1990 08 27CHANHASSEN CZTY COUNCZL
REGULAR HEETZNG
AUGUST 27, 1990
Mayor Chmiel called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.. The meeting was opened
with the Pledge to the Flag.
COUNCILHEHBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Workman, Councilwoman Dimier
and Councilman Johnson
COUNCZLHEHBERS ABSENT: Councilman Boyt
STAFF pRESENT: Paul Krauss, Gary Warren and Elltott Knetsch
APPROVAL OF AGENQA: Councilman Johnson moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to
approve the agenda with the following additions: Mayor Chmiel wanted to add
under Adminstrative Presentations by HnDot, turn lanes at Choctaw and Sandy Hook
for Cooperative Agreement. Under Council Presentations Councilman Johnson
wanted a follow-up on the dead trees along Kerber and Powers Blvd.; Councilwoman
Dimler wanted to discuss a walking path on Hinneuashta Parkway; and Counc£1man
Workman wanted to address the National League of Cities conference. All voted
in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
PUBLZC ANNOUNCEMENT~: RESOLUTZON I:~OCLAZNING SEPTEJtBER 23-29 ~ 'VALUES WEEK'.
Mayor Chmiel: This is a Resolution proclaiming September 23rd thru the 29th as
Values Week and I'd like to read this Resolution so everyone understands
basically what it is and why we're adopting this. It says, Whereas the City of
Chanhassen, State of Hinnesota has heretofore adopted eight basic values as set
in Exhibit A attached hereto; and Whereas the said values have been adopted by
the remaining governmental entities within the geographic area of Independent
School District (112; and Whereas it is the desires of these communities to
collectively promote these values and to encourage their support through
establishment of values week; Now Therefore be it resolved by the City Council
of the City of Chanhassen, State of Hinnesota as follows: (1) That the week of
September 23rd thru September 29th, 1990 is hereby declared as Values Week.
(2), that the citizens of the County of Carver are encouraged to partake of the
activities scheduled during the Values Week, read, embrace and hopefully
implement these values in their work and their family life. Passed and adopted
by the City Council, City of Chanhassen this day of 1990. Signed by the Hayor
and attested by City Clerk.
Resolution P)O-X02: Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman 3ohrrson seconded to
adopt the Resolution proclaiming September 23-29, 1990 as 'Values Week' for the
City of Chanhassen. All voted in favor and the morton carried.
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to
approve the following Consent Agenda Items pureuant to the City Hanager's
recommendations:
a. Approve Development Contract for Dexter Magnetic Materials.
City Council Meeting - August Z7, 1990
b. Preliminary and Final Plat Approval to Subdivide a 103,000 sq. ft. parcel
into two lots, 1010 Pleasant View Road, Fortier and Associates.
c. Approve Letter of Support to MnDot to conduct a speed study ol~ West'82nd
Street.
Resolution ~90-103: Approve Contract Amendment No. 2 for Public Works
Auxiliary Storage 8uildir, g.
h. Approval of Accounts.
i. Approval of City Council Minutes dated August 13, 1990
Approve ACH Origination Agreement with the Chanhassen Bank.
1. Approve Plans and Specifications for Park Place Phase II (CLBP 5th)
Improvement Project 85-138; Authorize Advertising for Bids.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
F. ACCEPT PRELIHINARY ASSESSHENT ROLL; CALL FOR PUBLIC HEARING.
Councilman Workman: It's the assessment roll that I have some concern.
Councilman Johnson: There's 3 different assessment rolls.
Councilman Workman: Well. the assessment roll that I have a concern about is,
and the City Manager was going to be best able to answer this question.
However, Jay you may. The parcels 25-300Z0 and 25--30010, anyway the City of
Chanhassen, HRA ls belng named in those and my continuing questlon with what the
status of the Crossroads Plaza and the Crossroads Bank and whether or not those
assessments become a part of the purchase prlce or have already done so or what
the liability of those assessments are to the HRA and/or the new owners.
Councilman Johnson: Todd Gerhardt got married yesterday. He'd be the best one
to, and he decided not to come to work today just because he got married
yesterday. No big deal.
councilman Workman: Saturday he did.
Councilman Johnson: Saturday was it?
Councilman Workman: Yeah, and I just wanted for the record to ask the question
and then we can, slnce staff ls all out of town this week.
Mayor Chmiel: Maybe Gary can address those in general, Tom might answer your
question.
Gary Warren: It's my understanding that in general the surface agreements for
tile property have special assessment write doun as a part of that. The building
has to be bullt in order for that obviously to happen so that's the caveat as
far as the incentive for the property to be built on. There are various deals
that the HRA, Clty Council have negotiated on on each parcel and to know
City Council Heeting - August 27, 1990
specifically what exactly is in that contract we'll have to take a look at it.
Councilman Workman: Right. That's the concern so we're talking about several
hundred thousand dollars and so I'd like to know.
Gary Warren: I'll note that and we'll follow up on that.
Councilman Workman: Okay. I would move approval.
Councilman Johnson: Second.
Re~¢lutioq 190-104: Councilman Workman moved, Councilman 3ohnson seconded to
accept the Preliminary Assessment Roll and call for a public hearing for-the
following:
1. Downtown Redevelopment, Phase II, Project 8&-llB.
2. North Side Parking Lot, Project 87-17.
3. Lake Drive, TH 101 to CSAH 17, Project 88-22.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
6. WETLAND ALTERATION PERHXT TO CDNSTRUCT A WAL. KW.'~Y PATH THROUGH A CLflS$ A
WETLAND TO ACCESS A DOCK LOCATED AT 70.,1.~ SANDY HOOK CI"RCLE. CHRIS ENGEL FOR. THE
LOTUS LAKE BETTERHEN ASSOC:IATION.,
Councilman 3ohnson: I pulled 2(g) on general principle. The recommendation is
denial so I'll move denlal of the Wetland Alteration Permit. We've had
circumstances in the past when we approved the Consent Agenda and the
recommendation was a denlal and then the applicant came in and sald bls thlng
was approved when it was actually denied so it's clear this is a denial and so
I'm movlng denial.
Councilman Workman: Second.
Councilman 3ohnson moved, Councilman ~orkman ~econded to deny Wetland
Alteration Permit Request t89-1 to allow a 4' wide by 42' long crushed rock path
through the Class A wetland adjacent to Lotus Lake. All voted in favor and the
motion carried.
K. ACKNOWLED6E STATE ESTIHATED 1991 _LEVY LZHZT FOR CHANHASSEN. REOUTRES
ESTABLISHTNG OFFICTAL PUBLTC HEARING DATES,
Councilman Workman: We're acknowledging State estimated 1991 levy limit for
Chanhassen which I don't know if this is based on. I guess I didn't number one
dldn't want to miss the opportunity to say how once again sllly this all
Councilman Johnson: It's not as silly as last year.
Councilman Workman: We could basically say 20 mtlllon dollars or any number and
it doesn't make any sense and that's State government. Not doing for us like
we'd like them to do. However, the other mlnor polnt ls that if we approve
December 3rd and 10th as official budget public hearing dates, December 3rd
realistically with the Natlonal League of Cities conference, we'd be out of
City Council Neeting -- August 27, 1990
town. So maybe we can discuss this in the Council Presentations.
Hayor Chmiel: Okay. We can move that.
Councilman Workman: So do you want to just hold that? Hold 2(k)?
Mayor Chmiel: Why don't we. We'll put 2(k) under Council Presentations.
Everyone in agreement?
Councilwoman Bimler: Yes.
VISITORS PRESENTATIONS: None.
PUBLIC HEARING: STORM WATER UTILITY DISTRICTE ADOPT STORM WATER UTILITY
ORDINANCE.
PUBLIC ~R_~..SENT:
NAME ADDRESS
Tim Erhart
Don Patton
Gayle Degler
Al. Klingelhutz
Roman Roos
Conrad Flskness
Tim Bloudek
Mike K11ngelhutz
Clark Horn
775 West 96th Street
Lake Susan Hills Partnership
Lyman Blvd.
8600 Great Plalns Blvd.
10341 Heidi Lane
8033 Cheyenne Avenue
1171 Homestead Lane
8601 Great Plalns Blvd.
7608 Erie
Gary Warren: As Council's aware, we've been working since March to look at the
funding scenarto for trying to address the challenges that face the City as far
as meeting water quallty lssues. Trying to keep up with the development in the
City as far as development proposals and also providing, be ahead of the game as
far as acquisition of parcels of property for consolidating storm water
retention ponds and things of this nature. Also recognizing some of the
~pcomlng capltal expenditures that we are aware of from the varlous watershed
districts and as mandated by State Statute for complying with the Chapter 509
requirements for adoptlng a local watershed management plan. As a result of
thl~ effort and through several workshops, as you're aware and with public
information meetlng to receive lnput from the community and separate
questionnaire that was mailed out, we have fined tuned the document which is in
front of the Counc11 for publlc hearlng tonlght whlch basically presents storm
water utility concept proposal for fundlng the anticipated financial plans here
before the City whlch we're looking at for the next 5 years. Some of the
brlefly the highlights of the capital improvement program that are major
elements would be the identification of wetlands and wetland mapplng which
about a $55,000.00 element. The local surface water management plan that the
Clty needs to do in compliance wlth the State Statute's about a $135,000.00
item. Water quality plan, about $72,000.00 and we have a backlog which we've
estimated a backlog of construction for storm sewer improvements of about
$150,000.00 and future demands which we estimate at about $400,000.00.
total lt's about a 1.7 milllon dollar program and as was identified through the
City Council Meeting - August 27, 1990
preparation of the document, the current generaI operating fund of the City is
not capable of financing a program of that magnitude without hav£ng other
programs be shorted and the utiiity district concept which has been accepted now
by severai communities in the area, has been a concept that is the most direct
way of acquiring funds to deai and to dedicate them specifically to the purpose
for which they're required. Namely a storm water management. So the document
which has been prepared refIects this. The ordinance which is also in tonight's
packet for adoption reflects the utiiity rates which would be conincident with
the adoption of the utility program. So we have pIaced the proper notices in
the newspaper for hearing and this is the pubiic hearing to address pubIic Input
in that regard.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there any discussion from the audience? Anyone wishing
to address this specific item? Please state your name and address.
Tim Erhart: I'm Tim Erhart, 775 West 96th Street, Chanhassen. Honorable Mayor
and Council, I had the opportunity to get the proposal and for the first time I
feel a little bit like Eric Rivkin coming up here. So I hope I don't look that
way I guess and I don't want to ramble on and on but this is an issue that I
think it's important and it affects a lot of people here. I note that the
survey that went out only received a 4~ return so I don't know how valuable that
should be. I don't remember getting it-and most the people I talked to don't
remember seeing it. I think first I'd like to address the issue a little bit
about the philosophy of government and perhaps defend the proposal with that.
I've been on the Planning Commission for almost 4 years and as I sit in here
always amazed at how many times we see people, almost every meeting come in and
want their government to do something for them. Solve another problem and it
goes on and on and I know Paul and Gary and the Council as well start getting a
feeling that everybody wants them to solve everybody's problems in the city and
so you're expected to respond to that and I think given your situation and at
least get staff's situation probably respond with an equivalent proposal if I
was faced with all these people that wanted everything to be solved for them.
The problem I have with that philosophy is that it, and with this proposal is
that it takes away I think a lot of the emphasis on the individuals to solve
problems and puts it on the city. In the past we've solved water problems
through assessments and looking at specific cases and taking money out of the
general fund only when the individuals or a collection of small individuals
dealing directly with the problem weren't able to solve the problem. People
wonder then why taxes keep going up and up and up and up despite all the
politicians saying that they're keeping the same. It's because, part of the
problem is on us, the taxpayers as a whole, we keep wanting the government to
solve all the problems. It's just not practical. You know there's only a line
between us and what they're trying to get rid of eastern Europe and Sweden. You
know where do we draw our line? There's some things we can't solve. So that's
my little speech on philosophy. The other one, I have a little more philosophy
and that's control. Again, I watched for 4 years we slowly have tried to
control everything we do. I relate to specifically wetlands in that I've been
involved in the city when we've written and expanded on some of the most
stringent wetland protection ordinances in all the Twin Cities and in fact,
correct me if I'm wrong Paul, I think we're looked at as a model case in some of
the other cities. Of course what happens when we write these ordinances? We
tend to get more restrictive in our ordinances and some people, in fact most
people don't know about it and they do things that they never expect that are
City Council Meeting --August 27, 1990
against the law and then some of them get caught and it's all sad for us who try
to, who love wetlands because then we expect to go back and ask them to fix it.
Well, it's pretty difficult for someone to go back and repair a wetland. Put it
back to like it was and so the tendency has been to let's police it more. As
I've been in meetings and I see this proposal, we're spending energy and money
on policing. Okay, we're going to spend $55,000.00 on a mapping of wetlands so
that we know when someone is or isn't. And we're going to go out and twice a
year go and inspect every wetland so that we can see if anybody is doing
something. I just don't think we can afford that kind of policing and not only
that, I don't think people want people in their backyards twice a year
inspecting wetlands. And I see this whole thing sort of as the drug war in that
we're all against drugs and we're all for wetlands but ue haven't been able to
police the drug situation and get people to stop using drugs by throwing them in
jail and I think the wetlands thing is as much education as is it trying to go
and spend another $75,000.00 to pollce it and add more people. You know
part of a free society is that some people are going to make mistakes. We're
golng to lose a 11ttle wetland here. Something's golng to get damaged and we
deal with it at the time. Okay, I don't think we want to live in a society
where ue go out and pollce every wetland and everything every cltlzen does and
try to avoid every mistake. That's not realistic so. Let me address the
proposal itself. Some of the concerns I have. Yes, the objective ls to raise
more money. We call this thing a utility. The way I see it, it's because we
don't want to use those words tax increase. I think that stems all the way, for
the reasons I just stated, all the way from the federal government to our good
clty of Chanhassen. Z don't thlnk thls lsa utlllty at a11. It's a tax on
something that we have to deal with. Those things that we have to deal with
collectively and ~ don't have a problem with that and I'd be more than happy to
put my money in to solve water drainage problems and wetland problems we have to
solve collectively. Well let's call it what it ls. It's a tax lncrease and
what concerns me most about this, lt's a duplication of a tax ue already have.
It's a duplication of the admlnstratlon costs that we have associated wlth real
estate tax. That's what it is. Zt's a duplication of real estate tax and we
already pay for the admlnstratlon of that. The tax really lsn't based on water
drainage. It's basod on the type of real estate because you really can't
measure, you really can't accurately measure drainage. You have things like
credits for retained runoff. You've got credits for low lncome. Are we going
to be in the buslness in our admlnstratlon to decide who's got low income in
this city? ~ think we're stretching a little bit beyond what we want to tackle
here. You've got credlts for conservation program. People like me have to go
to every down at the ASCS to file for it to get a credit. Some more waste of
tlme and more waste of your tlme. More administration costs. All these credlts
just get decided by a staff committee. Z don't know about that. We have
appeals to the Counc11. Sounds 11kc a real estate tax to me. We have a revised
billing system. We have 10~ penalties and if we can't collect, ue add it to
your real estate tax. If you read the document so lt's a real estate tax. How
many people are we going to hire to administrate this thing? I look at the
numbers and Z'm sure you have and you can draw your own conclusions. Zt's more
than 1. Document suggests that the rates are flxed for 5 years yet when I reach
page 13, it states otherwise. I won't read it but it sure doesn't read that on
that page. Document says lt's fair. I think it's unfair. I think it's unfair
to the lot owners who have reimbursed the developers who have gone in and put
proper drainage system in according to the engineering department's
recommendations and our policies. ~t's unfalr to people who have gravel
City Council Meeting - August 27, 1990
driveways as opposed to asphalt driveways, guite frankly, if you choose to
elect this kind of a system, I think the example's pointed out in the document
of the clties where they put a flat rate on individual homeowners makes a lot
more sense than trying to measure runoff which I don't believe you can do.
Lastly, Z'd 11ke to deal wlth specifically my case and a few of the others in
the room here and that's dealing with agricultural property. I heard one fellow
called me this mornlng and was wondering if they were golng to pay for the clean
out of his agricultural drainlng system since that now would be tncluded in the
water runoff problem. I won't pose that question here but I think there's a lot
behind the question. On page 3, which I will read, basically it states. A
quarterly fee ls typically charged agalnst all developed parcels. It says to me
that then typically fees are not charged against agricultural or undeveloped
parcels. Later on on page $it says, we've established a $.50 per acre per
quarter fee for agricultural land and it sounds to me like it's an arbitrary
flgure the way lt's stated. For me that fee would be $240.00 a year. It's not
unlike other people that have agricultural land in the city. I find tt hard to
believe that Z should be paylng $240.00 a year to solve a problem that's
associated as the document says, with developed areas and people in the
developed areas are paylng approximately $20.00 a year. Lastly, I'd like to
just remind the Council that in 1987 I was involved in passing an ordinance that
precluded the development of agricultural property in the city of Chanhassen in
order to preserve that land until such time the MUSA line was extended and sewer
and water can serve them. Essentially we've taken away any potential for
economic gain until that time and I find it would be totally unfalr that at this
tlme that we would try to assess those landowners who can't develop now because
of a taking in the ordinance change, a utility fund associated with development.
So I thank you for my comments on that and ask that you consider those 1dews and
requests.
Mayor Chmiel: Thanks Tim. Is there anyone else that would like to address the
issue? As I mentioned, this is a public hearing. This is your opportunity to
come forward and express your opinions.
Oon Patton: My name is Don Patton. Oid the planning for the Lake Susan
development. The reason that I guess Z'm opposing it, you're really taxing the
Lake Susan Hili people twlce. In 1987 when we put the development together,
worked the PUD through staff and Counc11, we and if you'll look at what I've got
in my hand, we had Hickock do a water runoff plan which showed the ponding. I
know that Gary has got a copy of it and it's been a master document for what has
been done in Lake Susan. Sizing the ponds again affecting the water quality and
the quantities of water. Runoff. ! don't see why, we pald for it once. It's
been implemented. Why the people in Lake Susan would have to pay for it again.
So I would ask you to oppose or at least omit the people that have already paid
for it in the prloe of their house and the development we put together from
paylng for it agaln. Thanks.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Anyone else?
Gayle Degler: I'm Gayle Degler and we live at Lyman Blvd. We're the dairy
farmers in Chanhassen along with my folks on CR 17. I guess I have to be
agalnst this concept, or when you call ita utlllty, whatever because flrst of
all rainfall runoff, that's a natural event. We make it sound like this runoff
is all negative. Wlthout the runoff we wouldn't have our lakes, our streams and
City Council Meeting - Rugust 27, 1990
any of this other stuff. We need the runoff. What we don't want and what we're
trying to control_ is the man made runoff. Your streets. Your blacktops. Your
parking lots. Your big buildings. The man made runoff is what we're trying to
control and that obviously does need control, t. ike Hr. Patton said, some areas
of the city are already doing their job controll2ng it and Z don't agree with
th.ts double jeopardy in that way. Utility concept has been mentioned in a lot
of the Literature and in the paper and it makes ~t sound like other c~t~es have
already adopted this. Well, making a few phone calls Fridley, it's all storm
sewer utlllty. They're charglng storm sewer. Frldley ls 11beta1 enough, they
don't even charge vacant land and undeveloped land. They will charge them once
it's agaln belng used but if lt's vacant at the tlme or if lt's undeveloped,
they don't get any charge. Shakopee, agricultural land, no charge. Storm
sewer. Hgain, storm sewer. Bloomington. They don't have much in the 11ne of
agricultural land obviously but the land that they do have, it's only charged on
the percentage that uses the storm sewer. All these other clties have a utllity
concept but storm sewer utlllty. And I think the City of Chanhassen obviously
has some storm sewer and it does need maintenance. That's different than
charging a flat rate. The shot gun approach of charging everybody some
grandiose ldea. Storm sewer, obviously we need. It's hard to justlfy charglng
ag land. These prices get passed on. If I have a company, a buslness and
somebody charges me extra taxes, that just gets passed on in my product. In
agricultural, I don't set my prices and it's hard for me to pass that on.
Obviously we farm more land than we own so I'm golng to be paylng for the next
person's land that I'm renting. That is going to be paid by the person farming
the land and me as a farmer, I'm going to have to somehow justlfy that but I
can't add it onto the produce that I'm trying to sell. I'd like the opportunity
to compete wlth the dairy farmer in Chaska whlch lsa mlle away from my place.
He doesn't have to put up with that. He's got sewer and water going right
through hls property. We'd 11kw to be on an equal basis. I thlnk agricultural
land obviously doesn't need. We do maybe need a utility for storm sewer but not
this general broad base type approach. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there anyone else?
