1991 09 23CHANHASSEN CZTY COUNCIL
REGULAR HEETING
SEPTEHBER 23, 1991
Mayor Chmie! called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.. The meeting was opened
with the Pledge to the Flag.
COUNCILHEHBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Mason, Councilman Workman,
Councilwoman Dimler and Councilman Wing
STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Roger Knutson, Paul Krauss, Kathy Aanenson,
Charles Folch, Todd Hoffman, and Scott Hark
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Oimler seconded to
approve the agenda with the following changes and additions: Mayor Chmiel moved
item 11 to 4(a) and item 6 to 8(a); under Council Presentations Councilman Wing
wanted to discuss the noise ordinance; Councilman Mason wanted to discuss a note
he received from Sue Severson about the trail in southern Chanhassen;
Councilwoman Dimler wanted to talk about the resurfacing of Dakota and Cheyenne
in Chart Estates and also an update on what's happening with the Minnewashta
Highlands development. All voted in favor of the agenda as amended and the
motion carried.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEHENTS: None.
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve
the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's
recommendations:
b. Resolution ~91-88: Approve Cooperative Construction Agreement for Trunk
Highway 5 Frontage Road Improvements at Lone Cedar Lane, Project 90-9.
c. Resolution 191-89: Approve Plans and Specifications, Authorize Advertising
for Bids; Lake Ann Park Picnic/Recreation Shelter and Utilities.
e. Resolution ~r~1-90: Approve Enrollment of Firefighters in Deferred
Compensation Program.
h. Approval of Accounts.
i. Planning Commission Minutes dated September 4, 1991
Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated August 27, 19'91
j. Resolution ~91-91: Approve Resolution Authorizing the Mayor and City
Manager to Sign Deeds Conveying Parcels 209C, 215 and 316 to MnOot.
o. Approve Animal Control Contract.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
City COLLm~ciI Meeting - September 23, 1991
F. APPROVE DEVELOPHENT CONTRACT FOR GRADING FOR LAKE RILEY HILLS. JOHN
KLINGELHUTZ.
Councilman Mason: Just l(f) with the development contract for grading for Lake
Riley Hllls, gl-9. I'm not clear in my mind uhat happens if they're allowed to
grade before the plat's approved, and that's in essence what we're belng asked
to do here rlght? I understand there's a development contract.
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, if I may. Thls is a 11ttle bit of unusual procedure
for us. Normally we don't allou gradlng to begln until the final plat's been
approved and all of the contracts have been slgned. Zn this case proceeding
wlth this development has been protracted basically because of a pretty complex
feasibility study. We're trylng to work wlth the property owners so they can
get into the ground early next year and they asked if they could be allowed to
do some gradlng early. We don't have a procedure in our ordinance specifically
that allows this and normally we'd probably recommend against it except we've
looked at thls project so much and we had the gradlng specifically tallored so
that virtually anybody who develops this property would need to grade that
speclfic area and we've lnslsted that any of the sensitive areas or any of the
places where we still had questions on tile plat, that no grading activity take
place in those areas. So basically we're trylng to work with the property owner
on this one to get into the ground a little earlier. We don't thlnk there's
much risk. Zn the development contract, if for some reason, or the gradlng
contract, if for some reason the pro~ect doesn't proceed, we'll have the site,
ground cover established on the slte. So there ls really no rlsk for the Clty.
We do have a letter of credLt requirement for that.
Councilman Mason' At some polnt itl tlme, regardless of what happens there,
there's going to be some sort of gradlng anyway right?
Paul Krauss: I really do belleve so. There's really only one way to galn
access into this property and that's pretty much the road corridor that they're
golng to be grading right now.
Councilman Mason: Okay. With that I'll move approval of item (f).
Councilman Workman: Second.
Councilman Hason moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve the Development
Contract for Grading for Lake Riley Hills, John Klingelhutz. All voted in favor
and the motion carried.
G. APPROV~ ~OUIPNENT ACOUISITION OF PUBLIC WORKS GARAGE U_EHICLE EXHAUST SYSTEN,
ROLL PACKER TRAILER AND FLAIL NOWER.
Councilwoman Dimler: Basically item (g) deals with the purchase for our public
works department with three items or three pieces of equipment. One having to
do wlth the vehlcle exhaust ~ystem and the other one wlth a traller for the roll
packer and the third one is for a flail mower. These basically come to a total
cost of about $10,000.00. I have no qualms wlth buylng thls but I'm just
wondering if we can put ~his off lint11 Spring in the fact that a lot of this
seems to be season related and may not be used until Sprlng. And the reason I'm
asking for that is because I've had residents from Chan Estates call me asklng
Clty Council Meeting - September 23, 1991
me why Dakota and Cheyenne, and that ts my Councll presentation, hasn't had
thelr road resurfaced and those roads are in terrible shape. I think they've
called the publlc works department. Have not gotten a sat£sfactory answer as to
being told there's not enough money in the budget and so forth. I was
wondering, I would rather see the $10,000.00 go now in the fall to gtve those
citizens a good road and then purchase the equipment in the Spring.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. The only thing I may think of at this time is whether or
not the prices on that equipment aren't better now than what they mtght be in
the Sprlng and Z don't know that. Charles can you?
Charles Folch: I guess no one knows at this time what prices may be next year.
As far as just to touch brlefly on each of the ltems. The vehlcle exhaust
system is something that would be used as soon as tt is Installed and it's
something that probably shouldn't wait until next Spring. The roll packer
trailer is also needed at this time. We've begun about 2 weeks ago doing most
of our patchlng work and paving work and so therefore the roll packer traller
and packer are being used almost everyday right now in our pavement patching
process. As far as the flall mower, these again are 1rems that we still
probably have at least a good 2 months worth of mowing to do on our park
property and such and thus would get some use this year. guite a bit of use
this year.
Councilwoman Oimler: Don't we have that mower that we bought?
Charles Folch: That's correct.
Councilwoman Dimler: Can't we use that lnstead?
Charles Folch: Well these are actually attachments if you will to be used with
that mower to make it more versatile.
Councilwoman Oimler: Also, on the exhaust system. What are they doing now?
They haven't had one in the past. What are they doing now? Basically my
understanding is they just run a hose off of the muffler and run tt outside.
Charles Folch: That's correct.
Councilwoman Oimler: So why can't we continue doing that until Spring?
Charles Folch: The only trouble is they also have to then, that requlres that
they have the garage door partially opened and during the winter months it's,
you're sort of defeating the purpose of heating the garage when you've got a
door like that open.
Councilwoman Dimler: But we have been doing that in the past?
Charles Folch: We have been doing it in the past, that's correct.
Councilwoman Olmler: Okay, and the traller for the roll packer. We have one,
it just needs replacing at some time.
Charles Folch: That's correct.
City Council Mee[J. llg -~ September 23, 1991
Councilwoman Dimler: It's not like we're doing completely without?
Charles Folch: No, that's correct but.
Councilwoman Dimler: I'd just llke to hear comments from others Z guess.
Mayor Chmiel: Maybe ~hese are two separate issues. Looking to get the streets
resurfaced ls one issue I thlnk that you're brlnglng up for this. Whether or
not, and I thlnk I've had discussions with Don about that as well. We've not
been following through with the process and I wanted to see that process still
hold. I thlnk these may be two separate issues and I don't know if that's a
transferable portlon from here to the streets. Maybe you can enlighten me.
Don Ashuorth: It is two separate funding mechanisms. The equipment is paid for
by the equipment replacement fund. We have levy authority under State Statute
for that equipment but that levy authority cannot use dollars that are levied in
that fashion to pay for other operating costs or other capltal costs. I need to
reverlfy with Harold but Z also recall that there's an OSHA problem associated
with that. That even wlth the door open a lot of tlmes the exhaust, the fumes
will not leave the building and be blown away from it but actually go back in.
The thlrd lssue ls the Chan Estates neighborhood is probably one of our few
neighborhoods that has not seen any form of a public improvement since the
orlginal subdivision. The streets in that area have been a problem for a long,
long time and it's going to take far more than just, let's say like a sealcoat
program that we're into for a majority of our streets. The only ua/ to really
fix those streets is to go through a public improvement process very similar to
what we dld on Frontlet Tra11. I mean they are ln, the sub base is shot. We
did a feasibility study I would say about 5 or 6 years ago and the neighborhood
had rejected it at that point in tlme because of the cost. It was $4,000.00 or
$5,000.00. For your next packet I can make a copy of that previous feasibility
study together with any type of current information that we may have but I
really think that as you noted, I thlnk they're two separate issues. You can't
use the motor vehlcle dollars for thls. And secondly, I thlnk you're golng to
find that thls lsa much bigger problem than $10,000.00.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay but in the meantlme can't we use a resurfaclng
~pproach like we do with all the other roads because that may be used down the
line and those poor people, I mean they're gettlng hlt ulth Hlghuay 5
construction into their entranceway and then they have a terrible road and I'd
just 11ke to glve them some temporary teller because Z do thlnk that it may be
2-3 years, maybe 4 years before they get that new road. And resurfacing would
seem to take care of a lot of that temporarily.
Don Ashworth: Why don't we see what we come up with. Again, if you're going to
spend any dollars, they should be very, very minor recognizing that again their
problem is because of contamination of the sub base of those roads. So any
money you put on top is just money that's going to go away.
Councilwoman Dimler: Yes, and I understand that because the same was true with
Frontlet Tra11 but I also feel that throughout the years if we would have
resurfaced it occasionally, it may not have gotten as worn as it dld.
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1991
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, I agree with that. The positlon there is that we should
have some type of a procedure for having this done within, the streets within the
clty. A certain amount of dollar allocations put towards that so we can
eliminate those problems in having to continuously go back and assess people for
additional road service when we haven't really been maintaining properly. I
thlnk that's something we're going to have to look at rather closely.
Don Ashworth: Agaln, why don't I present the reports that the Council had
looked at when that resurfacing program was established. There was a pretty
thorough analysls of the Chan Estates neighborhood at that point in ttme.
Councilwoman Oimler: So even if they didn't want it then they still would like
it resurfaced and have it be passable. I mean wlthout blg potholes and
endangering their vehicles. Also I don't know how much a resurfacing would cost
but perhaps we can flnd some money and instead of resurfacing like Laredo and
Iroquis that don't really need it as badly, maybe we can make Chun Estates a
priority.
Oon Ashworth: Again, stall will address that in your next packet.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, I think that would be the way to go to get the information
back so we know exactly where we are and where we're golng. Okay, Richard.
Councilman Wing: I wasn't going to, I hadn't pulled this one but one passing
thought Don because you're so conservative on thls. We klnd of went through
cutbacks here and apparently some of the cutbacks didn't occur. Suddenly now
we're buying this equipment. My concern is we're getting into a year end
spending spree and I don't like that. Some of the departments are saying oh
look there's some dollars left. We've got to get rld of lt. I hope we're not
going to get into that.
Mayor Chmlel: No, and I thlnk some of these thlngs that are here as indicated,
the vehicle exhaust system is probably a violation of OSHA. I'm'not sure but it
would certainly most likely be if there's something not being taken care of on
it.
Councilwoman Dimler: Then we've been in violation a long time then.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, and if they come back and you're still in violation, then
you pay a fine besides that and it might be heftler than $5,000.00 in knowlng
what we go through as a company. The other, the roller packer trailer. It is a
20 year old exlstlng trailer. I don't know how much 11fe it has left in lt.
Probably just thumpldy thumping right along but I think that some of these needs
are there as well as with that flall mower. So maybe with that someone care to
make a motion.
Councilman Workman: Why don't we, I think Ursula's on the right track. The
mower Z don't know if we need it or not. There's 2 months left of mowing. I
think we need to readdress the mowlng situation because I think we're mowing
property. They're mowing everybody's yard but mine. We're doing an awful
of mowlng and ! understand on outlots, etc.. I thlnk if we can address that and
Mr. Mayor I'd like to bring that up sometime on a future agenda where we can
request from staff to flnd out what we're mowlng because we're mowlng where
City Council Meeting -- September 23, 1991
don't think we need to be mowlng. But I don't know how much more asphalt we're
going to be laying. I think that's tile reason for the packer correct?
Charles Folch: That's correct.
Councilman Workman: You know I guess a halfway point would be to approve what
we need to approve for the safety of the gentelmen in the publlc works garage
and pull the mower and the packer trailer out.
Councilwoman Dimler: That's good. That's a good compromise.
Councilman Wing: I guess I'd like to ask Don. Is tile money there? If we don't
spend lt, can you explaln the budget process here and if we don't spend thls are
they goirlg to spend it someplace elae and are the~e needs that are going to hit
us in 19~27
Don Ashworth: As I stated, the dollars come from the motor vehlcle replacement
Fund as with the case of park acquisition and development. Those are dollars
collected for speclflc reason. They cannot be spent on something else. If the
dollars are no~ spent this year', tile dollars are still available or are
available for whatever the Counc11 would plck out as priorities for 1992. They
don't just go away at the end of the year.
Councilwonlan Dimler~ But we can purchase them in the Spring and that'd be part
of tile 1992 budget?
Mayor Chmlel: Oh yeah. Sure. We can accure interest off of the balance of the
dollars we don't spend.
Councilman ~lng: Z guess Z'd move approval of 1rem (g).
Mayor Chmiel: Approval of item (g) with tile vehicle exhaust system, the roller
packer trailer be acqulred and to hold on the fla11 mower until Sprlng of 1~92.
Zs that your motion?
Councilwoman Dlmler: Could we amend that to just approve 1rem i and hold off
until Spring on 2 and 3?
Councilman Wing: Rather than get into it, I will withdraw the whole thlng. My
motion was tile entire item (g) as pr-esented. As requested by City Manager.
Councilman Mason: Well, if these things are just going to come back up in the
Spring, I mean apparently there's a need for them.
Councilwoman Dimler: In the Sprlng.
Mayor' Chmiel: For one item.
Councilnlan Mason: The mower, yeah.
Councilwoman Oimler: And the packer too I think. We can get by for two months
on the roller trai. ler.
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1991
Councilman Mason: I suppose the question, then is the question do we spend the
money on this now or do we spend the money on it this Spring and if there
money's already there, isn't it kind of a coin toss. You know whether we do it
now or in the Spring. It's going to happen one way or another.
Councilwoman Dimier: We can get interest on the $oney.
Councilman Mason: No, that's true. Of course prices might almost be up 10~-15~
then too I suppose.
Councilwoman Oimler: Yeah, but it could be a wash..
Mayor Chmiel: Ursula, would you like to make that as a motion?
Councilwoman Oimler: Yes.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second? To just get the vehicle exhaust system taken
care of.
Councilwoman Dimler: Table 2 and 3 until Spring.
Councilman Workman: I'll second Ursula's motion. The idea being that simply
because the money's in the fund we have to spend it doesn't make loglc and I
think we can work out those details in the budget process.
Councilman Wing: That was my point in the first place I guess.
Resolution ~9&-92: Councilwoman Oimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to
approve acquisition of the Vehicle Exhaust System for the Public Works Garage
and to table acquisition of the Roll-Packer Trailer and Flail Hower until
Spring, 1992. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Councilman Mason: Is there any way we can see what these bids come in at in the
Sprlng? For the beck of lt.
Mayor Chmiel: Sure. See what it is now as opposed to what they will be in the
Spring. It will be interesting.
Councilwoman Oimler: Prices may be lower.
Councilman Workman: I'm a bit confused why Ruffridge-Johnson had two bids for
the trailer.
Mayor Chmiel: I noticed that as well Tom. I thought probably there were two
different types of trailers that he was offering on that bid and yet he wasn't
the low bidder. Is that what it might have been?
Charles Folch: I believe that's the case.
K. APPROVE CONTINUATION OF PARTICIPATION IN SOUTHWEST HETRO DRUG TASK FORCE.
Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor I just wasn't totally aware of where this money was
comlng from specifically. What budget. How we were funding the drug task force
City Council. Meet..il~.q .- September 23, 1991
force. That was questior, number one and if we did spend the $~0,000.00 Scott,
what would it be of? Is this just part of doing business? What if we didn't
spend the $10,000.00, what's the negative side of not spending this money?
Scott Hart: The negative side is we'd have that much less in expense of what
effective law erlforcement in that particular area that we've been committed to
since the project's inception in 19884 And the budget item that it's included
under Richard is the fees for service in the law enforcement budget section.
Councilmar, Wing: It's there now.
Scott Hart: Correct.
Mayor Chmiel: This is something that I myself have been really a pusher on and
I didn't mean that as being funny. But I totally ~gree with the things that
have been done. We've eliminated a lot of problems within our community by
having these people around and picking up people who have been selling drugs.
Council,,an Wing: Is this being budgeted for yearly?
Hayor Chmiel: Yes.
Councilman Wing: This is budgeted for.
Mayo]' Chmie].: Right. With this kind of funding that ue do plus tile other
cities, we're doing very well. Z might suggest possibly that at some time that
one each of the Council on given different busts have that opportunity to go
along. It would be an advantage for you just to see hou we do it... It's
really rather interesting, Plus the fact that if we just save one child, for
$10,000.00 to rehabilitate is well worth it.
Councilman Wing: Unless there's other discussion I would move (k).
Councilman Workman: Second.
Councilman ming moved, Councilman ~orkman seconded to approve continuation of
participation in the Southwest Hetro Brug Task Force for 1992. All voted in
favor and the motion carried unanimously.
APPROVE 1992 LAW ENFORCEMENT CONTRACT.
Councilman Wing: Law Enforcement Contract. We're approving a contract I
believe for 28 hours at this point.
Mayor Chmiel: That's correct.
Councilman Wing: And'I was a little surprised to not really have any discussion
or input or kind of be in tile loop here at all. With 1ny background ui~ll the
Public Safety Department for ~0 years, I think the 28 hours is bare bones. I
think Scott's getting the job done. I think he's doing it effectively but I
think it basically covers emergency responses, patrol, minimal patrol. And the
28 hours, in my opinion, is short unless in the 1992 budget we, as we've done in
the past, we include some additional dollars to tackle a specific and the one I
City Council Meeting - September
brought up that I feel somewhat strongly about is traffic. 3ust about every
Council meeting we've had somebody here commenting on our lack of police patrol
or lack of police department and traffic complaints from one end of the city to
the other. I think there's some inherent weaknesses in the contract that we're
all familiar with. It's not a criticism of it. It's just inherent in the
contract system and one is the ability to, on a limited number of hours, pull
cars out for very, very specific duties and one of these I believe needs done is
traffic. So I'm opposed to this 28 hours unless there's some thought or
consideration, whether it passes or not, at least consideration given to some
additional funding to buy a car specifically to tackle the traffic issue in the
city. I don't think this 28 hours will adequately address our growth in traffic
and the number of traffic complaints.
Mayor Chmiel: Maybe I can bring something up on that. You're probably right
with the speed problems that are within the community because I've heard a
of them. A lot of cltizens call me in regard to that and specifically we have
done some of those checks. We will in the very hopefully near future have that
radar digltal equipment on board which u111 start givlng reminders to people as
to the speeds they are traveling utthin the city. That uill be, a check will be
comlng from outside for thls and hopefully, maybe ulth that we can also have our
maybe CSO's utilizing this on their vehicles inbetueen times that they're doing
thlngs. Other thlngs and what they're supposed to be doing and may have this
awareness within the community in all locations, not just one. Because I think
that's what has to be done. I'm not a great one for lssuing tickets. In fact
just today I had someone tap me on the shoulder and he was a waiter in a
restaurant and he sald, I want you to know I just got a tlcket in your fair
city. I said, were you going a tad fast and he says, well just a little bit. I
reached over for my radio and he sald I'm going dounh111 on Kerber Blvd.. He
says I was going 40 mph he says there and then all of a sudden there was a
policeman golng the other direction and I obtaln the speeds of 50 mph. He says
of course I got a ticket.
Don Ashworth: Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
Don Ashuorth: If I may. The contract is written in such a fashion as to
provide on a daily basis the 28 hours. The contract also allows for the
purchase of additional hours. I am aware of Councilman Wing's request for the
additional patrol but I saw that as falling into the special patrol services
that can be purchased from the Sheriff's Department on an hourly basis. So that
concern has not been reflected in the fact that it really is being addressed in
this contract. It will be up to the Council as we go through the 1992 budget
process to determine whether or not we're going to be able to purchase an
additional $5,000.00 worth of special hourly services or $10,000.00 or $2,000.00
or none.
Mayor Chmiel: Right, and I was eventually going to get to that. I was trying
to get a lead in to what I was going to say. But it can be done, that's right.
Any other discussions.
Councilman Wing: Thank you very much. I move approval.
City Council Meeting -. September 23, 1991
Councilman Mason: Second.
Councilman Wing: With the knowledge that I'm going to be coming back.
Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the 1992 Law
Enforcement Contract. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None
AWARD OF BIDS: TRUNK HIGHWAY ~ FRO_~NTAGE ROAD IMPROVEMENTS AT LONE CEDAR LANE,
PROJECT 90-9.
Charles Folch: On September l?th bids were received and opened for this
project. The City received 5 bids with the low bid being submitted by S.M.
Hentges & Sons of Shakopee, Minnesota at $69,442.50. Thls bld ls approximately
10~ Lower tha, the engineer's estimate. It is therefore recommended that
Project 90-9 be awarded to S.M. Hentges & Sons ina contract amount of
$69 , 442 ..50 contingent upon receiving concurrence from the State of Minnesota on
t he bld.
Mayor Chmiel: We've used these people in the past haven't we?
Charles Folch: That's correct.
Mayor Chmiel: They do have a track record with us?
Charles Folch: That's correct. I believe they worked on the Lake Lucy Road
project.
Mayor Chmiel: And everything was done to our satisfac:tion on that?
Charles Folch: That's correct.
Mayor Chmiel: Any discussion? If hearing none, can I have a motion?
Councilwoman Oimler: I move approval of the award of bids for TH 5 frontage
road improvement at Lone Cedar Lane, Project 90-9.
Councilman Workman: Second.
Councilwoman Dimler: Be awarded to Hentges & Sons in the amount of $69,442.50.
Resolution ~91-93: Councilwoman Oimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded that
Project 90-9 be awarded to S.H. Hentges & Sons Jn a contract amount of
$~9,442.50 contingent upon receiving concurrence from the State of Minnesota on
the bid. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
REZONING OF PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY ZONED A2, AGRICULTURAL ESTATE DISTRICT TO
RR, RURAL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT,_F__!RST READINGs.
Paul Krauss: Tl~i.s item was originally requested by the Planning Commission some
2 to 3 years ago. It stemmed from thelr belief that many of the newer
subdivisions in the clty's rural area are zoned A2 agricultural rlght now rather
10
city council Meeting - September 23, 1991
than rural residential. This is particularly true south of TH 5. Many of these
subdivisions were created around 1986-87 prior to a change in city ord£nances
that lowered gross densities to 1 unit per 10 acres. Most of these subdivisions
are suburban rather than rural in nature and the Planning Commission believed
that the rural residential designation is better able to protect these
neighborhoods and the property values that the residence in them have.
Permitted uses in both the A2 and rural residential districts are identical.
