1990 01 08CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 8, 1990
Mayor Chmiel called the F~ting to order at 7:30 p.m.. The Feeting was opened
with the Pledge to the Flag.
COUNCI~ERS PRESENT: Mayor Ch%iel, councilman Boyt, Councilman Workman,
Councilwoman Dimler, and councilman Johnson.
STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashw~rth, Gary Warren, Paul Krauss, Lori Siets~%a, and Roger
Knutson
APPROVAL OF AG~DA: Councilm~n Workman m~ved, councilw~van Dimler seconded to
approve the agenda with t/~ followin~ additions to council Presentations: Mayor
Ch~,iel wanted to dis~s the Police Contract Addend~ and Councilwoman Dimler
wanted to discuss the Board of Adjustments and Appeals, Public Safety. (kmmission
and Park and Bec C~,ission. All voted in favor of the agenda as amended and
the motion carried.
RECYCLING PRIZE DRAWING: Mayor C~%iel drew a nam~ for the Recycling Prize and
presented a check in the amount of $2~.M~ to Theresa Quinn for her recycling
efforts.
ORGANIZATIONAL ITfF~:
Mayor Chv, iel: We have s~me organizational items to go through. These
organizational i~ are ~lles of Procedure. Don, do you want to address
(a)?
Don Ashworth: The I~lles of Procedure are basically the same 'as had been in
effect in 1989. Also included are the proposed meeting schedule dates as the
City fbuncil had acted L~on ~ on the ~md of ~r. Staff stands ready to
answer any. q%~stions regarding the rules of procedure. Did you wish ~ to go
down through tbs,,.?
Mayor Ch~,iel: Yes. Why don't you go down through each one of the items.
Don Ashworth: The official newspaper, you do have another request...
councilwoman Dimler: E~c~e me. Did you ~ant c~stions on the Rules of
Proced~re if ~ have?
Mayor Ch~iel: Yes. If you have any specific questions.
Councilwoman Dimler: Oh, okay. I did want to bring up under Section 1, 2.02
about the receiving of the agenda and it says at least 72 hours urior to each
regular CoL~cil m~eting and I r~ specifically that w~ requested 96 hours.
Last year or most of the tim~ w~ had 96 hours and I'd like to ~_"~c that at 96
hours. 2.02. Maintenance of Agenda. Page 3. It says 72 hours and I know w~
changed that to 96 last year.
Don Ashworth: Can I l~it w~rdage in there that ~uld be at a F~[ntm~ of 72 with
the majority. 96 or s~mething like that? I think that on holidays...
City Co~cil Meeting - January 8~ 1990
Councilwoman Dimler: Well yeah, if you miss it, you know w~ never ccanplained
when we missed it last. We just accept it but I would like to see it at 96 so
it becomes the norm, and not the exception.
CounciL--an Johnson: Is that all you had Ursula?
Councilwommn Dim]er: That's it.
Councilman Johnson: The section that talks about m~etings and the dates of the
m~etings. I forget, it needs to be m~dified to fit this year's calander. It
still reads last year ' s calendar.
Don Ashworth: We still used the primarily first and third Mondays.
Councilm. an Johnson: No. Last year was still second and fourth but it talks
about Dece~er and November.
Mayor Chmiel: Nov~-~er and Dece~er are normally the only two m~nths that w~
us~mlly changed but we did change one other month as well.
Councilman Johnson: We changed May as well. So mmke that agree with what there
was before.
Don Ashworth: Were there any other questions on r~tles? Under official
newspaper, we did receive a request frc~. the Sailor. However, the City
Attorney's position is that the City Oouncil must mmke the designation if a
newspaper has it's known office of issuance in the City. In this instance, the
Villager is the only newspaper having it's known office of issue in the City and
accordingly it's Roger's opinion that they must be selected. Any additional
q~lestions?
Mayor C~;iel: If there's any addition c~.lestions, jtmt direct the~, to the Chair.
Don Ashworth: Okay. Official depository. Staff is recomv~nding Chanhassen
State Bank. We've had a good working relationship with them. Kevin McShane is
present this evening if the Council has any c~.~estions regarding that
designation. I should note as part of that, the City does use other banking
institutions as a part of our investment program. I think when we're looking at
this designation, it is for our normml banking business. The City Attorney and
City Cotu~cil went through a process this past year of looking at the City
Attorney's office. Staff is recopy, ending Ca~ll, Knutson, Scott and Fuchs to
be appointed as City Attorney. Bond Consultant, sim, ilar to the previot%s one,
the Council did go through a very arguous task in looking at bond consultants.
Selected Springsted. Springsted did a very good job for us on this last iss~le
and staff is recommending that Springsted continue as o~uf Bond Consultant.
Acting Mayor is really an appointment of the City Council. Staff makes no
recc~endation regarding that particular appointment if you'd like to cc~ back
to that one. Weed Inspector, under State law is the Mayor. The Assistant
Public Safety Director has been appointed as the Delm~ty ~_~cd~ Inspector. We
would again recommend that for 1990. Fire Chief, the Fire Department has acted
to recc~end the appolnt~nt of Dale Gregory as Fire Chief. There's a separate
recc~v~ndation in the Council's packet regarding that it~. Health Officer,
Dr. Mccollum has served as the City's health officer for a number of years. He
again agrees to se~we in that capacity as desired by the City Council. Staff is
City Council ~k=etir~ - January 8 ~ 1990
recomv~nding Dr. MoColl~. City. Auditor's is an appointment required under
State Statute for first of year. ~er, really a lot of your audit work,
getting ready for you~ 1989 closings had to occu~ during Nov~er and ~r.
Accordingly, this past year the City Council did go through a review of Auditors
and acted to select Deloitte-Haskins-Sells. We would rec(a~ that that
designation represent the first of year designation for City. Auditor. I guess
that's it.
Mayor Ch%iel: Okay. Regarding the Acting-Mayor. ~nis requires City Council to
name an Acting Mayor during the disability, or absence of the M~yor. I would
like to make a motion that ~ have Ursula Dimler as Acting Mayor during the .u~ar
of 1990. Is there a second?
Councilman Workman: I ' 11 second it.
Mayor Chv, iel moved, Councilm~n Workman seconded to appoint Ursula Dimmer as
Acting Mayor for the year 1990. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Co~.~cil~an Johnson moved, Councilm~n Workman seconded to approve the following
Organizational its~s:
a. Resolution %90-1: Rules of Procedure - as s~nded to change 2.02 to include
96 hours rather than 72 hours and to update the ~eeting calendar for the
year 1990.
b. Official Newspaper - The Villager
c. Official Depository - Chanhassen State Bank
d. City Attorney - Ca~bell, I~utson, Scott & Fuchs
e. Bond Consultant - Springsted Inc.
g. ;-~ Inspector - Mayor Ch~iel and Deputy ;'~ Inspector, Scott Hart
h. Fire Chief - Dale Gregory
i. Health Officer - Dr.
j. City. Auditor - Delloitte-Haskins-Sells
All voted in favor and the ~)tion carried.
CONSENT AGf2~DA: Councilman Workman moved, Councilw~3n Dimler seconded to
approve the following Consent Agenda it~ns pursuant to the City Y~nager's
rec~r~ndat ions:
a. Resolution %90-2: Approve Contract ~%dment No. 2, Lake Lucy. Boad Trunk
Waten~ain Project No. 88-25.
c. Approve Plans and Specifications for Ersbo 2nd Addition.
d. Resolution ~9~-3: Accept Utility Improvenents, Lots 9 and 15, Chanhassen
Hills First Addition, Project 89-17, Steve Slack.
e. Approve Debt St~y Analysis.
f. City Council Minutes dated December 18, 1989
Park and Recreation C~v~ission Minutes dated November 8, 1989
City Council Meeting - January 8, 1990
Park and Recreation Om~,ission Minutea dated December 12, 1989
Public Safety Commission Minutes dated December 14, 1989
g. Approval of Accounts.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
H. RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIAL LEGISLATION FOR EXTENSION OF TAX INCREMENT
DISTRICT.
Councilw~v.~n Dimler: I just had, I was going to talk to Don earlier and I
didn't get a chance to. I had t~o questions on the resolution approving special
legislation for the extension of a tax increment district. I understand that
it's District 2 but the paper did not say what is included in this district and
also the infok~'mtion didn't tell ~m how ~ny years we want to extend it.
Don Ashworth: This is the legislation to allow us to reroute TH 101 that
represents the district that basically is in the ~Sden Prairie School District
and the far east end of town and it would be for 3 years, 1990, 1991 and 1992.
Councilwo~n Div.]er: Thank you. With that information I'll move item, (h).
Resolution ~90-4: Councilwo~zun Dimler moved, Councilmzun Workman seconded to
approve a Resolution approving special legislation for extension of Tax
Incre~_nt District. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
J. APPROVAL OF THE LAKE ANN PARK ENTRANCE FEES.
Councilm~n Boyt: Okay, the staff report needs to be corrected. I don't see
Lori here.
Lori Siets~m: I'm right here.
Councilman Boyt: (Ih excuse ~. Okay, Lori would you correct the staff report
so we can vote on this?
Lori Sietse~m: Yes. There is a typographical error on the staff report.
recommendation by the Park and Recreation Cc~v, ission and by staff was to
recc~v~nd that the fees remain the sam~ as last year. ~nat the fee for the
non-resident should be $10.00 instead of $5.00.
Councilm=nn Boyt: So with that change I would m~)ve approval of item 2(j).
Councilwoman Dimler: Second.
Council~'~n Boyt moved, Councilwo~n Dim]er seconded to approve the 1990 Lake Ann
Park entrance fees as amended in the staff report to change the non-resident fee
to $10.00 instead of $5.00. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
City Co, mcil Meeting - Jant~3ry 8 ~ 1990
K. AUTHORIZATION TO S~$. ZAMBONI~
Co, mcilm~n Johnson: The Zamboni. I'm wondering if this is the right time. We
don't need it this season. I don't know if w~ ever need it. If we do get
indoor ice, we will ~ a zamboni to manicure the ice.
Lori Siets~a: Not one of this size. You'd r~ one much larger. This one
would be totally inadequate.
Councilman Johnson moved, councilwoman Dimler seconded to authorize staff to
sell the Zam~oni. Ail voted in favor and the motion carried.
VISITORS PRESENTATIONS:
LAKE U3CY P~0MEGWNERS ASSOCIATION, ERIC RIVKIN.
Eric Rivkin: Dale Carlson and I are here to give ~u a quick update here on our
Lake Association pursuing a lake restoration. ~hen I'd like to ask the Council
if they. would consider doing a couple of things for the Lake Association. One
is that we set s~v~ goals to restore the lake and there are five basic ones.
One is to im~prove and maintain recreational uses of the lake over th~ long tenv,.
Two is to im~ove the biological health of the lake over the long term. Three
is to improve aesthetics and increase property, values. Four is to es*ahlish
good watershed manag~%ent practices by those in the Lake Lucy. watershed area to
reduce nutrients and prevent toxic substances fr~ entering the lake and five,
is to provide the City with a demonstration of a viable lake restoration method
at reasonable costs and watershed management practices applicable to other lakes
in Chanhassen. This would make it well ~)rth y~ur investment since the City is
also lakeshore owners. We have done a couple of things so fax this past y~ar to
meet o~ goals. One has to do with the quality of the biology of the lake and
that is getting rid of nuisance w~ds such as Purple Loosestrife. We've begun a
p~ogram to e~radicate it and we had the cooperation of the DNR who actually ca~e
out with a volunteer and actually helped us spray and they donated all the spray
and loaned ,~ the eguiimv~nt. We also got a permit from the DNR to put in a fish
screen to keep the crap from swi~,ing upstream from Lake Ann to Lake Lucy.. That
w~nt in this past w~eker~. .We'd like the .C'ity to send, we're having a meeting
to disc~s these objectives and our agenda for, it's going to he a Wednesday
night, January 10th at the at~i~v, conference roc~ here at City. Hall. Tom
Workman was kind emo~3h to reserve the room for us. ~nank you very much. Our
agenda is six it~ basically. We were going to review what has happened so far
with th~ restoration and the Lake Lucy access. Review of the restoration
objectives which I just m~ntioned. What we need to do to achieve our
objectives. We're going to have biologist Del Hogan there who is an independent
biologist. F~ was 6 years with Freshwater Biological Institute and is now an
independent. Does testing for Hennepin County on all their lakes. And a
presentation by. Bob La~3 of Clean-Flo Laboratories. We'll discuss possible
t~eatments, their time line and their impact and we're going to talk about what
it might cost us and how we can finance it and where we go fr(x~ here. We're
urging everybody, including the City., to make every att~ to be at this
~ting. We need evexybody's attendance to help make decisions. A
representative from Prince who agreed to t3~ project, we were able to get verbal
approval from Gilbert Davidson who is Prince's representative here and he signed
City Council Meeting - January 8~ 1990
our fish barrier permit by the ~ay which indicates that he is positive about
things, through Jim Chaffee who is our go between. So we'd like to have a city,
I don' t know if you can decide now whether to just send a representative for
this Wednesday or not or have sc~one volunteer, that's fine too. The second
thing that we'd like to ask, we have put in real and in kind expenses so far
into preparing for all of this over the past year and a half. Sc~e of it was
tied into the review of t_he w~rk plan for the other chain of lakes but still, we
had kind of in the back of our heads that we'd look at an independently funded
restoration effort on our own lake. We've ~.lt in a fish barrier at our own
expense. We did have s~r~ expenses but a lot of time put in to erradicate the
loosestrife and we'd like the City. to F~tch our efforts so far and donate for
Del Hogan's ti~ at this ~'~=eting. He charges $45.00 an hour. He might be there
3-4 hours at about $135.00-$170.00 to be at the meeting. He's going to be there
to explain what processes that we need to clean the lake up. What we need to do
to achieve our objectives and he would also be involved, if we're going to
pursue an LCMR grant, if he can tell tm what w~uld be involved in that. So
that's my presentation. I do have a copy. for all of you of the agenda and the
Lake Lucy. Restoration objectives.
Mayor C~m~iel: Eric, I'd like to see probably the Watershed attend this as well.
I asked Don if he would notify th~. Or have you?
Eric Rivkin: Oh no we haven't.
Mayor Chmtel: Just one other thing too. Back in October, had coversations with
Prince's people also. November I sent a letter req~esting that Prince partake
in sc~ of the restoration of Lake Lucy. I don't know if you're aware of that.
Hopefully everybody asking is getting the answer back.
Eric Rivkin: Yeah. We appreciate it. Becky Kelso also is trying to make
contact. I think Tom tried. We tried n~ero~ times over the past 3 months,
since October and I think all of it kind of helped. ~'nank you very much.
Councilman Hoyt: Well, without a motion he isn't going to get any money and
that's apparently what he came to ask for.
Mayor Chr. iel: We can't act on it anyway Bill.
Councilman Johnson: Without suspending our rules.
Councilm~n Work~an: How much money are we talking about?
CouncilFmn Boyt: $135.00 is what I heard. I would just say in general that
when the City spends F~)ney, it should be for a city sponsored presentation which
would be a fairly simple thing to do but I think the City has to be very careful
about sponsoring speakers to b0~owners associations. It just seems like we're
on the brink of sc~ething that could be very hard to control. But if the City.
sponsored the presentation, then it would be F~ch easier to justify funding.
Mayor Chmiel: We could make a collection right now. Everybody dig in their
pockets.
Council~n Workman: Frc~, the plastic tips on the breathalyzer fund.
City (buncil Meeting - January 8~ 1990
Councilwoman Dim]er: How much did that generate by. the way?
Councilman Work~an: City Manager Ashworth and I talked a little bit and Eric, I
talked to you a little bit about the fact that maybe the City., and this isn't
aiwa.us the best idea but Faybe in this situation mirroring Bill, that the City
o~3ht to maybe become the leader on this because h~meowners associations come
and go. People o0~ and go but cities don't ccme and go. When it c~mes to the
insuring costs of liability, etc. maybe the City. ought to be the lead agency.
with Eric Rivkin and Oanpany obviously in charge but that somehow the City step
in to pick up where Faybe a h(am~ownezs association doesn't have the longevity
and may not be around in 15 years to keep the aerators on.
Eric Rfvkin: Yeah, you're right. That was o~e of the options that w~ wanted to
discuss in the meeting and you'll ~ on the bottom on your agenda that one
method of financing suggested here is to have a contract with the City. in mine
way and special assessment which ~s scmet/~ing I talked to Don about briefly. I
F~an there's a lot of creativity could be come out of this. The City could be
an adminstrator of funds or play a larger role. I don't know but that's
something we would discuss at the _~=cting but we're asking that somebody frc~,
the City be present to be able to bring these up and be knowledgeable. Don told
~ that he would be available in his office if we neede to ask him some-
questions that evening. We Fay or ~ay not do that so it's going to be a pretty
infomative and decisive kind of F~eting.
Council~an Workman: Since you're going to talk about money that night and
funding, ~aybe we don't r~ to do anything tonight?
Mayor C~,iel: I don't think we do this evening unless we find out more of the
particulars and maybe bring a pot for donations to see if it might not be
offset. I'd be willing to start one right now myself. Are there any additional
visitor ' s presentations?
F~rc Simcox: Marc SL~ox. I live at 216~0 Lilac Lane and everybody's pretty
familiar with me by. way I think. This is continuing the ongoing, continuing
follow-up on the Teton Lane closure. As this has progressed there's recently
been s~m conflicting information about what occurred in October, November,
Dece,~er and sc~e of the information that we got ~s that the road would be
closed by. the middle of January.. That the letter of credit was drawn against
and a letter of credit ~as not drawn against and so forth and so on. In this
discussion I've had a chance to talk to Gary. Warren about it. Don Ashworth and
F~)st recently with Roger Knutson the Attorney and now I 'm being informed that
s~me information that I received Friday is, that was incorrect. That completion
of this is e~,inent and negotiations are ready to begin to finally acquire the
last of his property.. The developer has agreed to pay for whatever the
acquisition costs are. (]ne of the things that I'd like to find out tonight,
well there are several things. One is, is there any way after 3 years or so, we
can finally get so~e information voluntarily given to us by staff on this as to
what's going to happen? N~bex two, when does the negotiations officially start
and exactly how do they take place and what kind of a time frame axe we looking
at? Are they done by. phone? Are they done by Fail or what? Another point is,
how long are the h~meo~s allo~ad to respond? I understand there could be up
to a 6 month delay before the letter of credit runs out and therefore before I
guess before the ha~er drops again. It's also our understanding that many
offers have ~ Fade and counter offers have ~---_n Fade and that probably a lot
City Council Meeting - January 81 1990
of the offer/acceptance part of the negotiations have already taken place. If
that's the case, I think we talked about starting a quick take process almost 2
1/2 years ago. Do we expect that this will be solved in the next 30 da.va or are
we talking 90 or what? 60 days. And once that is finally completed, the last
offer has been accepted and the t is crossed and i is dotted, how long before
the barricade goes up and then once we get that on the record, that's all we
need.
Mayor Ch~.,iel: I think we can address some of those. Roger, would you like to
say sc~thing?
Roger Knutson: I didn't m~an to interrupt.
Mayor Ch~,iel: I had discussions with Don on this and I think basically what
Roger is going to say is where it's at. But as far as closing Teton Lane,
that's going to be done within, how ~.~nny days?
Don Ashworth: We would hope 30 to 60.
Mayor Ch~,iel: 60 at the ~'mx.
Don Ashworth: Tne only point I'd like to make in here is, this has been very
difficult because of the legal issues involved. I think that staff has
attempted to ensure that people such as Marc w~re fully aware of issues all the
wy through. There has been no attempts to in any way deviate from the City
Council's adopted policy to get that road closed as quickly as possible. ~lt
again, I think it becc~s important for everyone to realize that this has not
been an easy project. You have property rights of 6 or 7 different people that
you have to follow the legal processes to ensure that we do the job right. I
think we' re down to the point where w~ can honestly say that w~'re going to have
the barricade up within 60 days or hopefully 30 days.
Roger Knutson: What we've tried to do is first, if we could, avoid lawsuits not
only with Centex but with the property owners. There have ~ s(x~e
negotiations with property owners. I 'ye tossed out n~bers and now we are in
the position in working things out with Centex of responding to those nu~ers...
And if they say, if we have a deal, which I think we're close to anyway, then it
will be in their hands in the next day or so.
Mayor Ch~,iel: Great. Does that make you feel any better?
Marc Si~ox: We still would like to be informed if there's any...
Mayor Chmiel: Why don't we have contact with, would you like to be the
representative?
Marc Simcox: I've tried to be that all along. Don's got my nt~nber...
Mayor Chmiel: Don, would you please keep in contact with Mr. Simcox and make
sure he's aware as to where the status is?
Marc Si~ox: Thank you very much.
City Council Meeting - January 8~ 1990
A1 Klingelhutz: I was a little surprised when I saw Eric up here talking about
Lake I~lcy. We've ~ having s(m~ short meetings on Lake Susan ourselves and
the first c~lestion I'm going to ask is ~hen will the public access be open
because in talking with the DNR amd they said, once the public access is open
for Lake Susan, they'd give us a lot of help on Lake Susan. Is there any
indication, the road is in now, when the public access will be open?
Eori Sietse~a: It should be open by the end of this coming sterner.
A1 Klingelhutz: End of sum~_r or spring?
Gary Warren: It w~uldn't be this spring I guess. The actual boat landing work,
which is in design right now, has got to happen. Possibly mid-sterner.
A1 Klingelhutz: We had virtually a complete fish kill in Lake Susan last winter
and all we've got left in there right now is a bunch of bullheads and I think
it'd be an ideal time to do something to get rid of ~. Put in scme barriers
and restrock the lake with some good gs~e fish and have ~me of these things
done. It's very important to get this public access open so we can get the help
frc~, the DNR that we should be able to get because there is going to be a p~blic
access.
Councilman Boyt: Before y~u sit down, maybe with all the interaction we've had
with the DNR in the last year, we have this fully funded. We have everything in
process to get it done. Won't the DNRaccept that as good faith on our part and
go ahead and begin cleaning the lake up?
Lori Siets~ma: I don't know. If you ~nt a really honest answer, I doubt it.
Mayor Ch~iel: Pass this down to Bill.
Councilm~n Boyt: Yeah, I read it.
Lori Siets~ma: We could certainly approach ~,. They are part of, one of the
agencies that have reviewed the project and given their stamp of approval for
the LAWCON grant for the develol~mt out there. So they have every reason to
believe that it's going to happen but I think that their experience is that they
don't believe it's in until it's actually in because in every single situation,
in so many situations that they deal with, they've got so much opposition to
accesses. Tnis one there hasn't ~ any opposition but in every other county,
there's not a county, in the state that hasn't, they haven't had a real war with
and they j~mt, it has to be there.
Councilman Boyt: Have ~ gone thzo~h the bidding process on this landing?
Public access?
Gary Warren: No. The plans are being prepared right now based on the fill work
that we took advantage of from the Lake Drive project. We filled in the
ballfield area and such and our consultant ms ~iting for the final topo to be
done on that which I just received last week so we're getting that in their
hands and they' 11 proceed with finishing up the design plans here shortly.
Councilman Boyt: Maybe w~ can ask them when the contract has ~ let, if they.
would then take that as a go ahead?
City CoLmcil Meeting - January 81 1990
Lori Sietse~a: ~nat could be. I can call Del and pursue it further. I'm not
saying no, I don' t think so and I wouldn't pursue it because I defintely think
it would be worth im~rsuing.
Mayor Ch~,iel: I think that's a good point. If we were to indicate to thsm that
if we were to reim.~urse the~. for any costs that they would incur with getting
this accc~,plished. Onc~ getting it accomplished and then they can go from
there. Okay? Alright. Any other visitor's presentations? I think Dan Dahlin
would like to Fake a presentation.
Dan Dahlin: My. name is Dan Dahlin, 1889 Fairmont, St. Paul, Minnesota, 55105.
I cc~e here tonight to ask you to reconsider your ban on cigarette m~chines and
to look at the situation we have developed over at Chanhassen Bowl to protect
the sale of these it~ to minors. I've given a letter to I think everyone
except Mr. Johnson.
Mayor Ch~iel: I think what we'd have to do is we can't take any action on this
right now. If any action were to go on it, it would be at our next ~eting.
Unless there's sc~e discussion by Co~ncil at the present time.
Councilman Workman: I might have sc~e. Mr. Dahlin, I was the guy who muck
racked this thing.
Dan Dahlin: I was here at the meeting, yes.
Council~-an Workman: You didn't speak up.
Dan Dahlin: No. It ses~d like it was a foregone concl~mion and I had no
alternatives other than moving the things so I had talked to people and devised
this electronic lock switch.
Councilm~n Workman: Well again, my root concern with the whole thing was n~%ber
one, cigarettes are illegal to minors. Number two, they're in a machine that
generally minors can dispense to themselves. One of the problems with picking
and choosing who can have the vending machines and who can't was that it made
the whole thing so bulky, that really nothing would be accomplished. I think
myself can give you a list of names of minors who purchased cigarettes in your
facility. I think a couple other councilme~...berse might be able to too. You
state that the cigarette machine is in your bar area only and not the bowling
alley concoL%rse. Don't you have teen night there once or several times a week?
Dan Dahlin: Well you're missing the spirit of the letter was that we devised an
electronic lock out device that the machine is inoperable unless an adult
triggers it's ability to be used.
