CC Minutes 2000 04 24CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
APRIL 24, 2000
Mayor Mancino called the meeting to order at 6~35 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the
Flag.
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Mancino, Councilman Labatt, Councilman Senn,
Councilman Engel, and Councilwoman Jansen
STAFF PRESENT: Scott Botcher, Roger Knutson, Kate Aanenson, Cindy Kirchoff, Dave Hempel, Mark
Littfin, Sgt. Dave Potts, Todd Gerhardt, and Teresa Burgess
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Senn moved, Councilwoman Jansen seconded to approve the
agenda as presented.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None.
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Engel seconded to approve the
following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations:
a. Resolution #2000-31: Approve Proclamation Declaring May 6 as Arbor Day.
b. Resolution #2000-32: Approve Disposition of 1984 GMC Rescue Truck.
c. Award of Bid for 2000 Sealcoat Project No. 00-03.
d. Resolution #2000-33: Authorize Preparation of Feasibility Report for Crestview Circle, Project
00-05.
e. Approve Amended Development Contract/PUD Agreement for Villages on the Ponds 6th Addition,
Project 99-19.
f. Approval of Bills.
g. Approval of Minutes:
· City Council Work Session Minutes dated April 10, 2000
· City Council Minutes dated April 10, 2000
Receive Commission Minutes:
· Planning Commission Minutes dated April 5, 2000
· Park & Recreation Commission Minutes dated April 4, 2000
h. Resolution #2000-34: Approve Resolution Adding Minneapolis Fire to the Southwest Mutual Aid
Association.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None.
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
Mayor Mancino: What I'm going to do is wait for our public hearings for the Board of Review and
Equalization because I'm assuming that it was published in the paper at 7:00. So if it's okay with the rest
of the council members and those in attendance, we will just go ahead to our law enforcement update and
continue with our agenda until 7:00 and then come back to the Board of Review and Equalization.
LAW ENFORCEMENT UPDATE: PRESENTATION BY SGT. DAVE POTTS, CARVER
COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE AND MARK LITTFIN, FIRE MARSHAL.
Sgt. Dave Potts: Good evening Mayor and Council members. I'm assuming you had time to review the
memo that I prepared for this month. Any questions on the first three items?
Mayor Mancino: No.
Sgt. Dave Potts: Okay. Then under the miscellaneous items. These are just things that occurred during
the past month that I thought the council may have an interest in hearing a little bit about. And I just gave
you a short blurb there on the memo and I thought I'd just verbally give you a little more information.
With regard to the first item, the infant death. This was a situation, a 5 month old girl from Chaska who
was attending a home daycare operation in Chanhassen was put down for a nap and when the daycare
provider checked later, found that the child was unresponsive. Started the CPR efforts on her own. Called
911. Fire rescue continued CPR. Two of our deputies responded as well as paramedics. They continued
their life saving efforts enroute to the hospital but shortly after they arrived at the hospital the child was
pronounced dead there. And to my knowledge we haven't received any final determination from the
coroner's office so that is still ongoing.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you.
Sgt. Dave Potts: In regards to the second item, vandalism. Over the April 1st weekend we were hit pretty
hard with a number of mailbox vandalisms in a few different neighborhoods throughout the city. I think
there was somewhere in the area of about 40 mailboxes damaged over that April Fool's weekend. A press
release went out in regards to that and we thought since we were doing that we'd kill two birds with one
stone and kind of put out a warning to the public about a seasonal problem of car prowls or what we refer
to as car prowls where cars that are left parked outside overnight become the victim of a break-in and theft
of stereo or other valuable items. That we just wanted to warn the citizens about so we included that in the
press release about the vandalism.
Mayor Mancino: Are the mailbox, Sgt. Potts, are the mailbox when you say they're vandalized, are they
just hit with bats or?
Sgt. Dave Potts: Typically a bat or a heavy object you know like that. Sometimes it's nothing more than a
minor dent. Sometimes they're completely you know demolished but when they go through over the course
of a weekend and hit this many, I mean it adds up really quickly so we're hoping we could generate some
leads through the press release.
Mayor Mancino: Does anybody ever get you know license plates or?
Sgt. Dave Potts: Well in this particular case I don't believe that they did and that's, you know maybe a
little bit of a surprise that they would go in that many areas and hit that many mailboxes without a witness
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
or one of the victims hearing and being able to get some information but it's kind of hit and miss.
Sometimes you get lucky and we get a lot of information on them. So we're still hoping to get some more
on that. In regards to hunting. This is actually an idea that Carol Dunsmore came up with was to bring
property owners, ask them to come in and have a brief meeting with us just to discuss some of the concerns
with the ongoing development in this city and kind of encroaching on some long standing hunting grounds
in the city and some of the problems when people are shooting into the air. What goes up must come down
and so we talked with the folks about that. I and Steve Walter from the DNR were going to be attending
that meeting and then as luck would have it, we got real busy so I didn't actually attend the meeting but
heard afterwards that it went real well and the landowners were very understanding of the concerns and
they have their own concerns with the development that some of them were talking about perhaps closing
off their land before the city even looked at it as a possibility. So it sounds like they're taking that kind of
on their own shoulders. On Project Leadfoot, we had our first meeting over on our pilot program on
Pleasant View Road. And that was a well attended meeting. Steve Beddor hosted that meeting for us and
there were a lot of enthusiastic residents part of the program is the residents will bring their own ideas to
that initial meeting and many ideas were brought up. I know one that is going to be implemented which we
asked engineering about and they approved was to have residents along Pleasant View Road that live close
to a speed limit sign to adopt that sign and place orange flags into the sign for perhaps a week at a time and
then the orange flags would be gone for a few weeks and kind of back and forth to draw people's eye to
those speed limit signs. That's just one idea that came from the residents that looks like they're going to go
ahead and implement. There was other talk of you know perhaps bumper stickers that you know the
residents would get and the traffic that would catch up to them as they're going up and down Pleasant View
would see this bumper sticker that would say please drive safely or you know something along those lines.
So they're looking into some of those ideas on their own.
Mayor Mancino: Did they establish a core group kind of?
Sgt. Dave Potts: Well we're still waiting to hear back from Steve Beddor. I think he had left town for a
little bit right after the meeting and I imagine he's tabulating some of his results and getting some of that,
the flyer distribution and the petition going around now so we're kind of waiting to hear back from him.
We went ahead and started with the speed trailer. We set that out a couple of days that week and a plan to
put it out maybe one day a week here now for a quite a while to kind of keep that part of it going. And then
we'll bring in some of other enforcement efforts as the thing develops and time goes on. We're also looking
at, the County has a pretty sophisticated sign making machine or equipment and we're looking at having
some signs similar to the crime watch neighborhood signs made up for Project Leadfoot that we can put in
the different areas where the program is going on so. Still fine tuning and developing some bits and pieces
to that program.
Mayor Mancino: Great.
Sgt. Dave Potts: The last thing that I mentioned on the memo was Pleasant Acres neighborhood. One of
the residents called and asked if we might be able to attend one of their homeowners association meetings.
Beth and I attended that. They have a private beach on Minnewashta Lake and have had problems with
parties and damage, vandalism, that type of thing so we discussed with them some of their concerns and
ways that we might be able to help them out with the understanding that we can't enforce any of their rules.
You know their rules are for them to enforce. We can certainly deal with noisy parties or underage
drinking or some of those types of things. Vandalism if we're in the area when it's occurring, that type of
thing. But we're certainly willing to work with them on some of these other problems and developed some
good contacts there so we can go back and forth.
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Any questions? You know, this really isn't a question. Just a comment.
One of the things that I think would be helpful for the council to see is just visually I know that we have
over 30 neighborhood watch groups. You know where they are in the city, if we could just see a map of the
city and point to kind of where those are and talk a little bit about that, that would be interesting. You
know are they concentrated in certain areas and etc. A little bit about neighborhood watch. Okay. Thank
you. Next on the agenda we will continue, oh! I'm sorry Mark.
Mark Littfin: Good evening, and I'd like to apologize. We missed the last City Council meeting. We
shifted our officers meeting at the station too and we just completely forgot about it. I think the Chief was
out of town that week anyway but just a quick update. The fire department, we have started a hiring
process for new recruit fire fighters. We've got 6 candidates that are currently being interviewed and gone
through a physical agility test. We started off with about 12 and we're down to about 6 at this point so.
Most of them passed the agility test and we're starting oral interviews tomorrow night and then another
series of interviews after that so we're hoping to get 6 of them on by June 1st. Calls year to date, we're at
173 right now. Last year at this time we were at 203 so we're down 30 which translates we're down about
20% on calls in general. Some of that's attributed to the medical, priority medical dispatching and tracking
down nuisance fire alarms and getting their systems properly maintained and monitored. We've managed
to avoid all the large grass fires this season. They've all been happening down in Shakopee, Scott County
area and Plymouth and Medicine Lake. Been hearing from the news, it sounds like something to do with
arsonists and we've had a couple little ones but nothing to the magnitude that has been making the 10:00
news so there are still burning restrictions on. We are still allowing recreation fires and prairie bums which
are done by companies that specialize in that. And in checking our thermal imagining camera which we
ordered after the first of the year, in checking with the vendor, that should be coming in soon but so is
summer and fall and everything so we're kind of at their mercy right now when the thing's going to show
up so we're anxiously awaiting that. So other than that, no big fires to report and it seems to be going well
right now.
Scott Botcher: Could you explain a little bit, just for the council's edification the priority dispatching that
you talked about in medical.
Mark Littfin: Priority medical dispatching?
Scott Botcher: Yeah, primarily medical.
Mark Littfin: Sure.
Scott Botcher: And then maybe mention a little bit, because I've noticed it from Bruce's run sheets, I know
you and I have talked about it. The positive impact it's had on our payroll costs in terms of paying for
calls.
Mark Littfin: Okay. Basically what priority medical dispatching is is when a person calls in with an
emergency and, in their mind is an emergency. If they're calling 911, the dispatchers at the Carver County
Sheriff's Office answer that. They answer the phone. They ask them a series of questions to determine the
severity of the injury or the car crash or whatever. If it falls into a certain category such as a heart attack
or trouble breathing or stroke, they'll automatically dispatch rescue, sheriff and ambulance. If it doesn't
fall into that category, if the phone call gets transferred to Waconia Ridgeview Hospital, they can give pre-
arrival instructions such as instructions on how to do CPR if that was necessary or how to do mouth to
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
mouth. There's a trained person answering the phone. And then as they're answering questions, also if it's
deemed necessary to start rescue, we can get started also but it's, the intention is to use the resources that
are necessary for the urgency of the person's that's calling in 911 so we don't get calls for paper cuts or a
tummy ache or a head ache or something. When we are going, it's the heart attack or trouble breathing or
stroke or a fall or something that's going to require our services so. As far as impact on payroll. We are
down about 20%. We're still gathering data to see if January was, January and February seemed to be
quiet months not only for us but for the county and also discussing this with other Carver County fire
departments, the calls seemed to be low so, but it does have an impact on calls. You know generally we
need 2 or 3 people on a call. If the pager goes off, it's midnight we're going to get maybe 10 or 15 people.
If it goes off at dinner time, we're going to get 35 people showing up so. You know when we eliminate the
nuisance calls or the less severe calls, we can cut back on the payroll as well as that so. We're trying to
put some figures together to bring over tonight and they weren't quite done so John's going to have a
presentation at the next meeting to give some facts, some hard facts and dollars on how that's translating.
Mayor Mancino: Great.
Mark Littfin: And we have made a few modifications since the system started which is constantly
changing.
Mayor Mancino: Well I would think most of your time is taken up just watching the skate park and what's
going on there.
Mark Littfin: We have had them knock on the back door with, we had a Friday night some young man
walked over with a broken arm. We've had you know they're standing at the door and they're pretty tough
kids. They don't want to call mom and dad right away.
Scott Botcher: It's not really a call if they come to you is it?
Mark Littfin: No.
Scott Botcher: Saves on payroll.
Mark Littfin: No, we take care of them. Call the parents and get them on their way.
Councilman Labatt: Has there been any problem with the litter left from the skateboarders?
Mark Littfin: At first, when the park first opened there was and I just ran into Dale Gregory over at the
station now and I drove by there this morning at 8:00 and I mean it was immaculate as far as I'm
concerned. Dale's crews are out picking the stuff up and there's garbage cans out there and granted it's a
mess over the weekend but his crews must have got there before I did but it looked great to me this
morning.
