Loading...
75-01 - Comp Plan Amendment pt 4CITY OF '�' CHANHASSEN 7610 LAREDO DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Assistant City Attorney, Craig Mertz FROM: City Manager, Don Ashworth DATE: February 18, 1981 SUBJ: Letter of Credit Reduction - Chanhassen Lakes Business Park The attached letter from Dunn and Curry as well as my response are being submitted -to your office anticipating that Mr. Dunn will be requesting further clarification within the near future. No action on your part is required at this time. S"Ja', 4iV't_;) minnesota department of health 0 717 s.e. delaware st. minneapolis 55440 (612) 296-5221 February 17, 1981 Chanhassen City Council c/o Donald W. Ashworth, City Mgr. 7610 Laredo Drive Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Gentlemen: Re: Watermains for the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota. We are enclosing a copy of our report covering an examination of plans and specifications on the above -designated project. A set of the identified plans and specifications is being returned to you. If you have any questions in regard to the information contained in this report, please contact Mr. David Engstrom of this office at 612/296-5275. Y,_)_,rs very truly, Gary L. En,;lund, P.E., lief Section o ! ` ater Supply and General Engineering Enclosures cc: Suburban Engineering, Inc. Metropolitan Council R R;iECEIV��; F V11J.AGC OF CHANII AS864s ����f �16 2 Y y MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division of Environmental Health REPORT ON PLANS Plans and Specifications on Watermains Location Chanhassen Date Examined January_16,t 1961 Prepared and Submitted by Suburban Engineering, Inc., 1101 Cliff Road, Burnsville, MN 55337 Date Received January 7# 1981 Plan File No. KA Ownership - Municipal Scope - thfs report covers the design of this project insofar as the safety and sanitary quality of,,the water for public consumption may be affected, and applies to this project only and not to the entire system or any other part thereof. °"This project consists of the installation of ductile iron pipe waterman for !i Lake wean Hills [West Ist Addition in Chatnhasste6p Minnesota*. Hydrant drains shallnot be connected to or located within ten foot of sanitary s rs or storm drains (additional recb�=endations on back) Compliance - NO CONISTRUCTION SHALL TAKE PLACE EXCEPT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPROVED PLANS. If it is desired to make deviations from the approved plans, the State Department of Health should be consulted and approval of the changes obtained before construction is started; otherwise, such construction is installed without proper approval, and in addition may create dangers to public health. Conclusion The plans and specifi^atiors on this waterworks project are in general accordance with the requirements.of the Minnesota Department of Health, and are recommended for approval with the understanding as stated in the preceding paragraphs, and with the usual reservations as stated on the appended sheet., entitled "Information Relative to Plan Examination." A roved: Gary *lglund# PJ r Chief Section of hatter Supply and Gen+era►l Engineering David B.9 Fngst # �P.E. Public Health Engineer Section of Environmental Pieid Services 1 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division of Environmental Health Information Relative to Plan Examination The examination of plans and specifications for water supply and sewerage systems (Regulation MHD 136(a)), plumbing systems (Regulation MHD 139(a)(1)), and swimming pools (Regulation MHD 141(c)), is made to provide information concerning the sanitary features of projects presented for consideration in accordance with the above regulations of the Commissioner of Health. The approval of such plans is given upon the supposition that the survey and other data on which the design is based are correct, and that necessary legal authority has been obtained to construct the project. The responsibility for the design of structural features and the efficiency of equipment must be taken by the engineer or architect who designs the project. Water supply plans are examined with regard to the location, construction and operational features of the design and maintenance of all parts of the system which may affect the safety and sanitary quality of the water. Examination is based on the standards of this Department. Plans of sewage disposal systems considered by this Department are limited to those systems that can utilize soil absorption. They are examined with regard to the features of design which concern location, construction, operation and maintenance of the system and which may affect the public health. The examination is based upon information contained in 6 MCAR § 4.8040 "Individual Sewage Treatment Systems Standards," 1978. Plans on plumbing systems are examined only insofar as the provisions of the Minnesota Plumbing Code apply. Swimming pool plans are examined with regard to the features of location and design which may affect the safety and sanitary quality of the water for public bathing. The examination is based upon Regulation MHD 141, Public Swimming Pools. The Commissioner of Health reserves the right to withdraw his approval of plans if construction of the project is not undertaken within a period of two years. The fact that plans have been approved by the Commissioner of Health does not necessarily mean that recommendations for alterations or additions may not be offered at some later time when changed conditions or advanced knowledge make improvements necessary. 11/80 minnesota department of health O 717 s.e. delaware st. minneapolis 55440 (612) 296-5221 February 17, 1981 Chanhassen City Council c/o Donald W. Ashworth, City Mgr. 7610 Laredo Drive Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Gentlemen: Re: Watermains for the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota. We are enclosing a copy of our report covering an examination of plans and specifications on the above -designated project. A set of the identified plans and specifications is being returned to you. If you have any questions in regard to the information contained in this report, please contact Mr. David Engstrom of this office at 612/296-5275. iar rs very truly, y . E glund, P.E. hief Section Water Supply and General Engineering Enclosures cc: Schoell & Madson, Inc. Metropolitan Council FEB 190 RECEIVED �MLAGR of CHANHASSEN, MINN. I an equal opportunity employer O MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH'^1 Division of Environmental Health REPORT ON PLANS Plans and Specifications on waateains Location Chanhassen Date Examined January 210 1981 Prepared and Submitted by 8choe1l A WSOnr $nCst 50 9th Ave* So. # Hopkinsr MN 55343 Date Received January 14, 1981 Plan File No. DMA Ownership - municipal Scope - This report covers the design of this project insofar as the safety and sanitary quality of the water for public consumption may be affected, and applies to this".project only and not,. to the entire system or any other part thereof. This 'project consists of the btallation of trunk waatermainsfor the Chanhassen Lakes Business Para Phase 11 'in Chanhassen,, Minnesota, Hydrant- drains shall not be connected to or located within ten feet of any sanitary setter or storm drain Compliance - NO CONSTRUCTION SHALL TAKE PLACE EXCEPT IN ACCORDA-,;CE WITH THE APPROVED PLANS. If it is desired to make deviations from the approved plans, the State Department of Health should be consulted and approval of the changes obtained before construction is started; otherwise, such construction is installed without proper approval, and in addition may create dangers to public health. Conclusion The plans and specifications on this waterworks project are in general accordance with the requirements of the Minnesota Department of Health, and are recommended for approval with the understanding as stated in the preceding paragraphs, and with the usual reservations as stated on the appended sheet, entitled "Information Relative'to Plan Examination." A roved: Gaary glund, P*E.j Chief soots water supply and General Engineering David B, Engstcomf P.E, Public Health Engineer Section of Environmental Field Services 1 TJ MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Division of Environmental Health Information Relative to Plan Examination The examination of plans and specifications for water supply and sewerage systems (Regulation MHD 136(a)), plumbing systems (Regulation MHD 139(a)(1)), and swimming -pools (Regulation MHD 141(c)), is made to provide information concerning the sanitary features of projects presented for consideration in accordance with the above regulations of the Commissioner of Health. The approval of such plans is given upon the supposition that the survey and other data on which the design is based are correct,: and that necessary legal authority has been obtained to construct the project. The responsibility for the design of structural features and the efficiency of equipment must be taken by the engineer or architect who designs the project. Water supply plans are examined with regard to the location, construction and operational features of the design and maintenance of all parts of the system which may affect the safety and.sanitary quality of the water. Examination is based on the standards of this Department. Plans of sewage disposal systems -considered by this Department are limited to those systems that can utilize soil absorption. They are examined with regard to the features of design which concern location, construction, operation and maintenance of the system and which may affect the public health. The examination is based upon information contained in 6 MCAR § 4.8040 "Individual Sewage Treatment Systems Standards," 1978. Plans on plumbing systems are examined only insofar as the provisions of the Minnesota Plumbing Code apply. Swimming pool plans are examined with regard to the features of location and design which may affect the safety and sanitary quality of the water for public bathing. The examination is based upon Regulation MHD 141, Public Swimming Pools. The Commissioner of Health reserves the right to withdraw his approval of plans if construction of the project is not undertaken within a period of two years. The fact that plans have been approved by the Commissioner of Health does not necessarily mean that recommendations for alterations or additions may not be offered at some later time when changed conditions or advanced knowledge make improvements necessary. 11/80 ,A CITY OF ioA. CBANHASSES 7610 LAREDO DRIVE • P O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: City Manager, Don Ashworth DATE: December 8, 1980 SUBJ: Authorization to Advertise for Bids, Watermain Extension for Phase II, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park Public Improvements The City Council recently approved bids for the well field within the business park. Authorization being sought this evening would be for construction of the watermain connecting the proposed pump house facility to the existing watermain on new County 17. This authorization would not include authorization for the pump house facility. All. of the second phase improvements,-i.e. well field, watermain construction, and pump house, were included within the previous authorizations given by the City Council for the. Chanhassen Lakes Business Park public improvements, i.e. feasibility study, public hearing notices, and public improvement authorizations. Approval is recommended. LARSON & MERTZ \i ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1900 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING RUSSELL H. LARSON MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 TELEPHONE CRAIG M. MERTZ (612) 335-9565 April 9, 1980. OF COUNSEL HARVEY E. SKAAR MARK C. MCCULLOUGH Don Ashworth, Fran Callahan Bob Waibel City of Chanhassen Box 147 Chanhassen MN 55317 Re: Park Fees Chanhassen Lake Business Park Gentlemen, Please note and comment on JulesSmith letter and park fee schedule of April 2, 1980. This office requests your verification in writing of the concept discussed by Mr. Smith in his letter. Ve t my curs, fm R SU SELL H. LARSON Chanhassen City Attorney RHL:ner Enc JULIUS C. SMITH Attorney at Law 215 YORKTOWN OFFICE COURT 7101 YORK AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55435 (612) 831-8530 April 2, 1980 Russell H. Larson Larson and Mertz Attorneys at Law 1900 First National Bank Building Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 Be: Chanhassen Lakes Business Park Dear Russ, I enclose a copy of a Park Dedication Schedule covering the Lots and Blocks in Chanhassen Lakes Business Park which appears as Schedule 1 to the narrative which spells out how the Park cash contributions are allocated throughout the plat. Reading it over, I can see that it isn't going to be a best seller, but I do think it spells out how the allocations were made, and anyone looking at this a couple of years from now should be able to determine what was done . Further, if you want to check these numbers , have your engineer work them out. I think you will find that they are right on and are based on the area of developable land, although they have been rounded off to even dollars . The figures are based on the areas of each Lot and Outlot as submitted to us by Shoell and Madsen. I talked to both Fran Callanan and Bob Waibel with regard to the trail option, and both indicated that the option they were interested in was Number 1. I will prepare and send to you the papers transferring the Outlots and the trailway. I should have them to you in the very near future. If the enclosed park dedication schedule adequately represents what the Council has done, I would guess that no formal action would be necessary in as much as this is just an administrative method for collecting fees. I would like to hear your view on this . Yours ery truly, ?S/nw . Smit Enclosure CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK DEVELOPMENT COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK, LTD., the Developer of the premises described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof, to insure the appropriate land use thereof and proper development and improvement of said premises hereby makes this declaration for the purpose of subjecting the premises described in Exhibit A to the covenants, restrictions, conditions and standards herein; and the land described in Exhibit A shall be developed and operated in accordance with the standards so as 1) to protect the value of each building site, 2) to insure that each site is developed with attractive improvements constructed of suitable materials, and 3) to provide for the harmonious appearance and function of Chanhassen Lakes Business Park. NOW THEREFORE, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, Ltd., a Minnesota limited partnership, hereby declares that the land described in Exhibit A hereof 'shall be developed and used in accordance with the following standards and guidelines as to each and every part thereof and shall be binding upon each owner, and the successors in interest thereof. SECTION I. PERMITTED USES 1.01 Uses All commerical, office, warehousing, or industrial uses shall be permitted except as may otherwise be prohibited hereby, or by the zoning and land use ordinances and regulations of the City of Chanhassen. Said zoning regulations shall govern if inconsistent herewith to the extent actually inconsistent; but if not inconsistent herewith, the standards herein contained shall be considered as requirements in addition to said zoning regulations. 1.02 Prohibitions No noxious or offensive trades, services or activities shall be conducted on nor shall anything be done on any site which may be or become an annoyance or nuisance to other Owners of the land subject hereto by reason of unsightliness or excessive emission of odors, fumes, smoke, vibration, dirt, dust, glare, wastes or noise. SECTION II. APPROVAL OF PLANS 2.01 Submissions/Approval No improvements shall be erected, placed or exteriorly altered on any building site until the building or other alteration plans, specifications, including front elevations and/or architects rendering, a plat showing the location of such improvement on the particular building site, including parking, loading and landscape plans, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Developer, its successors or assigns, as to conformity and harmony of external design with existing structures in Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, as to location of the improvements on the building site, as giving due regard to the anticipated use thereof as same may affect adjoining structures, use and operations, as to location of the improvement with respect to topography, grade and finished ground elevation and as to fulfilling the purposes of this declaration. The Developer shall not unreasonably withhold 2 approval of any plans submitted pursuant hereto; provided, however, that failure to meet the standards contained herein shall be grounds for disapproval of any such plans. Failure to disapprove any plans within sixty (60) days after submission of said plans to it shall be deemed to be approved thereof. 2.02 Commencement of Improvements Upon receipt of approval, the owner or lessee or other party to whom the same is given shall, as soon as is practical, satisfy all conditions thereof and diligently proceed with the commence- ment and completion of all construction or alterations. In all cases work shall begin within one year from the date of such approval. If there is a failure to comply, then the approval given pursuant to this Section shall be deemed revoked unless the Developer, upon request made prior to the expiration of said one year period, extends the time for commencing work. 2.03 Buildinq Code All improvements shall be constructed in conformity with the existing building codes of the City of Chanhassen. 2.04 Completion of Improvements After commencement of the construction and alterations referred to above, the work shall be diligently undertaken so that the site shall not remain in a partly finished condition any longer than reasonably necessary for the completion thereof. Completion of construction or alteration of such Improvement shall be within two years after commencement except for so long as com- pletion is rendered impossible or would result in great hardship due to strikes, fires, national calamities, or other forces beyond the control of the Owner or his tenants, agents or assigns. t., 2.05 Landscaping Completion The site shall be landscaped in accordance with approved plans within nine (9) months of occupancy or completion (whichever shall first occur) of the building improvement. 2.06 Non -liability The Developer or its successors and assigns shall not be liable to anyone in damages who has submitted plans for approval or to any land owner by reason of mistake in judgment, negligence, or non-feasance of itself, its agents or employees, arising out of or in connection with the approval or disapproval of any such plans. Likewise anyone so submitting plans to the Developer, its successors and assigns, for approval, by submitting such plans, and any person when he becomes an owner agrees that he or it will not bring any action or suit to recover for any such damages against the Developer. 2.07 Lot Subdivision No lot shall be subdivided without the express consent of the City of Chanhassen and the Developer or its successor. SECTION III. IMPROVEMENT REGULATION 3.01 Setback (a) General No structure of any kind, and no part thereof, shall be placed on any site closer to a property line than herein provided. The following structures and improvements are specifically excluded from these setback provisions: 4 (1) Roof overhang, subject to the specific approval of the Developer in writing. (2) Steps and walk. (3) Paving and associated curbing, except that vehicle parking areas shall not be permitted within twenty-five (25) feet of the street or property lines. (4) Fences, except that no fence shall be placed within the street setback area unless specific approval is given by Developer in writing. (5) Landscaping. (6) Planters, not to exceed three (3) feet in height. (7) Railroad spur tracks, switches and bumpers, provided that the location of such tracks, switches and bumpers is specifically approved by Developer in writing. (8) Gas and service stations including all appurtenant uses, subject to the specific written approval of the Developer. (9) Displays identifying the owner, lessee, or occupant, as approved by the Developer in writing. (b) Setback from Interior Property Lines The setback line is established as twenty-five (25) feet from an interior property line. (c) Setback from Street Property Lines The setback line is established as thirty (30) feet from a street property line. 3.02 Excavation No excavation shall be made except in connection with construc- tion of an improvement, and upon completion thereof exposed openings shall be backfilled and disturbed ground shall be graded and leveled. 5 3.03 Landscaping Requirements (a) Every site on which a building shall have been placed shall be landscaped according to plans approved as specified herein and maintained thereafter in a sightly and well -kept condition. (b) The property owner, lessee or occupant shall land scape and maintain unpaved areas between the property lines and the setback lines. The first twenty-five (25) feet of the setback from street property lines shall be used exclusively for landscaping except for walks and driveways bisecting the required landscape area. (c) The property owner, lessee or occupant shall provide hose bibs and maintenance facilities in the vicinity of the landscaped areas. 3.04 Signs (a) No billboard or advertising sign shall be permitted, other than the following: (1) Those identifying the name, business and products of the person or firm occupying the premises, and (2) Those offering the premises for sale or lease when specifically approved by Developer in writing. (b) Signs shall conform to setback lines unless specific approval to the contrary is granted by Developer in writing. (c) Signs and identification on buildings or building sites shall only be of such size, design and color as is specifically approved by the Developer in writing. The Developer shall, at the Owner's request, provide sign criteria used by the Developer in determining whether to grant sign approval or not. 3.05 Parking Areas (a) General Adequate off-street parking shall be provided to accommodate all parking needs for employees, visitors and company vehicles on the site. If parking requirements increase as a result of a change in use or number of employees, additional off-street parking shall be provided to satisfy the intent of this section. (b) Parking shall not be permitted: (1) Between public street pavement and property line. (2) Closer than twenty-five (25) feet to a street property line. (3) On any public streets and roadways. (c) The parking requirements may be modified by the Developer as to any particular site as a precondition to plan approval. 3.06 Storage and Loading Areas (a) No materials, supplies or equipment, including company owned or operated trucks, shall be stored in any area VA on a site except inside a closed building, or behind a visual barrier screening such areas from the view of adjoining properties and/or a public street. (b) Loading areas shall not encroach into setback areas unless specifically approved by Developer in writing. (c) Loading docks shall be set back and screened to minimize the effect from the street. Docks shall not be closer than seventy (70) feet to the street property line, unless specifically approved by Developer in writing. Loading will be permitted to the rear of the setback line from that portion of a structure not fronting a street. SECTION IV. TERM; ASSOCIATION; AMENDMENT 4.01 Term The covenants and declarations of this Declaration shall run with and bind the land described in Exhibit A for a term of thirty (30) years from the date this Declaration is recorded in the Office of the Carver County Recorder, after which time - they may be extended for successive periods of ten (10) years upon the affirmative majority vote of the members of the association referred to in Section 4.02 hereof. 4.02 Owners' Association Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, Ltd. shall have the right to create a non-profit.association in which all owners of each site (as defined hereinafter) are entitled to be members. There shall be no other qualification for membership and no costs in connection therewith. The owner (or owners) of each site shall have one vote in such association, and membership therein shall be appurtenant to, and shall not be separated from the ownership of any platted lot. "Site" for the purposes of this Declaration shall be defined as any parcel of land conveyed by the Developer herein to any one grantee for use as a building parcel, whether a single platted lot or more. 4.03 Transfer of Rights Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, Ltd. shall have the right to assign all of its rights hereunder to any such association referred to in Section 4.02 hereof or to any successor developing all of the then unsold lots in the plat described in Exhibit A. 4.04 Amendment This Declaration may be amended by an instrument signed by seventy-five percent of the members of the Association referred to in Section 4.02 hereof. Any amendment so made shall be effective upon the recording thereof. SECTION V. ENFORCEMENT 5.01 Abatement and Suit The standards set forth herein shall be enforceable by the Developer, its successors and assigns, for the maximum period allowed by law and shall be enforceable by the Developer, its successors and assigns, by (i) injunctive relief, prohibitive or mandatory, to prevent the breach of or to enforce the perform- ance or observance of these standards, or by (ii) a money judgment 9 for damages by reason of a breach of these standards, or (iii) both (i) and (ii) . 5.02 Failure to Enforce The failure of the Developer, its successors or assigns, to enforce any provisions of the standards contained herein upon the violation thereof shall in no event be deemed to be a waiver of the rights to do so as to any subsequent violation. 5.03 Severability Invalidation of any of the provisions of these standards, whether by court order or otherwise, shall in no way affect any of the other provisions which shall remain in full force and effect. 5.04 Attorney's Fees In any legal or equitable proceeding for the enforcement or to restrain the violation of this Declaration or any provision hereof, the losing party or parties shall pay the attorney's fees of the prevailing party or parties, in such amount as may be fixed by the Court in such proceedings. All remedies provided herein or at law or in equity shall be cumulative and not exclusive. 5.05 Mortgagee's Rights No violation of any of these Declarations shall defeat or render invalid the lien of any mortgage made in good faith and for value upon any site; provided, however, that any mortgagee in actual possession, or any purchaser at any mortgagees' or 001 0. foreclosure sale shall be bound by and subject to these Declarations as fully as any other owner of any site subject hereto. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, Ltd., and Emmer Brothers Co. has caused these presents to be executed this day of , 1979. Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, Ltd. a Minnesota limited partnership, By: Dunn & Curry Real Estate Management, Inc., its General Partner its its and 11 page 1 Ilic: present City Comprehensive Plan indicates basically two areas dedicated to Industrial., Uses and two more areas for Industrial Reserve. All of these areas are extending from the westernmost border line of the City to the easternmost border and are located north of the Chicago -Milwaukee Railroad lines. Roughly, they comprise 300* acres for Industrial Uses and ZHO+ acrres for Industrial Reserve, fot, a tail a1 id' SHo+ act,us. It should be noted that not all this acreage is developable since it is inclusive of extensive acreage located in the Riley- Purv, t ovy Wal er, hed District' flood pl.aitt oad l'uture t-oad right-of-ways. For the purposes of this study, aimed at the updating of the present City Comprehensive Plan, the number of 450± acres is assumed as representing the total acreage devoted to Industrial and Industrial Reserve Uses. `This acreage of 450± also represents about 3% of the total acreage of the City of Chanhassen. At this point, an inconsistency ought to be mentioned: The Jonathan Land Use Plan and Chtinhassen's Guide Plan are not treating the same areas in the same manner. Johathan's Plan calls for additional land to be devoted for Industrial Uses. This additional acreage would probably brink; the total percentage of the total acreage of Industrial Uses up to approximately 6%. Looking at the percent-ges of other comparable communitites in khe Metr-l.politan Az,ea, we find that the fi.gttre of 6% .Is rather page 2 conservative. For instance, the City of Eagan in Dakota County to (t)ttl7 t+creage 22,000 acres) devotes 3,50n ac.!rc�a N 'C11duai r ..sl "S" (cippt-ox tmatt!l.y ] S% of total). Lagan Is UPP-Pcsxi'llately the SaIlle distance from Minneapolis as Chanhassen, and, like Chanhassen, is located in the departing line from the Urbanized Area to Agricultural. Roseville has about 20% of its land devoted to Industrial Uses; Lake Elmo has 8 - 10%. The Metropolitan Council projects an Urban'Land Demand of 18.3 square miles (1973-1990), and an increase in population of 46,205 persons for the Southwest Corridor. The Council also projects an increase of population for the same period in C1111I,),(,NA 11 d' about 12,000 perronn - or rlbout 28% of I)ir. p1,1 ltwi t'd population for the entire SW sector. In the same projections, the Council forecasts that the breakdown of the 18.3 sq. miles of Urban Land Demand is as follows: Southwest Sector Urban Land Demand in Sq.Miles/Acres Resid. Commercial Industrial Public Streets Retreat. Total 6.4/4.096 1.3/832 3.9/2,240 1.2/768 4.4/Z816 1.5/960 18.3/11,71; From these statistics, it can be observed that Industrial Land Demand consists of about 201A of the total Urban Land Demand. It has already been mentioned that Chanhassen allocates only about 3% or 450 acres for Industrial Use. If a 28% rate of Bb sorption is also assumed for Industrial Land Demand for the SW Sector by Chanhassen, that would mean that Chanhassen could absorb by the year 1990, about 630 acres. But Chanhassen has only 300± acres for Tndtsstrfal and 280 for Industrial Roserve. T f the +jva ),l.Nbia i i y of st,wer is also to be conotideared, it Qein boa sevit that III' ill(? tot ul • page 3 acreage for Industrial Uses (Industrial and Industrial Reserve) only 300 acres could be serviced by 1990 with yc!wur (Lake 11nt1 I111:e rceptor) . And, according to the Metro Council l s Projections, another 330 acres would be absorbed. It is suggested that what is now indicated as Industrial acreage might not be enough to generate the increasing needs in revenues for the smooth functioning of a metropolitan community. Chanhassen is experiencing difficulty (in its NE quarter) in developing areas that are already zoned Residential and provided with utilities - in particular, sanitary sewer. One way to facilitate this development (so that invested capital in utilities coan be rccovervd) iy to envourage compl Lmt�nt ary 11st to the needed Residential development in the form of employment centers. Another issue within the City of Chanhassen is the installa- tion of the Phase II Lake Ann Interceptor. If the Guide Plan, as it is now, were to be followed, and the Lake Ann Phase II into hi led, Ilia result might be to duplicate thc O ready ex i Fiffng situation of sewered areas that are having difficulty finding a market. Of course, marketing techniques and aggressiveness are also important, though secondary, factors. In terms of the above -mentioned interdependency of housing and employment centers (in this case Industrial) the following statistics are of significant interest: Worker -Area Ratio's Average number of employees/gross acres of Tnduiq rria nd - Neay.y Todutitrial H T ]g,ht Indurltria 1, 28 ;.1ldustria] l'ar , 1 page 4 (An average. of 18 Employees acres of Industrial acre can be assumed). The importance of these figures is self-evident when viewed from t-he point of the Housing Industry t s need for buyers. Another factor indicating a need for revision of the Comprehensive Plan is that of buffering. According the the present Plan, the Chicago -Milwaukee Railroad tracks are serving as the buffer between the Industrial and Residential uses. The typography on both sid e& of the tracks is similar, thus the use of the tracks as a buffer not only fails iii screen:ii►g t1w Industrial Use from the Residential, but accen►iates the problem due to the presence of the railroad itself. In view of the present markets conditions ( Tndtistr.i.a1 Dove7opment� apparently more marketable than residential), the relationship between available residential sites for development & employment centers, the imminent availability of sewer in the Lake Susan area, the presence of excellent slopes for buffering, the conti- nuity of extensive acreage within the some drainage sub -district, u, pr(I-sonov of inauetrially Indicated land west of Co. Road #17 ( all the way south to Lyman Boulevard -;Jonathan Plan ), it is suggested that the Industrial Use classification in the City's Comprehensive Plan be extended so as to include the following areas: a. The 90± acres bounded by State Highway #5, the Chicago- Milw. Railroads to the NW., the new Co. Rd. #17 to the west,Lake Susan to the south and a line coinciding with the eastern end of the lake to the east. b. Approximt►tely 50 mires east of Co. Ind. 417 fund aautb of the IN Uroad ItUW. v. An additional 140t nores immudi,titely PoWli of t-hu til)(WolimiltIoned rioreage to be indi(,attcd as, Industrial tteservc,. page S 17111 al] v 11`1 sliggesting the inc:lusioll of M11-se 2HOt acres are :I'lldlist t.ta] i11 the Cityta Comprehensive flan one very important element ought to be mentioned: If the City is to provide conditions for well planned Industrial, it should be remembered that a pre -planned Industrial Park requi- res a minimum of 320 acres and ideally 640 acres* A] Ho r4111411vt, requi vurnoitt ror a p1tir1no(I Tiirii,rt i ri l i'nt IG i r1 I rlr, I , easy and convenient access to good transportation facilities. In the case of the land which is proposed to he classified as Indus- trial State Highway #5, County Road #17 and proposed Co. Rd.