Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1980 03-13 Special Meeting
A T PARK.T WER � L S �E S w ..SE> two .w -++ f ^ ./ .ram .. ._ • ti. 17 AIS AVE. • ,` ( � j _ .. • .. ..I r w . � mot. - ( i _ .. mi VIKIN ............ R. _ '�AVE � } r— ! { COP AVE. if -,m -4m WL Jw VE. JR E R D. SANDHLURS - :7 _ _ ..� > L__.J - - _-- - _ _. •. 0 o 00000, uj - - i �• _. pis------- ��� �. t � le IRYA N': Q AVE. �- CID DRAINAGE AREA ............. PROPOSED STORM SANER (PROD.. 79-8) FUTURE STORM SEWER �r a� ��• EXISTING. STORM SEWER PROPOSED ASSE-SSM ENT AREA 1 MEMORANDUM d. TO: City.Manager tt T•1 t. {•�.. FROM: Director of Public Works SUBJECT:. Gladstone Park -Storm Sewer -.,Improvement 79-8 DATE: January 31, 19 80 Attached i.s a. copy of the -feasibility. report for the above mentioned project prepared by Kirkham -Michael and Associates The council- ini tiated .study was requested and paid f or by Ar Mon Properties,. Inc , developers of. the English Manor. P X. D , The study investigates the needed drainage facilities to serve the proposed English Manor P.U.D., -addresses. existing, drainage problems, and outlines the ultimate drainag-e system needed to serve the area. Staff is in agreement with the recommendations of the study which are a step toward providing .a storm di ainage system it conformance with the Maplewood ^omprehensive Drainage Plan and current City standards As indicated in the repor.L, assessments in accordance with our standard rates wi13 require a substant.al City contribution to the cost of the project. Addi tional debt service of this magnitude must be scrutinized very carefully. There does appear to be a conflict with current assess- ment policy, when evaluating- the advisibility of carrying out a project. The existing assessment rates are based. on the property owners paying approximately one-half the cost for storm sewer improvements This automatically programs additional debt service beyond assessment revenues into any storm sewer project. If the viability . of needed improvements: is .to be based on debt service impact, rates .should be adjusted to increase the assessment revenues for storm sewer construction. Staff is reviewing the adequacy of all current assessment rates, A recommendation as to needed. adjustment will be made ,to the Council in.March. This --project again points out the -need. -for a capital improvements program • It would appear that very few public works improvement projects can be financed using only special assessments, To adequately evaluate which projects should have the highest priority for limited City funds, a comparison. of current City needs . and a policy with regard to maximum debt service is needed. ` - This •proj ect is indeed. desirable from a standpoint of City needs . It provides the basic framework for a . complete -storm sewer system for the sub -watershed, alleviates surface .water problems at the area of County Road ''B" and Birmingham, and provides the adequate. f aci lit* es f or. "in • fill" development. r-.n..+n- .ti•nrw r,.w _ ..c.c -rw tea: J-.. r+»ti •. rv-a+w.•Y. z., .-.- , ... .s•. .. r .. .. - . - . • , ._ , .. .. t. ... -r ..-'l'`„/t+A.?'C••>' ;H7.»''i'• ... 'Ys-„f'*,+,artr,"... . r-....:.•rrra«?ss-." ... ... 1:"r!s.•*. ....•w.n.w;-ve.n•-";,.-....*..IP"'yirq.,v_,...s+lw^n+nn.e^-: r«A.,•S«�,...,o:....,.. . � , -:jWR YRneNi T.\Nh;4r'.'F!F.:7::M'TALY:Jet• •/i{t•N I, SUMMARY Recommended -Improvement Project i 1 Review of the drainage area re ui rements . q coupled with discussions with the - Maplewood Engineering Staff concluded tha - t .the development = of the ul t� ma:e -= storm sewer system would not be feasible at . this time. Therefore, the. .: . • .. fol 1 owi ng cost esti mate outlines the reco m c m ended improvement projects. _10 Reconstruct 'culverts under Gervai s A venue . and T.H. 36 60,000.00 20 Construct trunk storm .s ewer from T.H. 36 _ to County Road B 165,000000 3. Construct school detention and afnc` P e . - - sped al outlet 42 000.00 4. Construct Gladstone Park detention pond - and specla`l outlet.29 00.0.00 5. Construct' store sewer from: school detention. pond along County Road B to Bi rmi nc•a m Street then north to Laurie Road. - 90 000.00 _ Subtotal$3862000.00 t Contingencies 10� 38 .600, 00 Associated . Project Cost 25ro 965400.00 oo.00 TOTAL $521,000.00 The construction of ' the storm -sewer al'on Bi rmi n ham 9 g will require. _ the recon structi on of approximately one-half of the exi sti n a . g p v i ng - and the � ns tal 1 a • tion of curbs and gutters to channel the storm wa ter to the catch basins. ' The estimated construction cost for upgrading and recon P9 9 struct� * ' n9 aPProx�mately 960 feet of Birmingham is $81,000 which includes 10 percent conti ngenci es and ' 25' percent .associated project costs. 9 5. The existing 24-inch culverts under Gerv'ai s Avenue and T.H.: 36 -wi l l - handle the :existing storm water runoff. If the s stem i s y extended to serve areas south of Coe Avenue; then the "two cut- P verts will become overloaded. The balance:of the study area should not require additional storm sewer con- struction -until the ex-i sti ng land use changes or the existing streets are 9 9 upgraded to include curbs and gutters Recommended Solutions .The . proposed __ .development of English Manor will require the construction -: of a storm sewer to provide an outlet to - the G1 adstone Park area. It is : ,w. recommended that the first. segment of the :trunk storm sewer be -cons tructed to handle the estimated ultimate storm water flows from the drainage area. The first segment would extend -from' T.H . 36 soLtherly 'to County Road B This trunk storm sewer would solve the Cope Avenue and English Manor drainage problems. The construction of this segment -of the trunk storm i sewer would also require enlarging the culverts under T.H. 36 and Gervai s Avenue to avoid potential f l.00d i ng. problems. upstream from 'the two cul verts . It i s _ further recommended that two detention ponds with control l ed outlets be constructed south of County Road B and on either side of the. BNRR. These detention ponds will provide for temporary storage of storm .water- runoff which i n turn al lows the reduction in the size of the , downstream storm sewer pipes. To correct the drainage problem near th.e Bi rmi ng-ham and County Road B inter-, section, it will be necessary to construct a storm sewer along County -Road B to the Birmingham Street intersection and then north to the Sandhurst Avenue and Laurie Road intersections This storm sewer system would i ntercept the runoff and direct it to the school detention pond. In order to adequately* channel the water to the proposed catch basins, it i s further recommended that Birmingham Street paving be upgraded to tt standard street cross section, which includes curb and gutters, The storm sewer construction I1 :.: ^!.'^ • '.^. -4 r+ wi..... ...wn.y nv.vS • ....wy+..ww-ry w.. w ... ....-.... rti.-.w+ wu . R'.r,-q•.,t�.n..; u:A!'7!rg?'p?Ir,`ta.r..; ,lbs.--!•f!•r......-.<cav'R:c ^r••r t"f::-: SHT:'!'..y-., ,.�.m...we!.. ^n^...rrrek.•..q!;+.erY-!Mu.H9a.,yng•-•n•. ..:.-ee.:,q.. 11 .7R= .ry a..,� r..e+•T'v'.--tcn�' `•^!v.'.;yt!1k°'Y.'.."k'qy"!"-T/i`,u.�j!I';^...rvM..�-.�Tarh-W-r'.c.«aer,.•w.r,.o y along Birmingham Street would require removal. of ,a roximatel one half of PP Y y t i The areas benefitted by the proposed storm sewer and the'estimated revenues are summarized below. . . Drainage Assessment Assessment Estimated r- District Area (Sqe Ft.) Rate Revenue - A 374, 923 $0.09 $ 33 743.07 B 50.240 0.,045 .2 260.80 68,900 0009 6 201.OQ C 267.8.35 0.009 24 105.'15 159600 0.'045 702.00 D. 1.94 365 0.045 8 746.43 184.9507 0.09 169605.63 G 15,525 0.045 698,62 r- 206,169 0009 189555,21 H* 248,969 0.045 11 9203,61 I 389 8.9I 0. 045 17 , 545.09 753,270 O. 045 339897.15 K 1 98175l. - 0.045 4,443.80 448,400 0009 409356.00 o ..: - L 2829100 0. 045 12 9'694.50 " BNRR 264,000 .0.09 239760.00 Sub Total $2559518,06 Estimated Ramsey County Contribution 13,655.00 _ Estimated Ci ty ' of Maplewood Share 2519826.94 TOTAL $5219000*00 *337,142 square feet were previously assessed for' -storm sewer along Lark Avenue and are not included i.n these .figures 14 "•-`"--=-r.,.,..-,V,.., .,y„ •......,-.,>.>,•.;,::;;.;.•.,.-..-•.,.-r -:a.:,+.rt»,.,,....«..a»;:Se•.e.rmr-',5.,,..;..aa.M:-»:.:.c.ma...< •-•:+r"�!�. NOTICE OF HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, .that pursuant to action by the City Council of the ti T. If partnership, state name and address of each partner. tfdw 4,a oil Af If a corporation, date of incorporation state in which incorporated amount of authorized capitalization .�._. amount of paid in capita] ---� N a subsidiary of any other corporation, so state give purpose of corporation name and address of all officers, directors and -stockholders. and the number- of shares. r eld by each: tName) () (City) . If incorporated under the laws of another state, is corporation authorized to do business in this State? _______. Number of certificate of authority ' If this application is for a new Corporation, include a certified copy of Articles of Incorporation and ' By -Laws. $. On what floor is the establishment e located, or to be located? - - 9. If operating under a zoning ordinance, how is the location of the boding classified ? .-��2«c•� /' Is the building located within the prescribed area for.such license? ---- , 10. Is the establishment located near an academy, college, university,. church, grade or high school? .A10 State the approximate distance of the establishment from such school or church ILL State name and address of owner of building _400 y Z40<. has owner of building any. connection,: directly or .in- directly, with applicant ? �! .1Z. Are the taxes on the above property delinquent? �d 18. State whether applicant, or any of his associates in this application, have ever had an application for a Liquor License rejected by any municipality- or. State ' authority; : if so, give date and details 14. Has' the applicant, or any of his associates in this application, during the five years immediately preceding this application ever had a license under .the Minnesota Liquor Control Act revoked for aay violation of such laws or local ordinances if so give date and. details dr. 15. State whether applicant, or any of his associates - in this application, during that past five years were ever. convicted of any Liquor Law violations or any crime in .this state, or any other state, or under Federal Laws, and if so, give date and details j 16. Is applicant, or any of his associates in this application, a member of the governing body of the,. municipality. in which this license is to be it su ed ? Ny - If so, in what capacity? 