Memo Special Assessments - Project 90-04
.. .~
.
.
:.
CITY OF HOPKINS
'-'-,''''','''''
,'< ,', ~~ ~~,,]
MEMORANDUM
, ,.
DATE:
May 14, 1991
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Council
James Gessele, Engineering Superintendent JT~
FROM:
SUBJECT: Special Assessment Appeals
Project 90-04, Mainstreet
The following appeals to the above-referenced project have
been received to date. These are attached to acquaint ,
Council with the direction and substance the appeals have
taken. Staff has not prepared a summary for this special
meeting. The assumption is that Council will continue this
hearing to May 21 at which time final adoption of the
assessment, roll is anticipated. Council should be prepared
to hear other appeals presented orally at toriight's meeting.
/i
JG/rr
i'
.
.
.\
~
PROPERTY OWNER INPUT
MAINSTREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
May 14, 1991
Property Owner/Business
Complaints/Comnents
Dwight Yerxa
Vie's Red Door
715 Mainstreet
Would be easier to make utility service decisions if he knew
what the final resolution would be in Super Valu development.
Ray
Rapit Print
a05 Mainstreet
Parking for employees will be a bigger problem while construction
is on-going.
Dale Lommen'
Little Blind Spot
all Mainstreet
Why are there some intersections without nodes in them?
This defeats the purpose of having nodes altogether.
Chuck Redepenni ng
Bud's Music
Benches'will attract,rif-raf; eliminate benches.
Mark Senn
Daniel's Photo
908 Mainstreet
Foundation leaks badly when there is no sidewalk there --
need extra protection once sidewalk is removed.
Will planter area be sealed properly to ensure that no water
leaks into his basement?
Does not like the idea of brick pavers in front of his door
because of the potential problems with maintenance.
Daniels has a 10' easement from city for their elevator tower,
how will this be affected by plaza construction?
Albert Martin
Martin's Hair Design
910 Mainstreet
Would like to eliminate tree in front of store so it will not
block their signage.
Jerry Mashek
Mashek Tailor/Cleaner
916 Mainstreet
Nodes create a traffic problem - all nodes should be eliminated.
No trees should be placed along Mainstreet in the CBD.
Ed Hanlon
Boston Subway
Doesn't like tree locations
Too many blocks at one time for construction
Gil Johnson
Gopher Cash Register
Do not eliminate shelter at 13th & Main (by St. Joseph Church)
Bernie Osterow
Union Prescription
Should be some credit on high level lights.
Low level lights provide less security than existing lights.
Not logical to put 6' sidewalk in spots.
Wi 11 not pay for any ~ti lity work.
~_.....:....,-- ~.~-~--- ~.-.~-
Does nOt want shrubs in front of parking lot by print shop
because it causes a safety hazard (re: crime).
Oecorativethingsin CBD is okay but ,not outside.
Cost of project can never be recovered through rent -- property
taxes already too high.
.
.
'.
Property Owner/Business
Complaints/Comments
Mary Jane/George Thomson
1401 Mainstreet
Does not want the tree outside their building -- it will block
their signs. Can they get additional shrubbery?
Cathy Ecoff
1404 Mainstreet
May want to eliminate tree on corner - they want to put in a
new sign.
Harmon Glass
1413 Mainstreet
Tree in the existing plant area wi" block signage - can he
remove their existing plants also?
Beverly Fink
1419 Mainstreet
The cost of this project renders the property value unrecoverable.
Jasmine Gardens
1601 Mainstreet
Footing along the front of the building is not in good condition.
Trophy Shop
1609 Mainstreet
The cost of this project makes the property resale value zero.
He is going to appeal ill assessments.
Hopkins Auto Service
1701 Mainstreet
If any of the areas off of Mainstreet benefit from the utility
work then they should help pay the cost of such work by direct
assessment also.
Dan Pagelkopf
1715 Mainstreet
Wants a 9' sidewalk in front of property if he is paying the
same front foot cost as everyone e,lse.
Feste Auto
laOl Mainstreet
Look at removing the proposed tree in front of his property -
it would block his signage.
Caro 1 & Robert Swanson
1842 Mainstreet
Does not want the parking off of 19th Avenue eliminated.
Does not see sense in placing curb and gutter on 19th Ave. So.
The project cost is too high.
Dennis Brandstetter
1909 Mainstreet
Will tear down house before replacing any services. Is planning
on removing this house anyway.
Property Owner Input - Mainstreet
Page 3
.
.
.
Westwood Professional Services. Inc.
".
14180 Trunk Hwy. 5
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
612.937.5150
FAX 612.937.5822
MEMORANDUM
To:
From:
Date:
Re:
Dick Koppy ~.8-. ~6t.
Tim Erkkila/Randy Goertzen
May 13, 1991
Comparison of "Pavers" to Standard Concrete Sidewalks
This is in regard to your inquiry for information on the basic safety of using
precast concrete pavers in the downtown sidewalk. Generally, there are a lot
of misconceptions about this which were caused by the previous misuse of
"bricks" or "tile" (which we aren't using, vs. precast concrete pavers, which
we ~ using). westwood has researched this topic and provides the following
information.
The National Concrete Masonry Association has endorsed an article entitled
Desiqn and Construction of Interlockinq Concrete Block Pavements by B. Shackel
which states, "Block pavements have been shown to maintain satisfactory levels
of skid resistance in service. The skid resistance tends to be equal to that
associated with grooved rigid pavements and usually equals or exceeds that
associated with asphaltic surfaces."Westwood has interpreted "grooved rigid
pavements" to mean an outdoor concrete surface with control and construction
joints and "asphaltic surfaces" to mean an outdoor bituminous surface.
Also included in the National Concrete Masonry Association's (NCMA) technical
specification data (May 1989) for interlocking concrete pavers is a reference
to snow removal characteristics of pavers. The NCMA states, "Snow is removed
as with any other pavement. The high strength and density of pavers enables
them to resist deicing salts better than conventional asphalt or concrete
paving."
Westwood understands that north-facing buildings in a downtown will typically
experierice more problems with snow removal and ice buildup than south-facing
buildings. However, given the aforementioned data from the NCMA, Westwood
does not anticipate that interlocking concrete pavers will contribute to this
problem and that they in fact may help alleviate a portion of this concern by
the property owners.
If the product was inherently inferior ror its intended use, we would expect
it would be removed from the market. As this has not occurred, weare not
aware of any serious problem with this material. In summary, our experience
seems to be supported by the industry; precast concrete pavers. properly
installed and maintained. should perform as well as a standard concrete
sidewalk.
Attachment
cc: Tom Harmening
Lee Gustafson
WestWOod ProfeSSIOnal Services. Inc. IS an equal opportunity employer.
r ~-.i1
e9 '~ 14: 53 ~~CMA
. /.ICS"Jo"? ~ ~/7S-c, r-VC-e../~ fit:'
{l.pY1Cre.~ g/~~OOA.~~~'-'65 I"
751 P02
frJeL r /be,t / >-:.:J
.8, Sha~A:i...t
.I
r V"
~ . .. ..... ~.. . ...1_......:--
MAY ~9 '91 14:53
~ICMA
751 F03
Ii
70
100
-=
uo/lIlI ...
dOwnnlll T
Bl.OCKS
1 = sectlona
..
.. __b......................."...._
..- '
-~ ..' '
, ~~:::_-..JIt.---------....