Councilman Labatt: But the city's job is to clean it up?
Mark Littfin: Dale's crew. I mean they probably put out a couple garbage cans and you know if kids can
hit the can that's great. But there's still going to be stuff blowing around and over spilling but they patrol
it. Or the park crews patrol it quite regularly so it's maintained as far as, and if it's not our people, let me
know about it.
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Any other questions? Thanks Mark.
Mark Littfin: Thanks.
Councilman Labatt: Nice work.
REQUEST FOR PAYMENT OF ADJUSTED 1999 POLICE CONTRACT, CARVER COUNTY
SHERIFF'S OFFICE.
Scott Botcher: You have in your packet a letter from Bud Olson dated April 7, 2000. Wherein consistent
with the police contract he's required each year to determine the actual cost for service. By and large this
is the change in the rate between what was negotiated in the contract and what they actually settled with the
unionized employees. Consistent with our discussion in the work session I would recommend that you
approve the request in the amount of $9,110.40. If you have any other questions that you'd like me to
secure from Bud, as always he's willing to appear before the council and answer those.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. May I please have a motion and a second?
Councilwoman Jansen: Move approval.
Mayor Mancino: And a second please.
Councilman Senn: Second.
Councilwoman Jansen moved, Councilman Senn seconded that the City Council approve the request
for payment of adjusted 1999 Police Contract for Carver County Sheriff's Office in the amount of
$9,110.40. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Mancino: I'm sorry Councilman Senn, did you have a question?
Councilman Senn: No.
Mayor Mancino: Okay.
REQUEST FOR A WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT FOR A SEPTIC HAULER SITE
LOCATED ON PARK PLACE, METROPOLITAN COUNCIL WASTE HAULERS AND THE
CITY OF CHANHASSEN.
Cindy Kirchoff: Thank you. The Met Council's proposing to fill approximately 5,600 square feet of
ag/urban wetland to construct a liquid waste hauler site improvements on Outlot A of Chanhassen Lakes
Business Park 5th Addition. The City does own this outlot and we do have a lease agreement with the Met
Council to locate a discharge point into the Lake Ann Interceptor Sewer System at this particular area for
septic haulers to dispose of the waste. The facility is essentially a concrete pad with curbing, a drive aisle
and a turn around area with a manhole that connects directly to the interceptor sewer system. Access to the
site will be controlled with a gate. And staff was to administratively approve this site plan. However,
being that there was some impact to the wetland we decided to proceed with the wetland alteration permit.
On March 15th the Planning Commission reviewed this application. They did recommend approval.
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
However they did have concerns with landscaping on the site. The gate color and the number of trucks that
would be using this site on a daily basis. And the hours. In response to these concerns the Met Council did
update the landscape plan and provide landscaping to the site. They also have stated that they will paint
the gate any color the city wishes. And in response to these concerns staff has prepared conditions that
restrict the hours in a lease agreement also make mention of the number of trucks that may use the site on a
daily basis. The Met Council would like this, these particular issues to be addressed in a permit application
to the septic haulers would have to apply for. And they would like those conditions to be taken out of the
conditions of approval of the wetland alteration permit. Staff does support the permit and I'd be happy to
answer any questions that you may have. Thank you.
Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Any questions for staff? Is there anyone here tonight wishing to address the
council on this? Yes, please come forward. Could you please come up and state your name and address
please.
Jim Roth: My name is Jim Roth and I'm an engineer with the Metropolitan Council Environmental
Services and I'm going to take, assist the planning department with any questions you may have.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you Mr. Roth.
Scott Botcher: I have one dumb one. The gate. Is it going to be an automatic gate that opens by slipping a
card in and out?
Jim Roth: Yes.
Scott Botcher: Thank you.
Mayor Mancino: Do council members have any questions for Mr. Roth? Okay, thank you. You didn't
even have to answer it. Okay, can I have a motion or any discussion from council?
Councilman Senn: Move approval.
Councilman Engel: Second.
Mayor Mancino: A question on that motion. Does that motion for move approval, does that include the
hours? Number 2 on page 3 and number 4. Do you want to keep those in? One, the hours from 7:00 to
7:00 and put a maximum number in the agreement or do you want to have that in the permit application? If
you don't mind my asking.
Councilman Senn: I think you should just take the whole hour issue out and leave it administratively in the
permit.
Mayor Mancino: And also the maximum daily users?
Councilman Senn: Well yes. Let staff.
Mayor Mancino:
motion detector.
as conditions?
So when you say move to approval it is number 1, the light fixture shall operate my
And 2, the card reader gate shall be painted a color that compliments the site and that's it
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
Councilman Senn: Well it says staff will determine and stuff, like I mean that condition can stay in and
just say staff can basically do that and I think they should also govern the hours as they see fit.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, but that is different than what's in the conditions.
Councilman Senn: Right, on number 4.
Mayor Mancino: So staff shall work through with the Metropolitan Council the hours and the maximum
number of daily users is what you're saying?
Councilman Senn: Yes.
Mayor Mancino: Okay. Is that understood staff with those conditions?
Kate Aanenson: Yes.
Mayor Mancino: Does everybody else on council understand? And you still second it? Thank you.
Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Engel seconded that the City Council approves Wetland
Alteration Permit/t00-2 to permit the filling of 0.13 acres of ag/urban wetland for the construction of
a liquid waste hauler site subject to the following conditions:
1. The light fixture shall operate the motion detector.
2. Staff will work with the Metropolitan Council to determine the hours of operation.
3. The card reader gate shall be painted a color that compliments the site.
4. Staff will work with the Metropolitan Council to determine the maximum number of daily users
permitted on the site.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING:
Public Present:
Name
BOARD OF REVIEW AND EQUALIZATION.
Address
Carolyn Wetterlin
Tim Love
Nancy & Pat Blood
John & Paula Broten, Jr.
Brenda Vatland
Tim & Diane McHugh
Margie Borris
Dan Schumacher
7420 Chan Road
7010 Sandy Hook Circle
Paws, Claws and Hooves
502 Laredo Lane
7290 Kurvers Point Road
7450 Chanhassen Road
4071 Kings Road
7380 Kurvers Point Road
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
Larry Cook
Darrel Kirt
Bob Mortenson
471 Big Horn Drive
50 Hill Street
7371 Kurvers Points Road
Mayor Mancino: It is now 7:00. Waiting for the bewitching 7:00 hour and this is our local Board of
Review and Todd Gerhardt, if you would like to open this and explain to everyone who's here what is going
on for Board of Review.
Todd Gerhardt: Mayor and City Council members. Notices were sent out.
Mayor Mancino: Just a minute. Can everybody hear Todd? Okay, thank you.
Todd Gerhardt: Notices were sent out to all property owners regarding their estimated market values.
That includes the business people also. And tonight we have Tom Scherer from Hennepin County. We do
have a small portion of Chanhassen that is in Hennepin County. And Angie Johnson from Carver County.
Just so everybody here tonight understands, we contract with Carver County Assessor's Office and
Hennepin County for assessment services. There are communities throughout the metropolitan area that
have their own in-house assessment offices but we've chosen to contract with each of the counties for that
service. So at this time Mayor I would suggest that you open it up for public comment and open your
Board of Review.
Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Would you also then explain what happens on May 8th, Monday, May 8th.
At this point tonight we are going to take your comments and then we will have a meeting on May 8th and
would you explain what happens there please for everyone to hear.
Todd Gerhardt: Sure. On May 8th will be your final Board of Review. The Council will make a decision
on May 8th regarding each of the properties that have asked for review. After that, after the City Council
has taken action on that then it will be sent down to Carver County for their review and they could modify
that value. I believe they can only go, is it higher? Carver County could go higher or lower?
Angie Johnson made a comment from the audience.
Todd Gerhardt: The Council has the final say, okay.
Mayor Mancino: We've never been told we have the final say before. Oh that's good to know, thank you.
Todd Gerhardt: Then after that if the individual isn't satisfied with the valuation established by the City
Council or Carver County, they can go to District Tax Court and enter an appeal there.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you Todd. So those coming forward please state your name and address
and your concerns and we will listen to them but we will not make any final determination until Monday,
May 8th. And between now and Monday, May 8th we will be directing the Assessor's staff to meet with
you, to work with you and hopefully coming to some sort of agreement before May 8th. If that's possible.
So please come forward. Angie, sorry. Thank you.
Angie Johnson: I just thought first, I know the Council for the local Board has received our packet on our
summary. I just thought for the public maybe if I could just explain a couple things that happen with our
process and it might deal to eliminate some of the basic questions that they might have. Basically what's
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
happened is our office does one core tile viewing of a physical inspection of your property every year and
so January 2nd of 2000 is what we're looking at. The values and the classification of the properties that
we've not only reviewed but of the whole city of Chanhassen. Market values are based on a 12 month
study. This study runs from October through September. This year we had 470 sales of residential
properties that were included in our sales study to determine our net market value. In Chanhassen we have
about 7,000 residential properties so these properties were all revalued as of January 2nd. Basic average
was about 8 1/2 % increase overall. Also we've looked at the commercial industrial properties as Todd
had said. We haven't physically inspected all of them but we've had.., study which indicated that increase
market value of a commercial industrial. What happened there was the revaluation and this was at a
county wide of all the commercial industrial land values. That's basically what happened there. We have
two of our appraisers from Carver County that did the core tile work.., and Bruce Smalley and they
possibly could answer a lot of the direct questions if we have any. They've broken down Chanhassen into
15 neighborhoods so basically they feel that equity, especially in the land has really been taken care of this
year. So they should be able to answer a lot of questions. Either that, we have forms that if you can fill
them out please and what will happen is we need your name, your parcel number and a day time phone
number for our staff to get back to you to review your property so we can come back with a
recommendation to the Board in two weeks.
Mayor Mancino: So I'm assuming, let me get this right. Do you have the forms here tonight that people
can pick up? Maybe we could put them right on the table up here so if people. And Angie I'm assuming
that you'll answer general type questions versus specific. That you'd rather do that on a one to one basis.
Okay. Great.
Angie Johnson: And if there is something existing that.., but more than likely we're going to have to look at
our field cards...
Mayor Mancino: Okay, you've received 30. Well then you're going to hand one out to every council
member. Would anyone else like a form? To fill out. Okay, if you'd like to one by one come in front of
the council. Please.
Larry Cook: Good evening. My name's Larry Cook. I live at 471 Big Horn Drive in Chanhassen. And
I'm here to ask for a review of the property tax assessments particularly with my property and I apologize
for not having a little more detail but my spouse was able to collect some information. In the neighborhood
I live on, which is on the west side of Lotus Lake, according to the information we've gathered, the real
estate values along the lake went up in excess of 23%. According to the information that we had with
people who are not more than a block away, the land valuations were increased by 0 percentage and it just
struck me as being an incredible differentiation there and I would ask that that be looked into. It seems to
be a huge disparity. I almost fell off my chair when I saw the...land valuation. And the other thing is I'd
like the Board to look at the fact that it would seem to me at least, based on my knowledge relatively
comparable houses, same side of the street that I am, there was a great difference in how they were, the
values were determined. And I had a difficult time I guess determining what were the basis and then
according to my spouse, there wasn't a good deal of information to give an explanation on that. So I don't
want to take up any more time than necessary but I assume then just fill out this form and that would be the
best for you to handle the specifics?
Mayor Mancino: And also ask those very specific questions so that when the assessor does contact you,
they'll be able to give you comparables in your neighborhood and what the other land values are at, I'm
10
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
assuming. But the more specific you are when they come and talk to you, the more specific they can give
you those answers, whether you like them or not.
Larry Cook: Thank you very much.
Mayor Mancino: Whether you agree with them or not.
Larry Cook: Thank you.
Mayor Mancino: Thank you Larry.
Tim McHugh: My name's Tim McHugh. I live at 7450 Chanhassen Road. It's basically on the east side
of Lotus Lake on Highway 101. I think part of my questions were answered when you said everything
went up at least 8 1/2 %. It seems like they just arbitrarily bumped it 8 ½% without looking at it. Now
maybe you can do that in certain neighborhoods where all the houses are the same. Where I live there
there's older homes. A couple newer homes a block away. They're all different sizes. They're all different
values. I guess I question how you just arbitrarily just go 8 ½% without coming out and looking at it and
you haven't been there in 4 or 5 years. The biggest problem I have, because the property to the south of me
which is 7470 has two houses on it. It's a rental house. The person who owns it does not live there. We
have 7 separate people living there. We have 7 vehicles and every month there's other people leaving and
people coming in because they can't pay the rent. It's just a constant people coming and going. And it
almost seems like the Sheriff and the Police are there as much as the mailman. It just keeps going. It never
quits. And then you put that on top of what's happening, or isn't happening to Highway 101, it's almost
impossible to sell your house and get a reasonable price for it. And I really want you to take that into
consideration when you come out and look at it. They came out last year. Lowered the value of the rental
house next door. And it's all zoned single family residential. Now maybe I don't understand the meaning
of that, but to me that means single families. I don't see how we could have 7 different unrelated people
there. So if you can come out and look at this and explain this to me, I would really appreciate it.
