,
Attention: Mr. W. M . Corl
Dear Mr. Corl:
Thank you for your letter of August 21st expressing your
company's feeling regarding the 8-inch sanitary sewer line.
CHASKA O►►ICE
420 CHESTNUT STREET
44 S-S 121
WATERTOWN OF/ICE
555.1404
I would appreciate it very much if we could meet again as soon
as possible. Please telephone me upon receipt of this letter as to
a time and place you would be available to meet.
I would appreciate it if at that meeting you could have a
counter proposal available for our consideration so that this ques-
tion may be resolved in a relatively short period of time. I think
that both parties should consider the benefits to each by reason of
said sewer line coming under the control of the city. The City will
and should consider the• -.fact that they are receiving an existing sewer
line which could be used for serving other citizens in the City of
Chaska and that your company should consider the maintenance factor,
the benefits of uninterrupted sewer service due to the fact that the
city will constantly maintain it, and the fact that approximately 20 to
25 hours of industrial sewage has been deposited in our sewer plant
during this campaign already.
I am looking forward to meeting with you in the near future and
to resolve this matter.
Yours very truly,
Luke Melchert
LM/imh Chaska City Attorney
MELCHERT, MELCHERT & HUBERT
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
PAUL A. MELCHERT FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING
LUKE MELCHERT WACONIA. MINNESOTA 55387
DAVID P. HUBERT AREA CODE 612
442-2154
July 31, 1969
M. A. Gedney Company
Chaska, Minnesota 55318
Re: 8-inch sanitary sewer line
Attention: William M. Corl
Dear Mr. Corl:
As a result of a meeting between myself, the City Engineer,
Mr. James C. Olson and the sewer and water department head, Mr.
Leon Schmidt, I am writing to the M. A. Gedney Company requesting
that the company relinquish control of the 8-inch sewer line from
the westerly limits of the M. A. Gedney;-property to the City of
Chaska manhole situate near the offices of the American Crystal'
Sugar Company. `
The decision to request that this line be given to the City is
based on the proposition that not only is it in the best interests
of the City that said sewer line be a part of the municipal sanitary
sewer system, but also that it is of a benefit to the M. A. Gedney
Company that said sanitary sewer line be part of the municipal
system. It is felt that because of the age of said sewer line,
annual maintenance will become an increasingly important and
costly factor. The City of Chaska has continual maintenance and
repair on all city lines and the assurance to M. A. Gendey Company
of virtually uninterrupted sanitary sewer service is of great value
to the company. It is further the feeling of the City Engineer that
said line has capacity to serve all of the potentially buildable land
in the area.
The benefit to the M. A. Gedney Company together with the
benefit to the community_ as a whole , which the company is an
integral part of, by having all sanitary sewer lines in the Corporate
Limits of the City of Chaska be a part of the municipal system as
sufficient basis for turning over of this line to the City of Chaska.
We would appreciate it very much if this matter would be
CHASKA OFFICE
420 CHESTNUT STREET
440-2121
WATLRTOWN OFFICE
If08-1404
'. M. A. Gedney Company -2- July 31, 1969
discussed with the appropriate officers of the M. A. Gedney Company.
If the above proposal meets with the approval of the company,
please
notify us accordingly. If said proposal does not, we would appreciate
it very much if you communicate to us your ideas on this matter.
Thank you in advance for your kind cooperation and consideration.
Very truly yours,
Lul e Melchert
Chaska City Attorney
LM/imh
PHONE: (612) 448-2851
' City of CHASKA, Minnesota
205 E. FOURTH ST. 55318
PATRICK E. McGARVEY
City Administrator
# August 20, 1971
Mr. Gedney Tuttle
President
M. A. Gedney Company
Chanhassen, Minnesota
Dear Mr. Tuttle:
The City Council was interested in knowing if your Company has
reached any decision on the sewer problem you have. It is the
opinion of the City Council that the M. A. Gedney Company should
become a part of the City of Chaska if it is to receive the
benifits of our municipal sewer system.
In order for the Company to become a part of this City, if it so
chooses, a petition would have to be presented to the Village of
Chanhassen asking them to approve the de -annexation from
Chanhassen. A similar petition would be submitted to the City of
Chaska asking to be annexed to the City.
It is the decision of the Chaska City Council that no connection
can be made to the Chaska Sewer System until this matter is
resolved.
We are willing to meet with you at your convenience to discuss
this matter further if you so desire.
Respectfully yours,
lbw ��
Patrick E. McGarvey
City Administrator
cc: Mayor Ziegler
City Council
- — - -- i PHONE: (612) 448-2851
City of CHASE, Minnesota
205 E. FOURTH ST. 55318
June 4, 1971
Mr. Gedney Tuttle
President
M. A. Gedney Company
RR 1
Chaska, Minnesota 55318
Dear Mr. Tuttle,
The City of Chaska has received a copy of a letter from the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency concerning the June 17, 1971
deadline for use of the City sewer system. Involved is the use
of the sewer line along Stoughton Avenue to the treatment plant
formerly owned by the City of Chaska. The Gedney Company has
asked the City of Chaska if this sewer line has the capacity for
carrying the plant waste from your plant to the treatment plant.