Councilman Workman: I guess going over your four points, n~er one. Your
customers request cigarettes, fk~stomers can either one, come in with cigarettes
prior to Just as they do at work or wherever else. I found that m~st adult
smokers of cigarettes do not buy them out of vending m~chines. ~ney buy them at
half the cost at the local Tc~ Thum~o. Inventory control, manag~nent, security
is very difficult. I don't have any doubt about that but I think what you're
doing is you're calling a lot of your e~loyees crooks. I'm not going to worry
10
City Oo,~cil Meeting - January 8, 1998
about that specific issue. It's my understanding from the tobacco industry that
space limitations, they'll do whatever you ask them to do to help you with
security or space. To put an adult in charge of that product. N~er four, the
loss of revenues. I think we had that discussion that night. I don't know if
you're prepared to tell us or if it matters how much y~u make from selling
cigarettes. Again, I think a portion of those sales in most situations is frc~,
minors. The other option is is if we w~nt to a situation like this and a minor
did happen to purchase cigarettes from youx machine, it'd be a $3,~.0~ fine
and one year in jail. That could wipe out literal profits with a cigarette
vending machine for an entire year I'd imagine. I think the intent was missed
by a lot of people in ~hat we have. An illegal product and m~nors and it's a
rampant probl~ in that for us to promote this product in a vending machine
~asn't in what we wanted for the youth of this cc~unity. And again, I can
understand your arg~v~nts. I think there's very. good arg~aents against both of
them. I don' t know. The whole idea of a device and using a device is basically
the same thing as, I'm asm~.irg a device could be used, could you steal a pack
of cigarettes with this device?
Dan Dahlin: Could you steal a pack of cigarettes with this device?
Councilman Workman: If sc~eb(~y else tripped the device or anything?
Councilman Johnson: You still have to put money in.
Councilman Workman: We have situations probably all over your bar where things
co~%ld get stolen. Alcohol. This is a product that I just don't think belongs
in a vending machine. That's why I promoted it.
Dan Dahlin: And what I've tried to do here is to take those objections away
where the machine itself is no longer ~ed for just indiscriminate purchasing of
this product that you object to and that I would concede that 9~ days ago minors
could easily purchase cigarettes from Chanhassen Bowl. I could not argue with
that. It w~uld be naive on my part to do so. I would not be being candid with
you. Ho~_=ver, we've removed the ~.achines from the concourse area. From the
hallways and have now devised this electronic device which renders the vending
machine no longer objectionable in the sense that people can just use it. It
would require permission to use it. We can keep our product locked and counted.
An adult has the device itself which allows the machine to function. And that
person pushing the button becomes the person who would be violating the law.
Councilman Boyt: This is really not much different frcm having mmmebody sell
the cigarettes behind a counter. We allow people to sell cigarettes from behind
the counter T~v,. I agree with you that any. changes to the ordinance you passed
c~mplicate the ordinance. I think that night I tried to aaend it to no avail.
If I tho~3ht we could pass this, I'd move for reconsideration to do that. But
I'm one vote and I don't see t~ other votes on the City Council that say that
they're willing to try. this out.
Dan Dahlin: Well could two of you vote to reconsider this and let me show you
the device. Let me demonstrate this to you. Let me show you where these
machines are. It's very impor~t to that business to have this control and
security, over this product. I a~ not inferring that anyone is a crook there at
all. Much of your zealotry and the praises under ~hich you are working are not
tr~. I can see that a minor could have bought cigarettes and I'm apologetic
11
City Council Meeting - January 8, 1990
for that. It was my naivetee. I didn't know. I've ~-~n educated on this
myself. These m~chines are now out of reach of minors. ~ney're not in use.
They're turned to the wall. ~e've cc~plied with your ordinance but we'd like
your help here to help us with a problem, we have.
Councilwc~n Dimler: I guess I'd like to make a few ~ts. I appreciate
your taking the steps to try to do sc~thing to keep minors fro~,, but as I
indicated earlier, there is such a third3 as fake ID's and that w~uld be a
problem to control. Also, I saw on the news yesterday and I was glad to see it,
they are currently, there's 3 or 4 people being prosecuted under the new law
right now and they do face a $3,000.00 fine and/or one year in jail. I think
that enforc~%ent is going to be there. I w~uld like you to consider whether our
action hasn't really protected you from that because minors will continue to get
to that machine regardless of that device.
Dan Dahlin: But it is a legal product for adults to purchase and our c~%stomers
want th~, and we want to have some control ourselves on our inventory because
you're also facing problems of break-ins and m~ny different realistic
difficulties with selling anything. Shoplifting. Any of this. I mean this is
a ~chine that's locked for the physical tampering and now has an electronic
switch whereby you've got better, much, much better prote6tion. The people are
being prosecuted which on the radio today were convenience store people. Not
cigarette vending machines. This has been an education process for us. We do
not want to sell cigarettes to mdnors despite the fact that in the past perhaps
that's been inadvertently done. We admit that it was possible.
Councilwoman Dimler: And it can happen inadvertently again is what I'm saying.
You have better control that you don't have... 100%.
Dan Dahlin: Oh no. Not 100% but for...
Councilw~v~n Dimmer: So you're opening yourself up for this $3,000.00 fine.
Dan Dahlin: Well you are just by selling the things. If a young person is
behind the control desk at the bowling alley and a friend c~mes in, a peer.
Let's say another young person, the same thing. Or if the young person can get
at our inventory and steal it, which is possible. It happens in society. I'm
not calling anyone a crook at all, as you said I did. It happens in the society
and s~=one could steal these and then sell tbs,, in a black market sense. This
to us, I'm coming here because the sit~mtion we're in is difficult and asking
for a chance to demonstrate this to you.
Councilwoman Dimler: And you're saying selling over the co~mter ~ould be tot,~h
for you?
Dan Dahlin: It would be more difficult than this. We would only have the
cigarette machines in the bars where there are security people. Where adults go
and even with that protection, add the further protection of these electronic
switches. So you'd have several barriers ~'eking it more difficult and then you
would be giving to us the ability to control our inventory. From shoplifting.
Frc~, internal thievery. From however they would go.
Council~0man Dimmer: And then there was a statement in your letter that says
the loss of reven,.~s produced by selling these legal products jeopardize the
12
Oity Council Meeting - January 8~ 199~
continuing viability of our business. Are you really sa.ring that it's cigarette
sales that is making your...
Dan Dahlin: Aboslutely not but I'm saying certainly that's a net that helps us
pay our bills, sure. We would depend on that and when they're locked the way
they've been in the vending machine, w~ know how many w~ sold. They. say it's
possible, sc~e of those sales have ~ to minors over the years. It's possible
but now there are no sales at all. We voluntarily ccmplied and have tried to
come up with the better way to do this and I'm c~mning here to ask ~u to let us
do it. To have you waive the enforc~vent of this and come over and see this
thing rather than sitting here and hearing rhetoric about s~. calling
s~meone a crook and this and that. It's to ~ it. To see how it would work.
Mayor Chv, iel: Can I just interrupt you just for a second? I think what you' re
saying is sort of repetitious now that wa're going through. I'd like to go to
Councilman Johnson and see what his position is on this.
Councilman Johnson: Actually I think this device is dispensing cigarettes under
almost as good as what you have at a convenience store and probably even better
in that your bouncers that check your ID's are a little m~)re used to checking
ID's than the people working at the convenience store and are probably far more
likely, in fact it's in the newspaper all the time when you're catching people
in there. It's under the police reports, when you're turning people in that try.
to get in with fake ID's. The problem with fake ID's is worse at the
convenience store than it would be at a place like yours where you have people
that are used to looking at ID's. I personally couldn't tell a fake ID from a
good ID where your guys probably could. I think that wa ~ to look into this
a little ~=ther. We now have as much control with this device. Now there are
some drawbacks and before we modify, the ordinance to allow a device like this,
w~ have to find out what kind of fines and penalties can be assessed if on
inspection of this device wa find that the device has ~ pemmmanently put on
open. Ah, that's too bard to do that. Let's take a piece of tape and put it
over the button. Okay, if we c(x~e in and find the buttons taped open, there
should be a substantial fine and penalty, for that. We ~ to talk to our
Attorney to see what that would be and I would like to see this put on a future
agenda for possible reconsideration.
Dan Dahlin: Thank you. Thank you for your...
Co,~cilman Johnson: Place it on the agenda and get staff to find out a little
bit m~re about what controls would have to be put on this device amd what kind
of inspections and what it's going to do to our staff as far as inspecting such
a device.
Oouncilm~n Workman: That ~as the ~ahole idea Jay.
Councilman Johnson: Yeah. To make it as simple as possible. But once w~ get
the data, let's then consider it and wa can vote it down.
Councilman Workman: Are you going to then suggest that ~ put can beer and
alcoholic beverages in the same or typical kind of machine if they would like
it? A cold can of beer machine. Would you be for that also? It's an identical
product. It's illegal.
13
City Council Meeting - January 8~ 1990
Councilman Johnson: It's illegal to put beer in a machine?
Councilman W~rkman: It's illegal to sell it to minors but it's legal for
adults. Are you prepared to put a product like that in a machine?
CouncilFmn Johnson: I don't know if they're prepared to do that but if that's
legal to be done within his bar, he can do it right now can't he? I mean he
could bring in a pop ~chine and put Michelob in it right now and that would not
be illegal. As you know, there probably are those Fmchines here in the City
right now that have beer in tha~L. There's s(x~e that I know of c~trrently.
Councilman Work~.~n: I'm just saying Jay, you indicated yourself how c(m, plicated
it's going to be.
Council~an Johnson: Yes. I'd like to see all the data.
Council~mn Workman: ...but this switch is a heck of a c(m~licated way to figure
out a way to continue to sell an illegal product in a vending machine.
Dan Dahlin: But the pr~Lise is incorrect. It's not an illegal product. It's
illegal to sell it to minors.
councilman Work~n: Do you have teen night?
Dan Dahlin: Yes.
council~n Johnson: He can ~]rn it off on teen night.
Councilman Work~n: We can do all sorts of things. I'm just saying, what's
more fullproof than not having the machine there at all.
Dan Dahlin: I believe you missed the point because if you've got the product
there and you've got it in closets and you have...
Council~mn Johnson: Rather than debating this tonight, let's p~t it on a future
agenda and debate it at the proper ti~ when w~ get the inform, ration.
Mayor Ch~,iel: My position is we can't debate it right now because we can't cc~e
up with a conclusion. The only other thing w~ can do is put it on an agenda.
~t, prior to even doing that, I would like to see how this works.
Dan Dahlin: I'd love to have you look at it.
Mayor Ch~iel: I think we should all basically have a look see.
Council~n Johnson: Put it on the first meeting in February.
Council~n Boyt: You can't put it on an agenda without voting to reconsider.
councilman Johnson: No. We're putting the vote for reconsideration on a fut~re
agenda.
Mayor Chniel: It would be back on the agenda for reconsideration.
14
City Oouncil Meeting - January 81 199~
Councilwoman Dimler: Well before we do that though, can't we just direct staff
to get the information on this device and them all of us go over there? Try. it.
Councilmmn Johnson: That ~ay we have a staff report and it gets published and
we can have the public give their input into our reconsideration.
Councilman Workman: Can I ask a question? Is this machine in .~)ur bar now and
are you usirg this mechanism?
Dan Dahlin: There are t~D, as the letter indicates, there are two machines at
Chanhassen Bowl. One in the back stretch bar and one in Filly's portion.
Councilman Workman: Right noW?
Dan Dahlin: Yes.
CoL~ciLman Boyt: They're up against the wall.
Councilmznn Workman: Isn't that against our ordi~?
councilm~n Johnson: No. They're not in use.
councilm~n Boyt: They're spun around.
Dan Dahlin: They're spun around. They're unplugged. The device is in my safe
in St. Paul where you could not, you or anyone could not buy. a package of
cigarettes out of those vending machines.
Councilwcman Dim]er: So you don't have the device hooked up right now?
Dan Dahlin: (~ y~3h. It's already to go but I have t/~ little deal. The
switch so that nobody, would inadvertently push it and sell s~mething to violate
the ordinance.
Mayor C2~,iel: Would each of your enployees be willing to sign a starry, mt?
Dan Dahlin: Absolutely. Absolutely.
Councilm~n Johnson: We'd have to be talking about, what kind of posting w~ ~mnt
to put on the cigarette machine as far as warning. I guess there's already a
warning about minors on there and nobody pays any attention to them. We ~
all the facts before we do the reconsideration.
Don Ashworth: Staff should be able to l~resent this on the 22nd. I think one of
the things that Dan had ~ here for was to ask for s~ve fozm of leniency. I 'm
hearing the council say no. The ordinance stays in place.
Mayor Ch%iel: That' s correct.
Don Ashw~rth: And you're going to re-review it on the 22nd to determine
whether or not you're going to reconsider it.
councilwoman Dimler: Well don't put it on the agemda. Put it under staff
whatever, presentation?
15
City Co~cil Meeting - January 8, 1990
Councilman Johnson: No, it'd be an agenda item for reconsideration so w~ would
then decide whether w~ will reconsider this. Actually it can just be a
modification of the ordinance. It doesn't have to be a reconsideration per se
because w~'re not getting rid of the whole ordinance, just part of it.
Mayor Chm.,iel: I would like to ~ sc~e information back from, staff as to what
it is going to consist of. Even before considering I think we should look into
this fully before we jump to make 'a revision to the existing ordinance.
Councilw0~mn Dimler: The ordinance would have to be totally, because we're
saying it's illegal to sell them, through vending machines and now we're saying
bring vending machines back with the device on it. That's a whole different
thing. We can't just amend the ordinance. We have to redo it.
Councilman Johnson: Illegal say through uncontrolled vending machines and
define control.
Mayor Chmiel: Well, we can bring it back on the agenda. What I'd like with
that additional info~mation. I'm not sure if you can get that back with all
that infoz~nation by the 22nd. Maybe you should go to the first part of
February.
Councilm~n Johnson: I'd rather see it the first part of February so there's
time for notice.
Councilwoman Dim]er: Did that one pass t~ani~)usly?
Mayor Ckmiel: Yes. It was 5 to zip.
Councilmmn Workmmn: So this would potentially cc~e back on the first w~ek in
February?
Mayor fh~iel: First agenda in February.
Councilwoman Dimler: But it's whether we'll reconsider or not?
Mayor Chv, iel: Right. For reconsideration. Tnank you very m~h.
Dan Dahlln: Can I make a concluding co~.,ent?
Mayor Ch~iel: Sure.
Dan Dahlin: Insofar as the testing of this thing goes, would it be satisfactory
if we use them., and then you can try to send minors in to buy things in the
meantime to give it a true feel test instead of conject~%re?
Mayor Ch~,iel: No. No.
Dan Dahlin: Okay. I tho[~ht that would be a fair reading of the...
Councilw~..~n Dim]er: We would be violating our own ordinance.
16
City Oouncil Meeting - January 8, 199~
Dan Dahlin: Well then certainly I'd be available at any tim~ to show you, in
the ~antime to show you how it works and to de%onstrate.
Mayor Chv~[el: Dan, can I ask you a question? Are you a partner of John's?
Dan Dahlin: My. dad, Fred Dahlin was and he died on January. the 12th of 1989.
Not of cigarette s~)king. He got the flu and I can't get even with the person
who gave him, the flu. That's why. I'm here instead of him. Thank you.
PUBLIC HEARING: VA~.ATION (~F A PORTION OF IA%DEVELOPED RI(~T-OF-~AY ON LAKE
ROAD.
Public Present:
Name Address
Todd Ellmer
6661 Nez Perce
Paul Krauss: In Decs~er the City Oouncil granted final plat approval to the
Vineland Forest plat. At that time we indicated that there ~ms a related
request for a vacation of an unused section of Lake Lucy. Road right-of-way.
Unfortunately we couldn't hear it at that time due to publication require%ents.
Staff is currently rec~mding that the entire remaining 33 foot wide strip of
right-of-a~y illustrated before you be vacated with the exception of a 5~ foot
strip to support the Nez Perce extension onto the subdivision. The right-of-way
to the west of this site was vacated when the adjacent plat was subdivided. We
don't believe there's any public purpose remaining for the illustrated area and
are rec~v~nding that it be vacated tonight.
Mayor ~iel: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to address this
particular issue?
Todd Ellmer: Todd Ellmer, 6661 Nez Perce. We're the, if I can show you on
there? We're that property right there. I'm just wondering what happens with
the property is all.
Johnson: You're adjacent to it?
Todd Ellmer: Yeah. We're directly connected. We're where that trapezoid.
Co,~cilman Boyt: You get half of it.
Mayor (2~iel: You get half of the 33 feet amd the responsibility to mow it.
Todd Ellm~r: Okay. There' s no grass do~n there so we' re safe there. Is that
automatic ox do we have to do sc~ething?
Mayor Ch~,iel: Roger?
Bogex Knutson: First what you just said is the general rule. There are some
exceptions to the general rule and so what the City. does is it vacates it's
easement which is giving up it's right to use it for a roadway purpose. The
17
City Oouncil Meeting - January 8~ 1990
City does not determine who has title but that aside, in all probability you'll
probably own to the centerline. You don't have to do anything to get that
ownership but if you ~ant to establish it of record so it's down in the County,
then you have to go through a process.
Todd Ellm~r: Oh, okay.
Councilman Johnson: ~nis wasn't an eas~uent. This was our own city owned
property right-of-way.
Roger Knutson: That's an easement. A right-of-way is an easement. Sam~ thing.
Mayor Ch~.;iel: If hearing no other discussion on it.
Co~cilw~Tan Dim]er moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to close the public
hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Resolution 990-5: Councilman Workm.~n moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded that
the undeveloped portion of Lake Lucy Road right-of-way as illustrated in the
staff report dated January 3, 1990 be vacated. All voted in favor and the
~tion carried.
ZONING ORDINANCE AM~ REGARDING OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING TO PROVIDE
DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS, INCREASED PARKING REQUIREMENTS IF WARRANTED BY SITE PLAN
REVIEW, AND TO REQUEST ENCLOSED P~kRKING FOR TWO VEHICLES FOR MULTIPLE FAMILY
DWELLINGS, SECOND READING.
Paul Krauss: At the. last F~eting the City Council approved the first reading of
an ordinance amenc¥,ent that was designed to comprehensively deal with parking
standards. The issue of course that got the most attention pertained to this
standard dealing with multi-family parking. The Planning Commission had
recc~v~_nded that multi-family units be required to have 1 1/2 enclosed stalls
taken on a gross basis and made that recc~v~ndation to the City Council. The
City Co~uucil gave first reading to the ordinance conditioned on a revision that
would have required 2 enclosed stalls for multi-family units. However, the
Council indicated t_hat the standard could be discussed again at the second
reading or would be discussed again at the second reading and gave staff sc~e
guidance to look at separating out townho~ parking standards. Townhcme,
duplex, quads frc~ multi-family buildings, apartments, condc~initm~. The
~trrent draft ordinance has been revised according to the Council's direction.
Staff also used the intervening time to review the ordinance and obtain
additional data and I'd be the first to ac¥,it that we received a lot of phone
calls on this as well. We continue to believe that the requireT~nt of 1 1/2
enclosed stalls for townho~s, doL~les and quads is sufficient to meet the
de~..and that would actually be generated and note that this standard would place
Chanhassen in the forefront of the m~tro area in terms of establishing this
standard. It's exceeded only by one cc~unity and that's ~dina which requires 2
enclosed stalls at this time. We believe that this type of housing however does
have a greater parking de~and than do apartments and it makes sense that it
would. They're larger. They have multiple occ~oancies and that there is reason
to consider that this would generate and require a greater nt~uber of stalls and
18
City Oouncil Meeting - January 8~ 1990
apartments. We've reviewed a n~%ber of architectural plans for apartment
buildings including the Heritage Square project in Chanhassen and came to the
concl~mion that it's simply not possible to provide 2 enclosed stalls in
undergrour~ parking in mAtlti-family buildings. As one architect explained it to
m~, with the average lot size of an apartment is 9~ square feet and most of
these buildings are 3 stories high, you can only put 3 parking spaces under each
unit. I've got about 6 or 7 plans here in my office that pretty, well
d~nstrate that conclusively that with some modifications, the only way to meet
the 2 car requir~a~ent w~uld be to have a mix of underground and surface garages.
Based on our findings, we're continuing to rec(m~v~d that the Council consider
requiring 1 enclosed stall for efficiency, and 1 bedroc~ apar~ts. Raising
that to 1 1/4 enclosed stalls for 2 bedroom and larger. We believe that's a
standard that's supportable and consistent with our findings and again puts
Chanhassen in the forefront of establishing these standards in the metro area.
We proposed suitable modifications for the ordinance based upon the staff
recc~v~ndation. We also proposed definitions to be used. Our ordinance right
now is deficient in defining exactly what a townhouse is so if we're goin~ to
separate out the requir~%e~ts, we ~ ts provide a set of definitions and those
have ~ established. Again, the ordinance that's drafted right now is
consistent with your directions fr~m the first reading. It does have the 2 car
requirement in it. Also, there was an additional matter that was raised by
Gouncil~%an Dim]er pertaining to parking lighting. Security lighting in
parking lots. I att~%pted to find a standard, if anybody had a specific
standard to maintain secuxity and I couldn' t get a quote on one so I put in
there some general language that we would review lighting to ensure security and
the Public Safety Director w~)uld take a review of it. Also conversely, we have
a standard in there that you want a parking lot well lit but you don't want it
spilling over to adjoining properties so we had a standard in there that lights
spillover shouldn't be more than half a foot candle which is pretty, dim at the
property line. With that, we're again recommending the ordinance for your
approval.
Mayor C~,iel: I know that the last time we had proposed this we had s~me
developers here indicating their concerns. I'd like to allow each of you the
opportunity again. Hopefully you'll not repeat ~hat we have had. We've had
ample opportunity, to review all the Minutes of that particular _m_~cting. I'd
like to limit each of the individuals on this for a minim~% of 1~ minutes at the
max. Is there anyone who w~uld like to address this?
Brad Johnson: Mr. Mayor, ms,bets of Council. We've ~n reviewing the w~rk
that Paul has ~ putting into this project to try. to address all your concerns
and I think we' re more reviewing it frcm the point of view that most of us don't
really have a project we're doing. We're just trying to make sure that future
projects in fact will work within the community and also meet s~me of the
guidelines that you're trying to accomplish relative to parking and quality of
housing. So if you ~ant to turn ts page 5 of the staff rec~a~s~dation, I'd like
just to speak, give you t~ solutions that probably w~uld solve the probl~.
And I'm not saying, I have not had a chance ts talk them over with Paul because
we j,~st got his m~ today. I was over to see him today and this has all just
happened. There's two we.us of doing this I think. One thing that's m~issing by.
the ~y fr~, your definition is the word condo because townh~%e, doubles, you
know where you get a~y fr~m that, we don't have any definition called condo and
you can condo just about anything. As it works out where you don't have to deal
with lot lines or anything like that and I don't know how that's handled. One
19
City Council Meeting - January 8~ 1990
way to do it would be to use a zoning miles and say something like this. In
your R-2 and R-4, you require 2 car garages so you could write above that R-2
and R-4, 2 car garages. R-8, 1 1/2. And you could say R-12 could be 1 1/2 or
you could say R-12 could be 1 1/4. Okay? Then finally to solve our problem
with what w~ call multiple housing, R-16 would becom~ a new, come later on, a
new zoning ordinance because a very standard density in what you would call the
standard apartment building like Heritage is about 16 ~bnits per acre. For
example, that's 25 units per acre becaLme it's downtown but in talking to Paul,
he could probably point out to you a n~v~er of co~nunities where they're
building multiples that look nice and have a lot of green space are in that R-16
category and that would be a ~ay to do it. ~here you could go 1 to 1 which
would solve the problev, that w~ perceive you have is that as you stack and go 3
stories high, and that's about all the higher an average apartment building
today goes because of cost, you'd have a 1 to 1 ratio. Now in Edina where they
use a 1 1/4, they're forcing probably each unit to be about 1,200 square feet.
You see that's how they get to that 1 1/4. We're just not in that market. We're
3 cities away from, that I think so that'd be one approach to take. Just use the
zonir~ and agree that it should c(x~e back and people that have R-12 that would
like to do that, like Patton's, they could just cc~ in and request an upgrade
in zoning so they could build that type of building. Maybe they do it at the
same ti~ they bring the plan in. The other way to do it would be to do this.
You go to multi-family and you say 2 stalls, 1 of which is enclosed. Okay?
Then you x out item 2 and you change the definition of multi-family to be 16
units. It se~'.~ si~'~ler until you get to condo. You see that would be kind of
a nebulous area and if you did that ~e, Rick and I and those I've talked to over
here, don't know of any for sale housing that would look like a townhouse that
would be built much m~re than 12 units per unit. In fact most of your multiples
today are in the 32 units to 48 units per building. I suppose you could even go
up as high as 32. I was using 16 because I think that's about what sc~e of the
projects, like that Hazeltine Gates is. Is a 16 unit for rent project and it
would fall into that category but w~ don't know of m~ny. Dean, do you know of
any housing? You just don't do it. You don't get any windows. It gets too big
and you can't sell it. You may condo it by going up and that would be two ways
of solving the problevt. One, you simply change sc~e paragraphs and hope you've
got the condo situation covered because you would have to think of a definition
condo, and that's a for sale housing. Then any multiple would be a 16 unit or
greater. There's two solutions which we think the industry would accept. You'd
have control over the am~)unt of garages you have and the projects which seems to
be what yo6're interested in and then with Paul's additional changes on parking
standards. You know adding more parking that we just don't have, I think you
would have an ordinance that would m~et what you would be looking for. Tnank
Brian Hilmken: Brian Hilmken. ~ilders Association of Minnesota. 2469
University Aven~, St. Paul. I'd like to take the opportunity to address the
Council this evening. I'm bere, I represent the Builders Association of
Minnesota and the industry as a whole concerning this proposed ordinance.