#17 (w11 ir.71 has 11 high priority i_)t the C.I.P. of tho Cavvcr c:oullty pti— blic works) provide this site with this condition better than any other site in Chanhassen. In concluding, since a good Industrial Development has to provi- de the basic services to its employees with easiness, the proximi- ty of the land under consideration is an asset again not shared by any other site in the City. In addition such an Industrial Development, besides stimulating the local economy and broaderiing the tax base, it will undoubtedly through its proximity and size cont-ribute to the CBD's health and growth. *"Urban Land". ULI-The Urban Land Institute. Vo1.20. No.S . . .... . 2XIINI, Tr�jf I Fm m _7' - r . .......... . ......... ...... . ... .. , j 71� 4 11 4 1 c Mt 4 R.-7,a, _V' 7­ All ELL Al .......... . ... It IV ... . . ......... . ..... ............ ....... ... t.kcy L E A off Act V % COMMUNITY LOCATIONLAKE GRAPHIC 75-01 PLANNING CASE: PUD NNLAME' I A-, . .... .. APPLICANT: Ed Dunn W, ...... .=Mz . ..... t M .... ........ . .. . ....... r/oZ/00/011, mo r._R ff + 5 tE ..'c1- tt� ter �"- .,,_^� � v-_. ' i" I :��; j; i �� �. 1 + ' _tJ tl . ..... ........... 4 1,01 ,:4 GENERALIZED GUIDE `� ... . ........ ... PLAN ... . ..... L E G E N D li .. .. .......... .. . .......... ...... .. �Ilt TT Lace COMMERCIAL .. GENERAL SERVICE . ..... DIVERSIFIED CENTER — ....... ............. . PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT — INDUSTRIAL . ... . ....... INDUSTRIAL RESERVE— 77 -Jl r­ RESIDENTIAL "t SINGLE FAMILY GOLF "'Q1, MULTIPLE -3, NEIGHBORHOOD BOUNDARIES-----"" SEMI-PUBLIC/PUBLIC Q N4 12 VILLAGE HALL — SCHOOL . ..... PARK . . ............ y HIGHWAYS PRIMARY SYSTEM 4c EXPRESSWAY FREEWAY SECONDARY SYSTEM MAJOR COLLECTOR F ------------ MINOR COLLECTOR PARKWAY CITY OF 5,,& CHANHASSEN ' 1, 690 COULTER DRIVE * P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 5§3174- (612) 937-1900 _j June 1, 1981 Mr. J. A. Tabolich The First National Bank of St. Paul 332 Minnesota Street St. Paul, MN 55101 Dear Sir: We are hereby "drawing down" on your Letter of Credit #13749, $176,012.42. This amount is due and payable under that certain Development Agreement between the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota and Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, Ltd., dated July 9, 1979. We further agree that the amount of the Letter of Credit is re- duced by the above amount. Sincere!-,-, Don Ashworth City Manager City of Chanhassen DA:nh 1 U bo CITY OF F 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 January 27, 1982 Mr. J. A. Tabolich c/o First National Bank of St. Paul 332 Minnesota Street St. Paul, MN 55101 RE: Letters of Credit for Chanhassen Lakes Business Park Dear Mr. Tabolich: In response to your letter of January 18, 1982 to Mr. Don Ashworth concerning Letters of Credit numbers 13749 and 13500, I find that our records concur with your letter with the exception of the change in the parties (Dunn and Curry Real Estate Management, Inc. and American Linen) attributed to the account, and the change in the expiration dates of the Letters of Credit. Our records indicate that these Letters of Credit remain under the account of Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, Ltd., and expire on November 30, 1985. So that our records may accurately reflect the above differences, I respectfully request that you send me the appropriate documents pertaining to said differences. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, / r! r� Bob Waibel City Planner Bw:bf cc: Don Ashworth CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 0 CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 January 26, 1982 Mr. J. A. Tabolich c/o First National Bank of St. Paul 332 Minnesota Street St. Paul, MN 55101 RE: Letters of Credit for Chanhassen Lakes Business Park Dear Mr. Tabolich: In response to your letter of January 18, 1982 to Mr. Don Ashworth concerning letters of credit Vs 13749 and 13500, I find that our records indicate that these letters of credit remain under the account of Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, Ltd., remain in the amounts of $400,000 and $800,000 respectively, and have an expiration date of November 30, 1985. I was able to find receipt #9964 and check #012759 (attached) that reflect that $176,012.42 was received by the City of Chanhassen from First Bank of St. Paul and that the same amount was then paid by the City to the Carver County Treasurers Office. However, such does not reflect the apparent changes in the parties (Dunn and Curry Real Estate Management and American Linen) attributed to the account, nor the change in the amount or expiration dates of the letters of credit. So that our records may accurately reflect the status of the above, I respectfully request that you send me the appropriate documents that form the basis of your letter of January 18th. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Bob Waibel City Planner BW:bf cc: Don Ashworth F CC- � RELSSEN 7610 LAREDO DR. PHONE: 474-8885 CITY 0 CHANHASSEN, MINN. 55317 RECEIPT RECEIVED Or DATE TOTALAMOUNT CHECK 0 CASH El DEPUTY TREASURER 7610 LAREDO DR. CITY OF CEMBLISSE I CHANASS EN, MINN.PHONE: 55317474-8885 RECEIPT 00 RECEIVED OF DATE DESCRIPTION PERM/LIC. AMOUNT FUND ISOURCE I OBJ. PROG. TOTAL AMOUNT CHECK 11 CASH D DEPUTY TREASURER 7610 LAREDO DR. PHONE: 474-8885 CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINN. 55317 RECEIPT RECEIVED OF DATE 00 DESCRIPTION PERM/LIC. AMOUNT FUND JSOURCE;, U-' 013J. JPROG. TOTAL AMOUNT DEPUTY TREASURER CHECK 0 CASH 0 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7610 Laredo Dr., Chanhassen, MN 55317 PLEASE DETACH BEFORE CASHING NUMBER VENDOR NAME REMITTANCE ADVICE DATE CHECK NO. DATE INVOICE OUR P.O. NO. OUR ACCOUNT NUMBER AMOUNT NET Special Assessment payment 1 I I , ` F i i i i i i i 1 i CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK DEVELOPMENT COVENANTS AND RES- 'RICTTONS CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK, LTD., the Developer of the premises described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof, to insure the appropriate land use thereof and proper development and improvement of said premises hereby makes this declaration for the purpose of subjecting the premises described in Exhibit A to the covenants, restrictions, conditions and standards herein; and the land described in Exhibit A shall be developed and operated in accordance with the standards so as 1) to protect the value of each building site, 2) to insure that each site is developed with attractive improvements constructed of suitable materials, and 3) to provide for the harmonious appearance and function of Chanhassen Lakes Business Park. NOW THEREFORE, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, Ltd., a Minnesota limited partnership, hereby declares that the land described in Exhibit A hereof shall be developed and used in accordance with the following standards and guidelines as to each and every part thereof and shall be binding upon each owner, and the successors in interest thereof. SECTION I. PERMITTED USES 1.01 Uses t, C ° C All N} rY1 -17d 4 office, warehousing, or industrial uses shall be permitted except as may otherwise be prohibited hereby, or by the zoning and land use ordinances and regulations of the City of Chanhassen. Said zoning regulations shav-1.,govern if inconsistent herewith to the extent actually inconsistent; but if not inconsistent herewith, the standards herein contained shall be considered as requirements in addition to said zoning regulations. 1.02 Prohibitions No noxious or offensive trades, services or activities shall be conducted on nor shall anything be done on any site which may be or become an annoyance or nuisance to other Owners of the land subject hereto by reason of unsightliness or excessive emission of odors, fumes, smoke, vibration, dirt, dust, glare, wastes or noise. SECTION II. APPROVAL OF PLANS 2.01 Submissions/Approval No improvements shall be erected, placed or exteriorly altered on any building site until the building or other alteration plans, specifications, including front elevations and/or architects rendering, a plat showing the location of such improvement on the particular building site, including parking, loading and landscape plans, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Developer, its successors or assigns, as to A9i'3fGrm�'�T and harmony of external design with existing structures in Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, as to location of the improvements on the building site, as giving due regard to the anticipated use thereof as same may affect adjoining structures, use and operations, as to location of the improvement with respect to topography, grade and finished ground elevation and as to fulfilling the purposes of this declaration. The Developer shall not unreasonably withhold 2 approval of any plans submitted pursuant hereto; provided, however, that failure to meet the standards contained herein shall be grounds for disapproval of any such plans. Failure to disapprove any plans within sixty (60) days after submission of said plans to it shall be deemed to be approved thereof. 2.02 Commencement of Improvements Upon receipt of approval, the owner or lessee or other -party to whom the same is given shall, as soon as is practical, satisfy all conditions thereof and diligently proceed with the commence- ment and completion of all construction or alterations. In all cases work shall begin within one year from the date of such approval. If there is a failure to comply, then the approval given pursuant to'this Section shall be deemed revoked unless the Developer, upon request made prior to the expiration of said one year period, extends the time for commencing work. 2.03 Building Code All improvements shall be constructed in conformity with the existing building codes of the City of Chanhassen. 2.04 Completion of Improvements After commencement of the construction and alterations referred to above, the work shall be diligently undertaken so that the site shall not remain in a partly finished condition any longer than reasonably necessary for the completion thereof. Completion of construction or alteration of such Improvement shall be within two years after commencement except for so long as com- pletion is rendered impossible or would result in great hardship due to strikes, fires, national calamities, or other forces beyond the control of the Owner or his tenants, agents or assigns. 3 r 2.05 Landscaping Completion The site shall be landscaped in accordance with approved plans within nine (9) months of occupancy or completion (whichever shall first occur) of the building improvement. 2.06 Non-liabilit The Developer or its successors and assigns shall not be liable to anyone in damages who has submitted plans for approval or to any land owner by reason of mistake in judgment, negligence, or non-feasance of itself, its agents or employees, arising out of or in connection with the approval or disapproval of any such plans. Likewise anyone so submitting plans to the Developer, its successors and assigns, for approval, by submitting such plans, and any person when he becomes an owner agrees that he or it will not bring any action or suit to recover for any such damages against the Developer. 2.07 Lot Subdivision No lot shall be subdivided without the express consent of the City of Chanhassen and the Developer or its successor. SECTION III. IMPROVEMENT REGULATION 3.01 Setback (a) General No structure of any kind, and no part thereof, shall be placed on any site closer to a property line than herein provided. The following structures and improvements are specifically excluded from these setback provisions: 4 (1) Roof overhang, subject to the specific approval of the Developer in writing. (2) Steps and walk. (3) Paving and associated curbing, except that vehicle parking areas shall not be permitted within twenty-five (25) feet of the street or property lines. (4) Fences, except that no fence shall be placed within the street setback area unless specific approval is given by Developer in writing. (5) Landscaping. (6) Planters, not to exceed three (3) feet in height. (7) Railroad spur tracks, switches and bumpers, provided that the location of such tracks, switches and bumpers is specifically approved by Developer in writing. (8) Gas and service stations including all appurtenant uses, subject to the specific written approval of the Developer. (9) Displays identifying the owner, lessee, or occupant, as approved by the Developer in writing. (b) Setback from -Interior Property Lines The setback line is established as twenty-five (25) feet from an interior property line. (c) Setback from Street Property Lin es_,.The setback line is established as thirty (30) feet from a street property line. 3.02 Excavation No excavation shall be made except in connection with construc- tion of an improvement, and upon completion thereof exposed openings shall be backfilled and disturbed ground shall be graded and leveled. A 3.03 Landscaping Requirements (a) Every site on which a building shall have been placed shall be landscaped according to plans approved as specified herein and maintained thereafter in a sightly and well -kept condition. (b) The property owner, lessee or occupant shall land- scape and maintain unpaved areas between the property lines and the setback lines. The first twenty-five (25) feet of the setback from street property lines shall be used exclusively for landscaping except for walks and driveways bisecting the required landscape area. (c) The property owner, lessee or occupant shall provide hose bibs and maintenance facilities in the vicinity of the landscaped areas. 3.04 Signs (a) No billboard or advertising sign shall be permitted, other than the following: (1) Those identifying the name, business and products of the person or firm occupying the premises, and (2) Those offering the premises for sale or lease when specifically approved by Developer in writing. (b) Signs shall conform to setback lines unless specific approval to the contrary is granted by Developer in writing. (c) Signs and identification on buildings or building sites shall only be of such size, design and color as is specifically approved by the Developer in writing. The Developer shall, at the Owner's request, provide sign criteria used by the Developer in determining whether to grant sign approval or not. 3.05 Parking Areas (a) General Adequate off-street parking shall be provided to accommodate all parking needs for employees, visitors and company vehicles on the site. If parking requirements increase as a result of a change in use or number of employees, additional off-street parking shall be provided to satisfy the intent of this section. (b) Parking shall not be permitted: (1) line. (2) street property line. (3) Between public street pavement and property Closer than twenty-five (25) feet to a On any public streets and roadways. (c) The parking requirements may be modified by the Developer as to any particular site as a precondition to plan approval. 3.06 Storage and Loadin:: Areas (a) No materials, supplies or equipment, including company owned or operated trucks, shall be stored in any area 7 on a site except inside a closed building, or behind a visual barrier screening such areas from the view of adjoining properties and/or a public street. (b) Loading areas shall not encroach into setback areas unless specifically approved by Developer in writing. (c) Loading docks shall be set back and screened to minimize the effect from the street. Docks shall not be closer than seventy (70) feet to the street property line, unless specifically approved by Developer in writing. Loading will be permitted to the rear of the setback line from that portion of a structure not fronting a street. SECTION IV. TERM; ASSOCIATION; AMENDMENT 4.01 Term The covenants and declarations of this Declaration shall run with and bind the'land described in Exhibit A for a term of thirty (30) years from the date this Declaration is recorded in the Office of the Carver County Recorder, after which time they may be extended for successive periods of ten (10) years upon the affirmative majority vote of the members of the association referred to in Section 4.02 hereof. 4.02 Owners' Association Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, Ltd. shall have the right to create a non-profit association in which all owners of each site (as defined hereinafter) are entitled to be members. There shall be no other qualification for membership and no costs in 0 connection therewith. The owner (or owners) of each site shall have one vote in such association, and membership therein shall be appurtenant to, and shall not be separated from the ownership of any platted lot. "Site" for the purposes of this Declaration shall be defined as any parcel of land conveyed by the Developer herein to any one grantee for use as a building parcel, whether a single platted lot or more. 4.03 Transfer of Rights Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, Ltd. shall have the right to assign all of its rights hereunder to any such association referred to in Section 4.02 hereof or to any successor developing all of the then unsold lots in the plat described in Exhibit A. 4.04 Amendment This Declaration may be amended by an instrument signed by seventy-five percent of the members of the Association referred to in Section 4.02 hereof. Any amendment so made shall be effective upon the recording thereof. SECTION V. ENFORCEMENT 5.01 Abatement and Suit The standards set forth herein shall be enforceable by the Developeri_ts__suc_ciss.or_s_.and_as-s-i-gns,--f-o-r---the-maximum--per- od------ allowed by law and shall be enforceable by the Developer, its successors and assigns, by (i) injunctive relief, prohibitive or mandatory, to prevent the breach of or to enforce the perform- ance or observance of these standards, or by (ii) a money judgment 2 for damages by reason of a breach of these standards, or (4 both (i) and 5.02 Failure to Enforce The failure of the Developer, its successors or assigns, to enforce any provisions of the standards contained herein upon the violation thereof shall in no event be deemed to be a waiver of the rights to do so as to any subsequent violation. 5.03 Severabilit Invalidation of any of the provisions of these standards, whether by court order or otherwise, shall in no way affect any of the other provisions which shall remain in full force and effect. 5.04 Attorney's Fees In any legal or equitable proceeding for the enforcement or to restrain the violation of this Declaration or any provision hereof, the losing party or parties shall pay the attorney's fees of the prevailing party or parties, in such amount as may be fixed by the Court in such proceedings. All remedies provided herein or at law or in equity shall be cumulative and not exclusive. 5.05 Mortgagee's Rights No violation of any of these Declarations shall defeat or render invalid the lien of any mortgage made in good faith and for value upon any site; provided, however, that any mortgagee in actual possession, or any purchaser at any mortgagees' or W foreclosure sale shall be bound by and subject to these Declarations as fully as any other owner of any site subject hereto. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, Ltd., and Emmer Brothers Co. has caused these presents to be executed this day of , 1979. Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, Ltd. a Minnesota limited partnership, By: Dunn & Curry Real Estate Management, Inc., its General Partner its its and 11 0 i A RAUENHORST COMPANY ® DESIGNERS*BUILDERSCORPORATION October 3, 1983 Mr. Don Ashworth 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Mr. Ashworth: We have recently updated our site plan map for Chanhassen Lakes Business Park and a copy is enclosed. We hope it will help orient you to developments within the park. If you would like any additional copies, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, 4 iror r� Michele Foster Assistant Director Planning and Governmental Affairs Enclosure RECEIVED OCT -31983 CITY OF CHANHASSEN MINNEAPOLIS • CHICAGO • PHOENIX • MILWAUKEE EXECUTIVE OFFICES: 800 OPUS CENTER • 9900 BREN ROAD EAST 0 P.O.. BOX 150 • MINNEAPOLIS- MINNESOTA 55440 (6121 936-4444 CITY OF C8AN8ASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE 0 P.O. BOX 147 0 CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 September 1, 1983 Mr. Russell H. Larson 1900 First Bank Place West Minneapolis, MN 55402 Dear Mr. Larson: It is my understanding that you still have the deeds to Outlots A, B, C, E, H, and J, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park in your office file. Registration of these properties will soon be possible so I request you forward said deeds to this office as convenient. Your assistance in this matter is appreciated. Sincerely, William Monk City Engineer WM:k Ova- °- Minnesota Q Department of Transportation District Five 5801 Duluth Street OF 710 Golden valley, Minnesota 55422 June 29, 1983 Mr. Bob Waibel, City Planner City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 S.P. 2701 T.H. 5 Review of Replat of Outlots H, I and J of Chanhassen Lakes Business Park located in the S.E. quadrant of T.H. 5 and the C.M. St.P. & P. R.R. in the City of Chanhassen Dear Bob: (612) 545-3761 We have reviewed the above referenced plan and offer the following comments for your consideration: - Although we have no future plans to upgrade TH 5 in this area there is a need to do so. We anticipate that if and when TH 5 is upgraded, the major access points will be located at CSAH 17 and TH 101. Therefore, we are in agreement with the proposed plan which shows Lake Drive connecting to CSAH 17. We also recommend that when the property just east of this plat is developed, Lake Drive be extended easterly to TH 101. - There should also be some sort of provision to connect the property directly adjacent to TH 5, which is not a part of this plat, to Lake Drive. This will be of much greater importance when TH 5 is upgraded and direct access becomes more restrictive. If you have any questions in regard to this review, please feel free to call me. Sincerely, Evan R. Green Project Manager ERG:bn CITY OF CHANHASSEN E°CEIVED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEt T An Equal Opportunity Employer u' CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 C� �,c,✓ June 29, 1983 Mr. Craig Zinter, Assessor Carver County Courthouse 600 East Fourth Street Chaska, MN 55318 Dear Mr. Zinter: As shown in the attached City Council minutes of July 2, 1979 (page 7), Section 4.06 of the development contract for the Chanhassen Lakes Business Park required six (6) Outlots to be deeded to the City as a condition of platting. For reasons I will not begin to detail, the transfer of ownership was not finalized until recently. At this pont the City is attempting to record the deed to complete the transaction as originally directed. The lengthy delay has, however, caused the additional problem of delinquent taxes to complicate the proceedings. This letter is to act as a formal roquest that the County abate the unpaid and delinquent taxes for 1982 as currently levied against these outlots so the City can record the deeds. The property is being used for municipal utility and drainage purposes and would not have been taxed if it had been transferred to the City in a timely manner. The legal obstacles that delayed the transfer are indeed regret- table, however, were unavoidable as far as City intervention was involved. Should you have any questions or need additional information, please let me know. Sincerely, William Monk City Engineer WM:k Enclosure Council Meeting July 2, '1979 -5- Except for trucks furnishing essential services to the premises, no commercially r licensed vehicles shall be allowed. 12. The principal structure on said premises shall be connected to sanitary sewer and municipal water systems of the City prior to occupancy. 13. For the purpose of assuring to the.City that the site and landscaping improvements to be carried out by Kreslins and Baltic are installed and furnished as set forth herein, Kreslins and Baltic shall furnish to the City either a cash deposit, a corporate surety bond approved by the City Attorney and naming the City as obligee thereunder, or an irrevocable letter of credit approved by the City in the amount of 110% of the estimate as furnished by the City Engineer. 14. It is intended that the premises shall be used by Kreslins and Baltic solely as the business office of Baltic, for its finance -and insurance operations, which use shall not involve retail traffic on said premises. No part of the premises shall be leased to other persons, firms or corporations, without the prior written consent of the City. 15. For the purpose of insuring compliance with its terms, the within permit shall be reviewed by the City Council at the first regular Council meeting following the first anniversary date of the permit. Mr. Gustafson, Attorney' -for Baltic, stated they were in agreement with the terms of the permit and the amendments as proposed this evening and listed above. Councilman Neveaux moved to adopt the non -conforming use permit, Planning Case P-619, according to the Assistant City Manager/Planner's memorandum of June 28, 1979, with the conditions as discussed this evening and as amended this evening. Motion seconded by Councilman Pearson. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, and Matthews. No negative votes. Motion carried. PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN - CHAPARRAL: Councilman Pearson moved to approve C aparral Phase II preliminary development plan based on the Assistant City Manager/ Planner's letter of June 28, 1979, and direct staff to prepare the necessary development contract and direct the city engineer to prepare improvement cost estimates for the performance bond provisions. Further the conditions set forth at the June 27, 1979, Watershed District meeting be included. Motion seconded by Councilman Neveaux. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, and Matthews. No negative votes. Motion carried. Councilman Pearson moved to allow New Horizon Homes, Inc. to build one townhome and one twinhome models conditioned on no'sale or occupancy u-nti-l-municipal sewer and water are connected. Motion seconded by Councilman Matthews. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, and Matthews. No negative votes. Motion carried. HANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK - DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT AND COVENANTS: Ed Dunn and Julius Smith were present. Council members discussed the development contract and made the following changes. 3.06 Street Lighting. The expense of furnishing electrical energy for street lighting purposes within the plat shall be assumed by the City 36 months after the completion of installation of the street lighting system, or after 50% of the commercial and industrial building sites have been improved by the construction of commercial or industrial buildings thereon, whichever is first to occur. 3.08 Liability Insurance. The Developer shall take out and maintain, so long as the Developer's obligations continue under this agreement, public liability and property r Council Meeting July 2, 19/9 damage insurance covering personal injury, including death, and claims for property damage which may arise out of the Developer's work or the work of its subcontractors, or.by one directly or indirectly employed by any of them. Limits for bodily injury or death shall be not less than $300,000 for one person and $500,000 for each accident; limits for property damage shall be not less than $100,000 for each accident. The City shall be named as an additional named insured on said policy, and the.Developer shall file a copy of the insurance coverage with the City. Councilman Neveaux moved to amend 3.09 Building Permits. No building permits shall be issued for construction on individual lots prior to the completion of the public improvements as provided in Project 78-3, or, in the alternative, unless the City Council shall make a determination that said public improvements will be completed prior to occupancy of the principal structures upon individual lots. Applicants for all building permits shall be bound by all applicable building application requirements of the City, including City approval of site plans and building design and construction as required by #9.06 of the Chanhassen Zoning. Ordinance and -other - appropriate sections. Motion seconded by Councilman Matthews. The following voted in favor: Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, and Matthews. Mayor Hobbs voted no. Motion carried. 3.11. 1. Assessments. In the event the Developer shall default in the performance of any of the covenants and agreements herein contained, and such default shall not have been cured within ten (10) days after receipt by the Developer of written notice thereof, the City, if it so elects, may cause any of the required improvements to be constructed and installed, or may take action to cure said default, and may cause the entire cost thereof; including all reasonable engineering, legal and administrative expense i incurred by the City, to be recovered as a special assessment under - Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, in which case the Developer agrees to pay the entire amount of -the assessment roll pertaining to any such improvement within 60 days after its adoption. In addition, Developer further agrees that in the event of its failure to pay in full any such special assessment within the time prescribed herein, the City shall have a specific lien on all of Developer's real property within said plat for any amount so unpaid, and the City shall have the right to foreclose said lien in the manner prescribed for the foreclosure of mechanic's liens under the laws of the State of Minnesota. In the event of any emergency, as determined by the City Engineers, the notice requirements to the Developer shall be and hereby are waived in their entirety, and the Developer shall reimburse the City for any expense incurred by the City in remedying the conditions creating the emergency. 4.01. Lot 9, Block 1, Service Road Access Easement. There shall be dedicated on the final plat a service road access easement 50 feet in width on Lot 9, Block l for the exclusive use of the owners of Lots 8, 9, and 10, Block 1, for ingress and egress purposes to Carver County Road No. 17. The location of said easement on Lot 9 shall be located and constructed as recommended by the City Engineers and approved by the City. Said service road shall be constructed and maintained in a good state of repair by the Developer, its successors and assigns. 4.04. Development Phases. The platting and development of the aforesaid 31 lots into five blocks for commercial and industrial sites shall constitute Phase I' of Chanhassen Lakes Business Park. Outlots D, F, and I as depicted on said L4, preliminary plat are reserved by Developer for future subdivision, platting and development in successive phases. Council Meeting July 2, 1979 -7- 4.06.' Outlots A, B, C, E, H, & J. Upon the filing of the final plat with the Carver County Recorder, Outlots A, B, C, E, H, & J of the Plat shall be conveyed forthwith by warranty deed, free of all encumbrances, by the respective fee and contract for deed owners thereof, to the City without cost to the City for use by the City for sanitary sewer trunk lines, storm water holding areas and ponds, and soil and water conservation areas. Councilman Neveaux moved to approve the development contract as amended and the proposed covenants and restrictions as amended. Motion seconded by Councilman Matthews. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, and Matthews. No negative votes. Motion -carried. - SPECIAL MEETING - RILEY PURGATORY CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT: The Council set July 11 at 6:00 p.m. for a joint meeting with the watershed district. PLANNING C01MMISSION RESIGNATION:' Councilman Neveaux moved to accept Mal MacAlpine's resignation and direct the City Manager to -send him a letter of commendation. Motion seconded by Councilman Pearson. The following voted in favor: Mayo,- Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, and Matthews. No negative votes. Motion carried. CONSErdT AGENDA: Mayor Hobbs asked if any council member wished to discuss any items on the consent agenda. As no additional comments were received, Councilman Pearson moved to approve the following items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations: a. Hesse Farm Phase II, Extension of Final Plat Requirements. b. Temporary Loan Agreement, General City Funds to HRA Tax Increment Fund. ''otion seconded by Councilman Matthews. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, and Matthews. No negative votes. Motion carried. Councilman Pearson moved to adjourn. Motion seconded by Councilman Matthews. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, and Matthews. No negative votes. Meeting adjourned at 12:00. Don Ashworth City Manager I RUSSELL H. LARSON CRAIG M. MERTZ OF COUNSEL HARVEY E. SKAAR MARK C. McCULLOUGH Bill Monk City Engineer Box 147 Chanhassen MN 55317 Dear Bill: LARSON & MERTZ ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1900 FIRST BANK PLACE WEST MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 May 16, 1983 TELEPHONE (612) 333-ISII Re: Chan Lakes Business Park Recently Opus supplied us with the deeds to Outlots A, B, C, E, H, and J, in Chan Lakes Business Park. We were unable to record those deeds because the 1982 taxes were unpaid and delinquent. Enclosed you will find a copy of the County's delinquent tax notice. If this office is to seek an abatement of those taxes, please so advise -me. CMM:ner enc Very truly yours, �1 1 CRAIG M. MERTZ 1A AY 1 1983 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7- L CHASKA, MN. 3TATEMENT OF THE AMOUNT OF DEUNOUENT TAXES DUE ON Tf Z FOLLOWNIO DESCRIBED PROPERTY, TO-1 IN • WHOSE NAME ASSESSED DESCRIPTION LOT OR SEC. BLOCK OR TOWN RANGE 25 43 700 0033 Chan Lakes Outlot A 25 43 700 0034 Chan Lakes Outlot B 25 43 700 0035 Chan Lakes Outlot C 25 43 700 0037 Chan Lakes Outlot E 25 43 700 0040 Chan Lakes Outlot 25 43 700 0042 Chan Lakes YEAR TAX PENALTY COST INTEREST* TOTAL 1982 1 $ 1,777.96=248.91 k S. 1�• � $ �6 `{" q 3 / *INTEREST ON DELINQUENT TAXES FIGURED TO JAN 3 f 1983 PAY THIS AMOUNT: I $ ;2n yo • 39 RETURN THIS STATEMENT NAME: Lake Susan Hills CD Chan Lakes Bus Park, LTD. ADDRESS: 4940 Viking Drive Edina, Mn. 55435 JAN 21 i r; t BY: . JAN 3 1 tops 2'100IF PAYMENT IS NOT RECEIVED BY ruse IS- DAT9, TM -AMOUNT .DUE WILL TUrDWIM COUNTY AUDITOR,' Box 600 East 4th Street Chaska, MN. 55318 C) -PUS Q-0 K. Po a-PcTt ® k) — IN, jG'2 / k Z-0 Xz- J'� CITY -OF CHAKHA009X- 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 June 29, 1983 Mr. Craig Zinter, Assessor Carver County Courthouse 600 East Fourth Street Chaska, MN 55318 Dear Mr. Zinter: As shown in the attached City Council minutes of July 2, 1979 (page 7), Section 4.06 of the development contract for the Chanhassen Lakes Business Park required six (6) Outlots to be deeded to the City as a condition of platting. For reasons I will not begin to detail, the transfer of ownership was not finalized until recently. At this pont the City is attempting to record the deed to complete the transaction as originally directed. The lengthy delay has, however, caused the additional problem of delinquent taxes to complicate the proceedings. This letter is to act as a formal request that the County.abate the unpaid and delinquent taxes for 1982 as currently levied against these outlots so the City can record the deeds. The property is being used for municipal utility and drainage purposes and would not have been taxed if it had been transferred to the City in a timely manner. The legal obstacles that delayed the transfer are indeed regret- table, however, were unavoidable as far as City intervention was involved. Should you have any questions or need additional information, please let me know. Sincerely, William Monk City Engineer WM:k Enclosure Council Meeting July 2, ,/9 -5_ Except for trucks furnishing essential services to the premises, no commercially licensed vehicles shall be allowed. 