17. State whether any person other than applicants has any right, title or interest in the furniture, fixtures, or equipment in the premises for which license is applied, and if so, give names and details M Have applicants any interest whatsoever, directly or indirectly, in any other liquor establishment in the State of Minnesota? - .11d - Give name and address of such establishment 19. Furnish the names and addresses of at. Ieast three business references, including. one bank refer- ence-/1/�rt/L wtt i� �010 i09 f- • ♦ �7 /f �,L �i-X � / '� _ � i�' �! �/� CIO / • _ v� i� • ��. �G h�1i ,�' G`�Pg � of �/'- C4�ie � v,� /�•yi� / tti t•�►�-� 20. Do you possess a retail dealer's identification card issued by the Liquor Control Commissioner which will expire December 31st of this year? Give number of same N 2L' Does applicant intend to sell intoxicating liquor to other than the consumer? Are 27. If off sale license is being applied for, do you intend to deliver :liquor by vehicle? If so, state number of motor vehicle permits issued by Liquor Control Commissioner for current year 28. If you are building anew building for the purposes for which this application is. being made, please submit plans and specifications with this app 29. Financing of the construction of this building will be as follows: - 30. Furnish a personal financial statement with this application.. If a partnership,. furnish financial state- went of each partner.. _ 31. Give description of type of operation if this is an on -sale license application (i.e. whether cock- . tail lounge, Hite club, restaurant, etc., specifying capacity by number of customers and, any other pertinent data) ' ent . �' .T•4'� 1 32. What previous experience have you had in the operation of the type of business described in the hooanswer to No. 31 above .—..! 33. Applicant, and his associates in this application, will strictly comply with all the laws of the State of Minnesota governing the taxation and the sale of intoxicating liquor; rules and regulations promulgated by the Liquor. Control Commissioner; and all ordinances of the municipality ; and ` I hereby certify that I have read the foregoing questions and that the answers. to said questions are true of my own knowledge. VIC (Signature of Applicant) Subscribed and sworn to before me this _.._ day of 19�. THIS APPLICATION MUST BE ACCOMPANIED WITH YOUR CHECK FOR THE FIRST LICENSE PERIOD. .(Off Sale--$200.00 --.-- On Sale-$2,000.00 ) t .:w SHORT. ELLIOTT HINC. • CONSULTING ENGINEERS ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA CHIPPEWA .FALLS, WISCONSIN March 6 , 1980 RE: MAPLEWOOD , MINNE SOTA BEAM AVENUE WEST IMPROVEMENT. CITY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO*. 78-24 OUR . FILE NO. 790:3 5 � - PROJECT N�?.Z4f.,: �.z� City Council City of Maplewood ..... 19 0 2 Ea st . County Road B Maplewood, Minnesota 55109 . Dear Council Members: As requested at the February 2 8 , 19 8 0 - publ is hearing for subject ro ' ect, we have investigated the possibility. -of i.n'stal l ing theP � . sanitary sewer to phases A and E prior to and separately f rom construction of other facilities which were proposed in subject report. Also, at the direction of the Council, the sanitary sewer in Beam Avenue was to be studied such that it would be installed northerly of the existing road pavement yet within, the existing right of way Several items enter . into the sanitary. sewer . costs . by so modifying the alignment and construction sequence The existing right of way alignment has a great depth -,of swa+np deposit which would. have to be either excavated and backf illed with good material or the sanitary sewer would have to be placed on piling. This was avoid- ed by the curved alignment of the street proposed in the original report* In addition, the lesser amount of ' swamp deposit excavation and backf ill that we had anticipated with the northerly curved alignment was considered part of the street construction and not 1 part of the sanitary sewer , as would be..required if the sanitary . :sewer is installed separately . The. last major contributing factor to the increase--of-the-estimated sanitary sewer costs is the fact that restoration would now have to be included as. -part of the MIMS 6J sanitary sewer costs rather than the street -.costs We have taken 200 HILLSBOROUGH OFFICE BLDG • 2353 RICE STREET • ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55113 • PHONE (612) . 484-0272 iR!'RY7'x`m.•.,1NRt"'n>taM'rs+?c!+.vy!.,ror'unwri.c ,rno.,-TF., r`yy5ri;.^•,.•:+.c44!r.arn?.em+,?.afe - aj�ge+r. .. ncwYtsc - _ e*!+-r•eRx.., �� •. .tip ' City of Maplewood March 6,. 1980 Page 2 into account the'fact that the ma j or petitioner has volunteered to remove the excess embankment material on the north side of .the right of way adjacent to this property. Alternate 1 The first method we looked at to install sanitary sewer separately_ from other facilities was that of pil ir., g san itary sewer The san i- tar sewer would-be - installed northerl�r of the existing roadwayY pavement on.. timber treated piles in., an area approximately 400feet - th a maA imum i�le de th ' estimated. at 6 5 feet . Due totn:e long wi P P existin interceptor sewer elevation on the e gast side of Trunk . Highway .61 the sanitary sewer would have to be placed with about 9' Y ► y three feet of cover at the shallowest point. This would require extensive use of insulation fora length of about 600 feet, because it would not be Possible to add suf f is ' ent cover to the sanitary sewer so close to the .existing roadway and existing driveways If sufficient cover was, added to the sanitary sewer , there would be about a f i.ve foot upgrade and downgrade in the driveways . on the north side of Beam Avenue* The total estimated cost increase due to constructing the sanitary sewer separately from the other facilities is $158F7009 This in- clude s Various.sanitary sewer construction items -and restoration , The total estimated cost to construct sanitary sewer to serve �-hases A and E would then total $315,300. When .assessed to. the . 4 ,13 0 feet of f ronta9' e., the front footage assessment rate would amount. to $76.350 It should be noted that if watermains and storm sewer are constructed in this area in the future, they too would have to be placed on Piling,. ilin A future road in this vicinity would. also be subject to continued ,slight. settlement*. ._.Y..-.-rw--..F7t«v.-rr+c_+ae....-.....mfar•,M, ,kySp`}1,.,..-.,,.ey+n.1; rr. a-:..y„Ir�.anv.xr'Mr""!w!". , ... ... . .> ,. .. ^' .. ... __ , .Rdn�*N! . �" .. City of . Maplewood March 6 , 1980 Page .3 1 Alternate 2 The second method of providing sanitary sewer service to phase A of subject project is by -excavating. t-.he muck f rom the roadway. alignment so that the sanitary sewer can be placed . at: this time and a road could be constructed on this fill in the future . Such excavation limits gets to be so large that at its wide st pointmuck excavation would be approx ima � e1y 200 feet wide herefore we have assumed that the . sanitary sewer would be placed T � a I the center of the . road in - the area of the : muck excavation, and then northerly of the existing roadway for the remainder. of the sanitar sewer alignment. To do this,* approximately. f ive f eet of fill would have be placed at the. lo,�e st -point. in the road to rovide adequate cover over the sanitary sewer.. The cost of this P q . -f ill placement- is off set by elimination of the need to insulate the . san itarY sewer .. Future road construction would be benefited by this action in that the fill would . be placed to the proper grade and ready for permanent street construction. The total additional cost of constructing the sanitary sewer by this method including. muck excavation, placement of granular fill, grass restoration, repair of, Beam Avenue with a temporary street section, dewatering , and easements, is estimated to be $503, 000 . This would bring the total estimated cost to serve phases A and E of subject ect ro ect with sanitary '..sewer to $659.,600. If totally J p J assessed this would amount to $159.,71..per front foot. If the developer was able to supply all the -granular. fill required, the total estimated cost could be reduced by as -much as . $100 , 000, or -down to $135..'50 per front foot. Conclusions The costs presented ` herein. are based on a minimal number of soil borings taken , iri BeamAvenuew Therefore, the cost cannot be considered to be ..extremely accurate a However,. it can be seen that "'cv, -i:. ..M1. ... ^r" t.-� M+' t. lit Mll p..,-,.a.ox •".;^t:, "..•^^'R'. 5.i^i'.p.""„'..!'_",r.cwa: ..w.vr*., ... ,nRo ' "• � - �"' "y . _.. .C. �� '/!.a,+!D. :'l'-vv... "`'cif, q?'^`{? ""!.. .. v.. . _ `�!" .. "'v"rH. .'.'�....".ti't.1''.. I � _ r MEMORANDUM T4 s G. ty Manager FROM: Assistant City Engineer SUBJECT: Public Hearing Beam Avenue, . west of T. H. 61 Project 78-24 DATE* February 21, 19.80 A public hearing has been scheduled for -February 28, 1980.. The Council has. received copies of -the feasibility study. Attached is the previous staff report along -with. -its recomenda tion . Action 1T C otoi "^ ! , Ell K V d i-. .. .•-•.;!�:.vnw,-�w,..4.; •,...."'.�^R ;"r.a"�!!s�..,.��:m+•''rr:t+e;�w:.:«n !�"y`^:"""^"�'.n- ..e... . - ^r"":"^•"' . ...�-._ _ .. ..,.i :r.. , __.�q��t..Hn...rncnrtin.+ewe.,p.n�-�..�.w•. �.. -r•� �w4.!r...+.• w..�++- M :+1c.0 v�^b"^^ i !^?:.+.v. Da ..w 4.�. .•,.w.,:�... r.aw.e/!MnCt:^.Y•?CM1.-n-.l��:e... •.:.M'.IyC.Ci `,K4'ti nW"'.R!-f... t r T"•J)X^,c^.