Although the brunt of our m~bers do develop and build single family homes,
detached single family hc~s I should say, we do have several members and
several firms that do develop townh~v~s which is the extent of our concern with
this amendm~.nt to your ordinance. Basically our concerns stem frc~, the issue of
affordability. The Builders Association of Minnesota, along with our National
Association of Pkxnebuilders, have always been one of the largest proponents of
affordable housing in the United States. We're committed to working for
20
· City Oouncil M~eting - January 8, 1998
affordable housing. When I say affordable housing, I do not mean low i~
housing. Affordability is relative to the person who is dealing with th?t piece
of housing. To a hc~eless person a $10.~0 tent is probably affordable housing
but according to s~me of our figures relating to mor~x3aging, qualifications for
mortgaging, a person with a $31,0~.~ ~ could not find the $8~,~.~
house affordable. So when I talk about affordable housing, which after reading
all the notes from the previous Planning (2remissions and the previous Oouncil
m~etings, affordability was a major issue raised under this ordinanoe. So when
you talk about affordable, you're not talking al~ays about iow income people. It
should be clear that to a person making $21,~0.00, a home of $8~,~.00, which
is about the lowest you can build a single family quality, I've got to stress
the word quality., home. $8~,~0~.0~ is probably the low~st you can build a
single fs~ily h~me. We're talking about to~mv~s which can be built for
slightly less. So I have two concerns here. This reguir~nt raises a cost of
building townhomes. Adding the extra garage has been indicated to increase the
cost anywhere from I believe it was $5,~0.0~ to $1~,00~.~. Our research has
shown that even an increase of $3,~.~ on an $8~,~0~.~ hc~e, single family
hc~, could put about 7% of the market people out of the opportunity of enjoying
the k~erican Dream of owning their own h~me. This is something that we're
striving for. Hc~~ship in the United States is s~ething that we should
all be striving for as citizens. Like I said, hc~es are mot cheap and any
possible method, any possible ordinanoe that would increase the 'h~aes, cost of a
townhc~ for a person, should he questioned. Townhc~es offer the availability
of s~me citizens to o~n a home. Some people can't afford a $8~,~0~.~ hc~e.
~er, sc~ people can afford a unit that's priced in the mid-50's to 6~'s. I
think that's s~me of the concerns here. Not everMbody in tt~ world wants the
cc~,itments, requirements that go along with the single family hc~e. They don't
want to rake. They don' t want to cut the grass. They don't want to drive.
They don't have the ability to drive. They're older citizens. They're younger
people starting out that they can't afford it. They don't have the ability to
have 2 cars. They don't have the ~ for a 2 car garage amd so on and so
forth. SO we must maintain the ability, the Builders Association of Minnesota
would like to have that flexibility for the builder/developer to supply the
housing market demand for a 1 car or possibly a 2 car townhc~e in the City of
Chanhassen amd throughout the cities in Minnesota. Basically, to keep it short
here, again I'd like to stress the issue of affordahility. You're not, when
I say affordability, hear in mind it's not necessarily al~ays low inc~e.
Altho,E3h low income people have a place everywhere. That is our belief. We'd
urge that the cuzrent standards for tow~h~%es he maintained. Ho~=ver, I feel
that that's probably not in your interest and that we ~uld gladly support a 1
1/2 car for townhcmes on a gross basis for townh~zes in the city of Chanhassen.
Thank you.
Don Patton: My. nam~ is Don Patton with the Lake Susan Hills develoImm~nt. One
thing to I guess amplify, or clarify, frc~, our standpoint. When we did our PUD 2
years ago, there were 2 people on the Council that are currently there. One of
the real issues we had that was frustrating for us at the time, was you have to
have higher density but you also have to have maxim~ green area. We have
several areas of R-8, R-12 in our PUD. To achieve the density that the City
~anted, to achieve the green space that was ~nted and we had exhibits that we
presented at the time and that are a part of the PUD, we w~re lookir~3 at a 1 and
1. 2 spaces but 1 inside, 1 outside. That w~rks in with our ~JD. ~he other
thing that cc~plicates s(~e of that, and actually you're blessed with it in
Chanhassen. You have a rather rolling topography which F~ans that .~T)u do have
21
City Oouncil Meeting - January 81 1990
some lost ground because of slopes. That's a key consideration. It does reduce
density. It does provide green space but it also reduces flat space that you
can put parking lots. With regard to parking, and I think the idea of storage
or outside, things like that can be dealt with and I think they already are in
your ordinances Paul, if I'm not incorrect. Storage of motorhc~s. Storage of
boats and so forth, as far as outside, is prohibited. At least certainly
limited and that can be dealt with in your ~lttple family also. Again, I stick
with the position I did last ti~e and I'd like to have those points considered.
Thank you.
Rick M~rray: Rick ~lrray. I'm a Chanhassen resident. When I left this ~eting
the other week, I had two concerns that I felt pretty strongly about. After
going through what Paul's rec(x~.ended to you tonight, I think that he's co~ a
conclusion that I couldn't substantiate but I suspected and that was pretty much
you~ apartment sizing. I didn't w~nt to see this co~unity put itself out of
business for a standard apart~_nt building. I had a real concern about that. I
think that what Paul's done or what the staff has done here does take that into
consideration. When Brad and I were talking a few minutes ago, we were
wondering about how to ~mke a distinction. Tae standard [~it, as Brad was
~_ntioning, you get the 3 stories and 1 enclosed space if you want to ~t that
space underground, below each unit. I think that s(~how that has to be
addressed so that you don't put Chanhassen out of the apartment building market
totally. Whether you do that with an increased zone or whether you do that by
manipulating nu~ers within your definitions here, I think that's sc~ething the
staff can accomplish. Tae other overriding concern that I had was that in
general as zoning categories or zoning classifications of land, I didn't w-ant to
see Chanhassen become non-c~etitive with it's neighbors because there's a lot
of other multiple zoned property between here and wherever you want to go, ~dina
that will be used if wa can't be price competitive with o~r land here. If we
can't be price c(~Lpetitive, i.e. if ~ have to add more stalls, there's no
industry folks that is F~re sensitive to the F~rket in the building industry.
We have builders every year that have the misfortune of going broke because they
aren't sensitive to their markets. To legislate that you must do this, when the
marketse don't se~ to be asking for that, y~u won't get that built here. It
will get built in a cc~unity that doesn't legislate that. ~nat was a concern
I had. I think that those concerns have been addressed and I think adequately
addressed by your staff reco~endation. I'd ~.~p~)ort the staff recc~mendation if
we F.~de sc~e sort of effort to get a standard apartment complex back into
Chanhassen. Standard being when you go to a 3 story building, when you go to
where you know you're going to have underground parking, that I think has to
stay pretty close to 1 to 1 to get what w~ know as a norm. A building norm
right now. To get that to work. I guess that's all my co~ents. ~nank you.
A1 Klingelhutz: You heard what I said the last ti~. I'm sure you read it in
the Minutes. One thing I'm going to bring up. You've got 5-12 unit apartments
right on Chan View. I've got a sister living in one, a mother-in-law living in
another one and a real good friend living in another one. I'd say I visit one
or the other one of those 3 apartments at least once a w~ek. I've never yet
found that I couldn't find 3 or 4 parking stalls by each one of these apartments
and those apartments were built with less than 2 parking spaces per unit.
Outdoor units. It j~t se~%s odd that all of a sudden Chanhassen should have to
have 2 undergro[~d parking places for each apartment unit plus s(~ additional
outside space, which I've no objections to. And I think Paul has done an
excellent job of researching this. Most of the things that he's recommended I
22
C/ty ~ouncil Meeting - January 8~ 1990
would like to see you pass here except that the, I guess I could even live with
the 1 1/4 units per a 2 bedroom apartment. Thank you.
Mayor Ch~iel: Is there anyone else? If hearing none, w~'ll bring it back to
Council. Anyone wishing to address it? Jay?
Councilman Johnson: I might as well start off. I think evexybody probably
knows where I 'm going to go because I ~as pretty, plain last time. I think any
ordinance that restricts a m~nority group within our c(m~unity, ~hich I believe
this ordinance does, it is a restriction against the elderly. It's a
restriction against the young people of the cc~m~~. It's a restriction
against the people who have not made it to where we have. I think it is our job
to protect all factors, not just the majoxity. I think this ordinance, even at
a 1 1/4. If that increases the size of the standard apa~t~_nt to the sa%e size
as my house, I don't think that's right. I don't believe that we're serving the
total population of the city. and the R-12 is not designed for the people who
~ 1,200 square feet. The R-12 should be designed for the people who ~mnt to
live in a little less space and aren't looking for these amenities. I think
that any ordinance that does restrict a minority is not a good ~rdinance. I'm
going to continue to vote against this. I'd like to see the 2 bedroom and
larger stay right at 1. ~he only place I waiver there is probably the doubles.
The doubles I see no reason why. we can' t have 2. You can' t, on a double you can
design a 2 car garage into a double real easy.. 1 1/2 on a double to me sounds,
one side's going to have 1, the other side's going to have 2. So 1 1/2 doesn't
~ake any sense to me on a double h(~e. On a quad, 1 1/2 can make some sense to
me in that 2 of ~ can have 2 car garages and 2 of ~ have 1 car garages. I
think there's a market for both. So ~mat I'd like to ~ this go as is that the
doubles get treated al~st like a single family home as t~ car garages and that
they're ,~ually right with the single fa%ily hc~e areas, i~at everything else
stays at 1. I don't think there's a market here for 1 1/4 and I don' t think
that it's a good ordinance to go to 1 1/4 and 2 I think is disastrous. 2, we're
jL~t asking for, let's shut do~m apar~ts. Let's not, and I've only had one
phone call and that phone call was supporting the 2 or the people I called to
talk to about this, they all supported the 1. They. said that, before I even
talked to th~, about lo~_r income, they brought it up themselves. They said
well this is going to be a probl~, with the lower income and the elderly because
that's exactly ~hat I'm saying. I see no reason for it.
Councilman Work,an: I think Jay's got a lot wrong with what he said but I've
~n accused earlier this evening of things and I'll be accused again. I tend
to agree with the staff report. I think we, I. I'll speak for myself. I had
s(~e concerns about the apartment ccmplexes. I didn't understar~ quite how that
w~uld work. I think the staff report, well n~ber one, the definitions I think
we needed and I'm glad we've got scme now. I don't have a desire to be so elite
here in Chanhassem that we go so far as to say 2 but I do like the addition.. I
can hear Bill saying it soon that people are not asking for sc~e of the types of
housing Jay that I think ma.ube ~u're promoting. There are .two ends of a
spectr~ and all sorts of areas inbetween. I don't think Cb~mg~assen's going to
be everything to everybody. I don't think we have any intention to do that.
We' re ~aking a decision on not so much who we necessarily let into our c~a~unity
but how we want our cc~unity to look to the people who have an invest~nt here.
As we get TH 212 and we get a lot of ~td and southern (]lanhassen developed, I
think we're going to have a strong r~ for sc~e apartment cc~91exes. That's
one of the things I was worried about and I think that's answered here and I
23
City Council ~=eting - January 8, 1990
like the way the report looked from the first time. I just want to co~,pl~ent
Paul on the report but I agree with the way the report stands.
Counctl~mn Boyt: Okay. We'll drift to the other pole here slowly. I like
Brad's idea about a separate zone. I think it gives us an opportunity to do a
lot of things. An R-16 zone in which ~-~ybe w~ set up t_he 1 to 1 1/4 makes sense
to ~. I g~ss it ca~ through to ~ when I saw the quote in the paper as much
as anything. Affordable housing, as the gentle~n said this evening, is a very
nebulous term. I think though that if we're talking about housing that w~uld be
in the reach of people who might not otherwise quality, there are other better
ways to get there. The City should be pursuing mortgage guarantees. We should
~rsuing interest write downs and it turns out that Mr. Johnson's property is in
a tax incr~ent district and I think he should he [m~rsuing ways in which he can
offer a high quality living opportunity to people at less than Fmybe the price
would be if he had to pay the whole burden through the Fmrket. I'd much rather
see Chanhassen provide ho~=s to people who might not be able to otherwise afford
them through those means than I would by seeing Chanhassen provide those hc~es
by encouraging developers to build to the lowest standard because that not only
impacts on existing hon'63owners. It impact.s on the cc~munity down the road. I
want green space and parks in and around apartment buildings and that's going to
cost the developer sc~ money but it's going to give the person who lives there
a higher quality place to live. I think we talked the other night, ~mybe it was
more apparent when it was 20 below zero outside that apartment buildings that
have no covered parking certainly put those people at a disadvantage in
Minnesota's weather and they invite crime. I think personally, I think we have
plenty of examples in town of quad hc~es and duplexes that have 2 car garages
attached and they're all full. So I thikn that's a reasonable standard and I
think the Fmrket should support that standard and if it doesn't support it in
the short te~L, then don't build it. But it will. There's no way in the world
Mr. Patton that you're going to build hc~es or apartments that are going to rent
to people who are making $6.00 and $7.00 an hour. You can't do it with your
land costs and so ~ have to look at other ways of providing hc~es for those
people but settling for a lesser standard I think leads to long term problem.
In looking at sort of the hard facts of what the staff has generated here, I
would like to see ~%s go to, I don't know, 1 1/2 maybe. Maybe 1 1/4 for an R-12
but I don't think w~ should think of R-12's as apart~_nt buildings. I think we
should look at zoning that as an R-16. That people who want that zone should
con'~ in and tell us how and why they ~ it and that gives us some control. I
think that where they're not building apartment buildings, 1 1/2 is a reasonable
standard and anywhere they're talking about 2 family, quad, townhcme, they
should look at 2. And if they think people can't afford that, then they should
co~ back to the City and see how we can help them afford it. On another issue,
in such a comprehensive parking ordinance, I'm disappointed there isn't anything
in here on daycare. Have you got anything on daycare?
Paul Krauss: Council~'~n Boyt, in the past I've developed a standard for daycare
based on surveys from other daycare centers and some other cities and I've
gotten sc~e infoxanation that was cc~piled by my staff. They called a n~ber of
co~,unities to get so~ recent data. If I w~re requested to give a standard,
the standard would probably be 1 stall for every 6 children of design capacity.
It see~ to place it right about within the middle of the pack depending on how
you figure out the number of stalls that would be required.
24
City Council Meeting - January 8~ 1990
Oouncil~an Boyt: Well we have them for schools, retail stores, shopping
centers, research, exper~tal and testing stations, mortuaries, motels,
hotels. I think that we should have the staff develop a standard for daycares
and that the ordinance should be av~s~ded to include that. ~hether it's 1 in 6,
1 in 1~. I don't know but we should have it in there. So for my part, if it's
the sense of the Council that 2 stalls for an R-12 is too many, I guess I could
see 1 1/2. I think for the others it should be 2. I think staff should be
directed to pursue this R-16 zoning.
Council~m~an Dim]er: I'm not going to repeat a lot of things that have already
~ said. I guess I just have a few things. I did appreciate Brad's concern
about defining condo. I w~mder if we ~ to do that. I understand that he
addressed the lighting and that will be done a case by case basis. Is that what
you were saying Paul?
Paul Krauss: Excuse me?
Co,~cilw~man Dimler: The lighting will be done on a case by. case basis.
Paul Krauss: It will be reviewed with the site plan, yes.
Co,~cilman Boyt: But there is a standard for spillage.
Councilwcman Dimler: Yeah, I understand that but I mean as far as actual
lighting of the lot.
Paul' Krauss: ;~eguacy for security, right.
Councilwoman Dimler: Is there a standard there that we can go greater than?
You said you didn't find one.
Paul Krauss: I didn't find a minimum standard for example that Police
Department's tend to like because, w~ll it's my experience that they. would like
spotlights in a parking lot so there's got to be a happy, medi~ there.
Councilwoman Dim]er: ! understand that. I guess I'm okay with that. I'm
wondering when an R-16, I think that's a good idea but I wonder what it will do
to our cc~rehensive plan that has just ~ worked over.
Paul Krauss: Sure. Maybe I can respond to the condo issue and that R-16 as
well. As far as an R-16 district goes, right now our R-12 district is designed
for townhouses, 2 fs~ily d~llings and multi-family ch, allings so it's the ~ole
range. It's just the density at which it's built at. To the extent that the
Om~rehensive Plan doesn't define zoning districts, it just defines densities of
housirg, you could adapt an R-16 district to it pretty, easily. For example if
you have an area that's designed for high density dwellings on the Comprehensive
Plan, you could define that district so that high density means R-16 or R-12.
So that could be adapted.
Councilwoman Dimlex: SO that's not a major concern?
Paul Krauss: No. As far as the condo issue goes, in my opinion, that doesn't
need to be dealt with. Oondo is an issue of whether or not it's owner occupied
or rented. It doesn't define the buildin~ type or style and definitions that we
25
City Oouncil Meeting - January 8~ 1990
provided, do provide those. Whether or not you have 2 cars or 1 car isn't
dependent on whether you own it or not. It's how big it is and how many people
live in it.
Councilwoman Dimler: I guess my basic conclusion is after all this research
that has been done, I do like the staff report and I do want to congratulate
Paul for the w~rk he's done. I agree with the 1.5 and apartments 1 on 1.
Mayor Chf, iel: In lookirg over your rec(mmendations Paul, and I had some
disc~msions this afternoon, I guess I do go along with all the staff
rec~r~ndations. I think he's put a lot of tiFe into this and it has given the
Council s(~e opportunities to review and to ~nderstand really what it's about.
Rather than going and being repetitious of everything that has been said, I do
like the idea that 16 units as ~11. Tmose are things that ~ have to look at
so with that I w~uld entertain a motion to amend what we had considered at our
previous meeting and to adopt. Is anyone ready?
Councilman Boyt: Well I'll start with an amendment that we include daycare and
we set the standard as 1 parking place per 6 students.
Councilwoman Dimler: I have a question. Is this the place to do that? This
was multi-family.
CounciL-'an Boyt: Well, we define everything from churches to bowling alleys.
Mayor Ch%iel: It goes through the whole ball of wax.
councilman Boyt: Tnere may be a point at which we come back and a~nd that
nuF~er but we're no worse off than if we direct staff to go back and prepare a
report now and do it.
Mayor Chmiel: 1 for 6. It's sc~thing you keep persisting Bill, and
I understand that. Never say die, say damn.
Councilman Johnson: Well it should be defined.
Mayor Ch~,iel: Yes, I agree. I fully agree...6 but I 'm wondering what the right
number is. As a rule of thLm~, as you mentioned, 1 per 6.
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, if it's s~mething that .you wanted to act on later, I do
have the data and I could prepare s~me information for you.on that. For
example, I ~an if you just wanted to see what sc~ of the requirements were.
~k~rnsville has 1 per 6 plus a requirement for teacher parking so that would be a
greater requir~nt, fktina has 1 space for teacher and 1 space for 20 children.
These things are fairly labor intensive so there's a lot of teachers arotu~d
there. Also when you have it based on ~loye~s it's rather tough to figure
because you don't have a good handle on that. And all the rest of the
ordinances are based on square footage. 1 per 200 square feet in Maplewood so
it goes on and on. There's a lot of different ways to ~~te it.
Councilman Boyt: 1 per 6 seems pretty simple.
Mayor Ch~,iel: Is it 1 space per teacher or person working and 1 per 2~?
26
City Oouncil Meeting - January 8, 199~
Councilman Boyt: That's ~dina~'
Paul Krauss: That was Edina, yes.
Councilman Boyt: Burnsville is 1 per 6 plus tt~ teachers so ~'re coming in a
little less than that. A little more than...
..
Oouncilmmn Johnson: How does that oc~gare with ouz two daycare centers that w~
have noW?
Paul K~auss: I have information on one of ~. The new~st one that ~ j~st
opened up near the McDonalds has, it's 1~0 children capacity so under 1 per 6
you'd require 17 stalls. It's 16 and a f~action. They built it with 16 so it's
pretty, close.
Councilman Johnson: T~at's a good starting point.
Mayor C~iel: 1 per 6. I don't see any problem with that.
Councilman Johnson: I sure ~)uldn't ~nt to go any lower tlman that.
Mayor Ch~del: No.
Counci~ Boyt: Okay, is there a second?
Councilw~man Dim]er: Are you going to amend it further?
Councilman Boyt: Well I'd like to kind of take care of that one because if it's
clean it will pass and then w~ can deal with the n~%bers issue. We can deal
with it one at a time.
Councilman Johnson: Yeah, I agree. I'll second your motion there.
Councilman Boyt moved, Councilman Johnson seconded an amendment to Article XXV
to include parking reguir~%ents for daycare oenters be 1 parking stall for every
6 children of design capacity.. Ail voted in favor and the motion carried.
Councilman Boyt: And I w~uld propose another smendment amd that is that
townbomes, doubles, quads have 2 enclosed stalls.
Mayor Chv, iel: To~, doubles or quads.
Councilman Boyt: Its~ (b) there under Standards.
Mayor Ch~,iel: Is there a second?
Councilman Boyt: We've already built this stuff. We know this...
Mayor Ch~iel: We know it's existing. We have it here. Any discussion? Jay?
An~vthing?
Councilman Johnson: Was there a second?
27
City Oouncil Meeting - January 8~ 1990
Mayor Chv, iel: No. Not yet. We're not getting a second so I'm looking for some
discussion.
Councilwoman Dim]er: You can't discuss without a second.
Mayor Chniel: I'm just ~'ying to see if w~ can keep it alive for a minute or
two.
Councilm~n Boyt: Let's not forget that we require all single family ~ to
have two attached enclosed parking spaces. One of the reasons we do that is
because we' re in Minnesota. One of the reasons we do it is because we know that
people have a need for storage space. This is a case in which the m~rket in
fact will support that. Now if we let people with townhomes, doubles or quads
build 1, sc~,ebody's going to do it.
Councilwoman Dim. let: Isn't Paul ' s recom~,endation 1.5?
Councilman Boyt: Right. I'm saying, whatever we set the minim~, at, whether
the market ~nts 2 or not, so~body's going to build less than that becaL~e
developers are interested in quickly turning over their develotmv, ents. I don' t
blam~ them for that but that's a little different interest than we should have
for the long run approach to the City.
Councilman Workman: Where's our minimum on a double right now?
Paul Krauss: One.
Councilm~n Workman: They're not being built.
Councilm~n Johnson: No. I don't think anybody's building a double with a
single car garage. Maybe Rick is.
Rick ~kLrray: ...1974 but the reason they're not built isn't because people are
legislating th~, out of existence. The reason they're not is because the m=%rket
says hey, we're not going to buy that so we don't build the~. You don't have to
legislate everything. We're profit motivated. We'll build what the market will
buy.
Councilman Boyt: Quickly.
Rick ~%rray: No. We'll build what the m~rket will buy. that will earn us a
profit. It doesn't have to be quick.
Councilm~n Johnson: If you build a single car garage double at this time in
this market, it probably wouldn't sell.
Rick ~rray: You're right.
Councilman Johnson: There would be very few people, that would be a very small
market looking for that.
Rick Murray: And the reason was what you pointed to earlier Jay.
28
.City ~ouncil _~cting - January 8~ 1990
Cou~cilmmn Johnson: fbo~,ic conditions change. There may be a market for it
in the future.
Rick Murray: In 1974 they ~nt pretty ~11 and who knows, it might come back. I
don't know. You legislate it out and it's gone, it's tou~h.
Councilman Boyt: Well you look at Tc~'s development.
Mayor C2~iel: That's exactly what I ~as going to say. T(~, presently lives in a
quad. Each of those quads have double car garage.
Councilman Workman: I'm looking for a trailer though. Let me explain that. I
have one-fourth of my quad. There are almost 3 identical h~v~owners filling out
the rest of the quad and I'm going to sell mine to one of these same people.
Retired. From Excelsior. One car. Ail three.
Councilman Boyt: Are their garages not filled?
Councilman Workman: No, it's full.
Councilman Boyt: Because they're desparate for storage space.
Councilman Johnson: You fill ~hatevez space ~u have. Look at my basement.
Councilman Workman: You're right. They. like the location because it's close to
Excelsior still. They've got firewood in them. They've got ~ stacked.
There's no doubt about it. They enjoy the space, the little extra that they
have in spite of the fact that they have one car. ~hey don' t have to mow the
lawn. They. don't have to shovel. They. don't have to do anything. They. can to
Florida for 2 months in the winter if they ~nt. They can do ~ahatevex they
want. T~=y like it. They. like me and t~.'re all great people and I hope they
appreciate me telling the City. about them. But I know that they appreciate the
space. I know that they. can afford the space. They're all either retired, what
I w~uld call exec~ltives or individual business owners but they love it. They
love it in there and that entire area is becoming more and more elderly. It's
not bad. It's enjoyable having them as neighbors. What the beck does all this
have to do with our discussion? Other than they. all have one car. Now one of
them has a nice big Cadillac. People like the space too.
Councilman Boyt: Then without it, we're going to have s~ae people who axe going
to he parking that second vehicle, without a choice, they're going to be parking
~, in their drive%~y. And they're probably goirg to he parking it on the
street. Both of those ~an that they're subject to potential vandalism that
they. w~uldn't be inside and it also, you're neighborhood has mm~e very. tight
attempts at least to control people leaving vehicles out in the open. One way
they. can do that is because they've got 2 enclosed garage spaces.
Councilman Workman: Right. It's against the conditions of living there. Yeah.
And I think that's fantastic. ~3ain, I bxou~ht up the twins on Pontiac Lane. I
don't know, it doesn' t ~ to have been that bad lately but it's ~ just
terrible and they've got 2 car garages and there's cars parked all over. I
don't know if they're using the~ as rentals or ~hat they are but there are
trucks, cars, everything all over. It's a heck of a sight to drive through
every day and negotiate recessed manholes and puddles and kids %slking over to
29
City Council Maeting - January 8, 1990
the park and all the cars. And boats and everything else. Turn the corner into
the quads, not a car in sight. It is nice. It is a luxury.
Councilw~man Dim]er: I guess I have a point of order here. We're disclosing
sc~ethlrg that we haven't seconded and I 'm getting real confused here.
Mayor Chniel: Okay. I'll ask for a second. We had a motion on the floor by.
Bill. I guess the discussion is so that everybody really knows what we're
talking about here. That's why I'm entertaining discussion.
Councilwoman Dimler: I understand that and that' s fine but.
Mayor Chv, iel: We have a motion on the floor by. Bill indicate for standards of
townhc~es, doubles and quads. Each of these have 2 car garages. Is there a
second? We're not having it seconded. It dies then.
Councilman Johnson: I'll support doubles with 2 car garages. All doubles.
