2j. Minutes CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 9, 1991 •
I Mayor Chmiel called the meeting to order a 7:35 p.m.. The meeting was opened
with the Pledge to the Flag.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Mason, Councilman Workman,
Councilman Wing and Councilwoman Dimler
II . STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Roger Knutson, Paul Krauss, Charles Folch, Scott
Harr, Todd Gerhardt and Tom Chaffee
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilwoman Disler moved, Councilman Mason seconded to
approve the agenda as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None.
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve
' the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's
recommendations:
a. Resolution 991 - 110: Approve 1992 Park and Trail Dedication Fees.
b. Approve Indemnity Agreement with First Trust National Association Regarding
Gladys Nelson Claim, Chanhassen General Obligation Bonds.
c. Resolution 991 - 111: Accept Street Improvements in Country Oaks, Project
89 -1.
e. Resolution 991 - 112: Authorize Revision of Sanitary Sewer and Water Hookup
Charges.
' f. Request Amendment to Conditions of Approval for Minnewashta Highlands,
Project 88 -6.
g. Extend Final Plat Deadline for Summit at Near Mountain, Lundgren Brothers.
i. Approval of Accounts.
j. City Council Minutes dated November 18, 1991
City Council Minutes dated November 25, 1991
Planning Commission Minutes dated November 6, 1991
Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated November 19, 1991
Senior Commission Minutes dated November 15, 1991
Public Safety Commission Minutes dated November 14, 1991
m. Zoning Ordinance Amendment concerning Non - Conforming Uses, Structures, and
Lots, First Reading.
' n. Zoning Ordinance Amendment concerning Development Contracts for Site Plan
Approvals, First Reading.
1
1
II City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
II q. Approval of 1992 Joint Powers Agreement Prosecution Contract with Carver
County.
K. RESOLUTION REALLOCATING FUNDS FOR WEST 78TH STREET PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT
' PROJECT.
Mayor Chmiel: I guess I called Don and talked to him specifically in regards to
I this. I think we should have just a little bit more of an explanation on that
respective item with some clarification in regard to that. Don, if you would.
Don Ashworth: The West 78th Street Detachment project was approved by the city
II
as a project in 1988. We moved ahead with bonding for that project and after
bonding several questions arose as to the project itself. That project
interfaced with the County. The County's approval for the redesign for County
I 17 and any type of frontage roads required their approval. Literally during the
next year and a half we worked with the property owners and the County
attempting to resolve differences of all parties and by the time that we moved
I into 1991, we were literally ready to carry out that project in the Fall of
1990. However by that point in time the Highway Department had in fact set out
their schedule for doing TH 5 and if we would have attempted to do the project
this year, there was a possibility that we could have ended up with Dakota,
II TH 101, Market and 17 all down at the same point in time. The project was not
put forward in 1991. The Highway Department has assured us that the County 17
intersection will be the first intersection that they will do in 1992. Our
II intent is to be into a position of letting that contract this winter so that we
can parallel the construction of the Highway Department, meaning that when they
have 17 down, that our crews would be in working at the same time that their's
I was. An auxiliiary issue associated with this is what is called arbitrage.
What the Federal Government did in 1990 and they made it retroactive back to
1988 so they passed a law that had certain penalties associated with it and back
dated it for 2 years. Those penalties said that if a city earns more interest
I on a construction project than it should, then it is paying for those bonds,
that amount is equal to what they call arbitrage. The check has to be prepared
and sent to the Federal Government February 15th of 1993. For us that amounts
to $220,000.00. Recommendation before you from Springsted, from Holmes and from
myself is that through a form of reallocation process we should be able to keep
most of that in our own pocket. Staff is recommending approval of the
resolution in front of you.
II Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Everyone understands that or do you have any questions or
discussion? Richard, did you have a question?
II Councilman Wing: No. I just had a comment. This is one of Don's few memos
that seemed to be down to my level and worded that I could understand it.
' Specifically the note section. Garble -e -goop. I didn't have to look up.
Councilman Workman: Would it be appropriate for the Burdicks maybe to say what
he wants to say here at this point? I know that's on their mind.
II Mayor-Chmiel: That's one of the reasons I also pulled it.
II Councilman Workman: I guess I don't recall the West 78th Detachment being a
part of or not done because of everything else being done. I thought we did
' 2
1
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991 1
that with TH 101. We felt TH 101. I know the HRA was mad about that but I
don't remember us leaving this. i thought it was more tied in with TH 5 but I
didn't know that we had decided not to go ahead with it because.
Don Ashworth: It is tied in with TH 5. If I said TH 101, I was mistaken. It
was because of TH 5 construction and the potential taking down of Dakota, TH 101
and Market and then potentially 17 at the same point in time. The project was
delayed to 1992. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Right, but that project will take place this coming year.
Don Ashworth: And I should mention one additional point and that is that as the
Council will recall, the original engineers on that project were BRW. During
1991 the Council acted to ask another consulting firm to take a look at that
whole project which was Strgar. Strgar came back with various alternatives and
one of the conditions or suggestions by the Council and HRA was to insure that
that new design for 78th Street, including then that section of 17, that that be
reviewed with the property owners. I see Mr. Burdick is back in town and this '
does give us an opportunity to have him meet with those engineers so he can take
a look at the new design that has been, the City Council has seen.
Councilman Workman: Is that design going to also include, because I know that 1
the landscaping portion of it was left out and there was some confusion about
that. And switching consultants, which I don't think the Burdicks were upset
about because they didn't prefer the other consultant but it does seem like one
of those projects that's kind of leeched on and on and on for as long as I've
been around the Council and I know that the Burdicks are getting frustrated with
that. I don't know, maybe they want to say something. 1
Mayor Chmiel: I think probably what we'll do is give them that opportunity at
this time. If you'd like to do some discussions of this or express your views,
we'd be more than happy to listen at this time.
B.C. "Jim" Burdick: Thank you Mr. Mayor.
Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor, while he's passing this out, do we have a time 1
frame for this extension? A starting time or a conclusion of this project.
Don Ashworth: We again have a commitment from the State that they will be in, 1
Charles what was it the first part of May and be done by the end of June?
Charles Folch: That's correct. MnDot would like to have that intersection down
and completed by the end of June. Actually first of July is when it should be
- open.
Mayor Chmiel: End of June to July. Okay. Jim. 1
B.C. "Jim" Burdick: Good evening.
Mayor Chmiel: First introduce yourself so we can have it recorded.
B.C. "Jim" Burdick: Yes, B.C. "Jim" Burdick from Excelsior. First of all I
want to thank you and appreciate having some engineers on this besides BRW. I
3 1
1
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
' said once several years ago that BRW would probably be gone but not until the
Soviet Union was gone. They've both come about and they're wonderful
occurrences.
Mayor Chmiel: Good comparison.
B.C. "Jim" Burdick: Now all I want, ladies and gentlemen, all we want and some
of the landowners in that area is to get this off the back burner and onto the
front burner. It's been, I said 6 years here. It's been 7 and 8 years that we
first talked about moving. At first it was the unknown and then it was going to
be completed in 1989. Then 1990 and we even have one case here with nice help
of Mr. Tom Workman, he called the engineers, City Engineers on July 16th and
they said bids would be let August 6th of 1991 and they still haven't been let.
In April I confirmed a conversation here when the bids were going to be opened
' July of last year so that's all I'd like to have. Is to have it completed or
left the way it is. Believe me. If it's just all dropped and left the way it
is, that would make us the most happy but perhaps that isn't going to be left -so
' just complete it because we talk to people about building down there. There's
always fear of the unknown because until actually construction begins, it can
always be changed. And business will suffer greatly when the streets are torn
up. If it's nice weather as I put in the letter, it's dust. If it's rain, its
' mud and inconvenience and of course this applies to Charlie James to the north
and I think this is probably one of the ten reasons why the Market Square center
has been nightly slow, although I had news on Friday. You folks probably know
about it, that Market Square was all set.
Mayor Chmiel: Not until we get the final answer.
B.C. "Jim" Burdick: Yes, I've been told this before.
Mayor Chmiel: Yes. I've heard those same things. I heard them 3 years ago
too.
B.C. "Jim" Burdick: That's right. Just like I did on 78th Street. Well,
' that's the whole story ladies and gentlemen. I'd just like to have you see that
that is put on the front burner...
Mayor Chmiel: Right. I think you see that's where it's at right now because
it's time that something get done with the road as well. And so everything I
think is going to be moving as indicated. Hopefully it doesn't take another 2
years or 3 years or whatever. I think it will move ahead from what my
understanding is.
B.C. "Jim" Burdick: Sure. Because I'm convinced that downtown development will
come in a number of areas when that's completed. And because the completion
of TH 5 is apparently going to be by next Fall is going to be a big help too.
That was part of it too. Streets being torn up on both sides, TH 7 and 78th.
Okay, thank you very much.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Jim.
' Don Ashworth: Mr. Mayor. This is an opportunity to maybe, how long will you be
in town Jim?
1 4
1
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991 1
B.C. "Jim" Burdick: Part of this week. 1
Don Ashworth: I would really like to have you meet with the new engineers. Have
an opportunity to introduce to you. Let them show you the design that we showed
to the HRA and City Council for that section of roadway. Why they're
recommending it They're going through some widening in the downtown area and
would you be available Wednesday or Friday?
B.C. "Jim" Burdick: No. I've got tomorrow, Tuesday or Friday. Well possibly 1
Wednesday. Wednesday morning. Well, 10:00 would be okay.
Don Ashworth: Charles if you could try to see what their schedule is and get 1
back.
Mayor Chmiel: Good point. With that I'd like to move item (k). Is there a
second?
Councilman Workman: Second. 1
Resolution $91- 100A -1: Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Workman seconded to
approve the Resolution Reallocating Funds for West 78th Street Public
Improvement Project. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
L. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT CONCERNING MOORING OF WATERCRAFT, FIRST READING.
Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor, there's several issues before Planning Commission 1
coming to Council having to do with recreational beachlots and the lake useage
ordinance. The one that was presented this evening under (1), Zoning Ordinance
Amendment concerning mooring of watercraft, first reading, as I read it didn't
meet the, I don't believe met the intent of the original amendment nor the
Planning Commission's wishes. Two definitions here, dock setback. The dock
setback portion of the ordinance states that a dock can't be within 10 feet of
the extended property center line. The problem we're getting is people were
putting their docks out on that 10 foot center line and then proceeding to moor
. boats, put on boat lifts and extend right over the property lines. So the
intent was to keep 20 pounds of potatoes within a 10 pound bag if necessary.
Nonetheless leave this sort of no man's land so this was rewritten today and
presented by Roger. All I've asked for is that it basically stay the same other
than no watercraft, dock, portion of dock, storage, mooring or boat lifts will
infringe on that 10 foot dock setback so as they leave their beach, their docks,
their lifts, they'll in fact still be going somewhat going on their corner of
the lake which has been one of the major problems and which prompted this 1
amendment in the first place. So I believe that the copy that was given to us
is the actual intent of what we were trying to accomplish originally with this
amendment. 1
Councilman Workman: Can you clarify precisely where those changes are on here?
Roger Knutson: Change in Section 2 of the Ordinance. (c). 1
Mayor Chmiel: Worded as?
1
5
1
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
Roger Knutson: It stops at the setback zone and the prior draft had continued,
in such a way that the watercraft or ►any part thereof extends across the
extended side lot lines of any lakeshore lot. That was dropped out. And the
reference to boat lift was added. Identical change was made in Section 3.
Councilman Mason: Why are we dropping that off?
Roger Knutson: The original draft would allow you to moor your boat in such a
way that it extended all the way to your side lot line. Your dock must be 10
feet from your side lot line but your boat went out parallel to the shore, it
could extend all the way to your property line. The change says you have to
keep that boat moored so it's at least 10 feet from your property line.
Mayor Chmiel: In other words so you're not encroaching on any adjacent
property's water area.
Roger Knutson: That's right.
Mayor Chmiel: Alright. Richard?
Councilman Wing: No, I'm very pleased with this. I think it almost resolves
some of the recreational beachlot problems by itself.
Mayor Chmiel: Would you like to make your motion to move this item?
1 Councilman Wing: Yeah, with just one quick look at Mr. Krauss.
' Paul Krauss: No, that's fine.
Councilman Wing: I would move then.
Mayor Chmiel: Item (1).
Councilman Wing: Item (1).
1 Councilman Workman: Second.
' Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve the First Reading
of Zoning Ordinance Amendment concerning Mooring of Watercraft. All voted in
favor and the motion carried unanimously.
1 0. DEFINE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES FOR TEMPORARY SALES /CHRISTMAS TREE SALES.
Councilwoman Dimler: Item (o) having to do with temporary sales /Christmas Tree
' sales. When I first read this I guess I was looking for a reason why this was
being enacted. So I thought the only, as I was reading through it, I thought
the only concern I would have would be safety concerns that I could possibly see
that we would want to do something like this. So I checked with Scott Harr to
find out if there had been any safety situations in the past on any temporary
sale-at all. He assured me that there had been none at all, and even if in the
future that would be a problem, that this can be taken care of current
regulations through the safety hazards.
1 6
1 •
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991 1
Mayor Chmiel: Right. That does... 1
Councilwoman Dimler: Seasonal sales, yeah. And also I'm wondering with trying
to take care of one situation we aren't creating more problems than we're
solving because as far as I can see, then we'd be regulating garage sales, Boy
Scout Christmas wreath sales, lemonade sales. Perhaps bizarre sales and even
our own t -shirt sales at our 4th of July celebration. I'm wondering if we
really want to do that. Also I'm very uncomfortable with giving government the 1
authority to interfere with free market. I happen to believe that competition
is good. Also, I don't see any fee schedule and I think enforcement would be a
headache. So I am not in favor of this at all. I would move to deny item (o).
Mayor Chmiel: Paul, would you like to clarify?
Paul Krauss: A couple things if I could. Councilwoman Dimler, there is no 1
ordinance in front of you tonight. This could probably.
Councilwoman Dimler: I don't even want to proceed with this is what I'm saying. 1
Paul Krauss: Well this could probably have gone to the administrative section.
We have had problems with Christmas tree sales in the past and I think Scott can
tell you where we had one in a residential neighborhood last year where we had a
lot of complaints. I'm not sure of your conversation with Scott on this but
this in part grew out of a memo I got from Scott telling us that we didn't have
adequate controls over some of these things. What it is is basically, you know
when you talk about free market, there's a lot of issues you can get into but
I know that I've had a lot of complaints, not here but in other communities when
you have somebody selling shrimp off the back of a truck who is not paying any
property taxes and who is not a member of a business person's associations or
anything else competing with somebody who's paying a fortune to be in the
Festival Food. So there's a lot of different things that come into play and
I. have had instances where these have caused traffic problems. They set up shop
in a gas station on a major corner and people turning in. What this basically
was was an outline that says right now we'd like to continue to do business as
usual, especially with Christmas tree lots unless they show up in a residential
neighborhood which we won't allow.
Councilwoman Dimler: And that's according to zoning, not because you need an
ordinance?
Paul Krauss: Well but see in the past Christmas tree lots have always been kind
of a hands off thing. People would call up City Hall and say what do you do
about Christmas tree lots and there's nothing in the ordinance about it any
place and people were told that and the guy took that to mean that he could set
one up on his front lawn off of TH 7 and he did so. 1
Councilwoman Dimler: Not in a residential. That would be a zoning violation.
Mayor Chmiel: Well, some of those things are in residential areas. I've seen 1
in Minnetonka just off of TH 101.
Councilwoman Dimler: But are you then getting into home sales, which I'm 1
involved in?
7 1
1
' City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
Paul Krauss: No. No, not at all. No, this gets more into.
Councilwoman Dimler: Selling out of your home. Cosmetics.
Paul Krauss: If Mr. Burdick is correct, and I hope he is. I heard the same
information but once we get a shopping center up and if they want to bring in a
carnival into town, are you going to want to regulate that? Well you might.
Again it's like the seafood shop setting up in a gas station or it's the velvet
paintings out on a fence on TH 5. Those kinds of things typically cause some
problems and there's very little mechanism we have to deal with it. When the
11 Twins got into the playoffs I had several calls from National companies that
wanted to come down, they go around the country whenever there's a big sporting
event and they set up those stands. They wanted to do that here and I convinced
them not to.
' Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. I guess I'm going to say that that would be going
against the Constitutional rights because the Minnesota Constitution, Article
' XIII, Section 7 says that any person may sell or peddle the products, and I'm
talking here about farm and garden, not t- shirts, that are grown or cultivated
by him without obtaining a license to do so.
' Paul Krauss: Well there's no question that, the farm sales.
Councilwoman Dimler: I'm just saying this would be a hazard to that.
II Mayor Chmiel: That's completely acceptable and it's not intended to be governed
by this respective temporary.
' Councilwoman Dimler: That's not what I saw in here. I thought I saw something
about Kerber's being grandfathered in. Where did I read that? It must have
been in the.
Paul Krauss: Well it says that these are either grandfathered in or allowed
since they're located on land used for agricultural purposes.
II Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. The intent is not to govern that aspect of it.
' Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, but even if it isn't grown there. The shrimp truck
can still come in, wouldn't it?
Paul Krauss: No it can't.
I Councilwoman Dimler: Why not?
•
I Paul Krauss: That's not grown in Minnesota. I mean it doesn't fall under the
State protection.
Mayor Chmiel: We don't quite have the ocean front.
Councilwoman Dimler: I know but how do you prove. I know there's obvious but
how do you prove the produce was grown in Minnesota?
8
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
Paul Krauss: I don't try. I mean if someone tells me the potatoes came from
here or from Idaho, you don't really try to do it. If it's pineapples, it's
pretty clear. Even at that you use some discretion. I mean if a fruit stand is
set up, I know I've dealt with them in different communities before, you just
don't bother with them. But the ones that do cause the most difficulty are the
ones who come in, I mean I've even seen stereos being sold by the side of the
road. You know these operations tend to cause some problems because they're not
here to warrant their stuff. They're not paying property taxes. They have
signage all over. It's those kinds of things you want to get at, not the other
kinds.
Mayor Chmiel: Something where it's in direct competition to what's existing ,
within a community.
Councilwoman Dimler: The produce sales are in competition with the new grocery
store.
Mayor Chmiel: But if they're grown here, that's a different thing. Most other
things are brought in as Paul has indicated. The same thing with. stereos as he
said. There's a place within the community that will sell those items. Why
should that individual have the right to sell within this community when we have
someone here supporting it. Besides those things might be so hot you couldn't
put them in your car.
Councilwoman Dimler: Well that's controlling the market to me and I don't think
we should be doing that.
Councilman Wing: Last Christmas out at Minnewashta Heights one of the neighbors
decided to open up a Christmas Tree lot with signs, lights and it startled the
neighborhood. I guess I wasn't personally offended by it but I think you got a
lot of complaints on that one. I don't believe we had any control or any say at
that point did we? Isn't this directed at that problem? ,
Councilwoman Dimler: How about a public nuisance? Don't we have a public
nuisance?
Paul Krauss: Well that's a very weak ordinance.
Mayor Chmiel: This is a problem not only here but all over. I've heard the
same thing just the other evening that I was at a Planning Commission meeting in
Sherburne County. They have the same problem.
Councilman Workman: I'll get on the side with Ursula because I think she needs '
. a little help here, if I can.
Councilwoman Dimler: Certainly. '
Councilman Workman: It seems like it's too late for the Christmas tree sales.
Almost. '
Paul Krauss: Well we never intended, basically what we did is lay out how we
would deal with Christmas tree sales this year. It hasn't been a problem but
we've been operating like this all along. We just kind of wanted your blessings
9
1
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
to do it that way. Then outline some of the things that we thought we might
like to get at in ordinance later on If you don't want us to pursue it we
won't.
' Councilman Workman: No, that's not what I'm getting at because I think there's
some middle ground here. The one that comes to mind for me, and maybe the
firewood was grown in Chanhassen but the firewood guys just come out of the wood
work. In fact I was sitting in a driveway at my old home and a neighbor, they
look at the stacks to see if you've got the fireplace or not. Well the
neighbors got a false stack. They had the zero clearance look on it but they
didn't have a fireplace and I kind of said to them, we were sitting out with
some friends and I said number one, they're not home. Number two, they don't
have a fireplace. The guy turned around and said well they're probably a bunch
of jerks. I wasn't going to get in an argument with the guy. I knew the people
was good people but I get a lot of hostilities from some of those people. They
come all the way down from Brainerd and wherever and whatever and they've got a
load of wood and they've got to get rid of it and they're quite aggressive
which, and I won't bring up Mike Mason's velvet Elvis prints. I think something
needs to be done. If the produce stands that are found in town in the Fall I
appreciate and so what I mean by getting along with Ursula, I understand the
' free market thing and so I don't want to do something that we don't want to do.
And are we doing that with this. It does start to get a little, we need control
but maybe we ought to sit down and figure that out. Pick out who we don't like
and I don't know how to do that because there are State laws to go by and we've
got to figure out. Last year we restricted the sale of used cars at the corner
of TH 101 over there which a guy said hey, wait a minute. People have got to
sell their cars you know. It seemed like a good place to sell cars but it was
causing a safety problem so I realize that but I don't like to keep people from
being able to sell what they have because it's important for them to do that.
Frank Kurvers: I was just listening to this.
Mayor Chmiel: Why don't you come up and introduce yourself.
' Frank Kurvers: I was listening to this, I mean controlling all these businesses
and everything. What about the Schwann man? I mean you talk about things that
people sell in the store. They carry about everything on that truck and a lot
l of people like their products which I'm one of them. Now are you going to
regulate the Schwann man? He just gave $7 million dollars to the Mankato
College of some of this profits. I think that's a good business.
' Mayor Chmiel: But he didn't give anything to Chanhassen.
Frank Kurvers: No he didn't.
' Councilman Wing: That's not a good analogy because Schwann is ordered on a
private basis. It's like saying UPS can't come in and deliver a package. I
' don't see that. I think there's a need for control. I think the City has
always had a live and let live attitude. I don't see that this is cutting it
out. It's cutting out the problem areas but I still see, I like your corn
stand. I'd protect that because I think we should have that. The raspberry
' stands. I don't see it hurting those or cutting those out. It is getting rid
of some of the nuisance stuff. It does give Paul and Scott the authority to
10
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991 1
take action if they get complaints and it is in fact not in compliance with
this. I think this just kind of cleans this up like the noise ordinance. We
don't want to go out and pick on the community but if the complaint comes in,
there's something here that our Code Enforcement people can deal with. And so I
see this as really pretty luke warm. I don't see it as really attacking anybody
as I read it.
Councilwoman Dimler: Paul, are we talking about then regulating like the
Christmas Boutique at St. Hubert's? The Fall Festival Sales at St. Hubert's?
Our own sales of t- shirts at the 4th of July?
Paul Krauss: Well in fact that's an area where you've got to be careful that '
you're not doing charitable stuff. In fact you want a mechanism to be able to
do stuff like that. The ordinance right now doesn't allow, theoretically allow
any of this and if the Boy Scouts come and are making lawn furniture or
something.
Councilwoman Dimler: Selling wreaths. '
Paul Krauss: Well no wreaths is a door to door stuff. I mean my son does that.
Councilwoman Dimler: So you're allowing door to door stuff? '
Paul Krauss: Oh yeah. That's no problem. But you've got to be careful that,
you know there's some classic events like the charitable sales and you want to
make sure that they're called out separately. This is really gets to the stuff
that you see when you travel up and down TH 7 or TH 5 in places where the more
intensive things that pull into lots and take over part of the lot and put up
their signs. Or the carnivals that show up with a lot of rides and people park
in the streets. It's those kinds of things.
Councilwoman Dimler: It still seems to me like we can already regulate that '
according to existing, I mean safety concerns. They.must have some way to
control traffic problems. If it's a nuisance, under the nuisance ordinance.
Paul Krauss: We really don't. I wish Scott was here to relate some of the 1
problems that his staff has had in getting at some of those.
Councilwoman Dimler: Well I did ask him about it and he said there haven't been
any concerns with specific temporary sales.
Paul Krauss: Again, Scott and I conferred with this and this grew out of a memo
that I received from him.
Councilwoman Dimler: Yes, but couldn't you shut this operation down in a
residential area just because of the zoning of residential and the neighbors
were complaining of the lights and the noise and the traffic?
Paul Krauss: Well again, we're dealing with a classy use that wasn't regulated '
at all in the past. When they called up and got a secretary or somebody to say
yes, we don't regulate Christmas trees, they understandably went ahead and put
it in the residential area. You're right, it's technically probably a violation
of the zoning code. But at this point the guy had a 1,000 trees on his lawn and
11 1
1
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
' when we went out there, or he had 300 trees as I recall, and when I went out
there and told him you're in violation and all this, which probably would have
taken us, if we really tried to push it, it probably would have taken us a month
or two to get something written up and on the docket and everything to take
' action. By that time it's the middle of February. But he had already made that
investment and we felt we had to honor his ability to stay there and we just
asked him to keep the traffic down and watch out for his neighbors.
II Mayor Chmiel: I think it's a little late for the Christmas trees as you
indicated but maybe what we should do is just table this and have some
additional discussions between you and Scott. Maybe Ursula can have some of her
II input as to her concerns and the go from there. Maybe if you'd like to make a
motion to table this at this particular time.
1 Councilwoman Dimler: Then I'd have to remove my motion to deny.
Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
Councilman Workman: I think it was dead.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, you didn't get a second. There wasn't any second.
1 Councilwoman Dimler: I thought you seconded it with your comments?
1 Councilman Workman: Did I second it?
Mayor Chmiel: No. No, there wasn't a second here.
1 Councilman Workman: I said I was going to help her out.
Councilwoman Dimler: Then I'll make a substitute motion of tabling this item
until we can look at it further.
•
'Mayor Chmiel: Okay is there a second?
1 Councilman Workman: Second.
Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to table defining
I
Administrative Procedures for temporary sales /Christmas tree sales for further
clarification. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
1 P. APPROVE MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY ANNEXATION.
Councilman Wing: I just didn't fully understand this and I failed to ask today
I or I wouldn't have brought this up. This annexation is done. Both cities have
in theory passed these resolutions and that means that it's going to be Victoria
on both sides and Chanhassen's going to have a road going right through Victoria
and it's as simple as that.
1 Mayor.Chmiel: That's correct.
II Councilman Wing: Is that desireable or is it irrelevant?
1
1 12
1
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
Mayor Chmiel: Well the only way they can have that project completely done is
to have them involved with that conclusion as you see between the agreeance of
both cities and with the adopted resolutions.
Councilman Wing: So in the future Chan will be plowing and maintaining that
road but the homes on both sides will be on Victoria?
Mayor Chmiel: That's correct but there's other things that I think would be
discussionary at a later time with this and also with the City.
Councilman Wing: So you're comfortable that that's a reasonable way to go with
this at this time? 1
Mayor Chmiel: Yes. At this particular time I am.
Councilman Wing: With that I'd move approval of item (p). f
Councilwoman Dimler: Second.
Resolution *91-113: Councilman Wing moved, Councilwoman Dialer seconded to
approve the Minnewashta Parkway Annexation. All voted in favor and the motion
carried unanimously. '
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS:
Mayor Chmiel: Mr. Klingelhutz, please introduce yourself for those who don't '
know you, and I don't know if there isn't anyone here who does know you.
Al Klingelhutz: I'm Al Klingelhutz, Chanhassen, Minnesota. 8600 Great Plains ,
Blvd.. Honorable Mayor and Cbuncil people. The reason I came up here tonight
was the last few meetings I've been getting questions from the rest of the
County Commissioners as to what Chanhassen is doing on redistricting. We're
pretty well set in all the rest of the County and what's happening is Chanhassen
itself is more than one commissioner district in the 1990 census. Carver County
is approximately. 48,000 people. My commissioner district, today with Victoria
I've got about 14,500 in my district. What's going to happen is Chanhassen will
be divided into two commissioner districts to a degree. We've been debating how
this would be done. We'd like to keep Chanhassen on the low end because we know
where most of the growth is going to come in the next 10 years so that the
disparity isn't as big as it was the last 10 years. But it will be real tough
to do because we do have to stay within 10% of the population of Carver County.
I've heard some talk that there might be 6 precincts in Chanhassen. I've heard
talk there might be 5 where you have 4 now. 4 wouldn't work at all. 6, we
'couldn't take 2 and 1 wouldn't be enough to stay within the 10%. 5 would bring
the population in this first commissioner district to approximately 9,600 people
which when you divide 5 into 48,000 exactly is the number. So we wouldn't be
staying under the 10%. But the County is trying to come up with their own
redistricting until such time as Chanhassen finalizes their's so we can't do
that and that's why I came up tonight to see if something, a solution couldn't
be done with that because all 5 commissioner districts are going to have to have
an election next Fall and some of them would like to know how it's going to be
divided and if they're in the same district they are now or what's going to
happen. Thank you.
13 '
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
1
Mayor Chmiel: Thanks Al. I know that there was some lines that were being
proposed by the County and I of course didn't agree with some of the thoughts
that were done at that particular time in taking swipes right down the center.
I don't think that that would be adviseable as far as the city is concerned.
Maybe with that I'll let Don address some of those respective issues as
1 redistricting does apply within the area,
Don Ashworth: Well I think Al is aware that we were waiting for a long period
of time for literally the maps to come up from the County. Those were received,
and I think we've had them for at least 4 weeks, maybe a little longer. But
some of the issues are beyond our control. I just got a call from Ann Higgins
today with the League and this deals with our legislative districts. I don't
know if you're aware of it but one of the proposals has us as one district.
Another has now split off the Hennepin County section which is really the way it
should be because that means that Hennepin County's going to end up with a
' separate ballot. But in talking with Jean it's her hopes that we're going to be
able to get that completed as soon as possible. We didn't put a time frame
associated with it and maybe Al, if it'd be possible for you to stop in sometime
1 yet this week, maybe you and I and Jean could visit as to where she's at. I
don't know if the Mayor would like to sit on that.
Mayor Chmiel: I think I would.
' Don Ashworth: If there is a way we could push that ahead, I'm for it.
1 Mayor Chmiel: I'd like for us to probably put some type of a time frame on it.
What is the requirements as far as the County is concerned Al?
1 Al Klingelhutz: Well they didn't give me a definite time frame. Chaska has
completed their's. Waconia has completed their's. We're waiting for Chanhassen
to do the Carver County district. This was brought up at the last two meetings
...so I thought we'd better get on the ball and get going.
i Mayor Chmiel: Let us put it this way. That within the next two weeks plus we
should be able to have that pulled together. At least it will give you
something to give back to the Board. Does that sound reasonable?
Don Ashworth: I hope so. I know that at the State level that they're going
through a lot of debates as to was what the legislature did this past year valid
or not valid. Part of that's back in State Court, part of it's in Federal Court
and I haven't quite sorted it out how that affects us.
1 Mayor Chmiel: Right. There is some of those concerns.
Al Klingelhutz: I don't think the redistricting is dividing any municipalities.
1 I know we're dividing counties because Carver County the way it's presently
districted has got...which is really going to make it tough as far as ballots.
But one thing they don't want to do in redistricting is have to split a precinct
1 so that if you're voting for a county commissioner and half the people in that
precinct have to vote for one county commissioner and the other half for
another.
1
1 14
1
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
Mayor Chmiel: No, that doesn't seem logical to do and I agree with that. I
agree with that. Okay, so with that we will try to pull this thing together and
it'd be good to sit down and come up with some kind of conclusions on it. And
I'd be glad to sit in on that.
Don Ashworth: I would also like to, the idea of the two week timeframe I think 11
is good but maybe if it would be possible for you to come in, you and I sit down
with Jean and try to figure out what exactly the problem is because she's got
the map on her wall and the numbers are there. I think it's just a matter of
trying to sift through them.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. 1
Al Klingelhutz: One other thing. We do have a public hearing on the Carver
County taxes. 1
Mayor Chmiel: The 10th.
Al Klingelhutz: Which is tomorrow night. Anybody is free to come. We hope to
answer a lot of questions. Ue hope that you didn't take too much to heart what
you saw in that tax thing that came out because it's going to be quite a lot
different than what it showed on that.
Mayor Chmiel: We've been preaching that here Al. From the Council standpoint
that if anybody wants to really be heard, that's the place to talk is at the
County. As you well know, this won't be aired on TV until a couple weeks from
Thursday and it will be past the date so any word of mouth is good to get out
amongst the citizenry within the city. And it's been advertised in the paper
and as I mentioned the last time, too often times we sit back and don't take
that time to go to it. And we should. So end of sermon.
Councilwoman Dimler: Is it 7:00? '
Al Klingelhutz: Two years.ago we had our public hearing and I think we had two
people there. Last year we had about 10. Now if there's 48,000 people in
Carver County, it doesn't hardly pay for us to get together.
Councilwoman Dimler: At 7:00 tomorrow?
Mayor Chmiel: 7:00 at the Courthouse. And I hope that place is packed. Okay,
thank you. Anyone else? If seeing none we'll move right along.
REQUEST FOR AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT, KURVERS POINT 2ND ADDITION,
MELVIN KURVERS.
Mayor Chmiel: Don, are you addressing this or Charles? '
Don Ashworth: Charles.
Charles Folch: I can address that Mr. Mayor. Otherwise if you'd like we could
certainly have the visitors give their presentation first and I can just
summarize staff's viewpoints on it following their presentation if you'd like.
15 ,
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Gentlemen, either or.
Mel Kurvers: I'm Mel Kurvers and I think you have my request. I sent a letter
in and the reason that I'm asking for this is again due to the storm and we
didn't get the street in. We've got everything else in and we've got people who
are interested in building some homes. I know there's one that the request I
' believe is in to the City. It's a large home and it's going to take some time
to build and if we can't get an approval to start this home and we have to wait
until the good Lord takes away the snow that he dropped on us.
Mayor Chmiel: I'm glad you didn't say until the Sun Shines Nellie. That's an
old song.
Mel Kurvers: It could be a real long time and again I think that these homes
that we're proposing down there, they're going to take 5 to 6 months to build.
If we can't get something started and it's going to be quite a hardship on the
' people who want to build and also for us. We've tried to do everything we
could. We've got the rock down. We've got fabric down. We've done just about
everything we could but someone else was against us.
Mayor Chmiel: I think what you're talking about is roughly Lots 1, 2 and 6. Is
that correct?
Mel Kurvers: 6 is one of them. 2 is one of them and 1 is right near the
entrance and that's not one right now. There's 2 and 6 are the two. 2, 4 and
6.
Mayor Chmiel: 2, 4 and 6? Okay.
' Mel Kurvers: 4 he talked to me about probably starting sometime in January or
February because, and again that's going to be a big house and they're hoping to
get in August or September and hopefully we'll have the snow gone. But
everything is in there except they were supposed to, like I stated, they were
supposed to start the curb on the day of the storm hit and we'd sure like to get
some kind of a waiver or something so we could start some of these. Do you have
any other questions on any of the engineering side? Scott Harri is here so, but
' other than that if you have any questions.
Mayor Chmiel: Does anyone have any questions? Okay. Charles.
Charles Folch: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. As I'm sure you're familiar,
many of the ordinances and regulation requirements that the City imposes have
come about due to past experiences, past problems that we have to deal with. I
' guess staff has a couple concerns with the original, with the letter that was
sent. In general terms it appeared that the developer was requesting a complete
waiver of the building permit requirement as stated in Section 19, Paragraph F
' so there's a number of concerns with that. First of all starting off with
unpaved streets such as this one require a significant amount of maintenance.
Frequent maintenance during the wintertime, particularly in the winter and
' spring. Access, as I'm sure you're all aware is very, very important
particularly from an emergency standpoint. Should there be a fire call out
there or some other type of situation with construction. Also public water
service must be available for fire protection. At this point in time the city
1
16
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
still has not accepted utilities. There's also problems that can result from
contamination and damage to the unprotected Class V, particularly again during 1
the spring thaw. We've also had a comment if you will, or information received
from the projects soil engineer stating their concerns that spring thaw truck
traffic, construction traffic may have some adverse impact on the fabric liner
which is installed underneath the Class V. And if damage would occur, it's
nothing that, it isn't damage that would be easily and readily visible. It's
something that we wouldn't see sediment problems for probably a few years down
the road. One of the main concerns again is also related to the work that's
remaining to be done on the project. As Mel has stated, the Class V is down.
Curb and gutter and bituminous pavement is not. Also there is a substantial
amount of grading work yet to be done on the site. This grading work that's
done would certainly limit many of the lots unbuildable at this point in time on
the project. I guess lastly but still importantly, the City from our standpoint
would take a consistent viewpoint with all these projects. Maintain similar
requirements on other projects within the city this year such as Trappers Pass,
Lake Susan Hills, Minnewashta Highlands. It was very important that we put all
these concerns together in order to formulate a solution to this situation.
Given all this information, taking all of this into consideration, staff at this
point in time, based on past policy or practice if you will, the City has
allowed lots adjacent to a paved hard surface to be develop on such as Lots 1
and 2 would qualify and where we've also allowed a lot which would qualify as a
model home if you will to also be built on. My recommendation initially would
be to, if the Council so desired to allow the requirement to be waived for Lots
1, 6 and 14. Or I should say Lots 1, 2 and 14. Excuse me, it should be Lots 1,
2 and Lot 6 I should say. However, if Lot 1 is to be, is not in a crucial
situation at this point in time we could certainly allow 2, 4 and 6 as Mel has
requested but at this poont in time we wouldn't want to allow any other building
permits. And I will condition that on any damage, contamination to the Class V
which is evident next spring would be totally responsible of the developer. In
addition the City shall have the ability to impose a vehicle weight restriction
in the spring during the City imposed spring thaw period. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Being that we haven't even got into winter, we're
still in fall, and would you be thinking of completing that project prior to
spring? My concerns were just with Charles is saying the trucks, the heavy
trucks that would be in there. I would think if you'd probably start with those
respectability, when do you comtemplate them starting with let's say Lots 2, 4
and 6? 1
Mel Kurvers: 6, there's a request in here now. And that's the one I'm really
concerned with. We'd like to get that one going. It's a nice home. Lot 4,
they're talking about they'd like to start the basement sometime in the end of
- January - February. And 2 I can't give you anything. We're still working on that
and I don't know if that would even come in before the blacktop is down. I'd
like to see that because I'd like to move some dirt across the existing road
rather than across the blacktop and we're trying to. We don't want to break
anything up. I guess what I'd like to do is I'd like to work with the
contractors. The contractors that's doing the street said they'd be willing to
open up, keep the road open so they've got to grade it with blacktop. As far as
keeping...fire department and any other emergency vehicles that may have to get
in but that's, I can't see anything more. I don't know, 6 is my big one. That
request is in here for that.
17 1
1
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, and I guess what Charles is saying is that he would be
' amendable to that 2, 4 and 6 providing that the Class V doesn't become overly
disturbed with those trucks going in And causing any undue problems for the City
to accept. I think the two of you are going to be sitting around there most of
that time so you're able to watch what's there.
II Mel Kurvers: I don't know if I'm
going to be sitting.
11 Mayor Chmiel: Well, hopefully you'll be moving around. If it's too cold you'll
be sitting inside watching.
' Mel Kurvers: The other lots they mentioned were right near the blacktop so if
someone was to request that, to build in there, they could certainly get an
access off the blacktop. But the biggest concern is 4, 6 and possibly 2 that I
know of right now. The only other one they talked about was 13 and I don't know
II about that one.
Mayor Chmiel: 13 if I remember is quite a distance from those as it goes up.
Mel Kurvers: It's at the end, it's up the first cul -de -sac.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, and that would cause more of a problem. I don't have any
II real concerns with 2, 4 and 6 as far as I'm concerned.
Mel Kurvers: ...the ways of getting power in there but again I would certainly
I want to work with the people as far as when the trucks come in. We certainly
have an understanding that the road is soft...
I Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussion Council? Does anyone have any.
Frank Kurvers: That number 6, I want to enlighten you a little bit on number y 1 num er 6.
The power and everything is accessible to that lot. The old overhead lines are
j still in there so it can be served with every utility that a normal lot would
have to have... The power line's right behind the lot... The next lot over to
the right can also have a power line because we don't have any utilities at this
II time.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Ursula?
1 Councilwoman Dimler: I guess I'm a little bit confused because I've heard
different numbers of lots. I see 1, 6 and 14 and then I heard you say 1, 2 and
6 and now we're talking about 4, 6 and 2.
II Charles Folch: 14 is a typo. It should be 4.
' Councilwoman Dimler: Oh, okay. Which one is it then?
Charles Folch: On your staff report it should be 1, 2 and 6.
II Councilwoman Dimler: 1, 2 and 6. Okay.
Mayor Chmiel: ...2, 4 and 6.
' 18
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991 1
Councilwoman Dimler: 2, 4 and 6? ,
Mayor Chmiel: Right.
Councilwoman Dimler: It's 1 they don't want? i
Mayor Chmiel: Right. Okay if there's no other discussions.
Councilman Wing: Is this a Visitor Presentation?
Mayor Chmiel: No, this would take action. '
Councilwoman Dimler: It is under Visitors.
Mayor Chmiel: No. So it would take action. Would someone make a motion with ,
the concerns that Charles had had and covering Lots 2, 4 and 6?
Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor I guess I hear Charles' suggestions that we're not
breaking from a standard we wish to maintain by passing this.
Charles Folch: We're being relatively consistent with how we've operated with
the other developers. That's important.
Councilman Wing: I guess based on my knowledge of the Kurvers, their reputation
in that neighborhood and their past record in dealing with us on their
developments, I would so move amendment for the development contract, Kurvers
Point 2nd Addition.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second?
Councilman Mason: Second. '
. Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the amendment to the
Development Contract for Kurvers Point 2nd Addition for Lots 2, 4 and 6. All
voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. '
AWARD OF BIDS: SENIOR CITIZEN CENTER REMODELING PROJECT.
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, very briefly. I think most of you are aware that we're 1
on track to proceed with the construction of the senior center and the
unfinished space behind the Council's chambers. After receiving guidance from
the HRA, I believe the Council too, we did send out bids for architectural
services. We did recommend to the HRA that they go with EOS Architects. They
were one of the lower bidders. We also have a good track record with them. They
did other work at City Hall. The HRA supported that proposal. We're also '
asking the Council to reaffirm that as well. We're prepared and the architect's
prepared to enter into a contract within the week so we can get them going on
this and get under construction sometime probably in February or early March. '
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Does anyone have any questions at this 'time? Senior
Center is something that we're proposing in putting right in this existing
building. We have an area that is empty right now. It's to the bare studs,
which is located on the front of the building and it's basically used as
19 '
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
storage. The intent behind this is to use this for a Senior Center. A place
' for our own people to come to rather than going to other communities as they've
been doing in the past. We have a substantial number of senior citizens and I'm
included with them, in the community and we do need something for our people
right here and so that is what this is all basically about. Any discussions
from Council?
•
Councilman Workman: I guess I don't have any comments. I did as an HRA member
look at this and so I'm not just being quiet because I like to.
Mayor Chmiel: Yes we did. Eventually you're going to get to my age too right
Don?
Councilman Workman: But I was all for it.
' Councilwoman Dimler: Did HRA recommend EOS as well?
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. Basically yes. They're very familiar with what we do and
the building in itself so.
Councilman Wing: If we look at the growth of the city, is opening this up as a
' senior center in City Hall going to necessitate an addition to City Hall in the
next 5 to 10 years because, are we talking space that in the long term plan was
hopefully going to be used by the City for storage or staffing? Whatever the
case was. Are we confusing issues here? Should the senior center be kept
isolated from City Hall because of future space needs in City Hall?
Mayor Chmiel: Well, it's not saying that we may keep the senior center here at
all given times. It's true that expansion can be done eventually. I think
' we're looking at long term of having the existing library within City Hall in
another location within the City.
' Councilman Wing: Which would open up that space?
Mayor Chmiel: Right.
' Councilman Wing: So long term this is?
' Mayor Chmiel: So long term I'd say this is something we can use here now. It's
a vacant space. It's a space that can be put to use immediately. I'm not
saying that we wouldn't have something at a much later time frame down the line.
So can I have a motion to get contractual agreement for architectural services
for Chanhassen Senior Center.
Councilman Workman: So moved.
Councilman Mason: Second.
' Mayor Chmiel: As EOS as the architect.
Resolution 191 -114: Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Mason seconded. that
EOS Architects be given the contract for a not to exceed figure of $10,152.00
for the Chanhassen Senior Center. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
20
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991 1
KENNEL PERMIT APPLICATION, ROBERT NASH, 855 LONE EAGLE DRIVE.
it
Mayor Chmiel: Who is addressing this, Don?
Don Ashworth: I believe, Paul are you handling this? Oh I'm sorry, you're on ,
the kennel permit? The City has received an application for a kennel permit
Robert Nash, 855 Lone Eagle Drive. Procedure for a kennel's license, or really
any of our permit section list which includes stable is to advertise in the
newspaper informing the public that the City has received the application and
that we are considering issuing the license. In the meantime we do send our
public safety people to inspect the property and insure that it is the condition
for the number of animals that are proposed to be boarded at that location.
Along with any other concerns that the CSO may have. In this instance the CSO
found the property to be acceptable. The manner in which the animals are being
cared for is good. In the process we did receive a number of letters from
property owners in the area who did not wish to see this kennel license issued
because of what was referred to in almost every letter as barking dogs. The
parties writing in also requested to be anonymous. We believe that to be the
case but I think out of 1 or 2 of the letters may not ask for that and then our
problem was, we couldn't remember afterwards which 2 did and which 2 didn't. In
any case, typically a barking animal is not a valid reason for the denial of a
kennel permit. If it turns out to be a continuous problem, potentially with
next year's application it might be. In the meantime we did have a CSO go to
that location and was able to, or he heard the animals barking on more than one
occasion and issued a citation. Mr. Nash did plead guilty to that and at this
point in time the staff is under the belief that the barking dog complaints have
either been minimized or eliminated. If that is not the case, we would continue
to carry out citation process during the course of 1992 and would re- introduce
this issue to you literally a year from today. Accordingly staff is
recommending approval. I should note that the parties who did write in each
received a copy of the staff report that you have in front of you as well as Mr.
Nash.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is Mr. Nash here this evening? Would you like to add
anything to what Mr. Ashworth has said?
Robert Nash: Just briefly. In his letter he referred to, to the best of my
knowledge the neighbors concerns have been satisfied. To be honest I didn't
realize there was a situation. My first knowledge that anybody was unhappy was
with the issuance of the citation. After follow -up to that, I spoke with
several of the neighbors and it seems as though we've resolved that. They're
basically house dogs. Spend most their time inside and I think we've taken care
of it.
Mayor Chmiel: That was going to be one of my questions. How often are they
inside? I have two small ponies of my own and they stay inside all the time.
Al Klingelhutz: They are ponies too.
Mayor Chmiel: You've seen them Al. Okay, is there anyone else at this time who
would like to address this?
21 1
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
Councilman Mason: Just living in that area and some of these people that wish
anonymity have been talking with me about it and I wonder if there hasn't been a
misconception that if you get a kennel license and you're going to get 10 more
dogs in there.
Robert Nash: No. If it goes any direction... -
' Councilman Mason: Well yeah, and as I see in the permit process, if you wanted
to get another dog you'd have to reapply for a permit anyway. There•was some
concern expressed but I would agree with Mr. Nash. I think that the barking
dogs in that neighborhood, it's kind of hard to say that it's just his 3
collies. There's other dogs in that neighborhood that let loose on occasion so.
Shelly Manion: I'd like to say something.
II Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Would you like to come up here please. Just state your
name and your address.
' Shelly Manion: My name is Shelly Manion. I live at 825 Lone Eagle. I live
next door to Mr. Nash. We at one time had two dogs. This is a dead end street.
It's 4 houses on that dead end street. There were 6 dogs. Yes, the dogs are
I going to bark when people go down the dead end street. And we take care of his
dogs at many times. Those dogs do not bark any more than any other dog in the
neighborhood if people aren't around. They're very well behaved dogs. All the
I dogs in the neighborhood are. And to find out that there's complaints, it
bothers me because we have 2 dogs and are we going to all of a sudden get a
citation. Somebody walking up to our door saying here's a citation because you
have barking dogs. Our dogs are kept in the house also and it's just kind of
I something that needs to be watched but yet needs to be noticed that these dogs
are watched and cared for. If somebody has a complaint, I feel that the person
who's making the complaint or if there are complaints should be notified before
a citation is issued. I mean I thought that was kind of over stepping the
bounds. He should have at least been notified before the citation.
' Mayor Chmiel: Good. Thank you.
Don Ashworth: If I may follow up on that. I don't have the notes in front of
me but just so it doesn't sound as though we're mongers and going out and
I immediately issuing citations. After we receive the first complaint, which was
not one of the four that had written in, we did have the CSO go out on three
separate occasions and on the first two had attempted to go and get a hold of
I the owner. There wasn't anyone home at the property. It was really only after
the third visit that the citation was issued. I could have included copies of
those but it had all of the names of people involved and I would have ended up
with more x'd out areas than would have information for you. So I think in most
II instances Bob or one of the other CSO's attempts to get to the property owner
before we just go out and issue a citation.
I Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, I would expect that that really is what takes place. One
of those situations that probably occurred at this particular time but it's not
the intent of this city to do those kinds of things. Only because as I
said, I've got two dogs of my own too and I know how well they bark, but they're
' 22
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991 1
also confined in a house. Any time they see anybody walking by the street or
anywhere close to the house, they're barking at them so I understand that.
Councilman Wing: Were these dogs tied in the yard or fenced in the yard? What
was the conditions? They're obviously outdoors during these complaint periods?
Under what circumstances do you know Don?
Councilman Mason: They're fenced in. ,
Councilman Wing: Fenced in?
Don Ashworth: The letter simply refers to them being let out. That was '
supposedly during those time frames and especially, it's kind of ironic, in
defense of Mr. Nash. I have neighbors and I honestly don't think that they know
that when they leave the animal out in the yard and they go away for the
weekend, that that dog sits and barks all weekend you know. It becomes
difficult within a neighborhood to take...a neighbor. I lost one neighbor many
years ago and I kind of learned that I think dogs are more precious than kids at
times.
Councilman Wing: That brings up the reason that we have tolerated the expense
of the CSO program is because it would be nice if neighbors could deal with
neighbors but the hostility of the dog owner and the anomosity of the non -dog
owner gets to severe that the City's been forced to intervene. At great cost
intervene in these situations. I don't know where we're at on this but I'll
just continue that thought. Looking at our animal control history, at one point
the Council wanted to get rid of it because it was so costly. There was
actually an attempt to drop animal control but the community promptly let the
Council know that animals are an issue and they did not want that program
dropped. One thing I think I've learned over the years on public safety was
outside dogs in Chanhassen are kind of out. They're just not in vogue anymore.