-..e✓c+ ^'r .,»Y.: M.. " MEMORANDUM To: City. Manager FROM: Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Beam Avenue, west of T.H. 61 (Improvement Project 7.8-24) DATE: . January 10, 1980 .Attached . is the feasibility study f or. the above referenced project prepared by Short.,-Elliott,'.Hendrickson, Inc. Staff is. in 'concurrence with the overall plan for providing ` transportat`ion and utility service to the area. As indicated in the report, all phasing alternatives will involve _ considerable City costs, -investment of such sums does not appear appropriate at this time. as there are no firm development proposals in the area The feasibility study was initiated by . petition sponsored by a property owner in the area. He indicated he wished to subdivide. To date a proposal has not been submitted. In addition, the site plan approval. for the proposed auto-.. dealership om: the southwest corner of Beam Avenue and T. H. 61 was contingent on the improvement of Beam Avenue. The last state report on the proj ect indicated .that the owner could not acquire the necessary permit to construct in the wetland area. Lt is ..theref ore recommended that the City not proceed with any improve- ment at this time. .: .. w�..w.-.+-....w�.;w�:i Y-+wuniw�nrYw•.+ � i �-rru..v ...w- -m .vs.s.r.. .ww.. ...-.'.... � - _.. .... ...... .. ., .- .. vw..r:..,.rrt�+Y�wR.;vr WeT. 'I+:•.4tf"f^"'�".=tw�:.; •-•tt.wear-r.... y.�.-.;.+'r..-rv�'.. '.'.-h,• .. .. .. - ;. ��., ...-�..+r � • � i EXERPT FROM FEASIBILITY STUDY BY SHORT, ELLIOTT, HENDRICKSON .. CONCLUSIONS , Based on our study and report we conclude the following 10 Proper-watermain service to the project area.would include J are two connections. ections tolooping thewatermainsso that there the-'existing_watermain in Hazlewood Street. 2. The project. is feasible from an engineering standpoint. 3� The total.estimated cost of the proposed improvement is $2,4561800f which- includes sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer, and street construction. in t+Ze project area. 40 The total estimated cost recoverable by. -existing assessment policies. of the City of Maplewood is $1, 8 5 3 , 5 3 5 , which leaves a . cost to be paid by the City of Maplewood of $603, 265. - 50 The resulting maximum estimated front footage assessment rate of the total project is $135.00, which is considered high.by some . standards . 6. The net cost to the city of $603,265 is high and would probably . have to be recovered through some type of special f unding , or a change in assessment policy. CONCLUSIONS.- r SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED COSTS i • (ALT.) h PHASE A PHASE B PHASE C PHASE D PHASE E PHASE F COMBINED A-F WATERMAINt TOTAL ESTIMATED•COST. $237,000 $144,700 $158*000 $221,900 $ 66,500 $ 99,500 $ 927,600 ASSESSABLE FRONTAGE, L.F. 6,400 5,800 2,700 4,100 1,180 11460 21,640 ASSESSMENT RATE/F.F. 20 20 20 20 .20 20 20 r 1 SERVICE CONNECTIONS 34 74 36 0 13 16 173 SERVICE CONNECTION CHARGE. 660 600 600 - 600 600 600 f S TOTAL ASSESSED COST 148,400. 160,400 75,600 82,000 31,400 38,800 536,600 a CITY COST 88,600 (-15,700) 82,400 139,900 35,100 60,700 391,000 SANITARY SEWER: TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $109000 $151,700 $ 0 $ 0 $ 46,700 $ 0 $ 308,300 ASSESSABLE FRONT ' AGEr L.F. 2,950 5,800 1,180 ; 9,930 ` ASSESSMENT RATE IF.F. 32.07 20.41 34.62 25.56 4 SERVICE CONNECTIONS. 34 74 13 121 SERVICE CONNECTION.CHARGE 450 450 450 450 TOTAL ASSESSED COST 109,900 1511700 46000 308t300 ' CITY COST 0 0 0 0 STORM SEWER: TOTAL ESTIMATED COST S133,000 $305,0n $ �i $ a $ G $ 0 $ 438,300 (ALT. II) R1 ASSESSMENT AREA, S.F. 0 1 979 000 1,9790000 � NON-R1 ASSESSMENT AREA. S.F. 872,000 t650,000 1,5221000 ASSESSMENT RATE R1/S.F. 0.045 0.045 ASSESSMENT RATE NON-R1/S.F. 0.09 0.09 -0.09 TOTAL ASSESSED COST 70,480 147,555 226.,035 CITY COST 54,520. 157,745 212,265 STREETS: TOTAL ESTIMATED COST, $357,600 $425,000 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 782,600 • ASSESSABLE FRONTAGE, L.F. 2,950 .50800 f ASSESSMENT RATE/F.F. 121.22 73.28' 8,75 _ASSESSED COST 357,600 425,000 .44 600 782,0 CITY COST p p TOTAL PROJECT COST:. 'TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $837,500 $1,026,700 $158,000 $221,900 $113,200 5 99,500 $2,456,:800 • MAXIMUM ASSESSMENT.RATE/F.F. 173.29 113.69 20 20 54.62 20. 135.00 + STORM,SWR + STRM SWR + SERVICES + SERVICES + SERVICES + STORM SEw'EA • TOTAL ASSESSED COST + SERVICES + $694,380. SERVICES $8841655 $ 75,600 $ 82,000 $ 78,100 S 38,800 + SERVICES $1,853,535 } . CITY.COST $143,120 $1420045 $ 82,400 $139,900 ; 35,100 S 60,700 ,: 603,265 � HADNAiS HEIGHTS -N O E 2 I I W E so' oR sY t sd oot a!' E Q CUT q ^ .« 1*-2341 SIT. M9ANING COURSE E t`-2331 IT BINDER COURSE 11-l331 •IT 0A3E COUNSE MODIFIED CLASS S WRAVE L •A!E I 4006B PI AlTHE I L E G E N O PROPOSED STREET CONST. �A PROJECT PHASE .Z ••'•'••"•••••• PROPOSED FRONTAGE ASSESSMENT 2 1 l � BEAM AVE CITY OF MAPLEWOOD PROJECT NO. 78 -24 PROPOSED BEAM � AVE. PAVING PREPARED BY 11/43) SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON, INC. I ST. PAUL. MINNESOTA • CHIPPEWA FALLS. WAC DATE, 1-7-80* FILE NO.?9035 • DRAWING NQ 6 VADNA6 HEIGHTS CO RO M 1119COrrtMotpl Q .t . • tV� �•..•.••••••...• ..•.sees � •.�•�•••••••••• ••lose.. i 1 a0d how o L E E N D GULDEN S l W q 112-2 EXISTING TRUNK wATERUww PROPOSED WATERMAIN FUTURE TRUNK WATERMAIN - ® PROJECT PHASE E �' wlolo••lo••••�lo•• PROPOSED FRONTAGE ' s GOLF COURSE �D' ASSESSMENT 12" �.�.....�.BEAM AVE a /12'� . CITY OF MAP LEWOOD PROJECT -24 -• .NO.78 41 t WAT.ERMAIN - = ---. -- PREPARED BY A SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON. INC. ST. PAUL. MINNESOTA : • CHIPPEWA FALLS. wISC _ DATE, I-7-00 FILE NO. 79035 DRAWING NO. 2 w 11 is 1 VADNAIS HEIGHTS CO RD D VADNAIS HEIGHTS —.-_......... .... ..ram ..._. F IS N t o 118" • R/ . w • a W E3 M j42. 42". ' LS C o I 406 a� c 48 . O L. E G E N D -0 3 ..f._....—..._. COUNTY DITCH NO: la. EXISTING CULVERT 18---� ..� =.r •� �54 RM 2 ..�..C< PROPOSED STORM.__ SEINER 1 tO PROJECT PHASE NUMBER • �• �• . �--FUTURE 6A.F "D ,� ` 2• .� +........ �, PROPOSED ASSESSMENT AREA BOUNDARY 2 L �• ., r . J RM PROPOSED LAND USE t LAND USE BOUNDARY l loan CFS. DISCHARGE / / .--� ALTERNATE ]I =�— 48•• . A ( RECOMMENDED) • 3 - ��� a BEAM AVE CITY OF MAP LEWOOD PROJECT N0.7B -24 KOHL MA /Y L A Ar- E s. ' r t t STORM SEWER f t PREPARED BY SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON. INC. • ST. PAUL. Y"4WTA • p"►►E WA FALLS. MSC DATE: 1-1-e0 FILE NO. 79035 , DRAWING NO S ol 1 s Alternate A Alternate A considers a method of reducing,., the. ' cost of the Firehouse Pond as proposed in the feasibility report. dated November 27, 1979. With` Crestview Pond discharging to the east, --.and then:. north of Lower Afton Road, the Firehouse Pond could be reduced in size to..one acre foot storm water.s.torage capacity. The outlet to the Firehouse Pond would remain at a four cubic foot per second capacity. The outlet to the Crestview Pond would be a 21 inch storm sewer system lying south of Londin Lane and draining `to the east to Lower Af ton Road Before crossing Lower Afton Road,. the storm sewer would have . to increase in size to 48" diameter in order to pick up the local drainage lying east of the Crestview Addition. The ditch immediately northwest of the outlet of the 48 inch storm sewer would have to be lowered somewhat to allow the-48 inch storm sewer to drain to the northwest, On the north side of Lower Afton Road directly north of the Connemara - site, a small diversion dam would have to be constructed to reconvey the 11 cubic foot per second discharge from Crestview. Pond back into the Mississippi River Bluff Watershed from. the South Battle Creek. Watershed. The diversion dam would consist of an earth -dike with two .bituminous spillway overf lows. The overflow to the 'wes t ditch of Lower Af ton Road would allow an 11 cf s discharge to tine . pond. adjacent to Lower Afton Road and McKnight Road. The .remainder of the flow from the South Battle Creek Watershed would continue ..to the north as it is planned in the .City storm drainage plan This would allow the South Battle Creek Watershed to operate as previously planned. The four acre foot storage capacity reduction at the Firehouse Pond would result in an increase of four acre feet . of storm water- storage capacity at the McKnight Pond (McKnight Road and Lower Af ton Road) The McKnight Pond would then have to 'be excavated to a nine acre foot storm water -storage capacity. This location is not particularly conducive to storm water storage due to the existing terrain . If the facilities discussed herein are constructed it would be logical to construct a controlled outlet from the McKnight Pond and a controlled outlet from the Johnson Pond. The storm water storage capacity proposed in the Maplewood Drainage Plan can be . accommodated at the Johnson Pond between the existing water level and' a 928`- highwater elevation. Therefore, no construction at the Johnson. Pond site would.be - necessary to develop the required storm water capacity. We did not consider * herein excavating materials from the Johnson: Pond. site which have -silted in. over the past few years. We feel this can be accomplished when the adjacent site develops., 7 By constructing outlets for Johnson. Pond and McKnight Pond, the property between McKnight Road, Londin Lane, Lower Afton Road and the Condor Corporation site could reasonably be : assessed for these improvements This would result in an increase of the assessment area of about 22 ` acres, t s-...': ....e..•....n brrwwys.a+a. ..ten.•,.,..,,,. ^ir ..:.....,.. -..... .,. ....,....,,....... ... ._ . --Y:9fa.i+•....r�.MY.N_y^c•:m+ti`��..1':�' T.`..Y•4: T.S rr+t !:.'P.TfK A..t . v......+ ' fur )..w.�r.;..y.•,..-. nn.Tv.wy. o.rw•.vti• 7.7rm of ter giving eredit. for dedication of approximately a. 4-acre storm drain.ag a .easement: over Johnson ,.Pond which would ultimately be required. At the :non -single family residential rate of 90 per square foot, this increased assessment area would result in an assessment incomeincrease of $8692500 Cost Summarf or. Alternate A • The following cost summary table of . Alternate. A assumes.... construction as. just discussed, no assessment to the Ramsey County Open Space or, any property north of Lower Afton Road, and additional assessment: to the 22 „acres lying west of the Condor Corporation . site . It also assumes no cost for obtaining the property for storm water storage purposes for the McKnight Pond. Note that for the total improvements costs, including Alternate A, of $404, 360, there is a possible assessment of $408, 350. This is about $4,000 over the estimated improvement cost. CONDOR STORM SEWER -ALTERNATE A COST SUMM."I COST OF IMPROVEMENTS PER STAFF REPORT OF 11-29-79 $ 2619140 PLUS SILTATION BASIN C JOHNSON' S POND (219000 x 14 32) _ . $ 279720 AMENDED STAFF REPORT TOTAL IMPROVEMENT CST $ 2889860 LESS FIREHOUSE POND IMPROVEMENTS PLUS FIREHOUSE POND (REVISED) IMPROVEMENTS = +$ .239695 PLUS CRESTVIEW POND OUTLET STORM. SEWER _ -!M$ 35, 575 PLUS DIVERSION. DAM ALONG LOWER .AFTON ROAD = +$ 36,960 . PLUS MCKNIGHT POND. CONSTRUCTION + JOHNSON' S POND OUTLET = +$ 166,320 ALTERNATE A - TOTAL IMPROVEMENT COST $ 4049360 POSSIBLE ASSESSMENT PER STAFF REPORT OF 11-29-79 = $ 3229100 PLUS POSSIBLE INCREASED ASSESSMENT $ 86,250 , $ 4089350 .. ...