".. -.......__...~
,..,,,; .. ..' ---.,..... ...
o
o 10 20 30 40 :lO &0
NYmber oIl1q1ll\lll'-nl aWldllIll U'- _ll ,01
Fig. 3,)
PhJC:tuations in skid resistanee with time Cafter Ref,')
than that for tr.shly laid asphalt surfaces and are similar to those observed In
transversely grooved concrete pavemenb. Genera.lly for rIgid pavements the
minimum r~mmendtd tt)(turt depth Is 0.6 mm. .. It wUl be teen that judged by thb
crIterion the ~exturt depths observad to date In block pavements are commensurate
, with satisfactory skiddIng performance,
Measurements of IkId resistance and texture depth have been supplemented by
other asse$Sments of, pavement safety. !n this respect a study of an urban block
pavement conducted in Japan is of interelt. Here measurements of stopping distance
a. tM aJsunee from the point at whJeh the tyre. 01 a braking vehicle lock to the
point at whic:h It stops) showed that, tor speeds of 20, ~O and 60 km/h, bloclc
pavements were similar to asphalt sur1aces In the dry conditions and were marginally
superior when wet. (3) ,
It Is ltnpomM to recognlse that tho skid resistance 01 concrote pavement blocks
depends, In part, on thit mix cle,ign and &llo on fa.ctofl such as efflorescence. Per
example, It Is known that the use of siliceous aggregates serve to Increase both the
skid and weer" resIstance of conc:rete. By contrast, pracdcal experience show. that
e~,="..l~ eftlore.ccnce may iubstant1ally reduce skid resistance In .. I>!oc:k
pavement. !xcelllve e1florescenc:e may be attributable to the us. of an unsuitable
mix or curlnS realm. durin, block mtnutaC't\lre. More commonly, however, In block
. t
.,
I
I
Fig. 3./1
pavlliS it reSl
salts. The,
occurrence 0,
the blocks, I;
elflore$<:ence '
and vehLe!e..
contaIn Ins soi
Rced Noise
tt has bet
dominant noli
noue levels fr-
at vehicle spe
with cleek pa'
else Is lower(9
c:(lndidons the
a!)out a elS(A)
aaphaltpavem
remaIn on & b
noilo of the t~
C:~
.2~
til-
.- >.
, ~.~
<
~
c;
a
~
s
S
d
3. PRODUCT OESCRJPTJON
B~$ic Use: Interlocking con~
crete pavers can be used' in any
area that requires paving. These
areas include patios, pool decks,
walkways, driveways, parking
Iou, roof decks, parking garages,
gas stations, commercial and ,of-
fice buildings, streets, Industrial
areas, ports, and airports.
Compo$ition' ~nd M.teri.,,:
Concrete paVers are made from
portland cement, coarse andffne
aggregate. Color is often added.
Tne ingredients are combined to
make a "no slump" <Jow water
content) <:oncrete and molded' in
INnufac:turinsequipment under
vibration and ell:treme pressure.
Admixtu res may be placed in the
concrete to increase strength,
dtnsity, and to reduce eWor-'
escence.
4. TECHNIC.4l DATA'
Phyliw Ch,,.cterblla: Inter-
locking concrete pave" made by
NCMA members meet or exceed
the ASTM specification C936,
Standard Specifiatfonfor Solid
Concretelnterlocfcln!, Concrete
Paving Units. This standard re.
qUires a minimum of 8000 PSI
compressive stren8th~ leu th.n
5% absorbtlon ancf resistance to
' at least SO frettze.u,.w cydes, '
Appl;c~tlon St.;,d~rd~: Intet-
locking concrete pavements are
flexible paVements that withstand
loadings from traffic, wear and
weather. l1ie JOInts betwftrrlne"
pavers are typically filled with
sand. The sand between the
pavers, enabla IOlds to be ttans-
ferred to adJacent' unJts In I pit-
eem similar to asp~lt. The jOints
ellmi~te cracklng normal to pour-
ed COncrete pavements, Yehlde
loads arettansterred to sur,-
rounding blocks by shear forces
through the joint sand, load In-
duced stresses to the base and.
soil are reduced.
, Pedestrian application" res-
idential driveways, and walks reo
qulte2*,' thick units. For other
pavements subject to vehicular
tratflc, 3%" minimum thickness
units are recommended.
Concrete paving unit! are ready
to install. There Is no need to wait
for curing concrete. They at~
ready for traffic Immediately after
Installation~ The units an be cut '
quickly to .flt along adge! and site
' appurtenances. ,
' Repair to underground utilities
or local deformations In the base
materials can b. accessed by slm..
ply removing' and replacIng the
pavers. No' pavement materials
are wasted, nor are jackhammers,
or heavy.quipment required.
Th. modular units also allow
Pel4
SPEOC
n.____ ~
10 ....., . (liftICI1becI t7t
TM~~OiI. ,
11\IdM8. lltt 1MftV'-"t it ):Ij
"',*,,/1)11 for Mdtll4cal ac.
C'Ant11f. IQ
I " ~
changes to be rmde In the layout
of the pivement over its life.
The units are made In a variety
of colors suitable for traffic mark.
ings, delineating p~rkln~.and!.or
artistic sUpi!rgraphf~ deSigns, I ne
color, shapes, and texture of
p.ver$ enable them to be used to
control pedestrian ind vehIcular
traffic.
When pavers are placed on a
specifically designed gravel base,
air and water can get to tree roots,
thereby Inereesing the longevity
'of adjacent trees and vegetation,
especiaHy in pedestrian areas.
'Skid resistance I, slmltar to as.
phalt. Night time glare, when wet,
, -15 reduced because of the cham..
(erred joints. Snow Is removed as
with any other pav~m~nt Th."
tllgh stren~th and density c:d...
{'avers enab es them to resist ~_
icinl salts better than con.
',ventionaJ asphalt or concrete
pavi~.
...1
. . . -~ . - - . - . - ., - . . - . - .. - . . - - - .. -
1"1AY 09 · '31 14: 55 ~ICMA
11...5 ~o..~dC(..ro 0 p ~ c:,. .. t..t' <..:.a..:0o Y1
-r-;:: f\ (\, P 12 '. L II
I ~ +' t'7 (...J t::\.. v'. """j (.) ("I <- x-
C C / ay )
'(:;l.!. r-<;!~
Ped~r;~~ 't1-
L-I) l-yt
TAll.E 2 AbrIllOn MequJremlnttA
NoTI 1 _ Thelbnlion IndeX Ie calcvIaWd Irom thI cdO abIoI;ltion In porcer'Il
,'Ind 1M ocmpre"MJ' .trtI'IgIh In pouncl pili square k'ICft at 1CilIOWt:
.ACt'talorllnd411.' '00)( Ibeon:lllcn
~.~
~Ilve .venolh v... II'IIn1IvIf'lClld by .pedmIn tMpe (panIl:Ul.riy lI'le'
height 10 wIcIth ratiO Of \t'l/t tt6t ~l. 1'I'WeIOrt. . .".. tal!llCll'.I<S wnk:lI '
conlOn"/ll to tnt (lata on WI'lldIlhe lbrUIon ~)( II bUId.' ' ,
1llt con'IprtMlve I~ Ihd be ClttAIl'mlMd en apICfmInI ~ 3l' by
3"- by 2'" 1l'I. s '" 1tI. (98 t:If " by 5T rnm :II & mm) for ~ wI<WI, encl ntIQIlt
"'~. The !)liCk thelll)t WlNvt CCft l'lOIeI. Oll'.er perlcradon' Cl frcg.I.
