Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
6.m. Receive Feasibility Report - Order Public Hearing - Danbury Way
4 ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CITY COUNCIL City Council Meeting: June 16, 2015 AGENDA ITEM: Receive Feasibility Report/Order Public AGENDA SECTION: Hearing — Danbury Way Improvements Consent Project, City Project 453 PREPARED BY: Phil Olson, PE, Assistant City Engi r AGENDA NO. ATTACHMENTS: Feasibility Report; Resolution; Map APPROVED BY: RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: Motion to Adopt a Resolution Receiving the Feasibility Report and Ordering the Public Hearing for the Danbury Way Improvements Project, City Project 453. BACKGROUND: At the November 3, 2014 regular Council meeting, the Council authorized the preparation of the Feasibility Report for the Danbury Way Improvements. This project has been designated as City Project 453. A map illustrating the project area and proposed improvements is attached. Detailed information is included in the attached Feasibility Report. A full presentation of the Feasibility Report and all of the proposed improvements contained within will be made at the Public Improvement Hearing for the project to be scheduled on July 21, 2015. SUMMARY: Staff recommends Council adoption of the attached resolution receiving the feasibility report and ordering the public hearing for the Danbury Way Improvement Project, City Project 453. G:\ENGPROJ\453\Council Items\20150616 CC Receive FR-Ord Pt-Ldocx 6.m. City of Rosemount 2875 145 Street West • Rosemount, MN 55068-4997 th June 16, 2015 Danbury Way Improvement Project CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Philip C. Olson, PE Date: June 16, 2015 Lic. No. 47999 Prepared By: Mitchell Hatcher, EIT Date: June 16, 2015 Feasibility Report Danbury Way Improvement Project City of Rosemount Project No. 453 WSB Project No. 1928-54 FEASIBILITY REPORT DANBURY WAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT CITY PROJECT NO. 453 FOR THE CITY OF ROSEMOUNT, MINNESOTA June 16, 2015 Prepared By: WSB & Associates, Inc. 701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 763-541-4800 763-541-1700 (Fax) Feasibility Report Danbury Way Improvement Project City of Rosemount Project No. 453 WSB Project No. 1928-54 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................... 1 2.DANBURY WAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ....................................................................... 2 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 2 Authorization ...................................................................................................................... 2 Scope ............................................................................................................................... 2 Data Available .................................................................................................................... 2 General Background ........................................................................................................................ 2 Project Location .................................................................................................................. 2 Project History .................................................................................................................... 3 Existing Conditions .......................................................................................................................... 4 Surface ............................................................................................................................... 4 Municipal Utilities .............................................................................................................. 5 Private Utilities ................................................................................................................... 5 Proposed Improvements ................................................................................................................... 5 Surface ............................................................................................................................... 5 Storm Sewer ........................................................................................................................ 7 Stormwater Ponds ............................................................................................................... 8 Drainage Ditches ................................................................................................................. 8 Private Utilities ................................................................................................................... 8 3.FINANCING .................................................................................................................................. 9 Opinion of Cost ................................................................................................................................ 9 Funding ............................................................................................................................................ 9 4.PROPOSED SCHEDULE ........................................................................................................... 11 5.FEASIBILITY AND RECOMMENDATION ........................................................................... 12 Appendix A Opinion of Probable Cost Storm Sewer Improvements Figure Assessment Roll Assessment Calculations Special Benefit Consultation Appendix B Public Comments / Resident Correspondence Appendix C Frontier Communications Fiber Feasibility Report Danbury Way Improvement Project City of Rosemount Project No. 453 WSB Project No. 1928-54 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Danbury Way Improvement Project, City Project 453, originally investigated in 2007, and again in 2013, as part of the City’s Pavement Management Program, has been proposed for improvement in 2016. The improvements proposed as part of the Danbury Way Improvement Project are as follows: Street Reconstruction Storm Sewer / Water Quality Improvements The total estimated project cost for the Danbury Way Improvement Project is $2,083,300. The proposed estimated cost is summarized as follows: Surface Improvements $ 1,554,700 Storm Sewer Improvements $ 528,600 Total Estimated Project Cost $ 2,083,300 Proposed funding for the project is summarized as follows: Street Capital Improvement Fund $ 1,234,700 Special Assessments $ 320,000 Storm Sewer Utility Fund $ 528,600 Total Project Funding $ 2,083,300 It is proposed that construction begin in May 2016 and be substantially complete by September 2016. This project is feasible, necessary, and cost-effective from an engineering standpoint, and should be constructed as proposed herein. Feasibility Report Danbury Way Improvement Project City of Rosemount Project No. 453 WSB Project No. 1928-54 Page 1 2. DANBURY WAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Introduction Authorization On November 3, 2014, the Rosemount City Council authorized the preparation of an engineering feasibility report for the Danbury Way Improvement Project. This project has been designed as City Project No. 453. Scope Danbury Way was investigated with the 2007-2010 Street Improvement Program and was proposed for improvement in 2010. Danbury Way was again investigated in 2013 as part of the 2015-2016 Street Improvement Program. This area has been postponed due to reprioritization of projects. Over the past several years the condition of Danbury Way has continued to deteriorate. Several calls have been received from property owners concerning the condition of the road. A Appendix C copy of the resident correspondence can be found in of this report. Data Available Information and materials used in the preparation of this report include the following: City of Rosemount Utility Plans City of Rosemount Record Plans City of Rosemount Topography Maps City of Rosemount Utility Maintenance Records City of Rosemount Phone Call Logs City of Rosemount Assessment / Improvement Policy City of Rosemount Pavement Management Program Dakota County Property Cards Field Observations of the Area Private Utility Maps Special Benefit Consultation General Background Project Location The project neighborhood is located south of McAndrews Road (CSAH 38) roughly 1.3 miles west of Minnesota TH 3. Danbury Way loops approximately 6,300 feet from the west side intersection with McAndrews Road to the east side intersection with McAndrews Road. The project location is shown on the map below. Feasibility Report Danbury Way Improvement Project City of Rosemount Project No. 453 WSB Project No. 1928-54 Page 2 Figure 1: Location Map Project History Danbury Way was investigated in 2007 with the 2007-2010 Street Improvement Program and was proposed for improvement in 2010. At the time the project was not supported and was postponed due to reprioritization of projects. Coordination and communication with the residents of Danbury Way has been ongoing since late 2006. Several public informational meetings have been held, including December 2006, September 2013, and March 2015. A resident feedback survey was conducted in September Appendix B 2014. Full results from the resident feedback survey can be found in of this report. Feasibility Report Danbury Way Improvement Project City of Rosemount Project No. 453 WSB Project No. 1928-54 Page 3 Existing Conditions Surface Danbury Way is a bituminous roadway with bituminous curb and gutter. The roadway was constructed in 1978 at a varying width of 29 to 30 feet. Subgrade materials range from sandy clay to clay. The existing roadway is experiencing severe levels of pavement deterioration including alligator cracking, edge cracking, longitudinal cracking, and transverse cracking. Many areas of the road have settled causing issues with the conveyance of drainage along the pavement. Additionally, a lack of cross slope allows storm water to pond and then infiltrate through the existing cracks and into the roadway subgrade. The clay subgrade retains the water and making the roadway susceptible to frost heaves and heavy cracking. As part of the preliminary fieldwork completed in 2007, a test hole was dug near 12526 Danbury Way which revealed approximately 3 inches of bituminous pavement, approximately 6 inches of aggregate base, and an existing sandy clay material at least 3 feet deep. Table 1 below is a listing of the roadway length along Danbury Way and the condition rating: Table 1: Roadway Condition Ratings StreetLengthYear From To OCI Name(feet) Constructed DanburyMcAndrewsMcAndrews 62001978 0 Way RoadRoad An OCI value below 30 indicates the road has exceeded its useful life due to severe pavement deterioration. Maintenance measures including patching and mill and overlay improvements are no longer a cost effective option to extend the life of the roadway. Maintenance records have revealed seal coat improvements were completed in 1982. The following photos illustrate some of the varying levels of pavement distresses found along Danbury Way. Feasibility Report Danbury Way Improvement Project City of Rosemount Project No. 453 WSB Project No. 1928-54 Page 4 Municipal Utilities There is no existing sanitary sewer or water main servicing properties along Danbury Way. Each residential property along Danbury Way has a private septic system and private well. Drainage is conveyed along the curb line to low points with catch basins and it is then discharged to existing wetlands or swales. Since a majority of the conveyance is along the curb line, drainage pools where the roadway has settled. This has increased the rate of pavement deterioration. Due to the lack of storm sewer, short term flooding occurs within the roadway during large rain events. Private Utilities There are currently private utilities adjacent to and crossing Danbury Way throughout the project site. Known utility owners include: Charter Communications Velocity Telephone Dakota Electric Minnesota Energy Resources Frontier Communications Xcel Energy Proposed Improvements Surface Danbury Way is proposed for full-depth reconstruction due to the severity and types of distresses found in the roadway. The roadway section is proposed to include: Roadway Typical Section 4” bituminous pavement w/ concrete curb and gutter 6” aggregate base class 5 36” select granular borrow Geotextile fabric The roadway is proposed to be reconstructed to a width of 28 feet, which is the City’s minimum standard. Due to the existing poor subgrade materials, full subgrade replacement is recommended. It is proposed to limiting excavation in some areas by raising the roadway profile. Surmountable concrete curb and gutter is proposed to be installed to replace the existing bituminous curb and gutter. This will improve drainage along the roadway and will allow construction to be contained within the existing roadway footprint. Concrete driveway aprons are proposed to be installed at