- - ...._ ...r.... ... . ........_ .- + f > S.R µ.s.. .. ..r .. t t '1 W1 rn rNM1n a ,.e..7N!•+ r'f1r.... t•...Y'-vlr r %MSS.{.•w..:1rF•[•wr.+,•T`.w • , ..M- ...1. r .. .. r .. ....1r^.1M••t". .. .at1'!.•+wVr.•++ti : rw .•'Y Mre4±!MrYfr.ty �'f'1•'IP/4-.. .M.H ^r!' ••.F7".^!„ . ".+•..✓t+, !.`iRsWrVw..n-.1••. _ Alternative B This ` a ternative also considers a reduction of the Firehouse Pond capacity and an outlet for the Crestview Pond to. the ditch north o f Lower Afton Road . The concept of this system, however, is a departure from the Maplewood Drainage Plan. Approximately 130 acres that was planned to flow into Battle Creek would be discharged into St. Paul near Lower Afton Road and McKnight* An analysis of the.,. drainage area involved shows that approximately 11 acre feet of additional storage is needed at various locations north of Lower Af ton. Road to maintain the design criteria established . by .the City. By • reducing the capacity. o.f the Firehouse Pond and eliminating the outlet from the Crestview Pond, as proposed in the original feasibility study, a cost savings of $123,000 is realized. With the Alternative B system being considered, $36,000 must be used to provide an outlet: for Crestview Pond to the ditch north of Lower Afton Road. . In addition, the total storage capacity -must. be. increased by 11 acre-feet, . although this may not substantially increase the cost of facilities already proposed in the drainage plan. In the lone run it could be more cost effective to us.e the Alternative B system. In the short-term, there are ' s.everal laspects of the Alternative B system that must be considered. installation.of the dikes, ditches , outlet controls and pond excavation for this . system will require a substantially larger investment than the other two sy s t ems . As.you know, the area north of Lower Afton Road is Ramsey County Open Space. The area presently remains in its Lzatural state .with large stands of trees and a natural drainage system. Installation of. the Alternative B .system. would require removal of a large number of . mature trees as well as considerable grading in certain areas. Even though the MaP lewood Drainage Plan indicates facilities in the area north of Lower Afton Road, the installation of those facilities can be postponed until the need arises if in fact the need ever does become apparent. Coordination with other agencies must also be considered with Alternative B. Since this system .is contrary to the Drainage Plan approval of the change must be granted by the Watershed District. In addition, all the property involved is Ramsey County Open. Space. In light of the . impact on the natural character of the area , the County may not take a f avorab le view ` - of the proposal. Financing of this proposal may also be a problem. A considerable share of the cost to construct the facilities north of Lower Afton Road would be generated through assessments to the Ramsey County.Open Space. Since a natural drainage system does function at the. present time and, in view of the disruption to the natural character of . the land, storm drainage facilities in this area may not be considered a benefit to the property, In -conclusion, it. is not recommended to pursue Alternative B at this time, in light of the additional. investment, negative impact on the natural area, and unsound financing aspects of the proposal BARR ENGINEERING CO. Consulting Hydraulic Engineers DRAINAGE PLAN FOR. THE CITY of MAPLEWOOD General I The Ci of Maplewood is located in eastern Rams a Count It is ty p y y completely- surrounded by . other incorporated' municipalities St. Paul is located . to the southwes t, Roseville directly west, Little Canada and Vadnais Heights to the northwest, White Bear is located directly north.. The City of North St. Paul is located in on the eastern side of Maplewood and has a common boundary with Maplewood on the north, the west and south sides of North St. Paul.. Oakdale and Woodbury are on the... east side. and - Newport is located .directly. south. The total .land area .of the.. City of Maplewood is approximately 17.9 square miles. The 1970 population was 25.91860.It is a rapidly growing suburb at the present time. Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing -Comp any .has its main headquarters within the city limits., There is a new regional diversified shopping center located in the northern part of the.municipality. Purpose - = A common experience in most municipalities is that the storm sewer is usually the last of the basic physical facilities to be completed. Streets, sanitary sewers and water systems generally precede the development of an • adequate storm sewer system. -This is the case in Maplewood. Considering the amount of development located within the municipality, the existing storm sewer 'facilities to serve the development is grossly inadequate.' Many of the storm sewers that have been constructed were installed to alleviate current problems with little thought to providing. a coordinated. drainage system. There are exceptions to this such as the .Beam Avenue System which • was designed considering the long-term storm .drainage needs of that drainage area. In addition to solving problems .that were previously created, a pro perly prepared drainage plan can prevent problems from occurring in the future. -A. ma j or advan tage of a comp rehens ive drainage.plan is that it provides a tool to require all new developments to ' ins talk f aci li ties} which •will be. capable of preventing serious storm drainage p rob lems Another purpose. for preparing this drainage plan was to conforwith m a resolution passed by the. Ramsey County Commissioners. The. resolution which' they passed . reads as f ollows : 'Now, therefore,, be it resolved that all land development . , that increases runof f . `f rom an area ' hall rovide for re- moval of pollutants and further shall provide ondin so the rate of flog► to . Lakes , s treams or ditches * shall not be greater than.'it it was on all " This resolution was adhered to in. the develo meet of this com rehensive drainage plan for the Ci ty of Maplewood, The importance of this drainage plan as . a. -future planning, _tool -s-hou j�d ' notbe minimized. The mis take , of planning for only the existing or short-- term projected development can be observed in analyzing most of the exis Ling systems This mistake should not be repeated..' This drainage .plan will .allow f or s tage cons truction ' of drainage f acilities but always with the full knowledge of the size and location necessary to provide- the ultimate ' s torm sewer facilities in the future. The drainage plan presented in this report will serve its important function only if it is sys tematically followed during the future years. Any departure from the drainage plan must include compensating adjustments to maintain the continuity of the plan. Drainage Pattern . The natural drainage pattern for the City of Maplewood is fairly well defined. There are some small land -locked areas that probably have not contributed any runoff outside of their immediate drainage area since glacial periods. These land -locked areas are located.;:generally in ..tw.o ;'are -as one: of these areas is north of Fish Creek and south of Upper Afton Road. The . other area is generally in the area located between Frost Avenue and Highway 36 near. Hazelwood Avenue. There are other smaller* isolated areas which are. also land -locked. Generally, the development within Maplewood has not had any major effect on the natural drainage patterns This probably- is related to.. the. generally -77W' . • - , , . ..well-defined existing -drainage pattern. Almost all the storm runoff water that on the that -originates in g City of Maplewood eventually outlets through the City' -of St. Paul into the. Mississippi. River, There are two small areas one located o � n theextreme south end . of Maplewood where approximately 200 acres flow south along. the Interstate Highway into Newport, and the other area. in the extreme northeast corner .,where` approximately 100 acres either drain directl y east into. -Oakdale or south into Silver Lake which evally into outle Oakdale. Along some of ` the other boundaries water flows into so me me of the .adjacent communities but circles back throughMaplewood and eventual ritually through St. Paul to 'the Mississippi River.. There is one large drainage system and a number of smaller systems within Maplewood The storm .runoff from approximately 10 square.. ymiles • within the City Eventually outlets into Lake Phalen. This f . is almost all'of the land north of Larpenteur Avenue exce t ; for approximately • P PP ly 1 square mile on the extreme west side than outlets into Trout Brook. The remainin g I7 square miles outlets into St. Paul through -a number of smaller drainage g systems . These include the Beaver Lake System, the Battle Creek S stem., the Fish Y Creek System and some unnamed. creeks and ravines along the bluff . g of ..the Mississippi River. Design Criteria Prior to the preparation of the drainage plan meetings were held with h the engineering staff of Maplewood to set forth the design- n• criteria which . g would be used in the development of the .plan. In addition to meeting s with the Maplewood engineering staP ff, meetings were held with the Maplewood Park - and Recreational Department and their consultant to integrate this 'drainage :.. g plan with the park and open space plan being P Y developed concurrently. - The design. criteria was carefully determined , because the cost.o - f pro- viding complete drainage facilities represents a substantial a endi r' P xp tune and the replacement of inadequate facilities re resents an even greater cost, P Therefore, careful consideration was given the g . to expected life of the system, the extent of increased development in the drainage area, the p otential g .._..._ :.w. ,.. mow., d ......, .. _ _ ........ � .. . _.. . ' _ ... '. .. .... . '---e.,..... .. . _'• we.