1k. City Council Minutes September 23, 1996' CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 23,1996
Mayor Chmiel called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilwoman Dockendorf, Councilman Senn, Councilman
Mason and Councilman Berquist
STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Roger Knutson, Kate Aanenson, Todd Gerhardt, Charles Folch, and Todd
Hoffman
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Mason moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to approve the
agenda as presented.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None.
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the
following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations:
' a. Villages on the Ponds, Lotus Realty:
1) Final Plat Approval.
2) Approve Findings of Fact, Transferring of City Property.
C. Resolution #96 -76: Accept Utility Improvements at Creekside Addition, Project No. 95 -8.
d. Resolution #96 -77: Accept Public Street and Utility Improvements in McGlynn Park 2 nd Addition, Project
95 -16.
e. Approve Certificate of Completion for McGlynn Park 2 nd Addition, Project No. 95 -16.
f. Resolution #96 -78: Accept Streets and Storm Sewer Drainage System in Pointe Lake Lucy, Project No. 95-
9.
i. Authorize Installation of 100 watt High Pressure Sodium Street Lights, Herman Field Park.
k City Council Minutes dated September 9, 1996
Planning Commission Minutes dated September 4, 1996
Environmental Commission Minutes dated September 5, 1996
L Adopt Findings of Fact, Steven Schmieg, 900 Hiawatha Drive.
M. Approve Renewal of Interim Use Permit for the Bluff Creek Golf Course, 1025 Creekwood Drive.
' All voted in favor and the motion carried.
1(B). APPROVE PUD DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT AND PLANS & SPECIFICATIONS FOR
' VILLAGES ON THE PONDS, PHASE 1. ST. HUBERT CHURCH, PROJECT 96-13.
Mayor Chmiel: Kate, would you like to address item 1(b).
Kate Aanenson: Yes, thank you. Under the information for the administrative fees. On the breakdown sheet there is
an error in the amount of $5,000.00 so that motion, the total administration fee should be $106,905.00.
' Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I will move that.
0
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Councilman Mason: Second.
'
Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the construction plans and specifications for
Villages on the Ponds, Phase I dated September 16,1996, prepared by BRW, Inc. and the PUD/Development
contract dated September 23, 1996 subject to the following conditions::
1. The applicant enter into the development contract and supply the City with a cash escrow or letter of credit in
the amount of $1,076,000.00 and pay an administration fee of $106,905.00.
'
2. The applicant's engineer shall work with city staff in revising the construction plans to meet city standards.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Chmiel: Mark, I'm going to move items (g), (h) and 0) to item 13. Is there anyone here for any of those
items? Okay, if not we'll move along with the agenda.
VISITOR PRESENTATION: STEVE OLINGER_ CHASKA/CHANHASSEN HOCK ASSOCIATION
(CCHA) ICE ARENA IN CHANHASSEN.
Public Present:
Name Address
Joe P. 1000 Lake Susan Hills Drive
Amy Erickson 7090 Pimlico Lane
Mark Austo 15980 Dutoit Road, Carver
'
Brad H. 7280 Cactus Curve
Chad Sullivan 577 Concord Drive, Chaska
Elizabeth Pinnell P.O. Box 5, Chanhassen
Brian & Marge R. 1281 Hillside Circle, Chaska
Layton & Linda Zellman 2290 Timberwood Drive
Lynn Clemends 8699, Mary Jane Circle
Bryan and Peter McGovern 900 Penamint Court
l
Dave Erickson 520 Pineview Court
Ken Knutson 645 Dresden Drive
Ray R. 60 Lake Drive East
Stan Schwarz 2674 Spring Lake Road, Shakopee
Brian Johnson 2000 Scarborough Court, Chaska
Ed Garden 764 Ashley Drive, Chaska
Rick Jackson 8646 Chan Hills Drive
Mayor Chmiel: Todd, do you wish to say something?
Hockey Association.
'
Todd Hoffman: Sure can. I'd like to introduce Steve Olinger, the President of the
Mayor Chmiel: I hope you're as fast as he is.
Steve Olinger. Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council. First I'd like to thank you for bringing this to the table. I
think there is a unique opportunity here to combine the efforts of city government, private individuals and private
business in trying to do something for the children of this community, and that is to build a partly funded hockey
arena. We're in desperate need of ice. There's a severe ice shortage at this time„ and this is the only way that we
have been able to see that we can, and we can build in a short period of time. We believe it's a unique. opportunity to
combine business and private individuals and the city in something that ... the children. We did a study and we found -
2
,
H
n
u
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
the only way to do it is each one of these entities holds a piece of the puzzle and the piece that the city holds is a
parcel of land that we could use. If we can get that, we're confident that we can put together the rest of the pieces of
the puzzle to make this arena happen. I will now yield to Randy Mueller who is the Chairman of the ice arena task
force. I do want to say that, this not only counts for the children of Chanhassen but also Chaska, Victoria, and
Carver and even Minnetonka. I received a letter this morning from the President of the Minnetonka Hockey
Association and it reads as follows. Dear Chanhassen City Council. On behalf of the Minnetonka Youth Hockey
Association I would like to give our support for the building of a new ice arena in Chanhassen. MHYA has shared a
co- relationship with Chaska/Chanhassen Hockey Association... As part of this relationship, CCHA will make
available 300 to 500 hours of ice time in it's new arena to MHYA skaters. MHYA in return is willing to commit to
using these hours for the foreseeable future, helping to ensure that the new arena will be utilized at full capacity. We
hope the Chanhassen City Council will give it's support ... for our youth. Sincerely, Matt Thompson, President,
Minnetonka Youth Hockey Association. So you see this isn't just for the children here. It's for the children of half a
dozen communities around here. And we're just coming to ask that the city contribute the land for this so that we
can do the rest of the work... So right now I'll yield to Randy Mueller. A year ago I commissioned a ice arena task
force and Randy was the Chairman of that and he'll give his presentation and you can ask all your questions of him.
Thank you for your time.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you.
Randy Mueller. Mayor and Council. Right now one of my colleagues, Mark Ekloh who also served on the task
force, to help me here in the presentation. The presentation that we're going to give to you is the same presentation
that we gave to the CCHA Board on May 6 and it really represents the findings of our task force, as well as our
recommendations and I'd like to be able to spend a few moments with you to go through some of those findings.
First of all, it's hard to read I know, but we were sanctioned and charged by the CCHA ... task force to really go out
and search getting as much information and as much data as possible just to find out exactly what kind of situation
the CCHA was in. Not only in meeting the needs of our youth but also vis a vis, our competition in District 6. For
those of you that don't know, District 6 is one of the most, if not the most competitive districts in the State of
Minnesota where we compete against the likes of Apple Valley, Bloomington Jefferson, Burnsville and others.
...compare their quality of ice time because they do have available ice versus what we're able to offer our kids. So
we did have a mission statement that we operated on. We had a lot of significant volunteers from the association that
are participating in the task force and we're please to show you our results from those. From that task force.
Basically on the next slide here, history in time that I'd like you to walk through. This is not something that
happened overnight. As Steve mentioned, really the task force was formed probably about a year ago and Steve
and ...Board have been working on this problem for some time and this history time line that you see here basically
says that we've been working this issue and problem for some time, and it probably came to a critical head last
winter when what I call the ice disadvantage really kicked in. A lot of parents were upset due to the fact that they
weren't getting the quality of ice necessary, not only to compete in District 6 but a lot of the kids in our program
quite honestly were relegated to outdoor ice for their practice times and as you all know last winter was a very
difficult winter for all of us. Very cold. Poor weather conditions and the type of weather we had last winter wrecks
havoc on outdoor ice. I've got my son skated on a Squirt C team last year. Had one outdoor practice last January
because the conditions were so bad. So the quality of ice is very, very important to our program. And... because it's
such a team oriented sport, we need to have ice. We need to have the kids playing together in order to enhance their
skills and be competitive in this program. Some of our findings basically, and here's some of the facts. Due to the
growth in the community, and one thing that we're pretty proud of. This area is growing quite substantially. The
Chaska, Chan, Victoria, Carver, Minnetonka area. People are moving to this community to live here for the same
reasons we live here. And therefore they're bringing with them kids that want to get involved in hockey. So due to
the growth of the community. The existing indoor ice facility just will not be meeting it. It's not meeting it now and
will not meet it in the future. I also want to emphasize, we're here representing the CCHA and our focus is on
hockey but there are other interests for the community at large, including figure skating clubs and other open skate
that are very important to the entire community. Basically we're asking the, and our total participants who will go at
61% until 1999, year 2000 and I think that's a conservative estimate. If one of this goes to District #112 and looks at
the number of kids and what we ... that particular school district, which we're all a part of, you'll know it's supposed
to grow and the challenges that grow it's causing all of us. The biggest growth is going to occur, for those that are
not familiar with hockey, are going to occur at one of the senior levels. Bantam and Pee Wee. Bantam and Pee Wee
3
I�
�u
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
is where our kids really kick into developing advanced hockey skills. Therefore they require more ice. Therefore we
have this group of kids coming up through the program that are already at an ice disadvantage. At a time when they
need even more ice, it's not available. And we have a number of the coaches here that support the Bantam and Pee
Wee programs and they'll agree and contest to the fact that ... in order to be competitive. Our total estimated indoor
ice arena requirements will grow by 236% by the same year, 1999; year 2000. By the way, for those that don't
know. Our showcase arena, our only arena that we have right now is at the Chaska Community Center. One sheet of
ice. There is no ice available from the surrounding communities. They have none for sale and I think Steve
mentioned, Minnetonka will gladly purchase ice from us if they have an arena to purchase ice from. I mean their
demands for ice has also grown astronomically here so. Another key finding, we currently do not support the midget
or girls program. For those that don't know, the midget program are for those players that probably cannot compete
at the high school level but yet there's a lot of kids that want to still play hockey and skate and we don't have a
midget program now. We give this whole, the task force findings and why we sat on this task force is to encourage
participation and growth. We also do not have a girls program, which is an issue for us. Currently the girls within
our community, if they want to skate competitively, they participate in Eden Prairie. Eden Prairie likewise has a
similar problem with ice. Who knows what will happen in the future. Whether they'll support the girls of our
community to even have a girls program. So finally I kind of beat this up to death but again, outdoor ice is just not a
suitable alternative. I know a lot of people may think, well just flood an outdoor rink or get another outdoor rink. It
just does not work. The potential for injury exists, especially when these kids are flying at high speeds and trying to
playing a competitive game like this, it just won't work. But more importantly, just the weather extremes dictates a
very short season, if a season at all. I mentioned earlier that right now we believe from our findings, and this is
supported by some of the work we did, talking to some of the other programs in District 6, that our program was at a
disadvantage due to the lack of ice. Several of these programs, and you can look at the state champions. You know
Apple Valley, Bloomington Jefferson, and others that are in our district, I mean they're producing state champions
because they have multiple sheets of ice, which means they have more opportunities for kids to practice and
participate. The ice ... of 96 -97, when we started on this process, hopefully with the idea that we could find some
land so we could start the process to build an arena for this season. I think what's going to happen is the pains of last
year are only going to be worse this year. We've been unsuccessful thus far in finding that piece of land. That's why
we're here. And maybe we can minimiz the pain by telling people it's coming maybe in the next year. It won't
happen this year obviously. We can't find ice from other associations. I mentioned that earlier. One thing that I
also want to highlight is that hockey in Minnesota is a very big deal. There are some significant economic benefits to
this community. If we had our own arena we could sponsor hockey tournaments or figure skating club type of
events. Charge admissions. The benefits associated with those types of tournaments is significant. Motel, gas, food,
clothing, you name it. People spend money when they go to hockey tournaments. We're not reaping those benefits
like other communities in our district. We appreciate in our findings again all of the communities that have
participated with us. Of course Chanhassen. Also other cities like Chaska and Victoria also have expressed an
interest in helping, but you've been generous in your time you've spent with us. Therefore our recommendations, I
think you're one slide ahead of me here Mark but, our recommendations are that we have made as a task force,
through the CCHA Board, that we need to build another ice arena. We're estimating right now that the cost of the
arena will be anywhere from $1 million to $1.5 million. Owned and operated by the CCHA. Financed through the
CCHA and we hope to be creative in some of our financing, as well as other participation from businesses in the
community and individuals. We believe the key to make this work, and to make the economics work of course is to
have the land. I mean without it, none of this will work. It's going to require multiple community participation in
the process. The fact that we can apply for again to be part of a tax free status, under Minnesota 501C, helps the
economics work in this situation. And another thing is we, more importantly have a vested interest in an asset that
will be with us for some time. And we can therefore derive full ... of ice. One of the disadvantages of course of
owning a facility like this, that the CCHA recommends, is that we need to have strong management running the ice
arena to make sure that we do optimize, completely use the ice, including the sale of ice to other communities, as
well as addressing some of our own needs. And it may require some of the people within the CCHA securing a loan
and assuming some of the financial risk, but we believe we can address both of those disadvantages in this case. Our
next findings. We're talking about an arena that basically is going to be usable 6 to 7 months during the year. We
will be focused on that practice facility. We're not looking at building an alternative to the community center. A
very nice looking facility. It still is our showcase arena. We are looking for a facility that is quite usable during the
crunch period of time when we need it, like beginning here in the next month. The remainder of the year we're
basically suggesting that the building be closed down. The economics from our ... don't support having a second
4
1
u
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
sheet of ice in this community during the summer months. Now we can discuss alternative uses of the building but to
invest the dollars required to have a second sheet of ice during the summer months, we don't see it at this time. Of
' course we believe something like this, our focus is on youth participation because it's a great opportunity for having
multiple communities, that we service, to make it all work and we're really like your support and business
participation. We do plan on hopefully, if we do get the piece of land, we are hoping that our CCHA steps up with
volunteer labor to work. We have a number of people skilled in the trades that can help offset some of the costs
associated with putting this building together. It will be a challenge for our association and that's why we're here
tonight. I think we're up to the task. I do want to put up just some of the analysis and the data and I did give a copy
' of this to Todd, or a handout for your reference. The very first slide that I do have is the CCHA required ice time per
team by level and basically I want to draw your attention. The red is what we had available because of the one sheet
of ice. The green is what we need, and that's where we're at right now. And again as you add more people and more
youth and more participation, you can imagine the dramatic impact. The next slide basically shows the impact by
' adding additional teams, and it's hard to read this right now but we don't have a JV program right now. We don't
have a midget program. We don't have a girls program, and we do expect significant on the bantam, pee wee and
squirt levels. The next slide is our projected total of participants. We're still accumulating the information regarding
' this hockey season. The number of participants we're going to have but you can kind of see, as a total growth, and
we believe this is conservative going from 360, or there about in 1995, last hockey season, to over 600 by the year
1999 -2000 hockey season. This next chart probably hits home the growth by participants per level for those in
hockey. You can see there is a big growth in the youth that are coming up through the program. I mean this is like a
' tidal wave or what I like to say, a large pig going through a small snake because you've got all these kids coming and
we have no ice. Exactly what I see here and I don't know how the snake is going to open up wide enough to
consume the pig.
