1990 10 08CH~k~Se~ CZTY COUP11.
RE~ ~ET/NG
OCTOBER 8, 1990
Mayor Chmtel called the meeting to order at ?:40 p.m.. The meeting was opened
with the Pledge to the Flag.
COUt~ILI[~BEE PILOT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Workman, Councilwoman Dtmler
and Counotlman Johnson
ST~FF PIIF. SENT: Don Ashworth, Gary Warren, Paul Krauee, Todd Gerhardt, Jo Ann
Olsen, Scott Herr, Roger Knuteon and Sharmtn Al-Jeff
~ OF ~GENliR: Counctlwoman Dtmler moved, Counctlman 3ohnson seconded to
approve the agenda wtth the folio#lng changes and add[[tone: Counctlman Johnson
wanted to pull [rems 7 and 8 off the agenda ae they had been approved by the
Board of Adjustments and Appeals and dtecuee plaotng the ttems from the Board of
Adjustments and Appeals on the Ctty Counctl Agenda under Counct! Presentations;
Hayor Chmtel wanted to move item 9 to after Ytettor'm Presents[tone; and Don
Ashworth wanted to add under Publtc Announcements the presents[ton of a Haple
Leaf Award to Senator Schm[tz and dtecues the Community Center brochure under
Administrative Presents[tone. ~1! voted tn favor of the agenda aa amended and
the mot[on carried.
pUBLZC PJ~NOUNCEI~ENTS:
letter Sent to Election 3ud~.
Mayor Ohm/el: The first one that-I'd like to take te the letters that ! had
sent to all the elect[on Judges on behalf of City Council thanking thee for
servtng ae an elect/on Judge tn our ctty and want to at th[e parttcular ttme
recogntze [herr wtlltngnese to volunteer for this elect[on .Judge duty. Really
sincerely appreciate their dedication to our community for doing this and each
of those people did recetvea personal letter from me. The next item on our
agenda ts · presentation to Senator Bob Schmttz and !'d like, Bob tf you would
come down to the front here.
Presentation of ~laple Leaf ~#mrd to Senator Bob Scb~tz.
Mayor Chmtel: At thte time I would like to thank you for all ~he aeettance that
you've given to the city. We're worked very closely together tn getting
accomplishments done as far as our TH 5 ts concerned and TH 101. ~e really
appreciate that. With this %'d like to present to you from the City of
Chanhassen the Maple Leaf Award presented to Bob Schattz, State Senator, 1974 to
1990. !n recognttton of 15 years of dedicated servtce to District 36 including
Chanhassen. Chanhaeeen Ctty Counctl, Oon Chmtel, Jay Johnson, Tom Workman,.Btll
Boy[ and Ursula Dtmler. On behalf of the City once again thank you Bob for your
public servtce.
Bob Schmttz: Thank you very much. ! can assure you that ret[ring tea lot more
fun than starting out. These things come along and certataly ! will be
grateful... Chanhaesen was one of the precincts or one of the areas that !
represented all 16 years .... Carver County and ! can tell you that the work for
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
you people and with you people was indeed challenging. Something that took a
little extra effort I'll admit but when we were successful, you folks were very
cooperative tn supporting the challenge that was before you. ! hope at least
that we have accompZtshed...your tremendous responsibilities of guiding a new
community along it's way. Something that all suburbs have experienced.
Certa£nly probably not as much as some of those In my district and yours is
certainly one of them. My district tn Z982 had 60,I00 people and now there's,
from the numbers from Met Council that gives us slightly over [00,000 so my
hands are fuZZ as weZ! to keep up with everything. Certainly the Item you
mentioned with the extension of the tax financing district was indeed very
difficult. You helped me a lot and Don Ashworth was very much Involved tn it
and it was quite a challenge and most rewarding to see that come through.
had to probe all the County Commissioners, friends that we had there and get
them together to support this. It was really scarey at one time when I read in
the Hinneapolis paper that one of the ooamisstoners said tt was a m/Ilion dozier
rip off in Hennepln County. Well that didn't make our Job much easier. I don't
believe it was a million dollar rip off. The natural benefit that Chanhassen
has gotten...Thank you again. I really appreciate it.
CONSENT AGENDa: Councilman Johnson moved, Councilwoman Otmier seconded to
approve the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's
recommender ions:
b. County Suites Improvement project No. 89-25:
1. Resolution 4)90-125(.a): Approve Contract Amendment No. 2.
2. Approve Retaining Wall Contract
e. Resolution ~90-12&: Approve Contract Amendment No. 2 for Downtown
Redevelopment, Phase II Improvement Project 86-[1B.
f. Resolution 1~q3-127~ Accept Streets in TImberwood Estates, Project 87-17.
g. Resolution ~90-128: Accept Street and Utility Improvements in Chanhassen
Hills 3rd Addition, Project 89-5.
h. Approve Construction Plans from Carver County for County Road 17 flZZ,
located between TH 5 and Lyman Boulevard.
Approval of Accounts.
k. City council Minutes dated September 24, i990 Planning Commission Hinutes dated September 19, 1990
Park & Recreation Commission Hinutes dated September 25, 1990
Accept Carver County Recycling Bin Grant.
m. Set Special Heeting Date, Canvass City Election Results.
n. Resolution ~90-1Z9: Resolution Authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to
Execute Quit Claim Oeed from the City to the HRA.
voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
City Council Heating - October 8, 1990
R. fiUTHOR]:ZE PI,.M ItOOZI:'ZC.qTZON TO EC(M(MZC D[VELOI:qfENT DZSTRZCT 2 FOR THE
CONST~TZ~ OF_ AtNXJB(~ ROM) FROtl LYI'MN BGtJLEVMiO TO THE R~kZl..ItO/~ ~S.
Councilwoman Dtmler: [tee l(a) has to do with the mod/f/cation of TIF District
No. 2-1 and calling for a pub[lc hearing. Z guess my question on this one
was, I wasn't quite sure whether the amount that we authorized for upgrading
Audubon Road, $532,830.02 on 3uly 23rd had to do w~th Phase I or Phase 2. Gary,
can you answer that? Or Todd?
Todd Gerhardt: That uouLd be phase 2, the $532,000.00.
Councilwoman Otmler: Okay. So if It's Phase 2, we're Increasing the amount by
$227,170.00. What la Included or what does this pay for?
Todd Gerhardt: There had to be some additional land acqulsltlons that we had to
put ~n there. #e had engineer fees. Attorney fees and there was a change
order.
Hayor Chmtel: Do you remember what the land coats were off the top?
Gary Warren: The Land costa weren't that substantLal. They're l£ke $1,000.00
for easements from the Stockdale property.
Hayor ChmteL: ! thought that may have covered It but I guess not.
Gary Warren: There are fees tn there for the Bartnsky property for the tree
replacement which amounted to about $12,000.00 but that ~as actually In the
planting type fees.
Councilwoman Dtmler: Okay, so I've heard about $13,000.00. Where's the other?
Hayor ChmleL: Of course there were attorney fees In there. Excuse me Roger.
Councilwoman Oimler: That's quite a difference from $227,000.00.
Roger Knutson: Z didn't get that check yet Don.
Oon Ash#orth: Correct me If Z'm wrong but we had originally established the
program which would Include both Phase I and 2. Over a period of tLme and
actually doing Phase 2, the actual costs appeared to be greater than the
ortgLnal program costs and that's what necessitated this change. Zs that not
correct? ! mean It's not really, ! mean if there were an error there, it's the
orlglnal program costs that were Just a swag at that poLnt Ln tLme.
.-
Gary Warren: 1n the Phase 2, and ! apologize because ! didn't get the question
ortgLnally but Ln the Phase 2 we are bulld~ng an urban section as you recall
down .to future Lake Orive West and we've extended the watermatn and sanitary
sewer so we've gone from what ~as ~n the original scope here of Just basLcally
an overlay project to actually building a 44 foot urban section tn that
northerly piece Lncludlng street lights and such and then the southerly p~ece,
that La basically an overlay project w/th some grade correction down by the
Barlnsky's. So Z would say that that probably, and as you said, the original
cost was pretty much a guesstimate was the biggest part of the coat factor.
City Counc£1Heeting - October 8,
Don Ashworth: So we established, originally establishing the district we had a
good estimate as to what costs would be north of the railroad tracks and had
included that as a part of the original program. The original program also said
that there would be some work done to the south. As we get finished and this
would have been upwards of 2 to 3 years ago. Now as we're moving in to actua!
construction, the items as Gary is mentioning produces a cost factor of the
$532,000.00 which no longer is in conformance with that original plan so Eon
Beatty, Holmes and Graven's suggested that we modify the plan to ensure that the
original plan versus actual expenditures, that the two parallel each other.
Councilwoman Oimler: I guess I brought it up because it seemed like an
excessive amount of increase and it just seemed unbelieveable to me that we
wouldn't have estimated the administrative expenses and attorney fees to be off
that far. Will we get a documentation of this for the public hearing of the
expenses? A more deat iled?
Todd Gerhardt: You'll get the modified plan laytng that out.
councilman Johnson: I think part of what you're seeing is there wasn't an
estimate of $532,830.02. That's what the btd was.
councilwoman DImler: Yeah, right.
Councilman Johnson: Then on top of the bid you have your land acquisition
costs, your administrative expenses. Now whenever our building inspector goes
out there and all that, all those costs go ln. Isn't there a percent that we
charge a project.
Gary Warren: 30~.
Councilman Johnson: So 30~ of that $532,000.00 ts part of that difference so
that would be $150,000.00 right there of the City's administrative cost for
running this project. So that's part of that difference between the 532 and the
760 so the attorney fees weren't actually $150,000.00 on this.
Todd Gerhardt: It's staff time and...
Councilwoman Oimler: Alright. I'll move approval and looking forward to the
actual and more detailed account on October 22nd.
Councilman Johnson: Second.
Resolution ~90-130: Councii#oaan Dialer moved, Councilman 3ohnson seconded to
approve a Resolution calling for a public hearing on October 22, 1990 to
consider the plan modification to Development District #o. 2 and Tax Increment
Financing District No. 2-1. Ail voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously.
C~ ~ICCEPT PflvEHENT INVENTORY PRO. POSAL FROfl OSU,
Councilman Workman: Gary, was the pavement inventory and then back on item (o),
the water supply system analysis, those two were budgeted items? Or where did
those come from? They both seem to have some merit and although I don't know if
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
I have enough information to make that decision, they seem rather simple. Don't
our employees, engineering staff and street crew staff, don't, they keep some
sort of an inventory on the roads? I mean they're on those roads every day.
Isn't there a system that we have that can monitor this or what is OSN going to
go for us that, it Just doesn't seem like.
Gary Warren: Are you ready for the answer?
Councilman Workman: Yeah, go ahead.
Gary Warren: No, our crews andlsuch that travel the roads and such, their
duties are not keeping an inventory per se, at least any sort of a manageable
inventory that we can digest at this point In time unless they happen to see
something that, tf we have a road failure of sole serious lagnitude here that
they will actually mention It to Jerry Schlenk and they'll go about their duty.
We're talking here a little more sophisticated program. The pavement management
system and such that each of the roads will be looked at and we will actually
measure, take measurements for width and things of this nature to build this
data base. This Is funded out of 211-233 as [ noted in the staff report. We do
have $50,000.00 that we had set aside, a portion of which was dedicated to
getting the pavement management program up and running so we could address the
Frontier Trail need so to speak in relation to the total system needs. We are
looking to take advantage of some software that We've looked at. That is pretty
minor. It's a $35.00 package but to help us with getting the base established
and to go forward from here. The consultant route seemed to be the best as far
as bringing our staff up to speed on it so yeah, we do have talent in this
regard but specific to this software package and such, we're looking to augment
that at this time.
Councilman Workman: But are you saying we're going to have flexible pavement
management system, we're going to have that software package and we're going to
use tt so we're now going to have our own? OSM's going to help us get up and
running on this?
Gary Warren: Right.
Councilman Workman: The feeling is that the best way to tell if a road Is not
in good shape is to see It and [ guess Z don't understand what predicting, you
know certainly we want to manage our budget but we basically have an Idea In our
minds what roads. You and I talked about Chan Estates the other day and the
roadways there. Don't We have kind of a mental idea about what needs to be done
on a laJor basis anyway? =
Gary Warren: Were It that simple, I wish it were. Yeah there are the obvious
roads and unfortunately those are the roads that have failed and probably are
beyond salvaging to the point where you need to do a reconstruction like on
Frontier Trail. We found In looking at America Public Works data and other
research data as far as pavement management programs are concerned, that a road
goes through a life cycle and If you catch the road early enough in It's life
cycle of deterioration before it hits this critical break point, you can do
effective maintenance on the road with a eealcoat or crack sealing or some spot
repairs and you can extend it's life considerably but once tt goes over this
break point to the point where you visually see alligator cracks and the actual
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
failures, ltke we see in Chun Estates, then you've gone too far. And there are
some subtleties that are In road flexible pavement such as we have that you need
to basically walk the roads, lnspect them, look at them physically to look for
some of the key signs as far as what the age of the road is. Some communities
actually go to the polnt where they'll do borlngs periodically through a road
section. That is why, as we noted in the report here, we're looking to do an
inspection of our pavements each year for the flrst 3 years to see how they're
changing so we can slot each of the segments and where they are tn their Life
cycle. Then we can do some appropriate preventive maintenance hopefully so that
we don't have to deal with a large cost associated with total upgrade.
Councilman Johnson: Thls lsa small cost upfront to prevent a big cost down the
road.
Gary Warren: Specifically the cost here for OSM is to just get us started one
time. They would not be Involved. It would be totally city staffed from here
out. As far as the actual rehabilitation ts concerned, that also ls to try to
get to the road's before they totally fail so that we can spend less dollars
maintaining them on a pertodic basis than one big lump every 20 years so to
speak.
Councilwoman DJmler: I have one question too Gary. Does thls in any way Insure
that ue will reduce the portion that is assessed to the property? Benefitted
property owners. Isn't that what we're almlng at?
Gary Warren: Well I guess there is some beneflt in the program In that if the
City has a consciously applled annual malntenance program, that what we are
trying to do is extend the longevity of the pavements so that we don't get them
faillng and doing total fallures early on In thelr 11re cycle so there ls some
benefit tn that. As far as the relation to the actual percentage assessed, we
are dolng this to get a handle on the total system need. Where are our roads
right now? The 90 miles or so that we have out here as far as if we were going
to next year brlng them all up to 50 year life let's say or 20 year 11re, how
many doLLars are we going to have to spend to do that? Once we have the total
system need, then we can take a look at a Frontlet Trail or 5 year capltal
improvement program for the roads and decide what percentage the City feels
comfortable in dealing with from say the general fund or from other pavement
funds and likewise what then would be assessed as far as each project ts
concerned.
Councilwoman Oimler: Will you have this in place before the Frontier Trail
assessments come out?
Gary Warren: That specifically ts why we've been trying to get this underway is
to be able to do that so when the Frontier Trail assessment roll will be coming
to the Council next summer basically and thls materlal will be in our hands at
that time.
Councilwoman Dimler: But you're not guaranteeing it's going to bring down the
assessment?
Councilman Workman: You can't bring down those assessments from thls point.
City Council Meeting - October 8, ~990
Gary Warren: Well we haven't established the assessment rate yet as you recall
on Front[er Trail.
Councilwoman Dialer: Right, we sit11 have to do that. Will we have money
available at that time to take that Into consideration?
Gary Warren= Will we have money at that time to take?
Councilwoman Dialer: Yeah. So we could reduce the assessment to the property
owners.
Councilman Workman: But this isn't like a utility.
Councilwoman Dialer: I understand that but I mean that's what we're leading up
to here with this inventory.
Gary Warren: Currently the avenue which Is available for deferring or
minimizing, reducing the assessment roll on Frontier Trail Is to take funds out
of some other source such as the general fund. This hopefully will glue you a
better understanding of what the total need ts out there so that you can decide
if you're going to commit to Frontier Tratl, how many other Frontier Trails are
there out there and should we be funding them 20~, 80~, 90~, what percent.
