Loading...
1988 01 11~{ANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL ~XE2%R MEETING ANUARY 11, 1988 ~yor Hamilton called the meeting to order. The meeting was opened with the 'ledge to the Flag. [EMBERS PRESENT: Councilman Boyt, Councilman Horn, Gouncilman Geving and Ounci lman Johnson f TAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Barbara Dacy, Jo Ann Olsen, Gary Warren, Larry ~rown, Todd Gerhardt, Lori Sietssma, Jim Chaffee and Roger Knutson ] PPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Horn moved, Councilman Geving seconded to pprove the ager~a as amended by Councilman Gevirg to include discussion on ~ ip codes arid communications; and by Councilman Boyt to include discussion on ~. unting and shooting zones. All voted in favor of the agenda as amended and n orion carried. ]988 ORGANIZATIONAL ITEMS: RULES OF PROC~DURE. ~yor Hamilton: The first item is Rules of Procedure and all of these items, s through j have been outlined in the memo to all of us so we should be able tD move through these rather quickly. Rules of Procedure are standard ones t hat we've followed for the past several years. I think Jay had a change he Wa. nted to see made. .~ncilman Johnson: Yes, unfortunately I don't know exactly how to work this nge but under Section 8, voting, the intent of what I'd like to see here is ~f somebody verbally removes themselves from a vote versus abstaining from a .~pte, they say I'm not going to vote upon this issue, that that in effect z~d~ the size of the Council for that vote to four versus our current rules .~hich counts it as a negative vote on that issue. I believe that that would ~ more in keeping of what the intent of removing o~eself from a vote is. ~t's that you don't want to vote on that issue at all. There are certain t~mes, it's for conflict of interest or other legal reasons that you're not ?sting on that issue. There are times when you want to abstairu I believe t~at the State Law on abstention, or a 'recent Supreme Court ruling said on a sstention is that if you abstain, you're voting with the majority so I'd like t'b see this Section 8 reworded. ~yor Hamilton: There was some discussion about that prior to the meeting and I~ think it would be a good idea is Roger would review that and perhaps bring i~ back with a suggestion as to how it could be worded so that we can follow it correctly. Is that acceptable Roger? :. l~bger Knutson: Yes. What you have here works in some cases, not in all. It c~.~sends on what you're trying to pass. If you would give it to me, I'll get ~is back to you for your next meeting. (])uncilman Horn: I had an item on that also. Not on that issue. On 1.06, o ~der of business. Maybe I'm misreading this but it seems to me that s )mething's confusing here. It says in the absence of the Mayor, the Acting Mayor calls the meeting to order or in the absence of both, the City Manager. T~en it says, in the absence of the City Manager, the Mayor shall appoint a :. City Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 secretary pro tem. Well, if he's absent and the City Manager's absent, how did we get back to the Mayor being here. Mayor Hamilton: I would think the meeting would have been cancelled by that point. Perhaps you could take a look at 1.06 too Roger and maybe more clearly define what it we're trying to accomplish. Councilman Boyt: While we're at it. I would suggest that we add a 1.10 defining the lenght of our session to be January 1st through December 31st of each year. Mayor Hamilton: Don't we know what our year is usually?. Councilman Boyt: It just clarifies it. Councilman Johnson: There are some places in here that talk about a session. Councilman Horn: I saw somewhere we stated that our order is Robert's Rules of Order. I didn't see that in here. Councilman Boyt: It's under Section 7. Mayor Hamilton: I have no corrections or additions. However, I would like to call the Council's attention to the area that I do every year and I'll do it again this year, 5.02, 5.03 in Section 5 and Section 9. We all seem to have a habit of just deciding we have something to say and begin talking rather than getting the floor from the Chair. Everybody will have an opportunity to make their comments heard so in the interest of moving along at a little better pace, I think what you would do, that would give us a little more order. If you want to speak, raise your hand or let me know and you'll certainly have a chance to do your talking. Councilman Johnson: One thing that our Planning Commission, the Chair of our Planning Commission does, at the beginning of each meeting he has an extremely short thing that he addresses to the audience telling what the basic rules of how the meeting is going to be run. It talks about that we're going to give the people the chance to talk and when they can talk and that type of deal. It is very informative to the audience. We have different people in here almost every night. That might be a similar thing, by yourself at the beginning of the meeting, might be an appropriate thing to do to inform the people who have never spoken before a Council, exactly what the rules are. They're written here but who's got a copy of it. Councilman Boyt: There's a pile of copies right in the back. Mayor Hamilton: That's a good point. Councilman Horn: I was a little curious about this question of order. It talks about 5.02 and it also talks about the vote of the Council on order. That wasn't quite clear to me when you would use that or what it was used for or how that would be done. ~ity Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 ] 27 ~ayor Hamilton: ~03, a member once recognized shall not be interrupted when Ipeaking unless it be to call him to order. Is that what you mean? bunci lman Horn-. Yes. lYOther Hamilton: That means if you're getting off the subject, the Chair then right to call you out of order arzt get back on the subject. We're king about oranges and you start talking apples, we can get back on the }opic. ncilman Horn: I thought there was also someplace in here where the Council ided on a motion of order _ ~ouncilman Boyt: I think where that might come in is if you appealed the ~hair, the body as a whole w~uld decide. · . ,]~ayor Hamilton: Right. If we feel for some reason we're out of order, more aning not out of control but doing something out of sequence, then there can a question of order on how we're dealing with issues, the meeting would be nterrupted and then we would get back in order. Take a vote on it, if that's ~da~essary, and then proceed. ~ouncilman Horn: Does this say that anyone at some point in the discussion ~uld say, call it a question? ~ayor Hamilton: Yes. .~oger Hamilton: To call the question, that requires a two-thirds vote. You ~l~ote on that and then you vote on ~ motion. ~ayor Hamilton: I'm not sure we ~ to be so terribly formal. We seem to ~et along quite well and doing it informally... ~ouncilman Horn: I was just curious how it w~rked. · ~ayor Hamilton: I think if we spent all our time following the rules exactly 4s they're by the word, we'd spend all our time doing nothing but trying to ~ollow the rules. ~esolution #88-01: Councilman Geving moved, Mayor Hamilton seconded to s~prove the Rules of Procedure as presented with the noted corrections and ~dhanges from the council. All voted in favor and motion carried. qFFIClAL NEWSPAPER. _Mayor Hamilton: We have had in the past two years, South Shore has been our qfficial newspaper. Villager newspaper has recently come into town. They ~ave asked to be recommended as the official newspaper. Roger has passed on ~x,e coamen~ to us about that. city Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 Mayor Hamilton moved that the South Shore be recognized as the City of Chanhassen's official newspaper. There was no second and the motion failed for lack of a second. Councilman Geving moved, Councilman Horn seconded that the Herald be designated as the official newspaper for the City of Chanhassen for 1988. All voted in favor except Mayor Hamilton who opposed and motion carried. Councilman Johnson: Is that per the agreement before us that it is also published within the Villager? Councilman Geving: That ' s correct. Mayor Hamilton: I'm a little surprised at the Council's willingness to go back to a newspaper who up until this year has never had, or ever been willing to do a darn thing for the City of Chanhassen. The South Shore has and has done what I think is an excellent job in getting the city news out to all of the residents of the City. The Villager will not, as you may be aware or may not be aware. The Villager is not an official newspaper yet. It's a pass through deal. There are several negative things here and I think South Shore certainly deserves to have our support for another year. We don't even know if the Villager is going to remain here. We have no idea. It's a brand new newspaper. It's been here for just a few months. I think we're making a big mistake. OFFICIAL DEPOSITORY Mayor Hamilton moved, Councilman Horn seconded to approve Chanhassen State Bank as the official depository and maintaining the City's investment policy of 1978-87. All voted in favor and motion carried. CITY ATTORNEY Mayor Hamilton moved, Councilman Geving seconded to approve Grannis, Campbell, Farrell and Knutson be designated as the City Attorney. All voted in favor and motion carried. BOND CONSULTANT Mayor Hamilton moved, Councilman Horn seconded to approve Ar~dy Merry of McClees Investments, Inc. as the Bond Consultants for the City of Chanhassen. All voted in favor and motion carried. ACTING MAYOR Councilman Horn moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to approve Councilman Geving as Acting Mayor. All voted in favor except Councilman Geving who abstained and motion carried. ! ~ity Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 ][29 INSPECTOR ~ayor Hamilton: Normally the Mayor is the Weed Inspector. I would move that · e Public Works Director be made the Deputy Weed Inspector. ~ouncilman Johnson: I was going to move that Tom become the Weed Inspector. the deputy, I was thinking of Scott Hart personally. As the Code .k~forcement Officer, it makes more sense than the Public Works Director. 4ayor Hamilton: You don't ~ to move the Mayor as being Weed Inspector )ecause I already am. It' s required but that' s fine. ~ayor Hamilton moved, Councilman Horn seconded to approve the Code Enforcement ficer as the Deputy .~ Inspector. All voted in favor and motion carried. ~ayor Hamilton moved, Councilman Geving seconded to approve Dale Gregory as {~he Fire Chief. All voted in favor and motion carried. ~_ALTH OFFICER ~ayor Hamilton moved, Councilman Horn seconded to approve Dr. McCollum be ~esignated as the City of Chanhassen's Health Officer. All voted in favor and ~otion carried. ITY AUDITORS '.Mayor Hamilton moved, Councilman Horn seconded to approve Voto, Tautges, .~edpath and Company be designated as the City Auditor. All voted in favor and ~otion carried. .~SENT AGENDA: Councilman Geving moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to rove the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's ~ec(mmendations · · So Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Allow Auto Service Centers as Conditional Uses in the BH, Business Highway and Business Services District, Final Reading. bm Se Resolution %88-02: Approval of Membership to Regional Mutual Aid Association. Approval of Plans and Specifications, Lake Susan Hills West, Phase I, Argus Develolm~_nt. ge Resolution %88-03: Approval of Resolution Declaring Oertain Rents Due the HRAas Uncollectable. h. Ordinance to Rezone Portions of Saddlebrook, Final Beading. 5 City Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 i · Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Allow Contractor's Yards as Conditional Uses in the BF, Business Fringe District, Final Reading. j. Approval of Joint Powers Agreement Amendment, Southwest M~tro. k· Approval of Accounts, Final Payments - 1987 and Bills dated January 11, 1988· l. City Council Minutes dated December 7, 1987. Planning Commission Minutes dated November 18, 1987 Park and Recreation Cc~mission Minutes dated December 8, 1987 Ail voted in favor and motion carried. Councilman Boyt: I'd like to clear up an assumption on point (e) if I might ask Gary a quick question. On (e) Gary, I'm assuming that's the Lake Susan Hills, that we're including the typical building clean-up and road surface clean-up? Gary Warren: Yes. CONSENT AGENDA: (C) AUTHORIZATION FOR LAKE LUCY ROAD SPEED ZONING. Councilman Boyt: My concern here is two fold. This is in regard to the 35 mph speed zone setting for Lake Lucy Road. We have, I believe it's a trail on both sides of Lake Lucy Road that basically amounts to a painted line and a widened road. As I was reading the memo, it stated there that we were going to post 35 mph but enforce 45 at the discretion of the officer. I think we should post what we're going to enforce. I guess I don't have a feeling about what we should post but I just don't think we .should be posting one speed limit and enforcing something that's considerably higher than that. Councilman Horn: I agree. Mayor Hamilton: I agree too. I was surprised when we put up 35 or 30, that's up there now, because you can certainly driver faster on there. As Centex develops, I suspect there will be more traffic and we may want to reduce it at that time but as you go on the western part of the road, there's hardly any homes there. All the homes are off of Lake Lucy so there really isn't any pedestrian traffic. I drive that road 2 or 3 time a day and I have to honestly tell you, I think all fall I saw one person out there walking a dog. I drive it at different times of the day. There just isn't anybody on the road. I think we ought to post the s~ limit that we're going to enforce. I think 35, in my opinion, is too slow for there. Councilman Horn: Do w~ have it up? Mayor Hamilton: Maybe Jim could answer that. Is that a public safety issue? Gary Warren: It's the Commission of Transportation who has ruled on it so Roger, I guess could back me up here as far as the State Statutes, but it says ~ity Council Meeting - January il ~ 1988 ~t his discretion based on the speed study that they did. It's basically ~eir designation of 35 mph. ~ger Knutson: W~ make recommendations, they make decisions. buncilman Boyt: Did w~ reco~m~r~ a higher speed limit? ~ary Warren: No, we did not give them any recommendation. The road is lesigned, the area around Yosemite is a 30 mph spccd...so that's sort of where x)u're running into a little bit of a buffer here from the State on their ~peed study. If you've got this somewhat bottleneck in the middle, you've got :o be careful about how you treat the ends. As you saw on the street study, ~ spccds were up quite a bit and they would expect those to come down as you et more dense develola~ent through that area. ~uncilman Johnson: I had a similar situation in Omaha, Nebraska, where I ~ to live many years ago. We had this beautiful big wide street and ~verybody did a good 50 mlah through there and they posted it 35 one day. ~ne ~eason was that the development was coming-and that it's time to train the .