People won't tolerate the messes, the garbage cans upsets and the barking of
outside dogs. I think that's becoming intolerate and I think that outside dogs
are increasingly becoming non - existent and in this particular neighborhood, as
I looked today,'I saw it as a rather close, busy neighborhood that really can't ,
tolerate a lot. We just got down with the noise ordinance and people are very
sensitive to these noise issues and barking dogs. When I saw kennel permit here
I panicked. I saw just more dogs outside here creating a bigger hazard but the
big question I had Mr. Mayor, I guess if they're house dogs and we're just
trying to control them.
Mayor Chmiel: They basically are.
Councilman Wing: But I think it's important to note that outside dogs and
barking have never been in vogue and are becoming increasingly less in vogue in
the City and it's costing us a lot of money to enforce it and the citizens want
it enforced. So I think it behooves you to be very cautious. That that is an
issue and people are very intolerate of a barking dog or a dog at large by
today's standards.
Mayor Chmiel: Thomas.
23 '
1
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
Councilman Workman: I think that was very well said because when I saw kennel
permit come up, I got nervous. Mores nervous than Richard because the 3 of us
had a situation where the neighbors were just about coming to fist to cuffs and
the dogs were outside and then at 3:00 a.m. a racoon would walk by and they'd go
wild. And then when the CSO's went out there and the Carver County police and I
think we had the FBI out there, and of course they wouldn't bark. They'd sit
there for half an hour and they wouldn't bark so I'm glad that, I'm not glad for
' Mr. Nash but we caught their dogs barking. But we've had similar situations
where Bob Zydowsky went out to check on it, check on it, no barking dog and
finally the neighbor called me up and said I've still got a barking dog and what
are you doing about it. Then it becomes my problem you know. So I'm glad, I'm
not glad for any kind of a citation or anything but I'm glad to get the
clarification from Don that we did follow some sort of a process because this
is, I think the Council almost came to fist to cuffs over this one and whether
' it fit into the noise ordinance and the nuisance ordinance and everything else.
Maybe we're getting a direction here.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other discussion? Hearing none, can I have a motion?
Councilman Wing: I move approval of the kennel permit, 855 Lone Eagle Drive.
Councilman Workman: Second.
Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve the kennel permit
' application for Rober Nash at 855 Lone Eagle Drive with the condition that staff
be instructed to continue to monitor and enforce our Nuisance Ordinance in
regards to "barking dogs ". All voted in favor and the motion carried
' unanimously.
APPEAL DECISION OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS FOR A LOT AREA VARIANCE
TO BUILD A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, FRANK DAUGHENBAUGH, 750 CREE.
1 _ Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, as you indicated the applicants, they did receive a
variance approval from the Board of Adjustment but it was appealed by neighbors
II to the City Council. The request is to allow building on a lot that contains
9,043 square feet. City Code normally requires 15,000 square foot lots but
provisions in there allow non - conforming lots of record down to 75% of that
requirement to be approved without a variance. So in other words, if this lot
had 11,250 square feet, another 250 square feet, it wouldn't need a variance at
all. Of course this is in an area that's been difficult from an ordinance and
enforcement standpoint since the ordinance was drafted. It is an old lot of
record. Near as we can tell it existed as far back as 1932 in the same
ownership. The applicants are making a request to make this lot to use. It's
currently vacant. We did have some discussions with the City Attorney on this
and as in some other cases before this, the City has some perceived obligation
to make a lot useable. If there is no use for the lot, there may be a taking of
that lot. The applicant was able to design a home that fit on this lot without
needing additional variances. I think that that's really the break point. If
you can't build a home on a lot without any variances, I think argueably that's
not an acceptable lot but in this case it met that standard. That being the
case, we did recommend, admittedly with some reluctance to lot size that this be
approved because we saw no other recommendation that we could make. The Board
of Adjustments did back that up and again it's been appealled by aggrieved area
24
1
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991 1
residents who were seeking some appeal to the Council on that. Also in
reviewing this too, if this thing is approved or your agree with the approval,
we would like to add a condition. Drainage on this lot is being taken care of
but it is something of a concern. There is an outflow right over here and
there's sort of an impoundment area someplace like that where water, depending
on how fast it's flowing and how the pipe's working, may back up before it gets
through the pipe. What we'd like to do is protect that by *an easement and if
you do approve it, I'd like to require as a condition of approval that a
drainage easement acceptable to the City Engineer be provided. With that we're
continuing to recommend the variance be approved.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is the applicant here? Yes sir. Would you like to add 1
anything to what Paul has said?
Frank Daughenbaugh: My name is Frank Daughenbaugh. I'm the applicant
officially for this variance. The lot is actually owned by my brother -in -law.
The reason that we went into this is that he wanted to sell the lot. He's owned
the lot for 59 years and paid taxes on it and paid assessments. He wanted to
sell the lot but without a variance the lot is not buildable. Trying to sell a
lot that requires a variance scares people so we decided the best thing was
apply for the variance and build a house and sell it as a dwelling. We've
conformed I think to everything that's been requested except for one thing that
we can't change which is the lot size. The drainage I don't think is a problem.
I certainly have no objection to a drainage easement acceptable to the City
Engineer. There's about 8 feet of elevation from west to east. That is from
west over to Carver Beach Road there's about an 8 foot drop so I don't see
drainage as any problem at all. Setbacks are not a problem. I guess I can't
add much to what the staff report has already stated. 1
•
Mayor Chmiel: Is there anyone else who would like to address it? Yes sir.
Scott Nelson: My name is Scott Nelson. I live at 767 Carver Beach Road which i
is a pre- existing home that is shown on the plat there. First I'd like to
present a petition to the Mayor from local residents who are against the
building on that Second I would like to ask if all the board members have
gone out and taken a look at the parcel? Okay. It's a tough situation for both
parties. We understand Mr. Daughenbaugh's point and Mr. Tenney's right to build
a home on there. It's unfortunate that the home cannot be for Mr. Tenney. We
wouldn't like it but it'd be understandable. He has owned the lot for a number I/
of years and by that right he should be able to build on it. But what we find
here is that we're having a spec home put on the lot with no buyer either way
related to the party or unrelated. We feel it's going to be a direct 1
infringement on what we purchased. Our house is also on a small parcel of land,
however it was built in 1951. Our reason for moving out to Chanhassen was to
get away from the city. We lived in the city on Lake and Lyndale and we both
grew up in Glen Lake and liked the western suburbs. We moved out here, I see
they quoted me as saying fir trees in the notes but mature trees that we noticed
out in the area. I'm hoping that maybe we can come to some agreement with Mr.
Daughenbaugh. I know we have not talked directly for quite some time except for
the price of the lot which at that time was $29,500.00 and I don't know what his
situation is but I did have a thought the other day that I'd like to present to
the Council. And Mr. Daughenbaugh, if he's interested, can contact me after the
meeting. It's not going to hold up the vote. The vote can go through either
25 1
1
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
way. I inquired at my firm that I work at, public accounting firm, as to the
deductibility of the lot should either Russell or Russell gifted it to Mr.
Daughenbaugh, they were to give it to the City. It would be a tax deduction
generally speaking. I would have to do some research, up to the fair market
value of the parcel and I believe less basis. What I'm proposing is if Mr.
Daughenbaugh is interested, I will perform the research on that pro bono,
without charge for his review. He can take whatever information I give him and
1 present it to his tax adviser to see if it conforms. Where the City comes in,
if the City would accept the lot, that we would then take care of the liability
insurance on the property after checking out to see how much it would run a
1 year. And possibly get other neighbors in the area to donate playground
equipment and possibly along with this could be the park could be designated in
the name of Mr. Tenney. That way instead of having a house on it, we could have
a park where the kids could play, and there are 15 in the immediate neighborhood
that would absolutely use the park and I don't know how many more are within a
block or two. That is the only other idea that I have come up with. I know
that legally he is within the law and I'm hoping that maybe we can come to some
' agreement. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Scott. Found new innovation ways of thinking. Anyone
else? Michael.
Councilman Mason: Same thing occurred next door to where I live on an 8,000
square foot lot. In talking with Jean Nelson and we chatted quite a bit about
1 it. It's very frustrating. I know Carver Beach. I learned very quickly Carver
Beach is a thorn in the side of the city because of substandard lots, lots of
record, this, that and the other thing. I guess what I'd like to pursue is
' finding out just what lots are still substandard size in Carver Beach and if
anything can be done about it and at what point does the City no longer have the
legal responsibility to say yes you can or cannot build there. I think an 8,000 1
square foot lot's pretty tiny when we're talking about 15,000 square foot RSF
' lots. I understand the City's liability. I understand that the City
essentially has no choice but to grant the variance. I think it goes beyond
that and this one may or may not be a done deal, although I think what you're
1 proposing is certainly worth looking into. My hat's off to you folks for doing
that. This will keep coming up until Carver Beach is totally built up on and I
have no idea what any of the legalese or what would be entailed but at what
point do we still owe a lot that's 60 years old a right to be built on? Forever
in perpetuity?
Councilman Wing: It's not buildable now right?
' Councilman Mason: The lot?
' Councilman Wing: Without a variance.
Councilman Mason: Without a variance but grant the variance and we're saying it
is.
' Mayor Chmiel: Is that it Michael? Tom.
Councilman Workman: Well I've already saw this at the Board of Adjustments and
it was very difficult for the Board of Adjustments to deny it knowing where
26
1
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991 1
maybe our hearts were on the matter and what we would like to accomplish. It 1
becomes a very difficult decision because you don't like to say no to a group of
people who you know it's going to impact. I guess to answer Mike's question
somewhat, if you pay taxes on a lot for 60 years, it would seem you do have
quite a few rights and that's what made it difficult for us to say no. I don't
have anything against Mr. Oaughenbaugh but I realize how it's going to impact
the neighborhood. If anybody can give me any shred of legal foundation to do
that, I mean we would. I don't think, and I said this before, that we would
have to buy the lot. We meaning taxpayers and I don't think we've ever done
that. If we're park deficient up there and we need a park and we can get a good
deal for a piece of park, maybe that changes the whole scenario. But it would i
appear as though the profit mode of Mr. Daughenbaugh is what's driving the
thing. Maximization of dollars and I don't know how we would compete with that.
Mayor Chmiel: Good, thank you. Richard. 1
Councilman Wing: I visited it. I visited the lot today. Paul one thing I
didn't understand is running east to west in about the middle of the lot is a
very significant low area swale. Almost like a small drainage ditch that's
already there going into that easement area you're talking about. Put a house
in the middle of that lot, there's clearly a, that depression that is draining
that area. How are you going to with a house reroute that and then get it back
to where you want it?
Paul Krauss: Well, I think the area you're speaking about, the natural drainage
right there wants to come right through here. What they'd be doing is building
up, and they're showing with arrows. We get better plans than that with the
building permit. It's raising the elevation of the earth around the house so
the water goes around it both to the north and to the south and winds up in the
same place.
Councilman Wing: Brian Batzli at the Planning Commission some weeks ago brought '
up the issue of lot size and there was a lengthy discussion on lot size. And in
PUD's they were questioning the validity of smaller lot sizes even on a PUD and
he was suggesting that 9,000 and 10,000 foot lots do nobody, including the
homeowner, buyer, the future, the city any good. That you wind up with a house
on a lot that has no room, nowhere to go, can't build anything, can't change
anything, can't put your deck on. All the problems and he felt the city was
doing a disservice to allow PUD's and we got into a discussion of lot size. In
a PUD they were suggesting that maybe no less than 12,000. I remember a number
of, even in a PUD where...lot size of 15,000, 13,000, 12,000. The issue was
small lot size. I kind of hate to encourage another small lot. Continue the
problems in that area. On the other hand, the entire Carver Beach area is
substandard lots.
Councilman Mason: Oh, that's a gross generalization. A lot of it is but it's
not, to say that all of Carver Beach.
Councilman Wing: Well not all of it but a lot of it is. '
Mayor Chmiel: There's a lot of lots that fall past...that actually shows it.
27 1
i
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
Councilman Wing: So then I look at this and I see the neighbors are all on
small lots already and it's a lot of record, what do you do with it? I'm sure
the Park and Rec doesn't want it. Like you say_it's not buildable without a
I variance. On the other hand, it's a lot size that's compatible with other lots
in the immediate area. It's a lot size we've allowed in PUD's. I just have had
a real time of it. I would like to encourage larger lots. I would like to get
out from under the problem we have in Carver Beach and we've encouraging this
problem to continue. On the other hand, it is an old lot. An old family. A
lot of record that is buildable with this variance and I guess unless somebody
has a solution as to what they want to do with that lot, I feel we either have
1 to allow this party to build. The neighbors come in and buy it to their benefit
and they maintain it as a neighborhood park that they own or grant the variance
and let the house be built. To just leave it for another 60 years as an unknown
' I don't think is reasonable at this point so I guess I'm tending to support it.
But I'd sure like to see that Carver Beach area build and end the problem like
you were commenting on.
Councilman Workman: Somebody's going to have to buy the lots.
Councilman Wing: Yeah, at some point the lot's going to get bought and I don't
' see the City.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, that's not our responsibility to acquire lots I feel either
for the City and take those dollars and put it into just keeping them as such.
II Then if we establish a precedent here, any other areas that would have lots that
would not be sold, we're saying why don't you buy here because you bought in the
other location and that's not part of our business, as far as I'm concerned.
1 Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor finally, it was a lot of record. I think it was
known to the surrounding owners. I don't think this is new. I don't think it's
I a surprise so I think if the neighbors choose to buy it, that's an option they
have. I don't think it's up to the city as you commented to take that
responability and I don't think it's even fair for us to continue to leave this
-an unknown. I think we either have to find a solution here and it seems like
I the easiest solution to me might be to allow this variance. I guess I'm
favoring that direction.
1 Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Yes, would you like to say something.
Robert Rojina: I'm Robert Rojina. I live at 751 Carver Beach Road. I think
there's a survey of the average lot size done in Carver Beach and it was around
II 14,000 so what you're saying doesn't, goes in contrast to the average lot size.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Ursula.
1 Councilwoman Dimler: I guess I want to take a lot more time on this because I
think everything that's been said is true so I won't repeat all those points.
I The only thing that I think denial of this would constitute a taking which means
that we'd have to spend tax dollars. I believe at this point those would be a
high amount of dollars which I don't think the City can afford. We just passed
a very tight budget and it didn't really leave room. Even in our Park and Rec
II -
budget we were told that neighborhood parks, although they're very nice and I
supported them and would have liked to see more of them, they weren't a
28
1
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991 1
priority. We were going more with developing city wide parks at this time in 1
the budget so I just don't see it in the budget in any area for us to purchase
that lard even if we wanted to. Although I think that was a very good idea.
But I would have to go along with approval based on all the evidence. 1
Councilman Mason: Mr. Mayor, can I make one more quick comment?
Mayor Chmiel: Sure Michael, go ahead. '
• Councilman Mason: In talking with Ms. Nelson, she was told time and time again
throughout this whole ordeal if you will that it was an unbuildable lot. It's 1
an unbuildable lot. You don't have to worry about it. It's an unbuildable lot.
That's essentially what was going on. And I think part of that's perception. I
mean if I was told by the city that hey, you don't have to worry about it, I
wouldn't. And then to have this come down all of a sudden would be pretty
upsetting and I wonder if maybe we don't need to take a look, particularly with
areas like Carver Beach. That the people that are dealing and the people that
are working for the city that are dealing with the citizens, to be very careful
about what they say because to call, as I'm finding out, to call any lot in
Carver Beach unbuildable just is not so. And I guess I think City staff needs
to be very sensitive of the issues that are being raised in Carver Beach. I
suspect some of the problems would have been alleviated had they at least been
told well gee, this is Carver Beach. This is a tough one. Just an I don't know
I think would have been better than having them been led along being told it was
an unbuildable lot.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Richard.
Councilman Wing: Is the house that, the plans that you've seen Paul, are they
compatible with the lot and compatible with the neighborhood?
Paul Krauss: Well, it is a little bit different looking as you might think 1
would fit on the property. But you look at the interior and it's got everything
a house is supposed to have. I don't want to stir the waters up any more on
this thing either but we're in a very preliminary stage of working with our
water quality improvement plan and it's clear to me, and I can't tell you where
these things are going to be but it's clear to me that at some point we're' going
to need to obtain what little open land is left to intercept storm water before
it dumps into Lotus Lake without being settled out. I don't know if this is a
good site for it or not. I mean to get a settlement basin on this property
you'll have to tear down all the trees that you want to protect anyway but I
know that, I was talking to the consultant tonight about the parcel at the end
of your street which would probably be ideal for that. As far as a public
purpose goes, that is one that we occasionally have started to consider in
Carver Beach but again, I'm not certain that that really justifies doing
anything different on this one.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I too think that, from what I understand and what I see,
and I'm not too happy with that being built within there but nonetheless they do
have that right to construct. I did have some discussion with Mr. and Mrs.
Nelson this past Saturday as they came in and visited with me on Saturday
morning. I like the ideas as to what he's come up with and that's something
that possibly you can have some discussions with Mr. Daughenbaugh and also the
29 1
1
II City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
1 owner of that particular property. It your choosing but as I see what's
available right now and as far as the land and the owner's shift of it, with
that variance we would be vulnerable to leaving ourselves open to a given
lawsuit as well. I know it's going to create an imposition on the Nelsons and I
do feel bad with that and I've indicated that to them. I said come up with some •
idea, some proposals and I thought that was a good one that you did come up
I with The only problem is you have to get the consent of the owner himself in
doing as such. But I encourage you to pursue it with them to see and leave it
there. I guess I too would have to go along with building a structure on that
particular lot.
1 Councilman Workman: Paul, is this and maybe Roger, is this strictly a lot of
record taxes issue? The point that Mr. Rojina brings up about the average lot
I size in fact being 14,000 square feet.
Paul Krauss: I think your first point is probably correct.
1 Councilman Workman: I mean is that the only reason we have to, which is a good
reasons. I mean is that the reason why?
1 Paul Krauss: That's the primary reason.
Councilman Workman: I mean because on the Board of Adjustments well, and we've
kind of gone through that. The lots within 500 feet of this are small.
Paul Krauss: This graphic shows.
II Mayor Chmiel: When you say small, you mean smaller than what's being proposed?
Councilman Workman: Similar.
II Paul Krauss: There are a couple of smaller ones within 500. We use the 500
foot radius. There's a couple of smaller ones but there's quite a few larger.
' The ones in this tone exceed the 15,000 square foot requirement. The ones here
are something less than that. So there's a great deal of variety in there as is
typical thoughout Carver Beach.
1 Kirsten Rojina: Could I say something?
Mayor Chmiel: Certainly.
Kirsten Rojina: According to them, my name is Kirsten Rojina. I live on 751
Carver Beach Road which is directly across from Cree so our driveways will be
right against each other. The area less than 15,000 square feet, our lot is
1 shown as that but we actually own almost an acre of land so I'm not sure that
that you can say that the surrounding lots are all comparable because I think
there's quite a bit of difference between 9,000 and you know an acre.
1 Additionally, you were saying it's a hardship for the people actually who end up
buying the house because they can't add on and whatever. This is a corner lot
with two 30 foot setbacks and that makes it even more difficult to build and I•
1 know that the house has all the appliances in it and everything but the actual
size of the house is, if you take the garage out, it's extremely small. And
diverting the drainage around the side lot is going to be a maintenance problem
1 30
1
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991 1
and I think it's going to be a drainage problem. I just don't think you can
write it off as saying that all the lots surrounding this lot are substandard
because in fact they're not.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Any other discussion? Hearing none I'll entertain a 1
motion.
Councilman Workman: Can I ask one more question? 1
Mayor Chmiel: Sure.
Councilman Workman: Mr. Daughenbaugh, is there a chance that that lot could be
sold?
Frank Daughenbaugh: Could be sold? 1
Councilman Workman: Without a house on it?
Frank Daughenbaugh: We tried that for a year and what we ran into was that 1
every buyer that was even, many interested prospects but when they found they
had to go through a variance procedure and there was no guarantee that this
would be in fact a buildable lot, it's pretty hard to write a purchase agreement
and to get people to put money on the lot on a variance. It's I don't know,
sort of a trust thing I suppose for one thing. So we decided after a year of
trying to sell it that the best move was to go ahead and apply for the variance
and build and then sell the package. I'd be very happy to sell it. My interest
in the thing is to get my brother -in -law's investment for him.
Mayor Chmiel: One question that I have too that I was going to ask and it just 1
came back to me. How many square feet would that home be?
Frank Daughenbaugh: What is it Stu, around 1,800 isn't it? 1
Stu: About 1,800 square feet. It's quite a bit larger than a lot of the homes
in the area as far as finished square footage. It's similar to a house that's
on Pleasant View Road just north of the lake that was a second runner -up in the
Reggie competition in 1985 and there were several homes, it was so popular there
were about 8 other homes like that built in Eden Prairie. One near Town Line
Road and Dell Road and in that area. It's a quite popular design and it's got
more space than a lot of the homes in the area. Smaller than some.
Roger Knutson: Mr. Mayor, maybe I can just clarify what the rules are on
variances. When zoning regulations prevent all reasonable use of the property,
that constitutes a taking of that property. Invalidates the regulations, unless
you're willing to buy the property. The exceptions are when the property is of
such a character that any development of that property will do something like we
didn't have sewer and water there and it was right adjacent to a lake and you
didn't have a septic system that worked and you pollute the lake. Those kind of
extreme situations where you can turn down requests for a variance and say the
lot's unbuildable because if we allow you to build without sewer and water for
example, you're going to pollute the lake and that's just not acceptable.
Barring those kind of extreme situations, you're almost put in a box where you
really have no choice but to grant the variance or to acquire the property.
31 1
1
II City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
' Councilman Mason, the situation you were talking about where a variance was
granted, the difference there was that fell within what's called the self
created hardship topic. During the period in concern, one person owned
adjoining lots and we can require them to treat those lots as one. That's the
II distinction. Here that situation does not apply.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you.
II Councilman Wing: It would be ideal if one or more neighbors could buy that lot,
deed it back to the city and take the write off.
Mayor Chmiel: Yes, that was one of the things that I discussed with Mr. Nelson
Saturday.
' Councilman Mason: Not very feasible?
Councilman Wing: It's unfortunate there's such a silence here. It means
there's more than one very valid side.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, that's true.
II Councilman Workman: Mr. Mayor, I would make a motion to approve the variance.
Councilman Wing: I'll second that.
II Mayor Chmiel: It's been moved and seconded to approve the variance. Any other
discussion?
Councilman Wing: Only to say by seconding that I honestly, in support of the
neighbors, don't feel the Council has any other option.
' Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Wing seconded to approve Variance $91 -20
for 750 Cree, with the following conditions:
' 1. The applicant maintain the natural drainageway. A drainage swale shall be
created around the proposed residence.
2. The applicant shall submit a tree preservation plan prior to issuance of a
building permit.
3. A drainage easement acceptable to the City Engineer be provided.
II All voted in favor except Councilman Mason who abstained and the motion carried.
I Councilman Mason: I would just for purposes of clarification I would like the
Minutes to note I abstained on that vote.
Mayor Chmiel: Would you like to give your reasons for your abstention?
II Councilman Mason: Well one, I live in the area and I think that's a cop out.
Because I have said before, I can usually get my heart and my brain in sync on
these issues and the issue is, I would not, I understand the City's
responsibility there. I don't question the affirmative votes at all. Because
' 32
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991 1
of that I would have felt uncomfortable opposing it but I also couldn't support
it. ►'
Councilwoman Dimler: An abstention counts as a no right?
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you.
APPROVE DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT FOR LUNDGREN BROTHERS /ORTENBLAT/ERS80 PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT.
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, you approved this project, preliminary plat for this
project last fall. The applicant is requesting approval of a development
contract to allow him to begin grading on the property. Now this only really
applies to grading and it has something to do with our grading ordinance we
adopted last year which does not allow any work of this size to be done unless
it's under a CUP, which this is not, or if it's under development contract for
an approved contract. In doing this you should know that you haven't yet given
this final plat approval and we're all aware of this. Final plat approval, if
you approve this tonight, final plat approval must be submitted to you by May.
This is only to allow grading, site preparation work to begin and it's work
that's been approved by the regulatory agencies and I think you'll recall quite
a bit of detailed investigations. There's a couple reasons for starting the
grading early. First of all we'd prefer actually from an environmental
standpoint that they do the work in and around the wetlands in the winter. It's
the better time to do it from an environmental standpoint. You cause less
damage. But secondly there's some changes in State law that are coming up
with January 1st, 1992 and they're really quite complex and you know there's a
lot of uncertainty as to how that's going to affect projects and there's some
desire, we've had this elsewhere in town to get the project started and get it
going so there's no question about it. I see that they have Linda Fischer here
tonight from Larkin - Hoffman who can give some explanation of the changes of the
State law, if there's any desire to get that. But it is quite complex and I
know Linda's kind of an acknowledged expert on what changes are occurring. In
fact she gave a seminar on that not too long ago. But we are recommending that
the contract be approved. Again it is for the grading activity. We're getting
ample security to restore this site if we need to and there's a condition that
the final plat be brought in for your approval by May.
Mayor Chmiel: Paul, if it becomes complicated as you've indicated, but it also '
is something that would be applicable to follow with those guidelines that's
being proposed, why would we try to change that at this time?
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, when we had this project designed, we had it designed
to meet these interim regs that come inbetween 1992 and 1993 to the best of our
ability. We believe we've done that in terms of the wetland preservation, the
amount of conversion we have. We have a positive balance in wetlands being
created. I think you have a great deal of uncertainty in all these agencies as
to how they're going to apply all these rules and there's considerable concern
in the development community that while the State figures this out, that a lot
of things are going to be put on the back burner for who knows how long. I'm
not certain if that's actually the case or not but I know that there's a lot of
concern out there about that and having dealt with some of the agencies, I can
understand where the concern comes from. I don't think, in my opinion...all the
33
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
agencies we've worked with, I think as you're aware we've contacted virtually
' everybody there was to contact on thys. That there's nothing to change on this
project. It could just simply be delayed because of bureaucratic snarls.
11 Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I'll have some other questions but I'll wait and listen.
Charles Folch: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. There's two corrections that
have come to my attention with the development contract. In your item to
Attachment #1, which is the cover page for the development contract, their item
3, development plans. The third sentence which reads the plans may be prepared
subject to city approval after entering the contract but before commencement of
' any work in the plat. It should continue to read, except for Phase 1 grading.
The second correction occurs on page 6. Section R. Stated as final platting of
the property must take place by, it should be May of 1992. Not 1991.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, anything else?
Charles Folch: That's the only things I'm aware of.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Paul, you mentioned that maybe some clarification
regarding what it is for 1992 as opposed to 1991 and someone's going to make
that presentation.
Paul Krauss: Well, if I could pass this over to Linda. Linda's clarifying for
' me that one of the major concerns is the Army Corps permit which expires in
January.
Linda Fischer: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. Linda Fischer, 1500
' Northwestern Financial Center representing the applicant Lundgren Brothers. I
was really here this evening to answer any questions and it looks like there may
be some. There basically are two reasons that the applicant has requested the,
' I'll call it the early grading permit on the development contract. The first
really is the Corps of Engineers permit. As some of you may know, the Corps of
Engineers under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act issues permits under various
' types of authorizations. The two primary ones are individual permits and
nationwide general permits. There is a nationwide permit that authorized
wetland fill of less than 1 acre in certain isolated wetlands. The amount of
wetland fill that was authorized in October by your wetland alteration permit
' is .7 acres in isolated wetlands. We have obtained a written nationwide permit
from the Corps of Engineers that authorizes the exact same wetland fill that you
approved in October I understand of 1991. Nationwide permits are issued
throughout the country for 5 years. They expire in mass on or about January 1st
of 1992. We are concerned that the Corps has issued draft revisions to the
nationwide permit rules but they will not be finalized until January. To the
1 best of our knowledge, having reviewed those rules, the project would be
consistent with the proposed changes but because of language in the permit and
our concern about losing a vested right, we want to do the work that is
authorized by the Corps permit prior to it's expiration. That really is the
' principle reason that we are requesting the early grading because of the Corps
permit. expiration. In addition and without trying to, I'm not trying to give
you a seminar on the State wetland bill but you are aware that there is the
Wetland Conservation Act of 1991 that was enacted this summer. Your staff of
course in your city should be commended as you're way ahead of most communities.
34
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991 1
You already are regulating wetland alteration and you are generally consistent '
in this project with no net loss policy that is now the policy of the State.
This project proposes to create 1 acre of new wetland and to fill .7 acres and
to enhance over 5 acres by excavation and raising the control elevation so I
think there's no question that it is consistent with the intent of the Statute.
Point one. The interim program which has a moratorium on wetland fill takes
affect in January. The first guidance from BOWSR's, Board of Water and Soil
Resources was that plat approval obtained between August and January would not
exempt you from the interim program. It now appears that that may not be the
case and if you have a plat approval in October as an example, you may be exempt
from the interim program. However, you may then come under the permanent
program in July of 1993 or when the rules are adopted. What all this means is
that there's a lot of uncertainty. And just advising the developer because of
one, the expiration of the Corps permit and two, the question of exactly what
the affect of the rules will be, it seemed prudent to them to obtain Watershed
District approval which by the way we have obtained last week I believe and City
approval and to do the work before the expiration of the permit. We really
believe and I think Mr. Krauss has indicated that we would be consistent with
the wetland replacement certification that we may or may not have to obtain but
this is a moving target and we just don't want to take a chance on the loss of
our Corps permit. That's basically the reason for the request. I'd be happy to
answer any questions.
Mayor Chmiel: Very good. Are there any questions? Ursula. ,
Councilwoman Dimler: Yes. Could you please tell me why or do you know why the
Corps has made these revisions? What's the purpose?
Linda Fischer: Well the Corps, as I said, the nationwide permits are issued by
publication in the Federal Register. They're really not permits as you know
permits. Individual permits. They're issued nationally for a range of
activities that have been determined collectively to have minimal environmental
impact. One of them is fill in isolated wetlands less than 1 acre. They expire
by law. There have been several of these. They expire by law in January so the
Corps published proposed revisions but they haven't, the comment period is over
and they've not issued a final rule. So in the meantime when you get a
nationwide permit it tells you, it warns you that the permit may expire in
January. '
Councilwoman Dimler: But what I'm saying is, they didn't revise them in years
past. '
Linda Fischer: Oh, they have. That's the other thing. There was a nationwide
permit that ran from 1982 to 1987. It was slightly different from the one that
is running now from 1987 to 1992, whatever. One or two years there so there may
be some changes. There may be a need to go back to the Corps. We think the
St. Paul District will be here. You may have heard it will not. All of these
things are, uncertainties and when you have a permit, the rule of thumb is to try
to do the work under the permit so there's just no question.
Councilwoman Dimler: There's no big outstanding disaster that. •
35 1
1
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
Linda Fischer: Oh no, and as a matter of fact the, well it's virtually certain
' that the 1 acre of fill will remain in the permit when it's reissued. I mean
from what I've seen unless something changes so that, but the question about
whether we need to go through a new permitting process, etc., etc., is still out
there. So that's basically it.
r Mayor Chmiel: My understanding is that the Corps is going to remain in
St. Paul.
Linda Fischer: Yes, and that's what we think too but.
' Mayor Chmiel: That was decided just a few weeks ago.
Linda Fischer: It's something that we think would be prudent to do or at least
obtain the authorization to do so. As we worked on this, it's changed. The
' guidance we get is changing really on a weekly basis.
Councilwoman Dimler: Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: I'm just wondering, from what is existing, what's being proposed
will benefit the city. I guess that's my concern. From what they're talking
' about. Paul.
Paul Krauss: Mayor, if I could address that. Let's put it in the worst case
scenario. Let's put it in the context that those Class B wetlands where the
' road is going to be are filled and at the same time the better quality wetlands
are expanded because that's the other part of the arrangement. We were getting
more wetlands out of this than we started with. And at that point Lundgren
' pulls in their horns and says they can't do this deal and they walk from the
site. Arguably I think that we've got a better site from an environmental
standpoint without any cost to us or impact at all. We're coming up with two
I better quality, larger wetlands replacing some real periodic marginal ones and
it's at no cost to us. If there's any problem with not, you know even more
worst case is if the project's half done, we're asking for financial guarantees
so we can finish it ourselves. I mean Lundgren I think has the financial
I wherewithal to finish it of course but we are going to protect ourselves. So
I really think that there's no risk. In fact there's a possible benefit by just
proceeding with it.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other questions?
' Councilwoman Dimler: I think maybe you just answered it but that was one of my
concerns. We just gave Lundgren an extension and I think for the second time on
their final plat approval for Summit in Near Mountain. That was cited that the
housing market or the builders market isn't real good right now in 1991 and who
1 knows what 1992 will bring. So my question was, what will this early grading do
if they go for the extension? Let's say they come back and want another year's
extension in, they can't do it in May of 1992. Let's go for May of 1993. Will
that in any way impact us if it's done ahead of time?
Paul Krauss: No, again I think you'll have better quality wetlands and a vacant
site like you have right now. So it's no loss for us. There's no risk.
1 36
1
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991 1
Mayor Chmiel: I guess the question I ask is, and maybe Terry can answer it, is
to delay one specific project in the area that we just talked about as opposed
to this and being able to build right now. Homes within that particular area.
Clarify.
Terry Forbord: Your honor. Members of the City Council. My name is Terry
Forbord with Lundgren Bros., 935 East Wayzata Blvd. in Wayzata, Minnesota. Your
honor, just to make sure I'm answering the question that you asked. Was your
question meant that why would we be proceeding with this proposal versus not
proceeding with the Summit which you allowed our firm to extend the filing of
it's final plat? 1
Mayor Chmiel: Yes. The reason for that is that the market's not.
Terry Forbord: I think if you read the staff report, you'll note that the price
range of homes at Trappers Pass and at the Summit are considerably higher than
the price range that we are proposing on the subject property. Even though the
price range for homes $300,000.00 and up is soft right at this time, statistics
certainly will support that the price range of homes that we are proposing for
the subject property are doing quite a bit better. MLS statistics and Met
Council statistics for building permits would support that. And in our
business, just like any other manufacturing business, we're always trying to
meet what the market place is and that's a moving target. It's always changing.
Right now that is where the majority of the home buying public is is in that
price range. And so we are pursuing that. There are other things that
obviously have something to do with that although they may not be as important.
Those would be the timeframes of existing agreements that we may have with the
landowners. We have very favorable terms on the land in Near Mountain as far as
the amount of time that we have to develop the property with the sellers versus
the subject property. And there are numerous other items that certainly can
make us pursue one particular development prior to another. But the primary
reason is the price range. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Any other questions?
Councilman Workman: So is there going to be a modification to number 1 or just 1
as it sits? We're okay on all permits?
Paul Krauss: No, that's consistent. 1
Mayor Chmiel: These are all existing 1 thru 11. Those have not changed.
Paul Krauss: The only changes were the ones that Charles had mentioned.
Mayor Chmiel: The only ones that you've indicated Charles in each of these.
Other than the grading in the 1st as well as page 7 or 6 was it? '92 rather
than '91.
Councilman Workman: Well I would move approval of the development contract 1
agreement for Lundgren Bros. Construction Project #91 -14.
Councilman Mason: Second. 1
37
1
11 City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the Development
Contract for Lundgren Bros. Project #91 -14 as amended by the City Engineer as
follows: In Attachment $1, item 3, development plans add the phrase, except for
Phase 1 grading at the end of the second sentence. On page 6. Section R, final
I platting of the property must take place by May of 1992, not 1991. All voted in
favor and the motion carried unanimously.
AUTHORIZE PREPARATION OF A FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR TRUNK SANITARY SEWER AND
WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS IN UPPER BLUFF CREEK AREA (SECTIONS 15 AND 22). PROJECT
• 91 -17.
Charles Folch: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, the City has received a
petition from Kent Carlson of Ryan Construction Company, the developer of the
proposed Chanhassen Business Center property located west of Audubon Road, and
south of the railroad corridor. The parcel encompasses approximately 94 acres
and is zoned office industrial. In order to be subdivided, the property
developed to zoning standards, municipal sanitary sewer and watermain services
are needed to be provided to the property. Therefore it is necessary to conduct
a feasibility study to determine an appropriate sewer and water needs for this
property and the adjacent area north of Lyman Blvd.. In addition, since these
facility improvements will likely traverse properties owned by other
' individuals, a feasibility study will evaluate the costs of special assessments
for benefitting properties within the study area. The consulting engineering
firm of Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates has recently completed a
' comprehensive sewer and water study for the Bluff Creek area. Given their past
work effort and familiarity with the area, Bonestroo was asked to submit a
proposal for preparing the feasibility study. Their estimated cost for the
proposal is $11,900.00. Such costs would be credited against future design fees
' should an improvement project proceed. In addition this cost of the feasibility
study would be included with the total project cost for special assessments.
Therefore it is recommended that the City Council authorize preparation of the
feasibility study to evaluate sanitary sewer, watermain improvements to the
proposed Chanhassen Business Center and adjacent service area bounded to the
north by the railroad corridor and to the south by Lyman Blvd. conditioned that
a cash escrow or letter of credit in the amount of $11,900.00 be secured to
guarantee payment of the study.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. I guess I have just one quick question. Did we
I contact all the adjacent property owners informing them of the potential of this
feasibility study?
Charles Folch: I don't believe we have, no.
Mayor Chmiel: Should that not be something that we should do?
Charles Folch: Typically when we, after the feasibility study is completed and
we bring it back to Council for presentation, at that point we notify all the
affected property owners of a public hearing to consider approving the
feasibility study at that point in time.
Mayor Chmiel: Right, but don't you think we should bring them in a little
' sooner than that point in time in making sure that they're well aware as to what
we're looking at and what we're thinking as far as a city goes because often
' 38
1
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
times there, it's an after the fact and they feel that they're not brought into
the total process of it. 1
Charles Folch: We could certainly have some sort of informational meeting if
you will held that would basically talk about the area to be studied. However,
without a study we wouldn't have any more.detailed information concerning or
lines to potentially know what costs would be and things like that until we
actually have a study done.
Mayor Chmiel: I don't think to have an informational meeting for them because
you're right, it wouldn't dictate anything but just notifying those people in
and adjacent to where this is going that this is in process. 1
Charles Folch: I see. We can certainly send out a mailing. We can certainly
do that. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, I think it's good timing. And the other thing that I had
on this too, the City should not pick up any of the costs regarding the
feasibility study. Normally if a developer feels he wants to develop that
properties, that of course is a cost he's going to put up front for us as well
to do this.
Charles Folch: That's been our policy.
Mayor Chmiel: Right. Okay. Any other discussion? Ursula. 1
Councilwoman Dimler: I agree with both the points you just made Mr. Mayor,
especially the one about notifying the neighbors now because obviously they're
not asking for this and they're going to say why should we pay. You know I've
heard it, we've all heard it before. Also, I was wondering if we only got one
estimate, why didn't we get more estimates?
Charles Folch: Well we solicited from Bonestroo again because they had done the
much larger comprehensive study and were familiar with the area and there was
some work that would not•be duplicated. Having them proceed with this study
that would be possibly duplicated with another consultant. In comparing to
relative dollars, the estimate for a similar study which was done in Lake Riley
Hills area was estimated well, it's estimated at about $12,000.00 and that's
what the costs are running so it's fairly representative of the work effort
needed to do this study.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, but are you saying that the information that BRA has
that might be duplicated is not available to another consultant?
Charles Folch: Well it certainly is but there is work that has been done
basically by them that they have the work... '
Councilwoman Dimler: I guess I'm concerned because we could keep doing this and
we're really favoring one firm and excluding others and I don't like to see us
do that. I mean I want to get competitive pricing which is when you get more
bids.
1
39
1
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
Charles Folch: Sure. I think if the estimate would have come back and appeared
to be somewhat unreasonable for the amount of work needed, I think we would have
chosen to make that direction. We do try a diversity of consultants that do
work for the city.
Councilman Workman: Who's paying for the study?
Charles Folch: Well we recommend that the developer who's petitioning for the
project up front the initial security. If the project does proceed, these costs
• as I mentioned will be included in the total project costs which would be spread
out among all benefitting properties in the service area. So in a sense what
they're basically, what the developer's basically doing is guaranteeing payment
of the study should they walk away and the project doesn't proceed but they
would be credited for their fair share if the project is completed.
Councilman Workman: I'd move approval.
Councilman Mason: I would second that.
Resolution 191 -115: Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Mason seconded to
' authorize the preparation of the feasibility study to evaluate sanitary sewer
and watermain improvements to the proposed Chanhassen Business Centre and
adjacent service area bounded to the north by the railroad corridor and to the
south by Lyman Boulevard conditioned upon receiving a cash escrow or letter of
' credit in the amount of $11,900.00 to guarantee payment of the study. All voted
in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
' Councilwoman Dimler: Is that with the understanding that we notify the
neighbors now?
Charles Folch: Yeah, we'll send out notice.
APPROVE ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTRACT WITH BARTON - ASCHMAN.
I Charles Folch: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. Very briefly, this
consultant agreement is the final document needed to initiate the preparation of
the design plans and specs for the last segment of the previously programmed
TH 5 improvement which will extend from CR 17 west to TH 41. The 2.2 miles
stretch of this improvement project lie entirely within the corporate limits of
the city of Chanhassen. As such the city will function as the lead agency for
MnDot and enter into a cooperative agreement with Barton - Aschman. Chanhassen's
role through this design phase will be very similar to a project manager while
MnDot will be responsible for technical review and the actual contract
administration for the construction. The actual construction of this project is
tentatively scheduled for a 1996 start date. However there is a possibility
that this schedule could be accelerated as early as 1994. Therefore it's sort
of important at this point in time to initiate a design for this project so that
the plans are available and ready to go should an accelerated schedule be
available for 1994. Therefore it is recommended that the City Council approve
the consultant services agreement with Barton - Aschman for the final design
services for the extension of TH 5 from CR 17 west to TH 41 in Chanhassen.
1
1 40
1
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991 1
Mayor Chmiel: That total amount of dollars paid to the consultant would be
what?
Charles Folch: Basically our share, the total design fees are estimated at
about $320,000.00 of which the local share is $50,000.00. That $50,000.00 being
split by three communities and Carver County. Eden Prairie, Chaska, Carver
County and Chanhassen. So Chanhassen's.actual share is $12,500.00 of the
$320,000.00. 1
Councilman Workman: I would move immediate approval of this fine document.
Councilwoman Dimler: I'll second that. 1
Mayor Chmiel: A motion with a second to sign this document with Barton - Aschman
and Associates. Any other discussion?
Councilman Wing: Workman wouldn't have done that at 7:30.
Councilman Workman: Sure I would have. Are you kidding? This is the most 1
exciting thing on the agenda tonight.
Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussions? 1
Councilwoman Dimler: I'm assuming legal counsel has looked at it and everything
is in order. Thank you. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Just as good as you can get it. I did have some questions but I
think I'm going to forego those. The other question I think that Ursula asked
before is how many other consultants are there that could do this project as
well? Was this just provided to one respective consultant?
Charles Folch: This was chosen by MnDot. We really didn't have any control 1
over that.
Mayor Chmiel: You answered my question. 1
Councilman Workman: Barton - Aschman has done the whole thing.
Charles Folch: To maintain continuity through all the segments of the project. 1
Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dialer seconded to approve the Consultant
Services Agreement with Barton - Aschman Associates, Inc. to provide final design 1
services for the extension of Trunk Highway 5 from CSAH 17 west to Trunk Highway
. 41 in Chanhassen. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: LOWELL CARLSON SITE PLAN UPDATE, SENIOR PLANNER. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Let's just if we could, let's just skip a couple of these and
let's go to item number 12. Can we? I don't want Mr. Carlson to stay here all
night. He might get a little tired here. If that's agreeable with Council,
we'll move to item 12(a). Paul, are you going to address this?
41 1
1
' City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
Paul Krauss: Yes Mr. Mayor. This one's got a long history and it's a little
II confusing as to what's going on but I,think you'll recall that we've had some
concerns with the outdoor storage on Mr. Carlson's property for a number of
years and it finally resulted in legal action. Mr. Carlson pleaded guilty to
II maintaining a public nuisance and the Judge handed down a sentence which the .
dates are not being adhered to that well yet but I think we'll all working
towards that which includes clean -up of all items. All vehicles and equipment
II stored on site much be licensed and operable and he's got to submit a site plan
to the city showing that there's no exterior storage outside a building or
approved outside storage area. Mr. Carlson attempting to comply with this order
did submit a plan to us. I forget but within the past 2 months. We've got some
11 real concerns with what he's submitted...square feet. That's larger than the
industrial building that you just approved on Park Drive by way of scale and we
think it's somewhat excessive in that neighborhood. We developed sort of a
II staff position as to what we would find acceptable here but given the fact that
this isn't an ordinance requirement, we wanted to bounce this off of you and the
Planning Commission so we could get back to Mr. Carlson with a formal position.
II Because this may well have to go back before the Judge. We felt that, in fact
Jo Ann's got the conditions, the four conditions. That the building should be
no more than 5,000 square feet, which is quite large for a storage building in a
residential area. We think it's quite huge for a storage building in that sort
II of an area. That's the total storage area. I'm sorry and the storage area,
they consist of a building. The building is 3,000 square feet so there'd be
2,000 feet of screened outdoor storage. The Planning Commission agreed with
1 these outlines but again we wanted to come to you and get your feel for it
before we officially get back to Mr. Carlson and the Judge with our position. So
Mr. Mayor I'll throw it back to you and we're looking for guidance on this one.
II Mayor Chmiel: Lowell, did you have something that you wanted to show to the
Council?
I Lowell Carlson: Yeah. When this whole thing started out it was to we didn't
have all the equipment inside storage. I mean I agreed and what they agreed and
this whole thing has turned into such a God forsaken mess that I don't even know
I where we're at myself. Anyway this is all scaled out for this building. Some
of the equipment, this is all, each piece of equipment is scale to size. Some
of the equipment was not home at the time this guy took the scale and took the
thing down for this particular building. They're trying to tell me a 3,000,
II 5,000 whatever is...stand outside. I tell you, I'm 57 years old and that last
snowstorm worked out, with a piece of plastic over my head, snow all over and
I worked with mud before that. Dear Council I am really kind of uptight. I'd
II like to have a building. I'd like to live like a human being and be like a
human being like, Mr....built a big building over here and nobody said anything
about that. You know . just got to the point where I'm too old to fight the
II weather and conditions and for somebody to tell me how much square feet I need
to put and the rest should go outside. My equipment gets rusty. Most of it's
diesel. Won't start. What it costs me for my men to get these vehicles started
and rust and started and froze up and you name it, I'm only asking for the size
II building that I deserve and I've always been promised. They went over to Mound
and accepted when I tore it down. They renigged on their word. The Planning
Director was over there. She okayed it, Barb. Your building inspector was over
I there. They okayed it before I tore it down. I brought it home. They said I
had to have a moving permit then and they've been at this thing, one thing to
II 42
II
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991 1
another. I guess I deserve something before my time in my life. I'm asking you
people that I deserve the building of this size to only keep my equipment in
halfway decent shape and myself you know so we can work where it's warm and
decent instead of the conditions that we've had to work and trying to make a
living as a self employed excavator. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Basically what it boils down to is it's 140 by 80
feet and that segment that sticks out is the office portion there is roughtly 40
by 30. That entails as you're saying Paul 12,000 square foot?
Paul Krauss: That's the calculations that I have. Yes, 12,400. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. And Paul you're saying basically a total storage area not
to exceed 5,000 square feet. This was brought before the Courts, the Judge
accepted the 12,400?
Paul Krauss: No sir. The Judge set no limit at all. He asked that a site plan
be submitted and that we see what we could live with. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Okay.
Councilman Wing: Has this been to Planning? 1
Paul Krauss: Planning Commission did look at the same thing and agreed that the
5,000 square foot of storage space was about all they would feel comfortable
with.
Councilwoman Dimler: Paul, did I read that right that this is 6 acres total? 1
Paul Krauss: The site?
Councilwoman Dimler: Yes. 1
Paul Krauss: Yes, I believe that's correct.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. And is this building proposed to be hidden somewhat
by trees?
Paul Krauss: No, I don't believe so.
Councilwoman Dimler: It's out in the open? 1
Paul Krauss: Well actually you've got quite an exposed site. There's very
little in the way of trees. On about the fourth page there's a site plan and it
looks like it's. 1
Councilwoman Dimler: But we're not asking for any landscaping or anything?
Paul Krauss: Well again, we weren't recommending that this be approved so we 1
didn't spend a whole lot of time trying to make this work. •
Mayor Chmiel: You do have this building on site right now right?
43 1
1
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
Lowell Carlson: Pardon me?
Mayor Chmiel: You have a building on site? One structure. This one 40 x B0.
Lowell Carlson: Yes.
Mayor Chmiel: That's an existing building that you have' now?
Lowell Carlson: No.
Mayor Chmiel: Oh it isn't.
11 Lowell Carlson: That was the building that was okayed...Butler Building that
was okayed...come to the City of Chanhassen and wanted to go look at the
building and okay it to put on that property. That's been what, 6 years, 5
years ago. So this building has been lying there, on my property for 5 or 6
years and this thing's... It was okay at the beginning and I've been to Council
' meetings, Planning Commission, planning board meetings...and at that time it was
under a special use basis which I was automatically grandfathered in...whole
thing caught fire. And like Paul was not at the courtroom and the Judge says
okay, if I satisfy, I plead to guilty to storing debris on public property of
one of those counts that was charged to me so I pleaded guilty to that one. The
Judge agreed that if I satisfactored the City of Chanhassen, clean my place up,
he said he'd see that I'd got the, he'd give me the building if I did what
Chanhassen wanted. I have redrew plans. I don't know if he's got one here.
I drew three of them. I gave you a topographic plan. I drew one of them... I .
drew a landscaping plan of all the trees. I drew...plan. This is about, I
don't know how many plans on this particular one makes and still there's
' something rotten in Denmark somewhere but anyway. But I've given them
everything that...
Roger Knutson: To give you a little bit of background. My memory's a little
fuzzy because this goes back a long time. The Council granted Mr. Carlson a
conditional use permit for a contractors yard. I forget exactly what year. A
' number of conditions were attached to that approval and they weren't complied
with and numerous letters were sent and calls made requesting compliance and we
didn't get any compliance. The matter was brought to the Council's attention.
A public hearing was held and his conditional use permit was revoked for non-
compliance with the conditions of approval. And that's pretty rare here.
Lowell Carlson: Why's that?
