Loading...
CC Minutes 2002 09 09CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 9, 2002 Mayor Jansen called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Jansen, Councilman Boyle, Councilman Ayotte and Councilman Peterson COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Councilman Labatt STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Andrea Poehler, Teresa Burgess, Justin Miller, Kate Aanenson, Sharmeen A1-Jaff, Todd Hoffman, Mahmoud Sweidan, and Bruce DeJong PUBLIC PRESENT FOR ALL ITEMS: Janet Paulsen Pam Latanisian Brian Lundquist 7302 Laredo Drive 2051 Timberwood Drive 7281 Conestoga Court PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: Resolution #2002-81: Mayor Jansen moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to approve a resolution declaring September 11, 2002 as Patriot Day. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0. Mayor Jansen: Under Public Announcements, we have a significant day of observance that's of course coming up on Wednesday, and I know there's a lot of conversation going on around the 9- 11 events and I have received an announcement, actually a proclamation by the President of the United States that I thought was worthy of our recognizing and maybe reading this evening. It is actually declaring September 11th as Patriot Day, and these are the words from this proclamation. On this first observance of Patriot Day we remember and honor those who perished in the terrorist attacks on September 11,2001. We will not forget the events of that terrible morning, nor will we forget how Americans responded in New York City, at the Pentagon, and in the skies over Pennsylvania. With heroism and selflessness, with compassion and courage and with prayer and hope. We will always remember our collective obligation to ensure that justice is done, that freedom prevails and that the principals upon which our nation was founded endure. Inspired by the heroic sacrifices of our firefighters, rescue and law enforcement personnel, military service members and other citizens, our nation found unity, focus and strength. We found healing in the national outpouring of compassion for those lost, as tens of millions Americans participated in moments of silence, candlelight vigils, and religious services. From the tragedy of September 11th emerged a stronger nation renewed by a spirit of national pride and a true love of our country. We are a people dedicated to the triumph of freedom and democracy over evil and tyranny. The heroic stories of the first responders who gave their all to save others strengthen our resolve. And our armed forces have pursued the war against terrorism in Afghanistan and elsewhere with valor and skill. Together with our coalition partners they have achieved success. Americans also have fought back against terror by choosing to overcome evil with good by loving their neighbors as they would like to be loved. Countless citizens have answered the call to help others. They have contributed to relief efforts, improved homeland security in their communities and volunteered their time to aid those in need. This spirit of service continues to City Council Meeting - September 9, 2002 grow as thousands have joined the newly established USA Freedom Corps committing themselves to changing America one heart at a time through the momentum of millions of acts of decency and kindness. Those whom we lost September 11th will forever hold a cherished place in our hearts and in the history of our nation. As we mark the first anniversary of that tragic day, we remember their sacrifice and we commit ourselves to honoring their memory by pursuing peace and justice in the world and security at home. By a joint resolution approved December 18, 2001 the Congress has authorized and requested the President to designate September 11th of each year as Patriot Day. And then it goes on to read, Now Therefore, I, George Bush, President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim September 11, 2002 as Patriot Day. I call upon the people of the United States to observe this day with appropriate ceremonies and activities, including remembrance services and candlelight vigils. I also call upon the governors of the United States and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico as well as appropriate officials of all units of government to direct that the flag be flown at half staff on Patriot Day. Further, I encourage all Americans to display the flag at half staff from their homes on that day and to observe a moment of silence beginning at 8:46 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time. Or another appropriate commemorative time to honor the innocent victims who lost their lives as a result of the terrorist attacks of September 11,2001. I thought that was a very significant proclamation and wanted to share that with the community and then also note that our fire department on Wednesday morning will be holding one of these commemorative ceremonies. The fire department will open at 8:00 a.m. and then the program will begin at 8:50 with special ceremonies being held at 9:05 and 9:28 which is approximately when the towers fell. So certainly everyone in the community is invited to those and invitations have gone out to the different groups in the community to have everyone be aware of that occurring and we certainly appreciate their dedicating their time and pulling that ceremony together for the community. So with that I'll move onto the other public announcement that we have on the agenda is an update on the open house for the water treatment facility. Teresa, would you like to give a staff report? UPDATE ON OPEN HOUSE FOR WATER TREATMENT FACILITY. Teresa Burgess: Certainly. Thank you Madam Mayor. I'd just like to invite the citizens of Chanhassen and also the City Council to attend an open house being held on Wednesday, September 18th from 5:30 to 7:00 p.m. at the Chanhassen Rec Center. We will be discussing water treatment and distribution within the city of Chanhassen. We have hired Black and Beach to do a study of our system and they've now quantified and started to get a handle about our existing system, and we're looking at where we should go from here and what exactly is appropriate for the city of Chanhassen. With that in mind we certainly want to have as many of the public come in and give us their comments and input at this point in time. We will be having a second meeting in October and at that time we'll be bringing back some input, the results of what this input came to be in the study and as we're putting that study into final concept to come to the council for discussion. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Thank you. As a part of that, you noted that the hours are from 5:30 to 7:00. Is there any designated time where you'll be doing a formal presentation of the plan? Teresa Burgess: We do not have the plan together yet. That's what we're seeking input into. We do have an ongoing presentation that will continuously loop during the timeframe. The intention is to catch people on their way home from work or maybe right after dinner, if they want to swing by before they go to their workout or their other evening activities. That's part of the reason we've also chosen the Chanhassen Rec Center. It's right on Highway 5. It's convenient for people to swing in and stop and see us and then go on with their evening activities. And there City Council Meeting - September 9, 2002 will be city staff members as well as members of the consultant firm, and also the project advisory committee will be there to answer questions and take your input. Mayor Jansen: Great, thank you. Council, any comments? Questions for staff. Okay, thank you. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Boyle seconded to approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations: Approval of Joint Powers Agreement for County Auditor Counting Center, 2002 Elections. c. Approval of Bills. Approval of Minutes: - City Council Work Session Minutes dated August 26, 2002 - City Council Minutes dated August 26, 2002 Receive Commission Minutes: - Planning Commission Minutes dated August 20, 2002 - Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated July 23, 2002 e. Approval of Contract for Vandalism Repair, Lake Lucy Ground Storage Tank. Resolution #2002-82: Approval of Application Submission for Designating the Southwest LRT Route as a Snowmobile Trail for the 2002/03 Season. Consent to Assignment of Developer Rights and Amendment of Development Contract for Hidden Creek, Project No. 02-09. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0. APPROVAL OF REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TIME EXTENSION, 7000 UTICA LANE, HEIDI CARISH. Mayor Jansen: The reason I asked to pull l(b) is it is an extension for a variance, a time extension on a variance that I'm not familiar with and I would just assume abstain from this particular vote so I will do that and call for a motion. Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Boyle seconded to approve the request for a variance time extension for 7000 Utica Lane. All voted in favor, except Mayor Jansen who abstained, and the motion carried. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS. None. City Council Meeting - September 9, 2002 PUBLIC HEARING: EXTENSION OF UTILITIES, ASHLING MEADOWS 2N~ ADDITION, PROJECT No. 02-07. Teresa Burgess: Thank you Madam Mayor. The City has received a petition from the developer of Lake Lucy Ridge to extend utilities to that development through the Ashling Meadows 2nd. Ashling Meadows 2nd is being developed by Lundgren Brothers and Lake Lucy Ridge is being developed by Noecker. The property owner at Ashling Meadows 2nd Lundgren development has not expressed any objection to the project so far, however they would be assessed for the project and therefore have been invited to tonight's meeting, and would also be invited to the assessment hearing. City staff is at this time recommending approval, however we would like to reserve our judgment until after we have heard the public hearing. As well city staff has also received today the estimate for engineering services to update the plan to be able to go forward with this project, and that is an amount of $10,600. And if the council does decide to go forward with this project I would like to request that you also authorize that set of plans be prepared and the consultant agreement contingent upon the city receiving an agreement to be drafted with the assistance of the city attorney's office, that if the project is not awarded that we would be refunded the dollars expended for design from Noecker Development, the owners and developers of Lake Lucy Ridge. And I have not had a chance to talk about that with the developer yet so that is a surprise for him I'm sure. With that, it's a public hearing this evening and I will answer any questions. Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you. If you would prepare for us what you need that motion to read, I would appreciate it. Teresa Burgess: Certainly. Mayor Jansen: Thank you. Any questions for staff at this point? Then I will go ahead and open this for the public hearing. If there's anyone present that would like to address this agenda item, please step forward to the podium at this time. Okay. Seeing no one, I will close the public hearing and bring this back to council. Council, any comments? Questions? Then Teresa, when you have that ready for us we can move on with our motion. Teresa Burgess: Do you want me to just read that Madam Mayor? Mayor Jansen: You can certainly do that. So our motion will be. Teresa Burgess: Move to approve the feasibility study and authorize preparation of plans and specifications for extension of sanitary sewer and watermain utilities through the Ashling Meadows 2nd Addition development, and to authorize consultant contract in the amount of $10,600 with Sathre-Berquist. Approval of contract to be contingent upon an agreement signed by the developer of Lake Lucy Ridge for reimbursement of design services if the project is not awarded. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Councilman Boyle: So moved. Councilman Ayotte: Second. Resolution #2002-83: Councilman Boyle moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to approve the feasibility study and authorize preparation of plans and specifications for extension of sanitary sewer and watermain utilities through the Ashling Meadows 2nd Addition City Council Meeting - September 9, 2002 development, and to authorize consultant contract in the amount of $10,600 with Sathre- Berquist. Approval of contract to be contingent upon an agreement signed by the developer of Lake Lucy Ridge for reimbursement of design services if the project is not awarded. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0. AWARD OF BIDS: MARSH GLEN TRAIL CONNECTOR PROJECT. Todd Hoffman: Thank you Madam Mayor, members of the City Council. Trail improvements for the extension of the city's trail system generally follow one of two ways. Either road improvements and/or platting process. In this case this is a platting of Mission Hills 2nd that brings this piece to our attention. So Mission Hills 2nd was platted in this area and it brought with it the terminus of this trail connection which will go between Mission Hills 2nd and then right up to the trail that travels between Lake Susan and Rice Marsh Lake, and it connects there just below the St. Hubert's Church. So we're building the first segment of this dashed line as a part of the city's comprehensive trail plan. In the future the connection will continue to the east on the south side of Rice Marsh Lake Park connection to Eden Prairie and at some point in the future connecting all the way back and creating a circle around Rice Marsh Lake. The project's been going on for some time as far as coordination. It required DNR permitting, watershed permitting and then design work which was considerable. We're building this trail on top of a sewer interceptor line. Bids were open last Friday and we had an interesting bid opening. We had 15 plan holders for this project. Two bidders arrived at our door step that morning, and we opened bids on an estimated $92,000 project. When I opened the first envelope it was $326,000, and so I first checked commas and finding that none were in error. The second bidder who turned out to be the low bidder looked at me and said huh, that's a good bid. That's low, and so we were a little bit concerned at that moment, but when we opened Sunram Construction's bid who came in much closer to our estimate at $99,655, which we feel is a good bid. It is approximately 8 percent over our estimate, but given the bidding climate that we have two bidders here based off of 15 who submitted, our thought process is that it's a difficult construction area. It's in a low lying wet area and it's just not that attractive as what you would call real cream of the crop type of work so Sunram willing to do this at $99,655. It's staff's recommendation that we go ahead and award this project and get it underway and hopefully completed yet this fall. Mayor Jansen: Okay, great. Any questions for staff? Councilman Ayotte: It's surprising that the material cost, the bituminous line item was the adder for the, between your cost estimate and that of the vendor that you're wanting to select. Does that surprise you? I mean usually that's pretty cut and dry on cost. Todd Hoffman: Bituminous cost? Councilman Ayotte: Yeah. Todd Hoffman: Again it's an estimate. That's where the difference is you're correct, between Sunram and our architects but they gain some money back. Our bridge estimate was 4 1/2 thousand dollars higher than their bridge estimate of $12,000. I'm assuming when they're estimating the bridge, you've got a quote in hand for $12,000 so there was some trade off in cost there. Councilman Ayotte: But nonetheless, a linear cost estimate for material, I mean it's pretty cut and dry. A bridge construction has some variation because of design. City Council Meeting - September 9, 2002 Todd Hoffman: Well we specified the design so they had to purchase what we specified. Mayor Jansen: Well if you look at the concrete, that varies also again to staff's point, it was an estimate that was provided. Councilman Ayotte: I understand that but not...the bituminous was... Mayor Jansen: Sure. Okay with that, any other comments or questions for staff? IfI could have a motion please. Councilman Boyle: I'd make a motion that we award the bid for Marsh Glen trail and pedestrian bridge to Sunram Construction Incorporated. Mayor Jansen: And a second? Councilman Peterson: Second. Resolution #2002-84: Councilman Boyle moved, Councilman Peterson seconded to award the bid for the Marsh Glen Trail and Pedestrian Bridge to Sunram Construction, lnc. in the amount of $99,655.00. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4to0. REQUEST FOR VARIANCES FROM THE LAKESHORE WETLAND SETBACK FOR AN ADDITION, 8591 TIGUA, GORDON SCHAEFFER. Sharmeen A1-Jaff: Madam Mayor, members of the City Council. The site is located east of Tigua Lane and southwest of Rice Marsh Lake. It is zoned residential single family and has an area of 4.18 acres. Before I present the case for you I just want to explain how a setback is measured on lots that abut a lake. When a setback is measured between a structure and a lake it is measured at the ordinary high water mark. This is a fixed elevation established by the DNR. A shoreline on the other hand changes based upon the amount of rain that we get in a given year or lack thereof. A single family residence was built in 1982 at a distance of 186 feet from the shoreline of Rice Marsh Lake, so this setback is from the shoreline and not from the OHW of the lake. Approximately 4 months ago the applicant met with staff and requested an addition to his existing home. We explained that the ordinary high water needed to be shown on the survey. At that point we realized that the home was actually built 139 feet from the OHW. That is an existing non-conforming situation. The ordinances requires a setback of 150 feet. The applicant applied for a variance to encroach an additional 14 feet into the required setback, giving a 125 foot setback. His main reasons for the request are first, the current orientation of the house will face future Highway 212/312 and the applicant wishes to reorient the house to face the lake. Second, the direction facing the lake has 3 windows and the applicant wishes to increase the window space. Third, the current north facing elevation will need to be re-done for structural reasons and the applicant wishes to take the opportunity to create a space that better meets his needs. The applicant has indicated that a number of the homes within the subdivision are located closer than 150 feet from the OHW of the lake and the homes have been oriented towards the lake, meaning windows facing the lake. We sympathize with the applicant. However, approving this request will result in an intensification of a non-conforming use. The applicant has reasonable use of the property. Staff is recommending denial of this application. You have before you findings of fact should you decide to deny this application. Should you decide to approve it, we have prepared conditions of approval. The Planning Commission recommended approval of this application for 3 reasons. The first is the close proximity to 212. The second is City Council Meeting - September 9, 2002 this is a unique situation and there are pre-existing standards within this neighborhood where we're not creating a precedence. And with that I'll be happy to answer any questions. Mayor Jansen: Okay, appreciate that. Only one question on your last comment. The pre-existing standard. From reading the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting from what I've garnered is that all the homes that have been built in the near past, all of those in fact meet the actual 150 foot setback. Sharmeen A1-Jaff: That's correct. Mayor Jansen: Okay. So the pre-existing was obviously in place when they were, for whatever reason using the shoreline instead of the ordinary high water mark. Sharmeen A1-Jaff: That's correct. Mayor Jansen: Now the ordinary high water mark isn't our standard from what I was reading. It's the DNR's standard, correct? Sharmeen A1-Jaff: Correct, and we have adopted those standards. Mayor Jansen: Okay. And as their's reads, it's a minimum. Sharmeen A1-Jaff: That's correct. Mayor Jansen: They would prefer if anything to see it maybe be a little bit more but we've stuck with their 150. Okay. Alright. And then the other point that they had made about the Highway 212 as an issue. You said the house was built in 1982. Sharmeen A1-Jaff: That's correct. Mayor Jansen: And Highway 212 was on the books dating back 50 years? What 1950 or something was the original planning so okay. So that information, when you went back to the original construction, did you see the 212 information in there? I mean is that, I'm assuming that at the time that they constructed that they had that information. Sharmeen A1-Jaff: It wasn't discussed in the subdivision. Mayor Jansen: It was discussed in the subdivision? Sharmeen A1-Jaff: Was not. Mayor Jansen: It was not. Sharmeen A1-Jaff: Discussed in the subdivision. Todd Gerhardt: It wasn't officially mapped the corridor at that time. There were discussions on a couple of alternatives for the 212 corridor, but was not officially mapped in '82. Councilman Boyle: Well it's very possible the current owner was not the builder too. City Council Meeting - September 9, 2002 Mayor Jansen: That is correct. But the house orientation was placed, and what I thought was knowing where the Highway 212 corridor was going to be, but what you're saying, because there was a north and there was a south, and the southern obviously would not have affected this development at all because it would have gone completely south of, and down to Pioneer Trail. This cuts it inbetween this development and Lake Riley. Todd Gerhardt: Yeah I think the key thing here is expanding on a non-conforming use right now. Staff made the mistake in '82 of using the edge of the water as the setback and if the other homes are conforming to the 150 foot setback, I think that's the key thing here. And expanding on a use I think does establish a bad precedent that we don't want to get into. It's something if the council is leaning towards approving this, I think we should take a look at that setback mark. I just think this is establishing a bad precedent. Mayor Jansen: And a current standard whereas our current, for all of the newer construction in this area, has been that 150 foot. Todd Gerhardt: Correct. Mayor Jansen: This would be taking a dramatic step backwards. Okay. Todd Gerhardt: Which is the DNR's minimum Mayor. Mayor Jansen: Exactly. Okay. Thank you. Any additional questions for staff? Councilman Boyle: Could you put that, I do have a question. Picture up again. Mayor Jansen: The map? Councilman Boyle: Yeah. Go ahead. Councilman Ayotte: The orientation, so where he wants to put the addition on, the lake's to the north and the balance of the house is to the, 212 would be to the south correct? Sharmeen A1-Jaff: That's correct. Councilman Ayotte: The portion of the front of the house, well the southern portion. It's not necessarily the front, has an overhang. And so the idea of having within the envelope of that house, would that be doable for the homeowner if he wanted to take a different orientation to add on underneath that overhang? Because it looked in the picture to be significant. Still keeping the envelope of the home. Sharmeen A1-Jaff: From a setback standpoint, it would meet city ordinance requirements. And you would be expanding in an area that is conforming if you will. Councilman Ayotte: Okay, thanks. Mayor Jansen: Okay, Gary did you have a question? Councilman Boyle: Yeah. I'm really confused on this ordinary high water mark. Does DNR come out and say okay boom, here's a stake and that's the ordinary high water mark? And that's, they do this on every lake is that correct? City Council Meeting - September 9, 2002 Sharmeen A1-Jaff: Yes. Every lake has an established ordinary high water mark. Councilman Boyle: So when you go out to measure you say okay I can go from the house to this stake or what is it? What's there, there's something in the ground? Kate Aanenson: It's a survey. There's not a stake. It has to be surveyed. Councilman Boyle: Okay. Mayor Jansen: And it's on the plat for the lots, correct? Councilman Boyle: Okay. Have we approved any other setbacks in the last year that you're aware of?. Kate Aanenson: Variances? Councilman Boyle: Variances. Sharmeen A1-Jaff: Lake setback. Councilman Boyle: Did we do something on Lotus? Kate Aanenson: I don't have that information here. Councilman Boyle: Yeah, I mean from memory you don't recall anything. Sharmeen A1-Jaff: Over the last year? Councilman Boyle: Yes. What I'm getting at is this precedent thing so. Okay. That's all the questions I have. Mayor Jansen: Usually our lakeshore setbacks are pretty strenuously maintained so I do think it would stand out in staff's recollection though difficult to come up with on the spot. Okay. Any other questions for staff? Councilman Ayotte: I happen to have one other. Natural environment lake versus a recreational lake. I just want to make sure that I understand. That the impact, irrespective of the setback, the setback is greater on a natural environmental lake versus a recreational lake. But the environmental impact is, that's why the environmental impact is greater on a natural environment. Sharmeen A1-Jaff: That's correct. Councilman Ayotte: Okay. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Is the applicant here this evening? If you would like to bring up any new information from what the Planning Commission reviewed. We of course have all of the minutes and the information that was reviewed at the Planning Commission but otherwise if you'd like to add anything new, you're welcome to step forward to the podium at this time. And if you'll just state your name and address for the record, I'd appreciate it. City Council Meeting - September 9, 2002 Gordon Schaeffer: My name's Gordon Schaeffer and I'm the owner of 8591 Tigua Lane. Mayor Jansen: Good evening. Gordon Schaeffer: Good evening. I think the issues that I really want to present are first of all precedent issues. That only one house has been built in that neighborhood in the past 15 years that is 150 feet or further. And that all of the other houses potentially encroach because I think what they thought was the high water mark at 189 was the OHW or maybe there wasn't an OHW then. But I'm kind of in a difficult situation because I can't build to the east. I don't want to build to the south, and I can't build to the west. And I'm not asking for 25 feet. I'm asking for about 9 feet off my deck and I've put a lot of time and effort and try to make a plan work structurally and aesthetically too. So did everybody get a chance to look at the report? See the pictures and. Mayor Jansen: Yep. Gordon Schaeffer: The other problem is I can't really put windows in a log structure because it's a log house and I literally have 3 windows facing a beautiful lake and I think that is an additional hardship. All the other neighbors houses are really geared towards the lake. And this may not matter to you guys but this is also a big deal for my profession is I do film and television score and this entire room would be sound... I work in Minneapolis and California and Santa Fe, and it may also not matter but if this doesn't work out I'll probably sell the property and leave and it's too bad. I really like Chanhassen. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Gordon Schaeffer: So precedent would be one thing. Almost all the houses face the lake and many of them encroach. Some are 125 feet from the water, and I don't think it's fair that these houses can be that close to the water, they're probably 110 feet from the OHW and I would not be permitted in the same neighborhood the same rights. That feels unfair. And I guess the 212/312 is a big issue because I didn't realize it was going to be in my back yard. I don't know if you know how close 150 feet is but it's really close and all my windows face right there. Mayor Jansen: And Mr. Schaeffer, when did you purchase the property? Gordon Schaeffer: 5 years ago. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Gordon Schaeffer: But my mother purchased it in '89. And I bought it from her. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Gordon Schaeffer: So those would be the issues that I'd like to bring up and just say that I'd really like to make this work even if it meant re-doing the design slightly or doing something but I really thought it through and this is the best I could come up with. I hired what I thought was the best architect that does a lot of homes respectful of the environment and nature and I'd like to see if we could make it work. Any questions? Mayor Jansen: Okay. Any questions for Mr. Schaeffer? Okay, thank you. 10 City Council Meeting - September 9, 2002 Gordon Schaeffer: Thanks. Mayor Jansen: And I can certainly appreciate the concerns about where the other homes are positioned in this particular development. However, all the homes, at least initially went in under the same guidelines and I would like to think that what we're establishing is the guidelines that will be applied to again those existing homes. That if in fact they do come in looking for variances, that the message is clear that they're already within that high water mark due to the way that it was platted originally and using the edge of the water instead of the ordinary high water mark and other alternatives may need to be explored. So I don't know that that necessarily, on a fairness scale I can understand where Mr. Schaeffer's coming from but from a timing standpoint, you know the structure's are in place and we're trying to apply the ordinance as it's meant to be applied by the DNR. We do have other developments that have occurred along this same shoreline outside of this neighborhood. This one's relatively small. What are there, 6 homes? 3, 6, 7 or 8 lots that actually face the water, but the Marsh Glen development to the west of that, we did a rather extensive preserve easement over these wetland shores, correct? If I recall that's now held by the city. It was deeded to the city and that's where we're doing the trail for more of that natural setting going through that segment so that is the abutting property to this, and then of course it faces the properties on the other side of Rice Marsh Lake that would have gone in with that 150 foot setback from the lakeshore. Just so council understands in the scheme that this is, though there are just a few homes in this one development, this does encompass several additional developments that go around Rice Marsh Lake in Chan. Councilman Boyle: But are those newer developments? I mean are they conforming right now? Sharmeen A1-Jaff: Yes. Councilman Boyle: Thank you. Mayor Jansen: Okay, any other questions or? Councilman Boyle: I have one more question. This 9 foot versus 25 foot. Explain please. Mayor Jansen: Question to staff. We're back to staff, thank you. Sharmeen A1-Jaff: The applicant is adding on 14 feet. Councilman Boyle: From the deck? If it's 9 foot from his deck, then from the house it's 167 Sharmeen A1-Jaff: From the house he's adding an additional 14 feet. The current house sits 139 feet from the OHW. 139 negative 14 is 125 so the variance is for 25 feet. Councilman Boyle: Gotch ya. Mayor Jansen: Okay, answer your question? Councilman Boyle: Answers my question. Mayor Jansen: Alright. Councilman Ayotte, you had a question? 11 City Council Meeting - September 9, 2002 Councilman Ayotte: Just in terms of the hardship issue of hardship. Talked about the 212/312 and based on the definition, as I understand it, that is not a hardship. But dealing with an effect on a person's livelihood, the point that he brought up, would that be considered in any definition hardship? Andrea Poehler: No, it wouldn't be considered a hardship. You really have to look at the property and the land use as opposed to what use they happen to be making of it. Councilman Ayotte: I didn't think so but I wanted to ask that question. Thanks. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Comments. Council. Councilman Peterson? Councilman Peterson: You know I think that variances never get easier, and it would be comfortable for everybody to allow variances at will, but unfortunately you want to do. We want to set precedent. We want to do the right thing for the whole community, not just one of the citizens but everybody at large so. Because of that, and I don't see anything compelling here that really says that we should grant a variance, and I'm particularly sensitive to lakeshore setbacks because everybody wants to be as close to the lake and wants to have a view of any of the lakes in the community as they can so I wouldn't be in favor of approving the variance as it stands now. Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you. Councilman Ayotte: Succinctly put, I can't support it either. I want to but I can't. So I'm not in favor of the variance. Councilman Boyle: Well I agree. I would really like to support this for the homeowner, very much so. The precedent situation bothers me. I think that the, there's a hardship but not under the definition of hardship. And I can really appreciate the fact that the individual wants to remodel his home to make it more lakeshore and more enjoyment to enjoy the lake instead of the little 3 windows, etc. Under the precedent portion, every circumstance should be evaluated in it's entirety and not, I don't like the word setting precedent all the time because it gets, it can be an excuse. Nevertheless, in light of what's going on and the information provided, I would side with staff's recommendation. Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you. Lakeshore setbacks I think are definitely more strenuously enforced, if only because of the fact that we are so sensitive in this community to the quality of our natural resources and this being a natural environment lake, having a particular need then for the water quality protection leads me to very much have a problem with granting this type of a variance. I can sympathize with the owner of the home. I understand and realize that the design of the home certainly is not fitting the needs that you would like to have met out of this structure, but unfortunately adding to that segment of the home and intensifying the non-conformity and that is one of those guidelines that we do try to follow. That if we have a non-conforming use, and someone comes in and wants to do an update, we certainly want to encourage that. But typically what we're looking for is that it's at least not expanding upon that non-conformity which is what our city manager was emphasizing to us at the beginning of this discussion. So because this is an intensification of that non-conformity, I do have a difficulty supporting a proposal like this, though I can appreciate wanting to make improvements to one of our older properties. And would hope that maybe some other alternatives might be able to be explored in order to make the site doable. With that, if I could have a motion please. 12 City Council Meeting - September 9, 2002 Councilman Peterson: Madam Mayor, I'd make a motion that the council denies the request for a 25 foot variance allowing a structure to encroach into lakeshore setback for the expansion of a home based upon the negative findings of fact as presented this evening. Mayor Jansen: And a second please. Councilman Ayotte: I'll second. Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded that the City Council denies the 25 foot variance allowing a structure to encroach into a lakeshore setback for the expansion of a home based on the negative variance findings (a) in the staff report. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0. APPROVAL AND CERTIFICATION OF MAXIMUM PROPOSED LEVY TO COUNTY AUDITOR. Bruce DeJong: I will pass out a resolution prepared as you request at the work session. But before we get into the discussion directly of this resolution, I'd like to take just a minute to kind of discuss why we're here. Tonight this is really the first formal step in setting your budget and tax levy for the year 2003. The process is generally that we start having budget meetings with department directors during June and July of this year. We begin some preliminary discussions of those numbers with the City Council in August, and then state law requires us to adopt a maximum tax levy for Truth in Taxation purposes by September 15th of each year. This year your regular meeting's falling on the 9th, SO that's when we're adopting it but we still have to have this down to the County Auditor by the end of the week. The information from the city is combined with information from the school district and from the county and from other taxing jurisdictions to prepare a Truth in Taxation notice that is mailed out to all property owners in November, and then in December we have Truth and Taxation hearings where the public is invited to come in and speak regarding our budget and our tax levy for the following year. And then you are required to hold an adoption of your budget and levy at a different meeting at least a week later. So what we're doing now is the first step. Then on December 2nd we will hold that Truth in Taxation hearing after property owners have been notified about what their potential tax increase is based on their own individual circumstances. Whether their property has increased in value, remained the same or decreased. And then we'll adopt the budget on December 9th along with a final tax levy. What you're setting tonight is really a maximum. At this point we can reduce this when we hold our hearings in December, but whatever you adopt tonight is a maximum tax levy and we cannot go above that. Having put out the process, now I'd kind of like to just review where we've been. I started out with a fairly large increase this year in our general fund expenditures that we've proposed over for 2003 over 2002. Our expenditures in the document in front of you are up $753,000, with approximately $380,000 of that being new expenditures in support of existing programs. $280,000 of that is for street improvements that you've talked about extensively with the City Engineer and the pavement management program, and the remaining $100,000 is new employees that we've added to try and maintain the existing services given the increase in population and the amount of facilities and infrastructure that we have to maintain the city. The remainder of this is inflationary increases and additional contractual services that are required, including approximately $34,000 for library maintenance. Now what you're looking at tonight is reduced approximately $100,000 from the previous ones that we had talked about 2 weeks ago. We've made some additional changes at the staff level to reduce that tax levy and the expenditure level. The other thing that's affecting us this year is that we have some reduced revenue sources. During the past several years we've used one time revenues to help balance the general fund budget and those have been effective but we've kind of reached the 13 City Council Meeting - September 9, 2002 end of those. We've been I think fairly creative in coming up with those but we don't have any that we see on the horizon for next year or for the near future. The largest one that we use this year that we will not have available next year is an excess tax coming from the Hennepin County TIF District. It will be our distribution of the remaining money in that fund since we were not able to use that money for reconstruction of Highway 101. The other loss of revenue that we're facing is $60,000 worth of rental revenue that we used to collect on the old bank building, which is now being used as a construction office for Kraus-Anderson and will be removed as part of the library and City Center plaza park. What it really does is it leads us to an imbalance between tax revenues and expenditures. We've got a 9.3 percent tax, or expenditure increase and that's leading us to over a 20 percent levy increase for general fund purposes. We also have a number of other levies that we set on an annual basis. Those include general obligation debt, which in this case is equipment certificates, special assessment debt which is money for construction projects that have been at least partially specially assessed against property owners, generally in street construction. We also have two referendums that are on our levy, and that is a park referendum and the library referendum, both of which were passed by the voters in the last 5 years. What we have done this evening at our earlier work session is to reduce that special assessment debt levy by $200,000. What we're going to do is we are going to find some method to use some one time revenues to reduce that debt levy, but we do want to maintain our long term goal of keeping expenditures tied to current revenue sources so that we don't have a structural imbalance in our financing mechanism. We do have a precedent for paying debt with some one time sources, and I think that that is probably an effective method of using those one time sources. Generally you want to try and match revenues and expenditures so if you do have some one time payments you can make, you should make them onto one time expenditures. Otherwise the following year you'll have to raise the tax levy even higher than you would have in order to catch up so to speak with the reduction that you made in the previous year. Having said that I think that what you have in front of you is a reasonable request, which I hope that you can support. It's going to lead, based on some rough calculations that I have using certainly very gross numbers from the County Assessor and from the auditor, but it's going to lead to approximately 13.4 percent increase in the total city tax levy, which will translate into about a 10.2 percent increase on an individual property. That's because we've had during the past year an increase in value in the property because of new construction, additions, and remodelings of about 3.2 percent which helps to reduce the overall burden that's faced by individual property owners. With that I will stop my presentation and take any questions you might have. Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you. And thank you for walking through some of those revisions that we made prior to this meeting. The conversation that council had in work session was basically wanting to try to challenge as to how we can get this proposed levy down into what we perceive to be a more reasonable level, though unfortunately, and we do feel that staff has done an excellent j ob of keeping things tight and efficient and evaluating cost of services and the like with us. Unfortunately we keep losing our revenue sources and as that has continued to occur, it has impacted our taxpayer as we've had to raise these levies and we certainly addressed that last year. We were provided a grid from staff that does show that over the last what 5 years on average the gross levy increase has in fact mirrored the population increase so part of our conversation as a council was to try to also better mirror that population increase if we could going into 2003. At this point we've had a conversation about doing an additional $180,000 in cuts. However, until we have the opportunity over the next 3 months to identify what those cuts could conceivably be with staff, we do not want to restrict the levy making it impossible for us to cover services and costs that the community in fact may not want to see us cut. We did a community survey last September and though the majority of our residents said loud and clear that our taxes are high and they would like to see us do something about them, they're considered a problem. The taxpayers also said they didn't want to see us cut services in order to reduce 14 City Council Meeting - September 9, 2002 taxes, so we're in that difficult position of okay, how do you one without doing the other. So we will be doing again every year we do an extensive evaluation with staff, department by department. That's what we will proceed to do over the next, you know 3 months. So we're anticipating that though we are setting this levy amount this evening, that it will conceivably come down below that, but we do not as I said, want to cut our options off before we've had that opportunity to do all of those conversations that need to occur in order to take that $180,000 out of someplace that we haven't identified at this point. Council, any questions for staff on Bruce's presentation at this point? Councilman Peterson: Bruce the only one that I have is on the actual resolution. You've got a number of $8,868,635. I'm trying to correlate that to something that you've given us before. Is that just a typographical error or am I missing something? Bruce DeJong: No. That is the budget amount of revenues and expenditures, which really has nothing to do with the net tax levy but it's included in your packet this time. If you open to the 2003 budget, the revenue page. It's actually two facing pages in here. In that you can see the total revenue for 2003 is anticipated at $8,868,635. Councilman Peterson: It's just a number we haven't talked about per se, so I didn't catch it. Mayor Jansen: Any other questions for staff? Council, any additional comments though we've reviewed this in the work session. Certainly take the opportunity if there are comments that you'd like to have in the public record to do that at this time. Councilman Ayotte: I think what should be noted is that staff and council have worked hard to ensure that we work towards a reduction. And that we could have conveniently hit at a higher levy and elected not to. Just to say, decided not to. So we have a target bogey for a cost reduction in addition to addressing the $200,000 that's addressed in this document so I just want to make it clear that the situation here is a good news situation, and we should be talking more towards a positive that we've already taken some steps to ensure that the levy isn't something that's going to be a stress to our residents. Mayor Jansen: Okay thank you. Councilman Boyle: I agree. The real challenge of trying to balance, and Madam Mayor has already said this. How do you balance the cost of goods and services with the amount of money you've got to spend to achieve that. It's a major challenge but we're challenging ourselves and we're challenging staff to try to find ways to do that. It's going to be a lot of fun in the next few months. Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, council members. IfI can just, if you can go to the proposed levy certification pages and I'll make you familiar with some of the numbers that we had discussed during the work session. If you go under the very top line, the revenue. The general fund revenue you see the $6,465,535. That number relates to the number that we had discussed during the work session. And then if you go down to the special assessment debt, you'll notice Bruce lowered that by $200,000 so that's approximately $300,000 that we had talked about. And as part of that discussion we were going to take excess fund balance to balance that budget back up to the level of $8,868,635 and that should balance from what our discussions were upstairs. That's it. Mayor Jansen: Thank you. Okay, again I want to thank staff for having worked as hard as you have with us on getting the preliminary levy set. It's never easy until we can, actually it's not any 15 City Council Meeting - September 9, 2002 easier as we start diving into the detail. However I do think that starting last year we set a proper practice at least under your guidance to address those debt situation with these fund reserves. That we are in fact planning that balance budget and fully funding the services that are in place, but that what we're trying to do is apply what reserves we have to lessen the burden on our taxpayers but also reduce the amount of debt that the city's carrying because one of the reasons for us to have these cash reserves is in anticipation of these debt service amounts that we have coming off in the future and some future liabilities. So we are trying to be very responsible in where we are directing those funds, at the same time trying to reduce that burden on the taxpayer and that's been a very consistent message that this council has tried to express. All of us concerned about taxes but we have this ominous debt situation that we're having to address in a shortfall anticipated or at least partially anticipated. We don't know by how much in the near future and it's the by how much that we still have to determine and will eventually come to fruition but I do think it seems like a very responsible practice for us to keep addressing that debt the best that we can without impacting our bond rating and that's where again we have a lot of work and discussion still to have on how much of our cash reserve do we need to maintain in order to not impact that bond rating, because of course it is again another savings to our taxpayers as far as interest rates on the debt that we do have. So thank you for walking through all of this and for revising this over the last couple hours for us so that we could work on this resolution. Is there anything else that you care to add? Bruce DeJong: I hope that it's complete and is understandable as this rather muddy process gets... Mayor Jansen: Appreciate that. Could I have a motion please. Councilman Boyle: I'll make a motion that we adopt the proposed levy. Mayor Jansen: Do you need us to add any detail or how specific do you need that to be? Bruce DeJong: ... under the proposed levy certification. Councilman Boyle: So moved. Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you. And a second? Councilman Ayotte: Second. Resolution #2002-85: Councilman Boyle moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded that the City Council approve the resolution adopting the preliminary 2003 budget and establishing Truth in Taxation levies for 2002, collectible in 2003 as presented by staff. All voted in favor, except Councilman Peterson who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 3 to 1. Councilman Peterson: I oppose on the basis that I still believe it's too high for even a preliminary so we'll work on that in the next 3 months. Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you. And thank you to staff. Appreciate it. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS. Mayor Jansen: Any reports back from commissions? 16 City Council Meeting - September 9, 2002 Councilman Ayotte: The only thing I'll mention for the Environmental Commission, they're considering moving their meeting for the 11th of September to another date. They're putting feelers out as to when that will occur, so I don't think it's going to be on this Wednesday. Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you. One I thought interesting fact that was shared with us from the Southwest Metro Transit was on the State Fair numbers and I enjoyed sharing that with council because that was a relatively new service that they added just a couple of years ago and their final numbers came in. In the year 2001 they had transported 22,719 residents to the State Fair. This year that number went to 29,445 so they had a 30 percent increase in ridership to the fair this year, so it is a slick service. If you want to go to the fair and you hate parking and I think people are now discovering that and sharing the word on what a convenient service that is to the State Fair, so it was nice to see their ridership numbers jump like that. And Mr. Gerhardt, anything under administrative presentations? ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. Todd Gerhardt: We started putting brick on the library today so when we have daylight, if you want to drive by and take a look at a sample of what the brick will look like. Look at the east tower that's out there and they started on the lower part of it. We're working on a little issue every day out there but it's going well. Pray for no rain. Councilman Peterson: Are you concerned about Barry's letter that was in the packet? Todd Gerhardt: I think you never know. It's weather. If we can have good weather through the end of October, middle of November I think we're going to be okay. Mayor Jansen: The other thing I should have mentioned under council presentations, the Eastern Carver County Collaborative Leadership group is going to be putting together a communications package. The conversation by the group has been that we in fact meet. We have these collaborative efforts. We're sharing information financially as well as transportation wise and things that are going on in the community, the county, the school district, and we don't really get that communicated. And it's a significant effort and it really has helped as far as coordinating things. We had done a communications piece back when transportation became a key conversation and a complication for the school district a year ago so just so you're aware we are working on pulling together some sort of a communication vehicle on that that hopefully will be implemented. We're going to have a conversation with the group at their next meeting in October so it will happen over probably the fourth quarter at some point as we try to pull that together, but just FYI. Any correspondence discussion? Councilman Peterson: Just the one, Todd just one more question for you. Anything new on 101 trail? Anything atypical happening that you've heard of? Todd Gerhardt: No. You know weather again is playing a factor in that. We have some exposed areas with the large amount of rain so we have seen erosion issues but other than that I was not appraised of anything from Teresa that we're behind any 8 ball or anything like that. Councilman Peterson: Okay, thanks. Mayor Jansen: Are you hearing any issues? 17 City Council Meeting - September 9, 2002 Councilman Peterson: No. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Alright, with that ifI could have a motion to adjourn. Councilman Boyle moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The City Council meeting was adjourned at 8:10 p.m. Submitted by Todd Gerhardt City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim 18