1j. Minutes r
_11
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
JULY 13, 1992
' Mayor Chmiel called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.. The meeting was opened
with the Pledge to the Flag.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Mason, Councilman Workman, Councilman
Wing and Councilwoman Dimler
' STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Roger Knutson, Todd Gerhardt, Charles Folch, Paul
Krauss, Kate Aanenson and Scott Harr
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Mason seconded to
approve the agenda with the following additions: Mayor Chmiel added a public
announcement and under Council Presentations regarding Lake Ann Park; Councilman
Workman wanted to discuss the intersection of West 78th and Dakota, the leash
law and the City and Council's continued use of local companies in purchases.
All voted in favor of the agenda as amended and the motion carried.
' PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS:
Mayor Chmiel: The public announcement that I just wanted to mention is that we
' received from William's Pipeline indicating that they are going to be doing a
high pressure water test of their pipeline located beneath their signs and is in
progress and will start on July 22nd for several weeks. The actual test may
take several days to perform in one segment or whatever they're doing. You'll
know the test is in progress when you see the signs along the pipeline right -of-
way which state caution. Please stand clear, Williams Pipeline Company. If
there's any information or explanation of this, they have given us a phone
number. For those who may be interested I'll give that number out. It's
612 - 633 -1515 and the right -of -way agent is Linda Slaughter. It's also an
emergency number which is 1 -800- 331 -4020.
' CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Mason moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to approve
the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's
recommendations:
' f. Approve 1992 Audit Report Contract, Delloitte & Touche •
h. Approve Summary Ordinance for Publication Regarding the Minimum Lot Size
Requirements for A -2 and RR Districts
j. Approval of Accounts
k. City Council Minutes dated June 22, 1992
Planning Commission Minutes dated July 1, 1992
1. Designate Bus and Handicapped Parking Zone, Chanhassen Senior Center
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
7 City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
A. APPROVE JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT BETWEEN MWCC, CHASKA AND CHANHASSEN FOR
INTERCOMMUNITY FLOW.
I Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, item 1(a) is an agreement, a joint powers agreement
between the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, Chaska and Chanhassen. Also
there's a fourth party, the Met Council. I wanted to know what the Met
' Council's role was in this. And my second question is, why is Chanhassen
putting up money in front to be reimbursed and why can't we just okay the
project and have the MWCC pay without running it through our budget? And number
' three, how does this agreement assure the pursuance of a permanent solution to
the problem? In the worst case scenario if there is no permanent solution
implemented, how has Chanhassen then affected, are we then in a position where
we are forced to keep signing an agreement forever? Those are my three
II questions on that item.
Mayor Chmiel: Don, would you like to try to address each of these?
II Don Ashworth: Hopefully between Charles, Bob Schunicht and myself we can
attempt to respond. Although the item does not show Metro Council in the
limited item in front of you, the agreement very definitely includes
II Metropolitan Council. We want Metro Council to sign off on this agreement. It's
very important. It may be a signer to it recognizing their overseeing a role of
MWCC. Secondly, and again I'll offer Charles, is my understanding that between
II Metro Council. Or between MWCC and the City of Chaska, those two agencies will
be putting up any additional costs that would be incurred as a part of any of
the oversizing or the work to connect to this lift station. Correct Bob?
Charles?
Charles Folch: Do you want to address that one Bob?
I Bob Schunicht: Yeah, the Waste Control Commission is basically renting capacity
from the City of Chanhassen in facilities that you've already ordered for plans
and specs along Lyman Blvd. and Audubon Road. So they're renting for a period
of time not to exceed probably 8 years. The date is the year 2000. December
31st of the year 2000 so you have ordered a project to put in improvements along
there. They're going to use the excess capacity in that line for a period of 8
II years and pay you on an annual basis for that. The agreement is set up to pay
you for 5 years right now with a fixed amount that's paid for each year that
that extends beyond the first 5 years up until the year 2000. Any oversizing or
any other costs that the City was not normally going to incur as part of their
II current project is being paid for by the Waste Control Commission.
Councilwoman Dimler: Now if we decided to go ahead and develop and needed that
capacity for ourselves, how would that affect this agreement?
Bob Schunicht: Charles and I worked on some computations based on a real
aggressive development schedule out in that part of the area and we're confident
II that you will not have flow in that line that would cause any problems
whatsoever before the year 2000. The thing you have to remember is that a lot
of the capacity in that system is for the area south of Lyman Blvd. so you'd
II have to extend all the way down there too so you'd have to basically, in the
next 8 years, develop to complete saturation everything all the way over to
TH 41 and TH 5 and part of the stuff south of Lyman Blvd. to ever even dream of
2
1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
having a problem in that line. The other thing I'd like to point out too is
that one of the struggles we had in designing that system was that we're dealing '
with a real little bit of waste water flow because there isn't a lot of
development in that area right now and won't be until it starts to pick up for,
the first year will be maybe 50 or 100 homes on there and it will start to
continue. So we had to look at some interim facilities. Smaller pipes, smaller
pumps to put in that station. With the flow coming from Chaska, the City is
going to, in addition to the monies that are in the agreement, will save about
$30,000.00 to $50,000.00 in interim facilities that they would have had to
install just to be able to operate the system over the first 3 to 4 years.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, so you're saying it's a mutually beneficial? '
Bob Schunicht: Absolutely.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. Also, what power do we have to force a permanent
solution that say after the year 2000 and we want to use that capacity? Does
this agreement in any way hinder us from being able to do that? Are we forced
forever to sign this thing if they don't come up with a permanent solution to
the problem?
Bob Schunicht: You have to, after the year 2000, you have to mutually agree to
let the process continue. You could shut off. You could pull the plug. Shut
the valve and they're done after the year 2000. And they've got a similar
agreement in Plymouth dealing with Medina. Medina going down through Plymouth
and they're really concerned about that because it's starting to get to the
point where they need to do something and they're hussling to get it done.
Mayor Chmiel: But in their particular position, they are in no position
whatsoever, to accept additional flowage of sewage from anywhere, even with
their system so therefore there'd have to be some kind of flow going somewhere.
If not through their capacity in a normal sewage disposal plant, it would still
have to run through here. I get a little hesitant in thinking as to what that
solution could be and that solution could be a constant flow into there.
Bob Schunicht: They're looking at two solutions and the agreement is pretty 1
clear about the fact that they have to continue to pursue the solution to
Chaska. That this does not become a thing they wait until 1998 and start taking
another look at. And they're looking at either building a new plant or going
over to the Blue Lake Plant. Going down through. Across TH 41 down to Shakopee
and over to the Blue Lake Plant.
Mayor Chmiel: And that would take many, many years. '
Bob Schunicht: That, I don't think they could get it done much before 1998 and
that's the reason they're out of capacity this year and next year in Chaska
right now.
Mayor Chmiel: I guess if their flow is, total flow is going into the system,
how will the charges incurred by MWCC to the City of Chanhassen for those flows,
and I know Chaska's going to do it? Pay for those particular flows that would
go into it. 1
3
1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
Bob Schunicht: Right.
Mayor Chmiel: But does this effect our flows so, and that means that our people
may have to pay additional dollars as well?
Bob Schunicht: No. There will be a meter at the station that's going in Chaska
and that will be subtracted out of the flows that Chanhassen is billed for.
Councilwoman Dimler: I still have one concern and maybe Roger can answer that
and that is, I don't see anything in the agreement that gives us any say in
making them come up with a permanent solution. Can you address that Roger?
II Roger Knutson: To this extent that this contract terminates December 31st, the
year 2000. So at that point it's been said you can pull the plug. They'd
' better have their own solution or they've got their own problem.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, just the termination date then but with the renewal,
with the possibility of renewal though as I read it.
II Roger Knutson: At your discretion.
I Mayor Chmiel: Normally when Council gets some of these things, shouldn't there
be some dollar figures tied in prior to making this approval so we know exactly
where we're standing?
II Bob Schunicht: We did an estimate of the amount of money the Waste Control
Commission would pay to Chanhassen for that first 5 years of capacity. That's
about $80,000.00. What the agreement does is say that it sets forth a procedure
II for determining what that exact amount is based on the bid prices that the City
receives and the agreement is based on the same methodology that we used in
negotiating the Lake Ann project. Don and I worked on that in 1984 -85, so it's
I the same methodology. In this case you were paying the Waste Control Commission
for using their facility and in this case, they're paying you for using your
facility but the same methodology. It seems like both parties pretty much
agreed to that and have an agreement existing in that manner already.
11 Don Ashworth: If I may, that's the same cost agreement that now has been really
adopted metro wide. I think Champlin, another example. Again the cost, as they
II be associated with the Chaska connection, are back to Chaska and MWCC so we
don't, although I believe Bob has worked out what those costs are, we really
haven't seen them nor do we really care to as long as they've agree that they're
I going to pay. One of my recommendations parallels Councilwoman Dimler's
comments and that is, in addition to simply signing this agreement, I think it's
imperative that cover letters go along with this that say, we're going along
with this but it is with the intention that this will be disconnected in the
1 year 2000. That we're asking you to sign this document, meaning MWCC and Metro
Council, and recognize that this is everyone's intent and the Mayor point that
they'd better get moving to insure that they've got a permanent solution. I
' feel very comfortable that this is a good document for Chanhassen. Not only in
paying money back to us in the interim period, the current period of time, but
they're also agreeing to finding a long term solution for southern Chanhassen as
II a part of this agreement. They're agreeing that down by Holasek's, and I think
we saw that in one of the last reports. They had a lift station going over
1 4
1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
there to serve a relatively small user. Through this agreement Chaska would
allow that connection to go as gravity flow towards Chaska. They're agreeing 1
that Gedney will continue to be able to use the Chaska sewer lines in a similar
basis to what they currently are. They're agreeing that the area north of 82nd
Street and west of TH 41, that we can use Chaska's sewer line for that area.
That probably will be through a smaller lift station. They're agreeing that the
area east of TH 41 and north of 82nd Street, that can gravity feed towards
Chaska, that they will serve that area. So there's a lot of pluses in here for 11 Chanhassen.
Mayor Chmiel: Well...numbers basically are accommodating what our flows may be
in that particular area as well. 1
Bob Schunicht: We were very careful to make sure that Chanhassen would not be
hurt and only benefitted by this agreement. The other thing that Don mentioned,
it's enabled us to clear up a lot of questions about the joint sewer systems and
we are having some ongoing conversations about the joint water systems too so
it's been a very good process.
Mayor Chmiel: Who represents Chaska?
Bob Schunicht: Dave Pokorny's been representing Chaska. '
Mayor Chmiel: No outside, do they have a consulting firm?
Bob Schunicht: Yes, Ken Anderson from our office. 1
Mayor Chmiel: From your office?
Bob Schunicht: Yes.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. That's what I wanted to make sure was on the table. '
Bob Schunicht: But I argue with him all the time.
Councilwoman Dimler: It better not be a conflict of interest right. '
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, any other discussion?
Councilwoman Dimler: Hearing none, I would move approval of item 1(a). The
joint powers agreement with the addition that those cover letters be sent as Don
had mentioned. 1
Councilman Workman: Second.
Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve the Joint ,
Powers Agreement between MWCC, Chaska and Chanhassen for Intercommunity Flow
with cover letters being sent stating the intention that it will be disconnected
in the year 2000. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. ,
5
11 City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
B. APPROVE CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK &
ASSOCIATES.
Councilwoman Dimler: Item (b) has to do with the, approving of a consultant
service agreement between Bonestroo and Associates and the City of Chanhassen.
My question on this was, as I read through it, at first I thought it had to do
with the surface water management but I see that it's separate. Is this a
separate contract?
Charles Folch: This is a separate contract for providing municipal consulting
engineering services on projects such as the Upper Bluff Creek project and
future projects with the City.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. What criteria did you use to come up with a need
for such a consulting service at this time?
Charles Folch: Basically we have approximately, probably a dozen, dozen and a
half contracts with consultants who provide services for the city. Basically
what a contract does is it's an agreement between the City and the consultant as
to what types of services they will provide. Defines specifically as it relates
to a project, the specific elements and details that they will perform for the
City at what cost and such and a fee schedules are tied to that agreement. It
basically keeps a consistent mutual working partnership, if you will, between a
consultant and the City as to what is expected of the consultant and the
consultant also knows what is expected of the City in this mutual agreement for
providing services.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. As I was reading through it, I thought it was
rather extensive and very binding and I was just wondering, now it talks about
inspections here too. How do these inspections differ from the inspections
already being done by our public safety department?
' Charles Folch: The inspections conducted by our Public Safety Department are
more specifically oriented towards actual buildings. Inspections of the
buildings that are going in. Homes. Things like this. What the consultant
will be inspecting is, take for example a sewer and water project for the Upper
Bluff Creek area. They will be inspecting those utility lines. That's not an
area that the Uniform Building Code covers. That's an area that's governed by
10 State Standards and the American Public Works Association. Or American Water
Works Association and such so that's an area outside of the Building Code. So
they will be providing inspections on those particular types of projects.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, and who's been doing those inspections for us in the
past now?
Charles Folch: It typically is the consultant engineer on the project will
provide the inspection on the project. It's a normal process that they carry
through. They design the plans and then carry it through the project
construction administration.
Councilwoman Dimler: So you're saying the developer has a consultant and we'll
have a consultant and we'll be duplicating services here?
11 6
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
Charles Folch: Okay, on the public improvement projects such as Upper Bluff
Creek for example again. We have our own consultant such as Bonestroo that will
design and construct or contract, administer the project. On a private
development project, the developer has his own engineer who will design the
plans which we review in house and you approve by your action and they are
required to provide an inspector on the project but we also provide inspection
over that private development project so that we ensure that things are being
constructed according to our specifications.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. And then also, it didn't have a dollar figure with
it and I'm kind of relunctant to approve any agreement that doesn't show me what
it's going to cost the city.
Charles Folch: There's two in the appendices. There's two fee schedule charts
if you will that are a percentage of fees. '
Councilwoman Dimler: Right but I mean there was no dollar amount as to how
much. It said per hour yes but how many hours? What's it likely to cost the
City?
Charles Folch: Basically that would come about with the preparation or
presentation actually of the completed feasibility study. At that point in time
there's a project cost estimate that is given and basically by using these
schedules, at that time you can at least get a general idea as far as what their
cost for services are going to be to carry it through the project through the
design and construction process.
Councilwoman Dimler: But we're supposed to be approving this before we see how
much it's going to cost us? What if they come up with a cost that it'd be
cheaper for us to hire our own engineer to do this?
Charles Folch: Well under each project you have the decision making ability at '
the feasibility stage whether to see the project through as a public improvement
or whether the project warrants doing it or not based on a number of factors
such as cost. 1
Councilwoman Dimler: But once we have an agreement with them, they're always
going to be the consultant?
Charles Folch: Not the sole consultant. We work with a number of consultants.
Councilwoman Dimler: Oh you do? '
Charles Folch: Yes.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. So this is not an exclusive contract? '
Charles Folch: No, this is not an exclusive contract.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, thanks. Any other comments? I'd like to hear from
other Councilmembers.
7
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Quick question that I have. In looking this over,
and it's really thorough and I see some things in there. Were all these
services provided basically needed and can some of these that are contained
within this contract be done by our engineering department or staff as a working
1 part?
Charles Folch: I guess that ' s a difficult question to answer to you off the
cuff but both the consultant and myself have reviewed the specific points of
this contract. In just general terms I would say, it'd be very difficult. In
trying to maintain the continuity of the project process, our city staff will
still have review and input through the design process but at this point in time
' we really don't have the capabilities to actually take over any portion of the
design on a particular project like that. Most of our consultant firms are set
up with CAD and computer systems to do the hydraulic modeling and things like
that with the project. It would be more consistent for them to continue to do
the entire process rather than try and split it up and then you've got a
coordination effort that needs to be done and we really aren't set up to take on
portions of their projects.
Mayor Chmiel: I guess one of the things as you indicated, feasibility that
would come back to us. Knowing what the dollars are basically going to be and
' what the cost is going to be to the city. So with that I guess I don't have any
other specific questions. Ursula.
Councilwoman Dimler: I guess I'm still relunctant to approve it without having
some sort of idea what it's going to cost. And I'm sure the consultant has
probably worked with other cities of approximately the same size as ours with
the same amount of development going on and perhaps they could look into their
' records and see what it has cost those communities and maybe give us some idea
before I would approve this.
Mayor Chmiel: Maybe what you could say is not to exceed or have them come up
with a figure not to exceed.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, and I don't even have the budget saying where it
would come from. I would like to know what part of the budget. I don't want to
bust our budget here.
11 Charles Folch: Maybe I can kind of clarify. I didn't go back far enough in my
explanation. Take for example if a project would be petitioned by the public or
what have you. We would receive those petitions. I would typically contact one
of the consultants and get an estimate as to what it would cost for them to
perform the feasibility study. Okay. Then I would bring that cost to you along
with the recommendation of whether to proceed with us authorizing the study or
not authorizing the study. As I mentioned before, with the completion of the
' feasibility study, there is a project cost estimate associated with that.
Basically their fee for providing the design, contract administration and
inspection services are basically guided by the two curve pay schedules which
are listed in the appendices. So at that point in time, because each you know
differing projects can have different costs associated with them, typically the
larger the project naturally you're going to have, there's going to be more
II involvement, more time spent on their part. Although it's not a linear
progression where the dollar amounts progress directly in relation to the
1 8
1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
project, there is some savings. The larger the project goes, the pro rated
share of their consultant fee is not as high as a smaller project. But I think
it's difficult to say at this time what their fee is going to be on a project
because it depends on what the size of the project is and what type of project
it is. Just general sewer and water and street projects, that's pretty well
defined. When you get into doing a lift station, an elevated storage tank, some
type of specialty project like that, then it's not quite so defined.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, I understand what you're saying but I'm still a
little confused. At the time that we wanted to do the project, wouldn't we go
out and get bids and have them be one of the bidders and then pick the lowest
bidder for the study and the project? Or would we just exclusively say, well
we've got a consultant service agreement with them so they're the ones?
Charles Folch: Typically we do not go out, when we have a project and just put
basically RFP's out. Request for Proposals if you will from consultants on our
projects. We have done that on a couple large scale things such as a surface
water management program and the MUSA study because they were such large
projects and we basically felt that maybe it was an appropriate type project to
open it up to the general market because of the dollars that were involved. But
basically for performing ongoing, continual municipal services, it's a benefit
to both the City and the staff to develop a working relationship with a handful
of consultants that will provide continual services to you. They get to know
the city. They get to know what is expected of them. There's consistency
that's developed. And you're also giving them enough work that you keep their
interest. If there's a problem on a project and this consultant only gets one
small project a year in a community, well you're not going to get priority
service right away when something needs to be done. So there's some benefit
with taking, working with a group of consultants on general, ongoing municipal
type projects. And it's, for getting services such as these, it's not always in
the City's best interest to take the low bidder. Going out for bids on it for a
consultant and taking the low bid because you don't always have the most
qualified consultant providing those services. It may be their first time
working for the City and staff may end up spending, you may end up spending more
money on staff time to try and train these people in as to what is expected of
them.
Councilman Wing: Is this exclusive of the...contract?
Charles Folch: That's correct. We have a separate agreement for that specialty '
project.
Councilman Workman: It was my understanding, and I had to depart so I maybe '
didn't catch all the things but it was my understanding this is kind of a
continuation of the contract we had before. That contract expired? Or why are
we continuing at this time? 1
Charles Folch: This is actually a new contract for municipal services. We've
had previous contracts for Surface Water Management and the MUSA expansion but
this is a contract that basically will govern future municipal projects that
they provide services for the City.
1
9
1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
1
Councilman Wing: How do you budget for this? I mean Ursula has asked about a
dollar amount. How are you going to, is this an unknown or what are you going
to budget for this?
' Don Ashworth: I look at this, this is a master contract at times that Bonestroo
is selected to do a particular project so I'm not sure if ABC Company owning a
piece of land out here will be coming in and asking that the City extend the
sewer and water and at that time we would know how much that costs and how much
I would be charged back to that developer. But if the selection were then made of
Bonestroo to act as our engineers for that project, this contract would come in.
Would be an addendum to that adding that particular project? But if during the
' course of the year you did no projects, you've incurred no cost.
Mayor Chmiel: Sure it boils down to but still the dollars are hard to grab
onto. Normally when we submit a contract for just about anything...what I feel
' is an estimate so we know where we are within that ballpark, how much farther
can we go or should we go with that? As far as the dollar expenditure is
concerned, that's what I think we have to really look at. It's just that we
' can't loosen that dollar fully. We should have a fairly, at least a handle on
what we're talking. We're giving a Carte Blanche, open across the board kind of
thing here and we don't know really what those dollars will be. As Don said,
even if you don't do anything in that particular year, we're not going to spend
any money and that's true and I don't disagree with that.
Councilwoman Dimler: But Charles, did we budget anything for anything like that
' in this 1992 budget? It comes out of your budget in the engineering department?
Charles Folch: Actually it comes out of the particular project because again,
you would have to authorize the dollars to do a feasibility study which they may
' or may not be assigned to and then again, after that's completed, you would have
to authorize or actually order a project and approve them to do the plans and
' specifications on a project.
Councilwoman Dimler: That comes out of the project as well?
Charles Folch: That's correct, yep.
Mayor Chmiel: From whoever's requesting it. So it really doesn't all come out
of the city but there's a lot of time involvement within the city that we still
have.
Councilwoman Dimler: Well thanks for all the answers.
' Charles Folch: Excuse me Don, if I could add too. One thing we could do, if it
would behoove you, is with each project, as a part of the feasibility study, we
II certainly, I mean it shows there what their estimated costs would be to provide
their services so we could certainly make sure that that is a line item that's
clearly addressed based on the estimate of the project.
r Mayor Chmiel: That I would say would probably be a good idea to have. That way
it would give Council a little better idea. So with that, I'll call for
question. Would you like to entertain a motion on this Ursula?
10
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
II
Councilwoman Dimler: Well, with those explanations and with the expectations
that what we're requesting here will be kept in mind, I would move to approve
II
item 1(b).
Councilman Wing: Second.
II
Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Wing seconded to approve Consultant
Services Agreement with Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates. All voted in II favor and the motion carried unanimously.
C. APPROVE RESOLUTION APPROVING ASSIGNMENT BY LANOCO OF LOAN AND BOND PURCHASE
AGREEMENT. ,
Mayor Chmiel: Item (c) is the reassingment of the IRB loans. I guess I had a
couple of questions that I have and maybe I don't understand what it is but what 11 rate of interest did we have in '79 and '88 that we're looking at this and the
changes that we're going back to with some of the reassignment of the loans?
The other one I have is, we're moving this from one individual to another and
even though someone's indicating here that they assure that the opinion will be
II
a clean option, tax exempt status can be maintained, and I don't understand how
this can be done. If you're changing it from the city from one person to
another, you've giving them the tax exempt. Normally they don't take that tax
II
exempt status, do they?
Roger Knutson: I don't know what the interest rates are but, and we haven't II seen one of these I don't think in 7 -8 years. I don't know how long it's been.
7 -8 years. Long time. They don't make any sense to me... This is an
industrial development bond. Not one nickel of city money is involved. Not one
nickel of taxpayers money is involved. It was a method in use for a number of
II
years whereby you could get tax exempt status for your funding. And a project
was built with these IDB bonds, using basically the City's name but without
using...without using your money, without using anyone's money except private
investors, and now the building is being sold. And it's like in the old days,
when you sold a house, someone could assume your mortgage. Well, these folks
are assuming the bond. II Mayor Chmiel: Okay. And that is transferable just like it is with the
mortgage?
Roger Knutson: Not anymore. You can't transfer your mortgage. II
Mayor Chmiel: I meant purchase from and if it has an assumable.
II
Roger Knutson: Yeah, it's an assumable mortgage if you will.
Mayor Chmiel: Alright. 1
Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, I can add a little bit. The principle amount of the
bonds is $600,000.00. To date, the principle balance is $429,138.81. Don went
upstairs to get the interest rate for...
Mayor Chmiel: Well I guess he can probably tell me what that might have been
back then as to what they are now and I know that probably in '79 and '88 they
II
11
II
II
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
were higher. Therefore we'd proably bring it back down with the interest rate
right now on those industrial revenue bonds.
Roger Knutson: Traditionally they save people 2 to 3 points.
' Mayor Chmiel: As long as you can save at least 2 points, then it's to your
benefit. If it's 3, it's more. Don?
Don Ashworth: I'm looking. Maybe you could, if you have other questions.
Mayor Chmiel: No, I was just curious to know what that was back at that
particular time as opposed to now because all the rates are much lower and we've
done that with some of our bonding with the City where we've saved the City
money by doing that.
Roger Knutson: I'll speculate that they're higher than they can get now. Lower
than they can get now or not much better or otherwise they wouldn't be assuming
the financing. Knowing the parties involved, they'd get good financing.
Don Ashworth: They are not an obligation of the City. They're not shown under
the bond issues. I was hoping I would find a footnote to that extent and I
think it's, I think I still can under the auditor's initial opinion but again it
may take me a couple of minutes to find it.
' Mayor Chmiel: My major concern was, is I'm going to have to sign this thing and
I want to know what I'm signing. I don't think you're going to have to go
through that much more. I think I've answered most of my questions that I've
had. I would entertain to accept item 1(c).
•
Councilwoman Dimler: Second.
Resolution X92 -77: Mayor Chmiel coved, Councilwoman Dialer seconded to approve
the resolution approving assignment by LandCo of Loan and Bond Purchase
Agreement. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously-
!' D. APPROVE LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR THE DNR PROPOSAL "ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT OF
URBAN DEER POPULATIONS ".
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, item (d) has to do with the Department of Natural •
Resources proposal for the Ecology and Management of Urban Deer Populations.
Apparently from reading this I get that they want us, the City of Chanhassen
' along with 23 other communities to sign a letter which would be addressed to the
legislative commission on Minnesota Resources which is made up of 8 Senators,
State Senators and 8 State Representatives to get funding to study the deer
11 problem. Again, I have a problem with approving this without being given an
amount of what they're going to be asking for.
Mayor Chmiel: $256,000.00 is what they're looking for.
Councilwoman Dimler: Oh, where did you find that? Okay. They're asking for
$256,000.00 and I know from personal experience, because we have a hugh deer
problem on our farm in Minnetrista, over 200 deer eating our corn and soybeans
every year, we have contacted Larry Gillette of the Hennepin County Parks
12
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992 1
Systems who is, they are cooperators in this particular project. And he has
given, not only us but also the City of Minnetrista a wonderful presentation
with all the answers apparently that they're looking for in this project 1 and
2. So I feel the answers are already there and I think the money should be
spent on correcting the problem rather than studying it. And I would recommend
that if there are many concerns here within our city, that we would have Larry
Gillette come and give us that same presentation. It was very informative and
also had many solutions to the problems. '
Mayor Chmiel: Scott, I think you received this letter. Maybe, and as you've
indicated, support sending this letter to the legislative commission for the
appropriations of those dollars. And I think from what Ursula is saying, is
that Mr. Gillette, Larry Gillette from Hennepin County Parks has already gone
through that process. It looks like they're starting...just one more time. Is 11 there any quick response that we have to give to the ONR with this?
Scott Harr: Mr. Mayor, actually I see that the process was started about a
month and a half ago. This originally was scheduled...
Mayor Chmiel: Okay.
Councilwoman Dimler: Do you know how many cities signed the agreement? But I
still would recommend having Mr. Gillette come out here because I know we do
have a problem. That's not the point but I'd to see that...
(There was audio problems with the tape at this point in the discussion. There
was no action needed for item 1(d).
E. APPROVE BOULEVARD TREE PLANTING PROPOSAL. BARTON - ASCHMAN. '
Councilman Wing: That was mine. Boulevard planting proposal. Arboretum Blvd.
and Kerber Blvd.. Both streets about 1 mile long. This has to do with
boulevard tree bids. It has to do with planting boulevards, is that correct?
Putting trees and landscaping along and reading through this we have a, this is
going to be Barton - Aschman base map preparation, field review, conceptual
landscape plan, community open house, bidding documents, contract bidding,
construction services for $12,700.00 divided by $200.00 a tree, that's 600 trees
that for sure are going in. $13,000.00 just to do a feasibility, architectural
study for 2 miles of road? Can't we just say, we want shade trees along those
streets every 40 feet and put them in? What's involved here for $13,000.00?
You know I'm probably the foremost tree proponent on this Council but to spend
$13,000.00 to talk about putting them in, I don't know if I want them that bad.
Don, how would you address that?
Don Ashworth: I concur. It sounds like a lot of money. The problem is that,
the legislature doesn't really trust cities so they enact so many laws to make
you ensure that you jump through every hoop. So even though it sounds as though
you can just go out and put in trees, you still have to go through the formal
specification process to tell potential bidders what it is you want. You've got
to tell them where those trees are going. What work has to go along with it
because if the guy doesn't do what you want and the trees are crooked or
whatever, did you tell him he had to stake them? Did you tell him he had to
stick them in the ground? Which side up. I mean it may sound proposterous but
13
1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
I mean you have several nurseries in Chanhassen who will probably bid this. And
11 if there's any irregularities in the bidding process, they're surely going to
tell you about it. We want to ensure that we go out and we pick out the stock
that we want. This is the type of a job that if someone would want to volunteer
to go through each of the steps, I could help them and I think it's the type of
thing a Council member or somebody knowledgeable in this area could take on this
task.
II Mayor Chmiel: I'd be glad to. Now that I have some free time.
Don Ashworth: You're going to be putting in the hours associated with it. I
would guess if you would volunteer to take this over, I'd say it's going to be
100 hour project.
I Councilman Workman: So moved.
Councilwoman Dimler: Second.
Councilman Wing: I think there's some other issues here because the Park and
Rec is trying to form a Tree Board and some expertise is going to come with that
from the community and the Arboretum. I just wonder if for $7,000.00 if Peter
I Olin on the weekends wouldn't step in and make similar recommendations. Now I'm
not, Don I'm not trying to make light of this. I guess I didn't know planting
trees was that complex and to landscape. If this was going to be a city wide
project, and describe and make these standards for all our streets for the
II future but to do two 1 mile sections for $13,000.00.
Don Ashworth: I'm sure the Mayor can do a good job on this.
II Councilman Wing: Well he has my support.
I Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, mine too.
Councilman Wing: If you'll chair the committee.
Don Ashworth: And we will try to make sure that we do not violate any of the
State laws I was referring to.
I Councilwoman Dimler: I do have a question though. Are we required to go
through with these proposals because from, I drove those sections and I think,
if I'm anywhere near where you're talking about, the one here in the City on
11 Coulter Drive, is that going to have anything to do with our proposal for the
city park?
Don Ashworth: First I should note, in preparing the cover, the proposal from
II Barton Aschman is correct in that it describes Audubon and Kerber. I think the
cover talks about Arboretum Blvd.. The two streets here, Audubon and Kerber.
You take either of those segments, you do have existing trees in various
' sections. All the way through on Kerber. Parts there you would not be putting
trees in primarily on the east side of Kerber and on the, oh I'm sorry. On the
west side of Kerber and the west side of Audubon.
1
14
1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992 1
Mayor Chmiel: I think basically what you're looking at is the spacing of those
trees. What's needed. Species which are acceptable to salt and spray. That
don't die out and there's a lot of other things that have to be taken into
consideration.
Don Ashworth: I think that Peter Olin would be a good resource and maybe we
could get authorization to spend some dollars potentially with him. In terms of
recommendations regarding the species and also going out to the nurseries once
bids have been received, to actually tag individual trees so that we know we're
getting good trees as a part of this.
Mayor Chmiel: That's right. ,
Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor, just in due respect to you and Mr. Ashworth, I did
drive these today and I did feel it's not a very simple matter. I mean you
simply don't just start putting trees in and there's sidewalks and there's hills
and there's a lot of angles here that I think if there's going to be a permanent
planning and it's going to be maintained and address the future, it's not as
simple as just going out and driving and making some snap decisions. Beyond
that Don I would leave it in your desk.
Mayor Chmiel: Well I agree Dick. That's true because often times when you ,
plant trees, you're going to have to take some safety issues into view as well.
Because of the intersections and making sure that they don't get blocked or
placement of trees in proper locations. Nor do you want to put them directly or
as close as you can to the, in the boulevard section to the curbing because
there too you're going to have roots causing problems and breaking out sidewalks
and the curbing and a lot of other things so there's a lot more to it than
really meets the eye.
I/
Councilman Wing: Can we table this issue just for one meeting to get a little
background? ,
Mayor Chmiel: I don't see any reason why we couldn't.
Councilman Workman: So moved.
Mayor Chmiel: Do you see any problem with tabling this if we're looking at fall
planting? I also wanted to just bring out the fact in addition to your tabling
that I think we should look at a spring planting rather than a fall planting as
well.
Don Ashworth: These projects have been held open for a long period of time.
That's fine. It could go to this next spring. It will take 30 days.
Mayor Chmiel: It gives me a little better work base is what I'm saying. ,
Don Ashworth: 30 days for specifications. 30 days in the advertisement
process. We'll need to go out to the venders. You're probably talking 2 to 3
weeks there. My only trepidation would be, we can put it off one additional
agenda but if we miss let's say the next one, they won't be planted this fall.
It will be next spring. 1
15 1
II City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, we have a motion on the floor to table. Is there a second?
II Councilwoman Dimler: Second.
II Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to table the Boulevard
Tree Planting Proposal by Barton - Aschman. All voted in favor and the motion
carried unanimously.
II I. APPROVE CONTRACT FOR FEASIBILITY STUDIES FOR THE SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM TASK FORCE.
II Councilwoman Dimler: Another one on the budget. I serve on the Surface Water
Management Task Force and I did attend that last meeting but I'm sorry to say I
left before this vote was taken to approve a feasibility study for projects on,
I/ one on Lake Riley and I think too on Lotus Lake if I'm not mistaken. I believe
the amount is $15,000.00 and that was brought down from $30,000.00 wasn't it
Mike?
II Councilman Mason: I don't think that we arrived. We were just throwing figures
out
I Councilwoman Dimler: Oh, okay.
Paul Krauss: I think you were originally presented with a proposal that had a
1 different set of projects that could have gone as high as 30 and nobody was
comfortable with that. And neither was staff and as we discussed this further,
it seemed that one of the biggest expense was one of the projects. If you look
in your packet, one of the projects on Lotus Lake is a major project.
II Councilwoman Dimler: A. You're talking about A.
II Paul Krauss: Right. And in staff's opinion that didn't fit into the context of
quick, relatively simple, relatively low cost projects with big returns for
water quality. It's a valid project but it was very, it's something in longer
term. So we, we being staff came up with a third project on Lake Riley which
II does two things. Lake Riley obviously has a problem and we didn't want to focus
all the efforts on specifically Lotus. We happen to know more about Lotus than
the rest of the lakes which is why this tended to occur. We also felt that the
I one on Lake Riley, if we do the upfront design, we have a very good chance of
having the developer undertake much of the work with the construction of the
project subdivision. So that could be a real big bang for the buck on that
II one.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. I guess I look at a feasibility study as a part of
a project so when I approve a feasibility study I am actually already approving
I that project or saying that it needs to be done. So what I'd like to have is a
little bit of an idea on how much the total project might be. Now obviously,
and that is part of the feasibility study. I understand that so it's kind of a
11 catch -22 here is what we're doing but apparently you must have some idea because
we scraped A. We knew it would be too extensive and probably too expensive for
what we were going to get. So we must also have some idea on what 8 and C and
II the one on Lake Riley are going to.
1 16
II
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992 ,
Paul Krauss: Only very rough Councilwoman Dimler. ,
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. Well, that's all I want is a rough estimate.
Paul Krauss: As I recall, Ismael indicated to me that these projects were in '
the $10,000.00 range to complete. We eliminated the one that had a lot of land
acquisition. We believe we have easements over everything else. The other
projects and as I say, the Lake Riley project may cost next to nothing, or very
nominal.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. And see that would be fine and I'd have no problems
because I do agree with the principle of improving the water quality but I just
don't want to okay a study for something that's going to cost us big bucks at
the end. And then my other question was this $15,000.00, is that coming out of
the budget that we approved already for fees for service under water quality
plan? We approved $50,000.00 for this year plus also for initial water quality
construction. Another $50,000.00 so that's $100,000.00. Is that $15,000.00
coming out of this particular budget? '
Paul Krauss: Yes. As you're aware, for the other Council people's benefit.
The Surface Water fund is running a surplus right now and that's after we've
committed to Bonestroo in a bigger contract to complete the planning and the
program. We then have some money set aside to do things. Well this is coming
out of the to do things.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. So, it's already budgeted for? I just want to make
sure. 11 Paul Krauss: It's budgeted for. It's not in Bonestroo's original contract. If
that makes sense. This is work above and beyond what we have contracted with
them to do. But there is money in the budget to cover this. '
Councilwoman Dimler: To do it.
Paul Krauss: Yes. ,
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. I just wanted to make sure we weren't getting an
extra $15,000.00 from somewhere. Okay, I move approval. '
Mayor Chmiel: Well I'd just like to add to that because I wanted this pulled as
well. And the question that I had was, one. Are we in budget to date? It
sounds like we're having a surplus right now.
Paul Krauss: Yes. Let me back up a little bit on that. Now in the budget
hearings over the last couple years, you've heard me a couple times say that the '
Council authorized the 60% funding level but then we found we weren't even
getting that because some mistakes that were made by the engineering firm that
had originally set it up. So we're essentially getting 60% of 60%. What that
gave us is a total, after 5 years of about $800,000.00. Clearly that's enough
to pay for the initial contract with Bonestroo, which I think was 197. It's
clearly enough to pay for staff's time working on this project, which is some
small portion of that. And then it's clearly enough to do things. Now these
projects are small and fall within that, I think what we anticipated. What this
17 ,
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
1
will never cover, and the City Manager and I shared some concerns on that, is
major projects that maybe warranted. After the study is completed, we know that
you know you may want to spend $250,000.00 doing a single project or you have to
buy some land. Those are things that go well beyond the scope of the budget.
II Mayor Chmiel: Okay. And then what additional dollars do you see, it seems like
we're going to stay within there. That was my other question. What additional
dollars will be needed for this? It sounds like you're not going to have to go
1 through that process on what we've done thus far.
Paul Krauss: No. All of what's being proposed is within the current budgetary
I constraints. As this project though draws to a completed plan and we have a
capital improvements plan and we know what all the sources of problems are in
given lakes and what we think we have to do, I think at the last budget we
agreed we were not going to raise the quarterly fee but as is, hopefully the
II project will demonstrate that it's a success and has community support and at
some point we're going to ask you to reconsider that but we don't need to now
and this is not going to make us or break us.
1 Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, and I was just wondering how much longer are we going to go
with this until we come up with the next need is what you're saying from before.
Whatever the next project might be.
Paul Krauss: No. I think that we have availability of funding to do a number
of these smaller projects. As long as we limit them to 1 or 2 per lake and
1 stagger it out. What we won't have funding for is a major project of maybe
$200,000.00 or $300,000.00.