Councilm~n Boyt: What' s that?
Councilman Johnson: Doubles. But not townhomes and quads.
Councilman Boyt: What's the difference when you read the defintion?
Mayor Ch~,iel: Yeah. In talking the 2 car garages as to 1 1/2 which must be
enclosed, what's the dimension? Difference between the 2? 2 to 1 1/27
Paul Krauss: What we intended and I'm not sure, the ordinance might need a
little bit of modification there. What we intended was that if it was a 1 1/2
standard, that they not build 18 foot wide garages which are 1 1/2 cars wide but
that s(x~e of ~, have 1 car and sc~te of th~, have 2 car. We probably have to
add a line in there that no partial garages would be accepted to F~et the
standard.
Councilman Johnson: There's also a proble~ in the definitions. Under dwelling,
two family and then above in the standard it calls it a double.
Mayor Chmiel: What are you referencing Jay?
Councilman Johnson: Well here on page 5. He's got (b), townhcmes, doubles and
quads. Under the definitions below, he doesn't define doubles.
Paul Krauss: That should be changed to two-families, the defintion.
Councilman Johnson: Or doubles down below. One or the other. I know what you
mean, it's just didn't q%lite click.
Mayor Chmiel: That's being consistent too. Okay.
Councilman Boyt: Well I would certainly Jay support 2 anywhere I can get th~
so if you're only willing to provide it in doubles, make a motion and I'll
second it but I think, I guess I'll continue to think and be the only one doing
that, in this regard anyway, that in this area people need a 2 car garage.
30
City Council _~cting - January 8~ 199~
Councilman Johnson: There are a lot of people. I meant to ask the principal
ove~ at the el~ntary school how many single parent head of households are
c~%rrently going to our grade school. I know it's increasing all the time and
that's one group that really only nccds a 1 car garage, and ~.=3ny times can only
afford, if they can even afford a garage. If you look at the apartments,
another group of people besides the elderly and the newl.u~sds that are in
apartments are the newly divorced with kids. It's also the fastest growing
segment of our society, that is h~neless. ~letely hc~eless.
Councilman Boyt: But there are much better ways to provide h~zes for them then
to allow somebody to ccme in and build a minimal buildin~ to put tbs% in.
Councilman Johnson: One car garage is not, in an apar~t building. I'm going
to diverse away frc~ here, is not minimal. Minimal is zero enclosed. One
car...is far more expensive and does raise the cost of these. We're still not
talking about bringing the people fr(a% Phillip's neighborhood out here to live.
The people who are going to afford to live in an enclosed, having at least one
enclosed parking spot is going to raise it out of those people's. We're still
talking, w~'re not talking indigents are going to he coming in here because w~
have one car enclosed. If ~ had no cars enclosed, it was all outside parking,
that's even m~)re affordable. We're being exclusive by....
Councilman Boyt: The issue isn't who can live in the building. It's what
standard of living do they have when they're there.
Councilman Johnson: It's an issue of both. If ~u can't afford to live there.
But an.vway.
Mayor Ch~,iel: Okay. I would like to entertain another motion. Is anyone ready
for one? We r~ to do something.
Counci~ Johnson: I'd like to move the rest of the ordinance with the
exception of the to~s, doubles and quads and the multi-fa~ilies sections
and get that off. We've added the one list. Go for the rest of it. We se~% to
be down to just one section to argue about. Make s~me progress.
Mayor Ch~,iel: Okay, let's go back to the townhc~s, doubles and quads and I' 11
make a motion to have the townhc~es, doubles and quads 2 stalls with 1 1/2 which
mAmt be enclosed.
Councilwoman Dimler: I' 11 second that.
Councilman Boyt: Now that's with the intention that those he built either as a
single car or double car garages correct?
Councilman Johnson: Right. No quarter garages.
Mayor Ch~iel: 1 1/2 means it ~uld he more than 1.
Councilman Workman: Do w~ have dimensions on what a 1 1/4 garage is?
Pa,~l K~auss: No. We haven't established that.
Councilman Boyt: A standard double is 24 feet wide.
31
City Council Meeting - January 8, 1990
Councilman Workman: So w~'re talking an 187
Councilm~n Johnson: 22.
Councilm.~n Work~n: For a 1 1/27
Council~mn Johnson: You wouldn't build a 1 1/2. You'd build, one unit would
have a one unit ard one unit would have 2 to give you 3 for the 2. On a double,
I don't think 1 1/2 Fakes a lot of sense personally. On t_he townhomes and the
quads, I think the 1 1/2 makes sc~e sense so you have a variety. You can mix it
up. You can build a building that has both do[~les and single car garages. So
if sc~.~body, they can have a choice.
Mayor Chmiel: I'm not saying 1 car garages for quads. I'm saying t_hat 1 1/2.
Councilm.~n Workm.~n: SO as it is you m~an?
Mayor Chniel: As staff rec~endation basically is.
Counci~ Workm.~n: Then what about multi-family?
Mayor Chniel: Multi-family, to take consideration of the 16 units that we
talked about. Efficiency, 1 bedro(m, %~nits, 2 stalls - 1 of which must be
enclosed. Two bedroo~,s and larger units, 2 stalls - 1 1/4 of which must be
enclosed and this require~_nt to be reassessed on a gross basis for the entire
project.
Council~n Workm.~n: SO as it reads?
councilm~n Johnson: That's your motion to go (b) and (c) at the sa~ time then?
Mayor Ch~iel: Right. (b) and (c) with item 1 and 2. We have a motion.
Councilw0mzmn Dim]er: I did second that one.
councilman Boyt: One point of discussion before we go on. I think one of the
most significant things about the ordinance change is that the parking has to be
attached and that's certainly a move forward. It's my intention to vote against
it.
Mayor Ch~,iel: I don't ~_~-c anything on here that does say specifically attached.
Councilman Boyt: Oh it is.
Councilman Johnson: But there's another spot in here that says not only
attached but I believe it's underground for units, more than 24 units?
councilmmn Boyt: I think it says if you can't fit them underneath, then you
can, or architecturally it won't work, then you can go to sc~e additional out
building.
Mayor Ch~,iel: Parking outside, right.
32
City Council Meeting - January 8~ 1990
Council~n Boyt: But I think that's clearly an ~nity that I would anticipate
would impzove the value of the aparhnent. I don't think w~'re doing enough.
Brad Johnson: I'm still back to the m~ltiples. Somehow ~hen you do a multiple
project, you have to have a 1 to 1 coverage, which I call a zental. Whether
it's 16 units oz 32 o~ mo~e, because architecturally it doesn't work and if you
go over to Castle Ridge. One of the biggest probl~%s they've had with that
pazticular project, which has been e%pty or vacant over the last 15 years is
detached garages in a multiple because they're too far to walk. Even an added
garages doesn't do any good. It's just an added thing that makes the project
look, go around and drive around. Your average project today is what Prick?
~hat kind of land, other than the one we've got over here, what size project
would you anticipate s~ebody building? Yeah. Your sites, your projects today
in high density multiple are 150 or more. Probalby 4 or 5 buildings and to have
some detached units on slab, I just can't, and you can go back to your
architects, it just wouldn't look very good. It's even hard to determine whose
they are and the ratios just don't work. It just, as Paul found out, an average
apartment building is 90~ to 1,~0~ square f~et per unit and you just can't get
m~)re than 1 average. That means you've got 24 singles. Maybe 12 efficiencies
and 24 doubles. It just doesn't work. I did the same check that he did.
Probably with some of the same azchitects. It just doesn't work in the
apartment projects and it can be over 16 units. Maybe s~met~ later when they
can do that, that's fine but I don' t think you want to do that because we've got
a lot of land in town here. I'm talking about Mr. Patton's land is high, sc~e
day scmebody's going to come along and buy that and put a big project in there
which would be good the co~unity. Generate a lot of taxes. It's going to be
very. difficult for him to sell. He's says oh yeah, by the way you've got to put
in sc~eplace out there and then determine ~ahere they go to get them, an
additional 25 detached garages. You can't go underneath ~.
Mayor Ch~iel: I don' t know Brad. I think your analogy is fine but in talking,
my son lived in an apartment. No availability, of a garage and he would have
really loved to have a garage during the wintertime so he didn't have to go out
there and shovel off the snow.
Brad Johnson: But did they have it underneath?
Mayor Ch~,iel: No, they didn' t have any underneath either.
Brad Johnson: Well these would have then underneath.
Mayor C2~,iel: I know. We would have these underneath which is fine and that's
what I'm...
Brad Johnson: But you're adding ~.~re than that.
Mayor Ch~,iel: But if in the event that you have 2 cars and you can't get
another one undezneath, you'd have to put it somewhere and he would have just
have as soon as had another garage in or adjacent. Whether he had to walk 15
feet or 50 or 1~. You know.
Brad Johnson: It's architecturally I think. Then you're into something that
doesn't look very. good. We manage buildings. Have managed buildings. We have
a hard time selling off all, you actually remt the garages for $3~.~ to
33
City Council Meeting - January 8, 1990
each and normally the tenants don't take them, all. ~nere's always vacancies and
those people that want 2 can have them. That's just the way it works. I'm just
saying, you should think that through because you just would not have very good
looking buildings. That was all. Because I can't find any architect that says
they could design s(mething like that they would feel comfortable with. That's
the input you have to have.
Councilman Johnson: But they're doing it in Edina.
Brad Johnson: No they're not. In ~dina they're requiring, to do it you have to
build 1,200 square foot apartments.
Councilman Johnson: Yeah, I was just calculating that out.
Brad Johnson: And they don' t rent.
Councilman Johnson: 1 1/4 and we would end up.
Brad Johnson: It just doesn't work Jay. You'd have too big of an apartment
building.
Councilman Johnson: Yeah. You'd have to end l~ with so~thing like 1,100
square feet for each apartment in order to get 1 1/4 parking spots underneath.
Brad Johnson: If you go over and go in, they're roughed in over here at
Heritage, they're big at 1 to 1. If that issue could be handled in a separate
zoning like so~=how handled because I think that's a critical issue for
everybody.
Dean Johnson: My nam~ is Dean Johnson. One quick item, on the apartments. When
you get over 1,000 square foot the cost changes considerably because of the Fire
Code. Once you get over 1,000 square foot, there's a lot of different fire
codes that come into play. A lot of different sheetrocking. One hour rating
walls. All this other t.upes of stuff so it does affect the affordability over
1,000 square foot which again relates back to what you can put on...
Mayor Chniel: You're saying that there's less stringent requirements in under
1,000 square feet as opposed to over. Why is that?
Dean Johnson: I'm really not quite sure. I just know that some of those rules
apply that they talk about different types of different things.
Mayor Chmiel: I would like to see that same kind of protection given to all
people living in all kinds of buildings whether they be 900 or 800 or 1,000.
Dean Johnson: I guess I would i~'agine that the experts you know that look this,
the fire people that look at this, understand that the way fire spread and the
amount of area that they need to spread into and what goes in goes in to
determining what should be done for certain square footages. I would have to
think that that's probably already taken into their fire code. I would have to
think they probably thought through all those problems and determined that
because of lesser footage and more co~oactness that the area that it has to
spread into and the amount of space that it can burn before they're able to get
to it to put it out, has somewhat to do with what they req~%ire for fire codes.
34
City. Council Mseting - January 8~ 199~
Councilman Boyt: I would like to try. to ~ your motion. ~hat all zoning
districts, R-4, R-8, R-12 require a minim~ of 1 1/2 enclosed parking places per
unit with if they should build a 1 bedroom unit, that that oould be a 1 enclosed
space out of the 2. I think that sets, if there's a second to it, the reason I
would propose it is I think it sets the ground work then for an R-16 to c~me in
and w~ can look at a 1 on 1 situation. But we're doirg it by. zones rather than
by d~ll ings.
Mayor Ch~.iel: As a friendly ~m~ment?
Councilw~an Dimler: Do you accept it?
Councilman Workman: I second it.
Mayor C~,iel: What you're saying, let me understand ~hat you're saying. For an
R-4, an R-8 and a 12 to be 1 1/2 which must be enclosed. Is that what you're
saying?
Councilman Boyt: And that's basically the zoning districts we have today but
it's based on the praise that we're going to quickly move to an R-16 which
would be an apartment building zoning and that we would work out the enclosed
parkin~ for that but it's going to have to be something ccmpatible with the
parking.
Mayor Ch~iel: Okay. I would accept that.
Councilwoman Dfmler: If ~u accept that friendly a%e~t, I' 11 second that
friendly amemd~nt.
Councilman Johnson: R-16. We're kind of saying we're going to an R-16. We've
~ trying to maintain the gr~----n space and everl~zhirg and that's why we had 12
versus 16. A lot of the areas we're looking at, I'm not e~actly suze ~here
R-16's going to go in this town.
Councilman Workman: We'd have better control.
Councilman Johnson: I would think people would be rushing in here to charge all
their R-12' s to 16' s right away.
Councilman Boyt: That doesn't mean that ~ wouldn't maintain the same a%ount of
green space.
Mayor Ch~iel: No, that's true.
Councilman Boyt: It si~ly deals with the fact that ~ are going to have
apar~t buildings and let's zone for apartment buildings. Fr~m what I've
heard, R-12 isn't really an apartment building zoning because Brad was saving
he's got an R-25.
Councilman Workman: Is this a Planning Ommission question?
Councilman Johnson: I think the R-16 is. yeah. There's going to be a lot more
consideration before we j~%p into...
35
City Council Meeting - January 8, 1990
Mayor Chniel: Let's just throw that R-16 back to the Planning Cc~mission. Let
th~n review it and cc~e up with so~ recc~v, endations.
Councilman Johnson: Tnat friendly amendment kind of assumes we're going to an
R-16 though.
Councilw~?an Dimler: But we don't have to.
CounciLman Johnson: Well I'm going to vote against it because I think 1 1/2 is
still too ml~h on an apartment building. With our current zoning, the most
dense you can get to build an apartment building is R-12 so we are saying to
build an apartment building we have to have 1 1/2 which means we're going to
have attached and detached underground parking for one and we're going to have
half again as much above ground parking. Sc~e sheds out back to put your cars
in also out there, which is going to increase your imperviotm surface and
everything.
Councilman Boyt: We don't have any apartment buildings currently in the stream
anywhere do we? No. So this isn't impacting anything that's coming through the
Planning (kx~,ission. We have tLm~ to work the R-16 issue out.
Councilwoman Dimler: The 1.5 is enclosed?
Mayor Ch~iel: ~ne 1.5, right. Must be enclosed.
Councilm. an Johnson: They need 2 stalls overall so you have to have .5 outside
at least. Or . 5 in,enclosed.
Mayor Ch~,iel: Any other discussions?
Councilman Boyt moved, Councilman Workman seconded an smendmend that all zoning
districts, R-4, R-8, R-12 rec~ire two parking stalls per unit of which a minim~
of 1 1/2 be enclosed. All voted in favor except Councilman Johnson who opposed
and the amendment carried with a vote of 4 to 1.
CounciLman Boyt: One other c~lick iss~m on this and that is visitor parking.
Are you convinced that 1 in 4 is enough visitor parking? Okay.
Paul Krauss: Yeah, you'll act~mlly have more than that because if you're
requiring 1 1/2 enclosed stalls with a minimum. The units require 2 parking
stalls, 1 1/2 of which m~st be enclosed so with each ,.mit is generating .75
visitor parking stalls.
Councilman Johnson: Okay. Now you need your Fain ~tion.
Council~..an Boyt: Yeah. You've got to vote on the whole thing.
Councilman Johnson: You just aF~_nded the F~tion. We didn't vote on the motion.
Mayor Ch~,iel: That's correct. We did avLend the motion. Now I would accept the
motion to accept the balance of which has been changed and...
36
City Council Meeting - January 8~ 1990
Councilman Johnson: There's a motion on the floor Mr. Mayor. Your motion is
still on the floor.
Mayor Ch~iel: My motion is still on the floor.
Councilwoman Dimler: No, the amendment.
Mayor Ch%iel: Well w~ accepted with the friendly.~~mt to it.
Councilman Workman: Didn't ~ accept the whole thing?
Mayor Chv, iel: That's the whole thing. We don't have to then. Isn' t that right
Roger?
Co~cil~n Johnson: I thought w~ w~re voting on the
councilman Workman: There was a first and a second on the s~_ncl~nt right?
Mayor Ch%iel: Right.
councilman Boyt: So what ~ did is ~ accepted the friendly sm~mdm~nt into it
and that's what w~ voted on it with the first and a second.
Roger Knutson: That ~as my understanding of ~ahat ~v~u did. The only thing left
to do is adopt the ordinance itself as ar~xled.
Council~m%an Dimler: So I will move it~m~ 4 in the ordinance containing
am~m~l~nts to A~ticle XXV, Off-street parking and loading with the a~mc~ents
that have passed.
Mayor C~iel: And is there a second?
councilwoman Dimler m~ved, councilman Boyt seconded to approve the second and
final readirg for an Ordinanoe ~nding Article XXV, Off-Street Parking and
Loading as follows:
b. Townhcmes, doubles and quads: TWo stalls, 1 1/2 of ~hich must be ~mclosed.
c. Multi-family:
1) Efficiency. and one bedroom units - Tw~ stalls, one of which must be
enclosed.
2) Two bedroom and larger units - Two stalls, 1 1/2 of which must be
enclosed. This requir~nt is to be reassessed on a gross basis for the
entire project.
All voted in favor except councilman Johnson ~ho opposed and the motion ca_tried
with a vote of 4 to 1.
37
City Council Meeting - January 8, 1990
Councilman Boyt: I'd like to amend the agenda to move item 7.5 to the next
ita~L.
Councilman Johnson: Could w~ finish this one first?
Councilm~n Boyt: I think we did.
Councilm~n Johnson: No we didn't. I have a priviledge at this tim~ of ~m~tting
a stat~nt as to why my vote.
Mayor Ch~Liel: Go ahead Jay.
Councilman Johnson: I would like to have a place in the record of why I voted
against the entire ordinance is because I believe it is prejudicial to single
mothers, the elderly and other minorities within our society.
Mayor Chv, iel: Very good.
Don Patton: Does this am~_nded ordinance come back to the Council for second
reading because it was changed at this meeting?
Mayor Chm.,iel: No.
Don Patton: Why not?
Mayor Chniel: This should be the second reading in itself.
Don Patton: But it was amended.
Mayor Chniel: Even though it's a~'~_nded with the amemdments that we put to it,to
change it frc~ what it was previous frcra the first ~=eting, that is then
acceptable.
Councilman Johnson: You've got 2 shots at it.
A1 Klingelhutz: I've got one question. I've got quite a little high density or
R-12 zoning in the City right now. We haven't got any R-16. What if som6Jone
would cc~ in with sc~ high density zoning right now and without the R-16 they
would have to go to 1 1/2 units for an apartment.
Mayor Ch~,iel: I would say that's right, yeah.
Councilman Johnson: As of when this gets published.
Ccouncilman Boyt: But our intent is to have the Planning Commission work on
this issue immediately. Since there's nothing in front of t3m~, about an
apartment building, we'd like to think that wouldn't delay s(m, ething. I'd like
to think that.
Mayor Ch~.,iel: Okay, Bill has asked for m~)vem~nt of 7.5. Is there consensus
within the Council to move to 7.5?
38
City Council Meeting - January 8, 1990
Councilman Johnson: Was there anybody here from item 5, 6 or 7? I know there's
people here for 7.5.
Mayor (l~iel: Yeah. Any objections?
REVIEW ~ITY CENTER ~SK F(I{~ FINDINC~ FR(~ ~ITY G~OUP M~ETI~.
Jeff Bros: Good evening. My. na%e is Jeff Bros. I 'm up here tonight
representing the (km~unity Center Task Force. As you know w~'ve come before you
before this past fall and asked for some direction fr~, the Council as to which
way we should go as to presenting information and gathering information from the
c~unity in regards to a co~%nity center in Chanhassen. We took your input
for questionnaires. We also presented that information to different groups in
town. Navely the senior citizens, the Botary Club, the Lion's Club, k%erican
Legion, Chanhassen Fire Departmsnt, the Hockey. Associations and Concerned
Citizens fo~ the Future of Chanhassen. We also held three open meetings at
local schools in the area. We have arrived at a conclusion of these ~%rve.vs and
of these _m~ctings and we would like to present that information to you and
follow L~o with a r~~ation to the Council. A total of the cc~uunity center
questionnaires that we received back frcm these meetings was a total of 76
surveys back. We are the first to admit that it's a little bit lower than we
would have liked to have seen for a total n~_r of surveys. However, at nome
of the meetings did w~ run into any opposition anywhere close to what the
previous task force group ran into with the Filly's site. As you can see, a~ I
correct in that you have this packet? You can _."~c that 58 out of the 76 said
y~s, they would like to see a co~munity center in Chanhassen. 15 said no and to
go along with that, 44 said they would support holding a special referend~ for
a c~unity center here. 24 said no. There are some comments on the back pages
of each questionnaire. We gave a total tally for each group that we spoke to.
There are any. additional comments also listed there that were listed on the
surveys that w~ received back from the groups. I guess at this time, does the
Council have anymore questions for the Community Center Task Force?
Mayor Oaniel: I have sc~e information that, I have a letter here that I intend
on reading as well plus s(x~e of the calls that I received from people but I
guess I don't, sc~e of the things that I see in this. I'm just thinking we're
still pr~ature as to having a ~unity center. That's my position.
Jeff Bros: Okay. ~llat do you .~-~c as an appropriate time there?
Mayor Ch~,iel: I see something, as I m~ntioned, do~n the road. Anywhere from 3
to 5 years. I also ~ that this is not representation of the City but a very
minute percent of the population even consider a referendu%. I 'm sort of
offended with the fact that I feel that we're not at the point to really support
a cc~munity center at this time. I received a letter, and this .goes to Council,
expressing sc~e of their disapproval and I think there's a lot more people out
there than just this one. Several calls that I've received at home have
indicated almost the same, scme of the same things here. I'm really at the
point where my o~n personal feeling is that I don't see a referenda. I don't
see a c(armunity center going forth at this time. I think that w~ have more
things here now until we get going without down~ projects, which I'd like to
see consumated as well as waiting to ~.--c a population growth. I think Tc~
indicated the amount of dollars that we're talking about spending, 4.5 or 5
39
City Council Meeting - January 8, 1990
million dollars. I don't think that's a kind of a community center that we
want. I don't think we want to m~ke that investment into it until we can really
get so~.~thing that's going to benefit the entirety of the co~nunity. I guess
that I just feel rather strongly about it and I'm really letting you know where
at least I'm coming fr(~L. I don't know where the balance of the Council is at
but this is my own personal opinion and as I say, I would just as soon not see a
referendum on it at this particular tim~.
Jeff Bros: Okay. Would you mind sharing some of the points, the negative
points that you've received with us?
Mayor Chv, iel: Sure. I'd be more than happy to. I think this letter sort of
su~vmrizes everything that I've just said. It says here, I hope you'll share
this letter with the entire City Council and the C(x~,unity Oenter Task Force in
the event that I would not be able to attend the Monday night City Council
m.~eting. I must express my disapproval of the mmnner in which the Community
Center Task Force has recently operated. Specifically I'm concerned with the
survey conducted to seek resident's opinions on whether or not to build a
c(m~.,unity center. Since when does .76% of .the population represent a majority?
Only 76 people responded to the survey of which a mmjority was in favor of the
C(~r~Lunity center. Surely the City Council cannot consider this a represented
sample on which to base a referend~, vote. I sort of agree with that. Surely
the Task Force can do a better job than this. I think you did a pretty good
job.
Jeff Bros: I do too.
Mayor (l~,iel: But you didn't get enough people into it. I'm also, well I'll
leave this particular paragraph out.
Councilmmn Johnson: Please read it in.
Mayor Chniel: Oh, okay. I am also incessed at Jim, Mady's r~narks that he
thought that no attendance at the three ~xlblic m~etings held on the issue
indicated there was an overall support of the project. I looked for s~h
meeting and heard of none as I'm ~re other residents did. I suspect s%~h
m~ctings were not well publicized because those who want a center are afraid
that the real mmjority ~Bnts to postpone ~lch a project. T~at's an opinion. I
represent the Task Force attempts at trying to push the center through without
thorough research when we are already overtaxed in Chanhassen. I resent their
desire to spend my hard earned tax dollars for a special referendum to do so. I
suit, it that the Task Force desires a referenda, in March before Chanhassen
residents receive their property tax bills and are able to assess how recent tax
changes have affected the~. At the very least we deserve to be able to make
that assess%ent. If the City Oouncil votes for the referend~v, before ~, they
truly will not act in t/he best interest for their constituents.
Jeff Bros: Okay. Alright, first of all. The paragraph that you wanted to
leave out. I don't know what else we could have done as a task force or as a
groin. What else we could have done to advertise those meetings. I don't know
how m~ny w~eks that ran in the paper. We sent notices home to every child at
the Chan El~ntary School and to other schools in the area that have residents
of Chanhassen. I don't know what else we can do. I'm s~Ee the City Council has
seen the same kind of results from, things that you've tried to get done.
40
City Council Meeting - January 8~ 1998
think Mr. Mady's ~t about no negative, about it by. nobody showing up at the
m~tings is not true and I don't think anybedy would expect to believe that
because nobody showed up doesn' t mean anybody doesn' t ~nt it. We w~re very
disappointed as a group that nobody, did show up at the public meetings. As a
matter of fact ~m were amazed. ;~3ain, I don' t know what else w~ could have done
as a group trying to get public feedback to get that infon%ation frcm the
citizens of this town. One issue that comes up and has been one of our main
reasons not to put aside what's said in the letter but one of the ideas and the
basis for getting a special refexend~ done possibly in March was to halp gain
s~mething on building costs. Our architects that have ~ working on this and
basically giving us building costs have said that we would be looking at an
additional 6% roughly in building costs if we were to ~ait until a November
ballot. We would lose an entire building season. Whatever n~bers they come up
with for a total cost would be, add 6% to it and there you are. We felt looking
at the n~%bers that we ~_re working with, anywhere fr(x~ 3 to 4 1/2 million
dollars, you're looking at anywhere frcm, well upward to $100,0~.00 to
$150 , 000 . 00 of added cost unnecessarily. That ~s our basis for ~mnting the
special referendL~. I think that is pretty basic and in no way did we intend to
ram s~ething through before people got their tax statements. I don't think it
occurred to anybody that people got their tax stateaemts at the end of March or
April so we would beat them and they wouldn't know what they were paying in
their taxes.
