HomeMy WebLinkAbout6 - Carriage Hill Road Improvement Project
AGENDA NUMBER:
PREPARED BY:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
INTRODUCTION:
BACKGROUND:
"CELEBRATE PRIOR LAKE'S CENTENNIAL - 1991"
6
BRUCE LONEY, ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER
CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARING ON IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
91-11, CARRIAGE HILL ROAD, AND CONSIDER
RESOLUTION 91-31 ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AND
PREPARATION OF PLANS
JULY 15, 1991
The purpose of this Agenda item is to conduct
a Public Hearing for Project 91-11 and to
consider the adoption or the denial of
Resolution 91-31.
On June 17, 1991 the Council approved both the
Feasibility study for the project and
Resolution 91-27 calling for a Public Hearing
on the improvement project.
This proposed project is for the curvilinear
extension of carriage Hill Road from Ferndale
Avenue westerly approximately 1,800 feet
through the undeveloped parcels known as the
Meadowlawn and GrassinijGrothe properties.
The street improvement is proposed to be a
divided four lane urban roadway that would be
landscaped with trees in the median and
boulevard areas to create a parkway effect.
The main impetus for extending carriage Hill
Road at this time has been to provide a paved
road access to the GrassinijGrothe .parcel.
Len Grassini and Fred Grothe have stated that
their property is not marketable without a
paved street to their property. Several
letters from the property owners of both
parcels were included in the May 20, 1991
Council Agenda packet with opinions for and
against the project. The GrassinijGrothe
parcel is in favor of the project proceeding.
Letters received from Fanny Griffith and
Charles Bolger stated that Fanny Griffith and
Genevieve Griffith Bolger who are two of the
seven property owners involved in the
Meadowlawn parcel are not in favor of the
project at this time. The attached letter
4629 Dakota 51. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 447-4230/ Fax (612) 447-4245
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmatil'e Action Employer
from Jim Sco9gins was received when the
project was in1tiated.
The City Engineer has been in contact with the
property owners of both parcels to explain the
project intent and to address any questions
which would help in determining whether or not
to support the project. A letter which was
received on June 24, 1991 has been enclosed
for the Council's review. This letter is from
John F. Bolger to the brothers and sisters
associated with the Meadowlawn parcel and
recommends against the project at this time.
staff also has conducted an Informational
Meeting on June 17, 1991 on the proposed
abandonment of a portion of the existing
gravel surfaced Pike Lake Trail and Carriage
Hill Road with the proposed construction of a
new temporar~ road connection to the new
westerly term1nus of Carriage Hill Road. This
meeting was held with the residents on Beach
street as this proposal would affect their
roadway access. A total of thirteen residents
attended the meeting. The consensus of those
in attendance was for the City to construct
the temporary road connection and to continue
the maintenance of the existing Pike Lake
Trail and Carriage Hill Road gravel road. On
the alternative of providing access via the
temporary road to the proposed extension of
Carriage Hill Road only, Mr. and Mrs. Newstrom
and Evan Shadduck were in favor.
DISCUSSION:
Three alternatives were described in
Feasibility Study as follows:
the
Previous practice used in the Sand pointe
development.
Current Assessment Policy and the
criteria listed previously.
Negotiated alternative between staff and
the property owners.
Alternative Nos. 2 and 3 also recommend the
approval of a collector street fee to provide
additional revenue to pay for its collector
streets. The concept of a collector street
fee was first mentioned to Council on May 20,
1991 with a memorandum from Ralph Teschner,
Finance Director. This issue is a related but
separated issue that will be discussed at a
future Council meeting.
1.)
2. )
3. )
Alternative No. 3 is the alternative in which
staff is proposing to have the right-of-way
dedicated to the City in exchange for the City
constructin~ the roadway along with watermain
crossings w1th no assessment to the property
owners. This alternative would avoid the
condemnation of land process with the
dedication of property in order to construct
the roadway. The letters received by staff
from the Meadowlawn property owners have not
been in favor of the project. Signatures from
all of the property owners would be required
in order for land to be dedicated to the
city.
When the Feasibility study was initiated,
Lundgren Brothers was a viable developer for
the Meadowlawn parcel. Currently, the
developer has been unsuccessful in negotiating
an extension on his option for the property.