Accessory agricultural buildings are allowed ~n the A2 but not in the rural
residential. Rural residential does allow horse stables but only under
conditional use permits which of course would require a public hearing and
Council approval. I think there may be a little bit of misunderstanding about
that. I know horses are a sensitive item here and that the keeping of horses £s
allowed equally in both districts. It's the creation of a stable for a horse in
the RE district that does require addit£onal approval. The major d~fference in
allowable uses is that the A2 allows as interim uses bed and breakfast
establishments, mob&le homes, gravel mining, wholesale nurser£es, electrical
substations, golf driving ranges. The rural residential does not. Staff
or&g£nally received many cal~s in favor of this proposal, and this goes back
several months ago, from some of the larger subdivisions. However a lot of
concern was raised at the Planning Commission after the Plann£ng Comm&ssion
elected to add the West 96th Street neighborhood to this request. That was not
in the original staff recommendation. The West 96th Street neighborhood £s an
older, more established area that is more rural in character than for example
Timberuood or Lake Riley. The £ndiv~duals who spoke objected to restrictions on
their use of their homesteads that they believe are contained within the rural
residential district. Staff has also rece£ved s~milar concerns regarding the
Country Hills area along Lyman. They're similar in many respects the way that
neighborhood is set out to the West 9~th Street area. We're carrying forward
the Planning Commission's recommendation to approve the rezoning request.
However, after reviewing the issues we f~nd that the effect of the rezoning is
not really as dramatic as is being portrayed but we also don't believe the
benefit here outweighs overruling the concerns of the neighbors and we're not
really going to be asking you to do that although we are carrying forward the
Planning Commission request. While we are recommending approval, ue note that
both West %th Street and Country Hills could probably be deleted without
serious impact on the intent of the Planning Comm£ssion's recommendat£on as we
understood it which really pertained to the more suburban of those subdivisions.
Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Paul. Is there anyone wishing to address this specific.
item? As to what Paul has indicated that we possibly delete Country Hills and
96th Street.
Councilman Workman: Can I say something quickly?
Mayor Chmiel: Sure.
Councilman Workman: Mr. Mayor I know and I'm not going to take away anybody's
thunder in the audience. I know it was a very well orchestrated letter writing
campalgn and I thlnk the polnt has been really made and we've gone through an
awful lot of these Minutes. In talking to you Don and the rest of some of the
members of the City Counc11, it appears as though, ulth Paul's recommendation,
11
City Coun~i]. Meeting - September 23, 1991
that in fact we can keep most everybody happy in this situation. I don't know
if we have a short,;ut for those folks tonlght or not.
Mayor Chnllel: Yeah. I guess the other question I might have Paul, before I
have the residents c.'ome up. The ones that are listed here, have they
specifically come in and asked that thls be adopted for thelr speclfic areas?
Paul Kraus.~-' No Mayo)'. This originated with a PlannJ. ng Commission request to
rezone the property so lt's not locally based. Zt's coming from the Commission.
Mayor Chmiel: Z did get one other call regarding Riley Lake Meadows of a
concern wlth that as well. That being agricultural presently. That was brought
up by Dick Vogel who called me who has developed those specific properties. He
in his covenant has coverages of those concerns that's golng to protect them
from but hls concern still is the horses and having horses within that speciflc
area.
Paul. Krauss: Mr. Mayor, Z spoke to Mr. Vogel about that several weeks ago and Z
do understand that there's some covenants involved on that subdivision.
However, Z polnt out that covenants are prlvate contractual arrangements. We
don't know about them unless we're told and we don't enforce them so to the
extent that there's a beneflt to be gleened by the RR district, we're not
certain whether or not that same benefit applies with the covenants.
COUrlCi1woman Dimler: Before we get started too I do have Great Plalns Golf
E~tates wa~ later omitted by the Planning Commission. Are you putting it back
in here?
Paul Krauss: No. No, Councilwoman Dimler if you look on, I think it's page 5.
The .tO subdivisions that are remaining there.
Councilwoman Dimler: Oh, that's the list you've got. Okay, I'm looking at the
front.
Paul Krauss: Great Plains Estates subdivision was deleted not because of the
type of development that was in there but more due to the fact that it really
lsn't platted yet and I believe as soon as it is platted, there's golng to be a
desire to have it rezoned.
Councilwoman Dlmler: Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: At this time if anyone would like ~o step forward. It looks like
some of the concerns here you may be able to save yourself some words if you
don't wish to get up. It looks like we're looking at Country Hills and West
96th Street as a removal from this.
Councilwoman Dimler: Also the Jeurissen Addition?
Paul Krauss: That's the same, yes. That's also West 96th.
Councilman Wing: Can I clarify that? Would would be excepted? West 96th.
12
City Council Meeting - September 22, 1991
Mayor Chmiel: West 96th, Jeurissen Addition, Country Hills and the only one
that's in question is Riley Lake Headows.
Councilwoman Dimler: But before we do that, could I ask if the main concern is
about the horses and the barns, if we made in the RR, if we made horses and
barns to be a permitted use. That means they wouldn't have to come in for a
conditional use permit, then would that alleviate all the problems and we could
go ahead and include them and protect them from other things?
Paul Krauss: Councilwoman Dimler, I'm not certain that that alleviates ail the
problems but it probably addresses a lot of the problems we've heard voiced.
The primary concern that we've heard, and I don't want to put words in the
mouths of the folks slttlng here but seems to be related to the horses and
although the RR does allow you to keep horses, what we hear is you can't really
have a horse without a barn.
Mayor Chmiel: And the barn is the issue of not being able to construct that in
a rural residential without a conditional use permit.
Councilwoman Dtmler: Well, if we made it a permitted use then they wouldn't
need a conditional use permit.
Mayor Chmiel: But yet it falls under two separate categories as agricultural as
well a rural residential. Each have a separate classification contained within
and if you move one to the other and you're alleviating that and still I don't
see the basic need unless Paul.
Paul Krauss: Agaln, you can go either way on that. Either eliminating those
areas but I think Councilwoman 0imler's suggestion is reasonable tn terms of the
ordinance. You could add as a permitted accessory use horse barns and that way
nobody has to ask the City Planning Oepartment or the Planning Commission or
Counc11 for approval to bulld one. They just need a bullding permlt.
Councilwoman Oimler: Plus they would have to go through a public process where
a nelghbor could object. It'd be klnd of 11ke grandfatherlng them tn.
Paul Krauss: Right.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, any other discussion?
Councilwoman Oimler: That's a possibility.
Mayor Chmiel: You don't need building permits for ag buildings.
Paul Krauss: If I could, permitted accessory uses in the A2 district right now
lnclude prlvate stables. You could add that as a permitted accessory use in the
rural residential.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. Okay, with that I'll still throw it open then because it
seems like it's getting a little muddled here. Please come forward and state
your name and address.
13
City Council. Me,?ting -- September 22, 1991
Wes Dunsmore: Wes Dunsmore, West 96th Street. First thing, I don't know if
it's clear or nol. The 3eurissen hddition is the two houses on the end of the
street. .It's not ~,ay off so everybody understands that. At the Planning
Commission meeting Z submitted a petition from the neighbors down there that are
against changing this. I didn't have everybody's name on it. I didn't get
everybody at the time but Z've got them all here tonight and that four rows is
our neighborhood down there.
Mayor Chmiel: I've also received and as uell as the Council received letters
from everyone.
Wes DLtnsmore: I guess, I know what the City's after and you have to have rules
al~d regulations in Ilew neighborhoods, 1' understand float. But this neighborhood
is 30 years old. Zt's already developed. We're not going to be able to put
things in that they're trying to restrict. It's fully de~eloped so I don't know
~hy we need these restrictions on here. They're developing to the east of us
and to the west of us. They'¢e putti~lg in houses worth 3 times as much as ours.
We're not hampering anybody. People are building and they're moving in so they
like our neighborhood as it is. I see ~]o need. I don't know why we were put on
there. Originally Z think there was 9 neighborhoods on there and somebody from
the Planning Commission put our street on. We were even a~are of it for the
first meeting but I guess I don't know why they want to put them on now. Our
biggest concern is not just horses. I mearm that's fine al~d there are some of us
with horses there and we like it. We've got barns and we'd be grandfathered in
whether you change this or not. The big concern is down the road if I sell my
place, what good is 2 1/2 acres with a nice 40 x 63 polebarn if the guy who buys
it from me cannel have horses. I don't think he's goillg to want to mow 2 acres
of grass. ADd some of these people have that land. They've got 4 or 5 acres.
A lot of it's swampland and you can't build who don't have horses but they're
looking at the resale of that down the road. 10 years from now, 5 years from
now the next guy comes in and he's going to want a little open land. Maybe for
wlldllfe or whatever and they're puttlng a restriction on us and to me it's
almost a hardship. The people down the road, that may be somebody's retirement
money. They have bought out here and I hear people say well, we can't stop
progress. Wel]. we~'f'e not. They're bullding all around us yet. All we're
saylng is if you want to put restrictions on thls neighborhood to stop the
development, that should have been done 30 years ago when it started new. Now
you're shutting the barn door after the horse ls already out. That doesn't make
a lot of sense to me. I guess I just want to express everybody's view on that
here as far as I'm concerned and that's why all these people are here. We've
got a r, lce neighborhood. No complaints on anything or anybody. I don't know
why we'd want to change it so we're asking you [o delete the West 96th and the
Jeurlssen Addition. Thank you.
Councilwoman Oimler: Can I ask you a question. Would the permitted accessory
use of horse and barns and so forth, anything related to horses, would that
address your concerns and then st111, the reason I'm looklng at it ls because
certainly it's a developed neighborhood. Yes, I agree with that. Also, it is a
known fact that not all of you w111 be 11vlng there forever and as the, you move
out and new people come in, they may feel differently about the electrical
substatlorl and that type of thlng.
14
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1991 .
Wes Dunsmore: They're talking commercial, if I read that right in there.
commercial electrical substation. They're talking cemeteries. Wholesale
things. Those can never go in there.
Councilwoman Oimler: But I mean the A2 allows certain things to be put up that
are not allowed in the RR. They may not want that so if the only issue is
horses, I'd like to know that because then what I'm proposing to do would take
care of that.
Wes Dunsmore: It's a big issue but I can't speak for some of the people on
there who do not have horses rtght now. Z can't see some of those mineral
extractions, cemeteries. Rlght now the way it stands as agricultural, according
to you guys, I could put a cemetery in my place. I don't think anybody up here
would let me do that rlght now.
Councilwoman Oimler: I don't know that we could stop you.
Wes Dunsmore: I think you'd find a way of stopping that.
Roger Knutson: It's listed as a conditional use?
Councilwoman Dimler: No.
Roger Knutson: Permitted use?
Counciluoman Dimler: Permitted use. We could stop them.
Roger Knutson: No.
Wes Dunsmore: Well I think my neighbors probably there would be enough smoke
lald around there that I don't think it would go through people.
Mayor Chmiel: They may bury someone else.
Wes Ounsmore: Yeah, exactly.
Councilman Wing: Along that same line of questioning, being you're klnd of
representing West g6th Street. What if your neighbor under the agricultural
zoning goes ahead and really expands his horse operation. Puts up a bullding
that you genuinely don't like that's maybe offensive to you visually and maybe
ls going to devalue your property just by lt's presence and numbers of horses
and so on. This RR might give you an opportunity to say boy, I don't like that.
Maybe we shouldn't allow that. Maybe that ls getting excessive.
Wes Ounsmore: I don't think so. I had to come up here. I had to get a permit
and Z had to have inspections, meet setbacks and everything for my polebarn.
Some are restricted so it had to meet Code already.
Councilman Wing: Would that be the case Paul? There are still those controls
on uhat could go in?
Paul Krauss: No. I mean yes there was a building permit that's required and
for the building permit you make sure that the building's structurally sound and
15
City Council Heeting -- SeptL;mbor 2:?, 1991
doesn't fall down and meets the setbacks. But it doesn't get at the issue of
should there be all agricultural operation wi~l'l 40 horses or whatever the number
is. That's not something the building inspectors look at.
Wes Dunsmore: But there is city restrictions right now. Only x number of
hor~.:es per acre or whatever so nobody can move in on that small amount with
20-30 head of horses. ~nd if they did, I could care less, I like them. Thank
you.
Councilman Hason: ][ think it's pretty clear.
Hayer Chm£el: Haybe there are ~till ~ome more that want to come forward. I
think that probably. Pardon me.
Resident: Z say the'[-e'~ more of us that will get up there and talk if you're
pushing fo~ it to go but if you're going with us, we'll get it over with.
Councilman Workman: I'm sorry Paul, T don't see where it says that a cemetery
is a permitted use ir, the ~2.
Paul Krauss: ]Et's a ~onditional use.
Councilman Workman: ]E don't see that either.
Paul Krauss: Zt's on page 1205. It's use number 4.
Councilman Workman: Oh, okay. It kind of got blended in there. A commercial
communication transmission tower would need setbacks.
Paul Krauss: Ye.~ it does but we did have one put up last year.
Councilman Workman: Didn't that have necessary setbacks pertaining to height?
Paul Krauss: Yes.
Councilman Workman: ~nd that was a bigger lot, Would any of these lots sustain
those setbacks?
Paul Krauss: It could. ~ mean the setback for a commercial communications
tower is the height, of the tower.
Councilman Workman: From what?
Paul Kr~uss: From the property line.
Councilman Workman: But these are all, at least West 96th Street, these are all
very thin.
Paul Krauss: Yeah, I don't know the exact, whether one would fit there but the
tower that was approved was 140 feet high so you would need a lot that's 280
feet across to locate that.
Resident: Our lots are 150 feet wide. somebody can buy two of them.
16
City Council Meeting - September
Councilman Mason: That's kind of the issue there. They're ail developed.
Resident: We've all bought a large lot. Everybody likes to have a hobby or
something...lf someone wants to do something, I kind of agree with that. That's
why we bought it because everybody likes to have the room and stuff...You know
what's golng on. We all don't have horses but I would as soon it be left the
way it is now.
Councilman Workman: Your's is a rare neighborhood I would say then because we
normally don't find that kind of cooperation. It's good to see.
Matt Dill: My name is Matt Dill. I live at 9610 Meadow Lark in Riley Lake
Meadows. We have horses and we would like to be able to keep to have that
priviledge and that is most of the problem I would have with this rezoning. I
see any restriction, you're going to get a benefit and a restriction placed on
you and like Dick, it sounds like he talked to you. You know we have covenants.
I'm not worried about a communications tower in my neighborhood. I can't put a
flagpole over 10 feet in my yard according to the covenants. An out building is
limited to 850 square feet and it has to match the house so I'm not really
worried about any of those'kinds of things so ! guess I wouldn't want to have a
restriction because I don't think I'd be getting a benefit on the balance. And
I'd also like to say the neighborhood is only a few years old. We were the
first ones to move in less than 3 years ago and we didn't hear any of this
coming then so I think it's kind of a short time. It's not like the city has
moved into it in that length of time. That's everything I have to say. Thank
you for your time.
Mayor Chmiel: Appreciate it. Anyone else? If not, yes sir.
Mel Tensin: My name is Mel Tensin on West 96th Street. I like the
opportunity, I've met some neighbors I haven't seen before. We're the newest
member of the neighborhood. We moved tn in February. We have been in Minnesota
for two years. It took us over a year and a half to find a place we wanted to
purchase. West 96th Street, the reason is exactly the way it is. At present we
bought the property and I have an extremely large polebarn to the neighbor to
the west of me and if there was any restriction that I wouldn't be able to put
up a bullding of the same or close to lt, I'd be a very unhappy camper. Seeing
this one right next to me and me being restricted so I don't 11ke the
grandfathering ln. I'd 11ke this whole motion just to be denied for the West
96th Street. We need your help in a lot of things and we appreciate it. This
just happens to be one we don't need.
Mayor Chmiel: If there are no further, oh one more.
Dick Vogel: I'm Dick Vogel and as Matt Dill said, this is a fairly new
development and in the covenants horses were permitted but not for commercial
use. Not a commercial stable and some of the lots have been sold. They all got
a covenants when they purchased the lot and maybe someone would want to have
horses there that hasn't bullt yet. I'm just saylng I thlnk 2 1/2 acres should
permit horses. They knew it when they bought the lot I guess that horses could
go in there and that's all I wanted to say.
17
City Council. Meet.Lng -. September 23, 1991
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. With that I'd like to make a motion. That City
Council approve tho rezoning 91.-9 roy property zoned A2, Agricultural Estate to
Rural Residential District for the foil. owing subdivisions:
1. Timberwood Estates
2. Sun Ridge Addition
3. Pioneer Hllls
4. Lake Rlley Woods North
5. Oeerbrook
6. Hesse Farms
and that's it.
Councilwoman Dimler: Second.
M,'~yoY Chmiel: There's a motion on tile floor with a second. Discussion.
CoLtr, cilwoman Dimler: Carl we make this the first and second reading?
Hayor Chmiel: I would just as soon leave it as a first reading. There may be
some other.
Councilman Workman: Can I ask a question? And I'll just take one neighborhood
out of here randomly. Timberwood. Wily aren't the Timberwood people here? Why
dorm't they have a problem wlth this? Because there's no barns there. Z know
that some of those; lots in the covenants are allowed horses.
Paul Krauss: First of all if we can clarify this. Horses are allowed in either
district. I mean there's no question of that. You're a rural residential lot.
You can go put up your fence and have your horses. The only difference ls in a
rural residential lot, if you want to build a stable for your horses, that's got
to get approval and we have to tell. the neighbors about it. That's the only
difference. Horses are allowed. ~s f.o why Timberwood didn't object, I don't
know. I mean we notifled everybody in every subdivision that was 11fred in your
report. The West 9&th Street neighborhood wasn't initially notified because
they weren't initially in there. When the Planning Commission dld want that
neighborhood included, we asked them to hold off taking action. Then we
notifled everybody on 96th Street. $o we did get a number of calls and agaln
you don't keep tracks of calls you get but I know Kate got some and I got some
of people who were saylng, after they wanted it explained to them, but they said
that sounds flne. So I can't represent the cross section of oplnion in
Tlmberwood because I don't honestly know but I've got to belleve at thls polnt
it's not for lack of knowledge. They certainly know about it.
Mayor Chmiel: And 'that's why I'd just as soon keep this with the first reading.
Resident: Could I ask just one thing?
Hayor Chmiel: Sure.
Resident: I thought Paul said in our rural residential we could have a horse.
When you came in for a permit for a building is where tile problem is. Is that
correct Paul?
18
City Council Meeting - September
Paul Krauss: That's correct.
Resident: Well with a horse in Minnesota you do need a shelter for them.
I mean I thlnk they go together. The wlnter for sure and I don't know what...so
I don't think you should keep those. If you're going to have horses, you've got
to have a shelter.
Hayor Chmiel moved. Councilwoman D/mler seconded to approve the f/rst read/ng of
Rezon/ng ~91-9 for property zoned A2. Agr/cultural Estate to Rural Res/dent/al
D/str/ct for the follow/rig subd/v/s/ons=
1. Timberwood Estates
2. Sun Ridge Addltion
3. Ploneer Hills
4. Lake Riley Woods North
5. Deerbrook
&. Hesse Farms
voted In favor and the mot/on cart/ed unan/mously.
Mayor Chmiel: This will be the first reading. We will have another reading on
what specific date? Two weeks from today. What's the date on that Paul?
Paul Krauss: The 14th.
Mayor Chmlel: The 14th of October.
Resident: Is 96th Street eliminated from this now?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes. We eliminated Country Hills. We eliminated Riley Lake
Meadows. We eliminated West 96th Street area and Jeurissen Addition.
Residents: Thank you.
APPROVE OFF-SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE, SEVEN FORTY-ONE CRQSSING, p~ss BY
LIQUORS II. DOUGLAS PASS AND ROD PANKQNEN.
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, it's a little unusual for the Planning Department to
become involved in liquor license requests. Typically it's handled as an
administrative 1rem with Public Safety dolng the pollce checks. Our involvement
in this is a little bit of a backdoor type of thing. Our ordinance is a little
fuzzy on this type of lssue. Liquor stores are specifically allowed in the CBD
district and the BH district. They're not specifically allowed in the
neighborhood buslness district uhlch the Seven Forty-One center is. Normally
when an item isn't specifically listed in one district but it is in another, you
assume it vas intention and lt's not allowed. However, in this case the
neighborhood business district has an item called neighborhood retail business.
It doesn't say what it ls but it says that that's allowed and when I flrst heard
of this, I felt that a small square footage Liquor store probably fit that
definition. Zn discussions with the City Attorney we felt that we had several
options in clarifying this. The first .being put through an amendment to
actually add it as a permitted use in the neighborhood buslness district.
That's falrly lengthy and I'm not sure you want to change the ordinance for a
19
City Council lteeting -- Septembel' 22, 199Z
single use. Another possibility was take it before the Board of Adjustments and
have them clarify the issue. That's one of their purposes, The third option
[hat was suggested by the City Attorney, which I supported was that the City
Council has a good bit of latitude on whether or not you want to approve a
liquor license. I wanted to make you aware of this situation and if you choose
~o approve this, you would have made the determination at the same time or the
interpretation at this time that a small scale liquor store is allowed as a
r~eighborhood business. ~ would also point out too that although there was a
conditional use permit several year's ago with SuperAmerica and theie 3.2 liquor
license was denied on that. I believe it was denied in large part, from the
record anyway, J.n that there was concern whether a convenience store could
adquately m,'~n,'.tge the sale of liquor and the problems that would ensue if they
couldn't. Since that time, and again this is a professionally managed store
that passed ~.hrough the Police checks and everything else. Since that time
we've approved a full liquor license for that PS's restaurant that ultimately
was not built but that was certainly I think that was 1Z,O00 square feet. It
was quite a large establishment. There's also been an approval for the Chinese
Restaurant that's in there and they've been operating there for quite a while
without any problems. So to make a long story short, we didn't see any real
problem with it and we would support your interpreting the ordinance to allow
this size liquor store as a neighborhood business. With that ~ guess I'd pass
it back to Don to talk about the liquor license itself because that's not
something we're involved in.
Don Ashworth' Staff did review the applicant and under ordinance they, staff is
recommending approval of the license.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there something you'd like to say?
Oottg Pass: My name is Doug Pass, I'm one of the owners of, we own Pass By
Lj. quor in Chaska which is just up the road. Our credentials, you know they had
background checks oil tile pollce in Chaska. I'm married. I have a wife and two
kids. I quit my regular job for t hls job. We take it very seriously. We work
with the police in Chaska, We plan on doing the same with the pollce in
Chanhassen. I can't have the store close¢l because I'm selllng to minors,
because I'm doing things under tile table, because I'm doing things I can't do
because it is my 1lying. I worked 15.1/2 years at my old job. I'm not a person
that just decides Z want to open a 11quor s~.ore today and I'll be gone tomorrow.
That's not my intention here. Ny partner has 11red in thls area for the past 3
years. He's the reason that we are out here. Because of the growth of the
area. He's 11red in it a~d seen it and lt's just a buslness opportunity for us.
Me did our homework in the Chaska sr. ore and now we feel we did our homework in
the Chanhassen store. Thls lsa growlng community. The projections for the
years to come as far as the number of people that would support a small
business, the growth looks phenomenal and we would just llke to jump on that I
guess. We don't want to be millionaires. We don't want to be greedy but
there's a chance for me to work for myself instead of working for the guy I did
downtown for 15 years getting by. That's why we want to do it so if you have
any questions for' me, I'd be happy to answer them for you.
Mayor Chmiel: Good. Thank you.
Doug Pass: Thank you.
20
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1991
Mayor Chmlel: Any discussion? Let's start on this side. Ursula.
Councilwoman Oimler: Oh, thank you. Isn't that wonderful. I guess that after
readlng through thls, the flrst two approaches dldn't make much sense to me so I
would agree with the third approach and that is that the Council interpret as
was recommended by staff. Thls 11beta1 interpretation of the ordinance.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Richard.
Councilman Wlng: Is that all?
Councilwoman 0imler: That's it.