Councilman Engel: Tim, can you give a little more detail on where that's located.
Tim McHugh: 7470 Chanhassen Road.
Councilman Engel: You know a landmark there. I'm trying to picture in my mind.
Tim McHugh: Do you know where Christy Lane is?
Councilman Engel: Yeah.
Tim McHugh: Okay. If you were going west on Christy Lane you would run right into my driveway.
And they're just to the south.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, we will set up a time and.
Councilman Senn: I remember when this came up last year and the information we got back after it was
investigated was that that house and that situation was in conformance with the ordinances. That it in fact
was not that kind of a rental situation. Now if that's, you know what I'm hearing Tim say is it's the same
way as it was before, which is what most of us out there always believed it was, then why isn't our
11
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
investigation of it showing that that's in effect what it is and why aren't we doing something about it if it's
in violation of codes and ordinances?
Scott Botcher: Well if it's 7, it is in violation. Correct? I think it's got to be 5.
Roger Knutson: Yes.
Mayor Mancino: So they're allowed to have a maximum of 5?
Roger Knutson: 5 unrelated.
Mayor Mancino: 5 unrelated.
Diane McHugh: I'm Diane McHugh. I live at 7450 Chanhassen Road. Tim has followed through on all
the things. He's the same residence as I do. What my comment on the 7470 is, I've called the City asking
questions about the owner of the home, what his privileges were. I will not give the name here.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you.
Diane McHugh: But I was treated really rudely. I was treated rudely by her in the fact that her comment
on the 7 people were, we can't do anything about that because we'd show discrimination. The people that
live there rent by the room, as you gather. And I don't have a problem with these people. I feel sorry for
them, but they're plight is my burden. With all hours and all activity. My second comment was, is we did
have Carver come out, one of your estimators and asked them to value our land and tell us why our taxes
went up so high. The young man that did our evaluation at that time, and I made the comment with the
City of Chanhassen, what they're doing to us, as far as they can do that to any resident. If that home has 5
bedrooms that was next to you, and the gentleman that bought our home, which he owns 5 or 6, buys it, he
can rent that home to every bedroom to somebody unrelated. Then if one of those people in one of those
bedrooms happens to be married, they too can live there. In that bedroom with that person. So now you're
dealing with 6 people, 5 unrelated. But 6 people. And the young man that came out and made the
comment to me, was the reason why his taxes next door, which is double the property of mine and Tim.
The reason why his taxes were lower than mine is because the building was needing a lot of work. The
building he was talking about has 5 bedrooms, 2 living rooms, 2 kitchens, 3 baths. Which is much more
area than my house. Granted, I told the young man, that this home is basically being run down because the
owner of the property is not bothering to fix it up because he's getting $500 and over for each bedroom.
And I'm paying as much taxes on a residential, or as far as I'm the homeowner. I live there. Than him as
a non-resident. And that kind of irritates me and that's why I'm thinking, the City has not been behind me.
I called for help. I got treated rudely. And then I talk to your tax assessor and that's not his problem. The
man is going to fix it up. The man is never going to fix it up. And on that property, I want you also to
check there's decking around that, if it's on my property line. It was to my knowledge never put in by the
owner of the property who passed away with a permit. I would love that to be checked into to make sure
that decking is not replaced on the purchaser. It needs to be, it's on my property line. He has a satellite
dish sitting on 5 feet.., again my property line. Now when I built this I had to reside on a lot of codes and I
could not reside in that home because of a mud vent was not long enough. We built the home in '87 and it
was 11 inches of rain when they back filled. Yet that mud vent could have hold, on a slant, 11 inches of
rain sliding across brand new turned up dirt. But I could not get a residential permit.., wasn't allowed to
move in because of this mud vent, not because of the inside property. It was all habitable, I could move in.
But the City wouldn't let me because of an outside mud vent wasn't long enough. It was past our property,
12
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
of our building of our... We had to push it all the way down. So I want the City to look into this. I'm
really tired of it and I want these people to know, you will allow it...
Mayor Mancino: Thank you. We will. Roger, tell us a little bit about State law and how many people can
live in a home. I mean is this city? Is it State? I mean what guides us?
Roger Knutson: A whole lot of things but right now with.
Mayor Mancino: I mean just generally so we can.
Roger Knutson: Our ordinance definition provides a family means 1 or more persons occupying a premise
and living as a single relatively permanent housekeeping unit as distinguished from a group occupying a
boarding house or a hotel. That's a family. There's no specific limit on number. There used to be. There
isn't anymore. And that's frankly, you don't want to get into it I would assume but that's based upon
changing family make-ups. But it's a family.
Mayor Mancino: Okay.
Councilman Engel: That's a stretch.
Roger Knutson: So when you go out and look at it, we'll have to apply...if there's a violation that can be
dear with. If we can prove it.
Mayor Mancino: Okay.
Scott Botcher: Do you have the specifics? I assume 74.
Mayor Mancino: 7450.
Councilman Engel: 7470.
Mayor Mancino: The 7470 is the rental.
Tim McHugh: Our's is 7450 and their's is 70.
Scott Botcher: Very good.
Mayor Mancino: So 7470 is the rental, okay. And we'll also have to look on property lines, a deck.
Councilman Senn: You can't miss it. It's the one with the big parking lot in front.
Scott Botcher: We just need to check as far as permitting.
Mayor Mancino: Yeah, okay.
Margie Borris: I have an unrelated one. My name is Margie Borris and I live at 4071 Kings Road. It
says our Parcel Number is R25.0070700. The estimated tax value on my statement says $137,800. I went
to get a second mortgage last December. I have a 2 bedroom, small home. The biggest room in my entire
13
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
house is my 2 car garage. Okay. We did add one bathroom. We built the house in 1986. We live on a
dirt road. We have our own well. We have LP gas. We have had no improvements to our property since
1986. We have lost some property to the, there were some problems with, what do you call those lines?
Mayor Mancino: Utility lines?
Margie Borris: You know where they overlapped a little bit here and we made some concessions here. We
made some concessions there. We live on a top of a hill. We do have 2 acres of land. Unfortunately the
flood line comes up to a point where there's only one residential plot per this lot, okay? Which is fine.
That's what we had in mind. We built the house in 1986. I told my husband, we're going to die here
because I'm not moving ever again. But you increased the property over $10,000 and I'm sorry, it didn't
happen. We do live, when we moved out there it was pasture, okay. Now we have the mini hotels that
start at a quarter of a million dollars across the road. We are now low income. I realized that the other
day. We are low income. And I just think you need to take a look at some of this stuff.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you.
Margie Borris: I tried to fill this.
Mayor Mancino: Did you get a form?
Margie Borris: Yeah I did but I don't know what district we are.
Angie Johnson: Basically what we need is your PID and a phone number. Those are the two most
important things.
Margie Borris: I got it. And just leave it right here?
Angie Johnson: That's fine.
Mayor Mancino: Thank you.
Dan Schumacher: Good evening. Dan Schumacher, 7380 Kurvers Point Road. The outcome of Highway
101, and the potential range of projects there is far from certain. We've got a mile and a half stretch of
housing here which is seeing market value increases... 8 ½ to 10% and yet we were still threatened with the
potential of a four lane highway going through our back yards. So I'd like to request a review of that
valuation based on certainly the uncertainty injected into the market right now for my home, and if I... to
bring it up, all the other homes along that corridor that are still left in this state of uncertainty.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you Dan.
Bob Mortenson: Bob Mortenson, 7371 Kurvers Point Road and my sentiment is similar to Dan's in that,
while we certainly applaud the council's backing the neighborhood's choice for the 101 project, the reality
is is that we still have to deal with Carver County, Hennepin County and Eden Prairie. And this may, or
may not, get resolved in the next 1 to 2 years. In the meantime many of the people on 101 have properties
that probably right now today are even unsellable. Most certainly the people that have driveways that are
on 101 or that are in proximity where they have very small easements and right-of-way's to 101. Those
people would be very challenged just to sell their property period. And with the real estate laws as they
14
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
are, as a homeowner adjacent to 101, at this point in time you could be obligated to tell any potential buyer
of the impending road work that's someday to be done. With that in mind I would certainly say that while I
don't think that Chanhassen has been excessive in their valuation of the property, I think that in the years
I've lived out here I think you've been reasonable. I haven't really had too much to complain about but in
light of the 101 project I think that it really needs to be addressed, the people that are along the highway
because this is going to have a big impact and depending on what happens, everybody there is going to lose
some part of their property. And while it may not seem fair to someone else right now that we would get
some sort of property tax relief, I would remind all of you that in the time and event when the government,
whether it be the State or the County, comes and takes our property to complete that road, the
compensation that's there is very limited. And it does not anywhere compensate anybody for the loss of
their property and their enjoyment of that property. So with that I would leave it in your hands. We're
very proud of the way the council has backed us so far and we hope that possibly you'll see fit to give us
some relief here. Thank you.
Mayor Mancino: Thank you.
Darrel Kirt: My name is Darrel Kirt and I live at 50 Hill Street and our house is, it used to be the old well
house, or the ice house where they cut blocks of ice from the lake. And it's probably the oldest house in the
neighborhood. It's probably close to 100 years old. It has been remodeled and has had some stuff added to
it and the problem we run into is there's a lot of new construction next to us and I think they're evaluating
our house probably quite to new construction. And in 1998 we had a house fire in the house and it still
isn't completely finished yet either. You know we were completely satisfied with 1999 taxes but you've
raised it I think $50,000 or $60,000. And we still have stucco to be fixed and stuff and I think that's quite
excessive and I feel that if you investigate and look at it, that you'll realize that '99 taxes would be fine but
the new evaluation would be too much.
Mayor Mancino: Dale would you say that again? How much has it been raised in a year?
Darrel Kirt: I've got the papers. I think it's about $80,000 maybe or something like that.
Mayor Mancino: 8 or?
Darrel Kirt: 80 1 believe.
Mayor Mancino: 80?
Darrel Kirt: Yeah, it went from $115,000 to $186,000.
Mayor Mancino: Oh! Okay. It might have been a typo too.
Darrel Kirt: No I don't think so. But I just think if they would talk to us and look at it, you know they'd
probably agree with us.
The Assessor asked for clarification on the name and address.
Mayor Mancino: Thank you Dale. Well you're not going to be with us long.
15
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
Tim Love: Actually I'll be here longer than you anticipate because the game's over. First off let me
apologize for my attire but as I say, I was pressed into service. When you play with 9 guys on a slow pitch
softball, it's not conducive to winning. I've had, I'm Tim Love, 7010 Sandy Hook Circle. Property ID
Number is 25.2400200. I've had the assessor out a couple of times to look at the property. The concern
that I have is really two fold. One, when I looked at the comparable grid that was done for my property, it
was done in relation to homes in Kurvers Point. If you look at Kurvers Point versus Lotus Lake, the
Colonial Grove at Lotus Lake, I think you'll find a vast difference in the houses. Not only in the structure
but also in the value. That's number one. Number two is, the house across the street from me was sold
last July and it sold for 220. My house that is valued at over 300. Now that means that only 16 feet of
pavement really creates an $82,000 difference between my house and the house across the street. Now I
was told that this is not necessarily conducive to the appraisal process. However, when I called a realtor
because I am considering the relocation possibility. Again it depends on what transpires as a result of the
assessment. When I called the realtor the first question was, let me check and see what houses in your
neighborhood have sold for. So what I hear on one hand is simply this, it's what houses in your
neighborhood have sold for, which the one across the street would qualify and the one down the street
would qualify and both of those are less than my house. But yet when it comes to the comparison against
the houses that, where the taxes are assessed, it goes into a separate subdivision which doesn't really
qualify when the real estate agent comes out to put some kind of a fair market value on your house. Lastly,
the value that's on the house right now is the value, is not even the value that the homeowner got when I
bought the house in 1995, and the interesting thing about this is, when they came out and redid the
assessment after I purchased the house in 1995, they said after all you did pay this much money because
the house was valued at something, $30,000 or $40,000 less than that. So the first thing that was said was,
because you paid that much money, that's what it's worth. Well, and I would make the same statement.