Councilman 3ohnson: Frontier Trail wl[l set.the precedent. [f that precedent's
going to break the City's budget, we want to know about tt before we set It.
Councilman Workman: So'everything we're going to want to know about our 70
miles of roads Is gotng to be tn this package? I mean because we have a seal
coating program right now and we do a lot of preventative maintenance. I
guess I'm still not convinced what, ltke that utility thing that we're going to
talk about. I'm not quite convinced what we're doing here because.
Gary Warren: You're correct Tom. We do have an annual seal coating program but
It has been basically a program of geez, this road ls 7 years old. Typically
you sealcoat a road every 7 years so let's sealcoat this one. [t doesn't relate
to the subtleties of the actual deterioration of the roads that are golng on.
That needs to be factored tn here. Sealcoatlng ts not the only, ! mean that ts
an Important step but that Is not the only repair technique that needs to be
applied. Crack sealing, the City does not do crack sealing for example.
Councilman Workman: You did It on Red Cedar Point last year.
Gary Warren= Well, specia! requests we do. We do do some sealcoating, or I'm
sorry, crack sealing With the seal coating and some leveling.
Mayor Chmtel: Any further discussions on this?
Councilwoman Olmler: I did have one more question. Are you absolutely sure
that we can't handle this tn house? I would prefer to see tt done that way.
Gary Warren: Yeah, absolutely sure.
Councilwoman D1mler: You're absolutely sure? We don't have the expertise?
City Council Meeting - October
Gary Warren: We don't have the time.
Councilwoman Oimler: Okay.
Councilman Johnson: I move approval.
Councilman Workman: Second.
Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman #orkman seconded to accept Alternative No.
1 of the OSH proposal for street inventory assistance in the amount of
$4,830.00. All voted in favor and the motion carried unantmouslx.
O. ACCEPT PROI:q3. SAL FOR WATER ~UPPLY SYSTEH ANALYSIS.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. Good thing we're on the same criteria for item (o).
I just thought that $13,000.00 plus dollars was too much for what we're getting.
Some of the criteria or what we're reviewing here seems to me that it's
excessive at $75.00 an hour for an engineer for 24 hours to review the existing
records. Somebody here should be on top of that already. Assessing our future
needs also you know. Reviewing the population projections and growth patterns.
Those two seem to be, I mean it just seems there's too many hours at too high a
cost in here for what we're actually doing. Especially since the company that
we're recommending has done the updating up to the present and they should be
very familiar with what our needs are. Right now with the current usages anyway
and we already know or this report states that we're going to need Well Number 6
so I don't know wh we have to identify inadequacies of the existing system if we
already know we're going ot need Well Number 6. You see what I'm saying? It
just seems too excessive.
Gary Warren: I guess there are a lot of items brought up there. $75.00 per
hour is the going rate for a registered engineer.
Councilwoman Oimler: I'm talking about reducing the hours.
Gary Warren: Well the hours that it would take are basically, this is not a
lump sum contract here. We'd be proposing to go and pay for the hours that they
aotually spend on the project. We're not guaranteeing them that we would spend
the $13,300.00. We're just Identifying the scope elements that need to be
undertaken. This relates to the Comp Plan Section that we're trying to fill the
blanks In on and if it takes 12 hours to dlgest some of the exlstlng data,
that's all that we'll pay for. L£esch has done some good work with us from the
preliminary report that they dld in locatlng this drlft well for us right now
which the City is seeing I think some good benefit from and for them to extend
to do thls, we're not just looklng at wells. We're also looklng at sittng the
next water tower and when is the right time to bring the next water tower on
site. That takes a 11ttle blt of computer analysis which we don't have in house
at this point in time.
Councilwoman Oimler: Okay, on this one I can see where we couldn't do tt in
house but I'm wondering, you're saying that the cost may be less?
Gary Warren: I'm saying that we certainly.
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Councilwoman Dtmler: That the $13,300.00 ts the absolute top?
Gary Warren: It's the best guess.
Councilman Johnson: Did we bid this at all?
Gary Warren: OLd we what?
Councilman Johnson: Dld we ask any more than one?
Gary Warren: No.
Councilman Johnson: What ts the threshhold where we put thts out for bid?
I know we asked this last week.
Gary Warren: Professional services, so there's no threshhold.
Councilman Johnson: Yeah. But we should have some k~nd of threshhold. At
dollar cut off we want to go out for bid unless there's some reason because
truthfully my experience L~esch ~ not real well known on, at least my knowledge
of Liesch ts that they're more into the sttlng of wells and the hydrogeology
side of ~t. System analys~s
Mayor Chmlel: Jay, he's wel! known.
Councilman Johnson: He Is In there? Okay. I've only used h~m on the
hydrogeology side of things.
Councilman Workman: Yeah, me too.
Gary Warren: He ts augmented with staff, Jim Bollard who tn particular works on
th~s stuff with ua ~s from HcCombs-Knutson and has extensive experience In these
types of studies and he's the one who's handled the mechanical part of our
wells. Because of L~esch's background and the work that they had done on our
preliminary analysis, we felt, I fee! that they have the qutckest route to
getting to the solution here from a dollar standpoint.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, any further discussion? If not.
Councilwoman O£mler: I move approval.
Councilman Johnson: 0tscusston, can we move thls-aa a not to exceed $13,300.00
versus an open estimate of $13,300.007
Councilwoman 0imler: Right.
Gary Warren: Fine.
Mayor Chmtel: Motlon's on the floor. Is there a second?
Counc~lmanb Workman: Second.
Councilman Johnson: With the understanding it's a not to exceed?
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Mayor Chmtel: Right. Not to exceed $13,300.00.
Councilwoman Dtmler moved, Councilman Workman meconded to accept the September
21, 1990 propose! from Bruce ~. Lleach Associates, /nc. for preparation of a
uater supply system analysis report at an estimated amount not to exceed
$13,300.00. all voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
V~$ITOR PRESENTRTIONS:
A1 Klingelhutz: ! know ['ye gotten help from some of you Council and Mayor in
two previous meetings we had on Pioneer Trail and TH LO[ £ntersectton. We did
have the Department of Transportation out and they seem to be amendable to doing
something with that intersection but what i'm going to ask you for tonight [s to
pass a resolution from the Chanhassen City Council to the Oepartaent of
Transportation stating some of the hazards of that intersection and [ will get
the County to do the same thing and ! think we have to keep the pressure on to
get some things done on that intersection. That's my only request.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Al. We can't do it this evening because of procedures
unless we.
Councilwoman Otmler: We can waive the procedures.
Mayor Chmiel: We can waive the procedures.
Councilwoman Olmler: I move that we waive the procedures.
Councilman Workman: Second.
Mayor Chmiel: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion?
Councilman Workman: Maybe Oon you can explain, did you explain last week what
we were doing a little bit?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
Councilman 3ohnson= Oo we have the data to make a resolution tonight?
sounds like we need a resolution written up.
Councilwoman Dimler: Do you have a resolution written up Al?
A1 Kl£ngelhutz: I don't have one... It came up when Don mentioned to me before
the meeting that there was another major accident there Just a few days ago and
we've had 3 of them now In the past 3 weeks at that intersection and all we're
waiting for ts somebody to get killed.
Mayor Chmlel: Right. I agree. It's been termed as a very dangerous
intersection. Many accidents have occurred at that particular location and
we've discussed th£s for the past couple of weeks and have had discussions
with MnDot on early morning meetings at 7:00 at the Prairie House and they, as
A1 mentioned, they seemed amenable to it but I think by adopting a resolution
for this and Roger are you writing one fast?
LO
City Council Meeting - october 8, [990
Roger Knutson: I'm writing as fast as'[ can.
Councilman Workman: Al, when does tt need to be done?
al Klingelhutz: Well the sooner the better. I'm going to get the County Board
to adopt one tomorrow.
Mayor Chmiel: You have a Board meeting tomorro~ right? Okay.
Councilman Johnson: You're going to write one .up between now and tomorrow for
the Board meeting?
A1Kllngelhutz: The thought came to me that it could be very helpful to getting
something done there soon.
Councilman 3ohneon: We have a &:O0 meeting tomorrow. Can we have a resolution
before ua before our 6:00 meeting tomorrow?
Councilman Workman: Who's got a 6:00 meeting?
Councilman Johnson: You do.
Mayor Chmlel: We do. Budget.
Councilman Worksan: Not me.
Councilman 3ohnson: Budget workshop meeting.
Councilman Workman: [ don't have that meeting. -
Councilwoman Dialer: Was it 5:007 ! thought it was 5:00.
Mayor Chmlel: 5:00?
Councilman 3ohnson: ! got It at 6:00.
Councl[man Workman: Maybe.the City attorney can get something together before
the end of the meet[rig.
Mayor Chmtel: ! would Just as soon move on it right now If we could.
Councilman Johnson: I'll move approval of a resolution then to be drafted by
City Staff by tomorrow night for review at the meeting tomorrow night,
Councilwoman Dialer: Second.
Councilman 3ohnsen moved, CouncJLl~oaan D[aler seconded to approve a rseolut[on
regarding the Intersection of PLonser Trail and TH 101 being drafted by City
Staff to be presented to the City Council at the budget ~orkehop seer[rig on
Tuesday, October 9, 1990. R11 voted In favor and the motion carried
unanimously.
Mayor Chmtel: Is there anyone else who has any more Visitor Presentations?
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
PRESENTATTON OF THE SENZOR NEEDS STUDY. CONSIOER ESTABLISI'ItIENT OF. A SENZOR NEEDS
COHHI$SION.
Judy Marshek: Judy Harshek. I've been a consultant to the Task Force that's
been looking at a needs assessment of seniors for Chanhassen. You all should
have received the report in ample time tn advance of this meeting. [ assume
you've aL1 had a chance to review the report. I'd simply like to point out to
you that we do have some task force members with us tonight. We have $ of the
members of the task gorce sitting over here, Betty Bragg tn the black sweater,
Jane Kubitz in the middle and Selda Heinletn on the end. We did have some
gentlemen on the task force and they were commenting that it was funny that none
of them had shown up. That the dedicated women are here. Any questions that
you'd have they'd be happy to answer those. Z think the main Issue or the main
recommendation that we are hoping that you will approve this evening is a
recommendation from the task force that in light of the findings of the study
which showed that Chanhassen has second only to Eden Prairie in this area, the
most rapidly growing population of seniors and the largest population of seniors
and we were defining senior adults or mature adults as people over age 55, that
the task force is recommending the establishment of a senior commission which
could provide applicacy and advice to you about the needs of senior adults and
there were many other recommendations in this detailed report but that would be
of course key to some of these other recommendations being Implemented.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. This is something that I've felt that we need to do
and I would like to commend all members of that task force before the City
saying thank you. You've done a great job. In just watching the dedication
that you did give to it and being at all the meetings that you did, on behalf of
the Council and myself, thank you very much. Any other discussion or questions?
Councilwoman Dimier: ! did have a question as to there were 7 members on the
task force I believe. Did you want to keep that number of commissioner members
as well?
Judy Harshek: We hadn't really gotten into specifics for the commission. We
felt that it needed to be a group large enough to assure representation but
small enough to be workable and we had talked about between 7 to 10. We also
think It's very important to represent some of the different parts of Chanhassen
because part of our study showed that people that live tn the north and people
that live in the south have access to different types of services so geographic
representation becomes Important too.
Krauss: If I could touch on that Mr. Mayor? We've had a lot of 7 member
commissions and that number seems to work reasonably well. The senior needs
task force people ~nd£cated a desire to continue to serve on this commission
should one be created.
Judy Marshek: Some of them did.
Krauss: Some of them did. Well, there were more than 7 members of that
commission but there were 7 very active members and it was Betty Bragg, Emma St.
John, Barb Montgomery, Selda Heinlein, Dick Nelland, Floyd Tapper and Jane
Kubitz. For the sake of continuity, I guess our position would be, we'd
advocate rolllng over lnto those 7 tf you're comfortable with that and they're
12
City Council Heetlng - October 8, [990
comfortable with that.
Hayor Chmiel: I am.
Krauss: Hhen we had the senior needs task force, we advertised in the paper
twice for volunteers for the commission, or for the task force and really didn't
get a great response from that. Host of our members came from the Hayor's
asking through the churches to get people Involved. But once It's up and
running we'll probably have more success In generating.voIunteerIsm but there's
a lot of projects waiting on the back burner as you can see from the report for
them to get their teeth into and we'd like to keep the ball roiling if we can
now that some momentum has built up.
Councilwoman Oimier: Okay, I agree. Do you have a By-law example that we can
go by or do you have By-[awe?
Hayor Chmiel: I think that's something that they would have to.
Krauss: I've never set up a commission before but I would gather that they
would have to draft one up for your approval and that would be one of their
first acts.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay that would not be done by staff, that would be done
by t hem?
Krauss: WeII we would work with them on that.
Councilwoman OImler: A/right.
Councilman 3ohneon: Some of the people that did respond from the newspaper
advertising weren't put on the task force because they weren't seniors. One
person in particular, Kathy Dorfner who ts a provider of services to seniors and
she's a resident of this town and active volunteer In several ways. People like
this are still valuable for the seniors commission because of their professional
knowledge of the work that will be done. I think you don't have to, I don't
think ue should restrict it to only seniors on this commission. That even a
member of the Council could be, as we are on several commissions. Or other
people and as we have done and has been our policy, that. we've advertised every
commission opening for the last several years. That we probably should
advertise it and ! don't think we should restrict it only to somebody 55 or
older. That's actual age discrimination sort of. Reverse.
Hayor Chmtel: I question that but that's aIright 3ay.
Councilman 3ohnson: Now that you've hit the big 60.
Hayor Chmlel: You bet.
Councilwoman Oimler: I think 3udy already Indicated that some of the task force
members, maybe don't want to serve on the commission so I think It's good to
open it up to the process.
Hayor Chmlel: Do you have anything more?
13
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Krauss: If you would like us to advertise it, we'll do so promptly. We have
our newspapers reporters tn the audience tonight. Hopefully we can bring that
baok to you within the next.
Mayor Chmiel: 2 weeks?
Krauss: Well you'd probably want, if we can get an ad In the paper by then but
it might be 4 and we can bring you the results of that and we can get confirmed
from the task force those who would like to be on it.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, good. Thank you.
Judy Marshek: You're welcome.
Krauss: Would It be proper, I'd defer to the City Attorney, would It be proper
to consider telling us or asking staff to bring back a resolution?
Mayor Chmiel: Well yes. That's already been decided that a resolution should
be prepared accordingly. Should there be a motion?
Councilman Johnson: Should we be approving the report? We got the summary
report.
Mayor Chmtel: We already had the report at our prevlous meeting.
Councilman Johnson: Yeah, we had the summary report. That was the draft.
Should we be approving the entlre report and giving it out to the newspapers and
stuff at this point? Would that be an active we need to take?
Mayor Chmiel: I think we should probably do that. Can there be a motion on the
floor?
Councilman Johnson: I'd 11ke to get a copy of the whole report.
Mayor Chmiel: I think that should be available.
Councilman Johnson: So I move approval of the senlor needs study report and
instruct staff to start the process of forming a seniors commission.
Councilman Workman: Second.
Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Workman seconded approval of the Sen/or
Needs Study Report and instruct staff to begin the process of forming a Seniors
Commission. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
14
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
PUBLIC HE/tRING: COI6IDER COLLECT/ON OF PLASTZCS FOIl RECYCLII~.
Publlc Present:
Name ft~Idrea~
Kevin Crist
Bill Loebl
Craig Hertz
Woodlake Sanitation
7197 Frontier Trail
Recycling Committee .member
30 Ann Olsen: With the success of our curbstde recycling, the Recycling
Commission has been reviewing how to expand upon that and to add plastics which
we've been getting requests for. We've had.several meetings with the commission
that have been open to haulers and we have not gotten too much response from the
haulers. We did have 3 of the larger fires represented who stated that they
could provide the plastic collection. What we wanted to.do was to hold the
public hearing in front of the Council. Have the first reading held for adding
to the targeted recycleables. Beverage plastic containers and we wanted to
start with something real etmple and we do have a couple of the recycling
commission members here if they wish to speak. Other than that we Just wanted
to take back any comments to the commission and then bring back any changes
necessary for second and final reading.
