Loading...
1987 01 12t73 CITY C~IL MEETING 12, 1987 Hamilton called the meeting to order. The meeting was opened with the to the Flag. PRESENT: Councilman Horn, Councilman Geving, Councilman Boyt and Johnson. PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Roger Knutson, Barbara Dacy, Lori Sietsema, Gary 'eh and Todd Gerhardt. OF OFFICE: Roger Knutson, City Attorney, officially administered the of Office for Mayor Tom }~milton, Councilman Jay Johnson ar~ Councilman [illiam Boyt. OF AGENDA: Councilman Geving moved, Councilman Horn seconded to the agenda as presented. Mi voted in favor ar~ motion carried. [ZATIONAL ITf2~S - 1987: Rules of Procedure: Mayor Hamilton moved, Councilman Geving seconded to the Rules of Procedures followirg Robert's Rules of Order with the changes regarding "Approval of Minutes" to be included in the Consent ienda; to move the "Approval of Accounts" after New Business in terms of ,rder on the Agenda; and to adopt the Rules of Procedure in Resolution form. voted in favor ar~ motion carried. ~ilman Boyt requested that it would be helpful to have a condensed outline procedures that the Council follows available to tt~ public. Official Newspaper: Mayor Hamilton moved~ Councilman Geving seconded to :ove South Shore Weekly News as the official newspaper for the City. All in favor and motion carried. :. Official De~sitory: Councilman Horn moved, Mayor ~amilton seconded to Chanhassen Bank as the official depository for the City of Ail voted in favor and motion carried. Attorney: Councilman Geving moved, Councilman Horn seconded to n the firm of Grannis, Grannis, Farrell and Knutson as City Attorney for City of Chanhassen. All voted in favor arz] motion carried. Bond Consultant: Mayor Hamilton moved, Councilman Geving seconded to the fire of Merry and Associates as the Bond Consultants for the City Chanhassen. All voted in favor and motion carried. Mayor: Mayor Hamilton moved, Councilman Horn seconded to elect Geving as the Acting Mayor. Ail voted in favor except Councilman who abstained and motion carried. Fire Marshall: Mayor Hamilton moved, Councilman Geving seconded to lint Steve Madden and Dale Gregory will perfom the duties of Fire Marshall 174 City Council Meeting - January 12, 1987 until the time that the City fir~s a replacement for Jim Castleberry. Ail voted in favor and motion carried. h. Weed Ins~ecto. r: Councilman Geving moved, Councilman Horn seconded to appoint Mayor Hamilton as Weed Inspector and the City Engineer, Gary Warren as Assistance Weed Inspector. All voted in favor and motion carried. i. Fire Chief: Mayor Hamilton moved, Councilman Horn seconded to approve Art · Kerber as the Fire Chief. All voted in favor and motion carried. j. Health Officer: Mayor Hamilton moved, Councilman Geving seconed to appoint Dr. David McCollum as the City's Health Officer. All voted in favor and motion carried. k. City Auditors: Mayor Hamilton moved, Councilman Horn seconded to authorize the 1986 Audit Contract to the firm of Voto, Tautges, Redpath and Company. All voted in favor and motion carried. CONSENT AGENDA: Mayor Hamilton moved, Councilman Horn seconded to approve the 'following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations: (a) Final Plat Approval, West Village Heights, James ~y. (b) Amendment to the Joint Powers Agreement Establishing the Southwest Area Transit Commission. (c) Resolution 987-1: Approval of Land Use Plan Amendment Request to Include West 65th Street and Crestview Drive in the Metropolitan Urban Service Area. (d) Approval of Certificate of Correction, Fox Hollow 4th Addition. (e) Accept Resignation from Park and Recreation Commissioner, Wallace McKay. (f) Set Special Meeting Date for Joint City Council/Park and Recreation Commission meeting. (i) Resolution 987-2: Request to Remove No Park Zone along Kiowa Trail, City of Chanhas~en. Ail voted in favor and motion carried. Mayor Hamilton stated that because there were a number of people present at the meeting regarding Consent Agenda items, the Council would discuss items (g) and (h) at this point in the meeting instead of at the end of the meeting. (~) MRPA Request to Hold the Men's District Softball Tournament at Lake Ann Park. Councilman Boyt: They are real brief on (g), that's the one about the Men's District Softball Tournament and that's certainly exciting news to see that they are interested in using our field. I would suggest that rather than 171 Council Meeting - January 12, 1987 · lng all park entrance fees, which in talking to a couple Park and Rec )le, that wasn't discussed at their meeting or at least they don't remember being discussed, I would suggest that we charge $2.00. I think there are to be costs to the City of running this tournament and I think ~2.00 is nominal fee and I don't think we should open the gates to Lake Ar~ in August just let people come in so I would recommend that we give them some sort a pass that they buy for $2.00 and they can use it for the tournament. Sietsema: I talked to Dale and basically, except for additional pick-up picking up litter ar~ whatever, there aren't really a lot of extra as far as maintaining things. The other thing is the reason that I had ecommended in my Staff Report to the Park and Recreation Commission to waive fees is because we are members of the Minnesota Recreation Association and send teams every year to other communities for these tournaments ar~ pretty :h across the board they do waive the fees if there are Park fees charged it is kind of our turn to do that, to have th~ tournament. Boyt: Would it be then, by waiving fees, is that waiving fees for or waiving fees for just everybody that comes in on that weekend? Sietsema: We could, if you want to, try and figure out some way to [iscriminate who is playing ar~ who isn't but we get a lot of people out there watch the games and that is where we make the money is off the concessions the spectators, not as much as by the players. I would rather that we the fees for everyone involved with the tournament. It would be hard to the fees for the people playing in the tournament and not the people the beach but the spectators are as much a part of the tournament as the players. I would recon~end that we waive the~ for the whole weekend. Boyt: It would strike me that if you get a good turn-out, and I ,ld assume you will, that there is wear and tear comparable to whatever we with our men's softball league and they all buy passes to get in to play they are part of the community generally. We're bringing people in from of the community who are making no contribution to the park but Using it. think it' s a nice balance. It' s my point but I'm finished. Johnson: Is the Fire Department, has this been discussed with iri Sietsema: Dick briefly discussed it ar~ their general consensus on their rst discussion was t~ are not interested so our next step was I was going :o offer it to the Legion ar~ if they aren't interested, then it will go to :he City f~ployees to their group fund to do it. .~ouncilman Johnson: So you're saying you're having trouble finding someone to Fun th~ concessions. Lori Sietsema: After that I wil probably have myself and my gate attendants ~s t3~ concession workers. Mayor Hamilton: There is another group I think you ought to contact and that's the Chamber of Commerce. They may want to run it through their City Council Meeting - January 12, 1987 Scholarship Fund or something. It's certainly something that they may want to think about. Councilman Geving moved, Councilman Horn seconded to approve the MRPS request to hold the Men's District Softball Tournament at Lake Ann Park. All voted in favor and motion carried. (h) Approval of Lotus Lake Boat Access Operational Procedures. Councilman Boyt: I would like to see, I think the Park Rules and Lake Regulations being posted will help everybody out. I wish there were some way that we could get these to the residents of the lake as well and I would suggest that we consider adding some of these that I suspect are covered by State Statute where people might be benefitted by being reminded of them. One of them is I think we should have something on there that all boats must have a properly functioning noise suppression system. Anybody who has ~ out on Lake Minnetonka realizes that there are some people who think they can run a boat without a muffler. I would suggest, I have a few of these and I would just like to suggest them. I would suggest that another one, down on the third point we make the 150 feet of a scuba flag, I would suggest that we also want some sort of feet from a non-motorized watercraft, sailboat or whatever. They should be reminded that there is a restriction as to how close they can come and I think something else that would bear mentioning there is that motorized watercraft always must yield to non-motorized watercraft. Mayor Hamilton: I noticed that it says here that there is going to be no parking from TH 101 for approximately 500 feet. That is going into the park, is that correct? My question is how abouthaving noparking allowed on TH 101 or is that now posted there? That was one of our concerns that we talked about that once the parking in the park is full are people going to go and try and park on the highway which you don't want them to do. I think we ought to contact the Highway Department right now and get no parking signs along TH 101 along the entrance so it would make it virtually impossible for anyone to park there, on both sides. Don Ashworth: Did we have a problem with that? Mayor Hamilton: That's what I'm saying. Contact the State or do you want to wait until there is a problem and then contact them? Don Ashworth: We can contact the State but the way Lori has shown it, we aren't going to let them in after that lot is filled. Mayor Hamilton: They wouldn't be able to put their boat in there? Don Ashworth: I would like to try it without resorting to signage. We have a lot of signage along TH 101 right now. We can get everything in place and if there is a problem, we could literally have signage up in a week. I think we're getting into quite an expense for each of the signs posted. You are talking anywhere from $35.00 to $50.00 per sign. Council Meeting - January 12, 1987 Mayor Hamilton: Just for an example and use ridiculous and say a group of ~le got together and decided that they all wanted to all come to Lotus Lake boat on tbs weekerx] ar~ there are 20 people all having boats ar~ there is room for 12 so the first 8 are going to go in, put their boat in and rive out and the next 12 can come in ar~ put their boats in ar~ park their They may park on the highway, they may park someplace else. I guess that's what we're trying to avoid with that. That is kind of ridiculous. Roger Karjalahti: I had a question on defining the lot being full. If we have 12 spots and two are designated har~icapped only, when we fill the 10 are we going to close off the lot at that time and not let anybody else in unless they have a handicap sticker? Otherwise that llth boat comes in and he's the problem because