all driveway locations extending approximately 10 feet from the back of curb. Feasibility Report Danbury Way Improvement Project City of Rosemount Project No. 453 WSB Project No. 1928-54 Page 5 Evaluation of Concrete Pavement: Concrete pavement was evaluated as an alternate option to bituminous pavement. Concrete is more ridged than bituminous and is able to provide structural strength to span the underlying poor subgrade soils. This reduces the need for large amounts of excavation and is also a reasonable material to consider for roadways that do not contain a large amount of underground utilities. The design life for both pavements on local roads is estimated to be the same at 50 years. However, distresses for on each type of pavement are different as the pavements age since the distresses are primarily expected to be caused by weather related issues. The distresses on concrete pavement are expected to be focused at the joints which will create ride issues. Depending on the severity of the joint issues, the ride may be deemed acceptable at lower speeds. Concrete has a higher upfront cost, it is also difficult to patch, it is difficult to maintain underground utilities, and the longer curing time of concrete creates access issues for residents during construction. If concrete pavement is ultimately desired, the recommended typical concrete roadway section is below. Concrete Pavement Typical Section 8” concrete pavement w/ reinforcement and dowel bars 6” aggregate base class 5 (recycled) Geotextile fabric A Life Cycle Cost Analysis (LCCA) was performed to help evaluate cost of both pavements. Based on the LCCA, bituminous pavement is less expensive and also the more cost effective option for the life of the pavement. Table 2 below is life cycle cost analysis: Table 2 – Life Cycle Cost Analysis Initial Total Cost PavementTotalAverage Constructionfor Design Design Life TypeMaintenanceAnnual Cost CostLife Bituminous $1,554,700$534,600$2,089,300 50 $41,786 Concrete $2,047,800$434,000$2,481,800 50 $49,636 Feasibility Report Danbury Way Improvement Project City of Rosemount Project No. 453 WSB Project No. 1928-54 Page 6 Table 3 below is summary of the maintenance activities: Table 3 – Pavement Maintenance Activities Bituminous Pavement Seal Coat Year 3 Mill and Overlay Year 20 Seal Coat Year 23 Mill and Overlay Year 40 Seal Coat Year 43 Expected Design Life 50-60 Years Concrete Pavement Minor Rehabilitation at Joints Year 25 Major Rehabilitation at Joints Year 40 Expected Design Life 50-60 Years Both concrete pavement and bituminous pavement were presented as evaluated options to the residents of Danbury Way at the neighborhood informational meeting on March 12, 2015. Seven responses were received regarding the pavement discussion. Five of the responses were in favor of the bituminous pavement and two responses were in favor of either concrete pavement or bituminous pavement. Storm Sewer Storm sewer is proposed at all five low points along the roadway and it will maintain the existing drainage patterns in the area. The storm sewer will work in conjunction with the curb and gutter to convey stormwater runoff to catch basins and discharge into the existing wetlands. At two of the low point locations, sedimentation structures are proposed to treat the stormwater runoff before discharging into the existing wetlands. These sedimentation structures will improve water quality in the area. The cost for the sedimentation structures is approximately $100,000. The storm sewer improvements are proposed to maintain the existing drainage patterns and improve water quality prior to discharging into the adjacent wetlands. These improvements alone do not meet the City’s standards and practices for new development but they do improve water quality in the area without changing the character of the neighborhood by removing trees and creating large stormwater ponds. Feasibility Report Danbury Way Improvement Project City of Rosemount Project No. 453 WSB Project No. 1928-54 Page 7 Other Options Evaluated: Additional options were evaluated to determine if improving the area to new development stormwater standards is feasible. Due to the large impact these improvements would have on the neighborhood, these options are not recommended. Stormwater Ponds There are not any existing stormwater ponds within the Danbury Way neighborhood. Creating ponding basins will require a large amount of excavation, tree removal, and general impact to the neighborhood. If ponding is desired, additional analysis will be needed during final design to determine the exact layout of the stormwater ponds and what easement areas would be required. Drainage Ditches Drainage ditches would improve water quality along the roadway but would pose many impacts to the existing roadway corridor. Since the existing drainage is directed to the roadway, constructing ditches would require major construction activities outside of the roadway. This includes a large amount of tree removal, approximately two-and-a-half acres, and excavations to construct the ditches, drastically changing the current look and feel of Danbury Way. All stormwater improvement options were presented and explained to the residents who attended the neighborhood informational meeting on March 12, 2015. Residents were generally supportive of maintaining or improving stormwater infrastructure in the neighborhood as long as excavation and tree removal were not included. A detailed summary of the stormwater Appendix B comments can be found in . Private Utilities Through the public involvement process, five of the 32 properties on Danbury Way have requested that high speed fiber optic be made available to them. Working with Frontier Communications, the City obtained an estimate to install fiber in conjunction with the roadway improvements. The work includes extending fiber along McAndrews Road to Danbury Way and installing fiber the length of Danbury Way. This work will need to take place concurrently with the Danbury Way Improvement Project in order to reduce cost. If fiber would be installed at a later date, the cost will increase due to different construction methods required. The cost estimate provided from Frontier Communications is $257,250. Fiber is not been proposed at this time due to the low number of residents requesting this improvement. If fiber is desired by Council, a funding source will need to be identified. A Appendix C detailed cost estimate from Frontier Communications can be found in of this report. Feasibility Report Danbury Way Improvement Project City of Rosemount Project No. 453 WSB Project No. 1928-54 Page 8 3. FINANCING Opinion of Cost Appendix A Detailed opinions of cost can be found in of this report. The opinions of cost incorporate estimated construction costs and include 5% contingency and 25% for all related indirect costs (legal, administrative, engineering, and financing items). Table 4 below provides a summary of the cost for the recommended option for Danbury Way Improvement Project: Table 4 – Summary of Cost Indirect Construction Total (25%) Danbury Way Surface $1,243,800 $310,900 $1,554,700 Improvements Danbury Way Storm Sewer $422,900 $105,700 $528,600 Improvements Total$1,666,700 $416,600 $2,083,300 Funding A Special Benefit Consultation, dated July 8, 2013, was completed for the Danbury Way Appendix A neighborhood. The Special Benefit Consultation report can be found in . The purpose of the consultation was to provide an anticipated range of benefit for properties in the project area. Based on the Special Benefit Consultation report, the per unit project benefit is estimated to be $11,000 to $12,500 per assessable unit/lot. Based on the city’s current schedule of rates and fees, the assessment for rural and transitional residential areas with existing bituminous is 35% of the improvement cost. Based on this calculation, the surface improvement per unit assessment is estimated to be $17,000. Taking into account the calculated assessment and Special Benefit Consultation Report, the recommended per unit assessment is $10,000 for all 32 properties along Danbury Way. Appendix A. A summary of the proposed assessment calculations can be found in The Street Capital Improvement fund and Storm Utility fund will fund the remaining surface and storm sewer improvements. Feasibility Report Danbury Way Improvement Project City of Rosemount Project No. 453 WSB Project No. 1928-54 Page 9 Table 5 provides a summary of the estimated assessments. Table 5 – Estimated Assessments Total Assessment Units Assessment Danbury Way Surface Improvements $10,000/Unit32 Units $320,000 Total$320,000 Table 6 provides a summary of the estimated funding for the recommended option for the Danbury Way Improvement Project: Table 6 - Proposed Funding Street Capital SpecialStorm Utility ImprovementTotal AssessmentsFund Fund Street Capital Improvement $1,234,700 $320,000 $0 $1,554,700 Fund Storm Sewer Utility Fund $0 $0 $528,600 $528,600 Total $1,234,700 $320,000 $528,600 $2,083,300 Feasibility Report Danbury Way Improvement Project City of Rosemount Project No. 453 WSB Project No. 1928-54 Page 10 4. Proposed Schedule The proposed project schedule for the Danbury Way Improvement Project is as follows: Public Informational Neighborhood Meeting .............................................. March 12, 2015 Receive Feasibility Report / Authorize Plans and Specifications ................... June 16, 2015 Receive Plans and Specifications / Authorize Advertisement for Bid ............ October 2015 Open Bids / Compute Assessments ............................................................. December 2015 Declare Costs / Set Improvement & Assessment Hearing ............................... January 2016 Award Contract / Receive Bids / Improvement & Assessment Hearing / Adopt Assessment Roll ................... February 2016 Begin Construction ............................................................................................... May 2016 Final Completion of Project ........................................................................ September 2016 Feasibility Report Danbury Way Improvement Project City of Rosemount Project No. 453 WSB Project No. 1928-54 Page 11 5. FEASIBILITY AND RECOMMENDATION The following proposed improvements are included within the Danbury Way Improvement Project: Street Reconstruction Bituminous Pavement with Curb and Gutter o 4” bituminous pavement 6” aggregate base class 5 36” select granular borrow Geotextile fabric Storm Sewer / Water Quality Improvements Storm Sewer o Sedimentation Structures o The total estimated cost of the projects scheduled for the Danbury Way Improvement Project is $2,083,300 . Proposed funding for the project is provided through a combination of Special Assessments, Street Capital Improvement funds, and Storm Sewer Utility funds. The total funding responsibility of the Street Capital Improvement fund is estimated to be $1,234,700 . The total funding responsibility of the Storm Utility fund is estimated to be $528,600 . The funding level anticipated through the levy of special assessments to benefitting $320,000 property owners is . The project is feasible, necessary, and cost-effective from an engineering perspective. WSB & Associates, Inc. recommends proceeding with the proposed improvements as detailed in this report. The economic feasibility of this project will be determined by the City Council. Based on the information contained in this report, it is recommended to proceed with the improvements as outlined herein. Feasibility Report Danbury Way Improvement Project City of Rosemount Project No. 453 WSB Project No. 1928-54 Page 12 APPENDIX A Opinion of Probable Cost Storm Sewer Improvements Figure Assessment Roll Assessment Calculations Special Benefit Consultation Feasibility Report Danbury Way Improvement Project City of Rosemount Project No. 453 WSB Project No. 1928-54 Opinion of Probable Cost WSB Project:Design By: Danbury Way Improvement Project Project Location:Checked By: City of Rosemount City Project No.: 453 WSB Project No:Date: 1928-545/20/2015 MN/DOTEstimated ItemEstimatedEstimated Total SpecificationDescriptionUnitTotal No.Unit PriceCost No.Quantity DANBURY WAY SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS - BITUMINOUS 12021.501MOBILIZATION (5%)LUMP SUM1$70,000.00$70,000.00 22101.501CLEARINGACRE1$3,000.00$3,000.00 32101.502CLEARINGTREE30$350.00$10,500.00 42101.506GRUBBINGACRE1$3,000.00$3,000.00 52101.507GRUBBINGTREE30$350.00$10,500.00 62104.501REMOVE BITUMINOUS CURB AND GUTTERLIN FT12,500$1.25$15,625.00 72104.503REMOVE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENTSQ YD20$7.00$140.00 82104.505REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENTSQ YD21,000$3.00$63,000.00 92104.505REMOVE BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENTSQ YD1,000$5.00$5,000.00 102104.509REMOVE SIGNEACH4$30.00$120.00 112104.511SAWING CONCRETE PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH)LIN FT20$5.00$100.00 