I Councilman Mason: That's a new one on me.
Randy Mueller. Next slide Mark. This basically I think per their abilities to challenge again one just needs to
' analyze. The red being, here's where we're at as of last year, `95 -'96 by level and you'll see already in the turquoise
`96 hockey season, the significant disadvantage that we already have. Anyway, summarizing all of the data.
Basically we had 601 hours to work with last hockey season. This hockey season, if we would have had our arena, I
' mean basically to meet status quo to be competitive in this district, we need to double the ice hours and we don't
have it so it's going to be discouraging to a lot of parents. We're concerned that it may discourage additional
participation at a time when we need to encourage participation. And the last slide I do have is basically the pain
associated with what caused basically the reaction within our association to call a special meeting which I think was
' what precipitated why the task force was founded to begin with. It's very visible that we just don't have the ice
to ... so that's all I have. I have a lot more detail that goes behind this information. More than willing to share any of
this analysis with you in further detail. Thank you for your time. Any questions you may have?
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Council have any questions?
Councilman Berquist: Not right now.
' Mayor Chmiel: Colleen.
' Councilwoman Dockendorf. Are we going to be discussing this at a future time? How do you want to handle visitor
presentation?
Mayor Chmiel: Well I think the question should come forth at this particular time.
Councilwoman Dockendorf. A couple questions, if you don't mind, for Todd. Have you talked lately with the land
group with...?
' Todd Hoffinan: Not lately, no.
Councilwoman Dockendorf. Not lately.
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Todd Hoffman: Not for months.
Councilwoman Dockendorf. What do you think the reality of her plans moving forward, and I'm speaking to, there's
a piece of property right across the road in fact where there's been some suggestions of an ice arena as part of a
larger sports complex.
Todd Hoffman: I couldn't offer...
Councilwoman Dockendorf. Oh really? Okay.
Todd Hoffman: I don't want to say it's a long shot or we're hopeful but I think... I believe she has spent as much
time with the City Council as of late as she has with staff...
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Have you determined...
Todd Hoffman: The HRA received those reports, that report and you have a copy of it on Thursday night but it still
requires about, anywhere from 6 to 9 feet of excavation and then compaction as part of the construction. The
majority of the, the most significant soil corrections need to take place on the building pad. That 6 to 9 feet. 3 to 6
feet of excavation underneath the parking area.
Councilwoman Dockendorf. Is there adequate parking in that area for that use?
Todd Hoffman: Yes there is. Yeah, we did a preliminary site plan and that's what we based the soil borings on.
Councilwoman Dockendorf And if the land is muck, or excavated and filled, what's the estimated market value of
that piece of land?
Todd Hoffman: The lots 5 and 6, although they're just over 11 acres. Those of you who are familiar with it,
Highway 5 is to the north and Paisley Park is located here and the trees really stretch on this westerly side of the
property, and that's a nice barrier from the industrial park. Then there's a wetland which comes up out of Lot 4 that
stretches into Lot 5. Something like this configuration. There's also some wetlands in the back of the property.
Additional trees on this side so what we're talking about is this center area for construction. So even though there's
some open ground, the lots are still limited in the extent of development that could occur.
Mayor Chmiel: Any other?
Councilwoman Dockendorf. If your ... is that just on the building and the soil corrections? No, that's all for me.
Mayor Chmiel: Michael.
Councilman Mason: This would be for the CCHA Todd. You talked a little bit about managing the facility. How,
as a City Council person, let's just say I'm real concerned down the road that you might have some trouble with
management. I'm just throwing that out. I mean how do you see that happening? Are you going to contract that
out? Do you have people that are capable of doing that? And if you do have people that are capable of doing it,
what happens when their kids leave CCHA?
Mark Ekloh: I'm Mark Ekloh and I'm part of the Board here in terms of helping to get this thing going. Basically
the management of hockey arenas is an undergraduate program in the State of Minnesota. There are a number of
community colleges that offer it and most of the arenas in the Twin Cities are operated on a management basis where
there is a full time employee that is employed for 6 months of the year who operates the facility. Has part time help
in terms of local kids running the zambonis. Working at the concession stands, etc, etc. Those people, there are
degree people. The best example would probably be Blake High School has one. Eden Prairie obviously has city
employees operating their facility, but there are a number of, Hastings. There are a number of facilities and rinks,
1
L
i
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Apple Valley, that have private individuals that they hire that work. It seems that it's a compliment to people who do
' golf course work. So a lot of people that are the maintenance and people that run golf courses in the summer time,
turn out to be hockey arena managers in the winter time so they have that 6 months that they can do one or the other
so it seems that the intention of the association would not to be to have the association directly involved. There
would be a Board of Directors so to speak. We haven't decided—but this has just been in our discussions that
' there's too many disadvantages to members being directly involved and it's much more important to have a
professional manage on the staff. Actually operating the facility so that's what we would envision. The other
important part of having a manager and a professional staff operating it and where we see that as, first of all the
important thing when you build an arena is we want the arena to be used as much as possible. 100% of the time. So
that person then becomes kind of a neutral individual. He sells hours to both Minnetonka, Eden Prairie, to Chaska,
whoever needs it and makes sure that it gets utilized. He's also the person that structures the tournaments and there
again in a hockey association or in a local rink, normally you'll see tournaments run at least on a monthly basis, if
' not on a bi- weekly type basis. That brings more money into the association and also probably as importantly, it
brings a lot of people into the community, both in terms of staying overnight, eating, so on and so forth so it's a big
fund raiser, not only for the association but for the community as well. And we would envision this facility being
' used on that basis too. That we want to have tournaments there and raise money for the association and we think that
would benefit the community as well.
Councilman Mason: Thanks. That's it.
Mayor Chmiel: Mark.
' Councilman Senn: For the hockey association again. Your approach is commendable as it relates to doing the
private fund raising on the building and the parking, and the soil correction, etc, okay. I guess what I need to
understand is, we all know the piece of land we're talking about. What do you really want to do? Do you want a 99
year lease for a dollar? Are you looking for simply getting the property over? Can you be more specific in terms of
' what you're looking to the city for?
Steve Olinger: We would like to purchase it for a dollar. That would be part of our...
' Councilman Senn: Okay, so you need the underlying fee ownership?
Steve Olinger. Yes.
' Councilman Senn: All right.
' Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Steve. Did you have?
Councilman Berquist: Well I had a couple of questions, one of which was exactly that. From a lender point of view,
the CCHA has to own the parcel? Forgive me for sounding like a cynic but if the parcel were sold for a greatly
' reduced dollar amount, and looking down the road 15 to 20 years from now, there was a decline in hockey or what
have you and the citizenry matures and they don't have any youth playing it anymore and the CCHA has this nice
hockey rink or building that can be used for something else. And now it's on the market. I'd like to see something
in there for protection of the city. I don't know how it could be done. Question for Todd and Todd is, how much.
That land was gotten as a result of tax forfeiture, right?
Todd Gerhardt: No ... delinquent or for the meeting of special assessments on the property which was about
' $176,000.00.
Councilman Berquist: 176. Okay. And the CCHA is a non - profit, non -tax paying organization, right? Okay. So
currently we've got about $180,000.00 into it, give and take soil borings and a thousand bucks for preliminary design
with KKE. That kind of stuff. All right. I'd love to see it happen. I really hope this thing is able to get done. I
think this, given our previous conversations, you know I'm in support of it. Actually it's hard to say, go hell bent
Mayor Chmiel: Good. I
Todd Hoffman: Mayor, I think if I'd like to work towards a close so you can get onto your other agenda items. I'd
like to let Roger go ahead, I think he can get our hooks into the property in some fashion.
Roger Knutson: Yes. Mayor, if I could just make a comment on Councilman Berquist's concerns. Those concerns
can be dealt with in the documentation on restrictions on the use and things like that so that can be easily dealt with.
8 1
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
for ... based on four soil borings, but I would certainly hope that you can make the thing go and I wish you well. I do
have questions regarding ownership of the land and protection of the city. I think that's all I've got.
'
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Yeah. Would you like to come to the microphone please?
Mark Ekloh: Steve, can I ask you just a specific question? Just so I make sure we understand in terms of our
'
discussion in trying to meet your needs as well. Protection of what? The financial investment that the city's made
or?
thousands dollars to
'
Councilman Berquist: The City has spent obviously, you know thousand and of provide
recreation opportunities for youth and adults in all of the facilities, to the best of my knowledge, are community
owned. This would be the fast one that would not be community owned and the City would have no recourse for the
dollars, in essence, donated. So that's just something that needs to be worked out. I'm certain that it can be.
'
Mark Ekloh: Okay. I just wanted to make sure I understood.
be if it 20 down the
'
Councilman Senn: You know Mark, maybe a different way to look at it would you sell years
road, maybe the City would like to recoup it's $200,000.00 investment or something like that.
Mark Ekloh: Something like that, I understand. I just wanted to know if it was a financial issue that the city wanted
'
to make sure it protected or if it was a concern about something else so I appreciate that.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Can I...?
'
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, go ahead.
Councilwoman Dockendorf I'm curious as to how your 501C3...would be affected if you do start renting it out.
'
Does that affect your status as a non - profit? Or is it just a matter of looking at the books and if you're just breaking
even?
'
Steve Olinger. Yes...
Mark Ekloh: The other thing is the State Legislature 3 years ago, and we can get the Council a copy of that. Three
years ago was kind enough to pass legislation that allowed 501C3 corporations to own their own arenas and rent
'
them out and stuff like that and it was blessed by the boys over at the State of Minnesota.
Councilman Senn: Was that Mighty Duck legislation stuff.
'
Mark Ekloh: No, actually it was prior to that and then the Mighty Ducks followed after that, but there was actually
legislation that approved associations to own their own arenas and blessed the 501C3 status and there are a number
of arenas that are currently owned under that already in the State.
'
Councilman Senn: Does that same legislation then protect you on property taxes on the same basis?
Mark Ekloh: Yep. Yep. Yep. Makes it a non - profit, non - taxable scenario.
Mayor Chmiel: Good. I
Todd Hoffman: Mayor, I think if I'd like to work towards a close so you can get onto your other agenda items. I'd
like to let Roger go ahead, I think he can get our hooks into the property in some fashion.
Roger Knutson: Yes. Mayor, if I could just make a comment on Councilman Berquist's concerns. Those concerns
can be dealt with in the documentation on restrictions on the use and things like that so that can be easily dealt with.
8 1
I
I CJ
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Todd Hoffman: Specifically the association has met twice with the HRA. In May and then last Thursday evening.
' The HRA gave the project it's blessing. Obviously they wanted to see the input from the City Council. That's why
the association is here this evening. Assistant City Manager Gerhardt recommended to the HRA that a task force be
formed if this received the Council's blessing this evening, for a Council member and member of the HRA,
association members, staff members from the different parties, to study the uses and take a look at the other alternate
' uses which would then no longer be viable on the property and then to initiate the planning and review process on
this as a whole so that's where we are this evening. Again if you see fit, I would recommend that you go ahead and
initiate that task force formation.
' Mayor Chmiel: Okay. All right. We have a couple things then to look at. Is to form the task force in itself. Do you
have a question before that?
' Councilman Senn: Yeah, if I could Don. In relationship to forming a task force, it seems to me that that becomes a
working group effectively to put this proposal together. I think before we do that we should simply schedule this
item on a future meeting. Set a public hearing effectively with the concept that the city will provide the land for the
' situation and get past that point before we get into effectively a plan for implementation. And I think that could be
done fairly quickly and having it then, it seems to me the next logical step is then to put together that task force to
work towards implementation of the deal but I think first you've got to kind of get the preliminary stuff.
' Mayor Chmiel: They've indicated they can't do anything with that rink this year to have it ready that quickly so I
think there's time limitations there that allow us sufficient time to go through that particular process. But I wouldn't
want to see this bogged down in any way. I would like to probably see that probably all take place within, do you
' think take all this together within the next month?
Todd Hoffman: Yeah I think the, even though it's going to be next year, they have a lot of construction things and
site plan reviews and those type of things to take a look at so, we talked about a maximum two months review
process I think...
Councilwoman Dockendorf. You're not planning on surcharging the soil at all? So you don't need to get in there
' yet this year?
Todd Hoffinan: No, no.
' Steve Olinger: If we could get some sort of a commitment in a short period of time. We can begin negotiations with
corporations who have expressed interest in helping us out. I don't want to go any further with those negotiations
until we know that we've got the land so I ask you.
' Councilman Senn: Yeah, I think it's easier for us to give you that commitment, but I mean the fast step is kind of
holding the public hearing and making sure that everybody's aware of it. And then if they're aware of it, then I think
we can give you whatever you want in terms of a blessing or whatever. I mean that's a vote that would be taken and
' then beyond that you can go.
Councilman Mason: Can we do that public hearing two weeks from now? Put it on the agenda.
' Don Ashworth: I think so.
Councilman Senn: Yeah, maybe get the newspaper to do a little article on it or something so people know about it.
Don Ashworth: Yeah. The only question really would be the hearing notice. But I think we can. Making the
assumption of say that it would be in for next Thursday. Not this Thursday. Next Thursday.
' Councilman Mason: 7 to 10 days, isn't it?
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Don.Ashworth: But there's no real requirements. If that's acceptable to the City Council because then it would,
you'd be notifying people literally 3 -4 days in advance. If your next meeting would be two weeks from today.
'
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Are the surrounding property owners already aware of this discussion at all?
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah Charles.
'
Charles Folch: I believe the next Council meeting is three weeks from tonight.