You know if I can get somebody to buy that house, I would sell it tomorrow just to be honest with you. If I
could get that, and the answer is, I'm not going to get it because the house across the street is $82,000 less
than the one that I'm living in. So that's my story and I'm sticking to it and I appreciate anything you can
do.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you Tim.
Brenda Vatland: Brenda Vatland. Our address is 7290 Kurvers Point Road and Parcel ID is R25.3920030
and we've lived in our house for 8 years. We have not made any improvements to the property but it's
gone up in value $100,000 and that seems excessive. The last time we were assessed was 2 years ago and
it took a big jump at that time and I was understanding that every 4 years an assessor comes through and
looks at your home. It just seems like our tax base has gone up more than we could have budgeted for at
the time that we bought the house in 1992. That it would go up $100,000 is money that's going into
escrow and I hope to retire in this house and raise my kids in Chanhassen. If the rates keep going up like
this, I'm going to have, probably have to go back to work in order to make ends meet so I'd just like our
assessment to be looked at again.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you.
Nancy Blood: Hi, my name is Nancy Blood. I'm here about a commercial property. I'm at Paws, Claws
and Hooves Pet Boarding at 10500 Great Plains Boulevard. And my increase went up $66,700 and we are
a newly assessed business. I had my complete assessment on last year's taxes so I didn't expect this major
of an increase the following year. Having a brand new business like this I assume that all of the
information that the assessor's had on there were accurate. I called the, to ask why they'd gone up. They
said it was because of sale of similar property in our areas that had gone up that much. There is nothing
16
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
that I'm aware of like that. And then her comment was, when I said that, made that response, her comment
was that they haven't had time to do it for years so it's just playing catch up, which doesn't make sense.
Being a newly assessed business everything should have been up to date when they assessed me from my
original assessment. The other thing is we have no city services and also we have been continuously
assessed for 15 acres of land. I have written to the assessment office several times that we do not have 15
acres of land. I don't have it with me tonight but it's 13 point something and my letters have continuously
been ignored and my taxes have stayed the same and they haven't accommodated me for being taxed on 15
acres when I in fact don't have that much. Our taxes this year went up, based on the same valuation as last
year, and now it's going to be going up another 16.6%. I asked the, when I called the assessment office
what that looked like in dollar signs and I got a bit of a snippy answer but was told they really had no idea.
I can only assume my taxes are going to go up at least 16.6%. I'm a new business. I'm paying very large
taxes and I guess they should have some idea what the real increase is because I know there are
calculations. But I'd like to ask that our's also be reviewed. Thank you.
Mayor Mancino: Nancy, do you know of any other comparables... ?
Nancy Blood: Nothing comparable has been sold down there.
Mayor Mancino: Because you certainly couldn't compare it to Highway 5 or okay.
Angie Johnson: Basically all, there was like 24 land sales in Chanhassen of commercial industrial
properties. The entire county was redone as far as land schedule and that is basically where her.., came
from was solely on land. Basically what.., if there's less than 15 acres I guess we don't have any records
other than that. If you can prove that, that's fine.
Nancy Blood: I write it right on my tax statement every year. Or I have for several years. I wrote it right
on my tax statement.
Mayor Mancino: Write it on your.
Angie Johnson: No, we need.., your deed or.
Nancy Blood: Oh I've got it. These guys know us well. It took us a long time to get our project through
SO.
Mayor Mancino: We know them well. But Angie the commercial industrial, I'm assuming, you know so
much of our commercial industrial is in our MUSA and has infrastructure whereas Nancy's property
doesn't.
Angie Johnson: And they're valued differently.
Mayor Mancino: Okay. So they are valued differently. Take some time together.
Angie Johnson: ... and I did get some maps from the city here showing where the wetlands were and the
bluff areas. Her property is only valued at...
Mayor Mancino: Which means it could be higher. Okay, thank you. Anyone else? Please keep coming
forward. This is good for us to hear and we want to know and listen to you. Seriously, we're serious so
17
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
please come forward. Anyone else? Okay, well thank you. Make sure that you've filled out your forms.
Please leave it up here. Anyone who doesn't have one, you can get one from Angie so let's just take a
minute and let everybody fill out their forms and leave it. And thank you for coming and I'm sure we'll see
you on May 8th. Thank you.
Scott Botcher: Todd has recommended we keep the hearing open until the 8th.
Councilman Senn: Move to continue the hearing until May 8th.
Mayor Mancino: Is there a second please?
Councilman Engel: Second.
Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Engel seconded that the Board of Review and Equalization
public hearing be continued until May 8, 2000. All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously.
REQUEST FOR A WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT, UPGRADE OF TH 5/WEST 78TM
STREET~ MNDOT PROJECT 97-06.
Dave Hempel: Madam Mayor and Council members. This item is actually being brought back before you
this evening because of final design of the Trunk Highway 5 project and frontage road revealed that
additional wetland impacts were going to occur. Back in July of 1999 a Wetland Alteration Permit was
granted for this project. We're here tonight to re-approve that permit because of the additional impact to
the wetlands. On April 19, 2000 the Planning Commission held a public hearing to gather public input on
this proposal. There were no comments made at the commission and Planning Commission voted to
approve of the Wetland Alteration Permit subject to the conditions outlined in the staff report. I was
hoping to have an individual from MnDot to address any questions there may be on this item. However
there was no... Oh, I stand corrected. With that staff is recommending approval of the permit with the
conditions outlined in the staff report. Thank you very much.
Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Any questions from council for staff or from the MnDot representative?
Then may I please have a motion?
Councilman Senn: Move to approve.
Councilman Labatt: Second.
Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Labatt seconded that the City Council approves Wetland
Alteration Permit #99-1 subject to the following conditions:
Wetland Conservation Act and the City of Chanhassen Surface Water Management Plan
requirements.
The applicant shall develop a sediment and erosion control plan in accordance with the City's Best
Management Practice Handbook. Type III erosion control fencing will be required around the
existing wetland.
18
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
REQUEST FOR INTERIM USE PERMIT TO HAUL 50~000 CUBIC YARDS OF EXCAVATED
MATERIALS ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF TH 5 AND
GALPIN BOULEVARD~ LARRY VAN DE VEIRE.
Dave Hempel: Thank you Madam Mayor. Staff received an application to receive an Interim Use Permit
to import approximately 50,000 cubic yards of material at the intersection of Galpin Boulevard and Trunk
Highway 5. The applicant, Mr. Van De Veire is requesting the interim use permit to prepare the site for
future development. Timing of the permit is actually very well in conjunction with the upgrade of Trunk
Highway 5. Trunk Highway 5 is along the south. Galpin Boulevard is on the west and the new frontage,
West 78th Street will go on the north side of the property. The area of fill is concentrated on the westerly
and northerly portion of the site. There is an ag urban wetland located in the southeasterly part of the site
that will not be impacted by the filling. Future ponding by MnDot would also occur on the site in this
location. The pond will also be utilized by the applicant with furthering development of the site. Staff was
originally believed the material would be coming from the downtown Chanhassen area on the site.
However at this time we are unsure of where the material may be coming from. The Interim Use Permit is
an annual permit. It gets reviewed once a year. There will be opportunities to amend the conditions of
approval on annual basis should there be any changes and the site not completed within the one year time
frame. Staff is recommending approval of the permit with the conditions outlined in the staff report. If you
have any questions I'd be happy to answer those.
Mayor Mancino: Thank you Dave. Now, I'm assuming that the applicant has to get an approval haul
route from you prior to starting any hauling whatsoever? I mean you thought it was going to come from
one side and it might be another one so they have to make sure that you approve it?
Dave Hempel: Madam Mayor, that is correct. I believe that is one of the conditions of approval.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, if we can just check that. Secondly, they're going to put all this soil there. Clean
material. Are there any existing because they'll come back with a preliminary plat at some point when they
go to sell the property on that site. Are there any, is there any existing vegetation that we should know
about at this point that would have to do with when they come in for their preliminary plat and they have to
have so many trees, etc, that we should know about at this point?
Dave Hempel: The site is pretty much void of trees with the exception of the northerly property along the
creek. That has some trees. That is not proposed to be impacted with this application. Most of that area
most likely will be impacted by either the utility work or sewer extension or the extension of West 78th
Street.
Mayor Mancino: Is the applicant here tonight?
Dave Hempel: Yes.
Mayor Mancino: Oh good, because I want to ask Larry a couple questions. Great. Thank you. Any other
questions from Council for staff? Thank you Dave.
Larry Van De Veire: I'm Larry Van De Veire. Address 4980 County Road 10 East, Chaska. I'm
requesting the fill permit.
19
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
Mayor Mancino: Okay. Any questions for Larry? I just have a couple. You have some wonderful
coniferous trees on that northern part that you know is not part of the native vegetation doesn't look like. It
looks like you've planted them or somebody has. Are you going to keep those or be able to move those out
of the way when either MnDot comes in or when you sell it and it's developed and can they be moved
around on the site because they're pretty darn nice.
Larry Van De Veire: Right. I guess I'm not real sure what can or will happen with them. This project
wouldn't interfere with them. It's the MnDot project. I had thought about moving them myself. Moving
them to the property where I live because they will be destroyed. The grape vines are just outside the trees
so I'm not sure at this point. I haven't contacted a tree mover, but I don't know ifI can move any of them
back.
Mayor Mancino: Well I just wanted to make a friendly suggestion that instead of just destroying them and
cutting them down if they can be used.
Larry Van De Veire: I'm going to try to. I don't know.
Mayor Mancino: Let us know if you can't because then maybe as part of Highway 5 or the MnDot project
we can use them because they're really nice. Okay. Any other questions?
Councilman Labatt: The questions I have pertain to hours and the amount of grading that's been going on.
The hours requested are from 7:00 to 7:00?
Larry Van De Veire: Excuse me, I guess I'm not real familiar. Whatever the standard hours, 7:00 til 6:00.
Councilman Labatt: 7:00 to 6:00?
Larry Van De Veire: Yeah, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
Councilman Labatt: How long of a project is this going to be? What are you anticipating?
Larry Van De Veire: I guess I'm not real sure. Typically we thought about if we can get it from the site
where we're thinking of we should be able to move 2,000-2,400 yards a day. So then depending on rains
and stuff like that but it will be a lengthy project. It won't be done in a day or two or a week. But a lot of
it would be impacted by the weather.
Councilman Labatt: No, I'm just with the neighborhood just across the little creek, if 7:00 a.m. is a little
too early for earth moving and bulldozers and all that stuff over there.
Larry Van De Veire: Most of this shouldn't impact them a lot because the dirt will have to be loaded
before it's hauled. I guess I wouldn't anticipate anything happening there until between 7:30 and 8:00.
Depending on, usually people get to the job a few minutes before 7:00. Start the equipment. That would
be happening at the site of loading. Then loading would have to take place and get going before a truck
would end up on the site. There will be some lag time there I guess is what I'm saying.
Dave Hempel: Madam Mayor, just a point of clarification. City ordinance and permit will restrict the
hours of operation, including maintenance or idling of the equipment. 7:00 a.m. is the earliest start time,
20
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
Monday through Friday. 9:00 a.m. on Saturday and no work on Sundays or legal holidays. For
clarification.
Councilman Labatt: And are you going to be using a regular tandem axle dump trucks or belly dumps?
Larry Van De Veire: I guess I'd rather use tandems ifI can get them. It all depends on where the dirt will
be coming from and what trucks are available. I wish I had some solid answers but this permit is coming a
little slower than dirt has to be moved so I might lose the dirt that I planned on getting. And that's where, I
have to go to the watershed board after this so that's May 3rd SO time is kind of clicking by because the dirt
is wanting to be hauled.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, any other questions?
Councilman Labatt: Well the only other.., brought up was the entrance and the access to this site off of
Galpin. What could be done to prevent the trucks and then to go into the southbound lane to make the mm
into, that's a concern of mine.
Mayor Mancino: Dave, do you have any questions or any answers for that? Because to make that turn is
not real doable.
Councilman Labatt: Madam Mayor, Council members. We could request that an auxiliary turn lane be
built if the truck traffic warrants that. They're using a certain type of truck that would necessitate turning
into another lane of traffic. That they build their own auxiliary turn lane. The road, Galpin Boulevard,
County Road, it's actually their jurisdiction but we can certainly point it to them that we feel that there may
be a concern about truck turning movements into the site and request that they require the applicant to build
auxiliary turn lanes as part of the permit process for access to the site.
