The URL can be used to link to this page

1310 Cliff Rd - Special Assessments Appeal(s) Documents..S ,. HAUGE, EIDE & KELLER, P.A. ? :7Z11nrneys at 'l,uw TOWN CENTKF PROFESSIONAL 13LDG., SU[TE 200 ` 1260 YANKEE DOODLE ROAD EAGAN, MINNF.SOTA 55123 (612) 456-9000 April 12, 1988 Gene VanOverbeke Eagan City Hall 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55121 RE: Parkview Golf Course / Raymond Rahn Dear Gene: PAULH.HAUGE KEVIN W. EIDE ?AVID G.KELIEF LORIM.9ELLIN DEBRA E SCHMIDT THOMAS P LOWE You sent me the agreement between the City of Eagan and Raymond Rahn dated 1979 regarding the assessments that resulted from the storm sewer assessment appeal by Ray Rahn covering all of Parkview Golf Course in the late 1970's. You asked that we record the agreement and we discovered that the property is torrens which means that the only way you can record a document of this nature is to get the owner's duplicate certificate of title from the owner in order to record. It's very doubtful that Don Nelson, the current owner of the property, would allow us to record that agreement although I assume that he is fully aware of it. I'm sending a copy of this letter together with a copy of that agceement to the attorney that is handling the Parkview Golf Course lawsuit, Pete Regnier, so that he is aware of the background of those assessments. The original should be kept in the City files and if you have any other questions or comments certainly get in touch with me. Very truly yours, ;F% EIDE & KELLER, P.A. ? auge PHH:cam cc: Pete Regnier • f '? l ' A G R E E M E N T ROSELLA WHEREAS, RAYMOND RAHN and . PAlR4 are the owners of certain property located in the City of Eagan known as Parkview Golf Course and described as follows: Parcel No. 10-03400-010-25. The East One-half (E?) of the Northwest One- quarter (NW?) of SecEion 34, Township 27, Range 23, Dakota County, hIN; and WHEREAS, the City of Eagan installed certain water and sewer trunk services adjacent to or near the Rahn property located on Cliff Road during 1978 and that subsequent thereto, the City of Eagan prepared an assessment roll for Improvement Project #234 for the assessment of sewer and water trunk oversizing charges against a portion of the Rahn property described above; and WHEREAS, the Rahns filed an assessment anpeal with the Dakota County District Court, File No. 87962, Calendar No. 7571; and WHEREAS, the narties recognize that the Rahns are currently operating a golf course on the property and the Eagan City Council recognizing the need to allev- iate the assessment burden against the property until the property is develoned for purposes other than the use of the golf course or until such time as the owner of such property or any portion thereof connects to the Eagan sanitary sewer or water system; NOW, TfiEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. The Rahns agree to dismiss their assessment appeal filed with the Dakota County District Court mentioned above. 2. The City of Eagan agrees to forgo its assessments for water and sanitary sewer oversizing levied in 1979 for Project 11234 against the Rahn oroperty. 3. It is further understood and agreed that at such time as the Rahns, their successors or assigns, sha11 sell the property described above for development purposes or subdivide the property for purposes of construction and development thereon, or at such time as the owner of such property or any portion thereof con- nects to the Eagan sanitary sewer or water system, that at such time the City of Eagan may then proceed to levy special assessments for sanitary sewer and water oversizing purposes against the above described property at the rates then in ex- istence for comparable water and sewer oversizing improv,iments in the City of Eagan. ? ,.- '?. t. 4. The Rahns agree to waive any irregularities in the assessment procedure or notices required for the levy of such assessments at such time as the events des- cribed in paragraph 3 above occur. IN WITNESS WEEREOF, the parties have set their hands to this document on the 3rd day of December , 1979. CITY OF EAGAN BY ? o Murp y, I yor Attest Gut't/ 16-a-e?2- Aly e Bolke, Its Clerk ( S E A L ) STATE OF MINNESOTA) )ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) On this 3rd day of December , 1979, before me a notary public within and for said County, personally appeared LEO MIJRPHY and ALYCE SOLKE, to me personally known, who, being each by me duly sworn, did say that they are respectively the Mayor and Clerlc of the City of EaQan, the municipality named in the foregoing in- strument, and that the seal affixed to said instrument is the corporate seal of the said municipality, and that the said instrument was signed and sealed in be- half of said municipality by authority of its City Council and said Mayor and Clerk acknowledged said instrument to be the free act anm municipality. ul H. Hauge, Notary Public Hennepin County, Minnesota My Commission Expires: Oct. 9, 1983 STATE OF MINNESOTA) )ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) On this 3rcl day of nPr.Pmh[pr , 1979, before me a notary public within and for said County, personally appeared RAYMOND RAtIN and ROSE RAHN, to me oer- sonally known to be the persons described in and who executed the foregoing in- strument and acknowledged that they executed the same a?their free ac?nd deed. 'A??l,l THIS INSTRUMENT DRAFTED BY: HAROLD LE VANDER, JR. N07qRYPUBUC-MINNESOTA WASHINGTON COUNTY My Cammisvoo Expues lune 2, 1985. li "w?v?w ¦ Paul H. Hauge & Associates, P.A. 3908 Sibley Memorial Highway Eagan, MN 55122 (612) 454-4224 EXEMPT FROM STATE DEED TAX / I GLQ4Z&1 4 0-/viv Rosella Rahn JARDINE, LOGAN & O'BRIEN ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2100 MERITOR TOWER 44C CEDAR STREET ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101-2179 (612) 290-6500 FqX (612) 22350>O WRITER'SOiRECTDIALNUM6ER 290-6567 October 23, 1989 Thomas A. Colbert, P.E. Director of Public Works City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road P. 0. Box 21199 Eagan, MN 55121 FZECEII/ED pCT 2 5 9989 DONPLO M JAPDINE JOHN R O"BRiEN' GRAHAM HEMESf GERALD M LINNIHAN' ALAN R VANASEK JOHN M KENNEOY,JR' EUGENEJ FLICK' CHhRLES E. GILLIN' JAMESJ GAI-MAN' PIERFE N REGNIER MhRN A FONKEN' GREGORY G HEACO% GEORGE W KUEHNER MAR`( A FICE'} JAMESA JAROINE PATTIJ SNOGLUND SEhNE NADE' LNWRENCE M flOCHEFORO' TIMOTHY 5 CROM' 6PETT W OIANOER' GFEGG h JOMNSON' MPRLENE 5 GhfAAS RUSSELLD MELTON THOMAS M. CAUNTPVMAN JAMESG.GOLEMBECR' RERRY C KOEP DAVIO J HOEHSTRA ROBERT O TIFFpNV JAMES R NELIING THOMAS h.HNRDER MARNJ HILL MARSHA ELDOT DEVINE SCOTTJ LAOUA LEONARD J SCHWEICH 'TOMRTEO TO PP4CTICE Irv resconsN aonmeo ro mnnree NoR.H o.ko.. }ADMITTED TO PPACTICE IN ILLINOI$ JERRE F LOGAN (1923-1983) Re: Larsen, et al vs. DMS Investments, Ltd., et al File No. 15681 (69) Dear Mr. Colbert: Please find enclosed a copy of the Plaintiff's Expert Report. I would request that you review this Report and call me in the near future so that we can discuss same. Very truly yours, JARDINE, LOGAN 6 O'BRIEN James G. Golembeck JGG:djt Enclosure Harr Engirwnny Comp3ny 7803 Glenroy Road Minneepolis, MN 55435 6121830-0555 6721835-0786 (Facsimi7e) f1r. Donald Larsen Parkview Golf Club 1310 Cliff Road Eagan, MN 55123 Re: Parkview Golf Club -- Analysis of Drainage Problems Dear Mr. Larsen: This repore summarizes conclusions drawn from our hydrologic and hydraulic analysis of the drainage prohlems in two arees of Parkview Golf Club. Specifically, these areas are (1) the northwest corner -- the wooded ravine and 18th Fairway, and (2) the 16th Fairway in the vicinity oE the 16th Green. This report is divided into two sections that address these two areas, follawed by a summary. SECTION 1: NORTHWEST CORNER -- WOODED RAVINE AND 18TH FAIRWAY The following numbered paragraphs list and describe construction activities that have restricted flows chrough Cliff Road and caused wacer to pond upstream of Cliff Road on the golf course property. 1. Prior to the City Project 315R in 1983, approximately 70 acres of land drained to a 72-inch diameter pipe which passes under Cliff R6ad. This pipe is located about 180 feet west of Parkview Golf Club property. In 1983, City Project 315R restricted the upstream end of the 72-inch pipe. This restriction involved blocking the pipe inlet so that only an 18-inch diameter opening remained aC its base and an overflow opening remained approximately 4 feet ebove the base (see Figure 1). October 2, 1989 Hr. Doneld Larsen October 2, 1989 P88e Z 2. In 1986, City Project 444R furcher restricted flows. The overflow 4 feet above the base was completely blocked and the IS-inch opening wes reduced co 12 inches in diameter (see Figure 2). In eddition, City Project 444R involved constructing a junction manhole immediately upstream of the blocked 72-inch pipe (see Figure 3). From this manhole, a 12-inch diameter pipe was constructed to handle drainage from che upstream ravine. Also from this manhole, an 18-inch diameter pipe was constructed to handle weter pumped from Holland Lake (see Figure 3). Previously, Holland Lake had no natural outle[ and did not drain to this location. Project 444R involved constructing an outlet from the lake. Connecting the junction manhole to the blocked 72-inch pipe is a 12-inch diameter line that handles drainege from boch Holland Lake and the ravine (see Figure 3). 3. In 1987, construction of the Fairway Hills Development began. Activities by the Fairway Hills developer included new storm sewer facilities and site grading. The 12-inch diameter pipe connecting the blocked 72-inch pipe and the Project 444R junction manhole was left in-place. On the upstream end of the junction manhole, che 12-inch diameter pipe was replaced by a 24-inch diameter pipe (see Figure 4). This pipe was extended about 90 feet to the east and connected to a manhole constructed in Fairway Hills Drive. This manhole is the connection for two other storm sewer lines (see Figure S). One pipe, 24 inches in diameter, was constructed along tYie new Fairway Hills Drive to drain the Fairway Hills Development (see Sheet 8 of 14 of the Fairway Hills Development plans). The other pipe, an 18-inch diameter scub, extended 60 feet from the new junction to the 6oundery becween Fairway Hills and Parkview Golf Clu6 (see Figure 5). This 18-inch diameter pipe wes construcced to drain the portion of the wooded ravine on the golf clu6 property. Originally an 18-inch flared-end section of pipe was ( Mr. Donald Lersen October 2, 1989 Pege 3 placed on the upstream end of this 18-inch pipe. However, in 1987 after the July scorms, it F+as removed and a manhole was installed in its place. Figure 5 elso shows this manhole. At the stub's upstream end is another manhole (see Figure 5). This manhole has an upstream opening that wns plugged. Ac the top of che manhole is an overflow hole covered with a metal grate (see Figure 6). This serves as an inlet for flows that collecc in the ravine. The site grading operacions included filling the entire portion of the ravine located within the Fairway Hills Development and other grading to direct scorm water runoPf to Fairway Hills Drive and its storm sewer. These grading activities resulted in directing runoff from 19 acres of land north along Fairway Hills Drive which, prior to that grading, had drained elsewhere. A schematic drawing of the pipe facilities and filled section of ravine in Fairway Hills is shown in Figure 7. 4. In 1988, a 6aseball field and park acea was constructed south of Fairway Hills and west af Paikview Golf Club. This construction resulted in directing runaff from an additional 3.7 acres of land toward the intersection of Fairway Aills Drive and Cliff Road. 5. Sometime in late 1987 or 1988 (after the ,7uly storms), the City or the developer of Fairway Hills aodified the 12-inch section oE pipe located between the blocked 72-inch pipe and the junction manhole. We understand that this 12-inch diemeter pipe was replaced by a 3tl-inch or 36-inch diameter pipe. Schematic drawings of pipe system with this revision are shown in Figures 8 and 9. The above construction activities have resulted in (1) significantly reducing the rate of flow into the 72-inch pipe passing beneath Cliff Roed, (2) removing all stormweter etorage in the portion of the revine that had been filled on Fairway Hills, (3) increasing ihe area draining to the wooded Mr. Donald Larsen October 2, 1989 Page 4 revine from about 70 acres to about 93 acres, and (4) ponding excess water thac cannot be handled by the storm sewer facilities on Parkview Golf Club property. The 100-year storm was analyzed for the Hatershed with each of the conscruction revisions to determine how they wovld affect ponding on the Parkview Golf Clu6 property. Storm durations analyzed included the }-hour, 1-hour, 2-hour, 3-hour, 6-hour, 12-hour, 1-day, 2-day, and 4-day (snowmelc) events. Following is a description of our findings. Prior to the 1983 Cicy P*oject 315R construction, kater from the 100-year storm would have ponded upstream of the 72-inch pipe in the former ravine area. The 100-year flood level was computed to be Elevation 991.4. Ac that level, virtually no water would have ponded in the portion of the ravine on the golf club property. The low point of the ravine at the west boundary of the golf clu6 was about Elevation 991. Therefore, all ponding Would have Leen confined to the portion o£ ravine that had existed doFmstieam of the golf course, an area now occupied by Fairway Hills. Upon completion of City Project 315R in 1983 (Figure 1), water from the 100-year storm would have ponded in the ravine to Elevation 994.5. At this level wacer would have ponded in a small (0.07 acre) area on the golf club portion of the ravine at a maximum depch of 3.5 feet. The total length of time ponding would have continued on the golf club property was about 1} hours. Today, after the 1986 City Projec[ 444R, the 1987 Fairway Hills constructior(., the 1987 or 1988 pipe revisions and the 1988 ball field and park grading, water from the 100-year scorm will pond in the golf club ravine at slightly highez than Elevation 1012. This is 21_feet higher than it would have ponded before the 1983 City Project 315R. At that elevacion, water will flow over Fairaay Hills Drive and Cliff Road. Because the portion of the ravine withia the Fairway Hills Development was filled, no ponding will occur in chat area. Previously, this was the area where virtually all ponding for Mr. Doneld Larsen October 2, 1989 Pege 5 the 100-year storm occurred. All ponding will now take place solely on the portion of ravine lying upstream of Feirway Hills Drive; virtually all of this ponded water will 6e on Parkview Golf Club property. Approximately 1.1 acres on the golf course will be inundaced, including the wooded ravine and a portion of the 18th Fairway. This ponded water can remain on the golf club property for days or even weeks. This is because leaves, iwigs, branches, e[c. from the wooded revine will easily collect on the small openings in the storm sewer intake and plug it. The low point of this intake is 21 feet below the flood level. Water will remain in the ravine until it trickles through the debris-plugged ouclet or until the pooled water is pumped £rom the ravine and the blockage is removed. Because Fairway Hills ?rive serves as an overflow (when the water pools high enough in the ravine), the flood level for both the lOD-year storm and the 1,000-year scorm will 6e slighcly higher than Elevation 1012 -- the low point in Fairway Aills Drive. Flood waters for these storms will rise in the zavine until the excess flows overtop Fairway Aills Drive. Then the flood waters will recede until they no longer can flow over the road (Elevation 1012). The flood water will then recede very slowly as they trickle thraugh the plugged outlet structure 21 feet below the water surface or until it is pumped from the ravine. SECTION 2: 16TH FAIRWAY IN THE VICINITY OF THE 16TH GREEN The following numbered paragraphs list and describe construction activities which have inereased the watershed draining to the 16th Fairway and restricted flows exiting the fairway. / 1. In 1987, construction activities for the Fairway Hills Development near the 16th Fairway began. The site grading included constructing an earthen dike running north/south elong the boundary between Fairway Hills and Parkview Golf Club. This dike was placed across most of the natural drainageway where water from 11 acres af the golf course had previously pessed. A small notch was placed Mr. Donald Larsen Occober 2, 1989 Pege 6 in che dike about 200 feec north of the 16th Green to allow some flows to pass from the golf course onto Fairway Hills. The south end of the dike terminaces a6out 200 feet south o£ the 16th Green. At that poini, wacer can pass from the golf course south of the dike onco Fairwoy Hills in a swale. This swale drains to the north along the west side of che dike. The svale, however, was conscructed with a high point so that water must pond in the swale and the golf course until 1) it is high enough to overtop the high poinc, or 2) it flows north on the gol: course and passes through the notch in the dike. The construction of the dike, swale, and other site grading restricted and redirected flows from 13 acres -- 11 acres from the golf course and 2 acres fxom Fairway Hills. This construction significancly reduced peak flows leaving the golf course during rainstorm and snowmelt runoff events. 2. In 1988, the storm sewer plans for the Fairway Hills Development were revised and e 15-inch diamecer storm sewer intake was constructed near the south end of the dike. 3. In 1988, a ball field and park area was constructed south of Fairvay Hills and west of Parkview Golf Club. The grading activities for this facility redirected runoff from an additional 3.7 acres of land to the golf course. / The modified watershed draining to the 16th Fairway area along with the swale and storm sewer on Fairway Hills were analyzed for a series of 100-year storm durations. The 100-year durations analyzed were the }-hour, 1-hour, 2-hour, 3-hour, 6-hour, 12-hour, 1-day, 2-day, and 4-day (snowmelt) events. We found that ponding on golf clut property will occur for ell of these events. The most severe of these will be che 4-day snowmelt event. Under Mr. Doneld Lersen Octobe[ 2, 1989 PaBe 7 varm weacher (rainfall) events, some flows leaving che golf course will flow in the swale and some will enter the 15-inch pipe. However, the slope and configuration of the swale allow ice dams to form, which can block the 15-inch pipe and the swale and force water to back up and pond on the golf couese. The aree of inundation on the golf course under these conditions can be nearly 2 acres, which essentially surrounds the 16ch Green and extends over onto the 17th Fairway and 17[h Fairway pond. Ponding under these conditions can last for days or weeks uncil the ice dams melt and allow the vater to drain, and afier the ponded water subsides, the saturated soil cen remain saturated for an additional 1 to 2 weeks. This conclusion is substantiated by the fact that during the spring thaws in 1988 and 1989 ponding lasted about a week. SUMMARY Our analysis nas shown that City Construccion Projects 315R and 444R, the Fairway Hills Development construction, and the ball field and park grading will cause water to pond in two areas of Parkview Golf Club property. Ponding in these areas can last for significant periods of cime. This prolonged ponding has and can continue to kill fairway grasses and various trees. In the spring, it will saturate the ground on the golf course, which would restrict normal golf course maintenance operations and delay start-up operations. The ponding can also cause ocher problems during normal golfing weather. For example, golf carts may be slowed or stuck in the saturated ground and damage the fairway, and, in some cases, play may be delayed or stopped. ? Mr. Donald Larsen October 2, 1989 Pege 8 Please let me know iY yov have eny questions concerning this maiter. --S"iTCerely, _ even M. Klein, P.EA ( SMK/tmk c: Dick Ince 2319131/DL-L.WP / AREAS LE FOR STOI NOTE: THE TOTAL DPEN AREA WAS 64% LESS THAN THAT FOR THE 72" PIPE. / Figure 7 PROFILE VIEW OF THE 72" PIPE AS IT WAS RESTRICTED BY CITY PROJECT 315R - .. n n . n c _".. P I PE NOTE: THE TOTAL OPEN AREA IS NOW 97s: LESS THAN THAT OF THE 72" PiPE AND 929 LESS THAN THE OPEN AREA AfTER CITY PROJECT 315R. / Figure 2 PROFILE VIEW OF THE 72" PIPE AS IT WAS RESTRICTED BY CITY PROJECT 444R 0 SEE FIGURE 2 12" LINE TO HANDLE BDTH HOLLAND LAKE OUTLET AND RAVINE DRAINAGE 18" LINE FROM HOLLAND LAKE JUNC MANH FLOW 12" LINE TO HANDLE RAVINE DRAINAGE PLAN VIEW / Figure 3 SCHEMATIC DRAWING OF PIPE CONNECTIONS AFTER CITY PROJECT 444R 72" PIPE 0 SEE FIGURE 2 12" LINE TO HANDLE DRAINAGE FROM HOLLAND LAKE, PARKVIEW GOLF LLUB ANO FAIRWAY HILLS DEVELOPMENT FLOW 18" LINE FROM HOLLAND LAKE FI FLOW JUNCTION ? MANHOLE 24" LINE TO HANDLE DRAINAGE - FROM FAIRWAY HILLS DEVELOPMENT AND PARKVIEW GOLF CIUB RAVINE / PLAN VIEW Figure 4 SCHEMATIC DRAWING OF PIPE CONNECTIONS AFTER FAIRWAY HILLS STORM SEWER WORK ? 24" LINE DRAINING TO JUNCTION MANHOLE CONSTRUCTED DURING PROJECT 444R 18" LINE TD DRAIN- WOODED RAVINE OIr PARKVIEW GOLF CLUB w FLOW E FLOW FLOW 24" LINE IIJ FAIRWAY HILLS DRIVE PLAN VIEW i Figure 5 PLUGGED OPENING OVERfLOW - SEE FIGURE 6 SCHEMATIC DRAWING OF FAIRWAY HILLS DRIVE STORM SEWER AND THE RAVINE STORM SEWER INTAKE FACILITY OVERFLOW METAL GRATE FLOW .., ... ....::?...:?. MANHOLE •'- ?^ '.. s :i .,.; , .... _ _ ? -.. v.; ?. FLOW PLUGGED •'' OPENING 18" LINE LEADING TO JUNCTION WITH FAIRWAY HILLS DRIVE PIPE L'?.:.?::',:s::...:•D"::..?•. . _;`f. _?_ l'___' ;?, •....:a1' : --a ? •.i.•.••.a. ? ".•p?" `I ?. ?"" L.? PROFILE VIEW / Figure 6 SCHEMATIC DRAWING OF RAVINE STORM SEWER INTAKE FACILITY ? o u ¢ 0 Wc iow- 1000- < x 490- 980- ? 72" RCP MANHOLE MPNHOLE F? •Yto'.'.?.f., ';s:?,'..x,4.? ;r -:a.4}•tY °t:.;-:.%:«°u` -"?'c'-.ai;y;? .,,??:? .F?.:q? u¢'3c'i"VGS::_`?:ft.?rtyf:e}HW !' i.y` :.J'....A.: ?"vq-aP: n:=S 'bt?: ??•yvp } R d.: ?:'a',`ak?pv. wx. ;.l.i?f?i?°`'":.A Y.?? i?i.:?M1Xftr sX? .:"• 1::y"piy4,.?. ? ? °•"3"??crC?C?o?IR'r'aoF?.fi„?^??-? ??.?v,.11Fi?lAYINC}T?, .? ^r1? _ ;">"'.._: . _ r-•t.' ?.,.?`:?tk,5s3.'?»???'?....°titr? 13" PLP HOLLAND LRNE - DISCHARGE PIVE i 0•00 i o-So r? LL ? MANNOLE I ..? FL P?°H"?'• „.,a.P:x'•. In1"i????•.:1:5.?.-'R?n r3lM1?. .:e'.F?:" ?.?C:??• ?.'S?i ? ? ??,+?u< <f ry x ?j " OPEI4INL 24" RCP 14" LINE RUNxING NORiN/SDUTN AlON4 fAIRYAY HILLS ORIVE i.oa 1«50 ? 2.00 ? z- 50 Figure J SCHEMA7IC OF CRO55-SECTIOh FAIRWAy MILLS STORM SE1'.ER 72" PIPE FLOW F FLOW JUNLTION ? MAIJHOLE 24" LINE TO HANDLE DRAINAGE - FROM FAIRWAY HILLS DEVELOPMENT AND PARKVIEW GOLF CLUB RAVINE J PI.AN VIEW ? 30" OR 36" LINE REPLACED PREVIOUS 12" LINE Figure 8 SCHEMATIC DRAWING OF PIPE CONNECTIONS AFTER 1987 REVISED FAIRWAY HILLS STORM SEWER WORK 1$" LINE FROM HOLLAND LAKE ? c ., a J ¢ IQ IpC'l- L 95D- nnnHau nneum? ? ? nnN„oLt nooo 10 fL04 Y q 4 ? 'P .?q ? 1 ? . E ' ? ? •? ? ' ? FlLLEU SCCTION t OF flAVINE;t•,?,`?, wl? ? ? ' ! ? ?{M1•• ?3 a ` ? p 1 .r. ? 1 ` ? ?? S ? a'? •% x ? ?',r? '` as X r ?'? w 'r / A : a?'Y •? >• a`?' . s '? ? ,5i ` ( t ? v . , ?. . .? a ?? ? DY 4 { A { aX ' y yF t g 43 ? { 1 ' th • y * ? . ??L Y? ? f ? i . ?IF .?, m?? ' E• •. ? ? b? 'i A 4 ?R L ? S`C 3 ?e1 e? t' ? j IB" RCP _ - _-i?•:- ? ? . . 24" R[P ,.,.f•_,=??? . ., . 71" 0.CP , ° x ,...P;' •c. p..6ei^? ;?.'? . ?,:. V , . K ,, ? 30 Oft 16 RCP 14" LINE RUNNING NORTN/$OU7X ALONL ; fAIRMAY HILlS GRIVE MOLLANO IAKE DISCHA0.GE PIPE <«: N4Nv(L [ 7WGGF[` ?OPENIrvG 980- I • 0+00 0.50 i.oa 1.50 ' 7?0o t?5= Figure 9 SCHEMATIC OF CROSS-SECTION FAIRWqY HIlLS STORM SENER AFTER 1987 REVISIONS • PARKVIEW Gq.F CqUqGE ? ra?. I AIRW Y -5o a 5? ?oo 2 3 4 p 6 17 B• 9 10 11 12 17 ? . \'. --.. _-------- " i _'_ _' iNliWAT?I¢15 011NE"_'_'_"- _'_,• _ _ in • I / I I 2 B F 10 i 8 9 10 ? I 3 ? 4 ?yp' 5 7 11 %?p 2 a W.,-,.•.,o,.,,.o,,.,,u..a,,,. FAIRWAY HILLS DRIVE io?s ---- -? --^-T ? ---- -----_ __•__- -^?.,.?.. ?????I si_Mn-ce=iez-stx.+s:l--sia«.a: i =ce-a ? ? ? ? ? . •.r- __-_-= -- -_? - 1025 . -- ?_? -._-57' ? ..•.:. m,..?_re=?- _ !=__°_=.-- ?,?, -!?'???? wzo --- '? - __-- ° ' -- - -.__ . ? . , . _ S 1e1 - - - -- -- ? - . a -- -- I010 ? _ i mtb " " •... : ' ••??I???.??.?? • _ _ ._ _ `____ _ _ 1005 _' = v- I __ =-?i'r.?n? _ v^•acN'°.?' _- ;.. _I_- _' . •"'h..iL - -,ce•- ?- ?'? ___'" ._' . _ I I?OZP ID_20 _ ioo0 995 ,4 =.?--1___ _ _ .__ ___ . _ . " . _ • - _... ___?_.??'C.??_' _'_._..___? _._.? -r --•_-_ .. ? .: I " ?'. _ • ? _ 99 ?- ?'??m [1 [? _ 0__ -.-...' _ .. . : _I . 0•W I-00 2•00 )-OO 4•00 5•00 6•00 T•00 8'M 9-00 10-00 II'00 12-00 i3•00 I4•00 FAIRWAY HILLS ouoA" wr?oi? ,?y NGINEEIIING ?• t ?/• ??,/?? -? i-- ?'s??' VE OERPICN UND COMPANY . . ? COMPBNY, INC. •' .-' L__ aee un ??w mn?. umnu....nou u.v r. uriooo - •o••'•• DON LARSF.N pA??W F?ECErVED MAY 3 y yn?12-469-8884 OVt ]h:k; ?I6R (J Pia•t' 2.?, , 1991 !'1?^. Th??mas A. r.nlbcrt. Ci ty nf F..ag?.?? ? p- 0 3 yoV- oio-.z,? :?;==,ci ??i ic?t. r'?Zn`, R::?,d E_???at?; ti^J 5512'? Ri; I?rai??a??a impr??v?,n?e??L=1 Dea:? Toni; Z an? in receipt nf y??ur Mav L:' 1._t.tcr wP??ereit7 '?ou e;<:?,res: LnllCei'il ci5 t.p t,"IE ??1'd7.1'lct?3L-'' 7.f11C?1';?Y?'h'Ik'llt.5 Cntl51".1't,ir{.ed fPnr?i }.fla . 1';t.h greei? t?? the park: p??rid EF'-c:7. More speciFirall•r, yo?_a have , in??uire?? .?t?c???t: a. sn?all berm nat. cnnstruet.ed betwean the 13t.h gr?eert and the 14t.h tee, an?1 the F,ossibiii#.y ??f a?inther c1ai?'? ??L[clLASP ?lf t.rl1S ??1:1P?.XL?11. The prnjt.s:t. as cn??ftr-uct.e?? c??nsists nf a.lara= berm frc?m the 7_:ti? grefn west, R?.st the first no?.ise nn I-?tEi•]ar}-,et? ?ir•ivt. A dit-c-?, pFrasei»?.? in at +his 2ot, was ttren dWq (over _ ??eep in s??m?= a??eas) ??n ?. 7perccnt sl,?pe t.r_ the ben?? to the ???•aina??e ri:)f'1??. T?'lC n111'J pril'1:.7.nY1 1??7G r?}!1s{':Y'f„ar?,.CC? WcS a smal i f]t?i`i15 fi GhY the ea.st. si??t ?af the grt_en t,? the 14th tee. All ??f the park: a?tarinff it?fi.n the golf rnUrse, a.rnd the +tast. Ft?ajnl•j,+y pf the ??nlf crr:?irse ??rair?aye in this area., rc,?n= al?.?iig the f:=E?ce?in?= a.??,? wil]. nc,w iae int.erce?+t.e?i ati?d diveried L?? #.`?e pond. An Y;:.f:l'CI17C?.y sn'?ail area. i» this pt-_?,ject. woul?? r?ot. r?.ai? there ai?d a?o?i:ld ±.?-?eoretically run ar??un?i the east side ??f the grean -- aLtho?aq-? t.{-?is has ??aver bcen ??bserue?? ?:??erculati,,n nr?;r?= lik:el`? ??r_c?a?•ing €irst.?. I can assua^?= yoia l will rnot. fi1e any "future cla.in; f»r . ?Jarnages" ??ue to the sn?a11 bei^m beia?g ??elct.t?d. Uf much oi??re cni;ccrn is the lar,az am??unt. of w??c.er ,?ra.inii?g int.n the r???1f [i7??11`S4: ¢i"Oili lllt.t''1'Lcirf'YCi'i D1'1VF, Wrll.r?'1 WaS C??115'?.i'L.(C'f.E4?? a11C? ??tS].???? t.o ??rnin :nt.o the ?ar?7.f rourse wit.F?out. an ia-i4.erceF?tii-?g a»?3l??r divertir-??? systen?. Hrwever, Ynu have acf<:r?owl.e+?g•?,? t.his priat•lern and are ?+resently t.a.:i??g c?,ntractors ?atantes fnr a rcne??ial praj:=ct. Once t.his is cr,yist.ruct.ed, t.h?.= dan?a?.?ei??g ??ra.i?ia.??r? w1tet?s in this _?r.n?=ra). ai^ea wi 11 t+e= rem??ved. Sircerzly, ? /j D??i?aL?? W. La?-sert, outi?e?, FarE::vi?=w G?17.f C2ut? ?? CZ? E%ECU7IVE PAR 83 1310 CLIFF ROAD EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55123 P/ar XlVl?j.ws G'&h- 1K ?idd 7Gw6l HAUGE, EIDE & KELLER, P.A. 1lJ1 •AUIN MAUO[ ? qltOtwe1( at ?W e. N[vIN W [IDE TOWN CENTRE PROFESSIONAL BLDG.. SU1TE 200 DAVID O KELLER ` 1260 YANKEE DOODLE ROAD LORI M¦ELLIN EAGAN, MINNE507'A 55123 oEenA e scwMior (612) 956-9000 TNOM+s P Lowe February 4, 1988 T0: dbunty Pecorder IYiKOM OOUNTY GOVEI;tWNT CENZER Hactings, MN 55033 RE: E1/2 of NVJ1/4 of Sec. 34, T. 27, R. 23 (PID: 10-03400-010-25) RAH[V - CITY C1F EAGAN (PAACVg.'W GOLF COURSE) Dear Clerk: Enclosed herewi:h for record3ng, please find: Warranty Deed Quit Claim Deed rontract for Deed Assignment of Contract for Deed Certificate of Real F.state Value Affidavit of Purchaser Certified copy of ludgment and Decree Mor[gage Deed T'asement rtwner's Duplicate Certificate of Title /' Ovr check in the sum of S for recording fees. X AGIEMWI' between RAYMOND RAFN & ROSELLA RPdIN to QTit OF EAGAN X Please bill any recordin g fees direotly to City of Eagan. Very truly yours, PHH:rre (enc.) Paul H. Hauge /P . S. I]EAR ?]E : ?? You sent this to rre recently and asked whather we should record it and Xou and I have decided jointly to go ahead and record it in spite of the £act that tke current awner, ibn Nelson, has started a lawsuit against the City. It may be there will be sme repercussions, although I can only assiure that Mr. Nelson was aware of the Agree- nent when he purchased the property from the Rahns. PHH ? ?• A G R E E M E N T C I 46A ROSELLA WHEREAS, RAYMOND RAtiN and P.AII'.I are the owners of certain nroperty located in the City of Eagan known as Parkview Golf Course and described as follows: Parcel No. 10-03400-010-25. The East One-half (E'Z) of the Northwest One- quarter (NWk) of Section 34, Township 27, Range 23, Dakota County, MN; and WkIEREAS, the City of Eagan installed certain water and sewer trunk services adjacent to or near the Rahn property located on Cliff Road during 1978 and that subsequent thereto, the City of Eagan prepared an assessment roll for Improvement Project #234 for the assessment of sewer and water trunk oversizing charges against a portion of the Rahn property described above; and WHEREAS, the Rahns filed an assessment anpeal with the Dakota County District Court, File No. 87962, Calendar No. 7571; and WHEREAS, the narties recognize that the Rahns are currently operating a golf course on the property and the Eagan City Covncil recognizing the need to allev- iate the assessment burden against the property until the property is develoned for purposes other than the use of the golf course or until such time as L'he owner of such property or any portion thereof connects to the Eagan sanitary sewer or water system; NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants herein, the parties agree as follows: l. The Rahns agree to dismiss their assessment anpeal filed with the Dakota County District Court mentioned above. 2. The City of Eagan agrees to forgo its assessments for water and sanitary sewer oversizing levied in 1979 for Project 11234 against the Rahn nroperty. 3. It is further understood and agreed that at such time as the Rahns, their successors or assigns, shall sell the property described above for develooment purposes or subdivide the property for purposes of construction and development thereon, or at such time as the owner of such property or any portion thereof con- nects to The Eagan sanitary sewer or cvater system, that at such time the City of Eagan may then proceed to levy special assessments for sanitarv sewer and water oversizing purposes ap,ainst the above described property at the rates the.n in ex- / istence for comnarable water and sewer oversizing improvements in the City of Eagan. ? 1 4. The Rahns agree to waive any irregularities in the assessment procedure or notices required for the levy of such assessments at such time as the events des- cribed in paragraph 3 above occur. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have set their hands to this document on the 3rd day of December, 1979. CITY OF EAGAN By o Murp y, I P yor . Attest Alyce'Bolke, Its Clerk ( S E A L ) * * ? * * * * * * * * * STATE OF MINNESOTA) )ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) On this 3rd day of December , 1979, before me a notary public within and for said County, personally appeared LEO MURPHY and ALYCE BOLKE, to me personally known, who, being each by me duly sworn, did say that they are respectively the Mayor and Clerk of the City of Eag,an, the municipality named in the foregoing in- strument, and that the seal affixed to said instrument is the corporlte seal of the said municipality, and that the said instrumen[ was signed and sealed in be- half of said munic3pality by authority of its City Council and said Mayor and Clerk acknowledged said inatrument to be the free act and deed aid municipalitv. ?Paul H. Hauge, Notary Public Hennepin County, Minnesota 4ty Coimnission Expires: Oct. 9, 1983 STATE OF MINNESOTA) )ss. COUNTY OF DAK(YTA ) On this 3,.1 day of nPnamhPr , 1979, before me a notary public within and for said County, personally appeared RAYMOND RAHN and R(1SF, RAHN, to me ner.- sonally known to be the persons described in and who executed the foregoing in- strument and acknowledged that they executed the same as their free act and deed. / <Mhlq?P1AiI%AAAIAA,4A IF ? HAROLD Le '.:-•;DER..!R. ?-y?..y'?, ry0*af:P?...i •.llhNESU7A i??' NJASF!INGG;L YUNiY i,.:2: iScS rYWYVWVWVWVYYWv?'??i v NM^NlNV N THIS INSTRUMENT DRAFTF,D SY: Paul H. Hauge & Associates, P.A. 3908 Sibley Memorial Highway Eagan, MN 55122 EXE"T FROM STATE DEED TAX (612) 454-4224 Al?? /U, ? Rose3la Rahn . ? - i ? I / ?Council Minutes Page Thirteen August 7, 1979 /0-0 3YOd - 010-25 Qc- Z' ?3J. 3. Anna Heuer Property. Mr. Hauqe recommended approval of payment to Mrs. Heuer according to the standard payment schedule. Smith moved and Parranto seconded the motion, all members voted in favor, to approve the recommended payment for the easements that have been acquired. RAYMOND RAHN AND GEORGE OHMANN ASSESSMENT APPEALS - PROJECT #239 Mr. Hauge next reviewed with the Council the progress of the assessment appeals concerning the Raymond Rahn golf course property and the Georqe Ohmann property south of Cliff Road. It was noted that the Ohmann property was green acred and it was expected that the Ohmann family would continue to live on the property for a number of years. The attorney for Raymond Rahn indicated that Mr. Rahn has now listed the Park View Golf Course for sale and it is expected that it will probably be sold before long. Mr. Hauge recommended not levying the assessments on the Rahn property because of the difficulty of determining benefits for the utility improvements and sanitary sewer and water improvements to the golf course property. Smith moved and Murphy seconded the motion, all members voted in favor, to accept the recommendation concerning the Raymond Rahn Park View Golf Course property and to eliininate the assessments from the assessment roll with the understanding that the property will be reassessed at the time of change in the use of the property or development of the property. Smith then moved and Murphy seconded the motion, all mefiabers voted yes, to eliminate the sanitary sewer and water trunk assessments from the Geozge Ohmann property with the understanding that it too will be assessed at the time of development of that property, however, both appeals to be continued until approximately October 1979 for further developments and review. LAKE PARK ADDITION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT The City Attorney submitted a Lake Park Addition and recommended seconded the motion to approve the of the necessary escrow. All memb Parranto who did not vote. development agreement for approval. Egan moved and Murphy agreement subject to submission ars voted in favor, except D 79-104 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT CONTRACTS It was recommended that the following contracts be approved: 1. Project-#79-10 - Cedar Avenue truncks with Richard Knutson, Inc., for Improvement Project #186. 2. Improvement Project #79-18 - miscellaneous utilities for ? Projects #272, $265, and #255 with Richard Knutson, Inc. 1 ? Smith moved and Wachter seconded the motion, all members voted in favor, to approve and authorize the contracts to be executed. ?GtfC2? `Y?? Or 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55122-1897 PHONE(612) 454-8100 FAX: (612) 454-8363 November 8. 1989 MR. MHRK HANSON BONESTR00, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOC. 2335 W. TRUNK FiWY. 36 ST. PAUL, MN. 55113 RE: CLAIM FOR DAMAGES, DON LARSEN (PARRVIEW GOLF COURSE) EVALUAT20tV OF CLAIMANT'S ENGINEERING REPORT Dear Mark: V1C ELLISON Mayor 7HOMA5 EGAN DAVID K Gl15TAF50N PAMEL4 McCRFA MEOOOaE wncrTEa Cowcil Members nionnas HEDces aN?Mnrsfrotor EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE CM Cierk I am forwarding to your attention a copy of the hydrologic and hydraulic analysis performed by Barr Engineering on behalf of Don Larsen of the Parkview Golf Course pertaining to the flooding that occurred in the ravine area associated with the Super Storm. Because of your past familiarity with the design of the City storm sewer system in this area, I would request that you review this report and evaluate the City's position in defending against these claims. While I am aware of the concerns associated with the ravine adjacent to Cliff Road, I was not aware of a drainage concern from the park area adjacent to the 16th fairway. I would appreciate it if you would investigate this issue with Steve Sullivan of the Parks Department and ,Tohn Wingard to see if they have any knowledge regarding this issue that should be included in your report. The attorney representing the City of Eagan, Jim Golembeck, is anxious to review this report with the City and discuss our course of action in defending the City on this claim. I would appreciate it if you could complete this analysis and provide a response by November 22nd. Thanks for yaur help in this matter. Sincerely ou C?iLrs, Thomas A. Colbert,/ Director of Public Works cc: Mike Foertsch, Assistant City Engineer Sohn Wingard, Dev/Des Engineer Joe Connolly, Superintendent of Utilities Jim Golembeck TAC/jf THE LONE OAK TREE...THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY Equal Opportunity/Affirmafive Action Employer C?=?fn-o a ro a 45- '-?;ty oF eagn 3830 %LOT IQJOB ROAD EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55122-1897 VIC ELLGSON PHONE: (672) 454-8100 Kiaj9' FfJC (612) 454•8363 1HOe.vS EGnN p4ND K GUSTPFSON August 16, 1989 PAMEU'MCCRfA tHEOOOaE wncHrER c«.XeMampers iH0M45IffDGES ?. ?? ?BO? ?vPrmwimtraior PARRVIEW GOLF CLIIB ?NEVnr?ovEaa? 1310 CLIFF ROAD cxv ciorw SAGAN, MN. 55123 AE: Future Vpgradinq of cliff Road (COUnty Road 32) Aliqnment Within Riqht-of-Wap Dear pon: I have been informed that you have inquired of the City the possibility of offsetting the alignment of the future upgrading and extension of Cliff Road east of Pilot Knob Road to minimize the impact on your existing golf course facilities, parking lot, etc. Presently, this portion of Cliff Road is not scheduled in the City or County's Five Year Capital Improvement Program. Subsequently, detail design necessary to address your concerns will not occur for several years. However, when this proposed improvement is scheduled, preliminary designs will be reviewed with all affected property owners through the public hearing process conducted by the City. At that time, you will have ample opportuaiity to specifically express your concerns pertaining to detail design. Until that time, please be assured that we are aware of your concerns and will provide proper evaluation at the appropriate time. Thank you for bringing your concerns to our attention at this early date. Sincerely yours, T Colbert, P. . Director of Public Works cc: Thomas L. Hedges, City Administrator Dave Zech, Dakota County Design Engineer Mike Foertsch, Assistant City Engineer TAC/jf THE LONE OAK TREE...THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWfH IN OUR COMMUNITY Equal Opportunity/AttirmaTive Action Employer ? el ; Ya,Ian ; AErzW A'r t, «.L_e? "18 780. (14) S?1 FP' 8'' WG --24Z.oO co ln(O I?, ?" ?Ic.. 19-1Ca' '' I,GaQ''J.cA , ? 6v tT g°? P?c. J a• w 3, z76. tO o4` ,co z,zcr,.cxo DIh f1(i- Iw scca55 aF ?? POOP 00 ? 2a (p' TO FY..!:?T a0 I ? ?j")C 4 ' ?JyC ? .?. to r o ?f 4' wc. ?e zcv oo, oo -5evv / laoo 850 . co 1 Ki:,, 70i. oo `j I7?181 PNZKVI??.I faALF Cf?UI??? puarsexrcY hcRASS GO E) I,?? 8?' PVG .6L'R e-;rUB ct' PUWir- 55 {A IGHwA`( I e?e. -? ' -DiA z. 1.4 , +' bih M++ GrcPtzSM -NAnl g' ? ea, CvaNSc.T "Tb E.K.IS'?. MANNA?E ? i I ? 0„ A 4 N W YE. I o 4" Pv? 6E>P- z(o @ ?p0 SY. L1-rut4ia4a5 Fp,liF- iAtisjT tzEMovAL ? 3 To 0 BIT, Mh-fsiz iAl_ t'oR M1 -A -ruRPEE °?.• `- ?7 TbN z331 rsirU?u.bvs (a '1-ar_l 2341 tlTUMlnAuS ubo Ton1 Cv&ss 5 A&e-. 2k6F- ?- 2(I)o 5?y SoD `j/ TOp .Soi Z?g 7D , co oo.(zo `1 O(D co (bC' .47 I50.CC) ?tan.co Sd.oo too.oo (000.00 450 . ov 3'70. ao 19?.00 z?,4C? 5cx? . oc? 19) `tza.a (,L, STATE OF MINNESOTA ' COUNTY OF DAKO?A I ? ? ---i --- ---------- Raymond Rahn, /b/a Parkview!Golf Course'y I I i Appellant, DISTRICT COURT FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRZCT vs. I I City of Eaqan,1 ? ? j Respondent. NOTICE OF APPEP.L - - ? i - - - T - - - - - - - - - - TO: CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT, DAKOTA COUD7TY, MZNNESOTA AND CITY OF EAGAN,IAIINNESOTA: ' ; PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the appellant herein, Raymond Rahn, ? ; d/b/a ParkviewiGolf Course is the owner of the following de- I scribed property: • The E? of,the NVd; of Section 34, Township 27, Range 23, Dakota County, Minnesota (Tax Parcel No. 10-03400-010-25). That the appellant hereby appeals to the District Court for Dakota Cou ; nty, Minnesota from the adoption of assessments I, for sewer trunk and water area by the City Council on May 2, 1979, Improvemelnt Project No.; 234 on the appellant's above described property. , Dated: , May 31, 1979. LeVANDE , GILLEN, MILL$R & MAGNUSON ? By ? ??.?? . Ha o d LeVan er, Jr. Attorneys for Appellan 402 urovers Bank .iuildih i f South St, Paul, Minnesota 55075 Teleohone: 451-1831 i - I ,i FZECEiVED APR 2 raose ENGINEEAING COMPANY, INC. ? 1000 EAST 1461A STqEET, April 19, 1991 CONSUITING ENdINEENf PIRNNERS and IpND SUBVEYOIIS BURNSVILLE, MINNESOTA 55337 PM 432-5000 Mr. Tom Colbert Dir?c*or of Public Works City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Kno6 Road Eagan, MN. 55122 Dear Tom; RE: Staki * ng of Correctional 6radino Fairview Golf Course end Fairway Hills ?,st & 2nd Additions This is written pursuant to our meeting this past Monday, April 15th at the site. As you know from the conversations concerning the staking of the above referenced correction work, several changes from the city plan are being proposed, mainly by Don Larson. While we do not in pr'ncipal disagree with the changed manner of handling the drainage as discussed we nevertheless are uncomfortable with the procedure that would ?a followed; namely that Probe Engineering Co., Inc. in effnct field design the change. In reflecting on this sincu said meeting I would state the following: A. Our unders*and?ng of the Larson lawsuit settlement is that the City was to provide a Plan for the regrading; Probe Engineering was to stakr it for construction. B. The Plan as now proposed consists of changing the city plan in the southerly reaches into a system of berns in the golf course and a different scheme of grading in the park. We must insist that the city provide a revised plan to follow in doing our staking. We will not take the responsibility of changing it ourselves. We ask that you take this upon the City of Eagans' responsibility to carry out after which we will stake it as per our agraement. Sinc y `'L 1 D. Wagner, E. RDl4/csh cc: Russell Brown Don Patton GAB Business Services Inc 9537 West 78th Street Swte 320 Eden Prairie, Mmnesota 55344 Telephone 612-943-2307 FAX 612-942-2383 Claims Control O11iee pV{ilCf?