Hayor Chmlel: Anyone wishing to address it at this particular time?
Kevin Crist: Hr. Hayor, members of the Council. Hy name is Kevin Crist and
the district manager for Woodlake. We're one of the haulers tn the community
and we're ready to do plastics and #e will be geared up to do plastics. Hy only
concern about it is that the timing of when it would start. I think there's
some things within the Industry yet that need to be worked out and my concern
would be for the actual start up date. ~e're geared up as a company to do it.
I'm not sure how geared up some of the other haulers are as far as their
processing facilities and their collection methods. We've been involved in some
of the pilot programs and we're Just working out some of the bugs as far as our
collection methods so. The other thing that we're facing la the time of the
year coming up. in the wintertime with hard cold plastics, it's kind of hard to
work with those so, and especially getting started in a new process, it would be
good to give the haulers some time to work this into their schedule. [ think
the big thing that ue as haulers have to face is getting rtd of the material at
this point. The recylmation centers are ~ust, they haven't committed to ua yet
but they're getting close to coming out with who will handle the plastics and
who will not so my only concern there is the tieing of adding the plastics
collection to the routing. As far aa we're concerned, us're ready to go.
Just a matter of getting our trucks geared for it. Thank'you.
Councilman 3ohnson: How much of a market do you have at this time?
Kevin Crist: Pardon me?
Councilman 3ohnson: Harket.
Kevin Crist: The market for plastics? It's getting better. We've had 3 or 4
people approach us so far as far as willing to accept thee. The problem that we
15
City Council Meeting - October 8, lggO
face is that some of them have to be separated. Some can be taken ina comingle
state but at this point that's one of the things that we're trying to get worked
out with the recylmation points.
Councilman Johnson: What kind of start date would you recommend?
Kevln Crlst: Well we're geared up to start January I with a couple of cttles
but I guess my concern again is that time of the year with the cold weather and
worklng with plastics. My preference would be to start either March 1 or April
1, in that vicinity there. That will. Just give us a little more time to get our
trucks ready and take on with the spring.
Mayor Chmtel: AIl we do is lose out on 3 months of good plastic recycling. I'm
just kidding.
Councilman Johnson: It gives us more time to work with our community to educate
them on plastic recycling.
Mayor Chmlel: Jo Ann, dld we notlfy all the haulers in regards to this?
3o Ann 01sen: Yes we did. Once tt ts adopted, if it is, there's a gO day
perlod before it can go into place so you do have that 3 months.
Kevin Crist: I think the other key to the whole thing ts, as Councilman Johnson
says, is that the education out to the people and letting people know we're
doing it [ think is a real key to the whole thing.
3o Ann 01sen: Roger just sald lt's 120 days so you have 4 months.
Mayor Chmlel: 1207 That would probably put it right in the ballpart to where
you're looklng.
Kevin Crist: Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you.
Councilman Workman: You'd think that, and it'd be nice if plastics, I know
plastics are not uniform in any sense but it'd be nice if the person who was
plcking it up and haullng it could sort it himself and throw It through a
shredder or something in the back to make it easier to haul or something. I'm
pattonlng this 1dew. But I mean that would take the bulk out of it somehow,
don't know.
Kevln Crist: The problem with that is the reclaimers then have a problem with
shredded plast ic...
Councilman Workman: Yeah, I'm just thlnklng that if the person that was plcklng
it up could throw all milk cartons. Are all mtlk cartons created the same?
Kevin Crlst: Pretty much.
Councilman Workman: I mean If they're all the same you could shred them tnto
one spot and I don't know. This meeting's going to end too early tonight so I
16
City Council Meeting - October 8, [990
thought I'd just drag It out.
Hayor Chmiel: Okay. inyone else? Anyone from the Commission?
Bill Loebl: Bill Loebl, 7197 Frontier Trail. I speak on behalf of the
collection of plastics and I would like you to know that as a resident I would
favor it. I've been a plastics engineer for about 25 or 28 years and I know
that plastics per se are a valuable product, particularly in view of the fact
that most of them are derived from crude otl and with crude oil at $40.00 a
barrel, they become quite valuable. Plastics industry as a whole Is working to
improve the reuse of plastics and ultimately they could be used as a fuel for
power plants for example to generate electric power so the Idea of collecting
plastics is a good one and ! have to agree with Hr. Crier, winter is not the
time to start because some of the plastics are very sensitive to very cold
temperatures and they shatter when it gets a few degrees below zero and then
they won't be able to identify them. So his idea to start In the spring is a
good one. That's all I have to say.
Councilwoman Dialer= Does that mean then we have to quit It in the wintertime
in succeeding years?
Bill Loeb1: Well hopefully by next winter the collection will have proceeded to
the point where the householders have been educated to separate the plastics
that are susceptible to cold and not put them tn the garbage you know. Or put
them In the garbage but not in the collection.
Hayor Chmiel: Good point. Thank you. Anyone else?
Councilman Johnson= I think we Just found a new member for our Recycling
Committee here.
Craig Hertz= I think we'll ask him tn. Craig Hertz. I'm a member of the
Recycling Commission and on the staff report It Indicates that or implies that
the commission's taking somewhat of a position and I think the primary concern
of the people on the commission was what harm, if any, would this cause to the
existing haulers and we were hoping that by having this public hearing we ~ould
hear whatever objections that the haulers might have to this because one of our
concerns was we didn't want to cause any of the existing haulers to go out of
business because of something the commission did.
Councilwoman Dlmler: I have a question of Hr. Hertz. You're indicating here
that you're limiting it at present to beverage containers such as pop, milk and
water bottles. What Is the reason that you won't accept detergent bottles,
shampoo bottles, etc.? Those types of things.
Craig Hertz: 30 Ann can listen and correct me if I get this wrong. Some of
those types of bottles are of different plastic types that are not readily
adaptable to recycling and we were going down the list in attempting to start
with the Items that we thought the householders would readily be able to
identify as clearly being recyclable and the beverage containers seemed like the
Items that we could have people pick out with a minimum of education and then
see how this goes and then work up something else.
17
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Councilwoman Oimler: Is there a possibility in the future that we'd be
recycling those as well?
Craig Hertz: Yes.
Councilwoman Oimler: Okay, thank you.
Councilman Workman: Are dtapers in the future?
Mayor ChmIel: Bill, you are right with the plastics burning In power plants.
They do have what they call RDF facilities which do source separation of the
garbage and the light fraction plastics with the papers are burned. They called
that refuse derlved fuel and they can be burned tn generating plants. Is there
anyone else?
Councilman 3ohnson moved, Counc/lwoman Dtmler seconded to close the public
hearing. ~11 voted Ln favor and the mot[on carried. The public hearing was
closed.
Mayor Chmiel: I'd like to go by staff's recommendation that the City Counctl
open the public hearing for comment and approve the first reading. ~pproval
should lnclude requesting commission and staff to incorporate publlc hearing
comments into the draft prior to resubmitta[ for the final adoption. City
Councll approves ftrst readlng of the amendment to Ordinance 113, Section 1,
definition of "targeted recyclables" to include plastic beverage containers.
Is there a second?
Councilwoman Oimler: I'm all in favor. Second.
Councilman Johnson: Should we time our approval to where the 120 days hits
about March 1st?
Mayor Chmiel: That's just an automatic to what Roger said.
Councilman Johnson: Yeah, but see tf we approve this in October, 120 days hits
February 1st. Zf we approve it the first of Oeoember, 120 days ts Hatch 1st.
Mayor Chmiel: Well when it comes back here for the second reading, it'd still
be towards the end of this month so we'd still be in February.
Jo Ann 01sen: I'm sure we can add something to it to set the date for it to
start. It doesn't have to be 120.
Craig Hertz: Could the Council state a delayed effective date?
Mayor Chmiel: Sure.
Nayor Chmiel moved, Counc[1woman OImler seconded to approve the first read[rig of
an amendment to Ordinance 113, Section 1, definition of "targeted recyc[ables'
to Include plastic beverage containers. RI1 voted tn favor and the mot[on
carried unanimously.
18
City Council Heettng - October 8, 1990
PL_mLXC HE.a~..L.~G_-: REINXTIRTE _Q~_$T 78TH STR~__E'r DETN:tEENT /llPROWE]~IT PRO.1ECT NO.
Public Pre~ent:
Address ,
CharlIe James
B.C. Jim Burdick
T.F. James Company
Excelsior, Htnnesota
Gary Warren: Hr. Hayor, the West 78th Street detachment project was originally
Initiated in 1987 to deal with the recommended esparatton of West 78th Street
from TH S to get the proper stacking distance and better traffic continuity In
this area. Oue to various reasons, changes tn development plans and other
delays here, the project has actually gone .through a esrles of revisions and
retnltiatione and at this point tn tlme, one of the main driving forces la the
necessity to have the City's portion of this project completed to serve as a
by-pass route for the TH S Improvements scheduled for next year tn thls area.
There also have been a number of plattings that have happened In the area. The
subdivisions and such and tn worklng closely with HnOot, our engineers and
others, we have needed to modify some of the grades and some of the elements of
the plan so we've updated the feasibility study to address these changes. We
also settled on two Important elements. One was the right-In/right-out access
to the Burdlck property which Is the currently adopted plan and secondly was the
construction of storm sewer alternate A which basically Is the Eckankar pond
which the City ts currently In the process of finalizing the land acquisition tn
that regard. So with the time that It's taken here, we fortunately have been
able to better deflne the scope to where we are confident now of what the final
scenario for the Improvements Is so we therefore have updated the project oosts
which are contained in BRW's report which ts attached and also the. assessment
roll which Is a preliminary roll as we all know until the final assessment
hearings after the project but we have taken a concept look as far. as the .
methodologies and the costs which may be appropriated to each ofthe, benefIttIng
properties. So this ts a public hearing to receive public Input on the
feasibility once again as updated by this report and aa required by law to
relnitlate the project so that we can proceed to get Into construction tn the
spring. Hr. Ehret ts here as well from BRW If there are any epeoIfIc questions.
Hayor Chmiel: as I mentioned this Is a public hearing. Those wishing to
address this at this time, please come up to the .podium and Indicate your name
with your address. Rnyone wishing to address this?
CharlIe James: Hy name Is Charlte James. I'm with the T.F. James Company.
Just a couple of questions here. I didn't get any notice, any prior not[ce of
this meeting other than Just a note. I mean I didn't get any materials or
handouts that went with it mo tt was difficult for me to study all thls tn
advance. I've Just been doing a quick study In the back here but I Just had some
questions. I guess first of all I wanted to make, I haven't been following
whole tax Increment thing as It pertains to the City of Chanhaesen. I've heard
and read things In the newspaper about some concerns at the State Legislature
and I guess my question to the Council this evening Is, In addition to the
assessments that we're already paying on the property which are approximately I
think $30,000.00 a year, we're going to be looking at assessments, or I'm going
City Council Meeting - October 8, ~990 19
to be looking at assessments of half a million dollars on this property and !
guess what I'm curious to know is tax increment going to be there when we need
it. What is the latest status of tax increment in the City of Chanhassen here
and is there going to be any money left in the fund?
Don Ashworth: Can I respond?
Mayor Chmlel: Do you want to respond to that?
Don Ashworth: You're correct. State legislature did make some changes but as
it deals with existing programs and existing debt, they made no changes. This
roadway was actually included tn the bonds of 1988 and accordingly it's tn
pretty safe shape. The State is not really in a position to affect projects
such as the West 78th Street Detachment. I feel that that's a pretty safe
project as far as the State being able to in some way change. They would have a
very difficult ttme doing it because you have bond holders out there which gets
back to the widows and orphans and those types of things and legislatures just
do not change a law that would affect so many people.
Charlle James: Don, are you saying that the bonds to finance this project have
already been placed? So the money's just being arbltraged then in the meantime?
Don ~shworth: Well hopefully it's in arbitrage danger meaning the difference
between lnterest earned versus the lnterest pald ls subject to arbitrage rebate.
And of course we're currently having our auditors look at that but yes, the
bonds have been sold.
Charlie James: Will that shorten then the time that's available for payment?
In other words, if the bonds were issued in 1987, were they going to be paid in
full in 8 years or was the length of assessment. Because the project's delayed
now, is the whole project going to be assessed over a shorter period of time and
do you have an idea of what the interest rate is on these now that they've
already been placed?
Don ~shworth: No, I do not recall what the interest rate was and yes, it could
have the result of shortening the number of years.
Charlie James: Because If this was an 1987 project and it doesn't get built
until 1991 and then you have the assessment hearings and everything else, I mean
we could be caught looklng at about a 4 year fuse on this thtng.
Don Ashworth: I don't think it's that bad but, do you recall Gary?
Gary Warren: Which, the assessment?
Don Ashworth: Yeah, the assessment. The number of years that we looked at.
Gary Warren: I think we had 8 or 10. I believe that we were looking at
assessing the project in the earliest would be 9 and I would think that wtth
thls track that we're on we would be able to assess and levy the project, next
year would be our goal.
2O
City Council Heettng - October 8, 1990
Don Ashworth: I was thlnking when we loo~d at that, wasn't lt, I thought it
came on line in 1990 for collection in 19.9~ eo hypothetlca~ly we ~ou~d be I year
behtnd schedule but that the orlgtnal he, looked to the thlng literally being 2
years forward. That's ay recollection. Rnyway It's not ae severe as that.
Councilman 3ohnson: The property, Charll~e property would be eligible for
special assessment reduction program under: the TIF if you build anything out
there?
Don Ashworth: Right. Hr. 3ames is concerned I think, he has to generate
something.
Councilman Johnson: He has to get somebody to come in and build first.
Charlie James: You got it.
Councilman Johnson: I know you're trying-hard on that too.
Charlie James: Well, not aa hard as I could be trying but. Let's see. Also we
donated an 80 foot right-of-way and excavated the bad soil under the proposed
roadway and placed a compacted eubbase there in preparation for paving and I'm
wondering there was some talk when this Target thing was being proposed, whether
or not that type of cross section would be adequate. Is there any plane afoot
to ask for additional right-of-way in that area?
Gary Warren: We Just received late last week, and I haven't had a chance to
fully digest it but the information we received from our latest analysis on the
traffic ia that a 4 lane road section should be satisfactory to accommodate the
need and that's what we have designed out-there at this point so I need to study
the numbers a little bit more but at this point in time, it looks like we should
be able to work within the existing or the platted right-of-way.
Charlie James: Gary, is my understanding correct that the scope of the project
at this point involves nothing on CR 177 That the State is going to build the
County Road 17 segment's north and south so there won't be any assessments from
that?
Gary Warren: The State is building the segment from TH 5 up to the West 78th
Street detachment interchange. The new intersection. The City will still have
the County Road 17 project from there to the north to the crest of the hill
roughly so we do have a portion of the County Road 17 project still in our
scope.
Charlle James: Is that contemplated in this project or will that be a
subsequent project?
Gary Warren: That ts in this project. That would go with thts set of plane.
Charlie James: I guess that's lt. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you Charlie. Is there anyone else?
21
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
B.C. Jim Burdick: B.C. Jim Burdick from Excelsior. Good evening. I have some
of the same concerns that Charlie James fikd and there's two other points I'd
like to make and this is on the assessme~{'~ The east half of this project of
course is going to abut my property and I'm agreeable to working on the
assessments there and accept an assessment but not on the west half. I just
want it known ahead of time because there, one thing it doesn't benefit my
property. The road isn't going to touch my property. In fact, the whole thing
hurts me a bit but I've agreed not to claim anything for the damage in view of
the right turn in, right turn out and so forth. So Z just wanted to make that
point so there wouldn't be, I didn't want somebody, some engineering firm or
something to think they're going to assess me for anything on the west half. And
I say I will go along with the east half as long as they don't go wild and plant
a half million dollar worth of trees that cause accidents. It's a refuge for
our shoplifters and then they die anyway. And the second one is, if we do this,
let's go right ahead. Like you asked if Charlie James had what going down
there. I've had things going for about 3 years but the thing that kills it time
after time is the highway construction. By highway I mean both TH 5 and 78th
Street. There's Just fear of the unknown. The rest of the businesses down
there, the TH 5 construction's going to cost them 20~ of their business so why
don't we wait instead of operating at the best break even because, as they
compute it, they'll lose 20~ business due to TH 5. Then they find out about
78th Street being moved in addition, it really kills it so I sure hope we do
stay with this time schedule. I don't know if it was fortunate that past year
when Target came up just about the time they were going to let the contract. So
! just had those two points.