1 Roger Knutson: It's rare because we usually work with people and get things
taken care of. Following that, letters followed to Mr. Carlson saying. you have
to pull back your business to the scope it was in under your grandfather rights
and you have to get rid of the junk. We weren't able to get that accomplished
so relunctantly we resorted to litigation and the Judge, again rare, actually
walked the site and you don't find that very often. And he went through and
' told Mr. Carlson he had to clean the place up. The result is we're back here
now trying on Planning staff's recommendation for site plan approval. I believe
that building, it's on the site now isn't that correct?
Lowell Carlson: Yes.
1 44
•
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991 1
Roger Knutson: It's component piece is on the ground.
Lowell Carlson: Yes.
Roger Knutson: And they're weathered pretty hard aren't they? 1
Lowell Carlson: Well, they're all still got...but in any longer number of years
gone by I would say they're going to be... It's an all steel structure. 1
Roger Knutson: It's a metal building?
Lowell Carlson: Yes.
Roger Knutson: Class V floor?
Lowell Carlson: Yes. Except the shop.
Councilwoman Dimler: Class V is dirt floor? 1
Roger Knutson: Gravel.
Councilman Workman: Well if Mr. Carlson builds this smaller building, then what
have we got? We've still got stuff•butside then right? Then we're going to go
to screening.
Paul Krauss: The proposal that staff developed said you've got this 5,000
square foot space, that's it. Nothing is stored outside of that. Also I don't
want to speak for the building inspectors but I know they have severe
reservations that that thing is salvageable. I don't know how many years it's
been lying there but I'm not even certain it's a legitimate structure anymore. I
know the building inspector's raised some reservations with it.
Roger Knutson: If I remember right, when it was brought to your site it was not
a new building right? It was moved in.
Lowell Carlson: ...steel structure. They used it for all the people working
there for, I would say it was 30 years old.
Roger Knutson: So what you have is a building that's had, a metal building 1
that's had 30 years of use that's now been on the ground in piles for 5 or 6
years or something.
Councilman Workman: Well, can we require that he has to use new construction?
Paul Krauss: I think that whatever goes on there has to meet Code and I've got
very serious reservations that that thing will ever meet Code.
Councilwoman Dimler: So he couldn't use it?
Paul Krauss: I couldn't say with certainty but I don't think so.
Mayor Chmiel: As it shows here with all the items that were removed from the
site or stored in an accessory building, quite a few things that were to have
45 1
1
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
been gotten rid of. Have most of those been taken care of?
Lowell Carlson: Pardon me?
I Mayor Chmiel: On the items that were listed be removed from the site. Have
those been dispensed with already?
II Lowell Carlson: Yeah. There's a couple items that got snowed in under...
Mayor Chmiel: That's understandable this time.
I Councilman Workman: Well I don't know how to otherwise distinguish between
whether 3,000 is enough or not. It doesn't sound like it's enough but I don't,
a 12,000 square foot building is going to be unbelieveable out there I think. I
' don't know how to.
Mayor Chmiel: It's almost the size of what Cith Hall is right here. Pretty
close. We're 11,000 something.
II Councilman Workman: I guess I don't see anything that we can do then other than
to approve staff's recommendations and figure something out from there. Now if
1 you can make a 3,000 square foot building out of what he's got there or how that
works. I don't know to follow that but what else do we have to go by?
Councilwoman Dimler: Didn't we pass an ordinance that restricts the size of
buildings? Accessory structures.
Paul Krauss: Yeah, but this is under, and again I defer to Roger but this is
I under a court settlement and I think that you have some latitude to do something
other than what the ordinance says. Now I think you should refer to that a
little bit as guidance. Keep in mind here too that we've had complaints from
' some of the adjoining property owners for a long time.
Councilwoman Dimler: And would you refresh my memory what was the square
footage on what we approved for accessory structures?
Paul Krauss: It's 1,000 square feet maximum.
1 Mayor Chmiel: It becomes a problem really to look at it and see from what he's
proposing to do from what the recommendations are. Not to exceed 5,000 square
foot and storage area must consist of building screened outdoor. The building
may not exceed 3,000 square feet. But as Paul said, we don't have to do
accordingly. Even a 5,000 square foot, that's 50 x 100 and what do you wind up
with when you're looking at the total size that Mr. Carlson's looking at of
12,400? It's a vast difference. What he's going to do with the balance of the
II equipment?
Councilwoman Dimler: Well, I don't know what the answer is but I sure don't
I think I want to go beyond the 1,000 that our accessory structure limits
everybody else to at this point.
II Mayor Chmiel: This is a little different case as with what Paul said. Because
this has been established by the Court so therefore you'd have that ability to
' 46
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991 1
make that much of a difference.
Councilwoman.Dimler: But that building will be there maybe long after
9 Y
Mr. Carlson has sold it or moved or whatever. I would be relunctant to go
beyond our ordinary ordinance. 1
Mayor Chmiel: It'd be hard to put a restriction on that as well I would think.
To saying that if he were to build a specific size, that something like we did
before with Minnewashta, that house. That building would have to be removed
either upon sale of the property or whatever.
Roger Knutson: Those things are extremely hard to monitor because the City has 1
no knowledge, when someone sells property, they don't send you a letter saying
we're leaving town.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. No, that's right.
Councilman Wing: We have to bear in mind that that's an extremely choice piece
of property. One of the finest pieces of property in Chanhassen so if it gets
sold, it isn't going to be to store machinery. Someone's going to put up a
magnificent home there if Mr. Carlson doesn't.
Mayor Chmiel: Yes. That is excellent.
Lowell Carlson: For instance...what square footage have they got...that was
approved.
Paul Krauss: I honestly don't know that.
Lowell Carlson: ...riding stables or horse barns or whatever. I'm just asking
if all the neighbors...makes a difference or...
Mayor Chmiel: That's a good question. Could all that equipment that you have
there be called Mustangs?
•
Roger Knutson: One thing to bear in mind, many of those buildings may very well
have been there long before your ordinance requirements are in and ordinance
requirements do change. This is a change.
Councilman Wing: The cases I'm aware of, that would be true. Mr. Mayor, I
picture Mr. Carlson, if I could be slightly colorful here, sitting up on the top
of his hill on a horse looking around saying, what's gone wrong. Where did this
change? I mean this is sort of the last frontier and Custard's last stand in
Chanhassen. He has a very labor intensive, very equipment intensive. business
and when he moved out there and bought this property, nobody cared, nobody saw
it but it's an extremely prime piece of property. Very exposed and my real
concern almost is more for Mr. Carlson because in the very near future, and I
mean the very near future. Not decades but near future, development and housing
is coming in and every single house is going to complain. Everybody's going to
want to move the horse stables out. They're going to want to change it to their
liking and this type of business is not going to fit into that community. So
whether we like it or not or you like it or not, I think you're aware that
progress is going to squeeze you and I out. We're just not going to be
47
1
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
acceptable anymore. As the guy that builds his house right next to the horse
stable down south and the next day hei doesn't like the smell of horses and he
wins. You know we just start shifting the city west and further out and you're
going to get caught up in that so my concern is, you invest money and time in
these buildings and all of a sudden the pressure becomes so great that you
simply cannot maintain the business anymore. The restrictions even here are
going to be very curtailing for you with the amount of equipment that you've
I/ got. I just don't see an easy solution for you here. I see nothing but pain
and trouble for you regardless of what we give because progress is going to be
so against you in the near future. It's disturbing.
' Lowell Carlson: Where can you go? I'm only a... That happens to be my
livelihood and this started in 1973 with you people. I mean there comes a time
it's got to come to an end. If we would have built this building in 1973 like
I we were supposed to, a lot of, we wouldn't be here today... I mean I can't just
keep on all my life being here at Council meetings...a building that was
accepted... They said he'll be at it again...because I didn't have a horse. The
rest of them all got buildings because they had a horse or whatever they had at
' the time. At what part of the smaller building, what sits outside and what
don't? What engine don't start and what boxes don't I need to shovel snow off
of before I get... What equipment sits and what don't? If any of you have got
' diesel, sitting outside is pretty near impossible to get them going. You lose
that much work and you lose that much on a job and the guy ask you why you ain't
there. I'm only trying to make a living.
1 Mayor Chmiel: Okay, I guess we're going to have to come up with a conclusion on
this. Is there any other discussion that you'd like?
' Councilman Wing: Would you, I've done business with Mr. Carlson and know him
personally. Could I, would you allow me to bow out of this discussion? Mr.
Workman has taken the words out of my mouth. My heart and brain here aren't
1 going_to come to terms on this.
'Councilman Mason: That's my line.
Councilman Wing: I gave you credit for that. I quoted you.
Councilman Mason: You said Workman.
Councilman Wing: Excuse me, Mr. Mason. I stand corrected.
Councilman Workman: Mr. Mayor, like I said before, I don't think the Council's
going to say go ahead with the 12,000 square foot building. I think we need to
find a happy medium. Median. Medium. Anything less is going to cause Mr.
Carlson irritation and so, I guess without just throwing out an arbitrary .
number, which I think is going to be unfair and that's why the Council's kind of
hemming and hawing on this one. Maybe we should go out there and try to figure
that out. Get a little better. Maybe we need to go out there individually
1 again. But I don't know what, I have a good idea what this 5,000 square feet
is. It's not a lot considering what he wants so it may not have. any relevance
and maybe we're not supposed to care but I don't know how to make a decision.
I guess I can feel my temperature rising and I'm about ready to go home so I'd
like to make a decision. Maybe we need to table this. I know staff doesn't get
1 48
1
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
excited about that but maybe we need to, in 1973 I was a young lad.
Councilman Mason: Were you even born then?
Councilwoman Dimler: Extremely young. I just wonder about tabling this. This
is our last meeting of the year. It will take us into 1992.
Mayor Chmiel: Well nothing's going to take place on the site.
Councilwoman Dimler: The Judge left no deadline when this was done?
Mayor Chmiel: No, I don't think there's a deadline on this is there? Roger? 1
Roger Knutson: The things were supposed to have been done some time ago
actually but we're the enforcement agency. We bring it back to the Court's
attention. He should have had this done back in September.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. I guess I feel things aren't going to get better
and I think staff is looking for some guidance. Tabling isn't going to give
them any guidance.
Councilman Workman: Yeah but I mean to pull an arbitrary square footage. i
Councilwoman Dimler: Well we do have an ordinance and that's why I said that
earlier that I wouldn't want to go beyond that. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah but 1,000 square feet would be so minimal you couldn't park
my big toe in there. It's much too small as far as I'm concerned. I make a
suggestion we come up with a conclusion. If you want to table this, that's our
perrogative and we can bring it back. If you want to go out there and maybe
look and see total equipment. Or if you so desire, as I said tabling it, why...
Or come up with a conclusion as to total square footage. I think that the, as
everyone has indicated, the 12,000 square foot would be excessive but there's
got to be something that's going to keep Mr. Carlson in business. But yet as
you look at the .5,000 square feet which is 50 x 100, that's not going to do
anything.
Councilwoman Dimler: That's true. I'm sorry, I was confused. We were not
talking about a commercial building there on the accessory structure. That was
on a residential lot? Okay. Do we have an ordinance then that covers
commercial?
Paul Krauss: It's illegal. 1
Councilwoman Dimler: You can't?
Paul Krauss: No.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. 1
Mayor Chmiel: That's why everybody's been wrestling with this since 1973.
Councilman Workman: I'm for taking one more look at it. '
49
1
II City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
•
' Councilwoman Dimler: I guess in that case we'd have to.
Mayor Chmiel: Make the motion.
Councilman Workman: I move to table this so that Council can get a better grip
on what the square footage needs of Mr. Carlson are and come back the first
Council meeting in January to make the decision.
II Mayor Chmiel: I'll second it. Any other discussion?
Councilman Workman moved, Mayor Chmiel seconded to table action on the Lowell
II Carlson site plan until the first City Council meeting in January, 1992. All
voted in favor and the motion carried.
II Lowell Carlson: Let me ask you one thing? What makes the different size is
what that building is...long as wide. Nobody's going to build to the south of
me. Nobody's building to the west of me because I own property right up to the
west. Nobody down in the corner... The one who caused this problem...yelling
and screaming...but anyway. How two people or how two individuals, like I was
just listening to that dog deal you know. If one guy screams, you put the other
guy on the spot really... Anyway, the size to me, the length, this is going to
I be to front...if it happens. Whatever's going to happen. It's only in length.
And to screen...
I Mayor Chmiel: The other thing that bothers me a little bit about it Lowell is
whether or not that existing building will even be in conformance with the Codes
as well at this time.
Lowell Carlson: The Code, what I'd say...
Mayor Chmiel: State Building Inspector?
II Lowell Carlson: So that was always, it was Code when Tonka Toys had it because
all the people as far as...that thing was awful good construction...and
whatever. I called the Butler people and at that time it started way back on
the snow loads and whatever...
Mayor Chmiel: More than likely you're going to see some of us there just taking
II a look see.
Lowell Carlson: Okay...
i Councilman Wing: Lowell, before you commit a lot of money to this, I urge you
to remember my comments that you're the largest contractor lot in the Upper
Midwest right now right in the middle of progress. I mean progress is targeted
at your lot. I'm concerned about you putting a big investment into something
that isn't going to be feasible for the future.
' Lowell Carlson: I hear you. What happened to Mr. Wolf. I was at the same
time...it was farm land. That was all...but I never could understand...whatever
happened. Things just happened in the area and like I say, I've been there
' since 1973 and he bought that property out there 10 years ago. I was here when
it was still a township. Whatever.
' 50
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991 1
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, I'd also encourage Lowell to sit down with building
inspectors using 1991 codes to find out what's involved with that. To correct
one of the misconceptions. I think Roger was asking whether it was going to be
a gravel floor. I think a gravel floor is illegal these days. We had to pave
the floor in our maintenance shed and put in grease traps in there because of
all the equipment we have.
Mayor Chmiel: Even in our own buildings. 1
Lowell Carlson: Shop floor. The shop will be all that.
Paul Krauss: Right and it would have to have grease trap drains and you'll have 1
to maintain those.
Lowell Carlson: As far as me blacktopping the inside of there... 1
Paul Krauss: I don't know if it is or isn't but I encourage you to sit down
with the inspectors. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Lowell, why don't you come in and talk to our inspectors and have
them go out there and you can take a look see at that particular building. See
if it's even acceptable.
Lowell Carlson: Okay, that's the third building permit...This one here was a
pretty high priced building. 1
APPOINTMENTS TO COMMISSIONS:
A. PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION. 1
B. PLANNING COMMISSION.
C. SOUTHWEST METRO TRANSIT COMMISSION.
Mayor Chmiel: I understand that we do have a Council person, starting with item
(c) who would like to serve on the Southwest Metro Transit Commission. Mike has
indicated that he would and I would like to go backwards on this particular one
and start out with Mike because I've got someone's who...
Councilman Workman: I'd move approval of that.
Councilman Wing: Second.
Councilman Mason: Can I check with my wife first ?, 1
. Mayor Chmiel: No. Any discussion?
Councilman Workman: Mr. Mayor, yes and there is, and maybe Ursula's going to
get to it.
Councilwoman Dimier: I was just going to say it but go ahead. 1
Councilman Workman: No, please go ahead.
1
51 1
1
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
' Councilwoman Dimler: Well I served on that Commission and I guess I have to say
that Debra, who also applied has done an excellent job and she is a rider and
that really is valuable input. However, Chanhassen has had 3 representatives on
it and now that priviledge goes to Eden Prairie and I understand that they're
' appointing a rider so that view will still be represented. And since we only
have two, I would speak in favor of having that person be a Council person in
the fact that we have a heavy legislative agenda and Council people apparently
pull something with the legislature there.
Mayor Chmiel: More so.
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah. Also, I would urge Debra to reapply when the city
of Chanhassen again has the opportunity for 3.
Mayor Chmiel: Next year.
Councilwoman Dimler: Is that what you were going to say?
' Councilman Workman: No, yeah. Just a real strong thank you to her. We're not
trying to bump her out. As much as an elected official is usually.
Mayor Chmiel: I think a letter should be so sent to her indicating that so she
is aware that we'd like to see her back again next year if she'd like to make
that application at that time.
Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Wing seconded to appoint Councilman Mason
to the Southwest Metro Transit Commission. All voted in favor and the motion
carried.
Mayor Chmiel: Park and Recreation. We have had the respective candidates
' before us. I would like to make one recommendation, Mr. Berg.
Councilman Mason: I certainly would second that.
Councilman Workman: I know Mr. Erickson also.
Councilman Wing: I'll move those two.
Councilman Mason: I'll second.
Mayor Chmiel: Mr. Erickson and Mr. Berg. Any other discussion?
' Councilwoman Dimler: That would be as the Park and Rec Commission has?
' Mayor Chmiel: That's correct.
Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Mason seconded to appoint Randy Erickson and
Fred Berg to the Park and Recreation Commission. All voted in favor and the
'. motion carried.
Mayor Chmiel: Planning Commission.
Councilman Mason: I would move Mr. .Ledvina unless someone else wants to?
' 52
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991 1
Councilman Workman: Are those the only two? '
Councilman Mason: Well there was Mark Senn, Walter Thompson.
Mayor Chmiel: How long has Mr. Ledvina been in town? ,
•
Councilwoman Dimler: 4 1/2 years.
Mayor Chmiel: 4 1/2? Okay. The question was asked of him whether or not
there'd be any conflict of interest, just for your information Tom. He is an
engineer. He's an environmental engineer. 1
Councilman Wing: Was there a motion on this?
Mayor Chmiel: For which one? ,
Councilman Wing: For the Planning Commission, because I would just to move the
re- appointment of the encumbants. 1
Mayor Chmiel: The existing encumbants that are four. Would you just read off
those names? ,
Councilman Wing: Excuse me. Mr. Conrad, Mr. Emmings, Ms. Ahrens, Mr. Erhart.
Reappointment of those 4 and the fifth application will go to Matthew Ledvina.
Mayor Chmiel: There's a motion on the floor.
Councilman Workman: Mr. Mayor, could I get Councilmember Wing to make a motion
just for the current candidates and do that as a second motion which I would
abstain since I didn't meet any of these people.
Councilman Wing: I'll so move that friendly amendment. ,
Councilman Workman: Second.
Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Workman seconded to appoint Ladd Conrad, Steve
Emmings, Joan Ahrens and Tim Erhart to the Planning Commission. All voted in
favor and the motion carried. '
Councilman Wing: I would continue that motion Mr. Mayor, with Mr. Ledvina. I
did meet him tonight and I have not met the others. I am only doing that
because of my faith in the existing Commission and I feel that their first
. choice happened to be him and I'm willing to support that position. They seem
to feel he's compatible and what they most need.
Mayor Chmiel: We already had a motion on the floor for Mr. Ledvina. Would you
like to second that? Michael made it.
Councilman Wing: Oh excuse me. Second. 1
Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Wing seconded to appoint Matthew Ledvina to
the Planning Commission. All voted in favor except Councilman Workman who
abstained and the motion carried.
53 ,
•
1
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
Paul Krauss: We do have one more appointment that we neglected to put on here
but it's one that the Council fills and that's the Board of Adjustments it
occurs to me tonight. Councilman Workman has served very ablely.
Mayor Chmiel: We'll just leave him on there then.
Councilman Workman: Praise the Lord. I'm feeling better by •the second here.
I didn't even think about that. Aren't I supposed to get champagne?
Mayor Chmiel: You're right...public.
Paul Krauss: It's always filled by a Council person anyway. That's a Council
position.
11 Councilwoman Dimler: It's up to Mr. Wing.
Councilman Wing: Why would it be up to me?
Mayor Chmiel: Because everyone else has served on it.
Councilman Workman: Mr. Mason has now taken the Southwest Metro.
' Councilman Wing: Because they're all hassles and they all come to Council
anyway, can't we just?
11 Councilwoman Dimler: No.
' Mayor Chmiel: No. It's a very difficult job. It really is. But I would like
to make that motion.
Councilman Workman: Second.
Councilman Wing: No, there could be a conflict here. The only disadvantage to
that is that as a newly elected Fire Chief, it allows me to be there until 7:30
on Monday nights which looks good politically, off the record. Do these occur
every Monday night? Once a month?
' Councilman Workman: They've been just about every Council meeting.
Councilman Wing: When are they brought out?
' Councilwoman Dimler: It's when they come up.
Paul Krauss: It's virtually every, well in the summer at any rate, spring, it's
11 every Council meeting.
Councilman Workman: Actually it's an advantage to be on it because it's kind of
like you get that nasty decision behind you and so when it comes to the Council
you can kind of sit back and laugh at people.
Mayor Chmiel: And we're moving along.
Councilman Wing: Is it just simply my turn?
54
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991 1
Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
Councilman Workman: Well your's or Mike's.
Councilman Mason: It's either you or me. You do it this year and then the next 1
year.
Mayor Chmiel: You have the opportunity to either flip for it or. ,
Councilman Wing: Do I get paid more?
•
Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
Councilman Workman: In spades, yes. I took it last year because Ursula had
already done it and the Mayor, you're kind of the. 1
Councilwoman Dimler: He's the alternate.
Councilman Workman: And I took it last year because you guys were playing this 1
I'm too green thing.
Mayor Chmiel: So I have a motion on the floor that Mr. Wing be appointed to the t
Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Is there a second ?.
Councilman Workman: Second. 1
Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Workman seconded to appoint Councilman Wing to
the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. All voted in favor and the motion '
carried.
SET 1992 SEWER AND WATER RATES.
Mayor Chmiel: Who wants to do this one, Don?
Don Ashworth: Tom is here. Why don't I just start out by saying. '
Councilman Workman: I would move approval.
Councilman Wing: No. Please, not yet. 1
Don Ashworth: That it's been a real dilemma that we have with our sewer utility
operations. The biggest problem is the major, major increase associated with
the MWCC. To increase the fees to simply break even would put us into 40'c -50'c
type of an increase. Tom and I will be discussing again as part of the budget
presentation in which the material you have I think is really probably 2 months
ago, to try to make more gradual increases. Albeit 20% is not minor increase.
Mayor Chmiel: To me that's sort of hefty isn't it?
Don Ashworth: The shortfall, we're running into, we cut into our fund balances
this year, next year. We've been going with a 20%. We'll see another increase
this next year. The only thing I can think of doing is in passing this to make 1
sure that we get as much publicity as we can. That the City is not collecting
55 ,
1
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
1 any more for local costs than we were last year. The entire amount is going
over to MWCC. In fact more than what we're, 25% more than what we're going to
be collecting is going to take and go to them.
Mayor Chmiel: How about if we like our animal program, having an officer take
care of that, how about if we offer to some of the adjacent cities next to us
who don't really have water people, to absorb those into our system and start
' receiving some revenues from that?
Don Ashworth:- Water is a revenue producer for us. If you did not have a
combined water and sewer where the water was helping to offset all of your
sewer. It's the sewer that's the big cost. It's the sewer where you may have
seen the letter I wrote to Excelsior in regards to some of the antics they're
going through up there. There's an instance. We'd be a lot better off just
giving that line up. We make money by giving up those customers. It sounds
ridiculous but that's the absolute truth. For every dollar we collect from the
customers on Chaska Road, we will pay out $1.10. It doesn't make any sense to
operate.
Mayor Chmiel: The same token they can go in and blame those properties for the
city once they start providing those services and we'd be losing those people as
well.
Don Ashworth: I talked to... She's our representative for MWCC. She's trying
to set up a meeting. I wouldn't mind at all seeing MWCC basically take over the
sewer system in Chanhassen and then we'll turn around and offer contract to them
for cleaning their pipes and doing administration. We'd come out 20% ahead.
Right now we're losing 30% to 40 %. I mean it sounds ridiculous but it's the
truth.
' Mayor Chmiel: Something has to turn around doesn't it? I know when I threw
that out just sort of being funny, I'm serious when I'm saying...these kinds of
services to maybe other communities that are not able to do that. Maybe we
should look at that. Look at those new innovative ways of acquiring some
' additional dollars for the city.
Don Ashworth: Well there is that possibility as it deals with the Shorewood
' system. They're currently paying, what did I tell you it was Charles,
$40,000.00? $70,000.00? They're currently paying $40,000.00 or $70,000.00 to a
firm to simply tell them what it is they should do with them system.
Tom Chaffee: $70,000.00.
Don Ashworth: $70,000.00. With the new telemetry system we have in place,
maybe there is an opportunity. We've kind of shied away from that because
providing services to other communities hasn't been that popular.
' Mayor Chmiel: No but it's becoming more and more, some of the things I know
we've been doing and should be doing. If we can benefit from it but that's
something that has to be looked at. Maybe if you would take a look at that.and
come up with some conclusions to see where we could move with it. -
' 56
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991 1
Don Ashworth: Otherwise I really don't know what to do with the thing. I don't
know if you've noticed in the newspapers been almost every city has gone in and
f got going through rate increases. St. Paul, Shorewood, Excelsior. Virtually
every community around and the sad part is we're high to begin with you know so
now by them raising, they're just getting closer to us but ironically we're
being forced to raise ours that much more.
Mayor Chmiel: How is this going to affect the industrial or commercial
properties?
Don Ashworth: The rate per 1,000 is the same for all users.
Mayor Chmiel: No, I'm saying how much would it affect their bills? We're
talking residential and we've had those price quotes in here. I.don't have any
idea as to what the commercial or industrial people actually use. 1
Don Ashworth: Do you have any idea on an average Tom? Of course I suppose
there's a lot of variation. Take a large plant like an Instant Webb, Mail may
have less or equal useage with a residential home because they don't, I mean
except for the bathrooms, that's really it Whereas others, Rosemount on the
other hand has a relatively high bill.
Tom Chaffee: Their base rate is the same as the residential. The same as the
resident, I mean $2.60 per 1,000. Same as the residential rates it's just that
they have 1,500 employees that are in flushing the toilets every 10 to 15
minutes plus the fact that...typically the commercial and industrial users, they
have set... They're charged every quarter based on their water useage...because
of the fact that we have employment that will vary from one quarter to the next.
They shut a plant down in the winter quarter and you have 100 people or
whatever, we set their sewer rate at that. Then in the summer time when they
have 3,000 people...run us really into bankruptcy.
Don Ashworth: One of the nice things with, we used to have little postcard
type. Now we're sending the bills in an envelope. That does give us the
opportunity to stuff information with that bill. One of the things that we do
would be to put some of these statistics in there and then we're looking at over
40% increase from Metro. That we did not want to put on this type of an
increase but even with a 20% increase, we're still losing 25% and not one penny 11 is going to the city. Not one additional penny is available for salaries or
anything else. This is solely going to MCC. Try to hammer it home that way.
Councilman Wing: Is that 25% going to be resolved if you solve the infusion
problem?
Don Ashworth: The I & I? Yeah but you can make a dent in I & I but you're not
going to take... I mean we have high concentration of clays and at the same
point in time almost all of our sewer lines, I mean we're trying to keep
pollutants out of the lake and so the best spot to catch a lot of these sewers, 11 the septic systems, is right along the lake. So I mean Lotus Lake, that's where
the sewer pipe is. It's 12 feet below the level of the lake. 20 feet from it.
There's just such an impact on that sewer pipe that no matter what you do,
there's still going to be some leakage. I think we really should, we need to
get an aggressive program on these home sump pumps. I know our neighborhood.
57
II City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
I Mayor Chmiel: That's something that's been discussed but nothing's being done
but what are we going to do?
Don Ashworth: Well some of the programs we're talking about is when a home
II changes occupancy, make sure that the building inspectors and others who are
going in there, they look for this. Whenever there's a change in the-meter,
make sure they're looking for this. I don't know how effective.
II Mayor Chmiel: You know I was looking at this before the average use and I came
up with this is costing us with the new rate about a penny more per day.
1 Don Ashworth: I get so much of that at home where you know, buy whatever
insurance because it's only a penny more per whatever.
1 Mayor Chmiel: That's what Tom says all the time. But that's what I was looking
at, yeah.
Don Ashworth: If some portion of this were going to stay local, I would surely
recommend using that as a means to tell people but I think we're better off just
telling, show them what the gross figures are. How much more is being paid to
MWCC.
II Mayor Chmiel: And that's what we have to offset because we just can't
supplement that either. That's flow water that's causing it but somehow you
have to make up that difference. So any other discussion? Question.
Councilman Wing: I went into Tom Chaffee's office today at 1:35 feeling pretty
I good and I walked out at 2:15 depressed. What I did learn was that.
Mayor Chmiel: He gets me in 5 minutes.
1 Councilman Wing: It's my feeling that our sewer and water set -up in the city is
the greatest show on earth. It's the biggest bang for the buck I've ever
experienced and as Mr. Ashworth mentioned, the water is holding it's own. But
I something we haven't discussed and I hate to bring this up because I don't want
to get battered by the Council because they're so cost conscienscious but we've
talked conservation. We talk environment. We try and hold down sprinkling. We
encourage, we've had this Recycling Committee. I've got water conservation
II
items on every faucet and shower in our home. I'm doing everything I can. We
don't sprinkle our yard and so I'm going to pay $1.10 for the first 25,000
gallons and I thank the City for that. I think that's a very generous offer.
I But after that point I disagree with this $1.30. I think that we at one time
talked about a graduated penalty. If you want to use water and sprinkle your
yard year round on rainy days and all night long, do it but it's not going to
I come cheap. We don't have the ground water, the well capacity to support the
use of water and I think that we should be setting a standard here and
encouraging conservation. All the advertising in the world doesn't have the
same impact as the water bill going up steeply. And I would favor as a change
' to this resolution a .minimum of $1.50 for the additional 25,000 gallons to make
people start thinking. I consider that to be really fair and reasonable. If
I want to stay within that 25,000, I pay $1.10 per 1,000. I'm going to pay 20
I cents more over what's recommended. Now what happens? If people cut down on
water, it cuts down our flow which cuts down part of our sewer problem. This
' 58
i
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991 1
whole thing comes back on a constructive nature. Less water consumption. If
you choose to use it, it's going to cost you a fortune but by cutting back and
encouraging a cut back we're starting to tackle some of the sewer problems.
Sanitary sewer problems so that's one issue in the water. And assuming I might
be in a minority here because of the conservative nature of the Council, I won't
support this rate structure. I don't think it's reasonable for the
environmental impact. The other issue is the sanitary sewer. It's in trouble.
I think we have to pay for it. Infiltration is done. Mr. Ashworth has said
even with repairing the new lines it's still the way they're laid out, we're
going to have an infiltration problem. Sumps. How are we going to stop this
flow? Cut back 30!, we're still going to be running in the red on this one so
it looks to me like we're going to have to foot the bill on sanitary sewer. I
don't see any way around that unless somebody has some ideas. And it's an
enterprise fund. There's a word I learned today. I'm so excited about
gobble -e -goop and enterprise fund. I got those both today. That has to be
supported. That doesn't come out of general revenues. That has to be supported
by the user. By that particular fund and so if it's costing $100.00 to run it,
we have to collect $100.00 in taxes. There's no way around it so if we owe it, 1
we owe it. When it comes down to these types of utilities, I'm glad that we've
got them and I'm going to be willing to pay for them.
Councilman Workman: We could always defund MWCC. That's another layer of '
government.
Councilman Wing: I do wish Mr. Mayor that the Council would, before approving ,
this, address the long term conservation and environmental impact of the water.
Mayor Chmiel: I think we have done that before. 1
Councilman Wing: But it never got anywhere. I mean we really did discuss this
graduated scale and I don't know where it went. I think staff supported it and
I think the environmentalists supported it and thent he conservatives said well
geez. And it's easy to fall into that. But long term, let's get out of this
year, next year. Let's go 5 -10 years. I think we're making a mistake not
taking a stand on this. We don't owe the city water at the risk of losing it
and giving it away. I'm really, whatever you can do to me to force me to
conserve, I'm all for it.
Don Ashworth: Tom Chaffee will probably shoot me for saying this but you do
have the ability to potentially put in let's say 15%. I hate to say 10%
increase on the sewer that would be effective January 1 with then a mid -year, 11 prior to the summer season occurring, a 10% onto water which get the type of
.thing Dick is looking for. So you move that from $1.30 to $1.45 or $1.50 next
summer and put an what would be the equivalent of 12% -13% now. It should have
about the same number of dollars. You lose some in the first 6 months but '
overall you may be able to Out it in in a more gradual phasing process because
we'll get complaints twice.
Tom Chaffee: I should shoot you for saying that. '
Don Ashworth: Let's look at what...
59
11
J City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
' Councilman Wing: But I bet it's what you'd recommend. I bet if you guys were
to meet tomorrow that that's what you''d feel.
Mayor Chmiel: I think they already...
Councilman Workman: Are we going to table this?
Don Ashworth: That's not true.
Councilwoman Dimler: Can I ask a question? Does this require a public hearing?
Don Ashworth: No.
Mayor Chmiel: In raising the water?
' Councilwoman Dimler: Right.
Mayor Chmiel: No, other than the fact that we adopt it and not getting the word
out to the people and informing them that is what we do and showing them what
the difference in costs are in relationship to the MWCC.
Don Ashworth: On any of these, if you.felt this was really important, I'd like
to see a separate notice appear in the newspaper. You can always do those
things.
Councilwoman Dimler: I know a lot of people are in a budget crunch right now.
Mayor Chmiel: Everybody's on a budget.
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, everybody.
' Mayor.Chmiel: And all we keep saying is we're raising every time we turn
around.
Councilwoman Dimler: It's like increasing taxes.
Mayor Chmiel: I've been getting a lot of that and I'm not saying that no, we
' probably shouldn't but I think we should get this information out to the people
making them aware of the fact this is what we're looking at.
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, and to really hit this point home that this is not,
the City's not gaining anything by this. It's all going to MWCC.
Mayor Chmiel: It's all that we have to pay and there's no sense in going any
' other direction in that.
Don Ashworth: If the Council does not act tonight, it means that cannot become
then effective for January 1st so you bill on a series. In other words you
break it up into three different series which I think all of our town is broken
up into thirds. So that almost makes it more difficult. You're-almost then
going to be starting this effective April 1st. We're already behind the 8 ball
' with things. I mean can we get a minimum of 10X -15X? Something that could be
effective January 1.
' 60
1
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991 L
Councilman Wing: We're talking sewer now? '
Don Ashworth: Sewer.
Councilman Wing: Because I want to make sure the pounding fist heard, if you 1
use more, you pay more on the water. I don't want to lose track of that. I
don't care if I get voted down. I just want to make sure that there's a loud
statement from my part. ,
Councilman Mason: I think you might have a little support, at least on the
Council. 1
Don Ashworth: Why not then do the notice thing, that I could put in with the
sewer thing. Tell people this doesn't solve the problem. Additional rate
increase has to be looked at. Do a publication thing that we could potentially
look at effective April 1st for water rates. We've got the alternative then of
Councilman Wing's approach or take it all back on the sewer again.
Councilwoman Dimler: I do think it warrants discussion about our total package 1
as to what we're supposed to do. I would like to somehow notify the public and
get a little bit of input before we come up with the final solution. But I can
also see that we have to do something today with the sewer.
Councilman Wing: The public input can be whatever it wants. We still have to
pay it. It's not going to go away. It doesn't matter whether they like it or
not. I mean I don't want to pay it.
Councilwoman Dimler: Exactly. 1
Mayor Chmiel: But I think the point that Ursula's making is let the people be
informed as to why we're doing it before they get it.
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah.
Councilman Wing: I agree. That's certainly fair. 1
Councilman Workman: So what's to do here?
Councilman Wing: What was the recommended increase rate the City Manager '
suggested?
Tom Chaffee: The base per 1,000 increases from $2.20 to $2.60. It's all 1
.correlated to the minimums, etc.. Increased accordingly.
Councilman Wing: And that's effective January? 1
Tom Chaffee: Effective as of January 2nd. Additional comments for any interim
solution proposed that the rate increase be effective in it's entirity for all
buildings as of January 2nd so we don't go into a staged approach for increasing
it. As my memo indicated...$100,000.00 as a result.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, as you indicated Tom. It's going to $2.60. Before it was
$2.20 and previously it was $11.00 and now it's $13.00 so there's a $2.00
61 1
1
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
II increase there and 40 cents per 1,000.
Don Ashworth: I do think we have to put some portion of it on. I hear your
comments.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, and we do.
' Tom Chaffee: If you look at the proposed resolution there...presented earlier
in the budget process.. The one that was presented earlier identifies this
•
specific differences...
Don Ashworth: Just to get us out of here, how about just taking whatever Tom
has presented there. Cutting it in half.
Councilman Wing: In my discussions today I really felt that that Tom and Don
had really thought this out and worked it out and what they're telling us is
sort of not a maybe. It's sort of a must. Give me a number Don. I'll vote for
numbers. Give me a number. What do you need? What do we have to do right now?
Tom Chaffee: $3.00/1,000.
Don Ashworth: We're not going to get there even with or without the
recommendation of Tom's. I support the public hearing process. I guess what
I'm saying is, put through one -half of what it is that Tom has recommended with
' the idea that in mid -1992 there will be an additional rate increase required. It
would probably go on water at that point in time and again we'll do all the
notification things that we can.
Councilman Wing: I have to go to my financial advisor here Mayor Chmiel. Can
you accept that or are you hesitant?
Mayor Chmiel: No, I think I can probably accept it.
Councilman Wing: I'll so move.
Councilman Workman: What's the motion?
' Councilman Wing: Acceptance of, I believe it was $3.00 Don?
Don Ashworth: No. Taking the recommendation as presented by the Finance
Department as a rate increase and dividing that by 2. That becomes the
effective rate January 1st.
Councilman Workman: Second.
Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussion?
Councilman Wing: And the water fits in when later?
Mayor Chmiel: Water will come back in April.
1
62
•
1
City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991
Resolution *91 -116: Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Workman seconded to set
the 1992 sewer and water rates at lone -half of what was presented by the Finance
Department to be effective January 1, 1992. All voted in favor and the motion
carried.
AWARD OF BIDS, EMPLOYEE HEALTH INSURANCE BENEFITS.
Mayor Chmiel: I think everyone has had an opportunity to read this. They're
suggesting that they stay with their existing carrier Medica /PHP and it appears
as though all of the employees are relatively satisfied with what's here and I
would like to have a motion for that.
Councilman Mason: With a 90% overwhelming choice of employees to stay as is,
I'd move approval.
Councilman Workman: Second.
Mayor Chmiel: Moved and seconded. Any other discussion? 1
Councilman Wing: Only that 1 still feel we should, as a city, for our young
employees give some relief on the cost of dental. I. realize it's somewhat dead
at this point. However, I will introduce it as a motion and if it gets Council
support, I don't care if it's $600.00, $300.00. I don't care what we do. I
don't want to drop that.
Mayor Chmiel: There's certain things too that the employees feel are more 1
important than that to them and the way they're going right now I would suggest
that as long as they're happy, I'm happy. 1
Councilman Wing: Okay. And if you're happy, I'm happy.
Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Workman seconded to award the bid for the 1
Employee Health Insurance benefits to Medica/PHP. All voted in favor and the
motion carried.
Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to adjourn the meeting. 1
All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 11:12
Submitted by Don Ashworth
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
1
1
1
63 1
1
r CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING ►
DECEMBER 4, 1991 — -
' Vice Chairman Erhart called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m..
MEMBERS PRESENT: Tim Erhart, Ladd Conrad, Jeff Farmakes, Joan Ahrens and
Brian Batzli
MEMBERS ABSENT: Annette Ellson and Steve Emmings
STAFF PRESENT: Paul Krauss, Planning Director; Jo Ann Olsen, Senior
Planner and Kate Aanenson, Planner II
11 PUBLIC HEARING:
PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND REZONING TO PUD. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
OF 94 ACRES TO CREATE 10 INDUSTRIAL LOTS LOCATED SOUTH OF THE CHICAGO.
MILWAUKEE. ST. PAUL AND PACIFIC RAILROAD AND EAST OF AUDUBON ROAD.
CHANHASSEN BUSINESS CENTER. RYAN CONSTRUCTION.
Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this item.
Erhart: Does the developer have any presentation or comments to make
regarding the report on the plan?
Kent Carlson: Yes.
' Erhart: And your name is?
Kent Carlson: My name is Kent Carlson. I'm with Ryan Construction
Company. We've worked the past few months with staff to develop these
plan's and we're very pleased with where we are today and thank you for
• taking the time to consider them. One of the things that we're looking at
and we've discussed with the plans is the grading and the conditions that
will exist as we prepare the Phase I property for development. Staff has
requested that we do all of the grading at one time and install all of the
landscape on the buffer zone and that's a concern of ours. One of the
issues is the landscaping that would be installed in that buffer zone. If
there isn't any development nearby, we're concerned that it won't survive.
During this past season it would have survived because we had so much rain
but previous to that we went through several years where there was kind of
a drought condition and a lot of the landscaping that we planted in some of
our other business parks did not survive. So what we'd like to propose is
what we've discussed with staff earlier. Is putting in the landscaping
along that buffer zone as the sites develop or as the screening is
required. In our landscaping and grading plans you'll see that the
elevation and the buffer and the berm that's going to be built along
Audubon and to the south of that area is going to be quite extensive. So
the existing conditions will be improved upon and the residential
neighborhood directly across Audubon shouldn't be negatively impacted.
' What you'll see is very similar to the conditions that exist today with
kind of a large berm there that will be in a green area. We're not going
to be removing any trees there. The current site uses the soybean field so
you've got kind of a green low lying cover already so that's to remain
there. Again, what we're trying to do is just provide additional
landscaping and berming as the site develops. I guess that's my only real
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 2
comment as to the staff report. Everything else I think has been worked
out satisfactorily.
Erhart: Okay. You've reviewed all of the conditions with the staff on the
report?
Kent Carlson: Yeah. There's a few conditions that Kate mentioned that we
need to get together and work out. That 50% office. We talked about
certain users that are in the marketplace that don't fit that criteria and
yet they would be a very welcomed tenant to have along Audubon because of
the size, the mass, the design elements of their projects. So to try and
' pigeon hole a specific 50% office use is going to be difficult as far as a
criteria. I think we're better coming up with the design standard to meet
that. Again, the way we've priced that property over along Audubon, we're
1 going to attract the more image conscience user to that area. We're
looking for buildings that are typically going to be a little lower in
height. Going to be a little smaller in scale. That along with the
setbacks and the requirements for the buffer zones and those things are
going to allow us to have a little bit more of a green area. A little
nicer mix up in that area as the entryway to the park. So I think econmics
will drive the decision to have nicer buildings in that area.
Erhart: Okay Kent. Thank you. Okay, any other comments from the public
on the project or Kathy's report? If not, is there a motion to close the
public hearing.
' Ahrens moved, Conrad seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in
favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Erhart: Is there any, do you want to respond to anything that Kent had
indicated about the landscaping? Kathy at this point is that.
' Aanenson: We've talked about that. I'll let Paul address that.
Krauss: Basically...sketch that's on here.
Erhart: Just to review. Right now your conditions is that they should do
all the landscaping as shown?
Aanenson: In Phase 1 for the construction.
Krauss: For the buffer. The project's being built in two phases as Kent
outlined. This is the first project that you've seen that incorporates
those buffer yards that we developed when we drafted the Comprehensive
Plan. Ryan is fully comfortable with providing us with that space. The
additional space and they have developed a preliminary landscaping plan for
the buffer that needs to be refined a little bit but it probably does a
responsible job. We added a condition that the first phase buffer yard be
developed with the first phase and not wait until buildings are proposed
that we don't have any control over that. That's an economic thing. The
reason we did that was two fold. First of all when the buffer yard
ordinance was drafted, in part one of the questions that was raised was
will these buffer yards be installed up front or is that something that
will have to wait. I think specifically some of those questions were being
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 -- Page 3 1
posed by people who lived across the street and thought they had a buffer
yard but it was never been defined by the city and they never got it
although Jo Ann was negotiating with them and we think they've volunteered II
to put in some buffering after the fact. But that was, and the ordinance,
the buffer yard ordinance is structured to require that stuff up front. Soli
that's where we were coming from when we required it. On the other hand I
think that Kent's made some fairly persuasive arguments that this is an
extremely large project and it is difficult to maintain those plantings in 1 ,
areas where you don't have anybody there and you can't readily water and
that sort of thing. I guess when we discussed this at length this
afternoon I was unable to agree to change the recommendation. But I do
understand the concerns. There's also a cross concern obviously and I
don't know how much you need to concern yourselves with that but there is all
considerable cost to up front the trees and landscaping before there are
buildings up to carry that cost. I guess arguably you'd have the same up
front cost to build roads and sewers before buildings go in too and this is 11
part of that package. So I guess the long and the short of it is, the
ordinance requires it up front. You can vary that if you want to. I think
there's some reasons to consider modifying the requirements. Ryan is
trying to come up with some compromise positions to do that. I don't feel
I can recommend it to you but if you want to consider that, we'll work it
either way. '
Erhart: Okay. Well we'll continue that in the discussion here so with
that why don't we open it up to the commissioners and I guess with the few
people here tonight I'd suggest that we kind of have an open discussion and
maybe try to keep it by subject. Feel free to interject but we'll start
with Ladd anyway if you want to start out with something.
Conrad: Landscaping wise, I guess that's a key issue here and I'm real 1
impressed that staff and the developer have agreed on so many things.
That's outstanding because if we start fumbling around with it, we'd know
what would happen. My compliments. Generally it seems like a good idea to
buffer in the beginning and to landscape. Especially, it creates a
presence for the development. An entry presence. Like a monument. It
screens the neighbors. It creates a really positive image. If we didn't II
do that, is it piecemeal then? Is it piecemeal then by lot?
Krauss: That's the concern. By the way, before I respond to that too. I II
just saw something that we clarified for ourselves this afternoon. We've
been talking about the buffer yard on Audubon Road and the plans do show
the buffer plantings all the way to the north of the site. In fact the
buffer yard ends someplace right about here because that's where
residential development ends. The buffer yards were only created where you
had higher intensity land uses up against residential land uses so north of
that line, that landscaping and that buffer, we've already talked to the '
developer. That buffer yard that you see on Lot 1, which is this one up
here is not needed. 5o I guess the landscaping question that we're looking
at installing on page 1 runs from here to here. So you know, and you raise ll
the question about piece mealing it. That's a concern. There are ways of
working it out. Kent suggested a few. For example you have a site over
here. You could be building on this site and this site and that site
before and without requiring a buffer yard here because you haven't build II
on that site. The worst case is the buffer yard will be built whenever
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 4
market conditions dictate. Now hopefully this thing will be a prosperous
development and will be built quickly. I just am uncomfortable counting on
that.
' Erhart: If I can interject a couple questions. On the buffer, are those
built on berms or is that going to be?
Aanenson: We've got a cross section.
Krauss: I don't know if this one shows it as well. But yes, it's hard to
pick up from. You'd have to look at the full scale grading plans that you
' have. There are considerable berms along Audubon.
Aanenson: Kind of meandering.
' Krauss: Yeah, and we've asked for more detail on that but clearly we are
getting landscape berms along Audubon.
Ahrens: So the concern, Ryan's concern is that or Kent. Is it Kent?
Kent Carlson: Yes.
t Ahrens: Is that you won't be, what you plant on the berms may die because
there's not going to be anything developed in the park?
Kent Carlson: Right. ...no one there to maintain the trees... All of the
buildings are going to be built with irrigation systems...and without
anybody there to take care of the vegetation in the buffer zone, the
' irrigation systems won't go into the buffer zone necessarily but...
Ahrens: I assume though that you're going to have the berms in place?
Kent Carlson: The berms will be placed.
' Ahrens: And there's going to be sod on the berms?
Kent Carlson: Probably grass seed.
' Ahrens: So there's going to have to be some system set up anyway to water
the seed.
' Kent Carlson: Yeah...prairie grass...
Ahrens: Is there anything else that you can plant on there that would be,
any bushes or anything? That wouldn't be high maintenance? Temporarily
put something on the berms until you put trees. I mean is there a
compromise that can' be worked out there?
' Aanenson: Like a ground cover that wouldn't take much?
Ahrens: Yeah.
Kent Carlson: Yeah but I don't know that it gives us the height. I think
the majority, if you look at the elevations of the center where you've got
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 5 1
sight lines and you've got a building. You've got what would be a 2 story
building there. The berm really screens the business park itself and the
land area is mass is behind in the business park quite well from across the
street in the residential area. It's only when you put in a structure that '
you'll need additional landscaping. That's our feelings is that you can
wait. When we have something to screen, a building...and we've got
something to screen, then it's appropriate to put the landscaping in on top
of the berm... And Paul and I talked about...develop the lots on the north"
side between Lake Drive and the railroad tracks...develop the ones on the
south side, we'd go ahead and put some landscaping in there anyway. We
take some of the risk there because we do have a building...on our
preliminary approval neighbors were concerned... Our biggest concern, the
problem I have, I don't have any problem spending the money. It's spending
the money 2 or 3 times because they could die and then you go back and
remove it and plant it again and then it dies the following year and then I
you have to plant it again.
Ahrens: I agree. There's nothing that looks worse than a berm that has
dead landscape all over it. We have enough in the city but will an
unlanscaped berm cover up development that may be on Lots 6 and 7?
Kent Carlson: No, that's what I'm saying. If we develop Lots 6 and 7
before. Whenever we have something that needs it, we'll put it in. Even
if on the other side of...I guess we're looking at kind of phased plan for
the area north of Lake Drive...
Erhart: Any other comments about that particular subject. I guess if not,
the question I have is, would you expect that in putting in the underground"
sprinkling system that you're going to sprinkle this berm and the buffer
area. I thought I heard you say through it all that you would not.
Kent Carlson: Typically you don't run it all the way out to the edge of 1
the berming. You can have some elevations that...just difficult to
install. But if you put...out into your back lawn area, you get a pretty
good sweep area. '
Erhart: Yeah really but it wouldn't seem to me to make any sense if you
have a berm strip, if we have a buffer strip that's intended to be a
natural growth, you wouldn't want to sprinkle it at all. Why do that?
It's just a waste of water. Given that, and I question the premise that
that would be, those buffers would be taken better care of once there's a
building there and someone occupying it. I just can't imagine the 1
sprinkling it and quite frankly in our experience in our building, the
trees weren't taken care of any better when you were there than before they
were put in. So I guess I would have a hard time, I guess I'd agree with
Paul. It seems to me they ought to be put in in the beginning, at least on II
Audubon. The other thing is, the berms where all the trees died and then
we put those in in a drought. Some of those berms are extremely high.
What are we talking about here? The top of the berm relative to the
surrounding ground.
Krauss: As I recall, I know the ones you're thinking of. They're not
nearly as high as the ones up there.