• ...+r r . t + .. r.�.a�..ir::.:riew a...•�r+!"`+... ,..._: .:.. damage which could result from an inadequate sized s ' s tem and the initial • Y construction' cos t. Based upon these cons iderations ,. the des ign criteria which was established is. as follows 1.. The design, runoff rates and volumes were based on total land development in accordance with the Maplewood Land Use Plan. Ji • - - - Z. in areas presently not developed, ponding was incorporated. -to remove pollutants and to maintain the rate of flow into lakes streams or ditches equal to the rate that it is at present. ► 3. Storm sewers.. which . do not include .storage facilities were sized to carry the runoff from rainfalls with an average return period.-: of 10 years 4. - The peak discharges. -in creeks and other ma' or .-water ways Ys were _ calculated based upon rainfalls with an. avers a return period of 100 ears g p y 5. Drainage facilities at low. points • in the system and pond area Y P g s were designed to handle the runoff from 100-year frequency rainfalls us.e n q yg durations varying between one-half hour and 4 days and snowmelt conditions* ons up to 30 day duration. b. A hydrograph method was used to compute -the designcharges. dis and storm volumes. .7. Major watershed divides as well as interior watershed .divides were determined using the four -foot contour interval topographic maps supplied by the City, of Maplewood. In addition, for determinin watershed g divides outside the municipal limits of Maplewood , the U . S . Geological' Survey topographic survey maps were used. _ 8. The existing Sys terns were. analy.zed based on "as -built'.` plans or field information supplied by the City of Maplewood to determine if they met the design criteria. r Drainage Plan This drainage plan includes the preliminary design of all storm- sewers l located within the developed portions of the City of Maplewood. In' the undeveloped: areas, the:..tentative location , of ponding areas was determined, and storage volume and outlet discharges were calculated. The exact location or' size of' -storm sewers cannon be determined in an undeveloped _ area until the, ,s tree.t . locations'. and street grades have been es tablished, 'It is emphasized that this drainage .plan encourages the maximum use of the, storm water .s torage potential in. the Clay: The , ,loo-year frequency storage volume and the outlet d.ischar.ge for_a watershed are uniquely relat d ' and a change.: in one necessitates a change in the other. The storage .. - 1. ... _ volumes and the outlet discharges shown on the. drainage plan can be modified but such modifications should be done carefully to insure that other portions of the system are not adversely affected. Some ponding sites, especially in the southern portion of Maplewood, show a zero discharge. These are:. sites which are land -locked and have a large storage volume available, If an outlet is provided from any of these areas which show zero. discharge, the outlet . 'should have a small dis- charge rate which would only discharge after the.. peak of the storm runoff has passed -the downstream area. In areas where storm sewers have been sized, the sizing was based on existing s t.reet grades determined from the four -foot contour interval topo graphic maps., Due to inaccuracies in these snaps, there are areas where the size of pipe could. easily change one or more sizes when the system is final designed using accurate field information.. The exact routing of a system may be changed slightly because of existing utilities or inaccuracies in. the. topographic maps. The primary routing and the continuity of each of the systems should not be. altered. s Two.. types of ponding areas are shown on the . drainage plan, Some are. shown as inundation areas and the remaining anes are shown as. ponds. In most cases, either an inundation area or a pond may be used. The drainage plan only indicate: what is- believed to be the bes t type. of development for the area. based on the preliminary'' analysis. ......;..+.n--re.�,•.»...............w.-... ...-n--....-v......._._......... .... .. ._.__. __ .... ,. _. .... ..... .. ..... ....... ..:.. ..::'• w:.:r_ .. .w.. a`+. Y ... ..«- ...rw.........' .. •..ti.cr•••••+rwy.�d 1P F-2 -..r:..... mow•... ... :.,.:.`r 4f '_L'., r..;. ,.. • ' icular drainage area .is shown The proposed system leaving a part either as an open ditch or as a storm sewer* During the final design, it may be. desirable to replace some of the open channel with storm sewer and conversely .replace some of the storm sewer with open channel. The criteria • used ' :in determining -if an open channel should be used are:: there be suf f i-- cient :right-of-way to allow satisfactory side slopes , the drainage area should be sufficiently large to rovide a cor.(tinuous low flow the channel P , slope - not be too steep to be an erosion problem, . and that it be compatible with the ad j ascent land uses, On. the following page. is an index map which shows the various portions of complete system. An enlarged map of each of the individual systems is shown immediately tollowi:ng ..the;. discussion of the system. `, MEMORANDUM DATE January 10, 198 0 A , Pub l.c Hearing is scheduled for 7 : 45 P.M .' , January 17, 1980 for the _above project. . Attached is previously submitted information .about the project. Council has previously received the feasibf:lity report. ' �.?�sC A� MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager. FROM: Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Feasibility Study - Condor Storm.Sewer - Maplewood Project 78-18 LI DATE:. November 2 9 , 19 79 A number -of drainage problems are present in the study area f or this project. As -a result, the consultants were directed to study the entire situation and develop a plan to brine the area's storm drainage system back into. conformance -with. the City 's 'drainage plan. The .consultants . haT.'e made a : number of recommendations as detailed in the enclosed report, some. of the recommended facilities would be installed as part of a .public. improvement project while others would be installed by developers as part . of their . utility systems* The attached map shows the recommended improvements and indicates who will construct the various facilities The following are those improvements recommended. to be apart of a public improvement project 10 Construct storm sewer, from the Maplewood Hills Townhouses experiencing. flooding adjacent to Dorland Road to Londin Lane Pond (Section A, S.E.H. report) at a total estimated prod ect cost` of $34, 470.00. 2 Repair and eliminate further erosion damage adjacent: to the Connemara Apartments (Condor Corporation). by installing a storan .sewer outlet from the .Londin Lane Pond to the existing siltation. basin adjacent to Johns.on's Pond at a total estimated project cost of $32, 735.00. 3. Construct the Fire House Pond, inlet storm sewer from Crestview Pond and outlet storm sewer to ' the Connemara site, at a total estimated project .cost 'of $147,050.00. 4. Construct relief lateral storm sewers adjacent to Dorland Road (Sec ions B & C, S.E.H. report) at a total estimated cost of $33 470.04 and $13, 4.15.00 respectively . Parts 1 and .4 are recommended to be constructed by the City with the condition that the owner, of the Maplewood Hills Townhouses pay the .entire cost of the improvements attributable to his property. • Part 2, storm outlet from Londin Lane Pond west of Connemara and Part 3, Firehouse Pond with. inlet and outlet piping are proposed to be assessed. The service are, contains a , number of different assessment situations . Some areas were previously assessed, some is City owned; other areas have been provided with a certain amount of storm sewer facilities by developers.. These factors should be considered in developing an assessment formula . It is. recommended that the attached resolution calling for a public hearing January 17, 19 80 be adopted by the Council-. The State Statutes, Section 462.356 s�ubdivision 2 addresses the ques tion of Planning Commission review for proposed public improvements to investigate their impact on the Comprehensive Plan.. The statute further states ... . "The governing body may, by. resolution adopted by two --thirds vote dispense Tv41th the requirements of this subdivision when in its judgment it finds that the proposed acquisition or disposal of real property or capital improvement has no relationship to the comprehensive municipal plan" It is recommended, that the City Council adopt a second resolution finding this proposed project has no impact on , the . Comprehensive Plan. To be built by Connemara Project. To be built by City of Maplewood Built by Crestview �r `t: 2-'' o'oAY k7. CIR 1. o AI AND RD. , - Built by Crestwood Knol Is ` PROPOSED STORM SEWER ZX.ISTIN:G, S:TORV SEWER --------.-_ OPEN CHANNEL ' PONDING AREA. DRA.INAGE AREA RESERVED FOR ' PARKended, ----0 ----*%%a — —. on —�-.� • 1 i• .JI'r�t • ••I� �..., •w Via•►.. M at•r' • � # � . •.. t • •a . �• i t A N4 N N j c.�r N ~fats." ComMEMA�` j . - �. ...-ir LV _-�••t�.�-� i.�sif� ' r1.1 .-••.- ��h•,�•ii` �w _ - t'.. • ••- -_ Oi • e tf✓I L;� . . . do CIO 40, .o •/• t ow r••�taJ i a �} of p 0) * PO NO ACL• • G ," • !PLl S. low enemas • • • w�..�. _ ,r, ...�.,_..., _ ...�,.... .. .� ' FINANCING. SUMMARY . CONDOR . S TOal 'SEWER ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS .. Part 1 and 4 $ 81,355.00 - fart•. 2' -and 3 179 , •785.00 . Total . $ 261,14 0.0 0 To be constructed';: upon receiving guarantees that the Maplewood Hills Townhouses pay their attributable share of project.. POTENTIAL ASSESSMENT REVENUES Total Previous Potential Potential. Location Area Assess, Assess . Area Rate Assess . Amount A — -Condor .12132,000 24I, 300 8901700 0.09' $ 80,200 B — City .BUDGET, .AMOUNT FIRE STATION. PROJECT $ 30 ,.00 0 C — Crestview I £ II 1, 218, 800 — 0 — 11 218, 800 0.045 $ 54.2800 D. - Crestview 111 1.969 8, 800 724.1900 9 73 900 0.045 $ 431,800 E - Maplewood Hills 905, 900 - 0 - .9051900 0. 09 $ 812500 F -- -Crestview (future) 550, 000 - 0 - _ 550, 000 0.045 $ 24 800 G - 744,000 589,000 15590,00 0,.045 $ 72 000 • TOTAL $322 0100 t . •' •�� ••• • •/ it r ,' • . .. • ACITY 0 1902 EAST COUNTY R O -B MAPLEWOOD MINNESOTA 55.109 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 770-4550 - February 6, 1980 Dear Property Owner On. January 17, .1980 a Public Hearing was. held for the ro osed Condor Storm P P Sewer, Maplewood Project . 