A1Klingelhutz: I'm A1Klingelhutz. I live in Chanhassen, Hinnesota. 8600
Great Plains Blvd.. Environmentally I think I'm as concerned as anybody in this
room but after reading through thls thlng here and seelng the costs involved, it
looks to me like a good 60% to ?0~ of it would be for consulting fees,
administration and collecting fees. I've read there's a $200,000.00 backlog in
storm sewer arrangements in the city. Z guess since day one when Z was on the
Counc11 and Hayor, anytlme a developer came in he had to come up wlth a storm
sewer plan. Put in ponds. Put in the storm sewer. All these things on his own
and they were all charged agalnst the person that bought the lot. ~ thlnk thls
ls what Hi-. Patton was referring to saying that these people would be put in a
double jeopardy. They already pald for it once and would have to pay for it
again. Z'm ~lso a 11ttle bit concerned that the last legislative session came
up with a ruling that the soll and water conservation dlstrict in each county
would be the lead agency in controlling storm runoff water. Z'm wondering if
there's been any connection wlth thls plan and soll and water up to thls polnt
in the saving of a lot of consultant fees. 14apping of wetlands and these
thlngs. Z'm also a 11ttle concerned about people who already had storm water
assessments hearings. Places that were put in prior to developer's having to do
thls work and Z know there's areas rlght in the old part of Chanhassen that have
City Council Meeting - Rugust 27, 1990
had a couple storm sewer assessments because there was no storm sewer put in at
the time of development. Are these people going to have to pay for somebody
else's storm sewer or are they going to be eliminated from paying again?
really feel that if the Council is thinking about passing an ordinance like
this, there should be a lot more input and a lot of checking with other units of
government that do have some control over these things. Like the Soil and
Water Conservation District Extension Committee. Carver County. Watershed
districts. They all have a little finger in each one of these things. I was up
to a State Health Board meeting last week from Wednesday until Friday evening
and there was one whole conference on storm water runoff. $o there's a lot of
different departments that are concerned about it and I think before ue run off
and pass an ordinance like this, rather than have a tot of overlapping, there
should be a lot more networking done with the other organizations that have been
doing some work on this also. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Ri. Is there anyone else?
Roman Roos: Good evening. I'm Roman Roos. I live at 10341 Heidi Lane. I can't
really address what's already been addressed. I think it's been well presented
to Council but I guess I have a real problem about being hit twice and I'm
speaking as a private citizen at this point in time. A good case example would
be Bluff Creek Road. It's a road that connects Pioneer Trail down to TH 212.
That road was put in. Curbs and gutters. B612 curbs and gutters. Storm sewer
running all the way down to control the surface runoff on Bluff Creek which is a
paved road now. We're grateful to have that. My assessment charge is about
$3,600.00 for that road. That road was assessed back to the individual abutting
property owners on Hesse Farm and the two farms running along Bluff Creek. We
sustained the full cost of that short of government funding some grant aid
dollars that we received. We were utlling to do that. That road is used by the
majority of people coming from Shakopee to Chanhassen via a shortcut up Bluff
Creek Road. I guess I don't have a problem paying my fair share but I have a
real problem when I get hit a second time as a private citizen. As a developer
in the City of Chanhassen, case in point would be, there's not a project in the
last 4 years I would assume that have not come under the control of the city
engineering. Gary Warren and his staff. They've done an admirable job but it's
a thing called sewer costs. Okay? Storm sewer. I'm in the process right now
of getting hit on a storm sewer, second phase on a 4 acre parcel in the Chan
Lakes Business Park. It's going to hit me some $57,000.00. Now you're going to
tell me on that 4 acres, besides paying for the full cost of my prorata share of
that storm sewer, I also have to now pay a surface useage charge. I can't
believe it. I just think it's totally unfair both to the private citizen and to
the developer. Thank you very much.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Roman. Anyone else?
Conrad Fiskness: I'm Conrad Fiskness. I'm President of the Riley-Purgatory-
Bluff Creek Watershed District and I'm a resident of Chanhassen living on 8033
Cheyenne Rvenue in Chanhassen Estates as well. It's rather interesting having
seen the articles in the paper and listen to the discussion here tonight, the
issue of water is one that I've heard in many different forums Just in this
year. Zt's an issue which we're going to hear a lot more of and there's going
to be a lot more struggles and there's a lot of effort to get involved in,
especially in terms of control of water resource, not only in this state but in
City Council HeetiTig - August 27, 1990
the whole nation. Water is going to be a major' problem whether you're in State
or County or City er whatever have you. I've had my own tangles wlth the Met
Councll on this subject already and I'm expect lng a few more. As a
representative of the Watershed 01strict, quite frankly we as a board have not
had an opportunity to really see what you folks are proposing. Z did have a
copy of a newspaper article which I had at our last meeting and we talked
briefly about lt. Obviously that dldn't have information in detall so we dldn't
really get into any indepth discussion. On the basis of what knowledge we do
have of these types of utllties, we are assumlng that what you would be dolng
and our discussion I guess did have some assumptions like this. One is it, the
deslgn of what you are proposing probably would go beyond the watershed
di:strict's activities in terms of water management and we would not be expecting
that what you're dolng would be a duplication of watershed activities that have
already taken place and it would be, at least my assumption that what you're
looklng at is I guess what lt's referred to in the trade as a detalled lnterlor
system design. If that is correct. Then we would basically, I guess I'm here
to say then that whatever you choose to do, and if you do choose to go ahead,
that the watershed distrlct wants to make it clear that any information that we
have, any work that we have done. Anythlng that's in our file, we would be
certainly not only willing but we feel both obligated and eager to share
whatever work we have done that our flles are obviously available. They are
public property anyway but I just want you to be aware that we would make those
available to you and offer whatever expertise and assistance that we can should
the city of Chanhassen choose to do this.
Hayer Chmiel: Thank you Conrad. Is there anyone else7
Tim Bloudek: Good evenlng. I'm Tim Bloudek, 1121 Homestead Lane and I mu~t
admit I'm not very well educated on thls whole proposal other than the fact that
theru are a few polnts that are a little bit of concern to me. I'd 11ke to ask
you a questlon if Z could. Somebody stated that communities have adopted thls
typo of utility plan~ What communities are there? Are those that adopted that
Mayor Chmiel: Gary, would you like to address that?
Gary Warren: Most recently the City of Eagan has done it. The City of
Roseville. The Clty of St. Louls Park. PlymoLtth. Shakopee. St. Paul.
Councilman 3ohnson: Those are the local ones. Throughout the country there's
others. Seattle has had one for about 5 years now.
Tinl Bloudek: Okay. A couple of people that had addressed or had contacted some
of the~e other cltie9 talked about the rural areas, that they were exempt a few
other thlngs. Z ].1ye Zn a what I guess would be called a rural residential area
and so far I don't see any benefits to utilities that the Clty provides. We
have no city water. No city sewer. About the only thing we do have is
underground electrical utilities and telephone. That's about lt. $o I really
derive very little benefit from city serv£ces other than we do have fire
protection but lt's pumper trucks and that type of thlng which means my
insuYances are higher and that type. So Z'm not rea]. excited about additional
taxes. Also I see one of the items for capltal expenditures would be the
backlog of construction projects and future construction projects of which Z
10
City Council Meeting - August ~7, L990
assume I won't have any benefit again but again I wouId be paying a tax
probabIy, and I agree with whoever stated before, this is a tax. It's another
form of tax so I would prefer to caii it that, I don't see any benefit nor
wouId my neighbors see a benefit yet we would be paying a higher assessment or
tax than anyone eisa that would iive within the city that wouid have access to
storm sewer and that type of thing so I guess I'd just I£ke to be on record as
saying I'm opposed to some type of special taxation and I'd just as soon see
that lumped into the reai estate taxes which is what I think somebody else
brought that up also. That it is a form of reai estate tax. Why should we
dupIicate again the expenditure of adminstrating that? Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Tim. Is there anyone else?
Mike Klingelhutz: Mike Klingelhutz, 8601 Great Plains Blvd.. I have a copy of
the plan here and I had a chance to look at it quite extensively. It's going to
generate a lot of money and a lot of money is going to be spent on consulting
hydrologists and it looks like they're going to try and ease the burden on that
engineering and adminstrative department but I don't think that the way they're
spendlng the money lsn't going to really help to do much for our already
identified problems in the lakes like Lake Susan. I don't think that they went
about this and thought of their objectives before they made, they came up wlth a
utility concept. I'd like to see them look more at, you know create a list of
objectives and then see if enactlng a storm water utility meets or helps to meet
those objectives. Objectives like keeping Eurasian Milfoil out of lakes.
Keeping susceptible winter kill lakes from dylng out every other year.
Educating the people on non-point pollution. Stuff like that. I'd like to see
a list of objectives just there ls one or I'd like to see one made before thls
ls enacted. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Anyone else?
Clark Horn: Clark Horn, 7608 Erie Avenue. I think what you're talking about
considering here lsa long standlng pollcy in the clty of Chanhassen. I think
whenever you do that you have to take a careful look at what you're changing and
why things were put in place the way they were. This method of assessing storm
water runoff has been in place probably since before A1 was on the City Council
and it's worked in the past and I think the gentleman is right. You're talktng
about another tax. You're talklng about administering it and you're only
looking at one aspect of this thing. What comes next? Street assessments?
Will those be put on a basis like this? I think you've taken one aspect out of
this and you're looking at it. You really have to study the whole philosophy
and assessment policy. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Clark. Anyone else? If not, can I have a motion to
close the public hearing?
Councilwoman Oimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to close the public
hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was
closed.
Mayor Chmiel: Jay, do you want to start off?
Councilman Johnson: I've been one of the original people pushing for this in
11
City CouncJ.]L Meeti~g ,- August 27, 1990
that there's a ]Lot of things going on in this city in storm uater that needs
some central coordination. We have Lake Susan HtJ.]Ls doing their storm uater
plan. Saddlebrook doing their's. This next development doing their's and they
.took at a microcosm. They look at on]Ex their development and uhat's happening
uith.tn their development. Not uhat's happening uith£n the uhole city. We need
to be able to pu]L]L a]L]L these plans and the developments uit~ continue doing
these plans and they'l]L continue paying for their storm uater. Z like a~l the
shaking heads but ue have to have Lt. The developers uil]L continue paying to
uork a storm uater plan but no~ uith this, ue'11 be able to integrate it into a
city storm uater plan. Not just a site specific storm uater plan. It's
something that the uatershed district uants us to do. The State uants us to do
and eventually ue're going to have to do it anyuay. Whether ue take it out of
property taxes, uhich many people things a regressive tax. Or uhatever. ~ lot
of people, the higher priced house ends up paying a lot more than lo,er priced
house for the same utility. People say ee don't have a storm uater utility.
WeLt uhat Ss everything out there? We have a storm uater utility. We just
don't have operating fees }ike ue do for our uater utility or electric utility
or seuer ut~tj, ty. We have fees for tl~ose. We pay for maintenance of them.
There's no fees to pay for maintenance of our storm uater facility at this time.
than Pond out here is f~lting up uith sediment from a storm uater drain that uas
put in under a development that uas supposed to do it right and it didn't go
l'ight and nou ue're goi~g to have to dredge out that pond eventually. BuiLding
a neu delta in there. There's no money to do that ill the budget. We could do
~t on a general property taxes but then again ue're charging more because of the
uay propel'tx taxes are in this, the higher price of your house, the more you
pay. So the gu>, uJ. tha $200,000.00 pays 4 times as much as I do for the exact
same service uhere his house probably doesn't contribute to the storm uater
system any more than mine. That's uhy T l.tke the ftater rate personalty than,
it's c]Loser to people representative to uhat they're getting. Z'm not too sure
Z'm too uj. td about 50 cents an acre on the agricultura~ land. That's a tittle
much for the large agricultural tracts. But agricuJtural also does contribute
to storm uater and [o the pollution going into Lake Susan. Non-point source, as
.it has been brought out tonight, ue need more money to address that. The State
~ays you have to address non-point source pol]Lution. Where's the money State?
We have to address ~t but there ain't no money from the State to te~l us. They
just tell. us ue have to address .(t but ue have to get the money someuhere to
address non-point source pollution. Dairy farms, they have pollution. The cous
aren't al]L potty trained. Thoy have a high BOB coming off and then the
modern, .T.'m not sure about our ~oca~ dairy farm here, uhether they have all the
control systems that they have to put on the modern farms. The neu dairy farms
uith the settling tanks and everythXng else for the cous for the milking barn.
I tike the ]L~st of obJect,yes. We've heard a lot of objectives that our staff
uants as far as, Z just don't see it presented here. Z think there is a list.
We can co~e up uith a ]List but I think, there's another misconception I kept
hearing tonight uas ue're going to use this to build storm seuers in
developments or, that's not the purpose of th$s. When somebody makes a
development, they bui_ld their oun storm seuer for that development, lit becomes
part of the city utility just ]Like they put ~n seuers. They put in the
uatermains. The uhole bit. They pay for that uhen they make their development.
But then after those uti]LiLies go in, there's no more fees for use of those
uti.liLies. The storm uater uti]Lity. That's the story of mx comments.
Mayor Chmiel: That's about it.
12
City Council Meeting - August 27, 1990
Councilwoman Di$1er: Can I go next?
Mayor Chmiel: Sure. Be my guest.
Councilwoman Dimler: I happened to save my agenda from the City Council meeting
on May 9th and I don't know why we didn't have the Minutes from that because at
that polnt I guess I'd 11kw to clarify that I was not one of the ones that
wanted in any way to pursue this. I really don't know where it came from but it
was presented to us at the time and so my comments at that time were, that this
is a tax. We have to make sure that everyone knows that we're increasing taxes
here but ! was willing to study it more carefully only with the following
conditions and that was that we address water quality and not just ways to move
water along. I see nothlng in thls final report that addresses water quality.
The quality of the runoff. We're not saying anythlng about fertilizing lawns.
Educating the publlc as to that running off into our lakes. We're not saylng
anything about the present condition of our lakes. We're not going to use that
money to clean them up. Even if you get the purest water to run in from now on,
our lakes st111 need to be cleaned up. It just is not going to take care of
ltself. Also I wanted to find ways to educate the publlc as to flnd ways to
conserve water. That would be sanitary. Okay. Anyway, and I think some of the
polnts that have been made here tonlght, [ dldn't want that we increase
personnel and I think the report indicates that we would be increasing personnel
to monitor and manage. I see it as an admlnstratlve headache. ! see more work
for the Council. Perhaps to the point where everyone would be coming in for
adjustments and ue would need another Board of Adjustments just to handle
everyone's concerns. I think it's hard to correlate the fees to the benefits
and although I see credits and exemptions that are allowed for special cases, tt
is up to the property owner to justify the fee adjustment. I think it's hard
enough for the engineers to flnd the beneflt and much less for the property
owner to come in and prove the benefit. So my intention would be to vote
agalnst thls.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Tom?
Councilman Workman: I don't know, we're graced with a lot of big voices from
the community tonight. It's big if A1 Klingelhutz comes out. I'm interested in
what Father Barry has to say about thls. I think a lot of the goals that we're
trying to accomplish in this plan, I don't know that I'm ready to vote agatnst
it tonlght or for it. It's obvlous to me that there's a lot of different things
that we need to still shake out. I see Gary writing over there franticiy but
there's a lot of really good comments from everyone. It really would seem to me
that a lot of this really came out of, and Gary you can tell me if I'm wrong,
out of the Frontier Trail update where there was an argument about well,
actually the storm water system that they had' on that beat up old road was
actually adequate and they had already done it so they didn't want to be
assessed again so Council was kind of concerned about where that money was going
to be comlng from and then potentially how many more Frontier Trails would we
have in the future where we'd have to assess people, which I think is probably
the number one thlng Council least likes to do is assess people. Am [ sort of
correct?
Gary Warren: I would say Frontier Trail is a classic example of the challenges
13
City Council Meeting - August 27, 1990
that we're faced as fat- as funding improvements of this nature but I think it
would be a wrong impression to imply that it was because of Frontier Trail that
we said that we needed a district. We have been thinking all along based on the
request that we get for fighting Eurasian Water Milfoil, wetland mapping and the
other things to come up with a funding source to address the things that we saw
coming. The water quality plan that ue had in the program here is one element.
The state mandated 509 local plan that Mr. Fiskness referenced that we're going
to have to do. Those really have been things that we've been watching the
statutes and see them coming and since they're big ticket items said, well this
is a funding source that directly approaches the money for those particular
improvements. So Frontier Trail is a classic example.
Councilwoman Oimler: Could I just interrupt here? The people on Frontier Trail
are still being assessed. They were assessed once and they're being assessed
again with the redoing improvement. Are you saying that in the future we could
use that money to not assess people as we do their road improvements and storm
water improvements?
Councilman Workman: Just the storm water portion.
Cour, ciluoman Oimler: But you would do it along with the road right?
Gary Warren: Typically that's the way we do it. The real interest, and it's a
very important distinction. Some of the comments that we heard tonight are the
fact that the utility fund in no way, shape or form is intended to pre-empt any
developer from paying his fair share for the construction of improvements. It
does provide the city a little more discretion, flexibility to deal with some of
the more difficult problems. If you imagine trying to go back into Carver
Beach, which is very delinquent in storm sewer. Having very little of it and we
deal with it almost every week in trying to work out drainage issues with
particular property owners. To try to assess a project of that magnitude, it
will just be a nightmare and so it provides I think more flexibility to the City
to try to implement some necessary projects that can have very significant water
quality impacts when you look at the relation say to Lotus Lake.
Councilwoman Oimler: So at that point you would make the decision to use it for
that p:~rticular, use the fund for that particular project? It's at your
discretion?
Gary Warren: It would be brought to the Council on a particular basis like we
do with any other improvement project to lay up funding proposals and similar to
Carver Beach. I'm sorry, to Frontlet Trail, where we said we have street
improvements and we have storm sewer improvements and here's what we think is
reasonable for clty general obligation participation. Here's what we think ls
reasonable from a special assessment standpoint. So we would follow those
guidelines pretty similarly.
Councilman Workman: So there's the dilemma I guess. We have the dilemma of
wanting, we've had many discussions here on Lake Lucy and lt's uncleanliness, l
don't know. I guess a lot of thls ls what we're talking about yet we're not
really specifically talking about it. As Mike Klingelhutz mentioned, some of
the objectives, the thlngs that we can really polnt to and say thls ls what we
want to do or this is where we're going to start or this is a wish list of
14
City Council Meeting - August 27, 1990
things that we want to do with the $1.7 million over the next 5 years would
maybe give us, who have simpler minds an idea about exactly what we're going to
do. so I guess that's why I say I'm not ready to vote against it but I'm not
ready to vote for it perhaps because I'd like to learn a little bit more about
some of these concepts. I hear reoccuring theme of taxation and it's a tax.
Call it a tax and that makes me very nervous. There's something of a slippery
slope there. I would definitely like to see a sunset clause in this to say that
in 5 years it will end unless Council approves to carry it out for another 5
years or however that would work to give the Council's in the future, in 1995 an
opportunity to re-evaluate the process a little easier. That's really all I had
for now.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thanks. Some of the things that are contained in there too
indicate what those annual rates can be reviewed on a yearly kind of basis as
well. I too get a little hesitant. Number one, tax as you've already sald.
I don't want this to be a sort of fund raiser for the City. I don't see where
we should be the ones to come up wlth the amount of dollars. I have some real
concerns about it. One of the things too, even in that May memo that we had or
Counc11 agenda. It was indicated in there that Eagan City Council's expecting
to adopt a storm water utility district. Have they done that as yet?
Gary Warren: Yes.
Mayor Chmiel: They did? Okay.
Gary Warren: And a water quality management plan.
Councilwoman Dimler: They have a plan. That's what I wanted.
Gary Warren: We do have a budgeted plan element in this.
Mayor Chmiel: Have we reviewed their proposal to see a comparison to what our's
ls?
Gary Warren: We at this time were not provided with a copy of it so I haven't
specifically gone through it, no.
Mayor Chmiel: I guess I'm not in a position right now to say let's can it.
I guess I'm in a position to say let's look at this thing a little further.
Let's study ita 11ttle further. Let's look and see what these total flgures
really mean. I'd like to see maybe something from Mr. Oegler's area to see what
assessment costs would be for him. I'd 11ke to know what lt'd be for
Klingelhutz'. Some residential individual units. Some of the commercial
properties and under some of these land uses, as ! say, we're coverlng parks.