12. The principal structure on said premises shall be connected to sanitary sewer and municipal water systems of the City prior to occupancy. 13. For the purpose of assuring to the -City that the site and landscaping improvements to be carried out by Kreslins and Baltic are installed and furnished as set forth herein, Kreslins and Baltic shall furnish to the City either a cash deposit, a corporate surety bond approved by the City Attorney and naming the City as obligee thereunder, or an irrevocable letter of credit approved by the City in the amount of 110% of the estimate as furnished by the City Engineer. 14. It is intended that the -premises shall be -used by Kreslins and Baltic solely as the business office of Baltic, for its finance and insurance operations, which use shall not involve retail traffic on said premises. No part of the premises shall be leased to other persons, firms or corporations, without the prior written consent of the City. 15. For the purpose of insuring compliance with its terms, the within permit shall be reviewed by the City Council at the first regular Council meeting following the first anniversary date of the permit. Mr. Gustafson',.Attorney' -for Baltic, stated they were in agreement with the terms of the permit and the amendments as proposed this evening and listed above. Councilman Neveaux moved -to adopt the non -conforming use permit, Planning Case P-619, according to the Assistant City Manager/Planner's memorandum of June 28, 1979, with the conditions as discussed this evening and as amended this evening. Motion seconded by # Councilman Pearson. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, and Matthews. No negative votes. Motion carried. PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN - CHAPARRAL: Councilman Pearson moved to approve Chaparral Phase II preliminary development plan based on the Assistant City Manager/ Planner's letter of June 28, 1979, and direct staff to prepare the necessary development contract and direct the city engineer to prepare improvement cost estimates for the performance bond provisions. Further the conditions set forth -at the June 27, 1979, Watershed District meeting be -included. Motion seconded by Councilman Neveaux. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, and Matthews. No negative votes. Motion carried. Councilman Pearson moved to allow New Horizon Homes, Inc. to build one townhome and one twinhome models conditioned on no`sale or occupancy unti-l-municipal sewer and water are connected. Motion seconded by Councilman Matthews. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, and Matthews. No negative votes. Motion carried. HANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK - DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT AND COVENANTS: Ed Dunn and Julius Smith were present. Council members discussed the development contract and made the following changes. 3.06 Street Lighting. The expense of furnishing electrical energy for street lighting purposes within the plat shall be assumed by the City 36 months after the completion of installation of the street lighting system, or after 50% of the commercial and industrial building sites have been improved by the construction of commercial or industrial buildings thereon, whichever is first to occur. 3.08 Liability Insurance. The Developer shall take out and maintain, so long as the Developer's obligations continue under this agreement, public liability and property Council Meeting July 2, ._i9 -6- damage insurance covering personal injury, including death, and claims for property damage which may arise out of the Developer's work or the work of its subcontractors, or by one directly or indirectly employed by any of them. Limits for bodily injury or death shall be not less than $300,000 for one person and S500,000 for each accident; limits for property damage shall be not less than $100,000 for each accident. The City shall be named as an additional named insured on said policy, and the Developer shall file a copy of the insurance coverage with the City. - Councilman Neveaux moved to amend 3.09 Building Permits. No building permits shall be issued for construction on individual lots prior to the completion of the public improvements as provided in Project 78-3, or, in the alternative, unless the City Council shall make a determination that said public improvements will be completed prior to occupancy of the principal structures upon individual lots. Applicants for all building permits shall be bound by all applicable building application requirements of the City, including City approval of site plans and building design and construction as required by #9.06 of the Chanhassen Zoning Ordinance and other appropriate sections. Motion seconded by Councilman Matthews. The following voted in favor: Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, and Matthews. Mayor Hobbs voted no. Motion carried. 3.11. 1. Assessments. In the event the Developer shall default in the performance of any of the covenants and agreements herein contained, and such default shall not have been cured within ten (10) days after receipt by the Developer of written notice thereof, the City, if it so elects, may cause any of the required improvements to be constructed and installed, or may take action to cure said default, and may cause the entire cost thereof; including all reasonable engineering, legal and administrative expense i incurred by the City, to be recovered as a special assessment under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, in which case the Developer agrees to pay the entire amount of -the assessment roll pertaining to any such improvement within 60 days after its adoption. In addition, Developer further agrees that in the event of its failure to pay in full any such special assessment within the time prescribed herein, the City shall have a specific lien on all of Developer's real property within said plat for any amount so unpaid, and the City shall have the right to foreclose said lien in the manner prescribed for the foreclosure of mechanic's liens under the laws of the State of Minnesota. In the event of any emergency, as determined by the City Engineers, the notice requirements to the Developer shall be and hereby are waived in their entirety, and the Developer shall reimburse the City for any expense incurred by the City in remedying the conditions creating the emergency. 4.01. Lot 9, Block 1, Service Road Access Easement. There shall be dedicated on the final plat a service road access easement 50 feet in width on Lot 9, Block 1 for the exclusive use of the owners of Lots 8, 9, and 10, Block 1, for ingress and egress purposes to Carver County Road No. 17. The location of said easement on Lot 9 shall be located and constructed as recommended by the City Engineers' and approved by the City. Said service road shall be constructed and maintained in a good state of repair by the Developer, its successors and assigns. 4.04. Development Phases. The platting and development of the aforesaid 31 lots into five blocks for commercial and industrial sites shall constitute Phase I of Chanhassen Lakes Business Park. Outlots D, F, and I as depicted on said preliminary plat are reserved by Developer for future subdivision, platting and development in successive phases. Meeting July 2, ,_i9 -7- Outlots A, B, C, E, H, & J. Upon the filing of the final plat with the Carver County Recorder, Outlots A, B, C, E, H, & J of the Plat shall be conveyed forthwith by warranty deed, free of all encumbrances, by the respective fee and contract for deed owners thereof, to the City without cost to the City for use by the City for sanitary sewer trunk lines, storm water holding areas and ponds, and soil and water conservation areas. Councilman Neveaux moved to approve.the development contract as amended and the proposed covenants and restrictions -as amended. Motion seconded by Councilman Matthews. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, and Matthews. No negative votes. Motion carried. SPECIAL iMEETING - RILEY PURGATORY CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT: The Council set July 11 at 6:00 p.m. for a joint meeting with the watershed district. PLANNING COMMISSION RESIGNATION:- Councilman Neveaux moved to accept Mal MacAlpine's resignation and direct the City Manager to send him a letter of commendation. Motion seconded by Councilman Pearson. The following voted in favor: Mayo,- Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, and Matthews. No negative votes. Motion carried. CONSENT AGENDA: Mayor Hobbs asked if any council member wished to discuss any items on the consent agenda. As no additional comments were received, Councilman Pearson moved to aporove the following items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations: a. Hesse Farm Phase II, Extension of Final Plat Requirements. b. Temporary Loan Agreement, General City Funds to HRA Tax Increment Fund. ''otion seconded by Councilman Matthews. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, and Matthews. No negative votes. Motion carried. Councilman Pearson moved to adjourn. Motion seconded by Councilman Matthews. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, and Matthews. No negative votes. Meeting adjourned at 12:00. Don Ashworth City Manager RUSSELL H. LARSON CRAIG M. MERTZ Or COUNSEL HARVEY E. SKAAR MARK C. MCCULLOUGH Bill Monk City Engineer Box 147 Chanhassen Mil 55317 Dear Bill: LARSON & MERTZ ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1900 FIRST BANK PLACE WEST MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 May 16, 1983 TELEPHONE (612) 333-ISII Re: Chan Lakes Business Park Recently Opus supplied us with the deeds to Outlots A, B, C, r., H, and J, in Chan Lakes Business Park. We were unable to record those deeds because the 1982 taxes were unpaid and delinquent. Enclosed you will find a copy of the County's delinquent tax notice. If this office is to seek an abatement of those taxes, please so advise me. Very truly .yours, CRAIG M. MERTZ CMM:ner enc R�VL.I 11AY 1 1983 CITY OF CHANHASSED4 CHASKA, ill. ,TE NT aF THE AMaW OF DELIMENT TAXES DUE ON THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY, TO-' IN ' WHOSE NAME ASSESSED DESCRIPTION LOT OR SEC. BLOCK OR TOWN RANGE 25 43 700 0033 Chan Lakes Outlot A 25-43 700 0034 Chan Lakes Outlot B 25 43 700 0035 Chan Lakes Outlot C 25 43 700 0037 Chan Lakes Outlot E 25 43 700 0040 Chan Lakes Outlot 25 43 700 0042 Chan Lakes Out lot j YEAR TAX PENALTY COST INTEREST* TOTAL 1982 I S 1, 777.96 I . 248.91 $ Z oC6 5�d ..5 *INTEREST ON DELINQUENT TAXES FIGURED TO JAN 3 1 1983 PAY THIS AMOUNT: I $ aO V6.39 C;QF- RETURN THIS STATEMENT NAME: Lake Susan 111-1.1s CD Chan Lakes Bus Park, LTD. 1;L� ADDRESS: 4940 Viking DKive Edina, Mn. 55435 JAll 21 is �r: 0 BY: JA1d CIF PAYMENT IS NOT RECEIVED BY ABOVE- DATE, THE -AliCi NT `DUE WILL COUNTY AUDITOR ,' Box 1 �' 600 East 4th Street Chaska, MN. 55318 E PRPOpo REGULAR C' I H A S S N CITY COUNCIL MEETI FEBRUARY 7, 1983 Mayor Hamilton called the meeting to order with the following members present: Councilwomen Swenson and Watson, Councilmen Geving and Horn. Craig Mertz, Russ Larson, Bill Monk, Scott Martin, Don Ashworth, and Bob Waibel were present. Jim Thompson, Planning Commission, was also present. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilwoman Swenson moved to approve the agenda with the following additions: discussion of Council goals and objectives of Commissions, status report on Cable TV, and update on the Old Instant Web Building. Motion seconded by Councilman Horn. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Swenson and Watson and Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. JAYCEE RUN: A representati-ve from the Chanhassen Jaycees explained that the Jaycee's are planning an 11.2 mile run for May 21st. The run is proposed to begin and end on West 78th Street. Mayor Hamilton referred this to the Public Safety Commission for their review. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Geving moved to approve the consent agenda pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations: 1. RESOLUTION #83-02, Set Public Hearing Date for 201 Program. March 7. 2. Approve Engineering Contract with Maier Stewart and Associates for 201 Program. 3. RESOLUTION #83-03, Approving and Accepting Indemnity Agreement for Sanitary Sewer Easement, Lot 4, Block 5, Chanhassen Lakes Busi,,--,ss Park. Motion seconded by Councilwoman Watson. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Swenson and Watson and Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. MINUTES: Councilwoman Swenson moved to approve the January 10, 1983, Council minutes. Motion seconded by Councilman Horn. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Swenson and Watson and Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. Amend the January 17, 1983, Council minutes by changing the last sentence at the end of the first paragraph under SIGN PERMIT APPLICATION, 530 WEST 79TH STREET, CHANHASSEN VIDEO: Councilwoman Swenson suggested that the developer present planned signage for the building at the time of his presentation to the Planning Commission. Councilman Horn moved to approve the January 17, 1983, Council minutes as amended. Motion seconded by Councilman Geving. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Swenson and Watson and Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. Mayor Hamilton moved to note the December 15, 1982, Planning Commission minutes. Motion seconded by Councilwoman Swenson. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Swenson and Watson and Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. Mayor Hamilton moved to note the January 12, 1983, Planning Commission minutes. Motion seconded by Councilwoman Watson. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Swenson and Watson and Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. CITY OF -�" 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 February 24, 1982 Mr. Ed Dunn Dunn Real Estate Management, Inc. 4940 Viking Drive Suite 600 Minneapolis, MN 55435 Re:. Oversizing Costs Dear Mr. Dunn: As per our previous phone conversations, I have researched our files in regards to reimbursement of sanitary sewer oversizing costs in construction of Lake Susan Hills projects. As a part of the Phase I (trunks) construction, the following mention is noted: "...the developer of the industrial park has indicated he will fund an interceptor sized sewer.. If the MWCC acquires the line in the future, the estimated $200,000 oversizing cost would be recovered." As a part of Phase 2 (Business Park), a change order for oversizing of pipe to be used for northern property development was agreed upon and totals approximately $7,000. Although I can find no written agreement for reimbursement, it does seem proper for this amount to be added to the development costs of said northern properties as construction occurs. Upon arrangements yet to be determined, reimbursement of this $7,000 could occur. The above are the only.mentions of oversizing costs that I find in our files. If you believe this listing is incomplete or wish to discuss these in more detail, please contact me at your convenience. Thank you for your patience. Sincerely, William Monk City Engineer WM:k First Bang Saint Paut of Saint Paul 332 Minnesota Street Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 a L Loans and Account Relationships Metropolitan Twin Cities Area and Southwest United States January 29, 1982 Mr. Robert Waibel City Planner City.of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Mr. Waibel: A further review of our files indicates that the exceptions noted in your letter of January 27, 1982, are correct. The expiration dates on both Letters of Credit are November 30, 1985, and issued for the account of American Linen Supply Company. Please accept our apologies for these errors. Sincerely, Y A. Tabolich Commercial Banking Officer (612) 291-5566 JAT:lp CI i Y OFCIq A 1.,A,QS' Member First Bank System C IT Y OF f-4 "° CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE 0 P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Community Development Director, Scott Martin FROM: City Manager: Don Ashworth DATE: June 10, 1981 SUBJ: Tax Increment Plan, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park This memorandum responds to.the memorandum from Dave Sellergren dated June 2, 1981. Mr. Sellergren's memorandum basically discusses the costs of public improvements within the Chanhassen Lakes Business Park -an issue which has been discussed for more than a 3 year period of time. Prior to responding to points raised by Mr. Sellergren, I be- lieve it is important to get all parties to stop using the word "incentives". This word has continued to exist in cor- respondence from various sources 4probably including myself at one time or another)'. I am objecting to the use of this word as its usage has connotations of the.city"giving away" something. In all of the meetings that I attended and participated in wherein the HRA and City Council adopted the tax increment plan,'su-ch "giveaway" program was never invision or referred to. Specifically, the HRA and City Council included the Chanhassen Lake Business Park and surrounding properties as a part of the tax increment plan as: 1). The "Chanhassen Redevelopment Plan" was just exactly that -a overall plan to guide the redevelopment efforts of the City. It was not a plan solely to benefit the Dunn & Curry interests, a plan solely to redevelop the downtown area, a plan to carry out various public im- provements in one sector or another, etc. It was a "total plan" recognizing the necessity to redevelop the downtown area, plan and develop an area where businesses could be more appropriately relocated, provide public improvements within the entire "planned area, etc; and 2). All areas within the redevelopment plan met the findings under state law for a redevelopment area, i.e. blighted and/or delapitated structures existed within a portion of the district, improper land uses were occuring -2- requiring public action to acquire/consolidate/resale to accommodate more appropriate land uses, ;m- proper uses in land configurations existed prohibiting the overall planning efforts of the City, lands were being under utilized and required improvement to enhance utilization of those properties in terms of the overall plan, etc.; 3). The City.needed to provide an area for relocation so as to assure that business fatalities did not occur; that businesses were afforded both fair values for their properties and offered potential -sites (within the development district) to relocate;and to provide areas for new businesses to locate and insure that the overall "plan" objectives were met. As noted above, a part of the discussion by the City Council was the development of underutilized lands for the location of existing as well as new businesses. These discussions additionally encompassed the high assessments that would be created because of the City's desire to establish a business park. It was not simply a matter of extending local services.. The City was forced to seek means by which a major trunk sewer facility could be constructed, construct a major water distrib- ution system including well house and field, extend a County Road including bringing such to urban standards, and -to install other improvements to a standard which would insure that the business park complimented overall redevelopment efforts with- in the downtown area (increased street widths, street lighting, storm sewer systems, bike trails and walkways, etc). All of these factors were recognized to significately increase the assessments within the business park as compared to other areas within this City or within other cities. Herein laid the dilemma in that, the City was attempting to relocate existing businesses, without causing business casualties,to the business park & attempting to encourage new businesses into the business park which would compliment the downtown area while at the same time installing public improvements which could have significant negative financial effects if placed in the form of special assessments back against individual parcels.. To resolve this potential dilemma the HRA and City Council included as a part of the redevelopment plan,the costsof public improvements installed within the business park. To insure the City the greatest amount of flexability and to assure that these costs would be paid if the redevelopment plan did not materialize in a timely fashion, the City Council acted to additionally place these costs as assessments against the property. Although this memorandum is long, I believe it is important, to recognize the efforts carried out by the City to date prior to considering which of the two alternatives,offered by Mr. Sellergren,should be considered. Additionally, I believe -3- it is important to reemphasize that all of the efforts to date have been in terms of accomplishing an overall plan and not to benefit one faction or another. i.e. Dunn and Curry, existing businesses, Krause -Anderson, Bloomberg Companies, etc. In reviewing the optionslisted by Mt. Sellergren, this office would recommend that the HRA/City Council proceed under the "case by case approach" as listed in Mr. Sellergren's letter dated June 2. Although alternate #1 "overall 7% reduction" may be easier to administer initially, I sincerely believe it does have inherant long term administrative problems. Additionally, I do not see where this approach considers the emphasis desired by the HRA/City Council in assuring that existing businesses would be relocated without creating bus- iness casualties. In contrast, the case by case approach does provide for greater flexability to the HRA and does provide a greater flexability, potentially in the future, should the Council desire to amend or futher define conditions which must be met for a business to receive a reducation in assessment costs. Finally, ' alternate #1 does not adequately pro- tect the City should business developments not procede as anticipated. If the City does carry out a blanket reduction in assessements and development does not occur as anticipated, a shortfall position could occur._. In contrast, the case by case approach assures that assessments would remain against the property until such time as a specific development occured. Further, the actual reduction in assessment would not occur until the structure was completed and first year taxes paid. In addition, this approach would allow the City/HRA to est- ablish specific conditions which must be met for either an existing business or new business before such -redactions would be considered. Potentially these conditions would be different- ar additional reason for supporting the case by case approach. CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. 80X 147 0 CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Community Development Director, Scott Martin FROM: City Manager: Don Ashworth DATE: June 10, 1981 SUBJ: Tax Increment Plan, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park This memorandum responds to.the memorandum from Dave Seller.gren dated June 2, 1981. Mr. Sellergren's :memorandum basically discusses the costs of public improvements within the Chanhassen Lakes Business Park -an issue which has been discussed for more than a 3 year period of time. Prior to responding to points raised by Mr. Sellergren, I be- lieve it is important to get all parties to stop using the word "incentives". This word has continued to exist in cor- respondence from various sources (probably including myself at one time or another)'. I am objecting to the use of this word as its usage has connotations ofthe city"giving away." something. In all of the meetings that I attended and participated in wherein the HRA and City Council adopted the tax increment plan,`such.. "give away" program was never invision or referred to. Specifically, the HRA and City Council included the Chanhassen Lake Business Park and surrounding properties as a part of the tax increment plan as: 1). The "Chanhassen Redevelopment Plan" was just.exactly that -a overall plan to guide the redevelopment efforts of the City. It was not a plan solely to benefit the Dunn & Curry interests, a plan solely to redevelop the downtown area, a plan to carry out various public im- provements in one sector or another, etc. It was a "total plan" recognizing the necessity to redevelop the downtown area, plan and develop an area where businesses could be more appropriately relocated, provide public improvements within the entire "planned area, etc; and 2). All areas within the redevelopment plan met the findings under state law for a redevelopment area, i.e. blighted and/or delapitated structures existed within a portion of the district, improper land uses were occuring -2- requiring public action to acquire/consolidate/resale to accommodate more appropriate land uses, ;m- proper uses in land configurations existed prohibiting the overall planning efforts of the City, lands were being under utilized and required improvement to enhance utilization of those properties in terms of the overall plan, etc.; 3). The City needed to provide an area for relocation so as to assure that business fatalities did not occur; that businesses were afforded both fair values for their properties and offered potential sites (within the development district) to relocate;and to provide areas for new businesses to locate and insure that the overall "plan" objectives were met. As noted above, a part of the discussion by the City Council was the development of underutilized lands for the location of existing as well as new businesses. These discussions additionally encompassA the high assessments that would be created because of the City's desire to establish a business park. It was not simply a matter of extending local services. The City was forced to seek means by which a major trunk sewer facility could be constructed, construct a major water distrib- ution system including well house and field, extend a County Road including bringing such to urban standards, and to install other improvements to a standard which would insure that the business park complimented overall redevelopment efforts with- in the downtown area.. (increased street widths, street lighting, storm sewer systems, bike trails and walkways, etc). All of these factors were recognized to significately increase the assessments within the business park as compared to other areas within this City or within other cities. Herein laid the dilemma in that, the City was attempting to relocate existing businesses, without causing business casualties,to the business park & attempting to encourage new businesses into the business park which would compliment the downtown area while at the same time installing public improvements which could have significant negative financial effects if placed in the form of special assessments back against individual parcels. To resolve this potential dilemma the HRA and City Council included as a part of the redevelopment plan,the costsof public improvements installed within the business park. To insure the City the greatest amount of flexability and to assure that these costs would be paid if the redevelopment plan did not materialize in a timely fashion, the City Council actad to additionally place these costs as assessments against the property. Although this memorandum is long, I believe it is important, to recognize the efforts carried out by the City to date prior to considering which of the two alternatives,offered by Mr. Sellergren,should be considered. Additionally, I believe -3- it is important to reemphasize that all of the efforts to date have been in terms of accomplishing an overall plan and not to benefit one faction or another. i.e. Dunn and Curry, existing businesses, Krause -Anderson, Bloomberg Companies, etc. In reviewing the optionslisted by Mr. Sellergren, this office would recommend that the HRA/City Council proceed under the "case by case approach" as listed in Mr. Sellergren's letter dated June 2. Although alternate #1 "overall 7% reduction" may be easier to administer initially, I sincerely believe it does have inherant long term administrative problems. Additionally, I do not see where this approach considers the emphasis desired by the HRA/City Council in assuring that existing businesses would be relocated without creating bus- iness casualties. In contrast, the case by case approach does provide for greater flexability to the HRA and does provide a greater flexability, potentially in the future, should the Council desire to amend or futher define conditions which must be met for a business to receive a reducation in assessment costs. Finally, alternate #1 does not adequately pro- tect the City should business developments not procede as anticipated. If the City does carry out a blanket reduction in assessements ,and development does not occur as anticipated, a shortfall position could occur.., In contrast, the case by case approach assures that assessmentswould remain against the property until such time as a specific development occured. Further, the actual reduction in assessment would not occur until the structure was completed and first year taxes paid. In addition, this approach would allow the City/HRA to est- ablish specific conditions which must be met for either an existing business or new business beforesuch-reductions would be considered. Potentially these conditions would be different- ar additional reason for supporting the case by case approach. 07 LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1500 NORTHWESTERN FINANCIAL CENTER 7900 XERXES AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55431 TELEPHONE (612) 835-3800 4324 IDS CENTER MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 TELEPHONE (612) 835-3800 June 2, 1981 Mr. Edmund Dunn Dunn & Company 4940 Viking Drive Suite 600 Edina, MN 55435 1101 CONNECTICUT AVENUE, N. W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20036 TELEPHONE (2021 223-9398 Re: Chanhassen Lakes Business Park; Our File No. 5962-19 Dear Ed: JAMES P. LARKIN 5TEVEN G. LEVIN ROBERT L. HOFFMAN CHRISTOPHER J. DIETZEN JACK F. DALY PETER K. BECK O. KENNETH LINDGREN RICHARD 1. DIAMOND ANDREW W. DANIELSON JOHN R. BEATTIE WENDELL R. ANDERSON JON S. SWIERZEWSKI GERALD H. FRIEDELL MICHAEL S. MARGULIES ROB ERT B. WHITLOCK SAMUEL L. STERN ALLAN E."PAT"MULLIGAN 5TEVEN J. SHAPIRO ROBERT J. HENNESSEY THOMAS J. FLYNN RONALD R. FLETCHER RODERICK I. MACKENZIE JAMES C. ERICKSON MICHAEL D. SCHWARTZ EDWARD J. DRISCOLL FORREST D."DICK" NOWLIN JAMES P. MILEY JAMES P. OUINN GENE N. FULLER MICHAEL C. JACKMAN STEPHEN B. SOLOMON MARY E. CURTIN JOSEPH W. ANTHONY DANIEL A. OUINLAN DAVID C. SELLERGREN JEROME H. KAHNKE JOHN D. FULLMER TODO 1_ FREEMAN ROBERT E. BOYLE CATHY E- GORLIN FRANK L HARVEY JOSEPH T. GREEN ROBERT T. MONTAGUE, JR.• ANDREW J. MITCHELL JAMES M. STROTHER EMBER D. REICHGOTT CHARLES S. MODELL RICHARD A. FORSCHLER OF COUNSEL LINDA H. FISHER JOSEPH GITIS THOMAS P.'TIM' STOLTMAN LINN J. FIRESTONE .PRESENTLY ADMITTED ONLY IN PENNSYLVANIA Enclosed please find a memorandum I prepared for the now -rescheduled meeting of June 2, 1981. Please review it and give me your thoughts. You may wish to provide copies of the memorandum to Don Ashworth and Scott Martin. Unfortunately, I will be unable to attend the June 5, 1981, 2:30 meeting. If you wish to reschedule it so that I can be -there, please do so. Otherwise, you may simply wish to give them my memorandum and discuss procedures. If you have any questions or comments, please give me a call. Sincerely yours, 1" David C. Sellergren, for LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, Ltd. Sig Enclosure RECEIVED JUN 3 fs�,nY1 fr .5Q077- /`7�X Tia% �U p A.-, -eqx rls - LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. MEMORANDUM TO: Dunn & Company FROM: David C. Sellergren DATE: June 2, 1981 RE: Chanhassen Lakes Business Park (CLB) Incentives Our File No. 5962-19 Introduction In discussions with the Chanhassen City Manager and staff, Bud Andrus and you, questions have arisen with respect to the appropriate mechanism to bring about an incentive for the development of CLB. This memorandum outlines two alternative approaches. In my analysis, I have reviewed: 1 Chanhassen Downtown Redevelopment Project, amended plan, adopted May 27, 1980. 2 Downtown Redevelopment Project, Preliminary Feasibility Study and Design Report, November, 1980. 3 Chanhassen Downtown Redevelopment Project Overlay District, Preliminary Draft. 4 Minnesota Housing and Redevelopment Act, Minnesota Statutes, §§462.411 through 462.716. 5 The 1979 Minnesota Tax Increment Financing Act, including 1980 amendments, Minnesota Statutes §§273.71 through 273.86. 6 Minnesota law on local improvements, special_ assessments, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429. 