Mayor C~%iel: It would be later than that because of the time delay that we had
because of our budgets.
Jeff Bros: Correct. So that was our basis for it is to gain that extra
building season and help reduce the cost of the overall facility. Again, as Don
has supplied a letter that there is not money allocated obviously in 1990 for a
special referenda, which we fully understand. I guess at this time what we
would like to do as a task force is we're looking for the Council's input as
into what direction we should take fr~ here on out and we would like to modify.
our rec~dation that we will continue to collect survey results if you so
desire. A lot of us have spent many., many hours on this as volunteers. We
obviously don't ~ant to see it just roll over and die. We feel that there is a
need and we feel there is a want in this community for a community center. We
would therefore say that let's forget about the special referend~ in March and
would the CoL~cil support it by putting it on the November ballot in the general
elections and opening it up to the citizens? With that said, we would also like
to stand ready to prepare a detailed site plans and operational budgets and
financial options but we ~ to know ~hat your f~elings are. I guess we know
as far as March. What about November? Where do we go frc~ here?
Mayor Ch~,iel: Okay. Thanks Jeff.
Jeff Bros: Jean has some c(~ments also that she'd like to share with you.
Jean Bobbins: My. name is Jean Bobbins and I have been a ms,bet of the Community
Center Task Force for 2 years and I just ~nt to review for the Council the
reasons why. we need a c~v~unity centex. We have heard your input but I haven't
heard from the rest of the Council where they feel on this. I see basically 3
reasons. One, Chanhassen has a real shortage of facility space. The present
facilities that we have are inadequate. The population is growing and the ~
is going to increase. A center that we would build would appeal to all ages so
41
City Council Meeting - January 8~ 1990
it would serve the whole co~.unlty. I have kind of put together here a list of
some of the activities that have either been cancelled or are functioning in
inadequate space at present. As far as the gym space, youth basketball, the
space is very. limited. There's inadequate facilities for the number of
participants that w~ have. Adult basketball, the gym is too s~mll. ~ere's no
adult basketball program in Chanhassen. They have joined with Chaska and they
had to turn 2 tea~ away this year because they had inadequate space and the
scheduling has becc~ very difficult on Chaska as well. Exercise classes,
there's been numerous dayti~ and evening requests that have been turned down
because there is not facility for these. There's little or no opportunities for
daytime activities. For preschool children and for senior citizens. Dance
classes, there's a constant scheduling probl~n for these. We have no facility
or no good facility to host large events such as axt fairs and these kinds of
things. There's a lot of scheduling probl~ now with the present facilities we
have trying to schedule the Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, voting and other things as
well as the other activities that they're trying to schedule. As far as the
pool and swi~ing activities, Lake Ann. The lessons are full every sumner and
they have to tuxn children away so there would definitely be a need for more
facilities for that. Ck~.munity roo~. M~eting roo~m at the City Hall. You are
usually full. There's not a good spot for seniors and seniors really, they've
been crying for some room for a couple of years now and do not have a good
facility. There could be more opportunity for c~unity education if there were
~)re facilities available for that. As far as the ice sheet, right now we're
using the Shakopee bubble which is certainly not very desireable. There could
be bro(mgsall leagues, skating lessons. Right now we have skating lessons on
outdoor facilities only. A lot of the teachers will not teach outdoors so
there's a real li~tt for what we can do in that area. So these are just a
n~er of things that right now we do not have adequate facilities for in our
present sit~mtion and I can only see this getting worse as the population grows
and a c~unity center would address those. Secondly, c~unity center at the
City site will allow the Chanhassen El~ntary to develop additional classrooms,
additional g~ and supporting facilities that could be [~ed both by the
el~nentary school as well as by the c(m~unity. Thirdly, the corn%unity center
site would provide kind of a cc~)n denominator that would bring the City
together. It would also strengthen the downtown development and the c(x~,unity.
I think it's ti~ for Chanhassen to start providing sc~ of tt~se facilities
instead of depending on the surrounding c(x~,unities to provide the roc~ and the
facilities for a lot of these program~. Thank you.
Brad Johnson: I'm Brad Johnson, 7425 Frontier Trail. Chanhassen resident. A
couple things I'd like to clarify.. I've been through this referend~ twice
myself so far and ~as in the phone campaign last year and up ~mtil we had the
Filly's question, I'd say we were running 3 to 1 in favor of this particular
thing. When we ran into the site question, we w~re not able, and probably
justifiably so, to overcc~ that particular question. I think Mr. Mayor that
the last survey., which was 330 people which is a legal survey, as legal surveys
go, and would be one that you would say was representative of the co~nunity. We
had 79% for and 21% against. When we've gone out back into the c(m~,unity at the
present time, we ca~ back with the same results. In our c(x~unications and
talking to other people in the CAA and people that we come talk to, we don't
really feel much negative. I personally went with my armor on over to the
Legion Club which was by far the ~st vocal and against last time and they came
out in favor of it at this ti~ because they perceive, whoever was there, they
voted it and you can shake yo~ head but I was there and they said yeah. Looks
42
City Oouncil Meeting - January 8~ 1990
fine amd they ~_re very negative last time. Now I don't know ~hat the change
had ~ but they changed. I think that w~ have an indication that the
c(m~unity is for it in n~mbers and we have not as a cc~aittee had very many
negative people c(x~e, as a matter of fact, hardly anybody c(m~ to us in a
negative feeling smd I don't know where these people are. ~here are always
going to be people that are anti-additional tax. As you know, in any referemd~
you're going to get 30% or 40% of the people that are anti-tax. We havem't even
said we're going to increase or decrease taxes. We perceive that would be our
next 30-4~ da~us work to determine how this thing would be financed and what
affect it would have on taxes. Our populatiom b~- doubled in the last 5 years
and it's vexy possible it will double again. Ou~ cost on this co~%unity ~_nter
Tc~, is 3.6 million and it's bigger than the ~den Prairie Oenter whic~ is
supporting 35,~0 people so I think it's very adequate space. The one that ~u
quoted about in Pl~uth, because it costed too blasted much, is not going
anywhere. It's not an e~y hole because the cc~vAmity could not afford ome of
that size. The one in Chaska is fax too expensive for a cc~v~ity center and
how they can afford it, I don't know but in the figures of 3 to 4.5 million
dollars, we're fine. I'm very act, and it wasn't voted on. Okay? I'm very
active in the downtown c(x~v~nity. I have business people saying where is the
Chanhassen traffic. There isn't any. We have in the evening and during the day
very little reason for anybody within Omanhassen to cc~e to (~anhassen and many
people perceive and as a matter of fact I've had a n~%ber of retailers cc~e in
and say where is your co~v,~i~ activities and we have to say Chaska because
there aren't any c~ity activities in this c(x~m~ity that dra~ the ~ity
together. I think basically m~ny of us have worked hard. We have had very few
negatives. We've cc~e up with very creative ways of financir~ and in general we
save, than~ to Don and everybody, a million to 2 million dollars somewhere in
true cost to the taxpayer in the methods that we're using. We've got the land
free here. The sc~)ol district ~s it amd I think it's the job personally of
this particular Council to allow it to go forward to a vote. Whether it's in
March or April or next fall during the general election but at least o~ce again
see what happened because we all admittedly know that last time the question was
not the center but it was the question of location. We had very few objections
this time around on this current location or any other location so I feel that
you should at least take the attempt to allow the co~%unity center, one. To put
the financial package together and allow the ~ity, not 5 people who may
have received one or two letters, make the decision for the whole co~vm~ity.
Mayox Oa%iel: Brad, let me clarify the ~e or %mD letters plus all the calls.
Plus all the door pounding that we did last year. People indicating they didn't
want their taxes raised. That's the main issue. Now don't say that just three
letters ox so. The representation as to the total n~ers you had weren't as
good either.
Brad Johnson: I'm just saying, we're not even saying taxes are going to be
raised. We haven't got to that point yet.
Mayor ~,iel: You don't think they will he?
Brad Johnson: We don't know. Like you say, you haven't received your tax bill.
There are a n~v~_r of different creative ways to finance this thing that it's
possible that that doesn't have to happen. But in our questions when we went
out and said, we think the taxes will be increased, the people that ~are there
and heard that still in general said they we. re in favor of it because they
43
City Oouncil Meeting - January 8, 1990
perceived it's necessary for the co~,unity but the only true way you're going to
find this out is bring it up to the c~unity. Let them vote on it. That's
where I'm at. I think w~ had a decrease in taxes didn't we Don last .ut=ar?
Mayor Ch%iel: Hopefully. People are saying even with the decrease their taxes
are still too high.
Brad Johnson: I think they're going to say that forever but they ~my not result
in if their kids get to swim. If their kids get to play basketball. If their
kids get to do a lot of other things or if they themselves get tired. Personally
tonight my family has driven easily 50 miles so that our kids. My. wife just got
hc~e, so that our kids can enjoy certain things like swi~ning, skating, that
type of thing. None of which exists here. Good friends of ~dne that have
basketball adult leagues, I can go down and find them in Chaska. I mean that's
just the way it is. If you talk to Lori or anybody in this department, it's
very frustrating for them not to have any facilities in this co~nunity provided
simply because w~ don't happen to have I guess the senior high here. It's just
not a nor~ml kind of sit{mtion and a co~T, unlty center fills that role. I think
you should just let the people do it. I think it's unfair for 5 people to ~.ake
a decision for the rest of the co~nunity and I hope the paper quotes that. If
you guys want to Fake that decision, that's fine too. But I think it's unfair.
At this point. Okay? I know it's part of yo~uc job but you've also set us up as
an organization that's been working for 3 years on the project and we have not
found a lot of negatives. Tnat's where it is. Thank you.
Mayor Ckmiel: You haven't found any negatives and I haven't found any positives
from people I've talked to.
Brad Johnson: Well as I said, I've talked to a lot of people and I have not
found, we interviewed how many people down at the, whatever that was. We had.
Right, Oktoberfest. Very positive. I interviewed 50 to 100 people there. We
had a booth there. We have not run into the tr~nendous negatives. I think the
reason you don' t have people here is because they don' t perceive it's a big
negative. When you have s~nething that people really don't like, they're out in
masses afraid that it's going to happen. Here they get a chance to vote and I
think the key is they get a chance to vote. It doesn' t cost the cc~unity
anything if the referendum is during the month of November, this year because
there's going to be an election anyway and we can just find out. If they say
no, they say no.
Mayor Ch~,iel: Anyone else?
Leneda Rahe: My. naF~ is Leneda Rahe. I reside at 1021 Carver Beach Road,
Chanhassen. I heard the presentation. Our group, the Concerned Citizens for
the Future of Chanhassen received the presentation by the Task Force. The
Fajority of us also felt that it was premature. There were only 8 people in
attendance that night I believe and I think there were only 2, I'm not ~re.
Like he said, you have all those n~m~ers, but we felt it was pr~nature too
because there are other ways to solve the proble~ of not having swil~ing
lessons. I too have a hard time getting my kids into the swi~ing lessons at
Lake Ann and I've driven to Deephaven but there's just a lack of instructors. I
feel that adding instructors would resolve probl~ that and I do also feel that
a lot of my activities with my children in c<x~,unity activities take place at
the Chanhassen El~{nentary School and we've had no problem getting in our Girl
44
City Oouncil Meeting - January 8~ 199~
Scouts and basketball and the other things that the kids are involved in. The
cc~ity center's a good idea but w~ also, the majorityy of the OCFC felt that
it too was pre~mture and w~'d like to see the City look with foresight in
plannin~ the ~ity center so it will bemefit the cityy as it grows and when
there's enough taxpayers here to meet the ~, because the community's where
we're taking ouz kids for like hockey, and those other, where the facilities are.
The swimming pools, those communities have 4~,00~ people or 20,~00 and their
taxes are generating the m~)ney for tbsp. I just wanted to say that there were
sc~e people that felt it was too pr~%ature. People that I've spoken with.
Thank you.
Cindy GilL, mn: My. name is Cindy Gillman and I'm in Chanhassen. I guess I am
one of the other citizens that agrees with the letter that was sent to Fayor
Ch~,iel. It pretty much sum~ up everything I've thought of. I've thought
basically the idea for the c(~%unity cemter I never saw coming frcm the
cctv, unity. I never saw neighbors talking about the ~s we had. I don't know
if you as Councilm~bers had people callirg and wondering why. Chanhassen did not
have their own community center. It ~ to me it came out of a few people in
an office saying it would be great to have this for the City, and I think it
would but I think at this time it's not the right time for it. ~s are being
met obviously by. ~den Prairie cc~vAxnity center. I ass~e a great many more
~s will he met by Chaska's c~,unity center which is supposedly expensive.
guess I agree with the letter and I don't ~_~ us r~ing it at this time. Some
time in the future I'd like to have something that is great. That the location
is great. That the building is great. It se~r~ that we can either afford a
building or we can afford land but we don' t he able to ~ to afford both right
now and that says to me that our c~mmnity isn't ready to support it if we can't
afford it now. Instead of mortgaging or selling bonds to the hilt so we're
strapped financially as a City in order to get something right now, let's sit
back and maybe acquire land now or do scmething else now for something in the
future instead of we need it all right now.
Mayor Ch%tel: ~nank you. Is there anyone else wishing to address the issue?
Jim Mady: My. nave is Jim Mady and I suppose you figured I'd be up here sooner
or later. The c(~unity center idea didn' t hatch out of an office mm~a~nere.
Three years ago, almost 3 years ago this month, the Park and Becreation
C~nv, ission undertook a survey, of the residents of Chanhassen. It was a
scientifically compiled survey.. At that time there was one question on the
survey that asked the residents and we polled 330 residents. They were
selected, I believe it was every. 8th house at random through the published
street directory. ~hat's how it was done. At that time 80% of the people,
79.5% of the people said .~=s, we would like to have a cx~mm~ity center in the
City of Chanhassen. That's where the idea came fr~. A few months ago we came
in front of this body and asked you to give your input to us so that we would
know, should we go forward with public ~tings to gage sentiment of the
c~mr~mity. We held somewhere in the neighborhood of 12-15 meetings. The
results of the survey., we did not get 100% response on this survey. There are a
n~er of people who did not respond which is normal in any survey. We did
receive 76 responses. Boughly 80% of the people respomded said
Chanhass~m ~s a cc~munity center now. We did not hurry, this along or rush it
through. We've bccn working on it for 2 years. This particular proposal. 3
years for the total thing. For anyone to say we've bccn rushing it through, is
just not following what's going on. We've ~ vexy open. 0ur m~etings have
45
City Council Meeting £ January 8, 1990
been ~blished in the paper. I guess we haven' t gone door to door and told
everyone well tomorrow there's going to be a meeting. Be there. We've done our
best. Mr. Mayor, you know just through your Drug Awareness thing. You can't
get so~_body there even though it's a great idea. You just can't always get
everybody there. That doesn't necessarily ~an there's not interest. It just
shows that there's not a lot of opposition because when there's opposition to
s(x~ethi, ng, they do come out. The first site, the downtown site next to Filly's,
we had a lot of opposition and people came out. We found that out with just the
Eckankar church building deal. You had a lot of people here to fight against
sc~thing but we never see~ to have a lot of people in favor of something and
yet it se~ns to pass. We're asking you to allow this it~ to go forward.
There's ~n a lot of volunteer work put into it. A lot of good hard work done
by s(~e very well meaning residents of this city. I think we've been very open
and we respectfully would like to see the Council give Lm the go ahead to find
out what is going on. When we hear the negatives, two people tonight who spoke
against it. You've read one letter and you talked about a couple calls that you
received or a few calls or whatever. At the Oktoberfest booth, I personally
talked to approximately 24 people. I had 2 residents give me their reasons for
being against the proposal and the remainder, all enthusiastically supported it.
They aren't here tonight. As a ~.~tter of fact, none of the~ came to any of the
~etings. Did not fill out any of the surveys but they're there. The people
are there. If you don' t feel we have enough, we haven't talked to enough
people. Tell us the ~gic n~er. Do we need to go out and get a petition with
200 people on it? 500 people on it? 2,000 people on it? We need to know what
we need to do. It see~ like we're always battling at windmills here and no
~.~tter what we do isn't good enough. I want to hear from the rest of the
council and see what's happening. Thank you.
Mayor Ch~iel: Thank you. Is there anyone else?
Angie Banga: Angle Banga of Chanhassen and I would like to say first that I
concur with what the Mayor said. I'm not even going to try your last name. I
also, I try to keep fairly informed. I realize I'm not very informed in city
politics but I do read the Villager every week and I don't feel that I was
adequate info~d about those meetings. I would have attended one. I'm s~re I
missed it. I'm sure it was there but what I'm saying is, I don't think it got
that ~'~ch publicity. No attendance leads me to believe that I'm not the only
one that feels that way. The other thing I would like to say is that I am a
taxpayer and let me tell you, it's tough. I've got kids in the school system
and when I consider a choice between supporting a referend~ for the school
district and keeping our class size below 32 and supporting a co~nunity center
so my kids can do the extra things, I have to go with the education and I think
it's just the wrong time. In a few years when we have a better tax base and
we're able to do this, I'd say fine but right now our taxes are high and I think
our school system does deserve our support rather than a c(m~,unity center.
Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Is there anyone else? Hearing none, we'll bring it
back to the Council for sc~e additional discussion and direction.
Council~n Johnson: We're sitting here with the sa~.~ basic recreational
facilities that were here when I moved in here 9 years ago. With the addition
of the outdoor recreation of Lake Ann that was cc~leted at about that time. Now
we' re adding more there. Last year we had 18 youth basketball tea~ in the
46
City Co,~cil Meeting - January 8~ 1990
Chanhassen Athletic Association playing at the grade school. This year w~ have
24. Next year we' 11 probably have close to 30 youth basketball teams trying to
play in a small g2mnasium and then splitting the large g!~, into half. They also
have to, c~ve in there Tuesday nights or Thursday nights for practice. Tuesday
nights at 6:30 you've got 12 teams practicing in those tw~ g2mnasi~.
Sim~%ltaneously. I've coached the basketball here for 4 years. This is my first
year as not being a coach for q~ite a while. To~nk goodness and it's very hard
to do anythin~ with that m~y kids dribblin~ that many basketballs
simultaneously. (k~e to the next Pack mccting of the Boy Scouts at the
gl~masium at the grade school. Acoustically it is the worse place in the world.
You can't hear a thing other than the clr~ of the parents who can't hear the
speakers talking so they start talking and then nobody can hear anything. We
~ sc~e good acoustical places for our youth to hold their =tings. It's
very fr~mtrating if you're not near the front to listen in that g2mnasi~.
Outdoor recreation just doesn't have much affect on. Swimming lessons. The
line starts at about 6:00 in the morning when they open at 9:00 in ~ morning
for the summer swim, lessons down at (~aska Middle School. People ccme out there
with sleeping bags to get in line so they can get their kids into the proper
swimming class that's held at the indoor pool at C2~ska during the s~v~exs.
don't know how many sessions they hold there but it's tr~%endous amd a lot of
people just don't get what they ~mnt or what they r~. I thought it ~as very
telling that of the 58 people, I was really surpri~ to see the swishing pool
put as the highest ~ here follow, sd by the g2mnasium. Adult basketball is
almost non-existent. We don't have room for it here in Chanhassen and w~ don't
have the politics for it in Chaska. Volleyball reigns supreme in Chaska. You
go down there, I've never seen the adults playing basketball there but they're
playing volleyball all the time. The middle school when I go down for my kid's
swim, tea~,. I don't think it's pre%ature now. For being involved in.youth
athletics the way I have ~ over the past 5 to 6 years, w~ really ~ more
facilities. Our seniors m~t in the cafetezia of the grade school. If you know
anything about hearing aids, you know that in a room such as that, people with
hearing aids can't hear a thing because they hear everything. They r~ an
acoustically much better place to m~et. They ~ scmplace that is not a
gl~masi~,. My only concern is what is going to be the affect of the Chaska
c(~v, unity center. It's not going to have any affect on the basketball proble%s
or the Chanhassen Boy Scouts because I'm not going to take my cub scout do~n to
(haska to have meetings in their co~%unity center. That's getting ridiculous.
As is I know Brad's kids swim in ~k~en Prairie on the ~dem Prairie swim tea~,
think. My kid swims out of (haska. At least I stay in the same county. I
always like to give the Fox Jets a bard time if I can. Things just aren't
offered here that w~ should be offering. We are big eoough, 10,000 people.
Pkltchinson runs a swim progra%. Chanhassen doesn' t. I don' t know how big
Hutchinson is. I don't think it's as big as Chanhas~ but it's a free standing
c~v~,~i~ so it has to have those things. I'd like to see the financial side of
this. That's the next question. Where's the financials? I think that's the
next step and I think w~ should direct the c(x~Amity center task force to go on
with that next step. I'm not sure if March may be too soon, especially if the
tax bills aren't out by March because I think quite frankly, as a proponent for
this, I think what you're going to see on the tax bills in March is going to
help the cctv, unity center vote versus decreasing it. Frc~ what I've heard is
that ou~ tax bills are going to go down the second year in a row. I know that
w~'re doing sc~e fairly spaxtan things within the City to hold the line here in
the City for taxes and we have for several years but we can't continue holding
the lime in decreasing service with increased growth. The grade school is over
47
City Council Meeting - January 8~ 1990
crowded and if this can get them some relief, s(~ ~)re special ed rooms.
more ccm~xlter roo~. Whatever they're going to get out of this. I think
they're going to get like 3 rooms, 5 rooms. All and all I see it as being
important. I don't see indoor tennis or a banquet room being important. Weight
room didn't do too w~ll. ~irlpool and sa~bna didn't com.~ out too w~ll in the
surveys. Those were all under half of the people said they wanted those. I
really think that it's going to be an asset to the co~nunity and it will help
our school district. It will help oum' children and it will help the image of
the c(x~,unity. But I do ~ to see what it's going to do to taxes. We've got
to see that financial side before we go to referend~ and we have to have
information and that's the next important step to go that I think we need to
authorize. That' s my cc~nents.
Mayor Chniel: Thanks Jay.
Jeff Bros: Going along with what Jay said, fr(x~ our research that we've
gathered from other cc~unities that have put ~ anything from complete ice
arenas to com, plete centers similar to what we're looking at...financing for
these facilities that other c~,unities have cc~e up with that have not ~ a
tax burden at all in other communities. I hope, again I hope that the Council
will allow [~ the opportunity to go look at this. We certainly as a group and
residents of (l~-zmhassen have no intention of taking away from the school in
m~)nies that would be allocated for student useage. Again, this plan, the school
district has preliminarily agreed to add between 5 and 7 multi-useage roo~ out
the back side of the school. Again, it's going to do nothing but help
Chanhassen el~ntary and the school district in the long run.
Mayor Ch~,iel: Anyone else wishing to jump in?
Council~0man Dim]er: I guess I want to say again that I was a m.~mber of the
task force and I think that we worked hard and I think we did a good job. I do
see that we did a thorough research but I also believe that we have to consider
the non-attendance as not a negative and not a positive but an indifference. To
~ that H~ans indifference. I think that we should not argue as to who's survey
is correct. I think the task force survey is correct and other surveys add
additional informmtion that supplement one another. I have to say that I had 6
callers representing all the areas of Chanhassen and I gave th~ frc~, October
until now to do their calling. The results of that was mostly a few yes's, a
few no ' s and much indifference.
Jeff Bros: What were the c~estions that your caller's asked?
Councilw~vmn Dim]er: Just simply do you think that we need or want a community
center in Chanhassen. I just had one question.
Jeff Bros: No specifics as to location, cost?
Councilwoman Dimler: No. Let's just first determine if we want it and if we
want it, then we'll decide. Okay? And I know that you had a whole lot of more
information that you were looking for and I agree with that but my basic pre~nise
was to find out do we even want it. Do we need it. So that was the results of
that. I think that s(x%e of the comments here are unwarranted. I don't think
that the task force had anything in mind as far as deceiving about property
taxes or that thing. I'm relatively sure of that having been at the m~etings
48
City. Oo,~cil Meeting - January 8~ 199M
k~lt I also find that this letter does address the 76 people not representing a
majority, when you have about 12,MMM residents so I think w~ can all agree that
that's not a good representative survey.. I guess some of the task force
that were not able to be at the last m~ting did call me and asked me to make
sL~e that the Oouncil understands that the March referendum decision i~s not
unanimous even within the task force and also that the location decision has
never been unanimous. ~bst of the residents that I spoke to in greater detail
still indicate that they. want an independent site. Maybe purchase the land now
and build a state-of-~t cc~znunity center in scme future date. I also got
c~nv~ts that a lot of people that have children in high school and junior high
feel that their students, their children are going to be using the Chaska center
simply because they are in District ~112 and because they have friends in that
district and they're going to ~nt to go to the center with their friends. And
so any types of programs that we plan for ~ here in Chanhassen, we're going
to have to come up with something mighty terrific to draw bhem away frc~ there
and that would be one of the things that I would say that when we do to a
cody, unity center, that fhanhassen should be looking at having scmething that
Chaska doesn't have. That Eden Prairie doesn't have. Scmething that will draw
they, bere. I also had some c(mmemts as to if ~aiting will drive up the costs
and I think my position on that has always ~ ar~ it has not, the task force
has nevex really considered it, is that that's a good argiz~emt if the project is
a profit making ven~lre. But for a non-profit making venture, it simply means
that we're going to take the taxpayers money sooner or later. To me, in this
case, later is better because the money, could be drawing interest. Also, if you
build later, you're going to have, ma.vbe with inflation, ~u'll be building it
cheaper. So that arg~%ent about if it's a profit making venture and bringing in
m~)ney, yes. That would be a consideration but this probably will not be a
profit making venture. It will probably be a break even at best and perhaps
even cost and maintenance. We don' t know that
Jeff Bros: However, it still is a revenue producing facility.