Some broad spectrum. Ooes that also include the City of Chanhassen?
Gary Warren: Yes sir.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Z'd 11ke to see a few other thlngs brought into proper
perspectus before I think we should even consider adopting this at this time.
Gary Warren: The speclfic ordinance ltself, because that was a separate
revision here to the report and it's contained in the Council packet, does
15
City Council Med.;ting --August 27, 1990
provide up to an 80A credit. I think Tim Erhart referenced this earlier for the
agricultural properly and undeveloped property if they can document that they
have an implemented soll conservation service program so we were trylng to
address the public. Put tile concerns that were presented to staff here
throughout the development process here. The agricultural and undeveloped
parc~-;ls represent about 4~ of the total revenue package that is currently shown
in the document. The ordinance also in contrast to the document ltself, when we
looked at the ordinanc,;, I didn't feel comfortable with locking rates for 3 to 5
or the proposal so ue set the ordinance up to have the fees and the annual
budget reviewed on an annual basis witl~ the City's annual budgetary program
because Z thlnk that there are needs out there. There are studies that have to
be done to more specifically identify them and tile proposal that has been put
together has been put together ulth a lot of thought and revlew of our current
land use but until we get into some of the specifics and are able to study this
system a 11ttle blt more, there needs to be that flexibility to annually take a
look at this program a~ it develops to see that it isn't an albatrose so to
speak and lt's effectively addressing the interest of the city.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. As I see our growth going and constantly population counts
comlng up, I guess Z would 11ks to try to adhere to the practlce of not hiring
someone just to study or to take over this particular aspect of what we're
proposing here. Zf, and some calculations were made too and ~ thlnk A1 made the
statement that 60~ of that would be for fee of ~taff rather than put back into
the proper use and that's another thing that sort of disturbs me a 11ttle
bit. So with that I would.
Councilwoman Dimler: Could I j,~st ask?
Hayor Chmiel: sure.
councilwoman Dimler: Can you address, were you planning to hire some new people
to administer and monitor?
Gary Warren: Actually we have a need prior to this funding. In fact the
engineering department had been looking to acquire a storm water drainage
englneer and a portlon of hls salary would be funded out of thls fund. There are
some additional adminstrative costs just for implementing the program of about
$12,000.00 because we wlll be addlng several parcels onto our utlllty bulldlng
and such but that's pretty nominal. So that wasn't going to take any staff
additlon on the part of the utlllty adminstratlon end of it but storm water
drainage engineer lsa person that's specialty we're looking to establish here
to help us ulth a vlew of the proposals from the developers as well as to get
our handlo on a comprehensive nature of ~his whole system.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, so part of his salary would come out of this. Where
would the rest come from?
Hayor Chmiel: The budget.
Councilman Johnson: Developers.
Councilwoman Dimler: So we're increasing the budget?
City Council Meeting - August 27, 1990
Gary Warren: It'd be a combination of probably the Adminstrative Trust Fund.
Councilwoman Dimler; I guess one of my concerns with the budget shortfall that
we'd be cutting the budget and not increasing it. I think we need to look at
that real carefully. Also, getting back to Mr. Erhart's concern. You know he
testified to the fact that yes we can get credits and yes but it takes him a day
off of work. It takes everybody a day off of work and to go down to some
authority and to prove your point and I know what kind of headache that is.
Even though we're making conditions available for them to do it, it is just,
it's a headache for the public to go through.
Councilman Workman: But we don't deny that there are storm water, I mean we're
going to have to pay for some of thls somehow, someway though. We all
understand that and.
Councilwoman Dimler: Well I guess I don't because I thought if the developer
pays and then the people get assessed so they paid once. If you improve it,
they pay agaln through assessments so they're paying'and we're not improving the
quality of the runoff. That's my main point. If we were doing that, I could
see some of thls but we're not.
Gary Warren: The statement is accurate that developers pay to install storm
sewer systems and retention ponds and such when the developments are flrst
installed. But that's it. After that the maintenance of wood skimmer basins
which go through abuse through frequent freeze and thaw. cycles. The removal of
sediments out of these retention basins that, if you're going to have them
working right, you've got to be committed to removlng the sediments. Removal of
sediments out of the City's catch basin inlets. We talk about getting a handle
on our actual quallty, the degregatlon of the lakes and where we are in that
element. Those things aren't funded.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, where are those things beind paid for right now?
Out of what fund?
Gary Warren: Right now it's being done through a combination of the public
works staff. From primarily the street department which would be out of the
general fund and at this polnt in time staff, there's not enough staff to
address those specific repairs except on basically an emergency basis. We've
got 4 men in the street department.
Councilwoman Oimler: So you're increasing staff there as well?
Gary Warren: We wouldn't be increasing staff at this time with this proposal
but certainly is an element of the program that is a necessary part of the
puzzle. It's the on-golng maintenance that's really being sacrificed at this
point in time.
Councilman Johnson: As each of these developments put in a lot of small little
ponds, as we have in the past, and now we're talking about doing a
comprehensive, ls it lower maintenance to have a more comrepehensive system with
some larger facilities and integrated facilities versus? 'I know some of the
facilities you've got to go through people's yards. You can only get in there
in the winter with your big trucks. You have to have the ground frozen and
stuff 11kw that.
17
City Council. Hosting -- August 27, 1990
Gary Warren: There's economy of scale, there's no question about it but there's
also another .tml~ortant element and that is the water quality ability of a larger
pond is much more significa,t than smaller ponds. You can take a large pond and
get enough capacity so ~hat you have good retention time and your ability to
sett~e out so.lids and allow for the volatization of the nutrients, you can do a
~ot better job of treating the water. There's no question about that. ~nd Neat'
Mountain is maybe a good example. You're eluding to our access challenges in
our ponds up Jn that area. The larger pond's to be ahead of development to
acquire property so that we can have these larger facilities instead of running
around with ~0 small ones. I think there are definitely some economies to be
had.
Council. woman Dimler: But the developers still pays for the pond that's in the
development contract?
Gary Warren: Right. This does not preclude the developer paying.
Councilwoman Oimler' So we're not using this money to make.
councilman Workman: I'd move to table.
councilman Johnson: Second.
Hayer Chmiel: It's been moved and seconded. Any more discussion? Hike, you
wanted to make a point. I'll give you a quick minute.
Hike KlJngelhutz.' I just have one comment. Regarding the agricultural land.
For us farmers to comply with ASCS requiremen[s and gather the credit, if this
is enacted, lt's golng to cost us several thousand dollars in new equipment.
We're basically going to have to retool. No till planter. No till drill.
mean that stuff's not cheap.
Hayer Chmiol: Yes. We understand that. Okay, thanks.
Councilwoman Dimler: Could I ask a question here? I would vote in favor of the
tabling under one condition and that would be that when I approved the
preliminary report, I had asked that these concerns be addressed and yet the
final r~port came back without that. Now if we were concerned that Eagan had
done such a good job, why wasn't there a goal as to improving water quality that
Eagan had? You k,~ou that should have already been in the fina], report.
Mayor Chmiel-' There were some of your questions that you had...
councilwoman Oimler: I don't want to keep studying it and putting more money
into the study if we aren't golng to see these purposes clearly stated.
Gary Warren: Just so I understand, the 5 year capital improvements program
which I've addressed the water qLtallty plan and monetary programs as a part of
that ls not what you're looking for.
Councilwoman Dimler: Yes, because in the article here that was in the paper,
Eagan clearly sald that the whole system is for water quality management not
18
City Council Meeting - August 27, 1990
just runoff and we're not addressing that.
Councilman 3ohnson: It's in there.
Gary Warren: Page 10 of the report we have $72,000.00 budgeted for water
quality.
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah but you're not saying specifically how you're going
to do it. That's the difference.
Gary Warren: Well the scoping those documents obviously takes time and effort
as well. We have attempted here to establish the goals and objectives. The key
elements of the program where we saw expenditures necessary but the refinement
of those programs similar to, we're not doing Chapter 509 plan either which is
$135,000.00 estimate. Those would be things that will be funded and developed
as a result of these programs.
Councilwoman Dimler: Could you get a copy of the Eagan?
Gary Warren: We certainly will do that.
Mayor Chmiel: What I don't want to do is spend one heck of a lot more dollars
on this particular proposal either. We do have a budgetary shortfall and I
don't want to spend any more dollars than is absolutely necessary or keep...
Councilman Workman moued, Councilman 3ohrmon seconded to table adopting the
storm water utility ordinance for further study. Al1 voted in fauor and the
motion carried unanimously.
ENFORCEHENT OF WATER SURFACE USEAGE ORD~ AND 3ET SKI UPDATE.
Mayor Chmiel: Being that Scott Hart is not able to be here this evening because
he had some car problems in Hutchinson. Hls car broke down and unfortunately he
was coming home from vacation. That's my story. Maybe Gary can address this
just briefly.
Gary Warren: I'll paraphrase, if I can be allowed, his August 8, 1990 update to
the City Manager. Basically Mr. Hart addresses the response, to just update the
Counc11 on actlons that have been taken in enforcing these regulations on jet
skis. The following actions have been taken. One, he's met with the Carver
County Sheriff's Department, Water Patrol Division to request aggressive
enforcement of the Jet Ski regulations. Two, he's met with State of Minnesota
DNR Conservation offlcers assigned to the area requesting their assistance in
the enforcement of the regulations. Three, he's met wtth the Park and Rec
Department here to retain their assistance in educating gate attendants as to
the applicable laws and how to respond to witnessed violations. And four,
educational efforts have been initiated through the local newspapers and he has
offered any assistance to the Sheriff's Department and the DNR as far as our
CSO's assisting. However, he's qualified that from a liability standpoint it
didn't seem prudent to have our CSO's on a solo basis actually being in
watercraft and enforcing it so. He's recelved positive responses and he ls
bringing this up on an upcoming Public Safety Commission meeting.
19
City Council Meeting - August 27, 1990
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Anyone else wishing to address this at this
particular time?' Any discussion from Council?
Councilman Workman: So is it successful so far?
Jacie Hurd: I can tell you. It's been reasonably successful... The first
weekend after our meeting, both the DNA and the Sheriff were out on the lake
which was wonderful. The unfortu,ate part is that a lot of the weekend, the
weather was fairly terrible. The good news is they were there. The bad news is
nobody else was there. But you know...
Mayor Chmiel: Why don't you come up to the microphone and please indicate your
n~me.
Jacie Hurd: My name is Jacie Hurd and I live at 6645 Horseshore. I'd also, we
had asked in our original, petition that some sort of education, flyer or
something be sent citywide and we'd still like to push for that before next
year. Maybe sometime toward the end of tile winter, early spring.
Mayor Chmiel: I agree to a certain point with that but I think the main access
to that area is to hand it out to the people going in wlth those specifics
because I find that every time I've checked it out, the people using Jet Skis oll
that lake are not from Chanhassen. I've done it several different times and I
don't see the sense in sendlng out throughout the clty but I do see givlng them
dlrectly at the access point.
Jacie Hurd: Well that'd be alright too. Just if we can, I think if we can get
head start on the season next year and start it early when the problem is
really more acute certainly than it ls now.
Mayor Chmiel: Ha,d it to them and say, these are tile rules. This is what the
requirements are on thls lake. You have to adhere to lt.
Jacie Hurd: And I think also, to further that, if again not only the Jet Skis
out there but some motorboats are lnsane.
Mayor Chmiel: Right.
Jacie Hurd: Thank you very much.
Mayor Chmiel: I don't think there's any action that's required on that
particular 1rem.
SITE PLAN AHENDHENT FOR EXPANSION OF THE PARKING AREA WEST TO LOTUS GARDEN
CENTER, 18930 WEST 78TH STREET, REDXOND PRODUCTS.
Mayor Chmlel: Item 5 has been requested to be removed by Redmond. It will be
coming back on a later agenda.
2O
City Council Meeting - August 27, 1990
PLANNED UNIT DEUELOPHENT FOR THE DEVELOPHENT OF A LIBRARY/ANNEX/RESEARCH CENTER..
EXPANSTON OF THE EDUCATTON CENTER AND A RETIREMENT COHPLEX~. NORTH OF WEST 78TH
STREET AND EAST OF GREAT PLAINS BLVD., ST. HUBERT'S CHURCH.
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, the appIicants are requesting approval to construct an
expansion of the St. Hubert's Church facility. The plan calls for construction
of new relocated classroom space, an interconnected senior housing component
offering 24 apartments with attached underground parking and some internal
renovation and reallocation of space around the church is envisioned as well.
We believe the concept is a fairly innovative one that would combine the church,
housing and school into a community setting clustered around an open courtyard
area. Due to the mix of uses being proposed, the need to rezone some of the
underlying parcels which currently have a mix of zoning, and the need to work
with a site that's located in an older part of the community that really was
never developed in conjunction or in coordination with the City ordinances that
exist today, staff is recommending that a PUD approach be utilized since it
offers increased flexibility for the church plus increased control for the City
over what is actually built on the ~ite. In general ue believe the plan is well
designed and note that at the present time only concept plan approval is being
requested. Under the PUD program a development comes through first for concept
review where any kind of gross problems are indicated and whether or not the
City Council ~ould act favorably upon the formal PUD request is indicated.
Formal plan submittals, if this thing stays on track, would be reviewed before
the Planning Commission and the City Council late September, early October. We
believe that the plan is architecturally attractive and creative. A couple of
boards have been prepared. The architect I believe is present tonight and can
describe this further. We believe the architecture fits in rather well and
compliments and in fact improves a lot of respects the existing building. It's
fairly low scale consistent with the fact that this is located in a single
family neighborhood and ue think the design, while this is a large facility, the
design attempts to make it as unobtrusive as possible. A new access point would
be provided for schoo! buses on West 78th Street. That is indicated on the plan
as the horseshoe shaped access. There will also be a new access on Frontier
Trail for the underground parking lot and for a few surface parking stalls.
Parking was one of the major issues for staff in ~orking with church officials
on this program. The new apartments, the plan's been revised by the way. The
new apartments will be provided uith[ stall for each unit underground. Before
we were short Z or 2 stalls. The plan's been revised to accommodate that and
there will be some new surface parking proposed for visitors as well. While we
need to work out some of the final details, we're also looking at the
possibility of constructing some additional, and you'll have to bear uith me
because...of constructing some bump outs sort of what you see on the Lake
Calhoun Parkway. The kind of thing along Frontier Trail. Hopefully that can be
accommodated without impacting any of the trees and it would provide some on
street parking without blocking the street. We're going to work with the
applicant and the City Engineering department to see if that's going to be
feasible. We believe it probably is. One of the advantages though to this type
of development is that the senior housing generally requires a much lower
parking demand than normal market rate housing. Many of the people who will be
living there will either have 1 car or no cars. There will be some benefit in
that they can interact with the church and the school without having to utilize
a car. We also note that while ue acknowledge that the church itself has a
parking shortfall during services, that this development won't make it any worse
21
City Council Meeting - August 27, 1990
and indeed there are several projects around the community that are probably
improved on that with the reconstruction of parking lots the City's been
involved with on neighboring properties. Issues regarding drainage remain to be
worked out. We do have the concern for how the project would drain into the
existing storm sewer system. We've asked the developer or the church in this
case, to provide us with additional detailed informatio, developed by an
engineer so that we can work out those details before final submittal. We also
are looking for final landscaping and tree preservation details. The Planning
Commission reviewed this item on August 1st, They recommended it's approval
asking that more effort be put into recreational provisions of the plan and
asking that refinements be made to the parking as they are possible and as I've
already indicated, there have been some refinements to that. With that ue are
recommending approval of the PUD concept plan and really have an expectation
that should you approve it tonight, we couId work with the applicant in
producing a plan for formal submittal. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Paul. One of the things that I noted through here is
that lt's purely concept plan yet the parking availability for handicapped be
there and also the accessibility into that building. I know that there's an
elevator proposed for that as well. I just want to make sure that those aspects
are all covered.
Paul Krauss: Yes sir. As you noted, there is an elevator that will go down to
the parklng garage and uill serve the sen£or apartments. ~ believe other
portlons of the bulldlng uill be ramped and the architect can provlde additional
detail.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is the applicant wishing to address anything on what Paul
has o;' has not said? Father Barry, do you want to?
Father Barry: ...addressed at the Planning Commission. We have addressed the
...parking lot and there has been concern about safety and that would be handled
by blocklng to the entrances if they so deslred. Z have a letter here which
may, from the Principal, saying that it's adequate and safety... He's been the
Principal for 2 years and been uslng it for 15 years without inoldent but if the
Commission and Council would ask that we...traffic out by sawhorses or pylons or
some type... Paul, I'll give that letter from the Principal to you later.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Is there anyone else wishing to address the
particular concept?
Eugene Burke: Mr. Hayor, Councilmembers. Hy name is Eugene Burke. I live at
1892 Lincoln Avenue in St~ Paul. I'm a clinical psychologist licensed by the
State of Hinnesota. I'm the President of Prlmary Executive Consultants, a flrm
that offers psychological consultation to business and organizations and
government unlts and I'm the President elect of the upper Mlduest dlvlslon of
the American Association for Harriage and Family Therapy. It's the organization
for 11censed and professional famlly therapists. I rlse to address the issue of
the proximity of housing for the elderly and children on a playground.
I noticed in the hearing on August 1st that somebody mentioned some concern that
the older folks may not like the nolse that would be generated by the
youngsters. The research that I'm famlllar wlth wlth the elderly would slmply
contradict that hands down. It's well known that the elderly feel, as do young
22
City Council Meeting - August 27, 1990
people, powerless and sometimes useless and so they have a great deal in common
and they find the community of so~ls with eaoh other. 01der people feel more
vltal when they're around chlldren or even anlmals for that matter. Anything
that's alive and vital and young. I predict that if the older people are £n
those apartments durlng thelr recess times, they'd be at the ulndous watching
and being able to predict and getting to know children and perhaps finding their
names and flndlng it qulte interesting to themselves. I mean after a11,
children aren't on the playgound for hours at a time and there's plenty of time
durlng the day if they want to take naps, they can rearrange thetr schedules and
I'm sure that's what they would do. Both theoretically and practically
speaking, there are lots of reasons to support such a project. There's also
theological reasons that Father Barry can address more competently than I but
the idea of a whole community belng visualized for the remainder of the
community is a sign of the presence of working of good values. Where the old
and the young and the middle aged and everybody can be responded to and the£r
needs be incorporated £nto a living and working community. £r£c £r£ckson, an
analyst who developed a comprehensive theory of personality development suggests
that for both young people and older people, at the beginning and the end of the
11re cycle and development of thelr personality, when they successfully
negotiate those periods, hopefulness is the qualtty of their 11re so the young
people and old people can generate in each other hopefulness. For us older
adults, generativity is a need and I think this is what's happened tonight £n
the concern belng expressed by people for thelr community. For the wetlands.
For the problems of water runoff and how to solve thts equitably. These people
rose and are exercising their generatlvlty. Their 11re glvlng qualities.
They're interested in living things and the living community and so too here I
think thls project ls also allows the older people some generatlvlty. The
ability to work with and offer their services for and feel useful for. I'd l£ke
to see in the best of all posslble worlds that some use'would be made of thls
close proximity. That is the older people can do tutoring for the youngsters.
Can be playground monitors or even become lnvolved in other ways with the lives
of those children and feel like they're offering a worthwhile service so I would
11ke to be able to put to rest anybody's concern that the proximity of this
project would have any detrimental affect at all on the older people. I think
quite the contrary. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there anyone else7
Keith Kupcho: My name ls Keith Kupcho. I live at 7723 Frontlet Trail directly
across the street-from the convent and church property. I heard th£s evening
that some revisions have been made to accommodate parking on the property which
was a concern of mine after reading the Planning Commission report. I have not
heard what those changes are, only that they'll be made. It was an objection, a
high priority objection of mine that parking be a consideration or be examined
more closely because in my estimation the amount of parking that was golng to be
available in the plan presented at the Planning Commission was going to be
totally inadequate for the future. Z heard the word vlslon used a number of
times at that Planning Commission meeting and yet it seemed that the present was
the only thlng belng addressed. 18 stalls for 24 apartments doesh't at all
appear adequate to me. If you want to look at the maximum...at age 55 many of
them would have automobiles. 18 stalls for 48 people is wholly inadequate. Now
if you were to expand the parking ramp underneath the butlding to include the
space under the school building and galn that space as proposed wlth the plan, I
City Council. Meeting -- August 27, 1990
think that's a viable alternative. Access to that underground ramp however is a
concern of mine. Tt's on a residential street. Residential neighborhood. You
are also proposing a bullding that because of that underground garage would have
to go up an additional 4 feet so now we're talking 2 1/2 story buildlng in a
residential neighborhood and apparently the bullding ls set back somewhat but
nonetheless it is an apartment building ina residential neighborhood. At some
polnt in the past, I can't recall where I read it or heard lt. It was a few
years ago. 4 or 5 years ago perhaps. A City Council member indicated that
there should be a point in Chanhassen's growth where the commercial distrlct of
the clty is clearly deflned and that it not encroach into the residential
portlon of the clty. As far as I am concerned, an apartment house lsa
commercial property. Who owns it is not an lssue. Or is it perhaps that
because of who would own lt, that a zonlng ls glven speclal consideration? I'm
a member of the parlsh of St. Hubert's but I'm a resident. I am a homeowner
that bought a house ina residential neighborhood across from a school and from
a parish. At this point in time I see no reason why special consideration
should be glven to a plan that would put an apartment house across the street
from my house. There is the issue of additional parking besides that for the
residents. What about the guests, the friends, the relatives that would be
com£ng to visit these people of a more mature age? What about their children
and even grandchildren? Do they not drlve automobiles? Wlll they not be
visiting these people? From what I have read of tile transcript of the Planning
Commission meetlng, that's not addressed except for saylng we could make
Frontier Trail look like Ninnehaha Parkway with indents or outdents, whatever
you call those. Not a very feaslble or ratlonal alternative to providing
parking. Now we've got parking on the street. Hy chlldren use the street.
Other young chlldren use the street so now we've got parked vehlcles on a street
that they can run through and there could be consequences. On street parking is
not a rationale alternative. Not at a11. Another ltem that I saw on the plan,
and l.'m assuming it's stlll there, is a loading dock that exits onto Frontier
Tra11. Is there not a loadlng dock there? The plan I saw had one. Somewhere
orl the east side of the building?
Paul. Krauss: A deck.
Keith Kupcho: It's not there anymore. Good. But if it is there, now we've got
larger vehicles wanting to use Frontier Trail to gain access to the ~chool for
unloading and loadlng or the apartment building. And the plan by the way that I
was looking at was one that was published in the Hunter some time ago. I don't
have the date on lt. The other lssue has to do wlth lighting. If there lsa
parklng lot as proposed that exits onto Frontier Trail, that lot must be lit and
I'm assuming, I would hope. Hope? Z would expect that that parking lot would
be well lit because we are dealing with people in the more advanced stage, a
mature age whlch means then that that 11ght ls broadcast into our neighborhood
and into our residential areas. Much like you would see at Kenny's and that
whole development area there. We dldn't move lnto that house, we dldn't
purchase it with the idea of living across from a flourescent 1it parking lot.
I thlnk there are alternatives to thls concept plan. I think the 1dca ls great.
It's a nice idea. Combining elderly and children with the religious community.
I thlnk however that the concept and the bulldlng ls the wrong size and the
wrong place on the wrong sized property. The inclusion of all three facets of
the construction. The addltlon to the church and remodeling in there. The
addition to the school and an apartment building is just not appropriate for
24
City Council Meeting - August 27, 1990
this location. There are alternatives and they were mentioned at the Planning
Commission meeting. There is additional property available in the future and
could be made available probably in the present that would provide at grade
underground parking to the north of the current parking lot and a facility up
there. That would provlde then ample room for a new school, albelt perhaps one
story so it would maintain the semetry of the existing building. Provide ample
playground space for chlldren where they would not have to use a parklng lot and
yet the whole concept would be unified as a community of the church, of the
children and of those closer to retirement age. The concept would st111 be
intact. It's just a different arrangement and better use of space and perhaps
less costly. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Is there anyone else?
Father Barry: Can't let that go unanswered. We respect Mr. Kupcho's
observations but we must respond that this study has been going on for some 3
years and the plans were presented to the whole community for a perlod of
beginning 2 years ago with a pZat plan which incorporated basicalZy what we have
now. It lncluded surveys of our parishioners. Four in number for the last 2
years. Recently it included a survey after a weekend presentation of the
drawlngs whlch you see here where commentary was lnvited from the entlre
community. I flnd no commentary from Mr. Kupcho and perhaps he was absent for a
perlod of 2 months from the church meetlngs on weekends, I'm not sure but that
was presented fully to community. With regard to being a 2 1/2 story
building, I think that's inaccurate. If you ask the architect it does not
measure to 2 1/2 stories. The two buildings that are there now existing, the
two houses are 2 story buildings. The whlte house and the convent are both 2
stories. As regards to parking, I think you misread it. There are 24 stalls
underneath. Surveyed by me of the flrst people's intending to 1lye in the
housing development indicate there would be a total of 18 cars. That's where
the number probably came from. No loading dock was ever on any plan as far as
I'm concerned. I would have objected myself to that. The parking lot to the
north, this small parking lot became a reality when we went underground and it
is provided for visitors and if there should be need for other visitors and
chlldren to come to the retirement home, we have that large parklng area not too
far away from where the retirement home would be and would be accessible. It'd
be close by parklng. Chlldren and so forth would find no problem I thlnk if
there was no parking generally on the street. I mean to indicate to the
Schroeders who are here too that we resisted in expanding parking too close to
their home. They will find on the commission presentation that they were
talking about a barrler and I immediately resisted. I sald the Schroeder family
would not want a barrier but that was a concept mistake on my part. I
immediately thought of a battler vertical. They were talklng about lawn battler
and lawn is no barrier to me as we frequently discussed. So when I objected
saylng that the Schroeders would not want a battler, I did not mean they dldn't
want space and I explained that immediately. They would want space and I
constantly have been hassllng the architect about making more lawn space there
rather than more parking area. As regards to lighting, I think parking lighting
that would be requlred there would not be that bright that it would dtsturb the
Kupcho's who are removed from that parking space. They are not directly across
the street from lt. They are down the street. In fact there's another house
across the street before you come to their street. Had I known again that this
objection from some neighbors would have occurred, I would have had other
25
City Council Meeting - August 27, 1990
neighbors from directly across the street who welcome this project and find it
no problem, Thank you,
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Is there anyone else?
Jacqueline Schroeder: I am 3acqueline Schroeder. I live at 7720 Frontier
Trail. My house is right across from the retirement complex. In the first
Planning Commission notes, I read through them, it vas assumed that our house
~nd our property would be acquired. In it there was mentioning of a year. My
family has not agreed to sell. our house. We have given the church possible
first rights. We didn't say they have the absolute right to buy the house and
according to this plan, as far as I understand it, it includes our property as
being coming within the year. That if they pressured us, ue would move within
the year'. This plan needs this house supposedly for it's parking or extra. If
they cannot have this house, it vas never agreed to be given to them. If they
don't get this house, you cannot complete a half plan. In order for you to
accept this plan, they have to have everything together. They can't sell well
in the future we're going to get this. They don't know what the future is going
to bring. Neither do I but in order to complete or pass a plan, they have to
have all the components ready. If you cannot secure ail the components, you are
falling back on your plan and your idea. This could affect the vote. It could
affect how people view this plan. $o unless they have all their items together.
Unless they have everything set up ready to go and can guarantee this for you.
Not just possibilities. You cannot look at possibilities because possibilities
change. I would ask you not to vote for this plan on the fact that they don't
have everything they need. It is not been given full and complete support by
the parish. There's been arguments by several families. They don't have our
house which is part of tl~eir idea. I'd like to talk about the parking issue.
If they're parking on Frontier Trail, eventually they're going to need our land
supposedly. They don't have it. It is not written in stone they're going to
get it. This has not been finalized and if it's not been finalized, they cannot
assume. As soon as you take into assuming, anything can be proposed and
anything can be passed. I cannot drive legally unless I have a license. I've
not completed ail the steps. In order for this plan to be legally accepted, all
the steps must be met. That's all I'm asking. I'd just like to address the
issue of the playground. I was a student of St. Hubert's for 8 years. My 5th
thru 8th grades ue played on the parking lot. It vas fine for a while. You got
used to playing on the parking lot. It was okay but the parking lot, there's
not much to do. In the wintertime there's snow and it's hard and you can't play
football for fear of people getting tackled. They do play it. People do get
hurt. Kickball and volleyball get a little boring after 4 years. 4 or 5 years.
We are not allowed to play on the grass. We are told that ue couldn't do that
because it would ruin the grounds and I'd just like to say that half of the fun
that we had was when we were allowed to go onto the little kids side and play on
the suings. Play on the structures. The parking lot is not a place for kids to
play. ~t is not safe and it is ,rot fun. I'd like to also address the issue of
the building height. Ir, the commission notes, it was never answered in the
first one how tall this building was going to be. The question was asked. 5
feet? 10 feet? It was never' directly answered. They never said exactly how
tall this building is going to be. I would like just to know how tall this
building is going to be. It was never answered. I feel this is a question that
needs to be answered and I have a right to have it answered.
26
City Council Meeting - August 27, 1990
Mayor Chmiel: Jacqueline, if we could we'll answer that for you right now.
Paul, could you?
Paul Krauss: 26 feet.
Mayor Chmiel: 26.
Jacquellne Schroeder: Okay, but how would that be? How much?
Paul Krauss:
Councilman Johnson: To the top of the pyramid or what?
Paul Krauss: The flat roof section is 26. The pyramids are lower. I think
they're on the slngle story. The architect ls here, might be able to expand on
that.
Richard Lundahl: The pyramld is lower...and the atrium is lower than that.
It's about 18. The maximum height of the school and the retirement buildlng
26 feet. That ls not 2 1/2 storles.
Jacqueline $chroeder: Can you give me an estimate of how tall, I mean how many
storles ls it? Is a story 10 feet? I don't know.
Richard Lundahl: A story can be 12 feet.
3acqueline Schroeder: Okay, so it's 2 feet then? Over. It's 2 feet over.
Okay, thank you. I'd like to address about the survey in church. It was given
a 15 minute, maybe 20 minute proposal. It was given during the homely time. No
great depth was directed towards any issue in specific so questions were hard to
generate. Okay? The questions were allowed to be written on a survey that was
answered, how to rate the needs of each one. They listed the school. The
retirement complex. The atrium and so forth. It was not a great enough
presentation to fully understand what was going on. I feel if people would have
known more in depth about what was going on, they might have raised some more
important questions.
Councilman Workman: Mr. Mayor? I think we're getting into internal church
matters that are probably not pertinent to the clty.
Mayor Chmiel: ! would agree with that particular position. The discussions
within the church, of which I also go to St. Hubert's, is a discussionary thing
there. ! don't know if that's necessary for us to have that aspect of it.
Jacqueline $chroeder: Okay. I'd also like to address the issue of the barrier.
Father mentioned lt. We have been discussing thls. We have been havlng many
talks. I don't recall any talks. I don't recall being involved in this and I
feel that he gets up here and that it has been a we. It was not a we. It was a
him. He assumed. He assumed the land. He assumed what was going to happen and
that is not rlght. He cannot go through this plan unless it ls not assumed. If
it is agreed upon, and everything falls into place, that is a different story.
But if thlngs are just assumed, it cannot be let getting away with. Thank you.
27
City Council ~eetin9 -- August 27, 1590
Hayor Chmiel: Thank you 3ackie. Is there anyone else?
Father Barry: I'm sorry Kathy, you are right. I did not talk to you. I talked
a lot with your parents and when I said we, I was talking about Planning
cc)remission, Mr. Krauss, the architect, Facilities Committee of the parish. And
you are correct, we adults do overlook youngsters and that's a fault. I didn't
think of consulting Kathy but a history is necessary here. Kathy Schroeder,
Mrs. Schroeder knows already 4 years ago when we talked about the dearth of
pri~:s~.s and I presented to tile commuI]ity that one day perhaps there would have
to be an adminstrator and a priest coming in to serve and administrator living
there. That perhaps if their property became available, I could envision an
adminstrator there. At that time they were sharing with me that they were
looking at properties possibly elsewhere, hm Z correct Kathy? Yeah, I know.
$o at that time ~ said if you ever move, can we have first right? And as
recently as 2 years ago when we presented the plan, again Larry asked me when do
we have to move. That's her husand. ~ said as long as you are happy here I
will never pressure you to move. I will say that solemnly here before this
group. Mr. Krauss, when we talked about planning and further development down
the line, did you not point out various properties in the back that we ought to
be interested in?
Paul Krauss: Yes.
Father Barry: And my response was I will not pressure any of those people as
long as they are happy in their home. Mr. Klingelhutz and some others here
present may have been on the facilities committee and the finance committee when
tl~e $chle~k property came up and ue were urged ~ot to put monies into the
$chlenk property across the street because it did not well serve our purposes
and we didn't need it for cemetary and ue didn't want our people to go across
the street. And the facilities committee concluded that it would not be good
even to think of parking across there because people would park on the street
before they'd park that far away for church. At that time they again urged me
that I ought to be getting to approach some of the neighbors for future
expansion about their homes. I resisted. Z said I will not pressure our
neighbors. ~nyone can testify to that fact. The one year bit, that came from
somebody from the crew that was saying, even if within the year you need to get
that property and I said if it becomes available, ue will. It will demand some
further financing. We went into all of that. So Kathy, did she leave? You
tell Kathy.
Kathy $chroeder: 3ackie.
Father Barry: Jacki. e, I'm sorry. You're Kathy. You can tell her that we
never, ~lever said that, your parcel of land was never included at all ill the
pla'[ plan. Never. Everytime it came up they asked about that parcel because it
cuts out the complete square. Never, never was it in the plan. It is not in
the plan now. Never has been conceived to be a part of this plan. Only along
with future development, further parking lots if we contil~ue to grow. The
$chuptra family only this year. Last year ~ was urged to look at the $chuptra
property. Olanche is here this evening. It was not more than a 1oonth ago when
I first approached you Blanche because I have resisted even talking to Blanche
or Ewald about their home. Resisted. Rebuffed every effort. Mr'. Krauss can
tell you that and the architect. I don't want to talk about it. These people
2.8
City Council Meeting - August 27, 1990
are comfortable. We will not push them. When Blanche indicated she would be
one of the first to move into the retirement complex, then I said when you move
if your property ls available, would you glve us a flrst chance to purchase lt.
Is that not right? And that's been a month ago. Never before. Never. I
consider myself a better pastor than putting people out thelr homes and I have
resisted the community that have said to me, if you go to them and say we need
your property. What do you want for lt, they may think about selllng lt. I
said I will not do that until they make an overture. So I'm very sorry Kathy.
You can ask your mother. We didn't consult you and when I was talking about we,
I was talking about Planning Commission, architect, Facilities Committee.
Talklng about puttlng a parklng lot, first all external parking. 24 parking
spaces. I resisted that and said I don't care what the cost. Much cheaper the
architect wlll tell you if you do it outside. I said it will be better for the
seniors to be underground. I don't care how much it costs but we will not go
that close to the Schroeder house. We are space people and I certainly don't
want any hard feelings between any neighbor over this. I would, rather than
have the neighbors of Blanche and the Schroeders. Blanche wants the retirement
home and is ready next year to move in. The Schroeders are living there and
wondering about thls building. Rather than have them break feelings, I'd almost
want to give up on it. It's too happy a community. I would assure Jackie who
ls been loved by Blanche that you would flnd other Blanches over there and that
house w111 not be that ugly next to your home. And Blanche would be living
rlght on the other slde of you in the flrst lower apartment. Blanche and Ewald
and I never, never, never thought of pressuring your family. The only thing I
ever said. If you ever move, may we have first rights. Some of the Commission
wanted me to get that in writing, it went that far. We think you ought to get
that in wrltlng. I sald no. There word and my word is contract enough for me.
I will not do it. That's all I can respond to that. And I'm sorry.
Kathy Schroeder: I'm Kathy Schroeder. I'm 3ackie's mother. I live at 7720
Frontier Trail next door. My daughter read the Planning Commission Minutes of
August 1st and where she received the impression that we were being pressued to
move. On the bottom of page 6 and onto page 7 and perhaps Father was misquoted
and that can happen. We'll certainly glve everybody the beneflt of the doubt.
It says, had we pressured them they would have looked for other housing. One,
we have not been pressured. Two, she read this statement. She took it for what
it was. The way it appears. She drew her conclusions. She's old enough to
drau conclusions and speak for herself and defend what she wants to say. I do
have one question about space barriers, separation and I think we can work it
out wlth Father. I thlnk there should be some separation between the parklng
lot and our house. I don't uant a wooded wall, a brick wall but I think
shrubbery, trees, flowers, something 11ks that that everyone can enjoy and yet
does serve as a clean barrier rather than a hard barrier. Reading in the notes
about the parking on the outslde, I understand that has been changed. I do have
some concerns about parking on the street and some parking lot type situations
and I'm sure it can be worked out but if Wednesday's night you cannot get down
Frontier Trail. If a fire truck had to make it through, they never would. I
look at it as a safety lssue rather than a people pressure issue. I worry about
the kids coming to CCO classes and a car trying to get through. I've tried it
and it's not safe for the kids. That is my main ooncern. It isn't an everyday
occurrence and I don't know if we need to change directional flow maybe. Make
it one way at some point for a couple blocks. I don't know if that would solve
the problem but I think it's an issue that needs to be addressed because the
29
City Council Meeting -- August 27, 1~90
street isn't, the complex is it's not mine. It's the city's street and that's
all.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Anyone else?
Ken Giesen: I'm Ken Giesen. I've been in the parish for 20 years. 8 of my 11
children graduated from St. Hubert's. I don't recall, the last one graduated 9
years ago so I'm speakin9 somewhat ancient but my point is that I don't recall
my children ever really complaining a great deal about the playground facilities
as they currently exist, Or as they existed in the past. I'm also the chairman
of the Pastoral Council at St. Hubert's and I can only speak to one thing. I
apologize Lc) this Council. We've got a procedure, at least the people that were
concerned here could have come to our Council. They're open meetings. There's
never been anybody come to the Pastoral Council with objections to the current
building plans. There's been some rumors as of Sunday but no one's ever come to
the Council to my knowledge. No one's brought it up to a council member. There
are .10 of us. ~s to the situation concerning Jackie, the only thing I can
Atf. est to there is that when a discussion was held concerning the Schroeder
property at a Pastoral Council meeting, and I'll be darn if I know which one it
was but. it probably was .some Council meeting since hpril, one of the Council
membmrs suggested that if this property was going to be available in a year and
it was first right of refusal, we ought to take some action on it. I can attest
to the fact that Father Barry definitely said he would not do that. He didn't
think Jt was Christian. That was too businesslike. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there anyone else? If seeing and hearing none, I'll bring it
back to tile Council. Jay?
Councilman Johnson: What percent impervious surface do we have here? I didn't
see that anyplace. Maybe Z mlssed it. I don't know. Usually that's one of the
blg things we see on PUD's ls percent impervious surface. Thls has got to be
really high.
Councilwoman Oimler: 72~ I think it was.
Paul Krauss: Yeah, we did work it out. I think it was I believe 72~.
Councilman Johnson: What's the normal standard?
Paul Krauss: Well in the PUD district there is no standard.
Councilman Johnson: Yeah. Standard for an apartment building.
Paul Krauss: So like an R--i~ zoning or something like that?
Councilman Johnson: Yeah.
Paul Krauss: 50~.
Councilman Johnson: Office? Well, what is the school area? School. Church.
I mean we have a school, church and apartment building.
Paul Krauss: Institutional office. It's 65~.
30
City Council Heeting - August 27, 1990
Councilman Johnson: Okay, and we're a bit over that. If you believe people are
going to park in the parking lot on the west side and walk around to the
classrooms, go over here to the apartments and look at where they park. They
park on Kerber Blvd. because it's closer to their house and their door on the
other side of their garage. People are going to be parking all over Frontier
Trail. When anybody has to go into the classrooms there, or go to visit, human
nature. I've seen it several places. Human nature says you park the easiest,
closest spot. You see people driving around the Target parking lot for 15
minutes trying to find the best spot that will save them 50 feet of walking
which would have only taken 30 seconds in the first place. That's human nature.
I almost wish there was some way we could flip flop this and put everything over
where the parking lot is and maybe move some more parking over there or
something. Rearrange it to where they have parking on both sides of the
building or something.
Richard Lundahl: Excuse me. The school entrance is right on the main parking
lot. There is a school entrance right on a main parking lot.
Councilman Johnson: Well there's also a big entrance labeled people coming in
off of, that comes right into the classrooms. If I'm going to visit my son's
classroom, I'm not parking 200 yards away when I can park 50 feet away.
Father Barry: Are you talking about that horseshoe driveway?
Councilman Johnson: No. I'm talking about the sidewalk marked people on the
drawings that comes right into the last classroom. A little lobby right next to
the last classroom.
Father Barry: Okay, that's a double entrance to the school from that side.
That's also the senior citizens but that will not be a general entrance into the
school. The entrance into the schools are the bus drop offs and the other
entrance where the parking lot for after school activities. When they...school
building will be closed off for security reasons.
Councilman Johnson: There's nothing drawn on these drawings showing that that
lobby has any. There's doors all over the place but there's no walls. No
doors.
Father Barry: That will be restricted area for students that they can't get
into but it also will be an access area and this exit area for students.
Councilman Johnson: Those doors will be unlocked during the school day?
Father Barry: I don't know. Ask the architect.
Councilman Johnson: I don't know. Sometimes during the day it's hard to get in
there. I tried to get in one day to talk to the principal and the entire, every
door was locked. Fortunately people get out but no flremen could possibly get
in there if there was an emergency inside there without breaking down the doors.
Father Barry: That must have been an off day because those doors...open all the
time.
31
City Council Meet.in.q -- flugust '.2.7, 1990
Councilman Workman: They saw you comJ. ng Jay.
Council. man .'fohnson: They saw me coming.
Richard Lundahl: Mr. Hayor and members of tile City Council. My name is Dick
I,undahl. Z'm the principle of Lundahl Archltect, s and Z'd just like to answer
some of those questions. Number one, you've got to have two exits out of a
bu.ttding and we've got r, hem, You know. ac'ye got them, What are you talking
about?
Councilman Johnson: This is an entrance into the building. That's a simple
question. Is th,~t an entrance that's labeled there with an arrow pointed?
Ri. chard Lundahl: Of course it is. That's also an exit.
Councilman Johnson: Okay. Then people are going to park on Frontier' Trail to
go ~o the school.
Richard Lundahl: Why would they do that?
Councilman Johnson: Because it's easier. Why do they park on Kerber Blvd.?
R[chard Lundahl: People are going to come to the school on the bus. Kids are
going to come. orl the bus.
Councilioan Johnson: I'm talking the parents.
Richard Lundahl: ~011 the parents can park out here. They can also park right
thoro,
Mayo)' Chnllel: Jay, the real main entrance going into that school. T drop my
gr~lldd~ughter off there, is right from that parking lot.
CouncJ. lma)l Johnson: Yeah. Right there at the principal's office and
everything. I agree.
Mayo)' Chmiel: I don't see the use, I think that's golng to be used for the
living communJ, ty basically.
Councilman Johnson: Well he says where there's door to go through to get to the
living community and there's no doors to go through to go through to get to
classrooms. What Z'm trylng to emphasize, T thlnk anybody who's saying there
won't be any parking on Frontier TraiJ., just 9o look at West Village Heights
Apartments. They've got parklng spots. They're empty but to people, it's
closer to park oil the .street and walk across the grass ~o get into your house.
They do it, And they're golng [o do it here.
Richard LundahZ: Can you not put no parking signs on that street?
Councilman Johr, son: Oh yeah.
Rlchard I_undahl: Couldn't you?
32
City Council Meeting - August 27, 1990
Councilman Johnson: We sure could.
Mayor Chmiel: We could also make a request to the owners of that property.
Gave those people the opportunity to park on their own properties wlthin rather
than on the street.
Richard Lundahl: Anyway, I'm available as a resource person to tell you what
the entrances and exits. Where they are. Just ask me.
Councilman Johnson: I did.
Richard Lundahl: I told you too didn't
Councilman Johnson: Had to drag it out of you. We're going to have to accept
one thing that this sets a precedence that all religious communities here can
have housing facilities within thelr property. And that's an accepted principle
here in the city now that whether you be Lutheran, Catholic, Methodist, Baptist
or Eckankar, that this ls an acceptable standard that we bring apartments into
your property. I thlnk it's a great idea. I think the kids, you know everybody
talked about the elderly having some beneflts from having the kids around.
think the kids will have a lot of benefits from having the elderly around.
see in thls world too many kids that are never exposed to the elderly people and
they have no respect for the elderly because they're not exposed to them. I
grew up wlth my grandmother 11vlng with us and that was one of the great
benefits of my childhood. I see too many kids who see their grandparents once
every 5 years and stuff 11ke that. I thlnk for some of these unfortunate kids
that might live and their grandparents are in Florida, or whatever, having some
adoptive grandparents almost here in the apartments would be great for the kids.
I do really like this concept. I do see some minor problems. Parking on
Frontier and a lot of extra traffic on Frontier. If I was building an apartment
building, I'm not sure if I'd want to build it on there. I'd probably rather
have it closer to Great Plalns if there was someway to swltch it around and use
Great Plains that's already a more heavily traveled and wider street. I don't
see any real practical way of dolng that elther.
Mayor Chmiel: Anything else Jay?
Councilman Johnson: No. I think that's the main questions. Oh, was that, it
looks like glass pyramids or whatever in the atrium. There's a lot of talk,
wlll that be lighted at nlght at a117 I would assume that's dlmly lit-emergency
lighting or whatever.
Richard Lundahl: That's correct. When there's functions on, I'm sure it will
be lit. It probably wouldn't be lit at all...but if it were, it'd...
Councilman Johnson: Probably more of a glow than a shine.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you.
Councilman Johnson: Turn it over to one of the catholics now.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay.
33
City Council Heoting -. hugust 27, 1990
Councilwoman UimJ. er: I have just a few questions too that have been brought up
tonight. One w,~s that Paul indic~ted that there were more visitor stalls. This
pian shows 4. Is there an increase to the 4 or are you saying 4 is the
J. ncre,i:se?
Pau] Krauss: No, there are 4 but they've been reconfigured. We had an issue
with the way they were origZnally laid out. That there was one parking stall
that was virtually in the Frontier Trail right-of-way. The current plan
remedies some of that, Zt doesn't provide us any additional visitor parking.
We uere hoping to get additJ, onal visitor parking with modifications to Frontier
T~-~i]. and those have not been i~lustr,~ted yet.
Councilwoman Dimler: I guess I have to agree with several of the residents who
have indicated that Frontier Trail sometimes is so parked full. on both sides
that it's hard for one way traffic to get through, much less two way traffic so
I think that is a concern. Is a safety concern. I'd hate [o see that situation
be ampl. ified. I think that maybe we shouldn't count on parking on Frontier
Trail. That we should come up uith on site parking.
Paul Krauss: Clearly Councilwoman Dimler that would be preferable if we had the
opt. ions. I guess the way we envi.sioned though the parking on Frontier is that
you would have additional paved areas so the cars are now parking in the
right-of-way would actually be pulled out of it freeing up the travel surfaces
of the street.
Councilwoman Dimler: Suppose we implement that, who's going to pay for those
curb cuts and curbing?
Paul Krauss: The usual procedure for that, and I would defer to the city
Engineer but that's an improvement for a public street but it's benofitting a
private property and I would assume that the cost of it would be defrayed back
to the church.
Councilwoman Dimler: Do you have an estimate on it?
Gary Warren: No. There's just a concept presented and ~ think we've
entertained looklng further lnto that as an alternative. I agree wlth the
concerns as faT' as Frontier Trail's limited capacity right now and the impact of
the parking.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. One more question on the lighting. I guess I'm not
re~l famili,tr wi~h where the lighting is going to be for this parking lot. How
will that affect the Schroeder property?
Pall]. Krauss: That clearly is the property with the most potential for being
impacted because of lt's proximity. What we ask, in fact it was because of a
concern Z believe you had raised when we adjusted the parking ordinance is we
put in a requirement that parklng, lot lighting, contribute no more than half a
foot candle to property line. We only allow shielded fixtures on property so
that nobody's looking at bare bulbs. We would ask the same thlng of thls
project that we ask or any other developer. That they give us a 11ghtlng plan
that shous conformance to Clty ordinances. Some care needs to be taken in
siting the lights neaT- the schroeder's home and in landscaping the buffer area
34
City Council Meeting - August 27, 1990
between the home and the church site.
Mayor Chmiel: What you're saying basically is that the light be contained on
the property and that no reiective bounce comes back onto the adjacent property.
PauI Krauss: Exactly. I mean we may well have to go with low scale bollard
type lighting or something.
Councilwoman Dimler: I guess I do have a concern about the amount of impervious
surface. I mentioned that also. I don't know what can be done about that
because we're looking for more parking and the other concern I had too is that
gay said the precedent that we're setting for other churches. I'm not sure that
we've ever discussed that.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, is that it?
Councilwoman Dimler: Yes.
Mayor Chmiel: Thomas.
Councilman Workman: I think we have a few problems with this but none I don't
think cannot be worked out. The Frontier Trail, every time I go down Frontier
Trail heading north I think I go through that stop sign there. Behind the big
tree. Yeah, I'm a catholic and I'm a member of this community and I guess I'd
like to get one thing clear that was perhaps implied that because I am a member
of that community, I might have a problem separating my City Council duties with
my church loyalties. I do take exception to that and that's all I'm going to
say about that. I purposedly didn't show up at the Planning Commission meeting
so as to not sway a Planning Commission member. I don't often get to Planning
Commission meetings anyway and as soon as I'd walk in they'd say gee, I wonder
why Tom's here. And so as to not elay that onto the 7 Planning Commission
members, I stay away preferring to read the exciting Minutes. Simply because I
dldn't want it to appear as though I was trying to put extra pressure on the
situation here, which is an obviousIy pressure situation. We do have a concern
about the houses and I don't know if I heard in the audience kind of a
reconciliation taking place or not. I hope we can work something out there
because that lsa concern. The proximity of the house. Frontier Trall and the
parking situation I think can be remedied by a curb cut or something therein or
no parking slgns. I think those curb cuts get a little expensive. Jay, you
made a suggestion about we are now opening the ftood gates for every chuch in
town to bulld apartment buildings. I thlnk you're wrong somewhat in that this
is a retirement community. I don't know if this center is going to have strict
enforcement of how old you precisely have to be but if any other church in the
community, Protestant, Eckankar or other would promote the taking care of or
houslng of elderly, I think I would agree with it no matter who it ls. It's a
housing situation that I think St. Hubert's is probably f£11ing a need for. I
am not real clear on the lighting. I know that to be a very serlous concern of
some of the neighbors and should be addressed. The parking situation on the
other side Jay, as far as the east side I think ls something that can be handled
very easily. I grew up down in Chaska. Have I told you that before?
Councilman Johnson: And you drove up here twice a week to go to...
35
City Council Mee%J.r,g -- August 27, 1990
Councilmal, Workman: That's right. I've lived ir, this area longer than any of
you.
Councilwoman Dimler: Not me.
Councilman Workman: I grew up down there with Guardian Angels and the
playground was a parking lot and I don't know if that's a plus or a minus. It's
kind of what you grow up with. I grew up without a community center, sidewalks
and I played on a parking lot for a playground and I'm still A-okay right?
Councillnan Johnson: How many miles did you walk to school through the snow?
Councilman Workman: So I think we, the biggest concern I have is for the
neighbors and I trust that the parish and Father Barry are taking care of that
the best that they can humanly possible. I have all sorts of feelings about the
entire renovation here as a parish member which I won't bore everybody with. As
I mentioned before, I think some of these issues within the church need to be
handled within the church community and not here and that's something completely
separate from my city coLmncJ. 1 duties and I think other church community members
that belong to different churches would take exception to me maybe using this as
an opportunity to promote wrong].y this situation. I see it as a good, or a
feasible PUO and the problems that are there, not to belittle the house
obviously and the lighting and everything else. I think we can work with and
hopefully we can do that so. That's all I have,
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. As the elder of the Council, I'm eligible to go into
that house. That's termed as double nickles but as I've looked at the concept,
and rio sense in reiterating everything that everyone has said. It'd be just
another thing to say. The only re~l concern I have is the accessibility for
that handicap. That it be there. And I see some of the area too as far as the
parking lot and playground. The school I went to which was a grade school,
Catholic grade school. I think we were probably a little more affluent with
dollars because we didn't have tar, we had cement. The white background. 8ut
that was the place to play and that was the only place to play. I don't see
th,.~t as some of the problems. With the barriers going in and out. To eliminate
that access. To eliminate any problems with the children, I think that's
probably a good idea because there's a lot of concerns for the children that go
there. I don't see it as a problem with the adults who are going to live in
that particular center. I think for that hour and a half, if you had grandkids
like I do, you'd ~ust thoroughly en~oy having them for 3 or 4 hours and 5 and
spoil them rotten and send them home. I think the same kind of thing would take
place at this particular center. So other than that, I guess I don't see this
as a problem with the PUO concept. There are some things that will have to be
worked out. I guess that will conclude my basic discussion.
Councilman Workman: I would move approval of the concept plan.
Councilman Johnson: I'll second that.
Mayor Chmiel: It's been moved and seconded. Any further discussion?
Councilman Johnson: The only discussion would be that, or for me, is that of
~he process. And ~o reiterate what we said 40 minutes ago or whatever when we
36
City Council Meeting - August 27, 1990
started this, is that this is the very first step in the city process. Well,
beyond the Planning Commission meeting but all we're doing is looking at the
concept. Because we approve the concept does not mean that they can pull a
building permit tomorrow and start building this. There's a lot more steps and
a lot more work to go through. The lighting issues and all the issues we
brought up tonight and have been brought up by the audience, will have to be
looked at.
Councilwoman Oimler: With that, could you clarlfy if there will be any more
public hearings?
Paul Krauss: Yes ma'am there will be a public hearing held at the Planning
Commission. I don't have a date for that yet because it's really contingent on
when we get plans submitted but we w111 re-notify the folks wlthtn 500 feet and
if anybody didn't get a notice from us, if they give me their name and address,
I'd be happy to send them one.
Councilwoman Oimler: I think during the summer a lot of people were gone and
couldn't make the flrst one.
Mayor Chmiel: My other point I'd just like to make is if there are some real
concerns that you have within the parish and itself, my suggestion is to go to
the Church Pastoral Council and express your views at that particular time.
Councilman Workman moved, Councilman 3ohnson seconded to approve the concept
plan of a Planned Unit Development for the construction of a Libary/Annex/
Research Center and expansion of the education center and a retirement living
center for St. Hubert's church. All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously.
INTERIH USE PERHIT FOR A GRADING PRO3ECT TO EXCAVATE IO0,O00_CUBIC YARDS OF
HATERIAL, LOCATED AT 1500 PIONEER TRAT~, BRUCE J~IJRI$$EN.
Paul Krauss: First thing is a point of clarification. When this request was
initially presented to the City, we were talking about approximately 100,000
yards of material. Durlng the course of plan development, after the notice was
published, it turned out that the ultimate number of yards proposed to be
removed from this site is 190,000 of clay soil. The Plannlng Commission may
recall that approximately 20,000 yards of material was removed from this site
last sprlng. There's a fair bit of history to thls and lt's explained in detall
in your packet but in summary what had happened was staff and the engineering
department had issued a permit to basically correct the culvert situation that
had been washed out I believe in the super storm in 1987. It was renewed
several tlmes. You know there may have been some error on the part of the staff
people who were involved with that who are no longer with the City. That should
have been authorized by the Clty Council but it wasn't. Staff attempted to honor
that permit and material was removed this spring. Upon our concluding that more
than that had been removed from the site, we asked that the operation be
terminated. There was a good bit of wrangling where some of our stop work
orders were run over. Ultimately work dld stop on thls slte. It's left in lt's
present state today which is fairly rough and unfinished. The applicants were
also aware that at the same tlme we were going through this we were in the
process of adopting a new earth work ordinance that grew out of the Moon Valley
37
City Council Me~-;~.ing - August 27, 1990
issue but soon encompassed a lot of other issues. They were given copies of
[his new ordinance-; :~nd were working with it and b~sic,~lly are making their
application under the new ordinance. As such, they're the flrst major earth
work permit that you're reviewing under the new Code. The current request is
substantially larger than the orlginal and does trlp the new IUP permlt. And
I guess to be frank, there's a lot of aspects of this application that gives
staff sonle serlous pause. The number of trucks that would be movlng, ls huge.
We're talking about 10,000 truck loads out and 10,000 empty trucks coming back.
There's also the question of purpose. You know the report or the applicant's
submittal indicates substensively that this is to improve agricultural use of
the property. The property in question ls for the most part under cultivation
rlght now. The real aspect of it and what it really boils down to is that the
material's belng sold to the Flylng Cloud landfill. That's not necessarily good
or bad, it's just different and to be frank about it, that's exactly what the
uso ls for. There's also some indications that the gradlng operation would
improve agricultur,~l use of the property. I'm not a farmer. I grew up in
Brooklyn so it's a little hard for me to take a shot at that but as I say, as a
farm, this fleld is being cultivated now. Also there's a potential for ultimate
development of thls property for low denslty single famlly. Presumably
flattening some of the grades on this site could make that more feasible.
Conceptually we've approved a preliminary plat prior to the 1987 change in the
ordinance for iow density, 2 1/2 acre lots and this is one of the proper'ties
that you may recall thls spring you granted an extension. They were to come in
with a firm preliminary and final plat when the TH 212 corridor was officially
mapped. Upon request the City Councll gave thls owner and two others an
extension until the fine1 EZS is completed for TH 212. This plan does not, or
the grading plan does not necessarily correlate to that concept that the Clty
revlewed 3 years ago. That concept really didn't take into account TH 212 which
does bisect the property.
Council. man Johnson: Does this plan?
Paul Krauss: This plan is really drawn in a vaccum as far- as that goes
Commissioner Johnson. It's not, there's no attempt to correlate it to that '87
plan.
Councilman Johnson: Highway 212. Correlate to Highway 212.
Paul Krauss: Highway 212 is sort of a world onto itself. You know taking fill
down isn't golng to hurt that plan at a11. What TH 212 really really did ls
messed up the ability to subdivide the property. There's a number of other
concerns wlth thls as well. There's the environmental concerns we have.
There's concerns with maintenance and keeping clean of area roads serving this
thlng. There's concerns over noise lmpacts of trucking. At the same tlme, we
have to recognize that this request is largely in compliance with the new
gradJ, ng ordinance. That gradlng ordinance, as you wlll recall, was not deslgned
to halt all excavation, mining activity in the city. When we were working with
Noon Valley initially at the outset, there was a clear purpose that we not stop
these things entlrely but ra~her put the city in a position where you can
exerclse a good deal of control over lt. Hopefu111y minimizing the lmpacts and
minimizing the damages from it and of course requiring a solid restoration plan.
This proposal is belng brought in compliance wlth that new ordinance. There ls
an extensive erosion con[to1 plan. Top soil is being saved on site for
38
City Council Meeting - August
respreading out. The planning staff has added a number of conditions that we
hope address all of the issues that we could conceive of. We're asking that
letters of credlt be posted. We're working ulth the County Engineering offlce
to ensure that Pioneer Trail is maintained in good condition. We wi11 be
working wlth the County Sheriff's department to make sure that the road is
patrolled. That loads are trapped. That speed limits are adhered to. That
weight limits are not exceeded. We've been working with the Watershed Dlstrict
and the Soil Conservation Service to minimize erosion. We've had this thing
phased so that individual sltes uill be completed. In fact the phasing program
is broken out there that each phase wlll be completed and restored before you go
onto the next. Under the Unlform Bullding Code we would anticipate monitoring
this site on a daily basis with the cost of that monitoring being charged back
to the developer. To the applicant. Wlth those conditions that are fairly
detailed, we are recommending that this be approved. We took thls before the
Planning Commission, I thlnk it was 2 weeks ago. We've accelerated the process
here because of some request by the City Council. The Planning Commission
expressed substantial reservations with the past practices on this property.
However, they also recommended it's approval. They did change a couple of
conditions and one of them ls qulte important. That is that the gradlng
ordinance allows you to establish hours of operation with an eye towards
minimizing lmpact on residential properties. The orlginal proposal conformed
with the guidelines established in the ordin&nce that grading activities be
allowed Monday thru Saturday I.belleve 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.. The Plannlng
Commission recommended that Saturday hauling be eliminated since there are a
number of residences in the area and that ls when the residences are occuppled.
The condition's been changed accordingly. The Planning Commission also
requested that the exlsting problems on the slte be put rlght before gradlng
activity start. We've added that as a condition as well. With that we hope
we've covered all our bases on this. Thls lsa very complex and comprehensive
proposal. I'd also say that this will set a precedent for how we view these
things in the future. Wlth that we are recommending lt's approval wlth the list
of conditions outlined in the staff report.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Paul. Does the applicant wish to say something at this
time?
Loren Habbegger: Members of the Council and staff, my name is Loren Habbegger
and I'm representing Wanegrin Incorporated and Mr. Jeurissen who currently owns
the property. Looklng over what the Planning Commission had approved, I have
several things here to be brought up that I feel may be excessive in what
they're looklng for on thls particular project. You've got 13 1rems on the
letter that I received here yesterday that were outlined that the Planning
Commission had approved. I have several of these that Z would just like to go
over. As far as brlnging this site back to the condition that staff is looking
for here, we feel there'd be no problem wlth that whatsoever. There are some
things here that were passed forward by the Planning Commission that we do feel
that should be looked at and posslbly for future when you people conslder these
things again that you can look at it from a perspective that you don't
overburden a person that's trying to do some excavating and brlng a site up to a
development situation. Now the site is an agricultural aspect right now. What
we're basically dolng ls we're improving the agricultural aspect of it with a
future plan for a subdivision of 2 1/2 acres and I guess basically what we feel
here ls, lt's an improvement to the property and wlll generate tax dollars.
City Council Meeting -- August 27, 1990
And as the property is a grandfathered situation, it falls within the bounds of
future planning. I wou].d like to just bring tip a few points here that were
passed by the Planning 6ommission that I would like to express opinion here by
Mr. Wanegrin and Mr. 3eurissen. Number one is the letter of credit that they
were looking at. They were looking at a letter of credit of $30,000.00 be
submitted for this situation. Upon discussion here with Mr. 3eurissen and also
with Wanegrin Incorporated which will be assuming all responsibilities on this
project, we feel that a liability and insurance surety bond would specifically
take care of this situation. The amounts of, now the watershed district I have
met with about 3 times. The watershed district is going to ask for a similar
situation in conjunction with the city so probably this bond can be drafted
accordingly with the wa[ershed. I met with Hr. Bob Obermeyer last week and
Hr. Obermeyer felt that the situation could be worked out. By the way, they
have a September 5th meeting which all the cri[eria [hat will be reviewed, and
it has been reviewed by you, the watershed does have some things to add to it
tha~ we will oblige to.
Mayor Chmiel: Hr. Habbegger, if I could just interject on that particular one.
Z think as far as the City's concerned and as the watershed requires that as
another portion and that's additional bondlng that would have to be taken. A
letter of credit as to what I say. I'm not so sure that $30,000.00 is even
enough. Z look at it from another aspect of utilizing the roads withln and of
course this is a county road but some of the areas that I have real concern is
within the city too. I don't think $30,000.00 would even touch it. So I'm
looking, and I just want you to know where Z'm coming from right now.
Loren Habbegger: Right but I guess what we're looking at here is the liability
insurance situation and the bond which performs the same situation.
Mayor Chmiel: It doesn't perform the same thing as a letter of credit to a
bank. It does not.
Loren Habbegger: Well I guess I'm coming from Wanegrin's standpoint here that
they feel this Zs excessive.
Mayor Chmiel: I'm coming from the Clty's standpoint.
Loren ttabbegger: Okay. I guess maybe we'll have to try to work that out then
if at a].l possible. So what you're basically saylng ls that you'll need a
letter of credit of $30,000.00?
Mayor Chmiel: No, I'm thinking possibly more than that but I'll bring it up in
discussion.
Loren Habbegger: Okay, you do realize that this slte here does have to be
brought back to an agricultural situation.
Mayor Chmiel: Yes I do. I was there today and I reviewed the entirety of the
property.
Loren Habbegger: Right. I guess that can be worked out by staff here and with
your attorney and Wanegrin's ~ttorney which I'll be working with also. The
second part here, preparation of "as-built" gradlng plans preparing
4O
City Council Meeting - August
demonstrations with compliance with approved plans on a phased basis. I feel
~e've met that specification as far as we're dolng tt in a segmented plan and
I guess that "as-built". Number one, this site is, we're puttlng it back to an
agricultural status with a future development situation in mind. The as-built
at that time when we do put it into a development situation, we feel that thls
situation can be sufficed. But at this time we feel that we're just doing a
gradlng situation to improve the slte for future development and back to
agricultural. Oo you see any problem?
councilman Johnson: You still have to have a surveyor certify that what you've
got when you're through.
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, the reason why we went with that is because we want to
know on a phase by phase basis that what the resulting grade after they're
finished with that phase is exactly what ue committed to or what they agreed to
on their plan. Short of getting them to have a surveyor going out there to give
us an as-built grading plan, ue would have to do it with our staff time and our
expense which we didn't feel the City should be liable for. I'd also note that
when this applicant was pulling material off in the spring, we had a very
fundamental dispute over how much material was taken off the site. We had
concluded that far in excess of what we had permitted had been removed. They
prepared an as-built grading plan that indicated that we were right and then
they produced another one that said that the first one was wrong and that was
one of the points of contention. We want a formal survey done on each phase.
Loren Habbegger: I guess as to the amount of materlal that was taken off this
site, there was an engineering firm involved with BFI who is doing the analysis
on the slte and there was a letter that was sent to staff here regarding what
was taken off the site. The projections at flrst were higher than we had
anticipated as what had been hauled and in final analysis it was depleted as far
as it was a smaller amount.
Gary Warren: That's exactly the point Mr. Mayor and the confusion that resulted
in trying to get the site staked for our inspection and the difficulties that
resulted from that have led to this recommendation.
Mayor Chmiel: I noticed all the specific violations that had occurred. The
lssuance of the flrst excavation permlt. I guess my understanding of an
excavation permit and a grading permit is one of two different, at least in my
own mlnd Paul.
Paul Krauss: If I could Mr. Mayor. The new ordinance that was adopted and it
was put under Section 7, Building Regulations, is entitled an ordinance amending
Chapter 7 and Chapter 20 pertaining to excavating, mining, fllling and gradlng.
It's intended to be an all inclusive ordinance. We at different times refer to
it as an excavation or mlning ordinance but it actually refers to any movement
of earth.
Mayor Chmiel: I would like to have us probably look at that and come up with
definitions on what is what.
Paul Krauss: Yes sir.
41
City Council Meeting-- August 27, 1990
Councilman Johnson; It'd be earth work. That's the definition in the
ordinance. This is earth work.
Paul Krauss: It's not in the zoning ordinance so it's rather difficult to
locate. Oown at the bottom.
Councilman Johnson: Mr. Mayor, as long as we've got a second here where we're
talking about this condition of getting the as-builts, I'd like to have a
SLll~VeyOr'S, a signed survey of what's there today. I mean I took the aerial
photographs today and overlaid it with what they gave us and it didn't exactly
agree. The aerial photographs were shot one year ago May. There's some trees
missing. The (tee line they say is one place, extends right in(o where they're
excavating according to their drawings so I want, before anything starts, a
co~lditio~ I was going to talk about later is that we get an actual surveyor to
sign off on a set of prints showing what the as is conditions are before we
.st,~rt excavating and then at the end of each phase, resurvey it. I notice the
standard procedure at landfills and the engineering firm I used to work for, one
of our bJ.g clients was Anoka Coun(y landfill and ue went out there and surveyed
for thom about monthly. Went out and saw exactly where they were on building
their ski hill, or whatever that landfill is out there. It's going to be the
highest point in Anoka County when they're through. I'll get to that when, but
as long as we were talking about it.
Mayor Chmiel: One of my pet peeves Jay, as I'm just mentioning to Gary, is that
there is not a PE signing off on these. And I do want them certified by a PE.
Loren Habbegger: Okay, we'll have to bring that up here at probably another
meeting here but I guess ~he thing is, I'm bringing out some points here and
we're just trying to rectify what you people are looking at.
Mayor' Chmiel: Sure, go ahead.
I. oren Habbegger: The other aspect of the thing here is you've got a noise
analysis and other testing if required. Number one, when (his project started,
we did meet with the Sheriff's department and the Sheriff's department was made
aware of the trucks hauling to and from the landfill, and in the meantime we
were also hauling out of Chaska which we did work with the Sheriff's department
et, that. Chaska City Police. The Highway Patrol. Hennepin County and as far
as meeting ail standards of the truck's noise levels, I don't see that there's
any problem here whatsoever because the Sheriff's department would be enforcing
this. As a matter of fact, in the time period hauling out of Chaska, and what
ue hauled out of here, we were stopped 18 times for weight checks and different
situations and we met all criteria as far as safety features on the trucks and
noise levels so I don't fee]. that that poses a problem and should be deciphered
by the Sheriff's department which you'll have the Eden Prairie Police Department
also involved. The Highway Patrol and Hennepin County going across from this
point.
Councilman Johnson: They never issued any citations?
Loren Habbegger: No. There was a speeding ticket I believe that was issued and
believe that's ali that was.
42
City Council Meeting - August 27, 1990
Councilman Johnson: I observed that one.
Loren Habbegger: And at the point, I .don't think, it has gone before...
Councilman Johnson: He was also dumping as he went. I wasn't sure whether he
was pulling you over for the speeding or the dumping of dirt as you went down
the road.
Loren Habbegger: Well that can happen. I was following a truck the other day
with the same situation on Flying Cloud hi11.
Councilwoman Dimler: There's a State law against that.
Loren Habbegger: The State has been watching us.
Mayor Chmiel: Mud flaps covering the tops if they're too excessively filled.
Loren Habbegger: Right. What we're trying to do is number one, BFI business
does not want the trucks to be overloaded. The other aspect ls, I'm meetlng
with the Sheriff's department, Eden Prairie and also Hennepin County Sheriff's
department and Hlghuay Patrol. We offer for them to use the BFZ scale uhlch
a certified scale to weigh any trucks that come in so I feel ue can resolve any
problem that overload or any road restrictions as far as overloaded on the
county roads are damaged.
Mayor Chmiel: Hopefully full stops at stop slgns and not rolling stops as
they've been doing and I've observed that s~veral times.
Loren Habbegger: We'll make a notation to the drlvers. And also ! did talk to
the Sheriff's department, the Chief in operations regarding this that they
enforce and watch and they dld keep tabs on these drlvers. So I guess the thlng
is, what I'm saying here is, the Sheriff's department I feel can handle this
situation in conjunction ulth Eden Pralrle and I don't feel you have to have a
special police added for this particular situation. It was handled quite well
for the amount of yardage that we dld move through Carver County from Chaska, as
I told you the last time at the last Planning Commission meeting. That we moved
in excess of 120,000 yards in 45 days.
Mayor Chmiel: I guess you're probably right in that particular aspect but the
concerns I have, the amount of violations that they did to the City. Moving
just the amount of yards that they're moving out of the City of Chanhassen and
more so than what they've indicated, I thlnk sometimes warrants to have some of
these additional things contained within.
Loren Habbegger: I can see your concern Mr. Mayor but I guess what I'm trying
to work this thing out here in an orderly fashion and that's what I'm here for
tonight.
Councilman Johnson: So you're looking at item number 3 there. Noise levels
stemming from the operations are not to exceed Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency and EPA regulations?
Loren Habbegger: Right. I feel they can meet all specifications because your.
43
City Council Heeling -- August 27, 1990
Councilman 3ohnson: You don't have any problem with that condition? You meet
it?
t. oren Habbegger; We meet it, right.
Cc)uncilman Johnson; So we're .just going to leave the condition in there.
Loren Habbegger: I guess, not that you call somebody in, a testing company and
start testiI~g on these things when you've already.
Mayor Chmiel: We have a budget to 1.ive with too.
Loren Habbegger: Z understand that. The other aspect here, Z'm just moving
here falrly abruptly, is the trucks do meet all the standards here. The other
situation is, as faf' as your inspections on site, if we can control the
situation Z feel that we don't have to have a thorough inspection situation ulth
a man from yOUr' department on the site at all times. We dld move through the
flrst part of it ulth success untl~ we got to the polnt where the permit was a
probtem. What do you feel on that Gary? Do you feel you're going to need a
man? ~ just guess if you could take spot checks situations, there uill be a
foreman on site there. Not that we accumulate a lot of costs in inspection fees
which we're not trying to. We're trying to make thls a budget situation and
move it forward.
Councilman Workman-'. Are we keeping a man on site full time?
Gary Warren: We have a condition that any staff would be compensated for theLr
efforts in keeplng a handle on this. Z guess to address it specifically, we do
this similar to any contractor. When it comes down to the level of credibility
af~d degree of comfort that we have and to be honest, we're startlng out with
this process in a little bit more conservative mode because of the previous
start on thls project so I would say that we're going to have people out there
ini~i811y probably on a daily basis until we hit a comfort level that what's
happening and going on ls satisfactory and that we feel good about it and if
thlngs go along we1.1., we get cooperation and things make sense to us then, our
people have plenty of other thlngs to do.
Loren Habbegger: I guess this is what I'm looking at.
Gary Warren: We're not going to just plug somebody in there just to run up the
t ab, no.
Loren Habbegger: We did start out on a successful basis until this permit
situation got in tile entanglement here but I guess what I'm saylng is if we can
avold excess inspection, we'll try to remaln wlthln your guidelines like we did.
Gary Warren: We always avoid excesses in city government. We will respond
dlrectly to the quallty and cooperation that we get from your contractor.
Lorel, Habbegger: The other aspect here is on tile elevations here.
Mr. Obermeyer, we're uorkJ, rlg wlth hlm on the floodplain situation ulth the creek
and everything and you will be getting a letter from him regarding that
September 5th meeting which all lssues u111 be addressed here. I guess the
44
City Council Meeting - August
other thing is number 9, the hauling out on the agricultural road here. What we
basical]y did on the agricultural road is we set up a sanded driveway. We feel
that that will control the dust going out onto Pioneer Trail and I don't feel
that from our standpoint that we had much of a problem dragging too much mud out
onto the road. We did cover that in a fairly clean manner.
Gary Warren: I guess I would tend to disagree. We did have carry over onto
Ploneer Trall ulth the inclemant weather and that's, the sand serves a purpose
to a certain extent but the rock road construction access, the large rock, clear
rock is really what does the job.
Loren Habbegger: I feel we can work that out as far as with your staff as far
as in the engineering department on keeplng the road clean.
Gary Warren: If you agree wlth us, then there's no problem.
Loren Habbegger: Okay. Just coming here tonight, I was coming from Chaska, I
just ran across the same situation where they're coming out of a wet area. It's
hard to keep mud off the road. As far as, okay the other polnt here I guess
that I want to bring out is, as far as complying with you people on this permit,
we wlll give us our fullest cooperation here to get the thing rolllng agaln here
and how long a period do you think that it's going to take you here to, we want
to try and get this permit moved along if we can. Hopefully by that September
5th meeting with the Watershed.
Paul Krauss: Well Mr. Mayor, there's some things that the developer or the
applicant would be obligated to do. If Councilman Johnson's request for an as
is plan is put into a condition, that would have to be prepared. We would need
to contact the County Engineer and patrol the road and as you suggested this
morning, possibly videotape the road to make sure we document what's out there
now. We could probably do our part of it by the time the watershed district
meets. As long as they fulfill their obligations, that's probably a reasonable
deadline.
Loren Habbegger: Upon meeting with Mr. Obermeyer here he felt that the
specifications we'd have to him here this week, that the watershed would have no
problem wlth thls particular project so basically he has assured me that the
permit will be moved forward and I guess I did go to the Watershed several times
here regarding this matter to move it along.
Mayor Chmiel: How much clay are you going to take out of Phase 3 and Phase 4
and Phase 5?
Loren Habbegger: I'll tell you. I don't have that spec sheet here with me at
this time. The packet as you know is quite extensive. I'm sure that I can get
that to engineering as far as what.
Mayor Chmiel: I'd like that. I'd like to know that.
Loren Habbegger: Dave Sime can get you that with no problem as far as what we'd
be taking out. Oh, the other situation here I guess I forgot to bring up here
ls we feel that we would want to work on Saturdays. We dld work in Chaska on
Saturdays and you can accomplish quite a bit of work with less traffic and I
45
City Council Meeting --August 27, 1990
don't fee]. like we'd present a problem.
Hayor Chmiel: Well it presents us with a problem basically I guess with
Saturdays is that we have all our residents within the community. Secondly, we
don't have staff available on Saturdays to do ally checking so I would much
prefer that we keep it to a 5 day work week.
Loren Habbegger: Could you consider a Saturday situation? What we're trying to
do here is move this project along in a 75 day working period if we can do it.
If not sooner and it depends upon inclement weather what ue might run into but I
guess what we're looking at here if we can, maybe you can have a staff person on
a Saturday observe the situation on Saturdays and give us a chance here to work
on Saturdays if ue can. It would greatly help the project.
Councilman Johnson: You're going to complete all 5 phases in 75 days?
Loren Habbegger: That's what we're planning on doing.
councilman 3ohnson: You have to restore each phase before you go to the next?
Loren Habbegger: It will be all done. As a matter of fact, we're in
application right now with Carver County for a permit, actually west of Chaska
which we feel we'll have in hand here in conjunction with thls, completion of
this work here. I guess what I'm saylng is, can you give us the Saturdays.
What we need.
Mayor Chmiel: It's up to the rest of the Council. I'm sort of sticking to the
5 day work week only because of the fact that even if we did put someone on and
plck up that tab, lt's rather expensive as well. But I'll throw it open to the
resk of the Council. Tom?
Cou~,cilman Workman: Do you want me to give my general comments?
Councilman Johnson: Sar. urday work week.
Councilman Workman: Well I thlnk it's pro and con. If they have Saturdays,
they get done earlier and we did a little bit of manipulating for Rosemount's
extended or quicken schedule so they could get some things done. I'd prefer
they didn't work on Saturday. I'd prefer they weren't there Monday thru Friday.
Z don't know. It's a horse aplece. If they can get it done quicker by uorklng
some Saturdays, then they won't be there.
Loren Habbegger~ I guess what, I'm going to just bring a point up here right
now. I feel that if we could have moved forward here, we'd be out of your hair
already and you wouldn't even have us around. We'd have been gone. Now take
for example in Chaska, which I brought up at the Planning Commission meetlng,
they've already got the bulldlng up that we excavated for. It wlll be occupled
in a short period of time so I guess time is of the essence here. We're not
here to drag thls thlng out. We want to get it done and hopefully we'll back in
the area again next time we do apply that we won't have any problems with you
people.
46
City Council Meeting - August 27, 1990
Councilwoman Dimler: As far as working on Saturday, are there any neighbors
here that would like to address that? No? Okay. I think that hiring somebody
for Saturday, would we be saying that a City Council or say staff person has to
be there on Saturday?
Loren Habbegger: I guess we don't feel that we need somebody there but you
know, if it would make you comfortable, let's review the thing and you've got
the right to shut the thing down at any time.
Councilwoman Oimler: Are we talking about an increased rate per hour on a
Saturday?
Mayor Chmiel: How about if we conditioned it and said that if we receive
complaints from neighbors or residents within the community, that we would cut
out Saturdays?
Councilwoman Dimler: We would still have to have somebody that's willing to
work on Saturday.
Mayor Chmiel: That would be at their cost, not ours.
Loren Habbegger: Gary, how much review time do you think you'll need on a
Saturday? For everything to be the way it should be. Do you feel you'd need an
extensive amount of time?
Gary Warren: The problem is, if you're going to bring a person in on a
Saturday, you're not going to just bring him in for a half hour. A guy comes
for a half day.
Loren Habbegger: Let me feel out this. Do you feel lt's that important on a
Saturday that you have somebody there if you can review it on a Monday from
Friday?
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, this is not meant to influence your decision on whether
or not there's Saturday hours at all but one of the problems you have with an
operation such as thls in an area such as this is we notify wlthln 500 feet of
the site and we don't have the signs that you authorized yet in place so the
only notlce that went out ls within 500 feet and when you're talking about farm
country, you're not talking about a lot of people. We did give some thought to
trylng to notlfy people up and down Pioneer. We dld not do that but we were
aware that there were a series of complaints about noise and traffic safety and
other thlngs that we experienced last sprlng from thls and related operations.
I did ask Scott Hart to do some background check on that and he did indicate
that there were a number of complaints raised and there's a short memo in the
packet to that regard. There may be nobody here tonight representing the
neighborhood but we know they're out there because we've gotten thelr complaints
and I've received the calls. Gary's recetved the calls and Scott has as well.
Councilwoman Dimler: I guess thinking too, if you're going to use Bluff Creek
Drive, is that the one you're proposing to use?
Loren Habbegger: Pioneer Trail.
47
City Council Meeting - August 27, 1990
Hayer Chmlel: Stralght across into Eden Pralrle. To Eden Pralrle landfill.
Councilwoman Oimler: But you've got 125 truckloads per day.
Loren Habbegger.' There are 15 trucks that would be haullng on this job.
guess wh~t I'm saylng here, J.f you take that route, which I do regularly because
I run it across going to TH 169, you've got trucks. That's a lateral situation
as far as trucks hauling Oil .Saturdays. I follow them all the time. You've got
industry along there that has trucks that use that route. I feel that thls
not that great of a problem. You're going to have calls no matter what. Z can
lmaglne that Eden Pralrle gets calls on trucks golng through that area. Chaska
may get cal. l.~. No matter what you do you're.
Councilwoman Oimler: Ny other question is, can you work once the weather gets,
you're proposing to work through December anyway aren't you?
Loren Habbegger: What we're trying to do is if we can get into the site and go
ahead with the landfii1 and they'll let us move the project along, we will be
probably done before December if we can move aggressively.
Councilwoman Oimler: But you're getting into the possibility of bad weather.
Loren Habbegger: Well, the problem you do have some fall rains which occur in
September and October.
Councilwoman Dimler: And that restricts you from uorklng?
Loren Habbegger: Well sometimes on a site like that, which is cl~y, it's hard
to get in and out of so you can't do lt. Let's put it that way.
Hayer Chmiel: Z'11 agree. With 4 wheel drive had a little problem today.
Councilwoman Dimler: I guess if we've got a staff member that's willing and
they're willing to p~y, I guess I wouldn't oppose Saturday.
Mayor Chmiel: I'd like 'Lo have a stipulation though. In the event there are
complaints by tho residents, that it stop. It ceases at that time.
Councilman Johnson: What about reduced trucks? They're doing 15 trucks haullng
on weekdays,
l_oren Habbegger: I guess that's the purpose of this project ls to move it on
Saturdays and get as much work done as we can possibly do. That's it.
Councllnlan Johnson: I know I got in the middle of your trucks when you were
hauling in Chaska on Saturday because ~ had to go to visit somebody in Eden
Pralrle and you were the only trucks out there and you were just boom, boom,
boom.
I. oren Habbegger: Well Saturdays, there was a matter of fact there was a number
oF other trucks that were hauling in that area too. There's 3 pro~ect~ that
were going in that area.
48
City Council Meeting - August 27, 1990
Councilman Johnson: The Saturday I was there every truck went to where you went
and it was your trucks. I mean they all had your name on the side.
Loren Habbegger: Well I guess I'm not arguing who's trucks they were.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay.
Councilwoman Dimler: Are you going to start at 7:00 on Saturday like every
other day?
Loren Habbegger: That's what we would do, yes.
Mayor Chmiel: 7:00 to 6:007
Loren Habbegger: 7:00 to G:O0 and possibly shorter hours.
Councilwoman Oimler: I'd like to sleep in on Saturday.
Mayor Chmiel: In short order. Any other discussions?
Councilman Johnson: Did you have any other?
Loren Habbegger: I guess I've tried to cover here what I can cover here. If we
can move this thing along.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there anybody wanting to address this? It's your opportunity.
Councilman Johnson: I wish we had gone further out on the notices on this. A
few years back, 3-4 years back we had made klnd of the general policy under 2
city planners ago I guess. Back under Barb that down in the south area we
wouldn't use the 500 feet. We'd use something larger than 500 feet because lt's
only reasonable. 500 feet, you may not get off the property.
Loren Habbegger: Can I just bring up one point? What stops any hauler from
coming down Pioneer Trail to Chaska and going through your area? It's just that
simple.
Councilman Johnson: Well we have no control over any of the haulers.
Mayor Chmiel: We can't control Chaska or anyone else but we can control what
happens withln the clty of Chanhassen.
Loren Habbegger: I understand that but I guess what I'm saying is the 500 feet
level, I don't feel that we're going to have any problems with anybody in thai
immediate area because it's such a distance and then once you're out on the
road, I don't feel there's that blg of a problem. We're not golng to be
disturbing a neighborhood or anything like that. It's all agricultural.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. The one intersection of TH 101 is one of my real concerns.
Loren Habbegger: It's a rough situation and.
Mayor Chmiel: It's a bad intersection.
49
City Council Meeting - ~ugust Z?, 1990
l~oren Habbegger: I was down at the State the other day and I was trying to get
somebody to give me some a~suers on when they're going to improve that. I go
there every morning...car running into the side of you but that's the only way
we. have to go and they just have to play in an orderly fashion here. We did
puli signs on that TH 101 situation at...so that when people came over that
hill, Gary had requested that and I think our signage can help alleviate some of
the dangers.
Councilman Johnson: Your grandchildren will be asking the same question.
I.oren Habbegger: Hopefully it will be corrected by then.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Tom. Any questions?
Connciiman ~orkman: No. I wanted to know, we do have signs going for the north
and south on TH lO~ then? Either side?
Gary Warren: That's what we would intend to have.
Councilman Workman: Okay, are we going to have those coming out of the site
~lso?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
Councilman Workman' Because I don't know, if there's a loaded semi--trailer
full of clay shifting gears going across TH 101 there, it is going to,
SOlnebody's going to die. Jay, I like your engineer survey idea. That's
potentially something ~hat could hold this thing up as something that we're
going to approve this thing and require of them so it's an outside survey.
know Wanegrin did their own basically and we're looki,g for an outside?
Councilman Johnson: You guys had your own surveyor do this?
Loren Habbegger: The engineering was done internally. Wanegrin does a lot of
engineering inter~ally. This is just a prep situation.
Gary Warren: There are discrepancies between the as built information and
that's got to be resolved.
Councilman Workman: I guess I'd like to see that. The only other thing. I
guess I've heard the word, this is going to set a precedence. I get the
sneaklng suspicion that whlle the Counc11 and Plannlng Commission and everybody
involved includi,g staff, if they had their druthers, this thing wouldn't go
because it would appear as though, Loren that we're not galning a whole lot here
and I don't know what you're getting per Zoad on the per clay out there at BFI
but I'm sure lt's worth your uhlle to do
Loren Habbegger: I thir~k what we're basically looking at here, number one.
What you people should look at, there's golng to be excavating done throughout
Chanhassen no mat~er what l]appens. The other part is, we're looking at a
development plan for thls property. Not agricultural, it wlll be residential
and I think with the taxes that this uill generate, it far exceeds, the benefits
50
City Council Heeting - August 27, 1990.
far exceed what you're looking at.
Councilman Johnson: Many years away. I mean we're talking a long time before
we have sewer and water down here.
Loren Habbegger: We won't have sewer and water. This is defined for 2 1/2 acre
tracts.
Councilman Workman: Well the cost for city plows to get out there and plow that
will shoot any recognizable gain. Homes aren't necessarily a profit to the city
as industrial ls and improving it for agricultural, you know that's not
necessarily a gain to the city. But anyway, if this in fact is a precedence and
maybe thls has been a good test for us in the clty and we need to maybe further
look at our ordinance to see what we can do. What if thls mound was a mound of
earth that we all held in high esteem? What if thls was Near Mountain. The
mountain out on Near Mountain and they wanted to take this down. Would they
have the rlght to do that? It sounds 11ke they might. So somewhere we're
missing, and I think all the comissioners and the Council, we're all concerned
that number one, we're not getting anything but the aesthetics is what we're
going to get and we're going to be left without them. And so maybe we need to
further refine what ue thlnk, because Loren's rlght. There's golng to be
pillaging going on much like Edina and I know they prepped that property and it
dldn't matter to me that they dld that around Southdale but maybe to somebody
sometime it did and maybe we need to look at this very quickly because if it
starts to happen, who knows where the next landfill's golng to pop up and
they're going to need a whole bunch of clay and we're going to be convenient
also. And so we should learn from thls and say what are ue golng to do or how
are we going to be able to get by with restricting thtngs in the future that
might be to our advantage but we're not going to have any control over being
able to do it. That's what I've learned from this. One, I've learned that we
can't really stop them. We should put the appropriate constraints to protect
the environment and safety and everything else like that but if this were an
important 200,000 here, we maybe couldn't stop it.
Paul Krauss: I think that point's real well taken. You know again, the
ordinance wasn't designed to stop thls stuff. Zt was designed to get a handle
on it. Whlle it is precedence setting though, one of the things that's
different out here than would be different at Near Mountaln ls the ordinance
devotes a lot of attention to protecting wetlands and established tree cover and
natural vistas and on and on and on. None of those thlngs really applled here.
We just had some hilly cornfields so there was nothing intrinsicly worth while
savlng on lt. Zf there had been, we probably would have taken a different tact
with it. I guess the real test of thts is tf somebody tries to do a Near
Mountain, whether or not this ordinance would stand up and I thlnk we should
look at it in that light. When we have a lot of excavating, for example on Lake
Susan Hills 4th Addition, they're pulllng 80,000 yards of materlal off of that
but they're pulling the material off in conjunction with an approved subdivision
plan. They are buildlng what they approved. Hauling off the slte ls incidental
in that case to building homes. In this case, the cart's in front of the horse.
Councilman Workman: But then on the other hand I don't blame Wanegrin or Loren.
They're being market driven here and there's money in them thar hills you know
and so as long as that's true, they're golng to be dolng that to make a 1lying
51
Cil~y Council. He,~,]~J. ng -- ~ugust 27, 1990
and a wage and everything else. But that's not ours to worry about so much as
wl'~f~t J_.~ the ovel'all impact goillg to be in various spots as they pop up around
the city and that's all [ had to say. Thanks.
Councilwoman Dimler; I gues,~ I wanted to ask, I'm concerned about the
restoration of the site and I'm not real sure that I understand exactly what can
controls we have in place except that you're requiring restoration of one pha~e
to be completed before the next phase begins. Am I to assume from that that
after each phase there has to be a new permit?
Paul Krauss: No ma'am but there uould have to be approval by the City Engineer
that they've completed the restoration of a phase which mea~s they have to pull
ti'me black dirt back out. Spread it. They [,ave to plant ground cover. They
have to maintain erosion control until that ground cover takes.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, but the permit is a blanket permit. They could
feasibly go on. I mean we don't have any control over that.
Paul Krauss: The control is placed in the hands of the City Engineer. He is in
a pos.[.tZon to say you've completed or you haven't completed the first pha~e or
whatever. What we're also saying is that staff is golng to be ina posltlon to
say you've violated the permit, ~e're going to stop work and we're going to put
you in front of the Council.
CouncJ. lwoman Dim.l. er: But we've done tllat before.
Paul Krauss: Yeah. Well that's true but we were successful ultimately. It
took a while.
Councilwoman Oinller: I'm just thinking with the background and the history that
what other control do we have if they decide not to be in compliance with what
the City Erlgineer says?
Paul Krauss: That's when we shut them down. I mean there was a lot of
discussion and disagreement as to what they were or were not authorized to do
under the original permit. We felt very sure about it and our City Attorney
felt very sure about it but they apparently disagreed. There can be no question
here what the conditions are. What they're entering into and what they're
giving us a letter of credit for. It's fully been laid out for everybody and we
intend to watch it like a hawk.
Councilwoman Oimler: Okay, that brings to the question, do you feel the
$30,000.00 is adequate?
Pau.1. Krauss: We discussed this, the City Engineer and I discussed this after
the Planning Commission suggested a hlgher dollar flgure, I guess frankly I
wouldn't object if more money were placed aside. Gary and I felt that glven the
phased basis of th.ts thing, that the $30,000,00 should be enough to cover it.
Slnce we can shut it down at any glven tlme but if we had a 11ttle more comfort
.i.n the thing, Z wouldn't have a problem with that.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, thank you. That's all the questions I had.
52
City Council Meeting - August 27, 1990
Gary Warren: If Z couid just pick up on one of ursuia's comments. I think it
is important that, from my perspective, since I'm supposed to be the gentleman
authorizing the next phase, thece definitely wiii be a letter issued from my
office before any subsequent phases start so that there's no question that we're
satisfied that one phase is done and you're authorized to go the next step
because I can envision a Saturday if you will, if you're working a Saturday, you
flnlsh up the yardage on Phase 1. You've got the trucks rolling. You want to
go to the next phase. That's not going to happen. You're going to have to pull
up.
Councilwoman Dimler: That was my question. What kind of control do we have?
Mayor Chmiel: I guess the thing that I want to make sure you understand that if
any of these conditions are violated, the Clty will shut you down. Period.
There's no questions. I don't want to play anymore games because of what I've
read through here and I just want you to convey that back to the people who are
going to be doing this.
Loren Habbeger: I think Mr. Mayor, if you look at Mr. Wanegrin's track record,
Mr. Wanegrin has done an extensive amount of work in the metropolitan area. He's
did an extensive amount for Naegele on 494. A lot of work in Bloomington,
Minneapolis. If you check his reputation as far as doing what he says going to
do, he does the job and I mean you can check it out. I think the thing ls, we
got off to a bad foot on the permit here that was misconstrued and it should not
have ever have happened because we dldn't lntend it that way.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, I go through all the violations starting August of lg88.
Sprlng of lg89. January of 1990. February of '90. February 14, lg90. May of
'gO and a lot of these things are things that had been discussed and not really
adhered to and I think that I just want you to understand where we're comlng
from. I don't want this to be a consistent happening within the City.
Loren Habbeger: I think of the specifics of the original permit that was issued
would have been there, we wouldn't even be talking about this right now.
Mayor Chmiel: That might very well be true. Might very well be true.
Loren Habbeger: And there was a misunderstanding but I'm trying to rectify it
here now and gettlng the job done.
Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussion? Jay?
Councilman Johnson: I just basically went upstairs thls evening and after
going out to the site and looking around and it didn't look like what the
exlsting conditions drawlng ls and it dldn't look to me to be what the slte was,
I went and pulled the lg8g aerial photographs of the area. It is a little
different. That's why Z'm saylng Z think we need a registered survey of the
area before we start to know what our existing conditions are. There's no way
thls drawlng called Attachment ~3, Sheet 5 of 6 ls existing conditions. These
conditions may be 4 or 5 years old conditions. May be from the 1970 maps of the
area. I don't know where lt's from but definitely in July 2nd of 19g0, Phase 1
had been completed and it's not shown on here. What appears to be the black
dlrt stockpile from Phase i was put almost on the edge of the creek. We have
53
City Coullc.(.l. Heu. l. ing - August 27, 2990
almost a sheer bluff up there eroding away into the creek. There's no way
yo~t'r'e goi~i9 to get. erosion control across in there. There's a group of trees
here they seem to be circling that don't exist. I'm not sure why they're
leaving this ljttte hill tilers. ,'~d seem to be working too close to that creek.
Z've got some real concerns as to when we're through uhy we have this steep
embankment here next to uhat are shoun as 4 trees. Those 4 trees are not there.
Loren Habbeger: Can I just bring up a point here?
John.son.' Yeah.
Lo'ten Hztbbeger: Okay. Number one, the black dirt that was stockpiled there was
requested by the ~atershed. hsa matter of fact it's what is being requested
again. That we put a berm along there to keep erosion from going into the creek
and dJ. ver~ it i~to a slit area.
Councilman Johnson: Well that's not a berm. I mean I'm talking a pyramid
shap~.,d, 20 foot t,'.tll pile of black dirt that you can't even walk up the side of.
That's not a berm.
Loren Habbeger: That's part of the excavating but as far as along the creek
f.I,-;'r-e, J.t was requested by the Watershed to build a berm along the creek area.
Councilmarl Johnson: Are you talking about this berm here?
L.orel, Habbeger' Right.. Now you do have some excavating there.
Hayer Chmiel: Phase 2 that they hauled off.
Lor~:n 14abbeg~;r: Tl~at's not do~e. Granted what you're looking at but I guess,
Council. marl Johnson: Well one thil~g, in this area where there's an extremely
steep slope, this sounds 11ko a good time to put some control on that slope.
We're golng to have some heavy equipment out there. That seems to be a slope
that we ought to eliminate and make more gradual amid this is a watershed person
or somebody should look at that. Zt's uhere it shows there's 4 trees. There's
actually 4 dead stumps in that area. There's no lo,aves on those trees and
haven't been for years. Yeah, rlght there. Whether that should be taken and
inad~; a more gradLtal slope that uon't be eroding into Bluff Creek over the years.
Loren Habbeger: I think if you look at your plan there, and Gary can probably
talk to Dave on that, tile plan there is to, the elevation there will be smoothed
out. ~ mean it'e not golng to stay.
Councilman Johnson; Not on your fi;,a], grading.
[_oren Habbeger: Well I'm saying the trees that were cut down there. There were
tre:e~ I:h,'~t uere cut down that were dead. The Watershed and the DNR gave
permission to cut down.
Councilman Johnson: That's fine. I've got no problem but it shows you as having
trees here for some, they're not there. If we're worried about those trees, I
was just out there. There's no trees in there worth saving. There's some
54
City Council Meeting - August 27, 199o
stumps and stuff. It would help the creek out at that location. At this
location where it shows the trees in the southwest corner, they extend further
than that according to the aerial photographs into the area to be inside of the
erosion control fence so ue have to retook, that's why I want the surveyors.
Make sure we're not taking out any trees. Also, the erosion control along Bluff
Creek and along that access road. We need an erosion control all along that
access road. We're already filling in that wetland with erosion as you drive in
there. There's several tons of silt already into that wetland from Phase 1;
That probably should be hauled out of the wetland. The wetland restored that's
already been damaged and new erosion control put into that area along the road
accessing this. I mean that's already damage already done by Phase 1.
Loren Habbeger: I think that this can be resolved by your engineering
department just telling...
Councilman Johnson: Put conditions in here.
Loren Habbeger: That's fine. I guess that should be resolved engineering wise.
Mayor Chmiel: Maybe Gary can address that.
Gary Warren: Well I'm as concerned as Jay is that we have an accurate base that
we're starting from here. This drawing doesn't even document what the basis is
for the information so I guess I would say that we want to have these concerns
addressed that Jay has brought up here so we're starting from the proper ground
zero.
Loren Habbeger: Gary, I think if we can just meet, I think ali these things can
be resolved from an engineering standpoint and just put specifics on it and
we'll get it done.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other discussion? If hearing none. oh yeah, that
letter of credlt issue. I'd like to see that doubled. I really would. From
$30,000.00 to $60,000.00.
Councilman Johnson: Do we have any kind of cost estimate to base that on? Did
we ever put together a cost estimate to base the $30,000.00 on? If the
$30,000.00 is swagged, than $60,000.00 is a good of a swag. But usually we have
so many feet of pipe and so much of this and so much of this and here's your
letter of credit.
Councilman Workman: Well staff estimated what it would take to replace if
you're restoring one phase right?
Gary Warren: We basically estimated what it would cost to maintain the erosion
control fencing and to restore the largest phase if we were left with that
exposed. What could be done perhaps is if give me some comments about what do
you want to protect against aside from that, we can modify that number
accordingly but that was our approach is to say if we had to restore the slte
and stabilize lt, what did we need. Plus also if we were left holding the bag
for inspection costs that were invoiced.
55
City Council MectJ. n9 -- August 2?, 1~90
Councilman Johnson: You took all these items here and came Up with an estimate
of what you thought it would cost right?
Gary Warren: Right.
Mayor Chmiel'. $30,000.00 for each of those specific phases is what you're
saying?
Gary Warren: $30,000.00 that needs to be kept in force for the duration of the
work that's out there and as is typical with any of our developments and the
City Attorney's office has often advised a bond is not acceptable to us because
in order to get the bond to pay off it takes a lot of time and effort and money.
Mayor Chmiel: Ri. gAt. A letter of credit is the way to go.
Cottnc~lman Workman: ~ guess if the $30,000.00 is based on something I would.
Mayor Chmiel; I still sort of feel a little uncomfortable with that on each of
those phases. If o~e phase goes by the wayside, I don't think $30,000.00 and
I'm not questioning your judgment but I still feel $30,000.00 is not going to.
Gary Warren: Why don't we, at your discretion, we'll take another look at our
numbers and see if it needs to be adjusted. If you want to give me that
discretions. It WOll't go ally J. owel' than $30,000.00.
Mayor Chmiel: Right.
Councilman Johnson: The thing about 'this site over a Moon Valley or something
site is if they ,ibandon the site, basically we take the black dirt there and
spread it back out and seed it. It's not real expensive.
Gary Warren: There is a vegetative issue here and I would expect tile Watershed
District is addressing it as well but we're getting out of a planting season if
we're going to have tho 1,.tst phases exposed in I)ecember, you aren't going to get
ally grass to grow so you're talking about using erosion control blanket or some.
Loron Habbeger: Right and that's ali being reviewed.
Gary Warren: So that's a little extra money obviously that we'll address in our
revised estimated.
Cou;,cilman Johnson: Okay, so modify condition 1.