In addition, Jim Scoggins, a representative of
the Meadowlawn parcel, believed that the
alternative of providing a right-of-way in
exchange for no assessments may have been
acceptable. Jim scoggins efforts to convince
all owners of the Meadowlawn parcel to agree
with him were not successful either.
since all of the propert~ owners on the
Meadowlawn parcel are not 1n favor of the
project, further negotiation for the
right-of-way or condemnation would be
necessary in order to construct the project as
proposed. It is not anticipated that further
negotiation would provide for right-Of-way
acquisition, thus condemnation seems to be the
only alternative.
At this time, neither the GrassinijGrothe or
Meadowlawn parcels have developers with
o~tions to develop the property. Carriage
H111 Road could be constructed now without
development occuring for several years.
The Visions VIII parcel is currentl~ being
considered for development, and th1s may
provide a more viable option for access to
the GrassinijGrothe parcel for CSAH 21. If
the Council doesn't adopt Resolution 91-31,
this alternative can be pursued.
The Council should receive and consider the
impact from affected property owners of the
proposed improvements. Based on the input
5 cJY}
6.../
U'~
; Itu~
ALTERNATIVES:
received at the hearing and all other relevant
factors, the Council can discuss if the
project merits approval at this time.
Resolution 91-31 is attached which orders the
improvement and the preparation of plans.
Approval of Resolution 91-31 is in order if
the project is to proceed and denial of
Resolution 91-31 is in order if the project is
to terminate at this time.
The alternatives are as follows:
1. Adopt Resolution 91-31 ordering the
improvement and preparation of plans for
Project 91-11-
2. Deny approval of Resolution 91-31 and
abandon Project 91-11 at this time.
3. Table this item for a specific reason(s).
RECOMMENDATION: The recommendation is to deny Resolution 91-31
to terminate the project since all of the
property owners of the Meadowlawn parcel are
not in favor of the project. It appears that
the construction of Carriage Hill Road may be
premature at this time. The costs and risks
of condemnation with no development pending
are too high. When an option for development
becomes a reality, then the construction of
Carriage Hill Road should be reconsidered.
Action on the resolution should be withheld
until after the Public Hearing and comments
have been received by the property owners.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The cost of the project will be recovered
through MSA Funds, Trunk Reserve, Construction
Fund and Contingency reserve if the project is
to proceed.
ACTION REQUIRED: The action required will be to make a motion
to approve or deny Resolution 91-31.
RESOLUTION 91-31
RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENTS AND PREPARATION OF PLANS
ON CARRIAGE HILL ROAD (PROJECT#91-11)
MOTIONED BY
SECONDED BY
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution 91-27 which the City Council
adopted on June 17, 1991 calling for a Public Hearing to
be held on the proposed improvement of Carriage Hill
Road from 500 feet west of the Chatonka Beach Trail and
Carriage Hill Road intersection to the Ferndale Avenue
and Carriage Hill Road intersection by the construction
of bituminous street improvements, storm sewer, ~rading,
aggregate base, concrete curb and gutter, s1dewalk,
bikeway and appurtenant work; and
WHEREAS, ten days mailed notice and two weeks published notice of
the hearing was given, and the hearing was called to order on the
15th day of July, 1990 at which all persons desiring to be heard
were given an opportunity to be heard thereon; and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF
PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA, that;
1.
Such improvement is hereby ordered as proposed
Council Resolution 91-27 adopted the 17th
June, 1991.
in
day
the
of
2. The City Engineer is hereby designated as the Engineer
for this improvement. He shall prepare plans and
specifications for the making of this improvement.
Passed and adopted this
th day of
YES
, 1991.
NO
Andren
Fitzgerald
Larson
Scott
White
Andren
Fitzgerald
Larson
Scott
White
David J. Unmacht
City Manager
City of Prior Lake
{Seal}
I~
RECEIVED
I
I
I
r
r
J \).'f ? 4 h)1
BOLGER
C!TY OF
PRIOR LAKE
r
r
!
I
f
I'
r
,
, ,
May 28, 1991
Dear Brothers & Sisters,
i
t.
!.
t
t
;
I
I
r
!
r
to
You may be interested in some of the reasons I oppose the Carriage Hill
Road to our property. They are listed below:
We are told that the road is a four lane highway with an eighteen foot
median in the center planted with trees. (This is a super highway!)
There is also a bicycle path, and sidewalk. This road is actually
three times bigger than the main road in the area, Highway 42 and only
a short distance away from it.