Council~z~an Dimler: It's a revenue producing facility but you may have costs
that extend or go beyond the revenues.
Jeff Bros: Hopefully not. Looking at other cx~munity centers...
Mayor Ch~,iel: Jeffl Can I interrupt you please. I'd like Oouncilw~an Dimler
to finish her stat~avent and then if you'd like to say ~ing after that, I'd
be more than happy, to.
Oouncilwuman Dimler: Okay. ~gain, the people I've talked to fr~ the different
locations, I' 11 tell you what their concerns were. The people in southern
Chanhassen and in the Minnewashta area indicated that they would use the Chaska
facility, because it's closer to tbsp. Okay? The people at, I didn't really get
a response fray, the people at Near Mountain although I did have s(zneone survey
that and they never got back to me. But fr~m people that I've talked to
personally in that area say that they don't believe at this time, and that is
where the taxes are so high that they're not real interested so that knocks out
Minnewashta. ~hat knocks our Near Mountain. That knocks out southern Chan and
basically the interest is cc~ing from the downtown or near downtown Chanhassem
area. But I am concerned that we're not representing a lot of the people in
Chanhassem at this time.
49
City Council Meeting - January 8~ 1990
Brad Johnson: Ursula, would it be okay if w~ just did another survey of 330
people randc~ly selected in the c(~v~unity like we did last time... Why don't we
just do that? What was our cost last tim~?
Councilw~xnan Dimler: Again, I think you're going to run into that indifference
factor and you're not going to get an all inclusive reading.
Jeff Bros: Not if we randomly sampled 300 to 500 people. How could we not?
Councilwoman Dimler: How are you going to pick your random sample?
Jeff Bros: Every 8th nt~er out of the phone book...
Councilw(mzTn Dim]er: I guess one of the things I have about surveys is that
I know that I tend to do this myself. If someone calls ~ to survey me, I may
have feelings that I'm not really going to express because I want to say
sc~thing pleasing to the su~weyer or the questions can be misleading or they
can, you know. I'm not sure that a survey at this point, another survey is
going to do the job.
Brad Johnson: Then let's do a referend~ and find out. You've got 5 people up
here making decisions and we're sitting out here...
Councilwoman Dim, let: Well we're getting indifference though Brad and that's
what I 'm saying.
Jeff Bros: Okay, but let us put together a financial package and see if that
indifference stays...
Councilwoman Dim]er: Well I think we've done that. I k~ow we've done that.
Jeff Bros: We have not. We've cc~e up with scme rough estimates as far as cost
but we haven't said how we can pay for it. We have the tax increment ~ney.
The options are endless for financing. We may not have to tough tax dollars.
That's what we're asking for. All your people response to taxes going up. They
may not. At least give us the opportunity to find out what the citizens want.
You say we've got 76 back. You've got 5.
Councilwc~an Dimler: No. That's not what I said. I said I had 6 callers that
called in their neighborhoods.
Jeff Bros: But like you said, you don't trust surveys because you don't know
how the questions were asked.
Councilman Johnson: YouMs is the most biased type of survey.
Councilwcman Dimler: Well, rev~m~_r my prefacing cc~v~nt that your survey's
correct. Every survey is correct. They supplement one another. It's not this
one's correct and this one isn't correct.
Jeff Bros: At least o~r surveys w~re based on information given to the people
that we had at that tim~ and it was a direct response from the infom~ation that
they were given. Yes. No. Do you like it? NO. Are you willing to pay for
it? Yes. NO. Whatever. It wasn't just do you want one. I m~an we gave...
50
City Oouncil Meeting - January 8~ 1990
Councilwoman Dimler: Wasn't that the basic what we have to start with though.
First you've got to find out if they want one or not.
Jeff Bros: But you've got to give them something to base that opinion on.
Yeah, everybody wants one.
Councilwuman Dimler: No they didn't. That's the point.
Jeff Bros: At some ti~e they. want one. Wheths~ it's now or 5 years from now.
People ~nt one. So what are ~vou going to base ~ur decision on?
Councilwoman Dimler: Well I base my decision on the fact that there was a lot
of indifference out there and I'll have to tell you, one of the callers ~ms Dave
Zaunon. I'm sure that you are aware that he did some call in~ the last time to
garner support. Brad, you know him.
Brad Johnson: Yeah.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, and he ~as trying to gather support for the
cctv, unity center and he ran into such indifference that he gave up.
Jim Mady: One of your callers Ursula talked to me back in October I think it
was...Minne~ashta and she was so uninfon~ed as to the proposal that she
literally could not ask her any questions. She told me, because she didn't know
Councilwoman Dimler: The question ~ms, do .you ~nt a community center. ~hat's
real si~le.
Jim Mady: ~lt she couldn't get responses...
Councilwcman Dimler: That's why. we kept it so simple. Well, I'm sure that that
is a si~ole question and you get a ~ or a no.
Councilman Johnson: Or you get a question back.
Councilw0~n Dimler: If they show any interest, yeah. Like I said, we got a
few yes's. We got a few no's and we got a lot of indifference. That's what I'm
basing mine on.
Jeff Bros: Maybe another survey will help to push those one way or another.
Mayor Ch~iel: Bill, do you have s~me ~ts?
Councilman Boyt: I think T(~.'s next.
Mayor Ch~,iel: I asked you if you had any cc~ments Bill.
Councilman Workman: I can step right in. Step in where others dare to step.
I'd like to see a c~v~mmity center. I start out every, arg~aent with that. My.
two young daughters probably don't know ~at they're missing quite .vet. I'm a
Minnesota State High School League basketball official and I'm bavirg a lot of
fun with that and I do a lot of varsity games. I do s~me 6th grade girl
51
City Council Meeting - January 8, 1990
basketball gaffs to varsity gam.~s. I know about every g~mL in the metro area. I
think I've been in every g2m in the ~tro area and without a doubt Chanhassen
has the worse g~'~, including St. Hubert' s, in the Fetro area unless you go to
Waconia. They've got a private school. This rippled tile stuff is terrible.
It's dingy in there. I wouldn't play basketball on it. I'd hurt myself. It's
terrible. Kids are closer to the ground. They don't get hurt. There's no
doubt that I'd like to ~_--c 4 new g~umnasiums in town. I'd rather see glamnasiums
than hockey. Hockey is a big, big expense and a big, big question for people. I
know that Fast of the people on the task force that are very much for this have
a very strong interest in the hockey so there's, as you present the~,, cc~v, unity
cemter with hockey arena or community center without. I don't and haven't
really ~ a hockey player. I do enjoy ice skating and it's, you know just
because I don't care for it doesn't mean w~ shouldn't have it. It is a very
expensive part of this and I'd like future discussions to maybe highlight that a
little bit. It looks a little bit like w~'ve got to have this ice and people
are really concerned about that expenditure ite~ and I know that you guys have
figured it out where it's not going to cost us a cent. Nobody's using the word
free yet. There are some residents in town that are very much hockey. When I
grew up in Chaska, and I w~nt to high school in Chaska, when you tho~3ht of the
hockey team, most of the people on the hockey team came frc~, Chanhassen. I
think Chanhassen's much more of a hockey area with the lakes and Minnetonka and
that all breeds off of that and I 'ye talked to an awful lot of people. I would
assume I've talked to a h~dred people on this. I ask everybody I run into.
I'm disappointed that our community center hasn't really changed an iota since
the Chaska center has gone up. Unfortunately we're part of that Chaska
cctv, unity somewhat. They're adding two big new glaF~siums down there. They're
adding a huge hockey arena. They're adding just about everything you can
imagine. It's unbelieveable. I do believe that that affects us sc~ewhat. I on
the other hand think that's unfortunate because I'd like to have our own
com~mmity identity and I'd like to have our own c(m~nity centers. Own g~ums.
Hockey arena. I'd like to have everything. Curling ice. We could have curling
tournaments and things. But again, I've asked just about everybody that I've
run into, neighbors. There is a deep, deep concern about taxes. I wouldn' t be
doing my job Brad if I didn't reflect those concerns. Unfortunately for all the
Council we've been elected and it's our job to make sc~e tough decisions. We
talk about increasing the size of a hc~e by $3,000.00 and that can price
sc~_body completely out of the F~ket. Well, $50.00 taxes, $100.00, whatever,
can im~oact sc~_body also. People are definitely in a nervous mood about taxes.
Another co~v, ent that I heard quite often and this gets back to the hockey arena.
I'm leaning on the hockey arena because I think that's a part that people are
very much nervo~m about. These are Chanhassen residents who are saying why
should we build a hockey arena to support the Minnetonka Hockey Associations.
Now we're going to develop our own hockey associations, etc. I'm assuming and,
pardon Fe?
Brad Johnson: We already have one.
Councilmen Workmen: Yeah I know but not enough support for own ice. I m~an
we're going to be drawing in an awful lot of people and so again, I'm just
telling you what I'm hearing. There's an awful lot of nervous people about
cc~unity center's attach%ent to the school district. Chaska specifically did
not want it attached to the school. ~bey didn' t want the school to have any
part or control of that community center. What happens if it comes a very ~ch
youth centered facility and so we start to forget some of the people on the
52
City Oouncil Meeting - January 8, 1990
other end. The elderly, etc. when kids are always using it and I've been in
that Mden Prairie center. They. are jam%ed out of that thing. I tell you. I
couldn't stay in there much longer. It ~ms pretty wild in there. They have
kids in the lobby, doing classes and stuff. They are packed. And again, I think
w~'ve gone over some of the refinements of how this school district and city.
marriage will w~rk and whether or not it will affect us or not but I'd like to
look a little bit more at that. Chanhassen should provide facilities for it's
citizens. Gettin~ back to this rotten gla% idea. But w~'re again a unique
c~mmunity. We're nothing like Chaska. Chaska doesn't have much pulling ~n it.
Okay? We have, I lu~ Shore~x~, Excelsior, Minnetonka into one category..
They're pulling on us up there. Those people up there on that north end, I
don't know how often you've just surveyed that area but I think you'd find, I
think you know this that those people go that way. They like to live that way.
They like the Minnetonka school district, etc.. m~en Prairie pulls on s~me
people. People will buy. groceries on the south end down in Shakopee and of
course there's the fhanhassen people that get tugged on so w~ are a community
that's very much pulled on. How do we build that cohesivemess? I think that's
something that the task force should also be asking. Maybe we build the
cohesiveness by getting the ~ity ~enter. That helps. Maybe it does. Maybe
it doesn't. People are again nervous. I'm not going to get into the argtm~mt
about surveys. I'm about at the end of my cm~m~nts. Thanks heavens for all of
you. I guess I'm not adverse. I a% adverse to a referend~ in March. I've
been told by. people that, no. They don't ~mnt to do that. I've ~ told I
think Jeff, you guys that you don't want this to be a political decision so you
~mnt to have it stand alone and let people decide. I think this is very much a
political issue. As political as any w~.'ve seen. I w~uldn't be adverse to it
being on the ballot in November. ~hat's a big, big question for people. I
think we may be jm%ping ahead again on whether or not we can afford the building
at all. Don Ashworth, the magician just might come up with it but again, people
emphasize to me that they. aren't interested in bonding out because when we do
that we give ~ scram capacity that we could use in other areas. There is a
middle school c~ming. A new middle school cc~ing to the district within...
Brad Johnson: 5 to 6 y~ars.
Councilman Workman: That's not too long. That's not too long, if you go by
highway construction. Again, I want to ~ s(x~e of the arg%~ents in that I
appreciate the efforts of the task force and I don't ~nt to tell you thanks.
~ .va. Your efforts have ~ w~rthless. I know Brad. Brad's got a lot of
energy, in this thing and I know you all do so I'm not going to tell you you're a
bunch of fools for looking at this because again, I think it's a favorable
thing. I think when you ask people do they ~mnt a community center, you think
about a pool that your kids can swim in and a nice gla% and I can't think of
anything more desireable. I think a lot of the people mbo have talked to me
believe the same thing and they' 11 say they want a ccm~m~nity center but.
There's aiwa.us this big but. And so that's ~here I'm a little bit on this fence
of yeah, I'd really like it too and I think you can include me in that group of
people that say, well but I've really got to see more. Maybe the task force
needs to draw the Council a little more into what it's doing. I haven't felt
like I was a very big part of what ~ms going on. I know Jeff, you and I were
goirg to try and get together. We never were able to and I sugges~ to Lori
that Jim, and you and I get together and sit down. I just haven't been much a
part of this and that's again, not a reason not to vote for the thirg but I
think the task force could do a better job of drawing us all in. Us, meaning
53
City Oouncil Meeting - January 81 1990
the voters. Tne people in the different diverse areas. I don't know. Maybe
the people at Lake Minnewashta are thinking of going to Victoria or Chaska or
wherever. I think Chaska jumped into their c(x~,unity center because they didn't
want to go in with us. That was a suggestion. A three, tri-com%unity c(x~,unity
center. Could have built it for 20 million or so~thing. I think they 9~nted
their own. They also wanted their own identity but I 'm not afraid to let the
community ~ke the decision. I think it's going to be a to~h decision and
again I'd like to see it draw for the retail co~nity in town and everything
else and there's a lot of pluses but people are nervous and for ma, as a
Councilmsmber to discount those people which I think are in at least a 75%
majority, if not more, into my face, then I'd be doing a disservice. And so I
think we'll perhaps see something and we can take it to tb~a% and they can
decide. That always gets sticky, too but that's where I have to stand at this
point.
Jeff Bros: ...financial packages for this. Secondly, if you take it to the
cc~tunity and let th~ vote on it in March or November, that's fine but that
easily answers every question you've got Tom.
Councilman Workman: Right. Absolutely. And I don't need you guys to figure
out the financials of it. I have the magician right down here.
Jeff Bros: Well we've been assigned as an entity by the Council to do that for
you.
Councilman Workman: I know but I'm j~mt saying, it is a 3 month process but the
options, we're kind of aware of that and it's been indicated that taxes will
raise. That's where people are nervous.
Jeff Bros: But again, give us the chance to find out. Like I said, there's a
lot of different ways to finance this that are beyond everybody's...
Councilwoman Dimler: Excuse ~. Jeff, at one point when we talked about
putting it on the general, you indicated or the task force indicated that they
didn't want to do that because that would make it a political issue because of
an election year. Have your feelings changed on that?
Jeff Bros: I still, personally, I would like to see us... ~t I feel strongly
enough about the com%~ity center and the ~ant and desire in this corn%unity for
that facility that right now I'll take it any way I can get it. Now I'm not
speaking for the rest of...I'm speaking for myself. By. the tiF~ your 3 to 5
year plan that you're talking about, my young children are going to be out of
the schools. They ain't going to be here anymore to ~e it. They're going to
be in college. They're not going to be using it. They'll take me over there in
a wheelchair and walk me aro[~d. I can ~_~-c it. You see this is the whole idea.
We have sc~...we don't need to build a 50 million dollar facility... Chaska,
you're right. It's a top grade center but we looked at their package and as far
as we're concerned, we don't see why anybody else would need to have that big a
facility. Those are things you've got to weigh in. They didn't vote on their
center down there. You talk about one getting r~ through. Whether the
people down there like it or not, I don' t know but that's what happened. They
didn't even have the chance to vote on it yes or no.
Council~mn Work,an: They had a $5,000.00 telephone surveys every week.
54
City Co, mcil Meeting - Jan~ry 8~ 199~
Mayor Ch%iel: Okay, myabe if w~ could just, Tcm if You'd.
CounciLman Workman: I'll just wrap up. A~ain, I've told you that I'm not
adverse to that and my last c(mav~mt. There's a lot of mistrust out there;
There may be on this Council. There may be with me about that zealousness, just
like in cigarette vending machine zealousness. People look at you and say, well
what's the motive. It starts to bec(x~e a personal thir~ and people start to get
nervous about it and so this is another point that I've picked up from people is
that the hockey crowd or you know, how many people skate. How many people do I
know that skate. 2% of the population of kids that skate so. Is it 3%?
Jim, Mady: I don't know about what you know but it's not reflected in the
survey.
Brad Johnson: Somewhere close to 4~%.
Councilman Workman: I would 40% of the families in this city don't have kids
that skate hockey.
Brad Johnson: Not to play hockey. Skate. You can' t schedule...
Councilman Workman: I'm talking hockey. I'm sorry.. Let me be more specific.
Because the hockey, crowd is usually the crowd that is ~----~n as pushing it.
Brad Johnson: You're going to bear this fr~ ~m a hundred times T~% that the
rink doesn't cost anything. It supports ever2thing else. It provides the
operating income you r_~ to run the center and you may not believe that but
that's what happens. That's why. ~ina doesn't have a community center. T~ey
j~mt have hockey rinks. That's why Minnetonka doesn't have a ~ity center.
They just have hockey rinks in their community center because it supports it.
It's not an expense. That's why they don't have g2mnasi~%s. Things you need
programming for and why. they don' t have...
Councilman Workman: Again, that's your job to convince people because they're
not convinced Brad. And so ~ can talk about it, I know ~ can talk about it
all night and the Mayor's getting ready to swing his gavel.
Brad Johnson: We had two of you on our task force periodically. Jay and Bill.
Councilman Johnson: Ursula and Bill.
Brad Johnson: Ursula.
Co,~ilwuman Dimler: Thank you for r~ring.
Councilman Workman: Well Brad, the task force has lost some people who haven't
always gone along with it has it not?
Brad Johnson: I 'm not sure.
CounciLman Workman: Has it become basically a group of people that really just
agree that the cc.munity.
55
City Council Meeting - January 8~ 1990
Brad Johnson: ~Dst people have turned around and go along with us2
Councilwoman Dimler: I can answer that.
Councilman Workman: I'm just saying. Let m~ finish up my co~nts.
Brad Johnson: We have votes and you have to have votes. We have 10 to 12.
Councilwoman Dim]er: I wasn't there for the last vote. Several other people
weren't there so that's why I bro~3ht ~) the fact that it wasn' t unanimous and
they did call me. I would say that being one of the m~m~bers that worked hard
against the Filly's site, that yes. We've been to the meetings and we have
given sc~ input. I'm not sure that we've always been listened to or had our
points taken into consideration. They're just kind of been ignored. I know
that several of the other people have told m~ that they don't feel like coming
to the m~etings because of that. So yes, we have lost so~.
Jeff Bros: Then why weren't they at the public m~=etings? If there are so
Councilwoman Dimler: Why would they want to go, they don't want to make it look
bad in public. You know what I mean? They're not going to go to a public
m~eting and say, hey I'm on the task force and the rest of the people didn't
listen to m~.
Mayor Chmiel: Can I clarify som.~thing here? I don't want a debate going back
and forth. This isn't the issue. I think we should c,~rtail that and I'd like
to m~ve on to Bill.
Councilm~n Boyt: Thank you. Taanks also for moving this item up on the agenda.
I'd hate to think of what time this would be if we'd had it at our normal
schedule. I'm not going to beat m~ny of the bushes twice other than to say that
3 years ago when I was appointed to the first task force, we researched the
issues in depth. Maybe went to a vote a little too quickly. Ran into, as
everybody knows, a tough issue and narrowly lost. A handful of votes. Well
when that was over, in all good faith I didn't think we should start up again
but the Council, 3 of which aren't here now, directed the task force to
reconvene and to see if there was so~ way that they could put together a
proposal the co~,unity would support. I don't think whether we individually
support the community center or not is the point. I think the point is, as many
of you m~ntioned, what do you think the co~unity is going to do on the
co~nunity center. But after 3 years of studying this thing, somet~s rather
intensively and sometimes not, I can tell you that there is just a tremendous
amount of information out there. One of the challenges is for the task force,
or any group, to educate the rest of the people about what they've found. In
good faith the task force I think has looked at every issue. In good faith the
task force went out and openly accepted people who were vehemently opposed to
the first one in the second task force to try to get s(x%e sort of con,unity
sense of what will he acceptable. I think they've got that. I think that the
last time the task force was criticized for going without in~m~t. Without enough
input frc~L the co~v, unity. Going back. Getting the referend~ and with about 6
w~eks, trying to educate the co~unity. So this time what they did was they
w~nt out to co~v~nity groups and asked them. What do you think? Granted. It
was 76 people. 76 more than last tim~. I think we can all have personal
56
City Gouncil M~eting - January 8~ 199~
opinions and hopefully people have sorted out what our opinions are. I happen
to think that the c(~unity center is a darn tough sacrifice to ask the
c(m~unity to m~ke but I think it's one they ~nt to make. I think that if we
believe the c~,unity is in fact goirg to support the community center, we ought
to have a special referendum because it saves $1~,~0.~ and that's a
tre~r, endous return when you look at spending $1~,~.~0 to save $10~,~.~. Now
if you think the c(m~unity's going to turn it down, then go to November with it
because I don't want to be on this and deny people the right to vote on an issue
that narrowly lost last time. Especially if we can't do it in March, then I
think w~ should put. it on the November ballot and I think we should make a
motion to do that tonight so the task force knows what they're working with. To
keep the~, for 3 years, I'm not surprised that the people have fallen out of the
task force. How do you keep people motivated to gather data when they don' t
know what the ou~, what their chances are going to be? And so I'd like to
see the c(~v, unity center task force directed to prepare for a referendum either
in March, April or in Nov~m~.r and let's give the voters a chance to tell us
what they ~nt to do.
Mayor Oaniel: Okay. Hopefully we can move along rather quickly. Is there a
motion on the floor?
Councilman Bolt: Well I would m~ve that we direct the task force to prepare for
a March referendum.
Mayor (l~,iel: Is there a second?
Councilman Johnson: Don, do you think you can get the financial sides done with
the task force in time to educate the public about the financial side? I take
that back, becaLme we can't educate the public. To fairly provide that
information to the public if they ~ant to be educated about it, that they. can
learn about it. We can't force anybody to read the Villager. We can't force
anybody to come to a meeting. The apathy factor is high. I'm thinking March
mdght be too soon.
Don Ashworth: I think so as well. One of the reasons would be, and I did
mention this to the cc~ttee the other night. I would bring in Dave
McGillvarey of Springsted. There's ~ a lot of nice acculays for myself this
evening but I think that our bond consultant should do a majority, of the work.
There's so~ innovative financing alternatives that have been presented to the
co~%ittee. I will continue to state that I'm not that enthrilled with sc~e of
they, ~lt there are sc~ alternatives which could reduce the costs. I would
anticipate that McGillvarey could have his work done within a month, if that's
sufficient time. But I would say that's the anount of time that it would take
him.
Councilman Johnson: So you're talking mid-February. Then another probably 2
months as far as I'm concerned to try. to get the word out to the people so w~' re
talking mUd-April.
Councilman Boyt: You just don't ~Bnt to miss the building season. ~hat's how
you save yo,~ money. If we end up...
Councilman Jonson: You're not going to get the 199~ building season. There's
no way we're goin~ to put plans toget3mm and break earth in 199~. 1991 building
57
City Council Meeting - January 8, 1990
season's the first building season we're going to break earth on.
Brad Johnson: If you have an election in Nov~er to...1992.
Co~mcilman Johnson: Exactly. That's why. I'm looking at May rather than March.
Councilman Boyt: Well I'm alright with that if you'll second the motion.
Councilman Johnson: Yeah. If you'll go a May-JUne timeframe for a referenda.
I want to see the financials and that also gives us s(~e time for the financials
to come back with some major iF, pact on taxes in this town. It gives us a chance
to turn around and get so~, right now the public opinion is without the
financial. Once we get the financial information in, that's when the apathy
starts stopping. Tell me what it will do for ~ but tell Fe what it will do for
my wallet. There's a large portion of people in this town that are anti-tax.
There's a large portion of people in every town. As I talked to co~cilm~)ers
across the nation, it's the same everywhere. Nobody wants anything to do with
raising taxes right now. A motion says continue to get us the financial package
and a referendum in the May-June timeframe, I'll second.
Mayor C2~.Liel: Is that an a~.~ndment to Bill's?
Councilman Boyt: Well I accept it.
Councilman Johnson: Then I' 11 second the F~tion.
Mayor Ch~iel: There's a motion. Any further discussion?
Councilman Workman: I've got to get back to kind of an underlying point that I
had. I don't think your motion is going to pass.
Councilman Johnson: You seemed to be for it from what you said. You wanted to
find out the financial infon%ation. You wanted to find out...
Councilman Workman: That's right. I'm not for a special referend~v~. I don't
see it happening before Nov~er. I think what you're doing again is, do we
~ant a cc~v, unity center that is going to go into a referend~ on a 3 to 2 vote?
Would we be more interested in going in on a referend~ that's a 5 to nothing
vote. Having every council ~ber for it. Having every council ms,bet going
out and saying, I'm for it. You don't have that right now.
Councilman Boyt: You're not going to have that.
Councilman Johnson: You never will.
Councilman Workman: Yeah you could. Yeah you could. Absolutely you could.
And that's what I've been getting at tonight. You can be a soothsayer or you
can be whatever. I'm j~mt saying, well then maybe the co~unity center's out
forever then. There's sc~e people that would like to hear that too.
Councilman Johnson: Well it doesn't have to be a 5-0 vote.
Councilman Workman: I'm just saying, let's try. It's not going to happen in
May.
58
City Oouncil Meeting - January 8~ 1990
Mayor C~iel: Jay, my clarification as far as a ~c~unity oenter, I say we ~
one. Now is not the time. I really feel that way.
Councilman Johnson: I agree but I say let's put it to the voters and let the
people speak.
Mayor ~el: That it's frc~, 3 to 5 years ~ away. It's the taxes that people
are basically afraid of. You're going to have s(~e additional taxes coming with
Carver Co~ty. With the increase of a courthouse for 2 judges. Two more court
roc~. T~D more Judge's ~s. That's going to run 2 million dollars plus.
