1993 04 12CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
APRIL 12, 1993
Acting Mayor Wing called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Councilman Wing, Councilman Mason, Councilman Senn,
Councilwoman Dockendorf and Mayor Chmiel arrived during discussion on item 5.
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Paul Krauss, Charles Folch, Roger Knutson, Tom
Chaffee, Todd Hoffman, and Don Ashworth
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Mason moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to
approve the agenda with the following addition by Councilman Wing: At the end
of the regular meeting the Council will be meeting with the City Attorney in a
closed session to discuss some proposed litigation. All voted in favor of the
agenda as amended and the motion carried.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEH~NTS: None.
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Mason seconded to
approve the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's
recommendations:
a. Resolution ~r~3-26: Approve Grant Application to MWCC for 1993 Sanitary
Sewer Rehabilitation Program, Project 93-7.
b. Resolution ~93-27: Approve Year End Closings and Transfers.
c. Approve Agreement for Vending Priviledges in City Parks, Non-Profit
Organizations.
d. Approval of Accounts.
e. City Council Minutes dated March 22, 1993
Planning Commission Minutes dated March 17, 1993
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None.
PUBLIC HEARING: CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING ON LAKE LUCY ROAD EXTENSION BETWEEN
GALPIN BOULEVARO AND TRUNK HIGHWAY 41; AUTHORIZE PREPARATION OF PLANS
SPECIFICATIONSz PRO3ECT 92-12.
Actlng Mayor Wing: Item number 2 lsa public hearing regarding Lake Lucy Road
extension. However, to take any action on this we're going to need 4/5 vote of
Council. And because we only have 4, I'm recommending that we alter the agenda
accordingly and table this until later in the meeting when we have a full
Council that we can take action on lt.
Councilman Senn: I believe we have to open the public hearing, do we not?
City Council Meeting - April 12, 1993
Acting Mayor Wing: We will.
Roger Knutson: I should just point out. The engineer is recommending tabling.
If that's, as he's suggesting, if you agree with his action of tabling it, you
can table it with a simple majority.
Councilman Senn: Since the public hearing was scheduled though, do we not need
to still have the public hearing and then table it?
Roger Knutson: Sure. You can open the public hearing and then just
automatically table it for discussion.
Acting Mayor Wing: Do we want to take public input tonight on this issue?
Councilman Senn: I think we want to if it was noticed that way.
Charles Folch: Yeah, I'm not sure who's going to be here. Most of the people
have contacted me today and mentioned there was no need to attend but certainly
we could open it up to see if anyone's here to talk about it.
Acting Mayor Wing: Well let's then open the public hearing and Charles, if you
want to just give us a brief overview and then your recommendation for tabling,
and we'll go from there.
Charles Folch: Basically there really isn't a whole lot of new news to report
since we last held the public hearing on March 8th. A lot of the issues that
were still open ended last time that we've talked about really haven't been
resolved as we hoped they would in this last month. The one piece of question
that we are able to answer to you tonight was in regards to the ~0 foot roadway
easement that vas granted through the Westside Baptist Church property in favor
of the Gestach-Paulson-Klingelhutz property. We were able to obtain a copy of
the easement document from the property owners. We had Roger take a look at it
and basically it's Roger's opinion that this easement, road easement is not
specifically stated for public purposes and really it appears that all that can
be drawn from it is the intention was to give a road access specifically to the
Klingeihutz property but that was it. That it was not intended to be a future
road or public road access from those types of rights standpoint. Based on
that, staff's had contact almost daily over the last few weeks with these
property owners trying to get this issue resolved and it doesn't appear that
things are coming together very quickly but at this point it's staff's
recommendation that we either table this public hearing indefinitely until we
can resolve some of these issues and come to the table with more of a complete
package at that time.
Acting Mayor Wing: Even with the recommendation for tabling, this is a public
hearing. Is there anybody here tonight to address this issue specifically?
I would entertain a motion then.
Councilman Mason: I would move to close the public hearing.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Second.
Roger Knutso~t: I think the motion is to table.
City Council Meeting - April 12, 1993
Councilman Hason: We don't have to close the public hearing first though?
Acting Mayor Wing: A continuation. Continue the public hearing. I'd entertain
a motion for tabling on this issue.
Counciiman Mason: Okay, I'li make a motion to continue it.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I'll second that one.
Acting Mayor Wing: And I believe the motion wiI1 be to tabIe £ndefinitely at
this point on staff recommendation so we won't be setting a date for the
continuance at this time.
Councilman Senn: Charles, do you have any feeling at all for timing on it at
all?
Charles Folch: This could take a while. Take a while.
Councilman Senn: And the church definitely is now not a participating party?
Charles Folch: Not in the publlc improvements let's say at this polnt in tlme
as they once had petitioned for. 8ut in talking to the church, we're really not
sure what thelr intentions are. Whether they intend to develop on the property.
Whether they lntend to sell the property. At this point in time it's really now
known. They're not telling us a whole lot.
Councilman Senn: How does this affect any of the proposed development?
Charles Folch: Well at thls polnt in time, it does oreate an obstacle for the
Gestach-Paulson-Klingelhutz property to fully develop their property into a
residential subdivision. If they so choose, they could exercise their right to
build a private drlveway along that 60 foot easement and the ordinance would
allow them to bulld up to 4 homes and have that accessed vla the 20 foot
driveway.
Councilman Senn: Thelr limitation is the 4 homes then?
Charles Folch: At this point in time, right. Unless a public street could be
constructed through the property.
Councilman Senn: And what was the proposed subdivision size?
Charles Folch: Pardon me?
Councilman Senn: What was the proposed subdivision size?
Charles Folch: I think there was something ltke 17 or 18 lots subdivision.
Acting Mayor Wing: We have a motion to table this indefinitely. I'll call the
motlon.
City Council Meeting - April 12, 1993
Councilman Mason moved, Councilwoman Oockendorf seconded to table the public
hearing on Project 92-12, the Lake Lucy Road extension between Galp~n Boulevard
and Trunk H~ghway 41 ~ndef~n~tely. Al! voted ~n favor and the motion carried.
AWARD OF BIDS: RAILROAD GRADING CROSSING, TRUNK HIGHWAY 101 REALIGNMENT (NORTH
LEG), PROSECT 88-22B-1:
Charles Folch: This morning at li:O0 a.m. the City received and opened bids for
the railroad grade crossing portion of the Trunk Highway lO1 north
improvement project ~88-22B. A total of two bids were received from the
project, both coming from iocai established contractors. Just to your note,
there is a very limited number of contractors nationaIly that are abIe to, that
are quaIified to perform this kind of work and it appears that the brief bidding
time scheduie that we had and the fact that it's a reIatively a smaii scaie type
project may have piayed a part in these national contractors from taking
interest in this project. But as I mentioned ue did receive two bids. The Iow
bid was received from George F. Cook Construction Company iocated in Minneapol£s
with a bid of $326,245.00. I shouid point out that back in 19~0 when the Soo
Line had owned the railroad track, ue had entered into an agreement to have the
Soo Line construct these crossings and their estimate or the contract amount
that we had entered into with the Soo L~ne was $328,000.00 roughly $200.00. So
the bid ue did receive today was about $~,000.00 under that. We have made a
reference check of this company this afternoon with the Burlington Railroad and
with the Twin Cities and Western Railroad. We received favorable responses on
both those reference checks and at this point in time staff would recommend that
the City Council award the railroad grade crossing contract for the Trunk
Highway 101 north leg project to Geor'ge F. Cook Construction Company in the
contract amount of $32~,245.00.
Acting Mayor Wing: Just in the process here, could you just real quickly
descrlbe lt. Are we talking arms and the whole works?
Charles Folch: Basically the work will involve constructing the rubberized
grade crossing. Z[ u111 also lnvolve constructing the crosslng arm guards. The
controller for the crossing, uhlch wlll be integrated with the signal system
that u111 be installed both at TH 5 and at the intersection of West 78th and
TH 101. And there will also be some early detection devices put up upstream or
uptrack, if you will on both ends of the crossing.
Councilman Senn: Now this is separate contract from the rest of the
intersection improvements?
Charles Folch: That's correct. Thls is a separate contract. It's sort of a
specialized work. If things would have worked out differently with Twin Cities
and ~estern Railroad, ue may have attempted to bid this under the original, the
overall road improvement contract but unfortunately those two design phases
weren't tracking compatibly because we were still working out some details with
the Twin Cities and Western Railroad who had just taken over the tracks and ue
were trying to get them up to speed as to what had been done with the Soo Line
Railroad previously and such. So unfortunately they weren't bid all together
but I'm not sure in thls case that it would have made any difference because, as
I said, there's about a dozen specialized firms that across the country that can
City Council Meeting - April 12, 1993
do this work. And so I don't know that we would have benefitted by lumping it
as part of a big contract. They would have been the subcontractor anyway.
Councilman Senn: And that was my next question. Are they then a subcontractor
to our primary contractor or what?
Charles Folch: Not in this case. In this case they are a general contractor
under this contract.
Councilman Senn: You're not concerned about coordination or?
Charles Folch: No, we've set them up so that the schedules will hopefully fit
together. In fact this particular contract gives them 116 days to complete the
work so that when Phase I or Stage I of the road improvement is completed, which
wlll lnclude the by-pass, that the crosslng wlll be complete so we can start the
road phase. So we've tried to set up the completion dates to match both
projects compatibly.
Acting Mayor Wing: Mike.
Councilman Mason: No comment.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I just have a question as to when it's going to start.
Charles Folch: We would hope that we could start sometime around the first of
June.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: And finish up?
Charles Folch: We'd like to be complete and have it opened up completely by
around the first part of October.
Councilwoman Oockendorf: I don't have any questions about the contract.
Acting Mayor Wing: Well to keep this moving it's going to take another motion.
I have nothing to say.
Councilman Senn: I'll move approval.
Councilman Mason: I'll second it.
Resolution ~93-28: Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to award
the bid for the railroad grading crossing for Trunk Highway 10! (North Leg),
Project 88-22B-! to George F. Cook Construction Company of Minneapolis in the
amount of $326,245.00. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Acting Mayor Wing: Moving onto item number 4. Unfinished business. On this
particular issue, both the Mayor and the City Manager have a statement they wish
to make and have asked if they're back in time, that thls be delayed
accordingly. How do we just carry this?
Todd Gerhardt: A motion by Council to modify the agenda.
City Council Meeting - April 12, 1993
Acting Mayor Wing: And I guess the motion to modify would be, it will be the
next item on the agenda following their return, which hopefully will be very
soon, so we won't delay this other than to wait for them. Do I have a motion to
amend the agenda to move item number 4 as necessary?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: So moved.
Councilman Mason: Second.
Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Hason seconded to amend the agenda to
move item number 4 so that it will be the next item following the return of
Mayor Chmiel and City Hanager, Don Ashworth. All voted in favor and the motion
carried.
NON-CONFORHING USE PERMIT FOR SCHMID'S ACRES RECREATIONAL BEACHLOT. THE PERMIT
SHALL DESCRIBE THE NATURE AND EXTENT OF THE USE ALLOWED.
Paul Krauss: This is hopefully one of the last in a long line of the non-
conforming recreational beachlots that we've been processing. The beachlot ls
one of the older ones in the city. It dates back to almost the turn of century.
There was a survey of this lot undertaken in 1981 which showed one dock, about
45 feet in )ength with one boat belng stored on the shore. At that tlme staff
found no boats being moored or docked at the beachlot but that's a pretty tough
standard because if they happened to be out on the lake or someplace on
vacation, we didn't see them. The Associated requested continued use of the
dock with i or 2 boats belng docked, a canoe rack, 2 boats belng stored on land,
and continued use of the parking at the beachlot. The Planning Commission
reviewed the proposal on March 24th. They recommended approval of the non-
conforming beachlot permit for Schmid's Acres with 10 off-street parking spaces,
i dock ulth I boat allowed to be docked, i canoe rack and i boat to be stored on
the shore. As is typical with these, we basically carry forward the Planning
Commission's recommendations and we're encouraging you to go along ulth that.
Acting Mayor Wing: Having lived there for almost 30 years I'm familiar with
this, just for the Council's information and there generally has been a dock up.
~oun, up, down, more or less and it's been real unclear who's put it up and
who's taklng it down but I would concur with the request. Houever, I was
surprised to, I've had several people come out and although nobody is opposlng
what is requested here, I thlnk we maybe want to consider adding a few other
i~ems for the future. It has become a noticeable party site late at night. At
least twlce this past summer I helped pick up beer bottles, beer cans, and we'll
get some lnput from whoever's from the neighborhood here momentarily but just
some thoughts as we get golng. It's been asked that we consider a gate, that it
be posted and there be no parking after 10:00. And with that, if there's
anybody from Schmld's, the request here [hat would 11ke to address the Council
at this time, if you could come forward please. State your name and address
please.
Gary Carlson: Good evening. My name is Gary Carlson and I reside at 3831 West
62nd Street. I'd be glad to answer any questions on our access. It's one of
the least used accesses but it's one of the most publlcally visible because we
have the creek that runs through it. The creek ls actually lncluded in our
access so we don't [ry to make use of the creek but we try and leave it in lt's
City Council Meeting - April 12, 1993
natural state. It"s the only, the outflow of the creek maintains the height of
Lake Minnewashta so it's quite important, the outflow. And I hope the city in
the future will address that height of Lake Minnewashta because as the outflow
wash is, and becomes deeper of course it can lead to a lower lake level. And as
the lake fills up at times of the year, and it does, people have come over. Dug
the creek out. You know moved rocks around and said well it's not running out
fast enough. My baesment"s getting full of water. And again we at the
Association there have no control over that because no one resides next to it or
by it so I hope the city in the future will, in part of their storm water
control program that we're all now paying into, will address that issue in the
future.
Acting Mayor Wing: How do you feel about the suggestions I made? Putting up a
gate. Posting it. Limiting your hours until 10:00. There's neighbors going to
be on both sides of you now and it has been kind of an isolated area for kids to
go down and park and drink late at night and especially with the new neighbors,
they have at least 3 documented cases of parties that went on until 3:00 in the
morning with noise and debris occurring. So the neighbors are requesting that
to pass this that we request that you put up a gate, post it no parking after
10:00 and limit your hours to meet the city noise ordinance which I believe our
parks close at 10:00.