'
Mayor Chmiel: You're right. There are three weeks.
Councilman Mason: Way to go Charles. Well then I'd like to see that on the next Council agenda. Public hearing
.for this.
'
Mayor Chmiel: All right, we can do that.
Todd Gerhardt: Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes. '
Todd Gerhardt: I don't want to pour water on the fire here. There have been other parties that have looked at this
site for other interests. Compost site. Future public works expansion. And my recommendation to the HRA was to
go through those priorities so that we can start the future planning of some of those locations, if you wish to see that ,
on the site. But that was my recommendation to the HRA. To try to prioritize the uses for that site and kind of
weigh out what's the best advantage, or the advantage the community would have...
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. So with that, maybe we can get some additional information back from HRA is what you're '
saying, or are you looking at public works to come up with some solutions as to the basic needs that they're looking
at too?
Todd Gerhardt: I want to get a group together to prioritize the uses for that site. Evaluating it as a hockey site. '
Evaluating it as a potential public works expansion site. Evaluating it as a compost site. And then go through some
type of priority process identifying what the best use of that site would be. And not anticipating that it would take '
that long to do.
Councilman Senn: Can you do that by next meeting.
Mayor Chmiel: Can you get that done in 3 weeks?
Kate Aanenson: No. I don't think so. '
Todd Gerhardt: I would hope we could get some kind of preliminary analysis done by that time.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Maybe if we can go on that particular process. Did you have a problem Kate? '
Kate Aanenson: Well I think Todd's right. I think there's other competing interests. That's why the
recommendation came forward to do the task force because now we're holding a public hearing based solely on this '
and I think there's other interests, city interests on this piece of property. We want to make sure that we went
through a fair evaluation on that before we acquiesce the rights on that. Not to say that's not the best use of that but
we want to go through that process. There are some other interests, city uses that we need space for. So that's why
Todd's recommendation was, and the staff department heads talked about it. We felt the best way was to give us a '
little bit of time to try to go through that process internally before we gave up on ... so when you said the public
hearing in 3 weeks, that wouldn't give us really, I'm not sure enough time to go through that process.
10 '
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Councilman Senn: Well I misunderstood on Todd's end because when you were suggesting a task force, I thought
you were being specific as it relates to this proposal. For the member of the Council and the HRA included on the
task force you said. Now are we talking two different things here?
Todd Hoffman: No, it's two different interpretations. ...recommendation that came out of the HRA was to form a
task force to look at all the issues and the variety of uses and that evening we talked about the members that would
be on there. We had staff members and HRA and City Council so everyone could keep up to speed. This piece of
property has been kicked around for years and we've talked about soccer fields. It also happens to be the underpass
location, the trail underpass location for the future Lake Ann Park underpass. That occurs on the east side of the
' property. Public works is currently using it as a temporary stockpile site so it's a public issue as to, and perhaps you
can go so far as to hold a public hearing on constructing an ice arena there... Assistant City Manager Gerhardt's
asking that that the other interests on a city wide level get their crack at the property as well.
' Councilman Senn: Well I assume that would happen on the public hearing process but I think more from a context, I
mean if we're going to follow that procedure, which is fine. This would be a lot more than a two month process. I
' mean you're not going to put together a task force. Study all those issues. Produce a finding and bring it back to
HRA, City Council. Schedule a public hearing and everything like that in a month. Right?
Todd Hoffman: That is an in -depth process, you're correct. Like I say, it all depends on what the, who forms that
' task force and what they put into it. If Council's got some direction in that regard, we're willing to take it. You may
have opinions as well about the best use of the property that staff would be interested in hearing.
' Councilwoman Dockendorf: So you've already tentatively selected that task force members?
Todd Hoffman: No, we have not. We've just talked about what bodies it would be coming from.
Councilman Senn: What is that?
Todd Hoffman: HRA. City Council. Hockey Association. Assistant City Manager Gerhardt. Planning staff
' member. Park and Rec staff member.
Councilman Senn: Well, I'm sorry. I'm confused again. I mean it seems to me then that that's a group you're
putting together effectively over an ice arena proposal. Where's your people from public works? Where's your
' people from, you know that are interested in using it for composting or soccer fields or whatever. See I'm hearing
two different things.
' Todd Hoffman: Leave the hockey association out of it. Put your Public Works Director in there. I represent soccer.
Planning represents compost facility.
Councilman Senn: I don't think you need Council or HRA in it. I mean I think you guys ought to go put something
' together and bring it into us.
Todd Hoffman: We'd be glad to do that.
' Mayor Chmiel: I think that would be much simpler. With that direction for staff to move in that particular way. I
would think so.
' Todd Hoffman: Will allow Assistant Manager Gerhardt to go ahead and formalize that and if it's prudent to put the
public hearing on in 3 weeks, we'll do that. If it's not we'll postpone it another week.
' Mayor Chmiel: As Todd mentioned, if he can have some preliminary kind of information from their input.
Councilman Mason: If at all possible I'd like to see it in 3 weeks. I do also understand the limitations of staff and
how much work they do.
11
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Thank you. Go ahead.
Steve Olinger: I'd like to thank the City Council for taking this under consideration. I know that it's a complicated
issue and it's something that could be a political football but thank you for keeping an open mind on this. This
whole process began last spring when the Mayor... myself, members of the School District from Chaska, and ... part
of Chanhassen. He brought us all together and with the understanding that Chanhassen needs an ice arena. The
communities around us does not have that and this is an opportunity for Chanhassen to get an ice arena without
having to finance it. With having to just merely give us the land. It's a very generous offer. But it would be the only
privately financed arena in this area and that's something that Chanhassen can be proud of also. Along with the
hockey association, so please keep that in mind. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Good, appreciate it. All right, we'll move to the next item which is item number 3.
PUBLIC HEARING: ASSESSMENT HEARING FOR LAKE RILEY AREA TRUNK UTILITIES PRASE I
PROJECT NO. 93-32A.
Public Present:
Name Address
Wayne Holtmeier
8524 Great Plains
Blvd.
Betty Ann Clark
8522 Great Plains
Blvd.
Bud & Marian Paulson
8528 Great Plains
Blvd.
Al Klingelhutz
8600 Great Plains
Blvd.
Anita Beal 562 Mission Hills Way W.
Alicia Keane
566 Mission Hills
Way W.
Mayor Chmiel called the public hearing to order.
Charles Folch: Thank you Mr. Mayor, members of Council. We have our project engineer with us tonight to give
you a presentation, the final data and information regarding this improvement project. Following his presentation I'd
like to summarize some information from a number of appeals that we received and then turn it back over to City
Council for a formal hearing. With that, Dave Mitchell from OSM.
Dave Mitchell: Thanks Charles. Mr. Mayor, members of Council. I'm going to try to make this brief and get
through this rather quickly. I'd like to start off with just briefly going through what was included originally in Phase
I of the project. Primarily it was the watermain highlighted in red. As you very well know, this is part of a much
larger project that's currently being constructed this summer. This area was constructed in `94 -`95. There was also
a small part of the sanitary sewer that was installed by the developer of Mission Hills up to the south portion of
the ... property which is in this general area. Due to some ... that came up with this parcel of land down here, this
particular piece of watermain was not installed, but will be installed at a future date once development of that
property begins. What we're here for tonight is the assessment hearing for Phase I. This next slide shows the
assessment area. Primarily the area being assessed for Phase I of the project includes the single family homes along
the south side of Lake Susan, the Mission Hills development, Tigua Lane, and a couple other large parcel properties
on the north side of Mission Hills as well as a portion of the Al Klingelhutz farm on the south side of TH 101.
We've got approximately 134 properties enrolled with this particular assessment. Some project summaries,
financing and project costs. The total construction cost for the project, Phase 1, was $300,925.90. Engineering,
administrative and legal costs totaled $89,747.97. Slightly less than 30% of the construction cost, which is well
within normal ranges that we strive for. Easement acquisition for this particular phase cost the city $15,013.85 for a
total project cost of $405,687.72. Project funding down below shows a total project cost again of $405,687.72.
Proposed present assessments are $553,263.00 with the additional assessments being paid and future hook -up
charges. Again that's in the future when the other areas develop of $150,350.00. A footnote to the proposed
assessments. Over the project cost, you'll note that the anticipated revenues generated by the assessments exceeds
12
1
0
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
the total project cost. Just a reminder to Council that a positive.. :assessment revenue is used in the future for wells,
pumping stations, towers, lift stations, those type of trunk facilities which are typically not assessed. Like I say, in
' keeping it simple, that's I guess that's the end of my presentation unless Council has any questions of me or specific.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, is there any questions of Council? Steve?
Councilman Berquist: No.
' Mayor Chmiel: Colleen.
Councilwoman Dockendorf. No.
Mayor Chmiel: Mike.
Councilman Mason: None.
Mayor Chmiel: Mark.
Councilman Senn: Not for the moment.
Mayor Chmiel: You get off lucky. Okay, as I mentioned. Yes.
' Charles Folch: May I go through the responses...?
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, all right.
' Charles Folch: Prior to printing of the Council packets we received four letters. Formal letters of objections to the
assessment roll. All those letters, along with the response to those letters, are included in your packets. Just going
through them briefly. The first objection was from the Hruby's, which are property owners in the Mission Hills
' development. They basically just sent a formal letter announcing that no financial responsibility of the
assessments ... Rottlund Homes, had escrowed the dollars associated with the pending assessments at the time of
closing, as they have done with all of the properties of the new Mission Hills subdivision. The second objection was
received from Mr. Holtmeier of 8524 Great Plains Boulevard. Basically Mr. Holtmeier's contention is that he
' cannot directly connect to the trunk watermain at this time and does not feel he should be assessed. I explained in a
letter back to Mr. Holtmeier that this is trunk improvement. An area benefit and his property is within the service
area. At some point in time when lateral legs are extended to the property, there will be a future charge associated.
It's just more of a learning experience in terms, or learning that process in terms of what the differences are between
lateral watermains and trunk watermains. The premise applies for the third objection. Mr. Terry Owens of 8520
Great Plains Boulevard. Again, more of a definition of what the trunk benefit is versus the lateral benefit in the
future. The final objection was received ... was from the Nickolay's of 8500 Tigua Circle. Basically they were
' inquiring as to why they were being assessed when their developer installed a watermain at the time of their
development back in 1980. They're correct. However, the water lines that were put in in 1980 had nothing to
connect to. Basically were just dry lines buried beneath the road. The City has invested dollars now for bringing the
' trunk watermains down to serve that area and now will have water and such that there is a trunk to those properties.
There were three additional letters received either Friday or Monday that were passed out to you tonight, along
with... The first one from Mr. Clark, 8522 Great Plains Boulevard. He has a similar contention to the Holtmeier's
and the Owen's ... again. Finding water trunk assessment benefit here versus the lateral. And then the final two
objections are from property owners, the Larsons and also the Mulligan from Tigua Lane. Again, a similar
situation. They were not aware that they would have a future or have a trunk assessment kind of coming to their
property, believing that they had paid for their watermain at the time of development so again letters have been sent
out to all the property owners in response to these objection letters accordingly. Staff recommends that the
assessment roll, as included in the packet dated September 19, 1996 be approved accordingly.
1
13
L I '
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you Charles. As I mentioned before, this is a public hearing. For those of you who
would like to carry this just a little further with your concerns, other than what the letters have been. I'd like you to
'
come forward. Please state your name, your address and what that concern basically is. So with that we will start
that right now.
Wayne Holtmeier. Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, I'm Wayne Holtmeier. I live at 8524 Great Plains
,
Boulevard. I believe you have a copy of the letter that I sent to the City earlier. I would like to read a prepared
statement and then offer a copy. I don't know if that's appropriate or not this evening, and I'd be happy to answer
any questions that you might have. I did receive the letter on September 18 from the Public Works Director
'
rejecting my objection to the proposed trunk main assessment of $1,375.00. I do understand what a lateral main is
and a trunk main. I did not need to be educated in that respect. I guess my question is again, and registering a
concern that I do not see, even with the trunk mains, that it offers any benefit to my property at this point and as I
indicated in my letter to the city, I would love to hook -up to sewer at this particular point in time. This particular
'
area, with the various estates, I think that were referred to as the various parcels of land, I think are fairly unique to
the city and they were plotted back in the, probably in the 50's, late 40's and I think as I tried to point out in the
initial letter, when sanitary sewer came through, Project 73 -7, there was, I think that uniqueness was taken into
consideration and there were laterals that were brought off of the main sewer trunk line to take into consideration the
uniqueness of these parcels of land. And my request and my concern and one area that I did not understand is why
this same kind of consideration was not taken as the watermain was put through, and will be servicing this area in the
future. I respectfully request the following information within 10 days after the adoption of this assessment, if the
'
vote to uphold the proposed assessment of $1,375.00 against my property. Number one, I've asked and have yet to
see a copy of the policy determining and defining what is in fact the benefit of the service area for a trunk watermain
and trunk sewer line projects. I don't understand what the rationale or what the city project or policy is and I would
like a copy of that policy if I could please. Secondly, a list of property owners charged benefit sewer area
assessments on this particular project and other water projects within the last 4 years that did not have direct access
to the watermain. I have 400 feet that I can't access, that I'm from this trunk watermain. Even if I wanted to hook
up to it, I'd have to go over my neighbor's property. I have no access and from that perspective I don't feel have any
'
benefit from the watermain. And then thirdly, we've had some discussion back and forth about who are the affected
property owners if we put a lateral in, to my particular piece of property, and I'd like a list of the affected property
owners that would be in the service area for lateral water main extension to my parcel of property. I don't
'
understand who they are I guess. You talked about 50 %. I don't know 50% of who. Is it everybody along TH 101
or is it just the property owners that don't have direct access to that trunk line? I thank you for your consideration
and your time this evening and who should I give a copy of this to?
'
Mayor Chmiel: Why don't you just bring it here. Thank you. Okay, is there anyone else?
Al Klingelhutz: I'm Al Klingelhutz from 8600 Great Plains Boulevard. I guess I wasn't too surprised when I saw '
the amounts of these assessments. Amounts to about $104,650.00 and I think we discussed at one time a few years
back how this assessment was going to be applied I did talk to Charles prior to the meeting and I wish Charles would
explain once more how this is goingto work. My proposed present assessment isn't too bad at all. I won't complain
about that. What I'm really concerned is when I have to pay the balance of this assessment and how it's going to be,
if there's going to be interest charged or the assessment be increased in the trunk charges as the years go by.
