Loading...
1993 03 22CHANILqSSEN CTTY C~TL REGIJLAR HEETII4G MARQ4 22, 1993 Mayor Chmiel called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCIL HEHBERS PRE:SE:MT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Wing, Councilwoman Dockendorf, Councilman Mason and Councilman Senn STP~F pRESENT: Don Ashworth, Roger Knutson, Charles Folch, Sharmin Al-Jaff, Kate Aanenson, Todd Hoffman and Todd Gerhardt AP~AL OF i~iENEW%: Councilman Mason moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to approve the agenda as amended by Councilman Wing who wanted to comment on the letter from Peter Olin under Council Presentations. A11 voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBL~ ~NNOUNCDENTS: Mayor Chmiel: We have a public announcement at this time and I'll entertain any additional public announcements that may be within the audience. If someone wishes to do that. The proclamation for April 18th thru the 24th as Minnesota Volunteer Recognition Week. Just alone within our community we have a lot of volunteers, and ! mean a lot of volunteers and this is always the time that we show this recognition to those people and say thank you for what you're doing and providing their valuable time into the needs of the city. I'm not going to go through the proclamation per se but I do want you to know that we are adopting that and proclaiming April 18th thru the 24th as the Minnesota Volunteer Recognition Week. If there's anyone here that would like to address that at this time, I'd entertain that. Zf not, is there anyone else that has a public announcement? Resolution ~3-21: Mayor ChmIel moved, Councilwoman D~kendorf seconded proclaiming the ~eek of Rprtl 18-24, 1993 as. Hinnesota Uolunteer Recognition ~eek. All voted in favor and the motion carried. · . CONSENT AGENO~: Councilwoman Oockendorf ~m' Councilman ~ason seconded to approve the following Consent Agenda itea~ pursuant to the City Hanager's recommendations: a. Resolution ~-22: Approve Plans and Specifications for Trunk Highway 101 North Leg Railroad Crossing; Authorize Advertising for Bids, Project 88-22B-1. d. City Code Amendment Allowing Animal Control Personnel to Euthantze Animals, Final Reading. h. City Council Minutes dated February 22, 1993 Planning Commission Minutes dated March 3, 1993 Public Safety Commission Minutes dated March 1Z, 1993 All voted In favor and the motion carried unanimously. City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 B. APPROVE ~REEHENT PROU~OING UTILITY AND ~TREET SERVICES TO PROPOSED. SUBDIVISION (DEER RIDGE) -IN T. HE (~ITY OF SHORE~K~)D. PRO~ECT 92-10. Mayor Chmiel: The only thing I would like to see done with item 2(b), and this is where we're making an approval agreement providing utility and street servlces to the proposed subdivision called Deer Ridge in the clty of Shoreuood. It's project 92-18. I would like to move the adoption of this but with a condition as well. And that condition belng that we, the Clty, get something out of thls. What we're looking for is at least one residence within the Hennepin County/Shorewood properties and that, by doing and requesting that we at least have a minimum of one lot, ut11 give us the opportunity to be able to acqulre the CBDG funds through Hennepin County. And although we're still working at that legislatively uith the Federal government in adoption of that and through HUD as well, we're just trying to get a back-up for those additional funds and that amounts anywhere from $30,000.00 to $40,000.00. Councilman Wing: So you're approving the recommendation but changlng that approval of this annexation occur? Mayor Chmiel: An approval of a frlendly annexation. De-annexation agreement for one of the particular lots. Councilman Wing: I'll so second that. Don Ashworth: Hay I make a clarification, if I may? Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Don Ashworth: I liked how the Mayor phrased that in terms of at least one. When we make that presentation I will attempt to convince the Shorewood Council that it should be 2 or potentially 3 homes and the reason is that that uill become a separate precinct and so for voting purposes, their hypothetically one vote or if lt's a single person home, where two votes uill be known. The seoreoacy of the ballot ts. The other part would be, I'm assumlng that this means that lt's dependent on Shoreuood agreeing to the friendly annexation. Shoreuood ls probably not going to be the one who stops this from going through. Municipal Annexation Board wlll assuredly give us a problem because it ts not a contiguous border. A lot of the things that they look at. Hennepin County will have a lot of concerns on lt. Emergency response. 911. You have a situation where a South Shore police officer would be going to the residence. He has no jurisdiction in Chanhassen. So you've got some issues that you've got to work through and so I like the way you've worded this. Councilman Senn: Don, a clarification. I guess what I had in my notes was language contingent upon. Are we saying the same thing? Mayor Chmtel: Yeah basically. Councilman Senn: Okay, so I mean basically your motion. Mayor Chmiel: As an additional condition. Councilman Senn: That we approve this contingent upon. City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 Mayor Chmiel: Rlght. Councilman Wing: That's how I read this too is that rather than be iffy, we do ti, if then. You bring up these other ideas and why do we want to get into multiple jurisdictions and 911 issues and why even start? There's got to be a way to avoid. I think those are some real pitfalls you brought up and some of them insurmountable. Maybe we don't want to be lnvolved tn those situations. Councilman Mason: But then that would assure us, if we do get an annexation there, that wlll assure us of those community development grants. $o I certainly think it's worth taking a look at. Councilwoman Dockendorf: And haven't we dealt with these same issues in other annexations? Don Ashworth: Maybe not in annexations. We have faced the same tssue let's say with CPT. That lies in Hennepin County. Questions as to jurisdictions, Carver County Sheriff's and we overcame some of those problems. Z'm just saying that it's not as easy as it looks. Councilman Senn= But basically if this proceeds tonight, it's contingent upon that. If it doesn't happen, then it can come back in another form for discussion but that basically gives the... Mayor Chmiel: ...there's a motion on the floor with a second. Councilman Mason= I think someone would like. Mayor Chmiel: Oh yes sir. Would you. like to come forward to the m£c and please state your name and your address? Jeff Williams: Yes, I'm Jeff Williams. My address is 1700 Teal Circle, Chanhassen. I'm the developer or hoping to develop this piece of land. We came forward, Rick Sathre and I, the engineer on the property at a City Council meeting December 14th, 1992 and before Shoreuood would put this on their agenda, we had to be assured by the City of Chanhassen before they would proceed with their preliminary plat approval. And we were assured on that ntght of December 14th and we were also, when we talked to Shorewood we gave them the results and we were told that it would not be contingent at that point on annexation because we don't know if they're going to approve it. or not.- And so at this point, I spent a lot a lot.of money developing it. I came up after the meeting and I was told, and another person with me, that it was not contingent upon them approving that, or getting that lot annexed. So I have a real problem now that you're saying that it's contingent upon it because I've been totally misinformed and I've spent a lot a lot time and a lot a lot of money bringtng it to this point. We're currently on Shorewood's final plat approval set up for April 22nd but both the preliminary plat has been approved at the City of Shorewood, just as it was adopted here on December 14th. So are there any questions? Mayor Chmiel: No, other than the fact of saying that you were.assured that this was gotng to go through. That had not yet come to Council, My only concern is we're really in the bustness to provide sewer and water to our own residences within our own community. I do have concerns when we're not dotng that. But City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 I'm also looking for something, hopefully that the City may agree with and you may or may not have a given problem with that. But we have to have something in return. At least in my opinion and I think it's Council's opinion right now. Jeff Williams: Right, but when we discussed this with we, Don can confirm this. We had a meeting with Shorewood and Chanhassen. At that time the biggest concern that they had was the residence in Chanhassen. Increasing the lots from 3 to 5 because of the traffic concerns or whatever and I was told that we were supposed to address all the home buyers or the property owners within 500 feet and especially on Koehnen Circle, which we did. And there was no opposition. Ail the letters were done. We did I thought, I even talked to Dave Hempel today about it and unfortunately he's not here but I mean I've really, really been, if this is the case, I've been, I feel I've really been misled. And I have a lot of bllls to show that. If it's contingent upon thls, and maybe they'll go wlth it but I have a feeling that they won't. I mean I don't know. If I would have known at that point, December 14th, that it was contingent, I would not have spent the money that I have and I was told by more than one individual that it was not going to be a contingency. I understood that that Clty Council meettng determined that it was going to go or not. And now this City Council meeting I thought was to lay out the exact agreement between both cities. But not the contingency in there. So am I wrong in my assessments of these things? Or have I been misinformed7 Mayor Chmiel: Don, would you like to answer that? Don Ashworth: This item did appear on the December, as a part of our December 14th I believe regular City Council item. And at that tlme, Jeff is correct. That the contingency was not In there. The Counctl had approved the extension of sewer and water contingent upon developing the specific conditions, etc. and it was our assumption that that would come back to City Council so when Dave Hempel received the final draft from the Attorney, we did put it onto this agenda. It was approved though in mid-December without that contingency on there. At that point in time it was approved very similar to my draft, how I wrote this one up thls tlme around. I apologize to the Councll for not including the Minutes from December 14th and the draft from that point in time. That's not to say that City Council does have the rlght to examine facts as they become available to you and I don't know if on December 14th we knew all of the facts as it dealt wlth the Community Development Block Grant program. Councilman Wing: Is it good business to feed sewer and water to a neighboring community, just for the fun of it if you wl117 When we already have flow problems of our own. And I guess Shorewood is not, I've never felt been real generous our direction on lssues. Whether it's been anlmal control or anythlng else. Don Ashworth: Along the entire northern boundary we have a number of instances when some of our residences may have Shorewood sewer. We provide water in some instances. A good portlon of the flow from the whole Koehnen Addition area goes up through Shorewood. Councilman Wing: So it's good business to go back and forth? City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 Don Ashworth: We have acted to cooperate over the years and I'd say that goes back 20 years. Before my time. Councilman Mason: With what's just come up here, ! wonder if we can't reword this somehow because [ certainly would, ['m not, don't get me wrong. I'm not doubting a thing you're saying here but I'd certainly, if those things were said, I would have, at this point, personally, I'd have a little trouble putting a contingency on this. What I would like to do however would be to pass some sort of resolution hoping that the City of Chanhassen and the City of Shorewood can work something out here. Because as has been stated, we, with those Block Grant funds do support some activities that are going on in Shorewood and I would hope that they would understand that if they chose not to help us out in this, if we don't get the money, they certainly don't get any of those funds. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, that's a good point, because we do contribute about $4,000.00 to that from these CDBG funds. Councilman Mason: Right, and so with that, I mean I have, knowing with what Jeff has just said here, I guess I have a little trouble putting a contingency on it but I don't have any trouble passing some sort of resolution hoping that they'Ll work something out with us. Councilwoman Oockendorf: But is Shorewood the obstacle? Or is it going to be the other two major obstacles that you said? Don Ashworth: I think it will be the Annexation Board personally, but I can't guarantee you that Shorewood will respond. I'm hoping that the Mayor will join' me. We've had the opportunity over the last 3-4 years of attend£ng the South Shore Center on a Saturday morning and having breakfast with the CounciLmembers from Shorewood. I think we've got a good working relationship with them and I would hope that we can draw on that to convince them as to the need for this approval. But again, ! don't think that they're going to be the major stumbling block. I think the Annexation Board will be. Councilman Senn: Don, I wasn't here in December so it's a little hard to I guess speak about that but I would really like to see the motion stand as the way it is. But at the same time say to Mr. Williams that if for some reason this doesn't proceed, that doesn't really necessarily close it off and (b), I think we could have an open ear to talk with you. ! mean the intent here is not to damage you I don't think, and it's not to cause you unnecessary expense or anything else. But at the same time, as one goes through these negotiations... have to kind of have some basis to work from. So I'd really Like to see your motion stand and again just keep an open ear to Mr. Wtlliams if this thing runs into obstacles. Mayor Chmiel: Roger. Roger Knutson: Just a comment. We may have trouble with the Municipal Board but I'm fairly optimistic that we wouldn't in the sense that we're providing something here to that lot. Providing sewer and water. It isn't just like for no reason at all we have to say we want to pick-up the lot in the city of Shorewood. There's some reasonable reasons we can put forward to them and if Shorewood goes along. If Shorewood said no, and we had to fight it, is a City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 contested hearlng, then yeah, I'd have a heck of a problem. But with their concurrence, I think we have a much better than even chance of getting it approved by the Board. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, I like that. Councilman Wing: I think gll can be 8witched over to that house specific can't lt, or does the border cut it off? Do you know Don? Don Ashworth: I really don't know. I would hope that, well I would think that in the case of paramedic service, that you would leave that wlth Henneptn County and the same way wlth South Shore. The only issue is really one of jurisdiction on calls. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, the only thing that could be involved in thls too is that Metropolitan Council is looking to have one specific area as a call area that's golng to contaln all 7 countles lnto one statlon. And that then could be delegated from one to the other. In other words, they know where it's at by that particular address. They would take care of that. Councilwoman Oockendorf: Mr. Mayor7 Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Is your motion contingent upon the City of Shorewood approving the annexation or the annexation being approved by all parties? Mayor Chmlel: No, I thlnk that that ls to have a frlendly annexation? deannexation agreement wtth them. Councilwoman Dockendorf: With the City as opposed to the annexation being approved by all parties? Mayor Chmiel: Right. Councilwoman Oockendorf: Is that how it's put then? Councilman Wing: Well the annexation would have to occur, Shorewood would have to approve it but it has to go through the process. So it'd be all parties involved. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, sure. It is. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Oh, all parties. Mayor Chmiel: But it's still. Roger Knutson: So you're aware of the timing, so no one. The simplest annexation you know, it can't be done in 48 hours. It probably, assuming Chanhassen says yes tonight and Shorewood says yes tonlght. It's got to go, the paperwork has got to be put together and it's got to go to the Municipal Board and it will take them 30 to 60 days to approve lt. So just so you know, it wlll take some time even if there's agreement with everyone. City Council Meeting - March 22, ~993 Don Ashworth: That's why I was hoping that by making it as a contingency, I would just as soon that it probably wouldn't be, but then 3eff would know when it went to the Shorewood City Council, that it was going up or going down. mean if there were later problems with the Annexation Board. With paramedic or whatever, in my mind the issue would then be dead. ! mean we would be providing sewer and water and he could proceed under that basis. We simply will have failed in getting that lot into Chanhassen but we will not have forced him into waiting 60 days for Annexation Board, 90 days for somebody else. '~90 days for somebody else. ! mean his project could be put on hold for a year if this is contingency to approval by all of these other agencies. Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Well I still would probably, in fact ! was still going to stay with the same motion as I did have. Don Ashworth: But I thought in my clarification. Mayor Chmiel: But with that as you had indicated previously, right. Don Ashworth= Right, so this is subject only to approval by Shorewood. So ! mean if it's not approved by some other agency that has jurisdiction, then we have simply failed in our attempt and he knows that he can have the sewer and water and is under all these other conditions. Councilwoman Oockendorf: That's what my question was. Councilman Mason: Would that take a friendly amendment then to get it back on Council immediately after Shorewood agrees or disagrees or is it just assumed that it happens regardless? Mayor Chmiel: Probably a friendly amendment would be in order. [f you'd so desire to do that. Councilman Mason= Okay. I'll go along with, I would vote in the affirmative for this knowing that Mr. Williams knows that if for some reason Shorewood disproves of this, it comes immediately back to us and we work out any remaining problems so we can continue. So I guess my friendly amendment is, if the City of Shorewood denies annexation, this ls put on the agenda at the earliest possible date so as not to delay Mr. Williams anymore. Mayor Chmlel: But yet would the City of Shorewood just automatically say forget it and we'd still, one way or the other, I mean there's no leverage there whatsoever. Councilman Mason: Well, that's true. I guess what I'm hearlng from the City Manager is that he thinks our relationship is good enough... Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, and I don't doubt that. I don't doubt that. Councilman Mason: ...I guess is my concern. Mayor Chmlel: As a motlonee, I would accept that frtendly amendment wlth that. Councilman Mason: That it would come back on the agenda? City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 Mayor Chmiel: Right. Would the second accept that? Councilman Wing: I'm starting to feel the City Manager could probably handle this and if it dldn't go our way, he'd immediately put a stop to it and put it on the Council docket for formal action. Mayor Chmiel: Right. Councilman Wing: This might be the easier way to go. I mean if you feel you can accomplish this based on our comments tonight, and then if in fact it doesn't go and there's a need to put a stop to thls, that would be easy to do. Mayor Chmiel: Well I think if we can meet with the Shoreuood City Council, when ls their next meeting? Do you have any ldea? Don Ashworth: No. Surely they have one before the 22nd because they're on a similar schedule. In all likelihood it would be the 8th. I just subtracted 14 days. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, right. Okay. Is that accepted by the second? Councilman Wing: As long as this thing rolls along, sure. Jeff Williams: Could I just interrupt? I do have the Mlnutes from December 14th that weren't attached but the only thing I can say is, I'm not sure when we went through Clty Councll December 14th, I thought the process works according to December 14th. It seems to me 11ke we're basically, I'm doing it over exactly what was approved December 14th. £verything that we're dolng, how I proceed on this whole thing is with the agreement that it didn't matter if it was. I mean I can see your polnt why we want that lot in Chanhassen. I'd be in total agreement with it but if I knew it was going to be this type of procedure, I don't see what the December 14th meetlng was really about except we're basically back where I was December 14th. According to this letter it said that, or the Mlnutes. That the City Manager would go before the City Counc11, Shorewood City Council with an appeal to acqulre just one lot for the five to quallfy for thls CDBG funds and the motlon was all voted in favor and the motion carried and it was not contingent upon this. I'm not sure that the process here it was approved and now it's not approved. I'm not sure, can you explain that procedure? It's the first time I've developed a plece of land but I thought that's what I've been, I've done everything exactly according to plan. Now I have Sathre-Berquist, I've spent about $8,000.00 since the Oecember 14th to this polnt and as of Thursday I'm submitting all my materials to Clty of Shorewood for final plat because both, since December 14th I have received preliminary plat approval through both Counclls and now basically you're telllng me I can't proceed with my final plat. I feel like there's been a real injustice and I would 11kw, I thlnk some explanation or some reason how they can do thls. If this is how it works, I'll just sit down and go through the process but when the City Counc11 approved it December 14th, and ! was told and also my, and excuse me he's not here to verify it but my englneer was also told that it meant that it was not contingent and we could go ahead with the development. I mean I just can't understand it at all and if you could answer that. I mean I don't have any, I mean if you could answer, I mean is this normal? You go to two Clty City Council Meeting - March 22, [993 Councils for the same thing. That's what I'm asking ! guess? [s this normal procedure? Roger Knutson: .Rs ~'m sitting here Z don't recall the December [4th meeting or whether I was even there to be honest with you. Jeff Williams: Okay, well I do have the Minutes if you'd like to see them. Roger Knutson: If you could just show them to me a second. Jeff Williams: Sure. Roger Knutson: My impression is they approved the concept that they're finalizing tonight. Mayor Chmiel: Was it a concept previously and not the final decision as is tonight? Don ashworth: Well I don't see that it's unusual. I mean we've presented let's say concept here as how a particular program would look and what not and the Council will say yes or no. If they .say yes, then we'll have the specific document drawn up that parallels that concept. And at that point in time, the concept did not include the contingency on it. The agreement parallels the concepts that have been presented on December [4th but ! don't know of any time where the specific document itself, once it was drafted, has not been re-presented to a City Council for final approval. Roger Knutson: If I could just comment. It would have to be. No one has the right to, other than you, to enter into this kind of agreements and you've never seen this agreement before tonight. Obviously we couldn't just have the Mayor and the Clerk sign it and be done with it. It had to come back to you for final approval. For real approval if you will. Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor, I think that your motion can stand because a friendly amendment is clearly made that we intended to assist this gentleman and see that it gets pursued and if there becomes hang-ups, it will be I think found in his favor. But on the other hand, we need the negotiation power to get off dead center here. I'd like to call the question. Jeff Williams: Can I just say one more thing? Mayor Chmiel: One more. Jeff Williams: Okay. I did talk to the City Planner from Shorewood before this meeting and he was also told verbally and he thinks he has It in writing, too that he understood that because they wouldn't proceed on their agenda until we had something in writing and they do supposedly have something in writing saying that everything was agreed upon and that annexation was not required. So that's all I know and they were told the same thing as I was told. · Mayor Chmiel: You may have something in writing but it hasn't passed by Council. That's where the little hang-up comes but I think from what we've discussed here, and the points that have been brought forward, I think, those City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 issues will get addressed. So I think that with that I'd like to call the question on this. Hayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Wing seconded to approve the agreement to provide utility and street services to the proposed subdivision (Deer Ridge) in the City of Shorewood, Project 92-18, with the condition that staff be instructed to approach the Shorewood City Council and request their consideration of a friendly deannexation/annexation process 'for at least one lot in Hennepin County. If Shorewood does not approve this annexation, that the matter be brought back to the Chanhassen City Counci! for immediately consideration. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. E. APPROVAL OF 1993 LIOUOR LICENSE APPLICATIONS. Councilman Senn: I asked item (e) to be pulled because I guess I'd like to ask staff what, it references background checks and thls, that and the other thing. What is entailed in that process and what is the criteria that they're supposed to meet to come through this process for approval? Don Ashworth: It goes back to Carver County Sheriff's Department who then actually runs it through FBZ as well. It lncludes all of the corporate owners that are shown on the application and if there are any crimlnal violations, they are noted. They do not pick up speedlng tickets, etc. Help me Roger in terms of what other type of felonies or whatnot would trigger a review by the City Counc11. Roger Knutson: Well you do periodic reviews. Annual reviews to make sure that the normal liquor law violations. Any felonies. Anything. Drug arrests. What have you. Anythlng that goes on the establishment. Do crlmlnal histories on that. And then Scott also looks to see if there's been any complaints against the establishments that haven't been resolved. And if an issue appears, then it's brought to your attention. Mayor Chmiel: Or under age drinking and so on. Roger Knutson: And you had one, was it last year Mr. Mayor, where you brought someone ln. Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Roger Knutson: Because there had been under age drinking problem. 