/lJe.J:X°i:[ ? April 18, 1991 City of Eagan ATTN: City Finance Director, Gene Van Overbek 3830 Pilot Knob Rd Eagan, MN 55122 GAB FILE NO: 56542-04372 INSURED: City of Eagan CLAIMANT: Larsen, Donald (dba Park View Golf Course) Dear Mr. Van Overbek: I trust that you are aware that this case has been resolved. Attorney Jim Golembeck with the Jardine, Logan, & O'Brien firm was successful in resolving this matter. Your city engineer, Tom Colvert, is fully knowledgeable about the resolution of this case in the event you want more details. On your behalf, the LMCIT did incur total defense expense in the amount of $23,701.06. We also incurred $12,500 of loss paid. Coverages provided to the city under policy number MP82400R with a coverage period of 07-01-86 thru 07-01-87 do have a deductible applicable. The form is GL0300, it provides for a$5000 property damage deductible per claim. Accordingly, please prepare a draft Business Services Inc. in the amount of to myself at the above address. Pleas number_ of 56542-04372 somewhere on transmittal so *hat I may Vet this credited to your loss payment history. payable to GAB $5000 and forward a include my file your draft of matter properly To the extent you would have any questions pertaining to this matter, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Doug Gronli Branch Casualty Super.visor DG/maz oF 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD THOnMS EWN EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55122-1897 MayOf PHONE, (612) 454-$100 DAVID K GUSTAFSON FAX: (612) 454-8363 DnMEU McCREA TIM PAWIENTY THEODORE WACHIER Courice nnembers THON?t5 HEDGES CRy Adminis[rator EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE April 16, 1991 cityclerk MR JERRY S BLANKENSFIIP 1344 INTERLACHEN DR EAGAN MN 55123 Re: Reqradittq Within Ohmann Park & Parkview Golf Course Dear Mr. Blankenship: Sometime within the next week to 10 days, you will notice some regrading activities occurinq along your back property line within Ohmann Park and around the 13th green of the Parkview Golf Course. Enclosed with this letter is a grading plan that conceptually shows the construction limits and the qrading necessary to redirect runoff from the Parkview Golf Course along your rear property lines into the pond located within Ohmann Park. This work is necessary to address some of the drainage concerns that have been raised by the golf course as a result of the development of the Fairway Hills subdivision and Ohmann Park. Many of the trees that are designated to be transplanted from park property have already been done so. While you can see the construction limits of this work is proposed to be confined to the park property, final detail grading may require some minor adjustments along your rear property line. Also enclosed with this letter is a copy of the Certificate of Survey that was submitted with your building permit appl-ication. You will note that there is a 10' drainage and utility easement dedicated to the City along your south property line. In no event, will the grading activities go beyond this dedicated drainage easement. Any disturbance to your private property will be restored to an equal or better condition. If you have any questions or concerns during the construction activities associated with this work, please communicate with Mr. Bruce Allen, Engineering Technician, who will be coordinating the construction activities. His number is 454-8100. THE LONE OAK TREE...THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWfH IN OUR COMMUNIN Equal Opportunity/AHirmative Actfon Employer Page 2 We will make every effort to minimize any disturbance or inconvenience to your property associated with this work. we would appreciate your cooperation and patience during this work. Sincerely, Thomas A. Colbert, P.E. Director of Public Works TAC/jj cc: Bruce Allen, Engineering Technician Enclosures ?Ssity oF eagan 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAO THO,v,o,5 EGnN EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55122-1897 mayO' GHONE(612) 454-8100 DAVID K GUSTAFSON FAX (612) 454-8363 vAMELn n+ccRE^, TIM DAWI£NTY THEODORE WACHiER Counal Members THOMAS HEWES CRy AdminsVator April 16 , 1991 EUGENEC? OVERBEKE CRAIG & IARI CARRISON 1348 INTERLACHEN DR EAGAN MN 55123 Re: RegraBing Within Ohmann Park 8 Parkview Golf Course Dear Mr. & Mrs. Carrison: Sometime within the next week to 10 days, you will notice some regrading activities occuring along your back property line within Ohmann Park and around the 13th green of the Parkview Golf Course. Enclosed with this letter is a grading plan that conceptually shows the construction limits and the grading necessary to redirect runoff from the Parkview Golf Course along your rear property lines into the pond located within Ohmann Park. This work is necessary to address some of the drainage concerns that have been raised by the golf course as a result of the development of the Fairway Hills subdivision and Ohmann Park. Many of the trees that are designated to be transplanted from park property have already been done so. While you can see the construction limits of this work is proposed to be confined to the park property, final detail grading may require some minor adjustments along your rear property line. Also enclosed with this letter is a copy of the Certificate of Survey that was submitted with your building permit application. You will note that there is a 10' drainage and utility easement dedicated to the City along your south property line. In no event, will the grading activities go beyond this dedicated drainage easement. Any disturbance to your private property will be restored to an equal or better condition. If you have any questions or concerns during the construction activities associated with this work, please communicate with Mr. Bruce Allen, Engineerinq Technician, who will be coordinating the construction activities. His number is 454-8100. THE LONE OAK TREE...THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY Equal Opportunity/Attirmative Action Employer Page 2 We will make every effort to minimize any disturbance or inconvenience to your property associated with this work. We would appreciate your cooperation and patience during this work. Sincerely, ! / CLt--t.?.??J Thomas A. Colbert, P.E. Director of Public Works TAC/jj cc: Bruce Allen, Engineering Technician Enclosures z?=_Lsity oF eaga 3830 DILOT KN08 ROAD THOrnns EGAN EAGAN, MINNESO7A 55122-1897 m3yOr PHONE (612) 454-8100 DnVID K GUSTAFSON FnX: (612) 454-8363 PAMELA M`CREA TIM PAWIENTY THEODORE WACHIER Countd Members THOMAS HEWES CRy AtlminStralM EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE April 16, 1991 cV clerk AL HERMANN BRIDLEWILDE PROPERTIES 535 STONE RD MENDOTA HEIGHTS MN 55120 Re: Reqradinq Within Ohmann Park & Parkview Golf Course Dear Mr. Hertnann: Sometime within the next week to 10 days, you will notice some regrading activities occuring along your back property line within Ohmann Park and around the 13th green of the Parkview Golf Course. Enclosed with this letter is a grading plan that conceptually shows the construction limits and the grading necessary to redirect runoff from the Parkview Golf Course along your rear property lines into the pond located within Ohmann Park. This work is necessary to address some of the drainage concerns that have been raised by the qolf course as a result of the development of the Fairway Hills subdivision and Ohmann Park. Many of the trees that are designated to be transplanted from park property have already been done so. While you can see the construction limits of this work is proposed to be confined to the park property, final detail grading may require some minor adjustments alonq your rear property line. Also enclosed with this letter is a copy of the Certificate of Survey that was submitted with your building permit application. You will note that there is a 10' drainage and utility easement dedicated to the City along your south property line. In no event, will the grading activities go beyond this dedicated drainage easement. Any disturbance to your private property will be restored to an equal or better condition. If you have any questions or concerns during the construction activities associated with this work, please communicate with Mr. Bruce Allen, Engineering Technician, who will be coordinating the construction activities. His number is 454-8100. THE LONE OAK TREE...THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWfH IN OUR COMMUNIN Equal OpportunitylAffirmofive Action Employer Page 2 We will make every effort to minimize any disturbance or inconvenience to your property associated with this work. We would appreciate your cooperation and patience during this work. Sincerely, ,2tyz,c-?.uyJ ?"" homas A. Colbert, P.E. Director of Public Works TAC/jj cc: Bruce Allen, Engineering Technician Enclosures JARDINE, LOGAN -?Q O'BRIEN DONALD M JARDWE JOHN R O'BqIEN' GERALO M LINNIHAM ALAN R VANASEK JOHN M KENNEDY,JR' EUGENE J FLICK' CHAflLES E. GILLIN' JAMESJ GALMAN' %ERRE N flEGNIER MARK A FONKEN' GREGOFiY G HEACOX GEORGE W KUEHNER MARVA RICPt JAMES A JARDINE PATTIJ SKOGLUNO SEAN E HADE' BRETT W,OLANOER' GREGG A JOHNSON' JERRE F LOGAN (19231983) April 2, 1991 290-6567 THOMAS COLBERT CITY ENGINEER CITY OF EAGAN 3830 PILOT KNOB RD EAGAN, MN 55122 RE: Larsen, et al vs. City of Eagan, et al File No: 15681 (69) Dear Mr. Colbert: KERRY C KOEP OAVID J HOEKSTRA JAME$ K HELLING THOMAS A HARDER MARK J HILL MARSHA ELOOT DEVINE LEONARD J SCHWEICH KIMBERLY K HDBERT JEFFREY G CARLSON BRENDA L THEIS KATHERINE E. SPR4GUE' MICHAEI A RAYER FOGER L KRAMER MARY P ROWE ANNE F BOR6LUM MARK 0 O'LEARYtt JOSEPH T TREANOR STEVEN T CAYA 'AL50 AOMITiED i0 PMCi1CE IN WISCONSIN "AL50 AOMIiiED TO PqACTICE IN NCPTH pAKOTq }nLSa aoMinEO ro aanciiCE Irv ILLINDIS j1AL$O AOMITiED i0 PMGTICE IN iE%AS Per our telephone conversation of this date, enclosed is a copy of the Notice of Filing of Order and a fully executed copy of the Stipulation for Dismissal and Order. Mr. Golembeck will be back in the office on Wednesday, April 3rd. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Very truly yours, JARDINE, LOGAN & O'BRIEN ? Doris J. Tinucci Secretary to James G. Golembeck /djt AttOY11Cy5 dt LdW LAWRENCE M ROCHEFORD' 2100 MERITOR TOWER TIMOTHY S CflOM' 944 CEOAR STREET MARLENE 5 GARVIS RUSSELL 0 MELTON ST PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101-2160 THOMAS M COUNTfiYMAN (612) 290 6500 FAX (612) 2235070 JAME$ G GOLEMBECK" WRITER'S OIRECT DIAL NUMBER Enclosure _ __ 1.....__ ..??. LCF.,w ,4 ?, I ? 0 , A.o. t • rMR DONALD LARSEN ? 1319 CLIFF ROAD EAGAN MN 55123 L rTODD WIND ATTORNEY AT LAW 1100 INTERNATIONAL CTR 900 2ND AVE S LMINNEAPOLIS MN 55402 ey? • deN STATE OF MINNESOTA COUl+lTY OF DAKOTA NOTICE OF: >e FILING OF ORDEA 0 EKTAYOFJUDGMENT C7 DOCKETING OF JUDGMENT Court F11e No.: C1 98 104556 _ IN R E: DONALD LARSEN ET AL V DERRICK LAND COMPANY ETC ET AL YO++^s ?wroby nollned thet on MARCH 1ST 91 ?? en oraar we_i dufylllod In the nbove en1111ed meller. ' 0 You nre heraby nollfled Ihel on _ was duly enlered In lhe ahove enlltled meltor. a Judgmen! ? You are here6y nollfled thal on was duly docketad In the above enllllod matter In Ihe emounl e( y. Judpmenl - A lrue and Correcl copyof Ihla Nollce has bann servad bymnll upon Iho penloe named heraln al lhe Inat known adtlrwa of ench, puraucnt lo Mlnnesotn Rulos of Clvll Procedure, Rulo 77,04,' De(ed_ C?, 1991 JAMES G GOLEMBECK ATTDRNEY AT LAW 2100 MERITOR TOWER 444 CEDAR ST SAINT PAUL MN 55101 ` MR RUSSEL C SROWN ATTORNEY AT LAW 2110 IST BK PL W MINNEAPOLIS MN 55402 IqR MARK J. HELEY ATTORNEY AT LAW 4200 MULTIFOODS TOWER MINNEAPOLIS MN 55402 ROCER W. SANES :CO rt A dminl_ ? Daputy DALE B LINDMAN ATT ORNEY AT LAW 801 PK AVE MINNEApOLIS MN 55404 JAMES OLAY SABOE ATTORNEY AT LAW 5005 OLD CEDAR LK RD 2kINNEAPOLIS MN 55416 M tCA.A9 10 , STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF DAKOTA DISTRICT COURT FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT CASE TYPE: PROPERTY DAMAGE Donald Larsen, d/b/a Parkview Golf Course, Plaintiff, v. Derrick Land Company, a Minnesota corporation d/b/a Fairway Hills; DMS Investments, Ltd., a Minnesota corporation, and the City of Eagan, Court File No. C-1-98-104556 Defendants and Third-Party Plaintiffs, v. Probe Engineering Company, Inc. DLR Construction Company; and Encon Utilities, Inc., Third-Party Defendants, and Probe Engineering Company, Inc., Fourth-Party Plaintiff, v. Donald Patton, Fourth-Party Defendant. STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL AND ORDER It is hereby stipulated and agreed by and between the parties hereto through their respective attorneys that all of the claims asserted in the above-action may be and hereby are dismissed with prejudice and on the merits and without costs or STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF DAKOTA Donald Larsen, d/b/a Parkview Golf Course, Plaintiff, v. Derrick Land Company, a Minnesota corporation d/b/a Fairway Hiils; DMS Investments, Ltd., a Minnesota corporation, and the City of Eagan, DISTRICT COURT FIRST NDICIAL DISTRICT CASE TYPE: PROPERTY DAMAGE Court File No. C-1-98-104556 Defendants and Third-Party Plaintiffs, v. Probe Engineering Company, Inc. DLR Construction Company; and Encon Utilities, Inc., Third-Party Defendants, and Probe Engineering Company, Inc., Fourth-Party Plaintiff, v. Donald Patton, Fourth-Party Defendant. STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL AND ORDER It is hereby stipulated and agreed by and between the parties hereto through their respective attorneys that all of the claims asserted in the above-action may be and hereby are dismissed with prejudice and on the merits and without costs or disbursements to any party, except the counterclaims asserted by third-party defendant Probe Engineerinq, Inc. against third- party plaintiffs Derrick Land Company and DMS Investments, Ltd. in this action and in a companion action entitled Charles L. Paramore, et al. v. DMS Investments, Ltd., et al., Dakota County District Court File No. C9-88-525, specifically reserved within the Settlement Agreement in the above-captioned matter and the Settlement Agreement and Stipulation for Dismissal in Court File No. C9-88-525. It is further stipulated and agr2ed that a judgment of dismissal with prejudice may be entered pursuant hereto without further notice. December ZI, 1990 December ?7/, 1990 •? ?T Donald Larsen, Plaintiff ?.J Todd Wind (#196514) FREDRIKSON & BYRON, P.A. 1100 International Centre 900 Second Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 347-7046 Attorneys for Derrick Land Company and DMS Investments, Ltd. [Signature lines cont. next page] - 2 - ? February ? , 1991 James G. Golembeck (#179620 JARDINE, LOGAN & O'BRIEN 2100 Meritor Tower 444 Cedar Street St. Paul, MN 55101 (612) 290-6500 Attorneys for City of Eagan Februaryiw, 1991 Russel C. Brown (#12142) HFAD, HEMPEL, SEIFERT & VANDER WEIDE 2110 First Bank Place West Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 339-1601 Attorneys foz Probe Engineeeing Company, Inc. February 1991 /A?? Mark J. Heley (91728) MEAGHER & GEER 4200 Multifoods Tower Mi^neapolis. MN 55402 (612) 338-0661 , AttoCneys for DLR Construction Company [Signature lines cont. next pagel 3 - ?E'CEIIm@L223:'499 I9¢? Dale B. ' adam" (#63514ot) MAHONEY, DO HERTY & MAHONEY 801 Park Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55404 (612) 339-5863 Attorneys for Encon Utilities, Inc. 199 J Olav Saboe (#9499 5 0 Old Cedar Lake Road M neapolis, MN 55416 Attorney for ponald Patton - 4 - ? DONALD M JARDINE PIERRE N REGNIER JOHN fl O'BRIEN' MARK A FONKEN' GERALD M LINNIHAN' GREGORV G HEACOX ALAN R VANPSEK CaEOflGE W. KUEHNER JOHN M KENNEOY, JR' MARI' A RICE'T EUGENE J fUCK' JAMES A JAflDINE CHARLES E GILLIN' PATTI J SKOGLUND JAMESJ. GALMAN' SEAN E HADE' JERRE F. LOGAN (1923-19B3) November 21, 1990 Donald Larsen Parkview Golf Course 1310 Cliff Road Eagan, MN 55123 JARDINE, LOGAN ?Q O'BRIEN RECEIVED s 3 11"W9 A[tOT¢y3 IIt Ldw ' LAWRENCE M ROCHEFORD 2100 MERITOR TOWEF TIMOTHY S. CROM' 444 CEOAR STREET BRETT W OLANDER' GREGG A JOHNSON' ST PAUL. MINNESOTA 55101-2160 rnnRLeNe s. cnRws (612) 2906500 FAX (612) 2235070 RUSSELL D. MELTON WRITER'S OIRECT DIAL NUMBER' 290-6567 Russell C. Brewn HEAD, HEMPEL, SEIFERT & VANDER WIEDE 2110 First Bank Place West Minneapolis, MN 55402 `Thomas Colberti City Engineer City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Mark J. Heley MEAGHER, GEER, MARKHAM, ANDERSON, ET AL 4200 Multifoods Tower 33 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 Todd Wind FREDRIKSON & BYRON 1100 International Centre 900 Second Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55402 Dale B. Lindman Victor E. Lund MAHONEY, DOUGHERTY & MAHONEY 801 Park Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55404-1189 THOMAS M COUNTRYMAN JAMESCa GOLEMBECK" NERRY C. KOEP DAYIE) J HOEKSTRA ROBERT D. TIFFANY JAMES K MEILING James Saboe 5005 Old Cedar Lake Road Minneapolis, MN 55416 RE: Donald Larsen, et al vs. City of Eagan, et al File No: 15681 (69) THOMAS A HAPDER MAflK J HILL MARSHA ELDOT DEVINE LEONARD J SCHVJEICH KIMBERLY K HOBERT JEfFREY G CARLSON BflENDA L THEIS KATHERINE E SPRAGUE' MICHAEL A RAVER ROGER L KRAMER MARY P ROWE ANNE F BORGLUM MARK 0'LEARYtt •ADMITTEO TD PRACTICE IN WISCqN51N ^NOMITfED LO PMLiICE IN NIXiTH DMOtA }qOMITTED TO PflACiICE IN ILIINq$ }}ApMITiEp TO PRACTICE IN TE.5 1:jgq\15681(ei1.1tx November 21, 1990 Page 2 Gentlemen: This letter will on the following confer that we have agreed to settle the above matter basis: 1. The total amount of the settlement is $27,000. Of the $27,00, Mr. Donald Larsen is to receive $10,000 up front. At this time, arrangements are being made to ascertain the best method for escrowing or reserving the $17,000 to provide for additional remedial work on the qolf course. At this time, it is my understanding that Mr. Wind is contacting Mr. Patton and/or Mr. Derrick as to whether they will be monitoring the $17,000 and/or for suggestions in this regard. Zt is my understanding that Mr. Wind is drafting the settlement documents regarding the above matter. It is also my understanding that the overall settlement contributions to the $27,000 settlement are as follows: $12,500 from DMS Derrick. $12,500 from the City of Eagan. $1,000 from Encon. $1,000 from DLR. In addition, Probe is to provide staking and further engineering services as required on the remedial golf course work. It is also my understanding that the City will be doing the additional work of removing the trees adjacent to the ball park area. Mr. Larsen has indicated to me that it is his desire to proceed with as much remedial work as can be accomplished this year. This is especially important concerning the 18th hole/ravine situation. It is my understanding that Todd Wfnd is having Donald Patton cr Roger Derrick line up the various contractors to ascertain possible work schedules. Perhaps, given the uncertainties of the weather, we still may be able to proceed doing some of the work in the ravine, such as cleaning out the pipe and/or orderinq the castings and perhaps installing the castings this year. At this time, I doubt that we will be able to grade the 16th hole this year. As such, I would request that Mr. Wind have Derrick and/or DMS obtain a firm estimate for next spring and set up a time as soon as possible in the spring when this work can be accomplished in accordance with Mr. Larsen's desires. It is also my understanding that the City of Eagan will assist in coordinating the project with DMS and Derrick as needed. 1:jgg\15681(st1.1tr November 21, 1990 Page 3 Finally, as you are aware, the work contemplated on the golf course only consists of the 16th grading of the swale towards the baseball park pond and the work on the 18th hole/ravine. If there are any monies left over out of the $17,000, it has been agreed that Mr. Larsen will retain any monies in excess of the construction cost for the remedial work on the 16th and 18th holes. For this reason, i would suggest that Mr. Larsen be involved in the estimating and payment process so as to guarantee that the project is done in the most efficient and economical manner. Additionally, as it will certainly be noted in Mr. Wind's Settlement Agreement/Release, the above remedial work is not a guarantee from future flooding, but is a reasonable approach agreed to by the parties. Therefore, there will be no parties guaranteeing that any of the remedial work and/or the effectiveness of this work. Further, as will be noted in Mr. Wind's Settlement Agreement/Release, the $17,000 for the remedial work is the maximum amount that will be contributed by any parties involved herein, doing such work. Thus, remedial work on the golf course will be done up to the amount of $17,000. As such, I would request that firm estimates for all work be obtained by DMS or Derrick before any work is undertaken regarding the above matter. Given that we have obtained estimates for the remedial work on the 16th and 18th holes which are far below $17,000, we should not have a problem doing the work with the given amount of money. In all likelihood, there should be some excess monies available to Mr. Larsen after the work is finished. At this time, I would request that every party review the above comments and advise me if the above does not properly summarize our settlement agreement. Very truly yours, JARDINE, LOGAN & O'BRIEN JAMES G. GOLEMBECK JGG:djt 1:jgg\15681(et1.1ti Hg7CGIVErj F1' DONALD M JARDINE PIERflE N. REGNIER JOHN R 0'BFIEN' MARK F FONKEN' GERALD M UNNIHAN' GREGORV G HEACOX ALAN R VANASEK GEORGE W KUEHNEF JOHN M KENNEOY, Jfl' MARY A. RICE'} EUGENE J PLICK' JAMES A JARDME CHARLES E GILLIN' PATTI J SKOGLUND JAMESJ GALMAN' SEAN E HADE' JERRE F LOGAN (19231983) November 7, 1990 JARDINE, LOGAN W O'BRIEN Anorneys at Law ' LAWRENCE M ROCHEFORD 2100 MERITOfl TOWEF TIMOTHY 5 CROM' 444 CEDAR STFEET BRER W OLANDER' 6REGG A JOHNSON' ST. PAUL. MINNESOTA 55101-2160 MARLeNe s caaws (612) 290.8500 FAX (612) 223-5W0 pUSSELL D MELTON TR MAN WPITER'S DIRECT DIAL NUMBER 290-6567 Thomas Colbert City Engineer City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 RE: Larsen, et al vs. City of Eagan, et al File No: 15681 (69) Dear Mr. Colbert: THOMA$ M COUN V JAMESG GOLEMBECK^ KERFY C.KOEP pAVID J HOEKSTRA ROBERT D TIfFPNY JAMES K HELLING 9 1990 THOMAS A.HAROER MPRK J HILL MARSHA ELDOT OEVINE LEONAflO J, SCHWEICH KIMBERLY K, H08ERT JEFFREV G.CARLSON BRENDA L THEIS KATHERINE E SPRAGUE' MICHAEL A. RAVER ROGER L KRAMER MARV P, ROWE ANNE F BOHCLUM MAflK D O'LEARY •RDMIiiEO TO PPnC?CE w wiscow?rv - 'noMirreo ro Panc*Ice IN NOFTH MKOTA tAOMirreo *o vAn=E IN LLUNOIS As you are aware, the Plaintiff has rejected a joint offer of $27,000. The offer was to put $27,000 into an escrow account to provide for the remedial work as set forth in the Bonestroo proposal. I request that you provide me with a copy of the Ball Park Analysis which indicates that the overall flow from the ball park is negligible. As you know, we have obtained the services of an Expert Appraiser, Alan Leirness, from Boblett Associates. Mr. Leirness does have experience in appraisinq golf courses and will primarily address the loss of income and loss of value argument the golf course is making. I have spoken with Mr. Leirness regarding the Plaintiff's taking claim in regard to the ravine. Mr. Leirness indicated that, in his experience, the worth of the ravine would approximately be in the $20,000 range per acre since it could provide for open space or green space for development and, as such, the overall land value would not be devalued because it would be providing that essential service of the buffer. The Plaintiff is making a taking claim as concerns the ravine area of the golf course. I have copied the City Attorney with this letter and November 7, 1990 Page 2 request that if you have any questions or concerns regarding this claim, that he please advise. The matter has been set for trial for January 8, 1991 and it appears that this matter will go out on that date. I will be meeting with you and Mark Hanson prior to the trial date to develop Exhibits and your testimony for trial. If you have any questions regarding the above, please advise. Very truly yours, JARDINE, LOGAN & O'BRIEN 7_ ??-- JA . GJGG:djt cc: James Sheldon , RECr1liED OCT 2 5 1990 r MAHONEY, DOUGHERTY AND MAHONEY PROFESSIONAL ASSOpATION ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS RICMARD P. MAMONEYt PATRIp( E. MAHONEY THOMAB E. DOUONERTV BOY PARK AVENUE Dwwn G. AiCweOr+ JOMN (JAGO M MIILER THOhuB E. MMSHALL JwraesM MAHONEY MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55404-1789 JAIdESM.LEHMAN KENNET16lEA50N ? GRE60PY A LNN DALE B. LINDMAN PHONE (812) 3336863 Oeeru J. Heiaiac GARV C. RERER TELECOPIER(812)33i1528 VICtORE. LUND JOSEPM M GOLDBENti SANDM J. G110VE fiANOEE S. NELO MwRN J. MwHOEFliEtD INCLUDINO THE PFACTIGE OF ? (180P18ltJ O.P. MAHONEY B. URNESS GAY MILLER & NEARY G.J. MAHONEY 0?+960) MARY R WATSON R.J. NEARY (fY20.198q TXOMA9 S MCEACXRON• $ANOMS.FERRIAN October 23, 1990 ADMINISTRATOR LOPEN E. RUST. CPA • iuno?o?meo wvnemrww Todd Wind Attorney at Law EREDRI[tSON & BYRON 1100 International Centre 900 Second Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 (Attorneys for Derrick and DMS) Russell C. Brown Ji11 Ruzicka Attorneys at Law HEAD, HEMPEL, SEIFERT 2110 First Bank Place Minneapolis, Minnesota (Attorneys for Probe) VANDER WEIDE West 55402 Mark J. Heley Raymond L. Tahnk-Johnson James M. Riley Attorneys at Law MEAGHER, vEER, MARKHAM, l-,tv'DERSON, ADAMSON, FLASKAMP & BRENNAN 4200 Multifoods Tower 33 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 (Attorneys for DLR) Pierre N. Regnier?j James G. Golembeck Attorneys at Law I JARDINE, LOGAN &y0'BRIEN 2100 Meritor Tower 444 Cedar Street St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 (Attorneys for City of Eagan) , «?M ,. ?,a., SMI? Todd Wind October 23, 1990 Page 2 MAMONEY.DOUGHERTVAHOMAMONEY James Saboe Attorney at Law 5005 Old Cedar Lake Road Minneapolis, Minnesota 55416 (Attorney for Patton) Thomas Colbert City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55122 In re Our File No. 88-8387 Larsen v. Derrick Land Company, et al. Ladies/Gentlemen: This letter is in response to the meeting of October 15, 1990, at which we decided that everyone would make a concerted effort to obtain cost estimates from their respective clients regardless of whether the clients intend to perform any of the work. The cost estimates are for the remedial work on the subject golf course per the letter dated October 3, 1990, from Eagan's engineers. I have obtained the following cost estimates from Fred Glanz at Encon Utilities: Segment A-2 - approximate cost $2,000.00 Mr. Glanz advises me that he is not familiar with the special trash guard detailed in the plans. The cost of this item would be a3ditional. T. believ2 that plaintiff's expert suggested this special type of trash guard. He should have any information pertaining to it such as cost, etc. Also on Segment A, Mr. Glanz advises me that Encon does not perform work such as removing silt and sediment from storm sewers. This type of work is generally done at an hourly rate. He suggests two companies who might be able to do the work: Solidification (535-1065) and Visu-Sewer (593-1907). Mr. Glanz did not give me a cost estimate for this work. Since he hasn't seen the storm sewer and silt build-up therein, it is impossible to estimate how much work it would take to clean it out. He also suggests that Eagan has lines cleared out from time to time and may be able to do the work. Segment B (alternate) No. 2 $8,500.00 r Todd Wind October 23, 1990 Page 3 MAHONEY, DOUGHERTY aNO MAMONEY Please call if you should have any questions. Very truly yours, MAHONEY, DOi7GHERTY AND MAHONEY VA Victor E. Lund VEL/ma /0-L-9c7 ` ' PARRVIEW GOLF COURSE LAWSIIIT R4 ?T PROP08ED DRAINAGS PLAN CORRECTIVE AORR p SEGMENT A (RAVINE OUTLET) 1. Remove silt and sediment build-up over 12" flared end storm sewer inlet. Regrade to ensure positive drainage to this 12" inlet which should have a trash guard installed if none existing. Provide a siltation basin "sump" in front of inlet for future sediment collection. 2. 'Replace catch basin manhole casting with new high capacity trash guard inlet (special manufacturer). 3. Remove any existing silt and sediment from storm sewer system. 4. Remove all trash and refuse (tires, tanks, fabric, etc.) from the Fairway Hills backslope area. 5. Restore and reseed. SEGMENT B(CORRECT BACRYARD DRAINAGE LOTS 8-12) 1. Remove and replace existing fence as necessary to accommodate all grading and restoration work. 2. Regrade Lots 8-12 according to concept plans as staked in the field. 3. Restore all areas with minimum 4" topsoil and sod. 4. Remove and replace existing underground irrigation system on Lot 10. 5. Dispose of excess material on golf course property just north of #16 qreen and provide positive drainage to backyard drainage swale. Restore with minimum 3" topsoil (salvage existing disturbed area?) and reseed with mulch (heavy application)„ Limits of disturbance on golf course property to be staked in the field. r 6. Remove and replace existing fence as necessary to accommodate work. "B" ALTERNATE (STORM SEWER) 1. Remove and reconstruct existing timber retaining wall as necessary. 2. Install storm sewer facilities according to plans. 3. Regrade golf course property as necessary to ensure positive drainage to storm sewer inlet. 4. Restore all disturbed areas on golf course with minimum 4" topsoil and sod. Restoration on park property can be dormant seed in lieu of sod. 5. Remove and replace existing fence as necessary to accommodate work. n ' . Page 2 SE(iMENT C(REGRADE AROIIND INLET BETWEEN LOTS 1-13 1. Regrade at the common rear corner to ensure all direction positive drainage to catch basin inlet. 2. Restore disturbed areas with minimum 4" topsoil and sod. 3. Remove and r.eplace existing fence as necessary to accommodate work. SEGMENT D (INTERLACHEN DRIVE DRAINAGE 1. Adjust existirig buried catch basin on south gutter line at intersection with Fairway Hills Drive to maximize gutter flow interception. 2. Regrade area east of Interlachen Drive stub street and rearyard areas of Lots 1 and 2 to direct street drainage to backyard drainage swale and ultimately to existing flaired end inlet between Lots 1 and 13. 3. All disturbed areas should be restored with minimum 4" topsoil and sod. 4. Remove and replace existing fence as necessary to accommodate grading and restoration. SEGMENT E(INTERCEPT 13TH FAIRWAY DRAINAGE) 1. Regrade drainage swale around south side of 13th green and Lots 3, 4 and 5 to intercept drainage from 13th fairway and redirect it to City Pond BP-37 within park property. 2. Relocate existing pine trees on park property (approximately $) , 3. Remove and replace existing fence as necessary to accommodate grading and restoration. 4. Restore. all disturbed areas on golf course with minimum 4" topsoil and sod. Restoration on park property can be dormant seed in lieu of sod. 5. Grading on golf course around 13th green shall be scheduled last with restoration to be scheduled first. GENERAL COMMENTS 1. Existing topsoil to be salvaged and supplemented with additional topsoil borrow as necessary to meet 4" requirement. /? (\ ^, ' f \IJ?rC M ?V -. ? ..... ? - -- --?. -?.- ?Q?-??- _?__?-,??_- -- - -? -.?-?-,-?? -- --- --- - -- -- - - -- - - -- ---- -- - - -??- - ? -?--- -?-?-- -?? ??_ ? ?_ -- -- - - --- ---- - -- - - -? -? - -- -- - - - -_.?.?- - - -- ? - - -s- -- - - --- - ? ?"- - y T ?- ----- - - - - -.?-?----?_ - ?-- ? -->8 - - - - - - - - -? --.-?-?' - --- ?? - - - - -- - --- -- - ----- _? ? ., - - -- - - °- _ - -- - !?-"`-_- -?-`-?'_ '?- - - -? -_??'?`?'- - - - - ? -- -- ---- - - ?( ?'?--?`v??- --- ------ - -. - -- - -- -- -- - - -- - - -_?-??. .? _ ?_ _?._-.?-?- -??- ? - - -- - - - - ? a-<%;?.? ??- --0-??-a-? a= -?-?-^-?-- - -- - - --?b r? __?.--- -- - -- -- -- -- - - ?.??.?..-? - - - -- - -_ -?- -?"?_"?„?,?_ ' , _ _ .???; -- - - ?- , -- -- - - - - - - - - - ?±-a.?:- --??.?-d.?-? - - - - - - - - --- - - ---- - - -- ??-__ - ?` - z'? s?±- - - -- - - ?(?- - - - -- °-P _ -? - - - - -- - - ,?,.?- ,?.a,?,?.?- ??' ?? -?- - - -- -- - - - - ? ? s ???? _ .o?,o.?,--? .?.?? - - -- - --- -?_ .? _ -?? ?«?.?:?. - -- -- -- - - _-- ---`?°? ,w-?? ? - ?.?. Q, _?:?.?.??? - Gtr?„-?-2. ?,,.. _8 '?/n„ _ s?q?.Qe',.¢, _ ?.R? _./_h? .? - I ' ? - - - ???'"?°?-?? ? -?.?.?",?? ?. _ ; ? ??? _ ? . -- - ?-?-5 -Z -?ur - -- - , - ,_. ? - - - - - - - - - - - -.?'"--? - --- --- - - - - ? - - -? - - -- -- -"u`' 1 . nn i I n f ---- _ - - ?,? - - -- - ------ -- ----- ---- -- - - - -- - ? --?3?-- --?"- - e?? ---?-6-?- - - - - - - - --- - - -- - - - !???- - - - - -- - - - - - - - -'Z„ _ _F E -- -, .- - --- - 12' ---? F ? - --'?°-?' -- -(?--` - - - -- - - - - -------- - - - --- - - - - --- - - - -- ------ -- --- ?--- -??-?-- ?/r'?`?---Ci?- - F55 - - --- -- ? ----- --? -C/-?°"-?-- --a' - - - --- -- - --- - ? -- _--- -- - ---- -?_ ?-- - 2 = -_-?---?- - --- -- - - ---- - ? -- - - - - ---- - - -- - --- r -- v-?2= ?.- ? - r ? --- ? - - - - -- - -- ? ? . . n r --?•?--- --?? ?- -- -? -? ? ..vn _1_b n o GV 5oa n L ? N n. .- I w?._n w '.( ?r IYi o o n_ 1- E C D/l.n'+'oL_ O O n ::!:? ---- --- -?<? -?---P? --??^?-°--? °---?-ra?-,_oc? r ?v CAMBRIDCiE se2es ?I v<v ' 8'7 ?r?.ws n 5 5 I I I I ?7 - I S ?Sf I SUH-Ta7A ?T !? I' i 1 • , ? 77.?.?t7 r ? ? ( I I II ?I ? I i I Ij ? I I I ? ' ? ? I I I? 1 II I I I '? I 4• ? ?• ? /? 7• /i I• I ? I I , , ? ? ? I ? I I ? I II ? i? i 7EP ? 1 I ' 'I ? ? 31 3 O/.JE'r ' I 1? I I I ? I ? ' Ij 7 I 3 ? I I i ? I I I I I I I ? 511 , I I I I I I 9 ? b o'? ? I I t z 31 i ?a ' S 5 i ? ? ? ? - i ' i I ? , I ,?/ ? i ? ? ? ? 35 ? I T I 16 ?APoGObi ? ? 1 ? '? f ? ? ? ? ? 17 ° i 38 ? 391 ao , z ? E f 1 ? , , 1 2 2 .? cAMSRiDCE 58246 $-28-f'O ?lU4v 'S'/ 7rc?.? ,(b l?sr S?.r?-rosft ?r I ? I / • i I 2L2 ? j ? ? I ! ? ? i I ! I I I?' C f aW II I I I I I I li I ? I I I n, ' I I I I I I I I' ? I Z ? ? ? 11 7' r, 7 I 3 6 ? I I ? G. .5 0 ; ' II i ? I? I I I ? ?? ? ? ' ' ? /?ESY ? ? I I ? I 1 - j SE? /1 Hr ?? N I ? Fvl i /I/ ? Y M , T IT l 1 I , Tb4l l . 4 L; iIA 6.4 I I i I I I I 1 ? : 1 I l i ? I i II I I I li ? i I ? HI 1 7Z' ? I ? ? ? ? ? T1 1 J I aiPJ / N? I < I I i II I/i I Q ? I I I i , ? t?J % t] 91 l1 6fo 0.? I Z I ?? ?I I ? ?6 4Ji7 I I I I I, I ; i ? I I 'eI I I , I I I i Ii i I? i I I I I I II 1 7 ? ?I S/, /"j/? $ j ' I I I II i i ? I I, I ?' /?? ? ? i ? I SI ? ? 6 ??POLO6/ ? I I ? I ? I I I I 7 0 / eI I ? I ? 9 o ? ??c1?YS I ? 1 ( ? 1 z a S C ? ? 1( ;a n r 2 ? 2 2 2 ?-?! i o 7, le 7? f?JK LA25E=N- i?72K via`t,) 60G` ?u2sbr' / / / /, / / / " /..7A2/2 S /G G' C 6LC:n r+t-b?.0A7'/ONS v ??-L't/.'JU ?Q/?wc?.?. Ip'•'c-?S INLG>Y ? CLl/'/? C..,?,cc LP<3rci-de- ?"e^wJ? ?"<.-ci?G ti r?l'/O Dd U 0 f / / / d v?? , 1---? ? ?/ acre Pess-b/I a?e?cers in /!. 14 ?i l? E-''?J s ^w d e ? N P t?l S u ? Nti S o c« e_ S f??- w? S'Pwer ?a .^ ?/i.rta ?HQP?t/ln5-1 c,.r. STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF DAROTA Donald LaFSen, d/b/a Parkview Golf Course, 0 DISTRICT COURT FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT CASE TYPE: PROPERTY DAMAGE File No. 104556 Plaintiffs, PLAINTIFF'8 SUPPLEMENTAL AN8WER8 TO INTERROGATORIES Vs. OF DERRICR LAND COMPANY AND AND DMB INVESTMENTS Derrick Land Company, a Minnesota corporation d/b/a FaiTway Hills; D M S Investments and the City of Eagan, Defendants. and Derrick Land Company, a Minnesota corporation, d/b/a Fairway Hills; and DMS Investments, Ltd., a Minnesota corporation, Third-Party Plaintiffs, vs. Probe Engineering Company, Inc.; DLR Construction Company; and Encon Utilities, Inc., Third-Party Defendants. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) Donald Larsen, d/b/a Parkview Golf Course, upon oath duly sworn, deposes and states as follows: have a golf course but I am handicapped by late starts if the winter before the season produces normal snows which when it melts is now directed to my property from the subdivision and the ball park. Z have also lost, under normal engineering standards, land in the ravine that has been impressed into service for storage of water that would normally have been on Defendant developer's land or which would have transported through the 72 which culvert to Defendant City's land. I believe this is all detailed in the Barr report submitted and the value analysis by Mr. Ward previously submitted detail what was done and ascribe a value to my land so impressed to the service of Defendants. (Attached to my supplemental response to request for documents is my calculation of expenses incurred by the July 23rd storm that I contend I would not have had to incur had the Defendants not did what they did). Additional Response to Interroaatorv 9. I have no idea what is requested as a supplemental answer. The experts Mr. Klein and Mr. Ward will testify as to their reports and I believe in looking at their reports they state their opinions and the grounds for those opinions. Perhaps they should be asked the question. Donald Larsen Subscribed and sworn to before me this 13th day of July, 1990. Notary Publ have a golf course but I am handicapped by late starts if the winter before the season produces normal snaws which when it melts is now directed to my property from the subdivision and the ball park. I have also lost, under normal engineering standards, land in the ravine that has been impressed into service for storage of water that would normally have been on Defendant developer's land or which would have transported through the 72 which culvert to Defendant City's land. I believe this is all detailed in the Barr report submitted and the value analysis by Mr. Ward previously submitted detail what was done and ascribe a value to my land so impressed to the service of Defendants. (Attached to my supplemental response to request for documents is my calculation of expenses incurred by the July 23rd storm that I contend I would not have had to incur had the Defendants not did what they did). Additional Response to Interroaatorv 9. I have no idea what is requested as a supplemental answer. The experts Mr. Klein and Mr. Ward will testify as to their reports and I believe in looking at their reports they state their opinions and the grounds for those opinions. Perhaps they should be asked the question. Donald Larsen Subscribed and sworn to before me this 13th day of July, 1990. Notary Public 3 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF DAKOTA Donald Larsen, d/b/a Parkview Golf Course, DISTRICT COURT FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT CASE TYPE: PROPERTY DAMAGE File No. 104556 Plaintiffs, PLAINTIFF'8 BDPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE TO DOCUMENT REOIIEST vs. OF DERRICR LAND COMPANY AND AND DMS INVESTMENTS Derrick Land Company, a Minnesota corporation d/b/a Fairway Hills; D M S Investments and the City of Eagan, Defendants. and Derrick Land Company, a Minnesota corporation, d/b/a Fairway Hills; and DMS Investments, Ltd., a Minnesota corporation, Third-Party Plaintiffs, vs. Probe Engineerinq Company, Inc.; DLR Construction Company; and Encon Utilities, Inc., Third-Party Defendants. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) Donald Larsen, for his supplemental response to document request of Derrick Land Company and DMS Investments, states as follows: , Additional Response to Reauest No. 1 Attached hereto are copies of the only statements Plaintiff prepares or has prepared regarding his operations of the Parkview Golf Course from 1982 and 1989. Also attached is my compilation of the July 23, 1987 excess expenses. Donald Larsen Subscribed and sworn to before me this 13th day of July, 1990. Notary Public 2 ; - ?e 3 4 Je 7 B 9 1C n t: is J= ,4 2( r. ? z ? 's ? Jv . 6 - P?Fir/o ? ?• - ?_" . . , >_C_ _ 1 '_ J " (-_ _ ?G.'fr_ + _!'S__ _J - .. - " - -?- - ,--D?°-. R{'fryrJiU F/?V1n?70 31 I 2L1 :? IH?2 i 1'S 1S2.0 . - -- f?TG ?? • ? - ?- __ 07.eo I T -- ' _ 31 1?5, 58? _- --?-J ? . _ --- , - • :_.e?f ?. ' ? ? , cz y!g? 9 6?8% f 5Z% 115 ?C 2 JO `"-b 4' 3 7H °O _ , YP9v ? ?(?.?ec 1 I I?Z71 - - - _ 156 ? ? ?? . •? -0 L? i - , - ?- -- - - /Z9?o T t S$:Y3 J ' -9Z , ---- - --- - , . - i , bS9o i-??? - -5 EI6> ?_ y 2S s` ' I I ? -- -- /3id Y'? 1 _1 U 7 7'3' ? -- - - S0 ?`? - - - ? o? ? - i2S 3. G y? ? ? P 3?5 ? 1 3z? ??--_ -- I Z /- L 2? ? -- , ? ?s / ? ono!b6 -! -- -- -- I -- _ _ - - - v7 . s ° -. - -- --- -- ,- - - ? ? --?`-yT=--? -- -- S?14o --? /94'S6 __ - - ---- - - - - - ?1J11 _ ? 016'0 ' -- ' ? e? r ?9b?1r 12f??' 1152 ?? _ ?ess? g?5`?? -.I ' - -- - ? ? UCA i 8 ° j I ?? I? '?I i I I 9 ?? SnausS &r.7utf,eE y _ 77 ? 10 I T I ? I I I ? ? _.'•'. i _.. •. --. _? ? w ' 1 2 s 4 ? 6 7 e 9 SO n ,2 !3 14 1.4 lE IS _c L. 2; s 3 3 3 , 3 3 < `' ^--- y_' 1 ? 3 4 5 6- - - _ iZcs?sv. - - --- -- Cs?r?:??_ l? ?? ?-lca ? 1 - ? ? r (/JET "? ' ? - - - -- - , , ? i ? L. Q o' I?Z z' rz ? ?J +:i,?; ` ' ? ? i ? 9, - ?'io' - - - i i cx 7 ro, -, ? ' -- Y ?? --- ? ( - ? - - 4?lnC.? ? -,-• ? ?S 2,3?5'z' T / - ? . I ? ? ???? ? TwcFEou?e : - i ? ? i t ? 9 ? 1, 1 I8 s. ,2 zz?16 ? i ; , 6 ,?2 ' ?', ? -', , ft- - - - - 3 79 i I i I3? ? ? ? i . ? , ? -- --- - - / ' q(?nYYf4YT ?1'?S _ J Sv i ? X,cau I ? s6/s, I? ? I? Ax 7ke I ? ..?,.:, ' 'I I ? • ----- -- - i ? O;2 VM2 KZ!4s ? ' , y G`: • I ??L H ?41RS ? Z?L ? ' , . _ ? _ _ ? ?GA , oa - - - ? , , ; ; --- - - , ? - - -- . t1?. ' ''• ' r2 ? 7 --- 3 I C a i ' t o i I 14?'.4 3' s i ??, ? 3w v s? L/Y } ' i r t ? Rer ?1 i I I? oJ ? ; , - i I L o ? < 6 1 :::: F 2 b g bz t I.?... .._. _. ? ???.b??? ??.... ? . ___ . i.. _ ..J=:, - -L'°'-?- ,1?-- ; c. ?+n-S+a >+ ? . 11C lr.?Inc. _. S 71 22 ? . _._ . . _ _ . bi ' -, ? . 1o7 - - - - --- TntO -- - - - - -, TY LZ ? Z ?^3 2 ' "_ = T - _- ? - - ?? - - - - I (Z I BfDS U T ? I Z ? 22 1 ? Fur ./;i,..? 7 ? .? . t,h}?.?e I , 64 ?! I-- - -- ' -- - -- ? __j - , ? ' - - - - - -- ? , ? ??Z;zv ?. I i ? ,/ ?M_,=J •'.•?r.: ???_?:n. ? ' ?: ? -- ? ?oo?Sii?a? ? ?37 ? I ? ' ' ', ?I - --? EEE , ? ?Gp I ' • ? ! ? qy , ' V ?- Z ? 9 ?' '? ? ?y ? - t-- ? -- --- -- - . - - _,- i - -- --- b7 ; ?? t . ? ? ` ? - ? ? --? 5?7 --- -- ??? l}ePJ'?-- fG . 'vl I - - - -.- I I > 3' t Sb'oO z --- _ -- ° () ? OFTEU -_ ? ?4 2 .7?I'__' i 5 4f ? ? I . / i?0 5 ? ? _t . _ rtw?? -_ __.__ -- , 7 y v s ? ? ? S9 L?„?f < tll ? 4 ?' . v 47 _ I, --- - - 9 ?? ?? _n? ? ? y ; , ? ? i : F8 73b?_ '- ;o ?y !1 ? ? Ree? ?° 4 UJ H . .7 72. , Fa6 C/i 34 NU.r 35 I IpW I $.,G O? ? .-, ( s $ifT ST ? ? ? 38 ? V 6 ? : ' ? j ? 6?1'6 ub 39 `/? .,,.. ? ? ,? • o9 ?_ / i i qp ? .? I I I I ?? ? I uaiv?runC 3'? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 1C 11 Ii ?- i: i ? ?f?.. ? .. , 1_•? ?Gr ce__.a5.ca.??o.._ -?. ?. - - . . - --------- - ?-- _. t 3 L 5 6 7 a 9 1( r t: i; 1. i i 2 2 . i 1 2 3 4 5 t - - - - ? - -- -- ---- 7 , ?` ? ' ! ?-r se• ??9 ? c ? , - ? . ; 5 i --- , -- -- -- . J _ -- - - -- ?- ? --- 2 1 y Z!?P ?- --J- _? - ? - -- - - / 1 1 ? M? ? I j I V/ 1Jt_°_ ? ?? F?a.- _-• ??" `- --- ? _ _? - - p?5 06". -? -- C ? ' 1 Jier• '?'?o? , . , ?. I J 4TOIAC - -- . i ? 'S • 373'? ? ? I i J ; 33i J .ZvS. ? ? -- 5 37 2 I LG °'S3 - I? -- ---I ? -- -I? --- ' 7H??x?E?US£5 - -- --- - - --- -- - -- - - - - { = ? 28 i 6 ? ?/ITS 00 ? _-'- -- ?8 ? •' CT PENTAL -_ .?] L ? ? I ? v o I: Acs: t7 h 2-6T?? 7 b'? S.8 I i ; i _ 32 i 33 i -- 35 y i I - -- i ? :7 38 39 40 I ? ? i ? I ! I'.ac.. E-re.?F _?dr?Le-] T .. . _" ; • "?ACaNC? ?.+?eF r /S23 ----- - ? Z 3 4 5 6 I ? T Is _ P,?.,T - -- - -- - - - --- -- ---- ---- -- Rtnw?o?u Nli?ll[?R i I ? I ?. ? I ? •; I ?78 ----- = ont? ? 3 ' I 9 ? ? [ 3 g P ?, ? 6 _ - - HxE /- 6 0 S'l' ?9395 ' -- l 70 - - - - -- I?cvTALS , ' ? . , ;7yz - -- --- Gacv G?aas 80 ?Xeu u _ ' /'7t - - 1 70 d - - --. ' - i - - - -- -T - l7 19S.?6 I g? 3. Srcv.F , _ - " f I i 72 4 l I o S6j ? ?? ` usra I8., zs A?ss (a u•Nr 93) I`X oo ? i 99 3 70 ? 9`? i ? ? 95"e / ZE,E C?dES 3 sG ? ? ? I 33% 32 _ 1TNCXt-TS S? EA ?7 65 /07 5 30 oaoEA 297,T ?' L f/H? Ee 7 6 30- Fz `? I I ?/ I 7 9 L 5D D? , ? «C /, _ 1 _- F?. - . I_ 36?W dc st ? ? ? - iQ $?s - e. 14 & - ? ? zSzS -,-- D3i ? - ' S6 i i - zz i iul ? u I I ; ? frluu S/3.Ic r !I - i PS F 36 ' ' I ? 7F ?-Lcnu _2 _S3i ? --- - II ----?- -- , : ? ? {?? ?t.79b? l l ?ZLILsJS?+?. /?720 ? I ,?o%•? ,r. s r? T 1 ?6v/o' S7 2556 ' v 91? / 17 g ? I I - j{z.e So 0, -- - -, - - - - • , i ?i i ? ; 33% CN.UDy -- ' --*- 3s -- 1'960 Z-. ZLoD - _ -- - :-- -- - - - ?.. _- --- -----? - - , I . , ? - - - _ - ---- ; '? ?yil? -- ya-.?1?• - ??? _ _ $3uo zs e T is?ccv ? _so I ?oQ, - ? I - - < s r1E •rr?z.?„_?., - - ? , ' j Lo L - - i ? ' ' ---- ??CWJ4? !g I I / / i ? ! ---- __ ?e?<,AF.?r<r : I z9 rr ?1 ? , ; ' ' l yiDQl `/036Z A/ I . I ? t1?fR(REYAIRS r 'E75oN5 ) I ! Qa Z£?Z ? i ? ? 1'1 UCA '?weu i 7 1 6's i i 1 -- -- A?ov?Tisi,pb - r"79 I 1 x 6b??cocs 4 ?il ?-Z 8 . 4s i 6- __- T i?r?- ' ?1 -?A1GoNE ST ' I ? ? I i - • -, ? '' ? ? i ', ? _ I - -- - - _ , I . _ -•--- ?7 I s aE ) 28 G7S -- _ i Ur ---- -- e-r- wz A4,s °°;? ? ? --?- - ' - ?O-Q?' -- -' -- - -- ?._ , I - - - ? - - , . -.- - - -? -- --- - --G ?q-? ?F6 , -+- I - - -1'?N1aJES-- ---(vA?1JlALG ? - - . -?---? - -• - - ?- - - , ?'?'- 79.`IJ6S - - -- - -? ---' -- --- --- ---- -- '- - -- ----- - 1 -- -- - - I? II -J i Fi?r,oc?r? S37 ? ?er.?Tarse?i - • -- - - 7 89 6 -} -- t - ? - - i - - , --- ?. I I Sza_ - -- - - --- -- l-3- 64 - ? - -- - ? - -- ? -- ? --- -? - -? I ,I I I -- T srs . _ ?r.us-?s? I 9?'-- -- - - ? - - { i i ---I . ? - ,I, I ? IA(JEL(TuAFE.S?WP. I ° 1 I i i0 au ?, e.c?q 8o i --- - ? -- - - r- ? ? / _ ; ; ? ? 3 I 9 ?.9 ? - - - - ?EL'?IGES. _. /J - --- -r -- ?.`- - - ;-- -- --- ? - - ? ---- - - , __- Z ? - ' I 6 ? , ? , , I - -- -?- --? -•- ? -- , OI • j ?` i ' ? I+ ? ! - - - - - - - --- - - =? - _ - I --- -- -?- , I T S 1 ? i YS - . - ,- - -- r -- - ? ? f - - - - - - - so T ----?3a`?,?? I -?--...- - I-- -? -'-I-- -- I ? , t--? - - cU, J&AA.) - - 1 ! 8Z I fl, ?EPA1C5 fr /??lJNTE7,+A .Y.£ - r i ?; I; , ? ? yoe-S?B?irnc ' ? 135 ? L ? - TlDODL$ 1I. Dv I ' ? il ?f'o N 7_ I -- - 7 7_1 0 6 ! - I---- ¢i6AUFiEc "L 1 8 47 I ?7AYDENS?Poois / c. ?7O I 1 I II I - ? ? ? TJiR 16HTind A' rEn 9 Z 8 70 ? I i i I . I li8 HI SD _ Ro ocur Krc ? b S?4o i 1 ' I j i a-...? ? ? a_-r: . '^_ e6•: ? 2 3 d 5 6-7 r? I -?- -- ? ! 6?6 8 1_z9 I ?_ ? - -- -- -- - - - - - --- - -- - - - - ? -- . ?i 1 7 ! ? s? ? ? ? ? Io? ' ' ? -- - ---- - ; - I _--1- i - 7xc Eena, y z?y - - - i -- - - -- I I . CLU N 21 ZE 3 II ? /3, OPE[AT6Ub ?X E -" _ 2 171 y_ ? . J -- - ? I I- - I ? ? S, 1 6 b I -- - -? !- --?i - - - ; I AD LK I ? I ZS I I 1 I 3C 771 I - - I ' i . I I - - ? ! ? I ? ? ? I * ? I ' ? ? r-?oti?rT?s•nc. -- - - - / 1 0.? _ -- ?I '? -- . --- --- -- - -?---- --' ? I ---?- --- ' --- --!---, -- ------ --- , ---- ' , I , I --? ? -? - ? I 7? , ? ' I .-yL`_N9Trn.V=_ 3 ' ' ?