7 Correspondence dated June 27, June 10, June 5, 1980, between and among Donald W. Ashford, Chanhassen City Manager, Craig Mertz, Assistant Chanhassen City Attorney and David J. Kennedy, Special Counsel (HRA and Bond Counsel matters). I. Overall Seven Percent Reduction I attach Mr. Kennedy's letter of June 27, 1980, to Mr. Mertz. I do so because, in large measure, I agree with his technical position; more importani],�, I whole heartedly agree with its assessment of the practicalities of the situation. Both Mr. Mertz and Mr. Kennedy recommend an across-the-board reduction o seven_percent of the improveme,t costs known as Project 78-3. Those recommendations embody my recommendation. Please note that this would not preclude the BRA from writing down a larger portion of the assessments in a particular case if this is deemed appropriate. As I understand it, this blanket reduction has been in disfavor for two reasons. First, it is felt that such an approach is not sufficiently fine-tuned to a particular development proposal. Inferentially, an ad -hoc incentive approach would facilitate the encouragement of certain design and use objectives of the city. This reason now has limited vitality, due to the impending adoption of the Chanhassen Downtown Redevelopment Project Overlay District. So-called preferential uses and amenities are better obtained through a regulatory approach in any event. The second reason for resistance to a blanket reduction in assessments is the fear that it would inure only to the benefit of Dunn & Company and would not serve as an incentive to builder/owners on -sites in the CLB. The reasoning goes that the landowner would keep the land pricing the same and pocket the seven percent by simply having less assessments to pay off when a parcel is sold. Whether or not this fear has a foundation in fact, I believe it can be dealt with in the following manner: As a condition precedent to the granting of the blanket assessment reduction, Dunn & Company would enter into an agreement with the City pursuant to which it would agree not to contest additional special assessments equal to the seven percent abated as to a portion of land in CLB still owned by Dunn & Company if, 1 There are not enough tax increment dollars to pay the assessments; and 2 Land prices in the CLB have increased at a rate greater than the median increase metro region in the Coldwell Banker Annual Report over base year 1980 (or use CPI or some other index); and 3 The City Council and BRA, by a two-thirds majority vote reasonably determines that such increase in CLB land price is unreasonable and adversely affects the redevelopment of Chanhassen. This Agreement would be a part and parcel of at least two other formal actions taken by the City and the HRA. First, the City and BRA would have to make findings and enter into an agreement between themselves that the Downtown Redevelopment Project could not occur but for the installation of improvements embodied in Improvement Project 78-3. Second, the same bodies would have to amend the Redevelopment Plan to clearly show Project 78-3 was and is an integral part of the Chanhassen Downtown Redevelopment Project. A formal recognition of the reduction in the assessments, if necessary, could be accomplished by the Council's determination that the assessments for Project 78-3 were "excessive" under Minnesota Statutes, §429.071, Subd. 2, for reasons given in Mr. Ashford's letter of June 10, 1980. I leave to Mr. Kennedy the appropriate mechanism in terms of bonds, but since Temporary Bonds are the only ones issued for the project to date, a refunding bond should be workable. In sum, Chanhassen's two attorneys have recommended a procedure with which I concur. I believe it should be followed. The case -by -case approach is riddled with practical impediments, the result of which would be to function as a disincentive for development in the CLB. II. Case-b,:-Case Approach Despite my above recommendation, I wish to address the other alternative. Page 3 of Mr. Kennedy's letter of June 27, 1980, rejects a direct payment mechanism. He goes on to indicate that a purchase and sale back is the only mechanism which would work. If Chanhassen remains interested in a case -by -case approach, given the fact that a purchase and sale back is much too time consuming, I recommend that a direct payment method be further explored. I should like to discuss with Mr. Kennedy and Mr. Mertz the following approach for a direct payment. Minnesota Statutes §462.445, Subd. 4, .-1 authorizes an BRA "to make, or agree to make, such payments in lieu of taxes to the city or the county, the state or any political subdivision thereof, as it finds consistent with the purposes of Sections 462.415 to 462.711." This may be authority to make the direct payments heretofore considered illegal. Since all assessments are collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes (M.S. 429.061, Subd. 3), the payment of the assessments by the BRA could be considered a payment'in lieu of taxes. It is my understanding that Chanhassen files all assessment rolls in the City Clerk's office and certifies annually the amount of installment of assessments which are to become due in the following year. If the City were to receive from the BRA a payment (coming from the tax increment), then there are no assessments "which are to become due" and collectable as taxes in the following year. The City, having received a payment, would simply certify a lesser amount due, or none at all, equal to the seven percent, until the proper amount is received, and then it would resume certification of assessments. Such an arrangement would be preceded by an Agreement with the builder/owner, which agreement would specify this arrangement as a stated incentive for the desired development. Criteria to be applied by the HRA would be analagous to Chanhassen policies for Industrial Revenue Bonds and, possibly, some of the criteria used by the City of Minnetonka in reviewing tax increment proposals. If the builder/owner wanted the assessments to be reduced on the record, a reassessment hearing referred to in Minn. Stat. 429.071, Subd. 2 could be conducted by the City. On the other hand, if the builder/owner is assured that these assessments are going to be paid by way of the agreement, then such a reassessment may not even be required. The other steps with regard to Redevelopment Plan amendment discussed in I.would have to be undertaken in 1 this situation too, but only one time. Then, later case -by -case reductions would proceed through the BRA only, the City earlier having entered into an agreement with the HRA committing itself not to certify the assessments for collection if it receives payment from the.HRA. III. Conclusion I strongly recommend that alternatives described in I be followed. It is supported by Chanhassen's attorneys, and is the most expeditious mechanism for putting an incentive program into place. If you wish to discuss this further, please let me know. Sincerely yours, David C. Sell"ergren, for LARKIN, HOFFMAN,-DALY & LINDCREN, Ltd. vm CLAYTON L. LEFEVERE HERBERT P. LEFLER CURTIS A. PEARSON J.DENN15 O'BRIEN JOHN E. DRAW2 DAVID J. KENNEDY JOHN S. DEAN GLENN E. PURDUE JAMES D. LARSON CHARLES L. LEFEVERE HERBERT P. LEFLER. III JEFFREY J. STRAND JAMES P. 4YM EAR^ MARY J. SJORKLUND THOMAS D. CREIGHTON WENDY L. FREEDMAN / LAW OFFICES LEFEVERE, LEFLER. PEARSON. O' BRIEN 6 DRAWZ 1100 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA SS402 TELEPHONE (612) 333-0543 Mr. Craig Mertz Assistant City Attorney City of Chanhassen 1900 First National Bank Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 June 27, 1980 BROOKLYN CENTER OFFICES 610 BROOKDALE TOWERS 2810 COUNTY ROAD 10 BROOKLYN CENTER. MINNESOTA 55430 16121 SOI-3200 RICHARD J. SCHIEFFER Re: Chanhassen housing and Redevelopment Authority: Tax Increment Financing Problem Our File No. B-1998 Dear Mr. Mertz: In your letter of June 10 you have asked for our opinion, as consulting attorneys to the Chanhassen Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) and bond counsel to the City, about the legality of an HRA proposal to provide incentives to developers in the Chanhassen Lakes Business Park (CLB) in the form of total or partial reductions in special assessments to be levied by the City for Improvement Project 78-3: In this connection, we have reviewed the following: 1. City Manager Ashworth's letter of June 10 addressed to you. 2. The draft amended plan for the Chanhassen Downtown Redevelopment Project (Revised March 20, 1980) ("Amended Plan"). 3. Proceedings for Project 78-3 as part of the Bond Tran- script for the City's $1,730,000 General Obligation Temporary Improvement Bonds of 1980 dated June 1, 1980. For purposes of this opinion we assume the following: 1. That the Amended Plan has been duly adopted by the HRA and approved by the City. y LAW OFFICES LEFEVERE, LEFLER, PEARSON.O'BRIEN S DRAWZ 2. That the total costs of Project 78-3 are for assessable public improvements in the CLB. 3. That Project 78-3 is being.financed by the proceeds of the 1980 Temporary Bonds but also in part by the pro- ceeds of Temporary Bonds of 1978 and 1979 previously issued by the City. 4. That you have advised the City that it may proceed to conduct and finance the project embodied in the Amended Plan as a redevelopment project certified to the County Auditor prior to August 1, 1979 within the meaning of Laws 1979, c. 322, Section 8 (Minnesota Statutes 1979 Supp. Section 273.78.) General As we understand it, Improvement Project 78-3, consisting generally of sewer and water utilities, street surfacing and other street improvements was originally conceived and ordered in April, 1978 as a project to stimulate the development of the CLB which was not at that time a part of the Redevelopment Project. In December of 1978 the HRA and the City formally expanded. the Project to include the CLB with a view towards financing some of the public redevelopment costs in the CLB with tax increments from the Project Area. Improvement Project 78-3 is nearing completion and will be assessed in 1980. The HRA and the City have been exploring methods of stimulat- ing development in the CLB (and we assume, in the Downtown portion of the Project Area as well) by minimizing the cost of land development for industries to be located in the CLB by reduction in the cost of land attributable to 78-3 special assessments. A proposal for a direct subsidy of 7% of the construction costs of a proposed development has been abandoned upon your advice after a discussion with us and Mr. Ashworth earlier this year. we concur in your judgement that there is no express or implied statutory authority for that proposal. During that discussion, you may recall, we suggested that at least a -partial incentive�� might be achieved by. assessing only 93% of 783_costs and financ- ing the remainder of the costs by General obligation Redevelop- ment Bonds supported by a pledge of the special assessments and tax increments, a procedure we think is authorized by law. You state in your letter, however, that the HRA does not wish to consider this approach at this time. The present proposal is for the HRA to pay all or a portion of 78-3 costs from tax increments on a parcel -by -parcel basis. The full assessment would be levied, but the HRA would evaluate each development proposal, determine its potential contribution to development goals for the CLB (presumably with reference to some formal standards adopted by it) and, by one of two methods suggested, directly or indirectly reduce or eliminate the cost of the special assessments on a given parcel or parcels in a pro- posed development. LAW OFFICES LEFEVERE. LEFLER. PEARSON.O'BRIEN 6 DRAWZ Legal Issues 1. The threshold question is precisely as you have pro- posed it in your letter: "Would the disbursement of the HRA's M.S. §462.585 tax increment monies directly or indirectly to the City constitute a permissible expenditure of those monies, if disbursed as a part of a program to reduce private land acquisition costs within an industrial park; specifically to reduce municipal assessments imposed for the purpose of constructing public improvements within that same industrial park?" In our opinion the answer to the question is,,yes,) It seems to us that the cost of public utilities and others improve- ments constructed by the City in aid of an HRA Redevelopment Project is a public redevelopment cost within the meaning of M.S. Section 462.545, Subdivision 1. Such utilities and improvements are included in the definition of "redevelopment project" in Section 462.421, Subdivision 13, and a City is clearly authorized by Section 462.581 to construct such- improvements in aid of a Redevelopment Project. The fact that Project 78-3 may have been ordered and under construction prior to its inclusion of the CLB is not significant; the critical matter', is whether the City Council and the HRA can find (and by agreement formalize that finding) that but for the construction of the Improvement Project the Redevelopment Project would either be significantly impaired or not feasible. And it appears from the chronology of 78-3 and its relation to the CLB that both bodies were of the opinion that 78-3 was to be an integral part of the CLB portion of the Rede- velopment Project. A modification of the Amended Plan to clearly set out that rationale would, we think, be adviseable to remove any doubt about the matter. lit -' 2. The second issue concerns the first method proposed for paying a portion of the public redevelopment costs by reducing the assessments, that is, a direct payment of tax increment funds w to the City to be used, we assume, to reduce the assessment. _We �L m ts .m ti ,; 4 �;,:,�zknow ono method by which h; ay_ be ac�ompl �,�hed. The speci3 � assessment becomes a lien on the benefitted property upon adoption �a of the assessment role Section 429.0 'division 2, and may only be reduced by eassessmen under 429.071 or if the project is abandoned before completion u after assessment, Section 435.202, and neitheryro�e a is appropriate in the context of 78-3. (We should note that the procedure would be feasible under our suggestion of a`93% assessment with the balance coming from tax increments properly pledged to the payment of G.O. Redevelop- ment Bonds). 3. The third issue concerns the second method proposed for 9, �w the incentive, that is a purchase by the HRA of a site proposed � ._ Z; for development from the property owner and its resale to a developer at a price designed to write -down the cost of all or a LAW OFFICES LEFEVERE. LEFLER. PEARSON.O'BRIEN 6 DRAWZ portion of the assessments against the property. Although the accomplishment of such a procedure �resentq a hostof D-rart difficulties`? we think that, proper y conducted, it may be an ag2ropria P MV - to i of achieving t e — ----� MAI. a d -tom tives . The technique is not unlike n __-- .fie —typical _ r edeve l.opmen t prog____�here properly lis iC-enfified by the HRA for development, a proposal is made for its development by a developer, the HRA acquires and improves the property and it is - resold to the developer pursuant to a development agreement setting out such matters as the resale cost (including write -down of improve- ments), time -table for construction, and the other obligations of the developer and the. HRA as to the construction and preparation of the project site. The special assessment write -down and other site improvement costs become the public redevelopment costs to be financed by tax increments. The difficulty with this approach in the context of the CLB is twofold. First, the Amended Plan does not identify any par- ticular property within the CLB intended for acquisition the case with the Downtown portion of the Amended Plan)�asAl- though such identification is required as part of a tax increment financing plan under the new law, Section 273.74, Subdivision 1, -it appears that under Sections 462.421 and 462.521 such particu- larity is not required and a general -finding that all or a substantial portion of the Project Area is in need of redevelop- ment appears sufficient. Under those latter sections, therefore, it appears that one siin the A c-Q••l4 be dun_ be a ro- priate ''A�'�•���ment but not another.' and the second difficulty flows from that fact, that is, how is that determi- tion to be made? We do not think that th _ -mire value of the p o ose eve opmentis an adequate .criterion,. but__-i f the_E[RA were to _deve _op an3incorporate in the Amended _ Plan some_. ohjec. tive standards for considering _ proposals _ _( involving such matters as principal areas .for redevelopment, topography, access, types of developments more likely to achieve stated development goals for the CLB, together with_ the' _abi1ity­of_-the development _to generate.._ adequate_ increments_ .to_ _finance the write. -down), it may be that the case -by -case technique of this approach would be _ legally defensible. We must note that we have not seen this technique employed elsewhere, but we think it feasible and, although not completely free from legal doubt, worth considera- l tion by the BRA and council. If employed, however, the method would have to be most carefully monitored with specific and detailed findings as to each development to avoid any real o� apparent discriminatory treatment as between proposals. It may be that the development of and administration of the standards described above may be so onerous and difficult as to be impractical. We do not think it would be a simple task. And in any event, we would have to be satisfied of their adequacy in order to feel comfortable in approving any bonds to finance such selective redevelopment. For these reasons, we must state again our judgement that the most practical and a itable approach to t2�e �ro�ble_m is an acros - - a re uction in assessmen in _� a a' LAW OFFICES LEFEVERE. LEFLER, PEARSON. O BRIEN 6 DRAWZ the CL$_._ with_ the, --balance paid for from tax increments with both being pledged to the payment of G._O: RedeveZopment Bonds. Financing AA/'J. The public redevelopmen casts— described above can be financed h i ax *u�rPmP*+ts on hand already generated from the Redevelopment District or from the proceeds of G. O. Redevelop- ment Bonds to which increments and assessments from 78-3 are pledged pursuant to a tax increment agreement, or from a combi- nation of those two sources. We do not think it permissable for the City to invest its operating funds or debt service funds in obligations of the HRA: investment of municipal funds is limited to general obligations of a municipality, M.S. 475.66, Subdivi- sion 3 „ M.S. 471,56 and we do not feel that an HRA is a municipality within the meaning of these statutes. Although we cannot be certain of the exact techniques to be used, it would appear that the portion of the present oustanding temporary bonds which have been used to finance 78-3 could be refunded by one or more series of definitive G. O. Redevelopment Bons issued under Section 2 wi a assessments and tax increments pledgeTas sU6h a - bond issue would require cWr6fu1 planning if the selective redevelop- ment techniques described above were used, since it would be difficult to' predict with certainty when the prepayments of assessments (in the form of tax increment payments at the time of sale of individual parcels) would take place, but the problem idoes not seem insurmountable. If on the other hand the uniform assessment reduction technique we have suggested were used the ,issue would be relatively simple to structure. In summary, it is' our opinion that: 1. A reduction in assessments in the form of a write -down of those assessments is a proper public redevelopment cost -for an HRA redevelopment project. 2. Such public redevelopment costs attributable to Improve- ment Project 78-3 can be financed by G. O. Redevelop- ment Bonds. 3. A procedure for selective redevelopment of parcels of property by HRA p rc ase and resale to developers at a cost reflecting a reduction in all or a portion of the assessments for 78-3 is feasible, but must be accom-__ panied by modificiati ns in the Amended Plan and procedures for case -by -case evaluation in the light of ';k objective standards and be embodied and involved in j formal development agreements; and _J 4. We recommend that the HRA and City give serious consid- eration to uniformly stimulate development in the CLB LAW OFFICES LEFEVERE. LEFLER, PEARSON, O' BRIEN 6 DRAWZ by an across-the-board reduction in assessments for Improvement Project 78-3 with the balance of the cost picked up by tax increments from the CLB. Such an approach would not proclude the HRA from writing down a larger portion of the assessments in a particular case if this seemed appropriate. If you have any questions about this matter, please feel free to call on us. You verfy truly, G Davi Kennedy DJK:caw 6/29/79 CITY OF CHANHASSEN3 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK PHASE I This Agreement, Made and entered into this day of 1979, by and between the City of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as the City,) and Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, Ltd., a Minnesota Limited Partnership,the general partner of which is Dunn & Curry Real Estate Management, Inc., a Minnesota corporation (said Chanhassen. Lakes Business Park, Ltd. hereinafter referred to as the Developer); WITNESSETH, That the City, in the exercise of its powers pursuant to M.S. §462.358 and other applicable state laws, and the Developer, in consideration of the mutual covenants.herein contained, recite and agree as follows: SECTION 1. RECITALS. 1.01. Preliminary Development Plan and Preliminary Plat. The 'Developer has heretofore made application to the City under the City Zoning Ordinance for the approval of a P-4, Planned Industrial Development District, including a preliminary plat thereof, of certain lands comprising ,/ acres, more or less, identified as Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, more particularly described on Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof, which tracts of land are referred to hereinafter as the "plat". 1.02. Ownership Interests. The ownership interests of the tracts of land comprising the plat are as follows: 1. Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, Ltd., a Minnesota Limited Partnership, the general partner of which is Dunn & Curry Real Estate Management, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, contract for deed purchaser. 2. Emmer Bros. Co., a Minnesota corporation, fee owner. 3. Edmund B. Dunn and Elizabeth J. Dunn., husband and wife, and James A. Curry and Barbara W. Curry, husband and wife, contract for deed purchasers. 4. Dunn & Curry Real Estate Management, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, contract for deed purchaser. 5. Lake Susan Hills, a co -partnership, fee owner. 6.. L. Guy Schoenecker, a single man, and Robert A. MacDonald, married to Yvonne MacDonald, a co=partnership, fee owners. -1- 1.03. Zoning and _Preliminary Development Plan Approval. The City Planning Commission duly held a public hearing on March 8, 1978, on the petition of the Developer for rezoning of the tracts of land comprising the plat from R-lA, Agricultural Residence District, to P-4, Planned Industrial Development District, under the Chanhassen Zoning Ordinance, and for preliminary development plan and pre- liminary plat approval. Thereafter, the City Council, on April 17, 1978, granted approval of the rezoning of the plat to a P-4 district•, subject to all of the regulations of said zoning district, and granted preliminary plat approval of the proposed plat as shown on Exhibit A hereto attached and made a part hereof (said Exhibit A consisting of four pages setting forth the legal description of the plat and the arrangement of the lots, outlots, blocks, and streets within the plat as proposed by Schoell & Madson, Inc., Engineers and Surveyors.) Subsequently, the Planning Commission, on May 23, 1979, considered and the City Council, on June 4, 1979, approved certain modifications in said preliminary plat involving,,among other modifications, access to State Highway No. 5, as more fully set forth on Exhibit B hereto attached and made a part hereof and identified as Final Development Plan, Revision of May 17, 1979, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, pre- pared by Urbanscope; said revised preliminary plat to consist of 31 lots in five blocks for commercial and industrial building sites and CL_ outlots. Said approval is subject to and on condition that the Developer enter into this agreement. 1.04. Public Improvements. The Developer has petitioned the City to construct and install, in accordance with City standards, the fol- lowing public improvements within the plat and to have the cost thereof assessed against all benefitted properties therein under the provisions of Chapter 429 of Minnesota Statutes: 1. street grading, stabilizing and bituminous surfacing; 2. surmountable concrete curbs and gutters; 3. sanitary sewer mains; 4. water mains; 5. storm and surface water drainage_ The Chanhassen City Council, on 1978, authorized the construction of said public improvements as Project 78-3, subject to and on the condition that Developer furnish the City with certain financial guarantees more fu�el set forth in that certain assessment guarantee agreement dated r���z p' 1979 between the City and the Developer. -2- Rev. RHL 6/21/79 1.05. Other Improvements. The Developer has made application to the City to be allowed at Developer's expense to construct, install and perform all work and furnish all materials in connection with the installation of the following improvements: 1. street signs; 2. underground electrical, telephone and gas public utility lines; and 3. street lighting. SECTION 2. IMPROVEMENTS BY DEVELOPER. 2.01 Construction. Developer agrees.at its expense to construct, install and perform all work and furnish all materials and equipment in connection with the installation of the following improvements: 1. street signs; 2. underground electrical, telephone, and gas public utility lines; and 3. street lighting. 2.02. Standards of Construction. Developer agrees that all of the improvements described in Section 2.01 above shall equal or exceed City standards, shall be construed and installed in accordance with engineering plans and specifications -approved by the City Engineers and the requirements of applicable City ordinances and standards, and that all of said work shall be subject to the supervision of the City Engineers. 2.03. Materials and Labor. All of the materials to be employed in the making of the improvements described in Section 2.01 and all of the work performed in connection therewith shall be of uniformly good and workmanlike quality, shall equal or exceed City standards and specifications, and shall be subject to the inspection and approval of the City. In case any material or labor supplied shall be rejected by the City as defective or unsuitable, then such rejected material shall be removed and replaced with approved material, and rejected labc shall be done anew to the satisfaction and approval of the City at the cost and expense of the Developer. -3- 2.04. Schedule of Work. The Developer shall submit a written schedule indicating the proposed progress schedule and order of com- pletion of work covered by Section 2.01 of this contract, which schedule shall be a part of this contract. Upon receipt of written notice from the Developer of the existence of causes over which the Developer has no control which will delay the completion of the work, the City, in its discretion, may extend the dates specified for completion. SECTION 3. GENERAL CONDITIONS. 3.01. Final Grading Plan. The Developer agrees to cause its engineers to prepare a final grading plan encompassing all the lots within Blocks 1,2,3,4, and 5, except Lot 11, Block 1, which grading plan shall be approved by the City. I 3.02'. Reimbursement of Costs. The Developer shall reimburse the City for all costs, including reasonable engineering, legal, planning and administrative expenses incurred by the City in connection with all matters relating to the administration and enforcement of the within agreement and the performance thereof by the Developer. 3.03. Disclaimer by City. It is understood and agreed that the City, the City Council, and the agents and employees of the City shall not be personally liable or responsible in any manner to the Developer, the Developer's contractors or subcontractors, materialmen,.laborers, nor to any other person, firm or corporation whomsoever, for any debt, claim, demand, damages, actions or causes of action of any kind or character arising out of or by reason of.the execution of this agree- ment or the performance and completion of the work and improvements hereunder; and that the Developer will save the City, the City Council, and the agents and employees of the City harmless from any and all claims, damages, demands, actions or causes of action arising there- from and the costs, disbursements, and expenses of defending the same. 3.04. Written Work Orders. The Developer shall do no work nor furish materials not covered by the plans and specifications for which reimbursement is expected from the City unless a written order for such work or materials is received from the City. Any such work or materials which may be done or furnished by the Developer without such written order first being given shall be at its own risk, cost and expense, and Developer hereby agrees that without such written order, Developer will.make no claim for compensation for work or materials so done or furnished. 3.05. Erosion Control. Developer, at its expense, shall provide temporary dams, earthwork or such other devices and practices, including seeding of graded areas, as shall be needed, in the judgment of the City Engineers, to prevent the washing, flooding, sedimentation and erosion of lands and roads within and contiguous to the plat during all phases of construction, including construction on individual lots. Rev. RHL 6/21/79 `_1 V. RHL 6/29/79 Developer and its agents and assigns shall keep all streets free of all dirt and debris resulting from construction by the Developer, its agents or assigns, upon the lands described in Exhibit A hereto. 3.06. Street Lighting. The expense of furnishing electrical energy for street lighting purposes within the plat shall be assumed by the City 36 months after the completion of installation of the street lighting system, or after 50 % of the commercial and indus- trial building sites have been improved by the construction of com- mercial or industrial buildings thereon, whichever is first to occur. 3.07. Replacement of Defective Work All work and materials per- formed and furnished hereunder by the Developer, its agents and sub- contractors, found by the City to be defective within one year after acceptance by the City, shall be replaced -by Developer at its sole expense. 3.08. Liability Insurance. The Developer shall take out and main- t sari, so long as the Developer's obligations continue under this agreement, public liability and property damage insurance covering personal injury, including death, and claims for property damage which may arise out of the Developer's work or the work of its subcontractors, or by one directly or indirectly employed by any of them. Limits for bodily injury or death shall be not less than $ 300,000 for one person and $ 500,000 for each accident; limits for property damage shall be not less than $ 100,000 for each accident. The City shall be named as an additional named insured on said, policy, and the Developer shall file a copy of the insurance coverage with the City. 3.09. Building Permits. No building permits shall be issued for, construction on individual lots prior to the completion of the public improvements as provided in Project 78-3, or, in the alternative, unless the City Councilshall make a determination that said public improvements will be completed prior to occupancy of the principal structures upon individual lots. Applicants for all building permits shall be bound by all applicable building application requirements of the City, including City approval of site plans and building design and construction as required by §9.06 of the Chanhassen Zoning Ordinance, and other appropriate sections. 3.10. Occupancy of Buildings. The occupancy of any building within said plat for commercial or industrial purposes shall be prohibited by the City until municipal sanitary sewer and water lines shall have been installed and are available_to serve the lot for which a building per- mit shall have been issued. 3.11. Remedies Upon Default. 1. Assessments. In the event the Developer shall default in the performance of any of the covenants and agreements herein contained, and such default shall not have been cured within ten (10) days after receipt by the Developer of written MIE notice thereof, the City, if it so elects, may cause any of. the required improvements to be constructed and installed, or may take action to cure said default, and may cause the entire cost thereof, including all reasonable engineering, legal and administrative expense incurred by the City, to be recovered as a special assessment under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, in which case the Developer agrees to pay the entire amount of the assessment roll pertaining to any such improvement within 60 days after its adoption. In addition, Developer further agrees that in the event of its failure to pay in full any such special assessment within the time prescribed herein, the City shall have a specific lien on all of Developer's real property within said plat for any amount so unpaid, and the City shall have the right to foreclose said lien in the manner prescribed for the foreclosure of mechanic's liens under the laws of the State of Minnesota. In the event of an emergency, as deter- mined by the City Engineers, the notice requirements to the Developer shall be and hereby are waived in their entirety, and the Developer shall reimburse the City for any expense incurred by the City in remedying the conditions creating the emergency. 2. Performance Bond.. In addition to the foregoing, the City may also institute legal action against the Developer and the corporate surety on its performance bond, or utilize any cash deposit or letter of credit furnished pursuant to* this contract, to reimburse the City for the cost of making any of said improvements or for the cost of curing any default by the Developer in its performance of any of the covenants and agreements contained herein. 3. Legal Proceedings. In addition to the foregoing, the City may institute any proper action or proceeding at law or'at equity to prevent violations of the within development con- tract, or to restrain or abate violations of this development contract-. 3.12. Special Landscaping Conditions. At the time of sale by the Developer of each of the commercial or residential building sites, the Developer shall advise its purchasers in writing that landscaping and location of structures on individual lots shall be determined through discussions between City staff and the building permit applicant prior to issuance of building permits, subject to the following standards and conditions: 1. Landscaping and location of sideration the preservation surface drainage, prevention tial site problems. structures shall take into con -- of trees, slope protection,'sub- of siltation, and similar poten- Rev. RHL 6/29/79 `2. In the event agreement cannot be reached between the City Staff and the building permit applicant, the City shall have the right, at the expense of the building permit applicant, to engage the services of the City Engineer, Planner, a land= scape architect, a soil conservation consultant, and others, to advise as to specific problems. 