he can launch but he has no place to park because the chain wasn't closed so he can go out and park on the street like Tom is talking. Councilman Geving: I think the handicap has to be left open. Mayor Hamilton: Handicap is handicap. Roger Karjalahti: It has to be open for handicap but does that mean now that we say the lot is full except handicap where we're going to put the chain across because if we don't, we're going to continue launching and then the parking is going to go down South Shore Drive ar~ then maybe up along TH 101. Mayor Hamilton: ~hat's your thought on that subject Lori? Lori Sietsena: To be honest, I hadn't consider that. Mayor Hamilton: It seems like if there are two spots for handicap, then they ought to be for handicap, period. If there are 10 boats on the lake and 2 spots open for handicap, the lot is full unless someone comes with a handicap sticker. There is no exception for that. Maybe you want to include that in the rules. Jack Melby: I think for sanitary and safety reasons, I would like to see no pets allowed. Councilman Geving: I think that's included in here. Jack Melby: Two, for my benefit, if you could ser~ me a copy of the Rules amd Regulations that you' ye got. Mayor Hamilton: A couple of other things I would like to see us do with the Rules and Regulations would be to have them printed ar~ distributed to anybody using and if somebody comes in you hand them the Rules and Regulations along with having them posted. You also hand them a copy of it so they've got them for anybody using it. Should we have a sign in the park that violators will be towed at their own expense? In-fact I was going to call Gary today to see if himself or other local towers would contract with us to tow cars if we have a problen there. Is that something that you do Gary? c~ry Brown: Yes. 128 City Council Meeting - January 12, 1987 Mr. Arseth: I would like to see a trash can put down there. We've been getting a lot of beer cans, pop cans, McDonald bags, everything blowing around already. Also, you're going to need a Satellite down there plus right now they are parking all over your nice new sod that you put in and also the handicap people right now can't even find a place to park down there on Saturday morning because they are using that area for just ordinary parking for people other than handicap. Mayor Hamilton: Tnere isn't any signage up yet I don't believe, so there should be signage put up as soon as possible to try and minimize any destruction to the park right now. Councilman Geving: I liked the one Bill brought up about not operating a watercraft within a certain number of feet of a fixed object whether it be a dock or some other floating pontoon raft or whatever it is. ~nat's the one that I think is most important to me. Mayor Hamilton: I wanted to ask Bill, you said the noise suppression device on your boat, if we include that that has to apply to everyone on the lake also and I don't know what you mean by that. Are you talking about boats that are noisier than heck and I can hear all the way on top of the hill? Councilman Boyt: I suspect that there is probably a State Statute that makes it very specific. I don't know if people are all that aware of it and I think this is an opportunity to make them more aware. Roger Knutson: I don't know anything about this subject but my father owned a 5 hp motor which is about 50 years old and it doesn't make much noise, they don't have a muffler on it I don't think. Councilman Boyt: Yes, they do. It runs down through the water. Since the exhaust goes down through the water, it' s muffled. Councilman Horn: I'm wondering, a lot of people bring their dogs fishing with them and I 'm wondering why w~ don't allow ths~ to do that if they are leashed? Mayor Hamilton: What does our current Ordinance say? No dogs, leashed or unleashed are allowed in the park. Lori Sietssma: No pets at all are allowed in the park. Councilman Horn: Is that typical? Mayor Hamilton: I think so. Yes, I know it is in other parks. Councilman Horn: It must be the residents can do it but the people who come in can't. One other comment about what we put on the sign. I think the purpose, at least as I read it was to highlight the relevant issues. My experience with posting signs by water areas and if you try to put too much on them, they lose their pizzazz. Pretty soon the lettering is so small that you can bearly read it. I would suggest that we don't over clutter this one. Council Meeting - January 12, 1987 Hamilton: That will have the hours of operation on it too? Sietsema: Yes. Geving: I think a lot of what you're talking about here Clark, it be put on this flyer of Tom's, if it is going to be handed out, but the in itself would just include the hours of operation and some of the inificant rules about parking. Not all the ir~ividual park operations. Hamilton: I was thinking of something similar to what the Arboreteum Everytime you drive in there they har~ you 4 or 5 different things of literature. Park Rules for one thing and then what is going on in the park. Horn: I have no problem with adding to 'tha~ My only concern was too much on the signs so it would not be readable. My only experience with passing out literature like that too is the fact that many times it is a source of litter. Mayor Hamilton: Can w~ get s~me trash barrels down there quite soon? Councilman Boyt: Thinking of the source of litter, which I suspect it might be, would you pursue the possibility of having this printed up as a card rather than a 8 1/2 x 11 sheet of paper ar~ maybe if it is close to pocket size, that is what people would do with it rather than looking at it and letting it blow in the wind. I agree with you that it is a difficult situation if you put very much on a sign people don't bother to read it and maybe Tom's rec~m~ndation of a handout covers the difficulty. Councilman Johnson: On a handout, this is going to the people that are going to be launching the boats, that's what it's for, we're assigning the 1~ slots there for parking and 2 for handicapS, couldn't it be almost something that you give, you park in slot 12, you park in slot so and so. This is kind of their parking pass to show they are the person who is suppose to be parking there. It's got the rules on it and what slot they are suppose to park in and then they hand that back to you when they leave so there is no litter if they give it back to you. Lots of ideas. Mayor Hamilton: Maybe you want to kick that aroum~ and see what you come up with. Councilman Horn: I assume there will be other people parking besides boaters, who just want to use the park. Mayor Hamilton: They should get a copy too. Councilman Johnson: What happens on the lake is one set and what happens on the park grounds is another set. Councilman Boyt: You make a good point Clark that I would like some clarification oru I thought when I read this it said that people without boats could only park in one spot and people with boats could only park where the boats are launched, is that right? So that means if we had, for instance, City Council Meeting - January 12, 1987 a big turnout of just park users, how many spots do they have? Lori Sietsema: Taere are 12 single car only slots. Councilman Boyt: So there are 12 of each because it says something in here about 12 car/trailer spaces. Lori $ietsema: Yes, 12 car/trailer and to be honest, I'm not sure how many, it's 12 or 15. Councilman Boyt: We're basically saying there's no flexibility to take any of the car/trailer spots up with the cars? Lori Sietsema: Right. ~ne car/trailers have to be in the car/trailer spots and the car/trailers can not park in regular spots. The signs up along the street will be no car/trailer parking along the streets. Taey can use them only to use the park. Councilman Johnson: The streets within the park. Lori Sietsema: No, along the street. Councilman Boyt: Roger, can we do that? Discriminate against people who have a trailer on the back of their car versus people who don't have a trailer on the back of their car? Roger Knutson: As far as parking lots? Councilman Boyt: As far as on the streets. On the street parking. Roger Knutson: I don't see any reason why you couldn't if you made that your policy if you wanted to. Councilman Horn: Can you then conversely force a person to have a trailer on their car to park in a spot? A spot where it's a two spot portion for a car and trailer. In other words, if a car parked where a car and trailer should park, could you ticket them? Lori Sietsema: Yes. Mayor Hamilton: How about if the car, you have say a rowboat type things where they sit right on top of the car. Lori Sietsema: If you don't have a trailer on your car, you can't park in the car/trailer spot. Mayor Hamilton: But you can put a boat in. Tnen we're getting to the point where you can have more than 12 in the lake because you can put a boat on top of a car, a boat that you can put a motor on, and you're saying you can't use one of those spots so now you're up to 13 or more. I see those people going fishing. It's a one person operation where you have thing that hooks on top of your car and I don't know how they do it but it just sits on top of the '.ity Council Meeting - January 12, 1987 :ar. It's upside down, it's a boat with a motor on back. When a person puts boat in, I don't care if it's a canoe or a sailboat or a motorboat, they put t in the lake, that's one of the 12. There are 12 boats period that they put the lake. If they put a canoe off the top of their car, or if they have canoes on top of their car? Sietsena: Okay, that can be controlled. Hamilton: Then they park in the spot for the boats. As long as they in the middle of the two so it takes up both spaces. If that's a problem has to be some way to resolve it so we don't have more than the allowed going iD. I think those are things that we need to get formalized so whoever is working in that house there, will help in those situations. ~ilman Geving: But don't you think T~n that a lot of these things are ioing to evolve after we have ~ in operation a little bit. After Memorial we'll have another meeting and Lori, you come back to us at that time, the first of June or whatever and tell us the type of problems you are iiencing and maybe there are seine rule changes that we have to make at time to position this thing exactly the way it should be. Hamilton: I'm just trying to make this as painless as possible. Geving: I know there are going to be adjustments. ~ne other when are we going to get the little shed up on top of the hill there? facility for the park attendant. Sietsema: The slab has already gone in so this Spring. I envision that would... ilman Geving: Something like we've got at Lake Ann? ~ri Sietsena: Yes. lman Horn: (]me comment, slightly off the subject but I have also cars parked on the new grass and I would like the Staff to try and do ~omething about that so we can keep them off. Especially this winter when we have any snow, it's going to really tough on the grass with tb~ 'cars · on there. Hamilton: Tell the Sheriff and Deputies to start patrolling. Ashworth: Where are they parking? Horn: Tmey are parking down by the lake On the grass. Ice fishennan. Roger Karjalahti: Just a comment on the rules and an idea I had. Instead of card, which can still get thrown away, just have a 8 1/2 x 11 sheet that folds over into a brochure arx] something on Chan with the Maple Leaf and On the back have the limits on fisl~ Something that has pertinence to fishing. Of that's not all the people that are going out. Just something that City Council Meeting - January 12, 1987 folds over that they will kccp because a card won't have enough room to get all the things down and we're going to have to pick up sc~e of the rest. Mayor Hamilton: I think we can develop something that will be nice to hand out. Roger Karjalahti: It can have some interesting points on there. Talk about sunburn or whatever. Councilman Geving: I think little things like the average depth of the lake, the kinds of fish in the lake. Roger Karjalahti: Or a little map of the lake. Dianne Preiditus: And use biodegradable paper. Mayor Hamilton: Anything else? If not, I would entertain a motion to approve this with the noted changes and I think we should have this back for review again. Dianne Preiditus: I have just one question about a canoe car. I thought the road down to the lake for boats is separate from the park road and so that would be one of the boats, whether it had a trailer or not, they would have to use the boat road to get down to the water with their canoe right, so they would have to park in the boat parking lot. Is that true? That was my concern about how do you just keep 12 boats going in the water. Mayor Hamilton: Tnat's the same concern I had. You get the type of boat that one person can handle on top of your car, you can have one or even two canoes. I don't know if we addressed that. You can put two canoes on top of your car. Does that account for two or what do we do? Do we put an orange cone in one of the spots to say that that's been used. Councilman Johnson: Are we worried about canoes? Mayor Hamilton: Personally canoes and sailboats, I would think everybody would love to see on the lake but it's the motorboats that cause the problsms. Councilman Johnson: You can come driving up with six of them on a trailer and a group from the church is going to go out in the lake and they then fill up 6 parking spots. Roger Karjalahti: Tney're going to go down the river. They don't want anything as sedate as a little lake. Mayor Hamilton: Maybe you should address that too Lori. A group coming in with multiple canoes. How are we going to handle that? Rather than approving this, I think we should t~_ble this until Lori brings it back to us with some clarification. ',ity Council Meeting - January 12, 1987 Hamilton moved, Councilman Horn seconded to table approval of Lotus Lake Access Operational Procedures for further clarificatio~ All voted in ~avor amd motion carried. iSITORS PRESENTATIONS: Leon Hendrickson, President, Chanhassen Senior Her~rickson: I'm on the Advisory Board of the South Shore Senior Center they wanted me to report back to you o~ the 1986 activities. The Center is continuing to grow. 'They have been under existence for three years now and end of the quarter the first year they had 19 in attendance and at the end )f the quarter of 1986 they had 6~ as the average attendance. Our living Day dinner celebration or congregate dining, they took care of people and that's the heart of the organization is the congregate dining all activities are continuing to grow. I would like to give out some istics regarding 1986 which you can look at at your convenience. Hamilton asked if the Chan Seniors were still meeting at the elementary or if they had gone over to the other place. Leon Hendrickson stated they were mccting at both places. ~ilman Geving asked if the Senior Citizens were aware of the new potential in the City of Chanhasse~ and Mr. Hendrickson stated yes, they were aware of that. Hamilton asked out of the average of 6~ people in attendance at the 's, how many were from Chanhasseru Leon Hendr ickson stated that about l's of the people are from Chanhassen. Mayor Hamilton asked if better Ltion was available, would that increase the participation. Mr. [rickson said that it probably would but generally those that have cars pick up others to go to the center. OF MINUTES: Geving moved, Mayor Hamilton seconded to approve the Minutes of the Council meeting dated December 15, 198~ All voted in favor and motion tied. Hamilton moved, Councilman Geving seconded to note the Minutes of the Commission meeting dated December lq, 1986. All voted in favor and carried. BY CHADDA TO ESTABLISH A ~ITY CENTER TASK FORCE. Don Ashworth: I see Mr. Johnson is present this evening. They hsd made a :ion both at the Park and Recreation Commission as well as the Housing Redevelopment Authority as part of the downtown redevelopment plaru A community center is shown in that plan and Mr. Johnson would encourage the City to start work on the' feasibility for that type of facility. When it did go to the Housing and Redevelopment Authority they did recommend to the City Council that the Council proceed with setting a citizens committee or 11 City Council Meeting - January 12, 1987 whatever fashion the Council may choose but anyway to move ahead with at least studying this issue. Mayor Hamilton: It seems to be a good idea. I think we should have a Commission to look at all aspects of having a Community Center. We've talked about it for a long time. I think it's time now to start doing something about it and have a commission look at all the pros and cons and where it should or shouldn't be and whys and wherefores. I guess it's time to get started so I guess the recommendation was that there should be a person on the conxnittee from the Council, citizens at large and the Planning Cimxnission. Don Ashworth: We're suggesting that Council authorize Staff to advertise for citizens at large and go back to each of the Commissions asking them to select saneone in their group to serve on this committee. Councilman Geving: I would like to, and I do believe that this is time for a study of this nature. I think this is the way to handle it. We are asking, or at least CHADOA is asking or proposing that this be a general obligation bond financing type of operation so this is a significant amount of money that could be bonded and financed by the general public. In that respect I would like to say that there should be someone on this committee that is a finance type person because it is going to get deeply involved in assessments and alternatives for financing. I would also like to put another alternative here is to study the alternative locations. ~ne study as it is being proposed to us is that it be part of the downtown relocation and develol~nent effort. There may be a better site for such a community center that is not in the downtown area. I understand what CHADOA is attempting to do here for the downtown redevelopment but I think the committee should study all avenues of where is the best place for the location of such facility if we have to go out and build it from scratch, would it be better to build it on the outskirts of town or in the center of our community which could be somewhere between here and Chaska or somewhere between here and the northern part of our community but not necessarily located in the downtown area. I suspect that there are also some members who served on our previous downtown public facilities committee that are still available and they would do a very good job. It just so happened that before their committee recommendations could be reviewed by the Council we had already gone ahead and sold the Animal Fair building so they never really got to the point where their recommendations were answered but I think some of those people might still be available and I think of several people that are very active in the community sports. I can give you some names if you like. I think the questions I have would be brought up by the group so I'm not going to get into the details of finances, costs, what should be included in a community center in terms of facilities and so forth. I very much want the group to study carefully page 4 of this proposal which is the cost of the community center and the individual items such as the main ice arena, the blue rink arena, the community center building, the farmers market. Do we need a farmers market? Do we need an ice arena? What should we do with the old Bloomberg ice arena as we now know it? Who is going to. pay for the parking ramp that could also be used by the Dinner Theater people, etc, etc and all those kinds of questions hopefully will be answered so that we'll have a pretty good idea whether or not to proceed with this and then secondly, whether or not it should be financed through a bond issue or financed by 12 .~ity Council Meeting - January 12, 1987 ivate individuals as a private enterprise or somewhere in the middle of this ere some of the costs of this could be defrayed through the income that be derived from the community center facility so all of those items ~ he addressed and I, as well as the rest of the Council, are going to be interested in this. I surveyed a number of people myself before I came this meeting and I get an overwhelming yes that there is an interest in a center. Hamilton: I agree with you Dale that there are a lot of people that be good on this committee and there's one present in this ro~m and I~ to put her on notice right now that we're going to call her and ask her if she would be interested, Pat Swenson, former Councilwoman Swensor~ I have a great deal of respect for her judgment and her ideas and I know she has always ~ a strong proponent of a community center am~ I think she would do an excellent job on it. I'll be contacting you. We should at least consider the Council who would like to be a member. Perhaps to kick it off if we could one person and the others can follow suit. Is there anybody that would like to volunteer? I'll ask that first. Councilman Boyt: I'll volunteer. I'll be one of the volunteers if somebody else would like to volunteer. Mayor Hamilton: Anyone else? Mayor Hamilton moved, Councilman Geving seconded to appoint Councilman Boyt as the City Council's representative on the Ommnunity Center Task Force. All voted in favor and motion carried. Councilman Horn: I had one other comment too and I think it just amplifies a little bit what Dale said. I would hope that t~ won't start out with any constraints on this committee. What we are seeing here is a recommendation for a community center facility should not be under constraint. They should take a full, fresh look at this thing. This is maybe one scenario but I don't think t~ should start with that. I think t~ should start in a broader sense of a community facility. If it turns out to be this, that's fine but I don't think that should be the primary goal. Mayor Hamilton: Some of the things in here they ~ to consider. I think that gives the Committee a starting place. Councilman Horn: I think the idea has to be considered but I think they already have a starting place from the last effort that they did and I think most of those ideas were considered amd met and they shouldn't be locked into Mayor Hamilton: I don't think they should be locked in. It should be totally open. Whatever is out there is fair game. Councilman Geving: One thing I would like to interject too Tom, the phasing of the various downtown projects is something that really hasn't beec~e a part of the City Council presentation to us. We have not really had that brought before us as a project as far as I~ concerned ar~ so the recommendation here 13 City Council Meeting - January 12, 1987 is that it be a Phase I project. I would like to delete that term and put no constraints on this committee so they have to hurry up ar~ get the job done just so we can get something in the ground. I do not consider this a Phase I project. It will be done when the committee is ready to make their report and it shouldn't be carved out. The first thing that we do in the redevelopment of our downtown, if the group decides that it should be placed in the downtown, so that there is language to that effect in this document so I would like to, with that understanding, suggest that it not be a Phase I consideration. Brad Johnson: I think I agree with Dale and Clark about the location. I guess our concern is primarily that we put it in the downtown area because there was already space downtown for a center which we realize is still there and that's the only reason why we put it there. The urgency that we have on timing is simply that we will begin planning of that whole block area this summer. We would just like to have an indication of whether it will be there or not and we can plan around that. I think the same goes for the local traffic. A lot of things that will happen in the downtown area in the planning process, we will r~ to know about that time if that site is a good site or not but other than that I agree. I think we should look at all sites and decide where the best place is and I appreciate what you've done. It's exactly what we're looking for. Councilman Johnson: Do we ~ a motion to establish a community center advisory committee? We assigned Bill to it but we haven't had a motion yet to make the committee so I would like to make a motion to create the committee that we just assigned Bill to in terms of what Dale and Clark have been talking about. It is a City wide search and review of the feasibility of having this con~nunity center. Councilman Johnson moved, Mayor Hamilton seconded to establish a Community Center Task Force. All voted in favor and motion carried. Greg: ~nis is a minor problem but I think if you have three people at large, I think just as my own comments as a member of the CFA or others, there are senior organizations, there are probably more spots to make up the committee. You're probably talking about five outside people that would have great interest in different things. Mayor Hamilton: I'm not sure if you get a person from every interest group on there, I think the larger the committee the more difficult it is to get anything accomplished so if you bring those people in an advisory capacity and ask for their opinions and ideas is probaby the best way to handle some of the others at least from my standpoint. Don Ashworth: Did that include authorization for Staff to advertise? Mayor Hamil ton: Yes. DISCUSSION OF CHAMBER SIGN PROPOSAL. Mayor Hamilton: Gary Brown who is President of the Chamber is here with us 14 '37 2ity (buncil Meeting - January 12, 1987 and I guess I would just like to preface any remarks that Gary might want to add just to say that the Chamber that I've been active in for quite a few ~. rs has worked ~n this sign for maybe four years now and I was a little ~isturbed when they went to the Planning Commission to ~ some of the , as Gary was, that were made about the sign. It isn't something that been hidden in the closet for all these years. It has ~ brought up at every Chamber meeting for the last four years. I think they genuinely a sign and I think they should have a sign and some of the comments that were made were being kind of futuristic to what is going to be happening to the City. I don't think they can predict that. We ~ to have a sign now to the Chamber and most of all my biggest concern is that the City work with the Chamber. After all the Chamber of Oommerce, the people who are members of the Chamber are the City. They are business people in the City to make things happe~ here who play a major role in this City. To ~ the kind of things that were said previously at the Planning Commissio~ meeting I guess were addressing the r~-~, looked like an attempt to just knock them down without giving a chance to say anything or to have any respect for what their wishes were. Councilman Horn: I was disturbed when I read the Planning Commission Minutes also. It occurred to me that there was quite a bit of confusion on the Planning Commission's part between what was really happening and what the activities of the Chamber were and the fact that there didn't seem to be any coordination with that and the BRW and what they were doing downtown. I think that ~ had spoken with Gary ar~ his group and some of that confusion was... Gary Brown: They got confused between what we were trying to sell an idea on, the sign that we wanted to put up, between that and BRW and they got such a mix-up there that they didn't ur~erst~ really which sign they were talking about at any one time. The guy from BRW did say that night that he wanted to come back and talk to me later about this sign thing which was the first part of November maybe and he hasn't come back or answered any of my calls yet so I guess I'm not too excited about waiting for him any longer. Barbara Dacy: Mr. Lasher was in Europe after that meeting on December 10th. He was supposed to return January 7th. Councilman Horn: Is he the only one at BRW that can work on this? Don't they designate someone else whe~ they leave s~ething har~3ing like this? Barbara Dacy: Actually, to be frank, Staff 'did not ask BRW to authorize the work function until we had your approval and this is part of the request tonight. T~e direction from the Planning Commission was mixed and Staff didn't really feel comfortable authorizing BI~ to expend those funds until you saw this proposal. Councilman Horn: I think the concern the Planning Commission had was valid in that there is such a vast difference between what the two signs were in terms of architectural, ink, materials and everything else that I can see how they would have a problen trying to get things to bler~ together. 15 City Council Meeting - January 12, 1987 Councilman Geving: I think this is the kind of issue where we've got too many players in the game. We've got the HRA involved, we've got the BRW, City Council, Chamber. It's the kind of issue where everybody is going to have an idea and opinion about how best to do this and my personal opinion is that we ought to assign Barb Dacy to this project. She can work directly with the Chamber. She can come back together with the City Council. We'll make the decision and be done with it. I know that we have to respect everybody else involved but we're not going to get this done if we get too many players still in the game. I would like to limit it to just the Chamber and City Council and be done with it and have Barb act as our go between. Would you agree to that Tom? That's the way I see this whole thing because we've been going on with this for two years now. I think it's bee~ two years. I don't know how many years but let's get on with it and I think we can do it ourselves without having to get too many outside interests involved and I think whatever. I'm flexible and I think the Council is pretty flexible on these designs and if we can create and get this job done and get the signs up this spring. Mayor Hamilton: When the BRW thing came in was a total surprise to me. All the talking about signs with the Chamber has bccn going on and everybody has known about it who has had any interest in it and the Chamber has been wanting to put one up. Put up the darn sign. That's a totally different sign than the one that BRW suddenly is talking about and got thrown in there at the last minute and I think there is another proposal now that is going to muddy the waters even more and I don't think that has any effect on the Chamber sign and that may be a better proposal than the ones we've seen here with the BRW signs and that's down by Rick Murray ' s office building. He's agreed to perhaps change his signage so that it says Welcome to Chanhassen. Gary Brown: He's got a real good idea there. Let's not throw this into this issue. Mayor Hamilton: Tne sign that the Chamber has proposed and is recommending is a sign that is going to serve their purposes. It's modular and will have the names of the companies that need to be on there, that want to be on there and are willing to pay the $1,000.00 or whatever it is going to cost. It's not a cheap sign to put up. It's going to be a nice looking sign. The back is going to say Welccme to Chanhassen. Councilman Johnson: I do believe that the Planning Commission did get, there was a lot of issues mixed in here. I think a lot of real good points were brought up and I agree with a lot of stuff the Planning Commission did. What I really like is towards the end they got into saying, hey wait a minute, you're asking for several years. You're not asking for the next 20 years that this will be the sign and when I'm looking at 3 to 4 years, put a time limit upon this sign a little ways down the road so we're not looking to put up the HRA's signs in the next 6 months or anything that I can tell. It's a ways off as of yet. I like their idea of putting this sign up and guaranteeing them a length of time for their investment and using the sign to add on signage to see how effective is this sign and what can we do to make it more effective, the locations and stuff like that. It would be worthwhile to the City for it's signing problems and I agree, let's keep the other signs out of this at this point. 16 Council Meeting - January 12, 1987 Boyt: I thought the Planning Commission did a pretty good job of · some issues here and one of them, you said it took a 3 year you estimated as a payback. If you could have the sign up for 3 years felt that was close to break even. I think that should figure in the I think it would be worth the Council discussing because as the Commission mentions, they recommend at the end that this is going to down to a City Council decision and they have pretty much said what they to say and recommended that it quickly move to us for a speedy resolution. I would like to see something done. I thought there was a lot of discussion the importance of having some consistency with our sign ideas. I know from what you've told me Mr. Mayor, you've ~ at this for quite a while, if a lahone call or two here right now would help this, I think that would be time spent. _C~ry Brown: I think what the Planning Commission was saying and what we talked about too was the fact that whatever type of letters get used on the sign, everybody uses the same thing and I don't think anybody will have problems with that. If we're going to spend that much on a sign, we want it to look nice. Councilman Boyt: My other point that I thought was discussed pretty thoroughly here was the business ~bout a slow down sign before t~ came to your sign. Something along the line that this is (hanhassen. Remit that discussion? Councilman Boyt: It's in here where Ladd Conrad, whom I imagine has more experience than any of us sitting here on doing outdoor signs, said that reading a sign was quite a challenge. ~nat you had mentioned 2~ inch letters which seem rather substantial to me until Conrad points out that 18 inches is the minimum letter height that Naegele will accept on their signs. A little different purpose but maybe they face the same kind of challenge of traffic quickly going by. You also mentioned that this might slow it down more than we want so I think there is something to be said for a coordinated effort signwise and I think you all said that at this December 1Mth meeting. My last point is that you mentioned there might be some justification, or you ar~ the Planning Commission talked about the City's involvement in the cost of this sign to a~lish what the City wants to do. Gary Brown: Tnat was simply because it was brought up there to have Welcome to Chanhassen on it and the slogan and Maple Leaf or whatever and I said if the City wish to partake in a piece of that sign we could probably take care of that but now seeing that BRg; wants to put up Welcome to Chanhasse~ signs wherever they may be, I guess you wouldn't r~_~ that. Councilman Boyt: I think we're talking about I would like to have some sort of coordinated sign. I recognize that you have a time constraint. I also recognize that you are going to do something to work out as much as you can of a compromise with this thing. Looking at a minimum of a 3 year life on your sign. Ihn suggesting that another area, and I would like to know what the rest of the Council thinks about this, it might be worth discussing is would 17 City Council Meeting - January 12, 1987 there be a benefit to all concerned if the City got involved in part of this sign? Gary Brown: My personal feeling would be no. Let's leave the City out of the sign business. Let's have Chanhassen Population 6,400 and leave it at that. The City has something to sell and it's the city. I don't think it is going to pay for th~m to be on a sign with the service station, restaurant and bar. Mayor Hamilton: I think it's really unfortunate that BRW got involved in this thing at all. That anything even came up about BRW because the only thing you should be considering is the sign that was proposed by the Chamber and we suddenly start saying that this sign has to be consistent with any sign that BRW might do...they are unfamiliar with the Chamber and trying to have signs that look alike. This sign is a sign that serves a purpose and that is to advertise the businesses that in the downtown area and give you some direction as to where you go. It is taking the place of the directional sign that was on the northwest corner of the intersection of TH 101 and TH 5 which really nobody could read. The letters were so small, you couldn't see ~ and by the time you saw the sign you were past the intersection to turn anyway so that was a Chamber sign and the reason... Councilman Geving: Tnat was a City sign. We paid $5,000.00. Mayor Hamilton: It was serving a purpose for the Chamber but this one, we wanted to take that one down and put this one in it's place prior to that intersection so people can see it before they turn off. Gary Brown: We realize it isn't perfect and nothing is going to be but let's put the thing up and then we know if we blow it, we know next time to try six~ething different. Mayor Hamilton: Tnere have been so many people involved in this thing. You talked to the sign people and if this is their recommendatiom The Chamber has looked at it and it seems to serve it's purpose. I'm going to recommend approval of issuance of the sign permit for the Chamber of Commerce without conditions. These two things here, 1 and 2, they should probably be done but not as a part of this issuance. Mayor Hamilton moved, Councilman Horn seconded to authorize issuance of the sign permit for the Chamber of Commerce with City Council review in five years. All voted in favor except Councilman Boyt who opposed and the motion carried. Councilman Boyt: It would seem to me that you're probably not going to put this sign in the ground over the next two months. Gary Brown: Why? Councilman Boyt: I would suspect that the ground is going to freeze. Are you going to go ahead and put it in? 18 175 it, y Council ~cting - January 12, 1987 Brown: I don't want to take a chance on somebody coming back in 6 weeks rcm now and saying we're going to change this so you can't. Boyt: As it stands now, unless we can get some sort of agreement commit to talking to BRW to at least get the letters and the exterior of sign of common material, I vote against this but if I can get that kind of , you've got my vote. Hamilton: The BRW should have nothing to do with this. lman Johnson: I can't see how the BRW, at this point t~ have given us ome basic signs with one type of lettering. I don't think they have really ooked into the sign problem too much. I haven't four~ anything too wild their signage yet either. I personally agree with the Planning · ~sio~ when they call the ~ signage like a subdivision signage. It ooks like we coming into the Chanhassen subdivision, not the City of so I'm not too terribly impressed with their signage either. Hamilton: I agree with you. I don't know if I've seen anything from ~ilman Johnson: I think it would really delay it to try and get something ut of BRW. Brown: The picture that you're looking at doesn't really give you what t's made out of. I got to go alor~ with you. It doesn't show you what looking for but why don't you let Barb and I run through what the thing s going to be made of and present it back here at the next meeting ar~ either 'ire us the thumbs up and let's put it in the ground or let's forget the whole :ilman ~eving: I don't think that was the motion. I think the motion go with this thing. Work with our City Staff ar~ do it. Brown: That' s better yet. ~ilman Geving: That's the ~ray I read the motion. Dacy: As proposed in there. ~ilman Boyt: It would help me if someone would read the motion because I idn't get that. Hamilton: ~he motion was, I moved to approve the issuance of a sign it for the building of the Chamber sign without conditions as depicted on Attaclm~ent 3. Ashworth: Is there a timing associated with this 3 years? 5 years? years? Hamilton: No. 19 City Council Meeting - January 12, 1987 Councilman Johnson: I would like to see 4-5 years put on it. Mayor Hamilton: I guess I'm not concerned about that because as the town grows they are going to want to change the signage anyway and I think it is going to be one of those things that's going to become automatically obsolete and they are going to either want to put a bigger one. Councilman Johnson: I would like to at least guarantee them 3 years because if we come in 2 years and say we want to change his signage th~n we have done a disservice to them. Mayor Hamilton: ~nere's no time period on there so what I'm saying is they can put the sign up and the growth of the town can dictate when they want to change. ~ney may come back in 2 years and say it's not big enough. We want to put in a bigger one. That would be great. Gary Brown: If we have to keep adding to it, it will be great for everybody. Councilman Boyt: I agree. We add to the sign, so much the better. I think that this looks to me like an attractive sign. When we put it up I think it is going to have impact on the rest of the signs that go up in Chanhassen so I don't take this lightly. If we're going to put other signs up that welcome people to Chanhassen, they are going to have to be consistent with what you put in the ground already. I think it is conceivable that BRW would come back with a very acceptable sign that would not be consistent with this and I think we should have some sort of an opportunity to ask to have this sign removed in the future and maybe that' s 3 years, maybe that' s 5 years. Mayor Hamilton: Pat, you've always been very active in signage, do you have any comments? Pat Swenson: The only thing that I am bothered with is the one that I've always had is that I would certainly like to see conformity. If you're thinking of investing a considerable amount of money, for the Chamber's benefit as well as the City's benefit, not to have things that are going to conflict with each other. ~nat would be my own opinion. If in fact the streetscape comes in with something. I have no idea what the material is. I don't even know what we're talking about. I can't say at this particular time but if those of you who have seen it, it's tasteful and it looks like something you would like the rest of the street signs to look like, I would have to leave that to your discretion. I would hate to put a sign up that would fit in with the streetscape that is being considered but having not seen it T~m I can't speak. Don Ashworth: I just talked to Roger. I think the Chamber is happy with time limitation of 3, 4 or 5 years. Again, I would strongly recommend th In 5 years they can come back, make a reapplication and if you decide to extend it that's fine. If, in contrast though, they would desire to leave and the City Council wanted it down, you would have to pay to get it down Just so you realize that. We would literally end up condemning it and pai for it to have it removed if we did not put a time limit on it. 2~ a it lng 177 ity Council --~c~ting - January 12, 1987 ~ilman Geving: Kind of like a conditional use. Hamilton: I can put in the motion for review in 5 years. I think that Ld be fine. Johnson: C~ry, do you have any better drawings as of this date this sketch that is a couple months old now. Brown: Yes, I do. ~nat one's be~n passed around and recopied so many Jmes. Swenson: Tom, may I ask what the proposed color is of the aluminum color of the lettering? Brown: White and black. White background with black letters. ;ilman Johnson: What about the back of the sign that is metal with the to Chanhassen on it? Is that going to be a piece of sheet metal with to Chanhassen in black letters ~ white? Brown: In the original go around, the last time we had any discussion it, it was brought up about lighting the backside. Making that a lexan or plastic back, whatever, and lighting that also. ~ilman Johnson: Because the backs important too for people going Dacy: A final point. I found out late Friday afternoon that you ill have to apply for a MnDot p~,it as well. Hamilton: I think that having the approval of the City is going to be ust a matter of a formality for MnDot to get... Dacy: They have their supplem~t rules based on the Federal '.ification Acts for State Highways ar~ so on. It didn't appear to be a when I talked to the guy at MnDot. SH SCHEDULE FOR ORDINANCE CODIFICATION PR(X/ESS. Horn moved, Councilman C~ving ~ecor~ed to set the dates of January , 1987 and February 2, 1987 at 5:3~ p.m. as Worksession dates fox codifica- ion of the Ordinance. All v~ted in favor and motion carried. '.IL PRESENTATIONS: NOMINATION FOR METROPOLITAN ~IL DISTRICT 14 REPRESENTATIVE, COUNCILMAN JOHNSON. Hamilton: Jay Johnson we~t to the meeting with the other communities the attached memo here tells what took place. I guess your comment that will be more effective in getting other Metropolitan Council members to in favor of items which will help District 14. I think Ray has come 21 178 City Council Meeting - January 12, 1987 through with flying colors on absolutely every instance we've asked him for help. He has gotten the votes required and got the support of everyone he needed to accomplish what was needed for the City. I certainly can't argue with your comment that Marcy is more articulate than Ray. ~nat's just not his thing I guess. Councilman Geving: Mr. Mayor, have you read the papers lately? Mayor Hamilton: Which ones? Councilman Geving: The committee to nominate the individuals for this job has already voted to nominate Marcy Waritz and the Governor has already indicated to Marcy that she will get the nomination letter this week. But nevertheless, I think it's important as a City, if we're going to support someone that we should go ahead and do so. I talked with Marcy today on this and that is exactly what she told me. I read it in the paper yesterday I believe that the vote was 4-3 but there was one abstention so they called the 4-2 a 4-3 vote and the Governor did talk to Marcy personally at the Inaugrual and said that she would be. I think it would be in our best interest to endorse her for this position even though it seems like a nonsense position to take. It's up to the Council. We had this proposal a couple weeks ago and we decided to wait until this time period and it came out kind of the way I thought it might. I was surprised by the strength that she was able to garner and she never attended the meeting, even at the Governor's office. She ended up in a car wreck as I understand on that evening that she was supposed to make a presentation to the Met Council and couldn't present herself so they didn't know who they were even voting for other than based on her suk~ission of her own record or whatever but they did vote on it and she is going to be selected. That is a fact. Don Ashworth: Councilman Geving is absolutely correct. The committee did make a recommendation for Waritz. That recommendation is to go to the Governor's Office and under State Law he is to consider that recommendation. It also states under the law that he is to meet and confer with the legisla- tors from that District and consider their comments. I did talk with Bob Schmitz. I wanted to see how things were going there this afternoon. Three of the four DFL legislators are supporting Joachim and Senator Schmitz can not make a prediction. A decision is to occur this next week according to Mr. Schmitz. Councilman Horn: What happened to our input in this? I predicted this but what happened? Councilman Johnson: The last time I asked, we had enough time if we got our input in this week. As an individual I have already put in my input for Marcy. The Council can still pass a resolution supporting someone and pass that onto the Governor for his consideration. 22 157 Council Meeting - January 12, 1987 Hamilton moved to nominate Ray Joachim as the District 14 representative the Metropolitan Council. There was no second and motion failed. :il.man Geving moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to nominate Marcy Waritz the District 14 representative for the Metropolitan Council. All voted in except Mayor Hamilton who opposed and motion carried. ~ilman Geving: I would like to see the resolution out tomorrow possibly f w~ can because I think it's important that we move fast on this. lman Horn: I would like us to have the reading from the Met Council how expected their procedure to w~rk to get our input. ON SOUTHWEST CORRIDOR COALITION, COUNCI~ JOHNSON. ~ilman Johnson: They are having another meeting this Wednesday morning. the Coalition, they got started and got several things going our way then just kind of stopped their lobbying efforts and somebody outlobbied out there it looks like and the position for our TH 5 being designed in 1989 all of a sudden moved to November of 1991 which is right after the PGA lrnament is supposed to be through with here. That doesn't help us much. a pretty bad impression for the folks that are covering the PGA on that. Mayor Hamilton: Tnink how bad it would be if the road was all torn up. That's exactly why they did that. Johnson: Did they delay it for the PGA? Mayor Hamilton: Exactly. Councilman Johnson: I think it was delayed for that, I hate to say it but the Shakopee Bridge seems to have moved up on the Agenda for being designed and we backwards. If the design is complete in 1989 and the PGA is in 1991, Lldn't construction be done in time for the PGA is the questioru It would be a feather in the State's hat to have the announcer say how nice it is to drive to the PGA and easy to get to and this stuff instead of talking about the cow path that leads out there like it did 30 years ago or whenever the PGA was there before. I think we r~ to get back ar~ start supporting this or we will see TH 5 slip back again and that's basically what they want to do is get back and they will be asking monies. They need money for the lobbying efforts. They will be discussing this on Wednesday at 7:30. What type of fundraising t~ need to do? Whether they want the cities to pitch iD. I know they want to get support from the local business co .mmunity and raise most of the money there. They would also be looking at a membership cost for the communities. Dick Feerick is leading it. I didn't catch all the names in there. We had some folks from ~den Prairie there. The school superintendent was there. Tne lobbyist, the two lawyers were the lobbyist for this group there. They had some representatives from MTS. George wasn't there. He had a representative there who talked for him. Mayor Hamilton: Did you attend? 23 City Council Meeting - January 12~ 1987 Councilman Horn: No, I misread the a.m.. I was there at 7:30 p.m.. Mayor Hamilton: Tne last time this thing was going on, Clark and I went to a few meetings and A1 was there, working as the three of us. I think that's a must to get the same type of mix together again. The Chamber is more involved. Get people from all different, we want every area represented. I don't if you are going to be interested to do this or if Clark is again. Clark has followed this all the way through this and I guess if he is interested in doing it again. It needs to be the same mix of people again. You need a person like Butzow. He puts tons of pressure on people in the State, almost too much. Councilman Geving: Some of the big developers like Jim Curry and some of those guys. Mayor Hamilton: Jim was there. Fred Hoisington from his group and all the people he represented. Councilman Geving: I don't think we dropped the ball, Jay, for lack of interest. I think there were a lot of politics involved in this that just pulled it away from the southwest area. Councilman Johnson: There was no comment for almost a year. The Coalition became inactive. Councilman Geving: And I saw that. Councilman Johnson: ~hey all admit it and they saw let's not have that happen again. That's the whole message here. I'm not sure what we need to be doing on this tonight. * A tape break occurred at this point when Mayor Hamilton and Councilman Horn were making their comments. Councilman Horn: ...that was the last we ever heard from that group, when he was elected Chairman until now so I think you're right. I think both of those happened. I think George thought he had won a victory and I think so did Dick Feerick and he dropped the ball and didn't pick it up again. It's going to be tough though I think based on what's happening because it is ground that we've lost and we're not going to be able to pick up but if we don't start putting pressure on them, w~'ll just be losing ground. Mayor Hamilton: Clark you want to be on that committee then? Councilman Horn: Yes. Mayor Hamilton: And Jay, I guess is attending and anybody can go to it. Councilman Johnson: I'll work with Clark on this because we're very interested in all the highways around here. Councilman Horn: I don't think we can be over represented on this. 24 179 Council M~ting - January 12~ 1987 :ilman Geving: How about the 29th? Is that th~ one ~ the TH 21/ idor Study? ~rbara Dacy: That meeting is being held at the request of some of the rural who are abutting... lman Geving: That must be Sever. Dacy: Right, inviting the MnDot Staff to the meeting to explain their iming, acquisition policies, similar meetirg was held in Chaska this summer. Don and I met with Chaska officials, they are also initiating official .lat processes so our Staff, Jerry and I are meetirg with MnDot at the er~ of week to review that process to see exactly where the MnDot Staff is the of ~ centerline of TH 21/ so that is the purpose of the meeting on 29th. Any Council meuber who wants to can come. MINNESOTA NBA BASKETBALL REQUEST, CITY Council members decided to not make a response on the choice of names for Minnesota NBA Basketball team. PUBLIC IMP~ HEARING, CITY MANAGER. ~ilman Boyt: I really appreciated having the Article attached, Don, from Minnesota Cities Magazine I believ~ I thought they made an excellent ~int on the middle of the third column where it says that recent court cases limited the number of special assessments to the demonstratable increase .n value that results fr~n that improv~mment. I thought that was excellent. Ashworth: We did hire an appraiser and he did go through all the parcels far as establishing the assessment rol~ There is a question in my own as to which policy the Council would use in terms of the assessment of store sewer improvements. Again, I simply wanted the Council to be aware some of the issues that they will face on the 26th. Hamilton: I think the last time we discussed this last year the was 4 to 1, Dale was not in favor of including the northern portion the residential area or any residential area in part of the storm sewer ect for the downtown. ~ilman Horn: As I read through this, I got the impression from Don that he was saying was that we really don't have a consistent policy because we've done.., amd unless I missed something, when I look through this I I did find a consistency. A consistency I found was that if the issessment role was not going to be picked up by a private sector person, then would go on assessments and that is the common thread that I saw the issues the Council has reviewed in the past. Eib, if the ~sessments were not going to be picked up by someone such as CPT or one of other businesses who were demanding the improvement or the ~ for it was put as a general assessment to the peopl~ I think I that consistency here. I think the point Don is trying to make is that ~imes the City has assessed it to the effected land owners ar~ sometimes 25 180 City Council Meeting - January 12, 1987 they have not and my exception to that is I think in cases where it wasn't was because sc~neone was willing to pick it up. Councilman Geving: I disagree with you. I don't think it's a question of willing to pick it up. I think if you remember Clark, the CPT situation or Chan Estates, that was a situation that had to be corrected. It was only because CPT happened to be building and developing in a development district at the time that resulted in an enormous problem for us. ~nat entire project of almost $300,000.00 would have had to be assessed to someone. Fortunately we had a District at that same time and the CPT area and that district generated enough funds to handle it and not an individual in Chan Estates was ever assessed for the project but they could have been. ~aey could very well have been. I think what Don has put together here and this was not at my request by the way, he put this together I think to show that there has been other areas where we've had projects that were not assessed against the homeowners 100%. Now you're asking approximately 75 homeowners in the downtown area to pick up about $30,000.00 worth of cost for an assessment of this project and I'm not so sure in my own mind that there is going to be $30,000.00 worth of benefit to those 75 homeowners. What I5~ really trying to say to the Council here, since Don has given me the opportunity by bringing this out, is that there are many people in the 5 or 6 block area that will object very vehemently to an assessment cost of nearly $400.00 that they will apparently try to somehow fix with the downtown redevelopment project and will say, why should I pay for storm sewers and water drainage that is being collected down in the downtown redevelopment project. That if it hadn't been for the development project in the downtown in the first place, the water would continue to have run like it has run for many, many years through the normal channels that we have in the downtown area. I think this is totally over assessment for approximately 75 to 80 homeowners in a small area of the city to affix a $400.00 assessment against their lots when I can clearly see and demonstrate now that I have this paper in front of me, where we have 3 or 4 instances where this has not been the policy and that we do have a good opportunity to take this monies, and I don't know what the exact amount of monies are in terms of total, but let's say $400.00 per unit and assess it to the downtown redevelopment project and pay for it in that manner. The same way that we did with CPT, Chan Estates project and I think I could make a very strong case and have probably 75 homeowners here for the public hearing to advise you that this is unfair. To let you know that they are going to be taken, in my view, advantage of for a project that was not really their project. I won't belabor this much except to say that I will make every effort to make sure that these 75 homeowners are well aware of their rights and that it is unfair for them to pay $400.00 per individual household and lot owner for this project that is not going to benefit them to the extent that they are being assessed. I think we can make a very strong case on this. Again, I agree that in the projects such as Erie Avenue and the Sunrise/Western Hills project, where those homeowners were assessed, there was some relief. There was some other relief .provided to take care of ~Aae cost for their project so there are precedents that have ~-cn set for relaying some of these expenses back onto either Districts, the downtown development area or, in the case that we're talking about here, I would say that even if 50% of the project were assessed, I think that would be fair but not 100%. I can't see our homeowners paying $400.00 for the project. 26 185 Council Meeting - January 12, 1987 :ilman Johnson: I do believe that this project would go on without the of the downtown because these improvements ~ to be made. It is robably part of our problem that Met Council has ~ giving us grief on, Gary is looking into now. We would have to do something about our storm and our inadequate sanitary sewers in downtowru We have some problems there that we're going to have to do something about it whether we downtown or not, we've got a problem. However, the benefit to folks Kiowa, Huron and the street inbetween there, Iroquois, those three streets, benefit to any of those three streets of the storm sewers where they are they will have the same amount of water running down those three treets no matter what they do with these storm sewers down on main street and on Laredo. I can't see any increase value to the residents of those streets. Maybe the residents on Laredo where we're putting in 3-4 storm at the intersection of the Fire Department and the Post Office. I can the school and the City property and the bank property being helped. It s hard to believe that there is going to even $L00 worth of value to any of folk's home by improving the folks on Kiowa, Iroquois and Huro~u I like to see the assessor, in his facts and figures, show what is going be, as was brought out by Bill recently in this articles, demonstrate an ncrease in value that results from the improvement. I think Roger wants to on that. er Knutson: When it comes to special assessments, there is going to be no ion that storm sewers are th~ most difficult improvement to specially The folks at the top of the hill never had a water problem and people ~ bottom of the hill will say it's not our water, it comes from the top .f the hill. You c~_n argue all day and public hearings can become quite In response to that, a number of years ago the legislature gave you opportunity to at least consider another avenue of financing by a special taxing district. You can draw a circle around the area .f benefit or the area that you think is deriving benefit from your pipes and you have. It is an ad valoren tax based on valuation. It is not up the lot or square foot or anything like that. ~hat's another alternative consider. If-you use that tax, it's like any other ad valoren tax, you do have to demonstrate that the value of someone's property increases by the of the tax. Johnson: I do agree that some of these streets do have a problem vith water flowing down the streets, ice at ~ bottom the hill ar~ if our sewer project took into account and corrected those problems, if we have storm sewer problems on these streets, we're not correcting their but we're still assessing ~ I don't know what the cost increase be to run a storm sewer down to the end of Kiowa. Where Kiowa actually [id benefit from this project, that seems a reasonable thing to do. ~here is storm sewer presently on Huron and that can be intercepted. I think our ~s to look at, if we're going to assess these people to give some benefit at the same time. Hamilton: I had some of the same points here that Jay just mentioned that is I would suspect, and even though Roger said that doesn't latter, if you improve the drainage and storm water run-off in an area that ,roperty values are going to be increased not only by that but by the 27 City Council Meeting - January 12, 1987 development of the downtown. We development all of downtown, I just can't believe that people's property is not going to increase in value by more than what it is going to cost to put in the storm sewer. That is item 1. The second thing, I don't think it is unreasonable to ask or request or to have citizens pay something for the development of the downtown. In this case it is to do a storm sewer for a particular residential area in the community. I think what we're saying is if they participate it is going to help with the overall development of downtown. Now the other side can say, why not have everybody in the town contribute then because everyor~ will benefit from the development of the downtown here and that's probably something else that we can look at but I don't think it's unreasonable to ask in the first place. Then Jay's point also that I agree with that I believe this will be done whether the downtown area is developed or not, the storm sewer is going to have to be put in and it is going to be assessed at that time. I guess I'm in favor of having a public hearing and I don't care if we have 75 people. They can bring 1,000 people. Taat's the purpose of having a public hearing is to hear their comments and you make it sound like a threat that you're going to have 75 people here. Fine, let's hear what they have to say. Councilman Geving: It's not a threat. These are why people are in a democracy and they have a right to speak out if they feel they are being unfairly assessed for a project. Mayor Hamilton: I guess my point is I would just like to go to a public hearing and hear what the people have to say. Councilman Horn: My only response is I don't think, at least it wasn't my request, that any of us had said that this would be 100% assessed. I thought the option was the that they would be totally excused from any assessment and that's the option that I wouldn't favor. I think there should be some participation of those people and if we find that through the public hearing process and the study on the feasibility that we can only justify the 50% because of the assessed valuation, I have no problem with that. All I'm saying is I think there should be some contribution that is fairly based on valuation. Councilman Boyt: A question for Don. How did we get the $30,000.00 figure? Councilman Geving: That was just a quick calculation on my part. Councilman Boyt: ~nere is a dollar amount in here ~ere. Don Ashworth: I believe I used $45,000.00. Councilman Boyt: What you did, if I understand this properly, you took a figure that you thought might be reasonable, $500.00 and multiplied that by the number of homes, is that how? Don Ashworth: When I prepared my report, I went through the assessment role and it appeared that the average was $500.00 and there are 90 some homes so I 28 187 Council Meeting - January 12, 1987 okay an average of $45,0~.00. Yesterday one of our part-time people through and added them up ~ came up with $37,916.00 so it wasn't too off. To respor~l to something that was brought up, this project does ~lve reduction to the cost for the storm sewer project. Tree total cost we looked at when we started included the larxt area associated with ~ pond. kicked up the assessmemt which could not be legally supported. It did represent a cost typical of any other project because you were creating a and most other projects we've had a lake to go into. We didn't have to out and buy a lake. So we knocked out all costs associated with buying the The second thing was reduction in the assessment of the residential area 50% so the proposed assessment role for the residential area, is 25% of the ~1 real costs associated with the storm sewer and more realistically, 50% f rrm cost of the storm sewer. ~ilman Boyt: Dale, you mentioned, if we forget the $500.00 amount for a that a 50% assessment seaued reasonable, just from theory. :ilman Geving: As a taxpayer and as a citizen who would be involved in whole process, knowing what we've done in the past, I would say that 50% s a reasonable amount. lman Boyt: Now, hearing Don's explanation, does that sound like that's you were thinking? (]eying: Yes. ~ilman Boyt: So you wer. e saying, if you pull $500.00 from that, that be a reasonable figure? :ilman Geving: I would say that if the initial estimate was $40~.00, 's the figure I got at the other meeting, if that were reduced to $200.00, think that's a reasonable amount for a homeowner to pay for an assessment at time. lman Boyt: So you're thinking 25% then using Don's rough figures? .ilman Geving: No, Ibm not using his rough figures. I~m using the rough figures from BRW who gave us a fairly good dollar calculation of what it's [oing to take to do this project and the figure that I got from Dc~, the other Ringrose, was $400.00 and if there are in fact, I didn't count up all the it is 75 plus, in that area, if those people were to be assessed ~200.00 I think that would be reasonable. Hamilton: I think you're right. Based on what Dcn has said arm1 the you are saying a quarter... lman Geving: I think $200.00 is reasonable for this project. lman Horn: I don't think we should decide. What we're saying is we the feasibility report. 29 City Council Meeting - January 12, 1987 Councilman Boyt: I'm just trying to get enough background so that I know what the conversation is here and it sounds like, it seems to me we're talking 25% which Don is translating that out to, I don't care what the percentage is, $200.00 is a figure in itself. Councilman Geving: People are only interested in dollars. Councilman Boyt: My concern, and I would really appreciate it if someone could shed a little ltght is I would like to be prepared for what comes at us regardless of what the issue is in a public hearing. As I was reading this, if I was living here and looked at my rain water problem right now and the storm sewer problem and then you guys put this in and I look at my storm sewer problem, it's going to look like the same problem. Is that right? Don Ashworth: You're going to see relief to people like Riveria and Kenny's, etc.. Councilman Boyt: Let's talk about the homeowners. If I'm sitting in a home over here and I look out and you say I have standing water problems in my neighborhood, I've got sheeting problems on the road in my neighborhood and you're going to tell me that we're going to upgrade the storm sewer sysbem and I'm probably going to say it's about time. Now, as I read this, after you upgrade my storm sewer system, I still have standing water tn the neighborhood and I still have sheeting on the road. Is that correct? Don Ashworth: That's correct. Councilman Johnson: I have a problem with that. Councilman Horn: It's the same problem the guy sitting on top of the hill has. He didn't have a water problem beforehand and he still doesn't have a water problem. Councilman Johnson: If he's driving down the hill into the ice, he benefits from an improvement. It would improve the ice at the bottrxn of the hill. Councilman Horn: I agree but what I think we need to do though is we need to talk to our consultants about how we can solve these problems. We're not going to get that resolved between us. Some of this ice was caused because sump pumps were pumping into the street and causing it to sheet and if that's the case, that' s not totally our problem. Mayor Hamilton: To get back to one thing that Bill said that might put his mind at ease, when we have a public hearing, there is no response to the points that are raised. The question is before the public to respond to it. We do not respond to their questions. We are merely hear to listen to it. We will respond to it at a later time. We receive all the input, take a look at it and then we'll get back to them. You don't have to sit here and get into an argument or be expected to respond to some question immediately because we're not going to do it. 30 189 itY Council Meeting - January 12, 1987 lman Geving: But my question here Tom is this. ~he notice that goes to people probably is going to say to them that there is a project that you be assessed for a certain amount of this project and it is the ~ssessment policy that we're talking about that has to be brought out and have to be enlightened on. What is it going to cost based on the that we're talking about? Hamilton: It depends on what we explain prior. Geving: As long as they understand percentages ar~ potential for assessment. I think that's what Don was trying to get at in his... Boyt: It strikes me that this is fairly important, the public · part of it. Not just we can get input which will be important but I we're setting a tone that could easily generate 75 households that vote 'ainst anything that has to do with downtown if we set it to them and I don't to jeopardize a Five Million Dollars project for $3~,~.~-$4~,~.~ so .f there is something that we can do that will cause these people to come in with something other than a loaded gun, it might be a good idea. Ashworth: So we understand, the figure that Gary had thrown out was 3 1/2 per square foot so if you have a 15,000 square foot lot it comes out to assessment of about $5~.~. The original assessment, when we look to just identify storm water, dividing it out over the area was 14 cents pe~ square That is an average assessment of $2,0~0.00 per lot. We took out the area (the creation of the lake). That reduced it by or~-half (down to cents per square foot). We then applied the policY that we used in some of other projects of basirg the assessment on one-half of the storm sewer for residential a~d that brought it down to 3 1/2 cents per square Tb~ point that Jay has made and several of you in terms that we are to bring out comments regarding the extension of storm sewer. Wbe~r or we can correct some of these other problems. I really wonder if we're to be able to do that. It could very well force an extension on the ~y study. My concern is that we're under a relatively fast track with downtown redevelopment project. If we stay on the schedule, as it is ~utlined right now, we can start construction Jur~ L If we delay ar~ let's send this thing back to the consultant, we could delay the project this The original process was one of knowing that we wanted to do certain .mprovements in the downtown area. We brought in the Watershed District and what size storm sewer do we need to take care of all of this water ar~ through the whole process in that fashion. You're now going to be adding new process in saying, how do we exter~ this system back up into the al area? In some ways I would ilke to see us continue as it is other than starting a whole new feasibility study just for tb~ extension of storm up in that neighborhood because I really believe that we will get fr~n this whole group right along Laredo where tkey have water in hack-yards. I don't know how we get that out of there. The only way you could do it would be to run individual drain lines but ~ they have to have something to dump into so now you are extending a storm sewer system up there basically to accumulate the drain water. 31 City Council Meeting - January 12, 1987 Mayor Hamilton: Why not drain it into their backyards? Don Ashworth: It would become a very expensive process. I always come back with the position of do we really need the $30,000.00 in assessments from this area. Mayor Hamilton: Rather than debate that, can we just decide if we want to go ahead with the public improvement hearing? I don't think we decided anything. Don Ashworth: You did authorize the holding of the hearing on the 26th. We're prepared to send notices out tomorrow. Mayor Hamilton: Okay, I guess what I'm hearing from the rest of the Council is as long as the residents have good information really about what's happening and as long as when the 26th, you or Barb or BRW or somebody explains very clearly what it is we're trying to accomplish so they understand very clearly what their part of the project and why we're looking at this and what is going to be accomplished. What they have now. What they are going to have when the project is completed and what it is going to cost them and then listen to their con~ents and then we can go frcm there. Don Ashworth: You can always reduce it further at a future date. We wanted the Council to make sure that you knew some of the issues that are involved. Mayor Hamilton moved, Councilman Horn to set the Downtown Public Improvement Hearing for January 26, 1987. All voted in favor and motion carried. Councilman Horn: I noticed that since this is an administrative meeting tonight, I noticed that in going through here that some of our committee members don't a very good attendance record and I was wondering if we should, just asa matter of normal review, see these more often and have a recommended minimum attendance. Mayor Hamilton: I think we do. We already have a minimum. Councilman Horn: Some of tl~_m are down near 50% so I'm wondering what our policy is. Mayor Hamilton: I think you and I have been through that on the Planning Conmission. Councilman Horn: I know we asked one person to leave because his attendance was improper. What is our requirement and why isn't it being enforced? To me anything below 75% is inexcusable. DOn Ashworth: I have a letter noting what Council policy is and that is if you miss more than 75% of the meetings the Chairman is to request resignation. Right Barbara? Barbara Dacy: It is in the HRA By-laws. Councilman Horn: Just the HRA? 32 191 ~ity Council Meeting - January 12, 1987 Ashworth: No, all Commissions. The Council took a policy position on · .ilman Boyt: 67% is actually I think what the limit is, isn't it Ix)ri? ,ri Sietsema: We had a big discussion on this at the Park and Recreation ission and the way that I had interpretted it was that you had to be at '5% of tt~ meetings. The memo that I got that you had written a numbex of ago was one so you weren't sure if you could miss 75% or if you had to at 75%· I~n almost positive that the policy is you are to be at at least '5% but the policy also states that if you're going to be absent you should your chair person and it has to be an excused absence. ~ra Dacy: If it's not excused for three times in a row, th~n 'you're out. Ashworth: We' 11 serzl letters out to anyone below the 75%· ~ilman Geving moved, Oouncilman Horn seconded to adjourn the meeting. All in favor ar~ motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 1~:00 p.m.. Ashworth lity Manager by Nann O~im 33