9. Set Future Work SessionsCITY OF 9
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Don Ashworth, City Manager i�A YZ--
DATE: May 18, 1995
SUBJ: Set Future Work Sessions
We have work sessions scheduled through the
a regiment, I would like to place the "Beddor, ,
ry elieve the cn
Commission that we were not able to have oh
3yF
item was a priority for the city council.
fart of June. With the city n ci 's
,k Chanhassen" litigation as :00 item
ical item is the joint meeting wit the Planning
May Pas originally planned. I believe this
As can be seen from the attached correspondence, we c
collection." Additionally, I would like;to take part of tl
sessions to update the city council on-the city hall expa
�y
J,
�W
We also need to get a work session date to interview PI
one vacant position (the attached applications are in the
Planning Commission)
:inue to have interest in "organized
time for one of our future work
on project.
g
ring Commission candidates for
x:L:
- der as r men e
C1
PENDING WORK SESSION rrEMS
Date
Proposed
Date
Identified
Discussion Item
Work Session
Resolved
Date
1 -10 -94
City Hall Expansion
11 -21 -94
3 -6 -95 - 6 p.m.
4 -17 -95 - 6 p.m.
1 -10 -94
Senior Housing
4 -21 -94
10 -3 -94
Joint Meeting with Carver Co.
3 -20 -95/6 p.m.
HRA/Chan. HRA/City Council
Authorize Bond Sale
4 -24 -95
Board of Review:
- Work Session
4 -3- 95/6:30 pm
- Hearing
4 -17 -95/7 p.m.
1 -10 -94
Affordable Housing Update Report
4 -21 -94
10 -10 -94
Code of Ethics
12 -5 -94
4 -3 -95
1 -10 -94
Gateway Entries -- Dakota, Great
After Vision
Plains, Market Boulevard, and
2002
County Road 17
5 -19 -94
5 -15 -95
Organized Collection
3 -7 -94
6 -20 -94
7 -11 -94
2 -13 -95
10 -10 -94
Park & Recreation Referendum
11 -9 -94
- Town Meeting at Dinner Theatre
2 -7 -95
- Proposed Acquisition/Funding
4 -24 -95
Joint Meetings with Commissions:
- Planning Commission
- Park & Recreation Commission
5-15-"9, pm
- HRA
6 -5 -95
- Public Safety Commission
6 -5 -95
1A C5.z ✓ /3/��
May 9 , 19 9 5
City of Chanhassen
' organized Collection Committee
As a volunteer from our neighborhood I circulated the
attached petition favoring organized collection. I have
' collected 23 signatures calling on a total of 26 houses.
In describing organized collection, I mentioned the
following points.
1. Neighborhood would have 1 hauler.
2. It most likely would not be their picked hauler.
3. There most likely would not be a savings, but there
' could be.
4. They might have to switch the type of cans used.
5. We would have 1 garbage day.
6. We would cut the number of trucks to 1/5 of our
' present traffic.
7. Less trucks mean less wear and tear on our streets.
' Three people who did not sign gave the following responses.
1. Resident did not want the government involved.
2. Resident did not like the cans used by the other
' haulers.
3. Resident was in favor of our neighborhood switching to
one as long as the new service provider would provide
the same services as his current hauler (Woodlake).
' The above represents a good sampling of our neighborhood. I
believe that if I continued to call on every house I would
' receive a similar response rate.
With Cub Scouts, two kids in the little league and a baby,
this is all I could fit in presently.
' Our neighborhood currently has 5 haulers and 5 recycling
trucks a week. We have at least 4 garbage days. We are also
on a dead end street.
' I think it is the City's role to organize collection in
neighborhoods like ours. We do not have an association, so
mandating on our own would be difficult. I dislike increased
' government involvement in our lives, but when it comes to
health and safety issues we look for your help.
' Sin erely,
Steve Midthun
' 6510 Fox Path
Chanhanhassen
Tel: 470 -1767
PETITION SUPPORTING
ORGANIZED COLLECTION IN
THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN
We the undersigned urge the Chanhassen City Council to ratify the Organized Collection
Recommendations proposed by city staff and enter into a contract with haulers to organize
garbage collection with in the City of Chanhassen.
We believe that the benifits of organized collecttion such as a decrease in garbage collection
costs, reduction of road Nvare and tear and diminished environmental impacts far out wiegh our
consern over our choice of hauler or service day.
NAME ADDRESS
1. S- 4c . - /17�fq /n,orflyN 6S�o fox P�
2 . �� u v� 637*
3. ti c 14 y A4P& 1 - AiO i, &SSo F4-�
4. A c Lt l
5. Lk
8. FU X l U fi l
9.
10�
12\
ev
PETITION SUPPORTING
ORGANIZED COLLECTION IN
THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN
1
We the undersigned urge the Chanhassen City Council to ratify the Organized Collection
' Recommendations proposed by city staff and enter into a contract with haulers to organize
garbage collection with in the City of Chanhassen.
We believe that the benifits of organized collecttion such as a decrease in garbage collection
costs, reduction of road ware and tear and diminished environmental impacts far out wiegh our
consern over our choice of hauler or service day.
ADDRESS
'7�4 LA V- C, -
7« to e /L
- /0 � 1-,"�Ko -11
5.
7. c
—
i /fir �✓/L' —di --
�� /J / Cc�J
10.
12. _
Thomas J. Camphell
Roper N. KnUCSOn
Thomas M. Scott
Gary G. Fuchs
James R. Walston
Elliott B. Knctsch
K
CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUCHS, P.A.
Attorneys at Law -�
(612) 452 -5000 Andrea McDowell Poehler
Fax (612) 452 -5550 N `'ttl'ew K. Brokl
Marguerite M. McCarron
George T. Stephenson
Mr. Don Ashworth
City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive, Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
May 17, 1995
A4 A
�i1laA
o c, c C4--
�'^ v C f -�
RE: Beddor v. Chanhassen r'e� 121--74,. X , '`- e
Dear Don:
rz s ■
Enclosed is a copy of the Court of Appeals decision in the above matter. The
Court affirmed the original decision by the trial court in all respects. ,
Mr. Beddor has until June 15 to request a review of this matter by the Minnesota
Supreme Court. I assume he will file such a request. The Supreme Court reviews very
few cases. I believe it is extremely unlikely that the Court would see any reason to
review this matter.
If Mr. Beddor files a request for review, the Supreme Court typically rules on such
a request within a couple weeks. Therefore, assuming the Supreme Court does not
review the matter, the appeal process will be concluded on or about July 1.
Please call if you have any questions. I will keep you posted on all developments.
Best regards,
TMS:slc
Enclosure
AMPBEI: , KNUTSON, . COTT
& FUCH , P.A.
it L �.
T homas M. Scott
Suite 317 • Eaoandale Office Center • 1380 Corporate Center Curve • Ea�oan, MN 55121
t ,
This opinion will be unpublished and
' may not be cited except as provided by
Minn Stat. 8 480A.08, subd. 3 (1994).
i ' S STATE` 'OF MINNESOTA ° ' �i:1
1f� \f �.'� h•i �. E i! \�1 ii - -)i E :i L C. ..i ?. .. `. � tl
IN COURT OF APPEALS
PRE01 i 0 1:(i i .�.:'t .CAN .'it: F'iLE u, TE
' C9� 94 20 ZG B EL O% '
' Carver County Mulally, Judge'
District Court File No. C9 -93 -1111
' Frank Beddor, Jr., et al., Lawrence A. Moloney
Todd A. Noteboom
Appellants, Doherty, Rumble & Butler
' 3500 Fifth Street Towers
150 South Fifth Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402 -4235
' vs.
City of Chanhassen, et al., Thomas M. Scott
' Campbell, Knutson, Scott &
Respondents. Fuchs, P.A.
317 Eagandale Office Center
1380 Corporate Center Curve
' Eagan, MN 55121
' Filed May 16, 1995
Office of Appellate Courts
Considered and decided by Schumacher, Presiding Judge, Parker,
Judge, and Mulally, Judge.
' U N P U B L I S H E D O P I N I O N
MULALLY, Judge
' Beddor, et al., appellants here, commenced this lawsuit in
1993 contesting the City of Chanhassen's decision to proceed with
' ` Retired judge of the district court, serving as judge of the
Minnesota Court of Appeals by appointment pursuant to Minn. Const.
art. VI, § 10. :
7 Z i .i I-_V C,. I ✓1.- (iLN�(... �J , C. [�.� J
�j1i :� I ih.N 7��i•S Cai2 C.;�� / J
w ' C( O, �P M : r .a. ✓ 740
C, S 3 � C P• .
an extension of a residential roadway. Beddor alleged
environmental degradation in violation of Minn. Stat. § 116B.01,
the Minnesota Environmental Rights Act. The court ultimately ruled
for the city, after a denial of the city's motion for a directed
verdict, and appellants moved for a new trial and for amendment of
the findings, conclusions and order. The court made certain
amendments but denied the bulk of the requests in the motion and
denied the motion for a new trial. Appellants now bring this
appeal challenging the trial court's findings of fact and
conclusions of law.
FACTS
Beddor objected to the City of Chanhassen's proposal to extend
• local street through his property in order to provide access to
• certain residential parcel. The city council voted in favor of
commencing condemnation of Beddor's property, but Beddor and
certain of his neighbors objected. The council declined to
reconsider the project and condemnation proceedings commenced.
Appellants then petitioned the city council to conduct a study
to assess the impact the project would have on the area, but the
city decided a study was not required. Appellants then filed suit
pursuant to the Minnesota Environmental Rights Act (MERA). Minn.
Stat. §§ 116B.01 -.13 (1992). Appellants then amended their
complaint to include a count pursuant to the Minnesota
Environmental Policy Act (MEPA), Minn. Stat. §§ 116D.01 -.07 (1992),
and the Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act (UDJA), Minn. Stat.
§§ 555.01 -.16 (1992) . The condemnation proceeding was joined with
-2-
this action; the city's motion for summary judgment was denied, and
' the case proceeded to trial.
The case was tried to the court with both sides presenting
' expert testimony with respect to the impact on trees, water, and
quietude, as well as traffic volume and safety in the area. The
' trial court ordered judgment for the city and Beddor appeals.
D E C I S I O N
Findings of fact, whether based on oral or
documentary evidence, shall not be set aside unless
clearly erroneous, and due regard shall be given to the
opportunity of the trial court to judge the credibility
of the witnesses.
' Minn. R. Civ. P. 52.01. "[T]his court will only reverse a trial
court's findings of fact if, upon review of the entire evidence, we
' are 'left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has
' been made.'" In re Guardianship of Dawson 502 N.W.2d 65, 68
(Minn. App. 1993) (quoting Glovik v. Strope 401 N.W.2d 664, 667
(Minn. 1987)), pet. for rev. denied (Minn. Aug. 16, 1993). On the
basis of this standard of review, we affirm the trial court's
findings of fact as follows.
' 1. The Minnesota Environmental Rights Act provides any
person in the state of Minnesota with a mechanism for protecting
' the air, land, water, and other natural resources of the state from
pollution, impairment or destruction. County of Freeborn v.
' Bryson 297 Minn. 218, 224, 210 N.W.2d 290, 294 -95 (1973). In
' order to make a prima facie case under the Minnesota Environmental
Rights Act, plaintiffs must show that there is a protectable
' natural resource and, second, that there is a likelihood of a
substantial impairment of that natural resource. Id. at 228, 210
N.W.2d at 297 (citing Minn. Stat. § 116B.02, subds. 4, 5 (1972)).
Under MERA, protected natural resources include "all mineral,
animal, botanical, air, water, land, timber, soil, quietude,
recreational and historical resources." Minn. Stat. § 116B.02,
subd. 4 (1992). In MERA cases, we review trial court findings
under the clearly erroneous test. Krmpotich v. City of Duluth 483
N.W.2d 55, 56 (Minn. 1992).
Beddor challenges several of the findings of fact that the
trial court made with respect to this count, specifically those
regarding the impact the project would have on trees, water and
quietude.
(a) Wetlands
Beddor challenges the trial court's finding that the ponds
were not protected wetlands. While Beddor's expert testified that
the Lot 5 pond was a wetland, there was evidence to show that this
was true in 1992 but that the designation was changed in February
1994 to "utilized pond." This was due to Beddor's own application
to obtain a wetlands alteration permit so that he could combine the
Lot 5 pond with another pond. Beddor completed the combination of
the two ponds in 1993 and the City updated the wetland inventory
records to reflect the fact that the combined ponds had become one
utilized pond. The trial court's finding is thus not clearly
erroneous.
-4-
(b) Feasible and Prudent Alternatives
Beddor argues that the trial court's finding that there were
no feasible and prudent alternatives to the proposed project is
contrary to the record. This is not so. There was evidence
presented at trial that the alternatives proposed by Beddor
involved the construction of roads too steep to be prudent or
feasible. There was also evidence showing that diverting the
surface water, as proposed by Beddor, into another watershed would
be inconsistent with the principle of management planning to follow
natural drainage conditions as much as possible. The trial court's
finding that there were no feasible and prudent alternatives to the
proposed project is thus not clearly erroneous.
(c) Quietude
Beddor's challenge to the court's finding with respect to
quietude is unpersuasive. There was disputed evidence as to what
the increase in the decibel level would be as a result of increased
traffic in the area. Beddor's own expert admitted that his
projected 1.3 decibel increase in traffic noise would not be
noticeable. The trial court's finding that the proposed project
would not threaten the quietude of the area was thus not clearly
erroneous.
(d) Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)
Beddor challenges the trial court's finding that the City did
not arbitrarily and capriciously fail to conduct an EAW in this
matter. Under the applicable rule, a responsible governmental unit
shall order such an EAW if the evidence presented demonstrates that
-5-
the project may have the potential for significant environmental
effects. Minn. R. 4410.1100, subpt. 6 (1993). The responsible
governmental unit shall deny the petition if the evidence does not
so demonstrate. Id. The court found that the mere suggestion that
there may be a potential for significant environmental effects was
not enough to compel an EAW. This finding was not clearly
erroneous. Evidence at trial showed that the project at issue is
a minor one which will result in minimal if not unnoticeable
environmental impact. At the crux of appellant's argument is the
suggestion that since the so- called County Road 17 Pond and
Christmas Lake will experience some runoff from the project, an EAW
is warranted. But the trial court had ample evidence before it
that this runoff would not be potentially significant. The trial
court's finding with respect to the city's refusal to conduct an
EAW is not clearly erroneous.
(e) Traffic and Safety Issues
Beddor challenges the trial court's failure to find that the
city's decision to proceed with the project was arbitrary and
capricious due to the city's failure to conduct a traffic and
safety study. Contrary to Beddor's argument, there was evidence at
trial showing that the City had continually considered traffic and
safety issues within the subject area. Other evidence showed that
four or five alternative plans for the road extension were
reviewed. At trial, it was demonstrated that additional traffic
along the route would be minimal. There was also testimony at
trial that road signs had been placed along Pleasant View in
response to past concerns about traffic safety. The trial court's
' finding with respect to the city's concern for traffic and safety
issues implicated by the project is not clearly erroneous.
' 2. Beddor claims that the trial court improperly considered
and gave weight to his former support for the extension of Nez
' Perce Road through to Pleasant View, and improperly considered his
' personal motivations in bringing the lawsuit.
In its initial judgment, the trial court, though evidently
' aware of Beddor's alleged personal motivations in this action, was
of the opinion that no sanctions could be imposed because there
' were factual issues raised, thereby precluding summary judgment.
' Such factual issues were extensively entertained by the court in a
lengthy memorandum which concluded that Beddor's case failed the
' MERA analysis. The trial court did not base its determination on
Beddor's alleged questionable intentions, but based it on the
resolution of the factual issues brought before the court.
' D E C I S I O N
A review of the record reveals that the trial court's findings
in this case are not clearly erroneous. The findings and
conclusions in this matter are supported by the record and are
' affirmed.
' Affirmed.
L
(14;'13/95 14:33 $612 947 1525
FROM CITY OF CHANHH:�SEN
GELCO PAINETWORK
04.13.1995 97:19
P.
A pril >A.RUCATTON rog a yamasS E0 COMMISSION
A
DXTE t P 13, 1995
COMMZ84T APPLYING FoRi Planning Commission
ALTERN�TE s
= Craig J_ Peterson 8/31/57
BTRTHDItTS (optional)
ADDRESS z 1340 Qakside Circle CZTYj Chanhassen 8IPe 55317
gals$ p4oNE a 612/448 -9997 WORX I MQNE , 612/947 - 1555
KOW LOCI UAVE YOU BEEN A RESIDENT Or CHANHABaER? t 3 YR S�
H LEVEL OF EDU CA TION ATTAINED, PLUS DE GREES, Yp ANy
MBA - Management
CURRE E14PWYMENTs (state p013i.tion, employer is brief description
of dut es. If w it h prevent employer for only a s hort time, l ist
previo S emp"ayment ax " 11 4 _yi ra Prnsi Admini ctratinn ..
Gelco PayNet Financial Services Corporation
15 Ye rs of Service
ACTJVJ:S 1S8 AND AFFILIATIONS: (Inolude elective offices, honors and
r0cogn�tiOns received, if any.) - Inc.
Non p ofit organization that integrates abled and di$abled individuals into
wi 1deiness adventures.
REABONS FaR REEKIN4 THIS POSITYON AND YOUR QUALIFICATIONS i
i
I feel that I can provide both a business and personal perspective into.
the d decisions that are heard in front of the commission. I
have ?been involved in the real estate function of our organization
for o4er 10 years now and have made presentations to both planning
cOmmi sions and city councils.
r
IN FILTOG THIS APPLICATIOXQ, I UNDERSTAND THAT A COMMITMENT OF MY
TXM$, E EROY, INTEREST AND PARTICIPATION WILL BE XNVOLVED, ANDY AM
PREPARE TO RAKE SUCH A CO _ ME NT IN THE EVENT i AM APPOINTED TO
THE "01 COMlM18 B ION. "�
i
1 � 5
B
w.+. .1. C 6J1, �
RESUME
OF
DONALD N. MEHL
PROFESSIONAL SUMMARY
Extensive experience in small business operations with emphasis
in the organization and management of engineering and manufact-
uring functions. Broad background in product development, design
engineering, manufacturing and quality control.
EMPLOYMENT HISTORY
' 6/88 - present; Tonka Lures, Inc.
President and Owner
Design, manufacturing and sales of products related to the
sport fishing and boating industries.
1/88 - 4/93; Creative Research & Manufacturing, Inc
General Manager
Responsible for all functions of manufacturing operations.
12/80 - 12/87; Creative Research & Manufacturing. Inc.
President and Owner
Design and manufacturing of specialized biopsy needles
for the medical product industry. Sold company in 12/87.
5/76 - present; Mehl Engineering, Inc.
President and Owner
' Perform all types of professional level engineering
services including product research and development,
design engineering, product and manufacturing costs,
' manufacturing methods and processes, tool and manufact-
uring engineering and engineering management.
7/73 - 9/76; Northwest Microfilm, Inc.
V.P. Engineering and Manufacturing
' Responsibility for engineering and manufacturing of micro-
graphics equipment including facilities planning, tooling,
equipment, manufacturing and industrial engineering, product
' and manufacturing costs, research and development, product
engineering and quality control for start -up division.
6/67 - 6/73; Designware Industries, Inc.
' Manager of Engineering
Directed all phases of product design engineering, quality
control, industrial engineering, manufacturing engineering,
tool development, product testing and technical writing
' for the firm's extruded aluminum product line.
3/67 - 6/67; MTS Systems Corporation
Mechanical Engineer
' Designed and developed mechanical components for electro-
hydraulic mechanical testing systems..
7/65 - 2/67; Designware Industries, Inc.
Design Engineer
' Product design and development, fabrication methods and
processes, cost reduction and tool design for manufacturing
and field fabrication.
' 4/63 - 6/65; Designware Industries, Inc.
Layout Draftsman
Product development and assembly, fabrication tooling and
' packaging for extruded aluminum products.
n
APPLICATION FOR CHANHASSEN COMMISSION '
DATE: 41 b5
COMMISSION APPLYING FOR Fla4ntn�r '
ALTERNATE:
NAME: BIRTHDATE (optional) : 1212 015 '
ADDRESS: 3q(00 CITY: 5i�,"Wy ' ZIP
HOME PHONE: 470 - ZD WORK PHONE: 470 -7 S - 7'9 -
'
HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN A RESIDENT OF CHANHASSEN ?: 2 1I7. VLar5 '
HIGHEST LEVEL OF EDUCATION ATTAINED, PLUS DEGREES, IF ANY:
CURRENT EMPLOYMENT: (State position, employer & brief description
of duties. If with present employer for only a short time, list I
previous employment as well. )
�a►►tieQr�hc, Ma�Qr, P�u�b�-1► �,k,� -�� a►� �Doc�Seryi`�,e_ . ('�.�wsrbt -v •far '
�.�� QUWrrM1,r(Inu avl 04rui -ki5 iv, (ynavdix� a" UA,
ACTIVITIES AND AFFILIATIONS: (Include elective offices, -honors and '
recognitions received, if any.)
kke u rn.&,troa4 T-Ai uic of Am*, Ord. 50gc .► o( P(4
= Al�5 4 11U WW CkWULv 2L' P( [l DEU' LW � ' %r t l; oat -W vz-- sY 5m.
REASONS FOR SEEKING THIS POSITION AND YOUR QUALIFICATIONS: '
........... 11ij M
MAN
IN FILING THIS APPLICATION, I UNDERSTAND THAT A COMMITMENT OF MY f
TIME, ENERGY, INTEREST AND PARTICIPATION WILL BE INVOLVED, AND I AM
PREPARED TO MAKE SUCH A COMMITMENT IN THE EVENT I AM APPOINTED TO '
THE ABOVE COMMISSION.
SIGNATURE f VV
4- M oL I 4rDU -7 k EXCelsi'or