3. The certificate of occupancy for each lot, or covenants and restrictions, may contain conditions for tree maintenance, and restrictions on tree removal, after consultations with the City Forester. 4. Individual site drainage, basement waterproofing and footing drains for each structure to be constructed within the plat. shall be installed when necessary and appropriate. SECTION 4. SPECIAL CONDITIONS. 4.01. Lot 9, Block 1, Service Road Access Easement. There shall be dedicated on the final plat a service road access easement 50 feet in width on Lot 9, Block 1 for the exclusive use of the owners of Lots 8, 9, and 10, Block 1, for ingress and egress purposes to Carver County Road No. 17. The location of said easement on Lot 9 shall be located and constructed as recommended by the City Engineers and approved by the City. Said service road shall be constructed and maintained in a good state of repair by the Developer, its successors and assigns. 4.02. Outlot I Building Restrictions. For the purposes of this agreement, reference is made to a proposed preliminary plat of Chanhassei Lakes Business Park, drawn February 21, 1978, as prepared for Developer by Urbanscope, and depicting proposed sediment and erosion control devicE which proposed preliminary plat, for purposes set forth in this §4.02, is attached hereto as Exhibit D. Outlot I of the plat shown on Exhibit A (which has been approved as the preliminary plat of Phase I by the.City on April 17, 1978 and June 4, 1979) includes proposed future Blocks 8,9, 10,11 and 12 as depicted on said Exhibit D.- With respect to said proposed Block 11 of Exhibit D (said Block 11 beinc a part of Outlot I), it is agreed between the City and the Developer, its successors and assigns, as follows: 1. No structure shall be erected, the ground level elevation of which shall be less than 935 feet above sea level -at present grade, or within 200 feet horizontal distance from the ordinary high water line of Lake Susan, whichever is more restrictive, on Lots 3,4,5,6, and 7 of said proposed Block 11 (as shown on Exhibit D). 2. No structure shall be erected on Lots 8 and 9 of said proposed Block 11 (as shown on Exhibit D) within 200 feet horizontal dis tance from the ordinary high water line of Lake Susan. 3. The intent of the foregoing restrictions is to screen, as effectively as possible, structural development on Outlot I fro the view of residential properties on the easterly and southerl shores of Lake Susan. 4.03. Side and Rear Lot Utility Easements. Side and rear lot utility easements of a width determined by the City Engineer shall be shown and dedicated on the final plat. Rev. 6/29/79 RHL 4.04. Development Phases. The platting ana'development of sa-ia- 31 o s into five blocks for commercial and industrial constitute Phase I of Chanhassen Lakes Business Park. Outlots as depicted on said preliminary plat are reserved by Developer subdivision, platting and development in successive phases. the afore - sites shall D,F,G, and for future 4.05. Park Drive State Highway No. 5 Access. Developer agrees to pay all costs related to the Park Drive access to State Highway No. 5 includir turn lanes, acceleration -deceleration lanes, and other improvements re- quired by'the City and Minnesota Department of Transportation. Said costs shall include all construction costs and City engineering, legal and ad- ministrative costs related to said access, and may include the constructic costs of restricting or closing said access if found necessary in the future. 4.06. Outlots A,B,C,E,H, & J. Upon the filing of the final plat with the Carver County Recorder, the Developer and the respective fee and contract for deed owners thereof shall forthwith grant to the City, with- out cost, an unrestricted perpetual easement over Outlots A,B,C,E,H, and J of the plat for use by the City for City sanitary sewer trunk lines, storm water holding areas and ponds, and soil'and water conservation. areas. Said easement shall be in written form suitable for recording with the Carver County Recorder. 4.07. Performance Bonds. For the purpose of assuring and guaranteeing to the City that the Developer's costs for improvements to be constructed, installed and furnished by the Developer as set forth in S§2.01, 4.01 and 4.05 hereof shall be constructed, installed and furnished according to the terms of this agreement, and that the Developer shall pay all claims for work done and materials and supplies furnished for the performance of this agreement, and that Developer shall fully comply with all of the other terms and provisions of this development contract, the Developer agrees to furnish to the City a cash deposit, a corporate surety bond approved by the City as obligee thereunder, or an irrevocable letter of credit approved by the City in amounts equal to 110% of the estimated costs of said improvements as determined by the City consulting engineers. 4.08.. Compliance with Laws, Ordinances and Regulations. In the de- velopment of the plat the Developer shall comply with all laws, ordinances and regulations of the following authorities: 1. City of Chanhassen; 2. State of Minnesota, its agencies, departments and commissions; 3. United States Army.Corps of Engineers; 4. Riley -Purgatory Creek Watershed District. 4.09. Covenants and Restrictions. Developer has submitted to the City for.the City's approval proposed Chanhassen Lakes Business Park Develop— ment Covenants and Restrictions, which proposed covenants and restrictions are attached hereto as Exhibit C and incorporated herein. The zoning ordinances and regulations of the City shall govern if inconsistent with said covenants and restrictions to the extent actually inconsistent; but if not inconsistent therewith, the standards contained in said covenants and restrictions shall be considered as requirements in addition to said City ordinances and regulations. Except as qualified herein, said covenants and restrictions are hereby approved by the City. Rev. 6/29/ 79 RHL f _ 4.10 Proof of Title.' Upon request, the Developer shall furnish the City with evidence satisfactory to the City that it has the authority of the fee owners and contract for deed purchasers to enter into this development contract. 4.11. Duration of This Contract. This contract shall remain in force until such time as the'Developer shall have fully performed all of its duties and obligations under this contract. Upon the written request of the Developer and upon the adoption of a resolution by the Chanhassen City Council finding that the Developer has fully complied wi all of the terms of this contract and -finding -that the Developer has completed performance of all of Developer's duties mandated by this contract, the. Chanhassen City Manager shall issue to the Developer on behalf of the City an appropriate certificate of compliance. SECTION 5. MISCELLANEOUS. 5.01. Notices. All notices, certificates and other communications hereunder shall be sufficiently given and shall be deemed given when mailed by certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, with proper address as indicated below. The City and the Developer, by written notice given by one to the other, may designate any address or addresses to which notices, certificates or other communications to them shall be sent when required as contemplated by this agreement. Unless otherwise provided by the respective parties, all notices, certificates, and communications to each of them shall be addressed as follows: To the City: City of Chanhassen City Hall 7610 Laredo Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Attn: City Manager To Developer: Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, Ltd. c/o Dunn & Curry Real Estate Management, Inc. 4940 Viking Drive Edina, MN 55435 5.02. Binding Effect. This agreement shall inure to the benefit of and shall be binding upon the City and the Developer and their respectiv( successors and assigns. Nothing in this agreement, express or implied, shall give to any person, other than the parties hereto, and their respec tive successors and assigns hereunder, any benefit or other legal or equitable right, remedy or claim under this agreement. 5.03. Severability.. In the event any provisions of this agreement shall be held invalid, illegal, or unenforceable by any court of compe- tent jurisdiction, such holding shall not invalidate or render unenforce- able any other provision hereof; and the remaining provisions shall not in any way be affected or impaired thereby. 5.04. Execution of Counterparts. This agreement may be simultaneous] executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be an original, anc all of which shall constitute but one and the same instrument. 5.05. Construction. This agreement shall be construed in accor- dance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. _n_ IN WITNESS Lakes Business Park, be executed intheir above. ,.,tttit�,+lei±ter, [-SEA`6 ATTEST,.-) 1'S City Manager nttttU;, [SEAL] ATTEST; I s Treasurer STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF CARVER WHEREOF, the City of Chanhassen and Chanhassen Ltd., have caused this development contract to respective names as of the date first written ss. CI 0 CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK, LTD., a Minnes Limited Partnership, by. Dunn & u y R 1 Estate Management, Inc., a Minn t c. oration, general partner, By Its Pr sident On this /� day of , t,c.2.c.,r , 1979, _before me, a notary public -within and for said county, personally appeared Walter Hobbs and -Donald W. Ashworth, to me personally known, who, being by me duly sworn,did say that they are respectively the Mayor and City Manager of the City of Chanhassen named in the foregoing instrument, and that said instrument-was.signed and sealed in behalf of said corporation by authority of its City Council, and said Walter Hobbs and Donald W. Ashworth acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said corporation. o,tary - Pudic STATE OF MINNESOTA ) M& '11 Wd —idn. uD!-iwwop dyy y / ) s s . A1NnOO 89AWV3 COUNTY OF 1162VM IAl ) vaos�r,Hiw -�nend Aadlont 1CUVH13JN3 'f N38V)4 On this i?D ,3 -- day of WcltY e ore me, a notary public within and for said county, personally appeared and, to me personally known, who, being each by me duly sworn, did say that they are respectively the President and the %'reasurer of Dunn & Curry Real Estate Management, Inc., general. partner of Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, Ltd., a Minnesota Limited Partner- ship, named in the foregoing instrument as the Developer, and that said instrument was signed and sealed in behalf of said partnership, and said [� :,DtoyAl • - and ,i-? C' acknowledge said instrument to be the free act and deed of said partnership. Notary Public 00 r RUSsELL H. CARBON NOTARY PUBLIC—MjrJrgESOTA *Y Commas onpVER COUN�TY 2 1982 -11- 0, CITY DF � CHANHASSEN 7610 LAREDO DRIVEOP 0. BOX 1476CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 474-8885 PLANNING REPORT DATE: May 31, 1979 TO: City Manager, Don Ashworth FROM: Assistant Manager/Planner, Bob Waibel SUBJ: Final Plat Review, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park APPLICANT: Dunn and Curry Real Estate Management, Inc. PLANNING:CASE: P-054 The following items are attached for your consideration in reviewing the final plat of the subject item: 1). Proposed final plat; 2). Entrance revision dated 5-17-79; 3). Preliminary plat; 4). May 22, 1979, letter from MnDOT re: highway 5 access; 5). Planning Commission and Council minutes re: subject item; 6). Proposed covenants and restrictions. 7). Planning Report dated May 21, 1979. You will note from the Planning report dated May 21, 1979, that there are two major revisions between the proposed final plat, and the preliminary plat which are the deletion of the westerly most cul-de-sac in the preliminary plat, and a change in a point of direct access from park drive onto Highway 5.. As you know, soil boring samples have determined that constructing a cul-de-sac in the vicinity of block 1 as shown on the preliminary plat, would be most difficult. The net result of the unavailability of this cul-de-sac, Vas that an access plan must be developed for those lots on the western side of the plat so that the collector status of Audubon Road (old County Road 17) will be preserved. Since the Planning Commission review of May 23, 1979, I have researched the soils and slope conditions along the western edge of the plat, and find that,preliminarily,there should be no physical impediments to constructing a joint access planned for lots 8, 9, 10 and 11 of block 1 of the proposed final plat (previously under the Animal Fair proposals, lot 11 had separate access approval, however, I believe that ordinance provides that if no development action is taken within a reasonable period of time, that the property in question may be reverted back to its original zoning thus nullifying any prior development plans. Thus I would recommend that lot 11 be enjoined in a common access with lots 8, 9 and 10 of block l.). Attached to Mr. Don Ashworth -2- May 31, 1979 your copy of the proposed final.plat of Chanhassen Lakes Business Park is insert plan revision 5-17-79 which shows the presently proposed Park Dr. access from the business park to Highway 5. The original proposed final plat had the direct access directly across from_ the existing access from Lake Ann Park. Pursuant to the letter of May 22, 1979, and the memorandum of May 17, 1979, from MhDOT, the revision plan was developed which moved the intersection approximately 525 feet east of the Lake Ann entrance on the south side of Highway 5. At this point, the Department of Transportation would give a permit for left-in/left-out access, however, they noted that right turn -on and right turn-off is preferable. My.initial report on this recommended that this intersection only have full left access on a temporary basis, and that when new County 17 is opened for travel, that the Park Drive access to Highway 5 be limited to right turn -in and right turn- out only. The Planning Commission recommended that the right-in/right- out access requirements for the park drive access be an item for future reconsideration rather than a requirement of platting at this time. The approval of the final plat with or without akmandatory right -in/. right -out requirement for park Drive, may be a judgement call, however, I feel that the present conditions of Highway 5 deem right-in/right-out access at this time, with the full understanding that full left access will be needed until the completion of new County 17, and I do not anticipate any marked,,improvements of the accessibility or mobility of Highway 5 in the near future. The Planning Commission "moved to approve the development covenants and restrictions as presented with with the proviso that a further investi- gation be made to identify whether or not further design controls and architectural review should be incorporated either -into this document or to the development contract." This office concurs with the Planning Commission on this aspect and recommends that an attempt be made to contribute more substance to the carrying out of architectural harmony either through the covenants and restrictions, development contract, or city ordinances. Recommendation I recommend that the Council approve the proposed final plat for Chanhassen Lakes Business Park with the following conditions: 1). That the city engineer approve a joint access plan for lots 8, 9, 10 and 11 of block 1 and that said plan be referred to as an exhibit in the development contract. 2). That the park drive access to TH 5 be controlled for right-in/right-out access at a time when new County 17 is open for travel. 3). That more substance be given to the ways and means of carrying out architectural harmony either through the covenants and restrictions, development contract, or city ordinances. 4). That all pertinent conditions set forth in the preliminary development plan review be incorporated into the development contract and final plat.�s��"r'�d; �, i -3- May 31, 1979 Manager's Comments Council action this evening is to consider final plat approval. It was anticipated that the development contract could be considered as a part of this evenings action; however, back logs within the attorneys office have prevented this. It -is the recommendation of this office that comments in regards to the covenants be withheld until such time as these can be reviewed as a part of the overall development contract. It should be recognized that with final plat approval and agreement to the development contract the last pieces of the puzzle will have fallen into place - pieces which all other approvals have been conditioned upon, i.e. 1). Zoning was previously approved (including setback lines, public open space dedications, heights, uses, etc.) conditioned upon public improvements being constructed and final plat being approved; 2). Public improvements were ordered conditioned upon obtaining right of ways and gaining approvals of MWCC, Metropolitan Council, Watershed District, etc.; and upon the developer entering into an oversizing agreement and financial guarantee agreement; 3). Contracts have been let for Phase I construction (sewer and water) and financial guarantees received. Phase II construction (all remaining construction, i:.e. streets, grading, storm sewer, curbs, etc.) has been let conditioned upon receipt of financial guarantees. Although not received at the time of this writing, such are anticipated by Monday evening or shortly thereafter. Final plat conditions are required at this time to assure that Phase I construction and Phase II construction does not proceed ahead of any potential changes in street design or alignment. Final Plat Considerations - This office strongly supports the recommendations of the Assistant Manager/Planner: 1). Construction of the westerly (interior) cul-de-sac was not possible. This was deleted as a part of the construction bids. It is not feasible to consider another alignment. To insure that old County 17 can function, a common access drive should be considered for these lots (see preliminary plat - exhibit A in comparison to proposed final plat - exhibit B) . 2). Access to Highway 5 will be required until such time as new County 17 is completed, such being in advance of new County 17 construction. However, three full turning movement intersections within a relatively short distance (old County 17, new proposed access to Highway 5, and County 17) cannot be recommended. PETITION Dunn and Curry Real Estate Management, Inc. hereby petitions the city council of the City of Chanhassen to approve the following with respect to the Chan- hassen Lakes Business Park P.I.D.: 1. Expand and modify the phasing of the Chanhassen Lakes Business Park P.I.D. in accordance with Exhibit A attached. 2. Adopt the revised Feasibility Study (#9564) prepared by the City Engineer dated May 15, 1978 (Exhibit B). 3. Expand the assessment area along C.S.A.H. #17 from Trunk Highway 5 to Lyman Boulevard to cover only the costs of acquisition of all buildings to be taken by the right-of-way of that road. In order to deliver on this petition the Applicant hereby agrees to the following: 1. To expand the project development area to include Phase IA. 2. To waive any additional required public hearings that might be re- quired for a change in phasing and expansion of work areas. 3. To accept the costs of those im- provements in the form of assessments on those parcels abutting the im- provements in Phase IA. 4. To provide the city with the required 80' rights -of -way for the frontage roads from C.S.A.H. #17 to the east- erly property line of the proposed Planned Industrial Development (Phase IA) . This petition is made this 27th day of May, 1978, by the Applicant. OWNER: L APPLICANT: Dunn and Curry Real Estate Managem nt, Inc. By AR PLANNING CO! _SSION MEETING May 23, 1979 1 Page 3 3. That the applicant's building plans show all setbacks conforming to Ordinance 45, and do not encroach upon the flood zone and open space area. The Assistant City Attorney recommended denial on the following grounds: 1. There is not sufficient information to review this proposal; 2. The planning commission has in the past indicated that it is their policy to discourage the division of unsewered properties, and that being the case, it was suggested that all of the applicable ordinances should be strictly construed to hold such divisions to an absolute minimum. Pat Swenson moved to close the public hearing at 8:25 p.m. Motion seconded by Clark Horn, and unanimously approved. A discussion of the previous public hearing then took place. Roman Roos - Based on what Craig mentioned and also what staffs recommendation was, it is true that we do not have sufficient information, no where do I see exactly how many square feet or what is the size of the parcel. I guess.I would like to buy a little time on this one. Clark Horn moved to table the matter until further information is supplied by the applicant. Motion seconded by Walter Thompson, and unanimously approved. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW, LAKE SUSAN HILLS BUSINESS PARK Mr. Ed Dunn made a presentation, the specific subject was the Northwest corner of Highway 5 and Old 17, pointing out the changes from the old plan, and showing how they appear on the new plan. The recommendations of the Assistant Manager/ Planner were as follows: In recognition of the severe soil conditions discovered in the vicinity of lots 4-10 of Block 1, and in recognition of the preservation of accessibility on Audubon as paramount, it is his recommendation that the city engineer expeditiously prepare a map for the planning department that would show the areas of poor soils so that an access plan for lots 8, 9 and 10 can be incorpor- ated into a final plat at this time, and if this cannot be accomplished, he recommended that the recommendation to require the final plat to indicate lots 4 through 10 as outlots until the access situation can be studied further be included in,:the planning commission's decision. On the access to Highway 5, he recommended that the left turn access be provided for temporarily as shown in revision 5-17-79 and that said access be reduced to a right -in -/right -out access as approved by MnDOT and the engineer at the time whbni:= County State Aid Highway 17 is open for travel. A letter was presented from MnDOT dated May 22, 1979 stating two alternatives which they feel are acceptable for access to TH 5. Alternative 1 is a proposal for leaving the entrance opposite the Lake Ann entrance. However, because of their concern about left turns to this entrance, they recommend Conly right turns on and right turns off at this location. REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 23, 1979 Page 4 Alternative 2 is a proposed new location approximately 525 feet + east of Alter- nate 1. Here they propose a tee intersection which wouldi also line up with any future access north of TH 5. They feel that the tee intersection with proper turn and by-pass lanes is acceptable at this location. Mr. Dunn stated there are so many questions that are just not answerable today, there isn't any way they can project as far as statistics etc., so their request is simply that the left turn access be provided, and that it can be reconsidered later by MnDOT and the engineers as conditions warrant. Roman Roos - Do you have any comments on either topic, first being this access. Jerry Neher - I don't quite understand - temporary access you are looking for now. I travel it quite often. I don't know what bearing Lots 4, 5, and 6 have on it personally as long as they have taken that cul de sac out of there. I have no problem with it. Roman Roos - If that were made a permanent frontage road, a tee frontage road. Would you have a problem with that, you are looking at 4 acre parcels. I don't know how 17 could be used that heavily. That is the reason I caution the word "temporary", that we have some control on it. Walter Thompson - I don't have any problems with the establishment of a frontage road there really. Pat Swenson - Would it be a major project to run a true frontage road across those three lots and down? Mr. Dunn - I wonder if we are not having a problem with definition of size. This is 100 acre parcel of ground, and this is a half a mile. It would impact this lot, because you take away whatever that is, 40 or 50 feet of its area, plus the fact that the grade is such that this comes up here. I am not sure about the soils in this area. I think we would be creating a very long service road and I think it would be difficult to move traffic, and it would be next to impossible to maintain, and it would be a very strenuous solution for such a simple problem. Animal Fair is on their own, and I presume they will have their own egress onto 17. Pat Swenson - I am just visualizing three accesses in a "half mile" onto 17. I guess this concerns me a little, if the traffic ever really gets moving on 17. Do we have any kind of projection as to what the anticipated usage of that road is? Roman Roos - 17 will be alleviated - traffic on old 17 by new 17 going across. Gordon Freeburg - That tee that you are projecting in there, would that function as a city street? Would it be maintained by the city? Craig Mertz - I guess ideally we would like to tell the developer that the city would own the land, but we wouldn't do the maintenance work. REGULAR PLANNING COihMISSION MEETING May 23, 1979 Page 5 Gordon Freeburg - If it is a city street then it is going to have to be a cul-de-sac so a snow plow can turn around, we are going to have to maintain it, so it is going to take a considerable hunk of land out of there. Pat Swenson - If that 17 is only going to be just a virtually unused street, what is the objection with having the entrances onto the street? Roman Roos - There is a time frame. Bob Waibel - I think 17 is already in pretty good use right now, it seems like a major spine going through our open area right now, and out of habit people just use it, it is a major route to Chaska. Pat Swenson - This is why I am confused, because I can't, you say all this traffic is going to be delegated to the other 17. Bob Waibel - No, I think there will probably be a 50-50 split. It is still going to be one of those collector status streets. It is about a mile from the new 17. Roman Roos - I think there are several ways to look at this, because of the soil that would mean they would have to modify the road on the plat. That would mean that those three would have to be outlets for now, or possibly some kind of a road access into them. We wouldn't want three road accesses onto 17 at this point in time along with Park Avenue, along with Animal Fair. If we can still give the developer the option of selling those lots with -:,an access on 17 with a tee frontage road, then we solie his problem, yet we got. in under control in terms of contract. Pat Swenson - What you are saying is that while 17 is as busy as it is, you are eliminating two accesses. So we are still going to wind up with 3 within a half a mile. This disturbs me almost as much as 5, and I think we are having a great deal of conversation and I can't see that this is going to eliminate that much of the problem. Julius Smith - I don't think 3 accesses on a collector street in a city that are essentially 2 blocks apart, 3 blocks apart, is excessive access. Mr. Dunn - I think you are talking about standard and traffic counts and that sort of thing, and it may well happen that conceivably although it is hard to say when, that 17 would be upgraded to something that is basically a 2 lane local road. It is currently a county road and is functioning as such. I should point out that new 17 is a 4 lane divided limited access road. This, with a controlled intersection here or possibly tees and maybe some day actually with an overpass, but it is a major road and that is the future road that goes south into the county. That it why they designed it and are building it that way. It will carry, and most people will choose to take that route north and south, when it is available. This then gets relegated to some secondary use. Walter Thompson - Remember, that when 212 if it ever goes in, then the access onto 212 is going to be from the new 17, not the old one. REGULAR PLANNING CO�u-.SSION MEETING May 23, 1979 Page 6 . Mr. Dunn - That's why it is 4 lane divided, it will carry heavy traffic. Bob Waibel - I would like to research the possibility of including 8, 9, 10 and 11 on that one access at that point. Pat Swenson - Do you have, can you project at all the number of people who might be using that road? How many people are employed at Animal Fair? Mr. Dunn - 150 is the number that I hear. Pat Swenson - I guess I am complicating my own question because as we are talking here I suddenly see all these people egressing on one road, descending on it at one time, and I am seeing people anxious to get home and a back up of traffic which may be a greater hazzard than having the accesses so people can get out more readily. Pat Swenson moved to make recommendation for a tee access road on Lot 9, serving Lots 8 and 10. Motion seconded by Walter Thompson. Gordon Freeburg - I would like to see in the motion or somewhere that it would be legally defined what is going to be a city street or private property. Craig Mertz - Tile could say that X number of west feet of Lots 81 9 and 10 be dedicated for public right of way purposes. What that X number would be I am not prepared to,say. I think you would need a recommendation from the engineer how far back in the property you would go. I would assume that the city council would say that even though that west number of feet was dedicated, that that would be private maintenance responsibility, and that could be covered in the contract. Roman Roos - I think the only other comment I have is that if staff can work out with Animal Fair and join with you people the common access off of either your lot to Animal Fair or vice versa, something that would be of this connotation, I would like to see this motion go to the council. If that is agreeable. Unanimously approved. COVENANTS The Assistant City Attorney discussed the covenants for the Chanhassen Lakes Business Park Development.He stated the city may want to incorporate some more specific standards in either this document or the development contract, a requirement of uniformity of exterior materials. Mr. Dunn stated that the covenants are over and above the ordinances. They can't do anything that is not allowed in the ordinance. These covenants were installed to give them a degree of quality control that exceeds what the ordinances might spell out. Clark Horn moved to approve the development covenants and restrictions as presented with the proviso that a further investigation be made to identify whether or not further design controls and architectural review should be incorporated either into this document or into the development contract. Motion seconded by Jerry Neher. The following voted in favor: Pat Swenson, Jerry Neher, Roman Roos, Clark Horn and Gordon Freeburg. Walter Thompson voted no. Motion approved. REGULAR PLANNING COi_ _SSION MEETING May 23, 1979 Page 7 LEFT TURN ACCESS Roman Roos - I have no problem with the right in -right out as per staff right now, but I do think the developers, upon reconsideration, is a valid point. Gordon Freeburg - I still think that something should be done, or some consideration be given to closing that at the time that new 17 is functional, making that a dead end cul-de-sac or whatever, and not an exit/'entrance onto Highway 5 at that time. Clark Horn - Yes, I agree with that. I think that it is a problem right now on Highway 5. I don't think it is a future problem. It is with us now. I support the right in/right out. Jerry Neher - My only hesitation when I seconded Pat's motion was the fact that she had in there as recommended by the 14nDOT. Pat Swenson - It is according to Bob's paragraph here, he said as approved by MOOT. Bob Waibel- That would mean at a future date. Walter Thompson Mr. Dunn - Alternative 2 is the one that is acceptable to us. At this point in time we have no other access from Highway 5 to the property, and restricted to right in/right out at this time is to say we can't get on to the property. Nobody coming from the east can get in. Nobody heading toward the west can get out except to go out through 17 off of 5. That is a very very heavy restriction. At this time anything other than full access at that point would be not feasible, and the property in effect then,can not be developed. Roman Roos - I have to agree with both Clark and Gordon. I think we have to look at a phasing situation. I think right now it is paramount that we do have accesses there. If we have under control, the city, that at some point in time we can revise or review, or any time the city so determines that that is a hazzard, that it go under review for reconsideration, and that is in the motion, then I would go along with the motion, but if not I couldn't go along with the motion. Pat Swenson moved that we accept or recommend Alternate 2 of MnDOT's letter of May 22, 1979, with the proviso that if at any time it should prove that this is unacceptable to the city and a traffic hazzard, that we will have the right of revocation. Motion seconded by Jerry Neher, and unanimously approved. Clark Horn stated it should be entered in the minutes that we recommend that at such time as new 17 goes through, that the other area be closed. Bob Waibel stated that all of the provisions and conditions of the preliminary plat will be included in the final plat, except as changed as needed, and as would appear in either the plat or the development contract. Minnesota Department of Transportation District Five 5801 Duluth Street Golden valley, Minnesota 55422 (612) 545.3761 May 22, 1979 Mr. Bob Waibel City. Planner 7610 Laredo Drive Chanhassen, Minnesota. 55317 S.P. 2701. T.H. 5 Proposed entrance to T.H. 5 for Chanhassen Lakes Business Park South of T.H. 5 between West and East Jct. of CSAH 17 Dear Mr. Waibel: As per our discussion at the meeting that was held on May 14 in our Bassett Creek Office, I have attached two alternatives which we feel are acceptable for access to TH 5. Alternative 1 is a proposal for leaving the entrance opposite the Lake Ann entrance. However because of our concern about left turns to this entrance, we recommend only right turns on and right turns off at this . location. Alternative 2 is a proposed new location approximately 525.feet + east of Alternate 1. Here we propose a tee intersection which would also line up with any future access north of TH 5. We feel that the tee intersection with. proper turn and by-pass lanes is acceptable at this location. The developer has already submitted a sketch of a revised plat to match this location. It should be understood that the developer will be responsible for all necessary turn lane construction on TH 5. For your information I have enclosed preliminary drawings of both alternatives along with the minutes of our last meeting. Copies of this letter and the alternatives are also being sent to the developer. If you have any questions in regard to this matter, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, i1 22P3�r����t� L AY1979 a Evan R. Green RECEIVED ` Proj ect Manager ERG :b n. An Equal Opportunity Employer CITY OF doh CHANHASSEN 7610 LAREDO DRIVE*P.O. BOX 147+CHANBASSEN, MINN ESOTA 55317 (612) 474-8885 PLANNING REPORT DATE: May 21, 1979 TO: Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Assistant Manager/Planner, Bob Waibel SUBJ: Lake Susan Hills Business/Industrial Park, Final Development Plan Review APPLICANT: Dunn and Curry, Inc. PLANNING CASE: P-054 Attached hereto for your consideration and review, are the proposed final plat, and covenants and restrictions for this item. The plat consists of individual lots proposed to be platted at this time for Phase I, and Phases II and III platted as outlots. In comparing the proposed final plat with your copy of the preliminary plat, you will note there are two major changes which are the elimination of the westerly most cul-de-sac on Park Road, and the realignment of the north/south street in the north central portion of the proposed Phase I. The elimination of the westerly most cul-de-sac has been brought forth because of soil borings rendering road construction unfeasible. The resulting effect of this is that the applicant is now presenting a plan that would imply the need for individual accesses for lots 8, 9, 10 and 11 of Block 1 onto Audubon Road, which, pursuant to the Transportation and Thoroughfares Plan, is to function as a minor collector. Lot 11 (Animal Fair development site) had received previous access approval because of the terrain features in the vicinity. Several methods of alleviating this potential problem come to mind and are as follows: 1). Require the final plat to indicate lots 4 through 10 as outlots until the access situation can be studied further. 2). To incorporate into the development contract, the requirement that lots 8, 9, 10, be planned so that a joint access may be built for these lots. Planning Commissio �\ -2- May 21, 1979 3). Allow for individual accesses at this time, and through the development contract, arrange for the reasonable contribution for assessments if and when Audubon Road exceeds capacity at State Highway 5, and subsequent improvements such as off -setting alignment and/or frontage roads are necessary, can be provided for. As significant costs would have been incurred through the construction of the westerly cul-de-sac as originally shown, this alternative was deleted from the current cont.truction contract. It could not be included simply because of the additional costs exceeding original construction estimates and would thus, if desired, in any location, require a separate public improvement project for separate construction required by the developer. This being the case, whether options 1, 2, or 3. were chosen, a separate contract would be required. The benefit of options 1 and 2 would be to restrict the access to old County 17 a goal in the original preliminary plat discussion. The benefit of option 3 is that it may be several years before any improvement would be required to old County 17, i.e. a significant investment in improvements in upgrading old County 17 may not be required for a 10 or 15 year period. Regarding the second major change on the proposed final plat, you will note on your copy of the preliminary plat that originally, the north/south road showed a cul-de-sac with the dashed line extending to Highway 5. From preliminary review, this would imply that a permanent cul-de-sac is to be constructed at the end of said north/ south street as a possible temporary access to Highway 5. A verbal report verifying this in detail will be given by myself at the time of the final plat review by the Planning Commission. On May 14, 1979, there was a meeting with traffic engineers of the Minnesota Dept. of Transportation District 5 attended by the applicant, the City engineer, and myself. At this meeting, the applicant was requesting the State Highway engineers to ascertain the possibilities of a full left turn access at the point proposed on the preliminary copy of the final plat. The MnDOT engineers stated that such an intersection could be accommodated with certain design conditions, however, it was also noted that any final approvals more restrictive than the MnDOT requirements are under the jurisdiction of the local unit of government. The MnDOT recommendation also included the changing of the access point due to sight distances, a copy of which has been included in your packet and noted as revision 5-17-79 final development plan, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park. This office has the following concerns regarding the Highway 5 access. I would recommend that a full left turn access be allowed only temporarily which would be terminated at the time when new County Road 17 is open for driving, and at this point in time proposed Park Drive would be reconstructed so as to only accomodate right in and right out accessibility designed to the approval of MnDOT traffic engineers and the city engineer. In perusing the proposed covenants and restrictions for Chanhassen Lakes Business Park Ltd., this office would recommend that the ways and means of the provision for the harmonious appearance of the business park be delineating further through the adoption of architectural standards. Additionally, I would recommend that the applicant prepare a 3 dimensional model of the business park to aid in the selection Planning Commissic- -3- May 21, 1979 of certain areas that would be most adept to businesses requiring outside storage and said locations could thus be included into the development contract as areas of permitted outside storage. The Assistant City Attorney will have additional comments regarding the proposed covenants and restrictions for presentation at the planning commission meeting. Recommendation In recognition of the severe soil conditions discovered in the vicinity of lots 4-10 of Block 1, and in recognition of the preservation of accessibility on Audubon as paramount, it is my recommendation that the city engineer expeditiously prepare a map for the planning department that would show the areas of poor soils so that an access plan for lots 8, 9 and 10 can be incorporated into a final plat at this time. If this cannot be accomplished, I would recommend the recommendation number 1 of page no. 1 of this report be included in the planning commission's decision. On the access to Highway 5, I recommend that the left turn access be provided for temporarily as shown in revision 5-17-79 and that said access be reduced to a right-in/right-out access as approved by MnDOT and the engineer at the time which County State Aid Highway 17 is open for travel. (REV. a "' r r DEPAR'1•MVN'I TO FROM SUBJECT: t!L, I aL lauua U.L ti' I •1 1-11 i E•lan R. Green'�^ Project Manager r Q f fJt Memorandum SP 1002 T.H. 5 Proposed Entrance for Tomahawk Road to i—q. 5 opposite Lake Ann Park Entrance DATE: May 17, 1979 PHONE: 545-3761 ext. ll A meeting was held at the Bassett Creek Of____ to discuss the a:�ove referenced entrance. The following =;=,le attended: Bob Waibel City of Chanhassen, Plar_=== Ed Dunn Developer, Dunn & Curey Mike Wood Urbanscope Developers, r _=er Rodney Gordon Schoell & Madson, Inc. , 7-_.ineer Mike Robinson Mn/DOT - District 5 Tra-:=`_ = Engineer Gordon Adams Mn/DOT - District 5 Jack Reichel WDOT - District 5 Perm= _s Tom Anderle Mn/DOT - District 5 Per- _= Glen Ellis Mn/DOT - District 5 Fin- Design The Developer explained they wanted to lin- the proposed road with tLe Lake Ann Park entrance to make one commc_ intersection with an existing road on TH 5. Mike Robinson expla=.-:e', unless there is a lot of cross traffic from the development to t-- mark it may be more advantageous to bring the proposed road inc- =H 5, as a tee, at a separate intersection. Mike said after an --zing four legged inter- sections with turn and by-pass lanes, data-:n-icates a tee would be a Tsch safer intersection design. Lne developer indicated he also owns prope-� on the north side of iH 5 between Lake Ann Park and CSAH 17. H= = dicated he would be requesting access from the north side of T' It was then decided that some consideration should be given tc _,ing up the access on the north and south sides of TH 5, especially = =here will be traffic from one side of TH 5 to the other. This would _✓: o provide the best access if in the future a center island is -eeded on TH 5. The Developer suggested he change the plat T the south side of TH 5 so that Tomahawk Road comes out on TH 5 aF--: S:imately 600 feet east of its proposed location. Gordy Adams will f_ -:: check the proposed location and inform the Developer of a saf=I will develope a preliminary plan of the needed turn lanes :: he constructed by the Developer. Mike Robinson suggested the by-pass lane s -a:ad be strong enough to take mainline traffic, then if in the futu-_= when the north access is c onstr.ucte(l, we could possibly use it as a _- -p:;ss lane with a center l:ii,r striped out for left turns. The Devel. -per indicated he would hrel'cr to construct the minimum design necsaxy. He will ask soils for 2 different designs to see how much di=�-_rence in construction N, t t l he involved. N File: May 17, 1.979 Page 2 Bob Waibel stated that the City may prefer ----at the development obtain access at existing intersections of r.j 17 or be allowed right turn on and right turn off only at entrances. This would be preferable for Mn/DOT. On Tuesday, May 15, Gordy field checked the -=oposed revision for sight distance. He found if the entrance is moved too far east there is a sight problem due to the crest ve=ical curve just west of the proposed entrance. He recommends if _-_e entrance is moved easterly it should be moved no further than 1L5 feet east of the existing Lake Ann Park entrance. On Wednesday, May 16 I discussed the entrant= with Mike Robinson in relation to what Gordy had found out about t= = sight distance. Mike recommends we suggest the following two alter- ates : - Leave entrance at proposed location, __-C ever, allow only right turn off and right turn on. - Move entrances no further than Gordy r==ommended due to sight restrictions and design for full access. I will prepare sketches of the two alternate= and send them to the City and Developer. cc: D. W. Brown R. M. Rob inson - G. Adams J. B. Reichel - T. Anderle Central Files Fil e ERG:bn Riley- Purgatory Creek Watershed Distxic. 8950 COUNTY ROAD EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA 5534 May 3,. 1979 Mr. Kent Lokkesmoe Regional Hydrologist Department of Natural Resources 1200 Warner Road St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Re: North Lake.Susan Industrial Park - Phase II: Chanhassen Dear Mr. Lokkesmoe: The Board of Managers of the Riley -Purgatory Creek Watershed District has reviewed the plans, specifications and MDNR Chapter 105 permit application to work in public waters for Phase II of the North Lake Susan Industrial Park in Chanhassen. The plans indicated that a -crossing of Riley Creek is proposed and that a 45" x 73" RCP -A culvert is to be installed to carry the flow of Riley Creek. Watershed District criteria allow a maximum .5 feet of head loss through the proposed crossing. Our calculations indicate that to meet this requirement, A minimum 'culvert size of 62" x 102".RCP-A or equivalent is required: The plans also indicate that three stormwater storage/sedimentation basins are to be constructed on the development site. District criteria require that basement floors of buildings constructed adjacent to these basins be set a minimum. of 2 feet above the delineated 100-year frequency flood level for the basins. Our calculations indicate that for Pond 1, with a 6 cfs outlet, 13.4 acre-feet of flood storage is required. This results in a 100'-year frequency -flood level of 912.9. For Pond 3,-with a 4 cfs outlet, 1.2 acre-feet of flood storage is required. This results in a 100-year frequency flood level of 912.4. With the above referenced modifications and corrections being made to the plans, the Managers recommend that the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources approve the MDNR Chapter 105 Permit Applic.atiori for Phase II of the North Lake Susan Industrial Park subject to the following conditions: Mr. Kent Lokkesmoe Page 2 May 3, 1979 1. The District will require that all erosion control measures, as shown on the plans, be installed prior to the commencement of land alteration and be maintained until the altered areas on the site have been restored. The Watershed District must be notified after the erosion control measures have been installed so that the District's engineering advisor can inspect the erosion control measures. After. the engineering advisor has determined that the erosion control measures have been properly installed, the Managers will be so notified and land alteration can begin. Land alteration cannot begin. until the notification has been made to the Managers. The District:will require that staked hay bales reinforced with snow fence be installed wherever construction is within 50 feet of the centerline of Riley Creek. 2. The District will require that all work on the proposed, crossing of Riley Creek be completed within the period July 1 to September 1, 1979. The District will allow flow -in the creek to be temporarily bypassed by methods outlined in Schoell & Madson's correspondence of April 27, 1979 for a maximum of 5 weeks during the period July 1 to September 1, 1979. 3. The District will require that the three proposed sedimentation/ storage basins.be constructed at. the initial stage -of grading._ No work should be allowed in the bed of Riley Creek, and the erosion control measures for the north side of Pond 1 should be installed between the construction area and Riley Creek rather than -through the creek as shown on the plans. 4.. The District will require that all altered areas be restored with seed and mulch and/or sod or be hard surfaced within 30 days from the.completion of construction or no -later than September 15, 1979. 5. Should dewatering of the construction area be required, sedimentation basins must be constructed when sump pumps are used. Prior to the commencement of dewatering, plans for the sedimentation basins must be submitted to the District's engineering advisors. If you have any questions regarding the District's comments, please contact us at 920-0655. \,, s\incerely, \ Robert. C. Obermeyer BARR ENGINEERING CO. Engineers for the District RCO/lll Approved by the Board of Managers cc: Mr. Conrad Fiskness RILEY-E;URGATORY CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT Mr. Frederick Richards Mr. Bob Weibel/C'��iti,U'" ./� raw.resident Mr. Rodney Gordon Date: 0�a JULIUS C. SMITH Attorney at Law 100 YORKTOWN OFFICE COURT 7101 YORK AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55435 (612) 831-8530 Planning Director City of Chanhassen Chanhassen, Minnesota Dear Bob, Enclosed is a copy of the covenants for the Chanhassen Lakes Business Park. Please ignore the names of the Declarants and signatories - they may change - but rest assured I will have the correct parties in interest sign the document (we may have closed with Emmer Brothers by the time the plat is fit. ed). Let me know you comments. Than , j,-!lius C. Smith JCS/j m Encl. W\y_ -,.y a MAY197 Rec vtr WED QlftwjA r WILLIAM D SCHOELL CARLISLE MADSON JACK T. VOSLER JAMES R ORR f� HAROLD E. DAHUN LARRY L. HANSON RAYMOND J. JACKSON WILLIAM J. BREZINSKY JACK E. GILL RODNEY B GOROON THEODORE 0.KEMNA JOHN W. EMOND KENNETH E. ADOLF WILLIAM R. ENGELHARDT BRUCE C. SUNDING R. SCOTT HARRI DENNIS W. SAARI GERALD L. BACKMAN Board of Managers SCHOELL & MAOSON, iNc. ENGINEERS ANO SURVEYORS C n,S�: J r 1612) 938-7601 • 50 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH FOPK1 lS, fv11NN9 0* 15343 Referred :a: OFFICES AT HURON. SOUTH DAKOTA A149.0D{ENTON, T XA V i.0 riC;! .. .Q April 24 1979 Pla �ar_���/��+ - - Tlc�!fl::r Miley -Purgatory Creek Watershed District c/o Mr. Allen Gebhard Barr Engineering Company 6800 France Avenue South Edina, Minnesota 55435 Subject: Gentlemen: Parr.0 _ Uiiles P.ss - G'ili�r._.__ City of Chanhassen North Lake Susan Project 78-3 Phase I; Our File No. 9564 We are progressing well with the trunk sewer project between the existing manhole of the Lake Riley Trunk and Manhole 3 of our project. Manhole 3 is the first manhole completed by the Con- tractor when he was able to work along Lake Susan. He expects to tie into Manhole 3 in two or three days and has asked us to get permission from you to begin work again along the Lake. It does appear that the spring runoff is complete and the ground is dry- ing up. This may require an on -site inspection by your office and, hopefully, we could do this in the next day or two. Another question has arisen in the progress of the work and that pertains to the restoration work along the Lake. The City of Chanhassen and the developer, Dunn and Curry, would like to alter the existing contours to accommodate a nature trail parallel to the trunk sewer. This nature trail would be from 15 to 20 feet wide and would be above the 100-year flood level. . Could we please have -an answer to these questions in the next day or two. If you have any questions, please let us know. RBGordon:sg cc: Northern Contracting, Inc. Dunn and Curry City of Chanhassen Very truly yours, SCHOELL & MADSON,.INC. /'47 APR 1979 A ri d 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 & MADSON, INC. 1 '-x , City Administrator. ENGINEERS AND SURVEYO S ierred To: r,layor col,m i _ (612) 938-7601 • 50 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH • PI CWMtJS MINNESOTA -95343 Department of Transportation 2055 North Lilac Drive Golden -Valley, Minnesota 55422 OFFICES AT HURON, SOUTH DAKOTA A�q�TON TERitS"�" April 23, 1979 P�„cal i!ia:"tBS - Gt Attention: Mr. Tom Anderle, Permit Section Subject: City of Chanhassen Access Driveway Permit Northwest Quarter, Section 14, Township 116, Range 23 Our File No. 10096 Gentlemen: Enclosed is an Application for Access Driveway Permit, with plans attached, for a street access from property located.in the Northwest Quarter of Section 14, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County. This street will replace two existing private driveways and is proposed as a secondary exit from a plat which is to be developed into several commercial -industrial sites. We have noted on the application that the proposed access will be needed by August 1, 1979, but we would like to know as soon as possible your decision as to the granting. of the permit. If you have any questions concerning this, or require more information, please let us know. Very truly yours, SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. 25 RBGordon:sg �` .' 4 enclosures APP. 1979 cc: Mr. Ed Dunn, Dunn and Curry City of Chanhassen � v Q� �! CHANHA rS Co ZAG MINNESOTA DEPART HT OF HIGHWAYS Can TrunkSec. _ _ Hwy. APPLICATION FOR ACCESS DRIVEWAY PERMIT District Permit No. No. _ Print or type application. Fill out 3 copies, sign and mail to -Minnesota Department of Highways. ATTACH TO ALL 3 COPIES, A SKETCH OF THE PROPERTY, PRESENT AND PROPOSED DRIVEWAYS AND RELATION TO TRUNK HIGHWAY, SUCH SKETCHES SHALL BE DRAWN TO SCALE WHEN REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEER, Applicant City of Chanhassen Property Owner Dunn & Curry F Estate Management, Inc. .address el. M�74-8885 Box 147, Chanhassen, N 55317 Address 4940 Viking Drive, Pentagon Tel. Office Park, Edina, MN 55435 835-2808 Location of proposed driveway_ (circle one) (specific road, landmark, or road intersection) T.H. 5 in Carver County 1.39 Miles N—S—E—W of Minnesota Highway No. 101 Legal Description of Property Street from the Northwest Quarter of Section 14, Township 116, Range 23 Purpose of ❑ Residence Is a Building to ® No Driveway ® Commercial (Specify Type) New Street be Constructed ❑ Yes (Type) Will the ❑_ Temporary or Property ® Platted or Distance from center of highway to front Building be I _1 Permanent is in CJ Unplatted Area of building, or front of pump island is N/A feet. Land is show feet a i has , ElLevel No. of Present Driveways 2 Date Driveway is needed aries higher? NO lower?O — e40 s t with highway. to Property to be removed Aug.1, 1979 Give Exact Location of Proposed Driveway to Property 11201 East of Northwest corner, Section 14, Twp. 116, R 23 Give Exact Location of Present Approximately 10301 and 12801 East of Northwest corner, Driveway to Property _ Section 14, Two. 116, R 23 I, We, the undersigned, herewith make application for permission to construct the access driveway at the above location, said driveway to be constructed to conform with the regulations of the Minnesota Department of Highways and to any special provisions includedin the permit. It is agreed that all work will be done to the satisfaction of the Minnesota Department of Highways. It is further agreed that no work in connection with this application will be started until the application is approved and the permit issued. It is expressly understood that this permit is conditioned upon replacement or restoration of the trunk high- way to its original or to a satisfactory condition. It is further understood that this permit is issued subject to the approval of local city, village or borough authorities having joint supervision over said street or highway. SCHOELL & MADSON, INC., Engineers for tt - C' ty of C*ant assen AjJril 23, 1979 Date Sign ure of Tapp cant DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE OPP, ACCESS DRIVEWAY -OR ENTRANCE PERMIT NOT VALID UNLESS SIGNED AND NUMBERED Cashier's Check No. Or certified Check No. No Deposit Required A deposit of $ , payable to the Commissioner of Highways, in the form of a Certified or Cashier's Check, shall accompany the application. For District Use Only Special Provisions: This Deposit Made by - Name All work to be completed by State to furnish x After Permit is approved: date AINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS G' White to Applicant Pink to Dist. Maint. Office Green to Municipality or Sec. Crew _ Address culvert and —aprons. Dote District Engineer Dunn & Curry Real Estate Management Inc. 4940 Fiking Drive Pentagon Office Park Minneapolis, MN 55435 (612) 835-2808 April 10, 1979 Bob Waibel City of Chanhassen 7610 Laredo Drive Chanhassen, Minnesota SS317 Dear Bob: Enclosed is a Description Sketch of Proposed C.S.A.H. No. 17 across Lake Susan Hills. Cordially, G (2- Ed Dunn ED:sr Enc. AP'qt 9l RUSSELL H. LARSON CRAIG M. MERTZ OF COUNSEL HARVEY E. SKAAR MARK C. WCULLOUGH LARSON & MERTZ ATTORNEYS AT LAW Action by Council; 1900 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING Endorsed hM MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 od;fiod�t___----TELEPHONE Rejected 612) 335-9565 ^,arch 13, 1979 Date 11 -11172._,r Donald W. Ashworth Chanhassen City Manager Box.147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Don: e Al C W -Or',S . C am.1S s+N1 �7�w•f.t w! Re: CSAH #17 Construction Carver County By the attached letter dated February 28, 1979, but not postmarked until March 9, 1979, Carver County, by Donald C. Wisniewski, Chief Engineer, sent to me for review the enclosed draft agreement between the City and the County covering the proposed construction of CSAH No. 17 from T.H. 5 to Lyman Boulevard. I have examined the agreement and find it satisfactory as to form, except that the reference to Minnesota Statutes §162.67 on the second page should read "Minnesota Statutes s162.17." Please note that the agreement should be executed prior to April 1, 1978, by which date the City is to deliver the right of way easement across the Schmieg property to the County. I have been informed by Mr. Wisniewski that the buildings lying within the right of way easement will need to be removed by July 1, 1979. You may wish to place this matter on the agenda for March 19th for approval by the Council. VeaLH. , RS N Chanhassen City Attorney RHL:mep Encl. cc: Bill Brezinsky cc: Don Wisniewski � X:\NA23J 14- Z, � cb . "A LO CJl. M,IyA, u 4. ems;; STATE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL Metro Region haters, 1200 Warner Road, St. PHONE: 246-7523 M arch 7, 1979 Warren J. Israelson Israelson and Associates, Inc. Suite 185, 2100 West Bloomington Freeway Bloomington, Minnesota 55431 Paul, Mn. 551Q�)iT;. City Administrator' Referred io: File No. �1 Yw' COiir.,d; Ar U`.,, v RE: CSAH # 17 Extension, Carver County, Chanhassen Fs f—� Dear Mr. Israelson: GuiOr .� Dare 71Z,22 7" J' In regard to your letter of March 1, 1979, we have determined a DNR -- permit is required for the extension of CSAH #17 in Carver County. You indicated the 50 year flow was approximately 300 CFS. In order to comply with DNR regulation 6 MCAR 1.5025 B(2), the proposed culvert may not increase the flood stage for the 100 year event more than .5 feet, unless data is available verifying no significant increase in flood damage potential would occur upstream or downstream. Accordingly, we recommend the culvert be sized for the 100 year flow instead of the normal flow capacity proposed. If there is an approved floodplain ordinance this regulation would accede to the ordinance's requirements. To provide clarity to this matter, I am enclosing a copy of the regulations paraphrased above for your convenience. If there are any questions, please contact Mike Mueller at 296-7523. Sincerely, Kent Lokkesmoe Regional Hydrologist MC: MLM:sb enclosure (regulations) % cc: City of Chanhassen V AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER J� THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF SAINT PAUL P� ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101 February 28, 1979 Irrevocable Letter of Credit No. 13500 Amount: $800, 000. 00 U.S. City of Chanhassen 7610 Laredo Drive Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Gentlemen: We hereby authorize you to draw on The First National Bank of Saint Paul, Minnesota for the account of Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, Ltd.., a Minnesota Limited Partnership, 4940 Viking Drive, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55435, up to the aggregate amount of $800, 000. 00 available by your draft at sight. All drafts drawn must be marked "Drawn under Letter of Credit ##13500, dated February 28, 1979". Drafts must be presented to our Collection Department at 332 Minnesota Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota no later than 2:00 P. M. (CST) on November 30, 1985. All drafts will be accompanied by a certificate executed. by an official of the City of Chanhassen stating that the amount of such draft is due and payable under that certain Agreement between the City of Chanhassen and Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, Ltd., dated February 28, 1979. We hereby agree with the drawers, endorsers, and bona fide holders of drafts drawn under and in compliance with the terms of this Letter of Credit that such drafts will be duly honored and on due presentation to the drawee. This Credit is subject to the Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits (1974 Revision) I. C. C. Publication No. 290. Very truly yours, THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF SAINT PAUL B Y Its Vice President Dunn & Curry Real Estate Management Inc. 4940 Fiking Drive Pentagon Office Park Minneapolis, MN55435 (612) 835-2808 July 9, 1979 Mr. Don Ashworth City Manager City of Chanhassen 7610 Laredo Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Don: In accordance with your instructions I am enclosing Letter of Credit # 13749 in the amount of $400,000 drawn payable to your order. The deliverey of this Letter of Credit brings the total Letters of Credit delivered to your pursuant to the Security Agreement dated February 28, 1979 to $1,200,000 whcch I under- stand is the total amount of Letters of Credit which will be required under the Security Agreement. If you ahve any questions please call me. Very ruly yours, r CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK by Dunn & Curry Real Estate Management, Inc. its General Partner by Bruce G. Nimmer Treasurer BGN: j z Enc. I THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF SAINT PAUL ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101 July 9, 1979 Irrevocable Letter of Credit #13749 Amount: $400, 000. 00 City of Chanhassen 7610 Laredo Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Gentlemen: We hereby authorize you to draw on The First National Bank of Saint Paul, Minnesota, for the account of Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, Ltd., a Minnesota Limited Partnership, 4940 Viking Drive, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55435, up to the aggregate amount of $400, 000 available by your draft at sight. All drafts drawn must be marked "drawn under Letter of Credit #13749, dated July 9, 1979" and will be accompanied by a certificate executed by an official of the City of Chanhassen stating that the amount of such draft is due and payable under that certain Agreement between the City of Chanhassen and Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, Ltd., dated July 3, 1979. Bills of exchange must be presented to our Collection Department at 332 Minnesota Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota no later than 2:00 P. M. (CST) on November 30, 1985. The purpose of this Letter of Credit is to support the first five years of assessment of both principal and interest levied by the City for municipal improvements, all in accordance with the terms of said Agreement, and in the event of the fai lure of Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, Ltd, to pay, when due and payable, any part of said assessments so levied, then the City of Chanhassen may draw against this Letter of Credit an amount equal to the amount of said assessment of principal and interest then in default, together with any penalty and interest arising as a result of said default. We hereby agree with the drawers, endorsers, and bona fide holders of drafts drawn under and in compliance with the terms of this Letter of Credit that such drafts will be duly honored on due presentation to the drawee. This Credit is subject to the Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits (1974 Revision) I. C. C. Publication No. 290. THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF SAINT PAUL By Its Vice Presidenf" v Office of Director of Public Works Patrick 8, Murphy COUNTY OF CARVER Mr. Russell Larson 1900 lst National Bank Bldg. Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 CARVER COUNTY COURTHOUSE 600 EAST 4TH CHASKA, MINNESOTA 55318 February 28, 1979 RE: Draft Agreement for CSAH #17 Construction - City of Chanhasse Dear Mr. Larson: Enclosed herewith please find a "draft" agreement regarding the proposed construction of CSAH #17 (Powers Blvd.) from T.H. 5 to Lyman Blvd. in Chanhassen. Please review the document and contact me if there are any proposed revisions. This agreement should be executed prior to April 1, 1979. DCW:bh Enclosure Sincerely, 0 .j"t e. w Donald C. Wisniewski Chief Engineer An Equal Opportunity Employer r� Dunn & Curry Real Estate Management Inc. 4940 Viking Drive Pentagon Office Park Minneapolis, MN 55435 . (612)835-2808 February 27, 1979 City Council City of Chanhassen Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Re: North Susan Hills Project 78-3 Gentlemen: Delivered herewith are executed copies of the security agreement between Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, Ltd. and the City of Chanhassen. Please execute and return two copies to the undersigned. Also delivered herewith is a letter of credit in favor of the City of Chanhassen in the amount of $800,000.003W This letter of credit amount is necessarily an estimate of the first five years of assessments, both principal and interest, that will be levied by the City for the sewer and water improvements, the contract for the installation of which was let Febru- ary 20, 1979. The security agreement originally contemplated all improve- ments referred to therein being let at the same time, as well as having the necessary bond information to complete Exhibit C for said security agreement. However, the con- tracts for such improvements will, in fact, be let at differing times, and the bonds to cover said improvements have not as yet been bid or issued. As a result, the name of the contractor(s) for all improvements cannot be in- serted in the agreement at this time, nor can the bond payment schedule Exhibit C, be completed prior to the exe- cution of the security agreement. In addition, one amount of the letter of credit as contemplated by the agreement cannot be determined at this time. Therefore, the security agreement be delivered herewith is delivered and executed by the undersigned with the under- standing that: 1) as soon as the bond issue is completed 'r' covering the improvements contemplated by the security agreement, Exhibit C therefore will be completed and attached to said agreement, 2) the undersigned will add to the amount of the letter of credit to cover the esti- mated cost of said final five years of assessment as bids are let for the various improvements and 3) as the costs of the improvements become fixed and the amount of assess- ment for each is finally determined, the letter of credit for such improvement will be increased or decreased to reflect the actual rather than estimated first five years of level assessments for said each improvement. If this is in accord with your understanding, please sign the enclosed copy of this letter where indicated and return the same to me. Thank you. Yours truly, CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK, LTD. By Dunn & Curry Real Estate Management, Inc. Its General Partner by: Ap roved and accepted City o lanassen by _ ( - - 2 - �frorn: City Administrator' ferred To: W yor Council PIa'`uer � Attorne�_� Engin.nr L__,_ Dunn & Curry Treasurer \ ✓ _ Real Estate Management Inc. Poi FceA ;\--_ 4940 Viking Drive Pares a" --- Pentagon Office Park Street f:lint.__�____!