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 6
Erhart: All the water drains off the berm and so they get dry. The other
advantage you have in planting them early is you have the opportunity to
get the growth on the trees earlier on so you get it established. I don't
know. Any other comments on that subject? Ladd, do you want to carry on?
Conrad: Paul, you've reviewed the landscape plan and the berms are
accomplishing the need for the neighbors to the east. They're high enough
and you know, I look at what was to be planted there and not being an
expert. That you're comfortable with the planting. The proposed plantings
accomplishing what we want. It looks like a mixture. There were some
Norway maples in there which is not a, it's a fast growing tree and that
might meet some needs.
Krauss: We've asked for some additional detail in the grading for the
1 berming but the landscaping is fairly well done. Keep in mind that this
buffer yard is part of a bigger picture of buffering the property across
the street. We have the right-of-way for Audubon which in itself is just
distance and doesn't do very much except that Audubon is graded, the site's
' going to be lower and below Audubon. So you have the homes on the other
side down a little bit. The street up here and then the development down
further. Then we'll have the 50 foot area along Audubon. It's 50 foot
1 over here and it's 100 foot down there which is considerably more space
that will be bermed and landscaped and that's just the perimeter of the
project and then you have the final layer which is individual site plans
which you'll approve in the future which you can get additional screening
if necessary and the general landscaping materials. So there's sort of a
multiple tier approach to it that should do a pretty good job.
1 Conrad: How close is the nearest house to the south?
Krauss: Well the south isn't platted yet. That's the Rod Gram's property.
We've been speaking to a couple folks looking at developing that but it
hasn't materialized into a project yet. But presumabely, in the worst case
you could have somebody's backyard with a 30 foot setback right over there.
1 Conrad: But right now we're talking hundreds of yards before the next
large lot?
' Krauss: Oh well, Sun Ridge Court is quite a ways to the south and it's
over the top of a hill.
Erhart: What we're requiring is that the buffering landscaping be done
through Phase 1, not beyond that initially?
Krauss: Yes.
Conrad: Okay. Just a couple of other questions. The weather station lot.
The road that goes up to the top and I'm not sure I'm looking at the right
' stuff but there's a road that goes up to the top of the hill. What happens
at the top of the hill? What is that site for? Is that a balloon release
thing?
Krauss: We've seen a bunch of different plans. I think Kent, is this the
most recent concept because I've got.
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 7
Conrad: I'm just curious what the bullseye is for. 1
Kent Carlson: Oh, the balloon release?
Conrad: Is that the balloon release? 1
Kent Carlson: They've got two things. They've got a radar tower in here. 1
They've got a balloon release.
Conrad: Yeah, the radar tower is down the hill.
Kent Carlson: Yeah, I know that's... There's like a 300 foot radius 1
around it.
Conrad: And these balloons are how big? Tell me what happens in this 1
process when they release a balloon.
Krauss: Well I met with the weather station folks about a year ago and in 1
fact in college we used to buy these balloons and use them just to play
with but they're only about 12 feet across.
Conrad: And they release them and they're gone? 1
Krauss: Yeah. They carry a little instrument package underneath it and
it's labeled if anybody finds it, they should return it to the weather
service for a reward or something like that.
Conrad: So it's not a permanent, visible, visual hazard? 1
Krauss: Oh no. It's not like an inflatable gorilla on a Ford dealership.
The building where they'll be launched is permanent and it's a 1 1/2 story
high building with a little dome on it. They inflate it inside the
building.
Conrad: And that's a building? 1
Krauss: Yeah. Well, it's a very small structure. It looks like a tiny
observatory with one of those roofs that kind of scallop open. 1
Conrad: How is it designed? You've seen it and you're comfortable that
it's not offensive?
Krauss: Well, you've got to take all of this with a grain of salt
commissioner because we have not seen their final site plan submittal. In
fact they're flying a couple of fellows out here from California next week II
to talk to us again. The plans that I've seen have the office building
closer to Audubon Road where we prefer it. It's a brick office building.
It's 15,000 square feet but their plans are in a state of flux and what's 1
represented conceptually on this submittal is just, it's the best
information the developer is able to get from the weather service but the
weather service has not submitted an official plan yet and it may change. 1
It's clear that every plan that I've seen has a 15,000 square foot brick
office building. It has a small building for the balloons and it has the
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 -- Page 8
1 weather radar which is a tower with a height I believe it's come down. It's
down around 140 feet.
Conrad: The weather radar, does that have the moving radar?
1 Krauss: No.
Conrad: It doesn't?
Krauss: No. Well, it does move but it's inside a housing.
1 Conrad: I'm belaboring the point but we're looking at buffering and
landscaping and we're making a decision right now based on something that's
going in there that maybe our buffer yard should consider. That's a little
1 bit of concern because it is an unusual or little bit different operation
we're dealing with there.
1 Krauss: If I could add, in a lot of ways I've thought it's kind of the
perfect use for that corner because, because of their space requirements,
they're taking it. Is it a 10 acre site?
1 Aanenson: Yes.
Krauss: They're taking a 10 acre site and doing virtually nothing on it.
Most of it's going to remain green space. So when you add our buffer yards
to the fact that most of it's going to remain forever open, it's kind of a
nice way to interface with homes further to the south.
1 Conrad: Well kind of, unless they throw a surprise that the neighbors
don't like and moving parts or something.
1 Krauss: Well again, you have to approve that.
Conrad: Right. Right. But this is our only shot at this point. When
1 they come in, we'll be able to talk to them about their yard and whatever
but.
Erhart: Kent.
' Kent Carlson: ...is 12 feet below the road out there so the road comes in
and you've got your berm and it drops below that 12 feet so that berm.
1 Conrad: The dome of this little circle that 1 keep pointing at? Okay.
1 Kent Carlson: Yeah, so it's well below the berm. So people sitting across
the street would be able to look across Audubon and visually see the berm
and not see the top of that building...based on the preliminary information
we have. They will see the radar tower. 140 feet.
1 Conrad: Yeah. We'd like you to screen that tower somehow but. Okay.
That's all I have for landscaping.
II Erhart: Maybe if you don't mind. Would you say the landscaping provided
meets the ordinance or exceeds the ordinance? Substantially exceeds the
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 9
ordinance? What would you say?
Krauss: Well it certainly meets the requirements.
Aanenson: We're just talking about the buffer landscaping? 1
Erhart: The buffer landscaping.
Aanenson: They'll have to do a specific site plan.
Erhart: I understand. No, the buffer landscaping. Do you think it meets 1
the new ordinance? Do you think it substantially exceeds our new
ordinance?
Krauss: It's tough to measure Chairman because the buffer yard ordinance,
unlike the landscaping ordinance doesn't set a dollar amount. It just says
you've got to accomplish a goal and we think they accomplish the goal.
Erhart: Because one of the things you might, in response to their request 1
would be to negotiate for more. You know if we're to comply with that,
then negotiate for more landscaping maybe as a horse trade. An idea. Do
you have some more stuff?
Conrad: Not much. The walking path. Is that pretty much the way we saw 1
it in the beginning? I had a hard time looking at materials and figuring
out.
Krauss: I think maybe on the original concept it showed an internal loop II
in the property. The developer realized they had some problems with it and
our park folks realized that they probably didn't prefer it that way
either. The problem that the developer has is it's against the railroad
and they want rail access. It's also towards the backs of some of their
buildings and it's a little bit tough to police. As far as our parks were
concerned, this is part of an overall trail system that they'd like to
develop. It comes down through here and comes out onto the outlot that
we're going to be getting and ultimately they want to have trail
connections up and down Bluff Creek. We're going to hopefully begin
negotiations with the railroad. There's an underpass under the railroad
that we'd like to use. So it's a part of a bigger system where you'll be
able to make loops ideally one day down to Lyman or up to TH 5 and get
across TH 5.
Erhart: How do the people on the north side get to that trail? Is there a
trail off the end of the cul -de -sac?
Krauss: Inside this project? 1
Erhart: Yeah. 1
Krauss: I think was that one of the things you were...?
Aanenson: Yeah. 1
Krauss: Where exactly?
MMIMa
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting
' December 4, 1991 - Page 10
' Aanenson: It will come up this way and tie up along the road...
Erhart: Wouldn't it be logical to put a trail between Lot 7 and 8 into the
cul -de -sac or a trail easement at least?
Aanenson: You're talking...this right here.
Erhart: No. The western cul -de -sac there. In phase 2. So the people in
the offices on the north side of the development can walk down the center
of the street and get into.
Aanenson: Well we will have an access there. We are requiring that they
provide a utility easement over the storm sewer so we can get access to the
ponding.
Krauss: It's not a bad idea. I mean it would allow people in the
industrial park to have access as an internal loop.
1 Erhart: I guess I assumed that was one of the given objectives of the
whole thing was that the people in the park at lunchtime have some place to
' walk. Yeah, I see you were entirely focusing on the overall trail system.
Aanenson: The larger loop, yeah.
Erhart: Oh yeah. I think that's one of the common things in some of the
industrial parks I've visited. Modern ones is that the trail system is
integrated with the industrial parks so people can get out and conveniently
' use it. Ladd, is that everything you had?
Conrad: Yeah.
1 Erhart: Okay, Joan. What have you got?
Ahrens: Are we off to other subjects now?
Erhart: Yeah, I think we're on. I think you covered all your subjects
didn't you?
' Conrad: Pretty much.
Erhart: Okay.
Ahrens: Kathy, when you were giving your staff report you talked about,
you said there was no development contemplated at this time for Outlot A. I
assume that property's going to be deeded to the city.
Aanenson: Yes it will be.
' Ahrens: We don't plan on any development ever?
Aanenson: No. There's a mature stand of trees that's approximately 6
' acres. That will be preserved and then in the Comp Plan, the Bluff Creek
corridor is identified as a protected open space. So as we've shown, the
•
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 11
trail will be going through that area. So no, there will be no development"
of Outlot A.
Ahrens: Okay. On Lots 1 and 5. There is development planned for those
two lots right now?
Aanenson: I think they're just showing that as a rendering. We're not
reviewing anything. That's just to give you an idea. They do want that
separate access and we talked about that in the report on Lot 1. We talked
about our first preference would be no separate access but if there was,
that there may be a time when a light would be required at Lake Drive and II
Audubon. At that time we may restrict by putting a channel lane through
there that those people would not be allowed to turn left. We felt that
this sign, based on the traffic report, that most of the turn movements are"
going to the north back up to TH 5. Both people at Lot 1 and Lake Drive
will be turning to go onto TH 5 so we feel that there would be a
conflicting turn movement so.
Ahrens: Just a question for informational purposes. Is MnDot planning a
light on CR 117 and TH 5 also?
Krauss: At Galpin? 1
Ahrens: Yeah.
Krauss: Yeah. When TH 5 is rebuilt, which we're trying to work towards,
that would come into play. The traffic here at Audubon may be high, levels
may get to a high enough point that you need to signalize it before MnDot II
can put together that project. But yes, there will be signalized
intersections at each of those.
Ahrens: At Audubon and CR 117. Huh. Okay. This staff report is very ,
good by the way. I think you did a good job on it. This long cul -de -sac.
You voiced some concerns in your report about this. '
Aanenson: Well it wasn't our first preference but based on the shape of
the property and the slope and the railroad, the triangular shape,
obviously it would be our first choice to loop it but then we'd have the
problem with the preservation of Bluff Creek and the like. It is a long
cul -de -sac. 1,700 feet but we feel that based on the topography and the
configuration of the lot, it's the best design.
Ahrens: And how wide is it?
Aanenson: Well it would be 60 feet wide but we'd want 80 feet at the
intersection from the shorter cul -de -sac forward so we can get the turn
movements that we want because we feel that, as we mentioned, based on the
traffic here and the other industrial area, that there will probably be a
light at this intersection too. So we can have a left turn, a straight
across going on Lake Drive and a free right turn.
Ahrens: Okay. So you're anticipating this as mostly just going to be car 1
type of traffic into the cul -de -sac?
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 12
1
Aanenson: Yeah. They break down in the traffic report the percentage of
11 trucks but I could give you that percent. 8 %. 8% trucks. 8% of the
traffic would be trucks.
Ahrens: I don't have any more comments.
Farmakes: The only comment that hasn't been discussed I guess is, sort of
left at lying is to what the preference would be as far as completing that
berming prior to buildings going up. Or landscaping. I guess my
preference would be that the berm itself and the exterior along Audubon
Road be completed. I guess we're flexible on the interior and that makes
' sense to put it at the trees when buildings go up to take care of it. The
question though beyond the berm how much maintenance is going to be done on
those trees outside by the road. On the other side of the berm where the
building owners won't be seeing that. I guess I'd like to see that put in.
IF Conrad: So you'd like to see it bermed and landscaped?
' Farmakes: I'd like to see it landscaped on the berm but not on the
interior.
' Conrad: So you're in agreement with staff?
Farmakes: Yep.
' Conrad: So you feel that the developer should put the landscaping in and
maintain it.
' Farmakes: On the east side.
Conrad: On the Audubon side.
' Farmakes: Because for sure the Lots 11 and 10 are going to be open to
those development. It depends on which way you look out of your home. So
if you're not going to put anything in there, at least on 11 that you're
I going to see right into that.
Conrad: The berm would shelter it.
Farmakes: Well again, without trees it's going to look like.
Conrad: A berm.
Farmakes: A berm.
Conrad: Joan, what are you thinking? I wasn't sure.
Ahrens: I don't want to be unreasonable about this and I think they've
' made it clear, the developer's made it clear that any time that any
development goes in here at all, they're going to be putting up landscaping
and I don't have a problem with the piecemeal. As long as they're going to
screen whatever's being developed, I don't care if it doesn't go completely
' along Audubon Road to start out with. I want the landscaping to look nice.
I think ultimately it will. I think it's unreasonable to expect them to
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 13
completely landscape that berm if there's not even going to be any
development there to begin with What are they buffering? Empty lots? 1
Conrad: I tend to agree with you. The only thing I see is you get
landscaping going early. But this is going to be a good looking, I think
this is going to be a good looking development and I'm not sure that we're II
really, I don't know. I'm not as concerned with the landscaping as I
normally am. I think if we berm it and we have that integrity around the
entire parcel so we're comfortable that staff has, and then we reseed it
with grass, I think I'm comfortable with that. But Brian you could
persuade me.
Batzli: You're saying berm it and seed it?
Conrad: Berm it and seed it and then we'll landscape it when the
individual developments go in and that's pretty much contrary to what I've
always said but in this particular case it just seems okay.
Erhart: Anything else Jeff? '
Farmakes: No.
Erhart: Okay. Brian, are you ready? '
Batzli: Yeah. Can I ask a couple dumb questions first?
Conrad: Talk about landscaping first and then go to the dumb ones.
Batzli: I came in kind of late on the landscaping but my general feeling ,
t
is if they berm it and seed it and as they develop the lots they landscape
it, I don't think we usually ask for more than that. Most developers that
come in and do these things, I mean you really don't do it until you
develop that lot. Even in a residential PUD or lot areas so I don't know II
why.
Conrad: There's sure a lot of logic for doing it all in the beginning. II It's a neat way to do it. It packages the whole parcel. It's a good show
piece for the developer. It starts landscaping early. Buffers the
residents from, boy there's a ton of good arguments for it. 1
Erhart: Kathy or Paul, do we have any precedent or history on something
similar to this what we've done?
Krauss: I don't think so but I don't think we've had the ability to do it
in the past either. The existing industrial park was developed in a
piecemeal way. It has no overall landscaping framework. Lake Susan Hills
I think we wish probably in that case that we had done it up front with the
homes...because in that case it was a little different but it's difficult
to go in somebody's backyard and add trees after the house is built. 1
Erhart: Are you talking about the perimeter landscaping?
Krauss: That's the only thing we're talking about in this instance. '
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 -- Page 14
1
Erhart: Okay, now onto the dumb questions. Just kidding.
' Batzli: Is our normal limit on cul-de-sacs 1,500 feet? Is that kind of
what we look at for our benchmark?
Krauss: Well, the ordinance was changed a number of years ago to eliminate
a maximum length. It used to be 500 feet. That was probably more
residential but now it kind of says don't go too long but if you need to.
I might add too that this was one of the road connections that we looked at
a little bit during the comprehensive plan. Gary Warren and I had
initially sketched a road that would have been an extension of Lake Drive.
' This is getting kind of messed up but it was originally supposed to come
down here and jump the railway tracks at a crossing and then connect over
here. There's alternatives that are possible coming down through here. But
the problems that we encountered, the reason we dismissed that is the Bluff
' Creek flood plain is quite large there. The only significant trees in that
entire valley south of the railway tracks is located on that Outlot A that
we'll get title to and if you put a road through there, you're going to
' lose that. And a railroad crossing is probably more academic than reality
because it's always tough to get. All things being equal we decided that
the cost, the environmental cost of doing it really was not worth it The
trade off wasn't there. We would have preferred the continuity if we could
' have gotten it. It just didn't seem reasonable. We also looked at some
possibilty of looping a road back to the south. Coming out through here,
but that really doesn't get out. Then you're mixing residential traffic
' and industrial traffic and that doesn't make too much sense either.
Batzli: Dumb question number 2. Is this currently zoned PUD?
Aanenson: No, it's zoned A-2. We're going for a rezoning.
Batzli: Are we supposed to rezone it?
Aanenson: Yes.
' Batzli: Before considering this?
Aanenson: Yes. We did that as a part of this. We did that as a part of
the conceptual too and the rezoning justification was a part of this.
11 Batzli: But where in the packet do we actually say we want to rezone it?
' Conrad: I think we need a special motion on that.
Batzli: Yeah.
Krauss: Well it's preliminary development plan and rezoning to PUD.
Planned unit development. If there's not a motion in the conditions, there
should be a separate motion for the rezoning.
' Batzli: And in the packet that we got from the Park and Rec Coordinator,
or someone, they talk about we're going to get the deed for Outlot A. Is
that one of the conditions? Should it be one of the conditions?
•
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 15
Aanenson: The condition that there's no development on Outlot A. '
Batzli: But then we're not going to get the deed to it?
Krauss: No we will. This is in the process of negotiation right now. I '
expect it to be resolved in short order. It involves some HRA interaction
into how we acquire that parcel. At this point, I mean we're going to wind"
up with title to it.
Batzli: Does it matter if we don't?
Krauss: Well, we weren't going to take it as a development, well does it II
matter yes. We'd like the title to it. We'd like to be able to make it
part of that recreational trail corridor and to permanently be able to
protect those trees that are out there. Part of the trade off involves, if
we took this outlot through a development exaction then we wouldn't get the
cash park dedication that we would normally get. The park department would I
prefer the cash dedication so our HRA is going to work on a proposal where
the HRA acquires that through purchase and we get the park dedication fees
paid for the park department as development occurs. So I don't think you
need an additional condition at this time. It is happening.
Batzli: In any event, even if that doesn't go through, the condition is on
that no development occurs?
Krauss: Right.
Batzli: In that case, unlikely as it seems right now, who takes care of '
that outlot?
Krauss: I don't know. That's a good point. That's an eventuality we II didn't cover but if in that case it would remain an unbuildable lot which
would be owned by Ryan development and I would think they would have
continued responsibilty to maintain it.
Batzli: Is the holding pond for the second phase going to be on Outlot A?
Aanenson: Yes. '
Batzli: So if they transfer title, does it then becomes the City's
responsibility to keep up?
Aanenson: It would anyway. They would transfer that right, yes. And
we're asking them to provide access so we can get in and maintain it.
Regardless we would maintain it.
Batzli: On the environmental impact statement. We're assuming that the
City Council is going to, that's going to happen. That they're going to II
come up with the finding that it's not required.
Krauss: Yeah. Well we're not, I think that that's going to be the finding!'
but we're being presumptuous yet to do that. The process with the EAW is,
I wanted you to review it first and if you're comfortable with "it, we had a
couple changes we wanted to make but they're minor. At that point we send •
' Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 16
it to the Environmental Quality Board. It gets published in the EQB
Monitor and then there's a 30 day response period. The process provides
for us, this is not a mandatory EAW. We're requesting that this be done so
we're the petitioning body but we would receive comments from concerned
agencies. Based upon those comments, sometime in January the City Council
would have to make a finding as to whether or not further investigation
11 were required.
Batzli: The only thing I was looking at was from a water quality
standpoint. Question 11(b) where they talk about is there a sensitive
' ecologically resource on or near the site and the question is whether the
Bluff Creek corridor is on or near enough or whether that's the kind of
thing that we look at. And I know that in the report you talk about,
you're basically buffering the PUD development with... Do you feel
comfortable with their finding that nothing is on or near the site enough
to answer yes to that question so an impact statement's required?
' Krauss: I think you're raising a valid point. I think the answer is yes
and it's covered elsewhere in the EAW. I think we should modify that
because we talk at great length about the need to have nutrient removal
before it goes down into Bluff Creek and in fact.
Aanenson: Those are the two changes that we made that you didn't hear.
We're recommending that that be added. That the NRP pond standards be used
and that they also use the erosion control measures that we identified in
the report be added to their EAW.
Krauss: One of the other things we're working on now with the DNR on this
is right now Bluff Creek is just a channelized ditch through this property
because it was so intensively farmed. We're having the developer come up
' with a grading plan that in essence kind of busts up that ditch and
excavates out some of the lowland beyond it so we'll have periodic
innudation and the wetlands that used to be there hopefully will come back.
' But the answer to your question is yes. That should be changed and is one
of the things that needs to be.
Batzli: The projected Bluff Creek trunk line, is that the trunk line
that's been on and off for several years with the Met Council?
Krauss: No.
' Batzli: What trunk line is that?
' Krauss: No, this is.
Batzli: Or is this the interceptor that's been scrapped?
Krauss: Well, there was the Bluff Creek Interceptor. The famous one
that's never going to be built. When we had the comprehensive plan
approved, we had an alternative system that was approved by the Metro Watse
' Control Commission and going back through my butchered up schematic here.
The Bluff Creek pipe that you're talking about Mr. Batzli is going to go
all the way down here to the Minnesota River and then over to Eden Prairie.
That's not going to happen. I don't even think we want it to happen
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 17
anymore. The environmental damage is too significant. What Metro Waste 1
approved is to put a lift station someplace down here by Lyman Blvd.. It
may actually be a little bit south so that drainage in the Bluff Creek
system will flow down to that. So basically you have gravity flow where
you would have had it anyway. Then at that point it's going to be pumped
back up Audubon to new Lake Drive where it will flow gravity right into the
Lake Ann pipe. So we're basically using unused capacity in the Lake Ann
pipe to service an area that should have normally gone someplace else but
there's no place to do it.
Batzli: I thought we were running out of capacity in Lake Ann? 1
Krauss: No, we're really not. We're actually doing pretty good with that.
Bonestroo who's working with us on several projects helped us in the final II
stages of the comprehensive plan. They demonstrated to MWCC's satisfaction
that there's plenty of capacity in the pipe because Eden Prairie didn't
use, and most of us haven't used the rates that they projected. And
there's an upstream restriction, I think it's the Lake Virginia pump
station that no matter what they do upstream of that, it can only pump so
much so there's capacity left. The question that Bonestroo is looking at 1
now is we've got authorization to do this but they're trying to plan for
everything that's undeveloped in that city including that big study area
south of Lyman Blvd. and what we're looking at is whether or not there's
ample capacity in Bluff Creek for that. I'm sorry, in Lake Ann for that toll
take everything left in the city and that's a little nip and tuck right
now. They're finessing that at the moment but as far as this goes and our
entire MUSA line addition, that's all taken care of. 1
Batzli: Well the condition I think reads, it talks about reversing the
flow if feasible or something to take advantage of this. Phase 1 should be ii
switched to follow the trunk sanitary sewer system proposed for Phase 2.
Is that part of Phase 2 then?
Krauss: Phase 2 is the big project that I described. And the reason that II
there's a Phase 1 is because the big project, which they've given us a
feasibility study petition for, is a pretty major program and we're not
certain whether that's going to be able to come on line late this year or
next. So what they were looking for was an alternate means of servicing a
couple of the higher sites near Audubon Road. There is an existing sewer.
Not a very big one that serves Lake Susan Hills that comes, dead ends at
Audubon. There is some capacity in that line. Not a lot but probably
enough to take the first few buildings. And what we've been saying is that'll
the real way to serve that area, we can do that on a temporary basis but
it's really not designed for that and after we have the big system around,
this Ryan Development is going to be designed so that you plug up one pipe
and have it flow back the way it should be. We've also got some conditions
in there saying that even if we're able to provide you some temporary
service for some of these sites, this does not get you out of your
obligations for paying for that bigger system.
Batzli: I guess my problem was, if feasible, it sounded like you wanted to
eventually go to that other, not interceptor but trunk line but if feasible
doesn't sound very strong to me and if you really wanted to do it.
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 18
11 Krauss: To be honest, I wish we had our engineering folks here tonight.
They're both ill. They did plan on being here. I'm not certain if that,
in the meetings I was in, I had always assumed that to be mandatory. That
eventually it would be put there. Is that your recollection as well? I
guess the best we can do commissioner is to clarify that before it gets to
Council because I assumed it all was going to go that way.
Batzli: Yeah, I'd like you to do that. I've got like two more dumb
questions. How I'm doing so far? Dumb enough?
11 Erhart: You're taking all of my questions.
Batzli: Okay. How do you enforce an amount of discharge into the sewer
system? You've got this covenant regulating the amount of discharge. I
assume that's because we just have limited capacity through Lake Susan
Hills there but how do you monitor that?
' Krauss: Well in fact that was one of the items that we discussed tonight
that we've come up with some modified language on. The developer's
concerned that covenants are rather clunky and they cloud titles and this
' is a temporary one at best anyway and we agreed. What we're going to do is
revise the condition so that when each site plan, Phase 1 site plan that
flows out that way is requested, the developer is going to have to
demonstrate that the projected flowage from that site is consistant with
the capacity of the pipe.
Batzli: So you're not going to have the covenants on there?
Krauss: No. We're going to do it through a site plan approval.
Batzli: I think the other stuff has been talked about it sounds like so
that's it for me.
1 Erhart: Okay. Well I'll tell you. The only thing that's, I think it's a
good plan It will be a good development and I agree that Kathy did a
really splendid job of outlining the issues. The one thing that did make
me uncomfortable is this whole thing with the sewer. I'm not an expert and
yeah I think it would have been handy to have engineering here but the
impression I get is that we're trying to rush into something and I'.m not
sure it's, I'm just not comfortable that it's all clear. I mean there's a
' lot of questions out there. For example, why wouldn't we know yet what the
capacity is on Lake Susan Hill? The 8 inch pipe at Lake Susan Hills? I
mean that's a pretty easy thing to do.
' Krauss: It is but it's part of the feasibility study that's going to be
commissioned Monday night by the Council to figure out what the interim
capacity is. You have to do some computations about how many lots are
already using it. What kind of volumes we have now. What kind of lots
we're already committed to serve in that project that are unbuilt. It's
not that difficult a thing to do but it hasn't been done yet. I guess too,
as to the question of putting the cart before the horse or this seems
possibly premature. The way development normally has worked before in
Chanhassen is the city does not or has not pre - emptively gone in and built
major infrastructure without having a developer on the hook to pay for it.
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 19
Or help pay for it. Ryan is the first one in on this major system to do 1
that and they've been very cooperative with us on taking their fair share
of the cost on doing that and everything else. We have three other, four
other projects that are in the talking stages that are going to be using
the same pipe but they're not as far along as to petition the project yet. II
Erhart: The Phase II pipe? 1
Krauss: Yeah. The...system. The big system. There's every intent. I
mean this is a project that doesn't work unless, until that major system is"
in and Ryan knows that and we know that and we knew that when we wrote the
comprehensive plan. The only thing that they're trying to get a jump on is
they're willing to set the wheels in motion to get the big project done,
which point becomes a city effort but they're looking to get a couple 1
buildings or the possibility of building a couple buildings yet this
construction season so we were trying to work with them on that.
Erhart: And that's just fine with me but what you just said isn't the way 1
I read essentially the conditions. What I think we're going to get and I'm
basically agreeing with everything Brian's concerns. What you're going to
get is a permanent Phase I that empties across the street and I don't think`
that was ever the overall plan and that's what you're going to get with the
way it's laid out now because I agree the term, if feasible is very weak at
best. 1
Krauss: Well I would be comfortable with you changing that as long as, I
mean if I don't find out that the City Engineer has some real reason for
doing it.
Erhart: A couple other ideas. Right now essentially we're given, the way
it's written, we're given approval for Phase I to essentially hook up to
the existing 8 inch sewer.
Aanenson: You do it on a lot by lot basis. First they have to determine
how much capacity is available and then each lot, depending on the use
would have to come in.
Erhart: Okay. Why wouldn't we force them to, when they put in each lot 1
they also put in the lines to go west simultaneously? If our intention is
to make them do that and they've got to pay for it anyway.
Krauss: The system of pipes that you'll see in the street in the utility II
plan is a part of that system that feeds down the hill. I'm pretty sure
it's on page 1. Does that show up? 1
Erhart: Well that's okay...
Krauss: Oh here it is.
John Diedrick: John Diedrick from RLK Associates. Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 will
flow to the cul -de -sac north off of West Lake Drive. The gravity at that
point would have the option to move to the west instead of to the east once
the Phase II sanitary sewer line is in place. Lots 10 and 11 we have
divided Y connections to the sanitary sewer so that in the future there
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 20
would be an opportunity for Lots 10 and 11 also to be routed to the west
instead of to the east. Again, we don't have use scheduled for those lots
but we're trying to set up the infrastructure so that we have that option
to go to the west.
Erhart: Without going back in and digging up the landscaping and
1 everything?
John Diedrick: Correct.
Erhart: The fear would be to come back and say well gee now look at the
cost we'll incur.
Kent Carlson: The system is designed to go either way.
Erhart: Alright, that makes me much more comfortable on this issue.
1 Particularly if we can eliminate this if feasible and make it mandatory.
Then I'm settled with that. Let's go to the conditions on signs. This
would be condition number 24. Item (b). All signs require separate
' permit. Is that in our ordinance?
Aanenson: Yes.
1 Krauss: But if we could clarify that because the developer had the same
question. That's a sign permit that you just come to the counter upstairs
and pay your $35.00 or $60.00, whatever it is. We verify that it meets the
criteria and that there's no building code issues and then they just go.
Erhart: Even if a guy puts a little sign on his door.
Aanenson: Yeah, we have to review them all to make sure they meet code.
Erhart: But anyway as long as they're meeting code. That's what I was
wondering. Are we going beyond Code here and starting to write in wishes
because we've really got to stick to Code. What about the common theme
through the whole? This is new to me.
1 Aanenson: The entry sign that they have for the Chan Business Center will
probably set the theme.
Erhart: Yeah, I know what it is. I'm just saying, is this something new?
Krauss: Well yes and no. What we're looking for is a signage package in
1 the PUD documentation that will set some parameters for the signage that's
in there. I think if you look at the newer industrial parks, I mean one
that I'm most intimately familiar is the Minnetonka Corporate Center.
There's consistent monumentation in each site While they have corporate
logos has a similiar type of sign. It's in a similar type of place.
They're not all...different from one another. It shows some cohesiveness
in the industrial park. We're giving some pretty wide latitude for the
1 developer to establish those general parameters but once they're
established we'd like to maintain them.
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting 1
December 4, 1991 - Page 21
Erhart: Kent, you're all in agreement with that condition? Okay. So
that's a trend that we're going to probably be seeing. We can look forward
to seeing I guess. It's okay with me. I like it. I thought it was new.
Just again for my benefit here, the drainage pond. Is the object to take
the entire 94 acres and not increase the drainage from that parcel at the
100 year storm? In other words, you can use existing interior ponds and
whatever you have to meet that goal? Is that what? 1
Krauss: Yeah. Until we have an overall comprehensive drainage plan, which
we don't have right now, we have to operate the city the way that we always
have up until now which is that sites have to be developed with sufficient
ponding so that post development runoff rates don't exceed pre - development
runoff rates. Now to that we've added a new condition that we did with
Lundgren and we're doing on this one that not only that but we want to know"
that your pond is designed and usually is oversized and structurally
designed so that you're removing a significant percentage of the nutrients
from the storm water. So that before it gets discharged into Bluff Creek, 1
we're modulating the rate at which the water is going to hit the creek and
we're hopefully maintaining or even possibly improving the water quality
before it gets there. 1
Erhart: And to what degree possible you can use existing ponds for that
purpose?
Krauss: Well we could if there were any but there's aren't on this.
Sometimes you've got to watch it...
Batzli: Put in those fancy new ponds that we talked about over at the
Lundgren Development.
Krauss: The NRP stuff. Yeah, that's what we're doing here. 1
Erhart: What's the 30 day comment period in the EQB Monitor? Is that one
of those things I missed at the one meeting or is that something new? 1
Krauss: No. It's been that way since the 70's. When you get it published
in the Monitor, it basically says here it is. If you've got comments,
write.
Erhart: Who gets that?
Krauss: I get one.
Erhart: The planning professionals? 1
Krauss: Mostly planning professionals. Regulatory agencies. I think
there's some interested environmental groups that sign up for it.
Erhart: Okay. And lastly I think, you know this outlot negotiations seems
odd. To establish a price per lot for the Park and Rec and then come back
later and negotiate for the outlot but you obviously are experts at that soli
it appears to, are there any other questions or comments?
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 22
Batzli: Number 28? Why is there a condition in here that we do
something? -
1 Aanenson: We can change that. Take it out.
Batzli: Was that intended to be in here?
11 Krauss: Occasionally we want to put ourselves on notice that we're buying
into, we're acknowledging that we're going to do something. The Council
needs to recognize that. You know inevitably there's going to be a city
share of the cost of that thing.
Aanenson: We did add one Brian, by the way. 29. A condition.
Erhart: Would you go through that again.
' Aanenson: Okay. Condition 29 is we left out the, back in the development
standards for the PUD.
Erhart: Just a second Kathy. This is getting really complex. Could
someone kind of raise their hand to try and get a motion together on this.
There were some changes.
Conrad: Whoever makes the motion I think should work through it. As they
make the motion they should go point by point with staff.
' Erhart: Yeah, that's kind of where I'm going with this is we're going to
have to kind of go through what you did once and maybe we'll go through 29
at that point. The other thing I'd like to add is to make sure we have a
trail, the ability to put a trail from the end of the western cul-de -sac
down to the trail so when we get to that motion. The issue appears to be
the landscaping. What I thought I heard the consensus was to allow them to
do it on a staged basis.
1 Conrad: It looked like 3 to 2 at this time. I think we should just raise,
and it's obviously raised at City Council. They'll pay attention to it.
1 It's a close one. It's one that could go either way.
Erhart: Where in the motion is that addressed Kathy?
1 Conrad: That's under the 29 right?
Aanenson: That's my number 30.
Conrad: I thought 29 was your design and landscaping criteria?
' Aanenson: Yeah, but I'm not sure.
Erhart: With that then, why don't we start. Brian, can you make a motion
on this? Or who wants to?
Conrad: Well we've got to make a motion to rezone first.
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 23
Krauss: I was just looking at the way this was structured and you could
change that first motion to the staff recommends that the rezoning to PUD
and PUD Preliminary and well it's got to be changed. Preliminary and Final'
stage plan.
Erhart: We'll just go from the beginning. Why don't you go ahead and real
that again.
Conrad: Let's do the zoning first.
Erhart: He wants to combine it. 1
Conrad: No.
Ahrens: He doesn't care. Let's just.
Erhart: Okay, who wants to make a motion? '
Conrad: I'll move that the property that's described as the Chanhassen
Business Center be rezoned from A -2 to PUD. '
Ahrens: Second.
Conrad moved, Ahrens seconded to approve the Rezoning of property from A -2,'
Agricultural Estate to PUD, Planned Unit Development - Industrial for the
Chanhassen Business Center. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Erhart: Okay, now a motion on the PUD. Kathy would you go again through I
what.
Aanenson: Okay. Number 2. The typo. It says $3,500.00. That should be '
$2,500.00. On number 8, that has been completed. You can just say the
applicant shall petition the City for a feasibility report. We put.the
$12,000.00 in and that's really, I'm not sure that's an exact dollar amount'
so we're just recommending you strike out, and provide a $12,000.00 escrow.
Strike that. 19. That 36 %. We feel like those calculations may be
flawed. We'd recommend that, just say the developer may be responsible for'
a percentage of the cost for the traffic signals. It may be 5% but we'd
just as soon leave it open at this point.
Batzli: What if we say a large percentage? '
Aanenson: Not to exceed 50 %. Number 22. We talked about this. It says
that the parcels located along Audubon Road contain at least 50% of their II
floor area in office space. We'd like to strike that 50%. If we want to
use some other language. If we can leave that open to what the concerns
are. The design of those buildings. 1
Conrad: Yeah, all parcels located along Audubon meet a design criteria
that what? Works within the context of the neighborhood.
Krauss: We'd like your authorization to refine that. We didn't have much
chance to do that. We talked about it this afternoon but we talked about
defining the type of building that's appropriate there. It's not a 50 foot"
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 24
high base section but it's a lower profile. More office oriented towards
the street and more windows. We know what we're getting at but we have to
come up with the exact language.
Aanenson: Okay, and then 25. The applicants this clarification. On
25(c). All light fixtures shall be shielded. Light levels should be no
' more than half candle at the property line. They want clarification that
that's for site lighting. Does not apply to street lighting. And the last
one, Ladd you're right. 29. Site and landscaping screening. If you want
' to flip to page 10. We've outlined the criteria-for site and landscape
screening and in that, number 4 the criteria is that all of the buffer
landscaping in Phase 1 be completed. So you can either change that whole
1, 2, 3, 4, 5 needs to be added as a condition. But if you want to change
' number 4 to reflect.
Conrad: Kate, in number 2. Didn't you want to change the words in there?
Aanenson: Yes. And /or. Thank you Ladd.
' Batzli: I'm sorry, where was that?
Aanenson: On number 2. All approved outdoor storage must be screened with
masonry fences and /or landscaping. Did you want 4 to reflect the seeding?
Bermed and seeded for Phase 1 instead of completed landscaped?
Erhart: Do you want to put that in 29?
' Aanenson: Yeah.
' Erhart: Sure, go ahead.
Krauss: So it will be developed in a phased manner?
' Aanenson: Yeah.
Conrad: We're sort of doing this, this is sort of a committee approach.
t Erhart: You've also got all these conditions here.
Conrad: I think as you presented this to Council you have to reflect both
sides of the issue obviously.
Erhart: Is there any restrictions on this phasing that we can think of
' that we would want to, for those who are proponents of the phasing? Is
there anything?
Batzli: Well actually it would be kind of nice to put some sort of
' deadline in there though I think. They can phase it so long as it doesn't
take more than x years.
1 Erhart: I'm an opponent of the phasing. I favor that. Any other comments
on th Anyb o d y... n in t o that?
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 25
Ahrens: I don't know if I'd go with putting in years. Like within 5 years"
or something?
Batzli: Yeah. How long do you want it to look half finished? 1
Ahrens: Well it depends on if they're vacant lots. Does it look half
finished...supposed to look. 1
Batzli: I don't know. A sodded berm with nothing on top of it with trees
going up and then stopping and then the next. Let's say they leave Lot 10
and they develop Lot 11. Lot 10, you have trees going to Lot 10. Nothing. 1
I don't know. I think it's going to look half finished. I'm willing to
let them do that because it's reasonable but.
Ahrens: What do you consider a reasonable amount of time?
Batzli: I don't know. That's a good question. 1
Erhart: When do you expect the development to be filled out?
Kent Carlson: It's hard to say. 5 to 7 years... 1
Batzli: I don't know. I like 5 years but that's just me. I'm allowing
them to defer costs for 5 years. I think that's a pretty big concession in 1
a PUD personally.
Ahrens: I could go along with 5 years. 1
- Erhart: Ladd, do you have any input on that one way or the other?
Conrad: Not at all. I don't care. 1
Erhart: One way or the other?
Conrad: No, don't care.
Erhart: Jeff.
Farmakes: I'd like to see the whole thing put in.
Erhart: Why don't we just leave it up to staff. 1
Aanenson: My feeling is, if we put a time limit on it they'll come in if
it's not completed and we'll have a chance to talk to you about why and
what's going on.
Erhart: And then I think the last thing is, is there a condition here to
put that trail in there or is that 31?
Aanenson: That will be 30.
Erhart: Okay, 30. With that.
Batzli: Can we delete number 28?
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 26
Conrad: No, that's okay.
Batzli: You like that?
Conrad: Yeah.
1 Batzli: Okay.
Conrad: What's the trail?
1 Erhart: The trail is to allow an easement or something. It may already
exist on utility easement. From the park to walk off the end of the west
' cul -de -sac and get onto the trail system without having to go essentially
out to Audubon.
Batzli: What kind of access to the pond and stuff is there going to be?
1 Krauss: Well there needs to be final definition of that for approval by
the engineer but we're thinking of you can grade in like a Class V and then
1 plant over it so you can, with a slope adequate enough so that we can get
in there and use a backhoe and clean out. So if you're going to do that
anyway, putting a trail in is easy.
1 Batzli: Putting a trail in is no big deal.
Erhart: My point was just to make sure that we can do it. When we do
Phase II.
Conrad: Tim do you want to change number 11 and get the words if feasible
1 out of it?
Erhart: Oh yeah.
Batzli: I'd just strike the words if feasible.
Conrad: Yeah, let's get rid of them. And then what do we need to do with
the setbacks that have been changed?
Aanenson: I'll just make that. If you want to say as corrected in the
' staff report or something.
Erhart: Is everybody comfortable that we've got essentially the, we all
understand what, if the motion is made what we're moving on? I guess so.
1 So someone go ahead. I don't know that we have to go through all the items
again. Just make a simple motion.
1 Batzli: I move that the Planning Commission recommends approval of PUD
Prelimnary Plan for Chanhassen Business Center.
' Krauss: Preliminary and Final stage.
Batzli: Yeah. As set forth in the staff report dated whenever it's dated.
12/4/91? Is that it?
1
i
Planning Commission Meeting r
December 4, 1991 - Page 27
Krauss: Yeah.
•
Batzli: And set forth on the plans, whenever these plans are dated. If
they're dated. Received October 22, 1991. With all of the changes that well
just discussed.
Erhart: Is there a second? ,
Conrad: Yeah, I'll second.
Erhart: Discussion? ,
Conrad: Yeah. Kate, you brought up something that I wrote down and I II don't know if it got reflected. Revised right -of -way standards. I had a
note down. Revised right -of -way standards. Did we incorporate?
Aanenson: Yeah, it was 17 feet of additional right -of -way. We've got that '
in the conditions.
Krauss: Condition 26.
Conrad: Was that 26?
Aanenson: Yeah. 1
Conrad: Okay.
Erhart: Any other discussion?
Batzli moved, Conrad seconded that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of Preliminary and Final Stage PUD Plan #91 -4 for the Chanhassen
Business Center based on the plans stamped "Received October 22, 1991" and
subject to the following conditions:
1. Final PUD plan approval be subject to the 30 day comment period after II
public notice of publication of the EAW in the EQB Monitor and a
finding by the City Council that an Environmental Impact Statement is II
not required.
2. The applicant will be required to pay park dedication ($2,500.00 /acre)'
and trail fees ($833.00 /acre) in the development contract. No
development shall occur on Outlot A as it shall be preserved as open
space. The trail system shall be required to loop even if it is on a
temporary basis. '
3. The development standards as proposed by staff shall be incorporated
into the PUD development guide for the Business Center. '
4. Site plan approval from the city will need to be obtained for each lot
as development is proposed. II 5. Provide an additional 17 feet of right -of -way along the westerly side
of Audubon Road throughout the plat. Provide the 20 foot wide drainage
and utility easements over the proposed sewer and water lines outside 1
' Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 28
the road right -of -way. Provide a 20 foot drainage and utility
easement for the sanitary sewer proposed along the west side of
Audubon Road lying south of the proposed main entrance.
6. The main entrance street shall be named Lake Drive West consistent
with the future extension of Lake Drive West east of Audubon Road. If
a curb cut is allowed for Lot 1 on to Audubon Road, it shall be
located a minimum of 500 feet north of the proposed main entrance
(Lake Drive) and provide for a deceleration lane.
' 7. Provide the City Engineering Department with storm sewer calculations
designed for a 10 year storm event and ponding calculations to show
that the ponds will retain a 100 year storm event and will discharge
' at a predeveloped runoff rate. Data shall be provided on nutrient
removal capacity of all ponds for review and approval by the City. A
secondary retention pond should be constructed for the northerly 15
' acres of the site which drain to and parallel of the railroad tracks
(Lots 4 and 6) .
8. The applicant shall petition the City for a feasibility report for the
' extension of a trunk sewer line to service Phase II of the site which
will be refunded upon project approval and authorization by the City
Council.
' 9. If only Phase I of the site is graded, silt fence shall be
incorporated along the perimeter of the construction limits and if the
entire site is graded, Type III erosion control shall be installed and
maintained along the westerly perimeter of the construction limits.
All areas disturbed during site grading shall be immediately restored
with seed and disc mulched, sod or wood -fiber blanket within two weeks
' of site grading or before November 15, 1992, except in areas where
utilities and streets will be constructed yet that year. Areas
altered with a slope of 3 :1 or greater must be restored with sod or
' wood -fiber blanket. As a part of the erosion control measures, the
applicant shall be required to remove any materials that enter into
Bluff Creek.
' 10. The watermain loop between Lots 8 and 9 shall be extended to within 10
feet of the southerly property line and then proceed east and parallel
to the south property line back to Audubon Road.
11. The applicant shall provide the Engineering Department with the
calculations estimating the capacity of the sanitary sewer line
' through Lake Susan Hills West development and the predicted flows each
lot will generate. A convenant regulating the amount of discharge
from Phase I shall be placed in the title of each parcel as well as in
the development contract to ensure that flows will not exceed capacity
' limitations downstream. The sanitary sewer lines in Phase I should be
switched to flow into the trunk sanitary sewer system proposed for
Phase II.
12. Inside slopes of the retention ponds shall be reduced to a minmum of
4:1.
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 29
13. As a condition of final plat approval, the applicant shall enter into
a development contract and provide the financial security to guarantee
construction of the improvements.
14. The developer shall construct the utility and street improvements in
accordance with the latest edition of the city's standard
specifications and shall prepare final plans and specifications and
submit for city approval. Project specifications shall incorporate
the city's standard specifications. The developer shall acquire
utility construction permits from the PCA and Minnesota Department of '
Health.
15. The developer shall obtain all necessary permits from the Watershed
District, DNR and Army Corps of Engineers and comply with all
conditions of the permits. Drainage plans shall be revised as
outlined in the approved staff report and shall be resbumitted to city
staff for approval. The applicant shall obtain permission /permit from"
he railroad authority for all grading activities within the railroad
property.
16. The developer shall incorporate street lights into the street
1
construction plans. The street lights should be installed at 150 to
200 foot intervals. The street lights shall be designed consistent
with existing lighting on Audubon Road. A 250 -watt contemporary
low- profile rectilinear - rectangular style lighting fixture with
pressure lamps mounted on a 25 foot high corten steel pole (see
Attachment #2). ,
17. (No 17 on the staff report.)
18. The entire tract of land development shall be assessed for the future
trunk sewer system to be built for Phase II ( Lots 6, 7, 8 9 and 12).
19. The Developer shall be responsible for a percentage of the costs for I
traffic signals at Audubon and TH 5.
20. The permitted uses in this zone shall be limited to light industrial,
warehousing an doffices as defined in the PUD ordinance.
21. Truck transfer terminals shall be prohibited from this project.
22. All parcels located along Audubon Road shall meet a design criteria
and that the office components.of the building be oriented towards the
exterior of the PUD. ,
23. Building materials and designs shall be:
a. All materials shall be of high quality and durable. Masonry
material shall be used. Color shall be introduced through colored
block or panels and not painted block.
b. Brick may be used and must be approved to assure uniformity.
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 30
1 c. Stone shall have a weathered face or be polished, fluted, or
broken face.
1 d. Concrete may be poured in place, tilt -up or precast, and shall be
finished in stone, textured or coated.
' e. Metal siding will not be approved except as support material to
one of the above materials or curtain wall on office components
or, as trim or as HVAC screen.
11 f. All accessory structures shall be designed to be compatible with
the primary structures.
' g. All roof mounted equipment shall be screened by walls of
compatible appearing material. Wood screen fences are prohibited.
All exterior process machinery, tanks, etc., are to be fully
screened by compatible materials.
h. Large unadorned walls shall be prohibited. All walls shall be
given added architedtural interest through building design or
1 appropriate landscaping.
i. Space for recycling shall be provided in the interior of all
1 principal structures for all developments in the Business Center.
24. All freestanding signs be limited to monument signs. The sign shall
1 not exceed eighty (80) square feet in sign display area nor be greater
than eight (8) feet in height.
a. Each property shall be allowed one monument sign located near the
' driveway into the private site.
b. All signs require a separate permit.
c. The signage will have consistency throughout the development. A
common theme will be introduced at the development's entrance
' monument and will be used throughout.
d. Consistency in signage shall relate to color, size, materials and
heights.
1 25. The street lights should be designed consistent with the existing
lighting along Audubon Road.
a. A decorative, shoebox fixture (high pressure_ sodium vapor lamps)
with a square ornamental pole shall be used throughout the
development area for area lighting.
b. Lighting equipment similar to that is mounted in the public street
right -of -ways shall be used in the private areas.
1 c. All light fixtures for site lighting shall be shielded. Light
level should be no more than 1/2 candle at the property line.
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 31
26. An additional 17 feet of right -of -way on Audubon Road is required.
Lake Drive West shall have a 60 foot right -of -way. The right -of -way
shall be 80 feet from the intersection of Audubon Road to the short
cul -de -sac off of Lake Drive West. The radius on the curbs at Audubon"
Road shall be 30 feet.
27. The entrance drive to Lot 1 be moved to the north (approximately 500 II
feet north of Lake Drive West so that it aligns with the existing
drive to the east of the Stockdale property).
28. The city shall work with MnDot to request that a traffic signal be
installed to coincide with the completion of Phase I of construction.
29. 1. All open spaces and non - parking lot surfaces shall be landscaped, 1
rockscaped, or covered with plantings and /or lawn material.
2. Storage of material outdoors is prohibited unless it has been
approved under site plan review. All approved outdoor storage
must be screened with masonry fences and /or landscaping.
3. The master landscape plan for the CBC PUD shall be the design ,
guide for all of the specific site landscape developments. Each
lot must present a landscape plan for approval with the site plan
review process.
1
4. The buffer areas proposed along the internal public roadways and
southerly property line to and along Audubon Road shall be bermed II
and seeded at the completion of Phase I with landscaping to occur
as the sites develop.
