1f. City Council Minutes June 24, 1996' CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
NNE 24, 1996
' Mayor Chmiel called the meeting to order at 8:00 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag.
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor. Chmiel, Councilman Berquist, Councilwoman Dockendorf,
' Councilman Mason and Councilman Senn
STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Roger Knutson, Kate Aanenson, Charles Folch, and Todd Gerhardt
' APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the
agenda as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None.
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Berquist seconded to approve the following
Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations:
a. Resolution #96 -51: Approve Gambling Permit, Harvest Festival, St. Hubert's Church.
' b. Ordinance Amending Chapter 14 of City Code Concerning Park Rules Allowing Police K -9 Dogs in City
Parks, Final Reading.
d. Approval of Bills.
e. Planning Commission Minutes dated June 5, 1996
' f. Approve Settlement for Easement Acquisition, Jesberg Property, Lyman Boulevard/Lake Riley Improvement
Projects.
'
4111 voted in favor and the motion carried.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS:
' Conrad Fiskness: I'm Conrad Fiskness, President of the Riley/Purgatory/Bluff Creek Watershed District. Two
years ago at the 4th of July event up here, one of the residents of Chanhassen asked me for a map of the trails
is the area, and of course we didn't have one but it struck me that it might be a good idea to develop something
1 like that. Furthermore, we're required to provide information to the public about the watershed district so we
embarked on a project to develop a map of the trails in our district. Thought we'd have in time for the 1995
map. Well, I got it at 5:00 this afternoon. It was a little bit bigger project than what we bargained for but you
folks have the distinction of being the very first recipients of our map that we've had in our hands for 3 hours
so I'd like to present a map to each of the Council members. And we won't leave out the rest of the staff either
so. ` Just one addition, we are going to be up at the center here on the 3rd and we will be handing these out to
the,ggeneraLpublic so ... thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Appreciate it very much.
Conrad Fiskness: And if anybody else who wants them here, I brought a box so I guess I'll just start passing
them down.
1
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Are there any other'. visitor presentations? Seeing none, we'll move right along with the
agenda.
PUBLIC BEARING- APPLICATION FOR ON -SALE BEER AND WINE LICENSE, sBYERLY'S
RESTAURANT. 800 WEST 78TH STREET:
Mayor Chmiel opened the public hearing on this item
Don Ashworth:. This item was considered by- the City Council approximately two weeks ago. Tabled to ensure
that the property owners adjacent to the property were notified. That notice was mailed and staff isrcontinuing
to recommend approval.
Mayor Chmiel; Okay, thank you. Is there anyone wishing to address this, specific project at this time? If there
are concerns, this is the time for you to come • forward and indicate your position regarding this application. If
seeing none, may I have 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: Any discussion on this. Steve?
Councilman Berquist: I. really don't have any problems with it. I'm a little bit "surprised with the application but
no, I don't have any problems with approving it.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Colleen.
-i
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Nothing.
Councilman Mason: None.
Mayor Chmiel: Mark.
Councilman Senn: None.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, can I have a motion?
Councilman Mason: I will move approval for the request for on -sale beer and wine license for Byerly's at 800.
West 78th Street.
Councilman Berquist: Second it.
Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Berquist seconded to approve the, request for an on -sale beer and wine
license for Byedy's Restaurant conditioned upon receipt of the following documents. a $5,000.00 :surety bond, a
certificate of liquor liability insurance, and the license fee of $280.00. All voted in favor and the motion
carried.
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
1
' PUBLIC BEARING: ADOPTION OF A PROGRAM FOR DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 5 AND A PLAN
FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 5 -1.
Public Present:
' Name Address
Sandy Eastling 7285 Pontiac Circle
Stephanie Morrow 6673 Mulberry Circle
Douglas Volkmeier 6691 Mulberry Circle
' Todd Gerhardt: Honorable Mayor and City Council. Attached for your consideration is the creation of a new
tax increment financing district and Plan No. 5 -1 in Development District No. 5. Under this plan the city would
be proposing to assist 35 of 76 units within the Rottlund development called North Bay. Staff is proposing 18
units be designated for first time home buyers with a price range of $88,000.00 to $95,000.00, with a combined
net income of not more than $43,000.00. The remaining 17 units would have a price range of $105,000.00 to
$115,000.00 and a combined income of not more than $54,600.00. All the units would also have a recapture
policy where the homeowner will only receive the annual consumer price index over a 10 year limitation. Plus
realtor costs on the resale of the property. The proposed development currently pays $7,166.00 per year and
based on our estimate, once the development is fully completed, we would capture $60,481.00 to assist annually
to assist in writing out these home values. The total estimated amount of taxes captured through the life of the
' district is around $1.5 million. The total obligation to Rottlund is as follows: The city is proposing to assume
$350,000.00 worth of sewer, water and roadway improvement costs against the site as part of the Lyman
project. The land write down to further reduce the housing project cost of $400,000.00 and this would be under
a pay as you go program. Total incentives to Rottlund are estimated at $750,000.00 with administrative costs
for staff is roughly $75,000.00. Staff has also had conversations with the school district and they have
expressed their concerns. They do like the feel of this project. However, they do have regrets in losing out on
' those tax dollars. As some of the people that might live in these homes would probably send their kids to the
school district. Staff has talked with the school district, in talking about the joint tax study that we're working
on and looking at further impacts of creating districts like that and we may be trying to find other alternatives
that might not affect them as much. With that, staff would open it up to the public for any questions or
concerns they may have regarding the project.
Don Ashworth: Mr. Mayor? I should note for the record that we did receive a letter from the school district
' and I have distributed a copy of that to the City Council. It is dated June 21, 1996.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Has everyone had an opportunity to read that? Okay. Is there anyone else wishing to
express their opinion in regard to this project? Please come forward and please state your name and your
' address.
Sandy Eastling: My name is Sandy Eastling. I live at 7285 Pontiac Circle. My husband and I have lived in
Chanhassen since we married in 1987 and since we've lived here almost 9 years, we've seen phenomenal growth
and development in the city of Chanhassen. In addition our family has occurred with phenomenal growth ... too,
and we're going to be a family of 6 shortly. I'm a stay at home mom and my husband and I are prevented from
finding more adequate housing within Chanhassen, partially due to the high housing cost in town. We jokingly
refer to our townhome development, which is older, as the only affordable housing in Chanhassen so it is with
hope and relief that I encourage the approval of TIF districts specifically geared for families such as our's with
3
l
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
our specific needs. Perhaps with the proposed subsidies we would be able to provide our family with adequate
housing and still live within Chanhassen, which is what we would like to do, and we'd like to continue to raise '
our family here so I am very encouraged and very hopeful that maybe we could stay here instead of having to
move far away. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Sandy. Is there anyone else? Okay, if not we'll bring it back to Council. Steve. '
Councilman Berquist: I had talked with Todd this afternoon on some questions I had had and he answered what
I've asked him. I wondered whether the real estate taxes were going to be based on the written down amount or
the assessed value and he stated that they probably would be on the purchase price. Did you ask Orlin that
question?
Todd Gerhardt: I didn't have an opportunity to call him yet today but I can do that and get a memo back to
you.
Councilman Berquist: Okay. And the other question that I had had, with a 10 year switch if you will, in the
document that allows the buyer to sell at the 10 year point and reap any benefits, any appreciation that has
occurred. What happens to that unit in year 3? Year 4? That unit, someone buys it and they sell it in 1999 or
2002, does the unit stay in? If the unit stays in the district, does the unit remain under the affordable housing
program?
Todd Gerhardt: It stays within the tax increment district. However, they would have to pay taxes at the higher '
value and would not be affordable anymore. I mean if somebody came in and bought it at $138,000.00. They
could sell it for you know, up and above that. It only goes to the first individual. But the difference in the
recapture. Say it was one of the $105,000.00 units and it sold for $35,000.00, and you had one year of interest '
on there, that $29,000.00 - $27,000.00 would come back to the HRA. That's the difference. They would only
capture say $3,000.00 of that equity and the remaining amount would then come back to the City Council. The
next home buyer qualified for the $138,000.00 so it's no longer an affordable unit. So really going in to.
Councilman Berquist: If the sale price is tied to the CPI, which is part of the document, and I mean at some '
point the affordable, the definition of affordable housing is going to recognize the increases in the Consumer
Price Index and rachet up accordingly. So conceivably in 1999 when we've had three years of 3 1/4%
Consumer Price Index inflation, the affordable price would be higher. That unit would still be sold within the
affordable level.
Todd Gerhardt: I don't know if we can restrict what they can sell the home for. It's up to the open market and '
pay but the recapture is that the City Council would get the additional recaptured value. So if they bought the
home for $100,000.00. We had $9,000.00 of CPI. So they're going to capture the $9,000.00 and say it sold for
$130,000.00. You're going to get $21,000.00 back from the sale of that home. That comes back to the City '
Council.
Don Ashworth: Which you then hypothetically could roll back into some other home to drive it in a similar '
fashion.
Councilman Berquist: Okay. And then the other question I had, as far as bonding capacity. It's a pay as you
go program. Just incentive will not, we will have no bonding capacity affected by the project whatsoever?
J
1
1
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
Todd Gerhardt: We are not anticipating selling any bonds. The only bonds that would be sold will be for the
road project and us assuming the $350,000.00. And then through the increment generated off the project, we
would take that to write down and make the bond payments on that $350,000.00.
Councilman Berquist: That's it for now.
Mayor Chmiel: Any other?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well I too had an opportunity to talk to Todd, but this isn't an issue that we got
into this afternoon. First time home buyers, I mean generally those turn over pretty quick and my concern is
that we can only, I mean we're only starting with 35 units. What are your projections on how soon affordable
housing may evaporate?
Todd Gerhardt: This project is not going to solve all our problems.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I realize. It's a drop in the bucket in terms of the Livable Communities.
Todd Gerhardt: We anticipate this thing, we've already taken 4 or 5 phone calls from people who have heard
about it and we haven't had any advertising of it. And we've put them directly into contact with Rottlund. We
anticipate these units going very quickly. By July of next year they'll probably all be gone.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yeah, my concern is the turnover. Particularly if we can't control what they sell
for. I realize that we will, the City will reap the benefit of any appreciation in value but.
Todd Gerhardt: Well with that recaptured money that you'll get over the next 10 years, you'll have this pool of
money and then you can find other people with these incomes and basically try to set them up in any home
anywhere.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Oh, so it doesn't have to stay in that district?
Todd Gerhardt: No. Once you get the recapture, I've got to think that's non -tax increment money when it
comes back to us so you can spend it any way.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: And it doesn't have to be segregated into a different fund? I mean a fund
specifically for affordable housing.