Councilman Wing: I agree with Ursula in the interpretation. I just remember
this shopping center was hotly contested from the beginning from the
neighborhood and I think the surrounding neighborhood is relatively conservative
neighborhood and they're concerned about what is in there and the businesses and
I'm not convinced that thls is an appropriate use for the shopping center nor in
the best interest of the shopping center or the neighborhood and my concern
rests wlth the fact that there's a Shorewood Llquor store immediately across the
street. I see a price war occurring. I see ad campaigns. I see that suddenly
for these two 11quor stores to survive, start to domlnate that corner. So I
guess I would tend to interpret that this maybe is not what we want on that
corner. Not the type of business we want on that corner. I don't think we need
to have two of them in close proximity and I'm interested in what the local
neighbors would say that would be the prlmary users of this corner. If they
suppport it or if in fact were upset about it. I'm not so sure I wouldn't like
to see thls tabled until a nelghbor could go out to the immediate neighborhood
advising them of this intended useage and possibly some neighborhood iaput.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Tom.
Councilman Workman: Their request was printed in the paper and those people
being quite astute out there I'm sure were aware of it. I guess I'm not going
to concern myself with a 11quor store that's in Shorewood. I'm not exactly sure
Doug where is Pass By Liquors in Chaska?
Doug Pass: It's called Jonathan Mall. It's at TH 41 and Pioneer Trail.
Councilman Workman: I still separate that from Chaska so sorry about that.
I guess the center, maybe Doug got a good deal on it. The center hasn't been
hopping and popping real well. I don't know that we need to worry about that
either. It's a plece of retail space that has moved along slowly. They've
obviously got a traffic generator here and Doug and Rod, the idea of the center
is to bring in trafflc so that other businesses founder. Or not flounder but
rather prosper. The old center that I used to be in had the MGM and there's an
awful lot of trafflc there not that, I don't know. Maybe there was trafflc for
me there. Maybe there wasn't. It probably wasn't bad but that's the idea and
the concept behlnd, we're trylng to run that klnd of a business and 11quor
stores are seen as favorable because they do generate an awful lot of traffic.
I guess my feellng being that if there's no problems from publlc safety in
generating this kind of a thing, I don't know how this would affect the
neighborhood. I guess just knowl~g, if somebody has a problem perhaps with the
City Council. Meeting - Sep~r~.mber 23, 1991
-sale of alcohol i, that neighborhood, I'm not sure how that can affect, how that
really wilt aCfect their.
Councilwoman Dimler: They already have the one in Shorewood apparently.
Hayor Chmiel: Let Tom finish.
Councilman Workman: If there's a price war, then I'm sure Hike Mason will be up
~hef'e. So I'm looking at it as another business and hopefully a viable business
that the neighbors up there will frequent when they buy their bottle wine for
Christmas.
COLtnCJ].man Mason: I don't think I'd better say anything after that. One
wonders about more liquor stores. We've had some problems with under aged sales
in the past in Chan and .I see that as the biggest problem. You certainly ta.l_k
like you'lJ, do your best to avoid that from happen£ng and Z tl~ink Z share some
of Councilman Wing's concerns. Z think Z also hear what Tom says about getting
more business in the area and helping that center out. I guess I would agree
with Councilwoman Dimler.
Councilwoman Dimler: I just have a question to Paul then. Is it required that
we send out notices to tile neighbors as Richard was me~tioning for' a particular
type of a use. Z dldn't thlnk it was.
Paul Krauss: No Co~.tncilwoman Oimler. There's no planning request here.
There's r,o conditional use permJ, t or anything else which there was on the P3's.
We did have a lot of comment on tl~at and that was favorable but no, there is no
requirement to do that and under our liquor licensing regulations, there is no
requirement for that either. So it didn't trip anything on my side. It didn't
trip anything o, the other side. One neighbor is aware of Jr, in fact called me
today Lo raise some concerns with it. I'm ilot sure whether she read it through
the paper or not but there was one of the people that was active I believe back
when. But again no. No no[ice.
Councilwoman Dimler: I guess my concern is I'm asking what authority does the
city have to stop a business if we don't have a really good reason? Legitimate
reason.
Mayor Chmiel: Under our zoning, what are liquor stores permitted in?
Paul Krauss: The ced and tile eH.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. But in this specific area, this is considered to be, it's
not normally considered to be a permitted use within this area and if it doesn't
spell it out, you run into a bit of a problem, How can we correct that?
Paul Krauss: I suppose you can be, ask for a more explicit definition of what
neighborhood retail really is. Specifically as to liquor stores, it's kind of
tough to define something as broad as retail. They keep inventillg new things to
s~:ll in stores and it's tough to write an ordinance that limits you from doing
wh,.~tevor is new. Otherwise you wonldn't have any video stores. But you could
for example ask us to come back with something that specifically allows
22
City Council Heetlng - September 22, lggl
neighborhood scale liquor in that district which might be under 3,000 square
feet or 4,000 square feet. Whatever the appropriate number is.
Hayor Chmiel: Yeah. I would rather be a little more consistent than to just
sort of shoot from the hip as we're doing now in making it a permitted use. I
thlnk I'd like to see something come back from staff with thls and sort of
clarify those kinds of things because if situations come up again, at least they
can be addressed. Yes Don.
Don Ashworth: We had some of these same questions hypothetic wlth the strip
over by the Chan Estates area. That again is neighborhood business. It does
become a question, even wlth the Oominoes. I mean are they clty wide or are
they serving that neighborhood? I think that the def£nition that we came up
with and potentially should have in our ordinance firmed up as you're statlng
was if the store is say a smaller store. 2,000-3,000 square feet, it's in all
likelihood servlng that neighborhood. Whereas you get lnto a typlcal MGM,
10,000-15,000, even 20,000 square feet, you're in a11 l£kel£hood serving a much
larger. Paul ls correct in that the licensing procedure, I've seen in some
communities where they do notify a neighborhood for on-sale l£quor. I've not
seen any hearlng requirements associated wlth an off-sale. And again in this
particular neighborhood we did see two on-sale licenses that have been issued
but agaln I should note to the Counc11 that the neighborhood was not notlfled
and if you do end up tabling, you may w£sh to take and see staff make that
notification.
Alex Wagner: I'm Alex Wagner. I live in Wlllow View Cove. I've not direct
interest in this particular outlet but I do find it quite surprising to hear
that there's no requirement for notice for a liquor outlet to the residents in
the community. I would strongly urge the Council to consider making any type of
alcohol beverage outlet a conditional use such that there's a clear opportunity
for public comment. In the light of the extent to which problems that we have
are associated wlth alcohol as well as other drugs, we shouldn't treat it
lightly. I would like to see it be a conditional use 1rem that requires some
publlc lnput before a new 11quor license ls lssued in any case. In any
particular case. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. I think wlth that speclfic shopping center we've gone
through an awful Lot of discussions with them in making sure that what was
addressed withln their speclflc area, wlth what was going in was discussed
rather openly. Hopefully by this specific position that we may take this
evening, and at least I'm looklng at tabling thls because I want to be
consistent with what we're doing within the city, I would much rather delay th£s
for 2 weeks and come back wlth a conclusion. But to be restrictive enough to go
through the process of having a conditional use for an establishment as such and
I agree wlth the position you're saying. It's a drug per se but there are also
some people that can eliminate that as being a drug by just havlng a drink or a
glass of wlne and so on. So wlth that I see a gentleman here who'd like to say
something. Just please state your name and address.
Clem Springer: My name is Clem Springer. I'm the manager for Seven Forty-One.
I didn't come here with this particular in mind but I thought this was going to
go throughout wlthout any concerns tonight. I'd 11ke to say that we feel that
the liquor store in the center would be a good addition to the center to help
23
City COLtl]Oi]. Meeting -- Septembei' 23, 1993,
generate the mix that we need in that center to have a retail mix and a reason
for coming ther~.~. T. think it's very complimen~.a'ry ~.o the video sf. or~.,, the pizza
place. I think those kinds of businesses are very much looking forward to thls
business opening there. As you've b~;en aware, that center has had it's tough
times. We've been, thls last 6 months we've had an lncrease in lnterest in
there a~d we feel that the liquor store will help us wlth ti'me leasing of the
rest of the spaces in there. And for those reasons I'd like you to give it
favorable consideration. I want to also point out that Z manage a center up in
a north surburban community and we were going to put a 11quor store of 2,500
square feet in theft center and tile City Council said they dldn't want anything
less than 4,000 because it dldn't generate enough in taxes so I thlnk you can
get two perspectives on that kind of a situation. Personally as a former City
Planner and so forth, I certainly thlnk that you're treadlng on some treacherous
waters to start getting in to making decisions on zoning based upon the size of
a business and dictating to a buslness what size they ought to be in order to be
successful because I think sometimes it's very difficult [o do that. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Richard.
Councilman Wing: Z'd just like to rela~te back to it. I think Don you're not
going to be able to help me with thl~ but in 1~81 or 1982, and I think it was in
conjunction wZth tile gambling ordinance that the Public Safety Commission wrote
at that time and recommended. On publlc record wlth the Counc11 the Publlc
Safety Commission, which was faLrly b~ell rounded at that time in terms of police
support. O~r report to the Councll suggested, and thls ls along wlth Hlke'8
comment about tl'm~a que~.~on of more liquor stores being [n the best interest of
the City and that's maybe my major concern here. Not the buslness aspect8 of it
nor i8 tax an issue here. The gentZeman spoke about the drug issues. Hors
].lquor 8~ores. The polnt here, at that time Publlc Safety Commission presented
to the Council it's opinion that 11quor, 11quor mtores, the bars at that time
was, not F1].ly's but the one before lt. The Bronco. They all tended, and then
gambling, were all found to have negative impact on a city overaZ1. Not so much
as taxes but as far as lt's soclal, human servlc:es. They almost all had a
negative impact on public safety in that they all took special attention. So we
a~ that tlme I thlnk suggested treading 11ghtly in approving any of those lssues
becaus~ they tend to have a negative impact on the City. It causes the police
department flghts, drunken drlvlng, etc. and the bars. We've got a record of
tha~ so that would be my only concern here. I thlnk the only reason I brought
thls up originally, my comments really were sald better by Hlke. Ny concern ls
more liquor stores and the negative impact that element, you know that's a bad
cholce of words. I'm sure thls lsa very legitimate buslness and Tom has got
some exceJ, lent points. I don't want ~o missLate myself here. I'll just leave
it at that, I think Public SafeLy Commission said be cautious about these types
of businesses and tread lightly and go slowly because I thil]k they can have a
negative impact. This one may not and Z won't suggest that,
Mayor Chmiel' Yeah, your off sale and on sale I think, which was pointed out
before, probably could have.
councilman Wing: Yes, more so. No question.
Hayor Chmiel: And with this, I'm not sure you're going to have quite as much.
24
City Council Heeting - September 22, 1991
Councilman Workman: Don I know that as in the past years on the Council, you
know whether or not to expand for the Oinner Theatre, that one hour from
midnight to 1:00. That special provision and we really thought about that very
carefully. And so we're not taking that lightly and it's not always a good
place to defend a liquor store okay. But I've had an awful lot of people say to
me, where do adults, where are they able to hang out in this town. They've
either got Filly's or the Dinner Theatre. Pauiy's wiii be gone and so where is
an area that we can go. You know we're shooting down that aspect of our town.
The Bronco was a little bit before my time but I know and have heard ail the
stories. But as I mentioned to Hike, I don't want to get into the defending or
promoting the use of alcohol okay. But liquor stores are a part of the State,
City, the nation. That seems to me we're starting to tread on an issue that's
much higher than our own. Not that we couldn't try to handle that issue. On
another hand, if let's say I do not want any more drug stores in town that say
promote the use of birth control say because of my religion. I just don't think
we should have any more drug stores in town. Well a drug store is a use that
would we not have another one out there and here and there where we start to
limit them. If we're going to start to deviate, you know ~e wouldn't have any
convenience stores in town that sell cigarettes. But we can't do that so when
we start to getting selective about how we're going to decide which stores can
and can't be in here because of what we are perceiving as potentially a problem
and I'm not exactly sure where that problem is, that starts to worry me because
like the drug store issue. There's a lot of things on the racks of a drug store
that hey, that's kind of questionable.
Alex Wagner: Just a very brief comment in response. I think alcohol is
different. It's not like a drug store. It's not like another grocery store.
It's not like another car repair shop. It's different and we have a long
history in this country and in the last 40 years since prohibition with very
clear responsibility for the regulation of the sales of alcoholic beverages that
rest with the State and with each locality and I would urge you to take that
responsibility seriously. You have the right to look very closely at the klnd
of community that we're going to have 15 or 20 years from now and whether we
have a liquor store on every corner or whether we're only golng to have one in
the city, we need to think that through for the long term impact on the
community. Thank you.
Councilman Workman: Hr. Hayor if I could maybe address that. What I'm hearlng
is that I'm not taking this seriously. Okay? That offends me because I am.
I'm simply not going to get lnto the game of declding who's going to be in
business and who's not in this specific market. Talk about the one across the
street or the one here. I'm not going to decide who's competition ls who's
competition. Condoms, IUD's, you name it on a drug store. There's a whole
soclal lssue we could get lnto. The whole thlng and people could get into that.
That's just one narrow view and that's a view, same thing for a liquor store.
So Z'm just, I don't, I guess I'm not taking kindly to somebody saying I'm not
taking this seriously because I am.
Alex Wagner: I dld not mean to imply that at all. All I'm saying is that I
take it seriously and I would urge the whole Council to think about each
individual outlet in the context of thls larger lssue. I'm sorry if I offended
you. I in my way meant to imply that you were not taking the issue seriously.
was just urglng the Councll to thlnk about the broader lssues from alcohol.
25
City Council Meet.Lng - september 2.3, 1991
Councilwoman Dimler: But that's not the issue.
Councilman Masol~: It could be the issue.
Councilwoman Dimler: Next Council meeting please.
Councilman Mason: Point well taken. I think there comes a point, being in
education that it's kind of funny, sitting up here and truly having to look at
tile City in a more global aspect if you will. Z agree with what you're saying.
What I need to juggle lhat with is, at what point is it an educator and I
consider parents to be perhaps the best educators of a11. At what point i~ it
thelr responsibility to take on that lssue? Just the fact that this Councll or
Haplewood or Brooklyn Park or whatever says no to a liquor store is not going to
stop a 13 year old or a 25 year old or an 80 year old from drinking. It could
make it more difficult for them but if they want to get drunk and drlve drunk,
they're golng to do it unles~ somebody takes over for them and I certainly don't
think we can do that here. Now I don't know where that fits in with you because
I share some of those same concerns. I mean let's face lt. Alcohol ls the
biggest drug problem in this country. If I'm not mistaken, all the other
narcotics comblned pale in comparison. I'm not sure lnterprettlng thl.~ to allow
an off sale liquor store is golng to address that issue.
Doug Pass: If I could say something real quick and I think it has to do with
tile question of individuals really. I don't know if you're familiar with tile
gentleman but hls name ls Dave Chasers. He owns Chasers in downtown Chaska. I
met th~; gentleman for the first time rougly a monf. h ago. He and hiw wife came
in and introduced themselves to me. Welcomed us to the Clty. Sald he knew that
it was inevitable tl~ere was going to be another liquor store and that's called
America. We also were told that genetleman that owns the Shorewood or as the
City Manager, because as you know, Shoreuood is a municipal liquor store. So
you would not have me going to Shorewood because Shorewood will not allow it
because tl~e profit.s made go into the City coffers. They actually called the
Clty of Chanhassen and talked to Karen and volce their displeasure of the fact
that Z was even coming here tonight [.o apply for a license. We left it stand at
that but we were called a day later by Llquor Control and that ls, the guy ls on
border line illegal because as is stated, since my partner and I own the store
in Chaska, we cannot get together wlth any other 11quor store to make deals.
I've heard advertising, etc., etc~. You can't do it. It's against the law.
The fact that we will own two 11quor stores if you pass this in two different
cities just gives us the opportunity to buy at somewhat the same advantage as
the HGM's and they have that advantage. That ls the reason why we're dolng
this. Dave Chaser patted me on the back. Wished me the best and told me, open
that one down at the other mall. It's hmerlca. On the other extent, I haven't
talked to the gentleman but he's talked to everyone else and I'm surprised if he
hasn't called someone on the Counc11 and voice hls displeasure. Shorewood does
a $1,300,000.00 a year. What my partner and I look at is that is a large piece
of pie. And if some of that ple can be ours, lt's Amerlca. I reallze I have
people in my own family, including my mother that has told me with the liquor
problem in this country how do you fee].. Z can't be everybody's conscience. I
have a living. I have to I, ake a living but yet I'm not going to sell to minors.
I mean people come 1nrc my store. I've been told I look young. People come
into my store and they look 30 years old. I've people that are older than Z am
and I mean it's slmple. I've worked with the police and I plan on working wlth
26
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1991
the police and I can't do it any other way. But like I said, I can't be
everyone's conscience and you hit it on the head. Some peopIe wlI1 dr£ve. Some
peopie wiIi drink and drive. It puts more pressure on the poIice. I mean it's
something we ail deai with and I don't like the fact that the poIicemen have to
do the job that my iiquor, you know that my estabiishment's seiiing iiquor. It
is a probIem in this country. Education is the major point.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. I'd just llke to, a quick one.
Councilman Mason: What do you see as the ramifications in how we interpret this
for the rest of the City for small 11quor stores if you w1117 I mean what w111
prevent them from popping up all over?
Paul Krauss: Nothing. If we're directed to bring back to you some sort of
criteria that you let this one go and you want to amend the ordinance that says
neighborhood scale liquor stores are under 3,000 square feet or whatever you get
into, we do have one or two other neighborhood business centers. In the future
we may have a couple more and lt's not inconceiveable that you'll get additional
requests. It's not ~y job or I can't philosophize as to whether or not that's
appropriate. I do recall on several instances though where I've had people
selling pizza telling me that we shouldn't open up another pizza store because
you can only have so many pizza's in town. It's not something I deal wlth.
Councilman Workman: That's my point you know. Insurance agents. If you've got
one you've got too many. Attorneys. Let's limit the attorneys.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, I'd like to make a motion that we table this until we are
consistent wlth what we're looking at. Staff come back as to the discussion
that we had previously and bring that back to us and see where we can go with
that.
Councilman Wing: Second.
Mayor Chmiel: It's been moved and seconded.
Councilwoman Oimler: Can we Just add in there that we notify the neighbors
since we're concerned because it lsa buslness neighborhood and we didn't do
that.
Paul Krauss: At thls point, if we have the tlme, we can do that. Now are you
looking for us then to bring back an ordinance that we might propose?
Mayor Chmlel: I would like to see something in an ordinance so we don't have to
go helter skelter and jump around from where we're at. I'm not very comfortable
movlng from thls partlcul'ar positlon because if it's not a permitted use, it's
not a permitted use within that district and I th£nk if it could be, then fine.
Let's amend it and get it in there.
Paul Krauss: Okay, we could certainly do that but you wouldn't be in a position
to act on that for several months because it would have to be advertised.
Councilman Mason: So can we act on this one and then look for a rewording of
the ordinance?
27
City Council HeeLing -- September 2_3, 1991
Hayo'r Chmie].: Yeah, you could. I would rather not see that done. I would
rather see us go through our normal, process as to having it so we cai] refer to
others that are coming in with thi~ and saying that we were consistent with the
first to the ~inish.
Councilman Wing: 4s part of this process Don of tabling and this ordinance
coming back, would it be reasonable just for my interest, to have the City
Manager write a brief paragraph why we're not muni. The advantages and
disadvantages of going muncipal liquor store.
Hayor chmiel: That's because we already have a couple store~ in the community
now.
Councilman Wing: If Shorewood's doing a million three.
Don Ashworth: I can respond to that, You had to make the election back in the
60's and we didn't make that election.
Councilman ~Jing: Okay.
Mayor Chmiel: So with that we have a motion on the floor with a second to table
so we're consistent with what ue have going.
Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Wing seconded to table the off-sale intoxicating
liquor license for Pass By Liquors II at Seven Forty-One Crossing until staff
can bring back an ordinance dealing u/th the issue of liquor stores in the
Business Neighborhood District. Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Wing and Councilwoman
DJmler voted in favor. Counc/lman Workman was silent and Councilman Mason voted
[n opposition. The motion carried with a vote of 4 to 1.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, would you like to give a clarification or for what you've
already said?
COUrlc:ilman Mason: Just for what I said. I'm worried about leaving these people
in the lurch right llOW.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, and I don't want to put them in a lurch but I think if
we're going to be consistent, that's the way we should be. And Ilot just sort of
shoot from the hip and say yes, lt's a permitted use and take that position.
Councilman Workman: Mayor I know, and I was silent on my vote. I guess the
thlng that I'm wondering about is what klnd of response are we expecting back
from the neighborhood? It appears as though we go to the neighborhood every
tlme something wants to move into this mall and we can't continue to have that
as a part of the approval process for whatever food is cooking out of whatever.
I guess that in relationship to Mlke's concern. I'm concerned about that.
Councilman Mason: I am too.
Councilwoman Oimler: I think if I could c].arify, my understanding was that
we're going to look :t changing the ordinance to allow that in the 8N. If we do
that lt's going to take some tlme but we thought while, to lnform the neighbors
was not to get their approval. Sort of make that a condition of approval but to
28
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1991
get their feelings on it while we have the time. That wasn't the primary
purpose of tabllng however.
Paul Krauss: Could I clarify too? We can bring back to you on the 14th a
proposed ordinance amendment that deals with this. We could also notify the
neighbors. We could also brlng back, if you'd 11ke, an ordinance amendment that
would require regular notification with liquor licenses which is not now the
case. On October 14th though you'll have those draft' ordinances in hand. You
won't be in a position.to act on those so if you wanted to proceed with this
request on October 14th, you would st111 have to do it before the ordinanoe has
come through because that's going to take another 60 days. So that will put it
off until probably the first of the year at that polnt.
Mayor Chmiel: Why are you saying 60 days?
Paul Krauss: We've got to publish legal notice in the paper.
Mayor Chmiel: 10 days prior before the public hearing.
Paul Krauss: Which is held at the Ptannlng Commission and that's 30 days.
Mayor Chmiel: We can circumvent Planning Commission can we not?
Paul Krauss: I'm not aware that you can circumvent the Public Hearing
requirements. Now maybe there's a way and Roger stepped out but maybe there's a
way you can hold the publlc hearing here and just enact it then but I'm not
positive of that.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Would you check with Roger, as he's running through the
halls. I think he's got a book in hand, strictly known as his 8ible. And if I
talk a 11ttle longer he'll, welcome. We have a question. Phrase your question.
Paul Krauss: I indicated to the Council that we could bring them back draft
ordinance amendments that would define what's an allowable neighborhood liquor
establishment, also possibly changing the standards so notice might be required
for the liquor 11cense ltself but that the Council would not be in a positlon to
act on that on October 14th. The Mayor asked if there's a way we can legally
notlce the ordinance, which I think we mlght be able to make, that's the 10 days
but hold the public hearing here rather than at the Planning Commission?
Roger Knutson: It's got to go to the Planning Commission.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. That was the question I had.
Roger Knutson: You could also hold a public hearing but it's got to go to the
Planning Commission.
Councilman Workman: Mayor, can you maybe make it clear to me what we're doing
with this particular applicant then?
Mayor Chmiel: Presently? Right now?
Councilman Workman: Correct.
City Coumsil Meetill9 - Scptembu. r 23~ ].99].
Mayor Ct,rain).: He's sta,dir, g in a bai,d sort of nou.
CoLLncilma, Workm~n.' Well, are ue ~aying ~.o him that he ~ight have to uait until
the ordina,ce is passed?
Mayor Chmiel: From uhat they've said, ~ uas trying to see if there ua8 some
ue could rush that a little bit more. But there's no uay ue can circumvent the
Planning Commission for them to hold the first hearing, public hearing before it
comes back to COlll]cJ. 1 with their recommendation.
Councilman Workman: I guess I uould see that as being someuhat unfair to this
applicant and it's kind of, I do~'t k,ou. ~ heard J.t to,ight. The barn door
and some cous and I think the cous are out of the barn here. I guess as a
member of the ~zf¢irmative o, the last vote I guess I'd like to propose another
motion.
Hayom' Chmiel: You have the right to so do that.
counc.tlman Workman: I do that
Mayor Chmiel: ~Jth rescinding provided you get the majority of the other
Councilman Horkman: Do ue need a vote to make another?
counc~].uo~n D~m~e~': Before u~ da that, could Z ~:sk Roger z question?
HayoF Ch~e].: Go ~he~d.
CouncJ]uonan D~nler: If ue ur~te an ordinance nfter the applicant has come
ate ~.hey grandfathere~l .tn ~lly way or dons that ord.t~nce appZy to them?
Roger Knutso,: If they're ~n business;.
CouncJ. Zuoman ~im~er: Zf they are in bus,ness but not Zn our city. How does
that get 1nterpreted?
Roger Knutson: ~f they start a new business before you change the ordinance,
they a)'e grandfathered
Councll~oman D~mler: A business in our c~ty?
Roger K,utso,: I, that faciJ.ity, yes.
Counc~Zman Workman: What's the procedure to brlng up another?
Roger KnL~tson: ~ mot.ton to
Hayor Chmiel: Yeah, it uould be a motion to )'econsider' it.
CounciZman Workman: So moved,
30
City Council Meeting - September
Councilman Wing: Then what's going to be the point of this ordinance? To allow
liquor stores. Curtail liquor stores. San liquor stores.
Mayor Chmiel: Make them as part of the ordinance requirement, whether it's a
permitted use or not a permitted use.
Councilman Workman: In which districts?
Paul Krauss: Neighborhood Business District.
Councilwoman Oimler: Although when we have one already after the fact, then the
ordinance will pass right? I mean will that not set a precedent for that
ordinance then?
Paul Krauss: ! suppose it does. I guess I go back to our original
recommendation to you that we didn't think, and this is our opinion again
because there's nothing to judge but we dldn't think that a, and I forget the
square footage here. I think it's something on the order of 2,400 square feet,
slze store ls excessive for what is vlewed as a neighborhood type business. It
was our proposal to you that you, if you choose, interpret the ordinance in that
way. If you come after the fact and have an ordinance that says the cutoff is
3,000 square feet, you haven't caused any problems. If you reject the ordinance
entirely, then concelveably, I mean this one's already in but then you can
conceiveably not do it again. You have a lot of latitude and again I defer to
Roger on this but you have a lot of latltude on granting liquor licenses.
CounciIman Wing: Why would we care about the size and why would we want to
encourage a 4,000 foot store?
Roger Knutson: In a neighborhood business area, you don't want to bring in
traffic from all over the Midwest because it's supposed to be a neighborhood.
So you want a smaller faciltty as opposed to.
Councilman Workman: Well I have a motlon to reconsider.
Mayor Chmiel: And it was seconded.
Councilman Mason: Yeah.
Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussion?
Councilwoman Dimler: It takes 4/5 rlght? That wlll take 4/5 vote?
Mayor Chmiel: It takes a 4/5 vote for reconsidering, yes.
Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Nason seconded to reconsider the previously
made motion to table the liquor license request by Pass By Liquors II. All
voted in favor except Councilman Wing who opposed and the motion carried with a
vote of 4 to 1.
Councilman Wing: I supported the tabling just to give my mind a chance to study
this and think it out a little more. I'm not saying no to the applicant nor to
the liquor store.
31
City Council. l'leef, ing- September 23, 1991
Councilman Workmate; Well I guess I'd make that alternative motion.
H;~yor Chmie]_' He have a 4/5 f, ajority, 4 ~o l.
CoLlncilman Workman: I guess, and I don't want to circumvent the neighborhood
inpu[, What I'm trying to get at here is, and I guess I ultimately wouldn't be
opposed to maybe carrying this to October 14th if we had to. I don't know what
Doug's time line is. Probably fairly quickly, because Z don't want to
circumvent, the input of the neighborhood. I just don't want to have to have him
go through a full ordinance process when he's come here and that's where we're
shutting the door when the cows are already out of the barn. Which I don't
think is fair and so I guess my motion would be to approve this and then direct
staff to check into the ordinance and we can go through that process in the next
2 or 3 months.
Mayor Chmiel: I understand the positJon of trying to get this business moving.
Bu( Z sort of feel like just what you're saying. We're opening the gates and
ali. owing this to go through but then we'll put a restriction on anyone else who
comes in whe~ we ,'~houJ. d be consistent, as I said before in the first place.
.Start it now and I don't want to delay his timeframe but yet if we do it
property, that's the way T_ feel it should go. That's just my position.
Council. man Workman: I just feel that for this gentleman's business plans, it is
too late for us to do something.
Itayor Chmiel: Well that could very well be but this is the first time this has
come before us as well.
Councilman Wing: That's not our problem. Our's is the overview of the global
si[uation. Hr. Hayor, I don't disagree wlth anythi~g that's been said and
whether th.is passes or not, you know Z'm neutral enough but the orlginal
discussion was sort of the overview of the 11quor store, overview of the
neighborhood 11quor store and lmpact, socla], concerns and I don't thlnk we've
rea].ly discussed that enough to make a decision. That's why I really supported
the tabling. Just enough to clear our mlnds and as far as I'm concerned, it
could come back and Z would probably tend to support this based on Tom's
comments but not until I've had a chance to let the alt clear here a 11ttle bit.
Right now I feel under pressure or impulsive to do something. I don't think
lt's necessary. I don't think lt's, the City have a little rest perlod on thls
one..
Councilman Workman: I guess I'd feel the same if we had more than one liquor
store iml town. We have one liquor s~ore in town. 28 square mile city with
12,000 population and at least 3 major highway corridors going through lt.
don't tl~ink they're on top of each other at this stage.
Mayor Chmiel: No, I don't disagree with that either. But I guess I'm just
s~icking to my guns as Z have with being consistent with it. That's the only
reason.
Councilwoman Dimler: At this point I guess I'll second Tom's motion.
32
City Council Meeting - September
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. There's a motion on the floor with a second.
discussions?
Any ct her
Councilman Mason: And that motion is to approve this?
Mayor Chmiel: To approve the off-sale intoxicating liquor license for Seven
Forty One Crossing, Pass By Liquors II as the motion and with additional studies
to be done as Tom has indicated, for staff to review. ODes everyone understand?
Councilman Workman: Can I ask one more question?
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah.
Councilman Workman: When do you plan to open, and keep in mind that your belng
maybe in the neighborhood's good graces might help your.business.
Doug Pass: We wanted to open no later than November 1st. Only reason being
that we have a lease signed on the contingency that we get approval of a liquor
11cerise. We have financing at the Bank of Chanhassen contingent on the fact
that we get a license from the City. ~e've got everything tied together. The
only reason we want to open no later than November 1st is due to, in our
business it's a cycle business. We have the holidy season coming up. If we
don't open before the holiday season, there ls no polnt in opening at all untll
May of next year. 8ut then I have to start all over again as far as my
financing, my lease. My lease explres. What I have signed. The lease expires.
Expires period if I am not granted the liquor license. I have heard some
concerns from up there that you're saylng a precedence or what not. I do know
that the Council has to realize that my liquor license is up before you each
year so that if I'm not a model tenant as far as the 11quor industry is
concerned, then I don't receive a ltcense from you and I'm not grandfathered in
anything.
Mayor Chmlel: Your integrity to me ls not in questlon and the operation of the
facility.
Doug Pass: I realize that but I mean the facility ttself, if it doesn't meet
I'm sure the City, I mean each year you revie~ my license. If the C£ty can come
back and I'm sure the City Attorney can tell you that. tf there's a reason why
I should not be given that license the second year, I'm not grandfathered in-
anything. [s that correct?
Mayor Chm£el: Yeah.
Doug Pass: I mean then it's all done.
Mayor Chmiel: That wasn't my point at a11.
Doug Pass: I understand that but the way you explained it to me now, with the
table and the way the time goes back, for me to open the store, it won't happen.
Mayor Chmlel: Okay, we'll call the question.
33
City Council Heeting- September 23, 1991
Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to approve the off-sale
intoxicating liquor license application of Douglas Pass and Rod Pankonen to
operate a liquor store in the Seven Forty-One Crossing strip mall at Highways 7
and 41 contingent upon the following items and to direct staff to prepare an
ordinance dealing with liquor stores in the Business Neighborhood District.
- A $3,000.00 Bond.
- Liquor Liability Insurance Certificate; and
- $200.00 License fee.
Councilman Workman, Councilwoman Oimler and Councilman Mason voted in favor of
the motion. Nayor Chmiel and Councilman Wing Here opposed. The motion carried
with a vote of 3 to 2.
Councilman Wing: Hay I just state uhy on this one? Z don't oppose the buslness
and Z don't oppose the applicant. I don't even really oppose the use of the
shopplng center for this. However, Z do feel the City needs a little more
overview and a litt].e more clarification of this situation. That's all.
Councilwoman Dimler: And we are going to get that w~th the second part of that.
Mayor Chmiel: The motion passes 3 to 2 with the review as you will do.
Paul Krauss: Hr. Hayor, may I make a suggestion? I defer to Scott a llttle blt
on this too. I can certainly give you a land use standpoint of the liquor store
issue. You have neighborhood business that's a zonlng district. How blg should
it be. I can probably give you some information on that. But it sounds as
though the Councll wants to get lnto somewhat of the philosophical lssues about
liquor and it's affect on the community as a whole. Tile Planning Commission's
not really well equlpped to deal wlth that kind of a subject and maybe that's
something that, Z don't know Scott if the Public Safety Commission might want [o
discuss. We can certainly deal wlth the hard numbers but the philosophical
issue, Z can't do justice to that.
Councilman Wing: I agree. I'd like to address the Public Safety Commission.
Scott have that on tile agenda.
Clem Springer: Hr. Hayor. It seems that there are a few volds in your zonlng
ordinance Z think when it comes to this BN neighborhood. I know that just about
every tlme we come up wlth a new tenant we have to call Paul and ask hlm whether
it's a permitted use or not and tile liquor store was one example but we've had
others. I klnd of feel like and I'm a 11ttle disturbed by some of the
discussion tonight about declding that it's a neighborhood business based upon
how blg the store is and how big a draw it is. One possibility we have ls
there's been a medical clinic that's been talking about coming there. The type
of medlclne that they'd be practicing lsa narrow field. They obviously are
going to have to draw from a 15 or 20 mile radius to succeed. We have a
podiatrist who we've slgned a le'ase with. Obviously hls draw has to be more
than ne£ghborhood to be successful. So T. think if that's the criteri~ you're
going to start uslng on a neighborhood use, and when you allow a center to go in
that's of tile size it is with the spaces that are in there of 3,500 square feet
to 5,000 square feet on the end caps, I'd like to have a 11ttle further
34
City Council Meeting - September
definition before we get down the road with other tenants and then hear a
discussion about the size of store is too big to be a neighborhood type center.
Mayor Chmiel: I don't thlnk we're concerned with the podiatrist coming in or
who you may have coming in. It's the issue of where we're going with our
particular ordinance as it reads presently. In my opinlon that was not a
permitted use within that particular facility and that's the position that
I took. Therefore, if lt's a permitted use wlthin what the requirements are as
conditioned within the BN district, then that's a permitted use and you
shouldn't have any problem having a tenant.
Clem Springer: That's my problem is if you look at the BN use, and I may be
wrong on this Paul but it has about 10 or 15 specific uses in there and then it
talks about other retail uses. There's always a question, well what are these
other fetal1 uses? The fact that it's not specific like it is in your other
zoning with the highway use, it sometimes make it sound to us like it's not
allowed because lt's not mentioned in one and it's mentioned in the other. So I
think that might be something you'd want to clarify, it would be helpful. Thank
you for your action tonight.
Paul Krauss: And if I could Mr. Mayor, I have had a number of conversations
with Mr. Springer and a lot of times the answer's been no. And again, I don't
recall exactly what the requests were. Sometimes ! think it may have been
before Clem was involved but one was a fast food. That was inappropriate there.
[ thlnk one was a muffler shop. But the only place in the ordinance where it
specifically addresses neighborhood orientation is towards retail and that's the
questlon that was before you tonlght. Fortunately I thlnk one of the things
that is listed as a permitted use is professional offices and there £s no
clientele implication. It just says professional offices so podiatrist could
have somebody coming in from South Dakota. It really doesn't matter.
Councilman Wlng: Paul, just a question for Paul. On this buslness golng in,
are the ordinance in place that's going to preclude stacking beer cases with
sale signs out'ln front and plaques in the windows that say sale? Is this
business [n it's competition going to get out of hand w[th outside d[splays and
window displays?
Paul Krauss: That's a good point Councilman Wing. As I recall there was a
fairly stiff sign package with this shopping center. You may want to add a
condition though that insures that they maintain, that the only signage allowed
is the s£gnage that is consistent with the shopping center. I don't know that
there's a speclflc prohibition agalnst the things that you mentioned.
Councilman Wing: Well there is for Super~mer£ca.
Doug Pass: There is. Excuse me. In the Liquor By-Laws, you cannot display any
l£quor outside your liquor establishment. We cannot stack beer cases outside
the store. We cannot sell anything but liquor in that establishment. That
includes we can't have potato chips. We can't have any food items. I have, on
the side I have a llttle hobby that's a firewood business. I cannot stack
firewood across the entire front and sell £t. It's against the law. The window
use ls as far as I can advertise. I believe your ordinances are the same on
signs as they are in Chaska. If you'll ever drive by our mall there, we do not
35
City Coul~ci]. Meeting - Seplember 2.3, 1991
still have a sign up that advertises that we are even in that mall. It is
against the City ordinance of Chaska. We have to come to the city to ask to put
a sign up on the road which you have to do here in Chanhassen and that sign
canno~ blink. It can just sit on tho road with an arrow and we can put on it,
Pass By II now open. We have to go to you for that and I believe the ordinance
is the same for ~0 days at one lime twice a year. That's ail that we can put up
on the road as far as signs go. That's it. If you've seen the Statutes from
tl)e Minnesota Liquor Control, it's this thick. I've had some guys come in and
they laughed at me because ~ read it. I marked down the things that I had
problems with, We cannot advertise. We can never put a price in the paper. We
can't have a price war. I can't say Pass By Liquor II, Beer $9.9~. All you can
drink. That's against the la~, We can't do that. We can have signs in our
windows.
Councilman Wing: Paul, I'd like to verify this. The other businesses that have
gone ill, you've specified how many signs would in fact be allowed and what they
can and cannot have. I haven't seen that for this. Why not?
Paul Krauss; Well there's a sign covenant package for tile shopping center.
Each tenant is al].ocated a sign band. The free standing temporary sign that was
mentioned is something that's allowed by the City, It's allocated to the
shopping center so the period of time that it's allocated, it's allocated to the
shoppin~ center, How the tenants divy .it up is their problem, The only
question in my mind, and I don't remember the sign covenants exactly. Whether
or not...sign being painted up inside the window. I don't know that that's
prohibited by the sign package.
Councilman Wing: Okay, thank you,
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, let's move right along. We moved item 6 to 8(a) and I
believe there may be a motion.
Councilwoman Dimler: Yes. I move that we amend the agenda to move item 6 into
the next pZace here in the fact that those parents that wanted to be here are
now here.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, I'll second that.
Councilwoman Dimler moved, Mayor Chmiel seconded to amend the agenda to move
item 6 to this point in the agenda. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
CITY CODE AMENDMENT REGARDING THE SALE OF CIGARETTES~ FIRST READING.
Scott Harr: I was approached by several Council people requesting that we
consider the amendment that's before you to further tighten up restrictions and
regulations of tobacco sales. This ordinance was drafted through the Clty
Attorney's office to regulate self service sales. Sale of tobacco products by
minors and to re-emphasize the restrictions to whom tobacco products are sold
with administrative remedy regarding suspension to be handled by the City
Manager.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Yes sir.
36
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1991
Alex Wagner: I'm Alex Wagner from 7130 Willow View Cove. I'm also an Associate
Professor of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health at the University of
Minnesota, Twin Cities and I've been working in the alcohol, tobacco and drug
field for about 12 years doing research and teaching. I would like to commend
the Council and the staff for the development of this ordinance, i think it's
very timely. It addresses a pressing problem in our community and in our larger
community. Not just in Chanhassen and tobacco is a critical problem. It's a
very high risk factor. Early use of tobacco is a very high risk factor for use
of other substances like alcohol or illegal drugs. If we can get young people
to survive to age 20 without using cigarettes, they have virtually no chance of
ever becoming addicted to cigarettes. Young people are primary market for the
industry's that are marketing these products because their customers are dying
off at a regular rate. Over a third of everybody that purchases cigarettes dies
from cigarettes and I think this ordinance is very timely. It's another issue
where any one ordinance like this, any one change in the policy and the way that
we regulate these things in our community is not the answer but it's one thing
t.hat we can do to make it slightly more difficult for people to become addicted
to cigarettes and it will have some marginal effect in attenuating and reducing
this problem. I commend the Council and the Mayor and the staff for the
development of this ordinance and urge it's passing and would only suggest that
you might consider why exclude carton sales from this ordinance. Thank you very
much.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Anyone else?
Mary Sauser: My name is Mary Sauser. I live at 3721 Upton. I'm a nurse at
Park Nicollet Medical Center and we're involved in several research projects,
one of which is a smoking sensation program and I'd just like to share with you
a few things that we have learned along the way. While smoking is dangerous at
any age, it is especially hazardous to start early in life. The younger a
person is when they start to smoke, the greater the risk of eventually dying of
a smoking related disease. Smokers who start before age 15 suffer from cancer
rates 19 times higher than non-smokers. The final report of the National
Commission on drug free schools underscores the urgency for meaningful action
now to curb tobacco use among the'nation's youth. Tobacco and alcohol are the
most widely used drugs among young people today, even though their purchase is
illegal. Existing laws restricting sale of tobacco products are rarely
enforced. Each day more than 3,000 children and adolescents start smoking and
consume nearly i billion packs of cigarettes a year. Of the 3,000 adolescents
who start smoking each day, 23 of these children will be murdered during their
lifetime. 30 will die in traffic accidents. 750 will be killed by a smoking
related disease. In her 19~0 report on the health consequences of smoking, U.S.
Surgeon General Antonia Rebella called smoking a self destructive behavior and
the ultimate consequences of smoking are the most grim. If current smoking
rates continue, then 5 million of the children now living in the United States
will die by the year 2020 of a disease caused by smoking.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Is there anyone else?
Margie Karjalahti: Hi, I'm Margie Karjalahti. I live at 7413 Frontier Trail.
Two years ago the Clty of Chanhassen, along wlth Chaska, Carver and East Union
and Victoria adopted a set of 8 community values and the purpose for this was to
focus on how we can help our young people grow with good character and become a
37
City Co~lncil Meeting - September 23, 1991
be[ter city. When I thot~ght about this ordinance I was delighted because if we
can keep kids from trying tobacco, whether it's cigarettes or chew or whatever,
until they're at least 18 when it's legal, they have a much better chance of
making that decision from an adult perspective. And to put the products behind
the counter seems only to be a process for helping them to practice citizenship,
which is obeying the laws and responsibility which is what we're trying to build
in them. That they can make responsible decisions. So I really commend you for
doing this and Z would love to see all tobacco products put behind the counter.
In fact I have changed gas stations simply because this one station I go to has
no tobacco out where children can just reach it and touch it and kind of walk by
and pick it up on their own. And I appreciate that it's not so accessible to
kids. So Z hope you pass the ordinance.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Margie.
John Carlson: I'ln John Carlson. I reside at ~02 Penamint Court and I too would
11ke to speak in favor of this proposal. I'm the Vice President for Development
for the Cancer Society of Minnesota Division. The American Cancer Society is a
member of the Smoke Free Class of 2000 as is the Amerlcan Heart Association and
the American t.lzng Association and all of these organizations are supportive of
this type of local proposal. The Smoke Free Class of 2000 is lnvolved in trying
to work with our youngsters who are going to be the graduating class of 2000.
To have that class be the flrst totally smoke free class in our soclety and also
to work wlth all classes to follow. I would speak on a personal note. Golng
lnto Brooke's, you know you can go in and see the 3 candy bars for $1.00 and
then right next ~o it you can see the Camel's you know and they look like candy.
You can see the Camel's there and they're rlght there and it's, I think runs
counter to the message that we're tryirlg to give to our young people. It gives
the message, lmplled message that thls ls 11ke candy and lt's very convenient
and it's got a kld's image to it and that really works agalnst the effort that
we're trying to go after wlth our young people. One important thing to keep in
mlnd is that cigarettes do have a warnlng label on them. That's been long
debated by our Federal Government and that's been in place for quite some tlme
now and I guess something that has a warnlng label that is hazardous to our
health and has been proven to be hazardous to our health should be treated a
little more judiciously in terms of where lt's located in our establishment and
I'd just as soon not have them next to the candy bars. I applaud you for thls
initiative.
Mayor Chmlel: Thank you.
Therese Berquist: Hello. My name is Therese Berquist and my address is 7207
Frontier Trail. I also am very happy to be associated with the city at this
tlme. Very proud to hear what ls taklng place. Feel very confident that the
ordinance uill be passed and I see it as a positive step in keeping cigarettes
out of the hands of minors. When I flrst heard about the amendment, I wanted to
be involved in some way and so my choice was to invol,)e other people. In my
everyday 11re I know of so many people who have concerns regarding tobacco use.
Minors and adults. For minors and adults and Z would just like to say that I'm
very happy to see so nlany people voiclng their concern so I took probably about
an hour and a half and the people that I've run into in the last couple of days
and had them sign a petition. Z don't mean to apologize for it but I do want to
emphasize that it's just a very, of all the people I spoke to, there wasn't
.38
City Council Meeting - September
anyone who did not want to take part in this action of amending the tobacco
sales ordinance. The other point I'd like to make is that in speaking with one
of the signers, she was telling me about her brother who Duns a convenience
store in St. Paul who just was audited and found that he lost, she tried to
contact him regarding the figure. It was an enormous amount of money in stolen
cigarettes which something I felt comfortable bringing this issue before the
Council and supporting it knowing that it could be beneficial to our convenience
stores, gas stations, whatever. Who do I make the presentation to?
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Anyone ,1~,?
Mark Fornier: My name is Mark Fornier. I live on 50? Highland Drive which
I suppose to put a 11ttle perspective on it is right behind the sort of jungle
garden that Councilman Don Ashworth has. We often get melons and things from
hlm. It's klnd of a pleasant experience.
Councilman Wing: Are you registering a complaint?
Hark Fornier: Not at all. They're very wonderful. It's not huge in quantity.
I am the President of Student Council at Chaska High School. I'm also a class
offlcer. Z am on the £xecutlve Board of the Hennepin District Student Counc11.
I get relatively good grade~. I plan to go onto a good college to graduate
school. Z'm guess what you would call a good kid. But about 5 years ago Z did
something that most of my friends and most of the people I know did at one time
or another and that is shoplifting. For one summer we kind of went through this
phase where you discover that it's kind of easy to pick up things and you don't
have to pay for them. That's klnd of a nice deal and I flnd after talking to
friends and you kind of chuckle about things in your past, you find that a lot
of them dld that same thing and I think that whether the numbers or the flgures
that we get from stores and from things like that, actually show it. There is a
deflnlte problem there. There is a deflnlte situation. The shoplifting does
occur at some point in many people's lives and I think an ordinance 11ke this
helps circumvent that problem that people have. In many other situations with
movies, with cassette tapes, with knives, with other material that is easily
shoplifted, there are many measures to circumvent the shoplifting of those
materials. When I heard from Hrs. Oimler about this ordinance, I went and I
announced to the school over the PA system and we had sort of a petltion we got
together. I didn't bring that with me but I managed to talk to a lot of people
about that and there was support throughout our school for this ordinance among
those smokers and non-smokers. In particular a young man named Bruce Russo who
has smoked very heavlly for several years, he's strongly in support of thls
because he wishes that when he was younger it wasn't so accessible. It wasn't
so easy to sustaln a hablt and Z think that's the whole idea of an ordinance
like this. It's something that makes a moral statement and it does have a
strong physlcal effect. Whether the numbers may show it or not and I think lt's
something important that this Council needs to do. I'm also involved in debate
school and we look at policy maklng and when we look at a pollcy and we see that
there's many potential benefits and there is no significant disadvantage, only
logistical problems. Only problems of putting together the thing, there really
is no reason but to do anything but to adopt it. And I think logistics
shouldn't be any issue there that stops thls ordinance. Z thlnk it's a very
good ordinance and I think the youth of this area and of Chaska and surrounding
areas that I represent in our high school certainly support this. Thank you.
City Counc.'i]. He,;ting - September 23, 1991
Hayor Chmiel: Thank yOLt.
Jeannie Wygum: My name is Jeannie Wygum. I'm President of the Association for
Non-Smokers and you've heard it better from the student than you could ever hear
it from me so I'm not golng to add anythlng to that. I am golng to share some
pieces of paper with you which you may want to use in your discussion. The only
thlng I would add ls that there are just some new statistics that came out from
the Federal. government that show the smoking rates for whlte teenagers is now
41.2~ uhlch ls very frightenirlg to me.
Councilwoman Oimler: Jeannie, before you leave could Z ask you a question?
Would you address, I want to use your expertise to address the polnt that was
made here about including cartons as well in the self servlce.
3eannie Wygum: Z think it's a good idea. I talked with the people from Target
stoYes about wanting [hem to put their cigarettes behlnd the counter, particular
thelr individual packs and it was the securlty person and he thought that was a
real funny thing. Z said wily do you think that's so amuslng and he said, do you
reallze how long it takes a good shoplifter to get lnto a carton of cigarettes?
Z said give me a clue and he said, oh less ~han a second. He said lt's just
qulcker than a wink to get lnto a carton. My hunch ls that lt's adults who are
stealJ, ng cartons and that it's kids th,at are stealing individual packs. But Z
don't have a lot of statistics on that. That's a sense. When Z presented that
to the se¢;urity guy from Target, he did not disagree with that. I think it's a
good ldea to put c:artons behlnd the counter. Z thlnk lt's a 11ttle harder for
stores to do it. Zt's going to take more space for them. Z don't know, for
lf~dlvidual stores that may be a problem but lt's a good idea.
Councilman Wing: Same question to this gentleman. You recommended that. Why?
Alex Wagner: Well even if youth don't take the whole carton, they take a pack
out of the carton. It's the exact s~me lssue that we're dealing ulth with the
individual packs. If the principle ls Lhat an addictive drug 11ke thls, that we
don't w~nt to have it out on display for young people (o see and to easily
shoplift. Havlng cartons ina grocery store in an area that is not that closely
watched which is relatively easy to pick up a carton, take it to another place
or take a pack out of a carton in that particular place and a pack of cigarettes
e~sily fits in your pocket. It's an easy thing to shoplift, as you've heard
from the others.
Councilwoman Dimler: So you're saying they're not shoplifting the whole carton,
they're just taking packs out of it and putting it back? Put[ing the rest back?
Alex Wagner; I have no imperlcal evidence. Z've not studled thls specifically
but thls is antidotal evidence.
Hargie Karjalahtl: I was shopping in Cooper's in Chaska one day and happened,
they had a free standing carton thlng in like tile middle of the store and I
watched two young men that were clearly under age take a carton from there and I
stood and watched them and they got red in the face. I'm sure that their
intention was to just ua]k off wlth it so I thlnk, there's an example.
Mayor Chmiel.' Anyone else? We'll bring it back to Council. Tom.
4O
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1991
Councilman Workman: Weii Alex, you and I get to agree on everything. We
probably agree on most things anyway. I want to thank everybody for com£ng
tonight. Mark, you kind of remind me of me when I was a youth. I'll leave
everybody's imagination there. I was a good kid too darn it. These kinds of
issues have not only pragmatic concerns but emotional ones too and I won't bore
everyone with the story about my mom who's buried on a hill in Chaska at the
ripe old age of 53 from a lung disease caused directly by cigarettes. But I
will emphasize again that the industry does create Tom Workman's and Mike
Mason's and Richard Wing's and Ursula Dimler's and Mayor Chmiei's who I think
are going to pass this ordinance tonight because they know how that industry
affects our communities. And we'll get to the alcohol issue later. But it is
enlightening Mark to see the youth, who do have a handle on these kind of
situations. I grew up and went to school at Chaska High School in what I will
call the ugliest decade in the world, the i970's. Ugly hair. Ugly clothes.
Ugly attitudes. A lot of drinking. A lot of smoking. A lot of different
things. I'm lucky to have survived, unless you're a 60's kid I guess. We need
to do this and I'm hopeful that we can make this both first and second reading
due to the logistics of the experts that I think are in the room tonight for
perhaps not being able to make it the next meeting. I do want to see the
cartons behind the counter. I'm appalled when I walk into Cub and Target and
see the wall. Have you ever seen the wall? We need to get this passed because
it's simply a problem that's gone on too long. The retailers, I know they're
not here tonight, for what reason I'm not sure. St. Paul recently passed a
convenience store, the convenience stores in St. Paul must have two clerks after
midnight. They fought that. Now as you may have found out tonight from our
discussions with the gentleman who had the liquor store, I hold high esteem for
people who have the guts to go into business for themselves. Get up and work
their own business so there's a fragile balance there when you start tampering
with a business. I think St. Paul's doing it properly. Shoreview I think is
attempting to do the same thing. You cannot have one clerk on after such and
such an hour because these people are getting shot and taken advantage of. The
Grocer's Association is fighting that. They would fight this. I'm not sure
where they are. But it comes down to dollars for them and it does not come down
to dollars for us. I think the people who do smoke are going to continue to be
able to smoke. As I emphasized wlth the vendlng ordinance, it's not my interest
to keep people or attempt to keep people from smoking who have the habit because
it's very, very difficult to do so. And again I reference my mother but I hope
we can pass this all tonight wlth the first and second reading. And again I
want to say thanks to everybody who came and I'll pass it on.
Mayor Chmiel: Richard.
Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor, I think thls probably could have been approved on
the Consent Agenda tonight. I don't think it really even needed public comment
perhaps, although I like Tom and Mlke really appreciate the comments and people
showing up and having concern and just your presence tonight. Plus being
everybody got a chance at the podlum and Tom sald hls word, I just returned from
Seoul, Korea. 13 hours and 23 minutes from Seoul to Los Angeles and 3 of those
hours I had to spend middle of the nlght, dead tlred in the smoklng sectlon of a
747. Mostly Asians on board. The only reason I use the word Asians is they
smoke a lot and I just, Z got off that airplane so furious. I was just besides
myself. I thought of this ordinance the whole time. Anyway, I got that off my
chest. I feel better now. Z just want to make a comment. I agree with the
41
Ci[y Council Mee~ing -. September 23, 1991
cartol~s. I ual~'[ to see the cartons gone, We've heard about the horrors of
cigarettes. The problems with cigaretf, es. The health related and we're l"eGlly
moving fast to clean them out, but I'm feel~l~g uncomfortable tonight because
cigarettes didn't, break up my family arid they didn't bre~k up my parents and
they dJdn't ki~l my friend. I~e're moving fast to clean out c~garettes but yet
we're kind of casual with tile alcohol tonight and I'm still upset abou~ that
because that alcoho], has killed my friends and cost my friends their career and
broke up my fal, ily in my early days and I just look at Edina who has one
municipal liqLtOr store. 5ust one. They've kept the bars out. Z wonder why
Ed.tna's been so restrictive on it. They've got some reason why and Z wonder why
us're not more restrictive so I'd like to see the same group come back and
address the alcohol problem frankly and do as good a job as you did on the
cigarettes. Z suppo'rt this totally and ~'m real pleased...
Councilwoman Dimler: Thar, k you Richard. That's a wonderful note and it really
does help me too because Z have mixed feelings about the alcohol as well and
I do take that issue just as seriously. I am also pro business though and to me
that's really a struggle but in the case with the alcohol T guess ~ drew the
line because that is that ger~tleman's whole business whereas with the
convenience stores and the tobacco products, they have so many other products
that they sell ~nd they c~n stay in business and certainly we might put a dent
into their cigarette sales but the adults will still be able to get a hold of
tl~em for whom it is legal. But my main concern is here with Ibis is an issue
for the youth that they do not get a hold of it. If we want to t~ckle the adult
problem, that's another thing &nd that's not what I want to go into right now.
And again with the liquor again I was making the assumption that the gentleman
said he was golng to obey the 1au and not sel~ ~o mlnors and Z think our Publlc
Safety does a good job on checking on them so ~ feel reasonably assured that,
although Z'a sure there's some s].ippage, float ue are controJ.~1ng that alcoho~
and Z would like to take this one step further from the vending machlnes and
con[rol the tobacco access to you here and Z think that Z uould a~so go a~ong
uLth the cartons, although 1t u~11 cause al~ inconvenience. Z know of no adult
smoker that has ever sa~d that they uould oppose access to youth, even though
it's more inconven&ent for them to have some access perhaps. They all told me
that they ulshed they had never started and that they could stop so Z apologLze
for the ~ncreased inconvenience to the adult smokers but Z don't thank that
they're going to object.
Mayor Chmiel: Mike.
Councilman Mason: I would like to see the cigarette cartons also put behind the
self. There's been some interesting discussion here tonight on alcohol and
cigarettes and I, I mean this in all seriousness. These discussions tonight, I
know this sounds pretty hoky but it's true. Have made me (a), proud to be a
member of the City Council. The openness that we've seen here tonight. 4nd
(b), proud to be a residen( of Chan. 4nd I usually don't say stuff like that
but this stuff that's come out tonight I 'really think has been very informative
all the way around. That's kind of piggybacking on what you said.
councilman Wing: Have we shamed you prior?
Councilman Mason: No, no.
42
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1991
Councilwoman Dimler: It's kind of what he meant though.
Councilman Mason: No. Yeah, I would like to see cartons included in this also.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you .... rather than prolong it, accept what Tom was
talking about the ugly 60's. Back in my days.
Councilman Mason: He said ugly 70's.
Mayor Chmiel: But as I said back in my days of course, drugs were not as
prevalent. Smoking was. Unfortunately I didn't start until my later years in
life and finally quit but I guess I am also supporting this particular position
and feel that keeping this away from children under the ages of reason to do
what they'd like is really the way to go. I feel rather strongly with it. I've
even tried doing the same things in making specific incentives for a couple of
my own kids and finally got them to quit but, one I'm still working on. I think
it is. It's a good thing. It's a very healthy thing for them as well and I'll
call the question. Can I have a motion?
Councilman Mason: First and second reading?
Mayor Chmiel: I would suggest ue go through the two readings on this in the
event that there are some of the buslness people who would like to come back in
here and I don't know how they could really stand there and say it would hurt
them. They may have problems in flndlng locations for them but I'm sure they'll
find those locations. So I'd llke a motion.
Councilwoman Dimler: I would move the City Code amendment regarding the sale of
cigarettes, first reading only although I wish I could do the second reading.
Councilman Workman: Make a motion to do so.
Councilman Wing: It's going to pass anyway.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, first and second readlng.
Councilman Workman: Would we need to pass a separate, an initial ordinance or
amendment to our rules before we did that?
Roger Knutson: That's the way you've normally done it in the past. The By-laws
state if you want to walve the second readlng, that'd be a separate motion.
Councilwoman Oimler: Does that take a 4/5?
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. I would like to say that I know that we're all for thls
but I think we do owe a certain amount of time for the businesses in this
community to come back and dlscuss thls rather than railroading it through by
going right now.
Councilman Wing: Don, I'm going to support you and that won't give us the 4/5.
I agree.
43
£ity Council Meeting -- September ?.3, 1991
Council. man Workman: I ~'~gree.. We may have caught them off guard. I'm a little
surprised. I uou.td .tike everybody in here who eloquently i~elped us out tonight
to be aware that October 14th we will probably be doing this again and if you
could make i~ and attend, it may be a different room at that time.
Councilwoman Oimler: Okay, so at that point then I'll go back to the original
mo[iol~ fol' the first reading only.
councilman Hason: Second.
Scott Hart: Councilman Uorkman, did you want to include any changes in cartons?
Councilman ~orkman: Well, would we have to delet, e the part on self--servicing
merchandise?
Roger Knutson; If you wanted to do it, I would suggest definition of self-
.'.;c~rvicing merchandise be amended to read, self-.servicing merchandising means a
method of displaying tobacco products that the public has access to without the
intervention of employee.
Councilwoman Oim].err Fine, with that reading.
~ayof Chmiel: With that incorporated into it. ~ill the second accept that
amendment to it? Who had 'the second?
Councilman Workman: I did.
Councilman Wing: Did you?
Councilman Workman= .l don't think I did.
Mayor Chlniel: Michael did.
Councilwom,.~r, []imler': Bo you accept thai?
Councilman Hason: Sure. Absolutely.
Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the first
reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 10 of the Chanhassen City Code by
adding provisions regulating the sale of tobacco products with an amendment in
tho definition of "self-service Merchandise" to read: Self-Service Merchandise
means a method of displaying tobacco products that the public has access to
without the intervention of an employee. All voted in favor and the motion
carried unanimously.
REZONING OF 90 ACRES ZONED A2, AGRICULTURAl. ESTATE DISTRICT TO PUD, PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT TO CREATE 10 INDUSTRIAL LOTS; LOCATED SOUTH OF THE CHICAGO,
M~I.WAUKEE, ST. PAUL AND PACIFIC RAILROAD AND EAST OF AUDUBON ROAD, RYAN
CONSTRUCTION.
Kate Aanenson: I',l going to take this ill tWO phases. First will be the
CO~lCep[ual review and then the rest PUD. The si~e plan is currently used
agricultu'rally. Soy bo. an 'fie~ds cover most the site. The farmed area consists
44
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1991
of 67.6 acres of the 94 developable area. There are 12 lots proposed for this
farmed area and two outlots. Outlot A which is approximately 14.3 acres and
Outlot B uhlch ls approximately 7.8 acres. According to the National Wetland
Inventory Map, there is a marginal wetland located on approximately where Lot 6
ls proposed and staff ls coordinating a necessary review ulth the Army Corps of
Engineers and staff will also require that a wetland alteration permit be
processed for thls slte. In addltlon staff has requested that an Environmental
Assessment be done for the entlre site. We realtze this is an industrial park
and that tlp-up panels and the like are golng to be used. However, we want to
insure that there's significant architectural standards that will be employed to
malntaln this as a hlgh quallty project. The applicant has indicated that the
higher quality, high profile buildings be located along Audubon Road and these
buildings w111 probably be a hlgher percentage of office type uses. We will
also be asking that they develop PUO documents stating that these standards be
applled. On Lot 12, the only lot that ue know for sure what w111 be developed
is a U.S. Weather Service. They've indicated that they will be locating this
slte in the year 1993 or 1994. We believe that thls lsa really good use for
this site based on the fact that they'll probably need between 10 and 12 acres
of property and that the bulldlng ltself is very small in scale. Approximately
15,000 square feet so it provides a really nice buffer for those residential
properties on the other side of Audubon Road. As far as street access, access
to the 11 lots will be along the extension of Lake Drive West. This street will
be a long cul-de-sac approximately 1,700 feet long. Lots 2, 3, and 4 wlll be
accessed off an additional cul-de-sac and they're requesting that Lot 1 have
dlrect access off of Audubon Road. The engineering department has concerns over
this and we are requesting that this be included as part of a traffic study.
Whether or not it would be appropriate to put additional access onto Audubon
Road. The landscaping and tree preservation. The western portion of the site
contalns some unlque vegetative features. These features lnclude the Bluff
Creek floodplain and a large stand of mature trees which are approximately 6
acres in size. The applicants are plannlng to leave the exlsting mature stand
of trees. As currently planned, the city would take title to Outlot A and
permanently protect thls area. The applicants are also proposing to alter the
floodplain of Bluff Creek to build a storm water retention pond. Let me put
that one up there. See where that's shaded there. Where they're proposing to
alter the floodplain there. As far as the grading, we already touched on
alterlng the floodplain but that would require approval from the DNR, the
Watershed Oistrict and the Federal Emergency Management Agency. As far as
utilities, the Clty, the provision of water seems okay. They w111 do a looped
system to maintain internal water pressure. The sewer's the blg question.
Originally I proposed to come off of a 11ne off Audubon Road and we determined
that that road doesn't go anywhere at this time and under the recently approved
comprehensive plan, the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission approved the
placement of a lift station in the vicinity of Lyman Blvd. in. which this entire
site could draln by gravity and then utilizing forcemains, pump the sewage back
uph111 into the Lake Ann Interceptor. At this time the consultant working with
Bonestroo, Rosene and Anderlik, the City's engineering consultants on thls
matter, exploring appropriate methods of how to serve this area. So the main
concern we'd have ls how this area would be servlced and so we'd ask them that
they petition the city to do a feasibility study on the specifics of how this
would be addressed for sewage. Park and Recreation. The applicants have
developed a looped trail system around the entire site. The applicants are
proposing to dedlcate Outlot A and the trall system in 1leu of park and
45
City Council Meeting -Septombcr 23, 1991
ded.ica'liol~ fees. The applicants are working with the Park and Recreation
Commission on this m,.~tter. They will be meeting again I believe i~ the next
week.
Todd Hoffman: Tomorrow night.
Kate Aanenson: Tomorrow night. They have met with them once and they're working
out tho agreem~;nts of how that will come about. That's basically the conceptual
aspects of it. If you want me to move into tl~e PUD. If you wanted to discuss
any questions on the conceptual.
Hayor chmiel: Why don't ue .just save them all until we get through.
Kate Aanensol~: Okay, I'll go ahead with the rezoning.
Todd Hoffman: I have one, to speak on the park fees. It is stated in the
report ars it .ts in the applicant's dialogue that they would like [o dedicate
Out].ot ~ in lieu of parkland dedication. It should be noted that staff is not
recommending that we accept that and that will be discussed tomorrow evening.
Kate Aanenson: Okay, as far as the rezoning. ~s stated previously, there's 94
acr~.~s that's currently zoned ~2, hgricuJ, tural Estate and the?'re requesting to
go to PUD-OI, Planned Unit Development Office ~ndustrial. ~hat ~_'d like to do
J.s kind of go through the intent of the PUD zone and show you how they're
meeting the intent of that. The PUD is encouraged to, for the preservation of
desireable site cl,aracr, eristics including open space and protection of sensitive
environmental fe. atures. Zn this proposed development the applicant intends to
save the existing stand of mature trees a~ong Bluff Creek located in Outlot ~.
In addition, the Comprehensive Land Use Map identifies this creek corridor as
open space. ~%s far as more efficient and effective use of land, the shape of
ti,is property prohibits design] flexibility that one can find with a flat, square
piece of property. ~t's got the railroad tracks alor, g the northern side so it
kind o'F landlocks how you could develop the internal road system. If this was
to develop separately as individual parcels, many of these design considerations
would not be included. These inc:lude signage, uniform streets and parking lot
lighti;lg, compatible architectural and building materials. The coordination of
the site development will also improve the efficiency and cost effectiveness of
public imp~'ovements~ For example the project large enough to help facilitate a
solution providing sewer service to the new MUS~ lille. ~lso the development of
sil]gle comprehensive draillage system to maximize the effec~J, veness of ilutrient
removal. ~s far as the high quality design, the applicants are proposing to
submit individual building plans for each development lot and tile City will
utilize it'~, normal site plan review for each approved PUD development to make
sure they meet tile guidelines that we've established. ~s far as sensitive
development transitional areas, again we kind of stated that the site is
bordered by ~udubon Road and tile compl-ehensive land use plan calls for a 50 foot
buffer strip for additional buffering from the subdivisions to the east. In
addition the compt'ehensive plan calls for a lO0 foot buffer along the southe~'n
property lille. Let me show you that on the landscaping plan here.
Councilman Mason: That was 50 foot?
46
city council Meeting - September 23, 199Z
Kate Aanenson: Yes. That was when ue did the comprehensive plan we put those
development standards in. So that would help buffer those Lake Susan Hills on
the other side of Audubon Road. They did have some concerns because they did
not have a fence along their subdivision. Parks and open space. The site plan
shows a looped trail system around the perimeter of the site terminating at the
northern and southern property lines along Audubon Road. Plus the preservation
along Bluff Creek. Energy conservation may puruse use of the railroad spurs on
Lots 2, 4, 6 and 7. The main access to the site, excuse me. Use of traffic
management and design techniques. The main access to the site is off of Audubon
Road. This design is a collector street by the City's comprehensive plan and
last year it was upgraded. The traffic improvements such as turn lane may be
warranted to support the additional traffic in the area. So in summary staff
feels that the request is reasonable and we believe it results ina hlgh quality
development that's consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and ordinance
standards and the goals of creating a project that's sensitive to the
surroundings. And again I stated that we are working with them in doing an
environmental assessment uhlch u111 provlde much more information. At the last
Planning Commission meeting on September 4th the Planning Commission unanimously
voted to recommend approval. Agaln there was at the publlc hearlng some
concerns over truck traffic in the area. I guess the main concern came up
through McGlynn's as far as parklng on the road and staff has worked to resolve
that specific problem. And again there was a concern with the landscaping.
Additional landscaping. We talked about that. Lake Susan Hills and we will be
addressing that when we do the additional buffering along that western edge. So
staff does recommend approval of the PUD concept plan for the Chanhassen
Business Center subject to the conditions of the report.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Is there anything you'd like to say at this time?
Kent Carlson: I won't take much of your time. Thank you. My name is Kent
Carlson. I'm with Ryan Construction Company. We've worked with your staff over
the past few months to develop these plans and we're real excited about the
opportunity to come to town and develop this property. We see it as a great
opportunity for the community as well as ourselves to bring new businesses into
town and employment, hopefully add some new residents to your community. We'll
welcome your comments or take your questions. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, we'll start with Richard.
Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor, Council. There's no point in sitting here as a
rebel of one and I only say that because back in the Comp Plan I thought the
arguments for running industrial south of the tracks were kind of lame. I
dldn't agree with them in the flrst place and I oppose thls with residential
across the street and residential south intermingling industrial at this point,
but lt's moot at this polnt. So just two comments I would make regarding the
project. I think it's a good project. A positive development. I would support
Todd in taklng the fees. I'd 11ke to see the land utlllzed in this particular
development as much as possible. Is that your intent? Your suggest was fees
would not be taken in lieu of the land?