Mayor Chmiel: Good. Thank you Jim. Gary, addressing the question that Jim had
on that west half. Can you address that?
Gary Warren: Mr. Mayor, Mr. Burdick and ! had talked earlier on the phone
briefly about the Issue and I indicated to Jim that the preliminary assessment
roll does indeed show the frontage across his total property as having a
preliminary assessment calculated. We're strictly talking about the roadway
assessment. There's no storm sewer or watermain assessment or sanitary sewer
for his property. It's something that we are cognizant of. We will be looking
at that, reviewing that as a part of the assessment methodology when the roll is
prepared. By extracting the westerly half of his property out of the roll, that
has a net impact of increasing the assessment rate because we're still talking
about the same dollars that would be assessed so there would be some kick back
to the easterly half of the property where those might increase but it certainly
ts something that we intend to look at. It may be that we will need to do an
appraisal of the properties to see if those lots on the westerly half indeed
would receive a benefit from the road project. I guess that will be the final
test. With the private drive in there, ! guess it is concetveable in some
thinking that West 78th Street does provide benefit to this entire property. It
is the roadway that surrounds it but it is something that we certainly are
cognizant of. We have Mr. Burdick's comments here on record and we certainly
will be taking a good look at it when we prepare the final position as far as
the assessment roll.
Mayor Chmlel: Okay. Jay?
22
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Councilman 3ohnson: Something you Just said, private drive. WIll the street
that's be£ng, the old West 78th Street, there's going to be a right-in/right-
out. Is that going to turn Into a private drive that's go£ng to be half owned
by Mr. Burdlck and half by Mr. 3ames now?
Gary Warren: That Is correct.
Mayor ChmIel: The right-In/right-out?
Councilman 3ohnson: The right-in/right-out. It's currently West 78th Street.
That will no Longer be a city street?
Gary Warren: That's correct.
Mayor Chalel: Okay, any other? Char[Is?
Charlte James: I'm sorry. Just one more thing. I guess this ts something that
I wanted to say to Gary but I might as wel[ have It on the record. Gary, I need
to get together with you and look at the exact sewer and water service plane
because originally we contemplated that we'd be ahead of the city and we were
going to service our lots In certain areas because we had anticipated and we had
that whole plan out for temporary drive, ay accesses and we were going to build
this building way tn advance of this project and then after a near dIsasterous
situation very analogous to this out tn Eagan where we were building a center
with a road around us at the same time, we decided that wasn't a good Idea and
so [ guess we need to re-examine those service plans because some things that
you anticipate that we have already Installed or something, may not be there so
[ need to get together.
Gary Warren: Yeah, we've taken a shot at updating the plan somewhat but we
certainly need to have your Input at this point In time and If you want to Just
give me a call Charlle we'll set up a schedule.
Charlle James: Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there anyone else?
Don Ashworth: Yes, to Mr. James' questions he had requested Information for.
Yes, those were sold as part of bonds of 1988. That was scheduled then for
1990-91 tn that original roll so we'll be off by approximately a year but It's
not going to jeopardize the project and we're looking at approximately 8~ as the
assessment rate and that was scheduled over through 1998.
Mayor Chmtel: Okay, thank you.
Councilman Workman: I move we close the public hearing.
Councilwoman Dlmler: Second.
Councilman Ilorkaan ,o~,d, CouncIl~oaan Dialer seconded to close the public
heartng. A11 voted In favor and the aot[on carried. The 'public hearing
clo~ed.
23
City Council Meeting - October 8, [990
Resolution ~1~0-Z31:. Counc[lman Workman moved, Counc[[uoman D[mler seconded to
rein[t[ate #est 78th Street Detachment Improvement Project No. 87-2 for
construct[on [n 1991. R[! voted In favor and the mot[on carried unan[mous[y.
_RWRRD OF B~OS: RE3ECT BIOS. AUXILLIARY TURN L~NES ON TH ~.0.1 fiT CHOCTA# CZRCLE
AND :SANDY HOOK ROAD.
Councilman Johnson: [ move approval.
Councilwoman Dimler: Second.
Mayor Chmiel: [t's been moved and seconded. Any discussion?
Councilman Workman: Yeah, Gary then Cheyenne looks like we will be able to get
Cheyenne in there?
Gary Warren: We intend to include Cheyenne as well as Pleasant View Road.
MnOot's funding for this project requires submittal of candidate projects by
May of each year and you won't find out until August so we've got, I mean if
it's awarded in August, we still could construct both of those next year as
well. In fact I guess I was going to ask with Council's authorization we would
proceed to design those two with this whole package so that, I mean the logic
that prevailed for MnDot to include Choctaw and Sandy Hook In here would prevail
also for Pleasant View and Cheyenne.
Councilman Workman: You used the month August. What do you mean?
Gary Warren: August, we would not know until August of next year that MnOot has
agreed to find Cheyenne and Pleasant Uiew if we ask for that. So we'd be on a
fast track for those two pieces but we believe that if they agreed with the
previous logic, that they should also be with those so we would like to have
authorization to internally design those as well and get that package out too.
Councilman Workman: Does that need approval also?
Mayor Chmiel: I don't believe it does.
Gary Warren: Pardon me?
Mayor Chmiel: No motion is involved in that portion?
Gary War.Yen: No. We requested the cooperative agreement and Z guess that does
bring up a point. We have not requested a cooperative agreement to include
Pleasant View Road which that would be appropriate to add to the resolution
here.
Councilman Workman: On this?
Gary Warren: Yeah.
Councilman Workman: I would amend that. Who seconded that? Did you second lt?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes, Ursula seconded it. Do you accept his friendly amendment?
24
C£ty Council Heeting - October 8, [990
Councilwoman Oimler: Yeah I do.
Re~olat[on ~)0-132: councilman 3ohneon aovod, Councilwoman O]~ler seconded to
reject the bid receivod for the construction of the auxllllary turn lanes on
Trunk Hlgh~ay 101 at Choctaw C[rcle and Sandy Hook Road and authorize
re-advertising of bids [n Harsh, 1~)! for Hay, 1~)! construction including
Cheyenne Tra[[ and Pleasant Ule~ Road In the project. ~11 voted In favor and
the motion carried unanimously.
SITE PLAN REUZE# FOR ON-SZTE P~IRKZI~ IflPROUEHENTS. REDtM)MD PRODUCTS.
Paul Krauss: Hr. Hayor, on September 24th City Council reviewed two proposals
aimed at increasing parking for the Redmond facilities. The two proposals...
Lotus Garden and on stte one on the Redmond property itself. The off site
parking was largely resolved. Staff had a concern about two variances. The
City Council recommended approval of that temporary parking lot without any
variances. However, the future Increment parking on the Redmond property Itself
was I guess continued. Staff and the applicant were directed to discuss it
further and hopefully bring back some possible means to resolve the matter.
Since that time we've met with the applicant several times. There's two options
that have been explored actively to deal w[th this issue. The first concern was
an offer by representatives of Redmond to acquire a 1.6 acre city owned wetland
that's immediately adjacent to the property. What that does Is, If Redmond
acquires that, they will not convert that wetland to anything. It will stay
exactly the way it Is. It's used for city storm water system as well. However,
tt el/m/nates the hard surface coverage variance. The second option being
considered was suggested by Councilman Johnson which Is a performance oriented
approached to parking lot setbacks rather than a straight 30 foot requirement
that currently exists. Staff Is In a little blt of a dilemma regarding the
proposal to acquire the wetland from the city. It ts protected by the City.
Will continue to be protected by the city. It would only change, It's kind of a
paper transaction tf you will. The land would change hands tn the Courthouse
and Redmond would be able to state honestly that there is no hard surface
coverage variance. We thtnk it satisfies the letter of the ordinance at any
rate. We tried to work with Redmond to determine a price of the property and
were unable to agree to specific terms, basically the City Hanager became
[nvolved. We came up with a solution that If the City council who ts acceptable
in selling the land In the first place, a solution would be to use a series of
appra£sers. One appointed by the City, one by Redmond and a third appointed by
both of them to decide on a price with the City and Redmond agreeing ahead of
time that they would accept whatever terms came doan. In reviewing some recent
sales of what we think are similar properties on TH 5, there's been sale prices
all over the board so It ts kind of tough to get a handle on it. We also had a
question if the City Council proceeded along these lines, what would happen to
the proceeds. Whatever dollar amount that happened to be. There are several
suggestions and we Just offer them to the City Council to discuss and really
[t's your call. They could be used to acquire additional wetlands or open space
or dedicated to some sort of a special fund possibly such as the Old St.
Hubert's rennovatIon which was mentioned. That would resolve one of the two
main variances. We did ask the applicants to...on several occasions. We thtnk
that for the dollars spent, that the Lotus Garden site represents a much more
valid expenditure tn that that land could actually be used by Redmond physically
to locate new park[ng whereas the wetland property is basically off limits.
25
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
They did indicate that they contacted Mr. Kronick who owns that property on
several occasions and just could not reach anything close to acceptable terms on
it. We've also contacted Southwest Metro. Southwest Metro is going through a
staff change but they are going to contact Redmond to try to work out a program
for them if they're receptive to that but Redmond still maintains I think that
they'll probably be willing to do that but they'll have a problem that needs to
be resolved with additional parking in any case. The setback variance for
parking, as I noted earlier, Councilman Johnson suggested that the City consider
a performance oriented approach to establishing parking setbacks rather than
rely on the strict setback standard. We support that proposal in concept for
several reasons. The Chanhassen ordinance is somewhat unusual in my experience
that it establishes parking setback as the equivalent setback for the building.
Many communities have a different and much lower degree setback for parking.
or 20 feet is usually standard. But another thing about the performance
oriented approach that we support is that what you're doing with that is you're
establishing the goal and the goal is that you're not going to be looking at the
parking lot. ~nd we think that that's an acceptable goal and probably provides
better definition for a developer than saying that ae just want 30 feet and 1
tree every 40 feet. ~nd we think that Redmond's proposed parking plan that you
sea last meeting achieves ahat we would find acceptable as a performance
oriented plan. Essentially the Redmond proposal is that the site would look no
different from TH 5 than it does today. The berm would be smaller but you
wouldn't see it unless you went behind it. $o ~e support that in concept.
However, we've not had an opportunity to propose a revised parking ordinance to
you and note that if this aere to go through channels, which it aould have to do
eventually, it would take a fair amount of time, probably up to 2 months to
advertise it for legal notice and to get it on the Planning Commission and bring
it up to you. Redmond's asked that we expedite this matter and bring it to your
attention as soon as possible because they have a need to resolve this situation
ideally before the ground freezes. ~nd so we're bringing it to you with
basically the concept for your consideration. Now if you're comfortable with
the concept, if you wanted Redmond to proceed it would require that you grant
them a variance from the ordinance to allow them to do that. Now that would be
one variance remaining on this one =nd the grounds for that is that if your
intent is to change the ordinance, the ordinance itself is sort of becoming the
hardship because it no longer represents what you'd like it to be. $o as're
requesting that you provide us direction in how to proceed in this matter.
think it's possible for Redmond to proceed as outlined above without placing the
effectiveness of the zoning ordinance in serious jeopardy. We were quite
concerned with that with the four variance requests that was originally brought
to you and we think that's largely been resolved. If you wish to allow Redmond
to proceed tonight, you could approve their site plan contingent upon posting
financial guarantees which is the usual condition for the landscaping and
I believe realignment of that curb cut, the eastern curb cut which we ~ere
concerned about. You should also, if you're going to proceed with that, grant
them a variance to allow a l0 foot parking setback. ~nd with that we are
recommending, well we're recommending approval but we're leaving open. There's
a lot to discuss here that's a little bit different or out of the ordinary and
we need your guidance.
Mayor Chmiel: Very good. Thank you Paul. [s there anyone who would like to
address this before ue start our discussion? By the way I do Paul like the idea
of getting 3 appraisers. ! would much prefer doing that than setting a
2~
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
specific price on that property. As you say, they're all over the ballpark and
I think it'd probably be best for the City as well as Redmond to come up with
that specific way with the appraisers.
Councilman Johnson: Don?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes Jay.
Councilman Johnson: Can I make a few comments si> they know where I'm coming
from on this. One thing on the appraisers, I think that all the circumstances
surrounding the wetland should be known to the appraisers so they're not
appraising a wetland and what is the value of this wetland. If this is a
wetland out on some guy's farm or whatever it'd have a totally different value
than this wetland so it's Just the circumstances that, the market circumstances
of this wetland are slightly different than it was a year ago. The City was out
putting this on the market trying to sell this wetland a year ago it'd be one
thing. A little different market there. From a marketing standpoint. I
believe the proceeds of any sale should go to this watershed. Stay within this
watershed for improvements within this watershed.- Whether it's acquisition of'
land to put up another wetland or whatever.
Mayor Chmiel: I don't know if we should establish that at this particular time
Jay. That's something we'll have to talk about as we proceed.
Councilman Johnson: Yeah, but before we make the sale we need to make that
establish that.
Mayor Chmiel: I think we'll come up with an establishment on that once.
Councilman Workman: The appraisers might eat the profit.
Councilman Johnson: That's true. Then on the variance, is the two month
timeframe for doing the ordinance, could we get this done before January lst?
Paul Krauss: Certainly.
Councilman Johnson: So it would be this Council hearing it?
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah.
Councilman Johnson= And it takes a four-fifths vote on, in our case a unanimous
vote I guess to approve the zoning.
Hayor Chmiel: Depending upon how the election goes, I'd like to see us appoint
whoever one of the Council people are to fill the position.
Councilman Johnson: For the last month?
Mayor Chmiel: Right.
Councilman Johnson= That's a good idea.
Councilman Workman: What's that?
27
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Councilman Johnson: Fill Bill's position after the election for the remaining
meetings in December and November. But to give them a variance at this point
because we think the ordinance is going to be changed before we know, I mean
it's only 2 months off to change the ordinance, I'm not sure the huge need is
going to be there. If we can break ground on the additional parking lot on the
other, we can do everything. We can get a lot more spaces to get you through
the winter and then in the spring go without a variance. If I can avoid a
variance I'd rather avoid a variance. That's the part I wanted you to hear
before you had a chance to speak so you oan convlnce me otherwise but I'm
against variances when in 2 months time period the variance is not going to be
necessary. I don't want to see this thlng rlpped half apart and then the frost
comes and it's left all winter halfway ripped up either. Which happens with
construction projects that get started too late tn the construction season which
they're talking frost tonight.
Mayor Chmiel: That's just on the top level.
Councilman Johnson: That's just the top level, I'm sure. I hope so. Not real
heavy cold weather untll after November 6th. That's my qutck thoughts on that.
Councilwoman Oimler: I did have, something here about the letter of the
ordinance and not the lntent in selllng this. I'm not real sure that ! always
agree with gotng along with the letter of the intent. To me the intent is more
important than the letter of the law. It always has been and ! guess always
will be. If we do go ahead with the sale, does anybody have any idea what the
proceeds are 11kely to be?
Paul Krauss: I guess I could defer that to Mr. Gerhardt. We came up with a
number that we were using on our side of discussions but clearly that's open to
a lot of discussion.
Councilwoman Otmler: Right but a ballpark figure7
Councilman Johnson: What were the two numbers that both sides were using?
Councilwoman Oimler: Okay. That looks good.
Councilman Workman: Would it be based on like Eckankar pondlng site.
Councilwoman Oimler: The Mayor just gave me a figure. It looks excellent.
Don Ashworth: I think the extremes of that meetlng were 30 versus 200 and I
don't know that elther of the two sides were...
Councilwoman Oimler: Okay, somewhere inbetween there. If we do decide to go
ahead I would recommend, if there is a proceed.
Councilman Johnson: How many acres is this?