122104.513SAWING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH)LIN FT600$4.00$2,400.00 132105.501COMMON EXCAVATIONCU YD23,300$7.00$163,100.00 142105.522SELECT GRANULAR BORROW (CV)CU YD23,700$7.00$165,900.00 152105.604GEOTEXTILE FABRIC TYPE VSQ YD23,700$2.00$47,400.00 162112.501SUBGRADE PREPARATIONROAD STA63$200.00$12,600.00 172211.501AGGREGAGTE BASE CLASS 5 (100% CRUSHED)TON8,100$12.00$97,200.00 182360.501TYPE SP 12.5 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE 2,CTON2,250$62.00$139,500.00 192360.502TYPE SP 12.5 NON WEARING COURSE MIXTURE 2,CTON2,250$64.00$144,000.00 202357.502BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COATGALLON1,050$3.00$3,150.00 212360.503TYPE SP 12.5 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (2,B) 3.0'' THICKSQ YD100$30.00$3,000.00 222531.5076" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENTSQ YD460$55.00$25,300.00 232504.602IRRIGATION SYSTEM REPAIRLUMP SUM1$1,000.00$1,000.00 242540.602SALVAGE AND REINSTALL MAILBOXEACH32$100.00$3,200.00 252531.501CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN MODIFIED SLIN FT12,550$12.00$150,600.00 262563.601TRAFFIC CONTROLLUMP SUM1$5,000.00$5,000.00 272564.531SIGN PANEL TYPE CSQ FT13$35.00$455.00 282564.602SIGN PANEL TYPE DEACH2$300.00$600.00 292573.502SILT FENCE, TYPE HEAVY DUTYLIN FT12,600$1.50$18,900.00 302575.530STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTIONEACH35$150.00$5,250.00 312575.501SEEDING (INCL TOPSOIL, FERT, MULCH, DISC ANCHOR)ACRE5$1,000.00$5,000.00 322575.523EROSION CONTROL BLANKET CATETGORY 3SQ YD5,000$2.00$10,000.00 Subtotal - Danbury Way Surface Improvements (Rounded)$1,184,540.00 + 5% Contingencies$59,230.00 Subtotal (Rounded)$1,243,770.00 + 25% Indirect Cost$310,940.00 Total - Danbury Way Surface Improvements (Rounded)$1,554,700.00 K:\\01928-540\\Quantity\\Preliminary\\Feasibility Cost Estimate - Danbury Way.xlsx Opinion of Probable Cost WSB Project:Design By: Danbury Way Improvement Project Project Location:Checked By: City of Rosemount City Project No.: 453 WSB Project No:Date: 1928-545/20/2015 MN/DOTEstimated ItemEstimatedEstimated Total SpecificationDescriptionUnitTotal No.Unit PriceCost No.Quantity DANBURY WAY STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT S 332104.501REMOVE SEWER PIPE (STORM)LIN FT160$9.00$1,440.00 342104.509REMOVE DRAINAGE STRUCTUREEACH10$150.00$1,500.00 352104.509REMOVE CASTINGEACH10$100.00$1,000.00 362451.602GRANULAR FOUNDATION MATERIALTON500$10.00$5,000.00 372501.51518" RC PIPE APRON WITH TRASH GUARDEACH1$750.00$750.00 382501.51521" RC PIPE APRON WITH TRASH GUARDEACH1$1,250.00$1,250.00 392501.51524" RC PIPE APRON WITH TRASH GUARDEACH3$1,500.00$4,500.00 402502.5414" PERF PVC PIPE DRAINLIN FT3,000$6.00$18,000.00 412503.54115" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CL VLIN FT1,604$30.00$48,120.00 422503.54118" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CL IIILIN FT2,545$35.00$89,075.00 432503.54121" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CL IIILIN FT1,073$40.00$42,920.00 442503.54124" RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CL IIILIN FT212$45.00$9,540.00 452506.501CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN 48-4020LIN FT184$250.00$46,000.00 462506.501CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN 60-4020LIN FT24$280.00$6,720.00 472506.501CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN SPECIAL 1EACH14$1,250.00$17,500.00 482506.501CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN SPECIAL 2EACH3$1,251.00$3,753.00 492506.501CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN SPECIAL 3EACH2$40,000.00$80,000.00 502506.516CASTING ASSEMBLYEACH30$500.00$15,000.00 512511.501RANDOM RIPRAP CL IVCU YD100$100.00$10,000.00 522511.515GEOTEXTILE FILTER FABRIC TYPE IVSQ YD200$3.50$700.00 Subtotal- Danbury Way Storm Sewer Improvements (Rounded)$402,770.00 + 5% Contingencies$20,140.00 Subtotal (Rounded)$422,910.00 + 25% Indirect Cost$105,730.00 Total - Danbury Way Storm Sewer Improvements (Rounded)$528,600.00 K:\\01928-540\\Quantity\\Preliminary\\Feasibility Cost Estimate - Danbury Way.xlsx Opinion of Probable Cost WSB Project:Design By: Danbury Way Improvement Project Project Location:Checked By: City of Rosemount City Project No.: 453 WSB Project No:Date: 1928-5411/21/2013 MN/DOTEstimated ItemEstimatedEstimated Total SpecificationDescriptionUnitTotal No.Unit PriceCost No.Quantity DANBURY WAY SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS - CONCRETE 12021.501MOBILIZATION (5%)LUMP SUM1$90,000.00$90,000.00 22101.501CLEARINGACRE1$3,000.00$3,000.00 32101.502CLEARINGTREE30$350.00$10,500.00 42101.506GRUBBINGACRE1$3,000.00$3,000.00 52101.507GRUBBINGTREE30$350.00$10,500.00 62104.501REMOVE BITUMINOUS CURB AND GUTTERLIN FT12,500$1.25$15,625.00 72104.503REMOVE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENTSQ YD20$7.00$140.00 82104.505REMOVE BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENTSQ YD1,000$5.00$5,000.00 92104.509REMOVE SIGNEACH4$30.00$120.00 102104.511SAWING CONCRETE PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH)LIN FT20$5.00$100.00 112104.513SAWING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH)LIN FT600$4.00$2,400.00 122105.604GEOTEXTILE FABRIC TYPE VSQ YD23,700$2.00$47,400.00 132112.501SUBGRADE PREPARATIONROAD STA63$200.00$12,600.00 142211.501AGGREGAGTE BASE CLASS 5 (100% CRUSHED)TON5,000$12.00$60,000.00 152301.504CONCRETE PAVEMENT 8" SQ YD18,200$52.00$946,400.00 162301.541INTEGRANT CURB, DESIGNLIN FT12,550$10.00$125,500.00 172301.6011.25" DOWEL BAREACH11,500$8.50$97,750.00 182301.602NO 4 REINF TIE BAR (EPOXY COATED)EACH6,300$2.50$15,750.00 192331.604BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT RECLAMATION SQ YD21,000$1.75$36,750.00 202360.503TYPE SP 12.5 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (2,B) 3.0'' THICKSQ YD100$30.00$3,000.00 212531.5076" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENTSQ YD460$55.00$25,300.00 222504.602IRRIGATION SYSTEM REPAIRLUMP SUM1$1,000.00$1,000.00 232540.602SALVAGE AND REINSTALL MAILBOXEACH32$100.00$3,200.00 242563.601TRAFFIC CONTROLLUMP SUM1$5,000.00$5,000.00 252564.531SIGN PANEL TYPE CSQ FT13$35.00$455.00 262564.602SIGN PANEL TYPE DEACH2$300.00$600.00 272573.502SILT FENCE, TYPE HEAVY DUTYLIN FT12,600$1.50$18,900.00 282575.530STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTIONEACH35$150.00$5,250.00 292575.501SEEDING (INCL TOPSOIL, FERT, MULCH, DISC ANCHOR)ACRE5$1,000.00$5,000.00 302575.523EROSION CONTROL BLANKET CATETGORY 3SQ YD5,000$2.00$10,000.00 Subtotal - Danbury Way Surface Improvements (Rounded)$1,560,240 + 5% Contingencies$78,010 Subtotal (Rounded)$1,638,250 + 25% Indirect Cost$409,560 y Way Surface Improvements (Rounded)$2,047,800 Total - Danbur K:\\01928-540\\Quantity\\Preliminary\\Feasibility Cost Estimate - Danbury Way.xlsx 38) (CSAH S RD W NDREW MCA " " " " 12501 12572 12569 12502 12505 12568 12565 12509 12562 12561 12506 12510 12513 12514 12556 12557 12553 1255012517 12522 12538 12530 12526 12542 12549 12521 12545 12537 12541 12529 12533 12525 I F WAY Legend R U Storm Sewer " ± Danbury Way Improvement Project 07501,500 Feet MN550681MN550681MN550681MN550681MN550681MN550681MN550681MN550681MN550681MN550681MN550681MN550681MN550681MN550681MN550681MN550681MN550681MN550681MN550681MN550681MN550681MN550681MN550681MN550681MN55068 1MN550681MN550681MN550681MN550681MN550681MN550681MN550681 STATEZIP WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayR osemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosem ount,WayRosemount, ADDRESSCITY/ DanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDan buryDanburyDanburyDanbury ADDRESSCITY/STATEZIPPROPERTY MN5506812569MN5506812565MN5506812561MN5506812557MN5506812553MN5506812549MN5506812545MN5506812541MN5506812537MN5506812533MN5506812529MN5506812525MN5506812521MN5506812517MN5506812513MN5506812509MN55068 12505IL6206012501MN5506812572MN5506812568MN5506812562MN5506812556MN5506812550MN5506812542MN5506812538MN5506812530MN5506812526MN5506812522MN5506812514MN5506812510MN5506812506MN5506812502 WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayR osemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,393Rosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosemount,WayRosem ount, StMadison, DanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanbury DanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanburyDanbury 3rd Box INC1980 PIDOWNEROWNER ELLINGSONPO PARISH12569ROCK12565FOSTER12557HERMAN12553JOHNSON12549BRASTAD12541CARLSON12537FRANSON12533GUNDACKER12529PARRISH12525BOELTER12521GRUNTNER12517RUTOSKI12509VITEK12505DELANEY12572REED12562DAHMES12556RADT KE12550YANG12542ROIGER12522JONES12510HEFLIN12506QUARFORD12502 BRODER12561HARTLEY12545ULLERY12513BORNING12538BIEWALD12530WALDOF12526EHMER12514 GUPTON KATHRYN K MARIANNE SERVICES SUSAN CONSTANCE JA SMOAK A BRITT FOUA SHARON O D BERNICE AJ MARJORIE SHIRLEY MARJORIE MBARBARA D L ELAINE LINDA RICHARD SUSAN & JANINE RAIL ELIZABETHJ ANGELA MARY wƚƭĻƒƚǒƓƷ E ROSEMARY & C KMARY FRANSON G LAURAHARTLEY &KJ CHERYLPALYNN & M Assessment Calculation Danbury Way - Single Family Surface Improvements$1,554,700 Assessment Rate35% Total Assessment $544,145 Assessable Units32 Assessment per Unit$17,005 21340 iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ITEM PAGE NO. LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL ......................................................................................... i-ii CERTIFICATION ........................................................................................................... iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................. iv PHOTOGRAPHS OF SUBJECT ...................................................................................... v SUBJECT LOCATION MAP .......................................................................................... xi PURPOSE OF CONSULTATION ................................................................................... 1 FUNCTION OF CONSULTATION ................................................................................ 1 INTENDED USER .......................................................................................................... 1 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT ......................................................................................... 1 PROJECT LOCATION MAP ........................................................................................... 2 DESCRIPTION OF NEIGHBORHOOD ......................................................................... 4 PLAT MAP ..................................................................................................................... 7 ZONING ....................................................................................................................... 8 ZONING MAP .............................................................................................................. 9 2030 COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN MAP ........................................................ 10 SCOPE OF CONSULTATION ...................................................................................... 11 MARKET VALUE DEFINED ......................................................................................... 11 SALES COMPARISON APPROACH............................................................................. 12 RECONSTRUCTION PROJECTS FRONTING LARGER RURAL LOTS ................... 13 SAVAGE ........................................................................................................... 13 SHAKOPEE ...................................................................................................... 15 CREDIT RIVER TOWNSHIP.............................................................................. 17 INVER GROVE HEIGHTS ................................................................................. 18 LAKE ELMO ..................................................................................................... 20 ROSEMOUNT .................................................................................................. 21 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................. 23 ADDENDA EXHIBIT 1 - RESIDENTIAL SALES DATA ............................................................... 27 CONTINGENTANDLIMITINGCONDITIONS..................................................... 31 APPRAISING QUALIFICATIONS OF SHERRIL L. BRUMM ................................... 