The URL can be used to link to this page

1l. City Council Minutes March 24, 1997.CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MARCH 24, 1997 Mayor Mancino called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Mancino, Councilman Berquist, Councilman Engel, Councilman Mason, and Councilman Senn STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Charles Folch, Todd Hoffman, Sharmin Al -Jaff, and Roger Knutson Public Present: (The following were present for all items on the agenda.) Name Address Frank Scott Cliff & Jodi Donham David & Lynn Timm Scott Leverenz Jack Shimuta LeRoy Guba Tami Buntge Kevin Cowell Galen & Lisa Miller Chuck & Kathryn Nordby Jennifer Urbanski Terry Mueller Susan Mack Glenn Stolar 2730 Sandpiper Trail 18680 Twilight Trail, Eden Prairie 18805 Nature Lane, Eden Prairie 18853 Nature Lane, Eden Prairie 18741 Nature Lane, Eden Prairie 18924 Nature Lane, Eden Prairie 18744 Twilight Trail, Eden Prairie 18712 Twilight Trail, Eden Prairie 18795 Twilight Trail, Eden Prairie 18973 Nature Lane, Eden Prairie 18828 Nature Lane, Eden Prairie 18904 Twilight Trail, Eden Prairie 18847 Twilight Trail, Eden Prairie 18808 Twilight Trail, Eden Prairie APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the agenda with the following amendments: Under Council Presentations Councilman Senn wanted to discuss the Pauly's site, HRA expense item, February Festival and Rec Center Mission Statement; Mayor Mancino wanted to discuss the March 31, 1997 City Council work session under Administrative Presentations; and Councilman Mason requested that item 2 be moved to item 8(a). All voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: Mayor Mancino: Under public announcements, in our agenda tonight item number 5 under new business, Conditional Use Permit Request to allow telecommunication towers at 7660 Quattro Drive, Lot 3, Block 1, Park One Third Addition, and site plan approval for 135 foot monopole tower, 20 feet by 30 feet equipment building and an 8 foot chainlink fence, U.S. West New Vector Group Incorporated and American Portable Telecom has been deleted and is going to be continued to our April 14' meeting due to lack of property public notice. Peter, would you like to come up and make a statement please? City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 Peter Coyle: Good evening Madam Mayor, members of the Council. Peter Coyle here on behalf of Larkin, Hoffman, Daly & Lindgren and also APT, the applicant this evening for the Conditional Use Permit. We've reviewed this matter with the City Attorney and we understand the lack of notice as required under the Statute for the Public Hearing and the reason for the cancellation of the Planning Commission meeting for that reason. We have acquiesced to a limited waiver of the statutory 120 day processing rules in order to allow for the rescheduling of the Planning Commission meeting and thereon the City Council meeting that will follow after that Planning Commission meeting for the purpose of allowing the processing of the application that was to be heard this evening. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Peter Coyle: You're welcome. Mayor Mancino: And for those who are here tonight to listen and to comment on it, you will be receiving notices. Those that are within 500 feet, residents for the meeting that will take place on Monday, April 14` Special Planning Commission meeting and the regular City Council meeting after that. So this will not be on the agenda tonight. And for those who don't have any other reason to be here, you may leave. The next item on the agenda is the consent agenda. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Senn seconded to approve the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations: d. Approval of 1997/98 Liquor Licenses. e. Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Consider Modification to City Code Section 20 -415 in Regard to Extensions of Wetland Alteration Permits, Final Reading. f. Amendment to City Code Rezoning the Property at the Intersection of Great Plains Boulevard and Chan View from R -12, Multi- Family Residential to OI, Office Institutional (former Country Clean property); Final Reading. g. City Council Minutes dated March 10, 1997 Planning Commission Minutes dated March 5, 1997 h. Approval of Bills. All voted in favor and the motion carried. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: Dale Geving: Good evening Madam Mayor and City Council members. My name is Dale Geving. I live at 7602 Huron, Chanhassen. I'm here tonight to speak about the Pauly's site. Several weeks ago I was totally surprised, and a little bit alarmed about ... the proposal, as the paper indicated, that there was a possibility of a multi -story business building of some sort. About 20 years ago the City Council which I sat on for a number of years, we made a decision and a commitment to the City to St. Hubert's Church. At that time... anticipated a new church and couldn't stand the expense of maintaining the existing church so the Council made a decision to enter into a long term agreement with the church to maintain that church site as a working church. Since that time about 3 or 4 different church groups have met and are meeting there at the present time. But the vision that we had 20 years ago was that someday we would 2 t City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 build an historic site that would be centered around old St. Hubert's Church and the old City Hall, and whatever other community ideas that we would have come up with, like possibly even a Senior Center or something on that site once the old buildings were demolished and we had been thinking about that long before it actually happened. Now it has happened and we do have a one acre site that is available and it's in my opinion, it's a one time opportunity to do something for the City of Chanhassen to preserve our remembered past by building a city park, which I'm going to refer to tonight as possibly Heritage Square. At that time we did move the old north /south road in front of the old City Hall. We moved it to what it now is, as TH 101, and we had also both the land ... that space for a parking lot. Of course we didn't get $9.00 a square foot for it. We basically gave it to them and now I'm sure we bought it back at a much higher rate. I don't believe that the city needs to really develop every square foot of our community. ...the time and a place for a city park. I have traveled extensively in my work. I've been to many, many communities. I've seen the Boston Commons, New York Central Park, parks in Denver, San Francisco and even Chaska, and they all had one thing in common. They all had a city park that remembered their past and that's what we're proposing here. There is a great deal of ground level support for this park. Maybe you have received some phone calls or received letters. I'm not sure, but I do know that I have talked to senior groups and a number of people in town and they are very excited about this possibility. And my concern is that we don't want to see this site developed quickly and sold by the HRA to a developer before we have an opportunity to explore the entire issue of what to do the best possible way with that one acre site. And so what I'm proposing tonight is that you and the Council bring this back as a Council agenda item sometime in the near future, and I see tonight you're going to be talking about it but sometime officially so that the community can give you input and you have a time to really discuss this with people in the town. Bring it back and then we would hope that somehow you would vote on a moratorium for this piece of land so that nothing really quickly happens over a period of let's say two years. That we set this aside and discuss it. Work on all the angles and then decide whether or not this really fits a city park. Secondly I'd like to propose that we make it an official city park. Part of our park system, and that could be done at the same meeting that you would discuss what you're going to do with particular site. There is a lot of community spirit in our town. I've talked to people with the Jaycees ... the Rotarians. I've talked with people from some of the church groups. The Lions. The American Legion. They're all very excited so you're going to hear about this project quickly, if not already. That people are interested in preserving our old St. Hubert's Church. Not as just as a church but as a site for recreational, for people to enjoy and together with the Old City Hall. I actually had meetings in that hall back in 1976 if you can believe it. We had City Council meetings there before we built the present fire station. So I'm encouraging you to act tonight to start thinking personally as Council members about what we might do with that site. Sometime in the future bring it back so we can discuss it and vote on it and then hopefully we can start working on it as a community. Now I know a lot of people in town and I know that Al Olson knows a lot of people in town and we would make this commitment to you. That if this became a park, we would bring together all of the various city groups in our town and build such a park for you at very little expense I would hope, and it would be a project that a lot of people in town could excited about... So those are the two or three suggestions I have here tonight ... that we don't want to act hurriedly and I was trying to get ahead of the HRA or some other group that might say yeah, let's sell that piece of land. Get a few hundred thousand dollars and be done with it. We don't want that to happen. Thank you very much. Mayor Mancino: Thank you very much for your comments. Just so you know Dale it is, that historic area downtown is on the City Council's work session for June 2 Now we don't have any, what I want to say, formal. I don't know what we'll talk about at that time but prior to that we'll get an agenda and contact you. Dale Geving: Thank you very much. 3 t City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 Mayor Mancino: So thank you for your comments. Is there anyone else that would like to address the City Council tonight on any issue? AWARD OF BIDS• REMAINING 1997 VEHICLES AND EQUIPMEN FILE PW0016eee. (The microphones at the staff tables were cutting in and out so some comments were not picked up.) Charles Folch: Thank you Mayor, members of the Council. The Equipment Superintendent has provided the information contained in the staff report before you tonight. As indicated we did, this is a second phase of equipment acquisition for 1997. Back on the 24`'' we were before you to acquire a number of vehicles that needed to be approved in order to make the time line to purchase them through a ... County bid program, which we have done. Tonight basically before you is the remaining purchase of equipment and vehicles. Basically the heavy equipment if you will, and some of the ancillary items ... piece of equipment which is sanders and the plows and the wings for the plow trucks. Some of the plows and pick -up trucks that were acquired. The accessory items such as city radios for some of the vehicles acquired. All and all the '97 capital acquisition budget for vehicles and equipment in the amount of $393,000.00. To date, with the previous bid award approved on the 24 of February, along with these presented tonight to you, yields a total amount of approximately $366,000.00. As noted there are a few remaining add on items that need to be acquired for some of these vehicles. We anticipate these to be somewhere in the neighborhood of $6,000.00 to $8,000.00. What this all means is that the total acquisition this year should be around $375,000.00 or roughly... under budget. All of the equipment line items there listed, the bidders that bid, the highlighted or bold face firm, company which submitted the low bid which is being recommended for approval and with that staff recommends approval of the staff report. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Any questions for Charles from Council members? Councilman Berquist: Charles the question that I, and we went through a few of these earlier but I'm still, I want to understand the rationale to spend the money for this piece of heavy equipment, the park dozer. It's a two year purchase. $50,000.00 this year. $36,000.00 next year. You make reference in the staff report that we spent over $10,000.00 in the past three years to rent this particular device. You also make reference to using it to accumulate and haul snow, which I can understand. What else would we use it for and do we anticipate those same sorts of projects occurring in the next half a dozen years? Charles Folch: Well it's probably best to defer that over to Todd Hoffman, the Park Director. ...capital park improvement program approved... Todd Hoffman: Councilman Berquist. For the past three years we have leased this piece of equipment. We employ a heavy equipment operator who operates it. Typically in about a 7 to 8 month schedule to build parks and ... projects and so each year we found ourselves, the Park and Recreation Commission, approving capital projects to build trail segments, parks and those, if they can be bid out on a large scale we can go ahead and accommodate the cost but these smaller projects, we agreed to build an auxiliary soccer field out in the industrial park. It's a small job. We put the dozer out there and constructed that soccer field. Finish it up this spring. If we had to bid that out, that would bring some heavy costs for moving costs ... for moving that dirt. Is this going to continue, this trend? It certainly is. We're about halfway completed with our park and trail program and it will continue into the future. Have we run cost estimates of if we continue to operate it on a rental basis versus purchase or extended lease, and yes we 4 t City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 have. I feel strongly, Dale Gregory our Park Superintendent feels strongly that this is a cost effective purchase for the long term future of the community. Mayor Mancino: Even including maintenance costs on that? Todd Hoffman: Yeah. I talked at length with Harold about that. Councilman Berquist: So for the next half a dozen years, I mean the soccer field will be, it's graded now substantially. There will be some final grading yet this spring. Todd Hoffman: Correct. Councilman Berquist: So then we'll move to expect that we'll have similar stuff within the next half a dozen years? I mean the point that I don't want to get to is that we've got $100,000.00 piece of equipment sitting in the yard for 3 or 4 months of summer. Todd Hoffman: When we're done using it in 8 or 12 years ... life period, go beyond it's life period, we'll sell the piece of equipment and either... The City has had a tough time coming up with the capital to develop Bandimere Park into a youth athletic complex and this again could be another piece of machinery which could be used against that project to make it happen. So for the next half a dozen or more years we'll use it extensively. I could provide the Council with a list of all the work that's scheduled. Where this thing is scheduled throughout... What it will be used for. Councilman Berquist: Can you just answer one more quick little question? If we have to buy an hour worth of labor, or buy an hour worth of this machine with an operator versus our operator and our machine, what are our costs? What is the cost difference? What does it cost us to put an operator in a machine on a project per hour? Todd Hoffman: $18.00- $20.00 an hour. Councilman Berquist: Plus the machine. Todd Hoffman: Correct. Councilman Berquist: Well, okay. Charles Folch: I should add to that, there are a number of pieces of equipment in Public Works that even through they are acquired initially with the intent that they're for another department, a lot of times there is some inner sharing with those such as the grader is used by more than just the Street Department at times. The loader is used by other departments. I would say there's probably at least 3 or 4 times a year when we have to go in from a strict maintenance standpoint and go clean out a pond or dig out a pond or ... and we typically spend oh, somewhere between, depending on the year, anywhere from $5,000.00 to $10,000.00 in rental. Renting a dozer along with some other piece of equipment that does that kind of work and even though the Park Maintenance Division will use the bulk of the dozer, I see this as a piece of equipment that can make use of from time to time coordinately with the Park Maintenance Division. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Any other? Councilman Senn, did you have a question? Thank you. Is there anyone here tonight wishing to address the Council on this issue? Okay. May I have a motion please? 5 t City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 Councilman Senn: I'll move approval of the remaining 1997 vehicles and equipment purchase with the stipulation that the balance of, or the estimated balance of $18,000.00 be transferred to a Council contingency fund. And the reason I'm requesting that is we have a number of projects that we struck out of this year's budget because we didn't have the money, such as sirens and everything like that. I think rather than see this money just kind of go somewhere else, I think it should go to a Council contingency so we can re- assess it's use. Mayor Mancino: Good idea. Councilman Engel: Second. Resolution #97 -18: Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Engel seconded to award the bids for the remaining 1997 Vehicles and Equipment as presented in the staff report dated March 7, 1997, with the stipulation that the balance of approximately $18,000.00 be transferred into a Council contingency fund. All voted in favor and the motion carried. UPDATE ON U.S. POSTAL SERVICE CARRIER ANNEX. Roger Knutson: There's been a meeting on the subject with the Postal Service and the neighborhood. We're working on a number of issues with them. ...berm and now we're working on the details about extending it onto the Weather Service property and those details have yet to be worked out. Negotiating issues like who's going to pay for them. At this point they're still not resolved. We sent you a letter dated March 21 which summarizes where we're at now and I believe Sharmin has some additional details. Mayor Mancino: Sharmin. Sharmin Al -Jaff: Since the meeting, since we wrote this memo we ... contact the National Weather Service and find out if they have any objections to the extension of the berm. They welcome it. They have no problem whatsoever. They don't want to be responsible for any additional costs. Mayor Mancino: Of maintaining it or? Sharmin Al -Jaff: They didn't ... the maintenance. They wanted to know who will be responsible for the maintenance but the actual building of the berm and adding landscaping, they don't want to be responsible. They don't want financial responsibility. One of their concerns was the fact that the berm would have a slope of 2:1 and that would... In the past they've had a problem with growing... wanted to make sure that the berm was at a slope that ... be maintained... That was all that was discussed. They wanted to see the plans in advance. Meanwhile we're waiting for more information from the Postal Service and a resolution between ... the trail. Mayor Mancino: And the continuation of the berm and the wall. Great, thank you. Any other questions from Council members? Councilman Senn: Just a quick comment, and Sharmin just eluded to it and so did you but under the list of outstanding issues the cost issues aren't listed so I want to make sure we don't lose track of them because I think that's. 6 1 City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 Mayor Mancino: I don't think we're going to lose track of them. Councilman Senn: They shouldn't be left off of outstanding issues. Mayor Mancino: Good. Thank you. Any other comments from Council members or questions. Is there anyone here wishing to address the Council tonight on this issue? We're getting tired of you, you know. Bill Kemble: ...be singled out, thank you very much. I'll be brief as usual. I'm Bill Kemble. I'm here on behalf of the residents of Bluff Creek Estates to ask the City, and I would assume that it would be through the City Attorney's office, to request a copy of the Postal Services final grading plan which would depict berms in it's final state. And the reason that we're requesting that is, we have a, we've had this for a while. Or no, we obtained through the last neighborhood meeting a copy of a survey of the pile of dirt or berm, whatever you want to call it, in it's current condition which we were able to overlay on top of the landscaping plan that they presented to us at the last meeting. The two don't go very well together and what I mean by that is, when you overlay and apply the grade and the contours that are on this survey, it doesn't seem that they're going to be able to get the berm up to the elevations that they say they're going to that would satisfy the majority of the residents. And we just want to see this kind of and double check... our neighbor who's a civil engineer to take a look at it and make... Mayor Mancino: There isn't a problem but I think that Sharmin, correct me if I'm wrong. That is all the final plans will come through the City Council process. It will come to the planning staff who will review them and make sure that they're right so it will come as a final plan and have, be reviewed by staff and we will review it as a City Council and you can certainly get the packet at that time. So you will see the final plan. Bill Kemble: Okay. Are the neighbors going to be given an opportunity to rubber stamp on whatever the plans are before anything gets... Mayor Mancino: You'll be able to speak at the public hearing. At the Council meeting, sure. And they will present the final plans to us and it will be recorded in our process. ...not until we finish the negotiations on a couple issues will we then point it to that. Hopefully next month. Bill Kemble: So there's no way that we can get, or request that we get a survey at this point in time or are you inclined to wait? Mayor Mancino: I don't know that they have their final plans, do they? Sharmin Al -Jaffa Last time we spoke they were in the process of surveying the berm. Mayor Mancino: What we will do is, once we have the final negotiations, we will put it on, put a date when they need to have everything to us for the City Council meeting and all the plans will be final and they will do their survey, etc. Bill Kemble: Okay, thank you. 7 r City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 AUTHORIZE CHASKA/CHANHASSEN HOCKEY ASSOCIATION REAL ESTATE TRANSFER. Todd Hoffman: Mayor, members of the City Council. Members of the audience. There's been a discussion ongoing for about the past year with members of the local Hockey Association and the City of Chanhassen revolving around the possibility of constructing a practice ice arena with the City of Chanhassen. About a year and a half ago folks from the Association started to take a look around at the different cities, Chaska, Victoria and Chanhassen, for a potential site. In a cooperative partner in this project. In essence what the deal is, the community would up front the property. Would then donate that for some collateral... private financing of a practice arena. The site was selected... city of Chanhassen. Portions of Lot 5 and 6, Block 1, Chanhassen Business Park which is just behind, to the south of Paisley Park. Corner of Highway 5 and Audubon Road. Soil studies were prepared. Some basic concept site plans were prepared. It seemed like it did fit, at least to continue for study. This past November the City Council again reviewed this item and recommended that the staff prepare a working draft of a purchase agreement, or a transfer, land transfer agreement for this property to the Association. Since that time Todd Gerhardt, Jim Walston, City Attorney's firm, and I have... Association. They've been very up front. Cordial throughout the negotiations and what we have for your consideration this evening is a working draft of those documents and there are representatives from the Association here to talk about both this document and then exactly what are their future actions regarding this arena. It is our recommendation, staff's recommendation that you give approval to this working draft this evening with the notion that staff will resolve the further agreement. Plug in all the dates. Move forward with the Association if that is their choice and then brin back the final agreement with all the I's dotted and T's crossed at some point in the future for your consideration. I'll be happy to answer any questions and I note Steve Olinger, the President of the Association is here this evening, as is Kevin McShane, a member of the Association to address questions, and there may be other representatives of the Association present as well. Mayor Mancino: Tank you Todd. I have a question. Has the representative from the Chanhassen /Chaska Hockey Association had time to review this working document too? Todd Hoffman: Yes they have. Mayor Mancino: And their attorneys have? Thank you. Any other questions for staff at this point? Okay. Who would like to address the City Council from the Chanhassen /Chaska Hockey Association? Steve Olinger: Good evening Madam Mayor, distinguished members of the City Council. I'm Steve Olinger, for those of you who don't know me. I'd like to begin by thanking the members of the City Council and the City administration for the cooperation that they've shown through this entire process. need not go over the history of it. Mr. Hoffman did that quite adequately. I am very grateful for the opportunity to come before you once again to continue this process. This city has been amazingly receptive to this idea and I am very grateful for the opportunity to them. I'm here now to answer questions. I'm sure that this won't be done without questions and I'll answer them honestly and forthrightly, to the best of my ability. So I'm here. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Are there any Council members that have questions? There aren't any questions at this point. Steve Olinger: Good news. 8 i City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Anyone else wishing to address the City Council? On this issue. Okay. Seeing none, comments from Council members. Councilman Senn. Councilman Senn: As far as the documents before us and continuing the process, I fully support doing that. I just want to call the Council's attention to Article 7.3 in the Real Estate Transfer Agreement. It's a fairly critical clause which is an agreement that needs yet to be drafted and put before us. I would hope that along with our motion tonight to move this process along that that include a contingency that all final action come back to Council here for approval, including that operating agreement, which is fairly critical. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Councilman Mason. Councilman Mason: I have no comments. Mayor Mancino: Councilman Engel. Councilman Engel: Nothing to add. Mayor Mancino: Councilman Berquist. Councilman Berquist: Well I want to see the thing get done. I want to see it get done well and I want to see it where this site says it will be. I know there's been a couple flies that have landed in the ointment of late. I don't know what the disposition exactly is of that but. Mayor Mancino: Do you want to ask that? Councilman Berquist: Well, I'm not sure. I'm not sure if I want to open the can. Yeah, perhaps I will. The last we had heard there was an offer afoot from the City of Chaska that made an offer, the offer consisted of erecting a second sheet of ice on the Conununity Center property and from what I remember of the memo, there was very little, if any cost, to the Hockey Association. At that particular point I was miffed. I felt like there had been an end run made on the City of Chanhassen insofar that we had worked in honest and good faith to attempt to help the Hockey Association put this thing together. I haven't really heard anything more about it since then. Please. Mayor Mancino: Thank you Steve. Steve Olinger: I would love to address that. I can tell you with all honesty that the City of Chaska has never approached me with any sort of a draft. There was a memo that was sent to me several months ago that was very vague and perhaps intentionally so. We had an Association wide meeting a week from the time that I received the initial memo and a question was asked at the meeting that was attended by the vast majority of the members of the Hockey Association, why I was not considering, why Chaska was not being considered at this point. And my answer was, we've got one offer on the table and that's the offer we'll deal with. If Chaska comes up with something that is solid, it would certainly be irresponsible of me not to look at that. But we have dealt honestly with the City of Chanhassen, as they have done with us. I told you a year and a half ago when I stood before you that we would be honest and open. I would not take this land agreement and wave in front of Chaska to try and get a better deal from Chaska. Nor will I wave an agreement from the City of Chaska in front of Chanhassen to try to get a better agreement. I know that everyone involved, I hope that everyone involved. I know that these two parties will deal 9 1 City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 honestly and openly with one another and that's where we are. Right now the only offer that we have on the table is this land deal and that's where we're going. Mayor Mancino: When is the drop dead date for the Mighty Ducks? Steve Olinger: Excuse me? Mayor Mancino: When is your drop dead date for? Steve Olinger: The 15"'. Mayor Mancino: Of April? Steve Olinger: Yes. Now the City of Chaska has contacted a member of the arena task force and that is certainly his obligation and duty to entertain all possibilities and that would be the only thing right now. City of Chaska has not contacted me and that's my stance is the stance has always been. That I continue forward with the process. It's my hope that we can get this thing done in Chanhassen, and that's not a slap at Chaska. I don't mean that at all. I appreciate the effort that they've put forth, but right now I have not been contacted. You folks know as much as I do about that agreement. If the agreement that is rumored comes forth, it's a marvelous agreement. I have yet to have anything. Councilman Berquist: Well good. I'm glad to know that my feelings of, my bad feelings were mis, were not correct. I'm glad rumor and innuendo was just exactly that. Rumor and innuendo. Steve Olinger: And I wasn't entirely... because I feel that my reputation and the reputation of the Hockey Association is at stake when things like that happen. And perhaps, and I'm quite sure it wasn't intentional by the City, by staff. But the timing is uncomfortable. Councilman Berquist: Thank you very much. Mayor Mancino: Yes, thank you. Any other comments? Councilman Engel: We'll know by the 15` then? Mayor Mancino: So we will know by the 15 "'. Steve Olinger: If we have Mighty Duck funding? The City of Chaska... Mighty Duck funding. That's the rumor... Mayor Mancino: Okay, so you're working on that right now with, okay. Thank you. Councilman Berquist: That's when your application is due or that's when the? Okay. And notice would be sent out, yeah. We find out approximately? Steve Olinger: Oh, that won't be until this summer... Mayor Mancino: Do you have any idea Todd how long it takes for them to make decisions on who gets funding from Mighty Ducks? 10 1 City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 Todd Hoffman: Steve's correct. It will be sometime during the summer. Councilman Engel: Does that leave enough time to build it? For the next winter. Go ahead. Steve Olinger: Would you like me here or? Mayor Mancino: Up at the podium, thank you. Steve Olinger: Right now we've commissioned a fund raising company to do a study as to how many dollars they think we can raise privately and then there will be corporate funds... The Mighty Ducks was intended to be on the back end of any arena. They don't want to be the up front money. They want to be the money that comes in at the end. So that doesn't slow our progress down. We're still hoping to get in by the first of the year but we're tight at this point. Councilman Engel: Good, thanks. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. My only, I just had two questions that I wanted to make sure Todd are covered in this agreement and one is an access agreement to the property. That the Chanhassen /Chaska Hockey Association doesn't own, after the transfer. And two, that there is the specific plat showing exactly what land they will be buying from us. With that may I have a motion please? Councilman Berquist: I would move approval of, move that we approve recommendation of the, what am I approving? How am I going to word this? We authorize execution of the attached real estate transfer agreement as outlined within the packet with the added item as per Councilman Senn. That we, the City Council review all the documentation, specifically an operating agreement referenced in Section 7.3. And as per Mayor Mancino, that we have a cross access agreement drawn up or some type of an easement that allows access to the property, not part and parcel of the transfer. Was there anything else? Mayor Mancino: Friendly amendment that we see this for a final time. That it comes back to City Council again for final approval with all the is dotted and the is crossed. Councilman Senn: Point of clarification. I thought we weren't being actually asked to authorized execution of the document tonight. I thought we were just being asked to authorize the draft of the document saying you know, it's okay to proceed and that the final documents will still come back before us. Councilman Berquist: The execution of these documents only will occur after all the conditions of the document and any additional conditions put forth by this Council are met and, are agreed upon and approved to. I'll make that part of my motion. Mayor Mancino: Is there a second to the motion? Councilman Engel: Second. Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Engel seconded to authorize the execution of the attached Real Estate Transfer Agreement, Promissory Note, and Mortgage transferring portions of Lots 5 & 6, Block 1, Chanhassen Business Park 5' Addition to the Chaska /Chanhassen Hockey Association. The City Council review all the documentation, specifically an operating agreement referenced in Section 7.3 and execution of said documents will occur only after all conditions of the 11 i City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 documents and any additional conditions put forth by City Council are agreed upon and approved. All voted in favor and the motion carried. REQUEST OF CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH PARK BOND REFERENDUM, PARK TASK FORCE. Todd Hoffman: Are you looking for me or Alison, are you going to present? Mayor Mancino: Whoever is presenting? Park Task Force presentation team. Alison Blackowiak: I'm Alison Blackowiak. I'm a Co -Chair of the Park Task Force. Mike Lynch: Mike Lynch, same description. Alison Blackowiak: And we are here tonight to talk a little bit about what we would like to see happen in terms of a proposed referendum. We recently received the results of the park survey and feel that based on those results a scaled down version of the referendum would be appropriate at this time. Tonight we're asking more for conceptual approval. We'd like to come back to you at your April V h work session with specific options for a referendum and at that time talk with Council members about how to proceed. Mike, do you have anything to add? Mike Lynch: We believe we have good direction from the survey. Which sections of the community would like what. We need to have your approval to develop something to put before the voters. Alison Blackowiak: Within the next two weeks what we as a task force will be doing is we'll be meeting, not only as, alone as a task force but also hopefully with the Park and Rec Commission to get their input. And we'll also be calling on Council members to get input from you and your constituents via you so we can try to come up with some workable options to present on April 7"'. Any questions? Mayor Mancino: Any questions from Council members? Okay, thank you. Anyone else wishing to address the Council on this issue tonight? Jim Andrews: My name is Jim Andrews. I live at 7014 Sandy Hook Circle. For 6 years I was on the Park Board. I was involved in the early stages of the park task force, or the referendum task force. I guess one thing I'll say, and this may surprise you, is property taxes are very high but I'm in favor of this. I think this is something that is long overdue. That the city needs to move ahead on. Six years ago when I started with the Park Board and we already owned Bandimere Park. For the 6 years I was on the Park Board we talked about developing Bandimere Park. It's been 2 years since I was on the Park Board and we're still talking about development Bandimere Park. Now my kids will be grown up, married and have kids of their own at this rate before we actually develop the land that we already own. Recreation needs in this city are overwhelming our facilities. To my knowledge nobody's making any more land in our city. In my opinion we can't move ahead fast enough on this. And I understand that the tax climate is difficult right now, but I think if you talk to the people that were in this city back in the early 60's, before the Lake Ann referendum went through, they would have said the exact same things. That it was a tough time. That we could wait on it. We didn't need to do it but I think we would look back and see that that was one of the smartest things this city ever did and I'm sure that 10 or 15 or 20 years from now that we would look at the parkland we acquired and the facilities we developed and we would say these were smart things to do. So I would hope that you'd take a courageous decision here and try to push this 12 1 City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 through at a difficult time and look back some years later and see that it was a smart and wise thing to do. So thank you. Mayor Mancino: So you're going to join the Park Task Force and get out there? Jim Andrews: I'll do all I can to help. I mean I'm coaching soccer. Ref soccer. I've been involved in other task forces for months on end. I will support it and what I can do and assist in motivating certain interest groups like soccer groups and others that need to, that are asking for help to develop their programs so. Mayor Mancino: Good. Thank you for your comments Jim. Anyone else wishing to address the City Council? Randy Tufts: I'm Randy Tufts. I live at 1110 Dove Court in Chanhassen. I'm Treasurer of the Chan /Chaska Soccer Club. I won't get into all the details on why we need soccer fields but obviously I have a bias towards that. If that's a part of the referendum and the proposal by the task force, the Chan /Chaska Soccer Club would very much be in support of a referendum and would do everything that we could to help move that along and get it passed. Mayor Mancino: Good. Thank you for your comments. Anyone else wishing to address the City Council on this? On the referendum. Okay, seeing none. Comments from Council members. Councilman Berquist. Councilman Berquist: Well, I am certainly in agreement that taxes in this part of the state, well the entire state, are extraordinarily high and I understand the discontent of a lot of homeowners and business people regarding the state of property taxes and how they affect our lifestyles. I'm like Jim though. I look, I try to look further down the road than next year or 2 years or even 5 years. I have children that are grown up. they're not married yet. I also have a young son that won't be young for all that many more years and quite honestly the affect of a successful park referendum, the affect on my family's lifestyle will be negligible. The affect on the families that, whose children are younger than mine and who will live here after I've left for Arizona. Mayor Mancino: Which is tomorrow. Councilman Berquist: Which is tomorrow, is profound. Mayor Mancino: It should have been yesterday. Councilman Berquist: It should have been yesterday. The affect of a successful park referendum on the future citizens of Chanhassen will be very profound. Jim Andrews stated, talked about the futuristic passing of Lake Ann and the effect that that vision has had on the City. I mean if I try to envision the City of Chanhassen without that asset, and maybe you could argue that we would have something but I don't know where. I can't believe that it would be as good. And given the state of development and the pressures of development on this city, there is absolutely no time like the present and the hope that I have is that this sort of dialogue is able to convince people that difficult as it is, it would be wise for them to try to think beyond the here and the now relative to their pocketbook from a tax point of view. Does that tell you where I stand? Or was that more confusing? Mayor Mancino: That was pretty clear. Thank you. Councilman Engel. 13 1 City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 Councilman Engel: I guess I'm basically in agreement with Steve. I've got younger kids. I'll probably get a little more tangible benefit out of this. But at the same time the farther you can get away from April 15` asking for this money I think the more receptive everybody's going to be to it. I recall the costs for each line item when we were getting a brief and it was $5.00 per average household for this. It was $10.00 per average household for this. None of them seems to be that much until you try to build them all and then try to sell it so you've got your work cut out for you in deciding what makes it and what doesn't. I'll be interested in reading that. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Councilman Mason. Councilman Mason: Most of it's been said but I'll say some of it again anyway. I'm definitely in favor of the referendum. Yes, we have high taxes in this city. I also think we happen to live in one of the nicer spots in Minnesota. I think we have excellent services. That's not to say that we as Council and as citizens need to do what we can to lower taxes. However, I think the point about Lake Ann is very well taken. I think if we let this opportunity pass us by now, it will not be there again if we don't have some sort of park referendum and I certainly will be one of the people supporting that. And lest anyone forget, that means my taxes goes up too. Mayor Mancino: Land doesn't get any cheaper does it? Councilman Senn. Councilman Senn: I heard you were applying for tax exempt status. Mayor Mancino: Non profit Councilman Senn: I'm in favor of continuing the process towards the referendum. I can't tell you, I'm going to say specifically right now whether I support the referendum or not because it is yet to be defined, both in size and in scope. I look forward to hearing the ideas of the task force on the 7` so the Council can make some decisions, but I think until there's some definition to it, I think it's a little early or premature to say whether I support it or don't. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. I also am looking forward to April 7 when we get to see the options. I think that the Park Task Force has done a good job with the survey and doing the fundamentals that need to be done prior to our putting a referendum out to the voters and to the citizens of Chanhassen. So I look forward to what you're going to bring to us on the 7th and seeing some different options. With that may I have a motion please. Councilman Senn: What is the specific action we're being requested to make? Simply to authorize the process to continue? Mayor Mancino: Yes. Councilman Senn: So moved. Councilman Mason: Second. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to authorize the Park Referendum Task Force to proceed with the park bond referendum. All voted in favor and the motion carried. 14 1 City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 Mayor Mancino: The motion carries and we look forward to seeing you at our work session on the 7"'. AWARD OF BIDS: COULTER BOULEVARD PEDESTRIAN UNDERPASS, PROJECT NO. 93- 26C. Charles Folch: Thank you Mayor, members of the Council. Approximately two Mondays ago, or this past Monday, March 17' bids were received and opened for the pedestrian, the Coulter Boulevard pedestrian underpass, Project 93 -26C. It's also State Project No. 194- 090 -03. Federal ISTEA project 2796(049). MnDOT did conduct the bid opening here in Chanhassen with the staff representative. From the five bids received on the project, low bid was received from Park Construction Company at a total bid of $442,681.95. Staff report also lists the range of the other bids received. Going up to as high as $530,000.00. In your additional packet items tonight I've included an original staff report item which is, provides an explanation from the project engineer as to ... staff s determination as to why bids came in quite a bit higher than what they had estimated on the engineer's estimate of $380,000.00. Basically they had estimated a pre -cast structure. It came in at about $30,000.00 higher than they had estimated and then the pilings needed for that foundation structure were $14,000.00 higher than... generally right now the concrete costs are higher than what they were last year with... received on similar type projects last year. In accordance... estimate relates to the granular backfill. That basically is a factor of the supplier that they... Where they're located and ... costs accordingly. Basically that number's come in about $20,000.00 higher than the engineer's estimate so total sum, MnDOT has reviewed the bids also and they will be providing 80% of the funding of this construction contract. They have already indicated to me that they are ... bid of $442,000.00 and then... share to that amount so the City's construction cost share of this amount would be roughly $88,000.00. Mayor Mancino: And so that's what we actually sign the contract for? The $88,000.00 and MnDOT signs the contract for the other $354,000.00. Charles Folch: Actually MnDOT enters into the contract and when they would just basically ask payment from the City directly to MnDOT so the contract will be a contract with MnDOT. Mayor Mancino: MnDOT, okay. And all their specifications and they'll have people out here inspecting, etc.? Charles Folch: No, we provide the... inspection. Our project engineer designed the project by the inspection on the project and conduct or coordinate... testing requirements and then also I believe the Federal documentation on the project... Mayor Mancino: Was MnDOT concerned about how high it went over estimate? Charles Folch: Apparently not. Apparently. Mayor Mancino: State tax dollars at work? Charles Folch: Well apparently they also probably see the same information... structure and the concrete costs being higher. That was a large, basically of the $64,000.00... was related to concrete costs. And MnDOT's very involved in construction projects all over the state... comfortable with the bids received. Mayor Mancino: Any other questions for staff at this point? Councilman Senn? 15 City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 Councilman Senn: Charles, did you have a chance to find out how our city portion then fits within our, you know within what's budgeted? Charles Folch: Well what I've been able to come up with tonight is, in reviewing what we estimated our share to be at this point in time now, the latest and greatest information, the City will have a share of $88,000.00 worth of construction. To date with the design and administration of the project... bidding process, we've incurred, and to conduct federal documentation, there had to be project memorandums. There's a number of things that we had to go through as preliminary steps to get approval through this whole thing. The long and the short of it, to date we have engineering costs, $42,000.00 which is roughly 9 %z% of the construction contract amount. In checking this with a similar ISTEA project which was the ...bridge that we did between Great Plains and Dakota, that one also had approximately about 10% for engineering design so that's right in line there. The pedestrian bridge had an engineering inspection contract administration cost of approximately 11% of the contract. Our use, for a conservative number ... of this project but I don't think it will be that high because this is a pretty bad structure. It shouldn't take as long to construct what you saw through the span pedestrian bridge over Highway 5. Mayor Mancino: So another $44,000.00? Charles Folch: Nevertheless, let's assume $44,000.00 to be conservative and then engineering and testing on the previous ISTEA project ran 2.7 %. From what I can tell, conservative, it's probably somewhere between 3 and 4. We estimate 4 %. That's approximately another $18,000.00 for the testing that we're going to be required for the project. Mayor Mancino: So what is testing? Charles Folch: Oh they'll be testing the concrete. They'll be testing the materials used for the piling. Concrete piling footings. They'll be doing compaction tests on the granular material that they put in around the base of the structure. Basically they require testing of the material that's being brought in. Material being used. Mayor Mancino: And making sure the material is. Charles Folch: Standards and specifications. All of this is basically required by the State. They have, it's all. Mayor Mancino: And the manufacturer of the material doesn't have to do that? Charles Folch: Well they can provide, some of that though, the precast stuff they can provide but the stuff, the pilings and things like that which are done on site are tested on site. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Charles Folch: Again this, I don't anticipate this to be involved... Councilman Senn: $182,000.00 so far. Charles Folch: Probably about 20, you could as a conservative amount, probably 24% of the construction contract. Probably a worst case scenario... 16 City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 Mayor Mancino: 24% of 442 Councilman Senn: I don't know, I just added up the numbers. 88, 42, 44, 18. That totals 182 as far as I can tell. Mayor Mancino: And is that going to be paid out in '97, '98 and has it been projected in our budgets for this year? Charles Folch: What we've incurred in engineering costs to date, and that's already paid out. And the project was listed in our capital improvement program for this year and it will be completed this year. Basically...30 to 40 day project so the construction contract will be all paid out. What happens is, MnDOT will be making those... In fact before the contract starts here in the next month, MnDOT will be asking us to... Our design consultant... Mayor Mancino: Okay. So this summer, as we plan our 1998 budget for the city, we will not have any of these costs in the '98 budget? Councilman Senn: Okay, but do we have the overall project of Coulter Boulevard and stuff, I mean how does this sum, the $182,000.00 relate to the specific line item and their relating to this underpass? Charles Folch: Actually this is a sub project, the Coulter project which we undertook this year. The majority of the project. Going back to the feasibility study, this project was listed in that project in terms of the overall street costs and what we bonded for. Okay. At that point, I believe it was like $340 or $360,000.00 is what was estimated. At the feasibility time for this project so when we bonded for Coulter Boulevard, those numbers were included. Again higher than what we anticipated but. Councilman Senn: But I thought when we had that original budget amount, that assumed the ISTEA grant taking up the line share of it which left us effectively with a very small cost budget on this line item basis going into this project. Mayor Mancino: 20 %. Councilman Senn: Yeah, I mean we didn't even have $100,000.00. Now again, I'm getting old so my memory may be poor but, so I'm the first to admit that but I thought I remembered when we talked about this and approved it before, I mean we approved a number for this particular project well under $100,000.00 and now we're talking about $182,000.00. And the other thing that disturbs me about that is it's a MnDOT controlled project. We're simply going to be billed for it and also pay 20% of any change orders or overages too. So I mean this $182,000.00 is hardly a firm number and you know, there could in effect even be expenses on that. I don't know. Charles Folch: If you have a moment I could go upstairs and pull what the bonding amount was for the project compared to the feasibility estimate... arch underpass in there. Councilman Senn: Okay, because I remember a specific line item for the arch underpass. Charles Folch: If you want to continue this. Mayor Mancino: Sure, we'll go on to another thing. Charles, can you just answer also when it's a MnDOT project like that and there are changes, does that affect us and how does, you know what 17 City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 happens to the City as a result of that? If MnDOT authorizes the changes, do we still pay the, is it still the 80/20 rule? Charles Folch: Yes. Any type of contract ... due to ... changes or things that are encountered during construction that weren't known about during the design phase, they are, the 80/20 share applied to those. In a contract like this, if this was a typical contract, let's say $450,000.00 contract, general municipal project, and you had a bad year. We had a bad project. Let's say you have 25% overruns. That'd be roughly $100,000.00. If it did get that bad, our share would be $20,000.00 roughly... But again, this should be a straight forward project... This should be relatively straight forward. Mayor Mancino: And is the pattern with other, when we've done other joint projects with MnDOT like this, you know what usually happens? What's the history behind it? Charles Folch: Well I mean technically we're a party with MnDOT so we do have the ability to review _ and approve change orders like we do on all projects that we do. Mayor Mancino: Oh we do, okay. Charles Folch: But preface that and say that there's many times things happen in the field of a project outside the city project where we can't hold the contractor up 2 weeks for a Council item change order for approval. They've got to do it right there and then so I mean staff has to take the initiative and say, listen this has to be done now. We'll go back and do the documentation and get the change order approved. Certain things that you know, us and MnDOT. Mayor Mancino: It's part of the deal for having them pay 80 %. Councilman Senn: Well you know, I just want to be real sure of that this time. You know the last time we did this it was a disaster. The last time we had a 300. Mayor Mancino: What does that mean? Councilman Senn: Well last time was the pedestrian bridge, okay and it was a $300,000.00 project that became an $800,000.00 project and I don't want to get into that again. Mayor Mancino: But that didn't have anything to do with MnDOT. Councilman Senn: It was an ISTEA project. Mayor Mancino' I know but it was also the city that authorized some of the up charges. Councilman Senn: I understand but it was the same process. Mayor Mancino: Yeah, but we can't blame MnDOT for that. Councilman Senn: Well I'm not blaming them. I'm just saying the project expense, okay and I just want to make sure we don't get into that again. Charles Folch: But that, most of those, if I may add, we knew at the time we approved the award of the contract that that increase had happened because all those design changes and inputs went on prior to the 18 City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 award of bid. So we knew at the time we awarded the contract that we had this substantial increase because of the design element of the project. Councilman Senn: Yeah, but nowhere near the 800. That continued to grow after the design contract, or after the contracts were let. Mayor Mancino: I remember several times it came back. If you could check on that, that'd be great Charles and we'll just go ahead. The next item on the agenda, we'll be coming back to 8A, under Council Presentations. Pauly site discussion, Councilman Senn. Councilman Senn: Just point of clarification. I think we need to do 1C, Mayor, which was taken off the Consent Agenda. Mayor Mancino: Oh yes, thank you. CONSENT AGENDA: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ALTERNATIVE URBAN AREAWIDE REVIEW (AUAR) ON GATEWAY PROPERTY, TH 5 & 41. Councilman Senn: I had asked for 1C to be pulled, which was the Gateway request for alternative environmental assessment on the Gateway project. The reason I had asked for it to be pulled was, I guess, I just want to make sure that everybody involved, including the people who are proposing the project at this point understand that as a Council or we as a city are not committing to any number of things or even a concept yet as it relates to this project by authorizing this thing to go forward, okay. There's a number of assumptions that will be addressed by this process, including some not yet authorized intersections on TH 5 and I mean, there's a whole gammet of issues, okay. All we saw was a very tentative sketch of this project many months ago and haven't seen much more of it since then and I just don't want somebody to come back to us a few months from now and say, oh yeah but you led us on because you let this process start. They're starting this process. They're starting it at their own risk and we haven't considered a concept yet, nor provided comments to the concept and that's the only reason I wanted to pull it. Mayor Mancino: Well I feel, if you don't mind, I feel exactly the same way. When I look under all the questions that are asked about land use, about traffic, etc. and I did attend the Planning Commission meeting last week and I mean, this is a big parcel of land. It's 102 acres. It has a lot of slopes. The developers are talking about terracing the land, etc. They're talking about terracing the land. They're talking about making it mixed use so there would be a residential area next to the wetland, etc. And I'm not sure that I agree with all the uses that I saw so I would feel much more comfortable saying okay to this after we look at it conceptually, which I think we're going to on April 14 anyway and then going ahead with this. My only other question is... Sharmin, I mean the Villages on the Pond did an EIS document too, didn't they? And that was 60 acres. You know this is bigger. This is our gateway to the west. Why would we be doing a shorter process on such an important parcel? I mean when you shorten the time on something, it either means that there's less questioning. Less depth to it or something. You just can't shorten the time without taking something away from it. Or at least I don't know how you do it. Sharmin Al -Jaffa You will be getting the same amount of information out of it. The only thing that is different is the time, just like you stated. But you will be reviewing everything that an EIS would be reviewing. 19 1 City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 Mayor Mancino: And it's the public process that is shorter? Sharmin Al -Jaff: It's 120 days versus an EIS would have been 6 months, Roger? Roger Knutson: Minimum. Sharmin Al -Jaff: Minimum. Councilman Senn: Mayor, if I could. I asked Kate that exact question this afternoon, or earlier today. She said one of the reasons for the abbreviated process was simply the fact that this property is not surrounded by an existing developed areas of any, you know effectively will not carry, how would I say, the level of comment that some of the other ones have where, you know like Village on the Ponds. Mayor Mancino: It was next to single family. Councilman Senn: It was right next to a single family neighborhood and stuff so that was one of the reasons why it could be justified as a shorter review process. Mayor Mancino: Okay, then I understand that. Does using the shorter review process, does our city staff become more involved or have more hours in it than if it would be an EIS? Do you have any idea? I'm also thinking about efficiency of staff's time. Sharmin Al -Jaff: I believe we can do it ... I believe that we will be able to, with the amount of time... give you a good analysis. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Any other questions for staff at this point? Is there anyone here wishing to address the Council on this? Okay. Comments. Councilman Berquist. Councilman Berquist: Well, I don't have any problem with changing the format to the AUAR, and I'll tell you why. The first reason is that the City of Chanhassen is the responsible government unit. And the second reason is that before any of this takes affect we're going to see it on the 14`" of April. I mean I don't, I very seriously doubt that anything at the staff, or anything of substance at the staff level will occur prior to that. So we will have a wonderful opportunity. Mayor Mancino: So don't start it until after the 14` ". Councilman Berquist: I'm sure that. Mayor Mancino: But we can stipulate that. Councilman Berquist: If there is preliminary. I don't know what necessarily what sort of preliminary paperwork is consistent with this and I would not advocate necessarily stopping it until the 14". Preliminary paperwork. I believe that we have adequate time to let our concerns be known and time for the developer to address those prior to getting into the meat of the document. Mayor Mancino: Councilman Engel. Councilman Engel: Yes, feel the same. We'll wait for the specifics. A couple weeks. 20 1 City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 Mayor Mancino: Councilman Mason. Councilman Senn. Councilman Senn: I already made mine so. Mayor Mancino: Okay, and I did too. May I have a motion then? Councilman Berquist: I would move approval of the request to substitute an alternative environmental assessment for an environmental impact worksheet for the Gateway project on Highway 5 and 41. Councilman Engel: Second. Resolution #97 -20: Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Engel seconded to adopt a resolution recommending the AUAR be completed for the property known as the Gateway Development. All voted in favor and the motion carried. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: Mayor Mancino: The next item is under Council Presentations. Pauly site discussion, Councilman Senn. Councilman Senn: Let's see here. On Pauly's. Have briefly touched on this and talked about it I think the last couple of Council meetings. I'm not sure how we best do this but I think at this point we should really devise some kind of a way to take that area over there and kind of put an umbrella over it or a moratorium on it or something to allow us time to get out in front of what may or may not happen there. You know in the case of the little cleaners building where we had an applicant in, I think you know last Council meeting. It was finalized tonight. I think what we did there was the fair thing to do effectively because you can't really hold that up but you know as far as the Pauly piece of ground, I mean it's a publicly owned piece of ground and there really is no urgency in which to act on it at this point at all. There was an HRA designated developer for 3 months. That 3 months has long since passed so technically there isn't one even designated on it right now. Officially, you know rather than have people I think running around putting ideas together on it, thinking you know with the proposal generated, I would rather see us take a proactive position of saying we plan on studying the entire area and getting out in front of it. Now it is not just an issue in my mind with the Pauly's site but it's also an issue of the shopping center. The church property. I think we should be proactive out in front right now in terms of how we see re -use of the church property regardless of whether or not it stays in a church use or not. I think our position should be proactive. Do we want it to be continued tax exempt or do we want it back on the tax rolls. If so, under what land use, you know etc. I think we should get out in front and define that now because I think otherwise you're going to be very surprised. I think very shortly there will be proposals you know coming forward which may or may not meet what we would like to see and again, this is one of those instances where we have the opportunity and so I'd like us to really get out in front and look at it and in the meantime just say, to everybody, you know hold off until we do that. Mayor Mancino: Well and I think we can say that informally. I mean we do have it on our work session for June 2 and we can get prepared for that. Todd Gerhardt, is there any other from your point of view thing that we need to do in that area? Are there people out there wanting to look at the land? Wanting to purchase that will make a difference between now and June 2 And that will only be the start of the process because we'll just start on June 2 We'll need a couple months to review it and to. Todd Gerhardt: Nothing between now and June 2nd 21 ' City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 Mayor Mancino: Councilman Berquist? Councilman Berquist: Well I agree with Councilman Senn. That area I think is integral to the Heritage Park that Mr. Geving referred to. It really is Chanhassen. It was Chanhassen for many, many years and yes we may not have a proposal on the table to purchase the old Pauly's site but I agree with Mark insofar as that it's conceivable that in a very short, I don't know of any. I don't have any secrets but it's very conceivable that in a relatively short period of time, far before June 2 °d , we could have some dilemmas on our hands with... existing St. Hubert's site. Potentially that site. The old Kenny's site and if someone were to come in and make a proposal to us now for the old St. Hubert's site, I mean I can't even guess at what it would be but if we aren't proactive, in essence from this day forward, something could come in and present itself there and we would have no legal ability to decide whether that was what we truly wanted for the old center of town. Mayor Mancino: So are you suggesting some sort of a moratorium on the area? Councilman Berquist: That would probably be an apt description. Councilman Senn: Mayor, just if I could. One of the things I've said before and I really would like us to look at in terms of moratoriums, is I always hate when we're put in the position that we have a project before us and we're putting a moratorium on because we have a project before us. I don't think that's fair to anyone involved. Mayor Mancino: And we don't have a project now. Councilman Senn: We have nothing in front of us at this point and I think right now is the ideal time to do precisely that with no agenda, no nothing other than we want to determine the long term future of that area and we want to do it on a proactive basis. Mayor Mancino: Councilman Mason? Councilman Mason: Sounds good to me. Mayor Mancino: Councilman Engel? Councilman Engel: Yep. Good idea. I like it. Mayor Mancino: Roger, tell me a little bit, or tell us, I'm sorry, a little bit about moratoriums. I mean length of them. Can we determine that? Pros and cons. Roger Knutson: Initially a moratorium proposed by a city can be for up to one year with an extension up to an additional 18 months for a total of 2 % years. To pursue a moratorium is essentially to take a time out. Examine an area or an issue ... come back with official controls, changes in your zoning ordinance, things like that, to carry out your wishes for that area of the community. It's not, a moratorium ordinance is not an amendment to your zoning ordinance. It does not require referral to the Planning Commission. It does not require a public hearing. It does not require a simple majority vote. All it requires is for you to adopt the appropriate ordinance... Mayor Mancino: So the purpose of it is exactly what we're talking about here tonight. Very much in line with. 22 1 City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 Roger Knutson: Time out for a study and to make sure things don't happen you don't think are appropriate in the meantime. Oftentimes when people, here for example if you announce we're going to commission a task force or we're going to study an issue to consider changing, I'll just make something up, how convenience stores are supposed to be. You'd be surprised, people read the newspaper, they listen to this and tomorrow you have a flood of applications. And so to prevent that sort of thing from happening, moratoriums are often useful. Mayor Mancino: Got it. And we can have a, we can implement a moratorium right now for 6 months. We have all that flexibility. Roger Knutson: For a total of 2 '/2 years. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Councilman Senn: My understanding of it is, I mean effectively that would need to be put on the next Council agenda for consideration. I don't think we can effectively establish a moratorium tonight. Roger Knutson: It wouldn't, it would be difficult because I would need to know all the details. I mean I need to know. Mayor Mancino: Physical area and. Roger Knutson: Yeah, I need a description. Councilman Mason: That place over there. Roger Knutson: That place over there, okay. Good enough for me. Mayor Mancino: ...downtown area. Then Todd, if you could get something together. Is that the feeling of the Council at this point? To get together a moratorium of 6 months. Councilman Engel: Perfect. Mayor Mancino: Then if we need to extend it, we can do that. Roger Knutson: I'll have that for you at your next agenda. Councilman Berquist: You know I can tell you right now that there might be a kicker, a wrinkle in this. I don't know for certain but 6 months puts us at what, August? September? September. By that point the St. Hubert's School will discontinued using the classroom spaces at that other building. I would suspect that long before then, probably sometime in June the individuals that own that building will be actively seeking tenants. Well, that shouldn't matter though. Councilman Senn: Depends on the tenants. Whether they're an allowable use or not. Mayor Mancino: Then we get into temporary tenants. 23 1 City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 Roger Knutson: So I can be, in drafting this, the moratorium would be on which parcels and on what? What do you want to prevent them from doing? Councilman Senn: Well I'll take a crack at that, if you want, and then people can either agree or disagree. But I would consider basically the Pauly's site to be part of it. As well as the existing old church site and town hall site. I would consider the church, the existing St. Hubert's church property be part of it. I would consider the, I still call it Kenny's Market site. Roger Knutson: The strip center? Councilman Senn: The strip center. To be part of it. And also the, Jerry's property to the east of the cemetery. Now those are all parcels that are one way or another tied either to the church re -use, what the city owns, or are currently being offered for sale or development or whatever. Mayor Mancino: What about the Klingelhutz property? Councilman Engel: Which piece is that one? Mayor Mancino: South of that too. Councilman Berquist: Lloyd Graubel's office is in there. Councilman Senn: Oh, okay. Where the old office building is? I suppose we should include it huh. Roger Knutson: The old Klingelhutz building? Mayor Mancino: Yeah, he's still there but just so we can look at that for the future. Roger Knutson: And you want to prevent issuance of any building permits or rezonings or subdivisions or? Councilman Senn: All of the above. Mayor Mancino: All of the above. Any action. Roger, do you have enough information? Roger Knutson: Yes 1 do. I'm sure the staff will help me define these properties. Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Next item under Council Presentations. HRA expense item. Councilman Senn: Let's see here. Mayor Mancino: Boy, you must have had extra time this week. Councilman Senn: No, I was at the HRA meeting and I raised my hand and at the point it came to expenses I didn't get recognized so I missed my opportunity so I thought I'd take my opportunity tonight. In the HRA expense items there is an item for $8,604.14 for purchasing a lap top computer. I have a real problem with that I guess. It's in the HRA expense items that you'd have attached to your HRA agenda. Here, I can pass my copy around if you want to look at it because I'm assuming other people didn't necessarily bring that tonight. But I have a real problem with that for several reasons. One is, no 24 City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 questions were even asked about it. Two, I question $8,000.00 for a lap top computer. And third, and not last, there was absolutely no money budgeted for that item anywhere in the budget in any HRA account. And I have checked the budget. It comes under the heading, I can't wait until we get the changes made but at the same time I've been asking for I don't know how long now. Over a year I think that we have this discussion and I asked, in fact the last time we discussed it I thought we agreed that there were going to be no more purchases or actions of this type until Council did have that information and work session on MIS and ... and just kind of sail through. So that's why I was raising it. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Actually the MIS system is on the May 5"' work session. Todd, can you respond to the HRA? Todd Gerhardt: That expenditure, Mark has my '96 budget ... that item was an expenditure. However, due to the demand for... equipment, that... September and October and I received that computer in January. Received the bill this past month so it was a '96 expense. Mayor Mancino: So I'm assuming that we brought the money forward in '97 to pay for it? Todd Gerhardt: It will be coded in the '96... Councilman Senn: So we didn't bring. I thought we usually, when it's not expense, I thought we bring it forward into the new budget as a line item. Because you've balanced, in your '97 budget you've balanced out your '96 budget in that account and then you've brought it forward and put your new revenues and expenses against it. And that doesn't reflect in what you did in the '97 budget. Todd Gerhardt: What I'm telling you is that I've had that computer since January and that somebody had to write a check to pay for that computer before I received it. It's definitely a '96 expense. Mayor Mancino: That's fine. I mean you can't answer every detailed question about what was in `96- `97 budget but can you meet with Mark afterwards and maybe Pam next week and go over the follow through of the '96 monies to pay for the lap top. Take some time to do that. Councilman Senn: Well and I guess, you know the primary issue I want to get back to is again, we talked about MIS at budget times. Last fall and we said we were not going to do, you know other than the normal monthly maintenance stuff that we're paying, but we weren't going to do anything additional until we had a chance to sit down and consider MIS. That obviously is not what's happening, okay, because that is what we kind of laid out and said last fall. And we keep, because of other I guess pressing items, that discussion keeps getting put off and you know I don't see that as a turn around to say it's okay to go out and do something different than what we talked about doing last fall, which was just kind of like a cease and desist on purchasing additional computer stuff until we had a good understanding of what we were doing as a Council. And stuff, so I mean either we're doing that or we're not doing that. Mayor Mancino: Well Mark I remember having that conversation, obviously not last fall because I wasn't here last fall but I remember having that in January and haven't seen anything of that happen since and that's why we're having the work session on the 5 "' of May. And this is something that had already been approved by City Council in '96. So you know I can't go back and work through that all. I'm sorry I wasn't here. But is there any other discussion from members that were here during that time period? Any questions that you have? 25 ' City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 Councilman Berquist: I don't have any questions specific to the computer. I was ... the HRA, I mean I have concerns about MIS. Every two weeks we're writing, I mean every two weeks, I mean it's costing us $1,000.00 a day to Hartley and Associates for this managing of information system. And hopefully we can get to the bottom of it in May, if not sooner. We were supposed to have a demonstration as to what the capabilities are. What it would allow us to do. I know that in attending meetings with the City of Chaska and the School Board that the managing of information systems with the City of Chanhassen is the envy of every government agency in this area and given the amount of money that we're spending on it, I can certainly understand it, although I don't understand it. Mayor Mancino: Well you haven't seen it at work. You haven't seen what it will, etc. And that's one thing that we will be doing. We'll have on site, staff will show us what it does do from there we can have discussions. Any questions Councilman Engel on this? Councilman Engel: Well I guess I've got a little familiarity with this type of equipment. I'm curious what were the specs on that machine. It's a pretty nice machine. Mayor Mancino: It must be an IBM. Todd Gerhardt: That includes the docking station... software ... I can get you the specifications... Councilman Engel: I'd be interested in seeing that. Mayor Mancino: Councilman Mason, any questions on this? Okay. Going forward, review February Fest. Councilman Senn: The other two items, I had February Fest and Rec Center mission statement were items that were in our packet as it relates to the Parks and Rec Commission agendas. We don't normally see those items but I guess I'd just like to see an evaluation of the February Festival come to the Council once it is complete. So I just mainly wanted to, in fact I tried to catch Todd here before the meeting but things got kind of hectic. And so I'd like to see that happen as a follow -up and then also the Rec Center mission statement once staff and the Commission develop that. I would also like to see that come to the Council for approval. Mayor Mancino: Tell me a little bit, when you say you want a follow -up to the Fest, what is that you're looking for? What's the purpose of the follow -up? Just to see how well it was attended? How much money was generated? How much money, you know etc. or what's your purpose? Councilman Senn: Well there's a report basically in the Parks Commission agenda that gets into the money that was raised and the money that was spent and our expenses far outnumber the money that was raised. And I don't recall seeing attendance numbers and stuff in there, but again I mean that's again part of what I'd like to see tied into this report. I mean it is fairly costly. You know we've done an evaluation. Mayor Mancino: Whether the citizens are enjoying it? Councilman Senn: Yeah, I mean is it being used. By how many people? What is it costing us? I mean does it make sense I think as a Council, I mean we did that through a couple other ones that we've looked at in the past. I think we should also take a look at this one now that it's had a few years to go. 26 1 City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 Mayor Mancino: Todd, do you make that assessment at the Park and Rec Department? I mean after you've had an event like this, do you make some sort of an assessment whether we should continue doing this sort of thing? And can you also, one other question that I have on that is, is that somebody had said to me, you know there were such great prizes at the Feb Fest that we had people, you know a lot of people that didn't live in Chanhassen coming. So 1 mean do you kind of keep those numbers and? Todd Hoffman: We certainly do. We utilize after action reports. Evaluations. We do team evaluations of the Park and Recreation Commission. They were there. They all ran, operated the event. They worked it and, 6 out of the 7 I believe. The investment which is made on these special events by and large comes from the program, special event sponsorship program... public citizens on. They write checks for an average of about $20,000.00, $25,000.00 investment because they believe in the value of what these special events do for the community. That program has won a statewide award from the Minnesota Recreation Department... so the value of bringing in even other citizens to see this community, the shopping and commerce in the community is all of value to our business people who indeed write the checks to finance these programs. But we'll bring you back some photographs and evaluations, attendance factors and what we think we can do to improve it or refine it. You always wonder if you should go bigger or smaller and we are not afraid to go smaller on an event to fine tune the clientele. Not everybody in this city enjoys walking out on a frozen lake in the middle of February and participating in a fishing contest so we have eliminated the fireworks worth about 3 %2 thousand dollars. A lot of people say we'd like those back... can't justify that expenditure so, we'll get you a complete report back about attendance and cost projections and what changes could occur next year. Councilman Senn: Could you break down the revenue stuff so we can see, you know how much revenue's coming from the event. The stuff that sells versus the sponsors and also just one other quick question. In there I saw a fishing prize of $95.00 but I remember us approving a very sizable check to the Chamber to purchase the prizes. It was probably closer to $1,000.00. Todd Hoffman: Yeah... sporting goods, $1,660.00 plus fishing prizes. I don't know why the breakout was there. Councilman Senn: Oh okay. So Cabin Fever Sports is part of the prizes then, correct? Okay. Todd Hoffman: Yeah, cash prizes were actual cash. $10.00, $15.00 cash prizes. Councilman Berquist: Would you also please recap the intangibles? Todd Hoffman: Yes. Councilman Berquist: That you can't get a grip on but need to enter into the mental process. Todd Hoffman: I prepared a master thesis on it. I can do it. Mayor Mancino: And then Todd, when will you have the Rec Center mission done? Mission statement. Do you have an idea? Todd Hoffman: ... which is proposed is right on the inside of this brochure which is already out on the streets and it reads, Welcome to the Chanhassen Recreation Center. A place dedicated to serving the growth needs of a dynamic community or city. A place for playing, exercising, meeting, partying and relaxing. A place where people young and old can have to re- energize. A place for lifelong... 27 ' City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 Councilman Senn: In this March 17" thing though you're asking the Parks Commission to approve that. Todd Hoffman: Absolutely. Councilman Senn: Okay, and after they work with it what I'd like to do is have it come to the Council for approval. That's all. Mayor Mancino: Great. The next item on the agenda is to review, or Charles. Are you, do I still have to come back to you on the, I'm sorry, pedestrian underpass... COULTER BOULEVARD PEDESTRIAN UNDERPASS CON'T. Charles Folch: As I mentioned previously the estimated total project cost of... That included $320,000.00... so even though MnDOT with ISTEA ... that, the feasibility did not break that out of the cost estimate. So the $2.8 included $320 for that. We bonded last spring for the project, $3 million so all and all we're covered. Mayor Mancino: And we're covered for the increase in the estimate? Charles Folch: Yes, because if you look at it, basically subtract out the $320 that we previously had in the estimate, that basically is... point 5 million. If you add back what we estimated based on this construction cost, our share of approximately $184,000.00 would have put us up at about $7 million. We bonded for 3 so there's still $300,000.00 in there. In the overall project, this included Coulter Boulevard. Now to date we have not had any change orders on the Coulter Boulevard project. We're sitting pretty good there so our contingency is good. Mayor Mancino: Okay, and we're going to watch that contingency. Charles Folch: Yes. Councilman Berquist: Aren't we just getting to the point where we may see some changes orders? I mean isn't it just about to that? Charles Folch: On Coulter I don't foresee any because we've got the road substantially in place now. We didn't have any change orders or any surprises come up during the... installation or any of the storm sewer work. Things like that. Councilman Berquist: No bad dirt. Charles Folch: That's not to say there wouldn't, there might not be a minor one that's hanging up that we're not aware of but. Councilman Senn: Just because you said that, there will be. Charles Folch: ...we haven't had any claims to date so. Councilman Senn: Just because you said that, you know there will be now. Oh, Todd's got one for him already. 28 ' City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 Todd Hoffman: A substantial change order would be the expansion of the parking lot at the Recreation Center and school. Councilman Senn: That's in the Coulter Boulevard project? After thought Mayor Mancino: But will you speak, well. We'll go ahead with the motion and then will you speak to that for a minute to the Council, to bring the Council up to date on that. Any other questions? Then may I have a motion please. Councilman Berquist: I will move that we agree with MnDOT on the award of the Coulter pedestrian underpass to the Park Construction Company at the contract amount. Mayor Mancino: A second please. Councilman Engel: Second. Resolution #97 -19: Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Engel seconded that the City Council concur with MnDOT on the award of the Coulter Pedestrian Underpass, City Project No. 93 -26C to Park Construction Company at a contract amount of $442,681.95. All voted in favor and the motion carried. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: Mayor Mancino: Todd can you give us an update on the, I mean I think all the Council members know that we are having problems at the Bluff Creek Elementary with parking so we have been talking about attempting to deal with that. Todd Hoffman: Glad to. It's really a two phase approach to alleviate the immediate concerns. We have eliminated half of the desirable but not necessary, not required fire lanes and that has generated about 30 some spots. We've also taken Coulter Boulevard and signed it for parking Monday through Friday in the evenings and all weekend but that is really not permissible under State Aid standards. Once the road is open and the underpass is developed, we have semi's rolling down and, back up and down, we would like to remove that. But long term, what we really need to do is expand the parking lot and there's the availability to do that both on the school side and the city side takes an investment of approximately $100,000.00. We've had a series of meetings over the past 6 months with the School District. They're not in the position to finance today the 50% cost share of their improvements. What they would be willing to do is to allow the city to up front those costs and then ... back the west parking lot and they'd pay that cost back, that investment back over a set period of time. Other than that they said, you know you can do the project on your side and leave us out of it but the fact remains if we do that, the school is going to utilize that parking, that investment that we have made, that 100% city investment so in my opinion if they'll agree to that lease back, that's more advantageous to the City. The long term the customers are telling us they are not being served. That both the District and the City have made a $15 million investment out there on that site and on many occasions, often more times than not, they're arriving and not finding adequate parking. So they're saying we... And believe me we battled this argument back and forth 5 years ago through design development and parking was expanded from the original design. The architects just did not the complexity of this site being a joint use facility where the Rec Center operates all day and the school operates all day and then we overlap seasons when we bring all those families out on the ballfields in the summer. We've got big parking problems out there and we 29 ' City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 need $100,000.00 to solve them. And the reason that could be a potential change order is that it's tough to get a contract on the street for a project this size. We've got a contractor out there. I believe we can meet the change order specifications for the amount, etc., etc. and so that ... propose back to the City Council on how this thing could get done in the 1997 construction schedule. Added onto the Coulter Boulevard project. Mayor Mancino: Okay, and that would be pulled out as such. I can tell Council members that 1 have had several calls from parents and this is just during the day at 11:00, at 1:00, wanting to go to Bluff Creek Elementary School to see their first or second grader in a program and not being able to park. And not having enough parking spaces. Councilman Senn, do you have a question? Councilman Senn: Yeah, I guess I want to understand a couple things you said. If we expand just the west lot, or just the east lot, I thought under that agreement there's a cost sharing regardless of what's added. You made it sound like if we leave the west lot out and just expand the east lot, it's purely our expense. I thought any expansion in those facilities was a split cost. Todd Hoffman: We've not, up until this point we just talked about the east and the west, the school side investment and the city side investment, but you're absolutely correct. We could approach them and we could reduce the thing down to $50,000.00 and we could say we will build this and lease you the use of it back of 50% and retain that dollar amount. We absolutely could do that. Councilman Senn: Okay, secondly you know, I mean I understand the point you're making but when we built the Rec Center we never built parking to accommodate the school's needs, yet that appears to continue to be a fairly heavy user of our parking lot because I've been there for mid -day types of things that are small in number. I mean you can count all the people in the Rec Center pretty easy and you've got a full parking lot which means, I mean it's got to be getting heavy use from the school. Now if the school's lot is under built, I mean why does that simply become an issue for the City? Todd Hoffman: In my opinion that's not the case. We overfill their lot just as often as they overfill our lot. Councilman Senn: You mean people who use the Rec Center park out in front of the school? Todd Hoffman: You bet. Mayor Mancino: I have a couple times. I mean I have, you know the 212. I've gone there several times when the Rec Center was completely full and I couldn't park. Todd Hoffman: We have a sign specifically made for that which says Rec Center overflow parking. When you have a meeting going on in the conference rooms during the day and the lot is full and you start parking on Coulter. One of our employees walks out to the corner of the school parking lot and puts the sign up. Overflow parking... We have agreements to leave that corridor people evenings and weekends to allow people to park in that parking lot and then the Recreation Center ... and I think you could talk about which side generates more use on and on and on. As the user walks in the door, they really don't see the difference except that they're not being served by... Councilman Senn: No, I understand that but I've raised two kids now through elementary schools and I can tell you there was never a single event that I went to at those schools that could accommodate the 30 1 City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 parking of the elementary school programs and I don't think that that's necessarily either the position the City should be in nor be put in to simply accommodate all those needs at our expense. Mayor Mancino: No, and I think that on those specific days when it's an all school program, etc., that the, I know that the principal talked. Is it Kathy Sullivan? Todd Hoffman: Kathy Gallagher. Mayor Mancino: Gallagher. That you know if the city would just say where the extra cars could park, they're fine making sure that we tell parents up front, or that she tells parents up front if you need to park on Galpin Boulevard, etc. We can certainly do that and help them out that way. Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, just a comment that Mark made. He's exactly right. The school's portion doesn't accommodate all those activities and what happens is they spill over into the Recreation Center to take those prime spaces away from our Rec Center patrons and vice versa. When the school has activities and have programs in our space, we take theirs and thus push people out into the street and have to ticket. So it's a 50150 problem over there and Todd's got a lot of complaints in trying to keep revenues up on the Rec side of it to accommodate those people. They're very demanding over there. Councilman Berquist: I've got one other question. You just made mention and it just kind of perked my ears. Did you say that we freed up 30 parking spaces by removing some non - required fire lanes? Todd Hoffman: Correct. Councilman Berquist: Why in the world would we have over fire laned an area like that? Todd Hoffman: They elected to sign both sides of the road instead of one side and to eliminate parallel parking. Parallel parking is not ideal if the parking lots would accommodate those cars ... in there. But under the crunch people are parking in those fire lanes anyway so we pressured, you know we talked to Mark, negotiated... Councilman Berquist: But if they were not required to begin with, why were they there? Todd Hoffman: It was signed, well either signed no parking or fire lane... Prohibit parking on both sides of the road, either sign it no parking or fire lane. They were signed fire lane. I don't know why. Todd Gerhardt: ...was those drop off for the buses. Councilman Berquist: Yeah, I can understand that. You know there was a number of people that got tickets for parking in these fire lanes when there was literally no other place to park, only to find out now that they were excessive fire lanes. That's a little disconcerting and perhaps I've said too much. Mayor Mancino: The last item on the agenda tonight is a look at our work session agenda for March 31 What I would suggest is moving everything, you know with the exception of a few things, which obviously we can't move from April 7"'. April 7 will stay as is. Councilman Senn: Yeah, that was the point I was trying to get to earlier. It almost has to. 31 ' City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 Mayor Mancino: Yeah it really does have to. I think though everything else, we can put in March 31 and April 21" and then move everything down. Does that make sense to everybody? So March 31 comes on April 21 and everything moves down and we'll redo this and get it off to you. Okay? Does that make sense for everybody? Councilman Senn: I hate to be the auger or whatever in this thing but I think I'm going to miss the 7 "' regardless. The Bishop has set that as confirmation night so, and I asked him if he would change it but he said he wouldn't. Mayor Mancino: But if you look on the 7"', I mean I would think it would be easier for you to miss what's on the agenda on the 7`" than what's on March 31 51 . Councilman Senn: I agree. Mayor Mancino: Okay. So we'll go ahead and redo this. The other thing is we'll start filling in the dates later in the summer with, I know that Todd Hoffman has some things that he wants us to review during work sessions, etc. and if any of the Council members have certain items that they'd like to see on the agenda, the work session agenda this summer, please submit them to me. Thank you. Councilman Senn. Councilman Senn: A question. How should, I guess I've always been somewhat, or always had a question on this and I've never asked it so I'll ask it. The stuff that we get in the administrative section, you know such as the agendas we just talked about. I mean when we come to administrative section, do we automatically discuss that if there's any questions or do we need to. Mayor Mancino: Actually that would be a good idea to have it at the end of the night to say are there any discussions. Councilman Senn: Discussions on the administrative. Because a lot of times there's a question that would, I think would probably be valuable to be shared. Mayor Mancino: That's a good idea, so we'll put that on the agenda. I do think that if it, you know if it goes into much more discussion we should either put it on a work session item. Put them up in the next City Council agenda, an issue we want to talk about. But otherwise I read that too and I think but I've got more questions. Any other? Todd Gerhardt: ...make that as a part of Council presentations on the agenda. We could just go slash administrative section. Mayor Mancino: Good. Councilman Senn: Okay, and then we don't have to call out the items ahead of time. We can just, when it comes to that section we can just talk about them? Todd Gerhardt: Yeah. Just add them to your presentations ... Administrative section. Put it under Council presentations. Mayor Mancino: Well I kind of like it to be an open discussion on the Admin Section. I mean I would like to see open discussion on administration. Have an administrative section. 32 City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 Todd Gerhardt: Yeah,...just as a Council presentation... Mayor Mancino: Good idea Todd. Go with it. Councilman Senn: Question. Todd, you may know the answer. In this there was one item, there's a fax regarding proposed changes to an 1 -494 corridor commission. It's dated March 3` Does anybody know what that's all about? I mean is that something we're contemplating joining or, I guess I was totally lost. I was hoping Don was going to be here because I'm not sure he's the one that's got an answer but... Mayor Mancino: It doesn't look like anybody's asking us to join. I didn't get the impression we were being asked to join the commission. Councilman Senn: Yeah, I don't know. Todd Gerhardt: I don't know what community... Councilman Senn: Okay, well maybe somebody could. I mean it was just, yeah my problem was I just couldn't figure out the purpose or what we were trying to, or what was trying to be conveyed to us. Charles Folch: They were probably required to notify communities... corridor... Mayor Mancino: We'll also have to put under Council Presentations, for instance Councilman Engel who is part of the Southwest Metro now, when you have gone to the meetings and have something to communicate to us. Councilman Engel: We had one on Thursday. We, do you want an update now? Mayor Mancino: Sure. That'd be great. Councilman Engel: We've made our selection of the three people and an offer's been extended. I don't know what the status of that is. I'll find out Thursday. We've got a meeting 6:00 Thursday so. Mayor Mancino: An offer has been extended to one of the three? Councilman Engel: Yes. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Councilman Engel: We need direction. We want to bring them on as soon as possible. Councilman Senn: Just one other point so we don't, I believe we're talking about meeting tomorrow at 11:00 to do the prep work for the Chamber luncheon State of the City. I just want to make sure with Roger. I mean is that okay or do we need to continue this meeting to do that technically since we're going to be meeting or what? Roger Knutson: A quorum is getting together? Councilman Senn: Yes. 33 t City Council Meeting - March 24, 1997 Roger Knutson: To discuss what? City business? Councilman Senn: We have to make a presentation at noon before the Chamber on the State of the City and we're getting together at 11:00 before that meeting. The Chamber meeting is a published, or I mean it's a public meeting. Roger Knutson: With the City Council? Councilman Senn: With the City, well not of the City Council but it's been published that the City Council's going to be there. I assume that's, I don't know. That's why I'm asking you just so we don't get into hot water. Roger Knutson: Whenever you get 3 of you get together to discuss, vote or give information on city business, it's a City Council meeting and has to be properly notified. So tomorrow if you're getting together to do any of those three items, a Council meeting, then you should properly notice it. Now you can adjourn this meeting to tomorrow at 11:00. Councilman Senn: Right, that's why I asked because I think we almost have to do that to keep it legal, right? Roger Knutson: Unless it's been posted. Councilman Senn: No, I don't think it has been. Todd Gerhardt: Not officially. Councilman Senn: So I think we should adjourn tonight's meeting until 11:00 tomorrow morning. Councilman Berquist: Here? Councilman Senn: Applebee's. Public's welcome. Councilman Berquist: But we'd probably better get together here. Mayor Mancino: May I please have a motion? Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Berquist seconded to adjourn the City Council meeting until 11:00 a.m., Tuesday, March 25, 1997. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned for the evening at 9:40 p.m. Submitted by Don Ashworth City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim 34 1