Todd Hoffman: No. The land, the outlot is dedicated as part of the PUD. In my
belief thls development would not be feaslble as a PUD ulthout that outlot belng
dedicated as part of that as stated in staff's report so what in essence would
47
City COUrlCi]. Me:-~.t.[ng --September 2.3, 1791
happen is we would give them two benefits for that one outlet. So it is my
recommendatiol~, and I f~.~el it will be the recommendation of the Park and
Recreation Commission, to then accept full park fees as part of this
development. To go ahead and use those park fees to meet the needs of the
employees who will then, and their families who will be working and living in
Councilman Wing: Okay, I agree with that. The other thing I had is there's
j~tst ol]e angle that just doesn't f'J. llg of Paul. I<rauss and that's under the
setbacks. I think that Paul has consistently pushed for lessening impact and
great,';f' barriers. The 50 foot setback, as I look at these plans and the lots
alon9 A~tdttbon Road, I find really unacceptable. I think there's a neighborhood
across the street, hea~)y resident ia]. in this area and that even though they're
going '[o be quality office sites, I think the setbacks from the road should be
slgnifica~]tly more. Even at a 100 foot level. I'm wondering about this.
Paul Krauss: If I could address this Councilman Wing. When the Planning
Commission got into the issue of buffering, what they established and it's an
ordinance now. What they established was 50 foot buffer yard along publlc
r.[gllts-of-way and 100 foot on intef'nal property line. It also explicitly says
the. setback is then measured from that buffer yard so that pushes everything 100
feet back. Huch of the exposure along Audubon is taken up by the Weather
station, assumlng that goes forward and that's golng to be mostly open space.
So if you're one of ti'me honles across tile :street, and I'll. grant you those homes
acrosc the street, 20/20 hindsight are closer than one would prefer. But what
those homes have is they have theJ. r 30 foot rear yard setback. Then you have an
80 'foot right-of-way. Then you have a 50 foot buffer yard and then you have a
50 foot setback. P.lus it ~taf'(~ to...and that b~ffef- yard has to be intensively
landscaped so I'm pretty comfortable that we can do a pretty good job with that.
Councilman Wing: Intensively landscaped? I can take you literally on that.
I'd 11ks to see these buildings along that stretch of road to be conducive wlth
that houslng area. Look like up on, blg company up on Wayzata.
Kate Aanenson: Carlson?
Councilman Wing: Cargill.
Patti Krauss: Oh well.
COUflCi].man Wing: I realize that's extreme but I'm just saying it can, I think
that I want this area from Audubon Road buffered seriously.
Paul Krauss: We do have every expectation that we will buffer it highly. The
applicants also looking, it's in the PUB to have the higher profile office
primarily orlented uses, the hlgher quality buildings along Audubon on the
higher ground. And I thlnk everybody's working toua'rd that goal. We're working
wlth a slte that really doesn't offer a whole lot to start ulth. I mean lt's a
soy bean fleld.
Mayor Chmiel: ...that portion of it and sitting in on the Plarlnlng Commission
a~d listening to discussion there. The people that were there really had some
concerns but they knew that it was eventually golng to be developed and the way
48
City Council Meeting - September
Ryan is going to develop this particular piece of property, I think...
Councilwoman Oimler: I guess my main concerns were similiar to Richards. My
flrst questlon was, is thls consistent wlth our Comprehensive Plan and you
answered that. I guess I was a little bit surprised. I am surprised that the
Tlmberwood and other neighborhoods aren't here this evening. I really expected
this to be a long issue but maybe that was all addressed at the Planning
Commission and I'm not aware of that.
Paul Krauss: Councilwoman Dimler, much of Timberwood was beyond the 500 foot
notice. Now realizing that we've had a lot of contact with them and believing
we had a commitment to keeping them informed, I did notify them of the Planning
Commission meetlng. We dldn't get any representation from Tlmberwood. I found
that surprising too. But they knew about it.
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, but taking that into account then and the process as
has moved along through the Planntng Commission, I ltke the staff
recommendations. I am concerned about a few proposals here that I don't think
have been addressed such as the storm water basin. The relocation of the
wetland and the complexity of providing the utilities and havlng a feasibility
study on that. Also the concerns about TH 5 and the ~udubon Road intersection
and then agaln, and I think Mark dld address some of the concerns. Safety
concerns about having another long cul-de-sac and I understand that you would
have preferred the looplng but that's not a possibility here so. But is my
understanding correct in the fact that we cannot go ahead and approve this PUD
untll these concerns have been addressed?
Paul Krauss: Yes, exactly. You're not being asked to approve it. This is a
conceptual revlew. You're belng asked to give your comments and move thls along
if you so choose and give direction to us and the applicant so when they do come
back in, we'll have everything brought up to your standards and our standards.
Councilwoman Oimler: My overall comment then would be that I would rather see
it be a PUB where we have some control or a 11ttle blt more control than to have
these sites individually developed and not have the continuity.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Mike.
Councilman Mason: My two concerns, my basic concerns are the landscaping along
Audubon there. And I think as the city moves further west, I see Audubon Road
and TH 5 being an issue. Anything going on with that?
Paul Krauss: The City Engineer has been in some meetings recently with MnDot
and working with them to get the next phase of TH 5 scheduled. I'd defer to
Charles on that.
Councilman Mason: What's going on with that, do you know Charles?
Charles Folch: As of the week before last, we received approval from MnOot on
the cooperative agreement for that segment of the overall improvement project.
The next step is to develop the consultant agreement between the City of
Chanhassen and Barton-Aschmann to actually prepare the plans and specifications
for that portion of the work. That phase, if you will, wtll take place within
City Coulee.i! Nee[il'~9 - Septemb,'-.,.r 2.3, 1991
the next 2 to 3 weeks and that .also ha~[: to go through MnDot app'r'oval. Once
that':s reached then it's ,:zl~poximate].? ,~ 15 month design pFocess before
c;on:structton would begin.
Councilman Mason.' What eJse did you say Ursula? You said something I agreed
with.
Counc_'i..].woman P.iml~:f'.' Well, let me repeat it.
Cotincilman Mason: No. Nuts. T.f I think of it, I'll come back to it. The PUD
tl;i~g. Yeah, Z agree. ~ really like the city and staff being able to work with
the whole package instead of separate pieces. I think it's great. That's it.
Tha~k you.
Itayor Chmiel: Tom.
Councilman Workman: I,et's get it done. Come on in. That's my comments,
Nayo'r' Cl'lmi~l: Amen. ]: guess I feel pretty Inuch like that. I did sit in on
this earlier. We also origina].ly sat down and talked about this as to some of
the things whicl, we're expecting to see within the city. I think Ryan is taking
that position to fake care of those co~cer~s as well as some of time neighbors
COllCerlls within that aFea. Ryan is awel], known developer and I think they're
]ookJng to have something put in our community that's golng to be a benefit not
only for u~ but for them. For a quick referral [o say this is what can be done
!n your community. ~ sort of like that pos&lion at thls time. So with that, I
thZnk the stand of trees off in tha( area and I think a lot of that has been
addressed with the lift station and the feasibilit>,. Park and Rec's final
decision o~ Outlot A or the fee per se. I think this is something that all can
fa].] into place. So with that I would like to have a motion for rezoning of
those 90 acres zoned A2, Agricu].tuf'a]. Estate District to PUB, Planned Unit
Development to create ~0 industrial lots located south of the Chicago, Milwaukee
St. Paul Pacific Railroad and east of Audubon Road.
Co~trlni]man Wo'r'kmai~: So moved.
Counci].man Mason: Second,
Mayor Chmiel: Discussion.
Councilman Wino~. Just a real quick comment Paul on parking lots. Having been
to that seminar, I'm not sure as Y. look ~t the blueprillt on page 1, Lot 1,
Attractive bulldlng facJa shouldn't be on the road with the parklng lot on the
vest side. .T, think T. would prefer to see tl~e parking lot not visible from the
· road. Z'd prefer to have the bulldlrlg.
Mayor Chmiel: Parking behind?
Councilman Wing: Yeah. The building on the road with the parking on the other
side. On AI.t(lubon Road.
Mayor Chmiel: Well that's p'robably a very optional thing but depending upon
tota). :~pace'.s required for that 3 acres would be the dictaf, il~9 whether or not
5O
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1991
those spaces could be. I agree with you if they can be adjusted accordingly and
the bu/lding placed on that lot, then it could be done as such but if you look
also at some of these others, they're all over.
Councilwoman Dimler' I would like someone to put my mind at ease. Like I said,
I didn't think ue were going to approve the PUD today. Now the motion is to
approve it. How do we then address the remaining unresolved issues?
Paul Krauss: You're acting on a concept tonight. You'll have this back before
you over the next few months. Affirmative approval and I would expect that most
of those lssues would be resolved...condltlons at that' time.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, but once we pass it then the neighborhood, if they
have any opposition wlll not, they won't have another recourse or they won't
have another recourse.
Paul Krauss: Rlght. The concept approval is not binding.
Mayor Chmiel: There's nothing that's putting you into that position.
Paul Krauss: Also, when this comes back in front of the Plannlng Commission,
there will be the formal public hearing and we'll notify again.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. So at that time they can say we didn't want the PUD
and we can reconsider?
Paul Krauss: Yes.
Councilwoman Oimler: Okay.
Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve PUD Concept Plan
for the Chanhassen Business Center subject to the following conditions:
1. Prepare an Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the project to be reviewed
with formal PUD request.
2. Petltlon the City to undertake a feasibility study on providing services to
the site.
3. Prepare a formal PUD submittal responding to issues ralsed in this report,
as well as those raised at Planning Commission and City Council meetings,
while uorklng with staff on the plan development.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
CONSIDER TRAFFIC CONTROL REOUEST. NO PARKING ON YUMA ROAD AND WOODHILL DRIVE.
Charles Folch: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. This item was presented
before you at the last Councll meeting. However, following revlew of the
Minutes, staff is unclear as to whether or not action was taken on this item.
Therefore it ls brought back to you tonight for clarification. As you may
already know, these segments of Woodhill Drive and Yuma Road are one way streets
wlth an average width of approximately 17 feet. Staff has recently become aware
51
Cil. y Cour~cil He,'-;ting September 23, 1991
that vehicle parking on both sides of these road segments is frequently
oc¢:urt-~.l]g. ,~t the very least this parkin9 situation pr~-.'sel~ts a potential access
problem. Paf'ticular for larger emergency response vehicles. Zn addition staff
h¢~s recently received an anonymous complaint on the accessibility of these roads
with the two sided parking. This item has since been reviewed by the, and
,.~pPf'oYed by the Public Safety Commission and in addition ~otices were sent out
to all the affected property owners for the last Council meeting. However,
..;t,~ff did not r~-.'ceive any rc:sponses either for or agai~lst this issue. Therefore
~t is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution restrict.ing parking
on the north side of Woodhi1]. Brive between Nez Pefco and Yuma and along the
east s.ide of Yuma Road between Woodhill Drive and Ponderosa.
M,~yor Chmiel: Thank you. ~ny discussion? Mike.
Councilman Hason: It being my neighborhood, the parking on ~oodhill really is
,'.~n issue. Peopl~. are, it's a very steep hill and no one really, very rarely do
people park on Woodhil].. The issue is Yuma. By parking on the east side, it's
impossible to get around the corner down there. I've had neighbors talk to me
about it, this, that and the other thing. I talked with everyone on Yuma and on
~oodhill. They af'e 1()0~ in agreement. The Yuma Road issue, some of my
neighbors questioned whether we needed no parking on Woodhill. If we did, they
all ~anted it switched to tl~e othet' side simply because thet'e are some empty
lots that ~on't be built on on that side and people can park on that side
without tearing up people's la~ns, hs it sits ~ow, the only way you can park is
on people's lawns because that's where the homes are on ~oodhill.
Mayo]' Chmie. l: You're saying just vice versa of what's proposed?
Councilman Mason: Yeah, leave Yuma the way it is and switch the north side/
uouth side on ~oodl~ill,
Councilman Workman: It wouldn't have been published as north or south side
would it hav~-;?
Councilman Mason: Yeah, it was published that way. We got a map saying.
Councilman Wo~'kman: It was published as north side? I mean not here. In the
paper. It wasn't published,
Charles Folch: Not in the paper.
Councilman Workman; It was just put as Woodhill so we wouldn't have a problem?
Ok~ty.
Mayor Chmiel: No. And if he's had discussion with the neighbors and they
agreed with that, I do~'t see any problem.
Councilman Mason: So if we can restrict parking on the south side of Woodhill
as opposed to ~ho north slde, I'd move approval.
Councilman Workman: Second.
52
City Council Heeting - September 23, 1991
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, it's been moved with a second. Discussion. The only
concern I have. Public Safety, when they reviewed this. Do they have any
concerns? I don't recall that there were.
Scott Hart: It was unanimous to support engineering's recommendation. I've
been down there with both Councilman Mason and Charles and Yuma's not passable
with parking on both sides. It has to be restricted and Woodhill's caused us
problems as well so the Commission are very much in support of it.
Mayor Chmiel: Very good. Charles, you see no problem?
Charles Folch: I see no problem.
Resolution ~91-94: Councilman Mason moved. Councilman Workman seconded to adopt
a resolution restricting parking on the south side of Woodhill Drive between Nez
Perce and Yuma and along the east side of Yuma Road between Woodhill Drive and
Ponderosa. A11 voted in favor and the mot/on carried unanimously.
ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDHENT TO CREATE A BLUFF LINE PRESERVATION SECTION OF THE
CITY CODE, FIRST READING.
Paul Krauss: This ordinance is a long time coming. We originally got involved
in the bluff line for a couple of reasons. We've been having problems with
unregulated development causlng destruction of the bluff 11ne. Some of you have
been out with me or my staff and we've looked at...and are aware that there's
some severe eroslon problem occurring on the bluff 11ne largely due to human
tinkering. Either because we changed the drainage or somebody built too close
or whatever but this bluff 11ne ls extremely sensitive. It's a few lnches of
clay over a lot of sugar sand and there's a lot of subsurface water. All you've
got to do ls mess wlth it once and it starts to collapse. We also had a couple
of gentlemen who grew up in this area and became amateur naturalist, speak
glowingly of the Bluff Creek valley and some of us went on a tour of that this
spring and really agreed with them that there's a very precious natural resource
down there that's ina pristlne state. There's a lot of flora fauna that
doesn't exist anyplace else and there's a desire to protect that. Lastly I
thlnk, and thls came across at the Planning Commission during the Comp Plan that
the Minnesota River Valley is itself a very important natural environmental
resource, not only for our residents but for Mlnnesotans and that there's a
desire to make sure that it retains it's beauty. Retains it's environmental
qualities. With that in mlnd staff at the Plannlng Commission's recommendation
started working on an ordinance in conjunction with the ONR and the Watershed
District, the Soll Conservation Service and the 8oard of Soil and Water
Resources and there's probably a couple of acronyms I don't remember anymore.
But we trled to put together a bluff 11ne protection ordinance that
sensitive to the fact that a lot of the bluff line is already developed so
basically grandfathering ina lot of the people there. Bringlng it lnto effect
with as little hardship as possible. It was also sensitive to preserving the
bluff 11ne. Maklng sure that development that occurs up there ls not as
destructive as it's been in the past and hopefully ue can avoid some of the
problems. Essentially the ordinance creates an offlclal map of the bluff line
that's based on topographic contours. This blue line composite print over here
is our representation of the offlclal map. Now if this is adopted by you we'll
of course make it look a lot cleaner than this. It will be in a reproduceable
53
C(ty Council Heeti. l~g -. September 23, 19~J_
form but ';t basically defines 'the bluff line as where a percent of grade starts
,~l~d el~ds. The ordL~litllce a13o provides th,.~t structures must be located at least
30 feet back from the bluff line. That's top and bottom. We've had, you know
Ilurmally you thil~k the bluff line, the most destructive illtrusions have been on
the top. Z think those of you who have traveled down _t69 and seen like the mini
storage buiJ. ding that we have over there, can see how destructive you can be
work,no from the bottom up. Z think it's clear that we need to protect both
sorts of things from happening again. Zf there's an existing b~zildJ, ng on the
].ct, of course this takes place in 90~ of the lots in Hesse Farm which are
already built on. The existing setback is reduced to the existing setback of
the house or 5 feet, whichever is larger and there's language in there that
b;.tsJ, caJ.].y doesn't, ~t doesn't make existing homes non-conforming. Zt basically
says they're permanently okay. $o there's never any question of if it burns
down or falls off the cliff or ~hatever that they'll be able to put it back.
~¢..'re not tinkering wlth anybody's home value. ~e were very careful about that.
The CLttLil]g of tf-~;es orl the bluff line is prohibJ, ted. Clear cutting of trees.
The. ordinance does allow staff to work with afl individual so that they can cut
sorer: view corr.~dot's. People move up there for the view. I think we all ,~gYeed
that J.t would be inappropriate to say absoZutely no cutting at a11. You can
live on the bluff but you can't see tile valley. That there's some desire to
allow the view to occur but not clear cutting so there would be selective
cutting. Lastly, normally we allow grading permits. We ol~ly require grading
permits ls you're moving more than 50 yards of dlrt. Z can't emphasize how
sensitive th.i.s ~.l'~ing is. We've just seen time and time again where people
really dJ. dn't know there was any klnd of an lssue. They built a house too
c.l. ose. They put gutters on their house and changed the dr'~.~inage. Any kind of
mlnor thing ].J. ke that. Once thls st,~rts to go, it really goes. .I think
Colznciluoman [)imlel' was with us on the trip and when you're walking through the
v;,tley there, you can just see where some of the houses were up on top and you
see sheer cliffs, 90-12o feet high where they'~)e just gone. It's just exposed
th9 sand. To some extent that's natural and lt's tough to know what man dld and
what nature did but ~ lot of it has been induced. A lot of times you'll see the
house on top that caused lt. So what we're proposing to do is to lower the trlp
]_eve1 for grading permit down to 10 y,]¥ds. That will ~11ow us [o go out there
arm work with th~.,, property owner to make sure that the most sensitive gradlng
possible is done. That we're not Focusing water over ~ny particular point.
That we're promoting the sheet dralrlage. The Plannlng Commission revleued thls
over ~ number of meetings and we did send out notice to everybody in the bluff
district. The first meetlng of the P]annlng Commission was very well attended.
We got ~ lot, when we explained it to a lot of people .on the phone, a lot of
theul came away basically supporting it. There was one gentleman who did have a
si. to that's unbuilt on in Hesse Farms who was concerned that this ordinance
wo~tld result in the. fact that he couldn't build hls house where he wanted to.
The Planning Commission had a continuance. They Inet out at the site and walked
down to the spot on thJ. s lot where the gentleman wanted to build hls home. They
concluded th;~t this was a perfect example of ul~ere a home shommld not be located.
That thls is exactly what the bluff line ordinance is designed to prohibit. Now
f. here is a building site on f. his lot. It isn't where the gentleman wanted it
but it's back up on the h111 where [he other homes are located. Thls is
basically out on ~ pennisula. It dropped away on three sides. Beautiful spot.
I don't blame him for trylng but you basically have to level this, lt's a h111.
A knoll or, ~t pennisula that you basically have [o flatten the whole thing and
cut clown all the trees around it 'to make it work. Plus you wlnd up sticking a
54
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1991
big house in front of two other people who are already there so there were a lot
of issues with that. The Planning Commission came back feeling very comfortable
with the ordinance. They unanimously recommended that it be approved. We're
recommending that you approve the first reading to the ordinance and to the
official map. One related item that you may want to consider too, and Todd and
I have had several discussions about this in the past. The bluff line ordinance
goes a long way to physically protecting this thing. It doesn't acquire
property. It doesn't gain access. It doesn't allow for any kind of public
management or allowing the Arboretum to come in and work with these areas or
whatever. There's a long standing desire, it's in the Comprehensive Plan, to
protect a corrldor along Bluff Creek. Now that doesn't necessarily mean public
ownership but it may mean acquisition of easements. There's also a related
deslre to get some sort of a recreational trall down through there. That's a
long standing issue. I don't know how that would be resolved. The area through
Hesse Farms, you know we're talklng about an area that's literally 100 feet, 150
feet in some cases, away from the house. Below the house. But this is
something that if the Council wishes to see pursued, they would probably need to
work with the Park Board on that. There's a large area that we may be able to
get through dedication but that's only when the golf course is subdivided. That
was slated for a couple years ago but that's since lapsed and under the current
zonlng, lt's not likely to occur for qulte awhlle. Wlth that agaln we are
recommending approval of the ordinance and the official map.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you Paul. I think that what he's saying has a lot of
validity to it. Even going out and looking at a couple of other homes that
people had bullt where they're havlng areas just absolutely wash away and real
concerns as to how to protect that particular piece of property with some of
these proposals that are in here w111 alleviate a lot of those glven concerns.
I think it's a well thought out preservation ordinance and I know the Planning
Commission has done an awful lot of work wlth it. And when Paul talks about
that one individual, that's just the way it is too. It's not the best place to
put it where he wanted to put it in the flrst place and I thlnk that individual
understood that once ue discussed it. So with that, Richard.
Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor, based on your comments and the tremendous amount of
time and expert witnesses that have gone into this, I'd like to start it out by
movlng to approve the flrst readlng of the zonlng ordinance amendment to create
a bluff line protection ordinance.
Councilman Workman: Second.
Mayor Chmiel: It's been moved and seconded. Discussion.
Councilman Mason: Only comment. I would love to see a path. Not a trail but a
path and some sort of access in there. I was on that and it just knocked my
socks off dolng that hlke through there. It was like I was not in the State. I
was in the north woods somewhere and I don't think there should be an asphalt
path. I don't thlnk there should be a major trall but I think it would be
fantastic to have some kind of limited access there. I think you folks have
done a flne job on thls. I thlnk lt's neat.
55
City Council Heef..i. n9 - .Seplembe~' 23, 199i
Counc/lman Wing moved, CouncJlmalm Workman seconded to approve the first reading
of the Bluff Line Preservation Ordinance and the Off£c£al Bluff Line Hap.
voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE AMENDHENT TO AMEND SECTIONS REGARDING
LANDSCAPING AND TREE PRESERVATION REOUIREHENTS, FIRST READING.
Kate Aanenson'- The idea of tile tandscaping ordinance has been discussed uith
the Plar, ning Commission since February and general].y found that while the
existing ordinance contained a lot of good elements, there were portions of ~t
that were ~nappropriate of' difficult to admlrlister. So the first step the
Plannil~g CommJ. ssion did was put together some goals and the ordinance format.
What I'd 11ke to do ls just summarize some of the major problems that they found
with the ordinance. Also lncluded the exlsting ordinance standards are
contained in sever'al portions of the zorllng ordinance and presented ina manner
(hat ~f"e confusing and difficult to interpret and understand. No landscaping of
any sort J.s required under the current subdivision ordinance, thus in instances
where subdivisions may for example be located at a collector stree(, the city
w~s not in a positlon to require landscaping or screening. It was unclear as to
whether the goals and intent of the ordinance and what they were. For example
we [alked about screerling for heatlng and ventilating and alt conditioning
equipment or' [rash storage but it would not address trlzck loading and other
areas. The existlng ordinance contalns a standard where there be 1 tree for
every 40 linear fee~. We feel that this is kind of outdated methodology to use
for applying trees so the new ordinance takes a completely different approach by
establishlltg a ratlo landscaping cost to the project value cost. And then
flnally there has been a good deal of discussion that the existlng requirement
of 1 tree per lot for slngle family residences is too low and concern that that
should be increased to 3 trees. Z thlnk the Plannlng Commission probably spent
a lot of their time on this issue alone. So through a series of several
meetlngs the Plannlng Commission put together this draft for your perusal
tonight. The main concern again is a list of tree species and the Planning
Commission recommended that 3 trees be requlred wlth each bulldlng lot. These
trees would be selected from two lists and they came up with like what they
considered a hlgh value list and those belng deciduous trees and then one 11st
of conifer (tees. One tree would be plcked from each and then the thlrd tree
you could pick from either list. We sent the 11st to the ONR and they felt that
our existing tree species was appropriate but in addition we looked at the
University of Hlrlnesota Agricultural and Natural Resource Extension Servlces and
tha[ information was provided by Councilman Wing. So we provided the list for
you of deciduous and evergreen trees. Tills 11st ls really based on what we've
collected from those sources I mentioned. It's for thought or we're not saying
it's inclusive or exclusive. We really want your comments on that. In addltion
tile ordinance itseZf, maybe you can pass this around. Roger made a couple
comments on that. The flrst page of the ordinance we're misslng a sectlon and
Z'11 pass it around. The Zanguage. The first statement that's crossed out
needs to be le'ft Zn where it states that the Clty Councll of the Clty of
6hanhassen. That needs to be left in all ordinances. Then in addition there
needs to be a sectlon headlng on that and that's comlng around to you rlght now.
