Administrative Section1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
ADMINISTRA TIVE SECTION
Minutes of the Youth Commission Meeting of May 8, 1995.
ISTEA Implementation Newsletter dated April 20, 1995.
Letter from Lois Speak, Metropolitan Council dated May 15, 1995.
Letter to Marvin Hora, MPCA dated May 23, 1995.
Metropolitan Council Wastewater Services, 1994 Final Sewer Service Statement.
Letter from Mayor Sharon Sayles Belton of Minneapolis dated May 17, 1995.
Letter from Diane Desotelle dated May 22, 1995.
Memo to Charles Folch dated May 23, 1995.
Memo from Diane Desotelle dated May 31, 1995.
Letter from James Unruh, Barton- Aschman dated May 26, 1995.
Memo from Todd Hoffman dated May 31, 1995.
Letter from Marcus Zbinden dated May 23, 1995.
Correspondence to and from Bill Janohosky.
Memo from Sharm in A l -Jaff dated June 7, 1995.
Memo from John Rask dated June 7, 1995.
Minutes of Youth Commission Meeting
Monday May 8, 1995 i `� J
Early Childhood Center Board Room
The meeting was brought to order at 7:13 by Chairperson Lori Wellens. Those present included Kathy Wellens, David
Kocka, Cathryn Campbell, Kerry Holtmeier, Lori Wellens, Jason Thompson, Matt Kearney, Pat Donnay, Bob Kraemer,
Christina Osborn, Phyllis Lindstrand & Jeanne Straus.
Matt announced that the mentorship meeting date was changed to Thursday, May 18, 1:00 pm at the CRC in the high
school. Committee members please note.
The agenda was reviewed and approved as written on the board.
The minutes were reviewed. Motion/Campbell, Second/Holtmeier to approve the minutes. Motion passed
Old Business
1. Reminder to YC members. Set up another time to attend your agency meeting and make a presentation. Encourage
your agency to place you on their mailing lists.
2. Penny Harvest. Members were not certain what the StudelnCouncils' plans were. YC will still go ahead and make
plans. Need jars to collect and need to really publicize in the paper by the 15th of May. Put in the newspapers two weeks.
Matt will talk to the Chaska Herald about publicity.
3. YC members are encouraged to call their a and find out about applicants for YC openings.
4. YC members should make armingements to talk with respective agencies giving them an update. Include an update
about Search Institute meeting with YC and the Community Leaders. Explain need for better relationship between YC and
agency. Check to see if their application process is going well. Seems to be a problem. To better the lines of
communication, need to ask them
• what we need to do-
• what they need to do-
• express the need for agencies to contact applicants within a certain number of days in order to
respect the applicants time and need to know whether they have been selected.
5. Reminder: Clean up of YC flower bed is scheduled for May 21 at 1:00 pm.Bring hand garden tools, trash bags,
refreshments, etc. Should take 30-45 minutes. Pat Donnay agreed to choose the flowers. May the force be with her!
6. Chamber of Commerce sent registration form for working a booth at River City Days July 28 -30. This would be a good
source of publicity for the YC. Please brainstorm ideas.
7. Reactions from "Bring a Friend" to the meeting. Good. Next year, do it more often.
8. Discussed lowering the age of applicants to 6th grade.
9. Search Institute Meeting. Follow -up meeting will be held Monday, May 22 between 5 -6:30 pm. ECC Board Room
Next YC meeting June 5. 7 -9pm ECC Board Room has been reserved. If there is a change, the phone tree
will be used.
Motion/Holtmeier, Second/K. Wellens. Motion passed. The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Bob Kraemer,
Youth Commission Secretary
1
1
r innesota
D epartment of
Transportation
dSTEA
IMPLEMENTATION
'NEWSLETTER
The Intermodal Surface
, Transportation
Efficiency Act of 1991
,In this issue:
Mn/DOT receives
ISTEA funding for
congestion pricing
demonstration project
The whats and whys
of road pricing
Number 17
April 20, 1995
Mn/DOT Receives ISTEA Funding for
Congestion Pricing Demonstration Project `Add,, qtck ,
Mn/DOT has received
ISTEA funding to study
the feasibility of
implementing congestion
pricing projects within the
framework of public -
private partnership toll
roads. The newly created
Office of Alternative
Transportation Financing
(ATF) was formed in
September of 1994 by
Mn/DOT to study various
road pricing options and to
coordinate the
implementation of the toll
road projects.
A Congestion Pricing Pilot
Program was established
by Section 1012(b) of the
Intermodal Surface
Transportation Efficiency
Act (ISTEA) of 1991. The
ISTEA also removes
restrictions on the use of
toll financing inmost
federal -aid programs by
allowing states to consider
congestion pricing and
innovative financing
techniques to supplement
conventional fuel and
vehicle taxes, including
forming partnerships with
private enterprise.
In response to ISTEA,
the Minnesota Legislature
gave road authorities the
ability to either build toll
roads or solicit/accept
proposals for public -
private partnerships to
develop toll roads.
Legislation also was
passed requiring a study of
road pricing options with
the potential for
implementation in
Minnesota. A final report
is due to the Legislature by
January 1996.
In addition to studying
various road pricing
options, the AFT Office
also is charged with
recommending viable
solutions and developing a
framework to form public -
private partnerships to
build toll roads.
What is Road Pricing?
Road pricing is an
umbrella term for fees
charged to motorists for
use of a road. Current
road pricing options being
considered include
congestion pricing, a
vehicle mileage -based tax
and toll roads.
Congestion Pricing
Motorists pay a fee for
using a roadway, generally
during peak operating
(rush) hours. This term is
used when the purpose of
the fee is traffic demand
management.
Mileage-based Tax
Motorists pay a fee for
using roadways based on
how many miles a vehicle
is driven. This type fee
can be implemented
statewide and is
considered a possible
replacement for the
existing gas tax.
Toll Roads
Motorists pay a fee to use
a roadway. A fee is
considered a toll when
revenues generated pay for
constructing and operating
the specific road being
"tolled ".
Why Road Pricing?
The state is now studying
road pricing alternatives
because available revenue
sources are not available to
meet increasing and
diverse transportation
needs. For example, the
average annual mileage
driven has nearly doubled
in the last 25 years. Also,
during the same time
period, commuting
patterns have changed
significantly with more
suburb -to- suburb travel
making it difficult to meet
mobility needs through
increased transit service.
Currently, the gas tax is
the major source of state
and federal revenue for the
state's highway system.
Although people are
driving more, the state and
federal revenue collections
have been inadequate to
meet current needs due to:
• Inflation
• Better fleet mileage
which allows drivers to
travel farther on a tank of
gas and which allows,
motorists to pay less for
use of the system.
* Alternative fuel options
available to motorists (i.e.
gasohol, ethanol, electric
cars, etc.) which decrease
the amount of revenue
generated from gas taxes.
This trend is expected to
constitute a higher
percentage of vehicles in
the future.
* Federal highway gas tax
dollars being diverted to
offset the federal budget
deficit.
(continued)
Transportation needs
continue to outweigh
available resources and no
new transportation tax
revenues are projected at
this time. New funding
must be found to continue
operations, maintenance
and management of the
current highway system.
In working to meet
Minnesota's future
transportation needs,
Mn/DOT is studying a
variety of alternative
financing options. Road
pricing fees support the
general concept that those
who use the system most,
or who use it during the
highest demand periods,
should bear a larger
proportion of the costs to
operate and maintain it.
This concept also can
include differential pricing
that takes the size of the
vehicle into account.
Mn/DOT believes the most
logical method of
discovering if road
pricing has tangible
benefits for the state is to
gather public input and
conduct trial projects to test
the concept. No final
decisions concerning road
pricing will be made
however, until the feasibility
of the alternatives has been
determined.
What is Mn/DOT Doing?
Given the legislative
mandate to study and
evaluate road pricing
options, Mn/DOT's Office
of Alternative
Transportation Financing
will be involved in the
following initiatives:
Congestion Pricing
Demonstration
The ATF Office is
working with Mn/DOT's
Metro Division in
conducting a congestion
pricing demonstration
project. Possible project
considerations include
use of Intelligent
Transportation Systems
(ITS) technologies such
as roadside beacons and
in- vehicle transponders
for selling excess
capacity on I -35W or
I -394.
Road Pricing Study
Mileage -based tax and
congestion pricing
options will be evaluated
through the Office's
agreement with a
consultant team. Also,
two broad -based
committees will assist
with policy and technical
concern ranging from
whether congestion is a
problem to determining
public support for road
pricing.
Public- Private To]] Road
Proposals
Request for proposals will
be issued this summer
seeking private enterprise,
partners to fund, build and
manage toll roads. The '
private sector will identify
potential public - private
partnership demonstration
toll projects. The proposal'
are due by November'95.
The effort also may result
in congestion pricing
projects.
For more information on
road pricing and
ATF Office initiatives
contact:
L
Adeel Lari, Director
Mn/DOT '
Office of Alternative
Transportation Financing
395 John Ireland Blvd
MS 440
St. Paul, Minnesota 55155
(612) 282 -6148 '
(612) 296 -3019 fax
Shawn Chambers, Editor
0#T_S0& Minnesota Department of Transportation
Office of Investment Management
395 John Ireland Boulevard, MS 440
St. Paul, MN 55155
OF 612/296 -1605
Fax: 612/296 -3019
I S
APR 2 i99
ENGINEERING DEPT"
Metropolitan Council
' Working for the Region, Planning for the Future
I May 15, 1995
I TO ALL CITY FINANCE OFFICERS:
Metropolitan Council/Wastewater Services (MCWS) recently closed out 1994 revenues and expenditures and
completed the 1994 Final Cost Allocation. The enclosed statement shows both the estimated sewer service
billing your city paid for 1994 and the final billing to your city for the same year.
' The bottom line shown on the accompanying statement is the amount your city underpaid or overpaid in 1994.
This amount will appear as a credit or a debit on the city's 1996 statement of sewer service.
' For 1994, MCWS had a favorable variance of $7.5 million, composed of $1 million in unanticipated revenue and
$6.5 million in spending below budget. The variance occurred by design. As budget and merger activity became
more define, spending was constrained to allow MCWS more leeway to balance competing needs.
Ll
The Council decided that the variance should be used to reduce costs in the mid -and long -term, working toward
stability in billings to communities. The variance is being used to finance capital budget projects (in lieu of debt),
prepay a loan, set up an allowance for obsolete inventory, assist in re- engineering an essential activity and buy
out some of the older workers' compensation policies.
This use of the variance also means there will not be an across - the -board rebate on our 1996 sewer service bill,
which is another step toward long -term stability.