The Company has also asked the City of Chaska if an agreement
could be reached where the Company could use this line for a fee,
if the line has sufficient capacity.
Our engineering consultant has not determined if the line has
sufficient capacity to handle the plant wastes. If it determined
that the line does have sufficient capacity an agreement would
have to be'* reached between the Company and City of Chaska for the
use of the City line.
The City Council of the City of Chaska would like to suggest that if
the M. A. Gedney-Company finds it necessary to use the City sewer
facilities that it first become a tax payer in the City of Chaska.
This could be done by the Company requesting the Village of
Chanhassen to adopt a Resolution authorizing a de -annexation of
M. A. Gedney Company property from the Village, and by the Chaska
City Council adopting a Resolution annexing this property to the
City of Chaska.
We are willing to meet with officials of the M. A. Gedney Company,
Village of Chanhassen, and the Pollution Control Agency to discuss
this matter further if the.Company wishes to become a part of the
City.
Respectfully yours,—�
Dr. E
Mayo gar F. Zi�j per DS
Phone: 448-2612
Ik r M. A. GEDNEY COMPANY
,1
Chaska, Minnesota 55318
October 8, 1971
State of Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency
717 Delaware Street S.E.
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55440
Attention: Richard Miller
Gentlemen:
This is to inform you that the construction of our return system from
our impounding lagoons has been completed and all industrial and sani-
tary wastes are now being diverted to the Metropolitan Sewer Board
treatment facility located in the City of Chaska. The return system
was put into operation on September 29, 1971. During construction,
the pipe that was used for discharge previously was sealed.
This is our final report to your agency regarding the abatement order
issued to the M. A. Gedney Company on December 31, 1968, which instructed
the Company to construct or contract for adequate facilities to meet the
effluent standards of W.P.C..19.
Sincerely yours,
G�✓ v
I. D. Kittel //I
Production Manager
M. A. Gedney Company
cc/Village of Chanhassen
Gedney Tuttle
Bill Hempel
rg
o1�tOX, &Ott.
OQ '�
o�
4k
WIN CS't1IVI0 �
Capitol Square Building, Cedar Street at loth Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 Area, 612, 222.8423
September 21, 1971
Mr. Adolph Tessness
Manager
Village of Chanhassen
Box 147
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
Dear Adolph:
n INA
cst
This letter is in response to our telephone conversation on September 17,
1971, regarding the sewer connection for the Gedney Pickle Company to
the City of Chaska and the treatment of the wastewater at the Chaska Treat-
ment Plant owned by the Metropolitan Sewer Board.
The Board can suggest an alternative solution to those under consideration
for the treatment and charges for Gedney wastewater. The Board has used
this procedure in other parts of the metropolitan area where one municipality
discharged sewage through sewers not owned by the Board in the downstream
municipality. This solution could be used in this instance. The Village of
Chanhassen would be billed for the flow from the Gedney Pickle Company and
it would be responsible for billing and collecting sewer charges for Gedney.
The Board would negotiate a joint use sewer rental agreement with Chaska
to provide for the transmission of the Gedney wastewater through sewers in
the City of Chaska to the treatment plant. Under the terms of such an agree-
ment, Chaska would accept this discharge and the Board would reimburse
the City of Chaska for the joint use of that sewer.
We have negotiated with some 25 other municipalities in the area, rental
agreements on the basis of $600.00 per year per mile, for the joint use sewers.
The flow from Chanhassen (Gedney Pickle Company) would be deducted from
the Chaska flow so that Chaska would not be charged for the treatment or inter-
ceptor cost associated with this waste. We feel this is a workable solution
to this problem and we offer it as one alternative to the provision for treatment
of the Gedney industrial waste as ordered by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency.
An Agency of the Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities Area
Anoka County o Carver County Dakota County ,a Hennepin County 0 Ramsey County r, Scott County : Washington County
Mr. Tessness
Page Two
September 21, 1971
In addition, I am sending to you a copy of the letter from the Sewer Board
to Chaska outlining the requirements to be placed on the waste from Gedney
Pickle Company.
If you need any additional information, or if we can assist either municipality
in working out this problem, please don't hesitate to call us.