Mayor Chmiel: My major concern is too Paul that we don't raise the costs as we
did before to the residents within the City. And try to maintain and keep it
right where it's at. I guess for the long haul, there has to be sometime where
it gets cut off. And when that's going to be, that's the question that I was
asking.
Paul Krauss: I don't know the answer. You authorized an initial 5 year program
1 with annual review by the Council during each budgetary session. Is this a
program that will go on forever? I doubt it. Is it a program that will
establish a series of goals that may take more than 5 years to achieve and may
take some other budgetary considerations? Probably, but I don't know the answer
to that right now.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay.
II Councilwoman Dimler: ...it looks like you're going to be increasing by State
mandate up $8.00 per year for this other water quality. Drinking water, is that
the one?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
1 Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, so the utility bills will be going up and I don't
think that I want to contribute to any of these projects. Increasing that
utility. I think that if we have to do a major project for over $200,000.00, or
1 18
1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
II
$250,000.00, I'm sure we can look at some other funding sources. Maybe bonding
or something like that.
II
Paul Krauss: Well, and that's a very good point because frankly it's one thing
to tinker a little bit with ponds and make them work more efficiently or
II
restructure things but we have a number of areas of the City that have
significant area wide drainage concerns that were never dealt with. I hesitate
to suggest that some of those might be a special assessment project but the fact I
is, there's area wide benefits to fixing these problems. So yeah, undoubtedly
there are other things that are going to have to be looked at.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, and then also under that staff recommendation, I would like
II
it to read, as it reads now, staff recommends City Council authorize spending
$15,500.00 to conduct feasibility study. I'd like injected prior to the
$15,500.00 not to exceed. 1
Councilman Mason: I did note that if all three of those feasibility studies are
done at the same time, it will be a savings to the city of $1,000.00 which I
think would behoove us.
II
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, you're right. I agree.
Councilwoman Dimler: So with that understanding I move approval of item 1(1). II
Councilman Wing: Second.
II
Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Wing seconded to authorize spending an
amount not to exceed $15,500.00 to conduct feasibility studies under the Surface II Water Management Program for Projects B, C and D as outlined in the July 8, 1992
letter from Bonestroo Engineering. All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously.
M. RESOLUTION APPROVING WATER QUALITY TESTING MANDATES AND CHARGES. 1
Councilman Wing: City Manager, where is the water utility charge right now? I II don't see it listed here? Under water rates and Section 19. Is the utility
surface water fee that $3.00 quarterly, is that somewhere else? Where is that
fee written?
Councilman Workman: Surface water. II
Councilman Wing: Surface water. Utility charge. 1
Don Ashworth: That's a good question. Charles, do you know? I know Tom had
prepared this. The Resolution is identical to the one that's currently on the II books. It must be a separate resolution on the water surface.
Councilman Wing: Why wouldn't we just include that in with the utility
assessment?
II
Don Ashworth: It would make sense at some point in time to have one resolution
that basically is covering both charges but you're correct, I do not see it in
II
19
II
II
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
II here so that means that there are basically two separate resolutions governing
utility bills.
Councilman Wing: My other concern on this was, we have a Federal mandate that
trickled down to the State of Minnesota who immediately trickled it down to the
City of Chanhassen where the buck stops, with an exclamation point says, you've
got to pay for it. And that's fine and it says, protecting the health of people
I consuming water from public water supplies is a responsibility that Minnesota
and it goes on and on and on. Parameters going from 23 to 83 that have to be
checked so each user now has to pay $2.00. Me. Each one of us here has to pay
$2.00 a quarter or $8.00 a year to ensure that we have clean water. But it goes
II beyond assuring that the City water coming into my house is clean. I mean we
assume the City's doing that. It also says we have to go into private homes.
Private homes. Test their water for this factor, for lead, whatever the case
and I've got to pay the price for that private testing. How did this happen?
Don Ashworth: And the sad part is that this bill really recognizes that this
II work is being mandated on the Federal level for the entire State and it's really
the outstate area that is benefitting the most as far as the number of wells and
they literally looked and said, we're not going to be able to get the money out
state so we'll establish this as a charge for well testing. And this is like
II all of the residents of the City of Minneapolis who get water out of the river
are paying this amount of money to test wells?
' Councilman Wing: In the newspaper we put out an ad asking for people that
wanted their water tested for lead. I think they got 3 responses so I
volunteered. That was the fourth and it's mandated that we test 60 some homes
for lead and we can't even get citizens to volunteer to have the testing done so
II we go out and solicit it but then I've got to pay for it. Well, I'll move
approval of 1(m) but I want to be on the record as under protest. And I realize
we can't do anything about it.
II Don Ashworth: I agree.
Mayor Chmiel: We're all in agreement. It always seems like whenever something
comes up, there's additional dollars or the amount of fundings that they used to
give cities are taking away and every time we turn around the cities are getting
slapped with the charges. So maybe with our hopeful that's sitting up here,
1 when he gets up, he can start trying to do some things up there.
Councilman Workman: Mr. Mayor, is anybody asked about what happens if the City
I of Chanhassen doesn't comply? I know that I saw the people in Chaska wrestle
with it and Minneapolis and everybody else has kind of goose stepped right with
it but I am assuming that.
II Mayor Chmiel: Don goes to jail.
Councilman Workman: We're going to lose everything warm and dear if we don't
II follow this? I mean they're going to take our EGA away?
Roger Knutson: It's a charge...if you don't pay the MWCC. What they can do is
11 they can take you to court. You owe it to them.
20
1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
Councilman Workman: That's another story.
Roger Knutson: And incidentally, I've got to editorialize on this. This is one
of my hot buttons too. The amount of money they're collecting far exceeds their
cost. Far exceeds their cost.
Councilman Wing: Well there's a whole page explaining the bureaucracy and why
they had to get to that.
Roger Knutson: And they're suggesting, when people have asked why are you
charging this amount now when your budget, and then how much you're going to
spend is a lot less? Because we might have higher costs in the future. 1
Mayor Chmiel: I'd like to see us write a letter to them with those concerns and
indicate that we will pay but we don't understand how they determined or how
they came to the conclusions and that they will have a surplus of dollars.
Councilman Mason: A letter signed by the Council? I would like to sign that.
Councilwoman Dimler: I would like to sign that too.
Don Ashworth: Roger's additionally hostile because he's a Minneapolis resident. 1
Councilman Wing: Well one thing I think I can assure our residents is that by
the time we're done with our surface water utility work and paying for water
testing, we're going to have water good enough to drink in this city.
Mayor Chmiel: Oh sure, no question. Okay, would you like to make that as a
motion Richard?
Councilman Wing: Well I moved approval of 1(m) and then, are you talking about
the letter? 1
Mayor Chmiel: Yes and that we'd like to sign by Council.
Councilman Wing: Approve 1(m) and I would also in that motion request a letter
as per the Mayor's recommendation signed by the Council. And that will go to
the Minnesota Department of Health or up to the Federal level?
Councilwoman Dimler: Both I would say.
Mayor Chmiel: Little waves maybe make something...
Resolution X92 -78: Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve
the Resolution approving the Water Quality Testing mandates and charges with
direction to staff to write a letter of protest to be signed by the City
Council. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS. None. ,
PRESENTATION BY THE UNITED WAY OF THE MINNEAPOLIS AREA, BYRON LAHER.
Mayor Chmiel: Is Byron here? We'll go right along. ,
21 1
1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
Todd Gerhardt: We'll contact Byron and see...
Mayor Chmiel: He probably doesn't know where Chanhassen is right?
PUBLIC HEARING: SUPPLEMENT FEASIBILITY REPORT ON STREET AND UTILITY
IMPROVEMENTS TO TETON LANE AND LILAC LANE, PROJECT 91 -4:
Public Present:
Name Address
' Richard Bloom
James Fenning 14600 Woodruff Road, Wayzata
Ithilien Developer
Frank & Florence Natole 6251 Teton Lane
Gordon & Joey Johnson 1275 Lilac Lane
Mike & Ann M. Preble 513 4th St N.E., Montgomery, MN
David Ewald 6370 Teton Lane
Randy Karl 6391 Teton Lane
11 Mike Couple 6331 Teton Lane
Robert M. Bowen 6275 Powers Blvd.
Stephen & Cindy Dome 6398 Teton Lane
Charles Folch: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. During the renotification
process for this hearing, staff and the developer for the Ithilien subdivision
have had the opportunity to meet further to discuss the project. The results of
the meeting leave us with a new proposal for the improvements whereby the
developer has agreed to construct all the proposed Teton Lane improvements under
a private contract at their cost. The developer has also agreed to pay for 20%
of the improvements to Lilac Lane which will be a public project. In exchange
the developer is asking that trunk utility hook -up charges for their subdivision
be waived. Given that the sanitary sewer and water lines which they will be
11 constructing under Teton Lane under private contract may serve future
subdivision of the large lot parcels on the east side of Teton Lane, staff would
concur that this request is reasonable. The other significant change is the
elimination of a special assessment to the large lot property owners, i.e.
Johnson, Pickerd, Ware and Natole. Instead a connection charge is recommended
based on 50; of the cost of the Lilac Lane and storm sewer improvements and the
acreage of the large lots. This connection charge would come due if the
property would be subdivided in the future. The connection charge rate is
proposed at $2,687.00 per acre and would be adjusted annually for inflation. A
revised financing schedule for the project is attached in your staff reports
which provides the numbers for both the developer and the future connection
charges that may be incurred with the large lots. The result is that these
property owners, Johnson, Pickerd, Ware and Natole are not unduly burdened with
an assessment at this time. In effect development is paying it's way on this
project. The final issue involves the barricade and at Council's request, staff
has met with Shorewood representatives to get some more information on how the
two break away barricades they have installed are performing. In short, their
' maintenance personnel basically considered these a maintenance nightmare,
particularly in the wintertime. They're constantly going out there and
replacing either broken or vandalized pieces of the barricade or portions which
may get stolen or removed. Really they didn't have too many good comments to
say about the barricades. The temporary type barricades. Bottom line from
1 22
1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992 ,
staff's standpoint is that Teton Lane is a public street and as such, the public
should have access to this street as any other street within the city. Staff
continues to recommend that the barricade be removed on Teton Lane. That's all
we have. We can open it up to public hearing comments.
Mayor Chmiel: Right. Is there anyone at this time who would like to come up to
the podium and indicate their concerns? Yes. Please state your name and your
address please. One more time.
Donna Pickerd: That's okay. My name is Donna Pickerd and I live at 1215 Lilac
Lane. I speak for myself when I say this. I want to thank both the city
engineer and staff and also the developers for working together and eliminating
the assessments for us. I guess that was important to me and I guess I
appreciate the time that you put into doing that. I understand that the
barricade has to come down because it is a city street. I guess I just want to
make sure that an effort is put into ways to try to reduce the speed. One of
the ideas I had was possibly putting a stop sign where the Ithilien development
empties into Teton Lane. Kind of a three way stop. I understand that sometimes
you need to see what is going to happen first before you make a decision about
whether that's done but that was an idea I just wanted to throw out. I had one
more thing here. Also, I met with Mr. Folch and with Bill Engelhardt this
morning on our street to kind of go through design and what kind of things might
be changed when and if the street is constructed. Lilac Lane more than Teton
Lane and I just want to make sure that officially it's on record that they both
said that before anything is done, that they would get a hold of the neighbors
in the neighborhood so we can get together and kind of look over the final road
construction details to make sure we understand what's happening. The grading
of the roads. The configurations and just the details. Just because I guess
it's nice to know what's happening in the area. That's all I think. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Good, thank you. Is there anyone else? Yes sir.
Robert M. Bowen: My name is Robert M. Bowen. I live at 6275 Powers Blvd.. My
property is immediately north of what the engineer frequently refers to as the
drain. I understand the drainage of this area. This lot you're talking about
is going to drain into the creek. I was told by the owner some time ago that by
some miracle water is going to run uphill 50 -60 feet, go through Powers Blvd.
and then run down that drain. You'd better have an Environmental Impact
Statement in order because I'm not going to tolerate it any further. When
Beddor, and you permitted him and his crowd to build what we know is Club Med.
That area in the northeast corner of Pleasant View Road and Number 17. Water
has been draining down in that creek so that all of my fences have come down.
They were reinstalled 2 years ago. They're down now. Furthermore, in the
northeast corner of that same intersection, nobody has gone down there to see
the utter destruction that is being performed on that land by your drainage. And
your engineer's drainage. It's intolerable. A month and a half ago I went up
there and was horrified to see that so much water has come through that a
basswood tree this big around was standing on it's tenacles ready to go. I went
by tonight and turned left. I wish everyone of you members would drive down
that road, look into that intersection and see what you see now. The idea of
our preaching about environment is ridiculous in view of these developments.
There's no means by which you can meet the two things. You've paved over most I/ of this township, from here to the Minnesota River. You're wondering if we've
23 1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
r
got water problems and as you're suggesting tonight, you're still going to tax
and tax but we're going to call it a user charge. It's happening throughout
government and I'm not here to tell you what you should do. That's your
business but if you do it wrong, you're going to get sued. Finally, if anybody
here has been told that they won't be taxed, I remind them of 20 years ago. That
was the last time I appeared here. I presented a written statement to every
member of your Council and to Russ Larson, your attorney and got up and made the
same kind of a speech. Went over. Sat down. Russ Larson came over. After
consulting with you people, or your predecessors, he said Bob, you know we don't
intend to run an assessment on that sewer down the creek. You aren't going to
use it. Why? Because 2 years before I had agreed that you could come in on the
r north and do it. I was lied to. I was lied to by this Council. When I asked
Russ why they changed their minds, they said it was the Council and the
engineers. I've said enough.
Mayor Chmiel: Thanks Bob. Might I just add to that. The previous Councils
that you're talking about, and I don't know which one. I thought I just wanted
to clarify that.
Councilman Wing: Before we drop that subject. Is there a conceived drainage
problem running north from this?
Charles Folch: We were in fact just, as Donna mentioned, we were out there this
morning and I'm not aware of the pre - existing problem which Mr. Bowen has
described. Certainly I can get in contact with him and we can go out and meet
out there and take a look at what the situation is.
Robert M. Bowen: No. You do your own research. If you've got an engineer that
can't do it, I can't help.
Mayor Chmiel: I think what we'd like to do is sort of work with you Bob if we
can and maybe alleviate what that given problem is. We're not sure what it is
and I'd even like to come out and take a look at it as well.
Robert M. Bowen: You're welcome anytime.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you.
Councilman Workman: If I might add that I have my own drainage problem in my
backyard due to no fault of my own. I've been building a home there and staff's
working with me to rectify it. There's about three different options. I think
they do a good job of coming out there.
r Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. I think this is something prior to our engineer as well so
it's something that we can take a look see on. Is there anyone else?
r Joey Johnson: Hi. I'm Joey Johnson, 1275 Lilac Lane. I just have a couple
questions. I wanted to ask.
Mayor Chmiel: You live in Shorewood, is that correct? Are you in Chan?
Joey Johnson: Well, we're the Johnson's on, our house is in Chanhassen but our
mailbox is in. We're in that situation. I just wanted to ask when the
r 24
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
barricade would be removed. Do we have any idea how soon that would be done?
Charles Folch: It'd be staff's recommendation to remove it immediately. In
discussing the project timing with at least for the Teton Lane improvements
which will be coordinated with the Ithilien subdivision, they will be moving on
a much faster pace than of course the City project will since we have a number
of steps we have to go through by law during the public process but I would
recommend that.
Mayor Chmiel: Right. Prior to taking out those abutments as I call them, I
would like us to look at, from public safety standpoint, that 3 way stop. That
would have tendencies to slow down that traffic as Donna had indicated. I don't
think that's too bad of an idea. 1
Charles Folch: Yeah, what I would recommend, as I explained to Donna, is that
once the subdivision has developed. All the homes are basically built, you have '
the construction. The home builder traffic out of there and we're basically in
a normal traffic situation which will probably take I would imagine a couple
years to get to that point. Once we have that normal stabilized traffic
pattern, then we can certainly take a look and evaluate and see how effective a
3 way stop would be there.
Mayor Chmiel: Well, I think something should be done prior to that. Not just a
couple years from now because we did have complaints with speeds going through
that particular area and I think we also had some clocking on it as well. Some
back information so something should be looked at so there is not that given
problem with those speeds along that street.
Charles Folch: Certainly we can, I can work with Scott and maybe we can set up
some routine patroling and some speed surveys out there to see what's happening
during construction. Certainly if there is speeding going on by construction
vehicles, etc. we can certainly citate them accordingly. I really hate to be
premature and set up some sort of permanent signage if we only have some, what I
would consider short term violators that are in the area. But certainly we'll
do whatever we can to mitigate the situation.
Mayor Chmiel: Nobody violates, they just drive fast. Check downtown. 50 mph '
in a 30 mph zone.
Joey Johnson: My concern was just what you were talking about. I agree with
Donna or if you just look at the situation because we have, right now there is
no place to... I too would like to thank the Council and City Manager for the
way everything has gone. Thank you. '
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Is there anyone else?
Stephen Dome: My name is Stephen Dome, 6398 Teton Lane. This is in regard to '
the barricade coming down. I think that we have finally reached a point of
community and if we think of Chanhassen as coming together, we can now have
neighborhoods which are not separated by an artificial barrier but once again we
can become a community. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thanks Steve. Is there anyone else?
25 1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
Florence Natole: I just have to get up one more time.
Mayor Chmiel: If you didn't, I'd feel bad.
Florence Natole: Right. I figure, this is Florence Natole, 6251 Teton Lane and
I have fought so many battles but it sounds like the war is already won by
someone else but what I got a kick out of was this, when I got it. Donna got it
for me I should say. Saying how Shorewood, all the terrible things they've gone
through and all the complaints and all the problems they've got but they've
still got their barricade up. So it didn't do any good to do all this
complaining and I just thought, if it was that bad, how come they haven't
brought it before their Council and opened up. As far as our's being a public
road, it never was until Curry Farms got in there. And Christmas Lake Road has
always been open because I used to stay in that little cabin. Those little
cabins there for the 4th of July. We used to go out there for family outings so
that Christmas Lake Road has always been open but once it was closed, it was
closed and that was the end of it. But I also have to say, if you're going to
open it, it would be my intention that you open it right away so that all of the
11 traffic for building and all these trucks and so on will be going through Curry
Farms.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Florence. Is there anyone else? As I mentioned, this
is a public hearing.
Richard Bloom: Good evening Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council. I'm
' Richard Bloom representing the developer James Fenning. I just wanted to maybe
say a few things. I'd like to first of all thank your staff. This has been a
real naughty, difficult problem frankly to resolve. All the improvements that
we're talking about here and Mr. Folch and Mr. Ashworth and Mr. Krauss were very
helpful in working with us to come to the resolution that's being recommended by
your staff this evening. We wholeheartedly support the recommendation that's
being offered by your staff this evening. If we could maybe ask one indulgence
from the City Council. It's taken a long time to resolve for this improvement
project and our plat in effect, our final plat approval was conditioned upon
this problem being resolved, which hopefully this evening it is. What we would,
we're intending to come back I believe at your next meeting with the final plat.
We'll have the plans and specs for our private improvements including Teton for
you and the development agreement I believe will be before you that evening as
well. What we might ask is if you empower your staff this evening, if we could
maybe get our site grading started. We're anxious frankly to get going on the
development. We're very willing to comply with, I know there's Watershed
District approvals and permits. We need to do that. Erosion control and
bonding. We're not suggesting those be waived. We'll gladly comply with all of
those but as I understand your staff can only issue a grading permit of up to
1,000 yards administratively. If you want more than that, basically it requires
Council action. So I guess we would first of all support the project
recommendations this evening and maybe ask if Council could possibly give us
some consideration to allowing your staff to issue the grading permit subject to
their requirements. Whatever they may impose upon us. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Charles, do you have any problems with that?
1
' 26
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
Charles Folch: Taking into consideration some of the external time control
project schedule control factors which the developer did not have basically
control over or input on, 1 would say that if staff, if the developer could
provide staff with a grading plan which we could review and approve
administratively, I think that would be acceptable if the Council's willing.
That'd be acceptable under these circumstances to allow the grading to take
place.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there anyone else at this particular time? As I mentioned, 1
this is a public hearing.
Randy Karl: I'm Randy Karl, 6391 Teton Lane and I just wondered if we could get
some clarification. I know we've talked about what immediate is with the
barricades come down. What that means to the City and stuff. Taking it down.
I think when the barricades was put up, it was supposed to be put up immediately
and it took about a year and a half or so for that to happen. What timeframe
would we expect if that's to happen?
Mayor Chmiel: I think the availability of our particular people to be able to 1
get there to make that removal. What their workframe is right now, I can't tell
you.
Randy Karl: Is that like weeks? Days? Months?
Don Ashworth: Maybe Charles. One of the things I'm concerned with is if
they've got graders in and moving heavy equipment, I think that that has to be
taken into consideration there as well. Our physically being able to going out
and lifting the J barriers, that doesn't present a problem in my mind. But
we're still looking to the safety of the vehicles and the neighborhood and if
there is major grading, I think that should be taken into consideration there as
well. Charles.
Charles Folch: Well I agree. 1 agree.
Don Ashworth: Would you like to make a guess as to time?
Charles Folch: We could probably have the situation cleared by the end of the
week.
Bill Engelhardt: Could I comment on that?
Mayor Chmiel: Sure, go ahead.
Bill Engelhardt: Teton Lane is going to be totally under construction. If
you're talking sewer and water so it might be beneficial to leave those
barricades up until that road is fully improved, curb and gutter and accepted by
the City along with Teton Lane and then open it up as one project.
Mayor Chmiel: That's a good recommendation. Good idea. 1
Randy Karl: I'd just like to point out that anybody that drives down Powers
Blvd., TH 5 realizes they're driving through a lot of grading and construction
and I think the State and everybody is accommodating that situation. If you go
27 1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
over on Lake Lucy Road they're doing a lot of grading and construction trucks
II out there. And I think you can manage that issue. I would like to point out
again that we've had a couple times where emergency vehicles couldn't go through
there and I'd hate to think that if we've got the road under construction, the
I proper barricade should be set up for the construction issues and identified
appropriately but just to leave the barricades up because we know we're going to
do some work and do those things, might not be appropriate tomorrow. Might not
be a good day for somebody in the area. Again, we've had those situations a
II couple times. We've been lucky. I don't think anybody wants to see someone not
be attended to appropriately by fire and safety vehicles and I'd really
encourage the City to move on this right away and not take that risk for any
II folks that live in that area and then address the construction under the
appropriate action that you would normally do for that kind of work.
I Mayor Chmiel: Right. I think as we're looking at it, as you've indicated, it's
been a year and a half in it's timeframe since it's been installed and I am
hopeful too that there's no need for emergency vehicles within that area. But I
think from a safety aspect, that right now with what they're going to do through
II there would be a good recommendation as they've indicated before.
Don Ashworth: If I might. They're correct. For the next meeting we're
I proposing to have the development contract and the final plat approval, etc..
Hopefully by that time we will have a better idea as to the specific schedule
that they're looking at for the installation of the sewer, the water, the
II streets. If, as a part of this item, the next agenda, potentially we could,
we'd be in a better position to respond to that question and I totally agree
with the individual who just spoke that we should keep the road open. But as
Charles said, I think for the most part the road is going to disappear during
II the construction of the sewer and water line. And I think by our next meeting I
we'll have a pretty good handle on how long that will take to take and get the
sewer and water and street back to a condition that's driveable.
II Charles Folch: I was just going to add to that. That maybe one thing we can
consider with the approval of plans and specs for the project is that the
barricades, you know at contractor's discretion, the barricade, the permanent
II type could be removed and more construction type barricades could be installed
which allows the contractor access in and out of that point and would also allow
for emergency access from that end also.
II Mayor Chmiel: Okay, good. Thank you. Is there anyone else? Seeing none, I'll
make a motion or make a request to have a motion to close the public hearing.
1 Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Mason seconded to close the public
hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was
closed.
II Mayor Chmiel: Discussion. No discussion.
I Councilman Wing: I was through there today and the only thing I found
undriveable about the area was the barricade and it's difficult to turn around.
I don't see why, if the road's going to be torn up and undriveable and
II unuseable, you might as well take them down, enjoy 2 days of peace and move on.
I don't know if there's any hazards involved in not taking them down right away.
II 28
II
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
And it's not a thoroughfare. It's a very limited, isolated corner. Otherwise,
I'm comfortable with all this. '
Mayor Chmiel: Is there any other discussion? Ursula?
Councilwoman Dimler: I guess as I was listening to some of the concerns here, 11
Mr. Bowen's especially, I would like to see his concerns about the drainage
addressed and see if there really is a problem there. I think it might be a
good idea for all of us to go out there on a scheduled meeting even because the
way he makes it sound, it sounds like a major issue. Also I agree with Donna
Pickerd's concern about the 3 way stop. I think that's legitimate. I also
would like to know, and I still haven't heard anything about the agreement with
Shorewood. Do we have a construction and maintenance agreement on Lilac Lane
with them?
Charles Folch: Currently at this time Shorewood maintains Lilac Lane and it's 1
our anticipating from talking to them previously that they will continue to
maintain Lilac Lane once construction is completed.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. We're doing construction and they're doing
maintenance?
Charles Folch: That's correct.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there anyone here from Shorewood? We did send out letters to
them as well.
Florence Natole: They're having their own meeting tonight.
Mayor Chmiel: We should have had a combination. 11
Florence Natole: On Byerly's.
Mayor Chmiel: No, I don't want to be in that one. Thanks. We have our own
grocery store. Any other discussion?
Councilman Mason: I was just going to make a real quick comment on what Mrs.
Pickerd said. I think this is one of those cases that for the most part, after
people got together, everything worked out. I know there's some consternation
about the barricade coming down but other than that I think this is a case where
everyone worked hard and got a good solution. I think it's great.
Mayor Chmiel: Right. Ursula. '
Councilwoman Dimler: I guess I'd like to say too, you know I hadn't made up my
mind about the barricade before I came here. I was listening for the public
comments and I was really glad to see that there was a consensus to take it down
and I guess miracles never cease. It's like the Berlin Wall coming down.
Councilman Mason: I don't know about that.
Mayor Chmiel: Maybe with that I'll call the question. Tom.
29 '
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
Councilman Workman: I still am concerned about, I know Mr. Karl is anxious to
get that thing down. In fact he offered to take it down...and I guess maybe we
should start getting used to it opened. I guess maybe it will take time for the
Karl's and the Ewald's up there to try and... I do feel...our staff and
everybody's been able to work things out. We didn't get to hear from Mr. Natole
tonight at all or the past couple meetings but it's nice to know that perhaps
things have kind of worked out. I got to know Donna Pickerd a little bit with
1 our dancing daughters and things but maybe the people on the other side of the
barricade, the Karl's and Ewald's, etc. can help to try and self monitor and
keep an eye on the traffic speed. I know that on my own road and my own
cul -de -sac, that's what we do with each other. You know when somebody's in the
' neighborhood that doesn't live there because they're going fast because we don't
because there's a lot of kids. So a lot of changes on the north side of the
barrier and so if they can be extra careful about it.
Mayor Chmiel: Very good. With that I'll call a question.
Resolution *92 -79: Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to
approve the feasibility report and supplement dated July 9, 1992 for the
installation of street and storm drainage improvements to Lilac Lane between
County Road 17 and Teton Lane contingent upon the developer for the Ithilien
' subdivision waiving his right to a public hearing, accepting a 20% assessment of
the smaller project cost, and agreeing to pay the full costs of the larger Teton
Lane project (curb and gutter, street expansion, sewer and water extension,
11 etc., including barricade removal). In addition, the connection charge for'the
storm sewer improvements to Lilac Lane be adopted for the Johnson, Pickard,
Ware, and Natole properties for collection at such time that future subdivision
'
•
would occur at any of these properties based on a rate of $2,687.00 per acre of
contributing area as presented in the revised cost schedule and annually
adjusted for installation based on construction cost index. All voted in favor
and the motion carried unanimously.
' Councilman Wing: Could I clarify? Is the barrier coming down now?
Mayor Chmiel: No. Until they determine when the best time is really to have it
down.
PUBLIC HEARING: VACATION OF A PORTION OF DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT OVER
THAT PART OF THE WEST 5 FEET OF THE EAST 10 FEET OF LOT 1, BLOCK 2, COUNTRY
OAKS, 3931 COUNTRY OAKS DRIVE, MARK AND JULIE GRUBE.
Public Present:
Name Address
Jim & Ruth Boylan 6760 Minnewashta Parkway
Kate Aanenson: Legend Home is representing the applicant. This was an incident
where the applicant came in for a building permit. Staff does a check on this.
This shows a 10 foot setback which is required by Code. Unfortunately this is a
10 foot utility easement which doesn't allow encroachment. Upon inspection by
the Building Department at the time of final permit, it was noted that this
really is a drainage and utility easement. Normally a window well or certain
' 30
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
architectural features, bay windows, fireplaces are allowed to encroach into a
sideyard setback. But because this a drainage and utility easement, that is not
permitted. Another anomaly is that normally our easements are 5 feet. For some
reason a 10 foot utility easement was put on this. There is no utilities in
this easement. Staff feels comfortable vacating that and turning it into a 5
foot utility easement. Therefore he meets all the requirements of the zone and
there should be no problem. So this doesn't require a variance. It's strictly
just a vacation of the easement down to 5 feet. The only recommendation that we
would have is that the applicant pay for any recording fees.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there anyone wishing to address this issue at this
time? This is a public hearing. '
James Boylan: James Boylan. I live at 6760 Minnewashta Parkway. My wife and I
are co- owners of the property that immediately adjoins this area and we have a
little bit of a problem and have had since the beginning of this house
construction. There seems to be a problem with Legend Homes building too big a
house on that lot and needing some of ours. About 1,400 square feet at last
measurement, of our property that has been encroached on. The City has
constantly told us that this was a civil matter and that they couldn't do
anything about it. And I guess my question to you tonight is, okay. Then who's
responsible for the proper drainage of this land if this is a drainage easement?
We already have 3 feet of dirt on our property that we didn't contract for in
the first place and another foot of mud that has washed down and I have pictures
if you'd care to see them. If you are interested I will show you. But I guess
at this point in time, I'd like to know who's responsible and who we name on the
civil action as being responsible for this, because there will be.
Kate Aanenson: Can I clarify that issue? '
Mayor Chmiel: Go ahead Kate.
Kate Aanenson: I was called to go look at the property. The original plot line i
did show the drainage but it doesn't drain into Mr. Boylan's property. There is
an ongoing dispute. I was called to go out to look at, there is some drainage
going onto his property right now where the window well is in this area right
here. We did tell the homeowners that they would need to provide erosion
control at this time. There is a dispute. When the foundation went in, it's my
understanding that some trees were knocked down on Mr. Boylan's property. 1
James Boylan: Some trees? 1,400 square feet of our woods.
Kate Aanenson: I'm just explaining to you what the facts are as I understand 1
them. And that there's been a dispute between the homeowners complaining about
miscellaneous materials being on Mr. Boylan's property. It's all been turned
over. Someone's been speaking to the Attorney's office and there has been
complaints filed with our community service officers have inspected both
properties. As far as this issue, as far as the home size fitting on there, it
really meets all the requirements of the zone. They chose to place it as they
saw fit, which is their right to do. How to place it on the lot. It does meet
all the standards of the zone and there is a dispute between the two property
owners to some of those issues but we've asked them, there is right now some
drainage going on. I went out there Friday and I spoke to your attorney. I did
31 1
1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
1
ask the homeowners to put up erosion control on that side where it is currently
draining. It's my understanding that they will be doing that and that they're
going to be putting sod in shortly and also a retaining wall on that side.
James Boylan: Mr. Mayor, Councilmen, Councilwoman Dimler. I really would like
1 to address you on this point of, I have heard so many promises as how Legend
Homes was going to take care of things. I've been hung up on them. By those
people. I've been told that if I want to take them to civil action, I'd better
1 have my ducks in a row. We have one through 6 months of a lot of trouble and a
lot of problems just trying to get our ducks in a row. We had a survey done on
the property to find that the corner iron had been dug up in that corner of our
I property that locates that by the builder. Before we could get in and replace
the corner iron, our surveyor had marked that property with the proper stake and
properly marked. They came in and relandscaped. Dumped more dirt on top and he
had to go back to the government monument and resurvey it again because they had
1 buried that corner iron and it is the starting location for our property from
the government monument. I think that this is just ridiculous that we're unable
to keep these people out of our property. I have put up a fence. A
construction fence that was meant to be temporary. I have been cited by this
city that it didn't meet aesthetically with their values but it seems to be
alright for them to come in, tear up our yard, cause us all this expense just to
II prove that we've been wrong and end up in a civil matter over this. This is
just ridiculous and I'm, the day that I went to take the fence out of the
property and I had marked that fence 6 inches inside our property line just to
keep them out and doing more damage and I.had to go in and take it out because
II in 10 days I had 90 days in jail or a $700.00 fine or both, if I didn't comply.
So I complied. My van got stuck in that mud that's back there because of
•
improper drainage. Now who's responsible? I have already talked to the new
I owners. They feel it's the builder. The builder wants to get out of it and
make it a city problem and that's I guess fine with me, it's just a matter of
okay, who's got the buck here people? I mean you know, do we allow people to
come in and do things in an area where we have plenty of land out here. I think
II a 10 foot setback is ridiculous in the first place on the side given the amount
of land and lots that we usually build on here and the kinds of respect that we
have. That means that if you allow them that easement to put in that egress,
II and I don't know, if you'd like to turn that on again, I have a question for
you. I'd like to know why they needed to come in on this egress. Excuse me.
Here's the area where that window well coming into the property and I don't see
I it right now. How come it's not on there? Oh, this is the one. Right here.
Okay, it's in so that it's within 6 feet of our property line. Now, what I was
told was that that's perfectly legal due to an interpretation of the rules and
ordinances. That it falls under the same thing as a chimney or an overhang or
1 some other such, you know somewhat temporary things. I think that's stretching
it a bit when you consider it is a piece of the foundation just like it was the
basement. It goes all the way down to the footing level of the basement and
it's a major part. And if you look, there's a pretty substantial back yard
there that they could have put that in without going into that easement in the
first place. Why did they do it, in that particular spot and then encroach that
II close on our property? And I guess the third thing is that I wouldn't mind so
much except for the fact that they also chewed out 1,400 square feet of our
property in the construction of this house and in that area where they built
that piece and I'm real concerned right now because it is improperly graded.
1
1 32
1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
Improperly draining and it is draining on our property and I think that they
want to get out of this and make it a city problem. I rest my case. '
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. I don't want the problem for the City. I think, and
maybe being we have our counselor here, I'd like to ask his opinion being we're
paying him such a high salary.
Roger Knutson: We're looking at one discreet issue on your agenda. That is, do
you need the easement or don't you need the easement. This issue is really
apart from what the next door neighbor has done to his property. If engineering
and planning say you don't need the easement, then you don't need it You don't
have to give it away. It's your property interest and you can say no, we're
going...whether we need it or not. We own it and we can keep it. That's apart
from the other problem. From what I've heard, keeping that easement will not
soave the problems between the neighbors. '
Mayor Chmiel: Very good. Is there anyone else at this time that would like to
address this issue? This is a public hearing. If seeing none, I'll suggest we
close the public hearing. Can I have a motion?
Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Workman seconded to close the public hearing.
All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Mayor Chmiel: Being there's concerns here, as was indicated, that there's 6
feet in his property line I think as you've indicated.
Ruth Boylan: No, it's from.
Mayor Chmiel: From? '
James Boylan: 6 feet from our property. That's not a problem. It's just the
fact that I'm worried about who's got the responsibility for doing proper
drainage there. There's other damage that is a civil manner and has little to
do with the City Council. It will be addressed, believe me. But the problem
here is that there's also the drainage problem and I don't want Legend Homes to
feel that they can escape from a duty of proper drainage and dump it on the
City.
Mayor Chmiel: No, and I wouldn't even accept it from the City because I think
it's the responsibility of that developer who's putting that project in to
provide that kind of elimination for you.
James Boylan: Could I request that the City Attorney or somebody else from the '
City send us a letter stating that they feel that it is Legend Homes'
responsibility for the drainage problem so that we don't have the buck passed
around here.
Kate Aanenson: I spoke to him on the phone Friday and told him that specific
issue. He had to solve that immediately and engineering confirmed that. Yes,
with Legend Homes and the homeowner. I called them both and your attorney and
told them that. That they had to have that resolved. Immediately.
1
33
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
1
James Boylan: I would like something from the City please in writing that
states that they will agree to that.
Roger Knutson: I don't know if they'll agree to it but we can write the
letter.
James Boylan: Well, that it's not the City's problem because they're going to
come back and say, no, no. The City of Chanhassen, it's their problem and it's
' going to get just.
Councilman Wing: Right now they're on, excuse me. Did you open this up?
1 Mayor Chmiel: No, but you've got it.
Councilman Wing: I know my place.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Ursula.
Councilwoman Dimler: I guess I still have one, we're only vacating 5 feet.
There will still be a 5 foot easement there?
' Kate Aanenson: Yes.
Councilwoman Dimler: So in case we have any drainage or any other utilities
that need to go there in the future, there will be room?
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Mayor Chmiel: Are they going to rip rap that or you said they're going to put
grass on the retaining portion?
Kate Aanenson: They're going to put a retaining wall and seed or sod. There's
no seed or sod on the property either. That's part of the erosion problem.
Councilman Workman: That is all we need to do? I mean is that all we can do?
' James Boylan: Are they going to remove the extra dirt that they put on our
property?
Mayor Chmiel: That again will be between you and them.
Councilman Workman: Well you know, there's some people building a home right
' next to me and they took a couple of edges of my sod that I just laid and I can
understand where he's irritated if one tenth of what happened to his property
happened because you get a little sick and tired of the construction guys. I
see the construction guys in the back there.
James Boylan: Would you like to see the pictures?
Councilman Workman: I'd love to. And so I know it's very frustrating and very
irritating because they really don't take into account the fact that somebody's
actually living in my home you know and they are using my power and water. But
anyway, so I don't know that we can do anything other than to, as Kate has
' 34
1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992 ,
already suggested to the builder. You didn't have a drainage problem there
before. You shouldn't now. But does that hold any teeth? For anybody?
Mayor Chmiel: I think that's a litigation problem that has to take place.
Councilman Workman: Does the City have to pursue the drainage problem from on
Legend Home? Who does?
Roger Knutson: I have not looked at this issue. We can look and see whether
there are any Code's they're violating.
Councilman Workman: Altering an easement?
Mayor Chmiel: Kate, what'd you have to say?
Kate Aanenson: Oh I just say as far as setbacks, there isn't any. I know that
someone from Public Safety has talked to Elliott, yes and he is aware of the
problem. ,
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Michael. Do you have any?
Councilman Mason: No. If staff is okay with the vacation of it. And obviously '
there's another problem that needs to be dealt with here but we're dealing with
this one particular situation.
Mayor Chmiel: Richard.