36 PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 v PHOTOGRAPHS OF SUBJECT Looking South at Danbury Way from near its Westerly Intersection with McAndrews Road Looking North at Danbury Way from near its Westerly Intersection with McAndrews Road PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 vi PHOTOGRAPHS OF SUBJECT View of Danbury Way in Westerly Portion of Subdivision View of Danbury Way in Westerly Portion of Subdivision PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 vii PHOTOGRAPHS OF SUBJECT View of Danbury Way in Westerly Portion of Subdivision View of Danbury Way in Southwesterly Portion of Subdivision PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 viii PHOTOGRAPHS OF SUBJECT View of Danbury Way in Southwesterly Portion of Subdivision View of Danbury Way in Southerly Portion of Subdivision PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 ix PHOTOGRAPHS OF SUBJECT View of Danbury Way in Southeasterly Portion of Subdivision View of Danbury Way in Easterly Portion of Subdivision PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 x PHOTOGRAPHS OF SUBJECT View of Danbury Way in Easterly Portion of Subdivision Looking North at Danbury Way from near its Easterly Intersection with McAndrews Road PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 xi LOCATION MAP PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 1 PURPOSE OF CONSULTATION The purpose of this consultation is to provide an anticipated range of special benefit for single-family residential properties in the proposed project area. FUNCTION OF CONSULTATION The intended use of this consultation is to provide guidance to the City of Rosemount in assessing the feasibility of rehabilitation/reconstruction of rural Danbury Way as part of Rosemount City Project No. 445. INTENDED USER The intended user of this consultation report is the City of Rosemount and its legal counsel. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT The following project description is based on the 2013 Street Improvement Project and 2014-2015 Street Improvement Program Feasibility Report, City Project No. 445, prepared by WSB & Associates, Inc. and referenced as WSB Project No. 1916-75. A Project Location Map is located on the following page. The 2014-2015/Beyond Street Improvement Program consists of a multi-year program for street improvements recommended by the Rosemount Pavement Management Program (PMP). The multi-year projects include sealcoats of various roadways, along with bituminous mill and overlays of Shannon Parkway, from Connemara Trail to 145 th Street, and of local streets within the Carrollton 2 nd Addition subdivision. As part of the PMP, street and utility reconstruction/rehabilitation is proposed for Danbury Way, from its west intersection with McAndrews Road to its east intersection with McAndrews Road. PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 2 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 3 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT The properties that are the subject of this report include only those properties adjacent to the rural section of Danbury Way. Therefore, the description of the project will focus on the existing condition of the rural section of Danbury Way, along with proposed improvements to this section of roadway. The rural section of Danbury Way was constructed in 1978 and is currently a 29-foot- wide rural roadway. The existing roadway is experiencing severe levels of alligator, edge, longitudinal, and traverse cracking. The roadway has also settled, reducing the ability to convey water off the existing pavement. The lack of cross slope along the roadway allows storm water to pond, causing moisture to infiltrate through the existing cracks and into the roadway subgrade. The presence of clay material in the existing roadway subgrade retains water infiltrated into the subgrade, making the roadway susceptible to frost heaves and heavy cracking. @bbnqchmf sn sgd BhsxŬr O`udldms L`m`fdldmt Plan, roads have exceeded their useful life due to severe pavement deterioration when their Overall Condition Index (OCI) falls below 30. The condition rating for Danbury Way is 0 due to the severe deterioration of the roadway. In addition, the existing storm sewer system `knmf C`matqx V`x cndr mns ldds sgd BhsxŬr current storm sewer design standards. Drainage along Danbury Way utilizes the roadway as a channel where storm water is conveyed to existing low points, and then discharged through spot storm sewer locations to existing wetlands within the project area. As previously described, standing water has been identified in areas of the roadway, and the existing storm water conveyance system is inadequate during large rain events due to lack of an emergency overflow. Due to the severity and types of distresses found in the roadway, Danbury Way is proposed for rehabilitation and full-depth reconstruction. The new roadway will be reconstructed to include 4 inches of bituminous pavement, 6 inches of aggregate base, 36 inches of select granular material, and geotextile fabric to bridge the heavy clay material found in the existing subgrade and the new sand section. Minor grade changes may be made to the roadway profile to improve drainage. PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 4 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT Concrete curb and gutter, along with concrete aprons to all driveways, are proposed to replace existing bituminous curb and gutter along the entire length of Danbury Way. Proposed storm sewer improvements include removal of the existing storm sewer facilities and installation of a new storm sewer system. The new system would collect, pretreat, and transport storm water runoff to existing wetlands located throughout the project area. Additional analysis will reportedly be completed during final design to determine the exact layout of the storm sewer required to improve drainage and prolong the life cycle of the pavement along Danbury Way. DESCRIPTION OF NEIGHBORHOOD The rural portion of the project that is the subject of this report is located in the northwestern portion of the city of Rosemount, along Danbury Way. The subject properties along Danbury Way are located within a rural single-family residential zoning district. The single-family residential properties in the subject project area generally range from approximately 25 to 35 years old, with one home constructed in 2008. These properties include one-story, two-story and split level homes with an average residential square footage of 3,442 SF. Lot sizes range from 2.89 acres to 14.16 acres, with an average land size of 5.46 acres. Overall, the average improved 2013 assessed value is approximately $468,757, and the median assessed value is $446,250. A summary grid showing the affected properties in the project area is included on the following pages. PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 5 DESCRIPTION OF NEIGHBORHOOD Affected Properties SUMMARY OF PROPERTIES IN ROSEMOUNT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT Building Assessed ValueProperty TaxesYear Land AddressBRBuiltArea Characteristicsas of January 2, 2013Payable 2013Comments Carlton D. & Linda O. RockFndtn Size:1,596519784.53 (AC)Land$214,000Net Tax$5,724.2234-48601-01-020 12565 Danbury WayFinished SF:2,8382,838197,268 (SF)Buildings$197,100Spec Asmt$0.00 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$411,100$411,100Total$5,724.22 Cathy L. & Richard A. HermanFndtn Size:1,192419784.03 (AC)Land$207,900Net Tax$5,739.3434-48601-01-050 12553 Danbury WayFinished SF:3,2163,216175,444 (SF)Buildings$207,400Spec Asmt$0.00 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$415,300$415,300Total$5,739.34 Charlene DelaneyFndtn Size:1,332319864.50 (AC)Land$162,000Net Tax$4,078.5234-48601-02-010 12572 Danbury WayFinished SF:1,9271,927195,810 (SF)Buildings$139,300Spec Asmt$0.00 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$301,300$301,300Total$4,078.52 Charles C. & M.G. ParrishFndtn Size:2,5782198114.16 (AC)Land$380,600Net Tax$9,605.4034-48601-01-120 12525 Danbury WayFinished SF:3,6163,616616,929 (SF)Buildings$283,600Spec Asmt$0.00 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$664,200$664,200Total$9,605.40 Charles J. & Mary L. UlleryFndtn Size:1,791519803.39 (AC)Land$168,100Net Tax$5,413.0634-48601-01-150 12513 Danbury WayFinished SF:3,1423,142147,648 (SF)Buildings$226,900Spec Asmt$0.00 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$395,000$395,000Total$5,413.06 Chester Ellingson III & Sharon EllingsonFndtn Size:1,864319844.17 (AC)Land$209,600Net Tax$6,050.3034-48601-02-020 Spec Asmt$0.00 12568 Danbury WayFinished SF:2,4602,460181,788 (SF)Buildings$232,200 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$441,800$441,800Total$6,050.30 Christopher & Smoak VitekFndtn Size:1,434519863.72 (AC)Land$171,800Net Tax$5,658.1634-48601-01-170 Spec Asmt$0.00 12505 Danbury WayFinished SF:3,0063,006162,107 (SF)Buildings$236,900 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$408,700$408,700Total$5,658.16 Donald C. & Bernice GruntnerFndtn Size:1,490219853.53 (AC)Land$169,700Net Tax$4,800.2834-48601-01-141 Spec Asmt$0.00 12517 Danbury WayFinished SF:2,3582,358153,694 (SF)Buildings$182,300 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$352,000$352,000Total$4,800.28 Eric C. & Elizabeth HeflinFndtn Size:1,2974198710.55 (AC)Land$260,800Net Tax$6,209.5434-48601-02-130 12506 Danbury WayFinished SF:2,7642,764459,522 (SF)Buildings$189,900Spec Asmt$0.00 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$450,700$450,700Total$6,209.54 Eric R. & Tove K. JohnsonFndtn Size:2,170419795.94 (AC)Land$231,800Net Tax$7,645.9634-48601-01-060 12549 Danbury WayFinished SF:4,6024,602258,566 (SF)Buildings$311,500Spec Asmt$35.28 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$543,300$543,300Total$7,681.24 Erik & Rosemary GundackerFndtn Size:2,128419815.50 (AC)Land$226,400Net Tax$6,776.5834-48601-01-110 12529 Danbury WayFinished SF:3,5063,506239,641 (SF)Buildings$263,000Spec Asmt$0.00 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$489,400$489,400Total$6,776.58 Gary D. & Susan Kathryn FransonFndtn Size:1,760319783.89 (AC)Land$206,200Net Tax$5,893.9034-48601-01-100 12533 Danbury WayFinished SF:3,3523,352169,483 (SF)Buildings$220,000Spec Asmt$0.00 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$426,200$426,200Total$5,893.90 Jeffrey M. & Elaine D. BorningFndtn Size:1,347419796.62 (AC)Land$240,400Net Tax$6,970.7234-48601-02-070 12538 Danbury WayFinished SF:3,2873,287288,581 (SF)Buildings$263,700Spec Asmt$0.00 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$504,100$504,100Total$6,970.72 John & Cheryl K. RutoskiFndtn Size:2,284419863.73 (AC)Land$156,200Net Tax$5,250.6034-48601-01-160 12509 Danbury WayFinished SF:4,5244,524162,457 (SF)Buildings$222,700Spec Asmt$0.00 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$378,900$378,900Total$5,250.60 John T. & Marianne K. HartleyFndtn Size:2,5304198211.84 (AC)Land$321,400Net Tax$10,222.2434-48601-01-070 12545 Danbury WayFinished SF:5,1115,111515,695 (SF)Buildings$376,700Spec Asmt$0.00 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$698,100$698,100Total$10,222.24 Joseph Scott & Britt FosterFndtn Size:2,218319794.62 (AC)Land$215,100Net Tax$6,868.7434-48601-01-040 Spec Asmt$0.00Sale: 11/10 $408,000 12557 Danbury WayFinished SF:3,7623,762201,118 (SF)Buildings$277,300 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$492,400$492,400Total$6,868.74 Karl & Carol J. BiewaldFndtn Size:1,880519815.60 (AC)Land$219,900Net Tax$8,044.1034-48601-02-080 Spec Asmt$0.00 12530 Danbury WayFinished SF:5,0675,067243,862 (SF)Buildings$346,300 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$566,200$566,200Total$8,044.10 Laura E. & Kevin J. BroderFndtn Size:2,426519884.59 (AC)Land$214,800Net Tax$10,057.5234-48601-01-030 Spec Asmt$0.00Sale: 9/12 $813,000 12561 Danbury WayFinished SF:5,4505,450199,745 (SF)Buildings$472,300 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$687,100$687,100Total$10,057.52Sale: 9/01 $800,000 N. Fangky & Foua J. YangFndtn Size:1,854519883.40 (AC)Land$199,900Net Tax$7,556.8834-48601-02-060 12542 Danbury WayFinished SF:4,7244,724147,984 (SF)Buildings$336,900Spec Asmt$0.00Sale: 12/11 $524,900 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$536,800$536,800Total$7,556.88 PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 6 DESCRIPTION OF NEIGHBORHOOD Affected Properties SUMMARY OF PROPERTIES IN ROSEMOUNT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT Building Assessed ValueProperty TaxesYear Land AddressBRBuiltArea Characteristicsas of January 2, 2013Payable 2013Comments Loren E. & Marjorie A. CarlsonFndtn Size:1,784419834.35 (AC)Land$211,900Net Tax$6,702.5634-48601-01-090 12537 Danbury WayFinished SF:3,2563,256189,375 (SF)Buildings$271,700Spec Asmt$0.00 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$483,600$483,600Total$6,702.56 Luverne L. & Marilyn RadtkeFndtn Size:1,388419784.59 (AC)Land$180,900Net Tax$4,480.6834-48601-02-050 12550 Danbury WayFinished SF:2,6162,616199,759 (SF)Buildings$146,100Spec Asmt$0.00 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$327,000$327,000Total$4,480.68 Mark O. & Marjorie WaldorfFndtn Size:1,204319802.89 (AC)Land$163,700Net Tax$4,672.0034-48601-02-090 12526 Danbury WayFinished SF:2,4582,458125,964 (SF)Buildings$179,700Spec Asmt$0.00 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$343,400$343,400Total$4,672.00 Mark W. & Mary J. QuarfordFndtn Size:1,664319885.78 (AC)Land$191,700Net Tax$4,790.4834-48601-02-140 12502 Danbury WayFinished SF:2,5542,554251,860 (SF)Buildings$206,800Spec Asmt$0.00 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$398,500$398,500Total$4,790.48 Michael & Barbara JonesFndtn Size:2,920420084.29 (AC)Land$206,400Net Tax$10,714.8634-48601-02-120 12510 Danbury WayFinished SF:5,0235,023186,711 (SF)Buildings$510,900Spec Asmt$0.00 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$717,300$717,300Total$10,714.86 Mid-America Rail Services, Inc.Fndtn Size:1,454319864.59 (AC)Land$162,800Net Tax$7,457.0434-48601-01-180 12501 Danbury WayFinished SF:3,6263,626199,824 (SF)Buildings$366,800Spec Asmt$0.00Sale: 9/03 $445,000 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$529,600$529,600Total$7,457.04 Pat & Linda ReedFndtn Size:1,204419794.96 (AC)Land$219,500Net Tax$5,112.8034-48601-02-030 12562 Danbury WayFinished SF:2,3422,342216,012 (SF)Buildings$154,800Spec Asmt$0.00 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$374,300$374,300Total$5,112.80 Ronald A. & Susan J. RoigerFndtn Size:1,866519815.82 (AC)Land$253,400Net Tax$7,810.4634-48601-02-100 12522 Danbury WayFinished SF:4,6924,692253,503 (SF)Buildings$221,600Spec Asmt$0.00 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$475,000$475,000Total$7,810.46 Ronald R. & Constance BrastadFndtn Size:1,614319797.95 (AC)Land$257,200Net Tax$6,967.9234-48601-01-080 12541 Danbury WayFinished SF:3,2883,288346,403 (SF)Buildings$244,600Spec Asmt$0.00 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$501,800$501,800Total$6,967.92 Terry O. & Bette A. NobleFndtn Size:N/AN/AN/A0.57 (AC)Land$5,800Net Tax$94.5234-48601-01-142 Address UnassignedFinished SF:N/AN/A25,014 (SF)Buildings$0Spec Asmt$0.00 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$5,800$5,800Total$94.52 Terry O. & Bette A. NobleFndtn Size:N/AN/AN/A6.66 (AC)Land$223,400Net Tax$3,652.0234-48601-01-130 Address UnassignedFinished SF:N/AN/A290,072 (SF)Buildings$0Spec Asmt$0.00 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$223,400$223,400Total$3,652.02 Wayne D. & Janine M. DahmesFndtn Size:1,730419824.78 (AC)Land$217,200Net Tax$5,702.3834-48601-02-040 12556 Danbury WayFinished SF:3,0423,042208,241 (SF)Buildings$193,700Spec Asmt$0.00 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$410,900$410,900Total$5,702.38 William R. & Shirley ParishFndtn Size:915219814.17 (AC)Land$188,600Net Tax$4,612.8634-48601-01-010 12569 Danbury WayFinished SF:1,6591,659181,714 (SF)Buildings$150,100Spec Asmt$0.00 Rosemount, MinnesotaTotal$338,700$338,700Total$4,612.86 MEAN:3,44241983$446,622 MEDIAN:3,27241981$434,000 PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 7 PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 8 ZONING Zoning is administered by the City of Rosemount. As depicted on the Zoning Map and 2030 Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map located on the following pages, the properties in the subject project area are zoned and guided RR, Rural Residential. The purpose of sgd Qtq`k Qdrhcdmsh`k Ynmhmf Chrsqhbs hr Ůsn oqovide for a large lot rural residential lifestyle which is separate from and not in conflict with commercial agricultural activities. Within this district, public sewer and water systems are not available and on site systems shall ldds sgd BhsxŬr lhmhltl qdpthqdldmsr-ů Following is a list of permitted uses within the RR District. These examples are not meant to illustrate the only establishments intended to be covered Commercial horse stables (on lots not less than 20 acres) Essential service facilities, except electrical substations and switching substations Keeping of horses Single-family detached dwellings Conditional uses in the RR District requiring a conditional use permit include churches and places of worship, commercial greenhouses and landscape nurseries, golf courses, kennels, and public parks. Lot requirements within the RR District are as follows. Minimum Lot Area: 2.5 Acres (Platted)/5.0 Acres (Unplatted) Minimum Lot Width: 200 Feet (Platted)/300 Feet (Unplatted) Maximum Gross Density: One dwelling unit per 5 acres Setback Requirements Front Yard 40 Feet Rear Yard 30 Feet Side Yard 30 Feet The single-family residential properties within the subject project area are platted lots in LhbjdkrnmŬr Rdbnmc @cchshnm+ `mc `ppear to be conforming uses. PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 9 PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 10 PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 11 SCOPE OF CONSULTATION In order to estimate special benefit from the rehabilitation/reconstruction of rural Danbury Way, the following methodology was employed. 1.Researched other reconstruction projects in various cities throughout the metropolitan area. Projects researched include reconstruction of rural sections of roadway in areas with larger, single-family lots. 2. Investigated sales that sold before and after the reconstruction projects occurred, in order to isolate benefit from each particular project. 3. After investigating the above sales, and adjusting the sales for market conditions, the sales that occurred before the reconstruction project were compared to sales that occurred after the project was completed. 4. The multiple indications were then reconciled into an anticipated range of special benefit for single-family residential properties in the proposed project area. MARKET VALUE DEFINED Market value as utilized in this appraisal report conforms to the following definition obtained from Pages 122-123 of The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Fifth Edition. The most probable price that a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller each acting prudently and knowledgeably, and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby: 1. Buyer and seller are typically motivated; 2. Both parties are well informed or well advised, and acting in what they consider their best interests; 3. A reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market; 4. Payment is made in terms of cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto; and 5. The price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concession granted by anyone associated with the sale. PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 12 MARKET VALUE DEFINED Unless otherwise noted in the appraisal report, market value shall represent cash equivalent terms where the seller receives all cash for their interest. The property may be financed at typical market terms under this definition. The above definition describes market value as an exchange concept. According to The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Fifth Edition, at Page 206, value in exchange is cdehmdc `r sgd Ů`ssqhatshnm ne u`ktd sn fnncr or services based on what can be obtained for them in exchange for other goods and sequhbdr-ů L`qjds u`ktd `r `m `ooq`hr`k concept is a type of exchange value. SALES COMPARISON APPROACH The sales comparison approach to value examines the sale prices of other properties similar to the before and after conditions of the subject project area that have sold in the marketplace. This approach is good evidence of value because it represents the activities and reactions of sellers, users and investors as they respond to the marketplace. The theory behind the sales comparison approach is based on the "principle of substitution," which implies that a prudent person will not pay more to buy or rent a property than it will cost to buy or rent a comparable substitute property. The validity of this approach is based on the assumption that continuity exists between similar properties of like adequacy and their market values. The reliability of this technique is dependent upon the availability of sales data and the degree of comparability of the sales studied. To apply this approach to the subject rural Danbury Way area, information has been sought on similar reconstruction projects located in single-family residential areas. Since the function of this consultation is to estimate the level of special benefit resulting from reconstruction/rehabilitation of bituminous surfaced streets, sales have been selected that occurred both before and after similar projects in other communities. PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 13 SALES COMPARISON APPROACH Introduction For the purpose of this consultation, several cities were contacted to inquire about recent reconstruction projects that took place along residential streets. The focus was on reconstruction projects of rural sections of roadway. Since the lot sizes in the subject project area range from 2.89 to 14.16 acres, with an average lot size of 5.46 acres, we researched reconstruction/rehabilitation of rural sections of roadways in areas with larger, single-family lots. This analysis will examine special benefit to single-family residential properties, which will then be correlated to the subject project area. Several projects have been identified with before and after sales that are relevant to this analysis. The comparable reconstruction projects are summarized on the following pages. Reconstruction Projects Fronting Larger Rural Lots Research of reconstruction/rehabilitation projects of rural sections of roadway similar to the subject project and fronting larger lots revealed projects in Savage, Shakopee, Credit River Township, Inver Grove Heights, Lake Elmo and Rosemount. Savage A 2004 Street Improvement Project in the city of Savage included both a mill and overlay of roadways fronting small, urban single-family lots, along with the total reconstruction of rural sections of road. Although the properties located along the rural sections of roadway are served with public utilities, the lot sizes of the properties analyzed on the following page average approximately 0.70 acres in size, and the roadways are rural in design. In addition, the 2004 project did not include utility work. The reconstruction portion of this project occurred along 132nd Street West, Glendale Lane, Glendale Road, and Glendale Trail. After researching this project, four sales were found before the project, and four sales were found that occurred after the project was completed. These sales are summarized on the following page. PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 14 SALES COMPARISON APPROACH Reconstruction Projects Fronting Larger Rural Lots Savage Savage 2004 Reconstruction Project DateLandFinishedSale Sale Price Improved Saleof SaleSizeSFPriceAdj. for Time Sales After Project 113560 Glendale TrailMay-090.60 AC2,552$300,000$357,120 213640 Glendale TrailMar-071.53 AC2,377$312,500$316,938 313240 Glendale LaneFeb-070.46 AC2,540$261,000$265,646 413805 Glendale TrailJun-060.27 AC1,769$236,000$243,222 After Project AveragesJul-070.72 AC2,310$277,375$295,732 Sales Before Project 113805 Glendale TrailOct-010.27 AC1,769$184,900$222,712 213309 Glendale LaneJun-010.46 AC1,810$170,300$210,627 313800 Glendale TrailSep-000.44 AC2,862$240,000$320,496 413632 Glendale TrailOct-991.50 AC1,735$267,500$399,939 Before Project AveragesNov-000.67 AC2,044$215,675$288,444 After Project:= $295,732 Before Project:= $288,444 Indicated Benefit:$7,288 2.53% In order to isolate benefit, the before project sale prices must be trended for changes in market conditions. Residential sales data from 1998 through 2010, excluding new construction, has been extracted using the Multiple Listing Service (MLS) in order to estimate changes in real estate prices. A summary of this sales data can be found in the Addenda to this report as Exhibit 1, and was the basis for the market conditions adjustments applied to the projects analyzed in Savage, Shakopee and Credit River Township. After the appreciation adjustment, the before comparables indicate an average sale price of $288,444. This can now be compared to the average adjusted sale prices for the sales after the reconstruction project. PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 15 SALES COMPARISON APPROACH Reconstruction Projects Fronting Larger Rural Lots Savage Percentage of Average Project Year: 2004 Market Value Lot Size Sale Price After the Project: $295,732 0.72 Ac Sale Price Before the Project: $288,444 0.67 Ac Indicated Special Benefit: $ 7,288 2.53% This Savage study indicates a special benefit of $7,288 for a complete rural road reconstruction project along larger, urban single-family properties, which is 2.53% of the average market value before the project. The land sizes and home sizes are relatively similar for the sales studied before and after the project occurred. However, the lots are significantly smaller than the lots in the subject project area, and the values of the homes are also significantly less than in the subject area. Therefore, the special benefit indication of $7,288 likely understates special benefit for the properties located in the subject project area. In addition to the preceding study, the property at 13805 Glendale Trail sold both before and after the road reconstruction project and indicates a benefit of $20,510, or 9.2% of its adjusted sale price before the project. However, each