3 of them? Mayor Chmiel: That's correct. Roger Knutson: You brought them all in here and you had a chat about how serious you took that issue and got it resolved and gave them thelr license. Councilman Senn: Okay but, as I understand it, those complaints haven't stopped at least on one of the operators. In fact it was my understanding that those complaints were alred agaln as little as a week ago. Roger Knutson: I haven't heard them. 10 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 Don Ashworth: Scott's investigations found no complaints. Councilman Senn: No complaints from other businesses around any of these operators or anything? Don Ashworth: They would have to have had put it on file with us. We don't go out and knock on the door of businesses and say, do you have a complaint against your neighbor. If they have registered some form of complaint, Scott.would have notified me of that. Councilman Senn: ! thought last week some of the abutting property owners were in complaining again of Filly's at the HRR meeting asking that it'be bought again because of the happenings that are going on there. ! believe quoting... Mayor Chmiel: Those are past happenings that they were discussing. Of some time ago but it wasn't anything which was most recent. Councilman Senn: Okay. Then [ guess, okay so none of that was recent. Don ashworth: There's another issue there and that is that those issues were really relayed back through another property. In other'words, the hotel people had not registered that concern. There had been one from the previous year in whlch the Council was made aware of the lssues associated with that. But the allegation of, and I think that the way Clayton said was, well you've got. to do something about this HRA because we continue to take and have them throw beer bottles through windows, and we have no record of any beer bottles through wlndows. The owners have never submitted that claim. Councilman Senn: Then I'm assuming I won't see that referenced in any more staff reports either then. Con ~shworth: Huh? Councilman Senn: I assume I won't see that referenced in any more staff reports then either. I mean I've seen it referred to now in several staff reports regarding the purchase of Filly's. That that's a constant problem there and hearing two different things. Mayor Chmiel: I'm not sure exactly where you're coming from with that. Councilman Senn: Well Don Z'm coming from nowhere other than you're saying let's approve a liquor license here and you're saying let's approve a liquor license for an establishment that I've heard absolutely nothing but complaints about referencing back to the purchase discussions over HRA. Mayor Chmiel: But there are no commitments by the local enforcement agencies indicating that those situations really did occur. Councilman Senn: So there's none documented. Mayor Chmiel: And that's what you have to have is documentation. I think you'd have a lot of problem trying not to issue that particular license if you don't ll City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 have the documentation· Councilman Wing: Those comments were stated as this having happened a year ago and that they don't like it there because they had an occasion a year ago where someone threw a beer bottle through a wlndow. That was a year ago and that may be documented. It could have happened. I'm sure it was reported but lt's irrelevant to thls report. So far in the future, and that was stated as a past occurence. Not as a current problem. At the HRA meeting. Councilman Senn: Second issue is, in relationship to the passage of liquor licenses. I'm famlliar with several other citles or town boards that have denled 11quor licenses continually on the basls of the providers being significantly behind in back taxes. Is that a crtteria that has gone into looklng at approval of these liquor licenses or not? Mayor Chmiel: Not to my knowledge. Councilman Senn: And should we be awarding liquor licenses to establishments that are significantly behind in taxes? Don Ashuorth: I would ask the City Attorney to respond to that but in advance of doing that, I'm sure that Councilman Senn is referring to again the bowling center who just, Z think they're comlng out of Chapter 11 or whatever. They are current on this year's taxes and I believe on 1992. They still have outstanding 1990 and 1991 uhlch were both included as a part of the bankruptcy flllngs. Your position. Councilman Senn: The property tax data I had done Don was that they were years behind. I don't know, maybe that's been changed here in the last couple weeks or so by payment or so but you know to me that's falrly significant. Roger Knutson: To the best of my knowledge, and I'm not sure of this because I wasn't prepared for thls issue. I don't thlnk there's anythlng in our Clty Code, and I'll check, that says non-payment of real estate taxes means you don't get your 11cense. I have drafted and I work in several citles that have such provisions. This city does not, to the best of my knowledge. As far as the effect of the bankruptcy, it ls posslble that would be effected by what the bankruptcy court has done. I'm not a bankruptcy lawyer but I can find out the answer to that for you. Whether they're in Chapter 117 137 Don Ashuorth: The project's laying on my desk but it, the settlement agreement ls before the Court and it u111 be finally heard ulthin the next 15 to 20 days. It does include the arrear property taxes for I belleve it's, I'm not sure if '90 and '91 lt's '90, '91, or '89, , · Roger Knutson: Irregardless of the effect of the bankruptcy, you don't have that... Mayor Chmlel: Yeah, it's nothlng ulthin our ordinance per se. I don't thlnk we can enforce it from that standpoint. That might be a good point to look at. Councilman Senn: Pull that one Mark. Just hold that for one meetlng and get an answer on it. Determine where we want to go on it. If nothing else, we can 12 City Counci! Meeting - March 22, 1993 approve it at least. Maybe you want to make that change to our ordinance in the future. Councilman Mason: Well but that might be in the future. I mean we need to vote on this so. Councilman Wing: Well we can withhold that one. Councilman Senn: I guess I'd [ike to, at least from my standpoint, hear a little bit more about that in terms of our options.. Councilman Mason: Well that's fine. I mean if it's not tn ordinance now, we can't deny them this year. I mean it might be next year but we can't this year. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, I would agree with that. That position. Don Ashworth: I would ask that if you would like to see the City Attorney's office draft a new section to the ordinance that would make that, I think Councilmember Mason is absolutely correct. That since it's not tn a current ordinance, I find it difficult in putting it back to the current owner. The- other point as noted by Karen Engelhardt is any application which is not received by the department by March 30th, for every .day of delinquency there ts a good chance that they wi1! not have their license back by the 1st of May. Which means they'd be out of business then, let's assume we took action on April 12th. There's a good chance that they would be not able to serve for the' first 10 days in May. It requires them 30 days to process the application at the State level. Maybe we could speed it up. Councilman Senn: Okay, but when tt goes to the State, the State does withhold approval based on taxes being in arrears but not property taxes? Isn't that correct? Roger Knutson: Not property taxes, no. Councilman Senn: No. I didn't say property taxes. I said taxes. Roger Knutson: Sales taxes? Councilman Senn: Yes. Roger Knutson: I don't know that they have a... Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. I would imagine that there would be something there but what that is, I don't have the foggiest idea. Councilwoman Oockendorf: So can we move approval on this with the item of discussion at a future meeting? Mayor ChmieI: ! think that would be in the proper sequence to go right now. To have that motion. Councilman Wing: Did you make that motion? 13 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yes. Councilman Wing: And I'll second that again contingent on us reviewing that ordinance wlth posslbly inclusion of that as other, as mentioned other citles have that. We may want to include that. I think that should be put forth. Mayor Chmiel: Correct. Roger Knutson: Just an editorial comment. I work in some cities where it's amazing how taxes get paid on December 30th. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Z'11 call the motlon. Councilwoman Oockendorf moved, Councilman Wing seconded to approve the 1993 Liquor License Applications with the condition directing the City Attorney to draft an ordinance regarding delinquent property taxes. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. F. SETTLEHENT AGR. EEHENT, R~GHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION FOR EXPANDED HIGHWAY 5. (PREVIOUS BURDICK PROP[ERTY). Councilman Senn: The acquisition, I guess I haven't seen this before so I was just more curious than anythlng else. What it involves. Not ina lot of detall attached. Don Ashworth: We carrled out the purchase of the Burdlck property on Market Boulevard. That's where the pond is and it was needed for the pond. In the meantime MnDot started the construction on Highway 5 and as it turned out, we ended up as the owner by the time they had concluded that process. They then had to deal wlth us in actually acquiring that property. We felt that by the condemnation court making an award to Mr. Burdick, that established reasonable value for that property. We have debated this for the better part of a year, year and a half with MnDot and I thlnk we're about as far as we're going to get them and we flnally, the attorneys in talking wlth myself felt there ls no sense further pursuing this. We've got them to what we thlnk is going to be the best offer closest to the amount that we had pald for that property from Mr. Burdlck. Councilman Senn: Okay, and that's the $115,000.007 Don Ashworth: That's correct. Councilman Senn: And how many square feet of property are involved? Roger Knutson: It's 30 feet wide. How long is it? Oon Ashworth: It's partially along Market but primarily along Highway 5 so, I mean lt's not just 30 feet wide. I'd have to grab the flle. If you'd like to move on, I hope I can find the file. Karen finds files for me. Councilman Senn: Well my question Don is I guess coming back to how many square feet are involved? I mean how does this compare to in effect what we did pay for the property and what value are we getting for it now through the City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 condemnation? [ mean those are pretty basic questions but none of the information is here so I'm not. Roger Knutson: The per square foot cost is somewhat less than we paid for the whole piece but we're not selling the whole piece. We're selling a strip-and then when you consider in the cost, it would seem fair. ! did not, the condemnation lawyer in the office handled this. I don't have the numbers on the top of my head but we can run upstairs. I can't. I don't know where they are. Don Ashworth: Again, I could look for that in the file. Mayor Chmiel: Is this really pertinent to your questions that you're asking? Councilman Senn: Yeah, it is. I mean I have a little bit of a hard time Just approving this without understanding the background or the numbers behind it. Oon Ashworth: I mean this has gone on... Councilman Senn: But again you can vote without me so you don't need me. I'd like to see that before I would. Don Ashworth: If we table this for one meeting, like I said, it's gone on for 4 years. One more meeting probably. Mayor Chmiel: We might have it here now. We might be able to resolve it rather quickly. Don Ashworth: I'd say 1,500 feet by 25 feet. It could be if you want to pass the map. See if somebody else can. Councilman Senn: It's how much again? I'm sorry. Don Ashworth: Approximately 1,S00 by 25. Then there also is a construction easement in there which generally is less value. Roger Knutson: So it's about 37,000 square feet. Say 40,000 square feet. Something less than an acre. Don Ashworth: I recall the acquisition from Hr. Burdick was $2.80 and I know this came in at less. I can't remember for sure Mark but I think it was like 20 to 30 cents but fighting this further, attorney fees in my own mind were eating us up. No offense to Roger's office. Roger Knutson: You know at something less than an acre and we're getting $115,000.00 for it. So something less than $3.00 an acre. Councilman Senn: Just less than. Don Ashworth: But that's not correct because I know it's under the $2.80 that was paid to Mr. Burdick but not enough so to be, to further warrant. The next step on this process is to go into court and I Just could not see that. It just does not warrant a court process when you're that close. 15 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1992 Councilman Senn: Don, I'm not suggesting that. It's just when I get an action put in front of me which is agreeing to acquire, I guess I'd just like to see that kind of basic information that tells me. Geez, here's what we paid for it. Here's what we're getting out of the condemnation for it. You know, at least some reasonable comparison of cost. Don Ashworth: And I apologize because I guess in my own mind, having this been going on for such a long period of time, I just felt maybe we were kind of at the end and I should have included those earlier documents, I apologize. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, one of the things I'd like to have done Mark, if you do have those kind of specific questions, and we know we're not gotng to get them, get a hold of Don and talk to him prior to the meetlng so we can get that resolved at that particular time. Councilman Wing: Or get it pulled off the agenda. ! don't want to get here and staff putting this much effort into it and then tie up the meeting. We're going to change the consent agenda later tonight. Mayor Chmiel: Well hopefully. Consents work very well if you ask your questions prlor to, and they're not a hlghly controversial klnd of 1rem. What's your pleasure? Councilman Wing: Well I've been in on this one so I'll move approval. Councilman Mason: I'll second it. Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Nason seconded to approve the Settlement Agreement of right-of-way acquisition for expanded Highway 5, (previous Burdick property) as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. G. ~PPROVAL OF ACCOUNTS. Councilman Senn: I realize you like consent to be consent but on three occasions now, including in writing I've asked for speciflc breakdowns on expenditures. We're still not gettlng it. Mayor Chmiel: Which ones are you concerned with? Councilman Senn: Well I'm not going to, I've probably got 25 items listed here. I'm not going to waste the time to go through them tonight. I'm not going to vote for thls. I would 11kw staff to please start puttlng an explanation behlnd the expenses as has been requested and not have all these blanks. And real baslc thlngs like when somebody travels where they're golng and what they're going for rather than blank. councilman Wing: Pull it out and be specific will you Mark so I know where you're going. It would be a better idea of what you want on this. If you've got one in particular that we can look at. Councilman Senn: Well, I mean Dick I've been very specific you know with these on several tlmes nov and especially in wrltlng. Going down, I'm just golng down some of these items. 51035. Outhouse Graphics. Printing and Publishing, 16 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 $4,400.00 for newsletters. Is that the City newsletter? Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Councilman Senn: Okay. There are several travel and training items on here relating to, here's one for the Mayor. It just says travel and training. It doesn't say to what. For what. Anything else here. Here's one for Don Ashworth, travel and training. I thought we agreed that we were going to start havlng a location and a purpose. Councilman Mason: Mr. Mayor, if I could. Mayor Chmlel: Yeah. Councilman Mason: I think we were all at the same meeting and I don't recall that there was an agreement that that would be done. What'I understood was, is if anyone had any questions at all about any of this, to be sure to check with Jean, right? Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Yeah, that was the discussion. Councilman Mason: And if so desired, those folders could be pulled and checked as opposed to anyone in the city having to take the time to type every little thing out that's going on here. Mayor Chmiel: Or you could even review the expense sheet that indicates where it's been. Where we've gone. Mine was for, and I can think of it right off hand, mine was for mileage to St. Paul, two different times at the Hetropolitan Council. Over to Chaska City Council. School District over at Chaska. Councilman Senn: Don, I guess that's fine. My understanding is different than Mr. Mason's. I left that meeting, I thought assured by Don that they were going to be included. He was going to talk to Jean. If I wanted to, I could follow up and talk to Jean about my specific requirements. I told Oon that wasn't necessary because as long as there was a general explanation of what it was and where it was, I'd be happy. And I thought we had an agreement on that. Don Ashworth: I still have some problem. For example again I'll go to the Mayor's or my own but, I mean in both instances I would ¢all them miscellaneous. In other words there's been 10 meetings of under $10.00 each or $15.00. I mean would that help if it said G meetings. Councilman Senn: Miscellaneous mileage. Put miscellaneous mileage. I mean that's different than an airplane ticket to New York. I mean you know, the explanation you're giving here which is zero tells you nothing in terms of what you're approving. Don Ashworth: I think that Jean has been trying to include additional information under each one and I think each time we're maybe learning a little bit more as to what it ls the Council is looklng for under those. So again, under the travel and training I will ask for if they can put in, if there's & miscellaneous, than it's 6 miscellaneous, or & under $15.00 or whatever the case may be. 17 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 Councilman Senn: Yeah. What I specifically requested before was travel, training, subscriptions, dues. Things like that that we list what they are so we know. Don Ashworth: I'm sorry. I was klnd of looking for a 11st and I hadn't heard it. Councilman Wing: You know Mark's, I'm supposed to raise my hand. Mayor Chmiel: Sure, go ahead. Councilman Wing: I can sort of sense where Mark's coming from except being from the Fire Department, I've seen Jean hammer us so bad so fast. I mean if there's a haukeye in this clty, that's where it's at and you don't rent a car for $12.00 if you could have gotten it for $11.00. She won't pay it so you've got your budget money and she watches those budgets and thelr numbers extremely close. $o when we get to this point, this ls something that's been scrutinized already by someone that's a lot more qualified to scrutinize it and knows the numbers better than we are and I don't know if she has to then transpose all that scrutlnlzatlon so we can look at it arbitrarily and plck out one or two ltems that may or may not work. And I guess to go with Mr. Mason. I think if you've got a problem, a phone call to Jean is golng to get your more information than you want to hear. Mayor Chmiel: And she'll be there. Councilman Wing: And she'll be there. There's no questton about it. They run an extremely tlght shlp. Councilman Senn: If that's the way we want to handle them, then that will be understood. Councilman Wing: Well I favor more information although there's more information on here now, and be speciftc on what you want...50 pages here because then I'm not going to go through Councilman Senn: Again, I wrote a two page letter explaining that. I guess I'm not going to, you know go pull it out of the file and read it agaln I guess. I thought that would have been sufficient to expla£n what I wanted...one question. Why are we paying the engineer on Mlnnewashta Parkway more money? Councilman Wing: Which number is it? Councilman Senn: 050985. Councilwoman Dockendorf: As long as you bring up the issue. What was resolved since the last Council meeting with the Parkway. Councilman Wing: Fixed it. Mayor Chmiel: We took care of it. Put additional rock. Graded it with a pitch in the center so it has a slope and a drain off. It's still not the best but it's the best we can posslbly get as of right now. 18 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 Councilman Senn: Well you know listening to the past comments of Council, ! mean so far this project has turned into about the biggest disaster the City has ever experienced. Both costwise and cttizen wise, yet every, just about every month there's another payment here to the guy who caused-the disaster. Mayor Chmiel: Well I think we've gotten a new Enstght on that. If we can't get £t completed by September, we're not going to move into October. Councilman Senn: You mean we keep paying him until September Don? I mean just a question. I get real confused because I come to these meetings and here these' very specific comments yet I don't see any follow thru. Councilman ming: Good. Well I'll help you pick that one out then. That was which number again? 050? Mayor Chm£el: What page were you on? Councilman Senn: That is on page 3. 050985. Don Ashworth: Charles should respond but this city entered into a contract with the engineer. That contract is on a percent of work completed by contractor. i'm confident, well Charles why don't you go ahead. Charles Folch: as Don was eluding to, ue do have a contract that we've entered into basically with the consultant engineer which is based on a percentage of the project cost and therefore as the project construction progresses,.basically the percent of completions typically mirror the percentage of payment that is made. Partial payments that .are made to the consultant. Actually we went with Bill Engelhardt almost 9 months into the project back. Starting back from the feasibility phase before we actually,.before they actually submitted any payment invoices from the city so from that standpoint certainly we aren't paying ahead on anything and this is a typical contract:as with any other consultant engineer on a project in this city. Councilman Senn: You know ! guess ['d like to see this item pulled and i'd also Like some review by the City. Attorney as to whether this company is in company is in conformance with their contract or not. Or ts in. potential.violation of it. ['m going back to again a lot of what ['ye heard. Mayor Chmiel: Let me ask a question before you go that far. So we don't spend some more money over money that you're concerned about. Oo you have any idea Charles as to where we are with that contractor in the agreement? CharLes Folch: The actual percentage numbers right now, without going back and checking a file, [ couldn't tell you off hand but ! guess-maybe somebody needs to inform as to what's been failed to be done or why'we wouldn't want to proceed with paying them for some services that they provided. .. Councilman Wing: Well I think Mark spelled it out. It's been a disaster. The grade wasn't done right. There wasn't enough material put on. The neighbors have ruin their cars. Their clothes. Their driveways. It's--the worst disaster the City's ever faced as far as it's citizens is concerned and it's been really embarrassing to me and I think Bill's got egg on his face. I don't think the 19 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 present project got started too late. Z don't think it was done in good faith. Z didn't believe it uas going to be successful and none of the neighbors did. Every letter that came out from Bill or you promised things that never occurred on time tables that never happened and then ue get to this spring and engineering goes out and says, uell it's flat. Well it should have done this. It should have been graded. It should have had this on it. So finally after Council puts the pressure on, somebody goes out and fixes it. Well maybe it should have been done that way last fall. And if Bill was the engineer, he should have been responsible. And the buck has to stop someplace and I guess I'm with Mark. Maybe the buck's got to stop with Bill and we ought to pull this item and look at the whole project. Although this payment may be from past work. Maybe we're got to look at where we're going from now on because this hasn't gone right and it hasn't been good. Councilman Senn: ...quit getting calls and dry cleaning bills. Mayor Chmiel: I know. I've been out there several times myself. And I didn't charge the city for the wash jobs either. But that's probably true. Alright, can we have an approval of thls payroll check reglster as well as the accounts payable and to review item 050985 by our engineering department to determine what has really transpired on that partioular project. And at thls tlme I don't want to give it to the City Attorney to spend some additional dollars at this tlme. Councilman Wlng: I'd like to suggest that that item go to a work session, not a Council agenda. Mayor Chmiel: Alright. Councilman Mason: I move approval of 1rem 2(g) on the Consent Agenda. Charles Folch: Mr. Mayor, if I might pose a question. Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Charles Folch: Is there, ! mean what should we, what's your recommendation staff do with future bills that come through for this project? Mayor Chmiel: Well that's a very good question. Don Ashworth: I thlnk you have it on a work session so let's talk about it at that polnt in tlme. Councilman Wing: My intent would be to pay the bills. I want to look at the process and what's occurred. If there was a problem, it would come out of that discussion at that work sesslon. Mayor Chmiel: We're going to have that work sesslon on the 27th. That's what had down. Dld we change that? Councilman Mason: The ?th of April is the work session. Councilman Wing: And goals was on 27th. 2O City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 Mayor Chmiel: Okay. You're right. 5:30 is the work session. Don Ashworth: [ had the 7th. I didn't have the 27th. Mayor Chmiel: 8:00 a.m. In the courtyard. Councilman Senn: 27th was a goats session was it not and then the work session was the 7th of April. Mayor Chmiel: That's correct. Councilman Wing: I'd like to second the motion. Councilman Mason moved, Councilman #tn~ seconded to approve the ~ccounts Payable dated March 22, 1993. Ali voted in favor except Councilman Senn Nho opposed and the motion carried. -- Councilman Wing: Now does the meeting begin? Mayor Chmiel: No. I've got to do a ltttle apology here because I didn't know that Susan Hurm was going to be here to speak on the Minnesota Volunteer Recognition Week and I extend my apologies and I'd like to have you come forward at this time to do that. Susan Hurm: As he did mention, I'm the adult representative for the Youth Commission and we were bringing the proclamation for Volunteer Week to the Council to read as a proclamation.- My youth person-is here with me and I'd like to introduce her. She is a junior at Chaska High School and she is kind of new' to the Commission also as I am. I am filling the position and will need to be re-appointed by the.Council again.l And Natalie's going-to tell, Natalie Rostni is going to tell you what the Youth Commission has. been doing the year that they have been in existence and then [ wtll assist her. So Natatie. Natalie Rosini: Okay like Susan said, I'd like to tell you a little bit about what the Youth Commission has been doing. This past January we sent in an application to be recognized as a leadership plan and this is to Oarrel Busler at Mankato University. Eight school districts and four other sites for labs were selected and Chaska, or District 112 was one of them. And basically it's to learn how youth and adults work as partners on policy making bodies. And we send information about what we do and then we get information about other districts have been doing. It's just trying to pull-it all together and give other districts ideas. We also have two youth on our commission that are on the Action for Children Youth Advisory Council which.GovernorArnie Carlson has started last spring. It's a take off from the Adult Advisory Counctl and I am one of them and Chris Cerwanka-who's'a senior at Chaska Htgh'School'is'the other representative. And there's 26 youth from across the state that are on this Council. 