Gary Carlson: Well I hope there are ordinances in place for disturbing the
peace in that area and I hope the residents that are now moving in on either
side of our access w111 notify the propery authorities so that can be taken care
of. No one that I know of in the association does that. That after 10:00
affalrs. I do know it does go on down there.
Acting Mayor Wing: Well let's open it up. Let's start with you again Mark. Do
you have any comments or questions?
Councilman Senn: One question. As I look through here it appears that, as it
relates to your request and the Plannlng Commission's action, you're in
agreement with everything except the lssue of a boat launch?
Gary Carlson: This evening I would like to reinstate the boat launch. See
we've been using it and it has been an access since 1914 and since I've been
there some 20 some years. I occasionally do back in and put my boat in there
and some of the other association members also do the same.-And there is a
small gravel road that goes directly up to the edge of the lake. We're not
planning on making it a boat launch that the association members would say then
to thelr brothers, thelr relatives or anyone they meet to use our launch. We're
not, we don't want to open it up to that kind of use. We want to maintain it
just for the 25 or so famllles that can use it that occasionally they can't get
in at a public launch or that they're just going to take their canoe down and
launch it for the kids for the day or small boat. We would like to reinstate
the boat launch because it's something we've been doing and it's a grandfathered
thlng. We've been dolng it slnce we had the rlghts to use this property. The
other thing we would like to increase one useage of is the other association
members have remlnded me that it looks 11kw I've asked for the boat access to be
set up for me. You know I dock, 1 boat at it. There's going to be private
docks on either slde of us. The north property isn't developed yet but I'm sure
someone's, the man who owns it is a home developer and the private docks as I
City Council Meeting - April 12, 1993
understand on Lake Minneuashta can keep 4 boats. Is that correct, overnight?
private dock.
Acting Mayor Wing: No. A private homeowner can have 3. This is permitted and
you're really in this case allowed none unless it's grandfathered. In your case
there vas 1 found in 1981. So the only one you're really, [hrough the Planning
Commission investigation, you're entitled to 0 or 1.
Gary Carlson: Well, the whole point of this association is that us're coming
forward to ask you for this.
Acting Mayor Wing: Well let me clarify just.
Gary Carlson: To meet this ordinance but this entire association is on a
private person's property. It's not like any of other associations that sun it
in common_ We don't even have to pay the taxes or, this property. It's paid by
the man to the north that owns about 3,000 feet of lakeshore. So privately he,
it's his dock and he can keep 3 boats on it so you might as well have this
permit to say the same thing. Because this is a private piece of property. We
just have the right to use it. We're not even an association per se. $o that's
why I'm saying you might as well make it whatever a private party can keep. If
it's 3 boats, then make it 3 boats.
Councilman Senn: A question backing up on the access or the boat launch. Is
that, or Paul. Maybe this is a question for one of you two. But I mean what
are the deeded rights as it relates to the use of the property?
Paul Krauss: I am not sure.
Gary Carlson: It dates back to when it was first platted. Jacob Schmid.
Z believe his first name was Jacob, platted it and allowed his relatives and
those that lived on the other plats off lake to have an access to the lake. So
it's left fairly vague itl the orlginal plat. Zt's not like a normal lake access
that says, that's in thelr conditions of thelr property when they buy their
deed. They show that they're a member of some of the other associations. Our's
doesn't show that in our deed.
Acting Mayor Wing: We're going to lead ourselves astray here. Roger, first of
all under definition, is thls a non-riparian lot?
Roger Knutson: I've not seen it. I think lt's, you're on the lake aren't you?
Gary Carlson: Yes.
Roger Knutson: So it's a riparian lot. As far as the gentleman's comment about
you might as well give hlm the same rights as a single famlly homeowner. If you
had the same rlghts as a single famlly homeowner, you should reallze you
couldn't put your boat there.
Acting Mayor Wing: That's right. The footage.
Roger Knutson: No, more than that because you can only have your own boats or
boats of immediate members of your family. So you can't have a next door
City Council Meeting - April 12, 1993
neighbors or a friend's boat there. So you either qualify as a non-conforming
recreational beachlot or you can't keep your boat there,
Acting Mayor Wing: That's right. Yeah, let's back up because we're misleading
ourselves. This is a grandfathered beachlot under the 1981 ordinance. 1981
boat count and the only thing we're discussing tonight is verifying what was
there in 1981, and I think it was agreed upon that it was not a launch. There
was 1 boat and 1 dock and that's the only issue. What ever you would want or
what ever the other ramifications are, it's not our, that's not what we're here
tonight for. It's only to verify in the fairest manner we can and how many of
these have we done and disagreed with? So if in fact staff and Council is
satisfied that there was 1 boat, 1 dock, that's the issue tonight and that's the
only thing we really have to discuss here.
Councilman Senn: Well Dick, the reason I'm asking about the boat launch is
listening to the gentleman talk it appears that it's a non-improved boat launch.
Now a site survey may or may not identify that as a boat launch. I still have a
kind of basic question as to whether there is specific deeded rights relating to
a boat launch on that site. And nobody's been able to answer that question. I
think that's a fair question.
Acting Mayor Wing: I don't know if we're even permitting that in this case.
Paul Krauss: But even if there were specific mention of a boat launch, as far
as our ordinance is concerned it's irrelevant unless it was there in 1981 and
it's been operated consistently ever Since.
Acting Mayor Wing: And that's not the case. It doesn't matter what covenants
or any other issues or even deeded rights. The permit is discussing, the
ordinance takes precedent in 1981 and that's what we've gotten hung up on
repeatedly here.
Councilman Senn: Okay, then let me rephrase my question. As far as the
association is concerned, is the association in agreement with the '81 survey?
Gary Carlson: No we're not. I could have gotten several sworn affidavits for
the boat launch. A lot of the people that used to launch their boats are
retlred and the new people that have moved in now aren't starting to launch
there but this summer I'm sure they will. The road goes right into the lake.
Acting Mayor Wing: It's not, you couldn't launch a boat there if you had a 4
wheel drive. I mean it's just not a launchable slte and if you're dock's there,
then I'm questioning if you could even, now remember we have a dock setback
ordinance that's in effect here. Where your dock, or any portion thereof can't
be wlthln 10 feet of the extended center lot lines. So your dock has got to be
offset 10 feet from your lot lines and now you're talking about a boat launch
and a dock and so on and so forth and I don't know, the Plannlng Commission's
recommendation in reading their Minutes is to not recommend it and it wasn't
felt to have been there in 1981 or they wouldn't have made the recommendation to
us. And I don't know how we're going to prove it one way or the other. The
burden of proof ls on you. Not us and apparently it wasn't presented to the
Planning Commission where they felt it should be approved.
City Council Meeting - April 12, 1993
Gary Carlson: Well as I say, the little road goes straight into the lake and
we've had the right, the grandfathered right. This is a pre-existing, before
the city nas a city so all of the ordinances since then don't change the
grandfathered condition.
hcting Mayor Wing~ That's not true. Roger.
Roger Knutson: If you discontinue the use for & months, a year, you've lost
your grandfathered rights.
Gary Carlson: Well we've never discontinued the use.
Acting Mayor Wing= You haven't launched there for years. I live right there.
Gary Carlson: I've always launched there. I used to drive, well anyway.
Acting Mayor Wing: Gary, there's enough of a ridge line out there that you'd
drop a car over the edge.
Gary Carlson: Oh at time the ice heave is there and you go down with the skids
to your loader and we've taken that off so we have a smooth beach.
Acting Mayor Wing: Let's keep going. Mike, any comments? Questions?
Councilman Mason: Well this continues, this whole situation continues to be a
thorn Jn everyone's slde I thlnk and we'll be all glad when lt's over. I don't
have, I'm havlng some questions about this boat launch thing myself. On the one
hand we have Mr. Carlson who says they've been launching boats there every slnce
19147 Give or take.
Gary Carlson: You've got to realize that there's 25 odd families that there was
no public ramp on Minneuashta for years. How do you think all of these families
used that boat, put their boat in? I mean we didn't go over to McCallahan or
Kenneth Burr and say, can we back onto your property. We had 50 feet. They
said there's your 50 feet. Put your boat in.
Councilman Mason: Now you're saying that you could have some affidavits that
said that people have been launching boats there?
Gary Carlson: People of our association. My neighbors.
Councilman Mason: I guess I'm curious as to why those affidavits aren't here
tonight?
Gary Carlson: Well A1 Gellish is retired and up in Brainerd and Bill Frieberg,
my other neighbor who when the three of us did most of the launching. He's now
in Arizona unt11 later in the sprlng. And the new familles that have moved ln,
they will be launching there. I can't stop it. The road goes stralght in the
lake. I would carry forward your recommendation on the gate and an hour 11mlt.
Again, because it's on private property, and then trying to pass out keys to
everyone with the gate. The best answer I guess ls as the neighbors get moved
in on each slde and get permanent resident there, that they should just call the
police often enough so that the klds that are uslng that as an all night.
10
City Council Meeting - April 12, 1993
Acting Mayor Wing: No, it's not the neighbors responsibility I don't, I don't
want to get into that.
Gary Carlson: I know it's not but.
Councilman Mason: But on the other hand, if I've got somebody down the street
raislng caln at 2:00 in the morning, it ls my, you know. Somebody's got to
call.
Acting Mayor Wing: But if we're asking for a boat launch, it's not a public
boat launch. Then it's got to be somewhat, I don't know of an association in
the city that doesn't have their areas protected, fenced, posted or gated,
especially if there's an access to the lake.
Gary Carlson: Well you can sure ask us to do it and we will. We accept that.
We think it is a good idea to be gated and locked.
Acting Mayor Wing: Colleen?
Councilwoman Oockendorf: Well, I mean this is the only time I've come up
against thls particular ordinance and it always seems to be an issue over what
was there in '81 and nobody can prove or dlsprove it, although at the Planning
Commission you were at, they felt strongly about that to get that affidavit as
to what was there and what people recalled in '81. And the purpose of it is
just to keep these small accesses from becoming publlcally used. And there's a
reason for the ordinance and since we really can't say what was there in '81
outslde of the survey that was done, I guess I'm comfortable with going along
with what the survey says.
Acting Mayor Wing: Wh'~t the Attorney stated is that unless it's a continued
use, you lose it and in the last year or two, it hasn't been used as a boat
launch. It hasn't been improved. There's no access to the lake. There's no
way to get a trailer in. I mean it's not been used as a boat launch Gary, and I
live there so I don't want to keep debatlng this with you.
Gary Carlson: Last year it was a continuous ice fishing drive on to get to
their 1ce houses. Now this year it wasn't because of the improvement on
Minnewashta Parkway. Now all those cars that are drivlng down our road and
directly onto the lake.
Acting Mayor Wing: Well, there's a couple other issues here that we're
concerned about. First of all we've got, it's been a State or the snowmobile
trail I thlnk has been terminated. That needs to be taken care of. The
neighbors don't want it going through there anymore. I think that's going to
fall back on you to gate it and stop that. Traffic going in and out of there
has been a problem. I think it's up to you to stop that. It's your property.
Gary Carlson: We would like it stopped.
Acting Mayor Wing: My position is, whatever the Council decides here is that I
would ask that you add to whatever you choose to make a motlon here. A gate at
the end of the property. That the property be posted as private. And-it has
11
City Council Meeti~g -o April 12, 1993
posted hours as a].l the other cJ. ty...do which I think are in all cases no more
than 10:00. Which concurs with the city park times.
Councilman Senn: Oick, it sounds to me like there's a number of issues
surrounding this lot. I'm not sure which all have been looked at one way or
another. I guess I'm not sure I'm in agreement with the gate but I think it
sounds like there's some definite signage and enforcement issues revo].ving
around everything 'from maybe private property to no parking to hour restrictions
to snowmobiling to a whole bunch of other issues I'm hearing but I guess I'd
feel a lot more comfortable and I guess I'd even put it in terms of a motion to
send this back to the Planning Commission for additional look, and more
specifically at those issues and then resolve specifically also the issue of has
there been or has there not been a boat launch actively going on at the site.
Since whenever. And I think have it come back to us in a little more complete
state.
Acting Mayor Wing: We have a motion to send it back to Planning Commission. Is
there a second? Lack of a second. Motion fails. Paul, any comments on this?
Paul Krauss: I'm not sure. I mean the Planning Commission's dealing with the
same lack of complete information that you are. I'm not certain that they'd be
able to cast any more light on this. The information we have before us is about
all we have unless ther~ are some affidavits that come before us and Councilman
~ing's pointing, even that information seems to be somewhat contradictory so l
don't know what else the Planning Commiss£o)l can do.
Councilman Mason: Yeah. I guess I'll throw thls out and see how it goes here.
I guess what ~'d like to see is if we in fact can get some affidavits saylng it
was used as a launch. Because I'm uilllng to accept the launch if they're
willing to put up a gate and sl9nage.
Acting Mayor Wing: I think there's enough neighbors that will come in to
testlfy then that it is not in thelr tlme on the lake been used as a launch.
The grandfathering affidavits thls won't affect but that's flne. I don't have
any problem with this.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I think that's a nice compromise.
Councilman Mason: I guess I'd like to give then both sides a chance to speak on
that lssue and if the launch stays in, I'd like to see the gate. I want to see
the signage one way or the other. But I think the gate maybe would be somewhat
dependent on the launch issue.
Acting Mayor Wing: So you accept a motion to table?
Councilman Mason: Yes. I'd like to make a motion to table this. How long do
you thlnk it will take your friends from out of town to?
Gary Carlson: The problem with the gate ls lt's so close to a nice aesthetic
creek. The other thing is we legally have granted the city of Chanhassen access
to our 11ttle road because there's a sewer and a collector. The sewer comes
around Lake Minnewashta very close to the shore. Z thtnk within 15 feet of the
12
City Council Meeting - April 12, 1993
shore and then it dumps into a manhole right in the middle of our road access.
Right close to the lake. The City has a permanent easement for that.