~0Ple before the roads are there. We had the same problem with Kerber Blvd.. ~t's a big wide boulevard and people s~ on it continuously because they're t~sed to doing it. I think now's the time. If that road eventually is going to be 35 mph because of the future traffic, it should be 35 mph now and not witched in the future when we'll have a whole mess of residents coming in ere complaining because the~ve gotten used to driving 50 on it and it's no 'hunger safe to do it. I don't see any problem with it being 35 now. Get pecPle already used to driving the spccd that it's going to have to be. ially since it's got a 30 mph curve in the middle of it -- ".Mayor Hamilton: I'd like to ask the Public Safety Director, what your _~..e3~ughts are. ~Jim Chaffee: I think local action and Roger you can correct me if I'm wrong, but local action can go lower because that's designated as a bike trailway. ~e can go down to 25 mph if we so choose to do so. The reason I put the 10 -~ph discretionary rule in there is because of the s~--cds that, if you've ~riven out there, mostly all of the spccds have been upgraded to 35 mlah. So <it's like Jay was saying, it's a toning down period. Getting the people to .~slow down and get used to the slower spccd limits. An officer has total ~iscretion anyway out there. I think bad complaints pro and coD. For higher is~ and for lower spccd. (]ne guy is saying the s~ is too high, that .~oeople are speeding ar~ one who says it's much, much too slow for that roadway ~so it goes either way. As far as the safety concern, I don't think it's a ?safety issue right now. This is my best way of getting a handle on it. .. lCouncilman Boyt: What you're saying is, you're recommending that we post 35 {and enforce anywhere from 35 to 45, depending upon what the officer thinks is !appropriate? !Jim Chaffee: That's pretty much the way it is anywhere though. ,: ', 7 City Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 Councilman Boyt: I think everybody in this room is probably aware that the City of Chanhassen doesn't do much in the way of screening highway s~'~ so about the best bet we've got is a sign. What I'm saying is, since we're relying upon people to think that the sign is in good judgment, it just doesn't make sense to post a sign that people are going to ignore and you're telling me that people are going to ignore this sign and that we're not going to enforce it. I don't think that's good business. Jim Chaffee: When I said that the officer has discretion, that's just what he has. If the road conditions were such where a 35 mph speed limit is not safe, he can tag. By the same token, if 35 mph is too fast because of weather, he can tag for that too. That's a State Law so I just wanted the officer to be cautionary about enforcing the 35 mph s~---~cd limit. A vast majority of the people are exceeding the 35 mph s~ limit. It's merely a cautionary statement in my memo. Now, the speed limit is going to stay at 35. ~nere's going to be nothing that's going to say, you can go 45 if you want to because we're not going to enforce it. Tney'll never know what we're enforcing. I don't even know what an officer's discretion is. If an officer decides that that person going too fast is unsafe, then he can tag them. Mayor Hamilton moved, Councilman Geving seconded to approve the authorization for Lake Lucy Road Speed Zoning as recommended by the City Manager. Mayor Hamilton, Councilman (~eving and councilman Johnson voted in favor, Councilman Boyt and Councilman Horn voted in opposition. Tae motion carried with a vote of 3to 2. CONSENT AGENDA: (F) APPROVAL OF 1988 POSITION CLASSIFICATION AND PAY COMPENSATION PLAN. Councilman Geving moved, Mayor Hamilton seconded to table this item until a future meeting. All voted in favor except Councilman Boyt and councilman Johnson and the motion carried with a vote of 3 to 2. CONSENT AGENDA: (M) ESTABLISH BUDGET, 1988 REFERENDUM EXPENSE. councilman Johnson: I just wanted to know if staff had looked into the possibility of a mail referendum which I believe has just been approved by the State Legislature and has been tried once in this state so far, and what the success of that was and the cost of it. The $8,000.00 to run this referendum, we might be able to save a few bucks on the mail referendum, especially when we're looking at still somewhat cold weather time. I'd like that looked into. Mayor Hamilton: Did you consider that Don? Don Ashworth: I'm aware of it. I'm not sure under what basis it's allowed. I will be meeting with our bonding attorney Wednesday and so I could present that issue and get a response. Councilman Johnson: I know one city has done it so far. It was on some kind of referend~ and maybe we could find out what their turnout was. ~ity Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 ~yor Hamilton: My only comment would be, I suspect any time you're mailing, ~_sking people to mail something back your responses, is considerably lower ~han it might be. We have a very good voter response in this community and I ~ould hate to jeopardize something as important as this by letting it go to ~ailing because people just don't mail things back. But Don can check on ~hat. Why don't we then table this.  ncilman Geving: I'd like also to have Don consider the possibility of the ballot. The expense that we're talking about here, the $8,~.M~ is ntially to reprogram the County's computer system for this ballot and for election and it seems to me, that we would accomplish the same thing with paper ballot for the referer~um. I'd like to have that be considered. ~oger Knutson: I'm aware of the State. I'm trying to remember. I thought, .~nd I might be wrong, the back of my head something tells me that that can nly be used by very, very small cities. I think it was designed for rural &teas but I might be wrong. You might not be able to use then. uncilman Horn: I would have raised this issue but the thought that occurred me as I was reading through here, it appears the City is willing to spend rods to promote the Community Center and the Fire Department but I don't see $nything on here about the trail systems. You're spending money on these ~.ther two itens but not spending money to pr~note the trails. nAshworth: The brochure will handle all three items, will Again, look every means possible to reduce that. I would like to have authorization so can start some of the... ~ouncilman Johnson: I see no reason to table it. t r Hamilton: I agree. I think we should approve it with the condition Don will look into those items. .~ouncilman Boyt: In regards to the additional flyer, is there anybody who can ~ill me in on why the Fire Department wants to break out of the brochure &ctivity that they were to be included in? im Chaffee: We had talked about that at one of the fire meetings, at the ire building committee. They weren't aware of this other flyer was coming ~ut at the time and they had gotten in contact with a printer and designer and ~tarted to develop a brochure. It was after that they found out that this ~ther brochure was coming out. They had already gotten the gal working on it ~nd instead of cancelling her, they decided it might be good to reference in ~e fire department brochure the community center and parks trails. ur Hamilton: As long as the expense for making their own brochure comes , of their own expenses, their general fund or whatever t~ call it. ~im Chaffee: Originally that's what they intemded to do but after discussion, ~ decided if the City would be willing to do it, then fine. i ., · 9 : : City Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 Mayor Hamilton: I guess I would say no. We already have a brochure that's going to encompass the other ones, there's no reason why we should do a special one just for th~m. Councilman Horn: I agree. I think they should all be under one. Councilman Geving: My thoughts on that Mr. Mayor are that it would look to me like the fire department is competing against our other issues and we have not decided yet how we're going to box this or package this particular referendum. We may package it as one item which would mean that the firemen's efforts might not be real advantageous for them to go it alone so I'd like to see this all be part of one publication. Resolution 988-04: Councilman Johnson moved, Oouncilman Geving seconded to to establis~ budget for 1988 referendum expense with condition that the City Manager look into the paper ballot and mail referendum issues. All voted in favor and motion carried. VISITOR PRESENTATION Bill Kreiberg, 6444 Murray Hill Road: We came in front of this body in December concerning the decision of the City to build an access road off of Murray Hill to the water tower. It was our understanding that we would be on the agenda following you gentlemen taking under advisement the points that were made and I think you've all received some correspondence and a copy of the petition closing this particular project. I did not see it on the agenda and that's why I came forward. Mayor Hamilton: No, it's not on the agenda. Gary Warren: We just ran out of time to do it properly and we decided that we would handle it on a lighter agenda on the 25th. AWARD OF BIDS: AWARE OF BIDS, PUBLIC WORKS EQUIPMENT. Resolution 988-05: Mayor Hamilton moved, Councilman Geving seconded to accept the ~ids for the public works equipment as summarized in Attachment 91 including the paint alternate and authorize purchase of this equipment in the total amount of $117,950.39. All voted in favor and motion carried. Councilman Horn: Why didn't w~ receive the bid sheets? Mayor Hamilton: We did. Councilman Horn: Tney're summaries. We don't even know what kind of vehicles we' re getting here. Gary Warren: All the vehicles were consistent with the specs that we had submitted to the Council. If you'd like to go through some, they're certainly available. It's my judgment that seeing they all met the bids and specs, 10 i~ity Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 narizing it for the Council. yor Hamilton: They were all included with how the equipment was speced out. ut nCilman Horn: We didn't see their response to the specs. We had the quote not that? .~r Warren: Right. .~ayor Hamilton: I guess if they w~re overbudgeted, I'd be mom concerned. . ~~ATET Tg_ R~fX)NSIDER _TRAIL EASEMENT ALON~ THE REAR LOTS IN THE T BAR K S, KAR~ SLATHER. ~ayor Hamilton: This item was t_~hled in December. As you can ~-, the  rk and Bec Commission has reviewed this and made a couple of recommendations ck to USo ~ouncilman Johnson: I'd like to hear a staff report on this if I could ~ecause some of these alternatives are something new. Alternative 91 is ~nething new that nobody considered as of yet. From what I'm hearing from ~ome people, Alternative 91 actually runs through the wetlands instead of on ~he edge of it. ~hether that's been walked and stuff, I'd like to know. .. ~ori Sietsema: This is what currently has ~-~n approved. This is the T Bar K ~states three lot split. This being the trail going through the back of those .~ots. This area in here is the wetland area. We did review this further and im Erhart who has been working closely with staff on the trails in the ~outhern area, did walk through that area ar~ found that the area actually to ~ west of these lots, it will be difficult to get through ar~ he came up 'l~ '.th another alternate plan that will require more easements but will be a plan in the end. That plan is, instead of going around just one side tter~f the wetland area, just start down at the southwest corner by' Powers Blvd. ~ you would walk along the edge of this wetland area and then up to Lyman ~lvd.. At that point in time you'd take the off-street trail along Lyman and ~ off-street trail along TH 101 and complete the circle going down the south ~i_de of the wetland area. Again, that requires more easements. The plan as ~t's shown now is just along the north side of that but again, this area in ~ere would be difficult to traverse so we're recommending that you go straight ~ozth. That would accomcdate Mrs. Slather's request as well as providing a ~etter trail system. ~°uncilman Boyt: I went out and walked that. I've got some comments but I ~on t have any questions of Ix)ri. This is a wetland area that extends about ~n equal distance on the other side of what I gather is a property line. The aetland falls at the bottom of a natural valley, or is a natural valley, lling at the bottom of a ridgeline that runs all along here, dips down a bit ~ere and picks up into just a really beautiful natural wetlar~] are~ So what We've got is an opportunity. What I'd like to see eventually is a trail ran entirely around the wetland. We can certainly deal with ~his part now but it's a natural walk of probably, I would guess, about a mile .: 11 : .City Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 back through here and then another mile out the other side and it's the whole way except for a small area over here, is at the bottom of a ridgeline. So we're about 30 feet below this. I can see where the natural building area on this lot is probably going to be back towards this ridgeline. I can imagine the people don't want to build up close to TH 101 here or along Lyman Blvd. in this area, so they're probably going to be building back in here, which is I would guess, maybe 20 feet above the trail. I would think that our plan for this trail would be for it to be some sort of walking trail and not a mechanized trail. There is already a deer trail that runs all along it that would suggest to me that it's a natural flow in that area. I think if we go with Lori's proposal, first this is impossible. This line runs right through the middle of the marsh and it's not the kind of marsh you're going to walk through. It's certainly possible to run the trail, if you were to choose to, right up the edge of this property line or