5. Loading areas shall be screened from public right -of -ways. Wing i
wall may be required where deemed appropriate.
30. An easement from the park walking off the end of the western
cul -de -sac to get onto the trail system without having to go out onto II
Audubon.
31. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of the preliminary 1
plat.
All voted in favor and the motion carried. ,
Krauss: Can we also get a motion on the preliminary plat? We didn't set
that up but there's a preliminary plat before you as well. The conditions II
are in here but.
Erhart: Okay. You want another motion on the preliminary plat?
Aanenson: We did both with that.
Krauss: Oh, did you cover that? '
Aanenson: We did preliminary and final.
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 32
Krauss: No, no. You did preliminary and final stage PUD plan. You didn't
do the plat.
11 Batzli: Could we go back then and amend our motion to put in one more
condition?
' Conrad: Is this a bartering deal?
Erhart: Do you do this when Steve's here?
Batzli: The only question is, normally we throw in a condition that the
platting and this kind of stuff is tied to one another and that it's
contingent on them following through on all the conditions so we kind of
l cross it over. So I'd like to move that we add to our last motion a
condition 31 which the applicant shall comply with all conditions of the
preliminary plat that we're just about to pass.
' Conrad: I would second that.
' Erhart: Did we vote on, we voted on the first one. Can we do this?
Krauss: You can officially, the prevailing side can re -open and
reconsider.
II Erhart: Okay, any discussion on that then.
Batzli moved, Conrad seconded to amend the Preliminary and Final Stage PUD
to include a condition 31 which reads, the applicant shall comply with all
conditions of the preliminary plat. All voted in favor and the motion
carried.
' Batzli: I move that the Planning Commission recommends approval of a
Preliminary Plat according to the staff report with condition that the
' applicant meets all conditions set forth inthe Preliminary and Final PUD,
whatever this thing was. Preliminary plan and according to the plans
received dated and stamped "Received October 22, 1991 ".
1 Conrad: I'il second that.
Ahrens: October 21st you mean?
Batzli: The plans were dated October 21st?
Aanenson: 22nd.
Batzli: I don't know.
Erhart: Whenever they were submitted. Any more discussion?
Batzli moved, Conrad seconded to approve Preliminary Plat #91 -13 LUR for
' the Chanhassen Business Center based on the plans stamped "Received October
22, 1991" and subject to the following conditions:
•
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 33
1. Provide an additional 17 feet of right -of -way along the westerly side II
of Audubon Road throughout the plat.
2. Provide the 20 foot wide drainage and utility easements over the
proposed sewer and water lines outside the road right -of -way.
3. Provide a 20 foot drainage and utility easement for the sanitary sewer"
proposed along the west side of Audubon Road lying south of the
proposed main entrance.
4. The main entrance street shall be named Lake Drive West consistent 1
with the future extension of Lake Drive West east of Audubon Road.
5. Provide the City Engineering Department with storm sewer calcuations
designed for a 10 year storm event and ponding calculations to show
that the ponds will retain a 100 year storm event and will discharge
at the predeveloped runoff rate.
6. If a curb cut is allowed for Lot 1 onto Audubon Road, it shall be
located a minimum of 500 feet north of the proposed main
entrance (Lake Drive West) and provide a deceleration lane.
7. The applicant shall petition the City and provide a $12,000.00 escrow
for preparation of a feasibility report for the extension of a trunk
sewer line to service Phase II of the site which will be refunded upon
project approval and authorization by the City Council.
8. A secondary retention pond should be constructed for the northerly 15 II
acres of the site which drain to and parallel of the railroad tracks
(Lots 4 and 6).
9. If only Phase I of the site is graded, silt fence shall be
incorporated along the perimeter of the construction limits and if the
entire site is graded, Type III erosion control shall be installed and,
maintained along the westerly perimeter of the construction limits.
10. The watermain loop between Lots 8 and 9 shall be extended to within 10
feet of the southerly property line and then proceed east and parallel '
to the south property line back to Audubon Road.
11. The applicant shall provide the Engineering Department with the
calculations estimating the capacity of the sanitary sewer line
through Lake Susan Hills development and the predicted flows each lot
will generate. Sanitary sewer discharge through Lake Susan Hills West
3rd Addition shall be considered a temporary condition if future trunk
facilities on Audubon Road can feasibly serve Phase I.
12. A covenant regulating the amount of discharge from Phase I shall be
placed in the title of each parcel as well as in the development
contract to insure that flows will not exceed capacity limitations
downstream. 1
13. Inside slopes of the retention ponds shall be reduced to a minimum of
4:1. '
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 34
1 14. As a condition of final plat approval, the applicant shall enter into
a development contract and provide the financial security to guarantee
' construction of the improvements.
15. The developer shall construct the utility and street improvements in
accordance with the latest edition of the City's standard
specifications and shall prepare final plans and specifications and
submit for city approval. Project specifications shall incorporate
the city's standard specifications. The developer shall acquire
utility construction permits from the PCA and Minnesota Department
of Health.
16. The developer shall obtain all necessary permits from the Watershed
District, DNR and Army Corps of Engineers and comply with all
conditions of the permits. Drainage plans shall be revised as outlined
in the approved staff report and shall be resbumitted to city staff
1 for approval.
17. The applicant shall obtain permission /permit from the railroad
' authority for all grading activities within the railroad property.
18. The developer shall incorporate street lights into the street
construction plans. The street lights should be installed at 150 to
' 200 foot intervals. The street lights shall be designed consistent
with existing lighting on Audubon Road. A 250 watt contemporary low
profile rectilinear - rectangular style lighting fixture with pressure
1 lamps mounted on a 25 foot high corten steel pole (see Attachment #2).
19. All areas disturbed during site grading shall be immediately restored
with seed and disc mulched, sod or wood -fiber blanket within two weeks
of site grading or before November 15, 1992 except in areas where
utilities and streets will be constructed yet that year. Areas altered
with a slope of 3 :1 or greater must be restored with sod or wood fiber
1 blanket.
20. The entire tract of land development shall be assessed for the future
trunk sewer system to be built for Phase II (Lots 6, 7, 8, 9 and 12).
21. The sanitary sewer lines in Phase I should be swithced to flow into
the trunk sanitary sewer system proposed in Phase II.
1 22. The developer shall be responsible for a share of the cost for traffic
signals on Audubon Road at Lake Drive West and TH 5.
1 All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Erhart: Is there anything else anybody wants passed? Thanks for coming.
We look forward to having your development here in our city.
Conrad: Good job.
1
1
om ission Meeting
Planning C m g
December 4, 1991 - Page 35
111
PUBLIC HEARING:
ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO REQUIRE AN INTERIM USE PERMIT FOR
RECREATIONAL BEACHLOTS.
Public Present:
Name Address
Mark Rogers 3851 Leslee Curve
Ivan Underdahl 7502 77th Street
Bill Finlayson 6320 Fir Tree
Bernie Schneider 7501 77th Street 1
Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this item. Vice Chairman
Erhart called the public hearing to order.
Mark Rogers: My name is Mark Rogers. I'm with the Pleasant Acres
Homeowners Association on Minnewashta. Just had a couple of small things.
First a question. It's my understanding that this ordinance grew out of a
request from the City Council. Is that true? To develop such an
ordinance.
Aanenson: Recreation beachlot ordinance in general? 1
Mark Rogers: The one we're talking about, yeah.
Erhart: Change it to a temporary.
Krauss: No. This pertains to the, in all the new beachlots are required II
to get a conditional use permit and they have done that. You're correct.
This orginally came from concerns that were raised, well problems that we
had to deal with but concerns that were raised by the City Council that the 1
older beachlots are much tougher to regulate. There isn't a good set of
information or guidelines to know exactly what is allowed on these things.
What we've heard and what we've seen and what the Council's told us is that
over the years more and more boats start showing up and it's not clear
who's entitled to what out there. So the idea came down to permit these
things. Figure out once and for all exactly what folks are entitled to.
Give them a permit for that and then it's a fairly easy matter to regulate 1
it from that point on.
Mark Rogers: Okay. I've got several points. He just touched on one that
I guess I'll leave until last. It's the greatest. With paragraph B, I
would say that the notification should not only go to the property owners
on the lake but also all affected property owners in the individual
associations. Which should be an easy thing to do. 1
Krauss: Is it? I mean are all these people listed as owners of beachlots?
Aanenson: We've been sending them to the homeowners associations. 1
Krauss: I'm not so sure it's always so easy to find out exactly who's
involved in each one. 1
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 36
' Mark Rogers: No, but our notice here actually doesn't even mention
g 5 Y Y
anybody from the beachiot. It just says the property owners and the public
notice. In our case our association has a Quit Claim Deed to the property
and the individuals in the association are not listed on that.
Krauss: Oh, what this is referring to though is your beachiot will be
making an application and this tells us how we have to notify all the other
property owners around there of your request.
Mark Rogers: But we would certainly want to know about what's happening
with the other beachlots that might be on our lake and so forth. So I
guess that's what I'm driving at. It would take some work to talk to the
associations to find out the addresses and so forth but the names of the
people would not, would vary but the addresses of those homes would not.
Erhart: Okay, so when you use the terms owners of property on the lake,
that does not, it may not necessarily mean that the owner is of other
beachlots. It's not clear. So you just want that clarified that that
would include other beachiot owners?
Mark Rogers: Right.
Aanenson: So for every beachiot that's going for review, you want every
other beachiot notified of that review?
Mark Rogers: I think so.
Erhart: On that lake.
1 Conrad: That's not what you're saying. Ah, then I misunderstood. I
thought you wanted everybody notified in the homeowners association.
Mark Rogers: You are correct. I guess maybe we're describing it
differently.
Conrad: You're not concerned about a different beachiot?
Mark Rogers: Well that I am too.
Aanenson: So everyone would be notified of everybody else's hearings too.
So it'd be every month...
Conrad: What would that?
Mark Rogers: The purpose, it would affect us just as much as the other
property owners on the lake. If they're being notified of some changes or
conditions of some permit, why wouldn't we, as a matter of fact, it might
even affect us more than the other property owners on the lake.
' Conrad: Now my understanding was this was a one time deal. To get the
permit.
Aanenson: Right. To give them an understanding of what they can build in.
1
Planning Commission Meeting
P1 g g
December 4, 1991 - Page 37
Conrad: Right. So this is not a forever type deal. This is a one time
deal to get notification to everybody in that homeowners association that II
this is what is permitted. Or to review what is permitted and get
consensus so that the city has an idea of what is permitted in that
beachlot. So to inform other beachlots about your particular situation, I
don't know that that's.
Mark Rogers: Well you can't do them all at once. I'm anticipating, I
don't know how many there are. 1
Aanenson: 13.
Mark Rogers: Okay, 13. You can't do 13 in one night. At least I wouldn't"
think so. And I would like to know when the other ones are up. They might
be similar to ours. They might be different from ours. I'd like to know 11
when those meetings are.
Conrad: But for us to call and find out, or are we going to have to call
and find out everybody anyway? If we send notice to everybody in the
association.
Aanenson: We've been doing...the homeowners association president. That's
the way we've been doing it.
Conrad: Yeah. It's going to be that person's job. The homeowner's
association to deliver a list and so what you're saying is everytime one of"
these 13 comes in and send out a notice of public hearing to everybody in
every homeowners association, which we're talking about a 1,000 or you
know, it's a big number of how many people are in the homeowners
associations with beachlots. You're talking about mailing out 1,500
letters everytime somebody is doing something. It probably makes more
sense to send it out to the president of the homeowners association.
Mark Rogers: Well, it's just like, for instance the mailing for this
meeting came to me and not to the president. At the last meeting I had
requested that at least I get a copy and I checked with the president and II
he did not get one for this. And had I not you know happened to talk to
him, he would have been unaware of this meeting. If it's important enough
for all of the property owners on the lake to be notified about it, why
isn't it important enough for all of the homeowners in the homeowners
association to be notified about?
Erhart: Do you have a point on this specific subject? 1
Ivan Underdahl: Yeah I guess I had a question. We've been here...but when
it was first brought up here now, I guess I almost question what was the II
purpose of having this item on the agenda tonight?
Erhart: Okay, and your name is? 1
Ivan Underdahl: Ivan Underdahl.
Erhart: Let's step back a moment because it's not clear in my mind what II
the history is here again.
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 38
Aanenson: Okay, when the recreational beachlot was adopted.
Ivan Underdahl: You asked for public comment so I thought that was the
right time.
Conrad: He didn't mean you literally step back. I think he figuratively.
Erhart: No, no, no. Steve, stay up there. I'm really asking your first
' question myself because it wasn't clear in my mind so.
Aanenson: There were existing beachlots that were in place that were
' grandfathered in. What has happened over time is there was no one when
those were adopted, those that were grandfathered in, there was not
inventory of what they had in place. Over time there's been complaints
that those have expanded beyond what was grandfathered in. What we're
trying to do is come up with a mechanism to establish what they were
grandfathered in with.
' Erhart: Okay, and we have not done that before?
Aanenson: No. The other ones have been given conditional use and we
' established what they can have. We can go out and cite them for expanding.
These 13 that we're talking about, we need to establish what they can as
far as grandfathered.
' Erhart: The primary objective is to get.
Batzli: This is establishing a baseline.
1 Aanenson: Exactly.
Conrad: And so the point of tonight's meeting was to develop the process
' to do that but not we're not reviewing those 13 at all tonight. We're just
saying, what has to happen to get those 13 beachlots. And inventory of
those 13 beachlots. How do we do it? Do we mail everybody a notice 10
' days prior to public hearing? So that's what we're here tonight to do.
Not to review.
Ivan Underdahl: ...policies besides this and I guess if somebody hadn't
stood up, it sounds like that's all there is to it. It sounds like you
were ready to, there was going to be nothing more about it.
' Erhart: I guess we were hoping that somebody would stand up. That's the
purpose of this procedure.
' Ivan Underdahl: And as far as notice for this evening, our association
didn't receive any notice as far as I know. We saw it in the paper and
we're only here to...
Erhart: Could you comment?
Mark Rogers: How many lakes are we talking about?
1 Conrad: 7 lakes.
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 39
Mark Rogers: So it's not just Minnewashta?
Conrad: Right, everyone.
•
Aanenson: Lotus. Riley.
Ivan Underdahl: When you think of grandfathering now, does this...permit
that's required, is the implication now that if they're trying to be
accepting the granfathering or reconsideration of the total situation
without...?
Krauss: We do have some, there was some sporatic inventories done a couple
of times and we have information as to what we think was there then. We're
asking you to also provide information on what you think was there at the
time this became grandfathered in as a non - conformity. I guess the way we
envision it is there's something of a negotiation process there. I mean
ultimately they may accept what's there today if that's reasonable based on
what we think was there back then or we may ask that it go back to
something. 1
Ivan Underdahl: I guess that was my point. If this permit that is going
to have to be obtained is simply going to be adoption or the only thing you'
can apply for is what existed as far as the grandfathering is concerned?
Krauss: Well, to be honest our information isn't exactly enough to come in 1
and say you had 3 boats back there in 1980, what was it 2. And that's
definitely what it is.
Aanenson: We gave them that information following that so we gave them the 1
inventory that we thought...
(There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.)
Ivan Underdahl: I guess my point was the permit that can be applied for
now. Is that going to stipulate that you can only have what was there at
the time of the ordinance or is it open to new conditions or situations? 1
Or is it just going to be...
Olsen: You'll get an opportunity to make a case in front of the Planning 1
Commission and the Council.
Mark Rogers: I thought that's what we're doing tonight.
Bernie Schneider: I think that's probably the toughest part of that
process as I see it because the ordinance itself is worded very loosely in
regards to that so that's going to be a very tense process to try and get 1
that down to just what we...
Bill Finlayson: I see the Minnewashta Association's beachlot as a lot on
the beach that is not much different than either one of my neighbors who
have lots on their beach. Nobody's regulating the amount of boats that any
homeowner on Lake Minnewashta can own. I mean if in 1982 they had one boat 1
and in 1989 that had 2 boats, I don't understand why it makes a difference
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 -- Page 40
whether Minneswashta beach association had 15 boats and then in 1992 has 16
boats. It's not clear to me why this. all came about. The history of what.
Erhart: Let me clarify one thing for procedure here. The informal
' discussion here is fine. Are we messing up the Minutes by not getting
people's names? Okay, your name was that just spoke.
' Bill Finlayson: I'm Bill Finlayson from the Minnewashta Beach Association.
I'm the chairman.
Erhart: Okay procedure, would you like to get back to formal where we have
one speaker at a time or is it okay to keep it informal?
Krauss: I think it would help on the Minutes if we could.
' Erhart: Yeah if you could stand back up again and then we'll. Again your
name.
Mark Rogers: Mark Rogers. Pleasant Acres on Minnewashta. And again I'd
just like to reiterate that what's contained in the first paragraph, the
quote being permits shall be issued following receipt of satisfactory proof
' concerning the nature and extent of the legal non - conforming use. I'm real
nervous about what that means as far as the process and what goes into
setting those limits. That is the whole meat of the ordinance really. I
' agree with the intent of it. I can certainly see yours and others needs to
want to know what's there and regulate what's there but I just don't know
how we can improve this or if we should improve it in the ordinance but I
' feel like there's great potention that we could get stuck with something
that would be very difficult to live with.
Erhart: What's the key, one of the beachlots organization to stuff all
' kinds of uses in there just before they come in for the hearing and saying
they've been doing that forever?
' Krauss: Well I think it's clear that that's why we're not going to accept
the status quo as of whatever date they come in. I mean some of the
beachlots are perfectly fine and frankly we don't know very well if they
' had 3 boats or 5 boats back there in 1982. And if they had fairly good
rationale to support it, I mean it's a negotiating process I suppose and
it's going to be negotiated in front of you and the City Council. But you
know we would have some information. They would have some information.
' We'll have to work out what's fair with that. But if you've got a beachlot
that in 1982 had 2 boats and now it has 15, something is seriously remiss
and the clock's going to probably have to be turned back to some extent.
Erhart: Do we have any way to know that in 1982 it had 2 boats?
Aanenson: We've done 3 inventories. And when we met with the homeowners
' associations, we presented them with what we had as our best information
and we asked them to go back and check their records, photographs and
provide us with what they have as their best information. Some of the
homeowners associations have lotteries so they have receipts of fees so
they can actually document.
o m' ion Meeting
Planning C m iss g
December 4, 1991 - Page 41
Erhart: So your idea is essentially negotiate as much of this prior, in
advance prior to bringing this to the Planning Commission. 1
Aanenson: We've met with them once and provided that.
Mark Rogers: That's right and I have that in front of me here. Even in
the 1991 there were several errors so I can't speak for the earlier
assessments. But part of this is in 1982 which was when I believe they had
the initial assessment of how many homes. Say you had written down like
53. There's 80 now and one more subdivision going in and property for
several others. So there's obviously pressure that would be very intense
should we cut back to what's recorded for the 1981 levels. So that's why
people are going to get excited about this.
Ahrens: Isn't what Mark's talking about, what is going to be discussed
when their permit application comes before the Planning Commission?
Mark Rogers: Sort of
Ahrens: We're not discussing.
Batzli: No, but he's talking about the fairness of the process and he
really I think, he's questioning our surveys but I think even more than
that he's saying that probably there's more houses and the uses have
intensified and people are going to be angry if we turn back the clock.
Ivan Underdahl: I'd just like to point out another situation too where
it's not necessarily an intensification for people who are there now but
the fact that at the time this ordinance went into effect, there were just II
a very limited number of people that would even have chosen to use it. Or
that lived there so there really weren't as many boats there at the time
because of the relatively new development. And on our situation there I
were only 2 people that had chosen to have boats there. Most of the lots
were vacant. Several of those members lived directly on the lake. Had
their on docks and private locations. So now when there are more
residences there, they would like to have boats there too. But there were
only 3 parties that could have had an interest in having boats there at the
time the ordinance was developed...our grandfathering would say limited to
2. But it's not clear because the reason there weren't any more boats
there at the time was there weren't people there to have them.
Conrad: Then the current ordinance should apply to you. That's real
clear. That just doesn't make sense. If people didn't have them there, II that would give you rights if you used it then but then the ordinance, the
current ordinance that's good for everybody else should apply to you right
now.
1
Ivan Underdahl: The current ordinance would limit it to 2 boats.
Conrad: Well the current ordinance should apply to everything that's not
grandfathered. And you can't say well if we had built up and had 75 houses
before, that we could have put more boats down. That doesn't make sense at
all. 1
ZIMM
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 42
Ivan Underdahl: The current ordinance, in our particular subdivision, the
' current ordinance limits us to 2 I guess as we understand it, or staff's
interpretation. However any private property owner is entitled to 3. So
this is unfair right off the bat. In addition to that, all of our property
owners have the boating /docking rights in their covenants and restrictions.
1 Erhart: Okay we're not here tonight to talk about the beachlot ordinance.
We're here to talk about.
Ivan Underdahl: ...the application for this use permit or whatever was
primarily then going to be based upon what existed at the time the
ordinance went into effect.
Krauss: I think it's going to be based on probably 3 things. The
information that we have, which is all that we have right now. Information
' that the beachlot owners can provide to us, which we may decide is more
accurate. And in some cases, I'm not sure but we may have a beachlot that
under the current ordinance is entitled to more than was there in 1980.
' Maybe it's got enough space and met the requirements, then they could be
increased that way.
Batzli: So in other words they may be grandfathered in but if the
' ordinance allowed them more, you'd ignore the grandfathering. Is that what
you just said?
1 Krauss: I think that that's fair.
Erhart: Maybe what we need here is a good, well written intent statement
before we really take this to the next level because I think that's what
' we're, that's the issue we're dealing with. What are we intending to do
hero?
' Bernie Schneider: I have a question. In establishing the number of boats
that we will be allowed at a recreational beachlot, once the ordinance is
passed, who makes that decision? Is that up to the Planning Commission or
' what body will listen to our pleas?
Krauss: It will ultimately be the City Council. We'll make recommendation
to the Planning Commission and they'll recommend to the City Council and
it's the City Council's call.
Bernie Schneider: So the City Council will take each request separately?
Krauss: Right.
' Bernie Schneider: ...reasonable? Not necessarily what's grandfathered in.
Krauss: Well again, I mean 1 can't prejudice them doing that. 1 think the
Commissioner's statement about a...is a real valid one. I can tell you how
' I think the process is going to go and I see there being some room to
discuss some of these things. But I guess the mere fact that there's more
homes now than there was before, that does not persuade me. When something
is grandfathered in, it's locked in at that point in time. The uncertainty
for us is we're not really certain in all these cases what exactly all that
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 43
was. We have some information. We're willing to accept your information
and we want to figure out what it was. It doesn't entitle you to double or ll
triple in size. Now if, again if your beachlot under the current ordinance
would be entitled to more anyway, we're not going to artificially hold it
down. 1
Bill Finlayson: There's so many hypotheticals here. If the beachlot was
established in 1982 and they were gathering funds to buy a dock and so
forth and there were no boats down there and then the beach association got"
enough money together to install a dock and then they installed x amount of
boats, if you go back to 1982, it doesn't make any sense. Obviously they
developed the property over a number of years. I know at Minnewashta Beach ll
Association we've been developing that piece of property for a number of
years. There are many improvements made over the years. Who inventoried
this thing? Who did this investigation of the 13 associations as to what 1
they were back in 1982? Somebody's been researching this?
Krauss: Yeah. Jo Ann, do you want to give a little bit of the history?
Olsen: I'm not sure who did it in 1982. One of the other planners. Scott I
Martin..but the planning department had done a survey.
Erhart: This is something we're doing now or you say you found. '
Olsen: ...we found.
Erhart: Okay and you found some old surveys and you're pulling those
together, okay.
Aanenson: We compiled them together. We met with the homeowners
associations and presented that information to them and explained the
process. We met with each association and explained the process so. ,
Erhart: You met with every homeowners association about this ordinance
already?
Aanenson: Yes.
Mark Rogers: It was passed out right about at that time and we were told 111 that the chance for comments and so forth was here for changes and I guess
that's why I'm here. I'm surprised there aren't more like me. I guess I
just want to summarize my concern with this paragraph A. Setting the
number and all this kind of stuff is if it's, this is really the crux of
how hard we're either going to fight or support this amendment, or this
ordinance because if it looks like we're going to be cut back to 1982 and
let's face it. Chanhassen is certainly not the city it was in 1982. All I
the business developments that you've seen and other housing developments
that you talk about. I mean to go back to 1982 just can't happen on the
city as a whole. That's a big part of my concern in looking at this issue.
So enough said about that. I think that's the big sticking point for us.
And to clarify one other thing, I think remember Richard Wing at this same
meeting saying that an individual homeowner could have 5 boats at his
house, not 3.
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 44
Ivan Underdahl: ...someone else at that meeting said the same thing.
' Somebody on the committee there...
Mark Rogers: I don't think anybody from the Planning Commission was here.
Olsen: The DNR regulates that.
Mark Rogers: Yeah, and so that would certainly be something to be
' considered.
Ivan Underdahl: But I thought the City did that in it's own ordinance...
' Conrad: We limit it to 3.
Ivan Underdahl: Minnetonka I believe limits it to 5.
Mark Rogers: I think Wing said it was 5. Well.
' Erhart: We're getting off into the beachlot again.
Mark Rogers: Okay, and point 2 is something that you brought up Ladd about
this is permanent. This is a one time deal.
Conrad: To establish what was grandfathered.
Mark Rogers: Okay. I wanted to ask.
Conrad: Just two real clear things. There is a beachlot ordinance that
' everybody should have to live under because it's there and a lot of time
was spent developing that ordinance.
Mark Rogers: Well that's not my question though.
' Conrad: But it is there and so the point of this process that we're
looking at right now is to make sure that if something exceeded that
' because it occurred, there should be fairness to allow that use that
occurred prior to 1982 if it makes sense. And that's the process right now
that I think staff's trying to undertake.
Mark Rogers: But the ordinance did not pertain to the non - conforming uses
that were in effect at that time.
1 Conrad: Right.
Batzli: But the fact that the ordinance was passed means that all you're
' legally entitled to is the use that you had on the lot in 1982. And if you
expanded it, that doesn't mean that you're legally entitled to it at this
point.
Mark Rogers: Well I'll tell you, if that's what's going to go into the
ordinance, that you're going to try and strictly stick to the 1981 survey,
I think you're going to have a big fight trying to pass this ordinance.
Well I guess that's all I can say.
Plannin g Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 45
Conrad: Give us some examples of what would be a problem. I'm not aware
to tell you the truth that there are major. Obviously some, there have
been some problems with certain beachlots. With most of them are run
pretty well but there's something that you don't feel that you have that's
not acceptable that has happened since 1982? ,
Mark Rogers: According to this survey, which lists 1981, not 1982. We had
according to this survey, we had 4 boats with room for 6 docked. In 1991
the survey said we had 17, I believe that's an error but the number should II
have been at most 16.
Conrad: 16? 1
Mark Rogers: Boats docked. Room for 16. As you can see, there's a wide
difference between 4, room for 6 and 16. '
Batzli: So do you think that there was room for 16 back in 1981 or 1982 or
that's been the expansion of your beachlot since then?
Mark Rogers: I was not there in those years. I believe that is probably 1
more than what we have now 16 boats is probably more than there was there
in 1982. I did not personally get a boat until 1989. And I first moved
into the neighborhood in 1986.
Conrad: Well yeah, in that situation there's going to be some problems. I
think that's the point of the process. ,
Mark Rogers: That's what makes us nervous because if we say yeah, this is
a good amendment and we get into, or good ordinance and we get into
supporting it and the Council passes it and then I come back in front of
the Council and now we sit down and talk about the numbers, I'm getting
this distinct feeling from you anyway that we're going to walk away very
mad.
Erhart: Let me say, I don't think this ordinance, was one of the driving
reasons to create this ordinance because we're having a problem?
Aanenson: Yes.
Conrad: Very definitely. ,
Mark Rogers: The planning staff at that time indicated there had been some
problems in our own at the meeting. In our own case they said it was not 1
with our association but with, I don't know if it was Minnewashta Heights
or somewhere on the north shore of the lake that there had been some
difficulties. But what essentially would wind up. '
Erhart: I think is it fair to say that if you're not causing problems, I
mean we're not going to try to, I guess are you saying is the Council going
to be reasonable? I guess I expect that they're going to be reasonable.
Is the intent to make all non - conforming grandfathered beachlots conform tol
our new ordinance? That's not the intent is it?
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 46
Aanenson: No. The intent is to establish a baseline...of what they were
grandfathered in with.
.Erhart: Establish a baseline so I don't think.
11 Batzli: Yeah but that last part of your sentence, what they were
grandfathered in with and in this case that's a problem.
Aanenson: A few of them have that problem. It expanded. The subdivision
has grown.
Batzli: But the City Council, their intent was to actually go back to what
was grandfathered in?
Krauss: Well no, and I think you're hitting on the crux of the issue here.
' Their intent was to establish a means of regulating these things. I
guess my own personal interpretation of it is somewhat more of an open
ended negotiation. I find it tough to believe that it's going to be
' difficult to justify tripling in size of something beyond what was
grandfathered but there may be some sort of a middle ground that's found to
be reasonable. There is not an intent section here. You didn't discuss
intent when we brought this to you in terms of how that process would begin
nor did the City Council. It may be a useful question to ask yourselves. I
mean what would your intent be and possibly we can as the same question of
the City Council.
Bernie Schneider: I'd like to ask a question. When the survey was taken
in 1982, if that's when they were taken, were the homeowners associations
notified that the survey was going to be taken and that would determine the
I number of boats that would be allowed in the future? If the association
was not notified.
' Krauss: We have no way of knowing. This is 10 years ago.
Conrad: Again, the point is a beachlot can only take so much traffic. 100
' feet can only have so many boats on it. Maybe that's the same amount of
boats that a neighbor has or whatever but there's an ordinance out there.
I think the intent of this process is to make sure that all the beachlots
have some kind of guideline that's reasonable. And that's the point right
now.
Bernie Schneider: In 1975 when the City Council approved our subdivision,
' they also approved the Declarations of Covenants and Conditions which
stated that every property owner had the right to moor a boat at the dock.
That's right in the Covenants. We had a lawsuit going back 10 years ago
' over a second, third and fourth addition expected to get the lakeshore
rights and they were denied that in Court. Because of the fact that they
were denied the lakeshore rights and the boat docking priviledges, the
highest property owner was awarded $15,000.00 in damages for... There were
' different property owners that were paid off because they lost their
lakeshore rights. Now if the City Council authorized this back in 1975,
how can the City Council in 1991 take away the rights that were
grandfathered into us? Everybody says the grandfathering only applies to
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 47
the two boats that were there back in 1982. That should have no bearing on
this. 1
Conrad: Well legally there may be a case.
Bernie Schneider: I kind of think so because. 1
Erhart: I don't think that's what I heard. I didn't hear that we're
trying to grandfather in what was there in 1982. I think we're trying to II
determine what the intent, what the deal was when it was put in. If the
deal was that 15 homes each get a boat, then that may be what has to be
dealt with. '
Ivan Underdahl: That was the point I was trying to make but I think the
answer 1 think came...what was grandfathered is what you'll be going by.
Conrad: But we probably won't find out what was really intended.
Ivan Underdahl: This problem perhaps originated with our homeowners I
associations because one of the members also owns that adjoining property
and for some reason he became upset that there were 4 boats at the dock
although there were no problems in having 4 boats at this dock. But he
initiated a lawsuit.
Conrad: I don't think you're the only one. There are others.
Ivan Underdahl: He's tried to prevent us or get an injunction from having 1
any boats docking there at all. Well that's what's going on. ...he's been
pressuring the city now to enforce this grandfathered ordinance which would'
limit the number of boats.
Erhart: Well I think the comments are appreciated. I think we're starting"
to get a handle on the complexity of the issue here. So Mark, do you have
any other comments?
Mark Rogers: Yeah. Just one other one is again, I was starting to get at I
the, if we were to go through this process and get the permit. There
doesn't seem to be any mechanism for amending or changing this permit
should it be required for whatever reason. I don't know if that's intended
or covered under something else but realistically it would seem that that
should be allowed for. And the last thing was should we get this permit,
would we need any other permits in the future? I mean does the permit
cover toilets, picnic tables, whatever so that we would not need any other I
conditional use permits or I don't know, what else there might be in the
future short of reasonable beachlot kinds of things.
Olsen: ..conditional use permit. '
Mark Rogers: For?
Jo Ann Olsen's comment could not be heard on tape.
Mark Rogers: Okay, that wasn't clear from our first meeting because if it II
was listed on the survey and so forth.
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 48
1
Olsen: ...I thought you were asking.
Mark Rogers: I guess I'm asking because other beachlots have to have a
conditional use permit for toilets, I think you're saying so, would that be
another permit that we would have to then go get?
Krauss: You've got an existing one now?
Mark Rogers: Yes we do.
Krauss: That would be in the package of, assuming it's approved, that
would be in the package approved under this one permit application. You
wouldn't have to come in twice for the same thing.
Batzli: But if they didn't have the toilet, it was grandfathered in, they
1 may have to apply for it under the new ordinance and maybe that would be
under an amendment section is what he's talking about.
Mark Rogers: Okay. I guess that was about it.
Erhart: Okay thanks Mark. Is there anything else we haven't covered?
Bernie Schneider: Just on procedure now. This is going to be submitted,
if the Planning Commission here approves this resolution tonight, it will
be submitted to the City Council and then the City Council, will the City
Council hold a public hearing on this also? Or is it all...
Krauss: Well the official public hearing, the one that's mandated by law
is held at the Planning Commission but every City Council meeting is wide
open the Mayor always asks if anybody has anything to say. So if they
do pass it tonight, there will be more opportunity to speak at the Council.
Bernie Schneider: So this is the final meeting as far as the Planning
Commission?
Krauss: Well I don't know. They may continue this or ask for changes to
the ordinance and not approve it tonight. That's their call.
Ivan Underdahl: We just happened to see it in the paper but I don't know
what was on the letter.
Erhart: Kathy, did you meet with their homeowners association? Okay, and
were you at that meeting?
Ivan Underdahl: Well that was a long time ago.
1 Erhart: How long ago was it?
Ivan Underdahl: I don't know how long ago it was.
' Olsen: We did send out letters to all the homeowners.
Mark Rogers: About this meeting tonight?
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 49
1
Aanenson: The president.
(There was talking back and forth about the notification letter of this
evening's meeting.)
Olsen: I don't know with the storm and stuff, the mail might have. 1
Erhart: Well when was it mailed out Jo Ann?
Olsen: Beginning of last week. But with the holidays... 1
Ivan Underdahl: I was wondering, when does an association get the
opportunity to plead it's case.
Conrad: You would come in front of this group first to plead the case. So
tonight we're just saying, tonight we're making a decision maybe, should well
have a permit process. That's really what we're doing and then some of the
questions are, well how do we notify those groups of when that takes place.
But tonight is just should we do it. Then we have the next step where
individual, where it would be up to you when your homeowners association
wants to come in and see us. You'd have one year to do it. Then you plead
your case and if you can say based on legal conditions that we've had we
think grandfathered 4 boats or whatever, then we listen to that and make
our recommendation to the City Council.
Bill Finlayson: I don't know what number you're going to give me. I heard'
a rumor of about 14 boats on Minnewashta Heights Beach Association. Now
what number are we talking about so we know whether we have to plead a case
at all? Because I know that I mean I can pretty much establish 16 boats
and I can go back to maybe...
(There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.)
Olsen: ...conditional use permit for your recreational beachiot so you're 1
legal non - conforming. You're automatically in the process. You'd have to
get the permit. 1
Bill Finlayson: Now is the permit a one time thing forever? Is there a
cost involved in this permit?
Olsen: That's something that we haven't established yet but there would be
a fee.
Bill Finlayson: A dollar?
Olsen: I think we were discussing $75.00. 1
Bill Finlayson: $75.00? Forever right?
Olsen: Right. That is established by the City Council. 1
Erhart: Okay, anything else and again 1 think we all really appreciate you
coming. I think we got a good feel for what the issues are here. If
not, I'd entertain a motion to close the public hearing.
1
' Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 50
Batzli moved, Conrad seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in
favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Erhart: Why don't we just have an open discussion on this. Go ahead.
Ahrens: I think there needs to be an intent statement in here because
there's obviously a lot of questions people have concerning why we're doing
this. I think that the ordinance should address any changes people may
have in the future concerning. I don't know what it is. Maybe reapply for
another permit is it. But that needs to be clear in here. Who's the
Zoning Administrator? Is that you Paul?
1 Krauss: Yeah.
Ahrens: Is that really a title you have or is that just something you
' assume?
Krauss: Actually it was officially transferred. It used to be Don
Ashworth and he didn't know it. Or I guess he forgot.
Ahrens: Does this make any sense to have that in there?
Batzli: I think it's a term that's defined in our Zoning Ordinance.
Erhart: Yeah, we've used it quite frequently.
' Ahrens: Okay. I don't have any more comments. I think this has been,
discussion has been pretty adequate.
Batzli: So you'd want to table it and draft a new?
Ahrens: Yes.
' Erhart: Jeff, do you have a comment?
Farmakes: I would agree to table this. Get an intent statement. It seems
like there's some confusion out there coupled with the fact that a lot of
people currently didn't get a notice on it.
1 Erhart: Ladd.
Conrad: I don't know, obviously there's confusion. So I think the work, I
' don't know that the work has to be done in this document. Putting the
intent there is fine I guess. I think the real key is to make sure that
the associations who have to go through this process understand what's
going on and typically the intent, 10 words or 10 sentences may not do it
' in something like this. I think reference by the people who are here
tonight, it has to be real clear what the process is and even some of the
guidelines. I think realistically when you come back in, I hold the
current ordinance to be something that we really do guide development by.
The current ordinance makes a lot of sense so I would be dishonest if I
said that that wasn't a guidelines that we're going to use as we review
things but I think again as we talk to the homeowners, I think the
associations, there has to be some, and I can't, I don't know what's gone
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 51
1
on with staff. They've met with everybody but I think it's got to be real
clear that those homeowners associations, that the process is and what they
have to do and what the City's posture, what the City's role is in this
whole thing. And I don't know that that gets done in an intent statement
here. It may be a letter that says Dear Homeowners Association. Here's
what we're doing and if you want to send somebody else in and review the
process with us to get a better understanding, you should do that
Erhart: Okay was there something handed out at the meetings of the
homeowners associations?
Aanenson: A copy of this ordinance and then we gave them a copy of the
inventory. Mark has a copy.
Erhart: Okay so there wasn't any intent or general description of the
purpose or anything at that? 1
Aanenson: Yeah, we stood up and gave a presentation. Then somewhat we
kind of broke and met with them individually to answer specific questions.
Erhart: Yeah but it wasn't written, was it written out? Your
presentation, is it written out? So some of this might be around that we
could use.
Conrad: So how many showed up for that? Most?
Olsen: Quite a few but...
Batzli: So that may be why some of them aren't here tonight. 1
Bill Finlayson: When was that meeting held?
Olsen: October? 1
Aanenson: Yeah, I think that's when it was.
Bill Finlayson: There was one before this I know. Is that the meeting 1
you're talking about?
Olsen: Yeah, 4:30. 1
Erhart: Here?
Aanenson: I think we set up like 4:30 to 6 :00 because we figure people
could trickle in and we could meet with them one on one.
Conrad: I can see how this is confusing to some folks. 1
Erhart: Okay, Brian did you have anything else?
Conrad: Yeah, I'm pretty much done but again that's the intent statement
is here but I think it's the process that we have to follow. Even some
that are here right now are still a little bit concerned what's going to
happen and how it works. I think that's really communication.
1
}
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 52
Batzli: I like the idea of an intent statement I think. And potentially
adding at least a sentence regarding amendment. That if they want to amend
it, then they go through the process again or something. Reapply for
another one. Because that may, you may want to handle, it seems to me that
in, if they want to expand for example by adding a toilet, it's not clear
to me whether they would go through this process again or whether they
would go through our normal beachlot stuff about adding a toilet on a
beachlot.
Aanenson: Or go through the variance procedure, expansion of a
non - conforming.
Krauss: At that point it's not a non - conforming use anymore. It's a
permitted use so. The only options we would have is either come back
through or establish a separate amendment procedure.
Batzli: Yeah, but handle that so it's clear what they're going to do. And
I had a question about enforcement of this. On a conditional use permit, a
hearing is held before us and then it goes to City Council or what have
you. How do you envision if a problem arises under their permit, how would
it be handled?
Krauss: It's the same as a conditional use permit. We inspect them
annually. If we find a violation, we write to them about that. If they're
in violation of their permit and we can't achieve some accommodation, we
take it before the City Council and ask them to consider revocation.
Batzli: How would you revoke a permit?
Aanenson: Do you think we should put something into that?
Batzli: I don't know. I'd like you to at least look at that and see how
you would have to enforce this.
Aanenson: A violation section?
} Batzli: A violation section. Or if you're going to do it according t
g o the
conditional use permit, you can maybe again add a sentence.
Conrad: You know just the bottom line of this thing is real threatening to
a homeowners association. We've got to be real sensitive to that. There's
a feeling that we're taking away rights and on some basis we may but we've
got to be real sensitive to the fact that what this is doing and it makes
people nervous.
Erhart: Okay, what are we talking? Are we talking an intent statement, a
violation. Are we talking about putting that into the ordinance itself?
Or are we talking about when we hand this something out to people that it
sort of sells.
Aanenson: Put it right in the ordinance.
Bill Finlayson: I think the Minnewashta Beach Association can argue
numbers but we'd like to have something to argue with.
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 55
1
Batzli: Second. !!
Conrad moved, Batzli seconded to table the Zoning Ordinance Amendment to I'
require interim use permits for recreational beachlots until staff can come
back with a draft of an intent statement, violation section and a section
regarding - amendments. All voted in favor of tabling and the motion
carried.
ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT CONCERNING BUS SHELTERS AND PARK RIDE LOTS.
Jo Ann Olsen presented the staff report on this item.
Erhart: Okay, is there any reason to open a public hearing on this? Okay.
Any comments from the commissioners?
Conrad: The only thing that I didn't see in there was anything about
landscaping so I might assume that the landscaping of the section, what
landscaping will apply to this? To Ann.
Olsen: The landscape ordinance for site plans.
Krauss: Is it mandated that this get site plan approval?
Olsen: ...conditional use permit which...
Krauss: Well if we add to the ordinance just a one sentence line that says
it's also required to get site plan approval, have the full landscaping
requirements.
Conrad: My only point is, what we're doing is creating a giant parking lot
and if anybody cares about how we screen a giant parking lot. If we're all
comfortable that the landscaping ordinance does that, which it probably
does.
Erhart: Are you comfortable with the landscaping ordinance that applies to
this parking lot?
Olsen: Yeah, it's...
Conrad: It probably makes sense.
Krauss: Keep in mind we're the bus company too.
Erhart: That's what scares us.
Conrad: Yeah, Paul that's not the right thing to say.
•
Erhart: Are you satisfied Ladd?
Conrad: Yeah, I think the ordinance, as long as the ordinance applies to
this, then we're okay.
Erhart: Okay anything else? �' I
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 56
Batzli: Yeah. I thought we were going to, I thought the farmers market
thing was going to be tied in with the other stuff we were doing on the
temporary uses or whatever.
Krauss: There is going to be, right. Kate's working on that right now.
There is a separate section. We just happen to feel that a park and ride
lot is an ideal place for this to go and when you're talking about a
' specific ordinance dealing with park and ride lots, we might as well
mention it there too.
Batzli: Okay so we're just mentioning that it may, the conditional use •
' permit may allow it but we're going to cover it somewhere else what the
conditions are for that farmers market or in our temporary use, whatever
we're going to call it. Our new section is called.
' Krauss: Yeah. If somebody wanted to come in after the fact and establish
a farmers market at this park and ride, we'd run it through the conditional
' use permit procedure and permit it that way.
Batzli: But that's where the conditions are going to be for the farmers
market. What the temporary use stuff that's Kate working on now.
' Krauss: Right.
' Batzli: Let me ask a really dumb question. I'll probably be thrown right
out the window. Why can't the structure contain advertising signage?
Olsen: That's more...we wanted to keep it clean...
Batzli: But I mean every other bus shelter you see in the whole entire
world has advertising signage in it. It's just a philosophical thing.
' Krauss: No, and every other bus shelter we see doesn't cost $10,000.00 or
$12,000.00 to build. They're little plexiglass boxes.
' Ahrens: The new ones on the Nicollet Mall don't have any place for
advertising.
' Batzli: They don't? So Nicollet Mall and Chanhassen are going to be
without advertising signs.
Ahrens: Setting the pace for the future.
Erhart: What about, should we put a place in there to put like notices
' though? A bulletin board.
Ahrens: Like a bus schedule.
' Erhart: Yeah, bus schedule.
Batzli: Or a copy of the little Chanhassen newsletter that comes out.
Krauss: See the only reasons these things have advertising in them is as
these things are bus benches, bus shelters are erected by advertising
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 57
companies. The City gets it for free. Well I think Southwest Metro has
gone a much classier route. The bus shelters are distinctive. They're
architecturally designed. They don't have advertising.
Batzli: And we have to pay for them. Why don't we let some advertiser put l
them in for us?
Ahrens: What do you want to advertise in them?
Batzli: I don't know. I mean every other park bench you see has got some
realty guy on there. I don't know. Why are we paying for them? I mean
we're trying to keep down taxes and here we're building monuments for a
park and ride lot. Who cares? For a park and ride lot? Do you care if
it's a monument or a little plexiglass thing that advertises in there?
Conrad: Well there's a good case to be made for a keyast. A well designed
keyast that has, you know we're not talking about grandiose advertising but
you could sell it and it'd be relatively easy to sell advertising space and ,
it would be a public service. So I thought about that. It's not a big
deal to me but I think city businesses, boy if they wanted to reach a
public, boy what a great place to do it and you can do it real easily.
Erhart: Who's going to own this? '
Krauss: Southwest Metro. 1
Erhart: Okay, so if there was advertising, they'd collect it.
Conrad: They'd have to sell it too. They'd have to sell the space and
that's sort of a pain. If they're not set up to do it then, does Southwest
Metro sell anything in their buses? Do they have a system?
Krauss: I don't know. I know I haven't seen it on the outside of their ,
buses.
Batzli: They don't have the little cards up? ,
Krauss: I've never ridden one of their buses. I don't know.
Batzli: I haven't either.
Erhart: We just hired a girl from Romania that's here on political assylum ,
and she showed up for the interview. In the interview she said that she
does not own a car and can't drive. I said, how'd you get here? She says
I took a bus and I says you can get here on a bus?
Krauss: We've got an Iragee in our Planning Department who did the same
thing. She's since learned to drive...
Conrad: I think we should leave the advertising out until somebody gives II
us a decent proposal. We can always change the ordinance.
Batzli: Given the perpensity to graffiti and everything else. I mean if II
we're going to build a $12,000.00 thing that's going to be graffitied up
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 58
because Graffiti Bridge is gone now and all this pent up need to graffiti,
I'm stunned. I never heard that we were going to do that
Ahrens: Pent up need to graffiti?
' Batzli: Yeah. I guess I read the little Chanhassen Villager that we're
going to balance the budget and come hell or high water we're going to run
a deficit and we're going to do this and we're going to do that. Now we're
' building $12,000.00 monuments and no advertising. It's stunning.
Erhart: It's not us.
' Batzli: Well it's not city money but who supports Southwest Metro?
' Conrad: We have a transit fee that we pay.
Batzli: Yeah. So we support it. I don't know why we're trying to the
leaders in non - advertising on buses. That's my only point and why we need
to build park and ride lots that are, I don't know.
Ahrens: Most people wait in their cars anyway.
1 Conrad: Geez, if you've ever waited for a bus you're dying.
' Batzli: That's the only one I'm familiar with.
Erhart: Okay, where do we want to go with the advertising? Have we found
anybody to attach to Brian's ideas on the advertising? Okay. Good try.
r Batzli: I'll save a copy of the Minutes for posterity.
Erhart: Anything else on this? Ladd, you're cooking.
' Conrad: I was just trying to think if somebody came in with a good
J Y g Y 9
proposal for advertising what we'd do.
' Erhart: We're talking about one of these right?
Conrad: Yeah.
Ahrens: We have one keyast we're talking about?
Krauss: Well ultimately two or three.
Ahrens: One park and ride lot? That's it?
Krauss: Well ultimately there's going to be two or three or maybe a fourth
but that's, I mean sites that they've located including the one we have in
' here in town now, that one may move out to the corner of TH 5 and Dell
Road. Another site's over at TH 5 and TH 41. Another site is down on
TH 212 and TH 101, the new interchange.
Ahrens: These are potential sites?
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 59
Krauss: Yes.
Ahrens: It wouldn't be a big money maker now anyway? Not like the permit II
process we talked about earlier.
Batzli: 13 times $75.00 is a big money maker? We're going to spend more 1
than that on the lights burning in here for just the hearings alone.
Ahrens: I know. Especially this one. '
Conrad: But don't we want to have a place for public notices Paul or Jo
Ann? Now here you've got a captive audience. I don't know how many are II riding the bus. 50 to 100. Wouldn't you want to have a place for public?
It's just one more way of communicating to the citizens of Chanhassen.
Olsen: ...were thinking more of paid advertising...
1
Conrad: Here's a case where we could require some kind of bulletin.
Erhart: I was thinking public yeah. Provide a place to put city notices. I
The people who are going to use this bus live and work in Chanhassen.
Either live or work here. It's a heck of a good way. '
Batzli: Put copies of our Minutes.
Ahrens: That will put them to sleep. 1
Conrad: I guess I'd like to see that.
Erhart: Just like a cork bulletin board someone could put something else 1
up? It's not one that they have to go to the City and get a key or
something. Then they're going to have to hire someone to manage that.
Conrad: That cork is tacky.
Batzli: Have you seen the one at 7 Hi. They used to have a community
bulletin board. I'm sure it's not there anymore because was in the Red Owl
or Country Store, whatever it was. It was just tacky. It was bad.
Conrad: Did you ever sell anything there? 1
Batzli: No. I did look at it occasionally.
Erhart: They've got one up at the shopping center on TH 4 and TH 5, inside
the shopping center that's a public community bulletin board and I thought
that one was, you know people put their little want ads and signs and
stuff.
Batzli: Well I'm sure if you've got somebody going over there and kind of 111
keeping all that straight.
Erhart: That's probably why it looks good.
Conrad: But we don't want the for sale, dog for sale stuff.
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 60
Ahrens: Give the public what they want. That's what I always look at.