Councilman Wing: Don, if this is an ongoing problem and I was out there
probably several months ago and I saw where they came and rather handily mowed
down, although this is noninhabited, forested area which would be really easy to
move into slightly. Nonetheless it was Mr. Boylan's property and by vacating
this we kind of solve the problems for the owner and Legend Homes. I guess the
teeth we do have is to table this for a couple weeks and have Roger and everyone
else clarify it. Maybe I'll go out and look at it and before we vacate it,
being we're helping them out in the process of doing that, make sure they're
helping out the problem by their action. So I would move we table this until
the next agenda pending clarification of the situation.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay.
Councilwoman Dimler: Second.
Councilman Wing moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to table the vacation of a
portion of the drainage and utility easement over that part of the west 5 feet
of the east 10 feet of Lot 1, Block 2, Country Oaks for 2 weeks until the City
Council meeting dated July 27, 1992 for further clarification. All voted in
favor and the motion carried unanimously.
35 '
1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
NON - CONFORMING USE PERMIT FOR A RECREATIONAL BEACHLOT FOR MINNEWASHTA HEIGHTS
11 HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.
Public Present:
Name Address
Fran Faber 3471 Shore Drive
Morris Mullin 3451 Shore Drive
John Merz 3900 Lone Cedar
Ralph Hegman 3311 Shore Drive
Mary Jo Moore Dartmouth Drive
Kate Aanenson: Let me just clarify in case there's some ambiguity. This is
' Minnewashta Heights. I know the packet went out with the cover of Minnewashta
Creek. Located on Lake Minnewashta...approximately 74 homes in this area. The
beachiot does not meet the 200 feet of lake frontage requirement or the 30,000
square foot minimum area. It has 50 feet of frontage and is approximately 7,500
' square feet in area. The staff did do a survey of this beachiot in 1981 and
found that there was 6 boats at the dock, although there appeared to be a total
of 14 slips. We're not really sure what that means. If there was space
inbetween or there appeared that there was rope at the dock. I'm not sure.
Whoever did the inventory at that time just noted that there appeared to be 14
spaces. The dock at that time was 150 feet in length. In addition, the survey
showed that there was 2 canoe racks with space for 12. It's questionable
whether or not the dock, it fits within the setback zone. Myself, I've had
engineering out there eyeballing it. It's questionable. It looks like it may
be encroaching the dock setback zone so one of the recommendations in the next
'
•
year that they comply with that and make sure that there's a 10 foot. In
addition the swimming, since this beachiot is only 50 feet and they do have a
significant width to the dock, the swimming each really is pretty narrow. I
' want to make sure that any swimming is not encroaching onto the neighboring
property. The Planning Commission concurred and felt like the 14 boats that the
Association was requesting was consistent what they felt was documented in
11 '81. The Homeowners Association did supply documentation of their Minutes for
the last several years and they had in that 17 names on that list.
Mayor Chmiel: Can you clarify that? The last time they had that with their
' Association as to the date? Minutes or whatever they had to substantiate. •
Kate Aanenson: What these are? It's documentation showing how many boats were
' authorized for use in the different years. I think it goes back to 1979, '78.
In that year 1981 they showed 17 names, although they're saying 14 people...
they've got actual drawings of where those slips would be located. So basically
' the Planning Commission concurred with what the Association was requesting.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Is there anyone wishing to make a statement from the
Association? Yes sir. Would you please state your name and your address
please.
Fran Faber: I'm Fran Faber at 3471 Shore Drive. It's the property immediately
adjoining the recreational park. I just wanted to make a little bit of a
statement concerning the background on this. I moved out here in 1963 and
36
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
immediately upon arriving out there I found out that 25 feet of my land, my lake
space had been used for a recreational park. I also noted that Mr. Mullin's
and Mr. Wilbur, Mr. Lemke, Mr. Falgren and I were members of a Minnewashta
Heights Beach Committee and that we were responsible for the overseeing of the
use of the land. I don't think the author of this particular statement of using
25 feet on each side giving us a total of 50 feet of lakeshore really envisioned
how much the changes of the future were going to put pressure on the use of this
particular area. There has been, at the beginning, the use of small boats. But
as time has gone along, these boats have increased in size and have increased in
number and have now sometimes included pontoon boats. I think that as time went
along we realized that the possibility of liability was going to be there and so
we asked the Minnewashta Heights Homeowners Association if they wanted to take
over on the overseeing of this particular property. After a mutual agreement,
they decided to do this. So now the overseeing of this particular property is
in the hands of the Minnewashta Heights Homeowners Association. I would like to
just make a couple of observations because I have seen some things that I'm not
pleased with it. First I have had children swimming in our area and the people
have come out of the slips of this particular park area and have immediately
proceeded to the west which immediately crosses our swimming area. And when
small children are swimming out there and dive and keep themselves underwater
some of the time, it's very easy for the boat to go by and a propeller to hit
them. Luckily to date nothing has happened along this line but I'd like to
certainly set up guidelines that will prevent this kind of a thing in the
future. There's also some skiing done in this particular area and again, the
same risk is present. I hope we can set some precedence in this particular
decision that you people are making that will help to increase safety and
increase the possible satisfaction to all the people involved. For myself, I'm
perfectly willing and satisfied if the offsets on the property lines are
maintained. I do not like to see these abused. Also, I think that most of the
problems can be solved in a friendly, neighborly way with this Minnewashta
Heights Beach Association. Bill Finlayson and I have over a period of time
developed a friendship and I'm sure that we can work out things that will meet
with the mutual approval of all of us. I just wanted to make a comment that
we've certainly enjoyed our stay in Minnewashta Heights. Our property. We like
the setting and we hope that we can make it safe so that when we sell our
property, which is going to happen in the future, that they too will receive the
benefits and enjoy it as much as we have. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Is there anyone else?
Morris Mullin: My name is Morris Mullin. I live at 3451 Shore Drive. I'm on
the other side of the access in that area from Fran Faber. I moved there about
3 years after he did. Built a house there. Raised my children there. I concur
fully really with everything that Fran has said. We, at the present time in my
opinion, have the friendliest, hardest working, most agreeable people in that
area that we've had in my experience there. I'm very pleased about that. I
feel happy and comfortable there. We do have problems down at the beach but I
feel that most of them we can resolve internally in our own family in the
Heights area. I hope that this can continue to be so. I'd like to thank '
Bill Finlayson and that group. They've worked very hard, especially this year
in maintaining that property down there and things have gone extremely well. If
we can maintain this kind of a relationship in the area, we should very seldom
I/
37 r
1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
have to come here and ask for your help. We appreciate your understanding and
1 thanks for this opportunity to speak.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Morris. Is there anyone else?
II John Merz: My name is John Merz. I live at 3900 Lone Cedar. I'm not adjacent
to the Minnewashta Heights landing at all but I do have a question for the
Council as it relates to this issue. What it really relates to is the 1982
11 baseline. Planning Commission had voted to uphold the '82 baseline. This
Council itself had voted to uphold the '82 baseline and it's to my understanding
that it is the burden of proof, and I use that statement as has occurred here
' before. That the burden of proof as to the number of boats that should apply to
these recreational beachlots is what is in fact existed at the time that the '82
ordinance was enacted. This '82 ordinance, I remember being in these Council
chambers when that was enacted and it was virtually a war that went on here to
II
enact that. We have a good ordinance. It's in place. It seems to be well
founded and well thought out but for some reason, when we come to the absolute
adhering to the '82 baseline that we've all supported, we seem to abandon these
II thoughts and I just, not personal because of Trolls Glen. That's a separate
issue and I don't even like to mention it in here but in regards to Trolls Glen
and in regards to all these issues on all the lakes, it was repeatedly set out
' and confirmed by all of us here that the '82 baseline was going to be adhered
to. And it seems to me, from what I've seen so far, we're not exactly adhering
to our own recommendations and I really think that we should be more cautious in
how we approach that. I mean the '82 baseline is the '82 baseline. It doesn't
II say how many were planned to be there. How many were there and the burden of
proof belongs to the people that are applying in this permit process. I know
you all know my position and I appreciate your time hearing me. Thank you very
II much.
Ralph Hegman: Mr. Mayor and Councilpeople. My name is Ralph Hegman. I live on
' 3311 Shore Drive. We have lived in that house for 4 years. I have absolutely
no quarrel with the Minnewashta Heights additional boat slips. I do also have a
question however though on the baseline. When we moved in 4 years ago we chose
Minnewashta as a lake to live on after looking at many different places. On
II Lake Minnetonka and other lakes in the area and we chose Lake Minnewashta for a
number of reasons but one of them was because it did not have a heavy, heavy
lake useage. That's one of the things that does concern us is the, I have never
I come to one of these meetings before although I've had other notifications in
the past couple of years about adding slips to various places around the lake. I
guess my main concern is that if you have established a baseline, regardless of
what the needs are, whether you have some developer coming in from the outside
II that wants to take up a lot that's 50 feet or 75 feet or 100 feet long, and now
run out basically a marina for additional slips or if it's adding 1 or 2 boat
slips, I think that the integrity of your initial baseline should be what's
II upheld. Again I think it's the safety and the number of boats should be a main
concern and one of the main issues. Thank you very much.
' Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Ralph. Anyone else?
Mary Jo Moore: Good evening. Mary Jo Moore. I'm on Dartmouth Drive. Lake
Minnewashta. 1 just have to state that the property, the adjacent proeprty
II owners in this case apparently have no objection to this the way it's been set
11 38
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
up. I think it's very unsafe. I think 14 boats in a 50 foot lot is almost 11 unheard of. However I must again state that we have stick with our '82 baseline
which was your predecessor's did a good study of it and I grew up on Lake
Minnetonka. I saw that go from a very safe, fun lake to one that's'just
treacherous. I was there a couple weeks ago and it was not very much fun. I
also lived at Lotus Lake for 10 years. I saw that go from a very nice lake to
one way traffic. We did do the '82 for a reason and we had the saw, we had the
foresight to stick to it and let's continue to do that. Thank you. Oh, I do
have one question, if I may. Once this has been established, I'm really
questioning the whole procedure here. On the Pleasant Acres I believe it was,
was allowed 10 boats. Two weeks ago there were 12. This weekend there were 15.
How do we control it? '
Kate Aanenson: What we decided to do is, because it's going to take along time
to get through all the non - conforming beachlots, that we said the ordinance,
they had to be into compliance one year from the ordinance that we adopted.
That they come into compliance which is February, I can't remember the exact
date. I believe 24th, 1993. Because we figure the ones that we took through
the process first, it wouldn't be fair to the ones that we're getting towards
the end so basically this year we're trying to take them through the process but
next year anybody that exceeds the permit number, call the City and we'll go out
and cite them. '
Mary Jo Moore: So you're going to rely on the residents of the lake to report
any overage?
Kate Aanenson: Yes.
Mary Jo Moore: Okay, thank you. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Is there anyone else? Okay. Seeing none, I'll bring it back to
Council. Michael. ,
Councilman Mason: What John just was talking about really hit home and I got
one of my occasional flashes of hopeful intelligence. And you know, it's too
bad that it's taken 9 years to revisit this and I think that's the issue because
so much happens in 9 years. Party A says this. Party 8 says that. I'm in the
middle. You're over there. Someone's over there. And no one knows. Burden of
proof. In this situation there were only 6, or what. 7 boats there but it was
clear that there were moorings for more boats so you assumed they were out. You
know how do we deal with that. I'm hoping that from now on people will be
making periodic checks and seeing that whoa, there are 2 more boats than are
supposed to be there and I would be very surprised if there wasn't fairly
immediate action. But I really think one of the problems, I think the biggest
problem in this whole thing is we're trying to figure out something that
happened 9 years ago and we don't have, unfortunately very accurate records on
it which is too bad because I think the lake has suffered because of it.
However I think with this process in place now, hopefully that part of the lake
suffering and that doesn't make it any fewer boats. I understand that. That is
an aside. I was down at that beachlot today and it certainly is very well kept
up. I'm very impressed. It is very small and it is very crowded and I too
share the concerns of the adjoining neighbors about encroachment, although I was
also very encouraged to hear both gentlemen think that it can be worked out. I
39
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
hope so. I can certainly see with boats going in and out of there, how it would
be extremely dangerous for kids swimming on either side there. I'm not quite
sure how we can address that but I certainly hope we do before we approve this.
Because it's small. It's very well kept up. Don't get me wrong. Obviously
people care about what's going on on that beachlot but it's very small.
Mayor Chmiel: Right. I was there yesterday and looked at that with Councilman
Wing. And you're right, maintenance is done real well but it is narrow.
Thomas.
Councilman Workman: There appears to be, am I hearing correctly an encroachment
on the setback of another parties next door from this?
Mayor Chmiel: Basically I think what they're saying is the boats that are out
there are within that 10 foot from the property line over. As you take a site
line and look out to the lake.
Councilman Workman: Had the Planning Commission addressed that or are we
addressing that?
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah.
Kate Aanenson: What I said is that it appears to be minimal. It may be over
but they will have to rectify that. But again this goes back to they have to
' come into compliance by next summer. You know it sounds like they're going to
try to work something out for the rest of this year.
Mayor Chmiel: Let me just interject something Tom. I tried to clarify it with
you. The fence that's up there, I stepped off 10 feet and then looked directly
out to the lake and it appears as though there is that encroachment of that 10
feet.
Councilman Workman: Not only...?
' Mayor Chmiel: Right. There's also an additional piece of dockage out there
that I don't think should be there. On the boats on the far outside. Those
that are facing in with the canopies there. I don't think that should be an
extension of that particular dock either but that maybe we can discuss too.
1 Councilman Workman: Well you know, along with Mr. Merz you know...and the '81
or '82 baseline and have we, I guess does the Council feel satisfied that the
I Planning Commission has stated that 14 is what they had because of what it
looked like they had dockage for? Correct?
I Kate Aanenson: Yes.
Councilman Workman: Which isn't an exact science. Although they show boat slip
assignments, etc.. I mean it's such a hard and difficult thing at this point
1 for a Council to have to try and make a decision on on records kept by a
homeowners associations of how many boats. So you try and take a stance on what
apparently was the baseline, and I understand the work the previous Council did
I but how do you prove other than their own and guessing and using aerial
photographs or other, that say that it's something different. How do you do
1 40
1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992 '
that? How do you penalize those other people? I mean I think we care and 11 understand, I think we do, that we want to preserve the lake. We've had to fret
over this thing and we're going to have to continue to do so on all these lakes.
It's a very, very tricky business without trying to take away from somebody what
they're used to having you know, if in fact they've had it. You know what I
mean? It's kind of, so it's very difficult situation. I don't want to,
Ursula's smiling at me. You like to see me squirm, but it's so difficult
because you can't, how can you make a decision because it is difficult. Other
than saying well, we think you have too many boats there so now we're going to
choose 7. How do you do that? And so that changes the values of properties
inside the homeowners association and that's a whole other argument. So I
guess I don't in this situation have anything to go on other than what staff and
what Planning Commission has decided. I don't know how else to make a decision.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Richard. ,
Councilman Wing: There's some pluses here. The first one is that Mr. Finlayson
has been commented tonight as doing a good job trying to work together with the
neighbors. I think that's in everybody's best interest. I think both neighbors
have suggested that as long as the city will put into effect here and enforce
the dock setback zones, that that not only protects the neighbors but in fact I
think as Mr. Faber mentioned, satisfied his concern and gave him if you will
breathing room from infringement and then with the boat traffic getting out to
the west or whatever direction it goes. In fact has a way to get out to the
lake without infringing directly onto the neighboring property. So I think
there are concerns for that but our only question tonight and the only question
we're addressing isn't safety or the position of the dock or anything else. I
mean they've gone from several small fishing boats to all 20 foot boats. From 11 no boat lifts to a lot of boat lifts and so have I. You know everything's
grown. We've all expanded. We've gotten bigger boats and going further so
those are moot points. It's just unfortunate. The question is actual use. Now
on the '81 and the '82 sketches, actually in '81 they don't have a sketch. In
'82 they show three lines of boats which is what they're attempting to do now.
The three lines of boats is what's caused the trouble in the past is that third
line has in fact infringed on neighboring properties but we still come down to
actual use. What were the actual number of boats and Kate has suggested, our
survey said 6, 7, 8 or 9. Well I've lived there for 27 years and I know for a
fact that it wasn't 6 boats. No question that that's not an accurate number so 11 scratch that one. So then do we assume that this sketch they showed me from '82
is accurate where it says 18? Well it just happens for 1981 and 1982, Bert
Ackerman flew over and took aerial photographs of the whole area and we have a
picture of what it looks like. So you go down and there's only 6 boats parked
there in the photograph but anybody with any brains can see that there's a slip,
a slip, a slip, a slip, a slip and so if you count the slips, which is in fact
where the boats were, I came up with 12. It could have easily been 13. I can't
dispute it. They clearly didn't have 18 but I do see in the photograph they had
between 12 and 13 boats in two lines. And it's, so whether it's 1, 2 or 3
lines, again that isn't the problem so I see that the boat issue here is kind of
moot. Very little to be discussed. I think Planning Commission did the best
they could and all I would ask is that as a part of this permit, whatever number
the Council elects to go with, that the dock setback zone ordinance and section
be referenced in the permit so that subsequent officers from Minnewashta Heights
41 1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
recognize that this is a restriction and a city ordinance that has to be
complied with. I don't see that they're going to have any trouble with it.
Councilman Workman: Well Richard then aren't you really saying that our so
' called '82 baseline has a heck of a lot of holes in it?
Councilman Wing: Not all of them. This one. This one is not as accurate as it
could be. Absolutely. We've debated that all along. On the other hand, some
of the other ones are more clearcut. There was a better count or more accurate
count. We could blow this picture up but I'm just telling you, we could
honestly, there's a boat here. A boat here. A boat here. Obviously there were
boats next to it so if we go out, we've got a total of 12 boats that I can see
easily for 1982. Now that doesn't reflect on, are we counting the summer of '82
or summer of '81?
Kate Aanenson: '81.
Councilman Wing: '81. So I don't know what the argument is. I think they are
' interested in policing themselves and I was happy to hear the neighbors
relatively comfortable with compliance and I think that's a real important
issue. And unfortunately we all know that 14 boats, there's marina's on Lake
' Minnetonka that would kill to have that density. We're really getting up there
but on the other hand, the '82 ordinance was agreed to protect the existing
boats and if there were 11, 12, 13, 14 boats there, we agreed as part of this
compromise to that ordinance, to protect what existed. So as much as I'd like
to see fewer boats, I can't.
Councilman Workman: And maybe you can answer a philosophical question because
here I am a non, I didn't have an opportunity to spend the nice evening on Lotus
the other night. I don't own a boat and I don't live on a lake. Here I am a
cornfield dweller and I'm charged with preserving and protecting for the
' homeowners of Lake Minnewashta and Lotus, their lake but I get the sneaking
suspicion they don't, they only care beyond their own dock themselves. You know
what I mean? I mean I'm charged with it and I'm left at, this is maybe what I
was trying to get at. I'm left with feeling comfortable and guilty for trying
to pick a point in history where we can say okay, this is what you had. Right
or wrong. Too many or not enough. But everybody seems to be pointing at the
other guy and they've all got huge boats. What do you call them? A speed
' whatever, rippers?
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah.
11 Councilman Workman: You know, as a whole nobody cares about the lake.
Individually they all care about the lake but it's reflecting with the home.
11 Councilman Wing: I think it's frustrating with the lake owners because they
control 1,400 feet of lakeshore and have 14 boats on it and then 50 feet comes
along and that 50 feet has 14 boats. That's not right but that's the reason the
'82 ordinance was effected. They recognized that this was going to become the
norm and the way of life and it wouldn't work. There are very few like
Minnewashta Heights. We had what, 60 homes back in '81. Almost 70 homes in
virtue have been built and they all puddle down there and they all, it was just
a high intensity use and it was one of the first ones in the city. And
' 42
1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
II
Minnewashta Heights is probably one of them that prompted the alert that this II ordinance was needed. Nonetheless, those boats were there as I see it and under
this ordinance are protected whether we like it or not. All we ask is that they
stay off the neighbors properties and stay on their own property and that's why
that dock setback zone exists. That's been there all along and I think they
II
have violated and that's why Mr. Faber was here tonight to point out that that
has been an issue. If they will go along with that, Mr. Faber has no
complaints. Mr. Mullin has no complaints. I'm going to have a complaint? II I don't live next to them. And I don't see, if there's anybody here that can
prove to me that they had less than 14 boats, good. They've kind of showed me
that they had 14 and I hate to admit it but that picture suggests they did too. II Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Ursula.
Councilwoman Dimler: I just want to clear up one thing. When Mr. Wing says
II
they, you're not a part of that association?
Councilman Wing: I'm part of Minnewashta Heights but not part of the beach.
II
Councilwoman Dimler: Because I have to say something and this is my
opportunity. Guess what? When Sunrise Hills came up, I wasn't allowed to
discuss it because of conflict of interest. You remember that?
II
Councilman Wing: Well I didn't have an opinion and I'm not.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, I'm just kidding. II
Councilman Wing: I'm not trying to set a precedent here at all. I thought if
I either staying out of this or addressing it from the podium until I realize
there are no issues. The actual use is the only question.
Councilwoman Dimler: But I do get a kick out of you. You said anyone with a II brain could see that there were 14 slips and yet the boats, it shows only 6
boats. Well my parking lot issue was that exact same thing. We had plenty of
space for more and yet there were only 12 cars down there at one time so that's II what we were allowed to have. Can we change that now?
Councilman Wing: Well I'm surely pleased I was able to feed the fire. II
Councilwoman Dimler: Just a little personal thing there. I guess we are
talking about 1981. I keep hearing '82.
Kate Aanenson: '82 is when the ordinance became effective in January so we have II
to look at the level of use the summer before.
Councilwoman Dimler: At '81, okay? Alright. Looking at all this, I have the
I
same concerns that everybody else has but I can't prove that there weren't 14
there. I can't prove there were 6 there. It's really difficult for us to make
that decision. I really think that again Planning Commission did a good job 1
discussing it and seems to be in agreement so I would go along with the
recommendation.
II
43
II
II
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
Mayor Chmiel: I guess it'd be repetitious for me to say anything more but often
times when people go and buy property adjacent to lake, it always seems like not
all realtors, some realtors, really try to sell the issue on what you can do on
that particular lake. And by buying a home you're able to put a boat on that
lake. Until they start really understanding what it is and it isn't that way.
I think I mentioned this before on one of the others. I think when we
originally started these lots, they were designed purely I think for
recreational lots. That is swimming for the people who have the utilization of
' that lot and the accessibility to the lake. And this is just my own thoughts.
But they probably didn't even include boats or thoughts of that into it. I
think that by looking at what the Planning Commission has gone through, I sort
' of concur with it. I have some concerns with the setback of the 10 feet with
that site line. I have a little concern with the additional dockage which
extends beyond from where it's at and I don't know if that's a violation but I
think that should be looked at. But that 10 foot setback I think is something
' that we have to really closely watch. As I said, when I looked at that
yesterday, there was some encroachment that I feel is in there already with that
third row of boats that are sitting there. So with that I guess.
Councilwoman Dimler: I'd like to make one more general comment in regards to
what was brought up about how we're going to police this. I guess I think it's
' okay to have people call but I hate to leave it totally in that situation where
a neighbor has to snitch upon neighbor. What I'd like to see is that we do a
surprise check at least once a year.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, I think we could check them all once but what I'm saying
is, like we can make sure that the right length of dock is out there but I'm
saying, everyday we can't go out and check. If someone notices that there's
' additional. 1
Councilwoman Dimler: Right. Right. Yeah. So you're going to do a yearly
check?
Kate Aanenson: Yes.
1 Councilman Wing: Don, could I just make a general comment? This pertains to
all of these. The ones we're working on, whether it's Riley or Minnewashta or
Lotus, the ordinance we presently have doesn't allow any dock or any boat on a
recreational beachlots such as this so I think it really behooves these people,
Minnewashta Heights, Pleasant Acres or whatever group, Sunrise Hills, not to
abuse the intent of helping protect back in 1981 and '82. I think that there
was a real compromise made. The lake people cut down boats. Accesses were
closed. Numbers of boats were split between lake and non -lake. Then we start
intensifying and in the case of Mr. Faber, maybe infringing, they're really
abusing the intent of that ordinance and the protectiveness of that ordinance.
So I would just ask that all of these respect that position and stay within
their own bounds. I certainly expect Mr. Faber and Mr. Mullin to stay on their
own property and likewise with the Heights and again, I think Mr. Finlayson has
done an excellent job...supportive. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other discussion? If hearing none, I'd like a motion.
Councilman Wing: In good faith I will be happy to abstain.
44
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
Councilwoman Dimler: That's two no votes right there.
Councilman Wing: I guess I am bias enough on this issue that I, although I 1
support your decision as I believe it's coming out so just for the record.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there a motion from the floor? 1
Councilman Workman: I would approve Minnewashta Heights non - conforming
recreational beachlot I guess per Planning Commission recommendation...
Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second?
Councilwoman Dimler: That includes the buoys for the beachlot to make that more
safe right? They were not there but we're recommending that they be put in
Kate Aanenson: Buoys? 1
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, the question is whether or not if there are certain width
of a beachlot before you can put them in. We thought that would help delineate
the property lines to make sure that there's no encroachment. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Let me just get a clarification. I should have asked the
question before but I didn't. With those total numbers of boats and the canoe
rack that's located there, there are 4 canoes that were housed in the, what do
you call that? A skateboard, one of those wind sails appeared as though was on
there. In that, and by what I had seen here, they show that there are two canoe
racks consisting of those 4 additional and that's all part of the recommendation
by the Planning Commission.
Councilman Workman: Do we need to include also the setback?
Mayor Chmiel: I think that setback portion should be.
Councilman Workman: That they must. 1
Kate Aanenson: We're putting that in the letter to all of them but if you want
to add that again, that's great.
Councilman Workman: I guess I'd like to add it for emphasis and I mean that is
another ordinance.
Mayor Chmiel: Right. That's correct. Okay, motions on the floor with
clarification and second.
Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the Minnewashta
Heights Non- Conforming Recreational Beachlot with one dock 150 feet in length,
with emphasis on staying within the dock setback zone, two canoe racks, 14 boats
docked, swimming beach with marker buoys if they will enhance the safety of the
swimming beach, and a swimming raft. All voted in favor except Councilman Wing
who abstained and the motion carried.
45
1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE CITY CODE, CHAPTER 20, CONCERNING
' ALLOWED USE IN THE BH, HIGHWAY AND BUSINESS DISTRICT, FIRST READING.
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, very briefly. The ordinance is a little confusing on
the point of what exactly is allowed in terms of auto related uses in the BH
' district. Under one definition they're allowed as principle uses and there's
another definition, a little bit different, worded differently, they're allowed
as conditional uses. Frankly I think the City's in a somewhat better position
to have them all grouped as conditional uses. It gives you a little bit of an
extra measure of control over those kinds of things. Therefore we had the
amendment drafted that basically did that. It eliminated it as a permitted use
II and listed it as a conditional. Fairly straight forward and we're recommending
that you approve it.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. The only thing I'd like to see added to the recommendation
I is that this should be listed under then the conditional use and it doesn't
really specify.
Paul Krauss: Right.
Councilman Workman: So moved.
II Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah I do, is the property owner losing any rights here by
doing this?
Mayor Chmiel: No.
Paul Krauss: Well, these things are still allowed. Instead of as of right, as
' a conditional right. I guess I'd defer to Roger to explain the nuances
inbetween but the conditional use permit does give you those added review
criteria and a little bit of extra leverage to get a project to meet the city's
goals.
II Councilwoman Dimler: So they can still do the project but with our input more?
' Paul Krauss: And hopefully a little more input than you would have had before.
Mayor Chmiel: Right. This gives you an opportunity to put additional
II conditions contained on there that you didn't have the ability to do prior to
that time when it was a permitted use. Okay, call a question.
Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Mason seconded approval of Zoning Ordinance
II Amendment to the City Code, Chapter 20, Section 20 -712 eliminating auto service
centers as a permitted use in the BH, Business Highway District. All voted in
favor and the motion carried unanimously.
II Councilman Wing: You mean no discussion?
' Mayor Chmiel: No.
1 46
1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
II
AUTHORIZE PREPARATION OF A FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR EXTENSION OF LAKE LUDY ROAD II BETWEEN GALPIN BOULEVARD (COUNTY ROAD 117) AND TRUNK HIGHWAY 41, PROJECT 92 -12.
Public Present:
Name Address II
John Waldron 1900 Lake Lucy Road
Merle Steinkraus 1800 Lake Lucy Road
II
Mayor Chmiel: This is sort of a cut and dry thing.
II
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, I move approval.
Mayor Chmiel: Charles? II
Charles Folch: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. The westerly terminus of II Lake Lucy Road is currently at County Road 117, Galpin Boulevard. Future
extension of this road out to Trunk Highway 41 was a transportation element
specifically identified on the comprehensive plan. Ideally we would prefer to
see development of this road proceed from an east to west fashion in order to
II
maintain continuity and avoid deadheading a project properties but the City
has recently been contacted by two property owners located just east of TH 41
and would fall somewhere close to the west end of the alignment who intend to
develop their property. This places the City in a position of having to choose
whether to proactively plan for this road alignment or reactively respond as
each development proposal comes in. Proactive planning is preferred in this II particular case as the future Lake Lucy Road will function as an urban collector
road and topography and environmental features will play an important factor in
determining it's appropriate alignment. It is staff's recommendation to
officially map the entire segment of Lake Lucy Road from TH 41 to CR 17 and
II
conduct a formal feasibility study for the westerly quarter mile of improvements
which will serve these two developments. It is anticipated that the cost for
this study will be recovered over a number of years as abutting properties II develop and construction projects take place. It is therefore recommended that
the mapping and study as specified be authorized and that the consulting
engineering firm of William R. Engelhardt and Associates be assigned as the
project engineer.
II
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Ursula.
Councilwoman Dimler: This is part of our comprehensive plan isn't it? That was 1
always in there?
Charles Folch: That's correct. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Charles, not that I have any objections with Bill getting this
particular job but here again, although he may have the time to be able to do
II
it, do we ever look at putting these kinds of things out for bids to have people
come in, as we've discussed before?
II
47
II
II
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
11
Charles Folch: As we talked about earlier, on larger specific type, specialty
projects such as the Swamp Program and the MUSA expansion, we did. For these
general municipal type projects, it works real well for our department to work
with, well right now it's probably 5 to 6 consultants that we work with on a
' regular basis. Assign these projects out accordingly. When I assign these
projects out I basically try to evaluate a number of factors with the consulting
firm. One, their current work load with the City. Two, their ability to
perform the project. Three, have they done similar projects such as these in
' the city and how well have they performed. The ones I've worked with I'm real
happy with. I'm real satisfied. They know the city's system. They know what I
expect of them. Oftentimes they make my job easier because they cover bases and
I don't need to basically lead them by the hand all the time. I think it works
much better than, and I think we're getting good products from them. I would be
real leery about putting these out for RFP's knowing that, well not knowing who
we would get in that would come in as the low bidder on a project.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. I guess I'd just like to ask you those specific questions
to justify them. I know really I guess what the answers are but I want to be
I sure that the general public sometimes sits back and questions these and has
indicated some of those concerns to me from time to time. Why is it that we
always use the same ones? Why don't you have it on a rotating basis? Having a
number of select ones that you feel comfortable with. But those are some of the
questions that have been brought up to me and I guess I have those concerns to
ask that question. Is there any other discussion?
John Waldron: Can I make a comment?
Mayor Chmiel: Sure. Please be my guest. Please state your name and your
address.
John Waldron: Good evening. John Waldron, 1900 Lake Lucy Road. I'd just like
' to have entered into the record as you're planning for this extension of Lake
Lucy Road, that I think we've brought up before about our bike path that's not
really a bike path. Our kids aren't too safe so when you're going this
extension, could you have some planning made for a bike path that's not right on
II the road? Appreciate it.
Mayor Chmiel: If the dollars are there, we'll be more than happy to. Anyone
else? Any other discussion?
Councilman Workman: I had one little question. It didn't seem to me too long
ago that I asked the question. It seemed to me at the very end of Lake Lucy
Road now at Galpin we kind of did some upgrading of a water pump there and it's
like right in the middle of the road. Where the road will go. And I asked why
don't we move that or get it out of the way because you know our road's going to
II go there. Can anybody really...
Mayor Chmiel: The sewage lift isn't it?
II Councilman Workman: Is it sewage?
Charles Folch: Actually water booster station is what it is.
48
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
Councilman Workman: It seems to me we put an awful lot of money into that.
That's going to have to be moved and maybe we can figure out what, well I guess
it's money down the pit but did it make sense for us to upgrade that at that
time or did it fail and we reconstructed it?
Charles Folch: Well to be honest, I don't have the history of it.
Councilman Workman: Maybe find that out for me personally anyway. I guess I
was told at the time, and maybe it was Gary Warren who said.
Councilwoman Dimler: It was part of a well improvement.
Councilman Workman: The road wasn't coming through until the year 2010.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, can I have a, any other discussion? Can I have a motion
for the preparation for the feasibility study?
Councilman Mason: So moved.
Councilwoman Dimler: Second.
Resolution #92 -80: Councilman Mason moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded that
the official mapping of the extension of Lake Lucy Road between Gaipin Boulevard
(County Road 117) and Trunk Highway 41 and the preparation of a feasibility
study for the road improvement project of approximately the westerly quarter
mile of this segment be authorized, Project No. 92 -12, and that the consulting
engineering firm of William R. Engelhardt and Associates be assigned as the
engineer on the project. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
RECEIVE FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR NEZ PERCE ROAD EXTENSION, CALL FOR PUBLIC HEARING,
PROJECT 92 -6.
Charles Folch: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. Attached you have the '
feasibility report for this proposed road alignment. Two options are presented.
The first proposed is to construct Nez Perce as a thru street out to Pleasant
View Road with the realignment of Peaceful Lane connecting into this new segment
as a T intersection. This option would provide more of a continuous north /south
movement on Nez Perce between Pleasant View Road and Lake Lucy Road. The second
option proposed is to connect Nez Perce Drive to Peaceful Lane at a T
•
intersection and then upgrade the existing Peaceful Lane between that location
point north to Pleasant View Road. Both proposals will construct the roadway up
to the City's current urban standard roadway section. The feasibility study
presents some, at this point known advantages and disadvantages of each
alternative which hopefully will aid you in deciding along with staff which is
the appropriate alignment to choose. At this point, all we're asking tonight is
for the Council to formally receive the report and call for a public hearing to
be held at your regular meeting on August 10, 1992 at which time our project
consultant engineer will give a formal presentation of this feasibility report.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I looked at this and there's some discussion that we had
this last time with Mr. Owens where we should proceed with condemnation of that
roadway. And I can't see us spending money on condemnation for that until Mr.
Owens really starts developing his property. I can't see us throwing money down
49
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
and away because eventually he will plat that particular property and in no way
1 do I feel we should spend those additional dollars unless someone else is going
to pick up those costs.
I Charles Folch: Yeah, at this point it's not staff's recommendation to proceed
with a formal improvement project. Ue again want to proactively protect the
appropriate alignment of that roadway by officially mapping it. I'm not up to
speed on the current situation of the Owens property which was in I believe in
II bankruptcy but if the appropriate time would come about where we may be forced
into condemnation, we certainly would want clear justification before we'd
recommend that to you.
II Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor too when we reviewed the last plat, who's name escapes
me. Troendle Addition. You might recall that we had the folks on Lake Lucy
Road that were concerned that as traffic levels build, at some point they wanted
II to be able to trip something and we agreed that we would raise the issue again I
think in 12 months or 18 months. I'm not, you know clearly the construction
hasn't begun there in earnest and I'm not aware of any problems at this time but
II again this puts us in the driver's seat to respond.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, good. Is there any other discussion?
Councilman Workman: I'd move approval.
Councilwoman Dimler: Second.
I Resolution #92 -81: Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dialler seconded to
receive the feasibility study for the extension of Nez Perce Road, Project 92 -6
I and to call a public hearing for Monday, August 10, 1992. All voted in favor
and the motion carried unanimously.
I APPROVE SIGNAL JUSTIFICATION REPORT FOR WEST 78TH STREET INTERSECTIONS AT GREAT
PLAINS BOULEVARD AND MARKET BOULEVARD, AUTHORIZE PREPARATION OF PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS, PROJECT N0. 92 -3A.
' Charles Folch: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. Our project consultant
engineer, Mr. Dennis Eyler of Strgar - Roscoe - Fausch is present tonight to give
you a presentation on the updated signal justification report.
II (Dennis Eyler was not speaking directly into a microphone and therefore portions
of his presentation were not picked up on tape.)
II Dennis Eyler: Good evening Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. Last time I was
here the signal justification report...tabled and there were specific questions
that were asked by the Council that night. Those questions concerned the timing
I and the need for traffic control at the intersection of Great Plains Blvd. and
78th Street. And also the need for traffic signals at Market Blvd. and 78th
Street. Some of the questions and concerns were on the operation of the
I intersections today and...impact of commercial development along 78th Street,
particularly Market Square. And there was also discussion concerning the detour
of TH 101 due to the reconstructin of Dakota Avenue. At that time there was
still hope to get the work done in the fall so there was kind of a sense of
II urgency... Another question was, what happens after that project is done and
11 50
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
the dust clears and Market Square is fully developed? There will be increased
traffic from Market Square but based on a license plate study that we had done
before...due to the reconstruction of TH 101. We also took a look at the cost
of operating the intersections... Operating costs of the vehicles...
construction and maintenance cost of traffic...other impacts associated with the
operation of the intersection. And then we looked ahead to what happens when
the Target store's developed and within that timeframe since we were here last,
apparently the site is starting to look like...and we also took a look ahead...
plans for the James property and the Burdick property and compared that to an
earlier traffic study we did back in 1990. See if there had been any changes.
At that time we did... So with that, what we did, I'm not sure. Did you all
have a chance to read the handout? Basically we went through, not just one
analysis. It's graphical solutions that kind of show those. This being 78th
and Great Plains. The existing volume today is slightly over the line for
justification for signals and I'm sure...and your question about what happens
after TH 101 is rerouted is certainly pertinent. Traffic will go down. During
the detour the volume will jump up significantly and then after Target opens by
late 1993 or 94, the longest... We took a look at user cost because being this
is a T intersection, there are less conflicts than the graphical solution... So '
we took a look at the cost standpoint. In today's operation is really kind of
on the line to get back with the cost of the traffic signals to what's the
cheapest, overall operation of the intersection. These costs are based on
approximately 4 seconds per vehicle for stopping costs and delay is figured on
an hourly basis at $6.00 an hour. Those are typical costs we use in engineering
studies and they're generated by the... Traffic signal would cost approximately
$70,000.00 and $2,000.00 to $3,000.00 a year to operate the machine... So right
now today...that was very, kind of an astute observation that you made when I
was here last time I had reason to ask those questions. After we looked at the
detour, the additional traffic that caused the detour...not work real well with
the existing stop... There'd be no way to pass that traffic through the
existing stop signs. We did look at all way stops and we looked at a temporary
signal being in in 3 months. The temporary signals...would be the cheapest
solution. We also looked at ahead to 1993 and again, because the...but going
ahead in 1994 with Target... Went down to Market Blvd. and...with the opening
of Market Square and full development with really right on the line, and with
the...of Target by '94, it clearly is in the zone to justify a traffic signal...