0tIW IN:*laptelmw m.t'f \:Ie IIMCl ~ I'tlIC 111' prcduclIr autlmtlll tvldInoI
~ to ltle purchaleI' that the crMlgt In el'It.I)e 9Ivet t(lLlIVaIec'lt .tranQtlI
. nMuttl to ltlOtI of trIt If*llfted ~. '
Tn, ItlrulonrallltlllCl tt\ClUld be clttll'!lllntd .~ to NOt. 2 II'llnOM
elNt wt'MIlh. prooIdUrll requltemtnll fcf ~tlvt ttrtnQtl\ CI/V'lOt bt met.
NOTI 2-Tht itcIIJIM ~ leu tIlOIJld bt ~ In IOClOtdIt\CII ~h
MethOd C 418. YAm tM lOlIOWtng etIatlO" In proced\n: '. . .'
. (7) The I8tld illIG be . n8turII tll1ca ~ 1rCl'Il OttAwa. 11.. grecled to l*I ·
No, $0 (s000\UTl) '" anC tetaJned on " No. 100 (15O-pmt *""
m TIlt tMt .,..&11 ,t'>e /\In en dry bllClt.
(3) TII4I ClIntlon of lhe _ IhIIl bll 2 min.
(..) The me of WId tIOw _be 4QO gJmln. ,
(5) ",. YOlunl. let. IIld bt (lettnnIIlId by IUtIn; \hI1bl'ICIId ~ wllh
rnodWIO (j~, tV1kJng off IeYeI with the or\gInIlIlurlaC$ Of tilt ttICk. end ~
and WtIgting ClO modeIIng~. ~ YClume lOtI WI be CIlCUIatld frolft ltl. bulk
Qenelty Of ll'ot rnodeIlngday. The tlUtI< ~lY tIlOUld be dItIrmIntd on NdlIat of
mocltllnO daY., ' ' "
Nt -.nallvt nle1hod of ~ 1hI w~1'lt Of (Jjy uttd 1ft IlIInQ blllld.
bIalt CIYIty " 10 del$tn'llne trlt wtignt of l!\e tl'lCCMMO rAr/18tl\PIt ~ II'ICI aftII'
MItIO tM ClYIly. '
6,Slze
6.1 The size of the brick shall be as specified by tJ:
purchaser or produced by the manufacturer as a stock iter
6.2 The tolerance on dimension shall depend on the bot:
pattern 'and method of installation or the .units. 10ft
different methods of applications arc covered:
, 6.2.1 Application PS~Floor and patio brick intended f
general use and installed with a mortar joint betwet
'individual units, or in an installation without mortar jok
between units when they are laid in ronning or other bon
. not requiring extremely close dimensional tolerances. '
6.2.2 Application PX-Floor' and patio brick intended f i
installation without' mortar joints between the units. whe
ex~ptionaUy close dimensional tolerances are required a!
result of ~eial bond. patterns or unusual constructh
requirements.
6.2.3 APplicationPA-Floor and patio units manufz
tared and selected' to produce characteristic architectu.:
effects resulting trom nonuniformity in me, color. a:
texture or individual units. (The textures may exhibit ine:
sion of nonuniform nodules of mineral substances. or p1
posely introduced cracks that enhance the appearance or t
units.) The requirements on warpase as specified in 4.7
'not applY to this.application.
6.3 When the application is not specified. the requi
ments for Application PS shall govern. '
7. Visual Inspection
7.1 The brick shall be free of cracks or other imperfeeti'
aDd Class SX shall be accepted instead of Cass MX. Surface
coatiniS will not be required or C1uw $X cd MX, wberi
used instead of Class NX. Types I and U Iba11 be a~
'instead of TYPe m, and Type I shall be accepted iastead or
Type II.
5. Efflorescence
5. J Whea pa'Yina brick ate, tested in accordance with
Section 10 of Methods C 67, the radDS for efUorescencc shall
be: "'13ot cffioresccd. "
TAI1.E 3Mtxlmum """,,.llbl'!xteftt of ctllppl;.rrorn Eck
and ComeN '
NO\'I--~ ~ ~ of chIQa on. *lQit unit WI not taeMd 10
1M parirnlWoI the expeNd1*" 01 ttlI tri:It
~ II'lIrlClt'AllIMIIIrMVII) n lrcm
!dgt Ocmer
"." (1.') ',A, (12.7)
'/4 (t.") .' ~ ('.5)
u "*"'*' b1 ~
~
TABU. T....nct. on cknemllCna
PS
~
'A
l)ImenIiOn. In. (ImI)
Perlld~
VINllOnt 1'/IIll.
pIuI (# tIlM
1ft. (I'Ml)
~PS
,,. (3.2)
VI. (4.7)
'I. (e.4)
vlriaticlrt from
8pedlled ,DlmetlIlo
In.(mm)
~~
p)( PI>
Yte (1.5) nO"
",. (2.4) no ..
,~ (3.2) no ..
3 (781 and IIlCMt
0Wt 3to .4(78 tl:I1~ WJ
OY<< 6 lei! (127 10 2OS) Ind
---~n-r' .--..,--- .....-.."'" ~-'-- - --. "..._,.
...
.
.
.
.....
." \
., '."
'. :'-
~
w..$tWOod Pll)~ssional Services. Inc.
'"
14180 Trunk Hwy. 5
Eden Prairie. MN 55344
612.937.5150
FAX 612-937.5822
, May 14, 1991
MEMORANDUM
'1'0: t>ick XOPP1
Frotn: Allan Klugs;an ~
Subject: Hopkins Mainstreet., Eight.h Avenue Intersection..
The intersection of Mainstreetand sth Avenue is presently designed with no
nodes along Mainstreet, i. e., it has two lane approaches and two lane ex1 ts in
both directions east/west. 'l'his design was initially proposed to acknowledge
the :bnporta.neeof 8th. Avenue from a"systemslt point. of view. :eighth A\J'enue
alon9, with 5th, 11th and 17th Avenues, are the only roadways that connect
Mainstreet to CSAH 3 and also contain full movement intersections at CSAH 3.
However, of thesefow: intersections (5th, 8th, 11th and 17th), 8th is the
lowest volume one. \
. . \ .
. '1'hecounted volumes at 8th and Mainstreet are similar to' other intersections
such as 10th Avenue which will have nodes :in the "far side corner" along
Mainst~aet~ The ~ighth Avenue! Mainstreet intersection will likely function
. adequately with far side nodes, from a viewpoint of traffieflow along
I Mainstraet. However, one more item to consider is the possible impact of the
grooery store/retail center proposed for the north side of Mainstreet between
6t.h and 8th Avenues. We bave not attempted to con<.1uet any formal analysis o!
that. development, nor do we know the exact final layout of the parking lot and
entry points. Still, we do note that there may be a large traffic movement
that travels northbound on 8th Avenue from CSAH :3, then turns right onto
Mainstreet to gain access to the grocery store via the driveway opposite 7th
A"ex'l.ue. If you think that this will be a high volume movement, you may feel
that leaving out a node in the southeast c::orner of Ma1nsteet and Bth Avenue
may expedite the ri9ht'tu.-n movement described above.
My comments above relate only to traffic flow. I have not attempted to
consider what a change in node layouts will do to "any: other elements of the
design such as drainage, utility placement. or aesthetic treatments.
TOTAL P.02
'.' ',..
.efXCEL
MANAGEMENT
CORPORATION
May 7, 1991
".~ I
.
Hennepin County
City'of Hopkins
city council ,
Hopkins city Hall
1010 1st. street South
Hopkins,:MN 55343
RE: Public Improvement project 90-04 A,D,E,H,G,I ,& Public
Improvement Project 90-04 B
Dear city council:
This letter is to file our objection to the amount that is being
assessed for our property located at: 802 Main st. ,Uopkins,MN.