Conrad: But you know it's an opportunity for us to post official
documents. How many people ride the bus a day out of here? 50 to 100?
Something like that.
Erhart: Are you talking about this would be just for the City's use?
Conrad: Yeah, primarily.
Batzli: Jo Ann's going to have to drive out there every Tuesday and change
' it. I can see it now.
Erhart: If we wanted to do that we could always change the ordinance at
that time also and allow us to do that.
' Conrad: But if you want to force the Transit Commission to put this in,
now's the time to do it. Are they going to put it in anyway? Aren't they
' going to put a schedule up?
Olsen: ...the intent...
' Conrad: We're not prohibiting it but how about requiring it. If we want
it, we should have it in the ordinance right now. If we don't want it, and
it's time to go home, we'll close the subject.
Erhart: Anybody from staff want it then?
' Ahrens: Want what in?
• Erhart: We're talking about requiring them to put in the glass door with
the bulletin board behind it where the city can put notices.
Batzli: If this is just a proposed condition, why don't we say we might at
our option require something like that. Then we can talk about it when the
' time really comes.
Conrad: You're just getting out of the deal. We either want it or we
don't.
Batzli: Well it depends.
' Conrad: Yeah, it depends. We ask the City Council to make a decision. Do
they want another place to post city. There's some cost behind it. Maybe
it's not worthwhile, I don't know but this is the last time we're going to
' see this thing.
Batzli: Who's the Southwest Metro Representative? Who?
Olsen: From here?
Batzli: From here.
' Krauss: It's up for reappointment. Do you want to be it?
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 61
Olsen: It's three cities...Chanhassen, Chaska and Eden Prairie.
Batzli: I think you need somebody that actually rides the bus that has an II
interest.
Farmakes: There are 800 people waiting there. 1
Ahrens: I don't think it's worth spending 45 minutes...
Erhart: Yeah, what do you want to do? In or out?
Olsen: You can just take out...
Batzli: No, leave it in there. Tell the Council if they want it, they can
do it.
Ahrens: I agree.
Erhart: Okay, someone make a motion. 1
Conrad: Okay, I would move, what are we moving?
Erhart: We're moving to recommend the adoption of the ordinance right? 1
Conrad: Yeah, the ordinance. Are we just park and ride lots or are we
talking about bus shelters and bus benches too? Okay, I would recommend
approval of the amendment to Section 20 -266, Section 20 -294 as staff report
states and Section 20 -294 as the staff report states with the addition of
point number 9 which includes site plan review and, huh. Just with point II
number 9 which is site plan review and a recommendation to the City Council
that they review the option of requiring community bulletin board that
could be included in the park and ride lot.
Erhart: Okay, is there a second?
Conrad: That's not part of it. That's just a recommendation to the City 1
Council to review that subject. I didn't put it in as one of our
recommendations.
Batzli: Second. 1
Erhart: You stated there was a section 9. Where?
Conrad: I added item number 9. Under Section 20 -294.
Ahrens: He's not in the ordinance. 1
Olsen: He's on the part that I added.
Ahrens: Page 2. 1
Batzli: Right. Well we have two sections 20 -294. I didn't understand
that but I assume that's going to be straighten out. So if I would love toll
kind of friendly amend this that the staff figure out where to put the
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 62
1
requirement that there's a site plan review.
1 Erhart: Okay, any other discussion or amendments?
Conrad moved, Batzli seconded that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of the proposed conditions to be added to Article IV, Conditional
Uses, Standards for Agricultural and Residential Districts, Division 3 and
Standards for Business, Office, Institutional and Industrial Districts,
Division 4 of the City Code including an item 9 under Section 20 -294 which
will be site plan review. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
' APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated
November 6, 1991 were so noted.
CITY COUNCIL UPDATE:
Erhart: Questions on the City Council update?
1 Batzli: Have we heard anything on the Moon Valley stuff?
Krauss: No. That was a grueling couple of days.
Batzli: Was it just last week?
Krauss: Yeah. Judge Kanning, well he gave them 10 days to present summary
arguments and then I suppose it's going to take another while to go and
review it. On the three points though, for whatever it's worth, on the
point as to establishing that they are not grandfathered in on the northern
' piece, Judge Kanning seemed to indicate that he felt pretty strongly that
they don't have any rights to that piece at all. Roger thinks, Roger and
Tom Scott think we're in very strong legal ground on the question of
whether, 1 mean the Judge has already decided we have a right to regulate
' them. The question of whether or not we have a right to restrict them from
mining all the material, Roger feels we have a very strong case. As for my
rejection of their application, my guess is they're going to order us to
take it and they may order them to provide information. It clearly came
across in the meeting that they have information that they've intentionally
withheld. So hopefully they'll be ordered to provide that stuff. We'll
' see probably in a couple of weeks.
REVIEW LOWELL CARLSON SITE PLAN.
' Erhart: Okay, did you have something you wanted to talk about the Lowell
Carlson site plan?
' Olsen: We just wanted to get your...would you accept...
Erhart: This is in a residential area?
1 Olsen: It's zoned residential with there's residences on either side of
Lowell...
I Erhart: Okay, what are our alternatives to accepting that? We're
requiring that the guy put all this in a building and we can't, there's no
1
la nin Commission Meeting
P n g
December 4, 1991 - Page 63
way we can.
Olsen: Inside... He's got a lot of stuff he can removed from the site.
Erhart: Right. But we can't legally do that? We can either make him
enclose it and screen it or make him put it in a building.
Olsen: ...remove stuff that shouldn't be there...
Erhart: Why wouldn't we do that?
Olsen: ...but what he's proposed to us is a 12,000 square foot... 1
Erhart: That seems to me to permanentize the problem doesn't it?
Ahrens: What will the neighbors think of a 12,000 square foot building? 1
Olsen: ...
Ahrens: That's a big building.
Erhart: Isn't this the same building he's been proposing for years and
then never does it anyway?
Batzli: Well yeah but he was just going to put up some tin shed or a
couple of them. He wasn't going to put up a big one.
Krauss: He had bought the old Tonka Toy Company building.
Olsen: I think he's still... 1
Batzli: Tonka Toy building?
Krauss: Yeah, he had the Tonka Toy building and he took it apart. Now he
doesn't know how to put it back together again. It sat on the grass for 2
years. 1
Erhart: But everytime we go out there he shows it to us and says here, I
can put this up. It seems to me this process is going to go on forever.
It seems to me if we could get the guy to put some heavy landscaping around"
the thing and then keep the process going while he does that, we'd get more
accomplished.
Conrad: Has anything ever happened with Lowell?
Olsen: Well he has cleaned up the site. 1
Conrad: So the three things that were to be done by September 22nd, have
they been done? Clean up all items listed by September 22nd. All
vehicles, equipment on site must be licensed, operable?
Olsen: I don't know.
Conrad: I'll guarantee.
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 64
1
Olsen: He's got to do it or...
Erhart: Okay, if we win the case outright, what happens?
Olsen: Well this is part of the settlement. The case has actually been
won.
Erhart: Okay, but what's the best that can happen for the City?
Olsen: To get it screened...
Erhart: Okay and your term screening applies to...
Olsen: The building and screening.
Erhart: The building and screening.
Farmakes: Is this how much building he would need to house what he's got
there now?
Krauss: I doubt it. I mean that's a building that's as large as that
office building that you approved in the industrial park.
Farmakes: I was going to say...little oversized.
Conrad: That's the size of the building he took down so that's what he
wants to put up.
Batzli: 12,000?
Krauss: He never had it erected on his property.
Farmakes: So that isn't grandfathered?
Olsen: No.
Krauss: No, not at all. His use at some level is grandfathered.
Olsen: I just didn't want us to say no way. That's why I wanted to put it
past you.
Conrad: 12,000 is absolutely not even, I couldn't even consider it. And
to tell you the truth, you were recommending 5,000. I don't know that we'd
do that for anybody else. That's still a decent sized building. That's a
big building and we're putting it in a residential neighborhood. I don't
' know. I guess we should help. We've tried to help Lowell Carlson for 5
years or 10, whatever the number is and nothing happens and obviously he's
lost the case but geez, I just can't be real sensitive to putting up,
letting him put up something that's kind of going to be an eyesore in the
neighborhood. I don't know.
Erhart: What we're pushing for is what screening? Perimeter screening.
Ahrens: Probably his entire property.
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 4, 1991 - Page 65
Erhart: And how big is the lot?
Conrad: Couldn't he berm that? He'sdn the business. He's got the 1
equipment to do the berming.
Batzli: He could pile all his junk up there and cover it up. 1
Conrad: So if we bermed his equipment so that the neighbors, would that be
too big a berm? 1
Olsen: Yeah, I mean...
Conrad: And we can't build 10 feet berms? That's a lot of earth isn't
Olsen: Yeah. And that would be pretty ugly.
Erhart: Even Rick Murray couldn't do that.
Conrad: Yeah, the trees will die. 1
Olsen: Okay, well we'll...
Erhart: Do you have an answer from us? Okay, is there anything else? 1
Batzli moved, Farmakes seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor 1
and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10:45 p.m..
Submitted by Paul Krauss
Planning Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
1
1
1
1
1
1
11 N E a
y g a Q:
REGULARSMEETING AND RECREATION COMMISSION `.
DECEMBER 10, 1991
Chairman Schroers called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m..
MEMBERS PRESENT: Jan Lash, Dave Koubsky, Larry Schroers, Curt Robinson,
Wendy Pemrick, Jim Andrews and Dawne Erhart
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Coordinator; and Jerry Ruegemer,
11 Recreation Supervisor
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Robinson moved, Koubsky seconded to approve the
Minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated December 10,
1991 as amended on page 4 by Jan Lash, changing the word "inaccessible" to
"accessible ". All voted in favor and the motion carried.
INTRODUCTION OF JUDY COLBY, SENIOR CENTER COORDINATOR.
Hoffman: Tonight I'm pleased to introduce Judy Colby to everyone. As part
of the continuing effort to better serve Chanhassen's senior residents, Ms.
Colby has been retained as the Senior Center Coordinator for the new senior
center which will be located next door. Just behind the City Council
chambers. Perhaps in a moment we'll take a walk over there if you don't
know what that space looks like. Ms. Colby is employed by the Senior
Community Services, a United Way supported non - profit agency with whom the
City has contracted for her services. She's working about 12 hours a week
to begin with. Typically on a 3 day schedule, about 4 hours per day. Over
the next 6 months prior to the center's opening, we thought it was
important to have Judy into the office preparing. Doing research and about
programming and getting to know our staff and as well the senior population
in the city. End of speech. Join me in welcoming Judy to the city of
-Chanhassen.
Schroers: Welcome Judy.
Judy Colby: Thank you. It's good to be here.
MI
Schroers: It's nice to know that we're going to have a senior program in
Chanhassen here. My mother belongs to Tolheim down in Chaska and they have
a pretty nice program there and it makes life for the older people a lot
more fun. She has more activities and more things going on now than I do.
It's harder to get on the phone than I am so it's good. Nice to know we're
getting this.
Judy Colby: ...I was in Todd's office for an hour this week and the first
hour I get a call from the architect saying, well tell me what your program
is for next year so I know what to do on drafting these plans. I sort of
went give me one more hour. No, I'm real excited about this.. It's kind of
a dream. My background is all in advertising...and this is sort of my
second carreer in my life. It's just so opportune to be a resident here
and also on the ground floor.
Schroers: Well good, I'm sure you'll be well received. The communities
around here, I don't know how long you've been in the area but I know that
they have programs where they interact between the towns of Victoria,
Waconia and Chaska and they all go back and forth so there's things going
1
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 10, 1991 - Page 2
on. The volunteer drivers and that sort of thing I've found out is really
kind of... It's something they get a lot of use out of
Judy Colby: That's one things, I read the Minutes for the last year the
Commission has been meeting and transportation is always right up there.
Schroers: Great. Well sounds good.
Robinson: Thanks for stopping by. Did you say we're going to see the area
if we have time?
Hoffman: Sure. We'll take a walk over there.
11 Robinson: Good.
Lash: Maybe we should do that now before Dawne gets here. Before we get
into the budget thing.
Hoffman: If you want to sure.
(The Commission took a short recess to tour the future senior community
center area.)
UPDATE 5 - YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, COMMUNITY PARKS, CONTINUATION.
Hoffman: In preparing this item for discussion at the last meeting I was
anticipating that it would be available that evening. Unfortunately I was
not and thus the information was included in your packet insufficient to
carry out that conversation. So we'll continue that this evening and
hopefully get through the 5 year plan for our community parks and make some
progress in that regard. In conceptualizing in developing a 5 year capital
improvement program, a number of factors are considered. One that first
comes to mind, as always is the ability to finance. However, in the 5 year
plan or in a goal setting plan, I believe these factors should stand in the
shadow of the more dominant goal of planning and comprehensive city park
and recreational facility system which you as commissioners believe
accommodates residents at a desired level. If the commission, City Council
1 and staff is motivated to accomplish a certain project, great attempts can
be made to do so. If a conservative approach to development is desired and
recommended, that will be reflected at the end of the 5 year window that
we're taking a look at. Other influencing factors include population
growth, demographics, special interest groups that come to the Commission
with requests from time to time. The ever growing environmental concerns
and a number of other factors. With that I'll just briefly run down each
of the parks prior to discussing them with some overview comments and
then I would like to open it up to the commission members for your thoughts
on where you believe the city should be headed with these community parks
over the next 5 year time period and beyond. The first park is Bandimere
Community Park. As you're aware, this 30 acre parcel of property was
purchased from the Bandimere Estate in 1989 at a cost of $200,000.00. The
site consists of mainly tillable ground whick is leased to Mike
Klingelhutz. We held bids on that property each year and Mike was
successful for a 2 year contract. We earn rent of about $1,200.00 per year
off of that property. The remainder of the site is made up of an old farm
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 10, 1991 - Page 3
site. Drainageways, sloped areas and a small strip of timber. Concept
plans for the development of the site were'prepared in 1989. With
completion of Lake Susan baseball fields and the continuing desire to
equitably develop field facilities within the city, I believe changes to
that plan are now necessary. I've outlined those changes. They include
one Babe Ruth field. The elimination of one of the Babe Ruth fields since
we have one at Lake Susan and the inclusion of 1 or 2 girl's softball
fields, depending on what room allows for. I also believe that the
position of ruling out the installation of lights at this time or in the
near future should not be taken. As can be seen from this attachment, this
park will be at the crossroads of the first major interchange in TH 212
from the east. 15 or 20 years, this now rural park will be surrounded by AA
single and multi family neighborhoods. In regards to the issue of the
William's Pipeline, preliminary study has shown that will have a varying
impact on construction activity, depending on the park's final design
configuration. The pipe currently lies just about 3 feet underneath the
ground level so obviously we'll be doing an amount of grading. We'll be
working with William's Pipeline to correct that situation. A conservative
estimate of the funds necessary to develop this park is shown in either of
the concept,plans as $400,000.00. About twice the purchase price. The
grant proposal currently being investigated for Bandimere Park is of a
preliminary nature and in no way obligates the City to develop the site. In
fact it's a pretty far shot at the type of grant we received for the Lake
Susan construction project with the boat access and the field development
and the playfield development would be successful at Bandimere simply
because it does not have access to water. The development of access to
public waterways scores very high in those grant proposals and if you do
not have it, as is in the case with Bandimere, you simply have the athletic"
facility. Down in the very low percentage of receiving those grants so we
can in no way rely on that grant coming through for the development of
Bandimere Park. We're going to need to look to most likely a bond issue at
some point in the future. Do you want to go ahead and take them one at a
time Larry?
Schroers: Okay. Well, do you want to look at the site layout or a +�
projected schedule of development?
Hoffman: A projected schedule of what the commission, what their sense of II
the need for development of that park site is to each individual
commissioner. Obviously if you're going to develop through a bond issue,
it's going to have to be a public, the public is going to have to be
interested. The citizens are going to be interested in that development
and if they see no need for it, there's no reason for us to push the issue
of development. So we need to key into the athletic associations in town
and the youth associations and their feelings as to how well the City is
dividing athletic facilities for the programs which their children are
involved in and would they support a bond issue and at what point in the
future? Is that 2 years away? 5 years away? Should we not even be
considering development in the next 5 years or should we be considering it
on a pretty rapid time schedule meaning planning for the next couple of
years.
Robinson: What are the chances for a grant Todd? You say it's currently
being investigated.
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 10, 1991 - Page 4
Hoffman: As I stated, fairly minimal. If you don't have water access or
you're not providing a new access to a lake or a river or stream, your
points, they base them on points and you score very few points for atheltic
facilities. Ball fields.
Schroers: If I remember correctly, when we were originally working with
Bandimere, we were identifying it as a youth area and mostly targeted to
the younger, from Babe Ruth and under. To my knowledge the facility that
we have at Lake Susan right now is more catering to that Babe Ruth type age
group and the older kids so as far as I'm concerned, or my opinion would be
that we need this facility as much now as we did in the beginning and that
the residents of children in the age groups that would be using it are
probably who we are going to have to target to get support on a bond issue.
I guess my opinion is that it's something that we need at this point in
time. The sooner that we can move on it the better. I think that it's
almost impossible to say how long these governmental budget restraints are
going to be in effect but it's not just here in Chanhassen, it's
I/ everywhere. I think that what we need to do is identify projects that are
already in progress and then check what funding is available and finish
what we've got going before we start other things that we can just get
started and not finish. Because if the economy continues, you can
conceiveably get a whole lot of things, a few things started and nothing
finished. But do we want to start in order and go ahead.
Andrews: I have nothing to base this on other than a gut feel but I guess
I would say that we need to have this thing on line probably 5 to 7 years
out the way we're developing on the south side. Maybe just a little bit
11 sooner than that but the way I see it, I'd like to see the property
cleared. I'd like to see the old, has the farm house been removed? It's
still there isn't it?
Hoffman: All the buildings have been removed. The farmhouse still remains
and is being used by the Fire Department for training.
Andrews: It'd be nice to get that out of the way in the next year and
I guess as far as a master plan, if we can get the rough grade done, I
think another important thing since this is likely to be a bond issue or a
larger community investment, would be to perhaps look at sort of a
coordinated informational campaign and our local paper, whatever talking
about the Bandimere Park. Here's what our plan is. Here's when it's going
to be needed and this is something we're going to have to sell the citizens
on. It's not a very good time to sell our citizens on any additional taxes
in my opinion. So I guess I look at this as something that would be very
far out on our 5 year plan. Perhaps a bit beyond.
Pemrick: I guess I basically agree with what Jim said. I do feel that
when we get to that point in 2 or 3 years, it should be put before the
public to see just what is wanted on the end of the homeowners.
Robinson: I would agree that 5 to 7 years is a reasonable length of time.
You know $400,000.00 is a lot of money but we've shelled out $200,000.00 up
front and we're getting a $1,200.00 return on that every year so it's
sitting there but I guess I agree that we probably won't really see a real
need for it until 5 to 7 years. I don't know if we take it to the people
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 10, 1991 - Page 5
at that time or even to set $50,000.00 to $60,000.00 a year aside but
that's still a lot of money but maybe we should consider going that way.
Hoffman: The Commission had talked previously about setting aside money
each year. Bank rolling it.
Schroers: I think bank rolling it is a good idea but I think it's going to
be difficult because there's always going to be many pressing things that II
we're going to need funding for. But if we can specifically budget for
that, hopefully it would work. I don't think it makes any sense at this
point, if we're talking 5 or 7 years down the route to be looking
realistically or even wasting time on concept plans.
Erhart; What fund does the rent money go to that Klingelhutz is paying to
rent the land? 1
Hoffman: Into 410. Park acquisition and development.
Erhart: Okay. 1
Koubsky: Is that land currently in agricultural use?
Hoffman: Yes.
Koubsky: So the $1,200.00 is rent for is agricultural. I guess I'd hate
to see if we're going to, right now it's being used for something. You know
somebody's making a living on it. We're not making much return but there
is somebody making a living on the land and I guess if it is 5 to 7 years,
I agree that probably the master plan would change by then. We're kind of
probably have to do rearchitecture or restudy of that and maybe if we set
money aside it would be for architectural fees so when we decide to develop
the area or present a bond issue, that at that time we have some money to
put a plan together to present to the public. I think $200,000.00 was a
lot of money but I think once that Highway 212 is in, it's going to be a
heck of a bargain. 1
Hoffman: It was a bargain. 30 acres for $200,000.00.
Koubsky: I think as population develops, that's going to show us how we
need to develop it. If it's still going to be a youth orientated park or
more Legion activity but I don't think I have a fore sight into that right II
now. But I would be for putting money away for a new plan when we
determine that's needed. It
Lash: I guess I would want Todd to give me more information as to the
trends in what's happening as far as the useage of the facilities that we II
have right now and find out if we're looking back over say the last 5
years, the percentage of growth in the programs and maybe would give us
more of an educated guess as to right now we're picking 5 to 7 years. I
have nothing to base that on. I have no idea when we're going to need it.
It might be 2 years. It might be 15 years. I have no idea. I have
nothing to base it on and 1 think we need to look at maybe some past
trends. That's about the only thing you can base it on is looking at past II
growth patterns and if we get a 1,000 housing permits a year, how does that
1
1
' Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 10, 1991 -- Page 6
affect our youth programs or our adult programs? Maybe that would give us
a little bit better guess of it and a time. I would hate to say well let's
start putting $50,000.00 a year because in 7 years we'd have enough to do
it ourselves. Maybe we'll need it in 2 years. Maybe we'll never need it.
We just have no way of knowing. But I think too, before we'd ever go to a
bond referendum, if we think it's a priority for us to develop that by
starting to bankroll it, that does send a message to the public that we've
�. seen the need coming. We've tried to prepare. We're not just throwing it
all in their lap and if it does fail, there we sit and we have to start all
over again from scratch. At least we'd be a little prepared if we tried to
set a reasonable amount. 1 think it's frustrating when we have a small
budget to start with to take a third of it away and put it away for a
future use. Maybe we don't need to do that much but come up with a
reasonable amount.
Andrews: I wanted to comment that if we're thinking 5 to 7 years, that
that probably means that we need to have a concept plan in 3 years so we
can propose the bond issue in the fourth year so we can build in the fifth
year so it grows over and fills in in the sixth year so we can use it the
seventh year. So we're really not, it's not like we're going to sit and do
' nothing for 5 years. We really have to think about that.
Lash: And we have to think of all the other needs. We've got people who
want to have trails and the only way we're going to end up with any kind of
a trail system is probably through a referendum. And we've been trying to
get money out west by Lake Minnewashta for a park. If it ends up coming
' down to another, was that a few years ago when we sort of had a bulk
referendum there for all kinds of things. Maybe in a few years we may have
to look at something like that. Let the voters pick which things we need
the most.
Hoffman: The last one that went through was the purchase of land in
southern Chanhassen, the park property. Lake Ann expansion and then the
trail system. The trail system failed but the expansion of Lake Ann and
the purchase went through. There's been some pretty hefty bond issues
passed of late in the Park and Recreation area in the metropolitan area.
Eden Prairie has had some difficulty but...of millions in their bond issues
for golf courses and those types of things so $400,000.00 is a considerably
amount of money but as far as bond issues go in the metropolitan area, it's
a smaller issue but there are a combination of factors. Jan brought up the
trail plan. The additional lighting of ballfields at Lake Ann or at Lake
Susan. Land acquisition again with the MUSA line being expanded...other
land for the city. So it probably would not be a single issue that the
city would be looking to. To respond back to your question, the trends and
the future need. It's a complicated issue because of the fact that youth
activities and youth offerings are a complicated network. Who offers what
and who knows who has which registration numbers and we could start taking
a look at that. Getting into registration numbers for the athletic
associations. Not only Chanhassen but then there's South Tonka Baseball
Association and Legion Baseball and Babe Ruth and those types of things.
The Commission has responded to requests. Field No. 2 being changed from a
softball field to a Little League field in response to increased pressure
from those youth activity folks out there saying we've gone long enough in
the city of Chanhassen without having youth athletic fields for our youth
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 10, 1991 -- Page 9
ghost plats of houses over their property. There's a lot of activity in
that neighborhood out there. We need to keep our senses sharp so we can
move in at the right point and either negotiate for purchase or acquisition
through development or probably both. 1
Schroers: I was at a party in the west Minnewashta neighborhood last
weekend and I heard several times that they feel slighted. That they don't
have parks and the trails and they don't even have a safe way to get to the t
small park that we have at Minnewashta Heights. Is that where it is
Minnewashta Heights? So there is a lot of concern in that area that they
are paying an awful lot of money in taxes and really aren't getting the
amenities that the rest of the people in the city are.
Hoffman: The concern really came out during the Minnewashta Parkway
discussion and as long as you're venting your anger, where the heck is our
park out here west of Lake Minnewashta?
Lash: But wasn't there a lot of opposition to the trail along Minnewashta 1
Parkway?
Hoffman: There was some opposition but there was an underlying support fort.
it
Lash: The way I got it from the paper, it sounded like more people were
opposed to it and I don't know if they really were opposed to it or they
were just opposed to having to pay assessments for some of it. That was
probably the real problem there but I was really surprised when I read some
of those articles because to the best of recollection I thought they had 1.
petitioned to have a trail along Minnewashta Parkway and then all of a
sudden it's going to go in and the fur starts to fly.
Hoffman: I'm comfortable with Bandimere Larry. Bluff Creek Park. Again 1
it's more or less a land holding. Obviously you're not going to develop
that into an active park site. At some point in the future it will
probably be a piece of the much larger Bluff Creek watershed holding of
some portion.
Andrews: Is there any parking or access to that park at this point?
Hoffman: None whatsoever.
Andrews: Is there any logical space here to connect here for off of Hesse II
Farm Road?
Hoffman: No. It's remote. But we know where it is now Curt. 1
Robinson: We need a sign.
Hoffman: It's remote. It's the bottom ground of that valley down there 1
and it's isolated on all sides by private land holdings. There's no public
access. i
Andrews: Great. Let's move on. There's nothing we can do with that one.
1
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 10, 1991 - Page 10
Erhart: We entered through the golf course out there when we went on our
tour.
Hoffman: There was an individual who wanted to sell the lot just before
you go under the overpass for about $40,000.00 I think. That would provide
an access for one lot.
Erhart: How much was that Todd?
Hoffman: $40,000.00.
Andrews: That'd be a difficult to use property. Very dangerous.
Schroers: Well we can at this point look at that as green space.
Hoffman: Moving on to Chanhassen Pond. As the Commission discussed,
Chanhassen Pond Park is very functional in it's present condition. 1992
capital improvement program does contain $1,200.00 for installation of a
park identification sign, two picnic tables along Kerber Blvd.. The wood
duck and blue bird and Canadian goose nesting platforms were constructed as
11 a Boy Scout project. Those are there. The local neighborhood has recently
adopted those blue bird houses and will care for them in the future. Prior
to this area being used as a parkland, the site was used for grazing
cattle. That's led to the erosion problems which we're correcting on an
almost annual basis within that park site. The original road which comes
in from the south on the property is one of those remaining spots where if
we don't see that corrected, that will... So as far as a master plan does
exist. The amenities shown on that master plan are basically in place as
of today and there's no large scale improvements which are necessary in
Chanhassen Pond Park. It needs continuing care in the area of erosion
control so we can correct those areas.
Lash: Last winter we kind of kicked around a sliding hill.
11 Schroers: Sliding hill, yeah. And I think that was part of our original
plan and discussion of Chan Pond Park so that is one amenity that is not in
place at this time.
Hoffman: Well the hill's there. They're using it for sliding.
Schroers: They're using it on the opposite side though from the parking.
They're coming down from the east residential areas.
Hoffman: Yeah, they're going both sides. If we would like to move ahead
I/ and designate that as a sliding hill, we really need to bring parking in
off of Kerber. The Commission has looked at that in the past. On street
or diagonal or pull in or pull off parking was not, for safety concerns was
not considered but there is room along Kerber -Blvd. there to have, to
create a parking area. If that hill were designated as a sliding hill to
provide parking to it. That would be a viable use if the Commission would
choose to look at that at some point in the future...
Schroers: Well I think that as a community park we maybe should have a
designated sliding area. The residents who live there are going to slide
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 10, 1991 - Page 11 ►
wherever they want. The kids are going to go out there with the sleds and
go all over the place but for people who don't live there and they want to II
slide, they won't feel comfortable going through someone else's yard to go
sliding. 1
Lash: You don't think it's possible to just have parking, on street
parking right along there?
Hoffman: The traffic pattern, it's a major collector, Kerber Blvd....
Schroers: Not diagonal but they park parallel along here for City Center 11
Park. What's the difference?
Hoffman: You're correct. They do it. It's just not the best solution.
If we want to advertise a sliding hill, I think we'd be responsible to go II
ahead and advertise on street parking for the sliding hill. Those of you
who have experience with community sliding hills in any other communities,
that can generate some considerable amount of traffic and I'm not even
saying for sure that a 12 or 14 dr 16 parking lot off of Kerber would do a
sufficient job for a community sliding hill. These things are very popular
and you can generate...lights on the hill, a couple hundred people per
evening. Power Hill Park is also being looked at as a community sliding
hill. So those are the two sites and each winter we do get calls on it and
in the parks and recreational system, a sliding hill is really basic so I
think it's in our interest to provide one but you also need the parking and
lighting if there is any that goes along with it.
Schroers: Is parking something that would be more reasonable to pursue at I
Power Hill?
•
Hoffman: There's parking, I believe it's a 8 or 12 car stall parking lot II
slated in the master plan for development at Power Hill Park.
Schroers: Yeah but in proportion to where the sliding area would be, is it li
a workable situation?
Hoffman: At Power Hill?
Schroers: Yes. 11
Hoffman: Sure. The parking lot comes right at the top of the hill.
Lash: I can't imagine it would be real popular with the people over by
Chan Pond if we start sticking up a bunch of big lights up.
Schroers: Yeah, if we already have a parking lot going in place at Power Hill and if the area would accommodate a nice sliding hill, we should just
scratch it from Pond Park. J
Andrews: I agree. I think you're going to get a neighborhood...if you
designate that as a sliding hill. Like Todd said, that generates a
tremendous amount of traffic. I lived in an area over in St. Paul that I II
wouldn't even call it a designated park, or sliding hill but it was a well
known hill and they had a plowed parking lot and that place was packed up
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 10, 1991 - Page 12
11 every night. I mean it was very, very busy. My guess is if it was the
sliding hill, that it would be very easy to get 30 or 40 cars there on a
nice night. I'm not sure existing neighbors would appreciate that.
However, if we start with a new park and a new neighborhood and it starts
out that way, then there's none of this surprise. Look what we brought to
you. A new park service that you didn't ask us to do.
Lash: I guess when I, and maybe I'm really naive about this but I guess
what I had envisioned was just that kids that lived around there could walk
over there with their sleds and slide down the hill.
Andrews: My guess is they're doing that already.
Lash: Okay. I just wasn't visualizing that people would be driving from
all over the city over there to slide down that hill.
Andrews: Like over at Starring Lake I know they just pack them in over
there for sliding.
Lash: But that's because there's parking. If we didn't have that there,
11 it would just probably be.
Andrews: Well if it's a good hill, if it becomes known as a good hill,
you'll get the people. They'll come.
Erhart: Yeah, and if we're advertising it as a sliding hill for the
community that it's going to draw more attention to it too.
Schroers: And then the first thing they're going to do is say, what are
you doing? You're advertising a sliding hill and where are we supposed to
park?
Hoffman: We're in a position where scale back the parking lot because of
neighborhood concerns, because of potential concerns, then they end up
parking on the street. It's only going to make it worse for you so if
you're going to provide the facility, you need to provide the amenities
that go along with it and then try to head off the problem...down in
11 Chanhassen Estates with the Rice Marsh Lake Park and those people have
grown accustomed to it, the months of May and June when the Athletic
Association is down there, the cul -de -sac fills with cars... That's a
traditional use and they've grown accustomed to it. So Jim's comments
are...
Schroers: So basically we can be happy with Chan Pond Park as it currently
exists? With the erosion control continuing but other than that, as far as
development and the 5 year capital improvement, we really aren't looking
for much.
Koubsky: Just maintenance.
Schroers: Yeah. Just existing maintenance and keeping that trail mowed.
The turf trail and keeping it as more or less a passive park. Can we move
on to, does anyone have anything else on Chan Pond? Let's move on to City
Center.
1
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 10, 1991 - Page 13
Hoffman: City Center. 1
Schroers: I've been looking at our amenities here. Go ahead Todd.
Hoffman: City Center, I did not prepare any comments for simply because well
are at a point where we're in limbo between what's going to occur with the
central parkland and where that is headed with the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority and public comment is still being taken on that
proposed park plan. If it became a reality, then we would begin
negotiations or juggling of useage and different types of useage and the
space alloted for those types of things. The parking and the play area
would be displaced north of City Hall potentially. We would be looking for
acquisition of the vacant property to the north of City Center Park. We
need to continue to keep our relations open with District #112 since they II
are a major player in that. Any land north of...house they currently own
at this time. That whole block of land there so the city has developed it
in harmony with the School District over the past 15 -25 years. Whatever it
would be. We need to keep our sights set in that...as well but until we
find out what happens with the Central Park, planning a 5 year capital
improvement program is moot. However we do have the recently prepared
master plan concept. Concept 1 and 2 to rely on or to fall back on at some
point in the future when they do know which direction we're headed on City
Center Park.
Koubsky: Just one thought I had Todd, especially as you brought up the
need for the Little League fields. In City Center, are these all adult
fields on the master plans?
Hoffman: No. They're sized for youth activities. City Center is currently"
used for Atheltic Association sports programs and then the adult softball
teams does use City Center for practice but those are all youth fields.
The amount of use they receive right now is astounding. Unfortunately ball
fields and recreational facilities have a very short time frame. If they
were used every hour out of the day we could get by with 1 where we need 6
or 8 or 10 but they're used for a 2 hour time span each evening during a
month or two month or 4 month time period.
Schroers: The problem with these fields here at City Center Park is that II
they do not meet requirements for sanctioned league events.
Hoffman: And the outfields overlap. Crisscross. They're laid out poorly."
Lash: There's a lot of wasted space.
Robinson: Is there a difference between, we talked of Bandimere about two II
girls softball fields. Is there a difference between girls and guys
softball fields?
Hoffman: Girls would be youth softball fields. Yeah, so they're smaller. II
Probably a fence line of 180.
Lash: But are the girls different than the boys? 11
Hoffman: Boys softball?
1
11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 10, 1991 -- Page 14
Lash: Yeah, Isn't that what you're asking Curt?
Robinson: Well yeah. I don't think there, is there boys softball?
Hoffman: No.
Lash: So girls play softball on one of these fields at City Center?
Hoffman: Here?
1 Lash: Yeah.
Hoffman: Currently the girls softball program uses the two fields at
Meadow Green so that's their home fields. Those are large enough to
accommodate them. The fields at City Center Park would not be large enough
to accommodate girls softball. They're playing fast pitch. They have a
fence distance of about 180. Something like that. About 100 feet - shorter
than the ones would be at Lake Ann.
Robinson: I see.
Lash: So the ones you have in the new plans for City Center still would
not work for girls?
1 Hoffman: For girls fast pitch softball, no.
Schroers: So should we go onto Lake Ann then?
II . Hoffman: Sure. The opportunities for additional improvements at Lake Ann
are plentiful. Three which stand out are the construction of a large
picnic shelter at the Park View Picnic Site. Up on top of the hill.
Construction of a restroom, concession, storage building at the location of
the present ballfield concession building. It seems like we just got that
one done and now we're looking to include restrooms. Then the purchase or
lease of additional property to the east through a negotiation of some type
with Eckankar. With the major improvements projects impending and recently
completed at Lake Ann, it may not be appropriate to consider these projects
in the near future, with the exception of the land acquisition negotiations
which should always be ongoing. At least to keep ears and eyes open on
what's going on in land uses adjacent to Lake Ann Park. The other items
would probably be best placed in the far end of the 5 year plan or even
beyond.
11 Andrews: I agree that we should maintain continuous contact with Eckankar
for any opportunity to buy or lease land. It's absolutely the best piece
of land in the whole city for potential park use in my opinion, so it's a
high priority.
Lash: I don't know that I'd be interested in leasing it...
Andrews: You could lease it for long term though. If you could get a 10
year lease, that's certainly, or 15 year lease, that's certainly adequate
for us to develop a piece of property for a ballfield or something like
that. Or even just use it for picnic area and just let people picnic on it.
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 10, 1991 - Page 15
Robinson: I think we should keep negotiating to see if we can get
something for nothing there but boy, we just talked about funds we need ll
for out at Bandimere where we've got a piece of property already that we
can't afford to develop.
Erhart: That's outside the MUSA line too.
Andrews: They may be in a position though if we offer to lease it at a low"
rate and maintain it, they might be willing to let it be used as open space
or something like that. It certainly establishes a relationship that in
the future may make it that much easier to purchase and if you've had an
ongoing relationship, they'll probably come to you first if they really do II
want to sell it. I just think we need to be first in line if that happens.
Lash: There again it may be wise for us just to keep a handle on the ,
trends of the growth and if you're really feeling the crunch with the adult
facilities and you see it coming.
Hoffman: Yeah. With the future growth in Chanhassen and when the city is II
maxed out to it's potential, Lake Ann is a community park at that time
would seem nice but it certainly could be larger and the history of land
acquisition of Lake Ann has been it started with the initial acquisition on
the highway and a piece down on the lake and then items or parcels J and
K so it's been piecemealed together in about 6 different parcels over the 11
years and it's coming along to be a nice piece of property. The land to
the east, that Eckankar piece is, in order to make ballfields or soccer
fields or what have you, would need minimal work as far as grading and that
type of thing. Obviously Eckankar is a little bit tentative with the
welcome that they received here, to allow people back onto that piece of
property. However those barriers have come down quite a bit since they
moved into the city. They are much more receptive to allowing us to
discuss potential options with them.
Lash: You once Bandimere is done, then we'd be able to pull the Little
League and what's the other field designated. Then those could go back to
adult useage and...
Robinson: Todd, how did we ever and when did we ever get Lake Ann Park?
Hoffman: Lake Ann. Acquisition started 20 years ago. 1971. And land
acquisitions were partly through, it may have been general funds or park
funds and then LAWCON grants. Land acquisition grants. Bond issues. So II
it's been, 1971 was the major purchase and then pieces have been acquired
up to as recently as 4 or 5 years ago.
Lash: I think we talked to Conrad Fisk...
Erhart: He was on the Park and Rec Commission. 1
Lash: ...when that happened.
Robinson: Oh is that right? 1
Erhart: Yeah. That's 20 years.
11
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 10, 1991 -- Page 16
Robinson: Boy. That's what somebody's going to say 20 years from now
about Bandimere.
Schroers: Park and Rec people can take turns standing on the corner out
there selling watermelon.
Erhart: You know what's funny about it though when Conrad was on 20 years
ago, he was met with the same type of opposition that we are today and they
were wondering if they were making the right decision and now we look back
and say boy, we're glad they purchased that.
Andrews: Is the community park shelter, 1 hate to sound, I can't remember
if it's on again, off again but is that on a full go, full hold or wait and
see or?
Hoffman: The shelter building?
Andrews: Yeah.
Hoffman: It will come back to the Council with a new package for
authorization to bid the project in January and then we'll rebid and
hopefully have construction in time of...
Koubsky: 1 think the Council was just looking for a better price on a
rebid weren't they?
Hoffman: Yes. The project, some changes have been made to the project
specifications and material...but the building is essentially the same.
Andrews: So it's likely that's going to happen next summer? Okay.
t Lash: So you'll be looking at a completion like?
Hoffman: Late. It will not be, major completion will not be available for
the summer swimming season.
Lash: So no grand opening 4th of July?
' Hoffman: That'd be nice but probably not.
I Schroers: Okay. Is there anything else that we want to discuss on Lake
Ann?
Hoffman: Again, like an item such as the picnic shelter, that can be a
11 capital improvement program. That's affordable. It's certainly a big
project and...venture a price tag at this time but if money was set aside
for 2 years, that could be successfully completed. Constructing that
II building, a bathroom, restroom facility, concession area up at the
ballfields so you can facilities at the ballfield instead of using portable
Satellites and that type of thing, is more in the line of the shelter
11 that's being built down at the lake for a couple hundred thousand dollars.
That may be included as part of a bond issue or maybe if the bankroll
becomes sufficient as it was in this case, park acquisition and development
could build that structure as well. But those are things which certainly
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 10, 1991 - Page 17
are provided in other communities. Many softball complexes are not using
portable toilets. They have modern facilities and we'd be short sighted to
think that folks in Chanhassen aren't going to look to that type of
improvement at some point in the future as well. 1
Andrews: They're planning to stub that to the service for the rest?
Hoffman: Utilities will be right there. Water, electricity, phone so that'll
cost is in. It would be the cost of the building...
Andrews: I guess I feel like those things should be put onto our 5 year
plan. That in particular because that would be a logical next step after 1/
the park shelter.
Schroers: I was even wondering if to somehow incorporate that in with, not"
with the shelter itself but sort of in the same timeframe so that the park
is not continually under construction.
Andrews: Like you say, if you're going to rip up the field, do it once
instead of twice.
Schroers: Exactly. I
Lash: We don't have money to do that.
Andrews: We can wish can't we?
Hoffman: The major disruption is obviously going to be with the utilities."
If you want to plop in, take the structure which currently exists there,
move it to Lake Susan and make use of it in some other park site and build
a park structure, it would certainly cause some commotion in that one
particular location but the disruption wouldn't be so great that you could
not use the ballfields in that particular area.
Lash: Which do you think would be the most beneficial? The facility up by"
the ballfields or a large picnic area? The shelter north of the
ballfield...
Hoffman: The restrooms would obviously come first. Both would be very
nice.
Schroers: If you build just a basic structure with a slab and all you're II
talking about is a roof with a slab, you should be able to do it for around
$25,000.00.
Hoffman: Yeah. Or a little bit more maybe. I mean these are facilities
which.
Lash: Is that with restrooms? 1
Schroers: No.
Hoffman: No. Just a slab picnic shelter.
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 10, 1991 - Page 18
1 Schroers: Cement floor with a roof over it and that's it.
Lash: But that's not what you're talking about.
Hoffman: That would be the picnic shelter but the other one no. Is a
building. You hate to start comparing the city of Chanhassen to other
communities but when you pass through or if you're familiar with other
I communities, these are basic types of facilities which city park systems
have. Take a trip just through Chaska and their ballfield complex is half
water, picnic shelter, bathrooms which are there available for your use.
' An area which is available for picnicing... These are basic services that
Chanhassen has just not installed in our park system to date.
Lash: So what kind of money would you be talking for some kind of facility
1 with the restrooms?
Hoffman: At the ballfields? Something comparable but probably less
because you can get by with. The roof style of the shelter down at the
beach has added to that cost of that particular shelter. Just use the
gabled roof system and standard architectural design. $150,000.00 to
11 $200,000.00 would probably be sufficient to build that type of building.
Lash: So maybe 'that's another thing we can do...
1 (There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.)
Lash: How else can we do it?
Hoffman: Bonding.
Koubsky: Looking at bonding. I think we have to identify these needs and
' go at some point with a plan on we need these things. Other communities
have them. Where I'm from, every hockey rink had a permanent structure.
The only thing that was used for was for 2 months out of the year it was
used for hockey. It had a permanent structure. $150,000.00 permanent
structure. Running water. Heat. They had parks that were, just had a
little play area and one ballfield. Had a permanent structure. Had water,
' heat and electricity. We don't have any of that. Well, eventually we'll
have to get into that.
Lash: You have to remember this is Chan.
Koubsky: New Brighton is stockyard. It's stockyard town.
' Erhart: What's the population?
Koubsky: 26,000. Roseville. Big hockey town.
Schroers: Things are a little bit different now. Back when things like
that were being done, community organizations like Fire Departments or the
Jaycees or the Lion's or something like that would just go ahead and do
that. They would go and do it and it wouldn't have to necessarily go
through a political system or half of the people that were on the Fire
Department and the Jaycees and that were also on the City Council and were
1
11
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 10, 1991 - Page 19
able to incorporate and do things like that. But I think it's a lot more
difficult now. We don't have.
Andrews: The bonding environment was a little bit better than it is now. II
I think the only way we're going to get it done is with a bond and I don't
see that happening soon.
Hoffman: But you compare the bonding amounts for these types of projects II
with the School Bond and we are talking considerably less but again it's a
matter of priorities for each individual person as they look at school
versus park and recreation. 1
Lash: And if you look at New Brighton and they've got a heated facility at
every hockey rink, I don't even know if that is really basic or necessary. II
Sometimes kind of a luxury.
Koubsky: Yeah it might be a luxury but also they're more mature
neighborhoods. You know the kids have grown up and I think we're going to
see that need in this community as the kids grow up. We have a need for
Little League youth area. We can't supply our youth sporting facilities
and now we say it's going to take 3 to 5 years to even get them ballfields.II
Well that means my son who's 5, when he's 10 he might get some ballfieids.
He's missed that.
Erhart: I think the problem is we're a young community that's just all of II
a sudden started growing so fast and we're caught with all these things
that we need or we want. It wasn't that many years ago that Chanhassen was
almost a little ghost town. ,
Koubsky: And now it's full of babies. And those babies are going to be
involved in youth activities.
Erhart: That's right and we're feeling the pain right now.
Lash: We have to sort of look at that and think, what's more important? 1
Being able to have just the basic ballfields for the kids and for the
adults or is it having a ballfield with indoor plumbing?
Robinson: That's right.
Lash: Sure it'd be nice to have regulare bathrooms. I'd be all for that.
I'd love to have a regular bathroom instead of a Satellite but if it means
we're going to be short on ballfields, or short on some of the things, it's
really basic things that we have to start with. II Andrews: I think if you asked the ball teams which would you rather have,
indoor plumbing or 4 more ballfields, I don't think there'd be any decision
to make. I think they'd take the ballfields every time. 1
Hoffman: Can you wrap all those comments up on Lake Ann? What's the
consensus Larry?
Schroers: I think the consensus on Lake Ann is very similar to the
previous concensus. We would love to be able to expand Lake Ann. We would
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 10, 1991 - Page 20
like to have the picnic shelter but in order of priorities, considering
what Lake Ann already has, I would agree that the full service facilities,
the bathrooms and that, would or should come before the picnic shelter.
Andrews: One thing I'd like to point out, we're talking about 2/3 of the
cost of developing Bandimere to put in facilities. That to me is
ridiculous.
Hoffman: I agree.
' Lash: The picnic area with the large shelter would cost considerably less
and you do then have the rental potential don't you? So that is a revenue
generater and can pay for itself ultimately.
' Hoffman: Probably a worse return than Bandimere.
Andrews: It will never pay for the cost of the money you spent to put up
the shelter. I mean you can't look at it that way.
Schroers: And the additional cost of maintaining an area like that. I mean
' if you're developing a picnic area, then you're going to have additional
mowing and additional clean up and certainly that, the rental fee wouldn't
make up that difference. I think the concensus on Lake Ann right now is
' that we would like to have all these things but we don't have the money to
do it and we're just pretty much on hold and hope that we get the shelter
at the lake.
Andrews: My feeling is that Lake Ann would be sort of in a status quo
basis and if we are going to get into major development, I feel it should
go into Bandimere. We have a southern area of the city which has very
II little major facility available. To me it would be hard to justify what
$200,000.00 - $300,000.00 more into this park when Bandimere sits there
totally undeveloped. I think that's, it's a dilemma that we have as to
where's our money better spent but I guess in the long range plan, I would
see Lake Ann further out than Bandimere.
Schroers: That's exactly what I was getting at earlier when I was talking
about prioritizing the parks and identifying our need and I agree with what
Jim is saying that once our beach building, concession and with the picnic
shelter and all that is in place, that we could live with that at Lake Ann
11 for a while. If the opportunity to acquire additional property were to
present itself at Lake Ann, I think that's something that we would need to
consider at that point in time and hopefully be able to respond in some
kind of a positive manner there. But I feel that getting that youth
I complex in at Bandimere is more desireable than putting in flush toilets at
Lake Ann. Or a second picnic shelter at Lake Ann.
Hoffman: Sure. And then the question presents itself as well, if
Bandimere is developed, do you want utilities and a restroom at Bandimere
or are you going to start off with the portable services as well? That
$400,000.00 can easily jump to $600,000.00 in a blink of an eye.
Lash: And you know when you think about the $400,000.00, we've been
kicking around $400,000.00 to develop that for the last 3 or 4 years. We
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 10, 1991 - Page 21
are maybe way under our projections for that even or when we actually do
start it will be.
Hoffman: Yeah it was increased. The original estimate on that plan was
about $250,000.00 to $300,000.00. When the concept plan was developed to
take a look at if that piece of property was purchased, how could it be
used. So that's been increased to $400,000.00 as a conservative estimate
and that's just for ballfield grading and seeding and backstops and fences."
Schroers: We would be short sighted to say the least if we didn't at least
plan for modern facilities there and have them stubbed in with the original
construction. If we couldn't afford it all at once, we would at least like
to have it serviceable so that at some point in time we could finish it.
But does that pretty much sum up where we are with Lake Ann right now?
That's also kind of what we were speaking about earlier. Let's just finish"
the ongoing things before we dive into something new.
Hoffman: Okay. Lake Susan. Here again a major investment in park
development is in the final stages of being completed. Adding additional II
playfields or other large park amenities on this site are restricted by the
park size. By it's current size. The addition of lights for the various II
play fields in the park is one capital improvement which may be considered
in the future. I believe the present level of service offered at Lake
Susan with that one exception will satisfy park users for a period of time ,
much greater than 5 years.
Schroers: I agree. Are there any other concerns?
Lash: In the next 5 years are we going to try to budget for lights? 1
Hoffman: Either budget for lights or, I really think we're, the City is
looking at some point in the future for a bond issue and whether that
includes Bandimere. Development of Bandimere and then you take on lighting
of the additional 1 or 2 ballfields at Lake Ann and the ballfield at Lake
Susan or if we would instead of doing that drain our 410 fund. Lighting
that ballfield would take $60,000.00. It can be accomplished under 410 but
if it's tucked into a bond issue, it can be accomplished with much less
pain to the 410 budget. 1
Andrews: These dollar figures just blow me away. I'm just thinking here
as you're saying $60,000.00. Let's just put the money in the bank and
we'll pay interest to the teams and offer to pay them off not to play.
Forfeit your game. We'll pay you the money.
Hoffman: Again that's why my comment of the numbers are somewhat
overwhelming but again just look what we've done in the past 2 or 3 years. II
The $350,000.00 at Lake Susan. $350,000.00 at Lake Ann. $200,000.00
purchase at Bandimere. $150,000.00 purchase at Pheasant Hills so the
numbers are large but again, if we don't...look into the future, we
actually end up where we are today in 5 years.