Councilwoman Oimler: 1.6. My concern would be that it is valuable land to the
City as we're uslng it for water drainage and water quality. Somebody would
need to maintain it If we no longer own it, I'm sure the City would still be
28
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
maintaining it isn't that correct Gary?
Gary Warren: We would still keep an easement over It so we can still use lt.
Councilwoman Oimler: Right. So if we're going to be maintaining It, I would
recommend that If the proceeds would go to the storm water utility. I like the
idea of the Old St. Hubert's Church too but ! think probably the storm water
utility is more In conformance with the Intent here. If we go with the other
proposal, ! haven't made up my mind yet but Just some thoughts on it. I think
with the amending of the ordinance there would be other businesses In town that
would also benefit from this change in the ordinance and we would be however
setting a precedent so I think we need to take a look at that. That's all I
have at this point.
Mayor Chmiel: Thomas, do you have anything?
Councilman Workman: I was hoping I could hear from the applicant. Maybe you're
not going to say anything. Maybe you'd prefer that.
Mayor Chmiel: Would you like please state your name?
Larry Perkins: Larry Perkins, Chief Operating Office of Redmond and we do
appreciate being here again. We appreciate working with your staff. We'd Just
like to say that we support what we came up with with the staff. We support
really the staff's recommendation. I think each of the Issues that you talked
about, they're probably talked about In depth over a number of discussions but
we agree that the appraisers, we're not looking for anything that's not fair.
Whatever the panel comes up with and I think the staff especially, Don Rshworth,
that recommendation is a good one. It's fair. We'll pick ours. You pick yours.
They'll pick another one and that's probably the best way because It Is a
difficult piece of property to appraise. One, our side could say well It's Just
a swamp and you could say, but It allows you to do this so it's worth pie In the
sky you know. Somewhere inbetween they'll establish a value and I think it's
best for all of us because who could argue with a panel of respected appraisers.
We want to start construction right away and it's not Just the parking area,
which will run about $150,000.00. It's the 6 1/2 million dollars that we want
to get started on. We want to start design work. We have numerous
modifications to the inside of the building and so It's not Just the parking and
we don't want to start. It's a comprehensive project as we were talking before
so we don't want to start without all of the Issues being solved so we'd hope
that we could get something from you tonight per the staff's recommendation so
we could get going. We'd like to, we don't care what you do with the money. We
do support the St. Hubert's project. If you want to put it tn wetlands,
whatever you want to put it In, that's up to you folks. The only other thing I
guess !'d like to mention is that there are approximately SO Jobs Involved.
There's approximately $50,000.00 In increased taxes to the City. That's the
City's portion of the real estate tax Increase. And we're talking increase here
and ! didn't fully understand it before but If this were part of an HER district
which !'m familiar with working with or a T! district, this would probably be
something that we'd be wooing each other over substantially In trying to get
this thing off the ground so !'d be happy to answer arty questions. We just
would like It to take the staff recommendation. Thank you.
29
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Mayor Chmiel: Tom?
Councilman Workman: Paul, is this 30 foot setback causing businesses in town
problems or is it going to cause people problems, parking wise?
Paul Krauss: You've often managed to get around it by, I mean in the central
business district by having things go PUO. Where they've used 15 or 20 foot
setbacks. 2S foot setbacks.
Councilman Workman: Well, as we go out to Audubon Road and down TH S there.
Paul Krauss: Well see Audubon Road's a different situation Tom and in fact I
had a discussion with the Clty Attorney on that. The Comprehensive Plan is
proposing that buffer yards be established. 50 to 100 foot wide buffer yards
where nothlng will happen because that's where the lndustry kind of bumps up
against the slngle family and we need to put that in the ordinance that there's
a buffer yard that those property owners have to maintain.
Councilman Workman: The property owners and the roadway?
Paul Krauss: It'd be measured, you have like Audubon Road and then you'd have
50 feet where nothing could be done and then you'd have the parking lot setback.
Councilman Johnson: That's if you have residential on the other side of the
road but if it's industrial on the other side of the road.
Paul Krauss: Than this standard that we're talking about tonight would be the
one that would be applied.
Councilman Johnson: You're talking about getting your greater setback from
residential?
Councilman Workman: 80 foot setback.
Paul Krauss: Along audubon Road where you have single family homes across the
street, that's what we had envisioned, yeah.
Councilman Workman: Expensive setback. $o in relationship to that, where does
our changing thls ordinance, what kind of soup does that put us ln?
Paul Krauss: This would apply inside Chan Lakes Business Park. You know as I'm
conceptualizing the ordinance. It would apply possibly, if we really changed
all the districts which I think we should, in the central business district you
establish a 10 or 15 or 20, whatever ls the standard setback for those
properties that are not developed as PUO. The only difference, the only place
you devlate from that ls when you have single famlly property adjacent to that
and right now our ordinance does increase the parking lot setback when you're
adjacent to slngle famlly homes to I believe 50 feet.
Councilman Workman: Yeah, I'm a little unsure about the pond and the
appraisers. Mr. Perkin's destre to jump in so quickly makes me, but I
understand the impervious rule but I'm not hard core with it I don't think and
if we can accomplish thls that way I'd be more than happy. In regards to the
3O
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
use of the money, ! might be running for Council tn 2 years. I eight need the
cash so. I think the church idea ts an outstanding one. However, I think that
could draw some criticisms from areas of the community that unless the City
owned Lt. I don't know Lf that's really going to happen. Jay, as far as your
variance, if we're going to do this, I think a variance ts something we should
go ahead and do and I take the exact ~poslte of you. You can get.a pretty good
feeling from the Council that we're going to pass something in 2 months anyway,
why not give the variance versus you saying well If we're going to do Lt in 2
months, well why don't you watt. I don't see the value In waiting If we're
going to get it done. Get the construct£on going. I don't think Redmond wants
all those wealthy U.S. Open people coming by and saying hey, there's that
company we want to Invest Ln or other. So I think they want their place to look
good as soon as possible. I am finally nervous about changing the ordinance tn
th£s fashion but Lf we feel that this Lo going to be popping up ail over the
place and we're going to still get what we want as far as aesthetics, then I'm
for Lt also.
Councilman Johnson: Hy concern on the variance was that the rules, when we go
to public hearing and go before the Planning Commission, somebody comes up #Lth
a real good argument why not to do tt and we end up not making the rule change
but we've already given the variance saying that we'Ll give you the variance
because we think the rule change ts going to happen. But public hearings and
Planning Commissions can change things. That's why I get nervous on us trying
to predict what's going to happen before the public hearing occurs. On this one
it seems fairly non-controversial. Especially since Lt was my idea, it must be
a good idea.
Councilman Workman: I'd like to rethink this. I would stick my neck out as far
as to say that our prediction rate is 100~ on these things. I'm serious. When
we voted to change an ordinance like this and grant a variance, I would say that
IOOX of the times it's come back, the ordinance has been changed and that's the
way it's happened.
CounciLman Johnson: It's a pretty good message to Planning Commission saying
hey, it's already going to happen. Please do lt. You know Lt kind of by-passes
the system by which rules are supposed to be established. We're establishing
the ordinance by granting the variance almost without holding the public
hearings or anything else.
Councilman Workman= Haybe they're wowed by your legtslattvensss. I think what
we've been trying to do and Lt hasn't come up In our discussion tonight. There
was some in the memo about, and maybe we should send this to HRA to have them
talk about the economics of It all but I think we'd prefer to, I think we've
whittled this thing down to where we're not doing, we're not sticking our necks
so far out. We're accommodating. They're accommodating. For the past 2 years
this Council has been I think really compromising. I think we've whittled tt
down to where we all feel comfortable with a compromise and this thing Isn't
going to hurt us or our city or our Code book and I would make a motion to that.
Councilwoman OLmler= Which one? A change In the ordinance or the .... land?
Councilman Workman: Well that's really two separate ones.
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Paul Krauss: What you would be making a motion on is approval of the Redmond
site plan as drafted with a variance for front yard setback down to lO feet
conditioned on acquisition of the land and merger of it wtth the Redmond slte,
completion of landscap£ng, posting of the landscaping bond and resolving a
locatlon of the eastern driveway cut relative to traffic safety concerns.
Mayor Chmiel: Very well put.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, so we need both of them.
Larry Perk[ns: ..by the 3 appraisals?
Paul Krauss: Yeah.
Mayor Chmiel: That was in there.
Councilman Johnson: Acquisition of the pond by method of 3 appraisers.
councilman Workman: In my mind I was thinking the setback and then the
impervious but so, yeah. That's my motion.
Councilwoman 01mler: I'll second that motion.
Mayor Chmiel: We have a motion and a second on the floor. Any further
discussion?
Councilwoman Oimler: Do you want to talk about what we're going to do with the
money? Or determine that later.
Mayor Chmiel: I think that can be determined at a later time.
Councilwoman Oimler: Alright.
Mayor Chmiel: I don't think that's appropriate at this time to tnclude that in
there. Motion on the floor with a second.
Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Oimler seconded to approve the Redmond
site plan as drafted with a variance for front yard setback down to 10 feet
conditioned on acquisition of the land and merger of it with the Redmond site,
completion of landscaping, posting of the landscaping bond and resolving a
location of the eastern driveway cut re)~ative to traffic safety concerns. All
voted in favor except Councilman 3ohnson who opposed and the motion carried with
a vote of 3 to 1.
Councilman Johnson: I think it's a good deal but I don't like the variance part
of it.
A. APPROVE RATE STRUCTURE FOR SURFACE WATER UTILITY DISTRICT.
_B. APPROVE SUHHARY. QRDINANCE FOR PUBLICATION.
Councilman Johnson: I move the staff recommendation.
Mayor Chmtel: Yeah, but which one?
32
City Council Hosting - October 8, 1990
Councilwoman Oimler: Z want to discuss it.-
Councilman Johnson: There's two staff recommendations but they're both the
same.
Hayor Chmlel: Let's just hold this one and then can we just move on to the next
item and bring this one up towards the [as[ in case there's anyone else here for
some of the other thtngs? Well, we'll keep it right where it's at. Let's go
with this one right now.
Gary Warren: Briefly Hr. Hayor, I thought I could make It through without
making a mistake this year but I have to admit that I did make one mistake and
it happens to be in this report. On the 18 cents per month. That was a
quarterly rate divided by 12 months. -Actually t~e difference in-the rates would'
be 72 cents per month between the 100~ funding and &O~ funding. Just start with
that so you know I wasn't trying to slip one by you here. At your discretion
staff did proceed forward after adoption of the ordinance to run various
scenarios for the program and to relook at the CIP as it was presented to see if
it was appropriate. Basically our position has been and it continues to be that
the program, the est[mates that we've done, We've put together with our best-
thoughts in mind and we think that they are reasonable for the water quality
plan, the 509 plan and the wetland mapping elements which are the key elements
that we are saying that start the program. We have looked at the scenarios
which are summarized in the report for the financial impact of going from the
100~ program which would be $5.37 per quarter down to the &O~ funding level of
$3.22 per quarter. And the annual revenue projections which you see ranging
from $34&,800.00 down to $208,080.00. Am you can see from the program, this 5
year CIP ks, the studies which need to be Initiated which sort Of kick off the
program are totaling 300 some thousand dollars so we have basically continued to
support the fact that without being arbitrary, which from our discretion I guess
we can say that we believe that the 100~ program is the fiscally responsible
level to fund the program at. Also we acknowledge that there's about $30,000.00
worth of staff level which because of the participation that people such as
paul, myself, Jo Ann, Dave, Sharein, etc. do spend in dealing with the wetland
issue and with the storm water issue In the city, and water quality issue, that
there Is approximately about $30,000.00 of staff labor and overhead which by
rights should be allocated to this fund. That presently is effort which is
being funded out of the general fund. So while it is only $30,000.00 out of the
$300,000.00 shortfall per se, it is a step in that direction and we think that
it ks appropriate for this fund similar to the sewer and water utility funds to
carry that burden. The program, each element of the program, water quality
plan, storm water management 509 plan, etc. are elements that if we proceed on
them would be elements that would be specifically brought back after propossls
are solicited and the cost would then be refined so the funding would be,
there'd be another opportur~[ty for the Council to also adjust and say yes or no
as to each of those elements. So there is no commitment here to any of those
elements. They are only as concepts with our best estimate. So staff has
recommended and I apologize for the mathematical error but we continue I guess,
or ! do to support the 100~ funding of the program which would be the $5.37 rate
for the residential single family and which totally is broken down in the
Attachment 1 in the handouts.
33
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you Gary.
Councilman Workman: The 18 cents gives a difference, it's not 18 cents? It's
18 cents per quarter?
Gary Warren: What I did ls I took the quarterly rate. The difference in the
quarterly rate divided by 12 months instead of 3.
Councilman Johnson: It's a very long quarter.
Gary Warren: Watershed burnout. It's 72 cents a month is the difference
between &OX funding and 100~ funding. 27 cents per month ls the difference
between 85X and 100~ and 45 cents per month is the difference between 75~ and
100~ fundlng.
Councilman Johnson: I also did it on an annual basis. At $8.60 a year at 60~.
$5.36 a year at 75~ and a whole $3.24 less per year at the 85~ level.
Gary Warren: Utility mailing would be a buck.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Is there anyone wanting to talk about this one? If
not, we'll brlng it back here to Council. Tom?
Councilman Workman: How's the ag property classified done?
Gary Warren: Ag property, based on the modified ordinance is placed in there
strictly as a residential single family parcel.
Mayor Chmtel: one unit.
Councilwoman Oimler: Big break.
Councilman Workman: That's a big break I'd say because I think there's an awful
lot going on on that big parcel versus.
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, it's soaking in.
Councilman Workman: Breaking it up and plowing it up. I don't know. That's
gettlng by pretty easy I thlnk. I have a feellng for land that ls just sitttng
you know. That I think in more ways than one, idle land just sitting is doing
nothing to deserve a whole lot in regards to all thls but farmers are doing an
awful lot on their property. There's no doubt about lt. And so I've got a
11ttle problem with that. I think it should be a little more fair in that
regard. Then my only other comment is I'm willing to go with the 100~ at this
point.
Councilwoman Dtmler: I have some comments too. I guess what we've established
Is that I need a car and now I'm going to ask you to make it a Cadillac. That's
klnd of the way I see this. We've established that we need this utility. It
my experience that everything keeps going up instead of ever coming down.
would recommend that we start at the lower level and as the years go by I'm sure
that it will be going up as we see and assess the needs so I would start with
the 60~.
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Mayor Chmiel: That's a ditto. ! think ! mentioned that last time at the
meeting where [ felt we should come from and that ~as to start at 60~ and if the
costs are such that we have to increase it, then Increase it accordingly as we
go. and I'll just drop it there because I think we had enough discussion on it
before. But I did taIk to a Ici of residents in the community and they
concurred with that particular position.
Councilman 3ohnson= ! think an amazing amount of recycling that our citizens
are doing show how environmentally sensitive our citizens are tn this town.
believe that there'd be a lot of people backing this and aren't going to squack
a lot about the proposal here. I do not think we should start by underfundlng
and then have to Increase it in the future and make up for the loss of funds
that we don't pay now. This is pay me r~ or pay me later and pay me later a
littIe more. Here I'd like to establish and get the funds going. When you look
at what they're Looking at, $300,000.00 worth of work next year on the fund tn
the first year and we're talking about funding tt at $200,000.00 per year? ~nd
we're going to be $100,000.00 behind in the first year if we funded It at the
60~ leveI. We won't be able to achieve the first year's goals as I was reading
this. So I would want to go at Least the 85~ which gets $294,000.00 in the
first year's revenue if we're predicting to spend $300,000.00 in the first year.
I just can't see that we should fund it at $[00,000.00 under what we're going to
spend. 'We can't do deficit financing.
Councilwoman OimLer: Well we could cut the project scope for the first year
which ts what ! would recommend.
Councilman Johnson: That's taking the project out at the knees. This Is the
planning stage. This is one of the most important stages of the project. ]f we
really want to do something about water quality and protection of the
environment here, this is our opportunity. I would go with Tom on 100~ but I
would be willing to compromise and go down to 8S~ if we have to but I'd Like to
get as much of the work done sc we can. You know we're not getting the work
done because we don't have the money and if we don't give ourselves the money,
we're not going to ever have it and we're not going to get, we're not going to
find out what It's really going to cost us so ] will argue for [00~ but looking
at we've got 2 to 2 deadlock, I'll compromise.
Councilwoman Oimler: Jay, I'm uncomfortable with collecting a utility and then
talking about using that money to reduce a deficit tn some other part of the
budget. That Is my concern of what will happen and that's why I want to start
at 60~. Use it only for water quality and wetland maintenance and street
sweeping and whatever we've decided we need it for and then move from there. It
says in here that are deficit, we could use the money to cut our deficit by
getting salaries out of it and so on and so forth.
Councilman 3ohnson: That's correct.
Councilwoman Oimler: Yeah. I'm not real sure that I agree with that. That's
why I'd like to see us start low and I can guarantee you that in years to come
it will go up.
Mayor Chmiel: It's the old pay me now or pay me later or pay me more now and
pay me more later.
City Council Meeting - October 8, L990
Councilman Johnson== The argument that we're going to, we are taking money right
now and spending it on water issues and not billing it against water issues and
it is going against the general deficit or the general funds and is part of the
deficit problem that we have right now. We're spending money this year on water
projects. Next year that same money will be spent, 3o ann and Paul and Gary,
their time working on water quality projects would be billed against this money,
not against the general fund. That is not abuse. That is exactly what the
utility is for.
Councilwoman Dimler'- But we haven't worked on the budget yet though. Are we
going to reduce the general fund then by that salary? [ mean we haven't talked
about that. That's coming up in our upcoming budget sessions. That has not
been established.
Councilman Johnson: £xactly but to say that we're already.
Councilwoman Dimler: But so why are you saying it's a fact already? It's
lsn't. I mean we can contlnue to keep some of their funds comlng out of there
as well. We don't have to shift it all in one year.
Councilman Johnson: Well we're not shifting it all. They're only predicting
$30,000.00. That is not the full salary of Jo Ann and Paul and Gary, as much as
we'd like that to be thelr full salary. $30,000.00 between the three of them.
8ut I think they're worth more than that.
Councilwoman Dimler: I'm not arguing that. That's not the point here. I'm
saying that make this change slowly. Seeing what the actual is instead of
projections.
Councilman Johnson: I think they've got some good estimates. They've been
coming, these people have been very good at estimating some costs. They're
generally a little high, yes but not 60~. They are not 40~ above. That's
why I'm thinking that we may be able to compromise at the 85 but I think their
flrst year work plan, they're planning to, the plans here for the first year of
over $300,000.00 is appropriate for the work that has to be done.
Mayor Chmiel: She's saying the scope of that project doesn't necessarily, it
could be that total amount for that first year. That's the point she's trying
to make. I really basically agree with Ursula and I feel strongly that 60~
should be there and as you were saying, either pay me now or pay me later. Let
us see where It goes and if that's necessitated that we do have to have that
increase, fine. We'll make that increase. But let's not over go the total
amount of dollars. The 85~ or 100~. I'm saylng let's move from a low medlum to
moving up accordingly. This is something we're starting. This ts something
that we have to have. We all know that but let's start at that particular polnt
and that's where I'm coming from.
Councilwoman Dimler: Plus it's up for Council review at any time we feel we
need an Increase.
Councilman Johnson: Well the way I see it is we're building a house here and
the builder's told us it's going to cost us so many dollars and we're saying
well, I'll give you 60~ of that. You glve me what I'm going to get so that's
City Council Meeting - October 8, [990
what the Council's saying here Is we want 60~ of the product. Let's give the
citizens of Chanhassen &O~ of It.
Councilwoman Dialer: We're saying the cost of the house ts too expensive to
begin with Is what I'm saying. I do that all the time. I don't pay...do you?
Hayor Chmiel: Okay, any other discussion? Tom?
Councilman Workman: Well you guys all have very good comments. I don't think
Don and Ursula are trying to be detrimental to the environment. Ny ears go up
when somebody says you must not be very environmental If you're not gotng to do
thts. I have fears about raising.that kind of money and as I discussed with
'Ursula earlier Today, hey we can take a real hard look at Gary's engineering
budget here in the next month and we can decide whether or not that's a
duplicate of charges and other things. [ guess [ arrived at. the 100~ and big
ear because the staff has said that's what they need. I'd prefer to shoot high
tn the first year than to shoot low for many of the reasons that Jay had. I
think we can get a real good 1des about what we're going to need and what we're
not going to need. Oon and Ursula as well as myself and maybe Jay have the
strong concern that city government or any government spends exactly as much as
they have and so that's a big concern. I think we can look at, we are unable to
at this potnt look at all the specific costs and all the detail that Gary's
going to spend this money on this year but we'l[ be able to next year because I
wtll be here and Ursula, you will be here and It's at that point that this thing
is going to get our best and most educated look at this thing. And so Gary
knows that he's going to have to make this thing perform and produce and I think
he's ready to give the money back If.
Councilwoman Oimler: Oh sure. That's my potnt. It never goes down.
Councilman Workman: But I'm convinced that Gary's not trying to create an
enormous slush funds for ralses and all sorts of other bells and whistles. You
know, what are we going to have, 25 segIdIsks? a new bass finder boat? So
convinced that Gary's going to be frugal with our dollars and I'm anxious to see
how this thing pans out. I know that we've all got the lakes and the quality of
water in mind. We've all been through the Lake Lucy scenario and whatever we
can do. I think we've been leaders In recycling. We're going to be leaders In
the plastic recycling. We're leaders on this in the County and I'd like to do
tt well If we're going to do tt and not klnd of watt and see and then underfund
it as Jay would say and then try to figure out how, tt just delays the process
out a little blt. But I am concerned about the size of the money and It lsa
tax and it is ratsing money, more money from people who don't want to give any
more money. But as Jay says, yes. I think the residents are above average In
their concern for this area and I'd ltke to see us get It done. Get what we
need done In the first year and then we can make the best decision next year.
so that's why I was willing, because I don't have a lot of the details on how
60~ ts going to work, I've had to put my faith In staff to say I'm from
Missouri, show me.
Councilman Johnson: Like you said, you two will be here next year if there's a
big slush fund and the predictions are there, It's up to you.
Councilwoman Oimler: It's hard to take money away though I'll tell you that.
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Councilman Johnson: We're already doing it.
councilwoman Oimler: I know we have but it's hard to do that.
Mayor Chmiel: Don, did you have something?
Don Ashworth: Yes, one quick comment and that is. There's a danger in funding
a program at too low of a level. Sometimes you can never get out of there. A
year from today you find that the figures were right and potentially there's
whatever additional cost of 11vlng and you come back and say well, we'll look to
a 20~ increase. It really becomes difficult to go back to citizens and say, pay
that 20~ more. And now you're still 20~ behind the total program and in fact
with the cost of livlng has gone up, you're potentially at that point in time
25~ so then the following year you do another 20~. You never really catch up.
Oo you follow what I'm saying? You finally agree, well let's Just do it at 10~.
You have 10~ over 4 years but you've had 6~ cost of 11vlng. You never get up to
the 100~ level.
Mayor Chmtel: But the residents are at the same point of having it at a lower
figure. They know it's there. They don't mind putting that additional increase
and eventually you will get there I feel.
Don Ashworth: Sometimes you just end up with less grief doing it once. Getting
it over wlth rather than having to look at it every Year.
Councilwoman Oimler: Are you saying there will never be any increases in the
future?
Don Ashworth: No.
Councilwoman Dimler: So our 100~ level moves.
Don Ashworth: From the standpoint of the City budget in terms of the amount of
money that we extract from each Individual parcel, we've not increased in the
last 6 years. I mean we've had that many additional homes that has created that
many additional dollars that we have not had to go back and look to a mtl rate
increase. Our overall dollars, yes have increased. There's no question about
that. We have not asked for additional money in terms of a mil rate increase.
I won't tell you that that won't happen with, or I mean that we will not have to
have an lncrease but it may not be required. I mean if we bring tn 300 more
parcels and it brings in $20,000.00 more, that may be sufficient.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other discussion? If not, I'd ask for a motion.
Councilwoman Oimler: I move approval of the ~0~ rate.
Mayor Chmlel: ! would second that. Any other discussion?
Councilman Johnson: I think there's a lot of room to compromise. Let's go for
a vote.
Councilwoaan Dialer aoved, Hayor Chaiel seconded to approve the rate structure
for the Surface Water Utility District at &O~. Councilwoman Dialer and Hayor
38
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Chmie! voted in favor. Counciiaan ~orkman and Councthan Johnson voted in
opposition and the motion uae tied at 2 to 2.
Councilman 3ohnson: Exactly between 60 and 100 ts 80. You know it's not on our
list but 80~ is exactly between where Tom and Z want to be and you all want to
be so we can sit here and argue all night. ! move 80~.
Councilman Workman: Second.
Councilman 3ohnson moved, Councliaan ~orkman seconded to approve the rate
structure for the Surface ~ater UtiLity District at 80~. Counciiaana 3ohnaon
and eorkman voted in favor. Councilwoman Dialer and Hayor Chela1 voted in
opposition and the motion was tied at 2 to 2.
Councilman Johnson: Well, the Council in January could decide it too or we
could wait until after November when we have a fifth Counc£1 member.
Hayor Chmiel: Hy suggestion is that we table this and get further discussions
going and reconsider and bring [t up at the next meeting.
Councilwoman Oimler: Second.
Councilman Workman: But what can we discuss? It's only quarter to 10:00.
Mayor Cheiel moved, Council~cean Dialer seconded to table action on the rate
structure for the Surface Mater Utility District until the next Councl!
~11 voted in favor except Councliaan ~orkean who opposed and the motion carried
with a vote of 3 to 1.
Councilman 3ohnson: There's no huge hurry.
Mayor Chmiel: No.
Councilman Johnson: Staff can still go about creating this system for financing
and whatever.
Councilwoman Oimler: We're not going to start the utility until January anyway
right?
Hayor Chmiel: Right.
Gary Warren: We need to know the rates in order to get the billing.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. We still have time though.
Gary Warren: Any direction you'd care to give staff for the next go around?
Mayor Chaiel: No, but we're sure going to talk.
Councilwoman Dialer: Can you cut the project scope somehow in the first year?
Councilman Workman: See Gary you should have really played it up.
39
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Councilwoman Dimler: He did.
Gary Warren: There's something to be learned from that.
Don Ashuorth: Take out the bass boat.
Councilman Johnson: Yeah, take out the bass boat. That will do it.
Gary Warren: Hempel would resign. I can't do that.
Counctlaan 3ohnson coved, Counctlean Workean seconded to approve the Su#ary
Ordinance for publication for the Surface Mater Utility District. Al! uoted in
favor and the action carried unanieously.
CON.SIDER REVISIONS TO THE HARKET SOUARE SITE. PLAN.
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, last October, as you're aware, the City Council
approved the development stage plans for the PUD for Market Square. Since that
time the development hasn't occurred. There's been a lot of restructtng and the
Target issue came up in the meantime. As you've also heard, the project ls now
on the front burner agatn. There's an HRA or a City Council deadline to come in
and get the project going. There's been a transfer in or a change in who is
going to build the supermarket and at this time they're asking for a revtsed
site plan approval. Basically the orlglnal Super Value store which was a 20,000
square foot store with 8,000 square foot expansion is being replaced by a
Festlval Foods Market whlch ls quite a bit larger. It's 35,000 square feet with
initial construction with an additional 10,000 square foot building addition.
In the process some of that addition's been happened by replacing some of the
retail tenants in the shopping center but the balance of that's been done by
expanding the slze of the square footage in the shopplng center ltself. The
proposal basically went from 91,000 square feet to 97,900 so there was a need to
expand the parking on site accordingly to provtde sufficient parklng for the
expanded square footage. That's been accomplished largely without changing the
slte plan in any significant way. In fact the site plan ts only different in
terms of the butlding footprint. Orainage utilities, parking, everything else
is virtually identical. More parking stalls were put 1nrc the slte basically by
using a parking stall that was I believe 9 feet versus the 10 feet that was
originally proposed. City ordinances only requlre 8 1/2 so there's plenty of
parking. Staff is recommending approval of the amended site plan subject to a
few conditions. One is that a revised landscaping plan be prepared to
accommodate the new building footprint. Second is that there's a raised
concrete platform, a dlsplay platform belng proposed out In front of what wlll
become the Lawn and Sports Center. This is a new addition and staff has some
concern with this and clty ordinances prohlblt the outdoor display of
merchandise. We have two retail tenants in town who currently display
merchandise outdoors. There has not been an attempt to bring this 1nrc
compliance however both those Individuals are looking to movtng into the
shopping center and we'd rather not see the problem perpetuated so we're
recommending that the exterior display platform be removed. The third condition
is that the replacement of the Super Value wlth the Festlval ls going to alter
the building elevations somewhat and they do not have a final plan in yet for
the buildlng elevations. That's got to be approved by the Festlval Market plus
by the developer and then by the City. We think that we can keep the
40
City Council Neetlng - October 8, ~990
architectural consistency with the shopping center Intact. The developer's
aware that that's our goal and ts their stated goal as well. So what we'd
to do tn the building elevations Is that if staff believes the plans are
consistent with the architectural theme of the original shopping center, then
we'd like to be in a position to administratively approve tt so we can Issue a
building permit and break ground. If however there's a substantial question In
our mind as to whether or not the building is consistent with the
approvals which you and the Planning Commission spent a lot of time on, then
we'd like to bring back those revised elevations to the Planning Commission and
City Council. With that we do think that this is a relatively minor change to
the site plan and we are recommending that tt be approved.
Councilman Workman= Gary, what about the segment bet#men what's supposed to be
the Lawn and Sport and the grocery store?
Gary Warren: You mean Paul?
Councilman Workman: Did I say Gary?
Paul Krauss: Well it's all going to be reta£1 expansion. You probably heard
that there was a plan afoot at one point to make a hole tn the building?
Councilman Workman: Right.
Paul Krauss: That's now eliminated and the building is going to resemble what
it used to. In fact it's going to be bigger. There will be no hole In the
building. ! don't know who that tenant space Is for. Is that the drug store?
Councilman Workman: Insurance agency?
Brad 3ohnson: I've got, if you want to look, a comparison between the two
plans. I've drawn a circle around where the changes are taking place.
Basically the previous plan, the area you're looking at ts tn this are right
here. Previously we had a 22,000 square foot supermarket expandable to 30,000.
We had a 7,500 square foot drug store and then we had a vacant area which we
would fill in later. That was strictly a financing thing that we had to
accomplish. What we've done then, Gateway Is by the way, there's some people,
Arnle Prevey who Is the Vice President of Sales with Gateway...he's going to
address you and let you know Just what kind of store we have. When Gateway came
to us, their biggest concern Is that we be continuously competitive with any
other future development. As you know, there's a couple others planned for
other stores and stuff In the community, that this center would probably In the
next 20-25 years be able to accommodate a grocery store that will remain
competitive with the Cubs and the Rainbows and everything like that. So their
request to us that they felt at a 45,000 square foot store they could remain
competitive with most of the world for the next 20 years. Certainly as long,
you know short term. And therefore the center Itself, who's tenants are
somewhat relying, at least Initially.for the next 20 years on the traffic
generated by here, would remain Intact. So what we did is we went back to the
drawing board and talked to Paul and we went through the whole process with the
city to see if we could do it and what we did is we took out that vacant space
and moved the drug store over. Same drug store. And then we enlarged this this
way because we were able to move tt over and then kept the same basic expansion
41
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
area. I just showed thls to somebody else. They couldn't tell the difference
until I showed them.
Mayor Chmlel: There's one square missing.
Brad Johnson: Yeah. And so what we were trying to do is do as little as
posslble to make a major change. We end up wlth the same amount of parklng
spaces per square foot of space in the center. We end up Initially with more
parklng spaces but we have a larger grocery store and we have expansion space
for another 44...and we cannot use the parking over here at the present time.
That ls the message on that. And we will come back, we have to take some tlme
to try to incorporate the new grocery store's look into our front. And if I
may, I'd 11ke to address a few thlngs. I'd 11ke to introduce Arnle Prevey. He's
the Vice President of Sales for Gateway Foods. I'd like to have him just
explaln what type of store this would be so you have a 11ttle feellng for what
we're trying to accomplish. Arnie, do you want to come up?
Mayor Chmiel: Welcome to Chanhassen.
Arnie Prevey: Thank you and good evening Mayor and Council members. Yeah, I'd
like to explaln just a little blt about the Festival's Food. I'm sure that
probably there's a number of you who may not even have heard of the name before
and it is a new concept with our company. Our company, Gateway Foods has
Rainbow Food Stores and we come up with this concept based on the fact that we
think a lot of people do 11ke to shop large stores but also there's a lot of
people out there that would prefer to shop somewhat of a smaller type unit and
st111 have all the facilities that a large store would have. So we come up wlth
the concept that we like to call an upscale mini-Rainbow. Has all the
facilities of the Ralnbow and I'm sure you're famlliar wlth the Ratnbow we have
in Eden Prairie. And this would have all the facilities that that particular
store has but we'd have some extras. All of our Festlval stores wlth the
exception of one, are independently owned so there again, we feel that being an
independent retailer gives ita 11ttle better flavor and especially for a
community that you have like here. And I just, we feel kind of good about
comlng lnto Chanhassen because of the fact that we've looked at this clty for
qutte some time but we knew Super Value was here and had talked to you people so
at this tlme I'd 11ke to answer any questions that you may have regarding the
super market, whatever that may be.
Councilman Workman: Do you have an independent owner yet?
Arnie Prevey: Yes. We have a father and a son. Lyle King is the father. His
son Bob. They have a Festlval store over in Andover which was one of the first
Festival's we put in. That's been put in about 3 years ago. They have a store
in Champlln. It's an IG store and they have one on Chicago Avenue in
Minneapolis and of course they've been looking for another site. We also have
another site for them in Champlln whlch is golng to be a Festival and that w111
replace the IG out in that area. The [G store and that's, it's probably a year
away from rlght now.
Mayor Chmiel: I thlnk that's great. Z know what Ratnbow ts of course and I
just recently today had some discussions with some people and they were aware of
a Festlval store and thelr indication to me ls they 11ke the store very much.
42
C£ty Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Arnie Prevey: That's good.
Hayor Chmiel: So that was sort of encouraging to me. But I think you're right
£n saying that sometimes the women don't like to go Into Larger stores and
that's my wife exactly. She would rather shop tn a smaller one and ! think what
you've got designed Is going to make her go to that store on a constant basis.
Arnie Prevey: That's good. I'm glad to hear that. I might add also as far as
our pricing structure and that type of store, basicaLLy it's the same as a
Rainbow that you're familiar with or tf you've shopped our competitor Cub. The
pricing structure Is basicaLLy the same as what those are. And [ would say
because of the fact that It's an IndependentLy owned type store, they always
seem to have, put a LittLe different flavor Into that type of unit. I don't
want to take anything away from our corporate Rainbow stores. HopefulLy they're
doing a good job on service and everything else but there's Just something about
when an independent owns a unit and he's got his hard earned money tn tt and
heart and soul in lt. There's something that comes off a LittLe blt better.
That's what we're pleased about. We have a corporate store tn Moorehead that we
put tn about, well Let's see. We opened it in AprIL. That store Is
square feet and quite honestly I don't believe we'd ever put tn one, a Festival
store that Large anymore because It Just doesn't quite fit the profile that
we're trying to come up with. The 35,000 comes, is excellent and with the
growth that I think you're going to have In this area, we definitely need the
10,000 square feet to bring it up to 45,000 at some time. ! think the time table
as mentioned, did Brad say 20 years? I would hope that It's tn S years that we
need that 10,000 and that would be our time table. More that sort. That tn
years from now we're ready to add on the extra 10,000 square feet. So If
there's any other questions.
Councilman Johnson: How soon are we breaking ground?
Arnte Prevey: We've got the Lease in our attorney's hands In LaCrosse right
now. They're goLng through the Lease and Brad's camping at our doorstep.
HopefuLLy we're real anxious to get going on it. We Just want to get moving on
it real quickly. Also, the retailer that we want to put 'tn here Is a very solid
retailer. So many times now days as a whoLesaLe company we run Into a lot of
people that want to go into business but they Just do not have the operating
capital to get into business and this fellow, LyLe King and his son, they have
very good backing. They're very, as we caLL them, very healthy retailers.
Mayor Chmiel: Great. Appreciate It.
Arnie Prevey: Thank you for your time.
Brad 3ohnson: [ showed this plan to your City attorney and he said he went tn.
What you'd say to me? You were tn one in, wherever up there .and It Looked, he
thought he was in a Rainbow so he had to go out and Look at the sign.
Roger Knutson: I walked outside and Looked at the sign again.
Brad Johnson: So I think it'd be a good addition and probably solve some of the
needs. Rs far as timing Is concerned, we are fast tracking It. Like any Large
company there are beauracractes that we have to overcome at Gateway tn getting,
43
Ctty Council Heeting - October 8, lggO
and not llke here elther. In gettlng the leases done and they have their
process and I would say we're getting the best possible cooperative from them in
trylng to accomplish our goal whlch ts...
Councilman Workman: Can I interject? We had a great discussion, quickly drop
thls ln. We had a great discussion on thls Council on cigarettes and otgarette
sales in stores and one of the things we've done, we were like the second city
in the natlon to ban cigarette vending and we sort of dabbled in the whether or
not, what kind of a job a store could do to maybe keep cigarettes, etc. back
from minors and out of their hands and we're always told that well, we'd have to
revamp our whole store in order to do that. Would it be possible for, you're
not going to give me an answer here but would it be possible for them to maybe
look ahead at maybe our community's sensitive smoking ideas perhaps and maybe
deelgn a store with that in mind.
Hayor Chmiel: Just a little more control so it's not accessible for them to.
Arnie Prevey: You were correct at flrst when you said I wasn't going to gtve
you an answer. I'm not going to but I will say this. We have the same ooncerns
that a lot of you people have and lt's more of a concern all the time. We're
working on it to quite some degree as to how we can control this and everything
else. We not only have a problem with cigarettes as far as getting them lnto
the hands of the minors and people that probably should not be sold them. I'm a
non-smoker and I could care less if they never sold cigarettes but be that as it
may, we also have to contend with the shoplifting of cigarettes. A carton of
cigarettes of an expensive 1rem nowadays so we look at it from that standpoint.
How can we protect this product from getting into whatever wrong hands. It's
something we're working on all the tlme.
Mayor Chmtel: Good. Thank you.
Brad Johnson: Just one other thing. ! might mentlon that we agree entirely
wlth the recommendation of staff. We have added however to our site plan, I
guess we ran it up the flag. One of our ooncerns on this particular locatlon ls
that we're having the Chanhassen Lawn and Sports move into a faciltty that
really doesn't allow for outside display of merchandise. We have talked about
tt Internally as to how to try to f£gure out to do £t. I don't think we may
solve the problem here thls evenlng but we wanted to address it and it is
addressed in this particular plan. Because we feel, and th£s is my idea, not
Bernie's. ! do feel that beoause of the nature of hls buslness he needs some
ability to dlsplay the types of products that he has and he really doesn't have
a lot of window space in the back and that type of thing so we have proposed,
and also as the landlord we want to make sure that Bern£e didn't have them all
over everywhere so we'd have to go find them, you know so we put ina dlsplay
area out in front of bls store in the corner that would look like pyramids like
you do at the 01ymplcs and stuff 11ke that where we mlght have an opportunity
both to control the display and do that. Now this is tn a BG area and I realtze
under the PUD it may or may not be allowed but in the BG area lt's allowed
through a conditional use perm£t. O£splay merchandise In the outside If it's
under some type of control. So we've asked for that here. ! notlced that the
staff said they did not recommend tt and it probably is correct in not
recommending it unless we came back in for a conditional use permlt but Z wanted
you to be aware that we're do£ng it. I don't know, Bernie do you want to say
City Council Heettng - October 8, [990
anything about it other than what I've said?
Bernie Hanson: That addresses that [ want...
Brad Johnson: Yeah, and that's why that was tn there. We were trying to figure
out how to solve it and [t Just ended up [n the plan and probably a little
prematurely. We'll probably be back to the staff on that one so u/th that
accept the staff's recommendation with the [des we'll come back over time and
try to figure out a solution to that. Thank you.
Councilwoman O[mler: [ do have one quest[on here and [ don't think [t was
addressed, at least ! didn't see it. We uere talking about moving that bus
shelter. [s that addressed?
Hayor Chmiel: That's already tn process from my understanding [s it not?
Brad Johnson: Yeah.
Councilman Johnson: We approved that at the last meeting didn't we?
Brad Johnson: Yeah. Rs part of the development agreement we've agreed to pay
for the relocation pr[ce and ! think we have an agreement nov that we have to
escrow the money so it's there when they do lt. [ think Todd, you'r working on
a plan?
Todd Gerhardt: We've got a plan already for relocation across the street.
Brad Johnson: So I think that's all In the process.
Councilwoman Oteler: So it's all Incorporated?
Paul Krauss: That plan will be brought back before the Planning Commission and
City Council for specific approval.
Hayor Chmiel: Okay, any other discuss[on?
Councilman 3ohnson: It was before the Planning Commission at the last Planning
Commission meeting. That's why I remembered it. That was at mldn[ght.
Hayor Chmiel: Okay, any other discussion? Hearing none, I'll ask for a mot/on?
Councilman Johnson: I move for approval with the [8 cend[t[ons. I believe
there's 18. [9 conditions, I'm sorry, recommended by staff.
Counctlman Workman: Second.
Councilman 3ohnBon moved, Councilman #orkean seconded to approve the amended
Site Plan for PUD Development Stage Rpproval for tlarket Square subject to the
following cond/ttons:
1. Submit a revised landscap/ng plan illustrating plant matertal [n the future
expansion area of the Festiva[ Foods Store and of the revised park[ng
island configuration.
45
City Council Heeting - October 8, 1990
2. Submit final building elevations to staff for administrative approval of, if
determined by staff to be inconsistent with the original plan, to be
returned to the Planning Commission and City Council for review.
3. Eliminate the outdoor display area from in front of the Lawn and Sports
Center. All outdoor display of merchandise in the shopping center is
prohibited. Herchandise contained in the screened outdoor storage area is
exempt from this requirement.
4. Enter into a PUD contract with the City that will contain all of the
conditions of approval and which will be recoreded against all lots platted
in the project. The PUO agreement Should provide for a landscape bond as
outlined in the staff report.
5. The final plat shall reflect a 20 foot utility easement for the proposed
City water line over the southerly portion of the site.
The applicant shall enter into a development contract and provide the
necessary security.
7. The applicant shall enter into a PUD contract with the City.
8. Enter into a development contract with the City that required financial
suretles wlth oonstructlon plans to be approved by the Clty Engineer and
City Council for all public improvements.
Revise architectural plans as needed to:
a. confirm that the Vet Clinic will have windows on the north and west
elevations;
b. trash enclosures are to be constructed from rock faced block compatible
with the main building;
c. relocate the trash enclosure serving the dry cleaner to the uest side of
the building or incorporate it into the structure;
d. outdoor storage areas are to be enclosed by a rock faced block wall;
e. the trash compactor is to be provided with a rock faced block screen
wall and relocated to the north to provide a 24 foot wlde drlve aisle;
and
f. the addition of any drive-up windows will require site plan approval
wherein it will be the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate that
lnternal circulation patterns and parklng provisions wlll not be
impacted.
10. Outlot A is required to have buildings designed to utilize architecture
compatible with the shopping center. No additional access will be provided
to serve Outlot A. Only one additional monument slgn is to be allowed wlth
the outlot is developed. The site must be identical to monument signage
46
City Council Heet£ng - October 8, ~990
allowed elsewhere on the PUD. Unttl development occurs, the owner shall
establish ground cover over the site and keep tt in a mainta~ned condit£on.
Parking requirements for the outlot should be satisfied on it.
11. Modify and/or regulate access parking as follows:
a. provide a triangular traffic Island tn the West 78th Street curb cut;
b. delete the sidewalk south of the crosswalk that connects to the sidewalk
in front of the supermarket. A pedestrian crosswalk shall be Installed
on Harket Boulevard at a Location determined by the City Engineer. The
crosswalk shall be painted and signed in accordance with the
requirements of Minnesota Manual on TraffLc Controls;
c. eliminate the nine (9) northern stalls located on the east side of the
supermarket expansion and modify the Vet Clinic parking area to provide
a turning space at the end of the aisle;
d. all leases for the main building should require that employee parking be
located at the rear of the center;
e. any restaurant proposed in the center are subject to a site plan review
procedure. It will be the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate
parking adequacy if it Is to be approved. The restaurant spaces
illustrated tn the two northern tenant spaces tn the main building are
exempt from this requirement; and
f. all parking lot curbing shall be B-&/12 concrete.
12. The landscaping plan should be modified as follows:
a. increase the size of conifers along the south property line from 6' to
10-12';
b. remove the snow storage area along Market Boulevard and landscape the
space; and
c. cooperate with City staff in providing a relocation plan for the
existing landscaping along Market Boulevard and West 78th Street.
13. Provide final grading and drainage plans for approval. The plans should
Incorporate the following:
a. store sewers shall be sized for a ten (10) year storm. Revised drainage
calculatLons shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval;
b. the 72" storm sewer is to be installed by the developer;
c. installation of the line should be covered by the development contract.
The City can reasonably allow buiIdlng permits to be Issued with the
understanding that the 72' storm sewer, together with other public
roadway and utility Improvements, will be Installed simultaneously with
the construction of the buildings;
47
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
d. the existing catch basin adjacent to Manhole ~21 in Market Boulevard
should be relocated into the new curb radius;
e. project approval by the Watershed District is required prior to building
permit issuance; and
f. an erosion control plan acceptable to the City should be submitted prior
to requesting building permits.
14. Provide final roadway and utility plans for approval. The existing 10"
PVC sanitary sewer shall be placed in an oversized ductile iron casing
acceptable to the ¢lty. Existing watermains to be abandoned shall be
removed. The applicant will submit detailed construction plans and
specifications for approval by the Clty Engtneer and provlde as-bullt mylar
plans upon completion of the construction.
15. Provide written and graphic sign covenants consistent with the description
in the October 23, 198g staff report. The covenants will be filed with the
Planned Unlt Development Agreement.
16. Review (OR REVISE??) the site lighting plan to use the ornamental fixtures
east of the supermark and between the two Market Boulevard curb cuts.
17. All conditions must be completed as a part of the general construction of
the project and shall not be left to tenants, i.e. rear outdoor storage
areas, etc..
18. The bus shelter and concrete curb located on Market Boulevard should be
changed/moved to another location in order to accommodate future traffic on
Market Boulevard. The developer, at it's expense, shall acquire and convey
to the City a perpetual easement for a bus shelter along Market Boulevard.
The locatlon of the bus shelter shall be determined by the staff of the
Southwest Metro Transit Commission.
19. The developer shall construct and dedicate trails/sidewalks along West 78th
Street and Market Boulevard in accordance with plans and specificstlon
approved by the City Engineer. The trails/sidewalks shall be constructed
when street improvements are constructed.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE AHENDUENT TO AHEND SECTION 20-409, GENERAL DEVELOPHENT
REGULATIONS OF THE WETLAND ORDINANCE REGULATING ACCESS THROUGH CLASS A AND S
WETLANDS, FIRST REAPING.
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, there's been several cases reviewed before you and the
Planning Commission concerning the construction of a filled or an access on fill
through a wetland down to Lotus Lake in particular but it applies to all lakes
in general. The Planning Commission's recommendation typically has been that
access through a wetland be provlded by an elevated boardwalk and that's based
upon the best representations that we've gotten from the ONR and other
interested agencies. In reviewing these applications however, It was clear that
the ordinance did not specifically state what our goal was or what we were
48
city council Meeting - October 8, [990
trying to get. That elevated boardwalk had become a Planning Commission policy
to recommend to you and the City's done It frequent[y but as evidenced by these
recent cases it's not in the ordinance anyplace. Well this ordinance amendment
basically fixes that. It establishes what the City Is looking for on those
access points through the wetland. It's a fairly simple amendment. The
Planning Commission reviewed It and recommended It's approval and we are doing
the same to you tonight.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, ! just had one question Paul. On the Planning Commission
action, item number 7 where it reads access on fill material through a wetland.