That's c~v, ing right around the corner. And there are probably sc~e other things
that are we will have another 5 to 6 years too. Other schools and junior high
in Chanhassen. If we continue with the baby boc~dng as we are now, where the
school here, our grade school is bulging literally, there are s~e more dollars.
Now those dollars are all going right back to o~r constituents within this city.
Those dollars are going to be taxed somewhere and can those people k~-----~ up with
it. People that I have talked to are people ~aho are concerned about it.
Councilman Johnson: So what we're saying is let's get the information together
because the people do not have a full pscket of information at this time. We do
not have a f~ll packet of information to make a decision on it at this
Let's let the community oenter go forth with Don and Springsted and find out the
infozmation. Give us the information on which to make an info~med decision. At
this time we tentatively scbsdule, well I'm not that opposed to a Nove~er
referend~,,. I'm not sure, the cost of money. Inflation's going to go up.
Taxes are going to go up. The cost is going to go up by. inflation. It probably
all washes out. Ou~ tax base has ~ beating inflation. We've ~ increasing
our tax base faster than inflation's increasing so I'm not sure if the delay to
November isn't going to be a terrible one but I'd like the c~m%unity center task
force to know that we're going to bring this to the people. That we're not
going to come out and sit on it because of our personal opinion. I want to get
the opinion of the people and I ~mnt to get the information...
Councilwc~an Dimler: Jay. It isn't personal opinion. We've done these
surveys o
Councilman Boyt: I think that the Council probably pretty accurately reflects
the cc~unity on this issue. That there is going to be a substantial split. I
suspect in my mind that it will pass but I don't think it's going to be easy and
I think the issues that have been raised tonight are probably pretty, accurately
reflective of what the c(m~,unity is thinking. But I'd like to see this thing,
as you w~uld, decided by. the voters. If Tom says.he's not going to support it,
it's pretty clear that Don and Ursula aren' t going to support an ~rly
referenda,. So maybe we can just go with Ncw~_r and see if that passes.
Personally I'm c~mfortable with 3-2. There's a lot of things we've decided 3-2.
I'd like to move on this so w~ can get back to the rest of the agenda. It's
either going to go or it isn't.
Councilman Johnson: So you ~nt to withdraw your motion and modify it to a
Nov~_r referenda?
Councilman Boyt: Sure.
59
City Council M~eting - January 8~ 1990
Councilm~n Workm~n: I would, this isn't a motion. I would tend to ~ant to make
a motion not cc~mitting myself to November at this stage. I'd like to get more
input but I'm not going to c(x~it myself to November at this point.
Councilm~n Johnson: It's so early. By saying we're going to go for Nov~aber,
if something comes L~) to show us that it's totally infeasible for sc~e reason,
we can withdraw.
Councilwan Johnson: We can take away but I think we owe it to these citizens
that have been working for 3 years, 2 years. Sc~e of they, 2 years. Some of
them 3 years on this to show them that there's some hope in the future. What
they're going to see here is, do w~ want to continue working on this because the
Co~cil assigned us to ~ork on it and now the Council may not even ever put this
to referendum,. In fact by law I don't think w~ actually have to put it to
referendumL but I think something as major as this in this town, I think I want
to hear frcm the people. Referend~ style.
Councilwom~n Dimler: I have a convent. I guess I'd agree with Cindy Gillman's
comments that this mov~'ent was not initiated by the citizens. Grass roots
mov~_nt okay? Fr(m; what I've been hearing and what I'm getting is that most
people are indifferent that yes we'd like to have it but sc~etime in the fut~re.
Not in '90. Maybe not in '91. Maybe 3, 4, 5 years down the line. I hate to
see us keep wasting everybody's time and also there is the option that if it
really is a grass roots movement, even if w~ don't lm]t it on in November. In
1991 those people can sign a petition. They. can get a grass roots mov~ent
going and then you will hear from the people.
Councilman Boyt: What's it take for a petition Don? For the com~Lunity to
require a referendum.
Don Ashworth: I'm not sure that there is such a thing is there Roger?
Roger Knutson: No, there isn't.
Councilman Johnson: Especially since ~ don't even require a referenda...
Councilwc~an Dimler: NOt to re~ire one but let's say, I would like to see it
not be that it be a referend~u but that ~ want a com~,unity center. I'd like to
see that be a grass roots movement.
Jeff Bros: Ursula, I don't work for the City. I called Lori and asked her
after the last...
Councilman Dimler: I'm not saying you work for the City but you have a
special interest.
Brad Johnson: Who doesn't have a special interest in this City. It's our
cc~nunity...
Councilwoman Dimler: But so do all these other people that aren't being here
represented. They all do too.
6~
City Oouncil Meeting - January 8, 1990
M~yor C2m, iel: Let's just hold it down.
Jim Mady: Can I ask my question again Don?
Jim Mady: How many people do w~ have to get on a petition before you'll listen
to us?
Mayor Ch%iel: There isn't any rm~bers.
Jim Mady: Give us a n~ber.
Mayor Oantel: There isn' t n~%bers.
Council~an Dim]er: How m~ny does ~ opposition have to get before you'll
listen to the%? Sav~ question.
~ouncilman Boyt: Well, I'd like to call a question on the motion and let's get
this dealt with.
Mayor Ch~iel: Okay, w~ have a motion on the floor and a second to November for
a referenda.
Counci~ Boyt moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to put the Community Oenter
to a referend~ vote on the November ballot. Councilman Boyt and Councilman
Johnson voted in favor. Councilman Workman, Councilw~x.an Dimler and Mayor
Ch%iel voted against and the motion failed with a vote of 2 to 3.
Councilman Johnson: I was going to move that wa direct the task force to
continue on in the financials and report back to us on the financial aspects of
the community center by. tax day, April 15th.
Councilman Boyt: Then what you're directing the~ to do is spend money.
Councilman Johnson: That' s right.
Councilwoman Dim]er: That's right and wa don't want to do that.
Councilman Boyt: I'm supportive of that but I just ~ant everybody to know that
when you start getting Springsted involved, you're talking money.
Councilman Johnson: We're spending money because w~ have to know. I mean it's
a big issue in this town. It's not the kind of issue that you're going to solve
by ignoring it. Fr~, what I think, the majority is apathetic and then the next
largest group I think is for it in my personal opinion because the group of
people. You know Ursula you have your group of people ~ you call okay and
that is a select minority of this town.
Council~m~an Dimler: So is that o~e. That's what ! was saying.
Councilman Johnson: And I have my group of people...
61
City Council Meeting - January 8, 1990
Councilwc~n Dimler: And they' re all supplemental.
Councils~n Johnson: ...that I work with which is 500 families in this town in
the Chanhassen Athletic Association.
Councilwoman Dim]er: And that's a select group of people.
Councilm. mn Johnson: That's a select group of people and I feel that 500 people
of various pers, msions is for it. So that's my motion now.
Mayor Chniel: Okay Jay bas a motion on the floor.
Councilman Workman: For what? To do the study?
Mayor Chmiel: Do the study.
Councilman Johnson: Financial.
Councilm~n Workman: We don't know how much it's going to cost.
Councilman Johnson: That's what I'm asking to find out.
Councilman Work~n: How much is the study going to cost?
Mayor Chniel: What's the study going to cost us frc~ Springsted?
Councils.~n Workm~n: $10,000.007 $58,000.00? What are we going to pay? I'm
going to vote on something that's going to cost sc~ethi~ I don' t know. I mean
quite rushing it Jay.
Mayor Chv. iel: Give us a round figure Don.
Don Ashworth: If you recall, Springsted's proposal included x n~er of hours
that they would do as a retainer. I would anticipate that past the retainer
about, I would att~pt to insure tbat they did not bill us for it.
Councilman Boyt: But they're taking hours out of others?
Councilman Johnson: Out of the retainer.
Don Ashworth: Taking hours out of the retainer. In addition it would be my
position tbat they would be doing work for an upcoming referend~ and tbat if
that bond referendt~, would pass, that their fee schedule is such that they
basically retain their m~ney.
Mayor Ch~,iel: Tne Council by a 3 to 2 vote already indicated that there won't
be a referend~L in November. There is that vote.
Councilman Johnson: But there could be a new vote after we get the financial
info~m, mtion.
62
City. council M~eting - January 8~ 199~
Don Ashw~rth: $1,~00.00 in addition to the 6 or 7 hours that supposedly we have
credited to ns.
Councilman Johnson: $1,000.00 ona 3 to 4 million dollar decision? Be nuts.
Get the information so our people can make an informed decision.
Councilwoman Dim]er: But they w~n't he making it this ~ so why rush it?
Councilman Johnson: ~cz, ~hy don't w~ wait to the next century? We've got 24
basketball team~ trying to play on 3 courts. We play fr~m 8:00 a.m. in the
morning to 1:00 in the afternoon.
Councilw~van Dim]er: You are still...for a special interest group.
Mayor Ch~,iel: Jay. There may be the availability, now at the junior high and
the senior high if Chaska is going to take their people from.
councilman Johnson: I'm not bringing my second graders to play basketball.
They don't have the baskets either.
Mayor Chv~el: They do with hockey and pee w~e, they go all over.
councilman Johnson: They don't have the facilities for second graders to play
basketball.
Councilman Boyt: Gentl~%an, are we going to vote on s~aething here?
Mayor Ch~del: The question is whether or not we spend $1,000.00 at the present
time to ensure the total 3.4 or 5 million dollars that we've been discussing.
There's a second. Did you second that Bill?
Councilman Johnson: I made the m~tion. Bill seconded.
Councilman Boyt: That the cc~t~ be directed to investigate the financial,
the specific financial implications and tax burdens.
Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Bo.vt seconded to direct the C~munity
Center Task Force to prepare financial information to bring hack to the Council
by. April 15, 1990. Ail voted in favor and the ~tion carried.
ZONING ORDINAN2E ~ MODIFYING ZONING RESTRICTIONS AND LOCATIONS FOR
CONVENIENCE STORES, GAS STATIONS AND A~IVE SERVICE STATIONS, S~F~OND
READING.
Paul Krauss: At the last City council meeting the council gave first reading to
an ordinance regulating convenience stores having gas pu~s. k~ong other
things, the ordinance establishes a minim~% separation of 250 feet bet~sen gas
~ and 100 feet between t/~ p~v~s and residential parcels. The council gave
it first reading with a couple of changes and those have been incorporated into
the ordinance. One of the changes was based on Councilman Johnson's concern
that the 100 foot setback to residential he measured not ~mly fro~ the gas pumps
~elves but also from the vent pipes from the storage tanks. And the second
63
City Council Meeting - January 8~ 1990
one was that the require~.~ent be placed on conditional use permits that are
granted for these operations that they have a waste oil collection facilities.
With those changes, the ordinance is basically the way you had modified it at
your first reading and w~'re rec~ending that it be approved.
Mayor Ch%iel: Okay, is there anyone wishing to address this at this particular
time? If hearing none, any discussion? I think what w~ have here is what Paul
indicated. Tying in our concerns that w~ had frcm the previous Oouncil meeting.
Upon reviewing this, I think he has Pet all those specific reco~,endations.
Councilman Boyt: I've got one point if I might. It~n 8(6). It's on page 4 of
the ordinance.
Paul Krauss: I think you were looking to delete it from the CBD district?
Councilman Boyt: Central business district.
Paul Krauss: Yeah. Tnat would have to be in Section 20-734(4) on the existing
Code.
Co~cilman Boyt: Section...That's where you've got it listed now.
Councilv~n Johnson: As a conditional use. Bill, the inner section where the
current Holiday.
Council~n Boyt: Okay, maybe we have the wrong district.
councilman Johnson: That's Business Highway at that point.
Paul Krauss: The existing ordinance is already established convenience stores
with gas pu~gs as a conditional use. We hadn't proposed changing this in this
amended ordinance.
Councilman Boyt: Well, that's what I'm proposing.
Paul Krauss: Right and what you would need to am'end is Section 20-734(4) of the
existing ordinance were convenience stores with gas [ma~.ps are listed as a
conditional use in the CBD district.
councilFmn Boyt: Okay. That would be my intent.
Mayor Ch~iel: Could you give me your reasoning on that Bill.
Council~mn Boyt: Well, I think when I started out, I know that the Council that
started this had several different motives but mine was simple to stop the
multiplication of convenience stores with gas pu~ in our central business
district. We've got enough and I think that that's solved by just not allowing
it in the district.
Councilman Johnson: We have one.
Councilmen Boyt: What about the one that's already been approved down in right
down here.
64
.City Osuncil Meeting - January 8, 199~ -
Paul E~auss: Charlie James?
Paul Krauss: That's outside of the (~ntral Business District.
Councilman Johnson: That's in the BG.
Paul Krauss: The only gas pump operation w~ have is the Brooke's Superette.
Councilman Boyt: Okay. Well, I don't know about the BG district but I think
the central business district we shouldn't be encouraging them there. Maybe
it's not a possibility anyway.
Councilman Johnson: Bill? (~ntral business district goes basically fr~m north
of the railroad tracks to the laundr.~%at, what is it? Country clean? Then
across to the bank, the new bank. Right through Filly's. Fr(~. the map t~_re,
it looks lanes 11 and 12 are in central business district and the other lanes
may be in a different district.
Mayor Ch~iel: John, you mdght have to m~r~e those.
Councilman Boyt: Well if that doesn't hit at it. I don't think 25~ feet does
anything for us because the Standard and the Holiday station are within 25~ feet
of each other. That means they could put on on all four cornezs. That's what I
~as trying to get away from.
Councilman Johnson: Okay the four corners. One is 1OP. One is BN and t~o are
Bminess Highway. We have one business neighborhood which is where the daycare
center and the Total are. Business high~ay is where the Holiday and the Amoco
station is. Then the other corner _tb~r__~e is industrial IOP. Industrial office
park. ~hat do we allow for gas stations in the industrial office paxk?
Mayor Ch,,iel: I don't think we do do we?
Paul Krauss: We don' t.
Councilman Bo.vt: Okay. I don't know. I don't know what the answer is.
Councilman Johnson: What about business neighborhood?
Paul Krauss: Business neighborhood. We are proposing that...
Councilman Johnson: Business neighborhood should he the 25~ and that
effectively.
Mayor Ch~iel: Just keeping it as be has it I think pretty much spells it all
out.
Oouncilman Johnson: There's no new convenience stores with gas.pu~ps at that
intersection as it's written because they're not allowed in 1OP. They've got to
be 25~ feet apart in the business neighborhood so it w~uld be too close for the
65
City Council Meeting - January 8, 1990
Council~'an Boyt: Maybe we pass this and see how it worksl
Mayor Chtiel: Yeah I think we should. I think we should accept staff
rec~nendation that the City. Council approve the second reading.
Councilsmn W~rkman: If I could F. mke one cce~nt. I'm getting so nervous with
this whole sticky mess here. I think it's getting out of control. One thing I
do have a concern about is, re willing to put these darn things 200, 500 feet
apart but we're only willing to get about a 100 foot separation frc~ these gas
tanks to a residential.
Mayor Chniel: Residential, that's right. I thought there was something we
discussed at the tiFe getting a greater depth to residential. That there was a
reason for it.
Paul Krauss: I received no explicit direction to change it but you indicated
that it could be raised again at the second reading.
Councilman Boyt: Do you want to make it 250? I'm fine with that.
Councilman Work~.an: At least.
Mayor Chniel: I think from residential it should be.
Councilman Boyt: That's fine with ~.
Councilman Work~an: I think a baby's crib is more i~ortant than another Amoco.
Co~%ncilFan Boyt: Why don't you move an a~n~%ent.
Counctl~n Johnson: You know Don, I'd like to run a puff ~del on filling a
tank and seeing under what various meteorlogical conditions, probably take
your.., inversion condition and see what it'd be at 100 feet and 200 feet for
your benzine tyleneol factions?
Councilman Boyt: Do you want to table this until you do then?
Mayor Chtiel: I don't think that w~uld be necessary. I think if we kept the
distance fro~, residential. That was one of my ~jor concerns.
Councilman Johnson: Yeah, that was mine too.
Mayor Ch~,iel: And that would provide that safety aspect of it.
we!
CouncilFan Workman: I guess what I'm saying is, re not going to, to a very
slight extent, we're going to restrict how people can use their property to
build convenience stores and gas p~,ps and we're not going to do a very good job
at it. It's kind of, we have a problem at Brooke's with neighbors too close I
think. That's where I'm at. I think the previous Council tried to help a local
business~an out b~re and it's gotten to be a little bit crazy.. I'm not real
happy, with this one.
Councilman Boyt: Well you get convenience stores defined. Convenience stores
with gas pu~.~s defined and ~)tor fuel and service stations defined and we don' t
66
City Council Meeting - January. 8~ 1990
have any of that now.
Councilman Workman: Well ~ only ~ant them defined so ~ can restrict them.
Councilman Johnson: So you can control it.
Councilman Workman: Restrict. Gontxol. It's all the same.
Councilwoman Dimler: It gets back to, do w~ need this to have definitions, do
we ~ an ordinance?
Paul Krauss: You would ~ to change the ordinance to put that in the
definition section, yes.
Oouncilw~man Dimler: But w~ could just put in the definitions and leave it at
that.
Councilman Boyt: We have done a good bit beze in terms of changing our zoning
ozdinanoe to then fit our definitions. We've really not addressed, w~ haven't
figured out an answer. After a ~ of study, w~ haven' t figured out an answ~x
to how do w~ control the n~%ber of convenience stores with gas
Councilwoman Dim]er: Maybe w~ don't have to.
Councilman Bo.vt: And I guess w~'re giving up on that but w~'ve figured out a
lot of other answers that are going to help us. We've defined things and we've
indicated what zones we want ~ in.
Councilman Workman: I'm willing to go along. Again, I think it's going to have
some gaps. We can't stop people frcm doirg things and I think again, we've got
it all tidied up and we spent a lot of time and money to figure this all out. I
don't know that we have but I'm not sayin9 let's throw the whole thirg out and
let's get rid of it because there's some good things about it. Again, it's a
trend of we're not very good at controllirg the private, sector on where we want
thsm to be. They've got a lot of options out there and we probably ought to
stay the hell out. I think we spent too much time on this and I'm ready to get
this passed.
Mayor Ch~iel: Let's move it with your recc~ms~dation of the restrictive setback
fr~m residential. 250.
Councilman Boyt: I'll second that.
Mayor C1~,iel m~m~d, Councilm~n Boyt ~~ ~ ~r~ ~ fi~ r~i~ of ~
~di~ ~e~i~ ~p~r 20 of ~ ~s~ ~ ~ ~ ~i~ pr~isio~
~~rning ~nv~ie~ stor~ ~ ~r ~ s~tio~ ~ ~ ~ck of ~
25~ f~t for ~ gas ~ fr~ resid~ti~ pro~~. ~1 ~~ in fav~ ex~
~il~~ D~ ~ o~~ ~ ~ ~ion ~ri~ ~ a ~ of 4 ~ 1.
Mayor Ch~iel: Do you want to give your reason?
67
City Council Meeting - January 8, 1990
Councilwom~n Dim]er: Yes I do. I think this ordinance cam.~ about out of a
protection for a business~n. I never have believed in that cause and I believe
that motive may have been wrong. I do believe there are some good things in
this ordinance but I still don't want to interfere with the free mz%rket syste~..
Again, I will say that I feel that we are closing the barn door after the cows
are out. I don't think this ordinance is going to make a whole lot of
difference and that's why I'm opposing it.
Mayor Ch~,iel: Well, I think there's scme specific areas that are going to be
better than what's existing.
Councilman Johnson: I'd like to say it was the minority of the last Council
trying to protect a single business~n.
ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDM~2~T REGARDING REVISIONS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO Ar.rz)w
FOR THE REVI~ AND GRANTING OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOR USES THAT ARE
TMEPORARY IN NATURE IN ALL DISTRICTS, FIRST READING.
Paul Krauss: Would you like m~ to go through this one? We've continued it
before. There are so~.e people I know who are waiting for, well we've got a
group here waiting on that annexation from, Victoria.
Councilman Workman: I don't have any problems with this.
Councilwoman Dimler: I don't have any problems with 6.
Mayor Chmiel: I don' t have any proble~.
Councilm~n Boyt: Well I'd like to add. This is really quick. Under Districts
Paul has starred the conditions that he thinks are appropriate. I would like to
add in A-l, 1 and 4. In A-2, 1 and 13.
Councilman Workman: Are you saying these are not in there now?
Councilm~n Boyt: Yeah. What Paul did was he went thro,gh and starred the
conditions that he thought would be appropriate for temporary conditional use
permits so we get beyond just churches. And I'm saying, and maybe sc~e of you
have others you want to ~_~c added but not all of these were added. Just the
ones he starred. I think in R-4 we should add 2 and 3.
Paul Krauss: Bill, could you start at the top of this?
Councilm~n Boyt: Yeah. A-i, 1 and 4. A-2, 1 and 13. Both exactly the same
things. R-4, 2 and 3. R-8, 2. R-12, 3 and 4. Then I would suggest, well I
drop that one.
Mayor Ch~,iel: What did you hit on R-87
Co~cil~'~n Boyt: R-8 was 2. Then in IOP, 1 and 6. The logic I think behind
all those, because I went through there and I said, which ones of these
represent either soeLething that doesn't fit the nature of the district, which I
think IOP, cement mix plants don't fit the nature of that district, or are
te~porary enough in nature that a person isn' t making a major investment when
68
City. Oouncil M~et~ng - January 8~ 199~
they put it in and therefore we ought to be able to give the% a ba~porary
conditional use permit rather than sa~ething that goes with the building forever
or the property, forever from there. So along with the ones that Paul starred.
Councilman Johnson: Are we passing then all the ones that are starred will be
moved into a t~v~orazy?
Councilman Boyt: I would ava. nd with those with the n~mbers that I added.
Fayor Cl~,iel: k~end with what's existing for each of those districts as Bill
has indicated.
Councilman Workman: We have kennels in R-47
Councilman Boyt: Group hemes is probably a probl~?
Councilman Johnson: By. state law I think.
Roger Knutson: State law refers to group hcmes, certain categories, as being
conditional uses, not interim uses but this is just a first reading and we'll
get back to you om that.
Councilman Boyt: As far as the kennels.
Mayor Ch%iel: Private kennels under that R-4 was one of the ones that.
Councilman Boyt: It's not a conditional use and I'm saving that's almost
perfect for interim conditional use because if we grant it, we sure don't want
to grandfather it in forever.
Councilman Johnson: Do you realize that 3 cats requires a private kennel?
·
Councilman Boyt: So does 3 dogs.
Councilman Johnson: I must admit when my 3 dogs w~re alive.
Mayor Ch~iel: You didn't have one did you?
Co,~%cilman Johnson: No. I had 3 house dogs.
Mayor Ch%iel: Okay, with those specific a~m~ctments to what's existing for the
first reading. Do I have a motion?
Councilman Boyt moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to approve Zoning .Ordinance
k~endment regarding revisions to the Zoning Ordinance to allow for the review
and granting of conditional use pemnits for uses that are banporary in nature in
all districts, first reading, as staff presented with the following additions:
A-1 - 1, 4
A-2 - 1, 13
R-4 - 2, 3
R-8 - 2
R-12- 3, 4
IOP - 1, 6
69
City Council Meeting - January 8, 1990
Ail voted in favor and the~tion carried2
Councilman Boyt: Do w~ want to av~nd to skip to the one that everybody's
sitting here for?
Mayor Ch~iel: Yes, I think w~ will.
PROVISION OF SEWER SERVICE/POTENTIAL ANNEXATION FOR SUBDIVISION PROPOSED ON
CHANHASSEN/VICTORIA BORDER, PLANNING DIREOIE)R.
Paul Krauss: Staff has been contacted by. the City Planner from Victoria and by.
the proposed developer concerning a piece of ground that's located ~)stly in
Victoria but partially in Chanhassen. The proposal is to subdivide the property
into I believe 8 lots. They would need to get both access and utilities from
Chanhassen. It's not physically accessible from Victoria. l'ne old railway line
separates it frc~. the rest of the cc~v, unity and utilities in Victoria are
located some distance away. In viewing this, we felt that the reasonable way of
approaching this was to take it before you and ask you for your direction. When
we at a staff level looked at this, the first thing that occurred to us is
should we look at annexation. We could provide services. The City Engineer has
told us w~ have the utilities up in that area. We haven't had any engineering
work done. We could provide access. The street needs to be upgraded somewhat
to serve it but given the lay of the land over there, the annexation question is
one that we felt we need to get your feedback on. So tonight we're seeking your
direction on how to proceed with this and we will get back to the developer and
property owners are here tonight and the City of Victoria.
Mayor Chvdel: Okay. Just as a real c~ick one, I would suggest that as far as
we're concerned, rec(x~nd that that subdivision not be allowed to occur unless
the re~aining portion of the parcel is annexed into the City of Chanhassen. At
least that's my feeling.
Co,mcilman Boyt: I would second that.
Councilman Johnson: In the existing subdivision, there are 5, 6, 7, 8 and part
of Lot 2 even. That's kind of odd. Is there a hc~e on 8?
Paul Krauss: I think 8's undeveloped. 7 has a ho~.
Mayor Ch~,iel: Maybe if we could. Have sc~one just address it if you would.
David Hensing: My. name is David Hensing. I'm a consulting engineer. I'd like
to present Mr. Ladd Delowich and his wife. They are the owners of residence.
They live in (lhanhassen. The property is split, ihe property east of this line
is Chanhassen. The property west of this line is Victoria. What we've done is
we've laid out a subdivision using Chanhassen's ordinances with wetland setbacks
and lot sizes just to see how it would fit. There's been a couple of different
sketches that we've worked with Paul. The one you have I think is a little bit
different. We were going to put all of the property, in Chanhassen in one lot
but what we have now is 6 new lots and the existing h~ne would be on this lot.