This location used to be a Mr. Donut and has been vacant' for
several months.. We originally acquired thlsproperty on February
12, 1990 for a price of '$154,000. The two. assessments which are
proposed, .total $7,754.38 for our property. This seems high and
it is further compounded by the fact that we are not getting any
income from this property at the present time.
We have been trying to sell or lease this property for several
months and have no success whatsoever~ While the improvements may
be nice I feel that, at .the present time, they are' muchly
overpriced and should be adjusted to a more reasonable figure.
, . .'. . . ~. '. . ' "
~.;c tl.1;:.:r.afore:, ob"j ect to this p~oposal and :would hope that something
can be done to bring this more in ,li;ne:with a more reasonable cost.
sincerely,
~.H..S bin
Excel properties, Ltd.
RHS/lm
..
16955 Via Del Campo
San Diego,CA 92127 (619) 485-9400 or (800) 33.3-9235
FACK(619)485~8530
e
f'
.
.
.
ASSESSMENT HEARING APPEAL FORM
PROJECT NO. ,90 -'0 <I- '
Address of Assessed~a.rcer '-~if7'8.~tf-1j." ~re..et-..: .. .;,' /, : '
" , , . .
What assessment does this. cOnCern.~~ uIP6Jg-Q_J ~ r )
Property Identification Number.:-
1L- .!:F- - -L -L :J- - -.1: L ~ L
~.~1L
Do you wish to address tbe City Council at the he~?
(_) Yes (_) No
Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the
council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This
form must be completed and filed with the City Clerk no
later than the close of the City Council as.sessment hearing.
Your request will become part of the public hearing record.
I request that the City Council consider (check one):
a .(_) *Deferral of assessment (retired by virtue of
permanent disability)
b. (_) *Senior Citizen deferment (over 65 years of age)
c. <$) Canqellation of assessment
d. (_)
CU:A'~ f~T~ Cj~)
Revision of assessment
Reason for the request:
rflo
p(~
Pc<-< ':i-
t .L--( ::t
/
ti~~ Cl~d~
~ (97tf- '
, '
A'
~
U.e<.J
,
* You will need to fill out a special form for deferral of
assessment and provide the city verification of your income
or disability. '
fflfft./l; Tc..ffv 1~dL.l tj-6/'1/
(prJ.nt name) ,(sJ.gn ure) (date)
pro (/lId!- .~ '~ (-6("-) 9~'r---s--r.f~j-
(address of property owner) telephone
1~I::.{tUs: Zip SS-S f ')
.. e)
~
.
ASSESSMENT HEARING APPEAL FORM
PROJECT, NO.' 0'/1_ (J J/~,>"'" ,','; I '.',/, f) ,://..-i
-tY - -:f-'fl.7. ." ..,." ,..-f" .~" /\ f
Address of Assessed l?arcel'/;2..0C(' '11f tJLL;(~ I!P'" " · '-';;:-"" '
What assessment does thi~ concern-uJ r:l;t}j~'~r/A~~
,:/~}/ J..;l.f
. ,,/'"
[)
'/
Property Identification Number:
/J-!:L if2 -~ c3L ~$L -
DO you wish to address the City Council at the hearing?
~ Yes (_> No
Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the
council to defer, revise orcancal your assessment. This
form must be completed and filed with the City Clerk no
later than the close of the City Council assessment hearing.
Your request will become part of the public hearing record.
I request that the City council consider (check one>:
. a . (-) *Deferral of assessment (retired by virtue of
permanent disability)
b. (-) *Senior Citizen deferment (over 65 years of age)
c. (-) Canqellation of assessment
d. (-) Revision of assessment
Reason for thereqtiest:
1(e~<-,-- C<#~ Cf-9--e1kl-<fL .(J~ /t~~
* You will need to fill out a special form for deferral of
assessment and provide the city verification of your inco~e
or disability. '
(;;1-- 'fr(fi,1ftJit/l bj~~~ ~~ ;/,
. 3]J'l- I:; .:ri;%.4A-f71/; (~) /59?
(address of propert owner) telepnone
~AA ~<<&-7-'1~ Zip 5 y;J /73
17<11
f::"
:0
\. ~.cc
~
.
.
.
ASSESSMENT HEARING APPEAL FORM _
PROJECT NO.qO ~Olf4t~6/0r,H,Lt(~~~-f-7f~;,
Address of Assessed l;'arcel ~ I y.2.,( .f-.{ lLtn?trdi; ;', ," " .' . , ,.",,'
"'~
What assessment does this 'concern
~i:[
Property Identification Number:
'2- ':l - -L --L ~ - -1:. 2
~ 7- 1I~~-.1
Do you wish to address the City Council at the hearing?
(_) Yes (~) No
Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the
council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This
form must be completed and filed with the City Clerk no
later than the close of the City Council assessment hearing.
Your request will become part of the public hearing record.
I request that the City Council consider (check one):
a .(__) *Deferral of assessment (retired by virtue of,
permanent disability)
b. (__) *Senior Citizen deferment (over 65 years of age)
c. (__) Cancellation of assessment
d ~ (~ Revision of assessment
Reason for the request:
l ~si-.eJ -th<L ~V'^.~ ~'~ ~Cl~ u.SS<l$S~~/
\~ Qtl~<h~ ~ --r-k r~()-~~ b'^-5R- CLS5€.~SVl"~ IPS
l.t.M-~ ~a...l1~ ~f- ~.? ~'~. :L ~'-t- b~(I~J""z
-rk, \.f~ ~f-s as~'js~',
* You will f111 out special form for deferr of
assessment and provide the city verification of your income
or disability. ~ ~
't>ww l" ~l'{U (;"IL. ..' LJ. 7; 177 I
(print name) (8i . ture . .(~
QI0-0 66-k- fi''t Tr6J '~ft[/La , ( ~IL) ?3t... N,h
. (address of ropert owner) telephone '
Zip ~3 liS
o
.'
.
ASSESSMENT HEARING APPEAL FORM
PROJECT NO.
lfo:'" 6413", c,':,' .""
~ ", t~ I ,,11~~~'
,'.
" l' .: j~. :-:,'
,:)
What assessment does this concern
, ,
Address of Assessed~arcel
Property Identification Number:
;A K - 1- --L -L - .2:::- L
.fL.?-
-2_~-L
Do you wish to address the City Council at the hearing?
<_) Yes <~) No
Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the
council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This
form must be completed and filed with the City Clerk no
later than the close of the City Council assessment hearing.
Your request will become part of the public hearing record.
I request that the City Council consider (check one) :
. a . <-) *Deferral of assessment (retired by virtue of
permanent disability)
b. <-) *Senior Citizen deferment <over 65 years of age)
c. <-) Cancellation of assessment
d. g) Revision of assessment
.
Reason for the request:
~ . ~u-i .'--tk-c4,^~~ tiv- 'ir"V:ce.f 6.SSf-SSYhe.& .~
~'f1J- (~Cu' ~p,i<,. c4Lf:"'- . tLQdl":6'1""'c1 '/--lL- > .
!L^k~ r5lJ ~ -+- ~J ct~ ~~ ~ ~ ,,~'1
W-~. ),,::t b" LtH\'1e;::, Clh f2-Vb.A mb1~ dtft'()JJ.(fx;;~~1r.~(cJ~
, * You will need to fill out a special form for)J~ferral of ~
assessment and provide t ity verification of your income
or disability.
~gL J,Ltlu 1-:t,
, (prl.nt n , e)
(9 bJ: ~
(address of
\--L V\. V\. Q... ~';'.~Jc. R. r H V\ .
I
owner)
,~jq 11/
(date)
( (., ( 2....) q 3~ - 7 Lf-k /
telephone
Zip e::;S 3'+_':f
@)
.
.
.
ASSESSMENT HEARING APPEAL FORM
PROJECT NO. 90-04B Mainstr~et' Itnproveme.nt;:,_.;:::~: .,
Address of Assessed J;'arcel '1 S15MBirist~eet,lIo1)1{ins" ,', " "
What assessment does 'tllis concern Water serVices and San. Sewer Services
Property Identification Number:
-2- 4-- 117 _ _ - ~ _
32
0076
Do you wish to address the City Council at the hearing?
(_) Yes (~) No
Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the
council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This
form must be completed and filed with the City Clerk no
later than the close of ,the City Council assessment hearing.
Your request will become part of the public hearing record,.
I request that the City Council consider (check one):
a .(~) *Deferral of assessment (retired by virtue of
permanent disability)
b. (__) *Senior Citizen deferment (over 65 years of age)
c. (-x) Cancellation of assessment
__ or
d. (-x) Revision of assessment
Reason for the request:
w~ ~nn't f~pl thAt thp proposed improvement is necessary. nor is it of
Any bpnpfit to our property '
* You will need to fill out a special form for deferral of
,assessment and provide the city verification of your income
or disability.
Robert DeGhetto &
William'Schoell, owners
(print name)
.~~~~
. (sJ.gnature)
May 3, 1991
(date)
PO Drawer 5358, Hopkins
(address of property owner)
( 612 ) 938-3798
telephone
(Room 104, SO Ninth Ave. So., Hopkins)
Zip
-- --~ ~ --
@
Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the
council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment.. This
form must be completed and filed with the City Clerk no
later than the close of the City Council assessment hearing.
Your request will become part of the public hearing record.
I request t~at the City Counc~l consider (check one): \Y
~I 4~TI L.- I\-\tt WI%T li)\l'p ~\:.GIN~ '''' 114v ~
a . (_~ *Deferral of. ass7s~ment (re.tired by V1rcue of Al30 v~~~ D
'permanent dl.Bab11:l.ty) ASS~5l"1vf) ,.I) r - 1.
- Ltrv';L l~q;1 a-o qO-()~~i
b. (_) *Senior Citizen deferment (over 65 years Ofq:)~ ~ 04r k
iJQ'b' ~ c:rv P
~A 1N.s: --.::
c. \~J Cancellation of assessment
d ( ) Revision of assessment .J:0Jt' b ~!Js-: ~ ~ d '
. \ . - the request: I Nl-~/~;~'. 0/ ~ ;;'1"
r::JU I, .-
f . rs 'r 5:W li11, f-'
r:~;t-wln oT
d
~ - "3' ~ I'V\ A- <'~
. .s -f \fJ "l1Ch
~ VlV I tJ\c 1 t~ aVLj,}
, :[ 7\ :s;~~s~~~ =dpr~vi~e out c~t;~e~~~ic o~O~o~f d;~:~r c~:e WA4 ~
iTl~:l~:~ O~~ ~~~~n' UI:lI~~I:\~ an!
(print name) (signature) 1~
[1, '1 Mn;tJ 5~ ( b.ld) ~\3r -O]\1S
(address of property owner) telephone
~LH~-S , .~ \w)oJ Zip ~ SS;.) Lf"\
'I< \ ,:'" l'111Vl"V . "'" \ 6101 ~ :s 1\;'" ~ w ~ ~ Iu ~ I>.M"'M.....Fr;. ~ '" S~/ .
~ n.j\.; ~V\, 1 l O~ r r ,fV\)"~ It\:: ~\.t I t1-- IS. S A iJ ~ r r ~ L. ~ \) fl--M , r;;:;-.
,1'; Po U)\) " ,', ,,32/
'.
.
/) c:--
_\ G-
- , u
.~ f",.
I.....
2-
::..J:;'
..b
c
o~
C:-
-,
k"
?
,
4~1 <1.1
ASSESSMENT HEARING APPEAL FORM
PROJECT NO. ,q'Q -04!.i,'\)t.b;lJ"J,:.,;, -; ,;; ',; '. :.! "..'"-L
I
Address of Assessea")iarce1. . ." "llJ-~ ,', '1'11-\1'" STmID~l;; <.; )'..:;", ,'.
" ' " ,'WAT~ / s~rn, I\s~~.s",~ " "
What assessment does this'concern ,
Property Identification Number:
2.L - -1- Ll- -l.L ~l/_ -.d JL~. S-
Do you wish to address the City Council at the hearing?
:0J Yes (_) No
.
.
.
, '
, '
ASSESSMENT HEARING APPEAL FORM
PROJECT
,I'. <{
i/
NO. t:; ~ - () L/:./3 "<~~;, '- , , ,
i) '.:.i.AJ..:..
/'1 o/-c:L,~?J1' tu-t,~:;le/ j, 'i::- :
':'~I-- Lu~;' ,","
YY1~
':. I
Address of Assessed ~arcel
/,i >
, ,<' . " r~,
, , "
. ,\ .'
What assessment does'this'concern
property Identification Number:
d3 Jl.J.. - J;t_ _ - :i!:L-{)()~- -
Do you wish to address the City Council at the hearing?
(~ Yes (_) No
Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the
council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This
form must be completed and filed with,the City Clerk no
later than the close of the City Council assessment hearing.
Your request will become part of the public hearing record.
I request that the City Council consider (check one):
a .(_) *Deferral of assessment (retired by virtue of
permanent disability)
,b. (_) *Senior Citizen deferment (over 65 years of age)
c. (~) Cancellation of assessment
d. (_) Revision of assessment
Reason for the request:
'~w~ i \.I~' ~Vit:e "l'o --r1-t15
<PD~ >Jo-r Cb'~~ ~ fr'tf:><1,.,J
r\'.~$ ~' l<q-rH ~ff..:
't?U( L'VI ,..s<,. ,
~
, ~
. * You will need to fill out a special form for deferral of
assessment and provide the city verification of your income
e disability.
, A-Ro" - K.S'WA-NStJ-^/ ~C.AjA4.--1'~~
R"b~R.-r:-~5t{//HYSt'~1 G<.~!/g~t..:!4,J ;--3-7 /
(print name) (signature) (date) ,
38'tJ/:"'~ Ii JJJL- ([,1-'-) '173'-55;2 &,
'(addres of property owner) telephone
~.AA-~' (
Zip
SS-3~.~
,
B
.
.
.
ASSESSMENT HEARING APPEAL FORM. , . . m~;t
. PROJECT NO. 'ld- lJ'l:I+-,.~lj/!'/fc/f;;~
Address, of Assessed'~~arcel / ;ltfd-;"/;'J1l.~,,' ,,"!, ,,:_,i~/('(:""I".~~;
What assessment does thiscon"ern.1l1..~:f1-~~ ./
Property Identification Number:
::.L. 3- - -L -L 2- - 1- 1- !L ~ .Q Q L.sd
Do you wish to address the City Council at the hearing?
(Z> ' Yes (_) No
Please complete this form if you intend to appealtd the
council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This
form must be completed and filed with the City Clerk no
later than the close of the City Council assessment hearing.
Your request will become part of the public hearing record.
I request that the City Council consider (check one):
a .(__) *Deferral of assessment (retired by virtue of
permanent disability)
b. <_) *Senior Citizen deferment (over 65 years of age)
c. <__) Cancellation of assessment
d. <~ Revision of assessment
Reason for the request:
''vie.. fut;L -r-H~ /i...~v97M~ IS UJAY (l)d
~ tV d2t N 4, --rt$- .hrlt'tfr-tU, T/~<:; . (Lkt::- 0 ~J
~ VJ~?Nt:> 6'F MA-wJ ~'-...
\J- ~ l,)e p-
* You will fill out a special form for deferral of
,assessment the city verification of your income
or disability. /j, JJS~
',Ot}-f(dL..-E, S-w,A.-N.:5~ 1'/ ~.
Ro h eR..-r-'{/-.5'wA-l'lS~/'I 6(~ cJ.:5~
(print name) (signature)
?fta/- ~7t; fiJA-P_
..... (addres of property owner)
22t~A~ "
-MCy +l-
~
f -3-/ /
(date) ,
(ul.J-) '-173- 532~
telephone
~
Zip 5"".5"' ~,'f 5
~)
~
.
.
.
;,
ASSESSMENT HEARING APPEAL FORM
PROJECT NO . -E 0 - 0 ~B '". ...."..
Address of Assessed l'arcel ' Iq oct 'h~, "';~ i V-~l: -(-: ''''-..;
, , j
~"\ ." ",
\ '. , ..' ~'" ,I,' ,,'.
What assessment does this concern
Sart. 5liA>>ev- ~'UJ~t<2~ SelllJ/~p
Property Identification Number:
-2- .l - i L -2 - L 2:::..
D l
~-L
Do you wish to address the City council at the hearing?
'-
( i2( No
<_) Yes
please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the
council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This
form must be completed and filed with the City Clerk no
.. later than the close of the City Council assessment hearing.
Your request will become part of the public hearing record.
I request that the City Council consider'{check one):
a .(__) *Deferral of assessment (retired by virtue of
permanent disability)
b. (__) *Senior Citizen deferment (over 65 years of age)
c. {V1 Cancellation of assessment
d. (_) Revision of assessment
ReasOn for the request:
13 lA t' rJ l ~ 1 \ ~
-rOq-~ set. Ie
\11 -,..{ ~ l'" \ - 2-
i ob <? :1: ,)1" y..
of W
dOWt1 rov
i ~ Or r('< \~'~
'fe~\r'"
* You will need to fill out a special form for deferral of
assessment and provide the city verification of your income
or disability.
/J J ~~ S-l- q (
(Si;::J1e) . (date)
P e~h" s. ., J '\3 rcut dsie.ill?t'
(print name)
t;)-qOq UtJe(;(t()C\'1 1~~ I
(address of property owner)
M\~ke-{()f\~fA M..... ~5)<{)
'J.-
( G(~ ) <135
telephone
3675 D-f' Q15-;I-.()..{
Zip
@
.
.
.
ASSESSMENT HEARING APPEAL FORM
PROJECT NO. Cf U':' 0 t{ "
Address of Assessed ~arcel . Iql qNc.t/ltJi",ee:-t
.....--, .j
J .
~.;, .
'What assessment does this' concern \. UJq{e" ' . S ~"" ,~<= . y- ..' ....
( . 5 c("" Sew e ".. S ~... v Ie. (?
Property Identification Number:
-2-.L..-i.Ll-2.~
B-~
-1L ~'-L ~
Do you wish to address the City Council .at the hearing?
(_) Yes (~ No
Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the
council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This
form must be completed and filed. with the City Clerk no
later than the close of the City Council assessment hearing.
Your request will become part of thepublic.hearing record.
I request that the City Council consider (check one):
a .(~) *Deferral of assessment (retired by virtue of
permanent disability)
b. (_) *Senior Citizen deferment (over 65 years of age)
c. <lL> Cancellation of assessment
d. (_) Revision of assessment
Reason for the request:
"1 h-e . ~ (.{V\ Sew <? jr , s I q -~ 0 y ..-- S" () I J,
1 ~ € LlJ q i Q '" 5 ~ ~ vIi e C<. 5'" Co Y ~ s (J ld '
'J h -e { t e v l' ~ ~ l { ,~ {" .,; V\ ~. (> J. .. 1 () h e
c. J e c.. 4 I.( S t" 0 f 1 t... €'ll" e .
need to fill out a special form for deferral of
assessment and provide the city verification of your income ' .
or disability.
be~~l<) 5" ]\"t(kcL~ie.t{",.... /J~. f~ b-{- q,
(print name) (signature~ (date).
\d-qQ~ \(.J.e.. ~ (AlG.'( 1r-(;4; I ( ~(.:z....) q35 -;Ll')'( ov- (n5- 367$
(address of property owner) telephone,
M \ ~ r'- e 1 0 V\ \0(" h "- ~
\ .
Zip
S S 3 '1)
8
i- -
.
.
.
CITY OF HOPKINS
MAINSTREET ASSESSMENT HEARING
PRESENTATION MATERIAL
MAY 14, 1991
1.
BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED MAINSTREET PROJECT
The following summary. of events has led to this Assessment Hearing for
the Mai nstreet Improvement Project which extends from 5th Avenue to
Shady Oak/ Road.
May, 1988: A Commercial Market Study prepared by Laventhol and
Horwath found that the Mainstreet business environment needed improved
accessibi Ii ty, better short termon-street parking, and enhanced street
amenities to better serve the existing convenience orientated shopping
behaviors.
- May, 1989: TheCity/s Comprehensive Plan revised in 1989 contains a
section on the revitalization of the downtown CBD area.
May, 1989: A Mainstreet Improvement Concept Study was presented to
the City Council. Two concepts were presented that recommended
pavement surface, street lighting,and street furniture improvements.
On street parking was increased in one of the concepts to nearl y 100
on-street parallel spaces and was preferred by the City Council.
January, 1990: The City received a petition from property owners
and businesses people between .6th Avenue and 12th Avenue adjacent to
Mainstreet. The peti tion requested.. improvements to Mainstreet in
accordance with the 1989 Mainstreet Impr-ovement Study.
March, 1990: The Ci ty Counc i I ordered the preparat i on of a
Feasibi Ii ty Study for the Mainstreet improvement project including a
review of possible improvements between Highway 169 and Shady Oak Road.
August, 1990: The completion .of the Engineering Feasibility Study
was accomplished.
-September, 1990: The City Council conducted a pUblic hearing on the
proposed project.
November, 1990: The City Council authorizes the detailed ,design
process to commence on Alternative #5R which includes permanent
improvements between 5th Avenue and 20th Avenue along Mainstreet
including the straightening of Mainstreet with the replacement of curb
and gutter, sidewalk, utility repairs, new traffic signals and street
lights, installation of landscape improvements and new street
furniture. Also included was a Plaza design for the southeast corner
of 9th Avenue.
December, 1990: The Des i gn Rev i ew Commi t tee is organ i zed and, the
first of 10 meetings are held to' discuss elements of the detai led
design.
.
.
.
Page 2
May 14 Mainstreet Assessment Hearing, City of Hopkins
March, 1991: The City Council receives the final design plans,
specifications and cost estimate and directs the advertisement for
bids,
April 16, 1991: Bid tabulation results are brought to the City
Council. The City Council directs staff to schedule the assessment
hearings.
Apr i I and May, 1991: Propert y owner meet i ngs are he I d with the
property owners along Mainstreet that are proposed to be assessed for
the improvements.
- May 14, 1991: Mainstreet Assessment Hearing.
July 8, 1991: The proposed construction project is scheduled to
begin following completion of the Raspberry Festival.