Charles Folch: Sure. Basically there's two properties that Al has involved with this improvement project. It's listed '
as, well the easy reference in your schedule there is Plan ID number X and Plan ID number Z -18. And on both of
those basically will get done as, maintain a consistent policy that we passed whereby for a property that's non-
developed at this point in time, we institute a one unit per 10 acre assessment, trunk assessment at this point in time. '
And then future units basically will not come due until the property is developed. At that time when the property, the
lots are subdivided and we have a plat coming through, basically the trunk hook -up charges if you will, which are
the, in a sense, the deferred assessment would be paid at that time. It's not actually a deferred assessment where the
interest keeps compounding. Basically this property will pay the hook -up charge at that current rate at some year '
down the road when it does apply. The same goes for the other property, Z -18. There's a one unit assessment for
$2,400.00 in trunk sewer at this point in time and basically we've shown the future hook -up deferment charges, an
estimation of what they could generate, what could be generated from the property based on it's land use and net '
14 1
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
developable land. If it developed more intensely mow n the future it would generate more units of course, we'll
collect more charges based on the number of units that are derived. But that was correct. These non - assessed units
' at this time will be collected as a trunk hook -up charge at some future ... time.
Al Klingelhutz: I guess if that's agreed upon by the Council, I suppose I'll have to accept this assessment. I know
' the sewer and water is both there. I did have, the farmhouse already has sewer. It had sewer when the Lake Susan
project went in, which was quite a long time ago ... by Charles since I did come up and talk to him about that. That's
why the one... considerably smaller than the other one.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thanks Al. Anyone else? If seeing none, is there a motion to close the public hearing?
Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Mason seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and
the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Mayor Chmiel: Steve?
' Councilman Berquist: Yes.
Mayor Chmiel: Do you have any concerns in regards to this particular hearing?
Councilman Berquist: I wish I could offer solutions to everyone that doesn't think they're going to benefit from it
but I'm afraid I cannot. The trunk watermains offer a benefit to homeowners, however indirect they may be or
' however far down the road they may end up being something that it seems we end up being forced to live with as we
live in populated areas. Aside from making that comment, I really have none.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Colleen.
' Councilwoman Dockendorf: Charles, did you go through the process of contacting, particularly Mr. Holtmeier's
neighbors to see if there was consensus about whether they wanted the lateral to be put in as part of this project?
' Charles Folch: I believe there was some discussion at, this goes back probably three years now to when we had the
neighborhood meeting prior to the feasibility hearing on the project. I don't recall if Mr. Holtmeier or another
resident in the area had raised that question at the hearing, but it appeared to us that it didn't go any further than that
' in terms of support. I believe there's a couple of houses that have been put in there in the last 5 years that have
placed in new wells on the property and without receiving a formal request any further than just inquiring at that
neighborhood meeting, didn't pursue it any further.
Councilwoman Dockendorf Would there be some, you know economies of scale if we did put the lateral one and
save us the trunk line?
' Charles Folch: There can be but I think we've got enough projects going on each year that we can add this and
basically we're going to have trunk projects going on throughout the city here in the next coming years. This can be
an add -on, a site alternative but ... was to get that same benefit.
' Councilwoman Dockendorf. Okay. So it's not necessary for the neighbors, they wouldn't achieve any great savings.
Thanks. Nothing further.
' Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mike.
Councilman Mason: Nothing.
' Mayor Chmiel: Mark.
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Councilman Senn: Charles. I was trying to understand Mr. Holtmeier's issue over the 400 feet not being servicable.
Can you enlighten me a little bit on that?
Charles Folch: I believe what he's referring to is that it takes some 400 feet from his property, from the ... from his
property back to this trunk line for him to actually have water. That's not uncommon for trunk improved projects.
When you look at the other three phases of the Upper Bluff Creek trunk improvement projects that we've put in,
there's some of these properties that were 2 and 3 properties deep in the servicable area that basically received a
trunk assessment and I can certainly pull those assessment rolls out from the projects in the past. That's a typical
policy. We define the trunk sewer and trunk watermain... is defined what is the service area for the trunks that are
put in. Basically it's looking at a road map of where you can bring out the lateral lines to serve areas. And based on
that, those of you who plan, the concept plan if you will, that's what you use to determine what properties benefit
from the trunk service at this point in time, even though lateral lines will likely need to be extended at some point in
the future to actually serve the property.
Councilman Senn: Now in terms of the laterals that we're talking, or the laterals that are in place already. That's a
little bit the opposite of normal, right? Normally we're bringing the trunk in, ...the laterals follows?
Charles Folch: Typically, right. Typically the trunks come in first and the laterals second and most often what we
see is the laterals are put in by developers. Most often we're not involved in putting in laterals but there are a few
cases Eke .this particular one that's an existing developed area and at some point in time you're likely to see a capital
improvement project.
Councilman Senn: I'm just trying to draw correlations so they can understand it better. I mean effectively we
normally bring in the trunk. The developer does the lateral but effectively that all gets assessed through at the same
time.
Charles Folch: Right, right.
Councilman Senn: That would be normally.
Charles Folch: Right.
Councilman Senn: Okay, I mean normally that lateral cost is not in the cost of their lot or whatever. It's still part of
that initial assessment, generally? So it's coupled with the trunk. So I mean even though we're reversing it here,
they aren't being charged any more than anybody else is charged in relationship to the benefit of a trunk line.
Charles Folch: That's correct. They aren't being charged any more.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Some of the concerns that I had, I was trying to face the same issue that I did 21 years ago,
when I moved into the house that we moved into and I can remember being greeted with a nice little assessment as
well. Because the area had not been developed with the things that were needed for that specific location. I can
remember my costs initiated back from the city was about $10,000.00. That sort of shook me up just a tad. Needless
to say, you weren't here Charles. But it is, it's something that eventually goes through and those assessments have to
come back. The only way we can do it is, doing it just as it's being proposed. But some of those other things that
you're looking at Wayne, and we'll get back to your questions and address those and get a response from Charles.
So, is there any other discussions?
Councilwoman Dockendorf. One please. Do we have any terms like we do on some of the others, put a cap on the
dollar amount...
1
I F
I
Charles Folch: Sure. Basically this is based on the bonding for the project and the interest rate is set at 7 %z% and t
the term of 8 years.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Okay. So they have that option?
16
Ll
I
[I
L
n
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Charles Folch: Right.
Mayor Chmiel: What was that percentage?
Charles Folch: 7 %.
Mayor Chmiel: 7 %. Any other questions? If not I'll look for a motion.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I would move adoption of the assessment roll.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second?
Councilman Berquist: Second.
Resolution 496 -79: Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Berquist seconded to adopt the
assessment roll for the Lake Riley Area Phase I Trunk Utility Improvement Project No. 93 -32A dated
September 13, 1996 with the interest rate at 7 % and a term of 8 years. All voted in favor and the motion
carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING: VACATION OF GREAT PLAINS BOULEVARD BETWEEN LAKE DRIVE AND
MARKET BOULEVARD.
I Public Present:
I
I�
k
Name Address
John Ward 5916 House Road
Brad Johnson 7425 Frontier
Al Herzog 1191 Homestead Lane
Vernelle Clayton 422 Santa Fe Circle
Charles Folch: This is basically an important housekeeping item, if you will, for the Villages on the Ponds PUD in
order to proceed with site grading. On September I' of this year the MnDot Transportation Commissioner signed an
order which actually relocated or officially relocated the temporary trunk highway pass off of the segment of Great
Plains Boulevard through this development and actually officially relocated it to Market Boulevard as it is currently
signed. With that, MnDot has ... Trunk Highway 101 right -of -way to the city and since this road corridor is not going
to be in use or is not compatible with the development as being approved, there's no use for the right -of -way and
accordingly the city can vacate the right -of -way which allows the development to begin their mass grading. And so
with that the city would recommend the vacation of the described right -of -way.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. As I mentioned before this is a public hearing and anyone wishing to express their
opinion on this particular proposal, please step forward. State your name and your address and your concern. Is
there anyone wishing to address this issue?
Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Mason seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in
favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Mayor Chmiel: Steve. Any other concerns in regard to this?
Councilman Berquist: Well the only thing that struck me was the, we had a land transfer within the consent agenda.
I'm not sure if this is contiguous or adjacent to... I don't really need to know too terribly much other than these are
within the same project and it's not the same piece.
17
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Charles Folch: No. This needs to be vacated in order for them to have the plat cleaned up.
Councilman Berquist: No, nothing else.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Colleen.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: No.
Mayor Chmiel: Michael.
Councilman Mason: No.
Mayor Chmiel: Mark.
Councilman Senn: I have a little bit. So this isn't related to what we did in relationship with the land transfer?
Kate Aanenson: Yes it is. It's part of the same project but there's two separate issues. One, there's a piece of
property that we already acquired for acquisition for a watermain that went through the property earlier. But it can
be held separately so engineering generally does vacations. Puts it as a separate item because you're vacating a
segment of road, so instead of putting it on consent, we did hold a public hearing but it's in the same general area as
the Villages project. It relates to the Villages project. I think Charles answered that question, it can stand
independently and that's why we made it a public hearing.
Councilman Senn: Okay, but this isn't part of that trade -off or whatever that was referenced here now?
Kate Aanenson: No. No. That was part of the first one. This is the vacation of the road, right. But it's part of the
same project, I think was your question. The Villages on the Pond. They need to vacate this, as Charles indicated,
to clean up the plat and so they can go forward and proceed with grading.
Councilman Senn: Okay. So they're effectively vacated this portion and we will be re- establishing the new roadway
systems through the project.
Charles Folch: That's correct. There's a new roadway system as a part of the plat. ...and they will be private.
Councilman Senn: Oh, they will be private?
Kate Aanenson: All the streets will be.
Councilman Senn. Okay, well now how does that relate normally to what we do? Do we normally vacate the street
and just simply turn over the right -of -way when it wasn't part of the plan originally?
Charles Folch: I guess there's a lot of factors affecting how that's handled. In this particular case, due to design
elements and things like that and other issues, mutually agreed, mutual consensus from the staff and the developer is
that it made more sense to have the road system servicing the development... from a design standpoint.
Councilman Senn: Okay. Well there was, we had another letter that was given to us tonight in relationship to the
soccer field issue and the church and stuff and that appears like it potentially could be an ongoing issue. I guess the
thing I want to just kind of make the point on is, the city is making a substantial contribution to this project as it
relates to this right -of -way and land area already, correct? Is that a fair statement?
Charles Folch: That's correct.
Councilman Senn: Okay.
117.3
1
IJ
.1
1
1
1
I
n
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other discussion? If hearing none, is there a motion?
Councilman Berquist: I move approval of the adoption of the resolution vacating existing right -of -way on Great
Plains Boulevard from Lake Drive East to Market Boulevard.
Councilman Mason: Second.
Resolution #96 -80: Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Mason seconded to adopt the resolution
vacating the existing right -of -way for Great Plains Boulevard conditioned upon final plat approval of Villages
on the Ponds and execution of the development contract for Villages on the Ponds by the applicant. All voted
in favor and the motion carried.
AWARD OF BIDS: RESIDENTIAL SUMP PUMP INSPECTION PRO GRAM.
Charles Folch: Thank you Mr. Mayor, members of Council. During the past month or so, since receiving word of a
grant approved from the Metropolitan Council and Environmental Services, staff has solicited a request for proposals
from qualified firms to conduct the proposed residential sump pump inspection program within the city of
Chanhassen. A total of four proposals were received and it was relatively small group than was anticipated since
there are very few firms involved in this type of work at this time. This is, while the sump pump issue is not new to
the Twin Cities, the concept of going through and doing a formal inspection of these types of devices is actually a
new type issue. And of the four proposals that were received, they were basically rated on six criteria. The first was
past record and experience of the firm in performing this type of work. The qualifications and experience of the staff
that would be assigned to this project. Their approach to the program. The cost of the program with a proposed time
schedule... Of the four proposals received, the one submitted by Buchen and Associates, or Buchen Environmental
Services was rated the best overall of the proposals submitted. The firm has conducted a number of sump pump
inspection programs in communities throughout the state of Minnesota. All the staff that would be assigned to this
project had experience in conducting the programs, and in fact the project manager, Mr. Craig Anderson is actually
probably one of the pioneers in developing this type of inspection program, which other firms are not duplicating.
It's also clear from ... in talking with Mr. Anderson that we've learned what things work on these programs. What
things to watch out for and they apparently this is... Their proposal also would be compatible with the Metro
Council's 18 month window to complete the program. As indicated in the staff report, we have approximately
$100,000.00 to initiate the work of this program. Basically $60,000.00 from the City's budget. $40,000.00 from the
Metropolitan Environmental Services. This will likely allow us to conduct the beginning of Stage I. The phase one
program if you will. Probably somewhere in the neighborhood of 3,500 homes could be expected. One important
housekeeping item is that we still need to execute this grant agreement with Metropolitan Council Environmental
Services. I anticipate that, at one of the two Council meetings in October we'll have that grant document for your
approval and execution so therefore our recommendation is contingent upon having that document signed in the near
future. Basically again ... to the firm of Buchen Environmental Services... project. They submitted the highest rated
proposal and most experienced personnel and was actually the second lowest cost proposal received. Therefore, it is
recommended that the Council approve the contract service proposal with Buchen Environmental Services to
conduct the Residential Sump Pump Inspection Program, Phase I, in the amount of $100,000.00 contingent on the
execution of the program grant contract with Metro Council Environmental Services.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Mark.
Councilman Senn: Charles, a question. As I went through this, you kind of broke it down into a few sections. You
know public notification, information, education and physical inspection. Now public notification, now they're
going to do that under the contract?
Charles Folch: That's correct.
Councilman Senn: Okay. And they will also do the inspections? The only one that I guess that I wanted to talk a
little bit about was the information and education. I just would feel a lot more comfortable with that function being
done in -house effectively through the environmental commission, which I thought was kind of a real nice tie -in. One
19
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
of the reasons we set them in place for those types of education purposes and if we could do that, reduce the cost of
the contract, it seems like a right move. Can you respond to that or just give me your thoughts?