� Minneapolis, MN55435 Utilities (612) 835-2808 Press Other February 20, 1979 Chanhassen City Council Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Re: Initial Improvements in Chanhassen Lakes Business Park. Gentlemen: With respect to the Letter of Credit to be issued to the City of Chanhassen pursuant to the development agreement and security agreement between the City of Chanhassen and Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, we agree that: 1) the Letter of Credit will be issued in an amount equal to the estimated assessment payments due during the first five years following assessment of costs against the property 2) the amount will be adjusted to reflect the actual assessment payments due during the first five years following assessment of the property when such amount is determinable and 3) at the time additional bonds are issued by the City of Chanhassen for additional improvements, the Letter of Credit amount will be adjusted based on 1) and 2) above. Very truly yours, Bruce Nimmer 6 TO FEBi 570 RECEIVED VILJ.Aas ©ig Owl �r CHANHA �+ f N�INN. ti BGN:ap 2/ 15/79 AGREEMENT CITY OF CHANHASSEN - LAKE SUSAN HILLS THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of _, 1979, by and between the CITY OF CHANHASSEN, a municipal corporation organized under the Laws of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as "City," and CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK, LTD., a Limited Partnership organized under the Laws of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as "Partners." WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Partners are developing an industrial park of approximately 276 acres located in Section 14, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota, which said industrial park premises are more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, Partners have requested the City to hold public hearings, secure engineering services and enter into the required construction contracts as may be necessary in order to thereafter pro- vide municipal sewer service and other public improvements to said industrial park (known as Chanhassen Lakes Business Park), and assess the cost thereof against the property benefitted thereby; and WHEREAS, the provision of such sewer service would require the construction of a trunk sewer line beginning at the west terminus of the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission's Lake Interceptor, Phase I, forcemain as now located approximately 300 feet east of State Trunk Highway No. 101 and approximately one -1- quarter of a mile from the easterly line of said industrial park property, thence westerly to and along the northerly shore of Lake Susan, through the industrial park property in a northwesterly direction to a point on the Southerly right-of-way line of State Trunk Highway No. 5 at a point approximately five hundred (500) feet easterly, when measured along said highway, from the Northwest corner of said Section 14, (said location as shown on Exhibit B attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof), and WHEREAS, the..location for the construction for said muni- cipal trunk sewer line is the location previously selected by the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (hereinafter referred to as MWCC) for the construction of its proposed Lake Ann Interceptor, Phase II, and WHEREAS, the parties hereto agree that the best practice would be to construct the municipal trunk sewer line located as shown in Exhibit B to MWCC standards and sizing for metropolitan interceptors in order to avoid the necessity for the future construc- tion of said Lake Ann Interceptor, Phase II. However, in the event the necessary agreements from MWCC and The Metropolitan Council to acquire said line in the future should it become part of the Metropolitan Waste Disposal System cannot be obtained prior to the date construction contracts are let, the parties agree it is necessary to proceed at this time with the construction of a trunk sewer sufficient to serve the City, and WHEREAS, the City had previously petitioned the MWCC to construct said Lake Ann Interceptor, Phase II, and the said MWCC -2- had determined to construct said interceptor in 1971 in order to provide for the orderly growth of the City in accordance with the comprehensive plan of the City; however, such decision by the MWCC was repeatedly delayed, and it now appears that said interceptor will not be constructed by the MWCC within the next five to ten year period; and WHEREAS, the Partners have expressed a willingness to have the cost of the municipal trunk sewer, whether oversized to MWCC Standards or not, assessed against the premises described in Exhibit A hereto attached (the estimate for oversizing adds approximately $199,235 to.the amount of assessments for providing sewer service to said industrial park), all pursuant to the estimates of cost as set forth in the feasibility study prepared by the City Engineer, dated February 20, 1978, pp. 5 and6); and WHEREAS, it is likely, although not certain, that the MWCC may, pursuant to law,lease or acquire said municipal trunk sewer and include said.trunk in its overall Metropolitan Sewer Ser- vice System, in which case the City would receive for said trunk either (1) cash, or (2) credits to be applied over time to future amounts owed by the City to the MWCC for sewer services; and WHEREAS, it is the City's position that if Partners are willing to accept the risk of having to pay the cost of said sewer by accepting and paying assessments therefor on the Partners' land, that Partners should be entitled to cash or credits against future city trunk sewer charges, as hereinafter described, in the event said trunk sewer line as shown in Exhibit B is leased or acquired by the MWCC; and -3- WHEREAS, the Partners hereto desire to enter into an agree- ment to provide for the construction of said trunk sewer line and to provide for cash or credits to be received by Partners - the amount and application of said credits to be determined and applied as hereinafter set out in this Agreement; and WHEREAS, although Partners are, in addition, providing the City with certain guarantees of payment of assessments for the sewer line shown in Exhibit B (including trunk and possible inter- ceptor costs thereof and computed lateral benefit applied thereto), as well as for other assessments for lateral sewer lines, wa termains and roadways and necessary rights -of -way, it isonly the "trunk. sewer improvement" as hereinafter defined and the location of which is shown on Exhibit B for which the Partners may receive cash or credits as provided for in this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained, the parties hereto recite and agree as follows: 1. Definitions. For the purposes of this agreement, the follow- ing definitions will control: a. "Trunk sewer improvement" shall -mean the trunk sewer line as shown in Exhibit B and which may also be part of the proposed Lake Ann Interceptor, Phase II, which lies south of State Trunk Highway No. 5. b. "Other municipal improvements" shall mean sewer improvements, waterlines, roadways, rights -of -way and like municipal improvements included in North Lake Susan Hills Improvement Project No. 78-3 for which the City levies assessments, but notincluding the "trunk sewer improvement" as shown in Exhibit B hereof. =M C. "Partners' land" shall mean the premises as legally des- cribed in Exhibit A hereof. d. "Engineer's Feasibility Study" shall mean the feasibility study for North Lake Susan Area Improvements prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc. and Supplementary Feasibility Study for North Lake Susan Improvements dated May City. , 1978; for and in behalf of the e. "North Lake Susan Hills Improvement Project No. 78-3" shall mean acquisition of right-of-way for proposed County Road No. 17 and local streets and sanitary sewer easements; construction of sanitary sewer.lines, watermains, water supply well and pump house, storm sewer lines, streets and curb and gutter, all as described and shown in the "Engineer's Feasibility Study" and "Supplementary Feasibility Study" and the maps. and diagrams included therein, and as attached hereto as Exhibits "D" and "D-1" and incorporated herein. f. "Oversizing" shall mean the additional pipesizing required and the additional costs incurred if the sewer line as shown in Exhibit "B" is constructed to MWCC standards for its proposed Lake Ann Interceptor, Phase II, over and above the size pipe which would be required and the construction costs which would be incurred to construct, in the same location, a local municipal trunk sewer line sized to serve only areas within the City of Chanhassen as determined by the City Engineer. -5- 2. Public Improvement, Area. Pursuant to a hearing and other. proceedings taken in accordance with Minnesota Statutes,.Chapter 429, the City has ordered a sewer and other municipal improvement project, all designated as North Lake Susan Hills Improvement Project No. 78-3, consisting of the construction of trunk and lateral sanitary sewers, waterlines, storm sewers, streets, curb and gutter and other improvements, together with the acquisition of necessary right-of-way and easements in order to provide sani- tary sewer and other services to the properties within its corporate limits, including the area within the boundary described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. It is estimated that the total area benefitted by trunk sanitary sewer within the boundary of the land described in Exhibit "A", excluding the area,of public streets and highways not as yet developed, and excluding properties not capable of de- velopment as suitable building sites, is not less than 240 acres. The Partners have requested that the City undertake the trunk sewer improvement and other municipal improvements at this time in order to provide, as soon as may be, municipal services to the Partners' land. Because of the location of the necessary trunk sewer improvement to serve said property (as per the sewer line lo- cation.as shown in Exhibit "B"), the Partners have further requested the City to attempt to secure approval of the MWCC and Metropolitan Council to oversize said sewer service trunk so as to meet the specifications of the MWCC for the proposed Lake Ann Interceptor, Phase II, which the MWCC presently expects to build at some future !M. date. It is estimated by the City Engineer that if the trunk sewer line is constructed to meet the MWCC requirements for the Lake Ann Interceptor, Phase II, the cost is $744,254.00. It is considered that the benefit of the improvement to Partners' land is equal to and will sustain an assessment of the total cost of the trunk sewer improvement -as relates to Partners' land. 3. Construction and Bond Purchase Proposal. The City has prepared plans and specifications for the trunk sewer improvement and other improvements and has secured a proposal from for the construction thereof in accordance with the plans and spe- cifications. The plans and specifications proposal, in the form of a construction contract and performance bond proposed to be executed in accordance therewith, are now on file in the Office of the City Clerk andhave been examined by and are satisfactory to Partners. The total cost of completing the trunk sewer improvement and other municipal improvements including expenses of publication, bond printing, acquisition of land and easements, and engineering, financial, legal and other services required, and necessary.capi- talized interest to accrue on the money to be borrowed for said improvements, is.estimated at $ The City has also secured a proposal for the purchase of its general obligation improvement bonds to be dated , in an amount equal to said estimated total cost of said improvements, which bonds and interest thereon will be payable on the dates and in the amounts set forth in the schedule marked Exhibit "C", which is -7- attached hereto and is hereby made a part hereof. 4. Construction Contracts and Bond Sale. The City agrees to enter into contracts for the construction of the trunk sewer im- provements and other municipal improvements, and the sale of the Public Improvement Bonds in accordance with the proposals received, to secure and enforce said performance bond and the processing of the construction contract, to print, execute and deliver the Public Improvement Bonds as soon as may be possible, to use so much of the proceeds thereof as necessary to pay costs necessarily incurred in the completion of the trunk.:sewer improvement and other municipal improvements including the payment.of interest on said bonds, to do all other acts and things necessary and proper to assure the comple- tion of the improvements in the time and manner provided in the. construction contract, and to establish and maintain on its official books and records a separate and special Bond Fund, until all the bond principal and interest thereon has been fully paid, in which it will deposit all payments of special assessments levied for said improvement project, and any balance of the bond proceeds remaining after all other costs of the improvements have been paid, and the additional funds appropriated thereto as provided in the succeeding paragraphs of the Agreement and as set forth in the Approving Resolu- tion for such Bond sale.• 5. Special Assessments. After completion of the trunk sewer improvement and other municipal improvements contemplated herein the City shall levy special assessments at level annual installments of principal and interest in the amount equal to the total cost thereof as finally ascertained, upon hearing and other proceedings taken as - 8- required by law. Said assessments shall be made payable in fifteen (15) equal annual installments including an interest charge of one percent (1%) higher than the net interest rate of the bonds, as sold, as set forth above, when rounded to the next higher one-half percent (1/2%), e.g., a net interest rate of 5.35% would be rounded to the next higher 1/2%, or 5.5%, to which 1% would be added, equalling a total interest rate of 6.5% as an annual assessment interest, rate on the unpaid principal balance of said assessments. Said assessments shall be certified to the Auditor of Carver County for extension on the tax rolls for the following collection year and all subsequent collection years, during the term of the bond issue in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, and the procedures set forth in said Chapter 429 shall govern the levy of said assessments as well as the collection, prepayment, reapportionment and other matters relating thereto. Said special assessments shall be a lien upon the property described in Exhibit "A", subject to the division of such land and the reapportionment of said assessments as provided in paragraph ten (10) hereof. Partners expressly waive any right of appeal from such assessment, which shall be limited to those necessarily incurred and to be incurred by the City in the completion of the improvements. 6. Credits. In the event said "trunk sewer improvement" as herein defined is leased or acquired, pursuant to law, by the MWCC prior to December 31, 2009, Partners shall receive certain credits as hereinafter described, which may be applied by Partners in the manner "1 hereinafter set out against sewer assessments or sewer area charges of any kind as may be levied or charged by the City pur- suant to a city-wide ordinance or resolution governing and estab- lishing sewer charges of various types as may be enacted in the future, or pursuant to assessments as may be levied for the provision of future sewer service including trunk and lateral ex- ensions, in accordance with Minnesota Statutes relating to the levying of assessments to cover the cost of public sewer improve- ments. Prior to completing the assessment roll for the trunk sewer improvement, the City shall obtain from its consulting engineer the total cost of the trunk sewer improvement as constructed and, if said sewer is constructed to MWCC size and standard requirements, a computation (based on applicable construction costs in the area or actual costs from the project, whichever.is more appropriate as determined by the city engineer) of the percentage of said total cost of the trunk sewer improvement which represents and is attribut- able to the additional cost of said project resulting from construct- ing the same to-MWCC interceptor sizing and standards and specifications over and above what said project would have cost if constructed so as to serve as an ordinary local trunk sewer line sufficient to serve solely the needs of the City. Said percentage, hereinafter called "the oversizing cost percentage," when subtracted from 100%, results in a second percentage, hereinafter called "the local trunk sewer cost percentage." In the event the MWCC leases or acquires the trunk sewer improvement at any time before December 31, 2009, -10- the gross dollar amount of said lease payment or acquisition price to be paid or credited to the City by the MWCC, whether said lease or acquisition dollar amount is greater or less than the actual cost of construction of the trunk sewer improvement, shall be used to deter- mine the credits which are to be received by Partners and applied as hereinafter set forth. a. Annual determination of credits.. At the end of each calendar year, any portion of the lease or acquisition price paid or credited to the City by the MWCC..during that year, including any amounts of interest on said lease or acquisition price which may be paid or credited to the City by the MWCC, shall, if applicable, be multiplied by the "oversizing cost percentage" to obtain sum no. 1, and in any event by "the local trunk sewer cost percentage" to obtain sum no. 2. Partners shall be entitled to a cash or credit equal to the dollar amount of sum no. 1 in the year following receipt of credits or cash by the City. In addition, at the time the assessment roll is pre- pared, the City Engineer shall determine the percentage of sum no. 2 which is actually to be assessed against Partners' land as described in Exhibit."A", which said percentage shall hereinafter be referred to as "Partners' pro -rated percentage." Partners shall be entitled to cash or a credit in.the year following receipt of cash or credits by the City equal to the dollar amounts resulting from the multiplica- tion of sum no. 2 by "Partners' pro -rated percentage."* b. Application of credits due Partners. Subject to the provisions of subsection "c" hereunder, the City shall apply the annual credit due Partners as determined by this agreement against any assessment *Note: See Exhibit "E" for example of credit determination. -1.1- made by the City for sewer service to be certified to the Auditor of Carver County (except for annual assessment installments as may have already been certified to the Auditor of Carver County for collection in the ensuing year), or any municipal connection charges or sewer charges, but excluding MWCC sewer availability charges. If all assess- ments on land then owned by Partners within the area.described in Exhibit "A" are current and further providing there areno legal impediments thereto, the Partners shall have the right to determine whether said credits should be applied against the next assessment installments to be certified to the Auditor of Carver County, or to apply against future sewer assessments as may be levied by the City, or against any other municipal sewer charges. The Partners shall make such requests in writing, addressed to the City, and may make such requests at any time so long as credits are due it. The City and Partners agree that an administrative charge shall be deducted from the credit or cash payments due Partners, in any one year, pursuant to the above paragraphs -"a" and "b", said administrative charge to be equal to 1% of the credit due Partners in any year, except such charge shall not be less than $500.00. C. City delay of application of credit. It is understood and agreed between the parties hereto, however, that in the event sewer user and treatment charges collected by.the City in any calendar year are insufficient to pay the City's maintenance costs and the gross charges (without reduction for lease or acquisition credit) made by the MWCC for said year, the amount of credit due Partners for that' year, as hereinbefore determined, shall be reduced by an amount equal to said insufficiency, and the amount of said reduction of credit shall carry over and be added to the credit due Partners as determined -12- in the next succeeding year. (The purpose of this paragraph is to insure that, because of the application of credits as herein pro- vided in this agreement, the City is never placed in the position.of not having sufficient funds in its annual current sewer operating fund to pay current operating expenses of, and MWCC charges.to,- the City's sewer system. This situation can arise because MWCC charges are estimated for the year, and actual charges to the City, when com- puted for the period by MWCC, may be greater than the estimate, and the City may then require additional time to make up the shortfall through increased sewer user charges or other sources as the City may determine.) It is further understood, however, that any credits so carried over may not be carried over for a second year period, but shall be applied in the second ensuing year. 7. Guarantees. Before construction contracts for trunk sewer improvement and other municipal improvements to the land as described in Exhibit "A" are executed by the City, Partners shall deposit.with the City an irrevocable letter of credit approved by the City, payable to the City, from a banking institution acceptable to the City, in an amount equal to the first five level annual assessment installments of principal and interest, as estimated by the City, to be levied for the trunk sewer improvement and other municipal improvements to be con- structed by the City in and across the project area as defined in Exhibit "D" and/or "D-l" attached hereto. The amount of the letter of credit shall be reduced each year, or oftener as may be mutually agreeable to the parties hereto, by an amount equal to total of the following: a. The amount of assessments (both.principal and interest) actually paid by properties other than those owned by Partners and over -13- .�1 which assessments were originally levied as part of the North Lake Susan Hills Improvement Project 78-3 area, as determined by the City, at the assessment hearing for such improvement project; and b. The amount of assessments (both principal and interest) on any tract of land within the premises described in Exhibit "D" and/or "D-1" upon the following: i.. Payment of any or all of the first five annual install- ments on any such tract of land; and/or ii. Receipt by the City of a letter of credit or other security acceptable to the City, guaranteeing payment.. of assessments for land described in Exhibit "D" and/or but now owned by Partners; and C. In the event of lease or acquisition of the trunk sewer im- provement, the amount of the first five annual assessment installments relating to said trunk sewer improvement which have not as yet been paid. In any event, said letter of credit shall terminate and be of no further force and effect at such time as the first five annual in- stallments for trunk sewer improvement and other municipal improvements duly levied against the land described in Exhibit "D" and/or "D-1" are paid. In the event the City, at its'sole option, grants the deferment of assessments on land not owned by Partners, Partners' guarantee shall terminate as to such deferred assessments which extend beyond 1985. 8. Term. This agreement shall remain in effect until December 31, 2010, and shall survive the date of final payment of all assess- ments for municipal improvements herein contemplated for the land described in Exhibit "A". 9. Assignment. Partners shall have the right and privilege of assigning this agreement, or any credits provided for herein, to any third person. In such event,. Partners shall give written notice to the -14- City of the date and to whom such assignment was made. It is understood and agreed that this agreement shall be binding upon, and inure to the benefit of, the parties hereto, and their successors, personal repre- sentatives, heirs and assigns. 10. Reapportionment. Upon written request from Partners, the City will reapportion the installments of said special assessments for the trunk sewer improvement and other municipal improvements levied against those tracts into which the land described in Exhibit "A" may hereafter be subdivided.. Such reapportionment shall be done in accor- dance with Minnesota Statutes, 5429.071, Subd. 3. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this agreement, consisting of fifteen (15) pages exclusive of Exhibits, to be executed by the signature of their duly authorized officers as of the date and year first above written. In presence of: STATE OF MINNESOTA ..) ) ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ) CITY OF CHANHASSEN WN Mayor By City Clerk/Manager CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSYNESS PARK, LTD. By Dunn & Curry Real Estate Management Inc., General Partner By And The foregoing agreement was acknowledged before me this day of , 1979, by Walter Hobbs, Mayor, and by Donald W. Ashworth, Clerk, of the City of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, onbehalf of the corporation. Notary -Public -15- STATE OF M.INNESOTA ) ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ) The foregoing agreement was acknowledged before me this - day of , 1979, by and of Dunn & Curry Real Estate Management, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, as General Partner for and in behalf of Chanhasser. Lakes Business Park, Ltd. Notary Public -16- EXHIBIT "E" EXAMPLE CREDIT DETERMINATION AND APPLICATION Credit Determination 477,059 (estimated trunk sewer const. costs) 676,294 (intercept. sewer const. costs) 100% - 70.54% 70.54% = local trunk sewer percentag =29.46% = oversizing cost percentage Hypothetical purchase price, by MCC, of Lake Ann Sewer from Highway #101 to Highway #5, all within Lake Susan Hills Improvement Area = 800,000 or $40,000/year for 20 years plus interest: Credit Due Partners for Oversizing: 800,000 x 29.46% = 235,680 oversizing credit OR 40,000 x 29..46% = 11,784/yeas for 20 years plus interest (as rec'd by City from MWCC) Credit Due Partners for Local Trunk.Service A. Partners' pro -rated percentage calculations. $300,000 Total trunk sewer assessments against partners "Txhibit A" properties $477,-059 Total trunk sewer assessments - all = 62.890 properties B. Local trunk sewer credits. $800;000 x 70.54% = 564,320 (sum no. 2). x. 62.89% (pro -rated percentage) 354,901 (local trunk sewer credit) :OR 40,000 x. 70.54% = 28*, 216 x 62.89% 17,745 -per year plus. interest (as reed by City from MWCC) . ski �Lk 0 bA 0 FM Dunn & Curry Real Estate Management Inc. 4940 Viking Drive Pentagon Office Park Minneapolis, MN 55435 (612) 835-2808 February 2, 1979 Russell H. Larson, Esq. City Attorney City of Chanhassen 7610 Laredo Drive Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Re:. Trunk Sewer Assessment Guarantee. Dear Russ: As we discussed on the telephone yesterday, Dunn & Curry Real Estate Management, Inc., on behalf of Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, are prepared to stand behind the project's Trunk Sewer Assessment. More particularly we stand ready to guarantee the payment of Trunk Sanitary Sewer Assessments across the Martin Ward property for the first 5 years follow- ing the levy of such assessments. As you are aware we are prepared to execute,in the near futures Security Agreement with the City of Chanhassen coverik- the entire Lake Susan Area Improvement Project. When this agreement is signed we will want it to cover the Ward portion of the project. Until such time as it is signed, this letter will represent our commitment to guarantee the Trunk Sanitary Sewer Assess- ment on the Ward property. It is our understanding that payments made by us under this guarantee will be eventually repaid or credited to our own sewer account under a mutually acceptable schedule. The guarantee will cease upon either 1} sale, 2) development and 3) liquidation of the estate. Assurr,ing that this is acceptable to the City Council, we are prepared to, and urge the city to, move ahead without delay. Sincerely yours, Rodney. Ha d3� Vice Prg�sident cc: Julius C. Smith, Esq. - 2 - I I IC I ttk-ark.JG.1 I WRf T E (6n T ROL (OMt' 11111(fli) Twin Cities Preo 350 TETRWOURRE BLDG. 7TH S ROBEERT/TREET/ /AIAT PAUL mn s5101 (t 612 222.8423 lPCjC�2� {w� February 1979 F ' 0 Mr. Don Ashworth City Manager City of Chanhassen P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Dear Mr. Ashworth: This letter is to ackno%ledge the was submitted to the Commission as live sewer plan (csp) and to give of Lake Susan Trunk Sewer. REC MED VILL G$ op C2-IRtVfi�a�r.: receipt of the information that part of your interim comprehen- our approval for the construction The interim csp consists of the following information: a letter dated January 17, 1978 transmitting an analysis of proposed connections that will be made to the sanitary sewer system from 1978 to 1980; a legal description of the proposed MUSA line in your City; a report on the Lake Riley pollution problem; a -letter dated December 26, 1978 indicating that the City supports the arboretum request of sanitary sewer service; an existing land use map for the City showing those areas where sanitary sewer extensions will be programed over the next three years; a letter dated -January 11, 1979 from Schoell and Madson, Inc. transmitting the.parameters used in the design of the Lake Susan Trunk Sewer; and a set of plans for the Lake Susan Trunk Sewer dated January 9,.1979. A joint meeting was held between the staff of the'Metropolitan Council and the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission and it was determined that this information meets the requirements for an interim csp. The interim csp will be presented for review and approval to the Metropol- itan Council and the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission at our March meetings. It was indicated by your consultant that because of permit restrictions placed on you by the Riley -Purgatory Creek Water Shed District, that the section of the Lake Susan Trunk Sewer located adjacent to Lake Susan must be constructed by March 15. The Commission has reviewed the location of your proposed trunk sewer and with the -charges as discussed with your consultant and made on your final plans, the Commission has no objection to the project proceeding as scheduled. A connection permit must still be obtained from the Commission, for the connection to our interceptor (MSB-7138) at manhole 7. If you have any questions, please contact us. Very truly our R hard J. Dough ty Chief Administrator RJD:DSB:nc cc: John Harrington,. MC Bill Brezi nsky., Schoel 1 & Madson Myrna Hal l bach, MPCA Riley- Purgator January 4, Mr. Kent Lokkensmoe Regional Hydrologist Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 1200 Warner Road St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 y rorn: Cite Administrator Referred To: Mayer - _-- Creek'V� ate. e�e-d C iri c t G'l lli,I AOSQ,Ic0UNTY EDEN PRAIF;Oi� "MIIVN'_ 34: Tre3z-_ 6r _ _ Policc, SirBat 5"!3iii(.w - — 1979 Uiiizias - p!'953 `— Data. --- --- Re: Sanitary Sewer and Water Construction for North Lake Susan Industrial Park: Chanhassen Dear Mr. Lokkensmoe: The Board of Managers of the Riley -Purgatory Creek Watershed District has reviewed the Chapter 105 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Work in Public Waters Permit for the installation of sanitary sewer and water for the North Lake Susan Industrial Park in Chanhassen. The Board of Managers recommends that the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources approve of this permit application subject' to the following conditions: 1. All erosion control measures, as shown on the plans, must be installed prior to the commencement of land alteration and be main— tained until all altered areas on the site have been restored. The Watershed District must be notified after the erosion control measures have been installed so the District's engineering advisor can inspect the erosion control measures. After the engineering advisor has determined that the erosion control measures have been properly installed, the Managers will be so notified and land alteration can begin: Land alteration cannot begin until this inspection has been made. 2. The crossing of Riley Creek and construction north of Lake Susan (between M.H. #3 and M.H. 19) should take place prior to March 15, 1979 or not until after the 1979 spring runoff period. For the crossing of Riley Creek, the District will require that either a pump or culvert of sufficient capacity be placed to bypass the flow of the creek around the construction area. 3. The District will require that all areas altered between Manhole #3 and Manhole #19 of the proposed project be restored with seed and mulch and/or sod within 30 days from the completion of construction or no later than May 15, 1979. All other altered areas on the site must be restored with seed and mulch, sod or seeding with wood fiber blankets within 30 days from the completion of land alteration or no later than September 15, 1979. Mr., Kent Lokkensmoe Page 2 January 4, 1979 4. The Contractor must be informed that construction easements do not extent into Lake Susan or across Riley Creek as shown on the plans. 5. Should dewatering of the! construction trench be required, sedimentation basins must be constructed when sump pumps are used. Prior to the commencement of dewatering, plans for the sedimentation basins must be submitted to the District's engineering advisors. If you have any questions regarding the District's comments, please contact us at 920-0655. RCO/111 cc: Mr. Conrad Fiskness Mr.. Frederick Richards Mr. Bill Brezinksy City of Chanhassen Sincerely, Robert C. Oberme er BARR ENGINEERING CO. Engineers for the District Approved by the Board of Managers RILE PURGATORY CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT President Date: a.., to // /77 (1 w 15K1011 COM1a Uf100 "nr, ties rea !30 E PO,1)tlgR€ BLOC. 7TH & ROB RTr,1REE7f 612.222.8423" j fetYc= i S November 6, 1978 --y Mr. Donald W. Ashworth City Manager City of Chanhassen - P. 0. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: Chapparral - New Horizon Homes Dear Mr. Ashworth: 11—P The Metropolitan Waste Control Commission finds that the proposed sewer extension is not in conformance with the City's existing comprehensive sewer plan. We therefore cannot approve this extension without the amending of Chanhassen's CSP. Any amendment would have to receive. Commission approval after review and comment by the Metropolitan Council. Any acceptable amendments to. the present CSP would have to address other issues besides the proposed sewer extension. Outstanding concerns which must be included are as follows: 1) Proposed Lake Riley Sewer Extension Chanhassen has failed to submit the requested documentation to justify the proposed sewer extension to serve Lake Riley. An engineering report supporting the existence of pollution problems in the Lake has been requested. CSP amendments should address this as well. 2) Arboretum Area Proposed sewer service for the Arboretum Education and Research Building should be included. As of yet, the City has not defined its position on thi. s development. 