- - .? _ _ S??NS LY E Ft2'r -{ ? -? ± -- `3 b3 - - --a- -- ? --- - - ?- - i - .'- ? I I TtKTOR? I I , 3O '2_7S_? I - I -- ? ? - -? - ?-- I _ - .-- - ??`? ? ?' ? ' ' 4 • - -- _ - --- i - f - w S, ?uSU+PA?E -' i I I ,I ' G`l G7 - I -i---- I i ?i?E-GCa55 ? i 1iS4 7 ? ' , II ;--?- I G. ?AXES ?Aio ; ? l'q ZO I i { ? ? ? 3577 9 I -- I..? ----- I ? I PEAL ESTilT C£ FlCA FEO. HN. l1.. Fuuo C._ /FuTR ?`D • ?' `- - ' Hisc. - - zv Q I6 `? ? 8?9 9 P°9 / 89 LC l 10 5' 64 ,?4z ? i I i i 7 ? i ! ? ? i i - ' ? . ---- ? ??? ? J 6'6 !n,Ay?? I "- • dLS ? , ------ ? 9i7.Y - - , - ; --- ' --- i i 19.. - - JA7frJ Su7PL£5 ?A6u $?_ e?_L- - ' - - -I _ I ?_ ; _ So - aeTorwL i - ?Q.OvvicE ? ?aa en PA Frz. ? C?F.v.u?S ? uFS I I/ L S _ . - -- - - - - .- 68 ? l3 ' '_ __ I _.' '_ -_' ?' " ? • I i? CONDSM6N 5 .. _ _ .._ ? . _ '_ _ J 75?6[. ! ?? _?E6+STF1t.TA I I L5. ? .;_ t?_1.6b i L ? ? { __- --• i ?? /?.a,u6Facs _ _ ? Z°9.9 - q _ 4 - -- -- -? - - ; - - -?- I - II ' Rnses E . Cuvs } -?-- 86'lss?il --- - i 11 -j - - ? -. - i ! I ? , , -- i 4S7 ?,s,?,Erc „ 1 I 3 0 70• ? ? ?I ' iAs' - ? -?- --; ? ./ Z9g:i7Ji-- -- - - J ??? -- ; - --?- --- ---- - , _ , I ? ? ? .. _ ( ' ? -- -- , D?? ? .. ?1'T LG.?1T14L ? II ? I - - - - - , - i - _? j ? --- ' -- j - - -_ - I - --- /_9P3- -.--- , r--.-- - -&<.r.rx.E S".vcrr i98./ -? rAn?f? ? y ?i??TiT'I I: ?T 17EH I? Si.7fONE I ?iF? I ?s ` j S•JCerE j ' ^ I ?'HMI1i/?? I? I -- I z03 i9940 I i ? Gr749-::y S Nocc? 3 1 z-45 a' I / 39 3Bb ?D I /8 //n16 Y Z 5 '7 If G38S3-' , ? - iH o ts -iP I (inenotzsp.rc • , , I 7-7 96e I Yuu.G,tss ? N977 477-7 ' ? _- ? I 4$ LDS3 9 vy 740 /S r.J ? Z l 38 ' j i I I S4oz°s 1 00390' ? 0 JseDKN) i CEeo«vrlN) S?7I i -? LS9 Groo?s ?? . Z3LE?v??i, '8H08? ic ? .9e I y3 ,Tw?rs I! '-,E.?? , ; _ .:`J I 3c.bM j s ?' ?JooopF.? 39 N 7? 173z- I i ?O I ? Hi/:5 I . 60.F.vll ?z?/91 3 2?? I I i __ o? 3E ?iurrs I . / Ea ? 96 z8 3?O ' 3 ?n i I'- i I n dDLOVf3?'$ .ter2?, 'SI ' ? I I ? , IEA i ZZO' . 9-7 !? ? ? 99b /v90G5?''_?' - ° io ---- L-- -?-- . . .: '/S --.-- ? ? ? i S/ _ -?-I-- I ) I ?Y i_ < ? - -t3rtX.?JS??3,y . - s E? 7??7bj? -. ? t -.7r6.l,biy - ? -- .- r o_ I bEE.c?Dr.?Fr !a I y7, i ?9_4D?9a?• [D _. J:532?? : I 3p _ _9o4z? , -- ? ? ---r-i / - aL=/97aoe 'R-- ? . 17. ?/a(oi Z7/0;r?.. ._;31o'9?bf' ._ I -;- - -- -- ? !---? ? ? - , ? ? m ra ; i-?--?-?ZZ;? /7b,3f ?--?- --- -- _?- - '? ' ? •/. Gwov?A?n,Erc 9 T ?93i ea ? ? , ? : ? ?tswtc0 _???J - Or? ? res _ 3,'{.!-- - -? JJ o_•s -• ?_ ? --: . ? --- - -- I ( i I r ? I I4? ' J ?? i i __4.7?r.tyrY- - • ?0 -- -' - - - ? ' ' ?-T - ; :- - 2 ? ? ? 7. ?_ i.? , _._•_ . ? - , - ' 3 ? -?yr?•C1drl!CKl. f -?O_? ? - ' 'g? _' .,,- ? J_ _ ?? 97 Z9 I ? -- a f -? i L - i c ? i ? 1 z 2 z a 2, 3 . 0 WILWN lONES CCM>nNV G7506 GRCCN 3pJ_ l84 .7 ? . _ ?. -- y?? , - --?- • ? ' -- Ts? ?- ---- ..s ; .I7?vl i ?v?rur?r? i. GiSr j I CoST I i v t Lb.J- 7 ? 5: j l i? ? -- T ? ? li i Cl.uANOJSE ? l:r310? '? i Dursiv? i ZP66o I i ' /7L ? .f1A7tle?iL j ? I 7_ /OSD ' ?scr I ? wl 76 3 i 772-;fL I I SEED ? zoo .1i. ,! i ! _ SAUp ToPDK?ss?? S6T. I G G 3 ? ?. .r I. vp Z-q T 9 ? ? I I --- ? l0. /CV:F,?TxFF?r I I 6?Sour.JE_ ' z.asTbA ? zJl?/9s ? -._ . ? i - ?? • ? ? ?-?-a? --' -?- ?' ? ? - S__ 1.q?Y I-- j_ I ? . b?GS?z i i ? ? - - . I _i?/SO? I i ? ? I , ? i86 -- ------ i - - - , ' ? ? -?? I I , ? , ? ? i i eniSFK A - ? -- - - -? --??- 2 Yp _- /Z. af-AieS?/?9i.Jr6.V rl - -- - - - ~ ? ?- I T ? ? ? -, ? ? --- 5 6N5 oS7s - , , I ?y67? ? ? ? ? ? j p ' TEU6AT? c+V S -- at-. _ ?8 ? i ! : --- - 7a z 75 C _c ?i 2, ?I z 3 3 3 3 3 f.,wi?N,MESCom>.Njma&S$,r.iYS",1b?cs,frc 5G3 .. n ? T ? 7 ; r 3I<A.C>.E S.mwr (?,I ---- /9P4/ - ? I , ?OSr ? - - - - , _ ? i ? 11 li I rITAn?CS /y1L II 9n ? I, I ? o ??eTS l1.CAUE? Z= S ? ! j i ? A' 70 s4 ' I fQU?F. ?ulAC ( ??' ? I . . i . I i I T 7' ° 3 i Z Z ! ' . ? IjryERE4A ? 3 . ---- Hwue Stusw 1'6', f ?OGCS 1 I ? ? I I _ I .C.e. TilS I _ SO 6iv. i .T ? So o II _ 7ys ?+o /y ? . Sua-5re"? i --- i I :7b4'r I I i 6aa?a 5 ? ? , ? I -- To,rv . /375.6 I . ? i ' ? ?.371/ I '9?/ ;7, i ' yo 1.1.30 ; ? ' {9 I I ? C. CLUS?OLS? ? ? ? I , I I -- • t 3 .,r yb N?. GtV$S ? !.'7'99L 8D' ' 9b ? ? -- -? °--I - -- - ? - 4 ' . ? I _-. -- - I ? r ,3'? I L7 5 Ti.O? SE ? t 75. b - ?I ' i9 J I I a ? o c Kiu,s- ,--- ;- ? ? ?1Y8 ? ?;. ; ? ?? - ?s -- 8o,c _ ' i - .- ?-• ?? ,. , _?,r?s ? - ---?-? - --- ? - - ? - - 35 ' EMP60?EF//? ? 6I_. ..- 79 40 ? i- .i C WILiOh lONES LOMPAHY G7506 GRFE" --- -?- - i ? .? z : i ?Al1?.VCE S.KEF7' ??eNtL - - - ----- - -?- ?I I; - ---- i: - I ? To?JY - ?s I SrEn ? Qwo.?r•rY L/S. 7.v?vea,ocE , I 4 i ? ' 2047 ? HACCeuErrc -/? I 63 z 7-' I , ? v? I ' ? . TrES ?.n - ? ? ; l LLS /l I , w s ? ogI ? fFI,G /Z7119 71 . _ ' w , , I I I b ??• ? . ?.9Y XAH.J I ? /DO.?G . . . . . i . ! ! 37 8 $ y0' I i ? ? >(JPYU£5 /JaV ?SA AaLE ? I 5• - 5 r a. i _ p. r- P.?? i ?.? ?• ,?rs: ? . ? ? ' , , ; , ? ls.enuiue?SoP? Is's ! __ , _ . U_:yoi i -?-; , ? I .-? ' I --- 1 I { 3 ? 7. 6e I i - ? I J.- L I I I . , < - £? cuss P ras, _ _..__ --, _• ?/?L,9- - JI ^ I' - .-.:-{ •--- -- - - ? ?-- .- 5 6 e r K ?•??rr(?VY ? - I--?_ ? __. --'_-?_ _'__ 1__?-i I -.I?' /1$!?I ? I . i--. ? , . ? !9 - ? ' ' ; I I Z!919 io TrL.%C&- l..fz Fn _ s---. , • ? . ZVSC+r.?.JC _ + 33 , I W9 ? 1I ' i . ? 36 ? I I ' I S,L8G?0 . "6 ?lNEP XPENSE ` s ? _ _ _ I I ? --? -- 1 : : , Z/!9o . _• .I __ _ ? -- -?-- -? ? E z? [?.?E I . -- - --- -- ;5 --- ---- - - ? -,.-?- 1 ; -j 7 7 40 - '.- 0 WLLLOn JON[G COM,MV G7506 GRE[. ti ?-- -- --- -- ? -- : -- ._--- - - 7 ? - - -0.s0, I Cosr I MA41//1_ eS T f ..J L I I i B!/ncE 19 IS 7 k / 9 74 z Ps?vm ra 3 7 • ?/C? . 0 6ou? 4ass?r?a - ?i I i ?' I ? ? i ..l,. ? i 7s peg jy;0 D?`T 8b 1 3 99 ? '_ ' ? I • •--?-- -3Q0 6s?o?e.-- --- ?-- ' ' F i I ?/ ? i ? _ I _ ? `?? 3 I I I 2 1 4 I ' 7 yp I ---- I' -?; ' 7z I/.fr: -?- - ? I 3?9 Iq I? _ ?i ' ! 1 4417 ? ? ?u„?. - iz 1 -? _ ??_ ? (41 1.IJ /7 0. _ K.? o- ?_i I ? Yi. ? ? I I ?? '?/I? 1 0? . '? /?30 4!7- \ Sus I ? ? ? I M I o. 7 'r ?oPsr?lP)S'!q1'µ G 9I L ne : ? _ q 1 yz o ? C?,s) L?? ? g b ` ' r 3 , _ ! I - _ ra?A,?? ?. - S•IUtUUM6 3S?Q _l i , ? 2? Z S ?.?. ', .? ? 1 11q 1 - sb ? 71 l - I , - ?- ? I 1 i i i s Frc ,tJo?s t!ey G3 I b ? 2 7,3 3e ; 9 8? ? ? ? -• - _ ? ' a , ? o wtco ? / v,? 03 _ ? l ? - - I ? t -- 1' :DZ N8£aS.//J'S% ?2?0 4? ? - t i o zOcwD - ? t 4/0 # ---- h-t- ! I . . 3 Z?N ehenc. - ? 2 t ? A I?nMn ?UFS I - - - ? , - ? S 1Oj -- ,EGTIS/d4 - - /. Z ? ° S D?I ?iw[K?IN VTECE'ST T . .A? ?J ' i ? I J I 9?I _ ? ? I 1-?. ?:5?'YJ ? OG _ O ff T ? o c, e ? i I 9 3:5'7 /iz! U i 3 a 4 5 6 7 8 9 it 1 t; r. i? 1! tl 1! L 2' s z 2 2 2 2 z 2 3 3 3 3 3 J d 3 1 t ? -- --- - - -.. Y ? t : - --.. - ?•?? - ------------------- -- _ /9PS ----- --- s-Q=-7------ , i OO? i_ ? 1 G_us.?ovs? y? /,z 97 ? ? I ? z Ovrsiu? i 4d 1 I 8'9 '1 Z& : 3 dFF/GE • 11.3 ? D.fWszs ? S _ ?-_- oft? , ----?- - -4 Av.o. S?tES A11 1 o 7 ?---- _ -- -4 1 Z - I o 71 ; i? ?,--?-' - -;- - y- ? - I If I I ; Q7NEZ. 7 I 2 - ' _ _ -_1 _ I ? • S 2 S 'r ?? i ?? , ? s h I I I , tn?_.s,v.v ? ?1MEA(RNYSOME?A.V? __ I ? __ ? 1 (o (> 4 / G • Y j I i ?- ?l I l i i i?, i. I n+roue.sr-Nout twa? ry Ui e i1. . I g 7? P - I ?ori ?Naa?aw SauE ( ? 2 3i ! L ? ? i I - . i - - - _ , ? I z7 ? --- ?LEPNGKJE I '? ? I 1I I u I _'' i' t _ ? .?rrrAtnt Gns- 3? ' -- =-- i ? ? ?cr.ex? ?t ' 3 ? ' ?' ? ? E I ? Lr ' . ? r iCL GC?iE?? i --? - ? ? - ? - -- 6 L t?i?S --- / 3 Y 37 y _. ..? -.?_. ?,- I-- 9 i 3 I ? ' I i ! ?? I Ho,eTF,Ab£ IZ 3 Y? = z ,r, . ? l I ,, ' I ' ? - ? ? I i YvsucA,ucE ? + ' - -- I 2 B FESfiaJRLSEt??cLS: ? '? i . ? -i ? t? 98 'J' . o ? ? //CGCUdYAQ1I5_ Z ? _ _ _'1-• _ 1 _' " j 1 _ 5 ? a9.ur??f6- , i 3 1, ? I -? - ' - --- A 6- c , 9 ; 1- -?- ? B --- t-= . . .-- -.o??? s??EH ? ? ?- ' ?i ? -? ? ? !rb ! I ? J 1 2 s 4 s 6 7 B 9 u t r t, t n 1 Y 2 Z 2 7 2 7 z 7 7 3 3 3 3 1 : eb w.?iwcs caw??wr 67506 owcc - IW- P... Fi? 7'Sci esiLY? IYWLCl1A77 - ? ? -- -- r ? 6 : ---- -----?jAtAdKES?•'EET ?AOT. ------------- ------ - ? - - ? ---- /9?S -- - - --- - - 5 ? 1 e - -1 ? i Tor?? s ; I - - ? Src?a , i ?u,v.e?rir+' . fosr_ - i Ccs-r ? . i I b F -Ap AT O UJ - . PER ? i . ! SuPl??rS NoN- 1 StE ?___ I ? I_.. , i I AeiNf.AW StG I ? ? / ?Z ( - I ? ? ? OSrio6E / _ . j j ._ ? I - - _ - ? ± ?? r _ _ _ _ 07 I I i _Di'ASPL(k.7GsrJt-p TG_ -4-4 013 ? II ptJbC?Sd? __--__ - T -? i '? ?! - -' ?.33 - ? _ ? ? i g ? '_ ' __ • i ,&.e ,s a-L*ASw ' 93 ?_J I ' I I ? I s - • o{ ; , • , cE ? ?? ; ? ! ? ; ? Cy 4 , Sys scee Pr?aus- ' _ i I ? ? S 7 so 2 GVEC1=5_?.YR.VDFL/S YYID '? , -? - I ? I '3 . ?xaEAISaSrlW_SS?JESSHFMf ` _ I , ? i I -I 8G3 b I !4 ? I ?! 7001NEYS.rT1CCA'I???f . 5 E/1w, ? 1 srop5 ?nn 1 I -- , t6 ,_? 27 28 25 3 r ? I I ? ;I 20 . 31 3 1F.??Rrc?vu75 ' 33 39 ?I4 i I ? I{ I. S/,Z3 " - - I 74 4 75 A ._ ?_ _ 1ZU9TE]P/ui_S?5'7E_H - ,- - - -i- t ? ' . ? , 1 , ? c13.?tdcT?tK..at.--- , ;?. ' -- • l J -- '° t o_r T?cs . t -? 4 1 - -- , ? 2 39 40 ? i ? M ADL IN 2 U f V 7 2 3 t S 6 t B 9 11 1 i 1 t 1 i i 7 . Q W1LfON10NE5 CAMlAMY C'lOOd OREEN ?_- -- -- : " i ^ ?A?9NGE SNEET- CouT• --,- _----- /98S R = (? - , T T c s _ i .ITEM UA?J7'T'J ?CT lil ? //00. PA/L tl?A-TE,UA CP n i - - - ? i ' ? C? rZ7 A - 6Z.5 ; j i A thC 1ARE L'I?AC ? {1 3 ? ? i - - -_?- . p 0h SSAfETl? rCEN , _ ?- r- - I - - -- -?- - - -? 1 f ' ?. 2 GZbE'ZGo ? A ? 7E 1 ? I I !'/Ib 83 ? I, ? , _I , i . oZ 7RL _ 4Ur Ea O Z??I7/EK Ue.o. Ex. ( 1.. I . I ? 2 ?4P 0?") 37 I? ? I i I ; I 41 8 ; i - - p31 AiPUivACES ? 7 7v '? Z2 0O ?UIFU???"P: ? _ I i' II' i FS5ui15---- - '--t- ? - -- ?9 N 4 4 4 _ _ , ? f ; - ;!? s ;. i? A.,?HE _p c-r 179 ? l.cv_F?rsr?? -- ? _ _ ? ''7 9? i _ - i ? - ? •- i a ? ? , - - 9 i ? I Od, PRD?EHCNTS= ? I ?? I I ' ! ± ? ' I i ? ? ? gb ii I 3 {6 -?- I ?-- j 3 ? -----?--- I--4- ? I I ?G^1LYDEyvAL HEa ? I '? - I ' _ _ I I • : f ' i 1 _ - F16, L1Ftr_ ? I T ; i I I I ?- p 0 - - -- - • I ? -r: - ' t ? - T ? i 7? L ? ?W 4]?8 ? q ? 7q '3 ' Z?bs 1 i -------- ---- -- ( i - T ....,. ... , ? . U 1 a 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 lE u li l1' 11 i 2i 2 2I a z s 2 z z 2 3 3 3 3 s 3 ? Q WILiCN JONCS COMtGNY 07506 GRE[N Y r i ---- -----_- ?- - z n - ? s e=_ L ?'?Y,mr,r ? -_--_ - I Trt.r<.s --- .'Aar. rc ? S7zN ?? nr I I 7.?F ? ? ?sr ? S?ucawE ( .?K,. ? ?s ? I i ? ? ?..---..•-- ?, ? ? • ?? im- c i _ - - i - - i - - I - -- ? ' E/P''r"!', ( ? n C7 I ?y ' 3 ` z i i i g yo '? I / r y 3 Z-7: ?I ,' iz ?dr?rc5- ?? I II I I S 7 8 - 6 8 AS R'T5 u - ? CT'$ I O f I L ?' I I F i / ' 7 S - I I? r . ? B F AtcE55oP? 5 I . Z 1 3 ? 03? I VSao4l i v S pe . b O I i ? I cS 317 3 7 7 en• ? 3 4 9 2 -3 '7 0 7 I i 0 0 I 0 6 zYi ? I „ Purlacs, x' 2 A.i 8 /0 70 I 1 Y i . J! Z AqT'n i Y . ac ' , I li I V dr Eq q II ? ? i S Ea ?' Z - ? _ ? y 7 ?W+6CEUA 2 GUTS Z E I . ? ? I i b .0 I1 e 8 i 89 i Z S? y? B 9 N Ii/t ? Re . 9 ? I 3 3 7 7 ro ? "»i?? ? ff b i z i 3 6 o b I ? 2 5 a i I 6gu, ?P [ Z I 6 S - 7 / $O I /S 1 9 0 . ? - i f3+??a f I 2 3 y9 3 1 b 'rb ? I : ? ?? I s 8 g 5i V p 80 ? ? I qlY'r.. ? ms y o 8 - z o 0 ? ? ?nra Nun E.. 7 ,4 z N y Z s 3 g'f ? ? ' sv ? M SNlPS• 1 0 i i I Z 6L?la Z i ? ? ? . Z MA.AO)CqPr- 7 7 2 - fj? ER?ST : ??RYVIFW . T. r I2b I1T HE R_ i _ - i G? rvi N?? ;t d +e q r I 4 -. I 3 9 ?6 6?' t 7 9 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 t] 19 14 t! Ifi 79 :u :, 27 23 21 2: tE 27 24 9f 31 i: ,s a? 31 41 ? r . : s 1 T 3 4 5 6 r 9 io n tY 13 14 ts 16 I -- -------- -___- • ==-T -- - - - i - I oTqL _ ?- S ?TE H ? J? . rT COST I I ? ! I - - - 1 i - . I I i, < 43 ? ?l ?'iw.?cee DeqMJ ? Z b i xE5 /?Ar ? I • I '1 I 6 6o i I. i? I ??.u ? ? I ! 1 0 6, i yr, i ? I ?• ? rl..,e k? z 9 - I ! ? ? / 7 Z ? I o3 i 7 ( - i 1 /ivus s. t o ? z s Is l o Z ' I , 0 7,qv JLAHI I r S I SU .tY? t I I ) f i / E17E ? it C I L G ? ' I a- • I ? f ? I 8 I I AIAEVIWt AA ! 3?? I I I ? I 7 U, I/fGrViEW ??N/GLE: i b b 7 1/7 ' i ?0,6 ? 3 Z r3 j LT696E 2 ? P OF 55/oN.OL ??/ I Z 3 9 W/ . r Am??vs r 89 1 ?.avuTfloT I i Se?e?? ? i = I f9GA ' - ? A. 4,?s S 9 ALA SYSTE U. _ F I G I , ? ' EA?.va rc Secucr / '? ? 18 20 41 ZZ E z, 25 26 27 28 30 71 a2 d3 31 33 a! 7! 41 - -'- ---"' _LV. ?iq?,oucE SN?T l.awr, s . 0 _ /YPG : -- -- ? --___ ? -?- - -, ' I Gecr D. PEXA7/Nfi LfNPEN=? ' i SuDYt1ES NoN-SR1e+iH t , I .OI! OFr![E'- u Pz?ur? ic- ' ? o BGbCKLFP/YL ? / E 'Poss/ss< ? ?? z ?/ ? I? i Orrrc.L ' ?': i ?' 02 C?uaMOUSB - I 3 7 ? Pf1?E5 (L£9A211t76 15D ? 3b? I I? I (OAI D/H ? i? I PENGIL$ / LR ? Y 9 I . ? ? I! I SCptFCN.P?? i I '? i II fµos PtA?ES Erc . I! // 7 ? .- ?; ? ( i0/3 OVTSIDE ? i i, h?RA1DTOOLSC?'°? ? ? 79 ' ? I ?? TNE ?S20?Rp?£ .iZ Fo ELlSN - y'? ? : ? ? 'a P?0r480E 161A.CfS - I ? Lc/617 ?.tJ - ? 74 ? G 9 ?'? I AOVE?CTiSUJb ?S?s j I I I ' LicEses?aszF+m ,u i n I z 4 ' - I ? asceiPTin05? I o I j ?.o i i ? I 0 ?h'EU?S i AAIQRL Zi9 3 zo zo ??? ?I D U E S ? 3SRT9 I(7UQV ?iCNE5 I ?C I 73 s ./ s I 8 ? Z'/ ,r ; ' I , r LoNAT/oNS crriFr5 S P V 1 7 7 1 Ptl?ER YCR 6rcr Ex ? 2 9 9 i ? y 9 i , t 9 y i ? I I 6q50iENE ? Z 1 17 4 ba / i1 t 2 PROPA.VE - 8 /3 ijJL R'G<1NT5 - 11 P/7rR iM,9/n1TENRAt 5 . I Durpn"2 - ro ? .ON 6?v?oEUS S I / o pL - ' orz k)ir?ai.vb-S r? 11A. L Q 0 1 L S? . .0?3 Etec7e?c,al 9 M 8) .01? AsFS ? ? - ? Q ? O/S ?pecS F F v??+'I?K i OM ? J 1 2 i 1 5 6 ? e 9 ia li r. il 1! ii 2 1'. z. 2 2 Z 2 2 7 ] 7 d 7 1 w? ,w+aawrAwr a......... ..i ij.nn.,.. -- ??..?....._'.' ..__ _____ A TE o nTrT ' ?? T ?LT I? -_•{ - I. . AqL I?JR/?JTE'!q/ I T T T I 7 1 I? 1 .OC EQUipP1ENT ? i? i I 3 3 3Ii • _ O 7 '? ! ?' Zt ?roULDS ?? ,I 7 ?? 023 Teo ?? ?i g q sS,j ? I 02'1 ?N?GCWAP6 ?A4L' ?I ? l ? ? I . ' 02 f ?Fe'r ?tEeN ?: 1 I E-Z ? I? i, BwiHor I, Or T wlc?u? 21 1 -4 2 9 N I ? ? ? ? .D LLUBHOUSE ? II ? ? 99 ! L v ? 03 AIPI?A.UGES ?? L7 . c i ? /G I I - ? 1033 Srieu?r?rE ? - i I /2 0.1 TU2c PKEEP: ?? •P S r I? ? ua .P?c I 4 - 3 / Q I 13 . ?QwPMENr UYLHH ? 7E ' I I C ' 07 'i ? ? ' I I ?I? cHNe v ? 9 , I I ' ? i .O f?AN .eEFTO i / 3 3 31 i . D f/yozAucrc LIFr I . 1 1 ? i BarTet?G/Ae??e.. ' I ? ?' I I ? 44 ?1PKOVEMENT. S - t i ?I LAC4 3 ? I ? + H I SI .P YrfEq eBlALA J •_j . I 1) - •?I ir,ex lacscuYa 1 a - E-Z 6aLEr4sE ? ' ? - I T t t o I u - 3 '7 9O I 3 7 b? o ? 1, - - - - ?I --_ ? _ _ ? - - _ - - - I - - - - - ? - - - I ? ; -I 1 _ ? --f = - ' 1 : _? I J- - J 1 S 3 4 5 8 , 6 ? 10 11 17 13 ll t! tE tt zi 21 z; Z? ti 7 2 3 3 v i 1 ] 3 A O wu.wn wris ww.r.r.v 07806 oNcaX UNLAdLE SNEET - •? ? ?_- /9fs7 •.? . . 2 ! 4 6 6 ? T °.bFdonr ' T7A s -7 c ?TeM _ tiirriT ST .i KoHE D?FF. (es-r SNrcr+E fN.W/wG wYfMTet /D . EPO?IT ?T?N. ` TO-1 DFILY ;FECE/PTS . // E£N {? ; - 3 7 3 3 9 bf G1 7 -1 r L ° - r 3 1 0 i / l P . l2 ?JTA! $ '""' LD O n ? ?RS li9?LT_< ? ? 3 ? 6 / i o •r i?v Gox- ? i . l3 r?0[F atceSSaSi 5 g Q? - - ?P usEO'87) A ( x T J O? y 2 3 i ?/FH ,q,?? o a E ? 3 6 ? <C "'?ERS.? : f - / 2 7 70 i3 f/ r ro ? i K..??ceavic /n 5 e q 3 io 3€ 7 S Bex- 5 - 3 G Z 8 .brs , ? f5*?:5) , ? 2 t q r S o y 21 3 99 ? 6T1 POP r H 8L 3 2 lA. 1 Z ? '/ E O ? ip E? c G.H • OY' s flP RoZ I ? i n. i 4 - ? / / f0 63 EE I L o N 1 O 3 Si 9? ? / D - 90 /6 (boaz.) E 7 rs H 7 ! O O x o2 9 2 ?S 77 re 3 1 7 Co 7S y '.9 3 - 'L 1 r Lf5 .r 30 = .? 707 T r - 31 =1 1 a 3'/ 3 OZ EH8E7G5/??Y?: Z ?I Z . z l ?utt - 3 ? . tz. lJ?r?a r- 9 9 . zs Z"°?lsst-Z - 3 ? . 2?( f?ivaOrcAPS - ? O _ PAxeu, ., Z 3 7 061 10 Ty??? t ' ' D?MI EN Y P ? i ? TR.?c.16vE ?obaqy j - i ? i y z i i 7 2 1 e s 6 7 B 9 10 11 L t: f; 16 2c 21 22 77 t: 31 21 H 2! 9f 31 r, 34 3: 44 11 4 O WLLtON IONEi COMMNT O1006 OIIE[M MADC iN 0.6 • ?`ifi'Ir/.JGE T 9 : 6 ? II Cosr I ALAP.fES AIET : I ? ? ? 8 ? 9 1 3 I 5 e7 Z. !T51 ^ : I i I , I `II 3 '!i ? ?FIGE . OWNEK v? 30 . Art s I?.a.a : 8 t 57 . ! Esr.l, i ? L .v 5 0 73 /?i.uu UCFu?vc / cz, UG ?U7A s7 0 4 eY'EASES !$nN?e 1 y8 1 9 , s ? L?At' /2AMiJ / - G . L s I ?S•?cAn)C.?: 2$ ? , 1 emuctrY L u., ' 1 9 ; Z aWF ?< 6 ri e s: 1 ? i JtXRL e?rA i )FAF-e7-£C17V / I 70 . ECV/FJO //Efl/CLF: ? . 1 / 8 7- 7 6 1911 1 ? 3 ? £ I'1 / i9 ! f-bKT6N6E 3 Z ?, r .?U5UU44C,6- - 8 PESSicilt,L S6e?i 5 : 13 8 0 ? f . 1 Arro&,jE s G r ? Au.awr.r.vr 3 - i ,rx. sErr,cf Gi . 3 8 ? . ?/ N6A. SD .GA I .,r 7 S I , 7 dir 7?--& I ? fr M 56 F I T F T F I ? WLLJMi JOM[f COMMMY 61lO? O?E[M ? 'pdp ? ??? rECSIJti_ _ ?)T M6OL IN Y 6 t I 9 t S 6 7 a 9 ?o i? t7 51 tB ? .5 21 zi r 74 2! 21 T; ,i 2! ai 31 s; 31 oi 11 41 Firi?A.UGE S?',arT (22..ut ) • ' /9P7 ? . . . 2 ! 4 6 " T u rTt?_ ??? 7 CGKT ??tr l? . E.PAT/N<r EXPE=n .. .O SuPP[iES AkW -SA r+1e o// v??c - 0 4f PtiA1 T/.vlr I - - - 38 - I t Ct'CP/.fll.- osf.re-t 3 ? OsHE2 / ? - -. ?/2 ?+?G'HOUSE ? ? Q 3 6EqN1N6- $UPPUe Z 3 87 ?pRJ61NE.t1T$ S vuc R 3i 9 S° Sro?EUCOS - b a"cr=r G/P; i s ± s ' Z 9O I gnic TNEK TY ??E?c. 3 / 2 6 f ? 0/3 C?7?7DE AIlGT r' ? 5 f y Tea ?cs Gn 1 .O P1?GP?SN - I ! / gP oeToz4r T,:r*s 9 3 ? - O CUu-/F.,.) - i ADVFLTiSnJb??sii6Aps 3 74 f b SES ?t Fa+c 3 ; 1/1 ?y .SUE 10 ADOCU:S? /9 191 1 ; Exm"Aw s„s""E• ` T u? o ? sb i I?•O AT/OWS ? - I I i • ( I 3 ? L o E ? z3 ?` d'tx.s.U15 Ai,C /NTFN ' ? _ 9G ? 9? i YS 2 ? /3 EL6GTlL/CAL ? ? ? , ??b Lr.RT Pi.s ? - O?ruaeu aaau mu?.?n MDE ft 4 05 TD uAo. 1u u c w 1 t 9 { 5 6 7 8 9 10 ii ti n 14 1: IE 19 :a a, 27 27 71 2! 21 :1 tl 28 31 31 31 : 34 3! ii ]! .u ? /7r t >• • ' !i _ ,PreYaretlfr t a -- 53246 i, - - -- a7.5e ?. ,ZTE= - ?1vA.Vr?r}? ?sr ?iiKG+lE ?pST- - --- - SNtO?YE 27Eao5,T r Af .. - = -! - - =- -t- - - ? A Z7Ai?y K? * - 6KEEN -j?EES iGU ES FX t nE HBE N 5, , ? i ? i yNocE 3S ol _ _ 9o ?3z- _ / Z /Z3 32 ; ? - -- - .. y t - - - so ? •(9 N i 4 nz ( 3 S9 ° / 9 a ooD 4s e - -- - - - -•--- ---._. . -? - -?UU - - -- °G - - -i - - -s Is? -- -- - - ? ?2c F ?----- - ? 09, - -- --? - - ?? - -- --- - - ! , A l3 lccrHetFS I j E5 ? ? j b ie7 /11 7B 77-7 ?? ?--. (usco'8a1 -aG37ms.8ALLS- - - . - . _ ? ZO, - -- 'Q3 L- - --- '-7 ?- --- ---- ? 37ZaAGzpvES - -- - 37 _V7.37 z - o4? - - - -- -- --- ' ? - -- 7-17 ? - - 9s - ? f -- 4/9 38- ? 104 --- : ?Y _t - - - - ; I ? I _ Z3 36 30 g _ G! Y73 79 _ 9INP c? ____ __ _`- ?? ?Go? - ? b L4q ' •1 ??d?9 - - -- I ? ; eRfc i i ? I / 4i9 Po? Svcu .x z. su 7 Lo? ? 69 6? . oG 9r / v?s^- ; ? /327L 8EEK? 5 . __' _ _ /O 4/ S E _ __,_.3 Z2a -J-?/ ' ]-$ ? 851?4Def.) ' .S? 6D,0 ISa° 3 - - ' - ? I 39 I 3i7 EA Gl_71 3 8.7? , - ' ? ? b64 CoFFEC ay0 ? c ? r. n 46 z y,t " -- - - ? _ 3o/z )lwST i -- - , r- Ns?o 39246 i ob!- ir,cb 3 6oSg7 3 130 _ - i -- - 173Oi0 -" ?-- , LZ idEE KDAv JWIO ? ? zs '??°i'lEna 33 - '- - -- - . -- ? i o ri?rE,eESr s s A? • ' - ;- - - 71'y?T , . --- -- 5 ivia <7D5 wu Y YG?o? , - -- - ? ? I - -- - i . - - - i ? ---1-- -- /4 - j 0L7_. ? i -- - - -- - I - I ; I ? i ? ? z ? ? 91111?1AGf. 5WAWr (?T. ) I In.!?a'? ' a ? cAMB?t?D:,?- --- - /9??--- - ? ----,.c?•?..?e? -- bDN6 " . 5 --?---- - ?-------- o c5 -- __ . . ZrE ? ?--- - -?- Qca?.vrisY_ .IoS T ------- _ - _ _ O yvcullE I ? ' -- - ? --?- ?'- : ' -' ' -- . -? I --"- - - - _ Zb0 S•vwaES ?J? r): - -- --- -- - - -(7 z99-- -- / ?30 - - -; -- - --' - - ? . `IQv.UECC D •va, ... ? .-- -- - - - --- .- - 10 - 700' - - - ? --? - - _'TO ?- 70io --- ' _ _ 3cio. T.+,?s Ps,.o ? - - ?-- -- __... . _--'- - _ :-_:_ , _ i . i ?? F3r -- - - - - -- - - -- ---- -/ -- ? --- -Z9 3v9 -• - - - --- - I 3 ?•u.J 'V?i? 3 ZZI9 ' ' !f - - - --- -- - - --- - ' -- { - - - - -- ?- - ' ? - - - ' . - _ . - - -- f o b? ?FdT ? -- - - ; ? - - - - - - -- •- - - -- '?_!_!t9 -- -- -' - - - - - ? ? ' 7 D?'F-IL. - - -- -- --- I --- - - I -- - -- - ---- - -- p, 0 ; ocTG+96E5 0 l0 9z?9? ? . .,? - s - s, - Ty? - ---- s i , ? , ? ? ' ' ---?- - I ?oH.?? --(i z9 - C.vrr la?oa - -- - , ? e . . - --- - - --- - 8 ? ? i - - ' ? ScD. ? - suPllutE: -- - -- ? . . ? ? l M?At4u£77E?.ws ,rr Un& i .C.? ?/D L(e8 ? j I ? : . L Z IL, - - ? - -- 5 I TEtEPr?aVE _ -ll 47 ' I ; ? -- - -'- --?- = ?[IA -T ; ! i ErEcr¢iurs? 52Y? Z? Z7yY ' 700 y ? KviEw VEHI --r - -- --- -- ? ' . L?itEUSE - -- - - -- I I ? ? 4'LI y? I ? IB I 2 GAS -- -- - - - - - - --- ---- ,e so . 41 Ncers.vse I ?s f+rr?ci tsr 391 50 179 SF ?800 fESSiwlRis 7 9679- - --- I • ? I _ 'I _ e ' -? - ?< ' z?a?T - - ' - I - i -- - - 35 ? 3 GAIi ' , , 31 •f ? , ? ; ? a? 4 .N.G.A. I I >L I S° ? ; I - - I --- , ? 70 :.'" , - - i 39 ? 7 f4?0%LF /'o ? ' ? -1- -- -- ap us6A I ' ? ? iUbRb, `dYt 9F T ? 6 1 f ' 1 JL ?L '?fAr.c rAw Prrso.u? Aaroumr ` __' ._ _ _ Vis .v?c. _fi•r c _ _i'?"--_.d? Puoa?e?! I I?._'_>_ . CAMQPJDGE 567<6 - h , ? - ?--- - - -- ? . vl $ - --.=7E - - - /-- - t , ? i F.?ooeeEFP /5 7O i ? . _ . . . . ' - - - --- '--•- - -'- b _2D;- - -?. - . ' _ - -- - -- - - ' -- f OK 7 - -- - ' 319?''4 i ' I ? ---' Cs.Eaui,VS- Su pc E5. -. , - - ---'- '---- ---'- - . . . ? e? !?0 Nae iuCs ? ?E.UGitS . :?o Lb9 1 - 9S eavs - !99 - I d `'' = =- - - - r.vEX ' P3 ( ' - - I 0 ZU88lSN ? vJ Z1Vn 2 SL r . - J . . .: .O ?OCTF If o ° - ?i - - - I 3 /3 I ? gy 3 is --- 2 • R ryDYELT/5/N G / ICENSFSS I'_ - - - 41 / I? - - ? 9 ' O 4 7 Svssc+e?araN D Fs ry 5 --J yl o Y , ' ! -- -- - . _ ? I Q BADGlECKS ? A AL SH ? ? ? 9d' ? 9G ? Hma EYPENSES d . I G ? ? ZbQi?i ? / - jF r r PN;E /7:r - A v-"fY ; _ U 5 a 90 c I _??NAT/ON?I TS Sm LuaES nP_aoY +a E s. .? ? - zS?ie z?z 9TN?? - -- o t i rzo- T.?r IP - - , -1- 6.7 I z , Pra?rnaE ? Zto Qz , -- --- i _ -?-? -- -- 4 1 , ? ip- - i os 7l'S? - 35 Oll Gsi?A15 ? ?.z' ??" ---:- 0l3 FLELT.CrCA I ? - ' I _ ' _ _ _ 39 ? An ? oi. Ppo?a i I ?? i M L n t .? ,. ? 2 2 ? 2 , ??i„•. ?, _._ I i ?OT L5 ? =TE - i Qa/ii.?T/T'/ ?oST Ccsr I /100. ?_ .. - :.O --• - 1 G/SNHAiJ 80 ?O . . -? - --- - - : _ za Goows? Sra TuxF 3z8 "? . -- ? -- ?-- - --. . _ _' '- ? - - . Z3 T?EO c s.tow or +R 1 238.tb w ? ? s 241 </nienwA.? r,r z ffo° - ' - - - J. Z S SAFE7Y ? 8L Z9 +. - - ? E-z ? - L - - - -; - z7 FaUlP. PEA - R 2 7 S ' E C I i z ZSZ .D tU8Nou5 -? - ? ? - - - ? - - -- -? { - - -- - - - - ; -- 4? I ?( . ai. FtiawnueE, , rr. ? . -- ---'- -- -- - ? 73 $srvc'roeE . . .- - . . - - .- . - -. - - iy /98. -- - - - - - - - - ov.. ? ? sc 99 / OD. uGF UPKE ? t ' - - - ? _ --t - -- -'-° - -`I `I3E s3 / -- 4S 3 81_' -- .' ?. - --?-- ? ?a?SEEi7 - -- - --'- --:t? _ TonarESS. - - _.. . ' - - - - - . . _ ...--- - Si" --- --- : - -- - - - - i D I ?ic S?o Zo9 ? ? 1O_ ?Tis/E.8 ?- - -- - -- - -- -- --- - - -- - -?-- ' 3?. OOlPMEHT C 95ES --- --- - - --?-- -- - - - -/o s! 07 ?? ?,ol _ ?,! jJs/F?L ?-- ---+-- -- - ---; - .r.? -P3• - ? --? -- ---' . ? O ZGE Hofefk ? I - ? - - - - -- -- - - - - ?SCA?T T O7?q ? • ?.O GIHPUTO!e? i--- -- - -- --- - - - ? u - - ? - - - -; - Q _Ba.OkJEr--Y_ - iti! AW - - -- - - - - - - r? ?b' - --- - -- `-- _ ? ' -? _QTNE/C--- - - - ? ---, - ---- ? - - -- yS94 : - ? ---I - - - y - ? ? - - - PSOVE ; - ? -- - _. --- I O O E P / _- L7N6 TEN I ?3 ! 49 I_ 9s7:-- - - - ?: - aw r,n 6cP - so'e° - - - - - - _ I VZ)e &P/it ' ? 3 ? ! ? o F?rPL v?s ° cA £x? - ? ' ? q 9?37 ' - - --- - - I ? - ?-- . - - . - _ _ _ _ - - ' -- -- ---- - - --1--- -- -- - -- - - ?-- - -- - H?17 ?4G37" . z7S" ' --- ---- - - - - - - -- ? - - - T o - ---- ?-- - ? ? - - - --- - ? - - - -..- - - . . ?-- -- II t 2 ti ACq,?'? ?E"r `? - - • /9E'9 • ??ovir Toriof5 (ADT. fiaA rTE?4J ' yvAUTiTY GoST .LNGOWE ?O6'T T.VC?HE aENN/?/nlb . INVEX*OK/) /DO, DEPOSeT ITEMS .O/ D?7?tY RECB,PTS / .0?? l7WEA) rEr s -(ibUrES ExCLYD6 MENEG7!Sm,> ? SFF A'/rAG.VEO PaGES "570 0 4 2= 9 i141tc R"urt" i 9s'r.. 33 °,/o 227 0 30 ?s ?957s.' ( /r fi?oc.E e ) MErQERS /Y 737. /?}30J.! 50 .o?LF'-'vr?9<5-- ?9) I4 1 p 137?9- 341° y 997z3s ?s?95 TS [iB) i 1 43 WcWt 200 -?' io (nisrancs) I zpfu.cs) 17 4 Y S? 3 4 80 P04r. GJtrS 4207 i9 LB.. 93 lo ev Goi-o- Ce-?gs 9s'S qs 27 szc9 - .0?3 Gc?r Acr?sso,e.c5- 6 ZS770 ? /1/68') VECO ?)e ?HOa6NT'e1) ss, ooz. 3?8365. bsI a" 7/1 6r.G.[Ot?ES 2'/ En. 79 - / G Q'9 39,ocDfA7EES SOOODEA•. S83°O 73,I10 . 2ZEw4?4-185 376- 9/ E.+.wwr5 JN?EA. ?za A-e Syb_- ? EA. B•96S / Ea. S','r gZ / 00 - . . 3SEn. Sy?z?s 63En. 894'? . zoo - _ _ ?7NEG(BerUlK75 TRwii F/E''. ? LY?P.G ErG> . / 37 ? ysZ ( 16, l , .O1'/ ?Gi7D? ' SeiTia /B14 9o 21A174W S4632`I, y'p ii io?aa PoP4?'o.vs) . . . .1'1_3,28.?w, 49f.Y10 7°q 270 - -?v9a t . . /Z TL7 'POYKSYleu7) "M ?3 fwxKS Z8Z8n ? A 8b3r0 2653 9So9 $AM(u?s) - - /1 796 EA Scv I % / ? - 9609? 133126o 41, 760 6oen . Axre3 1 3 2 - . 3»,71b 25EE.t(DR4FT) IZOZ /// nz, 41/93 - 33so SA.Vor7icHE5 39i6 EA. 224014 3t g?? ' RES. .? Piccs ? zc CoFr? . na»r. . 9. 1 4 20 g a 80 . . 2090 P957.ClES 2789Ea. /0 S73G 17- 54 ? . _ GNOl,G+Ios,*ns,EM. 3 2 1/ ss°. . ss?7 70. ?s7 T?PqCCO LbOEV 8G ??Z_ . 13 1 y- .oz MereseesNiPS ,- 73 z s 7 S `ozI Fuu - - - - - •- - - -- -- 2S _ _ eenmw3 70 .ozz 4?cr.aq+'- , . 2 f . S7 8 S .oz3 Zitl-°N?MeEe- ?oz z?l 3(?00 2 / D ,pas 9syso -/ ? . 7Q. . . ??..,.., D'?r.vtEP?ST(swa skcr?% ?. ? ? Z4 66 sO z?i6L3, . , . D(o OTNE?c. I?.I?c.OHE: ,Ot3 Div,DEAws (am.mq Yh,w 6er) H 9 Z S. 3 t La Z Te [ew«,a ?eo&u.t . z s z s- , P.vo.vE ?O?-?..tL75 oaoGT?AU.s Z 3 0?. - / 90 . S I '19'l6 " ---- ? aA,?o,t? S•?r ?7r.) iq89 .r.......? STEy cfkw*?rr? losr ?(JD.U -T?t?? .Z-7EI95 7?00. Sivc.i.L?ES (i1?ET?:_ , .O/ ClfJPS/JOUSC .DZ OvTS.aE .?3 G'Frir? . 3Q?, TAXE> p/f/O % ,ol ?Fi*c Ecsd?E .oz H..u.v ,D3 i.vU .D'/ ;P?Ro V aS?'l,o.0 lJ.C. Fuuo ,ab ??a .07 IJr.v4s-- ?,OD. /7o?rG??6E5 = .o? 3.v,u? Lo.rt) ,OZ ?i9y' PAN.J 3 / ao 4-,9 90700- /o sooo -_ 7or.r..s 72 / 64 z4 „ /o30a^ ?v _ 6Sy7S ?9 ?/ ?181fOL 29 / 39 20/tov9 8S6 °? 6 i z "?.. Lso - .. ?: . . .. ('?iioc,b?xs,???-•s3?vD •r8 ? ?t1l,co4.W SsTi,nrrzrtr}-?/DO000 ? ? / .03 li1,eTAoil'o ?'ti1 /!J/B3SsS.vrsusv-./3 / L# 83 S?? -Zvsut.v.vcE: .o? l1,ZC+. -----.oZ Saue Geoss Cr{sa?cA,.) .03 07i,e-e. (GG,c.i.c.) . _ .D/ TELEOND.JE . .oz ?.onw?? ?ws 700. ?CCV/F?J (/EN/CLE = , .O Z 6r15 .03 2eM ,os Tvsur.q?E S'? • ?.?FESSiONAL ?vir?5 ; A/ AloGOeypS ,vz .?ccer,.v*.rRrs .D3 aw?.?ci?us?S??.li?s? . . . . -- ,o?/ ?lGA ,os 6cA .o? /9i.rr.* Si•srcti! .07 6ac? %6p ,oP Dryex izayags . . .- .. 879.':'. .. 1twP?&WS 7N8?- _. 17 ---- -• ?.S'bS9°a ? GS3.??? 3LG stV? L?G3,z9?sSw?s7}+3.9..f1_o8?? - T79 23L'VO? . . L? 3 70 2S0 ?6 1? // SSoS 31 4 • 8G65 ?6 " S7S6 9z yo7 ! 14 L/ ?. L ? J ?MECµavu)dd2? ? . so / 3Y9?s 1 ???.,ticE ?ar?r ! (?wT ) ' /999 - Z.rEM -- qo*.vn*v C'os-r 900. O?<tATi.ue ExPE.vSE 5 : -ol ?u?Tti&5 (A??-S?vrGwdlE? .o?l OFf?c.E - ?,'iuraY. _ / I / o ss 8aocrEGY..tM- . . . . . . 13387 -. - --- -- . ?vs7Ac.E 9?r o.?.cc v?wic.z 26 9 XV.. O,,vax S3 ' .. G1reMOUS?- , GEA61?U? Svrl7c.rE5 -. . ScoeEC.aeoS LO oco Cu/s, PtAres, E?c . . ?tft7lAPER?.?+a?5? C7G. OuTS?aE- _ /?•ouoTG»c5 OrN?, , UDZ +Zu3Br?+?- ---....O?pT!? ?TrL?S- . . . . . _ . _ . ... . . _ .osAorErr?s,ub(?s,?„?S?P?e.)- _ .0(e?.??EN5e5?8?C??ooa,Esr.?- .07 SuascciPr.ous,Dues,H+?s. - .08 BADG,?ECCS ?VaNCwusn - ---- : OS ?XPEVSES (Et5WE55 MCHLS? p7c. .- _ .. _ .. . . - _ - . lO TDUPA1fY5,I£l/GUES,TroPN/ES ? ,//, DoNRT/ONS/?/fT5 . /Z OTNER ?Q? Fl?EL UiPy?A7T : 98 "'' - - Sz Lb -- -- 343 93 77#60 9 36 so S97 Q? zsSss.... -/a-, TivLS COST_ 1114(a 9s LI-11 3obz°? ? Z3 79 ??. Sb 1 Zr -.q3S?? - -- - - ? SD9 7O__ 47?. - 3949c ?.e4(f?1 1!177- 09 ._---.-- 69 Cnsw .21 47 SS Gicr I?z Y 3 7S . z'si9"? `l? 93S'° - ?zsos'? . ? Soy'O s? L / ? No7 39s/? ? /N?zyO ? 3y3/ 3° ? ?,. 367o ry ?' _.-DJ ?i?vsotE?JE- -- • - 2Nf6&4. 1JL 7)-op,4NE - i z 7 56.?c Dit 41rlse,c.?,ars - s'sb.x PdPAiP- JtHNiL?TE?URNGE : ZBS.Sr ...--°-- L i b 13 .. !98 Z?' .al ?Ornc?e - ssev ue ?r ? . . . oN 6?1eoE,us . . . scc.c.KC ri.,P i e ° e 3 ?/ . .,D/Z G.)97'ERe(M-S?STEH . o*rER l462.s3 ? .nivTrrcs / ,O/fl?OOLS Si sq • ' ro 16 dr.vow- $rt?otFREM?R S89S6`^ e..rc,2 9 6 7 1s .t/ 9Z13t04 L . S?LA,?IGE SNEET ?Cp,?T. ? ? ?989 .....r...? Qo.wr,rJ losr ITEH- //DO-P-ZPArQ ?'jHA1.t17ENRnxE (fo.vr.? : -- .02 E-QVIPMEIL'T ? oz i GrsNn.r.? .ozz (>?yi?os?A?otn/SHRTORF w?z - A73 T•,,eo IbZ297 OrS !,X;grerv Ai? 2SL pZ, ou GarGe 11o,vcsr oz7 E4?iP. P.E,rry? 9s9 as ' SANDAioSMntf$Ia?fs/ I /f(" . .D28 bfa*JC . . . . - . . . . orn?R Z8 Z2 /4 .03 GWBNOdSE Z- p,ereeueF T?vc 49 G Yo .031 RorvaNCes or.Exx Msssc. .03Z uzuinie6,Kuss,Erc. 5S?s- ,033 STRUCfURE „ Z 380 9q., ----- J2OO. 7URF UPKEEP J .ol r-9771uZ.C2s,Erc. - // 2/ ZQ, DZ Soo - 9S 80 A3 !7ePDJW55/N[r -- 8i'f34 -- -• .O?I ??+L? ?HD? P.OGC " . _ . _. ./ E / 67 _. . '- - - •-'-- - . .... . . SQTH - 3S7 - ?r.re s lotT /OSLSIOL// 39L8 96 ?? /2 6L I G?' y/ .b E.? __... - 1300. QUIPMEM PURCNR SES % ,D! PAPCNA5Tez? 7-6;"Kr - 3"' 1d ?7 _ . l I 8 W ?I 9L .OZ G?EENS-l9i?E ?EKR7oiZ - !? ??-.?7 74ooS3.J ', •;?,'? ??:- ?j? ?;. - - - . .03 6rEw5 Saaart l.?e?. --- -. . _ . . . . . . '?. '1 N.'Y ??f '.. . - .. . . . . _ ,OYSMO?JAtOw?1? 77L74..V•' /yCt?. ZHPROYEHE.UTS : _ .. /Sa?. DryE,e = r _ .. D/ lPEA9/L 4NA/fJ7EVAA.l?.E07 ?BNWSE- ?ATOI? ? . . / WAa4_AN7FJG I 39 i - .. ]. Z9G" V L 8 6i IJR)NAL 4 2 5iNK3 ? t + TV NNTENNA . ? ? .. , - -- . _ DRApEC?ES S 83 70 PA?uTER /W.VtLP!lPE.e . CARPfT/N(s . /7?0- 9 LO ZNSTALL CARPET 63f' .. 3 t6 1 Liswr F1X7URE 3 CONfRpCTOFC 8?c?ooi?5 . . . . y?9 M??c LN8EL5 . .. 4/,SrAIYATATidV S .. M?s?u??v5 . . ?l GDKFS . .. .. TENl RENTIFL , . .03 Cor,es of F7 fsaoa ?,HOscs-, ....L G`/ 99 . . . . _ . 7S- /33rb. 300 - //d1f SS8 08. /7 r-r' , ?rr?ouD Tor.us A/ aE 7p3744 l! /7=o'v/ Sf?v?.y,z > >79??' JARDINE, LOGAN &? O'BRIEN DONALD M JARDINE 71ERRE N REGNIEfl JOHN R O'BRIEN' MARK A. FONKEN• GEflALD M. LINNIHAN' GflEGORV G. HEACOX ALAN R VANaSEK ' GEORGE W KUEHNER JOHN M KENNEDY, JR' MARV A RICE't EUGENE J. FLICK• JAMES A. JAFOINE CHARLES E GILLIN' PATTI J SKOGLUND JAMESJ GALMAN' $EAN E HADE' JERRE F LOGnN (19231983) June 20, 1990 City o£ Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road P. O. Box 21199 Eagan, MN 55121 RECEIVFD JUN 2 P ft Attorneys at Law LAWRENCE M. ROCHEFOFiO' 2100 MERITOR TOWER TIMOTHV S CROM' 444 CEDAR STREET BRETT W OLANDER' GREGG A JOMNSIXJ' ST. PAUL. MINNESOTA 55101-2160 MARLENE S. GAHIAS (612) 2906500 FA%(61Z) 22350]0 RUSSELL 0 MELTON WRITEP'S DIRECT OIAL NUMBER. 290-6567 A1r, Thomas A. Colbert, P.E. 1HOMA5 M COL1NTflYMAN JAMES G GOLEMBECK" KERRY C KOEP DAVIO J HOEKSTRA ROBEPT D. TIFFANY JAMES K HELLING Re: Larsen, et al v. DMS Investments, Ltd „ et al Our File No, 15681 (69) Dear Mr. Colbert: THOMAS A. HARDER MAPK J. HILL MARSHA ELOOT OEVWE LEONARO J SCHWEICH KIMBERLY K HOBERT JEFFREY G.CAflLSON BRENDA L THEIS KqTHERINE E SPRAGUE• MICHAEL A. HAYER ROGER L KRAMER MARY P. ROWE •Awirreo ro cWirM IN WSGVN&N "RDMITfEO TO PRACTICE IN 14OR1H DANOTA tnoMirreo 1o t? w iwHqs This letter is to advise you of the status of the above matter. At this time, we have received the plaintiff's response to our additional discovery regarding damages. At this time, I have enclosed a copy of the plaintiff's appraisal and Answers to Interrogatories and an additional narrative report for your review. At this time, the plaintiff is making the additional argument that additional drainage is coming from the Park and Ball Field, At this point in time, I assume the plaintiff is arguing the additional drainage is coming from Dakota County Park south of the Parview qalf course. As this point in time, do we have any information to indicate that there is extensive drainage and/or modi£ication by the County directing water out to the golf course. As you can see in Mr, Wardl's appraisal for the plainti£f, Mr. Ward is stating that the losses are because Mr. Larsen cannot use the golf course for approximately one month. If you look at Mr. Larsen's Answers to Interrogatories, he states that drainage problems are present early in the season making golf carts impossible, At this time, we are going to serve additional diseovery requests in order to flush out these bald allegations. At this time, I would like you to advise as to what ball park and park Mr. Larsen is referring to. In addition, I would like any additional comments on the analysis pro- vided by Steven Klein in his March 26, 1990 letter. Very truly yours, JARDINE, LOGAN & O' IEN James G. Golembeck JGG/plt cc: Mr. Joe Earley ?I i ? C-, . ? ? 4v V ry ' ! ? s ? STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF DAKOTA Donald Larsen, d/b/a Parkview Golf Course, Plaintiffs, vs. Derrick Land Company, a Minnesota corporation d/b/a Fairway Hills; DMS Investments, Ltd., a Minnesota corporation, and the City of Eagan, Defendants and Third-Party Plaintiffs, vs. Probe Engineering Company, Inc. DLR Construction Company; and Encon Utilities, Inc., Third-Party Defendants, and Probe Engineering Company, Inc., Fourth-Party Plaintiff, vs. Donald Patton, Fourth-Party Defendant. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) DISTRICT COURT FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT CASE TYPE: PROPERTY DAMAGE Court File No. C-1-98-198446 pLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR DOCUMENTS Donald Larsen, for his Response to Request for pocuments provides as follows: Request 1. Any and all balance sheets, income statements, financial statements and financial projections that show, pertain to or contain information about the Parkview Golf Course for the years 1981 to the present. Resoonse. The request is objected to as unduly burdensome and irrelevant. Plaintiff will provide the documents requested only upon a court order wherein defendant establishes relevancy. Reauest 2. Plaintiff's tax returns for the years 1981 through 1990. Response. The request is objected to as irrelevant and Plaintiff will provide same only upon a court order wherein defendant establishes the relevancy of the request. Reauest 3. All documents including, but not limited to all notes, memoranda and correspondence that pertain to or contain information about modifications, improvements and changes to the drainage system of the Property from 1981 to the present. Response. I only have the report of Barr Engineering which lists what was done and when to affect my drainage. I assume the City and the developer have the documents requested. Reguest 4. All documents including, but not limited to all notes, memoranda and correspondence that pertain to or contain information about plaintiff's intention to place a driving range in and around the area of the ravine on the Property. Response. Plaintiff has no documents. He believes this was his property to do with as he chose and one of the options was the driving range which now has been precluded by the use of Plaintiff's property to store water for the City and the develcper of Fairway Hills. 2 Reauest 5. All documents including, notes, memoranda, and correspondence that show, pertain to or contain information about plaintiff's intended or planned use of, or change in the use of the Property from 1981 to the present. Resnonse. None - one of the questions plaintiff is facing .is a requirement that another use of the subject property be contemplated because of the continuous flooding and difficulty of use for golf course purposes. Request 6. All documents, including, but not limited to receipts, cancelled checks, bills and correspondence that show, pertain to or contain information about repairs, modifications, changes or other costs that you allege resulted from the flooding in and around July, 1987. Response. See deposition of plaintiff previously given. As plaintiff understands the procedure, this is not a compensable claim and plaintiff does not intend to pursue same at trial and the question is objected to as not relevant to the current proceedings. Reguest 7. There is no request 7. Reavest S. All documents identified in your answers to the preceding interrogatories. Response. See attached report of William Ward; all other documents have been previously submitted. ? Donald Larsen Subscribed and sworn to.before me this 7th day of June, 1990. ? A ? /4?V ? ?J ?_ _ ` . w ? RICHARU L It7CE 551c??; NOTARY PUBUC • MIR6'ESOTA 3 NENNEPIN COUMY My Commiuion Eapires Oct 20,1990 . .,._ a . STATE OF MINNESO COUNTY OF DAKOTA --------°------ Donald Larsen, d/b/a Parkview Golf Course, Plaintiffs, vs. Derrick Land Company, a Minnesota corporation d/b/a Fairway Hills; DMS Investments, Ltd., a Minnesota corporation, and the City of Eagan, Defendants and Third-Party Plaintiffs, vs. Probe Engineering Company, Inc. DLR Construction Company; and Encon Utilities, Inc., Third-Party Defendants, and Probe Engineering Company, Inc., Fourth-Party Plaintiff, vs. Donald Patton, Fourth-Party Defendant. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) DISTRICT COURT FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT CASE TYPE: PROPERTY DAMAGE Court File No. G-1-98-198446 PLAINTIFF'S ANSWERS TO DERRICR LAND COMPANY AND DMS INVESTMENTS, LTD.'S FIRST SET OF DISCOVERY REQUESTS TO PLAINTIFF Donald Larsen, upon oath duly sworn, deposes and states as Answers to Interrogatories propounded by defendants Derrick Land Company and DMS Investments, the following: Interroaatorv 1. With reference to the allegations contained in paragraph IX of your Amended Complaint, provide the following information: a. Identify precisely which "defendants" that you are referring to in the first sentence of that paragraph. ' Response: The defendants sued as these are the only parties plaintiff was aware were doing anything, i.e., the owner/developer and the City. b. Identify which "defendants" that you are referring to in the second sentence of that paragraph and explain in detail what standards you are using to determine the adequacy of the drainage. Response: Same defendants as listed in response to Interrogatory la. STANDARDS: I had no problems when I had a 6 foot culvert and a ponding area that included the area under the development's road and beyond. Nature provided the standards in large part and it worked. My determination that what I have been te=c wir.n is inadequate is based upon the following: 1. I no longer have a 6 foot culvert but instead an outlet that is designed to flood at least a portion of my property even if it is working properly which clogging has not allowed since installation. • 2. I stand on my land and see the direction of the drainage from the ball park onto my property. 2 3. I stand on my land and see the direction of a lot of water from the development being directed at my land with no provisions for storm sewers. 4. I have seen the flooding of my land during the snow melt each year since the project has been developed. 5. I have seen the road installed over the natural ponding area and the fill that has been placed over the remainder of the ponding area. 6. I saw the'flooding caused by the 1987 storms. All of the above plus my reliance on Barr Engineering report previously submitted are the "standards". Interroaatorv 2. With reference to Count I of your Amended Complaint, provide the following information: a. Identify the legal basis for this claim. Resgonse: This question is objected to as not being the proper topic of an interrogatory question which is supposed to be to elicit facts. My attorney advises me to advise the requester to see generally 20A Dunnell's Minnesota Digest 2d, Waters, especially §2.02. b. Describe the method by which you determined that surface water had backed up onto the Property to a depth of approximately 30 feet, identify every person involved in making this observation and identify all documents that show or pertain to this allegation. Resnonse: Photographs previously provided, personal inspection of the affiant, water was going over the roadway 3 installed by developers and a measurement of the depth of the ravine which was full and gives the 30 feet stated. City employees were also present who affiant believes pumped water out of the ravine. Steve Klein from Barr Engineering inspected the water situation after the rains of July 20 and July 23, 1987 and will testify as to depth. c. Explain the factual basis for your contention that "in all probability" a large stand of mature oak trees will dies as a result of standing water on the Property and state exactly what the probability is and how it was calculated. Resnonse: See report of Barr Engineering previously submitted as to area that can be expected to be flooded under normal circumstances from the development and restriction of the water flow. Paragraph XIII of the Amended Complaint was based upon affiant's own knowledge that trees do not survive when being placed under water as the grove of oak trees was when the flooding occurred that was specifically noted in the July, 1987 rains. d. Explain the factual basis for your allegation that the reputation of the Golf Course has been damaged, identify every person who has knowledge of facts relating to this allegation and identify all documents that show or pertain to this allegation. Response: Affiant will testify that based upon the water placement on his property from the ball park and the residential development as a result of spring thaws, his course is unusable until well beyond the average starting dates because of standing 4 water and that even when the water disappears the resulting soil saturation precludes the use of golf carts. Affiant will testify as to the common sense effect this has upon the reputation of a golf course with it being unable to compete with•other courses and the effect upon revenue. Affiant is relying for his damage estimate of same upon the appraisal report of William Ward for the financial effect of this drainage problem. (COpy of Ward's appraisal attached hereto). See also previous deposition given by Affiant. Affiant is also relying upon the report of Barr Engineering as to proposed inundated areas and their duration of inundation every year. e. Explain the factual basis for your allegation that the Golf Course has suffered a loss of revenues, identify every person who has knowledge of facts relating to this allegation and identify all documents that show or pertain to this allegation. 12esponse: See report of William Ward. Revenues lost are not being sought by plaintiff but revenues I assume have some bearing on the land value which diminution in value 2 am seeking herein. As I understand my expert, the value of the land is based upon comparables for golf courses and residential lands and revenues mean nothing for the purposes of this case. My claim is for the value of the land lost or diminution in value thereof. f. There was no paragraph. 5 g. Describe exactly what damage was done to the underground drainage system, identify all analysis and calculations that show or pertain to this claim, identify every person with knowledge of facts relating to this allegation and identify all documents that show or pertain to this allegation. ° Resnonse: There is no underground drainage system. Interrogatory 3. Explain the reason a"French drain" was installed on the 18th fairway and explain any and all differences between a"French drain" and every other type of drainage system present on the Property. Response: All drainage on property was natural before the actions of defendants. The French drain was constructed to narrow the passage of water at that certain point for esthetic purposes and to provide more usable area. It did not increase the flow, only channelled it, slowed it down and provided usable space wherein no control existed before. Interrogatorv 4. with reference to paragraph XX of your Amended Complaint, identify precisely which "defendants" allegedly acted negligently and describe with particularity the factual basis for this claim. Resnonse: See response to all previous Interrogatories. Interroaatorv 5. Identify every change in plaintiff's use of the Property that you alleged resulted from the flooding of the Property after the storm of July 23, 1987. Resnonse: See deposition of plaintiff previously given; see Barr Report of October 21 1989 previously submitted and report of March 26, 1990 attached hereto; see appraisal report of William Ward. 6 Interrogatorv 6. State whether there are any insurance policies which may afford you coverage for the damaqes allegedly incurred by you as a result of the flooding of the Property in and around July 1987. If so, state the following: a. The identity of the insurers, the extent°and , type of coverage afforded and the policy limits of each type of coverage. b. The exact amounts which have been paid or which are owed under each type of coverage; and c. The coverages which are subject to subrogation by the insurer. Response• None. Znterrouatory 8. State whether you have any photographs, slides, drawings or other non-photographic visual representations bearing upon the facts or circumstances relating to your claims in this case and if so, state the following: a. The type of visual representation; b. The date each such representation was taken or made; c. The identity of the person who took or made the visual representation. d. What the visual representation purportedly shows. Ftesnonse: Affiant has numerous photos showing all aspects of the property and in various stages of flooding as a result of the July storm and subsequent spring run-off. Affiant also has pictures of spring flooding. Affiant took all the pictures. The pictures do not need to be explained as they adequately show what has happened. 7 InterroQatorv 9. Identify each perBOn whom you expect to call as an expert witness in this case, state the subject matter on which the expert is expected to testify, the, substance of the facts and opinions to which the expert is expected to testify and a summary of the grounds for each opinion. Resnonse: See report of Barr and report of` Ward. Their conclusions are stated therein. ? Donald Larsen Subscribed and sworn to before me this 7th day of June, 1990. f v"`? 'Ar? h-.,, Notary Public ¦ . le RICHARD L It1CE NOTARY PUBLIC • MINNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY My Commission EcDires Oct 20.1990 110 • . 