This highway starts at the Carriage Hill road to the East of us, and
will run a few hundred feet from each of the two houses over the crest
of the hill then through the woods, next to the Andrens and connects
with a small gravel road.
Bluntly stated this road, "starts nowhere and ends nowhere."
This highway costs over half a million dollars, $550,000... a gross
misuse of tax money at a time our state is trying to save money.... and
the national government is under heavy pressure to economize!
When the news media finds this misuse of over ha1f- a million tax
dollars it could make some spicy reporting. I certainly do not want to
be involved in such a story.... and in this league there are no
secrets.
Environmentally this big road takes out beautiful woods, good farmland.
and wildlife access to the lake. We would lose close to 4 acres of
property. which at one time we were to sell for about $40.000. Prior'
Lake pays us nothing.
What does this do to our green acre status. that has saved us so much
tax money? Would we lose that? This is very important.
:;
What about the farmer who rents from us? This highway would take a
huge hunk of farmland and divide what is left in a manner that might
make another huge parcel unusable. Actually it may make the whole farm
unusable.
.;;:1\ ( ,\I(J~\\i.,1-. \11"I\I'''l.h. \1"\ .;.'~,.j
hl~ 1)-1; /),;1! ~ .....onqqq h~ll ~ F\\ hl~ (,.,r: !-::.;"
This highway running haphazardly through our property would be a
serious handicap for any possible future use. A developer would want
the freedom to plan the grades so the lake is visible in certain areas,
and so there are attractive roads leading to the homes. This highway
slashing through our property ia all too likely to prevent a high
quality intelligent development. Everything would have to be planned
around this highway. In the long run it could end up costing all of us
a lot of money.
These are the basic business reasons for my objection to this highway
through Meadowlawn.
Cordially,
;
'---"\ i. . ~"-""
John\f. Bolger
Chairman of the Board
JFB/du
~
~.~I
,~'
HARVEY, THORFINNSON, SCOGGIN,
LUCAS & KALLAS, P. A.
A PRO.-ESS'ONAL ASSOCIATION O' ATTORNEYS
THOMA. M. THOIII,.INNSOfllt.
WIL.~I.M L.. LUCAS.
MICHAIL T. KALLAS
GI"'ALDINI C. STIEN
HOWARD L.. BOLTE'"
VALORII E. EDWARDS
KINNETH M. .LWIN
THE M.RQUETTE BANK BUlL-DING
6640 SHADY OAK ROAD. SUITE 400
EDEN PR.IRIE, MN 55344
TEL.EPHONE (612l'941';~
TEL.ECOPIER 1612 ;G'41 :8942
HOWARD E H.lltVEy
ROSS L THO",.INNSON
JAMES R. SCOGGIN. .
LoRRAINE TE.SL.OW
L.ICAl...'t.TA....T
January 10, 1991
'1~
~Of;'
'/4JI ..IV~
" I / ..l)
1o)~Q: O~ 1.9.9;
~-ik'~
Mr. Larry J. Anderson
Director of Public Works
City of Prior Lake
4629 Dakota st. S.E.
Prior Lake, Mn. 55372
RE: Feasibility Study, Carriage Hill Road
Dear Larry:
Enclosed is an executed Petition For Local Improvement having to
do with a Feasibility study for the extension of Carriage Hill
Road as indicated. We have noted on the application in accordance
with our phone conversations that the study will be without cost
to the owners of W1/2 NW 1/4, S.25, T.115, R.22, Prior Lake,
Scott County, nor will it commit them to agree to the project.
Very truly yours,
HARVEY, THORFINNSON, SCOGGIN,
UCAS & KALLAS, P.A.
R. Scoggin
Enclosure
CC: Fanny, Henry, Mary, Gen, John, Len, and Ann
\RRE\G0518601.37
~/
. L.ICENSED ALSO IN WISCONSIN
* . LICENSED ALSO IN ILL.INOIS
"CELEBRATE PRIOR LAKE'S CENTENNIAL - 1991"
PETITION FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT
Prior Lake, Minnesota
January 9
1991
, -
To the City Council of Prior Lake, Minnesota:
We, the undersigned, owners of not less than ~ percent of
trontage of the real property abutting Carriage Hill Road from
500 feet west of the Chatonka Beach Trail and Carriage Hill Road
intersection to the Ferndale Avenue and Carriage Hill Road
intersection, hereby petition the City of Prior Lake to prepare a
Feasibility study for such street to be improved by the
construction of storm sewer, grading, ag9regate base, concrete
curb and gutter, bituminous surfacing, sldewa1k, bikeway and
appurtenant work pursuant to Minnesota statutes, Chapter 429.