Councilman Mason: Okay. Then I guess I'd like my motion to state that I would
iike to tabie this untiI the City Engineer or his designate can go down there
and take a iook at what we couid do to get some kind of gate in there and get up
signage and give people a chance to either say whether it was or wasn't a boat
launch. Maybe a month from now.
Gary Carlson: If in part of the improvement on Minnewashta Parkway, we'd be
glad to take care of the gate but slnce the Clty has the access to that road,
it's mostly to the City's benefit, not to the association, to gate it. It's
mostly to the whole clty and that area of neighbors.
Acting Mayor Wing: Well but the way this is, like this is private property and
we're talklng about cuttlng off snowmobiles golng through there 24 hours, all
wlnter long. We're cutting off cars. We're cuttlng off kids going down there
parking and partying. We're cutting off access for what's prlvate property
which is heretofore been known as somewhat public property. So I think we're
trylng to control it and if we're golng to have a boat launch, we clearly want
to control access to private which means it's got to be cut off where fishermen
are comlng in there. I guess what I'd suggest ls if Council hasn't seen it ls
to go out and look at this and you make up your own mind. If this is an
accessible boat launch area and If in looking at lt, if this has ever been used
as a boat launch. Certainly not in the past year which then denies this
grandfathered, it doesn't matter what the affidavits say. It's irrelevant for
the fact that it has not been used. The fact that it was a boat launch in 1914
doesn't have anythlng to do with the 1981 ordinance which was discussed here.
So we have a motion to table thls for one month. A second. Any discussion.
Councilman Nason moved, Councilwoman Oockendorf seconded to table action on the
Non-Conforming Use Permit for Schmid's Acres Recreational Beachlot for further
review by city staff into the issue of a gate and giving the applicant time to
obtain affidavits in support of the boat launch. All voted in favor and the
motion carried.
Mayor Chmiel: The reason for our delay is that we were over with the City of
Shorewood trying to resolve our 1rem number 8, which is one our agenda this
evening regarding Oeer Rldge. We dldn't get a favorable yes but we didn't get a
no. Some discussion's gotng to take place and between staff are going to
hopefully come up wlth some klnd of resolvement. I think they, the Clty thought
that we were trying to acquiesce some of their property within the city of
Shorewood and after we got through with our discussions, we were saying that we
weren't trying to take land away from them. In fact I even made the comment
that if all came to a11, as far as the taxes were concerned, the Clty of
Chanhassen would be more than happy to turn those back over to the City of
Shorewood. Just to show that the friendliness was there. Hopefully we'll get a
favorable answer. So with that we'll move on to unfinished business item number
4. Informational meetlng, proposed elementary school slte.
13
City Counci]. Meeting -- April 12, 1993
INFORMATIONAL MEETING, PROPOSED ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SITE.
Public Present:
Name Address
Chris Polster
Henry C. Dimler
Shanon Graef
Brenda Welch
Lee and Herb Clasen
Karen & Roy Rockvam
Mary Low Frerich
Kathie Keiiy
Carol Edgeley
Rogue Swenson
Dave Robinson
Betty O'Shaughnessy
David E. Albright
Paul Knapper
Chris & Judy Hartinez Sones
Myrna & FranklJr, Kurvers
Mel Kurvets
Oennis Oirlam
3ay Johnson
3ce Scott
Richard Mi~,go
3ce Betz
Len Takkunen
Dave Clough
Kelly YonOeBur
3erome Carlson
8020 Hidden Court
961 Western Drive
855 Pleasant View Road
101 Choctaw Clrcle
6351 Yosemite Avenue
6340 Yosemite Avenue
651 Broken Arrow
2081 West 65th
7013 Sandy Hook Clrcle
35 Pleasant View Road
25 Pleasant View Road
1000 Hesse Farm Road
7900 First Avenue So., Bloomington
Box 516, Watertown
8756 Flamingo Drive
7220 Kttrvers Point Road
?240 Kurvers Poinl Road
15241Creekside Court, Eden Prairie
7496 Saratoga Drive
7091 Pimlico Lane
7601 Great Plains Blvd
8107 Dakota Lane
1291 Bluff Creek Drive
152]. Lake Susan H1115 Orlve
1341 Lake Susan Hi115 Drive
6950 ~alpln Blvd
Mayor Chmie].' Prior to this I'd like to probably pass out to Council. I'd like
to make a publlc statement. Thls past week there was an artlcle appeared in the
newspaper and it was slgned by Councilman Senn and in regards to this particular
1rem that's on our agenda. I belleve there were better ways to find answers to
questions he posed and he appeared to state that our clty, county and school
dlstrlct should work in isolation providing our own programs and facilities.
I find it difficult to belleve that Councilman Senn carl actually support this
philosophy and it has only been through the cooperation of jolnt powers
agreement ti,at we have been able to keep property taxes at the same level for
the past 4 years withirl the city. No one can reasonably question the cost of
efficiency of checking out a Carver County book at Chanhassen City Hall. We
surely do not need to have both build a library and operate it here. Our anlmal
control services contract wlth our neighboring communities continues to receive
statewlde recognition. Cooperative agreements in the areas of data processing,
assessing, jailing, dispatching, and prosecution has saved hundreds of thousands
of dollars each year. Our contract with the Sheriff's Department has galned
national attention and minimally saves this community $500,000.00 a year. The
prlmary emphasls of Councilman Senn's artlcle was agaln not whether cooperation
wlth other governmental unlts is cost effective, and I belleve Councilman Senn's
real point was a questlon as to whether residents 11vlng in School Distrlct ~276
14
City Council Heeting - April 12, 1993
would be somehow subsidizing residents living in the School District ~112. I
also believe that Councilman Senn has somehow construed that by entering into a
jolnt powers agreement that the Clty and School own lands at Hlghway 5 and
Galpin Boulevard wlll come at the expense of residents living in the School
Dlstrict ~276. This statement to publically acknowledge that this contention is
not correct. The proposed school site is located within one city's tax
increment district. Our negotiations to acquire this slte have been very
diligent to insure the dollars that would be received by the School Oistrict had
our tax increment districts not exlsted would be the dollars that would pay for
the school site. This public statement is intended to assure every resident
1lying in School District ~276 that every dollar associated with the proposed
acquisition are dollars that are or would have come from School Oistrict ~112
had the tax district, increment distrlct not existed. The article appears to
place emphasis on divlding a 42 acre joint use site lnto good lands for the
school and useable lands for the city. Such then producing a higher than normal
purchase price. This type of analysis does not consider the very rudimentary
principles whlch have gulded one negotiation for the past 2 or 3 years.
Specifically the Galpin Boulevar and Highway $ area is our next residential
growth area. There will be a need for ne!ghborhood park including play
equipment, tennis courts, ballfields, parking lots, etc. in this area. One has
to only look at Chanhassen £1ementary School or Mlnnetonka Intermediate School
to see how a city and school district worklng cooperatively can meet
neighborhood needs for recreational services. WhlIe simultaneously providing
the type of environment necessary for schools. No one really knows that the
property behlnd Chanhassen £1ementary School is half owned by the Clty and half
owned by the School District. Few care that the tennls courts 11ghting and
playground equipment were primarily funded through federal dollars wlth the
remaining dollars then being split equally between the School Oistrict and the
Clty. No one really recognizes that it is the Clty that schedules all evening
and weekend uses of Chanhassen Elementary School. They're unaware of the fact
that it was the Clty that bullt the ballfields technically on the Chanhassen
£1ementary School property and that we are the ones who maintain those fields.
What they do care about is that they have an ability for their son or daughter
to play T-ball, participate in Saturday morning basketball games, or to
participate in 3 field soccer tournament at the Mlnnetonka Intermediate School.
Regardless of what School 01strict they reside in, the proposal before the
City Councll this evenlng provides the opportunity for the City to recreate
exactly the same neighborhood park settlng that exists behind the Chanhassen
£1ementary School or Minnetonka Intermediate School for those residents who will
be 1lying in our future growth area. The entire site will be seen as one unit
ballfields, school buildings, gymnasiums, and yes, a beautiful wetland area.
The entire 42 acres will be jointly used with the school children having the
opportunity to enjoy the splendor of the wetland area and the city having the
ability to construct an additional gymnasium adjacent to one of the proposed by
the school district. That addltion could include locker rooms, associated with
adults and any other form of recreational opportunity. The proposal before us
this evening does not blnd us providing those additional recreational
opportunities but with 42 acres we will have learned from our one mistake that
was made at the Chanhassen £1ementary School or the Minnetonka Intermediate
School sites. We did not properly think of what our future needs may be.
Before I open this meetlng for comments from the general public, I would ask
each Council member as to whether they support the public statement that I've
just read. Richard.
15
City Council Meeting - April 12, 1993
Councilman Wing: Welcome back~
Hayor Chmiel: Thank you.
Councilman Wing: I guess I'm kind of surprised this is, I guess not surprised.
I guess I don't consider this a controversy, and if there's a controversy I
think it's a narrow one. This isn't something that got sprung on the city or
the City 6ouncil or it's residents or anybody else. This has been a very long
process that dates well back to the 80's. This involved the Planning
Commission. It involved the Comprehensive Plan. Discussion of land use and
zoning. These things have been argued by people a lot better than me for many,
many years now. What was going to go where and it's a little bit confusing
because it's really an HRA project. Not necessarily a City 6ouncil project.
It's using TIF money, which is a very complex tax situation I guess. The tax
increment financing. And if you don't understand that, it's kind of difficult
to even discuss this tonight but it really has been something driven by the HRA
in the last couple years. It's gotten a lot of publicity and I believe it's
been in the paper consistently. It's been discussed by past Councils and people
that I consider to be very knowledgeable. Representative Tom Workman and County
Commissioner Ursula Dimler are all people that have made this decision well
before this Council sat. I think it's had a lot of public testimony taken over
the years and public input. We look at the wetlands and the protection of the
wetlands and the Bluff Creek protection that we are trying to follow out. It's
in line with that. And what has surprised is that there's been any discussion
of school districts and schools. I live in Minnetonka and discussing this with
neighbors today out in Minnewashta Heights, we're at a loss to see how we're
being hurt by this. So I'm in ¢276 Minnetonka and I'm not threatened by this.
I'm not hurt by this. I disagree with it. I don't see any connection at all.
Chaska collects their money. Hinnetonka collects their's. If there was a TIF
district in Minnetonka, we'd be supporting Minnetonka. There's just absolutely
no, as hard as I try meeting with staff and anybody that I've been able to meet
in the last month on this issue, I can't find a crossover to support some of the
allegations that were in the newspaper or the discussion tonight. So to me it's
a done deal. It's a part of the Highway 5 corridor study. It's part of the
land use discussion. I think it's a good use of our tax increment money. We're
supporting our schools. We're supporting our open spaces and again representing
g276, I'm going to take the opposite view and I see no threat to ~276 taxpayers
whatsoever. I don't think it's an issue. I don't think there's any crossover.
~ think it's black and white. $o whether we give some TIF money back to Chaska
School District, I'll write in a check or we tend to help them out with this
land and control this land to the City's best interest, which I believe this is.
I think this is a good land use. I think it was a done deal years ago and I'm
surprised we're even debating it again tonight.
Hayor Chmiel: Thank you. Colleen.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well, city staff knows and the City Council knows and
a lot of people involved in the comprehensive plan of the city know what has
gone lnto thls planning for this piece of land and for the school, etc. For the
benefit of everyone here tonight, and lt's nice to see a big audience. I'd like
really, as a prerequisite to gettlng lnto any public statements, a prerequisite
of maybe Don Ashworth you can explain quickly, and I know that's very hard to
do, whatever exactly a TIF works. Who the HRA ls. Things 11ke that. And I'm
16
City Council Meeting - April 12, 1993
not asking you to do it now but maybe after everyone is done just so we have a
basis from which to talk about. I don't 11kw to speak personally because I feel
up here I'm a cltlzen of Chanhassen as opposed to a private cltizen. But this
is going in close to where I live, therefore I'm more aware of what's been going
on the last several years golng into it and I'm completely comfortable wlth the
decision that I've made that this is exactly where it belongs and it's good use
of land. I do support the statement Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Michael.
Councilman Mason: I think Councilman Wing said much of what I would have said.
I too live in the Minnetonka School Oistrict and I think that because we're
talklng a tax increment dlstrlct in the Chanhassen/Chaska School Olstrict as
opposed to the Chaska/Chanhassen School Oistrict, I think it's money that is
well spent quite honestly and I'm hoping that by putting this elementary school
here, people will start calling it the Chanhassen/Chaska/~ictoria/East Unlon
School Oistrlct as opposed to the Chaska School 0istrlot because we all know
Chanhassen is now a bigger city than Chaska. However that being said, it's
interesting, as I think most of you know, I teach in Eden Prairle. The
elementary school that I teach at, Eden Prairie School Oistrict owns 3 feet of
land beyond the school building. The City of Eden Prairle owns all of the
parkland around the elementary school. The Clty of Eden Prairie maintains all
of the facilities. We certainly have added facilities and continue to add, the
01strict continues to add playground facilities. However, the City of Eden
Pralrie does malntaln the grounds and the equipment so I'm a little concerned
about this comingllng issue. Be that as it may, this has been in.the hopper for
quite some time. Certainly before my brlef 2 year tenure on Council. I thlnk
we need another elementary school in Chanhassen. I think it's been in the
comprehensive plan for qulte some time to put it there. I think we have an
opportunity to do it and I've stated before I support it. I support, and
certainly, yeah I support what's golng on here.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Mark.
Councilman Senn: Well, I don't have a lot I guess different to say than what
I put in my comment which pretty much mirrors the comments I've made at, oh
let's say the last 2 or 3 Councll meetings that we've considered thls. My
commentary or whatever you may want to call it, I don't think was properly
paraphrased in your statement Oon. You know I'm not really attacking as to
whether it's a good plan or whether it's a good use of the property or not.