Andrews: I think you mention those dollar figures, I think it's vitally 1
important that we keep our citizens advised how much money we have spent
because if we're going to come in with a bond issue, we've got to say hey
1
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 10, 1991 - Page 22
look. We have spent a ton of money. If we need to go somewhere from here,
we need more money. Here again, I think if you.went to the average citizen
and said how much do you think your Park Board spent in the city of
Chanhassen last year, boy they wouldn't have the wildest idea.
Erhart: They also think we have so much more money than we do too.
Lash: Well they have no idea where the money comes from. They have no
idea... They don't have a clue as to how any of this works so.
' Hoffman: Curt can probably offer some insight in where you go in 6 years.
Where we were 6 years ago Curt and where the city's parks are today. The
time probably went by really quickly.
Robinson: Yeah. And a lot of improvements in those years when you look at
the parks and what we had at that time. That's true.
Andrews: We're a little pesimistic now I think because the cash flow is so
bad but if some of these commercial developments were to sprout up along TH
5 here, we could see an incredible change in our position.
Lash: Well it's just so overwhelming when you know that you're working
with typically $150,000.00 and then every project you hear is $60,000.00 or
$200,000.00 or $400,000.00. It's so overwhelming because you just feel
useless. That you can't do anything.
Robinson: And people in here every month complaining because their park
isn't getting developed.
Hoffman: You boil it down on what our annual CIP does is buy playgrounds.
' That $150,000.00 buys playground equipment and installs playground
equipment. We're doing a trail segment this year but up and beyond that,
any of the major park improvements projects are coming from a special
project fund or outside financing. HRA dollars. Grant dollars. Our bond
issue monies. Once we're up and beyond our annual CIP of putting in
playground equipment and park benches and that type of thing...ballgame.
1 Schroers: Okay well, back to Lake Susan Park then, are we all pretty much
in agreement that Lake Susan Park with all it's new improvements and as
nice as it is, we don't really need to consider doing anything in the way
of capital improvement there in the next 5 years?
Koubsky: The aeration, are they going to go with that this year?
11 Hoffman: We applied for the grant and spent the $4,000.00 which was
budgeted for the extension of power down to the boat access so that can
occur. The grant application looks favorable so that will be installed in
1993.
Schroers: And that really doesn't have anything to do with the capital
' improvement in any way right?
Hoffman: No. Again the one thing would be.the lighting of the field.
Baseball field and /or the tennis courts and /or the basketball field. If
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 10, 1991 - Page 23
you went into a lighting project of lighting tennis courts, we have two
lighted tennis courts in the city of 12,000 people which is far below a
typical norm as well.
Andrews: I think we've got to put something in there for lighting. Much II
as I think it's a ridiculous amount of money to spend for lights, I think
we need to somewhere in that 5 year plan it's probably going to become a
crisis as far as that ball program goes that we provide more lighted fields"
either here or at Lake Ann. I guess I'd like to see it spread out a little
bit more as far as what we can offer.
Hoffman: It doubles or triples your useage. They'll play to 11:30 at
night or so. You get one game in now, you can get 2 or 3 in.
Andrews: I guess the way that field is set up, it'd be quite easy to light 1
both the ballfield and the tennis courts at the same time.
Erhart: Just.$60,000.00 for lights? 1
Hoffman: Just on the ballfield. If you include the tennis courts, that
would be... ,
Koubsky: But I think part of our job is to install some sort of vision too
and right now Chanhassen has one ballfield that's lit so maybe our vision I
could be that we're going to double that and have 2 or maybe more.
Erhart: Within the next 5 years? II Koubsky: Within the next 5 years. It doesn't necessarily mean we have to
meet that vision. There's a need for it. There's a need for a lot of
things and I think part of our job is to identify the needs. Whether we
meet them or not, we rediscuss that in 5 years.
Erhart: We'll get a lot more use out of the park then. The ballfield.
_ Lash: Maybe we don't even necessarily want to earmark Lake Susan as the
one. We'd like to do another one at Lake Ann.
Koubsky: I think it's important to identify future needs and trends and
then as Larry says, identify parks that might best meet them.
Hoffman: The field at Lake Susan is really built to be a town baseball ,
field. If you want to throw out numbers, the backstop is $10,000.00 for a
backstop. This field is built to accommodate bleachers and stands and if
baseball tradition wants to nutured in Chanhassen, that's the place to do
it.
Schroers: And also most town baseball fields are lighted. What I'd kind 11
of like to do here is try a little harder to stay on each individual item
here so we get through this. So we've already been through Lake Ann and
we're discussing Lake Susan right now so the decision is whether or not we
want to put lighting in the 5 year capital improvement plan for Lake Susan. 11
I would like to see it.
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 10, 1991 - Page 24
Andrews: I'd like to see it in there.
Hoffman: What year?
Andrews: 1995?
' Schroers: I'd like to see it next year.
Koubsky: I think with that, well we have some bleachers out there don't
we.
Lash: We've already done the budget for next year.
' Hoffman: Yeah, the first year to look at it would be 1993.
Schroers: 1993. That's what I meant by next year.
Andrews: That's good.
Hoffman: We're two years apart. 1993?
' Andrews: That's fine. I agree. I can go with that. It's not going to
happen but we can put it down.
Lash: That's why I have a problem with things if I know it's not going to
happen.
' Schroers: Well we don't know that it's not going to happen. We're going
to try to make it happen.
' Lash: Yeah, I know.
Erhart: Let's compromise and go with 1994 then.
' Andrews: 1993 is fine. If we've got the money, we can consider it. If we
don't, we can push it off to 1994.
' Erhart: At least we're working towards it. We have to have a vision. We
can't lose it just because we don't have any money now.
' Schroers: Yeah, I think if we need it, we should plug it in for the
earliest possible time that we can and go to work on it. The worst we can
do is not accomplish our goal but maybe we can.
' Hoffman: Moving on to South Lotus Lake. Attachment #3 shows the three
parcels which comprise South Lotus Lake. The park. The two easterly
parcels being the boat access ramp and the parking lot and the playfield
area are essentially developed at the present date. The triangle to the
far west is the piece which has been in question for a number of years. It
still continues to be in question because as you can see there the dotted
line is drawn on the base map there which indicates the new TH 101
interchange in that particular location. So the size and the shape
configuration of that piece of park property will change when that road
project goes through in 1992 and 1993. Finished up in the Fall of 1992,
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 10, 1991 - Page 25
Spring of 1993. So at that point then the city can take a look at, it's
called for a tennis court on that piece of property. As long as the
remains the direction of the commission of the city, that it should be
sited or if there's other potential uses. When you drive by the site it
looks considerably bigger but that block of property, that rectangular
piece to the west, that's a utility easement or utility property for the
well houses which are constructed on the site and the piping and drain
systems and that type of thing. So this final piece of property is
actually smaller than you actually sense when you're out there driving by
but it will gain some property to the south when the road project goes
through. '
Andrews: Wasn't it discussed earlier that that ballfield would not fit on
the property?
Hoffman: Yeah. That's the middle piece. The middle parcel which is the
park property there and that's been relabeled just as an open field and
developed as such.
Lash: And the soil is adequate for a tennis court?
Hoffman: Yes. '
Lash: Boy, I think before Curt leaves tonight we should put tennis court
in the budget.
Robinson: See that little triangle to the west, that's where 5 years ago
we would put the 2 tennis courts in.
Andrews: And they're lighted too.
Robinson: That's right. Curt's tennis courts were going to go right in
there.
Lash: When is the road work supposed to be done? 1993? '
Hoffman: Next summer. It will be done in 1993.
Lash: So it will be done in 1993. So what did we just do it for the
lights? Did we do 1993 or 1994?
Schroers: 1993 for the lights. We could maybe shoot for 1994 for the
tennis courts at South Lotus Lake.
Lash: That place has been waiting a long time for that.
Andrews: It's filling with houses too pretty quick.
Hoffman: There it is, the last 5 year capital improvement plan. '88
through '92. $25,000.00 for tennis courts in 1992 and beyond.
Andrews: 1994, tennis courts. 1
Hoffman: It just got pushed a little farther.
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 10, 1991 - Page 26
Schroers: Well it was nice to get through that. There was a lot of
discussion but I think that we didn't get unrealistic. Hopefully we'll
accomplish something. We can go to item 4 on the agenda.
11 REVENUE AND BUDGET REPORT.
Hoffman: Item number 4. Prepared this commentary just in light of
reaction I heard to the budget situation in the Minutes from last meeting.
I'm not going to go through this report. It's solely for your information.
Two points that I want to bring out specifically are the impending budget
shortfall will not have any affect on our capital improvement budget for
1992. If there is a deficit, it's caught up with the bank account which
410 holds and will not have any affect on what we've already worked on for
1992. The second thing is the passage of the 1992 budget has occurred
so...it's set and established. That's obviously the 410 budget which was
proposed to the City Council. Any questions or comments? I attempted to
explain just by reading some of the questions on how those estimates are
' prepared. What they're based on for your information...year to year and
where these numbers come from and based on and how can we fall short. In
other years the revenues exceeded expenditures.
Koubsky: None of the cuts went to staff salary?
' Hoffman: Staff salary?
Lash: Or commission's salary.
1 Koubsky: Well, I've got two pops.
Lash: I still have no idea how this whole money thing works.
1 Robinson: That's the way it's supposed to be.
Hoffman: CIP, our annual CIP are $150,000.00 or $175,000.00 or whatever it
1 is is based on what anticipated revenues are going to be. How many housing
starts. What's the economy like? How's the industrial start up's looking?
Do we have 3 or 5 or 6 or 0 large industries looking at building in
' Chanhassen? That type of thing. It's a guessing game. It's fairly
accurate. We're $40,000.00 off this year but that can be made up over
night. A big industrial developer walks in your front door and says I'm
' going to build in Chanhassen and you collect $30,000.00 in park and trail
fees. The Rosemounts and the Empaks and all the industrial development
which occurred 3 or 4 years ago here took the 410 fund up into the
$600,000.00 range. We're spending that money now and waiting for the next
1 heyday to occur.
Lash: So if at one point we believed we were having a heyday and we had
$600,000.00, how come we're living with $150,000.00 budget and trying to
nickel and dime everything? Why didn't we have lots of money that year to
spend? It seems like we always have $150,000.00.
1 Hoffman: It changes and it's based on those reserves go up. The reserve
was up to, that's what is allowing the Lake Ann shelter to be built. I
mean that's a $250,000.00 project which is coming directly out of 410. So
1
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 10, 1991 - Page 27
that's a big part of the reserve which is used up. 1
Lash: So if we budget $150,000.00 and $500,000.00 comes in, $350,000.00
goes into reserve? 1
Hoffman: Into reserve.
Lash: And we really never know about that. So the next year we make a 1
$150,000.00 budget even though there's $350,000.00 sitting in reserve? But
that's there in case we go over budget.
Hoffman: Well yeah and you requested that I keep you more up to date on
what's going on in that fund. I'll do that and that way we'll know exactly
where it's at. We're not kicking the bottom of the barrel by any means but"
ith all the special projects going on and those types of things, the Lake
Ann shelter takes a big hunk right out of it.
Lash: Not to reveal my own personal spending habits or anything but if ,
I knew there was $350,000.00 in reserve and I was making up my budget, I
would spend $350,000.00 and I wouldn't be trying to live with $150,000.00.
Feeling frustrated because I can't do anything. You know. Can we not do II
that. or.
Schroers: It's not that we can't do anything. That $150,000.00 is just all
estimated figure based on what we think we're going to get in dedication
fees.
Lash: I understand that but if we have $350,000.00 left over from the year"
before, how come nobody tells us we have all this extra money that we could
play catch up with and do some things that we've been wanting to do but
couldn't? 1
Schroers: Well because that money was earmarked. It's not that we
shouldn't know about it but that money was sort of earmarked for the Lake 11
Ann expansion and development so it wasn't like we had $350,000.00 to
spend.
Andrews: That's why you have a budget. Otherwise we'd be here every month"
deciding how much did we take in and what are we going to spend it on.
Lash: No, but if we have a whole bunch extra left over from last year
because the estimated amount that was going to come in was exceeded by
twice as much, and it seems like the next year we should be able to spend
it if we want to.
Hoffman: ...$20,000.00 to $30,000.00 to $40,000.00 range and that was from
like 2 years ago to probably 6 years ago that that cash excess was built up
and now that's being spent on the Lake Ann shelter. ,
Schroers: What you're saying is occurring. It's happening. We're
spending it but it actually takes this long to spend it. 1
Lash: Well it's been a little bit each year that's accumulated.
1
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 10, 1991 - Page 28
Robinson: I think it's just a good, conservative approach to it.
Andrews: That's going to cover our shortfall this year. It smooths out
I the ups and downs and makes it easier for us to budget on an annual basis.
Lash: So typically it's just been a small amount?
Hoffman: You bet. It's not in the hundreds.
Schroers: Okay, any other questions on the budget and revenue report?
Robinson: No, thanks. I'm glad you put that in there.
TRAIL CONNECTION, HERMAN FIELD PARK TO MINNEWASHTA REGIONAL PARK.
Hoffman: It's fairly straight forward. I handed out an additional
' attachment there. The letter from Mike Liddicoat and the Minutes from
their meeting. To get straight to the point, we had two trail systems and
two separate park areas. A county park and a city park. It does make a
whole heck of a lot of sense to connect those two so they can be used
' together. But then again back from, blank blank back from the Park
Commission, County Park Commission, they have no interest in funding or
shouldering any of the burden in making that connection. In fact...that we
' spoke to thought it was discriminating against the rest of the city of
Chanhassen because you're allowing one neighborhood to connect up to have
an exclusive connection to Minnewashta Regional Park.
Robinson: I didn't understand that comment.
Hoffman: So there's varying thoughts on that. As you can see from the
' map, the most likely connection point would be to the west where the little
bubble in that trail comes closest to the Herman Field Park. There is
actually a security fence which runs the entire perimeter of Minnewashta
Regional Park. When they originally opened that park they had a policy
that walk -on's and bike -on's were not welcome. Those people needed to come
through the front gate and pay their entry fee. They've now ceased that
policy so they would not have any problem with bikers or walkers coming in
on this particular stretch but they don't want to pay for it. If we need
to make a gate and a fence and put in a trail and put in any type of
crossing which is necessary there because of the waterway, it would be at
' our expense.
Lash: Which would be about how much?
Hoffman: I have no estimate but probably the bridge, which I'm not sure. I
haven't been out to look at the creek crossing in this particular location.
The creek is somewhat small. It may be able to be culverted and built over
with a berm if the watershed district would approve that but 900 of the
work could be done in house. Clearing and grubbing and seeding and that
type of thing.
Schroers: This would not in effect be a link or master trail plan for a
trail going around Lake Minnewashta. That hook up with the Arboretum.
1
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 10, 1991 - Page 29
Hoffman: It certainly would be. 1
Schroers: Make that entire circle.
Hoffman: Well it's going to make the circle much more complete because the,
trail coming from the Arboretum will then connect with the park and then
you can go through the park into Herman Field. Then we've got TH 7 to
negotiate which hasn't been addressed yet. Then to the south you can take II
the trail from that portion on TH 5, north of TH 5 that will go in and then
jump onto the Minnewashta Parkway Trail so you'd encompass the entire lake
except we haven't addressed the TH 7 issue on the north side. '
Schroers: I guess from that point of view, I'm definitely in favor of
making that link. Anyone else? 1
Andrews: Do we need to do anything on this?
Koubsky: We're going to need a cost estimate. '
Hoffman: Yeah, just a motion to move forward with negotiations and
investigation. ,
Andrews: I move that we pursue obtaining more information so that we can
link up with the County Park. Carver County Park. I used the wrong name.
Schroers: Is there a second?
Koubsky: I'll second. 1
Hoffman: That's Carver County Park. It's Minnewashta Regional.
Andrews moved, Koubsky seconded to continue negotiations with Carver County"
Parks for a trail connection between Herman Field Park and Minnewashta
Regional Park and request that project costs be calculated and presented to
the Park and Recreation Commission. All voted in favor and the motion
carried.
APPROVE 1992 MEETING DATES. '
Hoffman: Chairman Schroers, the two decisions that need to be made are in
the months of May and December. Other than that the fourth Tuesday of the
month does work unless the Commission wanted to entertain a total switch of
meeting nights or dates or times of the month. Everything fits but in May,
because of Memorial Day and moving the meeting up in December to the 15th.
Lash: What about the one in November? Didn't we change that this year too
so it wasn't...with Thanksgiving.
Hoffman: Yeah, it was changed this year basically because we followed 1
Council's schedule which needed to be moved because of Veteran's Day.
Thanksgiving would be on Thursday and the meeting Tuesday night.
Robinson: Is that the problem with May also because of, 1 mean the day
after Memorial Day is really no big deal is it but the Council doesn't meet
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 10, 1991 - Page 30
on that Monday night so that's the reason you're proposing...Park and Rec?
Hoffman: Yeah. It can go on May 26th if that's the wish. The one
1 consideration there is commissioners may be out of town and didn't review
their packet over the Memorial weekend.
Schroers: So what you're saying in May in 1992, Memorial Day is on the
18th?
Hoffman: May 25th is Memorial. I would recommend moving the meeting to
the 19th.
Lash: Yeah, that's good.
' Andrews: I move that we approve this schedule for 1992 as presented by the
Coordinator.
' Pemrick: I'll second that.
Andrews moved, Pemrick seconded to approve the 1992 meeting schedule for
the Chanhassen Park and Recreation Commission as presented. All voted in
favor and the motion carried.
COMMISSION MEMBER PRESENTATIONS: None.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS:
RETIREMENT OF CURT ROBINSON AND DAWNE ERHART FROM THE COMMISSION.
Hoffman: Item (a), retirement of Curt Robinson and Dawne Erhart from the
Commission. It's with mixed emotions that we bid farewell this evening.
As Commission members are aware, Oawne Erhart and Curt will retire from the
Commission effective December 31st of this year. In appreciation for their
' years of service to the Community in the voluntary roles of Park and
Recreation Commissioners, each will be honored. Dawne for 3 years of
service will be presented a Certificate of Appreciation from the City
Council.
Erhart: Thank you Todd.
' Hoffman: Thank you Dawne. And Curt, for his 6 years of service will be
the recipient of a Maple leaf Award to be presented by the City Council,
hopefully if you can make it there, on January 13th.
Robinson: I wouldn't miss it for the world.
Hoffman: Both Dawne and Curt have served their tenure with integrity and
' good faith. The City's park and recreation facilities have grown rapidly
during their terms. We talked about that. Hopefully it will grow rapidly
over the next 6 as well. And exist in their present state in part due to
their input and contributions. You are both unheralded public servants who
should be proud of your accomplishments as commissioners and of your
dedication to the Commission's work. Thank you both for all your time,
commitment and involvement as Park and Recreation Commissioners. With this
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 10, 1991 - Page 31
we bid you farewell and hope that you continue to pursue your interests in
parks and recreation.
ANNOUNCEMENT OF NEWLY APPOINTED COMMISSION MEMBERS. 1
Hoffman: Item (b) is the announcement of the newly appointed Commission
members. City Council interviewed last week and recommended appointees at
last evenings Council meeting. Both those recommended by the Park
Commission were appointed, Randy Erickson and Fred Berg.
Erhart: Those are two good choices I think. 1
Schroers: The Council actually conducted their own interview?
Hoffman: Yes.
Schroers: But just of those two?
Hoffman: They interviewed them all. They like to keep their options open.
Robinson: And they agreed with our recommendation? 1
Hoffman: Yes. And they thought, as well, they thought the choices were
obvious so recommendations were coincided.
WINTER RECREATION PROGRAM UPDATE.
Hoffman: If Jerry has any comments. As you can see, the amount of
programs are plentiful and registration...
Ruegemer: I really don't, the report is pretty much straight forward with 11
dates and registration times. This year we did plan a little more, 2 or 3
more activities during the Christmas vacation to try to cater to the
children on break so they would have something to do instead of driving II their parents crazy at home or do whatever. So we're just trying to offer
more programs to a wide variety of age categories in the Chanhassen area.
So are there any questions about the report or dates or times or
registration procedures or anything like that? '
Koubsky: I have one question Jerry. I was asked where the proceeds to the
pancake lunch go? Are there proceeds to that?
Ruegemer: Yeah, basically they recover all costs of putting it on and then
the Chamber just uses that for city functions. Not city functions but
Chamber sponsored activities. If they would do any type of.
Hoffman: Not a big money maker. One year it goes in the hole and the next
year it pays it off so. ,
Koubsky: I'm assuming the skating party is in limbo.
Hoffman: That's the next report. 1
Ruegemer: Yeah, day by day thing here. Week by week so.
11
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 10, 1991 - Page 32
Hoffman: The one thing we continue to discuss in programming is
convenience. With today's lifestyle registration, the information has to
be quick and concise. People do not have a lot of time to spend coming in
for registration so we're taking a look at like a bank lobby type of system
where folks can register after hours in the lobby of City Hall. So they
can come in and fill out a registration form. Deposit it in a deposit box.
Fax registration and credit card over the phone registration and those
types of things. Folks are on a pretty fast track lifestyle and in order
to get them in and get them in these programs, you need to make...just
doesn't. happen.
Andrews: ...separate answering machine for stuff like that?
' Hoffman: The softball program or the summer softball program did use that.
It's used very effectively for rain outs and those types of things but many
communities have a Park and Recreation update hotline. Something of that
nature and we tossed that idea around as well.
' Lash: In the Villager...have the little registration thing in there which
is good but if I wanted to register for more things, it'd be nice to have
' more registration blanks included with the things so I could just sit down
and fill out a check and drop it in the box and be done with it.
Robinson: Did you say you have a fax machine here?
Hoffman: Yes. So if anybody has any ideas or experience in those types of
areas. From a consumer viewpoint let us know, or from your neighbor's
' viewpoint of what...
SKATING AND HOCKEY RINK STATUS REPORT.
Hoffman: Boy we sure thought we were going to get an early start and we'd
all be skating by now but during those heavy snowfalls we had cold enough
' weather but obviously the crews were assisting in clearing roads and then a
day or two later getting out and plowing the hockey rinks so we could get
some frost into the ground and freeze skating rinks. So we continue to
plow those but very little frost in the ground and not a lot of cold
weather so we haven't initiated flooding efforts to date.
Schroers: We flooded a rink on that day that it was zero, or a little
' below zero actually even and we didn't put a lot of water down because we
wanted it to freeze up. The next day it still wasn't frozen.
' Andrews: I thought you were going to say it just soaked in.
Schroers: No. It didn't soak in but the ground was still so' warm that it
didn't freeze.
Lash: Try and get it flooded by Christmas. I got both my kids skates.
Hoffman: That's the, you know the middle of December is always the target
date but you need to have them done by Christmas vacation but last year
that didn't happen. We were between Christmas and New's Years before we
were really on line.
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 10, 1991 - Page 33
Schroers: Okay. Well that pretty much takes care of item 8, the 1
Administrative Presentations. Then we have 9, the Administrative Section.
Anything there?
Koubsky: Getting back to 8. The cost of the warming house. I guess to me l
that seemed fairly reasonable. The 8 x 30. If you add them all up it
comes to $596.00 without attendants. And 8 x 30 is fairly big. I thought
that seemed to be fairly reasonable whether we wanted to try one of those
out this year or work maybe next year at lighting some area and trying one
out next year.
Hoffman: We'd have to put it into a '93 timeframe.
Koubsky: Or '93. '
Hoffman: Not while 1992. '92 -93 because we need to look at extension of
utilities and those types of things for the building.
Andrews: Based on these costs, it certainly would seem to make more sense
to do this.
Koubsky: At least to see what the response is.
Andrews: You figure what it costs us to build a building, $10,000.00.
Wait for the $10,000.00 with the interest in the bank, you could pay for
the rent.
Lash: And the maintenance too. ,
Andrews: That's right. And they're out of sight in the summer too. They
take it up out of the way.
Schroers: I looked at some of these at a show that I was at and they
looked nice but the insurance option I think is something that needs to be
considered and planned in for sure because I asked them about that and they 11
said we were, whoever rented it was definitely liable to see that it was
returned in reasonable condition.
Koubsky: What do they do? Oh, I'm sorry Larry.
Schroers: That's okay. If somebody took a notion they wanted to tear all II
the paneling out or something like that, it could be pretty expensive to
replace.
Koubsky: One thing that wasn't included in here was heat. Was that '
electric? Do they bring in LP?
Hoffman: Electric. Electric heaters. I believe they'll give you an
option on restrooms. You can actually hook these things up to a service
line or else you can use...but that's included in the structure.
Schroers: It looks more like a trailer house. Okay, is there anything '
else?
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
December 10, 1991 -- Page 34
Andrews: I was just reading that petition from the trail lobby, whatever
you want to call it. I guess the one thing I noticed is 1 kind of read
through all those names and I didn't see very many Chanhassen residents
11 there.
Lash: Well it's from Eden Prairie but there was a lot of people who
weren't even from Eden Prairie. It was Richfield and Shakopee and Chaska
and all over everywhere. I thought they were really scrapping.
' Pemrick: Edina. -
Andrews: There's no doubt there's an interest but I guess I look again at
the cost versus the number of users we're providing a trail for. I'm not
optimistic that we could provide them with what they're looking for and be
fair to our needs.
' Hoffman: I believe the signatures on this list represent the trail users
of the Horsemens Club in Eden Prairie.
Robinson: How did the lighting of the tree go last night?
Hoffman: Jerry was there.
Lash: Were there very many people there?
Ruegemer: Yeah we had I think around 75 people. We had the choir singing
and the Mayor gave a small presentation and flipped the switch.
Pemrick: What time was that?
' Ruegemer: 6:00.
Pemrick: Because I drove by about 6:30, I had to go to a band concert and
' it was beautiful.
Hoffman: It was beautiful. I was wondering why it wasn't on tonight.
Lash: Who was the Santa?
Ruegemer: Karen Engelhardt's cousin. His name is David Tiese. He dropped
' 100 pounds from last year too but he still filled it pretty good but not
like he was last year. Good turn out though. I was very pleased. All the
cookies were eaten up.
' Schroers: Okay. Anything else in the administrative section? We were
still in item 8 actually. If we're done with that we can go to number 9.
' ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. None.
Robinson moved, Erhart seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor
and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m..
Submitted by Todd Hoffman
Park and Recreation Coordinator Prepared by Nann Opheim
1 .
CHANHASSEN SENIOR COMMISSION rri
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 13, 1991
Chairwoman Montgomery called the meeting to order at 9:30 a.m..
1 MEMBERS PRESENT: Barbara Montgomery, Betty Bragg, Sherol Howard, Bernice
Billison, Selda Heinlein, and Jane Kubitz
1 MEMBERS ABSENT: Emma St. John
STAFF PRESENT: Paul Krauss, Planning Director; and Sharmin Al -Jaff,
Planner I
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Chairwoman Montgomery approved the agenda as
' presented.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Chairwoman Montgomery noted approval of the Minutes
of the Senior Commission dated November 15, 1991 as amended by Sherol
Howard changing the word "art" to "AARP" on page 15. All voted in favor
and the motion carried.
SENIOR CENTER DISCUSSION WITH EOS ARCHITECTS.
Montgomery: The first item today will be the Senior Center discussion with
1 EOS Architects. Nick Ruehl is here.
Krauss: If I could give a little bit of introduction. Just by way of
' updating. I think the last time that we met we were working to get some
concepts through on the Senior Center. We needed to get authorization from
the Housing and Redevelopment Authority and from the City Council to retain
an architect. I think Sharmin brought you some of the materials that we
' received. We had 5 submittals. We selected EOS Architects. EOS has a
long history of working with the City on a number of projects, including
some of the projects around City Hall. I'm in the process of finalizing
the contract language now. I have authorization to enter into it and we've
' stressed to EOS that this is something that we'd like to get done quickly
so we can get under construction quickly. Nick Ruehl is one of the
principles in the company. He could not be here today. Burt Haglund is
going to be on the project architects. Burt is here today. I think he can
introduce himself and start asking you some questions so we can start
defining that project and he can hopefully get to work on doing some plans.
1 With that I'll turn it over to Burt.
Burt Haglund: Good morning. As Paul mentioned, my name is Burt Haglund.
I happen to also be one of the partners at EOS Architecture. And as
such, I have a long history with the firm and have been a partner since
1982 so I've been involved in most all of the work that's being done in the
office and have myself had some experience. We worked with the Excelsior
Senior Center back in the early 80's. What I'd like to do this morning is
first of all of course I just came to get familiar with you and introduced
to you. I'm a new player here with you and I know that you have another
' new player, Judy Colby that's going to be introduced this morning and as
I understand it, we're going to have a working relationship with a number
of different people on this project and we're excited about doing this.
It's fun to kind of bring together a whole host of issues, a whole host of
needs from a lot of people to make something work. In saying that, I'd
1
Senior Commission Meeting
December 13, 1991 - Page 2
like to mention that one of the things that we would like to do at the
outset is to define a process. A way of keeping all of the people who need
11 to be involved in communication and involved to the extent that they need
to be so as we move ahead with the planning and making decisions and
reviewing progress, that we're including everybody that needs to be so it
can be a smooth forward process and that we don't have distant starts with
it. So that's one of the main things I'd like to try and discuss this
• morning and get a feel for how we best do that. So that's one of my things
on my agenda. Another is that I know that you have had some preliminary
concept planning done already. There are, I'm sure that you're aware that
there are some issues that have been discussed about the opportunities and
some of the limitations about the space that you're going to be moving
into I'd like to just touch on those and get a better sense myself of
where those issues lie and how we move ahead with those. So those are the
two main things I'd like to try to accomplish with you this morning, or at
1 least get some direction on. So I think first of all I'd like to first of
all ask if you have any questions of me. Otherwise I'll go right into
trying to discuss my first agenda which is the working relationships.
Montgomery: Anyone have questions for him? "1*
Bragg: No. I wish you would go right ahead and tell us what your vision
' is.
Burt Haglund: Well first of all there will be a number of actors here
involved in this. Of course there's EOS as the architect. We will have
our engineers be working the mechanical and electrical engineers working.
However we'll coordinate all of that and that interface will be our
responsibility. However, from the owner's side or the City's side of
course Paul is a very central figure. You as a commission. The HRA needs
some involvement in that they're involved in the funding and we want to
make sure that that body is kept informed. Judy of course from Senior
' Community Services and seeing that her input of course and proposed work
with you is part of that as well. So what I would suggest is that we first
of all need to know if that from the Senior Commission standpoint, if all
' of you would like to be involved as we go through the process step by step
of the design. Coming to a design or would you like, in the case of a
representative one or more that can be available because this is going to
take a little bit of extra time to be involved in kind of the day`to day,
week to week I should really say, review and update where we are on the
planning. That would be one thing. How you feel you are best represented.
' Bragg: I think a subcommittee is the most effective way. I think that the
Commission itself would like to hear reports monthly.
Montgomery: We do have a subcommittee now that is working on the center
issues and that is with Billison and with Jane and with Selda right? Those
3 have been the group that is supposed to be coordinating with other senior
center plans. So perhaps you could be working, you're the chairman of that
' group right? Then perhaps you could be the link between us all. Would
that be alright with you?
Burt Haglund: Yeah. That would be fine. So that would be Mrs. Billison?
Senior Commission Meeting 1
December 13, 1991 - Page 3
Montgomery: That's right, Billison.
Burt Haglund: Okay. And then the other two would be? 1
Montgomery: Selda Heinlein and Jane.
Burt Haglund: Selda and Jane. Okay. Well good, that helps. 1
Montgomery: They will report back to us and there may be additional input
then from the rest of us but at least that will save one step I think. 1
Burt Haglund: We'll be working on a daily basis very closely with Paul
Krauss of course and I expect also with Judy Colby along with you. I will 11
no doubt work with Paul on how to best keep the HRA involved but I would
suggest that as we look ahead to the next time that you sit -and have kind
of a working meeting because...working group to do the planning design of
it. Is that we take a look at having a meeting next week and I would
suggest that perhaps next Friday beforeethe Christmas holiday to sit down
and have a working session and go through some of the details.
Montgomery: Would you like us to establish that now whether that's a time
that would be satisfactory?
Burt Haglund: That would be great. If we can set something up.
Krauss: Well, it sounds like a feeble excuse but next Friday is the City's '
Christmas Party. Nobody's going to be here.
Montgomery: Sounds like a very good reason Paul.
Burt Haglund: We can also do it on Wednesday. 1
Heinlein: It's okay with me.
Montgomery: Is Wednesday alright with you?
Billison: Sounds good right now. 1
Burt Haglund: Let me take a look at my calender. •
Montgomery: Okay, the 18th.
Krauss: If I could make a suggestion here too and I'm not sure how you 11 want us best to handle it but I know we have Selda with the Chanhassen
Senior Group but I did tell Oscar that we would bring him in at some stage
or he could appoint somebody. Would it be alright if I gave him a call and
asked him if he wanted to sit in on this? 1
Montgomery: Sure.
Heinlein: He just will not, he just completely almost ignores me. 1
Krauss: Well if I need to, I can meet with him separately and have him sit
down and review the plan. I just want to keep them following along with 1
Senior Commission Meeting
December 13, 1991 - Page 4
1
everything so that when it's open.
Heinlein: That's true. It should be so they know what's going on.
Montgomery: I agree that there should be a man's input. An older man's
input also into that.
Krauss: I'll give Oscar a call.
Heinlein: You mean I should step out?
' Krauss: No, no.
Heinlein: We'll see how it works. -
Burt Haglund: Okay, looking at next Wednesday. I'm open. Whatever might
be the best time frame. ,
I Heinlein: I'll just clear the date for myself. '
Kubitz: This is where and at what time?
Burt Haglund: I'd prefer to meet here at City Hall.
Montgomery: Is there space?
' Krauss: We'll get you a room.
11 Burt Haglund: Okay. How about in the morning? If you're ac- customed to
meeting at 9:30 like this morning, we can set it for 9:30.
Montgomery: Do you have the date? What date is that?
Burt Haglund: December 18th.
' Montgomery: Okay. And I'd like to suggest too that any members of the
Commission who want to give any information or suggestions to the other
members of the subcommittee please do so before that time. Would,JUdy also
' be at that meeting?
Al -Jaffa Yes.
' Montgomery: Would you like to be part of that too Judy?
Judy Colby: Yes.
Burt Haglund: Alright. Very good. I noticed from the Minutes of your
last meeting about the intent to having the Senior Center done for the
' month of May which is Senior Month. What I've done is a starting point for
discussion is I put together a preliminary project schedule just to trace
back from May back to where we are today as a starting point and what the
main steps are in the process and how much time those might take. So what
' I'd like to do is give you each a copy of that. This is a preliminary
sketch because it doesn't taken into account yet some critical dates that
1
Senior Commission Meeting 1
December 13, 1991 - Page 5
we might have to meet in terms of the HRA meeting and when the City Council'
meets and that sort of thing but it's just to get a start on trying to
understand what steps we need to go through and what might be some target
dates of completing certain things. If you notice the first item here is
called programming and it's shown I'm taking basically through, between now
and Christmas. This is really to get a grip on what are the activities.
What are the things that need to be accommodated in that space so we have all
good common understanding of that. And therein is this reason to have a
meeting next week so we can get a jump on that. Once we have that, then we
can really be serious about the design and trying to really narrow our
sights and some alternatives to get to that final plan. And that I see
taking about a 2 week period so that by the 17th of January, or
approximately one month from today, we should have a design that should
really work with the needs. Then we need to produce the documents which
are the drawings and specifications for construction for bidding and for
construction. That's going to take a period of time. Following that of
course the work needs to be bid and then once a contract is awarded, the II construction. So I just laid this out ,o -give -you some sense of the steps
that we're going to be taking. This needs to be refined. We need, Paul
find out how this interfaces like I say with the HRA and some other"-things 11
but this gives you a first run at it.
Montgomery: I have a question. I wonder if you could tell me where for II instance the parking problem or the entrance problem, that sort of thing,
with what other agency would you be concerned that you meet with where that
sort of thing is concerned.
Burt Haglund: Well again, we're going to look to Paul to coordinate some I
of that. Who should be involved with what kinds of issues. We know from
the outset the HRA of course needs to be involved. Beyond that I guess
we're going to follow Paul's direction.
Krauss: Yeah, a lot of it is an HRA question. Of course the Mayor and Tom
Workman from the City Council sit on the HRA so there's a good connection 1
between the two. We're going to take the best crack at resolving those
things that we can. I mean the entrance is more an internal design issue.
Where that's going to be. How that's going to be. That's something you'll
have pretty direct input over. The future parking situation, I don't think
we're going to have a good answer on that one. The reason is it' 'really
contingent upon that City Center Park proposal. The central park proposal '
that I think you've seen flying around.
Heinlein: When will that decision be made?
Krauss: I don't know. They held some public hearings on it in October. III
know the plans are being further refined right now. I have met with the
architects on that and told them that, the designers and told them that if
we have our senior center down here we're going to want some accommodation
for parking. And there is another lower level lot. This parking lot that
we have out here at the library level is going to be expanded. I'm afraid
it's probably not going to get too much closer to the front door because
they have an amphitheatre on that hill that they want to design in. But
they are aware of that need and I'm hopeful that that's something that
they'll define in the next few months and get some decision on it I
' Senior Commission Meeting
December 13, 1991 - Page 6
haven't heard of a construction date for that thing. I don't think it's
this next year so we're probably going to have to live with whatever we do
for the senior center and whatever we have right now. Now we can look at
doing things like, I mean we do have parking on both sides of the street
and we can sign those somehow so people that need closer proximity to the
door can get in there. Maybe we can make a drop off area We can do
' things like that.
Montgomery: I think that's going to be a serious consideration. I was
' wondering if we need to have any input into the park project or something
so there could be some compromise. Is there any room for anything like
that?
' Krauss: I can find out.
Montgomery: Okay.
' Howard: There's a restaurant on TH 7 t )iat has not only handicapped parking
but also a few spaces marked senior parking which could be done on the
' street. A few senior parking slots.
Krauss: Yeah, see that kind of stuff, I mean it's a city street, we can do
whatever we want with that. As long as that street's still there.
Montgomery: Sorry but I think that's rather a, I just didn't know where
you'd go with questions about that.
Burt Haglund: Yeah, it's an important issue. It's one of those like I
said before, there are opportunities and there are limitations and the
' entrance to parking and access, that's one so it's an important thing to
get resolved. As long as we started on that, another is of course the
toilets and I think there's been some discussion whether to have them in
the space or provide access to the existing toilets out here in the
hallway. Both of the plans have shown, you know the concept plans right
now.
I Heinlein: That would be difficult. With the group we have now we have
some in wheelchairs that come regularly so we almost have to be level.
. ,
' Montgomery: That perhaps you can take up when you meet. But that would be
a real consideration.
Burt Haglund: Well perhaps it's best to leave the issues of design and
' space and program to our meeting next week rather than taking time this
morning.
' Krauss: I'm sorry, I had to run upstairs and get my calendar. I heard you
set that meeting in the morning. Is there any chance of making that in the
afternoon? I've got like a triple conflict.
' Montgomery: Got another party Paul? -
Billison: What time Paul?
1
Senior Commission Meeting '
December 13, 1991 - Page 7
Krauss: I'm open all afternoon.
Heinlein: How about you Bernice? Can you make it in the afternoon?
Burt Haglund: I'm flexible.
Krauss: So something like 1:30? '
Billison: Sounds good.
Heinlein: Okay. I can miss a soap opera for one day.
Burt Haglund: Okay, 1:30 it is. I think for myself that's about all I II wanted to get out of this morning's meeting. It's nice to be here. It's
nice to work with you. I'm looking forward to this. This will be an
exciting project for a lot of people. I'm going to sit through the morning
so I have a better sense of what some of your other concerns are and the
introduction of Judy Colby and so I'm just going to sit back in the chair II
and listen for the rest of the morning.
Montgomery: Thanks so much for coming and bringing this along. I think it 1
helps a lot.
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION NEEDS, DIANE HARBERTS, SOUTHWEST METRO TRANSIT. '
Montgomery: And is Cathy McGraw here also today? Okay. Who would like to
start? '
Cathy McGraw: Diane said I can start. I want to thank you for inviting me
to come and share with you. I understand that you people are talking about"
goals and importance of transportation and Sharmin just said that possibly
I could share with you some of the services that we provide as CART in
Chanhassen and then we could talk later maybe about how we can help further
meet your goals. Carver Area Rural Transit is a transportation program
that's been in existence since 1969. Actually it's been under the
administration of Social Services for the past I think about 12 years. We
provide, there's two parts. Two actual aspects of the transportation that II
we provide to the residents of Carver County. Primarily to the elderly andll
handicapped. We have bus service. We have 7 buses. Well actual),y,5 buses
and 2 vans and we have paid bus drivers that drive those buses. Our routes"
consist of, we do regular adult daycare runs throughout the County. Our
service provides transportation service to the entire county. So we do
regular, every day we do an adult daycare center run. We have supportive
employment run for clients of Carver County Social Services. We have local'
shopping in the communities for the elderly in the county. We have a metro
shopping run once a month where we pick up throughout the county. We
provide transportation to three of the congregate dining sites in different"
areas and for senior centers for the different senior centers throughout
the county. We also have all of our vehicles are handicapped equipped so
we do as much medical transportation for the handicapped as we can fit into"
our regular route service. So that bus service is available to anyone.
However, our trips are designed around serving the elderly and the
handicapped. In Chanhassen specifically we are on the Visions newsletter
comes out every other month and they're distributed throughout the County II
•
1
Senior Commission Meeting
December 13, 1991 - Page 8
at the senior centers and we do have quite a large mailing list. Do most
of you get this Visions? Have you ever. seen it before?
' Montgomery: No.
Cathy McGraw: Okay. Maybe I'll make sure that we can get this to the city
' of Chanhassen and Sharmin can make sure that you get our newsletter every
other month. The last page of the newsletter is our bus schedule and that
tells where we're going and when and how to access the service. On Tuesday
morning at 10:00 we pick up in Chanhassen. Those who want to we take to
Cooper's grocery shopping and then onto the Chaska congregate dining site
for lunch and then we bring you home with your groceries after lunch.
That's every Tuesday. You access service by calling Liz Miller at home and
then our bus driver checks in with Liz and picks up those who want to go.
Montgomery: Are they picked up at home?
Cathy McGraw: At home, yes. And usually -we end up helping carrying up the
groceries too when we bring them back home. That's on Tuesday mornings. On
I Thursdays we provide bus service to the senior center. We pick up, well we
start in Chaska and then we work our way through Chanhassen and for the
people who come on Thursdays to the elementary school. Our bus service is
for that. For those who can't get there in their vehicles. On the first
Tuesday of the month we have a run that goes into the metro area. We stop
at the Eden Prairie Center. We stop at Southdale and downtown Minneapolis.
We leave Chaska at 8:30 and we usually are back in Chaska again at 3:00 so
that's kind of like an all day and you get off wherever you would like to
spend your day shopping. That's about the specific transportation that we
have on our regular routes for our buses. We also have the volunteer
driver program. Are most of you familiar with the volunteer driver program
that we have? You know I .just can't believe it. I think that everybody
knows about it until I find out that they don't know about the volunteer
I driver program actually until people actually need the volunteer driver
program and then they find out so I'm really glad to be here to explain to
you what we have available to you. For your future needs we have volunteer
drivers throughout the county and it's primarily for medical appointments.
For people who have no other way to get to their medical appointments.
People, volunteers drive their own vehicles. They come and pick you up and
take you to your medical appointment. They wait for you and then.t4ey
bring you home. This explains how to access our volunteer driver program.
This sheet is pretty specific how we do it. We have a dispatcher and
people call up. They make arrangements. We dispatch the ride to a
volunteer driver and then the driver will call the person the night before
I and let them know what time they'll be picking them up. Throughout the
county we have about 35 volunteer drivers and we have about 10 of those
drive into the metro area. We do an awful lot of transportation of course
I into the metro area for medicals because of the, there's really not a lot
of specialized medical care out here in the, either at Waconia or at St.
Francis so we do, I think most of the cancer radiation therapy
I transportation. We do kidney dialysis. We go as far as the University of
Minnesota quite often. Our volunteer drivers collectively put on about
25,000 miles a month. These volunteers are reimbursed their mileage. For
both our bus service and our volunteer driver service there is a fare. The
fare is 50 cents local. $1.00 anyplace in the county. $2.00 up to 15
I
Senior Commission Meeting
December 13, 1991 - Page 9
miles out of the county and $4.00 beyond that and that's for your round
trip ride. And that's paid to the driver and then the driver turns that in
at the end of the month. Then the other item I gave you is our brochure
that gives you our telephone numbers and how to access us for either bus or
volunteer driver program...
(There was a tape change at this point in the meeting.) '
Montgomery: ...senior?
Cathy McGraw: Actually we don't try to distinguish who's a senior and who II
isn't. Actually we primarily are for the elderly. We design our service
around that but for anyone who is really transit dependent, who needs to 111 get where we're going, we try to get them the ride so we don't just do
elderly. There's quite a few transit dependent people who are not elderly
who we take to their medical appointments with volunteer drivers.
Bragg: How much lead time do you have )o- have?
Cathy McGraw: We like a 2 day notice. We like it. We don't always get
it.
Bragg: That tripped me up because I needed it this summer. Two times a
week into Methodist and I couldn't.
Cathy McGraw: We have done that. We'll do an ongoing. When somebody has
to get to cancer radiation they have to go for 6 weeks, 5 days a week and II
so I mean you don't call us every day. I mean we just automatically assign
that to a driver or two drivers and it's done but we like to specify that
this is a last resort transportation service. If other people, if you have
someone who can take you then of course we'd prefer you to do that.
Sometimes people will have a family member or friend who can take them a
couple of times a week and then we do it a couple of times so we try to
work it out with the passenger. '
Heinlein: How do you figure the mileage? I have gone further with one of
your drivers very polite. Twice I've had to use it but there's times now I '
gather that I'll probably have to use CART more than Dial -a -Ride for short
trips like to Eden Prairie or TH 5 and TH 4. I go both to a podiat.ist and
the.
Cathy McGraw: That would be a $2.00 fare.
Heinlein: It would be? Okay. '
Cathy McGraw: Usually up to Eden Prairie is about $2.00 and beyond that it
gets to be the $4.00 fare.
Montgomery: That's really valuable information. I think that is something
that needs to be better known.
Bragg: How about in the evenings?
1
1
' Senior Commission Meeting
December 13, 1991 -- Page 10
Cathy McGraw: That's a problem we have. We do not ask our drivers to go
out in the evening. We keep it during the weekday and from about 7:30 to
' 4:30 or 5:00. Most of them are seniors themselves and they prefer to be
home with their family and they are also volunteers so you can't really
request a volunteer to do something they don't really care to do. That's
why we keep it specific to what the volunteer wants to do. If a volunteer
I driver for instance wants to just drive within their local community, we do
that as well. You know so it's up to the volunteer to decide what they
want to do and then we find the right volunteer for the right ride.
' Montgomery: Is there any van service at night? Driver service?
' Cathy McGraw: No, we don't have any evening. We're under Social Services
and actually the County restricts us to county open hours. Any other
questions? _
' Montgomery: Are there more of these that can be left at City Hall?
Cathy McGraw: Sure. Yeah, I'll make sure that Sharmin gets all that we
' have. Thank you.
Heinlein: Marilyn...usually brings them in for us at the senior center, or
' whatever we call it.
Cathy McGraw: Right. And she does the shopping run in this area too so
yeah.
Heinlein: I've gone with them a couple of times to have lunch over there
but suddenly I have to cook meals again at home.
Cathy McGraw: Well you know not a lot of people go but for those that want
to go, we like to have it available. And for instance if somebody wanted
to go on the weekly grocery shopping and not go for lunch, we could make
' that arrangement too. She could run people back who didn't want to stay
for lunch at the congregate dining site too. But they wanted to have it
combined for those who wanted to have the lunch. Okay? Thank you.
' Montgomery: Thanks very much.
' Diane Harberts: Good morning. My name is Diane Harberts and I'm the
administrator of Southwest Metro Transit and I bet there's going to be a
question, do we offer evening service. I'm going to just pass out some
magnets and I'll refer to this in my presentation. My business card that
has my telephone number in case you have some questions later on and then
some pens. If you could just take one and pass them on. A couple minutes
ago when you were talking about your senior center, there was a discussion
' about the need of parking. Well let me tell you, Dial -a -Ride will
certainly help you with that parking need. I don't know how much you know
about Southwest Metro or myself so what I'd like to do is just take a
' couple of minutes. Tell you a little bit about myself. About the services
and then maybe just chat a little bit about the needs. I've been with
Southwest Metro just, it was a year in October. Prior to that I was with
the County of Anoka for 6 1/2 years and what I did there was basically
develop a transit program revolving around the senior needs and then later
Senior Commission Meeting 1
December 13, 1991 - Page 11
into a general public service called the Anoka County Traveler. In 1990
I joined Southwest Metro staff and in the past year we've had the
opportunity to see some real growth in riderships. As a matter of fact in II
December, this December we're celebrating our 5 year anniversary when
Southwest Metro was originally established. Southwest Metro, we offer
express service. This is service for people who commute to downtown
Minneapolis. We have 15 large buses that you may have seen in the morning.,
They leave the Chaska, Chanhassen and Eden Prairie, which is our service
area, as early as 5:30 in the morning and get back as late as 7:00 in the
evening. Basically it's peak hour service which means between the early
morning rush hour and the afternoon rush hour. That's when the big bus,
the service to Minneapolis is available. What I'd also like to tell you
about is our Dial -a -Ride. It sounds like Selda has some experience with
Dial -a -Ride. I hope it's pleasant. Dial -a -Ride is our door to door
service. Between the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday thru Friday
and from 9:00 to 6:00, any individual that's traveling within Eden Prairie,
Chaska or Chanhassen can basically call for a ride and we take them where I
they want to go. We're not in competit on with CART. Cathy did make the
comment that CART is there to take them if they want to go with them. On
the flip side, we're there to take you where you want to go. A senior
citizen age 65 years or older travels for 75 cents one way. 'the service is
available to any location in the 3 cities. Also to Southdale. Limited
service to Shakopee and then also to Glen Lake where you can catch the MTC ,
bus. You can also catch the MTC bus at Southdale. I think it was right
around Thanksgiving time, Dial -a -Ride service, we use it for many different
ages. For many different trip purposes. For example, a couple of weeks
ago there was a group of people in the Chaska area, it was at the Jonathan I
Apartments. Called us up and had about 20 people that wanted to go to
Target and take advantage of the early morning sale that they offered. Well
we were there for that. I think what I'd like to do is when you talk about
your' senior center issues, if it's appropriate I'd like to maybe talk with
you at a later time of how transit can be an important part of your senior
center. Being that access point. At this point the Commission is looking
at a 5 year study of how we can improve and meet those transit needs within"'
the 3 communities. What I'd like to do at this point is answer any
questions you may have about the services and also ask you what kind of
needs you see. Something what I'd like to do once you get your senior
center established is maybe be a frequent visitor. Have the opportunity toll
sit down with your senior center Board as well as your coordinator, 4nd see
how we can include transit as an important element. Transit isn't just for
the dependent. It's an alternative way. It's the alternative for building '
a parking lot. A larger parking lot. It's an alternative than to taking
your car out on a cold day so there's very many uses for transit and we
hope that you can work with us to help promote this to increase that '
awareness and useage of it. At this time I'd like to open it up for
questions and any comments that you may have regarding our services or
regarding the needs. '
Montgomery: I'd like to say that I was delivered here exactly on time this
morning by Dial -a -Ride. I'm a customer and it was just fine.