Mayor Chmiel: Are you making all of those modifications to what we had
suggested?
Councilman Johnson: I'm trying.
Councilwoman Dimler: It will be in the Minutes right?
Mayo~' Chmiel: It should be.
Gary Warren: Between Paul and I we'll.
56
City Council Meeting - August 27, 1990
Councilman Johnson: Submit a letter of credit, a minimum of $30,000.00. An
exact amount to be de[ermined by the City Engineer's revised cost estimate.
Something of that nature.
Mayor Chmiel: Saturdays we indicated. We'd have someone on site. In the event
there are complaints.
Councilman Workman: We would potentially not have somebody on $1te on
Saturdays. What happens Monday thru Friday could direct whether or not somebody
would be there Saturday.
Gary Warren: Mr. Mayor if I could, i guess concerning Saturdays, I would just
qualify it that providing city can provide inspection. If we have a problem
staffwlse gettlng somebody out there, I guess lt's golng to be difficult. Also,
if we have to pay overtime for that person to be out there, that those costs are
golng to be covered. If we're comfortable that thtngs are golng fine, I mean
we're not looking to have somebody out there Saturday if everything is working
flne. I think we're all agreeable to that but we're.going to be conservative as
we start out.
Councilman Workman: It could also be triggered by neighborhood complaints?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes. For that Saturday.
Councilman Johnson: I tell you, once you get comfortable and you start a
routine of not going out on Saturday, that's when you better go out on Saturday.
I used to go out to plants on second shift when they're not used to seelng
people in an inspector mode on second shift and people acted a lot different
when they're not used to seelng people. Thls one place they had the vlsltors
where a supervisor's uniform when they went into the plant.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. We won't go back to the CIA.
Councilwoman Oimler: Okay. Jay, did you want to put something in there about
the wetlands or...a condition about your concern about what's already been done
to the wetland?
Councilman Johnson: Ah yes. A couple conditions actually. We've got
something on number 4 about Saturdays. We've got that figured out. Under
number 7, I thlnk we need to add in number 7 that an existlng condition survey
be made prior to starting signed by a registered surveyor and maybe here the as
bullts can either be by a professional engineer or surveyor. Usually lt's a
surveyor that does that type of work.
Councilman Workman: Does Wanegrln have.
Loren Habbeger: I guess what we were trying to do in this thing, we don't feel
lt's that complicated of a situation here. Your staff can review the thing and
look at it. I mean you're maklng a large project out of this thing which like
said here before, we'd have been done by now and thing would have been over with
if we had.
Mayor Chmlel: That's just the discussion thls evenlng rlght?
57
City Oouncil Meeting - Auqust Z7, 1990
Council. man JOhrlson: Atl we're saylng ls we don't belleve the drawings and
please give us another one.
L. orerl Habbeger: What I'm suggesting here and if you people will go along with
.i.t is if the e~gineer' that's currently worklng on it meet with Gary and meet
Gary's expectations as to what he wants.
Councilman Johnson: Is h~., a professional engineer? Is he a licensed
professional engineer?
Loren Habbeger: Gary has been working with him in the past here. I don't know
what.
Gary Warren: I don't know who you're talklng about.
Loren Habbeger: Dave Sime. Well Oave Hemple has been actually.
Gary Warren: But I don't know who your engineer is. Regardless, we would want,
the city engine:;ring department would want the registered stamp on the plans
documenting to the accuracy of the drawings. We are not golng to go out, the
engi~eering department to double check the work up there. That's why ~e require
a stamp on
Councilman Johnson: That's standard procedure in most of these. Llke I sald,
tl~.,. ~.nginee'rlng firm Z used to work for did this work for peopZe. We did Anoka
County landfill. We dld the RDF, or the...1andf111.
Mayor Chmie.t: Hopr;fully with everything that's been discussed v~il], be reviewed
and made sure that they're all contained 1ri here.
Councilman Johnson: Also there be a condition 13 about restoration of the
wetlands along the entry road and eroslon control to be provlded along the entry
road. Has Bob Obermeyer been out to the sit~~. yet?
t.oren Habbeger: Bob looked at the site initially when we applied for the
lnitial permit.
Councilman Johnson: Which initial permit? This one?
Loren Habbeger: With the Watershed, yes.
Mayor Chmiel: But it probably has changed.
Cotmncilman Johnson: You mean 3 years ago or now?
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, I'd like to have him review that site one more time.
Councilman Johnson: How long ago was Bob out there?
I_oren Habbeger: I mean we got the initial permit in 1988 is what it amounts to.
Mayor Chmie!: Yeal~. Well since then there's been a lot of violations on that
slnce then and Z thlnk he should review it at that time.
58
City Council Meeting - August 2?, 1990
Loren Habbeger: He'll review it and then he's going to be coordinating with.
Mayor Chmlel: I'd like him to, Yes.
Councilman Johnson: Are signs in here anywhere?
Mayor Chmiel: We'll contact him.
Loren Habbeger: And I thlnk the engineering that he's work wlth thls w111 be
included with your people.
Councilman Johnson: Yes, lt's in 1rem 10 for the slgns.
Gary Warren: We should clarify that includes TH 101.
Councilman Johnson: That will be clarified to include the intersection of TH
101.
Mayor Chmlel: Okay, any other discussions? If hearlng none, Paul.
Paul Krauss: There was also a request that there be a requirement that there be
a letter from the City Engineer authorizing proceeding from phase to phase.
Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
Paul Krauss: That probably should be added.
Councilman Johnson: Condition 14.
Councilman Workman: I'd move approval.
Councilwoman Oimler: Second.
Councilman Johnson: Oh, dld you sllp that in someplace else? Under 7?
Gary Warren: 8.
Councilman Johnson: Okay. So that condition was sllpped in under condition 8.
Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Oimler seconded to approve Interim Use
permit ~90-2 to excavate material from the 3eurissen Farm subject to the
following conditions and with the understanding that v£olation of these
conditions will result in the immediate suspension of operation by city staff
~ith the permit being brought back to City Council for revte~ and possible
revocation:
1. Submit a minimum $30,000.00 letter of credit, uith the exact amount to be
determined by the City Engineer, in a format acceptable to the City. The
letter of credit will be used to ensure the folloulng:
City Cou;~cil Ideeti~,g -. August 27, 1990
a. cover the cos, t of daily site monitoring by the Engineering Department
and patrolling of area roads as required by Carver County Sheriff's
Oeputies and the State Highway Patrol;
b. maintenance of erosion control;
c. site restoration on a phase basis;
d. preparation of "as--built" grading plans demonstrating compliance with
approved plans, on a phased basis;
e. repair of haul roads due to damage caused by the operation as determined
by city and county staff;
f. removal of mud and debris from haul roads as frequently as required by
city and county staff;
g. control of dust and other nuisances;
h. noise analysis and other testing if required.
Pay a Uniform Building Code grading permit fee of $787.56. City and County
staff as well as Carver County Sheriff's Oeputles and State Highway Patrol
staff time to mor, ltor and inspect the operation is to be charged to the
applicant at a ra[e of $30.00 per hour.
3. Noise levels stemming from the operation are ]lot to exceed HnPCA and EPA
regulations. ~f tile city determines that there is a problem, warranting
such tests shall be pald for by the applicant.
4. Hours of operation are limited to ?:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through
Saturday and prohibited or, natiorlal holidays. If the Clty Engineer
determines that traffic corlflicts resu.l.t due to rush hour traffic flows, the
hours of operation u111 be appropriately restricted. Hauling on Saturdays
uill cease if the city receives any complaints. No activity will be
permitted durlng tile U.S. Open Tournament.
5. Provide a revised erosion control plan for staff approval. The revised plan
should provlde full protection for the creek, wetland and drainage areas.
Erosion controls to be established and approved by the City prior to the
start of excavation activity. Fallure to malntain eroslon control wlll
result in revocation of the permit. Under tile first phase of the operation,
the applicant shall clean and restore the creek channel to the satisfaction
of tile City Erlgineer.
Submlt a revised grading plan prepared by a professional engineer indicating
that no area wJ. ll be excavated below the 971' elevation to ensure that homes
can be bullt above the 969' 100 year flood elevation in the future.
Obtain approval of tho Riley--Purgatory-Bluff creek Watershed District and
malntal~ the operation in full compliance with their requirements.
6o
City Council Meeting - August 27, 1990
7. Excavation to be phased in accordance with approved plans. As-built grading
plans prepared by a professional engineer or registered surveyor indicating
flnished grades shall be prepared by the applicant for each phase, for clty
approval, to demonstrate compliance with approved plans. Before any grading
can begin on the site, the applicant shall submit an exlstlng oondition
survey prepared and signed by a professional engineer or registered
surveyor.
8. Site restoration shall be completed on a phased basis before work is allowed
to proceed on the following phase. A letter will be issued from the City
Englneer authorizing the applicant to proceed. Provide a revlsed
restoration plan indicating depth of top soil and ground cover for city
approval. Slopes over 18~ are to be permanently vegetated wtth an
acceptable ground cover.
The applicant will be held responsible for controlling dust and fumes from
the site. A plan providing details of the method to be employed to clean
truck tlres before they exlt onto the publlc right-of-way ls requlred for
staff approval. It shall be installed prior to the start of work. It shall
further be the applicant's responsibility to clean the publlc right-of-way
as often as required by staff.
lo. Pioneer Trail is the only permissible haul road in Chanhassen. Other
routings will require review and approval by the City Council. Appropriate
"trucks haullng" slgnage shall be posted at the intersection of TH 101 and
kept in good condition. Prior to the start of work, the condition of the
haul road wlll be documented by the City and County staff and the applicant
will be held financially responsible for all damage that, in their opinion,
is caused by the operation.
11. The City will work with the County Sheriff to coordinate speed and weight
checks. If trucks are violating trafflc laws, staff will requlre that the
operation be shut down and will ask the City Council to revoke the permit.
12. Prior to the issuance of any permit, existlng erosion control problems must
be remedied to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
13. The applicant shall install erosion control and restore the wetlands along
the entry road.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS:
Mayor Chmiel: Next item is Council Presentations. Jay, do you want to hit it
with trees, Kerber and Powers?
Councilman Johnson: Yeah. I think somebody on Council had this under Council
presentations before and I've discussed it with staff before.
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah I did. Todd Hoffman was supposed to look into it.
61
CJ. ty Council Meeting - August 27~ 1990
Hayor Chmiel: If I remember correctly, those were trees that the deveioper put
that weren't required to.
Council. man Workman: They were free trees. He wasn't required to put them up.
Gary Warren: They're )lot a part of his development contract.
Councilman Johnson: I've got a feeling he didn't pay a lot for them either.
But they died pretty immediately and then the Japanese Bark Beetle, according to
Mr. Hoffman has attacked them and would then be spreading to other pines here
and it's probably too late now. They've probably already done their damage that
the Bark Beetle's going to do but they should be removed. I was hoping the
forester would get involved .in this and if they had any rules or regulations
that could force them to remove them because I'm not sure if the City has any
authority to tell them to remove a d.iseased tree, I would think we do
someplace.
Councilwoman Dimier: We did have Dale Gregory look into it and he's the one
thJt s~id that they belong to Saddlebrook and would be Saddlebrook's
responsibility. After that I don't know what action has been taken by the City,
Councilman Johnson: Well yeah.
Mayor Chmiel: Can we just follow through on that?
Councilman Johnson: Yeah. I think Code Enforcement or somebody needs to say
hey, we've got dlseased trees.
Ilayor Chnliel: We'll get tile weed inspector out.
Gary Warren: I know Mr. Murray has been contacted but that's been awhlle ago
L~O .
CouncJ. luoman Dimler: Let's check on that.
Councilman Johnson: Getting a developer that's finished his development to do
anythlng is exactly easy.
Nayor ChmieZ: Okay, Ursuala? Walking pal:h.
Councilwoman Dimler: Z had calls from people along Minneuashta. They're very
interested in a p~th. Z know that both the Park and Rec and we are a11 for
that. They would 11kc to know if they need to, if they have to wait for the
street improvement or if they can go ahead.
Councilman Johnson: Yes. It's certainly going to be cheaper.
Mayor Chmiel: It will be much Ness costly.
Council. woman Dimler'. Okay, what is the time line?
Mayor Chmiel: Next year.
62
City Council Meeting - August 27, 1990
Gary Warren: For construction we're looking at next year. We'd be initiating a
feasibility study here probably in the next month we'd be doing that at the
Council's direction.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, I'll report that back to them. I think they'd be
satisfied with that.
Gary Warren: There are going to be some geometric changes to the road that would
impact.
Councilwoman Dimler: They said we'll take it without the road. We don't want
to pay for the road but we'll pay for the walkway.
Mayor Chmiel: Tom? National League of Cities.
Councilman Workman: Well the National League of Cities thing would coincide
with that December 3rd budget hearing that Don Ashworth recommended. I know Don
you were talking with Don on this and he was talking about getting cheap fares
in relationship to the budget and everything else like that. I don't know where
it's at but in light of that, December 3rd wouldn't work.
Mayor Chmiel: Right. $o that's something he's going to have to look at.
councilman Johnson: Are you all planning on going?
Councilwoman Dimler: Well, as I said to the press I don't mind not going but
that shouldn't be the extent of our budget cutting. I mean if that's going to
be a token, I'm not.
Mayor Chmiel: 8ut every dollar counts.
Councilwoman Dimler: Yes, every dollar counts.
Mayor Chmiel: The street department, they said they have $10.00 they can save.
No, it was $100.00.
Councilwoman Dlmler: We've got to do more serlous budget cuttlng than that.
Gary Warren: Relative to the hearing date however, that does need to be set so
we can.
Councilman Workman: Well let's set it.
Councilman 3ohnson: Tom, are you planning on going to the conference?
Councilman Workman: Am I?
Councilman Johnson: Yeah.
Councilman Workman: I don't know.
Councilwoman Oimler: We could pay our own way I suppose.
City CoL[ncj. 1 Meetin9 - ~gu,~;t 27, 1990
COUllcJlman Hork~nan: I don~t know what I'm doing tomorrow for ].unch.
Cott.cilman .:iohnsol~: I mean Ursula you said you were,'t planning on it.
Counci.twoman Dimler: Oh, Z uouid go if we approved it. I might even go and pay
my DUn way. I don't know.
Councilman Workman: We have one less council member to pay for.
Councilman Joh~son: See I think that conference is worth every dollar you spend
on i~ because it's educational. Somebody uho'~ been elected to office and isn't
in yet as o[ Jal~uary, this ~ before, should they go?
Councilwoman Oimler: No. We decided that.
(Everyone was talk.lng at the same time with a couple different conversatio,s
going at once.)
Mayor ChmJel: tge co~zld probably have it on the loth and 18th.
G,~r>, Warr:tr~: The loth o,ly gives us 2 days...
councilman goh,son: You know they didn't list Shakopee or Eden Prairie thi~
time. Last time they listed, because pa~'~s of Cha,hassen are in the Eden
Prairie School District and the Shakopee District that we couldn't have it when
tl~eir's were on too. It's fun to have 4 school districts.
Mayor ChmJel: Maybe if ue hit it for the lOth and 18th rather than the 13th.
Councilman Johnsol~: 3rd and 10th.
Gary Warren: That would still give us 2 days Lo do any final revisions if
necessary.
Mayor Chmiel: If it's strictly hypothetical like last year's was.
{:eunc.[.lman Johnson: Hopefully we're not hypothetical by then.
Mayor Chmiel: Heavens no. You're right.
Resolution ~90-105: Cou.cilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dimler ~econded to
acknowledge the State estimated 1991 levy limit for Chanhassen set the Official
Public Hearing dates of December 10, 1990 and December 18, 1990. ~11 voted tn
favor and the motion carried.
ADHINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS:
Hayor Chm~e].: Okay, next item Administrative Presentations. This is where we
added MnOot regarding turn lanes on Choctaw a,d Sandy Hook for a cooperative
agreement.
64
City Council Meeting - August 27, 1990
Gary Warren: Right. Request the Council to authorize a cooperative
construction agreement with MnDot. They've agreed to use construction safety
funds to pay for construction of turn lanes on TH 101 for Choctaw and Sandy Hook
Road.
Mayor Chmiel: MnOot has?
Gary Warren: MnDot has. The City is doing the design and MnDot will pay for the
construction.
Councilman Workman: Are you talking about TH 101 and those intersections? What
about and Cheyenne?
Gary Warren: Cheyenne?
Councilman Workman: I place that, remember the drainage issue and all that and
then that was a part of it because they're getting rear ended as they pull a
left going north.
Gary Warren: Cheyenne may be one that we want to continue to work on. These
two were carry overs from last year that we have gotten MnDot Safety Funds for.
Councilman Workman: Can I throw out Cheyenne also?
Gary Warren: I will add that to the list. We'll have to initiate a separate.
Councilman Workman: What they're doing is going north, people who are turning
left into there and this lsn't uncommon, kind of coming down a slope. Over a
h111 and then down a slope and they see these people are taklng a left and they
think they can get around on the right and there's no room there and they're
getting.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, that's something we can look at but for right now we have
to get this one going. Right?
Gary Warren: That's correct. This is just requesting a cooperative agreement.
Mayor Chmiel: Can I have a motion on that?
Resolution (r~O-106: Councilman Workman moved, Councilman 3ohnson seconded to
authorize a cooperative construction agreement with HnOot to use construction
safety funds to pay for construction of turn lanes on TH 101 for Choctaw and
Sandy Hook Road. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Chmlel: Can I have a motion for adjournment?
Councilwoman Dimler: Mr. Mayor, just something that came up in the
administration that was lying here and I have a question. Do we need to
formally accept Bill Boyt's resignation which was just handed to us this
evenlng? And number two, there was something about Distrlct ~112, the community
education committee representative. They recommended Polster. I don't know
anythlng about that. Does somebody?
65
City Council Meeting -- August 27, 1990
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, those are two other items and I think we should put it out
for, have his also make his application but put it out for,
Councilman Workman: That name is familiar, Who is that?
Councilman 5ohnson: Chris, what's the name of his company. He's in the Rotary
and all the stuff around here.
Councilman Workman: lie's got his own communications?
Councilman 3ohnson: Yeah. Graphic's Communications. He does some work for the
City. He worked actively w~th the athletic association. He was our Pee Wee
coordinator this year. He's very active in school things. Good man.
Councilwoman DLmler: Do we want to have ~t open to other applicants though?
Mayor Chmiel: I think ue should.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay.
Mayor ChmJel: We've done it before in everything else.
Councilman 5ohnson: That's almost standard policy. The thing that Z wanted to
say ~s that Z don't think we really completed Tom's ~tem there is our discussion
of the National Conference,
Mayor ChmJel: We didn't really come up with any conclusion.
Councilwoman gimlet: We changed the dates,
Mayor Chmie].: We changed the dates so they wouldn't coincide with it.
Councilwoman Dimler: So we left that open.
Councilman Johnson: Well one thing I'd like to know is, okay. We've got an
election coming up. We've already said that if there's any lame ducks involved.
Councilman Workman: ~t's i~ our rules,
Co~ncilma~! Johnson: It's .tn our rules, they can't go, Tha['s good.
Mayor Chmiel: Two that are here are not lame ducks.
Councilman Johnson: There are two that absolutely won't be. We know we'll have
o~e new person absolutely because Bill's not running so there will absolutely be
one new person. Should we reserve a spot and then if, at the time of the
election they say no, we can't go then say okay, we'll just cancel our
reservations. If we're going to go, should we reserve a spot for the new people
as an educational benefit for them to where they can go ahead and get this?
Councilman Workma,: Yes.
Mayor Chmiel: sure. Why not?
66
City Council Meeting - August 27, 1990
Councilman 3ohnson: If we're going to go at all.
Mayor Chmiel: If we're going.
Councilman Johnson: But for budgetary purposes, one of the good things to say,
as leading examples of cutting back on expenses is saying we're not going to go
to this and save the $4,000.00 or $5,000.00. That would be my first reaction to
lead by example and say we're going to bite the bullet. This is our only
educational thing... Okay.
Councilman Workman: $o moved the adjournment.
Councilwoman Dimler: Second.
Mayor Chmiel: Hold it. We didn't accept Bill Boyt's notice of resignation.
Councilwoman Oimler moved, Counc/lman Workman seconded to accept B/ll Boyt's
Not/ce of Res/gnat/on as presented on August 27, 1990. All voted in favor and
the mot/on carried.
Councilman Workman moved, Counciluoman Oimler seconded to ad3ourn the meeting.
All voted in favor and the mot/on carried. The meet/rig was adjourned at 11:17
Submitted by Don Ashworth
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
67