Those may very well be the case but I don't thlnk it is good public policy to in
effect pass a school referendum reciting a cost for a school and leave a big
chunk of the cost out. And then to have that chunk of the cost'picked up by a
different taxing district which is not part of the entity putting forth that
referendum. I call that comlngllng and ! think lt's a good word for lt. I
still disagree with it but I don't think it's putting the cost where the cost
belong. I don't think it makes any different what school distrlct it is. The
point here, whether it's the Chaska School Oistrict or the Minnetonka School
Olstrict is inmaterlal, as I sald in my commentary. And the polnts would be the
same either way. If Minnetonka School Oistrict or the Chaska School Oistrict
need to tax thelr taxpayers for services or facilities which they're going to
deliver them, they should do so. Just as the City of Chanhassen does. Again I
don't think it ls good publlc pollcy to have them taxed for part of it and then
17
City Council Meeting ~ April. 12, 1993
increase the cost through using the servic:os of another taxing entity. That's
the baslc crux of what I said in my commentary and I haven't really heard
anything to change my mlnd on that and the reason I ralsed it in the flrst place
ls I've heard a number of comments from a number of people who felt the same way
so Z stand by that.
Hayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. At this tlme, as I mentioned, I'd like to open
the floor for anyone who would 11kc to approach Counc11. If they have concerns
regarding this. Don?
Oon Ashworth: May I make a couple of comments in advance?
Mayor Chmiel: Sure.
Don Ashworth: Potentially responding to some points that Colleen had questioned
and I think it may make this funding issue a little clearer. The City can
create a tax increment district. The primary purpose is generally to see an
l~crease in your overall tax base as an encouragement to new businesses coming
1nrc the community. What the statutue recognizes ls the new taxes that are
belng generated by those new firms can be used to help the firm ltself can be
used to pay costs associated wlth major improvements that the community mlght
look to and they might not ordinarily have other sources. For example, trunk
water lines. Trunk sewer 11nes. The wellhouse out at Lake Susan. They can
also be used for other public goods. For- example we've outllned in our plan
that we would anticipate bullding a new library and uslng tax increment dollars
to fund those. The tax increment dlstrict takes away very, very minorly from a
school district. It's because of the State formula that you never have an
objection From a school district when you create a tax increment district. In
thls particular lnstance we went back to Jeff Priers who is the Business Manager
for School Olstrlct ~112 and the County Auditor's office and we stated, what
would be the 'Lax lmpact to the School Olstrlct because we created thls tax
increment district. In other words, wha~ would be the the dollars that would
have flowed back to the Schoo]. Dlstrlct if the tax increment district dld not
exist. The number that was given to me was $97,500.00. That's the amount of
money on a yearly ba~ls lost by the School Olstrlct ~112 because of our creatlon
of that tax increment district. Over an 8 year' perlod of time that produces
$780,000.00. In negotiations with the partnership, with the School District,
with how many dollars that they would be directly purchasing this site from us
for, took into consideration that stream of increment that was belng lost by the
School District. So if you look at the proposal, it's approximately $900,000.00
and I thlnk $88,000.00 ls the total cost to acqulre this ~2 acre site.
$300,000.00 would be paid dlrectly by the School District and was included in
their referendum. The remaining $688,000.00 would be proposed to be flnanced by
a bond sale by the City and carrled out over actually a ? year- period of tlme.
If you look at that $688,~6.00, and the future cost of lnterest that would be
pald. Interest would be approximately $116,000.00, which is exactly the same
$780,000.00 that would have been lost in revenue, or that wa~ lost in revenue by
the School District. So a~ this issue deals with residents in School District
~276, thls lssue is revenue and expenditure neutral. These are school distrlct
dollars for what could or should have been school district dollars that are
paylng the cost associated wlth thls acquisition. The other polnt, and if I
could, if you could move to the drawlng. This was a rendering that we had
prepared that would potentially show how that property mlght be used for a
18
City Council Meeting - April 12, 1993
school and as a recreational facility. Maybe Todd if you could point to some
items so people can see them. This rendering shows that the massive portion of
the slte ls going to remaln green. That it will lnclude a major recreational
element in that it includes a soccer fleld and two baseball fields, and again it
should be remembered. The school district has not revlewed this so flnal
configuration would be up to them. It would include the school itself as well
as an auditorium area. You can see a larger area that would be to the east of
the school that could very easily accommodate an additional gymnasium. Actually
lt'd be on the other side Todd. And again I see that thls site would be used
very much the same way that we're currently using either Minnetonka 3r. High or
the Chanhassen Elementary.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there anyone wishing to come up and discuss this with
Council?
Joe Betz: Joe Betz, Chanhassen resident and I just want to briefly say that I
think a lot of the key points have already been represented very well. I think
the Mayor's points bring out a lot of issues that are appropriate. I'm not
going to spend a lot of time going over those things. I think I was concerned
when I read the letter in the paper and my main concern came from the fact that
I really believe that it's appropriate for cities to work with the school
district. And I have been pleased to see that happening in my involvements wlth
the school district and with the city over the years. And I thlnk that I would
be very disappointed to see that that kind of commitment, that kind of working
together didn't continue to take place. And I think this is just an excellent
example of it taklng place in the way it should and I'd 11ke to just reinforce
everything that you have done in the past. Ask you to continue doing those
positlve thlngs and allow thls use of thls property to continue. I'd also 11ke
to use this opportunity to thank the residents of Chanhassen for supporting the
referendum in the past week. So thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Joe. Is there anyone else?
Chris Sones: Chris Sones, 8756 Flamingo Orive. You stole a lot of my fire here
Mayor. I had a lot of things to say and I think you said them very eloquently.
At the same tlme Mark, I appreciate divergent viewpoints. I appreciate people
kind of being watchdogs. I don't agree with you but I appreciate that. I made
some calls around to try and get some information to dlscover exactly what
the Mayor said was very true. It turns out that the city has the elementary
school busy. According to the recreation department, it's busy 6-or 7 nights a
week. And that's city use. In addition to that, the City of Chanhassen also
uses other Oistrlct ~112 buildings that are outside of our city 11mlts. I
understand that we have youth utilizing the Middle School on certain nights. So
0istrlct ~112 is our dlstrict and if it goes outslde of our city limlts, it
does. I'll be brief. Our city limits actually lnclude Mark, three school
districts. We have a bit of Eden Prairle that have taken a chunk of Chanhassen
as well. I called Eden Prairie and it turns out they've got no buildings, no
school buildings withln our city 11mlts. I called Mlnnetonka and I'm hearing
something that sounds different. Now Minnetonka tells me they've got no school
buildings in the city of Chanhassen. But from what I'm understanding now, you
guys are saying that the Middle School is? Somebody'd better call Minnetonka
and let them know. But I appreciate havlng one elementary school in District.
~112 in our clty and I'm for having a second one. Thank you.
19
City Council Meetin9 - April 12~ 1993
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Yes.
Myrna Kurvers." Hyrna Kurvers. Minnetonka School resident. City of Chanhassen.
And number one Z am u~:ry pleased th.~t Chaska passed their school bond issue. Z
think they needed it and that's a wonderful idea for them to have it and as a
Minnetonka resident having .just passed our bond issue, we realize the importance
of schools. However ~ do have quite a few discrepancies with your statement
and Z'd like to start wlth you Mr. Mayor. Your flrst statement was how
wonderful it was that the taxes were kept low. ~ell that's true. The taxes in
the Chaska School District of Chanhassen were kept low and Z don't know of one
resident in the Minnetonka School D~strict, not counting our mil. rate, who's
taxes when down. Our taxes vent up considerably. ~nd that's just one point.
Then skipping down to.
Mayor Chmielr Could I just address that real quickly?
Myrna Kurve'rs: No. I'd like to finish pi. ease. It's my turn. Then to Mrs.
Dockendorf. Z realize ~here you llve too and Z can understand why you'd
,tppreciate the school in your backyard. That's very comfortable. But for
Mr. Mason who teaches in Eden Prairie, ~t's wonderful to have a school district
completely within your city llmits so why wouldn't the city support it. So ue
have ti]is controversy here and Z think Eden Prairie should do that. Nov as a
resident of Chanhassen, which ~'m very proud to be a resident and probably
resident much longer than all of you here except for a few of us. But most of
you .I've been a resident, and very proud to be a part of Chanhassen. ~ really
fervently know that with that tax increment district in the Chaska schools, that
the services, regardless of what Mr. ~shworth said. The services to the city,
street, light, sever, F~re, whatever, has to be picked up by the Minnetonka
people. 6nd so when you say that it is not costing us, it has to cost us
considerabl?. ~nd Z would love, Z would 1ove to be able to use those facilities
at Ch~ska Schools but ~ know as a parent that it uae imposslble for the school
children, when my children went to school in Minnetonka, to use the facilities
in Chaska. ~nd ~ ha,)e not heard you mention Tom Berg, our ~dministrator of
School Services back and forth and how Minnetonka was going to be able to use
these facilities too. Z think the parents would love to be able to drive a lot
c]osei~ to use these facilities. But the way Z see them being used right
they are all used very nicely by Chaska school people. 6nd ~ think that's fine
if (he Chaska people are payillg for them. Thank you very much.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Anyone else?
Dick MJ. ngo: Dick Mingo, 7601 Great Plains Boulevard. 37 year resident of
dountowr, Chanhasse~. I'm a retired school teacher having taught 30 years. This
situation Js a little bit strange. I don't think I've come across anything
quite like this. My first question is, would the school bond issue have
excluded this grade school had Chanhassen not agreed to cover the extra costs of
that property?
Don Ashworth= The decision made early on was the recognition, the School
District was going to be analyzing wh~t their school needs would be. It was
highly likely that the cities could have gotten into a bidding war for where
those school facilities would be loc&ted and there was a potential that if
Chaska potentially would offer the land for nothing, that in exchange for...
20
City Council Meeting - April 12, 1993
both the elementary and the high school in Chaska, that that may be a part of
the School Board's decision. We dldn't want that to happen. So what we looked
at was the common prlce for land between the two clties and we came back with a
flnding that at $15,000.00 per acre, you could purchase lands in Chaska. We
offered that to the school distrlct that we would guarantee that the cost in
Chanhassen would not exceed $15,000.00 per acre and attempted to let them make
that declslon based on what schools they needed and where they should be located
and the monetary portion should not be a part of that consideration.
Dlck Mingo: That sounds rather strange to me. Number one, Z doubt that they
would have built a grade school in Carver or East Union or even in Chaska itself
with the major population center being rlght here in Chanhassbn and ls going to
continue to be so and continue to grow. Regardless of that, I still cannot
flgure out why the School District, I agree. We should share sites. The City
and schools. I think that's great. I've been in a lot of school districts
untll my last 19 years in Bloomington, we've shared sltes. However, Z will say
that the school district now charges the city to rent the'gyms, etc. at night
for basketball on some of these thlngs. But anyhow, Z cannot believe that that
school board would have refused to go ahead with that site. Let them pay for
thelr half at $23,000.00 an acre. We'll pay it for the other half at $23,000.00
an acre and I can't believe the little maneuvering that went on there to bring
this about. I'm all in favor of the school bond passlng. I think that's just
super but the situation that we're having I think is very, very strange myself.
I really feel, if we're going to start doing what we're doing, then let's get
the City of Victoria, City of Carver, East Union and Chaska to chip in. Let
them do the same thing for any property where a school goes up in thelr area.
Thank you.
Jay Johnson: Good evening. My name's Jay Johnson. I live at 7496 Saratoga.
Just a few blocks from here. I'm on the Board of Oirectors of the Chan?Chaska
Soccer Club and the Chanhassen Athletlc Association. Two of the three biggest
youth sports organizations in the city OflChanhassen. Neither of these
organizations restrlct thelr membership to any given school district, or even
any city. We have kids in the soccer club from 276. We have kids going to
Minnehaha Academy and 11vlng in Minneapolis. We have kids from Waconla. We do
not discriminate at all and we utilize District ~276 facilities, ~112 facilities
and city of Chanhassen facilities and in the future, city of Chaska facilities
as they build soccer fields down there. Also the baseball association, the
Chan?Chaska or the Chanhassen Athletlc Association has a lot of children from
District ~276. And they're welcome to come down and play on the fields here in
Chanhassen because they're Chanhassen residents and we utllize primarily the
grade school here for that and in the future we'll probably utilize the new
grade school. We utillze anything that we can get on hands on. If you were
here last summer, you noticed down here in these vacant lots, we'd set up T-ball
fields when it wasn't ralnlng and there was less 6 1riches of water on the ground
where the kids could play. That's the kind of thing we're up against. As a
sports organization we need ballfields. The only thlng I see wlth thls ls
there's not enough recreational area around that grade school. I told Don that
earlier today. But we're looking at trying to flgure out how we can get $
ballfields into where we've got 3 now, right here at this elementary school just
to support the number of klds we have playing here now. As-the clty grows,
that's going to be the growth area. We really need more park and rec space.
And if we can get park and rec space, and co-utilize it with the gymnasium or
21
City Council Meeting -- hpril 12, 1993
with the gym instruction, because durlng the day the school runs thelr phys ed
is r-un there during the day. It's a great co-use of facilities. So the school
district will be using Chanhassen properties during the day. It w111 be great.
As fat' as co, I think there's a lot of midconceptions on TIF. It's a very hard
concept. It took me probably 3 months and 14 meetings with Don Ashworth before
I understood TIF but TIF money is not taxes coming from the citizens of
Chanhassen. It's comlng from the businesses of Chanhassen. The taxes only come
out of the taxing districts that the businesses are ln. And those taxes pay for
the streets and whatever. It's paid for our new well. It's pald for a park and
this is not money, as I saw when I uas on this Councll a number of years ago,
that TIF ls not taklng money away from the cltlzens of Chanhassen. It ls
providing extra money. Thls buslness would not be here if it wasn't for that.
Now I thlnk several years ago we worked with the School Distrlct and klnd of
said, look. We realize these businesses are here. This money is somewhat
hidden from you by the TIF district but because of the State formula, you more
or less make that up. We were saying, let's help you out [oo with this TIF
money. We've got enough money within the TIF district to help them out and it
at the same time helps the citizens and the kids. I kind of wandered around
here but I think that this is a great thing. The most effective use of a tax
dollar is if seYef-al people can use that same dollar and if we went out and we
bought land by ourselves and we went out to only utilize that in the evenings
for sports and recreation, which is slmilar to what we're golng to do in other
places, it won't be as well utillzed for the same buck as this land is golng to
be utilized. For the Sanle buck, we're going to utilize it all day and we're
golng to utlllze it all nlght and we'll utillze it on the ueekends. To me thls
is a great use of tax money. Especially somebody else's tax monAy and not mine.
Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Yes sir.
Henry Dimler: I uas born right here in the village and I bet there isn't
anybody here that can say that. 98 years ago. But I do have a problem with
this. ~ live in Hlnnetonka and I thlnk we're opening the door to something.
This could happen al. 1 o,~er tile state if we do these kind of things. That's
all I've got to say.
Mayor- Chmiel: Thank you. Anyone else?
Roger Anderson: I'm Roger Anderson. I live on Sandy Hook Road. First of
all I'd like to echo uhat the lady said earlier about, and Mayor I'd like to
glve you a chance to respond also to the statement about keeplng taxes flat. I'm
sure that's correct but Z for one had a 60~ tax increase last year so I'm pretty
sensitive to lt. I'd 11ke to hear some more discussion if possible about, the
thlng that concerns me the most is what I'm hearing is that we're paylng a
higher prlce for the property and selling it at a lower price. Or $22.00 or
selling i~ for $15.00. It sounds to me 11ke we're subsidizing another, or
Chaska in dolng thls and that doesn't seem rlght to me for a couple reasons.
Number one, I suspect we're contributing a great deal through our oun taxes in
Chanhassen, whlch are probably at a hlgher rate. And also Z have a concern
being a Minnetonka School District resident in terms of how this lmpacts me in
terms, of why aln Z subsidizing a property purchase for another school district.
22
City Council Meeting - April
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Maybe you'd like to just address that part of it Don.
And maybe part as well on Mrs. Kurvers.
Don Ashworth: The details as to purchase amount resale, Z can repeat those
points. I don't know that they're really germane. At issue is that the dollars
that were lost by the school dlstrlct because we created a tax increment
district and therefore we're capturing them instead of the school district, are
belng used 100~ to purchase thls site. No more. No less. And again I don't
know that the details of purchasing at $23,000.00 or resale at $15,000.00 is
germane to the bottom 11ne issue and that ls that 100~ of the dollars associated
with this acquisition could have, or are dollars that would have gone to the
school dlstrlct had ue not created this district. The second part on taxes, dld
you want me to respond or did you want to?
Hayor Chmlel: Yes. Go ahead.
Don Ashworth: The City's tax rate has stayed at the same level for the past 4
years. Ms. Kurvers was correct, the biggest tax decreases occurred for those
residents llving in School Dlstrlct ~112. The biggest increases occurred in for
residents living in School 01strict ~276 and again the city portion of that, the
clty's tax rate stayed identical wlth the prevlous year. The major lncrease
that those owners saw was associated with taxes associated with the school
district. I should put in one caveat and that is, if your property was
re-evalued, you could have seen the dollar amount associated with the city
portion lncrease but agaln, the tax rate has stayed the same for the past 4
years.
Councilman Wing: Don I just, some of the accusations tonight repeatedly have
said that those of us that live in ~276 are taking it in the teeth and that
is subsidizing Chaska School District. And by subsidizing the Chaska School
District, our roads are going to go unpaved and we're going to have to pay more
for city services and I think you stated that for District ~27& taxpayers, this
is dollar neutral. And I believe from my research that that is a true
statement. Would you confirm that? That thls is not. impacting services, taxes
or costs to ~276 members. I mean these issues are so incredibly independent, I
don't know where these accusations are even coming from. And my statement ls
true, is that correct?
Don Ashworth: Yes.
Councilman Wing: Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you.
Dave Clough: Good evening Council. I'm Dave Clough. I'm here really wearing
two hats this evening. First of all I am a resident of Chanhassen and with that
hat on I would 11ke to say that I would not only encourage but expect my
community to be aggressive in pursuing schools for our community. Whether that
be school sltes that are ~112, ~27~, or Eden Prairie schools in the future. As
a resldent I think schools in our community enhance the quality of life in the
community. I thlnk they have an lmpact on the property values of homes in the
community. And furthermore, we generally don't look at schools in terms of
economic lmpact but we do tend to look at buslness that way comlng into our
23
City Council Meetln9 -- April 12, 1993
community. Bringing schools into our community certair~ly brings a r~umber of
quality jobs alor, g with it. I'm going to put my other hat on. Host of you are
aware, I'm the Superintendent of Schools in District ~112 and in that role the
first thing I want to do is thank the city of Chanhassen, along with the other
cities in our school district, for the tremendous cooperation that we have
received in this whole effort in dealing with the tremendous over crowding that
we are experiencing in District $112. This school district is really incredible
in terms of the type of community, joint community efforts that are going on.
And whether we're talking about community values or whether we're talking about
the site acquisitions for schools, joint tax planning. Many of you are aware
the school district, the cities and the school district in Carver County have
worked together- to try to develop a 10 year tax projection for Eastern Carver
County. I thir, k that the residents of our school district and community can
only benefit by this ~.ype of joint effort. I also want to say, and I'm a little
u~comfortable on that some of this comes off as kind of pitting District ~2
against Hinnetonka Schools against Eden Prairie Schools. I want you to know
that the school districts, just if we talk about those 3 school districts in
particular. I think there is good cooperation that goes on all the time between
those 3 districts. I can tell you that in essence, the Eden Prairie, District
~12, Hinnetonka school, there are practically no boundary lines between those
districts. We have hundreds of kids every year going back and forth between
those 3 school districts under open enrollment, but most of them under just
joint arrangements between the districts. $o I want to stress the whole issue
of cooperation. ~Jhether it's with the cities or even between the school
districts. Let me just make a few points that I think are important. First of
all I think the district is excited about this proposed elementary school site.
We think it's a wonderful site for an elementary school. As we evaluated sites
in the district and ue did start with over 30 in the first run at both
elementary and high school sites. This was our highest rated site for a new
elementary school or, a number of criteria. I can also tell you that kind of
back on the cooperation angle. I think the School Board was particularly
excited about the two sites that were chosen for the high school and the
elementary school in that both sites are the ones identified by the cities of
Chanhassen and Chaska in their comprehensive plans as proposed future school
sites. Both of them. I think when, I think maybe Don mentioned the concern we
had when this whole process began about site selection. We knew what a
potentially volatile issue that could be in this whole effort and so anyway, the
Board is excited that we have a proposed elementary site that is the one that is
.in the Chart Comp Plan as a proposed school site. And that the proposed high
school site happens to be in the Chaska Comp Plan as a proposed school site.
This is something I really don't like to talk about but I think you need to
know. What are the implications if, you know the kind of the pre-referendum
agreement that we thought we had on this, wo,~ld not pan out. I see two
possibilities. First of all you need to realize that the $46.5 million
referendum that was approved, that is a fixed amount. The district has that
amount of money to work with and any additional dollars beyond what were
projected for school sites have to come out of those projects somewhere. Now
let's say that we had to, it cost the district an additional million dollars for
an elementary site. We have no other way, other than if we were going to bank
it out of our regular capital outlay funds, which is really pretty ridiculous if
you look at that. The only way that we could acquire any additional monies is
to take those out of the projects. It would probably mean some of the repair
and betterment projects that we promised the taxpayers would not get done. Or
City Council Meeting - April 12, 1993
it may mean that 12,000 square feet get cut out of a proposed elementary school
or high school. That would be one implication. The one that I think would be
most likely, very frankly is that the School Board would have to go back and
look at the back-up site for an elementary school. And I will tell you that the
back-up elementary school site is not in the city of Chanhassen. If the Board
had to go to that. That is not the Board's desire. As I say, we are excited
about this site. It ls definitely our most favorable elementary site. But the
8oard would have to look at one of those two routes if this thing were not to
pan out. I'd 11ke to end back on a posltive note of again thanking the clty,
the City Council, the clty staff. I'm not sure if the Council people even begin
to recognize the hours and hours that your staff people, Paul and Don and Todd
and others have, both Todds, have put into this whole effort. Not just site
selection but servlng on the origlnal committee to look at the planning for this
referendum. Working with planners from other citles from Carver County, with
the district's demographer, to really try to get a handle on thls whole thing
and to make some decisions that are in the publlc interest. So my thank you to
the Council and to the staff for all of the cooperation that you have shown in
this entire effort. Thank you.
Chris Polster: My name's Chris Polster and I live at 8020 Hidden Court and I'm
here to express my support for the creative plan that our past Council and to a
certaln extent at least thls Councll has proposed in gettlng recreational
facilities for our children. I'm active with the CAA and we have more than 700
klds rlght now as part of the CAA. Most of them going to Chaska to play, or
going to Shorewood to play. That includes 276 residents or 112 residents. But
even more important than that ls thls ldea of comlngling. Thls ldea of
comingling goes beyond flnance. If it wasn't for me, a young person, seniors
wouldn't have a senior center if we told them they had to pay for it themselves.
Ballplayers wouldn't have ballfields if we told them they had to pay for. it
themselves. The ldea that we would have a City Council, or individuals create
new barriers to cooperation to me ls appalling. It's bad enough that black and
whlte can't get along. It's bad enough that Protestants and Catholics can't get
along. Now we have 276 and 112 that can't get along. For what? For how much
money are we talklng about here? I think none but Z'd be interested in knowlng
how much money are we talking about in the minds of the people that do think
money ls more important than the cooperative and peaceful coexistence of a
community. We are not two school districts in this-community. We are
Chanhassen. That's all I'd like to say.
Jerome Carlson: Good evening. Jerome Carlson, 6950 Galpin. Just on the
border. Half of my drlveway ls in 276 and the other half ls in 112 and that's
the truth. I don't know which half pays which but I'm in both. There's been a
tremendous misconception. I came ina little late, kind of in the middle of it
and I have the feeling that residents of 276 believe that somehow some of their
residential tax dollars have been used to buy an elementary school slte in
District ~112.
Audience: Right.
Jerome Carlson: You believe that?
Audience: Right.
25
C. Jty CoLtnci]. Heet.~ng -. ~prJl 12, 19.93
Jerome Carlson: That j. sr~'t the way it is.
Audience: Do you believe i~, tax increment?
Jerome Carlson: I.et me explain, well it's here whether you believe it or not.
Mayor Ch,~iel; If ue could let the speaker.
.3erome Carlson: Th(; t-ealJ, t>' is, as a person who has a hat split literally down
the middle, and I mean that in tet'l,S of my la~d. The I, oney that was used to
help purchase that property shouldn't please [ts more as residents because the
net effect is thaf. if. was money that prior to that decision was not going to be
used in any way that uou.ld help defray residential taxes. That money came from
bLts.l.r~esses. Businesses. ~nd prior to the communities and the city and the
school and the county government working together, that money would have only
been used t~ try to enhance; and bring in more b~siness. But instead, these wise
communities of people at the Carver County level, at the city level and at the
school district level, got their heads together and said, let's pro,~ide an
opportunity to charge our 'residents less in terms of taxing for this new school
bond issue. The bond issue.. COL,.ld have easily come out at .$47.5 million. And it
t4oLtld have been passed. But because of the tax inclement money that came only
from bus.[ness t~.tx~..'s, not residential taxes, and it has rarely, if ever been
used, ir, a manner which benefits a broad spectrum of residents in a public
project ].ike that. It liter;.,lly has had the effect of impacting all parties
pos.itively. There is a terrible misconception Mr. Senn, and to suggest that the
money could prob,.~bly have be%:n used to lower f-esident's taxes is precisely what
occurred. It just. wasn't understood. That is exactly what has happened and I
think it's impo;-tant ti,at we do u~derst.~nd theft. ~nd I applaud that and I think
th,~tt's the message that really ought to come through in the next editorial.
Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel.' Thank you. Is there anyone else?
Joe Scott: Joe Scott, 7091. Pimlico Lane. I just wan(ed to address not so much
the issue here bur. how the letter to the edltor and this ls directed
specifJ, cally ~tt Coui~cilman Senn. As we all know, multiple school districts,
Councilpeople are elected at large. This is not a ward system. Consequently,
any time afl issu~, like th~s i:s i, is'represented for the purpose of, and I think we
have Minnetonka School Oistrlct people slttlng over here perhaps and Dlstrict
.~112 people sir. ting over hero, with certain exceptions. I believe that's an
inappropri,~te means of utilizing something 11ke thls. Plus the fact, a letter
to the edit. or is somethJ, ng that does not need any rebuttal. Tl~is should have
been something that should have been utlllzed as an opinlon where Councilman
Senl~'s position could be on the .Shane Alexande;' side of the page and then Jack
KJ. rpatrlck or, the other so, iL's ]~lce to hear some discussion. I thlnk the
posltive tl~ing tl~t came out of this is that this is not a waste of any of our
times. ~ think we're lear~]lng some thlngs. Mr. Carlson brought up some good
points about funding and so Forth so this is where it's at and we ~11 know how
tho Council's going to vote so I'm not going to call the question. Thank you
very much.
Mayor Chmiel: Thar, k you. Is there anyone else?
26
City Council Heeting - April 12, 1993
Frank Kurvers: My name is Frank Kurvers and I would like to know just one
question. Now fiscal disparity is a 60/40 split, right? Okay. I called the
State of Minnesota and I talked to an individual by the name of Loen Hoe. He
said that out of Chanhassen'the fiscal disparities pays Minnetonka School System
$360,000.00. I said how much do they pay Chaska? He said a million
$600,000.00. So I'd like to have someone explain if this is not costing
anything in the Mlnnetonka residents, I'd 11ke to have that explained to me. The
numbers.
Don Ashworth: Fiscal disparities is calculated on the commercial/industrial
property that you have in the community. If there's two school districts, they
look at the amount of commercial/industrial property in each of the two
districts. In the case of Minnetonka, as it exists for the city of Chanhassen,
there are very few commercial/industrial properties. It's not surprising to me
at all that the amount paid to the Minnetonka District from the City of
Chanhassen ls golng to be small because there really are few, if any businesses
in that area. I'm sure that that amount recognizes the businesses that we have
on the very eastern portion of the city. Press, CPT, etc. As it deals with
fiscal disparities from, or within School Oistrict ~112, Chanhassen is a major
winner because they do not see the industrial buildings that we have in the Chun
Business Park because they're within a tax increment district. When that tax
increment dlstrlct ceases, we wlll move from a winner under fiscal disparities,
the mlllion you referred to, to a major loser. We'll lose about $2 1/2 milllon.