803 Evergrssn Drive • Bumsvltle, Mlnn. 65337 •(812) 891-1911 May 30, 1990 Mr. Richard T. Ince Attorney at Law 8900 Penn Avenue South Suite 312 Bloomington, MN 55431 Re: Mr. Don Larsen d/b/a Parkview Golf Course Dear Mr. Ince: Pursuant to your request, I have made a preliminary appraisal on the property located at 1310 Cliff Road, Eagan, MN 55123 which is legally described as follows: The East 1/2, of the NW 1/4, of Section 42, Township 27, Range 33, according to the U.S. Government Survey thereof, subject to roadways and easements of record, Dakota County, MN. The accompanying appraisal of same sets down some of the facts considered, describes my methods of approach, and was based on data gathered in my investigation. The Purnose of the appraisal was to estimate the reasonable market value of the subject property, and damages to same by City Construction Projects 315R, and 444R, the Fairway Hills Development, and Ball Field and Park as set forth in Barr Engineering Company study. Market Value is defined as the highest price expressed in terms of money that a ready,•willing and able buyer would pay to a ready, willing and able seller, both being fully aware of all the uses to which the property is adaptable and capable of being used. Neither party acting under compulsion, with the property being exposed to the market for a reasonable length of time, or Mr. Richard T. Ince May 30, 1990 -Page Two- the present worth of all the rights to future benefits arising from ownership. Propertv Riahts Annraised are those of the fee simple absolute held under individual ownership. The Hiahest and Best Use at this time is as a Golf Course, with future PUD residential as a substitute. I Herebv Certifv that I have no interest, present or contemplated in the property described herein and that neither the employment to make the appraisal, nor the compensation therefore is contingent on the value of the property. I Further Certifv that I have personally inspected the property and that according to my belief and knowledge, all statements and information contained in this appraisal are true and correct, subject to the limitations and contingencies as stated elsewhere in this report. It Is Mv Ouinion that the Estimated Market Value of the subject property prior to estimated damages was in the amount of $1,550,000. Furthermore it is the opinion of the appraiser that the estimated market value of the subject property following estimated damages is in the amount of $1,329,500. Respectfully submitted, y ASSOCIATES APP Wm. F. Ward, Appraiser FNMA #1012702 MGZC #22900 WFW:lag P.S. Final appraisal per your request! DAMAGE ANALYSIS (PUD Residential Development) The appraiser has estimated the subject's value based on its present use as a Golf Course, and its estimated potential to a PUD residential development. The *Barr Engineering Company has outlined in detail their conclusions on two areas of the subject property detailing problems arising from City Construction Projects 315R and 444R, the Fairway Hills Development, and a Ball Field and Park affectinq the subject property. The following are the appraisers opinions to value based on *Barr Engineering Company study. Section 1: Northwest Corner -- Wooded Ravine and 18th Fairway. Section 2: 16th Fairway in the Vicinity of the 16th Green, extending into the 17th Fairway and 17th Fairway Pond area. It is the opinion of the appraiser that using the lowest average approximately 4.9 acres on the subject property as defined in Barr Engineering Company's study of March 26, 1990 for future development for safety reasons the estimated conclusions are as follows: VALLJATION ANALYSIS (Estimated Before Value) 78.48 acres @ $19,750 per acre = Less 78.48 acres @ 3 lots per acre = 235.4 lots @ $30,000 per lot = $7,062,000 less development cost of 50% _$3,531,000 ? 235.4 lots =$15,000 per lot x 4.9 acres @ 3 lots per acre of 14.7 lots x$15,000 per lot = $1,550,000 $ 220.500 Equals Estimated After Value: $1,329,500 Total Estimated Damages from all Causes: $ 220,500 NOTE: See copy of attached Barr Engineering Report dated October 2, 1989 and March 26, 1990 CONTINGENT ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS Th9s property is appraised in fee simple, sub3ect to the following limlting conditions. The 1ega1 description furnished us or secured from public records is assumed to be correct. . We assume no responsibilities for matters 1ega1 in character, nor do we render ar?y opinion as to title, which is assumed to be marketable. All existing liens and encumbrances have been disregarded and the property is appraised as though free and clear, under responsible ownership and competent management. The sketch if any in this report is included to assist the reader in visualizing the proeprty. Me have made no survey of the property and assume no responsibility in connection with such matters. Unless otherwise noted here, it is assumed that there are no encroachments, zoning violations or restrictions existing in the subject property. Certain information, estimates and opinions contained in this report are obtained from sources considered reliable; however, no liability for them can be assumed by the appraiser. Possession of this report, or a copy thereof, does not carry with it the right of publication, nor may it be used for any other purpose by anyone but the applicant without the previous written consent of the appraiser and the applicant and, in any event, onty with proper qualifications. We are not required to give testimony or attendance in court by reason of this appraisal, with reference to the property in question, unless arrangements have been made previously therefore. Unless otherwise stated in this report, the existence of hazardous materials 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 in either the land or improvements. The appraiser is not qualified to detect such substances. The presence of potentially hazardous materials mdy affect the value of the property. The value estimate herein is predicated on the assumption that there is no such material in either the land or improvements, 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. The division or distribution of land and improvement values estimated herein if any is applicable only under the program of utilization shown. These separate valuations are invalidated by any other application and must not be used in con3unction with any other appraisal. Neither a11 nor any part of the contents of this report sha71 be conveyed to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales, or other media, without the written consent and approvat of the author, particularly as to valuation conclusions, or any reference to the National Association of Real Estate Appraisers or other professional organizations. e,R?22CLGdQ'.?4 603 Evergreen DHvo • Burnsvll{e, Mlnn. 55337 9 (612) 691-1911 CLIENTS SERYED American State Bank of Bloomington -- Minneapolis Housing & Redevelopment Argonaut Realty General Motors Corp. Authority Central Bank Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing/314 City of Apple Yalley Minnesota Housing Finance Agency City of Lakeville Minnetonka Bank City of Savage Mortgage Guaranty Insurance Co./MGIC Coldwell Banker Relocation Management Serv. Mutual Service Insurance Oavid C. Bell Investment Co. Northwest Orient Airlines Employees Diamond Shamrock Corporation Credit Union Ducks Unl9mited Norwestern Betl Telephone Equitable Relocation Management Norwest Bank of Maple Grove Farm Credit Services of SW Minnesota Norwest Bank Metro West, Hopkins FirsL Brookdale Bank Norwest Bank of Minneapolis First Edina National Bank Norwest Bank of Bloomington First Lakeville Bank Norwest Mortgage, Inc. First National Bank Cannon Falis Retocation Realty Service Corporation first National Bank of West St. Paul Relocation Resources, Inc. Firstar Metro Banks Rosemount National Bank Federal National Mortgage Association(fNMA Scfiumacher Mortgage Company GMAC Mortgage Corp. Signal Bank, Inc. Hennepin County Nighway Department Southwest Fidelity State Bank Home Equity Corp. State of MinnesotA Highway Department Knutson Mortgage 8 Financial Corporation State of Wisconsin Department of liberty Mortgage Insurance Yeteran Affairs Lomas and Nettleton Company Sterns County National Bank Lumbermans Investment Corp. Thompson Lumber Company Merillat Industries, Inc. Title Services, Incorporated Merrill Lynch Realty Relocation Mgmt. Serv. Unisys Federal Credit Union Metco Mortgage Carp. United States Mutual Mortgage Corporation Midway National Bank Vexex Assurance, Incorporated TfPE OF PROPERTf APPRAISED Land: Residential, multiple, corronerc5 ,,n ustria , a eshore, agricultural, and land - use studies. Tm roved Properties: Single family, duplex, muttiple, apartment, cortmercial, and industrial. on emnation cases for: Hennepin County Highway Department; 5tate of Minnesota Highway Nepartment; i ies of Hopkins, St. Louis Park, Minnetonka, Minneapolis; Southwest Sanitary 5ewer Districts; Minnehaha Creek Water Shed Commission and individual clients. BACK6ROUND AND EXPERIENCE DBA Associates Appraisals 1972 - Appraisal Associates, Incorporated 1969 - 1971 Marv Anderson Company, Realtors, Manager Appraisal Department 1971 Metco Company, Staff Appraiser 1966 - 1968 Appraiser has been appointed as a commissioner and appraiser by District and Probate Courts and has served in Dakota, Hennepin and Scott Counties as an expert witness. MM. F. YARD Appraiser arr Engi, nng ComFany 7a03 Glenroy Road Minrteapolis, MN 55435 6121830-0555 6721835-0786 (Fecsimile) March 26, 1990 Mr. Dick Ince Ince and Liszt, P.A. Suite 312 8900 Penn Avenue South Minneapo2is, MN 55431 RE: Parkview Golf Course Dear Mr. Ince: MAk Based on the existing storm sewer system downstream, you asked us to determine how much acreage would be requized to be set aside for stormwater detention if Parkview Golf Course was converted to single-family residential. Unfortunately, this question does not come with a simple answer. The answer is -- the acreage will vary depending on a variety of other conditions. Therefore, I have provided you in this letter a range of acreages based on other considerations. Some of the items that can impact the amount of stormwater storage and the acreage inundated include: (1) the condition of the ponding basin outlet structure, (2) the configuration of the ponding basin, and (3) the location of the ponding basin (or ponding basins) with respect to the watershed. With respect to Item 1, an outlet structure that is not clogged with debris will allow more outflow than an outlet structure that is partially clogged. Therefore, the physical condition of the outlet structure can have a significant impact on the area inundated upstream o£ the structure. Relative to Item 2, the area that is inundated is also related to the configuration of the basin. For example, more area is necessary to pond a given amount of water in a shallow basin than is necessary in a deep basin. Therefore, the area that is inundated is directly related to the depth in which the water is ponded. Relative to Item 3, the location of a single pond or multiple ponds in a watershed can also affect the area that is inundated during a design storm. For example, often more total storage may be needed in a single pond at the downstream end of a watershed than might be necessary with two or three basins in the same caatershed. With that background in mind, we have looked at a number of options. In our previous reports, we have looked at outlet conditions ranging from t ., ,. .. Mr. Dick Ince March 26, 1990 Page 2 being non-debris plugged all the way to being completely clogged. For the purpose of this letter, we looked at three outlet conditions: 1. Non-plugged 2. 50 percent plugged 3. 75 percent plugged These three options were considered because the existing structure in the northwest corner of Parkview Golf Course is, at the time of this letter, partially plugged and the remainder of the structure that is not presently plugged is subject to substantial plugging when storms occur. We found that if the golf course area is developed as single-family residential and the existing ravine in the northwest corner of the property is used for stormwater detention, each of these thtee outlet conditions will cause water to pool high enough that it will actually overtop Fairway Hills Drive and Cliff Road for the 100-year storm. Therefore, additional ponding capacity would need to be constructed upstream. Presently, the storage capacity of the ravine before water overtops Fairway Hills Drive and Cliff Road is 7.4 acre-feet, and at the point where water overtops those roads, approximately 1.1 acres would be inundated. Undez the non-plugging option, approximately 2.4 additional acre-feet would need to be stored upstream. Under the 50 percent plugged option, an additional 4.1 acre-feet would need to be stored upstream; and under the 75 percent plugged option, approximately 5.2 acre-feet of additional storage would be required. Assuming a pond with an average depth of 2 feet is constructed upstream, approximately 1.2 acres, 2.0 acres, and 2.6 acres would be required for the non-plugged, 50 percent plugged, and 75 percent plugged options, respectively. Therefore, combining the area of inundation in the northwest corner of the property along with the area of inundation required for additional storage, the total acreage necessary for ponding would be 2.3 acres, 3.2 acres, and 3.7 acres for the non-plugged, 50 percent plugged, and 75 percent plugged options, 1"E'ali2Ci.i VE L y. The above-described computations assumed that a single-family development could utilize the existing topography in the ravine in the northwest corner of the development. However, when considering ponding in the vicinity of a single-family residential development, the maximum depth of ponding may be s major congideration for a developer (due to safety considerntions). Under existing conditions, the maximum depth of ponding in the northwest corner ravine is approximately 20 feet. For safety reasons, a developer might consider that amount of bounce to be too much. A pond with a maximwn depth of 4 feet and an average depth of 2 feet might be more acceptable for that developer. If a single pond was developed in the northwest corner of the property with a maximum depth of 4 feet and an average depth of 2 feet, approximately 4.9 acres, 5.7 acres, and 6.3 acres ? . ?. Mr. Dick Ince March 26, 1990 Page 3 would be necessary for a non-plugged, 50 percent plugged, and '75 percent plugged outlet, respectively. As you can see from the above discussion the acreage necessary for ponding can vary gzeatly. Please contact me with your questions or comments after you have had a chance to review and consider this information. SMK/ymh c: Mr. Don Larsen, Parkview Golf Course 2319131/DI.LTR . 603 Evergreen Drive • Bumsvllie, Mlnn. 65337 •(612) 891-1931 May 30, 1990 Mr. Richard T. Ince Attorney at Law 8900 Penn Avenue South Suite 312 Bloomington, MN 55431 Re: Mr. Don Larsen d/b/a Parkview Golf Course Dear Mr. Ince: Pursuant to your request, I have made a preliminary appraisal on the property located at 1310 Cliff Road, Eagan, MN 55123 which is legally described as follows: The East 1j2, of the t3W 1/4, of Section 42, Township 27, Range 33, according to the U.S. Government Survey thereof, subject to roadways and easements of record, Dakota County, MN. The accompanying appraisal of same sets down some of the facts considered, describes my methods of approach, and was based on data gathered in my investigation. The Purpose of the appraisal was to estimate the reasonable market value of the subject property, and damages to same by City Construction Projects 315R, and 444R, the Fairway Hills Development, and Ball Field and Park as set forth in Barr Engineering Company study. Market Value is defined as the highest price expressed in terms of money that a ready, willing and able buyer would pay to a ready, willing and able seller, both being fully aware of all the uses to which the property is adaptable and capable of being used. Neither party acting under compulsion, with the property being exposed to the market for a reasonable length of time, or Mr. Richard T. Ince May 30, 1990 -Paqe Two- the present worth of all the rights to future benefits arising from ownership. Prooertv Rights Anpraised are those of the fee simple absolute held under individual ownership. The Hiqhest and Best Use at this time is as a Golf Course, with future PUD residential as a substitute. I Hereby Certifv that I have no interest, present or contemplated in the property described herein and that neither the employment to make the appraisal, nor the compensation therefore is contingent on the value of the property. I Further Certifv that I have personally inspected the property and that according to my belief and knowledge, all statements and information contained in this appraisal are true and correct, subject to the limitations and contingencies as stated elsewhere in this report. It Is My OAinion that the Estimated Market Value of the subject property prior to estimated damages was in the amount of $1,550,060. Furthermore it is the opinion of the appraiser that the estimated market value of the subject property following estimated damages is in the amount of $1,337,250. Respectfully submi ASSOCIATES APP IS Wm. F. Ward, Appra FNMA #1012702 MGIC #22900 WFW:lag P.S. Final appraisal per your request! AAMAGE ANALYSIS (Golf Course) The appraiser has estimated the subject's value based on its present use as a Golf Course, and its estimated potential to a PUD residential development. The *Sarr Engineering Company has outlined in detail their conclusions on two areas of the subject property detailing problems arising from City Construction Projects 315R and 444R, the Fairway Hills Development, and a Ball Field and Park affecting the subject property. The following are the appraisers opinions to value based on *Barr Engineering Company study. Section 1: Northwest Corner -- Wooded Ravine and 18th Fairway. Section 2: 16th Fairway in the Vicinity of the 16th Green, extending into the 17th Fairway and 17th Fairway Pond area. Section 1: The appraiser has treated the 1.1 acres on the Golf Course including the Wooded Ravine as a total loss of value as if for a ponding easement. This damage estimate is in the amount of $21,725. Section 2: This area of the study in the opinion of the appraiser shows a devastating problem to the subject property on an onward going time span. The appraiser concludes, based on the study and conversation with the owner of the subject property approximately one month of the subject's eight month season is lost annually. This represents 12 1/2% of the subject's estimated value after loss of ponding easement or $191,034. VALIIATION ANALYSIS (Estimated Before Value) 78.48 acres @ $19,750 per acre = $1,550,000 Less (Section 1: Estimated Ponding Easement) 1.1 acres @$19,750 per acre = 21.725 Equals Estimated After Value $1;528,275 Less (Section 2: Estimated 12.5% Loss of Value) $1,528,275 @ 12.5$ _ $191,034 say 191.025 Equals Estimated After Value $1,337,250 Total Estimated Damages from all Causes $ 212,750 NoTE: See copy of attached Barr Engineering Report dated October 2, 1989 and March 26, 1990 CONTINGENT ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS This property is appraised in fee simple, sub3ect to the following limiting conditions. The legal description furnished us or secured from public records is assumed to be correct. _ We-assume no responsibilities for matters legai in character, nor do we render any opinion as to title, which is assumed to be marketable. A11 existing liens and encumbrances have been disregarded and the property is appraised as though free and clear, under responsible ownership and competent management. The sketch if any in this report is included to assist the reader in visualizing the proeprty. Me have made no survey of the property and assume no responsibility in connection with such matters. Unless otherwise noted here, it is assumed that there are no encroachments, zoning violations or restrictions existing in the subject property. Certain information, estimates and opinions contained in this report are obtained from sources considered reliable; however, no liability for them can be assumed by the appraiser. Possession of this report, or a copy thereof, does not carry with it the right of publication, nor may it be used for any other purpose by anyone but the applicant without the previous written consent of the appraiser and the applicant and, in any event, only Nith proper qualifications. We are not required to give testimony or attendance in court by reason of this appraisal, with reference to the property in question, unless arrangements have been made previously therefore. Unless otherwise stated in this report, the existence of hazardous materials 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 in either the land or improvements. The appraiser is not qualified to detect such substances. The presence of potentially hazardous materials may affect the value of the property. The value estimate herein is predicated on the assumption that there is no such material in either the land or improvements, 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. The division or distribution of land and improvement values estimated herein if any is applicable only under the program of utilization shown. These separate valuations are invalidated by any other application and must not be used in conjunction with any other appraisat. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report sha11 be conveyed to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales, or other media, without the written consent and approvat of the author, particularly as to valuation conclusions, or any reference to the National Association of Real Estate Appraisers or other professional organizations. 603 Evergreen Drlve • Burnsvllle, Mlnn. 65337 •(612) 891-3911 CLIENTS SERYED American.State Bank of 6loomington - Minneapolis Housing 8 Redevelopment Argonaut Realty General Motors Corp. Authority Central Bank Minnesota Mining 8 Manufacturing/3M City of Appte Va11ey Minnesota Housing Finance Agency City of Lakeville Minnetonka Bank City of Savage Mortgage Guaranty Insurance Co./MGIC Coidwell Banker Relocation Management Serv. Mutual Service Insurance David C. Bell Investment Co. Northwest Orient Airlines Employees Diamond Shamrock Corporation Credit Union Ducks Unlimited Norwestern Be11 Telephone Equitable Relocation Management Norwest Bank of Mapte 6rove farm Credit Services of SN Minnesota Norwest Bank Metro West, Hopkins First Brookdale Bank Norwest Bank of Minneapolis First Edina National Bank Norwest Bank of Bloomington First Lakeville Bank Norwest Mortgage, Inc. First National Bank Cannon Falls Relocation Realty Service Corporation First National Bank of West St. Paul Relocation Resources, Inc. Firstar Metro Banks Rosemount National Bank Federal National Mortgage Association/FNMA Schumacher Mortgage Company GMAC Mortgage Corp. Signal Bank, Inc. Hennepin County Highway Department Southwest Fidelity State Bank Home Equity Corp. State of Minnesota Highway Department Knutson Mortgage E Financial Corporation State of Wisconsin Department of Liberty Mortgage Insurance Yeteran Affairs Lomas and Nettleton Company Sterns County National Bank Lumbermans Investment Corp. Thompson Lumber Company Merillat Industries, Inc. Tit1e Services, Incorporated Merrill Lynch Realty Relocation Mgmt. Serv. Unisys Federal Credit Union Metco Mortgage Corp. United States Mutual Mortgage Corporation Midway National Bank Yexex Assurance, Incorporatad T1(PE OF PROPERTY APPRAISED Land: Residential, multiple, conenercia , n ustria , a eshore, agriculturai, and land - use studies. Improved Properties: Single family, duplex, multiple, apartment, conmercial, and industrial. on emnation cases for: Hennepin County Highway Department; State of Minnesota Mighway epartment; ities of Hopkins, St. Louis Park, Minnetonka, Minneapolis; Southwest Sanitary Sewer Districts; Minnehaha Creek Water Shed Commission and individuat clients. BACK6ROUND AND EXPERIEMCE DBA Associates Appraisals 1972 - Appraisal Associates, Incorporated 1969 - 1971 Marv Anderson Company, Realtors, Manager Appraisal Department 1971 Metco Company, Staff Appraiser 1966 - 1968 Appraiser has been appointed as a commissioner and appraiser by District and Probate Courts and has served in Dakota, Hennepin and Scott Counties as an expert witness. NM. F. MIUtO Appraiser 1 STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF DAKOTA FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT CASE TYPE: PROPERTY DAMAGE COURT FILE NO. 104556 --------------------------------------------------------------------- Donald Larsen, d/b/a Parkview Golf Course, Plaintiffs, vs. Derrick Land Company, a Minnesota corporation d/b/a Fairway Hills; DMS Investments and the City of Eagan, Defendants, and Derrick Land Company, a Minnesota corporation, d/b/a Fairway Hills; DMS Investments, Ltd., a Minnesota corporation, Third-Party Plaintiffs, vs. Defendant, City of Eagan's, Answer to Prohe Enqineering's Request for Supplementation of Interrogatories Probe Enqineering Company, Inc., DLR Construction Company; Encon Utilitites, Inc.; and the City of Eagan, Third-Party Defendants, and Probe Engineering Company, Inc., Fourth-Party Plaintiff, vs. Donald Patton and the Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation DistTict, Fourth-Party Defendants. ---------------------------------------------------------------- T0: THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT, PROBE ENGINEERING COMPANY, AND ITS ATTORNEY, RUSSELL C. BROWN, 2110 First Bank Place West, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 Comes Now Defendant, City of Eagan, as and for its Objections and Answer to Probe Engineering's Request for Supplementation, states and alleges as follows: 6. Identify each person whom you expect to call as an expert witness at trial and whom you expect to testify on the subject matter of the claims which you have against Probe Enqineerinq and on the subject matter of your Answers to Interrogatory Nos. 1 and 2, state the substance of the facts and opinions to which the expert is expected to testify and a summary of the grounds for each opinion. Answer: Discovery is continuing. At this time, Defendant, City of Eagan, will update its Answer pursuant to the Pre-Trial schedule to be set by the Court. Notwithstanding the objection, at this point in time, Mark A. Hanson, Engineer, with the consulting firm o£ Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, is expected to testify as to the design of the City's storm water system and the design standards for which that system is based. Additionally, Mr. xanson will testify as to the level of protection afforded by municipalities in desiqning storm water sewer laterals, catch basins, trunk lines and ponding areas. Also, Mr. Aanson is expected to testi£y as to the design of the storm water system in the Fairway Hills Development, including the drainage area, tributary area of drainage and the effect of flooding on adjacent properties to the Fairway Aills development. Lastly, Mr. Hanson will testify as to the cause of the flooding on the Fairway Aills Golf Course. Mr. Hanson will base his opinions on the plans and diagrams for the Fairway Hills Development and his knowledge regarding the drainage of the Fairway Hills Development and the adjacent golf course area. Further, at this time, discovery is continuing and we will update our opinions and facts as to expert witnesses as they become available. Subscribed and s rn to before me this day of 1990. i ? Not?aryPublic ? I L p?e?rosaen?xi?t,ia?ees ?.:e M4441;1 L WUGI;` ND-AFY CC_-i.I? - M".' `."A ? DAKOTA C ?U;JIY Y ?.:..:?•? My C;n._..;.._n ExP fB t..? i d:: JJ:..?N:.':.: S ?., ...: • rM 1 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS: COUNTY OF ) THOMAS A. COLBERT, being fir5t duly sworn, deposes and states that he is the City Engineer of the City of Eagan, one of the Defendants in the above-entitled cause, and that he verifies the foregoing Answer to Interrogatories £or and on behalf of said Defendant, and is duly authorized to do so; that certain o£ the matters stated in the foregoing Answers to Interrogatories are not within the personal knowledge of deponent and that deponent is informeri that there is no officer of Defendant, City of Eagan, who has personal knowledge of such matters; that the facts stated in said Answers to Interrogatories have been assembled by authorized employees and counsel of Defendant, City of Eagan, and deponent is informed by said employees and counsel that the facts stated in said Answers to Interrogatories are true. i??-? ??/ THO S A. COLBERT i? i / to before me lZr?_'/ , 1990. .^EJplpl?dllNStR•Sf F T .. ? ?,RY PC`,MIt:?SOTA ?DAKOTA CGJNTY y Notary PUbl1C .Lh?:..• My Cem. -:: nn Exp Fz5 e, 1'03 , ?i- ih+N+asvu:+t?:rc:.^,etaers:-r?6 As to the form of these Answers and any pbjections. Dated this day of , 1990. JARDINE, LOGAN & O'BRIEN BY: JAMES G. GOLEMBECK (#179620) 2100 Meritor Tower 444 Cedar Street St. Paul, MN 55101 612/290-6500 Attorney for City of Eagan Subscribed and thas//'; day of DOIJALD M JAROWE PIERRE N REGNIER JOHN R. O'BRIEN' MARK A FONKEN' GERALD M LINNIHAN' GREGOPY G HEACOX ALAN fl.VANASEK GEORGE W KVEHNER JONN M KENNEDY, JR' MARY A RICE'} EUGENE J FLICK' JAMES A. JARDINE CHARLES E GILLIN' PATTI J SKOGLUND JAMESJ.GALMAN' SEHN E.HAOE' JEFRE F LOGAN (19234983) January 26, 1990 c??CE5VED J A N 2 9 19 ? JARDINE. LOGAN ? O'BRIEN Attorneys at Law LAWRENCE M. ROCHEFORD' ROBERT D TIFFANY 2100 MERITOR TOWER TIMOTHY 5 CROM' JAMES K HEWNG 444 CEOAR STREET BRETf W OIANDER' THOMAS A. HARDER GREGG A JOHNSOfJ' MARK J HILL ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 5510I-2179 MARLENE S GARVIS MARSHA ELDOT DEVME (612) 2904500 FAX (812) 223-5070 HUSSELL D MELTON SCDTf J. LAWA TMOMAS M COUNTRYMAN LEONARDJ SCMWEICH WRITEfi'S DIRECT DIAL NUMBER. JAMES G GOLEM9ECK" KIMBERLV K HOBERT KERRV C KOEP JEFFREY G CAfiLSON 2 9 0- 6 5 6 7 fIAViD J HOEKSTPA ?AOMItTEO TO PqACnCE IN `M9CONSIN ••AIXdITTED TO PMCME IN NOBTH DAKOTA }TOMITTEO i0 PMCiILE INILLINOI3 Thomas A. Colbert, P.E. City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road P. O. Box 21199 Eagan, MN 55121 Re: Larsen, et al vs. DMS Investments, Ltd., et al File No. 15681 (69) Dear MY. Colbert: Please find enclosed a copy of a Notice of Taking your Deposition for Thursday, February 22, 1990 at 9:30 a.m. in the office of Probe Engineering's attorney, Russell C. Brown. His address is on the Notice. I would suggest that we meet with each other at 9:00 a.m. at Mr. Brown's office in Minneapolis. At that time, we will go over various aspects of this matter and prepare you for your Deposition. Also, it has come to my attention that your Deposition may have been taken in this matter prior to my involvement. If this is the case, I am requestinq a copy of your prior Deposition. If you do not have a copy o£ the Deposition, please inform me as to who the attorney was that took the Deposition so I can obtain a copy prior to your Deposition so we both can review your past Deposition. Very truly yours, JARDINE, LOGAN & O'BRIEN w?ami.T¢x_wxrxameexei^t}px. \ James G. Golembeck JGG:djt ? Enclosure J? ? • . STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF DAKOTA a Donald Larsen, d/b/a Parkview Golf Course, Plaintiffs, v. Derrick Land Company, a Minnesota corporation d/b/a Fairway Hills; DMS investment and the City of Eagan, and Derrick Land Company, a Minnesota corporation, d/b/a Faicway Hills; DMS Investments, Ltd., a Minnesota cocporation, Third-Party Plaintiffs, v. Probe Engineering Company, Inc., DLR Construction Company; and Encon Utilitfes, Inc•. Third-Pacty Defendants, and Probe Enqineering Company, Inc., Fourth-Party Plaintiff, v. Donald Patton, and the Dakota County Soil and water Conservation District, Fourth-Party Defendants. ? DISTRICT COURT FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT CASE TYPE: PROPERTY DAMAGE Court File No. 104556 NOTICE QF DEPOSITION OF THOMAS COLBERT T0: CITY OF EAGAN, DEFENDANT and JAMES G. GOLE 444KCeda[ JARDINE, LOGAN & O'BRIEN, 2100 Meritor Tower, Street, St. Paul, MN 55101: I i; PLEASE TARE NOTICE that on Thursday, February 22, 1990, at 9:30 a.m. at the offices of Head, Hempel, Seifert & Vander Weide, 21?0 First Bank Place West, 120 South Sizth Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402, third-party defendant and fourth-party plain- tiff, Probe Engineering Company, Inc. will take the deposition upon oral examination of Thomas Colbert, City Engineec and Director of Public Works, City of Eagan, pursuant to Rule 33, Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure, be£ore Logan and Stycbicki, a notary public, or before some other officer authorized by law to administer oaths. The oral examination will continue from day to day until completed, subject to such adjournment as may be agreed upon by counsel. You are invited to attend and cross-examine. Dated: A 2 o4 VANtpRH?EI?E?,?IFERT & HEA BY yW"VV V ?. --- • - R sse C. srown, lzlf Attorneys for Probe Engineering Company, Inc. 2110 First Sank Place West Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 339-1601 ? AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF MINNESOTA ) , ) 6s. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) Karen Lehman, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that at the City of Minneapolis, county and state aforesaid, on the o-?3kA" day of January. 1990, she secved the attached Notice of Deposition of Thomas Colbert by depositing a true and correct copy in the United States mail at said City of Minneapolis, properly enveloped with postage prepaid, addressed to: See attached list. -r Subscribed and swo{n to before me this.-II$ day of 1990. ?/?wnr Notai c ? '1 NOi„RY PUBLIG-h'•??•. . NU:NEPIN COUh1 t My Commismon ExWres huv. 3p, lby? ? i f r- Larsen Richard T. Ince Donald Larsen Ince & Liszt, P.A. Parkview Golf Course Suite 312 8900 Penn Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55431 (612) 333-1671 John M. Roneck (#57472) Derrick Land Company Todd A. Wind (1196514) DMS Investments, Ltd. Fredrikson & Byron 1100 international Centre 900 Second Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 347-7000 James M. Riley (#91728) DLR Construction Company Mark J. Heley (#159116) Meaqher, Geer, Markham, Anderson, Adamson, Flaskamp & Brennan 4200 Multifoods Towec Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 338-0661 Pierre N. Regnier (#90232) City of Eagan James G. Golembeck (#179620) Jardine, Logan & O'Brien 2100 Meritor Tower 444 Cedar Street St. PaUl, MN 55101 (612) 290-6590 Dale B. Lindman (#63514) Encon Utilities, Inc. Mahoney, Dougherty & Mahoney 801 Ya[k Avenue Minneapolis. Minnesota 55404 (612) 339-5863 James Saboe Donald Patton 5005 Old Cedar Lake Road Minneapolis, MN 55416 DONALD M JARDINE 71EFHE N PEGNIER JOHN R O'eRIEN' MARK A. FONKEN' GERALD M. LINNINAN' GREGOf1Y G HEACOX ALAN R. VANASEK GEORGE W. KUEHNER JOHN M KENNEOY, JR' MARV A RICE'f EUGENE J FLICN' JAMES A JARDINE CHARLES E OILLIN' PATTI J SKOGLUND JAMESJ.GALMAN' SEAN E.HADE' JERRE F. LOGAN (19234903) January 10, 1990 3830 Pilot Knob Road P. 0. Box 21199 Eagan, MN 55121 JARDINE, LOGAN '?Q O'BRIEN A L w ??,::? f 2 ?3?9 [1CyS d[ d [tOI LpyypENCE M. ROCHEFORD' 2100 MERITOR TOWER TIMOTHY S. CROM' BRETf W OIANDER' 44a CEDAR SMEET GREGG A JOHNSON' ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101-2179 MRRLENES GAMIS RUSSELL D. MELTON (612) 290? FAX (612) 223-5070 ' THOMAS M COUMRYMAN WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL NUMBER 290-6567 Thomas A. Colbert, P.E. Judy Jenkins City of Eagan JAMESG GOLEMBECK" KERRY C KOEP DAVIO J HOEKSTtiA Re: Larsen, et al vs. DMS Investments, Ltd., et al File No. 15681 (69) Dear Mr. ColbeYt and M5. Jenkins: ROBERT D. TIFFANV JAMES K. HELLING THOMAS A. HARDER MARK J HILL MARSHA ELDOT DEVINE SCOTfJ.IAQUA LEONMD J SCHWEICH KIMBEflLV N HOBERT JEFFREV G CARLSON 'AIXARfEO i0 PNACiICE IN WSCONSIN "AOMITIED i0 PMCTICE IN NORl11 DAKOTA 1AOMITTED TO VML'TICE INILLINOIS At this point in time, I would request that you obtain any documentation in the City files regarding the prior assessment action against Mr. Larsen, which ultimately was not upheld. Tom, in conversations with you, you have indicated that the City has attempted to assess the Fairway Hills Development for storm-water sewer improvements. As I am sure you are aware, Mr. Larsen has a series of holding ponds on his property and, in all likelihood, must have argued at the prior Assessment Hearing, that he was not going to be benefited by the system. I would like to obtain the files and particularly, any testimony or deposition testimony by any party involved regarding the reason Mr. Larsen was not benefited by that system and/or assessment. Additionally, if there is a volume of materials, I would request that you notify me and 2 will either come out to view same and/or send my paralegal. If you have any questions, please contact me. Thank you for your attention to these matters. JARDINE, LOGAN & O'BRIEN .? James G. Golembeck JGG:djt JARDINE, LOGAN & O'BRIEN ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2100 MERITOR TOWEF 444 CEOAR STREET ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101-2179 (612) 2906500 FAX (612) 223-5070 WRITERSDIRECTDIALNUMBER 290-6567 October 17, 1989 Thomas A. Colbert, P.E. Director of Public Works City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road P. O. Box 21199 Eagan, MN 55121 DONALD M JARDINE JOMN R D"BRIEN' GRAHAM MEIKESf GERALO M LINNIHhN' ALAN R VANASEN JOHN M KENNEOY,JR' EuGErvEJ fuCn' CHhRLES E GILLIN' JAMESJ GAIMAN' PIERRE N REGNIER MARN A FONHEN' GREGORV G HEACO% GEDRGE W HUEHNER MhRY A RKE'} JAMESA JARDINE JERRE F LOGAN (1923-1983) ????111?D ?CT 18 ft PATTIJ SNOGLUND JAMES G. GOLEMBECK" SEANE MqDE' KERRY C KOEP LAWRENCE M ROCMEPORD' OhVIDJ HOENSTRA TIMOTHY 5 CROM' ROBERT O TIFFANY 6FETT W OLANOER' JAMES K HELLING GREGGA JOHNSON' THOMAS A HAROER MARLENE S. GARVIS MARK J HIIL RUSSELL O. MELTON MARSMA ELDOT DEVINE THOMAS M COONTFYMPN SCOTTJ LAOUA LEONAROJ SCHWEICH 'ROMITTED TO PPhCTICE vu wisrousiH 'ROMITTED TO PRACTICE N NORlX OANOTA }PD OTOPPPCTICE IN ILLINOI$ Re: Larsen, et al vs. DMS Investments, Ltd., et al File No. 15681 (69) Dear Mr. Colbert: Please review enclosed Answers to Interroqatories which I have drafted for your signature. Please be advised that I have followed previous Interrogatory Answers, which we have drafted. These Answers are basically consistent with our prior responses. I would request that you review the Answers and note any changes, if necessary. It is imperative that I receive these back immediately since they are due. Very truly yours, JARDINE, LOGAN fi O'BRIEN James G. Golembeck JGG:djt Enclosure STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF DAROTA DISTRICT COURT FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT CASE TYPE: PROPERTY DAMAGE Donald Larsen, d/b/a Parkview Golf Course, v. Plaintiffs, Derrick Land Company, et al., Defendants. File No: 104556 DEFBNDANT CITY OF EAGAN'S OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSE TO FIRST INTERROGATORIES OF TO: THIRD PARTY DEFENDANT, PROBE ENGINEERING COMPANY, AND ITS ATTORNEY, RUSSELL C. BROWN, 2110 FIRST BANR PLACE WEST, MINNEAPOLZS, MINNESOTA 55402 COMES NOW Defendant City of Eagan, as and for its Objections and Response to First interrogatories of Probe Engineering, states and alleges as follows: 1. If you contend that Probe Engineering was negligent in any way in connection with the performance of its contract with Derrick Land Company for the Fairway Hills development or in the rendering of any other professional services, or in connection with any of the events alleged in the Complaint, third party complaint, or cross-claims, then state in detail and with par- ticularity the factual basis for such claims. ANSWER: Objection. Question is overly broad and vaque. Probe had not conformed with contract specifications in all material respects because the work was not complete. It is believed the storm sewer was physically in place on July 23, 1987, however, the system had not been formally inspected and therefore substantial compliance with the contract was not verified by the City of Eagan at that time. Discovery is continuing and we will update our Answer as necessary. 2. If you contend that Probe Engineering breached any contract to which you were a party or of which you claim to be a third-party beneficiary in connection with the development and construction of Fairway Hills or any of the events alleged in the Complaint, third party complaint, or cross-claims, then state in detail and with particularity the factual basis for such claims, includinq, but not limited to, identification of the contract involved and the exact nature of Probe Engineering's alleged breach of such contract. ANSWER: Not applicable. 3. Identify by name, address, telephone nwnber and his or her relationship to you, any person who is known to you to have knowledge or information which in any way relates to your answers to interrogatories 1 and 2. ANSWER: Notwithstanding the objection as in Answer No. 1, Thomas Colbert, City Engineer, City of Eagan. Mark A. Hanson, Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates. 4. With resFact to each person identified in your answer to Interrogatory No. 3, describe: a. The qualification and professional background of the person or produce a copy of his or her resume. h. Each and every contact that person had with Probe Engineerinq or its agents related to the issues involved in any claim against Probe Engineering in this litiqation, includinq, but not limited to, the date of such contact, the means of communication, the names of persons contacted at Probe Engineering, and the content of each contact or communication. c. Each and every contact that person had that related to the issues involved in any claim against Probe Engineering in this litigation including, but not limited to, the date of such contact, the names of the person contacted, and the content of every such contact or communication. d. A brief description of the knowledge of that person related to any claim against Probe Engineering in this litigation. ANSWER: a) Thomas Colbert, City Engineer for the City of Eagan. Mr, Colbert is a registered professional engineer in the State of Minnesota. Mark A. Hanson is a registered professional engineer in the State of Minnesota, presently employed by Bonestroo. b) Resumes will be provided, if available. c) Objection. This question is overly broad and vague. Cannot be answered. Objection is specifi- 2 cally made to the words "issues" and "any claim against Probe" and "every contact" as being overly broad and vague. d) See Dbjection above. 5. Identify all documents in your possession or control or known by you to exist which relate to or bear upon your Answers to Interroqatories Nos. 1 and 2. ANSWER: Objection. This question is overly broad and vague. The City has in its possession numerous documents which may relate to or bear upon Probe Engineering's involve- ment in this matter. The City's complete files regard- inq the Fairway Hills developments are available for public inspection upon contacting Judy Jenkin6 in the City Engineerinq office to set up a time and date for examination during normal business hours. 6. identify each person whom you expect to call as an expert witness at trial and whom you expect to testify on the subject matter of the claims which you have against Probe Engineerinq and on the subject matter of your Answers to Interrogatory Nos. 1 and 2, state the Bubstance of the facts and opinions to which the expert is expected to testify and a summary of the grounds for each opinion. ,ANSwER: At this point in time, the City of Eagan intends to call as an expert witness expert meteorologist Bruce Watson. In addition, it is anticipated that City Engineer Thomas Colbert will testify as an expert witness at trial. Further, Mr. Colbert and Mr. Watson's opinions are set forth in affidavits attached to the City of Eaqan's Motion for Summary Judgment in this matter. In addi- tion, the City of Eagan reserves Mark A. Hanson who is an engineer with the consulting firm of Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates. Mr. Hanson is expected to testify as to the desiqn of a city storm water system and the desiqn standards which that system is based. L?G'? MAS A. COLBERT, P.E. Subscribed and swo n to before me thi?? day of ?1989. , WIIIII-IIIMI-INIIINIIllI MARI.YN L WLC:=i FENNIS ND:"AHV PUCLIC - MI.'.",::SOTA DAKOTA CCUNTY N O a r y P, z y b l i b My Comme;ron Exp FcG B. 19'i3 eroc.r??s+sxr? i ? 