At this time, I would also like to provide an update of the Cost Allocation /Rate Study Task Force appointed by
the Metropolitan Council Chair and chaired by Russ Susag, Council member of Richfield and former Metropolitan
Waste Control Commissioner. The Task Force and its Technical Advisory Committee are conducting a full study
of virtually every aspect not only of the cost allocation system but of SAC, inflow and infiltration and other rates
such as industrial strength. Their target date for reporting is early fall, 1995. They welcome questions or
comments, and we would be happy to put you in touch with them.
As always, your questions or comments are welcome. For specific questions about this statement or other
matters, please contact Steve Sielaff at 229 -2021 or myself at 229 -2017.
Sincerely,
A i
.isSpear
Controller
LIS:CCU:kme
A; \FNLCA94.LIS
cc: City Manager
Mayor
Enclosure
r
230 East Fifth Street St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 -1634 (612) 291 -6359 Fax 291 -6550 TDD /= 291 -0904 Metro Info Line 229 -3780
An Eauai Onoortunitu Emntouer
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL WASTEWATER SERVICES
1994 Final Sewer Service Statement
5028
Chanhassen
Notre: -7 11 - 1 2 1s is not an - invoice a fir credit riierno
The amount underpaid or overpaid will be added /subtracted on your
1996 Statement of Estimated Sewer Service Charges.
1994
EST.
ACTUAL
Gallonage Processed in million gallons
687
,733
Cost per Million Gallons
1,243.24
1`252.76
Total Sewer Service Cost
Other (Credits) or Charges:
Current Value Credit
854,106
1,858
. ,918,270.
41 858
Debt Payment Credit
0
0.
1992 Final Credit /Amount Due
73,394
73;`394
Total Other (Credits) or Charges
Amount Paid by Customer
71,536
925,644
71,536'
925,844
Reduction of 1994 Billing via Cash Rebate to Customer
0
Net Amount Paid by Customer
Amount Underpaid or (Overpaid) by Customer
925,644 925,644'
64 162'
Notre: -7 11 - 1 2 1s is not an - invoice a fir credit riierno
The amount underpaid or overpaid will be added /subtracted on your
1996 Statement of Estimated Sewer Service Charges.
1
i
1
1 May 23, 1995
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
VIA FACSIMILE & U.S. MAIL
Mr. Marvin E. Hora
MPCA Water Quality Division
Point Source Compliance Section
520 Lafayette Road North
St. Paul, MN 55155 -4194
Re: National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) and State Disposal System (SDS) -
1 Pennit No. MN0062880 for Pies, Inc., Chaska, Minnesota - City File No. PW -064A
Dear Mr. Hora:
On behalf of the City of Chanhassen I would like to respectfully request that a public informational
meeting be conducted prior to the issuance of NPDES and SDS Permit No. MN0062880 for Pies, Inc. of
Chaska, Minnesota. The City of Chanhassen's interest in the draft permit is rather significant since Bluff
Creek, a significant resource in Chanhassen will ''receive direct discharge of the proposed flow. The
request for a public information meeting is being made based on the following initial concerns:
1. The draft pennit does not appear to contain all of the detailed pertinent information necessary to
approve such a permit.
a. The site map provided on page 4 is vague since it does not show the actual "route to
receiving waters" as indicated nor affected ditch or ponding facilities.
b. The narrative on page 3 indicates that "discharge flows via a drainage ditch to a culvert
under a road which channels stormwater to a contained stormwater retention basin."
However, there I is no information regarding`'the culverts such as location, size and type
of-niaterial. The brief narrative does not provide information as to what road is being
;"
crossed (assumed to be Lyman Boulevard) nor what retention pond is being implemented
and where it is' 'located. The pond's design parameters should also be described.
C. The narrative on page 3 indicates an approximate daily discharge rate of 10,000 gallons;
however, page 6 indicates that "there is no maximum limit on daily flow." Furthermore,
there is no information on an analysis as to how this flow will impact the existing culverts
or pond area or the receiving waters nor whether there are potential erosion problems or
how this flow may impact private property.
The sampling requirements on page 6 appear minimal when considering the
environmental sensitivity of Bluff Creek. A description of Bluff Creek's water quality
seems more appropriate in the perniit than the Minnesota River's water quality since it is
much cleaner.
Mr. Marvin E. Hora
May 23, 1995
Page 2
e. Section 4c on page 9 does not provide any requirements for sending the required
reporting information to the City of Chanhassen.
f. Section 4-1 on page 11 does not provide for notification to the City of Chanhassen for
any bypasses which may occur.
g. Section 4j on page 14 does not contain any provisions for City of Chanhassen input on
any permit modifications.
2. It is also apparent that the draft permit may contain some incorrect information.
a. The draft permit lists the receiving water for the discharge as the Riley- Purgatory Creek.
These are two different creeks. Furthermore, the general location map shows the
receiving water to be Bluff Creek.
I am also concerned about the lack of notification regarding this draft permit. The public notice for this
draft permit was apparently issued on April 25, 1995; however, I first became aware of this matter through
conversations with a representative of the City of Chaska on May 19, 1995. I obtained a copy of this
draft permit on May 22, 1995. Given this brief timeframe, I have not had ample time to study this matter
in great detail.
The Bluff Creek corridor is an environmentally sensitive area and a very valuable natural resource to the
City of Chanhassen. Accordingly, the City has implemented a number of programs such as Storm Water
Management, Best Management Practices on Erosion Control, ordinances related to bluffline protection
and tree preservation, etc. in hopes of maintaining this pristine resource for many years to come. I am
sure you can understand the City's concern in being informed and a part of the process for any issues or
actions which may have an impact to Bluff Creek. Please call me at 937 -1900, extension 114 to further
discuss this matter. Thank you in advance for your time and consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
CITY OF CHANHAS
Charles D. Folch, P.E.
Director of Public Works /City Engineer
CDF:ktm
c: Don Ashworth, City Manager
Kate Aanenson, Planning Director
Diane Desotelle, Water Resources Coordinator
City Council Administrative Packet (6/12/95)
g. , engNch axlesVletters \hora
Metropolitan Council
Working for the Region, Planning for the Future
' May 15, 1995
L7 A-
1 ,
' TO ALL CITY FINANCE OFFICERS:
' Metropolitan Council /Wastewater Services (MCWS) recently closed out 1994 revenues and expenditures and
completed the 1994 Final Cost Allocation. The enclosed statement shows both the estimated sewer service
billing your city paid for 1994 and the final billing to your city for the same year.
' The bottom line shown on the accompanying statement is the amount your city underpaid or overpaid in 1994.
This amount will appear as a credit or a debit on the city's 1996 statement of sewer service.
' For 1994, MCWS had a favorable variance of $7.5 million, composed of $1 million in unanticipated revenue and
$6.5 million in spending below budget. The variance occurred by design. As budget and merger activity became
more define, spending was constrained to allow MCWS more leeway to balance competing needs.
t
The Council decided that the variance should be used to reduce costs in the mid -and long -term, working toward
stability in billings to communities. The variance is being used to finance capital budget projects (in lieu of debt),
prepay a loan, set up an allowance for obsolete inventory, assist in re- engineering an essential activity and buy
out some of the older workers' compensation policies.
This use of the variance also means there will not be an across - the -board rebate on our 1996 sewer service bill,
which is another step toward long -term stability.
At this time, I would also like to provide an update of the Cost Allocation /Rate Study Task Force appointed by
the Metropolitan Council Chair and chaired by Russ Susag, Council member of Richfield and former Metropolitan
Waste Control Commissioner. The Task Force and its Technical Advisory Committee are conducting a full study
of virtually every aspect not only of the cost allocation system but of SAC, inflow and infiltration and other rates
such as industrial strength. Their target date for reporting is early fall, 1995. They welcome questions or
comments, and we would be happy to put you in touch with them.
As always, your questions or comments are welcome. For specific questions about this statement or other
matters, please contact Steve Sielaff at 229 -2021 or myself at 229 -2017.
Sincerely,
`Lois I. Spear
Controller
LIS:CGN:kme
A; \FNLCA94.L1S
cc: City Manager
Mayor
Enclosure
230 East Fifth Street St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 -1634 (612) 291 -6359 Fax 291 -6550 TDD /T 291 -0904 Metro Info Line 229 -3780
An Equal Opportunity Employer
,/ /"/" .�
- C ,rr,� 1
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL WAS
WASTEWATER SERVICES
1994 Final Sewer Service Statement
'
5028
Chanhassen m
C's e r
,
1994
EST.
............................. .
ACTUAL..*.
Gallonage Processed in million gallons
687
.......
733
'
Cost per Million Gallons
1,243.24
1,252.761
Total Sewer Service Cost
854, 06
918,270:
Other (Credits) or Charges:
Current Value Credit
1,858
1,858
Debt Payment Credit
0
0
'
1992 Final Credit /Amount Due
73,394
Total Other (Credits) or Charges
71,536
71,536
Amount Paid by Customer
925,644
925,644:
Reduction of 1994 Billing via Cash Rebate to Customer
0
0
Net Amount Paid by Customer 925,644
925,644
'
Amount Underpaid or (Overpaid)
zip Customer
64162.
'
Note: This is not an invoice or credit memo
The amount underpaid or overpaid will be added /subtracted on your
'
1996 Statement of Estimated Sewer Service Charges.
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
350 South Fifth Street - Rm 331
Minneapolis Minnesota 55415 -1393
(612) 673 -2100
Fax (612) 673 -2305
SHARON SAYLES BELTON
MAYOR
MEMORANDUM FROM THE MAYOR
TO: Council Members
Charter Department Heads
Community Leaders, Elected Officials and Press
/-/Jm L_I
e e - 1_111417e
minneapolis
city of lakes
DATE: May 17, 1995
' RE: Principles to Guide City of Minneapolis Housing Programs
' Three critical problems threaten the physical and social integrity of Minneapolis:
• A growing concentration of poverty in specific city neighborhoods which
fosters racial and economic segregation;
' • Aging housing stock, and insufficient choices to meet the cost and style
requirements of prospective home - buyers;
• A growing performance gap between students of color and white students in
our public schools.
' These problems are related; the thread that connects them is housing and housing
patterns. It is critical that the City of Minneapolis develop short- and long -term
housing programs to dissolve growing pockets of poverty as quickly as possible by
' providing a wide selection of housing choices at a variety of price levels
throughout the city.
' Please note that in resolving the first two problems, we also address the third:
When people car. find housing 't w'] price 'evels throughcu o'.ir c.ty, then ^v11r
city's schools will become naturally integrated.
' As the first step developing in develo in these housing programs, I have proposed three
' housing principles which were developed by the Planning Department at my
request. They are as follows:
1. We must provide a variety of housing throughout the City and metropolitan
area that offers choice in both type and affordability.
AlF D (612) 673 -2157 f Recycled Paper 30% AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER Post Consumer Fiber
in
2. We must stabilize our neighborhoods by creating new housing and
rehabilitating existing housing stock throughout the city.
3. We must improve the management and amount of assisted housing, and also
increase the diversity of locations where assisted housing is available.
The Community Development, and Zoning and Planning Committees haved
already approved these principles. They will go before the full City Council next
week.
It is my hope that these principles will accomplish two goals:
+ They will form the basis for future city housing policies, serving as a
commonly agreed -upon touchstone to ensure that we stay consistently
focused on our housing goals.
• It is my hope that when Minneapolis School Board members meet at the
end of May, they will discuss the issue of community schools in the light of
this commitment from the City to move forward deliberately and with full
intent to more fully integrate our city neighborhoods.
Minneapolis is just starting to experience problems of aging housing and
infrastructure, and lack of development space. We know from our own experience,
as well as from studying the experience of older cities, that these physical
problems, if uncorrected, lead to intractable social problems: loss of personal and
public income, concentration of poverty, housing and school segregation, and
social unrest.
I am optimistic about our ability to work together to build a community that is
economically strong, physically beautiful, and that provides equal opportunity to
all of our citi --anS.
r
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
' May 22, 1995
Re: 1995 WCA Legislation - File No. SWMP -8G
Dear Local Governin g Authority Authori of the Wetland Conservation Act:
' As a Local Government Unit (LGU) administering the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act
(WCA), this letter is to inform you of the positive legislative changes the Urban Wetland
Management Coalition (UWMC) has helped make, and to encourage your LGU to join the
UWMC efforts by providing a monetary donation during this critical legislative time. The
UWMC has played a major role in educating legislators about our urban concerns and has also
gained a great deal of respect in their efforts to identify the mutual concerns of the public and
' private sector and to propose amendments to the WCA that provide more efficient administration,
regulatory flexibility, and protection of resource values. There is a very good chance the House
or Senate bill or a combination of these two bills will be successful. Currently, both bills contain
the following items that the UWMC supporters think will be beneficial to the WCA
administrative and planning procedures at the local level:
' Increase the size of allowable wetland impact before a WCA permit is necessary.
• Allow LGU's additional flexibility if they develop a wetland management plan that
also addresses the goals of the WCA. The House bill requires state agency
approval of the plan, where the Senate bill does not.
• Provide for 1:1 replacement instead of 2:1 for the construction of new public
transportation projects.
•
The State would assume liability r incidents involving legal and technical
h'
support in defense of the WCA.
• Allow for replacement credits above the 1:1 ratio to include buffer areas, water
quality ponds, or an area of permanent vegetative cover re- established on a
' wetland that was prior converted cropland.
' Additional sequencing flexibility for small wetland impacts.
May 22, 1995
Page 2
The UWMC needs public support to carry these items through into the legislative session and
into WCA regulation. We have gained a great deal of respect and are striving to find the middle
ground between private and public sector issues. The UWMC has incurred a substantial financial
burden in its efforts to be a major player at the capitol. The current UWMC members are sure
these changes will benefit your city. Your assistance in helping us at this time and supporting
our continued efforts would be greatly appreciated.
Enclosed is a brochure and a membership application. Please send your contribution to the
Builders Association of Minnesota. We sincerely hope that these efforts will help cut back on
the administrative red tape of the WCA, provide additional flexibility for the LGU, and still
protect and preserve the environment.
Sincerely,
RAMSEY- WASHINGTON METRO WATERSHED DISTRICT
Cliff Aichinger
Administrator and President of UWMC
CITY OF CHANHASSIV
4 4Y,
Diane Desotelle, P.E.
Water Resources Coordinator and Board Member of UWMC
J ms /ktm
g: \eng \d iane \w etlands\donate.lgu
' w c c w cccc w-v own �..]
� (D O A C O. G O " G G. O .� O O p A p
. ' p - O C p
(D ',0 (D vo " ( _ (u n, , p
"' of o C of — w (n ao w w , , c O ` -p - R "O o ro
' fl- vo ° <- ¢. a W S a o . ° '� ` ^ 3 ] : 0 0 (A
n:
Q. �s w o 0 n. w (o 0 w C :'17 : d � cr° w O
2 N Qo m C C m 0 r' � O O
N y O C O
o . o ¢ w M ao o R N rD M me ►
A O w w o o A c o° n
p 0 w o , < a M < (D
6 n R O (D y tv D w ` J
.+ O 7. N w (D (D Cl.
' ¢ a • C � x m O (D C W O (D p O w ' (n A �. ' � O N O (D A
N �_. " a w y a -cs M.
^ (D w ¢ ¢. of M w o cT w
o M � M
R O o to w O O
o L O * ^ ¢ (D (D w 0. (D w O ,'
S= �o °(D pow o° M w ;v o (D o o. r--i
n o n o O y T : Cl . 'L7 (D (A CD
" ► .S
o R. Q C N cD (D (D ` 1
Vl (D W 0 O
o
(D O o O 0) O —go T O Qi C o "a. p D A O
- (D O lD C (D o . o (D 0 r -i A y
C R y
p' (D A
d x (o ( y 5 w r. G1 �. < A voo
n (D n W A� `",.,,, to fD O (D cwn r -
O C o w G
(q A l�D (D O w 0 R . eb
C A
(o O C .d T 6 C ^ 0 < O O
`r3 pi �. A y �; y 0 QO o fD � y
ro w T (n O M o ( r* O (o
R 'O w O
r C7 (D of T (�•• - tU Q' fD w " N (9 (n (D -
V ►� v? c) C) G b p y A O m ti CD ((D pq
F w° o °' M
n 7 C 1 C n C C7 p O fD (D 0 O w °' �' O C (—'• M.
� (D o _
O n w Cn H H C57 (�D C 0
M
CL
ro y R
ro
C
� 1.0 N
C7 Ci ` p /r w y W -'
n o O w k T" 2) 0 (D :? w y p 0 �• O �' O
0 o °' O o (o w f D 6 � O (D O_ I
CD
w
�ow C Wwy � .C�C � !0, p.� <C V N Q- p o o H w o
0 C p �G p Y O (D '' w v, (D (D o C w fl- O — c 1 (D
7c x- O "J v, ►+� �0. T -� N (D Cl. to A (p` A O (D O K
C O A O < ( D y w O N fD v,. ... 1.--�
p _ 9 C c, G H H m p* (D G p y. w r* O O R CD -
a °. Cn v m `° o O w . o O `a o (p (1) o p w H
., r. o t1 O
r o n 0 (D CL -. o p, -. 0 O O -. �^ 4 0
O tr7 o d rD C1. c" C O ( p , ?� w o O p w ( C ....
n o o vi .� A a 0
o' cn y p 0, O �. (D 0 (D 9 (OD
C rb A O O
C O ti O - (D ¢- a R. Q ..
�, o o. w
42 ... ,
Ln
tj LA
W ° . 0
A
Z w a v
I� o o y
s rn ,
N 3 ° 3
in o M �, o
o i' '� � • J �
o - 1
Ln os�Ln.
Cn o0
N %0
n
. u1
URBAN WETLAND MA_NAGEMEN COALITION
570 ASBURY STREET, SUITE 30' '
ST PAUL, MN 55104
Printed on recycled paper with a minimum of ten percent post - consumer waFte.'
jebads io siio ; ;a - Buu(ggoj ogbads so; - - -'
suojimiops jeroads• jeuontppe, aq .(iglssod jjlnn aiat;Z •szsoo uonezTae2io otseq atp SlaAOJ aa; dMszagtuaut aqj, :aloN
xdd aNOHd 1
dIZ 31VIS AM
kNVdWOO
2WVN
:UOtjeuoCj jQUOtjtPPv ,
(Aluo siaumo Avadotd -,w d) dgjsi@gwaW ajepossd (]0I$
(sjaau;2ua ao swinInsuoa lauo!ssajoad 'siadolanap 'staplmq 'su)jnsip pagslatnm 'sarm sapnlaui) d[tislagt,[,[aW jjnd OOS$
1VOMWOO .LNYW7 VNVW QNV717Al NV99, 2 OW uio! of 021'1 P1 I '
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
' MEMORANDUM
TO: Charles Folch, City Engineer
FROM: Scott Han, Public Safety Director
' DATE: May 23, 1995
SUBJ: Spring 1995 Road Restriction Summary
Attached please find the above mentioned item as submitted by Deputy Chris Capaul of the
Carver County Sheriff's Department, which shows significant activity in Chanhassen. This
service is an excellent one provided by the Sheriff's Department, which is done in addition to
the regular contracted services and costs us no additional money. They have done a very
' good job, and I think you will agree that this helps our city roads a great deal.
PC: Don Chmiel, Mayor
City Council
Don Ashworth;.City Manager,
er
Public Safety s Commission
g:\safety\s h\roadres.lrn
Ll
SPRING 1995 ROAD RESTRICTION SUMMARY
The first shift worked for the spring restrictions was
3 -21 -95 ending on 5 -5 -95. The total trucks stopped
during that time was 76. The total number of tickets
issued was forty, with an additional four charged by
formal complaint. Six trucks were placed out of service
for unsafe conditions, and three drivers were removed for
not having a valid license. One driver was jailed because
of a gross misdemeaner.
A total of $3,453.37 was spent on wages for the time
period listed. Four shifts were on an overtime basis using
a reserve for the second person. Three double up shifts
were used for the second person. All other shifts were
accomplished by dropping the second car in Chanhassen and
and providing coverage with the scale truck. While working
soley in the City of Chanhassen a C.S.O. was provided as
the second person at no cost to the County.
If all the fines were collected as they are listed on
the fine schedule provided by the court there would be
approxiamately $10,500.00 in fines generated by the spring
road restriction enforcement. As an additional note future
double ups will be utilized to enforce truck and weight
regulations throughout the year.
In the city of Chanhassen thirty two trucks were stopped
and twenty two tickets were issued.
Deputy Chris Capaul
r MEMORANDUM
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
r TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager
FROM: Diane Desotelle, Water Resources Coordinator
r Ma 31
DA'I'S: y , 1995
r SUBJ: Met Council Grant for the Bluff Creek Watershed Plan
Staff applied for the Met Council's Twin Cities Water Quality Initiative Grant in January 1995 for
r the planning and implementaion of the Bluff Creek Watershed. This is the second year of a five -
year probram to fund nonpoint source grants for innovative projects within the Twin Cities.
r The Met Council has award the City of Chanhassen a grant of $89,147. Matching grants and in-
kind service for this project from the City, the Watershed; District, and the DNR amount to $83,500
r giving the City a total of $172,647 for the planning and initial implementation phases of the project.
Unfortunately, the City will not receive the Met Council grant until the Watershed District's 509
r Plan is completed. The plan has been in the review process since July 1994, but has had numerous
set backs. I encourage the council to contact the board members of the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek
Watershed District to encourage them to get the 509 plan approved and adopted so the City can take
r advantage of this funding.
Attached is a copy of the 1995 Grant Award Recommendations from the Met Council. A copy of
r the City's grant 'application is at City Hall. If you would like a copy, please contact Diane
Desotelle at 937 -1900 extension 156.
r C: Charles Folch, City Engineer
City Council Admin Section (6/12/95)
SWMP lE -2
'
g:\eng\diane\bluffckVnetcgrLcc
: \ \diane \bluffck\metcgrt.cc
r
Metropolitan Council
Working for the Region, Planning for the Future
Mears Park Centre, 230 East Fifth Street, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 -1634 ,
Phone (612) 291 -6359 TDD (612) 291 -0904 FAX (612) 291 -6550 Metro Info (612) 229 -3780
DATE: May 16, 1995
TO: Twin Cities Water Quality Initiative Grant Applicants
FROM: Jack Frost, Grant Manager
SUBJECT: 1995 Grant Award Recommendations
Attached are the recommendations for this years TCQI grant awards. This item will be on the
Environment Committee agenda on Tuesday, May 23 at 4:00 P.M. in Room 2A. As you can see
from the report to the Committee I am recommending that the Council fund 11 technical grants,
five educational grants and one special grant. To all the potential grantees that did not make the
cut this year I encourage you to work with me over the next year to prepare an application that
could be funded in the future. I anticipate the notice for the next round of grants will be
available shortly after January 1, 1996.
I will be making some modifications in the grant eligibility and ranking criteria before the next
round of grants. Your comments or suggestions on either the eligibility or ranking criteria are
welcome. I wish to thank you for your participation in the grant process this year and look
forward to working with you on future grants.
230 East Fifth Street St. Paul. Minnesota 55101 -1634 (612) 291 -6359 Fax 291 -6550 TDD /TTY 291 -0904 Metro Info Line 229 -3780 '
An Fnunl nnno l—ih, Frnnim,er
t Environment Committee Meeting of May 23, 1995
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
Mears Park Centre, 230 East Fifth Street, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 -1634
Phone (612) 291 -6359 TDD (612) 291 -0904 FAX (612) 291 -6550 Metro Info (612) 229 -3780
DATE: May 5, 1995
' TO: Chair and Members of the Environment Committee
FROM: Jack Frost, Environmental Planning & Analysis (291 -6519)
SUBJECT: 1995 Twin Cities Water Quality Initiative Grant Funding
Recommendations - Second Round, Committee #95 -028 -E
' EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ISSUE: This is the second year of a five -year program to fund nonpoint source grants for
' innovative projects within the Twin Cities.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Program is consistent with the Council's Water Resources
' Management Development GuidelPolicy Plan and the November 1993 Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) the Council entered into with MPCA regarding the NPDES permit for
the Metro Plant.
' FUNDING IMPLICATIONS: This request is to fund $1,388,000 in technical and educational
grants, including two special projects. In accord with the MOU, Wastewater Services is required
to provide about $8.8 million for nonpoint source reduction grants over five years.
PREVIOUS ACTIONS: The first round of grants was approved by the Council in September
t 1994.
DISCUSSION: The project review team consisting of Council staff, the Minnesota Pollution
' Control Agency, the Board of Water and Soil Resources, Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources, and Department of Agriculture, reviewed the 39 applications against the criteria the
Council established to rank the projects.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Metropolitan Council:
1. Approve the eleven top ranked technical projects and the five top ranked educational projects
' at a cost not to exceed $1,188,472;
2. Inform the City of Chanhassen that its grant request is awarded subject to the approval of the
RIley/PurgatoryBluff Creek Watershed plan by BWSR; and,
3. Approve a "special project" to be awarded to BWSR at a cost not to exceed $100,000.
1
1995 TWIN CITIES WATER QUALITY INITIATIVE GRANT FUNDING
RECOMMENDATIONS - SECOND ROUND, COMMITTEE #95 -028 -E
BACKGROUND
In November 1993, the Council approved a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) among the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), Council and the former Metropolitan Waste
Control Commission (MWCC). This MoU was drawn up to resolve the level of phosphorus
removal at the Metro Plant over the five -year duration of the MPCA's NPDES permit. Terms of
the MoU required the former MWCC to make available about $10 million over five years to fund
a grant program for nonpoint source management projects within the metropolitan area.
In December 1993, the Council adopted a work program, eligibility criteria and administrative
process to carry out that grant program. The eligibility criteria and administrative process was
revised by the Council in January 1995 for this second year of grants.
During 1994, the first year of the grant program, the Council awarded slightly over $1 million for
both technical and educational projects. Seven educational, five technical and three special
projects received grants. The grant to the University of Minnesota for a paired watershed study
was a multi -year project. While no guarantees were made that subsequent years would be funded,
the Council indicated that an additional $100,000 would be provided in 1995 if money was
available and the project was progressing in accordance with the approved work plan. Hence, the
University was not. required to submit a request for funding this year.
DISCUSSION
This year, the Council received 39 grant applications, of those received, twenty -nine were for
technical projects and ten were for educational projects. While no specific dollar amount was
established for the second year of funding, staff anticipated that approximately $2 million could be
made available if enough good projects were proposed. How the grant money would be divided
between technical and educational projects was also not predetermined. Requests for funding for
the 1995 round of grants totalled $2.7 million.
Even though the grant procedures were revised this past year to streamline the process and target
pollution problems, there is still a need to relook at the grant procedures for 1996 to again try to
focus the grants on priority areas. Before the next round of grants, staff intends to recommend
more revisions to both eligibility and ranking criteria as well as the application package to further
streamline the entire process and focus grant funding in areas that will have the most benefit.
In accordance with the Council's approved administrative process, a technical review committee
made up of agency personnel from Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Department of Natural
Resources, Department of Agriculture, Board of Soil and Water Resources, Metropolitan Council
Wastewater Services and the Council rated each project according to the established criteria.
The review committee members scored each project in accordance with the criteria approved by the
Council. Scores ranged from 95 to 198 for technical projects, and from 61 to 124 for educational
projects. Even though each agency had its own perspectives and familiarity with the grantees, based on
the ranking criteria, reviewers reached an overall consensus on which projects should be ranked highest.
In retrospect, this review process was a very good methodology in selecting potential grantees because it
included a much wider range of perspectives and familiarities than any single agency could bring to its
decision making process.
e
i
Table 1
1995 TCQI GRANT APPLICANTS
F-1
TECHNICAL PROJECTS
EDUCATIONAL PROJECTS
1
City of Lakeville
City of Dellwood
2
Carver County HRA
Carver SWCD
3
Scott SWCD
Friends of the Minnesota Valley
4
Scott SWCD
Board of Water and Soil Resources
5
Scott SWCD
City of Roseville
6
Scott SWCD
Friends of the Mississippi River
7
City of Chaska
St. Paul Neighborhood Energy Cons.
8
Scott County
Minn. Community Education Assoc.
9
U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Dakota County
10
University of Minnesota
City of St. Paul
11
University of Minnesota
12
None Mile Creek WD
13
City of Minneapolis
14
Dept. of Int. - NPS
15
City of Waconia
16
Carver SWCD
17
City of Chanhassen
18
Carver County
19
Hennepin Conservation District
20
Elm Creek WMO
21
Pioneer -Sarah Creek WMO
22
Carver Creek WMO
23
Crow River WMO
24
Bevens Creek WMO
25
City of Dayton
26
Six Cities WMO
27
City of Burnsville
28
Dakota County
29
Carver SWCD
2
Results of the ranking process are presented for technical applicants in Table 2 and educational
applicants for Table 3. The heavy solid line in each table is the recommended cut -off point for
1995 funding. The total recommended grants for technical and educational projects are $976,000
and $212,000, respectively, for a combined total grant amount is $1,188,000.
Special projects
The Board of Soil and Water Resources (BWSR) submitted a proposal to prepare a model
second generation watershed plan and model ordinances on wetlands, erosion control and best
management practices, and to assist watershed management organizations in implementing the
model plan and ordinances.
The technical review committee thought that the BWSR project should be classified as a "special
project ". The Council defined "special projects" as:
...those projects which have an overall significance to Metropolitan area water quality and
specifically nonpoint source control.
While BWSR applied for a grant under the educational guidelines and the project was reviewed
using these guidelines, it also fits the "special project" using the Council's criteria. It is therefore
suggested that this project be funded under "special projects" and the Council staff negotiate a
final grant amount with BWSR that does not exceed $100,000. There are parts of the grant
request that we may not fund and need further clarification from BWSR.
As indicated above, there is a likelihood of funding an additional $100,000 for the University of
Minnesota "paired watershed" study. The first phase of this project is proceeding very well, and
the University anticipates it will request that an additional year of funding be granted.
Funding level for 1995
While the amount of recommended funding is below what staff anticipated, the review team did
not believe the other grants should be funded this year. They recommend the criteria be revised
to better reflect the type of projects or targeted areas funding should be directed to in the next
three years of grant funding. Staff will also work with potential grantees over the remainder of
1995 to better focus grant applications on types of projects that we feel should be funded with
these grants.
Eligibility for funding issue
As part of the application each grantee was to certify, along with other items, that
the project is consistent with an approved watershed management plan prepared under
Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 103B
In the case of Chanhassen, the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District plan has not yet
been formally approved by BWSR. The Council's legal counsel indicated this certification could
be interpreted to mean that before a grant was awarded, the watershed plan needs to be
approved.
Table 2
TFC14NICAL GRANTEES
29 City of Minneapolis -- Illicit dischargers 95 1 98,207
il
Grantee & Brief Description
Total Score mount ($)
Rank
U.S. Fish and Wildlife -- Wetland restoration
198
73,000
1
2
Scott SWCD -- Land Mgmt Practices
192
100,000
3
Scott SWCD -- Floodplain and Riparian Rest.
190
100,000
3
City of Chaska -- East Chaska Cr Ponding
190
90,700
5
Scott SWCD -- Filter Strip Program
181
100,000
6
Scott SWCD -- Animal Conf. Poll. Abate.
176
100,000
7
Carver Co -- Feedlot Imp Proj
172
100,000
8
City of Chanhassen -- Blurr Creek Project
170
89,146
8
U of M -- InSLream Nutrient Removal Demo
167
23,340
10
City of Burnsville -- Stormwater Qual. Imp.
156
100,000
11
Carver SWCD -- Surface Tile Inlet Study
152
100,000
12
Carver SWCD -- RIM Supplement
148
90,000
13
Carver Cr WMO -- Watershed Planning
147
100,000
14
Bevens Creek WMO -- Watershed Planning
146
100,000
15
Carver Co HRA -- Septic Tank Revolving Loan
145
100,000
16
Scott Co -- Water Quality Staffing
141
100,000
17
Elm Creek WMo -- Watershed Planning
137
41,021
18
City of Lakeville -- ISTS evaluation
137
4372
19
Pioneer /Sarah WMO -- Watershed Planning
136
41,021
20
Hennepin Cons Dist -- Windshield Sury BMP's
131
15,821
21
Crow River WMO -- Watershed Planning
131
100,000
22
Nine Mile Creek WD -- Diagnostic Study
123
50,914
23
Dakota Co -- WQ Inititive for Miss. River
111
92,500
24
U of M -- WQ of Sludge Amended Watershed
110
60,235
25
Dept of Int, NPS -- Human Impacts L. St. Croix
110
15,360
26
City of Dayton -- Historic Village ISTS survey
108
40,245
27 -
Six Cities WMO -- Springbrook Mon & Ed Proj
108
80,360
City of Waconia -- Old Town NPS Reduction
101
30,082
28
29 City of Minneapolis -- Illicit dischargers 95 1 98,207
il
Table 3
EDUCATIONAL GRANTEES
Rank
Grantee and Brief Description
Total
Score
Amount (S)
1
Friends of the MN Valley -- Heritage Registry
124
72,198
2
Minn Comm Ed Assoc -- Minnehaha School Youths
124
49,814
3
Neigh Energy Cons -- Urban Neighborhood
Program
123
62,974
4
City of Roseville -- Catch Basin Filter Bag Demo
112
7,300
5
Dakota Co -- Miss River Educational Initiative
108
20,000
6
BWSR - Model Watershed Plan
103
100,000
7
City of St Paul -- Highwood ISTS Proj
96
74,031
8
Friends of the Miss -- TC Model Lawn Program
94
54,000
9
Carver SWCD -- Consery Farm Planning
75
100,000
10
City of Dellwood -- ISTS Insp Program
61
20,000
BWSR staff did, however, indicate the Watershed District is currently responding to their
comments and those of other review agencies. The Council must determine if the spirit of the
certification is met and allow funding of their technical grant request, or if the Council takes a
more literal interpretation and disallows this project. Since the Chanhassen grant request was
found by the technical committee to be of very high quality, staff recommends that the Council
look upon the spirit of the requirement for an approved watershed plan and award the grant to
Chaska after the watershed plan has been approved by BWSR later this year.
CONCLUSIONS
1. The Council has solicited applications for its second Twin Cities Water Quality.
2. Thirty nine applications for both technical and educational grants were received.
3. Grant requests totaling approximately $3 million were received.
4. During the second year of this grant program approximately $2 million was available for
grants.
5. Eleven technical and five educational grants are recommended for approval.
6. The grant request from BWSR should be acted on as a "special project ".
7. The City of Chanhassen has met the spirit of the grant condition to have an approved
watershed plan.
5
I RCCOMMCNDATIONS
That the Metropolitan Council:
' 1. Approve the eleven top ranked technical projects and the five top ranked educational projects
at a cost not to exceed $1,188,472;
' 2. Inform the City of Chanhassen that its grant request is awarded subject to the approval of the
RIley/Purgatory/Bluff Crcck Watershcd plan by BWSR; and,
3. Approve a "special project" to be awarded to BWSR at a cost not to exceed $100,000.
i
fi* 4 F i
B AA T O N- A S C H M A N A PARSONS TRANSPORTATION GROUP COMPANY
Barton- Aschman Associates, Inc.
111 Third Avenue South, Suite.350 • Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 USA • (612) 332 -0421 • Fax: (612) 332 -6180
May 26, 1995
Mr. Marty Timmons
Project Manager
S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc.
P.O. Box 69
Jordan, MN 55352
Re: Chanhassen Project 93 -26A Traffic Control
Dear Mr. Timmons:
Chanhassen City Engineer Charles Folch has requested that the detour route for Galpin Boulevard be
relocated from Audubon Road to Powers Boulevard (CSAH 17).
When the project 93 -26A traffic control plan was developed, reconstruction of Powers Boulevard was
anticipated at the same time Galpin Boulevard would be closed. However, it is now unlikely that
Powers Boulevard will be reconstructed in 1995. Relocating the detour route from Audubon Road to
Powers Boulevard has the following benefits:
Safety - The TH 5/Powers Boulevard intersection is signalized with two through lanes and
turn lanes in all directions of approach. The TH 5 /Audubon Road intersection is unsignalized
with only one through lane in each direction on TH 5 and a bypass lane for westbound TH 5.
Unacceptable queue lengths for left- turning vehicles at Audubon Road from westbound TH 5
have been observed since closure of Galpin Boulevard.
Pavement Structure - Powers Boulevard was originally designed to accommodate a heavier
vehicular loading than Audubon Road.
Enclosed, please find a revised Traffic Control Plan. Implementation of the revised plan is requested
as soon as is reasonably possible. An additional sign has also been placed at the Lyman Boulevard/
Galpin Boulevard intersection. The additional sign is shown on the revised Traffic Control Plan.
The cost of relocating the detour and placing the additional sign will be paid for on a force account
basis in accordance with Mn/DOT Section 1904.
Sincerely,
1. G�
awe=In P.E.
Senior Associate
JHU:kro
1212sj
Enclosure
cc: Charles Folch, Chanhassen (including plan)
Bill Weckman, Carver County (including plan)
Greg Coughlin, Mn/DOT (including plan)
Phil Gravel, Bonestroo (including plan)
John Gockel, John R. Gockel and Associates
PARSONS
CITY
oil
of
fr!
AY " ,'1 i09
'
A N
F 1 EPa
An Equal Opportunity Emoioye!
m
X 5
� m
� o
m
0
o
N A
m2
O
Dpp Nm
� U C
Z N m
0 q i
U �
O
I
A 2 R
u ..
0
V y }�
Ot
v gp m
�n
A
; , 11 0
o. m
oax Dxo Wo 0
-n
m�a} O =
o w Im
wa ni s
m
W2
mic
�b
¢�>
0 10 t m� Lm R m bQ N rc`.
i i-, 8 ~' c � y> cv> z
g $n g 0 80 g
g b ? q m �° u
O
3M OOOMU3BWLL f0
HLn05 = 31 I
atl3N
D3soio
O Dro
�
e❑
0
O
DRUMS
O
o
0
N
O
O
W
o
O
+Gri
fn
o $
lap
Fm
�m
8,
m
8
o � Y
O O W
W
o°
Zo
" Ni .
O N
=8
I �'�o
I
l
Fm
�m
8,
m
8
o � Y
O O W
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
MEMORANDUM
TO: Scott Harr, Public Safety Director
FROM: Todd Hoffman, Park & Recreation Director 7e ,5��
DATE: May 31, 1995
SUBJ: Miscellaneous Enforcement Issues
The summer park season has begun and reports of inappropriate activities are pouring in.
Seasonal staff members in the Park & Recreation Department are trained to intervene in a
variety of situations. However, many situations are best left to the professional staff of the
Public Safety Department.
Here are the types of complaints /observances being reported. The majority of the reports
focus on Lake Ann and Lake Susan Community Parks; however, all city park sites are
susceptible to the same incidents.
- Under age drinking and use of tobacco products.
- Glass containers.
- Parking in non - designated areas, including on the grass.
- Harassment/vandalism at the Lake Ann concessions stand.
Dogs xn the park.
Please assist us in curbing these activities in any way you can.
c: Mayor and City Council
Public Safety Commission
Park & Recreation Commission
Don Ashworth, City Manager
�� L rtGX rVl-t rL ,
J
' 'n95
' May 23, 1995
' City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Dear Bob Generous:
I have attended the Recycling Committee meeting the past few years as a County Employee.
However, since I now reside in Chanhassen, I have become involved on a more personal level. The
recycling committee has been focused on organized collection during its most recent meetings.
I have supported the concept of organized collection since I first began working in the solid waste
industry for Gallagher's Service a Twin Cities Metro area hauler. From a hauler's perspective I
1 realized that organized collection drastically increase collection efficiencies by reducing amount of
miles a truck travels, resulting in reductions in fuel cost, vehicle repairs and employee wages. It is
still my belief that organized collection is the most efficient way to collect garbage.
Many of my neighbors in the Triple Crown Estates subdivision have followed the organized
collection debate since 1993, when it was first discussed by the City Council. It appears to us that
' the recommendation, to organize garbage collection in Chanhassen, made by Recycling
Committees, Resources Strategies and City Staff should be followed.
' Having a limited amount of time, I circulated the enclosed petition favoring organized collection to
as many neighbors and other residents as possible. I have collected 29 signatures.
While outlining the pro's and con's of organized collection, I mentioned the following points.
1) Each neighborhood would have a single hauler.
2) The collection day would be chosen for them.
3) There would not be an increase in cost.
4) The hauler would be chosen for them.
5) Garbage truck traffic would be cut drastically
6) Aesthetics would improve with trash containers on the street only one day per week.
7) There should be a decrease potential of litter from blown over trash receptacles and
careless garbage haulers.
' 8) There would be less wear and tear on the streets.
9) Fewer trucks would increase the safety for children playing in the neighborhood.
Our neighborhood has many small children and as a result safety is a major concern. The City of
Chanhassen has an opportunity to reduce the risk of children becoming injured from garbage
trucks. It is our hope that the Chanhassen Villager does not have a similar headline as the enclosed
' Star Tribune article dated May 13, 1995.
Only two of the 30 residents I spoke to chose not to sign the petition. These results indicate a
strong support for the concept of organized collection. I believe this would be consistent with
other subdivisions in Chanhassen.
In addition, I have recently spoke to my hauler Gary Lano of, Chaska Sanitation, about organized
collection in Chanhassen. He stated his support for the concept and signed the petition. He is
however, frustrated with the length of time it has taken for the City to reach a decision and hopes
it will be soon resolved. This is a sediment shared by other haulers.
It is the hope of those that signed this petition that the City Council follow the recommendations
made by the Recycling Committee, Resource Strategies and City staff to proceed with organizing
garbage collection in Chanhassen.
Sincerely,
Marcus Zbinden
740 Canterbury Circle
Chanhassen
Tel: 975 -0858
Enclosure
cc: City Council
Mayor
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 ware and tear and diminished environmental impacts far out wiegh our
consern over our choice of hauler or service day.
-ff a + 1, 6-
7. s. Jb
11 .
9.
10
12. (� 11V ' I ,
ADDRESS
74C e n �(fC- t"X-1
C kC,n hG5Sz , -\
�"1 V �C= i,VI..����C1 l �� C 1 ✓� �� , � G� C� V� � Gi i5 �'(iJ
1_
�a , AT Jam- �j �� N
40 , 41 ,
Z3 C (r✓��eA" r r-. �
- ))a \ CGe, . IyAti
733 C� f b k �.-,� c L.
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 oreanized 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.
1.a�1E
2.
5 L MA 01.
8.
9.
10
11.
1?.
:ADDRESS
714,1 .441 14 k fl,
�j �j �J J
/ l / !
733 dl Cl
.50-3 Au.z2
-- f D-
7S3 Cfi��ER QvcY Gl,c «C �C�r
131 � � +�. �,� n z CAN -+ 5 le- p
PETITION SUPPORTING
ORGANIZED COLLECTION IN
THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN
\N 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.
N� 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.
NAME
3.
J.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
ADDRESS
�7D� ( 'D
_ 1
1?.
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 ware and tear and diminished environmental impacts far out wiegh our
consern over our choic of hauler or service day.
NAME
1. L�?/L QiQ/tQ> �y7�.CL QCl/kJ
2.
I
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
il.
1?.
.ADDRESS
Y
rl
I
ocI E ° ^•oZ "�wa� spy
�0
M
_
z
3
7 a �_
O- O x
�o �. .
o•w �.
o ao ° ° H
oo� a� �
3 (D
0
CL
c
° S
Pt
3 S'�<
f °. ii G d d
CD
---
`
—k
w
_ N
m
a�D
''
o
o
9
9
�
CD
0
O y w
" I ' E; a
Y £
3 < C
0��
ry
o wo
3.=
f
E 0
fo E �.a
aw SS <
ocI E ° ^•oZ "�wa� spy
�0
_
z
3
7 a �_
O- O x
�o �. .
o•w �.
o ao ° ° H
oo� a� �
3 (D
0
CL
c
° S
Pt
3 S'�<
f °. ii G d d
o
---
�0•a� 'os�
—k
C/)
a�D
''
CD
0
�.� E
N O
o wo
3.=
w N w w �•p ° X
ocI E ° ^•oZ "�wa� spy
m H
� O-N S C w p ... �....
7 �
rt w -• Y
^ O w ry w
' 3
O- O x
�o �. .
o•w �.
o ao ° ° H
oo� a� �
�� p �e io O O•
CL_
N
°
c
° S
p
3 S'�<
f °. ii G d d
E "R
�0•a� 'os�
.o •wia pa�� E w�
a�D
''
- O y
0 �
�.� E
N O
o wo
3.=
w N w w �•p ° X
fo E �.a
aw SS <
CD
ooaH s ° 3x -1 ^ �
°
aF o �• -ow o
w 0.w o g. 3 o d n <
s
?ooO W p �
w o'o o. w �T� w
o•�
w �•, : w E S w .� E �.iy � w
poo... 91on�0' o O C .. o
°.:3 c �� ^_tea o•�
.� O
2<
; '0
p, s n � ,< ao .�D, w �
N
w
wy w wo od °
w o
030
0.1 cl
o g o- E
... Oa S � tP `p � �
.
C w v
3 � °os NSaoE fDCC° �
s a 7 o J
w m a
d w E N w
w
S
a p ° o T� p
ww� 5 w. ° :
0w E
0
o
n w �
Nwo. os�
N
s
W
c
a
m
0
0
0
3
o � w
� m
aN'S�
N w CD
� w c
S m a
o ° °
aS° o
w �
Soo
116
ao ` ■
a=3 o
NNW
•
w m
N
m
n C.C)
w �
a
CD
n
CD
Cl
W
Cr
C
m
o•w �.
=,w
oo� a� �
c
° S
0
� °•
3 S'�<
f °. ii G d d
�'
� r, :o
a�D
o`er• �i
o• o w
ow
0
N
s
W
c
a
m
0
0
0
3
o � w
� m
aN'S�
N w CD
� w c
S m a
o ° °
aS° o
w �
Soo
116
ao ` ■
a=3 o
NNW
•
w m
N
m
n C.C)
w �
a
CD
n
CD
Cl
W
Cr
C
m
� Pld Z30 �Q�
� C ads
June 2, 1995
CITY � OF r CHANHASSEN
ltt]�U� �0!1 �'�J
1
Mr. Don Chmiel Mayor
City of Chanhassen
Chanhassen, MN. 55317
Dear Mr. Mayor,
JUN 0 6 1995
ENGINEERIN DEPT.
Once again I write on behalf of the vast majority of families in the Chanhassen Estates - Second
Edition. Once again the issue is how the City is handling our street situation. Once again the city
has made us feel that government for the peple and by the people does not exist in Chanhassen.
Once again I thought you should be aware of the situation as you may wish to rectify this
problem.
It has been several years since our streets have been patched as the city engineers have been trying
to force new streets, new curbing and new waterlines on us. Our curbing is very acceptable to us
and our water mains have no where near the incidence of failure that the city engineers are
claiming.
This spring we were unable to get our street swept because they claimed our street was not strong
enough to support the 20,000 pound sweeper. Yet last summer they were strong enough to
support approximately 100 trucks a day that weighed approximately 50,000 lbs. each. It took
several phone calls with the threat of liability to finally get our streets swept.
It was also quite apparent that there was absolutely no effort made to steer these huge truckloads
directly to highway #5 rather than through the entire neighborhood.
Mike Wegler does not return phone calls to residents from ounneighborhood. When we speak to
him or his department we get the distinct feeling they are trying to teach us a lesson for resisting
the new roads last year. I am not creating this situation - these attitudes are as real as they are
unprofessional.
At the very least we would like our streets patched - PROPERLY. Our preference is to have the
streets in the second edition resurfaced for now with the intent of replacing curbs and water mains
in 10 years.
Please understand that we believe our extreme high rate of taxes (4th highest in the entire State)
covers road improvements such as potholes and would prefer to not hire our own contractor and
deduct from our property taxes as this will create a very negative situation.
Once again, we don't understand why the city engineers seem to have their very own agenda and
are ignoring our feelings on OUR streets. It is our money, we drive on them, our kids play on
them, and we live with them - not Mike Wegler. What happened to government for the people?
They tell us that the streets were not installed properly initially. Yet we were told back then that
' they were in fact installed properly as a justification to the high price tag. We don't want to hear
this now and we don't believe it as the indulations on our street and curbing is very minimal and
livable to us for another 10 years.
Why are they so determined to spend our money? There must be some alterior motive that we
' are not aware of because on the surface, this does not make sense to us.
We are left with the feeling that they will do whatever possible (including poor maintenance) to
' try to prove us wrong and protect their jobs, ego, or whatever.
' As a local business owner I can't imagine running any business this way - even if it is essentially a
monopoly.
' If I can shed any further light on this for you please call me at 937 -8192 days.
' Sincerely yours,
' Bi Janohosky
rte--
-
P �
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
June 7, 1995
Mr. Bill Janohosky
8105 Dakota Lane
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Re: Letter of Response - File No. PW -230A
Dear Mr. Janohosky:
CERTIFIED MAIL
I have received a copy of your certified letter datedJune 2, 1995 to Mayor Don Chmiel regarding
the condition of the streets in the Chanhassen Estates 2nd Addition. I must say that it has been
a long time since I have received a letter which contained such a one -sided and uninformed
opinion. However, after reviewing the project:: file and finding that you did not attend either of
the two neighborhood informational meetings or the feasibility study public hearing on the
Chanhassen Estates street situation, I can only conclude that you did not attempt to become part
of the process or acquire all of the information which was being offered to your neighborhood.
I do have records indicating that you did speak to the City Council on the night that the plans
were scheduled for approval (which was not an official public hearing) with the opinion that the
streets did not need reconstruction but simply an overlay. For whatever it is worth I will
summarize the recent history of this issue and information you missed from the neighborhood
meetings and respond to the contention in your letter.
Approximately four years ago, in an effort to improve the maintenance and serviceability of local
streets and assist in programming, future funding: for capital improvement programs, the City of
Chanhassen proactively initiated a city -.wide pavement management study. This study was
conducted by an outside consulting engineering firm highly regarded in this field. This study
implemented the latest tools and technologies used to evaluate the condition- of road pavement.
Every City street was inspected. All-of the information acquired, then analyzed using the
CalTrans Pavement Management software program. The most efficient and cost - effective repair
strategies were assigned to each street segment.. The repair strategies ranged from no immediate
repair necessary to maintenance repair such as crack filling, patching and sealcoating to structural
overlays to total reconstruction. Finally, each of the streets within the City were prioritized
according to their condition and repair needs and a five -year capital improvement program was
developed and approved by the City Council.
The results of the pavement management study unanimously indicated that the streets in the
Chanhassen Estates subdivision, as a group, rated the highest in need of reconstructive repair
C
LJ
F,
Mr. Bill Janohosky
June 7, 1995
Page 2
Based on the age and condition of these streets, maintenance repair strategies or structural
overlaying were not viable solutions to the problem.
In 1993 an informational letter was sent to each resident of the Chanhassen Estates 1st, 2nd and
3rd Additions which briefly explained the findings of the pavement management study and
solicited input from residents as to what direction or action they believed the City should take.
The choices included the following:
Having the City conduct a feasibility study to evaluate, in more detail, the specific
elements of a reconstruction project, associated costs and potential assessments to property
owners.
2. Request that the City hold an informational neighborhood meeting to discuss the results
of the pavement management study in more detail regarding the streets in the Chanhassen
Estates subdivision.
3. Do not do a reconstruction project - City should just continue patching holes as needed.
4. Other ideas...
The overwhelming majority of responses received indicated a preference to have the City conduct
a detailed feasibility study regarding a reconstruction project for Chanhassen Estates. I also
found it interesting that many residents wrote in their response "Do not spend any more money
on studies. Just reconstruct the streets ".
As a result of this survey a feasibility study was then prepared. The results of the feasibility
study were presented at an informational neighborhood meeting held with all of the residents of
Chanhassen Estates and, at a public hearing held at a City Council meeting. Based on the
information contained in the feasibility study and resident'input received at the public hearing,
the City Council approved the feasibility study and authorized the City's project consultant
engineer to prepare the project plans and specifications for reconstructing the streets within
Chanhassen Estates 1st, 2nd and 3rd Additions. Once the preliminary plans were prepared,
including pavement and soil boring analysis, another informational neighborhood meeting was
held with the residents. The soil borings confirmed the poor condition of the existing road and
was valuable information needed to determine the design road section necessary for the
improvement project.
The plans were then presented to the City Council for approval. At that City Council meeting
you spoke as "representing" a number of property owners in the 2nd Addition who were in favor
of an overlay rather than a reconstruction project, despite the findings of the Pavement
Management Study and the fact that two (2) previous City Engineers and two (2) other consulting
engineers have studied the Chanhassen Estates street issue during the 1980's and all of these
professionals have concluded that an "overlay" was not a viable solution nor a wise use of road
funds. In any case, the City Council elected to reconstruct only the streets in the Chanhassen
Mr. Bill Janohosky
June 7, 1995
Page 3
Estates 1st Addition. The streets in the 2nd Addition were basically dropped from the project
at the "11th hour ". It is interesting to note that I received more than a dozen phone calls from
residents in the 2nd Addition following that Council meeting wondering why and upset with the
fact that their streets were not being reconstructed.
Now here I am today reading your letter on how the City is handling your street situation
indicating that the City is once again making you feel that "government for the people and by
the people does not exist in Chanhassen ". I find that very ironic considering the amount of
money and time spent studying this issue and recently the number of informational letters,
informational neighborhood meetings and public hearings we have had with the residents of
Chanhassen Estates regarding this issues. Your letter goes on to contend that "it has been several
years since our streets have been patched as the City Engineers have been trying to force new
streets, new curbing, new water lines on us ". I also find this ironic since a number of times each
spring and summer City maintenance crews are out filling potholes and patching problem areas
on streets throughout the City including Chanhassen Estates 2nd Addition. In fact, the crew was
in your neighborhood filling potholes just last week. I can only assume that since your streets
are not being overlaid, as you had previously requested, that in your opinion the City
maintenance crews are basically doing nothing in your neighborhood.
The next point of your letter states that this spring City maintenance crews were unable to sweep
the streets in your neighborhood because the street was not strong enough to support the sweeper.
This is in fact true; however, there are a number of older and poor condition streets such as in
the Chanhassen Estates 2nd Addition that are not swept until the spring thaw has occurred and
road weight restrictions are lifted in an effort to avoid further damage to the street. In my
opinion, this is surely a sign of good faith on the part of the City maintenance department to
minimize further deterioration of the streets. Your streets were swept in May when road
restrictions were lifted.
Your letter then goes on to contend that when you contaci the Street Maintenance Department
you get the distinct feeling that they are trying to "teach you a lesson" for resisting the new roads
last year. This could not be further from the truth. You further state that you would like your
streets "patched properly" and that your "...preference is to have your streets in the 2nd Addition
resurfaced now with the intent of replacing curbs and watermain in 10 years ". A complete
bituminous overlay of the streets in the 2nd Addition will not last 10 years; it will not last 5
years. The fact of the matter is that maintenance operations cannot fix the severe deterioration
or drainage problems of the streets in Chanhassen Estates 2nd Addition. Your streets have lived
their useful design life of 20 years. The pavement has literally dried out and is brittle. In many
places the road pavement consists of patch on top of patch placed over the years. An overlay
will not bridge underlying pavement in this condition. Therefore, the City will continue to patch
potholes to maintain safety but an overlay is not a viable option. There is no animosity, there
is no trying to teach anyone a lesson. This is the reality of the matter. Overlaying your streets
is analogous to contracting someone to painting a house when the wood siding is old and rotted.
' Mr. Bill Janohosky
June 7, 1995
Page 4
' You then go on to state that you believe the extreme high rate of taxes in the City should cover
road improvements. The fact is that your tax dollars which fund the street department are used
to maintain streets within this City, not to rebuild them or build new ones. This is common to
' all communities in the metro area and probably state -wide. Your development is not unlike other
developments within the City with regard to the fact that when residential streets are originally
built the property owners pay for the construction cost of these streets and other public
' improvements through the purchase of their lot and/or construction of their home. From that
point on, tax dollars cover maintenance operations of the local streets. Tax dollars do not fund
major overlays or total street reconstruction projects.
' Let me say, in short, that there are no "hidden agendas" as you are contending. The City has
spent significant dollars to implement high -tech and professional strategies on the maintenance,
' repair and reconstruction of all streets within the City. These strategies must be maintained
consistent with regard to all of the 104 miles of local streets within the City. The reality of the
matter is that the City cannot afford to unwisely expend significant dollars on streets which are
beyond maintenance repair. The cost needed to properly fix your streets is 2 to 3 times the
annual street maintenance repair budget. Therefore, the City will continue to maintain safety and
the level of service of the streets in the 2nd Addition by filling potholes and skin patching
severely "alligatored" areas.
In conclusion, I find your letter very disturbing, considering all the time, money and effort spent
' by the City to professionally analyze the situation and conduct a number of open neighborhood
meetings and public hearings to disseminate information to residents on appropriate options to
address the situation. The City's street maintenance crew consists of a small but highly
productive and dedicated group of employees and I take offense to any personal attacks or
suggestions to the contrary.
' Sincerely,
' CITY OF CHANHASSEN
' Charles D. Folch, P.E.
Director of Public Works /City Engineer
' CDF:ktm
' c: Don Ashworth, City Manager
Mike Wegler, Street Superintendent
Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer
' Mayor Don Chmiel
6/12/95 City Council Administrative Packet
g :\eng\charle,11e tten, anohosk
CITY OF
1
CHANHASSEN
F,
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
MEMORANDUM
TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager
FROM: Sharmin Al -Jaff, Planner II
DATE: June 7, 1995
SUBJ: Pointe Lake Lucy Subdivision, Robert Mason Homes
This is an informational memo to make the City Council aware of a situation that recently
took place, and the position of the city in regards to this matter.
At the March 13, 1995 meeting, the City Council approved rezoning of 18.15 acres of
property zoned RR, Rural Residential to RSF, Residential Single Family (94 -6 REZ),
preliminary plat to subdivide 18.15 Acres into 20 single family lots and one outlot with a
variance to allow a 20 foot front yard setback and a 50 foot wide right -of -way (94 -13 SUB),
and a wetland alteration permit to fill and mitigate an Ag/Urban Wetland (95 -1 WET). Some
neighbors from the Willowridge development requested some trees be planted to provide
screening for their homes. The City Council recommended the screening be coordinated with
the affected residents of the Willowridge subdivision. This was handled in a private matter
and the city never took part in those negotiations. On June 6, 1995, a resident from the
Willowridge development contacted staff and informed us that the developer will only plant 9
trees and that he originally promised a larger number of trees. Staff explained that this is a
private matter and ,that we will not interfere. Furthermore, there is a preservation area
approximately 25 foot wide over trees located between those homes and the southeast corner
of the property. ' Staff believes this buffer is sufficient.
Another complaint was received on May 24, 1995, from the property owners north of this
subdivision and north of Lake Lucy Road (6600 Charing Bend). The owners believe that
traffic exiting the subdivision will impact their home and devalue their property.
Consequently, they wanted the applicant to place trees along their house to screen it. Staff
informed them that this is a private matter, the - plat has been approved, and staff cannot
require the applicant to screen their home. However, we advised them to contact the
developer and request that they screen their home. The developer planted the trees for them.
The residents are dissatisfied with the quality of the trees and have been complaining to staff.
Staff visited the site and saw nothing wrong with the trees. At the new intersection of Lake
Lucy Road and the proposed street, the grade actually points down to Lake Lucy Road and
not up into the homes along Lake Lucy Road. Also, the house sits at a much higher
elevation than the road and we do not believe any car headlights will shine into their home.
J
d
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
I TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager
1
1
FROM: John Rask, Planner:
DATE: June 7, 1995
SUBJ: Neighbor Complaints on Great Plains Blvd.
This memo is to inform you of the internal policy staff is taking regarding an ongoing
neighborhood dispute. This issue is taking an inordinate amount of numerous department
staff time.
The purpose of this policy is to eliminate duplication within departments.
CITY OF
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
MEMORANDUM
TO: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director
Scott Harr, Public Safety Director
Bob Zydowsky, Public Safety Officer
FROM: John Rask, Planner I
DATE: June 1, 1995
SUBJ: Neighbor Complaints on Great Plains Blvd.
This memorandum is in follow up to our staff meeting on May 30, 1995 regarding the
ongoing conflict between neighbors at 8504, 8506, and 8508 Great Plains Blvd. A total of 38
complaints have been received by Carver County Sheriffs Department from 8506 Great Plains
Boulevard. The residents of 8504 and 8508 have filed numerous verbal complaints with the
city against 8506 over the last several years. The Planning Department has received over 20
phone calls /complaints concerning alleged zoning violations and enforcement actions at the
above addresses during the past couple of weeks. As of today, all properties appear to be in
compliance with applicable city ordinances.
The complaints have involved the following: outdoor storage, parking of commercial vehicles
and trailers, illegal, fences, property line disputes, noise, trespassing, animal complaints,
obnoxious odors, garbage; building code violations, junk materials, and other misc. issues.
Whereas, some of, the se complaints'' are clear code violations, a large number of these
complaints are either `not violations, or are simply an attempt to aggravate their neighbor.
Staff has spent a significant amount of time in, trying to resolve these disputes. Staff is
proposing to handle this neighborhood conflict in the following manner: The Planning
Department will investigate and enforce all zoning violations. Public Safety and Carver
County Sheriffs Department will not follow up on any zoning violation which does not pose
an immediate threat to the public health or safety. The Planning Department will respond to
formal written complaints only, which will then be prioritized and dealt with as time permits.
Public Safety and the Sheriffs Department will investigate all other complaints which pose an
immediate threat to the public health or safety, or any other legitimate complaint. The Carver
June 1, 1995
Page 2
County Attorney is investigating this matter and will contact the complainants regarding the
filing of frivolous complaints.
Finally, one of the residents who has filed numerous complaints is perturbed with the manner
in which staff has addressed his complaints. This particular individual insists that the city
issue citations or proceed with a criminal complaint against his neighbor for continuing to
store a commercial trailer on his property. Over the past 18 months staff has issued this
person two notices concerning the trailer. The trailer recently reappeared during the last
week. This person believed he had the right to park his contractors trailer on his property
because he was using this equipment for home remodeling and the construction of a fence.
After discussing this issue with the staff, he agreed to remove the trailer by the end of the
day. It has been the past practice of staff to issue several warnings before taking formal
action to resolve this complaint. This person agreed to immediately correct the violation,
therefore, staff did not issue a citation or proceed with other formal action. It is staffs goal
to obtain compliance in these situations. If citations or criminal prosecution is necessary,
staff will take the appropriate steps to abate the violation.
ATTACHMENTS
1.
2.
u
LJ
Carver County Sheriffs Dept. Report dated June 4, 1995
Carver County Sheriffs Dept. Report dated May 26, 1995
` Offense /Incident Report
Carver County Sheriff's Dept.
Chaska, Minnesota
�z (
�o
O
Date Reported: I
Time:
Offense Address
F
F
Date Occurred: - d �
Time:
No:
`, `
St: /_� �GtTP
!iv
d Y / (�
E
Offense /Incident (as reported):
Apt: City: ST:
Zip:
;
�/�
'
.�
N
Phone: (H)
Phone: (
E
Grid: O2 � Beat: NWC:
Z� N o
Complainant's Name & Address
Sex
Race
DOB
Age
O
/
G� (Last) I A -G�� I ( �/�.C.�i e)
M/F
9 y 3
�q
P No:
t:
Hg�
Wgt
Hair
Eyes
,
A API:
A(14- City:
$T��
ZIP:
Victim: Y[N
O
'
Phone. (H)
Ufa- 9y 9- 9S
Phone: (g)
�.�/c.
T Comments:
GGd� .tl�
R
Reported By: (Last) JP (First) (Middle)
Reporte How:
E
P
O
No: St:
Bodily Injuri s: Y/N .1
T Transported
to:
E
D
Apt: City: ST: Zip:
Transported by:
B
Y
DOB Ph e: (H)• one: (B)
l7
Describe njures o� pn:
D ib I i/C
/gal.
V
E
Vehicle
/
H
Involved: Y/N Veh Yr, Make Model Style
0
Next of Kin Notified S,lame, Date, Time)
��
C Color
Lic St
Lic No.
Vin No
L
E
Veh. Disposition (Towed /left At Sce e)
Keys Disposition /
/�J
Record Codes:
P
S = Stolen R = Recovered L = Lost F = F and D = Damaged E = Evidence I = Impounded SK = Safekeeping T = Towed
R
It Record Brand, Make or Model Name Description
Number Code OLY• Property Ty Manufacturer and Number (Color, Size) Serial Number Value
P
E
R
T
Y
Property Disposition
Total Value
Suspect Na e: ( t) (Firs (M' le)
Sex a D0.0 Age Hgt Wgt Hair Eyes
S
_
V
Address St: s •
1S,7Gf�
swr:
GS
S
Apt., / City: ST• Zf P'
V'ictim's A C3 Stranger 0 ❑ spouse G O Girlfriend J eighbor
P
Phone:
one: 5- (H) Phone !i (B)
Relationship 8 ❑ Relative E ❑ X- Spouse H 13 Landlord K ❑ Employer
To Suspect
E
l /GC
C ❑Acquaintance F ❑ Boyfriend I ❑Tenant L ❑ ee Em Io
D Y
C Vehicle
Veh Yr Make
Model Style Color
Involved Y/1
❑ Add'I Suspect M ❑Customer t ❑Unknown
T
Lic St Lic
No.
Vin No.
❑ Add'I Witness N CJ Merchant 9 ❑ Other
O ❑ Officer
Comments:
W
Witness Name:
Witness Address
(Last) (First) (Middle)
(�
No: G � I St:
N
E
��
Apt:
City:
ST :�,
Zip: ��
S DOB
-
Phone: ( )
1�r1 -gY - Z Go
Phon . (B)
(alp S
Repo f' //
Divi '
Reviewing Supervisor
Rank Name /C • I D fyl
Rank Name I D
Assisting Officer
Rank Name
Division
Page 1 OF , Pages
I
on 06/04/95 at 1521 hours, I was dispatched to 8504
Greatplains Blvd within the City of Chanhassen, Mn for a
complaint of a trailer parked in this driveway. The
complaint was a Leslie Gilman who is the neighbor who
'
lives at 8506 Great Plains Blvd.
It should be noted at this point that there is an
'
ongoing neighbor dispute between Mrs Leslie Gilman and the
Renter named Mark Howell who resides next door. Gilman
had advised me on 06/03/95 (see ICR 95 -7986) which was
another neighbor dispute that she will call the Sheriff's
Department each day that Mr Howell has a trailer home from
his business. Apparently last year someone in the
neighborhood complained that the Gilman's were keeping a
trailer at there residence that was used for a business.
'
She then claims that the City of Chanhassen made them
remove this trailer because they couldn't conduct a
business from there own home. Mrs Gilman then learned
that her neighbor Mark Howell was bringing a trailer home
that he uses on his lawn service job. She therefore
believes that this is in violation because it's business
related equipment. It should be noted that while I had
responded to the complaint on 06/03/95, I learned from
Mark Howell that he works for a lawn service. He said that
he brings the trailer home with a couple lawn mowers on it
so he could mow his own yard with the equipment. He then
'
brings the trailer and such back to work on Monday
morning.
Now on todays date of 06/04/95, I along with Deputy
'
D. Schmidtke #848 arrived at 1618 hours for todays
complaint. We had parked in Mr Howell's driveway, but
walked over to the Gilman's at 8506 Great Plains Blvd. I
'
then asked her what the problem today was. She said "I
told you that I'm calling each day that they have that
trailer over in there driveway ". Gilman also advised me
that they were now in violation because they were hauling
docks from a business on the trailer which is like
conducting a business on the residential property. She
also said that she wanted me to know that Mr Howell and
his female friend Jenny along with other visitors were
leaving trash on her beech area. She said there was a bag
of misc trash, and a beer can. She also complained about
the noise they were creating while swimming in Lake Susan.
It should also be noted here that Mrs Gilman strongly
'
dislikes Ms Jenny Lathrop who visits Mr Howell. She feels
that Lathrop has no business being over at Howell's
residence all the time if she doesn't live there. She
also refers to her in profanity, and feels that she is
harassing her. At this point, I advised Mrs Gilman that
it really wasn't any of her concern who visit's with her
neighbor as they are his guests. At this time I advised
Mrs Gilman that I would go over and speak with Howell and
his guests. I also advised Gilman that if I get any
complaints of her having used profanity towards them on
todays date, I would possibly start issuing some
Disorderly conduct citations. She advised me that the
issue of profanity back and forth is a lie, and she
intends to sue them for harassment. I told Gilman that
I would be warning them as well to leave each other alone
if everyone can't get along with one another.
At this point, I along with Deputy Schmidtke then
walked over to Mr Howell's residence. I advised Howell
that we received a call from his neighbor in reference
to the trailer loaded with wood. He claimed that the wood
was old pieces of docks that he would be using for
recreational fires. I then asked him if anyone had thrown
any trash onto her beech area. He stated that he had no
knowledge of this. He believes that this is just some
more continued harassment by Mrs Gilman. At this point Ms
Lathrop stated that she along with other's were swimming
today in Lake Susan when they observed Mrs Gilman waiving
at-them from her deck. Lathrop said that she just waived
right back at her. Lathrop said she felt that Gilman was
just looking for something to complain about. Lathrop
also indicated that they intended to bring in a Twenty
foot R.V. to park on the driveway, so that the Gilman's
couldn't look over at them. Mr Howell then indicated that
he was going to try'n purchase the house he was renting as
he doesn't intend to give into harassment by the Gilman's.
He also said that he would like to bring a Bobcat home
so he could just run the thing til 9pm each night. I then
advised Mr Howell and Ms Lathrop that I would be resorting
to Disorderly Conduct citations when appropriate if this
ongoing arguing and profanity towards each other doesn't
come to an end. I concluded with Mr Howell by telling him
that I didn't at this point see a problem with him
bringing the trailer home to care for his lawn and haul
wood for personal use. I felt that he wasn't conducting a
business in any way from his home.
As we were leaving, we were flagged down by Mrs Gilman
who merely wanted to know what they had to say. I advised
her that once again they had a different version of what
was taking place. I told her that tempers are high at
this time, and that it was best to ignore one another. She
then wanted to know about the trailer, and I advised her
that I didn't see a problem with it there. She then made
some reference to calling Sheriff Al Wallin on Monday.
We then cleared the scene at 1642 hours.
Note; Deputy D. Schmidtke later left me a voice mail
message from his PM shift today, that someone from the
Howell residence had called our office after we left as
they felt that Mrs Gilman was still harassing them. This
time Gilman allegedly was video taping them for no reason
while they were swimming in Lake Susan.
Additional information for this report is that I had
responded to a neighbor dispute involving these same
parties on 05/21/95 for an alleged exposing incident which
I felt was unfounded. See ICR 95 -7290.
Deputy K. Walgrave #841
CARVER COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPT.
Office Informational Report
Date:
Officer:
5 -26 -95
Deputy D. W. Potts, 819
On the afternoon /evening, 5- 26 -95, Leslie Gilman of 8506 Great Plains
Blvd., Chanhassen,called our office four times in reference to ICR's
95 -7556, 95 -7560. The calls were complaints about her neighbors at
8504 Great Plains.
The first call was to complain about a commercial trailer that is
parked at that address on weekends. Her complaint was that it was
against city ordinance and her husbands commercial trailer had been
complained about. I drove by 8504 and saw a small trailer with no
load on it. Being familiar with Ms. Gilman's numerous complaints, I
cleared the call as unfounded.
Ms. Gilman called back and was apparently informed by dispatch of the
disposition. She was calling back to file another complaint about
debris on the property at 8504. She wanted an officer to respond.
I responded and met with Ms. Gilman. The trailer she had complained
about was not at 8504, but there were two small boat trailers. Ms.
Gilman asked me how many boat trailers were allowed at one home. I
told her I did not know of a limit. She told me there should be a
limit. She then took me to her back yard and pointed out a pile of
brush, 4 feet across X 1 foot high, and a small pile of debris behind
the garage at 8504. She took me down by the lake and showed me some
logs and a couple other pieces of debris in a wooded area of 8504.
In my conversation with Ms. Gilman she told me she was making these
complaints as revenge for complaints against her and /or her husband
that she believes were made by 8504. She told me she complained of
the debris to Bob Zydowsky about a month ago, but that nothing was
done and Bob hasn't been returning her calls lately. She wanted to
file a complaint with me about the debris. I told her that I was not
going to do a report, but would inform Bob Zydowsky that she still has
the same complaint. Ms. Gilman was not happy with that. She asked
for my business card and told me she was going to call the Sheriff. I
gave her my card and cleared.
Ms. Gilman called again later to state that the commercial trailer was
back at 8504 and she wanted an officer to go there. I did not plan to
respond as I believed she probably already complained to the city
about the trailer. Also, her husbands work trailer was also parked
outside, loaded with equipment. I did not intend to get in the middle
of an ongoing complaint war. However, I did look down the driveway of
8504 as I was responding to an alarm call. I saw a trailer attached
to a vehicle with some lawn mowers on it. I do not know if the
trailer is parked there every weekend as was the original complaint.
a
t
' After I cleared the alarm dispatch informed me that Ms. Gilman had
called wondering why an officer had not gone to 8504. She also
informed dispatch that she was going to call the Sheriff.
' I asked dispatch to check the in -house computer for complaints called
in by Mr. and Ms. Gilman. Mr. Gilman has called in 14 complaints.
Ms. Gilman has called in 21 complaints. This does not include the
' numerous complaints they have made, mostly against neighbors, directly
to Chanhassen city.
It appears to me that Ms. Gilman goes back and forth, making
complaints to the city and to the Sheriff's department, perhaps often
about the same incidents. In talking to a confidential source at a
anonymous business in Chanhassen I learned that every employee has had
' negative contact with Ms. Gilman. In talking to one of the Chanhassen
CSO's I learned that Ms. Gilman moved to Chanhassen from Minnetonka.
Apparently, Mtka P. D. has a thick file generated by Ms. Gilman.
I believe all the Chanhassen CSO's, Bob Zydowsky, and Scott Harr have
had negative contacts with Ms. Gilman.
End of report.
Deputy D. W. Potts, 819
' cc: Bob Zydowsky
Scott Harr
17
1