Frank Kurvers: That's true but the money you're capturing in the Chaska School
District is not redistributed to the Minnetonka. A certain percentage which the
city taxes would be lower. When you capture this money in a TIF district, you
keep it. It never gets in. Nou I also found out that the money is handled by
the Anoka County Auditor, uhich is auful strange that TIF, the fiscal disparity
money is handled by the Anoka County Auditor. Now I mean it's really strange
that Anoka County is handling the 7 county metropolitan money. I never knew
that either until I started checking. But as far as the numbers are concerned,
if you had all these numbers on the table, and all the numbers as far as the
money that Minnetonka gets and all the money that gets to Chaska, I would say
there's a discrepancy. The sharing is not equal. The sharing is not equal.
Oon Ashworth: I would invite Mr. Kurvers and anyone else who is interested to
meet wlth Mark Lundgren and Laurie Engels at the Carver County Courthouse. The
lady that actually does the calculation. As the fiscal disparities relates to
the city of Chanhassen, the amounts are equal. There is no lncrease in cost
because you live in Minnetonka District versus in 112. As it deals with the
calculation of the two school's taxes and how much you pay, then the fiscal
disparities does come into play. Again, I offer to set up that meeting. I
offer to let them go through those polnts with you and you're correct, Anoka
County does do the distribution. When the law was initially established, it was
golng to move from county to county and after the first couple years, the other
county auditors said, Anoke County. You understand it. We don't. You keep
doing it. They agreed to do lt. They've been dolng it ever since.
Frank Kurvers: Well the individual, Loen Hoe that's in charge of the fiscal
disparities says he doesn't understand lt. I talked to hlm for 2-3 tlmes that
he called me back and I asked him another question and he couldn't answer it.
And he's the guy that's supposed to be in charge of it. Here we're talking
City Counci). Meeting - Apl-ii. 12, 1992
about millions of dollars that nobody really understands. I think it's about
time people sit down and say, where's this dollar coming from and where is it
going to go.
Mayor Chmiel,' Thank you.
Councilman Wing: Don, I don't beleive that nobody understands. I believe you
L~nderstand. Is that a true statement? If we had time to sit down and go over
thi~.
Don 4shuorth: I think I understand it fairly well but again, I think that
Mr. Kurvers and those I,~ho mlght support that position would better understand it
if they heard it dlrectly from the person who does the calculations, uhlch ls
Mark Lundgren wlth the Carver County Auditor's Office and Laurie Engels, the one
who actualJy does the spreading.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. And that's an open invitation for anyone who would
like to have thls done so they can try to understand what it is. Yes slr.
ten Takkunen: Hi. I'm ten Takkunen. I live at 1291. Bluff Creek Drive and have
:-_'.1rice 1976. I just want to say that one of the thlngs that differentiates
average communities from great communities is the quality of the schools and so
even as a resldent of the Distrlct 112 portlon of Chanhassen, if this same
opportunity were to present itself for the Minnetonka portion of the city, I
would support lt.
Hayor Chmiel: Thank you. Is there anyone else? If seeing none, I'll bring it
back to Council. I'd like a motlon from Councll regarding the approval of the
proposed purchase agreement.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I move that we approve the property acquisition for
the school/recreation facility at Galpin and TH 5~
Councilman Hason: Second.
Mayor Chmiel: It's been moved and seconded. Any other discussion?
Councilman Mason: If I could. I hopefully promise this is the last time I say
it. I teach in Eden Prairie. I ].lye in the Minnetonka School District and my
child goes to Excelsior Elementary and I think she's getting more than a flne
education. I represent the clty of Chanhassen. The fact that Hinnetonka School
District, excuse me. District 276 and District 112 happen to both be in the
city of Chanhassen. I'm up here to do what I thlnk is best for the whole city
of Chanhassen and I qulte honestly am getting increasingly disturbed and
perturbed about how I perceive some people feeling there's this fight going on
between residents of 276 and residents of 112. Again, I live in 276. I'm not
here to do what I thlnk is best for the city of Chanhas.~3en and I personally
thlnk, regardless of what dlstrict anyone 1lyes ln, thls is in the best lnterest
of the city of Chanhassen.
Councilman Wing-' Thank you Hike.
Mayor Chmiel.' Thank you. With that I'll call the question.
28
City Council Meeting - April 12, 1993
Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Hason seconded to approve the purchase
agreement for the school/recreation property acquisition at the corner of Galpin
Boulevard and Highway 5 as presented. All voted in favor, except Councilman
Senn who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 4 to 1.
Mayor Chmiel: As concerns were mentioned previously. Thank you. 4 to 1.
CONCEPT PLAN TO REZONE PROPERTY FROH BG, GENERAL BUSINESS TO PUD, PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT FOR EXPANSION OF AN OFFICE AND HANt~ACTURING FACILITY ~OCATED AT
7900 MONTEREY DRIVE, WEST ONE EXPANSION, DOUG HANSEN, WEST ONE PROPERTIES.
Paul Krauss: What you're being asked to review tonight is a concept plan
approval to rezone a property that's zoned BG and contains Chaska Machine Tool
Company and an adjacent parcel to PUD. I'll just summarize the kind of polnts
that we were hitting on. We were originally approached by the owner who wished
to expand hls property. It's a non-conforming a use. It ls an industrial use
in the heart of the city's central business district. However, when we looked
at it in detail and wlth what has occurred around lt, we realized that whlle
it's in the heart of the CBO, you can't get to tt or see it from anyplace else
in the CBD and we looked at what klnd of reasonable use can thls be put to.
There's an adjoining lot that's owned by our city HRA. Basically the existing
faclllty sits rlght over here. The lot that's owned by the HRA is down there in
the valley below Highway 5. We went through and tried to figure out if any
commercial, retail/commercial or offlce uses could legitimately go there.
Retail~commercial, it's almost as bad a spot for retail/commercial as the back
part of the Olnner Theatre ls. I mean you just can't, and that even has better
visibility. You just can't see it. It doesn't have the kind of traffic that
would lnduce people to come to their business. You've got the whole back of
Market Square. I know the loading dock's facing you. You have the entrance to
the loading docks for Target. Posslbly offlce might go there if there was a
market for office but even then what we're finding these days is most office
users want visibility and you know that they want signs and just about
everything that a retail use wants. What we have is an existing business that
ls doing well and a deslre, as we usually have, to keep them in the community
and to try to work with them. What that led us to is the conclusion that maybe
we ought do something a little different here, 1.e. look to gettlng some
property back on the tax rolls by legitimizing what's now a non-conforming use.
It dldn't seem to detract any from the central buslness district. In fact lt's
home to people who work and presumably do their business downtown. The HRA
owned property ls not being used for anything at the present time and it's,
we're not sure what we would ever use it for constructively down there. We were
concerned that all the trees that we worked very hard at saving for Target not
be damaged by this and we concluded that none of the trees would be damaged. SO
we came up with the idea of coming up and rezoning this thing to PUB and
actually doing a guide plan amendment that basically legitimizes the fact that
Chaska Took ls there. Would allow them to expand but through the use of the PUD
place some pretty significant guidelines on what kinds of uses can be allowed
and how development should look and operate down there. We clearly didn't want
to zone it IOp where then anything goes and you can have a turkey processing
plant or whatever else down there. It's just not appropriate but as a light
office industrial use compatible with what it ls now, hopefully incorporating
some aesthetic and landscaping improvements, we really couldn't see what the
harm was. And because of that we proposed that this rezoning and guide plan
29
City Council Mss. ting - April 12, 1993
amendment be considered. We took it before the Planning Commission and they
agreed that it had some merit. So tonight we're bringing forward that request
to you. It is a concept. It's non-binding. Basically we're asking you to look
favorably upon that and if you do, they'd come back in with t. heir formal
presentation and design package. There is a list of proposed conditions that
has been attached and the Planning Coml0ission added a couple. That basically
placed some limits on what the property can be used for and some guidance as to
what we'd be looking fei' when they brought back in a site plan. With that we
are proposing that it be approved.
Mayor Chmiel: Th~nk you Paul. Is there someone here from the Chaska Machine
Tool Incorporated that would like to address us?
Doug Hansen: Hy name is Doug Hansen. Z was a partner with Tom Klingelhutz when
we bullt Lhis building and just to gJve you a 11ttle background. Chaska Machlne
is a solid company and they had about 1/3 of the building when we built it and
as they grew they took over the space of DayCo Concrete, Frontier Meats, an auto
body shop, Lake.~ide Equipment and last was VernCo Maintenance that moved to
Chaska. Chaska Machine lsa solld company and they've had steady growth and
they really want to stay here. He approached me about it after talking to the
city that there was a possibility that thls could be, they could stay rlght here
and expand right here. I've got a building and remodeling company with my two
sons called Hansen Home Tech. We, together with Stelnkraus Plumbing, would
share about 2,000 feet in the southeast end of the b~milding. A small bay. And
like T. say, this building's been there about 15 yea'rs and we've had a good
record ulth tho cLty and they'd like to stay here and they'd like to expand
here. If you have any questions.
Mayor Chmiel: OD you I~ave any concerns regarding the recommendation from the
Planning Commission? As well as the conditions that were established on that?
Doug H~nsen: From a cost standpoint I would like to maintain the exact
appearance of the addition. What's exposed, the new part ls lust from here. The
parking lot is rlght in here now. So the new part is just this end here and I
would 11ks to...a couple hundred feet long... I would 11ks to maintaln ~hat
single appearance. Decorative block, two rows of decorative block tied in with
the windows...
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Council. Richard.
Councilman Wing: I don't have anything.
Mayor Chmiel: With all the respective conditions that are contained within.
Councilman Wing: Thls is just conceptual so I've got a couple comments on
preliminary and final. I just want to make sure that trees are there. But lt's
not the time so, I'd like to see it properly landscaped and it will be. That's
a11. I think PUO's the way to go. I'm ready to approve this.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Colleen.
Council. woman Dockendorf: On condition number 8, where transit planning shall be
incorporated into tl~is development. I have a feeling Diane put that in. Does
3O
City Council Meeting - April 1~, 19~3
that mean there will be a bus turn around?
Paul Krauss: Well, I'm really not certain.
Mayor Chmiel: In the front door and out the back.
Paul Krauss: I mean clearly this isn't going to be large enough to have any
kind of facility. However, what we've been asklng business people to do, in
fact Jerome Carlson who was here earller tonight has been very cooperative.
We've asked them to allow us to work with.their employees to survey them and
develop packages so that Southwest Metro can offer to tailor transit service.
The Dial-a-Ride servlce or van pooling, or just make them aware of the over the
road long distance services they offer. That's probably going to be sufficient.
I'm not really sure where Diane was leading that one but that's my guess.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Okay. Other than that, you know I drlve past that
area 2 or 3 tlmes a day and I never noticed it untll I got this packet. And
went oh, there's a building there? So I don't have any problem with the use. I
think lt's a good use for that space.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Michael.
Councilman Mason: Briefly, I shared the Manager's comments about expansion of
industrial use I thlnk is a concern but on the other hand, our fine City Planner
also says that this wlll be alleviated through the PUD and I agree. It looks
good to me and Chaska Machine I think has done a fine job...
Councilman Wing: But who does the hiring and firing7 Since you said the
Manager's comments, my ears perk up a little.
Councilman Mason: I certainly go along with the concept plan.
Mayor Chmiel: Chicken or the egg?
Councilman Mason: Yeah, that too.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Mark.
Councilman Senn: The existing operation, and I guess over the years even a
number of the buildlng tenants down there but Paul, when you talk about PUD's,
how do you exactly plan on controlling the use under the PUD?
Paul Krauss: What we would propose to do Mark is the PUD contract, agreement
that would be flled with the property would set very explicit guidelines as to
what types of uses could be there and how they'd have to limit their operations.
For example, 11mits on outdoor storage and truck boxes and heavy equipment that
you can hear outside the building and those kinds of things. We can place those
11mlts on lt. The goal ls to 11mlt any adverse lmpacts that might accrue and
really not limit them as to who's going to be occupying the building, because
that can change over time.
Councilman Senn: What's the underlying zoning that remalns in place?
31
City Coun¢;Jl Meet. ing -- Apt'.i]. 12, 1993
Paul Krauss: It doesn't under our ordinance. Once you zone J.t to PUD, that is
tile ~'oning. There's nothing underlying it. You basically void out what's under
it.
Councilman Wing: This would be a great place Paul for automotive uses. Right
behind Target's loading dock and the hardware store's loading dock.
Mayor Chmiel: For future thought. Any other questions Mark? Okay. I guess I
don't hart..,, any rea]. concerns. I think that as Paul has indicated in here that
tile concerns can be alleviated through the PUD contract and in that particular
case I would request a motion for the approval of the concept plan with the
conditiorls oF the Planning Commission. Making sure that, or I should say City
Council recommendations with items 1 thru a, b, c, d, items 2 thru 8.
Councilman Wing: So moved.
Councilman Mason: Second.
Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve concept plan request
to rezone Lots 3, 4 and 5, Burdick Park from BG, General Business to PUB~
Planned Unit Bevelopment uith the follouing conditions:
1. The applicant sha.l..1, receive and meet the conditions of the following
appr ova].:~:
a. Prel.iminary and Fir, al Plat approval combining Lots 3, 4 and 5, Burdlck
Park into one lot with approp'r'iate easements.
b. Comprehensive Plan amendment changing the land use designation from
commercial to ll'idustrial.
c. SJ. te plan approval for the building expansion.
Rezoning approval from BG, General Business to PUD, Planned Unit
Development.
2. The site plan shall have to maintain the proposed concept plan, with the
proposal being a~ expansion of the exlstin9 building for use by the existing
use, 11ght manufacturing. A hlgher intenslt, y industrial use w111 not be
permit Led at this site.
3. The expansion of the building shall match the architectural design of the
exist J. ng building.
4_ There shall be no outdoor storage permitted.
All rooftop equipment shall be screened.
The hard cover surface of the site (the three lots) shall not exceed 70~.
7. Prior to rezoning and developmel~t, the applicant shall purchase the property
in questlon From [he HRA.
32
City Council Meeting - April 12, 1993
8. Transit planning shall be incorporated into this development.
All voted in favor and the aotion carried unaniaously.
DISCUSS TESTING FOR AEDES TRZSER~ATUS (LASCROSSE ENCEPH6LITIS) NOSgUITO ON CITY
PROPERTY.
Todd Hoffman: It seems as though we just put to rest this issue. However, it
is mosqulto treating season once again. They are out spreading the briquettes
across our city. I've received calls from residents wondering what is going on
so if you've heard anything to date, they are out. In preparing for the
operations, the upcoming operations of the MMCD, Mr. Ross Green, the District's
Public Information Representative called to ask for a clarification in regard to
the testing for the Aedes Triseriatus or the LaCrosse Encephalitis mosquito in
our city parks. Specifically Mr. Green asked if the district would be allowed
to test for that type of mosquito which can carry LaCrosse Encephalitis in city
parks and if sufficient levels of mosquitoes were found, to apply chemical
treatment. It is important to understand that that has not been the case in the
past. They have never found sufficient levels ~o it's not as though it's a big
concern but I think they are on their toes so to speak in this regard and they
just want to make sure everything is clear. The staff's recommendation is that
the MMCO be allowed to test for the Aedes Trlserlatus mosqulto in the clty parks
and if populations warrant control, that the application of approved treatment
substances only be allowed upon the city belng notlfled and the area for
treatment having been conspicuously posted 24 hours prior to the treatment. That
was one area that they had agreed to undertake. The posting of publlc open
space when they're treating. However what they did is posted one 4 x 8 post at
the entrance to the park so we're asklng that they make ita little bit more
noticeable. In addition it is requested that staff be contacted prior to thelr
flrst testlng so we can observe exactly what thls testlng procedure includes.
From what I understand they go around in areas likely to hold, harbor this type
of mosqulto with a vaccum cleaner and if in 5 mlnutes they suck of 2 of this
type of mosquito, whlch I'm not sure I could identify them from any other
mosquito, but if they do that, then they'll tell you they want to treat for
LaCrosse Encephalitis carrylng mosquito. There is no one here from Mosquito
Control Olstrict. I take it wlth the recommendation in their affirmative, that
they weren't concerned.
Mayor Chmiel: Good. Thank you. Any concerns of Council?
Councilwoman Oockendorf: Have we done this in past years? Applied this
treatment?
Todd Hoffman: Not to my knowledge in city parks, no. But in other areas of the
city they have.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: No adverse affects?
Todd Hoffman: Again, not to my knowledge. -They've done this on private
property.
Mayor Chmiel: Anyone else? Can I have a motion?
33
City Council Meeting .~ April 12, 1993
Councilwoman Dockendorf". I move approval for testing for the LaCrosse
Encephaliti.s nlosquito in c~ty parks.
Councilman Wing: Second.
Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Wino seconded to allow the MMCD to
test for Aedes Triseriatus mosquitoes in city parks. If populations warrant,
the application of approved treatment substances only be allowed upon the city
being notified, the area for treatment having been conspicuously posted 24 hours
prior to treatment and that the Park and Rec Director be contacted prior to
testing to allow for observation of testing procedures. All voted in favor and
the motion carried unanimously.
APPROVE AGREEMENT PROVIDING UTILITY AND STREET SERVICES TO PROPOSED SUBDIVISION
(DEER RIDGE) IN THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD, REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION.
Don Ashworth.' The Council will recall, we have been looking favorably to
allowing the exterls~on of sanitary sewer and water into Shorewood to allow Jeff
Williams, J. Scotty Builders to be able to develop 5 lots that are in Shorewood.
As we've nearly exhausted all of the processes under which we might receive
Community Development Block Grant funds, we presented at the time that the City
Council Iast looked at th~s, the request that the Mayor and I attend the
Shorewood City Council meeting, which turned out to be this evening at 7:00, to
see if we could get their endorsement of allowing one or two of those lots to be
included in a friendly annexatio))/deannexation process. The Shoreuood Council,
I felt that this item deserved additional, time. They would like to look at the
ability of the two cities to potentially swap some properties. They would like
to look at what type of commitment that we might be wllling to make to the South
Shore Senior Cen[er if we were to continue being a participant under Community
Development Block Grant funds. We dld have in the audlence approximately ~ or 7
of our seniors who use the South Shore Center that are residents of Chanhassen.
I thought that Barbara Montgomery did an excellent job in volcing concerns the
senlors had as it may, i, case of the possibility that we would lose funding. I
thlnk lt's fair to say that the Shoreuood Counc11 was not happy that the Counc11
had put the condition, had moved it from let's work with Shoreuood to
voluntarily get them to release a lot versus putting it in the form of a
corldltion. I think at our last meeting Mr. Williams came before the Council
saylng, please don't do that. I want to be able to proceed with my development.
I don't want to get caught in the middle of some type of a disagreement between
Chanhassen and Shoreuood and literally have hlm become kind of a pawn that was
caught captive in this whole process. I can,or assure that yOU Shoreuood will
release one of those lots. We asked for a vote from the Council, which really
it was more of an informal where are you coming from type of a position, so that
I would have something, the Mayor and I would have something to report back to
this City Council. Ali. 5 councilmembers stated that they would keep an open
mind in this issue. That they did not want to see Chanhassen lose Community
Development Block Grant status. That they were concerned as to taxes that might
be lost as a result of giving up 1 or 2 pieces. That they felt that the two
staffs would be in the best positiorl to get together, try to develop a specific
proposal that they could look at within 2 weeks. In accordance with City
Council action from 2 weeks ago, a i, onth ago, whenever we heard this item, I
thirlk that you had made it clear to Mr. Williams of your intent to have this
item come back in fron[ of you in the case that Shoreuood had denied it. Because
City Council Meeting - April 12, 1993
I have a feeling, and what I told the Shorewood Council, I said well what about
thls as a condition. Ooes this mean that he is a hostage of this thlng? I
said, I really belleve that the Chanhassen City Council changed that from let's
work with Shorewood to it being a condition to emphasize how strongly they
belleve in Community Development Block Orant funds and thelr strong commitment
to see those dollars continue to be used for our seniors for Sojourn Center,
etc. I think the only reason that they modifled that was to try to convey to
you how important that funding is to our city. And again those were the major
polnts that I recall them stating. Agaln, Mr. Willlams is present. I'll go
back to the orlginal recommendation. That is that I would ask that you approve
the extension of the sanitary sewer into Shorewood with staff being instructed
to continue to work with Shorewood tn attempting to get one of those lots as a
Chanhassen lot under a friendly annexation/deannexatlon procedure.
Mayor Chmiel: Very good. Very well done. That's really the way it really
wound up. I feel that these points that I trled to clarify to them, we are not,
we as the city of Chanhassen are not really trying to circumvent them in any
particular way wlth the basic need for what we needed, that i lot. Don trled
for 2. I was satisfied wlth 1. With that i I said we'd be willing to give them
the taxes back if that was a given problem on that particular home, and that can
be transacted back and forth. I also brought up the fact that we have mutually
worked together wlth our Public Safety in regards to kenneling thelr dog
problems as well. They agreed that that was something that we had done. I
guess they just felt like we were trying to lnvade their domaln basically and I
would probably feel the same way. No question. But I tried to assure them that
that wasn't the lntent. The lntent was to beneflt everybody, including the city
here, but also including South Shore and the other location which we wlnd up
glvlng. What was the total amount of dollars both to Sojourn?
Don Ashworth: I wasn't quite sure and fortunately Larry Blackstad was there who
administers the program for the County. But I think I stated that approximately
$6,000.00 to the South Shore Center, and he shook his head yes on that. I said,
I thlnk it was 11kw $4,000.00 for this van, and he similarly shook bls head.
They wanted to know about other dollars and we talked about the Senior Center
and also accessibility for handicap in our parks.
Mayor Chmiel: Right. And I thought it was rather neat to see seniors there
this evening to support that position. And as well as the City of Shorewood is
golng to get some additional support. If we don't get those dollars, we can't
make those contribution dollars back and forth. So I thlnk they understand that
and I think thelr position is that, as I told them, trust me. But I think I'm
golng to trust them in this particular position. Any other discussion?
Councilwoman Oockendorf: If I could just get it straight. They just want to
mull it over, ls that the upshot of thls?
Mayor Chmiel: Well they'd like to see some additional information and have the
two staff people get together to work something out that's workable. Not saying
yes for them or anything but it's just that kind of-position. I guess I don't
feel, I feel a little more comfortable at least they knowlng. If they really
felt that it would be a no, they would have already said it. But I thlnk
they're looking for the additional information. Yes.
35
City Council. Meeting - April 12, 1993
Jeff Williams: Hello City Coul~cil, Mayor and Don. I'd just like to say I
appreciate Con, especially Ashwor'th taking the time to explain what they were
trying to accomplish and why they wanted the lot. When I went into this a month
ago I didn't really understar, d why you were trying to get the money and I
understand a lot further why it was done the way it was done so. I'd just like
to say that I thought the presentation went along really well over at Shorewood
and my feeling was, 2 of the members said, when they went into the meeting they
felt they were ~.otally against it. When they got done with it and it was
explained to the,,, they felt, I thought they felt really comfortable with it but
they just didn't want to have somebody saying you're going to hold up the
project because we're going to hold you hostage for one lot. I had the feeling
that if we go on good faith saying that, using their' better judgment and working
together on it, I think we're going to do a lot better than holding the project
contingent upon them giving you one lot. I just felt, .like you said with the
older people there and giving their comments and really bringing in view why
these funds are J. mportant to both cJ. ties, I think it's important. But I hope
for their sake and mine both, that you'd really look at not holding it
contingent upon that. one ].ot:, because I think it'd be more favorable for both
cities working in agreement friendly rather than having somebody say you have to
do it, otherwise ue have to go back to 3 lots. ~nd if ue go back to 3 lots,
I lose because I only get 3 lots. I spent a lot of money, a lot of time. You
lose because we don't get another lot and they lose because they only get 3 lots
into the city. From what I understand, the project is approved for 3 lots. I'd
just like to make sure, is [hat true? From what I was told when I bought the
piece of property that the 3 lots that were approved back in 1989, they checked
with the City ~ttorney. He says yeah, that agreement is binding. Is that true?
Roger Knutson: That's my recollection.
Jeff William.~'- Right. So ~hose 3 lots a]'e approved so I mean I could go back
to that scenarlo and say let's just go back to 3 lots and then we'd be done. The
only thing is I'm going to be out the money and time that I've waited to get
lnto the 5 lots so that's another option but I think, I would hope that we could
proceed wlth the 5 lots with both citles working together friendly. I think
there's a lot better chance of everybody winnlng on that situation. And just,
how would it work if it is approved that way and we get the 5 lots and I develop
the development, what do I do about that 1 lot? You were talking Don about that
it would maybe take 11kc a year or so to become annexed. What do I do in the
meantime as far as selling that lot or how does that work or would that lot not
be able to be sold or developable?
Don Ashworth: Now I, and the City Attorney should respond as well. But I know
of no reason that you would not be able to proceed with finalizing your plat.
Fillng that with the county. Obtaining bulldlng permlts from the Clty of
Shorewood. The certain i-eqtmirements agaln back through our city as far as the
sewer and water permit~ But you would notlce absolutely no difference in how
you proceeded with your development. This, in my own mind, would be a totally
separate process. If we're successful at the end of that process, Lot 5, Deer
Run Addition would move from a lot in the city of Shorewood to one in the city
of Chanhassen. But I cannot thlnk of anythlng that would effect 3. Scotty
Builders or Mr. Mi111ams.
Jeff Williams: Okay.
36
City Council Meeting - April 12, 1993
Roger Knutson: Just what you put on your letterhead I suppose when you buy the
house. Your address.
Jeff Williams: So, let's say I bulld a house. It's in the clty of Shoreuood
now and 6 months down the road my people that bought the home find out that lt's
in the process of annexation. There's no legality on my part that I have to
notify that the people that that lot is in proceedings?
Roger Knutson: I would disclose it to them.
Jeff Williams: That there's a proceedings going on now that might put it into
that.
Councilman Mason: And then I would guess they'd probably be happler knowlng
they were coming into Chanhassen.
Jeff Williams: We'll two of the exact same houses, exact same price and we'll
compare them. And we'll see what the values are. If the values are different
too.
Councilman Senn: But Don, lsn't ita falr statement that if the resident
decides they don't want it, that it won't happen?
Mayor Chmlel: Well there's a lot of conditions to lt. The Board could also say
no because of all the things that are there right now.
Councilman Senn: No, no. I understand that. But it's fairly absolute if the
resident disagrees with it that it's going to happen. Is that true?
Mayor Chmiel: Right. It could.
Roger Knutson: Well in this situation, there's the landowner.
Councilman Senn: No, but there will be a new landowner at the point that he
sells the lot is what I'm saying.
Roger Knutson: But this process will be petitioned by the owner and approved by
the governmental agencies and it goes to the municipal board..At that point
everyone in the clrcle ls in agreement then it will, they'll base it on that
decision. On that information.
Councilwoman Oockendorf: If that decision happens before he sells it.
Councilman Senn: Which depends on Shorewood deciding if it will.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Right.
Roger Knutson: It's possible that someone else would get that lot and jump up
to the municipal board and say I don't want it.
Mayor Chmiel: When will you develop fully the entirety of that parcel? What is
your lntent? I suppose what the market bears.
Cit? Council lteetirl9 .- AprJ. 1 12, 1993
Jeff Williams: Right now what I find is Lhat they'll, be real easy to sell. T
think 3 of tl]erfl are already sold. h buyer's sittlng here. He wants to get this
thlng going too but, so Z thlnk they'll sell really qulckly. Especially if they
find ou~. it's in Chanhdssen.
Councilman Senn: How about a contingency ill the contract?
Jeff Williams: Thank yo~.
Mayor Chmie].: Thank you. Any other discussion?
Councilman Mason.' Well. I was going [o make a motion if I could,
Mayor Chmiel: Okay.
Councilman Mason: I'cl like to approve agreement providing utility and street
service~ to proposed subdivision Deer Ridge in the clty of Shorewood, Project
No. 92-18 wlth perhaps a note to Shorewood City Council thanking them for
].istening to our tenter'ns and maybe reiterating that the reason we want to do
thl~ 1~ ~o bene'flt both cltles.