If you're familiar with Pipewood C~rve off of TH 7, right near the Cross
of Glory ~theran Church, this comes in and then their's is the large white
70
City Council Meeting - January 8~ 199~
house with the white col~ns. Mr. Delowich originally contacted me. Wanted to
proceed with his plat through Victoria and we had another sketch, as a matter of
fact we would have more lots and less w~tland setbacks, etc. but in visiting
with your staff it was indicated that we should abide by your ordinances...so
we're eager to pr~. We're excited about the l~roject and seek your guidance.
Mayor C2~iel: Thank you.
Councilman Johnson: Do the owners care whether they're in Victoria or
Chanhassen?
David Hensing: 0nly to the point that the requirements in Victoria are a little
less restrictive and it yeilds one more lot.
Mr. Delowich: I'm not even really so terribly interested in the extra lot.
Fine, but what it does and if we had the other drawirg we could point it out, is
it ~ves that whole drive further a~y from my house. Therefore closer to...on
the wetland. That would be the major advantage in beirg able to go... If we do
it, the best of both worlds for us would be able to do it under the Victoria
guidelines but let Chanhassen annex. That would be the best of both worlds.
Don Ashworth: They're going to have to petition for it.
Mayor Ch~iel: You would have to petition basically for this. You would have to
do the petition for this for the annexation. You're aware of that?
Councilman Johnson: What about the MUSA line? Our MUSA line basically I think
stops out here doesn't it? Our MUSA line cannot extend into the city. of
Victoria. How's the ~t Council goin~ to allow us to, we'd have to amend the
MUSA line also I would ass~e.
Mr. Delowich: We are within the victoria M[3SA line.
Paul Krauss: It's all served area. It's not our corporate limits but it's
Victoria's. I don't know how they view that but it's all served.
Councilman Johnson: So it's served by the Victoria MUSA line which would go
into the ss~e pipe as what we're putting it in anyway so it all plops together.
So there's no net change in MUSA line for the area? Okay.
Mayor C~,,iel moved, Councilman Boyt seconded that the subdivision for Mr. and
Mrs. Delowich not be allo~sd to occur unless the remaining portion of the parcel
is annexed into the City. of Chanhassen. Ail voted in favor and the motion
Councilman Johnson: I'd like to, you know it's going to make an odd little
triangle of Victoria also.
Councilman Boyt: There's only one wy they can do it.
Councilman Workman: We are a frugal core,miry.
71
City Council Meeting - January 8, 1990
Mayor Ch?Liel: That's basically what it is. That's what it boils down to. That
was my F.~)tion to annex into the City of Chanhassen.
CONSIDER EXTENDED CONTRACT TO PROVIDE ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES TO THE CITIES OF
SHO~, GREENWOOD, EXCELSIOR, TONKA BAY AND VICTORIA.
Don Ashworth: Jim will not be present this evening. If I can give the report.
Mayor Ch%iel: I certainly hope so.
Don Ashworth: You have the report from JiF, Chaffee. I should note that I have
a manager's cc~nt. I'd asked for a fomnula to be developed by the finance
department. I firmly believe in that fomv, ula as a F~ans to ensure that w~ do
not create a systen whereby private business would not be cc~peting with us. I
was asked though to relook at so~ of the nt~nbers in ter~ of how realistic is
it if a private business were to carry out this function. WOuld they logically
be paying $10.00 per hour for animal services and I guess in further review, I
would respond to that question by saying no. I think that anyone going into
this type of business, historically it's shown that they have hired people at
the very end of this, ve~ low end of the schedule and accordingly, even if you
~med $8.00 per hour and used the formula, you're still at $20.00 to $22.00 per
hour. The short and long of it is that I firmly believe that at $22.00 an hour,
the City will be fully reimb~rsed. I do have a real concern that the contract
not be looked at as a long tenv~ type of contract and I say that thinking about
future building r~cds. (1ir people and recognizing that this type of a function
could actually limit our o~n ability to stay in this building.
Council~mn Johnson: 2 years. I mean why 3 years? 3 years seems kind of long.
The objective is to get back to where there is another service, k~ used to have
a Tri-cities Animal Service and that one died.
Councilman Boyt: I think we're talking about vehicle as a driving force here.
Purchasing a vehicle.
Mayor Chmiel: Tnere was one that was paid off in the 3 years, you're right.
Yeah, that was the position. And I think too, what Don just said is I don't
think we ~nt to be in a long term portion but I think that if it's not going to
cost anything and we can assist our adjacent cities with what we have, I think
it would be a good thing for us to do.
Councilman Johnson: It basically gets us a little extra coverage for free.
Councilw~n WOrkman: So now we've got free animal service. We've got a free
cc~%unity center. We' ve got a free, I don' t know, we' ve got free everything.
Councilman Boyt: I wo~ld move approval of the animal contract as stated in the
staff report for $22.00.
Councilman Johnson: Second.
Councilw~m~n Dimler: I guess I would question the $.96 an hour for
adminstrative ti~ for Scott at 1 hour a week. I also question the secretarial
72
City fbuncil Meeting - January 8~ 1990
time although that might be a little closer to the time spent but an $1.0~ an
hour?
Oouncilman Boyt: No. You've got to take 20 times that. They're saying that
these people are contracting for 20 ~)urs a week so what does that break out to
in a per ho,~r charge? So the secretarial time w~uld be $10.00 an hour.
Councilwoman Dimler: But we're not saying then that they're going to spend 1
hour and 2 hot=s a ~ek.
Councilm~n Boyt: Well no. I think that:s ~at they are saying and I think
you're right to say w~ll, is that really accurate or not. Maybe Z~owsky does a
lot of this ~rk without turning it over to Scott and Caxol.
Councilman Johnson: A majority of it.
Mayor Chmiel: Or a good share of it.
Councilman Bo,vt: I w~rked with Don today fr~m 3 different angles on how do we
get reasonable cost for this thing and we kept c(x~irg up with $22.00. So
personally I'm pretty comfortable that that's accurate.
Councilw~man Dimlez: Have we got a time limit? It will be 3 .v~rs you're
saying?
Mayor Ch%iel: Yes. Within a 3 year period I think.
Councilwcman Dimler: But what incentive are we giving th~ to look for private?
Mayor Ch~el: T~e incentive we're giving thsm is at the end of 3 years we no
longer will provide the service.
Councilw~n Dim]er: But what incentive are we giving them to look in the
m~antime to shorten it up?
Mayor Ch~iel: Well, if they don' t have anything, then they never thought of it.
I think they have to do that on their initiative to see what they can acquire
for them-elves.
Councilman Johnson: I've ~n what? Like 3 different of these services fail in
the last 5 or 10 years. There's a big one that Minneapolis had that failed and
really caused a probl~ up there. I think a lot of suburbs, the Tri-City one
here fell apart. I can't r~mber what the third one was but there ~as another
commercial one. It's a service that may be able to be provided by. the private
sector. Maybe better provided by. the public sector.
Councilwoman Dimler: So that we can fail? Is that what you're saying?
councilman Johnson: Well s~ services, a private consulting firm is, you can't
do it because of your overhead and stuff.
councilwoman Dimler: I still don't like our taxpayers havirg to maybe subsidize
this if...
73
City Oouncil Meeting - January 8~ 1990
Mayor Ckmiel: Right now we're not subsidizing.
Councilwoman Dimler: Right but if we go to that point and we've told them for 3
years and we get to a point where we are subsidizing them, and we've got a 3 year
contract here, we can' t very well pull out of it. I'm real uncomfortable with
that.
Councilman Boyt: No, it' s open to, the price is open to negotiation every year.
We're not locking that in.
Mayor Chv, iel: That's right. That's what Jim, indicated last time.
Councilman Workman: What if these communities drop out?
Councilwoman Dimler: ~ney have an option to drop out.
Councilman Workman: What if they drop out in 6 months?
Council~mn Johnson: We have to sell the car.
Councilw~van Dimler: Yeah, I have a real problem with another vehicle too.
Councilman Boyt: One of the things that sells this outside of it's a nice thing
to do for our neighbors, is that we're giving, our citizens are getting much
better animal control service than they were getting 2 years ago. Probably
better than they were getting a year ago. We're taking somebody and we' re
paying t_hem more than a private vendor ~uld pay in this area and we're giving
and getting better service. This contract allows us to keep that person full
time. Taat's a beck of a benefit to us as a co~v, unity. We've now, $17.00
wasn't covering our costs. $22.00 is probably covering our costs and in the
course of the next year we're going to know and if it isn't, then next year
we' 11 propose a higher amount.
Councilman workman: Do we have detailed records of these animal pick-ups, etc.
Don?
Don ~h~rth: Yes.
Councilman workman: How extensive are they?
Don Ashworth: At issue though, if you're trying to get adminstrative costs,
which I really questioned in Jim.'s report. Secretarial and so~ of the others,
I don't think that we have good records because we really don't have, the
services isn't going, right?
Councilman workman: I'm saying, I want to see records that show that we have
such a serious animml problem in this town that we've got to add people for 40
hours a w~ek. That's what I'm concerned about. I understand trying to blanket
every hour with both police and ambulance and animal control. The animal
control is, it's rare for one person in a lifetim~ to have a serious animal
problem in their own yard.
Councilman Johnson: I picked up a dog this ~L=ek.
74
City Council ~ting - January 8, 1990
Co~ncil~n Workman: I'm saying, I don't ~ the detailed re~oEds that show that
we've got such an animal control probl~ that we've got to extend this thing so
far out and wide and beyond for us to get really what I w~uld say is a delivery
Mayor Ch%iel: On the other hand you can look at it Tom as the services that are
provided in the event that there are those dogs and ~u're saying what total
n~bers are there will be taken care of without any probl~ as well.
Councilwoman Dimler: But in C~anhas~ that w~uld be anyway because we have the
service for ourselves.
Councilman Johnson: But we'll have moxe of it. We'll have 20 hours.
Mayor ~el: They'll have a better chance to contain them.
Councilwoman Dimler: I never indicated that I thought we should make Z.?dowsky
and Deb Rand go part time as a result of rejecting this. We can find other
things for them to do. You understand ~hat I'm sa.~lng?
Mayor Ch~[el: Yeah, but it's just providing another kind of service because of
the av. ount of driving that they're going to do, there's that additional exposure
that's being sho~ thro,E3h the City. as well.
Councilman Workman: But we don't know how many dog problems we have a ~mek or a
~%onth o
Councilman Boyt: Well we do. I don't have the n~%bers right with me but I get
them every, month at Public Safety.
Phyllis Pope: My. name is Phyllis Pope and I walk my dog on a leash nearly every
day. Probably 3 miles most days and I don't think that there's a time that I'm
(~lt walking that I've not ~ these dogs and I'd hate to see what it w~uld be
at less service in ~ssen. I think we've got good service now. People
respond fast and they're very courteous.
Don Ashworth: To respond to the question though, my recollection of the 1990
budgetary process was one in which we w~re increasing the overall availability
of CSO's. Not necessarily increasing the amount of animal control for 1990.
We're looking at 2~ hours per w~ek for animal control. I did not recall that we
were increasing the CSO portion. We're moving frcm one full time position and a
half tim~ position to t~s full time positions with the additional half being
picked up through these contracts.
Councilman Work~an: So we're really gaining...
Don Ashworth: We're not gaining anything. We're not really losing anything.
councilman Boyt: We're gaining a body in that we've got s~mebody full time
which means we can probably hold onto ~ better than trying to get ~, when
they're w~rking a tho~ hours.
Councilman Johnson: If he's patrolling Green%Dod and a dog cc~plaint comes in
in Chanhassen, he's available to drive do~ here and pick it up. I had a dog
75
City Council Meeting - January 8, 1990
cc~,plalnt. I had 2 dogs running loose 2 weeks ago which I called the Carver
County Sheriff on Sunday and w~ had nobody on patrol on Sunday so basically he
says, if you can go o,~t and get those two dogs. One Airedale and a Laborador
and contain tbs~., yourself, we'll cc~ get tbs~. Otherwise they're running free.
I wasn't personally going to go out and try to capture this Airedale and
Laborador that I didn't know. The one dog I did know.
Councilman Workman: And I don't suggest you do. I'm just saying, what
com~nunity that doesn't have a police force seriously has 24 hour a day coverage.
Not us and not a lot of corny, unities. I'm just saying it's a very expensive
deal.
Counci~ Johnson: We're not proposing 24 hours a day.
Councilman WorkmAn: I know and I would never propose that a loose dog isn't a
problem at any given tiFe of the day. I'm just saying, we're going to alwa.us
have loose dogs. People are going to let their dogs off. People who own the
dogs let their dogs run free. Again, we can't fix every problem but I just
don't see the gain in ~m extending ourselves beyond the border so far. I'm not
saying reduce and get rid of animal control. I'm just saying the gain t. hat
we' re getting to get a 4 wheel drive pick-[~ or vehicle, to do the other
communities isn't really I don't think advantageous to the City. ~lt why don't
we take a vote.
Don Ashworth: I do have a response to that one question if I may.
Mayor Ch~,iel: What' s the answer.
Don Ashworth: The question was, what happens if they drop out. They can' t.
They've got to take and pay you. If they drop out, they're still obligated to
pay unless you let th~ off the hook. That's paragraph 14.
Councilman Boyt moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to provide animal control
services on a contractual basis to the cities of Greenwood, Shorewood,
Excelsior, Victoria and Tonka Bay for a period of 3 years. Councilman Boyt,
Councilman Johnson and Mayor Chniel voted in favor and Co~cilman Workmand and
Councilwoman Dimler voted in opposition. The motion carried with a 3 to 2 vote.
Mayor C2~,iel: Would you care to give your reasons or you already stated them.
Councilwoman Dimler: Well I pretty much stated them but if we want to get
extra, get Bob Zydowsky full time we can do it without having this contract.
Also, if you ~ant another vehicle w~ can do it without this contract. I just
think i t' s...
Councilman Johnson: Yeah, it will just cost our citizens to do it.
Mayor Chniel: I don't think it's going to cost us those am~)unt of dollars. If
I did, I think I would vote the opposite way. Believe me.
76
City ~ouncil M~eting - January 8~ 199~
CONSIDER ORDINANCE AME~iM~T REQUIRING CERTIFICATES GF 0(/]U~ ON SINGLE
FAMILY HGMES, FIRST READING.
Don Ashw~rth: Again, this is an item presented by. Jim. ~ne inspectors feel
that we do not have a means by. which to issue a certificate of occupancy, for
single family h~mes and are recc~memding that we pass a local ordinance that
basically w~)uld allow us to do that. It's basically enactirg a portion of State
Statute but there has to be a local ordinance in effect to be able to do that.
Councilwoman Dimler: I have tM questions. Can the party, close without this
Certificate of 0ccu~
Mayor Ch~iel: Can they close on the house?
Oouncilw~man Dimler: Yes.
Mayor Ch%iel: They cannot occupy, the house but tl~y can close on it as far as I
understand. Is that right Boger?
Roger Knutson: That's right.
~ouncilw~man Dimler: In other w~rds you're saying they can close and then we
can deny the Certificate of Occupancy. for one reason or anothe~ and there they
sit?
Roger Enutson: Normally what's happening. If it's a spec house, it's nonmally
completed before someone or the Certificate of Oocupany is already, issued. If
it's a cust~ house, then you already have the construction financing in place
for your CO.
Mayor (]~niel: Gertificate of Occupancy basically means that everything is in
compliance with the regulations of the Building Code. That they. are in
compliance and that they can then occupy, it.
Paul Krauss: Typically they're going to want their Certificate of Occupancy
before they close on the home because the mortgage c(m~many w~n' t allow you to
have the mortgage without the CO in hand...
Oouncilw~man Dim]er: Gkay. T~at's what I was getting at.
Roger Knutson: Now in construction financing.
Council~ Dimler: Okay, and the other question is, is it only new
construction or also on resale of a h~%e?
Boger Knutson: No, just new.
Paul Krauss: It's not a departure. It's been going on all along.
Mayor Ch%iel: Many. cities have this already, in place.
Councilman Johnson: I thought we Ee always doing this.
Paul Krauss: We are.
77
City Council Meeting - January 81 1990
Co~ncilman Johnson: We've been issuing Certificates of OccL~ancy but w~ Just
didn't have an ordinance.
councilman Johnson moved, councilw~x%an Dimler seconded to approve the first
reading of an Ordinance ~,en~%ent recruiting Certificates of Occupany on single
family homes. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
COUNCILMAN PRESENTATIONS:
PROPOSED ORDINANCE REGULATING CIGARETTE SALES, COUNCILMAN JOHNSON.
councilman Johnson: I think real quickly, we've gone over this at a previous
m~ting but the City Attorney's looked at this and fo~d that we could make this
a req~ire~ent. I've looked at a couple of our convenience stores that sell
cigarettes here in town. Brooke's w~uld have very little trouble implementing
this and neither w~uld Kenny's as far as those tw~ that I've looked at this
w~ek.
Mayor Chniel: Did you discuss that with them at all by any chance?
councilman Johnson: I discussed it with the manager of Brooke's slightly and
she didn't see m~h of a problem with it either. I asked her to get some
figures for me on how, if she could, and also the corporate Brooke's people, I
asked th~ for some figures and neither of which got back to ~ with them and I
didn't follow up so it's partially my fault too. But on thefts of tobacco in
stores. They run a m~nthly inventory of every Brooke's store once a month. I
did find out that the shoplifting has gotten high in the past few months at our
local Brooke's store but she didn't know what it was to tobacco items. But
they're one, well Brooke's and Kenny's where they keep their cigar materials is
totally uncontrolled. It cannot be seen by, the people operating the stores. If
somebody's in the Kenny's deli, they can observe the tobacco areas but the
people behind the cash register cannot. It is not visible to them,. Same with
Brooke's. A slight rearrangement of that and they can be done. Putting up so~m
plastic aroL~nd the displays of cigarettes that they have the counters, some
clear lexan around it makes it to where only the person behind the counter can
reach in and get it.
Councilman Boyt: We need to put this on a future agenda, is that it?
Councilman Johnson: Yes.
Councilman Boyt: I w~uld so move.
Councilman Boyt moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to place a proposed
ordinance regulating cigarette sales on a future agenda. All voted in favor and
the motion carried.
Mayor Ch~,iel: One item, that I had was regarding the police contract. Sc~e
proposed am~ndm~ts. I find that if there were sc~ additional amendments that
78
City Osuncil M ting - January 8~ 1990
were placed onto the contract addend~ which ~ms agreed that C~anhassen shall
have the ability, to seek r~%oval of any deputy, assigned to serve the community
(a) for just cause, (b) in accord~ with the union oontract presently in
effect, and (c) consultation with the Sheriff on his desig~. The Sheriff
responded that they cannot c~mply with those which I can under~ because I
think this is something that we discussed previously. The thin~ I don't
understand is why this ~as mot brought hack to Council to discuss before an
addend~ was even added. I think it's a full Council's decision amd not just
one ~ of the Council to move this.
Councilman Johnson: The full Oouncil but not ne6essarily this Oouncil did
request that at one time.
Mayor Ch~iel: Not to my knowledge.
Councilman Johnson: I believe we have havem't we? I'm not sure if it ~s this
Council or the previous Council.
Councilman Johnson: Basically it was supposed to have ~ in last year's
contract. It ~as suppose to have been brought up.
Mayor Ch~iel: Maybe Bill, would ~u like to' clarify it?
Councilman Boyt: Well sure. In an att~ to take the police contract issue
out of the newspaper, I met with A1 Wallin about I guess 4 months ago or so. We
talked about two points. We talked about the survey of surrounding communities
and we talked about the police contract. The t~) of us were basically trying to
find a c~mon ground that we could work through. H~ said that he would be open
to a letter of understanding about the contract and so then I w~nt to Jim
Chaffee and I said, Al has proposed this as a ~ay in ~b. ich we can resolve the
differences that I ~as havirg and I asked Mr. Chaffee to pursue it feeling that
he ~as a better person to pursue it then I. There ~s, I think evex~e got the
letter in response and if I ~ known you were goin~ to get the letter, I would
have certainly have informed you. What I was under the impression was happening
~as that we were finding out what was possible. Frc~ there, it certainly weuld
have cc~e back to the Council. I have no ability to enter into an agre~nt
with the Sheriff officially. Only the Council can do that. I'm aware of that.
On the other hand, we were doing r~thing but making headlines in the newspaper
tryin~ to discuss this as a Council. Didn't make sense to me to try to do that.
Council~s~an Dimler: That's where it should be.
Councilman Boyt: Well I suspect it will be again.
Council~an Dimle~: For public input yeah. It should be.
Mayor Chniel: But hasn't this ~ brought up before? Because he's bringing up
the same issues in here. Osntract that's currently in effect %ms the same thing
that they had with Chaska.
Councilman Boyt: Actually, if we go back and look at the initial discussion
this year on the contract. One of the reasons that I didn't discuss it in more
79
City Oouncil N~eting - January 8~ 1990
detail was because that was my understanding. That the County had said there's
no flexibility. When I m~t with Al, he said well let's look at a letter of
understanding. Well it's taken all these months to now get his response and say
well we're not going to do that. What I find interesting about this Don, since
you bring it up, is that they're saying on the one hand we're doing this, but we
won't agree to do it. I just find that ironic.
Councilm~n Workman: What are we going to do?
Councilm~n Boyt: We already have the right, even as general as the contract is
stated, we already have the right to request something be done with the
officers. Just the Sheriff has the final word on whether anything will or not.
ii~is letter of understanding says nothing different. T~e Sheriff has already
agreed that his de~%ties will be infon~,ed about the City ordinances. That's all
we're asking him, to do in this letter of understanding.
Mayor Ch%icl: Yeah, that's what he's saying. Every effort will be Fade to
assign deputies familiar with your ordinances. However, there may be times when
it would be practically iF, possible to do so. Inclusion of this line in the
contract could negatively impact your police coverage.
Councilman Boyt: And I have a call into Al. I didn't get this until YoU got it
and I have a call in to find out more about what he F~ans here. But my intent
was not to circumvent the Council and still isn't. It's siFgly to get some kind
of working document before we discuss it in public.
Councilman Workman: I guess with this addendum, I think just about every Carver
County Deputy has had a problem in this City and is probably has been run out of
this. There's an awful lot of they,. That either don't want to work here or
have been told they can' t work here. I mean there's been nothing but problems.
Council~n Johnson: One that I know of.
Councilm~n Workman: You don't know about a dozen of them but the current ones
that are here are under stress. Ask the~,. I mean it's unbelieveable. I don't
think o~r Public Safety's gotten along with any deputy that's come through this
city. Whether that's because of the Council or the Public Safety Department, I
don't know.
Mayor Chv, iel: Okay. I guess we addressed the question that I had. Let's F~ve
on to the next one if we can.
Councilwoman DLm, ler: I have a request to be taken off the Board of Adjustment
and Appeals. I have accepted a position on the Board of Battered Wom~_n's
Alliance and they F~et the same day as the Co~cil late in the afternoon and
getting here at 7:00 could be a conflict and be very difficult for F~. In
place, because I don't want to shun my public duty, I request to be appointed to
the Public Safety C(m~,ission to replace Candy Takkunen. That's the first itc%.
The second item is the Park and Rec C(m~ission. It has been brought to my
attention that there was an advertising in the paper just prior to Christmas for
Park and Rec people to apply to the Omvmission. To my knowledge there have been
no other applicants at this time. I just want to m~ke a co~t that I think
that maybe having it just prior to Christmms is not fair representation and I
80
City Oouncil Meeting - January 8~ 1990
think that we should notify the public again. Also, call all previous
applicants and let them know that these openings are available.
Oouncilman Johnson: Doesn't the Public Safety Ommission m~_ting at the same
time as the Bus (km~ission which you're on?
Oouncilman Boyt: It _m~cts on this Thursday.
Councilman Johnson: So it meets the second Thursday?
Councilwoman Dimler: We m~-----t on the 25th of January with the bus.
Councilman Johnson: I think we m'~-~t on the fourth ~uz~ay then. So Public
Safety's on the second Thursday. Okay. It used to be a conflict.
Councilwoman Dim]er: No, it' s not anlamore I don' t believe.
Councilman Johnson: When I first got on it ~as a conflict. Okay. SO it's not
a conflict anymore.
Council~an Workman: Are we going to handle how Council's going to be situated
on Omv~issions?
Councilman Johnson: Those appointments are going to be cc~ing up in future
Council m~etings.
Councilwoman Dimler: Is this the time?
Mayor Ch%iel: This is just discussionary...
UPDATE GN SENIOR STUDY A~D DISCUSSION OF SELECTION FGR ~%SK F(1~CE, PLANNING
DIOR.
Paul Krauss: As you're aware, we've entered into a contract with Judy Marshik
and Associates to conduct a Senior needs study. She's going to be in attendance
at your next meeting to give you an overview of how the study's going to be
conducted and get your fccdback on that. One of the things we've done though is
you ~dght recall her contract specified us designating a task force to ~Drk with
her on the study. Is discussed it with the ~ayor and at his request I had
articles, short articles put in the newspaper to try and solicit some interest
on this task force. I got 3 people to respond and I've got their na~es here
tonight. We need about 6 or so. 6 or 7 to have a good cross section of opinion
and what I'm asking is for the Council to take the information I have here and
through your contacts figure out who ~u'd like to have serve on this co~mission
and have their na~es for JUdy at the next ~ting if we could.
Councilman Johnson: Is St. H~bert's pretty active in seniors? I was
thinking...
Mayor O~%iel: Any of the churches. Any discussion on this? I notice there ~s
one which was n~%ber 3, Joan Link frc~ Shakopee resident. I mentioned that to
Paul that I don't think we want someone fr~ outside the confines of this city
81
City Council Meeting - January 8~ 1990
and that hopefully we can get enough people from within the City to serve on
this o
Coun~ilm~n Johnson: She's part of the Scott/Dakota/Carver County co~v, unity
action.
Paul Krauss: But so ~as the previous ~nan and she is a Chanhassen resident.
Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to adjourn the m~=eting.
All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 12:20
S%~x~itted by Don Ashworth
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
82