26 were chosen out of 80 applicants so it's been a really rewarding thlng to be on. Our role ls to create a vislon for Minnesota's children and families. That's a rod ro11. Some of the things we've been doing'is reviewing legislation and policy. Right now ue're working.on a medta summit and March 31st and April 2nd, I'm not sure what channel it will be on but there's a children's summit that we were just interviewed wlth the Adult Advisory Councll and President Clinton is going to be on there the third day talking about other 21 City Council Meeting - March 22, lgg2 programs throughout the nation and stuff and the Action for Children Youth Advisory Council was chosen for one of those so that should be pretty excit£ng. We've also worked wlth the Community Education Advlsory Council in Chaska and they came to us because they wanted a youth member on their board and asked us to take care of selecting a youth for that so we've been worklng wlth them. And another thing that the Youth Commission is doing right now is we might participate in the Minnesota Youth Summlt whlch is brand new this year. It's of, by and for the youth and lt's a one day deal in April and just discussing toplcs of, current toplcs Z guess ls what we'll be discussing there. Then the Youth Volunteer Service Directory, that's another project that we've worked to create. We put this together. I can't say I because I came in after they put thls together but basically what they did is went around to the communities and asked them to put thelr lnput in and glve ldeas of, or went to buslnemses and asked you know, do you need, do you have room for some volunteers. And ~o then they came back to us and we put it all together and that's the Youth Servlce Directory. So if you want, if a student wants to volunteer for ~omething or get community servlce hours or whatever, they can just go to the book and look it up and choose what they'd like to do. And ~o that's, we've been distributing that book throughout the community and that's how Susan I thlnk found out about thls and came to call the Youth Commission because we were looktng for someone to f111 the positlon for the Chanhassen representative. Rlght now we are currently worklng with the League of Women Voters to set up Growing Up Female. That's thelr program whlch will take place next Monday night. So if any of you would like to come. We were asked, the Youth Commission was asked to come and talk and answer quemtlons just on growlng up female. That's thelr topl¢. And also, the last thing is that we've been working with Tanya Bishman who is the Carver representative I thlnk wlth the steerlng committee for the Community Learnlng Center. Have you heard about that? It's a proposal that the 01strict was offered a grant and we are competing with 22 other sltes around the country for thls planning grant. It's to set up, it's not a new ~ohool but it's kind of confusing but lt's a community learnlng center. That'm what lt's golng to be called. And then also we are thinking about participating in the National Service Learning Conference but we haven't really de¢lded. That's just too revitalizing education or renewing communities. So that takes place in April also. But basically the Youth Commission, we serve as a 11nk between the community and youth so we're here to help other programs and facilitate other thlngs. Mayor Chmiel: Good. Thank you Natalle. Appreciate that. Susan Hurm: One more thing before we give up the mic. This year we will be updating thls Youth 01rectory. We'll be doing thls every year and if you look through here, there isn't a whole lot from Chanhassen for the youth in Chanhassen to do. So we will be golng around agaln as they did last year looking for volunteer opportunities for our klds in this community and so we would certainly 11kc to have your help in locatlng those klnds of things for the kids to do. Mayor Chmiel: Great. Thank you very much. It's always a pleasure to see a younger individual withln thts community take an active role in what you're dolng and we certainly appreciate it. Susan Hurm: She did a nice job. 27_ City Council Meeting - Hatch 22, 1993 Mayor Chmiel: Yes, an excellent job. councilman Wing: What's happening to this book? I mean there's really, just paging through it, there's some tremendous information here. I didn't know half these things existed. How 'is this being disseminated? Where is it going? How many copies are out? It deserves some publicity. Susan Hurm: Well we have them in the high school. We've got them in the middle school and I'm taking them over to St. Hubert's. We're just trying to get them to the youth as best we can. And I know that it's not well know. That this is available. Councilman Wing: We have the Chanhassen Villager is our local paper. Maybe they should get a copy of this just to see what's available. Susan Hurm: It wouldn't hurt, yeah. We would like to get. a lot more PR and each one of the youth members, representatives and the adult representatives are going to the City Councils so they'll be going to Victoria and they'll go to Carver and so hopefully we'll get more information out to everyone. But they've morked real hard and they've accomplished, a lot in a year. And they are a good voice that needs to be heard. And there is now a youth member on the School Board so they've made some inroads and they do have really strong leadership skills mhich we are trying to develop..So we-hope that someday maybe they'll be on your Council. Mayor Chmiel: The leaders of tomorrow. Natalie Rosini: You were asklng about when, what was your last question about if that was being distributed or with the paper? Councilman Wing: Well just the distribution of thls I think is Important because there's a lot of information. I've got a, I Just happened to pick one out here. My daughter ls doing some work, graduate work right now and there's a couple things in here that just fit right in. I'm going to show-this to her and she's going to be excited to call-these numbers. Natalie Rosint: Because there's our President, or our Chairperson, excuse me, is going to, I think he just mrote up an artlcle to send in to the paper but that mas kind of a. slow process because we~ve been working with other things. There's many things. Councilman Wlng: Well Chanhassen Villager is our local paper and they're right here in town and sometimes we can, under pressure bend their arm a little bit to get support for things. Natalie Rosini: That'd be great. Mayor Chmiel: And I think we have him sitting here. Susan Hurm: Well me appreciate anything you can do for us because they are a good body. 23 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: Mayor Chmtel: Hark, may I just ask that hopefully you will get through this without too much problem and hopefully if there's anything that we've discussed previously, at the last meetlng, I would appreciate that as well. And I'd 11ke to glve you a shorter period of time this time than you dld the last time. Hopefully you can wlnd up wlthin 5 or 10 mlnutes at the most. Mark Halla: I'll do my best. I don't think there will be any problem with that. Councilman Senn: Excuse me Don. Just a point. Do we have an 1rem under Visitor Presentation too that's scheduled? Mayor Chmiel: No, that's item number 3. Kate Aanenson: That's a visitor presentation item. Mayor Chmiel: Oh 3, okay. Yes. We'll get to that. It is. Mark Halla: Thank you for allowing me to speak here tonight. I've basically written a speech and I'll just read it through and that was in the lnterest of trying to save as much time as possible. I know my pursuit of this issue has angered some of you but I appreciate you allowing a political process to continue nonetheless. I wish to point out that you, the City Council, have the opportunity to make a declsion that will effect the clty forever. You're unfortunately in a posltion that pits you either against city or against local business. You also jeopardize your own political goals if you make an unpopular decision. I don't envy your position. I hope you consider your decision from all sides before you finalize lt. This lssue to me has become one of principle rather than simply economics. I've always agreed with the goals of reforesting our city but I also belleve you must not do thls at the expense of local business. The Tree Preservation Board by name is preservation. Not reforestation. However, reforestation ls obviously a major goal of all of us. It's also the goal of the federal government. There are federal monies available that by law must be spent through local business. Not in competition wlth or against local business. Your decision on this matter should take into account the actlons by the federal government. To declde to compete wlth local retailers in any fashion by selling anythlng at any price may have legal ramifications. You are to use our dollars to lmprove our public land, not our prlvate. If you want more trees, require more when subdividing. Plant them on boulevards. Improve landscaping on city property but don't sell them. The use of our taxes to compete with local retailers or to sell anything for private use ls confllct of interest. It is wrong, unfalr, probably illegal, contrary to the standard government practices and should not be done. When we proposed to the Tree Board that we may be w1111ng to offer a discount to Chanhassen residents, and that was all three of the local garden centers. If they match that discount they said, the Clty does not intend to spend any money on this project. That is not up for discussion. This has been labeled a top priority but there are no funds available to promote lt? Every slngle day, 3&5 days a year, I spend money to operate my business. I pay taxes, insurances, utilities, payroll, the list goes on. I realize that I must sell my product at a hlgher prlce than I pay for it in order to survive. I risk my livelihood every day. If I don't make money, I and 20 to 30 other people lose their jobs. As any entrepreneur in buslness City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 for himself or herself would agree, the competition from other retailers is expected. They have similar cost and overhead and therefore similar pricing. Competition from a city that does not have these other associated costs is unexpected, unjust and immoral. The end does not justify the means. The Tree Preservation Board would be better off seeking local retailers support rather than alienating them. It was expressed at our meeting last Monday night that the Arbor Bay celebration itself was an important aspect of this program. was mentioned that the local retailers could donate trees or possibly even move one with a tree spade for the city celebration. That would help bring a crowd and also get us some exposure but they would still sell their trees. Halla Nursery has in the past donated goods or services'to the city and may do so tn the future but the incentive to do so would be greatly-reduced if. th~s program continues. The lack of support in this instance is overwhelming. I'm disgusted that the city in uhich I operate would even consider selling anything for any reason to private citizens for their own private use. This program does Just that and should not continue. The city has'3 garden centers that local residents can go to for landscaping, trees, shurbs, related products. The competition between these garden centers will naturally keep pricing fair. You may believe the prices for these products are too high but that isn't your concern. Each one of us in this bus£ness is competitive not only w~th each other but with the general Twin City marketplace for similar goods. We would not be in this business if we d~dn't strongly support your'end-goal of reforestation and beautification of our environment. That's the unquestionable truth. I think ue all agree on that.. Please help:us achieve this goal through education, city programs that stress the value of. trees, recycling, legislation to require more trees, otc, but not through selling to the public. As you already know, the 3 local garden centers have written support of more than 40 local businesses. I believe that was mailed to. each. of-you, In addition I have here some more signatures bringing the total support against this program upuards of 50 local businesses. All of these are either owners .or managers. also have some information on the federal tree planting program. It outlines the method of promoting reforestation as well as the fact that it can only be used through small business and on public land:only.- I wish to point out that I'm representing the viewpoint of-not only myself but over 50 other-business people. We've used the political process as it was meant to be used and we have no animosity towards any member of the city or. the Council ~tself, and hope you feel the same. I know that your decision will be based on what you believe is best for our communit and I don't fault you for that. I admire you for ~t. This will be a late night and I know you're all doing the best you can. I thank you for hearing me out and I have some paperwork that I th~nk mtght help in your decision. Who would you like me to pass it out to? Mayor Chmiel: Good, thank you. Why don't you just bring those and give those up here to the Counc11. Whatever you have. ' Councilman Senn: Don I have a question if I could. Mayor Chmiel: Sure. Councilman Senn: Last meeting when this came up ! asked that these guys go back and meet with the Tree Board.. It sounds like that's occurred but it sounds, if I'm interpretting the comments correctly,.that it kind of went nowhere or did nothing? 25 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 Mayor Chmiel: No. My understanding is that the other two nurseries or the other two people who were in business within the city, maybe Todd can answer that particuIar question. Todd Hoffman: To answer your question CounciIman Senn. I did carry out the City Council's directive. Called a special meeting of the Tree Preservation Board with the retailers. Mr. Halla, Mr. Jay Kronick and Mr. Jim Wilson. As a result of that meeting the board, boardmember Schroers moved and Eiler seconded that they made a motion to sponsor as a part of the Arbor Day celebration, specifically on that day, that Saturday morning, a tree sale offering 50 inch and one half, balled and burlapped sugar maple trees in observance of the city's emblem at considerably reduced prices. That would be on a first come, first serve basis as part of the event. Single tree per person. In addition to that, that local vendors are invited to participate in the process or the event as they choose and we suggested that we could distribute sales flyers or information to the residents and participants of that celebration from each of the individual businesses. So the tree sale as occurred last year was dismantled. It was not suggested that that would continue. Upon calling Mr. Halla, Jay Kronick and Jim Wilson the morning after the Tree Board meeting to inform them of this position, Mr. Kronick and Mr. Wilson responded favorably to the process, and at least neutrally if not favorably to the outcome. However Mr. Halla continued to express his displeasure with the issue. Councilman Senn: And when does this recommendation from the Tree Board come to the Council for consideration, or doesn't it? Todd Hoffman: It was my understanding that the City Council asked that the Tree Board resolve the issue and this is their resolve. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, and I think that was the direction we had given at that time. Councilman Senn: Well I think that we asked that they meet and see if they could resolve the issue. From what I'm hearing it wasn't resolved. Councilman Mason: Well no, two of the people involved in the nursery business at least gave tacit approval to this time around because it was a little too late to stop lt. Am I correct in assumlng that Todd? Todd Hoffman: Correct. Councilman Mason: Now I had a chat with Jay Kronick after that and I suggested to him maybe after the first of the year ue sit down and see how ue can, for years previous get all this worked out. And he was amenable. So I believe that 2 of the 3 were, like Todd said, at least in tacit agreement. Mark Halla: Let me point out. Councilman Wing: Let's just keep going here. Mayor Chmlel: We're just having it right here at Council yet. I also had discussions with Jay and basically what you said is what he said to me as well. And I thlnk the lntent as we indicated a long tlme ago was the fact, not trylng 26 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 to take business away from existing nurseries or businesses. The intent behind it ~as to promote the planting of trees wh£ch was the main intent and what we indicated at that time to be selling the trees for cost, was Just that fact of putting trees in. To get them planted and hopefully helping the environment as well in cleaning it. But ! know that the position that we had taken at that time and clarification that [ had made at that particular meeting was that we know that they weren't going to be making money on this but hopefully we were looking at it from the Council standpoint to promote an exposure to those businesses, or whoever that successful bidder was last year. And that was where we were really coming from with this whole situation. [ don't think this Council nor myself would take a position to try to run in competition with any other businesses in this community. If anything ue do, we support those businesses and do that rather strongly. Mark Halla: That's exactly why I got the petition together. Mayor Chmiel: That's right. That's right.-And many of those people who had even signed that petition had called me and said, can you tell me really what I really signed. They still had some concerns. Mark Halla: I wouldn't know that. Mayor Chmiel: But nonetheless, I just wanted to make that clarification. Richard do you. Councilman Wing: I just might clarify what we did that night because I was there and I agreed with the business and the retail group that were there. They had some valid points and I think we listened intently and we listened hard and [ think that's the reason was called in the first place. What we did was stop a month long process with a tree sale that went over weeks and weeks and weeks and tried to sell as many trees as we could and unknown number and I think last year we sold 60. What we decided to do was just have an Arbor Day and some way to-, you've got to get people in the door somehow to this Arbor Oay celebration. So we decided to pick one tree a year. This year it just happened to be a maple because it's our signature. Limit it to 50 trees t. otal and use those trees to bring people in on an educational process. I guess our goal here. was urban reforestation. This is a long term decade after decade type goal. It's not, the retailers came in and were talking about today and me and I and what's best for me today and how it's going to effect me today and'I started to shut it out because there was no talk about the city and it's-future. It's growth and ho~ they might help and present a better program. So as an attempt to compromise in this environmental issue, we simply cut it do~n to one day, no more than one- day. 50 trees, which is fewer than...local-community in it's entirety with brochures, with trucks, set up stands if they want to and give away discount coupons. Pass out brochures. Whatever they want to but [ see this as bolstering the local business-community. Not hurting it-. I was, frankly Hark when you come up here and start talking about being against local business, l think I'm being supportive of local business. When you start talking to a guy like me that's heart and soul on this Council, and talk about political goals and political decisions, you're out of line. That really, if I'm turning red, I'm glad I'm tan because I'm not a politician and I'm working for the city and I'm trying to be visionary long term and business is our local community and ! don't agree with your position or your statement at all. And I think if you've 27 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 chosen to get on this band wagon, HaIIa Nursery could have become famous in this thing. So I just can't agree with what we're going. Now the one question I do have is the iegaiity. This seems to be areai common thing in a lot of cities. In our community and certainly out East is where we got this started our idea. Is this iIlegal for us to have a few trees on a Saturday morning and pick them up at wholesale and sell them to the community? Roger Knutson: I don't think so. Councilman Wing: I don't think so either. Roger Knutson: The DNR's been selling trees for, forever might be too long but for a long time. Councilman Wing: So I don't agree that it's illegal. I think you're wrong. Vernelle Clayton: I just have a suggestion. It's not original with me. It was Brad's ldea a long tlme ago and I dldn't follow up on lt. It seems to me that we have a good thing going here. That the city's trees could be sort of like a lost leader and Market Square, we manage the shopping center. That's I understand where the give away is going to be taking place. We would certainly be happy to lnvlte the nursery folks to come and have a few of their wares to display as well. Come and get the free trees as a sort of incentive to come out and then see their pretty thlngs and buy them I think could be a uln-uln all the way around and you're welcome to come and I'd be happy to invite the others. Mayor Chmiel: Could you please state your name just for the record. Vernelle Clayton: Oh, for the record I'm Vernelle Clayton. Mark Halla: I'd appreciate that opportunity and we'll probably take you up on that. I've always stressed that I firmly believe in this end goal. For 50 some years we've been in business dolng this same thing. We've been out here for nearly 30. And Richard I apologize if I've offended you in any way because I certainly did not mean that, but I can state the facts for what they are and there's 50 signatures on that petition stating they believe the program as it stands ls incorrect. Don in reference to whether they slgned it and then read it afterwards, I can't say that. I can only say that you or I would probably read something before we slgned it and each of them seemed to have read it before they signed lt. As you can see, a lot of them are faxed in. They're all hand wrltten in thelr own wrltlng so I belleve strongly in the issue and I pursued it and if I've angered any of you, I apoIogize for that. That wasn't my intent. It simply was to say I disagree with the process here. To do the best that I could to change it and if I can't change it, then it's 11ke voting for President. I'm going to get behlnd the new person or the new program and try to support it. I thlnk it's wrong. There's no question about it. It is wrong. You have no business in being in the free market enterprise system. It's not right. Don Ashworth: Mr. Mayor, I'd like to bring up one last point because I did have an opportunity to talk with Mark. I guess I felt happy about the process in that the City Councll 11stened to the concerns of the retailers. Asked that the item be submitted back over to the Tree Board, which is represented by 5 28 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 citizens. Each of the retailers were given an opportunity to speak and give their thoughts. The Tree Board listened and then they voted. I guess that's what I think government's all about. It's a democracy. It's an opportunity for people to express their views. You present those to a neutral group and a decision is made. That Tree Board did not have the latest information which is now this survey of businesses. [ think where the Council ftnds themself pressed between a rock ts that at our last meeting, at the meeting at which time we sent it back to the Tree Board and asked them to reconsider, we knew that we were running short of time if you were going to have a program for 1993. To now again come back with additional new Information, I think that wou~d surely kill the program for '93. ! suggested to Hark that although he did not get all of the things he was looking at through the Tree Board, I thought that they had made major concessions towards the retailers. And ! encouraged him to continue to work through that group and hopefully earlier than we did this year to potentially make it better for '94, '95. ! mean I do not know why, whatever the program is this year has to be exactly what we do in '94. This is not the same as 1992 and again ! would thlnk '94 would even;..further. Mayor Chmiel: Yes and I just might add a little bit to that. I also talked to a couple members on the Tree Board and they'd be willlng to'sit down and re-review what could happen for 1994. I think as they-had put it,-it's sort of a put and take kind of situation. To hopefully get thts thlng resolved wlthin that particular commission. So if we can do that,-I think maybe everybody's going to be happy in the long run. Mark. Councilman Senn: From all the stuff I've seen I guess going back and forth on this, [ think given the fact that it's already been'published, etc, ! think what they've gone back and worked out appears to be a good quick solution for '93. But beyond that ! guess I'd like to reiterate the comments I made last time and that is, while I'm not necessarily in full agreement with anyone in specifically saying, I do think that we should seriously examine our role in this and'I think our role is really education and promoting the planting of trees and stuff and not selling them and I think we ought to really take a hard look at that as [t relates to future years. Mayor Chmiel: And that is what the discussion will wind up being with the Tree Board. Come up with a conclusion as we've discussed, right? Todd Hoffman: Correct. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you.. REQUEST FOR SNALLER AVERAGE L, OT S:TZES ZN ~ PUD Z0Nq: Tip ~I,I, ON.FOR AFFORDM~BLE HO~I$:]:NG. DOL£3$:]: PROP[RTY NORTH OF LAKE RILEY AND BANDZHERE PflRK. TERRY FORBORD. I, UNDGREN BROS. Terry Forbord: Your Honor, members of the Ctty Council. My name is Terry Forbord with Lundgren Bros, 935 East Wayzata Boulevard in Wayzata. And a point of clarification. We are not here specifically this evening to be slte specific about a particular piece of property. It was probably my error. I may have misinformed staff of that but I am here thls evening to talk about for your consideration a review of the zoning ordinance relat-ed to lot size and also the PUD ordinance as recently adopted and it's inflexibility for creativity in the City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 development of neighborhood communities. I have with me this evening John Uban. We're going to be very brief with a presentation to you regarding this. It was 2 years ago Saturday that I appeared before the Planning Commission at their request when they were discussing the PUD ordinance. In fact it was a member of Dahlgren, Shadlow and Uban that participated in that presentation at the Planning Commission with me and interestingly enough, a different PUD ordinance was adopted. But we wlll be very brief in thls. We just ask for your consideration on this matter. At this time I'm just going to let John glve you an overview. John Uban: Thank you Terry. John Uban, I'm a planning consultant and both in the prlvate sector and the public sector and we've been helping Lundgren Bros on many different projects really in the western suburbs. And what we'd 11ke to have the clty conslder lsa revlew of the PUD ordinance and so we can have more flexibility in developing Lundgren type neighborhoods in the community. What we're findlng ls that you have a PUO but it doesn't quite give the flexibility that ue thlnk ls needed. We have developed some neighborhoods that have a certain level of housing but we'd 11ke more diversity. We're looking for more diversity. There's more pressure because of environmental concerns and so forth to have a lotting pattern that is more efficient and more cost effective. So we're really would 11ke to give that cost effective houslng product to the clty and we want to look at it in different ways. We need to look at trying to get to some lot slzes, about 9,500 square feet in a way that we can still provlde all those amenities in the Lundgren Bros style. Buffering busy highways. Adding other speclal amenities ulthln the neighborhood. Dolng a really good job of mitigating environmental effects on the property. There are a variety of things that really speak to havlng a quallty neighborhood developed on every parcel. Now every parcel in the city is not necessarily subject for smaller lot sizes. We thlnk this should be carefully considered but should be looked at very specifically on PUO's that come through and have performance ratings that would really promote good housing. What we see ls people, typical houslng or a client or a new resident, income $40,000.00 to $50,000.00 looking at a house in the range of $100,000.00 to $150,000.00. Coming lnto the community. How can they afford the best house possible and thls is what we're trying to give them. If we're klnd of locked lnto a larger lot size, larger lot width, there's a singular cost associated with that and so they'll always try to maximize the best house possible on the lot. If we can brlng in smaller lots that are still excellent lots in the community but smaller with amenities with them, then we can offer something to them where they can put ina higher quallty house. Maybe a larger house than they normally would be able to afford. $o lt's that whole package to bulld quality in the neighborhood that should be looked at. Not have a singular goal of just larger lots or a certain size lot but to allow flexibility so there is a method of getting quallty neighborhoods and a quality house. We think people really want to have an efficient product that speaks well toward that neighborhood. Sort of the thlng that we want to leave you wlth, and is thls ldea that this kind of housing project will develop the best neighborhoods, the best tax base, and the best diversity and flexibility that the city can really look at to provide all those housing opportunities that you should have in the clty. We're findlng that this sort of move up from different styles of houses within a community is an important part of becoming a member of a clty so that there's lot of different levels of opportunity and we want to offer that in our types of development. So we would like to have you consider 3O City Council Heeting - March 22, 1993 this. Have staff look at it. We'd like to participate and hopefully bring this before you for some consideration. Terry Forbord: Your Honor, as many of you well know and I think some of you are participating, there are two legislative items this session regarding these types of issues. One is the Community Stabilization Rct offered by Representative Orfield. And another one is offered by Senator Mondale. I'm not here to judge the merit of every one of those and I'm not, I certainly have my own personal opinions of both of those and I don't necessarily believe that they're in the best interest of the community. However I do know, after meeting with both those people out of curiousity to find out what their motives are. Some of the things that they do say have some merit. It's the methodology of how they go about it that probably disturbs most people.- But in my presentation to the Planning Commission 2 years ago, one of the things that I discovered to my surprise was the Planning Commission told me that they, number one, had never allowed a PUD in the city. and number two, they certainly had never allowed lot sizes smaller in the range certainly below 15,000 square feet. I was very surprised. At that time I put up an exhibit of the Near Mountain Planned Unit Development which is developed by Lundgren Bros and is now almost complete. There are 144 lots in Near Mountain that are under 12,500. square feet. They range from as low as 8,500 square feet to 12,500 with lot widths as low as 65 feet. Rnd interestingly enough, Chanhassen and this project were selected in a national award. I'm not here just to toot Lundgren Bros' because this is a community award and it was on this project and it was in the front page and a foldout section of Builder Magazine in 1984. So it was almost 9 years ago that the City of Chanhassen had the vision to provide a diversity in both housing product and price range. Rnd it's only been in recent memory through the revision and amendment of the Planning Unit Oevelopment and. Zoning Ordinances that larger lots became what they are today. What we're telling you is that in order for us to provide more affordable housing, lot-sizes, have to-get smaller. What we're also telling you that on certain sites that may be next to highways, that may be flat as a pancake without a tree on it. In order to take a site like that and mitigate the impact of the highway, to plant a lot of trees, to create hills where there are no hills, to put in ponds where there are no ponds, that costs a lot of money and the only way one can do that is by increasing the density. The net result is a finer neighborhood community. The density and on these 144 lots, is 2.2 dwelling units per acre at Near'Mountain. It's already there. It's been there for almost 10 years. There's a brand new neighborhood community right adjacent to the Chanhassen boundary in Eden-Prairie' Right off of Dell Road just south of Highway 5 called Windfield North that we are developing with the Pemtom Corporation. The-density in'there is 2.7 dwelling units per acre. All that we're asking for you to do is we merely request that the City Council direct the staff and the Planning Commission to open public hearings. To review the existing zoning ordinances related-to lot size and. the PUD ordinance. Right now you might as well not.have a residential PUD ordinance. It has virtually no flexibility whatsoever and it,s impossible to achieve really what I understood the ultimate goal of it to be. So we're just asking you at this time, being that we will be coming to the city in the near future with two more requests for Planned'Unit Oevelopments; that'we ask you to consider reopening those public hearings so we can give you a more elaborate presentation with more facts and more details hopefully to persuade the city to allow a greater diversity of housing product within the community. Thank you. City Council Meeting ,- March 22, 1993 Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Terry. Any discussions? Richard. Councilman Wing: I would, Terry you've been here my two years and you're aware that we just completed thls process. The Plannlng Commission physically gave up on lot size and sent them to the Council. And we debated this for at least the 2 years Mike and myself have been here and we just now, we held up a PUD ordinance for a year and a half on lot slze and we finally decided to stay with 15,000, although some of us wanted to go higher. Councilman Mason: Some of us wanted to go lower. Councilman Wing: Some of us wanted to go lower, and we compromised where we are. I think we went down to 10 or 9,500. Mayor Chmiel: No, 12. Kate Aanenson: The lots can go down to 11,000 but they have to average 15,000. Councilman Wing: 15, right. And so we just got done with that after 2 years of arguing. My proposal was the same thing I just said. If we're going to really talk about affordable housing. I mean if we really are concerned about affordable houslng, our PUD isn't golng to do that and a 15,000 foot subdivision doesn't do it. And Lakeville has projects that are 50 x 150 foot lots. 7,500 square foot lots and maybe there's some need for that. 8ut I went to the extreme, I said I want a 22,000 square foot lot size average and in a PUD you can go down to a 7,000 if you want to. There's some flexibility. But denslty became the word and nobody could define density and nobody could come up with a denslty formula so we klnd of stayed where we were. So to open thls up again ls denylng that we just completed the process. I mean literally within the last 2 months, 3 months we just completed the process. And I hear what you're saylng. It's not flexible enough. Councilman Mason: What's moderate priced housing for Lundgren Bros7 No seriously. Terry Forbord: Well I think the other, the scope of this, we all need to understand that the engine that drtves the machine, and I've testified at the Met Council unt11 I'm blue in the face on this and they wlll never admlt lt. When you have a restricted urban service area the price of land goes up. It's a supply and demand. Rlght now land in Chanhassen for residential purposes, depending on the school district you're in. If you lnclude Minnetonka and Chaska school district, prices of land are golng to be anywhere from approximately $18,000.00, $19,000.00 at the very low end to $35,000.00 to $45,000.00 per acre on the hlgh end. And that would be in the areas in the Minnetonka School District. So it's almost virtually impossible to provide any sense of what most people would call affordable houslng when they're on 15,000 square foot lots. Councilman Mason: But Terry, you're not answering the question. I mean what do you folks consider. I mean we do have some very, I think important issues and it's going to come up on the next, for number 5. For what we do with Block Grant money in providing moderate to low lncome housing and I guess what I want 32 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 to know ls Lundgren Bros serious about providing moderate cost houslng for people with moderate incomes? Terry Forbord: Okay, we can provtde as moderate a price of housing as what the raw land prlce and the lot size will dictate. For example, and I can only use 11vlng example and you don't have to believe me. You can go there yourself. Eden Prairie. Windfield North. Homes there, the base pr£ce starts at about $135,000.00 and then it goes up from there. Councilman Mason: But that's not moderate prtced houstng though. Terry Forbord: It depends on who you're tatking to. Councilman Mason: Terry, for people with moderate or low incomes, $135,000.00 is on the high end. Now I think we really need to talk serious in definitions here. I'm not saying I'm in disagreement with smaller PUD's or anything like that but I'm hearing some awfully alturistic stuff right now. Terry Forbord: And I'm not here suggesting that we're providing low income houslng. Not at all because that's Impossible to do in Chanhassen. It wlll never happen unless it's subsidized. Impossible. Councilman Mason: That very well may be. Terry Forbord: But moderately priced housing certainly is in the range that I'm telling you. Councilman Wing: But I don't want to be market driven either. Maybe we don't want to provide 7,500 square foot lots and Orono is what? Maybe we want to be in Orono. What do you say to the Orono Council? Oo you try to get them down from 2 acres to an acre and a half? Terry Forbord: Orono doesn't have sewer and water so it's a different issue. Or the majority of it doesn't. And all I'm asking this evening is for consideration. I reallze you just went through a lot of this and I came here and volunteered my time, certainly more often than once, and tried to share with you purely from a plannlng standpoint and from a housing standpoint, of the problems associated with the proposed amendment to the PUO ordinance. And it wouldn't work and it doesn't work. Now all I'm suggesting is maybe it should be reviewed and maybe you can take a proactive stance rather than a non-proactive stance and say, you know. Bo we want to be a community where $200,000.00 is the minimum price range, base price'range or do we want to try to get into that $140,000.00-$135,000.00 range and work up from there? And by allowing smaller lots, it allows you to do that. And you've already done it and it's already been very successful. Now if you were to look back of me and say that wasn't successful, it's a slum and it's in this city and the reason it's a slum is because they were small lots, then I'll walk away; Councilman Wing: No but some of the comments on record stating that we don't particularly like the area, or like the density and the appearance of those small lots and we have had consistently problems with small lots. The project was wonderful. Zt won an award. Z don't like it. ! drive down TH 101 and I go, geez could we cram any more houses in there. So I don't like the small lots 33 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 Terry and I've got to be upfront and honest about that. I prefer much less density and it may rule my kids out buying a house in Chan or I might have to move out someday. Councilman Mason: Personally I'd like to hear what's said because I know, and I thlnk Paul Krauss has talked about this too. The difference between urban sprawl, or suburban sprawl and denslty and there's a trade-off I think as our city is growlng by leaps and bounds that we really need to take a look at. Councilman Wing: I don't think we resolved it with what we did. It was an effort to compromise and I think affordable housing ls the key word and I agree wlth Terry. The only way you get that down is land cost by today's standards and that means smaller lots but not if it gives up density. That's where I get hung up here. Mayor Chmiel: And it's that moderately, even reachlng moderately priced. What is a moderate priced house? Councilman Mason: And maybe that's something we need to grapple with too. Councilman Senn: When you did go through the past reuiew in the PUD ordinance, was any thought glven to a lower denslty but on a rationing type of basls? Llke for every x lots you develop you're allowed I lot of 7,5000 square feet or you know that type of thlng. I have ~een that used effectively in some other cities where in effect it deals with the problem 0ick that you mentioned whlch ls lettlng the denslty get carrled away but at the same time it does provlde for and allow for types of situations which Terry's talking about. It controls the total numbers in relationship to some overall slze or plan so to speak. Mayor Chmiel: Some of the problem with that being too, of course is what that footprint's going to be on that existlng proposed lot of whatever lt'$ golng to be. I think we're runnlng into some difficulties with that wlth people wishlng and wanting to put decks on thelr homes. Kate Aanenson: If I could just add to that. What we did is we came up with the standard home pad size ls because what happened ls we approved those and then we constantly were innundated with variances on that so we came up with the standard home slze. A11owlng for deck, front yard, rear yard and then we sald the minimum and then an average square foot. Mayor Chmiel: And I too like Richard, have been an advocate of having larger lot sizes only because of this being a young community. A young community needs klds off the streets rather than in the streets and in thelr yards. If you have it too small, there's not that availability for those kids to do what they want to do and play. Whether it be football or softball or whatever. But I just, I've taken that position of saying that 15,000, I too had that in mind at the tlme and wanted to see that brought 1nrc the clty because of those concerns. I too look at some of those, the areas in Near Mountain. I think those houses are very close to each other as well. I'm not exceptionally excited about it but I would take still, yet the posltion of saying that if were to bring these down to what you're looklng for, I guess I'm still where I'm at wlth the 15,000 and having that adjusted for the PUD. 34 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 Terry Forbord= Your Honor, the interesting thing, ! was going to prepare this exhibit for the benefit of the Council and I didn't get it done but I can, I think I can graphically represent it to you verbally. What the current ordinance prefers me to do would be to take a piece of property. I have right now a piece of property in Chanhassen that's about 77 acres. There's no trees. There's no hills. There's no wetlands. What it encourages me to do is to grid it out. It encourages me not to do any landscaping. It encourages me not to do any ponding. It encourages me not to do any buffering. It tells me to put in the straightest streets as I can because they're the cheapest. Make all the lots 90 feet wide and make them 15,000 square feet and meet the letter of the ordinance and make it a vanilla subdivision. 3ust like all the other uncreative subdivisions in the United States that have been done. That's what the ordinance is telling me that Chanhassen wants. Now I know each one of you enough and I've worked with you enough that you're going to say geez, that isn't really what we want for Chanhassen. And what I'm saying to you is that you put in the pressure on the developer to give you nothing more than what I've described to you. The PUO ordinance, in using your words during the public hearing, it should be a carrot and stick. And if we're willing to take unusual situations and bring something in creative. Remember you throw out the ordinance book with the PUD and everything's up to you. You have the authority to approve it or deny it. And so we bring in something to you and we say we're going to take a cow's ear and make it into a silk purse. Let's work together. Let's try to do that and it gives the city the ability to do that where right now when you say that you can be as small as 11,000 square feet but they all must average 15,000 square feet and they all must be 90 foot wide at the setback, you've just thrown away any creativity that one can do. Mayor Chmiel: I guess this really has come into the fact that this has been a request that has been brought forward and I think it's going into a debate more than it is a request. And I think that I feel that whatever, do you have any specific concerns Colleen? Councilwoman Oockendorf: Well I think we're all grappling with the same issue which is...diverse community and yet we want a lot of open space and they're working against each other. I'm not sure what the solutton is and I tend to sit on the side of larger lots but how do you accomplish that. Either you've got single family homes in the $200,000.00 range and apartments and there's no inbetween. Or you've got suburban sprawZ so I guess all I want to say is I don't know. ! think we're all struggling with the same issue. Mayor Chmiel: I don't think we're going to take a position on this this evening. Maybe we should discuss this too at our workshop. Councilwoman Oockendorf: Zt's a good time to talk about it. Mayor Chmiel: And see that if we can come up with some conclusions on it either yes or no. Or at least see what it is and what it looks like. Mark, did you have anything more? Okay. Thank you. 35 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 pUBLIC HEARING: METES AND BOUNOS SUBDIVISION OF A 40,823 SO. FT. PARCEL INTO TWO PARCELS. 1950 CRESTVIEW CIRCLE, WAYNE POPPE. Public Present: Naee Address Wayne Poppe Julie Thorndycraft Daniel Delaleese 1950 Crestview Circle 1940 Whitetail Ridge Court 1940 Whitetail Ridge Court Mayor Chmiel: My understanding the two lots would consistent of 19,535 square feet and 21,888 square feet. Kate Aanenson: That's pretty much the staff report. I'll just add that one issue that we did look at was, we need additional right-of-way on Galpin so the part of the condition of this will be requesting that the additional 17 feet of right-of-way be granted. The other issue is the Crestview Drive itself. Normally ue only allowed 4 homes off that. The engineering departmenting in looking at it felt that under the circumstances, that 5 homes would be okay and that improvement of the street is not necessary at this point. There is sewer available. Sewer and water available for both lots. The existing home will meet the setback requirements except that it already is in non-compliance to the front setback off of Crestview Drive. By splitting it in no way changes that setback requirement. So with the condition of the additional right-of-way, staff would recommend approval. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. We were just having a short discussion here regarding some of the things we were talklng about. Councilwoman Dockendorf= I'd just like to clarify one thing which Mike did answer for me but I wanted to put on the record. I thought a couple of months ago we had said no more metes and bounds descriptions would be. And this was in the hopper before that decision was made and that's why we've got a metes and bounds description? Mayor Chmiel: Kate? Kate Aanenson: That's a good question. I raised that same issue. Because it was my understanding that we weren't allowing those either. We can allow for a simple lot split when it's straight forward. Clean as far as the legal description when it goes from metes and bounds to another metes and bounds. I'm assuming Jo Ann worked with Roger on the interpretation of that and it just goes to City Council. Roger Knutson: I discuss lots of planning requests every day and this one doesn't stand out in my mind but I assume what they're doing. There's a procedure under your ordinance, not for clty staff to approve a metes and bounds subdivision. There are two procedures. First, in a limlted way the city can approve, clty staff can approve administratively certain slmple subdivisions of property. There are only 2 or 3 of them that you allow and city staff can do that wlthout ever brlnging it here. It's rlght in the Code. What was being 36 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 proposed for change, and the ordinance you rejected, would have opened that up from 2 or 3 to a lot. Kate Aanenson: I can reference the section of the Code. It's under Chapter, Subdivision Chapter 18. What it allows is dtvtding a simple metes and bounds. What it exempts them from ls the platttng process. They're st111 coming before you for the subdivision. What they're exempting though is what we were looking at too ls the expense of golng through the whole plattlng and all that so. Councilwoman Dockendorf: So you can still have metes and bounds because £t's straight. Kate Aanenson: One lot split. Right, stralght forward. Simple. Without going through the platting... Roger Knutson: That ls rlght in the Code today. But that's what city staff can do and if that's what were happening here you wouldn't see this. But there's also a provision in the clty code that allows you to watve the procedural requirements of platting...then approve as a metes and bounds subdivision. Councilwoman Dockendorf: So should part of this be to watve that? Councilman Senn: Kate, just point of clarification though. I thought when we took that action we were directing staff to change that so that there was no administrative ability to do metes and bounds. Everything was now going to be platted. Roger Knutson: No, as I understand. Excuse me, maybe I misunderstood but an ordinance memo was brought to you to amend what we currently have to open it up. To allow. Councilman Senn: Rlght, whlch we denied. Roger Knutson: Which you denied. Councilman Senn: And I thought then we directed, maybe I'll go pul! up the Minutes but I thought we directed staff at that point to simply get rid of metes and bounds spllts. Period. I may be wrong but agaln, that's my memory. Roger Knutson: I don't recall that but I think there's some stmple things you could see. Councilman Senn: ! remember staff arguing that but I remember the Councll going the other way on it is my memory. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Z don't have the same recollection. Councilman Senn: Well maybe we should follow up on it. Roger Knutson: Sometimes a nelghbor is selling 10 feet to a neighbor. Not creating any new lots. Councilman Senn: That was brought up and discussed. I remember. 37 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 Roger Knutson: And that's in the City Code and allowed. Councilman Wing: The City Manager's recommendation was that we send this to the moon. The metes and bounds. Councilman Senn: Because his recommendation was different though. Councilman Wing: And I think we nuked it. Roger Knutson: You nuked the new ordinance. Councilman Wing: Why would we not simply have this surveyed? Why stay with the metes and bounds? Why not just approve this but do it on a survey so it's? Councilman Mason: There is a survey. Councilman Wing: But a metes and bounds description. Mayor Chmlel: Yeah, this is done rlght here by a registered surveyor. Councilman Wing: But it's thls 3 page thing that goes from generation to generation versus one paragraph with a few numbers. Right? Mayor Chmiel: Right. Don Ashuorth: What I would suggest, I agree with the Attorney's interpretation in that you denied the ordinance that would have loosen it up. If you would 11ke staff to brlng back what currently ls allowed for you to examlne whether or not we want to continue to allow let's say staff to do a what we call a simple subdivision. We can do that. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Basically, I mean you guys work with this. You know you want the simplest way to define lots. I don't feel the need to move on that. Don Ashworth: I think that this one is well enough along that I would feel very uncomfortable denying the applicant because I'm sure that they did visit with staff. This type of description I $t111 thlnk ls pretty unwelldy and I guess I would 11ke to meet with our staff in terms of how do we stop this in the future. Councilman Wlng: I thought we declded that. Councilman Senn: Yeah, I thought we decided that and I guess I don't think we cut off the abllity of the.staff to do simple subdivisions. I thought ue just sald they had to be platted. I mean they could still do the small ones, and I thought that was discussed. If there was a 2 or 3 or something they could still do lt. Roger Knutson: City staff can't approve plats. There's no possibility of that. Councilman Senn: Okay, so they would have to come back in here then? 38 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 Roger Knutson: Absolutely. There's no such thing as a minor plat. A plat has to go to the Planning Commission. it's got to come here. Staff can't approve plats. Councilman Senn: is that by our ordinance? Roger Knutson= [t's by ordinance and State law. Councilman Senn: By State law outside or superceding our's? Don Ashworth: But there is a minor subdivision. Roger Knutson: Yes. There's a difference between a subdivision and a plat. Councilman Mason: And this is a minor subdivision. Don Ashworth: So for example, a person wanted to sell the east 10 feet of Lot 1, Block 2, Western Hills, you could do that without having to come back before the City Council. Roger Knutson: If you were adjoining it to your neighbor. Don Ashworth: Right. And he met then all the ordinances. They can't create non-conforming uses and all those things. And I don't have a problem with those. It's the longer descriptions. Councilman Senn: But doesn't that Don create a lot of longer descriptions? mean that 10 feet can start meandering all over the place depending on the line. Don ~shworth: It has to parallel the. line. So I mean just in my example, the east 10 feet of Lot 1. It can't be starting at the corner of Lot 1 and meandering over to the tree and then back again. It's got to be 10 feet of Lot Councilman Wing: I still agree with Mark that we want to avoid these and I'll move approval of this one but I want a clarification on what we decided and where we ought to go because I think we want to avold these. I think that was the Council's overall decision that night. To avoid metes and bounds as much as possible. Mayor Chmlel: Okay. Is the applicant here? Wayne Poppe: Right here. Mayor Chmiel: Is there anything you wish-to add to the discussion that we've had already? Councilman Senn: You made a motlon didn't you? I'll second it just to. Mayor Chmiel: For discussion. But we have to close the public hearing before we take a vote. Councilman Wing: Sorry, I was out of order. 39 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 Wayne Poppe: Well then, for the record my name is Wayne Poppe. I live at 1950 Crestvieu Circle. We've got a little bit less than an acre lot there and my wife and I would like to split it and build a new home there at some point in time. It's as simple as that and metes and bounds and surveys all aslde, I hope you got the paperwork you need. Mayor Chmiel: Very well put. Thank you. Is there anyone else wishing to address thls at thls tlme? Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Mason seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Mayor Chmiel: Now if you'd like to make your motion, I'd be more than happy to accept it. Councilman Wing: We got off on discussion before we asked for the public input. I'd move approval of item number 4, subdivision. Councilman Senn: Second. Mayor Chmiel: It's been moved and seconded. Any other discussion? Resolution ~3-22A: Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Senn seconded to approve Request $93-6 Metes and Bounds subdivision as shown on the plans dated February 16, 1993, ulth the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall pay park and trail fees at time of building permit application. Provide required drainage and utility easements for Parcels 4 and B. 3. Oedicate 17' of right-of-way along the westerly lot line of Parcel 4. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Councilman Wing: And one clarification on that. Staff will give us a laymen's review of what we did and where we're going. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER THE ALLOCATION OF YEAR XIX FUNDS FOR THE URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY. DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM, FUNDED UNDER TITLE I OF THE HOUSING AND COHMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974 AS AMENDED. Public Present: Name Address Esther Steller Emma St. John Sally Hebson 6311Steller Circle 1621 West 63rd Street Sojourn, 4151 Hwy 7, Excelsior Mayor Chmiel: Paul being not here, who will address this? Sharmln. 40 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 Sharmin Al-Jaff: CDBG funds normally are used for programs of benefit to low and moderate income households, hand£capped individuals, and senior citizens. This year we received $43,792.00. The City Council would have to allocate these monies. South Shore Senior Center has requested some funding. Many of, or a number of our senior citizens still attend the South Shore Senior Center and we have been funding that center. Sojourn Adult Oaycare Center is requesting to purchase a van and requested some funding. Oawm Lemme's salary, a portion of it to work with the seniors, coordinating the Senior Center is also funded by the CDBG fund. And the rest of the money is proposed to fund handicapped facilities at Lake Ann and Lake Susan Park. We are recommending that the City Council approve a resolution allocating these funds as outlined in staff's report. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. As I had mentioned, this is a publtc hearing. Is there anyone wishlng to address this at thls time? Please state your name and your address. Sally Hebson: I'm Sally Hebson and I live at 4270 Circle Road in Excelsior. My business is the Sojourn Adult Bay Program and Sojourn Early Learning Center, which is located at 4151 Highway 7. Has an Excelsior mailing address and I think it's in the Chanhassen city township. I've been told that and then I've also been told that doesn't exist so I'm not exactly sure where we are. But we are in Carver County and in Chanhassen in some way. I'd first like to thank the City of Chanhassen for their very generous donation toward the Sojourn Bay Program in the last 2 years of the Community Bevelopment Block Grant montes for several items. I did send a letter to each one of the Council-members outlining our request for the 20~ match on the small bus that we wrote a grant proposal for through the Minnesota Department of Transportation. I think each one of the Council members received that. At least I hope you did. What we're asktng for is a donation from the City of Chanhassen. for a portion of the 20~ matching part which is our local contribution and that's $6,000.00. This small bus will be used for the participants in the Adult Bay Program, for the children in the Early Learning Center and also as part of this grant application process, we needed to show coordinated efforts with other community agencies and have this vehicle available for church groups, youth organizations, and whomever wanted to use it in this community and the other communities that we serve. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Sally Hebson: Thank you. Mayor Chmlel: Is there anyone else at thls time? Yes, please come forward and state your name and address please. Emma St. John: I'm Emma St. John. I live in Chanhassen at 1621 West G3rd Street. I have an Excelsior address. One of those that didn't want to change. Esther Steller is with me here and she also lives in that same area. We want to thank the Chanhassen city for supporting the South Shore Senior Center which has been going now for 10 years. We were in it when it was started and appreciate all the help that they have given us. And we will hope that we will be getting, according to Paul Krauss there was a figure of $4,000.00 something that we would be getting from them this year and we want to thank you for that too. 41 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 Mayor Chmiel: Good. Thank you Emma. Maybe I might just like to impose a question to you in regard to the prior discussions that we had regarding the CDBG funds. Maybe have you accompany us to the City of Shorewood to just say exactly what you said to us right now. Give us a what for reason. Would you like to do that? Emma St. John: Sure. Mayor Chmiel: Great. Appreciate it. Is there anyone else? Can I have a motion to close. Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Wing seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Mayor Chmiel: Can I have a motion for discussion7 Mark. Councilman Senn: Just a couple of questions. I guess nothing on the South Shore Senior Center. As far as the van goes and the contribution then is, that's just for the capital purchase of the van? Okay, so basically we don't contribute in effect to the ongoing costs or anything? Sharmin Al-Jaff: No. Councilman Senn: Why is the portion going to Dawn's salary going from $8,000.00 to $17,000.007 Does that reflect that more of her time is going to senior activities? Sharmin Al-Jaff: I believe we funded her for half a year at the beginning. This year it will be a full year and then she was part-time and now she is full time. So all of this was adjusted and the number reflects what she gets paid now. Councilman Senn: Okay, so essentially a half time to a full time? Sharmin Al-Jarl: Correct. Councilman Senn: Alrighty. And then one last question. On the handicap facilities at Lake Ann and Lake Susan. I saw we had $8,000.00 in last year. To that now we're addlng $18,000.00 more. Is that an extension of those programs or I mean is our handicapped access bill going to keep going up on this? You know whlch looks 11ke lt's now $26,000.00 and runnlng or? Sharmin A1-Jaff: There will be additional work done at different places in the park. Not all of the work was completed with last year's funds. So additional work will be done this year and that's the amount that would be requtred to complete that work. Councilman Senn: Todd, could you help me out and just tell me a llttle about what that Todd Gerhardt: I don't know the details of what Todd's work is but we're starting a survey now on the handicapped accessibility throughout the city. ADA requirements and I know Todd has been worklng each year in trylng to upgrade all 42 City Council Meeting - March his park facilities to meet ADA requirements. But I can't tell you what specifically he has... Mayor Chmiel: And he has left. Councilman Senn: That's it. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Michael. Councilman Mason: I'm certainly in favor of the funding proposals that stand. At the last HRA meeting we talked extensively about the need for perhaps not low income but certainly moderate income housing in the city of Chanhassen and Z do know that that's part of the, one of the reasons for the CDBG grant. I'm certainly not going to stand in the way of anything here because obviously I think they're very good causes but I do think that if we get this grant again, regardless of whether we get this grant again, I think we need to start taking a look at that and certainly using these grant monies could be a way of going at that. Mayor Chmtel: Good. Thank you. Colleen. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well, Mark asked most of my questions. I have an additional one and that's about the HOME program. I don't know exactly to whom I should address this but I understand what it is but why don't we'need anymore funds and aren't we belng actlve in that program? Sharmin Al-Jaff: We have $5,000.00 left in that fund from last year. We haven't used up all that money. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Is that because of programming isn't very active or lt's just deficient or? Sharmln Al-Jarl: It's been, there are months were there is a lot of demand and then all of a sudden it slows down. So for some reason they haven't used up all that money. Mayor Chmlel: And then stops sometimes. Okay. Did you have your questions answered? Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yes. Councilman Wing: Well only one place I got stuck here was on the 20~ match for Sojourn. Oon have we got. Mayor Chmiel: It would be $6,000.00. Councilman Wing: And that's an additional request? Mayor Chmiel: Right. Councilman Wing: I sat through the Park and Rec discussions of playground and handicapped and AOA requirements and so on and so forth. I can't debate or argue that but I asked what percent of our community actually uses that 43 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 equipment and while this $18,000.00 was going to support what percentage of the community. It was so lnflntlslmal I just kind of withdrew you know.with all due respect. Sojourn happens to be in my neighborhood and accordingly I get in the door and Sojourn is the seniors senior center. I mean when the seniors can no longer get to the senlor center, Sojourn steps in. And I would say the majorlty of their people are perhaps not ambulatory and they're really providing an incredibly critlcal servlce to the elderly elderly if you wi11. And so because I've seen thelr operation, some we've been real good to our seniors here in the downtown area and so when they come to me on this grant and say they could use $6,000.00 for a van, it maybe is going to cut down on the use of taxicabs runnlng back and forth and so on and so forth and move some of these people around that need some very, very intense personal care. And if I ever am old, I hope this program's in effect because they're really balling some people out of some troubles. And as long as I'm ambulatory, it wouldn't matter to me but thls group goes beyond. So I would 11ke to conslder letting ADA klnd of rlde another year and follow through Park and Rec's budget and pull that money out of that $18,000.00 and glve Sojourn the match. That would be my preference. 01vlde thls money up but we're st111 golng to be able to move ahead on some of the park projects but if we're going to. Councilman Senn: Dick, just a clarification. I thought we were already doing that in this proposal. I thought your lncrease here from $2,700.00 to $4,000.00 covered all...of the van. Am I misinterpretting that? You're going from $2,700.00 to $4,000.00. I thought you were just clting the $6,000.00 figure as a balance which needs to be plcked up from the other communities. Isn't that correct? Sharmin Al-Jaff: Correct. The $6,000.00 will be picked up from other communities. Councilman Wing: Is that correct? Councilman Senn: Yeah, see we're paying $2,000.00 towards the van in the proposal. Sharmln Al-Jarl: We"re paylng $4,000.00. Councilman Wing: Oh I stand corrected. I misunderstood. I thought that the proposal from Sojourn then sald they need an additional 20~ match. That's an error. Sally Hebson: The local 20~ match is $6,195.00. We serve the whole south shore area of Lake Minnetonka as well as the city of Chanhassen and so we have requested funds from other cltles also. And as much as I appreciate your generous offer, we don't want to get more money than we need or we'd really be in blg trouble. So I think when I talked wlth Mr. Krauss, he felt that $4,000.00 from the City of Chanhassen and then monies from other cities that have been promlsed and have been worklng wlth Larry 81ackstad on this also. I appreciate that generous offer but I think we would mess things up. Councilman Wing: I stand corrected and I appreciate your... Sally Hebson: And belleve me it breaks my heart to turn down money. City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. I think everything's been said. I would entertain a motion. Councilman Wing: I'll move approval. Councilman Mason: Second. Mayor Chmiel: It's been moved and seconded. Additional discussion. Councilman Senn: Just to follow up on Dick's point though. I guess I'm really all for the accessibility to the parks and stuff but I mean, this looks like it's becoming fairly significant dollars and growing. I guess I'd like to see staff at least give us a little better understanding. Since that can't be answered tonight as to what's really required by AOA as it relates to the park. You know are we meetlng the minimum requirements? Are we going overboard? I mean what are we doing? Mayor Chmlel: Some of the requirements we haven't met. One speciflc one I'm aware of is Lake Ann Park. We had a f£shing pier put in by the DNR that is not handloapped accessibility. Councilman Senn: Well tell the DNR to come back. Mayor Chmlel: Well we should on that but we didn't ask them. But anyway, what we had to do was get a path from the point of the park...path to it so those people could get out there and get that fishing done. And we dld do that. Councilman Senn: I'd just like to see again a full answer or at least explanation to that question earlier if we could. Mayor Chmlel: Sure. That I think we can find. Resolution ~93-23: Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Hason seconded to approve the resolution allocating Year XlX funding as follows: 1. South Shore Senior Center - $4,160.00 2. Sojourn Adult Day Care - $4,000.00 3. Chanhassen Senior Coordinator - $17,000.00 4. Handicapped Facility at Lake Ann and Lake Susan Parks - $18,632.00 All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor, I'd like to just request that Item number 6 be switched with item number 7 because I've got some questions on it and I think it'd be fair if we get these people in the audience out of here. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I might add too that this is not a public hearing on 6 as so indicated. It was brought to my attention that this is not a requirement for public hearing. So if Councll agrees to move to item number 7 flrst before we get to item number 6, I would be more than happy to make, ask for a motion. 45 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Mason seconded to amend the agenda switching items 6 and 7. All voted in favor and the motion carried. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND SITE PLAN FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN AB~ FACILITY, LOCATED SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 5, NORTH OF LAKE DRIVE EAST, AND EAST OF THE CHANHASSEN EHISSION CONTROL STATION. Public Present: Name Address Bill Griffith Vernelle Clayton Jim Benson Don Hagen A1Beisner Tom Kotsonas Gerard & Lindsay Amadeo 1500 NFC Tower, Bloomington 422 Santa Fe Circle 15036 Cherry Lane, Zinnetonka 1589 Highway 7, Suite 203, 7549 Mariner Point, Haple Grove Chart Estates Chan Estates Sharmin Al~3aff: The Abra site plan appeared in front of the Planning Commission 3 months ago. They approved it and recommended that before it appears in front of the City Council, the architectural design of the building be redesigned, and that's what the applicant has done. The materials of the building are decorative integra! color concrete block. The west, north and south elevat£ons have a pitched element to them. The garage on the north elevation facing Highway 5 is recessed behind the pitched element. All services will be conducted entirety inside the building. At the last meeting when you approved the 6oodyear facility you recommended that brick be used on the exterior of the building and we believe that based upon that action, that the Abra facility should have brick exterior as well. We're also recommending that additional landscaping be provided on the Abra site. And those conditions are reflected in the site plan conditions. With that ue are recommending approval with conditions outlined in the report. Mayor Chmiel: Does the applicant wish to make his proposal once again to us? Mith revisions if they're there. Okay, go ahead. A1 Beisner: I'm A1 Beisner. I'm the developer, 7549 Mariner Point in Haple Grove. I feel like I've been here a long time. We are in agreement. Mayor Chmiel: Would you like to move here? A1 Beisner: Well, I don't know. Only if I can have a small lot or a blg lot. If I have to put brick on my house, I don't know but. No, we think we've revlsed everything. We are in agreement with the staff recommendation. I have a representative from Abra here. If you have any questions of their buslness or their operations, what's going on, he'd be more than happy to answer them for you. Otherwise I'm open to questions. Thls ls our number 8 design that we've been through and we will put brick on it. Councilman Wing: What did you say? 4G City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 A1 Beisner: I said we will. I said this is our eighth design and we will put brick on this. Is that okay? Councilman Mason: Just about a cardiac arrest back here. Councilman Wing: No, I misunderstood where they were going. Councilman Senn: Did I misunderstand Sharmin though that that was the recommendation? Mayor Chmiel: That's correct. A1 Beisner: That was their recommendation and we are in concurrence with that. Councilman Senn: It will be all brick or what? Sharmin A1-Jaff: Yeah. It will be all brick. Mayor Chmiel: Is there anyone at this time wishing to make any statement to us? And if there's something that we've said before, we have, believe me all the notes and all the statements that have been made so if there's something new, we'd be more than happy to listen to it at this time. Okay, thank you. Mark. Councilman Senn: If this is going to go ahead I guess I would ask or like to see a couple of additional conditions put on it. Which are essentially the same ones I thlnk we put on the Goodyear whlch related to no outside banners or temporary signage. And then the hours I believe was from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. If I remember rlght. I'm going by memory here but I think those were the two. Councilman Mason: The hours are in here. Councilman Senn: Are they? I don't know. Beyond that, I guess I'm not sure I'm in concurrence with the general issue of standards because I find myself readlng through these and havlng a hard time allowing that this w111 not be detrimental or endanger the neighborhood. I also find it hard to believe that it will not be hazardous or disturbing to the existing neighbors or neighborhood. I guess I could kind of go on and on but I guess I've said my plece enough that we have enough of these uses out on the east end and I have a hard time supporting any more of them. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Michael. Councilman Mason: It's been a very long and involved process and I kind of feel we mlght have a vote tonight, one way or the other. I think the new deslgn I think looks good. I think with brick it will look even better. I'm glad that staff added landscaping and I know that this ls not the lot closest to the neighborhood. My concern is, and I think it does tie tn with this, is what kind of buffering do we need. Wlll there be. Should there be additional buffering when that third site comes in along the south side there. More trees. A berm. A blg h111, whatever. Is that being looked lnto now? Or w111 it be? Sharmin A1-Jaff: It will be. 47 City Council Meeting -, March 22, 1993 Councilman Senn: Yeah because those will be in probabIy next month. Councilman Mason: And that's why I want people to know that right now I guess. Sharmin A1-Jaff: There is a buffer right now between Lake Drive and the residential. Mayor Chmiel: But there's not enough. Councilman Mason: There is not enough there, I agree with that and I think personally, you know well. We need more of a buffer there but I thlnk-, I mean said my piece on that and I guess maybe that's a battle we'll be flghtlng when the next site is used up. Mayor Chmiel: The only reason I remember that is we as a Council had gone out to do a litter plck-up all through that area. All the way up and down that servlce road and some of those speclflc areas where thls ls addressed, there needs additional kind of buffering. For whoever or whatever goes in there. Sharmln. Sharmln Al-Jarl: When we approved the, when you approved the. Mayor Chmiel: What's this we business? Councilman Senn: Well let's give it to her. Sharmin A1-Jaff: When you approved the emission control station, one of the requirements was that they bulld a buffer and then they add landscaping between Lake Orive and the residence and that's what they did. It was a condition of approval, correct. Councilman Wing: See that's where we get trapped because by definition they build a buffer. Baloney. That's not buffered. Sitting out in an open field. It's not landscaped. Aye Councilman Mason: And you know I don't think, maybe that's a discussion not to be. Councilman Wing: Excuse me Michael. Councilman Mason: No, I just want to get this one over and done with to tell you the truth. But I do, I mean it lsa conditional use permit. They're meeting the requirements whether we like it or not. I guess I've been saying that all along and I'm hoplng that this will work out for everyone, particularly if the clty or the applicant for site number 3 or whoever, does some serious looking at the buffering and berming for the neighborhood there. But let's move on lt. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Colleen. Councilwoman Dockendorf' Yeah, we've discussed this ad nauseum. Just a couple comments. I was really happy with the hours. They look great. And I apologize for belng gone but it looks like lt's brlck now? And would that include the trash enclosure? 8ut it's still a chalnlink fence? At the gate. 48 City Council Meeting - March Sharmin A1-Jaff: Yes it is. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well I'm not going to hold it up for that reason but I don't... The trees on Lot 3 will be left for now. Right? Sharmin Al-Jarl: Correct. Councilwoman Dockendorf: And the signage, is it agreed that the signage will be on one monument? Sharmin Al-Jarl: Correct. For all three parcels. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Alright, nothing further. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Richard. Councilman Wing: The last time we looked at this I asked that we have a landscape plan that we could look at and with all due fatth and I trust Sharmln, I think she's done her best. Mark said everything I wanted to say about this really lsn't in my our best lnterest and Mlke, you've got it down and the comments have all been made. Key words. That rear lot is going to be a big lssue and buffering is going to be a new word in this clty and Z'm hopeful that the new ordinances and our land use review and our zoning review, the comprehensive plan review ls going to be at least paralleling that lot and maybe making some headway on this issue on what we're going to allow in there. So as soon as you've made your comments Mr. Mayor. Mayor Chmiel: I guess the only thing that I really would have to say in regard to thls. There was a letter to the edltor and I think it was sort of self explanatory with the newspaper making a comment. That he did as such and I would 11ke that person to know that this Mayor is concerned what happens to it's residents, but he's also concerned as to how it's going to affect the city if we were to deny a situation as such. Whlch would mean that there'd be litigation between the city and I don't want to do that nor do I want to cost the residents of thls community additional dollars. But I know what their-lfeeling might be. At'one time I lived very closely to Htghway 100 in Golden Valley. Unbeknownst sometimes Z thlnk it's buyers beware when you're purchasing property to see what's going to be developing in and adjacent to your proposed purchase of a new home or to bulld a home or purchasing an exlsting home that's there. These things do come up and it's something that we have to act upon and I believe that's what we're going to be doing this evenlng. Councilman Wing: Could I just be a little supportive on that. I thought the editorial and your comment as quoted was out of context and unfair. But I think it's also fair to state that any member of this Council or anybody in the city has the right to say ii want that buslness there. I think it's going to be a good business. I happen to like it with brick. I think we should put an automotive center there and I think as a Mayor, if that was your feeling, you had a right to make that statement without being faultered and I guess that's another viewpoint. Mayor Chmiel: I think I've really said enough. So with that ! would look for a motion to accept the conditional use as well as the site plan review. 49 City Council Meeting - Hatch 22, 1993 Councilman Mason: Does it make any difference which one we do first? Mayor Chmiel: Well we have on the list as the conditional use but it doesn't really matter. It can be either or. Councilman Hason: Okay, I'll move approval of Conditional Use Permit to allow an auto service facility in the BH district. Councilman Wing: Second. Mayor Chmiel: It's been moved and seconded. Any other discussion? Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Wing seconded to approve the Conditional Use Permit for Abra Auto Service Facility on Lot 2, Block 1, Chan Haven Plaza 3rd Addition subject to the follouing conditions: 1. No public address systems are permitted. 2. No outdoor repairs to be performed or gas sold at the site. Garage doors are to be kept closed except to allow vehicles to enter or depart. 3. No parking or stacking is allowed in fire lanes, drive aisles, access drives or public rights-of-way. 4. No damaged or inoperable vehicles shall be stored outside overnight on the Abra site. 5. No outdoor storage of materials shall be permitted at the Abra site. G. Noise level shall not exceed OSHA requirements or Minnesota Pollution Control agency guidelines at the property line. Doors will be kept closed or no more than a 12" opening. 7. Environmental protection shall meet standards set by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 8. Compliance with conditions of approval for Site Plan Review ~92-3 and Subdivision ~90-17. All voted in favor except Councilman Senn uho opposed and the motion carried uith a vote of 4 to 1. Mayor Chmiel: I think you probably have clarified that enough. The second part we have to act upon is the Site Plan Review. Can I have a motion for that? Councilman Mason: I'll move approval of Site Plan Review for an Abra Auto Service Center, 6,494 square feet. With conditions as stated in the staff report. Mayor Chmiel: Approval of Site Plan Revieu ~92-3 dated November 30th? Councilman Mason: Yeah. 5O City Council Meeting - March Councilman Senn: Would you accept that thlng on the banners? Councilman Mason: Oh sure. Councilman Senn: Banners and temporary signage. Councilman Mason: Sure. Mayor Chmlel: Okay, in additlon to that ltems, lt'd be 14 and 15. One being banners and the other Mark. Sharmln A1-Jaff: Hours of operation. Councilman Senn: Was that in your conditions already though? Mayor Chmiel: No. Councilman Mason: That's fine. Z don't have any trouble with 14 and 15 added. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there a second to that? Councilman Wing: Second. Councilman Mason moved, Councilman #~ng seconded to approve Site Plan Review ~1~)2-3 as shown on the site plan dated November 30, 1992, subject to the following conditions= 1. Obtain a slgn plan approved by the Planning Commission and City Council. 2. The applicant shall provide staff with a detatled cost estimate of landscaping to be used in calculating the requlred financial guarantees. These guarantees must be posted prior to buildtng permit issuance. 3. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the clty and provide the necessary financial securities as required. 