So what we did ls we broke it out into the sections as we mentioned. There
t~asn't one for subdivisions so we put that in and I think it 'reads a lot easler.
Unless you wan[ [o specificalZy go through lt, that's all I have.
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1991
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Let's start with Tom.
Councilman Workman: The guy who doesn't want this? Explain to me there in the
very first page, (b). This article does not apply to single family detached
residences in the A-l, A-2, okay never mind.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, we're just talking about.
Councilman Workman: I was drifting and I thought it meant one thing and it
means another. We are talking about requiring 3 trees for a new development.
I guess I have a real problem with that. I guess I'm just going to leave it to
general comments right now for the first reading here. ! think we're going over
board just a little bit. I think it's going to start to effect people's ability
to, I don't know.
Kate Aanenson: Can I clarify that? It's saying if there are 2, up to 2 trees
that are existing on the site may qualify so.
Councilman Workman: Well we're building a lot of houses in bean fields.
Kate Aanenson: Right, where a lot of them don't have any trees.
Councilman Workman: And not to be anti tree but it just seems to me that we're
getting kind of, maybe not over zealous but just zealous. I want to see this
move along. I'm going to save a lot of my comments for later. I just want to
make sure everyone understood that's how I felt.
Councilman Wing: Like the Bluff Creek ordinance, I sat and listened to Planning
Commission night after night on this and I think it's a real clean-up. The one
issue that's a little new is the 3 trees. Z think some of us agreed with that.
Perhaps the comments won't later on but as far as agricultural book talks about
what trees do for us. What it does for the value of your property and your lot.
The value of your land. And to take a bean field that our ancestors ripped out
the oaks and maples and expect them to put 3 trees back when they're going to
pave most of it anyway, to me is the most, it's such a token back to the
environment it's hardly worth discussion. I mean I'd like a half dozen trees.
Three was, it's going to cost nobody a thing. The developer can choose to
donate them if he's really environmentally, or if not it's going to go on a 20,
25, 30 year mortgage at an additional $200.00 over 30 years. The tree issue's a
big issue to me obviously. I think we owe it to the community to start putting
a little bit back. Into the bean fields. That's all. Other than that, and the
other thing I wanted to comment on is the University is coming up with a formal
list of trees that they would recommend the City limit to and it's similar to
the one we have. I like the ordinance really well. Even without the trees I
think the ordinance is really excellent. The trees happen to be a sore point to
me.
Councilman Workman: Weii I guess when you go in for a building permit there's a
$750.00 ding on there if you don't put the tree in.
Paul Krauss: Yes.
57
CJ. ty Council Meeting --Septembe'~' 23, 1991
Councilman Workman: Now if you dol,'t put 3 trees in there it's not just $200.00
orm a mortgage. It's up to $2,250.00 on a mortgage. Ny concern isn't that. I'm
contemplating buildlng a home on a lot that has not got one sirlgle tree on it
right now. Am I golng to leave it that way? Not in a milllon years. Okay? Am
I goirmg to have more than 3 trees on that lot? You bet you. Do I want to
declde whlch trees lhey are? Oo I want to decide where they go? That's the
crux.
Councilman Wing: But that's old talk. I think we trled to clarify before. You
can pick which trees you want and you can put them where you want and you have a
year to do lt. We're just saying before you get occupancy.
councilman Workman: In ali. situatiorms? Are you guaranteeing that in all
situations?
Councilman Wing: I don't think we're impinging on the owner's right to
landscape and select his trees, are we Paul?
Paul Krauss: Well a couple things. As to cost. We do reserve $750.00 now.
$500.00 of that is for seed or sod of the disturbed areas of the iot. There's
tree requirement now and we figure the tree equates to about $250.00. So this
requirement would add another $500.00 into the escrow if they didn't do that.
So you're up to $1,250.00.
Councilman Mason: If they do~'t do it?
Paul Krauss: Well, a lot of homes don't have that done at the time they receive
the Certificate of Occupancy. So that ls an increase. There's no question
there's a cost. Now as far as what tree you plck and we propose the tree 11st
here based on information Councilman Wing gave to us from the Arboretum. They
evaluated trees. They gave them actually a numerical value based on suitability
to Minnesota. Zt's ability to survive and a couple other things. It gets a
11ttle complex here but the Plannlng Commission went ulth i high value tree
minlmum, deciduous. And there's a lot of them to pick from. i any other
deciduous tree and i conlfer. Of all those I think i has to be in the front
yard. The idea to get some landscaping along tile street so you can pick from
virtually any tree, any quallty tree that will survlve in Minnesota and apart
from the fact that it's got to be in your front yard, i of them has to be there,
you can elect to put it anyplace.
Mayor Chmiel: I guess total, of $1,250.00 in the next 30 years is insignificant
but yet initially as peop].e look at it whe]~ they flrst go 1tm, lt's a chunk for
them to chew off. Slze wise lsa concern of mine too. What callper are we
talking? Some of the trees that are in here, the one that I know a 11ttle blt
about is just the Marshall Ash and I'd like to see tl~at as only seedless because
they can be a very dlrty tree for that individual. Haybe those wlll dlffer from
tile University as well. or from the Arboretum. But some of those trees that are
contained in here to me are not one that I call a weed, Sllver Maple.
Councilman Wing: The University intended to exclude that one Don because of
lt's growth and the likelihood of dlsease.
58
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1991
Mayor ChmieI: Okay, good. Because that one to me is just not a tree that
shouid even be pianted. Aithough I Iike mapies and I have a couple of them £n
my yard but that one I'd never put in. There's a few others in here that stiii
need some discussion but I can see where it could cause a probiem within the
buiIding portion for some peopie. Nonetheiess, if to me I think is something
that is needed to a point but aIso in the same token there's a iot of people
that just automaticaiiy put in a tree once they get into a home. I started out
with 5 trees on my lot and I think I've got about 57 trees on it now. I guess
I'm just iooking from peopie, trees as I mentioned once before, trees are man's
best friend reaiiy. It shades the house in the summertime and it opens it up to
the sun in the winter once it ioses aiI it's ieaves so-there's a iot of good
things that they can produce and affects the house and cost of operating for air
conditioning or even heating. So consequentIy 3 trees seem like a bunch but I'd
like to see us, anybody can pick up a tree. A bare root and plant it and say
thls ls lt. Does that count?
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, we've gone with the minimum, same standard we use
elsewhere uhlch lsa 2 1/2 lnch mlnimum and 6 foot helght for a conlfer.
Mayor Chmiel: Other than that...one other comment. You have to have some sort
of landscaping on those lots because it does give a deflnlte aesthetic appeal,
plus doing something, cleaning the air for us as well. So with that I'11,
Ursula?
Councilwoman Dimler: I just want to clarlfy that we're talklng only about new
development and not existing neighborhoods. Is that correct?
Paul Krauss: That's quite accurate. Our only mechanism for applylng this is as
a condition to a development contract. So any lots platted prior to the
adoptlon of thls, we can't enforce that.
Councilwoman Oimler: My question is, are we keeping some people out of
Chanhassen because of these requirements? In fact Z know when we bullt our
home, we could not have afforded the extra money, even as a financial guarantee
to put it in in the future. Maybe we ought to take a look at that and leave
some space there for them to get that done. I hate to keep people out just
because, you know when you flrst guy your home you want a roof over your head
and you worry about your yard a year and a half later. The other thing is on
maklng the tree removal and so forth. That agaln only applies to the new
neighborhoods or wouldn't that seem feasible to apply to old neighborhoods as
well?
Paul Krauss: There's really, I could be wrong but my recollection is there's
nothing that would restrict a homeowner from doing virtually whatever on their
lots. Now one of the things we're going to be probably doing in the future ls
something that we did on Lundgren for the first time. Is where you have
significant stands of trees, actually put a permanent easement around it and
that way nobody can come to us in the future and say I've got to have this
house. I've got to have it on this lot and lt's got to be in your easement.
You're going to know that ahead of time and try to get the house on the lot
where lt's supposed to be.
Councilwoman Dimler: Do you know any other cities that have done this?
59
City Council Meet Jrt.c., --September 23, 1~91
Paul KYauss: Councilwoman [)im].er, I haven't done a survey. I mean I know a lot
of cities require the 1 a~]d the sod and seed. I did a survey, I think I gave
the information to the Council about 2 years ago about that because we had
always had that iii the subdivision code if you recall. It's been in there for
years but it was never enforced and it wasn't written into development contracts
and we finally said, well if we're going to do it, el[her throw it out or let us
do it. Tell us to do it. We've been enforcing it quite seriously since, well
about 14-1.5 months now. 3 trees, I don't know. 4s ~o what it does for cost, if
you're bull. ding a $250,000.00 house, the increment isn't that big. If you're
building a .$90,000.00, it's proportionately bigger.
Councilman Workman: What if you're building a mobile home?
Paw]. Krauss: Tigon you've got to be in Victoria. So you know the Metro
Council's periodically talked about cities. In fact 3ack Kemp at HUD just did
this about regulations. Raising the cost of housing and limiting people's
choices or keeping them out of the market. I think it's valid to a point. I
don't know how ~o address that specifically. ~s far as, whatever number you
choose, I do know that the on].)' way for us to administer it effectively is to do
what we're doing now which is to say up front [hou shalt do this and we'll
escrow for it. You'll know ahead of time what it is. It's in a development
contract. It's filed with tl~e property. We tFy [o be flexible. You have
houses that are built in the winter, as Tom's house looks like it's going to be.
Obviously we don't say you c.'~n't move ill until the trees go in. We give them
the better part of a year to comply but again, whatever you select, we have to.
Councilwoman Dimler~" Have the right concer. Plus I'm also thinking that on the
one end we're talking here abou[ affordable houslng and on the other end we're
m~king it so expensive to move in. I hate to see us lose a competitive edge to
other communities.
Councilman Wing: You know on the cost of these trees, the ones I've looked at.
I just bought a specimen from Bachman's. I think it was $350.00 delivered for a
2 1/2 inch, slightly bigger. I'm suspecting that the wholesale value that these
people buy the trees at, the developer will buy wholesale trees. I think we're
talking $100.00-$150.00 maximum on these trees. Remember, one is going to be
from the select list, if we were f.o approve that, which is going [o maple, oak.
That's more expensive than the seedless ash is going to be or some of the others
in the secondary list.
Councilwoman Dimler: But the developer's going to pass the cost onto the
consumer. There's no doubt about that.
Paul Krauss: Well, and it depends on tho developer too. We have developers
like ..Toe Miller Homes that give tile homeowner a package, When you contract for
your house, Z think [.hey glve you coupons to go redeem them at a nursery for
your seed and sod and for your [ree. And what we've done in those cases ls
we've said flne. Z mean there's a cash value here. We're not going to double
dip and take an escrow on top of that. In that case the developer is dolng it
up front. We've heard a lot of other storles though where we make the
developer, we make the builder slgn a notice when they lake the building permit
out saylng that ti'liS J.s golng to happen and of course they always say Z never
signed that when the Certifica't.e of Occupancy arid then they try right along to
6O
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1991
pass the cost along at the llth hour to the buyer who knew nothing about it.
~nd occasionally it gets sticky.
Councilwoman Dlmler: Rlght. That's what Z'm trying to get at there.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mike.
Councilman Mason: Just about everything's been covered. I was curious as to
how the information will get disseminated but I think that's being addressed.
Zn the scope of things, Z mean remembering thls used to be the Big Woods and all
that, I think of the thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of trees that have
probably been cut down in Chanhassen alone just to put up some homes. I thlnk 3
trees is a small price to pay. However Ursula, we need to take into
consideration what you're saylng also, and Z'm not qulte sure how to grapple
with that one yet but I think lt's a good ordinance but I want to look into that
some more too.
Councilwoman Dimler: Perhaps before the second reading you can...
Paul Krauss: We can do a survey if you'd like.
Councilman Wlng: I've got one concern on the lssue I think needs to be
addressed and rewritten. On page 10, on 18-61 on this tree. The number of
trees. Z thlnk the way lt's wrltten ls ambiguous and Z think also Councll
should understand that the list that exists in this ordinance.
Mayor Chmiel: What paragraph is it?
Councilman Wing: It's on page 10. Section 2 to 18-61(a). Required landscaping
residential subdivision. The tree list I think has to be set aslde for now
because I think the list is being very professionally done by the University
wlth a lot of factors involved. With a lot of recommendations for each one and
a lot of variety. But specifically under (a), each lot shall be provided with a
mlnlmal of 3 trees. One must be from 11st 1, which is the select list. One may
be from list 2, because they may choose to have 2 select trees or 2 maples or
whatever but the second 11st glves them a variety. And then thlrdly, 1 may be
from list 3 which is the coniferous. In my yard I don't want a pine tree. I
don't want to have to mow around it so Z would come to you and say ~ want
that... I'd like to see that coniferous tree an option. It's a list. You may
put one in but lt's not force so I must be from a select, whlch is a maple and
an oak, a birch, whatever decide for the select list. Second list, the Green
Ash and so forth and then the third one may be a coniferous tree. The only
other issue I would bring up, and I'd like to see that rewritten as such because
that's a list that Planning requested. The second is the issue of where to
place the trees, and Tom's maybe got lots of real strong feelings on this
because he's golng to be bulldlng a house but in the Comp Plan and in the front
of this ordinance it talks about creating a boulevard effect and using trees to
create thls Minneapolis boulevard shaded street effect. By only asking i in the
front yard, you're limiting that. If we were to require 2 in the front yard,
even though they may be set back. They may be on the corner of the house. Still
their overall shading and effect is going to be to shade and engulf that street
a 11ttle blt and Z'm not so sure you wouldn't want to just consider, and that
may be infringing way beyond what our right is but.
City Counr'.£]. Meeting -. ':;eptember 28, 199i
Mayor' chmie].' Yeah, .t 'think it could be bec:;tuse of 'the fact that yOLI put trees
in to shade the house, i/et so muoh boulevard.
Coui~cilman Wing: okay. I wil] withdraw that then.
councilman Mason: I don't know about having a conifer being an optio:~. I like
pi. ne trees.
Counc:ilman Wing: We].]. the issLle tO me is the number of trees. Where they go
I'm addable on and wh,'~t thr-.,y are I'm ,-.,ridable on. As long as one of them is a
map.le.
Cottn~;ilwoman DJ. ruler: .T. like t. he w,~.y we're putting our own preferences in here.
lt,'.~yor chmiel: Okay, any other discussion? Zf hearing none, cal~ u,; have
motioh?
Councilman ~in9: I uould ].ike to move approval of the first reading of the
l~n(l:¢c~pe ordinance. 'rh,~t's ali. I ll~ve tc say.
M~.~yor Chmiel: zs L here a secol]d?
Co~znc/lman Workman: Second.
Commilman Wing moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve the first reading
of ~ ordinance amending Chapter 18 and Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code
regarding Landscaping and Tree Preservation Requirements. Ail voted in favor
and the eot[on ca~ried unanimously,
ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 10 OF THE CITY CODE REGARDING GAMBLING, FIRST
READING.
H,'-tyor Chmiel: Who ~ould like to do this?
Scott H,'~'r: Other ~.llan authorizing the S(atutorily f'eq~zired premises permit,
Chanhassen has had virtual].y no co~trol over charitable gambling operations
wJthi, n our city. The Zussue arose several mol~ths ago when the Council directed
me to develop an ordinance to keep charitable gambllng operations more closely
tied to tile city ~ts w~;11 ,~s keeplrlg the proceeds closer ~o home by benefitting
the welfare of our residents to a certain degree. Such organizations as the
Ch,~ska Lion's and the Chanhassen Legion, both of whom have been very generous
with [helr proceeds to the clty and beneficiaries wi. thin the city in the past,
have been kept ,~pprised of the developing draff, s over tile last several months
and the Publlc Safety Commission has also reviewed the efforts and support the
concept, l'he draft t. hai: you have before you is basical].y the final draft,
4tlthough severa], last minute changes were developed after the packet wss put
togeLher ]_asr week. The goal. of the ordinance is to allow the City to maintain
control, over the charitable gambling operations that are being run on a more
consistent basLs wi~.hin the cj.t? rather than the infrequent fund raJ..~J, llg events
such as Rotary, BJ. ngo of- church related events. ~f it meets wlth Coun¢iZwoman
/)imler's approval T.']_i note tile Few changes that were brought up at the Z~st
mlr~ute on Friday_ Ursula, Zs tllat alrigh'L? I'd 11ke to recommend the ordinance
t,~]'.th these changes. To ct~ang¢ '.';cotton J. 0--152(c~) to ii~cZtzde the final sentence.
~2
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1991
That an organization may designate that money be used internally by the city for
a specific city use as long as the purpose is a lawful purpose. Change Section
10-152(c) to eliminate the previous paragraph that you have before you because
upon review State Statute and IRS regulations deal with funds that are obtained
by such organizations and replace it with the sentence that an organization that
conducts gambling on fewer than 5 days in a calendar year would be exempt from
the requirements of this Section. Again that's so that organization such as
St. Hubert's or the Chan Rotary Club could operate their occasional fund raising
Bingo, etc. without unnecessary restrictions. And change Section 10-153(a) and
(b) to include the words, upon request so that organizations only need to submit
data to the City when we need that information so that duplication of effort is
avoided since most of the information would already need to be filed with the
State. I'll add that there was discussion about what organizations could be
contributed to and Roger and I worked on the draft so that donations could be
made to organizations that are not only based within the city but provide
services within the city. For example, the Carver County Sheriff's Department.
The, help me with the title Ursula. The South Valley Women's League.
Councilwoman Oimler: The Southern Valley Alliance for Battered Women.
Scott HarK: Those organizations.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Any other comments?
Councilwoman Dimler: While we're on that subject, I guess I still have a
concern that I'm not quite sure how we're including them and how in the future
it could be interpretted that they shouldn't be included and the fact that
they're in Scott County and not contiguous with the City of Chanhassen. They're
in Belle Plains, their headquarters are.
Councilman Workman: That would defeat that...intent.
Councilwoman Dimler: See I'm still not clear that ue're allouing that donation
to that organization then.
Scott HarK: Section 10-152(b) states that each organization conducting lawful
gambling within the city must expend 75% of it's net profits derived from lawful
gambling on lawful purposes conducted or located within the city and in
consulting with the City Attorney, it's our belief that that clause would permit
a donation to an organization such as that, albeit based in Belle Plain. Our
concern is if we include contiguous counties, we're literally expanding that to
Ramsey County because it's contiguous to Hennepin which we're partially in.
Councilwoman Dimler: But we're talking about counties that are contiguous to
CaFVeF. That would not include Ramsey.
Scott HarK: But a portion of Chanhassen is in Hennepin County. Ramsey County
is contiguous.
Councilwoman Dimler: That little property there has caused us so much trouble.
Roger Knutson: ...if they provide service~ to people in the city of Chanhassen.
City Coot, cji. Heetinc -- Sel~tember 23, 1991
Councilwoman gimler: They do.
Roge;' Knutson: And otho]' contiguous communities, ti]eh tl~ey may qualify.
CoLlncilwoman Oimler: On lawful purposes are you saying?
Scott ltarr: Yes. Because we use them as a direct referral for- our residents
through [he Sheriff's office. We'd have no problem with including an
organization like that.
Roger Knutson: The key is you have to have 75~ of the proceeds in Chanhassen or
ir, contiguous communities...
Councilman Wing: Why would we want to give anything to Chaska? It's somewhat
flippant but why not keep it in the city? I don't understand that.
Scott liar-r: That's a very good question and the reason it was drafted as it was
is actually not so we could give there but because.
Mayor Chmiel: They're giving to us.
Scott Hart: The Chaska Lion's have been so gerlerous to us, we did not want to
exclude them. That came about as a direct result of discussions here as well as
my co~,tacts with the Chask~ Lion's.
Councilman Workman: Well and C;~aska has a similar ordinance that pretty much
rostricts where that I~as to stay ii] the town. They ha~e that and that's kind of
what really brought thls Ltp. And then the problem we had wlth the Bow1. We're
going to ship it out to somewl~ere else. Tl~at's where Ursula you may have a
problem because John was maybe golng to start a bowllng as a letter sport in
High School thing or ~omething and it was going to go somewhere else. I thought
there was a concert, about our ablllty to be able to dlrect where those funds go.
That's where.
Don Ashworth: There was a third problem that it dealt ulth. An organization
that was, they were doing this on behalf of a well known group or need like
Cancer or whatever. But their track record was also such that they would maybe
give 2% or 3~ of the tot;z], money that they collected. All the rest of it would
be a management fee whlch ls really a scam.
Roger Knutson: You also realize, getting back [o what .... when the City gets
it's...the Clty can donate that money to that shelter even though they're not
contiguous. They could be in South Oakota or South America.
Councilwoman Dim].er: Okay, and we are also talking about only 75~ so that
].~:aves 25~ for tile organization to use in discretionary purposes. Which is
another th.i. rlg that I wanted to brlng up. I'm wondering now at this point, you
m~y h,'~ve heard about the woman who sat on the billboard in White Bear Lake to
raise money for the Vlet Nam Veterans Memorial. Thls would severely curtail the
ability of the American Legion or Veterans Club who exist for that purpose, to
1.i. mit t holt amount that they could have given to her. It could have been a very
small amount and I'll., osking now if 75~ is maybe too high and maybe we should be
at 50~. To leave them only 25% discretionary may be curtailing their ability.
64
City Council Meeting -- September 23, 1991
Mayor Chmiel: It was up to a dollar amount.
Councilwoman Oimler: Huh?
Mayor Chmiel: What is the total dollar amount you're using to come up with your
percentages?
Councilwoman Dimler: Well that's going to differ each year so we don't know
but.
Mayor Chmiel: It could be very insignificant as far as total dollars.
Councilwoman Dimler: Or like I said, they may want to donate to a cause such as
something that's in Washington D.C. and we would prohiblt that completely except
for the 25~.
Roger Knutson: And then your 10 on top of lt.
Councilwoman Oimler: Yes, if the City decides. It's unlikely though I think
that we'd be giving to the flremen and I'm sure that the 10~ would stay wlthin
the city for clty purposes. Chuck, did you want to address them? He's worked
on this ordinance.
Chuch Dimler: Mr. Mayor and Councilmembers. Chuck Dimler, ?203 Kiowa Circle.
I'm here really in the capacity to serve the American Legion. I've not been
directly involved with the charitable gambllng at the Legion but at a general
membership meeting I believe oh probably last spring I was asked to follow the
lssue and to speak on thelr behalf and I've had a couple of occasions to meet
with some of the Legion members, and particularly the gambling manager and a
former gambllng manager and a club employee and a bookkeeper. I have visited
with Scott Hart and Councilwoman Dimler as well. You know a couple of things.