market transaction varies according to motivations of and negotiations between individual participants, and the overall comparison of sales that occur before the project to sales that occur after the project is best derived from an overall comparison of sales within a project area. Shakopee In 2008, a road project took place in Shakopee that consisted of a rural road reclamation project, including sub-grade reconstruction. The reconstructed roads included Eaglewood Lane, Eaglewood Circle, Eaglewood Drive, Bridge Spur, and Bridge Crossing, with properties in the project area that are approximately two to three acres in size. After researching this project, two residential sales were found after the project, which can be compared to two residential sales that occurred before the project. A summary grid of these sales is located on the following page. PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 16 SALES COMPARISON APPROACH Reconstruction Projects Fronting Larger Rural Lots Shakopee Shakopee 2008 Rural Street Improvement Project (Eaglewood) DateLandFinishedSale Sale Price Improved Saleof SaleSizeSFPriceAdj. for Time Sales After Project 12063 Bridge CrossingOct-101.29 AC3,504$295,000$307,508 22044 Eaglewood DriveSep-082.85 AC2,943$364,600$323,473 After Project AveragesSep-092.07 AC3,224$329,800$315,491 Sales Before Project 12044 Eaglewood DriveSep-072,943$343,500$278,475 2.85 AC 22080 Eaglewood LaneJul-053,140$439,900$354,515 3.21 AC Before Project AveragesAug-063.03 AC3,042$391,700$316,495 After Project:= $323,473 Before Project:= $316,495 Indicated Benefit:$6,978 2.20% After the appreciation adjustment, the before comparables indicate an average sale price of $316,495. This can now be compared to the average adjusted sale price for the sales after the reconstruction project. Percentage of Average Project Year: 2008 Market Value Lot Size Sale Price After the Project: $323,473 2.07 Ac Sale Price Before the Project: $316,495 3.03 Ac Indicated Special Benefit: $ 6,978 2.20% This Shakopee study indicates a special benefit of $6,978 for a rural road reclamation project along larger, rural single-family properties, which is 2.20% of the average market value before the project. In this particular case, the average lot size for the properties that sold after the project is smaller than for the properties that sold before the project. Therefore, this analysis likely understates special benefit to the properties in the subject project area. PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 17 SALES COMPARISON APPROACH Reconstruction Projects Fronting Larger Rural Lots Shakopee It is also noted that the property located at 2044 Eaglewood Drive sold both before and after the project, resulting in an indicated special benefit of $44,998. This indication of benefit is 16.2% of its adjusted sale price before the project, and appears to be an outlier. Credit River Township Data was also available to analyze a road reconstruction project that occurred in Credit River Township in 2004. The reconstructed roads included portions of France Boulevard, France Court, and Frontier Lane, with properties in the project area that are approximately five acres in size. After researching this project, one residential sale was found after the project, which can be compared to three residential sales that occurred before the project. The sales are summarized below. Credit River 2004 Reconstruction Project DateLandFinishedSale Sale Price Improved Saleof SaleSizeSFPriceAdj. for Time Sales After Project 19936 France CourtOct-095.04 AC2,090$332,000$332,000 Sales Before Project 121570 France BoulevardAug-035.00 AC2,220$325,500$291,030 29746 France CourtApr-024.11 AC3,848$386,500$352,102 321681 France BoulevardJun-995.00 AC3,652$267,700$330,636 Before Project AveragesOct-014.70 AC3,240$326,567$324,589 After Project:= $332,000 Before Project:= $324,589 Indicated Benefit:$7,411 2.28% PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 18 SALES COMPARISON APPROACH Reconstruction Projects Fronting Larger Rural Lots Credit River Township After the appreciation adjustment, the before comparables indicate an average sale price of $324,589. This can now be compared to the average adjusted sale prices for the sales after the reconstruction project. Percentage of Average Project Year: 2004 Market Value Lot Size Sale Price After the Project: $332,000 5.04 Ac Sale Price Before the Project: $324,589 4.70 Ac Indicated Special Benefit: $ 7,411 2.28% This Credit River Township study indicates a special benefit of $7,411 for a rural road reconstruction project along larger, rural single-family properties, which is 2.28% of the average market value before the project. Given significant differences in home sizes before versus after the project, this $7,411 indication of special benefit may understate benefit from this road reconstruction project. Inver Grove Heights A road reconstruction project was completed in Inver Grove Heights in 2005 along Albavar Path, from Akron Avenue East to Cliff Road, and along 112th Court West. This project was a reclamation, including an aggregate base and shoulders, along with bituminous paving, grading, and drainage improvements. As previously described, in order to isolate benefit, the sale prices of properties in the project area are trended for changes in market conditions, and are trended to the average after sale price. Residential sales data, excluding new construction, has been extracted for Dakota County using the Multiple Listing Service (MLS) for the years 1998 through 2012. A summary of this sales data can be found in the Addenda to this report as Exhibit 1, and was the basis for the market conditions adjustments applied to the project analyzed in Inver Grove Heights and Rosemount. After researching this project, four residential sales were found after the project, which can be compared to five residential sales that occurred before the project. The sales are summarized on the following page. PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 19 SALES COMPARISON APPROACH Reconstruction Projects Fronting Larger Rural Lots Inver Grove Heights Inver Grove Heights 2005 Rural Road Reconstruction Analysis DateLandFinishedSale Sale Price Improved Saleof SaleSizeSFPriceAdj. for Time Sales After Project 111895 Albavar PathOct-105.11 Ac2,875$330,000$347,160 211380 Albavar PathApr-105.00 Ac2,648$361,000$377,462 311960 Albavar PathApr-095.08 Ac2,842$368,000$356,040 41638 112th Court W.Jun-082.72 Ac3,239$415,000$364,246 After Project AveragesAug-094.48 Ac2,901$368,500$361,227 Sales Before Project 111145 Albavar PathNov-042.50 Ac2,806$400,000$336,400 211945 Albavar PathJul-025.01 Ac2,480$320,000$301,501 311330 Albavar PathJul-025.01 Ac3,293$405,000$381,591 411183 Albavar PathJun-022.50 Ac3,050$419,900$395,126 511380 Albavar PathJul-015.00 Ac2,648$359,900$353,314 Before Project AveragesSep-024.00 Ac2,855$380,960$353,586 After Project:= $361,227 Before Project:= $353,586 Indicated Benefit:$7,641 2.16% After the appreciation adjustment, the before comparables indicate an average sale price of $353,586. This can now be compared to the average adjusted sale prices for the sales after the reconstruction project. Percentage of Average Project Year: 2005 Market Value Lot Size Sale Price After the Project: $361,227 4.48 Ac Sale Price Before the Project: $353,586 4.00 Ac Indicated Special Benefit: $ 7,641 2.16% This Inver Grove Heights study indicates a special benefit of $7,641 for a rural road reconstruction project along larger, rural single-family properties, which is 2.16% of the PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 20 SALES COMPARISON APPROACH Reconstruction Projects Fronting Larger Rural Lots Inver Grove Heights average market value before the project. The land sizes and home sizes are similar for the sales studied before and after the project occurred. Therefore, the $7,641 indication of special benefit is a good indicator of special benefit for this road reconstruction project. In addition to the preceding study, the property at 11380 sold both before and after the road reconstruction project and indicates a benefit of $24,148, or 6.8% of its adjusted sale price before the project. However, as summarized previously, the $7,641 indication of benefit derived from an aggregate comparison of sales before and after the project is also considered a reliable indicator of benefit for this reconstruction project. Lake Elmo A road reconstruction project was completed in Lake Elmo in 2005 along Hilltop Avenue North, in an area of rural home sites. After researching this project, two residential sales were found after the project, which can be compared to three residential sales that occurred before the project. The sales are summarized as follows: ject Lake Elmo 2005 Reconstruction Pro DateLandFinishedSale Sale Price Improved Saleof SaleSizeSFPriceAdj. for Time Sales After Project 15460 Hilltop Avenue NMay-061.01 AC2,554$379,900$379,368 25171 Hilltop Avenue NFeb-061.27 AC3,218$460,000$460,322 After Project AveragesMar-061.14 AC2,886$419,950$419,845 Sales Before Project 15201 Hilltop Avenue NOct-031.35 AC3,300$395,000$440,504 25291 Hilltop Avenue NMar-011.08 AC2,691$310,000$393,669 35111 Hilltop Avenue NJul-001.08 AC3,060$290,000$391,355 Before Project AveragesOct-011.17 AC3,017$331,667$408,509 After Project:= $419,845 Before Project:= $408,509 Indicated Benefit:$11,336 2.77% PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 21 SALES COMPARISON APPROACH Reconstruction Projects Fronting Larger Rural Lots Lake Elmo The sale prices of properties in the project area were trended for market conditions based on residential sales data, excluding new construction, for Washington County using the Multiple Listing Service (MLS) for the years 1998 through 2010. A summary of this sales data can be found in the Addenda to this report as Exhibit 1, and was the basis for the market conditions adjustments for Lake Elmo. After the appreciation adjustment, the before comparables indicate an average sales price of $408,509. This can now be compared to the average adjusted sale prices for the sales after the reconstruction project. Percentage of Average Project Year: 2005 Market Value Lot Size Sale Price After the Project: $419,845 1.14 Ac Sale Price Before the Project: $408,509 1.17 Ac Indicated Special Benefit: $ 11,336 2.77% This Lake Elmo study indicates a special benefit of $11,336 for a rural road reconstruction project along larger, rural single-family properties, which is 2.77% of the average market value before the project. The land sizes and home sizes are similar for the sales studied before and after the project occurred. In addition, the home values in the Lake Elmo reconstruction area are most similar to those in the subject Danbury Way area. Therefore, the $11,336 indication of special benefit is a good indicator of special benefit for this reconstruction project. Rosemount A road rehabilitation/reconstruction project was completed along Shannon Parkway in Rosemount in 2010, in an area of rural home sites. After researching this project, one residential sale was found after the project, which can be compared to two residential sales that occurred before the project. The sales are summarized on the following page. PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 22 SALES COMPARISON APPROACH Reconstruction Projects Fronting Larger Rural Lots Rosemount Rosemount 2010 Rural Reconstruction Analysis DateLandFinishedSale Sale Price Improved Saleof SaleSizeSFPriceAdj. for Time Sales After Project 112931 Shannon ParkwayJun-127.07 Ac3,530$540,000$535,302 After Project AveragesJun-127.07 Ac3,530$540,000$535,302 Sales Before Project 112720 Shannon ParkwayJul-074.24 Ac3,855$730,000$525,746 212930 Shannon ParkwayJan-054.27 Ac4,058$655,000$481,098 Before Project AveragesApr-064.26 Ac3,957$692,500$503,422 After Project:= $535,302 Before Project:= $503,422 Indicated Benefit:$31,880 6.33% After the appreciation adjustment, the before comparables indicate an average sale price of $503,422. This can now be compared to the average adjusted sale price for the sales after the reconstruction project. Percentage of Average Project Year: 2010 Market Value Lot Size Sale Price After the Project: $535,302 7.07 Ac Sale Price Before the Project: $503,422 4.26 Ac Indicated Special Benefit: $ 31,880 6.33% This Rosemount study indicates a special benefit of $31,880 for a rural road reconstruction project along larger, rural single-family properties, which is 6.33% of the average market value before the project. The land sizes and home sizes are not PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 23 SALES COMPARISON APPROACH Reconstruction Projects Fronting Larger Rural Lots Rosemount homogeneous for the sales studied before and after the project occurred. Therefore, reliability of the Rosemount analysis is reduced. While the Rosemount project analyzed in this consultation has weaknesses, the indication of special benefit from the Rosemount project is supportive