'i 3 STATE OF MZNNESOTA ) ) SS COUN`PY OF ) THOMAS A. COLBERT, being duly sworn, deposes and says that he is the City Engineer of City of Eaqan, one of the Defen- dants in the above-entitled cause, and that he verifies the foregoing Answers to Interrogatories for and on behalf of said Defendant and is duly authorized to do so; that certain of the matters stated in the foregoing Answers to Interrogatories are not within the personal knowledge of deponent and that deponent is informed that there is no officer of Defendant, City of Eagan, who has personal knowledge of such matters; that the facts stated in said Answers to Interrogatories have been assembled by author- ized employees and counsel of Defendant, City of Eagan, and deponent is informed by said employees and counsel that the facts stated in said Answers to Interrogator s are true. TH S A. COLBERT, P.E. Subscribed and sworn to before me ' ddy Of MAAIiYN L WI1CI:;"?FENNIG ? :: .. NOiAHY PU'LI? - MI.':NESOTA ?? zs DAKOTA COUN7Y My Conu:ncnon Exp F:b 8, 1,?3 NO iY PIIb1iC / ? As to the form f these and any Objections. Dated this day of 1989. JARDINS, I,OGAN 6 O'BRIEN By: JAMES G. GOLEMBECR (A.R. #179620) Attorneys for City of Eagan 2100 Meritor Tower 444 Cedar Street St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 (612) 290-6567 4 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF DAICOTA --------------------- Donald Larsen, d/b/a Parkview Golf Course, Plaintiffs, -vs- Derrick Land Company, a Minnesota corporation, d/b/a Fairway Hills; DMS Investments, Ltd., a Minnesota corporation, Defendants, and Derrick Land Company, a Minnesota corporation, d/b/a Fairway Hills; and DMS Investments, Ltd., a Minnesota corporation, Third Party Plaintiffs, -vs- Probe Engineering Company, Inc.; DLR Construction Company; Encon Utilities, Inc.; and the City of Eagan, Third Party Defendants, and Probe Engineering Company, Inc., Fourth Party Plaintiff, -vs- Donald Patton, and the Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District, DISTRICT COURT FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT PROPERTY DAMAGE File No. 104556 CITY OF EAGAN`S RESPONSE TO ENCON UTILITIESt INC.'S REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS AND INTERROGATORIES TO A7•T. PARTIfiS Fourth Party Defendants. ----------------------------- TO: TAIRD PART DBFENDANT ENCON UTILITIES, INC. AND IT5 ATTOR- NEYS, DALE B. LINDMAN AND VICTOR E. LUND, 801 PARR AVENUE, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55404 Third Party Defendant City of Eaqan, for its Response to Encon Utilities, Inc.•s Request for Admissions and Inter- rogatories, states as follows: 1. That the work performed by Encon conformed with con- tract specifications in all material respects. RESPONSEz Denied. 2. That the storm sewer, water main and sanitary sewer installed by Encon on the Fairway Hills Development Project substantially complied with contract specifica- tions in all material respects. RESPONSE: Objection. Question is not specific in that reference to a pre-storm and a post-storm work performance is not indicated. As of July 23, 1987, Encon had not con- formed with contract specifications in all material respects because the work was not complete. Although, the storm sewer was physically in place on July 23, 1987 the system had not been formally inspected and therefore substantial compliance was not verified at that time. In the event that you fail to admit either of the above, admit that the following statement is true: 3. That deviations from contract specifications with respect to the stornt sewer, water main and sanitary sewer which Encon installed on the Fairway Hills Development Project did not cause the allegedly improper drainage of water from the Fairway Hills Development Project which is alleged to have resulted in plaintiff's damages herein. RESPONSE: Denied. See Response to Admission No. 2 above. Further, discovery is continuing at this time. 1. Zf you have failed to admit any of the above, state in detail the factual basis therefor, includinq: 1) the manner in which you contend that Encon failed to perform its work or install a storm sewer, water main and sanitary sewer on the Fairway Hills Development Project; 2) the manner in which you contend that Encon deviated from contract specifications; 3) the manner in which you contend that such deviations from contract specifications resulted in either harm to plaintiffs or improper drainage of surface waters from the Fairway Hills Development Project. ? Thomas Colbert, City Engineer City of Eagan Subscribed and sworn to before me th /yZj?day o£ 1989. i? ? EMAR" YIl L YrLCII.APF ENNIG 1:.^-P.V PJ°LI? -M1!IRivE50T.A Dl,KOTA CCUNTY /Notary PUbI1C My Czmr.r^;:on Exp FzG B, 1943 ' / . i ? .fONtMNIPfN C' As to the form of these Answers and any Objections. Dated: JARDINE, LOGAN & O'BRZEN BY ? James G. Golembeck (179620) 2100 Meritor Tower 444 Cedar Street St. Paul, MN 55101 (612) 290-6567 Attorneys for City of Eagan 3 A 7Ac file 49g86W MEMO T0: Jim Golembeck Jardine, Logan & 0'Brien 2100 Meritar Tover 444 Cedar Street St. Paul, MN 55101-2179 FROM: Jerry Bourdon DATE: .Tuly 28, 1989 Re: Fairway Hills - Eagan project 86W Response to Admissions and Interrogatories Larson vs. Derrick Land et al Paramore vs. Derrick Land et al BY FAX: 223-5070 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The following are our suggested responses to the admissions and interrogatories the city received from Encon. 1. ADMISSION: That the work performed by Encon conformed with contract specificatione in all material respects. RESPONSE: On .7uly 23, 1987, Encon had not conformed with contract specifications in all material respects hecause the work was not complete. 2. aDMlSSioN? That the etorm sewer, water main and sanitarq sewer inetalled by Encon on the Fairway Hills Development Project substantially complied with contract specifications in all material respects. gFSPONSS; On July 23, 1487, the sanitary sewer and watez main were complete enough to allow hookups. As such it may be argued that the sanitary sewer and water main aubstantially complied with contract specificatione. Although the storm sewer mas physically in place on Julp 23, 1987 it had not been inspected and therefore substantial compliance is not verified. 3. ADMIS TON: That deviations from contract specificatians with respect to the storm sewer, water main and sanitary sewer which Encon installed on the Fairway Hills Development Project did not cause the allegedly improper drainage of water from the Fairvay Hills Development Project mhich is alleged to have resulted in plaintiff's damages herein. RFSPNSEt Because the condition of the storm sewer on July 23, 1987 was unknown, ve do not know if any deviations existed and/or caused or contributed to the plaintiff's damages. I will be out of town next week. If you have any questions concerning the details of this issue I suggest you call Craig Larson of our office at 454-1532. d:h f:encon STATE OF MINNE$OTA COUNTY OF DAICOTA Charles L. Paramore, Darlpne PazamoYe, and Randy Paramore, Plaintiffs, -vs- PM5 Inveatments, Ltd., a MinneantA corporation, and nar.riCk Land Company, a MiruieesvtA corporation, Defendants, and DMS Investn?ents, Ltd., a Minnesata corporation, and DPrrir.k Land Compdny, a M3nnrtsota corporation, Third Party Plainti£fs, -vs- Prnbe EnginpPring Company, Inc.; DLR Construction Company; Encon Uti.lities, Inc.; and the City o£ Eagan, Third Party Defendants, and Probe Bngineer.ing Company, Inc., Fourth Party Pinirttiff, -vs- Donald Patton, and the ?akata County Soil and Watet Conservation Di5trict, Pourth Farty Defendants. DISTAICT CQURT E'ZK5T .TUDICIAL OISTRICT PROPERTY bAMRGE File No. C9-88-525 EtlCON UTILITIES. IHC.'S REQUE5T FOR ILDMIS$IONS AND Il'iTERROGPITORIES TO rr-r- PARTIES I . 9 TO: All parties and their counsel of record: Third party defendant Encon Utilities, Inc. (Enoon)p #or i.ts request for admiasiona end interrogntory to all partiea, requesta all parties to admit thnt the fQllowing statPments are true: 1. That the work performed by Encon conformed with Contract apecifications in all mdterial respects. 2• That the storm sewer, aater main and aanitarY aerrer installed by Eneon an the Fairway Hills Oevelopmant FroSecc subsEantially complied with contract specifiCationa in all material respecta. In t}ie event that you fail to admit either of the above, admit that the following statement ie true: 3. That deviations from contract specificationa With respect to the sCOrm SeweL, wateY main and sanitary 4ewez whi.ch Encon inatalled on the Fairway Hills Development Project did not cause the nl].egedly improper drainage of water from the FaiL-way Hills pevelopmant Prvjeet which is alleyeii LU have re5ultncl in plaintiff's damaqes herein. INTERROGATORY 1. If you have failed te admit any af the above, etate in detail the factual basis therefor, including: 1) the menner in whieh you cvntand that Encan failed to perform its wurk or install a storm sewert xnter mnin and sanitery sewer on the Feirway Hills Development Pru jeCL; 2) Ltte manner in which you conten(a ttiat k:ncon deviated from contrect specitications; 3) the manner in whi.Ch you contend that such deviaLions Lrom contract specificationa reaulted in either harm to piaintiffa er improper drainege of sur#ace waters from the Faix-wa1r Hills Developrnenl. Prvject. narad= .7i,1.y 20, 1989. MAHONEY, DOUGH.ERTY AND MAHONEY Dale B. Lindman ' 63514 victor B. Lund 150076 AttornPya for Third Perty Defendant Encon IItiliYles, Iac. 401 Park Rvcnue Minneapolis, Minneaota 55404 (612) 339-5863 -2- q pR ? g 19?9 JAROINE, LOGAN a( O'BRIEN DONALD M JARDINE PATTIJ.SHOGLUNO ATTORNEYS AT LAW JOHN R.O"BRIEN' SEAN E MAOE' GRAHAM HEINES} IAWRENCE M ROCMEfORD' 2100 MERITOR TOWEF GERqLO M LINNIHPN' TIMOTHY 5 CROM 44A CEDAR STREET AL4N R VANPSEI( BRETT W OLANDER JOMN M HENNEDY,JF.' GHEGGA.JONNSOH ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 5 5 101-217 9 EUGENEJ.FLICN' MAFlENES,GARV15 (612) 290-6590 FAX (612) 223,30J0 CXAqLES E GILLIN' RUSSELL O. MEITON JAMES J GNLMAN' MAl1REEN A MULLIGAN WRITER'SOIRECTDIALNVMBER 290-6571 PIERREN.REGNIEp TMOMASM.COUNTRYMAN MARK P FONHEN' 19, GREGORY G.HEACO% April 1989 GEORGEW.NUEMNER MARY H RICE'} JPNES A. JARDINE JERRE F LOGAN (19231983) Thomas A. Colbert, P.E. Director of Public Works City of Eaqan 3830 Pilot Knob Road P. O. Box 21199 Eagan, MN 55121 Re: Larsen v. Derrick Land Company, et al Our File No. 15681 (69) Dear Mr. Colbert: TIMOTNV C GOOFFEY JAMES G. GOLEMBECK" KERRY C.KOEP DAVIO J. XOENSTRA R06ERT O. TlFfiINY JAMES N. HELLING TNOMAS A.MARDER MARNJ NILL GR[GORY 4 WRIGMf 'ADMITiED TO GMCTICE IH W19CONSIN '•/.OMRtEO T0 GN?TICE IN tqRIN .OT. 1ADM11TDT0 PR?CTIC[ IN ILL1N014 This letter is in response to your March 21, 1989 letter requesting a status report of pending claims against the City of Eagan. The purpose of this letter is to briefly provide you with a status report of the Larsen vs. City of Eaqan litiqation. As I am sure you are aware, the above litigation involves the Park View Golf Course. The main Defendants are Derrick Land Company, DMS Investments and the City of Eagan. Three Third-Party Defendants have been brought into this case, Probe Engineering, DLR Construction Company and Encon Utilities, Inc. In addition, Probe Engineering has brought a Fourth-Party Complaint against Donald Patton and Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District. At this time, the Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District has been dismissed from the above matter. On November 9, 1988, I took the Deposition of the Plaintiff, Donald Larsen. Mr. Larsen, as you know, has a Bachelor's Degree in Civil Engineering from the L7niversity of Minnesota. The brunt o£ the Deposition was to ascertain damages. Mr. Larsen was evasive as to the damages and most of his damages appeared to be speculative and lacking support. His damages are basically that a grove of oak trees have been flooded and are possibly dying due to being flooded. He also states a loss of business income because of the flooding and/or lack of prestige to the golf course from being flooded. Mr. Larsen's most concrete claim of damages is an itemization for repairs to the greens and fairways of approximately $7,500. As of this time, we have no concrete documentation regarding the value of the April 19, 1989 Page 2 trees and/or loss of income and/or prestige to the golf course. At this time, this claim is in the discovery stage in that parties are making discovery requests for additional documents. At this time, the Plaintiff's attorney has not filed a Note of Issue and, as such, there is no trial date set for the above matter. At this time, we are attempting to further substantiate and/or pin down any damages in this matter. Because of the large number of parties and attorneys, the matter is proceeding at a rather slow pace. If you desire further information, please contact me at the above number. Very truly yours, JARDINE, LOGAN & O'BRIBN James G. Golembeck JGG:djt HEAb. DOUGLAS M. HEAD WILLIAM 1 HEMPEL THOMAS V. SEIFERT VERNON J. VANDE0. WEIDE RU55ELL C. BROWN KENNETH A. 1AR50N MARIANNE E. DURKIN CHARLES W. ARNASON CHARLES H. CLAY 1AN15 M. CLP.Y NANCYlENSEN BECK IILL RIJZICKA City Council City of Eagan City Hall 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eaqan, MN 55122 CO?•`? ?C, S RE: Donald Larsen, et al v. DMS Investments, Ltd., et al ?FS Court File No. 104556 Dear Sir or Madam: Please take notice, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466, Probe Enqineering, Inc., 1000 East 146th Street, eurnsville, Minnesota 55337, by virtue of third-party claims and cross-claims asserted against it in the referenced action now pending in Dakota County Aistrict Court, has a claim against the City of Eagan for indemnity and/or contribution for all damages, the exact amount of which is unknown. Please correspond with the undersigned regarding this notice of cAaim. Russell C. Brown RCB/dlc 96-63-02 cc: Mr. Ralph Wagner Pierre N. Regnier, Esq. James G. Golembeck, Esq. HEMPEL. SEIFERT VANDER WEIDE FORMERLY HEAD e TRUHN ATI'ORNEYS AT LAW 2110 FIRST BANK PLACE WEST MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 (612) 339-I601 iELECOPIER (612) 339-3372 1EROME TRUHN 1940 -1982 CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED November 17, 1988 ? J Q ??,? r\J 989 Westvlaw Drive Hastings, MN 55033 (812) 437•3148 Fax M (612) 437-2732 Samuel H. Hertogs .DOnaIdJ Fluegel ioMichaelR Sieben weMichael S. Polk .Harvey N. Jones evRichardA LaVerdiere Steven D. Hawn George L May Thomas R. Longlellow Leo F.Schumacher Shawn M. Moynihan Mark J Fellman Michael R. Slrom John P Sieben Swtt J Hertogs John D. Skinkle James M. Hemilton Enc A Short John O Sonsteng Mlso edmitletl in Wisconsin pCerLhea as ervll inel specielisls Oy ine National Boartl oi Tnal AGvocacy ST PAUL OFFICE. Gallery Bwlding Swte aos 17 W Ezchange St SI. Paul, MN 55102 (612) 222•4146 Hertogs Fluegel Sleben Polk Jones 8 LaVerdiere PROfE5510NAL A55CCIAiION o? - r ? 2 a 1988 ?LD ; ;<°,'tOGAiJ & 0 B?;?; - --- .s._._---?--- September 28, 1988 Ms. Ronda P. Bayer FREDRIKSON & BYRON Attorneys at Law 1100 International Centre 900 Second Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55402-3397 Russell C. Brown Head, Hempel, Siefert & Vander Weide 2110 First Bank Place West Minneapolis, MN 55402 Pierre N. Regnier James G. Golembeck Jardine, Logan & O'Brien 2100 Meritor Tower 444 Cedar Street St. Paul, MN 55101 Encon Utilities, Inc. 1530 East Cliff Road Burnsville, Minnesota 55337 Gary L. Manka Katz, Davis & Manka, Ltd. 555 Peavy Building Minneapolis, MN 55402 Re: Larsen v. Derrick Land Company, et al. Court File No: 104556 Dear Counsel: If any discovery had been conducted prior to joinder of my client, DLR Construction, I would appreciate receivinq copies of'all responses to discovery requests, including answers to interrogatories, documents or other materials produced to date. If depositions have been taken, please identify the deponent(s) and the court reporter(s) used. r Page 2 September 28, 1988 Thank you all for your anticipated cooQeration. I also enclose and serve upon Mr. Brown, Mr. Regnier and Encon Utilites: 1. The Answer and Crossclaim of Third-Party Defendant DLR Construction Company; 2. The Interrogatories of Third-Party Defendant DLR Construction Company; and 3. Supplemental Interrogatories of Third-Party Defendant DLR Construction Company. Very truly yours, James M.'HAmilton JMH:jkt Enclosures Hertogs Fluegel Sleben Polk Jones & LaVerdiere ?ES4p,,, ,550Ci.l0? September 26, 1988 999 Westriew Drlre Hastings, MN 55033 (612) 437•3148 Samuel H. Hertogs .Donald J. Flue9el .eMlchael R. SieDen • ?Michaei S Polk .Harvey N Jones r aFjch2rd A. LaVerCiEre Steven D. Hawn George L. May Thomas R Longfellow Leo F Schumacher Shawn M. Moynihan Mark J Fellman Michael R. Strom Jonn P. Sieben ScmtJ.Henogs John D. Skinkle John O Sonsleng fAlso atlmXletl in Wisconsin aCerbbeC as rnn mal Sp2Ciahsl5 Cy Ine NaLOnal Boertl ol Tnai Htlvowcy ST PAUL OFFICE. Gallery Buiitling Smte 409 17 W. Ezchange St St. Paul. MN 55102 (612) 222-4 i a6 Ms. Ronda P. Bayer ??? Q "F; FREDRIKSON & BYRON ?Attorneys at Law ? 2 .?? 1100 International Centre 90D Second Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55402-3397 ontn?F 1 C1GAN ? O? Re: Donald Larsen v. Derrick Land Company, et al. v. DLR Construction, et al. Court File No: 104556 Charles L. Paramore, et al. v. DMS Investments, Ltd., et al, v. DLR Construction Company, et al. Court File No: C9-88-525 Dear Ms. Sayer: Enclosed and served upon you by United States mail find Third-Party Defendant DLR Construction Company's Supplemental Interrogatories to Defendants and Third-Party Plaintiffs Derrick Land Company and DMS Investments, Inc. Very truly yours, ? ames M. Hamilton ?? ? JMH:jkt Enclosures cc: Douglas M. Stevens, Esq.(w/encs.) Russell C. Brown, Esq. (w/encs.) Pierre N. Regnier, Esq. (w/encs.) i STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF DAKOTA 1 ? , ' ----------------- DISTRICT COURT FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT CASE TYPE: PROPERTY DAMAGE ------------------------------------- Donald Larson, d/b/a ¢ Parkview Golf Course f 3 Plaintiffs, i t v. ' Derrick Land Company, a N.innesota corporation d/b/a Fairway Aills; D M S Znvestments and the City of Eagan, , Defendants, and Derrick Land Company, a Minnesota corporation, d/b/a Fairway Hills; and DMS Investments, Ltd., a Minnesota corporation, Third-Party Plaintiffs, v. Probe Engineering Company, Inc.; DLR Construction Company; and Encon Utilities, Inc., Third-Party Defendants. File No: 104556 INTERROGATORIES TD: Plaintiffs and Third-Party Plaintiffs above-named and their attorneys; Defendants and Third-Party Defendants City of Eagan, Probe Engineering Company, Inc. and Encon Utilities, Inc. and their attorneys: PLEASE TAKS NOTICE that the Third-Party Defendant, DLR Construction Company, hereby request that you and each of you, -1- ; F x e answer the following Interrogatories within thirty (30) days, according to the Minnesota Rules of Civil Proc:edure. INSTRUCTIONS 1. In answering these Interrogatories, furnish all information, however obtained, including hearsay which is available to you, and information known by or in possession of yourself, your agents and your attorneys, or appearing in your record, 2. In answering each Interrogatory, identify each document relied upon or which forms the basis for each answer given or which corroborates the answer given or the substance of what is given. 3. If you cannot answer the following Interrogatories in full after exercising due diligence to secure the full information to do so, so state and answer to the extent possible, specifying your inability to answer the remainder, stating whatever information or knowledge you have concerning the unanswered portion and detailing what you did in attemptinq to secure the unknown information. 4. A question which seeks information contained in, or information about, or identification of any documents, may be answered by providing a copy of such document. 5. These Snterrogatories shall be deemed be continuing until and during the course of trial. Information sought by these Interrogatories that you obtain aft2r you serve your answers mvst be disclosed to the Defendant by supplementary -2- answers. Objection will be made at trial to any evidence introduced which should have been, but was not, diaclosed. DEFINITIONS 1. Describe: This word means to specify in detail and to particularize the content of the answer to the question not just to state the reply in summary or outline fashion. 2. Document: This word means any written, recorded or graphic matter, whether produced or reproduced or stored on ? paper, tape or any other medium in your possession, custody or ' control or known by you to exist, and includes originals, all t copies of originals, and all prior drafts. t ' 3. Identify or ldentity: These words: f ? a. When used in reference to a natural person mean to ; state his or her full name, present business and home address, present employer and position with ' employer,the relationship, business or otherwise, between such person and the person answering the ' interrogatory; b. When used in reference to a firm, partnership, corporation, proprietorship, association, or other organization or entity, means to state its full name, address and telephone number (designate present or last-known), the legal forms of such organization or entity, and the identification of its chief executive officer; c. When used in reference to a document means to state the type of document (e.g. letter, memorandum, telegram, contract, invoice, etc.) or some other means of identifying it, it state, author, addressee or other intended recipient, or audience, its present location, and custodian. If any such document was but no longer is in your possession or subject to your control, state its disposition; d. When used in reference to a'conversation, conference or meeting means to identify all persons participating or in attendance, to identify all documents prepared for or assembled in preparation for or in connection with such conversation, conference or meeting, to identify all documents, -3- ? s recording, summarizinq or otherwise arising out of such conversation, conference or meeting, and to describe the purpose of such conversation, conference or meeting, and the means of communication, and all actions taken as a result of such conversation, conference or meeting. 4. You or Your: These words refer to the party upon whom these interrogatories have been served. ZNTERROGATORIES 1. Identify by name, address, telephone number and his or her relationship to you, each individual furnishing information contained in your responses to the following interrogatories. 2. If you contend that third-party Defendant DLR Construction Company was negligent in any way in connection with the events described in the complaint or third-party complaint, then state in detail the factual basis for that claim. 3. If you claim to have sustained damages as a result of any action taken by third-party defendant DLR, then state in detail the nature of those damages and provide an itemized list of such damges. 4. If you claim that third-party defendant DLR breached a contract to which you were a party or of which you claim to be a third-party beneficiary, then state in detail the factual basis for that claim, including but not limited to identification of the contract involved and the standards or specifications from which DLR is ciaimed to have deviated. 5. Identify all documents in your possassion or control or known by you to exist which contain the standards or -4- specifications referred to in your Answer to Interrogatories No. 1 3 and 4. ? 6. Identify by name, address, current telephone number and ' his or her relationship to you, each person known or believed by 'y ouu to have information concerning the events alleged in the ? complaint or third-party complaint. ' 7. For each person ideatified in your Answer to Interrogatory No. 6, provide a brief description of the information known or believed to be in his or her possession. 8. Identify the officers, employees, agents or other i ? representatives currently employed by or associated with you who ? are most knowledgeable about the events alleged in the complaint 3 E ? and third-party complaint. ` 9. Identify all documents in your possession or control or i known by you to exist which contain information relating to the . allegations contained in your Answers to Interrogatories No. Z, 3 and 4. 10. If you claim that third-party defendant DLR, its , officers, employees or other agents have made any statement(s) which constitutes an admission on the part of DLR, then state in detail the statement made and identify the person(s) claimed to have made this statement(s). 11. Identify each person whom you expect to call as an expert witness at trial and, for each such witness: (a) State the subject matter on which the expert is exnected to testify; (b) State the substance of the facts and opinions to which such expert is expected to testify; -5- (c) Provide a summary of the grounds for each opinion; and, ; i ; a ; (d) State whether you will provide copies of reports issued or prepared by such expert without a court order. ' 12. Identify each insurance policy affording coverage to you in connection with the claims or damages at issue in this matter, including but not limited to: (a) The name of the insurance company; (b) The policy number(s) under which coverage is afforded; (c) The policy limits; and (d) Whether any reservation of rights or declination of coverage has been issued by the insurance carrier(s). HERTOGS, FLUEGEL, SIEBEN, POLR JONES & LaVERDIERE, P.A. i ? i ? i r Dated: C n9' J B of CtiMM, ames M. Hamilton ' Att rneys for Third-Party Defendant DLR Construction Company 999 Westview Drive Hastings, Minnesota 55033 612-437-3148 -6- STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF DAKOTA j ° --------------------------------- Donald Larson, d/b/a ; Parkview Golf Course ? Plaintiffs, v. Derrick Land Company, a j Minnesota corporation d/b/a i Fairway Hills; D M S Investments and the City of Eagan, ? I Defendants. 1 ? and f Derrick Land Company, a Minnesota ' corporation, d/b/a Fairway Hills; and DMS Investments, Ltd., a Minnesota corporation, Third-Party Plaintiffs, v. Probe Engineering Company, Inc.; DLR Construction Company; and Encon Utilities, Inc., Third-Party Defendants. DISTRICT COURT FZRST JUDICIAL DISTRZCT CASE 2YPE: PROPERTY DAMA6E File No: 104556 SEPARATE ANSWER AND CROSS-CLAIM OF THIRD- PARTY DEFENDANT DLR CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Third-party Defendant DLR Construction Company ("DLR") as and for its answer to the Third-Party Complaint of Derrick Land Company ("Derrick") and DMS Investments, Ltd. ("DMS"), states and alleges as follows: 1. Denies generally each and every allegation, matter and thing contained in said third-party complaint, except as -1- specifically admitted, qualified or otherwise pleaded hereinafter. ' 2. Admits Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 16. 1 j 3. States that it is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of Paragraphs 5, 7, i i i 11, 12, 17 and 18 and therefore denies same and puts third-party i ? ? laintiffs to their strict burden of P proof thereof. , 4. Specifically denies Paragraphs 9 and 15. ' AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 5. DLR realleges Paragraphs 1 throuah 4 above and i incorporates the same herein by reference. ? 6. Affirmatively alleges that third-party plaintiffs' , complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be i granted. 7. Affirmatively alleges that plaintiffs' damages and/or any damages sustained by third-party plaintiffs were caused by their own fault or the fault of persons over whom this answering third-party defendant has and had no authority or control. 8. Affirmatively alleges that plaintiffs' damages and/or any damages sustained by third-party plaintiffs were caused by an act of god and/or an unavoidable accident. 9. Affirmatively alleges that DLR performed its work in a manner consistent with the applicable standard of care and/or in conformance with all applicable standards and specifications. -2- I ! ? i ! F i ? ? , i , ; CROSS-CLAIM 10. DLS realleges Paragraphs 1 through 9 above and incorporates the same herein by reference. 11. In the event DLR is found liable to plaintiffs or third-party plaintiffs in this action, DLR is entitled to contribution and/or indemnification from Derrick, DN.S, Encon, Eagan, and/or Probe for any and all alleged damages that plaintiffs and/or third-party plaintiffs may recover from this answering defendant. Wherefore, DLR prays for relief as follows: 1. Dismiss third-party plaintiffs pretended cause of action on the merits with prejudice; 2. In the event DLR be found liable in damages to any plaintiffs or third-party plaintiffs, that DLR be awarded contribution from and indemnification by DMS, Derrick, Probe, Encon and Eagan as required by law; 3. Award DLR its costs, disbursements and reasonable attorney's fees incurred herein; and 4. Award DLR such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and equitable under the circumstances. Dated: 0171?? HERTOGS, FLUEGEL, SIEBEN, POLR JONES 6 LaVERDIERE, P.A. wta-, / n .a.LL C James M. Hamilton At orneys for Third-Party Defendant DLR Construction Company 999 Westview Drive Hastings, Minnesota 55033 612-437-3148 -3- It is hereby acknowledged that costs, disbursements and reasonable attorney and witness fees may be awarded pursuant to Minn. Stat. §549.21, Subd. 2, to the parties against whom the allegations in this pleading aze asserted. ('U'?i.?? 7'•,?--t? qnqry ,,{.'^!, , Ja es M. Hamilton -4- JARDINE, LOGAN & O'BRIEN ATTORNEYS AT LAW 900 MERITOR TOWEF 444 CEDAR STREET ST. PAl1L, MINNESOTA 55101-2179 (612) 290-6590 wRirEa -soIaECroinL NUMeER 290-6567 July 6, 1988 Mr. Thomas A. Colbert City Engineer/Director Department of Public Works City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55121 RECEIVED .JUL 8 JO DONALOM JAROWE JOHN R O'BRIEN' GRAHAM HEIHES} GERALD M LINNIMAN' ALAN R VANASEK JOHN M KENNEOY JR' EuGErvcJ rucK' CHARLES E GILLIN' JAMESJ GALMAN' PIERRE N REGM1IER MPRKA FONHEN' GRCGORY G HEACO% GWRGE W KUEHNER MARY R RICE'} JERRE f" LOGAN (1923 1983) RE: Larsen v. City of Eagan, et al Our File: 15,681 (69) Dear Mr. Colbert: JAMESA JAROINE PATTiJ SNOGWND SEAN E HACE' LAWRENCE M ROCHEFORD' TIMOTHT 5 CROM 9FETT W OLANDER GREGG n JOHNSON MAFLENES GARVIS MARIE A DARST* RAE L RANOOLPH RUSSELLO MELTON TERESA SGHULTZWARNER MAUREEN A MULLIGAN THOMAS M COtINTRYMqN TIMOTHV C. GODFREY JAMESG GOLEMBECK" HAREN R SWANTON HERFY C KOEP pAVID J HOENSTRA 'ApMRTEO T0 PRRCTCE Irv WISCONSIN 'ADMITTED TO PPPCTI[E IN NOFTH OPKOTA 1AON17TED TO PRPCTICE w iLuNOiS This letter is in follow-up to our recent telephone conversation regarding the Plaintiff's answers to Interrogatories wherein the Plaintiff indicates that they have retained Barr Engineering to evaluate the above matter. Please find enclosed a copy of the Plaintiff's answers to Inter- rogatories and a letter from Steve Klein, Barr Engineerinq, regard- ing the above matter. As you will note by answer no. 2, the Plaintiff states that the flood- ing of the Plaintiff's property occurred as a result of the construction and inadequate drainage system instituted by Defendants. In addition, see Plaintiff's answer to no. 5 which states that the City, by design in the handling of runof£ caused a flood of Plaintiff's property. In addition, see answers to nos. 11 and 12. I have attached Barr Engineering/Mr, Klein's initial report which states that he estimates the 33 to 36 inch diameter concrete pipe would be necessary to handle flows from the Parkview Golf Course. After you have reviewed the above documents, please give me a call as I would like to go over some of the aspects of the case. Very truly yours, JARDINE, LOGAN & 0'BRIEN James G. Golembeck JGG:lw Attachment STATE OF MINNESOTA COIINTY OF DAKOTA Donald Larsen, d/b/a Parkview Golf Course, Plaintiff, vs. Derrick Land Company, a Minnesota corporation, 8/b/a Fairway Hills, D M S Snvestments, Ltd., a Minnesota corporation, and the City of Eagan, Defendants. DISTRICT COURT FIRST JUDZCIAL DISTRICT CASE TYPE - PROPERTY DAMAGE PLAINTIPF'S ANSWERS TO INTf:RROGATORZES OF THE CITY OF EAGAN Court File No. 104556 TO: TfiE CITY OF EAGAN, DEEENDANT ABOVE NAMED, AND ITS ATTORNEYS, JAMES G. GOLEMBECIC, ESQ., JARDINE, LOGAN & O'BRIEN, 2100 MERITOR TOWER, 444 CEDAR STREET, ST. PAUL, MN 55101 Plaintiff states the following for his Answers to Interroga- tories of the City of Eagan: 1. Relative to the allegation of Paragraph 12 of the Amended Complaint that as a direct and proximate result of defen- dants` intentional actions, surface water has backed up onto plaintiff's property to a depth of approximately thirty feet and has thus flooded plair.ciff's land for several days at a time: ' a. Identify each and every person who you claim has know- ledge of facts to support said allegation; b. identify each and every document which you claim sup- ports that allegation; c. Set forth in detail each and every fact which you have knowledge of which supports that allegation. ANSWER NO. 1: a. The parties and their attorneys. Bradley S. Larsen 3575 Blue Jay Way, Apartment 203 Eagan, MN 55123 Assistant Manager, Parkview Golf Course Les Duchon Mankato College Mankato, MN Groundscrew, Parkview Golf Course Richard I. Zdebski 14228 Dearborn Path Rosemount, MN Superintendent, Parkview Golf Course David ICowalczyk 12790 Germain Avenue, Apartment 306 Apple Valley, MN 55124 Groundscrew, Parkniew Golf Course Thomas Colbert 1220 Mourning Dove Court Eagan, MN 55123 City Engineer and Director of Public Works, City of Eagan Michael Foertsch Engineering Department City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Craiq Rnudse.i Engineering Technician • City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Ralph Wagner Probe Engineering William Maurer Probe Engineering Mark Hanson identity Unknown 2 Donald Patton D M S Znvestments 11095 Viking Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Various agents, employees, contractors and/or subcon- tractors of defendant, Derrick Land Company. Steven M. Klein Barr Engineering Company 7803 Glenroy Road Minneapolis, MN 55435 Various additional agents, contractors and employees of the City of Eagan, the exact identities of whom are currently unknown. b. Photographs taken in late July, 1987 Blueprint of "Storm Sewer Construction" by Probe Engineering Co. 7/23/87 letter from Craig Knudsbn to Don Patton 7/10/87 letter from Michael Foertsch to Don Patton 5/15/87 letter from Paul Hauge to Thomas Colbert 8/26/87 letter from Don Patton to Mike Fcertsch Plaintiff's Daily Reminder c. See (a) and (b), above. 2. Relative to the allegations of your Amended Complaint that your property has sustained damage as a result of conduct by the defendants: a. Identify each and every person who you claim has know- ledge of facts to support said allegation; b. Identify each and every doci•-nent which you claim sup- ports that allegation; • c. Set forth in detail each and every fact which you have knowledge of which supports that allegation. ANSWBR NO. 2: a. See Answer to interrogatory No. 1(a), above. b. Books, records and accounts of Parkview Golf Course Plat of Fairway Hills prepared by Probe Engineering Report of plaintiff's expert, Steven M. Klein of Barr Engineering Company 3 In addition, see Answer to Interrogatory No. 1(b), above. c. See Answers to Interrogatories P7os. 1(a), (b), (c), and 2 (a) and (b). The flooding of the plaintiff`s property occurred as a result of the construction and inadequate drainage sys- tem instituted by defendants. See letter from Gary L. Manka to Michael Foertsch dated August 27, 1987. Fur- ther, defendants allowed silt to accumulate on plain- tiff's property when they failed to utilize erosion control measures. Said flooding cansed direct and immediate damagae plus ongoing damage to the trees in the area. 3. Relative to the allegation of your Amended Complaint that the plaintiff has suffered consequential damages to the reputation of the golf course and loss of revenues: a. Identify each and every person who you claim has know- ledge of facts to support said allegation; b. Identify each and every document which you claim sup- ports that allegation; c. Set forth in detail each and every fact which you have knowledge of which supports that allegation. ANSWER NO. 3: a. See Answer to Znterrogatory No. 1(a), above. b. See Answers to Interrogatories above. c. See letter from Gary L. Manka to Michael Foertsch dated August 27, 1987. These con-equential damages are also reflected in plaintiff's books and records. . 4. Relative to the allegation of Paragraph XVI of your Amended Complaint that the defendants' intentional and reckless con- struction of the driveway and obstruction of the natural flow of water constitutes a nuisance to plaintiff: a. Identify each and every person who you claim has know- ledge of facts to support said allegation; b. Identify each and every document which you claim sup- ports that allegation; 4 c. Set forth in detail each and every fact which you have knowledge of which supports that allegation. ANSWER NO. 4: a. See Answer to Interrogatory No. 1(a), above. b. Probe Engineering drawings (before and after) showing road relocation Report of plaintiff's expert, Steven M. Klein of Barr Engineering Company Plaintiff's Diary Letters listed in Answer to Interrogatory No. 1(b), above Before and after typographical drawings, photographs, plus charts and graphs prepared by Barr Engineering c. See letter from Gary L. Manka to Michael Foertsch dated August 27, 1987. 5. Relative to the allegation of Paragraph XVIII of the Amended Complaint that the actions of the defendants constitute a trespass against the plaintiff: a. Identify each and every person who you claim has know- ledge of facts to support said allegation; b. Identify each and every document which you claim sup- ports that allegation; c. Set forth in detail each and every fact which you have knowledge of which supports that allegation. AHSWSR NO. 5: a. See Answer to Interro9atory No. 1(a), above. b. See Answer to Interrogatory No. 1(b), above, as well as letter from Gary L. Manka to Michael Foertsch dated August 27, 1987. c. The City, by its design of the handling of runoff, caused a flood of plaintiff's property, without obtain- ing the necessary easement rights. The contractor installed a silt fence on plaintiff's property, stockpiled soil on plaintiff's golf course, destroyed a wooded area on the course and excavated on plaintiff's property, all without permission. 5 6. Relative to the allegation of Paraqraph XVIII that the actions of the defendants caused a"diminution in value of the plaintiff's property": a. Identify each and every person who you claim has know- ledge of facts to support said allegation; b. Identify each and every document which you claim sup- ports that allegation; c. Set forth in detail each and every fact which you have knowledge of which supports that allegation; d. Specify the amount you claim the property has been devalued and set forth in detail the formula and basis for arriving at such figure. ANSWSR 1Q0. 6: a. See Answer to Interrogatory No. 1(a). b. See Answer to Interrogatory No. 1(b) and 2(b), above. c. Plaintiff has lost business due to the damage to his property by the defendants. Patrons have been over- heard to say the course was poor if rain could cause such a disruption. Zn addition, the flooding has caused damage to the large stand of oak trees on plain- tiff's property, which woods will in all likelihood be lost completely. The acreage consumed by flooding is noW incapable of being developed. Plaintiff had plan- ned to clevelop that area into a driving range, and that is no longer possible. d. The full extent of the damage is not known at this time, in that affected trees continue to die. 7. Relative to the allegation of Paragraph XXIII of the Amended Complaint that actions by the City of Eagan impaired the natural flow and drainage of water across plaintiff's land: a. Identify each and evety person who you claim has know- ledge of facts to support said allegation; b. Identify each and every document which you claim sup- ports that allegation; c. Set forth in detail each and every fact which you have knowledge of which supports that allegation. 6 ANSWER NO. 7: a. See Answer to Snterrogatory No. 1(a), above. b. See Answer to interrogatory No. i(b) and 2(b), above. c. See previous Answers to Interrogatories, as well as documents attached hereto and referred to above. in addition, the City caused to be built a force-main storm water relief line for the lake approximately one mile east of the plaintiff's prope=ty. This line passes and empties under Cliff Road at the same point as the ravine water and the Fairway Hills water in this area. , 8. Relative to the allegation of Paragraph XXVZ of the Amended Complaint that the City of Eagan negligently constructed and maintained storm sewer modifications under Cliff Road adja- cent to plaintiff's property that such modifications caused damage to plaintiff's property: a. Identify each and every person who you claim has know- ledge of facts to support said allegation; b. Identify each and every document which you claim sup- parts that allegation; c. Set forth in detail each and every fact which you have knowledqe of which supports that allegation. AFSWSR NO. 8: a. See Answer to Interrogatory No. 1(a), above. b. See Answer to Interrogatory No. 1(b) and 2(b), above, as well as the letter from Gary L. Manka to Mic'iael Fcertsch dated August 27, 1987. • c. See Answer to Znterrogatory No. 7(c), above. The storm water zelief line referred to therein and the Fairway Hills 24" line aIl added to the original flow that passed through the culvert under Cliff Road. In addi- tion to the substantially greater flow contributed by those lines, the capacity of the culvert was rednced to a 12" pipe. 9. Relative to the allegation of Paragraph XXVIII of the Amended Complaint that the City of Eagan's intentional and 7 reckless obstruction of the natural flow of drainage from plaintiff's property constitutes a nuisance: a. Identify each and every person who you claim has know- ledge of facts to support said allegation; b. Zdentify each and every document which you claim sup- ports that allegation; c. Set forth in detail each and every fact which you have knowledge of which supports that allegation. ANSWER NO. 9: a. See Answer to Interrogatory No. 1(a), above. b. Plaintiff's Diary, photographs referred to above, plaintiff's schedule of "in-House Labor to Clean and Rebuild" and letter from Gary L. Manka to Michael Foertsch dated August 27, 1987. c. Please refer to documents set forth in Answer to Inter- rogatory No. 9(b), above. 10. Relative to Paragraph XXX of the Amended Complaint that the City of Eagan's intentional reckless and negligent obstruc- tion of the natural flow and drainage from plaintiff's pro- perty by virtue of the construction to the storm sewer sys- tem resulted in flooding and diminution in value to plain- tiff's property thus constituting a trespass: a. identify each and every person who you claim has know- ledge of facts to support said allegation; b. identify each and every 8ocument which you claim sup- ports that allegation; c. Set forth in detail each and every fact which yotz have knowledge of which supports that allegation. ANSWSR NO. 10: a. See Answer to Interrogatory No. 1(a), above. b. See Answers to interrogatories Nos. 1(b), 2(b) and 5(b), above. c. See Answer to Interrogatory Fo. 5(c), above. 8 11. Relative to the allegation of Paragraph XXXIIZ of the Amended Complaint that conduct of the City of Eagan resulted in taking of your property without just compensation: a. Identify each and every person who you claim has know- ledge of facts to support said allegation; b. Identify each and every document which you claim sup- ports that allegation; c. Set forth in detail each and every fact which you have knowledge of which supports that allegation. ANSWSIt NO. ll: a. See Answer to Interrogatory No. 1(a), above. b. See Answer to interrogatory No. 5, above. c. See Answer to Interrogatory No, 5, above. In addition, the defendant, City of Eagan, knew the effects of their actions, were forewarned and placed and allowed a pond- ing easement without payment: 12, a. Identify each person, giving the address, whom you expect to call as an expert at the time of trial. b. State the subject matter on which they are expected to testify. c. State the substance of facts upon which they are expected to testify. d. State the substance of the opinions to which they are expected to testify. ANSfiSR NO. 12: a. Steven M. Rlein Barr Engineering Company 7803 Glenroy Road Minneapolis, MN 55435 b. Mz. Klein will testify as to the size of the pipe necessary to handle the amount of flow across plain- tiff's property. c. Mr. Rlein will testify to the current drainage system put in place by the defendants. 9 d. Mr. Klein will testify to the inadequacy of the defen- dants' drainage system. Additional experts will be utilized to prove damages, including, but not limited to a hydrologist, forester and golf course expert. 