We didn't do a whole economic study now. We also prepared graphics that show a
change from our earlier forecast. I guess the most significant thing there was,
the most significant changes were that the earlier study was done with the
access to the development on the southeast corner of Kerber and now with the
possibility of two intersections between Kerber and Powers, the volumes on that
south leg have been dropped and the volume on the west leg... The most
significant impact on 78th Street was that earlier when we felt that 78th Street
would either have to have two thru lanes in each direction or left turn lanes...
west through Market with the transition taking place between Market and Laredo
down to one thru lane. Now with the, kind of the crystalization of what's going
to happen out here on these two parcels, that first graphic is...to the point
where, and again this whole development and it's anybody's guess as to what the
timeframe is but at that point we'd probably need to have two thru lanes all the
way down 78th Street. The turning volume there since...But again that's out of
the whole buildout on the horizon...but from a pure and graphic standpoint,
these intersections will be approaching...level service 0 or below with one thru
lane by the time of this whole buildout...
51 ,
II City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
I Councilman Workman: How soon can we get a signal in there if we ordered it
tonight?
Dennis Eyler: If you were to put in a temporary...but if you were to try to get
II
one in as soon as possible, a temporary could probably go in if we could
identify where to put one...and I'm not sure what your letting schedules are but
realistically 3 months would be the soonest you could get one.
11 Councilman Workman: Temporary? How about permanent?
I Dennis Eyler: A permanent, probably 6 months. Yeah it would be quicker. It
depends on the manufacturers and where they are in their cycle. The principle
pole manufacturer for traffic signals...they make about three different types
and they set their dies and they run a particular die for a particular time and
11 then switch over. So if you hit it wrong, you're looking at 4 or 5 months for
poles. If you hit it right, you could get them in 2 months.
I Councilman Workman: It would seem to me that on TH 5 it took, at Rosemount it
took them a year to get it.
I Denrds Eyler: Now it depends on your approval process you're going through. If
you're through State Aid, and I'm not sure what the City's, Charles' plan is
on...but if you do go the State Aid route, then you have to go through MnDot
approval and review process. For State Aid only projects, that can...
I Councilman Workman: Is the Great Plains intersection be a State Highway?
II Dennis Eyler: Great Plains and 78th? That would be County State Aid and it
would be. No, Great Plains? Yeah, you're right. I'm not sure what the status
is on the turnback. Part of the negotiation for rerouting TH 101 onto TH 5.
II Councilman Workman: 1998?
Dennis Eyler: Well, I'm sure MnDot wants to get off of 78th Street... As a
matter of fact, I checked with the right -of -way section. Their records don't
indicate that they ever reconveyed the old right -of -way where the Town Hall was
relocated. Apparently they still own the land under that building. Their
I records never did take over the intersection. I don't know if that's just
paperwork slow to follow so there might be a question of who owns the
intersection today? Whether they actually have any ownership in it...because it
is a trunk highway... Typically their lead time for a signal project, by the
II time the plans are turned in to the time you can let it, runs about 3 months. So
if it took us a month to get the plans over to them and 3 months to review them,
that's 4 months and possibly another 4 months... So you'd be looking at next
I spring. Ideally to get the underground this fall... The other question we took
a look at...and I saw Don's memo to the Council.
II Councilman Mason: I was going to ask, what your opinion is on this matter Mr.
Ashworth.
Dennis Eyler: I did bring along an example of the kind of graphical example of
il what signal coordination can work in this manner. This is the standard one way
signal progression with everybody's driven on a one way street with the signals
11 52
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
go bang, bang, bang down the line and what the slope of this line represents is
the speed. So if you wanted to go in on a one way roadway to control the speed,
this particular one is kind of dark. It's set for 25 mph. The steeper this
line goes, the slower the speeds are. Now what's wrong with this picture is, if
this is a one way street, it's fine but if you're trying to go in this
direction, down the street this way, you hit green here or red, green, red,
green, red, green and so on. That's why we had them... Anybody can draw a
line. Sometimes there are hand solutions for these too. If it appears that...
by hand 10 -15 years ago. This is a two way solution. This happens to be in
Moorhead, or how a through band can be maintained in both directions. Up and
down the street. Again, these speeds can be controlled at 25 -30 mph or
whatever. Again, it's the block spacing has a lot to do with that... Sometimes
to control speeds you may have to impose a stop every 3 intersections and a
stop. It doesn't always work out...
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, are there any questions? 1
Councilman Wing: What, Market Boulevard is the first one? I guess the one that
I effect the most is Laredo which to me seems to be passed over. In your
priority, where do you see the signs going in order of 1 thru 4?
Dennis Eyler: I believe one of our earlier memos we had, I think we had Kerber
before Laredo.
Councilman Wing: Market was the first one?
Dennis Eyler: Well, 78th and Great Plains was first and Market was second.
Councilman Wing: Market must have been first.
Dennis Eyler: Yeah, Market was ahead of Kerber. I understand what your
concerns are a little bit...
Councilman Wing: That's where I've gotten the most complaints.
Dennis Eyler: I don't know if having a signal at Market, there are some streets ,
in here that's possible to get... If problems continue at Kerber, they can
use...
Councilman Wing: If there's stop signs east and west of Laredo, considering how 1
narrow those roads are, if a stop sign stopped traffic either east or west of
that intersection, is the Fire Department going to get out and be able to go
east or west on West 78th Street? The space curb to curb has been really
marginal. More than once we've not been able to go around traffic.
Dennis Eyler: Yeah, that's a concern. We really don't have room for a fire
truck to pass stopped vehicles. Don mentioned...
Councilman Wing: That would stop traffic. I want to know about traffic that's
on there and stops. That system doesn't move them out of our way. It stops
them.
53
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
Dennis Eyler: Well if you're coming up behind a standing string of vehicles, it
turns the light green and clears the traffic out in front of the approaching
fire truck. So if the fire truck was coming down 78th and they came into an
interesection with backed up traffic, it would turn the light green for the
direction that fire truck's going so presumably the traffic would get out ahead
of it.
Councilman Wing: State law says, pull over and stop.
' Dennis Eyler: Pull over and stop but with a 60 foot road that isn't a problem.
MnDot's current standard for a curb to curb...
' Councilman Wing: Well Scott, I think before this goes any further, that's got
to be addressed because right now traffic just sort of keeps moving on and they
sort of just move on but when you start stopping traffic, the Fire Department's
going to have to find alternate routes. It's my suggestion or my opinion that
in the majority of our trucks, there will be no emergency fire vehicles going
east or west. They simply won't be able to get through. We're effectively
going to block off that road and those narrow sections. I think it's that
severe. I don't think I'm exaggerating. In the case of the aerial truck,
without any doubt impassable. There's not even a chance of them being on that
I road.
Dennis Eyler: Yeah, I've looked at all the alternate fire routes and...this
project to build a turn lane along...right turn lane into Market Square and a
right turn lane at Market Blvd... That block, at least the fire trucks can do
that one block.
Councilman Workman: I think that's fixable. I don't know, Don's memo talked
t about 4 different intersections. I thought the rest of the memo talked about
just two of them at this point.
Mayor Chmiel: Saying Market and Great Plains Boulevards.
Councilman Workman: I know that Kevin McShane's here and he probably wants to
address it a little bit too.
Don Ashworth: Mr. Mayor?
II Mayor Chmiel: Yes Don.
Don Ashworth: I would like to throw in my pitch. It's going to be cheaper.
First of all, you're going to end up at some point signalizing all of them. From
a traffic needs standpoint, Market is first. Kerber, if we just do Market and
Great Plains, you're still going to have the problem on Kerber. From a fire
' standpoint, you need to do Laredo. You end up literally doing all of them. Why
not do them now? Take care of the pedestrian issue. I think that the issue as
to whether or not certain segments need to be widened can be studied if that's
I what the Council so desired. But I think it's critical that, at a minimum, 2
signals, and again I would prefer the 4, get in before TH 101 gets shut down
this next spring because you'll be opening the new grocery store. Shut down
TH 101. You'll see the same thing that happened here on Market Blvd. from
II earlier this year when TH 5 was closed down. It was a mess. And with a 3 or 6
54
1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
month delay on signals, it's very difficult to wait. You've got to be ahead of
these decisions. 1
Councilman Mason: I agree. Assuming that it is going to happen, we might as
well do it right and do it as cheap as we can.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, I don't disagree with that. Some of the concerns that I
see here, I'd like us to somehow to emphasize that crosswalks, pedestrians have
that right -of -way to get across there. I think we're going to have to do that
with some kind of markings, number one. Number two, I really want us to get our
little digital miles per hour recorder on that street on a daily basis starting
at 7:30 in the morning and running that probably until 8:30 or 9 :00. And I'd
like to see it on that street from 4:30 until maybe 6:30. I'd really like to
see it on a daily basis only because God only knows the way they go through that
downtown. It just frustrates me to just watch that. And being that we have a
mechanism that we can start making people aware of, I think we'd better put it
to use. The sooner the better because I don't want to see us writing tickets. I
don't like to see that done but if it's got to be, then it's got to be. The
other day I was going 30 and I was going east on 78th and I was just about to
Market Blvd. and the car that was behind me was a good block and a half and he
had to be going 45 or 50 by the time he caught up and I kept it right at 30.
And it just scares the living bejohn out of me to know there are people walking
up and down that street. This is just not happening in any specific hour. It's
all the time. It's constant. So we've got to start doing more protective
issues for our people. If it gets to that point of having to write tickets,
then we're going to have to do it. If that's going to be the name of the game.
I don't like to see it. I don't want to do it but it's the only way to start
slowing people down. It's the same way going into Excelsior.
Councilman Workman: I've never yet seen an officer writing a ticket on that
road.
Councilwoman Dimler: Excelsior? ,
Mayor Chmiel: No, 78th now.
Councilman Workman: Well you know, I used to be concerned about what signals
would do to downtown in a negative way. I no longer think that way. I think 50
mph easily is going on down there and every day I'm at the post office. It
seems like I'm there at 4:30 or 5:00 every, I shouldn't be but I'm there just to
be in the middle of it because there are frustrated people down there.
Screeching rubber. Threatening lives. It cannot be doing anything good for the
downtown business community, climate or other. And whether Target comes or not
and whether TH 101 moves out there or not, to me it is not going to make a hill
of beans in the future. This is going to be a problem here on out and I never
thought I'd hear myself say that if we need four, we need four. Excuse my
condemnation of our forefathers but the decision has not been planned real well
in that our roads end at West 78th. Kerber, Laredo and everything else and so
there's no place to go. They've got to make rights and lefts and that doesn't
help anything and we've got to give these people some relief because I tell you,
as elected officials, the grief and the looks on people's faces that I've seen,
I hope they didn't recognize that it was me anywhere near. But if I'm coming
West 78th at 30 mph and somebody's right on my butt and I'm going to make that
55 1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
1
turn to the post office by the bank, I can just feel them on that edge of that
bumper and they're going around me and it's just every time. I guess I've now
turned my feelings toward how excited I'm going to be when it starts to cool off
in our downtown because it's as unfriendly as it can get and it's going to get
worse, I know it. And not to be a big promoter of pulling people over but these
people need to be pulled over and ticketed because, I mean I condemned a fellow
City Council member when he suggested 31 in a 30 was a ticket. I still would
but 50 in a 30 in that zone is outright insane and I would suggest that if we
get, when we get these lights hopefully, that it's a 25 mph segment, not a 30 to
keep it pleasant.
Councilman Wing: Where's all this conceived speed? Where are we talking about?
I can see from Kerber west but are we talking about Kerber east?
Mayor Chmiel: You're either going east or... Either or.
1 Councilman Mason: I come on Kerber all the time and I'm tearing from Kerber
onto 78th and they're just coming off of Powers Blvd.. They're just right on
1 you.
Mayor Chmiel: I'm getting to the point where I get to those intersections and
1 I get there. I wish I had blinders and I go.
Councilman Mason: They come out pretty fast.
' Mayor Chmiel: Because it is. It's just too darn fast. Something has to really
be done. I guess I'm not opposed to the stop and go lights because we're going
to have to have them. I'm not sure yet whether the four are really needed all •
1 at once but I think if we start stringing, we put in the proper amount of
conduit for those additional two that might have to come on line.
Councilman Mason: I hope whatever, assuming we decide to put in some stop
lights here, I hope we at least do think that there should be some kind of
master control and like you said be looking, even if we do just approve two now,
let's make sure that we can control them all and not have to.
1 Mayor Chmiel: And I'd also agree with the comment that Don made. In the event
these are in, they have a control that the police vehicles as well as the fire
vehicles can flick and turn those things.
Councilman Mason: The Mayor gets one of those in his car too, doesn't he?
1 Mayor Chmiel: No, that was Charlie McCarthy.
Councilman Mason: Oh that's right.
1 Councilman Wing: When you start talking about an opticom system, we're talking
about one expensive system and we're not roaring down Lyndale Avenue in
1 Bloomington through a million stop signs. This is faily limited and I can't
imagine what that system would cost.
Dennis Eyler: Yeah, it's an additional, these days about $5,000.00 an
1 intersection. There is an interim phase. If you only have two traffic signals
1 56
1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
in downtown and they are hooked together, we can have a...right from the fire
hall which is just a push button. We put one of these in Duluth. They have a
central fire station in downtown and they have two runs away from the fire
station on one way street and they have a button for each one and that turns all
those signals all the way down the one way street for 9 or 10 blocks a green and
holds it green for some preset time. I think 60 seconds so that would help
clean out downstream of the other intersections along 78th. Not only do you get
the green to get out onto 78th, but then you could have it go green in either
direction from the intersection out here in front of the fire hall. And that's
where, most of that stuff comes with a control...anyway. It's all in software
and...
Councilman Wing: Why don't we start realistically looking at downtown and stop
hedging around the fact that a mistake was made and stop trying to run thousands
and thousands of cars. It's like trying to run 35W out of downtown during rush
hour with 2 lanes instead of 4. You can't do it. And if we're going to put in
this enormous retail downtown with all these major discount stores, why have
we've got a 16 foot road segment? We've got to face up to the fact that that
just isn't working anymore and maybe that median has simply got to go and open
up that additional space.
Councilman Workman: That isn't going to stop the speed though. ,
Councilman Wing: I'm talking about moving traffic.
Mayor Chmiel: I think...what he's just saying. With controlling of those
lights as per se. I think the right widths were much too narrow. As I've
indicated before, but they did the same thing downtown Minneapolis on Nicollet
Mali. They narrowed that one more and more than what it was before and I still
don't agree with some of that.
Councilman Wing: You're soon to know what it's like to live in downtown Tokyo
and Seoul, Korea. And this is truthfully. These are four more stop signs than
I hit all the way from Seattle to Minneapolis last week in four blocks. It's
just disheartening to me that we're at that point. I mean let's face it. I
mean Tom, I agree with you. I guess they have to go in. You guys are driving
this thing and it's a nightmare. I can't construe. I don't come down here. I
don't want to be near the place. It's disheartening to see us putting in 4 stop
signs in a 4 block area. I've just got to support you guys, whatever you
decide.
Don Ashworth: If I may make one additional. Although the two may have some
appeal, I think it has to be recognized that you're really kind of only putting
in one. The one at Great Plains I think will really help in terms of vehicles
coming up the roadway so they know they should be bending to the left and it's a
safe movement and they don't have to worry to get out in this big intersection.
What am I supposed to be doing? It will be very, very beneficial to the left
turn person because he's got some guidance there. He feels safe. I mean hey,
the green arrow. The other vehicles have stopped. But one of the drawbacks
will be, you're still going to have that 4:30 traffic coming down by the clock
tower, stopping and then moving out. Stopping and then moving out. I think
Denny's talked before about this spacing issue and really piatooning in a lot of
ways is better. But you're still going to have that as it deals with the
57
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
11
westbound traffic. So the pedestrian, if they're down by Medical Arts or the
Riveria or the person trying to get out at Laredo, is still going to have the
problem because of these vehicles that are platooning out from the clock tower.
And that's why again I would push for that Laredo. I think that that's a way in
which I really like this idea that Denny came up with. Turn the signal green at
Laredo and then clear out greens all the way away from that so the cars don't
pull off and stop. If you don't do Laredo, you can't have that. But Laredo's
kind of the last priority so then you kind of come back to this position, well
let's just do it.
Councilman Workman: If we do Great Plains and we do Market and we don't do
Laredo, that's where the most potential backlash from the people who care the
most is going to come. Because somebody's going to say, that Market Boulevard
light's only for the City Hall people. And Laredo is where the people are
coming out of there and I can, geez. I can just see the faces and the names of
those people down there that are going, what were you thinking? Why didn't you
put one at Laredo? And that's where we were originally thinking about putting a
stop sign temporarily. Remember that? A couple, few years ago.
Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
Scott Harr: Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
Scott Harr: Councilman Wing addresses an issue that it at least is something to
think about. The problem will only be slightly taken care of by greening out
the intersection or stopping it. The problem downtown is, the law does tell
' people and people are trained to pull over when they see an emergency vehicle
and therein lies the problem. And there's nothing quite as terrifying as trying
to get people to yield. They'll either pull to the left and stop. Stop dead in
the middle of the road. Seldom pull to the right. In this case, even if they
11 did, they'd still cause a backlash. We train people in Driver's Ed to pull over
and stop. Frequently they'll do that despite the fact that you're behind them
with an airhorn telling them to move on. That may just be something with the
size of that street that we have to deal with but I think that's an issue you
were trying to address there Richard that wouldn't be alleviated by signal
controls. And it's one of the reasons that the deputies don't work downtown
very much. There's no place to pull off to the side.
Councilman Wing: That's true. If they made a stop, traffic stops.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, any other discussion?
Councilman Workman: I'll make a motion.
Mayor Chmiel: I don't want it.
Councilman Workman: I think I'd better make it so it gets done properly.
11 Approve signal justification report for West 78th Street intersections at Great
Plains Bouelvard, Laredo Boulevard, Market Boulevard and Kerber Boulevard.
Authorize preparation of plans and specifications of Project No. 92 -3A.
1
1 58
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
11
Councilman Mason: Second.
Mayor Chmiel: Clarification. Are you going to have these all go in at one time II
or are you still looking to go with one and try the other one and then make sure
we put the?
Councilman Workman: Yes. Go in. I think so. Get the system in rather than '
trying to figure out half of it I think.
Mayor Chmiel: Well once it's put in, it's never wasted. II
Councilman Mason: We can put the system in and then not put the poles up.
II
Mayor Chmiel: Right.
Councilman Wing: This is a major, major decision for the city which impacts a
II
lot of people. And I'm not opposed to it. I support Tom's motion but at some
point here is there going to be a public hearing or advertise this? Let the
public speak. Let them be encouraged because this is going to be a large. I'd
II
like the public to know what it's going to cost. What we're doing. Let them
know that we're going to sign downtown aggressively and then they can either
oppose it aggressively or at least support the Council's decision.
II Mayor Chmiel: I think that's a good idea.
Councilwoman Dimler: Isn't there always a public hearing on these projects? 1
Mayor Chmiel: No.
Councilwoman Dimler: Oh. Well then I would support that definitely. II
Don Ashworth: What I would suggest is that if the motion is approved, and you
can do it or since it's through the HRA is paying for it, you might ask them to
II
do it, but we've got a 3 month period of time while they're developing plans and
specs and getting ready for the whole bidding process and another 3 months after
that until deliveries and all the rest. That somewhere before these things are II actually bid out, that the public hearing be held before any orders are made.
Mayor Chmiel: Rattier than a public hearing, we'll call it a public information
meeting.
II
Don Ashworth: And would you like to do that or would you like to have the HRA
do it? 1
Mayor Chmiel: I think Council should probably do it.
Don Ashworth: Okay, advertise it as a part of one of our agendas? I/
Mayor Chmiel: Yep.
II Councilman Workman: My motion stands.
11
59
I/
II
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
Mayor Chmiel: Motion stands with public conditions contained. If you accept
that as a friendly amendment.
Councilwoman Dimler: Mr. Mayor, Mr. McShane wanted to address?
11 Kevin McShane: Good evening. I know the hour is late. I'm Kevin McShane at
180 South Shore Court. For those of you who don't know. I'm also the President
of the Chanhassen Chamber of Commerce and so I come to you. I agree with
everything you've said about signing downtown. I wasn't going to say anything
ill because you've covered basically all the items on my mind but I do think that I
live a half mile from where I work. I'm a resident of Chan. Work here. I get
up and down that street many times throughout the day and all your comments are
I very true. Pedestrian traffic in particular. I try to walk to the local
restaurants at lunch, sometimes not making it back. People really do travel
down that street. Richard, the digital readout has been set up across the
11 street and I have a pretty good view from my office and you see 40, 46. I don't
see any brake lights go on. Speed is a concern. Coming in and out of those
roads on the north /south roads trying to take rights and lefts. It's almost
impossible during rush hour so all those things do happen and I'm here everyday
and see it. I really encourage, I know signing is a big issue but I think with
all the development going on right now and all that's sure to come in the next
few years, we need to get that in place now because as we saw this summer with
II road shut down, it was very, very difficult at Market. It happened overnight.
I mean the minute the road shut down, all of a sudden there was just horrendous
traffic so I'd encourage you to vote in favor of it. Thank you.
II Councilman Workman: Who knows, we may be able to enjoy the trees and bushes in
town now.
II Mayor Chmiel: We have a motion on the floor. Was there a second?
Councilman Mason: Yes.
II Mayor Chmiel: Seconded with a friendly amendment. Any other discussion?
Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the signal
justification report for West 78th Street intersections at Great Plains
Bouelvard, Laredo Boulevard, Market Boulevard and Kerber Boulevard; authorize
preparation of plans and specifications; and that a public information meeting
be held in regards to Project 92 -3A. All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously.
II ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS:
UPDATE ON LIQUOR LICENSE PUBLIC HEARING HELD BY THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION,
I PUBLIC SAFETY DIRECTOR.
Mayor Chmiel: We have had the opportunity to do some administrative
presentations with the updating. I'd like Mr. Harr to address the issue.
I Scott Harr: Thank you Mr. Mayor and City Council. Included in the Council
packet are the Minutes of the public hearing on alcohol issues which you
II directed the Public Safety Commission to hold and to return the results to you
1 60
1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
in July and so here they are. I believe the hearing was more than adequately
advertised with notices being sent to, among others, each school principal in 1
our District, the Superintendent of Schools, the Drug Education personnel at
each school, our churches, liquor license holders and the citizens that have
attended drug abuse prevention meetings over the past 5 years here at the City
Hall. Only 5 citizens attended and those that spoke were in the liquor sales
business, each offering to provide the city with assistance if further
restrictions are to be considered. No one in attendance raised specific
concerns regarding the number of additional on sale and off sale licenses beyond
the existing holders of record or regarding the locations of future liquor
stores. Because the Public Safety Commission was specifically charged by the
City Council to solicit input from the community on these issues, this was what
the Commission did. Because no specific safety issues were raised, it was
suggested by the Commission that if the Council wishes the matter pursued, that
the Planning Department may be an appropriate resource from here regarding what
the city would like to see from a planning and development perspective in the
future. I think we were all surprised at the noteworthy lack of attendance at
this public hearing and I'd like to comment on this. Frankly, I was very
disappointed. I think the specific issues that were being looked at are
important, but I think there's an even bigger issue that I believe deserved more
attention, far more attention than it received. That issue is community
chemical awareness and concern. Chanhassen has led the way in taking a strong
position in restricting access of tobacco products to our youth. Similarly, we
assisted in the design and implementation of the Southwest Metro Drug Task
Force. Over the past 4 years the Mayor has worked diligently at attempting to
mobilize the community itself in developing an ongoing response to the negative
impact with chemical abuse in all the communities that surround us. This public
hearing was yet another example of our Council's sincere concern about the
problem. We have not been overwhelmed with community concern however and
frankly this troubles me. The problems of drug abuse are with us. The Mayor
and Councilman Wing have joined the Drug Task Force to see the activity that is
occurring around us. The deputies and troopers that work in our areas can
attest to the devastating effects of alcohol and other drug abuse on our roads
and even within our homes and schools. There is a problem and whether or not
further liquor license restrictions are the most appropriate way of addressing
the overall societal problem. I was shocked that our school district, churches,
and the community at large found this attempt by Councilman Wing, the City
Council and the Public Safety Commission to examine an important health and
safety issue of such little importance that no representatives attended or even
called to make an inquiry about the hearing. What was apparent was that we do
have liquor retailers in town that are responsive to your concerns and have made
themselves available to assist with any future re- examination of issues that may
occur.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Any discussion?
Councilman Mason: Just a quick comment on what you said Scott about, I think a
lot of people tend to believe that we don't have, there are no drug problems in
Chanhassen /Eden Prairie, just like we don't have at risk kids in Eden Prairie
and Chanhassen. And until people, you know it's real easy to hide things like
that in the suburbs and I think that's an issue. I mean certainly you share it
in one way and public safety and I share it in education and it's there. We
battle that one in the schools alot too and it is frustrating.
61 1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
1
Scott Harr: We've attempted to get people interested and I've written articles
in the newspapers and told groups. I agree with you Mike 100,. I think the
change that we've seen that concerns me is 10 years ago, even longer there was a
counter culture that appeared different who advocated the use of illegal drugs
or drug abuse and people saw something that concerned them. Now it's a more
conservative time and it's not being seen and doesn't appear as a problem and
yet all of us, because we see the information, here from a public safety
perspective. From an educational perspective or others, see that it's there and
1 the difficulty is knowing how to address the problem. And that's why I wanted
to make the statement tonight is I was really surprised that whether or not this
was a specific problem, influential people were invited and didn't even call to
' find out more and that concerns me.
Mayor Chmiel: I think too, with our Drug Task Force as we have it, we will be
having some inquiries from the High School, Chaska or I should say in School
1 District #112. I don't know whether they have contacted you or not but they
will be doing that and they're going to follow through with it this year. I
brought it up at a School Board meeting here a couple weeks ago.
II Councilwoman Dimler: I was going to ask, I was on a Drug Task Force here
several years ago and we were supposed to meet at least once every 6 months or
so and I haven't heard of any meetings since then. What happened to that task
II force?
Mayor Chmiel: You missed both of them.
1 Scott Harr: That speaks to the problem. We had so few people attending that we
redirected the energy towards other attempts. Red Ribbon Day. Other awareness
programs. The Drug Task Force. Those were the meetings that caused me to write
articles in the paper and address concerns with community groups because we'd
have these meetings and so few people would show up. And the Mayor and I talked
about, what do we do? We want to get the energy. We've kept the people in
1 touch. We've just not been sure of what direction to get the momentum going.
Councilwoman Dimler: I bring that up because several times I've stopped at the
1 pharmacy here in town and he was on the drug task force too and he's asked me
several times, what happened to that task force. I haven't been notified of a
meeting in a long time.
II Mayor Chmiel: We didn't have people really showing up for the meetings, that
was part of the problem either.
1 Councilwoman Dimler: Well, the ones I attended were well attended there for a
while but that was because there was a specific drug information that we were
giving at that time.
1 Mayor Chmiel: And those weren't bad but they still weren't good for what the
populous is here.
1 Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, after a while it kind of petered out.
Councilman Wing: One of the members of Public Safety and myself did a survey of
1 all the other cities and I guess my intent wasn't so much alcohol abuse or the
1 62
1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
problem itself but rather, what are we doing as a city in zoning, licensing and
planning issues. As I was able to look at other cities and talk to Paul Krauss,
he's got some complaints on minor issues such as definition of restaurant. When
is a restaurant a restaurant and not a bar? I was concerned about the 18 year
old issue of bartending and serving liquor and it turns out that that's common
in every other city. It's the norm so why would we be anything but normal? So
I think all that's come out of this that I learned was there's a couple zoning
issues that need to be addressed by Planning. A couple licensing issues that
could be discussed and just some definitions that need cleaning up. It puts us
pretty much in par with what every other city is doing. I guess I found this
pretty much up to the level with everyone else with the exception of a few
definitions of restaurant. How many square feet should a bar /tavern be? Or how
would distance from a church or whatever? We don't have those things right now.
Councilman Workman: Richard, did you find that cities are regulating them or
not?
Councilman Wing: Not anymore than we are.
Councilman Workman: Well we aren't regulating them so you're saying, maybe
Roger can answer that question. Are cities regulating? What I did was, I've
heard Burnsville had an ordinance. I thought I brought it with. I don't have
it with me.
Councilman Wing: Roger wrote it, didn't you?
Councilman Workman: The Burnsville ordinance?
Roger Knutson: Yeah. 1
Councilman Workman: You did? Well I've got Roger's ordinance and they sent it
out to me. I haven't been through the whole thing yet but that's what I'm
asking. Do most cities not regulate the number of licenses?
Roger Knutson: There are 800 cities in this State and to be honest with you,
I've not canvased them all.
Mayor Chmiel: Roger, 854.
Roger Knutson: Most cities I'm familiar with don't do much more than you d� 11
having a licensing ordinance and restriction. Certain zoning ordinance
restrictions. Burnsville has dispersion corner that they have to be so far
apart.
Councilman Workman: You asked him the question and why and the clerk couldn't
tell me. Well I kind of like it that way she said. '
Roger Knutson: I think the idea is that they're perceived to have certain
undesireable secondary effects. Drunks going there or not. I don't know
whether it's true or not. So they want to separate them. They don't want them
all clustered to create an environment which they would not feel good.
Councilman Workman: You said you surveyed 36 of them? ,
63 1
i
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
II
Councilman Wing: Well no. We had 20 some cities. Well anything from St. Paul
II over we called and got, we have all the ordinances and there's nothing in them
to read except everybody has done away with bars and taverns. They don't exist.
Burnsville, all the liquor licenses are at motels, restaurants. Serve food.
There are no bars or taverns. St. Louis Park has one left but that one's on
II it's way out. So I think that's, Roger correct me but I believe that there are
no bars, taverns such as Filly's or the Bronco used to be in Chanhassen. Their
licenses all go in to food establishments now.
II Roger Knutson: Just from observation, from driving around Minneapolis and St.
Paul seems to have their share of bars. What I'd call a bar.
II Councilman Workman: Well I mean a microwave makes them a restaurant.
Roger Knutson: Yeah, a lot of cities do not want traditional bars.
II Councilman Wing: Suburbs. Suburban ring.
I Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I guess basically what we have is what we have. I think
where we're going in the direction we're going is probably the right way.
II Councilman Workman: Which is what?
Mayor Chmiel: Knowing as to what we want with setbacks and total numbers.
We're looking also at populations.
II Councilman Workman: That's what I'm concerned with.
I Mayor Chmiel: That was the other thing where for each 5,000 population they
increased it as I remember reading someplace. And I guess that's something we
can think about right now. I don't know if we have to act on it at this
particular time but I think it's something that we should think about and maybe
II come up with some conclusions and have some additional information prepared for
us to pursue a given direction that maybe we should go.
I Councilman Wing: I think Mr. Ashworth came up with some good ideas and
suggestions that came from a position of knowledge maybe. When there's a real
dull agenda, he could throw a cover letter in with some ideas that might...
II Councilman Workman: You mean like tonight?
Mayor Chmiel: We're getting too close. So with that, I don't think we have to
1 have any action on that particular item at this time but I'd like to thank the
Public Safety Commission for taking the time out to hold this and go through the
process.
II COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS:
I Mayor Chmiel: I have one that I want to just discuss briefly. Our lights are
on too long at Lake Ann Park. Can we check into that and make sure that the
timing device is accordingly and I think we close the park at 10 :00. Good,
because they were on until 11:30 when I went to bed again.
II
II 64
II
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
Todd Gerhardt: Dale...shut off.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, so we're looking into that. I don't like to watch that
meter spin. I don't get any more paychecks from them.
Don Ashworth: We've incurred a lot of personnel costs as well in going out on
those and I know in the last 2 or 3 weeks they've just had a continuous problem
and I don't know why. We're working at it.
Mayor Chmiel: Can we address that and take care of it?
Don Ashworth: Yes. '
Mayor Chmiel: Because I don't see those rabbits and the other animals playing
any games out there. Tom, West 78th and Dakota. 1
Councilwoman Dimler: Could I just follow up on Lake Ann? I wanted to talk
about it.
Mayor Chmiel: Oh yes you did. The building, yeah.
Councilwoman Dimler: Yes, the shelter that's being done and I know that Mike
wanted to know what was happening and why it's so slow. But also it has been
suggested to me by some members of the public for the naming of that shelter.
I know that our current Mayor here deserves to have that honor. However, the
name that was suggested to me by several residents was that we would honor Mr.
Al Klingelhutz since he was the Mayor when Lake Ann was established and I know
that he worked hard to make this a beautiful amenity. It's not his suggestion
though. A beautiful amenity for the city. Big Al's or whatever but I would
just like to bring that forward for the public that expressed this concern to me
and maybe we could consider it.
Mayor Chmiel: The other question that I was going to ask too is, why is that 1
going so slow? I don't think they've done anything in 3 weeks. 2 weeks at
least.
Don Ashworth: There was a mistake in the delivery of the, I keep saying brick
but it was the, what was it? The rock and that was to be a, not a smooth face
and they ended up delivering a smooth face which would be terrible because that
provides a real opportunity for kids to write things. That, I'm sure was part
of the problem. I'm sure that our wet time here hasn't help anything either.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, well I'd like to find out what the reasons are. Let's keep
them going.
Councilman Workman: Is that the same company that is doing Minnewashta Parkway? '
Mayor Chmiel: Yes. I think so. And 101.
Councilman Workman: West 78th at Dakota. You all know where that is. Right
when you're exiting TH 5 at McDonald's to the right there and you were to take
that frontage road back to 78th there. Patricia...Pappenfus who owns Chanhassen
Secretarial has been kind of on me and I will note for the record that she is a
65 1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
resident of Plymouth but they are having a very difficult time at that
' intersection. And this is a very bad intersection. I know they're getting done
with TH 5 but that frontage road, people coming off and on and if a Lyman Lumber
truck wants to make a left to get out onto Highway 5, you cannot get by. In
' fact they're tagging people who are going around them on the shoulder. After 2
or 3 light changes, they're not being able to get through. In fact, boy that
light is so quick on TH 5 now, I swear you can get 2 cars out onto TH 5.
Mayor Chmiel: 7 cars.
Councilman Workman: Boy then they're speeding. But it's a real, real, real bad
' situation. I don't know what we can do. If we can pave an actual by -pass lane
there or what. Can engineering, can the Council suggest to engineering to take
a hard, and public safety, take a hard look at what we can do to give those
businesses satisfaction. There's some real frustration going on.
Scott Harr: You're talking north of TH 5 and east Dakota.
' Councilman Workman: The whole intersection.
Scott Harr: But specifically when they're coming out of the Chan Business
Complex?
Mayor Chmiel: Right.
' Councilman Workman: I mean not to mention the fact that if you are heading east
and you want to go to West 78th down there near Redmond, you can't do it because
it's backed up and stacked up and it's real tricky in there.
Mayor Chmiel: What we need is a light there.
1 Councilman Workman: Charles, do you want to take a look at that and maybe bring
it up as a future item to pave it or something because something's got to be
done?
' Charles Folch: Yeah, we can certainly take a look at it. I'm not sure that
there's going to be an easy answer. We would have hoped that our Trunk Highway
101 north leg project would have been under construction already and would have
been on it's way to help alleviate that problem that you're describing but we've
run into some delays with the railroad people.
Councilman Workman: Maybe it just takes some paint on the road designate an
actual pass lane or something because it's terrible.
Charles Folch: We can take a look at it.
' Councilman Wing: Terrible's not the word. It's really impassable.
' Councilman Mason: Yeah, it is impassable there.
Councilman Workman: Really. I mean you would be sitting there in excess of 5
to 10 minutes if you didn't break a law, which is unacceptable time for people
' on the go.
11 66
r
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
Mayor Chmiel: But it's going to improve.
Councilman Workman: Leash law. I was approached by a woman and I thought I
brought this up at a Council meeting. We've done nothing on this. The old
doggie do law or something. We have got in our parks big signs that say
absolutely no pets allowed. This person has complained that in fact what that's
doing is people are then not going to the park but they're actually having their
dog do their thing on their neighbor's yards and stuff. So I don't know if
we've got a problem with this law. There was also a concern that in fact dogs
don't have to be leashed, just under the verbal command of their master, which
is what I do all the time. But we're inviting people to the parks and I know
Ursula has a problem with this but they have to leave their pets out but it's
apparently causing people frustration in that now we've got all these little
lots. They've got big dogs. They don't have anyplace to run their dogs. I'd
like us to revisit that if possible. 1
Councilman Wing: What did Jay call that?
Councilwoman Dimler: Pooper scooper. '
Councilman Wing: Super duper pooper scooper law. That was it. Well I'm not
bringing it up. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Neither am I.
Councilman Workman: I'd like to readdress that because there's some '
frustration.
Councilwoman Dimler: Tom wants to. '
Councilman Workman: I'll bring it up.
Councilman Wing: Do we want a leash on them? What's the real issue?
Councilman Workman: That people have 120 pound dogs and they've got less than a
third acre lot and they don't have anyplace to run their dogs if you can't take
them to the park. What I think we need to do is we need to have some way that
people are going to take their baggy and their scoop and clean up after their
dog. '
Mayor Chmiel: Well that's what you should do in the first place but people
don't do it. '
Scott Harr: Councilman Workman, what you're suggesting is that we, the City
permit animals in the parks.
Councilman Workman: Look at what we can do to find a place. What people have
been doing is they're going to walk them. They're going to walk them down the
road or something and they're going to crap on, excuse my language. Yeah, their
going to leave their problems. They're leaving them on people's front yards.
Anyway.
1
67 1
1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992
Councilman Mason: I don't personally don't think telling people they can now
' run Rover at Chanhassen Park is going to have an effect on whether they're
letting Fido do it in somebody else's yard or not
Councilman Workman: All I'm doing.
Councilman Mason: No, I understand that.
1 Councilman Workman: Passing on what a couple of people have told me.
Mayor Chmiel: I think it's just up to the individuals who have dogs should
really police themselves and take care of those situations.
Councilman Workman: What I'm going after here probably is a technicality that
' we've got signs in our parks that say, humans but no pets and that causes some
problems for some people.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. Maybe it should read no humans, just pets.
Councilman Mason: Yeah, that's something to think about.
Councilman Workman: I'm just saying. I don't take my_dog to Lake Ann. There's
a little park behind me. I dare somebody to tell me I'm not going to take my
dog there. I'm going to. You know what I mean?
Councilman Mason: Yeah, I'm the same way.
Mayor Chmiel: Yep. It's getting late. Would you like to carry on to the next
one?
Councilman Workman: Yes. I've been having conversations with Don Ashworth
about a situation that arose at a company, actually it was two companies that
complained that in fact they didn't feel like they were being fairly treated by
the City in, as the city makes purchases. This is not, by me a reinforcement
that they are not doing that because I know they try hard and they do that. What
1 I.
Councilman Mason: Local people?
' Councilman Workman: Yes. The one primarily has to do with Park and Rec and
purchasing Park and Rec equipment. Picnic tables, etc.. There's a firm in town
1 that sells all of that and they do not feel as though they are being given a
fair chance or missed that. And so I'm going to, like Todd Hoffman knows about
it and so does Don and we're going to get together to talk about it and I wanted
the Council to be aware...
I Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. I think I brought this up a long time ago that I'd like to
see the City purchase from within it's own residents providing the prices are
right. And if they are, that's where you buy it.
Councilman Workman: Well what further complicates it is the fact that you've
got, if you want a playground set and you've got a consultant that says there's
some very, very specific specifications and only one firm can really match those
68
1
City Council Meeting - July 13, 1992 1
specifications, you're in effect choosing that firm and maybe eliminating others
and so there's some of this going on. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Can I have amotion for adjournment?
1
Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Mason seconded to adjourn the meeting_ All
voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 11:30 p.m..
Submitted by Don Ashworth
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
69 1
1
1
•1 -� -
CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION 1
REGULAR MEETING
JUNE 23, 1992
Chairman Schroers called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m..
1 MEMBERS PRESENT: Larry Schroers, Jan Lash, Wendy Pemrick, Randy Erickson,
Jim Andrews and Dave Koubsky
MEMBERS ABSENT: Fred Berg
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Coordinator; Jerry Ruegemer,
Recreation Supervisor; and Dawn Lemme, Program Specialist
' Schroers: Since we have quite a few people in the audience here tonight
and some things to attend to, we're going to move ahead to items 3 and 4
first and get those taken care of and then we'll move back to the rest of
the agenda after that. So we'll start with item 3.
' NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING, CARVER BEACH PARK, VEHICLE PARKING.
Public Present:
Name Address
Pat & Keith Gunderson 6660 Lotus Trail
Roger Byrne 6724 Lotus Trail
K. & Susan Boudrie 6482 Murray Hill Road
1
Hoffman: Chairman Schroers and commissioners. Following a motion by
1 the Park Commission at their May 19th meeting, to call a neighborhood
meeting in regards to vehicle parking at Carver Beach Park. The enclosed
notification in your packet was mailed for that neighborhood. To reiterate
' the installation of four parallel parking spaces with one of the four being
designated as handicapped parking is being recommended. This action is
needed to bring the City into compliance with the ADA, the American with
Disabilities Act and provide reasonable access to a public park facility.
' These parking spaces are to be accommodated by a widening of the shoulder
of Lotus Trail, which is a gravel road, for a length of approximately 80 to
100 feet. The location of the parking is to be just north of the small
1 beach on the east side of Lotus Trail. This design has been discussed with
the City's engineering and planning departments. The placement of signage
designating the parking spaces will be coordinated with the engineering and
public works department. Again, following the comment by the neighbors who
1
are here this evening, it is recommended that the Park and Recreation
Commission recommend the City Council approve the construction and signage
of four parallel parking spaces, one of the four to be for persons with
handicaps, at Carver Beach Park as specified in the documents and shown on
the attached maps. Over to the exact location. North being directly up,
we have the length of Carver Beach Park with the main beach and the four
parking spots currently existing at the park in this location. Then
traveling to the north, the mini -beach is located in this location.
Fishing dock and then the canoe racks are down in this location. Again as
stated in the letters, parking does occur down there and is tolerated to a
certain degree. However, the City does receive a call, a complaint call,
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 2
to enforce it and then you go down, because it is currently signed no
parking. Either write a ticket or give a warning and inform those persons
' that parked there that they must move. Obviously they're confused many
times because they parked there previously and nobody in the neighborhood
has chosen to call and report that the vehicle is parked there. They're
receiving mixed signals from the city. This would rectify the situation in
' placing four stalls in this location. That dashed line does show the
extent of Lotus Trail which is posted No Parking all the way along the
lakeshore in that location. This recommendation is to place four parallel
parking spots in that location.• On a little larger scale, this shows you
the parking as it would fail just to the north, I mean to east of Lotus
Trail. Directly across from this parking...
Schroers: Okay, thanks. At this time then we'll entertain any comments
from the residents of the Carver Beach area or any other residents of the
city that wish to comment on the parking there. If you'd be so kind as to
come to the podium and state your name and address for us please and we'd
like to hear what you have to say.
Roger Byrne: My name's Roger Byrne. I live at 6724 Lotus Trail there.
Right across from the mini- beach. I don't know if I've got too much for
comments. I've got some questions. I'd be interested to know why that
location was picked for the parking, for one thing. It seems there's some
' better spots probably. I don't know if anybody, I don't know who was down
there and who looked at it. Who decided what, where. What was best or
what. For one things there's a lot of trees there. Some are going to have
' to be removed to facilitate this deal. And we've got a problem with trees
out there right now it seems like. And to cut anymore down doesn't seem to
be just the right thing to do at this point in time really. Another thing
' is, there's the park actually goes a lot farther than what it shows on that
map there. I mean there's a lot of land down past Lotus Trail that isn't
even on a road which would be a lot better for parking. That could be used
you know. I don't know if anybody even took that into consideration.
Schroers: Down where the old access used to be? Is that where you're
talking about?
Roger Byrne: Right, past the old access. That's all parkland down there
too. That's the same as what, from the access to the mini - beach. On down
the other way from the old access down is parkland also. And there was
something else I can't remember right now but. Oh, as far as the
handicapped thing, I don't know. From what I heard, they said that
somebody was using the dock out there and they said they had to park there
because they were handicapped. Well to put a handicapped parking spot down
there by that dock, you don't want to encourage any handicapped people to
use that dock because that's not a handicapped dock. They'll end up in the
' lake. If you try to roll a wheelchair or something out there, that's not.
I don't think that's a good idea. If you take a look at that dock and then
take a look at what handicapped people need, that's not a handicapped dock.
' You don't want to encourage anybody handicapped to be down there on that
thing. I don't know, I just wondering. I'm just looking for some answers
to them questions. That's my deal.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting 1
June 23, 1992 - Page 3
Schroers: Okay. Todd, do you know if the site further down, past the old
approach was looked at in regards to parking?
Hoffman: The parkland which would be farther to the north, once you turn II
up and take Lotus Trail onto, is it Mohawk? Is park property. It's not on
a city street so it would be somewhat more difficult to go ahead and
install parking in there. They would be backing up and turning around. '
Roger Byrne: That is a city street. Doesn't the street up through
there? It's all gravel just like Lotus Trail. In fact it must be part of II
Lotus Trail.
Hoffman: That site would not be as clean to develop. Would not work as 1
well as the site which is being proposed this evening. To go ahead and
address Mr. Bryne's question, the reason why this site was chosen and as
the Commissioners who were that evening noticed, there's an absence of a
residential homefronts just opposite this location. It's a hillside. If II
you were to move the parking farther to the south or the north, you would
be installing parking stalls in front of homefronts. The issue of removing
trees. No trees will be removed as a part of this project. Currently
we're thinking probably the shoulder would be widened by an extent of 4 to II
6 feet with additional gravel. The issue of what is handicapped
accessible. It's simply not the city's position to designate what is and
what is not a handicapped accessible piece of city park equipment or a cit
facility. That is really left up to the individuals who choose to use eac
park site within the city.
Schroers: Okay, I think that maybe to help clarify. As well we're talking'
about here is not a full scale parking lot. All we're talking about is a
little widening in the road so people can get out of the way so other I
traffic can continue to pass by without a hazard and we don't anticipate
that it's something that's going to be busy or heavily used either. It's
just going to be a little widening of the shoulder so a car can safely pull
out and park. '
Koubsky: I don't think we were anticipating taking any trees down either
were we Todd? It's just a matter of putting some Class V on there so if I
people did pull off, they wouldn't get stuck if it started raining or
something.
Roger Byrne: If you extend the curb 4 to 6 feet out from right where '
you're talking about there, you're going to be hitting those trees. Now
you can maybe put the rock around the trees and leave them there. One way
or the other the trees that are going to be there are going to die. I
really think that if you insist that that's where it's going to be, I think!!
you should have an environmental impact study on it because it's awful
close to the lake right there. It just seems to me there's a lot better
places on down the line or maybe back up the other way...we're going to
lose some trees there one way or the other if you insist on placing it
there. I'm sorry but that's, apparently you people haven't looked at it II very closely because I live right there and I've lived there for 20 years
and I know how wide it is there. If you extend the curb out 4 to 6 feet,
you're into the trees. And there are some pretty _good sized trees down
there too...but that's exactly the way it is.
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 4
'' Schroers: Okay, thanks.
Keith Gunderson: My name's Keith Gunderson, 6650 Lotus Trail. I'm just
north of the site. Proposed site. I've got a couple of questions I'd like
to have answered. The dock that we have down there right now, in the past
2 years has changed locations twice and right now it still is not in the
' location that it was originally proposed for. So I'd like to know where
the dock is going to stay. Okay. From what I understand, Rocky touched on
a couple points here as far as not a handicapped dock. And I think there
is a regulation as far as it should have a ramp. It should have rails and
it should have a better access. This is not safe at all. Then your map on
the proposed parking. The grayed in area really leads a person to believe
that there's a lot of room down there and Rocky's right. There's just not
a lot of room down there. If you're going to make this wider, to make this
safer for handicapped parking, you can go into any handicapped parking
stall and you can measure out and find out how wide it is. It's got to
have access on both passenger and driver sides. And if you're going to get
into this kind of distance, I just think that possibly there's going to
have to be a retaining wall put in. There's going to have to be trees cut
down. I think this should be measured out a little bit closer. And is it
going to be paved or is it just going to be like you say a Class V going to
be put in there? It should be checked out a little bit more. Okay, I've
' had several conversations with the officers in the area because of the
trouble in the area. I'm sure you're aware of the swing that was down in
the park area for quite a while. That is now since been removed. The
officer that I did talk to said there was over 70 arrests down there and
none of these are local people. Now if we're going to be putting in more
parking, and it's just going to be inviting more trouble. I think 4
parking spots is totally out of line. At the south end of the beach, the
' large beach which you call it, has got 4 parking areas. You're calling
this the north beach. Mini- beach, which is a lot less than a third of the
size and you want to put in the same amount of parking. If you're going to
put any kind of parking in at all, it should maybe be one space for
handicapped. One space for other people. This beach was put in years and
years ago for the local people in the surrounding area and I think that's
probably the way it should stay. The public beach on the south end, again
has a bathroom location on there. Is the north beach going to have a
bathroom in it? Where is that going to be located at? Is that going to be
handicapped equipped? I think the whole issue here is get something for
the handicapped and make it safe for the handicapped. I think the better
location for these parking areas is the area that Rocky talked about...
North of the pump house. It's in a dead end street. It's safer. There's
ample room to fill. To make parking spaces. To put in a bathroom. The
' dock can be moved over there. It's out of the way. It's easy accessed and
it's easier to turn around in and you're off the road. You're off the main
stream of traffic. It's not going to cost anymore. There's going to be a
I lot less maintenance. I don't think you have to put any kind of retaining
wall in. It's just a better location all the way around. There's no
problems. No cost and little or none maintenance. I think we should look
at this a little bit closer and if any or all of these answers can't be, or
II
questions can't be answered, the only other solution is just take the dock
out. That will alleviate all the problems totally because again, the main
thing here is the city has received several calls on handicapped parking
II for the use of this dock which is not handicapped equipped. Take it out.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting 1
June 23, 1992 - Page 5
Get it out of there. Put it on the north or on the south beach. The
bathroom's already there. The parking's already there. Thanks.
Hoffman: Chairman Schroers, if I could address those issues. This
recommendation is more than just to adequately address needs, facilities of
residents or persons with disabilities. There's been a number of
occasions, not only this year but on previous years where again, parking is
tolerated to a certain degree. I think if you ask the people who speaked
tonight, they'll let you know that on certain days, there are vehicles who I
are parked there. Who are there using the beach. Using the canoe rack.
Utilizing the dock or fishing from shore and many times that is tolerated.
However again, when it is not tolerated, when we receive a call, we're
forced then to go ahead and inform that person that they must move their II
vehicle or they will be ticketed. A distance of 4 to 6 feet can be
accommodated in that location. That was measured out. Park Commissioners
were there that evening. You can respond to that issue as well. No
retaining wall is necessary. No trees would be cut to accommodate this
parking. The area will not be asphalted. Four parking stalls do exist at
the south beach. Or excuse me, at the south of the larger beach and that
is just simply a beach location. There is also a Satellite, portable
restroom there. The north beach or the mini -beach also has the fishing
dock and the canoe rack. There are six spaces on that canoe rack so
parking needs to be made available to that as well. Portable restroom
cannot be installed on the north site because of it's proximity to the 11
lake. If there was a spillover or runoff into the water, is what we need
to stay away from. The issue of moving the parking lot to the north of the
old access or the current pump house there, just does not make any sense.
In my thinking it over, if you drive in there, then you're going to have to
necessitate or allow for back -up and turn around. You're going to have to
take and improve a much larger surface into a gravel turn around type of II
situation. I'm not sure if this is just an issue of moving it farther down
the street. It is not my belief that that would make a better location for
parking. 1
Schroers: What about cost of developing parking down there? Do you think
it would be roughly the same? II Hoffman: Costs are insignificant. The maintenance in this type of thing
is insignificant. It's simply you would have to drive into that location.
Park. If you park parallel there you're going to have to turn around and I
exit traveling the opposite direction from which you traveled into there.
You're going to have to do a full 180 degree turn around.
Lash: Where, if we have the parking on the street, how are the people who I
are parking on the street supposed to get turned around? Would they have
to go down to that area, turn around and then get out?
Hoffman: Well presumably they would go up, whichever direction they came I
from. If you're parking on the right hand side of the road, if you came
down Lotus Trail, then you would exit on Mohawk. '
Lash: Is Mohawk not shown on this map?
II Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 6
il Hoffman: Not on this map, no. It's just off the picture to the north. So
again, that area's in the residential homefronts abut that property
1 directly. The area being recommended for parking in that regard is the
only area on this side of the park. Which lends itself to being out of the
way. To not being visible from the front of homes.
' Koubsky: That was one of our major concerns too when we went down to look
at that area is that we select a place that people aren't going to be
looking into, Instead at a high bluff on the west side. Our intent here
II isn't to make a three lane highway down there. It's just to give enough
people to pull off the side so cars can pass.
I Roger Byrne: What I hear is they're more interested in what's somebody
view is then what the impact has on the environment. The big problem we've
got right down there right now. That's the crux of the whole thing when
I somebody cut some trees down there. But you were the other way around on
that. Now this one, you're flip flopped around. You don't care about the
environment. You just care about what somebody's going to have to look at.
You don't worry about what the other way around. I don't understand.
I Schroers: That's not all we're saying. We're saying that we don't intend
to cut down any trees in order to do this.
' Roger Byrne: But you haven't looked at it then. Even if you don't cut
them down, you fill around then, they're going to die. If you fill around
I trees, they die. It has to have... If you have cars parked there, there's
oil leaking down there. When it rains, gravels going to wash down there.
You're going to ruin that whole stretch of trees right there. You've got
land right on down just a little ways where there is no trees. They've
I already been cut down. It's closer to the dock. I don't understand what
his problem is with moving this parking down. I'm all for parking. I
think people should access to that park. I've always said that for 10 -15
1 years. I've been trying to get you people to do something with that nice
piece of land down there so people can use it. If I was you I'd move it.
But let's do it right. Why wreck some more of it just to accommodate so
somebody don't have to look at cars in front of their house you know. It
I doesn't make any sense. You people are flip flopping back and forth.
Everytime you turn around just to accommodate what, I don't understand.
I Resident: How about our driveway that accesses onto that road? If we're
not so worried about that. Our driveways go out that way too. Now only
that Mr. Hoffman, can you tell me how many calls are received every month
I for parking down there? You tell us that we okay it. How many are
received actually per week down there for parking?
Hoffman: I could not respond to that without going ahead and checking with
I Carver County Report record.
Resident: It's a bunch. We've talked to the officers. There is problems
I down there and there are big problems down there. How are you going to
patrol this? Who's going to maintain it?
II Keith Gunderson: We've talked to the officers in the area that have made
some arrests on the swing and I think parking's going to just add... The
II
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 7
1
officers said they can't even catch these kids because they're literally in
the middle and bottom of the park and you just can't catch these kids. '
Resident: He said that they lay down. They can't even see them. The
swing back there.
Keith Gunderson: ...pump house. You already conceded the fact that you
can have...and they're very easy. It's like getting in and out of a
parking stall...
Schroers: Did staff say that the City Engineers have looked at this
project?
ll
Hoffman: Correct. The City Engineers and City Planners were..to that area
and neither department had a problem with this proposal. The area in
question is located up in this area? If we were to install parking in
there, there are 3 homes which directly front this piece of property. You'd
be taking lake frontage which is currently maintained...and pull that up
and fill it with gravel to make that a parking area, turn around which II would then be situated right in front of those homes. The area which is
being recommended down here, you'd do much less damage to the park. You
need to rip up much less turf. In fact all you're doing is widening the
shoulder in the area where there is a sloping area down to the tree line
which is in question there. Again, it's not our intent to kill trees. I
do not believe that we will be killing trees...establishing those 4 parking
spots. That 4 to 6 feet of gravel to the addition of the shoulder area is I
simply a precautionary measure to make that parking safer. Parking
currently takes place on the shoulder as it exists. Any widening that we
can do is simply making this a better situation. '
Keith Gunderson: If I could address the houses.
Andrews: Could you go to the mic please just so we can have this for the II
record. Otherwise we have no way to refer back to what you're saying.
Keith Gunderson: The houses in front of, north of the pump house. If II there's 3 houses up there right now. One has got a dock in there at this
time.
Tuck's I believe has that which nobody else can have a dock. I don't know
why he does and the next door neighbor I noticed for the last month or so, 11
they've got a big dump truck parked on this land here also. Now this is
park property. This should be used as public land. This guy is using it
for his own parking lot. I'd like to see somebody address that also. I II
think a better look should just be taken at the proposed site. Because
right now there is parking going on right now but when you open up the
trees, or open up your door, it's right in oak trees. So yes, there's
going to have to be fill put in and if you take a closer look at it, I mean'
just over the side it drops down about a good 5 feet. So where is this
fill going to go when it rains? Where's it going to wash?
Erickson: Would there be room near there for one head in spot that we
could make wider for like a handicapped van? Are these large enough for
that? 1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 8
Keith Gunderson: Sure. You can make all the room you want if you cut trees
and put in fill and put in a retaining wall.
' Erickson: Without taking out trees or changing the shoreline.
Keith Gunderson: I don't know what the regulations are as far as what you
have to have for footage on each side of a vehicle on a handicapped
vehicle. But as far as a van, some of the vans that I have seen, they're 8•
feet wide. Your door swings open on either side a good 3 feet and right now
there's not even close to any kind of room like that.
Lash: Part of our perception problem here might be in everybody's mental
image of handicapped. For some reason when we talk about handicap, people
assume a person is in a wheelchair. I don't know for sure the people, the
women who were down there before, my impression of the memo that we got, it
was not a wheelchair bound person. I can relate personally to my mother-
in-law who has a handicap sticker on her car. She was not in a wheelchair.
She was just, her lung capacity was such that she couldn't park way out far
away from Target or something so she had the right to a handicap spot. Now
' I haven't even seen the dock but I trust your word that it would not be the
kind of thing a person in a wheelchair would want to go onto and I don't
even know if that's what we are intending by saying that we think that
' there should be a handicap spot there. It's just basically the law that
it's supposed to be there and if the dock doesn't accommodate a wheelchair
and there's no access for a wheelchair to get to the dock, I really rather
' doubt that someone in a wheelchair would be going there. But it could be
someone else with some type of a handicap that gives them the right to a
handicap sticker with the right to a handicap spot. So I just want to
clarify that I think everybody gets real hung up on the fact that handicap
just assumes that a person's in a wheelchair and I think we need to look at
a bigger picture here of what that definition is.
' Schroers: That's exactly the point when we discussed the issue previously.
What we were going to do was make one handicap spot available at the front
edge of the parking so that anyone that has some degree of a disability
would have less of a distance to go to get to the lake. But this has not
been designed as a full handicap accessible facility down there and that's
not what we're advertising. All we wanted to do is provide some parking.
We stuck money in the park. We developed the park, which is what the
' neighbor said that they would like to have, and if we invest money and
develop a facility and not provide parking, that's ridiculous. I mean we
need a couple of places to park there and we're not talking about a great
big elaborate parking lot here. We're just going to widen the shoulder a
little bit and try not to hurt anything in so doing. And we don't
anticipate that it's going to attract a lot more people to the area. Only
people that know about it now. It would just give them a place to park
whereby they would not be ticketed for parking there. And that is our
only...
(There was a tape change at this point.)
Andrews: Todd, was the intent to more aggressively enforce no parking if
we were to provide spots there designated as legal parking?
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 9
Hoffman: Parkin is currently enforced from my understanding, pretty
Y Y g� P Y
routinely down there currently.
Andrews: Well it sounds like it's on a complaint only basis rather than an
actual what I'd call enforcement by patrol at least.
Hoffman: I can't respond to the patrol schedule down there but certainly II
once we install parking, to see to it that it doesn't get abused and they
don't start parking additional vehicles there past the 3 normal stalls and
then the handicap we can ask the Sheriff's Department to do those.
Schroers: As far as problems with teenagers and that sort of thing down in
the park, that's really not our jurisdiction at all. That's law
enforcement and all you can do, if you bring it to Park and Rec, all we can"'
do is request to the law enforcement people that they, that we can just
notify them that we've had concerns from the citizens and ask them if they
could step up their efforts in the area but we don't have any authority as
far as law enforcement is concerned in the park.
Keith Gunderson: In either location, whichever one you choose, when you do II
put up the signs, are there going to be any kind of hours posted at all?
Because I know when you get into any other parks in the state here, there
is always hours. You've got boats running across the lake at 10:30 and 11 11:00 at night.
Erickson: Todd, aren't all the lakes posted to 10:00?
Hoffman: Park hours are 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m..
Erickson: And that one sign is at the mini -beach which would be near where,
the parking. They're supposed to be closed at 10:00 as it is.
Keith Gunderson: Okay, and that will be patrolled on a regular basis I
would imagine.
Hoffman: Again we would make that request to the Sheriff's Department that
they patrol that portion of the city. The Department did respond.to the
issue of the rope swing. We received two calls on that issue directly to
the department. The swing was probably 40 -45 -50 feet in the air.
Keith Gunderson: A lot of fun. Did you get on it?
Hoffman: The park department crews did go down there and remove the swing.
Remove the steps to the swing and the other trash which had accumulated in '
the area due to that swing being in that location.
Schroers: Okay. And did you note the personal property that is being
parked on park property right now? He mentioned that there was a dump
truck and stuff parked there. In the beginning when we were starting to
develop this area, there was a lot of boats and things that were tied up I
down there to the trees that did not have a right to be there and we
pursued that and got them all removed. We appreciate you bringing that to
our attention because we do not want private property parked on the park ,
property.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 10
Roger Byrne: I guess I've got an idea Todd. If you insist on having it
there, which I have no personal problem with per se. Parking being right
there in that location. Why not just take down a few of the no parking
' signs there. Let them park there. Why do you have to widen it? They've
been parking there anyway. Let them park there. You don't have to widen
it and kill them trees and stuff... Just take a couple signs down and let
' them park there. Put up one at the end where you want to and I mean
they've been parking there now. Why do you have to wreck something so they
can park there when they're already parking there? I'd go along with that.
If you don't want to move it down. If you want to put gravel and stuff,
put it down there where it belongs. If you want to just have them park
there, just let them park there.
' Schroers: Your point is well taken and I guarantee there's nobody sitting
here that wants to see any trees be killed. We don't want that.
' Roger Byrne: I don't want to see stuff wrecked down there you know and
that's what's going to happen. If you insist on widening it out there.
' Erickson: The only thing we want to do is if we allow people to park,
right now if you give people an area to park that is now dirt and grass and
sod and they get down there and it gets rainy. It's going to get mucked up
and I think there's going to be a lot more damage to the side of the road
than if we put a dumpload of Class V down there and spread it out.
Roger Byrne: I could see it spread out from what it is right now you know
' but he's talking, he keeps saying widen it 4 to 6 feet wider you know and
you're into the trees.
Schroers: I'll recommend that we have the City Engineers to look at it
again and specify that we definitely do not want any damage occurring to
the trees there. But we also would like to create as safe a situation as
possible and try to get the cars off the traffic lane if we can.
' Roger Byrne: I guess that's all I'm looking for. I still think it's safer
and better down farther but you know. If you have to put it there, you
' know, just don't wreck anything, that's all.
Schroers: I think we can modify our recommendation to accommodate that.
We'll try.
' Lash: I have a couple of quick questions that I want to ask just so I get
my bearings since I wasn't able to go down there and look. Is there
' parking up on Pawnee?
Hoffman: Pawnee?
Lash: Or on Mohawk? Mohawk has just been...
Hoffman: Mohawk contains no parking. Pawnee farther up, I'm not sure if
that's signed or not. I believe it may be.
Schroers: Most of those roads in there are really pretty narrow.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting 11
June 23, 1992 - Page 11
1
Lash: They're all so narrow that I just can't see putting anything on
there. And then this other area further north, is that closer to the dock!'
than what we have?
Hoffman: Depending on where you install the parking there, it could be
closer to the dock by some certain amount of feet. 1
Lash: And I'm assuming from the map that there's no parking on either side
of Lotus Trail? 1
Hoffman: Correct.
Schroers: Do any of the other commissioners have any specific thoughts 1
regarding this issue?
Erickson: Just to reassure the residents a little bit. If you didn't,
weren't already aware of this. We're also the Tree Board for Chanhassen s
we spend a fair amount of time talking about saving trees and putting trees
up so your concern really hits home with us about the trees so we want to 1
make sure that, like Larry said. The City Engineer's know for sure that
the trees aren't going to come out when the parking is widened a little
bit.
Keith Gunderson: At the start of all my paperwork here is, I asked where
the dock is going to stay. Is it in the location where it's going to be
from now on? Or is it going to go closer to the beach? 1
Hoffman: The current location of the dock is where it will stay.
Keith Gunderson: Going to stay, okay. 1
Resident: Was that the original proposed site?
Hoffman: As shown on the map.
Resident: The one that we all voted on. I don't think that was the
proposed site is where you have it right now. Down by the old beach, just II
a little ways away from it. Somehow it ended up way at the other end.
Hoffman: The master plan was developed off of the neighborhood meetings II
and then recommendation by the Park Commission and it shows the canoe rack
is located here and the fishing dock is located here. Those are currently
where those two facilities exist.
Schroers: And they exist where we had wanted them?
Hoffman: Correct. There certainly may have been discussion about other II
locations at the site. I have no reason to believe that it was shifted for
some reason in final development anyway.
Resident: When it's installed, is it something that's removed each year?
Hoffman: Correct.
1
II Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 12
II Resident: So when the maintenance people go to reinstall it, how do they
know where it's supposed to go? Do they look at it.
' Hoffman: They'd know where it was from the previous year.
Resident: ...never stayed in the same spot, okay?
II Schroers: I mean does it matter if it's 10 feet one way or the other?
Resident: Well if you're voting on parking and all that. I mean this
I wasn't the original spot it was supposed to be in that we voted 2 years ago
when...
I Keith Gunderson: It was supposed to go right next to the mini - beach.
Resident: This was not the original spot. I don't know...
II Roger Byrne: We were supposed to have a Satellite down there too. We
never did get that. I don't know what happened to that.
II Resident: Somebody shifted here from the original plan. You know like I
said, I don't know how long it's been or I don't think it's been very long
but this is not the original plan that we all voted on and we came here for
II and they were going to.
Schroers: You're saying that this was 2 years ago?
II Resident: Well 3. 3 years ago.
Schroers: Okay, I've been here that long and part of the thing is, when we
II make our recommendations and then it goes, the job gets out and the actual
contracting takes place. Like Todd stated previously, the proximity to the
lake made it not suitable for putting another portable toilet there. It
was too close to the lake. Some of these changes that occured during the
I
development, happen after they leave here and they're due to a variety of
things. Usually it's not something that really greatly alters the plan a
lot. It may move the dock a little bit one way or the other but if it was
II changed from original, there was a reason for that. •
Roger Byrne: ...the reason for the Satellite was, everybody was whizzing
I in the weeds down there so, you're worried about the Satellite tipping
over, well they don't even have to tip it over because everybody's going on
the ground already. Same thing. So why not take a chance with a
Satellite.
II Lash: They don't have to tip it over but trust me, they do tip it over.
II Roger Byrne: I know but even if they don't, everybody's going on the
ground anyway...so what are you going to do?
I Resident: Why can't you take the dock and put it down at the nice beach,
at the nice public beach that you have down there? There's a spot right
there that there's no swimming there... You have 4 parking spots up there
and you could have a Satellite. Why does that dock have to be down at
I I the...beach that can't facilitate, can't handle it?
II
Park and Rec Commission Meeting II
June 23, 1992 - Page 13
II
Lash: I don't imagine it does have to be down there. I thought this was,
my impression was that you people were the ones that wanted it. ,
Roger Byrne: Well we did but we also wanted it with the Satellite and with
the other stuff that we were going to have. But then all of a sudden, one
thing gets put in and everything else gets left out. That just doesn't
II
work out. It doesn't seem right.
Resident: And you're not facilitating us. We don't need parking spots.
We live there. Obviously you want to facilitate other people. So when you '
say, you thought that's what we wanted, well you're not dealing with we.
You're dealing with the public... As far as I'm concerned, it should go to
the big, beautiful beach that we have down on the south end or put it where,
your public access is.
Schroers: I was at that meeting and several of the residents from Carver
Beach told us that that is where they always have fished. Fishing was good'
there and they liked to fish there and that is why we put the dock there
and it wasn't anybody else. It was people who lived right in that area
told us that.
II
Roger Byrne: Right, but we were also told we'd get the Satellite too...
Then you don't, and then you've got a reason why. Because it might tip
over. I don't know why you put them trash cans but it just goes on and on II
and on and on and we're really frustrated.
Schroers: There isn't a why...
II
Roger Byrne: ...come down and look at it. Where these engineers went to
school to say that that was 'the best place to put in parking. Sure, best II place if you're looking at the people that don't have to look at the
parking. I'm sure you'd get less heat there but environmentally, for
that... It's not the best place. I don't care. I didn't even go to .
engineering school and I can figure that out. It's common sense. All II you've got to do is look at it. I know what these people are doing. All
they're worried about is who's going to cry because they have to look at
this car parked out in front of their house. Well, put them here, nobody's'
going to have to look at it. So let's just go on from there. You people
just keep doing the same thing over and over. You know what you're doing,
why do you do it? Why do you keep doing it and then sit there and say, II well this is the best from safety. From this and from that. I tried to
get something for that park...people down there and all you people do is
give us the run around. Bad plan. Bad ideas. When you do give us
something, you take half of it back and leave the crummy stuff down... I'mll
sorry. I'm sorry, but this really frustrates us. It's a great park. It's
a beautiful park and people could use that park. I've been telling you
people that and you just.
II
Hoffman: To respond to the issue of the Satellite. I believe at the time
that it was reviewed that it was the City's intention to install that
Satellite there because there was not a concern or an ordinance in place II
restricting the instailatin of Satellites within that proximity of the
lake. After the fact, after that time, there was an ordinance passed and
approved by the City of Chanhassen restricting the distance from a lake for!'
the installation of a portable restroom.
II
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 14
Schroers: Okay and as we have it right now, we can't meet those
requirements anywhere in that area. The entire area is too close to the
lake to install. Okay, there's a regulation.
Roger Byrne: ...if you can't put the Satellite in, how can you encourage
people to come down there by putting up the dock and putting up the canoe
racks and doing all the other stuff there? If they're just going to be
going in the weeds all the time like they were before. It's like walking
on the deck and there's guys standing there whizzing in the weeds. You
wouldn't want it out in front of your house would you? I don't mind people
using it but you know, it's either the dogs or the guys or there was a gal
off a pontoon boat went over there the other day. I mean I'm standing up
there on the deck.
Schroers: I guess that's something that we don't have control over. We'd
like to think that people would have a little more, what's the right word?
A little more discretion but unfortunately that's not under our control. I
apologize for all these frustrations but there are a lot of issues to deal
with here. I think that in general, my opinion is that the area has gotten
better and we'll continue to work at it to try to make it better still. I
don't see why we can't have a garbage can there. We should have a trash
container there and we will ask in our recommendation that one gets placed
there. We can't put in a Satellite if there's an ordinance against it. I
mean we just can't do it and it's not a perfect world. I'm sorry.
Lash: Were there other things that you thought were going in that have not
one in yet?
Roger Byrne: Well I thought there was going go be a path put in there.
That never materialized.
Erickson: Part of that trail system? Or just a path?
Roger Byrne: No, they were talking about wood chips and stuff. Somebody
came through about 10 years ago, the Boy Scouts were down there and cleaned
it out and put some wood chips in but it's got grown over. You can't
hardly get down there...
Lash: Are there benches or picnic tables or anything like that there?
Roger Byrne: Well they were talking about picnic tables too but that never
did materialize.
Schroers: Okay well, I think at this point we're kind of whipping a dead
horse because there's not a whole lot we can do about some of those thing
at this point. It's hard to remember exactly but we at one point were
considering installing a limestone path from the north to the south. What
happened with that?
Hoffman: The trailway which exists there is over grown. It's used by some
people in the area. The tree cutting which took place blocked the trail
for a period of time. I would recommend that tree trimming and clearing of
the area be the best solution. I'm not sure that installing Class V
aggregate in that area would make it any more pleasant of a trail or
Park and Rec Commission Meeting '
June 23, 1992 - Page 15
useable. The packed black dirt which currently exists is quite useable. II
It just could use a clearing out.
Schroers: Okay, I think that we have discussed this issue before and
decided that just periodic clearing of that trail would be better than
going in and trying to build a formal aggregate trail in there.
Lash: I think when we looked at that there were a lot of areas that we
thought would be wash outs didn't we? With wood chips or anything there.
Schroers: Yeah. We thought we would have a problem with either wood chips,
or limestone and that the anticipated use would not justify the cost in
paving it so we just thought that we would use volunteer groups. Scout
projects and that sort of thing to try and keep the area clear so that
there was a walking path.
Hoffman: In closing, I would encourage that the residents that are in that
area, if they notice things which are deficient or which need attention,
simply to call the department and we will take every measure to respond to
their request. '
Schroers: Okay, thanks. Anything more from any of the Commissioners on
this? Okay. I would like to ask for a recommendation then that would II include paying special attention and special care as to not damage trees
and also to ask for proper waste receptacles in the area along with the
normal recommendation.
Lash: Would we like to possibly re- evaluate the number of spots...? '
Schroers: It seemed like the area, the idea that I'm getting is that the '
mental picture we're receiving of this is a lot bigger program than it
actually is going to be. I think that what we intend to do is going to be
really hardly noticeable. All we wanted to do was expand the shoulder a
little bit for that distance. Remove the no parking signs in that area so
that people wouldn't be ticketed for parking there and that's basically it.
We're not going into a great big elaborate thing here. I think that to,
it's not going to make a difference if there's 3 spots or if there's 4. '
Andrews: I have a question or comment and that would be, by putting in an
aggregate or a Class V or whatever, are we then going to be, have this II brought back to us with a request for paving and a path so it be further
accessible? Are we really solving a problem or just starting to scratch
the surface?
Schroers: We certainly wouldn't be paving that unless the road was paved. II
The road itself was gravel and we wouldn't be paving a little parking area
on a gravel road. '
Andrews: Does the Federal law state anything about what'd be require as
far as a base goes?
Hoffman: It'states make reasonable access and again it does not define
what reasonable is. And Jan was correct, under 3% of persons labeled with
disabled are in wheelchairs. _ '
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 16
Schroers: Okay. Is anyone ready to make a recommendation? If not, then I
will. I'm going to recommend that the City Council, or that we recommend
to City Council 3 parking spots with 1 being designated or assigned as a
handicap parking spot. That we are also going to ask that when this is
facilitated, that the Planning and Engineering take a very close and
careful look to insure that there is no damage done to any existing trees
in the area. And that also upon completion we would like to have proper
waste receptacles at that location. The parking is to be facilitated by
construction of a widened shoulder for a distance of 60 feet on the south
side of Lotus Trail as depicted on the attached diagram. That is my
recommendation. Do I have a second?
Erickson: You said 3 spots Larry. Did that include the handicap spot?
Schroers: Yeah, 3 spots includes the handicap right?
' Hoffman: The recommendation on the floor this evening is for four stalls
with one being a handicap.
' Erickson: One of those being a handicap.
Schroers: Okay, I stand corrected. There will be three designated parking
spots and one additional spot designated as handicap for a total of 4. But
it will still, they will all be within that 60 foot distance on the south
side of Lotus Trail.
Koubsky: I think we can put the garbage can at the earliest convenience
instead of at the completion of the project.
Schroers: Okay, well that's something. I don't even think that that has
to be on the recommendation. We can just ask staff to request maintenance
to get a receptacle down there. Okay, now do we have a second?
' Kousky: I'll second.
Schroers moved, Koubsky seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
11 recommend the City Council approve the construction and signage of four
parallel parking spaces within the 60 feet on the south side of Lotus Trail
for Carver Beach Park; one of the four for persons with disabilities, as
11 specified and shown on the attached maps; and that Planning and Engineering
take a very close and careful look to insure that there is no damage done
to any existing trees in the area. All voted in favor except Lash who
opposed and Andrews who abstained. The motion carried with a vote of 4 to
2.
Andrews: I'm going to abstain. 'I have to see that site better before I
can make a decision.
Lash: I'd be interested in getting more information on the other, further
' north location.
Schroers: Okay, what do we have?
1 Hoffman: A carried motion with 4 votes.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 17
Schroers: Okay. Thank you very much for coming in and for your interest
in this. Okay, let us move on.
Lash: Before we move on can we...signs designated. To let people know
that it's only open until 10:00 like the rest of the parks.
Koubsky: Parking hours? '
Schroers: Do we have those signs available Todd?
Hoffman: Yes. They will be incorporated. We intend to do a very thorough'
job in signing that so it is clear where the parking begins and where it
ends and the inclusion of park hours on those signs or on a separate sign in
can be accommodated.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS ON MOSQUITO CONTROL:
A. ERIC RIVKIN. RESIDENT. '
B. ROSS GREEN. METROPOLITAN MOSQUITO CONTROL.
Public Present: '
Name Address
Ross Green (MMCD) 2380 Wycliff St., St. Paul
Dave Neitzel (MMCD) 2380 Wycliff St., St. Paul
Renee Wagner (MMCD) 2380 Wycliff St., St. Paul
John Thompson (MMCD) 6100 Sunny Road, Minnetonka
Susan Palcheck (MMCD) 2380 Wycliff St., St. Paul
Ernest Wermerskircher (MMCD) 7757 Valley Drive, Jordan
Harold Trende (Carver Co. Comm) 9010 Co. Rd. 140, Cologne
Al Klingeihutz (Carver Co. Comm) 8600 Great Plains Blvd., Chanhassen
Hoffman: We'll take a couple minutes to set up and then we'll get rolling I
from there.
Ross Green: Okay, thank you. My name is Ross Green. I'm a Public
Information Officer for the Metropolitan Mosquito Control District. At
this time I'd like to introduce some of the people that came with us just
for in terms of questions that may be asked. Just so you know who these II
people are. In the back is Ernie Wermerskirchen who is the supervisor in
the Scott /Carver Operating Division of the Mosquito Control District.
Sitting next to him is Dr. Susan Palchick who is the Aedes Program Manager II
for the Metropolitan Mosquito Control District. In front of Ernie is Dave II
Neitzel who is the program leader for the LaCrosse Encephalitis Prevention
Program and the Lyme Ticks Surveiiience Program. Sitting next to Dave is
Renee Wagner who is a foreman in the Chanhassen area for the Scott /Carver
Operating Division. And next to her is John Thompson who is our Data
Processing Manager, who happens to live near the area and he was with us
this afternoon, or this evening. So if you have some questions, at least II
you know who we are and you can address those that way. I'd like to
basically give you, I'll be very brief if I can, about 15 minutes to go
through what mosquitoes and their control is all about here in Chanhassen.
I'll try to address specifically the park issues as to what our involvement
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 18
is there and we'll go from there. Can I talk from here? Okay, can you all
see that? Otherwise we can dim the lights or something if possible. Oh,
11 there we go. Alright. Briefly, the Mosquito Control District is a 7
county cooperative governmental agency. We're governed by a 17 member
Board of Commissioners. You may know that Commissioner Trende is one of
the members on the Carver Board. Appointed from the Carver Board to sit on
our commission and then there are County Commissioners from each of the 7
counties that make up the Metropolitan Mosquito Control Commission. We
operate in controlling mosquitoes in about 3,000 square miles so it does
include the eastern half of Carver County. Just to move on to a little bit
of biology. I think you need to know a little bit about the mosquito
before we can talk a little bit about control and I'll try to be brief
about this. We have about 50 different varieties of mosquitoes in the
Midwest, and in particular Twin Cities and there's only about 10 that
actually bite human beings. A mosquito, our number one pest mosquito is a
' little creature called an Ades Vexan. That's where you heard the name Ades
Program Leader. In fact about maybe 7 or 8 out of 10 times you're bit,
it's this one mosquito that does that. We have about 7 or 8 others that
develop in the early spring and live all summer long that are involved with
biting too. A mosquito spends about a week of it's life in the water and
it spends about another 2 to 4 weeks, the main pest mosquitoes, biting
people. Living in the air. They start out as eggs and they actually lay
their eggs on moister, dry depressions and I'll show you where these places
are. They over winter in an egg form. It's kind of an egg hibernation and
these eggs left where they're deposited, if they're dry, they can maybe
last up to maybe 5 years or better without going bad. And that was very
' well indicated here through the drought years and finally when we did get
the rain back in 1990. But anyway, in the springtime, the snow melts and
spring rain. The eggs hatch into little creatures called larvae. They
spend about a week of their life in this stage. Interesting to note, I'd
like you to note that during this stage, there's a natural growth that
takes place and there's a natural hormone. It's a juvenile hormone that is
naturally, that naturally occurs in the mosquito. As it grows and it
actually sheds it's skin before it turns into the next stage we call a pupa
but I'd like you to note that because one of the control materials that we
use is a growth hormone mimic. It's a biological approach to mosquito
control and it mimics this stage. This is a pupa or coccoon like.stage
that's involved and it transforms itself into an adult mosquito and then
emerges as an adult. It mates. Then it desires for blood. The blood is a
protein that's used for the nourishment of her eggs and there can be up to
about 200 -250 eggs per female and she can bite you more than once if she
survives. These mosquitoes can fly at least 1 to 3 miles a night. Maybe
' up to 35 miles and they get to 50 miles from their breeding areas. One of
the reasons why our district is as large as it is. Basically what we have
are these pothole depressions and breeding areas that are dry most of the
time. Wet some of the time where they reseed and what happens when it
rains, they fill up. The mosquitoes hatch out basically and develop.
Emerge from the water and then they leave and they can do their flight and
they occupy the daytime areas in what we call daytime resting areas or
harborage areas. And they're just like little vampires. They come out at
night looking for blood. That type of situation. Or on overcast days whn
people are near, that type of thing. Taking a look, we've documented
nearly 60,000 breeding places in the Twin Cities metro area and I'll give
' you some examples of what they are and you may recognize some of these we
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 19
1
find in park areas. We find them in other areas all over the whole land is
dotted with these breeding sites where mosquitoes develop. But the idea i
when it's dry, it looks like you saw there. And then when it's wet...and a�
few days after that it dries up. New mosquitoes come in. Lay their eggs
there. Wait for another rainfall. Then we need to get another brood or
•
population of mosquitoes that develop. On a normal year we get about 6 I
broods of mosquitoes a year. In the last couple of years we've had up to
12 or 13 broods of mosquitoes which is abnormal and then during the drought
years we had very few. Other examples are runoff into ditches that you see'
here. Very shallow water we're looking at. Less than 2 feet deep most
often. In the rural areas we have rain pools where the cattle will walk
around. They'll take drinks. They'll leave their hoof prints and it's
maybe a little difficult to see but those dots are larvae and there can bell
up to 1,000 larvae per hoof print. Other examples are spring mosquito
sites. These are rain pools. Woodland pools that are wet generally in the
springtime and they dry up during the summer but they do produce a number
of mosquitoes that live all summer long. This is a very prolific type of
breeding area. This is wild hay or canary grass. Reed such type of
vegetation and dries up rather rapidly but a very prolific breeding area
and many of them you'll recognize. Another example of that, between the
fence and the cattails out there. Very prolific in terms of mosquito
development. This type of habitat produces less mosquitoes. Where you see
the cattails there and the rather, maybe 4 feet of water better. Not a
real good breeding habitat but in the shallow marshes we may find some
development in a site like that. Again, in the very shallow 6 to 12 inches
of water towards where that tree is that you see there, but when you get II
out towards the lake out there, very few mosquitoes, if any out there. So II
mosquitoes are not developing in the streams, lakes, or rivers but rather
the marsh areas and these are sometimes called floodplain mosquitoes.
Meaning that when the rivers and creeks overflow their banks, we have a
number of breeding areas where the water is after the water has receeded
back into the channels. We have all this floodplain that will produce
tremendous numbers of mosquitoes. Housing developments that go in. I I
think you're probably well aware, I know we built a house, my own family
back in '86 and we have a marsh area behind our house and it's very
expensive to build in these areas. But one of the things to consider is II
that many of these are mosquito producers that are going to annoy people
greatly. This is the logo of the equipment. You've probably seen that.
When we get anywhere from an inch to 2 inches of rain, this produces a
brood of mosquitoes and we have like 75 rain gauges throughout the Twin
Cities that moniter rainfall. We operate from section maps where one of
the things we do in the fall and the winter is to update these maps. And
so this gives us very detailed information about the wetlands, breeding I
sites that we have where mosquitoes develop and we keep very accurate and
meticulous records of everything we do out there in the environment to
where these breeding areas are. One way of doing surveillence is by giving'
you an example of how prolific mosquitoes are. This is one of these
breeding site areas. He's looking into a little thing called a dipper.
When we find an area the size of a football field that has water in it.
With shallow water that will stay for about 10 to 15 days and everytime we
dip, we find 5 little mosquitoe larvae developing in there and we call that
an average of 5 per dip. That translates into about 2 1/2 million
mosquitoes if it's left uncontrolled. That's an average. For adult I
mosquitoes, there are New Jersey Light Traps. This is not too dissimilar
11
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 20
1 from a bug zapper but it does collect mosquitoes. One way of monitoring
adult mosquito populations. One of the things that we do to monitor
mosquitoes. We put the district on a 4 mile, a grid. This is Renee here
taking a collection in one of the harborage areas and so we have about 200
locations of which we're doing about 100 locations this year because of
budget cutbacks and those kinds of things. But we take actually a 2 minute
collection to determine what the population of adult mosquitoes are and we
do that all over the Twin Cities area. Every 4 miles there's a grid and
within that 4 miles we try to locate the most prolific area where we find
the greatest numbers of adult mosquitoes that are there. Then we plot all
' that information. When our anamologists has had a look at it, sorted them,
find out what kind they are and what densities they're in, we plot those on
a map and this is an example of one of those maps. This is a few years
back but it does indicate what we see. This is the whole Twin Cities and
1 on June 18th here, the ranges was 5 mosquitoes. Where you see 1 or 2 lines
up to about 91 mosquitoes where you see up in the upper right hand corner
of that map and we have, we keep these like twice a week so it gives us an
' indication of where the adult mosquito populations are. You can control
mosquitoes one or two ways primarily and that is one, while they're in the
water and two, while they're up flying. The direction and emphasis of the
' Mosquito Control District program is to control the mosquito while it's in
the water and that's known as larval control. What we are using at the
present time are two materials. Biologically derived materials. One is
called Methoprine. The brand name is called Altocide. It's the Insect
Growth Hormone mimic that I talked about earlier. And the other one is a
natural soil bacteria called BTI. That's short for basilios... I think
you understand why we call it BTI. But it's a natural soil bacteria that
' is very specific for controlling mosquitoes and very much different than
the conventional pesticides that have been used in years past and are still
in use all over the country. So the material methoprine that I eluded to
here, it's supplied in a number of different forms. Primarily one that
most people are familiar with are the briquettes that will last 150 days in
water and that's in essence a mosquito season. This can also be used in a
sand formulation which can last anywhere from 4 to 5, up to 20 days.
' There's different formulations that can be used. And then there's also a
liquid application that can be done also but primarily much of what we do
between March and June have to do with applying the briquettes and this is
' a one time treatment for these breeding areas for the summer. And so what
happens basically, if it's dry or wet, we do know that these produce
mosquitoes. We've had historical data to refer to that and what happens
basically when it rains, the sites fill up with water. Mosquito eggs hatch
' into larvae. The little bits of material break off into the water and form
a concentration that's about 1 to 2 parts per billion that affect the
mosquito biologically. And it affects the pupa stage where the mosquito
' actually dies of a confusion. A physiological confusion. Biologically it
doesn't develop properly and so it never leaves the water. One of the
benefits to this is that, if you relate it to other types of insecticides,
is that it allows the mosquito to go through it's water stage and therefore
any other creatues. Maybe a duck would come in or whatever it might be to
feed on those creatues, they can do that without any hassle or without any
problem to that creature. We do apply, as I
' mentioned, the sand materials and the use of BTI with the use of a
helicopter. When the sites are larger than 3 acres, this is what we use.
It's a more temporary type of arrangement in terms of treatments but we do
1
II
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 21 1
use helicopters and these pilots have, most of them have 10 -12 -15 years II experience flying and these are known locations that are treated once we
find mosquitoes there. The other aspect is adult mosquito control and we
do adult mosquito control primarily in park and recreation, heavy used park,
and recreation areas and for civic events and functions that go on in the
communities. One other purpose for our spraying for mosquitoes is also for
disease prevention and I think that's something that you're probably all
concerned with down here in Chanhassen. Inasmuch as there are at least 5 I
locations in Chanhassen that, where LaCrosse Encephalitis has been a
problem and we have that mosquito here called an Aedes triseriatus that
develop in the tree holes and artificial containers and the habitat that II
exists in not only Chanhassen but basically the southern part of our
district. So I'll discuss that a little bit later but nonetheless, the
adult mosquito control is involved with 2 different operations. One is
called cold fogging, which simply, that's just simply what it means. It's II
a cold mist that's sprayed from a truck mounted unit and the material
that's used is called resmethrin and I'll explain that in a minute. And
the other operation is called backpacking with permethrin. It's a similar II
material. It is applied with a backpack or a backpack mounted to an all
terrain vehicle. Both of these materials, and that's applied to the
harborage areas and I'll show you that in just a minute. These two
materials are called synthetic pyrethroid materials. In their natural form'
they would be called pyrethrum or pyrethrins and they are basically, those
natural materials. These are synthesized materials in a lab but very
similar chemically and the natural materials are related to the extract
from the chrysanthemum flowers so it's a botanical type of insecticide that
has a very low...toxicity in terms of when we apply this to vegetation for
treatment of mosquitoes. Very effective on mosquitoes however. Cold I
fogging, this is one of our fogger units on the back of a truck. We
primarily, we're doing less and less of this type of operation each year.
As we are able to reach more breeding areas with the resources we have
available, there will be less of a need to do adult mosquito control but
as it is now, there are extenuating circumstances in terms of invasion from
mosquitoes or mosquitoes that get away from us as a result of inclement
weather where the helicopters are not able to get to all the breeding
I
areas. There's still rationale for using the adulticides to control
mosquitoes. Primarily this cold fogging happens in the evening time around
sundown for a couple of hours. And again, most of that is for park and
I recreation areas to reduce the population so that people can enjoy
themselves for the weekend or for an event. That type of situation. We
also, another operation is involved with backpacking. This is an all
terrain vehicle where we've applied permethrin which has a risidual
II
capacity. We actually apply it to the vegetation as a barrier type
treatment and it will last, if it's in a shaded area, will last up to about
10 days. If it's in the sunlight, it may break down to anywhere between 1 I
and 3 days. But it provides kind of a preventive treatment and as the
mosquitoes inhabit or move from one harborage area to another, as they move
through the vegetation and they come in contact with it, the mosquito
populations are bled down. So this is kind of a preventive approach and we '
again, apply those to the park and rec areas to decrease those populations
of mosquitoes. During the daytime these are applied. The fogging would
happen then, say for example on a 4th of July, if I could give you an
I
example of how we would do an adulticiding program. If there were
mosquitoes there, and this is all based on surveillence. Whether there's
1
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 22
' mosquitoes there or not. If there's not mosquitoes there, we're not going
to go and spray. I think that needs to be understood. But secondly, what
we would do, about 3 or 4 days previous to an event, we would come in and
spray the harborage areas for adult mosquitoes. Then we would come back in
the night before the event and determine whether the mosquito populations
were sufficient to cause annoyance or problems. Then, if necessary, and
the conditions were proper to spray with the cold fog unit, this unit that
you see back here, then we would do that to knock down those populations so
that people could enjoy the event at that point. I'll briefly go through
this. The cattail mosquito control program actually starts in the
spring. There's one very vicious biting mosquito. Probably the most
1 vicious biting mosquito and it will probably become evident in some areas
right now. It has a very different life style than a majority of
mosquitoes that bite us but they're going to be evident this year. More
' evident this year because of the vexan population being down because of the
dry weather and the controls that we've applied already. But these
mosquitoes actually develop in the roots of some portions of some cattail
' marshes. And that program starts early in the spring by applying these
briquettes to these known areas that produce this mosquito and there's
extensive surveillence that's done by this particular unit that we have for
these treatments. And one of the reasons is because a lot of these are
' bogs and if you've ever been in a bog, if you go through a bog, you can go
down 10 -20 feet or something so we apply them in the spring. Or I should
say late winter so that it presents less of a problem to our employees in
terms of treatment. We also have a biting gnat or blackfly control program
which is primarily a larval control program. The species of gnats we have,
either develop in the small streams that are around the Twin Cities area or
they're in the large rivers as you see here. This is the Coon Rapids dam
' and one of the more prolific areas for gnat development. What you're
seeing here is the treatment and again the materials we use for blackfly
control is the same for mosquitoes only it's in a liquid form. It's the
BTI that we use. And we work very closely with the Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources in securing permits and also doing environmental studies
on the effect of this material on the bio that's in the river and factors
' involved that way. To give you an idea. This is a line, one of these.
They're nylon rope if you will. About a 6 inch section there and what
you're seeing there is a gnat larvae and they're very prolific and come out
of the fast moving. They have a very different habitat than mosquitoes.
' Very fast moving, highly oxygenated water and this is what gnats look like
when they're in the larval form. Thank goodness they're not that big but
they do take a chunk out of you and they use blood for the same reasons
' mosquitoes do and we also monitor the adult populations of gnats and this
gives you an indication of what the gnat population looked like or how we
attract those adult populations. LaCrosse encephalitis I eluded to a
little bit earlier. LaCrosse encephalitis is primarily a children's
disease. It affects most often children and it's carried by a mosquito
called the Aedes triseriatus and that particular mosquito is not a long
distance flier. As a matter of fact it doesn't fly any further than about
' one mile and perfers to be around wooded, shaded areas. This disease is
able to survive the winter in the egg stage because it is an aedes
mosquito. It actually lays it's eggs on the dry areas or moist areas of
the inside of a tire or container or in a tree hole which will get wet
really along the bark. It prefers to feed of small mammals such as rodents
that you see here and also mice and shrews and that type of thing. This is
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 23
a map of the district and you can see where the red dots are. These are II
known case areas for LaCrosse encephalitis in the district. We work very
closely with Minnesota Department of Health in this regard and you can see
around the Lake Minnetonka area that it does extend into the Carver area I
where most of those cases have been found in the Metropolitan Mosquito
Control District. Primarily what we're looking at in terms of tree hole
habitat are the maple basswood type forests where there are multi -stem
trees that you see here and many times you find a tree hole and we've used I
the turkey baster here or syringe to take a sample out of that and put it
into a container and all those little white dots are the Aedes triseriatus
larvae. And what we do then, when we identify these areas, and I think, I
I know that Chanhassen has enacted an ordinance involved with making it
against the law to or a part of an ordinance that makes it against the law
to produce a habitat that will produce the Aedes triceriatur mosquito and I'
think that's excellent. When we find these areas, we either educate the
public on how to take care of those tree holes. The material you see there
is an insulation type material. It's called rock wool and it's different I
than cement in that it's somewhat flexible and is able to expand with the
tree as it grows to provide a greater length of time from filling it at
another time. And obviously I mentioned the artificial containers. The
tires that are imported and we monitor these locations. All the tire
recycling centers and dumps and those kinds of things and we again, one of
the main approaches to control here is education of the public and we hit
very heavily on that. What you're seeing here, this is Dave doing a
surveillence with one of his aspirators here. Checking the adult
population but basically we're looking at pollution here is what it is.
Just to back up a little bit here on this. So one of the things we do, we
monitor those adult populations and especially in the Chanhassen area I
because there are a number of cases. Just FYI, for your information, we
will be doing some treatments in the Chanhassen area this coming week
because we have found populations of adult triseriatus mosquitoes in our I
collections. That's not to say that there's any LaCrosse encephalitis
there but we are taking measures to reduce that population so that mosquito
does not become more prolific and to control that. Western encephalitis is
another disease that has a potential here and on various years, especially
very wet years and all of the, I might add too that with the LaCrosse
encephalitis program and with the Western encephalitis program, that all of
the Metropolitan Mosquito Control District does get involved in the control'
and involved with both these diseases and how they're remedied in terms of
knocking off the adult populations or the populations of mosquitoes. I
neglected to tell you that we're also working with the Minnesota Pollution I
Control Agency. They are providing funding or have provided funding over
the last few years to help clean up the tires and just this year alone
we've cleaned up nearly 22,000 tires in the district. And to supplement
that, we've got another 30,000 that we've taken care in the last 2 years
previous to that. And so we work very heavily to see that there's just an
absolute minimum potential, if at all, for a mosquito born disease to take
place in the district, and especially in this area. One of the most commonll
diseases that we have to contend with obviously is not with humans but with
the dog heartworm. That is, what you're seeing here is a relatively recent
slide that shows the spread of dog heartworm which is an exclusive mosquito
born disease. I don't mean to gross you out here or anything but this is
an electron micrograph of the part of the mosquito and some of the small
worms that are being injected into the dog. And after a period of 120
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 24
1
days, maybe up to 5 years later, this is one of the hearts that has been
' taken from a dog that has died and those are the adult worms which have
basically clogged up the plumbing so the dog's not able to pump blood.
Obviously, many people will feed their dogs, dog heartworm pilis...to
control the little larvae before they grow up but they can grow up to be a
' size of about 1 foot or more and so from a domesticated animal standpoint,
again mosquito control is the way to knock down those populations also.
Under the program we have is a lyme tick surveillence program. Lyme is the
' name of a community in Connecticut and what we're doing, the legislature
enabled us to do tick surveillence here a couple of years back. This is
our third year and this is an adult deer tick. There's three different
' phases. This is a nymph form. You can see that's a fingernail in the
upper left hand corner there on the skin and as a larvae, it's almost
undetectable. Most of this phase.of the tick though is a non- infected
stage so it's the other ones that do that. So we've been running
' surveillence on small mammal trapping. This is a white footed deer mouse
and you can see on the ears and on the eye, the ticks that have been
attached. We set out, and this is the adult deer obviously but this could
' as well be a human being or a large mammal that collects ticks. We have a
number of locations, we have about 270 locations through the district where
we put out these transets and trap small mammals and then when we find
these mammals, we then search them for ticks and that information gets sent
to the University of Minnesota to be studied and also to the Minnesota
Department of Health and also information shared with the Center for
Disease Control among other agencies that are involved too. I might note
' that the cadavers here of the creatures that are caught are also given to
the University of Minnesota. I believe it's the Rapture Center, Dave.
Dave Neitzel: Wildlife Rehabilitation.
Ross Green: Wildlife Rehabilitation area and they use that for the
carrying feeders that they feed it to. So they can eat it. So they are
recycled in a way too. Also drag sampling is another approach and also
examining road kills and I'll let Dave address some other things. This is
the budget for the Mosquito Control District for 1992 and you can see how
' it's broken down into the various programs. Do any ofyou want to'add
anything to this presentation? MMCD.
Schroers: What is the total dollar amount to that budget?
Ross Green: It's $9.9 million. $9,946,714.00.
Schroers: Where does most of the funding for this?
Ross Green: I'm sorry, thank you. It is, it's primarily through property
taxation in the 7 counties and HACA credit that is given to the District.
Questions. Comments.
Schroers: I have a question. I don't know if you're going to address this
further down in your presentation or not but I think that the major concern
here is going to be what kind of an affect these pesticides have on the
environment. A couple of particular questions that I have is, do you have
to have a commercial pesticide applicator's license to apply this and is it
a restricted use chemical?
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 25 1
Ross Green: No. They are not restricted use chemicals. And as an II organization we feel compelled, because of the quantity of materials that
we do use, we feel we need to have a license and we do have licenses. But
many of these materials can be bought over the counter and bought to apply
by a homeowner many times so we do have licenses through the State of in
Minnesota however. The Agricultural Department.
Schroers: And is someone going to address the issue of what kind of
environmental affect there is as a result of applying these chemicals?
Ross Green: These are EPA registered materials that we're using that we
apply them according to label and they're designed to be put onto the
vegetation at a doseage rate that we comply with. And we have asked,
because of some of concern, we have asked. We have a panel called a
scientific pure review panel which is composed of a number of experts in
their field from toxicologists to behavioral biologists to enamologists to
a number of different discliplines. And we have asked the SPRP we call
them, scientific pure review planel, to look into, to answer some of the
concerns that are involved with the adulticides or the adult mosquito
control materials that we use. We have exhausted, I should say, inexhause
material on the larval control materials that we've had. Primarily back i
1987 we have been involved with doing studies on the larval control
materials that we have and I brought a number of references so you can hav
a look at. They're welcome, if you want to come and take a look at them,
we have an extensive library of information and the studies, the
independent studies that have been done. I want to be very clear that
these, the SPRP are independent scientists that award grants to these
independent contractors to study the most pressing questions that have com
up since our environmental impact statement of, well 1977 and then again ir�
1987 and these are long term studies that are addressing those major
concerns. And as I mentioned to you, the primary approach for mosquito
control is with the larval control program. That's our direction. And well
are using less and less of the adult mosquito control materials. But
because of the concerns and the fact that we're still using them, we asked
the SPRP to take a look at the use of adulticides as well. But from an
adult mosquito control standpoint, we feel that these are the safest
materials available for use in controlling mosquitoes in areas. The label
states very clearly about residential and park areas. Campsites. They
have a ton of different areas where it can be used and that's the way we II
approach it so from an environmental standpoint, they have a very low
mammalial toxicity and that's what we use.
Resident: I'd like to ask a question. Are any chemicals used proven to be
life threatening?
Ross Green: Life threatening? I would hope that no one would drink them. II
I mean that's one of the things that.
Resident: No, after applied. 1
Ross Green: Oh, absolutely not. Absolutely not. These materials.
Resident: ...got mosquitoes in... 1
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 26
Ross Green: The Aedes triseriatus mosquito is able to transmit LaCrosse
' encephalitis which is a severe disease. And I would, if anyone has any
specific questions not only about the program but about LaCrosse
encephalitis, Dave Neitzel is the expert in the area from our district and
can address any questions from that standpoint too. That's why he's with
us. Yes sir.
Erickson: Maybe you can't answer these and I know they're kind of general,
' but roughly, how many cases are reported in the 7 county metro of
encephalitis caused by mosquitoes or is it just this LaCrosse?
Ross Green: Dave, do you want to?
' Erickson: Presently with the control program. Just rough numbers if you
have them.
Dave Neitzel: Well prior to the beginning of our LaCrosse encephalitis
prevention program and that began in 1987, there was an average of 2 to 3
cases of LaCrosse encephalitis in the 7 county metroplitan area every year.
Since 1989 now, we've had 3 years without a case of LaCrosse encephalitis
in the district. That's partially due to the use of adult control
materials but it's also due to the public education program that we've
' conducted and the extensive breeding site removal efforts that we've
conducted.
I Koubsky: Is there any other source of spreading either LaCrosse or Western
encephalitis?
Dave Neitzel: No. LaCrosse encephalitis is transmitted by this one
mosquito. This one species of mosquito and Western Equine Encephalitis is
transmitted by the QX tarsalios mosquito.
' Koubsky: Is there any other natural way to spread this disease or is the
mosquito the sole?
Dave Neitzel: No. Yeah, both of these viruses are mosquito transmitted.
Erickson: This may be a real hard question to answer but how many cases
would you expect if this program didn't exist?
' Dave Neitzel: Well it's impossible to speculate. I would think that we'd
at least see the 2 to 3 cases in the 7 county metropolitan area every year.
Statewide there's roughly 10 cases reported every year and there have been
cases reported the last few years outside of our district. Mainly in
southeastern Minnesota along the Mississippi River.
' Schroers: What is your goal or your mission? Is it to totally eradicate
the mosquito or is it to control it to tolerable levels?
Ross Green: I think we'd like to get the Aedes triseriatus mosquito off
the map but as far as the Aedes vexans and the ones that bite, we're
talking about a control program and getting it down to a tolerable levels
1 in terms of annoyance but that also affects.the general public health. So
it's not an eradication program by any stretch of the imagination. It is a
1
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 27 1
control program that's directed at the most prolific breeding areas that
produce mosquitoes. 1
Schroers: Which mosquito transmits the heartworm and how effective is your
program on reducing that risk? '
Ross Green: There are probably 10 to 13 species of mosquitoes that produce
or that can carry dog heartworm. The Aedes vexans is one of them. The
spring variety of mosquitoes which are 8 or 10 or even more than can carry II
this disease.
Schroers: And how effective do you think your program is in reducing the
risk that a particular animal is going to contract heartworm?
Ross Green: Again, I'm not sure of the data from the University of
Minnesota. We get a lot of the information from the University of
Minnesota on terms of the cases that are reported by the veterinarians
around the 7 county area. Some are reported. Some aren't. There's a lot,
it's hard to say from that standpoint. We do know that it's an exclusive II
mosquito born disease however and we do, in terms of our treatments, we're
involved with doing pre- treat, post -treat counts. In terms of reducing a
population in a certain area for example. If there's a harborage area or II
particular location. I mentioned to you the harborage collections that
we're involved with. The light traps. We also run 2 and 5 minute bite
counts. They're either slap counts or they're collections that are taken '
to indicate the number of mosquitoes. We do that before and after to
determine how effective we were in that particular area. But again, the
adult mosquito control is again a back -up or supplement...
(There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.) 1
Al Klingelhutz: ...have there ever been any cases of encephalitis recorded,
in the city of Chanhassen?
Dave Neitzel: Yes. Since LaCrosse encephalitis was discovered back in
1965, there are 5 confirmed cases from within the borders of Chanhassen. 411
cases near the northern border of the city and 1 kind of in southern
Chanhassen. But remember the map that Ross showed you, there's a big
cluster of confirmed case sites around the Lake Minnetonka area and coming II
down into the Chanhassen area here.
Al Klingelhutz: But what has been done in the past 5 years to control that
mosquito in Chanhassen?
Dave Neitzel: Well in Chanhassen specifically, well first of all. The
City of Chanhassen passed an ordinance, it's part of your nuisance '
ordinance that prohibits having potential Aedes triseriatus breeding
habitat on property. That's helped quite a bit. We've done extensive
surveillence across the city trying to locate neighborhoods with high
populations of this mosquito and once we've found those areas, we moved in II
with public education in the form of LaCrosse encephalitis prevention
leaflets. There's a supply in your library here and upstairs also, to kind
of educate the public about potential problems in their own back yard. To ,
get them to pick up the water holding containers. We've also removed any
11
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 28
water holding containers that we've come across during our inspections.
Tires, buckets and we've filled in tree holes. And we've been able to
I effectively reduce a lot of these potential problem areas. Reduce the
numbers of the mosquito and hopefully that will end up reducing the disease
risk also.
Resident: Are you finding more breeding sites as the new homes are going
in to...
' Dave Neitzel: Unfortunately that tends to be the case. Since this
mosquito uses man made containers so much, they usually exist at low levels
and most wood lots around the Twin Cities here but when you move, when you
' get a development into an area, you get a lot of peopl? going in there.
They throw out even just a 12 ounce beverage can makes a great breeding
site for these mosquitoes and it's not uncommon to see the numbers go way
up. A lot of times before we can get in there and clean up some of these
' areas, it's necessary to treat these wood lots with adult mosquito control
materials to knock down the populations until we can get in there and clean
up the areas.
Resident: Aren't some of these sites...
Dave Neitzel: Sure. Sure. Obviously we've had to prioritize our
surveillence efforts and one of those criterias to look at areas where most
of the people are. Start there and work into the more uninhabited areas.
Andrews: I have some questions about the chemicals again. I noticed on
one of the slides that the person driving the ATV had a gas mask on as
they're driving away from the camera. I guess my question was, are these
chemicals, when they're in a pre -mixed stage at the site or like when
you're doing helicopter applications, are they then a higher concentration
that would present a problem if there was a spill or problems like that?
Ross Green: Yes sir. Two situations. When you're talking about the
helicopter, we don't apply adulticides from the helicopter but we do ask
our people or recommend that they use a dust mask for the particulate
' matter that's there when they breathe it in as they load the helicopter
because many times they don't turn off the engines because of fuel
consumption and it presents very little threat in terms of how they
' approach the helicopter and training involved. That's one aspect. In
terms of the ATV, with the gas mask you see, that's a half mask respirator
is what that is. And it's an OSHA regulation for employees. It's part of
right to know. It's part of, there is a material on there that are
aromatic petroleum solvents that are used in this process. They've
identified that as a threshhold limit value on that and because we work in
close proximity to the application, these people have it on their backs and
they apply close to the vegetation. As they do that, a gust of wind can
come back right in the face that close when it comes out of the nozzle and
that we've asked them and it's recommended. We've done testing on the
outside of whether need to use masks or not. Many times it's borderline in
some cases that you need a mask but because it's recommended, we do require
our employees to wear the half mask respirator. Also goggles, a bump cap
and gloves and long sleeve shirts. These are all employee protection
situations. We have an internal policy of staying away from people and
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 29
obviously on the label it states to stay, because it's toxic to fish.
These material. These adult mosquito control materials so we stay away
from fish bearing habitat and so we also have an internal policy of staying '
away from people too and if anyone's walking, we'll try to stay 100 feet
away from them. That doesn't state that on the label but we do stay away
from that standpoint.
Andrews: Let me rephrase the question or have it clarified a little bit
more. When these sprays are emitted, is there a certain distance they must'
go before they reach a safe concentration or are they safe immediately upon
discharge?
Ross Green: If there's an insect that comes flying right through where the'
nozzle is.
Andrews: I'm not worried about the insect. I'm worried about the human. II
Ross Green: Oh. From an overall standpoint, the chances of becoming
harmed by it are very minimal but the way we apply it, we stand about 10 II
feet or less away from the woods itself. It's kind of like painting the
fence. We walk along and we apply the material to the vegetation so
there's no one there when we're there. And as we notice, as there are
people approaching or that type of thing, we'll turn it off. That type of II
thing so there's not that.
Andrews: Another question would be. If you were to adopt new chemicals, I'
would assume we would be advised on what these chemicals are so that.
Ross Green: Absolutely. One of the things I've had a chance to, one of
the things we're trying to do is enhance the relationships we have with the ll
communities that we work in and we've already had a meeting with Todd here
and the Park and Rec Department. I know there's been some expression of II concern by some citizens and also from a notification standpoint and we're
trying to work with the city of Chanhassen and your Park Board via Todd as
to posting the parks and to notify Todd when we are going to be in an area
so you know what we're up to and what we're doing. We want to establish II
that positive relationship between the cities when we do that. I also have
given a presentation to your Safety Commission a couple of years back and
have had conversations with Scott Harr, your Public Safety Director and
we've enjoyed a very positive relationship with the city of Chanhassen. We '
appreciate the cooperation we've had and we want to enrich that.
Koubsky: I have a question. On your material safety data sheet you have II
two compounds basically. The permethrin and that's at 57%. Is that 57%
solution?
Ross Green: No. That's a concentrate is what that is and that's diluted II
down into the finished spray that's used.
Koubsky: And then you've got your xylene which is. 1
Ross Green: That's not xylene sir. I've included on the document that
I've seen there, it is not one of the toxilogical inert concerns that you II
see on there but it's xylene range and that's in term of how the material
1
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 30
is formulated and how it's applied. It's unfortunate the word xylene
itself is there but it's not xylene and as you can see from the
documentation that you have before you.
Koubsky: Okay, and then your TLV. Is that based on xylene?
Ross Green: No, it's based on, those are aromatic petroleum solvents.
Mineral spirits.
Koubsky: I understand.
' Ross Green: Yeah, and that's what it is. There's been a threshhold limit
value established. I think it says 100 part per million doesn't it? And
that's why the use of the, for our employees, that material safety data
sheet is for the use by employees to, that's why we ask them to wear a
respirator when they work in close proximity to the material. So they're
aware of the factors involved. I mean the material itself.
' Koubsky: It's a mineral spirit then?
Ross Green: Yes sir.
' Koubsky: Now for toxicity you've got on your ad here, that it kills
mosquitoes, gnats, biting, non - biting midges, blackflies and other biting
flies. It is an insecticide that kill insects?
Ross Green: Yes sir. And we use it to control mosquitoes.
' Koubsky: Right. But it would kill insects, so bees, spiders.
Ross Green: It depends on the doseage rate that it's used at. But the way
we apply it is applied to control mosquitoes and tiny flies that are in
that range. Example, a blackfly for example would take a much greater
doseage to control than a mosquito would for example. And we don't spray
for blackflies. But that material is designed for use in applying for
different kinds of insects but the way we apply it is for mosquitoes.
Koubsky: Okay the does, is that a dose they get when it's in the air or a
11 contact dose when it's on vegetation?
Ross Green: Susan, would you want to address the chemical aspects of this
thing? Dr. Pelchick can probably shed a little more light onto this and
answer your question.
' Susan Pelchick: I'm not sure I understand the question.
Koubsky: Well it is an insecticide. I know the goal here is to kill
mosquitoes. I'm just wondering what else it kills and the answer was
I given, the doses are made to hone in on mosquitoes or I would think
mosquito size insects. My question is, does it kill every mosquito sized
insect?
II Susan Pelchick: Part of it is size dependent and part of it would also be
just basic physiology. The permethrin is applied at a tenth of a pound
1
II
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 31 1
active ingredient per acre. So part of that is meant to impinge on the
vegetation and be contacted by mosquitoes as they rest on the vegetation. II
So it's bringing in the behavior of the mosquitoes as they move in and out
of these resting areas. They'll contact vegetation and contact the
insecticide.
II
Koubsky: Okay, then farther up the food chain, any study on effects? What
that does to birds or fish or frogs or any other?
II
Susan Pelchick: Not that I'm aware of.
Resident: ...it does not kill anything. Bees, frogs, spiders...
II
Koubsky: That's the adult spray they're using?
Resident: The adult spray... II
Schroers: I think I'd like to point out that one reason that we are so
particularly concerned about the effects of the chemicals on the 1
environment is because it's something that is in such focus currently in
our entire, in the entire world actually. But Chanhassen seems to have a
number of very special people that live here that are real concerned about II
all of the issues and you can tell from the first item we addressed this
evening that there are a lot of people that are concerned and we want to be
as sure as we can be that the chemicals that are going to be used in our '
city are as safe as can be and used as properly with the right mixing and
that sort of thing. I have an applicator's license. A commercial
applicator's license myself and I understand that they tell us that they
tell us that we can drink a quart of Round -up and it won't hurt us. Well II
I'm not going to drink a quart of Round -up and I think it's unfortunate
that we have to use any kind of chemicals but I also feel that most of the
major damage that's been done to the environment was done a long time ago. II
Before the current chemicals that we have now were being used in proper
doseages and proper mixtures so hopefully we're not contributing any more
to the deterioration.
II
Susan Pelchick: Can I add something along those same lines? There's been
some recommendations from some IPM groups in California and what they
recommend is basically what we're doing so some of the bad press goes along
with some of the, like you said, some of the chemicals that were used
before. But the materials that we're using now are the ones that are being
recommended by some of the.
II
Schroers: The question that I have, you know you read the label and
anybody that has an applicator's license knows that being consistent with
the label is of ultimate importance but the question that I always have is,"
who puts the information on this label? Is it the chemical companies or is
there a governing agency that oversees what information is put on the
label. I mean how do I know that the information that's on the label is II
totally correct?
Susan Pelchick: The labels are composed by the manufacturers, which is
unfortunate. But it's under the scrutiny of EPA and then within the
different states goes another level of scrutiny. And what we've done in
II
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 32
some cases is, like Ross said, was staying away from some of the water
areas. We've taken what the label says and put an extra measure of safety
on there. Taken it a little bit further than that to take it a little bit
further than what the manufacturer says just to be extra sure. And another
thing is, we do have a pretty extensive training program for our personnel
so it's not just that they get their license and then they're free to just
go out and do whatever they want. The full time personnel go through
extensive training every winter to go over some of the new safety things
and some of the other concerns. Environmental concerns and what not and
also proper application techniques and concerns. And the seasonal
employees also go through several days of training every year.
Koubsky: Just one comment I'd have. You do say that it is EPA approved
and you follow the labels but things like 24D are also approved and people
' follow the labels and residents can put that on their lawn. You know
nobody else can in a commercial application. DDT was also approved and was
used extensively. Your people use respirators and I don't think you have
to hide behind that. You know the material safety data sheets says there's
some things that people shouldn't be breathing and respirators are a thing
to wear to protect long term exposure for that. I would be interested
though in, if there was a study. I'm not a chemical engineer by any sense
' but I do work with chemicals and has anybody looked at long term effects on
the higher order of food chain for some of these compounds? We're spraying
them in parks. We're putting them in wetlands. The intent is to put them
in a very productive organic environments. What is the effect on birds and
other higher forms of wildlife?
' Susan Pelchick: Actually there have been studies on mammalian toxicity,
which is very, very low for these materials. I don't know that they've
looked at it in terms of going up the food chain but they've looked at some
pretty high doses and higher than what we're talking about.
Andrews: I have one more chemical question here. Are you done?
' Koubsky: Yeah, I'm done.
Andrews: There was a comment made about diluting a chemical. I just heard
it briefly mentioned. I was trying to get an answer to that before.
' I guess I'm concerned about are compounds brought to the site on a very
concentrated format and then diluted at the site or is that done elsewhere?
' Susan Pelchick: That's all done elsewhere. Most of it's done in one
central warehouse and then distributed.
Andrews: Obviously my concern's about spills.
Susan Pelchick: Yeah, it's in the diluted form.
' Lash: I had a couple of questions too. Just if we take Lake Ann Park as
an example. And you said that we had a big public celebration there on the
4th of July and you would spray then. Do you also do that periodically or
on a regular basis or just when you're called in or how often do you do
that?
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 33 1
Ross Green: Well, as I mentioned, because of the surveillence aspect of
this, if there are no mosquitoes there, we're not going to spray. If ther
are mosquitoes and then the operation that I described is what we would do.
Again working within the label and how we apply it.
Lash: 5o in the past has it been twice a year? 20 times a year?
Ross Green: Oh. It depends on the mosquito populations. It really does.
It depends on how bad they are. During the drought years obviously we had II
very few mosquitoes. When we had high populations where there's 12 broods
of mosquitoes, you know we've had a lot of mosquitoes so it's on more of a
regular basis that it's done. Because the permethrin is able to last in
shaded areas maybe 10 days or so, it would be on a regular basis if the
mosquito populations were such where they needed to be brought down.
Otherwise if they did not need to be brought down, we wouldn't be doing the,
spraying.
Lash: So it could potentially be done say every 2 weeks?
Ross Green: Yes.
Lash: Okay. And I heard you say something about some kind of posting or
signage. Is that something you're considering doing or is it something you
do already?
Ross Green: No. That's something we are doing. That's one of the things II
we picked up from. We had an opportunity this year, all the supervisors to
contact all the Park and Recreation Directors in all the 7 county II metropolitan area. Todd is one of them and we had a meeting with him and
discussed our relationships and what we do and how we do it. We invited
his input into the whole thing and recommendations and those type of things
and we're trying to adhere to those recommendations as we've discussed
them. If you want to add anything to that Todd, from our standpoint at
this point.
Lash: Well and I know Dave's already hit on the food chain a couple of
times but I had that in my notes too and I wasn't even thinking of birds. I
was thinking of larger mammals like deer or even it does affect the fish
population and then that humans turn around and consume. And you said,
obviously someone wouldn't drink this chemical but if these animals are
eating the foliage that's been sprayed and then humans eat the animals, is
that something that can affect humans? ,
Ross Green: Part of the reason we talk about fish is because they're a
cold blooded creature and they're not designed to be applied to fish
bearing habitats and so we stay away from that. As far as mammals go, from
a mammalial standpoint, as Susan mentioned to you, has very low mammalial
toxicity and again, we believe that according to the data that's out there
through EPA, and it's not EPA approved. It's EPA registered, not approved."
Materials that we're talking about, the adulticides. We believe that these
are the safest materials to use for adult mosquito control and as I think
we've pointed out, especially in the Chanhassen area, that many of the park,
areas and places where we do spray, there's "an interrelationship there
between not only vexans and spring aedes mosquitoes but also could have an
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 34
' effect on the triseriatus populations too. So it's the same materials that
are used. These synthetic pyrethroids are used for mosquito control no
matter what kind of mosquito it is. And so just FYI.
Hoffman: Any more commission questions for the folks here from the
Mosquito Control. We do need to move forward.
Koubsky: The briquettes are not chemical based?
Ross Green: Everything's a chemical. It's a growth hormone mimic is what
it is and they are designed for larval control and they are considered non-
toxic to human beings.
Koubsky: Does that have a safety material data sheet?
Ross Green: Yes it does. I don't have that with me but yes they all, all
of these materials have material safety data sheets, yes.
11 Koubsky: Can you get me a copy?
Ross Green: Sure can. In fact, are they in, well Susan's left. But I'll
make sure you do get one. In fact Todd I think you have, I think he has
this already. I've given a packet of information with the control
materials. Material safety data sheets and everything. If he doesn't have
that, I will get you a copy.
Koubsky: There's one in here but I don't think it's for the briquettes.
' Ross Green: Yeah I think that's probably, it's probably for the
adulticides that you've got.
Schroers: Okay, well thank you very much for making that presentation.
There was a lot of useful information. I have seen personally the mosquito
control out in action and from what I've seen, they appear to be very
professional and I hope that it is a safe and successful program and
something that continues.
Hoffman: Chairman Schroers? Prior to moving forward, I think it would be
to everyone's benefit in the room to discuss why we're here tonight.
Obviously we had a very nice presentation on mosquito control in it's
entirety. The reason the Park and Recreation Commission is reviewing this
is because they operate within Chanhassen city parks. You are the agency
or the commission which oversees activities within city parks. The safety
of the activities of the Metropolitan Mosquito Control District have been
brought into question, not only in our city but in other cities as well.
The application of a pesticide called Punt, which you have the label of,
within 100 feet of Lake Ann quickly brought this issue to focus here in the
city. This application of Punt was in violation of it's EPA label. Based
on this information, the Minnesota Department of Agriculture asked the
Court to assess a $1,000.00 civil penalty against the MMCD and ordered them
to remedy the violation by appointing the responsible employee to speak on
11 the importance of complying with the Minnesota Pesticide Law. Again, it is
the burden of the Park Commission and not only the Commission but the city
as a whole to decide whether or not you would like the Metropolitan
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 35 1
Mosquito Control District to operate within Lake Ann. To operate within II
Lake Susan and another side note of interest is that currently they do load'
their helicopter in a parking lot at Lake Ann. Representatives of MMCD
stated they received permission to do so from a maintenance employee. I do
not believe that permission is valid and I would like for the Park
Commission, the Public Safety Commission and the City Council to review
that loading of a helicopter for mosquito control at location at Lake Ann.
So again those are the essential issues of why we're here tonight and I
just needed to clarify that part prior to Mr. Rivkin making his
presentation.
Schroers: Okay, thank you. Eric. ,
Eric Rivkin: Thank you very much. I thank Todd Hoffman and the Park Board
for having me here to make a presentation and enlighten, with an opposing II
view. My talk intended to be about 20 minutes so it will be about half as
long as Mr. Green's. I wish that I could get as many bites on a fishing
line as I get bites from mosquitoes. I don't like them as anybody else. II
I'd like to clear the air with some facts about mosquitoes and pesticides
that I hope will help you decide what to do about nuisance mosquito
controls in Chanhassen parks. And I emphasize the word nuisance mosquito I
controls. I'm not against LaCrosse encephalitis methods, you know to
control that. I do however have some things to say to this couple here who
are real concerned about it. I would say if it's in my neighborhood, I
would do what I could to get the Mosquito Control District out there and II
educate myself to find out where the sources are. Ross Green goes on
public television and says, and his pamphlets and says, education is our
biggest weapon against LaCrosse encephalitis and I believe that, and he
says it's the most effective weapon against it. I understand that the
Mosquito District is spraying adulticides for this mosquito. If that's the
only way, last resort, fine. If it's treated as a last resort but maybe
there's a, try what I can to find. Maybe it's a gutter or a tree hole
somewhere in your neighborhood that's causing it but why not get rid of it II
where the source is. Rather than put up with the potential of having this
disease effect you. '
Resident: ...conscientious about the tree holes and we have cleaned up...
unfortunately has not been found and they were still there...
Eric Rivkin: Well if that's the last resort, than that's what you've got
to do. But it's hard to find a citizen around that knows the difference
between a mosquito that can cause a disease and one that can't. One of my 11
neighbors who I live next door to, his grandaugther had LaCrosse
Encephalitis and is mentally retarded from it. Once I gave him the
brochure that Mr. Green gave me, he then became aware that hey, the
mosquito that's in my wetlands right now, the Aedes vexan and the
...mosquito is not the one that caused my daughter to get mental
retardation. It's the very rare mosquito. We're talking about 17 cases in
the last 10 years in the 7 county metro area and it's not considered a
disease control program. If that's the case, then we're spending roughly
$1.66 million dollars a case. That's not cost effective. Also, if you
notice, I don't know that Ross really did answer your question about how II
effective is the heart worm reduction. You really can't answer it but I do
know from my research that the general knowledge is that the sheer number
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 36
of mosquitoes left alive after mosquito control is all over with to do
their job is enough to keep heartworm at levels, that if mosquito control
didn't exist and that's true in other parts of the country that don't have
mosquito control or other cities in Minnesota that don't have mosquito
' control. Also, as far as antidotal evidence that you've provided us about
the recovery of wildlife after spraying. The findings of Hennepin Parks
and hundreds of scientists around the world unfortunately do not agree with
' your antidotal data. I will present evidence that shows that to the
contrary that pyrethra is one of the most toxic to all kinds of wildlife
including insects. And with regards to the question about, is there full
environmental impact studies of wetland ecosystems? There isn't any.
' Mammalian studies alone, bird studies alone which are being conducted or
have been conducted don't cut it. Dr. Cooper you know is an unfinished,
you know Dr. Cooper? The one who is the expert on water fowl, here did a
' study that showed that both growth and breeding habits of mallard ducklings
can be affected because of the disruption of the food chain in eliminating
mosquito larvae which they eat. If it's available, they'll eat that. If
it's midge larvae, they'll eat that but the metheprine does kill non target
species other mosquito larvae and midge larvae is one of them. And he
found that, it suggests that it can affect that. The study isn't completed
yet because he hasn't been given funding to complete it. So it's
I inconclusive but that's where it's at right now. I want to continue with
my presentation thank you. I'm here because I don't want what happened to
me and my son at Lake Ann Park to ever happen to anyone ease. After
exhaustive research over the last several years, local environmental groups
and I were able to collect enough facts, not feelings, about the safety and
effectiveness in the Mosquito Control District program. That number one.
It convinced the legislature, State Legislature to pass a law this year
' authored by Senator Gen Olson to put a cap on the wasteful spending of the
MMCD and made all legislators aware of the severe lack of accountability of
this agency. Two, it convinced former Senator Don Storm to introduce a
' bill last year that tried to stop the MMCD from wasting $3.1 million on a
new headquarters in St. Paul at a time when budgets were supposed to be cut
and there's a 27% unoccupancy rate in St. Paul office space. Three, it
' convinced Senator Johnston and Representative Kelso of our area to sponsor
bills that would forewarn concerned citizens of the health hazards before
mosquito pesticides would be applied. That's how serious they can affect
human health. We're very sure about that. Four, convinced the Minneapolis
Park Boark, as of June 10th, to unanimously give strong vocal support...in
all 64,000 acres of city land and parks. The MMCD Director, Robert Shogren
infuriated the Park Board by challenging their decision on Channel 9 TV
News by calling it a political...of scientifically based decision. He also
failed to show up at the Park Board meeting he called for to discuss the
issue. And five, it convinced many other Metro area parks, cities and
individual citizens to refuse nuisance mosquito control chemicals using
rights guaranteed under Minnesota Statute 473 which guarantees the right of
refusal of a control program. Not the disease control but the nuisance
control. Two City Councils, Maplewood and Forest Lake will go beyond a
mere band and consider opting out of the District altogether. Saving their
citizens tens of thousands of dollars in property taxes that could be used
to solve real problems, not for killing bugs. Programs like the protecting
natural resources, improving parks and recreation, or help for the poor.
Citizens in Chanhassen would greatly appreciate that too. The actual
literature and scientific references that I refer to in this presentation,
II
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 37 1
now I can prepare a copies for you if you like. I do have some fact sheets,
to hand out at the end of the presentation. And at your request I'll
prepare the same thing that I gave Al Singer at the Minneapolis Park Board.
So who's buzzing who? What are the hidden facts about Metropiitan Nusiance
Mosquito Control? Well, as Ross Green said, their main mission is to, but ,
it's with a chemical control program. The cost test...is $9 to $12 million
dollars a year. The tax levy for Eastern Carver County, not all of Carver
County is involved in the district. Only the eastern half because that's
where most the breeding sites are. In 1992 mosquito control, the tax levy II
is $96,270.00 and that's up from $88,000.00 in 1991, an increase of 8 %.
Despite deep cuts in government spending elsewhere. I don't know what
portion of the levy is Chanhassen's though. The MMCD would like people to ,
know that, believe that nuisance mosquito control is safe. Mosquitoes are
not the only victims however of their chemical warfare program. Some of
these victims are citizens effected by pesticide spraing around their II neighborhoods and parks. The National Academy of Sciences in Washington
reports that at least 15% of our population are chemically hyper sensitive.
Many people can or have become seriously ill from exposure to mosquito II pesticides in particular. Especially the adulticides the MMCD uses, Punt
and Scorge. In spite of increasing health complaints, innocent bystanders
in our parks and homes in both Minneapolis and St. Paul especially, because
they receive hundreds of calls, are at risk of exposure when these
II
adulticides are sprayed in the air we have to breathe. So what public
health threat really exists here? It's not a disease control program.
First it is important to understand that $10 million or whatever worth of II
pesticides to reduce mosquito nuisance each year does not protect us from
mosquito born diseases. It's a selective, localized control mechanism for
that. The MMCD allocates only very small portions of their funds for II mosquito disease prevention. But they like to have you believe it's like
the reason for the whole program and you have to accept the whole program
in order to get disease control. That's not true. You can have zero
nuisance mosquito control and 100% disease bearing control and it would
cost a fraction of that $10 million. The main education tool of course to II
control that is through breeding sites like old tires, last resort
spraying. The cattail mosquito program is the same way. It is set up for II
nuisance mosquito control. Ask any technical advisory board member on that
independent advisory panel that he mentioned and they'll tell you it's not
a disease control program for Western Encephalisit or Eckland Encephalitis.
There's a nuisance control program. Mosquito annoyance in itself is not a II
public health threat yet the pesticides used to control them seem to be, in
1991 alone hundreds of people either witnessed or were directly exposed to
mosquito pesticides and some became ill. All were concerned enough about II
health effects to call and complain to their Park Boards, the DNR and other
agencies because they didn't know who to call. This contrasts with only 17
confirmed cases versus the hundreds of complaints of people getting sick of
mosquito born diseases in the last 10 years in the metro area. I am still '
glad to see someone is removing tires and trying to educate people. I wish
they would do more of it. There is a lack of safety assurances here.
Citizens ought to feel secure that mosquito pesticides are tested safe and II
yet there is no evidence that all ingredients have been fully tested safe
for humans. Their hazardous effects have not been revealed because EPA
registration is not a measure of safety. The MMCD boasts that their
pesticides have EPA registration and therefore should be presumed safe but 1
on the other hand, according to the U.S. Congressional Testimony by the New
II
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 38
York State Attorney General, last summer who testified against lawn
chemicals, EPA registration is, an established fact, is not to be
considered a measure of safety. Because all EPA registration means is that
the required tests were conducted so the product will, and I quote,
"perform it's intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on the
environment ". Registration does not require that full environmental or
human health effect studies be done. Period. Inert ingredients which may
constitute up to 99.8% of the pesticides, according to the labels, have no
adequate health testing. The nature of these inerts are protected by trade
secrets and need not be disclosed to the EPA or the public. That's why
it's very difficult for Ross to answer your questions, well what's in this
stuff. The National Coalition Against Misuse of Pesticides, NCAMP,
reported in 1985 that inert ingredients including those found in mosquito
abatement pesticides, may actually be as toxic or more so than the active
ingredients. Xylene is one of them. What chemicals are used to kill
nuisance mosquitoes that can be harmful to humans? The adulticides are the
worst. There's your pyrethroids, Punt and Scorch. After they've been
hatched and already become a nuisance. This is how they're dealt with. As
' much as 570 of total acres treated or 226,000 acres of our public parks and
neighborhoods in the 7 county metro area were treated in 1990 with these
for nuisance mosquitoes, our parks included. The number of acres treated
however has significantly decreased to the parks natural areas opting other
control programs and all the massive number of complaints. Massive use of
these airborn toxics also aggravate air pollution because they contain the
aromatic petroleum solvents that you see on the labels, including Scorch.
Scorch is that cold fog used in the areas with the highest complaints. It
is considered an aerial toxicant. That was a term coined by scientists. It
toxifies the air. Anything that breathes it will be effected adversely to
whatever degree that organism is, including people. It's supposed to kill
mosquitoes flying in the toxified air but there is no evidence that it
actually kills mosquitoes. It chases them away out of the neighborhood and
1 3 to 6 days, they all come back to normal levels anyway and that data comes
right from the MMCD's own charts. Punt has permethrin that is spray coated
on the vegetation and it's effectiveness is up to 14 days but that's
without rain. Now as you can see from Punt's label, it's a very hazardous
chemical. Highly toxic to birds, bees and fish. It is 8 times more
effective at killing biological organisms than Malathion, which was
recently found in April, 1991 to effect our immune systems in the
I University of Southern California Scientific Findings. I find out after my
case file is open to the public, that the material safety data sheet also
in your packet for Punt, reveals that it contains xylene aromatic solvents.
Now Ross Green told all of us and me yesterday, there's little worry about
Punt because it's merely dilluted with food grade mineral oil and he says
it really doesn't contain xylene. Well, I know better. I take that with a
grain of salt. I called and talked for an hour with a toxicologist down in
11 Texas for Russo Bio. The producer of Punt and he toad me that Punt not
only contains 5% xylene bio mass, there may be hundreds of other xylene
range, hydrocarbon chemicals that make up to 37% of the entire mixture of
11 Punt. Xylene is one of 17 chemicals targeted by the Governor's
Environmental Task Force as a source of extremely harmful pollution that
must be stopped. Xylene is a none carcenigen. As of June 11th, Punt 57 -05
' is no longer registered for use in Minnesota and I hope it stays that way.
The MMCD is being considered for exemption from this band until they use up
their stockpile but I understand that this exemption is going to be
Park and Rec Commission Meeting '
June 23, 1992 - Page 39
withheld until further investigation into the chemical's potential harmful
effects involving the Environmental Quality Board and the Department of
Health. This is the first time these three agencies are going to get
together and talk about Punt's effectiveness. Many other mosquito
abatement districts in America, as far back as 1982, including Chicago.
Districts 10 times the size of ours, recognize that adulticides are useless'
as an effective mosquito control. They say they're not good for people.
I'm quoting Dr. Deim who is the head of their district. They say they're
not good for people, wildlife and beneficial insects. As a result,
adulticiding has been severely restricted or eliminated from our abatement t
program. And with the MMCD's notify list, I recognize that allergic
reactions can exist from exposure. That's in one of the MMCD's pieces of
literature. But it's surprisingly contradicts, the MMCD's surprisingly
contradicts this by stating adulticides don't pose a threat to human
health. I don't understand that. NCAMP reports that quote, "exposure to
pyrethroids, resmethrine and permethrin, can result in contact dermititist '
and asthma like reactions, including runny nose and eyes." The EPA notes
that quote, "people, especially children, with a history of allergies and
asthma appear to be particularly sensitive." Labels also state pyrethrins
are extremely toxic to fish, birds, insects and can harm ornamental plants II
and can peel the paint off your house. I don't think I want to breathe
something that could do that. Some pyrethroids themselves are suspected
carcenigens. Aerial toxicants in their dilluted form can drip into homes II
with open windows. On July 5, 1990 one person and her family in the
Malcaster Groveland neighborhood in St. Paul suffered violent reactions
from inhalation exposure to Scorch in this manner. She was infuriated when'
the MMCD told her quote, "we can't spray houses" and the MMCD did not
investigate further. The MMCD did send her a fact sheets on Scorch which
clearly state quote, "avoid breathing vapor or spray mist. Avoid contact
with skin, eyes or clothing. Toxic to birds and fish." Unquote. In her II
written testimony to the legislature, which I had to present myself because
she was too sick to come and testify in person. She says, "she feels lucky
to be alive after that incident ". The MMCD personnel, as you've seen, wear,
masks to prevent inhaling this toxicant. Punt 57 -0S sprayed illegally in
Lake Ann Park in Chanhassen in early June, 1992 caused my son and I to
inhale residues resulting in headaches and nausea confirmed by a doctor the
same day from foliage samples taken and witnessed by Pat Kelly, the MDA
investigator. This is all in the case file. As you may know, the MMCD was
found in violation because they failed to spray according to the label and
spraying it too close to the lake. This was no accident. They have to
stay 100 feet away. As a result of this action, their policy now is to go II
15% beyond the the label rule and say 150 feet away. The report in the
case file says that children were playing in the playground at the beach II
when the immediate area was sprayed. The applicator stopped, went around
the kids, and started again 50 feet away. I bet those children needlessly
breathed toxic vapors from the drift as it was sprayed. Their policy of '
keeping away from people is not followed. I was told by Ross Green,
Information Director of the MMCD in a letter which is also in your packet,
that Lake Ann Park was always sprayed according to the label and usually
and it said that it was sprayed 4 times in the summer at 2 -3 -4 week
intervals. Apparently whether the park had a mosquito problem or not. Notll
when there were dip counts taken because there weren't any. They just went
in and sprayed on a schedule. I couldn't find any city employee who had
ever requested the Mosquito Control in Lake Park at all. It stemmed
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 40
from just the fact of coming in in 1983 and when they started coming into
the district and started spraying every park and if anybody came in and
said no, then they'd stop. But until then, there really wasn't any close
loop request. Even after being found guilty of this crime, the MMCD has
not yet apologized to me nor to the City of Chanhassen where they
jeopardized my health and that of other citizens. In August 19, 1991,
MMCD staff sprayed the trail area in St. Paul's Crosby Farm Park when
school children were present. I believe that was Scorch. The Park's
Naturalist with the class refused to lead the children to the toxicified
area for fear they would be exposed to the pesticide. She was also angered
' there were no warnings given to her before she conducted her classes every
day and that the MMCD tried to convince her that the chemicals weren't
harmful. The children observed quote, and I'm quoting this naturalist.
' "If it wasn't harmful, then why were the sprayers all wearing masks ?" This
is an observation of 8 year old children. As of June 17th, all mosquito
controls are not banned from this park. And all the St. Paul parks along
the Minnesota River. I want to talk about the larvacides for a minute.
r The BTI formulation contains the highest percentage, 99.8% of inert
ingredients of the 4 major pesticides the MMCD uses. This is troubling
because according to NCAMP, I'm quoting from one of their publications, "it
11 is unclear how much public toxicity (skin sensitivization in animals and
eye irritation in animals and people) can be ascribed to these "inert
ingredient "." The EPA's major environmental concern about some BT
formulations is that they can also kill endangered species of butterflies
along with earthworms and bees. According to NCAMP, "the EPA has been
critical of an apparent lack of standardization in BT product potency
because the percentage of active ingredients cannot ever correspond to the
statement on the label." Alticid. The metheprine in there is a chemical.
Heroin and cocaine are derived from natural materials but they're
considered quite toxic. Metheprine is the same kind of category. It is
' derived from natural materials just like they are but it is toxic to living
organisms. It has 95% inert ingredients. Metheprine, as you can read it
right on the label, says can cause moderate eye irritation. Data is still
incomplete about the adverse effects of metheprine. I told you about Dr.
Cooper's study. Overdosing wetlands is a potential problem because
according to the MMCD's own reports, undissolved briquettes do accumulate
but the adverse effects of this accumulation are still not known. So why
are we still permitting them to do this if they don't know what the effects
of this common occurence is of overdosing. It happened in our wetlands.
As some neighbors were calling me up and saying hey, my dog has got these
1 briquettes in his mouth and my kids are going and picking these up, what
are these things? I said those are the briquettes from mosquito control.
He says the label says you'd better keep them away from children because
it's got chemicals in it. And the dogs pick them up every year. You have
to imagine people going, seasonal employees, high school, college aged kids
going out into wetlands and trying to hit every briquette in a pool of
where it's going to land in water. They don't. The effectivity, or
11 efficacy as they like to call it of these briquettes is really not that
known. They have selected sites that they test but that's the same sites
every year. They don't randomly go to a site and say well geez, how many
briquettes made it and dissolved and how many didn't. We found hundreds of
briquettes in ditches that were left undissolved after a rainy year. They
will sit on little tufts of grass so the next year they would come and then
dump another 200 briquettes doseage for this one wetland and I have the
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 41
application records to prove it. There would have been an accumulation of
about 3,000% of the amount of briquettes for that one particular 3 acre
pond over by Lake Lucy Road. Now that pond drained into another pond which,
drains into my wetlands which drains into Lake Lucy. So you've got all
this overdoseage possibly accumulating and going into a watershed and I
said, we got together and said, enough is enough. Let's see what we can do,
without this chemicals. And we got together some facts and got a petition
together and under the Statutue 473 we said, we don't want mosquito
controls anymore and they're out as of 1990. We have over 200 acres west II
of Lake Ann and north of Lake Lucy that are out of the control program
entirely. No briquettes. No larvacides. No adulticides. No nothing.
We're very grateful that the helicopters aren't disturbing us anymore and
as a result, the wood ducks came back and nested for the first time since
1983. And I checked this out with 20 other residents on Lake Lucy who
hadn't seen a wood duck since they started mosquito control. This also
verified, coincides with data that Art Hawkins of the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service says that up at Lake Emelia the same thing happened in thell
early 1980's. Mosquito control came in. Wood ducks disappeared. Mosquito
control went away. Wood ducks came back. Okay, it's all antidotal. Non II
scientific but nonetheless, the same thing happened here. Our dragonfly
population has just zoomed. Dragonflies eat almost exclusively mosquitoes
and annoyance seems to be about the same level or less last year after a
year after mosquito control was kicked out. And we got a lot more song
birds we feel and it seems there were a lot more fireflies hovering now
too. Hundreds of concerned citizens call various park boards and the DNR
despite desparate to find out who is spraying the chemicals in the parks.
Almost none of these complaints get reported to the MMCD until our
environmental groups told them they went unreported and the sheer volume of
complaints is one reason that Minneapolis refuses to use mosquito control II
anymore. I'm alone here in Chanhassen apparently with these kind of
complaints but once people get educated about it. Oh, that's what those
are. You know I'm going to watch out for it and if I get sick, now I know
what it is. I'll complain it you know. Now I know what it is. But it
takes education for that to happen. The MMCD would treat an area without
checking to see if there was a major problem to begin with and that's one
reason why the Park Board in Minneapolis cancelled the program. They
sprayed on a schedule rather than a need. When, contrary to your antidotal
evidence, I was there the day and the day after they sprayed Lake Ann Park
with Punt. And there was a noticeable quiet in sounds throughout the
section of the park. No birds. No insects. Nothing. No frogs. No
snakes. Nothing in the harborage. I mean it was completely dead.
Adulticides have no place in natural areas. They, according to the experts
at Hennepin Parks and the DNR who banned these adulticides because they are
sprayed in harborage where birds are not likely to nest because they nest
on the edges of open areas and savannahs and grass areas and bees, they're
likely to find flowers to pollenate because that's where the sunlight is I
and that's in their most vulnerable time. This is when they're young and
this is also when they spray. And there are many, all our State agencies,
the Federal agencies, all these park boards have cancelled adulticides
because they know it's harmful. Don't take my word for it. I've got, if II
you don't want to take my word for it. There's a list of contacts that I'm
going to leave with Todd for copying for all of you. You're free to call
any one of these people and ask away. After all this compelling evidence 11
that adulticides are harmful, the MMCD continues to use these toxic
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 42
materials. They promised at the last Technical Advisory Board meeting that
they would improve their notification system but as it's actually gone 10
steps backward. They did not hold their promise and they eliminated the
notification system for Punt entirely and made it very difficult to find
out when Scorch cold fogging is being done because they're requiring a
citizen to call a hotline every single day. It's only updated once a day.
You have to call it every day for 150 days during the season for a daily
fogging report. It's near impossible to make plans on short notice like
that. In order to avoid needless exposure and minimize the risk to human
health, citizens should have the right to know in a timely manner when
these pesticides are used and whether they're a nuisance or an encephalitis
threat. Senator Johnston and Representative Kelso introduced legislation
' that might have resulted in adequate notification system but since that
time I have learned more facts about the toxic hazards of adulticides used
by the MMCD. And in the interest of public health, I am concentrating
efforts to get the adulticides banned outright instead of promoting a
system of warning the hazards. To prevent exposure to mosquito adulticides
in the first place, Chanhassen parks should discontinue their use. The
MMCD would like people to believe that the nuisance control program is
effective. No scientific evidence exists that the nuisance mosquito
control program reduces annoyance anymore. Growing awareness caused many
legislators and citizens who can't be fooled easily who initiated proposals
to ask for facts because of the apparent lack of accountability of this
agency. They may brag about their independent advisory boards and how many
mosquitoes they kill each year but they don't kill enough to make a
difference. The advisory boards only meet once a year for a few hours on a
schedule set by the MMCD. They have no voting authority over the program.
I have been to two of these meetings in the last 2 years with environmental
groups and we've observed this in action. Concerns get aired about the
1 banning of adulticides 2 years in a row and nothing gets done. Here I am.
You know about the only way we're going to do it is at a grass roots level.
Alright, let's do it. Local governments can prohibit nuisance mosquito
' controls. They can prohibit certain controls like adulticides. You can
require notification that really works for it's citizens if you have to do
it such as signage that warns of the actual health hazards. Not a sign
that says, mosquito control done here but take the label. Do what OSHA
' does with label, warning labels. I'm a safety label designer. I've
designed thousands of safety. You have the sign warning. What it can do
to you if you ignore the warning and what to do to prevent it. Or what you
' can do is allow nuisance mosquito control only when you request the
application such as an event like July 4th and it has a 3 to 6 day life
anyway. The MMCD has notified park boards to ask them when and if they
want adulticiding but if you have to have it, right now the MMCD calls
Scott Harr in Public Safety but I think they and Public Safety should in
turn call concerned citizens to notify when, at least a week in advance so
we can make plans to avoid an area if we should so choose to do that.
Because mosquitoes are so bad in Chanhassen Estates Park, I know parents
won't take their kids to games before dusk. It's next to Rice Marsh Lake
wetland which are heavily treated by the MMCD, and some of my neighbors are
so intolerant of mosquitoes, they won't go in the woods after June 1st.
Private property owners like myself and 13 of my neighbors, like I said,
opted out of the nuisance control program and we report to you that it
doesn't make any difference in the number of bites or annoyance. It's the
same with or without the chemicals so if you're going to have mosquitoes,
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 43
do it without the chemicals and not create a public health threat. Now
everyone has their own tolerance threshhold for mosquito bites but does the
fact that nuisance mosquitoes are plentiful in Chanhassen and it's parks
mean that Metro Mosquito Control isn't working? That's right. They can't
kill enough to make a difference and annoyance can't be reduced to the
unrealistic tolerance goal which has been publicly announced at 2 bites in 11
5 minutes which the MMCD set. They can't do that without devastating cost
to our pocketbooks and the environment. Now that's the opinion that
worried scientists and latent citizens environment groups concerned about I
mosquito control. They also might, the MMCD might brag about how many
thousand of sites they treated and mosquitoes they killed but there are
thousands more they can't treat because they're in thousand of standing
water puddles, rain gutters, children's pools and litter containers.
Eliminating potential breeding sites like these are cost effective
prevention. We should be encouraged as other mosquito control districts
around the country do, to do these simple things to prevent mosquito
breeding by the MMCD in their press releases, but we are not. Chicago has II
a publication that they hand out in the parks that says just the things
that 1 said. This is what you can do to prevent mosquitoes and they found II
that 500 of mosquitoes, nuisance mosquitoes come from people's own
backyards and it's a very cost effective program because you almost do
nothing to empty water out of a container or clean your gutter out. Our
State legislative auditor reported that the Director of the MMCD receives
one -third royalties on the metheprine chemical formulas because he
co- invented them with our tax money. This potential conflict of interest
effects trying alternatives which are not financially self serving for it'll
director. Scientists agree that mosquito numbers are controlled by the
weather, not periodic chemical control. Peak rain years always have sent
out mosquitoes at high levels inspite of 32 years of chemical warfare. I'm'
going to show you a chart which is out of the Mosquito Control District's
annual report for 1990 and it shows from 1960 to 1990 these peaks or wet
years. This pink line here, connects the peaks and you can see that the II level of mosquitoes hasn't changed in 30 years. They're talking about an
eradication program. Not even close.
Schroers: Eric, I think that we've receiving your signal here. Are you II
getting pretty close to completion with your presentation?
Eric Rivkin: Yeah, I'm on my last page. That's it. So what action can well
do to control mosquitoes that will be most environmentally safe and cost
effective? There's three areas. There's prevention, natural controls and
personal avoidance. These come from...Massachussets and South Cook County
Mosquito Abatement District publications. Under prevention, standing water,
in people's own back puddles, driveways, gutters, swamps, pools, litter
containers, things you can clean up. KSTP News reported the other night
that mosquitoes love to breed in these puddles found everywhere so why not 11
require proper drainage for our city engineers and the site management.
Construction site management on our building permits. And public right -of-
ways, we can do that in drainage ditches for our streets. Keep children's
pools clean and so forth. This is a wild one. Don't provide so many blood
meals for mosquitoes which come mainly from wild...Scout troops could have
fun building bird houses for our parks. Materials donated by local
businesses and citizens and that's been done in many communities already. II
My neighbors and I are doing it. After we clean out the Mosquito Control
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 44
chemicals from our watershed, as I said, we got a return of wildlife. You
can stock small ponds with fish that eat mosquito larvae and build nesting
sites for ducks because they eat mosquito larvae like mallards and wood
ducks. Eliminate lawn chemicals so that salamanders, frogs and song birds
can thrive better to eat both larval and adult mosquitoes in our wetland
which tend to accumulate toxic runoff. Landscape to eliminate harborage
and circulate breezes. Personal avoidance. There's safer chemicals that
don't have DEET in it like Safe and Free and Bug Off which are available at
local food co -ops. Lakewinds. There's a new plant called a citroca plant
that's designed to repell mosquitoes. These are all simple and cost
effective and alternatives that will, to chemicals that will not save us
from nuisance mosquitoes. So I urge you to ban all mosquito controls from
11 Chanhassen Parks and urge you to recommend to the City Council to also ban
them from other city park property. One note about the lawn chemicals.
Remember that it is now proven that Hodgeskin Lephoma Cancer in humans and
11 other cancers in dogs are linked to 24D common in these lawn pesticides
which is definitely a health threat. If you're interested in adopting the
Minneapolis' environmental policy, perhaps look at it. Learn from it.
Contact Al Singer who wrote the policy and had it approved.' Thank you very
much.
Schroers: Thank you. That is an awful lot of information. 2 hours. My
inclination is, at this point to put this as an item on a future agenda
that we can discuss at a later date. Right now we've addressed 2 items on
the agenda and there's 11 so we're looking at quite an evening here.
Harold Trende: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, I can guarantee
you I'm going to bore you with a very long speech here this evening. My
name is Harold Trende. I've served on the County Board for the past 16
years. For the past 6 years, I've been Carver County's representative of
the Mosquito Control Board which is comprised of 17 County Commissioners
from the metropolitan area. Through the 6 years that I've served on the
Board, a great majority of the calls for mosquito control, for additional
mosquito control dealing with functions, Carver County Fair, your local
church dinner here. The requests have come through me and I have forwarded
them to the Mosquito Control Commission. Prior to one certain individual's
testimony, every city that I have been involved with that has been served
by the Mosquito Control District has requested those services time and time
again. It kind of tells me that someone must be kind of happy with the
11 services that were performed. As far as environmental concerns are
concerned, folks believe me, we all have them. I appreciated the fact that
you made a remark Larry in regards to Round -up. I am also a farmer, or
have been all my life. Deal with sprays. Fertilizers. And believe me,
everyone has the same concerns or at least the great majority have and
everyone should have as far as environmental effects are concerned.
Mosquito Control District has worked many, many years with the DNR, with
the EPA and agencies to try to have a product that is safe. I'm sure that
if there were any doubt in any of the County Board members that sit on that
Board that the materials they were using were toxic or a danger, I'm sure
they wouldn't be using them. And as I said, I'm not going to bore you with
long speech. I just wanted to leave you people know that as your
representative from the County on the Mosquito Control Board, those are the
1 things that I have found. If any of you have any questions, I'd certainly
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting ,
June 23, 1992 - Page 45
try to address them. If you don't have, I feel for you with the rest of II
the agenda that you have remaining this evening.
Schroers: Any particular questions for Mr. Trende? Thank you very much. II
Harold Trende: Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you. Appreciate
it. 1
(A majority of the following conversation was taking place out in the
audience and was not being picked up very well by the microphone.) ,
Resident: ...are your credentials somewhere on record for accurate
interpretation of the information that you provided? Are you a chemical
engineer? I found your information very interesting. I was just wonderin
how, where your training came from...
Eric Rivkin: I simply take an interest in it because my own house is
effected directly by mosquito pesticides and... On a larger scale, the
information that I have found...
Resident: How long have you lived in Chanhassen? 11
Eric Rivkin: 5 years.
Resident: But you feel then that you are now qualified to absolutely
interpret the information that you're researching and sharing that with the
Board? 1
Eric Rivkin: I'm just providing a generalization. If you want specific
information, I can provide...or you can call any references... 1
Resident: I was trying to get your qualifications.
Andrews: I have a question for you Todd. It says here that the granting II
of permission shall be invalid regarding the use of the park. Do we need
to take action on this now in order to be set for 4th of July?
Hoffman: In that regard I was speaking to the loading of the helicopter 11
Lake Ann Park which came as a surprise to me in a meeting this spring with
the representative of the MMCD. The other issues of granting permission t
cold fogging or adulticides, you can certainly address that this
evening or you can put a temporary halt on that control until such time you
wish to review it further.
Koubsky: ...helicopters, is that a solid or a liquid?
Hoffman: I believe it's solid. It's granular. 1
Ross Green: We haven't loaded the helicopter here this year. After our
discussion with Todd and his checking with a few people early this spring,
we have not...helicopter at that point. One of the reasons...
Lash: Where are you loading it now?
1
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 46
MMCD: I just used it once this year and loaded at McKnight y I loade it ght Park in
Jonathan...
Ross Green: ...the helicopter is much more personal in it's application
and it's easier to load... It's been at Lake Ann Park which is very
' convenient and we steered clear of any boats that are around or anything
like that when we've loaded it. Make sure that there's no materials... We
have not since talking to Todd.
Resident: Were you asked by the Mosquito Control District to come here
tonight?
Resident: No...
Resident: We heard it was going to be on the agenda tonight and we did
hear from Mosquito Control but... There wasn't any notification that I'm
aware of from the City...
Lash: It was in the paper. The agenda. The Villager.
Richard Wing: ...represent Chanhassen. Where does this mosquito...? What
area do you...
Resident: We've lived in Chanhassen 14 years. 8 years out by the MIS
middle school near the water tower. And in a heavily wooded area and we've
1 been very active with the school... My wife is very active with the
school. Girl Scout troops. Boy Scout troops. Trying to police the area.
Pick up trash...empty out tires...cooperation from Shorewood... Residents
there to clean up their tires and...
(There was conversation going back and forth between the audience.)
Schroers: Excuse me. I'd like to interject here. All this information is
very valuable and we appreciate it but we are going to have to take this up
at a later point in time. We thank you very much for coming and addressing
this issue.
Resident: Will we be notified?
11 Schroers: Yes. There should be a sign up sheet where you can leave your
name and address and will be contacted when this item will come up again on
the agenda. Thank you.
1
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Koubsky: I have one correction. April 28th, page 18. Third paragraph
down. I did not say that.
Hoffman: X it out. Take out the whole thing.
Koubsky: Just put whoever said that in there. I think it was Fred. Since
Fred's not here. No, I didn't say that.
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 47
1
Schroers: Any other corrections?
Lash moved, Koubsky seconded to approve the Minutes of the Park and 1
Recreation Commission meetings dated April 14, 1992 and May 19, 1992 as
presented and the Minutes from April 28, 1992 as amended on page 18 by Dave
Koubsky changing the third paragraph to Fred Berg. All voted in favor and II
the motion carried.
APPROVAL OF TREE BOARD MINUTES.
Lash moved, Erickson seconded to approve the Minutes of the Tree Board
meeting dated April 28, 1992 as presented. All voted in favor except
Schroers and Pemrick who abstained. The motion carried.
DISTRIBUTION OF PARK INVENTORY, REVISED APRIL, 1992.
Hoffman: Just to clarify an item for you. Do you want me to bring that II
back to the Commission again in July? Presumably we're going to get all
these lobbyist back in here again and how would you like to orchestrate
that?
Koubsky: Do we want a special meeting?
Hoffman: I don't necessarily think we need to take commentary. I think well
just have the Commission, you need to digest the information. Take the
additional information we received tonight and make a motion. 1
Andrews: I would like to comment, if we have the two diverse sides, that
we limit time.
Lash: I can't imagine they would have much more to add.
Erickson: I can't imagine that there's that much more that we are
qualified to digest and make decisions on. I mean other than.
Koubsky: We have to make a decision.
Erickson: I mean make a decision but how much more information can we take
in. I mean scientific information from a group of 15 scientists, workers
and one well read, very passionate man. How much more information do we II
need?
Hoffman: And again, we are simply a recommending board. We will be making
a recommendation to the City Council whether or not to ban adulticides fromll
our city parks.
Lash: Do you have anything to add? Worthwhile. 1
Hoffman: To this program? I know the incident at Lake Ann was severe and
I was surprised to hear their comments this evening that they always follow,
the label and they even go beyond that and go to 150 feet. The entire
harborage at Lake Ann is within 150 feet of the lake so they were, I've
been enlighten greatly in the operations of the MMCD over the past few
years. They simply operated there without telling anybody. We had no idea,
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 48
they were there. If you weren't informed of their activities, you just had
no idea what was going on.
Lash: So who's in charge of that? Isn't there someone at the City level
who contracts it or supervises it?
t Hoffman: No. By their legislative action.
Schroers: They get funds from the State and they just go out and do their
thing. They don't answer to anybody. They're a separate, independent
government agency and they can just.
Lash: But if we decided we didn't want to have it anymore, there would be
an impact on our taxes correct? I mean the money comes from our taxes.
Koubsky: $92,000.00 in Eastern Carver County.
Lash: But it just seems like.
Erickson: If we get them out of Chanhassen's parks, Chanhassen doesn't
just get it's money back.
Hoffman: No. You'd have to opt out of the district as some of these other
communities are looking to. If you opt out of the district.
Erickson: Eastern Carver County would have to get out right or Carver
County would have to get out?
Hoffman: Something to that degree, yes.
Andrews: Let's put that one on next month.
Koubsky: Just one note. There wasn't 15 scientists. There was a doctor.
Pemrick: Yeah, Doctor of what? We don't know what the.
Hoffman: Ross Green said it would be him and one other person so• obviously
they brought up their lobbyists.
Schroers: This could again, on a future issue, turn into the same kind of
thing. I think that, I wish that we could do this on our own without, just
between the Board and the staff and just address this issue without having
to make it public. I think that since we have already had it open and have
consumed all this information, at this point I would just like to discuss
it among our own commission and staff and make the recommendation.
11 Andrews: I guess I want to know, what are we being asked to decide? Are
we being asked to decide are chemicals safe? I mean we're not qualified to
do that.
Lash: We're being asked to decide if we think the benefits of the proposed
mosquito control outweighs a perceived fear of.
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 49
Andrews: I don't think I'm capable of understanding that based on my
understanding of chemicals and their effectiveness.
Koubsky: I think those are issues that need to be discussed.
Schroers: I think what we're supposed to decide is what we think is best 11
for the citizens of Chanhassen who come to use our parks.
Andrews: Unfortunately, if that's what we're supposed to do, then I think
that we're going to have the same discussion group here again and I think
we should. I don't think we should make a decision. If I have a question
about a chemical or a practice, you've got to have somebody here to answer
the question. I would say that if you invite the district back, then we II
have to invite Mr. Rivkin back as well.
Lash: Could we have a, schedule a work session and record our questions II
and then contact MMCD or whatever they're called. Get answers to the
questions or whatever and then, possibly then have it on a future agenda or
something. Maybe we do need to have time. I know I need time to digest
some of this. And I think we all need to take some time to get back to
people that we know and ask them how they feel. Maybe there's a lot of
people out there who have this concern. Maybe they think any chemical
exposure is worth the benefit of controlling mosquitoes. I have no idea holl
people feel. I've never really.
Schroers: I think that there are people that feel that lots of mosquitoes
aren't worth jeopardizing the environment and people's safety with
chemicals. I mean I personally, my own personal feeling is that I don't
think there is such a thing as a safe chemical. When it says toxic on it, 11 you know even if you go by all the proper safety procedures and all that
sort of thing, it's potent and toxic enough to kill whatever form of life.
Whether it's animal life or plant life or whatever. If it's toxic enough
to kill something specifically, it's harmful and I don't think anybody has 11
all the answers and the chemical companies themselves are putting out how
safe it is to use. That's like the oil companies with the gasoline.
They're not going to tell you that there are better solutions than fossil
fuels because they're making money off of it and the chemical companies ar
just the same.
Andrews: If you read that label, it doesn't say where it's safe there any II
place. It says none side effects.
Schroers: Warning. Hazard. 1
Andrews: Agent Orange was safe in 1965 and DDT was safe in the 1950's.
Hoffman: I just simply needed to clarify how you wanted to present this on"
the next agenda?
Lash: We still don't know. What do we want to do? 1
Andrews: If we're going to have a work group, I'd like to have that put
out as a motion and voted on. If that's what we're going to do. I want to/
have a chance to say that I'm opposed to having a work group. I think we
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 50
need an open discussion so if we have questions that need follow -up. I
don't see myself coming up with a list of questions that I may, there may
be a follow -up question. A comment that I just feel that we need the
experts here to decide.
Schroers: I don't know that we're making a real major decision for anyone.
I think all we can address is the issues as are related to the parks. And
do we want the adulticides sprayed in the parks knowing that that is really
pretty toxic? Pretty harmful. Do we want the helicopter loaded or
unloaded with large amounts of chemicals in our park? That sort of thing.
Lash: Larry, you're injecting in there, knowing that they're toxic. Now
if you listen to the first presentation, they're making it sound like it's
1 no problem. They are not toxic. They are not a problem.
Schroers: Wrong. When you read the label, it says toxic right on the
11 label.
Lash: But that's where we're trying to decide if we're qualified to decide
I that.
Andrews: I move that we re -open this as an agenda item. I think it would
have to be August because I'd need to read the Minutes in July in order to
figure out what the heck we talked about tonight. Open agenda item as we
did tonight.
Erickson: And the basic question we have to answer is whether we're going
to allow the use of adulticides and the briquettes in Chanhassen parks?
Hoffman: Correct.
11 Erickson: Just that simple.
Pemrick: Dealing with the parks.
Hoffman: If we put it off until August, season's over. They've be done
with their activities.
•
Andrews: Either that or we go to two meetings in July which could be
possible.
Lash: Is it something that, and I don't even know that I would want to do
this. Is it something that we would want in the paper and ask people if
they have feelings to contact the Park and Rec Department.
Erickson: We could rent an auditorium someplace.
Lash: Maybe there's a lot of people out there with strong feelings that
think they're the only one in town who has strong feelings about it and if
nobody calls, then we know nobody has any strong feelings.
Koubsky: I guess I think we need, although you made a motion.
11 Andrews: It died for a lack of second. Nobody seconded it.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 51
Koubsky: I think we need a work group. It looks like, I don't know, what
other committees or commissions are looking at this? Are there? We're
going to make a recommendation to the City Council.
Hoffman: Correct. And they're going to make a recommendation or make a
motion or take action in the same type of situation that you. They're not
experts either but they're going to listen to the arguments and they're
going to make a determination whether or not they want to agree with your
recommendation. 1
Schroers: We almost need a work group to see how we want to handle this.
I mean it's getting to be that. I think there was so much information and
on both sides it was presented well and it's just really a lot to consume II
all at one time and it's a little bit overwhelming. I think we can break
it down and make it simple but I also think that if we put it on another
agenda item just like this as Jim suggested, that we're going to have an
instant replay. We're going to have the same thing back all over again and ll
we're going to be sitting here another time at 10:00 -11:00 at night
wondering what the heck to do about it.
Koubsky: Yeah, we didn't get a chance to discuss this between ourselves.
We heard a lot.
Schroers: No. That's why I think we need a work session amongst 1
ourselves.
Lash: If we have a work session, from that we could then put it on a
future agenda which then would be open to the public like Jim wants. This
would just be a step before that. I think for us to collect our own
thoughts.
Schroers: Or we can do it now. If you know how you feel. I mean I know
how I feel about it. 1
Pemrick: I know how I feel.
Koubsky: I guess I feel, I don't think chemicals are the answer either ,
Larry. I didn't when I came in and I don't now. There's a thing, this
chemical may not kill you but we live in a chemical world. We were sprayed
with chemicals when we were kids. We've all put Off, we've all put Deet.
There's an accumulative effect and I don't think we need to.
Andrews: Put up a motion. If it flies. 1
Lash: No, I don't think we can do that. We closed it.
Andrews: He can. 1
Lash: But we closed it to the public now and now they're gone and now
we're still discussing it and for us to make a motion, we made a motion to II
table it to a future meeting.
Schroers: No, we didn't make any motion. We didn't take any official
action on this at all and we make all kinds recommendations on evenings Ir
11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 52
when the general public is not here. We've kind of indicated that we're
going to be taking this up again.
Lash: Yeah, but these people came here intentionally for this issue and
now all of a sudden after.
Andrews: ...even amount of presentation. I feel that if we have a motion
here that will fly, let's go with it. Get it behind us.
Koubsky: I would move that we ban adulticides from the parks and we
reconsider the use of briquettes in the parks if they're currently being
used in the parks and I would move that the City also rethink the use of
mosquito control in the city.
Schroers: And I would add to that the Mosquito Control notifies the City
each and every time that they come to do any kind of mosquito control
activity and make us aware of their presence. What it is that they're
doing and for the nuisance control, require them that 150% of the label
warning. Just stay at least that far away from the water.
Andrews: We're banning adulticides here. What else are we doing?
Requiring that they advise us of anything else they're going to do. Is
that it?
Schroers: Well, that's not really it. We're still kind of discussing.
Andrews: Well it's in the form of a motion right now. I want to know what
we're moving here so I know what we're voting on.
Lash: And I want to know how this effects the treatment for the
encephalitis whatever.
Andrews: I would appreciate this motion being broken into little pieces.
I think it'd make it a lot easier for us to digest.
Koubsky: Sould we jot them down as a group?
II Andrews: Just shoot them out one at a time.
Lash: Why don't we shoot it out first but not say it's a motion and then
once we get it kind of put together.
Koubsky: Okay, Dave would move to ban adulticides in city parks.
II Andrews: I'll second that motion. We can have a whole string of them here
just to get it done here.
Schroers: Do you want to actually move on that?
Andrews: We can move that we don't, tell them we don't want the helicopter
11 there.
Schroers: Alright, the motion is to.
1
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 53
1
Koubsky: Ban adulticides use in city parks.
Schroers: Is there a second? 1
Andrews: I will second that.
Koubsky moved, Andrews seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission 1
recommend to ban adulticides use from all Chanhassen City Parks. All voted
in favor except Erickson who opposed and the motion carried. 1
Lash: Can I make a suggestion on a possible amendment. Can we have this
be for a one year trial period and then be reviewed in a year?
Schroers: We could but do you really think we're going to know anything?
Lash: I'd like to see, I think what we need to do is see what kind of a II
difference it makes. If it makes any difference or not.
Andrews: Okay, why don't you just move that we reconsider in one year.
Lash: Okay. I'll do that.
Andrews: I guess I would suggest, why don't we go through the list of wha
we're going to do here and then perhaps as a final motion reconsider all o
those next year. That might be an effective thing to do. By banning
adulticides, have we eliminated any control of the disease carrying
killers? The encephalitis mosquitoes.
(There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.)
Schroers: ...I think we would want to continue with that program. The
nuisance program provided that we use that 150% on that buffer zone and
that the proper authority, and I'm not sure who that would be Todd but that
someone is contacted and that somebody knows of the activities that are
going on. Someone who can officially represent the city. I mean I just
think that the City has the right to know when anyone is coming in and on t
public or a citywide basis, applying any kind of chemical.
Lash: Someone responsible like Todd?
Andrews: He's the Park and Rec Coordinator, yeah.
Schroers: Park and Rec. We can only deal with the issues that pertain to
parks. So if you're willing to accept that responsibility, I would like t
know. I mean I just wouldn't like to find out after the fact that oh a
month ago, yeah. 1
Andrews: I would move that we require any mosquito control efforts that
directly involve parks. To require pre- notification to the Park and Rec
Coordinator not less than one week in advance of any treatment. Planned II
treatment.
Schroers: Is there a second?
1
11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 54
Koubsky: I'll second.
Andrews moved, Koubsky seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
recommend to require any mosquito control efforts that directly involve
parks notify the Park and Rec Coordinator not less than one week in advance
of any planned treatment. All voted in favor except Erickson who opposed
1 and the motion carried.
Lash: I'd like in there a motion that we continue the insect carrying
control program. Make sure that's.
Koubsky: Or could we identify what the disease?
11 Lash: Yeah, that's what I meant to say.
Schroers: Encephalitis.
Koubsky: What the approach is?
Lash: I don't know what it is.
Schroers: You know that's something that I'm wondering about. I mean it's
hard to know if all the figures, facts and figures are correct and accurate
but if we had like 7 cases in the last, how many years or whatever. In the
last 10 years. 7 cases in the last 10 years and divide that by the amount
of dollars, I hope that if I get sick, somebody spends that much on me.
Lash: Me too. I took great offense to that comment.
Schroers: Geez, that is unreal.
' Lash: One child getting encephalitis is not worth. I mean it's worth any
amount.
II Resident: Can I ask a question? When we left here we were going to have a
chance to refute what it is that was said and what you considered and be
carried on at another time. Was that what I heard?
Schroers: That was what we talked about but it was not an official motion.
We are kind of discussing and trying to sort out for ourselves for what we
want to do in the city parks. And we're just passing our recommendation on
to City Council.
I L, Resident: I guess my question is that what Mr. Rivkin had to say and what
we had to say...and a chance to talk about that and I know it's a late hour
but the decision to ban...ban adulticides in the parks in Chanhassen, I'm
wondering whether you had an opportunity to address those assertions...
11 3 Resident: There were a number of inaccurancies that we'd like the
opportunity to...
Schroers: You know to be perfectly honest with you, we discussed that and
that's why we decided to go on with this because we feel what's going to
happen next time is an exact repetition of what happened this time and
1
II
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 55 1
we're going to be sitting here again some night at 11:00 and 12:00 still li
not knowing what to do. Exactly. I mean we're getting all this
information. None of us here are chemical experts or biologists or trained
environmentalists or you know. We're in kind of a spot here as far as what
to do. We need to take the best interest of the city to heart. The people'
who are using the parks and the only logical thing we can do is go with
what's safe you know. We don't know how dangerous the chemicals are and
what the long lasting, reaching effects are and it's like better safe than II
sorry.
Resident: I'm not sure...Department of Health has just finished a written
assessment on...and it's currently under internal review. It's completed
and they're just going over it before it comes out, that... I think that
that's where we can get more of an impartial view of the whole thing rather
than listening to sides and... 1
Pemrick: I think that's why we said we'd give it a year and then
re- evaluate again. That will give time for that review to be completed and
then we can review that.
Schroers: See what we're opting to do is to not use parks as a program but
continue using other parts of the program and see if we can tell any kind li
of difference. If comments from people who use the park, if they can tell
any kind of difference. I mean it seems if we're applying these chemicals
to the parks one year and then we don't apply them the next year, and
nobody notices a difference, then what would be the advantage of using II
them? I realize that there's a lot of other environmental issues. Now
much rain we have and so on that's going to effect the mosquito population II as well but we're going to have to figure out something to do about this
and if we bring it up another time on another agenda, we're going to be
sitting here in the same situation as we are right now. I mean the
additional information that we're going to received, we're not going to be il
any more qualified to assess than the information we received tonight.
Hoffman: Chairman Schroers, Commissioners, as an alternative I might
suggest that if this issue needs readdressing again, it was I believe, the II
intentions of the Commission with the people who left there this evening,
that this would be discussed at another meeting. That we put an interim,
temporary ban on adulticides within the city's parks pending a review, a II
second review by the Commission. Then you limit the testimony on anybody's
part at the July meeting. Make a recommendation to the City Council and
we'll pass it up to them in 2 weeks. 1
Lash: I like that. I am interested though, and I'm not trying to put you
on the spot at all Randy but I know that you were opposed to the motions ,
and I'm really interested in your feelings.
Erickson: Really just because I think it's a lot of the discussion is way
out of our league and the step we're taking is relatively drastic. Not
drastic to our everyday lives but relatively we say no more adulticides
basically because we're not sure about everything. We're not sure about a
lot of things in life. We can't just say, well let's dump them. This
discussion is probably going to have to go on in front of the City Council,'
again?
II
11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 56
1
Hoffman: Yes.
Erickson: I mean basically the same discussion. I mean wouldn't it Todd?
We'll give them our recommendation and then it will come on the agenda and
more than likely, similar groups would probably show up again.
Hoffman: Sure, depending on how they would like to address it.
Erickson: And we're not really a scientific body. Certainly the City
Council takes our recommendation very seriously and stuff but I think we're
kind of jumping on this. Our gut feelings like Larry and all of us with
the news headlines the way they always are and the current environmental
trends, chemicals are bad. Let's get away from chemicals. I don't like
pesticides. I don't like herbicides, you know fertilizers and things. The
gut instinct is let's throw this stuff out. Let's get rid of all of it. I
mean the gentleman who was here was very passionate and done a lot of
research was also mentioning fertilizers. He wants to get rid of
fertilizers. Well I put fertilizers on my lawn all the time. Not a ton.
I try to use them very responsibly but they're toxic. They're bad. I try
to use them the way they're labeled and responsible. Maybe this gentleman
will be back next year and say let's get rid of lawn fertilizers. Are we
qualified to get rid of lawn fertilizers? I mean this is something that's
just so far out of our league, I just don't think our first step should be
let's get rid of them. Maybe other workshops where we can get together
with our feelings and some facts and spend some more time maybe but I don't
think our first step should be to throw these things out. I think Todd's
got a good suggestion. Maybe for now to address these concerns, have a
temporary ban. Was it a health department study that's coming out?
Resident: There was a Risk Assessment.
Erickson: Risk Assessment. I'm in the medical field. I'm in the
pharmaceutical business and you have to take opinion leaders words for
things because they're the ones who put in the time and have the education
and the background. Maybe this will shed a lot of light on it for us and
our concerns. We're all concerned about chemicals being sprayed around us.
As a matter of fact, if I was in the park playing frisbee with my kids and
the ATV comes by spraying fog, I think I'd high tail it. I mean I just
wouldn't hang around for it. That's just common sense. But I think making
a drastic jump. Throwing them out for a year so that next year we can
hopefully be more enlighten. I don't know how much more enlighten I'm
going to be in a year about things I can't.
Schroers: I don't either. That's just the whole issue. That's what makes
it so hard to decide. I mean this can be one of those wheels that just
continuously goes on and on.
Erickson: I think what we need to do is get together another time.
Specify more exact general questions that we need to know. I think the
health department study will be real helpful for us.
Lash: When is that supposed to be complete?
i
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 57 1
&,Resident: It is completed. It's in internal review in the health
department.
Lash: But when is that supposed to be finished then?
Erickson: Knowing any kind of review board, it could be forever.
7 Resident: They actually, I was surprised. They got through it pretty
quick. I was surprised that it was done as far as it is.
Erickson: But this was overwhelming information for me and I hate to
see, I don't know if this is the right cliche but throwing the baby out
with the bath water. I mean we all despise chemicals and abuse and people
getting sick from it and being hyper sensitive to them but.
Pemrick: That's why I think we should be stopping everything until we do
know.
Schroers: That's kind of the approach I was taking too. It's better safe II
than sorry until we know what we're doing. What we shouldn't go ahead with
something when we're not sure. When we're not convinced actually what is
the final results and what all the hazards, what all the risks are. I
don't feel qualified to make the decision for the rest of the people in the
city that we should be participating in that type of activity. I mean I'm
not personally convinced that it's okay. 1
Pemrick: When other cities have banned it, there's a reason. They've
thought these things through I would think. That's something that we
should be thinking about.
Erickson: Well the other people that besides ourselves that look out for
the citizens. We look out especially for the Chanhassen citizens, are the
legislatures that put these departments in and oversee them and fund them.
I'm sure they address these concerns. Are you in front of Senate panels
and things like that every once in a while? 1
4 f, Resident: Yeah, quite a bit actually. All the bills that this originally
referred to, none of them passed the way they were, none of them passed or
went through committee the way that they were initially put out. The one
that did partially get through, actually the...was very, very far away from
what it was originally introduced at. That gives you an indication of what
the legislative thinking is on these things. Sure they were introduced but
none of them went anywhere. And I guess one recommendation that I would
make for you to help make a decision is to ask Mr. Rivkin to provide some
of the scientific documentation that he says he has because we've asked for
it and never seen it.
Koubsky: That's one thing I'd like to make clear too. My feelings haven't'
changed since I came in the door tonight listening to both groups. I've
made a motion or started making motions and have an opinion which may or
may not change after I read the health department's study. I just want to
make that clear to you folks that you gave your presentation. We heard an II
opposing presentation. My opinion of the use of chemicals for mosquito
control weren't changed here tonight. I've had an opportunity to voice
1
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 58
them and I am. So I'm always open for new information but my mind hasn't
changed.
Schroers: I want to know what really generated this issue on the agenda in
11 the first place? Was it because of the helicopter incident out at Lake
Ann? Or did Eric request this? What generated this?
Hoffman: It was not a direct request of Mr. Rivkin, although he certainly
appreciated the opportunity to voice his opinion in a public forum. As a
result of meetings and letters being forwarded from the MMCD in the past,
representatives of the District dealt with the Public Safety Commission.
11 Scott Harr. More recently they began to deal with myself and the Park and
Recreation Department. I believe it is an issue of public concern if
spraying for mosquito control is taking place in the public parks.
Schroers: It should probably be a public hearing.
Hoffman: It certainly could be.
Lash: That was kind of my point with the newspaper.
Schroers: I mean it really is. If none of us sitting here are qualified
experts and it should actually be a public hearing would probably be the
most appropriate way to handle that.
Lash: But if we have a public hearing, I don't want to go through another
thing tonight where it's going to be just these, no offense or anything but
just the two sides giving us all the same information. What I want to hear
is from John Q. Public who uses the park.
Andrews: I think the public hearing will be tonight plus more.
Schroers: Oh yeah. We would almost have to schedule a public hearing for
that specific event and that's it. Not have it on a meeting night or on a
regular agenda.
Lash: But I don't want to hear repetitous.
1 Andrews: You'd have to have a timer. Say you've got 5 minutes. Make your
point and you're done. Or 3 minutes or whatever it's going to be.
Hoffman: However you wouldn't but the public who was here would certainly
need to hear that information.
4. Resident: I have just another question. I just found out about this
meeting here a few days ago when I talked with Todd. He called my office
and asked me what the status of the mosquito control was in Chanhassen for
the parks and I informed him what it was. What we've been doing and we
discussed this...business as usual in Chanhassen or...and he said, he
basically told me that it's, for now that's what it is. He told me...
' Schroers: Well the information that we received tonight was helpful in
explaining what it's all about and what the objectives are and the current
statistic information and all that but for us to decide what's the right
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 59
thing to do for the people who come out to use our parks is a pretty tough
call for us because we don't really have all the scientific data and what
do you do in that situation? Do you say well, probably no one has died so
far. Let's just go on with things. Or do we want to take the safe
approach and say, maybe we should cut back and be cautious and be safe
rather than sorry and find out some of this information before.
.Resident: We're another government agency serving the public and there's a'
lot to digest. As you pointed out there's a lot of information to go
through and are you able and willing to go through that information to make
a decision is a tough call. There's absolutely no question in my mind
about that.
Koubsky: I would appreciate any specific chemical information you can give
me about what you apply. I do have access to some chemical engineers at II
work and it's something that those guys are a mystery to me but they're
very good and I would like to run past what it is we're applying. I don't
need newspaper articles. Something even more complicated, you know safety"
data sheets are very generic. Something very specific. What is it?
Lash: Okay, can I make a motion that we advertise this in the paper and
call a public hearing for resident input before we make any final decision"
and what was the other part to that? Do we want it in July already?
Hoffman: No. Public hearing, we cannot hold a public hearing per se. We
can hold an open forum. City Council is the only body in the city that ca
hold a public hearing.
Koubsky: We can also move in our recommendation that the City Council holdr
a public hearing or that we feel.
Schroers: I was thinking that same thing too. 1
Lash: Maybe it needs to go through us but when we send on our
recommendation to them, ultimately we can have in there that we recommend
that they hold a public hearing.
Hoffman: Okay. ,
Schroers: That sounds a lot like passing the buck. But the program is not
just for the parks. That's the only issue that we can deal with but the
program is for. 1
Andrews: The concern is really city wide.
Schroers: Yeah, it's city wide so we only deal with one portion of the ,
city. One aspect of the city.
Andrews: Can you read the motion back? '
Hoffman: Motion to postpone this meeting until the July meeting.
Lash: Have public notification in the paper and have an open forum. '
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 60
Hoffman: For continuation of discussion.
Schroers: That's probably the best we can do from our position.
Andrews: You know what? I don't think that's going to help me at all
because I think what I'm going to end up thinking to myself is, let's pump
this up to the City Council and let them decide what to do with it.
' Schroers: You almost have to keep a score card. You know how many people
come up and are in favor of it and how many people come up and are not in
favor of it and then move or make a motion or recommendation to the City
Council for the majority of the input.
Andrews: Okay, I'll second it. I surrender.
' Schroers: Okay, so.
Lash: The thing is, that's what we're for. We're the buffer before City
Council so hopefully when it goes to City Council, they won't have to go
through as much as what we've had to go through.
Hoffman: Most likely in this type of, on this type of issue they will.
Schroers: ...they will. There will be a lot of lobbying on both sides at
' the Council level.
Hoffman: I would presume so.
Andrews: Should we call the question? Are we spinning wheels?
Schroers: Pretty much.
Lash: That's alright. We can go through the motion. We're doing our job.
Andrews: I'm asking for you to call the question.
Schroers: Okay. Did you write down that motion Todd?
11 Hoffman: Yes.
Schroers: Would you read it back please?
Hoffman: Chairman Lash moved to table this issue until the July meeting to
make public notification in the paper as to that open forum meeting and
what was the last deal Jan? That was it.
11 Lash: That was it. And I mean if it's possible, to get something more
than just our agenda.
1 Hoffman: Correct. Send public notification.
' Schroers: Alright. Is there a second?
Andrews: I already seconded it.
i
Park and Rec Commission Meeting 11 June 23, 1992 - Page 61
Lash moved, Andrews seconded to table the decision on the mosquito control"
in the city parks until the July meeting and to put notification in the
newspaper that the Park and Recreation Commission will be holding an open
forum discussion on this matter. All voted in favor and the motion
carried.
Schroers: That's what we came up with for your information.
Lash: So are we striking the earlier motions?
Andrews: That have to be done by motion. 1
Hoffman: Rescinded.
Lash: Okay. So I make a motion that we rescind the earlier, however many II
there was there until.
Schroers: Until after the forum. 1
Koubsky: I would like though that notification be made to the City of any.
Andrews: That was a separate motion. Let's leave that one sit.
Koubsky: I would appreciate if we were notified before before we get
treated.
K• Resident: Through Todd?
Lash: Through Todd.
j�. Resident: No problem. We discussed that earlier. 1
Lash: And I also think that we need to have the posting.
Andrews: That's a given too I believe. 1
Andrews: I would like to move that we rescind the ban of adulticides until
it's reconsidered at a future meeting. Rescind the ban. 1
Schroers: I will second that.
Andrews moved, Schroers seconded to rescind the previous motion to ban 1
adulticides in the city parks until it's reconsidered at a future meeting.
All voted in favor except Koubsky and Pemrick who opposed and the motion 11
carried.
Andrews: What can we table? I've got to get out of here.
Hoffman: Item number 5. I would recommend that the Commission table. 1
Andrews: I move that we table item 5. '
Erickson: Second.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 62
' Andrews moved, Erickson seconded to table discussion of park inventory.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
SUMMER BALLFIELD SCHEDULES.
Ruegemer: Does anyone have any questions on it?
Commission: No.
Andrews: Fields are busier than heck right?
Hoffman: That's the gist of it.
' 1992 FOURTH OF JULY CELEBRATION.
Hoffman: All we need is your volunteer assingments.
Lash: Okay, I'll do the raffle thing Friday night and I'll do this sand
castle judging Saturday.
' Erickson: I should be able to help on Friday, but not Saturday.
Lash: Will you help with the sand castle with me Wendy?
Pemrick: Sure. What time is that?
Lash: I don't know.
' Ruegemer: 2:45 on Saturday.
Pemrick: I'll work Friday night. What do I have to do there?
Ruegemer: We have coordinators this year for the.carnival games.
' Pemrick: Oh, so you're all covered?
Lash: Do you need me to help with the raffle? Did you somebody for that?
1 Ruegemer: Yeah. We can have somebody sell shirts. The people that are
going to help out...shirts tonight.
Lash: Wendy, do you want to sell shirts? We could do that because aren't
the shirts and the raffle right next to each other?
(T- shirts were handed out to the Commissioners at this point.)
1993 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
Hoffman: Item number 8. The recommendation has been made to table it.
Andrews moved, Koubsky seconded to table the 1993 Capital Improvement
' Program. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Lash: What did we have to do for it? Did we have to do anything for it?
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 63
Hoffman: No. '
Lash: Why don't we just approve it and be done with it?
Hoffman: No, item 8 is a motion to table it until the July, 1992 meeting II
because the information was not completed. It's acting on the 1993 CIP.
Lash: Oh.
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS UPDATE:
Schroers: Construction updates. Can we just do that basically real quick?"
Hoffman: Yeah. Lake Ann Utilities. We're having some problems with the
contractor. Getting him to perform. The shelter's been going real well.
Lake Susan Park is completely done. Herman Field, we're still arguing over
seed but we'll get that straighten around.
Lash: I saw guys working at Lake Ann.
COMMISSION MEMBER PRESENTATIONS: 1
Schroers: Are there any Commission Member Presntations?
Koubsky: I am hearing grumbling about no totlot at Sunset Ridge. I know r
you are too.
Hoffman: They started the border wood work on the new ones today... 1
(There was a tape change at this point.)
Andrews: Two items. First of all people are totally ignoring the ban on 1
dogs at North Lotus. There's dog poop piles everywhere you go.
Lash: Are you sure it's dogs or is it geese? '
Andrews: It's dogs. But the second item is just as a note for next
meeting. I think we need to put on an early agenda item before we get to I
the mosquito control thing that we'd have to make some official decisions
about limiting discussion time. If that takes official action in order not
to get in trouble so, I don't want to get into a 45 minute speech on
another one because it's too much to digest.
Hoffman: Council routinely gives those recommendations. Limit your
comments to 5 minutes. 1
Andrews: I think we ought to make sure that we don't forget to announce it
so nobody gets hard feelings and surprised. '
Schroers: You know we could actually lay out a format. We could design
the questions that we need answers for. The questions that we would like
public input on and just ask those questions. Just say we want to know how
you feel about.
11
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 23, 1992 - Page 64
Andrews: I think it's just important to state a limit before anybody
starts because then it's fair.
Lash: Well, if we can get a halfway decent write up in the paper about
what happened tonight with both sides and people read it and say, this is
going to be continued in July and if you have feelings, come to the
meeting. Then they've already read it and they already know the two
opposing sides and they've formed their opinion and they're coming. They
probably don't need to hear from either the MMCD or Mr. Rivkin.
Andrews: How many people in a row...say I agree with my neighbor that we
don't want a parking spot? I expect there to be one after another just
coming up and saying, I'm for or I'm against it.
1 Schroers: That makes our job easy. All we've got to do is have a yes and
a no colume. Check yes. Check yes. Check yes. Whatever and then add up
the scores and at the end of the night, make the recommendation to the
' Council.
Andrews: I have no other presentations.
Lash: ...if no one shows up.
' Schroers: I know. This is going to be a tough thing to do.
Hoffman: You just simply need to do it.
Schroers: That's it.
Andrews: You were looking for volunteers for the TH 5 Commission?
Hoffman: That's coming up, item 11.
Schroers: We would have done this probably if they hadn't have walked back
in the room.
Hoffman: If you were in the mood to do it, you probably should have made
your motions when everybody was still here and everybody.
•
Andrews: I feel a little better about this.
Schroers: We were a little bewildered at that time.
•
Lash: I thought we were being real under cover there with letting
1 everybody go and then starting to make motions.
Andrews: It's easier that way.
1 ADMINISTRATIVE SECTION AND PRESENTATIONS.
Hoffman: Okay, item number 11. We need the nomination to the TH 5
1 Corridor Task Force.
Andrews: I'd be interested.
1
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
1 June 23, 1992 - Page 65
Lash: I nominate Jim Andrews. 1
Pemrick: I second it.
Lash moved, Pemrick seconded to appoint Jim Andrews to the TH 5 Corridor 1
Task Force to represent the Park and Recreation Commission. All voted in
favor and the motion carried.
Hoffman: Anything in the Admin packet? 1
Lash: I have one. Your clean up the parks. For Greenwood Shores, can you
also have glass?
Hoffman: Sure.
I
Lash: Because there gets to be a lot of glass down there. Right around
the tree and the picnic table and the garbage can.
Hoffman: The ones that I mention glass are the ones that I thought there'd,
be heavy populations of...
Lash: Have you gotten any tips on the tree cutting down at? 1
Hoffman: Trying to keep up with it with the Sheriff's Department. I
Todd Hoffman presented the video of the WCCO News on the tree cutting at
Carver Beach Park in Chanhassen.
1
Andrews moved, Lash seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor
and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned.
I
Submitted by Todd Hoffman
Park and Rec Coordinator
Prepared by Nann Opheim 1
1
1
1
•
1
1
1
� 1
PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION MINIITES
1 7/9/92
COMMISSION PRESENT:
1 Dave Dummer, Dave Johnson, Bill Bernhjelm, Eldon Berkland,
Brian Beniek
1 Councilmember Richard Wing
Steve A. Kirchman, Building Official
Paul Krauss, Planning Director
1 Elliott Knetsch, City Attorney
ABSENT:
Don Chmiel, Craig Blechta
Chairman Dave Dummer opened the meeting at 7:00 p.m. Brian
motioned, Eldon seconded to approve the 5/14/92 minutes as written.
All voted in favor and the motion passed.
1
OLD BUSINESS
Planning Director Paul Krauss reviewed the proposed ordinance
dealing with sexually oriented businesses. Discussion followed
with City Attorney Elliott Knetsch advising the Commission on
1 ordinances adopted by other cities. The Commission agreed that
licensing could be an effective means of regulating these types of
businesses. Eldon motioned, Brian seconded to submit the proposed
1 ordinance dealing with sexually oriented businesses, with minor
modifications to include adding massage centers as exceptions, to
the City Council for their consideration. All voted in favor and
1 the motion passed.
The Commission also suggested that Elliott Knetsch draft a separate
proposed ordinance dealing with massage centers.
111
FIRE DEPARTMENT
1 Richard Wing reported the Fireman's dance will be held August 15.
Tickets will be mailed to residents.
1 Brian commended the Building Official and the Mechanical Inspector
on their investigation of the garage fire on Chaparral Court.
Dave Dummer questioned the sprinkling ban in effect. Another
notice will be sent to The Villager for publishing.
Steve A. Kirchman informed the Commission of the testing of water
1
1
July 9, 1992 1
Page 2
1
in the City for lead. Homes built before 1987 could possibly have
lead in the water pipes that were installed when the home was
built. The Utility Department needs a minimum of 60 homes for this
testing. Many Commissioners volunteered.
SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
Brian reported the need for increased police patrol in the vicinity
of the Chanhassen Elementary School. This request will be passed
on to the deputies.
BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT
1
Steve reported on the increased valuations and the number of 1
inspections for the month of May.
NEW BUSINESS
Steve distributed copies of the petition from the Lotus Lake
Estates Home Owners Association requesting two "no parking" signs
on Choctaw Circle. The Engineering Department has given this
request their full endorsement. Dave Johnson motioned, Brian
seconded, to approve the Association,s request with Director Harr's
approval. All voted in favor and the motion passed.
Dave Dummer gave an update on the warning system issue. Dave
Johnson was requested to initiate contact with the local cable
companies to determine their exact capabilities and willingness to
participate in a new local warning system. A meeting will be set
up in late summer to establish goals and time lines.
Eldon questioned the status of the alcohol issue. It has been
placed on the July 13 City Council agenda. 1
Brian motioned, Bill Bernhjelm seconded, to adjourn the meeting at
8:40 p.m. All voted in the favor and the motion passed. 1
1
1
1
1