Todd Gerhardt: That's up to the City Council.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Okay.
Todd Gerhardt: If you want to start a first time home buying fund.
Kate Aanenson: If I could just comment on that. We'll be talking about it later in the Housing Action Plan.
That's one of the strategies that we'll be talking about.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Oh! Well I mean we've already approved the development in and of itself and I
think it's a great product. It's something we don't have in Chanhassen currently and the units will be owner
5
1
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
occupied. My only concerns are trying to keep it, or continue the program down the road, and it does show
effort to the Met Council. I guess that's all the comments I have. '
Mayor Chmiel: Mike.
Councilman Mason: I basically agree with Colleen. I think it's a good project. It is just a drop in the bucket
and I think we need to continue to pursue this kind of thing. I do share the concern of School Districf 4112.
Even though my kids don't go in that district, I understand those concerns. And I think we need to continue to
work with the County and the School District whenever we work with TIF districts and come to an amenable
agreement on how the taxes are divvied up and how that works out.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mark.
Councilman Senn: Todd, when we originally talked about this idea you know we talked about filling
in ... system, effectively an incentive... keep it as affordable housing. Okay, and what's been created here I mean
is kind of like, we're going part way there and basically going out to the 10 year thing. Is it your plan to put, I
mean this needs a lot more detail as it relates to how that system or incentive system is going to work. I mean
it seems to me the best place to do that is in the creation of the district. I suppose the other, I mean the other
possible place to do it would be in the development agreement but it seems to me, since this is our first one, it
,
would make more sense to make sure it's in the district so we set the rules out real straight forwardly up front
rather than as we go down the road. The part I think we're skipping is, we're kind of skipping the ... that actually
provides the reward or incentive to keep it affordable housing. I understand what you're doing in relationship to
the resale and the money coming back and going to an affordable housing fund is created or whatever, but it
seems to me we ought to have incentive right in the program which ties the value or the sale price of the house
to the then defined affordable housing rate and if it is so with that, then there is no disincentive to sell, or more
or less no penalty to sell or no payback. But for any amounts that it's over that amount, then I think we should
have effectively as a penalty in there which allows us to effectively take that unit and recreate a situation
elsewhere. And that's the kind of detail I see lacking here. I mean can we spend some time and put that
together and include it in here so that matrix, you know works effectively right up front. Or should we create a
separate, you know working document to impose over any of these TIF districts we create. It would cover them
'
all or what are you thinking about?
Todd Gerhardt: Yeah, that's a good comment. There needs to be some more details worked out and it's one
that we have to really sit down with Rottlund and figure out how they're going to be marketing these. These
homes and also to put together how the flow of money back to them works. And how they're going to have
legal language that you record against each of these homes to ensure that the recapture is spelled out right.
There are some additional details that we will have to bring back to City Council for your approval.
Councilman Senn: Your preference is to do that separately then rather than in the document creating the I
housing district?
Todd Gerhardt: There's so many different ways you can go with it and I guess we haven't worked out those
things with Mark. The tax increment plan doesn't need to have the details of that in there. The biggest thing is
to show the tax impacts and what your overall budgets are for that. And in this case we're not selling bonds but
bond indebtedness that you'd take on as part of the key things in the tax increment plan. The details of how
you structure the documents and recording against the property don't need to be spelled out in the plan. But
those were things that we will bring back to City Council so you endorse those.
s �
C1
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
Councilman Senn: Because I think that's, as we talked about when we first talked about even introducing the
concept. I mean that was pretty much the key part of it. We're going to enable the house to be sold for
$105,000.00 even though it's worth $130,000.00. You know basically if the next year, Met Council change that
$105 through inflation to $110, and that's what they sell it for, in my mind who cares. It's still affordable
housing. But if they sell it for $120 and Met Council's only changed it to $110, I don't think the penalty should
be the difference. More or less we recapture the penalty effectively.
Todd Gerhardt: Well I wouldn't have language like that. I mean I think we're going off today's rules with the
$115 you know, and anything of what the home, the $105. The $88 to $95 would be the base and then CPI up
and above that. So not using the $115.
' Councilwoman Dockendorf: So you're talking, I think you're talking about using Met Council's appreciation as
opposed to the CPI?
Councilman Senn: Well, I'm assuming using CPI, Met Council's going to have some kind of annual adjustment
in their now defined level for affordable housing and I think that's, if they're not, we should ask Met Council the
question but I thought.
Kate Aanenson: I believe that's what they'll be doing.
Councilman Senn: Yeah. And so if we tie what we do to that level, I mean I don't think we should limit the
' values going up, or the people who own them for the values going up but as long as what they sell it for is
limited to the new, they're keeping pace effectively with inflation then, which is what they should be allowed to
do. If they're going to do more than keep pace with inflation, then that's where I think we should get the money
' back and be able to pump it effectively into. Well maybe a disincentive to sell.
Councilwoman Dockendorf. That's what the point is.
Councilman Senn: No, under the current way it's set up. Not until after, I mean it isn't really set up that way
from day one to start that way.
1 Mayor Chmiel: But I think what Todd is saying, the additional information will be brought to Council for final
approval.
Councilman Senn: ...separate document.
Kate Aanenson: Right, because Rottlund has...
Councilman Senn: Okay. So we'll deal with that in an overall...
Todd Gerhardt: I don't know how we'll bring it back but we will bring it back. It might be just informational
but I've got to think there's going to be some legal documents. Definitely you're going to have to have a private
redevelopment agreement with Rottlund on this where you're going to have to approve the promissory note and
the repayment of the $400,000.00 back to them so that's definitely got to come back. I was hoping to work out
' more of the details into that agreement also. Making them have to record each of these against the units and the
language spelling out, you know you can use CPI and definitely put language in there, if that's the Council's
7
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
wishes to say would not take into account any Met Council inflationary value increases and things like that.
Yeah, that would be detailed with the private redevelopment agreement.
Mayor Chmiel: Don.
Don Ashworth: Councilwoman Dockendorfs interpretation was correct though. The plan as set out, if it would
produce that $21,000.00, could then be' used to take and, for some other housing. It probably wouldn't be that
same house but it could be put into your housing program. Potentially at that point in time used in a whole lot
different fashion. In other words, to help a person with a down payment and then when they sold, they'd have
to pay that back.
Councilman Senn: But that's the, you're talking about effectively the excess increment or whatever, okay. '
Don Ashworth: Correct.
Councilman Senn: What I'm talking about is something that would come into play before we even hit.
Todd Gerhardt: Mark's talking about the recapture percentage on what the individual may get. You know that
you don't ... Met Council as a mechanism to bump up the value even higher. I think you just use the CPI as your
sole source of pumping it. It's a simple procedure. I don't think to use two areas of the Met Council and CPI.
I think you use, zone in on one and I'd use CPI.
Councilman Senn: But I think we should really move in on Met Council because I mean that's where our '
responsibility lies to meet affordable housing goals.
Kate Aanenson: But you're getting credit at what you're getting in at. That's where the credit lies so it's kind of
I
moot.
Todd Gerhardt: Met Council won't be making adjustments every year, do you think?
Kate Aanenson: To me it's a moot issue. If you recapture it and put it somewhere else... Right, we're trying to
find other opportunities.
Mayor Chmiel: Well, we can find that out too.
Todd Gerhardt: We'll bring that back. Decide which of the two options.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I'm not going to take any time on this because of the fact of what everyone had said. I
think what Michael said about this being a drop in the bucket but we need a lot of buckets to meet the
Metropolitan Council's requirements. So with that, can I have approval of creating a new tax increment
financing plan No. 5 -1 and development district No. 5.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Did we close the public hearing?
Mayor Chmiel: No we didn't.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I move to close the public hearing. -
8
fl
L
11-1
L
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
Councilman Berquist: Second.
Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Berquist seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in
favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Councilman Senn: I move approval of creation of the district.
Councilman Mason: Second.
Resolution #96 -52: Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the Resolution Creating
Tax Increment Financing District No. 5 -1 and Development District No. 5 (see Attachment #4) and direct staff
to prepare a private redevelopment agreement with Rottlund Homes. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
AWARD OF BIDS: 1996 STREET SEALCOATING PROGRAM.
Charles Folch: Thank you Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. Bids were received and opened for the 1996
street repair program. As expected only two bidders submitted bids for this year's project. They're the same
two bidders we've been receiving for the last 10 years. Unfortunately bids came in a little bit higher than
expected, probably due to a couple of things. One, this year's contract for the actual sealcoat work is smaller
than in years past, so I think the volume discount is lost. Also we required to use a different material on some
of the connecting streets with Trunk Highway 5. Basically it's an additive to help the material set up quicker
and we had never used that before and our estimates for that cost were lower than what was received. I think
also the aggregate cost was a little bit higher than expected also but in all, the low bid received was
approximately $7,000.00 or $8,000.00 over what we have remaining in the budget for this year's project. Given
that fact, and also anticipating that this may happen, we've provided language in the specification documents
which allows the city to add or delete from the contract so as to stay within our budgetary limitations. Staff has
made a review of the program which the location maps are included in your packet tonight. Staff would
propose that the streets listed on Figure 10 be removed from this year's program and that would delete
approximately $8,000.00 and get the program, or this year's project within the program budgetary limitations.
The streets listed on Figure 10 are pretty much low volume, dead end streets. We do not see that that would be
a problem to delay their sealcoating one more year until next year. So staff would recommend that the contract
work be, work scope be revised eliminating the roads listed on Figure 10. This would yield a revised total bid,
the low bidder Allied Blacktop of $83,290.64.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Steve, any comments in regard to Charles' project?
Councilman Berquist: No.
Mayor Chmiel: Colleen.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I'll explain my ignorance but why are we proposing to do roads like Trondle and
even new West 78th down near Target? I mean those are only a couple years old, aren't they?
Charles Folch: Typically what you try to do is hit a new street within 4 to 5 years of when it's been paved.
That's when it starts to chalk up and you'll get the first sealcoat layer which will adhere. What we're trying to
accomplish in the downtown, the stretch in front of Target was placed in '93. December of '93 so it's roughly 3
years old. What we're trying to do is to get, since we've done so many piecemeal projects in the downtown,
E
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
Market Boulevard, West 78th Street, Great Plains Boulevard, we'd like to have it all sealcoated so it all would
have the same basic look so it doesn't look like a hodge podge of patches here and patches there. Plus again the
streets that we're looking at doing are at least 3 years old. So that's why you see us proposing to do the
downtown with a gray granite.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Okey doke.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Mike.
Councilman Mason: None, other than I like the plan for reducing the work scope. That sounds reasonable to
keep within the budget.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mark.
Councilman Senn: Looks fine.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay.
Councilman Mason: I will move approval of award of bids for the '96 street sealcoat program, Project #96 -11
with the changes noted in the staff report, or actually in Charles' presentation.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Who are you awarding it to?
Councilman Mason: To Allied Blacktop, thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second?
Councilman Berquist: I'll second it.
Resolution #96 -53: Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Berquist seconded to award the bid for the 1996
Street sealcoating program, Project #96 -11, to Allied Blacktop in the amount of $83,290.64. All voted in
favor and the motion carved.
APPEAL DECISION OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS FOR A VARIANCE FROM
THE 10 FE SIDE YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A GARAGE
ADDITION, 960 LAKE SUSAN DRIVE, DAVE BLOOMQUIST.
Public Present:
Name Address
Bruce Bongg 990 Lake Susan. Drive
Phyllis Bruss 8624 Chan Hills Drive
Dave Bloomquist 960 Lake Susan Drive
Bill Hoover 1000 Lake Susan Drive
Lance & Tia Black 8620 Chanhassen Hills Drive No.
10
LE I
1
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
Kate Aanenson: On June 10th the Board of Adjustment and Appeals heard a request for a variance. A side
yard variance from the 12 feet to 10 feet. A motion was made by Mr. Senn to approve it from a 12 to a 10
foot. That would require a 2.5 foot variance. The reason this is before you is, Mr. Johnson voted against it
and Carol Watson abstained so we had a three way split on that. A majority of the Board is required for an
action. The staff had recommended denial. There was some concern from the neighbors on this request
regarding, this lot is relatively flat. ...storm drainage his proposed garage. It was addressed in the report and
staff is of the opinion that if the Council was to approve the variance, that a drainage swale should be put in
place along the lot line of the garage. Again, the staff had recommended originally denial of this request. If
you were to approve it, then again we would recommend that you add a condition regarding a drainage swale
because the lot is relatively flat. To have the water go towards the street. That's all I have. If you have any
questions, I'd be happy to answer them.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Kate. Any questions from Council? If not, is there anyone here who would like to
address this specific proposal?
Dave Bloomquist: My name is Dave Bloomquist. I live at 960 Lake Susan Drive. All we're basically asking
for is to be able to install a garage on that side of the house. Currently out at the property, we could put a
garage on the other side of the house but that—but I don't think that's really conducive to the neighborhood and
that was determined not as an option... With regard to the drainage swale ... currently is on my property. It starts
basically right at the very far back corner of the property... That's about the starting point of the drainage swale.
It starts right at that corner and then continues all the way to the street, ending about 3 or 4 feet from the front
of the corner of the property... After rain for a couple days, you'd probably have some water in there. It's
certainly below the garage line to where the drainage is. It's just a matter of waiting for it to get to the street.
So I personally don't see it as being an issue and I'm the only one that has to deal with it. I guess if someone's
getting their feet wet, it's because they're on my side, on my front. I've discussed it with Mark Senn ... offered
suggestions for me to...
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Is there anyone else?
Lance Black: My name's Lance Black. I live at 8620 Chanhassen Hills Drive North. I'm the property adjacent
to this, to my back yard backs up to the side. And my main concern is the drainage. This swale does tend to
come into both yards. Actually it butts up on three yards right there. It's all right in the corner. I just installed
a fence and even walking down by the side of the fence, walking on the property it's, usually even after
yesterday when I was out there, it was, it's always, I have a guy that cuts my yard. He calls it mooshy. My
main concern, if he puts the garage you know that much closer, there's going to be more runoff from the house.
From that garage that's going to come right on that property line. That you know, would back it up even more.
It can be standing water back there after a good weeks worth of rain, which affects three properties back there.
And that's my main concern of that, barring there would be a fire or something where people would have to get
back, I just would hope there'd be enough room between the fence and the garage where someone could get to
the back side of the house if that need be addressed. There was some sort of emergency that vehicles had to get
back on that side of the house, and those would be my concerns.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Anyone else?
Phyllis Bruss: I'm Phyllis Bruss and I live at 8624 Chanhassen Hills Drive North. My back yard abuts Mr.
Bloomquist's yard also and setting right next to the Black's. I've-been a resident there for 6 or 7 years now.
I've enjoyed the openness of the area and this... encroaching the property. I have lots of concerns about that.
11
it
�l
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
Where the property is, where originally put, the house would be having just a two car garage. Also I have a big
concern about the drainage because it is wet and it is very squashy back there, or mooshy as Mr. Black has
stated. Also if this is approved, that would start a tremendous opening of other people are going to want to
have variances for other things .... I have a lot of concerns about that too. Also this was not a hardship case, as
was written in the report to the Planning Commission so it's not necessary for making a living and it's not
necessary for the livelihood. I feel this is of most concern also. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Anyone else?
,
Bruce Bongg: Bruce Bongg. I live at 990 Lake Susan Drive. I have some concerns about the water. The
water runoff. I'm not quite sure if the garage goes in, how far the swale is and how wide is the swale ... water
going to travel. Is it a 2 foot wide swale, running down the center of the property line? Is that, or is there a 5
foot easement for utilities? Does the water run in that 5 foot easement? That's a concern of mine. Also with
,
the fence that the Black's put in, which they have a right to put in. I think the garage extension come any
closer to that is going to ... lot more crowding. Also there's a domino effect that if Mr. Bloomquist is allowed to
build into that 10 foot easement, then so is everybody else. So we can open up the possibility that other lots in
,
the neighborhood with 3 car garages, outside of the 10 foot easement, still have the option to build a 4 stall
garage inside the easement. There's a homeowner across the street from me that has more square footage than
Mr. Bloomquist's home, yet has managed to have a 3 car garage. That's at 991 Lake Susan Drive. So I think
the problem, one of the concerns I have is the house isn't centered on the property... mentioned on the other side
of Mr. Bloomquist's property and only 17 feet on the other side, on the garage side. I think the reason he wants
to build the garage is to store a boat. There's other, they've got a 3 stall garage ... store a boat and then... I guess
Mr. Bloomquist had mentioned that he also had the option to build, I believe he said a garage on the other side
,
of this property. I'd love Mr. Bloomquist to build a garage on the other side of his property. I would like to
see the person that buys Mr. Bloomquist's property where the third stall garage is on the other side of his
property. I don't think that's an option. I think it's just an idle threat on Mr. Bloomquist's part. He's pretty
much be shooting himself in the foot in terms of trying to resale his home if he did something like that so.
Other than that...
Mayor Chmiel: Thank Anyone else?
r
you.
William Hoover: My name is William Hoover. I live at 1000 Lake Susan Drive. About 3 doors down. I'm on
the Board of Adjustments at Carver County so I understand exactly what you guys are going through. Just all
the things you're thinking about and trying to weigh. I'm there. The only issue, the setback, it doesn't make
any difference to me. I mean either way. The issue I'd like to address is drainage. It was stated that there be a
swale mandated to handle drainage. Who enforces that if it doesn't happen? If, when the construction is done
and the ... there's now a second Lake Susan there, how is that going to be taken care of? If someone could
address for me please.
Mayor Chmiel: Charles.
Charles Folch: Well, I think the building permit that's applied for the garage. As such, there's certain
inspections that will take place. If it's noted, as it passes through the different reviews for the departments, that
there's an issue with the drainage that's critical. Then they'll make note to make inspection of that, if necessary,
to make sure that it is done properly.
12 1
11
1
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
1 William Hoover: Okay, when we get past that point and it still isn't done property, how's it going to ... The
reason I ask this is, Mr. Bongg and I were in court today spending thousands of dollars about the property line
between our houses. I'm not making this a personal forum for us. There's a 5 foot difference in lot height
there, and no matter which side I'm on, well the argument we're on, we can agree that the city's dropped the
ball. Big time. They've done nothing. We've had it up in civil court. Extreme hard feelings. Thousands and
thousands of dollars. Plans were not followed. Surveys, you know, let's say ... want to get into personal.
Surveys 2 1/2 feet off surveys. 5 feet off development plans. The city's in today arguing the plans don't count.
It's okay that one lot misses the survey. You've get one creatively interpreted and we got immunity. Can't
touch us. So we get back to, how do we protect the Black's and the Bloomquist's from the expense and the
hard feelings that the Bonggs and I have found.
' Mayor Chmiel: I don't think there's an answer for that right now. Because we're not too familiar with your
proposal. With your project as you're saying. So it'd be rather difficult to come up with any summarization on
it at all.
' William Hoover: Well I just want to know how the drainage swale and the drainage will be enforced. How it
goes down to the road? When it gets to this point that it's constructed, and it's a problem and good engineering
' and one day they say one thing and one day they do another. The plans are obviously off and they go, tough
luck you know. Basically you throw the citizens to the wolves and we go... And if we had everything enforced,
the approving of plans, the approval of plans, inspections department, engineering and everyone to be able to
come back afterwards and say, hey. We've got a problem. This is all approved and we all agreed. Now we
have a problem. Can you correct it? How do you think you're going to, if you're going to pass this variance,
how are you, because we have to deal with this issue. Our issue is past. Like I say, I'm not trying to make this
a personal forum. Our issue is past. How do we protect the lots from Bloomquist if you pass this variance?
How is that going to change? Work from today, the argument for today is going to qualify for this and I guess
unless, I would request that it be adequately addressed if the variance is going to pass. Now like I say, I don't
want to take a shot at Mr. Bloomquist, I don't care about setback one way or another but we need to protect the
' citizens from this.
Mayor Chmiel: Many situations occur but who knows whether or not it's a hypothetical situation that you're
indicating. Who knows? It may work just the way it would be with that swale. To eliminate. I'm not sure.
1 But I think our engineering has indicated that they would do the inspections in making sure that they would
comply with those specific requirements.
William Hoover: Well once again, they didn't do anything in our situation and like I say, they failed miserably
so I guess we aren't going to get to answer on that.
' Mayor Chmiel: Right, and I don't think we can solve your given problem at this particular time because that's
in Court. We can't even comment on it.
William Hoover: I understand. I'm trying to stop another problem from occurring so all I'm saying is that, like
I say, I wasn't turning it into a personal forum. Just how do we stop it from becoming another problem and I
think maybe we should install steps that would be taken and people specifically be responsible... engineering
didn't work.
' Mayor Chmiel: Good, thanks.
13
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
Don Ashworth: Mr. Mayor? I mean in that particular instance we will not issue the Certificate of Occupancy
for that particular structure. Without that, financing goes out the window. In addition, in previous cases such
as this, I know that engineering, planning have gotten down into the details, have required that monies actually
be put up to ensure that correction take place. As I note, I think that Mr. Hoover did use tonight's meeting to,
for really his own personal purposes and it should be noted that he did the grading on his property. The Court '
found against him and he is currently appealing that decision.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, good.
William Hoover: I'd like to address the issue. '
Mayor Chmiel: You're out of order right now. ,
William Hoover: Excuse me.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Go ahead.
Bruce Bongg: Mr. Bongg once again, 990 Lake Susan Drive. As a comment to Mr. Hoover's question about
hard feelings. I can assure the Council that, whether there was a deviation or problems along the property line,
I can honestly say I will like Mr. Hoover anyways so, that's... I don't want to do that. The Court of Appeals of
District Court will be settling that. I guess the water concern there is, I guess that's a big concern for ... a big
concern for me too because that's going to come too close to the foundation of the garage and there are some
issues that were brought up in other cases where it comes too close to the foundation, it tends to damage.
'
Potentially damage... That's a concern... Also, I just want to stress again that the, it does open up the possibility
for other people to build 4 stall garages or sheds or anything else.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Anyone else?
Dave Bloomquist: ...like me to address that?
Mayor Chmiel: If you'd like to, but we'll give you about two minutes.
Dave Bloomquist: Okay. I wanted to address many of the concerns that we had now. Again, I don't plan on
changing the drainage there. I mean ... it's in the grass. It's only a one foot drop in 150 feet so it's not supposed
to drain... There's nothing we can do with it. That's the site elevation. That's the site drainage that's available.
There's not much you can do to improve that. With regard to additional rain coming down if I have a 3 stall
,
garage, it's not going to make it drain more so there is no additional flowage that's coming in that side of the
house. Because it all comes down to...if it's on that side of the house, it's going to come down on that side.
And I don't know... With regard to access on that side of the house. They don't drive trucks, fire trucks into
the back or sides of the houses. If there's some reason they needed to get back there, there's 25 feet on the
'
other side. They mentioned... garage on the other side of the house. The opposite side. It is an option... this is
the best option, so therefore a 6 inch variance on the front property line and I believe 2 1/2 feet on the back of
the garage... And what would happen to the other houses in the neighborhood and 3 car garages. And with
regards to other people requesting variances... through the neighborhood. Found no homes that would first of all
be able to put on a third stall garage with a variance. Or without a variance... Certainly if someone's got a
house 10 feet from the property line, they can ask for a 10 foot variance because they want to put up a 10 foot
,
garage, is not reasonable...so I appreciate it.
14 1
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
' Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. You've got to remember that the proposed garage that you would be putting would
eliminate the additional absorption of that soil as well, so you will get a more concentration of rain going down
within that specific area without the absorption taking place, and I don't know what your percolation is within
that particular area.
Dave Bloomquist: It's poor. It's a real heavy clay. When I've tried to get into it, like to plant trees and stuff,
on a hot summer day, I've used an ax to get into the soil. It took me all day to put in 13 posts... deck. Two
guys grinding all day long with a post hole digger.
Lance Black: It took my guy about a half hour to dig all of my posts in that area for my fence so it's.
Dave Bloomquist: He's got a different post hole digger...
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. 'Steve.
Councilman Berquist: Well, I've got a lot of notes here. First of all, I would hope that any decision made here
will be accepted by all the parties concerned with grace. I understand there's some enmities that have developed
as time has gone on. As a homeowner, if I was looking at my neighbor's encroaching on my property line, I'd
be opposed to as well. As a matter of principle, I am not in favor of granting variances that permit
encroachment on another person's property line. There are areas within Chanhassen that, just by the nature of
the area that are prone to side lot variances and front lot variances. I honestly don't believe that the
neighborhood that we're discussing is one of them. I have much less problems with front setbacks insofar as
roads are concerned because you're not encroaching on your direct neighbors. The way I look at it, the setback
was arranged when the development went in and I believe, at 44 years old you learn a lot from the time you
were 21 or 22 buying your first house but I believe that when a buyer buys a house, they need to be astute and
informed enough to know what the limitations of the property that are being purchased are. And given that I'm
not, I can't go along with a variance. I was out of town the week that we as a Council elected to grant a 1 foot
variance to a gentleman that wanted to put a garage up in Saddlebrook. I probably would not have chosen to go
along with that variance either. It's the precedent setting that I have a hard time with. There is no difference
between 1 foot, 1 1/2 foot, 2 foot, 3 foot, 5 foot. Encroachment is encroachment. And unless we wish to
change the setbacks for the entire neighborhood, which I don't think is practical, I can't see that I'm going to be
in favor of this. I just don't think that these types of variances are in the best interests of all concerned. I do
want to comment on the, no I think I'll, I don't think I will.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Colleen.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Kate, a couple questions. How close is.
Kate Aanenson: 7 1/2 feet from the property line.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: How about from, is the fence right on the property line? So it's right on, okay.
Well you know I drove out there.
Councilman Senn: 6 inches in front, 2 1/2 in back.
Kate Aanenson: There's a 6 foot utility easement but then it'd be 7 1/2 feet.
15
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well I drove out there on my way to the meeting this evening and saw your kids
playing in the sprinklers. But you're saying that it would have to be regraded to create a bigger swale so.
,
Kate Aanenson: That would be the recommendation of the engineering. It's relatively flat. You can see the
grade here. 919 back ... and 918 at the street so it's relatively flat and that would be the recommendation. I
mean the Mayor's right. When you put up the garage, you're accelerating water along the property line. It
'
comes off the roof. So we'd probably put a condition in, if you're looking that way, to even a gutter system to
try and control the water to get it back out to the street.
'
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well you know, I'm looking at 2 1/2 feet and it doesn't seem like much but I think
Steve really was well spoken in his philosophy and I tend to agree with it. Particularly, I don't have issues
when variances are requested and nobody cares, but there's obviously some issues here in addition to the
drainage. If the neighbors don't want it, I think that's a neighborhood decision and I'm not going to, in addition
'
to there is no hardship here so I guess I'd be inclined to vote against it.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Michael. We have it at the Council right now. You'll have to wait. Mike.
,
Councilman Mason: I essentially agree with what Steve and Colleen have said. The issue is not how many
three car garages there are in that neighborhood. The analysis in the staff report I thought was to the point. My
stance on granting variances typically has been in a neighborhood where lot sizes are irregular, Red Cedar Point,
Carver Beach, there are issues that are unavoidable. This development was set up as a PUD. I am inclined to
agree with the people that say, if you grant, yes it is a small variance but if you grant a variance in a situation
like this, that certainly does open up other variances in a neighborhood like that and I just, I'm opposed in
,
principle on that kind of variance.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mark.
,
Councilman Senn: Well I'd gone out and looked at it before we had it I guess before Board of Appeals in the
first place. I guess kind of the thought process I went through was that effectively if the builder would have
centered the house on the lot, there wouldn't be a problem. And I guess that's water over the dam but it sure
would have been a nice easy solution. Generally tried to look at the neighborhood and found a mix of 2 and 3
car garages there. Talked with the applicant the first time I went out there and kind of asked him how he
intended on going it, in terms of the garage and he was going to remove the wall there and I simply suggested
that he reduce it as much as he can reduce it and then he reduced the size of what he was looking at doing and
it ended up being a 6 inch variance in the front of the garage and 2 1/2 feet in the back with the change he was
making. When it came to Board of Adjustments the, I believe it's Tia Black, who I assume is Lance's wife
there. She showed up. She came to the hearing and stuff and did not state that she opposed this and they are
the abutting or affected property owner. She said she was concerned about the drainage issues and that sort of
thing and that's part of why the, part of the motion included that any variance approval here would require staff
review and approval of the drainage situation that would work there and that was part of the motion. But
'
beyond that she did not state that they opposed it. Mr. Long showed up at the Board and was not an abutting
property owner. He did live in the neighborhood and had some concerns and comments and I guess that
probably relates to his lawsuit, I don't know. Mr. Hoover was not at the Board meeting, nor was Ms. Press. I
couldn't quite hear her but I was not there either. In standing out and basically looking at the situation and
talking about it with Mr. Bloomquist, you know it was real obvious that he could very easily pop the garage on
the other side of the house without getting a variance or anything and I guess his family's growing. He's
'
looking for a way to, stay in the house. Isn't really looking to move at this point. I don't know. I mean it's not
16 1
1i
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
' my position I guess to judge whether he's going to do it that way or not but he certainly can do it that way.
That's the way I was looking at it and I thought that would really be kind of, well I guess he could actually put
it there or he could actually put it on the back side of the house. Either way. Create the storage he wants. Put
it either way I thought it was really not in keeping with the neighborhood and I think it would upset a lot more
neighbors than at least were upset at the hearing, which again nobody was really upset at the hearing other than
Mr. Long who wasn't an abutting property owner anyway. The placement of the garage, the addition on the
side that the garage is on leaves a lot of room still yes, on the other side of the house so I wasn't real worried
about the emergency access and that sort of issue because there's more than ample room to get around there to
service any potential emergency needs. The real issue in my mind came down to being the one of drainage and
in my mind I could live with the variance again given the alternatives and again the motion that at least was
forwarded to the Board of Adjustments was to include the pretty tight handle on that by staff and basically
formal approval by the engineering department of any drainage scheme. To make sure that it would not create
any additional problems so that's what I felt about it at that time and I guess after hearing what I heard tonight,
I really haven't changed my mind.
' Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. And I really have to almost agree with everybody on here to a certain point, but
once you create a variance in any neighborhood, whether it be a garage or an addition to their existing dwelling
for another bedroom or a den or whatever it might be, you can bet your bottom dollar those people are going to
be coming back in to the city to request that variance be given. And once you start one, you do definitely have
a given problem. And so variances are variances are variances unfortunately. And I did see that there was not
any real hardship for this. I think Mark indicated that if the builder had more foresight he should have put that
' more in the center of that lot and that would not have given him any given problem. So with that, I'd like to
ask for a motion.
Councilman Berquist: I'll move denial of the 5 foot side yard variance request based on the staff report as
detailed within the memo.
Councilman Mason: Second,
I Mayor Chmiel: Moved and seconded. Any other discussion?
1 Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Mason seconded that the City Council deny the five (5) foot side yard
variance request based on the findings presented in the staff report and mote specifically as follows:
1. The applicant has a reasonable use of the property with the existing home and two car garage.
2. The applicant has not demonstrated a hardship that would warrant the granting of a variance.
' 3. The request, if approved, would create a standard that deviates from surrounding properties.
All voted in favor, except Councilman Senn who opposed, and the motion carved with a vote of 4 to 1.
1 17
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT REQUEST FOR A PROPOSED PROJECT TO FILL A 0.037 ACRE
TYPE 1 - AGAMAN WETLANDS AND M MGATE BY CREATING 0.07 ACRE OF TYPE 1 -2 '
WETLAND. (WORK TO BE COMPLETED AS PART OF THE PROPOSED KNOB HILL DEVELOPMENT
ALONG YOSEMITE). METRO AREA PROPERTIES, INC.
Kate Aanenson: Thank you. Originally the Council gave final plat approval to this contingent upon getting a
wetland alteration permit. At the time that this was being reviewed for final plat, it was noted that the wetland
actually went out into Yosemite. In concurrence with that, the new state law is in effect and staff was trying to
figure out the way to best remedy the situation and get compliance. One of the alternatives was actually to
elongate the wetland in the back of the homes. We felt that wasn't acceptable to really compromise the utility
of the back yards, so we felt a better position would be to actually do a wetland alteration permit which would
be this area of wetland right here being mitigated on this side. We felt that made a better design utility for
those back yards. Also we wanted to ensure that we were not, we were following the current ordinance of the
city as far as the wetland alteration permit, even though the Governor has signed a new law, we haven't
implemented that into city ordinance so this is concurrence with our ordinance as a 2:1 mitigation. The '
Planning Commission did recommend approval and we are also recommending approval of the wetland
alteration permit. If you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer them.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you Kate. Any questions of Kate at this time? Seeing none.
Councilman Senn: Move approval.
Councilman Berquist: That was fast. '
Councilman Mason: Second.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Do you have any questions Steve?
Councilman Berquist: I had about six of them but I'm not going to ask them now. ,
Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve Wetland Alteration Permit #96 -3 for the
proposed Knob Hill development subject to the following conditions:
1. Wetland Conservation Act and the City of Chanhassen Surface Water Management Plan requirements.
2. General Permit 17 under the Army Corps of Engineers is applicable and should be completed by the
applicant.
3. The Applicant shall develop a sediment and erosion control plan in accordance with the City's Best
Management Practice Handbook. Type III erosion control fencing will be required around the existing
wetlands.
All voted in favor and the motion carried. ,
18 '
C�
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
PRELEW NARY AND FINAL PLAT REQUEST FOR LOT J BARDWELL ACRES INTO TWO SINGLE
FAMILY LOTS; 6250 CHASKA ROAD, BLACK WALNUT ACRES, WILLIAM SWEARINGEN.
Kate Aanenson: On June 191h the Planning Commission reviewed this application and unanimously approved it.
The applicants are requesting for the purpose of the sale of the property. It's a large lot, over 4 acres. In order
to sell part of the lot on a Contract of Deed, to separate the two. What we've proposed is that this be put in
outlot status at this time and if they do want to plat it, it would have to come back before the Planning
Commission and City Council to become a buildable lot. So really what you're doing is allowing transfer of the
property in two different forms of conveyance. The one unique situation with this is part of the lot is in
Shorewood and they have some concerns about how that's transferred and location. Access to the property.
They want to ensure that access isn't gained off of Highway 7, which we certainly don't want to see happen
either. So we did have a condition on here that we want modified slightly and that would be that the remnant
piece located in the City of Shorewood be accessed via Chaska Road through Outlot A. Such restriction shall
be, and it should be changed to say, recorded in the form of a development contract, instead of a restriction on
the deed so that would be a modification, and that addresses the concern that the City of Shorewood would have
so again, we're splitting a lot. We're not adding any additional homes at this time. It's just a lot split for
conveyance of the property. I'd be happy to answer any questions.
' Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any questions? If not.
Councilman Berquist: Not of Ms. Aanenson.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Bill, is there anything you'd like to say? Alright.
Councilman Berquist: I've got a question for him.
Mayor Chmiel: Really.
' Councilman Berquist: I'm wondering how many bedrooms we have in Mesa.
Nancy Swearingen: If you approve it?
Councilman Senn: That takes care of Berquist.
' Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Are there any questions? If not, who'd like to make the motion.
Councilman Mason: Move approval.
' Councilman Senn: Second.
Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Senn seconded to approve the preliminary and fmal plat for Subdivision
' #96 -15 for Black Walnut Acres for one single family lot and one outlot as shown on the plans dated Received
June 7, 1996, and June 17, 1996, subject to the following conditions:
' 1. The remnant piece located in the City of Shorewood shall be accessed via Chaska Road through Outlot A.
Such restriction shall be recorded in the form of a development contract.
All voted in favor and the motion carved.
19
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
APPROVE PLANS & SPECIFICATIONS FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL INSTALLATION ON TH 212 AT EAST
AND WEST JUNCTION WITH TH 101 (MNDOT PROJECT), S.P. NO. 1013 -63, CITY FILE NO. P2 -290C.
Charles Folch: Thank you Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. Tonight we have a couple of the
representatives from MnDot. The project engineer, signal design engineers with us to give a presentation. I
believe we have Bev Farraher here tonight, Todd Clarkowski and Rod Koehn and they're here to provide a
presentation of the project ... this year and answer any questions you may have.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Thank you.
Todd Clarkowski: This is the set of plans for this roadway. What we're talking about here... What we have
here is Trunk Highway 212 and Trunk Highway 101, and the Shakopee Y that's right in this area. What we're
doing here, this project is a widening project to the south side. We're adding the left turn lane to this movement
and a left turn lane to this movement. Right now.
Councilman Berquist: Excuse me. You're adding a left turn lane to turn from westbound TH 212 onto TH 101
Okay. So the other access to Shakopee is disappearing. So it's all going to have to come out of that way then.
Councilman Senn: No. That's TH 101 coming in from the north. That thing that you just pointed to, that's just
a local little, local street type of thing. That doesn't really go anywhere. It doesn't go anywhere. It accesses a
house I think, doesn't it?
Charles Folch: That's correct.
Todd Clarkowski: This, the movement of flow ... As far as the widening part, that's what we're looking at doing.
We're also extending culverts to allow for that widening out there. A culvert there and a culvert here... shows up
as. So we're placing a culvert here, and we have a minimum diameter that we can put in for culverts... radiuses,
we are also flattening these radiuses out. The in place radiuses are a little sharper than that. And we run truck
training templates to allow like semi type trucks around these corners so they aren't dragging their rear wheels in
the gravel. So that's why we flatten these two radiuses over here.
Councilman Berquist: Where is that parking lot?
Todd Clarkowski: That parking lot? Okay this, this is like an inset and that sits inside the Y here. That's kind
of an inset. -
Councilman Berquist: I've never been so confused in my life...
Todd Clarkowski: This is the park and ride lot. Right now there is a, MnDot has, MnDot maintenance has a
pile of recycled bituminous garbage and ... what we're going to do is re -rake this. Have it drain the way it's
draining now. Maintain the in -place drainage and resurface that and stripe it.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Is this an active park and ride lot?
Todd Clarkowski: Yes. Yes, yes it is.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: So buses don't, buses do?
20
u
t
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
Beverly Farraher: It's more of a...
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Car pool?
Todd Clarkowski: ...and work with Chuck Schneider from Southwest.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Oh okay. Southwest Metro, alright. I didn't realize.
Todd Clarkowski: Sat down and he approved this layout and he's looking at the vans.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yeah, commuter vans, yeah.
Todd Clarkowski: Small vans, commuter vans. Being able to come in here and drop people off, pick people up
here and then take them back out. So that's, we've been working with him and they have all stayed the same...
They're looking at the future of the possibility of a bus shelter here. Loading and unloading area but that, at
least this movement will be set up to allow for this. Also, which Bev and Rod are going to detail a little later,
there's a new signal system going in right here and right at this intersection also. They'll be giving... details of
that a little later. As far as when this whole project is going to take place, we're looking at starting this fall.
About September 30th is what our MnDot project engineer... September 30th. We'll be placing a surcharge on
the south side here. Roughly about in here. All the way through to end this project at the south side where we
widened it. We've got the soils underneath there are real, very soft soils. Muck and peat ... and what we're trying
to do there is by putting this 4 foot high, 1.2 liters, 4 foot high, surcharge on top to compress these soils
underneath so then we can put your final roadway on top of that ... on the site so what we're doing... This fall,
placing the surcharge. That sits all winter. Okay, that's got a 6 month minimum. Our soils people determine
it's going to take up to 6 months for these soils to settle out. That's what they're estimating. There are settling
gauges along every, every 100 meters that the settlement gauges will tell them how much settling is taking place
so if they get the recommended settlement, they'll take the surcharge off of it. So there will be some ... there.
Surcharge throughout the winter. In the spring. The contractor will come back and finish his widening and
complete the rest of his work and he should be out of there, he's supposed to be out of there by July 1 st of next
year. So ... the winter. Get the widening of the north side and... There will be barrier. Concrete barrier
protecting you from the surcharges along the south side. And like I said, that will be there in place all winter.
Until the spring when the settlement's completed and they will pull the surcharge off. You see all these
dimensions are in metrics. We're starting to produce our plans in metric now, so it's something that's a little
different... But basically the ... meters are 12 foot lanes so it's still our standard roadway width. That hasn't
changed. I guess with that, are there any questions?
Mayor Chmiel: Any questions?
Councilman Senn: I've got a couple, if I could. One thing I've tried to understand when I was looking at the
packet on this. The little nitch around the park, go down to the park and ride there. No, go down below.
Okay. Okay now. The little nitch that comes through there with a little intersection you're creating where you
' said you're putting a new signal. There. Right onto TH 212. I have a hard time understanding, what's that for?
Simply access to the park and ride or what?
' Mayor Chmiel: For this access right here?
1
21
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
Councilman Senn: Yeah, because I mean if a person's coming up from Shakopee, I mean they're only going to
take that left movement. Why would they take a right movement? Why wouldn't they just keep going?
'
Beverly Farraher: The reason that, maybe we should... show the movement. ...why a signal system would be
placed at this intersection, and you're correct. Most of the traffic coming north out of Shakopee and they want
to make a left here. What we did is, we've got another intersection that's in place here and then another
'
intersection placed out here that are already signalized. With those being signalized and adding a signal at this
location, we determined that there really wouldn't be good gaps for the folks trying to make this left. There'd be
so much traffic coming this way and coming this way. It would be good...
,
Councilman Senn: Because right now it's a lot easier to, I mean I frequent that intersection a lot. If you're
coming down TH 101 and you want to get on TH 212, you literally have to accelerate very quickly or watch
out. But coming up from the south to north movement, it doesn't seem like it's anywhere near as bad, but what
'
you're saying is, it basically has to tie in with the signalization.
Beverly Farraher: You've got it. You've got it. This is the park and ride lot that is used that we're talking
'
about. These are the two locations that are already signalized. This is the signal that we were just talking
about. This is the...
'
Councilman Senn: Okay. So that isn't your access point, okay. That was one thing I was curious about.
Okay. That answers that. Second question is, on TH 101 coming down effectively from the north, I thought I
saw, or I can't remember if I saw it or if I heard it that at some point that whenever TH 101 is upgraded, it was
going to be straighten there and moved to the, I don't know, would we move more to the, I guess I'm trying to
,
think. Your direction gets so confusing down there but I would say generally to the east. Okay. And stuff.
Was that just something that somebody was throwing around at a certain point in time or was ever part of any
plan?
'
Todd Clarkowski: I heard that. These layouts that we start with come from our pre- design area and they are
supposed to discuss all these options with the different affected communities... and to work out, yeah is this a
,
good place to put it or, to the east of here, is that better. So when we got this layout, this is where the layout
shows... staying as is and not relocating.
Councilman Senn: So that would be viewed as a permanent road location then?
'
Todd Clarkowski: Yes sir.
Councilman Senn: Okay. I think it was when that bridge was taken out or whatever that was brought up... and
I think in relationship to that, that's when it was brought up saying that the roads might move. I never really
quite under, again. I'm not saying whether it was positive or negative. I just remember it was brought up at the
time when the bridge was taken out so I was just curious if it was something that was really being considered or
'
not. Okay. No, that's it.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Anyone else?
'
Todd Clarkowski: If you have any questions, my business card is in the front there.
'97
'
Councilman Berquist: So we're looking at the later part of before it's complete. At this time next year?
22 1
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
Todd Clarkowski: July 1st of 1991.
Beverly Farraher: As Charles mentioned, my name is Beverly Farraher and here's a few of my business cards,
and I'm the signal design engineer that was involved in the design of the two signals... this location and the
reason I want to tell you some of the neat things about these intersections. Eventually I'll be asking the City
Council to pass an agreement with DOT that says that the City will be paying for the monthly power and
connection charges for both of these signal systems. And also that the City will abide by the emergency vehicle
' promotion, a system ... and you may or may not be familiar with that. If you're not... I do have to thank Charles
for inviting us here. And for all his help during the design of this because he was always very available to call
him up and ask what the city's preferences are...
' Councilman Berquist: You never get his voice mail?
Beverly Farraher: Oh yes. We have... It worked. Both of these signal systems are being fully funded by
Federal funds and the DOT so there is no cost participation by the City of Chanhassen, but ... issues, emergency
vehicle promotion and different operational issues. I did talk to Charles... The really interesting things about
these systems is that they're fully state -of- the -art. What's going to be happening at these two intersections is that
' this would be a protected left turn, which means an arrow off of the trunk highway because the speed limit here
is so high that we have to protect the left turns so that's what you'll be seeing at this location. At this location
there will obviously not be a protected left turn, because there is no left turn in this direction. There will be
basically two phases of operation, either the main line traffic is operating or the left turn is happening. A very
simplistic system... We are going to be placing the emergency vehicle promotion systems. They will have the...
light and we do not identify on our special provisions what system with specified parameters they must follow
but we do state they have to work with the city's existing... so that should not be a problem. Currently the
Department of Transportation is a very strong supporter of ...diotechnology so you'll be seeing that ... of this
signal system and always important to the city, there is a much lower power consumption cost. It will use
incandescent bulbs... Each of those bulbs will be 150 watts, and they would burn out about every year, year and
a half. So there's a lot of cost there making sure that there's no ... and having someone come out and change that
' bulb. With ... we get a nice bright red. Your power consumption... goes down to about 20 watts and the life of
that light... although the capital cost is higher, is about 10 to 12 years and you get a payback from the capital
cost in about 5 to 6 years. So the years after that you're just saving energy so it's a pay back for everybody.
So the DOT is supporting, putting the money into the capital cost of this at the city... We think it's a benefit to
the public in general so we support it. We will need a, for final approval, something that the emergency
vehicle... but it is not tied to... As you can see on this diagram here, there's several boxes shown in the lanes
' along the system. What those are are conductive loops. Inductive loops I should say. In the pavement that
when a vehicle passes over them, there is a field generated that just simply exists in the pavement. When a
vehicle passes over that, the metal in the vehicle changes the inductive limit of those loops and that sends a
signal back to the controller. We used to simply saw cut these loops in the pavement and they'd go bad after
about 2 or 3 years, if we were lucky. What we're doing now is, we've created a PVC conduit that we place
them in and they last, well Anoka County has does this extensively and they have not had any fail ... for 20
years. So we do not see that we're going to have to go out and replace those for a long, long time. We're also
' trying to make the system look nice in that there will be a cabinet in this location for this intersection. A
cabinet at this location for this intersection, and the pad will have actually two boxes on it. One would be the
controller cabinet that operates the signal system and the other will be the source of power cabinets. So instead
of having unsightly things hanging off of wood poles, it will be a nice... cabinet. Very sedate. Very vandalism
proof. That will work better in the area. At this location, currently that farm entrance has been relocated, and
this is another issue I should bring up for your attention. Current DOT policy is that cost participation for
23
I
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
intersections is done by entering legs. So if someone who were to look at this project in one light, they would
look at this leg and say this is the city leg. It's ... and that the city should pay 25% of this intersection cost for
the signal system. When we were discussing this project in -house before we ever approached the city, the
discussion, I felt strongly was that because the city, and the property owner are okay with the relocation of this
farm entrance, which was a safety improvement because had it stayed in this location, it would have not
improved the operation... Because of it's new location, we felt that we would not have the city participate in the
cost of this system. So in future instances, I just want to make sure that everybody understands, that if there are
private legs to signal systems, there would be cost participation but in this instance, because it's a ... issues
involved in this situation, it was tabled as a discussion. But because of the possibility of this one day
developing, and I know Charles mentioned that it's not likely in the near future at all but we are making an
effort to ... so that nothing will happen to this intersection to add... appropriate for development... There are no
pedestrians in this area. There's no indication of pedestrians... planning for pedestrians so we will not be include
any pedestrian indications for either of these intersections. What I have done though... conductors at the time of
this installation are so cheap, that we've added the additional conductors so that if this area does ever develop
and there do result pedestrians, we can add pedestrian indications really easily, just by going and... It's a real
pay back. It's about $50.00 now as compared to lots of money... This is a house moving route so we've added
hinges at the appropriate locations so the house movers can make it through the intersection. There will be
signing on the mast ... that show the appropriate Trunk Highway 101 or 212 sign. And that pretty much covers
what's happening from the two newer systems. Any questions about those? And any positive thoughts on...
Mayor Chmiel: Love it.
Beverly Farraher: No? Yes?
Mayor Chmiel: Love it.
Beverly Farraher: Love it? Good. Okay. Then we'll move on and make you even happier about what we're
going to be doing with the two in -place systems. And if you can remember from the other exhibit that was up
that had the two in -place systems. Those two in -place systems are older and they are not a maintenance
problem at this time but they are also not looking great. So what we're going to be doing with this project is
painting them. These two systems will receive pre - painted poles that are baked on at the factory. It works great
and it lasts for a long time... The two systems that are here don't have those and were not available when they
were put in so we're just going to have someone go out and... environmental concerns have them re- painted so...
Also the other controllers at both of these two intersections are outdated and they would not effectively talk to
the controllers that were operating these two intersections so we're going to be replacing those. And we'll be
stringing conductor through all of these four intersections so that all four intersections talk to each other and that
they work together efficiently. As efficiently as... That's about it. Any questions?
Mayor Chmiel: Any questions?
Councilman Berquist: I'm impressed.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: That's a fabulous presentation. A lot more interesting than I thought it would be
Beverly Farraher: That's good. Signals are very interesting.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Appreciate it. Any more questions?
24
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
Beverly Farraher: I would everyone to call me, if you ever have any questions about this signal or any other
signals. I just gave birth to a very big and very beautiful baby girl so I'm actually on maternity leave and Mr.
Rod Koehn is here. He is filling my position at this time. So if you call the number on my card, which you're
more than welcome to do any time, he'll be answering the phone and answering the questions.
Councilman Berquist: Congratulations.
Beverly Farraher: Thank you.
Councilman Mason: I'll move approval.
Mayor Chmiel: Of the plans and specs.
Councilman Mason: For traffic signal installation and channelization improvements, Trunk Highway 212, east
and west junction with TH 101, MnDot Project S.P. No. 1013 -63, City File No. PW -290C.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Second.
Resolution #96 -53: Councilman Mason moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to approve the plans for
the traffic signal installation and lane channelization on Trunk Highway 212 at the east and west junctions with
Trunk Highway 101, MnDot Project No. S.P. 1013 -63, City File No. PW290C, with the further understanding
that the City's cost responsibilities will be limited to the monthly electric charges for the two new signals. All
voted in favor and the motion carried.
TH 101 TURNBACK: APPROVE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY AND
MNDOT.
Charles Folch: Thank you Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. As I've indicated in my staff report, this is
kind of the first, if you will, process or milestone in the process of the Trunk Highway 101 turnback. Basically
there are four MOU's that the State of Minnesota needs to enter into, or would like to enter into. One with each
of the counties, Hennepin, Scott and Carver County and because of the circumstances with a previous
improvement project with Chanhassen, unfortunately Chanhassen now has to enter into an MOU with MnDot,
which it normally wouldn't in a turnback like this. As I mentioned in the staff report, there's two legs of West
78th Street and Great Plains Boulevard that were previously designated as TH 101 and since the completion of
the Trunk Highway 101 north leg project back in 1993, and the subsequent signage change of the TH 101 route,
we've actually had kind of a pseudo jurisdictional change for this segment. Although to this date no formal
paperwork has transpired on this turnback, it's kind of important for the city to enter into this MOU so that it
can designated that these two segments, West 78th Street and Great Plains Boulevard be jurisdictionally
transferred to the City of Chanhassen so that we are able to put them on our municipal State Aid system and
draw both annual maintenance bonds and also future reconstruction funds for these roadways. If those roads are
turned back to the County first, and then subsequent to the city, they would not be eligible to put on a
municipal state aid system. So there's, that's probably first and foremost the driver behind this MOU between
the City and MnDot. The second issue which is kind of tagged along to the MOU language is a discussion on
some funding that MnDot is going to be providing for the extension of West 78th Street out to Lake Ann Park
and there's some dollars that they're previously programmed in the Trunk Highway 101 construction account for
25
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
a future year that they now will move over that, those dollars into a cooperative agreement account specifically
earmarked for Chanhassen to help fund that project which we expect to let a contract on in the next 30 to 60 '
days. So there's really two benefits for the City to enter into this MOU. At this time I believe that MnDot has
completed the, or executed MOU's with both Hennepin and Scott Counties and are very close to executing the
MOU with Carver County. Once the four MOU's are executed, they will then move onto the next step which is '
putting together the formal turnback agreement with all the parties involved. So at this time, based on the
financial benefits to the City of Chanhassen, not only for being able to redesignate these two routes on the MSA
system but also the additional funding for the frontage road. Staff would recommend the city enter into this
MOU. '
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Thank you. Oh, and I just wanted to play Acting Mayor.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Staff report's been given. And we have all the information contained in our packet. '
Anyone have any questions of Charles at this time?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I have one. Does MnDot currently do the maintenance on that stretch? On that '
piece of West 78th?
Charles Folch: No, we do. Basically once we've completed a project, they re -sign TH 101 down to Highway 5 '
at Dakota and then it runs basically in a co- alignment with Highway 5 ... to Market. So no, we've been since '93,
once we completed that improvement project, we've been actually maintaining West 78th Street from TH 101 to
the clock tower then Great Plains ... TH 5 and also the segment of Great Plains from where the Legion is south to ,
where it then joins with Market/TH 101 again.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Michael.
Councilman Mason: No. '
Mayor Chmiel: Mark. I
Councilman Senn: No.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there a motion? '
Councilman Senn: Move approval.
Councilman Mason: Second.
Mayor Chmiel: Approve memorandum of understanding between the City of Chanhassen and MnDot regarding '
the turnback of Trunk Highway 101, PW 356. A motion's been made and seconded.
Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the Memorandum of Understanding between ,
the City of Chanhassen and the Minnesota Department of Transportation for the impending tumback of Trunk
Highway 101. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
26 1
F I
LJ
I CJ
77
�J
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT, ACTION PLAN.
Kate Aanenson: Thank you. This is the third component of our commitment to participate in the Livable
Communities Act. The first one was to pass a resolution saying we would. The second one to adopt the goals
and then the third component would be to provide information of how we intend to meet those goals. What I've
outlined here is kind of where we are to date. We've been moving forward with a couple of projects such as the
one we approved tonight, on the North Bay. We certainly see the senior housing project we're getting credit for.
Looking at reviewing city ordinances, especially the PUD. Looking at some of the density ranges requiring that
we, instead of going for the minimum, maybe moving some of those to the upper range. And then also
requiring a percentage of those within each one to be affordable, and this is something we would come back to
the Council specifically looking at ordinance amendments. Then also how the City HRA can participate as we
talked earlier tonight and then the County HRA, the program that they would offer as well as the Minnesota
Housing Finance and CDBG. As we indicated last year, Hennpin County is now requiring that... some housing
affordability. Carver County is also pursuing the housing condition study. We may be looking at some of that
money ... but that's their target now is for housing so our CDBG funding request would have to be in line with
that. So whether we're 50,000 or 49 below the cut -off, that's one of the programs that we have to look at would
be housing. So what I've laid out here is, what actions the city would be taking. Who's responsibility it is and
then finding where the funding source would be. Just to talk about some things that are in the works. We've
talked about before the project with Southwest Metro and the house site at TH 5 and Prairie Center Drive.
Doing kind of a transit related with Carver County and Chaska. Excuse me. Yeah, Carver County could
possibly be doing the financing on it but it would be with the City of Eden Prairie and Chaska and Chanhassen.
Kind of joint partnership there, again a transit. That was one of the other goals too was to try to provide transit,
which is something that the Met Council wants to look at too. Transit friendly. Then the Village projects that
we'll be seeing here shortly. That's going through the Planning Commission in July. And then providing other
opportunities as projects come available. If you're looking at where the city can get involved in bringing in the
County funding source so if you had any questions, I'd be happy to answer those. Otherwise this would be the
document to bring forward to the Met Council.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Steve, any questions?
Kate Aanenson: Sure.
Councilman Berquist: I didn't have any questions. I had a couple of wordage changes that I thought maybe
you might want to consider.
Mayor Chmiel: What page?
Councilman Berquist: Page 2. Under policies. First paragraph down. If it's written as stated, as State and
Federal funding permits, in my mind I'd put in, as appropriate State and Federal funding programs permit, small
consideration. I don't know if it's worth while or not. The other thing that I had, in the next paragraph down.
Plans and ordinances should ensure that adequate amounts of land are designated to accommodate projected
desired residential growth, as opposed to, I'm not certain.
Kate Aanenson: These are verbatim out of the current Comp Plan, and I agree with you. Some of them are
written a little awkward. The reason I put these back in here is because they were in 1991 when we adopted
our last Comp Plan. If you look back, I think they were right on. I think as far as today's date, so what I was
trying to tell Met Council was when we adopted the Comp Plan in '91, I think that we're current with what their
27
r]
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
desires are, and you just need to kind of go back and refresh yourselves to say that yeah. We did look forward
and these are the projections we still have. But I agree with Steve. Some of them are written a little awkward.
Councilman Berquist: And then the last item, page 3. Under current trends. The City's HRA, the middle of the
paragraph. The City's HRA has approved the creation of a tax increment district. Has the HRA, has that been a
Council generated or an HRA generated?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: It's Council.
Councilman Berquist: That amendment and then the price range for 35 units would be from 88 to 115. With
everything else that I understood of it, it looks great.
Kate Aanenson: I also, just a side bar here. Tried to incorporate what we talked about at the goal session too.
The education component regarding the action.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yeah, I think this is the document that we start with and... I was surprised, it was
nice to see that, I mean the total language out of our '91 Comp Plan, and you're right. We were right on. I
mean I thought you could have written this today.
Kate Aanenson: We'll give credit to Paul on that.
Mayor Chmiel: Anything more Colleen?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: No.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Mike.
Councilman Mason: No. This looks.
Mayor Chmiel: Mark.
Councilman Senn: No. No additional comments.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I think that one sentence he said, it was generated by Council but I think HRA still has
to go through the process.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, I'll correct that.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Kate, on those interest rates, who really sets those? ... for some of the improvement loans
that they have...
Kate Aanenson: Through Carver County?
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah.
Kate Aanenson: Minnesota Housing and Finance Program. I assume that they would.
28
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Whatever the going rate is at that specific time?
Councilman Berquist: No. They look at the individual applicant.
Kate Aanenson: And they give a rate commitment...
Mayor Chmiel: ...total dollars.
Councilman Senn: Well also funding availability from different programs. They have different programs at
different rates.
Mayor Chmiel: But I was just wondering if there were, you know on the other ones were, is strictly interest
rate of 8% on the assessability improvement loans... That is going to remain at that percentage point.
Kate Aanenson: Correct. That's what, this is the information that the County gave me ... but like Mark said, on
the other one I think there is a range based on the availability and amount requested.
Mayor Chmiel: Oh page 2. The third paragraph down, excluding those first two lines. Should we have a
percentage in there or keeping it generalized as it is?
Kate Aanenson: The development of alternative housing? Is that what you're saying?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
Kate Aanenson: Right. I think that's something I wanted to work back through the Planning Commission. If
you look at some of the ordinances and maybe kind of come back with, we certainly don't want to do an entire
project, and maybe some project lends itself to being in that nature.
Councilman Senn: I was assuming that we couldn't really mess... Was that an incorrect assumption?
Kate Aanenson: Those are part of our Comp Plan, but we certainly can reinforce or as a part of this, make a
statement that we're going to modify that, sure...
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, I only ask that question, which is better for us?
Kate Aanenson: Well I think it's good to leave it open ended. I think that's something that we certainly want to
talk about. And the action statements that I've laid out, I think that's something we want to look at requiring a
percentage. And what that should be. It may depend on the type of product. What we're missing as far as
rental. Maybe want to push higher on that as opposed to owner occupied.
Mayor Chmiel: Alright. Thank you. Any other questions? Is there a motion?
Councilman Berquist: I move approval.
Mayor Chmiel: Second?
Councilman Senn: Second.
29
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Senn seconded to approve the Housing Action Plan for the Livable
Communities Act. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
APPOINTMI+'..NT TO THE HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY.
Todd Gerhardt: Mr. Mayor, Honorable Council. Staff was directed to advertise the HRA vacancy. With that
advertisement we received two applications, plus Charlie Robbins did request to be re- appointed. Under
Minnesota Statute the Mayor must recommend a committee member to the City Council for their approval. I
leave it up to the Mayor to make the appointment.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I think what I'd really like to do is also interview Barbara Murphy, who is the last one
who presented her application and I would suggest that we have an opportunity at either one of our work
sessions. Don't we have one?
Todd Gerhardt: We have one, the next one is July 29th.
Mayor Chmiel: July 29th. Okay.
Todd Gerhardt: No, that's our next strategy.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I don't think we have a meeting before that though.
Todd Gerhardt: Yeah. You've got a Council meeting on the 8th and 22nd. If you want to come early.
Councilman Mason: I will be out of town. I would certainly like to be here for that interview. I'll be back by
the 29th. If we could do it before that.
Todd Gerhardt: So I think we scheduled the 29th at 6:00 again?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yes.
Todd Gerhardt: So you want to interview at 5:30? Half hour enough time.
Mayor Chmiel: Can you make 5:30?
Councilman Berquist: That's alright.
Mayor Chmiel: So we'll set that up for the 29th at 5:30. And we're going to be meeting at the.
Todd Gerhardt: Rec Center. Bluff Creek Elementary, Rec Center.
Mayor Chmiel: Alright, good. Thank you. Mark.
Councilman Senn: Do we have to accept on Minutes yet?
Councilman Berquist: Yes, let's do my Minutes real quickly.
WE
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
CONSENT AGENDA:
1(E). APPROVAL OF MINUTES.
' Mayor Chmiel: Go ahead.
Councilman Berquist: On page, this is for the record only. On page 50 of the Minutes. Second paragraph.
' Where it says, the esteemed Mr. Knutson was ... about how the housing, metro wide is a system and what the
definition of system is and I, it's written that I made the comment. What's the board based definition of system
when in fact I said, I made a statement and I said, that's a broad based definition of system...
1
Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the Minutes of the City Council meeting
dated June 10, 1996 as amended by Councilman Berquist on page 50 to change the statement, second paragraph,
from "What's the board ", to "That's a broad" based definition of system. All voted in favor and the motion
carried.
1(G). RESPONSE TO AUDIT COMWNT, CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT.
Councilman Senn: It appeared to me that the issue involved in the Auditor's observation has some interesting
repercussions, both as it would relate management wise, personnel wise and policy wise, and so I guess from
that standpoint I'm not real excited of just simply referring the response to the Public Safety Commission and let
it go from there. I think it should come, I mean either the Council should do it or I think it should at least
come back to the Council to look at before it goes on.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other suggestions?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: That'd be fine.
Councilman Berquist: It's fine by me.
Don Ashworth: Before it's sent to where? Before it's sent to Public Safety?
Mayor Chmiel: Alright. You heard the item number 1(g). That before anything is sent, that it come back to
Council.
Councilman Senn: Well as I understood your memorandum, what you're requesting was that there is some
response needed to the auditor's concerns or comments as it relates to the fire department issues that were
identified on the back. I think you were out at the time I said this. In my mind it appeared very quickly to
present some interesting ramifications from a management, personnel as well as policy standpoint. I didn't think
that was something that you just simply go to the Public Safety Commission and be an answer to that point. I
think it should either come to the Council or Public Safety is fine but then come back to the Council for
consideration before it would go back in response to the Auditor.
Don Ashworth: If I may Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Chmiel: Go ahead.
31
Councilman Mason: Second. I
Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve in response to the audit comments regarding
the Chanhassen Fire Department, to prepare a study of suggestions by the Public Safety Department. All voted '
in favor and the motion carried.
R APPROVE PURCHASE OF LOT 1, BLOCK 2, SCHNEIDER PARK FOR FUTURE CM HALL
EXPANSION. '
Councilman Senn: Let's see, item (h). I talked with Don briefly about it before the meeting because I couldn't
get a copy of the appraisal to review it but I would like to I guess suggest tabling this tonight and coming back '
and talking about it next time. I think there's some real issues over the appraisal as well as the assumptions...
that's going into on the economics.
Councilman Berquist: I second. '
Councilman Senn: And rather than get into it.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Just because of the age or?
32 1
'
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
Don Ashworth: My intent would be to have that response say, this item will be sent to the Public Safety
Commission to conduct a study to see alternative ways that the concerns raised by the auditors can be
addressed. Period.
'
Councilman Senn: That's the response you'd give back at this time you mean to the auditor's?
,
Don Ashworth: To fill in that particular section where it says response. I would have in here, I am proposing
to send this item to the Public Safety Commission to study alternative ways that the concerns raised by the
auditor's can be addressed.
'
Councilman Senn: Oh, okay. So I mean you're not looking to the Public Safety Commission to devise a
response?
'
Don Ashworth: No.
Councilman Senn: You're simply saying the study would be the response.
'
Don Ashworth: Correct.
Councilman Senn: Okay. And that'd be fine but then I think that study should again come to the Council for
'
consideration before it go back anywhere from there?
Don Ashworth: Yes. When Public Safety Committee looked at alternative ways that fire duties, especially
'
administrative could be handled, that report would come directly back to City Council. There would be no
other action on it.
Councilman Senn: Okay. Well given that case, I'd move approval.
Councilman Mason: Second. I
Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve in response to the audit comments regarding
the Chanhassen Fire Department, to prepare a study of suggestions by the Public Safety Department. All voted '
in favor and the motion carried.
R APPROVE PURCHASE OF LOT 1, BLOCK 2, SCHNEIDER PARK FOR FUTURE CM HALL
EXPANSION. '
Councilman Senn: Let's see, item (h). I talked with Don briefly about it before the meeting because I couldn't
get a copy of the appraisal to review it but I would like to I guess suggest tabling this tonight and coming back '
and talking about it next time. I think there's some real issues over the appraisal as well as the assumptions...
that's going into on the economics.
Councilman Berquist: I second. '
Councilman Senn: And rather than get into it.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Just because of the age or?
32 1
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
Councilman Senn: No. I mean I hate to get too specific because it's kind of like one of these deals where the
attorney's negotiating with somebody and you don't want to get a bunch of stuff on the public record but it
basically involves the basic assumptions and the comparables and that sort of thing that were used to
demonstrate the price.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Okay. Is it going to affect any of the time...?
�I
h
I
Don Ashworth: No.
Councilman Senn: So I'd like to move to table that.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I'll second his motion.
Mayor Chmiel: Everybody agreed? Okay.
Councilman Senn moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to table discussion on the purchase of Lot 1,
Block 2, Schneider Pads for future City Hall expansion. All voted in favor and the motion caned.
Councilman Senn: Don, can I ask one question on the administrative portion if we're going to jump past it?
But I mean whenever we get to it.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, I'm going to jump past it because we didn't put it on. Okay.
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: COMMITTEE REPORTS.
A. HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY.
Mayor Chmiel: Mike, do you want to? It was very quick and brief.
Councilman Mason: It was a very quiet meeting for HRA, although there are some problems that have come up
with West 78th Street entertainment, but my understanding is things are continuing to be worked on and at this
point I'm assuming no news is good news. And that was, I mean it was a short meeting.
Don Ashworth: A report will be ready for the next City Council meeting on this item.
B. CENTENNIAL COMA TTEE.
Mayor Chmiel: Who can give a report on the Centennial Committee?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Nancy Mancino.
Mayor Chmiel: Yes, there she is. But she didn't look like she was going to say anything.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I haven't been to the last two meetings.
Nancy Mancino: My name is Nancy Mancino from 6620 Galpin Boulevard. I really don't know a lot about
the Centennial Committee but I can tell you a little bit about the Centennial Parade. It's on the 4th and... We
33
n
City ouncil Meeting - June 24, 1996 ,
Y g
have 62 units. 62 entrants in the parade, which will start on the 4th and it starts at 2:30 ... and in fact we tried to
figure out how long the parade route is so that we make sure that we have enough line -up space for all this.
And the Waconia High School Marching Band, I mean there's just a whole... neighborhood walk units. We have
'
entertainment units... We have animals and horses. The Carver County Sheriff Posse. And old antique
vehicles..., thanks.
'
Don Ashworth: Mr. Mayor? If I may add. The centennial quilt is nearing completion. I guess that the
quilting people have really gone way beyond any type of expectations as a depiction of, well our history in a
quilt form and each person has taken an area and then it's literally all been sewn together. The Centennial Book
'
is, the first edition came off this past week and so we're doing a final, final edit on that. The books I'm
anticipating will be available within the next week. Continuing the sale of the blocks for the old depot and I
think we're still working on that. So a lot of things.
'
Mayor Chmiel: Good. Thanks.
C. SOUTHWEST TRANSIT.
'
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Our monthly meeting's coming up this Thursday so I could give a better report
next meeting but anyway.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Oh, come on. Give me my soapbox. Everyone gets the articulator and I hope you
'
read it in the Administrative packet. Kind of, the biggest issue we're dealing with now in terms of the transit
site is that our financial advisor, First Star has gone out of the business so that kind of puts us a couple, several
months behind in terms of, we had a very good relationship. They were helping us out in trying to get tenants
,
for the retail space of the facility. So we're a little behind schedule insofar as we have to find a new financial
advisor. But other than that, things are cruising along, so to speak.
'
D. BLUFF CREEK COMMISSION.
Kate Aanenson: I can do that one, if it's okay. There is a draft out right now. We'll be preparing 50 more '
draft copies. There were minor changes made to that. At that point, after the task force reviewed that at their
next meeting on July 18th. It will be forwarded to the City Council for a work session where they will hold a
public hearing hopefully the end of August and then hopefully be before you in September so we can petition
the Watershed District for some projects. '
Mayor Chmiel: Good, thanks.
Councilman Berquist: When did that list of priorities go out? '
Kate Aanenson: It went Thursday or Friday. Did you get one?
Councilman Berquist: Yeah, I did but I honestly didn't how long it had been sitting on my pile. Thursday or ,
Friday, so not long. Good, thank you.
34 1
11
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
E. PARK TASK FORCE.
Councilman Berquist: Do you want to do that Nancy, or shall I?
Nancy Mancino: Go ahead. Or Frank could.
Frank Scott: Go ahead.
Councilman Berquist: Okay. Fill in if I leave any blanks here, which I'm sure I will. There was a public
information gathering meeting that was held about two weeks ago. As I recall there were three odd attendees.
And ... odd attendees. Continuing to meet on a regular basis. I think everyone realizes the date of the
referendum has been moved to early spring in 1997 in an effort to make it an issue in and of itself. There has
been a number of things that have come into the discussion process regarding inclusions in, the possible
inclusions in the referendum and most of the groups with vested interest in land uses have been included in this
process so it seems like it's becoming broader based and generally, there's some ... out there now which I'm happy
to see. Although I don't feel like I've been as in tuned with it as I was in the recent past. What did I miss?
Nancy Mancino: Only that there has been a renewed interest... some of the people that were on the golf course
commission 3 or 4 years ago...
Councilwoman Dockendorf: There was an interesting article in Saturday's paper, I think it was. Dealing with
park issues in suburban communities and it looked like we had, we were one of the higher ratios of parkland
compared to residents.
Councilman Senn: Yeah, that was per 1,000. You ought to see the comparison based on land area.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Oh, that was per population.
Councilman Senn: Yeah, that was for 1,000 and there was another comparison... parkland by land area.
Councilman Berquist: Before we, I'd like to touch on about four different subjects here, if I may, before we
adjourn. Is that permitted?
Councilman Senn: I wanted to touch on one in the Admin Packet and I wasn't permitted.
Councilman Berquist: I want to talk about, I want to ask about the Pillsbury parking issue. I also want to ask
about the decision by the USGA and how it will affect the upgrading of Highway 5.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Is it coming back to Hazeltine?
Councilman Berquist: No. Not in 2001 and I believe 2002 have been awarded and neither of them have been
Hazeltine. And I also wanted to touch on 4112 versus HGA. District # 112 versus HGA.
Mayor Chmiel: Well, I'll leave that up to Council. Normally, if it's not put on the agenda or requested at the
time, we live with this. You have your opportunity to insert it at the approval of agenda. At that particular
time.
35
City Council Meeting - June 24, 1996
Councilman Berquist: Alright, I'll remember from now on.
Don Ashworth: I don't think any of the issues are really urgent and I could take and have a short memo in the
next packet, which would address most of the issues. I may do something different with HGA. That depends
on what the attorney advises me.
Councilman Berquist: Which one?
Mayor Chmiel: 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 10:10 p.m.
Submitted by Don Ashworth
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
36