Diane Harberts: We appreciate that. We transport on Dial -a -Ride alone
about 6,000 rides every month. Between 6:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. with
weather can be a challenge some days. Our priority goal is to always have I
11
' Senior Commission Meeting
December 13, 1991 - Page 12
that best customer service we can. Sometimes there's reasons we may be a
little late but we certainly try to improve. And always, we always welcome
I any comments good or bad on how we can improve it so thank you I'll pass
that on.
Montgomery: Of course my question is always, what is the possibility of
' extending hours into the evening. What we find is that seniors can't get
to community education programs. They can't get to church programs. They
can't get to suppers. You know it's an ongoing problem.
Diane Harberts: You know and I realize the importance and we'd love to
extend our services to the evening hours. You know the year that I've been
with Southwest Metro the questions we always ask are do you want evening
service. Yes. How often would you use it? Well maybe once a week. Maybe
once a month. One of the things that we have to work under is what's
referred to as performance standards. They send the funds that we receive.
' We have to meet certain goals of efficiency and this efficiency is a
product of how well utilized the service is so I think that with your need
of wanting that evening service, with our need of meeting our goal, I think
' by working together, by increasing the awareness that that service is
available, I think it's going to be a very easy opportunity to deliver that
evening service.
' Montgomery: Has there been any communication with the Community Education
Department for instance where that's concerned?
' Diane Harberts: We've had, I've had conversations over the last year with
different community education centers that offer classes in the evening and
would like that opportunity. It's finding these pieces. Now putting the
' pieces together to extend that service. Like I said, it's not something
that's impossible. It's just a matter of finding those pieces and putting
them together so we can fit that transit with the needs and I think with a
' commission such a.s yourself, it's one piece in Chanhassen that we can
certainly identify as well as the other pieces in the other two cities.
Montgomery: So what we need is cooperation with a lot of different?
Diane Harberts: Exactly right and that's one of the roles that I can do is
to be that link between the different pieces but it's a two way str %et.
' It's as I said, we could really use your assistance by that encouragement.
By the awareness of the service and at the same time we can be that link to
provide that service to meet that need.
' Montgomery: We do have some questionnaires I'm sure that we'll be
preparing from time to time and perhaps that could be.
' Diane Harberts: That would be an excellent opportunity. What we've done
with other agencies is that when they have a questionnaire like that, we're
able to maybe provide a question or two that relates to this particular
' area such as evening service or transit service. That helps us get a
response back. That helps us put that plan together and how to offer an
evening service that's going to be successful.
Senior Commission Meeting
December 13, 1991 - Page 13
Bragg: I think I understand what you're saying. I'd just like to
gg• '
y y ng. I d e s 1� o point
out that the older eye is why we need evening service. Because a senior,
it's just what happens when you age is that your eyes are not as clear at II
night and if you're going to be safe on the highway, it's better not to be
driving.
Diane Harberts: No, that's a very good point Betty. I appreciate that and,
you know what I'd like to suggest is that within this 1992 year that
Southwest Metro is committed to taking a harder look at that and I think
with input like that, that's what make the pieces come together. So I'd
like to maybe suggest that as a goal for both of us to work on.
Montgomery: I was thinking of all the driving courses too. The 55 Alive
or whatever they call it. Perhaps that might be a link too.
Diane Harberts: That's a very good suggestion. Very good. You know if
you have other suggestions like that, you have my business card with my
phone number. Please give me a call. I" m there Monday thru Friday anywhere
from 7:30 in the morning to 7 :00 at night depending on what the schedule is
but we really welcome that input. I'd even welcome the oppor4unity to come
out to your senior center meeting and maybe discuss some other comments
like that with your other members. Thank you.
Montgomery: Well thanks so much. It's nice to know we have some hope ,
here.
Heinlein: If you want to go like from Southdale, just how much difference '
is there in the timing. What is the tinning to get to Eden Prairie to get
the bus that goes there?
Diane Harberts: That's a real good question Selda. One of the things that'
drives Dial -a -Ride is a shared ride service. That way we're able to keep
the cost down. By having a shared ride, we...a little flexible on time.
Usually the run between Eden Prairie and Southdale I think runs maybe about
20 minutes, depending on traffic. I think that's usually what the time
allowed is. I'm not sure on that. That's something I can certainly get
back to you on.
Heinlein: I like to go to Southdale once in a while but I never Rndw. You
know I know when the bus will pick me up at my door but then when I get
there, how long will I have to wait to get the bus that goes further and
the same way on the return?
Diane Harberts: Sure. What I would suggest that you do is to call our ,
Dial -a -Ride number. On this magnet we have the express number for bus
information to Minneapolis and also for Dial -a -Ride. If you wanted to give
them a call or to give me a call with that question, I can follow up on
that and answer that. By calling Dial -a -Ride you can pose that question to
them. Tell them where you live. Where you want to go. Do you want to stop
at Eden Prairie first or do you just want to go from your home to
Southdale? They'd be able to give you a response because it also depends
on what day and how many other people are going that way.
1
1
' Senior Commission Meeting
December 13, 1991 - Page 14
Heinlein: Because basically I was under the impression that I'd have to
wait at Eden Prairie for a bus to pick me up there to take me further and
then coming back it would be the same thing.
Diane Harberts: What you're referring to is a time transfer. Sometimes
because of the number of people because they're coming from the different
parts of the communities, we do ask you to wait but usually it's a very
minimal time. 5 to 10 minutes at the most. One of the goals for 1992 that
we've also identified is really stepping up that frequency of service to
' Southdale simply because of continued requests like this as well. So it
does help to have comments like this. Thank you. Thank you very much.
11 Montgomery: Thanks very much Diane.
Diane Harberts: Thanks for inviting me today.
' Montgomery: We'll be seeing you.
H.O.M.E. PROGRAM, BETTY CROUCH.
Betty Crouch: I'm here to tell you about the H.O.M.E. progra which is an
acronym for Household and Outside Maintemance for the Elderly. We also
serve the disabled and I think you've already heard a little bit about us
from Paul and Sharmin. I understand there was also an article in your
newspaper telling you about us and that there is a flyer or mailing going
out, I don't know has that been received yet?
Krauss: No, not yet.
Betty Crouch: Oh, okay. I'll just give you a few brief things and then I
have a little video tape for you to watch. But H.O.M.E. was established in
1980 in our offices in Bloomington. At that time it was established with
South Hennepin Human Services Council. We are now with Senior Community
Services. We do a variety of services for a chore project. We kind of
like to refer to ourselves as a full service program because we do cleaning
and maintenance and seasonal work. We have about 15 homemakers, a
maintenance coordinator and a painter and then we have extra help in the
summer when it's needed. We don't do any personal health service but we do
a lot of cleaning that is very necessary. We try to help people stay in
' their homes as long as possible and at an affordable cost. So at this time
I'd like to show you the video. I want you to understand that there's
maybe been a few changes in personnel and it doesn't have the expertise of
Paul and Diana but I hope you'll enjoy it.
Bragg: Ms. Crouch, where are you located?
' Betty Crouch: Oh I'm sorry. I'm in the Bloomington office at Creekside
Community Center. You'll see that on the video also.
' Bragg: Do you have any other contacts in Carver County or any other places
besides that? That's the only place we can reach you?
Betty Crouch: That's where my office is. We serve the cities of
' Bloomington, Richfield, Edina, Eden Prairie and St. Louis Park.
1
Senior Commission Meeting
December 13, 1991 - Page 15
Bragg: So say a person was located out this far, you might possibly have
an auxilliary person closer or would you always take all the calls? 1
•
Betty Crouch: No, I would take the call but I would assign someone who
lives closer to your area.
Bragg: Thank you. That's what I wanted to know.
Krauss: Well, we're having technical difficulties. They're going to run II
upstairs and see if they can get someone to come down and run it.
Betty Crouch: Okay. Well as you can see from that opening, it showed the
four cities it includes. That's one of the things we'll have to change.
That are now going to be serving someone in Chanhassen. Maybe while we're
waiting for that, I'll hand out our newsletter. We try to do two
newsletters a year. A spring and a fall issue and everyone that gets
service would automatically get one. -
Bragg: The reason I asked the question is I had need for the service and I'
was referred to Carver, County and a very nice person came out did the
assessment and then I waited forever because she didn't have anybody to
send. Finally she got somebody and I was within about 2 weeks of being
able to take over myself pretty well. She came one time and then she quit.I
I think the wages were small and probably that's why but it was a little
unsatisfactory for my needs.
Kubitz: I won't say that about Betty. I called her for snow shoveling and"!
within a half an hour I had somebody calling me to do it.
Betty Crouch: Serving the suburbs sometimes is difficult. I want to
assure you I already have anticipated that and I just recently hired 3
homemakers that live in' the Chanhassen /Eden Prairie area that really only
want to serve out here. They don't want to go to Richfield so I am trying II
to coordinate.
Bragg: In other words this Carver County probably doesn't have as good a I
service, maybe it's a different program even.
Betty Crouch: Right.
(A short video on the H.O.M.E. program was presented to the Commission at
this point in the meeting.)
Betty Crouch: Does that explain it all?
Montgomery: That's wonderful. It's good to know there's that service.
Betty Crouch: We've very proud of the program. I will be happy to answer
any more questions that you might have or explain anything. The process. II
I'd like to ask now, as the program expands and you're coming west
with that, will you need more volunteers from this area?
1
Senior Commission Meeting
December 13, 1991 w- Page 16
i 3
Betty Crouch: Yes and someone has given me a contact name. I haven't been
able to make that contact but yes we will need more volunteers obviously.
But as Jane just pointed out to you when she called me the other day, I had
a call right after that from a young teacher so I had him call her back
right away and he had a group who wants to do snow removal. They're on
11 snow patrol Monday thru Fridays so.
Jane Kubitz: We got it all cleared out by then and he wanted to come out
and shovel right then and there. He had two 7th and 8th grade boys he
' wanted to put to work. I said I'm sorry, we're all done. This is for next
time. Does anybody else in your neighborhood need snow removal and of
course there wasn't any.
Montgomery: That's an absolutely wonderful service to coordinate the
need... -
(There was a tape change at this point in the meeting.)
Betty Crouch: I guess that's kind of what we represent. Trustworthy
' program and we're very happy to be meeting all you people her,p in
Chanhassen. You can call me or do you have any more questions now? Okay,
thank you.
PLANNING DIRECTOR UPDATE ON CBDG FUNDS.
Montgomery: I guess Paul is up next. He's going to be telling us about
the CBDG funds.
Krauss: I'd also like to talk I guess more focused on our budget too. I
' met with Larry Blackstad trying to get a handle on what's going to happen
for the next year's round of funding and we're still not sure. We get
information on that in March. February - March. In the past we've typically
funded South Shore. I think recently it's been in the order of $8,000.00 a
year. Of course this past year we gave some to Sojourn but that was more
of a one time type of thing. We don't know how much money we're dealing
' with next year so it's really kind of tough to know what to do with it yet.
And we have some competing demands as well. I mean one of the things we've
been, well I think you're aware that we finance some handicapped accessible
park equipment. One of the things that we're starting to work on'here is
to get some moderate cost housing. Not just on the open market, into town
so we began to talk to some people about some ways of doing that and some
block grant money might figure into that. I had some meetings or
' discussion with Ron Block from Senior Community Services about our funding
levels. Our likely funding levels for South Shore in the future and
basically what I told him is we've always had a stated desire here to keep
on funding South Shore to the best of our abilities but as we have a
' facility opening up here, we're going to have to balance that somehow. So
basically to expect something but probably not as much as we were able to
do before. Even if the dollars are there, we can't, I think you're aware
we can only give 15% of the dollars to that service activities so we have a
problem with that. But as soon as I know more I'll let you know. I'm real
hopeful, and maybe I'm being naive about it but the last time they figured
the block grant allocation, as far as they were concerned in Washington, we
had a population of 6,000. Now we have a population of 12,000 so I'm
1
Senior Commission Meeting
December 13, 1991 - Page 17
i
hopeful that that yields more dollars. The City Council, since we last
spoke, City Council's approved the budget. One of the things that we tried
to do and Park and Rec tried to do is put senior activities on a more even
keel so we weren't just wholly dependent on Block Grant funds. We don't
think we asked for a lot of money but we wanted the City Council to feel
comfortable enough that there would be sort of a base line amount of money II
that could be funneled through and actually we can have a lot more control
over it. There's no strings attached. Well there is, you've got to get
City Council approval but you're not trying to please a bureaucrat in
Washington with it. And I'm pleased to say that both Planning and Park and ll
Rec were successful. Park and Rec has an allocation I believe of $5,000.00
which will be used in programming senior activities so if they need to hire
I don't know, a low impact aerobics instructor or bring in somebody for a II
lecture series or do whatever between what they come up with with Judy, we
have some funding for that.
Montgomery: Is that for the year? _
P
Krauss: Yes. I also got an additional $8,000.00 part of which is to be
used for your functioning. Now there's a little bit of an accounting thing"
with that. I mean we have somebody taking Minutes. We do'mailings. We do
other things. We maybe start subscribing to some periodicals that you want
us to do. Every Commission in the City has about a $2,000.00 to $3,000.00 I
a year allocation that they spend on just basic business so that's part of
it but then there's sort of an additional, that leaves about $5,000.00 for
discretionary type of things and what I'm hopeful we can do is use that
either instead of or in combination with Block Grant or use in areas where I
we can't use Block Grant to get senior programs. Instead of programming
but programs up and running. So we'll keep you posted on that. We do have I
the $8,000.00 and the $5,000.00 are going to be available to you starting
. January 1. So in your goals for, when you discuss your goals for 1992, we
have a little bit more in the, way of resources than we had before.
Montgomery: That's very nice to hear. Is that for sure the $8,000.00? 1
Krauss: Yes.
Montgomery: Great. Any other developments? An questions for Paul?
Y P Y q
• s
Howard: I have a question not related to this. Last time we met we made 1
suggestions about forming a committee. Was anything presented to the
Council about that?
Krauss: For volunteers? i
Howard: For fund raising committee.
Krauss: I have not yet and in the interim Judy Colby's come on and I'd
like to get her involved with that as well. As soon as Judy gets her feet
on the ground, I think we need to work with you and then start making
pitches. We don't know what to ask for yet and I don't want you to be, I'dll
rather you'd didn't go in the position of just asking without a specific
goal in mind. When we have a facility up and you need a new refrigerator II
or whatever, I mean something specific, a goal that you're trying to raise
1
Senior Commission Meeting
December 13, 1991 - Page 18
or fund a program, then I think you're in a much stronger ground of pulling
out and making a pitch. Something that Rotary can write you a check for
$250.00.
Howard: Well you know Buffalo worked 5 years towards making their own
' center and I assume we will still work towards a free standing center so we
have that goal.
Krauss: Yeah and because of the way things fell out here, we jumped that 5
year process. Originally I thought we were going to have that same 5 year
problem that Buffalo did. In fact I think if you remember back when we
originally started talking about this, we said think about this in a 3 to 5
year time horizon. Well the HRA came riding to the rescue and you've got
to jump on that and I think you've got to digest a lot of things that have
already gone on before you jump to the next step. This is going to be a
real busy year. Coming year for you. Sharmin reminded me though, there
was something else in terms of Block Grant. We met with Julie Frick who is
with the Carver County HRA. They have own Housing and Redevelopment
Authority. She was seeking city assistance on doing a senior housing needs
' study. Basically for us to pay into a kitty so she could put,together a
project. Honestly I told her that we really weren't interested. The
reason being that I think we can fund our own study out here and be much
' more specific and it's going to be specifically what do Chanhassen
residents need? Where should this thing be located? How big should it
be? What sort of amenities? How much square footage? Does it have to
' have underground parking? All those kinds of things. The concern that
I've often had with a lot of Carver County programs is they get so watered
down. They get very little support. It doesn't seem like they get much
support from the County Board and I didn't see throwing a few thousand
' dollars to do a study that says yes, they need more senior housing in Young
America as being of much benefit to us so I indicated to her that there's a
lot of things we could probably work together on but I couldn't recommend
that we contribute to that, especially in light of the fact that we're
doing our own. So if I was out of line, tell me.
Montgomery: No, I think that was a good move Paul.
Howard: Paul, is a study a thing or a service?
' Krauss: In the Federal definition it's a thing. We can fund that
apparently.
' Howard: We were wondering about that.
Krauss: Well when it's done it's a book so I guess it's a thing. I don't
know how they come up with that definition Sherol. I don't understand it.
Howard: Well we have to be careful of our 15 %.
' Krauss: Well actually we exceed that. In the past we've been about 20% or
25% services but out of the pot of money that Hennepin County gets from the
Feds to distribute to all the units of government, they have to maintain
15% so if another community is at 5% and we're at 20 %, it all just kinds of
1 balances.
Senior Commission Meeting 1
December 13, 1991 - Page 19
Montgomery: I guess this isn't the place to talk about. Well, we'll get 11
to that later. Anybody else have any questions for Paul about the grants?
Okay, well we'd like to meet Judy Colby who's the new Senior Center Program
Coordinator. We've been looking forward to this
INTRODUCTION OF JUDY COLBY, SENIOR CENTER PROGRAM COORDINATOR_
I/
Joan Kvern: I think this is my job too to introduce her. Before I do I
would like to make a few comments about your city. City of Chanhassen.
I'm a program administrator for Senior Community Services but I also work 1
in direct service and in that, 8 years ago we began the Senior Center
called the South Shore Senior Center which is located in Excelsior but
which was to serve 6 communities, Chanhassen being one of them. And all
these years Chanhassen has helped fund the South Shore Senior Center so
when this movement of starting a new senior center in started I
will tell you that I looked upon it with real mixed emotions because South
Shore Senior Center is very dear to me and I think it has made a wonderful II
contribution to the area. However, I also think that this is very., very
exciting for the older people of your community and it's something that you
don't see in many communities. You see kind of a yes we know our
population is aging but we really don't think it's the city's business. We
think it's the State or we think it's the Federal government. So I really
believe that you live in a community that is showing a real concern for II it's citizens and I think you should be very proud of that. And as I sit
here today and see that the City of Chanhassen is contracting with Senior
Community Services H.O.M.E. program and they really want to develop a
program for their elderly, I feel very good about it. I also feel very
good about the person that we have hired to work with you in developing
this center. When Paul talks about the CBDG funds and whether or not they
will be able to continue to help South Shore, again I listen very carefully'
because I'm very tuned into that. Right now that South Shore Center is
serving many of your residents and until you get your full time center it
will continue to serve. Offering them congregate dining and so I'm very
happy that Paul and the City of Chanhassen are saying that they will
continue to help fund South Shore Center until your center is up and
running as is the South Shore center. I think too that that is a wonderful
out -look on programs for seniors because right now you're starting very, II very low key. You have a woman who's going to be working 12 hours a week
and so you really, with that 12 hours combined with South Shore can right
now offer the people of your community almost a daily senior center
experience. Judy Colby, let me just tell you that about, what was it 2 -3
weeks ago. We spent the day, Selda, Emma St. John, Sharmin, myself and
Todd. No, Todd wasn't there.
Al Jaff: Emma, Selda, you and me.
Joan Kvern: Yeah, because Todd wasn't able to be there that day. We had II
put in an ad for a 12 hour a week position and we had about 18 people
respond which is really very surprising because a 12 hour position is not
easy to fill believe you me. We had the most wonderful candidates.
Wouldn't you say so?
Al -Jaff: Definitely.
' Senior Commission Meeting
December 13, 1991 - Page 20
Joan Kvern: That it was just amazing. We picked 3 and then the week later
Ben Withhart, the Executive Director of.Senior Community Services and
Todd Hoffman, your Director of Park and Rec and myself, interviewed the
three finalists and we asked Judy Colby to take on the job. Judy's lived
in the City of Chanhassen for 9 years. She has 2 sons age 7 and 9. She's
been very involved as a volunteer in their school. She has a daughter 17.
Judy attended the University of Minnesota and worked in the journalism
department but she has been in advertising all these years and you might
say well, advertising? How can she work with me to develop a senior
center? When you work in a senior center, one of the two main qualities
are necessary. First you must love the people you're working with, and
Judy really does enjoy older people. She told us a story about when she
was young and the volunteer work she did and when I talked to other staff
people almost every one of us in our lifetime has had a wonderful
experience with either a grandmother or with an older adult and that really
does carry through. So you need that love. Just like a teacher needs to
' love children and everybody doesn't. And then the second thing that's most
important is you need to be creative. ; You need to have ideas and I'll tell
you, Judy has them. And then third, you do have to be a little organized.
Now now and then I fall down on that when I leave my keys in the old purse
and my husband has to come and bring them to the center but 3 dy has proven
and in talking with the people that she gave as reference, each one of them
' has really praised her and talked about how she started a project and was
able to follow it through and that's very, very important. So I brought
along some job descriptions. I don't know if you want them now. I can
give them to Sharmin and keep in mind that this is kind of a generic job
description of a senior center director and you might want to take them
home or whatever. A 12 hour week position you will not be able to expect
all of this to happen but when you go full time, then these kinds of things
' happen and so I want to introduce to you a woman who I think you will
really enjoy working with and who will do an excellent job for your city.
Judy.
Judy Colby: Paul said that when I get my feet down on the ground and I'm
supposed to follow that introduction and get my feet down on the ground. I
don't think that's going to happen for a while. Joan was right. I've just
had a love of seniors that I just know I was born with. When I was very
young the volunteer that she was talking about that I was doing, I was in
probably about 4th grade and I lived in South Minneapolis and ther % e % was a
1 group called the Little Sisters of the Sick Poor and I don't think they
exist anymore. I think there's the Brothers that work with the poor and I
used to, you know God only knows why you do these things but they talked
about this at school. I signed up and I took this bus to Bloomington
' Avenue. I remember sitting in front of this drug store wondering, as
I transferred to go into Southeast Minneapolis and work with the seniors
and I went into their homes with the Sisters and I would just walk into
these homes and these people were so poor and I had never seen anything
like this and the houses stunk and I would sit there and go, pooh. Now
what did I give to those seniors I don't know because that's how I remember
' it. But I kept going you know. Month after month, year after year and I
just loved it. We put on parties and I can remember the canaries in this
one lady's home where she sat with these canaries next to her and she was a
huge woman and I don't think she ever got out of that rocking chair. But
she would smile her toothless grin and I would just feel very uncomfortable
Senior Commission Meeting 1
December 13, 1991 - Page 21
with her but here I am and what that might bring to you I don't know but
Joan is right. I've just always felt comfortable with seniors. I've
always felt there has never been enough done for seniors. As I sit and
listen to everything available, I'm really excited because this was just,
I'm going to be on the learning curve as it sounds like a lot of you when
you hear that these exist and we don't know about them and that's the
saddest thing is that there are services available but I think probably all
of you have experienced when you make one phone call and they say oh yes,
we can help. Oh, you're in that county. Oh, never mind. You can't. Well
trying calling here and try calling there and I did that for years with my II
mother and fortunately I was available to help her so I just quit calling
and did what I had to do for her but there's a lot of her friends that
didn't have that and so I think that's one of the things that probably the
senior center will want to do. And through Senior Community Services,
they've just got their fingers on the pulse throughout the Metropolitan
area and it's so exciting to have that kind of expertise to always rely on
because no center alone is going to be able to know that whereas that's
their goal is to keep abreast of what's . happening and so I'm real excited.
I was telling Selda this morning that my second grader as I was coming
here, he just doesn't think this a good idea of course you know as I didn't"
when my mother went to work. Because I work out of my home at my_
advertising so now you're going to do another thing. You know Book Nook at
school and working on your advertising and this too. I said yeah but this
makes me happy so you're going to get the benefit of that and he said well II
why do you want to work with those seniors. He thought I was going to work
with the seniors at Chaska High School. Now if any of you have had a 17
year old daughter, those seniors are not acceptable. They are not
acceptable so he's kind of why would you want to do that as Michelle's
slamming the door and crying. Ah, these are different seniors so I'm
really looking forward to it.
Montgomery: Golden ages tell him.
Judy Colby: Golden ages, yes. Yeah, he thought you were all about my age II
and I said they're just a little bit older than that. But if you have any
questions and concerns, just feed everything to me because that's what I
promised when I first talked to Joan. That. I'd be a really good listener. II
Really good listener.
Montgomery: I'm sure you'll have a lot of questions that you'll at to
ask us too and we're just delighted to have you Judy. It's wonderful to
have you aboard.
Judy Colby: Thank you. I'm delighted to be here. 1
Montgomery: I think we have a lot of things we can do together and it
takes a lot of cooperation but I think we've been so lucky to have that
kind of support and Sharmin and Paul have been wonderful to work with.
Judy Colby: And Sharmin promised me, I want this on the record. Who's II taking these notes? That she will just be there with us you know so it
isn't just like she's cut off so her experience over the last year's going
to be valuable too. And as Joan said, the thing that's so exciting is that
we're starting the center and then we're starting the H.O.M.E. program at II
Senior Commission Meeting
December 13, 1991 - Page 22
the same time. That kind of momentum and that kind of press will get the
word out.
Montgomery: Well we've certainly been looking forward to having you come
here. It will be great to work with you.
11 Heinlein: One of the seniors at our church last Sunday mentioned that, boy
you're really going to town she said. I'm surprised all the things I'm
reading in the paper. I said well, now we're really going to have it. I
said a complete working group. Keep it up she said. She's a retired
school teacher.
' SENIOR COMMISSION GOALS UPDATE.
Al -Jaff: One of the goals that you had on your, at our last meeting we
listed a number of goals and I promised I would update you on each item.
The directory. We made contact with First Call for Help. They sent us a
sample of the type of agencies that served Chanhassen. In return we sent
them a list of what Carver County offers. They don't have a complete list
as to what Carver County has to offer so they're going to enter all that
information into their system and then from that they will pull out what's
available for the city of Chanhassen. So that's where we're at right now.
The second item was the grand opening and Older Americans Month. You
' wanted that combined into one item. We really haven't done anything on
that yet. Housing study. At the time when we were working on this agenda
the meeting with Julie Frick had not taken place yet. Paul updated you on
that but again the housing study isn't... Transportation. You met earlier
with Diane Harberts and Cathy McGraw. We will keep in contact with them.
I will relay all your concerns, all your goals...I will relay that to Cathy
' and Diane and make sure that at least an effort is made to take care of
those transportation issues. At the last meeting you pointed out that you
wanted a heritage preservation committee established. That I have on
inactive as well. That's it for now. If you have any other items you
' would like to add to this list, feel free to do that. If there are any
questions I'll answer them.
' Montgomery: Does anybody have anything to add to the list?
Howard: Our transportation seems to be incomplete isasmuch as it.dQesn't
' cover any evening rides. I wonder if we could form volunteers. The Mayor
was saying that a young man went into his office asking for things to do.
For any purpose in the evening a senior might desire a ride, whether it's
frivilous or not.
Montgomery: You mean as a volunteer?
Howard: I wonder about forming a committee of volunteers to take care of
evening rides. I would volunteer.
' Billison: I would too.
Howard: So if you've got 30 of us.
1
1
Senior Commission Meeting 1
December 13, 1991 - Page 23
Kubitz: I think that's when we get our center going, there may be some
younger people too and somebody had said something to me about there's an
awful lot of kids out there with drivers licenses that might be willing to II
transport seniors once in a while.
Howard: Well it's a shame to miss a dinner. It's fine to take care of
medical first but the extra things are nice too.
Al -Jaff: If we can prove there is a need for evening transportation,
Dial -a -Ride will extend their hours. '
Howard: But she never got around to saying how many you needed or anything
specific about it. She just said they had to investigate and coordinate.
Al -Jaff: Maybe one thing that we can propose to themris doing it on a
trial basis for 3 to 4 months. If it's a success, keep it. If it doesn't,
eliminate it because that's how they started the Saturday service. It was
a trial basis for 3 months and it picked up beautifully.
Howard: Well the first thing to do is to let people know it's there. 1
Montgomery: Yeah the publicity would be an important thing - or else it
wouldn't go.
Krauss: Starting our own volunteer efforts, you can always go that route
but it's difficult to organize. You know we don't have the expertise in
doing that. 1
Howard: But Dial -a -Ride would make a trial of it.
Krauss: But yeah that's a different way of approaching it and I think once'
we have a center open, or on the verge of it, you may want to put together.
There's powers in coalitions. You touch base with the Eden Prairie Senior
Center and Chaska and whatever groups you want and figure out who exactly
would use this thing after 6:00 p.m. and then it's a matter of going to a
Southwest Metro Commission board meeting and make a pitch. I mean we have
2 City Council people who are on the Board. It's comprised of all local I
people. I'm sure they'd, they are under very tight budgetary constraints
and they were recently cut back along with all the other bus servi %s. You
really have to be, they're more than willing to serve but we have to I
demonstrate to them that they're not going to waste $7,000.00 or $8,000.00
because they have to contract for these things. Get people lined up. That
there's actually a demand for it and I think if we can demonstrate it, I'm •
sure they'd be receptive to doing something about it.
Heinlein: I talked to Dennis a couple weeks ago and he said they are
working on some kind of plan but it won't be confirmed I guess until after II
the first of the year where regular routes will be more or less planned.
She didn't mention anything about it but when I talked to him, that was
before the Target deal I was talking to him. Like they're going to have
certain stations where they will pick up people as I understood it so we'll,
just have to wait and see what's going to come out of that.
Montgomery: You mean during the evenings Selda? 1
' Senior Commission Meeting
December 13, 1991 - Page 24
Krauss: That's not for the evening service. That's for the higher volumes
service. But again the Board that Diane works for is comprised of focal
11 people. Ursula Dimler who you know is on it and on Monday they appointed .
Mike Mason, one of our new City Council people who's a school teacher to
fill the open slot. We could talk to them about it but you really need to,
instead of just, it's fine to come up with an idea and say wouldn't it be
' nice to have night service but it's something else again if you come to a
meeting with 15 or 16 people representing 3 communities that are served by
this thing all of whom are making a pitch and say here. We can present you
' with this as a package. We'd like you to work with us. I'm pretty sure
they would.
' Montgomery: So it's a matter of coordination.
Al -Jaff: It can be done.
Montgomery: I suppose if we did do some kind of volunteer thing, that also
involves...and communication and all ti-et-sort of thing.
Krauss: And one of the things we've found, one of the reasons we went with
the H.O.M.E. program is they screen volunteers. Most people tut here are
good folks but there's a lot of craziness in the world today and I don't
want to, I mean I don't have the expertise nor does my...
(There was a tape change at this point in the meeting.)
Bragg: I think that's an excellent program. I was very impressed.
Montgomery: Well maybe it's not out of the realm of possibility that we
' could coordinate to show some need.
Krauss: I know that Judy's going to be touching base with all the other
centers out here and making those connections.
' Montgomery: And that could be one of our questions.
Krauss: It's something you can start working towards.
Bragg: Sherol Howard and I are representing the Commission to IndeRendent
' School District #112 over in Chaska and we would like very much to
encourage some evening or daytime continuing education for seniors. People
that can go to classes somewhere and actually take part in something. I'm
sure that they're going to want to do that in the evening because seniors
' aren't singled out. It could be young adults and family members and those
people always have to go in the evenings because they have jobs. So we'd
like to know could there be a bus generated or a van or something so that
' if something like that is set up, that we'd have a chance to go.
Montgomery: You know I remember when Ben Withhart was here and he made
some mention of helping us to get a van at some point. Maybe that will be
' something too. If we could schedule our own van.
Krauss: You could and that's something we can use Block Grant towards and
a lot of the senior centers I know do have their own van and they do have
Senior Commission Meeting
December 13, 1991 - Page 25
some drivers that are on call.
Howard: That would be a goal. 1
Bragg: Down the road a ways.
Montgomery: But who knows. Maybe we can speed it up. 1
Joan Kvern: Senior Community Services owns 4 vans that we wrote grants for
to the Regional Transit Board and so that is a possibility. It's not hard II
getting the van. You generally get a van through writing a grant. It's
then the funding of the 'gas, the maintenance. At South Shore we have one
15 hour a week paid employee and then we have 3 volunteers. Minnetonka,
the city of Minnetonka, they have their own van and they use all volunteers!'
to drive the vans. That's'5 days a week. Delano, we,have 2 vans out
there. We have again kind of a combination of paid volunteer' drivers and
the same in Mound. But when you talk about adult ed classes, this is what
you want to bring to your center.
Bragg: Right, have the class in the center. But let's say it's a general
interest and not just for seniors. Then you almost have to F?ve it at a
time when people can come.
Howard: I asked Greg Shank if we could be on the agenda in February and soil
we have to organize.
Bragg: Our presentation. 1
Montgomery: So transportation can be part of it.
Kubitz: They had an article...and there were others besides seniors there I
so there are people who are home during the day too.
Bragg: Oh, I know that. That's a given. I think when our center is up II and running, we would like to see art classes and things going on. At the
same time there's a drop in for maybe others but what I was thinking of was
anything from something about computers or a lot of other things. Or maybe ll
even a foreign language. That's not out of the question. When you think
of elder hostels for example, what they offer and what a wonderful play
there is all over the world with elder hostels, you know that life Fong
learning. I mean it doesn't stop when you finish your formal education. ,
Montgomery: I think that's something that we could maybe try to get some
coordination on. ,
Bragg: I think it's a little long range but nevertheless to bring it up is
okay too to think about it. '
Kubitz: ...long range. After all Paul was saying we weren't going . to do
this for 5 years.
Montgomery: We can think positive. Anybody else with anything about that?"
Any other comments about the goals? Anybody have any bright ideas about
the opening? We were going to think about that and come forth with some ,
Senior Commission Meeting
December 13, 1991 - Page 26
marvelous ideas. One of these days we're going to have to hurry up and
think about that.
t 1-Jaff: We can do the same thing we did last year. Hand out the...offer
of installation of a free smoke detector system. Paul, do you have any
suggestions?
Krauss: This is for the grand opening?
Bragg: I'd like to suggest getting Marilee Belgum who is a senior herself
and she is so terrific. She is a comedian. She was formerly an assistant
professor of the Social Work Program at the University and she just retired
I and she is going out. I've forgotten which big time comedian has hired her
for a TV show but she is from Minneapolis and she's a person that would
just be terrific to have. I don't know if you've seen her on television or
not.
Krauss: I can always punt now that we,bave Judy but one of the things
we've asked Judy to start working on is to work up kind of an agenda to
I bring back to you of who needs to be contacted. What kinds of thins need
to be set in place. We're even talking hypothetically about' hopefully we
can get some programming started even before the center's up. I mean we
I have this room. We have some other rooms and that kind of just to start
building interest so that once the doors open it's just a matter of falling
into that space.
Bragg: Has there been any policies set up yet about how you're going to
use that space? If we start out with say 12 hours a week, will it ever be
offered like the Minnetonka Center is for wedding receptions and reunions
and things like that? The extra hours.
Krauss: Minnetonka does it as a catering hall but they have facilities.
Well you've seen it.
I - Heinlein: We don't have that.
Krauss: No. I could see occasionally, if there's a community group that
needs to meet and there's no space, going into there if it doesn't conflict
with something else but keep in mind that when we have Judy on for ,2 hours
I a week now, we have our Park and Rec folks to• fill in some of the gaps and
`hopefully there will be a codry of volunteers. I mean I don't think the
doors are going to be locked up after the 12 hours.
I Bragg: That's what I would think and I thought maybe that should be
addressed by some committee now that Judy's on board to talk about the
utilization of space.
Montgomery: I think last year at Older Americans Month the South Shore
Center had such a good idea because they had interviews with all sorts of
seniors and put it all together in a book and that might be something that
we might want to do at some point and maybe for that. I don't know but I
thought that was really a good idea.
I
I
Senior Commission Meeting
December 13, 1991 - Page 27
Bragg: That was Joan's idea. We interviewed the seniors who used the
center that were over age 85 and then that was published and those people
were all especially invited. That was a great day.
Montgomery: And that can be part of the heritage goal that we have too.
Bragg: Yes. ,
Montgomery: Anybody else?
Howard: Weren't we going to have a Senior of the Year at this opening?
Montgomery: I think that came up. Somebody mentioned that. That's
something else we could discuss. Or I mean that they could find out about
the timing. That would be good. I think it's all very exciting. No other
burning ideas here? ,
Bragg: Not yet. r
Judy Colby: Excuse me. Do we want to get that subcommittee - mow because ,
Paul and I talked about me presenting some programming idees in January.
The months are going to go so quickly that maybe if we had a subcommittee
that would be talking about the actual programming. Not the center but how
to utilize that space if we had that committee now. I could work with that
committee before the next meeting in front of the commission.
Montgomery: Now are we speaking of the committee that would be the '
Advisory Council so to speak for the center?
Judy Colby: Probably not. This is more of a subcommittee. I think the I
Advisory Committee is going to be talking more about goals and objectives
and maybe By- laws...bit more focused to programming.
Montgomery: From the Commission do you have in mind? I think that would II
be the same people.
Judy Colby: It will be the same people? 1
Montgomery: Yeah. I think they were concerend with both aspects`bdcause
they sort of go together. It's hard to separate the use and the design
from the programming. I think they do go together. And there may be
other people who want to help with that too.
Heinlein: Well yeah, if anybody has any ideas or I mean thoughts along
that way, let us know.
Montgomery: Well Sharmin can give you their numbers. '
NON - PROFIT ORGANIZATION STATUS UPDATE.
Al -Jaff: One of the things that we have to submit is an operational budget"
for 1992 as well as 1993. No, operational budget for 1992 and then
projections for 1993. What do you want to spend this money on? I mean
I need to list all that.
' Senior Commission Meeting
December 13, 1991 - Page 28
Montgomery: Sharmin, I think we need to clarify what it is that we're
talking about. Which expenses? Are we talking about this as simply fund
I raising, what shall we call it group which also then would do some
publicity and some what shall we say outreach to support the center but it
would not then include any of the expenses that go to the center or that
are involved with the center. This is what I think we need to decide
' before we can write up what the expenses are going to be. For instance
just for the fund raising foundation, you would have the expenses maybe of
postage, mail and maybe I don't know. You know that sort of expense. But
' it wouldn't involve the expense that is involved in the center operation
itself.
Al -Jaff: For instance if you wanted to have a comedian come in.
' Montgomery: Well that would not be part of the foundation. Or,none of the
operating expenses of the center. This is just simply what I think we need
to decide but in one version it would not include that.
Al -Jaff: What do you foresee the funds being spent on? A directory for
instance?
Montgomery: Yeah maybe or writing letters to people or having meetings or
anything that would be involved in outreach to tell the public about the
' center and it's operation. Or any senior needs for that matter. It
wouldn't be limited to the center. So you'd be thinking more about
expenses in connection with support but not in connection with operations.
' And I don't know. I'm not saying that's the way it should be or can be or
anything. I think that's what needs to be found out and decided if that is
an option. I don't even know if that's legal or if that's the way you set
' up a foundation. _
Al -Jaff: Judy was in the senior center in Mound and she found out that
they do have a non - profit organization status established. I think through
Judy we can contact them and see how they went about it.
Montgomery: Yeah because I think each center is a little different and
11 they're funding is so different. I know that the City does not want to be
involved as part of a non - profit organization. So I think that's very
important to define just exactly what those expenses will cover.
Howard: Well they should be able to tell us.
Montgomery: Right and I think that number, I gave Sharmin a number of
' somebody who's supposed to know these things but you know.
Al -Jaff: I haven't had a chance to contact, sorry.
Heinlein: I think that's part of Judy's, would be part of her assignment
more or less or whatever you want to call it. But anyway, I think that's
why we've got you involved with.
Kubitz: I think after we've been into the center we're going to find needs
that we can't contemplate now.
Senior Commission Meeting
1
December 13, 1991 - Page 29
Montgomery: That's true and it will need to be funded perhaps by the
foundation.
Kubitz: Getting a television and a VCR or who knows what we might find
that we want that we don't have.
Montgomery: Or we might want it for some other thing and not the center at"
all. I don't know but it would involve seniors. If it's called a senior
foundation.
Al -Jaff: I also spoke with the Mayor about numbers for the Board that
we're talking about and he said he would write a letter but that we should
identify. I did explain to him what you were requested and he was very
agreeable with it.
Montgomery: Did he have any names to suggest?
Al-Taff: Well I mentioned to him that wanted to have.
Howard: The different categories.
Al -Jaff: The professionals. Citizens from the community. He thought it
was an excellent idea. That that should be the type of people involved 111 with such a Board.
Montgomery: Well I suppose the next thing then is to think of the specific
people who would match. 1
Al-Taff: I will be in contact with you Barbara.
Howard: Who's supposed to do this? Who invites the people to be on the 1
committee? -
Al -Jaff: It will be an invitation from the Mayor but the City will not be II
involved with the Board.
Montgomery: And since we are a city commission, then we are not the ones
either.
% •
Howard: Who finds out who to invite? 1
Al -Jaff: You named the categories. The different categories.
Kubitz: I thought that was the end of our's. '
Montgomery: And then it's up the Mayor?
Al-Taff: Correct. 1
•
Howard: You have to find someone who knows those people...
Al-Taff: I have received a few names. Daisy Whitehill.
Montgomery: Daisy Whitehill. She's just been interested. ,
Senior Commission Meeting
December 13, 1991 - Page 30
Al -Jaff: We thought about contacting the minister at St. Hubert's.
Howard: Perhaps one or two of the people from the bank who spoke to us. -
Montgomery: We could suggest some names perhaps without being an official
1 list.
Al -Jaff: Definitely. I think the list could be generated. I don't see
that as a problem.
1 Kubitz: If you sent the letter out to these organizations, wouldn't it be
up to them to pick somebody?
1 Montgomery: Yeah.
Howard: For the organization. That would be a good idea.
' Al- -Jaff: It would be a letter that would go out for instance to the Rotary
Club and say, send us somebody. Appoint somebody.
1 -.
Howard: Even some of the businesses, like the bank.
' 1-Jaff: Definitely. Same with the church.
Montgomery: You mentioned something about putting an ad in the paper for
the at large people but I don't know who would do that... Well we'll have
' to, I'll be curious first of all to see how this comes through the final
non - profit before we.
' Heinlein: The main thing is to get the thing started, the building and
everything else and then we know where we're going. Then we'll go gung ho.
Kubitz: I think things are going to unfold real fast.
A1- -Jaff: One other thing that I found out, that application as I was
trying to fill it out, was they wanted the names of the officers and of
1 course we don't have officers.
Montgomery: That's why we need these people. Did you tell the Mayor that?
1 i-Jaff; Yes.
' Montgomery: Well I don't know what more we can do.
Al Jaff: Well we're working on it. As long as you know we are working on
it.
1 Bragg: It's alive.
' Al -Jaff: It's alive.
•
Judy Colby: I'll contact Mound and get as much information as I can. How
they started.
1
1
Senior Commission Meeting
December 13, 1991 - Page 31
Montgomery: Find out too whether there's any city involvement or not for
their's .
APPOINTMENT OF SENIOR COMMISSION CHAIR AND VICE - CHAIR.
Montgomery: We have come to the last item here which is the appointment of
the new Senior Commission Chair and Vice - Chair. As you know in our By -laws '
in January we're supposed to elect new officers. I think that's something
we can do in January but I just think that should be, everybody figure out •
what you want to do about that.
Howard: Must we change?
Heinlein: That's what I was going to say. 1
Montgomery: Well, I think it's good to have change. I really think it
keeps organizations alive and I think there should be a change. I think
somebody else. f
Kubitz: I think we should keep Barbara in because we've got4his ball
rolling at this level now and then we'll let you off the hook next year.
Bragg: But some of us have 2 year appointments and some of us have 3 year
appointments.
Heinlein: But this is separate from that. I
Montgomery: Yeah. Right. Well we don't have to resolve anything now but
I really think that it would be great to have somebody else take over for
the next year. I just think it would be fun. It really is an exciting
thing.
Howard: Would you consider staying?
Montgomery: No. I'd rather not let's say.
Al -Jaff: Your arm is being twisted. 1
Bragg: Yeah it is. •
Montgomery: I know but there are a lot of capable people on this 1
commission. I think they should be doing this too.
Kubitz: It's like about 5 against 1 Barbara. 1
Montgomery: Well you'd better think harder.
Billison: ...you have been very capable.
Heinlein: After all, this is going to be oun project is supposed to be
finished in May and I think you both have done a good job and you know
what's up and what's coming and that you could, it would be nice to still
have you in the spot that you are now.
1
Senior Commission Meeting
December 13, 1991 - Page 32
Billison: I think so too.
Montgomery: Well, we're flattered aren't we Betty. I just think you still
need to think about it for a month and we'll see how you feel in January.
i still a great believer that change is a good idea. I think it keeps
' people involved and keeps everybody really thinking about what's going on.
I guess we have covered everything official here.
Kubitz: Did you want to...Swedish...
Montgomery: Oh, I'm sorry Jane. I knew there was something else.
Kubitz: Did anybody else watch Channel 17 on Tuesday night? They had an
excellent program on elder care in Sweden. I wished I had had a pencil and
paper with me so I could write things down but afterwards I tried to
' remember and put some notes down. And their goal is to keep all their
seniors in their homes just as long as possible and they have a pretty
terrific program. Of course Sweden has-that first degree health program
which we don't have. Then in the rural areas they have a program where the
mailman comes and he knocks on your door and you must answer4he door or he
opens the door to find out if you're okay.
' Howard: I can see our mailman doing that.
Kubitz: That's what I thought. It's going to take our mailman an awful
long time. It's not like going in the car...but in the process of that he
also serves as your banker and goodness knows what because each senior is
given 500 crony or whatever it is a month besides whatever pension they
have and they are great savers for their pensions. When he comes with that
check or whatever it is, he also serves as your banker and so forth and he
cashes your check. He takes your bills and goes over them with you and
takes the money out of that and then he goes and pays your bills with it.
I'm sure he doesn't do that. I'm sure it must be through the post office
but it's an interesting program.
Al -Jaff: How rnany seniors does he service?
Kubitz: I have no idea but this is rural and so I imagine it's divided,
they don't have very many if they're going to do all this. They don't do
' the number that our letter carriers do. Shall we say it that way. Then
they also have a program to keep seniors in by a daycare center. Now they
showed this one woman who's husband had dimentia and she has a part time
' job. She works 3 hours a week or a day in the daycare center which she's
paid for but then her husband is put into a program I imagine like Sojourn.
But also every so often they keep him overnight on Friday or a weekend so
she has time off. They also keep him for 6 weeks while she takes a 6 weeks
' vacation.
Bragg: Restbit for the caregiver.
' Kubitz: Yeah. And then when the seniors do need nursing care, besides all
these home programs that they have that send somebody in for so many hours
in the year or so many days a week, if you need that help. Like the
H.O.M.E. program. Rather than put people into a regular nursing home, they
Senior Commission Meeting 1
December 13, 1991 - Page 33
have a senior center that's a service center. Those are built in shopping II
areas where there is a lot of activity because they want their seniors
active. The couple they showed, the woman went down at least twice a week 1
to a craft area where they did sewing and handwork and the husband went to
a woodworking area. So they keep active. They've got to keep doing
things. Also in that center you see they don't want you there any conger
than they can so they work to get you back into your home and they maintain
your home on your... So a nursing home is the last resort over there.
What they brought up in the panel was that they hadn't mentioned for all
this care, they hadn't mentioned what we spend an awful lot of our health II
care money on is the really drastic, life preserving systems. Now whether
they have it or didn't have it they didn't seem to know. But that's where
a lot of our money goes is to that drastic care. Keep the vegetatble
going. They also have a program which is the morning and night patrol. Atli
night there's a patrol comes and checks you and makes'sure that-everything
is alright. Helps you get ready for bed. Medication. This sort of thing
and then they're off and they do that and in the morning there's another
group that does the same thing to make lure you're up and dressed and get
breakfast and everything is organized for you. All of this is not paid
for. You pay according to your ability and it's like this one with II dimentia. That. costs her 80 cronas which is not much of her %00 but each
one of these services there is a charge for but it's minimal and it's
according to your ability to pay. Very much like our H.O.M.E. program. I
Then they had a panel discussion. Oh transportation and I think they said
buses were free to seniors but taxis or other forms of transportation was
on a low rate.
Heinlein: Well I can't see that coming over here.
Montgomery: Not tomorrow I guess. There was an article in the paper last
night about, or I think it was yesterday about all of the new interest
apparently by the State in keeping the elderly in their home and I'm not
sure where that, how that program money is available or just what but I
1 think it's worth looking into. See how that's coming down.
Kubitz: Well after that part of it was over they had a panel and there
were 5 or 6 people on it. I can't remember what all of them were. One of 1
them was a woman who was a doctor of geriatrics. One was a representative
whether it was State or Federal from Kansas. A young fellow. Than there
was a senior woman who was on the Senior Legislature in California, I
whatever that is and she described the program they had out there with the
directory and very much like H.O.M.E. care. A directory referral and all
of that sort of thing.
Montgomery: It sounds like we're on the right track.
Kubitz: Yeah. A lot of it hit home. Just what we're already working on. 1
Montgomery: Well I think we have to close but we really thank you Jane.
That's really great.
Kubitz: They said the way to get these programs that we want, we'll never
get them out of our Congress. We have to go through with...a local senior
centers. •
1
Senior Commission Meeting
December 13, 1991 - Page 34
Montgomery: Well, we're trying. Is there a motion for adjournment?
Billison moved, Heinlein seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in
favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 11 :30 a.m..
Submitted by Paul Krauss
Planning Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
•
1
1
1
1
1
1