78-18. The City Council did not take action on the proposal and continued the hearing until a later date. All those who wish to express their opinion -to the City Council. are encouraged to attend this meeting e The time and location is PUBLIC HEARING (continued) 7.30 P.M*, February 21,. 1980 Maplewood City Hall 1380 Frost Avenue In.,preparation for the Public Heari.n� , she En i neering staff will hol d d an o th =r information 'session for those interested in learning more about the proposed project. If you have questions concerning the proposed construction , how it affects ects your p roper ty or the.. costs involved - , please -make plans to .attend. the information session. The time- and -location is: INFORMATION SESSION 200 P.M, until 6: 30 P .M. , February. 129 1980 East County Line Fire Station 1177 No Century Avenue (Century at Maryland) The format for the Information Session will be informal. Interested persons may come during the designated time and .have their questions about the project ' ect answered -on an individual basis. Please keep in mind that no decisions will be., made at the Information -Session;. however, you are encouraged to attend to gain a better under atandi:ng of the project. It i.'s hoped that this process will result in a more organized Public Hearing with the City Council because only relevant and valid issues will be discussed. Very truly yours., Kenneth -GO Haider Assistant City Engineer XGB: o • ISO I it J. o•c�N#aat$ 1. ATTORNEYS AT l_AW :: , %SUITE 1400 910I:ri[t'11cA W. 1040#4A� Jv.c- A. w�.�;, Cn.., T.1004AL A. KCLLCA III TH RTY-EI,GHTH FLOOR, ! U 5 TOWER loto PC'MU SY LVANIA AVe: N. WASHIHG-1-ON. o:C. Z0000 MLtr4:C.Mcou►nr OO SOUTH EIC•HTH STREET /I1.r►IARO L.. p0•jT t302)705-0700 'J4Wit VT.J.C►41443TIAN'a0N.JR• MINNEAPOLIS; MINNESQTA_55402 P^TalcK'J.eC9NNOR C►4&*1LC% 0. fA rCfAC` r0^011i .J. WAL2 -..-. WILLIA M T. NAN N,.AN � • CD.W^RD W. eiRoOAE • .,1A04Cto i1. DL)R'CT A/1O`PCW .'.904CA 012) 341-3000 JOHN J. r LY'N N. N..ROOERT NAI.PER• QOu3L.A3 N. McwILLAN Cr►AALl=S O.FiL•1TC TELEX 2 0-0S84 j05ePm C. DILLON THOMAS ".0u1HN • WILL$AM,.R. MCGAANN • .w�►I.T[A C. PARKINS TEL.ECOPlER 4312 341-300042'56) ►tQWARD G. r E LO M AN • OAVtO`:R. ►wELINCOc RF• - t•1T E..At.GM>=T .IAMCs 0115 RCYER . CELA04CEY W. DAVISDAVIS• RICHARO.G. MORGAN :.J1064M J. SOMMERVI.LL[ -: "I"Es A. PUDEt+STEIN l1AtICT P.s'OwLEa PASEO DE LA CASTELLANA• 8 OJi►Yip 9U-RL1NGAME � PMILIP R. NOC►•1DERG • �- TMO►►aA9 V. vA►tE1Z_�C., • DOUG.LAS M. t.AfiH11VAL • JCPE#4:AM J. KEARNEY MADRID 1. SPAIN MARTIN M. BERLINER• TEPENCE P. BOYLE� '.. T140FAAS R. SHERAN 276-5524 GREGORY A_ KEARNS JON;N, A.13URTO-N.JR. • HOPES. fOs`i ER • oaUNIGTELEX 23802 FALW E•� SUIT1�`t100 SECURITY LIFE BUILDING R0604T A. . THOM S R.'JLAN• THOAOLLY•. r84C4E R1Cn .:W- MORRIS 1616 G L ENA R M PLACE WILOA►4 E.FLYNN BARRY J. CUTLER • MICNAEL J. CONLONa 14At400LPM J. MATER OEM VER, COLORADO 80.202 DONAL:D S. ARB.OUR•. --- 1303) S73-7737 PETER:C. KISSEL• WILLIAM C. KE.LLY (1918•1970) CAROL N. PARK• JOSEPN E. PATTlSON • . LOCAL CHARLES W. GA RRISON'" G0RD0N K. GAYER. a _ .COUNSCL•• t� Q n r.JAVIER rA0AEt3AT• JanuaryJanuary 17 , �./ 8 L ROBERT J. STEEL.E • . .CMRIST1NA W. F:.EPS • ' MIC►4AEL E. VEVE • M^RTNA PRIOOY PATTERSO N JAM ES N. 1•I O LT • • or COuwsC< JOS.EPM F. CASTIELLO • PREt7 D. N.Ot�P50N • ' ...JOMN' M• KOL:LOMAN' $• - •MOT' MCMOER Or.M�MNCSOTn 6AR Mayor and. Ci �y Council - Cit` of Maplewood 1380 Fro s t Avenue - Map-lewood Minnesota 55109 • Re.., Condor Storm Sewer Proposed improvement Pro j ect 7 8 -18 . Ladies and Gentlemen We represent Condor Corporation, the. developer of.* the Connemara condominiums in Maplewood,, Condor has received the Notice of Public Hearing scheduled for this evening regarding the. above Project, and. will. be represented at the hearing. In addition, Condor has. received. a copy of the ' Feasibility Roport dated November 27., 1979 on the. pro-- posed improvement prepared by Short -Elliott -He' ndrickson, Inc. , consulting engineers retained by the City. We have reviewed the report with Condor, and make the following comments in i_ is behalf . We request that g this . letter be included: as part of the record made at the public heari.ng. .w nap•r.+•- M•.'.r.._.^+'V.w..•n.•r.!..:s•v..t-rtsnryiM.........+w.....wn...n.r.+.....•......... ... .. .. ..- .. `. _ .... r .. .. .. ., ,... .. ...._.., ...._ .. . ,.._... .. _ • r -. ... ....-...«...;...,,.,.. ' Mayor and City Council Page 2 January 17 , 19 8 0 • • The Cause of the 1 Existing Drainage Problems } on the Condor Site Initially, we note Condor ' s full agreement with � what we' believe to be a signif icarit unstated pre-. mine of the engineer's . report as it relates to the Condor property,, namely,,.. that the existing erosion and siltation pond conditions in the westerly portion of the site are. not of Condor' s making .,.The problems which exist on the site , including the ero s ion, . the de terior- ti:on. of that .part of Johnson's Pond lo.ated Qn the site . Ca.— probl erm ,not acknowledged in the 3:.-eport) and. -the condition of the existing siltation basin adjacent agent to what is left of Johnson's Pond, are primarily attri- butable to the development of the .property south of Londin. Lane. .That development, as the report does indicate, has proceeded in repeated substantial "de-- vi:a`tions" from the area drainage pl �n previously ap= proved , re sul t.ing in runoff rates onto and through the _ Connemara. site far in excess of those -contemplated in th:.e,:.existing plan, and. even farther in excess of the runoff rates:•Jhi.ch existed when the area south of -Londin ...Lane: -:was, -in a*i undeveloped state, It is important that the members of the Coun- cil and the City staff bear these facts in mind, not only in connection with.. their -consideration of the proposed storm sewer proj ec-t', but also when_ the time comes .to assess the costs of the, improvements, as finally .determined, against the land "benefited" by them. The basic. improvements are clearly intended to and. will, inure primarily to the benefit of. the land south of Londin Lane, nOt the Condor site. Condor. s Cooperation - 3 n CoMpleti.ng the Project Next, we wish. to assure you that Condor fully. intends .. to cooperate with the City in effectuating the basic improvements, consistent with its commitments to the: City, under the existing planned unit development ("PUD'.') and related contractual arrangements . • `^`•^•.RSNP.RMR"..G.,.`C_.••.a'a!•Y ....'.+.w+--..++.w..f^ w.i^•.•t'....r.•wn.....-.. ....._..... • -..... .. • ..... . . .. .. . .. ... .. _ ... ...... ,. +. •. . Mayor and City C.ounci�. Page 3 'anuary 17 l 1980 improvementsthe extent.. that th proposed seed considerati n fro m Condor be and the scope of its • however , Conc�.or expects fair con- prior comrnitMents , . s iderati on or compeiis.ation in return. S prior Commitments Condor . As ou will recall, the PUD for` the. Condor - Y _ Counc�_1. on December 21, 19 7 2 . _ site was approved by •the . ,� . sub ect to a number of conditions , • The approval was re elation of in- • conditions re�.ating to the g �ncludiftg • ' er.s and.. siltation control of ternal storm drainage wat o contemplated - into . Johnsonw s Pond at, als drainage - is for ubl is utility routes an negotiated ease�nen P he site serving areas that would need to cross through t _ other ad ' acent . areas o � More recently, on r�iay. 11, 1978, the Council - and .site lan for Connemara . II r a roved the buXiding P to certain PP a ain sub ect • S phase II of the.. PUD . . g t that • i • , e� conditions concerned Concor s conditions . one o f th mina e tan subrni tted' on • • - • anc e ��Ti th a -g rad ina and dr g P Compliance asmodifiedto conform to certain recom-MayZ, .y 197 r . c - .a ti:on Service. Another menda-t1ons o f the �o zl Cons ery anc� bond to rovision of a $?5, oCO perform concerned the P lap. (The latter e com lance with the grading p a insure ne otia�tion to provide for condition was amended by g _, • t in lieu of the performance $30r.0-00 letter of credo. bond r . Condor was to. shill another cond1tion, • - _ Under ,including a 20 • certain easements to the City , it dedicate "al on the drainage channel foot storm sewer , easementg nt on the westerly p art of its s1* a flowage easeme e around that. part o f Johnso n S pond located on Condor s mcnt for a siltation pond - property; to and a pond,, ng ease I he latter T be located 1:o the east of 3ohnson s Pond. • • enerall anticipa t.e�d- the improvement pro � ec:t - easements g Y Theproposal outlined in recently under cons �derat�on . _- eral P differs in sev en ineer ` s report, however , of the theg • is f rom Condor s understanding material respec • lated, and. is likewise ro ' ect as-Lnitially contemp _ is for 3 ith Condor' s existing commitmen inconsistent. w - znd ponding easements . drainage • • • .. .. •... a?:w:,.•k..rw•++`.+rJ.w/!'.,IRInw"•b.+rt+•• ur•w.••'^" _ ..... .. _. • .. I . • _ ..�,� . Mayor and City Coinc -1 Page 4 . January 17 , 1980. Departures. in :the Project - as proposed f rom. Condor ' s y Existing Commitments l.. Location of. th.e. Londin Lane Pond Outlet Storm -Sewer. First, as outlined in the engineer ` s report, the proposed Londin Lane Pond Outlet Storm Sewer line does not proceed "along the drainage -channel" on the Condor site, i.n accordance with Condor s understanding • and. its co=i tmen t to provide the necessary easement. _ - Instead, the proposed sewer. line proceeds. more or. less directly a -long the westerly, boundary of . the Condor site to John son' s Pond 2. Location. of - the Silta---ion Pond.. Second, . the proposed ' s ewer Nine does .no t discharge into a siltation pond east of Johnso ' s Pond-, in the location shown on Condor' s plans for such. a pond as previously submitted to the City, and in accordance with Condor' s conunitments to provide a--pondi11g ea eme.nt Instead, the proposed line discharges into the existing siltation basin which has been created through erosion caused, and silt cam%ed.,. by excess runoff, from the property south' of Lond in - Lane, 3. Failure to provide for the preservation of Johnson's Pond Third, the existing siltation basin occupies an area formerly occupied by a portion of Johnson's Pond, which has deteriorated significantly in, the un-- controlled drainage process. ` It has always been Condors.understanding that the restoration of Johnson's Pond would necessarily be included in whatever solution. was proposed for the problems ��rhich developed from the excess runoffs south of Londi.n Lane. Condor. ,has never consented to the I deterioration of that portion of. the pond located . on its e s f Mayor and City Council Fa.ge 5 January 171.1980 property, except as a temporary condition to. be cor-w rested when the City' s drainageplans for the area were finalized . 