OF
DESCRIPTION OF
PROPERTY
PHONE
NUMBER
W 1/2 NW 1/4 S.25
941-1040
(J.R.S~g' , on
behalf 0 owners of
property )
T. 115, R. 22, Prior
Lake, Scott County
It is understood that this study will be made without cost to the
owners, and that this request will not commit the owners to agree
to the project. '-,4'
I
Examined, checked, and found to be in proper form and to be
signed by the re9uired number of owners of property affected by
the making of the lmprovement petitioned for.
Cit~ Manager
Davld J. Unmacht
4629 Dakota 51. 5.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
'~~ /.5, I c;/(? /
...
~~n~~~LJg ~ ~
L/ ()
Alu ~ c2- t. -6-- 1~-6-~ ',.;<brr: ~L.d~ z{<-
,c~~ ,~,c-& /)"'x.LL'~'r' -=/~. -eLL ,.
---~ /t"LY- ~(> tkd1.-- ~,~ruA..
...J<.-~~LAJ_~_4'7'-" ')f 0UL'-4.'/.. ~,-, du/ ;tML ~~
-t~ ~Ayl :;/:;/
d./(~,L "}")~.'I' - ~ ,~.~I cil ~,"t.~~ rn
) j,,/7
/(C~~LtiA/~, . A/ui:~, _-'~~ :~:/? a(/<.?~ r~
~ /--L.-,~ adc~~~-yf~ ~~ 6u ~~
~..~ 71-1 ~~ ~~ \~ ~..L6 ~~C/j'
"",/ ;(.v~j G/' ~(UL~- -d- ;Q:/ a.v ~ tf"--L
. /}'Ifd."U- :5J -t~ O,'7Ld-L1 V--y/U-a...--.L./- .,./~~' /
t0~ &r, (0./- ,~ -~ -c{ ~k. ~UA-
Ly-J t~ c:zu.~~'U.TU-
~~ ~ ~ ~C-o ~ '~. ~ /)~
/), ~ /j
!(;;;! ::!:u~~.r~./~ /~ ~
~ ~ ~ a./~, ~hJ t~ ~ ?1~
~w.- ~ ~'P /-~~ ~ /fq(~
~/~,(; ~ t:~ p~ -tx.u- a<.( ,--ILu,fer/ ./
tuc6:.L1 J?f./~ (~). ~ ~. ~ ~fl GL-Cl; zi ~J
" te/ / - ~/'- - T
-t~ /YfLdJ-td~~, t~~ /{.-u' &~ ~ /,
.~ ~ ~.~ ~~ -;r-~ u~-
/.Q,u.~ cli~x~'7~~) 6... ~ t
~
~~L
~J'
~ (
~'
. L.6--r-n ?/~~~ UYl ~~
~ -c'-MJ j - r~~~
/ - 67Uy- /ftVL ~ J'!i ~
~;J ~ -uv //Y~~J ~ ~ ~ ~
.L~~, -0 ~' . , ~ L / lL ~~ /~. /~
~.Lr ~r'--:f-. ~~"'C;{u I~_~/.- ~~ ~
/~ 6/J,,~.J/'K6:.-- (ZfL.<!-<J -- ~ ~
~ {.v> - /lU.J- ~~ U-o
//i . .
({/C-LL ~-)ce_/- ~) .!~h Ct:- c:~ I / / "
~. aJ; /l'~ ~ ~' " ) '~?VZ
~, 6- ~ ~ ~. -/YY~ ty-'
~ ~J)tL ~/~,~
~ ~\~ .x:;r~ ~ 4-
~ :, JD.c UA/~' . 6-- _~ cu-;'
I--;( A.uA.. j l?-r~,~ ~/)uce-~ a~ ~
~ ~0 ~~~ '-,. ~"Y) ~/? h. /1,iL~
~ 4c~ v'
/ :;1~t.L y~
~~
H 9/ /9~1
~7lM.L ~I
fb--- ~ ~ &6n~
~ ~ In. J ,A, f--h ~~
On July 15, 1991 The City Council will hold a public hearing to
consider extending Carriage Hill Road westerly across the Meadowlawn
property located on the north shore of Prior Lake. This proposed
improvement was requested by the property owners to the west, Mr
Leonard Grassini and Mr Fred Grothe.