Mayor Chmiol: Very good_ Is there a secor, d?
Councilwoman Dockendorf'- Second.
Mayor Chmie]..', Tt's been moved and seconded. Any other discussion?
Councilman Mason moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to approve the
agreement providing utility and street services to Deer Ridge, Project No. g2-18
with the condition that staff be instructed to approach the Shorewood City
Council and request their consideration of a friendly deannexation/annexation
process for the most southerly lot in Deer Ridge. All voted in favor, except
Councilman Senn who abstained, and the motion carried.
Councilman Wing: Could I j,tst interrupt momentarily. Mr. Boyland is here and
he's kind of way dowr, under Administra[.ive_ Cou.l.d we possibly move him up,
being he's been sitting here. patiently, and then get on with our agenda? Would
i.t. be appropriate i:o let.... Insert .ti(a) ,ts the next item Mr. Mayor, just a
suggestion.
Mayor' Chmiel: We can move that around without too much trouble. Is 'this part
of the discussion that we're going to have thls evenlng? No? Good. Okay. You
do~,:t have to leave because you gOt what you want. You get to slay around.
Okay, lo('s move Lo item tl(a).
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATION: PROPOSED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE MINNEWASHTA
PARKWAY PROJECT, JAMES AND RUTH BOYLAN, CITY ATTORNEY.
Mayor Chmiel: As you have read, the City Attorney is recommending a settlement
agreement. Roger?
Roger Knutson.-' Jusi. a few oolnments on it and .T'].i basically stand for your
questiol',m. This i.'s in conjunction with the Minn~ewashta Parkway project. We're
38
City Council Meeting - April 12, 1993
acquiring some 4,220 square feet of property, 15 trees and we're taking out a
driveway that has to be replaced. Our settlement figure is based upon a
combination of those costs. Our estimated value and the estimate of what it
would cost to proceed to condemnation. That it's a reasonable settlement and
recommend $15,000.00. Wlth that I'll just stand for you specific questions.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Do you have any questions regarding this? Seeing none,
I'll call a question to the approval of settlement in the amount of $15,000.00
to James and Ruth Boylan.
Councilman Wing: I'll so move.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I will second it.
Councilman Wing moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to approve the
settlement agreement in the amount of $15,000.00 for 3ames and Ruth Bo¥1an for
easement acquisition for the Hinnewashta Parkway project. All voted in favor
and the motion carried unanimously.
Councilman Wing: Just a question I guess as we passed. If everybody on the
Parkway had done this, we would have been in real trouble wouldn't we?
Roger Knutson: The cost would have been a lot, lot higher. Yes.
Councilman Wing: Is there anythlng unique about this property that's different
than the other ones? I mean I understand the old 1817.
Roger Knutson: We took out quite a few trees, although most of them were quite
small. 2 1/2 inch trees which is a lot of trees.
Councilman Wing: Which were going to go anyway.
Roger Knutson: Pardon?
Councilman Wing: I mean it's happening the full length of the Parkway as part
of the project.
Roger Knutson: Nothing else.
CONSIDER AMENDNENT TO THE SOLICITORS QRDINANCE, FIRST READING.
Roger Knutson: Don, do you want me to comment on this?
Mayor Chmiel: Would you like to7
Roger Knutson: In Scott Harr's absence I'll comment on this. The initial draft
was put together, it was based on, I guess this went to the Public Safety
Committee. It was based upon an Edina ordinance that says you can put up a
little card in your home or business and say solicitors stay away and they're
not allowed to knock. That ls the first draft that arrlved here I don't know, 2
months ago?
39
City Council Meeting · April. 12, 1993
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah.
Roger Kr, utson: hnd the. suggestion was made that maybe ue should have more than
that. That we. :¢hould keep what we have, which is basically a registration
procedure that's where, solicitors and transient i, erchants have to register with
the City. Pay a r(;gistration fee set by this Council before they can go out
peddling, soliciting or doing their transient sales in the community. It's a
fairly benig~ process but it allows the Public Safety to keep track of who's
running around to people's doors. What this draft attempts to do or does is
combine the first draft of the 1~o knock rule and registration.
Mayor Chmiel: I guess I was in favor of having none within the city and only
allowing Boy Scouts ,~nd Girl Scouts and things of that nature to do their
solicitation. But I guess.
Roger Knutson: I would support a Constitutional Amendment to that effect.
Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussion?
Councilman Senn: What this does is we request that there's been I guess one
insert that T_ wasn't sure on and that is the pricing on the permits. It
basically says $25.00 per person, which I assume means per person soliciting.
But it sets as a maximum, $50.00 fee per charitable groups and I thought that
when we did that I'd ask if with the charitable groups we'd kind of treat that
uniquely instead and set a very minimal fee. Relating to charities.
Roger Knutson: What I have, it says in Section 10-].45, the fee will be set by
resolution of the Council.
Councilmar, Senn: Well in resolution, which is unnumbered but the third to the
last page in the attachment it says, Now Therefore, Be It Resolved by the
Chanhassen City Council that the registration fee be $25.00 per person or a
total of $50.00 for' a charitable organization.
Roger Knutson: I don't know where those numbers came from. I had nothing to do
w£th their selection so I can'~ really say any comment.
Hayer Chmiel'. Was that something we had previously?
Roger Knutson: I don't know what your numbers were. I assume that came from
Scott's department based upon how much work he thinks it's going to take to do
[he registration. The idea of these fees is Rot to raise revenue but just to
cover your costs. I don't know Mark, I can't comment.
Councilman Senn: I'd just much rather see, I meat, I think I understood from
Scott the basis of the $25.00 per person, which is as it's stated. ~ mean if a
group comes in and says they're going to send 10 people out, you're paying o;]
the basis of the 10 people. But for the charity groups I'd much rather see a
flat fee of the $25.00 no matter how many people. Rather than $50.00. I mean
I'd like to see no fee at all but that probably raises some problems for us too
so. Maybe the $25.00 would be minimal or set as a minimum for charity groups.
Councilman Wing: I don't know what Scott's reasoning was.
4O
City Council Meeting - April 12, 1993
Mayor Chmiel: Well I think being that this is the first reading, that's
something we can bring back for the second reading and see what we should come
up with for that at that time.
Councilman Wing: I favor Mark's position where it's just $25.00 period.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, I don't find that, depending upon what charity it is too.
We may not want to have any. So with that.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yeah, is there an easy way to delineate what's a
charitable organization? Do they have to be registered by?
Roger Knutson: 501C3.
Councilman Mason: If I can just ask, under exemptions here. Children age 18
and younger soliciting for school sponsored activities. Is that then Girl
Scouts and Boy Scouts? I mean is that an umbrella term for Girls Scouts and Boy
Scouts?
Mayor Chmlel: Yeah. I mean you get the groups comlng from the high school with
kids going on trips and things of that nature. But I think that's a11.
Councilman Wing: See I think this is, well.
Mayor Chmiel: If we were to say, any charitable group within the confines of
the city of Chanhassen. Would that, that probably is a little loose yet.
Roger Knutson: The American Red Cross or the Boy Scouts. Those aren't really
Chanhassen groups. It's really kind of hard to get your arms around. Like if
the Rotary or any of those things that are really, could cross borders.
Mayor Chmiel: Do we spell each of those that we feel don't require? I mean
we're talking Jaycees. We're talking Rotary. We're talking Lions. We're
talking CAA. We're talklng just about anythlng that you can think of wlthin the
community.
Roger Knutson: So we're not subject to some protection challenge. What we'd
try to do is if you gave us the list of who you would want to exempt, we would
try to flnd a common denominator for them. A list by generic sort of terms.
Mayor Chmiel: Could you make sure that you get back to Scott on that Don. Jay.
Jay Johnson: Yeah, as I was just listening to this. There's a difference
between non-profit and charitable in tax's eyes and stuff. Like the CAA's not a
charitable organization but it is a non-profit organization. And so with this
solicitation, if the CAA ever went out and dld something, Z think in the past
they have, and the klds that were going to England last year, they did some
solicitations. They sold candy and stuff like that. As part of a club but
they're not a charitable organization. It's not tax deductible as a charlty but
it is non-profit. Then another thing I was thinklng of is a non-profit
organization with a unlt withln Chanhassen. So the Boy Scouts aren't based out
of Chanhassen but they have Chanhassen units here in the Boy Scouts. I mean we
have a Cub Scout pack and we have a Boy Scout troop. And then the Glrl Scouts
City Council Meeting -, ApI'il 12, 1993
are the same way. They have units within the city. The Rotary has it's unit
here in the city. So some terminology like that might get around what you're
looking for.
Mayor Chmiel: Well, we'll see what we can come up with.
Roger Knutson: Yeah, we'll work on that.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. All those in favor say aye.
Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Senn seconded to approve the first reading of
an amendment to the Solicitor's Ordinance. All voted in favor and the motion
carried unanimously.
ZONING ORDINANCE AHENDMENT TO THE CITY CODE TO DEFINE DOCK SETBACK ZONES, FIRST
READING.
Paul Krauss: Well Mr. Mayor, I'll take a crack at this but is there a desire to
lay it over? No? I was kind of hoping.
Mayor Chmiel: I don't know, I was looking at some of 'these things here. You
know why redo what we've already had in effect, and I think all you wanted to do
was just to put a clarification ir, there. And that clarification was al.1 that
we wanted.. Ali oF a sudden this is ali. changed around and it looks like us'ye
changed the position from where we were before as to where we are right now and
that's sort of defeating the issue that we were already indicated what we wanted
done.
Councilman Senn: Yeah, I had some questions about it before and I guess Kate's
really the one who's worked on this and I guess maybe Paul's comment, it seemed
like it'd be maybe appropriate to walt until Kate's here.
Councilman Wing.' There's going to be no new information. We've taken a lot of
testimony of all the neighborhoods. I mean we've debated thls at length. Hour
after hour and th~r'e's no new information going to come in because the lssue was
very clear cut. And if she wants to present information, then we've got to
bring all the neighbors back in that weren't there this last tlme because they
think lt's a done deal and they're protected. So I would move approval of thls
with the exception that I would delete Exemption 2. Exemption i I think is a
catch up 1rem. So I would move approval of the amendment with the deletlon of
Exemption 2, which leaves us where we were.
Mayor Chmiel: Previously?
Co~mncilman Wing: Yep. And it'.?, the first reading. If Kate's got some
information that's pertinent, fine.
Paul Krauss: If she I~as something new, I'm sure she just didn't come up with
it. There's got to be a reason behlnd it.
Councilman Senn: Why did she have 2 in there, do you know?
Paul Krauss: I really couldn't tell yOU.
42
City Council Meeting - April 12, 1993
Councilman Wing: Well there shouldn't have been any. There was only supposed
to be a clarification.
Paul Krauss: Unless Roger you have something to add. I'm just not certaln.
Roger Knutson: No. What our office worked on is that first definition of
deflnlng what the dock setback zone is as far as 100 foot and all that stuff.
That came from our office. Working with Kate, but the rest of it.
Councilman Wing: I think that change would be out of order Paul.
paul Krauss: Which?
Councilman Wing: The exemption would be out of order.
Councilman Hason: Is there a motion on the floor?
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, there's a motion on the floor.
Councilman Mason: I'll second that.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other discussions?
Councilman Senn: Question. This is first reading?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
Councilman Senn: So that's something that Kate can come in and tell us what
she's dolng before second readlng?
Mayor Chmiel: Rlght. Wlth the eliminations as Richard has indicated.
Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Hason seconded to approve the first reading of
Zoning Ordinance Amendment to the City Code to Oefine Oock Setback Zones amended
by deleting Exemption 2. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
SET MEETING DATE TO DISCUSS THE CITY'S MISSION STATEMENT, CITY MANAGER.
Don Ashworth: City Council had asked that this item be put onto this agenda so
we could kind of look at calendars and make a declslon as to when you want to
meet again. That's my recollection. We are meeting the first Monday in May.
We plcked that flrst Monday in May as a work sesslon for.
Councilwoman Oockendorf: Yes, we're talklng about downtown.
Don Ashworth: To talk about.
Councilwoman Oockendorf: Downtown. That's what I have.
Councilman Senn: The 5:00 meeting on the 3rd is strlctly downtown. No other
issues is what I have written down.
43
City Cow,eli. Meeting · .~pri] 12. 1993
Don Ashworth: Oh okay. So that's back with this joint HRA/Citx Council. Try
to make a decision ulnar u~:'re going to do with downtown.. Okay. As it would
deal then with this mission statement, the work we started from a week ago
Saturday. I~h,}t ~.:an be conYenient for Council members?
Councilman Senn; And that's where you had the tentative 5:30 on the 5th.
Councilwoman Oockendorf: Yeah, that's what we have. 5:30 on the 5th. You
don't like that?
Don hshuorthr Okay, so you want to go with that then?
Courmci~an I,~Jng; 5/5 at 5:30. Chinese again?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yeah.
Councilman Hason, So th~r-e is a meeting on Hay 3rd at 5:007
Hayor Ch~niel: hnd o,e on Hay 5th.
Councilman Senn; ~nd the 5th at 5:30.
Councilman Hason~ I knew about the one on the 5th. I did not know about the
Mayor Chmie].: Okay. Now I'd like to clea~- the chambers for a close session and
turn the cameras off.
Roger Knutson: Maybe if ue could just for the record explain that we'd like to
discuss litigation on t~o pending cases. One involving ~pple Valley Red-E-Nix
and one J. nvol¥ing the Eckankar property.
Boll hshuorth: Did you ua~t to sho~ for the record though that ue would put down
in p~ritin9 what was discussed here this evening and at the time.
Roger Knutson: You can do that. It's not required.
Don ~shuorth: ht the time that these issues are settled, ue ~ould make that a
pub].ic document.
Roger l<nutson: Yes, you can do that.
Den ~shuor~h: I guess that just seems reasonable to me.
~t this point an Executive Session took place with the Council and the City
Attorneys.
The regular portion of the City Council meeting was adjourned at ~0:20 p.m.
Submitted by Don Ashuorth
City Manager
Prepay-ed by Na,n Opheim