of special benefit to the subject properties in the Danbury Way project area. Conclusion The function of this appraisal is to estimate the level of special benefit resulting from the rehabilitation/reconstruction of Danbury Way, from its west intersection with McAndrews Road to its east intersection with McAndrews Road. As part of the project, a new storm sewer system is also proposed. The six comparable reconstruction projects analyzed in this consultation are summarized as follows: Average Market Indication of Percentage of Avg. Land Value Before Project Special Benefit Market Value Size Savage 2004 $288,444 $7,288 2.53% 0.69 Ac Shakopee 2008 $316,495 $6,978 2.20% 2.55 Ac Credit River 2004 $324,589 $7,411 2.28% 4.79 Ac Inver Grove Hts. 2005 $353,586 $7,641 2.16% 4.21 Ac Lake Elmo 2005 $408,509 $11,336 2.77% 1.16 Ac Rosemount 2010 $503,422 $31,880 6.33% 5.19 Ac These projects indicate a range of special benefit from $6,978 to $31,880, with an average indication of $12,089. Alternatively, the indications of benefit range from 2.16% to 6.33%, with an average of 3.05%, of the average market value before the reconstruction project. Excluding the Rosemount analysis, these projects indicate a range of special benefit from $6,978 to $11,336, with an average indication of $8,131. Alternatively, the indications PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 24 SALES COMPARISON APPROACH Conclusion of benefit range from 2.16% to 2.77%, with an average of 2.39%, of the average market value before the reconstruction project. In addition, the average lot sizes range from 0.69 to 5.19 acres, and the average market values before the project range from $288,444 to $503,422. As stated previously, the single-family residential properties located within the subject project area have an average 2013 assessed market value of $468,757 and an average lot size of 5.46 acres. The single-family properties in the Credit River, Inver Grove Heights and Rosemount reconstruction areas have land sizes most similar to the subject project area. Although the average land size in the Lake Elmo project area is smaller than that of the subject, the average market value of the properties in the Lake Elmo and Rosemount project areas is most similar to the average assessed value of the properties in the subject project area. In addition, as previously described, the indicated special benefit from the Savage, Shakopee and Credit River Township projects likely understates special benefit to the subject properties. Therefore, the indicated special benefit as a percentage of market value likely understates special benefit to properties in the subject project area. Conversely, the indicated special benefit from the 2010 Rosemount project likely overstates benefit to the subject properties, and the indicated special benefit from this comparable project as a percentage of market value likely overstates special benefit to the subject properties. Given that Danbury Way is in very poor condition, with an OCI index of zero, special benefit to the subject properties will likely fall in the upper end of, or slightly above, the range of special benefit indicated by the comparable projects analyzed in this consultation. Given lot sizes and values of the subject properties, along with the reported condition of the street improvements, we conclude to a range of anticipated special benefit of $11,000 to $12,500 per unit for the subject residential properties. This equates to 2.35% to 2.67% of the 2013 median assessed market value of the subject properties. PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 25 SALES COMPARISON APPROACH Conclusion As a check of reasonableness, we have also investigated the benefit of paving (from a gravel surface) to 2.50- to 5.00-acre building sites. Based on previous analyses that are retained in our files, the observed benefit of gravel to paved roadways for larger residential building sites typically ranges from approximately $11,000 to $13,000 for 2.50- to 5.00-acre building sites. Also based on previous studies, single-family properties on 10- to 15-acre building sites may realize a special benefit of $15,000 or more when roadways are reconstructed from a gravel to a bituminous surface. While the subject street surfaces are paved in the before condition, they are in very poor condition. Therefore, the estimated benefit of $11,000 to $12,500 for the subject project area appears reasonable. PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 26 ADDENDA PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 27 EXHIBIT 1 Residential Sales Data (Pages 28-30) PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 28 OVERALL APPRECIATION 1998-2010 () Shakopee, Prior Lake, Savae, Credit River Township & Sprin Lake Township gg Number of PropertiesAverageAverage AnnualMonthly YeaSoldSFSales PricePrice/SFAppreciationAppreciation r 20107282,468$259,256$105.05 -0.09%-0.0075% 20098472,487$261,493$105.14 -12.03%-1.0025% 20087492,441$291,760$119.52 -10.61%-0.8842% 20077642,441$326,390$133.71 -4.21%-0.3508% 20068242,346$327,471$139.59 -1.53%-0.1275% 200511272,278$322,931$141.76 7.83%0.6525% 200411242,305$303,031$131.47 5.56%0.4633% 275,000124.55 200311712,208 $$ 5.77%0.4808% 248,951117.76 200211142,114 $$ 1.70%0.1417% 231,921115.79 200110572,003 $$ 8.19%0.6825% 214,675107.02 20009142,006 $$ 13.72%1.1433% 183,23694.11 19999601,947 $$ 11.80%0.9833% 162,72684.18 199810181,933 $$ PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 29 OVERALL APPRECIATION 1998-2012 () Dakota Count y Number of PropertiesAverageAverage AnnualMonthly YeaSoldSFSales PricePrice/SFAppreciationAppreciation r 201235662,322220,32694.89 $$ 3.74%0.3117% 201130252,295209,92591.47 $$ -8.00%-0.6667% 201025302,317230,35599.42 $$ -1.23%-0.1025% 200929852,198221,258100.66 $$ -9.74%-0.8117% 200827532,259251,933111.52 $$ -11.90%-0.9917% 200728552,247284,425126.58 $$ -3.73%-0.3108% 200632652,254296,371131.49 $$ -0.48%-0.0400% 200540472,230294,623132.12 $$ 4.47%0.3725% 200442612,164273,677126.47 $$ 6.70%0.5583% 200343742,166256,738118.53 $$ 7.02%0.5850% 200241172,120234,801110.76 $$ -1.58%-0.1317% 200138351,947219,121112.54 $$ 10.04%0.8367% 200034351,925196,874102.27 $$ 8.76%0.7300% 199936891,892177,90194.03 $$ 11.11%0.9258% 199842321,882159,27984.63 $$ PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 30 OVERALL APPRECIATION 1998-2010 () Washinton Count gy Number of PropertiesAverageAverage AnnualMonthly YeaSoldSFSales PricePrice/SFAppreciationAppreciation r 201017632,386$255,997$107.29 1.14%0.0950% 200919242,306$244,625$106.08 -12.62%-1.0517% 200817472,360$286,495$121.40 -10.57%-0.8808% 200717152,285$310,187$135.75 -4.96%-0.4133% 200620012,247$320,957$142.84 0.84%0.0700% 200524432,257$319,699$141.65 3.32%0.2767% 200425522,218$304,083$137.10 6.50%0.5417% 200325182,162$278,325$128.73 4.85%0.4042% 200224702,129$261,391$122.78 2.04%0.1700% 200123731,965$236,455$120.33 9.26%0.7717% 200023281,976$217,610$110.13 9.55%0.7958% 199922841,878$188,797$100.53 8.40%0.7000% 199823561,858$172,305$92.74 PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 31 CONTINGENT AND LIMITING CONDITIONS (Pages 32-34) PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 32 CONTINGENT AND LIMITING CONDITIONS The value estimates and conclusions in the appraisal are made subject to these assumptions and conditions: 1. No title search has been made and the reader should consult an appropriate attorney or title insurance company for accurate ownership data. Title to the property is assumed to be good and marketable unless otherwise stated. 2. The legal description, furnished or otherwise, is assumed to be correct. No responsibility is assumed for the legal description or for matters including legal or title considerations. 3. The information contained in this report is not guaranteed, but it has been gathered from reliable sources. The appraiser certifies that, to the best of his knowledge and belief, the statements, information and materials contained in the appraisal are correct. 4. All value estimates in this report assume stable soil and any necessary soil corrections are to be made at the seller's expense, unless otherwise noted. 5. The site plan, if any, in this report is included to assist the reader in visualizing the property. I have made no survey of the property and assume no responsibility for its accuracy. 6. The market value herein assigned is based on conditions which were appli- cable as of the effective date of appraisal, unless otherwise noted. 7. The appraiser herein shall not be required to prepare for, or appear in court, or before any board or governmental body by the reason of the completion of this assignment without predetermined arrangements and agreements. 8. Surveys, plans and sketches may have been provided in this report. They may not be complete or be drawn exactly to scale. 9. Possession of this report, or a copy thereof, does not carry with it the right of publication. It may not be used for any purpose by any person, other than the party to whom it is addressed, without the written consent of the appraiser, and in any event only with properly written qualification and only in its entirety. 10. Information in the appraisal relating to comparable market data is more fully documented in the confidential file in the office of the appraiser. PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 33 CONTINGENT AND LIMITING CONDITIONS (Continued) 11. All studies and field notes will be secured in our files for future reference. 12. It is assumed that all applicable zoning and use regulations and restrictions have been complied with, unless a non-conformity has been stated, defined and considered in the appraisal report. And, it is assumed that the utilization of the land and improvements is within the boundaries or property lines of the property described and that there is no encroachment or trespass unless noted within the report. 13. The distribution of the total valuation in this report between land and improvements, if stated, applies only under the reported highest and best use of the property. The allocations of value for land and improvements must not be used in conjunction with any other appraisal and are invalid if so used. 14. It is assumed that there is full compliance with all applicable federal, state and local environmental regulations and laws unless non-compliance is stated, defined and considered in the appraisal report. 15. The appraiser was not aware of the presence of soil contamination on the subject property, unless otherwise noted in this appraisal report. The effect upon market value, due to contamination was not considered in this appraisal, unless otherwise stated. 16. The appraiser was not aware of the presence of asbestos or other toxic contaminants in the building(s), unless otherwise noted in this report. The effect upon market value, due to contamination was not considered in this appraisal, unless otherwise stated. 17. Unless otherwise stated in this report, the existence of hazardous material, which may or may not be present on the property, was not observed by the appraiser. The appraiser has no knowledge of the existence of such materials on or in the property. The appraiser, however, is not qualified to detect such substances. The value estimate is predicated on the assumption that there is no such material on or in the property that would cause a loss in value. No responsibility is assumed for any such conditions, or for any expertise or engineering knowledge required to discover them. The client is urged to retain an expert in this field, if desired. 18. The value stated in this report is fee simple, assuming responsible owner- ship and management, unless otherwise indicated. This appraisal recog- nizes that available financing is a major consideration by typical purchasers of real estate in the market, and the appraisal assumes that financing is or was made available to purchasers of property described herein. 19. The appraiser has neither present nor contemplated interest in the property appraised and employment is not contingent upon the value reported. PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 34 CONTINGENT AND LIMITING CONDITIONS (Continued) 20. Unless otherwise stated in this report, the appraisers have not made a survey or analysis to determine whether the property is in compliance with "The Americans with Disabilities Act" (ADA). If the property is not in compliance with the ADA, it could have a negative effect on the value of the property. 21. The property is appraised free and clear of any or all liens or encumbrances unless otherwise stated. PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 35 APPRAISER QUALIFICATIONS (Pages 36-37) PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 36 QUALIFICATIONS OF SHERRIL L. BRUMM PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS MAI Member, Appraisal Institute Certified General Real Property Appraiser, State of Minnesota, License No. 20249948 Member of MNCREW, Minnesota Commercial Real Estate Women BUSINESS EXPERIENCE Patchin Messner Dodd & Brumm, Principal, 2011 to Present Patchin Messner & Dodd, 2001 to 2011 Patchin Messner Appraisals, Inc., 1998 to 2000 Kelly Appraisal Services, Staff Appraiser, 1995-1996 Valuation Counselors, Inc., Staff Appraiser, 1986-1989 United States Army Reserve, 1983-1989 Mid America Title Company, 1981-1984 EDUCATIONAL WORK Bachelor of Science Degree, Northern Illinois University, majored in Finance, minored in Economics; graduated Magna Cum Laude, 1986 SPECIALIZED REAL ESTATE Appraisal Institute/American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers Course Work: TRAINING Real Estate Appraisal Principles Basic Valuation Procedures Residential Case Study Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice Basic Income Capitalization Advanced Income Capitalization Highest & Best Use and Market Analysis Advanced Sales Comparison and Cost Approaches Report Writing and Valuation Analysis Advanced Applications Business Practice and Ethics Litigation Appraising: Specialized Topics and Applications The Appraiser as an Expert Witness SEMINARS ATTENDED: Appraisal Institute Annual Real Estate Trends (2008, 2009, 2011) Trends in the Lodging Industry Annual Forecast/Industry Forecast (2009, 2010, 2011) Appraising Distressed Real Estate Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions (Yellow Book) APPRAISAL EXPERIENCE Preparation of appraisals for condemnation, tax appeal, financing, acquisition/disposal, and special assessment appeal. Properties appraised include nursing homes, hospitals, apartment complexes, office and industrial buildings, shopping centers, single family residences and development land. Specialize in litigation valuation of development land and commercial, industrial and investment properties. COURT EXPERIENCE Qualified as an expert witness in Hennepin County District Court, Isanti County District Court and Commission Hearings in Dakota County, Rice County and Scott County. PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors 21340 37 QUALIFICATIONS OF SHERRIL L. BRUMM (CONTINUED) RELATED EXPERIENCE North Star Chapter of the Appraisal Institute: Region III Alternate Representative - 2007 to 2012; Board of Directors - 2011 to present @ooq`hr`k C`s` Mdsvnqj '@CM(9 An`qc ne Chqdbsnqr ũ 1/0/ sn Oqdrdms: Oqdrhcdms 1/01.1/02 Faculty participant at the Minnesota Association of City Attorneys Educational Conference, 2013 APPRAISAL CLIENTS Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota Minnesota Department of Transportation Bolton & Menk, Inc. Minnesota Pipeline Company, LLC Dakota County Community Development Agency Ramsey County Regional Railway Authority Evergreen Land Services Company Richfield HRA Foreman & Associates, LLC R. S. Eden Fredrikson & Byron, P. A. Saint Paul Port Authority Great River Energy Shakopee Public Utilities Commission Greater Minnesota Transmission, LLC SRF Consulting Group, Inc. Jaspers, Moriarty & Walburg Stewart Title Johnson, Johnson, Burkhardt and Johnson, LLP TCF Bank Kennedy & Graven The Green Institute Leonard, Street & Deinard Ulteig Malkerson Gunn Martin LLP University of Minnesota Melchert Hubert Sjodin, PLLP Upper Midwest Management Metropolitan Council Walmart Minneapolis Community Planning and Wells Fargo Economic Development (CPED) WSB & Associates, Inc. Xcel Energy Cities: Bloomington, Burnsville, Cambridge, Carver, Chaska, Chanhassen, Elk River, Farmington, Lakeville, Lino Lakes, Minnetrista, Monticello, New Brighton, New Prague, Plymouth, Prior Lake, Richfield, Robbinsdale, Rosemount, St. Paul, Savage, Shakopee, Victoria, Waconia and Wayzata Counties: Brown, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Rice, Scott PMD&B ATCHIN ESSNERODDRUMM Valuation Counselors APPENDIX B Public Comments / Resident Correspondence Feasibility Report Danbury Way Improvement Project City of Rosemount Project No. 453 WSB Project No. 1928-54 Feedback.xlsx Questions/CommentsName Phone Meeting Feedback\\Neighborhood 540\\Admin\\Docs\\Resident K:\\01928 Surface Type r e b i F e t e r c n o C s u 1 o n i m u t i B Project Timing Drainage s n e d r a G n i a R s e h c t i D s b r u C ? n e h W , o N f I d 6 n 1 o0 2 y e B y a l e D , o N 6 n 1 i 0 d 2 e e c o r P , s e Y r e t a L 5 1 0 2 n i d e e c o r P 4 1 0 2 n i Danbury Way Street Improvements Project , City Project 45 d e Neighborhood Informational Meetings - Resident Feedbac e 3 c o r k P n o i s u r t e n z I i m i n i M y t i l i b a l i a t v r A o p e R y e o v t r e u s S n o p s e R o N e y t e a v rD u S / g n i t e e M Address 5/20/2015 Feedback.xlsx aynedahmes@gmail.com Questions/CommentsName Phone Meeting Feedback\\Neighborhood w 540\\Admin\\Docs\\Resident K:\\01928 Surface Type r e b i F e t e r c n o C s u 2 o n i m u t i B Project Timing Drainage s n e d r a G n i a R s e h c t i D s b r u C ? n e h W , o N f I d 6 n 1 o0 2 y e B y a l e D , o N 6 n 1 i 0 d 2 e e c o r P , s e Y r e t a L 5 1 0 2 n i d e e c o r P 4 1 0 2 n i d e e c o r P n o i s u r t e n z I i m i n i M y t i l i b a l i a t v r A o p e R y e o v t r e u s S n o p s e R o N e y t e a v rD u S / g n i t e e M Address 5/20/2015 Feedback.xlsx Questions/CommentsName Phone Meeting Feedback\\Neighborhood 540\\Admin\\Docs\\Resident K:\\01928 Surface Type r e b i F e t e r c n o C s u 3 o n i m u t i B Project Timing Drainage s n e d r a G n i a R s e h c t i D s b r u C ? n e h W , o N f I d 6 n 1 o0 2 y e B y a l e D , o N 6 n 1 i 0 d 2 e e c o r P , s e Y r e t a L 5 1 0 2 n i d e e c o r P 4 1 0 2 n i d e e c o r P n o i s u r t e n z I i m i n i M y t i l i b a l i a t v r A o p e R y e o v t r e u s S n o p s e R o N e y t e a v rD u S / g n i t e e M Address TOTALS 5/20/2015 APPENDIX C Frontier Communications Fiber Feasibility Report Danbury Way Improvement Project City of Rosemount Project No. 453 WSB Project No. 1928-54 www.Frontier.com May 18, 2015 Phil Olson Assistant City Engineer City of Rosemount th 2875 – 145 St W Rosemount, MN 55068 RE: Danbury Way FTTH - Frontier Communications; Estimate Dear Mr. Olson, Below is the estimated cost for Frontier Communications to place Fiber to the Home (FTTH) to the properties along Danbury Way within the City of Rosemount. The estimated cost is based on the assumption that the Frontier FTTH build would occur during the proposed City of Rosemount infrastructure re-build that is currently under review. The fiber build would include the following: 1. Extending Frontier fiber along McAndrews Rd (CR 38) to Danbury Way 2. Plow fiber along Danbury Way establishing nine (9) Hand Hole/Pedestal distribution locations. 3. Plow fiber service wires to each home and installing Optical Network Terminals (ONT) near the existing copper Network Interface Device (NID) Please note that the home owners will be responsible for any modification to the home (if any) that would be required to the termination location up to current standards. This may include AC power outlet and/or CAT 5 inside wiring. Design, project management: $ 1,675.00 Construction/Fiber Splicing: $ 105,650.00 Material: $ 149,425.00 Fiber Splitter cabinet Fiber: 48, 24, Service Wires Hand Holes, Pedestals Duct Permits: $ 500.00 Total: $ 257,250.00 Best Regards, Darrell Hansen General Manager Frontier Communications 405 Industrial Park Drive Blooming Prairie, MN 55917 507-583-4422 Darrell.Hansen@ftr.com CITY OF ROSEMOUNT DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2015 - A RESOLUTION RECEIVING THE FEASIBILITY REPORT AND ORDERING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT HEARING DANBURY WAY IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT CITY PROJECT 453 WHEREAS, the City Council deemed it necessary and expedient that the City of Rosemount, Minnesota, consider constructing certain improvements, to-wit: City Project 453, Danbury Way Improvements Project, in the City as described in and in accordance with the feasibility report prepared by the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, the City Council has been advised by the City Engineer that said utility and street improvements are feasible, and should best be made as proposed, and the City Engineer's report to this effect has heretofore been received by Council, and filed with the City Clerk on June 16, 2015. WHEREAS, the statutePProvidedthatnosuchimprovements shall be made until the Council has held a public hearing on such improvements following mailed notice and two publications thereof in the official newspaper stating time and place of the hearing, the general nature of the improvement, the estimated costs thereof, and the area proposed to be assessed,in accordance with the law. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Rosemount accepts the feasibilityreport for CityProject 453 and places it on file. NOW THEREFORE IT BE FURTHER RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Rosemount that the public hearing be scheduled to consider City Project 453, Danbury Way Improvements Project, to be held on Tuesday, July 21, 2015 at 7:00 o'clock p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible, in the Council Chambers of the City Hall. ADOPTED this 16th day of June, 2015. William H. Droste, Mayor ATTEST: Clarissa Hadler, City Clerk v o V LAKE COBBLESTONE 40,f 2,....!.'..;;--------,„y y . o CT Vin' / CA a U ar, t CAND SEWS RD C._'-` r ..,..: 1. ----- 771,111;i m y 3 i s 3ems^' W...m r^"'a El o u,, 127TH CT W ©a a. f 44 0 . 1:__% :1-- 7 4 Q te.. 4.0.,....„-------\___ _, C8 Cr RUMCLLFFE HAR, LST,S N AY t 9RUMCLIFECCSPCTw Y z 1111 i sC - E ©RUMCL EEr GS' 1 z._. .Z 7• RU 3G ER G N 1 fiatµ j Shannon i , BIRGER toile CI`ISG Park 3' tQ P. 1 a ,,`'. 4143, POND int1 R ate, t X.i Li „ , - T' t Ai • (,,cz, UPPER135THSTW> Z' a y 36THSTW z jar .--,.SCT ..--, z. K Z a1-7"--4-..‘‘.' 0, 13-TH ST W 4 1 cy a 2 F u., f f r ? G RLISSTRl o y 17 r L7 SC ',c ?] <>, t 1377H ST: z r- o V4 '''' •\--. p, 1., Qtr ! m-* V r t r,,.r' T^!,fix'^ v q, O 0 t M 138TH J , O i CO , Schwarz Pond Park I Nr \cx r 4',.\'''''' (LA, NY' 1,-,,„--- ', -,,_ C , > r tt? i-6,et SCHWARZ 4 C) r, a Lei'S POND 24 Connemara Q "--'"",..,.,.-- ,Park 4 Schwarz Pond Park Q • 1 F4'.•, t.`' R COPPER I err 1-40an Z w tom , P F.- ict , i Ali Carrolls ROSE1\40 Danbury Way Street & Utility Improvements N MINNESOTA City Project 453, August 2013 GªWX D O D D B L V D M CA N D R E W S R D W T R L D I A M O N D P A T H (C S A H 3 3 ) D O D D B L V D (CSAH 38) M A R A C O N N E S H A N N O N P K W Y DANUBE T R L C R O S S M O O R A V E C O A C H F O R D C R O C U S W A Y P A T H C R O S S C R O F T A V E C T D A N V I L L E A V E W A Y A V E D A Y T O N A D A R W I N C T CURRANTCIR G L E N N C T P A T H CRUSHEEN CT C R O L L Y P A T H C T C L A R E D O W N S D A F F O D I L P A T H CL O V E R L N D A N U B E L N EVERMOOR 131S T ST W C H I L I A V E 137TH ST W CO FFEE TRL D E A R B O R N P A T H C T W D A N B U R Y W A Y W D E E P W O O D S C T CHAR LSTON WAY C R O S S L O U G H 142ND ST W 136TH ST W 138TH D A R T M O U T H P A T H C R O S S G L E N N P A T H D A N E A V E C O U C H T O W N C H I N C H I L L A A V E C O B B L E S T O N E L N D E L L W O O D W A Y C R O S S R I D G EWAY D A I S Y C T DALTON D A N N E R UPPER 135TH ST W DAHLIA CT 12 7TH CT W D RUMCLIFFE 133RD CT W CANADA CT C R A NBER R Y W A Y CIR C R U M F I E L D A V E D A N D E R D A L L A S D A P H N E L N D O D D WAY C O P P E R C T LN CT W D E L T A A V E C H A R L S T O N 1 3 7 T H C T A V E DRUMCLIFFECIR 141ST D A V Y C T P A T H C R U M P E TPATH C R O M W E L L T R L C O U C H T O W N 136TH ST W D A N B U R Y C H I N C H I L L A C T COLESHIRE PATHCORLISS TRL 137TH ST C O R C O R A N A V E C O R C H M A N A V E C R O M P T O N C R O S S C R O F T P L C R E G G SCI R C R A N F O R DCI R D A N B U R Y W A Y W C R O S S L O U G H T R L C R O M PTO N C R O M W E L L CLAR E D O W N S D E R R Y - DANUBE LN C O U C H - T O W N D E L T A C T DAVENPORTCT C R O S S C LIFFE PL DELLW OOD C T DARNELL CT D A L L A S C T D E L T A P L C R O O K H A V E N C T D E R R Y - M O O R C T P A T H D A N U B E C T DRUMCLIFFECT P K W Y DR U MC L I FFE C O R L I S S C O R M A C KCI R W A Y COBBLESTONECT 132ND ST W C T C O A C H F O R D A V ECT C A R R A C H AVE C A R R A C H A V E CROLLYCT DANVILLE CT W A Y A V EA V E W A Y C O A C H F O R D 140TH ST W D A N B U R Y P A T H P ATH C O U C H T O W N C T C O U C H T O WN C T C A R L I N G F O R D C A R L I N G F O R D L A N E 134TH ST W 140TH CIR B U R G U N D Y W A YBURMA A V E B U R N L E Y W A Y C R O SS- C R O FT AVE S W A Y C R O S S C L I F F E P A T H C R O S S M O O R C T C A R B U R Y W A Y E V E R M O O R P K W Y C A R B U R Y A V E D O D D B L V D C A R RAC H W A Y C O A C HFORD AVE COPPER POND SCHWARZPOND BIR GERPOND WILDELAKE I n n i s f r e e P a r k ShannonPark Schwarz Pond Park Innisfree Park CarrollsWoodsPark ConnemaraPark Schwarz Pond Park T :/G I S /C i t y /M a p s /D e p a r t m e n t a l M a p s /E n g i n e e r i n g /C h r i s /L o c a t i o n M a p - 4 5 3 Danbury Way Street & Utility Improvements City Project 453, August 2013