'
Charles Folch: Actually I think that's probably not a bad idea, but more so from a cooperative effort. I still think
that you need, you know we intend to hold a couple of neighborhood meetings up front, that you probably still need
the consultant there as the expert for some of these questions that may come up. But I think certainly
'
you... compatible with some members of the environmental commission. And I also think that again, we can
certainly have the environmental commission assist us with creating the video, if you will, which we would like to
put out the information video to put on the cable channel but again I think there's certain things that we will need
'
Buchen's expertise in helping set that up. But certainly a joint effort, a cooperative effort with Environmental
Services Commission I think is a really good idea.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Anyone else have any questions of Charles?
Councilwoman Dockendorf. Well, I continue to amaze myself as to what I find interesting but this was interesting.
Is there any strategy including those initial homes? Are there any known violators? I mean where do we get started?
,
Councilman Mason: These are the sump pump cops now.
Charles Folch: ...the request or understanding if you will with members of the building inspection department that
'
whenever they had an opportunity or for the utility maintenance division also, whenever they were in a home for
whatever reason to replace the meter. Was to inspect finishing of a basement, something like that, to just keep that in
mind and keep an eye open for how the sump pump. If there's an obvious violation in the sump pump system and I
,
know the former building inspector that was here, Carl and I think it was in a span of about 2 years. I think he found
probably in excess of 30, probably close to 40 violators just in making contact with some of these day to day
inspections and things like that. But I think what we'll try to do is, in that first phase, is target areas that number one,
are known to be high ground water tables. High water problem areas. Two, that are probably subdivisions that were
'
constructed before the last 4 or 5 years. Or four years if you will, that we've had this ordinance in place... were
constructed initially to meet this standard. Not to say that we couldn't change over in the future but I think we try to
strategize in the areas that we think potentially could be conducive to this type of connection. So making the most
'
use of our phase one if you will.
Mayor Chmiel: Michael.
'
Councilman Mason: No.
Mayor Chmiel: Mark.
Councilman Senn: No.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay.
Councilman Senn. I'll move approval contingent upon the notification and receipt of the grant from the Met, what is
it?
'
Charles Folch: Metropolitan Council Environmental Services.
Councilman Mason: Second.
f
Resolution #96 -81: Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the contract service
proposal with Buchen Environmental Services to conduct the Residential Sump Pump Inspection Program,
'
Phase I, in the amount of $100,000.00 contingent on the execution of the program loan/grant with the MCES,
PW342. All voted in favor, except Councilman Berquist who was not present during the vote, and the motion
carried. I
20 1
I
I
J
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
AWARD OF BIDS: LAKE ANN PARK BALLFIELD LIGHTING PROJECT.
Todd Hoffman: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. On August 26 the City Council authorized the advertisement
of bids for this project. Bids were opened at 10:00 a.m. last Thursday morning in City Council chambers. I am
pleased to report that we had an excellent cross section of bids. There was 9 companies which had plans. Eight of
those companies chose to bid. There was one person finishing their bid in the conference room upstairs... A bid
tabulation is attached. I should note that at the top of the bid tab it says Alternates A, B, C, D and E. Those are not
alternates. Those are items. There were no alternates as a part of the project. The bid bond is noted there as item
number 1. Bids ranged initially from $126,000.00 to $219,000.00. However Ridgedale Electric, the apparent low
bidder was rejected. After some conversation they left out the footings. Everybody got the same footings price but
they neglected to incorporate it into their bid. So the second bidder, the low bidder which is now the bonafide low
bidder, is Electrical Installation and Maintenance Company at $151,050.00. As you note, the City Engineer, excuse
me, the engineer's estimate was $179,000.00. With that it is recommended that the Council award City Project RA-
515, the Lake Ann Ballfield Lighting project, two fields, Fields #4 and #5. Field #4 would be the Lions Field, to
Electrical Installation and Maintenance Inc. of Maple Plain in the amount of $151,050.00.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, any questions? Mark.
Councilman Senn: Todd, if my math and memory serves me correctly, given these favorable bids, we can now leave
the contingency alone on the Rec Center project? Effectively between the Lion's money and the other $60,000.00,
we've got this thing covered basically on these bids?
Todd Hoffman: Well the Lion's money is $100, $98,000.00 and change total but a portion of that was $20,000.00 is
needed to pay for other improvements of the ... so their portion of the lighting contract is half which would be then
just over $75,000.00. They have the Lions monument, the landscaping, some bleachers and some other
improvements as a part of the proposal that are assigned to their dollars. Just over $75,000.00 of their $98,000.00
was assigned to actual wiring and electricity, etc. and those numbers were noted in those original proposals. But you
are correct. The bids were favorable. We will not have to spend as much of that contingency but I still ... might have
to spend some of those dollars.
Councilman Senn: Okay, but what balance we do have left, that's what we can leave alone?
Todd Hoffman: Correct.
Councilman Senn: Okay, because that was the one part that I was uneasy with. With all the outstanding issues we
still have on that, okay.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Michael.
Councilman Mason: None.
Mayor Chmiel: Colleen.
Councilwoman Dockendorf. No, Mark asked it.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Steve.
Councilman Berquist: I've just got a couple of quick questions on the bid spreads. Ridgedale Electric disqualified
themselves. They left $20,000.00 off. I'm assuming that's off of Alternate B?
Todd Hoffman: Alternates B, C and D. A combination. Those are the light poles and they left the footings off of
each item.
21
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Councilman Berquist: Okay. That kind of skews my numbers but it's still a point. What I did is I scored these with
low, high and I threw the low and high out to where I have a median and the each units are very, very close to that
estimate then. Engineer's budget. Both the lump sum budgets are significantly out of line. I mean item E was
$40,000.00 budget and it came in at $17.7. Item A was one for $25,000.00 estimate and it came in at $17.4. Any
explanation or just the luck of the draw?
Todd Hoffman: Sure. Items A and E?
Councilman Berquist: Yeah.
Todd Hoffman: Currently what we're talking about? Both the engineer and I talked with the bidder and they are
comfortable with their bid. Mark Holden of Holden Associates is the electrical engineer and I chatted both prior to
these bids coming in and after about how he estimated his cost. Item B, C, and D are very hard numbers. The
contractor cannot hide any dollars in those areas. They're for the poles and lights, the illuminaries and then the
footings and those are all known numbers. A and E are where a contractor can hide dollars for increased profits,
depending upon how busy or how competitive they are at that particular moment and that is the reason those numbers
are fine tuned down to where they still feel they can make a profit but they didn't per se hide anything in those
numbers. He was conservative, being a strong believer in being higher when we award bid as the engineer's
estimate.
Councilman Berquist: Good, thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, I don't have any questions. Is there a motion.
Councilman Berquist: I would move approval that the City Council award City Project No. RA -515, Lake Ann
Ballfield to Electrical Installation and Maintenance Incorporated, Maple Plain in the amount of $151,050.00.
Councilman Mason: Second.
Resolution #96 -82: Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Mason seconded to award City Project No.
RA -515, Lake Ann Ballfield Lighting (Fields #4 and #5) to Electrical Installation and Maintenance, Inc. of
Maple Plain, Minnesota in the amount of $151,050.00. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
ADOPT FINDINGS FOR PAWS CLAWS AND HOOVES PET BOARDING NANCY LEE AND PATRICK
BLOOD.
Kate Aanenson: Thank you. This item, you did table the Findings of Fact which were prepared for you last time.
The applicant asked for another chance to try to ... move in the direct that you wanted as far as types of materials. I'll
let them go through. Obviously their fast choice is still to go with metal on the stable only, but they have shown
some plans with metal on the lower one -third and then wood, which is in the red area, and then the metal roof. But
I'll let them explain in a little bit more detail but we do have the Findings of Fact so we have prepared to which ever
direction you would recommend approval or denial of the variance.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Nancy.
Nancy Lee: By request this is ... two weeks ago. What I've come up with is like ... and I can still keep it clean and
sanitary. I would ask that ... when I was here a couple weeks ago ... August 26 Staff had recommended that the
kennel....and the stable could be left metal. I would ask that you still allow this. I have shown ... and they felt the
best way to .handle the horse manure was... cultivate it back into the land and they felt it was absurd to do otherwise.
It would just be healthy for the land. At this point I'm being asked to take it all off. Something... Any questions?
Mayor Chmiel: Is that going to be tilled back into the soil?
Nancy Lee: Yes.
22
LI
0
7
r
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Mayor Chmiel: Steve.
Councilman Berquist: I don't know that I have any questions. I just want to let you know Nancy that, whatever ends
up happening, it's a need that we have in the city of Chanhassen and I'd like to see addressed and I'd like to see the
project done. How we end up getting there still remains to be seen but at least from my perspective, I'd like to see it
get accomplished. That's the only comment I have at this time.
Mayor Chmiel: Colleen.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Is there a, when you say it would be ... standards. Is there a certain square yard per acre
standards or you know, I just don't want there to be piles with smell drifting up.
Nancy Lee: It's the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and also the ... feedlot people. They were very helpful. I
don't want ... either, because it isn't good business...
Councilwoman Dockendorf. So at this point you don't know if the estimated output is going to be.
Nancy Lee: I won't have a real...
Kate Aanenson: Can I just make a comment on that? There is the natural wetland adjacent to this property. Part of
the property does contain it and we have concern because we do not have that many natural wetlands in the city,
what that We believe that it shouldn't be spread. If there's a way that a minimal amount can be spread but we
believe, based on the number of horse ... the threshold is way too much to handle the quality to protect that wetland.
If you want to leave it open ended to say to work with the City and staff to find an acceptable level, that's fine. If
you want to soften that condition but certainly protect the wetland. We think that there needs to be some regulation
on that
Councilwoman Dockendorf. Nancy have you, I know that you're using... Is there a specific type of metal—because
of a concern that...
Nancy Lee: The reason I didn't go wood all the way down was simply that this area to this area, on both sides ... is
where the outdoor runs are and ... solid wood, it would be trashed in a year. You can just imagine.
Councilwoman Dockendorf Yeah, I'm just wondering if metal is your best material in terms of rusting and.
Nancy Lee: I have a 20 year warranty on that metal.
Councilwoman Dockendorf. Okay. That was my question on the material. I have nothing further.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mike.
Councilman Mason: Not at this time, no.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mark.
Councilman Senn: The statement you just made about a 20 year warranty on the metal, I assume that warranty's
canceled if you have animals urinating on it all the time, correct?
Nancy Lee: No.
Mayor Chmiel: Anything else?
Councilman Senn: No.
23
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thanks. Appreciate it. Let's go into some discussion. Steve. Maybe you've already ,
indicated your.
Councilman Berquist: Well, I understand our reluctance to put a metal structure in the 212, the existing 212 '
corridor. It would appear as setting a precedent and then being obligated to possibly grant other metal buildings
within that corridor. It probably goes without saying that we need to, if we're of a mind to approve this, we need to
structure it in such a manner so that precedence is not recyclable so to speak. The present construction methods that
she has indicated as acceptable within the district? '
Kate Aanenson: Right. What the ordinance says is that metal can be used as a support material, so that's what she's
showing on the kennel portion. And the stable, that's how it's represented in this picture. Her request is still to go
all metal on the stable. '
Councilman Berquist: On the stable, right. I understand that. I guess from a practical point of view, as a business
owner, I can understand where she's coming from. I don't have any huge problem with locating a metal stable and t
approving a structure like that although one of my first concerns when this thing came to the floor was noise.
Concrete obviously to me, anyway concrete is a better noise inhibitor than wood or metal so that's still a concern but
given the location of the building, that's probably a small factor. If the waste products from the animals can be '
handled, that's fine with me. This wetland that you referred to, I've been up to that site and maybe I didn't go far
enough. Where's the wetland? How far away from the pasture area would it be? That's not even something that...
Kate Aanenson: It's a portion of the property that has yet to be delineated which is one of the conditions of '
approval. It's close to the driveway and the setback to the barn may be impacted by it. It has yet to be delineated. It
may be the applicant's position that they want to see if they've got approval yet but obviously if the wetland's too
close, it may jeopardize the site plan as it's shown. '
Councilman Berquist: So the final design characteristics will take that into account?
Kate Aanenson: It will have to. '
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Does the applicant have any answer to that? Would you like to come forward to the mic
again please. '
Nancy Lee: The area where the wetland is is on 212 and it's the... in front of the kennel building. The stable
building's quite a ways over and it shouldn't be even close to the wetland. The pasture would be, it's 212, then the
stable and the pasturing area so it shouldn't be... '
Kate Aanenson: She's going off the existing maps. It has not been delineated. The driveway is close so there could
be, the actual delineation line could ... what's shown on just a point of reference map... We're just raising it as an '
issue and a condition.
Councilman Berquist: So even if we were to approve this, it may be negated or amended by another agency?
Kate Aanenson: Well the way ... we're the permitting agency.
Councilman Berquist: We're the permitting agency for the wetland as well? '
Kate Aanenson: I think for the wetland, if they were too close, if they wanted a variance or something, I guess we've
raised this issue all along. It's one of those things that I guess we've, if you can tell them they can't go forward until
they've delineated it or ... certainly it has to be delineated before we issue a building permit. '
Councilman Berquist: Okay, thank you.
24 1
L
n
I_ I
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Nancy Lee: I just wanted to comment ... it's a 4 foot high cement inside so it isn't just a metal building.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Colleen.
Councilwoman Dockendorf. I guess I'm torn between let's have the buildings look alike versus my original position
which was, you know I didn't have a big concern with the whole thing being metal. I guess that's where I still am so
I could go either way on that. Either way, going on both or the kennel. Not the kennel, excuse me. The stable being
all metal. In terms of spreading out the manure, I'd like that to be worked out with staff. I think we can get some
advice from the Pollution Control Agency or whoever is an expert in those fields. I'm sure someone... I think it can
be worked out
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Michael.
Councilman Mason: Well, in terms of the building, I pretty much share Colleen's thoughts, and have from the
beginning. If we get some kind of assurances that the wetlands won't be affected, I quite honestly, if the manure can
be taken care of on site, that's fine but I certainly agree with Kate that that wetland is an issue that has not been
taken care of yet and we need to get that well. They need to get that figured out before it takes place but I'm
comfortable with staff getting the direction to work that out.
Mayor Chmiel: Mark.