.
:/Ad-ftu- d1j ~
As one of the property owners of The Meadowlawn parcel I strenuously
object to this developer-initiated project for the following reasons:
~.
;;.
It would be premature; this $500,000.00 road runs approximately 1300
feet across our property and dead ends 500 feet into the
Grassini/Grothe parcel. Yet Messrs Grassini and Grothe have yet to
provide a plat to The City Council to show what and how they intend to
develop their parcel. A $500,000.00 road going nowhere for nothing
seems to me to be putting the cart before the horse.
It would be unfair; the agenda write up for this proposed project says.
"The main impetus for extending Carriage Hill Road at this time has
been to provide a paved road access to the Grassini/Grothe parcel. I!
The majority of the proposed roadwork and the cost thereof is to be
done at the expense of Meadow1awn owners. There are other alternatives
such as improving Pike Lake Trail that will accommodate the request of
these gentlemen.
The city is taking a BIG risk by spending $500.000.00 of Minnesota
State Aid and city money plus special assessments for a road which
serves no good purpose at the present time.
As a resident and a taxpayer I plead with the city. Use your money on
roads needed by our citizens. Spend Minnesota State Aid money wisely.
That money is needed for many purposes.
~~~,
~ 7J ,.&Jfd4-
"..~~...g'tf~~l<I'':>
..
PE'fITION
We, the undersigned, oppose t.he extension of Carriage Hill Road as proposed by the
, City of Prior Lake from Ferndale Avenue westerly across the Meadowlawn parcel to the
Chatonka Beach area. (
NAME
ADDR'~SS
PHONE NO.
/
6
5'J(O(~ ~1J..Q..l}i C( 1_le";.q q 7 ;r
G?-Cf f CqYf/i9:f:-J-},'J! Rei Lf .!-/;C,-52 ell
S.-?8L4 /~' L-t:;v- -:::>0 r: 0
~ ( VA,~'Ab8 /-/''u net If, ..Y ...J .; l;' L-'
<~t\ ~Jt'\.t(',~ \~ u\"") c\ ej_C/G_) ~~j(;g ,
.5.:3;< '1 Cwrt'o/j{ (-blLfC~ L\l_\ i~)(T=~~
ri110 F.AtY/~ftLl JVu- L/1&'- 3::2rY
S3.S-Q ('(j~1 j ;j~11 frl Yl~, --37J}/
--t:J,-/8R 5f--rv> 1I ~ -tJf ~/'I s - rJ(JI 7
'-:;- r-;/'
_1'1 ~ <00. S ~O""\L \.--.1J N E.- 1..,/ ~ ..-..J - 'e"/ I ~:>
J LJ l/:;b( W;l)J~;lJi!iU) ~~.,l /:;- - ~~(~*
ll~~ 1'1::1J~"-. L ~ N 'i~ '/'h' () ,-, '- 0_
12, .. ;nhtA __0. ' _ 1'1~~)1 S - "-' J\J E. !I'll, " 1(.)'
13~ ~ / WzJ#'D .:f!"'.k~<".' .0/::. ~-,?", 'C' >' -,'j'
1<1~~'rv\~. 1~~~L.&\j\)e 1.(2 _/t-!5--()j)~(
15 ~J)\ ~(\~ :-X-.J\f\l}J'Mn(k:,Cj-1~ ' ~, L/90 -(~~ ':-/7
16~WQ~(Vj , ?71?&;i{riJ1/{t(J(f. ---rrAlr L/-'>I'f~'?:-';~
17 _--;;J..JV\ CJ__~_ _ 0. __ r 4 S 7 S S~ ~,,-s~ L-::f', 1.-1 l{ (,-. - S.1 I,>
18_~1,.5 t}~-~--JJJ361 ~hQr-e-Lc<^-e --
20.. /J " /..-' /Y3..t't2 ~E ',.,/[ L-' 'Y7c.., - /( 't .~
21' JA;/f.t::;: .__.J"~. ?4 7 5ho I f> La.a.P~/t i-fi(', . 1<(; -7!/ ~
22~~'-(.LJ _ J~J P,tJt i{~---_J.).,.Ys- L'L"f~;'~
7
8
23
24
25_