pretty close to it and there's a, it looks like a cowpath that runs up there now. I would question our ability to run a trail along a boundary like this when we don't know how this particular piece of property is going to be subdivided in the future and this may well be in the middle of somebody's lot vertically and no easier to put a trail through than what we're looking at right now. Tnrough walking it, our ort~inal trail is a natural flow for that trail, although there are other options. Councilman Horn: My preference would be something like Alternative #1. If that's not feasible, than I'd have trouble picking another alternative that I would vote for. Councilman Geving: I think the Park and Rec took our comments at their meeting and went back and tried to work out an agreement and a solution to the problem and I think that Alternative 91 was better than I had hoped for. didn't know if they'd be able to come back with any kind of agreement so I was pleased that they came to us with Alternative 91. I think it will satisfy Mrs. Slather and I think it will accomplish what we want and that's the trail system that goes directly north to Lyman Blvd. and comes around back on TH 101. I'm satisfied that that will work. Mayor Hamilton: Jay, you were at the Park and Rec, lobbying them, what comments might you have. Councilman Johnson: At the Park and Rec, one of the main things, I tend to agree with Bill on this that the best thing I would like to see, be able to go all the way around the wetlands. Unfortunatey, I think there was, what I would call due process type deal. We made a trail plan in the middle of the platting and also added this at the last minute. I really don't thing it was fair to T Bar, Mrs. Slather, and therefore I'm at this point in favor of Alternative 91 if it can be worked out to where you can put a trail along the western border and the southern border of that wetland. My main reason for voting for reconsideration was that we had not fairly treated the applicant. By the llth hour nature of bringing in the trail plan, and it wasn't on the preliminary plat, at final platting. If we had had this trail plan prior to preliminary platting, I'd be sticking argently to the trail plan on the north side of this but there are times when we have to bow to the concerns of a single individual when it's their rights. 12 ~ity Oouncil'Meeting - January 11, 1988 .~ayor Hamilton: Al, you're here representing the applicant. ..~' Klingelhutz: I expected Mrs. Slather to be here but she actually lives in ring ar~ her mother broke her hip ard she's ~ staying with her a~] I'm ust wondering if she got notice of this. I like the idea of going to Lyman. think it very well satisfies her concerns. I have no problem with the  oot eas~anent along the road. That's about all I'm going to say. . ~~~d ilman Boyt: I'd like to ask a quick clarification point. Dale, when I this honestly, I wondered where Alternative %1 came from because what I in the Park and Rec Minutes was a firm commi~ent on their part to stick i,~o the original alternative which ~uld Alternative %2~ ~ouncilman Geving: Well, the alternative has changed. -. =-~nCilman Boyt: But the Park and Bec didn't change that alternative. ~ayor Hamilton: Maybe Lori can clarify that. ~ori Sietsema: You're correct. Park and Recreation Commission did not see .~rnative %L That came to my attention, just a day after your last meeting the Park and Recreation Commission met. ~nis was what we came up witth ~his line represents the edge of the wetland area which would be high ard dry .~nd you would be able to get through there. Between Tim and 'myself, we felt .~hat getting around that wetland area, around a majority of it, was a good ~olution even though we would have to get onto the main trails along the ~oads. I did ask Tim to look at my sketch to make sure that it was a fair ~epresentation and he thought that it was. ~ouncilman Boyt: What I read here was when Jay took this back to the Park and ~c Commission the next evening, the Park and Bec Commission said, Very  trongly that they felt that '- it was very mportant to not set a precedent here and that they wanted to stick with what ~o _them made the most sense which was Alternative %2. The Park and Rec ~mmission made the comment on Page 26 of '~[ast night I got the real distinct impression that a majority of the Council {nay have read what we had done on T Bar K, but they were not basing their i~ideration on it or anything we had done." Well,for my part, I think that Park and Rec Commission looked at this twice and both times came up with  eaving it the ~ay it was originally on the trail map. . '~ayor Hamilton: When we were at the National League of Cities conference 'recently, Bill and his wife and myself were all at the same seminar and I .~on't recall who the people were who were speaking but we sat in the same room ~nd listened to the same people and heard different things. What I heard was ~ situation similar to this that they were making examples of one in .~alifornia. Well, there were three different topics. One was in California Where there was a similar type thing where they wanted to put a trail across Some people's property except in that case the trail was going to go right across the beach between the house and the ocean. They said it was a clear ~iolation of a person's rights. That that is their property and you can not ~ut a public trailway across a person's property. It's taking their property. .' City Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 So I guess I'd like to see Roger investigate that a little bit. We can find out who the Attorneys were. Roger Knutson: It's Nolan vs. California Coastal Cc~mission. Mayor Hamilton: It would seem to me, and Bill might disagree on this, but it would seem to me that it was a similar type situation and I guess the guy made the point that when you put a trail across somebody's property, that's their property and you're taking their property when you put a trail across their property. You're inviting people to walk across their property 20 feet from their house and that's in violation of their rights. That's what I got out of it and I know Bill herad something different. It was worthwhile listening to however. It was a very good discussion. Roger Knutson: Books have been written about that case. If you want me to go on for a couple of hours, I'd be happy to. Mayor Hamilton: I think that may be part of the problem. We don't know exactly if it's even, personally I don't think it's right to put a trail across somebody's property and divide their property and invite the public to come in ar~ walk virtually through your backyard while you're trying to enjoy your own house on your own property. That seems to be a germane type issue. Is it or am I wrong? Roger Knutson: Nolan vs. California Coastal Commission, the request by Mr. Nolan to basically to rebuild his beach house. He was asking for a building permit. The Supreme Court said in that case, there was no rational nexus between his request for a building permit ar~ the reasons expressed by California Coastal Commission for their easement. They requested that easement because they said the home blocked the view of the ocean and the Supreme Court said, there's no rational connection between that blockage of view and an easement crossing the property. It went on to say that if the Coastal Commission had requested a viewing platform in front of his home, they could have had a viewing platform and that would have been okay. This is a little different in that we are dealing not specifically with a building permit but we're dealing with a plat. Under State Statutes Section 462 you can require reasonable dedications for trails and parkways. The question becomes what is reasonable. Mayor Hamilton: In everybody's mind that seems to be something different. Councilman Horn: I think something that didn't come out while I was reading this was something that I heard from Bill at the conference and that is we talked about property values and whether they increased or decreased. The point has been made as shown in the minutes that trail systems will increase property values. I believe the comment he told me at the convention was that is if they run on the front of the properties and not on the rear property line, that it is in view of backyard living area. I would find it difficult to believe that a trail going through this point in the property would actually add some to the property value in your rear lots. To me that's the issue we're dealing with here. Are we detracting from property values for these lots that we're talking about? What may be the greater good of the 14 ~ity Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 · leneral public of Chanhassen but are we depriving these property owners of ~ertain values? To me we are in this case. oUnCilman Johnson: One thing I'd like to do is see that we aggressively go ter obtaining the easements for Alternative 91 at this time before waiting r a platting, if we can get s(xne kind of agreements from the existint perty owners. So that's already established. We don't have a fight. I ink this ~s to get on a trail plan well before preliminary platting and t we'll be in much better shape in the future to get this. I'm saddened at we're not going to be able to get the T Bar easement on the north side use I agree that it would be great for the City to have but it just, to it was too much infringement up(~ the people to bring it in .at the last ute after we had already gone through preliminary plat and on the final t add it when the applicant wasn't even here. ~OUncilman Geving: Again, I think it's a reasonableness issue. The fact of ~ matter is that the Slather's appealled this to us and t~ said t~ just ~ouldn't sell the home with that easement on it and I think in responding to f~ way we did, we've given it a second airing and I~n satisfied that tl~ Report from Lori, who is in fact the Park and Rec Coordinator, .~_epresentirg the staff, maybe not necessarily the Park and Bec Commission in ~his issue but certainly the staff report, I would move that we choose Alternative 91 in reference to her report of January 5, 1988. , · ~ouncilman Geving moved, Councilman Horn seconded to choose Alternative $1 ~n the Staff Report dated January 5, 1988 regarding T Bar K Estates. All ~oted in favor except Councilman Boyt who opposed and motion carried. - -~QUEST FOR STREET NAME CHANGE FROM SINNf~ CIRCLE TO MARSH CIRCLE, BILL ~ayor Hamilton: Have we heard from the Sinnen's y~c? · ~arbara Dacy: Yes. Mr. Sinnen contacted me this aftern(x~ ar~ said that he ~ requested the Council to keep the street as is. A representative from the ~ttlund Company did not follow up with a letter as I indicated in my memo. Mr. streepy had indicated that he had talked to somebody else in their office ~ecently with a contrary plan regarding the street name charge so I really ..~on't know what to represent to the Council as far as how the Rsttlund Oompany ifeels about this issue. Mr. Streepy is here this evening. · ,. Bill Streepy: I guess my question is, there is a lot of concern about the ~orth of changing this and I wondered why there was no concern, I bought my perty on the 6th of August ar~ I moved my family here so I changed the name nobody even asked me what I thought of it. Now, you're checking with ~_rybody in the world, which I sympathize with a family wanting to carry a '~me but it's created a real hassle with trying to get to that area, as I say, ~o 'my house and now I worry about fire, ambulance and police. Nobody can find {~y house. It takes 3 or 4 phone calls and they call back and say, you don't Live there. The map says that it's Marsh Circle. As I said in my letter, at ~e time of an emergency I won't think to explain to an ambulance driver why : 15 City Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 my street name is not the same as it is on the map. I suggested naming a park, the whole development, anything they want but the street name is listed on the map. Councilman Horn: What map are you referring to? Our city map? published map? Generally Bill Streepy: I don't know but all the contractor's, everybody I've called, they say on our maps it's listed as Marsh Circle. Barbara Dacy: 7~ne plat was approved and the street name change came after the plat was recorded. So all the official maps still have it listed as Marsh Circle. Councilman Horn: Isn't there some process where we make a name change, that that gets through to the mapping process? Gary Warren: We update the maps annually. We're in that phase right now. Councilman Horn: So this will straighten itself out next year? Can we assure him of that? Gary Warren: We're making the name change right now... Don Ashworth: But the problem goes deeper in that, after the plat is approved, we send a copy of that over to the gas company, the telephone company, they use that plat to record their bills. Where they put in the telephone lines. Where they put in the gas, etc.. If someone calls, even if we worked very hard and said please be aware a name has changed, those area offices are still going to go back to that other map. We can't be assured as to everyone who may have had that original map. Bill Streepy: I can site an example of that in trying to get the street light fixed. We're the only house on the cul-de-sac. I called three times to get the street light turned on. I had no results after three days each call. When I called and said, wait a minute, have them look for Marsh Circle, it was on at 2:00 that afternoon. This is what I fear in an emergency. Mayor Hamilton: In an emergency Mr. Streepy, all the emergency agencies are notified. The Public Safety Director is here and the Fire Department is notified of changes immediately and it's all changed on their maps so they have correct information so that part of it really is not a problem but I can see if you're having vendors coming to your home which you mentioned t_hat. Do you have vendors coming to your home? Bill Streepy: I was building a new house. I have a number of contractors coming out and no one can find the house. I sent out 70 change of address cards addressed to Marsh Circle when I bought the home. I guess my question is, why wasn't this addressed to me before it happened? We're now going to the other property owners and everybody involved and this happened long after I bought my home. 16 buncilman Johnson: It happened a year before you bought your hc~e. August .8, 1986. ~i]ll Streepy: 1987. kmm~cilman Johnson: ~hat's when you bought Dill streepy: I bought my ~ August 3rd of this year. ]~ouncilman Horn: It changed in 1986. i~nnenyor Hamilton: How would tt~ Council like to handle this item? I know that the Sinnen property for many, many years ago ar~] I guess Barb had a good promise. If we wanted to change the street names, perhaps we could use the name someplace else. However, that is their homestead property I can ~r~erstand why they would want to leave their name up. .