II.
SUMMARY OF THE MAINSTREET PROPERTY OWNER MEETINGS HELD BETWEEN APRIL 17
AND MAY 14. 1991
Attachment #1 is a graphic of the properties that are proposed to be
assessed a portion of the project cost. Through the past three weeks,
each of the property owners effected has been contacted by a member of
the RLK Associates staff to discuss the project details. RLK
Associates is the Construction Manager that the City retained to handle
the construction phase of the Mainstreet project. During the many
property owner meetings that were held, concern was expressed on four
primary items. They are listed below in order of frequency:
Attachment #2 is a copy of the two page questionaire that was completed
on each of the properties during the course of the meeting.
1. Many of the property owners in Segment Three and Segment Four felt
it was unfair to assess the ut i I i ty work when the extent of the
necessary repairs are unknown.
2. Several property owners questioned the fairness of the assessment
rates and the benefits that would be received by the adjacent property.
3. There were several detailed design issues that were brought up by
the property owners that quest i oned the mer its of the construct ion
plans.
4. Work activities on the side streets was questioned with respect to
the impact on the corner properties.
It appeared to the staff ofRLK Associates that the property owners
appreciated the time that was spent with them to discuss details of the
project and the assessment, data. Additionally, the City's
Rehabi Ii tation Loan Grant program washighl ighted. Several property
owner's expressed sincere interest.
l'
.
.
.
Page 3
May 14 Mainstreet Assessment Hearing, City of Hopkins
III. SUMMARY OF BIDS RECEIVED
There were nine separate contracts that the Ci ty accepted bids from
contractors on April 12, 1991. 'The following contractors and bid
resul ts are summarized. Attachment #3 is a matrix which indicates a
complete list of the contractors that submitted bids, their exact bid,
and the total tabulation. '
C. S. McCrossan, Osseo, Mn.: Proj ect #90-04A (Street & Curb), 04B
(Utilities), 04E (Landscaping, Sidewalks and Pavers), and 04F (Plaza);
Total Contract Price $ 2.075.781,41.
Ii llmer Electric: Project #90-04C and D (Traffic signals and lighting
installation); Total Contract Price $ 411.532.67.
Davis & Assoc./EESCO/NorthlandlJudd Supply: Project #90-04G (Lighting
hardware supply); Alternates are currently beinqreviewed.
Bench Manufacturing: Project #90-04H (Trash receptacles and benches);
Total Contract Price $ 17,887.00.
Neenah Foundry: Project #90-041 (Tree Grates & Frames); Total Contract
Price $ 26.250.00.
Riddl eControl s: Project #90-04J (Traff i cSignal Controllers); Total
Contract Price $39.381.00. '
IV. PROJECT COST AND FUNDING PLAN
To explain more easily the project costs and revenues, Attachments 4
and 5 have been prepared. These pie charts diagrammatically
demonstrate ,the. distribution of costs and revenues" that compose the
$3.7 million project funding package.
It is important to point out that 70% of the costs for the project are
for the refurbishment of the underground utilities, the installation of
new traffic control signals, and the paving/curbs/sidewalks of the
street. The remaining 30% of the project costs are for landscape
amenities, street lighting, and the plaza at 9th Avenue.
Revenues for the project are' predominant I y from funding sources other
than special assessments. Approximately 75% of the costs are funded by
Tax Increment Financing, Municipal State, Aid, and the Ci tyJ's Uti I ity
Fund. The remaining 25% are funded by special front foot assessments
and service replacement costs for the sanitary sewer and water
connections between the street and the buildings.
~
.
.
.
Page 4
May 14 Mainstreet Assessment Hearing, City of Hopkins
V . DISCUSSION OF FRONT FOOT ASSESSMENT RATES FOR STREET AND AMENITIES
Minnesota State Statute 429 requires that at least 20% of the project
cost be funded by assessments levied against benefitted property. How
these costs are assessed is the perogative of the Ci ty Counci L The
Mainstreet project has two assessments that are proposed to be charged
to the benefitting properties adjacent to Mainstreet -- Front Foot
assessments and Utility Services connection assessments.
The front foot assessments have been calculated by reviewing the
project bId tabulation data from April 12 and assigning a cost to each
of the properties along Mainstreet. If the property adjacent to
Mainstreet I ies between 5th Avenue and 11th Avenue (Segment #3), the
price is $63.20 per foot. If the property lies between 12th Avenue and
20th Avenue (Segment #4), the price is $59.65 per foot. Assessments
for the block between 11th and 12th Avenue, the transition block, are
$61.50 per foot. Attachment #6 is a table that compares the assessable
categories between Segment #3 and #4, demonstrates the cost per foot
per block, and the specifiC assessment rates for the three
distinguishable project areas~
, '
VI. DISCUSSION OF ASSESSMENTS FOR REPLACEMENT OF UTILITY CONNECTIONS
Ut i Ii ty assessments are based upon the actua I costs of rep 1 ac i ng the
sewer and water connections between the buildings and the utility main
1 ines in the street. Tax Increment Financing and Muncipal State Aid
assistance of $ 250,000 has resulted in utility assessment rates being'
reduced from the full cost by approximately 45%.
If a property has a water service that needs to be replaced because it
is a lead pipe or in a deteriorated condition, the replacement cost is
$ 1,405. This cost includes a new copper water service from the main
in the street to the face of the building or the property line.
The sanitary sewer replacement cost is $ 3,506. This cost includes a
new sanitary sewer line from the trunk sewer line in the street to the
building connection.
It has been very difficult to determine the replacement needs of the
properties along Mainstreet during the project design phase. The City
has few, if any records, on when utility services were placed along
Mainstreet. Attempts at televising. the services during the winter of
1990/91 were predominantly unsUccessful. During the property owner
meetings, approximately 10% of the property owners were able to
demonstrate that their water and sewer uti 1 ity services were replaced
wi th updated services, or that their services connected to the side
streets. An examination of the bui 1 ding's services from the basement
can help the inspector ascertain information about the utility
connection. However, this information is not conclusive.
.
.
.
PROPERTY OWNER PREASSESSMENT MEETINGS
MAINSTREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT
APRIL-MAY, 1991 RLK ASSOCIATES, LTD.
DISCUSSION ITEMS TO COVER AT THE PROPERTY OWNER MEETINGS:
1. INFORMATION ABOUT THE OWNER AND/OR TENANT(S)
OWNER'S NAME AND ADDRESS
TENANT'S NAME,(l) ,
SQ.FT.OF OPER.(2)
AND HOURS OF (3)
OPERATION. (4)
OWNERiS PHONE
TENANT'S PHONE
EMERGENCY CONTACT (AFTER HOURS, NAME & PHONE)
2., INFORMATION ABOUT THE BUILDING
AREA OF STRUCTURE AGE OF STRUCTURE STORIES
ACCESS TO BUILDING:
REAR FRONT SIDE (what street)
SPECIAL COMMENTS ABOUT THE CONDITION OF THE BUILDING:
3. COMMENTS ABOUT THE NATURE OF USERS OF THE BUILDING
MAIN ENTRANCE OF PEOPLE USING THE BUILDING
PRIME BUSINESS HOURS WEEK-END OPERATION
MAXIMUM PERIOD OF OPERATION WITHOUT WATER
MAXIMUM PERIOD OF OPERATION WITHOUT SEWER
4. WATER AND SEWER SERVICE CONNECTIONS
WATER:
SIZE OF THE WATER CONNECTION LOCATION
AGE OF THE WATER CONNECTION TYPE OF PIPE MATERIAL
CONDITION OF WATER CONNECTION
SPECIAL COMMENTS/REQUESTS ABOUT SEWER REPAIR (IF APPROPRIATE):
SEWER :
SIZE OF THE SEWER CONNECTION LOCATION
AGE OF THE SEWER CONNECTION TYPE OF PIPE MATERIAL
CONDITION OF THE SEWER PIPE CONNECTION
LAST TIME THE SEWER WAS CLEANED
SPECIAL COMMENTS/REQUESTS ABOUT SEWER REPAIR (IF APPROPRIATE):
Attachment 2
.
.
.
PAGE 2
CHECKLIST FOR PRE-ASSESSMENT HEARING PROPERTY OWNER MEETINGS
5. VEHICULAR TRAFFIC'USING THE BUILDING
WHERE IS YOUR TRASH PICKED UP HOW OFTEN
WHERE DO YOUR EMPLOYEES PARK THEIR VEHICLES
WHERE DO YOUR CUSTOMERS PARK THEIR VEHICLES
WHAT SPECIAL KINDS OF SIGNING WILL YOU NEED FOR YOUR CUSTOMERS
SPECIAL COMMENTS ABOUT YOUR CUSTOMERS/BUILDING USERS RELATIVE TO THE EFFECTS
AND IMPACTS OF CONSTRUCTION ON THEM
6. REVIEW OF THE PLANS FOR THE PROJECT
OVERALL DISCUSSION OF THE PLANS ?
SPECIFIC COMMENTS
SPECIFIC BLOCK DISCUSSION ?
7. REVIEW OF THE ASSESSMENT POLICY FOR THE PROJECT
DRIVEWAY ASSESSMENTS
WATER SERVICE ASSESSMENTS
PROPERTY OWNER/TENANT COMMENTS
FRONT FOOT ASSESSMENTS
SEWER SERVICE ASSESSMENTS
8. CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTS
APPROPRIATE SIGNATURE OF PROPERTY OWNER OR TENANT?
EASEMENT APPROVED? DATE
9. CITY'S COMMERCIAL REHAB LOAN PROGRAM AND SIGN GRANT PROGRAM'
COMMERCIAL LOAN PROGRAM DISCUSSED
SIGN GRANT PROGRAM DISCUSSED
CONTACT: KERSTEN ELVERUM
INTEREST ?
INTEREST ?
10. OTHER MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS (please note):
ACKNOWLEDGED:
PROPERTY OWNER AND/OR TENANT:
RLK REPRESENTATIVE:
DATE OF MEETING LOCATION OF MEETING
RETURN MEETING SET FOR REVIEW OF SEWER LINE OPERATION
;'
CITY OF HOPKINS MAINSTREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT BID TABULATION
ATTACHMENT #3
Apparent
Bid Tabulation Low Bidder
Project Description
.
Project No. 90-04A
[Demolition, street
reconstructIon
including paving
and new curbs]
Project No. .90-04B
[Utilities including
watermain,sanitary
sewer, and storm
sewer]
Project No. 90-04C
and 90-04D
[Traffic signals and
Street 1 i Qhtl ng
installation]
.
Project No. 90-04E
[StreetscaJ?e
amenities including
sidewalks, pavers,
drive aprons, and
install.ation of
street furniture]
Project No~ 90-04F
[9th Avenue Plaza
constructionw/o
the clock tower and
the Kiosk]
Contractors
C.S. McCrossan
Thomas & Sons
Midwest Asphalt
Hardrives
C.S. McCrossan
G.L.Contracting
Northdale Construct.
Killmer Electric
Egan-McKay
Electric Service
C.S. McCrossan
Curb Masters
Thomas & Sons
Sunram Landscaping
Lakeland Nursery
C.S. McCrossan
, Lakeland Nursery
Thomas & Sons
Project No. 90-04G Davis & Associates
[Supplier of Light EESCO/United
Poles, Fixtures
and brackets] Northland Electric
Base Bid only, no Judd Supply Company
alternates are listed
Project No. 90-04H
[Supplier of Trash
receptacles and
Benches]
.
Project No. 90-041
[Tree Grates &
Frames]
Project No. 90-04J
[Traffic Signal
Controllers]
Bench Manufacturing
Fl anagan Sa 1 es .
Earl F. Andersen
NeenahFoundry
Riddle Controls
Traffic Control Carp.
$789,718.91 ((((<(<(<
$848,834.23
$877,753.25
$991,462.41
$886,041.15
$1,366,619.72
$1,633,245.45
<(<<<(<<<
$411 ,532.67
$443 , 144.39
$507,607.30
<<<<<<<<<
$277,144.70
$275,952.95' ***
$318,142.10
$327,522.71
$418,051.66
$122,876.65 <<<<<<<<<
$161,377.73
$175,352.40
$143,510.00 ****
$203,235.65
$185,463.00
$144,021.00
$17,887.00 <<<<<<<<<
$20,787.00
$23,410.00
$26,250.00 <<<<<<<<<
$39,3a1.00 <<<<<<<<<
$46,306.00
Notes:
***
****
Because of tied bids, C.S. McCrossan is the law bidder.
The City is currently reviewing the alternate bids to
decide an the lighting hardware they wish to purchase.
.
.
.
$1069 (29%)
STREETS
$1200 (32%)
UTILITY
, $50 (1%)
COMMUNICATIONS
" $133 (4%)
PLAZA
$329(9%) ",
TRAFFIC SIGNALS
PROJECT COST
, '
DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS
Attachment 4
.
.
.
$507 (15%)
FRONT FOOT
ASSESSMENT
$1362 (37%)
M.S.A.S.
$611 (16%)
UTILITY FUND
$239 (6%),
SERVICES
(ASSESSED)
PROJECT REVENUE
DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS
Attachment 5
.
.
.
MAINSTREET TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT
Hopkins Project No. 90-04
TH IS AGREEMENT is dated this _ day of
("Owners").
, 199_, by the City of Hopkins ("City") and
PURPOSE FOR THE AGREEMENT. The City is to construct and install public utilities and other
, improvements on Mainstreet to benefit the property of the Owner. The Owners are the fee owners of
record of the property that will be affected by the construction located at and legally described as follows:
PIN #
Although this construction project is temporary in nature, the installation of the improvements and
utilities may necessitate changing or disrupting certain designated areas and will require the City's con-
struction crews to enter on certain portions of the Owner's property which is shown and highlighted on the
attached drawing and described as follows:
ADDRESS
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS:,
1. The City shall carry out the construction and installation of the improvements in a manner which
will minimized disruptions to the Owner and his property.
2. After the work has been finished, the City shall promptly restore the disturbed area to a condi-
tion equal to or better than that existing prior to the start of the project.
3. The Owner hereby gives the City and its representatives the right to enter upon the property in
order to construct and install the improvements.
4. This Agreement will end:
November 30, 1992 (for Segment 3)
November 30, 1993 (for Segment 4).
5. For the duration of the project, the contractor on the project will never close more than one of
the two available access driveways to the property from Mainstreet at any time, unless other access
arrangements have been made with the Owner.
6. The Owner is responsible to notify the tenants of his property, if appropriate, of the potential
construction activity disruption. The City will coordinate the construction activities with the affected
property owner and tenants adjacent to the Mainstreet Construction project. The Owner shall provide the
City with a list of the tenants and telephone numbers.
OWNER
CITY OF HOPKINS
By:
Nelson W. Berg, Mayor
By:
Steven C. Mielke, City Manager
CONSTRUCTION MANAGER
Attachment 7