4. The applicant shall provlde a flammable waste separator as required by Building Code. 5. Provlde a complete, flnal set of civ11 engineering documentation to staff for review and approval. Meet all conditions outlined in the Fire Marshal's memorandum dated October 8, 1992. 7. The applicant shall post 'No Parklng - Fire Lane" signs along the south curb line on Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. Signs shall be placed at 100 foot intervals and the curb painted yellow. 8. Concurrent ~ith the building permit, a lighting plan meeting city standards shall be submitted. 51 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 9. The applicant shall pay $7,580. into the Surface Water Management Program fund for water quality treatment downstream of the site. This fee will cover Lots 1 and 2 only. 10. No signage will be allowed until sign plan approval is obtained from the Planning Commission and City Council. 11. The applicant shall provide eight additional Black Hills evergreens along the east and four along the south side of Lot 2, Block 1, Chan Haven Plaza 3rd Addition. 12. Brick shall be used on the exterior of the Abra building. Plans shall be developed to staff approval. The brick shall be designed to incorporate highlighting treatments slmilar to or better than the current proposal. Also, the applicant shall introduce architectural elements such as dormers along the eastern roof line to break the long mass of wall along the east elevation. 13. Compliance with conditions of Subdivision $90-17 and Conditional Use Permit $92-2. 14. No outdoor banners or temporary signage will be permitted. 15. Hours of operation will be from 7:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m.. All voted in favor except Councilman Senn who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 4 to 1. WEST 78TH STREET DETACHHENT PROJECT 92-3: A. APPROVE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS; AND AUTHORIZE ADVERTISING FOR BIDS. B. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF EASEMENTS AND/OR QUICK TAKE. Don Ashworth: Mr. Mayor, if I may. The reason that we had shown this under public hearing ls there was a concern as to whether or not we had in fact notified all of the owners as a part of the original hearing and that's the reason it ls shown under publlc hearlng. Those areas of concern have been met as far as contacting owners. So this would lnclude the two ltems shown as well as actually the authorization for the project ltself. So somewhere in the process I would suggest that you do officially open the public hearing for comments. Probably in advance of that we should have the engineers provlde a report on the two items. Hayor Chmiel: Okay. Charles, would you like to do that now? Charles Folch: Hr. Mayor, members of the Council, our project engineer Mr. Jim Dvorak of Strgar-Roscoe-Fausch ls here tonlght to give a presentation reviewing what the project elements are. Mayor Chmiel: Good, thank yOU. Jim Dvorak: Thank you Charles. I'll try to be brief...This project has gone through many changes since we started looking at it about a year ago. And what 52 City Council Meeting - March I've done is Z've tried to mount representative plan sheets that kind of show you the entire plan. Just shows the basic elements of the project, so starting with this one, this is the plan sheet that shows the West 78th alignment is right here. West 78th here, Powers at this point and then we are proposing to construct a water quality treatment pond in the, it would be the southwest quadrant of Powers and West 78th to treat the water that comes from this area prior to entering the DNR wetland that's on the Eckankar site. As you can also see, we're showing a trail connection being made along Powers from West 78th and ~n addition, there is some problems with the existing traJ! that goes to the, I believe it's Lake Ann Park to the west. We are also proposing to do some maintenance and overlay on that trail all the way to the entrance of the park. That's why that is highlighted here. That's an existing tra~l that we're just going to upgrade a little bit and do maintenance work on. This ~s a copy of the landscape plan for the West 78th. Starting at the west side, here again is Powers. At th~s locatlon we've h~ghl~ghted the trees and shurbs as proposed. As most of you are aware, we have landscaping. We have lanes. We've added an irrigation system to maintain this in addition to the roadway, utility and signal system improvements. The trees are relatively well spaced to.provide a somewhat more open feellng than we have at the other end of town. We've also taken into account that the Target site landscaping,.which would be in this area, they've proposed a walk kind of outside of the right-of-way. We've matched basically what we've done there with what the Target folks have proposed. We have street 11ghtlng to illuminate the roadway and sidewalks. And we've also proposed some brick paving treatment at the noses of the medians to kind of dress that area up a little and have a low maintenance effect 'also. Then continuing down here, this would be the main entrance into Target. The buildlng would sit down at thls location. There's another entrance being proposed here to the north. And then Kerber, there's another thing ii guess I should point out that there's a signal belng proposed here and at Powers and West 78th. And again here at the main entrance to the area to the south. One of those tenants being Target, or the butlding that's under construction. We also have a signal proposed here at Kerber. West.of Kerber then, in the existing area, we worked qulte a bit with staff trying to-coordinate what we need to do, where we need to do it with the uideninglto create some additional lane width in areas that are perceived as needed. One of these-areas'is along Kerber on the north side. Where anywhere you see the red. curb highlighted is a new curb 11ne where we're widening out to two thru lanes, instead of the one thru lane that is out there today, or one wide thru lane. In this area where we're doing the widening, any of the existing landscaping that we're disturbing will be replaced. As the curb gets pushed back in the s£dewalk then~.we would redo that landscaping there also. And then at the very east endlof town, continuing on we have much the same situation where we have widening.tn this area and this area wlth that widening golng where the exlstlng landscaping ls. We will- replace that behlnd the sidewalk and new curb line. In'addition we are proposing to do a little bit of work at the median noses to.facilitate some left turn movements and some new turns. When we do that we are alSolproposIng them brlck paving treatment at the nose so that we get in effect some continuity throughout the roadway. Continuing on then there's a little bit of work at the west end...east end of town and then at the Great Plalns intersection we are proposing to lengthen out th£s median and do a little geometrics working of that intersection in conjunction wlth the new signal whlch ls proposed there. And then because the median gets qu£te narrow and is actually too narrow to plant, ue would then again continue to...pavlng scheme throughout.these medtans as 53 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 well. The project also has been expanded sllghtly on Trunk Highway 5 to incorporate an emergency 3M vehicle system so that for...fire, ambulance, police can trip the signal and proceed on through lnstead of waitlng at the red 11ght. Our project estimate at the feasibility stage was approximately $3.1 million. I believe that Charles lncluded my latest letter to him in your Council packet that showed the latest total project cost at about $3.3 mllllon. There are a number of things added to the project as it developed. One of the things was the maintenance of the trail to Lake Ann. We had it overlaying of old Monterey or Kerber to the south of West ?8th and then we added an irrigation system. That is the reason that the project costs have gone up approximately $200,000.00. That's all I have with that. I'd be happy to answer any questions that the Councll has or anyone in tire audience. Mayor Chmlel: Maybe what we can do is we'll come back to you in regard to questions that we may have. Rlght now I would like to see if there's anyone who would 11ke to address thls at this tlme thls evenlng. If there's any real concerns or whatever their concerns mlght be. If you would just please state your name and address one more tlme. Charlie James: I'm Charlie James with the T.F. James Company. I'd like to make three polnts tonight. I guess number one, I'd 11ke to, I guess all thls is a repetition of what points I've made in the past but number one. I think this project ls very welcomed and long overdue but it would be an impossible burden without the TIF dLstrlct and so in our acqulessence to this project I guess we're really countlng on TZF being there when we need it. When the time comes. Second point is that there was some discussions in the past about addressing issues relatlng to the impact of thls project to my property with regard to grades and there hasn't been any further discussion about that and I spent the better part of the morning wlth my engineers, Jim Hill, trylng to review this matter and we do have some lssues. There's nothing that's going to get solved here tonight but there are some lmpacts there and I would hope that there would still be time in this process here to look at some minor design changes that mlght facilitate the grade transitions on our slde of the street. As you all know the street was lowered from what was originally designed to accommodate Target to lower the grades into thelr drlveway and that had the effect of raising the grades on our property. Steepening the grades so if there's anythlng that can be done before thls whole thing's set in cement to help alleviate that situation, we'd appreciate that. And the third and last polnt ls, thls probably lsn't the tlme or lsn't the place but I guess it ls the tlme and tire place. Z guess I'd like to ask the Council one more time to consider the effects of closlng our access polnt. I belleve that thls decislon in the past was more of a political decision than an engineering decision and what we're flnding is that in attempting to come up with some sort of format and some sort of scheme so that ue can begin to market our property out there, we've had to conslder numerous plans for frontage roads to connect our full access point back to the corner and it's a mess and I'm not just posturing. We have got a multitude of problems out there and this frontage road is golng to be a necessity out there. Even with the replat so that's very much of a detriment and impact to us and I don't know if there's st111 time to consider making that opening or not. Z think that Jim has testified in tire past that engineering wlse it could be made to work but there were other, as I say, I don't know if that's a proper word but Z'11 say political consideration. But now that the clty's closed on that land and is the owner of the land that they have acqulred 54 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 from Mr. Burdick, maybe we could revisit that issue. I don't know but and realize we're not going to solve that tonight but I just wanted to be here tonight and express my concerns. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Is there anyone else? If not, Charles do you have any respective answers to Mr. James in regard to item number 3 that he had brought up. Charles Folch: Related to the access tssue? We11, as we've been through a number of meetings on this before, I think we've kind of beat that one to a dead horse but staff continues to support the posltlon that there should be no intermediate full access between the proposed signalized intersection immediately east of County Road 17 and County Road 17. I think Strgar's engineers have also spoken to the safety issues and some of.the problems that may be lnvolved in opening up a full access there. So we continue to support the position. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. It's our turn... Councilman Senn: To start with I guess, could Don or somebody run through these numbers in terms of, you know there's an estimated cost of roughly $3.3 mlllion. Is that correct? Mayor Chmiel: It was $3.1 and it's now $3.3. Councilman Senn: $3.3. Okay, so there's $3.3 million in total costs and I go back to the breakdown on what ls belng assessed and what lsn't being assessed and the total is $2,324,800.00? It shows that $884,000.00 is being assessed and $1,440,000.00 isn't? Okay. Where is the remaining bucks? Don Ashworth: Tax increment. The rate of the assessment was established at the same level that all of the downtown improvements, or I should say that first two phases of downtown were assessed at. And generally we assessed the cost of road improvements and that was to, I can't recall, 48 foot street or 52, sewer and water. Other items such as sidewalk cost, landscaping, lighting, storm sewer was a 50~ rate. And those were felt to be reasonable costs to be patd by tax Increment and so again to treat this portion of the project equal wtth the first half, we assigned the same assessment rate for that portion of the project as was established for this part of the project. So whatever you see as a differential between assessments on this end, it was the same differential on the east end. Councilman Senn: So a mllllon bucks is TIF and that's covering only that portion in effect west of Kerber Boulevard then? Am I tnterpretting that correctly? Mayor Chmiel: You're saying everything west on 78th Street from Kerber to Powers Boulevard? Councilman Senn: Yeah. I mean you telI me everything else down here was treated this way and now we're going this way so we're treating it the same way. Is that a correct statement? So a million dollars of TIF is going to cover the area from Powers to Kerber? 55 City Council Meeting - Harch 22, 1993 Jim Dvorak: Yeah. The assessments that are proposed only cover that portion of West 78th between Powers and Kerber. Councilman Senn: That's the 884? Jim Dvorak: That is what is proposed to be assessed. Councilman Senn: Correct. Jim Dvorak: Okay. The balance of the project, as I understand it is going to be funded through TIF monies. Now I think the reason that you're confused, when you look at the feasibility report versus what's shown in the plan. As I stated before, the project has gone through several lderations and changes. Initially when we started the project it was only golng to be Powers Boulevard and West 78th between Powers and Kerber. Those are the numbers, that's the $2.3 m1111on that you see in the feasibility update, or in that table. If you notice at the bottom of our revised cost estimate, there's a little caveat if you will about the cost of roadway and slgnal improvements between Kerber and Great Plains of $784,000.00. That is that differential. That is what was added to the project as thlngs evolved and we thought it would be clearer to just kind of separate that out from that segment of the project that was getting assessed. Councilman Senn: That's that $1.58 million? Am I on the right? Jim Dvorak: I guess I'm not sure. Councilman Senn: This has cost estimate segment. Jim Dvorak: Okay. That 3.3 is the total project. That's just the segment's broken up. In other words, Powers ls SgO0,O00.O0. Powers to Kerber ls $1.3 million and then that extra million ls west of Kerber to Great Plains. Councilman Senn: So $1.58 million is the portlon from Kerber to Great Plains then? Jim Dvorak: Correct. Councilman Senn: Not the $700,000.00? Jim Dvorak: Right. The $784,000.00 was that amount in the feasibility report. This is where most of the extra work is taking place. Councilman Senn: Am I correct in assuming, by reading this that the funding sources for this project are $884,000.00 where 25% are coming from direct assessment. $1,441,000.00, I'm uslng round numbers here, is comlng from general obligation bonds. Jim Dvorak: Not to my knowledge. I guess I wasn't aware that there were any general obligation funds in there. I thought it was all tax increment beyond the assessed amount. Councilman Senn: Well then I flip the questlon over to Don. Why does it say on here general obligation amounts on both of, on both of the project summaries? 56 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 Don Ashworth: What page? Councilman Senn: Well there are no page numbers so I can't help you. It's the two project summaries. City Project ~2-3 and ~2-3, basically the same thing where the first column says, if you go to the second page of that or the back side of it, it breaks down assessable amount versus general obligation amount and it says assessable amount $884,000.00 and then it says general obligation amount $1,441,000.00. Not it's the first time I've ever seen general obligation money belng. Jim Dvorak: If I could answer that Don. We are the ones that prepared that table and we were not aware at the time that it was prepared that this was going to be flnanced through tax increment. I believe that the Mayor, in my inltial presentation corrected me when I had mentioned general obligation. That the funds that were belng used for thls are indeed tax increment and not genera[ obligation funds. I guess you could consider that a typo, tf you wtll. Councilman Senn: Okay, well that's what I'm just trying to get to understand. So 884 is being assessed and 2 millton 440 roughly ts comlng from TIF. Don Ashworth: Is coming from TIF. Part of the misunderstanding is all of the projects in the downtown have been completed as 429 public improvement projects and technically have been referred to as general obligation funds. The underlying source of funding, other than the special assessments has been TIF. So TIF has come in and paid what would be the general obligation portton but they were still sold as general obligation bonds. Councilman Senn: So TIF doesn't pay them'. The taxpayers are responsible for general obligation bonds? Don Ashworth: That's true in literally any type of bond that you would sell. An exception would be... Councilman Senn: And so the TIF portlon of thls project. Okay, if you look at the assessment ro11, the assessment roll only deals with the end of the project from Powers to Kerber. Rlght? Don Ashworth: The assessment, that's correct. Councilman Senn: The assessment is, okay. So taking that assessment portion out of the other $2.4 million, okay. Part of that's going towards, of course that segment and part of it's going to the rest. Now didn't we already use on the other portion and for the other projects once already? Don Ashworth: Yes. Councilman Senn: In downtown. So we're going back and doing it again? Don Ashworth: To the extent that you're adding signals. Carrying out widening from Kerber back to Great Plalns and. what other type. Councilman Senn: Well all the proposed improvements is what we're talking about. Because I mean I'm not hearing any other funding source. Okay, so TIF 57 City Council Meeting - Hatch 22, 1993 is going to be spent a second time then to basically redo that area where it's already been spent once? Don Ashworth: Yes. Councilman Senn: Okay, and so I don't understand the comment that was made earlier as it relates to how we're using TIF on this end because it equals out wlth TZF on the other end. You lose me there because we've used TZF twlce now to put in the same improvements on this end and we're putting them on this end once. How does that equal out? Don Ashuorth: What I was trylng to say is, the business owners on the east side were assessed at exactly the same rate as we're proposing to assess the property owners on the west side. To the extent that we are going back today and maklng lanes wider that should have been maybe been made wider to begin with, we are not charging that cost back to that owner on the east nor to that owner on the west. Councilman Senn: So, okay. And so what you're saying is, if you take Powers, let's say if you take Kerber east. Okay. There you're in effect charging, you're not charging people anything? Don Ashworth: That's correct. Councilman Senn: Okay. And on the area from Kerbers to Powers, you're charging the people what you charged the people on the other end to put in the single lane? Don Ashuorth: That was still based on the equivalent of a 48 foot street. It did not have a center island. So I mean what we assessed for on the east side we're assessing really the same cost on the west side. Councilman Senn: Okay well, I understand, I think I understand the concept of what you're looking for as it relates to let's call it the east side. Because I mean there you've already put road improvements in and you've assessed the people for them. They have not produced trafflc uhlch in effect requires you to upgrade those roads. I assume that's correct. Because the road was designed to meet what was there in the first place and that's what ls there. Okay, now you're designing a much bigger road to follow these improvements down to the west with the Target and stuff but you're not proportionately assessing you know the need and demand. Are you? Mayor Chmiel: No. No. Councilman Mason: I don't think the changes from east of Kerber are due in total to Target and I might add nobody that's sltting behind this area right now was present when the lnltial plan went through for downtown. I think there have been some ongoing problems with downtown ever since the doggone thing was put in and we're looklng to change that. I don't know that that part of downtown is being changed because Target's coming in. Councilman Senn: No, I didn't say that Mike. The question I asked was, why are we only assessing the west end though for a single lane road, whlch is 58 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 equivalent to what you said is already installed downtown. In the rest of downtown. Why aren't we assessing the west end for really the full cost of those improvements and then going down and charging the east end on1¥ the difference to what they've already been assessed? I mean T don't understand the rationale to carry it all the way back to Powers. Don Ashworth: I asked the Jim, and I'll make the statement first and then he'll come back and say, no Don. You're wrong. But my recollection was is we were assessing the west end for what would be the equivalent of a 48 or 52 foot wide street, which is really for a 4 lane. Jim Dvorak: That's correct Don. I guess I don't remember exactly how wide it ls but the assessment is based on some standard width roadway that would serve a commercial/industrial area. The traffic that is gotng to be using West 78th is not totally generated by the businesses that abut the road but there's also quite a bit of thru movement also.I The turn lanes and all the amenities that are lnto the cost of the project, whether that would be appropriate to assess back to the abutting properties or not, I guess that's more a policy decision. But the rationale behlnd the assessments was some type of 9 ton collector type roadway, whether it be 36, 48 or whatever we use, I guess I don't recall that at this time. But in checklng this assessment that's proposed here, as Don has pointed out, it matches very closely to what was previously assessed to the folks to the east. Councilman Wing: My mind was so clear on this. We've got the west end of town. It's a whole new project. It's a new world. The sun is shining land we're assessing it. It's just simple. It's just a basic simple assessmentI I don't have any problem with that. The east end, in our 2 years Mike, and I won't speak for you, it's clearly a screw-up. It's a disaster. It hasn't worked and we're fixing it. Am I wrong in separating these two projects out? To my way it's Kerber to Powers and we're handling that with an assessment.. To the east we're going to fix the problem that should have been fixed 10 years ago and it's going to be done with tax increment money. Bo I have to go any further on that? Is that too narrow or is that a reasonable way to approach this? Councilman Senn: Dick, that's too narrow. Because if you look at the numbers here, that's not what they say. You can't say that $884,000.00 of assessments is covering almost $2,200,000.00 in costs for the west end. Councilman Mason: No, it's not $2,200,000.00. Councilman Senn: Well that's what it says here. Powers Boulevard, West 78th, Powers to Kerber. That tells me there's $2,200,000.00. Mayor Chmiel: No. Don Ashworth: $1,376,000.00. I don't think it's fair to add the $864,000.00 for Powers as though it's a cost of 78th Street. Councilman Senn: Well then let's separate it into three segments but Dick was Just separating into two and what I'm saying is, when you separate into two, that's what it comes back and tells me. Because you're assessing $884,000.00 but that end of the project is cost $2.2 million. 59 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 Don Ashworth: Well, and Roger might want to comment here but I think if we were to go about assessing County 17, Powers Boulevard in that section, especially with what we're attempting to do, I don't think we'd sustain that assessment. I mean we're assessing that portion that we reasonably can assess which is West 78th Street detachment which means we're assessing $860,000.00 out of $1.3 million. Which is approximately, is the same ratio that occurred in the downtown. So if the assessments there were $800,000.00, the cost of the project was $1.3 million. Roger Knutson: Take a stab at it. Mayor Chmiel: One more time. Go ahead. Roger Knutson: The basic rule of assessments, which I think you all know is you can't assess more than the amount more than the project causes the market value of that property to increase in value. And what's been done here, as I understand it, is ue looked at what you call a commercial equivalent. How much street sense does this project really need and how much is created by being part of a bigger road network and that was the number that he came up with. Taking those two things into consideration. Councilman Senn: Okay but then the $2.2 million that you're talking about plus interest, in effect, or I guess it's not really $2.2 million. The $2.4 million that you're talking about in effect being the TIF money plus interest becomes then in effect a public subsidy that's going back to the taxpayers because rather than that money going on the tax rolls to control taxes, that money is going to be going to pay this roadway back there. Correct? Roger Knutson: That's correct. Councilman Wing: Why do we create a TIF district? I thought that's why TIF vas created. Roger Knutson: You can see in a lot of communities that don't have this kind of TIF money available, I'll tell you what happens because I work In some of those communities. The roads just don't get built. Because you can't assess it. Councilman Senn: Yeah and this is only a fraction of the TIF cost though going lnto that overall area of the project. Mr. James came up here earller and sald, he hopes he can rely very heavily on TIF when he builds his project. Target, the outlots, everything else, they were already gettlng heavy TIF subsidies. The roadway here is an additional issue relating to the area. You cannot tie it back into any of those TIF deals correct? Don Ashworth: Say that again? Councilman Senn: The road, this roadway issue that we're dealing with here, which lsa $3.3 million has absolutely nothing to do ulth TIF subsidies that are already being glven to Target, the outlot or Mr. James expects or whatever? Those are going to be separate TIF deals other than the road deal? Don Ashuorth: No. You calculate the full amount of dollars that a project is eligible to receive. In this caes Target was roughly $1 million. You subtract 6O City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 off of that any public improvement costs that are proposed to be carried out, the streets, etc and that's exactly what we did with Rosemount and Target. The remaining amount of what would be up to 3 years of taxes can be used for a land writedown, which was the case with Rosemount. Or in this case, we had additional costs of preserving the trees, insuring that we had the additional landscaping, and all the rest of that stuff as it was associated with Target. $o included in that, and I think it was $986,000.00, the first thing subtracted out of there was the amount out of this assessment roll which is proposed to go against Target. Which I agree is a minor amount. $100 and do you know off hand Jim the amount that's proposed to be assessed to Target? Jim Dvorak: About $180,000.00. Don Ashworth: I was going to guess 160. Councilman Senn: So the $800,000.00 assessment number is truly then basically an adding up of the numbers you expect to have remaining out of that TIF money to go back and pay for the assessments? Don Ashworth: As all of the properties in that area would develop, you would anticipate that they would be able to achieve a writedown in the special assessments against them. I think that Mr. James may be one of the first ones to the microphone saying, you know he participated in a conversation regarding trunk water assessments against his property and he liked this conversation about potentially reduclng bls costs because of development that could be eligible. The problem was, it really didn't come in the timeframe that he was hoplng it would come and he has ended up paylng those principal and interest payments himself. Not been able to fully take advantage of that program. I'm sure he would hope to be able to fully take advantage of it as it deals with this $864,000.00 assessment, not all of which would go against him. But a portion, $300. Councilman Senn: So if I'm understanding you, I thlnk I just got what you said. The $884,000.00, or whatever it is, is a total of what you would expect to get in off of that TIF formula for the abutting properties. Don Ashworth: If they can bring development to the table and we enter tnto development contract whereby then the HRA would take over that $884,000.00 because of the new development that they're bringing into the community. Councilman Senn: Zf they don't they have to pay tt themselves? Don Ashworth: That's correct. Councilman Senn: So we're telling them they'd better get in here with a project and ask for more TIF dollars so we can pay them back for the public improvements with our TIF dollars? Don Ashworth: Well, if they don't bring a project to the table, they eat the costs. Mayor Chmiel: Any other questions Hark? City Council Heeting - March 22, 1993 Councilman Senn: That's it for questions. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Michael. Councilman Mason: No. I've been privy to all this stuff for the last couple years. Mayor Chmiel: Colleen. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well I haven't been privy to all of this for the last couple of years and I kind of feel 11ke I'm coming in on the bottom of the 9th. These plctures in here aren't shoulng me clearly what's happening. You know, probably out of my own ignorance and fault Z haven't looked into this enough but I'd 11ke, particularly where the, I'd like to see where the semlfores are golng. Hayor Chmiel: You're more concerned with the semifores... Councilwoman Dockendorf: I understood on the left we've got one at Powers and at the Target entrance and then the next one is Kerber. Jim Dvorak: This would be Powers at this point. Okay, and then here's the main entrance into the Target site. Councilwoman Dockendorf: And you're got 2 lanes there plus a left turn? Jim Dvorak: Actually there's a left turn, 2 thrus and a right... Councilwoman Dockendorf: While you're on that. Is right now the way CR 17 has been done, it's really bad when you're taking a left turn. You can't see anything. Is that golng be graded so the slght 11nes u111 be better? Jim Dvorak: Yeah, some of that will be, sight lines will be taken care of... Councilwoman Dockendorf: And again we've got 2 lanes plus a couple left turns or what do we have there? Jim Dvorak: When we're at Kerber, we're into the, on the east slde we're lnto the existing area. One of the problems that we have ts...again at Market and another...uldenlng at this polnt. Here we've added another left turn movement south of Market. Then down at Laredo is another slgnal proposed. Here again some uldenlng at this polnt and then continuing on and get to thls area. Basically in front of the Medlcal Arts businesses, there will be a widening... Councilwoman Dockendorf: Okay. I hate this. I realize it's necessary but I just, it reminds me of what I conslder the mistake that was made on Highway 5 whlch ls stoplight after stoplight after stoplight and it certainly doesn't give me the feel of a boulevard which is what we're trying to do with that Highway 5 corridor study. But I understand the trafflc concerns. Are we dolng anything interesting wlth the semifores to make them unique? Jim Dvorak: Interesting? 62 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 Councilwoman Oockendorf: I have no idea what I have in mind but are they going to be, I mean they're not going to be posted on the size. They're going to be... Jim Dvorak: They'll be basically a standard signal with a mast arm that's in the corner, comes up. There's a light on top of the mast arm and then it arches over and supports... Mayor Chmiel: You're looking for a more unique kind of a fixture? Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yes. I'm looking at something that coordinates with our street lights. Charles Folch: I might add that, we are intending to the finish and the coloring for these signal poles and mast arms are, we're intending to have them look and be compatible with the corten steel lighting that will be going out there. So they'll be kind of a brown tint to dark corten color. They won't be like your standard MnDot green base with a yellow pole and aluminum, brushed aluminum mast arm. They'll be all like a dark corten light, Councilwoman Dockendorf: And ue have to have the standard red, green, yellow? Mayor Chmiel: All we need is a skyhook so they can... Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well, there's nothing I can do about it. Thank you. Mayor Chmtel: Okay, thank you. Richard. Councilman Wlng: Engineers wear pins Colleen that say stop 11ghts are your friends. We'll just time them. But good Councilmembers have a pin that says lt's the lights stupld, and they are a problem. Don, I'd. llke to talk about just this east end. Specifically the east end. I don't want to talk about tax increment or anything else. I want to talk about the east end. We all know that, those that have been on the Council, that there's been an incredible number of complaints and traffic's comlng to a standstill and cars can't pass and emergency vehicles, they're having problems and the stop lights were requested by the neighborhoods that exist. What we've had 1, 2, 3 requests for stop lights specifically plus whatever development has brought in. So they're here. But my concern is, is that this ls becoming our Lake Street and our future has nothing but growth and development. It's not going anyplace but up sky hlgh and more people are coming in and who knows what surprises Mr. 3ames has for us in his development but maybe it's gotng to be a Mtlls Fleet Farm and a Wa1 Mart both rlght across from Target. What I'm getting-at here is we're golng to be drawing into this communit-y more and more and more and are ue~ this was poorly done. Zt was done wrong. We know it was done wrong. We-know it's been a problem. We know cars can't pass. We know traffic can't flow, etc, etc, etc. We can't run two lanes of traffic. Flre equipment can't pass cars when they pull over the way they're supposed to. And I.hate to have staff turn to me and say, wlll he never be satisfied. But I've got to ask the question because my concern is, ts that if I want to be visionary and look to what the ctty is going to be in 10 years, 15 years, even though tt's costing a million dollars to fix what we should have never done in the first place, andltO take out stuff that probably should never have been put in in the first place, and widen lanes 63 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 that should have been wider in the first place and those engineers don't work in the clty anymore, wherever they are. Is this a bandaid just to cut down public opinon? Is thls a short term flx ulth no hope for the future? And ls this a long term disaster? This one's on my shift now so it starts to bother me a little blt. We can add a little turn lane here and a tlny bit of curb cut here so the aerial truck can actually make the turn, and ulden this area so that if the signs are rlght, the truck can squeeze by the car that pulls over. But when we start looking at our city develop, is this going to be another impassable road that ue're going to have to in 10 years say, this is hopeless. We can't move traffic on West ?8th Street. It's got to be a 4 lane road or we simply need an 18 foot lane. Is thls the tlme to buy the land, widen the thlng out, admit that maybe we can't fit some of the landscaping in. Maybe we can't take that...trafflc studles 10-15 years from now and never deal with thls agaln. Or are we golng to bandaid it and ls thls in fact a bandald and is it on our shift? Are we golng to be looked back on the guys that dldn't have the foresight to move traffic down West ?8th Street? Don Ashworth: Jim should respond but I would like to go through my recollection. That was the flrst step we took was to employ Strgar. Take a look at the projections and flow for thls road. To deslgn what would be the ultimate roadway through the community. One in which they felt would comfortably handle the trafflc as far as they could reasonably foresee lnto the future. Then as far as particular improvements we said, yes. We are going to go back and do the whole thlng to lnsure that trucks leavlng the statlon, turning at Laredo and heading west have the full lane configuration. They've got the ultlmate deslgn now. As it dealt wlth that segment to the east, we sald alright. Yes you may come back in some of these sections such as right in front of the furniture store. And go lnto their exlsting parking, eliminate that entire row of parking stalls but is that necessary for today's traffic needs? And so the deslgn in front of you ls not going to be one in whlch we go back and we tear everything out. There are small parts of it that we maybe move further back such as right in front of the hotel. That's a problem because we've got the retaining wall. 31m, have I properly paraphrased all of the work efforts? Jim Dvorak: Yeah, I think so Don. I guess I'd just like to add a thing or two here. Roadways have a certain life and as engineers we design for basically a 20 year 11fespan. We try and use trafflc projections that wlll take us through that 20 years. Hopefully you'll get more than 20 years out of your roads. Maybe you'll get 30. Here you have a road that was recently bullt. I guess I'm not even sure when it was constructed but in our mind it doesn't make any sense to take and remove those thlngs that you've already had bullt and have paid for unless it's absolutely necessary. We think we should get a little use out of that roadway and then when the problem ls becoming apparent, then make the full improvements as Don said. You know use what you have. Use what you've paid for and then plan for in the future and we have, as Don polnted out, have an ultlmate plan through the area and all of these things that we're doing are kind of part of the plan. You're rlght there wlll probably need to be other things done in the future but we think you should use what you've already pald for, for as long as possible. Councilman Wing' But Jim my problem is, I have no problem with what you're saying at all and I agree with that and the 20 year life, but I think I've been on some heated discussions here in the last 2 years where it's been determined, City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 at least the Council at that time, that the project was a poor one to begin with and it simply didn't meet the city needs and it didn't allow for traffic flow. And so even though we've got some minor flxes coming in, and forget the fire department. If a city sweeper is going down the street, I guess I still see traffic held up. If a city truck is parked, cleaning trees or doing whatever they're going to do, or fixing the road, we've got lane closure. I mean West ?Sth Street ls shut down. We don't have traffic flow on West 78th Street. So I admit, we can use what we built and then in 10 or 12 or 15 years still have to condemn the property, rip out the parking lots, at a much greater cost, maybe today is the time you maybe ought to look at the road for it's entirety and just say we made a mistake. Why don't we fix it right once and for all. I mean I'm going to have a hard time going along with this because there's little bandaids. A little corner here and a little width here. We've still got this narrow little road that's our main east/west Lake Street-and it's certainly not, if you need it 4 lane to the west, you're probably going to need it 4 lane to the east. Maybe, I'm just suggesting and I'm not, this isn't an ax I'm carrying other than saying maybe nou's the time to be looking at doing this project upfront once and for all and meeting the future needs once and for all and building for the future. Not putting a few bandalds on just because we did it wrong a while ago. That's my only comments. I think we're short sighted in what we're doing and I'm not so sure ue shouldn't be going all the way east to west. Dolng the whole road right now. It's going to be harder to move it. Harder to condemn it. Parking is going to become more accustomed. Walls are-going to be built. Businesses are going to be established. Then we're going to come roaring down there with bulldozers to make a road that's mandatory so, those are just my comments and thoughts. Councilman Senn: Dlck are you talklng about, I mean the whole length or really where the bottleneck so to speak occurs to the east? Councilman Wlng: Kerber east. Councilman Senn: So really the eastern bottleneck. Councilman Wing: Just the eastern bottleneck. Just the part that was done that hasn't worked. Councilman Senn: Which is being redone but you stlll have the bottleneck down to the east. Councilman Wlng: Yeah, they're trying to open up the bottleneck with some of the little turn lanes and some widening here and there so at least tfa car stops, another car can get by and it doesn't have to be a firetruck. It could be anybody. If a street sweeper breaks down, can we get by? Well, I think what you're saying is there's enough wldth occurring that we're going to have a, we're going to be able to pass two trucks now? Jlm Dvorak: In quite a few areas we've attempted to give some additional wldth so that you do have two lanes but you are correct in stating that there are still some areas that only have what is exlsting today wlth this plan. Councilman Wing: Alright, so then in fact, then i'll bring up the fire department. So the flre department wlll st111 in effect then, ifa car pulls 65 City Council Hooting - Hatch 22, 1993 over and stops like it's supposed to, and they do. We're still then going to have a bottleneck for that piece of equipment. A truck, no matter what the stop lights say, a car pulls over and stops by State law, and they do on West ?8th Street, whenever all emergency vehicle approaches, and that's our main thoroughfare east and westbound, so the fire department has the same problem, at least going eastbound that they're going to bottleneck up then. And have to come to a halt or drive up on curbs to get through cars. We're not fixing the problem. We're only bandaiding some specific areas. Jim Dvorak: There are areas that are remaining the same, that's correct. Oon Ashuorth: I don't know if I would totally agree with that, if I may. First of all remember that we're still proceeding with the idea of the firemen being able to activate the button. Basically it's going to turn this signal green for them and stop any further traffic from coming through. Councilman Wing: Don, I don't want to aggravate you here. Let's leave the fire department out of it. Let's just work with x vehicles but wide sized vehicles that might be stalled or trying to pass. Don Ashuorth: Through this segment in here, we're bringing the curb back to have sufficient distance to pass a plow, whatever the case may be. As you pull 1nfo this segment, you notlce thls ls the turn over toward the Rlverla. So this curb...so you still maintaln that passing COrlditlon down through this segment and one area that's a real problem is right in here. But thls ls the area rlght in front of the Olnner Theatre and to take out that entire row of parklng, I mean yes. If there's a stalled vehicle there, and a stalled sweeper, you've got a problem. Dui if you're simply following that sweeper, that small, I mean it's not as though you're having to follow it all the way through the downtown. You follow it for 200 feet before it opens back up again. And lt's not an lssue, l mean at some tlme yes, we will take and bring this one back out. But I don't know that it warrants the expense at this tlme and the removal of a lot of landscaping in that process mlght...and I thlnk there were certaln compromises that were being made in terms of the loss of landscaping in comparison to lnsuring that you have that 2 lane condition. Councilman Wing: That clarifies my question Oon, thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Any other questions? I think it would have been simplified more if we could have had the exact widths on the north and south side of those roads as well as extending from east to west to have alleviated some of the concerns that we're talking about. That was some of the questions that I had as to what the wldths were and I don't thlnk I'm golng to pursue that now because some of that's been explained even though I don't know what those widths basically are. One of the other questions that I had is regarding the Department of Transportation Carver County. Have they reviewed this and come up with an approval for the areas that are going to lnvolve them? Jim Dvorak: We have received comments from Carver County and have incorporated those comments 1nfo the plan. We do not anticipate any further major changes from Carver County. State Aid is basically reviewing the plan because Carver County wants to keep this on their system and receive some type of funding for it. They may have some things to do with content and format of the plan but the City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 basic design I do not believe they will have much to say about. We cannot get their final approval until the city approves the plans and Charles signs the plans and Carver County engineer signs the plans and then we send it back to them for their final approval. They have a draft set that they are reviewing at this time. Mayor Chmlel: Okay. Some of the other things that I had regarding the easements. Some of these, some of the easements are temporary. Some are perpetual. Some are outrlght acquiesce. On each of these parcels that we have, have we started any negotiations with any of the parcels at this time? Or have none of these been approached yet? Don Ashworth: I guess I would leave that back over to, do you feel comfortable answering that Charles? Mayor Chmiel: And let me just add a little bit more to it. Some of these temporary easements that we're getttng. Should they be a permanent easement rather than just that temporary in some of these specific parcels? Roger Knutson: Well the temporaries are to be used for construction purposes. Mayor Chmlel: Right. Roger Knutson: And to this date we get our descriptions from an engineering firm and I see no need for it. Mayor Chmiel: Alright. Okay. Next time what I'd like to see, if and when we go through the process again, I'd like to see who the actual parcel owners are on each of these parcels rather than just showing the perpetual easement of the roadway for such and such. Roger Knutson: ...that information is available and we can share that with you. Mayor Chmiel: Alright. That was the other question I had. Councilman Senn: Don? I'm sorry, I didn't know we were asking questions on B. I had just one there. Is the action then that we're taking, I mean if I understand the actlon, we are actually authorizing the acquisition of the easements and the quick takes. To me to do that I think we need the list exactly that you asked for of the property owners and the amounts of money that we're offering. Mayor Chmiel: I guess this is ali part of the total dollar package. Is that correct Jim? Jim Dvorak: The easements that are required. Mayor Chmiel: Or is that in addition to it? Jim Dvorak: The costs were not reflected in the dollars shown in my letter for easements. So those would be additional. 67 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 Roger Knutson: But to point out the obvious. That ue do is obtain an appraiser and the appraiser gives us the numbers. We offer the appraised amount. But any approval of a settlement, you know if we come back and someone wants $5.00 or $500,000.00 and whatever we agree to has to come back for your approval. Nothing is done without your approval. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, right. Councilman Senn: In concept I don't understand why we're going out and buying temporary construction easements and why we're not getting them free when we're turning around and suggesting that we're paying all of these people's assessment costs. Mayor Chmiel: Well maybe we could be getting them free on some of them. Councilman Senn: Well and I guess, but that's what I'm saying. I mean when we're authorizing this to proceed, I think we should know what we're authorizing versus this kind of blank check approach that says go out and negotiate the fields. I think our policy should be that if we're paying their assessments for them, then we should be getting at least the temporary construction easements for nothing. And I think that should even maybe even looked further into permanent easements depending on what the situation is. I mean we're talking about spending big bucks for these property owners. Our residents probably wish they could achieve the same when their streets go in. Roger Knutson: In a lot of these cases, like in the case of Mr. James' property, if we're going to pay the assessments, Mr. James, that depends upon what Mr. James builds and when he builds it. You may or may not pay his assessments. And our experience in the past is most people want to get paid. I've never. Councilman Senn: Well then let's assess him too. Assess him the full value of the improvements. Let's assess the east end the value of their improvements. If we're going to turn around and pay him for the temporary easements and the easements. Don Ashworth: The only way that I could see that working, and Roger is correct. I mean we've got to do the project which means we've got to get the easement. You've got to pay compensation to obtain that. Now in a subsequent action, if the property is developed and they come back and look to an incentive package because they have brought whoever to the plate, you may want to see the incentive package show that one of the things we'll get back first will be any monies that ue spent for easement acquisition. Mayor Chmiel: That's a good point. Councilman Senn: That's a good point but I don't see that included in here at ail and Z guess I'd like to see it as a matter of policy included. Don Ashworth: Right but where it would need to be included would be in the HRA's redevelopment plan because it's the HR~'s redevelopment plan that spells out what form of assistance you're going to provide to the individual owners. The other problem may be, and I haven't thought the whole thing through, is 68 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 you've got an existing owner. Let's say the people that own the property here in front. The Mithune's. Well if we pay Mlthune's for the acquisition of that right-of-way, they end up selling it and lt's ABC Companies, is it really right that we're going to reduce the incentive offer to ABC Companies simply because they bought the property from Mithune. Councilman Senn: No. Normally when you sell a piece of property, especially commercial, you have to pay those assessments before it goes forward. If there's any outstanding assessments. I mean that's pretty standard policy on commercial property. Don Ashworth: Okay. Councilman Senn: I mean I'd rather see you go back and at least as getting maybe a motion halfway there, have the HR~ adopt that ktnd of a policy before you come back and have us adopt assessments. Mayor Chmiel: That could be a recommendation from Council to HRA to do that when it comes to their particular part of lt. Councilman Senn: Well Don, I guess what I'm saying is I'd rather see that policy before I agree, or at least as one person sitting up here agree to go spend money to buy these easements. Mayor Chmlel: Well in order to make the improvements you have to 9o out and purchase those easement rtghts and spend those dollars accordingly. Councilman Senn: I understand that. Mayor Chmiel: So if we take a position right now and say that we would like HR~ to reconsider some of the previous thtngs that they have done before, but to include into this those easement portions into that agreement, I think that would take care of your concerns. Councilman Senn: No it wouldn't because I'd like to see. Mayor Chmlel: Well it would mlne. Councilman Senn: I'm just saying from my perspective I'd like to see the policy in place from the HRA in place before we take an action, saying we're going to go buy these easements. Don Ashworth: If I may Mr. Mayor. Let's assume that the Council tonight made a motion saying that you would like to take and see the HRA modify it's redevelopment plan to lnclude a new policy whereby any payments made to property owners for easement acquisitions would be a first reduction out of any subsidy offered to them. Okay. You're talking about modifying the plan itself, so I mean you're talking, the draft work necessary to actually carry that out. The formal notices back over to the School Distrlct and the County, back to the HRA. I mean what is a typical process Todd? That's 6, 8, 10 weeks? Todd Gerhardt: The notice part is 30 days...School Board, County Board, and the public hearings through the HR~, Planning Commission back to the Council. City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 Don Ashuorth: You delay this 2 months and this project will not open when Target opens. If this project, including the lights are not opened when they open, I think we're in big trouble. Councilman Senn: So your answer is is we should go spend both amounts of money? Don Ashworth: I see nothing wrong with the Mayor's suggestion that you direct the HRA to make that plan modification under the premise that they in fact will comply with what it is you ask them to do. councilman Senn: But all these will be in the hopper before you do that which means you're going to come back with the next argument which is, ue can't effect the properties that were already in the hopper. Well I mean that's what we keep coming back to all the time on these deals. Don ~shuorth: If this were to be applied back to Target, I might agree with you but we've already taken the additional lands that we need for Target. If somebody walked in the door tomorrow, I just don't see anyway in which you're going to have a owner be paid today and not subject him to what would be this new policy in 60 or 90 days. Councilman Senn: Well you could. I mean the way you could do that is you can give them in effect the purchase price or whatever of the easement or whatever but you can say urlte back lnto the assessment agreement that gee, if we don't get credit for that, you get assessed for it because ue also have the right to assess them for lt. We don't have to forgive the assessment and use publlc subsidy to pay their assessments. You know Don, I'm no wonderful genlus on this stuff. Z don't know why it wasn't really thrown out before but I look at this thlng and it's just 11ke a bottomless pit of money. Everything I look in here ls just the money going out, out, out, out. Councilman Mason: First of all, I think once again we're getting mucked down in the mlre here and I'm not qulte sure why. Thls stuff about bottomless plt Don, I believe I heard you say not too long ago that 1992 put Chanhassen in the best financial posltlon lt's ever been in. Don 6shuorth: I was talking about all of your funds, yes. Councilman Mason: All of the funds, so I question the bottomless pit. I do know my property taxes are still continuing to go down. Not very much but my city portion is going down so it seems. Mayor Chmiel: I'm glad you said that. Councilman Mason: Oh, hey. I mean I think this banter could go on for quite some time. I'm ready to make a motion to approve this here. Councilman Wing: The plan modification Mike, I think that in due respect to Mark's comments, I agree with some of his comments. I'd like to see this plan modification looked at by staff. Revlewed by staff and a recommendation made to Council before it goes to the HRA because I'm not convinced that I'm in agreement with Mark. But Don, I thlnk Mark's comments are well taken. I think that thls plan modification should be revlewed and a recommendation made from 7O City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 your office prior to going to HRA. I'd llke to see it handled that way and I will second. Oid you make a motion? I got lost here. Mayor Chmiel: Yes he did. Councilman Wing: z'il second that. West 78th Street's got to get roiling. Mayor Chmlel: You're right and what Oon had said, if we don't start on this, I probably shudder more than anybody else here when I think of the amount of dollars that are going to be expedited on this. But I know that we have to have thls done by the time Target is in or we're going to have people running after us with whatever those things fasten around the neck and get tight. But I think that we do have to go with that but I'd like to see all the thlngs that were discussed and the conditions as such to come up with and I'll call the question in regard to this. All those in favor of approving the plans and specs for West 78th Street detachment and downtown improvements and authorize for bids regarding the project 92-3 and West 78th Street Detachment Project resolution authorizing the acquisition of easements and/or quick take. Councilman Hason moved, Councilman #ing seconded to approve ResoXgtioq l~3-24, approving the plans and specifications and authorizing advertising for bids; and Resolution ~1~3-25, authorizing the acquisition of easements and/or quick takes. All voted in favor, except Councilman Senn who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 4 to 1. Don Ashworth: For clarification. So that motion was both A and B? Mayor Chmiel: That's correct. Councilman Wing: Can you put in your notes to get us a Hanager's recommendation on Mark's comments. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, he has that down. DISCUSSION OF SEASONAL ROAD WEIGHT RESTRICTIONS. Public Present: Name Addreas Nancy Lee Patrlck Blood Tom Moline Shakopee Shakopee Woodlake Sanitation Service Charles Folch: Hr. Mayor, members of the Council. As some of you may be aware of, each spring the City imposes along with the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the County Highway Department, seasonal road weight restrictions during the spring thaw period. This typically lasts about 2 months or so and each spring the Carver County Sheriff's Department will cite a number of violators of these road restrictions. Last year some of the violators that were actually.caught were companies that provide garbage service to the community. About a month ago 3 of these haulers representing Aagard West, 71 City Council Heeting- Hatch 22, 1993 Chaska Sanitation and Woodlake Sanitary Service, contacted staff and we sat down and had a meeting to discuss some of the issues surrounding this matter and I've included some of the discussions, information from that discussion in the staff report. From what staff's been able to determine, it appears as some of these heaulers are able to provide service with equipment that meets the weight )'estrictions in the spring and whereas others have equipment on their fleet that if loaded in providing a seFvice, they're not able to readily meet the weight restrictions. As Z've eluded to in the staff report, we're very concerned about OUF roads in Chanhassen. We deal with the issue of maintaining our streets with an annual maintenance sealcoating, crack filling, overlay program. From time to time we're also faced with considering major stFeet reconstruction projects which are always a very difficult battle for neighborhoods to go through, not only from an inconvenience during construction standpoint but also potential cost assessment standpoint. So we're looking to at least develop some sort of solution to this problem. Being that these weight restrictions is an ordinance, staff, as I explained to the haulers here, we could not staffwise could not administratively grant them a permit to run overloaded during this period. That's something that the Council would have to grant. Z've provided a couple alternatives that in this short period that we've kind of devised as potential options to deal with this or investigate further to deal with the solution. A number of the haulers are also here tonight to provide some information on their concerns with the problem and how we might potentially arrive at a solution. Mayor Chmiei: Okay, thank you Charles. Z noticed today I had my pick-up from WoodIake and I noticed that they did have a much smaIler truck for pick-up on city streets. But I also think that, or I like the fact that we're Iooking at maybe potentialIy assigning, I don't know how we'd do this but, and Z don't iike getting mixed up into somebody else's business but rather than having one truck go through, or 3 or 4 or 5 trucks go through my particuiar neighborhood, maybe just having 1 vehicle or 1 company and somehow split these things up but I know how protective each of those hauIers get with that. I'd like to suggest too that we involve the Solid Waste Committee that we have on this to at least funnel some of that information through them and then get back to Council with it as well. But I do understand the problems that we have with the roads and I know that the cost of these roads, as you mentioned in here, the investment is over $60 miIlion in roads and of course those heavier vehicles are the ones who reaiiy cause most of the problem8 within the city. So with that I will open discussion. Councilman Wing: What do other cities do? We've talked about this before. Do a lot of other' cities limit or contract or is it kind of a free for all overall? Charles Folch: Well from what we can tell in talking to other communities, there is quite a few that apparentIy impose the seasonaI weight restriction. Some of them, even though they put up signs, they may tend to look the other way for certain types of vehicles such as, well by State iau school buses are exempt but other vehicIes such as garbage hauiing and such. They may tend to just look the other way and primarily concentrate on construction veh£cles and things Iike that. Councilman Wing: How about the cities Charles that have gone to a contract system where just one CaFFieF with one truck with 2 or 3, is that real common? To limit the number. 72 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 Charles Folch: Well, actually the only, speaking from my own experience, the only community that I am familiar with that has, that I've been tnvolved in that has a cltywide contract for garbage hauling is the city of Hastlngs and they actually, because of the soil types being real sandy, do not have a problem with road restrictions in the springtime but there may be other communities out there that also do a have a citywide program that I'm not aware of. Councilman Wing: I guess I'd be interested in hearing from some of the haulers. (At this point the quality of the recording became very poor and was hard to hear what was being said.) Mayor Chmlel: ...major concerns that we had back when we originally initiated this was to, not put anybody out of business but I think we have what totally, 11 haulers? Charles Folch: 11 licensed haulers currently. Mayor Chmlel: It'd be nice if they'd be able to work those things out themselves. That sometimes is not the problem...past business of worklng for NSP, I know there becomes quite a problem for the haulers... I'd like to, if at all possible...I don't know. I don't have any real solutions to eliminating, and I don't like eliminating businesses per se. But Mark do you have something? Councilman Senn: Yeah, I don't, well Don I agree with you 100~ and I don't think we need to eliminate business. Our neighborhood has one truck come in once a week. Gary can speak for hlmself but I thlnk it's a good deal for our neighborhood and I think he thinks it's a good deal too because he told me up front, lt's wonderful to be able to come in and pick up 40 houses in just' a couple blocks. That lowers the rates plus raises his margin. Now to me we ought to put the garbage haulers...sensible ones versus the non sensible ones but we ought to keep the senisible ones together with staff...system could be deslgned out. 01strlctize or whatever, that kind of a system:because at least from what we've done in our neighborhood, that's what we do. Gary probably won't 11ke me to say thls but I'd match rates wlth any one of you. So I think there's beneflts for everybody but again I'd rather see something like this deslgned by the experts in the industry working with staff and seeing if they can come up with...that they could both live with and then come back to us with a recommendation. Mayor Chmlel: Well I just see a few of these here on the list, commercial and construction debris. There are three only and they wouldn't have to haul during that period of tlme so...just automatically take three off there. Councilman Senn: The big concern becomes the regular... Mayor Chmlel: Yeah, right. And that's I think... Councilwoman Oockendorf: Yeah, this whole discussion goes beyond city roadways...and contrary to what Charles is saying...we don't want that but there's... Mayor Chmiel: Michael, do you have something? City Council Meeting - March 22, 1992 Councilman Mason: I'm just listening. What I'm hearing sounds good so far. I do have a little trouble with & different haulers going down Woodhill Drive... but that's a real tough issue. If there's someway the haulers can coordinate. Of course then you're going to have...one sanitation service for 10 years are going to be yelling and screaming when they have to change so, it's a can of worms but I think it's something we need to slowly start dealing with. Mayor Chmiel: And I think too, if we bring in all these licensed haulers to a Council meeting, maybe we can get a little better handle on it as well. From their perspective... Charles Folch: Mr. Mayor, we do have a couple of haulers out in the audience tonlght if you'd like to take some testimony from them. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, we're getting close to our bewitching hour but we'd be more than happy if you sat here this long with us, we could take on a minute or two to 11sten to you. Tom Moline: Thank you Mr. Mayor. Council. My name is Tom Moline. I'm operations manager for Woodlake Sanitation. Just briefly, after our meeting wlth the clty staff, city englneer and so forth, we explained our posltlon whlch was actually resources, putting your resources. What resources do you have where you have them? We took a look at the city's concerns. I felt real good coming away from there because by, I almost started jockeying things around. We are trylng to comply totally wlth the road restrictions, even down as far as 4 and 5 ton under this open system we have here and I was under the impression that all the haulers were going to try and jockey their resources around. It's also true for us in the private sector here that we have to watch our resources. These trucks aren't cheap and we can't get them rlght away so it's something relatively new to the industry and so we're trylng but it takes tlme and it takes capltal but currently we're worklng in different parts of the clty, only on 2 days of the week, Monday and Tuesday, with three small trucks and our big truck we're 11mitlng to the, when it's empty a 7 ton road and then the 9 ton road. We are not going on any 4 or 5 ton roads. Period. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, that's why I had mentioned your smaller truck made my plck-up this morning. I noticed that immediately because I had read this prior to, it was good to see. Tom Moline: Yeah, so we are trying to work with the city and staff here. Any other questions? Mayor Chmiel: I guess not. Thank you. Anyone else? Okay. Action on this Charles. You're looking for one of the four optlons that you've indicated. Charles Folch: Or any other option which you feel merits further investigation. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, I'd like to get some of that citizen input as well. Councilman Mason: Yeah, I'm curious Charles. It's great to hear that about Woodlake. Is anyone else, any of the other haulers trylng to uork with that? City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 Charles Folch: Well I did receive a call today from Gary Lano from Chaska, and he apologized. He couldn't make it to the meeting tonight but he did state that you know he is, they're trying to do what they can to stay within the limits but he's being honest in stating that he's not able to do that in all cases. In looking at he was, I basically sent a copy of the staff report to all the haulers and he just wanted to go on record as saying that the only option that he really opposed was option number 3 I believe which is organizing the city into districts and such which he felt would really hurt his business, being a small company. He didn't feel he'd be able to compete on a big city wide contract basis. Chris Boatright from Aagard West. Councilman Senn: A clarification. City wide contract. Charles Foich: Or districting a city wide contract. A large district type contract. Mr. Chris Boatright of Aagard. West, he's kind of been the spearhead man from the beginning on this. UnfortunateIy he was going to be here tonight. I'm not sure why he's not but he is also in a situation where unfortunately bls fleet, his size of fleet, he does not have the abiiity:evidentally to use smaller vehicles or free up smaller equipment and increase manpower for the short period of time to be abIe to meet the weight restrictions on ail streets. So those are basically the three haulers who we've been working with that have raised the issues and concerns and have been cooperativeIy working with staff. Mayor Chmlel: I've seen some of these llttle Cushman plck-ups wlth blns in the back. They would pick-up maybe 2 or 3 homes and then scoot back out-to the highway and dump it back in the big truck and come back ln. I've seen that in several other communities. I know it's an additional cost but so are the roads. I have concerns wlth those roads as well. Don Ashworth: BFI picked mine up this morning and they had the smaller truck. Councilman Senn: ~ would move that we direct staff to pursue option number 3... back to us with a recommendation. Charles Folch: Would you also recommend that that involve the Solid Waste Committee that we have? Councilman Senn: Yes. I assume that's a tie in thru staff, I'm sorry. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I would second that. Councilman Wing: That's one of the recommendations but I think that this, if we start imposing weight restrictions and enforcing them, it's going to put people on guard that they simply can't tear the streets up. Even though it's a necessity and people are contracting for it. Maybe it's going to force some of the truckers to start looking at that realistic in their planning and thinking of purchases for the future. Now obviously...if we were to go out and just enforce it wide open, it'd shut everybody down but Z think that we ought to start letting them know how bad off they are and it's not acceptable and something's going to give because of it. I don't think we ought tolignoFe the enforcement aspect of it. 75 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 Charles Folch: No. At this point ue will continue to enforce the restrictions. Only you have the authority to grant permits or waive that otherwise. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. Well ue have a motion on the floor and I'd like to make a friendly amendment to that to also include citizens within the community come up with some suggestions that they may have, and offer those suggestions as well. If that's acceptable to the...and the second. Councilman Senn: I would assume the Solid Waste... Mayor Chmiel: Right, and have them go through that process. Okay, any other discussion? Councilman Senn moved, Council,oman Dockendorf seconded directing staff to look into reducing the number of garbage trucks on local streets by establishing city garbage service districts and bidding out annual or biannual contracts by meeting with haulers and the Solid Waste Committee with citizen input. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Mayor Chmiel: I'd like to probably go to the next ltem and I'd like to suggest that we table 12 and maybe if Olck's not going to take too long. Councilman Wing: I'll wait until next meetlng. I want Paul to be here. Mayor Chmiel: Good. That'd be Dick's Council Presentation as well. So we'll go to item number 11. CITY COUNCIL REOUEST FOR INFORHATION CONCERNING AUTO RELATED USES AND POSSIBLE OVERLAY DISTRICT ORDINANCE. Councilman Senn: Can we table that one too? Mayor Chmiel: We're getting very close to the bewitching hour which is 12:00 and I don't know if this can be done .ulthln 15 minutes or not. Kate, do you want to give us. Kate Aanenson: Yeah, I'll be very brief. What we're really looking for ls some further direction from the Council. What Paul did here was kind of based on the work sesslon that you had. Tried to polnt to you in some direction and that was one, looklng at the auto related uses. Eliminating them from certain uses from the zone or adoptlng the PUD overlay distrlct which we had proposed previously. What we've included in this packet is all the zones along the corridor and what the uses would be that may be objectionable as far as auto related. To have you look at those. Paul points out in hls memo that a lot of the vacant property is belng absorbed and there lsn't a lot of so called hot spots. We do know of one that was ralsed tonight and we have heard talk of a car wash golng on that site. The other issue is to, we've had requests for them for downtown too. The other issue too is if we eliminate them entirely from the city, where is the appropriate location for these type of uses. We all are users of them. If they can't go along the so called highway orientation, where should they belong. Should ue create a special district? So I guess what we see as the alternative is going through the districts and maybe outlining for you those lots that we know are vacant and have potential of something happening and giving you the 76 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 options of each of those lots. What could happen. This kind of ties in with what we're doing with the Highway 5 corridor. Mike was at the last meeting where we talked about architectural standards. We've kind of got that draft put together. Beefed up those standards. Next we'll be working on setbacks and as we look at each of those ordinances we'lI be passlng them through, the task force w111 be looking at those and then we'll pass them onto Planning Commission. We're not golng to'wait until they're all one piece. We'd like to get those into the process as soon as possible so we can react to those. that ls ongoing too but if you'd like for direction, then going back, if you want us to pull out some of those vacant lots that may have potential of uses. We talked about Target, that was an indication that a posslblIlty of two fast foods going on there. Identifying all those so you can look at specifically whlch ones you have concern about and then talk about rezoning. So if you want to glve us direction as far as modification of the zones now or looking at the PUD overlay. So Z guess what we'd want is further direction from you as to which way you want to go. Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Councilman Wing: But I think that thls, I think this is one of those items belongs on a work session where we can sit down in a round table with staff and throw out thls ordinance blt and say, we don't like these items. Let's cross them off and here, where are we going to put these people with a map in front of us. So we don't have to go through thls packet trying to put stuff together. Councilman Mason: I wonder if it wouldn't be helpful to have a list of those lands before we did anything. Kate Aanenson: That's what I'm saying. It might.be helpful to show you which lots are vacant. Councilman Mason: ...might get a little better handle on it. Kate Aanenson: What's permitted with each of those vacant sites. Okay. Do you want that for 11ke a work sesson? Councilman Senn: ...wonderful starting point but I'd really like to, I think the ldea of a work sesslon specifically dealing only with this issue and throwing...got to move this along because next month the next proposal's going to be ln. I mean by the time we finlsh this, they're all going to be bullt anyway. Councilman Wing: At the last minute ask for specific...zoning, land use, comprehensive plan. This is what we're talking about. Councilman Senn: Yeah, we take these uses and say okay, now what are we going to do with them. Kate Aanenson: So you're telling me the one component you want to see first is the vacant lands and what potential uses can go on all those? Councilman Senn: Right. And the existing land...for these type of uses. 77 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 Kate Aanenson: Okay. So existing ones too. Councilman Wing: April ?th, I don't want to discuss it at the Council meeting. Z don't want to sit here and be bogged down ulth these lssues at a Councll meeting. Mayor Chmlel: Okay, is there anythlng in addltion to that that you'd llke to see? There is no need for any action to be taken on this anyway. It's just direction that you're looklng for and I thlnk we can go with that direction. Okay. 8111 Grlfflth: If you'll indulge me for 60 seconds, 1'11 be terribly brief but I have been sittlng here For several hours. Mayor Chmiel: Well, if you gave us all that time we'll give you some time. Bill 6riffith: Okay, thank you sir. Mr. Mayor, Council members. My name is 8ill 6rlfflth. I'm representing the property owners of the Mason parcel which you approved a pr-oject his evenlng. They asked me to essentially enter their objections on the record and the basls for this. If this overlay dlstrlct ls intended to apply to the project area. The remaining parcel 3 let's call it. The maln r'eason ls because of the long hlstory on this parcel of development limitations including a 2 1/2 year development moratorium. Two lawsuits. The 6 months process that we just went through and I think a practical limitation ls that auto related uses have been allowed pursuant to a great deal. of planning and study on thls property and now the horse ls essentially out of the barn. The area's developed in auto related uses and essentially the reasonable or only compatible use of the parcel ls an auto related use. So we will continue to follow the process closely. I reallze this lsn't a publlc hearlng and continue to object and posslbly ultimately challenge application to this parcel. Thank you. AMENDMENT TO CITY CODE REGARDING PEDDLERS. SOLICITORS. AND TRANSIENT MERCHANTS, FIRST READING. Hayor Chmiel: So with that I would like to suggest we table item number 12. Do have a motlon on that? Councilman Wing: Except I've read that and this is, okay I just happen to like it so I'd be happy to approve it. Councilman Senn: Which one are we on? I thought we were still on 11. Mayor Chmiel: 11 we just gave direction. Councilman Senn: I'ln sorry. I misunderstood. Okay, but so on 11 are we going to. Kate Aanenson: We're golng to follow up. Mayor Chmlel: They're going to follow through with what's necessary to do with what we proposed to her. 78 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 Councilman Senn: Can we do that at our April 7th meeting or not? Kate Aanenson: That's my question. Mayor Chmiel: Depending on what time we have and if the time is available, I'd say... Kate Aanenson: Paul and myself are both going to be out of town. Councilman Senn: Our work session is what I'm talking about. I mean we have to set an agenda for that night Z'm assuming. Kate Aanenson: Paul and I'll be on vacation. Did you want to have someone else do it?... Mayor Chmiel: Okay, next item. Can I have a motion to table item number 127 Councilman Hason moved, Councilman Wing seconded to table the first reading of the amendment to City Code regarding peddlers, Solicitors and Transient Herchants until the next meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor, before, we go home tonight, I would like to once again state my request that we meet at 7:00 prior to Council meetings. Round table upstalrs specifically on the consent agenda. Review issues, 1dews, thoughts. Councilman Senn: Is that a motion? Councilman Wing: I'm making that a motion. Councilman Senn: I'll second that. Councilman Mason: And I will once again say, when I have questions about the consent agenda, whlch I dld and I made two calls to the clty and I had my questions answered and that's why I didn't need to pull any items from the agenda. So I don't, comlng at 7:00 you know, I'll be honest wlth you. I'm already putting in a lot of time with this job but I can get my homework done on the phone at City Hall without having to take an hour for a Council meetlng for consent agendas or taking staff's time at 7:00 to take care of those lssues. I don't see the need personally. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, there's a morton on the floor with a second to meet at 7:00. I sort of feel like Mike does, just so you know where I'm comlng from. Because I do go through that process of getting my questions answered...and I do get them answered. Z either come in or I call. One of the two. I may even do that on Friday when I get the packet and I of course have that luxury of all day to be able to sit and read but we do have a motion on the floor with a second to meet at 7:00. Councilman Senn: Don? One point of discussion. I thlnk the rest of you need to know maybe where I think Dick and I are coming from...and Dick probably has a similar situation to mine. When I can do that, I do that but I'm flying in and out all the time just 11ke 0ick's flying in and out all the time. Yeah, I get a 79 City Council Meeting - March 22, 1993 packet Thursday night. Sometimes I don't even get a chance to even review the packet until Monday before the meeting because I'm not home to get it and I'm not flying until Monday. Well I don't work, excuse me, an 8:00 to 5:00 or a 9:00 to 5:00 job and I'm gone for days at a time and I do everything I can to come back for these meetings but I can't always figure it out on the basis that I'm going to get here to get all of that contact time either done on Friday or Monday. Councilman Wing: Well and then things come up. I see it as a work session. We could spend a half hour just on lot size. Councilman Mason: Look, I don't have an 8:00 to 5:00 job either and I took this job on knowing that there were some things I had to do outside of the Council meeting. And that's where I stand on that... Mayor Chmiel: ...when in my better haydays, I was gone ali the time too, Put 8 hours, 10, 12, 13, 16 hours, blah, blah, blah and there is a motion on the floor with a second to start at ?:00. Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Senn seconded that the City Council meet at 7:00 prior to City Council meetings for review of the agenda. Councilman Wing and Councilman Senn voted in favor. Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Mason and Councilwoman Dockendorf voted in opposition and the motion failed with a vote of 2 to 3. Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Mason seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 11:55 p.m. Submitted by Don Ashworth City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim 80