4 Des-iltation of Runoff from. Adjoining Property The-,. f inal two points are principally matters of necessary clarification. It, is not clear -from the engineer ` s r-eport : whether. the. des it tation pond. on Condor ' s property is i.h nded' to serve as such with respect to internal stormm,,later drainage only, or also as a desil tat on vehicle for- drainage waters from outside . the si.te,- specif ical.ly, for drainage from the Londin Lane Pond and the Fire House Fond. h�t has always been Condor' s understanding and intention t]. at its proposed desittati ' pond would serve as such. only with respect to internal drainage on its. Own site. • 5 Runoff from Fire House Site: F-,.*%.--na1ly, we -,note that the peak discharge rate from the Crestview Pond to the Fire House Pond is. pro posed to be increased by five and one --half tides the. rate shown in the drainage plan previously approved. The, correspondingly increased capacity of the Fire House Pond, as proposed, may permit the discharge rate to the Condor site to remain at the level shown in the approved plan. That level, in turn, would appear to be tolerable at this time. Again, however, it is im- portant that discharge to- the Condor site from . the -.east not be increased beyond the rate initially contemplated, • and. that desil.tation occur prior to the discharge Desiltation is particularly important with respect to the discharge from the Fire House Pond, in that the flowage across the Condor site, assiuning the completion of Phases III and IV of the PUD, will ultimately pass through two -additional ponds on the site, primarily aesthetic . in character. ' Mayor and City Council Page G January 17, 1980. Suggested Modif ications .in Project as Pro2osed In suimunary, Condor is not ommi.tted to pro-- vida.r g either storm sewer or. ponding easements as pre-- sently proposed. To accommodate the completion of this impor- - • tint drainage t�lor:, Condor . suggests that the proposed project ect be modified as. fol-.lows. - In -essence, the proposed storm sewer project should be modified by returning it to its original C conception, -as-Condor has- always understood it. That would invo lve (1) the restoration of -that portion of w Johnson's Pond l.ocat.ed on. the Condor site, as part of the. proposed improvement; (2) the relocation of the siltation pored to the location shown on Condor s pre- vious . site p* lans ; and (3) rerouting the proposed storm sewer line along -.the ey..Isti.ng drainage channel, so that 1 it discharges to the si.1..ta,tion pond, as relocated 1. Restoration o f Johnson's -Pond. The and should �be restored to the condition, . . , - - • or configuration, existing when Condor acquired the Pro - ert and the restoration should be accomplished in • P Y the context c f the.- pro j ect presently proposed. 20 Relocation of the siltation pond. Next, the siltation pond should be relocated east of Johnson's. Pond, approximately 100 feet east of the siltation pond shown in.. the engineer 's report. Condor. has consistently shown the pond on its plans. as being located at the head .of. the. drainage channel 30 Relocation. of the storm sewer line. The storm sewer line should be routed along .the existing drainage channel to the siltation pond, as . relocated. That was the route previously contemplated. Y b the City, and agreed to by Condor. . In that -regard, in the context of grading activity which occurred on the Connemara II site this ...w.•...--r.+�...r.- -.... r �►. ... . • .►.w - r ..+._. .....« . .. • ... ... .. ..• w«L ..... ... .. .. r....+....•w►+w...... �.. , »... •.....'..-.+r4..�,.•.�.--. .r. .� i .. i •I+► 'n . .�...'•� . "''r""- rw...... n..w-.- .......-. ... .. -.r Y. ...t.Y.•.w.....+rw.Nv •..z - .-.. w. i.. r. .._..-.. .. ....... ...«. a... _ .. . . - .. . ' .. ...M1JA•• ., .. J J mayor -and City Council P. ? January 17 ', 1980 past -summer, Condor ,..;r efrained from filling and grading channel- even though the f ill material was the drainage _ able to it, in order to facilitaate the. City' S. avail construction of the sewer line along..the channel. e ore .if the drainage channel route isnot - Ther, , even to ed f the drainage channel. shots ld be brought to ern p y rade as: part of the proposed improvement e In any g route. of the sewer line, the line _ etjent, whatever the tout . uld discharinto.thesho �e siltation pond, as relocated. on Condor: r.e uests that the City _ In cone lus , g give consideration `to modi-fications of the proposed.. . improvement pro- ect as stated r and that the publica.rnp P h eaz-n on those portions of the project discussed in • letter e cont-i nued * for further hearing following _ this . such considel'ation e Condor is prepared to meet with the Citystaff and its. consulti ng engineers to discuss the proposed modif cations, at their i p pr convenience le . Respectf ully submitted, ti Frank J. ��� Z FJW : emw cc: Mr. James R o Riley Mr . John J . Smuda Mr . John F . Banni.gan , Jr - Subse uentl ,when the City staff and its consultants con- q y - eluded to reroute the. proposed sewer line, the s taf f asserted that Condor was in default in the performance of its grading . plan for Connemara II, pri-nci.pa.11y because the drainage P channel had not been brought to final grade, The resolution of that matter has been def-erred., at least, temporarily, pend-- i.n the C©unci.l' s decision on the.. current proposal. g O' CO N N o R HAR! N A N PAT.RICK...J..VCONNOR ATT O R N E Y S AT LAW SUITE 800 rR'CVEMICK W. I.►IO.MAS 10.19 pENN3YLVANIA AVE.N.W. .J.O.E.Ai WAL7EN9. THOMAS A. KELLER M THIRTY EIGHTH FLOOR, I D S TOWER WXSHINGTON.O.C.20006" MICHAtL E. /,ICGUIRE 80 SOUTH EIGHTH STREET (2:02)7a5-6700 RICHARD L. POST �.., KENNEIH D.JONES.JR. gOBC:RT'J.C*HRISTIANs0N.JR. MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 PATRiCK J.O'CONNOR C.N'ARLE•SI1Si..:F-AEGRE WILLIAM T. HANNAN • FRANK J. WALZ ...._.. '' EDWARD W. BROOKE * JAM'.ES R. D(�Rc,EY JO.H.N J. F'LYN N ANOR.CW J. SHEA (61:2) 341-3800 H:. ROBERT HALPER * DOUGLAS M..MCMILLAN JO.SEPH E.DILLON CHARLES D..REITE TELEX 2 9-0584 THOMAS H.QUINN * WILLIAM R. MCGRAN N HOWARD. G. FE.LDMAN WALTER C.-P^RKINS.• TELE.COPIER 612. 341-3800 4256) DAVID R..MELINCOFF _ KENT E.RICHEY DELANCEY w. Dt.vlS• DAMES OTIS REYER `- RICHARD .G. MORGAN JOHN J. SOMMERVILLE PHILIP R. HOCI^;BERG* JAM ES A. RUD[NSTEIN PASEO DE LA CASTEL:LANA.8 DAVID BURLINGAME• THOMAS V. VAK'_'RICS * DOUGLAS M.. CARNIVAL* NANC ..F. FOWLER .: JEREMIAH J. KEARNEY MADRID 1, SPAIN MARTIN M."B.ERLINER+t TERENCE P. BOYLE* THOMAS R•. SHERAN 276-SS24 GREGORY A. ICEARNS •. HOPE' S. F05TER* BRIAN P. PHELAN`+ JOHN A. BURTON.JR. ROBERT A :BRUNIG TELEX 23802 FALW Esa SUITE 1100 SECURITY LIFE BUILDING THOMAS R. JOLLY• FREOERICK� W. MORRIS 1616 GLENARM PLACE BARRY J. CUTLER WILLIAM E. FLYNN DENVER, COLORADO 80202 MICHAEL J. CONLON* DONALD S. ARBOUR •' RANDOLPH J. MAYER ......_ (303) 573-7737 PETER C. KISSEL0 CAROL N. PARK • WILLIAM -C. KELLY (1918-1970) JOSEPH E. PATTISON • --- (� Q January 2l 19 V O y CHARLES. W..GA RRISON'R GORDON K. GAYER * LOCAL COUN5CL•• F. JAVIER FABREGAT • ROl3ERT J. STEELE • CHRISTINA` W. FLEPS* MICHAEL E.VEVE* MARTHA PRIDDY PATTERSON • JAMES H. HOLT • Of'.000nI�EL - • 'j a d C3.t CounC11 JOSEPH F: C.ASTIELLO* ayor n y FRED 0. THOMPSON• JOHN H:. HOLLOMAN ZM* . . City. of Maplewood •NOT MCMeER OF MINNESOTA OAR 1380. Frost Avenue. Maplewood, Minnesota 55109 Re: Condor Storm Sewer Propos(.d Improvement Project 7 8-18 Ladies and Gentlemen: Please refer to my letter of January 1..7 , .19*8 0 regarding the above project. Darin the course of the ,onsul g ting engineers P resentation ' ' at the public hearing on that date.; ; our, client, Condor Corporation, and we learned . for. the first time that the totalL estimated costs. of .th*e ,. various aspects of the project , approximately. $ 2 9 0 , 0 0 0 , are proposed to be spread on an area -wide basis; that vir-- tually. the entire Condor PUD site is included within the area proposed . to be assessed; and that the assessments are proposed to be spread at -approximately 956 per square foot. Insofar as the unimproved acreage comprising Phases III and Iv of the approved Condor PUD are con- cerned,. that is, the northerly portion of the site, it is incredible. to us that such property is propo I Q �lcrk assessed in any amount, for any portion of the ropy qe improvements. We defy anyone to establish that property stands to benefit in -any respect .from , he r improvements contemplated, or that it contribut �,•.r •and p;..f a p. p ., L may to the drainage problems proposed to be solve.l; c.� �i ;or E Mi. of IF z rks RE c. . Dir. Cf 1'tlb. %Sa ve 'ram "n. 'i (,;�11t-.Cr . .. t1i�'Jij:i� n,,c,.urance 0ther .I (w I. PAT*11CK J.O'C0NN0R } rAEDE.RICK w; T H 0 M A 5 .: JOE A. WALTERS THOMAS A. KELLER III i MICHAEL. E. MCGUtRE " • RICwARO L. POST KE;NNE.TH__©. JONES. JR. - 'ROHEPT J. C►+RtSTIANSON, JR. i CHARLES S. FA EGRE IrRAN'K J. WALZ DAMES R.. DORSE.Y ANOREW J. S.HEA. DOUGLAS M. MCMILLAN CHARLES D. REITE WILLIAM R. MC.GRANN WALTER C. PARKINS - KENT E. RI C H EY JAMES OTIS• REYER JOMN J. SOMMERVILLE JAMES A. RUBEN STEIN NANGY F. FOWLER JEREMIAH J. KEARNEY THOMAS R. SHERAN JOHN..A. BURTON.JR. ROBERT ,A. 6RU N IG rRE.DERICK W. MORRIS WIL.;LIAM E. FLYNN RANDOLPH J. MAYER WILLIAM C. KELLY (1918•1970) LOCAL COUNSEL-• F.JAVIER FABREGAT- O�CONNOR &.HA'N NAN ATT•O R N EY S AT LAW THIRTY-EIGHTH. FLOOR, I D S TOWER 80. SOUTH EIGHTH STREET MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA- 55402 (612) 3d1-3800 TELEX 2 9-0584 TELECOPIER 6I2 341-38 00 (256) SUITE e00 191Q.PENNSYLVANIA AVE. N.W. WASHIN GTON, O.C. 200045 #202) 785-6700 PATRICK J.O'CON.IdOR . W1.4LIAM T. MANNA.N • EO:WARD W. BROOKE JOHN J. FLYNN.. H. ROBERT HALPER JOSEPH .E..OILLON THOMAS H.QUINN • HOWARD G. FEL.DMAN • OAVID R. M:.ELINCOFF• DELANCEY W. DAVIS • RICHARO G. MO.RGAN PHILIP R. HOC'HIBERG - THOMAS V. VAKERICS• PASEO OE LA CAST.ELLANA.8 OAVIO BURLINGAME* DOUGLAS M. CARNIVAL• MAOR10 1, SPAIN `,1L. MARTIN M. BERLINER" TERENCE P. BOYLC- 276-5524 GREGORY A. KEARNS • HOPE S. FOSTER • BRIAN P. PHELAN • TELEX 23802 FALW E-+ SUITE 1100 SECURITY LIFE BUILDING ..THOMAS R.JOLLY* 1616 GLENARM PLACE BARRY J. CUTLER'* OENVER COLORADO 80202 • ONLON OON,I�LO S. AR9O�UR • DONAL L J. RBOLIR (303) 573-7737 PETER C. KISSELR CAROL N. PARK • JOSEPH. E.;..PATTISON • February (� j� 4, 1980 GORDON W.GARRISOtr` CORDON K.:GAY.ER • ROB.ERT J STEELE CHRISTINA W. FLEPS • E Mayor and City Council City of Maplewood. 