Let me just say on the onset a couple of things. One, and you may all be aware
of this but to my knowledge the Legion did not ask for the ordinance or look for
any ordinance changes and something that I noted here tonight that I've been
thinking about and I know to address Councilman Wlng's comment about why are we
giving any money to Chaska. I guess ue alway9 want to put thi$ baok lnto
perspective but hopefully it's the Legion that's directing their monies, and I'm
not sure who's monies they are. I suppose they're the monles of those persons
who choose to purchase pulltabs. I have yet to buy my first pulltab. But
nevertheless I thlnk the Leglon has taken on the responsibility, and there are
numbers of them I think as you live within the Statute and the Charitable
Gambllng Control Commission of the State of Minnesota. And I understood in
visltlng ulth the Public Safety Director, Mr. Hart that, and he shared with me
some of the thlngs that were mentioned tonlght, why the City was looking for
this ordinance. So I come here kind of interestingly enough because I think the
old adage ls always true that regulations protect the regulated and so probably
the more you regulate this the more you protect the Legion since we already have
Charitable Gambllng Control but I try to think of it tonight in terms of other
organizations as well so as you direct this ordinance tonight, we really can't
forecast what mlght happen in the future. What other organization mlght be
looking for a charitable gambling operation to raise some monies. And that
mlght be the Llon's Club or it might be another organization that wants to use
it. It could be, hopefully not the Rotary Don but it could be any organization
G5
City Council M,,:eting -. September 2.3, 1991
that chose to use charitable 9amblin.o, 'to raise some monies and good legitimate
om'gal~i×ations. And so I ti]ought about that too and the Legion person that
~ spoke with and Scott and I discussed this as well, were not very comfortable
with that 75~ in the context tJ]~t iL has to be expended within the local
municipality. I mean we went back, or I went back with some members and took 3
ye~t-s and at the Legion we had expended not only within the community. We had
expended al~most all of our monles, more than 75% wlthln the community. We would
[all within thlr: at the present ~ime. l'l~at was not the problem and I think 34~
over the 3 years that we haU gone back was really spent w~thin Chanhasen to
Chanl~assen city or quasi public organizations of the City of Chanhassen, i.e.
the park or maybe the school and 11br'ary and the school patrol and those klnds
of things. But neverth~:less, what if the Legion suddenly wanted to take on,
Ursula referred to, maybe they wanted a one tlme expenditure and then all of a
sudden everybody has had this in motion and then all of a sudden we find some
ordinance ba~k }mere that says no, you can't do that? Or maybe the Lion's Club
decides that they want [o erradicate AIOS or something as we did with Rotary.
We spent hundreds of nm]lllons of dollars to erradlcate Pollo internationally and
maybe that happens suddenly and then all of a sudden the [.ion's club has a
restriction in Chanhassen that they can't participate. So I think, I'm not
sure. ~ just think tibet 75~ may be high and I don't know, do we need 75% to do
what we're trylng to do wi. th this ordinance? I'm not certaln that we need
to do that. Maybe 50~ would be do that and then still leave some 1,xtltude for
expenditures outsicle of the local unlts. ~ know there may be lnstancee when an
organization is wanting to do something very, with a real good cause and yet
they'd be restricted so lt's something to thlnk about. I thlnk the other
points I think we've pretty well covered and they seem to address the lssue and
do what the purpose of ~he ordinance was created for. And certainly I thlnk in
some cases serve as I said to actually probably benefit the Legion, who I speak
for here tonlght.
Mayor Chmiel: Roger, does State law indicate requirements established for this
at a117
Roger I<nut$on: No.
Mayor Chmie].: Nothing?
Councilwoman Dimler: The percerltages?
Roger Knutson: The only percentages, 75~ isn't. 10~ is. You can go less than
10~ taking yourself but you can't go more.
Colmncilln,zn Wi~g: Gambling proceeds have to be used for charitable purposes
rlght?
Roger Knutsol]; Yes.
Councilnlan Wing: But they're allowed to put on a roof or new furnance. They
can internally main[aln some of those funds. What percentage of the funds can
they malntaln internally? What percentage has to go out to a charitable
orgallization under State l~w?
Roger Knutson: Virtual].>, all of it.
66
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1991
Chuck Oimler: 100%.
Councilman Wing: Then the Legion being a charitable organization can obtain
some funds?
Roger Knutson: There are several pages of regulations. For example they can't
use those funds in their building fund. They can't do that. They can do
thlnks 11ke paylng their cost of operation. Paying thelr gambling manager.
Things like that. Paying...but generally speaking, it all has to go to a
non-profit organization...
Councilman Wing: We've had an ordinance in Section 349, Gambling.
Roger Knutson: You have nothing right now.
Councilman Wing: Okay, other than State law.
Roger Knutson: Yeah.
Councilman Wing: We didn't add to that? State law then allows us to be more
restrictive which we're dolng.
Roger Knutson: More prohibitive.
Councilman Wing: More prohibitive. And so up to this point then the Legion has
had, they just have to spend it on charitable functions. We've had no rules, no
percentages. They've pretty much been free to do what they wanted and it's been
very generous to Chanhassen up to this point. Do you have a percentage
recommendation that you're comfortable with?
Chuck Dimler: Councilman Wing and others, I think for our, I have to speak for
myself now I guess because I don't have that. Again I'm saying that we didn't,
if you asked us to put a number in there, we'd say flne we'll 1lye with the 10~
to be expended to the City of Chanhassen and I said that even before with some
reservation because if you set a celllng, all of a sudden or a floor, all of a
sudden that becomes the ceillng and hopefully we wouldn't go from 34~ to lOX
because now we put a 10~ minimum on. Do you hear that? The other 75~, we'd
rather have that non-existent if we had a choice. We'd just strike paragraph
(b) because it serves us no purpose so we'd rather have the freedom I presume
anytime that, and we have an executive board at the Legion that makes, hears
requests for contributions and then they wlll approve certaln limits and beyond
certain limlts they'll bring before the general membership for approval to
dlspense those proceeds but we do have to, we have to expend all the proceeds.
As the Council pointed out, we were able to deduct certain operating expenses.
Purportedly only those expenses that pertain to the gambllng and then the more
general underlying rule I think for State Statute is that all of the, any
purpose for which you use the funds in order to be legitimate has to benefit the
community at large if you wi11. In other words, we can't take and say we're
going to do lt. We're going to correct say everyone that say has some disease
or something as long as they're a member of the Legion. We cannot do that. If
it beneflts only Leglonaires, lt's not a legitimate contribution so it has to be
for the community at large. And that community though could be, we may want to
give some money to a relief fund if there's an earthquake in another continent.
City Council Menti~g --.Sept.~mber 20, ;,991
Commncilmall Workman: The Legion is clearly not the problem. It hasn't been the
problem in this whole situ,.zt[o~. We dld h~ve situatlon~ wllei-e Ch~k~ Llon's
w~.r~ havlng probl, em~ with ~n outfit that was runnlng ~ gambllng operation,
pulltabs and tl~ey were either taking the funds and going ~o place them elsewhere
or telling tho Chaska Llon's where they're supposed to use them uhlch I
understood at that ~ime by law they could not. Am I correct Don?
Don Ashworth: .T thlnk ~hat was their own By--laws. Prohibited them from doing
1[.
Councilman Workman]: Okay. And so clearly the Legion hasn't been the problem, l
don't know how we get ~round the otl'ler p~i'[ of it. ~ tliink we need sometlling.
Some assurances. Zt's difficult to restrlct those who are not, don't need to be
restricted when there a~'e some wl~o ~eed ~o be. I guess that's called even
handedness at the expense of others but the Legion I wouldn t say na~ been any
k.i.~M of a problem in this whole thing. Zn fact they've done an awful tot of
good things. ~ut how do we restrict everybody else?
Chuck Dimler': And maybe to address Councilman Wing's questiol~, maybe if that,
~:nd I'm feeling that's what the ordinance would do. That to prevent somebody
from comlng irl that's running a, if it's a seam or maybe that's too strong a
word but maybe that's what it is if they're trylng to, as Mr. ~shuorth sald, if
they"re trylng to only give a couple percentage of the profi[ and use the rest
for administrative and operating costs. And so the wordlng here ls to do that.
T don't know, maybe 50~ would do that as well. That's something to think about.
Maybe 50~ would precJ, ude those persons as well and then you have, because there
are some opef*ating costs and .~ suppose Sf they had to come .tn and pay a lease or
whatever they have to do, there are other taxes and so on as well.
Roger Knutson: It's 7,5~ of ne( profit. It',o not of gross,
ChLtck Oimle)'". Yeah, I realize that but some of the questions that came up and
Z don't fully, /. didn't fully fill out the report to understand this [)ut I know
the bookkeepc, r had some conce'rn about that, and we shared a little about that.
Tlmnro. are some accumulated, if you don't dispense it at the end of the perlod
it's taxed and so on and the questlon was, was that comlng before or after that
75%. WelJ., it makes ,.~ 11ttZe difference if it comes before or after and Z
suppose if we were at 50% rather than 7.5~, it wouldn't get that close to.
Mayor Chmiel-' chuck, not knowing how this thing works fully, would it be to an
advantage for us to pass it as ls presently and see how it does work. Of
course, ordinances can ~.~lways come back and be revlewed by Council to make
changes just to make sure. Not just to accommodate the Legion but to make sure
th~.~i: we'r'c doin.g this properly as well.
Chuck Dimler~ That could be done either way. I mean you could, either way
you're saying to do it as lt's amended ulth the suggestions made and see how it
does work. I don't know who that leaves the responsibility on. What happens
f. hen J.f an organiz~.~tion comes in and, i.e. Alliance Club. Are they going to be,
lt's go~n9 to be the1;- 'responsibility then to come and say we need an ordinance
change if we're ~.rying to, .-say we're trying to er'r'adic,~te some problem?
68
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1991
Mayor Chmiel: Well, if they have a proper way of putting those dollars
somewhere else, then I think that's something that can be looked at to make sure
that that's belng done properly as well.
Councilman Wing: I thlnk we're going to permLt gambling. We're offering a
priviledge. A rlght that we have a rlght to say no to altogether. I think we
have a right to keep the money in the city and control lt. I would be very
happy Don with a 40/10 whlch glves a total of 50. I mean it kind of gets moot
at some point. Maybe ?$ is high. To move this along to appease some of the
opposition, I would be willing to. I guess I'm kind of looking at you. The 75~
I'm comfortable with but I'd be very happy to compromise.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, I think that can be something that can still be discussed
and brought up again. I think they could probably possibly persuade us to say
this ls what we see and chose what those basically are and from there the
Council can look at it. Review it and then come up with a conclusion.
Scott Hart: Mr. Mayor, I should add too that I thlnk as Councilman Wing said,
obviously the Legion isn't the problem and that's right. The City Manager, the
City Attorney, myself, the Public Safety Commission drafted this with a careful
eye on the Legion and their generosity so it wouldn't infringe upon that. So
lt's really, and of course that's why they've been kept apprlsed of this from
the get go.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah and I think you spelled it out. It's not the Legion. We
have to be careful with what else is coming in and that's our only concern
because as you say, the Legion has been generous and they have done an
exceptional job within the city. There's no question but I think in adopting as
to what you really sort of pull together, ls something that we could look at and
try it on for size and see what it really is. And if something can be different
than what we've discussed, then we can make those klnds of changes with whatever
they feel is necessary and approve that point.
Chuck Dimler: I understand that.
Mayor Chmiel: Whether that be Legion or whatever other organization that might
be.
Chuck Dimler: I understand that Mr. Mayor but a caveat to that though is still
that we'd hate to be what could happen, and I know that goes with most volunteer
organizations. You know suddenly we flnd out after the' fact that we vlolated
the ordinance and that's not comfortable. That's why if we start out with a
50~. If we're going to start and try something, if we try at a lesser percent
and from our perspective it's easier to go the other way whereas from maybe
you'd rather start at the 75 and come back to the 50.
Mayor Chmiel: Well, you can always come down but it's hard to go back up.
Councilwoman Dimler: We're not going to go higher than 75~?
Mayor Chmiel: No. That's what I'm saying.
69
City Colinc.[1 I.Inel.;[i~'.q .. Scf-,tnmbe;- 2-3, 1991
CouT~ci].t,~oman .r)imler: Okay. We.l. 1 then you're at the ~.op. It's hard to come
down.
Mayor Cl'~miel: Zt's easy to come down.
(;l~ttc. k l]imler: I'In no[ sure because.
Hayo'r Chmie.l.: If we start at 50 and raise it to 75, it would be rather more
dif ficuJ..t..
Ch~mck Dimler". The situation may arise when there's a whole bunch of different
players see.
Councilwoman gimlet; And Lhere will be after a year.
chuck Oimler: Everywhere and so it's hard to say. I understand that. Th,~t's
why I stil].. I understand thai you folks have to make the decision but I'll
plead the case for the lesser amount.
CouncJ. lman Workman: But you're saylng that the Legion is already really doing
euerytl'l.Lng tll~t's in this ordinance anyway.
Cl'luc:k bimler: Well the]'e are a few things in here that they are not that we did
riot have a problem with such as the lnvest.tgatlons for the appllcarmt and so
and I'm sure we're comfortable t~lth that. The only thing that, armd as Z shared
with you. We were expending 34~ to direct city organizations and then a bigger
percentage than even 75~. ~ can't say that wlth certainty now. Z'd have to
[hink about that. ~ did not at the time, at the time that Z did that we ~erel~'t
lookJrmg at the 75~ We were looking at the 10~ but we were expending 34~ of
city pubtic and the~ A greater percentage w¢~s going to actJ. vities within the
city or county, gut I thlnk we do have, Z can understand where an organization
such as L.eg~.on,~ires may want to t~ke on a project. Like we have several, as we
have an aging population we have many homes. There's an American Legion Home
Michigan. A large home and we have righ~ in Minnesota. We have homes in
St. Cloud and Hastings and Hinneapolis that may run into problems. Haybe (he
1. egislatLtre suddenly isn't goim~g to fu~)d them or something like that and so
the Legion then decides we're going to take thls on and take care of our aging
comrades. And so we have a great pJan and then all of a sudden we've done this
and somebody says hey, remember you gave 50~ of your funds to the aging
t_egionaires in IJastings and St. Ctottd and Minneapolis and all of a sudden, hey
we violated the la~, ordinance in Minnesota. Then the press writes about
Scott I~arr: Because, again the ordinance was drafted with the Legion, among
others in mlnd, Z don't want to risk offending the Legion. Frankly Z wasn't
aware th,'~t the percentage was an issue. Z don't think we talked about that
Friday so Z've not had a chance to took at the percentage. Z was going under
the assumption that all was okay. I'd like to recommend that this be tabled so
I. hat ~ could consult wlth the gambling chairs of tile Legion, the Chaska Llon's
I:o see if they, what alternative they might suggest, What Roger and ~_ ~nd the
City Manager came up with the 75~ because that was in 11ne with the goal set
forth when we wef'.'; charged with developJ, llg f. hJ.s of'dJ.~lalloe to maintain more local
conti-'ol. BI.tt T'd be happy to go back and talk with the gambling managers of the
orq,~l/.iz.~lLJ. OllS .[11 [owIi [o get more input.
7O
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1991
Mayor Chmiel: Or we could keep this as a first reading and you can do that
checking as well over the next 2 weeks and ue could sit back and have Council at
least think of the percentage that they may think would be more appropriate than
what's existing. Being this is the first reading.
Scott Hart: Because I think everything else we're in full agreement.
Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor, I'd like to make a motion passing the first reading
of the ordinance amending Chapter 10 of the Chanhassen City Code by adding
Article 5, Regulating Lawful Gambling as is. I agree there will probably be
room for change at the second reading.
Mayor Chmiel: I think that's something that ue should think about.
Councilman Mason: Second.
Mayor Chmiel: It's been moved and seconded to accept the first reading. Any
other discussions?
Councilwoman Dimler: As amended.
Mayor Chmiel: Yes. As amended. Amen.
Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Nason seconded to approve an Ordinance
amending Chapter 10 of the Chanhassen City Code by adding Article 5, Regulating
Lawful Gambling as amended by the Public Safety Director. All voted in favor
and the motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Chmiel: Let me make a suggestion. Because of all the first readings that
we had, keep all these first readings for the second reading because it would be
much simpler for us not to have staff reproduce everything one more time. Rlght?
Let's save a tree.
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS:
Mayor Chmiel: Richard, noise ordinance.
Councilman Wing: It's my understanding.
Mayor Chmiel: In 10 words or less.
Councilman Wing: I'll keep it to 1 minute or less. It's my understanding that
Mr. Hart approached the Councll some time ago regarding a noise ordinance and
that there was, I thlnk we all felt, as I remember, that there was a need and we
recommended he pursue a noise ordinance for presentation to the Council. In the
meanwhile the one he wrote I thought was very fair, baslc and simple. Oldn't
make any waves. It got to Public Safety and apparently got waylatd and
criticized. I thlnk, and that's what I'm looklng for Council support. I
believe we directed Scott to proceed with the noise ordinance which would
instruct the Publlc Safety Commission to support Scott in creating that
ordinance. Get it back to City Council. I guess I'm recommending once again
Scott be recommended to proceed with the nolse ordinance for clarification to
Council and we'll make the decislon whether to go ahead or 'not.
71
City Council HeetLng -. September 23, 1791
Councilman Workman: Public Safety?
Co~tncilman Wing: Thoy waylaid it and I don't think that was their position to
do so. They should have supported .Scott in that endeavor.
Councilman Masol~: I concuY completely.
Scott Hart: Yeah, a little history there. Because of several unusual
situation.s this summer, I wanted to see if the council was supportive of looking
at it. Z looked at it. There was a lot of discussion at the Commission level
but the ordinance is drafted and i'eady to bring back and I'd be happy to do
t hat.
Hayor gl'~mJ.e].: fi]right, Hike,
Councilman Ha:~on: I got a letter about Chanhassen putting a traL1 where the
abandoned railroad tracks are in the southern part of the city. I understand
from Councilman Workman that Itennepin County owns that.
Mayor Chmiel: I understand they do.
Councilman Hason: Okay, and th;it they're.
Mayor Chmiel~ As a corridor for light rail.
Councilman Mason; Yeah, and they are planning on doing something with that as a
trail? Does anyone know?
Councilman Workman: It was my understanding that Eden Prairie in conjunction
witl~ some of tl~ose was planning something.
Don Ashworth: Todd?
Todd Itoffman: We're taking a look at that segment. The Hennepln County
Regional Railroad Authority owns that. They'll allow the City to use it as an
interlm use as a trall .... brought to the Park and Rec Commission in Apr11 and
will be presented tomorrow eye,ling again for col~slderation for potential fundlng
in 1992. The surface, the aggregate material ls about $15,000.00 cost but
there's other...that go alol~g with that. There's also accessibility issues...
Councilman Mason: Thank you.
Mayor chmiel: Okay, tllanks~ Ursula.
Councilwoman Oimler: Okay, I have already spoken to the resurfacing tblng.
Mayor Chmiel.'. Yes you have. Chan Estates.
Councilwoman Dimler: I would like to see that addressed at the next Council
meetlng. How much it would cost and whlch fund the money would come from. And
again let's make Chart Estates a prlorlty rather than Laredo Clrcle and Iroquls
and some of these roads that are in better repair.
72
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1991
Councilman Workman: I don't know where we're going with that one in there but
the comments that I've gotten are don't, we don't want new curb and gutter. We
don't want.
Councilwoman Dimler: No, no, no. I'm just talking about resurfacing.
Councilman Workman: But that's kind of the Minnewashta thing and it was my
understanding that that neighborhood was klnd of high on the 11st as far as
getting major roadwork done. Not just overlaying it and so I hope, I don't know
if the neighborhood's thinking or talking to you. I've talked to a few of them
and they said don't curb and gutter and put new sewer
Councilwoman Dimler: No, just resurface.
Councilman Workman: I know but that's the Hinnewashta issue again.
Councilwoman Dimler: Yes it is but agaln, going back'to the Frontier Tra11.
The neighborhood there feels that if the road had been resurfaced periodically
throughout lt's 11fespan, would it have gotten to the point where il got and
needed that extensive of repair.
Hayor Chmlel: I would like to see us develop a plan for each of the areas for
resurfacing and come up with that and probably have that for one of our next
Council meetings.
Charles Folch: Just to address on that lightly. We are working on finalizing
the preliminary draft for the pavement management program which should be
presented to you withln the next few Council meetings here. Preliminary
indications for that Chan Estates area is that those roads rank real high as far
as in need of road improvements. It's my anticipation that the recommendation
from the report will be that reconstruction is warranted as more of a viable and
economical, long term economical solutlon rather than overlaying or sealcoatlng
or something like that because of the poor condition they're in.
Councilwoman Dimler: But again it may be 3 or 4 years down the line and in the
meantime they've got this horrlble condition to live with. You know I just,
I mean we're resurfacing Iroquis. Come on. What's wrong with Iroquis? You
know what I'm saying? We're resurfacing Laredo CircZe. What's wrong with
Laredo Clrcle? We're resurfaclng some roads anyway and that must be in the
ongoing maintenance type of thing and yet these roads aren't benefitting from it
and we want to do a major reconstruction when the residents may lndeed not want
that but they want regular maintenance.
Councilman Workman: Can I piggyback on that just very quickly? And...to the
Mayor and City Manager that what we need then is not only a management program
but we need a list and a very well publicized list of those roads, like
Minnewashta then Lyman Blvd. then Chart Estates that are going to need to have
this done so that nobody ls shocked and surprised when this all comes or when
they move in that they know because I tell you, I'm getting weak knees getting
klcked in them everytime this comes up in the assessment part. So if we can put
every road for the next 25 years that's going to probably need this because we
do it rather systematically anyway. Frontier Trail then Minnewashta then Lyman
then Chan Estates then people have a 5 year window of opportunity to get out of
73
Ci[y Council I~e.,.~.ti~.q - Septt.;mber 2.3, 1991
there. Se].]. it or, do you know what ~ mean but as long as it's well pubJ. ic:ized,
Z think we'll, s,'ive engineering staff some headaches. It wou].d save future
council some concerns but as long as it's well publicized, then people say,
c;ln ~y hey you knew about thi~.
Councilwoman [limler; But Tom you're not talking about resurfac~ng. You're
talking about majo~' recon,struction.
Councilman Workmate: ~ell surfacing can have a list and then restructuring would
be ~ ].ist because soon~;r or later you can't just resurface. But that's what
Z th~nk u~: need.
Councilman WJ.~g; Let's not drop that. I think that's a significant issue.
Hayor Chmiel: Yeah, we're going to have that coming to us.
Councilwoman Dimler: Then on the second issue, I guess the reason I brought
this ~p here on the Hinnewashta Highlands was because it was a Uisitor's
Presentation several weeks ago and I'm just wondering what has been done. I did
get that letter [oday from Johnson and Wood and we've been talking about it a
little bit here. But could we basically have an update from staff or legal
COUll:gel.
Charles Folch: If I might add just briefly. Today Hr. Borchardt I believe it
is, I~is attorney, Hr. EngeJ. hardt and Dave Hemps1 met out at the site. They
discussed the situation and Zr. Engelhardt i~ preparing a letter of
understandirlg from the discussions today and it's my understanding that they got
t. he situatJ, or, pretty well r~solved.
Councilwoman Oimler: Okay, thanks.
Hayor Chmiel: And I will accept a motion fo'r adjournment.
Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Mason seconded to adjourn the meeting. All
voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 11:45 p.m..
Submitted by Don Ashworth
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Ophe[nl
74