1986 08 18
1, C?
, t -""~ 1\
......-- ~-- -.
I
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
AUGUST 18, 1986
Mayor Hamilton called the meeting to order. '!he meeting was opened with the
Pledge to the Flag.
Members Present:
Counc i lman Horn, Counc il wanan Swenson, Counc i lman Gev ing
Manbers Absent:
Councilwoman Watson
Staff Present:
Don Ashworth, Bill Monk, Barbara Dacy, Todd Gerhardt
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Mayor Hamil ton moved, Councilman Geving seconded to
approve the agenda as presented with the following additions. Councilman Horn
asked for a quick update at the end of the Sterling Estates Beach lot.
Councilwoman Swenson asked to discuss Bluff Creek Drive and South Lotus Lake
Park. All voted in favor and motion carried.
I
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Geving moved, Councilman Horn seconded to approve
the follow ing consent agenda items p.1rsuant to the Ci ty Manager's
recommendations:
a. Resolution #86-58: Approve Resolution Concerning Completion of 201
program Community Systems.
b. Resolution #86-59: Approve Resolution Increasing Sanitary Sewer Trunk
Charge.
c. Resolution #86-60: Approval of Election Judges for Primary and General
Elections and Designation of Polling Places.
e. Resolution #86-61: Street Name Change in Hidden Valley Estates.
f. Review Design of Klingelhutz Sign.
g. 1987 Animal Control Agreement with Chaska.
All voted in favor and motion carried.
VISITOR PRESENTATION:
APPROVE EAGLE SCOUT PROJECT, STEVE WHITE.
I
Steve White stated he had been before the Park and Recreation Commission at
their August 5, 1986 meeting at which time they approved his project to
construct stairs up to an observation deck at Chanhassen Pond Park. He stated
1
-," 0"
i.,i '.L~_
~ c..." ;J-'-.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - August 18, 1986
the budget was $2,420.00 of material costs and the Park and Recreation Board I
approvEd a maximmn of $3,000.00 which would include rental of some equipnent
such as roto-tillers, jack harruners, etc.. Councilwoman Swenson asked how many
young men were going to help with the project. Mr. White stated that he would
get his Boy Scout Troop in Chanhassen, which is about 15 people, plus some of
the surrounding neighbors around the park to help with moving the railroad
ties, shoveling, etc. Mayor Hamilton asked if this project would interfer
with the path going around the pond. Lori Sietsema statEd that it would not.
Councilman Geving stated that he wanted to make sure Dale Gregory would be
present during the project. Mr. White stated that he had already seen the
site and will help supervise the project. Councilman Geving also stated that
he would like to see if the materials could be purchased without sales tax.
Don Ashworth stated that they could be bought through the City which is tax
exempt.
Resolution #86-62: Mayor Hamilton moved, Councilman Geving seconded for
adjustment of the budget to authorize up to $3,000.00 from the Capital
Improvement Program Fund to Steve White for the Eagle Scout Project. All
votEd in favor and motion carried.
SOUTH LOTUS LAKE PARK: Mayor Hamil ton stated that at this point he wanted
Bill Monk to update the Council on what happened over the weekend at South
Lotus Lake Park and what steps were being taken to solve the problem.
Bill Monk: I just want to review a couple of basic points for the residents. I
I pulled the maps we had used not too long ago to review a site and it will
gi ve everybody something to talk from. With the 3 inches of rain or there
abouts that we had on Saturday night, this project did experience, what I
consider, a major failure of the outlet structure down in this corner of the
si te. You can see the retention pond over here does outlet directly to it.
We graded the project recently, built the outlet structure, had failure
adjacent to that structure where one of the embankments that had been put in
on the east side adjacent to the Melby property did give way during the storm
and allowed a considerable amount of sediment and rip rap to be pushed out
into the water. That rip rap and silt did push its way over the top of the
curtain that we've got out in the lake to catch sediment due to the weight of
the material that was put out there and has pushed its way out basically
across Mr. Melby's dock, out a distance of about 50-60 feet and deposited
itself in that area. Most of the sediment, I believe, is still inside the
curtain but there is no question that a fair amount did go to the far side and
deposit on the other side. What we did this morning, we were out with a
contracter. We are revising a design of that outlet structure, building wings
on that wall to tie back into both slopes that will eliminate a reoccurence of
this same situation. We are also doing some intermediate things as far as
reestablishing erosion control around the site but also talk now about trying
to establish ground cover on all the slopes that won't be disturbed again.
We're doing much of the grading operation and trying to get done this week so
we can get seed and mulch down and then put a little fiber blanket over the
top of those areas to try and eliminate some of the runoff that is carrying
sediment down the slopes into the sedimentation basins. '!hat is the work that I
is taking place to date. We will be pushing off putting down gravel until the
restoration work is started and until the new retaining walls can be built on
2
I
I
I
-:1Qr;
J~ C~~~-j'
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - August 18, 1986
the existing structure. I will be meeting with representatives of the DNR and
potentially Fish and Wildlife and any other regulatory personnel that I can,
concerning the sedimentation that has again gotten out into the water and
beyond the curtain. It is always assumed that we would clean up again inside
the curtain before the project was finished. We now have to do that over in
this corner of the site but also we have to look at once that is done to
potentially moving the curtain around the portion of the Melby property so
that we can get out there and remove the substantial amount of sedimentation
that has been deposited out in that corner of the property. I guess what we
are attempting to do is to revise the weak point that we found. It was found
in the drainage system and to speed up restoration of all areas possible as
quickly as we can. I guess that is what has occ::urred to date given the
occurrence on Saturday. Chances are we will be going out into the water again
to determine the exact limits of the major sedimentation so we can try to get
a handle on that for removal purposes. Again, it was a failure in the
construction and I will not attempt to down play the significance but we have
started repairs and clean up and that is the work that has been done to date.
I've got another one of the detailed drainage system that we worked from last
time but if this will help in discussion...
Jack Melby: I was with Bill yesterday and he has given a pretty acc::urate
description of what has occurred. I don't know what else you can do. I would
like to see the project done as soon as possible to try to avoid this kind of
stuff. Tbnight I was down there and they had rebuilt the wall and reinforced
it and they added boulders this big rather than that big so maybe that will
help. I will say there were several tons, 30-40 tons of stuff that went out
into the lake. I hope it can be pulled out. I don't know how you can do it.
The other issue I wanted to bring up was during the same period of time on the
northern side of the lake, and I'm sure you have received a letter from
Phyllis Pope, the same thing is occuring on that side of the lake as well.
Not as dramatic but I just wanted to remind you of that.
Susan Conrad: Do you think it would be reasonable for us as a City to ask the
DNR to do some suction dredging. I know we can't reclaim the water quality
from all the damage but that seems to me that we are at a point where that
might be a reasonable request from them and they might very well consider that
because they now have access to our lake. The City has done everything in
good faith and we are kind of at a loss.
Mayor Hamilton: That is one of the things that Bill and I discussed this
afternoon, to call the DNR and see if there are any suggestions that they have
for getting the material out of the lake as quickly as possible. Whether that
should be done right now, immediately or whether or not they would suggest
waiting. We are open for suggestions as to whether or not we should proceed
immediately or whether we should wait until the project has been stabilized
but yes, we will talk to them and ask for any help they would like to give us.
Jack Melby: Maybe some additional advice and the DNR has said this a lot, I
talked a large number of times about the volume and velocity of the water that
comes off the hill. It really comes down there. Consideration for what has
now occured as well as later when you put in the sidewalks and all that kind
of stuff. I don't know where it all comes from. I think there is an
3
1,O,M,
IO-v
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - August 18, 1986
underground spring that fills up too. It is really unbelievable. At 2:00-
3:00 in the morning with a spotlight is really something. You can see the
pictures but you really can't see the water coming in there and I know this
was a pretty heavy rain but we get several like that a year. When we get the
project done, trap as much as you can but then I don't know what is going to
happen after all the sidewalks and streets are in. I don't know if this
holding pond will slow that stuff down.
I
Mayor Hamilton: It appears to be working as it should be as Bill has said.
The water that comes out the large pipe into the holding pond. If it was
coming up too fast it would be blowing out the other side of that holding pond
and it is not doing that.
Jack Melby: At 2:00 or 3:00 in the morning, it was doing that before the
retaining wall broke. The pond filled up, and that is a large pond but it did
hold for some time. I was watching it through the lightning. I was
concerned about my boat that night. The pond filled up then the water just
went right over the side and across the valley and out that creek about 4 or 5
feet down to Horr's property so it did hold for a while but then pressure just
built up and out she went.
Fred Oelschlager: Jack brought it up before about the velocity. We talked
about it at that last meeting about trying to do something with the velocity
of the water coming down there. It seems like now the water is all being
channelled in one direction which is fine but somewhere in there it should be
slowed down before it gets to that point because it's not the volume as much
as the force that is building up there.
I
Mayor Hamilton: We did talk about that this afternoon too. As we were
looking at the new road that is being buH t, you can see where the path of the
water had gone on Saturday. It looked like part of it had gone down the hill
and the other half had gone off where it was suwosed to into the catch basin
so Bill thought that what we should probably do is put some hay bales along
the new road at intervals to slow that down if we should have another rain.
At least it will slow it down. In one of the pictures you had, you can see
where the bales and the retaining wall were doing their job but there was such
a velocity coming down there that it started to pull them off too so if we
slow it down before it gets there.
Fred Oelschlager: Because it wasn't the amount of water coming down but the
velocity of the water coming through it.
Mayor Hamilton: But it's got to be the volume that had a lot to do with it.
I think the third bank on the east side just wasn't stable enough. It wasn't
compact enough.
Marge Karjalahti: I would really like to commend Bill for how well he has
done on getting on top of this. After we have sent letters to various
government agencies, they have all come back and said it is the City's
responsibility and they make recommendations and your work has far exceeded
their recommendations so the Homeowners really realize that you have been
working on this and we just wanted you to know that we appreciate it.
I
4
I
I
I
-;1. Q r7
JL U (J
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - August 18, 1986
Mayor Hamilton: We also appreciate Bill's work. It has been excellent. We
could also see as we were walking across right down by the beach where we have
hay bales and the fence then the silt fence, those hay bales were buried 6-8
inches with silt in front of them so obviously they are doing their job. They
were stopping them. There were a couple of leaks along there but it didn't
appear to be anything maj or so I think one of the things we have done has
worked we just had a blowout on one side.
Councilwoman Swenson asked if the design of the road should be reconsiderEd so
that the water reaching the lake will at least be clean.
Bill Monk: One of the things that Tom and I were talking about tcday arrl one
of the reasons I put up this map is that it shows the drainage area. If you
look at it closely you can pick out features. The parking lot, the road going
down, Hill Street and so on. If you look at this pretty closely, Jack
mentionEd it in terms of the what is going to happen with the ultimate paving
and so on, one of the things that I have done in going back and looking at
this a thousarrl times, if you look at it carefully you can see that the bulk
of the development in phase 2 of the west side of the site, will drain into a
separate basin down a drainge way over in this vicinity arrl is going to have
to be carefully looked at as Phase 2 develops. The situation that we have out
there right now, I believe is extremely close to ultimate because that clay
isn't taking much in. It is almost all coming off. It is so packed down in
through that whole site that you have got a runoff prohibition of between .7
and .8 right at the moment. If we go out there right now and you walk down
the road, you can see the path the water took. There is no huge gouge in
there. You can see the path but it is not like 2 feet deep or anything like
that. Basically what has happened is the water is coming off these slopes,
ripping through the basin and is basically running down through here but
again, it is so hardpackEd on the road surfaces that I don't think the roads
right now are a lot different, at least absorption wise, then they will be
when they are blacktopped because they are just so hard. The scrappers have
been on them so much. I guess, if anything, my intent in this whole thing is
to keep that water on that curbEd road because it is the only way that it is
really going to contain it, hold it. Granted you will pick up some things on
the road itself that are inherent to blacktop but trying to do that with a
di tch, everyone who lives over there can tell you how many times the gravel
road down to the lift station has basically washEd out. A couple times a
year. It always did. We would have to basically go in there and either try
to pull the gravel back up or whatever but I think in the errl the water that
comes down here being directed down the street will curve over to the basin,
is about the best corrluit that we have that will not come in to this upper
basin. I think that what we have right now is at least ultimate as far as
volume goes if not somewhat worse because a lot of this area up above the
parking lot will be seeded and basically once it is seeded, we won't have that
same volume coming off the path right now arrl won't be carrying sEdiment like
it is so I really think what we have happening out there right now is a very
close approximation to final if not a little bit worse, going through the
numbers. There is no way that we can readjust this into a ditch because there
is no ditch made short of a half culvert or something that would even contain
that. I really don't believe it will and I think that we almost have to use
the road for that purpose.
5
-:(10'
JiUCl
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - August 18, 1986
Jack Melby: Why would you use catch basins rather than storm sewers?
I
Bill Monk: What doesn't get caught up as it goes down because it is going a
12% grade, you are only going to get so much water into those basins. The
rest will follow the road and basically go down to the pond. '!hat is one
reason that we raised the end of the whole lot here so as it comes down it has
to go into this pond. It can't try and runoff the end of the road.
Everything is tilted back I think something like 18 inches so that it can't
just runoff into the lake. It is going to be forced into that basin.
Councilwoman Swenson: If that pond gets filled up, we aren't going to have
Jack's front yard full of water again are we?
Bill Monk: What we will do in the design we came up with today for the walls
that we are building, those 45 degree walls will come back 10 feet either
direction and will be concrete at the bottom. They will be one full board
above the one that is designed so if this should overflow, it will hold back
and it would have to go up 12 full inches which is one hell of a storm.
Councilwoman Swenson: We've had four of them so far this year.
Bill Monk: It will be that much above so it will be forced out because even
with the rain we have had with the weakness on really both sides. When it
gave on this side, there was no movement of the structure itself. It didn't
move at all and I think when we tie these walls in with concrete, the bases
down.
I
Fred Oelschlager: Who decided on the distance on the wings, the 10 foot
distance on the wings?
Bill Monk: Basically we looked at a couple of similar types of installations
which the engineering firm had designed. We thought the 6-8 foot was too
short and wanted to lengthen it so we thought the 10 foot would be better
because it goes back into both banks further.
Fred Oelschlager: My personal opinion, because in railroad tie construction
in retaining walls, you drop it down... (a tape change occured at this point).
Bill Monk: We did design it hastily this morning. I wanted to get one in
because I was fearful of another rain so we did get it in but we could extend
it. I will do some additional looking to make sure that the 10 foot is
adequate.
Councilman Horn: Do we have a schedule for this project?
Bill Monk: The project will be completed sometime in September. I don't know
the exact times. '!his will slow us down a little bit but I can't say it will
be finished September 20th or anything like that but we do expect it to be
finished in September.
Councilman Horn: Will it be fully stabilized at that point or will it take
some time?
I
6
I
I
I
.... ""''''",
~l \"",,1"/1
_ i ~ (..::} ~.P
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - August 18, 1986
Bill Monk: If we can get seeding done on major slopes yet this week, I would
expect that we would have growth within 2 to 3 weeks. At the time the
blacktop goes down and the project goes to the final stages.
Councilman Horn: But is the ground compactErl as much as it is going to get
or will time compact it further? will it take some aging of a year or so?
Bill Monk: No, the slopes are not compacted. The roads are because there is
so much equipment on it. They are very hardpackErl where they are supposed to
be ready for the gravel but the slopes neErl to be coverErl with what black dirt
we have on the site and we will seed to try to cover to get grass to grow so
it won't wash. The slopes aren't compactErl there. They are fairly loose.
That is one of our problems. You can't compact too much to get seeds to grow
so we are kind of caught. we are trying to get that done this week.
Councilman Horn: Can't it be compacted underneath and spread over the top
with some light dirt so it will grow? It seems like that is one of the things
that always happens with new construction is that it will wash out more
rapidly because it hasn't had tbne to compact.
Bill Monk: I guess I haven't really looked at potentially compacting slopes.
One of the fears we have at this point is that we don't have enough black dirt
to go around and we are actually looking at other jobs to go raid for black
dirt and there are a couple available. I'll take a look at whether we can get
away with packing down a little bit in the interim. That is a possibility.
Councilman Horn: I'm saying before you put all the black dirt on.
Bill Monk: Once the black dirt is on, you will be surprised what a difference
there is in runoff over the top. Black dirt holds so much better that there
is really no comparison once that is on.
PUBLIC HEARING:
APPROVE lAKE DRIVE EAST UTILITY AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS BETWEEN HIGHWAY un
AND CR 17.
PUBLIC PRESENT:
John Ward
Representative of Ward Estate
Bill Monk: I'm sure there are some individuals here. I know that the Council
is fully aware and there are some issues that the public may want to go over.
Unless you object, it might be good just to go over it very briefly just to
give an overview and Bob Freegard from OSM is here. If there are no questions
and Council wants to go through a brief presentation, Bob could give one to go
over the storm drainage and so on but I would be very quick.
A little bit of background. City Council, some time ago lookErl at a series of
improvements to Lake Drive East. Three sections to be exact. This was over a
year ago, Opus petitionErl for improvements to Lake Drive East to service their
property from CR 17 to the east and from CR 17 to the west. The portion to
7
11 ~)~)
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - August 18, 1986
the west of Audubon Road has been dropped as no one has really corne in to I
develop the property and Opus is just holding on that section of the
improvement. However, they did wish to proceed with this portion of the
alignment from CR 17 over to TH 101. '!his is a sketch of the original
alignment as it is from the straight shot between the two roads. Council is
fully aware of the revision to the feasibility study. '!he road is being
realigned up aroum this ponding area then back down to the Ward Estate.
Several major issues. Again, since the Council has looked at a feasibility
for a straight alignment am the curved alignment am already accepted the
revised feasibility study, I will go through just several of the major items.
We did go back at the developer's request to take a closer look at storm sewer
because storm sewer costs were originally estimated at $541,000.00. We have
made substantial revisions to the storm system such as piping rearrangements,
pond modifications and limited use of open channels have gotten the cost down
to $390,000.00. We are still looking at several options that Opus has
mentioned in terms of further open channels and things like that but at this
point in time, especially given the problems we have encountered in other
projects that stop short of going with a lot of open channels and leaving the
major portions of the pipe and Bob Freegard can go over the latest drainage
plan if there are questions about it. '!he reduction to $390,000.00 do allow
for $1,850.00 per acre decrease in storm sewer costs. They still are high but
they have been reduced to $4,708.00 per acre. As the Council may remember we
are planning on using the wetlams on this portion of the site in conjunction
with the Sunnybrook proposal. Having that water piped down to a larger pond
which will be created across am adjoining City property down in this vicinity I
before it runs into Lake Susan. '!he plan is quite well devised in terms of
sedimentation am just water quality. It goes a long way toward handling this
site in it's entirity as well as some of the other water that crosses the
si tee Secondly, MSA participation has been deleted in light of the HRA's
decision to include this entire area for an improvement project with this area
in it's 7% reduction program so that no MSA participation is being recommended
at this point in time. All project costs have been divided up on an area
basis for all the parcels involved including the Ward Estate. The only
exception is the road realignment that goes around the pond, with the
surcharging am additional subgrade costs incorporated. The costs of that
realignment have been assessed back to purely abutting frontage which is
basically the Sunnybrook property am a portion of outlot A to the north and
none of that cost is spilled over back in this direction or towards the Ward's
Estate and I believe that is consistent with Council's direction when we
reviewed the subdivision for Sunnybrook back some time ago. One of the most
significant portions of the project that is important to note, a portion of
the project area, namely what is called here the Ward Estate, is not included
in the petition am does constitute improvements outside of the petition area.
We have made an effort to keep the representatives of the Ward Estate apprised
of what is going on. Seming them copies of the feasibility studies am any
other information that has come up. Also, what I have done is work out a
rough time table showing as far as this improvement goes. I think what we are
really looking at is completion of the wear course on this entire improvement
in 1988 with assessments being done probably at the em of 1988 so that the
project assessments wouldn't come on until 1989. <X1e of the reasons that I I
specifically noted that was in talking to the Wards in the past, they have
sometimes talked, and so have I, about the possibility of staging these
8
I
I
I
~ O'l"il
~~ ~~ -';
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - August 18, 1986
improvements where this might go first am this might follow. Under that
delayed time schedule, I think that would, in essence act almost as a delayed
project am give the Wards quite a bit of time to look at potential
development and/or sale of the property because in looking at the improvements
in total, I guess I have reinforced my thoughts that to have a maj or
facilities along this roadway some distance away from their primary access is
just not feasible am I do not recommem running the improvements in without
letting them all the way through to TH 101 for the public safety of the double
access am just overall traffic circulation through the area. Gi ven the size
of the potential developments and the type with heavy peak usage which could
potentially come from one direction if the City did decide to cul-de-sac,
those are the major issues. I know there are people here in the audience who
probably wish to talk about the project. If the discussion gets SPeCific I
guess I would again ask Bob to go through those sections of the project that
the Council or the public wish to discuss but that is just a very broad
overview.
John Ward: Speaking for the Ward Estate, our major concern expressed to
Bill in staging was the concern about the timing am I think he has pretty
well met that. If the assessment wouldn't go on until 1989, that would
satisfy us am that was our major concern. Otherwise we are in agreement.
Councilman Geving moved, Councilman Horn seconded to close public hearing.
All voted in favor am motion carried.
Resolution #86-63: Mayor Hamilton moved, Councilman Horn seconded approval of
the plans am SPeCifications by OSM for the public improvement project for
Lake Drive East from TH 101 to CR 17 and conditioned upon the execution of the
approval of the Development Contract by Opus and Sunnybrook within Sixty (60)
days of this hearing. All voted in favor and motion carried.
AWARD OF BIDS: LAKE LUCY ROAD STREET IMPROVEMENTS.
Bill Monk: Lake Lucy Road represents a major project the City has looked at
for the last six months. For the record, I am disappointed in the bids but
not surprised when we found out that we had to add a substantial amount of
storm sewer to handle the job correctly am alleviate some major problems that
showed up as we prepared the plans. I guess it was pretty evident that the costs
were going to go up but we all crossed our fingers am hoPed that oil prices
and whatever would stay down and help us out on this one. '!hat was not the
case. The bid that came in was pretty much what we were afraid we would see
but is a good bid. At this point in time it really boils down to some pretty
simple issues. What the Council is looking at is a bid of $669,000.00 from
Hardrives, Inc. is at a minimum upon our estimates. 5% increase from the
proposed assessments which would take the assessment rate, the two of them
that we had from up to 11.80 per foot and 23.30 per foot. '!hese are what I
call extremely reasonable as far as the assessment portion goes but it does
increase the MSA participation considerably. Approximately $140,000.00 to
$601,000.00. That still means pledging 100% of the MSA reimbursement to the
project. I can't remember a time when the City has pledged quite that much
money to any single project but at this point in time I guess I will restate
my belief that Lake Lucy Road is very important to all of Chanhassen in moving
9
lary
.1 ~.)/,,~
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - August 18, 1986
traffic ultimately east and west and I still believe that we should proceed.
I hate to recomrnerrl using so much MSA participation. As I put in my
memorandum, basically between Lake Drive East near Hidden Valley, it has been
approvErl am we will start within the next two weeks am Lake Lucy Road, we do
use up MSA money through 1986. We will not have the amount left over that I
hopej to start a balance to work with 1987 money that would be available
through MSA but I still feel allows the City quite a bit of flexibility
especially in light of what you just approvErl with no MSA participation for a
major improvement on Lake Drive East through Opus and Sunnybrook. I guess
with that I answer questions. I am disappointErl but the impact on assessments
is less than I was afraid it would be.
I
Mayor Hamilton stated that Hardrives, Inc. was a very reputable company having
been mentionErl on the radio that morning for a job well done on the main road
into the State Fair. He stated the City had receivErl bids before from
Hardrives, Inc. am they had always been high. Bill Monk statErl that the
original bid had been revised from their original bid and the cost reduced by
about $45,000.00 with changes.
Councilwoman Swenson stated she was concerned about all the use of this MSA
money stating that Bluff Creek Road was again being pushErl back am would this
delay that project?
Bill Monk: cne of the last Council meetings we looked at that. '!hat is one
of the reasons that I put the last paragraph on here. I was specifically I
thinking about that and in looking at that project, that is something the
Council said they wantErl to initiate this Fall am will be one of the things I
will be talking to Don about in the next few weeks. cne of the things talked
about in the last Council meeting was doing it in phases, which I think is a
very realistic idea. Doing perhaps the lower two sections and leaving the top
one am filling it out over a period of time. If you remember the feasibility
study that was done way back when, about 1980, had total costs of somewhere
around $350,000.00 or thereabouts. I think that was a pretty fancy plan for
that road and I believe that with cuts that could be made in the plan, that
the costs would stay about the same am I believe the City is still in a very
good position that if you decide to proceed with the lower portions of that
road that you could, for the amount of the 1987 allotment, still be in very
good position to do the first major phase of that entire project and leave the
secom phase for either a future year or somewhere down the line. By phases
I basically am talking about south of Hesse Farm as one phase. North of Hesse
Farm Roa:] as another phase.
Councilwoman Swenson: Where is that in relation to the top of the hill?
Councilman Geving: South.
Councilwoman Swenson: When we went on our tour a few years ago we talked
about starting at that point on the hill am taking it from there because I
was out there yesterday, but the major damage was south of the Hesse Farm
Road. In view of the fact that we have discussErl this am kickErl it aroum so
many times, I really think we have to seriously consider making a move on it.
I
10
I
I
I
]J23;
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - August 18, 1986
Bill Monk: with $225,101010.1010 of State Aid left in 1987 plus whatever
assessments you might put on, I think that puts that phase right in the
ballpark and very realistic.
Councilman Horn: We're only $410,101010.1010 off here. I can't believe that would
make a dent in any changes in any timeframe for another project.
Mayor Hamilton: Plus Bluff Creek Road was number 3 on the lists of priority
when we prioritized roads to be done and I think we have been maintaining
that until the other two are completed or underway so that moves it to the
number one priority spot so I believe it is going to be done next year.
Councilwoman Swenson: We have seemed to rearrange that priority before and I
guess I want to make sure we don't do that again.
Councilman Geving: When I first looked at the bids, my immediate reaction was
exactly what we talked about earlier. The first possible request for bids is
now in the middle of the construction season and possibly a strategy would be
to hold this and rebid at a later date for the next construction season. The
more I got to thinking about this, the more I was convinced that we might not
get a better bid even into next year and it delays the whole process another
year. It pushes every bit of our schedule down and the things that were added
that were significantly in excess to what we planned were the grading, the
storm sewer and after that was explained to me, I seem to think that if it
had been in the original proposal, the original feasibility study would have
been estimated also so our bid and our estimate wouldn't have probably been
that far off if we had done a lot of that pre-work earlier. My comment is I
think we should proceed with this one.
Councilman Horn: I think too Dale, to go along with that, maybe the bid is
somewhat higher but I think our bonding position is going to be so favorable
at this time that it would not be good to do it.
Councilman Geving: The other factor I was thinking of, I was quite surprised
that we didn't see more of the people in the area here tonight because this
will be a slightly increased assessment.
Bill Monk: We did have a neighborhood meeting. I did put some correspondence
in there just to show we had one but at that point in time we did not talk
about costs and I have not sent anything since that time to say that we are
anticipating 5% increase or anything so whether all the individuals along the
road understand the process or not for awarding bids and stuff, I'm not sure
but a lot of them have been very concerned, rightly so, as with any project
but I think with 5%, I still think we are within a good range.
Councilman Geving: Have you heard from the State Aid Office? Does it look
favorable?
Bill Monk: Yes, that will approve. It is just a matter of did we cross every
"t" and dot every "i" and they have not finished reviewing it yet but it will
be approved, no question.
11
1:. O'.6t
L f:J' ~
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - August 18, 1986
Councilman Horn: I remember earlier projects and we have been very happy to
have only 5% over.
I
Mayor Hamilton: I think your coments with OPEC reaching an agreement on their
oil production, we could see higher prices so I think we might be in trouble
if we wait.
Resolution #86-64: Councilman Geving moved, Councilman Horn seconded to award
the contract for the Lake Lucy Road Construction Project to Hardrives, Inc. in
the amount of $669,296.21 with the condition that this be approved by the
State Aid Office. All voted in favor am motion carried.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mayor Hamil ton moved, Councilman Horn seconded to approve the Minutes of the
Planning Commission meeting dated July 23, 1986. All voted in favor am
motion carried.
Councilwoman Swenson moved, Councilman Geving seconded to approve the Minutes
of the Public Safety Commission meeting dated July 24, 1986. All voted in
favor and motion carried.
CONSIDERATION OF COSTS FOR TRANSMISSION LINE, NSP.
Barbara Dacy: As you recall, on June 2, 1986 the Council issued a Comitional I
Use Permit for installation of overhead transmission lines along what was
known as Option 3 which included along the north side of TH 5, to aroum the
vicinity of the Dakota Avenue area, crossing to the south side along TH 5 to
the church property then along the railroad through the business park to
Audubon Road. My memo refers to Powers Blvd., that is incorrect. '!hat should
be Audubon Road. Basically the costs that are attached in your package show
that placing the transmission line underground would cost approximately four
times as much as the cost of the entire line. NSP has broken down those
estimates into two areas. Basically, around the downtown area and the second
area is through the business park. They note that with the undergroum
installation that there needs to be, what they call, termination structures
which add additional cost am require keynote lam of approximately 2,500
square feet. In evaluating this information, Staff finds that the cost for
undergrounding the lines is prohibited am very expensive. We are
recommending as Council action tonight that because undergrounding of the
lines is not feasible, that NSP continue to work with Staff regarding the
location and the size of the poles, preparing a specific plan showing existing
wires that will be incorporated am combinErl with the new structures and
establishment of appropriate spacing to minimize impact onto the downtown and
the business park area. This was one of the comitions also in your approval
on June 2nd. We would also recommend that this plan be brought back for your
final action.
Mayor Hamilton asked if Don Chmiel had any additional information. Don Chmiel I
stated that Barb had pretty much covered everything. They could break the
costs down into segments if the Council wished to take the time.
12
I
I
-rl (00 [1;""
',; ....',;-j
J,- Q.;I Q....'
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - August 18, 1986
Mayor Hamilton: I think the last time we discussed this we talked about the
trade-off in costs in purchasing the right-of-way of the 212 Corridor as
opposed to running it underground or doing something else. I do know there
was a question regarding what the cost of purchasing the right-of-way and
going down 212 was and I didn't see that in here. Maybe it is here but I
didn't come across it and I thought that was one of the things that we had
asked to know is what the cost of that land was going to be.
Don Chmiel: We probably discussed that but no, we did not include that in
those estimates. That was a sort of viable location for the line with much
discussion we have had on TH 5, was more the route Council had selected to put
the line on.
Mayor Hamilton: I think that is true but the question was raised because what
it would cost to run a line down the 212 Corridor and the cost of the right-
of-way as a part of that cost could off-set against going underground for
instance, at least through the downtown part.
Councilman Horn: You see that at the top of page 36 of the Minutes.
George Warner: I have acreage on the 212 Corridor. Approximately 41 acres
and they come to TH 5 would be approximately 16 acres. We couldn't put a
price on it because our easements are based on percentages in value of
property and we haven't made any studies in trying to determine the peak value
of the lam on the 212 Corridor versus the 'ill 5.
Mayor Hamilton: So if you covered 41 acres, based on what the value of land
is in the City today, the costs would be approximately in the neighborhood of
$130,000.00 to $140,000.00 to purchase that land which isn't a significant
amount when you are looking at what it would cost to go underground.
Councilman Geving: I don't know. I don't think that is really an accurate
assessment. 41 acres at $3,500.00-$4,000.00 per acre would be a bargain if
they could get it but you heard several of the large land owners say that they
would pay dearly for that lam if they tried to put that transmission line
across and I'm sure that it would drag out in Court for a long time and a very
high number of dollars before they were able to require them to do that. I
think that would be very difficult for NSP or anyone else to try to determine
what it might cost without going through the actual process.
Councilman Horn: I'm sure they have all kinds of history from previous
projects like this. This wouldn't be the first one where they put a line
through an area where the people didn't want it.
Don Chmiel: We basically do have rights of eminent domain so it doesn't
really get dragged through the Courts for a period of time.
George Warner:
formulas for.
We use a percentage of the value what our lam department has
I don't have those.
III Don Chmiel: I would say that is a pretty close ballpark figure.
13
-: () f!J
lL 2:,,, (})
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - August 18, 1986
Councilman G:ving: $3,000.00 to $4,000.00 per acre.
I
Councilwoman Swenson: Did you talk with Opus about the section through the
business park?
Barbara Dacy: Yes, they were sent a copy of the estimates approximately 2
weeks ago.
Councilwoman Swenson: Did they have any cornnent?
Barbara Dacy: I talked with Christine Peterson today over the phone today and
she said she agrees with our recommendation. I thought she would be here
tonight but I don't see here.
Don Ashworth: '!hey have participated in all the meetings we have had.
Mayor Hamil ton: Just looking at your costs here Don, why in going through
downtown your costs are $53.00 per foot, when you are going down the railroad
your cost is $23.00 per foot? What happens that is so significant to make a
$30.00 per foot difference in cost?
Don Chmiel: '!he difference is the kinds of structures that would be used in
those locations and I think George can address those two particular cost
differences because he did the indictive cost on that or Bob can.
Bob Brossands: On the plans, the unit price of the cable itself installed is
somewhere around $175.00 per foot in place. '!he difference comes when in the
number of manholes, the number of splices required.
I
Mayor Hamilton: I think you misunderstood. I'm talking about $53.00 per foot
when you are going through downtown versus the $23.00 per foot for the
overhead lines as you are going down the railroad.
Bob Brossands: The railroad is essentially a straight route. No angles in
the line. Around the south side on TH 5, every structure would have an angle
on it and angle structures, just due to the angle itself, are heavier
structures and more costly so it is in the cost of the structure that makes
the difference.
Mayor Hamil ton: So you are not going to be putting less environmentally type
structure going down the railroad and you want to make sure that whatever
structure you are putting in are as aesthetically nice whether it is along the
railroad track or whether it is going downtown.
Bob Brossands: No, it is the same structure type, it is just the angle
structure versus line structures.
Don Chmiel: If I could, I just wanted to show you some pictures of
termination structures which are required for going overhead to underground.
This would be within certain points in the city. If you go underground at one
point then terminate at another. You have to buy these kinds of structures.
They take care of that 55-50 which is noted.
I
14
I
I
I
...,; (J\ '7
L 6'Y t
CITY COUNCIL MEETING ~ August 18, 1986
Councilwoman Swenson: You mean something like this would be at the east end
of the City where it starts going down and then where it comes back up?
Don Chmiel: Yes, then the other side coming up.
Councilman Geving: How high, 35-50 feet?
George Warner: I'm not sure about those particular ones. Those projections
you are looking at is a project that was completed about 1 1/2 years ago in
Mankato and it is a termination of 115 kv line into an oil field self
contained cable such as we are talking about here. Those structures are
35-40 feet in height or maybe more. '!hat would be depending upon what is
necessary to come into the overhead line inside but yes, the overhead to
underground termination structures, there is a lot of hardware and equipment
required to accomplish that.
Councilwoman Swenson moved, Mayor Hamilton seconded a motion stating with the
selection of the corridor and determination that undergrounding is not
feasible, NSP and City Staff should be directed to prepare detailed plans
showing:
a. Location and size of poles.
b.
Incorporation of all existing wires (poles) onto the new structure.
c.
Establishment of spacing so as to create the least visual effect for
the downtown area, business and residential neighborhoods.
The above plan is to be referenced in the conditional use permit and submitted
to the City Council for final approval. All voted in favor of motion except
Councilman Horn who opposed and motion carried.
Councilman Geving asked when this project would be completed. Don Chmiel
stated that ccmpletetion would be May, 1988.
APPROVAL OF ACCOUNTS:
Councilman Geving moved, Councilwoman Swenson seconded to approve the Accounts
Payable check numbers 023981 through 024104 in the amount of $2,509,682.63 and
check numbers 026941 through 027068 in the amount of $274,342.45 dated August
18, 1986. All voted in favor and motion carried.
APPROVE CONSTRUCTION PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR UTILITY AND STREET
IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN PARK ONE.
Bill Monk: '!his item is perhaps a little bit rushed in that I might not have
gotten it on the agenda quite this fast but there is some follow-up on this
project that I need to do quickly so we did put it on the agenda. Dick Potts
from ReM is here. He hasn't had a chance to talk too much either but I am
going to ask him to go over the street section of this because it is extremely
important that the Council get a full understanding of the street portion of
15
-1,00'
; 1.\./ J r'.!
...:-l....c......""'-_
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - August 18, 1986
the improvements and I would just like to take a minute to go over the project I
in a little bit of detail in just very general terms. The project area
includes construction of 184th Street up to the interior service road that
will service commercial developments on here. This proposal was petitioned
and is supposed to be assessed and the balance coming from TID No. 2 monies.
West 77th Street does presently exist down to a cul-de-sac in this location.
We are, in essence, extending utilities and streets from this point to derive
service. en utilities, we will be extending water all the way down under the
highway all the way through the subdivision tying back into municipal systems.
I don't think there is too much more detail that is needed on that.
Additionally, utility service will be provided in here. It should be noted
that the most important part of the utilities is the installation of a lift
station. At this point, to be able to get back and service these lots, and
that will be pumPed into a force main that already exists along 77th back into
the existing system, the extensive storm sewer in through the project that is
carried through a system of pipes and swales to a ponding area here where rate
control will then outlet into Eden Prairie. The Mitchell Lake wetlands in
Eden prairie and we are making sure that that rate control is proper and meets
with requirements by Eden Prairie and Watershed District. A major part of the
improvements includes street improvements from TH 5 on up to this service
road. We have worked with Eden prairie quite a bit to come up with a ultimate
design for 184th street to Dell Road, as Eden prairie calls it, for multiple
lanes, turn lanes and medians. What we are proposing to do with the plans
that are in front of you is to construct and modify the street section through
this entire section that will have a right on only at this point in time into I
the project and it will incorporate the west side of those turn lanes and
channelization as the east side of Chanhassen's street in through here and
that ultimately Eden Prairie will build the other side so we will, as
development occurs to the west or Dell Road is built to the north, that those
improvements will go hand and hand. Another important feature is that the
whole planning for right-of-way up to the railroad tracks, we are not planning
any improvements up to the north at this point in time. Until Eden Prairie
makes some decisions there, there is no reason for Chanhassen to look at those
improvements. I think it is important to go over those improvements. Dick
does have an exhibit that I would like to have Dick go over with the Council.
It is not in the plan because it is more informative than it is specific. It
shows in more clear detail the proposed portion of the improvements right here
and the ultimate street design in a little bit more detail and if the Council
will give Dick a few minutes, I would ask him to go over the street portion
and improvanents for you.
Mayor Hamilton: Before he does that, can you tell me where is Eden Prairie
at? When are they planning on this?
Bill Monk: When are they going to do something with the other half? Dell
Road is so far up in the air right now, I don't see Dell Road pushing this
thing one way or the other. It is my understanding right now that Mr. Beddor
has either bought or has an option on this property right here. I would say
that right now, it looks like within the next 2-3 years that this may develop
and if that happens, Eden prairie knows that basically that will trigger their I
portion because there is just no way they can use the street in Chanhassen
because it just won't be built to any kind of standard. We have had a lot of
16
I
I
I
11 (i)i ~
..:C..Q..-~iU
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - August 18, 1986
problems with the State and we have settled right now on right-in for the time
being just to get these people in instead of requiring th=m to come all the
way down and back around but I know we need an interchange here but until
Dell Road is actually constructed, it is just not economically feasible
because you would have to do it all yourselves and it would just be
phenominal for us to try arrl do that. I think this will push it 2-3 years.
Dick Potts: This is basically what Bill had up there but with a little more
color to give you an idea what you can see. West 77th arrl 184th are
colored in brown, the proposed Hidden Lane, which it is now called, to the
development in here arrl of course, 184th Street. These were put together
when we did the feasibility study and colored them off into two phases,
if you remember that when we did the feasibility. We split up the cost
into a phase 1 and Phase 2 to see how financing would work out and see how
the tax increment am assessment would work out. At the Council meeting in
April, the entire project was ordered in. The plan was to construct 184th
so that can be utilitized by Chanhassen arrl yet fit the long range plan for
Chanhassen and Eden Prairie to the north and Eden Prairie to the south.
Hook up to a full channelized intersection to TH 5. The subsequent
feasibility study that Bill mentioned, we have done a fair amount of
looking at the 184th with Eden prairie and Staff here in Chanhassen. The
first thing we looked at was, what is the long range plan? We took the
long range plan, then backed off into something that they could be doing in
Chanhassen with the tax increment money and could be used by Chanhassen.
If you look at this depicting the long range plan as irrlicated in cross-
hatch, you get the overall view in cross-hatch in orange. The long range
plan calls for a four lane divided roadway from TH 5, raised median with
curb and gutter down the middle, is laid out for the channelized and signal
intersection at TH 5. The long range plan calls for two north-bourrl lanes
to be constructed over on the Eden prairie side up until you get to 77th
with provisions for a left turn lane onto 77th, then straight through for a
right into Eden Prairie if 77th is constructed straight through in Eden
Prairie. Then from this intersection it tapers from a two lane down to a
single lane approximately at this point and north all the way through Eden
prairie with a single lane. Southbourrl Dell Road in Eden prairie is a
single lane, across the tracks until approximately this point where she
widens out into two lanes southbourrl until you get to 77th. There are
provisions for a right turn lane into the industrial park, go straight
through arrl a left turn into 77th when it is constructed in Eden Prairie.
South of 77th continues on two lanes down to TH 5. Provisions for a left
turn lane ul timately out onto TH 5, right turn arrl straight through. With
that long range plan in mind, the turning movements laid out based on the
traffic projections, we then looked at what Chanhassen built on the
Chanhassen side. Colored in the yellow then, is within the city limits of
Chanhassen. The westerly side of this roadway. Yellow on here is what is
proposed to be constructed. Basically, one-half roadway. The right turn
lane off of TH 5 will be northbourrl in these lanes. It will be one way on
the top of 77th. At 77th, there will be two lane roadway. <X1e lane
south to 77th arrl one lane northbourrl so if you block at the signal, there
will be no access to TH 5 at this intersection. liDo Not Enter" signs and
it will be a one-way northbourrl only so traffic that is coming westbourrl on
TH 5 could access to the industrial park northbound, turn left and go
17
C] 1'1\\ n1 "
/d \0;; \UJ
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - August 18, 1986
around or continue north to Hidden Lane, up in that area. A little bit in
the future, there are some plans now and I can't tell you when Mr. Eeddor
is going to add another building east of the Press. There is some talk of it.
I haven't heard any plans about when another addition might go but we have
seen some concept plans. There would be additional access put in about where
this 184th, one in this location, one in here and possibly one in here. When
that occurs, southbound traffic on 184th will proceed to get into the proposed
parking lot in this area and approximately in this area and then the
southbound lane would be blocked off at approximately here. You have a
northbound lane all the way out here. '!he southbound could be curbed and put
a parking lot in the Chanhassen side with your 11':[" to the south and here.
There would not-be any access onto TH 5 until it widen.
Before I go any further, are there any questions?
I
Councilman Geving: Who decided that they would have access off of 184th to
those proposed building sites rather then coming off of 77th?
Dick Potts: At this point, there is not access. '!here is curb and gutter. When
the development plan is submitted to the City, curb cuts would have to be
applied for and the locations determined by the developer depending on
where he wants it.
Councilman Geving: Couldn't he do just the same thing coming off of 77th
Street and not disrupting a four lane road?
Dick Potts: It is hard for me to answer what his...
I
Councilman Geving: Well, we are making this decision.
Dick Potts: But not tonight.
Councilman Geving: We are the ones who could give directions to them
saying that maybe this isn't such a smart idea coming off a proposed four
lane road onto two or three properties where they are going to build a
210,101010-310,101010 square foot building. Maybe it would be smarter to come off
of 77th Street. We have to look at that potential.
Dick Potts: At the present time, the plan shows for a 6 inch high concrete
curb and gutter along this whole westerly route without curb cuts for two
reasons. One, we don't know where they want them. Two, if they are going to
be and where they are going to be and I guess that decisions has to be made.
Councilman Geving: All I'm trying to tell you is I think we ought to look
at that very carefully.
Dick Potts: '!he concept plan that I have seen put together by the developer
and his archi teet has shown curb cuts along here and on this side. Whether
they actually occur..
Councilman Geving: And 11m sure it sells if there is demand for a building.
I
18
I
I
I
~ n. -:1
L~ \:.;' J '
CITY COUNCIL MEETING ~ August 18, 1986
Mayor Hamil ton: If you could go back to the plan for a secom am look at
Hidden Lane intersection. As that intersection develops, and if it goes
north into Eden prairie, is that whole intersection going to need to be
redone?
Dick Potts: Yes. '!he point up here is where the four lane tapers into a two
lane, 36 foot wide street. This going north is 36 feet wide with curb and
gutter. In order to build a long range plan, is to center this 36 foot road
on the Eden prairie-Chanhassen line. In order to build something now, we want
to get it on the Chanhassen side so the portion to this area here does not
follow the ul timate line. We have taken it am pulled it off onto the
Chanhassen side. We are constructing a 28 foot wide bituminous through here,
moved off to the westerly side. Just like you would have the center line down
the road sloped off this way, 28 feet wide coming around down Hidden Lane.
When the 36 foot wide street is put through, the yellow portion that is
outside the cross-hatch will be removed. Asphalt would stay in here and curb
and gutter would be placed along this route, then the intersection would be
put in where the cross-hatch shows. '!here is bituminous curb through this
portion. Bituminous curb along this portion where it is not going to be
permanent. '!he point was, we are trying not to get any permanent structures,
curb and gutter on the Eden Prairie side. I'll just go quickly through the
utilities here. Basically, the storm sewer involves collection of the water
that is picked up am being placed in facilities now at 77th am Hidden Lane,
pipe it northerly, install some new catch basins along the roadway, put stubs
out for develofXIlent in the future so they can put their terminal pick-ups am
drop-offs in these swales down through here. By the way, we haven't done a
feasibility for it, the plans that you have in your packet follow very closely
to this pick-up point might be here instead of here. It is the same concept.
Surface pick-up here am catch basins at this point. Water basically flows on
the roadways, we pick it up, drop it off at a swale that will be constructed
down into the holding porn that is now in place. Also catch basins installed
in here with stubs out for the future parking lot that is proposed along in
here. Revamping the catch basins at the intersection here, piping it down
into this holding pond. '!he holding pond was constructed during some previous
development. That pond is designed to hydraulicly store the water, slowly
release it down into the upper end of Mitchell Lake. We will have to go
through the Watershed District again with this as to whether it meets with
their long range concept but was previously approved. Bill talked about water
main improvements, it basically involves construction of a 113 inch water main
to loop around Hidden Lane and the construction of a 113 inch water main on the
Chanhassen side on the westerly side of l84th, all the way down to the south
side of TH 5. In the future, the plan is to extend the 10 inch water main
further south then l84th am westerly around and hook up to the CVT line over
there so you have continuous water main loop for the industrial park north of
'IH 5 and south of 'lli 5. Hydrants am services will of course be put in with
the spacing and stats required in an industrial park. Sanitary sewer Bill
touch on a little bit. Basically it involves installation of a pipeline from
about right here, carrying it north and easterly, along Hidden Lane, south
down 184th to a low point here. Also, construction of sanitary sewer from the
intersection of 77th north to that lowpoint. Where we run the pipeline north,
we will pick up the in place sewer that is on 77th now am bring that down to
this point. '!he pump station that lifts it back up to a force meter we are
19
c:; C":,/l)
/." ,/':J
L-.:;:.J.~-,,~
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - August 18, 1986
going to install, connected to the existing pipe that is in place, along 77th
arrl place a manholes owosi te the Lyman Lumber interest arrl right owosi te the
Press. Also included will be a street lighting that we talked about in the
feasibility studies. We will be installing street lighting on the north side
of 78th Street until approximately the Chanhassen Office Complex on the north
side, all the way on Redman Drive, Lyman Lumber, north on l87th and also on
77th. We also will put street lighting in on Hidden Lane. '!here will not be
any street lighting on l84th. I think Bill added up some of the data on the
cost. We are preparing that and the feasibility. '!he costs remain basically
the same so the financing schedule and attached increment and assessment
monies still remain the same.
I
Councilwoman Swenson: Isn't it a little dangerous to have that section of
77th and l84th without lights?
Dick Potts: 77th will have lights. l84th will not be lit up.
Councilwoman Swenson: Will the intersection be lighted?
Dick Potts: we are going to run street lights down 77th to this intersection.
Mayor Hamilton: So that intersection will be lighted?
Dick Potts: Yes, the last light will probably be at this point here. We are
not proposing installing lights on l84th for a couple of reasons. One, the I
development hasn't occurred here, and it certainly hasn't in Eden Prairie.
There is quite a stretch in this low point here that is wetlands on both sides
of the road. Development has not occurred on any of the Eden Prairie side.
It has yet to occur on anyplace on l84th plus the wetlands down in here. The
lighting will alternate up and down the streets.
Don Ashworth: we will look at that issue as we go into the final plans.
Resolution #86-65: Mayor Hamilton moved, Councilman Horn seconded
that construction plans and specification for utility and street improvements
wi thin Park One be authori zed. All voted in favor and motion carried.
Councilman Horn: I think as a safeguard, we should specify that before the
road connection can be made to the north that Eden Prairie complete their
section of the highway. I don't want them to pick-up where We have built and
have access to the road without constructing their portion of it.
Bill Monk: They have no right to build anything in Chanhassen which is
what they would have to do to connect without first requesting from the
City for permission to do that.
SITE PLAN REVIEW, 25,000 SQ. FT. OFFICE/WAREHOUSE BUILDING, CHANHASSEN LAKES
BUSINESS PARK, PMT, INC.
Barbara Dacy: '!he applicants have signed a Purchased Agreement for Lots 1 and I
2 at the corner of the Business Park. What is being proposed tonight is
building on Lot 2 across from the Chanhassen Public Works Building. Proposed
20
I
I
I
9'rf'. GJ'l
.l:..._-j~!~~__("
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - August 18, 1986
is a 25,000 square foot facility and the applicant has indicated that, if all
goes well, an expansion may be undertaken within the near future to exparrl the
building to the west. '!he applicant is PMT, Inc.. '!hey are responsible for
assembling and manufacturing medical supplies arrl equipment. The Planning
Commission recommended approval of the site plan subject to the five
corrlitions contained in the Staff Report. There were two issues from the
Planning Commission. One was concern about the engineering recommendations as
to whether or not open drains or catch basins should be installed arrl the
applicant has resolved those concerns with the engineering office and they
have submitted a revised plan showing the installation of the catch basins so
that issues has been resolved. Another issue of concern was the amount of lot
coverage. As is indicated in your report, 79% of the lot is being covered by
building and parking. While we do not have a specific ordinance requirement
stating that 70% is a maximum, it is a guideline that the City has imposed on
all site plan reviews in the Business Parks. Before the Planning Commission
meeting we discussed this issue with the applicant. They felt they could not
reduce the amount of building and parking because of the particular needs of
the company so an option that was proposed by Staff to the Commission was to
require that the City record a restriction on Lot 1 so that when that site is
developed that the overall coverage for both lots does not exceed 70%. The
Commission was concerned about the legal mechanism to do that. In between
meetings we consulted with the City Attorney arrl he advised us that the best
way to do that would be to require the applicant to record a private deed
restriction against Lot 1. Therefore, we have recommended that corrlition 4 be
amended. '!he City Manager has reviewed the plan and has suggested an
alternative option. In order to reduce the coverage from 79% to 70%, that
would be including the parking on the 7,000 square feet of additional open
space. That could be accomplish by doing an administrative sutdivision of
adding 20 feet of Lot 1 onto the legal description of Lot 2. '!hen what could
happen is the entire si te be shifted over 10 feet, you would increase your
sideyards 20 feet on either side, and you would have 70% coverage and meet
that intent so the Manager has offered that other option. He also notes
something I guess Staff should have brought up before the Planning Commission
meeting is the larxlscaping. We did not realize the full impact of the site
from Audubon Road. '!he property is very flat and is easily seen so we talked
to the applicant about adding additional larrlscaping especially along the west
side to screen the loading area. What has been submitted and we received this
afternoon, is a grading plan showing approximately a four foot berm in an area
on the western lot line covering the loading docks and then that tapers down
to a two foot berm along the front part along the west lot 1 ine. On the east
side they have indicated approximately a two foot berm in the rear from the
rear of the building increasing to the center of the site arrl then continuing
on down to the front of the site. Another two foot berm is proposed in the
front. As far as larxlscaping is concerned, the applicant has along the front
for example, proposed installation of three trees and some ground plantings
arrl along the west lot line is proposing three trees. In the phone
conversation to the applicant regarding the west lot line, he indicated that
in addition to the berms, temporary vegetation such as honeysuckles could be
installed so that when the future expansion occurs, that such is easily
transplanted or replaced in the future. We do note that on the east lot line
that there is only the two foot berm on the east side. We are recommending
that the Council consider requiring additional larrlscaping on that side to
21
cp 0\,&
L.e \u: _.::
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - August 18, 1986
account for the views from the east: However; in discussing this with the
applicant, Staff's main concern before the Council meeting was the west lot
line and the view to the loading dock area. I don't know if the City Manager
wants to add anything but that concludes our report.
I
Don Ashworth: Barbara's report is sufficient.
Mayor Hamilton: I would just ask you a question. In reviewing the Planning
Commission Minutes, there is some question by the applicant about putting in
concrete curb and gutter. I didn't see anything in the report we got that
addresses that. There was a question about whether or not they had to so I
guess they were going to go back and talk to you and was that resolved with
them.
Barbara Dacy: As I recall, that was in specific reference to the north lot
line as to whether or not there should be open drains instecrl of catch basins
along the back and that has been resolved with the City Engineer.
Councilman Horn: I think there were two issues. I think the concrete curb is
still in the middle.
Mayor Hamilton: Drainage was discussed and the applicant was going to go back
to talk with the City Engineer and the concrete curb and gutter was another
issue and I didn't see anything in here saying that those issues were
resolved. If they were resolved, fine.
I
Bill Monk: '!he catch basins were resolved. '!hey are needed to get into the
facilities on the back side. As far as the curb goes, I guess it would be my
understanding that the curb would be required on the back lot line unless
specifically not required by the Council. I have not talked to the applicant
about that but since catch basins are required, I would assume the curb would
go on the back side.
Councilman Geving asked the applicant if he agreed with the conditions that
were placed upon the proposal. The applicant stated that they have agreed to
the conditions. The City Manager asked the applicant to explain why he
prefers the alternative of condition 4 as opposed to the City Manager's
revised condition 4.
David Kordonowy: I just think the alternative 1 of requiring that the total
be built on Lot 1 and 2 would be more easily accomplished then adjusting Lots
I and 2.
Councilman Horn: I guess I don't understand why.
David Kordonowy: I think what is suggested is a replatting.
Councilman Horn: An administrative plat as I saw it.
Don Ashworth: There would be no costs or anything else associated with it.
I
David Kordonowy: We would have to redraw the plan?
22
I
I
I
205
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - August 18, 1986
-
Don Ashworth: There would be a shifting of the plans, yes.
David Kordonowy: So there would be costs for the architectural site plan,
costs for engineering am all those things incurred in cost to do that. We
can accomplish all those things by the first alternative and not incur all
those costs. He is on a pretty tight budget am we are trying to control
costs.
Councilman Horn: But as I understood it, there were costs incurred in the
first one in terms of trying to put a statement through to the County am it
is a question of who picks up the cost in each method, is that what we are
getting to?
Don Ashworth: I didn't look at the cost. '!he plan portion, I know the
administrative lot split would be far cheaper then protecting the plat. That
brings up the point of redrawing plans and I guess I put the question back, if
all cost factors were the same, would it make any difference as to the two
choices because I sincerely believe your cost alternatives would be cheaper in
mine then the suggestion that was presented.
David Kordonowy: I really haven't given it much thought to tell you the
truth. I think the cost would be less just by making the owner record
something at the County that he can't build on both lots in excess of 70%. I
think those costs would be less.
Don Ashworth: I guess if the Council approved it either way, literally
leaving the challenge back to me to show that costs are cheaper, would you be
satisified with that?
David Koronowy: I think we could work with you on that.
Don Ashworth: One of the other reasons is that I have talked with Opus am we
always try to make sure we are maintaining a good neighbor relationship and
one thing the recommendation has presented is it does insure that Opus will
not have problems developing that lot to the east of this lot. I firmly
believe that I can show the applicant that it will be cheaper to go this way.
Consider, in essence, the Council would literally give it dual approval
putting the challenge back to me to prove to the applicant that that would be
cheaper. '!hat is what I am recomnending.
Councilwoman Swenson: I'm a little confused. The applicant owns both lots
1 and 2 at the present time? So actually what we are really doing is taking
20 feet from Lot 2 am putting it onto Lot I?
Councilman Horn: '!hat is correct.
Don Ashworth: Lot 1 is 320 feet so the loss of 20 feet...
Councilwoman Swenson: It Isn't going to make any difference. I would like to
go back to the response to the percent of acreage. As you need it for
additional parking and warehouse space, the size of the building per se then
is what we are discussing then when we are talking about warehouse space?
23
,-", 0"'-" ,n)
L:.JIU tp
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - August 18, 1986
David Kordonowy: It is the combination of parking arrl developnent:
I
Councilwoman Swenson: Right, I see that you have 11 parking spaces beyond the
required number and I was concerned that, you are not considering any outdoor
storage?
David Kordonowy: No.
Councilwoman Swenson: And your reason for the additional 11 parking places is
for cars for employees?
David Kordonowy: '!hat is correct.
Councilman Horn stated that the he thought the Council should go along with
the City Manager's recommendation and base it on his judgment. The Council
might be setting some precedent and some other problems with this if they
didn't go along with the City Manager's recomendations. Councilman Geving
agreed.
Councilman Geving moved, Councilman Horn seconded to approve Site Plan #86-3
for a 25,000 square foot office/warehouse facility based on the site plan
stamped "Recei ved July 10, 1986" and subject to the following conditions:
1.
The relocation of the fire hydrant located on Park Road closer to the
center of the proposed building or the addition of another hydrant to
be possibly located on Audubon Road.
2.
'!he perimeter of all parking areas shall be lined with concrete curb
except those areas that are to be expanded.
I
3. Compliance with all of the Watershed District's regulations on new
construction.
4. The City Manager shall work with the applicant to determine the least
cost alternative to achieve 70% lot coverage for Lot 2, Block 1,
Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 5th Addition.
5. Deletion of the open drains along the north curb line and replacement
with catch basins whose outlets will be connected to the existing
storm sewer on the north property 1 ine.
6. '!he applicant shall submit a revised landscaping plan showing
additional berming and landscaping along the east and west lot line.
All voted in favor and motion carried.
Councilman Horn:
landscaping plan.
resolved.
For clarification, the 6th condition refers to the
You have not specified then the method that would be
Councilman Geving: My thoughts on that were that we had been shown a plan by
Barb tonight. Is there a date on that thing?
I
24
I
I
I
207
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - August 18, 1986
Barbara Dacy: That is a grading plan. However, a revised landscaping plan
has not been submitted:
Councilman Geving: A1right~ so I guess we can't refer to a dated plan other
then a revised landscaping plan that is due along with this condition:
Councilman Horn: I was referring to your other condition: You have not
specifically stated then that we would accept the Manager's recommendation but
only that we would work them on the recommendation.
Councilman Geving: That the Manager would work with the applicant regarding
an amendment to condition 4 to work out the least cost to the applicant and
that we would approve that least cost method as a condition.
Councilman Horn: Even if it didn't achieve the 70%?
Councilman Geving: It would. The Manager assures us that it would achieve the
70%.
Councilman Horn: As long as you have that in the motion I have no problem.
Councilman Geving: It would achieve the 70% maximum utilization.
David Kordonowy: en the two lots?
Don Ashworth: That would be the alternative as approved by the Planning
Corrmission.
Councilman Geving: Clarification is 70% of the Lot 2. It has nothing to do
with Lot 1. That would be worked out with the management. We are working on
one lot at a time here. This is Lot 2.
David Kordonowy: We're at 79%.
Councilman Geving: Right, we're asking that you work out an arrangement with
the Manager so that when you finish your lot split, Lot 2 still would not
exceed 70%.
Mayor Hamilton: Either by rearranging the line by 20 feet or by applying with
the County so it is an either/or situation.
David Kordonowy: But it seems to me if we are going to file with the County,
the other lot will come into account.
Councilman Geving: You have to give some land here to make some more room for
Lot 2. How you do that is what you are going to work out with our Manager.
Mayor Hamilton: The motion is to work with the Manager and if he can show you
that his alternative is more cost effective to you, then that is the
alternative that would be chosen.
25
nno
L.:l 'U.' {y
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - August 18, 1986
David Kordonowy: But if it is more costly, then what we suggested then we are
back to 79% coverage on that lot.
I
Mayor Hamilton: Yes, but then you would have to file with the County so that
the two lots together would not exceed 713%.
Councilman Geving: '!hat wasn't really how I envisioned this. I would like to
think in terms of one lot at a time. My motion was really very specific to
Lot 2 not to exceed 713% however it was worked out with the Manager and
yourself. My motion is still based on one lot situation with Lot 2 not to
exceed 713%. I guess that is my motion.
APPROVAL OF DESIGNATING PARK AND RECREATIONAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUNDS FOR
DEVELOPMENT OF NORTH LOTUS rAKE PARK.
Lori Sietsema: Bill has indicated that he is prepared to begin grading of the
North Lotus Lake Park plan which you had approved earlier this year. The Park
and Recreation Commission in the last budgetary process, when reviewing the
Capi tal Improvement Program, was not anticipating that they would ever get a
grant to develop the North Lotus Lake area so what they intended to do was to
rollover a large sum of $15,131313.1313-$20,13130.00 into 1987 so they would have a
larger sum of money to work with to begin that project by next year. '!hey
really felt that area park, something should get going at least by next year.
Bill has indicated that he can do the grading for $15,1300.013. '!here is
$15,0130.013 in that fun:] am the Park and Recreation Commission is very excited I
about getting it going this year if possible. '!hey have recommended that the
City allocate up to $15,0013.013 of the 410 Capital Improvement Program Fum
for the grading project at North Lotus Lake Park.
Mayor Ham il ton asked if on the Capi tal Improvement Fum which has $ 20,131313.013
in there presently, does that include the approximately $15,01313.1313 which was
given to the City for Herman Field. Don Ashworth stated that money was in
this fund but they were established as a reserve in this fund so it is not
included in the $31,13130.1313 balance.
Resolution #86-66: Mayor Hamilton moved, Councilman Horn seconded approval of
allocating up to $15,131313.00 from the Park and Recreation Capital Improvement
Fund for the grading of North Lotus Lake Park. All voted in favor and motion
carried.
CONSIDERATION OF 1987 POLICE CONTRACT.
Don Ashworth stated that the contract is a reasonable contract in line with
the previous contract, in line with formulas established by the Multi-City
Group.
Councilman Horn moved, Mayor Hamil ton seconded for approval of the 1987 Police
Contract. All voted in favor am motion carried.
I
26
I
I
I
...:; O~,(.,'l
bJ '. tL>~.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - August 18, 1986
DISCUSSION ON PROPOSED USE FOR ASSUMPTION SEMINARY PROPERTY.
Barbara Dacy: '!he Planning Commission was very specific. '!hey basically felt
that it would be the applicant's or developer's responsibility to prove to the
City that the building was historically significant and would be responsible
for going through that process with the federal agency and that they would not
deviate from the existing Ordinance No. 47-AJ as to apartments or any other
type of use. They did not want to intensify the use in that area. unless
historical significance could be shown and that it would have to be based on a
specific project. We brought this to the Council's attention too because we
do have a specific request to rehabilitate that into apartments. Again, it is
contrary to existing ordinance. We get calls maybe once every two months. We
have had bed and breakfast, automotive repairs, housing for the elderly, so we
needed some direction to tell some of these people how to PJ.rsue it.
Mayor Hamilton: '!he only thing I thought of was we should have the building
inspector go out there and look at those buildings and see if any of them
should be condemned. When we had a request from Chuck Galbrielson about a
group home and I talked with him just last week again, he still has interest
in that property but he would say at the time that some of those buildings
were just terrible and were totally stripped of all the piping and electrical
and everything so it may be a hazard. I would hate to find out that vagrants
or kids were in there playing or whatever. I'm certainly not in favor of
putting any apartments in there.
Councilman Geving: I'm not in favor of rezoning it.
Mayor Hamilton: I guess I don't even know to give any direction. I would say
that if someone has a use that they want to propose for there, they should
just propose it and maybe it would be alright, maybe it wouldn't.
Councilman Geving: I think they would have a hard time making it an
historical site though. It would take a tremendous amount of renovation.
Barbara Dacy: JoAnn has done a lot of research about this. Supposedly there
is a possibility that it could be established on the Register but that can
take six months to get that established.
Councilwoman Swenson: I can't imagine how anybody could conceivably renovate
that building. I have been in there. I understand that incredible things can
be done but...
Councilman Geving: I'm surprised that it hasn't burnt down.
Councilman Horn: I think we should PJ.rsue the historical significance though.
Mayor Hamilton: I don't think we should pursue anything on the property other
than making sure that the buildings are safe so if anyone goes in there, they
aren't going to fall through the floor, have a ceiling cave in on them.
Councilman Geving: Who owns the property and are taxes being paid on this
property?
27
210
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - August 18, 1986
Barbara Dacy: 'Ib the best of my knowledge, taxes are being paid. I believe
the owner's name is Notterman.
I
Councilman Geving: I can hardly imagine they are paying $8,000.00 a year in
taxes on this piece of property.
Councilwoman Swenson: '!here are, or at least there were, people living in the
one house am they have been using the others for storage.
Councilman Horn: As I read this, I didn't see where pursuing Historical
Registration effected us. All we would do is recommem to the applicant that
that would be his route.
Barbara Dacy: My concern was that if the building was destroyed and there was
some type of historical significance am so on. If it is useless am
dangerous then it should be destroyed but if there is some type of historical
value that could be a benefit to the City, then maybe we should consider an
adaptable use.
Councilman Horn: I think we should first have it inspected and then if
someone comes in with a recommendation, he go through the historical
significance process.
APPOINTMENTS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
I
Councilman Geving moved, Councilman Horn seconded to accept the application of
James Wildermuth as a Planning Commission member. All voted in favor am
motion carried.
CONSENT AGENDA:
2. (D) CONSIDER STOP SIGN PETITION FOR CARVER BEACH ROAD/NEZ PERCE
INTERSECTION. - -
Councilwoman Swenson: I have had a request to review the tri-corner of Nez
Perce and ponderosa. The uphill going west on Ponderosa, I guess creates some
major problems for people there in the winter time because Nez Perce is really
a drag strip am creates a problem and we had a request for two additional
stop signs there. One on Ponderosa. I'm bringing this up because we are
talking about that one corner down the back there. ponderosa is just about a
block south. '!here is a stop sign here on ponderosa but not on Nez Perce and
they have a heck of a time because they have to stop am if the street is bad,
they have a bad time whereas if they had a three-way stop there, it would be a
lot easier for them to get through.
Councilman Horn: How would having another stop sign help them if they can't
get going now because they are stopped.
Councilwoman Swenson: I don't know. I guess I would prefer to have the two
stop signs on Nez Perce.
I
28
215
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - August 18, 1986
I
Councilwoman Swenson stated that Ms: Melby who lives on the corner had
contacted her regarding this: Don Ashworth asked if the Council would like
Staff to address those two stop signs in a separate report to the Council:
Bill Monk asked if Staff should wait for a petition or does Council wish to
initiate that for action. Mayor Hamilton stated that Councilwoman Swenson had
already received the request for a resident.
Bill Monk stated that the streets in through there are narrow and curvy and
this was the first he had heard that it was a speed area. He stated that he
hates to use stop signs for speed control. There is fairly good sight
distance in through there. He stated he would have to look at it but right at
the moment, he would not recommend doing it for that purpose but if the
Council wants to wait for a petition to corne, then process it.
Councilwoman Swenson stated that it was not a matter of worrying about a
petition, it is a question of a concerned citizen who lives on that corner,
who is really concerned about the potential traffic accidents. Bill Monk
stated that it wouldn't necessarily take a petition. A single letter would
suffice for him to bring in to the Council for action.
Councilwoman Swenson moved, Councilman Geving seconded to accept the stop sign
petition for Carver Beach/Nez Perce Intersection. All voted in favor and
motion carried.
I COUNCIL PRESENTATION: STERLING ESTATES BOAT ORDINANCE
Barbara Dacy: I attended the Homeowners Association Meeting on Thursday and
they wanted some clarification of the Ordinance and the new Ordinance
Amendment. As you can see by the letter in the administrative section, there
supposedly has been boats added to the existing dock that is there. '!he
current ordinance declares that existing beachlots to continue as non-
conforming uses meaning that whatever occurred on the effective date of the
ordinance is allowed to continue. However, if they increase that, that is not
permi tted. So the issue is different homeowners have different
interpretations of what was occurring on the beach lot prior to the effective
date of the ordinance.
Councilman Horn: What was suppose to have happened is that Staff was to go
around and record what the current usage was of all and what non-conforming
usage was at that point.
Barbara Dacy: '!hat is exactly right. We still have that survey on file. It
was done on June 4, 1981 but what we found, that is only one day out of the
summer in early June. Some docks were not installed yet, the boats could have
been out fishing, it could have been a bad year so they didn't install the
docks right away.
I
Councilman Horn: '!hen what was suppose to happen is the beachlot owner was
sur:;pose to corne and peti ton to the City and say that what we had recorded was
not adequate. You are going to go out there and record exactly what we
29
216
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - August 18, 1986
observed and they were suppose to come back and verify it if we told them that
they were overintensifying.
I
Barbara Dacy: We just did the same thing again this summer because of their
request and we have gotten complaints on the Minnewashta Heights dock and some
other docks on the other lakes, we sent out a copy of that survey done in 1981
and said to verify this so if there is a violation issue we can pursue it and
have adequate facts to prosecute. So far, I have only gotten two responses
yet so it is getting very difficult to work with some of these associations
because one set of people are saying one thing and the other is saying another
and we are trying to have them document as much as possible, be willing to
testify if necessary, submit pictures, etc..
Councilman Horn: What they are suwose to do though is come back and awly
again if what they have is more then what is recorded by the Ci ty Staff so
they should be coming to us.
Barbara Dacy: But we can't seem to agree as to what occurred there in the
first place.
Councilman Horn: What is on the records? That is the record and they want
greater intensification of that then they have to come back for a non-
conforming use permit otherwise they have to take it away.
Barbara Dacy: In this particular case, we did establish that the dock can
continue to exist. I would have to look at the survey again to see what we
had for the number of boats. I think in 1981 we had two, I would have to
verify that.
I
Councilman Horn: If what they are doing now is greater then what is on the
records for that lot, then they are non-conforming and they have to cease and
desist. That was the question that I had. Is it greater intensity then what
is on the record.
Barbara Dacy: It appears to be so but again, to give the Homeowners
Association the benefit of the doubt, I said if you have some contrary to that
then prove it to us. SUbmit your pictures, etc. because maybe on that one day
two of the boats were out fishing.
Mayor Hamilton: Maybe it is one we should keep an eye on to see how it
develops.
Councilman Geving: Is it an unusual situation with that particular one?
Councilman Horn: No but it should be noted that anytime that this comes up,
if the adjacent property owners say, that is really the enforcement for this,
if they see further intensification, this is their mechanism to have it
stopped and it is incumbant on the Association to come back to us and get
their non-conforming use awroved otherwise they have no option. If you tell
them that and they don't come back before us, then they will have to quit
using it and go back to what you have on record.
I
30
I
I
I
Gn17
~,j.L t>
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - August 18, 1986
Barbara Dacy: '!he way we left on Thursday night, they were going to return
information to me as soon as possible regarding the number of boats am then
we would go from there. If it is larger, then they would have to go through
the Commission for a permit process am I told them because of the size of the
lot and so on, that if they did come through under today's standards, there is
no way that would be approved.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATION:
Bill Monk stated that the administrative section there is a letter from
the Watershed District about a meeting they are inviting people to attend on
September 3, 1986 at 7:30 p.m. at the Eden Prairie School where they meet. He
bel ieved that letter was in response to a lot of the things that have occurred
about the South Lotus Lake Project. About inadequate control by the Watershed
District, not strong enough overall plan to protect the lake, etc.. He stated
he may attend and if any Council members wanted to attend, he just wanted to
advise the Council where the letter was coming from.
Councilman Horn asked if anything was being done to find a replacement for the
City Engineer. Don Ashworth stated that everything possible was being done.
Mayor Hamilton moved, Councilman Geving seconded to adjourn the meeting. All
voted in favor and the meeting was adjourned at 10:40 p.m..
Prepared by Nann Opheim
31