1380. Frost Avenue Maplewood, Minnesota 55109 MIIt— HA L E. VEVE!_ MARTHA PR.IDDY PATTEkSON • 'JAM.ES H:...H.OLT • Or COUNSEL JOSEPH F. CASTIFLLO - FRED O. THOMPSON+ JOHN H. HOLLOMAN ITta *NOT MEMBER Or MINNESOTA ISAR Re : Condor Storm.. Sewer Proposed Improvement Project 7 8 • -18 Ladies and Gentlemen: The public hearing on the :above • mat-te'r held on January 17 ,•' 198 0 was. continued to a later date , at the request of the City' s consulting engineers, in order to, give them an opportunity to review the comments. we made in our letter dated January 17 on behalf of our client, .,Condor Corporation, -and to consider the comments -and objections raised by a number of people at the public hearing. At. the same time, the engineers indicated that it was their intention to meet with the City staff' and our client to discuss the various points being raised.. To date, neither our client nor. we have been contacted concerning such a meeting. Yours vr. truly, Jbai:, r . rcrii: Citv Clerk Frank. J wal FJW•emw - C. cc : Short -Elliott -Hendrickson, Inc.,,.��•":_ • ;' y''''•' , r,..._._.___•-_ Geoff. r Olson y .. .. Mr . John F . Bannigan, Jr. • Mr . James . R . Riley Mr . Sohn J . Smuda , Transmittal Cate ea ...,..;..T.:......�._.,..;..._.•......c.._...,,---..«v.n-..•..-,• - wra.....,.>-..n•er+•r-.v.....s".,pr..--•�...,.�...........__.-.rr.w....-•.•....-.-.+.�Nn.y...; .u.......r...+t•-s•e.-+r.:rz.+rr-.,...••.,.... .. ...-�._-_..,.,•... -- .. w. .. ,.. ............__..y_.a._....._..-__....... _._ _....... � . _... I -._ •....r-,� ...-........-a.:........,.,••-...,..�....«-..•. . � .. ......, ..... �,.... � t.164. zrd' 4 xx - ----------- --------- , Vz Z 1Z _1# i. 41 of /01 ----------- - --------- W2 01 - X_ ti -7-7' f c»I � 'i �$`} ,{� � y �)'////� //; ` f - per _,}• �` � ;��'i`�'�'•�', /..eaa�� � � :,;1...,,..�;=j���Cv� � �-6/L��r�I.. -.rn+� Y..��J � %/i���_I' IfA ���y/��`�....A Cr'G..�-/,5:.� ��`�".+�. ��'•..f 3'-`��'�_ -�� '� . .......... >C:._3...T�'r''._X ✓u �.'•'C_:..5^` �f- .. fix...:.. -,..� +.<e!, : � J J, %r C. .w may' �t Y"�:. n�x � 1. ... . �.• FCC •r 1 i i p p �-,'-� !�%""-�---'e%� rfr�����/i!,..+-",;F�./c•-.%/�-"":�""""���.-�,.�..-�• L=•�..�ac�� _�'•",-'�!�`}�... .. _ ._.._ _ __.. ---- - -- �r,�j°-"•''�_Ta� ._ ._. _... --- � ' fix,.,--� �,�� �• �' 4 / r4 ----- ------ - _ .- - -- •moo-'�---%---- - -- -- -------�-------- -_---_ -- �:----��_--- - --------------------------- ------ --- D It-, V*Sse y ead" C OWE 47 RESOLUTION DENYING IMPROVEMENT after public hearing WHEREAS, after due notice of public hearing on the construction of storm sewers and appurtenances, and necessary street construction, and curbs and gutters (Public Improvement 79-8) in the area lying generally south of Trunk Highway 36, east of Atlantic Street (extended) , west o.f Hazelwood Avenue and north of Belmont Avenue (extended) , a hearing ' on said improvement in accordance- TAth the notice duly given was duly held on March. 13, 1980, and ' the Council has heard all persons desiring to be heard on the matter and has fully considered the same; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA, as follows: That the project is hereby denied. 4:57 ---------- - ----------- ------ . ......... NZ, V. ..... . r. 01 po!'I 9 oo 7i As instructed by the Council the Consulting Engineer has investigated the cons truc t ion of sanitary sewer only for portions of the Beam Avenue As indicated in the attached correspondence, the alternatives investigated involve substantial cost and result in assessment, rates that do not appear f easible 1 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a special meeting of the CityCouncil of the City i �.y of Maplewood, Minnesota, was duly called and held in the Council Chambers in said City on . the 13th day of March, 1980, at 7:30 P.M. The following members were present: Mayor John Greavu; Councilperson Frances Juker Counc ' i1 -� p , men Norman Anderson, Earl Nelson and Gary Bastian. The following members were absent: None. Councilman Nelson introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: , 80 3 62 NOTICE IS ,HEREBY GIVEN, that pursuant to .action by the City Council of the City of Maplewood,.on March 13, 1980, an Off. Sale Intoxicating Liquor License was approved for Carmen G.. Sarrack, Jr. and Gust B. Sarrack, dba C & G Maplewood Liquor, 1347 Frost Avenue. The Council proceeded in this matter as outlined under the provisions of the City Ordinances. p � Seconded by.CounciUman Anderson. Ayes - all, STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF MvISEY ) S S . CITY OF MAPLE1,100D I,.the undersigned, being the duly qualified and appointed Clerk of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have carefully compared the attached and foregoing extract of minutes of a special meeting. of the City of Maplewood, held on the 13th day of March, 1980, with the original on file in my office, and the same is a full, true and complete transcript therefrom insofar as the same relates to approval of an Off Sale Liquor License for C & G Maplewood Liquor, 1347 Frost Avenue. witness my hand as such Clerk and the corporate seal of the City this 18th day of March, 1980',. City Clerk City'of Maplewood, Minnesota (e ----------- - ------------ '- --- � lnves tment of such sums to serve the limited :number of houses that currently . exist does not appear ap ro ria �.e P There are no firm development proposals for the area. In adds tion, past policy has been to require -complete upgrading of streets and utilities before sub- . . __---_-------- ividing. Thus, sanitary sewer alone wound not f..___----------------__-- area cons truc do necessarily open the for additional It is recommended the. City not proceed p with any improvements at this time. -z l 1' j^f tf r ti"/ s'Gf �( _.1y� �` �.- 1- ��--`�„i'� c �fr' �•r � i/� •� —�',' �,.-^''`" / %/�S..�tO.�.....-..�I . mot.. •:�,., ..:..�+°^,.:,":�'''C •a� /� � .! l._.""'"'�— ;1� '� •�-.'�-� ,.-.. _.---.. ------�---.._.. .._... _..--�----------------��--'---�---�-- —�--. �..r✓_------ -__._.. .. .._.-� ----. ....:-�:�--'--- -� -fir'!--�'`-�-�---- -- --.� .------------------(/.!�_._. _. _-__. _._.----"----- ——_'--'----------�.._. L.__.. _.._._..__ `_-- .- -----.-�'—'--- -_------'-------o�-- fi f ^, _J'Si-" �i�-art__ _.i ./• o f� :T J� � � i .T ��' � /� F ✓.J � / l `�-y. .. .ear ,% w� Y A s r — ;e- lee. ........... / .41 r /} J�; � < � �%/,///7 � ��,�*.� rf 1���_.��✓ �I' gym.....---._._ � —� 'i�� J d�! ��„'�1.✓•c,�.,: cr'f r! `���"'^-�'�R--�y�'1:�.n��'-" r j tY r emu.-•--�- � � � •^"'�7=•,.....,;s. y„a•t�°• ��y' / ,�+ ri..:v `._-'4-y�•••�-iff' vy' L G��d�L''2.�'-M./`✓--_--- .. ti ' y •- f 6 o� , a f f' • . gym. •� �. �`,� .��%.�'' `•e„•,,,n.-'� ..,I�. �• �� /' / � •„"%rr��-� �f t! � '�fr :1� "vim �� �' i� ' � �a ..^� ._ � d d y �� .>.��, � �.� s�'C-,�.:�,:� _rv�>- .:r .,'°� r!"`� o r ' J ___________._.-_ ____-.. ../_��__�.._-_._..______.. _._..-- �_ _... .L._-.. ..___.._ ✓J•-__�___.. __-.__.___. _-__.___�-.___.._ ._"""'.__..__..._..____ _._..______..-._ ..__ _____-_. .Er-..____ r _. /:* _-y?_'_.-.___. �``�`��+�:-_... _.._ __._... ...__..____ ,fir_. _. _._.._____. _._.. ._ ____ .. _.... _...__.__.._.___._._._ lx�'Q If, w�"'rv• + �-''+�` � V t_.. • V 1} .,ram _.'"' �c� �F�� ��"�> :1� �^� :t�• i ^����4i/!ff=.Y'm _ 7! " Ile t 1 �+ ..e-li oof it J� • 2 �z.w-.�. it y l� l p .f Y /�--• _ ; � � '� � i`�_�'�- _ .•�"i? � �'.G'�!'��-_.s��-�'/yr ''a _ err /� . �% �`r�;r,? .�^'/' ,.,f �,�.a'� _ ,', a � e `^rX�"'��/�,,s'�°,..,.,._;;.� .. .�:�aa i. «'- � s (C,v��.�t' � Y' '� �u-�•L /J_ �y � �/ C '� �-'•1%l„•....'�_-.'�✓� -'�'�% f � __ --. _ v� �P' . �` 1..,,< _ - _ __-. __ _-___ _ e F �� � r'f .���, y>'��_��,,.. �� �/ �+' �_. �:.•�+-'C,-.A' G%�F��i✓4°•--C-A.,if, '��,,.Eg.,....�.-.T�-••-'+' c�E�\�•�d `�i _�";id''�,,,.. �:�;rtl.�._.���:�-,ors^•., ��"•��l" �'' ��.�.-�°..•-�* ^ .+s" e`"�„d�..�.-_ jF�• •"�„�-"' .�2`'� .+`,�.•, p✓�... •�o,,.,o �...,:..C•.�� � .4�,F�'�,•.- ��>"a'��� ¢�*� �' .aneira�'- ell ...mac-•-- � �.� �}- f'' // /] / �r J •-� ram/" / "^" %�..,,%�«-'4...-mil c•�'�•r tr �� �-,i � �� r �*. „/ i i � .�, f , �.�� � , •l .�,.fvt� ,,.:Em ,.,,�"k• , o•�-cf�� t�����" • � e',. =-'@�✓ :Kc ,,,� �,_%� �� ' .. /�.�-�/ �� � r �,z-a�l��.,-C•.�� r",�._-•`�• �--�",-'�._._„w- _� e r� 1 Y' ,dT' H r •�` < e r %estem�/ A19�3'pd RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENT after public hearing WHEREAS,, after due notice of public hearing on the construction of storm sewers and appurtenances in that area generally lying south of Lower Afton Road between McKnight Road and Century Avenue and a line 1300 feet south of Mailand Road (Public Improvement 78-18) , a hearing on said improvement in accordance with the notice duly given was duly held on March 13, 1980, and the Council has heard all persons desiring to be heard on the matter and has fully considered the same; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA, as follows: 1. That it is advisable, expedient and necessary that the City of Maplewood construct a - .portion of the project as described in the notice of hearing thereon by the construction of a storm sewer conduit from Johnson Pond to Londin Lane, and orders the same to be made. 2. The City Engineer is designated engineer for this improvement and is hereby directed to prepare final plans and specifications for the making of said improvement. i r !I �f ��� _�_ � � .� rf :�_,!?,_ ,•fir �-`c4+,,.�� ^�;Y. ,P'- j,�` �/! � �!/J/j�J��� �- � �, �i..�'!...i� 't—....y¢. � �... .fir.: (_. f%�' _'G d• a . . • � ��? .r��.;'s� _�..-;'.f_ - ,,..,.w'°•, � �� >..�.�;,,�_-;�'�':}-. ;..A-'i�f / � / �'''•'ti•�- - .. �L, _<^'"(._,.�� y-v'''/N''J -- - - � -- - �------- ����s•'-_.._.___ ,,•��-`'�_••-�ti/ _�=�t.-�,`...r.. i / � f ..,�.n silo-!'•; � a:t'�- �- � � s � N!J �� Y++'_^'"�''(w� 1-�-^"'..�'. s i %k --—--------- — _ -- -- -- - --