3) Lake Susan Hills Industrial Park The design basis and proposed timetable for sewer service to the planned Lake Susan Hills Industrial Park should be incorporated in the CSP. The City should be careful in the location of the proposed trunk line, in that the approval will be based upon possible future Metropolitan Interceptor construction. x"\ %fltJ-A,GA �.. �;`9RA?;iAss��y Mr. Donald W.. Ashworth City Manager City of Chanhassen November 6, 1978 Page Two 4) Other Areas The issue of undeveloped areas within the MUSA boundary is of particular concern. The planned direction of these areas has not been clearly . defined.in the present CSP. The sewer extension referred to in this letter is an example. The timetable of development and the location of proposed future laterals serving Neighborhood Service Areas must be established. This is expecially important when considering the capacity limitations of the Metropolitan Interceptors serving Chanhassen. Should you have any..questions about these matters, please call Mr. Ray Odde or Mr: Don Bluhm of the staff. Very truly yours, Bernard J./Fl�rrington Director O�Engineering- BJH:FJS:hw cc: John Harrington, Metropolitan Council Myrna Halback, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency ` v 7610 LAREDODRIVEOP.O.BOX1470CHANHASSEN, , • I I iii MEMORANDUM TO: City Attorney, Russell Larson FROM: City Manager, Don Ashworth DATE: October 5, 1978 SUBJ: North Lake Susan Project - Phase I I've reviewed your letter of September 19, 1978, regarding discussions between your office and Martin Ward. Although I am not clear as to the purpose of Mr. Ward's request, I believe stumbling blocks may prevent the concept from becoming a reality, i.e: 1). It is very likely that the North Lake Susan Project will be carried out over a one to three year period with easement acquisition and construction contracts let over a period of time. Recognizing this possibility and given the scope of the entire project, it is reasonable to assume that the city will sell temporary improvement bonds for one or more phases in the project. Final bonding for the project would then occur on the final phase thus assuring adequate financing occurred and that all debt repayment occurred through one bond issue rather than multiple issues. 2). Although I have not been involved in the issuance of municipal debt instruments without use of the typical prospectus and underwriter, I am assured that this type of sale is legal in Minnesota. I am sure that this technique is quite beneficial for municipalities who do not maintain recognized bond ratings and where the sale is so minimal that costs of the sale exceed the bond proceeds. However, I do not see this type of sale occurring with the North Lake Susan Project.. Instead, this project would be carried out during a similar timing period as the north frontage road construction, Lotus Lake drainage improvement project, new MSAS 101 improvement project and potentially several others. This would place any sale in a minimum $1 million dollar bracket. To separate out a very small portion of the sale for local placement could generate concerns from public as well as add additional costs for the City acting as a paying agent. I also believe Mr. Russell Larson -2- October 5. 1978 that, even as a local placement, that public bids would have to be sought. The chance of receiving a syndicated bid would be remote; however, the city could receive numerous other local bids on the proposed sale. 3). I do not see a benefit to Mr. Ward through the purchase of bonds, which have financed the acquisition of his property, over the purchase of any other tax exempt bonds. Specifically, the bonds purchased'by Mr. Ward, even though financing the acquisition of easement across his property, would be backed by special assessments throughout the project area and, in all likelihood, be backed by special assessments for all similar projects financed under the bond issue. A default in paying special assessments in another project area or on other properties within this specific project area, could result in a default action by the city on the bonds held by Mr. Ward. In actuality, a default would not occur, with the full faith and credit of the city being pledged to insure such. However, whether bond payments were made as a result of payment of special assessments from other property owners or through a general property tax, such in no way would change the ownership of the easement or ownership of other public improvements which have been financed by the bond sale, public right of ways, concrete curbs, streets, storm sewer systems, sanitary systems, etc. As such, I fail to see any benefit in holding the bonds which finance the acquisition of the Ward easement versus any other general obligation bonds of the City, other high rated municipal bonds, or bonds of the State or Federal government. 4). Assuming that a higher interest rate is paid to Mr. Ward through a private sale of the bonds to finance acquisition of his property, such would be minor, and would place the city in a difficult position of defending the city's actions given the significant costs occurring as a result of handling the sale as a partial'sale and the establishment of administrative procedures differing from all other projects previously financed by the city. Again, although the legality of such may be found, I am concerned about placing either the city or Mr. Ward in a position where morality of the issue could be questioned. As stated at the beginning at this memorandum, I am unsure as to the total concept discussed by yourself and Mr. Ward. The above comments may not relate to your proposal, and, assuming such, I apologize if the above has been misinterpretted. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. LARSON & MERTZ ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1900 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING RUSSELL H. LARSON MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 CRAIG M. MERTZ OF COUNSEL September 19, 1978 HARVEY E. SKAAR MARK C. McCULLOUGH Donald W. Ashworth Chanhassen City Manager Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: North Lake Susan Project Phase I Dear Don: I just finished a meeting with Martin Ward, during which we discussed the following question: TELEPHONE (612) 335-9565 Can the City acquire the Ward property as part of a statutorily authorized development project and pay for the property by delivery to ward of said bonds in the amount of the negotiated purchase price? This idea is attractive to Mr. Ward in that it will provide him with tax-exempt interest income. We have not yet investigated the law on the issue, but will do so if you feel the concept should be further explored. Corollary to this idea is the attached opinion of the Attorney General to the Grand Rapids City Attorney covering the question of "public purpose". The opinion is most helpful on this issue. Mr. Ward has requested that this idea be kept confidential between the three of us to avoid pressures from D & C while the matter is under study. I await your further comments. i Ve yours, RUSSELL H. LARSON Chanhassen City Attorneyti2 " 4 RHL:mep Cl%d SEP 1978 Encl. CR] RECEIVED cil VILLAGE OF ) CHANHASSEN, `l���i MINN. C� �� 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. GOROON THEODORE O. KEMNA JOHN W.EMOND KENNETH E. ADOLF WILLIAM R. ENGELHARDT BRUCE C. SUNDING Y�� SCHOELL & MAOSON, INC. ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS (6121 938-7601 • 50 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH • HOPKINS, MINNESOTA 55343 OFFICES AT HURON. SOUTH DAKOTA AND DENTON. TEXAS June 28, 1978 Minnesota Department of Transportation c/o Mr. Jack Reichel District 5 Office 2055 North Lilac Lane Golden Valley, Minnesota 55422 Subject: City of Chanhassen, North Lake Susan Trunk Watermain, Phase I Utility Permit Application, Our File No. 9564. Gentlemen: Enclosed are five (5) copies of an Application for Utility Permit to install watermain along and across Trunk Highway 5 in Chanhassen, Minnesota. Specifically, the City of Chanhassen requests permission to install approximately 4,320 lineal feet of 8, 12, and 18-inch watermain within the Trunk Highway 5 right of way including: 1) Approximately 3,700 lineal feet of 12-inch watermain 45 to 70 feet from and parallel to the T.H. 5 center- line; 2) Jacking 18-inch watermain using 30-inch steel casing in the vicinity of C.S.A.H. 17 (north leg); 3) Jacking 8-inch watermain using 16-inch steel casing at Lake Ann Park (approximately 1,080 feet east of C.S.A.H. 17 (south leg); If you have any question or require further information, please contact us. b d c�c Very truly yours,� SCHOELL & MADSON,, INC.Rec ,'' WED WJBrezinsky: cm Encloes`' cc:,City of Chanhassen MnID01' 2525 (7-77) STATE OF MINNESOTA Page 1 Commissioner of Transportation DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORATION Transportation Building B55ding APPLICATION FOR UTILITY PERMIT Attn.: Utilities Engineer on -Az�E_-_n TRUNK HIGHWAY RIGHT OF WAY SUBMIT 5 COMPLETED COPIES (SEE d-1, PAGE 2) Reference: County Carver T. H. 5 Company Project No -Chanhassen Improvement Project 78-3 Application is hereby made for permisdsion to place, construct and thereafter maintain a 8—inch, 12—inch and 18—inch watermajaiong � across Trunk Highway No. 5 from _ Carver C.S.A.H. 17 (north) westerly a distance of approximately 3,700 feet to C.S.A.H. 17 (south) .45 to 70 feet from center line on the south (east, west, north or south) side of the trunk highway in accordance with the sketch shown on the inside hereof, or attached thereto. 1. AERIAL CONSTRUCTION ❑ Single pole ❑ Open wire ❑ H-Frame ❑ Cable check one ❑ Single pole & H-Frame check one ❑ Vertical ❑ Steel tower ❑ Cross -arm Other ❑ Vertical & cross -arm VOLTAGE I NUMBER OF CONDUCTORS I SIZE OF CONDUCTORS Minimum height of conductor: ft. along highway ft. at crossings over highway EXTENT & LOCATION OF TREE TRIMMING AND/OR CLEARING: II. UNDERGROUND CONSTRUCTION MAX. OPERATING PRESSURE CONDUIT __ 50 PST ❑ Multiple tile ❑ Sectional concrete Class SIZE 8,12 & 18—inch ❑ Transite ❑ Steel pipe W.T. Grade ❑ Clay tile ❑x Other Ductile Iron Pipe DEPTH 7 to 12 feet CASING *.403 (30—inch), .250 Steel pipe W.T. * Grade ❑ Sectional concrete ❑ Other VOLTAGE INUMBER OF CONDUCTORS (16—inch) Class Size 30" (18" Carrier) , 1 611 (811 SIZE OF CONDUCTORS METHOD OF INSTALLING UNDER ROADBEDS (if open trench, explain why necessary) ] Jacking ❑ Borin EXTENT & LOCATION OF TREE CLEARING: ❑ Open trench NEW FACILITY REPLACEMENT FACILITY ® I ❑ III. Work to start on or after .T111 U 91 , 1 q7R and to be completed on or before N,,v_ 19. 1 q7R IV. The applicant, in carrying on all of the work mentioned above or referred to in its application and in the Permit for construction issued therefore, shall strictly conform to the terms of the Permit, and the Rules of the Department of Transportation as set forth in Order No. 31424 dated May 3, 1961 together with the Special Provisions, all of which are made a part hereof. The applicant specifically agrees to be bound hereby. The applicant shall also comply with the regulations of all other governmental agencies for the protection of the public. The work shall be accomplished in a manner that will not be detrimental to the highway and that will safeguard the public. CITY OF CHANHASSEN Name d unhry making appl-1— Signature SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. By-Y52, / �.7 PROJ . ENG. Tide Address 50 NTNTH AVENUE SOUTH Carrie Dated this 28th day of June 19. City HnPKTNS, MN 55343 Pursuant to 'Minnesota Statutes, Section 161.45, the following Rules have been promulgated by the Commissioner of Transportation under Order No. 31424 (see reverse side): CITY OF 3 CHANHASSEN 7610 LAREDO DRIVE*P 0 BOX 147*CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 474-8885 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: City Manager, Don Ashworth DATE: June 5, 1978 SUBJ: Lake Susan Improvement Project, Request to Change Public Improvement and Business Park Phasing and Security Agreement The City Council previously received a report from the city's engineer, Bill Brezinsky, noting various reasons to consider a phasing change associated with the North Lake Susan Improvement Project. Specifically, the engineer's report of April 21, 1978, stated the following: "Since it appears that certain problems associated with the development of Phase I of Chanhassen Lakes Business Park may take considerable time to resolve, it may be to the developer's advantage to develop phase II. The advantages would be: 1). Construction of a connecting street across the undeveloped Martin Ward Property could be delayed. This would give the owner time to consider future development of the property and the best location for the street. 2). The assessments on the Ward Property would be reduced from $229,998 to $33,705. Only trunk sewer would be initially assessed. 3). Animal Fair would be served by a "looped" watermain rather than the dead-end main now proposed. The cost per acre_ for Animal Fair would be reduced from $9,358 to $9,317 per acre. 4). The overall project cost Would be reduced from $2,644,300 to approximately $2,351,220. Assessed cost for all property owners would be less for comparable services. 5). More net industrial acreage would be initially available at less cost per acre. Not including Animal Fair 91.9 acres could be developed at a cost of $12,555 per acre. The 81.1 acres in Phase I would cost approximately $15,232 per acre to develop. Mayor and Council -2- .Tune 5, 19 7 3 6). Access to Highway No. 5 via County Road 17 would no t depend on construction of the railroad bridge." Supportive Documentation included in the Council packet effectuating the change include: SUPPORTIVE DOCUMENTATION - CITY ENGINEER 1). Cover letter restating advantages of change in phasing. 2). Supplementary feasibility study. 3). Revised public improvements map. 4). Revised estimated total and unit costs by type of improvement. SUPPORTIVE DOCUMENTATION - DUNN AND CURRY 1). Cover letter. 2). Formal petition requesting change, agreeing to waive public hearings, agreeing to accept assessments in the new phasing, agreeing to expand assessment area for buildings to be taken as a part of right-of-way acquisition, and agreeing to provide and donate to the City the frontage road right-of-way for the new Phase I -A as such crosses the Schmieg property. 3). Revised phasing map (exhibit A). 4). Security guarantee for project and sewer oversizing agreement. ANALYSIS OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION 1). Engineer's Revised Feasibility Report - I believe the report from the engineer is self explanatory and will not be repeated in this section. In addition to improvements shown on the map included in the engineer's report, it should be noted that an access to State Highway 5 was shown in the original plat submitted to the Planning Commission. This access was shown as a dotted line presently having a cul-de-sac terminating prior to access to Highway 5. The engineer has requested the State to determine whether an access to Highway 5 would be allowed at this point. Should the State fail to allow such access, the cul-de-sac as presently shown would be installed. Should the State approve an access to Highway 5 at this location (approximately at the same point as the exit from Lake Ann Park), this item would be returned to the Planning Commission and City Council for a determination as to whether such street should be extended to Highway 5 or remain as a cul-de-sac. Mayor and Council -3- June 5, 1978 2). Lake Susan Hills Supportive Documentation - a). Petition for Improvements - The city attorney has reviewed the petitions submitted by Dunn and Curry and find such to meet the requirements of State law in the expansion of a project including authority to waive any additional public hearings, agreeing to the rephasing and agreement .to be assessed for such changes in phasing. Dunn and Curry have agreed to purchase or in other fashion obtain the frontage road right-of-way as it crosses the S chmieg property from new County 17 to the new phase I- A and to donate such to the City. b). Map - The attached map is self-explanatory. c). Agreement - Preconstruction and Extraordinary Expenses - Dunn and Curry previously agreed to deposit $7,500 with the city to pay for feasibility and attorney costs associated with this project should such be aborted. As additional costs are likely to be incurred prior to final consummation_ of the preliminary plat and public improvement conditions, Dunn and Curry have agreed to furnish an additional $7,500 to the city to. pay any additional.costs during the period of final consummation of the preliminary plat and public improvement process. Should final agreement be readhed between all parties and the city acts to proceed with the public improvement project and is capable of such, the monies expended for engineering, legal,.etc. would become assessable costs of the project. However, the $15,000 submitted by Dunn and. Curry would then be held by the City until after completion of improvements and assessment thereof (including the assessment appeal period) to insure that any extraordinary costs incurred after completion of the project, which. were not assessable costs, would be covered. Dunn and Curry have agreed to supply the city with the $15,000 to be used for the purposes noted above. d). Security Guarantee and Sewer Oversizing Agreement - The attached agreement has been redrafted based on discussions with the city council during preliminary plat consideration. Although the council may desire to discuss terms or other conditions of the sewer oversizing agreement or details of the security agreement, I believe the basic concern of the council is: 1). Security guarantees in case default by Lake Susan Hills; 2). Security arrangements in case of other property owners in the project area default; 3). Term of bonds; and 4). Feasibility escrow and extraordinary cost agreements. Mayor and Council -4- June.5, 1978 In discussing these items with Dunn and Curry, we believe the agreement as presented and agreed to by Dunn and Curry represent a balance of reasonably protecting the public interests as well as allowing the City to accomplish overall planning objectives. Specifically, Dunn and Curry have agreed to the following: 1). Dunn and Curry will post a letter of credit or other deposit guaranteeing payment of principal and interest during the first five year period bonds are outstanding. Totally, this guarantee will exceed $1.5 million dollars. In case of tax forfeiture, the special assessments against a property are paid in full from the forced sale, with any remaining amounts then being split or paid on a partial dollar basis to mortgagees. As the appraised value of the land far exceeds the value of improvements, the major concern to city's is typically payment of principal and interest payments during the potential five years of non-payment prior to tax forfeiture. As such, staff believes the security agreement by Dunn and Curry is reasonable. 2). The terms of the agreement specifiy that, should other property owners likely to be assessed, fail to pay assessments against their property during the first five year period, that the letter of credit from Dunn and Curry will be used to pay such principal and interest payments. Reimbursement to Dunn and Curry would occur when the city receives monies from owners originally assessed. Again, the five year period during the forfeiture process is the most critical. 3). Dunn and Curry have and still.request that a 20 year bond term be considered. Staff has informed Dunn and Curry that the 20 year term would be unacceptable and they have agreed to a 15 year term. A concession offered would be established of an even payment schedule instead of even principal payments. This will not affect our bond rating although it could increase the net interest rate slightly (less than a a%) on this specific bond issue. This concept, even payment, is allowed under State law and is a practice used by several cities in Minnesota. 4). Feasibility Study Escrow and Extraordinary Cost Agreement - This was previously noted and represents assurances that the City will be reimbursed if the project fails to become reality and/or to pay costs incurred through assessment appeals. ADDfiTIONAL REQUIREMENTS"TO CONSIDER CHANGE IN PHASING To consider the changes in phasing as proposed above, the city council must accept the amended feasibility study from Schoell and Madson and act to officially accept the change in phasing as proposed by Dunn and Curry, approve the expanded project (including waiver of public hearings for such) and come to agreement as to the terms of the security agreement, oversizing agreement and other deposits or conditions. However, prior to final action as noted above, a determination must be made as to whether the project would be expanded to include the Schmieg proper y as shown in the engineer's feasibility report and Mayor and Council -5- June 5, .1978 the Dunn and Curry petition. Specifically, Dunn and Curry have agreed with Mr. Schmieg to purchase the frontage road right-of-way at a specified cost and will, in turn, donate such right-of-way to the city for constructing the frontage road as shown in the engineer's report. However, for the city to consider expanding the project area to include improvements across the Schmieg property for frontage road improvements, one of the following must occur: 1). Mr. Schmieg would have to agree to waive the public hearing requirements to consider expanding the project area to include.frontage road improvements across his property (acquisition of new County 17 right-of-way was previously considered and would thus not be part of such waiver). Such petition waiving the public hearing requirements should also note his willingness to accept potential assessment for improvements abutting the frontage road construction. 2). A decision by the city council to order a public hearing to consider expanding the project area to include the Schmieg property. Such hearing could occur in an approximate 30 day period. 3). A decision by the city council to allow expansion of the project for the Dunn and Curry properties involved in the new Phase I -A plan, but deleting frontage road improvements across the Schmieg property. This option would have the disadvantage of not allowing the proper looping of water service at this time and would provide only one entrance/ exit to the Dunn and Curry properties (from old County 17). This statement assumes that the access to Highway 5 across from the Lake Ann Park entrance would not be allowed by the State. City staff has discussed the above options with Mr. Schmieg. It is our belief that Mr. Schmieg is generally in favor of expanding the project area and has come to agreement with Dunn and Curry regarding acquisition of the frontage road - such then to be donated to the City. However, of concern to Mr. Schmieg is the potential assessments that would be placed against his property for such frontage road assessments. It is the belief of staff that Mr. Schmieg would agree to waive the public hearing requirements and provide right of entry agreements to the city if a deferment of assessments against his property was considered by the city council. Staff was unable to comment in regards to the acceptability of this type of condition.by the city council. It is our belief that Mr. Schmieg will be present to discuss this item with the City Council. Should the council consider allowing a deferment of assessments against the Schmieg property for frontage road improvements, the council should strongly consider limiting the number of years for which the deferment would be granted and additionally include in such agreement a statement that if the property were to be d or developed, that the deferment would then be cancelled. J --OF CITY b� WK 7610 LAREDO DRIVEeP.O. BOX 147*CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 474-8885 I. May 16, 1978 Dunn and'Curry Attn: Ed Dunn 4940 Viking Drive Pentagon Office Park Minneapolis, MN 55435 Dear Mr. Dunn: On Monday, May 15, 1978, the Engineer, Assistant Planner and myself met with John Harrington of the Metropolitan Council and Don Bluhm of the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission to discuss finalization of the MUSA Line in Chanhassen, and to discuss the oversizing of the interceptor sewer through your property. These items are proposed. to be considered by the Physical Development Committee after I have forwarded additional documentation concerning the necessity for inclusion of the Lake Riley service area as well as a miscellaneous letter concerning the Arboretum. These.two issues do not directly concern you, except that such would be considered as a part of finalizing the actual MUSA Line. In regards to the oversizing of the Lake Ann sanitary sewer to interceptor standards, attached_please'find a memorandum from John Harrington to Ray Odde.and Don Bluhm..,Also shown is a draft memorandum to the Physical Development Committee from John Harrington. Although changes could occur, I believe that Mr. Harrington's memorandum represents the Metropolitan Council's staff recommendation on the interceptor versus trunk sewer issue. I would appreciate your comments in regards to the proposed staff recommendation from Metropolitan Council. Sincere7� Don Ashworth City Manager DA:k Dunn & Curry Real Estate Management Inc. 4940 Viking Drive Pentagon Office Park Minneapolis, MN 55435 (612) 835-2808 May 23, 1978 City Council City of Chanhassen Attention: Don Ashworth 7610 Laredo Drive P. 0. Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Re: Chanhassen Lakes Business Park Gentlemen: MAY 1978 RECEIVED LO VILLAGE .CHANHA SEE %" % MINN, It y As Developers of the above referenced Planned Industrial Development, we are enclosing a petition plus miscellaneous support information requesting a change in phasing of this project. We are requesting this change to accomodate a development program that can begin this fall and be ready for the market early next Spring. Our request for change in phasing is related only to timing. We are in agreement with all ap- provals previously granted. In petitioning for immediate installation of all utilities in our revised Phase IA (formerly Phase II) we are concerned that the final work in layout of the required frontage road to Highway 101 in Phase I might well be delayed. Further- more, our work now in Phase IA will result in a more eco- nomic package as we will be helping to assure delivery of utilities to Animal Fair as soon as possible while helping to reduce their related assessments. In our negotiations with your staff covering they proposed Guarantee Agreement which the developer of this Industrial Park will give to the City of Chanhassen, we are prepared to move forward on the following: The Developer will provide a letter of credit good for five years covering all bond principal and interest pay- ments at level annual installments. We have agreed to a 15 year term on the bonds which will cover all the work related to the installation of trunk utilities and Phase IA improvements. These costs are presently estimated by your engineer at $2,400,766. In return for our guarantee we have tentatively agreed to a rebate formula in the event the Metropolitan Waste Con- trol Commission should acquire the interceptor sewer line. Under separate agreement Dunn and Curry Real Estate Manage- ment, Inc. will provide the city with $7,500 prior to final council consideration of this project. These funds along with $7,500 previously escrowed with the city will be used to cover third party expenses incurred by the city in the event this project is abhorted prior to consumation. This sum will continue to be held by city until 90 days follow- ing the levelling of assessments to cover only the costs incurred by this project that are not assessable by the city. Such escrowed funds will bear interest at seven (7%) percent. Please review these petitions at your next council meeting. Your approval of these matters will be most beneficial to us all. Siryeprely yours Rodney SDI. HAM Vice President cc: Jules Smith Russell Larson RDH:sr Enc. - 2 - h1FMORANDUM April 26, 1978 TO: Ray Odde, Don Bluhm, MWCC FROM: Environmental Planning Division, MC, John Harrington SUBJECT: Chanhassen CSP Amendments, Lake Riley and Arboretum I have reviewed the Chanhassen submission on Lake Riley (MC Referral File #5154) and believe that the project may be approvable, consistent with Metropolitan Development Guide Framework Policy 10 and Policy 15c. However, in order to facilitate preparation of a staff review and positive staff recommendation to the Council's Physical Development Committee, additional information will be necessary. The existing documentation on the Lake Riley service indicates that petitions were received from a number of landowners in'theShorewood area, requesting sewer -service because of concern about polluting Lake Riley. A copy of the engineering (feasibility) report for the sewer should be submitted to further document the existing pollution problem. (Additional data providing more substantive documentation of the problem existing is necessary in one form or another.) Since the Lake Riley service area is outside the currently defined Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA), adjustments to the MUSA within Chanhassen will have to be proposed by the City. This can be dealt with through an amendment to. the current Policy Plan, or possibly through the review of Chanhassen's plan submission in conformance with the Land Planning Act. In addition to the approval of the provision of service to the Lake Riley area, there is another service area proposal in Chanhassen about which'we need additional information from the City. The Arboretum Education and Research Building is seeking approval of a connection to the City's sewer system; and thus to the Metropolitan System. Since this is an existing facility, and is now or soon expects to experience problems with its current discharge or 6,000 gpd to its septic system, it appears that the request warrants favorable consideration by the metropolitan agency staffs. I do not believe it would be necessary to consider adjustment to the MUSA if the Arboretum facility is permitted to connect to the system, since the nature of the .facility in question is not likely to constitute "development" outside the PIUSA. However, we need to know the City's position on this subject. In light of the above, I would appreciate it if you would arrange a meeting between the appropriate personnel from Chanhassen, and the necessary staff of the Council and Commission. For discussion purposes only, please feel free to use this memorandum, and the attached draft memorandum on the Lake Susan Hills trunk sewer, in your arrangements for the meeting. JRH/hs _Ak t b4l eA.1 MEMORANDUM (draft) April 25, 1978 TO: Physical Development Committee FROM: Environmental Planning Division Staff (John Harrington) SUBJECT: Chanhassen Comprehensive Sewer Plan Amendment .for Lake Susan Interceptor (Referral File No. 5211) On October 12, 1977, the City of Chanhassen filed the "Lake Susan Hills Feasibility Study".request ,with the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission. On January 23, 1978, the•Commission notified the City that the request, together with additional information subsequently submitted, was being considered as an amendment to update the CSP. The request involves the provision of sewer service to a planned industrial park in Lake Susan Hills. Authority to Review The Metropolitan Reorganization Act of 1974 requires•each local government in the Metropolitan Area to prepare and adopt a local sewer policy plan similar to the Council's policy plan. The local plans, and amendments thereto, are to be submitted to the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission for review and approval. According to the "handling procedures" in the current Waste Management Development Guide/Policy Plan, the Commission shall submit local sewer policy plans and proposed amendments thereto to the Metropolitan Council for review and comment, before the Commission takes final action on a plan. Background The City of Chanhassen has expressed concern for some time about the timing of the construction of the Lake Ann Interceptor, Phase Two. In the System Statement for Chanhassen, it was stated that the determination on the Phase Two project would be made as part of the Commission's 201 study (currently on -going). The' commission has indicated (January 23, 1978 correspondance to Chanhassen) that it would take a minimum of three (3) to five (5) years. for them to have a metropolitan interceptor available to the City to preclude the need for a local facility. Chanhassen believes that service to the area in question is necessary now. The question is whether or not to oversice the facility so that it could serve as a metropolitan interceptor. Metropolitan Development Framework Issues None. The area proposed for service is within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area. Waste Management Development Guide/Policy Plan Issues 1) The proper size of the facility cannot be determined until the Commission completes its 201 study. 2) A sewer built by local government at this time for metropolitan usage in the future could have only limited financial support if constructed without federal and state construction grant funds. 3) Since the local trunk line will follow a route similar -to that proposed for the Phase Two Interceptor, the Waste Control Commission should be assured that permitting the local trunk sewer will not complicate the future construction of the interceptor, unduly increase its construction cost. rnnrrin¢i nn Provision of sever service to the Lake Susan Hills planned industrial park is consistent with the Waste Management Development Guide/Policy Plan. Provision of that service through the construction of a metropolitan interceptor would be premature at this time. Construction£ an oversized trunk line which could later serve as a metropolitan interceptor would not be consistent with obtaining maximum federal and state grant participatmon in the construction of the metropolitan interceptor. F . o Recommendation That the project be recommended for approval by the Commission as a local trunk sewer, to be paid for using local funds. That the Commission approve the project only on the condition that they the eventual construction of are assured that it will not unduly complicate oxxingxs�xsxtkex�e�sxstxmki:ten suskxxm9 the Lake Ann Interceptor, or increase its construction costs, if the Phase Two construction is recommended through the 201 study and included in a future Capital Madget.