Councilman Senn: Kate what's, based on the new proposal, what's the, have you looked at what the surface area is,
basically metal versus wood?
Kate Aanenson: In our opinion that meets the intent of the ordinance ... as a support material.
Councilman Senn: No, I mean what is it? I mean is it 2/3 metal, 1/3 wood? What is it?
Kate Aanenson: It's probably 1/3 to % metal.
Councilman Senn: Now are you including the roof structure on that?
Kate Aanenson: We haven't included roof structures before because generally we have a lot of standing seam siding
roofs in this town so we haven't...
Councilman Senn: Okay.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I guess I don't have any other questions in regards to this. I would ask for a motion.
Councilman Senn: I mean what's our process on this at this point?
Roger Knutson: You have three items before you. The conditional use permit, the site plan approval and the
variance. You could move them all in one motion or you could move them separately. Or you could move them
individually, whichever you ... whatever your pleasure is.
Councilman Senn: So you've got conditional use permit, based on the use.
Roger Knutson: Site plan approval.
Councilman Senn: Site plan approval.
Roger Knutson: And the variance.
Councilman Senn: And the variance which is the variance for?
25
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Kate Aanenson: To give metal for the barn.
Roger Knutson: The site plan findings would be amended slightly if you decided to grant the variance to say, in the
site plan that you allow the metal to the extent you allow it.
Kate Aanenson: We've identified both of those on page 2. Q...
Councilman Senn: Okay, we have findings of fact before us, okay. Is that what we're acting on or are we acting on
new motions related to A, B, and C. If we're acting on motions A, B and C, then there's no reason for findings of
fact which is what's on the agenda tonight, correct?
Roger Knutson: You can still have findings of fact and it's preferable to have findings of fact even when you
approve something. So I'm recommending that you act on the findings for each of those items. Conditional use
permit, site plan and variance.
Councilman Senn: Okay, what's the required vote levels on these.
Roger Knutson: Majority vote.
Councilman Senn: Majority vote on?
Roger Knutson: All three.
Mayor Chmiel: The conditional use, there's not a 4 /5ths?
Roger Knutson: No.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay.
Councilman Senn: Then why are we even here?
Roger Knutson: Some cities require it. Because you tabled it with two votes before?
Kate Aanenson: We did the variance. We needed, the variance we were short.
Roger Knutson: That's right the variance. Your ordinance, I get my cities confused.
Councilwoman Dockendorf. This is Chanhassen.
Roger Knutson: That varies from city to city. Some cities, by State law you're only required to have a majority vote
but you can increase that vote and you have for the variance. Excuse me, I stand corrected.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay.
Councilwoman Dockendorf. I'll take a shot at doing all three at the same time. Under the conditional use. Oh, you
want to do them individually?
Councilman Senn: Yeah, that would be my preference.
Councilwoman Dockendorf Okey dokey. On the conditional use, I would like to strike spreading the manure on
site shall be prohibited. Change that as an item to work out with staff so an acceptable level of manure can be
spread, to the extent that it does not impact the wetland and is tillable and you know, whatever.
26
1
I
0
1
ri
1
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Roger Knutson: So I understand, the motion is to approve the conditional use permit in accordance with the findings
and adopt the findings with that one change?
Councilwoman Dockendorf. Yes.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second to that?
Councilman Berquist: Well I'll second it and I'll just offer a friendly amendment. To paraphrase the striking of
prohibited Just use in conformance with the recommended methods of on site disposal subject to staff approval.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Sounds good.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, there's a motion on the flood with a second. Discussion.
Councilman Senn: Yeah, I've got a question. I'm confused. If you're doing it as per the findings of fact.
Roger Knutson: You accept the findings on the CUP on each item, and the CUP does not address the metal.
Councilman Senn: Okay, so you're saying as per the findings of fact, only relating to the CUP then?
Roger Knutson: That's right.
Councilman Senn: Okay.
Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Berquist seconded to adopt the Findings of Fact for the
Conditional Use Permit for Paws, Claws and Hooves Pet Boarding per the City Attorney's recommendations
as amended to change item 5 -16 to read: The spreading of manure on site shall be in conformance with the
recommended methods of on site disposal subject to staff approval. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Roger Knutson: If I could suggest that you take up the variance issue next because technically the site plan approval
kind of dove tails into that. Once you've resolved .the variance issue, then the site plan approval is easy.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, is there a motion?
Councilman Berquist: Do you want to keep going?
Councilwoman Dockendorf Well, I'm still kind of sitting on the fence as to. I guess here it's saying there's no need
to action on the variance if we want to do the wainscoting only on all the structures. .
Roger Knutson: That's staff s interpretation that that does not require a variance. They could put the wainscoting up
without the variance. What the variance is for is all metal buildings on one or both buildings.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I guess I'm not going to make that motion.
Councilman Berquist: Okay, well I'll make a motion that we grant a variance for the stable being constructed of
metal. And that's the only variance.
Roger Knutson: You're going to deny the variance on the kennel.
Councilman Berquist: And deny the variance on the main structure and include, well just deny the variance on the
main structure. Approve the variance on the barn and adopt Findings of Fact.
27
City Council Meeting e September 23, 1996
Roger Knutson: The Findings of Fact yes, the Findings of Fact will have to be slightly amended and staff, with your
discretion, will do that to reflect what you do.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there a second to that motion? Or is there some discussion before that? I see a couple
puzzlements there.
Councilman Mason: What does that do to the kennel part?
Councilwoman Dockendorf. It allows the wainscoting.
Councilman Mason: Steve, would you re -state that motion please.
Councilman Berquist: Nann, can you play that back please?
Councilman Mason: Yeah, I'm sorry. Well kind of you know paraphrase.
Councilman Berquist: I make a motion to grant a variance for the stable building being constructed of metal. Being
of metal construction. And adoption of the Findings of Fact with the amendments necessary to be worked out by our
esteemed attorney and staff ...and to deny the variance on the metal building. The kennel being constructed all of
metal.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second? Is there any other discussion?
Councilman Mason: I'll second it.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, there's a motion on the floor with a second. Any other discussion?
Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Mason seconded to grant the variance for the stable building being
of metal construction, and to deny the variance for the kennel building being of metal construction and to
adopt the Findings of Facts to be amended to reflect this motion. All voted in favor, except Councilman Senn
who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 4 to 1.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Now we need the one...
Roger Knutson: Next item is a site plan. Since you approved the variance, the only things that would have to be
amended in the site plan is to reflect the variance approval you just granted.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. As Roger so stated. Is there a motion?
Councilwoman Dockendorf Yes, as Roger so stated.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, is there a second?
Councilman Berquist: I'll second.
Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Berquist seconded to adopt the Findings of Fact for the Site
Plan for Paws, Claws and hooves Pet Boarding amended to reflect approval of the variance on the stable
building and denial of the variance on the kennel building. All voted in favor, except Councilman Senn who
opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 4 to 1.
REQUEST TO REVIEW UTILITY BILL, DOUG ROPER. 2751 SANDPIPER TRAIL.
Don Ashworth: City Council acted to table this item giving an opportunity for staff to go back and find out if there's
some way that the outside unit could record faster. My conclusion, after talking with Boucher, the firm that provides
28
1
1
I J
7
L
i
L
7
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
the meters, is that no. That it could not. Staff continues to believe that the water in fact was consumed. That
approval, after removing all penalties and late charges, as well as allowing the Roper's to pay the $395.00 in three
payments over the course of the next 90 days is recommended. Although we will ... wish to see the Roper's receive
fiuther rebate, such simply would not be fair to all other customers.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Questions. Steve, do you have any questions?
Councilman Berquist: Well since I'm the character that brought up the possibility of an electric meter running fast
last time, and knowing Jerry Boucher and the fact that I'm sure he in fact did try a meter testing out my theory. I
suppose then I'll get a bill for that one. He probably said, what? Well as much as I hate to see anybody have to pay
charges that are extraordinary, I have to believe that somehow or another they're valid. I mean if you look at
something and you're trying to think of reasons why and you exhaust all the possibilities, no matter how logical they
may seem, but one that is the most illogical however in my ... usually is the truth. So I have no more comments.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Before I continue. Is either of the Roper's here this evening?
Kathleen Roper. Yes.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there something you'd like to say before that, and I was wondering why we still had one more
citizen here.
Kathleen Roper. Well, I did want to thank you for ... doing the research ... are feasible after hearing some actual cases
that have been possible that that kind of water usage can occur, so that's...
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Colleen.
Councilwoman Dockendorf I, you know this falls under the category of, it's unfortunate for everyone involved and
I really do appreciate you sitting ... to say things to us, that's above and beyond. I guess to be fair it needs to be...
Mayor Chmiel: Michael.
Councilman Mason: I agree with what's been said. Yeah.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mark.
Councilman Senn: Same here.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, is there a motion?
Councilman Berquist: What are we motioning? We're motioning that the bill will be agreed to and waiving.
Councilman Mason: Waiving all late fees.
Councilman Berquist: Waiving all late fees and all penalties and.
Don Ashworth: Trying to set up an installment plan to, maybe the 90 days. Maybe they need more relief than that
SO.
Councilman Berquist: So I'm motioning approval of all penalties and late charges as well as allowing the Ropers to
pay the amount in three payments over the course of the next 90 days as recommended.
Councilman Mason: Or as is deemed necessary by Ropers and city staff.
Mayor Chmiel: Will you take that as a friendly amendment? Okay.
29
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Councilwoman Dockendorf. From your second.
Councilman Mason: From your second, that's correct.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other discussion?
Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the removing of all penalties and late
charges as well as allowing the Ropers to pay the $395.95 in three payments over the course of 90 days, or
whatever the Ropers and staff deems necessary. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
CONCEPTUAL AND PRELEWWARY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR A MEDIUM
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ON 7.03 ACRES, LOCATED SOUTH OF COULTER
BOULEVARD AND EAST OF STONE CREEK DRIVE EXTENSION, REZONING OF PROPERTY
FROM A2 AGRICULTURAL ESTATE TO PUD -R; PRELIM] NARY PLAT OF 25 LOTS, ONE OUTLOT,
AND ASSOCIATED RIGHT -OF -WAY: SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR 25 TOWNHOME UNITS, AND A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR EXCAVATION AND FILLING WITHIN THE FLOOD PLAIN,
TOWNHOMES AT CREEKSIDE, HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT.
Kate Aanenson: Thank you. This is the third time Council has seen this. Obviously this isn't the staff's first
choice—development of this property. You tabled this for the applicant to work with the staff, or the applicant really
to give some additional consideration to the housing product that was selected for this property. The applicant... and
this is their preference on how to develop the property. So there's no changes to date as far as the report. The staff,
after numerous negotiations and going through the process, had recommended approval, as did the Planning
Commission so the way the staff report reads, is approval with the conditions of the staff report.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you Kate. Any questions of Kate? Anyone? Okay.
John Dobbs: Good evening. I'm John Dobbs from Heritage Development. There is one small change. Actually not
small but there's a change. ...just trying to address the concerns that were brought up at the last meeting and...
What we did come up with is the elevation. He can eliminate the second floor on the two end units, and here's the
blueprint. He did make an elaborate, a master suite on the bottom and ... about 1,380 square feet... So he did some
quick estimates and figured that that would still come in somewhere about the mid 130's ... range from $135 to about
$200 -210. Then we'd put walkouts on the back side and... It'd be offered as an option and then ... offer as an option
on the walkout lots along the... So if you have a buyer who comes into his model and would like to do that, and is
trying to get a price point, he's got a little bit more flexibility. Actually he thought it was a pretty good idea too.
Other than that it stays pretty much exactly the same.
Kate Aanenson: This is news to me. I just, was there a percentage that you were looking at John or place that you
were looking at as far as, or are you just saying it's an option.
John Dobbs: It would be an option on every end unit on every building.
Kate Aanenson: So just the end units?
John Dobbs: Yeah. Just remove the second floor and pull the eaves in on both sides so if somebody came in and
wanted to do it on the slab on grades next to Coulter, we could do that. So it'd probably be the option of up to 6,
maybe=8, depending on... So there'd be eight options and the question obviously is whether the people are going to
be ... people looking for or not what they ... and what I can do in terms of flexibility. So it wasn't two weeks of just
biding time. We actually went back and did some research trying to figure out to resolve some...
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Steve.
30
1
r
!J
1�
C
1
0
I�
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
_Councilman Berquist: I talked to John at length about this. I mean conceivably there could be what, eight of those
things? Not that everybody's going to buy one but.
John Dobbs: Conceivably there could be eight. The problem with four of them would be that they would be
walkouts going to the south so then we'd have a whole basement down below ... so it's going to be back up to the mid
130'x.
Councilman Berquist: And for informational purposes, 130, roughly the 130 range is with the slab on grade walkout,
or slab on grade rambler versus a two story, which would be the mid 150's. Is that what you had?
John Dobbs: Yeah, probably in the mid 150's and with the walkouts, mid 170's. Then if you loaded them up with
all kinds of extras you can go higher than that.
Councilman Berquist: Okay, thank you John.
Mayor Chmiel: Colleen.
Councilwoman Dockendorf Well I'm having a little side discussion with Mike and it is something that I talked
about with Bob Generous this afternoon. We still need really to review our comp plan. We don't have a lot of legal
leg to stand on in getting what we want out of this piece of property. Or what some of us want out of this piece of
property. Given that it is small, it would have been ... it would have been a nice transition... small sandwiched
between two, between single family homes and residential, or excuse me. An industrial piece that has yet to be
developed. It could have been, would have been nice. It's going to be nice developed this way. And because it is a
small piece, I don't feel all of our hopes and dreams and wishes for affordable housing exist on this piece of
property...
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mike.
Councilman Mason: I would essentially agree with what Colleen has said. I think I spoke to this two weeks ago.
My feelings on whether we should approve it in the time line and what not so I'll let it go at that.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mark.
Councilman Senn: Nothing to add.
Mayor Chmiel: I don't either. Is there a recommendation for a motion?