Mayor Mancino: So that will mean that someone from staff will need to just, you'll need to go and actually
watch them and see how they can negotiate that turn. And then go from there and maybe that can be one of
the conditions of approval. To put that on there. Okay. Great, thank you Larry.
Larry Van De Veire: Okay.
Mayor Mancino: Can I have a motion?
Councilman Senn: I'll move approval with one clarification and one addition. Move approval with the
clarification that the city retains the right to administratively further restrict the hours as staff sees fit.
Even during the.., permit. And secondly, that the condition be added that auxiliary turn lanes may be
required by staff to be constructed if deemed necessary.
Mayor Mancino: Do you feel comfortable? Is there a second to the motion?
Councilwoman Jansen: Second.
Councilman Senn moved, Councilwoman Jansen seconded that the City Council approve Interim Use
Permit #00-1 subject to the following conditions:
21
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
The applicant shall provide the city with a letter of credit in the amount of $10,000.00 to guarantee
erosion control measures and site restoration and compliance with the interim use permit.
The applicant shall pay the City $589 for the grading permit fee. In addition, the applicant shall
pay for all city staff and attorney time used to monitor and enforce the interim use permit. The
inspection fee shall be billed at a rate of $50.50 per hour.
The applicant shall obtain and comply with all permit requirements of the Riley-Purgatory- Bluff
Creek Watershed District and Carver County Public Works.
The applicant shall supply the city with a mylar as-built survey prepared by a professional
surveyor registered in the State of Minnesota upon completion of excavation to verify the grading
plan has been performed in compliance with the proposed plan.
All disturbed areas as a result of construction shall be restored with topsoil, seed and mulch within
two weeks after grading is completed or November 15, 2000, whichever occurs first.
Noise levels stemming from the operation are not to exceed the MPCA and EPA regulations. If the
city determines that there is a problem, the applicant shall pay for warranting such tests.
Hours of operation are limited to 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to
5:00 p.m. on Saturday with work not permitted on Sundays or legal holidays. The city retains the
right to administratively further restrict the hours as staff deems necessary, even after the permit
has been issued.
Prior to starting grading activities, erosion control measures shall be installed, inspected and
approved by staff with special being paid to the eastern side of the site near the creek.
All disturbed areas as a result of construction shall be seeded and disc mulched within two weeks
of grading completion. The interim use permit shall expire one year from the date of City Council
approval. The applicant may submit a written request to the city for renewal of the permit up to 45
days prior to the expiration date of the permit.
A landscaping plan shall be prepared for the ~Landscape buffer" area around the wetland. This
plan shall be consistent with the species in the BCWNRP.
Importing of material is restricted to the approved haul route. No hauling shall be permitted on
any street not designed as a haul route. Traffic control signage will be required in accordance with
the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Devices - Appendix B for staff review and approval
prior to site work commencing.
The site shall be graded in accordance with the plans prepared by Sathre-Berquist, Inc. dated
January 14, 2000.
The 50,000 cubic yards shall consist of clean fill material only. No concrete or construction
debris.
The applicant is responsible for keeping all streets clean as a result of hauling activities.
22
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
15. Auxiliary mm lanes may be required by staff to be constructed if deemed necessary.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
REQUEST FOR AN 18.5 FOOT REAR YARD SETBACK VARIANCE TO PERMIT A
GARAGE EXPANSION, 6712 HOPI ROAD, MICHAEL WOITALLA.
Kate Aanenson: The applicant's property is located in Carver Beach and consists of eight lots. It's
consistent with the city ordinance as far as the minimum square footage but it doesn't meet the current side
yard setback. The applicant is proposing a three car garage. The staff's position was we felt comfortable
with replacement of the existing garage based on some failure of the property but by the addition of the
third stall it further imposed on the non-conformity of the side yard setbacks so we felt uncomfortable
recommending approval. There is some topographic features on this site. Planning Commission looked at
that. The staff felt that the garage could be reconfigured a couple different ways, pulling it forward so
we're not increasing the non-conformity, or detaching the garage. The applicant was reluctant to do that.
The Planning Commission felt that based on topography and the existing house configuration that, and the
need to preserve some of the trees, that there may be a hardship on the site but based on the fact that they
only had 3 votes, it was recommended denial because you need to have 4 votes of the Planning
Commission. Therefore it got sent up to the City Council for determination. Again the staff's position,
taking this position that we would.., interpretation of the ordinance that there are other alternatives. Again
the Planning Commission was leaning 3 to 2 in favor of granting the variance. With that I'd be happy to
answer any questions.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Any questions?
Councilwoman Jansen: I have one. In reading on page 2, the sections that you quoted, 20-72(e). Does the
reconstruction of the garage constitute the removal or destruction of 50% or is that section actually
referring to 50% of the value including the house?
Kate Aanenson: What we've interpreted is the entire property.
Councilwoman Jansen: Okay. So that's why we're saying that your comfortable actually reconstructing it
in the footprint. Otherwise you could say, if they demolish it they have to completely put it into
conformity, correct?
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Councilwoman Jansen: I'm used to you doing these denials so I was trying to apply that and I was thinking
no, they wouldn't let them put it back. Okay. My other question, that may have answered my next
question. If you built it then in the existing footprint, they could still construct the tuck under garage,
correct? They would just be digging, would it be digging deeper in the foundations, because there's a tuck
under with this, correct? They're doing the reinforced or whatever you call concrete for the tuck under?
Kate Aanenson: Oh, we're talking about a double deep, is that what you're calling a tuck under?
Councilwoman Jansen: Yes.
23
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
Kate Aanenson: Okay. The double deep would be, one car in front of the other?
Councilman Labatt: No.
Mayor Mancino: No. No, they're actually doing like a basement underneath it or a lower level underneath.
Kate Aanenson: That does not the setback issue.
So okay, so they could still do the double up and down?
Councilwoman Jansen: Okay.
Kate Aanenson: Yes.
Councilwoman Jansen: Okay.
Those are my questions. Thanks.
Mayor Mancino: I have just a couple too. And well I guess I just have one. No, I guess I have two. The
existing footprint is 24.3 by 23.5. They want to add on to the side 6 feet. Now the 6 feet that they add on
will increase the non-conformity by what, 6 inches or something like that?
Kate Aanenson: I believe it's close to...
Mayor Mancino: Okay, from Planning Commission I heard it was, you know even though they want to add
on 6 feet.
Kate Aanenson: It's the rear yard is supposed to be at 30 feet. So I mean, the object is to pull it closer to
the street. So you're maintaining that same non-conforming line.
Mayor Mancino: So you're maintaining the same but because it's at an angle it's not quite as much.
Kate Aanenson: Right. Right.
Mayor Mancino: Okay.
Kate Aanenson: They probably put down like actually probably 11.5 as opposed to 12.1. So somewhere
between a half foot and a foot.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, great. So the 6 feet wide will increase the non-conformity by 6 inches to 12
inches, okay. And then they are adding a lower level. Is that a walkout on the side? That lower level.
Kate Aanenson: Yes.
Mayor Mancino: So I'm assuming that all those trees on that side would come out, and of course that's
their property. Got it, okay. Thank you. Is the applicant here? Michael.
Mike Woitalla: Hi. Mike Woitalla, 6712 Hopi. Now in this project it would only be 2 trees removed.
And that's just where you'd need room to put in the property retaining wall.
Mayor Mancino: Thank you. That was one of my questions. Any other questions for Michael? Okay.
24
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
Mike Woitalla: See there are, if I can add a little more. The garage that I have there now is considered a
two car garage but when the house was built there was no closest in the bedroom that attaches, you know
that is right in the garage. And there's a 4 foot walk-in closest that's built into the garage where I only
have 19.3 feet actually wide garage. So if I drive two vehicles in you can't exit or enter the one vehicle on
the side.
Mayor Mancino: But it's not that whole length, that whole 23.5?
Mike Woitalla: It's a big closest. No, it's not.
Mayor Mancino: Because you know your garage abuts the front door so you don't walk into your
bedroom.
Mike Woitalla: You enter the garage the same way as you enter the house and as you enter the house, my
bedroom is right 4 feet inside of the entryway there. And then the closest I would say is probably just
under 4 feet wide and probably covers 12 to 13 feet in length in the garage. Whereas it does take a lot of
space out of the garage there. And if you were to move the garage way forward to meet the setbacks you
wouldn't be able to have the closest there at all. And I can move the garage 2 feet forward without
changing, you know because the driveway goes down the hill. If I move the garage 2 feet forward I would
lessen the non-conformity from the back side of the, where the property line is. And then I would also be
able to keep my existing entry way or the way that I access my house without having to change anything
there also.
Mayor Mancino: That's where your steps are.
Mike Woitalla: Right.
Mayor Mancino: Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions?
Councilman Senn: Mike, the garage addition, that's going to be used for normal residential purposes, not
home business or anything?
Mike Woitalla: No. No, it's just the, I've got some snowmobiles and a boat and stuff and some of that's
stored in outside storage spaces so the garage and the lower part I just wanted to use that to keep my boat
and snowmobiles so they didn't have to sit outside. I've got a few trailers I'd like to put in there just to
keep them out of sight, out of mind. And there wouldn't be any driveway really accessing it. It would just
all remain a grass area right up to where the slab would be poured in the garage.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Any other questions for Mike?
Councilman Labatt: Mark asked, that's the one I had.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, thanks. Anyone else here tonight want to, any neighbor or anyone? Okay, let's
bring it back to Council. Councilman Senn.
Councilman Senn: I guess I can't disagree with staff's position. They're doing what they're supposed to
do in relationship to the ordinance but I don't know, for 6 inches to a foot, it... so let's just get on with it.
25
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
Mayor Mancino: Yeah. Councilwoman Jansen.
Councilwoman Jansen: I guess I too would prefer not to increase the non-conformity. Since this is a
complete demolition, Mike had mentioned that if he brought the building, or the reconstruction 2 feet
forward, that he could then avoid extending the non-conformity into the setback and I guess if we can do
that and that would help alleviate expanding it then I would certainly feel more comfortable doing that and
moving it forward the 2 feet.
Mayor Mancino: But how do you make up for the width of the, that he loses due to the closest? Kind of
the 2 feet forward.
Kate Aanenson: He's going wider. That's what's solving the problem is going out.
Mayor Mancino: I know. He's going 6 feet wider.
Kate Aanenson: Right.
Mayor Mancino: But I mean if you don't do the 6 feet wider and you just go 2 feet forward, is that what
you're saying?
Councilwoman Jansen: That he can do the 6 feet wider but he would have to move it the 2 feet forward
which would then not extend it farther into the.
Mayor Mancino: Oh, I see what you mean. Okay, so just.
Councilwoman Jansen: And Mike had mentioned that today when I was out there that he could move that
footprint forward to avoid extending that non-conformity.
Mayor Mancino: So you would have this kind of extension out here and not have it back here?
Councilwoman Jansen: The whole footprint because they're demolishing the whole footprint. The whole
footprint could move 2 feet forward.
Mayor Mancino: So this whole thing comes 2 feet? Even with the stoop you could still get in. Okay.
Councilman Labatt: That's a 2 foot stoop.
Mike Woitalla: The steps are about 5 feet wide. Little over 5 feet and if I move it 2...
Mayor Mancino: Okay. Okay, and you don't have a problem with that?
Mike Woitalla: No.
Mayor Mancino: Oh, okay.
Councilman Engel: I don't have a problem with it.
Mayor Mancino: With going the 2 feet and just.
26
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
Councilman Engel: Yeah, if he's okay with that.
Councilman Labatt: I was kind of going to go with ditto of what Mark said. I mean it's just, you know. 6
inches, a foot, you know.
Kate Aanenson: That's true but it's supposed to be 30 feet. That's where the staff is coming from. It's
supposed to be 30 so you're...
Mayor Mancino: Well I think if we can do it with not increasing the non-conformity and going 2 feet
forward and Michael's fine with that, let's go with it. So do you want to make a motion please?
Councilwoman Jansen: How do we put it in as a condition?
Councilman Senn: Just move approval with the redesign and moving the garage 2 feet, or the addition of 2
feet forward.
Kate Aanenson: I would say the entire garage.
Councilman Senn: Oh, the entire garage?
Councilwoman Jansen: The entire footprint.
Councilman Senn: The entire footprint 2 feet forward.