Sincerely,
Maurice K. Dorton
Administrative Assistant
Metropolitan Sewer Board
MKD:kc
cc: Mr. Patrick E. McGarvey, City Administrator, City of Chaska
Mr. Julius Smith, Board Member, Metropolitan Sewer Board
Mr. Lonnie Dye, Chief Engineer, Metropolitan Sewer Board
Jan,== 1% I.971
npany
t�,12S1.c ) -'i rmovota 55310
-°,tt nticn : ''r. T-rion D. Fittel
Production ManaGar
Cent ler.-n :
We have completed our review of the infom. ation which you submitted con--
cernint- the caste di-scharrged from your plant. It appears that the quality
of th^ i-.,mte is higt];l varlLable which is of concern in the treatment process
at the Chi sl;a plant. In order that we could provide adequate treatrr-nt
at all tires for L .i; ;-taste, it i�:ill be necessarj to est<;bush certain
condi ticn-1 as folio :s
1. - `."'lie waste water -rill consist of treated ef'fliz-nt i'fhic?s
has passed throw both ponds presently operated by ?•I. A. Gedney
Corpany .
2. All treated prcceso ;;rite water will be dischax�ed to and receive
treatr--nt at the Cha3lZa tr*--at:�nt plant.
;. 1'he averapp daily flea shall not exceed 35 GPM without obtaining
prior approval Born the Board. peak flaa shall not exceed 70
and shall be restricted to those hours when the flow at the treat-
rmrt plant is of such rrnmitud^ that it can receive this peak flat
rate.
11. rMe present treatrnnt system emloyed by the P.-I. A. Gedney Cor.many
will be continued in operation and will be operated and maintained
to optic.^:=- efficiency. At no time shall the effluent from the
pre -sent Gedney plant have a stmn,,27th exceeding 800 TkPJ1 of 5 day
BQD. Additional pre-treatment ray be required by the Board should
it be found that the hi li strength waste from M. A. Gedney Cor.�any
is having a deleterious effect on the treated process.
5. M:onthly records of the waste volmm and strength shall be submitted
to the +fillapp of Cha^,ka an:! Vh�� ?I[etropolitan Sewer Board.
M. A. Gedney Corpany -- 2 - January 18, 1,971
6. The flew will be discha-Md into the Chaska system at a uniform
rate with facilities provided for metering the volume. The rmter►-
ing, equiprrrnt shall provide indicating;, recording;, and totalizing;
capabi l_itfes and of a design to provide a per3r3anent recerd of the
flag.
7. The discharee of the industrial waste shall be subject to the rules
and regulations of the i,,etropolitan Sewer Board to be adopted in
1971 and as may be amended from time to time .
8. the Tbtropolitan Serer Board reserves the might to terrzinate its
perrdt and/or rtqtzire additional pre-treatment as may be required
and to ir:rose a. reasonable surcharge if the inclusion of this
v,aste irrroses an unusual additienal cost in the operation.and
maintenance of the treatrr<nt facilities.
We appreciate the cooperation of the M. A. Gedney Comearky in supplying us with
the infor,:rition recessa -r to nake a Jud,^rent concerning; the discharge of their
vwte into the I',:tropolitan disposal system.
Verg truly yours,
ft chard i . ')Ogrl -7
Chief Adrrdnistrator
RTJ:IDI:sil
CC: City "'anar--r; (,'hns?;a
State of Minnesota Pollution Control .�,� encv
i
"�OLLOr9 %
a
i(1�
utl3X
Phone: 445-4350
M. A. GEDNEY COMPANY
Chaska, Minnesota' 55318
January 26, 1968
Mr. John P. Badalich, Director Reference: Your letter of 1/9/68
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
459 Board of Health Building
Univerbity of Minnesota 55440
Dear Sir:
On January 16, I had the pleasure of visiting with Mssrs. Koonce -and
Frazer of your department. These gentlemen were helpful and generous
in their time; we are grateful.
I discussed your letter of January 9, 1968, with Mr. Koonce, particularly
regarding the scope of testing required on our ponds monthly, in view of
our normally discharging on an annual basis only. My understanding of
this conversation is that monthly reporting should be continued, but
need not be as comprehensive as is required prior to and during our
annual discharge. This monthly report, during the impounding period,
should include a statement that no discharge was made to the river
during that period; a measurement (volume impounded) of the ponds;
the odor, color or any other determinations made; and./or other opera-
tional information on the ponds during said month.
Our ponds have been frozen over since December. We do not anticipate
that they will open until March or April, at which time we will begin
to monitor the lagoons in anticipation of an approximate late April May
discharge. It is my understanding that sampling through the ice for
monthly testing is not required.
I discussed the chemical testing procedures with Mr. Frazer and am now
ordering additional test equipment to perform the prescribed tests, for
compliance with your letter of Jan. 9, 1968, and WPC-5 Standards.
We have ordered two 5 HP Aerators for installation into Pond A as soon
as conditions are favorable this spring. We are hopeful that they will
be sufficient to maintain a favorable oxygen level in this pond.
I am enclosing a report that is compiled from our tests on these ponds
covering July through November of 1967. I hope that the above meets
with your approval.
Sincerely,
e
7. ,
Zan. Kittel
Laboratory Director
02f3X�
of
INZ
_Ira — -----
titNIJ� , � , - o � - o I- � , I z r
ziz
NV,
_4
r N"
21
........ .1.
NY