Councilman Berquist: Well I'll make a motion for approval but before I do that I just want to say, I'm not certain
that you guys understand from whence I was coming. I look at this as, I don't look at this as a question specific to
this piece of property as much as I do all developments that are potentially coming to Chanhassen. And what I had
asked John to do is to try and convince us in a logical manner as to why a housing project would not be widen from a
marketing perspective. Broaden from a marketing perspective. And he really didn't come back to me with any
concrete information but since that time I've talked to a couple other builders and developers and I understand the
difficulty of my request from a marketing, as well as from a construction point of view. What I'm asking, I'm not
certain what the rest of you think and what Kate thinks but what I'm asking is almost for a reinvention of the wheel.
And if in fact it can't be reinvented in a manner that I've got in my own mind, why not? And it really boils down to
a matter of risk and what the inherent risks the builders are willing to take. This little project just serves to
demonstrate the difficulty inherent in achieving housing goals. I don't have any doubt that the projects are going to
be successful. It's just a tough row to hoe and trying to bring innovative and imaginative plans to address diversity.
And different housing types within a particular project. So I wasn't trying to ram anything down anyone's throat as
far as increasing density. I'm well aware that this project is very approvable on the site and meets the comp plan and
what not. I'm simply looking for additional information that we can carry forward. I will move approval of the
project, as soon as I find it. Approval of the conceptual and preliminary planned unit development for 25 unit
31
u
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
medium density residential development on 7.03 acres, etc, etc. as contained within the staff reports with conditions
1 through 34.
Mayor Chmiel: There's a motion on the floor. Is there a second?
Councilman Mason: I will second it.
Mayor Chmieh Moved and seconded. Any other discussion?
Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve Conceptual and Preliminary Planned
Unit Development, PUD, for a 25 unit medium density residential development on 7.03 acres rezoning of the
property from A2, Agricultural Estate to PUD -R, preliminary plat of 26 lots, 2 outlots and the associated
right -of -way on approximately 29 acres, site plan approval for 25 townhomes units and a conditional use
permit for the excavation and filling within the flood plain, Townhomes at Creekside, subject to the following
conditions:
1. The applicant will be responsible for applying for and obtaining changes to the FEMA flood plain maps to
reflect developed conditions. The applicant shall further define, graphically, the proposed floodplain boundary
and provide justification for the changes.
2. The applicant shall notify and obtain a permit from the Bluff Creek Watershed district as needed for the
activities of altering a flood plain and discharging storm pond runoff into the Bluff Creek. The city shall review
comments from the Bluff Creek Watershed District before final plat approval.
3. All buffer areas shall be surveyed and staked by the applicant in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance.
The City will install wetland buffer edge signs before construction begins and will charge the applicant $20 per
sign.
4. The final plat shall dedicate the appropriate utility and drainage easements over all utilities, wetlands and
ponding areas outside the right -of -way. Consideration should also be given for access for maintenance of the
storm sewer lines as well as ponding areas and wetlands.
5. The storm ponds shall be constructed with the initial site grading.
6. Water quality fees will b based in accordance with the City's SWMP. If the applicant constructs the water
quality ponds as proposed, these fees will be waived. Water quantity fees will b based in accordance with the
City's SWMP. Storm sewer trunk fees will be evaluated based on the applicant's contribution to the SWMP
design requirements. The fees will be determined by staff upon approval of the construction plans.
7. The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tiles found during construction and shall
relocate or abandon the drain tile as directed by the City Engineer.
8. All utility and street improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the latest edition of the City's
Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed street and utility plans and specifications shall be submitted
for staff review and City Council approval.
9. The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer calculations for 10 year and 100 year storm events and provide
ponding calculations for storm water quality/quantity ponds in accordance with the City's Surface Water
Management Plan for the City Engineer to review and approve. The applicant shall provide detailed
predeveloped and post - developed storm water calculations for 100 year storm events and normal water level and
high water level calculations in existing basins. Individual storm sewer calculations for a 10 year storm event
between each catch basin segment will also be required to determine if sufficient catch basins are being utilized.
In addition, water quality ponding design calculations shall be based on Walker's Pondnet model.
32
C II
0
u
J
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
10. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with,the City and provide the necessary financial security
to guarantee compliance with the terms of the development contract.
11. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, i.e. Carver County,
Watershed District, MWCC, Health Department, PCA, DNR, Army Corps of Engineers, and MnDot, and
comply with their conditions of approval.
12. Prior to final plat approval the applicant shall submit to the City soil boring information. On lots with fill
material that have been mass graded as part of a multi -lot grading project, a satisfactory soils report from a
qualified soils engineer shall be provided to the Building Official before the City issues a building permit for the
lot.
13. No berming or landscaping will be allowed within right -of -way areas.
14. The lowest flood elevation of all buildings shall be a minim of two (2) feet above the high water level
calculated according to the shoreland ordinance guidelines.
15. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc -
mulched or wood -fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with the
City's Best Management Practice Handbook.
16. Type III erosion control fence shall be installed adjacent to wetlands. Additional erosion control measures such
as rock construction entrances may be incorporated on the final construction plans.
17. A buffer strip of 0 to 20 feet with a minim average width of 10 feet shall be maintained adjacent to ag/urban
wetlands. The principal structure setback shall be 40 feet measured from the outside edge of the buffer strip.
18. All structures shall be set back a minimum of 100 feet from the project boundaries which are adjacent to Bluff
Creek and it's tributaries. An exception will be made in the northeast corner of the site where an 80 foot setback
from the property boundary will be permitted. The applicant shall be required to revegetate within the altered
floodplain and adjacent to the wetlands with native wetland vegetation to maintain natural features along the
creek and establish a consistency in preserving this natural resource.
19. Stone Creek Drive shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City street standards, i.e. standard
boulevards.
20. The storm sewer system shall be redesigned to limit discharge points to one on Stone Creek Drive.
21. If the applicant installs that rusk sanitary sewer, they shall be compensated by means of credits against their
Coulter Boulevard assessments for the cost difference between an 8 inch lateral line and the 18 inch trunk sewer
line.
22. Street A shall be constructed as a private street with a 26 foot wide street section.
23. The developers and designers should meet with the building official as early as possible to discuss commercial
building permit requirements.
24. Submit street names to the Public Safety Department, Inspections Division, for review prior to final plat
approval.
25. Adjust property lines to permit code complying projections or revise plans to remove projections. Adjust
property lines to permit screen porches or revise plans to remove porches. This should be done before
preliminary plat approval.
33
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
26. If parking on the street is desirable, the roadway must be widened to 28 feet. However, this will allow parking
only on one side of the street. "No Parking Fire Lane" signs must be installed per Chanhassen Fire Department
Policy #06 -1991.
27. A ten foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, NSP,
NW Bell, cable television, transformer boxes. This is to insure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and
safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance 9 -1.
28. Land within the 50 foot creek setback will be dedicated public property.
29. Heritage Development will construct Trail "A" and Connector "A" within the 50 foot setback. Heritage will be
compensated for the construction and engineering costs associated with these trails. Heritage will also be
granted park fee credit for the linear area required for these trails based on a calculations of length times 20 feet
in width. The proposed plat, at 25 multi - family units generates a land dedication requirement of two- thirds of an
acre.
30. Heritage Development will also construct Trail Extension `B" within the right -of -way of Stone Creek Drive.
Heritage will be compensated for the construction and engineering costs associated with this trail. The staking
of these trails are to be approved by the Park & Recreation Director and City Engineer prior to construction.
These improvements are to be bid as a unit of the larger public improvement projects being sponsored by the
applicant as a part of this site work. Upon certification by the city of a low bidder for the trail components, said
work shall be completed. Upon completion and acceptance of trail components, the applicant shall be
reimbursed for engineering and construction costs associated with the trails utilizing trail acquisition and
development funds.
31. Staff shall work with the applicant to come up with a variety of base colors for the units.
32. The staff will review the parking issue.
33. Landscaping shall be enhanced on the east side to improve buffering.
34. The applicant shall submit for approval a foundation planting plan for each of the units.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Councilman Mason: If I could just tag onto what Steve said, and Colleen's and my side bar conversation centered
around re- opening the comp plan hopefully in 1997 and taking a look and see what we can do as a city to encourage
that kind of thing and I think that's going to mean.
Kate Aanenson: You'll be seeing that report from our staff shortly.
Councilman Mason: Good. Great. And you know what kind, you know are there financing options HRA has at
their disposal? Yeah, so I think we're, I mean hopefully we're getting there.
Councilman Senn: You might want to add to that. I mean Steve... earlier in the week, or not this week, last week I
guess on this issue and they are working on that and the important part is that we get some flexibility in the comp
plan to give us effectively a negotiating arm in doing it. And then figuring out from there what's the best way to
accomplish it if...project comes in.
Don Ashworth: Clarification Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
Don Ashworth: Did your approval include the modification as it is presented tonight or not?
34
0
F�
I
'1 Meeting - September 23 1996
City Counci g p ,
J
r�
Councilman Berquist: The modification being the option to, for an individual buyer to be able to drop out the
second floor?
Don Ashworth: Right.
Councilman Senn: I guess my question would be, would staff be comfortable with that having not reviewed the
specifics.
Kate Aanenson: I think it's certainly doable. It's not going to change the footprint. It's just the elevation, right. We
just want to make sure that and that was the intent is that you have a price spread and it sounds like...
Mayor Chmiel: Would you like to see those prior to that Kate?
Kate Aanenson: I know which ones they are. There's four buildings. The four units on the end so.
Councilman Berquist: Yes it did.
Don Ashworth: Thank you.
APPOINTMENTS: PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah I had just put down, you had interviewed the Planning Commission candidate last week and
we're just looking for your consideration to fill the vacancy.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Are there any questions of Kate?
Councilwoman Dockendorf. No, I would move that we appoint Alison Blackowiak.
Councilman Mason: I will second that.
Mayor Chmiel: There's a motion and a second.
Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Mason seconded to appoint Alison Blackowiak to the
Planning Commission. All voted in favor, except Councilman Senn who abstained, and the motion carried.
Councilman Senn: Usually we have discussion in- between. I kind of wanted to do that but you jumped right to the
vote.
Mayor Chmiel: Well, I think it's getting too late and everybody's gone to sleep.
Councilman Berquist: I just wanted to make one quick observation.
Mayor Chmiel: Go ahead.
Councilman Berquist: Yeah the observation is that we had seven applicants and I think this was beaten to death.
This was discussed when I wasn't here. We had seven applicants and I'm sure the Planning Commission's, this was
an anomaly. Yes.
Kate Aanenson: As far as?
Councilman Berquist: As far as the number of candidates that were passed onto us.
35
�J
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Kate Aanenson: Correct. They felt if you didn't pick this candidate, they would prefer to readvertise and that was
their recommendation.
Councilman Berquist: Okay. Well that's.
Kate Aanenson: I don't sit in in the interviews so I can only be the messenger.
Councilman Berquist: They shoot the messenger.
Councilman Mason: I think they shoot horses.
Councilman Berquist: Or if the messenger is armed.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, we'll move right along to item number 12(b).
Councilman Berquist: Are you going to let Mark...?
Mayor Chmiel: Mark, do you want to make some comments on that?
Councilman Senn: Well, I had some I wanted to make. We're getting past all that really. I guess my comment is
that I believe Alison is a good candidate, and I'm not arguing that one way or another. But I also think that the other
applicants were good candidates too because our pre- requisite for applying is basically, you know being a resident or
voter. Okay. And I think that given our policy, other people deserve at least the opportunity for an interview and I
can't you know vote for what we did because I'm not going to sit up here and say that, who was it Lance Black,
Jacqueline Schroeder... Carl Meyer and Gayle Degler were all unqualified candidates, which I think is effectively
what you're saying and I think the Council should stick to it's policy. Should have stuck to it's policy and should
have done the interviews and picked a candidate from there.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. We'll move on to item 12(b).
APPOINTMENT TO HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY.
Todd Gerhardt: Mr. Mayor, Council. Under State Statute, the Mayor must make a recommendation to the City
Council in appointing a new HRA member. Currently you have Charlie Robbins, the current member, asking for
reappointment. Barbara Murphy, a resident of Chanhassen who you interviewed approximately one month ago, and
Councilmember Steve Berquist and Mark Senn as your applicants.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. In reviewing the applicants, I had looked over fully and I still thought of many given things
and I think one of the things that Steve indicated one time was having someone who was qualified for this particular
position. As I looked over the applications, as I indicated, I really sort of centered on Barbara Murphy, and the
reason I say that is, Barbara has an awful lot of background in that specific area and she's had all kinds of different
things which gives her a broader aspect as well. I think Steve indicated he'd like to see someone on there a little
younger. A little smarter and one other question.
Councilman Berquist: Don't put words in my mouth. No, no. I would never have said any such thing...
Mayor Chmiel: But anyway, I would like to see finally a woman appointed to the HRA. I don't think we've ever
had, have we ever had a woman?
Don Ashworth: Pat Swenson.
Mayor Chmiel: Oh that's right. Well, I think from another perspective as to how she looks at things, is always a
good way to see from what all the men do as opposed to some of the things women, and I think they add some of that
to that particular position. So that would be my recommendation.
36
1
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Councilwoman Dockendorf. Do you need a second to that?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
' Councilwoman Dockendorf. I will second, although I don't necessarily agree with your statement about women.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, moved and seconded. Any other discussion?
' Councilman Berquist: Who's position are you contemplating appointing her to, Robbins or Chmiel's?
Mayor Chmiel: No, Robbins.
' Councilman Berquist: Okay, I just wanted to get that clear.
Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussion? Hearing none, I'll call the question.
' Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to appoint Barbara Murphy to the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority. All voted in favor, except Councilman Senn and Councilman Berquist who
' opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 3 to 2.
Councilman Berquist: May I interject just a moment?
Mayor Chmiel: Sure.
Councilman Berquist: Your position is up as well?
' Mayor Chmiel: Not yet. I'm still sticking to my position.
' Councilman Berquist: There's nothing that will.
Mayor Chmiel: Something will take place very shortly. Okay.
CONSENT AGENDA:
G. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF LIVABLE COMMUNITIES DEMONSTRATION
' ACCOUNT APPLICATION.
Councilman Senn: Kate, I pulled this because I had a question of Bob. Bob was out Friday. I did not get a chance
to try and reach him today. I don't know if he was around or not. Maybe you can answer the question. As it relates
to the financial information that's attached, okay. What happens if we don't get it?
Kate Aanenson: The Livable Demonstration Account?
Councilman Senn: Yeah.
Kate Aanenson: Well we're competing with twelve other communities. Making our pitch to the Met Council on
' Wednesday. There's a little over $2 million available. We're requesting 500 so there's a 50150 chance but we're
going to make our best effort. There's no harm in trying. I mean it has to be a new urbanism or this type of a project
and we certainly meet the qualifications so if there's an opportunity to seek money to do this sort of thing, we
' certainly want to take those opportunities. And also it's a good opportunity to let the Met Council see what we're
doing.
Councilman Senn: No, from that ... I think that's great but I'm just saying. What fills the gap here?
' 37
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Kate Aanenson: Well they still have to do it. I mean it's just an additional landscaping. Some of those public
treatment sort of things. Landscaping. The bike racks. The street fiuniture. Those sort of things.
Councilman Senn: Okay. So these elements have to go in regardless?
Kate Aanenson: Absolutely, right. Right.
Councilman Senn: Okay, that's what I kind of wanted to clarify.
Mayor Chmiel: What time is that on Wednesday?
Kate Aanenson: I think I'm on 4:25.
Councilman Senn: Move approval.
Councilman Mason: Second.
Resolution #96 -83: Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the resolution
authorizing application for the Livable Communities Demonstration Program. All voted in favor and the
motion carried.
H APPROVAL OF PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, CHUCK'S GRINDING.
Councilman Senn: (ID I pulled because I wanted to, I'd be happy to move approval but with the caveat that the
property go on the tax rolls after the three years, which would be in 19, which one was this again? 19 what? Well
it'd be in 2000. After 2001 it'd go back on the tax rolls.
Councilman Berquist: So 2002.
Councilman Senn: Yeah. Well whatever point it gets.
Mayor Chmiel: Todd, do you have anything?
Todd Gerhardt: The City Council has several obligations out there currently. Currently we need the additional
revenue to pay off debt associated with parking in that position in that area. Those monies are also assisting in
funding the Rec Center construction and this tax district also is included in any excess dollars generated would go
back to the County for road construction ... on the tax rolls that would eliminate those dollars being available for
those projects.
Councilman Senn: Except by putting it back on the tax rolls, the County would get their monies for road
construction as they normally would through the taxing process, correct?
Todd Gerhardt: Correct but we would lose those percentages that would go back to fiscal disparities... and the
county's, the city's benefit are greater if the district would stay...
Don Ashworth: Pam is in the process of updating our whole debt study thing which can give us a pretty good handle
on, will we be able to meet our debt obligations with or without this parcel. So really after a three year period of
time in here, I would suggest that you instruct staff to bring that study back to the City Council in the near future.
The reason I say that is our fast priority is really the whole budget process. Capital budgeting and it seems as though
that particular element is something that could go to some time after the first of the year. A January- February time
frame.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, any other?
K:
0
L�
L
L
7
5
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Councilman Berquist: When does the district expire?
Todd Gerhardt: This district closes out in the year 2001.
Councilman Senn: But will continue accumulating monies for years after that?
Todd Gerhardt: No.
Councilman Senn: So then what's wrong with the caveat I put on that it goes back on the tax rolls in 2002?
Todd Gerhardt: That's fine. I mean they'll all go on the tax rolls then.
Councilman Senn: So there's nothing wrong with that caveat then?
Todd Gerhardt: As long as 2001...
Don Ashworth: See I'm not sure what...
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, while we're doing that, we'll just hold (h). Do you want to go to 0) so Todd can check?
Councilman Senn: Sure. Jump to 0).
L APPROVAL OF BILLS.
Councilman Senn: Don, the questions I sent over to Pam, let's see on page 2. Now let's see, I don't know, there are
different dates here again. Sorry. Let's see, the third piece of paper. Let's see, 9/11. Page 2, 9/11. Do you want to
jump back?
Mayor Chmiel: No, we'll stay with this.
Councilman Senn: 9/11, page 2. There's an item, U.S. West Communications telephone, $2,219.46 that I didn't get
a response back on.
Don Ashworth: Okay, because she gave me the ones you had.
Councilman Senn: That was one but I think it got missed. It's not on her list of responses.
Don Ashworth: I believe the response there is going to be the interconnect between the Rec Center and City Hall,
but I'm not sure about that so. You said $219.00?
Councilman Senn: No, it's $2,219.00. So we'll pull that one off until we can get an answer back to me. On page 3
of the 9/18/96. One, there's an item to Boland & Associates. Services rendered. $1,000.00. That's the explanation
on it. That's something we're paying on a continuous basis and I was told that that is for a contribution to the
Southwest Coalition and I'm just curious why are we still making contributions to the Southwest Coalition since it's
now private non - profit?
Kate Aanenson: That's a different coalition. I think we explained that one once before. That's the communities in
the southwest that get together. Keep updated on Met Council and legislative issues. All the communities, based on
population, pay a percentage of that. All we add is the housekeeping so it's $1,000.00 but we're all contributing to
it. All the communities. Eden Prairie, Victoria, Chanhassen, Shakopee.
Councilman Senn: So you give $1,000.00 a month to that then?
39
City Council Meeting s September 23, 1996
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, that's what we pay Boland & Associates but all the other communities are paying into that.
Councilman Senn: And Boland & Associates is what? A lobbyist then for that group?
Kate Aanenson: Yes, it keeps us aware of the legislative and Met Council issues. We're kind of the central point.
We meet here.
Don Ashworth: So all we're doing is doing the billing for the thing. We've got a $100.00 share of the $1,000.00.
Councilman Senn: All right. Okay. Let's see here. On page 11, 9/18. I had asked for six months now I've been
asking for where we sit on the projects with Hartley Associates, MIS. We've got some numbers back relating to
how we sit for this year but I keep asking for numbers relating to the overall project, where we stand. Last time I
thought it was going to be provided. I still haven't got that.
Don Ashworth: Pam made me aware of that one. I just, I couldn't pull them together. I do want to bring, that is an `
item that we will discuss when we're going through the administration budget so I anticipate having that completed
by that budget work session.
Councilman Berquist: Isn't that a computer consultant?
Don Ashworth: Yes.
Councilman Senn: That was it then so move approval.
Councilman Berquist: Oh, I've got a couple as long as you're on a roll.
Councilman Senn: Oh! Okay.
Councilman Berquist: Since I didn't get a chance to talk to him today, I might as well just take a couple minutes.
Page 10. There's a Grazzini Brothers tile work. Can I ask, where was that? Where was $4,200.00 worth of tile
work? Certainly not in the addition.
Councilman Senn: I have Pam's answer to that. That's City Hall expansion.
Councilman Berquist: It is?
Councilman Senn: Yes.
Councilman Berquist: We've already done tile work in the City Hall expansion?
Councilman Senn: Well, that's what I was told.
Councilman Berquist: Then the other question I had was the U.S. West charges for the internet. How many hits
have we got on that and what really use are we making of it? Are you happy with the results?
Don Ashworth: I will have a report for you as to, he did give me a report as of 30 to 60 days ago when we were just
basically fresh on there so let me freshen it up for you.
Councilman Berquist: It seems like .they're spending $700.00 - $800.00 a month on the thing.
Councilman Senn: No, we spent 2 -3 times that a month ago. And we brought, well ... and Don said he was going to
be doing a report and getting it to us so.
Don Ashworth: It's all part of that.
40
n
I
fl
L
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Councilman Senn: Is that all yours?
Councilman Berquist: Well yeah, I can ask the other stuff tomorrow?
Mayor Chmiel: Would you like to move that one then?
Councilman Senn: I can give you the one that Pam gave me the answers on there. I'll move approval with the
exception of the U.S. West Communications Telephone of $2,219.46.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second?
Councilwoman Dockendorf Yes.
Councilman Senn moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to approve the Bills with the exception of
Check #082896 payable to U.S. West Communications in the amount of $2,219.46. All voted in favor and the
motion carried.
Mayor Chmiel: Todd, did you find out?
Todd Gerhardt: That district's... 2002.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay.
Don Ashwordh: ... you literally have the next three year period of time to figure out how many parcels can be
decertified. There's no direct tie between doing it now and going it later.
Councilman Berquist: So this thing comes back on the tax rolls through the natural course of events in 2002?
Todd Gerhardt: No. It will be back on the tax rolls in the year 2004.
Councilman Berquist: 2004, okay. Unless the report indicates that you just can't—and then you can close the
district out
Councilman Senn: Or it could go longer if you have additional debt?
Todd Gerhardt: No, it cannot go past 2003. At that time, unless you have special legislation that allows it to go past
that...
Councilman Senn: This is part of the?
Todd Gerhardt: This would be the National Weather Service...
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, is there an approval?
Councilwoman Dockendorf I would move approval.
Councilman Mason: Second.
Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the Private Redevelopment
Agreement with Heracles, LLC and their request for $58,430.00 in city assistance. All voted in favor and the
motion carried.
Mayor Chmiel: We have Council Presentations, committee reports. Mike, would you like to summarize?
41
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Councilman Mason: Yeah. Maybe you can help me out with the Hanus one. BRA did move, with the excess
increment, if any, with District 112. That check would be cut based on the formula that our City Manager has
worked out, if there's excess money there. That's convect, right?
Don Ashworth: Well yeah. If it can be shown that they had generated those dollars.
Councilman Mason: Right, okay. Got a verbal update on the entertainment complex. Things seem to be going. We
may have a movie theater in Chan in March, which my kids thought was pretty cool. I want to make sure I've got
this one right, with the Hanus property and there's some sort of snafu apparently between Gary Brown and Gary Kitt,
that they need to take care of. The action HRA took was, when that note comes due, that we would go ahead and pay
that note on or about the first of December. Therefore releasing some of the City's obligation and letting Mr. Brown
and Mr. Kirt deal with the problem as opposed to the City dealing with the problem.
Mayor Chmiel: Right. It wasn't basically our problem in the first place.
Councilman Mason: Right.
Councilwoman Dockendorf. But the balloon is our responsibility?
Todd Gerhardt: I have to put this on a future agenda but as the HRA generated the monies to the Historical Trust,
that fund is in the control of the City Council. The HRA was basically requesting that the City Council take monies
from that fund to pay off the mortgage as, what I would like to say as an interim financing mechanism because we
think it would be difficult to sell bonds, revenue bonds on a facility with a pending lawsuit out there between Gary
Kirt and Gary Brown.
Councilman Berquist: Could I ask a couple questions about that?
Mayor Chmiel: Sure.
Councilman Berquist: I'll tell you, I was more than surprised in looking at the report from Jim Walston. That the
real issue, which is in my opinion the $395,000.00 balloon. I mean the way the memo was addressed made it sound
as though the City was in default in not getting this thing closed. The real issue was one of timeliness and getting the
mortgage paid off. The balloon taken care of And he didn't address that adequately within his memo, in my
opinion, because from listening to the conversations that took place in the HRA, that was lost on everybody. So, and
there was very little discussion to that end. The second question I had was, well that's a statement the fast one.
Second question I have is, the first part of the motion that was made stipulated that the City work hard to set a
closing date at the earliest possible time. Now Brown and Kirt are going to be wrestling over who didn't notify who.
The City conceivably could be construed as having been remiss in not having notified Brown as to a closing date. To
go ahead and set a closing date with Kirt seems to invite us being named.
Mayor Chmiel: I don't see it that way. That was strictly an agreement between Kirt and Brown and no way should
that have any bearing factor on what the HRA was doing. The only agreement that was with anyone would have
been with Kirt, but that was waived, isn't that right Todd?
Todd Gerhardt: Bottom line is that we have an obligation to close with Mr. Kirt and we have a contract between, it
was, we had a repurchase agreement with Gary Kirt and that was a question of the HRA is that a binding agreement.
The opinion from the city attorney was that is a binding agreement. And thus the HRA's motion was to direct staff
to close with I& Kirt as soon as possible. The second motion was to direct staff to meet with Gary Kirt and Gary
Brown and discuss working out a mutual agreement between all three parties. I talked with Jim Walston today.
He's got phone calls into both parties. The third motion was for the HRA to request the City Council to finance the
mortgage out of Historical Trust.
Mayor Chmiel: Good.
42
1
C
�I
P
P,
k
City Council Meeting - September 23, 1996
Councilman Mason: Steve, would you go over that fast? I'm not, your first statement was, what was lost on HRA?
Councilman Berquist: It was my opinion after reading the staff report, the issue that was of primary importance from
a timeliness point of view was the balloon. Not necessarily the closing date. I know there was some pressure by Mr.
Kirt to set a closing date. Obviously he wants to get this thing done but the importance of the balloon date was not
addressed adequately within his memo. Nor was it really even discussed amongst the HRA members.
Todd Gerhardt: Are you saying that it could have been extended or?
Councilman Berquist: Well, up until the last 10 or 15 minutes of the discussion, unless I misheard, the importance of
getting that balloon payment paid was not evident from the HRA members that I was listening to. The way I
understood it, the closing date would be, we're looking at it from the standpoint that you had to get the thing closed
so that the funds would be available to pay the balloon.
Todd Gerhardt: We're not going to get any money from the closing...
Councilman Berquist: No, I understand that. But there was never anything that really addressed the City having to
front load or front end that money within the memo, and maybe it was a given within the agreement that everybody
knew about but it certainly didn't seem that way to me.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Let's go to Southwest Metro.
Councilwoman Dockendorf. The most imminent thing that we need to deal with is when we get our Truth in
Taxation notices, because of legislation that was passed this past session, you're going to see city tax and then transit
tax broken out. We're working on a public relations campaign communication to let citizens know what that is.
We'll also be working with city staff members in case, when the phone calls do start coming in here. Trying to
redirect them to either the County Assessor or Southwest Metro staff.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, good. Thanks. Who would cover the Bluff Creek Corridor? Kate?
Kate Aanenson: I'd be happy to. The next Planning Commission meeting, next Wednesday we'll be having another
work session on the Bluff Creek and the public hearing will probably be a month after that.
Mayor Chmiel: Good, thanks. And Park Task Force, Steve.
Councilman Berquist: We met 10 days ago I think and we met with the gentleman from the TPL and tried to assign
some semblance of a priority to the properties that are of interest to us and the projects that ... to give him some
direction from a negotiation point of view. That's about it. We're moving along.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, good. Okay, is there a motion for adjournment?
Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Berquist seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the
motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10:37 p.m.
Submitted by Don Ashworth
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
43