~11 Streepy: It s~,~----med like a strange selection because there's Rice Marsh ke and then Marsh Drive and this cul-de-sac is Marsh Circle. It had good ~.~tinuity it ~ like it to me. .: -j .~ounoilman Geving: Right about where that circle is is where the old barnyard was. That's the reason for the attachment to that particular area by the ~innen's. Did you say Barb, that the Sinnen's had con~~ you and they ~anted to retain the name? ~ayor Hamilton: Did they have any reason why? If he was so concerned, I ~uess I would think that he would he here. ".~3r. bara Dacy: I sent him a letter a week ago and a copy of the staff report ~nd for whatever reason he didn't come to tonight's meeting, he fully .~r~erstood that it was up to the Council. That there would he a chance that ~t could go back to Marsh Circle but he just wanted to state his preference. ~ayor Hamilton: ~hat's the signage on the street? ..':~rbara Dacy: The pole is up but there is no sign. ~ounci~ Johnson: Were you the first purchaser? ~ill Streepy: I'm the only occupant at this time. ' .~3ncilman Johnson: It seems like several other lots have been sold. I'd ~ike to know if they made the same mistake that the people who sold you yours, ..~Yctlund Company or whoever it was, have given you the wrong address. This is ~hat has happened here because the address was changed a year prior to your ~uying the lot. Bill Street: Yes, my fault~ you're right. I thought that was ~ocjust 18~ .~98. 7 which was ten days after I bought my hc~e. '.~ .. ., 17 City Council Meeting - January 11~ 1988 Councilman Johnson: If we've got five other purchasers now who are going through paperwork for Sinnen Street and we change it back to Marsh, we've got five people with the same problem you have. Bill Streepy: Likewise, if they have this, you're going to have a magnified problem with a number of people having contractors running all over. Councilman Johnson: Yes, and if Rottlund still thinks that that's named Marsh, then we've got five people with this problem. I think we should table it. Councilman Boyt: It sounds like some of this is taken off the plat that's filed. Is that right Barbara? Would it be appropriate for us to refile the plat with the proper names? Barbara Dacy: The City per se would not be able to refile the plat. We did send a resolution to Carver County Recorder's Office in August of 1986 for them to change their records. Tne County offices only update their maps too on an annual basis. What we can do is double check and make sure that the County has done that. Councilman Boyt: Mr. Streepy, how far along are you in having the vendors ccmpleted at your house? Bill Streepy: The essential move in vendors like gas, electricians and all those, are pretty much done. Councilman Boyt: So your major concern then was your safety? Bill Streepy: That's my prime concern. The frustration I can deal with. I just worry about the safety aspect. You're giving me the assurance that it will happen, but I still hesitate because every time I call now, oh yes we know where it's at and I have to explain quite a few times. Councilman Boyt: They have a different mapping system than the City has. The City has a current map. Councilman Geving: I think we can deal with your problem too Mr. Streepy. We have the Public Safety Director here tonight and a motion has been made to make all the notifications. The Fire Department, the Public Safety people will be notified i~mediately. You can be sure of that. Councilman Johnson: I think there are Hudson Map Company here in the Twin Cities is probably the predominant map company that people rely upon to get information, for vendors like Sears and whoever is trying to deliver something. They have these little flip maps and realtors utilize them. I think we should also put a letter out to Husdon Map Company informing them of this change so they can update their map as they republish it. Mayor Hamilton: They just came out with a new one so it will probably be a year. 18 ~.i~y Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 , .:, .~o,uncilman Geving moved, Councilman Horn seconded to deny the request for the .~t. reet name change by Bill Streepy and leave the street name as Sinnen Circle .~_i~th tl~ stipulation that city st~ff contac-q: .~hat city maps are changed accordingly and that public safety people are t]~otified. A.I.1 vot~ in fair ~ motion c~rriod. .,. ,:'. D~qSlD~ION OF P~'I' APP~ ~SION FOR ~ 8UBDIVlSION: :1 A. SEVER PETERSON AND GILBERT LAURENT >. B. ROBI~'~ BURGH :.~ C. ~ RIr.h-'~ ~8 SOU~-t .'.~ncilman Horn moved, Mayor Hamilton seconded to approve plat approval  tension for rural subdivision for Sever Peterson and Gilbert Laurent, Robert resh and Lake Riley Woods South. All voted in favor and motion carried. : ¢~)gncilman Geving moved, Mayor Hamilton seconded to accept the Stormwater ~.~.nagement Plan prepared by Barr Engineering Company dated September, 1987 and Ghat this plan be adopted as a guide to dealing with stormwater mangement ~thin the study area. All voted in favor ar~ motion carried. ,. ~ PLANNING ~SSION RESIGNATIONS AND APPOINT NEW MfI~B~. , ~omncilman Geving moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to accept the ~e~.ignations of Robert Siegel and Howard Noziska from the Planning Commission ~nd to send them a Certificate of Appreciation. All voted in favor ar~ motion ~a~ried. ~o~uncilman Boyt: I think it should be more than a Certificate of '.~p~reciation. I think it should be scme sort of a plaque or something. ~o~ncilman Geving: I don't know about that Bill. (~o~ncilman Boyt: They donate a lot of time. Not for Cc~mission members. ~ayor Hamilton: It's something that in the past we have always given letters ~f appreciation. It doesn't mean it has to stay that way. . ~ouncilman Boyt: It seems to me that a plague is reasonably inexpensive. ~t's s~mething a person might be more inclined to put on their wall. That's ~y 'thought.' ~ayor Hamilton: I think that's something that we r~-----d to have Todd .i~W. estigate possibly to look into something like that. A plague and perhaps ~ome back to us with some type of information written on it that we could look ~t and see if it w~uld be a standard thing for all of our c~missions. 143 19 City Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 Councilman Boyt: The Planning Commission is, as far as time input of the people compared to the rest of the Commissions is by far the most time ' consuming and these gentlemen have been on it for quite some time ar~ have put in a signficant amount of effort. I really feel a little extra for the Planning Co~x~ission. Mayor Hamilton: I think if you would investigate that, it certainly is a reasonable thing to do. Councilman ~eving: We have one item to consider ourselves with. Tnere is another member on the Planning Commission who's appointment is coming up. I think we need to determine, first of all, whether or not we're going to make that reappointment to determine whether we have two positions to fill or three positions. Would that be appropriate? Mayor Hamilton: We have two resignations and then we have James Wildermuth who, his term has expired as of the first of the year so there actually are three positions available at the present time. Mr. Wildermuth has reapplied for his position and it was the recommendation of the Planning Commission that he be reappointed. Tnere were 20 other applicants, or 21 or 19 or whatever the number ended up being. The largest number that I can ever recall having to review for the appointment for to the Planning Commission or any commission. I suspect that some of the council members have gone through a great deal of analysis in trying to figure out who would be best suited for these positions, when in fact I suspose, with the exception of a couple of those who applied, we could put all the names in a hat and draw out three and we would have three very good commission members who would very fairly represent the city. What I have done is rather simply use the rules that we have followed in the past and that is to look at the distribution of the members on that commission geographically in the community and to also look at the backgrounds of each of the people who are on the Commission currently and those who have applied. Simply because I think it's best to have as many backgrounds as possible and a diverse group of backgrounds so we get as many different inputs into the decision making process as possible. I also think the entire community has a right to be represented on the Planning Commission since it's a commission that is appointed by the Council. So if we have that opportunity, I think we should take advantage of it. Consequently, out of all the people that, it's hard to select from, and I think all of them are really good. There's no question in my mind. The Planning Commission recommended appointment of a couple along with Mr. Wildermuth. I felt that not only were there some duplications of vocations but also locations. If you look at the current planning commission, we have Tim Erhart who is south of TH 5 in the eastern part of town. Ladd Conrad is north of Lotus Lake. Steve Emmings is on the north end of Lake Minnewashta. He's an Attorney. Ladd Conrad is a advertising and marketing person. Dave Headla is on western Lake Minnewashta so we've got kind of an umbrella there around the lake. He's retired and represents quite a large constituency of people. Jim Wildermuth is from the old part of Chanhassen and is in manufacturing. We had several people apply who are either in the real estate or development field which I think is something that's very important for a city to have on a planning commission. They were not the people selected by the Planning Commission but I think we'd be remiss if we didn't appoint at least one of them. Then we also had a 20 i.y Meeting - January , Oounci 1 11 1988 ~ ~'~so~ who was a private contractor who lives south of TH 5 in the western t. If you look at it geographically, I just tried to select people e~graphically again ar~ by their vocations. I guess it would be my e~omm~ation that we appoint James Wildermuth, Grant Johnson and Robert tharSOn to give us a very well rounded planning commission to hopefully ed the horizons and the scope that the Planning Commission has to deal To deal with land issues and there's no one on that Commission right t knows anything about land or deals with it other than Tim, which I ..~nk he gets involved in it sc~e. So that is my rec(mmlendation. .' .~ilman Geving: ~hat ~s your second one , _~tyor Hamilton: Jim Wildermuth to reappoint him. Then Grant Johnson and .'.~Oe. rt Peterson. Robert being a contractor and lives in the western part of i_~h~ community south of TH 5. Grant Johnsan is apparently a real estate person .~t~o lives up in the Murray Hill area. It's been a long time since we've had a .. a~.~/e~resentative from that area who's eve~ applied. So with that, let me ask , if we could go' around here ar~ get everybody's brief comments and see re we stand. ~qUncilman Johnson: I have to agree with you that primarily we could draw ~me names out of a hat. I've never -__-~n_ such a large group of highly ~u~lified people. Some of them even, you could say over qualified even. I .~pe, we can only name three people out of the 16 who applied that were ~nterviewed and I hope that the people who do not get selected continue to WOrk with this city in other capacities. There's going to be plenty of  o~unteer capabilities coming on with the city in the future and maybe we u~ht to keep some of these people in our back pockets. I~ going to sonally go with Annette Ellson and Brian'Batzli and Jim Wildermuth as my ee selections along with the Planning Commissioru We had ~ opportunity read the interviews, they had the opportunity to do the interview. There's ot of difference. I would like to go with the three people recommended by Planning Ccumission. ~u%cilman Boyt: I was here and sat in on the first evening of interviews for ~ Planning Commission. I was impressed with a few of those candidates that 9~ning and with the discussion the Planning Commission had after that ting. I understood they were going for ' _ _' ' · best qualified candidates regardless of location or occupation. I noticed t in their recommendations they only had I believe one person who rviewed that night, Mr. Prillaman so I take it by that, that these other candidates were even better. I think, as I've said all along in this, we're ~king a real mistake when we don't interview these people. We don't at least -[rfcerview the top ones for the opening plus one or two more to give us some ~ .l~xibility in this and also to establish some contact with those people. , I support the Planning Oommission. I think it's ~er.y important that we include Annette Ellson. She was their number two ,~1~.o. ice I believe she was the woman who had recently ~i~ished her MBA at St. ~'nomas. Brings an advertising background and appeared ~i be very impressive in the interview notes I read in terms of the questions m~ thoroughness she raised. I had a question about Mr. Wildermuth. In [o.