13. Identify each and every photograph that you have in your possession relative to the property that you intend to utilize for an exhibit in this case. ANSFTER NO. 13: See photocopies of photographs attached. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 1 • . J.• - day of 1988. . /, / ?. ; 7 i ` Notary Public;: DATED: LP?/Q C? pro-7 Donald Larsen v • ? ? '4? PANELA J. MURPHY c NOTARY PUBLIC-MINNESOTA ?-y DANOTA COUNTY My Commission Expues laa ll, 1994 r r RATZj.,DAVIS?, MANRA & HAUGAN, LTD. . . ? _ / `i ? ? "?--- r By• ir Gary L. Manka Attorniys for Plaintiff 4830 IbS Center Minneapolis, MN 55402 • (612) 333-1671 Attorney Reg. 67180 10 Engineering Company DouglasW 8an JOhn O Orcksoo L R Molsalner Allan Gebhartl LeonardJ Kr¢mer Dennrs E Palme, August 5, 1987 Mr. Gary L. Manka Katz, Davis, 6 Manka, Ltd. 555 Peavey Building 730 Second Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55402 Re: Flooding and Sedimentation Problem - Parkview Golf Course, Eagan Dear Mr. Manka: As you are awarep today I inspected the Parkview Golf Course property where water had ponded for several days after the raius of July 20 and July 23p 1987. You had asked me to visit the site and roughly estimste the size pipe that might be necessary to allow vater to flow from [he northwest corner of the golf courae property, asauming no major ponding. In our discussioa at the site, you stated that about 100 acres drain to the northwest corner of the golf course property. From my site revievp it appears your estimate ia correct; however, I have not conducted a detailed investigation to make a apecific determination. Because the owner of the golf course has not heen approsched by the City oP Eagaa for a ponding or etorm water detention easement in the northwest corner of the propertyt I assume that it is the intention of the Citq to allow wa[er to outlet from that location with minimal ponding. (For example, only the amount of ponding necessary for the receiving pipe to flow full.) Also assuming the downatream collection sys[em is designed for at Least, a 10-year atormt it would aeem reasonable to asaume the design of the outlet from the golf course property to be designed for similar criteria. Therefore, based on 100 acres of golf courae and park land waterahed and a 10-year/1-hour duration storm, the peak flov* at the northwest corner of the golf courae property is estimated at about 30 cfa. A 10-year-1/2 hour storm would reeult in about 50 cfs. Based on these diecharges, the pipe necessary to handle such flows without resulting in major ponding upatream of the outlet would be a 33-inch to 36-inch diameter concrete pipe. 7609 Glenroy Road Minneapo/l; MN 55135 6771870-0555 Mr. 6ary L. Manka Auguat 5, 1987 PaSe Z As you requested, I have attached a copy of a recent resume for your review. If you have questions concerning this estimatep please call me at 830-0555. rely, ? - SL en M Rlein SMK/mmm ? GA/320,0 STBVBN K. Ia.SIN9 Profeeaional Bnginear BARB BNGINBEEIlFG C0. Experience_: Mr. Rleia hae 12 yeara oE experience as a Civil Engineer at Barr Engineering Co. Thie vork includes extensive vater resource planning, hydrologic analyais, hydraulic design, groundwater analy9is, and drainage facility design. Fxperience at Barr Eagineering Co. includes: • Prepara[ion of several municipal drainage plana including Hastiaga, Edina and Maakato, Minneaota. • Rural and urban water resource management for private indusery and government ageneies. Example• ara overall planning for Bemaey-Waedington Metro, Nine Mile Creek# and Rileq-Purgstory-Bluff Creek uatershed districta. • Water eupply reeource and management studies for municipal and mining clientsp including vastewater recycliag, inventorq, and studiee of coastrainta on urban and industrial development. • Eavironmeatal studies, groundwater monitoringo aad superfund hazardous waste iaveetigationa. • Eroaion and flood control, including project management of multi-ataga plaa for Battle Creek folloved Dq awardwinning remedial work. • Waete migration studieat including gzoundwater sesessmeats and CERCLA studiea and remedial inveatigation at aeveral uaeontrolled vaste sitea. • Computer modelling for studq and hypotheeia of Lake levels, outlee proposala, and land development. Education: University of liianeaota, MS. Civil Engineeringo 1975. Uoiversity of Minnesotag BCS, Civil Engineezing, 1973. Registration: 8egiatered Professional Eagineer, Minneaota Memberships: Minnesota Societq of Profesaional Engineern Minnesota Geotechnieal Soeiecy MEPfO T0: BRAII SlffTH, ASSIST9NT CITY ATTORNEY FROH: THOMAS A. COLBERT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC AORKS DATE: JULY 23, 1985 SU&TECT: PROJECT 315R - SPECIAL ASSESS"''"'T APPEAL PARBVIEH GOLF COURSE - SUMIIARY OF COIIRT CASE On Friday Suly 19, at the Dakota County Courthouse, the Special Assessment Appeal for the above referenced project was heard before Judge Bruenig. As in all cases, there are two sides to every issue. Through this memo, I will try to identify various points made by each side in hopes that this will help you to prepare the final summation for the Judge's•consideration in the final decision. CITY'S POSITION The City's position is premised on the fact that this property benefited by the proposed improvements in the amount of the assessments due to the fact that there is an inherent liability associated with the surface water runof£ from the Golf Course resulting from the downstream damage and erosion that it causes. This is verified by the £act that the Golf Course itself recogni2ed these problems as witnessed by the erosion occurring within the ravine on their property. Although the efforts perYormed by the Golf Course to detain and control the storm water runoff tend to minimize the impact within their ravine, it nonetheless allows the same volume of water to proceed downstream creating similar erosion and damages. Therefore, they share continuing responsibility for the control of this water as it heads downstream to the nearest water 6asin. The alternative to participation in the City Storm Sewer Project would be the retentian o£ the storm water on their property which would require the contruction, dedication and maintenance of on-site storm water ponds adequate to handle the runoff generated from their 80 acres. This would be far more expensive than their proposed $13,000 assessment. Due to the fact that the City has a policy whereby trunk area utility improvements (sanitary, water and storm sewer) are financed through trunk area charges against every parcel of property within the City, it can readily be identified that this property has a future financial obligation due to the fact that it has not yet paid any trunk area atorm sewer assessment. Subsequently, I concur with the City Appraiser's contention that the increase in land value is equal to the amount of the assessment due to the fact that this future financial obligation will have been fulfilled (or relieved if we lose the case). In addition, for lack of an adequate comparable sale for Golf Course, I believe that the highest and best use of the property is for single- family residental in determining land values. MEMO T0: BRAD SlIITH, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY .NLY 23, 1985 PAGS 2 APPELLANT'S POSITION Don Larson of Parkview Golf Course and his attorney contend that the assessment is not justified due to the French drain and berm construction that they performed on their property and their contention that no other drainage enters into the ravine. The French drain system is inadequate to handle 70+ acres of aurface water runoff from the Golf Course, especially during peak intense storms which is what the City is most cbncerned about. In addition, during these peak storms, I find it hard to believe that the volume of runoff generated by the impervious surface area (parking lot, maintenance building, driveway, etc.) does not drain to the west and to the ravine. This directional flow is even supported by an independent observer, their own appraiser as identified in his report. In their appraisal, I don't think comparables of other golf courses are accurate due to the many variables associated with location, size, con£iguration and dates of sale which did not take into consideration the increase value of the dollar over those many years. In addition, they state that they do not see any benefit resulting from the City reducing the size of the outlet of the existing 72 inch culvert underneath Cliff Road. While on the sur£ace, this sounds like a good argument, they did not need a 72 inch culvert to begin with. To reduce the capacity of a system that was initially overdesigned does not restrict their ability to continue to use this culvert in a manner that is not detrimental to their property through the construction of the four foot weir structure with the 18 inch opening at the invert. Their contention that these improvements result in the required ponding o£ storm water on their property has been diaproven by the topographic map showing that whatever ponding does occur will be on the property immediately to the west. In reality, we're having to pond water on somebody else's property because they failed to detain a sufficient amount of their own surface water runoff on their own property. This is just meant to be a summary of the various major points as presented during the trial. I£ you would like to discusa any of them in further detail, please let me know. In addition, if I recall any other additional sufficient points worth your consideration, I will forward them to yau accordingly. ? Thomas A. Colbert Director of Public Works _ TC/dk MEMO TOZ THOMAS A. COLBERT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORRS FROM: BRUCS ALLENt ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN DATB: May 17, 1991 SOHJECT: DRAINAGE REGARDING WITHIN OHMANN PARR & PARRVIEW GOLF COURSE Johnson Excavating began work on Tuesday, May 14th and finished grading and sodding by the next day. Some fine grading and raking has been put off until it dries out in a couple of days. Grading began in the park and material for berming was placed in the golf course with the removal of the fence. While building the berm between the fence and the 13th green, Don Larson of Parkview Golf Course said he did not want to construct the second berm between the 13th green and the 14th tee as he felt almost no siqnificant runoff would flow around the east side of the 13th green. Contour plans and field observation would agree with this. I said i felt the berm had been agreed to and should be constructed. Don Larson again said he felt there would be no future problems and was willing to risk the legal consequences. For restoration, the contractor provided 250+ yards of sod in place in lieu of seeding the entire construction area. Because of very wet clay bogging down the equipment in the deeper cuts, sod was laid in the ditch area for about 200 feet. The rest was used to match abutting properties and up onto the berm. Steve Sullivan has said that, while the Parks Department had aqreed to finish seeding this site, they are now probably going to sod the remaining area. Access to this site was across two lots in Fairways Hills 3rd Addition. Don Larson told me he had to promise in writing to the owner A1 Hermann that he would restore these lots. Bruce Allen BA/jf MEMORANDUM TO: TOM HEDGES, CI7'Y ADMIIYISTRATOR ?M_Om: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS & RECREATION DATE: MAY 15, 1991 RE: OHMANN PARK - SETCLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH DON LARSON BACKGROUND As you are aware, the owner and operator of Park View Golf Course, had previously filed a]awsuit against Derrick Land Company in the Fairway Hills Addition, Probe Engineering, Don Patten and the City of Eagan. The lawsuit sought damages as a result of water run-off across the golf course properiy associated with the development of Fainvay Hills Addition. It also sought damages against the City of Eagan in part due to the supposed run-off from Ohmann park. The City was represented by G.B.A., the City insurance provider, which eventually reached a settlement agreement in stipulation for dismissa] of the law suit. That agreement provided for a payment by the City in the amount of $12,500. In addition, the agreement provided the construction of a"dike" for the interception of water along fairway #13. This water is to be re-directed to City Pond BP-37, which is located within park property. (Ohmann Park) A drainage swale is to be constructed within the park. All disturbed areas within the golf course receive a minimum of four (4) inches of topsoil and sod. Restoration of the park property is to be accommodated through dormant seeding in lieu of sod. T'he department staff is irritated over the fact that besides being left out of negotiations with the settlement agreement; the swale area will be seeded rather than sodded. Clearly, a seeded swale can not be expected to grow seed when it is being used for drainage purposes. This area should be sodded, not seeded. Further, re-directing this water to the pond within the park wil] now increase the frequency of storm water flooding to the adjacent park facilities. These facilities include horseshce courts. At the time of construction of the park, it was anticipated that these courts would flood out occasionally, but clearly the frequency and the duration that these would be inundated with water were relatively infrequent and for short periods of time. Now, by increasing the amount of storm water directed to this pond, frequenry and duration have increased. T'hese additiona] floodings will cause additional maintenance work to the department and an obvious cost. As a result of the iacreased amount of storm water directed to the park, staff has reviewed the need for increasing the size of the pond to dcal with the flood potential. This would reduce the frequency of flood outs. Staff is also looking at an opportunity to deepen the OHMANN PARK SETTLEMENT MAY 15, 1991 PAGE TWO pond so that it now becomes a"wet pond". With additional water being directed into the pond, it is logical to assume that it will be freqaenUy wet and unusable and hence - unmaintainable. Therefore, it mighi just as well be converted into a wet pond. It would appear that during the discussion of the settlement agreement, litile attention or concern was given to the additiona] responsibilities created for maintenance, the impact of the water run-off on the park, or the cost for re-sodding. Consequently, the department is now faced with additional costs for sod, park maintenance, and costs for enlargement of the pond; all as a result of the settlement, of which this department had no opportunity to comment on. 7fie financial responsibiliry is not insignificant. T'he question is, who should pay for these additiona] costs? I do not believe it should be the responsibility of the Park Site Fund. The pond in question was not originally identified in the City's Storm Water Management Plan. It was created by the department with the construction and development of Ohmann Park, and was intended to be a dry pond with a relatively small drainage area. Tbe settlement agteement has significantly changed that. How should we proceed with this issue? Clearly, there are going to be some additional expenses for sod, and pond enlargement which now appears necessary. Shouldn't these costs be the responsibility of the City's insurance carrier? Would you please provide me with some direction on this. We need to make some decisions relatively soon in order to make sure that the drainage swale gets sodded, and an enlargement of the pond is taken care of. Thank you for your direction on this issue. KV/bls cc: Gene VanOverbeke, Finance Director Tom Colbert, Director of Public Works 04i03i91 15:34 002 ' BTATE DF MINNESOTA , COUNTY UF DAKOTA Dvnaid Larsen, d/b/a ParkvieW Golf Course, DI6TAICT COURT FIRST JUDTCIAL DFSTRICT CA$E TYPE: PROPEItTY DAMAGE Court FilY No. C-1-98-104556 Plaintiff, v. Decrick Land Company, n Minnesata corporation d/b/8 Fairway Hills: DMS InvQatments, Ltd., a Minnesoka Corporation, and the City of Eagan, Defendants and Third-Party Plaintiffe, v. Proba Enqineering Company, Iac. DLR Construction Company; and Enaon Utilities, Inc., Third-Party De£endants, and Probe Engin@Bring Company, I2YC? Fourth-Party Flaintiff, v. Donald Patton, SEi"TLEbUMT AGRE91'r f1ND $TIPIII.ATICK FO& DI$MI$$AL Fourth-Party Aefendant. ---------------------- RECITAI.$ A. Donald Lereen, d/b/a Parkview Oolf CouY6e ("Larsen") has commenced litigation against Derrick UBad Company ("Derrick"), DMS Investmenta, Ltd. ("DMS") aad the C4ty of Eaqan ("City") by sQrving a Summons anfl Complaint and an COPY 04i03i91 15=34 003 I Amended $ummons and Complaint in the First JuBfcial D#striat. CouCt Fi16 No. C-1-98-304556 ("I.aasuit"). B. The City interposed an Aaever to Laraea'e Complaint and asserted a czossclalm against Derrick ari.d DKS. C. Derrick and DMS submitted a joint Aaswet to Larsen's Complaint and asserted e aroesclaim against the City pnd cammenced a thicd-party action against Probe Fngi*earir?g Cq. ("Probe"?, DLR Constructioh Comgany ("DLR") and E*con Utilities, Ino. ("Encon"). D. Probe, DLtt and Es2COn each submitted an Answer ta the Third-Party Cautplalnt aad aeeerted crossclaims dqpinat 6aoh other and against the City. Probe and DLR asserted oounterclaima against Decrick and DMS in the third-patty action. E. Probe commenced a fourth-party action against Donald Patton, Petton answered the Fourth-Party CompQaint and counterclaimed against Probe and asserted claims against the City. F. All parties in the Lawsuit, either direptly or lndirectly through their attorneys, attended a meeting or+ October l, 1990 For the purpose of diacuaeing poseiblh remedial measures to cvrrect the drainage problam sloaq the ea4t line of Fairway Hills. Subaequent to this meetinq, eoneetroav Rosene, Andeclik 6 Associates, developed a aetailed plan and descrigtion of the vork required to corract the dreinbge problems on the golf aourse and parts of Fairwsy Hillo. The xemedial '++ork to be parformed copsicts of wock in the =avine Page 2 of 9 04/03i91 15:35 004 I adj8c8nt to the 18th fsirvay and on the 13th fairway•i The worY t0 b@ performed in the ravinO has been modified by La4een as deSCxiAed on FXtiibit A hezeto. The woxk ta De paxforied oa the 13th £airway is described on Exhibit H hereto (Exhibi4a 71 and H sre collectively referred to es the "Plans")• G. All parties have had an opportunity to #eviev and diBCUSS Lhe Plsns, and uttderstand and agrce that ther$ are no vartanties, promises, guaranteas os underatandinqs th*t the Plans, as implemented, will solve the draihaqe proble*a on Parkviev S3olf Cvurse and the east line of Fairwsy Iiilts. THEREffORE, it is hezeDy aqreed by and betwee* all of the parties as follows: 1. Dercick and DMS, the City, Encon, end DJ.R will create a settlement fund ("Fund") in thB total emaunt•of Twenty-Seven Trious&nd Dollars ($27.000) to be qompriaod of the fol]owing contrihutians: a. Twelve Thousand Five Fiundrad Dollars (i12.500) from the City; b. Twelve Thousand Five Hundred Do13aCS (02,500) from Derrick and DMS toqether; c. One Thousaad Dollars (i1,000) from DLR; d. One Thousand Dollars 01,400) from Encohs e. Services in Xind to be provided by Probt as described in paragraph 5(t)• 2. Por the cosssideration Sescribed in this AqreQment, every party to this Agresment hereby rolaaois avary otner party including their employees, agents, insurets, P Page 3 of 9 04i03i91 15:35 005 , offiCexg, direcSors, owners, shateholders, sucoeasore and aesigns of and fzom any and all claime, demands, obiigatioas, damages (inCludinq interest and liquidated damaqes), tloets (includiuq attorneys' fees), actlons and causes o£ aatioa, knowa or unknown, that arose prior to the effective date of this Agreement and that were or could have been asseraed ia the Lawsult, anQ any cleims arisinq out of the remedinl vqrk to be petformed, escept as provided in psraqxaph 4 beloa. 3. It is speaiEically understood and aqreed that all expenses incucred to date in conneetion wit6 the Lawnit, incluQinq eurveying work an$ staff and consultant time, exce t as provided in paraqraph a below, shall be included withia the terms a£ the mutual release deecribed above. a. Probe specifically retains its claims for reimbursement vf attorneys' Feas in this cese and ia a Companion case entitled Charlea L. Paramore, et ai. v, DMs Investments, et al „ CouCt File No. C9-88-525, which blaim is sec forth in paragraphs 31 through 34 o£ Probe's counterclnim againxt Derrick and DMB. Derrick and D143 reserve any and ell defenses tv Probe's claim, which claim is io be resolved, if at all, in a separate proceeding ia this action. 5. Regardinq the recaedial vork to be perfotmed, the pacties nqree as follovs: a. Larsen will vbtain a v?ritten cast eetimpte for the rrork desaribed on Lxhibit A gertainAag to remedial work in connection with the ravine adjacent to tha 18th FeirWay. Page 4 of 9 04/03/91 35:36 006 t b. Derrick and DM8 will obtain a writtea cast estimate fo= the remedial work described on Eshibit 8 and to provide the same to Lnraen. It is understood and aqreed that aeither Derrick, DMS nor sny other pazty to thie Aqreement 6ha11 have any responaibility to guaxaatee thA per£ormaace by any contcaetor in accorddnce vith the written estimate. Lareen shall hcv9 the opportunity to obtain cvmpetinq bids frdm other catttxactors or subcoxitractore end nhell have the final 8ecision as to who will actually lperform the work. C. The psrties aqree that the remedial work described in the Plans is to be commeactd ss soon as practicable after the Fund is created. d. Pattan aqrees to serve, at his own expecLae, as "Dff-site Coordinator" in oonnection with the remediai work described on Exhibit H. Pntton's duties as Off-8ite Coordinator ahall be to ohtnin a vritten cost estimate from a eontractQr or subcontrector to perfotm the remedial vrprk describe8 on Exhibit H, end bo provido Lbe seme to Laraen, and to coordinate the times tor the work to be Derformed. Page 5 of 9 04/93/91 15:36 007 • e. The City sqrees to s¢rve, at its own eapenee, as "On-Site Coordinator" in connection vitlt the zemadial work described in the Piane aa provided in paraqraph 6 below, f. Probe agrees to provide, at its own exponee, tne construction and grade atnking eervices for the propoae8 drainaqe plan corrective vork *2 raguired by the Plane. 6. Upon completion of the remedial r.rork an@ upon receipt of a certificate of compliance from the contrtctor, the City will provide inspection services to verify that the remedial work is done in accordance with the Plans. It is further understoad that no warranties ara provided putsuer+t to para9raph "G" on page 3 of 9 herein for any services tendered. 7. sy signing this Aqreement, the undersigned acknowle$ge that they understand its terms and agree ta bC bound by them. e. It is specifically understood and agreed that the compromibe and settlement of the disputed claims in this case does not constitute and shall not be construad as an pdmission of liability ar fault on the part of eny perty. 9. It is further sgecifically understood ahd agreed that this ngreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and that there Are no covenents, promieeo, undectakings or underatandinga outside of thie Agreemtrat. Page 6 of 9 , 04i03i91 15:37 008 , i0. Triis Agreement shall aot be modified exQeyt in writinq signec3 by all parties hereto. 11. The parties aqzee that this Aqreemeet shall be governed by nnd construed pursuant to the lnvs of the Stete of Minnesota. 12• The parties suthoriae,their attorney6 tp file the Stipulation of Diamissal executed concurrently herewith. DBCember /3 , 1990 ponal Larsen FII:? DpcBmber,2L, 1990 FI;[q Its MaYOt [Signature lines cont. next page] Paqa 7 pf 9 04i03i91 15:37 009 DItRICK LAND 00!'ff.'ANY DecemLe=,2L, 1990 c? . D.rrick Its Preai en D1dS Il1VESTlENTS. LTD. Decemben,2L_. 1990 December 2L, 1990 ?- I t*? ey? ?? ?&, .. Donald Pattori [Signature lines cont, next page] Page e o£ 9 04i03i91 15:38 010 DLR OONSTRUCrION CODiP1WY December j?,, 1990 Decamber Li, 1990 December _, 1990 . 8 , YPa c Mu pt? ! its_ vice P?eside?? EiCON OTILITIESe INC. Hy Fre dln kav4t- its- Vice Presi4ent PROBB EriciIRffitING COMPAN7C ele e J? :) BY- Raip aqner Its President 2838M Paqe 9 of 9 04/03i91 15:38 011 saTH HOLE CORxECrIVE NORK 1. R9move flarQd end stosm sever inlet from eKiating manhole aad estend the inlet 16' On a eliqht positive qrade with 18' c2aos s RCP. Build e minimum height manhole over the end of the 16' extensioa with a trash qunrd oastinq oa eslab manhole top (or better), 2. aemove the casting and top slab from the eXistinq manhole and rvplace with a high oapacity tzash guard inlet (see atteChed dreviaq). 3. Ramove sny existiag silt and sediment from storm aewer eystem. 4. Restore area. SiCCHIHIT A 04i03/91 15:39 012 IliTBRCEPT 13TH FAIR?iAY DRAIN7IGE 1, RBqrade drBinage swale around eouth side of 13th gteen and Lots 3, 4, and 5 to intereept drsiaage from 13th Peitway nnd redireot it to City Poisd 8P-37 vithin park psopexty• 2. Remvve and xeplace existing fence ae necasmary to eccommodate qradiaq and restoration. J. Aestore all disturbed sreas on golf course vith miaimwn 4" topsoil and sod. Restocation ost park property can De dormant aeed ia 11eu of sod. 4. Grading oa qolf course arouad 13th qreen el}all be SCheduled last vith restoration to be achedul¢d first. 5. Gradinq on golf couree shall be coordinatedL with the oaner, Donald Larsen. E)QiIBIT H _n r `UWmtw rxUtluY MAr[mAL PaoN EMM Ap'A 6 Y 0.MWe ? Byeq0400%dl ivlD 11f ? Lw"",vao. Ae oemoMrm sr r ro.M I ,MmaMac .u ° 1? oa or? to nav?t wwno e?rwM aav. aru e , • ? sneet sK?, . ?? 6 /-- - .?• fiabra ? exwrino noAo.r•, ? ?•:,. i` ?'' ro aEwAm w nAce . . . ..... . . v.uW ' . . _. .. . ...._ . ,.._ .fPNCIfqNE?lEII Nu...... /L701 4[' ML Yw . •?• . . . . 5 tT Rp pOREA6FA _?.?? '?? • --?? T ?PPIqRL00A7qMOf10? f0' Of 51RiPNQ `- ?--y?N?AIM OF [ ql E11G1 tW! OF P!E OF TILL EllV. i1W uprA7e acLow [xisnNa oa?tt pi?,vn? ro taa a n? ?nrtn , Il.MI1L Of 1 ROOT ANO REMOV! A1 ONONnC I1ND pNluliMl.E Y?iLAMJ?I ' tomep pre. ? !11? Y"7! TO T0? Oi fiL lA dC9t VO91'ERIO1Rq 110MwAr IM ANEI? OF U?6TREN/ fLl? •? SECTION: EMBANKMENT FOR DE7ENTION POND 6 ,o BCA M FEEt ? ?-EROBqN 1Mi ACROBB Iffy EROBqN TOI TO OONNBTNEiW TOE NOT[: [%GIYATB !N'ALf MO Iq7E: WM6iNICT lWdl! N LOOATqN 61qNN M? MANp? QppMp lLOPE BN'ALE MOT OqEATlR TNAN 6% p 26 8ECTION: EMBANKMENT OVERFLOW 3WALE NO BCAIE ? NAMBEY-WABWNGTON MEiAO WATEi18HED DIBTNIC7 DETENTION POND A AND FlSH CREEK PROJECT BORROW AREA 0 26 ? ?. PRECABr CONCRI?TE BASE 11f.P P6EH , 1 BASIN mABNnAa e NDT BIIOWN 6EE rCH BASIN x TR?SHXeCN: SEE AHD TRASH RAq( pMENS10N TABLE RCP RISER ? e TPASH NACN FASTNEP:BEF ' m TPASNRACN 9NKL BE J 8tOp1I SEWER $EClX1ElY Fi18TEHED TO RISEP AND fl0I 6M Wrth 4 FA6TFNEHB MANHOLE/CATCH ASB101AMETER . '... e DETAIL: TRASH RACK AND RISER ra ecnLE TRASH NACN OWENBION TABIE MANNOIE/ NOflIZ. VEXT. IW BM CATCM BA9W A B? C 0 ? ? p?T B'w p1A. 1' 014' 1'S 11d' I'41 VI' LI' 114' ]/f r ra ra ra ro. , r r r r r r-r re 3-4 ra, . r r r r VENTICAL 0M8 e• er,w.+o ai ? Q or ir ren nnanm aeNaoort I . ?r fd rctm4 e+oenn wr NT OVERFLOW SWALE 4" TRASH p,ya{ 11DTDIIDWM H( CI W F11 6 4 1 "rFAcAer CONOREre aAse BASIN CAMCRET4 BAiE r. vY aKVUUm t I NON2. BM19: OAIVNlIZED, .. SD ..............ENiFR MLVAItlZED wu auvAAazm ? v' •' 1-1/t IM • ? IK IE%/F/O MLVAMZED BOL1B e DETAIL: TRASH RACK FA3TNER w ec.uF . RACK. AND OVERLAND FLOW SWALE e DEFAIL: TRASH RACK b hE6 RAIABEY-WABHINOTON METRO WATEPBMED DIBTAICT JCIr I IVIYJ HIYU UG 1 MIL?7 FISH CREEK PROJECT MANHOLES, CATCH BASINS, TRASH vwmZ ? NO sau.e , .. : ., PARKVIEW GOLF COURSE LAWSUIT PROPOSED DRAINAGE PLAN CORRECTiVE WORK SEGMENT A fRAVINE OUTLET AT FAIRWAY HILLS DRIVM 1. Remove silt and sediment build-up over ,... flared end storm sewer inlet. Regrade to ensure positive drainage to this - inlet which is proposed to be extended 16'. Provide a siitation basin "sump" in front of inlet for future sediment collection. 2. Replace catch basin manhole casting with new high capacity trash guard inlet (special manufacturer). 3. Remove any eaasting silt and sediment from storm sewer system. 4. Remove all trash and refuse (tires, tanks, fabric, etc.) from the Fairway Hills backslope area. 5. Restore and reseed. SEGMENT B(CORRECT BACKYARD DRAINAGE LOTS 8-12) 1. Remove and replace existing fence as necessary to accommodate all grading and restoration work. 2. Regrade Lots 8-12 according to concept plans as staked in the field. 3. Restore all areas with minimum 4" topsoil and sod. 4. Remove and replace existing underground irrigation system on L.ot 10. 5. Dispose of excess material on golf course property just north of #16 green and provide positive drainage to backyard drainage swale. Restore with minimum 3" topsoil (salvage existing disturbed area7) and reseed with mulch (heavy application). Limits of disturbance on golf course property to be staked in the field. REauovE 0.0.9 Rcoft-AKc EX?sTixl? F&7reE "B" ALTERNATE (STORM SEWER) 1. Remove and reconstruct existing timber retaining wal] as necessary. 2. Install storm sewer facilities according to plans. 3. Regrade golf course property as necessary to ensure positive drainage to storm sewer inlet. y-. "B" ALTERNATE (STORM SEWER) Cont'd 4. Restore all disturbed areas on golf course with minimum 4" topsoil and sod. Restoration on park property can be dormant seed in lieu of sod. 5. Remove and replace existing fence as necessary to accommodate work. SEGMENT C(RF'GRADE AROUND 15" APRON BETWE, EN LOTS 1-13) 1. Regrade at the common rear corner to ensure all direction positive drainage ro catch basin inlet. 2. Restore disturbed areas with minimum 4" topsoil and sod. 3. Remove and replace existing fence as necessary to accommodate work. SEGMENT D (INTERLACHEN DRIVE DRAINAGE) l. Adjust existing buried catch basin on south gutter line at intersection with Fairway Hills Drive to maxdmize gutter flow interception. 2. Regrade area east of Interlachen Drive stub street and rearyard areas of Lots 1 and 2 to direct street drainage to backyard drainage swale and ultimately to existing flared end inlet between L.ots 1 and 13. 3. All disturbed areas should be restored with minimum 4" topsoil and sod. 4. Remove and replace existing fence as necessary to accommodate grading and restoration. SEGMENT E(INTERCEPT 13TfI FAIRWAY DRAINAGE) 1. Regrade drainage swale around south side of 13th green and I.ots 3, 4, and 5 to intercept drainage from 13th fairway and redirect it to City Pond BP-37 within park property. 2. Relocate existing pine trees on park property (approximately 8). 3. Remove and replace eatisting fence as necessary to accommodate grading and restoration. SEGMENT E(iNTERCEPT 13TH FAIRWAY DRAINAGE) Cont'd 4. Restore all disturbed areas on golf course with minimum 4" topsoil and sod. Restoration on park property can be dormant seed in lieu of sod. 5. Grading on golf course around 13th green shall be scheduled last with restoration to be scheduled first. 6. Grading on golf course shall be coordinated with the owner, Don Larson. GENERAL COMMENTS 1. Existing topsoil to be salvaged and supplemented with additional topsoil bonow as necessary to meet 4" requirement. I/IUM MGt NsItlE11:eFE I IIII.fINAGt $w41 N ULfw61EwEO 10116f11 OM MOM 4 fA61[MEII\ : iFE AMO 11IAtM IInGM IsuE G 11NE11 -6IORY i[WFII ? e DETAIL: TRASH RACK AND RISER M {CKE 1M0111? OYFH[qN UY[ MAWIOLE/ 1q11a VENI 11D0' GAICNlA6H ? 0? C D OAR S'w w ? !M d .. { 4' 0'?Y 1'0 Yt 1'41 i/1' !/f iH' YP ?' f0 I'Q Y4 vF111CK /Mt 6, V.1(rM OH. ?i. enna: oAtr.vutFq ?..?.?`._ T". UYiE11 MAN& dLLYANIEO M4l MLY?fD r. vr o.arw.rm t TRAShI RACK FASTNER N O S C A L E r vr w ?vY mx tEwa ? auvuueo KAn Boneatroo fiwono Mdorllk i AswcINN Oate: t 0/3/1 990 Comm.48ao1 8 enaM.«o a a.abli.oi. K IW YIwwM? DETAIL t e DETAIL: TRASH RACK w Scu[ IMPORTANT MESSAGE TO I lm, /_ q 3 ?% A.M. DATE (O' I 1 TIME P.M. WHILE YOU WERE OUT Nt s i et/L. Kuh).? OF Area Code ?3n d ? 55 & Eachange TELEPHONED PLEASE CALL CALLED TO SEE YOU WILL CALL AGAIN WANTS TO SEEYOU ' URGENT RETURNED YOURCALL Message C?IUE Y m2 ?v CAI_-JED T0 _ -7vtE tifinlr. UF Ps F?2rN T r}RT t{E K? W S CC"iUL l? T?7^3z1 C. ATE TNC- 'T'7WtsH 6?1KRb ? C--OLF CS-%Ji?SF_ Operator n, HVs - n3cLn7) - nGn - 1 ? 1 STATE OF t4INNESOTA DISTRICT C4URT 2 COUNTY dF DAROTA FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT 3 CASE TYPE 6 4 ------------------^------------°----------------- DONALD LARSEN, d/b/d COPY 5 PARKVIEW GOLF CdURSE, Plaintiff, 6 vs. FILE NO. 7 DERRICK LAND COMPANY, a @ Mianesol:a corpozationt d/b/a FAIRWAY HILLS; 9 DMS INVESTMENTS, LTD., a Minnesota corgoraGion; 10 and the CITY OF EAGAN, Defendants. 11 12 -------°-----------------------------..--------- ? 13 Depvs3tion of THOMAS COLBERT taken 14 pursuant to Notice of Taking Deposition and taken 15 before 3ames R. Nlaves, a Notary Pubiic in and for the 16 County of Ramsey, State of Minnesata, on October 13. 17 1987 at 555 Peavey Huilding, Minneapolis, Minnesota 18 commencing at approximately 9:00 a.m. 19 * * * 20 21 22 23 4w 24 APFILIATEn COURT REPORTERS 743 NORWEST MYDLAND BANK BUYLDIiVG 25 bIINNEAPOLIS, MTPINESOTA 338-4398 2 0 I* . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 APPEARANCES: ON BEHALF OF THE PLATNTIFF: GARY L. MAAIKA Katz, Davis & Manka, Ltd. 555 Peavey Buildin9 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT DERRICK LAND: AMY DARR GRAAY Larkin, Hoffman, Daly & Lindgren. Ltd. 1500 Northwest Financial Center 7900 Xeraes Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55431 Ot7 BEHALF OF THE CITY OF EAGAN: PAUL H. HAUGE Hauge, Eide & Keller, P.A. Town Centre Professional Bldg. Suite 200 1260 Yankee Doodle Road Eagan, Minneapolis 55123 2 3 4 5 S 7 8 9 10 11 12 ? 13 14 15 15 17 18 ].9 20 21 22 23 ? 24 25 3 YNDEX DEPOSYTION OF THOMAS COLBERT Examination: P2ge Mr. Manka 4 Exhibits: 3 Hauge letter to Colbert, May 15, 1987 41 2 Bonestroo Memo, 8/28/87, to file 41 3 26 August 87 Patton letter to Foertsah ce: Fai.fway Hills 41 4 23 Ju1y 87 Ifnudsen letter to Don Patton re. Fairway-Hills - StorM sewer 41 5 10 July 87 Foertsch letter to Patton res Fairway Hiils Development 41 6 26 Februry 87 Rirscht letter to Rodger Derrick re. Fairway Hills - City Project 86-W 41 7 Two-foot topo sucvey 41 8 Map 58 4 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 b 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 P R 0 C E E D I N G S (Witness sworn) TAOMAS CQLBERT called as a witness, being first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows: *** EXAMINATION *** BY MR. MANTtA: 4• Mr. Colbert, my name is Gary Manka. I cegresent Don Larsen and the Parkview Golf Course and I'm goiny to be using those terms interchangably today. You understand the property we are talking about though, is that correct? A. Yes. Q. My understanding is also that you have had your deposition taken previously so you are familiar with the basic ground rules of not talking while I'm talking and answering the queations out loud, is that understandab2e? A. Right. Q. Mr. Colbert, your full name is Tom Colbert, is that correct? A. Yes. 5 0 0 r'1 L-A 1 2. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 1& 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q. what is your address7 A. 1220 Mourning Dove Court, M 0 U R N I N G, Eagan, 55123. Q. What is your title with the City of Eagan? A. City Engineer and Airector of Public Works. Q. How long have you held that particular position? A. Nine years. Q. Before that where were you employed? A. The City of Brooklyn Park. Q. How long were you there? A. Five months. Q. Tn what capacity? A. Assistant City Engineer. Q. And before that? A. The City of Fridley. 4. In what capacity? A. Assistant City Engineer. Q. How long were you there? A. Three and a half years. I Q. And before that? I A. Jonathan Development Corporation in Chaska. Q. in what capacity? A. Project Engineer. Q. How long were you there? A. Fifteen months. 6 ? 0 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 i8 19 20 21 22 23 Q. And before that? A. Student at the University of Minnesota. Q. Your educational backgraund is the University o€ Minnesota and an engineering degree? A. Right, civil engineerinq. Q. Is that a four-year course? A. It`s hard to say, it's four to five years. Q. Okay. Did yov get a bache2or of arts in civil engfneering? A. No, it's a bachelor of scieace. Q. What is your actual job desaription with h.he City of Eagan? A. Twofold. I'm the City Engineer which is responsibie for the Engineecing Division activities and I'm also the Airector of th2 Public Warks Department which incorporates the utilities, streets and maintenance. Q. You have had both of thase titles during the entire nine years you have been with the City of Eagan? A. Yes. Q. Prior ta coming in here today have you reviewed any documents in preparatian for having your deposition taken? ' A. What do you ca11 this7 0 24 MR. HAUGE: Summons and complaint. 25i THE WITNESS: i have eeviewed the sumnons 7 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ?.0 21 22 23 • 24 25 and complaint and I have reviewed some miscellaneous notes made from meetings that occurred at the City of Eagan while i was on vacation during August of this year. SY MR. MANKA: Q. Who prepared those notes7 A. The assistant City Engineer, Mike Foertsch, F O E R T S C H. Q. Did you bring those with you today? A. Yes. Q. Could I review those, please. Mr. Colbert, I have had an opportunity to review some of the correspondence so now we will go through it a little bit. At some point have you had any discussions with someone else other than Mr. Hauge who is your attorney in preparation for your testimony here today? A. Fiaxk Hanson, who is a consultant engineez with the firm of Bonestross, Rasene, Anderlik & Associated, Incocporated. Q. what was the content of those discussions? A. A refresher as to the progression of the various improvements that were installed in celationship to Che claim made against the City. Q. With respect to this particular claim or some 8 E ? 0 z z 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 13 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ao 21 22 23 24 25 previous thing? A. Right. Q. Let me start maybe at the beginning with respect ta the Fairway Hills development. As the initial plat was submitted to Fairway Hil1s was that submitted through your office? A. Yes. Q. And is that then appraved or disapproved through your office3 l A. Let me clari£y somethi.ng. Platting consists of two phases, one is a preliminary pZat and the second is a finai plat. The pxeliminary plat application is initiated thruugh the Pianning Department which is nat my department. Piy department gets invalved in reviewing as a part of the preliminacy plat application. The fina.t plat applieation is initiated thr4ugh my department. Q. Do you know when the preliminary plat submission was made by Fairway Hills? A. I can't give you the exact date. Z'm going to say it was sometime in the spring of '86. Q. In conjunction with the preliminary plat are hearings held or is there any investigation at that time as far as rnnoff or hydrolagy or does that come up at a lal:er point in time? 9 ? 0 Is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ia 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A. With the preliminary plat there are preliminary grading, draining, ernsion control, utilities, stxeet layout designs that are submitted. Q. How does your department get involved with that process at that staqe? A. k7e do a review based on the preliminary submittals to find if khey generally cancur with the City codes and standards and requirements to the best that we can without getting detailed infarmation being submitted, I Q. Was that done in the case with respect to the preliminary pl.at submitted by Fairway Hills? A. YeS. Q. Was there any concern at that time expressed about the runoff problems which may be created a3 a result of Fairway Hills development? A. The major emphayis of concern regarding runoff from Fairway Hills pertained to the northwest corner of the Fsirway Aills development near the intersection of Cliff and Pilot Knob Road. Q. Which is the corner not adjacent to Mr. Larsen's property, is that correct? A. That is correct. Q. And what was the nature of that concern? A. That is where the majority of the rvnoff from the , 10 to 9 ? 1 2 3 4 5 G 7 S 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Fairway Hills was to be discharged and the concern was the coordinatzon of the development of Fairway Hills with the storm sewer improvements to be installed wikh the county upgrading nf that intersection, Pilot Knob Road and C1iEf Road. Q. Let me go back trom a historical standpoint. Back when Mr. Lacsen purchased Parkview Goif Course back approximately in 1981 it was my understanding that under Cliff Road handling his runoff from the Parkview Golf Course was a 72-inch line running to the north side of Cliff Road, is that correct? A. Yes. Q. All right. Now there has been a progression of improvements, or maybe imprnvement is not the right wnrd, but a progression of construction which has affected that particular line. When was the first construction that limited that 72-inch line? D7R. HAUGE: State, if you know, the time. THE WITNESS: Yeah, I'm trying to get the progresszon tiere correct. The first proj?ct that • ,. affected that would have been City Pcoject 315 R which is referred to as Well Site Alumbec 5 Storm Sewer Improvements. And that I'm going to guess was probably 1983. BY MR. h1ANKA: 11 . ? 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 29 25 Q. So I keep a track in my own mind there was an improvement or a construction project 315 R Aiternates are those different projects or were those the same projects? A. Same project. Q. All [ight. I think the terminology is 315 R Alternate with was the one that was actually constructed. What was done at that time by the City? A. At that time the ravine on the north side of Cliff Road, which had been experiencing severe erosion, was improved with a variety of storm sewer piping installed, some regrading of the ravine and some ditch block construction to try and slow down the runoff that was being dischacged through the ravine, and also the upstream end which is on the south side of Cliff Road was modified to a configuration from what was beEore a 72-inch diameter openinq to an 18-inch diameter opening at the invert. Q. which is at the bottom? A. Yup. And a block wall or a poured-in-place concrete wall was then constructed around that 18-inch opening about two-thirds of the way ug that 72-inch pipe. Q. Leaving a two-foot headspace on top of that wall, is that correct? A. Yes, that is kind of it was constructed like a weir 12 0 0 rI 1.J 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 $ 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 or an overflow dike at the headwall of that culvert. Q. What was the gurpose of that construction? A. That was to reduce the velocity and rate o£ flow being discharged through that culvert to a rate that would minimize or prevent downstream erosion in the ravine on the north side of C1ifF Road. Q. Were hydrological studies done at that paint to determine the amount of acreage which was ilowing into that 72-inch culvert? A. Xes. Q. And do you recall who did the hydrologic stndies at that time? A. Mark Hanson. Q. D£ Sonestroo? A. Of the BRA firm. Q. And what is your recollection of the amount of drainage area that was coming through that 72-inch line? A. Approximately 90 acres. Q. Was a calcvlation done as to the amount of capacity which was going to be required to drain that particu:lar area as far as a diameter of an out£low such that that 90-acre drainage area could be drained? i A. Yes. 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 13 Q. What was the calculation of that amaunt of dcainage which was required? A. I'm not sure what kind of an answer you are looking for, the calcuAation, are you looking for cubic feet per second or are yoa laoking for five-year or 200-year stosm or are you lookzng for a ponding capacity of acre feet, I'm not sure. Q. Let me come at it all of these ways. As far as cubic feet per secand calculation what was required to handle the outflow from there with no ponding? A. I don't recal3. 0. And who would know that? A. Mark Hanson. Q. Okay. As far as the acre feet what was that calculation whsch was performed? A. Again I don't know the numbers. Q. Okay. R. And it would vary toa dependin5 upon the frequency of storm event that you are talking about so -- Q. rlaybe yau can enliqhten me; daes the City plan for a five-year storm, a ten-year storm, a 100-year storm in its calculation of the runoff capacities3 A. We use all three. Our internal storm semer laterals are desiyned based on a five-year stvrm event. Ten-year storm event is used in design of storm sewer 0 ? ? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 14 laterals in low points that do not have natural overflow outlets or have restricted natural overflow ovtlets. And the 100-year storm event is used in designing storage capacity o£ ponds and detention basins. Q. tdhen that initiai construction was dane sometime in 1483 or approximately there did any of that construction relate to the City kiaving previously granted building permits downstream Erorn the ravine on the north side of Cliff Road? A. No, not related at all there. Q. Were there any complaints that the City had received from the doti,mstream people as fxr as the runoff corLiing down through that ravine on the narkh side of Cliff Road? A. Yes. Q. Had there been any claims made ayainst the City ar lawsuits filed aqainst the City as a result of that? II A. There were no lawsuits that had been filed against the City that I was aware of. Q. Were there clainis made against the City as far as you know? A. I believe there was but I can't be specific because z knaw there was damages and S remember working with propzrty owners to try and mitiyate the damages and 15 0 0 ? 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 xo 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 az 23 29 25 perform clean-up but I can't remember a specific dollar claim resulting fcom it. 4. What was the nature of those claims? A. The nature of the claims resulted frvm flooding and erosion of sediment being deposited nn psivate property at the downstream end of the ravine. Q. And the City granted building permits betwaen 1481 when P1r. Larsen purchased the property and 1963 when that construction was done on that fvr those building sites on the private property immediately downstreara of the ravine on the north side of Cliff Road3 A. No, they wers all pre-existed prior to 1483 end even prior to 1962. Q. When the City undertook the construction to limit the 72 inch to the 18 inch at the bottom and the bricking above that leavinq the two feet of headspace open was any consideration given at that paiat as ta what effect that would have on the Parkview property? A. Yes. Q. And what was that consideration7 A. Consideration was that the 18-inch opening wou2d have allowed X cubic feet per second oE discharge which T believe was comparable to a five-year storm event and that any water geneeated by a higher frequency storm would have resulted in some ponding in the ravine 16 C1 11 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 il 12 13 14 15 16 17 1$ 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 backing up to an elevation that would have reached the golf course property at approximately the same time it would have reached the top of the headwall in the 72-inch culvert, Q. So as i understand it as it was designed at that point there would be nv ponding on the golf course property, is that correct? A. That is correct. Q. It would have gone out over the overflow and ali khe ponding which would have occurred would have been an the property which ultimately became E'sirway Hills? A. Right. Q. All rigMt. That is approximately 1983; what was the next step in the constxuction of that particular storm water system? A. Approximately three years later in 1986 project 444 R, which is the Holland Lake Truak Storm Sewer Outlet, was initiated and that provicled for the canetruction of a starm watec liEt station at Holland Lake which pumpeci the water -- Halland Lake is approximately two miles, a mile and a half to the east of Parkview GoZf Course, about a mile and a half, and the storm water lift station would then pump the watec from that Iow point through a force main that was constructed along the north side of 17 0 f'?1 U 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 lQ 11 12 13 34 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ? 24 25 Cliff Road until Lexington Avenue anfl then accoss to the south side of C1iEf Road alang the frontage of the Parkview Go1f Course at which point there is a high goint on Cliff Road and the 14-inch force main was then converted to an 18-inch reinforced concrete pipe as a qravity line discharging down towards the cornmon property line of Fairway Hills and Parkview Golf Course, at which point it was discharged inta a newly constructed junetion manhole with an 16-inch line, excuse me, with a 12-inch line being constructed thraugh the previously existing 18-inch opening in the bulkhead that was previously conducted within the 72-inch culvert vnderneath Cliff Road. And the bulkhead was then sealed up through the entire opening and the area was beckfilled with dirt incorporating the six-foot-diameter culvert opening and the majarity of the newly constructed junction manhale. Q. Let me see if I understand that, that wa3 a13 a project 41YliC}3 occurred in 1986? A. Right. Q. That is project 444 R? A. Yea. 4. Okay. And that particular groject added an 18 inch which came off a 14-inch force main from the Holland ? 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 iz 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 is Lake Lift Station coming into a common manhole, is that correct? A. Yes. Q. The only outlet from that common manhole i6 a 12-inch line? A. Yes. g. That then ran into the 72-inch line which had already been partinlly blocked? A. Yes. Q. And the remaining top portion of that 72-inch line was then completely blocked? A. Yes. Q. And what size line picked up the flow from the Parkview Golf Course rnnoff that had previously gone direotly into the 72-inch line? A. A 12-inch diameter. Q. Wha was nn the City or wha was the engineet who designed this particular project? A. The firm of BRA Incarporated. Mark Hanson was primarily involved and I'm sure there weze other engineers in his firm at that time who provided design assistance. Q. Was any hy8rologic study done at that particular time as to what effect that was going to have on the Parkview Gol£ Course runoff? 19 ? 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A. Yes. Q. Who did that particular study? A. Mark Hanson or under his direction. Q. And what was the import of that particular study? A. S'm not sure how to answee that. Q. Was it the understanding of the City at that point that by restricting that runof€ to a 12-inch 3ine, the Parkview runoff to a 12-inch line, was goang to requise pvndinq on the Parkview Golf Course? A. The new 12-inch line had a steeper gra8e, carried the same capacity as khe previous 18-inch line with a ? flatter grade. So there was no restriction in the amount o£ -- rate of runoff from the Parkview Golf Course by aonstructinq the smaller pipe. It had the same capacity because it was conatrucCed at a steeper grade which carries more flow. Q. So the 12-ineh 2ine was going to Carry the same as the previous 18-inch line? A. That is correct. Q. There was no provision however to pick up the additiona3 capacity which had previousiy occupied the top two fe2t of that six-foot diameter cuivext, is that correct? A. Yes. Q. So while the previovs studies which had indicated zo ? n L_.l n L..J i z 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 zo 21 22 23 24 25 that to avoid the floodzng of the Parkview Golf Course you were qoing to need two feet of top space in that six-foat culvert that two-foot top space was now bricked off, is that correct? A. Yes. I would also like to add the other partion of that project that T forgot to mentian. I brought you through the steps up to the junction with the 72-inch diameter culvert on the south side of Cliff Road. That project also involved completing the installation of storm sewer facilities on the north side of Cliff Road thraugh the ravine where pipe had previously not been installed. I mentioned there were ditch blacks construcCed in the ravine. They could not handle the continuous tlow of water and were being washed out and being destcoyed and so we enclosed that ravine in a storm sewer pipe with limited capacitY. 4. Why with limited capacity? A. Well, the minute I said thAt I knew you wonid ask that question. Everythinq has a limited capacity so I didn't mean Y.o say it was a lim.iting capacity. With a deiined capacity. Q. The pipe which was coming into that manhole on the north side of C1iEf Road running east and west was a 60-inch line? 21 i 171 ? 1 z 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A. Repeat the question. Q. There is a line which runs east and west that comes inta the common manhnle on the north side oE C1ifE Road, is that correct? A. Right. Q. Is that a 60-inch line which comes into that common manhole or a 48-inch line? A. Maybe I'm in the wrong spot but it's an 18-inch gravity discharge from the force main. We have some graphics here it that would help, otherwise -- Q. There is another line coming into the area on the north side of Cliff Road? A. All right. Q. Okay. My recollection is that that is either a 60 ar a 98-inch line. Do you remember what that is? A. PAy understanding is that it's a 24-inch corrugated metal pipe picking up the ditch drainage on the north side of Cliff Road. Q. All right. Was any consideration given at that point as to khe effect of closing the top two feet headspace on the six-foot culvert? A. Yes. 4. Okay, and what consideration was given at that point? A. That it had to be closed off because the downstream storm sewer system was now an entire enclosed system 22 11 0 ? 1 2 3 4 5 & 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 IB 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 whereas before it was an open-ditch drainage. Pteviously any toppingrover aE that block wall ran through an open ravine downstceam which was creating extensive erosion damage. By clasing o€f that dormstream end on the north side there was a defined capacity in that storm sewer pipe which covld not handle any Plow that wauld have topped over that bulkhead. If that bulkhead wouid hsve been left open the storm water would have topped over and that wou2d have filled up that 72-inch diametez cvlvert undecneath Cliff Road like a very mini reservoir because on the aorth end of that culvert it was closed off ta bring it into the enclosed storm sewer system which carried it all the way down to Thomas Lake. So with the downstream or the north side storm sewer improvements limiting the available capacity the effect of that overflow weir was no longer beneficial or o£ any advantage or involvernent to the storm sewer system. So closing that up allawed us tn fill in aaound it to secure the junction manhole to protect it from the flow so it didn't move from the force of the water. Q. Let me see if I understand it. By closing that off I -- strike that. Had it been left open it would have 23 11 0 ? z a 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 simply have overflowed that and £lowed outside the storm sewer down through the ravine on the north side, is that correct? A. No, there would have been na outlet for it on the north side because on the narth side of the 72-inch cuivert it was closed up. Q. If it had been Ieft open like it originally was the top two foat on the north side and the south side it could have overflowed into the property on the north side of Cliff Raad? A. And down the ravine. Q. And down the ravzne. A. Right. Q. That is City-owned property as I understand it? A. Yes. Q. Okay. How much -- the entire ravine is City-owned property on the north.side af Cliff Road? A. Yes. With the exception of there is same additional right of way for C1iff Road which is county right of way, but it'sia public agency. Q. Flas there any study done at that particular time which ind'acated that thaf was going to, by alosing that off, cause back-up of watee onto the Parkview Golf Caurse property? ' A. Throuqh previous calculativn it had been determined 24 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that there would have been some ponding on the golf course's groperty which would have been their water as the City was not discharging any water into a system that would have backed up nnto their property. And that was all in iieu Gf the water continuing down through the ravine causing erosiun and -- 4. What is your understanding of the City•s responsibility to obtain pondzng easements oc to pucchase ponding easements from property owners? MR. HAUGE: Counselr I think you better clarify your guestion. What is your understandinq about getting essements. You could ask a question whether the City does reqnire easements of pcaperty owners. MR. MANKA: That is my next question. MR. HAUGE; As r read your queation it's one that really draws a legal conclusion. If that is true of caurse there would be an objection. MR. MANRA: What I'm asking is his understanding, whether it is a corraet understanding or not from a 1ega1 basis may be the subject of the lawsuit, but insofar as his understanding at this particular point and what was obligated and what was done or not done I think that is a proper questinn. 25 ? 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 lI 12 13 14 15 is 17 18 19 ao 21 22 23 24 25 MR. HAUGE: I dan't understand your question, what is his vndeestanding. BY MR. MANKA: 0. Is it your understanding Char the City is obligated if by actions at the City thay are going to flood particular property or xequire ho'ldinq or ponding areas that the C.ity is obligated to parchase ponding easements? MR. HAUGE: I wi21 object to this. It is asking for a cnnc2usion. Instruct you not to answer that, Tom. MR. MANKA: 2'm not asking for a 1ega1 conclusinn, counsel, what I"m askzng for is Ais understanding of that. It's not calculated ta be a legal conclusion and it's obviously not hfnding because he is not a lawyer and he is not instructing the City in legal matters but inso£ar as his understanding and bezng that this is a discovery deposition I believe it is a proper question to be asked at this particular paint. MR. HAUGE: You will have to clarify what you mean by the word understanding. That is toa vague to refer to -- lead to anything other than a conclusion, BY MR. MANRA: 26 11 C1 J 0 1 z 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ii 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 zx 22 23 24 25 Q. Do you believe, Mr. Colbert, that the City must acquire a pondinq easement if action by the City is going to result in the ponding of water? MR. HAUGE: S will object on the same grounds. It's clearly requestinq a legal conclusion from the witness and again I wi11 instruct you not to answer that. BY MR. MANRA: Q. Mr. Cvlhert, does the City acquire ponding easements? A. Yes. Q. IInder what circumstances? A. There have been pzojects where stoxm sewer has been constructed discharging water into private property with an outlet, with or without an outlet being constructed, at which time ponding easements have been aoquired in association with the project where the starm sewer was constructed. Q. Have there been projects of your knowledge where the City has acquired a ponding easesnent where the City's action has obatructed the natural runoff from a piece of praperty and held water and forced water to be held bttck an the property owner's property? A. As far as I know the City has never acquired a property easement to pond a property owner's water an his own property. 27 . ? ? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 aa 23 24 25 Q. You will agcee with me, Mr. Colbert, that at least up unti1 1963 Mr. Larsen and the Parkview Golf Course did not have ponding of their water runo€f on their own property because they had the runoff undec Cliff Road on the northwest corner of their property, is that eorrect? A. No. Q. It was your undexstanding that that water was ponding someplace on the golf course propecty? A. Yes. 4. Was any of it panded in the ravine area? A. Not that I know of. Q. It was your understanding it was held sameplace else on the golf course? A. Yes. Q. Where was that2 A. It was my understanding through information given to me by Don Larsen that he had constructed two internal limited smali ponding areas on his golf course with many autlets and same French drain systems, eC cetera. Q. Was it your understanding that those ponds on the golf course were designed to handle storm water cunof f P A. Yes. 28 9 0 0 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q. And did the City have some engitteering report that was going to indicate what effect those ponding areas or the French drain was going to have on the golf course property? A. No. Q. Was there an understanding or did you have an understanding nf what diameter of storm water runoff capacity was going to be needed in that ravine to handle the storm water runoff of the Parkview Golf Course prior to the construction in 1983? A. That is a relative term depending on the frequency of storm that you want to look it. Q. Let's take it from a five-year storm, what capacity? A. For a Eive-year storm I believe the capacity wes comparable to the 18-inch opening in the bulkhead or the 12-inch diameter that was subsequently constructed through that bulkhead. Q. With the two feet of overflow, is that correct? A. Right. Q. And if you went back historically even a 100-year stocm had that 72-inch line been maintained there would have been no ponding on the golf course, ia that correct, in the ravine area? A. That is correct. 0. Okay. And even assuming a 100-year storm with the 29 . 0 ? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1$ 19 20 ai 22 23 24 25 overflow capacity on the tap of that 72-inch line plus with the 18 inch in the bottom of the 2ine there would have been no pondinq in that ravine area on that golf coursQ property, isn't that your understanding? A. There may have been some Zimited ponding, or no ponding, insignificant. Q. That was even with a 100-year storm, is that correct? A. That is my understanding of the calculations and infocmation that has been given ta me, Q. That chanqed in 1986, is that correct? A. Yes. Q. And it changed in a couple oE different respects, namely that there was the Hollan8 Lake line which was added, there was the downsizing and the elimination o£ the overflow capacity that had previously existed in that 72-inch Iine, is that correct? A. Yes. 4. And the purpose of that was to attempt to control the erosion on the City property an the north side o£ Cliff Road, is that corrzeC? A. And downstream damage, yes, to private property. Q. And that was do wn an the Thomas Lake area? ? A. Yes. Q. I take it Lhat there were other alternatives to doing ? 0 0 i 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 30 the action which was done in closing off that buikhead, is that correct, namely the downstream capacity eould have been increased in size, is that correct? A. Yes. Q. Did anyone at that particvlar point in time express the concern that, hey, wait a minute, as a result of this we are going ta be backinq water up onto the golf cnurse? A. Don Larsen had expressed a concern of that continuously. Q. When, approximately, did he first express that concern you to or to your office7 A. Uuring the very first project of the we11 site improvements which is 315 R Alternate. Q. Which was the 1983? A. Or thereabouts, right. Q. And what was done to take into consideration his concern? A. He was informed of the drainage calculations, the downstream improvements, the reasons for the corcective action, and the opgortunity to participate financially in downstream stnrm sewer improvements to handle his runofP which he subsequently objected and appealed any financial contribution denying any 31 0 0 ? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 responsibility to contribute to downstream etorm sewer improvements to handle his water. 4. And it's my recollection that you testified in that proceeding, is that correct? A. Yes. 4. It proceeded to triai and his 6asis of the claim was that it provided no improvement to his property? A. I'm rtot sure what was the final rendering in regards to amount o£ assessment. MR. EAUGB: Have you read the court order? If ycu haven't simply say you don't know. TAE WITNESS: If I did read it it was four years ago and I dan't remember the specifics af the court order. BY MR. MANKA: Q. Tha upshot o£ that was that the judge who heard the matter at that time made certain legal factual findings such that Mr. Larsen was not required to make Einancial conkributions to the City project 315 R, is that carrect? A. i don't know. I would have to review the court nrder, it's there of record. Q. Was the 315 praject subsequently changed after Mr. Larsen prevailed in his cauct action2 A. No, the imprnvement had already been installed. 32 ? 0 ? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 aa 23 24 25 Q. Okay, in the three-year period between 1983 and 5986 when the additional construction was conducted did anyone express, besides h9r. Larsen, the Eact that the additional eonstruction entectained in 1986 was going to zesult in the flooding vf his golf eourse2 A. i don't recall anybody. Q. Did the City Engineer or the consulting engineering £irm, Mr, Hanson or anyone e2se, advise that as a result of that particular construction it was going to require ponding up on the golf course and flooding up on the gol£ course property? A. Yes. Q. Okay. So the City in 1986 at least knew that as a result of their construction it was going to reguire ponding vp on the go1P course property and flooding up on the golf caurse property, is that carrect? A. In the ravine on the golf course property. Q. Okay. It was your understanding that the floodinq and the ponding was going to be only in the ravfne and not up an the main portion of the golf course itself, is that carrsct? A. Yes. Q. All right. And that took into consideration the fact that the ravine that then existed that thexe wae additional ponding capacity on Lhe Fairway Hills 33 ? 0 ? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 development on the northeask corner of the Fairway Hi11s property? A. Yes. 4. Do yau remember how many acre feet of ponding capacity were in the northeast corner of the Fairway Hilla development? A. No. Q. 3uffiee it to say your understanding was that there was a substantial ponding capacity in that acea, ie that earrect? A. 1 don't know what you mean by substanti-al but there was a ponding capacity availabie thare, yes. Q. And that ponding capacity in the prelimsnaty plat that was filed with the City Planning Department took that into consideration, is that carrect? A. The initial one, yes. 4. Okay, At that particular time ail of the sunoff from the Fackview Golf Course was being handled by an 18-incli line? A. A 12-inch line that carried the same capacity es the previous 16-inch 1ine. Q. Dkay, and the only change which had oecurred at that point which aEfected the golf course directly was the fact that the top portion had been eliminaCed? 34 ? 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ie 19 20 22 ? 22 23 ? 24 25 Q. Now after the preliminary plat was filed were there any meetings that you were privy to where the subject of the efLect oE the additional storm water that wou2d be coming down from the Fairway Hills development would have on the starm water capacity. storm water runoff downstzeam? A. Xes, there were several meetings but they were more related to the runoff from Fairway Hills through its northwest corner near the intersection of Cliff and Pilot Knob Road as that is where the majority oE the Fairway Hills rain was being directed, Q. There was additional capacity from Fairway Hills which was also going to the northeast corner of that propecty, is that correct? A. Not additional capacity but additional runoff. Q. Aciditional runoff. I misspoke. Do you remember how many additional acres were being drained to the northeast corner of that property? A. No, I don't. Q. Does the City take that into cansidexation when they review a preiiminary plat as to the effects it's going to have on adjoining propecty owners or the downstream storm water capacity7 A. To a very limited amoUnt on those projects where the improvements are proposed to be installed privately. 35 0 0 ? 1 a 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q. And what does the City do in those circumstances? A. On developments that public imnrovements are to be installed privately we requirs that they be designed by a registered professional civil engineer and that they be designed in accprdance with city codes, standaxds and guidelines and policies in accordance with comprehensive master plans £or the various utilities. And when those plans are submitted we do a cursocy review, more of a spot check rather than a detailed reca2culation or analysis o£ the calculations that wers performed and that went into the Einal plan. 4. Am I correct that Mr. Larsen expressed his concern that the development was goinq to add to the stnrm water capacity and thus cause additional ponding and flooding on his golf course pcaperty at that particular point in time? A. Not to me. Q. Were you aware that complaints or that that concern was raised with other people from the City? A. Yes. , Q. Was these any action done by the City oc any af its agents or erap2oyees in response to that? A. Yes, those concerns were relayed to the de5ign engineering firm of the Faizway Hi11s development, 36 E ? 0 1 2 3 4 5 b 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 lq 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Probe Engineering. Q. Were they relayed by letters? A. Yes. Q. Would those letters be contained in particular designated files of the City? A. Yes, I have two of them with me this morning that you reviewed. Q. We'll get to those in a second. My recollection is those particular le tter s dated from 1987. Were there letters written in 1986 which addres sed that same concern? A. Not that I'm aware of. Q. Do you know when the Pinal plat was submitted for Fairway Hills? A. There was a final plat application that was submitted late-summer of '86 that subsequently was revoked because it was never processed in the reguired time frame. And an extension for that final plat approval was requested by the developer and was subsequently denied by Council action. And in the wfnter or the early part of 1987 a new final plat application was then submitted to the City and processed. And I believe the final plat was subseqvently approved in the spring, the month or day i don't recall. 0 0 i 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 37 Q. What was the basis for the initial denial? A. The inability of the developer to comply with all final plat application submittal requirements in a timely manner. Not with all of them, with some of them. Q. And in conjunction now with the final plat does the City require any hydxoiogie studies to indieate what the eEfect of the development is going to be on either the downstream atorm water runoff or adjacent land owners? A. We provide available downstream capacity information to the developer or his representative, his engineer. And they are then to take that information into consideration in designing their internal system. 4. So I get the sequence right, the construction of the 12-inch constriction together with the top construction in that six-foot diameter that all occurred in 1986? A. I believe so. 0. And so that predated any final plat approval or any consideration as to the additional storm water which may be cominq into that as a result of construction of the Fairway Hi31s development, is that correct3 I A. That is correct. 38 0 11 CJ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q. So even prior to any additional water being added by Faicway Hills the City was aware that the constriction which had been performed in the previous storm water runoff system was qoing to require floodinq or ponding on the Parkview Golf Course property, is that correct? A. in lieu of downstream damage, yes. Q. That took into consideration there was certain storage capacity on the Fairway Hills Golf Course? A. Yes. Q. And it was the understanding of the City that all of the ponding was going to be able to be contaiaed in the ravine area on the Parkview Golf Course because part of the ponding capacity was the ravine in the northeast corner of the Fairway Hilis development, is that correct? A. Yes. Q. All right, now the final plat which was approved by the City sometime in 1987 for all intents and purposes eliminated the storage capacity which had previously been in the northeast corner oE the Fairway Hills Golf Course, is that correct, the ravine was filled? A. Not in the Fairway Hills Golf Course. Q. Fairway Hills Subdivision, I'm sorry. 39 0 0 . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A. Yes. Q. And the reason was that the road was rtioved from the preliminary plat to the final plat? A. Yes. Q. Was there any consideration qiven at that particular point in time of moving when that road was moved and the City approved that plat that that was going to eliminate a certain number of acre feet of storage capacity that had previously existed there and was a cesult of additional water was going to be backed up on the Parkview Golf Coucse property? A. Yes, we were aware of that. Q. Okay, And how did you become aware of that? A. By the revised grading plan that was submitted to aceomodate the relocation of the road alignment in its intersection with Cliff Road. Q. What action was taken by the City and/or the developer in consideration of that additional flooding or ponding which was going to be necessitated by the relocation of that road? A. We were wpiting for revised storm sewer and drainage plan to be submitted to accomodate the revised grading plan due to the relocation of the roadway. The plans that were submitted to the City wece conveyed to us as being adeqvate to handle the ao 0 0 0 1 a 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 za 23 24 25 situation. And through subsequent letters we requested confirmation oE those ealculations to verify that condition which we never subeequently received. Q. Was the City aware at that particular point in time as a result of the grading on the Fsirway Hills development that additional water was going to be drained to the northeast carner to that ravine area? A. Yes. Q. And my recoilection in reviewing it, and I'm certainly no engineer, was approximately an additional 18 acres wace going to be drainec3 into a corner as a result of grading of the Fairway Hi11s development, is that Correct? A. I can't confirm the number of acres but the concept, yes. Q. Now correct me if I'm wrong; there had been a previous determination ar the City knew previonsly that even without the Fairway Hills development adding any aaaitionai water tHere was going ta be ponding or flpoding at least in a portion of the I Parkview property, is that correct7 A. Yes. Q. And the City then approves a plat which adds an additional acreage to that and then eliminates in 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 41 that same plat the ponding capacity which had previously existed on the Fairway Ailis development, is that correct? A. Xes. 4. And there was no construction oc modiPication of the downstream capacity, is that correct, it maintained the 12-inch steep line coming out af that common manhole with the top of the 60-inch line being continually or 72-inch line being bloaked, is that correct? A. Well that is an on-qoing situstion we are trying to still resolue with the developer oE H'airway Hills. Q. All right. MR. MANRA: Let's go off the record. (Short break taken at 10:20 a.m.) (Colbert Depositinn Exhibits Number 1 throuqh 7 foe identification.) BY h1R. MANRA : Q. Mr. Calbert, showing you what we've marked for identification, let me ga throngh in reserve order, first o€ all is Deposition Exhibit 7. Could you identify what that document is? A. Is a copy of a two-foot topographic survey of the northeast corner vf Fairway Hills and the northwest corner of the Farkview Golf Course showing the ravine 42 11 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ia 13 14 15 16 17 la 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 and the proposed graphic street alignment, storm sewer construction, and proposed house pad elevations of the Fairway Hills development. Q. Showing you now what has been marked as Number 6, could you identify that, please? A. This 15 a letter from the City vf Eagan Engineering Department to Derrick Land Company cegarding the plans, regarding items to be resolved, regarding the plans that were submitted for the installation of the pcivate improvements or the public improvement to be installed privately. MS. GRAAY: Counsel, what is the date of that letter? THE WITNESS: February 26, 1987. BY MR. MANKA: Q. And Number S? A. Number 5 is a letter dated July lOth to Derrick Land Company making reference to a meeting that was held a few weeks prior regarding the relocation of the roadway ana the requiced modifications to the storm sewer system resulting from that street relocation. And requesting that the developer and his engineer document the sizing of the storm sewer system that was being submitted as being adequate to handle the runoff from the Parkview Golf Course. ` r1 L J 0 0 1 2 3 A 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 43 MR. HAUGE: Excuse me, in the interest of time -- BY MR. MANKA: Q. That is a July lOth letter. That is a follow-up letter from the City oF Eagan dated July 23rd of '86, is that correct? A. Yes. Q. Addressing the same concerns? A. Regarding storm sewer, yes. Q. And Number 3? A. Is a letter from Dt4S Investments to the Assistant City Engineer relating their position regarding a meeting on August 21st regarding the starm sewer. Q. And Deposition Exhibit Number 1 is a letter dated March 15, 1986 to you, 1987, excuse me, to you from Mr. Hauge's office? A. Yes, Q. And then Deposition Exhibit Number 2 is a memo from Bonestroo apparently to you, is that your understanding? A. Yes. It's the copy of notes from a meeting that was held on August 28th. Q. All right. Let me ask a couple of questions from the letters. The letter Deposition Exhibit Number 6 44 0 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 speaks in terms of ponding easements that the City may be requiring Derrick Develapment tti get, is that on adjoining property? A. No, this pertaitts to an easement ta be dedicated with the Fairway Hi13s plat. Q. So as a condition of the plat certain ponding easements were goinq to be required as a condition of getting the plat approeal3 A. Yes. Q. So the Fairway Hills was going to be required to hald certain amounts of the water as it would flow ta the southwest? A. Northwest. Q. Northwest, all right. Then Deposition Exhibit Number 5 which we have identified as a City of Eagan letter dated July 20 where the City had determined, according to that letter, that the outlet pipe provided to serve the Parkview Galf Course is undesized. what had the City used to determine that? A. we had used our consulting engineering firm. Q. Had khey gsovided you with a report whiah had indicated tha"t the line was downsized or inadequate? ? 29 A. NO. 25 Q. How wouid that communication come to the City? 45 n 1_J 0 ? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 16 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A. I don't know exactly as this would have be°n communication betFreen our consultant and the Assistant City Engineer. But our consultant had been requested to review it to determine if it conformed to the previous design calculations o.f the previous city projects an@ it's my understanding the information came back that there was concerns raised, we then raised those concerns back to the developer and his engineer. Q. What action raas taken besides sending that letter by the City in an attempt to resolve the problem at that particular time? A. Nothinq, it was still in the communication stages trying to work it out with the developer. Q. And that predated any of the July storms which sort of brought all of this to a head, is that correct? A. Yes. Q. The next letter, Deposition Exhibit Number 4, coincidentally dated July 23rd which wxs the date of the larger rainstorm was a letter written by the City to again a Don Patton at Derrick Land indicating that the City at that point would not approve any additional permits until the storm water problem was , resolved? A. Yes. 46 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 lA 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 4. All right. Now as we sit hece today it is my understanding that additional permits are now being granted by the City? A. Yes. Q. What occurred between that letter which says that the system was inadequaYe, the July 10th letter which predated it, and the City's determination that they would grant permits? A. I don't know. 4. Okay. Who made the decision that additional permits would be granted? A. Building Inspection Department. Q. That is not part of the Department of Public Yiorks? A. No. Q. Did you have any input into that? A. No, Q. The letter of July 23rd says that the City would not issue any more building or sewer or water permits until the problem is resolved. That was issued by --- the lettez was issued by Craig Rnudsen, an engineering technician. Is he located in youc department? A. Yes. That letter was at my direction. 4. Okay. Did you have any discussions between that point and the time Che Suilding Department made the 47 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 az 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 . 24 25 decision that they would subsequently issue additional permits? A. Did T have any discussions with who? Q. with someone from that department which Ied to them grantinq additional permits? A. No. As a result of this letter it's my understanding that building permits were on hold until the issue had been cesolved. 0. At what point did the City then decide they would issue building permits? A. I have baen unable to determine that. When I cams back from vacation in the first part of September I found aut that there was no longer any hold on building permits being issued. S had a meeting with Don Patton to try to find out where they were in the storm sewer situation because I was under the impression that there was sti11 a hold on the buil8ing permits and I was surprised that they were taking as 2ong as they were to resolve the issue with no building activity occurring during the Parade of Homes activity. He informed me that there was no ho13 on the building germits and that the hold on building permits had been reieased once the utilities, sanitaey sewer and water that wsre being canstructed 48 . 0 I* 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ia 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 privately had been cocrected and repaired and reinspected and retested after the super storm of Juiy 23rd. So it was his understanding and obviously it was someone else at the City's understanding that the hold on the building permits only pertained to the damage that resulted from the super starm of July 23rd and not as a result of our concern regarding the storm water situation. when I inquired in the building inspection department they were not awace that there was a necessity for any further building pecmits to be put on hold subject to any other concerns, Q. Wou2d the people in building permits would they have hAd access to the prior letters of the Department of Public Works, your letters? ` A. Doug Reid, who was copied on the July 23rd Zettec, is the department head, chief building official of the Building Inspection Department. Q. was he copied on the previous letters as we117 A. No. Q. So he was only copied on the one letter which said you won't issue any more building permits until the problem is resolved? A. That is correct. Q. That predated any damage to the storm water system or 49 0 0 r Ll 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 $ 9 10 ii ia 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 za 23 24 25 sewaqe 5ystem, is that correct? A. It's so close to the super storm of July 23rd that naturally the letter was written and was in typinq and was in process and then the storm occurred and as copies wece being distributed -- during that period with the super storm is when there was some problems that occurred out there. Q. In your familiarity with the City of Eagan wha made the decision to issue the additional building permits, who was the person that sazd okay, we will issue building permits now? A. It would be the Chzef Auilding Inspector. Q. Does he issue building permits and does he also issue water and sewer permits? A. No, sewer an3 water permits are issued thraugh a combination of the Finance Department, which is utility billin9, and the Engfneering Department, which must ensure that the internal utilities are readiTy available for hookup for sanitary sewer and water, and the Utility Maintenance Division which actually issues the water meters in conjunction with the sewer and water permit. Q. Mr. Colbert, when did you come back fxorn vacation and first learn that in fact permits were being issued? A. Approximately the -- we11, it wovid have been the 50 r? LJ 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 second week of 6eptember. A meeting was then scheduled with Aon Patton for Tuesday, September 15th which he had ta reschedule due to a cnn€lict to k'riday, September ISth. Q. was any action takan by the City at that particular point in time as far as requiring Derrick Land to do anything to resolae the prablem? At that meeting i had discussed wzth Aon Patton again the urgency to correct the storm sewer situetion out there as eae wouZd not be issuing any building permits. It was then when I found out Lhat building permits were being issued and he relayed his understanding that they were being withheld subject to the correction of the damage of the sanitary and water of Che super storm and not as a result of the storm sewer situation. AEter that meeting I then tried to veriEy with varions individuals of the Building Inspection Department from the Chie£ Buiiding Inspector to the departmental secretary to the clerk typist as to the status of any hold on building permits on Fairway Hi].ls and i was informed there was no holc3 and when I qu€;stioned how it got released nobody could tell me as to when the initial Ytald was issued ar whera it was released and the next T had heard about that was when 51 0 0 i 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 zs Don Patton had contacted the City Adminiatcatot very upset regarding no more building permits were being issued. When was that? That is -- I don't recall the date. It was prnbably within seven to ten days after our September 18th meetinq. The City Administrator contacted me and wanted to know why building permits wece being put on hold and I said T don't knoor whether they are on hold or whether they have been reieased, that goes through the Building inspection Department. And he then contacted the Chief Building Inspector and between the twp of them evidently permits were again being issued. 4. The water and sewer permitting is at least a portion comes under yaur department, is that cvrrect? A. Yes. Q. Are water and sewer permits currently being issued7 A. Yes. Q. Who made the determination that the water and sewer permits would be issued? A. Our engineering division based on inspections pex£ormed by in-house engineering personnel and consulting personnel regarding the acceptable status 52 • L.J 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 o£ the installation of sanitary sewer and water which would allow houses to connect physically to the sewer and watec services so that they can get their meters and have the meters installed so that they can complete their driveway and typical yard restoration improvements. Q. I think I'm missing something. I look at two letters, the first of whieh was a July lOth letter before any damaqe occurs to the storm water runoff or the sewage water problems asking Derrick or telling Derrick that the outlet pipe from the Parkview Golf CouzEe is undersized and they needed to do something about it. A second letter dated July 23rd again dictated before there was any damage again from the Engineering Department saying that in order to resolve the issue the City wouldn't issue any more building permits or sewer and water permits until the ptoblem is resolved. And then a decision or then the issuance of seraer and and water permita apparently under the auspices the damage which was done after the time of those two letters had been completed, corrected, or repaired. What am i missing? A. i don't know. Q. What happened? A. i don't know. i can give you -- 53 ? 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ia 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 4. what is your best guesstimate, because you knaw more than the rest af us in this room I suspect? A. My best guesstimate is khat the peessures from the developer and the amount of worklaad that is put on the individuals involved and the push to get everything done it got put in a process and taken care of without beinq recognized by anybody that there was another outstanding issue invoived. Too many people being involved in too many processes to effectively ensure that the entite problems are being resolved. And that is where I got involved to try to find out what happened. 0. Do you have the anthority to stnp the issuance, as of the time you returned from vacation aad become aware that the problem has not been resalved and that permits are being issued, to atop the issuanee of additional sewer and water permits to require the developer to correct the problem? A. Yes. Q. Did you attempt to do that? A. I thaught it had alzeady been done. Q. When you realized after you returnea from vacation it was not in Eact already done did you stog the issuance of additional water and sewer permits which are under your control and direction? . 0 E 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ii 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 54 A. No, because be£ore T did that I wanted ta have an apportunity to sit down and talk to the developer to make sure T wasn't missing anything. I don't want ta put a stop on permits which puts a hvld to a whale organization of ackivity of putting up houses as fast as you can rea2ize they are gaing up in Eagan. That may not be necessary if something is schaduled, snmething agreed upon, something is in the works. There had been several meetinqs that were held between various individuals while I was gane so there was a certain amount of research that I wanted to do before I took an action that may not have been necessary. Q. After you met with Mr. Pattan on September 18th and were advised that in fact -- were you in fact advised Z guess the question is that nothing had occurred? A. He informed me of the various m2etings that had been he2d between the City and the developers and the goif course and that the golf course and Fnirway Hi11s had submitted ta the City their positions of their understanding of the situation and that the City was then to make a determination or to cammit a response as to what was to OCCll[. And to date that has not happened. In my cliscussions with Don Patton 55 0 . c 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 explaining the situation, what had to be done, they were in essence verbally refusing to do any further storm sewer improvement because they felt it wasn't their responsibility. I informed him that my recourse is to either stop development until they perform the improvements, to force the irapxovements to be done by some manner or method to try to work out the issue in an amfable manner. He then indicated he would go back and talk to Roger Derrick regarding the situation, re2ook at their position based on my position, and get back to me. And to this date I have not heard back from Don Patton. Q. And you haven't stopped the issuance of additional watec or sewer permits3 A. No, since that time we have been noticed as a deEendant in the lawsuit and I'm not quite sure what the proper pasition of the Ciky's best interests would be. Q. When the City issued the preliminary building plat, approved it, and then approved the Einal plat does the City, your department, require certain erosion control or sediment control measures? A. Yes. Q. In conjunction with the grading? 56 9 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A. Yes. Q. Where do those come about? Who drafts those? A. The grading, drainage and erosion control plans that are prepared by the developer, are submitted to the City, are then sent to the pakota Caunty 5oi1 and Water Conversation District on a contractual basis for review and comments. Those cominents are then returned to the developec for incorporation into the plan. We also hire the SWCD to perform periadic fie2d inspections to ensure that erosion control measures are properly installed, and that vegetation re-establishment is parformed in a timelp manner and they follow up with periadic progress reports and carcespandence ta developers either informinq them of the required compliance areas of deficiencies, time defaults or whatever so we hire them to take care vf that issue on behalf of the City. 0. In this particular project did Derrick Land Development comgly with the obligations insofar as erosion and sediment control in their construction? A. I don't know. Q. Would there be anybady emplQyed by the City who wou18 be familiar with that and have firsthand knowiedge? A. There would be a variety of individuals aIl the way from the engineering technician who is primarily 57 is ? i 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 iz 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 aa 25 involved in grading, dzainage and erosion problems to the Assistant City Engineer or the individual from the SwCD who performs it. Q. What is the SWCD? A. Soil and Water Conservation Dzstrict. Q. Does the City issue a datailed list of things they need to do on a timetable in which they need to do them? A. Yes. Q. And if I wanted ko abtain a copy of that laundry list of things which was required where would i find that? A. Either in the City files or in the S4aCA files. Q. And in which of the City files would it be conCained? A. it might either be under the plat file for Faicway Hi11s or under the private improvemsnt project 86-W. Or possibly under a separate grading permit fi1e, i don't know if one was issued. But many times developers wish to praceed with their yrading prior ta final plat approval and if so it might be under a separate grading permit. And we have a separate grading permit file and I can't te11 you the er,act file number, it's a numerical number in relation to section number and sequence of permit issuance of any gfven year. 0. When a preliminary plat is submitted to the City is 58 0 11 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 14 19 20 21 22 23 aa as it aubmitted to what department? A. Pianning Department. Q. Okay. Does your particuiar depactment have any,input into the preliminary plat insofar as whether it`s approved or not approved? A. Yes, we do review relating to enqineering issues and we prepare a joint repoct with the Planning bepartment that is then processed through the various commissions and the City Council. Q. That particular report that you would prepare wou1d that be contained in the plat file maintained by•the City of Eagan? A. Yes. (Colbert Depositian Exhibit Number 8 macked for identi£ication.) BY MR. MANKAs Q. Showinq you what has been marked for ideni-ification as Colbert Deposition Number 8 do you recognize that as the preliminary plat submitted by Fairway Hflls? A. Yes. I Q. I only have really one question about that. A portion of that preliminary plat shows parking, tennis covrts, hard courts, hackey, fcee skating, wacming house in the east portion of that particular ? p1at, is that correct, talking up in the top portion 59 i ? i 1 Z 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ll 22 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 o£ the plat7 A. It shows that beyond the confinements of that plat. Q. On property which wasn't owned by the developer? A. I don't know the ownership oE the property. Zt was my understanding he did not own it. Q. Okay. Does the fact that that is platted or suggested as a preliminary p2at on property in fact vwned by the Farkview Golf Coucse did that have any input or factoc in any respect in appcoval of the pceliminary Nlat zn the final plat? A. That is an issue that was specifically addressed by the Parks Department. There was a whale issue as to where the neighborhaod pack should bs constructed ia this general vicinity. The proposed location is something that had been selected by the applicant and not by the City and its acceptability was reviewed by the Park Department and not by the Engineering Department so F don't know whether the 8eveloper had worked out -- I don't even know if that is golf conrse property, if it is golf course property I don't know whether the developer had worked out something with the golf course to make that praposal ar if that was just a cancept or if that was in response to the Park Commission's recommendations, I just don't know. 60 0 n 1._.J 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Would the Park or the Planning Commission or any of those actually take any steps to investigate whether or not that park which they proposed is on somebody else"s property which they had not had any discussians with the owner o£ that praperty about actually developing this park on this property? A. Well a preliminary plat that is processed has to be aigned 6y the ownec of the prnperty included in the proposed subdivision. Now I don't know if that is proposed to be part of the improvements associated with this development or if it was submitted as just a concept af haw the park praperty conld expand through subsequent purchase by the City of parkland combined with their paekland, I don't know what the intentions of the developer was by submitting that. As far as the ceview goes I indicated there was considerable discussion and concern as to how the required number of aceeages of parkland was to be dedicated as a part of the Fairway Hills plan. Yn fact I think some of Che preliminary submittals showed just an overall outlot until the Parks Commission could negotiate with the adjacent property owners, whether it was the golf course crr property owners to the south, additional land acquisition that woulci have fu1fi11ed their park dedication i ? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 la 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 61 requirements. ' Q. it's my understanding as a conjunction of the initial development of the Fairway Hills project they are obligated by city ordinance or city requirements that there be certain dedicated park areas, is that correct? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And insofar as the pzeliminary plat included certain park areas which wQre not on their property whp would know whether or not it"s ultiruately in violation of that particular requirement? A. Well, I can only make a supposition. You can only take it foc what it's worth but an 80-acre development is required to dedicate 10 percent of the land area or a cash contribution at the discretion of the Park Commission and City Council. Many times what happena with the development application is that the -- let me back up. The Park Commission and the Park Department has a policy that there is a minimum size acreage for eny city park for a neighborhood park, And I believe it's greater than eight acres. And sa there was still a desire to designate svme kind of a neighborhood park in this general area. Now thzs is I pure supposition and speculation on my part. But 0 ? J L z z 3 4 5 6 7 B 9 10 ix IZ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ao 21 22 23 29 25 62 may6e the developer recognizing that requirement and working with the Parks Department indieated okay, here is where we can dedicate our eight acces of parkland and if and when the Parkview Golf Coucse were ever to develop inko some kind of use othee than a golf course they would be xequired to dedicate a compacable parkland dedication and if they did here is how the two couid tie together to justify why they were proposing to dedicate -° why Fairway Hills was proposing to dedicate that patkland in that particular location to shaw how 3t could be combined with some future parkland dedicatfon with a potential future develogment of the golt course. 4. When the £inal plat was approved it dzdn"t include any of the possible future development or the park land itself, is that correct? A. That is correct, it was acquired as an outlot to a13ow the issue to still be worked aut throuqh , potential future acquisitions by the Patk Aepartment of either the Fairway Hills land or purchased from adjacent properties. Q. Sp as it sits naw there has been no dedication of a park nf the 10 percent reguired area, is that correct? A. I'm not eure but it's my understanding that no title 63 . 11 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 22 13 14 15 16 27 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 transfers have taken place other than a commitment as a part of the final plat development agreement of the first addition that their parkland dedication will be required with the second phase. Q. If and when that is ever done? A. Yes. 4. Now one last area of questioning. The Fairway Hills road which was relocated; at the time the final plat is approved does that become the property of the City? A. The dedicated right of way? 4. Xes, the roadway and the dedicated right of way? A. Yes. FSR. HAUGE: Just a minute. MR. MANKA: His undecstending is a11 I'm asking for. MR. AAUGE: Do you have an understanding as ta the nature of Che ownership of a road after completion of the plat? Do you know what the status is after a plat has been completed? Tf you do sap yes, if you don't knnw -- THE WITNESS: I can only give my understanding right or wrong. Tt is up to somebody else's aetermination. My understandiny is that when a plst is cecorded at the County with Ghat recording ? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 6 9 10 11 12 13 19 1S 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 64 there are dedication of certain public right of way and drainage and utility easeuents dedicated Eor public purposes. The acceptance of that publicly dedicated right of way is subject to it being brought up to City standards. Sa you ace talking about a conveyance of nat title but ownerhship but we don't accept the responsibility associated with that until the improvements have been completed aecording Co City standards. And to ensure that we have a flevelopment agreement, and so whether, yvu knaw, S don't know of any other formal action that would transfer the rights of the public right af way from somebody else's as £ar as recordinq it at the Connty goes. Now if I'm wrong I stand corrected. H1R. MANKAs I have no further questivns at thzs time, MS. GRADY: Mr. Colbert, I represent Derrick Land Company and S believe I will be regresenting DMS Investmentu. As of yet I have not been retained by DM5 Znvestments to represent them in this action and because of that we will reserve our right to recall you for your deposition at some later so I will ROt bL' asking you any questions at this ? 24 kime. 25 THE WTTNESS: Can I ask one question? 65 . 0 El 1 a 3 4 5 6 T 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. GRADY: Sure. THE WTTNESS: Plhat is the difEerence beCween Dercick Land Company and Dt4S? MS. GRApYs My understanding is DMa Investments is a separate company that owns the lands and it has entered into same sort of agreeraent to have Derrick Land Company develop the property bat Derrick Land Company is rsat the fee owner. T8E wITNESS: Just the development company an behalf of DMS, akay. MR. FTAUGE: I have no questians. And I would recommend, Tom, here that yau be given an opportunity to read the depositicsn and then siqn the depasition after it's been typed. (Deposition conciuded at 11:05 a.m.) ti ? 40 1 2 ? 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ? 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 • 24 25 66 ORIGINAL S S G Pd A T CI R E P A GE CASE: Don Lacsen/Parkview Golf Course vs. Derrick Land, DMS Investments, City af Eagan DATE OF DEPOSITIOiv': 13 October 87 I, Thomas Colbert, deponent, certify that I have read the foregoing transcript of my testimony and have made the following corrections and/or changes and the reason why: PAGE: LiiVE: CI;ANGE: THE W7TNESS R70TARY PUBLIC My cammission expirns the ___th day of 19 -- L.J El 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 6 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 66 S T G N A T U R E P A G E CASE: Don L,arsen/Parkview Golf Course vs. Derrick Land, DMS Investments, City of Eagan DATE OF DEPOSiTIONa 13 October 87 I, Thomas Colbert, deponent, certify that I have read the foregoing transcript of my testimony and have made the followinq corrections and/dr changes and the reasan why: PAGE: LFNE: CffANGE: e TH6 WITNESS NOTARY PUBLIC My commission expires the __th day of , 19 - 67 . ?J 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 STATE OF MINNESOTA j COUNTY OF RAMSEY • ) Be it known that I took the deposition o£ Thomas Colbert on October 13, 1987. That I was then and there a notary public in and for the County of Ramsey, 5tate of Minnesota, and that by virtue thereof I was duly authorized to administer an oaths That the witness before testifying was by me first duly sworn to testify the whole truth and nothing but the truth relative to said cause; That the testimony of S31d witness was recorded in stenotype by myself and transcribed into typewriting under my direction, and that the deposition is a true cecord of the testimany given by the witness to the best of my ability; That I am not related to any of the parties hereto nor interested in the outcome of the action= That the reading and signing by the witness and Notice of Filing were not waiveds WITNESS ESY HAND AND SEAL THZS 20TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1987. James R. Maves . ". 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ? I* 13 14 15 16 17 is 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 68 October 13, 1987 + h1r. Thomas Colbert RE: Don Larsen/Parkview Golf Course vs. Derrick Land, DIyiS Investments, City of Bagan Dear Mr. Colbert: Enclosed is your deposition transcript along with the "°Original" signature page. As you will recall it was agreed that you wouid read and sign the deposition transcript. I wculci ask that you correct any errors in the transcript on the "Oriyinal" signature page, indicating the chanye that snould be made, the page, and the iine or lines involved. Alsa, please sign youe name on the bottom of this sheet before a Notary Public. You should sign the signature page and have it notarized even if there are no changes. cnce you have completed this proceclure, please send the list of corrections, if any, to my HOh1E ADDRESS: 1833 ROHF. AVP., SAINT PAUL. h9INNESOTA 55116 and I will then file it with the attorney taking the deposition. Sincerely, / .Tames R. t•,aves 690-0716, 338-4348 . y- . .? 0 W r (< L? 5 -/ e- /=y/ 7- r?= CpLV?' ?- / Exh,on Date?? f T ,_ ; R. MaveE PAUL M. MAUGE ANEA CODE 012 KEVIN W EIDE TEIEPNONEa56?GOOD DAVID G. NELLER ?S?'4224 WRI M. BELLIN DEBRI, E SGHM10T Mr. Thomas Colbert Eagan Public Works Director 3830 Pilot Knob Road • Eagan, MN 55121 RE: Parkview Golf Course/Storm Sewer Project Issue S?- w ,?'a•rc?.,n? fr,<.S Dear Tom: Mike Foertsch, you and I met last week concerning an issue that has arisen very recently regarding storm water run-off from the Fairway Hills project on the south side of Cliff Road and how it relates to • the potential back up of storm water at the northwest corner of the Parkview Golf Course property along Cliff Road. -it is my under- standing that storm sewer line running northerly along the street connection directly across from Ches Mar Drive may cause the culvert outlet under Cliff Road to back up in the event of heavy storms. Don Larsen, the owner of the Parkview Golf Course, has indicated that he will make a claim against the City in the event that corrective measures are not taken to avoid that type of back up in the future. Facts It is my understanding that Larsen intends to use the land which is designated for permanent storm drainage for Parkview Golf Course in the event that it is developed at some time in the future for a gokt driving range. At the present time, it is a fairly deep ditch ancH' not in use as a part of the golf course. The City held at least two hearings in recent years concerning the improvement of storm drainage from the south side oP Cliff Road, running northerly through City land, and rather than install the entire project, the Council authorized the installation of the storm sewer pipe, together with'open ditch drainage. Because the C1ty could not acquire sufficient assessment revenue to pay foc additional storm drainage improvements, such improvements were delayed until a future project. • It is my understanding that Don Larsen has argued that there was a 72 inch outlet and now it is down to twelve to fifteen inches. It is partially bricked. The street outlet has been changed to the east in order to become aligned with Ches Mar on the north side and , ' . f ' Mr. May Page Thomas Colbert 15, 1987 Two this has created part oP the problem. An eighteen inch pipe has been installed in the Fairway Hills street connecting to Cliff Road and, therefore, the outlet will now get the Fairway Hills runoff also. You outlined several alternates for resolution of the problem including the following: 1. Relocating the 5 CFS restriction to the common property line between Fairway Hills and the golf course. The system, however, was not designed for all of the Fairway Hills water but this would, as I understand it, then allow 5 CFS from the Parkview Golf Course property. 2. Remove the restriction and let the Fairway 8ills and Larsen drainage go through the culvert without a restriction. It is my understanding that this would mean that additional storm drainage on the north side of Cliff Road would be required to avoid serious storm drainage problems in that area. , 3. Another alternate would be for the City Council to approve a project for the construction of the improvements on the north side of Cliff Road with the restrictions provided to avoid ponding on the south side and unto the Parkview Golf Course property. This would mean additional revenue would be required which, of course, cannot be assessed under the present circumstances without the golf course being improved. It is my understanding that the Boonestro office is prepacing some runoff calculations from the Parkview Golf Coucse property based on 100 year storm calculations. Computation of the runoff and the discharge rate would then be helpful in determining the amount of ponding that is required and, in addition, the future onsite ponding would also be an issue, y` w A decision will have to be made whether to fully or partially remove the restrictions and therefore, assuming the potential liability of a condemnation action by the City or inverse condemnation action by the owner, or to use the same money to impxove the drainage system on the north side of Cliff Road. Because of the uncertainty of the damages in condemnation, it may be well to review the possible cost of the additional improvements. Ver _ ruly yours, • UGE EIDE 6 ELLER, P.A. xrgqlo? aul H. Hau 9 PHH:jjm .. Cvt?r?7 ?Z M E M 0 . BONESTR00, ROSENE, ANDERLIK 6 ASSOCIATES, INC. R. IyqyE` 2335 W. Trunk Highway 36 "`OparEq , S[y Paul, Minnesota 55113 RE: Date: ? X FILE N0. gy; T0: FILE ? 9 . •.. 3696b ? 777 ' ? i._.. M • /,7?-' f?G .• . ?:' ' - I !?-/ l ' /!,: .'?C/ !r ?-:'. '%i<_ 0 26 August 1987 Mr. Mike Foertsch CITY OF EAGAN 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 RE: Fairway Hills Dear Mr. Foertsch: CoLaQ???* Pate? u ??- ?E"... ' 4. V A tlFr As a result of our meeting on 21 August 1987 regarding the storm water management, several issues were highlighted: • 1. The down stream design and construction from Fairway Hills and the golf course is very critical to us in regards to the balance of run- off quantities and retention requirements. As you know it covers a much larger area than that of our development and required a short term solution as impacted by current construction and long term solutions as Cliff Road is upgraded and other development occurs in the area. 2. The modifications of the storm water system around the intersection at [he entrance to Fairway Hills off of Cliff (regarding #1 above) it was decided that the 12" outlet from CBMH-6 as referenced on the Holland Lake force-main Project number 444-R should be replaced with a large pipe. The size of the new pipe should be determined by your consultant and replaced at the expense of the City of Eagan. We_lazsca hZ.yL paid $44,021.85 for trunk sewer improvement as a part of the Fairway ' Hills lst Addition. Regarding #2 above, we will complete the construction of the inlet for the golf course run-off to insure unobstructed flow and access for future maintainence by City personnel. This will include suitable erosion control and soil stabilization of the area. We will continue to work with you for equitable and resovable solutions to the problem in the area affected by our development. ? Si c ely, Don Patton D M S Investments " a .___ oF ea 3830 PILOT NNOB ROAD. P.O BOX 21199 EAGAN, MINNESOfA 55121 GMONE (614) 454-8100 July 23, 1987 DON PATTON DERRICK LAND COMPANY ONE SOUTHWEST CROSSING 11095 VIKING DRIVE EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55344 BFA BLCMQ11I5T ? 1 ?¢ nwra ,HOMAS EGAN CoLB 14fvfE5 a MTM '?'''j?? V1C ELlL50N nate .._! J' - THEODORE Y(ACMER C?i?is llfOMvS HEDGES ' ' G?yAtl111WillOlq EUGENE VAN OvERBEKE Gry C.d Re: FairvaY Sills - Storm Seaer Dear Mr. Patton: As previously addressed in Michael Foertsch's letter dated July 10, 1987, the City is concerned with the storm sewer used to provide drainage for the Parkview Golf Course. According to Prob Engineering, this pipe was adequately designed. However, the City's position is that it's undersized and requires modifications. Therefore, in order to avoid future drainage problems, it is necessary to provide these modifications as soon as possible. In order to insure this issue has a timely solution, the City will not issue any more building or sewer and water permits until this problem is resolved. Your cooperation in solving this matter would be appceciated and if I can be of any assistance, please contact me at 454-8100. Sincerely, rE. Knudsen 9 Engineering Technician cc: Thomas A. Colbert, Director of Public Works Ralph Wagner, Prob Engineering Doug Reid CEK/af t+ s, iHE LONE OAK iREE THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTN AND GROWIH IN OUR COMMUNIiY C o ? pr?z ;& ---- R. ?":... .: OF d830 PI101 NNOB ROAD, F.O BOX 21199 EAGAN. MINNESOTA 55121 PHONE (612) 454-8100 July 10, 1987 MR DON PATTON DERRICK LAND COMPANY ONE SOUTH44EST CROSSING 11095 VIKING DRIVE EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55344 Re: Fairway Hills Development Dear Mr. Patton: As few weeks ago, I met with representatives and Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates in design criteria affecting your Fairway area in question is the road connection extension of the Fairway Hills storm sewer facility. BEn &On1UU4Sf Mlra 1110AM5 EGAN 14ME$ A SMRH VIC EL1150N n+EOOORE wncrrtea ca.,w ena?n RIOMPS HEDGES CM Abwnt1aia HIGENE ViW OVERBEKE Gry Cleh from Probe Engineering to discuss differences Hills development. The to Cliff Road and the to the existing City As a result of the meeting, it was determined that modifications to the existing storm sewer control structure were required and these modifications were the responsibility of your development. Probe Engineering is aware of the required modifications. Furthermore, City and Probe differ as far as the proper sizing of the outlet storm sewer provided to adequately handle the storm water runoff from the Parkview Golf Course. The City has determined that the outlet pipe provided to serve the Parkview Golf Course is undersized. Unless your development and Probe Engineering are willing to document acceptance of full responsibilitg for any damages which may be incurred by the golf course property as a result of the inadequate design, the outlet is required to be sizec}' to meet City design criteria. ? Thank you for any assistance which you may provide to ensure a timely solution to the City's concerns. SinCerely, ( ^ cc: Thomas A. Colbert, Director of A/. \i 7 I Public Works „_"ij.,' ? _.y? Ralph Wagner, Probe Engineering hl?ichael P. Fo-t?sch Mark Hanson, BRAA Assistant City Engineer IdPF/j j THE LONE OAK TREE. ..THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND 6ROWfH IN OUR COMMUNITY • oF 3630 VILOT KNOB ROAD. P.O. BOX 21190 EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55121 PHONE (612) 454-8700 BFA &OA40UIST Mww iHOMAS EGMI .14ME5 A SMfIH VIC ELLISON 7NEODORE WACHfER ca.,ai n? RIOMAS HEDCES CiN b? HIGENE VPN OVERBEKE aN pxt February 26, 1987 RODGER DERRICK DERRICK LAND CO 1650 SHELARD TOWER MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55426 Re: Dear Mr. Derrick: u City staff has received a letter from David C. Sellergren of the law firm Larkin, Hoffman, Daly & Lindgren, LTD requesting final plat approval for Fairway Hills, and we have made a review of items listed below that the City will require in order to get this plat back on line for final plat approval by the City Council. 1. Resubmit the final plat application form with the appropriate fees. Original final plat approval was revoked on November 18, 1986 due to noncompliance to furnish a financial guarantee in the appropriate time frame. (See enclosed packet.) 2. Pay all administrative costs accrued to date for legal and administrative fees by the City in the amount of $1,543.29. (See attached invoice and cost breakdown.) 3. Complete final plat work$he,et which is in the final plat packet. a. s: 4. Resubmit utility, Street, and erosion control plans and specifications along with the final plat, title sheet, and final plat application. 5. The City staff is going to require that the financial guarantee be submitted prior to placing the Fairway Hills final plat approval on the City Council agenda for final plat approval. Last year a letter of intent was submitted but was not adequate to obtain a financial guarantee. 6. The City will require a permit from the Williams Brothers 0--j Pipeline Company prior to final lat approval. Cp??U-C ?ele ??3:ar;,o?e THE LONE OAK TREE. .THE SYMBOL OF SrRENGTH AND GROWfH IN WR COMMUNIN '' . RODGER DERRICK FEBRUARY 26, 1987 ? PAGE TWO 7. The City staff will be working with the developer's engineers to correct any easements and make minor revisions to the plans and specifications. There is the possibility that a ponding easement at the southeast corner of Cliff Road and Pilot Rnob Road was obtained instead of using Lots 11, 13 and 14 of Block 2 for ponding purposes. The City will review the plans. 8. The City is requiring that Parcel #10-03400-010-27, located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Pilot Rnob Road and Cliff Road, be incorporated into this plat as right- of-way and/or coordinated with the county &o that this parcel is platted by the county as right-of-way for Pilot Knob Road. This parcel is proposed to be used as a ponding easement by this development. Upon zeceipt of the above listed items, the City will a9ain review all items and prepare the revised, updated development contract. it will be sent to the city attorney for typing and final review. The city attorney will send the development contract to the owners for signatures. The signed development contract shall be returned to the City staff along with the ? appropziate financial guarantee and esctow account. if the development contract and all plans and specifications, including permits, etc., are in order, it will be glaced on the council agenda for City Council approval. (See copy of sample financial guarantee in the final plat packet.) Sincerely, wA"' - 1 v ? Edward J. Kirscht Senior Engineering Technician EJK/mc M cc: Don Patton, Realty Center ? David C. Sellergren, Larkin, Hoffman, Daly & Lindgren, LTD. Bill Mauer, Probe Engineering Tom Colbert,, Director of Public Works e`?'oeztah; ??Assi?starit?ity;?ngineer ?ic a i? ? ? . 1 t ? ? - -- -- -... isa:e - R. MA1'EE \ - l1 . _ .r O _ r Yr ??N l ' s. I ' ? / . . . ` • i? .. . . . . ?. ? : ti-L ?.....? b' 'L ? ?• ?T 11 1 ?? - _ '? \ \ `- ? . !?i ?. ??? ? ? ? ` ` \ ? \ \ \ \? ? • ? `?? \, ? \ \ ? ` ? . ? .? \ ? ? ? -- ? ? ? SLOPF ^ • 2.5-1 14 ? i ?? - ? ? ` \? " ? • \ ? 40 ' ti 'i • i \ O 'i - SE ? • ..- -" '? ? ? ? --- -•? ? ? ? • ? • ~•?. 1 ' ? ? yn ?? `, , ` • ` r I ?' \ .. . + 2 ? ? ? ? ? FLAT ? . ti ? \ :. p _ • f? ? . _ _ o - ? ? - ? ? ?1 . „ \ . • \ m _ , r .- \ r1I 1 O ? !¦ J- - , ' / CI'CY OF EJIGAN ? a , *DATA PAGCESyING FORM - lUCAL IMPROVEMENIT ASSESSMENTS D/r FO°'i F ?REVICUS BATCH # CURMJT HATCH # DATE D.cu;.E: r;' A' y pLAT :n;T ? ELk ' C [ij: FdCTC? f,•R ASS.^i: OftIGr1AL NE'd PRL+CIPAI, CURRE?!T YEA.R BEG DIST A P U ? D ? P?iSMT NLl,!E # PRuJCIPAL AMOiT1T Pi,ID AMOuTiT YR TO C A P 5 FAC i OR AbfT . T Y Z 3-; 12 1.1-18 19 22 24 25 27-j6 37-40 /*1-$0 51-6 1 69 71 78 9 80 13 21 23 26 70 72 77 i lo 03yoo oro d?s y? ss T.,Z qq5 7 Yd, do Io' 85 p , b i 6 F 6 F 6 F 6 F 6 F 6 F 6 I ' 6 F 6 F ' 6 F ' 6 F - 6 F 6 P 6 F - ,' .. ')4?'? ??• STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF DAKOTA -------------------------------- Donald W.Larsen and Louise L. Larsen, Petitioners, vs. I City of Eagan, Respondent. ------------------------------------ DISTRICT COURT FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT File No. 97982 FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSZONS OF LAW, a n d ORDER FOR JUDGMENT The above entitled assessment appeal came on for trial before the undersigned at the Couthouse, City of Hastings, Dakota County, Minnesota on the 19th day of July, 1985; A P P E A R A N C E S were as follows: Warren E. Peterson for Petitioners and Bradley Smith for Respondent. 6 The Court having considered the evidence presented, the memoranda submitted, all records of proceedings in this matter and being fully advised makes the following; FINDINGS OF FACT 1. On April 2, 1985, Petitioners perfected an appeal from an assessment against their property in the siim of $12,792.00. 2. Petitioners' land consists of a 78.5 acres tract. The high- est and best use of the land is its present use as a golf course which is consistent with existing zoning. 3. The City of Eagan linited its assessment to the northerly 300' by 1320' of said tract of land and covering something less 9 acres of land. 4. The area assessed is necessary to the use of the entire tract as a golf course and cannot be developed for another purpose without destroying the present and highest and best use of the entire 78.5 acres. - 1 - .- '.; .` ;._ :'.. ? 5. There was no showing that there was-an unreasonable discharge of surface water from Petitioners' property nor that the storm sewer project in any manner benefitted or increased the market value of their tract of land. CONCLUSION OF LAW The assessment against Petitioners tract of land in the amount of $12,792.00 is vacated and the City of Eagan is directed to have it removed from the assessment roll. 30 day stay entered Dated this 16th day of August, 1985. ?6 trict Jud e ;TATE OF MINNESOTA 'OUNTY OF DAKOTA DISTRICT COURT FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT ----------------------------------------- File No. 97982 vs. City of Eagan, -------------- Respondent. ------------ The above entitled assessment appeal came on for trial before the undersigned at the Couthouse, City of Hastings, Dakota County, Minnesota on the 19th day of July, 1985; A P P E A R A N C E S were as follows: ionald W.Larsen and Louise 1. Larsen, Petitioners, FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, a n d ORDER FOR JUDGMENT Warren E. Peterson for Petitioners and Bradley Smith for Respondent. The Court having considered the evidence presented. the memoranda submitted, all records of proceedings in this matter and being fully advised makes the following; FINDINGS OF FACT 1. On April 2, 1985, Petitioners perfected an appeal from an assessment against their property ia the siim of $12,792.00. 2. Petitioners' land consists of a 78.5 acres tract. The high- est and best use of the land is its present use as a golf course which is consistent with existing zoning. 3. The City of Eagan linited its assessment to the northerly 300' by 1320' of said tract of land and covering something less 9 acres of land. 4. The area assessed is necessary to the use of the entire tract as a golf course and cannot be developed for another purpose without destroying the present and highest and best use of the entire 78.5 acres. - 1 - 4 5. There was no showing that there was•an unreasonable discharge of surface water from Petitioners' property nor that the storm sewer project in any manner benefitted or increased tkle market value of their tract of land. CONCLUSION OF LAW The assessment against Petitioners tract of land in the amount of $12,792.00 is vacated and the City of Eagan is directed to liave it removed from the assessment roll. 30 day stay entered Dated this 16th day of August, 1985. ? i n (A ' ` °e Lf i trict Jud);r-e- ????/ __e, /D"- 03 Yeg ev J0 10 -as OF 3830 FILOT KNOB ROAD. P.O. BOX 21199 EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55121 PHONE(612) 454-8100 August 26, 1985 n MR BRAD SMITH, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY HAUGE, SMITH & EIDE, PA ATTORNEYS AT LAW CEDARVALE PROFESSIONAL BUILDING 3908 SIBLEY MEMORIAL HIGHWAY EAGAN MN 55122 Re: Project 315R Alternate - Special Assess (Parkvia'u Gnlf r.,,,,-?o? Dear Brad: BEA BLOM9UISi MOyIX THOMAS EGAN JAMES A. SMITH JERRY THOMAS THEODORE WACHTER Counctl Members THOMAS HEDGES QN AdRIllYShOfC! EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE cirr c?N I have your letter of August 21, wherein you forwarded to my attention the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order for Judgement regarding the above-referenced matter. I feel it would not be in the City's best interest to pursue any further course of action and that the City will vacate the proposed assessment and strike it from the final assessment roll. This item will not be levied but will be noted that it had been stricken by court action dated August 19, 1985. Unless informed to the contrary, I will assume that there is no further action required by either party regarding this matter. Sincerely, Thomas A. Colbert, P.E. Director of Public Works TAC/jj cc: Gene VanOverbeke, Finance Director Ann Goers, Special Assessment Clerk Thomas L. Hedges, City Administrator THE LONE OAK TREE. ..THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GRON/fH IN OUR COMMUNItt t' K,1 HAIIGE, SMITH & EIDE, P. A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW CEDARVALE PROFESLIONAL BUILDIHGS 3908 SIBLEY MEMORIAL FIIGMWAY EAGAN.MINNESOTA $5122 PAUL H. HAUGE BRADLEY SMITH KEVIN W. EIOE Lori ri. Bellin Mr. Thomae Hedgea Eagan City Administrator Eagan Municipal Cen[er 3830 Pilot Rnob Road Eagan, MN 55122 omas A. Colbert Public Works Director Eagan Municipal Center 3830 Pi1ot Rnob Road Eagan, MN 55122 August 21, 1985 AReA Coo[ 6 12 T6LCPnOxc 454•6224 RE: Laraen vs. City of Eagan - Parkview Golf Course Assessment Appeal 3/S12-4" Dear Mr. Hedges 6 Mr. Colbert: Enclosed is a copy of the Findings of Fact, Concluaions of Law, and Order for Judgment in thia matter. As you can see, the .7udge was not convinced that the market value of the property was increased by the improvement. We have two options. One is to hring a Motion for Amended Findinga, or in the alternative, for a new trial. This hearing would be befare .Tudge Breunig, and I believe that it is unlikely that he would change hia decision ar allow a new trial. The second alternative would be to appeal the deciaion. If we do appeal it, it would be appropriate to bring a Hotion for Amended Findinge or for a new trial before doing so, since this makes it clear to the Appeals Court that we have done everything that we can to have the matter decided in our favor before the trial judge. Given the attitude of the State Appellate Courte toward assessment appeals, I believe that it is unlikely that we would win an appeal. The Judge's deciaion is stayed for 30 days to allow ue time to bring a Motion for Amended Findings or for a new trial, so if you would like me to pursue tha[, please let me know as soon as poesible. If you believe an appeal is appropriate, pleaee let me knov that as well. Very truly yours, BS:ras Encloaure HAUGE, SHITR 6 EIA. Bradley S , Clrrk'.?utir Pursu.nl w Rulrn u( (1?1 Pna•rdure-'7 (4 Mp Lpp C<r =_ 'o MtNIfAkCLIS STATE OF htINNESOTA, IN DISTRICT COUR.T COUNTY OF DAROTA - - FIRST JUDICInI, DISTRICC Xo. 9i 982 _.... ? , Donald W. Larsen and Louise L. Larsen ? Citv of J`[a1rt!'ry] Pe t ilt iune rs , 77e7Zf[llare6espoJtaen[ To 'Mr. Idarren E. Pe[erson, Attorney at Law, :507 Midwest Federal Bldg., St. Paul, hfn. 55101 Mr. Aradlev Smith, Attornev at Law, 3908 Sibley ?femoriai Hiv;hway, Eagan, ?tn. 55122 YOU .4RE IfEREBP NOTIF/F.Ti, That a FindinFs of Fact, Conclusions of Law & Order for plydrr Ilo,nirn urdudwmvntl U gRIEIIC intluaboa•eentit7rdcauaewaa,ontht 19th dQyo' Augus[ rJ9 85c filed in the o/J'ict oJ the Clerk oJ taid District Cort rt. (FJ6d nr 6ntertv3) Au,gust 19[h 85 Roger iJ. SAmes ? tsd R. D. 19 _ Clerk - . -.. - - - ? B4 ,., t•-? c 2-.l .. '..<-•' C? ?. . . DePut y ? -- - \ .\ : ! L \ \ STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF DAKOTA DISTRICT COURT FTRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT ----------------------------------------- File No. 97982 Donald W.Larsen and Louise L. Larsen, Petitioners, FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, vs. ? a n d City of Eagan, Respondent. ORDER FOR JUDGMENT -------------------------------------------------------------- The above entitled assessment appeal came on for trial before the undersigned at the Couthouse, City of Hastings, Dakota County, Minnesota on the 19th day of July, 1985; A P P E A R A N C E S were as follows: Warren E. Peterson for Petitioners and Bradley Smith for Respondent. The Court having considered the evidence presented, the memoranda submitted, all records o£ proceedings in this matter and being fully advised makes the following; FINDINGS OF FACT 1. On April 2, 1985, Petitioners perfected an appeal from an assessment against their property in the siim of $12,792,00. 2. Petitioners' land consists of a 78,5 acres tract. The high- est and best use of the land is its present use as a golf course which is consistent with existing zoning. 3. The City of Eagan limited its assessment to the northerly 300' by 1320' of said tract of land and covering something less 9 acres of land. 4. The area assessed is necessary to the use of the entire tract as a golf course and cannot be developed for another purpose without destroying the present and highest and best use of the entire 78.5 acres. - 1 - 5. There was no showing that there was,an unreasonable discharge of surface water from Petitioners' property nor that the storm sewer project in any manner benefitted or increased the market value of their tract of land. ` CONCLUSION OF LAW_. _ The assessment against Eetitioners tract of land in the amount of-$12,792.00 is vacated and the City of Eagan is directed to have it removed from the assessment roll. 30 day stay entered Dated this 16th day of August, 1985. ? i trict Jud e CI'fY OF FAGAN . , DltiTA PACCESSiNG FORM - LOCAI. IMPRAVII+IM ASSES24ENTS , D/r FU°'S F . ?REVICUS BATCft N CUEiREflT HATCH # DATE T.l?:C7.:•Gfi? ? PILT IaT ELK ' C G%P fdCTCL C3 ASShf: OFtIGElAL NE'd PRL'iCIPAL CUR?E:JT YEA.R BEG DIST A P U ? ' D b A.SSMT N.*X .? PAIidCIPAL AMOUiJi Pi,ID AMOuZiT YR I TO C A P 5 FACTOR A2dT. T Y Z 3-7 i2 L'.-lc 19 2? 't.4 25 27-36 37-40 41-50 51-6 1 `18 8.^. 13 zi 23 26 70 72 77 IO 03yoo oro as ss T.A 9qS 7 4-?. do 85 ? 6 # 6 6 ? ? . 6 ? 6 i 6 ? 6 6 ' 6 F 6 F ' 6 F ' 6 F . 1 6 F 6 F 6 FI co ' STATE OF MINNESOTA, IN DISTAIGT COURT COUNTY OF DAKOTA Fmsr JUntcul, Drs7tucc Na.97982 Donald W. Larsen and Louise L. Larsett ZRDqptWPet ioners " City of Fagan ?8oj`a=dax*x R pondent To Mr. Warren E. Peterson, Attorney at Law, 307 Midwest Federal Bld g., St. Paul, Mn 55107 Mr. Bradley Smith, Attorney at Law, 3908 Sibley Memorial Highway, Eagan, Mn 55122 Judgment YOU .9RE HEREBY JV'OTIFJED, Thnt a (Order, Decieim, or Judgmenq 16th September 85 filed & entered in the above entitled cauae waa, on the ?ay of (Filed or Eutered) in tlu of]'ice oJ tFce Clerk of eaid Diatrict Court. September 16[h 85 Roger W. Sames Datcd A. D. 79 - , Curk By ??. ?2 a Deputy (3 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF DAKOTA Donald W. Larsen and Louise L. Larsen, vs Petitioners DISTRICT COURT FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT J U D G M E N T File No. 97982 City of Eagan, Respondent ------------------- Phe above entitled assessmen[ appeal came on for trial before the Hon. Robert J. Breanig at the Government Center, City of Has.tings, Dako[a County, Minnesota on the 19th day of July, 1985. Warren E. Peterson appeared for the Pet3tioners and Bradley Smith appeared for Kespondent. The Court having considered the evidence presented, [he memoranda submitted, all records of proceedings inthis matter and being fuliy advised duly made and filed its FindinFs of Fact, Conclusions of Law and ORDER for Judgment. THEREFORF, Fursuant to said Conclusions of Law, IT IS HEREBY OR?ERED, ADJLiDGED A:ID DECREE?: The assessment agains[ Petitioners tract of land in the amount of $12,792.00 is vacated and the City of F.agan is directed [o have it removed from the assessment roll. DATED: SF.PTEMSER 16th 1985. SY THF COIiRT ROGF.R W. SAMES COURT ADMINISTRATOR C .?. ? 11-? SY: Deputy _??