Mayor Mancino: And then let's.
Councilman Senn: And the other conditions of the staff report.
Mayor Mancino: Yeah, all the other conditions outlined in the staff report.
Councilwoman Jansen: That'd be condition number 5 then, moving the.
Councilman Labatt: That's a 20.5 foot variance or 16.57
Councilwoman Jansen: 16.
Councilman Labatt: Okay. So just change it to.
Mayor Mancino: 16.5 and then with the other four conditions.
Councilwoman Jansen: So moved.
Mayor Mancino: A second.
Councilman Engel: Second.
27
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
Councilwoman Jansen moved, Councilman Engel seconded that the City Council approves Variance
#00-3 for an 16.5 foot variance from the 30 foot rear yard setback for the construction of a garage
expansion at 6712 Hopi Drive, subject to the following conditions:
1. Setback shall be measured from the eaves.
2. The applicant must provide the City with a detailed grading, drainage and erosion control plan.
3. No driveway shall be provided to the lower level of the garage.
4. The applicant shall provide a tree preservation plan.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
REQUEST FOR AN AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, 40 LAKE DRIVE
EAST, ABRA AUTO BODY & GLASS.
Cindy Kirchoff: Thank you. Abra's requesting an amendment to their existing Conditional Use Permit to
allow outdoor parking of damaged or inoperable vehicles. Their current Conditional Use Permit prohibits
this activity. However the zoning ordinance does permit screened outdoor storage as a conditional use in
the BH district. Therefore staff would be requiring an additional Conditional Use Permit for the outdoor
parking or storage. Abra would like four stalls dedicated for the parking of these vehicles on the northern
portion of the site. Staff does support this location. There is existing berming and landscaping that is
present on this site to shield partially from Highway 5. Staff would recommend as a condition of approval
that 2 evergreen trees be planted per designated stall and have that along the northern portion of the site to
provide additional screening for the outdoor parking. The Planning Commission... that staff work with the
applicant to direct the drop off of the cars to the designated areas so they're not left in the other portion of
the parking lot. Staff does recommend approval with the conditions and I'd be happy to answer any
questions that you may have.
Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Any questions for staff'? So I'm assuming the applicant's here and I'll ask
them but you've been told that they won't be anywhere else on the parking lot?
Cindy Kirchoff: That's correct.
Mayor Mancino: So what happens if we, if there are parked in other parking spaces?
Roger Knutson: It'd be a violation of the Conditional Use Permit.
Scott Botcher: Then you can review the whole thing.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, then you can review it and.
Scott Botcher: Do everything.
Roger Knutson: You have a couple of choices. You could cite them criminally. Criminal violation. Or
you can bring them in here and have a revocation hearing on the CUP.
28
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Alright, is the applicant here and would you like to address the
Council?
Henry Cornelius: Henry Cornelius, 40 Lake Drive and Jeff Newman, same address. The Conditional Use
Permit was 5-6 years old and at that time there were no buildings around it. Since that time, well first of
all the problem is that in the middle of the winter, snowing out, a car gets in an accident and they drop the
car off. In the morning we get a ticket. And we weren't even there so right now the Conditional Use
Permit doesn't make sense. For things have just changed a little bit. But anyways, around the area
basically in the last 5 years the major concern of the Planning Commission was the disturbing the neighbors
and one of the things we've done is, we've gone every place in the parking lot and you cannot see any
neighbors from the parking lot. On the south side they built a car wash and the trees have grown
substantially. There were a lot of trees planted. On the west side, Youngstedt's has built their tire
building. On the east side they're building things and you can't see it from that side anyway because of the
building. And on the north side is the road and we're putting up trees there. So basically it's, we just said
you know, what we typically get is the conditional use permit does allow us to park cars there overnight if
somebody's going to pick one up. The problem is every once in a while you get something dropped off
that's totaled. And we don't' know when it's totaled otherwise we really wouldn't want it there but we're
stuck with it until our insurance company can come out and tow it. And because they are totaled, often
times their wheels don't turn or anything. We don't have the equipment to move them. So that's basically
what we're trying to deal with. But it's pretty low risk opposition is that none of the neighbors can see it
anyway. And the only people that can possibly see it is those driving by.
Mayor Mancino: The rest of the public.
Henry Cornelius: From the street. The trees should block that.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Anything else?
Jeff Newman: No, I would only wish to add that our situation is a little bit different than say Goodyear's
next door for example in that, as Henry stated, when a vehicle gets towed in there lots of times the vehicle's
not movable. And under the existing permit that we have, every night we, and every morning we have to
drag those cars somehow in the building and then take them back out in the morning waiting for the
insurance company to come out and inspect them and decide what's going to happen with them. So we're
out there with hand jacks and floor jacks trying to jack these cars up and pull them in and pull them out and
it's just.
Henry Cornelius: The other thing too is though, in the last 5 years a lot of things have changed around
there and it's pretty hard to see.
Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Any other questions that council members have?
Councilwoman Jansen: No.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, any discussion from council members? Councilman Senn?
Councilman Senn: I would go with the request but I'd like to see the trees up from 8 to 11 and I'd like to
see them, the parking stalls, I'd like to see them in two rows, 5 to 10 foot on center.
29
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
Mayor Mancino: Okay. So staggered.
Councilman Senn: Staggered. Basically two rows. Out in the front row closest to Highway 5 I'd like to
see 6 trees and then the back row closest to the parking lot, on the stall line so to speak. See 5 trees
essentially and that would broaden, you know then broaden the screening to the highway on the outer part.
Mayor Mancino: Okay. Any other discussion? Then may I please have a motion and a second?
Councilman Senn: I would move approval with the alteration to condition 1 that the, that there be two rows
of 8 to 10 foot evergreens, 6 on the other row closest to the highway and 5 in the inner row closest to the
facility. The 5 trees just centering on the stall lines and the 6 towards the highway staggered. And other
than that the conditions as listed in the staff report.
Henry Cornelius: I did have a question.
Mayor Mancino: Excuse me. Just a second. We're not done. Anything else on there? On the conditions.
Councilman Senn: No.
Mayor Mancino: Okay. Would you accept a friendly amendment on number 3? Damaged or inoperable
vehicles may be parked overnight within the designated area shown on attachment 5 for a period not to
exceed, and I'm assuming staff means this. Not to exceed 48 hours per car. Should we just add the words
per car?
Councilman Senn: Certainly.
Mayor Mancino: Do you have a problem with that friendly amendment?
Councilman Senn: No. Accepted.
Mayor Mancino: Is there a second to the motion?
Councilman Engel: Second.
Mayor Mancino: Okay. Yes, your question.
Henry Cornelius: Well I just had a question about the, one of the problems is with putting up evergreens,
it's better if we could put up big shrubs or something like that because I mean they're going to grow up and
then you just have to trim them down. They're not going to look good after a while.
Mayor Mancino: Well I think we want the opaque screening. That's part of the whole concept that it be
opaque and if you put shrubs, they won't be opaque enough. So thank you.
Henry Cornelius: The problem is if you look at the trees that they put up on the south side, they have
grown to the point where you can't see, I mean if we had to put those up we couldn't see the sign.
Mayor Mancino: I think that's going to be quite a few years before that happens.
30
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
Henry Cornelius: There's also quite a big berm there.
Mayor Mancino: We know. Thank you. Do you want to change your motion at all? Do you have any
concern about that? Or any discussion on what Henry's brought up?
Councilman Senn: No. We spent a lot of, when this originally came through 5 years ago we spent a lot of
time on it and had some very strong concerns. One was both as it related to the Highway 5 ordinance and
the visibility of all the auto stuff along there. And secondly the neighborhood and obviously the
neighborhood concerns have been dealt with as it relates to the siting of the stalls and I just want to make
sure that we deal with the Highway 5 part to keep it consistent with what we intended 5 years ago.
Mayor Mancino: Okay. Any other discussion? Okay, the motion's been made and seconded.
Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Engel seconded that the City Council approves the request to
amend CUP/t92-2 to permit the outdoor storage of vehicles overnight and on weekends and CUP
/t00-2 to permit screened outdoor storage with the following conditions:
1. All outdoor storage must be completely screened with one hundred percent (100%) opaque
landscaped screen. There shall be two rows of 8 to 10 foot evergreens, 6 on the row closest to the
highway and 5 in the inner row closest to the facility. The 5 trees just centering on the stall lines
and the 6 towards the highway staggered.
2. The landscape screen must meet the standards of the HC-1 District.
3. Damaged or inoperable vehicles may be parked overnight within the designated area as shown on
Attachment 5 for a period not to exceed 48 hours per vehicle.
4. The applicant shall submit to staff a procedural plan to ensure that damaged or inoperable vehicles
are dropped off in the designated area only.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS:
Mayor Mancino: Next item is Administrative Presentations in two areas.
Scott Botcher: Three.
Mayor Mancino: Three areas.
Scott Botcher: Just want to make sure that you all, not understand. That you all are, see your quarterly
investment summary in here. We are going to put this on here quarterly.
Mayor Mancino: Thank you.
Councilman Senn: It was very nice.
31
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
Scott Botcher: Yeah. It's a nice print out. We do have some additional reports that Bruce and I are
playing with to give to you all that are going to show our financial statements a whole different way. Quite
frankly the auditors have been here for 2 weeks and Bruce hasn't had time to go to the bathroom so it's
just life with the auditors. Couple things. First of all. Update on the school siting process. I can't say that
a lot has changed since last Monday, because frankly I don't think that it has. I was at a meeting this
morning at the school district offices and it's my personal position, and I think that the school district still
has not, well I know they haven't, settled on a site. I don't know if they've really made any great headway
in identifying a site as one over the other, over the other. I don't think they've done that. They are seeking
additional information about a couple sites within the District 112. I had a conversation with Dave
Peterson today. He and I and Todd and Kate and Mark were all going to get together and try to pull some
numbers together for him in terms of infrastructure costs to different sites. We continue to maybe beat
around the lease revenue option that's out there. It will be up to the school as to whether or not they want
to pursue it, and of course they have to go through some, they have to go through some hoops on their end
before it even gets to you all to consider. But that's I guess that's in a nutshell where we are at this point.
My understanding is consistent with last week, they are meeting on Thursday evening as a school board.
And it's my understanding that they are to report out two sites to the public. They will call a public
hearing. I believe last week I heard it was the week of the 8th or the 15th. Now I hear it's the week of the
15th. I don't know when it's going to be but they're going to do that. Take public input on the sites. They
need the information that they're seeking from us to assist them in their public hearing process. And then
May 24th, something like that.
Mayor Mancino: 25th.
Scott Botcher: They're going to vote. Okay, they're going to vote and pick one is my understanding. So
that's where they are. That's what I know.
Councilwoman Jansen: The one site as I understand it, that they've narrowed it down to at least within
Chanhassen, one of the major sticking points of course is the fact that the cost of the land does exceed the
referendum amount. And part of the conversation that occurred over the last two meetings was a
suggestion that you know as we're looking at the property, there's a great deal of open space or
undevelopable acreage that they also would be needing to acquire in the total purchase on this property.
And I'm just, I'm wondering from a comment that staff had made way back in the beginning of the
discussion, realizing that there could be in effect of this open space, are there also conversations occurring
between the school district staff and city staff on this open space and possible parkland as well as also any
consideration of the additional fields that would be available then to the community with this facility being
located in Chanhassen. What kind of conversations are happening there?
Scott Botcher: Well we're going to continue those. I guess it is somewhat specific upon what site they
identify. You know they've identified a couple in the city and a lot of them have fallen away quite honestly.
Councilwoman Jansen: I got the sense that they are down to the one primary in Chanhassen anyway as far
as our having a conversation.
Scott Botcher: And that will be up to them to identify and to decide. I think you're probably right but you
know I'm not in the school business so.
Councilwoman Jansen: I guess that's maybe what I understood this morning and over the last meeting I
guess.
32
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
Scott Botcher: I think the issue is two fold. First of all if there's any property that we are, that staff would
even bring to you to consider to pick up, it has to have value to the city. I mean frankly the issue here is,
the school's trying to buy you know, property that's going to cost them y with only x amount of money.
And we're not going to, personal opinion, if I was, had all 5 votes, I wouldn't recommend giving it to them.
It's not, I don't think it's the city's role to make up a shortfall. They need to build their school and we can
assist them with tools to do that, but ultimately that compensation is, it's got to be paid for by the school
district. If there's green space, wetlands out there that make sense in terms of adding it to the city's
holdings already, then we can do that. One of the problems I think that they're going to find is that say a
property costs $50,000 an acre. That's what the guy is asking for it. I don't see the, and I know that the
broker has indicated this. That when they sell property, they're taking total number of acres and
multiplying it by the asking price and that's what they expect to get out of it. We're not going to pay 50
grand an acre for a marsh. We're not paying 50 grand an acre for a swamp so if we go in there and we pay
10 grand an acre, 20 grand an acre, the balance of the property now all of a sudden is $75,000 an acre or
however the math works out. And the school ends up in a not, and we have to run the numbers. But the
school's position does not improve to the extent that I think the city's expense would be. In other words, I
don't think that their situation improves greatly enough considering how much we would come to the table
and buy property. We probably wouldn't buy anyway. I mean if the school wasn't part of the site, would
we look at this site as an acquisition? Probably not.
Councilwoman Jansen: Well we actually did with this particular, with a couple of the properties that were
considered when we were looking at spending the open space referendum and the reason that they were.
Scott Botcher: But we spent it elsewhere. Because.
Councilwoman Jansen: Potentially not all of it I guess is what.
Scott Botcher: And we don't know, I guess. And I guess so that's my answer on the wetland thing. Is it
out there? Yeah. Do I really think it's going to come to the table? I guess I don't think so because I don't
think the value added is going to be there and I think that the school, certain school district staff members
realize that. I think that if the city came and said geez you know, we'll give you 50 grand an acre for that.
Sure they'd take that and they'd run to the bank and cash the check. But I don't think, we're not going to
do that.
Councilwoman Jansen: And that's not what I'm suggesting.
Scott Botcher: Right, but the economics on their side, there's persons I don't think that understand that. I
mean they're not going to buy property for 50 grand an acre. We're going to give 10 grand an acre and
their price is still going to stay 50. It's not. It's going to go back up here. And the gross dollars necessary
to make the deal go will not significantly change.
Mayor Mancino: They don't have, I mean even if we were to buy, do some numbers. Even if we were to
buy the marsh land, the rest of the property that they need to put the school on, they still don't have that
amount of money.
Scott Botcher: So it's out there. We're talking about it. We have talked about it. We have the issue that
we don't know what the Frank Fox condemnation is going to cost us yet. Would we rather make sure that
we make our own commitments first.
33
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
Mayor Mancino: ... know what's left over.
Scott Botcher: Yeah, I think we ought to do that. But it's not fully.
Mayor Mancino: I wish we were further along in that.
Scott Botcher: It would help. It would help.
Councilman Engel: When will it be done?
Mayor Mancino: Do we know when that?
Scott Botcher: I asked Todd Friday. He indicated that they're scheduling the hearing. They've got the
commissioners picked. They're going to schedule the hearing so that's where that is.
Councilman Engel: When do they expect, I mean give us a guess.
Scott Botcher: I couldn't guess Mark. I'd hate to do that. No. The second thing you asked was, what did
you ask me?
Councilwoman Jansen: As far as the fields.
Scott Botcher: Oh the fields, that's right. It's going to be pursued. I guess I have two responses. I don't
think that it will happen in the time frame suitable to the school's demands in terms of time. In other
words, you're really saying we got to pull this together in a month and just in theory, again depending on
the economics, it's easier for the cities of Chanhassen and Chaska to make that kind of move given our
cash position than it is for the city of Victoria and Carver. So that may be an issue. I don't know how you
put together a four party deal when half the parties have budgets that would make doing something like that
a pretty major economic step. I mean that's a big deal in Carver. That's a big deal in Victoria. So I think
that's an issue. Practically I'd ask the question, we're not building anything new or different. And I know
Porkorny and I have talked about this. If you take a square and say okay, this is what the school needs to
build to be a school. Why would the four of us step in and say oh by the way, what you need to build a
school isn't really what you need to build a school. We'll count part of it as stuff you need to build to meet
the community recreation stuff, not what you need to build a school. I think we're playing some semantics
with that. In other words, they need to build what they need to build to be a school. If they're going to tack
on property, say they tack on fields in addition to that, maybe then that, personal opinion. Maybe then it's
more appropriate to do that. So I think you've got the practical answer and I don't think, you know if we
can great but I don't think we're going to be able to pull it off in time, in a month, because that's what
we're talking about. And secondly I just think, it's another way to just shoot cash toward a site they need
to build to have a school anyway. Personal opinion.
Mayor Mancino: What my question turns out to be also is, I mean they need to have their PE stations.
You know we were at those meetings, the programming. So they have to figure out how much they really
need too as a school, but my other question is as a city, we probably have to do some sort of a needs
assessment to say, do we need the fields and how many more fields do we need because you know when we
went through the referendum before we asked the Park and Rec Commission you know how much should
we put into this referendum. Are we going to have enough money in the referendum to be built out for the
34
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
whole city for the next 20 years? And the answer we got back was, yes. Now that doesn't mean that
things haven't changed and that the Park and Rec Commission couldn't do a needs assessment and it
doesn't also mean that they couldn't look at their funding source. You know they get fees for park
development and they may have some money sitting there, but they would have to look at that. Number
one, do an assessment. You know any city I'm sure will always say we can have more fields but then we
have to look at it as the overall balance of the community. You know do you put it to a public works
facility. I mean it's a hard thing to look at, but they may have some money in their park development fund
that they get from developers. I don't know that.
Scott Botcher: Don't know. I just, I think that.
Mayor Mancino: Because if you put that together with if we have money left over from Frank Fox would
they want to put that then into developing more fields? I don't know as a priority for them.
Scott Botcher: And I guess I have not heard this council collectively or individually frankly, come to me
and say beyond assisting and providing tools to make it go, transfer some money because that's really what
we're your suggestion would contemplate. It would be a transfer of money from us and Chaska and Carver
and Victoria. From the taxpayers of those communities to the school to pay for a site that they need to
build for their own school purposes anyway which to me is different than saying, Dave Peterson we'll do
these revenue or we'll do whatever and we'll get you to market and we'll back load it and we'll make it fit
your cash flows and do whatever, but you do need to pay us back. I mean I think that's, unless you all
have a change in opinion and you're saying no, take tax dollars from Chanhassen city residents and make
this deal go. Because that's what the joint effort would practically do, as would the acquisition of green
space.
Mayor Mancino: Well what I heard today was one of the options or tools that we were talking about we're
using, lease revenue bonds and I got the impression today, didn't you Linda, that they did not want to? The
school board does not want to.
Councilwoman Jansen: There are definitely school board members that have hesitations with that funding
mechanism, yes.
Mayor Mancino: They've used it before but they are.
Councilwoman Jansen: But I didn't gather that they've actually.
Scott Botcher: They used it in the building we were sitting in there.
Councilwoman Jansen: Yeah. I didn't gather that they actually took a formal vote on it because there
wasn't a definite thumbs up or thumbs down this morning. It was just voiced that there was a hesitancy.
Scott Botcher: And there was obviously not a majority of the school board members there anyway so you
know they couldn't say.
Mayor Mancino: Their other option is to use a $500,000 that was part of the school referendum. To use
the $500,000 for the land acquisition for the elementary school site. To use that money and put it into the
pot too. And that was the one, they got the land free from Chaska and yet for the referendum they had put
in $500,000 for the elementary site. So they could be looking at the school board could be looking at those
35
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
two tools right off the bat. Number one, using the lease revenue bonds. They could also, as part of the
middle school land budget, they could also include the $500,000 for the elementary site which they didn't
have to use. And they can also be looking at the condemnation of property. I mean they have some tools,
some other tools that they can be using.
Scott Botcher: They're in a difficult spot. Certainly the tools that are before them, none of them present
necessarily easily chosen options. The easiest chosen option is if someone gives them some money to make
up the difference. And I know that with the, personal opinion again, with the Victoria, you know skidaddle
thing that was going on, the school board played Let's Make a Deal a little bit with taxpayers of some who
weren't even in 112. And unless you know, if you guys say differently that's great. If not, we're
continuing working with Dave Peterson and the school and saying you know let's, we want it in Chan. We
want it in Chan. We want it in Chan and practically the school district is going to have to consider if they
do not put the school or a high school site in Chanhassen, practically what are their chances of passing a
referendum again. I mean because they got strong support from Chanhassen but it was predicated upon
you know a commitment of Chanhassen 112 dollars toward putting a school in Chanhassen. If they don't
do that, what's that cost to them? And it comes with a cost and they're in a tough spot but they've got to
make a decision at some point and give us some direction. Yes, we're going to do A. We're going to do B
and we'll back load whatever. But a recognition that we've got to pay the boat. We've got to pay the full
boat.
Councilwoman Jansen: And I'm not disagreeing with the majority of what you're saying. I guess
philosophically where I may be diverge a little bit is that we did as a city identify this open space as having
value to the community. And in that it, numerous of these properties were given that sort of a
consideration, as we were considering where we were spending the referendum money for open space, I
come back to this piece and look at it instead of their asking us for money, as our now having an
opportunity to buy this piece of open space that we considered to be less valuable because we would have
had to have purchased the high ground, or the buildable. So in essence it wasn't as appealing as an open
space piece because of high ground.
Scott Botcher: But you would have had a couple options to acquire that if that's what you wanted to do.
You wouldn't have necessarily had to buy the high ground. There were other options.
Mayor Mancino: No, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait you guys. I was there. I mean the
reason why we didn't buy it was because when we got surveys back, etc, we decided we did not, when we
didn't have enough money in the referendum to put in a whole new community park there, because so much
of it was field and it would have been an active ballfields, community park.
Scott Botcher: But this arguendo. Let's say that that was the green space that makes Chanhassen residents
just sing. From a practical point of view I'm not sure that our participation in it, at the level of expenditure
that you're going to find comfortable, is going to do them much good. I don't think the math works. I just
don't think it does.
Mayor Mancino: Well you guys we also went through, we spent two city council sessions going through
the primary and the secondary corridor and we said, is there any land in the primary corridor that we
should buy? We kind of looked through it and we tried to identify, if we couldn't do density transfer, is
there any particular land in this whole corridor going down to the south, and we spent a couple city council
work sessions on this, that we should buy now or can we really acquire or keep the primary corridor doing
density transfer. And we went over every single parcel and also decided that we did not have to buy any of
36
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
that property. That when it comes ready for development that we felt comfortable that we would be able to
transfer that density and to be able to keep that primary corridor there without having to purchase it. Also
as a city. I mean we went through that kind of discipline of doing that.
Councilwoman Jansen: And absolutely agreed, but now if there's an opportunity to bring a facility that we
know the community really needs or wants. We know the sentiment of our residents. If we could get the
school, and not to say we're purchasing that property for them but in the same vein we're acquiring either
the open space or as you mentioned, identifying with parks and rec whether there are fields that could
maybe be added to what the school needs to again be participating with, even if it's just Chaska and
Chanhassen. To make this facility work what are some of those creative options and what I was curious
from staff was whether we were opening that up in relation to this piece of property because actually Ms.
Aanenson was at the meeting this morning and mentioned that also if staff sat down and went through some
things, there may be some opportunities to work with the district. But as far as council having really given
that direction, we haven't necessarily at this point as... options that I have no idea what they are. You
know staff would be the professionals as far as being able to work those out. Have we properly authorized
or suggested we are open?
Mayor Mancino: Scott, you've been doing that.
Scott Botcher: Everything's on the table. I mean everything is on the table. There's relative interest in
different, on the different items on the table and that's a fact. We're not to the point where we said, I guess
the only thing I've told Dave Peterson is no, we won't buy the site for you and give it to you.
Mayor Mancino: But so you're been pursuing, you have been pursuing other creative options?
Scott Botcher: Oh yeah. But obviously Todd and I and Kate represent what we think is in the city's best
interest and also what we think is going to be acceptable to the majority of the council and you know we
balance out the Frank Fox issue out there. We don't know what that's going to be. We've got that
commitment that we need to take care of and you know we're working to get the school in the community,
but at some point they have to pick what tool they want to use and also make a commitment to the
community to do that. And certainly they're going to do that by the amount that's in the referendum but
frankly the amount that's in the referendum probably isn't enough. Because if it was, they'd have bought
something.
Councilwoman Jansen: Well and part of, as we've all seen them trying to do is using the future. They're
ending up having to consider using the future school land dollars for the existing but I appreciate your
having addressed the specifics of what we're trying to negotiate with them and the importance.
Scott Botcher: We're trying. There's pros and cons to everything. It's just a matter of what, ultimately
what you and the school agree upon. You know we start the Let's Make a Deal thing, it gets to be difficult
and Chaska sort of started that off and the last time we had Victoria and Chaska doing let's make a deal
and I'm just not sure that's a good way to do business. But you all can disagree with that. That's certainly
alright and I think we can step up and again provide the tools to assist them. But when we start talking
about cold hard cash, and making up reasons to give them cash, you know we'll pay for part of the football
field because it's a community resource. Well, it's a PE station and just call it different things. I think we
really need to think long and hard about doing that because we have, I mean let's be honest. We have, and
you remember from budget session, we've got our own financial issues to deal with. We've got two big
balloons coming up in 2003 and 4 and we've got our levy to drive down. We've got cash balances to drive
37
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
up to try to go for a bond rating upgrade. And I'm being pretty damn parochial. I'd like to make sure my
own house is in order before I start you know giving cold hard cash away. But I think we can work with
them and yeah, there's no question that it's very valuable to the community and a lot of citizens want it.
And then finally we all know that we've got two districts in this city and that just makes it a different
animal than Chaska faces so, but we are working on every option we can and if anyone has new, I mean
seriously. If you come up with new and different creative options, taking all $42 million and when the lotto
gets to be about $80 million, buy $42 million worth of tickets when the odds are 1 and 80 million. That'd
be a good suggestion but we are trying our best. Alright, can I go on?
Mayor Mancino: Yeah. Can I just make one suggestion and that is that the, I think it would be helpful for
you to talk to Dave Porkomy as far as when Chaska makes a statement about needing more recreational
fields, etc, kind of make that a little finer point with him. What does that really mean?
Scott Botcher: Well and especially considering, and one of the sites they're talking about in Chaska they
would actually give up fields. It just didn't jive.
Mayor Mancino: Yeah. And I think that that's.
Councilwoman Jansen: That's where he's saying they haven't identified the acreage where they'd have to
replace them out of. That's the next step.
Scott Botcher: You're right, and how much that would cost.
Councilwoman Jansen: Yep, exactly. Absolutely.
Scott Botcher: Okay. Put on your thinking cap, the next two ones are not difficult. Don't need to answer
it but I need you to think about something so we can come back in a week or two or three or four and talk
about it. I had a brain scasm last week. This is before I was sick. We have an issue of, and it hasn't been
talked about in a while, about the location of our ambulance. If you remember last summer we talked
about this and it's sort of up in the northwest comer. Response time to a majority of Chanhassen is not so
good. I mean it's alright but they're saying 7-8 minute which seems to be the norm. Longer, I took a
compass and if you draw a line to the highly populated parts of Chanhassen your response time is not
within the standards that you would like to have. My question is this. Is there any thought, or is there any
benefit and just think about this. To adding a bay onto the Lake Ann maintenance building and putting an
ambulance in there. We're going to be moving, futzing around with the dirt and we're going to be doing a
majority of the building, add on a 20, and we've got a site plan. This is conceptual. Add on a 20 x 30 bay
and put the ambulance in the center of the, sort of center of the community and certainly in the center of the
populated area. Now the western end of the community has got an arboretum and let's just say it's always
going to be arboretum. Your closer to the north/south roads to get south of TH 5 and get up and down and
then with 5 being reconstructed and the 78th being redone, you've got some alternatives to go east/west and
I just thought geez, you know if we're looking at this and we don't do big public projects often, thank god.
And you look at the things that are coming down the pike potentially. You've got the library. You've got a
public works building. Beyond that we don't have, looking long term, a lot of buildings, which is good.
It's a good thing, but that also means we don't have opportunities necessarily to piggy back these things
together. And you know maybe it's just something we ought to look at and get a price on and say you
know, what would this cost because as our community continues to grow and grows south of TH 5, and we
know where the MUSA lines are. Again the growth is away from the fire station. Where it is now. I mean
where the ambulance is and I guess I've just thrown that out there. I don't have any magic numbers. I
38
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
don't have any, I'm just saying conceptually it's got some advantages. And you've got traffic lights there
across TH 5. You put those optic things on there where they hit the button, they all turn green and off they
go.
Mayor Mancino: Do you have to have an office there to house people who are manning?
Scott Botcher: They have like a break room that would be part of that as well. My conversations with
representatives of the hospital, and I haven't talked to Mr. Stevens so I don't want to say I've gone, you
know talked to the big guy yet. I've talked to some other ambulance people and whatever else and
apparently in Watertown when they did this, and so there is some precedent to this, the community did the
shell and they finished it off. So if we're there and we've graded the site and just build our pad to whatever
the site plan ends up being, we put the shell in there and they're willing to finish it off, that provides us I
think, personal opinion again with a better ambulance location within the community. At a better location
with better response time a majority of our citizens. I'm just, I'm throwing that out because if we want to
do that, obviously the time to do it is now because that building is, you know Engelhardt's doing the
surveying and stuff so.
Councilman Senn: What's the added upgrades to the building if you're going to have occupancy in it and
also, as far as sewer and water upgrades? All those sort of things.
Scott Botcher: Right now I don't know Mark.
Councilman Senn: Well I'm just saying these are just questions to get answers to. The other thing is is if
you're affectively, is there a reason why we wouldn't have it at the main fire station?
Scott Botcher: I think space is. I think it's just the space issue.
Councilman Labatt: I don't think they have the space inside.
Mayor Mancino: So you're saying add onto the existing fire station? Is that the implication?
Councilman Senn: Well question A is, can it be accommodated in the existing fire station somehow. And
if not, could the existing fire station be added on to in a way that it could be accommodated there. I mean
the only reason I'm asking that is, again given the, depends on what the answers are to A. I mean if we
have to upgrade a lot of things in that building because it's not going to service occupancy and we have to
do additional sewer, water, all that sort of thing it would make far more sense maybe to do it here because
you're only talking about a two block difference as it relates to point of origin. Because even if you go to
Lake Ann, you really have to view the point of origin as being 78th and Powers because there's only one
way in and out of there.
Scott Botcher: Now.
Councilman Senn: Well I'm assuming you wouldn't alter that.
Scott Botcher: No, but when the road is done.
Councilman Labatt: When West 78th goes...
39
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
Scott Botcher: You cross there.
Councilman Senn: No, I understand. I understand but I mean for now, that's what we're talking about.
Scott Botcher: I was assuming TH 5 was going to get done someday. Silly me. Your questions are good.
I don't know the answers to them. It's just one of those things. I know, and Steve's answer is the same one
I got from fire persons. Is that it's just, there's no space there for it, but if you add onto it, then all bets are
off so. I guess the bottom line is.
Councilman Labatt: Is there even enough space to add onto the building? They added on that one bay how
many years ago?
Councilman Senn: Well I mean if there's something that could be moved out of the fire station that's there
now that's used only very infrequently like maybe the boat or something like that. I don't know. I mean I
have any of these questions. I'm just posing the question. Is there something that could be moved out that
would make room for the ambulance at least for the timing or whatever.
Scott Botcher: Okay, so the answer I'm getting from you all is look into it. Not a totally stupid idea.
Mayor Mancino: Yeah, it's a great idea. Get the response time standard.
Scott Botcher: Well it is a good location as far as the ambulance goes, and whatever.
Mayor Mancino: I don't know if it's better at Lake Ann Park or again next to the skateboard park.
Scott Botcher: Well they're there already. They've got first aid boxes in there. We need to get closer to
the softball players.
Councilman Senn: Especially the old softball players.
Scott Botcher: Okay one more thing, and this is something that you need to think about as well and I will
bring in the fire people, and I want them to. John and Mark to come back, probably to a work session and
maybe even next week. We've got that two agreements on my desk for the sale of fixed assets to the
County, which was part of our deal. You know they would acquire guns, leather, Bob's car which was the
Lumina... that sort of crud that goes with it. But there is a question out there and the fire department has
expressed an interest, and I know that the automobile inventory usage thing is on the plan for June or July
Mark. One of the two.
Councilman Senn: Which year?
Scott Botcher: This year. No, it's this year. And the capital plan has a nice inventory in it by the way.
The question is this. And I'm going to screw up on the title but the duty officer who is not Mark, not Greg,
not John. The person who's on duty for a particular call. Shift. Could be Mark. Could be anybody.
Doesn't have a vehicle and their question is, here it goes. I'm going like this as I ask the question.
Councilman Senn: Go out in the parking lot and grab any one of the 30...
40
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
Scott Botcher: No, I'm with you. See, now you're playing into my hands. I set him up. This is good. I
knew if I waited long enough I'd hook Senn.
Mayor Mancino: You're going to let him go off on this subject.
Scott Botcher: You know you let him run for a while. Wait til they get tired.
Councilman Senn: Oh boy I'm ready. I'm ready.
Scott Botcher: Now here's the deal. The Crown Vic is part of the sale package to Bud. They've come and
said you know, you're not getting much for that Crown Vic. I don't remember how much it was. It's an
old Crown Vic. 70,000-80,000 miles I think is on it. They've come to me and said you know, what if we
just transfer that to the fire department and then deduct it out of the capital plan, you know $5,000 or so
that is supposed to be applied to the Blazer which you remember is in the capital plan 2001. I think it's
2001. You remember the one I'm talking about?
Councilwoman Jansen: Yes.
Mayor Mancino: You do? After all the conversations that we have over vehicles, are you kidding? We've
talked about every single one.
Scott Botcher: I'm raising the question. I want you to think about this because I'm going to have them
come back in and give you the full report but I want to give you a week or two in advance.
Mayor Mancino: They don't need to take up that much time to give us a full report.
Scott Botcher: I'm just trying to be helpful here. No, no, no. Well here's the deal.
Mayor Mancino: We do policy decisions. What good is this?
Scott Botcher: Fine, okay. We'll do that. No, I don't want to, I guess I'm letting you know if you guys
look at me and say geez Scott we don't really care. Here's the deal, we're not going to get much for the
Crown Vic. We're not.
Councilman Labatt: ... fire rescue either.
Scott Botcher: True.
Mayor Mancino: Scott, you can make the decision. You have the executive rights and privilege to make
this decision.
Councilwoman Jansen: Go for it.
Scott Botcher: Well but it is a fixed asset and you guys disposed of it. Okay, well I'll tell you what I'll do
then. I'll just meet with the fire department and have them make the case and take care of it.
Mayor Mancino: You have our full confidence. You make the decision.
41
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
Scott Botcher: I don't know what I'm going to do.
Mayor Mancino: And you just, and we'll be fine with it.
Scott Botcher: Okay.
Councilman Senn: That's three items. How many more have we got to go?
Councilwoman Jansen: Tell them not to drive it when we're around though.
Mayor Mancino: As long as we each get to take it home one night a year or something, yeah. Okay.
Scott Botcher: Okay, thank you. I'm sorry.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Anything else?
Councilman Senn: I've got two things.
Councilman Labatt: I've got one.
Councilman Senn: Very quickly, I think we should direct staff to send a letter to Carver County advising
them of our decision on 101 and asking that they essentially support their member city in their
recommendation. And secondly.
Mayor Mancino: Does everybody feel comfortable with that?
Councilman Labatt: ... a resolution.
Scott Botcher: They'll get a copy of the resolution.
Councilman Senn: Secondly we need to submit a formal request to MnDot for use, let's see I've got the
exact wording here if I can find it. For MnDot to consider temporary use by the City of Chanhassen of the
right-of-way for purposes of a trail.
Scott Botcher: Yeah, we know that.
Councilman Senn: And stuff, but we need to get that in to get it start going through their process and.
Mayor Mancino: Because they'll write back and tell us what they need.
Councilman Senn: And I'm not sure Scott, I'll tell you tomorrow because I'm not sure whether it's
supposed to go to Bob Brown or if it's supposed to go to the commissioner.., so I'll let you know
tomorrow.
Mayor Mancino: Okay. Anybody have, feel comfortable with that?
Councilman Engel: No, those are good ideas.
42
City Council Meeting - April 24, 2000
Scott Botcher: Yeah, basic housekeeping items.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, Steve.
Councilman Labatt: I got a call from a future resident here who is building right now and just wanted to
call and thank Bob Reid and Bob Bement from our staff. Really helped him out in his problems he's
having so, said the two staff guys did a great job.
Scott Botcher: I think Steve's done a nice job with it.
Councilman Labatt: He's building over on Frontier.
Mayor Mancino: Alright, thank you and the meeting's over.
Mayor Mancino adjourned the City Council meeting at 8:50 p.m.
Submitted by Scott Botcher
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
43