~.' king at his attendance and seeing that it was below our required standard, 21 City Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 that troubles me. However, I'm aware he had, what I consider to be excellent reasons for being gone in March and April since he was temporarily assigned to Japan by his company making it very difficult to participate in our meetings. And I understand he missed the December meeting because of a broken leg. If I pull out those absences, his record appears to be reasonably good. I think it's very important that people who get on our commissions are committed to being there. I noticed that we have three of the people, Mr. Conrad, Mr. Emmings and Mr. Headla who have 90% attendance. That's what I think they should all shoot for. So given he had some good reasons for being gone, I assume he'll get his record up into the 90% category in the coming year, I would support him along with Annette Ellson. I had a question personally about Brian Batzli in that I remember vividly the Fox Hollow discussion about putting that road through in Fox Hollow Drive. I remember the night that was presented. There was no one from the neighborhood here to contest that going through and yet I see Mr. Batzli was apparently not happy with it going through. If he wasn't here that night, I'm wondering a bit about his commitment to the issue that he raised at the Planning Commission. However, having said all that, I support the Planning Co~%~ission's recommendations. Councilman Horn: I think there's one thing that we've missed when we talk about people representation here and I again support Annette Ellson in this case. I think it's important that we have a woman's point of view on our commission. My recommendation would be that we appoint Annette and Carol Watson along with Mr. Wildermuth. Councilman Geving: I did pretty much what Tom and the rest of you have done. I kind of like the geographics of where these people come from. For a long time we never had anyone from the Minnewashta area and now we've got two very good candidates there, people who are on the commission in fact. Ladd, representing his area and Tim. I was looking at Annette Ellson for example representing the Carver Beach area and that area and I felt that the statement's already been made but I really feel that we need to have a woman's point of view on the Planning Commission and all other commissions. I was always pleased when Pat Swenson and Carol Watson had a view that was entirely different than what I had thought of as a council member so I think that was important. In terms of Jim Wildermuth's reappointment, I was not aware of some of the information that was brought out tonight about his attendance. I was basing my particular opinion on the attendance. Now that I know a little bit more about that, I would tend to go back and review that again and say I would go with the Planning Commission recommendation to reappoint Jim. Also, with Mr. Batzli, I think I do remember a case where he did come in here. He is a recommended candidate representing the Fox Hollow area and I think we do need representation from those 100 homeowners in that area as well. I guess the problem that I have is in the procedure. The Planning Commission has an opportunity to look at all of these candidates and all we see is the paperwork and their recommendation. It's kind of had to fit a face with a person and there summary resume. I guess it would be kind of nice just to meet these people. The seven of them. The total number that were recommended to us just to be able to look at them. Get an idea of who they are and maybe a 2 or 3 minute statement from them as to why they want to be on the Planning Commission. I think that would be very important for us to look at. So the procedure is one thing that I have a little bit of problem with. I would say 22 i y Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 ~t we've got a number of really good candidates because there are people out ~h~re interested in our community. We're a growing community and for the ."i~st time, we've got a number of people that we are going to be able to draw ~ in the future. Eve~ though they might not get selected this time, there lr~ a few out there who I would like to see come back around like, I was very ~m~ressed with Mrs. Mancino. I think she would make a good Planning km~nission member. I don't know here. I only have read what I know about and have talked to several people who know her and she would have ~ my third r fourth candidate if we had a chance to .drop on it. In summary, I'm going :oi go with the Planning Commission's recommendations that we reappoint Jim ;i~dermuth and appoint Annette Ellson and Brian Batzli. : .~r Hamilton: I had talked with Todd Gerhardt and he had ~ to a session ~fl some kind where you talk about the ~ for various vocations and people go ~%rough different thought processes on commissions. Perhaps you could share ~me of that with us. .- ~]d Gerhardt: I'm taking a class right now at Mankato State and the City ~ager from Mankato asked the class what they thought would'be a good mix for ;ity Council or Commission. He went around the class, we thought that a good ..~i.~ would be somebody from all sides, professional, blue collar, white collar ~ a variety of different professions. .~er Hamilton: I guess it just points out and reinforces what I said. We an attorney on the Planning Commission now. We have an advertising ar~ ~aXketing person on the Planning Commission now and we're putting more of the ..~ame on there. Especially when you have an opportunity like this, to appoint .~ee people who come from different backgrounds. It doesn't really matter to if Annette Ellson has six degrees, I~n not convinced that that in itself ns that she's goirg to be any better decision maker than any of the other ple. The only comment I could agree with the rest of the group is, it ~r0bably would help to have a woman's point of view on the Planning ~m~mission. We ~ something on there to give a little different perspective t~ some of the decisions that are being made. You know how I feel and I think !s important that we try to build the Planning Commission up and have a Strong Plannirg Commission and I%m not sure that we're accomplishing that. I ~1~o would agree with what Bill was saying. I~ not sure how we accomplish pt. Perhaps the process isn't right. If we're going to interview these le and to do the appointment, perhaps the Planning Commission shouldn't be ~o.fng it. It shouldn't make any difference to those people who are remaining .~i the Planning Commission who they work with. They're going to have someone i work with and it shouldn't really make any difference who's there as it .$uldn't make a whole lot of difference to us as long as we feel we have the ~ight mix of people there to work with each other to give the perspective ~hat's ~ded. Maybe we do ~ to review that to see if maybe all the .~nterviews ought to be done here. · ~ouncilman Geving: I think the reason this has worked in the past is we've ~:~er had that many carz]idates Tom. We've had two car~idates for three ~ositions a lot of times so we just make the selection. The interview process ~s. very limited. .'[ i 23 City Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 Mayor Hamilton: It's either that or I think we should go the other way and not even see this and let the Planning Commission select who they want and let them go about and do their work but I think that the decisions and the recommendations that they need to make are too important for us not to have an opportunity to at least review the backgrounds of the people who are going on there to see if hopefully we will find some people who have backgrounds dealing with land and land development and planning and that type of thing. I see now that we're going to appoint some who have none of that background. Barbara Dacy: I think under procedure, this year was a little unusual. Besides the number of applicants, that second round of interviews unfortunately conflicted with the Council's trip to Las Vegas. In the December 7th packet we notified Council members of these interviews but unfortunately you were out of town. Maybe next year there will be three or four commission terms that will be up agairu Maybe the Council can again pursue a joint interview session. Mayor Hamilton: Yes, I guess that's a good idea and along with that, just trying to think what might work better than the current process we have and I understand there was some kind of a point system established with grading and so many points allocated. It seems like for all the Commissions, there ought to be established something that would, criteria that would be number one in all cases. If it's a Planning Commission person and they have development background or an independent business person, it would seem to me to be a very valuable thing to have that would lend good credance to them being on that commission. Maybe that should be number 1 or number 6 or someplace on there but there should be a list of items that are important to us to see in people being appointed to that which would be weighted somehow rather than just palling things out of the air and you meet a handfull of people and you say, well if we weight it this way we know we're going to get this person so let's go ahead and do that. You can get weight and change your number system any wa you want to accomplish anything you want. Councilman Boyt: You might accomplish what both of us want if the Council were to develop a weighting system and allow the commission to do the interviewing. I'd still like to have a shot at, if there are 3 openings, at the top 4 or 5 candidates. I think that adds s~me to the process. Mayor Hamilton: I'd like to see, Barb and Jo Ann perhaps come back to us with some rough idea or sketch or something about the possibility of doing that type of thing. Either the Council doing the interviewing and appointing and also coming up with the criteria that would be good to have and a weighting system on those so we could review that. That should probably be initially established in a combined meeting with the Planning Commission and the Council and then determine how we' 11 go about making appointments might be the best. Councilman Geving: Tom, I'd be surprised if Ladd and the Planning Commission didn't do something like that when they took this enormous number of people and broke it down into the final seven people that were recommended to us and then their final three. They must have done something like that. 24 ity Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 · . ~r Hamilton: That's possible but they didn't have the Council input is ~ Conrad. We probably had different criteria than what you people have and :~ think that criteria char~3es every time we interview a car~]idate deper~ing o~ /~e mix of people on the Planning Commission. ~nis time, it's the first time ;~'ve had choices. I don't recall a whole lot of choices over the last couple ~f years and this is almost like a luxury. Tree candidates that we presented ~.u, any one of them, in fact there are more, any one in this group, are )rdmably better than candidates that I've seen in the past. Tmey probably lon't have the Chanhassen knowledge that we've ~ in the past. They don't ~aue any burning issues that we've ~ in the past. Generalizing, but I '.~h~'..~k to a person that we ruled out immediately, they are willing to donate e. They feel it's their civic responsibility is part of living. We're lo~king, and I'm guiding a little as Chairman, we're looking for folks that .~isten and aren't up there pounding om the desk. We're really looking for . r~.ePle that will pay attention to what's happening and are fair minded and n't working for one particular issue but also can handle themselves ~gressively in making motions. Maybe we've ~ missing s~me of that. Those .things that's we're looking at and I think you may be looking at other ings too. To get a balance in our community. Location will do that. .~o~ation will recognize that western Chanhassen is not represented a whole Most folks recognize that we don't have any women on the Planning .~. aiSSiOn and I think we overly balanced the rating system for favoring a le candidate. I think we saw three real good female candidates. All are oing to contribute. In summarizing, I don't mind if the City Council nterviews car~tidates. I don't have a problem. I think it's just what do you ..~an. t to do type of situation. We can be impressed by selecting candidates ~hat look just like us as you can in selecting a candidate. I think what it ~eally came down to when it's up to people that are up for reappointment, it's rd to get down on your peers and I think it's really valid that peers, who e peers who are up for reappointment, come in here based on I don't know ~hat kind of a way of review so if they want to come in and talk to you, it is .~erribly difficult to say, Jim you're not coming so we don't want you around. .~n~mterv. think that type of scenario is valid. We talked about it on the Planning ission, we don't mind if you select or we select. Or we weed out and you Jew the final carz]idates. ~ayor Hamilton: I guess my personal choice was initially that, having seen .~1.1 of the Planning Ommmission members in operation, I've alwa~ felt that Jim ~;i-ldermuth, although he's a beck of a nice guy and I really like him ~eksonally, he's not very forceful and he doesn't speak up enougl~ When ~ou're going to do this type of thing, I think you do have to bang on the ~able once in a while and I guess I disagree with you, I want people who bang ~n the table and make themselves heard ar~] will say something and not be ~fraid to do it. Jim kind of holds back and often times doesn't say, I think, .What' s on his mind, unfortunately. .. -, $ouncilman Boyt: Following up on this ar~ realizing that we're making a .{~'o_ i.lnmitment to 8ome t:~ople here, I'd like to ~ a little bit of di~2ussion ~ut tl~ possibility of taking the Planning O:amission's top tl'u:ee :t · 25 .-~ ',~ City Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 recommendations, adding the other woman in their top group and Jim Wehrle and interviewing those, I believe that's five people on the 25th. I see one major problem h~re and that is that I'm not sure that the Planning Commission has a quor~ to meet with. You have three members. Mayor Hamilton: Four. Councilman Boyt: So if you can get Howie to show up you're covered, is that it? Ladd Conrad: If Jim can come in, we're okay. Councilman Boyt: Would that se~m fitting to the Planning Co~ission? Ladd Conrad: It could. Barbara, what are we doing next meeting? Barbara Dacy: Your agenda on the 20th, you have five items plus the transportation chapter of the ~ Plan. Mayor Hamilton: Didn't you have some items Barb that you specifically wanted the new m~bers to be there for? Barbara Dacy: Yes, there are five regular items and subdivision... Mayor Hamilton: Could any of those be put off or is this something that they all have to be done on the 20th? Barbara Dacy: If the Council meeting was held on the 25th, we could look to a week postponement on the 27th. The only drawback to that, that would give the new members a day to read the reports. Mayor Hamilton: That's not fair either. Councilman Horn: How about the possibility of appointing Mr. Wildermuth and Annette Ellson and we can interview for the final position. That way they will have a working group. We've got pretty much agreement I think on those people. Councilman Boyt: I would suggest that in our City Code the people who have just resigned, continue to serve until they are replaced. That's allowed for. That means Noziska, Siegel and Wildermuth would all be eligible and that's our seasoned verteran crew Let them make the decision and give us a little time to interview the top five candidates. Don Ashworth: I'm worried, even with five candidates, that it's very difficult to hold a 15 minute schedule on interview processes. We're talking about a regular agenda and I'm fearful that you're going to be into a wee hours of the morning if you try to do it on the same night. Councilman Boyt: Can't we do it on a Saturday or something? 26 '.~i.~y Cour~il Meeting - January 11, 1988 '~' Ashworth: You could do it a week from today, a Saturday, whatever you ~hbose. I'm just suggesting that a special would probably be better. Either .~t or start at 6:35 - 7:55. kmaTcilman Johnson: I think we're getting kind of, we've decided on a )rocess. We went for it and then at the eleventh hour now we're trying to ihange our process and do it slightly differently. We say we've got a whole k~ndful of car~idates that we could, each of them equally well will work out. believe I'm going to go and say we ought to get this over with, appoint ~se three people ar~ get on with business. I agree the process probably is ~ot. the best process we've could have done. I think with the large selection )fi people, we're going to have good, capable people doing the job. We can get [t over with and we can change the process on all the commissions, look at all ~e commissions and decide on a process. I don't think we should do that '.omight. Let's just get this over with and go on with business. ~.~ouncilman Johnson moved, Councilman Coving seconded to accept the Planning _~mission's recommendation to appoint Annette Ellson, Brian Batzli and Jim .~ildermuth to the Planning CommissioD, All voted in favor exce~ Mayor }{amilton who opposed and motion carried. r SIDERATION OF MISCELLANEOUS ITI~ FOR AMI~IIMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE. · ~a. yor Hamilton: I think it's all pretty clear and straight forward. We're not ~eciding o~ these things, it's just discussion right? ~bara Dacy: What staff would desire is direction from the Council either ~gree or disagree with the Planning Commission's recommendations on the eight · ~t~s so w~ could go through the public hearing process. ~tayor Hamilton: Gkay, the first one is the 155 foot lot depth. The i~Ommission agreed that the lot depth should be reduced to 125 feet. What's .lhmgic about 1257 : ~arbara Dacy: The 125 requirement was what was originally proposed in the ~ntial discussions of the Zoning Ordinance ar~ was increased during review. O~er the past year we've had a number of variance requests to the 155 foot lot ~e~th requirement so the Commission asked that we go back and relook at that .~quirement and based on information from other communities plus a look at .~arious subdivisions, the Commission agreed that the most important k~quirements are the lot area requirements and the lot width requirements and ~ lot depth requirements was not as important. The advantage of the reduced ~qpth is that it w~uld allow design flexibility for subdivisions. ., O~uncilman Boyt: I disagree. We've got Shadowmere, Saddlebrook, Currey Farms, Kurver, they've all conformed with us. I think that the Planning ~x~mmission made the comment, although it currently didn't carry the day, that ~dlis hasn't been on the books very long. That we have plenty of examples of :~soPle being able to live with it and hardly enough time to throw it out. I '~hink that it's very important when we design, when people design layouts of · ~operty, that there be distance between them and their neighbors. Most homes · 27 City Oouncil Meeting - January 11, 1988 have the windows on the front and back of their home and that's where we the greatest distance. We have a setback from the road capability and we need distance from the neighbor who's going to be behind them. 150 feet gives them 25 more feet of distance. Councilman Horn: Just to respond to that, I think you're assuming architectural styles and I think that's the idea of this is to allow some architectural flexibility. You're assuming a traditional house with a front yard and back yard. Some housing has the windows on the sides and I think depending on the type of style used on a particular lot, this gives you some flexibility on doing that. I agree with the concept of having space between. I think that's why we have density. I think this gives people more flexibility. Councilman Johnson: Tae only comment is we've got a 30 foot rearyard setback which means they can put on a 125 foot lot, they can put it at 95 feet back so they only have 30 feet in their backyard but at 150, it doesn't necessarily guarantee anything more. The 30 feet is the only thing that guarantees it. I wouldn't want anything m~aller than 125. Mayor Hamilton: So you're 60 feet away from the neighbors. Councilman Johnson: 30 in the front and 30 in the rear. Yes, there's 60. Minimum, the closest they will ever be is 60 foot to their neighbor. I don't see 125 as that bad of a problem. They'll have to have an awfully wide lot to get the 15,000 at 125. Mayor Hamilton: I guess I've never been afraid to see my neighbors. I don't think 125 is bad. They're just people. Barbara Dacy: The only comment I was going to give was, with the required 90 feet of frontage, by necessity to get to the 15,000 square foot area, you're going to have to end up with 167 feet of lot depth anyway. Having a shorter lot depth, again just allows some flexibility in those cases that you still receive a minimum amount of lot depth, or reasonable amount of lot depth but we're going to have to make up for that in the lot width. So again the lot area and the lot width are probably the most important as far as maintaining separation frc~n side to side. Mayor Hamilton: I'll just poll each of us on these items so that will probably give them an idea of how we all feel. Just to give us a yea or nay. Councilman Boyt: I'm against the Planning Commission rec~endation. Mayor Hamilton: SO that's a nay, correct? Councilman Boyt: I gather. Councilman Horn: Yea. Councilman Geving: Yea. 28 .~ity Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 buncilman Johnson: Yea. ~yor Hamilton: And I'm yea. The next one is the barbed wire fence. Barbed ~ire fences and fences in general. I just had one questioru How about a fence with a barbed wire at the top? ~o Ann Olsen: That is prohibited right now to commercial buildings. You exposed an't have the barbed wire... ~yor Hamilton: You can't have the barbed wire fence on top? eeUncilman Johnson: You can't have a 6 foot tall fence with two additional t of barbed wire? ~ouncilman Geving: Don't we have that over at Hanus' where we've got the flat ..~ayor Hamilton: I think so. · :. ~ouncilman Boyt: They ought to take it down. ~o Ann Olsen: Tais again is in the residential. The industrial and commercial ~t's a conditional use permit. : ~ouncilman Johnson: They can have that in those with a conditional use ~_rmit? I know there are certain government regulations for certain types of information to be secured behind certain items that we may end up having to do ~hat at some building. : : ~ayor Hamilton: You are yea or nay? .. (~ouncilman Johnson: Yea. Nayor Hamilton: Yea. (~ouncilman Geving: Yea. -. ~ouncilman Horn: Yea. uncilman Boyt: Yea. ~ayor Hamilton: The next one is accessory buildings not to exceed 1,000 feet. ~ouncilman Boyt: I think that we need some. sort of sliding scale here. With ~he 5 foot rear lot setback, which is I think what we have now for accessory ~uildings, the prospects of an 800 or 1,000 square foot buildir~, 5 feet back ~rightening. I would suggest that we have something along the lines of 5 foot .~etback for up to something like 200 square feet which would be a small garage. Maybe 10 feet for something foot setback or something between that ~r~ some larger size and 30 feet for 800 feet in building. 29 City Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 Mayor Hamilton: I think this is a maximum. That's what you're saying isn't it Barb and Jo Ann? This is a max so each one is going to have to be looked at on it's own merit. Aren't they conditional uses anyway?. Jo Ann Olsen: No. Mayor Hamilton: So then each one on each piece of property is going to be looked at though, whether or not it's... Councilman Boyt: No. Councilman Johnson: It's permitted use. Jo Ann Olsen: It also has that 30% of the area... Mayor Hamilton: How would you address Bill's concern then? Jo Ann Olsen: Are you talking the sliding setback? Councilman Boyt: I'm saying that if you have a certain size outbuilding, that can be within 5 feet. If you have a larger outbuilding, you need to be further away from that end lot line. At 30 feet, which is our existing depth for a house, I would think an outbuilding could be 800 feet or 1,000 feet or whatever but we shouldn't allow a large outbuilding that's any closer than we would allow a house to be of comparable size. Barbara Dacy: I think an opportunity that we could investigate would be looking at typical size, I guess what I would call a Sears Tool Building and get just a rough idea of what the smaller ones are versus a larger garage type and potentially propose something to the Planning Commission for consideration. Anything smaller than 500 square feet, it shall be set back 5 feet from the lot line, is that what you're saying? Councilman Boyt: No, I'm saying if it's smaller than 20 by 10, I don't know that that's magic, I think you're going to find whatever this outbuildings are and a small one of those should be 5 feet and as they get larger they should be further back. Barbara Dacy: Tne only caveat to that is just trying to make sure that a number that is fairly consistent otherwise you could be getting a number of variance requests with 350 versus 300 and at 4 feet instead of 5 feet. So one drawback of the zoning regulation is trying to make sure that what we're regulating is actually what's out there. Councilman Boyt: That's where your hc~nework will help us. Councilman Geving: I think 1,000 square feet is large. That's a big building for residential outbuilding. Mayor Hamilton: I would guess there probably aren't any. 30 ~ity Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 ] '55 ~ouncilman Geving: There might be some but I think 1,800 is way too large. tl's got a farm, maybe he knows. tl Klingelhutz: I know there are several of them that have 1,280 on 2 1/2 Lcre lots but you'll never see 880 on a 15,808 square foot lot. ~uncilman Geving: Staff recommended 800. 2ouncil~ Horn: I think too you get into, to umderstand what Bill was getting ~t, I think if you start getting into something like that, the administration ~)f it becomes very tough ar~ very confusing to know whether they're conforming .~o it or not. The other thing which might even be a bigger issue than this, i~%at we'll be addressing later, is the architectural style. If you have one ~f these Sears metal buildings, if I were a neighbor I'd object to that 10 .~eet away from my lot line a lot more than I would object to a 10 by 10 wooden tructure of some type that blended in so I don't know that the distance is total criteria here. I think what we're trying to get at is something t won't be obnoxious to the neighbor. ~nis only addresses o~e potential i~ssue and that can get even stickier. '~yor Hamilton: Let's leave this one until staff can bring it hack. : ~arbara Dacy: You would want us to pursue looking at the graduated scale? ~ayor Hamilton: Right, and then bring it back. ,. '~ouncilman Horn: Amd I think look at other criteria relating to how obnoxious '~t may be in the architectural styling. ..~ i' ~ayor Hamilton: The next iten is treated wood. Yea or nay? ~uncilman Johnson: I agree with the Cxxmaission. ~uncilman Geving: I agree. · '.~m/nci~ Horn: Yea. ~)unci lman Boyt: I 'm okay with that. - ~ayor Hamilton: Yes, that' s five. knateur radio towers. ~f~uncilman Boyt: I have a note here that says two towers, one dish. I think ~that given some of the concerns that we've had earlier, some of the people who -~anted these antennas, that two might very well be reasonable. I think what the Planning Commission was suggesting was one? We had a fellow who was in here in the last year who talked about how very inconvenient it was and how it :~ould limit his use. If there's one there, is two that much worse? .: ~ouncilman Horn: We're talking permitted use. They can still c~me in under .~he conditional use. . - .i. 31 . : City Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 Mayor Hamilton: Plus, according to the FCC, can we limit to one? I'm not sure that w~ even have the right to control. Roger Knutson: The regulations are not tremendously clear. After some analysis of it, I think we have a good argument that we can regulate the number as long as we give them reasonable use of the airways. We've asked them about it, I guess Jo Ann asked them about it, and they will not give you a definitive answer. Mayor Hamilton: Clark, yea or nay or cora~ents? Councilman Horn: I agree with one. Councilman Geving: I agree with one. Councilman Johnson: I'll agree with one. Mayor Hamilton: I was wondering if you could clarifyyour wording here a little bit or maybe that will get worked over but it wasn't clear to me that it was just one per household in all residential areas. It almost seemed like you were saying one house in one residential area could have an antenna. I'm okay with one. Councilman Johnson: If you have a radio tower, can you have multiple antennas on that tower? Councilman Boyt: Oh yes. Councilman Horn: It's just massed right? Councilman Johnson: Because the back end of the section says, or one individual antenna in all residential districts. Jo Ann Olsen: You can have a tower with individual antennas throughout the large tower. Barbara Dacy: One point of clarification, would the Council also want the dishes? That's one per lot also. Councilman Geving: Let's go with one. Mayor Hamilton: The next item is the demolition debris disposal. Jay, any comnents on this one yea or nay?. Councilman Johnson: I'm totally for it. Councilman Gev ing: Yea. Councilman Horn: Yea. Councilman Boyt: What' s point 2 mean? 32 ~ty Council Meeting - January 11, 19BB ., k)uncilman Johnson: There's a typo in there. It should read from the lowest .~levation of ~ lar~fill, if I rom~ ~h~ St:~ ro:julation8 corrocq:ly. ;nstead of the lowest high water elevation. In other words, the bottom of the lobris landfill should I:~ 5 foc~q: ~m:~0'e ~ wateJ: t~le. 2ouncilman Boyt: Okay, then I'm assuming that when they're burying this it's ~low the frost level. I see nothing that indicates that in here. '~ouncilman~ Johnson: I thought there was a minimum cover in this State. ~e_re .~s a 4 foot cover required. 2 foot cover? ; , i~ouncilman Boyt: It P~s to be below the frost level. '.~ayor Hamilton: Why? ~ . [Counczlman Boyt: Because eventually you'll see it on top of the grour~ if {it's not below the frost level. It se~ms like a simple thing to add. iMayor Hamilton: I disagree. When you do berming, one of the best things to · ~do in bermirg to make the berms work and to make the trees that you plant on i!'berms grow, is to bury some debris in there. Specifically boards, because ;that retains water. Otherwise, your trees are all going to die. You can ask .!.builders and developers, they all say the same thing. You can require them to iiput all the berm and all the trees and when they get done, the trees will all -'~be dead because it does not retain water. !Councilman Boyt: I don't know exactly how a frost heave works on a berm but 'when you take a flat piece of ground and you put something above the frostine, eventually it works out to the ground level. Just go and pick up rocks in the 'i field in the springtime. 'Mayor Hamilton: I think boards and things are going to decay. I don't know "if concrete would work it's wa up. I suppose like a rock. :. Councilman Johnson: Concrete will work it's way back up. .: ~ Councilman Boyt: We're talking 2 feet deeper her~ It would seem to me, -' given what they're going to use to bury this stuff, that another 2 feet that · keeps it below the ground is worth the effort to do that. · ii Mayor Hamilton: I don't have a problem with that as long as we put in a section that says when you're berming, tl~re allowed to put some demolition ! debris, or however we want to term it, in the berm to make the berm liveable for the trees. · · ' Councilman Geving: As long as the debris can decay. : .: Mayor Hamilton: So could you bring that one back to us too. I think we're all in favor, it just ~s to have a few adjustments. ~he next one was the ' architectural exterior standards. : Councilman Boyt: No comnent. Yea. : .- .. 33 City Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 Councilman Horn: Yea. Councilman Geving: Yea. Councilman Johnson: Yea. Mayor Hamilton: I'm okay with it as long as it states here, the provision eliminates the construction of metal buildings, pole barns and encourages a better appearance and we don't start getting into the architectural exterior design of homes and other things we don't need to have anything to do with. The next one is lot width requirement for cul-de-sacs and flag lots. councilman Johnson: There are some occasions where I am for some flag lots and we've got some very unique circumstances here. The Centex circumstances would be a couple of lots nestled in behind the pond, the wetland and the top of the hill there. I sometimes see that the flag lot used in very small moderation, I'm not sure if it should be totally permitted but I don't think it should be totally excluded. I guess in the cases I've seen and have been able to justify in my mind enough of a hardship that, I guess here they say have a hardship. The first part of it sounds real strict. It should not be permitted and I'm personally for permitting a flag lot under shown hardship. It has to be a topographical reason for it. The reason can't be to save concrete and put in smaller streets and be able to put a whole bunch of houses out back with only having one circle. ~hat's not a hardship. Tnat's my comment there. councilman Geving: I agree. I think the only thing we need to do here is change the wording a little bit on the line here. Flag lots shall not be permitted unless there is a hardship that exists and I think that's fine, so I agree. Councilman Horn: I agree. I think flag lots should stay in. councilman Boyt: I liked Option 3 on page 7. It leaves some things to be worked out about arc length but I think what we've done in fact is to approve homes that have a 90 foot width at their building setback line. We've done that all year, so that would be the option that I would support. Mayor Hamilton: Personally, I think there are instances where flaglots are necessary and so long as we can still handle that issue, I'm comfortable with it. Is that all you need? COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: councilman Geving: I think Todd should handle the zip code issue. You're more familiar with it and you're ready to give us some information. Todd Gerhardt: Don and I have been working with getting all the people outside the Chanhassen zip code district and have come up with 934 addresses. I've given Dale a copy of those. What I'd like to do is go through here, I briefly printed it tonight and I'd like to make some corrections and we will mail that out to you, the Councilmembers tomorrow. You have a meeting here 34 ~ity Oouncil Meeting - January 11, 1988 ~xt week on the 14th with the Minnewashta Creek Association that lives up by Fire Station. Roy Leach is a hom~er in the Red Cedar Point Townhomes that is at 3:00 on Sunday, the 17th. ~ouncilman Geving: The only thing I'd like to request is that there be some x~ncil members at the meeting on the 14th at the Minnewashta Creek ~sociation, and specifically Jim. I'd like to have you ther~ You had some ~ery good insight on some of the public safety issues and Al, could you make it on tht 14th? That's an evening meeting at what time? ~dd Gerhardt: On the 14th at 7:00 at the Mi ewashta Fire Station. ~1 Klingelhutz: I'll sure try to make it. ~ouncilman Geving: Tnis is a real important area to hit and I don't know who ~ president of that homeowners association is. I haven't met ~. ~dd Gerhardt: I know it's the daughter-in-law of Mr. Brose. ~ouncilman Geving: Then Todd, you're going to hand out to all the people who ~ttended our first meeting, the postcards and mailing address, name, address ~nd mailing address. ~ Gerhardt: That will go out with tomorrow's mail, and I've also drafted, ~lay recommended at our last meeting to establish a telephone log. You would ~bone people and what you would do is date it, time it, name and address of own Person you talked to and write down 'their yes/no vote and then again write who the caller was. '? ~unci~an Geving: Can you send out one of those in each of the packets because we're going to have people that we'll be telelphoning. One of the ~roblems that I have with the groups, I thought we had a really good meeting the last time we met with, there were several councilmembers there, Tom was ~here, we're fairly well organized in the south. I think the Chaska area ~e've got fairly well covered with personnel making a lot of personal ~m~ni~ents and going out and knocking on doors and so forth. Ign not as .. ~vinced that we've got that good of a team arrargement with the northern ~rea. I guess that's what w~ ~ to strengthen on. ~ Gerhardt: From our conversation, we wanted to try and establish another ~eeting time here within this week to try and get that group together and the {marne type of situation we did with Chaska. Get them motivated to go out and 'Solicit votes. ; ; ¢xamcilman Geving: ~hat day would that be on Todd? .; .i~dd Gerhardt: Anytime during the week. The 13th would be a good one. . ~ouncilman Geving: I'd sure like to have the councilmembers attend that if -tt~y could. What time would you set it up for? ~]d Gerhardt: It sounds like around 6:30 is the best time. City Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 Councilman Geving: Let's plan 6:30 on Wednesday evening to try and organize our Excelsior area. We hope to have 5 or 6 people. It's going to be tough. This is a tough Sale. I'll admit that to anyone but we have to really work at it. If we're going to go for it, we.have to go for it all. Mayor Hamilton: Have you considered talking to the Rotary and the Chamber? Councilman Geving: You know we haven't and I think that's a good idea. Mayor Hamilton: The Rotary meets every Wednesday morning. The Chamber meets the 26th this month. Councilman Geving: Let's see if we can't get on the Chamber agenda Todd. I think that's a good idea. Jim, would you make that presentation if you can get on the schedule? Jim Chaffee: Sure. Todd Gerhardt: We're going to go for a public hearing on the 19th of January. Surveys are going out on the 20th. I'm expecting their return, everybody to return their survey by January 29th and then after the 29th there will be a second survey to hit our 70% response rate if we didn't hit our 70% by the first survey, and that will be a phone survey. Then we'll bring our committees into City Hall to go through a phone survey and I'll have a list of phone numbers. Then from there, on February 13th, I will be tabulating' results from the survey. We will have a presentation to the Post Office by the 14th of February. Councilman Geving: The 14th is on a Sunday, so you mean the following week, like the 15th? Todd Gerhardt: Sure. Councilman Boyt: Didn't I hear something about a February meeting with the Council and staff? What weekend was that? Todd Gerhardt: The 6th and the 7th. Here's a copy of the preliminary agenda for that meeting. Mayor Hamilton: You had a con~m~nications comment also. Councilman Geving: This here is just an informal comment. I don't want to sound like I'm gripping or complaining about a lot of things but one of the things that we're hearing a lot of at the homeowner's meetings, I've been to several of them now over the Christmas holidays we had several meetings, and there's a lot of communications going on in the community. There's a lot of discussion about what's happening downtown and a lot of people think that some of the things we've done with the streets are not real wise. What's happened with our planned community park, the Heritage Park is causing a lot of interesting concerns and comments. Of course, I think a lot of people are jumping to conclusions. ~ney're not seeing the end product and they can't visualize the end product but my comment is specifically the removal of the 36 ~.ity (~ouncil Meeting - January 11, 1988 .. : .~treet signs, the stop sign and the yield sign approximately a week ago. I ~ an tell you honestly that I almost had an accident that day that the street igns were pulled. I pulled up in front of Kenny'S at .78th Street ar~ a car ,hizzed by me and I looked and I said, gee-that car didn't stop. Pretty soon car from the left and that car didn't stop and the bus was sitting to the eft of me in front of St. Hubert's and I couldn't see around that bus ar~ here was another car coming. ~nat's when I realized that the stop signs had een pulled. I've heard a lot of discussion about maybe we could have done hat a little bit better and phased it in over a several week period of time. 'ye got a letter here, in fact several letters that I've received, since iQ're on the correspondence trail of this. I have not seen the response to ~amily of fl~rist Lutheran Church. This is a letter dated Decomher 31st to Don ~nd Todd. One of the things that we're failing to do, is to effectively do ~ ome correspondence return. I know that you've called them but I think they ~ ave some concerns that t~ would like put in a newslettex or a bulletin so ~ff~ey can show it to their parrishers about what's going to happen there in ~ront of the church. The stop signs and no parking signs so I think our ~orrespondence control could he a little bit better. Then I received a letter ttey, and I'll share it with you. I won't mention any names however but this r was sent to the City Hall on November 4th and the individual hadn't l~ceived a response of any kind. Finally, he called me several times and I ~aid talk to the City Manager, so he finally did. His comment that came back me was, attached is a copy of the letter our Attorney sent to Don on ember 4th. I talked to the Manager yesterday and he said he misplaced the ?tter so we have not received an answer yet. Now that's two months ago. '.~his is a very important letter because it's from the developer who says in .~act, I want to buy all the land on 79th Street and make a development out of ~t and I want to pay cash. Ten years ago, if we had 9otten a letter like ~lhis, we would have walked down there ar~ graced the .fellow ar~ said, let's go .~.ith it. Give us your money and you can start building, but I can't ~nderstand why we haven't responded to a letter that I think is very important ~hat was received two months ago. So again, I think it's just a matter of ~g~munications and correspondence. Maybe we need to set up a correspondence ..~ontrol mechanism of some sort so we do respond to these. These are the only ~wo that I have but I think I had two letters from Pastor Nate and this one '.~hat I received today. · · ~kxld Gerhardt: I did respond to Mr. Zamour's letter. I did call him. Don ""i~egalled him and he did send a letter hack thanking both Don and myself for sponding to his concerns and we will be getting back to him as soon as we  r back from MnDot on the situation of 'the no parking signs on West 79th eet. .. ,i. ~ouncilman Geving: I think too, even a Stratavarias can be fine tuned. What ~ see at the intersection of our new downtown street as we come west in front ~.f the bar there, Pony Express, people are turning left. It just seems like ~here should be more from an e~gineering standpoint that could be done there. ~aybe we ~ to put another island iD, In fact, I looked at it again ~_esterday, the people they way they've ~ driving now over the last several ~eeks, have almost outlined a physical ar~ visible island there now. ~ne wa ~hey're turning and the way they're forcing themselves to turru I would ..z~ally like to suggest to the staff to take another look at that or give us : · -. 37 F. City Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 some input as to what's going to happen there. To my knowledge we've not had any accidents there but there might have been. There has been Jim? I can see some real potentials for problems there so maybe, if you will, if I could just spend a couple minutes more on this. I'd like to have the staff look at this and maybe come back to us again about some improvements that could be done to fine tune that area. Gary Warren: We are, what I would call under temporary construction and again, with signage and some of those things that do help in that regard. That particular intersection did have a small median proposed in the original plan that you actually asked us to eliminate. I personally have not set my own mind that it shouldn't be there. It's specifically to address that turning movement. Gary Ehret and I have talked several times, as recently as today, about that whole intersection and what we want as a final design there so we certainly are not satisfied yet ourselves. Mayor Hamilton: Just to respond to some of those, all of your concerns I guess. Those are the types of concerns I don't like to wait for a council meeting to bring up and I was just as concerned as you are and the other council members. I talked with Don at some length and with Jim about the stop signs and about how that whole thing occurred because I wasn't satisfied that it was done the way it should have been done. There were other ways to accomplish that without having cars piling into each other all of a sudden because the signs were done, so I think the staff knows my frustration and I think that type of thing won't happen again, hopefully, anyway. Larry Zamour has bcc~n responded to. I talked to Larry several times about that property. I've talked to Don about his proposal and I've talked to Larry about his proposal and he knows very well where the City stands. Larry is a nice guy but he likes to stick a thorn underneath your saddle every once in a while just to find out what goes on but he knows exactly where the City stands on that at this point. Tnat doesn't mean that won't change. We have some options coming up that Larry is aware of and he knows what process has to be followed so he's the kind of guy if he doesn't get the answer he wants from one person, he'll keep going on to someone else until he finds the answer he wants or thinks he's going to get. Councilman Geving: But has he received a letter in response to his inquiry on November 4th? Mayor Hamilton: That I don't know. What I'm saying is he knows the answer to his question very well. I've talked to him several times and Don has also. Then the Family of Christ Church, Don and I talked at some length about that and talked about the options that we could make available to Family of Christ. Such things as on the morning of their service, could they have temporary stop signs put out in the street. Could they have a patrol like a school patrol type of thing where they have a person out there to hold a flag so their parrishers can cross the street more safely. Striping of the intersections, very clearly, that's what we've done in the past. We need to have a good professional job done of striping the intersection. Just a lot of options like that. I know Don has passed those onto the staff and they're considering it so I'm sure you'll be seeing some recommendations back on that soon. Just so you know I do try to keep up on those things because I think they're 38 163 ~ity Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 Important.I try toto Don or on things. talk staff all time ~ouncilman Horn: I guess my frustration is not so much with staff on this .ssue as it is with who I consider to be our hired consultants who suppo~ly ,re putting the plan together for us. I don't think' we're getting our money's · )rth o Dn Ashworth: We do have BRW coming in right now. ~hey are scheduled for the !5th. Every issue that you've brought out this evening, they have ~ made re of as far as issues which we ~ to have answers to and I'm confident t on the 25th they will respor~ to each of the issues such as the striping &cross the street. ~e pulling of the stop sign, I consider that an error. '~na was the State Highway Department dropped off a listing to us saying that is to be removed. Yes we should have caught it. It could or should ~ handled better than it was but they will be here on the 25th. ~ouncilman Horn: BRW was at the HRA meeting ar~ all of these issues were ..i~~gressed at the HRA meeting. BRW was aware that MnDot was requesting that n be put down. They knew it was coming. They could have instructed our ff as to the proper procedure when it came down. We grilled them. I asked ~hem specifically, would you consider having a hotline for citizens of- nhassen to deal with the calls that we're getting and they didn't think t was such a good idea. I think all of these things that we've talked ~bout tonight, were addressed to BRW at the HRA meeting. I frankly was not ~omfortable with the answers we got. I don't think that it's our staff's  nction to try to section together all the things that our professional nsultant should be doing. : ~ Ashworth: I don't think he had the answers that evening though. Some of ~ answers could have come fr~m the State. The number of no parking signs .~hat we can eliminate by the church to meet Nate's questions, is a question ~at has to be responded to by the State Highway Department. Whether we can .~ut the median in, and I totally agree with you Dale. I've driven that '~ntersection. I look and say there really should be a median there to define ~e left turn lane. That was MnDot's desigru I think that they heard what ~he HRA was sayirg that night. I believe that Gary Ehret will be in a ~osition to respond to those questions on the 25th. . ~ayor Hamilton: Next is hunting and shooting zones. Bill, you wanted to (x~ment on that. ~ouncilman Boyt: We had a couple of letters in our administrative packet on ~ problems around Hesse Farm. I think we've talked about this a month or so ~go and I would like to ~ on a future agenda the position that we would ~stablish no hunting, no shooting zones around Hesse Farms and other zesidential areas in Chanhassen. ~ Ashworth: I believe that modifications are already underway by B~ger's ~ffice and he'll be prepared to have that on for the 25th. Jim Chaffee: I haven't talked to R~er ~t. I was waiting to got 8ome ~eedback from the Council but I don't think I see any problem with that. All :- ~ 39 City Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 we're talking about is designating the no shooting zones that are already designated as no hunting zones. Don Ashworth: Right, that will be on the 25th. It'S solely a sematic issue. A definition problem and Roger can have that prepared for the 25th. ADMINSTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: a. Enforcement Action Plan. b. Light Rail Transit. c. Highwa~-~"U~rade, Private/Public Partnerships. d-~ League o7 Minnesota Cities 1988 Legislative Conference. Barbara Dacy: On item a, there will be more information coming back to the council on the agenda and there's a brief memo in the Admin Section... Item b, that was brought to your attention to follow up on that whole Light Rail Transit process. I had the County Commissioner explain it and any of the Council who have specific questions about the memorandum or about the process... Councilman Johnson: Mine goes almost more to A1 in that the southern route primarily goes through the city of Chanhassen for a large portion of the route and I see that the County Commissioners have named themselves as the Carver County Rail Authority for acquiring that land. A1 Klingelhutz: I guess that's one of the reasons, I saw this on the agenda for tonight and I did want to talk about it a little bit. We are preparing at this time to acquire that right-of-way through Chanhassen into Chaska. We feel that it's a very good corridor. Especially for Chaska and southern Chanhassen to utilize for Light Rail Transit .... to acquire land all the way out to Norwood that would make an excellent two land addition to TH 5. It lays side by side all the way out and it just would be something that if we present it to the State at this time and say, we've got the corridor for you to put in four lanes all the way to Norwood. Councilman Johnson: I'm wondering if there's any possibility of getting some Chanhassen representation on the Rail Authority. Councilman (~eving: Right there. A1 Klingelhutz: If the thing ever materializes, we will set up a committee of people in the areas that it affects the most and I think that's pretty important. One other thing, the Excelsior/Victoria line will probably be first along that to be reserved. That does not affect Chanhassen. I think it's most important to designate these lines as future rapid transit because I understand we've been getting a lot of feedback right now protesting the new rapid transit line on that corridor. Councilman Geving: Someone apparently has attended s~me of these meetings. 40 ~ity Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 mrbara Dacy: I just attended one and that was on December 14th and that was public hearing conducted by the Southwest Advisory Co~mit~. Ouncilman Geving: I guess what I'd like to see if that you continue to do bat. ~ayor Hamilton: Or that we ask someone on the Council or Planning Oommission ~o if you can't make it or Jo Ann. ~rbara Dacy: Mike Krause was on the Southwest Advisory Committee process. .~ey're process has now concluded. Now the remaining corridor committees of /%e other 6 or 7 corridors are still finishing up and with there's another ~inance committee... It's just a matter of finishing up the process and the ~ard will make a decision near the end of March. ~yor Hamilton: Next it~n, High~ay 5. uncilman Horn: I think Barb put a fairly complete statement of where we · A1 mentioned one of the meetings that's coming up. What's happening e and thought we should talk about as a Council, is that we're-furthering ~ur process with the city contributing to try and make things happeD, What ~e're trying to do is accelerate the schedule for widening TH 5 to move it out oTH 41 before 199L In fact, 1990 and we think there are ways that can be ne. The meeting that A1 was talking about is to work with the private .~eCtor to raise some funds to contribute to this. What we, as a Council r_~ .'.~o address is we're going to be looking at the public contribution to this ~ffort also. I would think that our contribution would be arranged as Barb ribed here and I'll get more detailed on that. In fact there's another ition meeting on Wednesday. What I would like to get this evening is some of consensus on going along with this concept. I feel that we are ~inally making some progress on this issue and as a matter of fact, we do have ~ meeting schedule with Governor Perpich on February 2nd. ' It's the first time n'S agreed to talk with the Coalition. That's something we've ~ working for a number of months now ar~ it's finally happened, which in my mind is .~ust another small indication that we as a coalition are beginning to be heard ~nd make some effort in this thing. Which in my mind helps me justify spending some of our money to try to include the progress of TH 5. It's ~)mething that's frustrating because you can't clearly see that our efforts .~ill be rewarded. On the other hand, I~ totally convinced that if we don't .~o something like this, we're absolutely guaranteeing ourselves that nothing .~ill happen. ._ ~ouncilman Johnson: I think this, I almost want to use bribery or whatever, .~his payment we're looking to make to MnDot, is a fairly new thing ar~ will .Work at this point in time. Five years from now, this will be so commonplace ~hat you're going to be required to pitch in to be on the regular schedule Instead of on the accelerated schedule, so I'm for doing it at this time. I fhink we're on the leading edge of s(~mething that I think is not real good ~recedent in the first place but it will be to the benefit of our citizens. ~ 5 has to have something done to it. .. ; ., City Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 Councilman Geving: Clark, you mentioned TH 41. This is the first time I've heard anyone say anything beyond CR 17. Were you correct in your statement? Councilman Horn: That's what we're shooting for. Mayor Hamilton: Then the League of Minnesota Cities 1988 Legislative Conference. If anybody is interested in going, I'm sure the staff would like to know so we can make reservations. Anybody is welcome to go to the conference if you wish. What we've done in past years, which we didn't do last year, there is a cocktail party after the day's sessions are over, there is a cocktail party at one of the hotels and we have usually gone. The legislators do show up but sometimes during that time you have opportunities to discuss any issue you want with your legislator and meeting other people from other communities if you wish to talk to them about what's happening. Then we have with other communities in our legislative district, taken legislators out for dinner so we could on a more serious basis and more personal basis talk to them more one on one or ten on one. If that's something the Council is interested in attempting to do again this year, I think it's a good idea. The legislators like it. They do like to get to know who's on the Council and get to meet you personally and find out a little bit more about each one of us and it's good to find out more about them. From my standpoint I am in favor of attempting to do that again this year. Don, if we can put together with the other communities, if they're interested in joining us, or if they're not, we'll do it on our own. Councilman Geving: I think there was some confusion last year Tom. We didn't get together with the people we thought we were going to. Councilman Horn: I think what happen is that Shakopee was involved last year. Typically they're the ones who have strong supporters along with us... Mayor Hamilton: They have three new council people this year so they may be wanting to do something. I have just two brief announcements to tell you about. You received a letter from Roger, actually from Tim Berg but from Roger's firm, about what's happening downtown. I would suggest that if you have any questions about things that are taking place, that you talk to Roger. These are all things that have been approved but if you have any questions about the process that's going on, grab Roger and find out what's happening. Then on a personal basis, just so you can all sleep easier from now on, I want you to know that I no longer am affiliated with Brad Johnson or Lotus or CHADDA or Bloomberg or anybody else having to do with that whole thing. I'm with Realty World/Streeter Andrus. They have nothing to do with the downtown. Councilman Geving moved, Councilman Horn seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10:05 p.m.. Sutznitted by Don Ashworth City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim 42