Loading...
CC Minutes 2002 01 14CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 14, 2002 Mayor Jansen called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Jansen, Councilman Labatt, Councilman Ayotte, and Councilman Boyle COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: Councilman Peterson STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Roger Knutson, Teresa Burgess, and Todd Hoffman PUBLIC PRESENT FOR ALL ITEMS: Deb Kind Debbie Lloyd Mandi Niirala 2351 Lukewood Drive 7302 Laredo Drive 7510 Park Drive PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None. ORGANIZATIONAL ITEMS: Mayor Jansen: We have a recommendation from staff to continue with the rules of procedures. The official newspaper, the Chanhassen Villager is the recommendation for appointment. They are the only ones that meet the official newspaper designation guidelines that are established by State Statute. Is everyone okay with b? Okay. On c, the acting mayor for 2001 was Steve Labatt. Do we have a volunteer or a suggestion? Councilman Ayotte: I so move to have Steve Labatt do it again. Councilman Boyle: I'll second. Councilman Ayotte moved, Councilman Boyle seconded to appoint Steve Labatt as Acting Mayor for 2002. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 4 to 0. Mayor Jansen: We'll do that one separate. Steve, you've accepted? Councilman Labatt: I guess so. Mayor Jansen: Okay, as our Acting Mayor. D is the Fire Chief. The recommendation there of course is John Wolff who was just re-elected as Fire Chief for another 2 year term by the Fire Department. The Health Officer, which is item e is the recommendation of re-appointment of Dr. David McCollum as the City's Health Officer. And then the Schedule for Professional Service Bids. Does anyone have any questions there for the city manager's recommendation? City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 Councilman Ayotte: Are basically the fees associated with the professional services bids, is there any play in those? Are they going to be consistent for the duration of what we have on our contract like when we extend one or the other? Todd Gerhardt: The auditor's service is a set rate and banking services are a set rate. Financial advisor is based on the bond amount. And insurance of record is a set amount. Councilman Ayotte: I understand that but is there potential for growth in any way after today? Do they have the ability to influence growth in any way? Todd Gerhardt: No. Those are 3 year... Councilman Ayotte: Thanks. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Any other questions? Okay. Then ifI could have a motion to approve those agenda items please. Councilman Boyle: So moved. Mayor Jansen: And a second? Councilman Ayotte: I'll second. Councilman Boyle moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to approve the following organizational items: a. Rules of Procedure: As presented. b. Official Newspaper: Chanhassen Villager d. Fire Chiefi John Wolff e. Health Officer: Dr. David McCollum f. Schedule for Professional Service Bids: As presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 4 to 0. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Boyle seconded to approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations: a. Approve Revision to Consultant Contract for 2002 MSA Street Improvement Project, No. 01-08. c. Resolution/t2002-01: Approve Resolution In Support of State Funding to Acquire the Seminary Fen in the Assumption Creek Watershed. e. Resolution/12002-02: Receive Feasibility Study for MSA Street Improvements. f. Resolution/12002-03: Approve Resolution Establishing 2002 Park & Trail Dedication Fees. g. Approve Recommendation for Carver County Recycling Center. City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 h. Approve Recommendation for the Environmental Excellence Awards. i. Approval of Bills. j. Approval of Minutes: -City Council Work Session Minutes dated December 10, 2001 -City Council Minutes dated December 10, 2001 Receive Commission Minutes: -Park & Recreation Commission Minutes dated December 11,2001 k. Approve Landscape Contract for City Center Commons. 1. Approve Amendment to City Code Concerning Compensation for Council Members Attending Additional Meetings. m. Approve Modification to the Fire Department By-laws. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 4 to 0. Mayor Jansen: Typical procedure would be to move 2(b) to the end of the meeting. Is that any difficulty for staff for us moving it to the end? Teresa Burgess: No Madam Mayor. Mayor Jansen: Okay, so we will do that. We will discuss that at the end of the meeting. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None. PUBLIC HEARING: REOUEST FOR ON-SALE BEER & WINE LICENSE, GYPSY CURRY HOUSE, 459 WEST 79TH STREET. Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, Council members, staff has reviewed the application for an on-sale beer and wine license for the Gypsy Curry House at 459 West 79th Street. All investigations showed up negative. Staff is recommending approval. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Does Council have any questions for staff at this time? Otherwise we will open this for the public hearing. If there's anyone who would care to comment on this item, please step forward to the podium. Seeing no one, we'll close the public hearing. Council, any discussion? Otherwise I'll call for a motion. May I have a motion please. Councilman Ayotte: So moved to go with the staff's recommendation to authorize the request for on-sale beer and wine license to Gypsy Curry House, 459 West 79th Street. Mayor Jansen: Thank you. And a second? Councilman Boyle: Second. City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 Councilman Ayotte moved, Councilman Boyle seconded to approve the request for an on-sale beer and wine license for the Gypsy Curry House at 459 West 79th Street contingent upon receipt of the license fee and the liquor liability insurance. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 4 to 0. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR VACATION OF A PORTION OF A DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT, 610 CARVER BEACH ROAD, COFFMAN DEVELOPMENT. Public Present: Name Name Debbie Lloyd Phil Hanson 7302 Laredo Drive 621 Carver Beach Road Teresa Burgess: Thank you Madam Mayor and Council. Staff has received a request from Coffman Development. The developer is representing Rachel and David Igel, the owners of the property and they are developing the property to be the Big Woods on Lotus Lake. That plat has been approved by the Council. They have requested the vacation of an existing portion of a drainage utility easement. They are rededicating that easement. A different slightly configuration from what is being vacated this evening as part of the Big Woods on Lotus Lake parcel. The original easement was taken as part of the Carver Beach Road sanitary sewer and water project in 1975 that project was done. The easement contains an existing sanitary sewer and water line in addition to lift station number 10. We are not vacating the lift station itself but we are vacating the easement that it sits on. What will happen is the city controls when those easements are filed down at the county. We will take both documents down at the same time. Condition that you will notice in tonight's vacation is that this may not be vacated until the plat has been filed, which will mean that the city attorney will take the two plats, the plat and the easement vacation down. File them at the same time so that we at no point will have a situation where we do not have an easement over our lift station. In doing this we will clean up the situation so we don't end up with a very convoluted and confusing easement. We will have a very clean cut, easily described easement for future. And the purpose of the vacation, the reason that this is being done is the property owner that is purchasing that first lot that is adjacent to the lift station has requested to relocate his sewer line, at his cost, so that he can reconfigure the layout of his home. He is not going to need any variances once this has been taken care of. Otherwise he would require an encroachment agreement into the easement and we are uncomfortable with him being on top of the sanitary sewer line itself and had recommended denial in which case he's pursuing this alternative. If there's any questions I'd be happy to answer those. Mayor Jansen: Thank you. Council, any questions for staff at this time? Councilman Ayotte: Point of clarification now. He is going to move the sewer lines at his own expense? Teresa Burgess: Correct. He will submit a plan to the city for approval. Will hire a contractor that will be approved by the city. Will bond for the work with the city and will pay the contractor himself. Councilman Ayotte: And will do the acceptance of what's been installed. Teresa Burgess: Correct. And we will hold the bond until after that acceptance. City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 Councilman Ayotte: Got it. Mayor Jansen: Any other questions? Councilman Ayotte: No. Mayor Jansen: Okay. I'll open this for the public hearing. If there's anyone in the audience that would like to speak to this issue, please step forward to the podium. And state your name and address for the record. Debbie Lloyd: Hi. My name's Debbie Lloyd. I live at 7302 Laredo Drive. Mayor Jansen: Good evening. Debbie Lloyd: Hello. I had a conversation with Teresa today and there was one other point that I asked for clarification on, and that was condition 18 of the approval of the final plat stated that the permanent utility easement around the lift station number 10 must be increased from 50 feet to 60 feet, and that a 20 foot easement is required for access easement off the proposed cul-de-sac and I want assurance that this condition will still apply. And that's the only point she didn't cover. Mayor Jansen: Teresa, would you be prepared to speak to that? Teresa Burgess: Certainly. All of the conditions of the original Big Woods on Lotus Lake plat still apply to this. This vacation does not impact any of the conditions already approved by the council. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Debbie Lloyd: Thank you. Mayor Jansen: Thank you. Anyone else that would like to address the council on this item? Good evening. If you'd state your name and address for the record please. Phil Hanson: I'm Phil Hanson. I live at 621 Carver Beach Road and my concern is, if you vacate the easement, will we be guaranteed there will be a valid road to go to the lift station when it starts to overflow? Could the old one be tore up before the new one's in place? Teresa Burgess: No. The easement, that's why the city is controlling how these are recorded. The city will record the vacation and the plat so that no one will have the opportunity to do that. We will not vacate. As a condition of this vacation is that it cannot be vacated until the new plat has been filed. So it will have coverage. Phil Hanson: And the road is in. Teresa Burgess: Right. Phil Hanson: And the road is in. Teresa Burgess: Well the road's not, there's an existing access point. City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 Phil Hanson: Yes, but once that's vacated, the current road if that's vacated, we'll have to have another. Teresa Burgess: That current road is not being taken. Phil Hanson: Oh, that one isn't then? Teresa Burgess: No. It's being upgraded but it won't be removed at this time. Phil Hanson: Okay, because I was afraid that we'd end up with, nobody could get to the lift station. Teresa Burgess: No. Phil Hanson: Okay, thank you. Mayor Jansen: Thank you. Appreciate your question. Anyone else that would like to address this item with the council? Seeing no one, I'll close the public hearing and bring this back to council. Council, any further discussion? Councilman Labatt: None. Mayor Jansen: If I could have a motion please. Councilman Labatt: I recommend that we approve the resolution vacating the portion of the existing drainage easement located at 610 Carver Beach Road as defined in the attached vacation description. Mayor Jansen: And a second? Teresa Burgess: Excuse me Madam Mayor. We do need that condition listed in the motion. Subject to the following condition at the very bottom of the sheet. Councilman Labatt: Oh, subject to the following condition that the easement vacation will not be recorded until the new utility lines are constructed and tested. Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you. And a second. Councilman Ayotte: Second. Resolution/12002-04: Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to approve a resolution vacating a portion of an existing drainage and utility easement located at 610 Carver Beach Road as defined in the attached vacation description, subject to the following condition: 1. The easement vacation will not be recorded until the new utility lines are constructed and tested. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 4 to 0. PUBLIC HEARING: REOUEST FOR VACATION OF A DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT, 8124 DAKOTA LANE, TONY MERTES. City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 Teresa Burgess: Thank you Madam Mayor and Council. The city has received an application from Tony Mertes. He is also the property owner of the property at 8124 Dakota Lane. He's requesting the vacation of a portion of an existing drainage utility easement in his back yard. What he wants to do is to construct a garage addition that would have encroached into the drainage utility easement approximately 9 feet into a 50 foot wide drainage utility easement. Upon visiting the site, staff was able to determine that it is not necessary for us to retain that section that he is requesting to encroach upon. We would have allowed the encroachment. However, rather than do an encroachment agreement and cause a difficult situation where we have to track that agreement, it is much cleaner for us to vacate the portion instead and that is what staff is recommending to council this evening. I would be happy to answer any questions at this time. Mayor Jansen: Thank you. Any questions for staff? Councilman Ayotte: Just for clarification. On the caveats that you've listed under the proposed motion, the folks involved understand clearly all the requirements and concede to those points? Is there any hard point with them? Teresa Burgess: I believe the property owner is here this evening. Staff has been working with the property owner in drafting this this evening. But I would have to ask the property owner to step forward and say if they understand what they're agreeing to. Tony Mertes: Good evening. I'm Tony Mertes, 8124 Dakota Lane and yeah, I've looked at the 3, I guess I don't know the terminology. Requirements? Mayor Jansen: Conditions. Tony Mertes: Condition. Four conditions and I don't have a problem with any of the conditions so. Mayor Jansen: Thank you. Appreciate that. Councilman Ayotte: Thanks. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Any other questions for staff at this time? Okay, I'll open this for the public hearing. If there's anyone here who would like to comment on this item, if you would come forward to the podium please. Seeing no one, I'll close the public hearing. Council, any other discussion or I'll call for a motion please. Councilman Ayotte: I so move that the Chanhassen City Council approves a resolution vacating a portion of the existing drainage and utility easement located on Lot 55, Block 2 of the Hidden Valley plat as defined in the attached vacation description subject to the following conditions. Number 1. Show all existing proposed contours on the lot survey. Number 2. Show the proposed driveway leading to the garage addition. Number 3. Move the existing shed which is shown on the lot survey out of the drainage and utility easement or obtain an encroachment agreement from the city. Number 4. For access purposes, limit the width of the easement vacation to 10 feet which would be to the edge of the proposed garage addition. Mayor Jansen: And a second? City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 Councilman Boyle: Second. Resolution #2002-05: Councilman Ayotte moved, Councilman Boyle seconded that the City Council approves a resolution vacating a portion of the existing drainage and utility easement located on Lot 55, Block 2 of the Hidden Valley plat as defined in the attached vacation description subject to the following conditions 1. Show all existing proposed contours on the lot survey. Show the proposed driveway leading to the garage addition. Move the existing shed which is shown on the lot survey out of the drainage and utility easement or obtain an encroachment agreement from the city. For access purposes, limit the width of the easement vacation to 10 feet which would be to the edge of the proposed garage addition. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 4 to 0. PUBLIC HEARING: FEASIBILITY STUDY ON HIGHWAY 101 TRAIL CONSTRUCTION, NORTH OF HIGHWAY 5. Public Present: Name Address Mike & Pat Miller Mitzi & William Shimp George & Janet Weaver Smith Angela Schlender Colleen Frankowitz Richard Borotz Joel Rutherford Jay Rubash Greg Flickinger Mike Farland Brenda Vatland Leon Narem Carol & Harvey Parker Tim Love Dianne Whiting Thompson Ruth Shoemaker Chantha Bo Matt Livers Steven Berquist Mark Senn B. Vernes 71 Choctaw Circle 155 Choctaw Circle 31 Hill Street 6801 Brule Circle 6770 Brule Circle 6750 Brule Circle 7510 Market Place Drive, Eden Prairie HTPO Inc., Eden Prairie 7013 Sandy Hook Circle 7261 Kurvers Point Road 7290 Kurvers Point Road 20 Sandy Hook Road 7480 Chanhassen Drive 7010 Sandy Hook Circle 51 Hill Street 41 Hill Street 7380 Kurvers Point Road 7004 Sandy Hook Circle 760 Alexander Circle, Chaska 7207 Frontier Trail 7160 Willow View Cove City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 S. Resnik Kurt Fossey John Glattly Steve Donen Sandy Carlson Steve Liedtke Ruth Kinkade Steven D. Bloom Frank G. Mendez Tiffany Prosen 7381 Kurvers Point Road 21 Basswood Circle 7636 South Shore Drive 7271 Kurvers Point Road 7231 Kurvers Point Road 20 Basswood Circle 6781 Brule Circle 7361 Kurvers Point Road 2701 Longacres Drive Teresa Burgess: Thank you Madam Mayor and Council. I know this is the one that a lot of people have been looking forward to this evening. This evening is the time set for the public hearing for the feasibility study for the trail adjacent to Highway 101, north of Highway 5. This section of trail is being considered as an alternative to the original turnback project that was proposed by MnDot and the counties and Eden Prairie and Chanhassen did participate in that study as well. At this point we have attached a copy of the feasibility study. The cost of the project is approximately 1.3 million dollars. This evening staff is recommending that council hold the public hearing, but not take any action at this time. We have sent a letter to the neighborhood to inform them of the public hearing. It is attached in your packet and in that packet we also informed the neighborhood that we would be happy to accept their comments and would copy any comments from them received by Thursday the 24th at the end of the business day to the council in time for the meeting on Monday, the 28th. That will allow us time to photocopy them and also allow the council time to read them prior to the meeting. Any e-mail comments would be sent by e-mail and we'll continue to accept those right up until about noon on Monday to allow the council time to review and digest those. Certainly any comments received after that will go into the file, but the council presumably will not have time to review those people to the meeting on the 28th. I'd be happy to answer any questions the council might have. One clarification, we were hoping to have the traffic counts back from Benshoof Associates. They're doing a traffic study for us, or traffic review for us on Highway 101. WE have not received that data yet but will have it in time for the 28th. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Thank you. Any questions for staff at this time? Councilman Boyle: Not now. Mayor Jansen: Okay. I had just a couple, and I won't maybe share all of them right now but maybe a couple that other people might have questions about for the public hearing. In here it mentions that there are 3 possible rest areas that the city could include in the project. Does that project cost include the cost of those rest areas currently? Teresa Burgess: Yes it does. Mayor Jansen: Okay. So where I'm seeing the suggestion on some of the cost differences that we could consider, and one of them was to say that if we did not make this ADA accessible, the $200,000 that we could reduce it by, is that just the rest areas and the trail would still be acceptable for wheelchairs and meet those standards? Teresa Burgess: It's also, ADA would also refer to the grade of the trail and that's what's driving a lot of the cost because we have to have additional retainageway. MnDot and DNR, we're receiving a DNR grant City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 for this trail, both require that this project be ADA accessible. So because of that, to remove that piece of it would require us to move it out of the right-of-way and also we would have to give up the DNR grant. Councilman Ayotte: Which is? Teresa Burgess: $500,000. Mayor Jansen: And I'm not wanting to make it not be ADA, meet those requirements but I'm wondering on the cost of those 3 rest areas, is that also a requirement? It looks like it's just a suggestion. Teresa Burgess: ADA suggestions the rest areas. We would talk with DNR and MnDot to see if they would allow us to remove them as a cost savings. The alternative would be to not put in benches but to just put in the flat areas so people could stop. And those could be considered as part of the design, but that is something that should be discussed at a later date instead of trying to take it out of the feasibility study, so that we have a good idea of worst case cost instead of getting to the end and MnDot telling us you have to put them in and we haven't budgeted for it. Mayor Jansen: And I guess that's where I was going. If this is a worst case number and that $200,000 savings that's noted on page 7 isn't for just the rest areas, if we can get a number that reflects just what the rest areas would be to take those out. And I'm not saying that I want to, but it just seemed like one of the alternatives that was a suggestion but it didn't look like we were given a dollar amount on that option. Teresa Burgess: And we can have for the 28th when the council needs to have discussion and decide what to do next. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Go ahead. Councilman Boyle: I do have one other question that kind of comes back to that. We talked about, I think it was $4,000 per lot for screening for trees and also for private fencing. How many lots are involved? Teresa Burgess: What we've included is, we haven't included that screening for the trees and the fencing in the feasibility cost estimates. But I did ask the consultants to give us a approximate dollar amount if a property owner was to come to us. Several property owners said that they did want screening. If they were to come to us and say we want it, this gives us an idea so we can tell them what the cost is, and this feasibility study recommends that those people be assessed the cost of the additional screening. We will, as matter of policy, we replace the trees that we do have to remove. We will do the same type of replacement that we would require of a developer. Anything above 6 inches in diameter we replace 2 to 1. 2 inches for every caliper inch removed. And those would be placed, to landscape the trail and to replace, focused in the areas of the tree removal to mitigate the tree loss. But we are not proposing any additional screening. We are treating this trail like we would any other trail in the city and that's not something we do in other trails throughout the city. But we wanted to keep, to give the neighborhood an idea of what it would cost and also so as I'm talking with neighborhood people I can tell them, well if you want more trees I can get those for you but it's going to cost you and it's, and I can give them a dollar amount. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Answer your question? Councilman Boyle: Thank you. 10 City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 Mayor Jansen: Knowing that we're parallel tracking this Teresa with the potential for a road reconstruction, did that project include any of the screening or buffering and landscaping? Teresa Burgess: The road project? Mayor Jansen: Yeah. Teresa Burgess: The road project has not gotten to that phase yet but we have had discussions conceptually with MnDot and they have thrown out that they would be open to some extra landscaping to mitigate the road impacts. But they have not committed to that on paper. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Okay. As I'm opening this up for the public hearing, I want to maybe take a step back and make sure that everyone is clear on exactly what it is we're looking at here this evening. The feasibility study for the trail is on one of the two tracks that we're proceeding with. This is if in fact we can't get MnDot to come to the table and get the roadway reconstruction agreed upon in the very near future and Teresa's working with them now, and Tom Workman has continued as a part of that negotiation with us to see if we can't get both projects done at the same time and have this be complete. A big motivating factor in that of course is that MnDot would then be picking up the cost for the trail. There may be some more landscaping involved. We don't end up tearing up the trail if we put it in initially but that's one track that we're still investigating and is still actively being pursued by staff as well as Mr. Workman. Tonight what we're looking at is track two. If we can't get the roadway project moved forward quickly, then the trail would go in prior to there being any kind of a roadway reconstruction. So this evening what we're looking at and taking comment on is this particular location for the trail. If you've got comments on the location, on the logistics of it, certainly bring all of those questions forward or contact staff if you have questions or comments. But we do have this delineated plan now that we're looking at and looking at potentially moving forward this evening. Well we're being suggested that we in fact continue it to the next meeting so that we can get additional comments as well, but that's what we're reviewing this evening. So with that I'll open it up for the public hearing. Anyone who has comments to share with us, certainly step forward and state your name and address for the record. Good evening Frank. Frank Mendez: Hi, how are you all? Mayor Jansen: Good, how are you doing? Frank Mendez: Just fine, thank you. My name is Frank Mendez. I live at 7361 Kurvers Point Road, Chanhassen. I just want to touch upon a few areas here in reference to the feasibility study. That I want to share with other people here as well. And the overall feeling of it, it seems to be again continuing to go in the right direction from the people that I speak to so we seem to be, that's a real good feeling that I get from people. Knowing that other details will be worked out and still need to be worked out. I just want to share this because this was very exciting as well. The two primary concerns that MnDot has with the construction were drainage impacts and safety impacts. As part of this feasibility report it will be demonstrated that that trail can be installed prior to the improvement of the highway and that some of the current drainage and safety problems associated with the existing highway can be improved as part of the trail project, which is wonderful because it's a safety feature which is needed to be done with or without the trail. Existing safety problems along the highway include areas where guardrails have been previously damaged. These guardrails should be replaced with or without a trail. As part of the trail project it is recommended that these guardrails be replaced because they may no longer provide the protection required during an accident. In addition to replacing existing guardrails, new guardrails will be installed to reduce 11 City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 the likelihood of a vehicle leaving the road during an accident, and that's on page 2 and 3. In addition to providing additional safety for users of the trail, they would also provide improved safety for those using the highway. So I'm really excited by the fact that they really reassured us that the trail will be safe and in fact we're not only making the trail, according to what's been presented at this point, in time will also be safer for the people who are driving as well. Also, at the very end of this, I thought I'd share this because most people don't have this and when they read this again or get a hold of it from the city they'll have more of a positive, workable approach to what's going on. And that's the very end of the report, excuse me. At the very end of the report, and for some reason it's not here at the moment, summary impact. Teresa do you have it there where, thank you. It's summary which basically confirms that they really are for this road and they think it's really doable. For some reason it's not here or here. That's not really exactly what I was looking for. My apologies. I don't see it right here, but I'll go on and I'm sure it will come right back up. Thank you. The other part that I wanted to really approach was this. Is that we've had this communication that we want to maintain and I think with this communication it really helps to settle people's anxieties and lack of knowledge or lack of information tends to unsettle people because it allows for misinformation to be out there. So in reference to this I'd like for really the city to continue to hold onto the entire process to maintain rigorous attention to communication and schedule of public meetings to keep area residents fully informed of progress and decisions. And the reason I need to say it, well there's a lot of reasons I need to say this but one of them is, Teresa I think you had said that the neighbors had received this particular notification, and really it was only the neighbors who live on 101 or have their property on 101, and there's about 400 residents involved here so there's around 350 people, 350 residences that weren't notified so we need to make sure that those people remain notified and not just isolated to the people on 101. So I wanted to share that as well too, and would you please continue to do that and as we've done before. The other thing I want to share as well is, and I'm bringing this up because it's a concern again. It's a matter of communication to make sure people are happy and understood, not only in our neighborhoods but adjoining neighborhoods, that we keep mentioning the $1,300,000 for this project and we've dropped for some reason recently that $500,000 of this can be, that the DNR through Tom Workman's effort will be brought into this picture making that an $800,000 project from the city. And also, if we could please emphasize and reconfirm to people that that $800,000 was set aside a long time ago for this particular project. It is not additional funding. It's not an additional tax burden that's being put on the public or the residents of Chanhassen. That really needs to be made sure, needs to be clarified so the people understand that because as I talk to people out there at this point in time, it stirs, you know people are always concerned about money and it leads people to make wrong conclusions because the information is not complete. The other thing that I kind of want to bring up, and what I heard today also was that, I hear that we didn't have a road study yet or it hasn't been completed. Well we don't, but I don't know what to say other than I have a road study here from Benshoof and Associates, you know, so I really wonder what that's all about here as well. Teresa Burgess: IfI can answer that. Frank Mendez: Okay. Teresa Burgess: What you have is the traffic counts that Benshoof did. Frank Mendez: Oh thank you. Teresa Burgess: They need to go back and analyze the study that was done by SRF by, paid for by Hennepin County. If you remember back in about April of 2000, they did a presentation to the council. I remember attending it. It was before I started to work here and everybody said are you sure you want to. 12 City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 It was held out at the rec center and they presented the traffic data for the traffic projections. The city has requested that Benshoof and Associates review those traffic projections and tell us if those are accurate or if they are skewed by the fact that, they used a model that was based on Hennepin County and Highway 101 being on the very, very fringes of Hennepin County does not operate the same as it would if it was in the dead center of Hennepin County, so we're questioning if the model is accurate. And therefore are the traffic projections for 20 years from now accurate? We don't have that information yet. MnDot will not come back to the table and discuss the road itself without that information, which is why we're still continuing to dual track at this point. We don't have enough information to know one way or the other. Frank Mendez: Well thank you very much for that clarification. It's very much appreciated. And just a couple of other things, and that's, again regardless of which way we track, I think it needs to be expressed again that really the sense of urgency needs to really be here and the attention and the communication really are critical at this point because I think we found that we were very workable and we really want to help in any way which will help any of the City Council or the Mayor to move these things forward in any way so we're here to aid in those areas as well so please let us know. And I also wanted just to remind the City Council along with a lot of other people who are here that may not know this, but people in this area, in these neighborhoods, they're landlocked by the way. That's another good way of determining who you send these letters out to, of information. A good portion of them are landlocked. We've been waiting for 30 years and some people have passed away during that time. We have been putting money aside for the last 20 years in reference to parks and trails, and you know, these people, my neighbors are so patient. We started a line for parks and trails. We were the first in line for parks and trails. We've been good neighbors and let other areas go ahead of us with understanding, and now we have this $500,000 that's been brought to the table by Tom Workman, and these other concepts going as well at this point in time. It's really simply our mm. It's quite that simple. We've waited quite patiently and with great desires and with children and high expectations and we've been pushed aside and let people go ahead. It's just simply our mm right now to have the trail. I just want you to know that but that is the way we really do feel and we'd appreciate that you maintain that sense of urgency to drive this thing forward so that we can be walking on this trail by mid-summer and late fall. Those are the expectations of the people who are in this room and you need to know that. Thank you. Mayor Jansen: Thank you. Just a couple comments if I could before the next speaker, to address a couple of the issues that Mr. Mendez brought up. We have emphasized the fact that we do have that $500,000 grant from the DNR. We have been very appreciative to Mr. Workman in his efforts in garnering that grant for us in regards to making this project more palatable. It's a project that began projected at a $200,000 cost that went to a $400,000 cost, that went to 750, 800, and now we're at a million 3. So it's been astronomical as we evaluated the cost of this project and to have Mr. Workman put the efforts in to come up with a creative avenue for us to help fund part of this, was very exciting. It certainly would have taken some of the burden off of our taxpayers to have to pick up some of the cost of the project. That is why we're parallel tracking the other project as well. We're trying to come up with the most cost effective way for the city and the community to be able to put this project in. Council has said it's a priority we move forward on this trail project. One of the first things that we did last year was go back to the table and start negotiating with the other entities. We've been very encouraged to have gotten to the point that we have with the other entities. The city of Chanhassen has stepped up and said that we will take responsibility for this roadway and we actually have Teresa Burgess to thank for coming forward and saying why don't we take over the jurisdiction. Let's make this a simpler project for the city to try to move forward because now it will be a city roadway. So the negotiations there are continuing as far as moving forward roadway or trail. We're just trying to find out what's the most feasible and how can we move this project forward so if you're here tonight concerned that the trail isn't going anywhere, it's going someplace. 13 City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 We're not only investigating one avenue for doing it. We're investigating two, and I assure you, and I don't see him here this evening. I don't think Mr. Workman's here. He was at the public open house on the trail. Teresa has been in touch with him. Mr. Gerhardt has stayed in touch with him. He's continuing to work with us with MnDot as we try to accomplish this with the roadway. So he's been a very good partner with the city to try to get this accomplished but hear loud and clear the trail is coming. We're trying to just figure out which way we can get it done the most effectively. And certainly we've acknowledged that grant numerous times. And as far as the notification to the residents Frank, we did talk about the extent of the mailing on this and the original intent was getting input on this particular trail from the people that are affected by it on their properties. So that was the intent of the mailer. It wasn't intended to restrict the amount of input on the trail so, but I appreciate your having brought that up. It is something that we did discuss last week, but thank you. Let's go ahead. Sorry to keep you waiting, thank you. Tom Devine: No, that's fine. My name is Tom Devine. I live at 7640 South Shore Drive in the South Lotus Lake development. Couple of quick points that I'd like to just make relative to the feasibility study. One of the things that popped out in looking at the cost structures that have been assembled underneath the plan here for the trail. One of the things that I would encourage the city to do quite aggressively is the cost of the guardrails, the removal of the guardrails, some of the walls and that sort of thing should maybe go back to the State because there is, as we all know, a huge amount of deferred maintenance that has not been done for a number of years and so rather than having the taxpayers of Chanhassen maybe bear those costs, as part of this $800,000 that the city is committing to, we should maybe look at that and see if we can get some of that money back for the State for the cost of these things that are included as part of the fixing of the deferred maintenance items so that we as the taxpayers aren't necessarily paying for that, so I make that comment. And there's a number of items relative to the walls and the guardrails and the removal of the guardrails and the new guardrails, that might save the city money and bring down that $800,000 that we're looking at as part of the project. Not to say that we don't want to see those items included for the safety features, but also as an issue that's clearly deferred maintenance the State just hasn't done. I'd also like to congratulate the city on the detailed study work that was done by HTPO relative to the water work and the discussion of the surface water and the runoff water within the feasibility report. In the first reports that had been made, we couldn't get any surface water information at all relative to the road work, and for the many hundreds of thousands of dollars that's been spent on this study work, once again I would maybe suggest that the cost of the report, and I don't know if it could be broken out by the people that prepared the report. Certainly it's part of, it could be maybe part of the cost that could be recovered relative to the work that was done inside of this report, back to the other municipalities meaning Eden Prairie, Hennepin County, and the State as part of this project where we could again reduce our costs because the cost estimates for the administration and what not relative to the cost estimates were several hundred thousand. If we could get another 20-30,000, the package here might amount to 100-200,000 dollars of savings that the city of Chanhassen could have by re-assigning the costs that have been put forth. The issues of the water and where it's going obviously need to be clarified in greater detail and there's I know quite a bit of concern about what water reaches Lotus Lake and water quality and whatever but clearly it's been demonstrated here there's a real interest in trying to address those issues upfront so that we can proceed with the trail as it's being proposed. The final two points that I'd like to make is the, or the final point that I really I guess I would like to make would be the, on the overall time line. The fact that there is a time line that's a part of this feasibility report and adoption that the city is moving forth I think is also to be commended. As it's been stated before and as it's been stated, this project has escalated in cost. The trail could have been built many years ago without the ADA, the pieces and obviously we look at how those elements are now escalating the cost of this project and certainly if we sit here a year or 2 years from now we're going to be looking at another 100 or 200,000 dollars depending on whatever those costs escalate to 14 City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 be so clearly the fact that we're committed here is a very, very positive sign. The final point that I'd like to make is the fact that the State and the various groups up to this point, Eden Prairie, Hennepin County, the State, Chanhassen has addressed the roadway and addressed the deferred maintenance. Did the overlayment and got started and really took care of the road so we're not really necessarily pressed to go in and do anything else on this first track but the fact that we got the roadwork, the basic road bed is now repaired. In good repair and everything. It's really, many people are very pleased with that and the fact that we don't necessarily move forward with the widening or anything else, I think a lot of people within the city are just plain happy that the city's reacted and gotten the job done and gotten the work done that needed to be done that was the accumulation of the deferred maintenance so we certainly thank you for your support in moving this project forward and being committed to a time line and helping us to get this long overdue project completed. Mayor Jansen: Thank you. Teresa Burgess: Madam Mayor, while we're waiting. The City did apply to MnDot for financial contribution to this project and it was done under the previous administration. We were denied in November of 2000 for that financial aid for this project and we did ask for it to be applied towards things like the drainage, the safety improvements and were told that no, we could not get that. They did not feel it was an appropriate use of their dollars to contribute to this trail. Mayor Jansen: And that's if we were to move forward with it as just an individual project for just the trail. Teresa Burgess: Correct. That was our first step in this project was to request that funding and we were turned down at that point. Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you. Tom Devine: ...the trail, the safety issues and what not that they've addressed in the study report here. Certainly the State can't overlook this new report now relative to what the finances... Teresa Burgess: The State is not interested in doing them as part of the, in cooperation with the trail. They would do them in cooperation with a turnback project but they are not willing to do it as part of the trail. They made that very clear. Tom Devine: Maybe the city should be aggressive you know, if they don't get their way in the tumback, we should be aggressive in trying to recover the cost that we spend on their behalf to identify their deficiencies in deferred payments.., best interest of the taxpayers to be aggressive in trying to do that. Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you. Teresa Burgess: We'll continue with that process. Mayor Jansen: Good evening. Steve Bloom: Good evening. Steve Bloom, 6781 Brule Circle. The last couple of years that I've been involved with this project I've noticed that council members change. Sometimes within the term, but we're not as patient as 30 years, I will say that. Sometimes you negotiate with yourself in business. Sometimes you try to get in front of what the argument's going to be. This is a very detailed and difficult project. 15 City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 There's budgetary issues. There's certainly environmental and safety issues. And then there are some concerns about taxes and you know, my understanding is that this is earmarked 410 fund. It's budgeted. It's ready to go and we did get 500 grand from MnDot and that's great. There will always be reasons to not get this thing done. There are a lot of complications with it. So I think what I need to do is appeal to the sense of those that may have not been involved with this throughout. The taxpayers in the 101 corridor, which my understanding is there was a referendum some years back and there were almost $5 million raised. One of the things that was promised to the 101 corridor neighborhood was a trail. The money was raised. Parks were built. Trails were built. And we still don't have a trail. So we need to get it done regardless of the issues. We'll figure out a way to get through them, and council members are certainly running the business but Todd, the City Manager, you've been around long enough to know. We deserve this. Sometimes the complications of getting these things passed and done are enough to just kill it. You get frustrated. Instead of measuring all of the various issues, keep in your heart what's fair. What is fair to the community and to the 101 corridor homeowners is a trail. It's not going to be the best. It's not going to be the safest. Bear in mind, you know you're dual tracking. You're trying to accomplish maybe more than one goal. Maybe it won't be the safest trail. Keep it minimum impact. That's what we asked for. And that's what was committed to. Think about what's fair. That's all I ask. We have waited long enough and it's getting to be a joke. Thanks. Mayor Jansen: Anyone else who would like to address the council. Bob Mortenson: Mayor Jansen and the council, my name is Bob Mortenson. 7371 Kurvers Point Road in Chanhassen. I did go to the public hearing. I've been to almost every hearing that's ever been or meeting that's ever been on this project. Sometimes I was in favor and other times I was rather outspoken and not in favor. I have to commend you because we're now at a point in time where all of a sudden we're starting to say that on June 1 of 2002 we're going to start construction. I think we need to dwell on that and try and see if we make the other things come around and get in place. Many people made compromises along the way to get this project done, and as everyone has said so far, we've had, we have a wonderful opportunity because we have this opportunity to cash in on some money that we're going to get from some other entity in our State government. If we don't do it now, I challenge you to tell me how we're ever going to do it in the future. I perceive that you guys are gung ho to do this and I don't see that there's any question in my mind at this stage that the City Council isn't on board 100% on this project. That being said, I want to make note of just one minor thing and that is that on my property on Highway 101, I realize that this is a proposal, but I do want to go on the record and state that I have objection as to where they move the trail. If you look at that piece of the plan, when they come to my land, all of a sudden zip, they're up there on top of the berm. Mayor Jansen: Excuse me, could you direct us to the page? Bob Mortenson: Sure. It's A3. Page 7, A3. And it actually says Basswood Circle there but that's an error. It's really Kurvers Point Road. Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you. Bob Mortenson: Okay. And you see, if you look there, you start off there at the Glattly property and you can see that the trail is down in the ditch, and then when it starts coming up to my house, all of a sudden it's way up there on top of the berm. Now, we took at the open house, Teresa and I took a ruler and we measured what this would represent and that represents 53 feet from the center line of the road. Okay well, tonight before I came here I got my little tape measurer out, went out there on the road, measured 53 feet. 16 City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 Well there's probably some that if they'd known I was up there they'd probably run me over but, but I did measure it and when I measured it, when I come up to 53 feet, it's right up by my one small evergreen. So I would say there's plenty of room down there. I know that you're going to have to do some restructuring. I have some trees back there and stuff. I've long ago come to the conclusion that those are probably going to go and I was happy to hear tonight that they're going to probably do some replacements. But I've already visited with Teresa and when we get to the actual process where we do an engineering study or a plan where we actually get into survey measurements and everything, I want to go on record as to say, like I've always stated, that I want my portion of the trail down in the ditch area, not up on the top of my berm up there where all my trees are. And that being said, I'm very pleased and I'll go sit down. Mayor Jansen: Thank you. Sandy Carlson: Hi. I'm Sandy Carlson. I live at 7271 Kurvers Point Road. I'm also a realtor in this community and this part of the area is of course dangerous for children to ride bikes on. There's joggers. I'm a runner myself. I do not go out on 101 for safety reasons, so we'd like to get a trail so our kids don't have to cross the road to go into Eden Prairie to get to Chanhassen. I hope it's not going to take somebody to get injured or killed on this road to get this thing done. Again we all had set aside the money. We've paid our taxes. This side of Lotus Lake pays a lot of taxes and it was all set aside for us earlier. I guess you're continuing with feasibility studies. There is a feasibility study out. You're checking to see if it's accurate. Well, you probably paid for that already. It should be accurate and those of us that live along the proposed trail probably are the best judges of feasibility studies and we're all saying that we need that trail so it is a little dangerous to get out there. There's no place to run or bike so if you can get that going before all of our kids graduate and are off to college and with their new lives, we would like to get a trail. Also for resale in the area, a trail would greatly enhance the property values because then people would see ways to get into Chanhassen. Many people are concerned about the busy road and gee, their kids are kind of landlocked in some of these neighborhoods and some of these homes so, thank you. Mayor Jansen: Thank you. If I could emphasize again, and I'm not cutting anyone off but it has already been determined that we're building a trail and what the public hearing is for this evening is for input on the specifics of the plan and what we've been presented as being feasible. And it's this document that we're looking at addressing with all of you before we move forward into the plans and specifications, which to the city that means 130 to 150,000 dollars of cost. So ifI could emphasize again, we realize how emotional and necessary and important this trail is to all of you, and what we don't want to do is as we go through what's required of us with these public hearings, we don't want to put you through the angst of feeling like you need to come up and continue to defend whether it's going to be built or not. What the council has said is we're going to go a trail, and what we're trying to find out now is which way are we going to do it. And we're going to do it. And we have Mr. Workman working with us with MnDot so that we can get both options in front of us so we can decide and go forward. And though we're emphasizing that yes, there is $800,000 in the park and trail budget that we could put to this trail, no one's saying it isn't there. It's absolutely there, and our charge to this community is if there are alternative revenue sources out there, like this grant, we should pursue them because now it's not just coming out of your pocket, there's another way to pay for it. What we're hearing is that if we can get this road project to come forward, we've not only saved the community the 500,000 that the DNR would pay for, but we could conceivable save a larger portion, if not all of the 800,000 if we move it forward with the road. No one's trying to delay it. Mr. Workman, and I'm not just continuing to throw his name out for other than the reason that he is working very hard with us on this. He's the one who has the relationships with MnDot and so we are very seriously at the table. Teresa's been working very hard at this project and it's no hoax. We're not sitting here... We're going forward with it. It's just a matter of how we pay for it. And I think we all have gone through 17 City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 all of the public hearings. We've heard the comments. We're with you on this. We're trying to find out how to best get it done and it's not that we're trying to keep you coming up to City Hall by having these public hearings. We're having them because it's a requirement on the plans and specs. It's moving forward. So do take a look at the plans and you're certainly welcome to comment, but it's really these plans and specs and where the trail is being located, as Mr. Mortenson was speaking to the piece of trail in front of him. We need to hear all those comments now before we move forward with the plans and specifications. That's why those notifications went out specifically to those property owners. So that we can address some of those situations and Teresa can then work with the design in order to properly place it down this corridor. But with that, if there's anyone else who would like to comment on this project to the council, certainly step forward to the podium. And there are copies of this available at City Hall, if anyone wants copies. Just contact Teresa and she can get you a copy of it. Good evening. Peggy Naas: Hi. My name is Peggy Naas. I'm at 7200 Willow View Cove and my daughter Lauren Mestiff is too shy to stand up but I figured this was a good civics lesson. There's time value of money which has been brought up, and certainly it's worthy of you to try to reduce the cost to taxpayers to investigate alternatives but let's not investigate all alternatives because we will always be waiting for other alternatives. The city is building a very attractive nuisance right next door here which is called the library, and so there's a time value in getting the trail up and running before that attractive nuisance is even more attractive and still out of reach of our neighborhoods. I also wanted to support the idea of the traffic light. Turning left into our neighborhood, which is Kurvers Point is a very dangerous proposition and so certainly we've supported the minimum width improvements to the roadway, which include the turn lanes, but I also support the study which refers to I believe it's the 3 stop lights along that corridor and would speak in favor of those stop lights. Thank you. Mayor Jansen: Thank you. Dan Shoemaker: Dan Shoemaker, 7380 Kurvers Point Road. I haven't had the opportunity to react very positively to much that's been done on this topic in the 10 years that I've had to live with listening about it, so I think in all fairness tonight, I wanted to react positively to the feasibility study. The issues that have been brought up in the past years, it seems have been largely addressed in there, which I think is great news. There are clearly safety issues. I think there's been unanimous consensus on that. They're largely addressed in that, and in fact it's going to improve just the safety issues on the road itself just by virtue of putting this trail in according to the study. The fiscal issues have been addressed. It hasn't expanded beyond the $800,000 which has been allotted so we're fortunate on that. The environmental issues, the water runoff which has been brought up earlier, hadn't been addressed before. They are in there. Although if this is the time to be making notes, I still have some personal questions about how that's going to be resolved since I've had some ongoing runoff problems going through the back of my property. So I want to thank everybody for the effort on that. The only question I'm leaving with tonight is, while I appreciate the continued commitment on the part of the council to getting this trail done, that commitment was also made in April of the year 2000. What I don't have the sense is, is there a commitment to getting this done quickly? So you've heard time and again everybody wants to see this done fast, but we really haven't heard any response on do you have a time line other than what's in that feasibility study that could be done this year? And I don't know if that's something you can respond to tonight. But that's the only open request I have. Thank you for the effort on it. Mayor Jansen: Thank you. Teresa Burgess: Madam Mayor, ifI can answer that time line. 18 City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 Mayor Jansen: Sure. Teresa Burgess: Once the council adopts the feasibility study, they are adopting essentially what it states in here. We're not bound to the time line but we do try to adhere to it as closely as possible. So once the council does adopt this feasibility study, unless something from the outside impacts us, such as applying for the limited use permit which is required before we can start construction in the MnDot right-of-way, we would keep on this and put all of the city resources that are necessary and available to us to keep this going. Staff would put their time toward it. The consultant has committed their time toward it and we would keep on that path. But at this point there are outside forces as well. MnDot has to allow us to construct, just like I can't build on Bob's property without his permission, then I can't build on MnDot's either. Brenda Vatland: Good evening. My name is Brenda Vatland. I live at 7290 Kurvers Point Road. I have attended the public hearings held in 1998 when we were trying to get 5 government bodies to agree on one plan, and I found it to be an incredibly frustrating political process. Trying to get Eden Prairie, Chanhassen, Carver County, Hennepin County and MnDot all to finalize on one plan seemed like it was just dragging on forever. So I would like to have a little clarification of what the dual track, track one plan of having the City of Chanhassen turnback the portion of roadway. As I'm understanding it, the center line divides Hennepin County and Carver County. So it'd just be the lane that would be the western lane that we would be, so we would need to coordinate with Eden Prairie? Teresa Burgess: What we have proposed to MnDot is that we would be willing to take the road. We would be willing to take the whole road. We would be willing to take only our lane if Eden Prairie wants to take their lane. We would be happy to coordinate with Carver County, Hennepin County, anybody that wants to work with us. We've basically thrown it on the table as we're here to work with them and to make it work. The reason we are dual tracking is because of the situation that you're describing. We're trying to get 5 entities to agree to something is very difficult and so we have voiced to those other 4 entities, we are willing to work with you. We want to do the road at the same time if possible because it gives us a complete project. We put the whole thing to rest. The neighborhood can then know what the final solution is to Highway 101 because MnDot is going to continue to pursue a turnback. At the same time we know that may not be possible in the time line that we are hearing is necessary for the neighborhood so we are pursuing the second track of just doing the trail. If we can get it all in place and move forward with the road and the trail, get a good project that meets the needs of Chanhassen and we feel is a good project, that's the best solution. But if we can't, we're willing to go down the road of just viewing the trail now and letting the road wait until those 5 entities can agree. Brenda Vatland: I'd just like to say that my confidence in that process of the roadway being turned back to the City of Chanhassen and Eden Prairie or Hennepin County agreeing that Chanhassen would take over the maintenance, even though that portion of the roadway lies in a different county, I don't have much confidence that that decision could be reached and that a trail could be built by October of 2002. It just seems to me like that could go down the path of negotiations between these cities and counties for many more months than this so I'm a strong advocate for the feasibility study and going ahead with the trail portion. There are 40 homeowners in our neighborhood who are also affected by the placement of the trail in that we all have a vested interest in a lot where a swimming pool is located at our entry monument. So in regards to the feasibility study, I think each of the 40 homeowners in our neighborhood needs to be notified of the trail meetings. Like tonight, I wasn't notified but I'm very interested in it. How that affects our shrubbery and our entry monument, we would all like to be able to study the drawings and the locations 19 City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 before a decision is reached. I have been a resident of Chanhassen for 10 years and over the past 10 years we've been told that a trail along 101 was identified as a priority. I've seen the costs escalate and I voted yes for the parks and trails referendum. Although the 101 trail wasn't included, I support that our community was being linked by the trail system. I've been paying higher taxes since the referendum was passed and still we don't have a trail. So I'm a strong proponent of October of 2002 in having some kind of a goal or a deadline to get the project moving forward. Thank you. Mayor Jansen: Thank you. If anyone has anything new to add, please step forward to the podium. I'll continue the public hearing for about another 5 minutes so if you have any comments on property immediately abutting the trail or the feasibility, and as I said, certainly contact staff if you don't share your comments with us this evening. But please step forward to the podium. Tim Love: That sounded like a last chance gasp. So I thought I'd take advantage of the opportunity. I just have one quick question. I was asking some questions back there. Mayor Jansen: Excuse me, if you could please state your name and address for the record. Tim Love: Sorry. I thought everybody knew me I've been here so often. Tim Love, 7210 Sandy Hook Circle. The question that I have is, what is the purpose of the re-look at the traffic situation? I thought all that had been agreed to and I would just caution the council to, that this is the same body as I recall when we had the meetings at the recreation center, that said we had enough traffic for a 4 lane highway but we didn't have enough traffic for stop lights. So that's the caution and that's the question. Thank you. Teresa Burgess: The reason for the re-look at the traffic study is because we have some concerns about the traffic study that was done originally by SRF. We've requested a different expert from Benshoof and Associates. They are also a traffic company, but they are a separate company. Take a second look at it and tell us if that traffic study is accurate. Based on the fact that it is based on a model for Hennepin County and with the Hennepin County line running down the center of Highway 101, is it accurate to take a model that is very accurate in the middle of Hennepin County, but we're getting out to the fringes and there's Carver County impacts onto that road. It's not a typical, keep in mind what Hennepin County encompasses. It's not a typical Hennepin County road and we want to take a look at it. See if those traffic counts, projections that they came up with are accurate. And also some of the statements that were made about you have this much traffic, you need a 4 lane divided highway but you don't qualify for signals based on your current, we're a little concerned about that as well from the staffs standpoint. Tim Love: IfI could just clarify. So you're saying that the second look is to verify the first look, is that correct? Teresa Burgess: Second look is to look at how accurate that first one is. Tim Love: Okay. And what happens if the second look says that the first look was inaccurate? Teresa Burgess: If the review says that the first look is inaccurate, then we can go back to MnDot and presumably that will mean that the traffic count is too high. I doubt they're going to come back and say it should be higher. If they come back and say it's too high, then that is the trigger that MnDot needs to be willing to do a two lane with safety improvement roadway, which would be turn lanes, the traffic signals, our two lane road. Some improvements on that two lane road, and reconstruction in that manner. 20 City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 Tim Love: And the closure date for all of that would be when? IfI could, last question. Mayor Jansen: Sure. Teresa Burgess: The traffic analysis is, we were hoping to have it for tonight's meeting. We didn't get it back in time. They are still working on that. They have told me that they will try to get that to us by the end of the month. They got into it and it got a little bit deeper than they thought it was going to. That, hopefully once we have that information back, MnDot will be willing to work very fast. Talking with Representative Workman, he has stated that if that data comes back as we're anticipating and hoping it will, that he will then put pressure on from the legislative side onto MnDot to move very quickly and to making a determination of what can be done with the roadway. And so we're hoping, between the pressure of the city continuing to nag at MnDot and Representative Workman putting pressure on from his side, we'll be able to move that forward very quickly, but I don't have a set time line yet. Tim Love: Okay. I'm a great believer in the statement that analysis is paralysis and I just want to make sure that we don't start digging a hole here that we can't ever climb out of, thanks. Mayor Jansen: Thank you. Teresa, one of the other comments that was made was about the recent, well not that recent any longer, the road bed repair. Could you maybe express the temporary nature of that? Teresa Burgess: Well I wouldn't encourage anyone to go out there and look at it too close because the traffic is very difficult, but you'll notice as the winter goes by it will get bumpier and bumpier. That is simply an overlay. Looking at it, Hennepin County placed that overlay and they did a nice job. I'm not saying that they didn't, but they are anticipating 3 years at a maximum for that overlay to last. If you did go out there and look, and again please don't. Cracks are already starting to form in the roadway. We're starting to see reflective cracking. The cracks that were in the old pavement are coming through. We're starting to see some heaving on those cracks. As the winter progresses and we go through the frost heave, we will start to see that old washboard effect. You won't be able to, you know right now it's not too bad of a ride but not too long from now you'll be able to feel it and it will be, you wouldn't want to drive it with a hot cup of coffee. But it will hopefully get them through the winter so they will be able to plow it very clearly. It did take out the wheel rutting and so we no longer have, when we put the traffic counters out earlier this year we got some phone calls about what on earth are you doing. Because when they put the traffic counters out and you stretch those a little bit tight so they don't move too much, and they actually suspended so we had wheel ruts underneath so the traffic counter tubes were suspended in the air and there were gaps of 2 and 3 inches underneath the tubes. And so that has been taken care of by the overlay. That's probably the biggest improvement, but the cracking is coming through and when we've gone out there with, in the company of a deputy to slow traffic down for us and looked at it, the cracking is coming up and we are going to see that start to deteriorate very quickly. Hopefully we'll get 3 years but to be honest, Carver County and Chanhassen, Eden Prairie and even Hennepin are, we're not anticipating a full 3. We're hoping, but. Tom Devine: We're grateful. It's a vast improvement from what it was. I think most people that use it are happy. Teresa Burgess: It's a short term improvement. Frank Mendez: One quick thing here on that too is, on here so that we know what to expect next time we come, which will be January the 28th, please notify everyone that we know, and again we'll be expecting at 21 City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 that point in time some sort of information that we're going to be having this on January the 28th. It says prior to taking action on January the 28th. What does that really mean? I want to make sure that I, I have an idea of what it means but I need to make sure I know what prior to taking action on this project on, what are we going to do then? What are we going to expect? Will we have the figures that we need to come up with conclusions? Teresa Burgess: Are you looking at this letter in the packet? Frank Mendez: Right, this letter here. Teresa Burgess: The council needs to take action to adopt this feasibility study. Formally adopt the feasibility study. At this point they have received it. This is the public hearing. The next portion is adoption. And then the council will need to authorize the next step in the project which, if you noticed I spoke to Todd Gerhardt for just a moment. We left a step out and the next step in the process would be discussion with MnDot and then also we need to authorize design in preparation of plans and specifications. And so Madam Mayor mentioned that that next step will cost the city between 120 and 150,000 dollars. That's the design and preparation of plans and specifications. That would be the contract with the consultant engineer. That is included in the $1.3 million. Frank Mendez: Does that mean that's a commitment to go forward as planned on the schedule that was presented on the feasibility project? Teresa Burgess: The council at that time is proposing, is authorizing us to prepare plans and specifications. There is a process that is set out and we do have to follow. We have to bring back plans and specifications for approval by the council. After approval by the council, then they must authorize us to bid and an award of bids is done by the council. Frank Mendez: So basically this long labor, basically we may have birth. We may have the birth of a trail on the 28th, is that what it may at that point in time really finally start. Teresa Burgess: If you view the initiation of the feasibility as conception, then yes. You could consider it birth. Frank Mendez: Thank you so much. Tom Devine: The only other comment that I might make is I think that the communication process here, the dates that you're referring to right now on the benchmarking, those don't follow what's in the feasibility study which has been distributed fairly widely along to the people on 101. I think what the city maybe could do or we could encourage the council to do is either publish those or in the letter format, the communication thing to the people on the list that has been assembled that were at the park and rec center and what not, and then we know that everybody's getting the same dates, the same times as far as what these approvals are so there isn't confusion about that. I think that's in everybody's best interest. I think everybody wants that communication linkage established and if we could do that, that would be very, very helpful because I wasn't aware of this meeting on the 28th now. I thought this was it tonight so, thank you. Mayor Jansen: And part of the reason for the 28th being the date where we would actually do something with this was the acknowledgement that those notifications did not make it to the neighborhood. So staff had suggested to us, before they sent out the staff report, that we needed to give more time for the public 22 City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 comment. That this evening might not work out for everyone because of the short notification. So the reason for the delay is really to allow for more of that public comment. As Frank had mentioned, the notifications just really didn't get out there to everyone. And then this way everyone will have an opportunity to communicate to us via e-mail, through staff, through written communication so that we've got all of the comments before we do anything as far as adopting this. Teresa Burgess: And Madam Mayor, ifI could stress. Anyone, either here in the council chambers or at home that wants to submit additional comments, staff would really appreciate if you submit those in writing. Either by e-mail or a letter to the city. That way we can pass it on in your own words to the council instead of us, as staff, trying to paraphrase it. We won't misquote you. That way it will get to the council exactly as you intended it to. We will get all that information to the council once it's received. Mayor Jansen: Okay? Okay. With that, I'm going to close the public hearing and we will then address this item on the 28th, along with the rest of the comments. Teresa Burgess: IfI could make one closing request to council. Based on some of the comments we're hearing this evening and also discussing with Mr. Gerhardt, one recommendation I would like to make to the council is, I know that I requested no action. I'd like to revise that and request the council authorize us to submit a copy of the feasibility study to MnDot for the beginning of the limited use permit review. That way we will have some information in place when we come back to talk about the contract with HTPO. If MnDot is going to put some requirements on us, we want to make sure that we're getting those covered in our contract negotiations with HTPO. So if I could have a resolution from the council authorization to do that. Councilman Boyle: So moved. Councilman Ayotte: Well I have a question for clarification on that. Would it be wise to confer with Representative Workman to see if such a resolution would be a disadvantage to what he's trying to process? Teresa Burgess: I don't believe it would. Representative Workman is in support of us doing the dual tracking. Councilman Ayotte: No, I understand that but I'm just saying in terms of coordination with the. Todd Gerhardt: No, we need to know that information as a part of this feasibility study and we don't want to get down the road and they come back and say they have a problem with a segment of it again so we need to get that going. Mayor Jansen: If anything, and I appreciate your mentioning that this evening. It sounds like that would save us time because we would need to submit for that LUP no matter what, correct? Teresa Burgess: We need to submit for that LUP and it puts us in from of the ball. We had originally anticipated doing the design and then submitting, but I believe the feasibility study has enough information for MnDot to start to react to it and that way we aren't committing to the HTPO contract and having to come back and make revisions. Or for that matter, it may also light a fire under MnDot into moving forward a little bit quicker. 23 City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 Mayor Jansen: They can see we're taking one more step. Teresa Burgess: ... we're serious and it also shows a commitment to the neighborhood since they have taken the effort to be here this evening. It shows commitment to the neighborhood that the council is moving forward on this. It would not be an adopted feasibility study but it would be submitted. Mayor Jansen: Okay. So Councilman Boyle has made a motion to submit the feasibility study to MnDot for the LUP review. Can I have a second please? Councilman Ayotte: Second. Resolution #2002-06: Councilman Boyle moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to authorize staff to submit a copy of the feasibility study on Highway 101 trail construction north of Highway 5 to MnDot for the beginning of the Limited Use Permit review. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 4 to 0. Mayor Jansen: Okay, so do you need me to do anything else as far as tabling or are we just now going to put this on our agenda then for the 28th so that we can review the additional information you're bring forward to us? Teresa Burgess: I will place it on the agenda as a separate item on the 28th. Mayor Jansen: Okay, great. Thank you. Thank you for being here this evening. We appreciate it. We'll take a 5 minute break so that you can depart. Thank you. RECEIVE TRAIL CONNECTOR STUDY REPORT-TH 5 AT BLUFF CREEK, TH 5 AT RILEY CREEK, TH 101 SOUTH FROM LAKE SUSAN DRIVE TO BANDIMERE PARK. Todd Hoffman: Thank you Madam Mayor, members of the City Council. Back on October 22nd of 2001 the council ordered the preparation of a study report for 3 trail connectors in the city. Two of these connectors are Trunk Highway 5 at Bluff Creek, Trunk Highway 101 at Riley Creek. Bluff Creek is at the recreation center, if you want to think about it that way, and Riley Creek is at Lake Ann Park. These are needed to make final connections to the new Highway 5 underpass system and the new West 78th Street trail. So in that project we have approximately 5 million dollars worth of road and pedestrian trail improvements and we need to make the final link to connect our community pedestrian trail system up with those improvements. The third connector is Trunk Highway 101 south from Lake Susan Drive to Bandimere Park, and this connection links the city's southern neighborhoods to our core city and allows access to Bandimere Community Park from the north. Trails do remain the highest rated recreation amenity in our community, and across the country for that matter. Bonestroo and Associates, under the direction of Phil Gravel who is with me here this evening, has completed the attached study report for these proposed trail connections. Staff is pleased with the study results and happy to report that the budget estimates included in the study's 2002 CIP are on target. In fact we have money hopefully left over by the time these are done. Three alignment options for both Bluff Creek connection and Riley Creek connection were studied. I'll allow Mr. Gravel to go over those during his portion of the presentation. After that, it's staff recommendation that the City Council receive the 2002 trail connection project study report for the 3 sections that I have spoken about. And that they schedule a public comment period for January 28th and the property owners adjoining these projects will be mailed an informational packet upon the City Council's acceptance of the study report this evening. I've prepared those mailing areas today and they're very broad 24 City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 so we'll be having a broad spectrum of representation. Probably the highest concentration of those interested would be on the 101 trail. The Highway 5 connectors are more or less out in the middle of some of our industrial areas. There's just not a whole lot of residents nearby. I'd like to allow Mr. Gravel to go over those options with the City Council in more detail. Phil Gravel: Thanks Todd. Mayor Jansen: Good evening. Phil Gravel: Good evening. I think all of you have seen the report and it is pretty straight forward. What I'll do is go through the 3 different trail segments and the alignments looked at, and then talk a little bit about cost. Anytime while I'm here, feel free to jump in with questions. The first trail segment that was looked at was over by the rec center. What we refer to as the Bluff Creek connection and the purpose of that, this trail connection is to connect the Highway 5 underpass with the existing trails at the Rec Center and along Coulter Boulevard. For this connection we looked at 3 options. One was to make a connection from the underpass westward to the existing rec center trail. Another option was to make a connection from the underpass to Stone Creek Drive which isn't actually shown on this drawing because the aerial photo was before that road was built. That's where it is. And then the third option we have is to do a combination of both of these. And that's the option we recommend. The trail will utilize an existing field crossing. I don't know if any of you have been down there but there's a little field crossing there, that already crosses the creek so the disruption to the creek will be pretty minimal. Right-of-way or easement for the connection up to Stone Creek Drive was obtained as part of that platting process, or agreement to get the easement was obtained as part of that platting process so. Unlike the hearing a few minutes ago, there's 2 willing property owners involved here. The second alignment, or the second connection we looked at was for the.., and for this area we looked, actually looked at 5 alignments. The first alignment we looked at, which I was hoping we could use, isn't even shown on that drawing, was to actually follow the creek bed. To stay down low and follow it through the woods and along the creek but for environmental and topographic and constructability reasons, we aren't able to pursue that so we didn't even bother costing that out. A second alignment we looked at was to follow Highway 5 over to Park Drive and then we'd also have to construct some trails down to Park Drive to connect to Park Road. Another alignment we looked at was to go along the east edge of the Paisley Park property and connect with the cul-de-sac area of Park Place by going through some city owned property there as well. And finally the fourth, or the last one we cost, the fifth alignment, fourth one we costed, was to go westward from the underpass and just connect to Audubon Road. All of these alignments have some difficulties with terrain and constructability. Cost wise, the Audubon Road option is the least expensive and for that reason, and a constructability reason, I recommend that option. And finally the third trail connection that the study reviewed was along Highway 101 from Lake Susan Drive down to Bandimere Park. This trail, there's only one alignment. We did play a little bit with maybe going on the south side of Lyman where the common area is there but for reasons of crossing and right-of-way, the north side is the way to go. This trail would extend from the existing trail at Lake Susan Drive southward along the west side of 101. We'd have to have a pedestrian crossing at the intersection of 101 and Lyman and we could go eastward from that point along the north side of Lyman and then southward along the east side of 101. And this area it's kind of nice because with the development they constructed a large berm there, if you can picture that, and the right-of-way and alignment, or the right-of-way's already there so we can hug the trail right next to the berm and get pretty good distance from the highway. The property owner between Bandimere Park and the development, the area gets a little tight and we'll have to work with them and do some retaining walls and some things to protect trees. The cost of these alignments are shown a couple places in the report. I'll refer to the executive summary. The Bluff Creek connection, the combined option is approximately $66,000. The Riley Creek connection is, for the 25 City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 Audubon Road option is around $82,000. And finally the Highway 101 trail is around $200,000. I believe that the financing for that has been included in the most recent budgeting process so I think we fell within those lines. Naturally these will require MnDot and County permits similar to the permits that we required for the north 101 trail, but we've already notified both Carver County and MnDot. We sent them a copy of this report. We've been in contact with them so they're aware that the project's coming. Mayor Jansen: Phil, my only question was that in the description of the Highway 101, it notes that it will be an 8 foot trail. Yet on the photograph it shows proposed 10 foot wide trail. Phil Gravel: It's an 8 foot trail. Mayor Jansen: It will be 8? Okay. Phil Gravel: The other two trails will be 10 because. Mayor Jansen: Is it MnDot? Phil Gravel: And that's what the existing trails are at the underpass. And similarly, the 101 trail is existing 8 foot so we just match what's there. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Any questions for Phil at this time? Or staff. Go ahead. Councilman Ayotte. Councilman Ayotte: Well, none of staff's here so. Todd Hoffman: I'm still here. Councilman Ayotte: Oh, I'm sorry. Is there an order of merit to the trails? You look at it at award, bid award schedule the same, but if something were to occur, would one drop out over another? Todd Hoffman: If there were a reason to drop any, the 101 south would be the first one to drop out. The connections to the Highway 5 underpass system are absolutely essential. Councilman Ayotte: That's got to happen. Todd Hoffman: Got to happen. Councilman Ayotte: Yeah, so you do have an order of merit, okay. Thanks. Councilman Boyle: On the Bluff Creek option, did you recommend the combined option? Phil Gravel: Yes we did. Councilman Boyle: Okay. Phil Gravel: The rationale there was if we don't build it people are going to walk there anyhow. Mayor Jansen: And then we did verify earlier I had the conversation with Mr. Gerhardt that the funds with the 101 trail north and these projects is substantial enough to cover them, as well as the other projects that 26 City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 are in the CIP. So the funds are there in the dedicated park and trail funds to be able to cover these projects, as well as the trail north. It's not that this would be eliminating anything. Todd Hoffman: It has the capacity to complete them all. Mayor Jansen: Correct. Thank you. Phil Gravel: The next steps would be to get some more public input and then make a decision at that time whether or not to proceed. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Great. Thank you. Phil Gravel: Thank you. Mayor Jansen: Any other questions for staff? Councilman Ayotte: No ma'am. Mayor Jansen: Then if I could get a motion please. Councilman Ayotte: I so move that we go along with the staff's recommendation that the council receive the 2002 trail connection project study and that we schedule a public comment period for January 28th. Mayor Jansen: And a second. Councilman Labatt: Second. Mayor Jansen: I have a second from Steve. Councilman Ayotte moved, Councilman Labatt seconded that the City Council receive the 2002 Trail Connection Project Study Report for TH 5 at Bluff Creek, TH 5 at Riley Creek, and TH 101 South from Lake Susan Drive to Bandimere Park and schedule a public comment period for January 28, 2002. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 4 to 0. 2(B). APPROVE REVISION TO CONSULTANT CONTRACT WITH WSB & ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR CENTURY BOULEVARD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 97-1C. Councilman Ayotte: The concern I have is because of the vendor's unsolicited moving forward to complete work and place a charge on the city I think is somewhat inappropriate. I think they should have probably said something first, one. Two, I'd like to get a reaction from staff as to whether or not the work that was performed, whether or not it had value. Because it was an unauthorized commitment on the part of the contractor as far as I'm concerned. Mayor Jansen: Teresa, do you have comment as to the actual value? Was it necessary? Teresa Burgess: Staff would have liked the opportunity to address the issue before it came up. Whether we would have gone with WSB doing the full inspection or we would have had the opportunity this year, because we did have a full time intern, to send them out at a much lower cost to do the inspection for the 27 City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 project. It certainly was necessary to inspect, and in that case yes. It does have value. But we would have liked to have had the opportunity for cost containment. Councilman Ayotte: What would have the delta in cost been of an intern doing it vis a vis the company doing it? Estimate. Teresa Burgess: Assuming that the intern would have would have been available to do it, we pay the intern approximately $10 an hour. The consultant, depending on the person that was out there ran from $35 to $65 an hour. Councilman Ayotte: So an approximately 300 percent increase over that particular line. Teresa Burgess: At a minimum. Councilman Ayotte: At a value of, what is that math wise? That would have been, what about 3,000 bucks? Teresa Burgess: And certainly there were pieces that the intern would not have been available to do because they were outside her expertise. We may have chosen not to use the intern, but we did not get the opportunity to determine that. Even using one of our more expensive staff members, we could have used a technician. In-house that was already on the payroll. Councilman Ayotte: So the cost delta then would have been maybe 2,000? Teresa Burgess: Yes. So there were several options that we could have used in doing that and we did not have the opportunity to make that determination. And that is the concern obviously is that we were not given the opportunity for cost containment. We may have still gone with what was done, but we should have been given the opportunity to discuss that and make that determination since we were the ones paying the bill. Councilman Ayotte: In your view, how much should we not pay the vendor? Mayor Jansen: We could actually make that determination as a council. Councilman Ayotte: Well I was just looking for staff recommendation. Teresa Burgess: We have already cut several times from the vendor and at this point, what I have told the vendor is I will put it to council and as discussed in my cover letter, this is something that I do have some discomfort with. I am comfortable with the council making any determination they feel is appropriate. One thing I would point out to council is that there were two changes made by staff directly that relate to this. We directed that on line bidding be done. We were not informed that would increase the cost but we did request that change. We were also requested a median revision, and we were not informed that that, the cost for the consultant engineering but we did request that change on behalf of the property owner. For that work there was approximately 50 percent of the construction cost fees is related directly to the median. And then the on line bidding and the revision of the median design was all things the staff did request. But again, we should have been told of the increase in costs. We were not anticipating as great an increase of cost as there was proposed by the consultant. And at this point it's too late to go back and say well do you 28 City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 really need to be there 40 hours or can you be there half time inspection. Can we send someone out? We don't have those options anymore. It's should we pay for it or shouldn't we? Mayor Jansen: I'm in agreement with the questions and the direction that Councilman Ayotte is going and I actually also put a phone call into Mr. Gerhardt today on this. And it increased my concern that they had gone ahead with this without talking to the city and when I was told that they also did the final assessment roll, so they were cognizant of these costs at a time when it could have been included in the assessment roll and the city would not then be bearing the full burden of these additional costs. So I would certainly be in favor of at least splitting those additional construction services cost, the 4960 and reducing that to 50 percent and splitting the cost of that additional expense with the company versus us our having to bear the full burden. Councilman Boyle: I agree. Mayor Jansen: So instead of $4,960 for item number 3, we would be reimbursing them $2,480. I can appreciate that staff has noted that they have been informed that these not exceed amounts will be held to in the future. That they do need to be coming back to staff and requesting change orders or making some sort of notification to the city as a standard operating procedures. So with that, if I could call for a motion on this item. Councilman Ayotte: I so move that we split the additional construction services extended to us by this company from 4960 to 2480 and that we accept the other costs as stated. Mayor Jansen: For items 1 and 2. Councilman Ayotte: Yes ma'am. For items 1 and 2. Mayor Jansen: If I could have a second. Councilman Boyle: Second. Mayor Jansen: Thank you. Councilman Ayotte moved, Councilman Boyle seconded that the City Council approve revision to consultant contract with WSB & Associates, lnc. for Century Boulevard Improvement Project 97-1C as follows: Online Bidding Coordination with Quest.cdn $1,700 Revising the Median Design $ 700 Additional Construction Services $2,480 All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 4 to 0. Councilman Ayotte: Thanks for staying so late Teresa. I know it's a long night. Appreciate it. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: 29 City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 Mayor Jansen: Under Council/Commission Liaison Update I thought I would just mention one of the items on our consent agenda was to approve resolution in support of state funding to acquire the seminary fen in the Assumption Creek Watershed. That group is meeting with legislators tomorrow at the capitol to have some further discussions with them. I will be present for their conversation with Mr. Workman. It is at 2:00 in the afternoon. I would encourage council, if you have an opportunity to encourage our legislators to support this to please do. And if you would like to be in attendance at any of the meetings as they bring this forward to the legislature, we're speculating that they would like to have any sort of testimony given as possible by local officials in support of this as they try to move some of the funding requests through this session. And they'll be getting us notifications of that so it is on at least an action plan at this point. They are definitely trying to move that forward which I think is very exciting. Councilman Ayotte: 2:00? Mayor Jansen: Yeah. And then the only other meeting that I attended as a liaison was in Councilman Ayotte's absence for the Environmental Commission tour of the Carver County Waste Management facility that they're purchasing and it was a very interesting tour to be a part of and it's amazing the resources that we have on our Environmental Commission as far as the information they were able to share with the County as to the services they would like to see provided to the community so I certainly expressed my appreciation to them that evening. They brought forward their recommendations. That's also included in our consent agenda as to what we will be communicating to the county that we'd like to see in that facility. So that was a very positive I think motion on their part to move that forward on our behalf. Anything else under council presentations? Councilman Boyle: I met with the Senior Commission just prior to Christmas. They had 3 areas that they asked that they wanted to let it be known to city staff or council. One of the big one, issues and Todd's very much aware of it, is they want this side, when the library goes out, they would like to have this side of the, the east side of the City Hall for a senior center. One of the other things, and I don't know if we have anything to do with this or not, but senior housing. On Kerber there's several wheelchair occupants. There are several occupants in wheelchairs on the third floor, and when there is a drill, alarm or even an emergency with the elevators not working, it's difficult to get the wheelchair people down 3 flights of stairs. So they just brought it to our attention. I don't know if we've got anything to do with that or not. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Councilman Boyle: They also, when we approve apartments or whatever for senior housing, we should make sure that they have higher sinks, toilets and the, what am I trying to say? The things to grab onto. Councilman Labatt: Grab handles. Councilman Boyle: Thank you. Grab handles. Councilman Labatt: Grab bars. Councilman Boyle: Bars. There you go. Grab bars. That's what I was trying to say. That was it. So I listened to their concerns. Mayor Jansen: Great, thank you for sharing. Appreciate that. 30 City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 Councilman Boyle: End of report. Mayor Jansen: Anything else? Councilman Ayotte: Well the last Environmental Commission meeting the Environmental Commission did request that, and I'll get a note off to Mr. Gerhardt, any rules, regulations, policies, ordinance issues associated with haulers. They wanted to get a little bit more education themselves so they can be pointing in the right direction. Number 2, they built quite a schedule of events for next year that they're prepared to share with us at our next joint commission/council meeting. They did a lot of hard work on that. You know that they've interviewed and make their recommendation tonight for the commissioner and they received, was it last Wednesday? Last Wednesday the resignation of one of the commissioners so they'll be making an announcement that they have a need for yet another commissioner so that's all I have. Councilman Boyle: Over and above what we. Councilman Ayotte: Yeah, yeah. So one more. Mayor Jansen: Okay, great. Thank you. Councilman Ayotte: Yes ma'am. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: Todd Gerhardt: Yes, I have a few. Strategic planning session, coming up at our next council meeting. I think you got a copy of the strategic plan. The draft plan that was in the packet. You'll see that again in the next coming council packet. We'll talk about those job descriptions for the Assistant City Manager. Second thing was, I'm going to try to set up a meeting with Mediacom to come in and make a presentation to council at our next meeting. Talk about some of their, if you noticed in this packet there's a rate increase coming up. As a council you cannot control rates. That is done federally so the FCC has control their rates. We control customer service and where they would provide service in the community. So I've asked their government affairs individual to schedule attendance at our the next council meeting. Mayor Jansen: When we have that confirmed, if we could maybe let the paper know so that they can give it some attention if possible. But can we also have it on the agenda to make it clear that it's a public hearing? Because if we do have public come that would like to make comments to Mediacom, I think that would be their opportunity. I know people pick up the phone and I have gotten a phone call recently and usually the first thing the resident says is, I don't know that you can actually do anything about this but I need to vent. And it just seems like it would be the opportune time for some of those individuals to feel as if they got the direct contact with the company here, and they're hearing what we're hearing at the same time, but they can also maybe provide them with some direct feedback. And then any information that you receive from phone calls from residents, it would probably be a good thing to maybe pass it along to that representative also. Todd Gerhardt: I do that frequently. Mayor Jansen: Okay. 31 City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 Todd Gerhardt: I just want to try to build a little better relationship with them. Try to make it a regular scheduled attendance here. If you ever watch the cable access, the Lake Minnetonka Cable Commission is a consortium of communities that have combined their franchise fee money to basically manage Mediacom's work in their communities. So we opted not to be a part of that so I think we need to build a relationship with Mediacom and have representatives come to our meetings so if you hear complaints from neighbors, you can address those to Mediacom and they can tell us where they're working in the community. How is the rebuild of certain areas going. What are they hearing from residents that are concerned so, and just to try to build a better relationship so we have, you know not hear so many complaints regarding our cable company. So that's one of the goals I've got for myself for this year. Mayor Jansen: Great. I think that's a great idea. Thank you. Todd Gerhardt: And Environmental Commission appointment, I believe you're ready to make that appointment so we'll have that on for the next council meeting. You interviewed one candidate tonight so we'll put that on for the next council meeting to appoint that individual. Mayor Jansen: Can we still do that tonight? Or does it have to. Roger Knutson: Sure. If you want to. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Do you want to make a motion? Councilman Ayotte: Sure. I'd like to make a motion that we go ahead and appoint Mr. Ron Olson to Environmental Commission for a term expiring March 31, 2003. Mayor Jansen: And a second? Councilman Boyle: Second. Councilman Ayotte moved, Councilman Boyle seconded to appoint Mr. Ron Olson to Environmental Commission for a term expiring March 31, 2003. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 4 to 0. Todd Gerhardt: And just the last item. In your next administrative section you will see, start to see some preliminary numbers from AMM, which is our local municipality association on the State's budget shortfalls. And how they are proposing to balance that shortfall and they will be looking at cities as a part of that. There are a variety of different numbers out there, and it looks as if we will have to get involved in those legislative discussions because I believe we will be hit again and it will be probably significant numbers. Preliminary estimates would probably be around $300,000 and so Bruce and I will be active in that, in attending those meetings and probably preparing a resolution for City Council to review in not endorsing the current plan. So if it's one there, they looked other than just local government aid that cities were receiving. They also looked at excessive levy increases and I think we had justification on why our levy increase occurred and that we still stayed below a million dollars of our levy limit. But we were still penalized because of bringing on those referendum debt this year. So we'll be putting our case together, submitting that to AMM. The Minnesota Cities and testifying if need be so I wanted to give you the head's up on that and look in your administrative section for that information as it comes available. Mayor Jansen: Thank you. 32 City Council Meeting - January 14, 2002 CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION. Mayor Jansen: Under correspondence, I had noted the Mediacom increase and now Todd's brought it up already. The other thing, there was a flyer in there from the Carver County Leadership, elected official leadership program as to participation. They're continuing this into 2002. I had participated in the 2001 program. Not as diligently as I probably should have. I made a couple of the meetings. But I wanted to bring that to your attention if that's something that you would like to participate in. You're certainly welcome to. It was a good experience this last year and they're just continuing to focus on different leadership skills and building more of an understanding of how we all work together within the county on issues. So I just wanted to mention that in case that's something you care to participate in. And I believe there's a filing deadline. Alright, anything else in correspondence? Anything else for this evening? If I could have a motion to adjourn. Councilman Ayotte moved, Councilman Labatt seconded to adjourn. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The City Council meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Submitted by Todd Gerhardt City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim 33