Zt just doesn't read right and maybe It's the way I'm looking at It. I came up
with something. Fill mater/al through a wetland access shall only be considered
when the access must be for vehicles. Does that make a little more sense than
what's there or what's there you feel is alright?
Councilman Johnson: ! think there's too many accesses.
Paul Krauss: It needs to be capitalized.
Councilman Johnson: There are too many accesses tn the sentence.
Mayor Chmiel: No.
Councilman Johnson: In his sentence. Not your's.
Mayor Chmiel= As you started out with access on fill material. That just
doesn't to me read exactly right tn what I'm saying. Fill material through a
wetland access shall only be considered.
Councilman Johnson: How about f111 materta! shall only be used in a wetland
when access must be for vehicles?
Hayor Chmlel: Didn't sound too bad. Say tt agatn. What'd he say?
Councilman Johnson: Fill material shall only be used in a wetland when access
must be for vehicles. That's close. It was recorded over there. Read that
back to me.
Councilman Workman: Why don't we just replace vehicular with an? An access on
fill material through a wetland shall only be considered when the access must be
for vehicles.
Paul Krauss: How about, is designed specifically for vehicles rather than must
be and then I think we've.
Mayor Chmtel: Designed for vehicles? That's fine.
Roger Knutson: This is the f/rst reading.
Councilman Workman moved, Councilman 3ohneon aeconded to approve the first
reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendment by amending Sect[on 20-409 as
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
(6) The dock or walkway is elevated 6 to 8 inches above the ordinary high water
mark and 6 to 8 inches above the ground level when above the ordinary high
water mark, and shall be a maxlmum of 6 feet in wldth.
(7) An access on fill material through a wetland shall only be considered when
deslgned for vehicles. Prlvate boat launches on f111 materlal will not be
permitted through a Class A or 8 wetland if a public boat exists on the
subject lake.
~11 voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS:
Councilman Johnson: This is real short. The Board of Adjustments and Appeals
has items just before the City Council meeting and then they're also put on the
agenda. The ordinance, as I remember it whloh I didn't grab it and look at lt,
allows people 14 days to appeal or I0 working days to appeal the deciston of the
Board of Adjustments and Appeals. If an appeal is made, then it goes to the
City Council. In the past the reason for putting in on the City Council agenda
is more for when an 1rem ls rejected and then the applicant who ls standing
there immediately appeals it to the City Council that same night. Well the City
Council then does not have the Mlnutes of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals
or anything on which to base their decision. What I would like to do is not
have the Board of Adjustments and Appeals and the City Counc11 on the same nlght
so that when there's going to be a protest, the staff can prepare a report for
the Clty Council saylng what the Board of Adjustments and Appeals actions were
and we have a regular report on which to base our decision as a City Council.
That seems to be what the Ordinance requires anyway but we established a
procedure before I got on the Council of doing it this other way and it never
made sense to me.
Paul Krauss: If I could expand on that too. There's often times, I don't know
if you'd call It a hardship but it sort of is, in that the applicant comes to a
Board of Adjustment meetlng at 7:00 and we preschedule this thlng for City
Council review. The City Council doesn't review it unless there's an appeal and
I know Councilman Boyt had somewhat of a difference of oplnion on that, but the
fact is is that if the Board approves it, it's a done deal unless somebody
appeals lt. If lt's not appealed, it doesn't need to be scheduled for the City
Council. However, the way you're doing it, somebody comes for a 7:00 meeting
and they might be untll 11:00 at nlght before that 1rem comes up and then just
to hear that it's no big deal and nobody cares about it. It would seem that the
best way of dolng it mlght be along what Jay's suggesting ls that we not
regularly schedule these things for City Council review. We don't issue the
bullding permit after a varianoe ls granted. If a varlance ls granted, we don't
issue that permit for 10 working days. If in that time ue get an appeal from a
resldent or from a Council person who asks us to sohedule it for a meeting, we
then will not issue that and we'll get it on the next available Council agenda.
Mayor Chmiel: I like that.
Councilwoman Oimler: I agree except how do we find out? We never get the
Minutes from the Board of Adjustments anyway. How would a Council member know
whether it was approved?
5O
City Council Meeting - October 8, [990
Paul Krauss: If we schedule an item for you to consider, we give you the
original report,.our recommendations and the Minutes of the meeting.
Councilwoman Dimler: I know but even to get it considered because once it's
passed, if nobody brings It up, it may never come before us.
Paul Krauss: You get the Board of Adjustment packet.
Councilwoman Dialer: We do?
Paul Krauss: You should.
Councilman Workman: I've never.
Councilwoman Dialer: I've never gotten one.
Councilman Johnson: You don't because It's aIaays an Item In our agenda so you
don't.
Paul Krauss: We'll make sure you get a copy of the Board of Adjustments.
Councilman Johnson: What Ursula ts saying is not before. She wants the results
of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals given to her.
Mayor Chmiel: Once it's done. Once It's completed.
Councilwoman Dialer: We don't ever know, if it's not ever put on the agenda for
us, we don't ever know.
Paul Krauss: So would you like their Minutes put in your packet?
Councilwoman Dim[er: Yes.
Mayor Chmiel: That would take care of it.
Councilman Johnson: Now if It's not a unanimous decision of the board, then It
becomes a recommendation to the Council.
Mayor Chmie[: Right. That's an automatic.
Councilman Johnson: Right. So that's why I'd like to see the Board of
Adjustments meet one week before the Counoil so that #e don't delay them a full
2 weeks if it's not a unanimous decision. It's delayed one week untiI the
Counci[ gets it the following week.
Mayor Chmiel: I don't have any problems with that.
Councilwoman Oimler: Okay.
Mayor Chaiel: Okay, let's do it Paul. Jay you'll report back to the Board of
Adjustments.
5!
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
ADHINZSTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: TH 5 CONSTRUCTION COORDINATZON/CZTY, PRO3£CT
ZHPACTS, CZT¥ ENGINEER,
Gary Warren: Mr. Mayor, we're having several meetings trying to coordinate the
construction package for next year with the TH 5 work and I thought because some
of the information we have had before that you've been auare of and the changes
that are coming about that I want to bring Council up to speed on some of the
coordination efforts and what the implications are for our construction time
next year. Basically I've tried to color code things here. The area in orange
are the projects that you basically have completed already so they're out of the
picture for the moment. The areas in blue are areas that right now we have an
option on the south leg of CR 17 but after further discussion even this morning
I think they were looking at the north leg of TH lO1 and CR 17 are most likely
going to fall into the 1992 construction season.
Councilman Johnson: What's the delay?
Gary Warren= I'll get into that in just a second.
Councilman 3ohnson: Oh, okay.
Gary Warren: The areas in green would be projects that by necessity or
practicality would be constructed in 1991. The whole thing revolves around the
magnitude of construction on TH 5 and trying to coordinate with MnBot's
contractors. We reviewed the scenario here on the north leg project and the
fact that we don't have the rest of the picture here but our Park One business
park is Just going to be impossible to tolerate traffic at this intersection
when MnDot has it tore up and if we're going to have it tore up with the
railroad crossing on top of it without any easterly outlet. This year MnOot
should make great strides to completing, or ! shouldn't say thls year. The next
year they should make great strides on completing the 0ell Road intersection and
wlth that we have an outlet for the park, buslness park that does not lnvolve
the residential streets of Eden Prairie. Until that happens, everybody is
coming this way or they're violating the rlght In restriction whlch ls very
hazardous. So we couldn't see a lot to be gained by forcing this issue and in
fact from a property acquisition standpoint, there are maybe some advantages to
the City in having some extra time to deal with that especially as it relates to
the leases on the Meadows Apartments and such. So we're looking at 1992 for
that project. We will still continue to proceed with the property acquisitions
and including the deslgn plans here in 1991 but basically get set up for
construction In 1992 bidding.
Mayor Chmiel: How many additional parcels do we have to get yet on that north
leg?
Gary Warren: The north leg basically involves 6 parcels. We've got the Taco
Shop, AVR, the Meadows Apartment. We talked about the pond earlier north of the
Chanhassen Offtce Complex. We're acquiring a 11ttle trlangle up there to add to
our pond and what did I miss?
Mayor Chmiel: Abby Bongard but that's completed.
52
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Gary Warren: Abby Bongard which we've already acquired. There's a pome[bil[ty
of nicking another corner. Not the building not another corner of the second
apartment building. That's not going to impact the building itself so
basically... The West 781h Street detachment #e touched on earlier tonight.
updated the chart. I had a little error [n what you have. That includes the
two elements here. Some on CR 17 and on West 781h Street. When HnOot starts
construct[on on CR 17, this has to be [n place to serve as a by-pass. To get
traffic out of this location. They could be brought down Harket Blvd. and would
then either continue down Harket to TH 101 as we're showing completing this
element or they could also go on Lake Or[ye and take CR 17 down to here. That
ks why we are saying that CR 17 should not be constructed until 1992 aa well
because as I think we all recall we have our surcharge area here on Lake
That will come off when we redo this road here and if we start this construct[on
in ~99~, we're going to box th[e as Well. Again, it's not earth shattering. I
think it gives us a little bit better sequencing and availability on the detour
routes. MnOot will be Working on finishing intersections of Harket here so
golng to be a real tap dance to keep things under control. So what we're saying
basically would be the blue is 1992 and green is 199[. From that perspective,
that's how we are proceeding forward unless you have some direct[on.
Nayor ChmLel: That's looks reasonable.
Counc[lman Workman: What happened to the north leg of TH 1017 I thought we
were talking about spring there.
Gary Warren: North leg of TH 101, the biggest lei=act la, well there's two
things. One we have the railroad crossing [n here which has to happen and we
all know our experience with railroads. The second ts that until the Dell Road
intersection is completed next year with the current TH 5 project, we have no
way out for the buslness park there without going through the Eden Prair[e
residential subdivision. That is the biggest impact here. It also allows HnOot
and it's contractor to I think work with more freely at that intersect[on to...
more quickly.
Mayor Chmtel: I would have l[ked seeing that north leg of TH 101 be done sooner
but it just seems l[ke it's not feasible.
Gary Warren: Yeah. Initially we were trying to them cot~cJdentally. We
thought that would make sense but there are just too many things that are going
to have potential for causing a lot of access problems. We thought let MnOot
come in. OD their thing. They have a transit[on sect[on that will allow
traffic [n the interim and then we'll come tn and complete our segment. ! think
that will work out the best. One other quick comment. That [e in the
adm[nstrat[ve packet you may have read Wednesday night we are hay[rig a meeting.
We've invited the [6 parcel owners that are on the TH 5 project. The next
element now that's scheduled for ~arch 22~d. We've [nvlted them to either
execute Right of Entry forms that we have sent them or if they have questions,
we'll be meeting Wednesday night to let ua hopefully answer their questions so
that we can get the Right of Entry/Ex[ts to them. If we are successful [n
acquiring all the Right of Entries, this wtll guarantee that the project will
stay on the March 22nd letting date. If not, if all the parcels have to go to
the Quick Take process with MnOot and full acquisition process, we are looking
at probably a 3 month delay in the letting date which would net out to a
53
City Council Heeting - October 8, 19~0
construction start no sooner than late Rugust of 1991 which means basically you
lose the whole 1991 construction season on this next element.
Hayor Chmiel: Can't that proceed automatically Roger once that's?
Roger Knutson: Once you have your appraisals you can start that clock running.
It takes 90 days.
Gary Warren: HnDot has a little more rigid approach... We walked through their
schedule last Thursday with their right-of-way agent Bob Lindahl and basically
what happens is we lose a construction season if we can't get the right of
entries. We're actively, as you know we have agreed to take on this to help
HnDot...
Hayor Chmiel: Eight.
Gary Warren: ...Chanhassen of which we do own about 3 of the parcels so we
expect to get good cooperation but right now I don't have any signed.
Hayor Chmiel: Good. Thank you. Don? Community brochure.
Don Ashworth: This may look long but it's really short.
Hayor Chmtel: I just looked at that right now I don't see a north arrow on
there.
Don Ashworth: That was one that the Council had suggested I think right.
Hayor Chmiel: Right, but I still don't see a north arrow.
Don Ashworth: I thought that I had distributed a copy of this to ail Council
members. The plan was to have this, in fact we already do have it to the
Villager for inclusion in this week's edition correction Dave?
Councilman Johnson: Can we add a north arrow?
Don Ashworth: I mean I'd have to run the 4,500 again for all of them. At issue
though and what I wanted the Council to be aware, on this cost.
Councilman Johnson: Just take this and add a north arrow to those 4,500.
Don Ashworth: The figures as you see them here are from the McGillavery study
and lt's wlth contribution from school district. ! met with the school distrlct
and they felt that they still stand behind the project but unttl such time as we
have agreement actually signed and recognizing the potential to lose tax
increment money, that the city would be in a better position or more
conservative posltton to use these other flgures whlch ls the circled ones. You
can see the two that we'd be looking at. Both cases you're talking about 4.l
m1111on. That's your base cost. In the top figures, that's without
contribution from the school district. The lower figures are with contribution.
so this past week ! had it changed. 5o in other words, the Council's looking at
an older brochure so where it shows the $25.00, the figures that have already
been given over to or run and given to the Vlllager in fact are the higher
54
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
numbers. So the ones given to thee for an $80,000.00 home are the $3&.00. The
one for $100,000.00 is the $52.00. There Is an alternative and that would be to
have an additiona! column that would take and be headed by if tax Increment ts
available and then continue to show the Lower numbers in that column. I think
that that may cause more confusion than it's worth but I thought I should make
sure that the Council knew what numbers are In here and where they came from.
So the numbers that will go out to the public, as tt stands right now are the
higher numbers without contribution of tax increment.
Councilman Workman: And that contribution is what Don? The mlllton?
Don Ashworth: It was based on $Z24,000.00 per year over a 8 or ~ year period of
time so you were talking about a total of a million, roughly a million eight.
Councilman Workman: There's really no easy way to convey that to people because
they don't understand tax increment. I think /t really confuses things
although, then they'll say well why don't we Just do that? Or where Is that
coming from or I would be a proponent for the use of it.
Councilman Johnson: It's Just a matter If the State allows us to do it.
Councilman Workman: They will.
Councilman Johnson: They should unless they're trying to change their laws to
not allows us to do it. Then we have to give them the money or something
instead of. What they're trying to do ks change the law I believe to where If
the school district uses that money, the State takes away that much money that
they give to the school district so then the school district ends up being a net
loser. So then there's no reason for them to do that.
Don Ashworth: Then they become concerned.
Councilwoman Dimler: That's already been passed hasn't it?
Councilman Johnson= No.
Don Ashworth: Well it's been passed in terms of two different laws. One
dealing with declaration of surpluses by cities where It used to be that when
that surplus would occur, those would become free dollars for the school
district to use. Now they've rolled that into the aid formula. The other ts
when there's a cessation of a tax increment district. Those dollars used to go
to the school district. Now those dollars first pay off the school aid. Go
under the school aid formula. There's only really the th/rd method of
potentially getting dollars back to your school district wh/ch is through the
excess levy referendum process. Where you make a calculation of how much money
they would have gotten under the excess levy and passed that amount to the
school district and then those dollars become available for whatever you jointly
use. School district's point is, two out of the three techniques that we used
to have have been shut off. They're already saying that they're gotng to shut
off the third of those techniques. Can we honestly put out a brochure like this
more or less guaranteeing that? I mean the school district is willing to make
the contribution. We're willing to accept It but how long will State
legislators allow us to do it?
5S
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Councilman Johnson: They want the money to balance their budget.
Don Ashworth: So no action £s required.
Mayor Chmlel: Alrlght. Thank you.
Counciluoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to adjourn the meeting.
All voted tn favor and the motion carried. The meettng was adjourned at 10:32
p.m..
Submitted by Don Ashworth
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim