Loading...
1991 04 22CHANHASSEN CZTY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING APRIL 22, [99[ Mayor Chmlel called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.. The meetlng was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCIL HEMBERS PRE~NT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Mason, Councilman Workman, Councilman Wing and Councilwoman Dimler arrived late, (durlng 1rem 5). STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Roger Knutson, Todd Gerhardt, Paul Krauss, Todd Hoffman, Charles Folch, and Scott Hart APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve the agenda with the following additions under Council Presentations: Mayor Chmlel wanted to dlscuss bls meeting with the Metropolitan Council regarding the Comprehensive Plan; and Councilman Workman wanted to discuss Personnel Revleu Board and related matters and Southwest Corridor Transportation Coalition. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: PROCLAHATION DECLARTN6 THE Ht:)NTH OF UftY RS 'OLDER P~IER~:CAN$ Hq)NTH', Mayor Chmiel: We have two public announcements this evening. One is the proclamation declaring the month of May as 01der Americans Month. I'd just 11ke to read that proclamation. This being a resolution proclaiming the month of May as 01der Americans Month. Whereas, older citizens have utllized thelr 11fetlme observations and experiences to shape the course of our society; and Whereas, older Mlnnesotans are a valuable resource to themselves and thelr communities contributing over 70 millton hours of volunteer service each year, and Whereas, older citizens have experienced more explosive social change in their lifetimes than any preceding generation; and Whereas, these older Minnesotans are the "architects of society" wlth thelr contributions as innovative and varied as the institutions and individuals themselves. Now Therefore, I Oonald J. Chmiel, Mayor of the Clty of Chanhassen do hereby proclaim the month of May, 1991 to be 01der Americans Month and call upon all citizens of Chanhassen to recognize the importance of strengthening bonds between all ages to create a brlght vlsion for the future. Can I get a motion for the acceptance of this resolution? Councilman Mason: So moved. Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second? Councilman Workman: Second. Resolution ~91-31: Councilman Hason moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve a Proclamation declaring the month of Hay, 1991 as "01der Americans Month". All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. City Council Heeting - April 22, 1991 Hayor Chmiel: I'd really like that resolution, I'd like to see a few more things incorporated in there but I'm going to settle for what's there right now. I'd 11ke to see a 11ttle more participation probably by our senlor citizens, provided they have some of thelr free time. We have many experienced people uithln our community that I'd 11ke to see become lnvolved ulthln the clty. I'd like to see that happen. Paul? Paul Krauss: Hr. Hayor, the Senior Commission intended to have some representation here tonight. They had some commitments that came up at the last moment, the two people that were golng to come but they did want to convey their appreciation for the proclamation and for the Council's support in programs that they are now looklng at taklng over. They lntend to be equally actlve in the future. They asked me to convey that as well. Hayor Chmiel: Thank you. PROCLAMATION DECLARING MAY 5-11, 1991 AS 'VICTIMS OF PORNOGRAPHY WEEK". Hayor Chmiel: This is something I felt rather strongly to have here. I'm going to read that as well. It's a resolution proclaiming, as I sald, the week of Hay 5-11, 1991 as Victims of Pornography Week. Whereas, the laughter of children is the most precious sound in 11re; and Whereas, there's something more distressful than an abused child whose pain circumvents laughter; and Whereas, the memories of childhood are cherished for a lifetime; and Whereas, the experiences of childhood influence an adult's emotional, sexual and physlcal behavior; and Whereas, the attitudes chlldren carry 1nrc adulthood are passed on to yet another generation; and Whereas, people who exploit and abuse children rob them of pleasant childhood memories; and Whereas, studles show a hlgh correlation between the addition to pornography and child molestation and other crimes; and Whereas, victlms of pornography have suffered the loss of everything lnnocent and precious; and Whereas, the California State legislature has proclaimed Vlctlms of Pornography Week as an annual statewide event; and Whereas, citizens against pornography, legislators, law enforcement, parents, educators, mental health experts, soclal service agencies, clvlc leaders, youth and religious organizations are united in their concern for vlctlms of pornography; and Whereas, we wlsh to express compassion for all vlctlms of pornography regardless of their age; and Whereas, we deslre to know as a city filled with happy childhood memories; Now Therefore, I, Donald J. Chmlel, Hayor of Chanhassen hereby proclaim Hay 5-11, 1991 as Victims of Pornography Week in the City of Chanhassen and urge all cltlzen$ to show compassion for the vlctlms of pornography and assist in efforts to keep childhood memories happy. Can I'have a motlon? Councilman Workman: So moved. Councilman Wing: Second. Resolution ~t91-32: Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Wing seconded to approve a Proclamation declaring the week of May 5-11, 1991 as "Victims of Pornography Week". All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. City Council Meeting - April 22, 1991 CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Hason moved, Councilman Rorkman seconded to approve the follo#ing Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Hanager's recommendat ions: b. Approve Plans and Specifications for Construction of Well No. 6 and Related Watermains and Appurtenances; Authorize Advertising for Bids, Project 91-1. e. Accept Plans and Specifications, Authorize Advertisement for Bids, Herman Field Park. f. Approval of Accounts. g. City Council Minutes dated April 8, 1991 Planning Commission Minutes dated April 3, 1991 Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated March 26, 1991 Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated April 9, 1991 h. Approve Purchase Agreement in the amount of $30,890.00 for land in Carver County, Chanhassen, Minnesota legally described as Outlot A, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park Sixth Addition for Lutheran Church of the Living Christ. i. Resolution ~91-33: Release Temporary Easement for Drainage Purposes, Lot 11, Block 1, Sunset View Addition. k. Resolution ~91-34: Approve State Aid Roadway Designations. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. · 1. 1990 CONSTRUCTION AOHINISTRAT:];ON CHARGES AND ATTRIBUTABLE COST ALLOC~T];:ON, Don Ashworth: Would you like me to review that item? Mayor Chmiel: I'd like you to cut this. My concern was the next to the last paragraph on the second page but I'll let you address that. Don Ashworth: Both of the items were considered as a part of the 1991 budgetary process. The first one, administrative charge for the administrative trust fund lsa charge that we put back agalnst all of the open construction and capltal project funds. It amounts to approximately 4~ as a recognition that in most of those cases the administration, meanlng maintaining the financial books on those projects will occur by the City for the next, anywhere from 8 to 15 years. So each tlme we do an assessment against a particular project, there's a group of property owners that are involved with that assessment, we maintain the books on that project agaln for the next 15 year perlod of tlme. Thls is a charge that has been in place for at least 15 years that I'm aware of. The amount of money that's belng transfered to that fund is slightly higher thls year than previous years. I believe it's about $280,000.00. In previous years it's been about $220,000.00-$230,000.00. The administrative trust fund does account for all of the major expenditure items where we really don't have a direct property tax levy. For example, any tlme that we do studies, the clty fundlng for 212, TH 5, TH 7 corridor, etc. all those types of things came out of that particular fund. The other part of the item recognizes that as a part of the 1991 budgetary City Council Meeting ~ April 22, 1991 process, we saw a significant deficient. A position that we did not want to have follow us into this year. So we had a problem to correct in 1990 and also in 1991. The attributable to concept was presented in the 1991 budget as a means by whlch specific work that was completed by the Planning Department and Engineering, by Flnance Department associated wlth each of the projects that we're carrying out, could in fact be funded. So that the general fund wasn't picklng up the whole share on those. The amounts that are shown here are taken directly out of the 1991 budget. So each item as it relates to finance, planning, etc. are in the 1991 budget. So if you look at the budget under finance you'd see that attributable to $24,200.00. Unfortunately, the other side of the entry really lsn't shown. So in other words, the operating budget for the Clty under Gafld outlines all of your operating expenses but it doesn't have what would be the opposite entry whlch would be the aggregate charge back to all of the construction and capltal project accounts. So this ltem really normally would have gone as a part of our year end transfer from 2 weeks ago but it was delayed. We had the auditors going through these and it just didn't work for 2 weeks ago. They're presented this evening. Mayor Chmiel: Clarified? Normally, as Don said, it's carried under Admin sectlon. I think in belng consistent with what we're dolng, we try to bring everything out on the table. Okay. I'd make a motion to accept item (j). 1990 Construction Administration Charges and Attributable Cost Allocation. Councilman Workman: Second. Resolution ~91-35: Hayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Workman seconded to accept the 1990 Construction Administration Charges and Attributable Cost Allocation. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: Rosemary Pauly Mingo: My name is Rosemary Pauly Mingo and I live at 7601 Great Plains Blvd.. Previously I made a written request that some street in chanhassen be named after my forefathers and nothlng was done. Thls was in 1988 and I again made a request in November of 1990. I think if everyone saw the Vlllager last week they probably were given a background of when my ancestors came in 1953 and my grandfather was the first white child born in Chanhassen Township. I have a suggestion. I don't know if it would be workable or not but in view of the fact that the Great Plains Blvd. ls now shut off by, it doesn't cut through by where the Old Vlllage Hall now ls located, I thought it would be appropriate if they would rename Great Plains Blvd. from 78th Street going north. It's only a few blocks. I 1lye on that street and my mother and father live next door to me for 20 years and my brother lived on the other side of me for 24 years and hls son Davld now 1lyes in that house so we do have three people, or three families that are on that part of Great Plalns Blvd.. The only ones it would really affect much for address changes would be just a few homes because the apartments have post offlce addresses. Of course the church would be the only large entity that would be affected by name change. I don't know how important that would be to them either. I do have coples of those letters that I had mailed last fall and I do have the thlng I got up today, sort of a supplemental thing to that letter. Now I don't know if you wlsh to have those or not. City Council Meeting - April 22, 1991 Mayor Chmiel: Yes, if we could please. Councilman Workman: Mr. Mayor, if I could while she hands those out. It's kind of a coincidence because in relationship to 1rem 3(k), approve State Ald Roadway designations, Charles and I were talking about roads and new roads. I talked to hlm and I sald, you know Charles klnd of belng new and gettlng up to speed here and I said you know, and I still have your letter somewhere but I forgot your last name currently. That you were a Pauly and that you had, talk of this lsa coincidence isn't it? And that we start thinking about, as these new roads are developed, that we think about a road that we might name Paulys Place or something and so we did that. In fact we kind of found one and Charles is going to kind of do some research to flnd out maybe where the old homestead was and where it might be appropriate. But we were thinking more along the lines of a new road and not maybe just a two block segment. Rosemary Pauly Mingo: The old homestead would be what was named Lyman Blvd.. That was the orlglnal Pauly homestead and now lt's built up of course. I don't know what it's called now. Councilman Workman: But I guess I suggested it wouldn't have maybe any relationship to the old homestead. The road that would extend between Galpin and TH 41. Now that doesn't necessarily have, it would have a large road and a widely used road but it may not have any relevance to the old homestead. don't know how that would go with changlng addresses and changlng the name of the road. Mayor Chmiel: It becomes rather cumbersome for a lot of people when that does happen, as I'm sure you're aware. It's changing their driver licenses not only to the post offlce but to every credit card they also have and wlth the church, it may also cause an additional problem. And I'm not sure if there ls but there could be. I think what we have to look at is, if we can, have a separate street newly named would be probably the way for us to go. Rosemary Pauly Mingo: Okay. Well thank you for your time. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you for coming in. Is there anyone else who would like to address the Counc117 PUBLZC HEARTNG: HEAR1'NG tis A RESULT OF' ILLE6RL BI~I~R SALES TO HZNORS, BROOKS SUPERETTE. Mayor Chmiel: I guess our major concern is that we did address a few of the others last week. For some reason you didn't get notifications. Something happened. Dennis Carlson: Could I just explain that sir? Mayor Chmiel: Sure. Dennis Carlson: I received a call, I can't remember. I think it was a Thursday after the Council meeting and I was very concerned. I was taken totally by surprise. If I might, I've got an envelope. Here's a mailing, a wrong zip code and it was delayed and we received it at the store on 4-9. If I might just give City Council Meeting - April 22, 1991 that to you. Brooks Food Mart, we are very concerned about our activity in the city and what ue do in the city. It vas definitely not our intention to not be at the Council meeting. Had I been aware of it, I would have been present so I hope that explains or tries to because I vas very surprised when I got the phone call. Mayor Chmiel: I appreciate that and I can see where that did have an incorrect zip. I guess the questions that we had asked 2 weeks ago at the Council vas we know of course what had happened and you had some discussions with the County as well as the attorney. The position I think we're taking in looking at is how can we correct the situation that occurred in the future, because the Council is very concerned about drugs themselves within the city and ue term some of that as drugs. We're very watchful over that aspect of it. So maybe if you could just tell us how you could conceiveably eliminate problems of this happening, and I know that checking ID's is a problem. Old persons like myself, I know you'd probably have a problem asking me for a drivers license because I look so young. Not to make light of it but I'm just saying, those are the situations that I krlou do happen so maybe you could just explain to us what you'd do in the future. Dennis Carlson: In the future, we've had meetings at the store. I've had meetings with my supervisors. It is a very critical issue and we are very, very concerned in all of our stores about the posslble sales of alcohol to mlnors. I wish I could say it never happened and when in fact it did. We deal with some part tlme help and Z don't know if the person on duty that evenlng was not tralned properly or what it might be. It may fall back on our responsibility. We didn't do the proper training. Since that lncldent dld happen, we have put a new manager in the store who I think is considerably stronger than the person we had at the time of the incident. Works better with her employees. Is better on training and I think has a better understanding of the legal issue. The posslble ramifications and the problems that it could create for us as a company. And also for the City. But her instructions have been and to my area supervisor and so on that all employees are advlsed that if any doubt of any person ls under 25 years or younger, that they are to be carded. At that point, if they have any problems and we have had problems where somebody wlll say I don't have it or they start to hassle our employees, that they are supposed to contact the police department. I thlnk lt's that serlous. As part of our hirlng practice, ue cover the sale or the laws for the sale of beer to minors. Employees are made very well aware that it can result in their termination if they violate that in any way and also there can be prosecution or charges agalnst them. We are very, very concerned about lt. We hope we can work ulth the City in any way possible and if you have any ideas for us, I'd be more than happy to listen. To try to implement any new policies, procedures, or anythlng that some of the other companies that have this problem may have come up with at the last Council meetlng. One thing I would appreciate, in the future if there are mailings, if there is someway possible that corporate headquarters could be copled on any malllng in the future. I dldn't, 11ks I say, I think thls could eliminate a lot of problems and I really feel badly about that. But that's one of my suggestions also. That if there lsa pollcy concern or whatever, that corporate headquarters of various companies be notlfied also. Mayor Chmiel: Good position and I think we should probably do that. From just what you're saying and I believe sincerely that's what you really mean and City Council Meeting - April 22, 1991 hopefully you'll make all your employees aware as to what restrictions are within the city and the ramifications of those. We thank you for coming in here although the Council may have some other questions that they may have. Dennis Carlson: I know there was one question in the statement on a hearing with the Safety Commission once a year, or whatever it might be to address concerns. When I received the letter they had some items that might be covered. Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Dennis Carlson: And I would be very much in favor of that. I think anytime we can bring it out into the open. Other people can bring problems they're having to the table. Whatever it might be. I would be very happy to participate in something like that. Mayor Chmlel: Appreciate that too. Don Ashworth: The corporate address you referred to, is that any of those that were shown on the Clty Attorney's letter to you? Dennis Carlson: Yes. The Retail Foods of Minnesota I believe was on there. 5720 Smetana Drive. Minnetonka. That ls the Corporate. Don Ashworth: Okay, thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussions? Anyone else? Councilman Wing: I didn't catch your name Don. Mayor Chmiel: Would you kindly state your name again? Dennis Carlson: Oh, it's Dennis Carlson. I'm Director of Operations for Brooks Food Markets. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. If no other discussions, can I have a motion to close that public hearing? Dennis Carlson: Thank you very much. Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Workman seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussions? Councilman Workman: In relation to ail of this, I've been rekindling my feelings on the sale of cigarettes to minors issue. While it's not relevant to maybe this particular lssue tonight, I did witness what I thought to be a very young person purchasing cigarettes at that store. The person wasn't asked. I didn't know the circumstances. I didn't raise questions. I just observed it as I observed the same thing in Kenny's. Since we were kind of battling the cigarette mlnor lssue and where they could be displayed, it almost appears as though it's gotten worse. I'm reminded because Brooks is here tonight but Brooks is probably, and they know they were the last time, they were one of the City Council Meeting - Apri]. 22, 1991 stores that really heavily displays tobacco products in a wide area in front of their cash registers. It's getting wider than I think when we had earlier discussions with most of these stores had kind of agreed that they would try to keep it in a little bit and keep an eye on it. So seeing that coupled with what I thought to maybe be questionable sales, I'm wondering if there isn't something that maybe we can rekindle maybe with Scott Hart again. I think we had an incident where somebody sent a minor into the Brooks store and then somebody was planting and playing games and I wasn't going to be playing games. This is serious business and I wasn't going to stop somebody and put an employee on the hot spot here but it's definitely getting broad and wide again. The SA on TH ? used to have so many signs about checking the identifications of young looking smokers. Those signs have ail slowly come down. They're not there anyl0ore so I don't know if that changes their policy of asking but I'd like to not think that it wasn't something they just did the week or the month that we put the pressue on them. It's something that they were going to be. Mayor Chmiel: Right. I think that's a very valid point Tom and I think everybody was supportive of that, at least the previous Council. Previous two Councll members. I think what you should probably do is bring this up on another agenda if you'd like to address that. Councilman Workman: It just starts to appear as though you're wasting a lot of hot alt on a toplc and well, it kind of goes up and then it comes down and everybody forgets about it. It really, you feel a little futile or even disregarded. Maybe next tlme we need to put teeth in this. Mayor Chmiel: Right. That's something I think we can address at that particular tlme. Councilmarl Wing: Rather than on an agenda Don, I'd prefer just to have Scott Hart advised. He's here tonight and he's heard that and I know that Scott will react aggressively on that lssue. Perhaps a report back. Mayor Chmiel: Next item on our agenda is item number 5 which is West ?9th Street. Oh, Z think we maybe better. Very good Roger. Z'm moving a 11ttle too quickly. I think we'd better have an approval of the issuance of the license or that uill be inoperable. Can I have a motion for the approval of the 11cense for Brooks Superette? Councilman Wlng: I'll move that approval at thls tlme. Councilman Mason: Second. Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Hason seconded to approve the 1991/92 liquor license for Brooks Superette. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. City Council Meeting - April 22, 1991 MEST 79TH STREET FEASZBILTTY STUDY FOR IHPROVEHENTS EAST OF TH A. PUBLIC HEARING. B. AUTHORIZE PREPARATION OF PLRNS RND SPECZFICATZONS. Public present: Name Rddress Scott Harri William Madden Oirector of Oevelopment Bob Mikulak Brad Johnson Van Doren-Hazard-Stallings 1004 Red Rain Circle, Lexington, Kentucky Valvoline Valvoline 7425 Frontier Trail Charles Folch: The project consultant engineer, Scott Harri of Van Ooren- Hazard-Stallings is here tonight to give a brief presentation on that feasibility report. If you'd like, Scott could lnitiate wlth that presentations if you want. Mayor Chmiel: Yes I would. Scott Harri: Good evening Mr. Mayor, Council. I'm Scott Harri. I think what I'd like to do is start with the feasibility study for West 79th Street. The impetus for that was your approval of the site plan for Valvoline Rapid 0il Change center on what would be the future Lot 2 of the Gateway First Addition. I'd like to start with perhaps the executive summary from our report and to state that the project is feasible from an engineering perspective. Secondly, the project is proposed to be financed and assessed into benefitting properties in the Gateway First Addition. That the entire...street that's under consideration here. Thirdly, that the estimated assessments in the Gateway First Addition are as follows: For Lot 1, Block 1 would $13,911.11. Lot 2, Block 1 which is developing the Rapid 0il site, would be $39,822.44. And Lot 3, Block 1 was $21,619.45. And if I've done my right arithmetic, that would lead me to item number 4 which is the total estimated project cost of $75,353.00 so the entire project would be funded with assessments. And then fifth would be one of the caveats of the project would be the development dependent upon storm sewer improvements to occur in a timely fashion to open their business towards the end of June, 1991...and the phasing and the timing and scheduling of this project which I will conclude tonight, should make that feasible so they will have that storm sewer connection available to them. As a...introduction to West 79th Street project exists as approximately a 300 foot cul-de-sac street. The intersection with State Highway 101 is a T intersection. It lies just south of the railroad tracks and TH 5 is in this location. Amoco station, car wash and the Hanus repair facility over in this location. West 79th Street is built 26 foot wide face to face. Therein lies the problem. Normal standards for commercial streets would be a 36 foot wide street. The other deficiency I just mentioned was the storm sewer...ability to Lot 2 in this direction. This portion of the street, or what I call the westerly 60 feet or so was built and upgraded in conjunction when TH 101 was widened to 4 lanes. This remaining easterly portion of approximately 275 feet has been severely distressed due to the large number of heavy commercial vehicles that have used this site and the City Council Heeling - ~pril 22, 1991 street over the years and just due to natural aging cost...freeze/thaw cycles and the like. The proposed improveroents to the street would include in the shaded area right there a widening of the street from this curb line on the south side up to this location to make the pavement width be 36 feet wide consistent with the City's commercial standards for a street. And in conjunction with this, we proposed milling approximately 1 1/2 inches off of the surface of the existing street and then overlaying it all at one time. And this should renew that surface and put it back into a like new condition. In conjunction with the street improvements, at 36 feet wide we propose in this thing to have 3 lanes of traffic. The shaded area would become the dedicated right turn lane only which would funnel traffic more on to TH 101. The center lane which again would be about 12 feet wide...left turn lane and direct traffic southbound onto TH 101 and then the southerly lane right here would be providing all the incoming traffic for the street and possibly if the street were to be extended in the future. As I mentioned earlier also storm sewer was the other main component of the proposed improvement. We would be proposing a gravity system connecting starting here at the existing facilities in TH 101 and there would be a gravity line consisting of 18 inch diameter reinforced concrete. There'd be two catch basins in the street to collect runoff and the stub coming from this system over to the property line where the Rapid Oil facility could connect to that and collect their runoff from on their site. Street lighting is also proposed in conjunction with the project. Currently there is one street light that exists in this location. This proposal would entail replacing this with the standard street light that the City now has on this segment of West ?gth going west of TH lOl here and it would also propose another standard here and one down over here which would be in close proximity to the two entrances that come to get some good intersection lighting when ue anticipate there may be some fairly high volume traffic there during the evening hours during the winter time. The standard proposed would be 30 foot tapered steel poles with the south weatherly very similar to what we have in the city now. The lamps would be 250 watt high pressure sodium and mounted in the rectangular fixture. Landscaping is also proposed in conjunction with the project. The landscaping theme on the south side will fit mostly with that landscaping proposed by the Rapid Oil development. We've seen a preliminary...plan and we haven't called out a real legend if you will for the type of landscaping that would be done but ue would design improvements in this location and improvements on Lot 1 that would be consistent with what is being proposed by the Rapid Oil development. The north side landscaping theme would fit more with the keeping of a future walkway that has been envisioned to occur on the north side of the road and perhaps extend further east at some point in the future. That would entail a series of low high berms with evergreens and deciduous trees that would help screen this portion of the boulevard and the street from the railroad right-of-way over here. Oo you have any questions on the proposed improvements at this point? okay, I can jump into the financing again is being proposed on the basis of assessment on a front foot basis. In looking at the proposed improvements out here, we felt that all properties started from this location here over in this direction. All benefitted equally from the roadway improvements so as part of the $75,000.00 total estimated project cost, approximately $56,791.00 was attributable to the roadway improvements. And based on the amount of front footage here, we had proposed an assessment rate for the street improvements to be $177.39. The storm sewer system and the assessment for that was a little bit different. Lot 1 doesn't really benefit from the storm sewer improvements and based on a calculation of the amount of flow at the time of the improvements, it 10 City Council Meeting - April 22, 1991 was determined that 80~ of the cost of the storm sewer was justified from the runoff created from Lot 2. The other 20~ from property on Lot 3 over here. And so using this 80/20 split and based on the total storm sewer costs, that we'd be looking at $18,562.00. We'd be looking at $105.48 per front foot assessment rate for storm sewer here and $36.77 for front foot on this lot. Again, from the executive summary that I showed you would result, when you add up and multiple all these out, to those proposed assessments that we have for you. Then the last item for my presentation would be the project schedule. And if it is your pleasure, 2 weeks ago you received the feasibility study and ordered this public hearing tonight. We are at that public hearing and if it's your pleasure, we would like you to order preparation of the plans and specifications and in so doing so, we would be looking at a bid opening on Hay 14th and awarding the project on the 20th of May, the second meeting in May. And we would anticipate beginning construction approximately 10 days later with an interim completion schedule of June 21st for the storm sewer which would allow the Rapid Oil people to be completely up and running by at least their initially projected end of June completion and then the City could follow with completion of landscaping and street paving in the following 3 weeks or so so that you could have a project in both the the Rapid Oil project and the street project come to a conclusion and be acceptable. So any questions anybody would have? Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. I'd like you to go over those first figures that you put up there. Scott Harri: Okay. These figures right here? Mayor Chmiel: Right. Scott Harri: Okay. Again, each one of these figures is comprised of two variable assessment rates. For Lot 1, and you have in your packet the report that was prepared. Lot I has a front footage of 78.4 feet and would be proposed to be assessed at $177.39 per front foot. That extension in multiplication would result in the $13,911.11. Then for Lot 2, thelr assessment would be based on a combination of both the roadway front foot cost and the storm sewer front foot cost as well as Lot 3. To get to that, the roadway cost again because each property benefitted equally, was $177.00. Then you add the $105.48 per front foot times 140 front feet that they have and then we arrive at the flgure of $39,822.44. Correspondingly, Lot 3 would have the standard $177.39 front foot cost plus $36.77 for storm sewer. Those two numbers together times 100.95 feet would then result in an assessment of Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. We're open for public comment. Is there anyone wishing to address this at this particular time? Please state your name and your address. William Madden: My name is William Madden. I live at 1004 Red Rain Circle in Lexington, Kentucky. I'm Director of Development for Valvoline Instant 0il Change. Some of the questions I have this evening. I'm interested in the program being presented this evening. Is it being presented in finalized format to be approved as ls in lt's presentation tonight? Mayor Chmiel: As we're looking at it rlght now with the few things that we have to have motions on in order to order the project and then authorize preparation 11 City Council Meeting ~ April 22, 1991 of plans and specs. Yes, I would say so. William Madden: Okay. Hay I return later if questions occur? Mayor Chmiel: Certainly. Any other discussions on this? Brad Johnson: Another question? Brad Johnson, 7425 Frontier Trail. Our interest of course is that we're the developer. I might also mention that this is the first knowledge, within the last 2 weeks that Valvoline, at the Kentucky level, has been aware of the extent of the assessments that are going to be made against the property. Naturally because they were just made. I think the question that I would have, as a procedural one, is that at what period are these assessments actually set? Number one. Are they set today? Later? Or are we just authorizing the project? Don Ashworth: Typically the years, you're talking about the years it's going to be assessed over? Brad Johnson: The amount of. Gerhardt: Final dollar costs. Don Ashworth: oh, the final dollar amount? That can only occur at the time of the assessment hearing which would be after the project is complete. The problem with waiting until that period of time is, if we do the project at this point, somebody's going to have to pay for it. We've laid out a methodology for how we feel that should be paid for. If any landowner does not feel that that's correct, now is the time to say that a different methodology should exist. Brad Johnson: And does that have to follow some guideline laid down by the state for this type of project? Don Ashworth: Well typically the method that was outlined by the engineer is the normal process. I think all of the roadway improvements have followed a front foot basls. Everything withln the downtown area. Similarly the storm sewer a~sessment. We're using the same policy here that we did for all other parcels downtown. Brad Johnson: Is it possible that the storm sewer might, who's the engineer around here? The storm sewer might in fact benefit the Hanus property or not? Scott Harri: They do and that's why we're proposing a portlon of the Hanus from that storm sewer system... Brad Johnson: Because right now we have no on site drainage up there. Scott Harri: That is correct. Brad Johnson: Is it possible that that could be changed? I mean just ~echnically or negotiated so more of it could be assessed against the Hanus property at a later period? 12 City Council Meeting - April 22, 1991 Scott Harri: Well right now, as we were saying, the assessment is as 4shworth explained. Right now...the formula of this 80/20 was based on the amount of runoff generated from each site and based on the... We don't anticipate more runoff coming down into that system in the future and therefore we think the drainage area and the improvements are...as they are right now. They will accommodate the future development. Brad Johnson: On the Hanus property? Scott Harri: Well, looking at the property that's developed right now. On the portlon that is developed, it has the storm sewers that are in place rlght now or being proposed... Brad Johnson: What I'm fishing for is it possible to assess more to the Hanus building? Based upon storm sewer, or lack of there. Charles Folch: Based upon existing conditions, we can only justify, as Scott had mentioned, the 80/20 percentage share of contributing runoff. I believe most of the southern portion of that Hanus property then ends up draining off to the TH 5 ditch so most of that runoff ts going to a different system. If we had a plan before us showing some future improvement which would change the existing condition significantly, that's something we would definitely take that into consideration but at this time we don't have any of that information. Brad Johnson: Well at the time the actual assessment is done, could you change this then? That's what I'm trying to figure out. Charles Folch: That's a good question. I guess Roger, maybe you could answer that. Roger Knutson: Final assessments are not adopted until the final assessment hearing. Thls gives you a good indication of what they're going to do but you don't adopt the assessment roll tonlght if that's your question. Brad Johnson: Okay thanks. Mayor Chmiel: Brad, maybe just a second. It appears to me as though you've not seen these figures per se. Brad Johnson: I've seen the figures. Mayor Chmiel: Oh you have? Brad Johnson: Valvoline is just becoming aware of them. Hayor Chmiel: Okay. I guess maybe what I'm looking is if there's some real concerns by you. Maybe what we should wlnd up dolng ls tabling thls for 2 weeks and let some of the issues be discussed with staff and let staff come up with some conclusions on thls. I know you've made a nlce short trlp from Kentucky but, it's a good place to come to Minnesota. William Hadden: Oh yeah. I lived here for several years so. Mr. Mayor, I appreciate your recommendation and I have to concur. I think it's a prudent 13 City Council Meeting - April 22, 1991 approach at this point. We just this evening received a letter of explanation from Mr. Ashuorth helping us to understand the HRA agreements. We have resubmitted development agreements to the City in a red line format and I don't believe we've received final response back from the City there. At this juncture, Z really cannot be comfortable making a recommendation to our organization for the type of a tax structure that we're talking about without a better handle on exactly what it's going to cost us and what the benefits are. so Z appreciate your recommendation. I think it would be the right approach. Thank you. Mayor 6hmiel: Good. Thank you. Any discussion Council? Councilman Workman: I'm not so sure I understand. Is it the spreading out of the assessment that's concerning you or is it the assessments themselves have surprised you? William Madden: Well there's a number of features to the agreements at this juncture that we are not comfortable with. The allocation, which I belleve is what you're referring to as an assessment. The allocation of the cost to the lots. Allocations or property tax assessments, which play very heavily in that. Those are all undefined features to us rlght now as to how they've been arrlved. A tax assessment that far exceeds any of our other properties including those most recently opened in the last 60 days. So it's a 11ttle blt of a problem for us to have a grasp of how we're arriving at what we're dolng and the long term effect on us. Particularly in signing agreements that are based on State Statutes. Z thlnk we have to have a better understanding there before we are fully committed to that. And agaln, Mr. Ashworth has been very helpful in sending us a lengthy explanation that, by his words though, is subject to final revlew by the Clty Attorney or the County Attorney. I don't remember whlch now so I thlnk we need to see that document in it's final format as well to have a full plcture of this program. Mayor Chmiel: Very good. Councilwoman Dimler: Mr. Mayor, I would move that we table. Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second to table for 2 weeks and have it brought back with discussion of staff and the conclusions reached to everyone's satisfaction? Councilman Mason: Second. Councilwoman Oimler moved, Councilman Mason seconded to table authorizing preparation of plans and specifications for Project #gl-8, West 7gth Street improvements east of TH 101, for two weeks. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. AWARD OF BIDS: SOUTH LOTUS LAKE BOAT ACCESS GRADING, DRAINAGE AND LANDSCAPING IHPROUEHENT PROJECT 90-18. Todd Hoffman: Thank you Mr. Mayor and City Council members. South Lotus Lake access improvement project was initiated as an engineering project to correct grading and drainage concerns. The damage to the slte occurred, which requlres 14 City Council Meeting - April 22, 19gl the correction, as part of the heavy rains experienced shortly after the finishing of the original access project. Consideration to landscaping is also being given on the slte to bring the existing landscaping that is there up to the specific standards which we desire in today's developments. Bids for the project were opened last Tuesday and range from $41,885.00 to $32,611.00. The seven bids show a variable of plus or minus $9,000.00. As noted, the low bid is higher than the estimate. However, recognizing the competitive bids in this project, it is felt that the low bid is fair for the city. The additional $6,000.00 does however require fundlng and as noted by the City Manager, it would be paid for with the remaining funds in the original access budget thus closlng that out. The original access budget, as it was constructed, had a remaining balance of $6,200.00 and some odd dollars. The add£tional $6,000.00 or the discrepancy then could be paid from that difference. The other fundlng sources for this project include Environmental Trust Fund which is $24,000.00, a Soll Conservation Grant whlch was administered and collected by the £nglneerlng Oepartment of $5,177.00, and then Park Acquisition and Development up to $8,000.00 out of that specific fund. As such, the approval of the low bid of $32,611.00 to Kusske Construction Inc. of Chaska is recommended. Just a side note, we dld hear from Kusske that they were btddlng a number of projects and had sharpened thelr pencil on this one. They were bidding a number of projects this spring and were not being too successful so it is my oplnion that their bid is competitive and represents a good bld for the City. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Thank you. Any discussions or any questions? Councilman Workman: Well, "Uh oh, here comes the pea and shell trick." Mayor Chmiel: guote unquote. Councilman Workman: Notice the City Manager said I almost hate writing a report like this. He didn't say he hated it. He just said he almost hated it. Didn't we have changing of the rock, dldn't we have thls down about $20,000.00? Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Councilman Workman: So we're about $12,000.00 off of what we wanted? Councilman Wing: Well the Mayor saved us $7,000.00. $6,200.00 so that's around $13,00o.00 overage. I want to thank you for saving the amount they spent. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, thank you. I certainly appreciate it. I think we probably saved $1,000.00 but that's about it. Councilman Workman: Am I correct in that? Didn't we get it down to about $20,000.007 Mayor Chmiel: Pretty close to that. Councilman Workman: We're a full third off. Well, we're $0~ high. Mayor Chmiel: We have two things we can do. We can reject all bids or accept the bld that's here. 15 City Council Meeting - April 22, 1991 Todd Hoffman: Engineer's estimate was $26,444.00. We have a difference of $&,100.00 and again, the seven bids that came in, I mean these people were hungry for work. The nature of thls project ls somewhat unusual. The engineer's estimate was based on unit costs for the standard job. This is not a standard type of application. It's a small job. It's unlque. It has a number of different things. The contractor still has to bring all their equipment In to perform each 11ttle segment of thls project. Thus they lncur cost doing that. So the project came in $6,000.00 over the estimate. However, the boat landlng access area has never been up to par. It has not looked 11kc we wanted it to. The seed has never grown properly. The drainage has not worked properly. It's my opinlon that thls job needs to be done in some shape, manner or form. We brought it to the Council. It was reduced by the Mayor and Council by $?,000.00. Z thlnk we've got it down to the bare bones and to get the access again, up to snuff, we're recommending approval of that low bid. Don Ashworth: Zf Z may. Mayor Chmiel: Go ahead Don. Don Ashworth: I'm sorry. Councilwoman Dlmler: Maybe you were going to answer it but I just wanted to know, it sounds to me that it was never done rlght. Is there still some 1lability on the origlnal developer of the project that we could go after? Todd Hoffman: I'm not so certain it was never done right but a large amount of damage occurred from that 7-12 lnch raln, whatever it was, shortly after the project was finished. Mayor Chmlel: Two in the same year. Councilwoman Dimler: But wasn't it constructed to handle such a 100 year storm? Todd Hoffman: Of that magnitude, I'm not sure if the orlglnal construction was intended to handle that type of storm. Ideally it did not. Scott Harrl: I'd be glad to answer your question. Councilwoman Oimler: Would you answer that please? Scott Harri: The storm was rated as 500 year or 1,000 year or some unrealistic number like that and the pond systems that are employed here in the city are deslgned to handle and accommodate the storage and runoff from a 100 year storm event. What compounds matters slightly was that there was a slightly larger dralnage area that flows and had flowed in through thls pondlng system that was originally portrayed on initial developments for the residential component that adjolned the park over here. So the two events klnd of compounded and they all hit at one time and it would be fairly rare to even find that being a problem today with say a normal 100 year event occurring. We wouldn't find the klnd of gully washing but wlth a severe event, you know once every 1,000 years or something would lead to this. I dldn't want to have Todd struggle wlth an engineering matter 11kc that because he does a good job in the Park and Rec. 16 City Council Meeting - April 22, 1991 Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. Can you tell me, who was awarded the bid the first time? Who did the project? Scott Harri: It was one of the bidders. Councilwoman Oimler: One of the ones that rebtd? Scott Harri: It was Hartman Excavating. They were the third high bidder at $34,800.00. But a word of explanation to this project, we tend to estimate projects based on historical cost data that are bld not only in thls clty but in surrounding communities. Because the scope of the work was so small and ftntte in so many areas, the mobilization cost of brlnging men and equipment and materials back and forth to the project got disproportionately high to the actual work that had to be done. And on thls project, typically what we do ls we say, what the unit price is normally found for curb and gutter is about $5.00 a lineal foot. So we say because of the mobilization it's going to be $10.00. Well this ended up being $15.00 so there is, it's kind of a guessing game once the project becomes so small. Plus most of the work is maintenance work and we needed the contractor to protect existing boat users, park users, the existing infrastructure. The streets, the drives-and the storm sewers that normally wouldn't be there to protect if this were a new project. So he's got to take more care. It's golng to be slower. It's going to be a delicate remodeling job like you would in your home or a building. So these costs tend to be higher unfortunately but agaln, in analyzing the bids, the blds were, especially the low three bidders were really tightly grouped. These are good bids for the Clty. The estlmate was just a little off and I would take the responsibility for that. Don Ashworth: To respond to Councilman Workman's question. The original estimate, was that $32,000.00 or is it the current $26,000.007 Where did we cut the $7,000.00 off? My recollection is it was higher 11ke $32,000.00 and this brought it down to $26,000.00. Scott Harri: That is correct. The $26,000.00 does reflect the reduced and amended number that we had worked out by changing some of the materials and the approach. Mayor Chmiel: Had they looked at the changing of those materials in the cost of the bid that they submitted? Did that include what was suggested at that time? Scott Harri: No it didn't. But what they bid was only the reduced or the different material. They didn't actually have a chance to look at the, say the flrst approach that we had recommended or proposed. Mayor Chmiel: At the higher cost? Scott Harri: Exactly. Intuitively, there may be not too much difference between like a boulder wall versus the concrete wall. Just due to the amount of labor that's golng to be lnvolved now in getting thls to flt in here. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other discussion? Unfortunately I know that there's a need wlthln that particular area for havlng thls done. If we don't really move on this and we do get some additional heavy ratns, we could be facing additional 17 City Council Meeting - April 22, 1991 dollars. Althougl, I'm not very happy with the existing bids coming in as high as they are, I think we're in a position to move ahead and make sure this is done. Councilman Workman: So moved. Councilman Mason: Second. Resolution ~91-36: Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Mason seconded to award the bid for the South Lotus Lake Boat Access Improvement Project to Kusske Construction, Inc. in the amount of $32,611.00. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. AWARD OF BIDS: EHERGENCY REPAIRS TO LIFT STATION NO. 1. Charles Folch: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. As I eluded to in the staff report, in recent years we've had numerous problems ulth the exlstlng 11ft station and it seems that the repalr time, effort and associated costs to maintaln thls lift statlon have been steadlly increasing through the years. Many of these problems are directly related to the existing pumping system set up. The exlsting 11ft station operates vla communication 11ne which regulates the operation of this 11ft station to restrict it at times when the much larger 11ft statlon downstream ls pumplng. Unfortunately, we had a problem with the communication line and both pumps were operating at the same time which caused an lncrease in back pressure and we lost one of the pumps in Lift Statlon No. 1. So right now we're only down to one functional pump at this lift statlon and if thls pump should fail, we have the potential for a sewage back-up and potential discharge into Lotus Lake. Now the problems with this lift statlon have been known for quite some tlme. In fact, thls repalr work was scheduled for, or tentatively scheduled for the 1992 budget year. However, given the current situation, now seems to be the appropriate tlme to make these necessary repairs. As I also mentioned in the report, this type of work would quallfy as an emergency purchase whlch would allow us to save time in performing the workby not having to go through the formal bldding process. Quotes have been acqulred from a few contractors uhlch are lncluded in your packets. The low bld for performing the or installing the new well and all the underground piplng was F.F. 3edllcki at $14,792.00. Waldor Pump quoted $24,659.00 to furnish the two new 20 horsepower pumps and install all mechanical and electrical work. In an effort to enhance thls tlmlng process and also control oosts on this repalr work, I would propose that staff could lnspect and administrate this contract. Now the next questlon comes to as far as fundlng this type of work. What I would propose is to do a funding shift if you will between this program and the 1991 sewer rehab program. Currently the sewer rehab program ls falllng slightly behlnd schedule due to it's trying to be coordinated with the pavement management program. What I would propose doing ls shlftlng $40,000.00 from the sewer rehab program this year to fund this repair work and then in '92, that $40,000.00 that was proposed and scheduled for the '92 year could be reallocated back to the sewer rehab program. Kind of a shlft if you will that would be returned in the next flscal year. Due to the timlng of thls problem and agaln the potential impacts if this situation is not rectified soon, I would recommend that the blds be awarded to F.F. Jedllckl to lnsta11 the new well and all the underground work and Waldor Pump to supply the pumps, install them and do all 18 City Council Meeting - April 22, 1991 the electrical and mechanical work and that this repair work be noted as an emergency repair situation. Mayor Chmiel: Very good Charles. I sort of agree with what you're saying here. If that pump should fail, there's potential for some of that maintenance sewer back up. We either fix it now and take care of the situation or we pay that to the MPC for a flne that we'd wtnd up having by the City. I think we're going to need a resolution on thls particular proposal. The other thlng I'd 11kw ls, I want to see all of our city employees and staff thinking smart in ways that we can save money. In this particular case we would save it if we dld have the discharge problem and cost the city a lot of dollars. I think that's what we have to continually try to do and come up with some of these project cost savings that we can. Any other discussion? Mike. Councilman Mason: Yeah. A quick question on the note from Jedlicki talking about saving us a lot of money. 4 foot manhole with a new top. I'll plead ignorance. What ls Jedlickl talklng about here with this. Mayor Chmiel: The 4 foot manhole? Councilman Mason: Yeah. The 4 foot manhole with the new top. Put the other submerssible in the steel can. Charles Folch: Actually Jerry Boucher, the Utility Superintendent met with Frank out on the site to investigate this possible option but both concluded, after further investigation that this ls not an option. Councilwoman Dimler: Mr. Mayor, I move approval of emergency repairs to upgrade ' Lift Statlon No. 1, PW 055a. Councilman Mason: Second. Resolution ~91-37: Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Hason seconded to award the bids for emergency repairs to Lift Station No. 1 to F.F. 3edlicki in the amount of $14,792.00 for the wet well and underground piping work and to Maldor Pump Colpany in the amount of $24,659.00 to perform the lift station mechanical and electrical work. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. LAKE ANN PARK PICNIC/RECREAT)ON SHELTER, REVIEW CONCEPT PLAN/X99~ BUDGET AHENDHENT. Mayor Chmiel: Just a quick second. In my packet I notice I have item number 7 but that was deleted. Is that correct? Don Ashworth: That's correct. Mayor ChmLel: Thank you. Todd, sorry about that. Todd Hoffman: Thank you Mr. Mayor. This item represents one of two items on tonight's agenda which have a long history in the city. The other being Herman Fleld Park. Zt ls the hopes that the plans may now pay off. This plan belng in the conceptual stage for the shelter for about the past 10 years, or 8 years. 19 City Council Meeting - April 22, 1991 Herman Field for approximately 10 years, and that the City will be able to enjoy the subsequent benefits of this shelter. My involvement with the project, although somewhat brlef, has been in depth in nature. The Park and Recreation Commission has methodically refined and revleued the plans as they've gone along the past 3 or 4 years and in more detall here in the past 3 or 4 months trying to reflne this plan for presentation to the City Council at this initial level. The plans that you have before you was prepared for the City by Van Doren- Hazard-Stallings, our planning/architectural/engineering firm which the City uses for the most part in the clty park projects. Scott Harrl ls here tonlght and wlll be glving a presentation on design and architectural features of the proposed shelter following my comments. In short, thls park development project requlres the expenditure of a significant amount of dollars. The expense is not foollsh or exorblnate however. The construction of the park building, it really fits into the picture of a developing, well rounded park system uhlch the city is currently attempting to develop here in Chanhassen. It provldes balance as we strive towards the goal of a fully developed, quality park system. I welcome the Councl].'s comments at thls tlme. Agaln, lt's an inltial presentation to the City Council on this item. The Park and Recreation Commission have revlewed it approximately 3 times uithln 1991. You notice their comments in your packets over those months. And again, I'll accept any of your questions at this time or if you'd 11ke to go directly lnto a more detalled presentation on architectural design, considerations on this particular park shelter? Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Maybe what we'd do is just have Scott give us a brief overview of what we're looking at. I think many of the Council have sat in on Park and Rec as well as thls was presented. I'm glad that you brlng up that first one Scott. I just have one real concern. I like the building in ltself. I 11ke the way lt's deslgned but more specifically, on that side vlew perspective as you're showing, with that openness up on the second floor. Somehow I have some real concerns wlth 1lability. It's open. Klds are going to be up there. Whether dropping balloons fllled with water or bottles or whatever, and I'm thlnklng of some of the thlngs we used to do as klds. I see that openness and I like that but is there something that we can look at to somehow eliminate some of those concerns for even klds trylng to jump off there? Scott Harri: I can jump in and say that two options that we looked at that addressed that issue that were brought up numerous tlmes by numerous people through the review process at the Park and Rec was to put some type of a balcony feature on the front of thls thlng. Here we show a planter out here. That's not our recommended optlon at this point just due to perhaps some of the maintenance lssues regarding the vegetation out there. What we would be proposing is a, oops! There you go. Some type of stone masonry, metal, wood type of sloplng thlng. Thls area would be about, protrude about 4 feet out. Cantilever out over the people underneath. Would be a low maintenance thing but aesthetically pleasing when you look back from the lake towards the structure and it wouldn't allow somebody, now agaln these are really railings...malls and other locations so the securlty liability, somebody would have to intentionally have to climb over to want to hurt themselves. But again, people who are standlng here at the food servlce, at the rental wlndow, just standlng underneath out of the raln, wouldn't be subject to somebody looklng stralght down and dlve bomblng them~ But that doesn't prevent somebody from lobbing something out either I guess. I mean I vas a kld too so I think I did those things. Part of this presentation, if I could footnote upon thls thlng, ls all 2O City Council Meeting - April 22, 1991 the comments that were made at Park and Rec which are included in this packet, we've taken note of these things and these plans somewhat address those'but a lot of those are details about they'd like to have an electrical outlet here and one there. The stage we're at with this plan is a conceptual planning stage and if you're familiar with kind of the stages of a project, the next stage would be design and development where a lot of materials and size and color and shape and logos and stuff would be brought in together and then worklng drawings would be prepared after that approval. And in each step down the line, a new cost estlmate would be prepared to insure that we're golng to stay along what would be arrived at as a final budget. To start with, the structure that you're seelng here ls entirely masonry or concrete. The exterlor flnish would be stone or masonry. Possibly simllar to the Lake Susan shelter as far as the stone. The roofing material proposed would be a thlck heavy asphalt shlngle. Not wood like down here at Lake Susan. This is a high quality Timberline type of shingle. Inslde the roof materials would be made out of wood. There's a large beam that runs full length from this dominant chimney structure on this end to the faclllty over here. Again, the plcnic shelter's located at the north end of the park. There was a steep bank in the h111 and we're golng to tuck this building into that h111 so access would be on grade at the south end. This ls agaln south. This is the lake on the north end and it would provide for a walk out at the lower level in thls location. Access to the lower level would be vla walkways around the exterior of the building due to cost and space saving features of not havlng stairwells inslde the shelter. What I'd 11ke to do ls show you the floorplan. Talk about some of the highlights. I'll start with the upper level. At thls locatlon over here we started looking at a fireplace. The fireplace left due to practical vandalism issues about people starting fires, how do we get flrewood here, how do we manage storlng of it and selllng it to people. Who's going to burn a fire sort of thing. What this area right now is ls we are going to provlde power, water for people to cook on. There's some shelves and cabinets in here and you can bring in your crockpots and other things 11ke this. There will be a hot plate there. You can actually do some heating and cooking right in this area. It will be protected, when it's not being rented, by a fold down steel klnd of a wall I guess, if you w111. And this would be likewise, these would be fold out tables that would also have power and water brought to them in case there were two small groups that wanted to use the shelter. This area right here would support with a picnic table layout, a comfortable 50 people as far as the occupancy. This agaln ls thls sloped area out in front that would view the lake to the north in this location and the access and circulation would be vla two walks that would approach it from either side. The lower level, which again this is the north towards the lake in this fashlon rlght here, would consist of a mens and womens restroom facilities on the back half. A large storage area in this location. First Aid and the lifeguard's room and a rental food service counter and window in this location. The restroom facilities contain overlarge stalls to permit and so they functlon 11ke changlng rooms. You can brlng your son or daughter and change clothes right in there. Also, all the materials in the restrooms are made from masonry materlal except for the water closest and other thlngs so when clean up is required, take a hose and you can flush down walls and floors and maintenance would be a very easy thing to accomplish. There will be also low helght facilities, sinks and water closets for younger aged children to access so that doesn't require a parent to always have to run in and help out in this location. The food service right now is being contemplated as all packaged goods. Anything from cans to candy bars. Things that come someplace that 21 City Council Meeting -- April 22~ 1991 they're already containerized. The requirements of the FDA and other sanitation requirements would greatly increase the cost of finish foaterials and sanitation provisions for the employees but that is still an option that we would be open to get some feedback from you on. The rental area right here for paddles, boats, life jackets, etc. would be adjoining the food service window to allow some efficiency of employee staffing perhaps both windows. We don't see a large demand at the rental window so this person can occasionally come over and take care of the need. $o we see some employee efficiency. The storage area would be available for the storage of the rental equipment, food service equipment and also any and all janitorial supplies that would be required for the functioning of the picnic shelter. The first aid and lifeguard room would contain a small storage area and bed or a cot so somebody would lay down. Say your child got a little queezy or sick or needed just to lay down for a while, it's a place where they can bring somebody. They can put them in here and wait for an ambulance to come or something like this. Very spartan and we have a little window that the person working in here can also look through there and perhaps make some observations if somebody's left in there unattended. Generally that's it in a nutshell. There's a lot of things and I guess we're here to kind of gather some of your feedback. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Thank you. Any discussion? Councilman Mason: Any thought given to changing tables for diapers in the mens and the womens restrooms? Todd Hoffman: It was discussed. The intent was then to enable people to carry out those activities on the wooden benches which would be inside the stalls rather than the Kolar Bear pull down type. It serves basically the same type of function. Scott Harri: This area right here is where the benches would be. Good question. Todd Hoffman: Little people were given a lot of consideration. Councilman Wing: Where did we wind up on tile telephones? What was decided on telephones? Some communication. Todd Hoffman: The site for a telephone? Councilman Wing: No. The need at Lake Ann specifically, with this building in particular. Todd Hoffman: For this building, the window was installed between the First Aid and rental for the installation of one common phone which then could be used by an employee in the food service rental area and/or the lifeguards so that would just be one phone for employee/lifeguard use and then there would be a pay publlc phone on the outslde of the building. You know any tlme you add an additional line, you 3ust get that additional monthly bllling. Councilman Wing: Sittlng through the earlier meetings and then readlng the Hinutes from the jolnt one, there's words of budget and aesthetics and they don't necessarily match. But then they used words such as pry bar, sledge 22 City Council Meeting - April 22, 1991 hammers, which is a real concern to me. We've lost a major light standard out there. It's vulnerable to vandalism. I guess the only thing I have not heard addressed in real detail is the issue of being a public building in an isoiated area and the issue of vandalism, I guess Scott's not here. I wanted to ask him about that. Is this going to necessitate us hiring summer park patrol to guard this building? It's got to be pretty much vandal proof which is going to cost some in the aesthetics and is the vandalism issue being addressed on this adequately? Even the terms of wooden benches. I mean there's nothing between disaster and the vandai except permanent cement fixtures which is not aesthetic. Todd Hoffman: Correct. The main factor in how to address that would be the lockable doors which are included in this proposal. So you're correct. The exterior has got to be made somewhat armor clad so people in there after hours, evening hours, it's not that enticing. It's not that inviting. You can't do much damage to a steel door or a brick or stone surface. But you're correct and then you have to take a look at the access points and just how easy would it be to get inside there with a pry bar. With a sledge hammer. Those type of things. Councilman Wing: The overhead area then, am I looking at, I might have missed the specifics. There are windows up above? It's an open area or a glassed area overlooking the lake? Todd Hoffman: Open area. Councilman Wing: Okay. With metal sheets that come down? Todd Hoffman: The upstairs area would be open to the lake and then the availability of elther puttlng a closed gate system at the two walkln entrances at the upper level. If it was deemed necessary to go ahead and gate that upper area off just so somebody couldn't get lnto the actual plcnic area, we could make that option available. Councilman Wing: So the front looking at the lake on the upper level, would be open year round? Todd Hoffman: Correct. And that upper area is going to be a concrete floor with block stone walls. The wood beam structure across the ceiling and then the one corner where you have your electrical outlets, food serving area which then would be protected by the pull down doors. They'd be steel clad doors. Councilman Workman: Well I like the utility improvements coming out to the park, although that doesn't guarantee that we'll have lights on any other fields too soon. Our efforts in that area, having Susan. No, Susan's not 11t. Todd Hoffman: Susan is not lit. Councilman Workman: It's about time NSP got out there. Mayor Chmiel: We light up your life. Councilman Workman: I'm not sure what the hold up there ls wlth that. Unfortunatley for this project, it's come on a Council night when the pea and 23 City Council MeetJ. n9 - Apl'il 22, 1991 shell game has been seen 3 tilnes already and Z just, you know Z get so darn mad because we've got $90,000.00 to move ahead with this but we've got people screaming just to finish their little neighborhood parks and that frustrates me a whole lot. Necessity versus what people might think looks a little bit extravagent. $o I've got a real, real problem with doing that and it just seems if we really want to have the money for something, we've got it but we kind of take our time and do things, and this isn't just Park and Rec. This is areas and then that's got me real frustrated. Z don't know. We've got a ways to go with this. We're just reviewing this. We're not making a decision to,night are we? Or ~re we oil the $90,000.007 Todd Hoffman: A decision to move forward with, we've come quite a ways in the conceptualation planning. If you want to take a look at some hard cost figures, at the next Council meeting we can have that opportunity. You're response back, in the back of my mind, 3 or 4 months ago I recall a comment you made somewhat frustrated by these neighborhood parks. We need to get going on these projects. Get these neighborhood parks in. Have these people in the new areas of Chanhassen have an opportunity for some recreation and I wholeheartedly concur with that. It's been in the back of my mind ever since that time. I can only say that in my personal commitment to the department, moving forward in a timely fashion is one reason these projects are now coming before you. We're working off of a 1~9~ budget which was proposed and created during a somewhat shakey time in the department. Moving ahead into future years, z will personally have a better grasp o~) where we need to put some money. Which neighborhoods need some attention. Which neighborhoods we need to get into the meeting process. The public hearing process and hear their needs and their desires and take a look &t and seriously address those. We have an Annual budget, capital i~provement program which we work off of. It's fairly lean but then you have this budget reserve which is built up in park acquisition and development and is built up ~nainly because of the bJ.g industries which have come into town and put .Ln their big dollars in the park acquisition and development. Coupled with all the single f~mily home development that you have going on in the city and so that the money .[s there. We need to ue start the wheels turning with a motion to get these parks brought on line in these new neighborhoods. ~t takes 3 to 5 years to take a neighborhood park from a piece of raw land to even something which resembles a neighborhood park. Councilman Workman: Haybe we need to stop building neighborhoods, Fight Paul? ~ don't know. I guess I'ni anxious to hear what everybody else thinks. We seem to be about 30N off on almost everything tonight here. Mayor Chmiel: Who'd like to? Mike. Councilman Mason: Well, as a frequent user of Lake Ann, my wife and I have commented frequently on the smell of the chem toys as Mr. Workman chooses to cat]. them. Zt's used a lot. We like going there and I think a lot of people, not only in Chanhassen but, well I know. Teaching in Eden Prairie, I've seen a lot of my kids at Lake Ann Beach and I think it's a great idea. Clearly you guys have put ~ lot of thought into it and I think what Tom is saying is true about the smaller neighborhood parks. We certainly need to get going on that but how much more expensive will it be if we put it off that much longer? think it's time to move ahead oil it. Z'd ].ike to use it. 24 City Council Meeting - April 22, 1991 Councilwoman 'Dimler: I guess. I just would like a clarification here. I agree with everything that's been said but what does that $90,000.00 get us so far and what are the costs likely to be? Did I read $200,000.00 or something like that? Todd Hoffman: To take a look at the building itself as a separate entity, we're approaching the $200,000.00 figure all inclusive. Including the building, engineering fees, landscaping, those types of concerns aroung that area. The $100,000.00 which would be funded out of sewer and water expansion funds to actually bring the water from TH 5 which is stubbed in underneath the highway anticipating this type of future expansion. Bringing electrical from the front of the park to TH 5. Not only running it down the ballfields, the 6 ball diamonds. Up past the current building which is there and then down to the site and then as well... Councilwoman Oimler: So that includes all that? Now what does the $90,000.00 get us? Is that what we're doing tonight is approving you to go ahead for the $90,000.00 only? Todd Hoffman: The current budget, the 1991 Capital Improvement Program only included $110,000.00 of that $200,000.00 so this $90,000.00 is Council's approval to add that $90,000.00 onto the $110,000.00 to get us up to a realistic figure to go ahead and bid this. Councilwoman Dimler: Oh, and then you can go ahead with the total project? Todd Hoffman: Correct. Councilwoman Dimler: Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Okay? Richard. Councilman Wing: No, I just missed what, I'm not physically responsible. The $90,000.00 was coming from where? Excuse me Todd. Todd Hoffman: Park acquisition and development fund. Councilman Wing: I agree with Tom. You know it's kind of a little frustrating for me and of course I come from the opposite extreme. I don't think I've ever been in Lake Ann. Not seriously SO but my area out where I am says, you've got to be kidding. We're still looking for a park off of Minnewashta Parkway and there's not any money for our development. We're looking at a building that's more expensive than my house out on the lake out there. I couldn't sell my house and the lot for what we want for this one park building. And I won't say that as criticism but it just shocked me. Councilwoman Oimler: It is shocking. Councilman Wing: Other than it is a major public improvement. In terms of numbers of people, there's no question that this is handling the main, probably more people in this one park than all the other parks combined. I don't know but I'm suggesting that's probably true. I can't address the money issues. I'm just a little stunned I guess. 25 City Council Meeting - April 22, 1991 Ha/or Chmiel: Todd? I'm sorry. Councilman Wing: Nothing Don. It mas irrelevant. Mayor Chmiel: What is total square footage of that building? Todd Hoffman: Lower level 1,600 and upper level 1,600. Mayor Chmiel: 3,200 square feet. What does that break down to costs of that building excluding utilities? I don't have a calculator. Oh, I do too have a calculator here. $62.00 per square foot. What does it cost to construct a home? Anybody have any ideas? Per square foot. Todd Gerhardt: $50.00 to $55.00. Scott Harri: Well, it could cost $100.00 too. Mayor Chmiel: Yes, I realize that but we're not putting anything, the necessities that we have within a home. I'm trying to make a comparable comparison. Todd Hoffman: That was Todd's house. Todd Gerhardt: That's a cheap one. Councilwoman Oimler: One with all the basics though right? Councilman Mason: I'm not sure we can be comparing a home to a park structure like this. Mayor Chmiel: Well, you can if we're looking at total square footage. Within a home you do a little more dressing as far as the walls. Here we have a lot of openness. Councilman Mason: Yeah but there's also the vandalism issue that's being addressed here. I mean there's so many, the useage. Councilman Workman: Rock is more expensive than sheetrock? Did you know that? Councilman Wing: But a steel sliding door isn't more expensive than Anderson casements with gas. And also, somebody just mentioned in the background, $100,000.00 of city money to run public utilities to that building. Mayor Chmiel: No, that's true. Of course everything's...and that's a large cost. That's a realistic figure that I see. Councilman Workman: And one of the biggest, and I hang around there a little with softball, is where can I get a drink of water out here. Mayor Chmiel: The lake is awful clear. But no, that's true. There are a lot of those questions. Councilman Workman: I've gotten that a lot. 26 City Council Heeting - April 22, 1991 Hayor Chmiel: We do have a drinking fountain out there. All you've got to do is find it. But no, I guess there's a lot of people that use that beach on a constant basis and of course I never really went down and asked exactly who's who and what's where but many times during the summer I do walk down there and it's filled. And you hear the kids having a lot of fun with their screaming and know there's a well supervised area to watch out for them as well. There needs to be some kind of a facility within that beach area. I'm not too keen on spending dollars, no more than anyone else here but I think there's a certain amount of things that we have to provide for the use of the people within the city. True, it's not going to meet all of them. Hot all the needs that everybody wants but ~ think there's going to be a lot of things that are going to be used by the parents and the kids that utilize that park. Sometimes I'd like to take a total count of what's used within that facility by numbers and ~ think it'd probably work out rather well. More specifically, when we have even just the 4th of 3uly. That place is absolutely packed and it's really neat to see that people utilize those facilities. They take care of it which is even better yet. So ~ guess my question is, being where it's at, they're looking for that concept plan for the budget amendment. And even though we're not approving this as yet, they're looking for some direction from Council. Councilwoman Oimler: Can I just ask one more question Todd? If we didn't use it for this, where would that $90,000.00 be used for? Is there another priority? Don Ashworth: If I may. It kind of fits in with what I had wanted to bring out. The Park Acquisition and Bevelopment Fund has a very healthy, undesignated reserve and we knew that coming into i99i. The Council's catching me a little short from the standpoint that it sounds as though there's a question, should we allocate this amount for this project when we have other needs that you wanted to complete some of the neighborhood parks. When we came into ig~l, and being Todd is new in his position, one of the concerns that I had was insuring that we really didn't over burden Todd, especially recognizing that in terms of park development area, that was probably one of the weaker experience areas for him. So we picked out the South Lotus Lake project, Lake Susan, Lake Ann shelter, Herman Field and felt that those four projects would be kind of a test of fire for him. But that's not to say that we don't have the dollars to potentially look to some of our other neighborhoods. ! mean you're not giving up completion of some of the other neighborhood programs in lieu of let's say the Lake Ann project. I again, recognizing that this is going to be a pretty fuji year for Todd, would like to see him get through this year and then maybe add some of these neighborhood projects next year. But ~ mean we're not giving up some of those projects to do the Lake Ann shelter. Todd Hoffman: And that's not to say either that we're not aggressive on some of those neighborhood parks this year. Sunset Ridge, a new park down in Lake Susan Hills West with initial development. Final grading, seeding, installation of play area, ballfield. That will take place this year. Herman Field Park, we will obtain potential access to that ll acre neighborhood park which that neighborhood has looked for over the years as well. So we're by no means ignoring neighborhood parks for this project. This is a separate project built in a community park for the entire community. 27 City Council Heetin9 .- April 22, 1991 Councilman Workman: But we could address those parks sooner with that money? I'm not saying us're taking the place of them. We could address those sooner. Is the park in Chanhassen Hills done down there? Todd Hoffman: Chanhassen Hills has been final graded, seeded. The grass is coming up nicely. They just fertilized today. The ballfield area is graded off. The ballfield backstop and that type of thing is not there but the play area is available. The play equipment has been installed and sand volleyball court has been installed. The sand surface, the poles are yet to be installed. The area for the eventual tennis court is graded off. Councilman Workman: I've got to make one final comment, and this is a little off the track but down in Chanhassen Hills, I don't know where we're getting some of this design for these neighborhood parks. They've got a little parking lot out there for about 2 cars sitting out in the middle here and it just looks ridiculous. I don't know if it's supposed to be a combination basketball court/ parklng lot or botchy ball court or what it ls and where are those botchy ball courts by the way anyway? But it looks ridiculous. Here we've got a little strlp across from people's home that looks ridiculous Z thlnk. But anyway, I just wanted to make that point because if we want the money badly enough, we can always find it and maybe we should have been dolng that to address some of these other problems because I know we've had a lot of parks that have, I don't know if Curry Farms done? Todd Hoffman: Curry Farms has got an additional $10,000.00 thls year to expand their play area, install bituminous walkway. Councilman Workman: They've got a parklng lot there too don't they? Todd Hoffman: Correct. Mayor Chmiel: It should be a walking area for everybody. Be a little more environmentally conscience and walk rather than using cars. Councilman Mason: It's a neighborhood park. Councilwoman Oimler: Save us some money too. Councilman Wing: To go back to election day, I promlsed myself to thlnk long term. I'm glad that somebody had the insight to thlnk long term at Carver Park. Z mean Z was dumbfounded when I heard what they were doing and what it was golng to cost but thank goodness someone had the insight. It bothers me that this bullding is larger than my home and it costs more and a drlnking fountaln for $100,000.00 bothers me. Long term, thinking down the road, it almost starts to make, we've got to make some decisions. My comment, even starting to speak Don, Z wish ue had some public input here tonight. I wish the public was looklng at these numbers and that they were publicized and that the publlc was here to address thelr desires for Lake ~nn and the dollars that lt's going to cost. I'm almost frlghten to make the declslon as a Councllmember wlth these kinds of dollars for a building for the park. I just wlsh the public or the newspaper, the medla. 28 City Council Meeting - April Mayor Chmiel: There's nothing stopping us from doing that to request that we be provided input from the citizens within the community. Councilman Wing: I guess I support this because there, excuse me. Mayor Chmiel: No, go ahead and finish what you're saying. Councilman Wing: Thinking long term support this financially and the dollars and looking at my own area and what they'd like to see done. I'm really nervous about supporting thls as a Councilmember because the dollars are so extensive without a little further public lnput. And I'll support this all the way and do what I can for you and Don, whatever decision you choose to make but I'd sure feel more comfortable if we had some media coverage and some public input prior to maklng the flnal declslon here. Mayor Chmiel: We can do that. There's no question. The news media's here and I can hopefully try to get some free advertising. No. Hopefully to have some kind of an article indicating as to having, maybe we could even have this within a 2 week period. Have it come back and just see the feellngs of the general public as to what it is. And then of course you're golng to have pros and cons to the issue. Those that use it agalnst those who don't. Why spend thls additional amount of dollars. I think we always have to look at it from our standpoint, belng on Counc11. We have to provlde the kinds of services that are basically needed within the community. Whether it be shopping for grocery stores or providing totlots and areas of need by different locations. And so I think that we are sort of charged with that. We have to make the best judgment declslon as to what that need ls. I too, 11ke you, am not too keen on the total amount of dollars but I do see the need for the people going down to that facillty and havlng something. The other turn of the coin, as you mentioned about the drinking fountain, the $100,000.00, that also is another good deterrent for an environmental concern by havlng the facilities in the mens and womens area. Councilman Wing: I agree. Mayor Chmiel: And that alleviates a lot of concern too for what goes, possibly either behind the trees or in the lake. Councilman Wing: I think that's the greatest need Don. I agree. Mayor Chmiel: Not only that but we have different functions during times of the year whlch many clubs would use that faclllty as well. I'm sure there would be many picnics that could utllize that facility. The upper portion of which will be glven out for familles and family use. There's a lot of thlngs that can be used but I guess I'm not opposed to at least listening to what people have to say and lnvlte them into our next Council meetlng, if that's the wish of the Council. Don Ashworth: You may want to set the public comments for the second meeting in May simply recognizing Tom could not get any, I'm guessing, could not get something into thls week's edltlon. Zt would mean he's klnd of submitting it to himself this Friday which would come out then for the following Thursday. City Council Meeting - April 22, 1991 Mayor Chmiel: Oh, he's a wizard. He can do that. Right Tom? Don Ashworth: Almost two weeks from now and then people writing in. So again, you may want the second meeting in May may be a little more reasonable. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Let me ask another question. How far does this throw off what we're looking for? Todd Hoffman: If you want to address the time line at all. Otherwise, obviously this construction is going to start mid-late summer. We'd like to wind things up, wrap things up end of October. That type of thing and have the structure basically completed and ready to go to do the final fittings in 1992. Mayor Chmiel: So I guess I don't see any real problem with delaying this. Any whatsoever and I think possibly, as what Don has indicated, to be able to pull that together and see what input we can get. Todd Hoffman: Sure. Councilman Workman: So we're going to look at it in 2 weeks? Don Ashuorth: Again, the second meeting in May which would be about. Councilman Workman: The third week. Don Ashworth: The third week, yes. The third Monday. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, which would be the 20th of May. Okay? Again, I don't think any action is really required at this time. Thank you. Let us just move right along. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO SECTION 20-263 REGARDING PORTABLE CHEMICAL TOILETS ON RECREATIONAL BEACHLOTS. Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. The Planning Commission got involved in this issue last fail when they received a request for a variance, as I recall, to locate a chemical toilet on a beachlot. At the present time our ordinance specifically excludes this type of use on a beachlot and staff investigated this and we had concluded originally that we would recommend denial of that given the fact that we're familiar with some problems that had occurred. The item came up to the Planning Commission and the Planning Commission indicated that they were receptive to this but wanted to make sure that if it were to be allowed, that it be sensitive to the fact that beachlots are oftentimes, well they are in residential neighborhoods. They're oftentimes close to other homes and they wanted to make sure that the environmental and neighborhood impacts, if these were to be allowed, would be considered. The Planning Commission reviewed a couple of drafts of an ordinance. The most receipt one was prepared in cooperation with Chairman Emmings who indicated that he would be willing to work on this. The Commission ultimately recommended approval of this ordinance and it was scheduled to be heard by you I believe 2 or 4 weeks ago. The City Attorney indicated that upon reading the final draft, he had some questions in a couple of areas and asked for an opportunity to correct what he felt needed to be addressed. It was a somewhat minor point in 30 City Council Meeting - April 22, 19gl terms of ordinance but it was an issue that the Planning Commission talked about quite a bit and that was, how the neighbors should be brought into this discussion. And the current ordinance has been corrected to eliminate the I guess obligation that was formally in there that the beachlot proponent have the homeowner's sign off on something. So in other words, the original draft would have given them the right to approve or deny it and that right really resides in the Clty Counc11. These are conditional use permits so if you have an existing beachlot or if you're proposing a new beachlot, or a new toilet on a beachlot, it has to go through the CUP procedure during which we notlfy everybody wlthin 500 feet and everybody has the opportunity to speak at a public hearing. The current ordinance requlres a 75 foot setback from the lake. The chemlcal roller would be available for use from Memorial Day to Labor Oay. It must be anchored securely to the ground because the one lncident that we're aware of lnvolved vandals tipplng these things over and polluting the beach. We think the anchoring gets away from that. It's got to be screneed, not only from the lake but also from adjoining properties. It has to be serried weekly to hopefully get at the odor or cleanliness problems and there's an annual 11cerise required. Now these thlngs would not require annual CUP review. You get your conditional use permit once and the way lt's set up ls that the Plannlng staff would handle this as an annual license. As long as we confirm that the commission's approval had been vlolated and that we hadn't received any complains or anythlng else about it, then we would just process the license renewal. If there were problems, we would brlng it back through the Plannlng Commission and City Council. With that we are now comfortable with this ordinance and we are recommending lt's approval. Mayor Chmiel: Very good. Thank you. Any discussion? Ursula. Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah. I think it's been discussed enough and I recommend approval. I move Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Section 20-263, Recreational Beachlots regarding Portable Chemlcal Toilets. Councilman Wing: Being they exist and I think this is going to give us much greater control, in fact may discourage some, I'll second that. Mayor Chmiel: Good. It's been moved and seconded. Any further discussion? Tom. Councilman Workman: We're a little hasty here tonight I would say. Councilwoman Oimler: We've discussed it enough Tom. Councilman Workman: Well, we're going to discuss it some more. I think the intent of this, of the homeowners associations and everybody else, they have a strong case. I can thlnk of a lot of reasons why you should have them. I've come to the conclusion that we're either, on this issue we're either $ years ahead of our time or we're 25 behlnd and Z think we're 25 behlnd on thls. If you're just talking about the use and why they're needed, and then go ahead. think the issue ls chem toy, chemlcal toilets' design. I thlnk they're ugly. They're a degradation of the beachlots, of the beaches, of everything else for slght, smell. You name the sense, except when you need to use one, they're fantastic. I don't know what the solution is to that but I think this, and maybe they're there and maybe we need to force thelr elimination but thls to me seems like a step back into something prehistoric. All under the guise of 31 City Council Meeting -. April 22, 1991 convenJ, ence, And I don't think the decisions that we've made on Council the past years, tree ordinances, how things look, environment, water, you name it, I don't thlnk thls fits in that. And agaln, I season that ulth well if you're sitting down there and you've got to cross Minneuashta Parkway to get to it and you're a quarter of a mile away from home, you have very few optlons when Mother Nature calls. But ~ think this is, so what ~'m saying is, ~ don't think it has been worked out. Z don't thlnk the aesthetics or how it's all going to happen or how we should allow it to happen, has been worked out sufficiently for me to say yes to thls. And so Z'm golng to vote against it until ue can flgure that out. Mayor Chmlel: I think you're going to look at another design Tom? Councilman Workman: I don't know. They're built cheap and ready, to go. When we allow them in every one of our parks, we're saying great. We've voting for that design. Mayor Chmlel: I don't thlnk we're golng to see a difference in design, unfortuna[ely. Councilwoman Oimler: I don't think it's up to the City Council to design chemlc&l toilets. I mean we're going to buy or get what's out there in the nl~rkot arid when the market improves, we'll get the better ones. Maybe we can ~tipulnte that. Councilman Workman: I'm not saying we're going to design the toilets. Councilwoman Oimler: No, but. Councilman Workman: I'm just saying, the units they have is made of, I don't know plastic. They smell. For every thing that's bad about them, there's one good thing about them and I don't think it balances at a11. I thlnk we lose a lot more than we gain. That's all I'm saying. Mayor Chmlel: Well yeah, and I understand that. I think with the maintenance that they do on them, more frequentZy, eliminates the odor problem. I've been out on job sltes and unfortunately I've found that to be true. If that ls consistent with cleaning. Secondly, if you tip those over, they're seZf- contained. Runoff ls very unlikely. Councilman Workman: I've seen one tipped over. Mayor Chmiel: Then it's probably not the newer design. The newer designs had that taken care of. I'm not saying that we shouldn't fasten them. They have to be fastened because kids are golng to be kids. Unfortunately. Mlke, you were going to say something? Councilman Mason: I was just going to ask. Is it as, you've just mentioned that the new ones are designed so that if they're tipped, they don't spill. Is ~t wrltten anywhere in here that that has to be those kind of chemical tellers? Krauss: No it isn't. We're going on the presumption that it has to be anchored so it shouldn't tlp in the flrst place but we have been told that the new ones 32 City Council Meeting - April 22, lggl have I guess some sort of a sump init so when it tlps over it basically catches itself. Councilman Mason: I guess I'd like to see something like that in there because saying it's anchored so it won't tip over, you get a number of senior hlgh students or whatever that declde otherwise. I mean I guess I'd want to know how they're going to be anchored before I'd be comfortable. Councilwoman Dimler: So, excuse me. Paul, are you saying that they're already designing them better now? Paul Krauss: That's what we've heard. Councilwoman Oimler: Can we stipulate that we get the newer designs then? Paul Krauss: From what I understand that that's the new technology, I would assume that we could probably demand that, yes. Councilwoman Dlmler: Okay. Let's do that. Councilman Wing: What about the screening Paul? That was a big issue. How tlght are you going to be on the screening? Paul Krauss: Well that's really left up to the analysis of the Planning Commission themselves. It was vlewed as one of those situations where lt's almost impossible to say what screening is going to work in what way but the object, the way thls ordinance addresses it ls it says that this may be unsuitable if it can't be adequately screened and you're going to have to make that determination. The beachlot in question here I thlnk ls only 50 feet wlde. The one that brought this up. That maybe a very tough one to work on. Now it may be fine but because it may be so narrow, it needs more intensive efforts to do it. But that's grounds to deny it. If it's not effective, that's grounds to reject it. Councilman Wing: The Plannlng Commission discussed the tipping issue at length. In much more detail than we did. I wound up feeling it really was not an issue at this polnt, considering the screening and so, it does affect that neighborhood in particular. They have to police it. Call the motion Mr. Mayor? Councilwoman Dlmler: Call the question? Mayor Chmiel: Any further? Councilman Mason: I just, if I could just make one qulck comment on that. I basically agree with everything Tom is saying. I don't like them. However, I 1lye in Carver Beach and I do spend some time also down at Lotus Lake there and there is a chemical toilet there. And when you have a 5 year old that needs to go to the bathroom and you live a half mlle away, it creates some problems. I was talklng with my wife about this one and I kind of thought she'd say, I don't think we should have them and her comment was, well great. Now kids won't go in the lake or behind a tree so I don't know. I dlsagree with how Councilman Workman's golng to vote on this but I agree wholeheartedly wlth his philosophy, which may not help much but I... 33 City Council Meeting - April 22, 1991 Councilwoman Dimler: I agree with that too. I think here the practicality to me outweighs the aesthetics. Councilman Workman; If you live a half a mile away from one of these things, you haven't got a problem. If you live next to it, or if you're driving by, you're looking at it or anything else, then you've got a problem. So it's the people, and I've lived near this. Near these situations. Councilman Mason: The one on Carver Beach, you can't see from the road. I mean it is well screened and that's. Councilman Workman: Yeah, ue].l Carver Beach is well screened. Councilman Mason: Well that's true. I mean even going down Carver Beach Road there it's set back in. There's a barricade around it and you really don't know it's there unless you're using it. Mayor Chmiel: We have one in Greenwood Shores Park as well. Councilman Wing: Is that City? Mayor Chmiel: Yes. City park. And that one is pretty well screened too. In fact, sometimes you can't even see it. Councilman Workman: I'm just saying, we've got a situation, and we may as well not even have this ordinance because apparently they're up anyway. So thls is just another ordinance following. Paul Krauss: I should say part of the problem too in the Planning Commission reviewing thls was the fact that the Clty does it in our own parks in slmllar situations yet we prohlbit private parties from doing it on a common recreational beachlot. Councilman Workman: Well, I think those are a little different that we invite people to go there en masse and you expect that. Paul Krauss: And ldeally we malntaln it well. Mayor Chmiel: Being there no further discussion, I'll call the question. Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Wing seconded to approve Zoning Ordinance Amendment &90-9 for regulating portable chemical toilets as a conditional use permit on recreational beachlots as shown in Attachment #! with the addition that only spill proof models will be allowed. All voted in favor except Councilman Workman who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 4 to 1. 34 City Council Meeting - April 22, 1991 COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: SET SPECIAL HEETING DATES: A. TH 5 CORRIDOR HASTER PLAN B. CITY COUNCIL GOALS. Don Ashworth: I must apologize to the Council. When I put this packet out, I anticipated having the goals that we had looked at from our Saturday meeting several weeks ago, ready for distribution. I do not. I can tell you that I would have those ready for any type of a first, I'll call it a first work session when we're going to take a look at the Trunk Highway 5 Corridor. So let's assume we pick out whatever the date is, I'll ensure that you have those before that date. Hopefully we can discuss them a little bit, maybe even at that time. We talked originally about like a Saturday morning for that TH 5 corridor. Saturdays are becoming more and more precious I think for all of us. I'm wondering if an early evening might work just as well. 5:00-6:00. Councilwoman Dimler: It's got to be light out. Don Ashworth: Well, it really doesn't get dark. Mayor Chmiel: It stays light until 8=oo or a little after. Don Ashworth: That way we wouldn't take that much time and get a jump on the thing. Mayor Chmiel: I think an evening would probably be appropos as opposed to the weekend. Weekends are few and far between. Bo you have a problem Tom? Councilman Workman: No. Evenings are always very busy for me. Weekends are less. Don Ashworth: Any one more so than another? Like Tuesdays or Wednesdays? Councilman Workman: Well Monday thru Thursday. Friday? Councilwoman Dimler: Friday night's fine. Councilman Workman: Why don't we pick out a date. Mayor Chmiel: Do it on a Friday? That's fine with me. That doesn't create a problem. Councilwoman Dimler: Richard, has a comment. Councilman Wing: I didn't know if you were on goals. If the TH 5 Corridor, what's the word I want? Councilman Mason: Task force? Councilman Wing: Well task force I don't want either. We're not at that point. Just kind of the preliminary thinking. I think it involved the head of urban 35 City Council Meeting -- April 22, 1991 design center at the University who said he would come out and join the Council, Planning commission, staff and just take a bus and go up and down TH 5 and talk and dimcuss and share but it would have to be a Saturday morning and it would have to be, I think the first three Saturday mornings ill 3une that he was available next. I tried to reach him today and he didn't get back to me. Mayor Chmiel: I think that can work too. Don Ashworth: How about if I work with Councilman Wing in finding out which of those and then potentially putting it back on for all the Council. Mayor Chmiel: Yep. Either the 8th, 15th or the 22nd. Councilman Mason: I'd like the 8th if at all possible because I'm going to be out of town. Mayor Chmiel: June 8th. Councilman Wing: And I'll work with the City Manager and be certain that the Council is contacted. We'll try to work that out even if it got pushed ahead or behlnd a 11ttle blt. Don Ashworth: Then the Council's desire would be in doing this, to invite Planning Commission and HRA members as well? Mayor Chmiel: As well, yeah. And I think if we try to get something going, that it be early in the morning. 8:00? Councilman Wing: I think that's what he was suggesting. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Trunk Highway 5 corridor master plan. Don Ashworth: Those really are tied together. Mayor Chmiel: We're all going to go with that? Okay, City Council goals and that you've already discussed. Okay. Let's move on as we're golng with Counoll Presentations. I just wanted to, I'm going to let Oon do it. We met today with Met Counc11. Let me see if hls ideas and my ideas, we haven't discussed thls. See if his ideas were the same as what mine are. Don. Don Ashworth: We're reaching a critical juncture as it deals with the Metro Council revleu of our Comprehensive Plan. We had, the Mayor and myself, had met wlth, and Councilman Workman had met wlth our new Metro Councll representative Bonnie Featerstone here about 2 weeks ago. That led to hopefully a secondary meeting today wlth the new Chair of Metro Counc11, Mary Anderson. Don had worked diligently to get that meeting established and the primary purpose was simply, we've got klnd of a new playlng fleld here. We had felt that we had tried to keep the previous chair, Mr. Keels up to date as to what we were doing as well as Marcy Warltz sat in on all of the meetlngs as our Comp Plan had been developed in the past 2 year perlod of time. Again, final review of that document u111 occur probably withln the next 30 days. The statements that we made to Mary were to the effect that as it stands, we've gotten mlxed emotions from thelr staff so we're looklng at, most of the statements we have recelved 36 City Council Meeting - April 22, 1991 have been very favorable so we're anticipating a favorable staff report. However, we do have certain members of their staff, Mike Munson more specifically who has not 11ked the population forecasts or even the job forecast. He admits that his model is not correct. It needs to be updated and it would be at least a one year perlod of tlme before he's able to do that. We had two messages that we had tried to carry in. One was if, we'd like to know which of these two scenarios lt's golng to be. Wlll we have a favorable type of a response or will in fact someone like a Mr. Hunson be the overriding force. Two, if that later case does occur, then we would 11ke to be treated slmllar to other communities who have faced the same type of problem. I mean there have been other communities who's forecasts have not been in accordance wlth Metro Council's. Woodbury's, Oakdale's, Savage. In each of those instances, Metro Councll went ahead and processed thelr application in splte of the fact that their population forecasts didn't match. Again, if that occurs, we'd simply 11ke to be treated ina simllar fashlon. I thought that Mary was very cordlal. 8onnie was there. I thought that she understood our point. Time will tell. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, and I think they were both supportive of the information that we provided them plus also offering comments on how we felt Met Council should asslst Clty's themselves in glvlng them some, agaln innovative 1dews as to how they should do thlngs a little differently than they're presently dotng. As you well know, Governor Carlson has charged the Chalr of the Metropolitan Council, Mary Anderson to come up with some solutions to problems within cities and one of the polnts I thlnk we dld point out was how we do do things differently than most cities with specifically havlng the Sheriff do our pollcing rather than having our own police force. By savlng dollars from that standpoint. Bringing in the dog situation with all the other cities that we do the enforcing for. These are thlngs that they had not really heard too much of. Other things that we've done on a basis with our water. Runoff and showing the environmental concerns that we basically have as well. So we polnted out a lot of good things that the City of Chanhassen has done the last few years. With that Z'm sure she was impressed and she, I think wlll be very posltlve in... little bit about it and I think that's where they're going to come from with that recommendation. If it lsn't, I'1 be rather surprised but I've been surprised before. But I think it was well worthwhile to sit down and discuss the things that we've done. So that's about the extent of what I wanted to say on that. Tom. Personnel Review Board. Councilman Workman: Well, on our Saturday morning meetlng I brought this up in a specific situation and I don't think anything's happened yet. Don Ashworth: We apologize for that. I've asked Todd to take and poll the two Councilmembers who sit on that so we can establish a date and get on with it. Mayor Chmlel: Okay, we'll flnd something comtng quickly? Okay. How about your public coalition? Councilman Workman: You mean my Southwest Corrldor Transportation? Mayor Chmiel: Yep. Councilman Workman: Are they requesting a contribution there? Is there a contribution request coming from them? City Council Meeting -. April 22, 1991 Mayor Chmiel: It's got to be a $10,000.00 request or something? Don Ashworth: I would anticipate so. I just put a note over. Councilman Workman: In the Admin Packet there were some other letters but I didn't see one from them and I didn't know. Mayor Chmiel: Yes, that's coming. Councilman Workman: So we don't have anything yet but we will? Hayer Chmiel: Yeah. I think that was mentioned at the meeting previous to the one where we met with the Commissioner of Transportation. Councilman Workman: I don't remember that. Mayor Chmiel: I think Ursula was at that. Okay. Councilman Wing: One other item on presentations? Mayor Chmiel: Pardon me? Councilman Wing: Item (b) under Council Presentations? The City Manager was going to collate that Saturday morning meeting of goals and discussions. We were going to set a date for a brief Council review of those issues. I under the City Manager hasn't done that but I think we still need a meeting date for that specific issue which is independent of TH 5. Did that meeting get set? I might have been talking. Don Ashworth: No. Originally I had anticipated that we might discuss it as we did the corridor issue but we're not putting that out to June. That may not be acceptable as far as that length of time. One of the things the Mayor and I had talked about earlier today was potentially doing that type of thing in advance of a regular City Council meeting. Potentially 2 weeks, well our first meeting in May. If we potentially started that at 6:30 or 6:00, if that would be acceptable to the City Council? Councilman Wing: Just so you order enough pizza this time. Mayor Chmiel: And make sure you get Dick those anchovies. Don Ashuorth: 6:007 Do you want to do it at 6:00? Mayor Chmiel: Why don't we do it at 6:00. It will probably take that much time to go through that. Don Ashworth: The first regular meeting in May, which would be the 6th. 38 City Council Heeting - April 22, 1991 ADHINISTRATION PRESENTATIONS: n. REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL DETERHINATION R[GARDING ISSUE SURROUNDING SURFACE MATER UTILITY BILLING, PLANNING DIRECTOR. Paul Krauss: First ! should say that the billing program and the program itself, the surface water utility program is going quite well to date. We've gone through a full bllllng cycle and I should polnt out that out of over 5,000 bills, ue got approximately 30 that had complaints attached to them or issues belng ralsed. We've trled to keep you abreast of those and I thlnk in about every administration packet over the last month you've seen responses that we've gotten out to people on some. Some of them quite frankly are ktnd of tough to respond to but ue try. Also we're to the point right now where ue have sent out requests for qualifications. We've got them back from 16 firms interested in working with us. Charles and I have not had a chance yet to go through those but we really need to do that in the next week or so. What we'd 11ke to do then is then pare it down to 5 firms to be finalists and prepare RFP's which we'll have the task force comprised of City Councll and Plannlng Commissioners to work with staff in doing the interviews. So we're moving forward on that. Now this is a questlon that I'm brlnging to you tonight that's been ralsed with the last billing ue did. The last quarterly bllling which involved the rural area. As you can recall, the earller proposals for the assessment, or storm water assessment in the agricultural area was originally proposed to be a per acre basls and I thlnk there was going to be a charge or a credlt glven for those who had soil conservation service policies or something along those lines. There were concerns raised regarding the lnequlty that this mlght cause in terms of cost of production as I recall relative to farmland in Chanhassen and farmland elsewhere. So the Councll came up ulth a compromise proposal that sald that farmland would be assessed the same, one unit charge per parcel that we're doing for basically a slngle famlly home. So if you have a single famlly home on a 15,000 square foot lot, you're paying $3.22 every 3 months. And if you have a farm with 40 acres, you're paying the same $3.22. The problem that's come about is the ordinance, as it's set up right now, talks about an agricultural lot as being 40 acres. Now we have not really been dolng exactly what it says we should be doing on this. Unlike commercial/industrial property where we actually...and found out the exact acreage and dld the billlng on the exact acreage, uith the farm property, instead of figuring out how many 40 acre parcels they had, we have just been uslng the tax identification numbers. And what's happened in a couple of instances where, for example the Oegler farm has two, had two tax parcels. Each was I believe dO acre or larger. Now slnce they had two tax parcels, they were given two statements. They've since gone down to the county to comblne them into one parcel to avold that so nov they're only going to get one statement. However, if you read the ordinance the way it's supposed to be applied, they should still get two statements in effect because it's on a 40 acre basis and there's been several instances like that. The Erhart's have 3 statements I belleve. Sometimes we find 11ttle remnant pleces that have no clear purpose that are stranded on the wrong side of the street and ue flnd this in ag districts, residential districts and everything else and we've aluays tried to use a little common sense and say those are not useable lots so we're not going to charge anybody for that. But this question was raised by enough individuals that we wanted to bring it to you tonight to give us some guldance as to how you wanted us to proceed and thlnk posslbly ue could clear up what lsa question in the ordinance. I think there's basically two City Council Meeting - April 22, 1991 alternatives for the agricultural area billing that should be considered. The first is a method that we've been using which is to apply the charges on a tax parcel basis. For each tax parcel, legitimate parcel or developable tax parcel in that area, you would be assessed one unit. I've gone into what the few problems that we've had with that but the second alternative is to take the time to actually compute the area of every agricultural lot and then for every 40 acres that you have or percentage of that above 40 acres, you would get one unit. Now I don't think the amount of money we're talking about here is a whole beck of a lot. When the problem was established we were looking at $300.00 a quarter from all the ag land in the City and I haven't been able to figure out if there's a significant difference if we figure it one way or the other. My guess is it's probably going to balance out. We'll go whichever way you'd like us to go on this but we should point out though that that second alternative where we have to preliminer the lots raises an equity question in the rural residential area which is often an agricultural use as well as having a house on it. A case in point is you might have a lot in Lake Luch Highlands or Sunridge Court that's 2 1/2 or 3 acres. You're getting one unit of assessment on that or one unit of storm water assessment. On the other hand, if you're Prince or Jerome Carlson, you're also getting one unit because that's basically your homestead. If ue were to do exactly what the ordinance says right now, ue should be telling Jerome Carlson he should be getting 33 units or whatever it is, which seems excessive. So I guess in the interest of equity, we'd like to go back to the way we've already set this up which is in those districts we're going to do it on a one tax parcel, one fee basis. We realize that for some owners that causes a little bit of complexity and difficulty but I think it's probably the most fair way ue can think of doing it. And if you agree with that, or whichever one you agree to, ue think the ordinance should be fixed so that it's clear on that point. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Appreciate that Paul. I see where if we confirm that billing for that agricultural zoned parcel fee be based on that one unit for each according tax parcel, nlaybe the Clty Attorney should revlew the ordinance and if necessary, propose language changes needed to really clarify th£s point. Z thought some of the intent is what we had sald before. Councilwoman Dimler: I remember that. Mayor Chmiel: It was, go ahead. Councilwoman Oimler: I guess you know being that I think I represent the only agricultural business here. Mayor Chmiel: That's why I thought I'd let you talk. Even though it's not in toum~, but the corn is. councilwoman Dimler: We do know about agriculture and you know, it ls st111 my feeling and I'd 11kg us to consider. Go back to the years when Chanhassen was mostly farmland. Our lakes were clean. And that makes me thlnk that lt's not farming that's the problem. It's development. It's impervious surface that causes the runoff. Now unfortunately farmers have to have a lot of land in order to run their business and they should not be penalized for havlng to have a lot of land to make their 11vlng. We can't survlve on 40 acres you know. The average farm nowadays is, I would say 300 to 400 acres so I don't think it's 40 City Council Meeting - April fair to keep penalizing the 'farmer because he has the most land, which he needs for his business in order to pay for all these things. And this isn't the utility that they get hit up for. They get hit up for acres for a lot of things and they pay a large share because they have so many acres on a lot of things. $o it isn't necessarily the amount here that the farmers are upset about either. It's the principle of the thing. That the next thing that comes along, they again will, they'll use this as a model and say okay, we're going to hit the farmers. And unfortunately they get hit hard every time because they have the land. And again, I don't think it's the ground that soaks it up that's causing the problem. I think it's the ground that has a lot of impervious surface so think it's development that's causing a majority of the problem. I think that that's why we treat them equally as one parcel no matter how much land they have. Mayor Chmiel: I guess I agree to a certain point, although I can pick one out specifically on Lake Riley. Lake Riley Addition. Particular area that has a lot of storm parcel runoff that comes directly off onto that lands and has caused problems. Councilwoman Dimler: They're right on the lake. Mayor Chmiel: For the residences in and adjacent to the lake and adjacent to that open farmland too. And it has caused a lot of given problems for some of those residential people. I'm not disputing the fact that agriculture is not doing lt's job properly and the absorption ls going and percolation ls good but once the percolation gets to that point where saturation is there, it's got to go somewhere. Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, no doubt there is some runoff but again, why charge them triple what we're charging other people because they're not contributing triple, in my estimation, they're not contributing triple what the other development is contributing. $o that was the original purpose why we wanted to treat them as the slngle famlly lot, or just 11ke we do the slngle famlly. Paul Krauss: A couple things. That we've tried to do and that's why we applied it on a tax parcel basis but then you do have instances where you have the Deglers or the Erharts who own multiple parcels. Then we have to say, are those parcels contiguous to one another or are they all over town? It really, you start making a lot of subjective judgments so I think we can administer it either way but lt's really, either it's tax parcels or it's per 40 acres. Councilwoman Oimler: In the Erhart's case I think they came out the same either way. Paul Krauss: I think they do. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. If they have a section line with the center line as such that divides it off, those are put into separate parcels and that's what happened. That's what happens I thlnk in Tim's case. Paul Krauss: I think you can combine parcels across section lines but then you've got to get lnto, are they financed differently and all that. In terms of the agricultural contribution to the problem too, there's been a lot of research - 41 City Council Meeting -- April 22, 1991 on that recently which sort of disputes what seems like common sense. ~ctually, oddly enough tho Metro Council has been putting out data that would indicate that single famiJy development, the densities that we develop here which are very low, actually produce a lot less runoff than the ag land does. I think you're right. Historically when this was all farmed it didn't used to. Councilwoman Oimler: Lakes were clean then so I ask myself why. Paul Krauss: And I think it has to do with the last 30 years, the use of chem.[cat fertilizer which is a relatively neu phenomenon. That stuff just winds Ltp down in our lakes and down in our rivers and nobody wants to apply too much of-it because it's a waste of money. But the worst, I serve on the Minnesota River Task Force for water quality and the worst problems they're finding are like Bevins Creek and the creeks upstream that service or flow through only the agricultural areas. $o I think it's a problem we all share and we all have to recognize that and I thought the approach that you originally adopted pretty much did that. Councilwoman bimler: ~nd again, speaking 'for the Erhart's here, in their case they're paying triple what most of us are paying. Mayor Chmiel: I think they have four parcels. Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, plus they have, actually they help the city in it's management because they have retention polnds that they maintaln on their property. So they're doing that at their own expense plus we're billing them three tlmes what the other people get bllled. $o are we making adjustments for people that actually help us? Paul Krauss: Well when you think though that they have 100 acres, they have 300 limes the amount of land that a slngle famlly homeowner has and is paying the exact same amount. There ls some balance there. Councilwoman Oimler: But it's not developed land. You know it's the same. Paul Krauss: But in terms of the, well it goes back to the runoff that's generated by it and a11. Z don't know. Z don't know what the ideal answer Clearly somebody's golng to fall lnto the cracks. If we do it by tax parcel, the Erhart's are get[ing at least 3 statements. If we do it by 40 acres, uhlch we haven't done to thls date, I think they get the same if not more. Councilman Wing: When you say triple, am I misreading this? Triple would be $9.66? I'm paying $3.22. Councilwoman Oimler: Yeah, per quarteT'. Councilman Wing: Would you guys like to chip in and just? Councilwoman Oimler: It's not the amount. It's not the amount. It's the principle. Councilman Wing: I thought you were trylng to fill A1 Kllngelhutz' shoes. 42 City Council Meeting - April 22, 1991 Councilman Hason: I'm taking into consideration, I mean clearly Ursual does represent the agricultural sector of the city. However, I think the point that's belng made here ls you've got a lot of 15,000 square feet as opposed to somebody who owns 120 acres. Now whether you're putting chemicals in the soil or not, my understanding of thls program ls, it's based on the amount of land the water ls running off of. Some people own i acre, some people own 120 acres. Some people own a third of an acre. I'm not, if we're talklng in terms of fairness here, is it fair that someone that has 15,000 square feet is paytng $3.22 where someone with 120 acres is paying $3.22? You know, what you're saying is true too you know. Councilwoman Dimler: It's that development. In my feeling, development contributes the majority. Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussion? Councilwoman Oimler: Yeah. Are we doing every single family according to the amount of land they have? In other words, we're charging them, if they have 374 of an acre, you're charglng them more than half. Paul Krauss: No. No, we're not. That's what we're dolng on multi-family and on commercial and on industrial. That's a per acre charge and that's where the significant difference in dollars comes ln. Where you have, you know Rosemount has a very large amount of hard surface and that's directly taken into a formula. The formula got twisted a 11ttle blt to recognize the sensitivity that yo~z have to agriculture to kind of come up with a different standard there and for the rural residential because agaln, if we applled it strictly. If we strictly interpretted the ordinance, Jerome Carlson would be getting every three months and that dldn't seem equitable either. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. What you're looking for, that specific direction? Would someone 11kw to make a recommendation? Councilman Workman: I think it's gotten a little ridiculous. I don't know what the easlest thlng to do is. When somebody splits thelr acreage for mortgage purposes, etc. and it's simply a technicality, I don't know why they're getting a bi11. It doesn't seem to qulte make sense. You can go both ways. The for the 120 acres or $3.00 and whatever I'm paying for whatever I've got. It's gettlng almost laughable. Z thought it was laughable in the beginning in that, and there's converging philosophies here. Again, Good God, the rain falls and I have to pay for lt. That theory and then there's the development and ex-councilmembers talking about cows in diapers and everything else. Councilman Mason: You said ex-councilmembers didn't you? Councilman Workman: Soon to be ex, former Council. I don't know. I guess I would lean more towards if you had 40 over here and 40 over across town, two statements. If you've 81 acres all in one and you had to split it off and do something, I don't know. I think that's stretching ita 11ttle bit to glve them 3 statements. But I don't quite agree with you Ursula, as I stated before that the farmers. City Council Meeting -- 6pril 22, 1991 Councilwoman Dimler; I understand that but when you go farming you'll understand. Councilman Workman: We need chemical toilets on these farnis...but really Z think we're talking about peanuts here. Z don't know. The farmer's is a lost breed Jn this town and we're not the only pressure they're getting. There's no doubt, about thati Councilwoman Oimler: You would like to continue to eat wouldn't you? Councilman Workman; Well this isn't McLeod County. This is Car~er County and so you know. Councilwoman Dimler". I was just saying, we should take care of our farmers. Councilman Workman: Well, the farmers will take care of themselves. I think we're managing waters in development areas pretty well. There's something, again f. his .ts one of those issues where there's so much kind of wrong with I think the whole situation that I don't have any idea what to do. Councilwoman Oimler: But again, we've already, I think there was 100 or so complaints j.~ the first three months because I uae checking with it so it's not sitting well with a lot of residents apparently. Not just the farmers. Paul Krauss: I've got to get an exact count Ursula but we're thinking it's in tho realm of 30-40 complaints tops. Cottrlcilman Mason: Out of how many? Paul Krauss: Out of about 5,000. And of those, I'd say most of them came in the last round where for the first time ever folks who are not on city water and sewer got a bill from the city and really kind of reacted to that. Councilman Workman: And Tim Erhart is not against this program. Mayor Chmiel: He's just looking at trying to understand how we come up with our figures. Councilman Workmal~: He's not against the storm water utility. Mayor Chmiel: No. He's in favor of that. There's no question. As many people are because environmentally we're taklng the right positlon on lt. We're golng to cause a lot less problems as time exists and we're starting early so therefore we're gettlng a better jump on lt, as most other clties haven't even touched thls. Councilman Workman: Can we move to table this until May 6th? Colznc$.luonlan Oimler: We can't act on it anyway can we? Peru1 Krauss: I guess what we would like to do is get your direction on which way you're leaning and we could bring back an ordinance change. 44 City Council Meeting - April 22, 1991 Mayor Chmiel: Why don't we have the City Attorney review that and come up with some kind of conclusion. Then we can look at it at that particular time. Okay? I don't want to give him too much work but please finish it in 10 minutes. Roger Knutson: It's already done. Mayor Chmiel: He's got it done...That's good. So maybe what we should do is just table thls until we get that information back and move from there. Councilwoman Dlmler: Great. Thank you. B. FEASIBILITY STUDY TO PREPARE SEWER AND WATER COHPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR NEW HUSA AREA, PLANNING DIRECTOR. Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, call this optimism on our part but. Mayor Chmiel: You have to be optimistic. Paul Krauss: We've already gotten some very serious inquiries by large developers who want to be putting together projects in the new MUSA area. One of those individuals is here tonight, Terry Forbord from Lundgren Construction. I thlnk you've met Terry before at other meetings on the Comprehensive Plan and his letter that was handed out to you tonight. Some of you were also aware too that we have been talklng, at a preliminary level wlth a large, vet1 well known industrial office developer who's looking seriously at two or three major projects. I have at least two of those wlthin the new MUSA area. One of the things we're confronted with in working this area out there is we know where the Metro Interceptor ls but we don't know much else on how to serve it. The Comprehensive Plan has some real sketchy ideas about putting a major lift station down in Bluff Creek and Lyman Blvd. and then lifting this sewage up through Audubon and down new Lake Orive lnto the Metro Interceptor and that's fine and good as well as it goes. We haven't had an opportunity to take it beyond that. People are coming to us now with serious questions. Well, where do you want us to hook into water? What improvements are going to be made or need to be made to service this development? And this is a question that we need to get out in front of. We really need to determine where these improvements are going to go and not be reactive where we may look at 100 acre development and based upon what the developer is telllng us, it may work very well for them to serve this project but we may not have the ability to serve a property down the street which doesn't do us any good in the long term. Don and I and Charles have had several conversations about this and we felt the best way to address it was for us to undertake a comprehensive sewer and water plan whlch will lay out the locations of city sewer and watermain and other facilities. Llft stations. Do we need anymore wells? Do we need a reservoir? Whatever we need. So that we have a framework to build upon and then we can use that information to feed 1nrc stuff that Terry mlght be dolng and he can work off of that. We took the liberty of going out and calling up 6 consultants to give us proposals on dolng the work. We wanted to come to you wlth, time ls something of the essence. I won't tell you that it's imperative that this be done right away but it really ls important that we do thls fairly soon. As soon as, we have people who are serious enough that they would actually want to start, they've actually started to work wlth us before the MUSA line's officially moved. $o we'd 11ke to be in a position to give them as much direction as 45 Ct. tM Council Meeting -- April 22, 1991 possible so that we can get these projects underway through the Planning Commission, through the City Council this summer. Out of the six proposals we received, we received a pretty high range I suppose of costs. It ranged from an upper end of $30,000.00 for this study from TKBA down to $8,876.00, which I thought was a pretty precise number for Bonestroo. Bonestroo is a firm that's working with us right now. We've been using them in Gary Warren's absence to help us with sanitary sewer issues relative to the Comprehensive Plan. They've also worked out in this area. They represented MWCC when the Lake Ann Interceptor was put in. I understand they're also working with Chaska on t.heir's so they have some familiarity with the area and I think that that probably led to their ability to give us a lower cost on that. There were two firms that we thought were pretty close and it was Bonestroo and Short-Elliott~ Hendrickson. SEH was a little more pricey and some of the work that Charles felt should be done in terms of computer modeling for a water system was options in the SEH where Bonestroo had indicated they would be doing that. Based upon that, it's our recommendation that we enter into a contract with Bonestroo to undertake this study and we'll put the provision on there that we not, that we will follow the Metro Council review of ouT' pla~. If there's a serious hang-up, you know we won't be spending a whole lot of money until we figure out which way they're going. 8ut we would recommend that Bonest¥oo be awarded the contract for doing that. The City Hanager has assured us that there is some funding availaUle for this I understand in the Administrative Trust. What we'd like to do is be J.n a position to recoup this expense by putting it against when a project, when we actually do a project, as part of the feasibility for that. ~nd again our recommendation is to go with Bonestroo. Mayor Chmiel: ~ would like to make that recommendation. That we do contract with Bonestroo. He's also lower dollars and Z'm aware as to the workings of Bonestroo through different associations ~'ve had within our company and they're very ~ell 11ked by other cltles and that's the deallngs Z've had through other cities and they're very congenial. They get things across. They work very closely with the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission. I feel that they're a reputable kind of company for an engineering firm to have roi' the city and I would make that recommendation. Councilman Workman: Second. Mayor Chmiel: It's been moved and seconded. Any other discussion? Councilman Mason: My only comment is once again I think that the staff that works in thls city ls dolng everything they can to keep ahead of thlngs and thls kind of stuff just insures, helps insure the future of Chanhassen. Z think it's great that people like you guys are thlnking up stuff 11kw thls. I really do. Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Workman seconded to appoint the firm of Bonestroo to prepare a feasibility study for a Sewer and Water Comprehensive Plan for the new MUSA area. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. C. LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES ANNUAL CONFERENCE, CITY MANAGER. Hayor Chmiel: Maybe I could just throw something in on that. I've been rovlewlng thls and for the League of Minnesota Cltles it's golng to be in Rochester. I've been reviewing what they call coming together and holdlng on 46 City Council Meeting - April 22, 1~91 common ground and I've looked at thelr agenda. I am considering, I'm not considering. I'm golng to go to thls and I'm look£ng at possibly Wednesday and Thursday and Frlday. Although Tuesday evenlng they have a special kick off event but they have some of that starts with the conference planning, committee meetings at 3:30 and that moves right on through that evening. I think I'm going to kind of forego that special kick off event that they have. Although it would be sort of fun but I'm looklng at mlne for Wednesday and Thursday and there are several different sessions that really are good sessions that I see. I'd 11ke to make a polnt of going to most of those that I can. Z think if the balance of the Council is in the position, that they would so choose to go, that we sort of spllt up some of those respective conferences that they have so we get as much as we can out of it. Don, did you have anyth£ng more to add to that? Don Ashworth: No. I was planning on just generally polling Council members to see what type of interest there would be. I agree. In a lot of ways it's good to klnd of be as a group. Not only in housing but also in attending some of those sessions and getting back together. You attend a particular one and somebody else goes to another one. Evening events, both the Wednesday and Thursday are well attended. It is a real opportunity to meet other counc£1 members throughout the state of Minnesota. Klnd of learn what some of their problems are and in fact I think a lot of the informal sessions, you can learn, galn as much knowledge at as some of your formal sessions. Zf you wanted to do what I would call kind of a mini program, you might want to consider coming down Wednesday afternoon. Conslder staying Wednesday nlght. Potentially Thursday evenlng and returning Friday morning. That wouZd be kind of a longer program but a very nice one. Otherwise you might consider the Thursday afternoon and late Friday morning type of thing. Councilman Workman: I thought Governor Lamb was going to be there. Ex-Governor Lamb. I don't see it on here. Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Councilman Workman: Z believe that's the week of the U.S. Open. Mayor Chmiel: Yep it is. Councilman Workman: I'm going to be selling...Can I get back to you Don on maybe the mini something or other? Don Ashworth: Sure. How about if I have Karen contact each one of you maybe individually. By then you can have a chance to take a look at this. Again, thls is well attended by spouses as well. There's usually lots of thlngs golng on for them as well. Councilman Hason moved, Councilman Workman seconded to adjourn the meeting. voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10:20 p.m.. Submitted by Don Ashworth City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim