2l. Minutes CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 28, 1991
Mayor Chmiel called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. . The meeting was opened
' with the Pledge to the Flag.
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Workman, Councilman Wing,
Councilwoman Dimler, and Councilman Mason
STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Roger Knutson, Todd Gerhardt, Paul Krauss, Charles
Folch, and Sharmin Al-Jaff
' APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to
approve the agenda with the following additions: Mayor Chmiel wanted to add a
' Public Announcement, Councilwoman Dimler wanted to discuss a Council Workshop to
establish goals for 1991, and Councilman Workman wanted to discuss performance
standards in zoning and Highway 101. All voted in favor of the agenda as
' amended and the motion carried.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS:
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING NATIONAL GIRLS AND WOMEN IN SPORTS DAY.
Mayor Chmiel: This is a resolution whereby the Council will support, reading as
such. Whereas, it is known that a girl learns determination, discipline and
confidence when she learns to swim and shoot a basket, qualities that will help
here in school and life; and Whereas, it is desireable to bring attention to the
' needs of females in sports; and Whereas, it is recognized that sports and
fitness activities can benefit the lives of all girls and women, Be It Resolved
that Thurday, February 7, 1991 be observed as National Girls & Women in Sports
Day in the communities of Carver, Chanhassen, Chaska, Victoria and School
District #112. Do I have a motion?
Councilwoman Dimler: I so move.
tCouncilman Workman: Second.
Resolution #91-10: Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to
approve a Resolution Proclaiming Thursday, February 7, 1991 as National Girls
& Women in Sports Day. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
' Mayor Chmiel: The second item that I have for public announcement is that we
have received a donation from PMT, Incorporated in the amount of $500.00 for
fire education and prevention. On behalf of the Council to PMT, Incorporated,
' thank you very much.
(Note: This action represents acceptance of this gift. )
' CONSENT AGENDA: Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to
approve the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's
recommendations:
I
1
I
i
City ,Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
a. Approve Low Bid from Collins Electric Company to Replace Lake Ann Light Pole
which was destroyed by vandalism.
b. Approve Certificates of Correction of Surveys Recorded with Carver County,
' Ted Kemna, Schoell and Madson.
g. City Council Minutes dated January 14, 1991 •
Planning Commission Minutes dated January 2, 1991
Public Safety Commission Minutes dated January 10, 1991
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
C. REQUEST MNDOT TO CONSIDER CONSTRUCTION OF AUXILIARY TURN LANES ON TH 101 AT
PLEASANT VIEW ROAD AND CHEYENNE. TRAIL, PROJECT 91-6.
Councilman Workman: Mr. Mayor, I'm going to just bring this up briefly and then
as I mentioned, we can discuss it maybe at greater length. I think the
engineering staff, Dave Hempel's been kind of following and working with this
' and that 's great. I think we're only getting half the problem corrected on
TH 101 by only installing turn lanes on our half side of the line. Eden Prairie
being the other half. No turn lanes. It's definitely a sub-standard road as it
' traverses through our entire city. I know in the southern half we have bits
and pieces that we're going to be working on. This half however is difficult
and while we're putting, I think this time $35,000.00 into correcting part of
the problem, I think we need or what initially brought my frustration on this
II was that every time I read a memo from staff regarding TH 101, I get the same
paragraph about how the State of Minnesota doesn't want the road. They don't
want to repair it. They don't want to do anything with it. We can hardly
I afford to take it over I would think. All of it or why should we but the fact
remains, it is the State's Highway and they're not, nonetheless following
through with what I think should be minimal safety standards for turn lanes and
passing lanes, etc. and I'll end it right there. We can discuss it a little bit
later on how we can plan to call the question with the State. For once and for
all decide what's going to happen with this thing before. I mean we're going to
have to lower this speed limit on this thing 30 mph and we're going to have
I problems but I think the City, along with Eden Prairie should call the question
to find out what the State really plans to do because I think they're being
negligent with this stretch of highway. So I'd move approval of our request for
MnDot to consider construction of auxiliary lanes on TH 101 at Pleasant View
Road and Cheyenne Trail.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second?
Councilman Wing: Second.
1 Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Wing seconded to request MnDot to consider
construction of auxiliary turn lanes on TH 101 at Pleasant View Road and
Cheyenne Trail. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
I
I
2
I
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991 t 1
H. FIRE DEPARTMENT:
1) AMEND FIRE RELIEF ASSOCIATION BYLAWS.
2) AMEND FIRE DEPARTMENT BYLAWS.
Councilwoman Dimler: It's the second portion that changes to the Fire
Department Bylaws that I'm interested in. I noticed that Article II, Section D
and that's on the second page I believe. Yeah. That we have, the Department
shall be composed of no less than 20 and no more than 60 members except to
provide for 3 additional members on probation. After doing some checking I
found out that we currently have 40 fire department members and that 5 more are
on line for approval. I think to jump to 60 at this point is a little bit much
and I'd like to see us go step by step and amend as needed rather than give them
blanket approval of 60 at this point.
Mayor Chmiel: I guess one of my concerns that I have as well is the numbers of
firemen that are available for each of those calls which would sort of dictate
possibly having those numbers depending on how many work out of town during the
day is another consideration. Dick, do you have any thoughts on that as well?
Councilwoman Dimler: Could I just add one other thing?
Mayor Chmiel: Sure.
Councilwoman Dimler: The reason I pulled this is because it does have budgetary
implications whereas the first one doesn't and to go to 60 at this time without
knowing what that cost will be to our citizens I think is excessive. And I
think if we amend year by year as we need them, then we'll have a better control_
of what those budgetary numbers are.
Councilman Workman: Does that mean that we're going to 60 members or does that
indicate where we would stop pertaining to our growth eventually? I
Councilwoman Dimler: Well it is, you know I asked that question too Tom and to
say that we're going to stop at 60 is not reasonable either. At some point
they're going to, you know depending on our growth, we might go beyond 60 and to
limit them to 60 at this point isn't right either. So that's why I'm saying I'd
like to see us go year by year as we see what our growth is and what our needs
are because really with this approval, if they wanted to, they could go
immediately to 60 and we would have no budgetary constraints on that at all or
no say in it. So that was my reason. It's not that we don't trust them but I
also think the citizens of Chanhassen have entrusted us with budgetary items and
that we should have a better hold of how it's being done.
Don Ashworth: This is an area that I had a number of discussions with the
firemen on. It is their desire not to have to come back on a yearly basis.
Councilwoman Dimler is correct in terms of State Aid. That they potentially
could exceed the 45 guideline that has been set for this year and that's
currently what's in the 1991 budget. I have again come to an agreement with the
fire chief that they will not exceed that 45 and that any additional requests
would be part of the 1992 budgetary process recognizing that again Councilwoman
Dimler is correct in that they are prepared to put on the 5 additional officers
now. And again, before they would look to any adjustments to that, they would
3
I
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
II
wait and persent the justification as a part of again the budgetary process.
Again hypothetically they could violate that guideline but I really doubt that
they would.
Councilwoman Dimler: I doubt that they would too Don. It's just that I'd like
' to have a little. How about if we make it 47? Give them 2 beyond what you
know, rather than jumping to 60 right away.
Mayor Chmiel: I'd like to throw it open here to Council. Anybody have any
feelings? Dick?
Councilman Wing: I'd only bring up a little history from Public Safety and
Mayor Tom Hamilton who addressed the issue some years ago and he asked, I think
we were at 27 members at the time and they were concerned about the shortage and
the Mayor at that time wanted to know what if there was only 22. Would that not
be adequate. He wanted to know where the number 40 came from and that number 40
itself was an arbitrary number. It seemed to have no justification, rhyme or-
reason to it per se so I guess to increase it, I'd like to know where the 40
' came from. If the 40 is inadequate or would the number 30 or 20 be an adequate
number. I mean I don't have that answer. It's just a suggestion I'm making so
to go from 40 to 45 or 60, that assumes the 40 is an inadequate number and I
don't have that information nor have I been presented that information to make
that decision with.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Tom, do you have anything?
Councilman Workman: Only to echo maybe Ursula's budgetary concerns down the
road. Is this a leak? Is this a potential leak that we can budget for? What
does each man cost us per year? Maybe we need to find that out. If each man -
I costs us $2,000.00 or $5,000.00 a year, and they can add 15 more, that's a
potential $30,000.00 over the previous year. Is that a budget buster?
' Don Ashworth: The cost per firemen for retirement purposes is about $800.00-
000.00 per man. So if you're talking about increasing by the 5, we're about
$4,500.00.
Councilman Workman: Are you talking about hourly pay too?
Mayor Chmiel: No.
Don Ashworth: No, that's solely the retirement portion. The pay is really on
the number of calls. It becomes difficult to say exactly how many calls we'll
' have this next year and is that, one new firemen, will he make 50% of the calls
or all of them? I guess we could come up with some fairly good averages for
you.
Councilman Workman: Can we go by 1990 and average all the costs to find out
exactly what?
Don Ashworth: I don't have those this evening but we could easily get those for
you, yes.
1
4
1
1
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991 II
Mayor Chmiel: Maybe what we could do is put the number at 45 and take this back
to Public Safety and the Public Safety can discuss it and come up with some
conclusions as to where the 60 would be and how that would be arrived at or why
it's being arrived at.
Councilwoman Dimler: Or the amendment process really isn't that difficult to '
process that . You know I would think that they could come in here at any time
and if they needed to amend it, I'm sure Council would open to that.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, we could because they were Bylaws.
Councilwoman Dimler: So do you want it at 45 or 47? '
Councilman Workman: 45 would be a freeze.
Mayor Chmiel: I think at 45 that we've got right now would probably be the ,
place to put it.
Councilwoman Dimler: Because that 's where we are at . Okay. '
Councilman Workman: Ursula, would you make a motion that would approve the
Bylaws minus that or no? With that. '
Mayor Chmiel: Put that referred back to Public Safety for discussion.
Councilwoman Dimler: Yes. '
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, is there a second?
Councilman Workman: Second.
Councilman Wing: We're approving the Bylaws, is that correct? ,
Mayor Chmiel: Approving the Bylaws.
Councilwoman Dimler: Unless you have any other areas of the Bylaws that. That '
would be my only amendment unto Article II, Section D that the Department shall
be composed of no less than 20 and no more than 45 members except to provide for
3 additional members on probation. So we're changing the number 60 to 45 on
that and that would be the amendment to the Bylaws.
Mayor Chmiel: I guess my only concern is that we do have enough personnel on
hand to provide the services that we have to provide.
Councilwoman Dimler: Exactly. But like I said, they have the amendment to come
before the Council at any time to be amended.
Councilman Workman: I seconded the motion.
1
5 ,
1
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
II
Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve to amend the
Fire Relief Association Bylaws as presented and to amend the Fire Department
Bylaws with the following amendment to Article II, Section D that the Department
shall be composed of no less than 20 and no more than 45 members except to
provide for 3 additional members on probation. All voted in favor and the
motion carried unanimously.
I. ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 9, ARTICLE 3 OF CITY CODE REGARDING THE FIRE
CODE.
Councilwoman Dimler: Item (i) also has to do with an ordinance amending Chapter
'
•
9, Article 3 of the Chanhassen City Code concerning the Fire Code. Basically
this is changing to the 1988 Fire Code. We're currently under the 1982. I
agree with everything. I just want to make sure that there's an appeals process
still in place. I understand the 1988 Code does have that but on Page 2,
Section 7 it says that the Chanhassen City Code is amended by deleting Section
9-46 in it's entirety and that is the section that deals with the appeals of an
aggrieved person. After checking with Roger, the 1988 Code although it provides
' for appeals, it gives no time line. After checking with Roger, our City
Attorney, he feels that we are advised to have a time line so that I would amend
this particular proposal to take out Section 7. And that's, is it Public Safety
that would have to look at it and put a time line in?
Don Ashworth: As an alternative, the existing ordinance establishes the time
line that Councilwoman Dimler. is referring to. In some ways it is a repeat of
State law except again for that time schedule. By simply reinserting that
existing section, you would be accomplishing what you're looking to and not have
to take and bring it back again.
' Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, so we delete Section 7. To delete Section 9-46 is
what you're saying.
Don Ashworth: Exactly.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, makes a lot of sense. Okay we'll just delete it.
Councilman Wing: Don, why was that deleted? Do you know the reasoning or the
purpose?
Don Ashworth: Yes. In talking with the Fire Marshall, since most of the appeal
process is duplicated in State law, from staff's standpoint we didn't see where
that was important. Councilwoman Dimler is absolutely correct in that there
' probably would be a benefit in having a specific amount of time and we hadn't
considered that in our initial analysis.
Mayor Chmiel: I guess I'd agree with that part of it. By adopting of course
the most recent gives the most stringent requirements and it puts the City in
protection.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. Any more discussion?
Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussion? If not , I'll entertain a motion on it.
6
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991 II
Councilwoman Dimler: I would move item 2(i) with the amendment to delete
Section 7. I
Councilman Workman: Would it be referred to Public Safety?
Councilwoman Dimler: I guess it doesn't need to be. I
Roger Knutson: This is the first reading. It will come back for the second
reading. '
•
Councilwoman Dimler: Yes. This is the first reading.
Councilman Workman: Second. '
Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve the Ordinance
amending Chapter 9, Article 3 of the City Code regarding the Fire Code with the 1
amendment to delete Section 7 and refer it back to the Public Safety Commission
for review. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None. '
PUBLIC HEARING: VACATION OF SURFACE DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT, EMISSION
CONTROL TESTING STATION, LOCATED NORTH OF LAKE DRIVE EAST, EAST OF DAKOTA AVENUE
AND SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 5, POPE ASSOCIATES.
Public Present: '
Name Address
Allan Klugman Eden Prairie '
Jerry Perkins St . Paul
Walter Rockenstein Faegre & Benson, Minneapolis
Dennis Palmer 9555 James Ave So, Suite 220, Minneapolis
Stanley Krzynicki 9555 James Ave So, Suite 220, Minneapolis
Martha Nevanen 9555 James Ave So, Suite 220, Minneapolis
Tom Kotsonas 8001 Cheyenne
Jean Mason, Mason Homes 14201 Excelsior Blvd.
Herb Mason 27010 Edgewood Road, Shorewood
Ned V. Rukavina 5275 Edina Industrial
Donald Hagen 33-10th Ave So #375, Hopkins
Gene Borg 6897 Chaparral Lane
Charles Folch: As part of the replat of the Chan Haven Plaza and site plan '
proposal which you'll be reviewing tonight, the applicant had requested that the
City release an existing drainage easement which is overlying the northwest
portion of the Chan Haven plat. In doing a little research on this particular
easement, it was found that basically the intent was for the purpose of draining
a portion of the McDonald's site of that direction and it was strictly for the
benefit of the McDonald's property. And it was a temporary easement to exist
until such time that the City found it to no longer be necessary. Given the
proposed site plan for the emission control testing station and the grading plan
that 's associated with it, it is apparent that the drainage from the McDonald's
site, what 's limited coming off that site, will be controlled down the shared '
7
IICity Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
property line between the two parcels and there's no longer a need for the large
easement area that is shown in the attached figure. So therefore it is my
recommendation that the City release that drainage easement.
' Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Is there anyone wishing to address this
vacation? As I had mentioned before, this is a- public hearing. If anyone
wishes at this particular time, please come up to the podium. State your name
and your address.
Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to close the public
hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was
' closed.
Mayor Chmiel: Discussion.
iCouncil-woman Dimler: Mr. Mayor, can we decide this along with item number 5
since it pertains to that? Because it is conditional upon what we do.
Mayor Chmiel: No, this is a public hearing. We'd have to.
Councilwoman Dimler: But we've had the public hearing and do we have to make a
' decision now or can we decide with item 5?
Mayor Chmiel: I think we could probably decide that with item 5. Is that right
' Roger?
Roger Knutson: That 's correct.
Councilman Workman: So moved.
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, second.
Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to amend the agenda to
discuss item 3 along with item 5 regarding the emission control testing station.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Mayor Chmiel: We will then at that particular time close that public hearing as
well.
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
Public Present:
Name Address
Mark Foster 8020 Acorn Lane
Eric Rivkin 1695 Stellar Court
Jay Johnson 7496 Saratoga
Richard Donnay 8109 Dakota Lane
Peter Moe 7141 Minnewashta Parkway
Craig Mertz 1100 First Bank Place West, Minneapolis 55402
Steve Emmings 6350 Greenbriar, Excelsior
Jim Curry 4817 Upper Terrace, Edina
8
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
' I
Name Address
Terry Forbord, Lundgren Bros. 935 E. Wayzata Blvd. , Wayzata I
Stan Rud 2030 Renaissance Court
John & Dani Hennessy 7305 Galpin Blvd.
Linda Carlson 6950 Galpin Road
Pat Cropsey 9100 W. Bloomington Ferry, Bloomington
Charles & Susan Markert 7461 Hazeltine Blvd.
Jim Hastreiter 14375 Valley View Road
. Charles & Irene Song 7200 Galpin Lake Road
Peter Beck 7900 Xerxes Ave So. , Bloomington
Greg Sorensen 8121 Maplewood Terrace
Betty VanDeVeire 4980 Co. Rd. 10E, Chaska
Roger & Gayleen Schmidt 8301 Galpin Blvd.
Paul Knapper Watertown
Dennis Dirlum 15241 Creekside Court , Eden Prairie
Tim Keane 7900 Xerxes Ave So, Bloomington
Mary Harrington Timberwood
Jeff Oberman 7450 Hazeltine Blvd.
Paul Krauss: On January 7th, the City Council officially received the
Comprehensive Plan from the Planning Commission. Although there appeared to be
a good level of comfort with most of the plan, several issues were raised and
staff was given some time through a continuance to respond to those issues. The
current staff report provides responses to these questions and I'll touch on
those briefly. Staff is continuing to recommend that the City Council adopt the
plan with revisions if required so that it can be forwarded to the Metro Council
as soon as possible. This morning, I should make you aware that I became aware
of a series of phone calls that apparently were made to a number of residents in
the area. I was not privy to that but as I understand it, there was some
indication that mass changes were being anticipated in the Comprhensive Plan.
Before starting on the land use plan tonight, I wanted to indicate that is not
the case. That the plan is the same one that was reviewed by the City Council
on January 7th. In fact it's the same one that was reviewed and approved by the
Planning Commission in October. With that I'd like to touch on some of those
issues that were raised. Jerome Carlson raised two issues. One about a buffer
yard that apparently was omitted from a plan around his existing home down on
Galpin. We found that in fact it was included. The buffer yard concept was
illustrated on the blue line prints. That map hadn't been corrected. We've
since corrected that. Mr. Carlson's second concern was towards the trail
designation on the Lake Ann interceptor. There is language that's been provided
in the staff report that we think, if it's incorporated into the plan will
correct any misunderstandings about that. Mr. Carlson is correct . The City
doesn't have the right to build a trail down the Lake Ann Interceptor. It's an
easement we'd have to obtain in the future and there may in fact be alternate
locations for that that we would explore whenever development occurs. The
second issue concerns Lake Lucy status. There was a question regarding it's
designation and future use of the lake by the few boats that use it. We wanted
to clarify that no changes had been proposed by the Comprehensive Plan. The
lake is guided or designated as a recreational lake by the DNR. No changes had
been anticipated in that and we have rewritten the section that was questioned
in the Comprehensive Plan to resolve that matter once and for all. Another
issue pertained to a potential neighborhood commercial center at Galpin, '
9
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
II
northeast corner of Galpin and TH 5. The property owner continues to request
the neighborhood commercial designation at this spot be reinstituted in the
plan. The plan currently recommends mid-density residential but an earlier
draft of the plan, in fact well over a year ago at this point. The original one
I believe, did show that as neighborhood commercial and it was since eliminated
' by the Planning Commission. Staff believes that there's some merit to both
sides of this issue but is also concerned with changing the plan substantively
at this late date. We did present the pros and cons of that issue and the
background of it in your staff report. Basically this is one that requires the
City Council to make a determination on. The Planning Commission had determined
that it should be medium density residential. I believe it dates back to
' meetings last summer. Neighborhood meetings that were held and staff really
doesn't have a strong recommendation about changing that. Again, we are a
little concerned about changing courses in midstream. The Timberwood area, as
you're aware, has been one of the prime focuses of much of the Planning
Commission's attention. As noted earlier, no changes are being proposed in the
low density residential, middle school site designations around Timberwood.
However, the City Council did request a discussion of how the City could define
' what , if any type of non-residential uses may be acceptable in the future. The
question has often been asked if the City would ever consider a very high
quality office campus or similar type of development there and in fact it may
offer some benefits to the residents that a high intensity single' family
development might not. In Planning Commission discussions on that item, there
was always a general conclusion that if somebody actually ever did make such a
recommendation, that it should be brought back to the City Council for
' examination. You could always decide that you didn't want to go that way but
that it at least warranted an airing. To respond to this, as a result of this
request in several discussions with the City Council, a possible change with
planned text has been drafted for consideration. We want to stress that the 1
Plan itself is not being proposed for any changes. It would continue to have
that low density designation. The text changes outline some very limited
circumstances where the City may, and I would underline may consider non-
residential development on that site. And those guidelines that are established
require a quality of development that is much higher than what we normally find
in our IOP district. The guidelines establish that this would have to be
' primarily office or a corporate campus, probably somewhat similiar to what
American Express is building in Chaska. That architecturally would have to have
a high quality of design, mostly brick and glass. That there would be severe
limits on any kind of warehousing or manufacturing. Densities of development in
this area would be anticipated to be lower than what we allow elsewhere and that
preservation of the middle school site, creeks in the area and tree cover, would
be required. . . .to be handled as a PUD which gives the City the most control
over anything that might happen. Staff believes that by keeping the land use
plan designation of low density residential with the school site and with the
possible text change, the City holds all the cards. You're still in the
' position of having a plan that says low density residential and somebody really
has to come to you and make the case in a public hearing, public atmosphere with
neighborhood involvement. Again we feel that the idea has some merit and we've
written it with that in mind but we want to take care that the surrounding
neighborhood is assured that their interests are being protected and again that
the plan designation has not changed. Last week we received a letter from
Don Halla referencing development of his property down off of TH 101 and
' Pioneer. He's requesting that this be incorporated into the current MUSA line
10
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
request . Staff is very concerned with this proposal and believes it's quite
inconsistent with everything that we've developed up to this date. There's no
way that we know of that we can actually serve that area. It's quite a ways
from any utilities that we would be extending and it represents a real
substantial change in where we would anticipate development occurring and when
we would anticipate it occurring. We're therefore recommending that no change
be undertaken in that area. Next issue, I believe the last issue is an attorney
for Lakeview Hills, which is the apartment complex by Lake Riley, raised
concerns with the designation, in a letter, of an area of their property as
park. Upon exploration of this, this was quite intentional by the Planning
Commission. This site is being divided. Being split by Hwy 212 corridor. As a
result, it will strand an area that is currently zoned R-12 on the other side of
the highway from the apartment site and the only means of access that we can
provide into that area is through a single family neighborhood. We believe the
park designation is consistent with the fact that this is a very heavily
forested area. Quite beautiful overlooking Rice Marsh Lake and in the
recreation plan, the park board agreed that this would be an ideal natural park
site. However, we did believe that the attorney had some merit in his argument
that simply by designating land as park in a plan doesn't automatically mean it
becomes park. We obviously have an obligation to buy it and if we're not in a
position to do that , to let the property get some valid use of their property.
I note that this same situation occurs on Lake Susan and Bandimere Park as well
where there's some significant expansions. What we've done isl4e've recommended
that the Plan be revised somewhat to show underlying residential uses on these
properties and basically kind of make an overlay district of the park. Thereby
when somebody wants to develop the property, if we decline to acquire it , they
would have the rights to develop to that underlying use and we think that clears
that up. I think that about sums up the issues that we were asked to respond
to. There's several others that are in the staff report that I didn't feel
warranted any action but we described what we were doing with them. With that ,
staff is recommending that the City Council approve the plan for forwarding to
the Metro Council. The recommendation in the staff report provides a list of
items which hopefully will direct or help direct you if a motion is to be made.
It touches on all the items that were raised. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Paul. I'm going to open this up but hopefully I'm only
going to address new issues. Those who have already spoken and addressed their
concerns previously, we are well aware as to what has taken place and also the
concerns. We reviewed the staff's decision and I basically agree with the
conclusions that have been reached. I would like to also limit the time period
for each individual to have 5 minutes and no more because we've discussed this.
We've hashed it . We've rehashed it. We've looked at it with fine kit gloves
and as I mentioned before, I think the Planning Commission has done an excellent ,
job in summarizing and reaching a conclusion and finally putting it into the
Comp Plan. So with that, anyone who has any new issues, please come forward and
indicate your concern.
Craig Mertz: Craig Mertz representing the owners of the Lakeview Hills
Apartment complex. The planner's recommendation as I understand it and I want
to clarify one point and that is he's recommending that the overlay for the
residential use actually be a low density residential use rather than the high
density residential use that's on the property and we view that as significant
change. This property has been indicated since 1963 on both township
11
I
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
proceedings and City Council proceedings as
a high density residential
development and we protest any attempt to classify this property as parkland
without taking any steps to acquire the property. To change the designation of
this property to low density residential at the eleventh house after you've been
through this entire planning process strikes me as highly questionable. In fact
it appears as an attempt to dampen the value of this property prior to it's
acquisition by the municipality. I spoke to the owners this afternoon and they
wanted me to tell the Council that if we lose this high density designation on
' the property, we will take steps to challenge the Council's determination on
that. Our plea to the Council is that you maintain the status quo. We can live
with something similar to what Paul is suggesting, namely show the property as
park in the recreational element to the plan but we would want the property to
I continue to be shown as high density residential land use area so we simply ask
that the Council maintain the status quo rather than take a 180 degree turn
after 27 years of history on this property. -
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Paul, do you have any.
- , Paul Krauss: Well as to the legal ability for the City to do that, I'd defer to
the City Attorney. However, we have information now that we didn't have 27
years ago. The fact is that we now know where the highway is officially mapped.
We now know how we can serve neighborhoods with roads and sewer and we now have
a better idea of what the City's recreational needs are. You go through a
planning process like this, not only to develop concepts for virgin territory
but also hopefully to correct omissions or incorporation new data as it becomes
' available. I think that the property that the Planning Commission, the Park
Board have made is reasonable based upon what we know now. To the best of my
knowledge, we're assuming that TH 212 is a reality. It's been officially
mapped. There are funds committed for some early design phases on the thing.
Once that occurs, that property will be completely severed from Lakeview Hills.
We're not asking for dedication of right-of-way or anything else. I mean that
falls between the property owner and MnDot to negotiate at whatever time that
occurs. But we still stand by the plan.
Councilman Wing: Would you just point out Paul where the apartments are? Just
visually explain what's happening.
Paul Krauss: The apartment building's Councilman Wing sit down in here. There's
actually two properties as I recall. One of which Lakeview owns and the other
one is another owner. The property right now extends up to Rice Marsh Lake and
there's TH 212 coming through severing that property.
Councilman Workman: Why designate it low?
Paul Krauss: Primarily because once this highway come through, the only means
in and out of this area will probably be some extension. . .Lane and that comes
through a single family neighborhood.
Mayor Chmiel: Roger, did you have something?
' Roger Knutson: Just a brief comment. First you should remember you're not
dealing with your zoning map tonight . You're dealing with a land use plan.
' Second, I think it 's universally recognized that no one has an ownership
12
I
I
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
interest in any particular classification. You have to act reasonably in your
land use plan. You have to have reasonable reasons for what you're doing to
kind of provide somewhat of a viable economic use of the property and things
like that. I think Paul has offered a pretty good explanation why he's making
his recommendation. His recommendation isn't to depress anyone's land values.
No one suggests that other than Mr. Mertz. So I think in conclusion that Paul's
recommendation is a reasonable recommendation. If you choose to go that way,
it's defensible.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you.
Mary Harrington: My name is Mary Harrington. I live in Timberwood and I don't
want to say a whole lot . I would like you to clarify something that you said.
At the last meeting a number of you on the Council had made comments in
relationship to favoring Fleet Farm as a commercial enterprise on the corner of
TH 41 and TH 5 which would be basically in competition with the downtown area
but , and then also some of you had, on the Council had made comments last
meeting in terms of wanting to know why we don't line up TH 5 with commercial.
You thought that , or industrial. That would be a wise use of things like you '
need to spend more time thinking about this and review the plan and what not.
And then tonight Mr. Mayor you made mention of kind of like it sounded like you
said that at present you were in favor of the present plan that is before you
with the Planning Commission. That sounded slightly different than what was
being said 2 weeks ago and I just wanted to understand what is the Council
thinking about the present plan as is? It just both didn't seem to square too
well. Maybe my hearing wasn't right or something but maybe you could also
address how when some of the elected officials were elected here this fall,
where they mentioned that they wanted to maintain the quality of life. They
realized that is was a small town atmosphere and I remember that in some of the
rhetoric in the newspaper and that how you viewed that and I just wanted to
understand from last week to this week kind of where is the City Council because
it's kind of tough for people to say or ask or know what to address when we
listened last week and then it kind of sounds like you're slightly different
this week. Or that's kind of how, maybe I just misunderstood Mr. Mayor. I just
wanted questions.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Basically Mary as far as the area that we have
designated in and around your Timberwood area, we had looked at that. There
were also some meetings that we had had with some of the people who own the
property in and adjacent to that and asking that we possibly look at some other
things as well. Potentially that is zoned residential in and adjacent to what
you have now. We were going to explore the possibilities of having some high
tech coming in which sometimes could be better. We're not saying it is better
but could be better rather than having a higher density residential in and
adjacent to where you're at. To having a quality kind of business come in to
that particular area. To have more land open rather than house upon house. Not
giving you a good view aesthetically as to what we had seen. We had looked at
many of those things and I think those are the things we still have to explore
in looking to see what the needs for the City is and what's really, what we
think sometimes might be best for the City. But as we're looking at that
residential area presently, that I believe is going to remain as is. So there's
been some discussions on it. We've talked to people but we're going to leave
that set as is presently right now.
13
I
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
Mary Harrington: . . .land around Timberwood. I'm referring to everything down
TH 5.
Mayor Chmiel: Well we're exploring the, you're talking about the 1995 study
area?
Mary Harrington: Yes. On the north corner.
Mayor Chmiel: North of TH 5 on TH 41?
Mary Harrington: Yeah. . .
Mayor Chmiel: Yes. That 's something that the Planning Commission has already
taken into consideration to review that particular area to see what's best for
there- and that will be taking, Planning Commission will be reviewing that
sometime this year.
Paul Krauss: Yeah, if I could clarify that though. There's never been a
directive to incorporate that area into the MUSA line in anything other than the
pace that the Planning Commission had recommended. What the Planning Commission
had volunteered to do and what you requested that they do is to develop a
concept plan for how that area might develop at such time that it is brought
into the MUSA line and there's no commitment that that concept plan is going to
make a home for Fleet Farm or anybody else. It's basically, that's up in the
air. There's no decisions, preconceived ideas that have been made.
Mayor Chmiel: Right .
Councilman Mason: Is this the time to talk about performance standards along
TH 5?
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, I think maybe as we discuss it later on.
11 Councilman Mason: Okay, because I think that might address some of Mary's
concerns too.
Mayor Chmiel: Sure. Anyone else?
Roger Schmidt : I'm Roger Schmidt. I live on 8301 Galpin Blvd. and I heard
Paul, correct? When he talked about some modifications to this plan. He
mentioned something about a buffer around the Carlson property. That would be
the property south of TH 5 correct? That 's the property you're talking about?
Paul Krauss: Yes.
Roger Schmidt : Could you explain that a little bit more for me please?
Paul Krauss: Yeah. The Planning Commission developed a buffer yard concept
that would provide in addition to regular setbacks normally required in
landscaping, it provides a greater setback with more landscaping from between
uses that are of different intensity. What it implies, wherever you see green
dots, that there's an additional 100 feet. . .it's 50 feet there. That would have
14
I
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
to be landscaped and screened to provide additional buffering for those
neighborhoods recognizing that they're in close proximity. The Carison's were
concerned originally that it appeared as though this buffer near their old home
was omitted. It was in fact omitted from this plan but it was on other plans
that we've updated more recently so we just corrected the map and included it
there. So when that property is developed, there would be a buffer yard. I
Roger Schmidt : So the buffer actually works down into the purple area then as
opposed to working back towards his home?
Paul Krauss: Right.
Roger Schmidt : Thank you. I
Mayor Chmiel: Good. Thank you. Anyone else?
Eric Rivkin: Mr. Mayor. I was in the back shadows there but. Eric Rivkin. '
I live on Stellar Court. I want to thank Paul for his suggestion that Lake Lucy
stay a recreational lake. Is that my understanding? Okay. I would like as
Association Co-chair to get a copy of the new wording. Okay? I
Paul Krauss: Sure.
Eric Rivkin: And I didn't hear any mention of a concern that I brought up last ,
time. I want to know if it was addressed. That the septic systems ability
issue. To be able to use alternate drainfield sites. I don't remember if I
stated it last time but my feeling is that this would encourage the protection
of lower density estate setting desired in those locations and the protection of
natural areas for a longer period of time. Of course the reasons for protecting
natural areas are already well defined in the plan. Was that addressed? I
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, I'm not actually sure if it 's in there yet but at the
public hearing we agreed to modify the policies concerning, if they hadn't
already been, to modify the policies concerning on site sewer to make it clear
that if you had a new system and you had the alternate drainfield, that you
would in fact be entitled to use that. There was never any indication or
implication that you wouldn't. What Mr. Rivkin's trying to address is that when
a system fails, and if there's no alternative, an owner is obligated to hook
into the sewer for understandable reasons. But if a second drainfield site
exists, it would be our understanding that you could use it, yes. ,
Eric Rivkin: I wonder if there could be a more explicit language rather than
make.
Paul Krauss: Again, I don't know if I could find it in a few seconds but I know
that we did write a draft that had it in there. We'll make sure that it is.
Eric Rivkin: Okay. I didn't see it in the last draft and that's why I brought
it up. Then there's a couple of new issues. Well one old issue with a new
opinion and a new issue. I understand from an article in the Villager that
the Metropolitan Council is reviewing rural development policies with the idea
of allowing clustering homes without a minimum lot size and this would encourage
the protection of natural areas. Although it referred to the 1 acre in 10 '
15
I
I
II , City, Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
density issue, I think it would be worth considering to extend that concept to
perhaps a blanket policy for zoning large tracts of land so that adequate
flexibility would allow lot size and type of housing to make it more feasible to
meet the goals stated in the natural feature section which includes the thing
about the trails and the quality parks and all that and save natural areas. And
yet it would still have the same or slightly more density than traditional
zoning allows so that developers can still make their money without compromising
the goals in the plan. A good example of this would be what they did in
Anderson Lakes in Bloomington. You have a multi density type of arrangement
where they planned the whole thing out into several hundreds of acres of tracts
and beautiful trails with townhouses that never have a problem selling mixed in
with single family of different price ranges and they have lakes and wetlands
and forests that they saved and built around those rather than bulldoze them all
down and rather than have lot line to lot line carving up of, force a quarter
acre density or whatever density we choose. It 's traditionally been slated for
now. I think that would be commensurate with the trends that the Metropolitan
Council is hoping to see happen because they're getting a lot of pressure to
save natural areas and of course globally act locally I think would be a good
premise to start with here. If we could save our forests and save our wetlands
and keep drainage away from, put more drainage buffers between them by saving
our forests and the areas and slopes that aren't suitable for building and that
sort of thing, that we'd be far better ahead in meeting the desires of the
wishes of the residents in the city. I think that it would avoid sacrificing
large amounts of the last remaining forests. Virgin forests in Chanhassen and
1 leave space, adequate space for quality parks and the trails and allow more
flexibility. That's a new issue. Now as an old issue, this has to do with
Fleet Farm. I think that there's been enough said about what the concerns are
and I'm not going to repeat them but the new, I just want to propose a thought . —
II I'd like to see the Planning Commission review that as a high quality office
campus status and that height limits ought to be studied briefly to establish an
acceptable limit that would be more suitable to the Arboretum and the view from
there. Thank you.
Councilwoman Dimler: I have a question of Mr. Rivkin. Eric, are you saying
11 then, on your issue there, instead of 1 in 10 you'd like to see 4 in 40?
Eric Rivkin: That 1 in 10 thing that was in the paper was only, I think had to
do with only rural desntiy designations. Not within the MUSA but outside the
MUSA. Is that right?
Paul Krauss: Yeah. In fact if I could, that whole program and the City
' Council's aware of this Eric because we're talking about getting some
flexibility for our rural areas. Right now we're bound by a contract we signed
with the Metro Council for the Lake Ann Interceptor and we need to change that
1 contract to get that flexibility. But it only pertains to the rural areas
outside the MUSA line and it 's still fixed that you can only have one home for
every 10 acres gross. However we compute it, whether it's 4 per 40 or.
1 Councilwoman Dimler: Except the 4 in 40 would allow the clustering and save the
rest of the land. I think is that what you were saying?
Eric Rivkin: Well you could apply it to the rural the way the Met Council's
looking at it too but I'm saying extend that same concept to areas within the
16
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
MUSA.
Paul Krauss: We do have that within the MUSA. It's called the PUD and we've
used it quite a bit .
Eric Rivkin: But now solidify that in policies in the Comp Plan more. Okay, to
say that we would like to consider bore flexible land uses. You know no minimum
lot size in the PUD concept . That kind of thing.
Mayor Chmiel: As Paul explained, we can't do that until we get that contract
changed with those people. With Metropolitan Council.
Eric Rivkin: Right. It seems a lot of things, changes will have to take place.
That can be one of them.
Mayor Chmiel: Well the City Council's already authorized us working with the
Metro Council to get that contract language changed so we're in the process of
doing it .
Eric Rivkin: Okay. I
Councilwoman Dimler: I think it warrants more discussion.
Eric Rivkin: Okay, thanks. ,
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Anyone else?
Susan Markert : My name is Susan Markert and my husband and I, Charles live at
7461 Hazeltine Blvd. which is right next to the property that Fleet Farm
purchased and I was quite surprised at some people in the City of Chanhassen 11 didn't realize that we still lived there. They somehow thought that Fleet Farm
had bought that entire parcel all the way to the wetlands and it's quite
frightening to think that something like this could come in when we look at our
property as a sanctuary. I will do anything that I possibly can do to prevent
something like that from coming. I understand that we live on a corner of TH 5
and TH 41 which would be conducive to commercial use but to put something like
that in there is like putting a strip mall in the Minnesota Zoo or something
like that . So I would hope that you would take into consideration all factors
before you, as you approach the plan to take a look at it and to drive by. To
take a look at exactly what's going to be affected because once you cut down
trees or alter the land, it only takes an hour for a bulldozer to destroy
something and it takes hundreds of years to preserve something and I just think
that we really need to reassess what we're doing. Highway 41 is one of the most
beautiful, in my opinion and a few other people, streets in the entire state and
to put something like a Fleet Farm store next to the Arboretum is just appalling
to me. I mean it's just like, I mean even if I didn't live there it would be
appalling to me. So I just hope that you take that into consideration and I
will be at every meeting to make sure that people know that I still live there
and we do not plan on selling our property at all. We love that place and we
try to preserve it like a santuary. We're both artistic people and we need that
to survive and I would hope that people still appreciate that nowadays so thank
you.
Mayor Chmiel: Would you please restate your name? I
17
I
I
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
II
Susan Markert : Susan Markert. Susan and Charles Markert .
Councilman Workman: Are you to the north of that parcel?
Susan Markert : Yeah, we're right next to where Fleet Farm purchased the
property. We're the yellow farm on TH 5 and TH 41.
Mayor Chmiel: To the east?
Susan Markert : Right. That's right. Thank you.
' Councilman Workman: I think there are members on the City Council, I'll speak
for myself, that are concerned about the issue that was just brought up. One
thing I appreciate for the Council and for the residents of the City, I'd prefer
to hear the name Mill's Fleet Farm left out . I don't necessarily see them as a
culprit . I'd rather discuss the issue of high density, high powered commercial
retail for that corner if anything. It could be a K-Mart or a Target or anybody
' going in there. I think what we're concerned about is the type of business
that's going to go in there whether it 's a Mill's or not so I get a little
nervous when we start picking on Mill's Fleet Farm because I think they're a
reputable business. I think our concern is for the type of business that's
going to go in there. I think we ought to refer to that as such. But there are
people that, are listening to your concerns and I think the word was used,
rhetoric during the campaign. I don't think that was rhetoric. I think that's
sincere concerns that we had running for City Council and one reason for myself
I'm here so I saw the word rhetoric as just a little sarcastic and it hit home
being that was somewhat of a sincere. If I made any statements during the
campaign, they weren't rhetoric.
Mayor Chmiel: Thanks. Any other discussion?
Jeff Oberman: I'm Jeff Oberman. I live very close to Sue but just across the
road and i too chose to live there with my family because of the remoteness and
the beauty of that area and being situated between the regional park on
I Minnewashta and the Arboretum. I'm a wildlife photographer and there's an
incredible amount of wildlife that is drawn in that area because of the public
areas there and the vision I have in my mind of a large development like a
K-Mart or a Fleet Farm and 10 acres of Hallogen lights at night and concrete
just doesn't fit with that area and I guess I would like to piggy back on
Mrs. Markert 's comments. I just don't think that fits with the mode that, at
' least the local residents of that intersection would like to see on there.
Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor, are the issues being discussed here regarding that
corner even relevent tonight because that's a study area for the future?
tMayor Chmiel: Yeah, I guess it is a study area as we all know but at least what
we're doing is letting people voice their opinions as to their feelings at this
1 particular time.
Councilman Mason: Just to go along with what Dick said, I think a lot of people
are getting the feeling that we've already sold that corner up the river and I
don't know where that's coming from. I mean that certainly isn't my feeling and
18
1
I
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991 1
I do kind of wonder where all these people are getting that. That's all.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Good clarification. Nothing has been pre-set in
concrete for that particular corner. Eric?
Eric Rivkin: To answer Mike, the reason we're getting these feelings is because
the gentleman who represented Fleet Farm at one of the Council meetings or
Planning Commission meetings expressed a desire to put a Fleet Farm there. H
mentioned about how many jobs it brought. . .
Councilman Mason: Right and it 's my understanding at that meeting it was asked
that the Planning Commission would start studying that area. Not that Fleet
Farm or K-Mart or that anything would go in there but that we would parcipitate
that so residents would know what's going on as would the people that purchased
that property. 1
Eric Rivkin: I see a lot of seed planting.
Councilman Mason: Yeah, all the way around. I
Councilman Workman: Mr. Mayor if I could make one quick point and this is not
an easy task of anybody but if it's Mill's Fleet Farm, they own the property.
It's not even ours to sell down the river. I mean when you own the property,
that gives you certain rights. We're trying to take care of things as best, I
think as we can. I had a woman tell me, she didn't want any more growth in the
city and she said when I moved here there was nothing between me and City Hall
but cornfields. I said I live between you and City Hall.
Councilwoman Dimler: She does not want you here. I
Councilman Workman: Well I don't know what she means. We have ex-Councilman
Jay Johnson in the audience and he told this story 12 times if not 20 about the
farmer that lived near him was never going to sell and he's out , they were going
to carry him out feet first and he sold. He sold.
Mayor Chmiel: And ran all the way to the bank. 11
Councilman Workman: I just want to emphasize that property ownership in this 11 city, if not nation, still gives you or affords you certain rights and I get
real nervous when we're all molding the clay for other people. We do have
certain rights as a City Council and residents that are living here but there's
an underlying tenant there, both constitutional and other that I thikn we're
running ripshot on and it's starting to worry me.
Mayor Chmiel: Good. It's good that we clarify some of these things rather than
having people sit back and think about what they're thinking. Okay, anyone
else? Okay, if not we'll bring it back to Council for any further discussion. I
think Paul has adequately addressed everything that we had some concerns about
previously at the last particular meeting to address all those particular
issues. I think it's probably due time that we get the Comp Plan moving and I'd
like to open up for discussion or if not discussion, to have a motion. Tom, do
you have anything?
19 1
I
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
II
Councilman Workman: Well, there's there s very few people that can own large tracts of
land and leave it trees and prairie grass and cornfields. I would presume
11 they're Prince and maybe Jerome Carlson. And maybe a few others so I'm going to
go down the list and Jerome's, I don't think we have an issue really with Jerome
anymore.
Mayor Chmiel: Nope.
Councilman Workman: But he's going to let his 80 acres?
Paul Krauss: At last count. It keeps counting.
Councilman Workman: I think the Lake Lucy status item is something that
fits in very well considering some of the work that we're done with that and I
think that is great that we're able to straighten that out . One of the reasons
for my last outbrust was I got a note and a petition from the neighborhood, the
Timberwood neighborhood and I don't know who it came from this time. It 's got a
lot of the older newsletters on it, etc. but it had a cover letter to me saying
that what the residents want should override any speculating, absentee
landowner's proposals. Residents are concerned for the town, not lining their
pockets with profit. We're all out to make a living and I'm not going to spend
time here to put in perspective that we're all trying to make a living. People
who own homes in Timberwood are very fortunate because they can own 4 1/2 acres,
4 acres, 3 1/2, 2 1/2 acre lots and build sizeable homes and they're doing
something well at work I would suggest too and making some money somewhere.
Paul, had Met Council's plans and you and I had talked about this quite a bit .
Had Met Council's 1 in 40 or 4 in 40 or clustering occurred, would Timberwood
even exist? Had we not been given perhaps erroneous, weren't they telling
people on the other side of town they could do that but?
11 Paul Krauss: Timberwood is a product of a city ordinance that no longer exists
because the Metro Council required us to conform to their policy and their
1 policy is the 4 per 40 or the 1 per 10 density. Timberwood is developed to a
considerably, well it's developed to a higher density than is now allowed.
I don't know if that clarifies it but Timberwood under the current ordinances,
because of those Metro Council requirements, could not occur today and look
exactly like it does.
Councilman Workman: Well then why did it occur? Why are there houses there
now?
Paul Krauss: This is speculation on my part Councilman but you know, they
I obviously met a need. I mean people wanted to live in that kind of a life style
and that 's fine and there's nothing good, bad or indifferent about it if it
suits your need. We also had a window of opportunity that kind of forced, a lot
of people sort of jumped through this window in 1986 I guess to get developments
platted prior to the imposition of the new ordinance that we were being forced
to adopt . The unfortunate thing about it is it sort of made it difficult to
plan around these areas once the City grew out to them and I think we're seeing
that with the great care we're trying to exercise around the Timberwood area
itself. But it 's apparently a successful subdivision.
11 Councilman Workman: Was Timberwood the brain child of somebody speculating idea?
20
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991 1
Paul Krauss: I'm sure somebody made money on it if that's. I
Councilman Workman: I think we've addressed the issue surrounding Timberwood,
or at least the residents believe that it's been addressed and I don't know Paul
that they've really accurately had a reviewal of this memo or not.
Paul Krauss: No. No, that was something that was introduced to the City
Council last packet and is in there today. And that's part of the reason why
you know I exercise a little care. I mean I think that the memo was fully
consistent with the directions that we've been given and I tried to adhere to
for the last year regarding Timberwood. I mean nothing substantively changes on
the land use plan. The City Council still controls all the cards. I guess I
put that in there at the request of several Councilpeople and I think it's a
valid way of handling things. On the other hand, I'd be relunctant to see that
hold up approval of the plan. The plan has looked this way for the best part of
a year and it's not changing and I guess I'd rather not get hung up on that kind
of discussion.
Councilman Workman: When I look at the area surrounding Timberwood and with the
northeast quadrant at Galpin there, 13 acres, and I see some pretty strong
language in there that says it has to be, if in fact it's going to be some sort
of a corporate or commercial entity, it's going to have to be the highest
standard and quality and everything else. I think that's good if in fact that
should ever occur but what I feel very uncomfortable about, as I stated in the
last meeting, was that TH 5 has come down to the real rub of this whole plan.
And Mike Mason brought up and I brought up as part of a Council presentation
later and maybe both of us it was hammered in our heads from a certain developer
who's in the audience tonight, who talked a little bit about performance
standards and requiring from these developers and people who want to build and
do things in this city, to build with what we find to be at least minimum
quality standards. Quality materials, etc. and I don't know that we're doing
that all up and down. Are we going about this piecemeal on those two corners or
those two areas and we're kind of leaving the rest of it out? You and I
discussed briefly Eden Prairie's going to put a first car dealership in. Ford
dealership. In reading some of the details on that, you're not going to be able
to tell it's a car dealership. They're going to be able to have 5 cars out
front . Lights real restricted. No gorilla's. And what's wrong with that?
What's wrong with us doing that but if we're just doing it on this corner and
we're not doing it on the south side, all the way down to TH 41 and we're not
doing it on the north side, which includes the study area, are we doing it
piecemeal?
Paul Krauss: A couple things Councilman. First of all, as '
you're aware, we've
processed a large number of amendments to our codes in the time I've been here
and a lot of those embody performance criteria. Performance standards are kind
of a buzz word that simply means that you don't just say you have to have a 10
foot setback or 20 foot setback but you describe what you want to achieve in
that setback and the kinds of design you want to incorporate. We've been adding
those kinds of things to our ordinance. There's a couple of things to remember.
We could totally revamp our ordinance and we're ultimately striving to do that.
To incorporate more and more of the currently available technology. One
approach that you might want to consider, ideally after the adopting of the
comprehensive plan is that you might want to do a specific corridor study and
21 1
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
IIget very detailed on that. Just focus in on that. Once the MUSA line is moved
and you have the ability to do some work, focus in more intensively on a
particular area. If there's a concern along the corridor and develop a new
zoning district and specific standards for that. As far as singling this corner
out and treating it differently, I don't know that I agree with that. The
Planning Commission and staff were fully content to leave it exactly the way it
is right now. Without any change in the language or anything else. The City
Council always has the ability to change the Comprehensive Plan and keep in mind
that this is a comprehensive plan. This is not the ordinance where those
standards would be placed.
Councilman Workman: But we are putting standards.
11 Paul Krauss: But only because at the request of the property owners. They ask
well give us some guidance. Under what limited circumstances would you even
' think about talking to us about non-residential uses there and I was given the
task of saying fine. If you really want to know, here's what has been going
around in my head and here's specific guidelines for that site. Again, the only
reason it was singled out was because the property owners asked for more
information basically on that corner. Some of those standards might apply
elsewhere in the corridor and that's why you might want to.
Councilman Workman: But could we apply? -
Paul Krauss: You wouldn't have the mechanism to apply them unless we changed
our zoning ordinance because that's the document that enforces all the
standards.
Councilman Workman: We have the Chairman here tonight. Maybe he'll let us know
11 if he wants to do that. It just seems as though that is the crux of the matter.
I think once people get into a Mill's Fleet Farm, they think this is a great
store. There's all sorts of stuff I need here and people all the way out to
Young America are telling me that, but they don't like what it looks like. And
certainly the Arboretum and neighborhoods and neighbors and greens and ponds and
things around that thing are valid concerns. There's no doubt about it. But
maybe we can get it in there or maybe somebody can do something with a corner
like that if in fact we dictate that. Again, it's a property owner versus.
Paul Krauss: But I guess the perspective here is that you're talking about a
piece of ground that for the past year and all the planning efforts has been
considered residential with a school site. Again, I think staff and Planning
Commission would have been perfectly content to let it just sit that way but
because we were pushed to ask the question of what might you find acceptable,
recognizing how sensitive that area is, we thought we'd try to develop some
guidelines that recognize that. I don't know that those guidelines are
particularly appropriate everywhere in the corridor. I mean that's something
that you need to do a corridor study to look at.
Councilman Workman: Corridor Study Commission.
Paul Krauss: Many communities have done it. Minnetonka did one on 1-394.
Bloomington's done one on 494 as has Richfield.
22
I
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991 11
Councilman Workman: Well, for the amount of anguish that this corridor has
caused, I would say it 's probably a good idea. I'm not for taking that corner
out of the study area. I think it 's just fine there and as your memo indicates,
that's great . It's expediant. It's almost cowardly. I'm not at all a person
who believes that the northeast corner of Galpin is going to be nice houses. In
that hole. By a frontage road. That 's impossible. I mean that 's realistic
thinking. I just don't think that can happen: I don't think it will happen but
I think we need to maybe get that commission or something together so that it
can be reasonably laid out in some more detail. That's all I have. Other than
that I think the plan and the report is, that 's all I have.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Tom. You went past 5 minutes. Richard? I
Councilman Wing: Are we going in order?
Mayor Chmiel: Well I just thought maybe. I guess I'm already at a point here 1
where- I feel we have to do something with this. We either move it on or we sit
on it, as I mentioned before.
Councilman Wing: This is difficult being so new and I'll let you, as a matter
of fact , would you mind if I loosen up here. I put as much time and effort into
this as I can possibly do with my free time and the comprehensive plan, it 's my
understanding is a required document. Met Council is saying we have to have a
comprehensive plan. It 's never going to satisfy everybody. We determined that
long ago. No matter what we do, there's going to one side that's going to be
made and another side. We're not going to get all the spaces filled in here.
I've heard the words, I think you used at the last meeting, it's a guide. It's
somewhat vague but the most important word I've heard through this whole
discussion, it's proposed land use only. I think we could approve this tonight
without any changes and not really affect anybody or hurt anybody. I think it-
gets it off dead center. I think that needs to be done. I think we need to get
moving on this. There's going to be many issues coming up. My pet is going to
be TH 5. You think I'm not going to be watching TH 5 but it's got nothing to do
with passing this or not . I think we need a corridor study. Not only a
corridor study. I'd like to see a task force comprised of this Council and
staff, Planning Commission and residents of this community and property owners
get together and create a picture. 10,000 words and one picture to me is worth
10,000 words. 22,000 words, I don't know but I would rather, I'd like to see
this get passed. I think it's a good document. I think Planning Commission has
done an excellent job, even with these minor changes. People may not get what
they want tonight, are issues that are really going to be discussed later
anyway. Strong zoning, performance standards. They're not included in here. I
think they're issues the Council and staff has to handle. The corner of TH 41
and TH 5 and Mill's Fleet Farm. It says on the map it's 1995. Ursula has
proposed that Planning Commission get going on it this next year which is
1991-92, who knows. That 's not even in my thoughts right now. I
Councilwoman Dimler: They're doing that already.
Paul Krauss: If I could touch on that for a second Councilman. The 1995 date j
was a date that frankly was plucked out of the air at the time. . .reasonable but
it was just at the time that we should look back at that area and take another
look. We've been asked to take another look or take the look at it sooner than
23
1
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
that but not to change anything and I guess that's what we'll be doing.
Councilman Wing: I see that as just not even an issue that 's worthy of
discussion tonight. That 's another issue coming up later as part of the
Comprehensive Plan so. Things I feel we need to do as a Council is determine
some concrete goals for this area and we're concentrating on TH 5 but I'm not so
sure that TH 212 corridor isn't something that's going to need addressing and
would be a real concern. Glare. Pollution. Traffic. Setbacks. Noise.
Storage. I mean all these performance standards. Architectural themes is a big
one I'm concerned about . I don't intend that every building's going to look the
same but I'd like to have a theme going down TH 5 and if I could just take one
minute to drive into Chanhassen from the east and this will clarify where I'm
coming from. I drive into Chanhassen completely oblivious of what this city is
and the first thing I run into is billowing white smoke coming over the highway.
Now they tell me that that's just steam from some dryers but it doesn't smell
like my teapot. And then I move on further down and there's buildings on the
' right and then I get into a nursery area and then there's a building that looks
like it might have been built many, many years ago. And off on the left then we
have some open space and they tell me there's a garage for pollution checking or
- 11 something going on there and right next to that a McDonald's. Then I hear a
Taco place and there's a cement plant. So far I'm not impressed with the City
of Chanhassen and all I'm saying tonight is I don't want the west end of TH 5 to
look like the east end of TH 5 so I'm real concerned about that and count on me
to take some stands. I think Mr. Mayor that kind of, that's probably enough
comments from me because I really do appreciate my naivety here. However, one
comment that was brought up to me that is interesting that wasn't addressed.
' Fast food is something we -love to hate. I hate fast food driving out their
driveway. We all use it. We all stop and I'm not so sure as part of the
comprehensive plan, the Planning Commission wasn't lax in taking one street, and
I'll pick where the new development 's going in. The grocery store. What 's the
street just to the west of there?
Don Ashworth: Market?
Councilman Wing: No, not Market .
Don Ashworth: Monterey?
Councilman Wing: Monterey. I just wonder if that street shouldn't have been
' zoned fast food and limit fast food. No, no. Well, now I don't find this
humorous. I'm saying this quite seriously. Fast food street. It 's part of the
downtown development . Part of the grocery store complex and have a street
that 's wide open for fast food development. Anybody that wants to come in
there. Hardee's, McDonald's. I don't care but a fast food strip but then limit
it and have a stop gap at that point .
IICouncilman Workman: How do they get off the highway?
Councilman Wing: Well how do they get to the grocery store and downtown area?
Or connect it to the highway.
Councilman Workman: It 's the highway that's the draw. The traffic. It's the
50,000 cars a day that sells burgers.
24
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991 11
Councilman Wing: So you intend to put fast food all the way out then?
Councilman Workman: No. 1
Councilman Wing: Okay, I'm just saying. 1
Councilman Workman: Unless they were all McDonald's.
Councilman Wing: I was just saying, the suggestion that was brought up to me 1
was would a fast food zone be a good idea and Paul, I don't know how we'd
address that at this point but maybe the Planning Commission could review that
issue. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Ursula?
Councilwoman Dimler: Oh gee, there's so much and I think that we have hashed
this over so often that I am ready to make some specific recommendations just to
get it moving with the understanding again that it is only a guide and that it
probably will change. Okay, so I'm going to go right by what Paul had down on
the numbers. Number 1 was the Jerome Carlson's property. I see no problem with
that and I would recommend that we approve it as proposed recommendation on page
4, paragraph 3. It has to do with the timing of the installation of the trail
connecting Lake Ann and the Minnewashta Regional Park. Number 2 is the
Lake Lucy status. I think again as Paul recommended on page 4 in the upper part
of page 5. Number 3 is the VanDeVeire property. I do not like to see leapfrog
development of commercial sites so at this time I would recommend that it is
left as shown on the map and that we put in language that would allow a
procedure in the event that we have a high quality, non-residential development
in the future. Number 4 is the area between Timberwood and TH 5. I think it I
should be as single family residential as is shown on the map as now. Again,
with the language in place that a high quality non-residential development would
be considered. And then the 1995 study area as we've said. The Planning
Commission is already making that their priority and is indeed probably going to
come up with some recommendations as early as the end of this year. Number 6
was the Halla Nursery request to be included in the MUSA line at this time.
Again, I don't like the leapfrog development so I would recommend that we do not
include it at this time. And then number 7 was the Lakeview Hills and I
appreciate the comments that were made by Mr. Mertz. However, I think I see
some reasoning behind what Paul has recommended. The northern portion of that
site, once TH 212 comes through, is definitely going to be more consistent with
the low residential neighborhood. And I think it's 84th Street you said that
has to come through there to connect that up so I would go along with the
recommendation that that is a low residential.
Councilman Wing: Is that a motion?
Mayor Chmiel: It was indicated as a motion.
Councilman Wing: Second. 1
Mayor Chmiel: It 's been moved and seconded. Any further discussion?
Councilman Mason: You mean I don't get my turn? 1
25
II
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
II
Councilwoman Dimler: One more comment . Can I make one more comment? I do
agree with the recommendation that Richard made on the corridor study to include
the Council, the Planning Commission, the staff and the neighborhood.
Mayor Chmiel: Have a task force per se?
Councilwoman Dimler: Yes.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay.
Councilman Workman: You'd better let Mason vent.
Councilman Mason: No, no. Hey, everyone's done it for me. Going last , you
know I wish I had a little pearl of wisdom to kind of tie all this together.
Going last and you don't say anything, people either think you're a dummy or you
don't know what 's going on. No, in going through this, I essentially agree with
everything you said Ursula. There's always going to be some concerns. I like
the idea of a corridor study. I think that 's imperative. I concur with what's
been said here tonight. I vented Tom.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. We have a motion on the floor to accept all the
changes with the adoption of a draft comprehensive plan for conveyence to
the Metropolitan Council.
Resolution 491-11: Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Wing seconded to
accept all the changes as outlined by staff with the adoption of the draft
Comprehensive Plan for conveyence to the Metropolitan Council. All voted in
favor and the motion carried unanimously.
11 EMISSION CONTROL TESTING STATION, POPE ASSOCIATES:
A. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW EMISSION CONTROL TESTING STATIONS AS
CONDITIONAL USES IN BH AND IOP DISTRICTS.
B. LOT 2, BLOCK 1, CHAN HAVEN PLAZA SECOND ADDITION (BH LOCATION NEXT TO
MCDONALD'S):
1) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION TO LOCATE AN EMISSION CONTROL TESTING
STATION IN A BH DISTRICT.
2) SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 4,042 SQ. FT. EMISSION
CONTROL TESTING STATION.
3) REPLAT OF LOT 2, BLOCK 1, CHAN HAVEN PLAZA SECOND ADDITION INTO ONE LOT
AND ONE OUTLOT.
Public Present:
Name Address
Allan Klugman Eden Prairie
Jerry Perkins St . Paul
Walter Rockenstein Faegre & Benson, Minneapolis
1 Dennis Palmer 9555 James Ave So, Suite 220, Minneapolis
26
I
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991 II
Name Address
Stanley Krzynicki 9555 James Ave So, Suite 220, Minneapolis
Martha Nevanen 9555 James Ave So, Suite 220, Minneapolis
Tom Kotsonas 8001 Cheyenne
I/
Jean Mason, Mason Homes ° 14201 Excelsior Blvd.
Herb Mason 27010 Edgewood Road, Shorewood
Ned V. Rukavina 5275 Edina Industrial
Donald Hagen 33-10th Ave So #375, Hopkins
Gene Borg 6897 Chaparral Lane
Paul Krauss: This request is somewhat unusual. Not because the proposal itself
is terribly complex. It's a relatively simple site plan. However, it results
in an ordinance amendment to allow Emission Control Testing Stations in the IOP
and BH Districts. The ordinance is set up as a conditional use permit so
there's a conditional use permit application. There's a site plan approval for
the site itself and there's also platting that's required to create this site.
Complicating everything is that there's two sites being brought to you tonight.
The original site that was reviewed and recommended for approval on a split vote
by the Planning Commission is located on Park Road in the industrial park. The
other's on Lake Drive next to McDonald's. I'll try and summarize this as much
as possible. I'm kind of going to dance back and forth between the two
applications. The proposal is to locate an emission control testing facility
under license with the State of Minnesota relative to the air quality protection
program that the State is mandating for the Twin Cities area. These facilities
will be scattered throughout the Twin Cities to serve metro area population.
The one proposed for Chanhassen will have 4 testing bays. Three main testing -
bays and one for additional tests with the tests taking about 2 minutes apiece.
No cars are stored on site. No cars are repaired on the site. It's only
automobiles and light trucks. There's no diesel testing. It's a very
restricted operation set to guidelines established by the State. The proposed
- ordinance amendment is required to allow this use since frankly it wasn't
considered when the ordinance was drafted and there's no allowances for it .
Working with the Planning Commission, a new conditional use permit code was
drafted that provided specific standards to insure that .off site impacts would
be minimized. The ordinance allows the use in both the IOP and the BH
districts. Tonight you're only being asked to give first reading of the
ordinance itself. What I'm going to ask you to do is if you select one of the
sites tonight , that before you give second reading, that you tell us to change,
or in conjunction with the second reading, you direct us to change the ordinance
so we can eliminate the district that this doesn't happen to get located in.
The first site is located on Park Road. This was reviewed by the Planning
Commission I believe late last fall. The staff had recommended approval.
The Planning Commission ultimately did recommend approval on a split vote but
there was a lot of controversy raised about that site. The primary issues
concern the poor visibility. In fact total lack of visibility it had from TH 5
and the rather difficult access. Several adjoining property owners too were
concerned about the introduction of traffic and whatever else into the
industrial park. Since it was clear from discussions with individual City
Council members and the Planning Commission had some pretty significant
reservations even though they had recommended approval, no further action was
taken on that site since last fall essentially. The applicants wanted to take
27 1
I
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
an opportunity to show it to you tonight but most of the attention, in fact
' virtually all the staff's attention since then has been focused on the new site
that 's been chosen off of Lake Drive adjacent to McDonald's. The Lake Drive
site works out reasonably well for the use. The site's located near TH 5 which
will minimize impact on the adjoining neighborhood. It does have access to two
signalized intersections one of which is under construction right now at Dell
Road. The other one's being rebuilt at Dakota. Lake Drive is a commercial
street that was designed for this kind of traffic. In fact we just completed
rebuilding it last summer. Also I'd note that the site is located in the BH
district which could accommodate a fast food restaurant or a convenience store
which would generate considerably higher levels of traffic than we anticipate
this operation will produce so in a backdoor sort of way, there's an advantage
from the City standpoint for traffic management from the adjacent neighborhood
south of Lake Drive to having this use in there since it avoids a very high
intensity use that could theoretically go there. Utilities are available at the
site. Drainage plans are quite complex. The Assistant City Engineer can
describe them to you in detail if you so desire but after a lot of work on them,
to find the drainage plans that are acceptable and will result in the
preservation of the wetland that 's partially on this property, partially on the
adjacent McDonald's site. The plan was very carefully designed to provide the
maximum amount of buffering and screening from the residential neighborhood.
Screening includes berms, landscaping, the maintenance of the wetland itself and
additional landscaping located south of Lake Drive as needed to kind of fill in
the holes in that tree buffer. Access was a major concern on this site and
frankly a lot of alternatives were explored up to and including last week. The
11 variety of options that were explored include numerous different kinds of public
cul-de-sacs. Different kinds of designs for them and private drives.
Ultimately it was determined by staff that the private drive option offered the
best combination of safe and effective access. It 's kind of complex but if
there's questions about the cul-de-sac it basically is that the way this
cul-de-sac was designed, all the site, well this site and any future development
on the adjoining sites would access off the cul-de-sac and all this traffic
would be crossing on itself in the cul-de-sac bubble in a very unconstrained
manner that we felt was hazardous. So we are going with a private drive
recommendation on this. The private drive would be built to a city street
standard in terms of width and curb and gutter and road construction, everything
else but it allows us to get away from the need for a cul-de-sac and we can
introduce new developments to the east onto this road in a much more efficient
way. Platting will create two lots. The western lot would be occupied by
Systems Control. The eastern lot, there's no use proposed on that right now.
It is zoned BH. There is a very good potential that this site is large enough
that it could be subdivided in half and get two uses but there's nothing going
on with that right now. Preliminary and final plat approval is being requested
in the interest of saving time and expediency on this. One thing I'd like to
touch on in the plat is, as you see from the initial survey it shows a platting
of right-of-way for the TH 5 improvement. Based upon some advice we're
receiving from our City Attorney, we're requesting that that be platted as an
outlot . MnDot is right now in the process of acquiring that from the property
owners. However, we have been in the process of attempting to negotiate a right
of access for MnDot onto that property in the interest of being as expedient as
possible with the construction of TH 5 this year. The owners have agreed that
1 they will be supplying us that document but there's still some last minute
glitches into exactly the wording that ::00ts' looking for. We're asking that
•
I
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991 II
you add a condition to the plat approval, final plat approval so that the plat
cannot be recorded until we have the right of access acceptable to the City and
MnDot , signed and delivered. I have every assurance that this is going to occur
quite rapidly at this point and I think it's just a matter of ironing out some
final language but tying it to the final plat will help. Systems Control is
very anxious to proceed on this site and cannot until the plat is filed so I I
think everything is set up in order that it will all occur as soon as possible.
Staff is recommending that the ordinance amendment be given first reading and
that the Lake Drive site be approved with associated requests. The conditional
use permit and everything else subject to appropriate conditions and the
conditions are all laid out by subheading in the staff recommendation. Thank
you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thanks Paul. Does the applicant have anything to say?
Walter Rockenstein: Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council, my name is Walter
Rockenstein. I'm an attorney representing Systems Control this evening. We
really have two parts to our presentation. First I'd like to have Dave Kelso
who's here from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency to give you a very brief
background on why these testing stations are necessary and then I need to spend
just a couple of minutes reacting to the staff report so if Mr. Kelso could
begin that please.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay.
Dave Kelso: Thank you Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. My name is Dave
Kelso. I'm the program manager for the inspection maintenance program with the
Pollution Control Agency. You'll have to pardon my coughing. This is my third
presentation I gave on inspection maintenance since about 3:30 so if I start
talking about something that has nothing to do with Chanhassen, this is your
chance to kick me. I was asked to make a few brief comments on why we actually
have the inspection maintenance program. Back in 1987 and in 1988 the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency designated the entire 7 county metropolitan area
as nonattainment for carbon monoxide. This means that we produce enough carbon
monoxide in the Twin Cities area to exceed both the State and the Federal Health
base standards. Because of this, the U.S. EPA then directed the State of
Minnesota to develop a plan to abate this problem. They also highly recommended
that an inspection maintenance program was the preferred mechanism to do this.
In response to that , in 1988 the State legislature passed legislation that
authorized the inspection maintenance program. That legislation also directed
the Pollution Control Agency to develop rules and regulations to administer the
program and to hire a contractor to not only build but to operate the inspection
maintenance network. With that in mind we entered into a competitive bid
process to hire a contractor. We had 5 responses to our request for proposal of
which we selected Systems Control as our contractor and again, Systems Control
will be building and operating the inspection maintenance program under the
auspices and direction of the Pollution Control Agency. We believe that we do
have a carbon monoxide pollution problem in the metropolitan area. We also
believe that the primary cause of the pollution is the automobile. We also
believe that the inspection maintenance program is the preferred alternative to
reduce that problem. Pollution from vehicles is usually measured in pounds of
pollution per mile traveled and we think this program will reduce hundreds and
I
29
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
hundreds of tons of pollution per day. With that I turn it back over to Systems
Control and I'll also hange around for any questions you might have.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you.
Walter Rockenstein: Mr. Mayor, Systems Control in developing it 's system of
stations, emission control stations, had certain criteria that were given to it
by the Minnesote Pollution Control Agency. As part of their request for
' proposal, they required that at least 1 of the stations be in each of the 7
counties in the metropolitan area. They also required that all, 90% of the
registered vehicles be within a 5 mile average driving time of these stations.
It was this set of criteria plus proprietary programs that Systems Control has
developed in it 's other locations that led to the choice of 11 stations across
the metropolitan area. The ones nearest to the one in Chanhassen will be
located in Minnetonka, on 1-494 in Bloomington and in Savage. Those are the 3
in the closest proximity. This is the station that will be located in Carver
County and meets the requirement and the request for proposal that there be one
in each of the metropolitan counties. This is one of the smaller stations
' reflecting the fact that this is a growth area in terms of population but it is
sized to accommodate the traffic that is expected in the year 1998, the last
year of the 7 year contract and indeed all of the traffic studies that are
present in your packets show those figures in terms of 1998 figures. If there
is any confusion or blame about bringing two sites forward, I guess you'll have
to lay that at my doorstep. I advised Systems Control that with two new members
on the City Council, I thought it best to bring both sites forward and let the
City Council make the decision on which one they preferred rather than
prematurely having one_ site dropped and simply bringing one before the City
Council. Obviously we don't desire to build two testing stations. We desire to
build one. We trust the Council will make a decision about where they prefer to
have the emission testing station located. Approve that site plan and then
modify the amendment to your zoning code so that it reflects only one of the two
districts, the districts that you choose to put it in. With respect to the
proposal before you for the IOP district , Systems Control has no disagreements
with the staff recommendations that have been put forward. With respect to the
recommendations that have been put forward with respect to the Business Highway
district , again we have one major disagreement with that which I'll get to in a
moment but I think we should point out that the other conditions that staff is
suggesting, both as a site plan review, subdivision and conditional use permit ,
that we are in agreement with all of those conditions including the one that has
been most recently suggested by staff, although it is actually the partnership
we were purchasing the property from that has to agree to provide that early
access agreement. We do not object to having that made a condition. The one
that we have continued to have a disagreement with staff over is number 1 under
the Site Plan Review. The requirement for a mansard roof on the building. We
begin our difficulty with this again from our contract with the Minnesota
1 Pollution Control Agency and I'll provide each of you here first of all with a
letter from Mr. David Thornton who's the Chief of the program development in air
analysis. When Systems Control bid on this project originally, the bid was
based on a set of standards which included the standards that are stated there
by Mr. Thornton. Namely that the buildings should be of uniform design, brick
over block and that that design was the one that was to be built in all of the
different communities. As you can see, the Pollution Control Agency is still
interested in uniformity of design and as recently as January 16th in this
30
I
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
letter, has indicated to us that they wish us to maintain that contractu al
requirement . So the first difficulty we have is that our contractual
arrangements with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency require that we build
uniform structures and the design that is being proposed is the design that was
approved by them and is in fact in the contract . We have suggested to staff
that in an effort to provide additional screening, we can raise the parapet of
the building but that the mansard roof was not something that meets the
Pollution Control Agency's requirements. Secondly from an aesthetic point of
view, simply looking at the area into which this building is going, there is
only one building in the area which meets the requirement that the staff is
suggesting be imposed on Systems Control and that is the McDonald's restaurant
and of course that's a part of their standard design. The other surrounding
buildings, including the Chanhassen Office Complex which is the nearest
commercial building immediately across TH 5, the industrial buildings of which
I have pictures that I'll pass down to you. All of those are flat roof
buildings. Same type of building that Systems Control is proposing. The last
photograph in this group is in fact one of the Systems Control buildings that is
under construction at one of the other sites. Is relatively close to the one
that would be built here although it shows one more bay than would be built on
this building. Finally, the addition of this roof is not an inexpensive
item. We're talking about a cost of between $40,000.00 and $45,000.00 which is
roughly 1O% of the value of the structure itself. Even if we simply added the
parapet , that would be somewhere around $9,000.00. Considerably less and
Systems Control is in fact willing to do that. So that's the major remaining
issue that we have with the staff report . We trust that you would be willing to
consider the design that we have proposed with the addition of the higher
parapet to make sure that the equipment on top of the building is screened from
the residences which we think is a reasonable request by the nearby residential
owners. - If you have any questions, we'd be happy to try to answer them about
either one of the sites that are before you. I
Mayor Chmiel: Does anyone have any questions of Mr. Rockenstein? I guess there
are no questions at this time. Tom? You. looked like you wanted to say
something.
Councilman Workman: Are you opening it up for Council here now?
Mayor Chmiel: Well yeah but I'm going to start at Mike's end this time.
Councilman Mason: I guess I want to hear more about how Council feels about the
mansard roof thing and I guess I'd like to hear if Paul has anything more to say
about it . I'm a little concerned about having two site plan reviews before us.
I think of all the time that Paul and his staff had to put into that and I think
the Planning Commission gave Paul and everyone else a pretty clear direction
which way they wanted to go. I think it's too bad that the time has had to been
put into that for two site plans regardless of how new Richard and I are.
Mayor Chmiel: Good. Thank you. We'll go from one end to the other.
Councilman Workman: I guess I don't understand where the PCA is concerned about '
architectural design. I didn't know, well somebody's going to have to explain
that to me why that matters in all of this to the PCA.
31 ,
I
1
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
1
Dave Kelso: I knew you weren't going to let me off that easy. Our concern was
when we wrote the original specifications for the contract, we wanted buildings
that were uniform and identifiable to the public for that reason. Also, the
cost that could be spread out with a one set design and now there's a change, or
at least a proposed change to that so it's our desire to go back with the
' original concept that we agreed to with Systems Control. We're not trying to
design buildings that fit into communities. That's your job. But we're just
expressing our concern.
Councilman Workman: So the reason that you want them all to look the same is
because of cost?
Mayor Chmiel: Cost basics.
Dave Kelso: Low cost and their identifiability with the public because they can
go to any of the 11 facilities throughout the metropolitan area. We would like
them all to look the same with the same signs in the front , the same
directional.
' Councilman Workman: I guess I'm a little confused by that. I know next door is
a McDonald's. McDonald's, they try to sort of look the same but they're in
competition with Hardee's and everything else so they need to have that
' identity. I'm not convinced that these facilities need to have an identity.
They're kind of a captured market I would think. I mean people from Fridley are
not going to come down here looking for this, and quite frankly I don't know if
you have one in Fridley.
' Dave Kelso: I live in Fridley. No, I don't. I live in Circle Pines just south
of Duluth but you're absolutely right. People are not going to be driving all
' the way across the metro area but when we designed the entire network, we just
had the concept that if we had one building, we could approve one concept. We
could approve one set of floor plans. We could approve just one entity and we
weren't in a position at the time we wrote our contract to go in and try to
approve a separate inspection station in 11 different communities.
' Councilman Workman: You aren't getting any of this flack from any of those
other communities?
' Dave Kelso: I have not . No.
Councilman Workman: Is there a testing site in Fridley?
Dave Kelso: No, there is not .
Councilwoman Dimler: Will there be one?
Dave Kelso: No, there will not be one in Fridley. Why Fridley? What's with
this? My wife teaches. . . No, that's just our basic concern and when Systems
Control approached us indicating that the City of Chanhassen was suggesting some
' changes, our immediate response was, well that's contrary to what we have in our
contract and so I'm here to just simply express our concerns and we'll play it
by what happens with the Council.
32
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
Councilman Workman: Well that isn't that drastic of a change. It's not
changing floor plans. 1
Paul Krauss: Maybe a little back-up on that. A little bit ago you were talking
about performance. controls and what can we do about that and one of the things
we've done about that is in the last year we adopted a new site plan ordinance
that clarified the fact that the City does architectural review. Now for a lot
of reasons it was fairly vague. It doesn't say everything has to be brick or
better which Bloomington and Burnsville do. It doesn't say everything has to '
have a roof but it basically says each building will be reviewed on it's own
merits when it's brought in and that gives you some latitude to exercise some
judgment on that . I think your analogy to a McDonald's an appropriate one. 20
years ago McDonald's came into every town and said this is what a McDonald's
looks like. We unpack it out of a box and that's the way it is. You know since
then McDonald's has been getting very adept at having a multitude of different
buildings that fit into a lot of different areas but you always know it's a
McDonald's. They always get that point across. The only change that's being
requested here is the addition of a mansard roof. We just received the
information, the letter dated earlier in January and the information on costs
today. I did obtain a copy of a letter a week ago however from the City of
Minnetonka who is also looking at asking them to put a roof system on the
building and their Planning Commission has approved it with a roof system. The
Council hasn't acted on it yet so I don't know the ultimate disposition of that
but they had the same concern we did. In that case you're looking down onto it
but it 's very visible from Cedar Lake Road which is a busy street and some of
the residences. In terms of cost you know, I don't know. We just had a brief
time to look at the numbers but if you add the cost for the parapet extension to
the roof, the cost differential between adding a parapet and adding a mansard by
their numbers is approximately 7% of the total building cost. I don't want to
say, I mean if that 's a major dollar amount or not . It doesn't seem like it's"
a major figure. The reason we got into this discussion in the first place was
for several reasons. There's been a desire expressed to us by the Council
relative to downtown and relative to development along the highway to get a
better quality of product. Flat roof buildings may have been the norm in the
past and some of them are quite attractive. We're sitting in one right now but
there's been a tendency in downtown to go with pitched roof systems and in fact
all the new buildings have them and in fact when we're looking at things to
identify the fact that you're in downtown Chanhassen with the TH 5 improvements,
it's been the roof lines. Silhouettes of the rooflines that's being considered
to highlight that. . . .that recognize that this lot backs up to a residential
neighborhood where there's a pitched roof system. You know I can't sit here
tonight and tell you that every building in town has to have a mansard roof or
pitched roof system. That would be arbitrary and I think that's the kind of
thing you really need to look at more in depth but this particular building on
this particular site under the design review guidelines, ordinance that we have,
we felt it was a worthy recommendation to make and apparently we're not alone in
doing it. And again, I haven't had a chance to talk to the PCA about it but I
can understand why they want to have some recognition between buildings so that
people know where these are but nobody's trying to paint this building paisley
and make it fade into the woodwork or anything else. You're going to know what
it is. It's just going to have a roof on it if it's approved that way.
33
I
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
1
Councilman Workman: But you're going to have to go there every year by force
11 whether you want to or not. You're going to know where it is. I mean if you're
going to be within 5 miles of it, nobody forces you to go to McDonald's.
Incidentally, my car's in the lot in this picture at McDonald's. I guess we've
dealt with. Dealt with. That's a tough word. We've been, tried to work with
the PCA before and that's been kind of, I would say that the PCA is kind of
didn't do it self real good by assuming that 11 communities would want the same
looking facility in all of them. I don't know. I guess I would stick by
keeping the roof if we can do that. Then the only other question I have. A
couple questions. Number one, if we're not going to test large trucks or
deisels, why do we have the large door?
' Walter Rockenstein: It's my understanding, and we can have Mr. Krzywicki who
helped run this program in Maryland and some of the other states, be more
specific about it but some of the vehicles that come within the weight limit and
are gas powered, have rooflines that are higher than a standard automobile and
that 's the reason for the higher bay. You can get campers. You can get trucks
with the camper tops on them which are under the weight limit and are gasoline
' powered but are still taller than a standard bay. That's the reason.
Councilman Workman: Okay. And then under the conditional use permit , number 6.
It says maintain site in compliance with State and Federal air and noise
standards. After 6 months of operation, a compliance report shall be prepared
by the applicant and supplied to the City, which you guys agree with. Then we
go on to say, additional studies requested by the City after the initial report
' shall be paid by the City unless the reports conclude a problem exists which you
also agree with, which I don't agree with. At a very minimum I'd rather say the
City will, I will disinclude that the City will pay for any report. We're
dealing with the PCA here again and they're trying to save air quality. Or
improve the air quality but they're going to ignore these facilities or they're
not going to have regular testing in or around these facilities? Then for us to
say that we get excited. Are we going to get more excited about the air quality
than the PCA would?
Paul Krauss: The PCA has a lot of decent folks working for it but they're often
' times stretched pretty thin and.
Councilman Workman: They had time to sit and watch Instant Webb and The Press
though.
Paul Krauss: And hopefully that white plume across the highway is being taken
care of by that new burner that was required by the PCA.
Councilman Workman: But let me say. We've got 12 of these facilities, or is it
11? 11 of these facilities and they're all looking the same. I would just
' think that they'd have a built in plan to monitor all of them and for the City
to say yeah, if we have a problem we will test it when we're dealing with the
PCA themselves in the first place. We're going to have to call them up to test
11 their own facility in a sense.
Paul Krauss: I don't know what the PCA monitoring program is honestly and
possibly they can fill us in on that . There was a concern voiced that okay.
Here we've got a new animal in town. Nobody quite knows how it 's going to
34
11
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991 ' II
operate. They agreed that they'd provide us with a test after 6 months of
operation just to confirm that they're in compliance. At that point, I'm
speaking for the applicant here, they were concerned that the City could start
asking for a lot of requests just to make their life difficult without really
having serious basis to think that there's a problem. They're expensive to do
and after the 6 months we should have a good indication that it 's operated
successfully and there probably shouldn't be; I mean there shouldn't be
significant fluctuations in air quality or noise coming from this site over
time. We should have good working experience after 6 months and possibly they'd
like to expand on that further but that's my understanding.
Walter Rockenstein: If I may try to expand on that further. One of the things
that I do in my particular practice is environmental impact statements,
environmental assessment worksheets and applying on behalf of clients to the
Pollution Control Agency for indirect source permits so I'm relatively familiar
with the Clean Air standards and specifically with testing for sites such as
this In the PCA's requirements for each of these sites, they require that each
site be studied for it's compliance with air quality standards and in fact we
provided that study to the City staff and they also, we have provided them with
a noise study. That study, which is a model using the Environmental Protection
Agency's approved modeling techniques, shows that we are no place close to
violating air quality standards in the last year of operation -of this site, that
is 1998. I'm not talking about, I'm talking about a huge gap between the air
quality at this site and State and Federal standards. In every other community,
that has been sufficient demonstration of compliance with air quality standards.
Here there were concerns from the neighbors that perhaps the facility wouldn't
operate the way it was advertised and so we agreed to provide 6 months later an
actual monitoring study. Not a modeled study but a monitoring study of the site
to demonstrate that compliance was being achieved. But the staff also had in
there a provision that any time the City wanted to, it could ask for another
study which would be done at our expense. We felt based on the fact that the
modeling study show that this is no place close to a violation, that we were
willing to do a study 6 months later. That that was not fair to put the risk of
any number of studies on Systems Control and so we worked out this compromise
which is that if the City feels there's a problem, they can order the test . And
in fact if a problem exists, we'll pay for it and we'll correct the problem. I
should point out additionally that on site there is carbon monoxide monitoring
under OSHA to protect the staff who are present , and that is, it is very
unlikely that those monitors will be tripped but if they are, that protection is
there. So that's the genesis of the requirement and we think that it's a fair
compromise with what the staff had proposed.
Councilman Workman: I've had my fill of modeling studies. They're the same
ones that said we'd have 10,000 people in the year 2000 in this city. Modeling
studies. I would at the bare minimum take the last sentence of number 6 out. I
don't think we should assume any liability for it or for a study if a problem
exists. If a restaurant in town were emitting fumes or something and staff had
to go out, check it out, doesn't the restaurant pay for that?
Mayor Chmiel: It 's their responsibility to correct it.
Councilman Workman: I guess I would take that out so that, I don't think we
should have to pay for any sort of. I know what the applicant is worried about.
35
i
11
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
That we're going to once every month get them and I can understand their worry
but .
Councilman Mason: It does say that if there is a problem, not only will they
' correct it but they'll pay for the study too. I mean I guess I do see that as
somewhat of a compromise. I mean that's right isn't it? If there is a problem,
yeah.
Councilman Workman: How are we going to know if there's a problem?
Councilman Mason: If we say, okay I think there's a problem. We go ahead and
' authorize this study and in fact there is one.
Councilman Workman: But that 's why I'm a little shocked that regular or annual
or bi-annual tests aren't built into the whole thing considering the business
that they're in. But it's for us or the 11 other communities to prove and pay
for if not . I guess I wouldn't want the City to bind itself.
Walter Rockenstein: My only observation would be that if the business we're in
is inherently one that produces air pollution, then the same testing requirement
should be proposed for the McDonald's because it generates more traffic. The
' same testing process should be mandated for banks because they generate at least
as much traffic. In terms of air quality, this facility produces no more or no
less than other business highway uses. In fact it produces less than a fair
number of the business highway uses you already have and you can demonstrate
that either by modeling or by monitoring, whichever you choose to use. Frankly
I don't think we have any objection if you want to move to take the sentence
out . That would also meet with our objective not to be exposed to monthly or
daily studies.
Councilman Workman: As a citizen I wouldn't know if this thing was causing
' pollution problems or not .
Councilman Mason: . . .causing the pollution problem though?
' Councilman Workman: You can't smell carbon monoxide can you?
Councilwoman Dimler: You can't taste it , you can't see it , you can't smell it.
Councilman Mason: But of course they already have the carbon monoxide in place
for the people that are working in the building so if that gets tripped, there's
' going to be a problem.
Councilman Workman: I just don't think we should.
Mayor Chmiel: I think really what you're saying Tom is basically Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency requires pollution abatement equipment on different
areas of concern for industries for whatever and with this, by bringing in this
kind of operation, it 's going to bring in some additional cars and you said it's
going to be no different than McDonald's or probably even less. But you may
have concentrations that are there for a longer period of time than what you
might have at a McDonald's. Those are in and out. You may have a back-up total
numbers of cars that could cause a problem. I'm rather surprised too that MPCA
36
I
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991 11
has not taken in consideration with their concern about cleaning up the
environment, to rather having a concern in causing a problem within a specific
location. Presently that's a clean area. There's not this kind of business or
additional businesses. Therefore I think not only our location but the other
location should also be looked at in other cities. I'm rather surprised that
they have not taken that position. They have the equipment to do the testing in
Downtown Minneapolis. On the freeways. By-ways. Wherever. I'd think that
they would also take that precaution to do the same kind. Alleviate any given
. concerns that the people may have.
Walter Rockenstein: I'll try to respond again by indicating that the modeling
that was done was done not for the average day. It was done for the worst case II
situation. That is end of the month, maximum month, maximum operation, maximum
hour, maximum thru-put of the facility and it still shows the facility a huge
distance in air quality standards away from the standard. In fact a distance
which many intersections in the Twin Cities area do not even come close to.
Routinely large buildings being built in downtown Minneapolis and St. Paul are a
approved with modeling studies which show the air quality much closer to the
standards than they are for this building. Secondly, these buildings have been
tested in Maryland by OSHA and by the Maryland Environmental Protection Agency
and they have consistently come up with clean bills of health even on maximum
days with maximum thru-put of the facility. So we're confident that we have
built in a large margin of safety for violation of the State Air quality
standards on these facilities. To the extent that the individual operators
themselves might be threatened, they have the additional protection of constant
monitoring of the sealed levels within the building. 11
Mayor Chmiel: Strictly a hypothetical question. As vehicles come in there, I
can't remember in reading it and going through the packet , the purpose for this
is to pick up and detect those who are in violation of emissions of. . .coming
from their vehicles. What happens if you have hypothetically 20 cars that are
all in violation? Would the concentration be much higher than what it would
normally be if you were just driving in and out of a McDonald's? I mean you're
getting all these cars in here.
Walter Rockenstein: I understand that. I guess that , I can't react to the ,
specific question of 20 that are in violation of the standard.
Mayor Chmiel: 10? 15? You know, whatever. '
Walter Rockenstein: All I can tell you is that the experience in other states
where they have done monitoring and where they have the continuous monitoring of
the carbon monoxide to OHSA standards, is that they have not had a problem.
You're going to have it on any given day a large number of vehicles that are not
in strict compliance with the standard and will be asked to go and have their
cars fixed. Now that will get better year by year as people are required to fix
their cars.
Mayor Chmiel: I guess one other question that I had that hasn't been really
addressed. Are there any outside speakers or telephones that could cause any
problems? Saying putting them in Bay 3 or into line 2 or whatever? Paul?
r
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, you raise a valid point though and I thought it was
something that we had written into the ordinance but you may want to add that .
I mean if they're in agreement with it but you may want to add it to the
ordinance.
IIMayor Chmiel: I think an additional line should be put in. Anyone else?
Councilman Wing: Where did we wind up on the roof issue?
Councilwoman Dimler: Some of us haven't commented.
Mayor Chmiel: One other thing. It slipped my mind. On Dell Road, as well as
184th, that 's going to be a controlled intersection. To eliminate the
congestion going into the specific residential area, is there anyway that MPCA
' can have discussions with MnDot to have signs for those coming from the east
going west to go in at that controlled intersection rather than going back down
to the residential intersection? And at the same time upon completing their
inspection, is there anyway we can have them leave the site and go back up to
Dell Road and come back out onto that controlled intersection?
Walter Rockenstein: I think you will see in the conditions that we are going to
' submit a sign plan to MnDot which has been reviewed by your staff first of all,
which will suggest the manner of entry to the station. We will also, as part of
the publication process be publishing a map which shows the ways to access the
' station and it 's our intent again that staff, although those have to be approved
by the PCA and MnDot eventually, what we've agreed with is that those will be
reviewed first by your staff before we submit them to PCA and MnDot. I don't
know if there's any way when somebody exits the facility to mandate that they
turn left or right . I guess I haven't got an answer to that problem.
Mayor Chmiel: True.
Walter Rockenstein: We can deal with accessing and we will try to deal with
that both through the map and the signage. I don't know how we can require them
' to leave a specific way.
Mayor Chmiel: There's no way you can mandate them to do it but I would much
prefer seeing that kind of access from that site back onto the service road as
well as back to Dell and then out on TH 5.
Walter Rockenstein: We can do that with the map and clearly people coming from
' the east , that would be the most logical way for them both to access and to
leave the site. That raises the other concern which is that the communication
program which is going to be a part of the beginning of this program is a 7
county wide communication program. I think it's part of the concern here of the
' uniformity of the station look is that the hope is that the material sent out
will be one set of materials that will go to all people. And if you have
testing stations that look different , you're going to have difficulty in
11 mailing, trying to mail drivers different pictures of stations that look
different and I think that's one of the reasons that the PCA initially was
interested in a facility which has a single look that can be put into that
material.
38
1
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991 1
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, anyone else? Paul, on the berms that are being proposed, r
we're looking at approximately 2 to 3 feet high. From a sight line from a
vehicle, that's really not going to screen any of that away is it?
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, it's not. going to obscure the total view of the vehicle
but with the distance and the landscaping that will go on top, it will really
diminish direct views. I can't say that you won't see it from off site but it's
going to be screened.
Mayor Chmiel: I was just looking. They have the option of 2 or 3 feet and I
would like to probably see that remain at a 3 foot rather than 2 or 3. 2 foot
berm does absolutely nothing. Any other? Ursula.
Councilwoman Dimler: I guess I would look to Paul now to give us an idea on how
to proceed. Again, I agree with Mike that having been given two sites has
greatly confused the issue and has also caused a lot of extra work and makes our
job more difficult. Do we go with the vacation first? The vacation refers only
to the Lake Drive East site. Then do we deal with the zoning ordinance
amendment and then the site plan and then the replatting or what? How do we go
about this?
Paul Krauss: There is rather a lot to deal with. The best order for you to
work with might be to give first reading to the ordinance. When we're touching
on that too, Chairman Emmings is behind me and he noted that there were some 11 changes, one of which happened to do with the testing. That's a condition
that's laid out in the ordinance but it 's kind of complicated but the Planning
Commission approved the ordinance back in October and then they approved this -
site plan and modified the conditions on this site plan over here on Lake Drive
so the language is a little different relative to something like that testing
than is contained in the ordinance. To make a long story short, what I'd like
you to do is to give the ordinance first reading and any changes that needed to
- be incorporated, and it 's rather minor and kind of detail oriented, we will make
for you so that the second reading is correct. So I would do the ordinance
first. And then you may wish to possibly act , and I'm anticipating what you
might do but act to reject the IOP site and then you can make all the
recommendations or all the approvals. The platting, preliminary and final,
conditional use permit and site plan relative to the BH site if that's your
wish. '
Roger Knutson: Saying that that would have to be subject, you couldn't actually
approve the conditional use permit. That's subject to adoption of the
ordinance. Until you have the ordinance in place, nothing else- can happen.
Councilman Workman: Can we do one reading?
Roger Knutson: If you wanted, you could waive the second reading by two-thirds
vote of this body.
Councilwoman Dimler: Two-thirds?
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. I think that's right.
39
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
IIPaul Krauss: I guess I would also add too that while we'd like you to do
preliminary and final plat on the BH site so they can get to work filing that
and getting the right of access and everything done. We have scheduled the
approval of a development contract for your next meeting so we already have some
items associated with this that are going to be coming up in 2 weeks anyway.
Mayor Chmiel: The point that you just brought up. That right of access. That
will be in hand so we can provide that to MnDot regarding TH 5?
Paul Krauss: Yes sir. It 's my understanding that they're fully willing to give
it and in fact have several versions of it available tonight. We're just not
sure which is the correct one. What I'd like you to do is add a condition to
the final plat approval that requires having an acceptable right of access
agreement endorsed and delivered to MnDot as a condition for final plat
approval.
Councilman Workman: Have they lost time on this due to this?
Paul Krauss: Well we've worked this out with the applicants and their attorney.
' It's going to take probably the better part of a week or a week and a half to
get all the plat documents filed anyway. We've also told them that if you agree
to approve the site plan tonight , we would allow them to begin site grading. Not
' to pull a building permit but to get site grading done so there's a lot of
things that they can be working on in the next two weeks. I don't believe it's
going. They're on a very strict timeline but I think if it goes as we've laid
' out , they should be okay. At least that's what they've told us.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, is there anyone here who would like to address this -
particular subject at this time? People living within that particular area? _ 1
I know we've had some discussions previously and hopefully you've got some new
points to bring up.
Tom Kotsonas: Tom Kotsonas. I live in Chan Estates. I'm not too sure if I have
any new points on it. Listening to the various discussions, it sounds like it's
pretty well set except, at least coming from the Planning Director, that this is
going to go there. I just want to reiterate asking the City here to please keep
' in mind the residential neighborhood that's there. That's been established
there and it 's been there for 20-30 years and what's coming in there. To keep
in mind that we have a gas station on the corner. We have a McDonald's and now
' we're going to have an emission testing station relatively in our backyard.
Everything that comes up for discussion. They say well this is better than what
could go in there. I think, and so do the other neighbors, that it's not
' necessarily true that if this doesn't go there there's going to be a Hardee's or
a Wendy's or another multiple traffic type facility. There are other things
that could go into this site I'm sure besides that. Also talking and thinking
about the traffic that goes in there, if you've driven out and looked at the
i corner that McDonald's is and you take a right turn coming off, or left turn to
go towards McDonald's down Lake Drive East. When we start talking about what
they mention as possibly 80-90 cars or 100 and some, 70 some trips which means
in and out and you add that to what McDonald's already draws in there and you
add to DataSery when they get that going in the morning in the early hours or
what comes out from 4:00 to 6:00. If anybody stood on that corner and watched
' the traffic right now without those facilities or without this facility, just
40
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
the two facilities that are there now, McDonald's and DataSery emptying out, you
would see long lines of cars already on Lake Drive East. Planning Director says
that the road there is adequate. It handles the traffic. I'm not sure what
they mean by handling the traffic. If you're talking about traffic back up for
200 yards or 300 yards down the road there now, evidentally that's adequate
then. It sure doesn't look very adequate to the neighborhood that's right
there. We do appreciate the discussion and the concern. Talking about berming
and the shrubs and the trees that go in and protect what once was a very quiet
residential area and then is no longer true. I guess that's basically our
concerns. We realize that they're are going to be commercial things that go
into this area for some time now. Obviously our concern is that it's the right
types of things that is compatible to our neighborhood since our neighborhood is
there. I purchased my house long before the Lake Drive East was there. It was a
residential zone. It was changed. It 's not like I moved in knowing that these
things were going to be there. I moved in with a different concept. So did
most of the neighbors down the line. We talk about worrying about commercial.
Making money and profit and so forth which I understand the world turns on but
also when I talk to real estate agents about what's happening to the property
value, I'm looking at a large percentage of my house going down and the
difficulty of selling a house. I've talked to a realtor who has sold 4 houses
in that neighborhood about the difficulty of selling my house and the neighbors
and the cost and what's going to happen and I guess from a selfish point of
view, I too have to look at the amount of money that I spent on my house and
what if I chose to sell it . The types of facilities that go in there, I think
you can see the decay of a neighborhood. I really do. You can look around the
Twin City area and look at what comes into, commercial things that come into a 11 neighborhood. Certain neighbors move out. It's not a threat but obviously as
more and more traffic type, and this type of thing goes in there, I'm very
seriously and neighbors are very seriously talking about moving. If I move and
have to sell at a loss to move, to move to someplace that's more private, then .
obviously we're talking about a decaying of neighborhood. Not a developing
neighborhood. That neighborhood has been there for a long time. It's been a
very established and very stable neighborhood and I would like to see it stay
that way. Thank you very much.
Mayor Chmiel: Paul, that's another good point. The access going out of there. 11 Will those people use Lake Drive to go to Dell Road to exit onto TH 5 as well?
Would there be any sense of direction given there once that road is in fully?
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, yeah. There should be. First of all I don't know what 1
the mix is. I know the traffic report has some guesses as to where people will
be coming from that are going to use this site but this site is, you know just
when you know the others one are located, it's going to draw people from much of
Eden Prairie, from southern Minnetonka, from those communities and they will be
approaching the site from the east and if we get the signage package and the map
package that we'd like to have, they will be intercepted at Dell Road and
brought into the site at Lake Drive. I'd also point out that in our saying that
the road is sufficient to handle the traffic, clearly Lake Drive was built for
this in mind. I mean we just finished that job. The missing link in this right
now is Dakota and as the Council is aware, Dakota is going to be rebuilt and
I believe it's got 2 lanes in each direction plus a turn lane and that's going
to happen starting this summer. There are clearly significant improvements that
are going to happen in there. I don't want to give the impression that there's '
41
I
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
II
not going to be an increase in traffic, either from this site or the adjacent
site that's being created, or probably more importantly all the vacant land in
front of DataSery that is now on the market as well too. There is clearly going
to be significant volumes of traffic. Now hopefully we can capture as much of
that as possible at Dell Road and we'll make every effort to do that but I don't
want to say that it 's not going to change. It clearly is going to change.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Richard, do you have anything?
' Councilman Wing: As Paul was talking I was thinking what's next? What's going
in next door to it? Is it going to be any lesser evil, if I use that word for
the station but a lot of development going in Paul. I don't know what to do for
the residents. I guess we've talked, the roof issue hasn't come up yet and it's
further down the road but it seems to me if all these going in, if we could
protect that neighborhood with additional berming, additional trees. There's
got to be more we can do for them to make this more environmental impact less.
I don't , I'm. . . lost in the discussions here and stop there.
' Paul Krauss: If I can respond to that briefly. This site's pretty ideally
suited for what we're doing. I mean physically the active part of this site is
located about as far away from the neighborhood as you can possibly have it and
still have it south of TH 5. As to what's going to happen next door, Councilman
Wing I wish I had a better idea but I don't and I suppose it's subject to the
vagaries of .the market and whoever comes up with a proposal that's consistent
with the ordinance first. We are sensitive to the needs of the neighborhood. I
should point out too that it 's my understanding that the underlying property
owners who are here tonight, Chanhassen Holding, when they originally platted
that area they left a strip of land that they landscaped that now has trees on
it on the south side of Lake Drive specifically to buffer those homes and those
trees are not matured and provide a fairly good buffer and we're asking them to
supplement that by doing some additional landscaping over there. Lastly, as
I recall when Lake Drive was rebuilt, it was shifted somewhat to the north, you
' know not significantly but somewhat further away from those homes to even leave
more of a buffer concept on the south side. That land adjacent to most of the
homes is permanently set aside for that . It's not developable. It 's always
going to be a buffer.
Tom Kotsonas: I'd like to counter something that Paul said. First of all, the
landscaping that goes down Lake Drive East was not put there by the owners of
that property. They allowed some people that lived in those houses to plant all
those trees years ago. Alright? They were told you can go ahead and do it but
we're not spending a penny on it. You just go ahead and do it. Secondly, the
road that went in this summer went at least 3 feet to the south and they have
gone to the north also and there was a section of all those trees, at least 6
feet off of every one of those trees when it got near the road that was sliced
off. You go down there and look, they're cut right off so I don't know what
you're looking at but you're not looking at the same thing that we're looking
at. And it was the intention of the people when they put that road in there in
the first place, they wanted to. The developers did not out of the kindness of
their heart put that road where it is because they wanted to go right up to the
property line and they would have taken every one of those trees out if it
hadn't been for some of the neighbors who started yelling and screaming so I
don't understand some of the things. And if you look at the road plans and look
42
I
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991 II
at where the road went, the road did not go just north. Some of the road went
further into that property which required trees. Branches of those trees be cut
off so you have trees going up 30 feet in one direction. Branches going 20-30
feet south, 6 feet north a big slice of it going down. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thanks. Did you want to say something? 1
Craig Mertz: Craig Mertz, 510 Laredo Lane in Chanhassen. Speaking as a citizen
rather than anyone's attorney tonight, I would urge the Council to use the ,
industrial park site rather than the site on Lake Drive. I think this activity
is more appropriate to the industrial park than to the margins of the Chanhassen
Estates neighborhood. '
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other discussion? If not.
Councilwoman Dimler: I guess I would like to bring up one. I know that when ,
we, in a business neighborhood type of development, I'm thinking of TH 7 and
TH 41, the neighbors complained about the lighting there. Is there any way that
we can minimize the lighting effect? I know those lights are going to be on all
night and that will be a problem for those whose bedrooms are right.
Paul Krauss: Right . Councilwoman Dimler, as I recall I believe it was due to
your suggestion. When we wrote the new site plan ordinance last year, we
incorporated.
Councilwoman Dimler: I know you're meeting the requirements but it there some '
way we can cut down the number of lights?
Paul Krauss: We hold them to that requirement which has no more than half a
foot candle at the property line and all the lights have to be shielded and
downcast and they have submitted an earlier drawing that showed how that worked
and they were fully consistent with that. I'd also point out too that this use
is not , maybe they can describe their hours of operation but as I recall,
they're somewhat limited in terms of evening operations and weekend operations
as well so there's not going to be a need for huge amounts of lighting anyway.
But it's not on their plan now and we will.
Councilwoman Dimler: But the lights will be on all night as I understand.
Paul Krauss: I'm sure some will for security, yes. But we verify their ,
lighting plan based on the site plan whenever they pull a building permit.
Councilwoman Dimler: I'm just asking can we reduce the number? I think they ,
have 4 or 5 proposed that are going to be on all night. Is that necessary?
Will 2 do it? Will 3 do it?
Paul Krauss: I would believe the concerns are primarily security when the place
is closed. Possibly the applicant can address that.
Councilman Wing: This building in it's appearance, I mean I hate to even open 1
up the subject of the other site, but it certainly does fit in to that building
grouping down there better than up on this TH 5 area. On the other hand, the
43
i
I
11 City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
access is so much better. Is the first step we have to do the ordinance or is
11 the issue of the roof and everything else?
Mayor Chmiel: I think probably one would be, if so desired, one could reject
the IOP site. Second would be the first reading to the ordinance.
Councilman Wing: Where does that roof fit in?
Mayor Chmiel: The roof would come in to as a conditional use requirement.
Paul Krauss: It would be under the site plan review.
Mayor Chmiel: Or the site plan review.
Councilman Wing: Which is later discussions?
Councilman Workman: Well let's move it.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, would anyone like to make a motion?
Councilman Workman: I'm not entirely sure why we have to reject a plan that we
' really haven't reviewed. Can't build this thing in two spots.
Mayor Chmiel: Maybe as a condition of the contract.
Councilman Workman: Who's contract?
Mayor Chmiel: Between them and the former property owner as a condition.
Councilman Workman: I don't understand why we've got to deal with their
contract .
' Councilwoman Dimler: It should be their choice of sites.
IMayor Chmiel: I think it probably is one of the reasons.
Councilman Workman: I don't know what kind of a motion that requires because I
don't know what , but I would move to approve the BH site. That I do know.
Mayor Chmiel: Alright.
Councilman Workman: Is that the first thing we're going to do?
Mayor Chmiel: We can go through that particular, the reading is something that
' we have to do.
Roger Knutson: What you could do for example is move the first reading with the
use being at the BH site or IOP site, designating which one. That takes care of
the first reading.
Councilwoman Dimler: Would this also be the appropriate time then to move item
3 in? The vacation?
I 44
I
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
Mayor Chmiel: Yes, that was something I was going to bring back up as it's
being carried over. I
Councilman Workman: Nobody likes my simple motion?
Councilwoman Dimler: Well it gets.us moving in a, direction. I
Mayor Chmiel: It gets us going somewhere.
Paul Krauss: I'm sorry, did I miss something? ■
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah. How are we doing? ,
Paul Krauss: Well you're doing alright.
Councilman Workman: So I move to approve the first reading of the Zoning I
Ordinance Amendment to allow emission control testing stations as conditional
uses in the BH. Do you want me to add onto that or do we want to vote on that?
Let's vote on that.
Roger Knutson: It 'd be appropriate to take them one at a time.
Councilwoman Dimler: Piece by piece, yeah. ,
Mayor Chmiel: I think so because there's so many things that are tied into
this. It 'd probably be better if we did it that way. Okay, there's a motion on '
the floor.
Councilwoman Dimler: Second. I
Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to approve the first
reading of amendments to Section 20-293, 20-814 and 20-714 of the Chanhassen
Zoning Ordinance to allow emission control testing stations as a conditional use
permit in the BH district. All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously.
Mayor Chmiel: Second item. Rejection of the IOP site proper Roger?
Roger Knutson: If you wanted to you could move to reject the IOP site since
it 's not allowed as. . .of the zoning district.
Councilman Workman: Is there something that isn't there? It doesn't make sense
to me so I won't make a motion to that.
Mayor Chmiel: A motion as stated by our City Attorney.
Councilwoman Dimler: It's not necessary to reject something that isn't there, '
in my opinion.
Roger Knutson: You could just pass it as moot since it's not under a ,
conditional use for that district .
Mayor Chmiel: Good point. '
45
i
I
IICity Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
Councilman Workman: Should we move to item 3?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
11 Councilman Workman: I move vacation of surface drainage and utility easement ,
emission control testing station located north of Lake Drive East , blah, blah,
blah south of TH 5, Pope Associates.
Councilwoman Dimler: I'll second that .
Resolution #91-12: Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to
approve the vacation of the surface drainage and utility easement upon approval
and completion of the replat of Chan Haven 2nd and site plan for the Emission
Control Testing Station located north of Lake Drive East, East of Dakota Avenue
and south of Highway 5. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Chmiel: Now I believe we would have to go back into now the conditional
use permit itself.
Councilman Wing: Are we going to waive the second reading?
Councilman Workman: No, because we're coming back with it in 2 weeks.
Mayor Chmiel: We have something on the table with the conditional use permit
with the City Council. Conditional Use Permit #90-5 subject to the following
conditions with some of the removals of Tom's concern on item 6. Can we get
something phrased differently in there Roger?
Councilwoman Dimler: Where are we? Could you tell us the page?
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, you're on page 22.
Councilwoman Dimler: On 5(B)?
Mayor Chmiel: On 5(B).
Roger Knutson: Again, to repeat myself. On C 1, 2, and 3. All three items.
If the Council. . .to approve them, it'd be conditional approval on all three of
these that you must approve the second reading of the ordinance at the next
meeting.
Councilwoman Dimler: So actually we don't need to do anything else until the
second reading? Is that what you're saying?
Mayor Chmiel: He's saying combine it with the second reading at the same
particular meeting. Is that what you're saying?
Roger Knutson: Yeah, you could table this if you wanted to. You technically
can't approve this until you get the ordinance in place or you could tentatively
approve it subject to. You would say we approve the conditional use permit if
we pass the ordinance.
Councilman Workman: You're talking about the BH site?
46
I
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991 II
Roger Knutson: Correct .
Councilman Workman: Should we go ahead while it's fresh in our mind to approve I
the conditional?
Mayor Chmiel: Go. I
Councilman Workman: Approve the conditional use permit application with an
amendment to Conditional Use Permit Section III, on page 22 number 6.
Subtracting additional studies requested by the City after the initial report
shall be paid by the City unless the reports conclude a problem exists. And to
leave intact on page 20, number 1. I'm not changing that I guess.
Mayor Chmiel: No. That's going to remain as is.
Councilman Workman: So just with the one change.
Councilwoman Dimler: I'll second that .
Paul Krauss: You had discussed two additional conditions that you may wish to
add. One was that the berms be a minimum of 3 feet high as a condition added to
the site plan. The second was that as a condition of a conditional use permit,
that there be no outside speakers. ,
Mayor Chmiel: Or telephones.
Councilman Workman: And that 's conditional on passage of the ordinance. '
Councilwoman Dimler: Do you accept those items?
Councilman Workman: I do.
Mayor Chmiel: And that would be as a friendly amendment . - I
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, and I'll second those.
Paul Krauss: Could I make a request that you not make the final plat approval 1
contingent because they'd like to go get that plat filed in the ensuing 2 weeks?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Yeah, we can do that. ,
Councilman Workman: Are we approving the conditional use, the site plan and the
replat all in one pop here? I
Roger Knutson: No, just conditional use.
Councilman Workman: Okay. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, I have a motion on the floor with a second. Discussion.
Councilman Wing: I just wanted to discuss this mansard roof. Steve, I don't
recall the feelings of the Planning Commission that night. Was that a unanimous
vote for that mansard roof? I remember you discussed it at length. I
47
I
I
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
Steve Emmings: What I remember of the discussion was just that people were,
11 didn't like the flat roof and I think also because of the proximity to the
residential neighborhood, we felt that something like that. Whether it 's
mansard or something else but something other than a flat roof that would be
more compatible with the residential. Beyond that I don't think anybody
cared. . .
Councilman Wing: I'll just on the record say that I don't like mansard roofs.
Every time I see one, I look at them in number of overhead swings with an ax to
get at the fire should one ever occur in that type of structure. So that's just
my personal opinion. Would we be better suited in dropping the mansard roof and
converting that into additional berms, trees, landscaping appearance for this
building? Would that better suit the neighborhood and better serve the
residents of the area? In fact isolate that a little bit more and camoflauge it -
even a little bit more in lieu of mansard roof for appearance sake. That's my
only comment .
Mayor Chmiel: The reason for the appearance sake basically is so it blends in
more with the existing neighborhood. So we have a motion on the floor with a
second.
Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to approve, conditioned
on passage of the second reading of the Zoning Ordinance Amendment, Conditional
Use Permit #90-5 subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with conditions of site plan and plat approval.
2. Provide direction maps reviewed by staff with each notice that vehicle
testing is due. The maps shall clearly illustrate and promote entering the
site from Dell Road rather than Dakota Avenue.
3. Applicant is required to maintain contract to provide services with the
State of Minnesota.
4. No repairs to be performed or gas or parts sold at the site.
5. No testing of diesels or heavy trucks to be performed at. the site.
6. Maintain site in compliance with state and federal air and noise standards.
After 6 months of operation, a compliance report shall be prepared by the
applicant and supplied to the City.
7. All vehicle stacking and parking to be in designated areas. No parking or
stacking is allowed in fire lanes, drive aisles, access drives or public
right-of-way.
11 8. Work with MnDot to erect directional signs along Hwy 5 that direct traffic
to the site via Dell Road.
9. There shall be no outside speakers or telephones. •
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
r
48
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991 II
Councilman Workman: Then I would move to approve the Site Plan approval for
construction of a 4,042 square foot emission control testing station as in the I
plan which would include the mansard roof.
Roger Knutson: Conditioned upon passage of the ordinance. I
Councilman Workman: Correct .
Gene Borg: . . .I'm the owner of the McDonald's that you've been talking about 1
all night . I had 3 concerns on the site plan. One's been addressed with the
wetland. . . There's one concern with water drainage. Paul assures me, off my
back corner you guys take out the easement and water drainage I think drains out
would be partially on their property. On the water drainage. I would like to
see something in writing or along that order that will guarantee that that water
flow off the back corner of my property actually goes down into, the highway is
suppose to put in a new sewer and stuff but it's going to cross their land
somewhat.
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, the Assistant City Engineer possibly can provide some I
light on that but basically right now the McDonald's site sheet drains across a
portion of the proposed emission control site. The easement that covers that
drainage is extraordinarily large and covers much of the property, most of which
is not where the water goes. When Systems Control builds up their parking lot,
basically the water which now kind of flows, sheet drains towards the northeast ,
is going to be channeled in sort of a ditch that will flow right into a catch
basin on TH 5 and there is an easement that we're getting in the plat that
covers that drainage and replaces the one that we'll be giving up. Charles, is
there anything else to add to that?
Charles Folch: No. That pretty well covers it. 11
Gene Borg: Just so I know it 's going on. And also there's going to be a
portion of the people that have their cars checked are going to walk across
to McDonald's. I know they say it's going to be 2 minutes more or less to check
a car. I've seen their lanes and they have their slow periods and busy periods.
There's times when they're going to be stacking 10. They could stack probably
30 cars in there if you took it down the street, depending on how many employees
they have working at the time so if you take 2 minutes a car. If you had 10
cars, that 's 20 minutes for the last car. Some people are going to walk across.
I spent a lot of money landscaping and I would like to see some sort of
sidewalks or something between the properties.
Mayor Chmiel: The question that I have, good try. I understand what you're 1
saying. Are they not required to stay within their vehicles at all given times?
Gene Borg: Well, requiring them what to do. I
Walter Rockenstein: The only time that people aren't required to stay in their
cars, if they failed a test and they're coming back for a waiver test and they
go in the side bay. Then the car is actually stopped and the hood's opened and
they may get out of the car as well but otherwise those lanes will be moving. If
you have 20 cars there and 3 bays, you'll put the cars through those bays in a
little under 8 or 9 minutes. So people are not going to want to get out of
49
1
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
their cars because those lanes will be moving forward constantly.
Gene Borg: But you're assuming there's one person in the car.
tWalter Rockenstein: Just talking with Mr. Kryzwicki, we don't want to put a
sidewalk in to encourage people to get out of their cars and walk across to
the McDonald's.
Gene Borg: I'm just looking for. . .being covered. Maybe they could repair the
grass because what will happen over time there will be path through there over
the grass. That will happen. Now if they would like to repair the grass if it
happens, I'd be more than happy for that. Or do something to keep that from
happening.
' Walter Rockenstein: If that becomes a problem, we'd be happy to repair the
grass.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you.
11 Councilman Workman: Did we second my?
Councilwoman Dimler: Yes, it's been seconded.
Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to approve Site Plan
Review *90-11 as shown on site plan dated December 3, 1990, conditioned on
approval of the second reading of the Zoning Ordinance amendment and subject to
the following conditions:
Ii. The applicant must revise plans to include a mansard roof on the proposed
building. Plans must be submitted and must be approved by city staff.
Plans should also illustrate screening for HVAC equipment. Wood slat
Iscreens are unacceptable.
2. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting any signage on
site. Provide a sign plan incorporating the following elements.
a. Monument signage incorporating waiting time information.
b. On site directional signage as outlined in the report.
c. MnDot/Hwy 5 signage to direct westbound traffic from Eden Prairie to
11 enter the site via the Dell Road/Lake Drive intersection subject to
MnDot approval.
3. The driveway shall be designed to incorporate a 36' width curb and gutter,
11 storm sewer and a 9 ton design. Plans to be approved by the City. A
permanent cross easement and maintenance agreement acceptable to the City
Attorney shall be drafted and filed against all current and future lots in
the Chan Haven Plaza 3rd Addition plat. A restriction shall be filed
indicating that all lots in the plat and any future divisions are to gain
access via the private drive. Provide a stop sign at the intersection of
the private drive and Lake Drive.
50
I
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991 II
4. The applicant shall obtain a permit from the Watershed District and comply 11 with all conditions of the permit. Drainage plans shall be revised as
outlined in the report and shall be submitted to city staff for approval.
When the easterly portion of Chan Haven Plaza 3rd Addition develops in the
future, the storm sewer outlet located east of the private drive shall be
extended to the future detention pond and the temporary ditch shall be
eliminated.
5. Type III erosion control shall be used along the edge of the Class B 1
wetland.
6. Plans for landscaping south of Lake Drive shall be refined to avoid existing I
trees and to ensure that all material is located on private property in a
protective easement running in favor of the city. The applicant shall also
provide staff with a detailed cost estimate of landscaping to be used in
calculating the required financial guarantees. These guarantees must be
posted prior to building permit issuance.
7. The berms shall be a minimum of 3 feet in height. 1
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Chmiel: What else do we need? Is that it?
Councilman Workman: I move the replat of Lot 2, Block 1 Chan Haven Plaza 2nd
Addition into one lot and one outlot following the same. No, not following the
same condition.
Paul Krauss: But there is a condition to add if you will that basically says I
provide a properly worded and endorsed right of entry agreement for MnDot .
Mayor Chmiel: Yes. I definitely want that right of access there. It's the
only one that 's holding up TH 5 and I don't want to delay TH 5 for a year.
Councilman Workman: Yes, absolutely. I
Councilwoman Dimler: Second that .
Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to approve the I
preliminary and final plat for Subdivision #90-17 for Chan Haven Plaza 3rd
Addition as shown on the plat dated December 3, 1990 with the following
conditions: 1
1. Park and trail dedication fees to be assessed at the time building permits
are requested.
2. Provide the following easements:
a. Standard drainage and utility easements around the perimeters of all
lots.
b. Drainage and conservation easement located over the wetland on Lot 1.
•
51 1
11
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
II
c. Thirty foot wide utility easements centered on sanitary sewer and
watermain located outside of public rights-of-way.
d. Drainage and utility easement dedicated over Lot 2 to accomplish the
temporary drainage ditch and future extension of storm sewer.
e. Plat the future right-of-way along the Hwy 5 frontage to accommodate the
Hwy 5 improvement project as an outlot.
f. Cross access and utility easements located over the proposed private
driveway. These easements shall run in favor of Lots 1 and 2 and any
11 future subdivisions thereof and shall be drafted in a manner acceptable
to the City Attorney. This easement shall also be drafted and filed
concurrently with a private maintenance agreement acceptable to the
City.
g. Landscaping easement over the planted area located south of Lake Drive
running in favor of the City.
3. Enter into a development agreement acceptable to the city.
4. The applicant shall provide a properly worded and endorsed right of entry
agreement for Hwy 5 to MnDot.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
Paul Krauss: And we did vacate the easement?
Councilwoman Dimler: Yes.
-Paul Krauss: You're done.
Mayor Chmiel: Yes. It all should be done. That should be the last item. Amen.
ZONING ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTIONS 20-504, 20-695, 20-715, 20-735, 20-755,
20-774 AND 20-815 REGARDING PARKING SETBACKS AND BUFFER YARDS, FIRST AND SECOND
READING.
Councilwoman Dimler: I move approval.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second?
11 Councilman Wing: Yes.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there any discussion?
Jay Johnson: The public would like to discuss it.
' Mayor Chmiel: I don't want to talk yet. We'll let you come up Jay.
Jay Johnson: This evening is my first chance to see this and since it was my
idea last fall, I wanted to take a look at it and it went way beyond what I
thought.
52
11
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991 II
Councilwoman Dimler: Didn't you like it?
Jay Johnson: No, I didn't as a matter of fact. We're going from 30 feet to 10 L
feet with a 5 foot high berm. You know I drive a van. I mean it's way beyond
what Redmond was requesting. We're going to end up making a 5 foot high wall,
whether that wall be of dirt or of-trees or whatever. I'd rather see instead of
5 feet , more like 15 feet. If we're going from 30 feet, cut it in half and have
some kind of, I don't like the Redmond berm as is. It's just kind of something
that you see in the military around something. Just a straight line pile of
dirt . I'd rather see something with some curvature. Some natural look to it to
where it aesthetically is something other than just a straight line of dirt. As
I read this, which I only read it briefly this evening, we could put a 5 foot
pile of dirt at a 45 degree angle going, well not 45. It'd be less than 45.
2:1 from the edge up 5 foot high at 10 foot and then a fence on the other end
and that would do. My concept was something that was equivalent to being 30
foot away where when I park my van it's going to be like my van is sitting 10
feet from the road. If anybody parks anything of any height, that little 5 foot
berm's not going to do anything. I don't think that it is equivalent to these
current ordinance. I don't think it meets what I envisioned as a performance
standard.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you Jay. Is there anybody else that would like to
address it?
Councilman Workman: Jay, you're talking about you want it 15 feet wide and how
high? 1
Jay Johnson: No. Instead of being a 10 foot setback, right now the ordinance
is 30 foot . They're reducing it to 10 foot with a 5 foot high berm. About yea
high.
Councilwoman Dimler: It 's as tall as I am.
Jay Johnson: Yeah. I drive a van that's yea tall and it 's not really one of
the tallest around. You know they've got the ones with the raisers and
everything else. What we're trying to say is that this 5 foot, you can't do
I/
anything but a fence but something that 's 5 foot high, 10 foot away from the
street is equivalent to having a car parking 30 foot away from the street and is
visually equivalent. What I foresee happening is just kind of a straight line,
non-natural looking, look like somebody put up a wall. Whether it's a wall of I/
trees or whatever. I'm not sure if it should be higher. Maybe it should be a 5
foot berm with trees on top of that or bushes or something. I don't think, 10
feet seems to be, I mean Redmond was only asking for 7 foot or something. How
many feet were they asking for?
Paul Krauss: Redmond wants, it was approved for 10 foot setback from the
right-of-way.
Jay Johnson: It was 10 foot? Okay.
Councilman Workman: That's a specific situation.
Councilwoman Dimler: Well that was the reason for this amendment wasn't it? ,
53
I
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
II
Paul Krauss: That was the reason for considering a change to the ordinance. As
you recall there was a relunctance to just consider a variance to one off site
but that there was some merit to considering some flexibility and performance
standard for everybody.
Jay Johnson: Berming to me, and this is something Eric brought up in, our good
friend Eric Rivkin, brought up a while back on another subject is that putting
in a pile of dirt that goes 100 foot that's straight, uniform, looks exactly
like somebody just took and put in a pile of dirt for 100 straight feet, is that
what we really want? Is that what we're trying for as an image along TH 5?
Councilman Workman: But I still don't see what you're proposing entirely
different maybe except that the pile of dirt is zig zig.
Jay Johnson: Right . It could have some more natural looking features to it .
Nature generally does not dump dirt in a long staright row. If you have a
little more room to work with. Now I was wrong about Redmond there. I thought
Redmond only wanted 15 but you're giving only 10 feet to work with, you don't
have much chance to do anything but put a nice long straight line of dirt .
Paul Krauss: I would agree that Redmond does have just a nice long straight
line of dirt and I don't particularly care for the way it looks. It 's effective
in screening. - Keep in mind that this is part of a site plan review that you
have a lot- of authority to say you want an undulating berm or they've got to do
other things. The ordinance is quite specific that it says just the dirt
doesn't work. You've got to landscape it. It says fencing doesn't work and
basically it says that -setbacks may, underline the may, be reduced to a minimum
of 10 feet so you may want to work out a compromise in a given situation based
on site specifics. I don't know how to.
Mayor Chmiel: Leaving it open is what ou're saying?
Y
Councilwoman Dimler: We have flexibility in there to get what we want.
Paul Krauss: Yeah, I have a dificult time. I mean it's tough to write
11 ordinances that legislate the kind of flexibility you're looking for. I mean I
fully concur with what Jay's striving to get and I think we can demand that
because this is part of the site plan review. You know if we wanted to
introduce some language to clarify that the term has to be undulating and effect
a natural appearance, I suppose we could add some language to that effect.
Steve Emmings: I think to add a little bit I guess. I think Jay's outlined the
worst case that can happen under what we passed. The Planning Commission and I
would hope that it would never happen and the thing that we've been trying to do
over the last few years is always put an intent statement in that tells what
we're trying to achieve and in here it says the intent is, basically the City's
going to trade or reduce setback where additional landscaping is both effective
and of high quality aesthetically. What Jay describes was neither effective nor
of high quality aesthetically so hopefully if any proposal came in that would
meet the description he gave, we'd reject it under the intent statement. So I
think this is broad enough so that we can approve good ones and it's not so
narrow that they have to come in so everyone will look the same. They have to
54
1/
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
put the burden on them to propose something. If we don't like the way it looks,
we can reject it.
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, and I agree with what Jay's saying too but I do
think this document gives us the flexibility that we're looking for. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, and that 's what is here.
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah. l
Mayor Chmiel: Any other further discussion?
Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Wing seconded to approve amendments to the
Zoning Ordinance Section Numbers 20-504, 20-695, 20-715, 20-735, 20-755, 20-774
and 20-815 regarding parking setbacks and buffer yards. All voted in favor and
the motion carried unanimously.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATION: SET SPECIAL MEETING DATE, JOINT CITY COUNCIL/HRA
MEETINGS.
Don Ashworth: I had suggested either the 4th or the 7th. In checking with
Karen, the 7th every room in this building is taken. The other alternatives
then would be the 12th, 13th which is Ash Wednesday, 14th which is Valentines,
or just .go to the HRA's next regular agenda or schedule which would be the 21st .
Councilwoman Dimler: Does the 4th not work out? ,
Don Ashworth: The 4th is awfully late notice but if the Council would like to
shoot for that, we can do that as well. I
Councilwoman Dimler: I'm going to be gone on the 14th.
Don Ashworth: Do you want me to go through why it is that we were proposing to ,
have a joint meeting?
Mayor Chmiel: No because I think it is something that should be done. I
Discussions deal with each of the respective commissions. February 4th, Monday.
Councilwoman Dimler: I'm open. I
Mayor Chmiel: Are you open Tom?
Councilman Workman: I'd rather do it Thursday, the 21st but who am I? I
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, I'm open both days.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, you're saying at what, 6:30 or 5:30?
Mayor Chmiel: Richard? I
Councilman Wing: I'll just do what you tell me Don.
Councilman Mason: It makes no difference. I
55
I
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
Councilwoman Dimler: Well the 21st is fine.
Councilman Workman: I've already got a meeting that night and I'd just as soon
do it .
I Councilwoman Dimler: Are we meeting before then? Before the regular HRA
meeting at 5:30?
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, why don't we do that. On the 21st at 5:30.
Councilwoman Dimler: Public Safety has a meeting that night .
Mayor Chmiel: 21st prior to the HRA meeting.
Don Ashworth: So we'll have one of our pizza meetings where we could.
Councilwoman Dimler: Yes, I can't make it that night.
Mayor Chmiel: She can't do it the 21st.
Councilwoman Dimler: We've got the Southwest Metro that night.
Mayor Chmiel: Well, we're back to the 4th. You can't make the 4th either? You
can make it .
Councilman Workman: I'm here every night that week except that night and I just
didn't want to.
Mayor Chmiel: Well that 's alright. Then you'll have a full week.
Todd Gerhardt : We can make it an earlier meeting than 7:30.
Don Ashworth: Well I think that 's still the conflict though isn't it?
Councilman Workman: Yeah, if we meet right at 5:30 or something and we meet for
an hour, an hour and a half.
Mayor Chmiel: Sure.
Councilwoman Dimler: Southwest Metro meets at 7:00. Did we change it to the
4th? I thought it was the 3rd. But there's a public safety meeting that night
too.
Councilman Workman: No, Public Safety is the 14th.
Councilwoman Dimler: No, they changed it to the 21st because of Valentine's
Day.
Councilman Mason: Yeah, but that's until 7:30 though right?
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah but then.
Councilman Mason: So we could still do it at 5:30.
56
I/
I
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991 1
Councilwoman Dimler: He has to be at the Public Safety plus HRA.
Don Ashworth: What time is Public Safety?
Mayor Chmiel: 7:00. I
Don Ashworth: And that's here in this building. I don't see what's wrong with
the 21st. Start it at 5:30. We'd done by 7:00 for yours. We'd done close to
7:00 so you can make it to Eden Prairie right. That's where their's is?
Councilwoman Dimler: Right.
Don Ashworth: So we've got to get done at 5 or 10 to.
Councilwoman Dimler: That's fine with me. I
Mayor Chmiel: We'll do it the 21st at 5:30. Everybody got it down? 5:30 p.m.
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: I
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, let 's go back to Council Presentations. _ Ursula.
1991 goals.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, good. This is already in the workings and I'm glad
to hear it. Could I have an update on when, what are we looking at and when? I
Mayor Chmiel: Well Don and I have discussed this some time ago and because of
me being gone the last couple weeks, I don't think we really have come up with a
date but we indicated some time in February.
Councilwoman Dimler: Which is difficult .
Mayor Chmiel: Which is becoming more and more difficult and I think we're 11
looking really now at about March. Probably the early part of March.
Councilman Workman: What are the rates to Florida? 11
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, I was going to suggest a retreat. Not just a one
day workshop. So we can get away from telephones.
Councilman Workman: How about the Hospitality Suites?
Don Ashworth: They do have meeting rooms that are quite nice. The IDS facility
over here is also very nice.
Mayor Chmiel: I'd just as soon keep it in town. Maybe Country Suites would ,
like to have the Council come over and view their facilities they have to offer
for us and we could therefore make recommendations to other groups as well.
Don Ashworth: You want me to negotiate with them a little bit?
Mayor Chmiel: We have a budget to contend with. 1
57
I
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
IIDon Ashworth: I don't know if we can get it free but I think we can take and
get a reasonable rate.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Don will work that out .
Don Ashworth: Were you thinking then like a Saturday?
Jay Johnson: Sunday the 3rd.
11 Mayor Chmiel: Saturday or Sunday? That would be wonderful.
Councilwoman Dimler: A weekend would be great.
Don Ashworth: Tell you want , why don't you and I try in getting together very
quickly in the very near future. We can talk about putting together a program
and present it potentially to the Council within the next week.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, sounds great .
Councilman Wing: After tonight , are you convinced we can do it in one
weekend? Maybe we should do it Monday thru Friday.
Mayor Chmiel: We've got a lot of goals, believe me. Okay, Tom? Performance
standard zoning and TH 101.
Councilman Workman: Well performance standards has gotten talked about a little
' bit tonight. I think we need and it would be nice to have something -that we
could direct Planning Commission on. I know they've done here and there have
done things but I think that 's the tail that wags the dog on TH 5 and if we
11 could maintain that . That I think takes care of our fears and the residents
fears and if you're a quality developer, I don't think you mind the performance
standards. If you're building for life, you're not going to worry about it .
But if you're building to carpetbag, then you're going to worry about it and
they're going to come out in the woodwork real quick.
Councilman Mason: That may in fact even attract higher quality developers when
11 they see it 's a town that 's serious about, that 's willing to back up. I don't
think we can do anything out of line. I mean I guess that's always kind of the
teeter totter there but absolutely. I think performance standards.
,, Councilman Workman: And despite Councilman Wing's repetroire of ugly buildings
on the east side, they are tearing down, we're trying to tear down some
buildings.
' Mayor Chmiel: Eventually. We're going to try to make it aesthetically pleasing
for you to view.
Councilman Workman: That's all I had on that. And secondly, maybe I would like
to be a part of, maybe we need a 25 member task force for the corridor study. I
11 think 25 sounds like a good number because you're probably only going to have
about a dozen that participate anyway. But to get a little better handle on
that whole situation down there so that we can all envision when we drive down
there what we think should be down there and get some specifics.
' 58
I
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991 II
Mayor Chmiel: This is part of the goals that were going to be brought up.
Councilwoman Dimler: Right. And like I said, Council should be, Planning
should be, staff should be and then residents that want to be.
Councilman Workman: And then my last item on the TH 101 and there are some
definite memos. Right away in the adminstrative section from Dave Hempel to Mr.
Katz and MnDot about Cheyenne Trail, Sandy Hook, etc. and everything else. Can
staff come up with a game plan or a resolution that this Council can pass with
teeth that will tell MnDot, or whoever. Because MnDot generally is cooperative
but I think they have on TH 101 to tell them to start taking care of their road
or give us what their long range plans are for the road other than letting it
fall apart and become.
Mayor Chmiel: Tom, all they have to do basically is patch it. They'd be more
than willing to turn it over to the County or the City at any given time.
Councilman Workman: But that 's not feasible.
Mayor Chmiel: No, I don't think it's our responsibility to take that. The
County has already taken parts of TH 101.
Councilman Workman: Well to what extent, I'm thinking of just north TH 101
right now because we've kind of taken south TH 101 into account but when Town
Line Road is in and that road gets more and more traffic, at what point can we
say to MnDot we need this done?
Mayor Chmiel: I guess there's a lot of controversy yet between Minnetonka and
Eden Prairie on that . My understanding is that a portion of that has already
been gone as far as Minnetonka is concerned. And Eden Prairie is not really -
completely jelled all this together as a. . .from what I'm saying.
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, I'm not sure of the final status of it although I
obviously know the folks over in Minnetonka and last I heard was that it's
virtually a done deal at this point. They finally came to terms over the final
road design and I thought it was committed for like a 1993 construction. It was I/
originally supposed to be built in 1989. The only reason it wasn't was because
the cities started arguing about where it's going to go. If it's not actually
on the dotted line, it's getting close as I understand. I
Mayor Chmiel: Maybe what you could do is check on that and see what the status
is. i
Councilman Workman: I don't think that's going to change.
Mayor Chmiel: It 's not going to change anything as far as TH 101. 1
Councilman Workman: Again, what's driving my thought is that everytime we get a
memo, and I don't have it now in front of me, every time we get a memo we get a
synopsis of MnDot since 1940 has disavowed ever owning or knowing about this
road and so it's very difficult for us to get anything accomplished and
everything else. It would seem to me that the City of Chanhassen and Eden
Prairie, at least for that section, could do something jointly. If I have to go
59
I
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
IIover there to their Council meeting myself and say let 's improve this piece of
roadway or tell us what you're going to do because I don't think with a straight
face they can say ah, we're not going to do anything with that road and how can
they just ignore the road.
Councilman Wing: Is there a problem?
Councilman Workman: Well yeah. I mean we're talking about doing speed studies.
We're trying to put patched up, temporary right turn lanes that probably don't
11 meet a whole lot of code for length or other.
Paul Krauss: The Eastern Carver County study is anticipating traffic increasing
to about 15,000 or 20,000 trips a day which is getting up to TH 5 levels. It
also anticipates that that's going to need to be 4 lane at some point.
Councilwoman Dimler: Who's going to upgrade it?
Councilman Workman: The owners are. I think we need to zero in on that because
we're going to, I think we're just doing little spot things here. Not that we
_ shouldn't do them but for example at Cheyenne. If you're coming south you'll be
able to take a right turn in there. But when you're going north and you have to
make a left in there and you have to stop for any amount of time and they're
starting to come down that hill, people trying to get around and there's a
mailbox right there. I mean it 's real tight . It's substandard. Are we going
to get some hard answers out of MnDot or are we going to continue to put up with
that stuff?
Councilman Wing: I guess I'm still curious what's wrong with the road because I
relate it back to TH 7 where they actually had a history of fatalities and
•
' accidents but it still didn't trip to MnDot completely. TH 5 has. TH 101, does
that have a history of traffic accidents and violations and problems that they
can actually document? I'm not aware of it.
Mayor Chmiel: I guess the only thing, you know really with the fact that
there's just no way for people to maneuver, foot traffic along TH 101 which is
really real basic problem.
Councilman Workman: Well getting on at Valley View Road is a major. I don't
know. I'm sure people are hitting each other and if we have to prove that too
but I think the trips and everything else, and they're going to do the speed
study.
Mayor Chmiel: From reviewing the police reports, I have not seen too many
accidents coming out of those intersections. I've seen some at TH 101 and 78th
but I can't recall really seeing how many accidents were along there.
1 Jay Johnson: Didn't the State Legislature actually pass legislation requiring
MnDot to give that road back to the Counties a numbers of years ago.
Councilwoman Dimler: Or tried it. I don't think they were successful.
Mayor Chmiel : It wasn't successful because nobody would take it.
60
I
City Council Meeting - January 28, 1991 • II
Councilwoman Dimler: They tried it though, you're right .
Mayor Chmiel: Hennepin County did because of some specific conerns they had in
other areas and that's why they took one.
Councilman Workman: I guess if you had people from Kurver's Point on up in here '
right now and we were saying what 's wrong with the road, they'd be at our
throats because they're pretty angry about, I mean they like a turn lane here
and there but I don't think that 's accomplishing anywhere near long term what
needs to be accomplished.
Councilman Wing: Is that a Level 3 collector by definition in the study? II
Paul Krauss: No. That's an arterial.
Councilman Wing: If it 's an arterial, then it's a major road by my layman ,
thinking.
Paul Krauss: Yeah, an arterial goes between two counties, two or three cities. 1
It 's an intercity road. It's not just a neighborhood road.
Jay Johnson: It 's the only north/south road between 494 and South Dakota. 1
Paul Krauss: Well, it's the only thing between 494 and Lake Minnetonka
certainly.
Councilman Workman: That's all I have. Can we et staff to maybe cont
9 y contact
Eden Prairie and to figure out if we can't get an idea or meet with MnDot to
find out what the long range plan is for that road so we don't have to keep
guessing?
Mayor Chmiel: I'm afraid they'll tell us to take it. I
Councilman Workman: But they know that's not possible.
Councilwoman Dimler: They'll want you to take it. I
Mayor Chmiel: If Eden Prairie says yes, what are you going to say?
Councilman Workman: Yes what. I guess they'll just have to shovel that north 11
side.
Councilman Wing: What happened to performance standards? '
Paul Krauss: As I understood it, it was going to be listed, it will be brought
up when we have this goals discussion and we can establish that as a program for
the Planning Commission.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, if there's no further business. I
61
1
Ci:!y Council Meeting - January 28, 1991
Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to adjourn the meeting.
All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 11:00
p.m.-
Submitted by Don Ashworth
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
1
I
U
I
U
I
I
I
I
I
11
i 62
CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION S,<, ?
d REGULAR MEETING .,:„
11 JANUARY 22, 1991
The meeting was called to order at 7:40 p.m. .
MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Andrews, Wendy Pemrick , Dave Koubsky, Larry Schroers ,
and Jan Lash
MEMBERS ABSENT: Dawne Erhart and Curt Robinson
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Coordinator ; and Jerry
Ruegemer , Recreation Supervisor
WELCOME NEW COMMISSION MEMBER, DAVE KOUBSKY.
' Hoffman: The first order of business is to welcome our newest Commissioner
Dave Koubsky . If you all haven't met him , welcome Dave .
Koubsky: Thank you .
Hoffman: You probably all remember interviewing David.`and since that time ,
' since the Council appointed him , we got together one morning for just over
an hour and went over the basic format . Please feel free to jump right in
there and help Dave along at any time to give him a few pointers on how our
11 meetings operate so he feels right at home . He's got a blank name tag but
it 's on it 's way so it 's all official .
' ELECTION OF OFFICERS, CHAIRPERSON AND VICE-CHAIRPERSON.
Hoffman: Just go ahead and feel free to open up discussion and . . .if
anybody wants to nominate themselves or nominate somebody else , I guess
it 's all yours .
Andrews: I 'll just say I have an interest .
Hoffman: Jim has an interest. Curt 's not here . Dawne 's not here .
Anybody else?
Schroers: Haveyouu heard from either Curt or Dawne? Do you know if they
plan to attend tonight?
Hoffman: I heard from Dawne will not be attending. Curt I did not hear
from .
' Lash: Do you have any idea if they have any interest? Did you ask them?
Hoffman: I didn 't ask them but I would think that if they had an interest ,
Dawne especially when she called, would have left that message or Curt
would have called and expressed his interest .
Lash: Well I 'd be willing too if no one is interested but Jim 's interested
so I won't .
Andrews: I 'll flip you for it.
Hoffman: We need a Vice Chair as well . Chair and Vice Chair .
I
IIPark and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 2
Pemrick: Well do you have any druthers? Would you prefer one or the
other?
Lash: It really doesn 't matter to me and I 've always thought that Larry 's
done a nice job when he 's chaired too .
1 Hoffman: Okay , somebody make a motion because I don 't .
Schroers: I 'm going to say that I guess I was just willing to go along
' with the program . I would volunteer if there wasn 't other interest but if
there is , that is fine with me as well . I don 't mind acting as Vice Chair
in someone 's absence .
Pemrick: And I don 't mind doing that either . How about you Jim?
Andrews: We can 't all be Vice Chairs either I don 't suppose .
Lash: Do we want to do , go ahead and vote Chair first and then do a Vice
Chair?
' Hoffman: One or both . As a platform or separate .
Lash: Well I 'd move to nominate Larry for Chair .
Hoffman: Is there a second?
' Pemrick: Would you like to be Chair?
Schroers: Yeah .
Pemrick: I 'll second it .
Schroers: If everyone goes along with that , I will do it .
Pemrick: Yeah , I 'll second that .
' Lash moved, Pemrick seconded to nominate Larry Schroers as Chairman of the
Park and Recreation Commission for 1991 . All voted in favor and the motion
carried unanimously.
Hoffman: Okay . Larry is Chair . Is there a motion on the floor for Vice
Chair?
Schroers: I will move to nominate Jim as Vice Chair .
Pemrick: I 'll second that .
11 Schroers moved, Pemrick seconded to nominate Jim Andrews as Vice Chairman
of the Park and Recreation Commission for 1991 . All voted in favor and the
' motion carried unanimously.
Hoffman: At this point we should take the liberty to discuss any merit to
the rotating chair . You know the opinion of some of the Council members .
We have had that rotating chair in the past 1 or 2 years . If you would
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting I
January 22 , 1991 - Page 3
like to discuss continuing that or discontinuing that , I think we should do II
that at this time .
Andrews: I 'd like to suggest that we drop that . I guess I 'd like to see a II
format that becomes familiar and maybe I guess my personal opinion , I 'd
like to see a little bit more structure to agenda items being acted upon II and if not acted upon , being set up so they are brought before us and kept
in front of us on a regular basis . I think that could be better suited
with a consistent chair .
Pemrick: I agree . I thought we kind of decided on that didn 't we?
Lash: I think there were still some mixed feelings .
Schroers: Yeah . We had discussed it . I guess that I 've got two points on
it . I think it 's good experience for those who want to do it , to have an
opportunity to do it and from that aspect it was real positive but the
negative portion is that the City Council was not comfortable with it for
the most part . In the past we have had some rough edges with certain
commission members and certain Council members and that is non-conducive to
achieving our goals . I think in view of the fact that the Council was not
happy with it , it would be easy to make that concession .
Lash: I do think it was somewhat confusing to the public . I guess I 'm
just more comfortable with having a spokesperson . If Larry 's going to be
the Chair , he would be the one who would be quoted or asked questions about
things and I think having a rotating chair it just gets confusing for the II
public as well as us and Council and everone so I think it just looks more
professional . A person that looks like someone is willing to take charge
and be responsible for it . '
Pemrick: I agree .
Lash: I would move then that we discontinue the rotating chair?
Andrews: I 'll second that .
Lash moved, Andrews seconded to discontinue the rotating chair for Park and 1
Recreation Commission meetings. All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously.
II
CALENDAR OF 1991 MEETING DATES.
Hoffman: Item 3 is your meeting schedule calendar . I went ahead and
marked that out so you can keep that or plot it out on your own calendar at II
home . There 's just a few dates that we flip flop around. We 're typically
on the fourth Tuesday but when we come up against a Holiday or something
where there 's a three day weekend , we just slightly alter one week .
Basically we 've followed the Council 's pattern to that degree where they
have changed it , we will as well .
Andrews: I was looking at November 26th . Would it be possible we could
consider moving to the 19th instead . I know some people I know that
Thanksgiving preparation can get relatively intensive even that far in
advance .
IIPark and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 4
Hoffman: I wouldn 't have a problem with that . Thanksgiving falls on what ,
the 28th?
' Andrews: Yeah .
Hoffman: Okay . We 'll make that modification as well get that modification
into the City records si-pce this schedule has been distributed to the
Council and other commissions .
Andrews: And we had also talked about if necessary we would adopt the
twice a month if the building activity and so forth requires .
' Hoffman: If necessary , even in the months of February and March when we
get fairly intensive activity going on . Preparation for spring
construction season , if we need to call a second Tuesday , we 'll do so . Most
' likely we will know far enough in advance where we could make that
modification at the meeting previous than this meeting . . . You can take it
from here Larry .
' APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Lash moved, Andrews seconded to approve the Minutes of the Park and
' Recreation Commission meeting dated December 11 , 1990 with the following
changes on page 3 by Jan Lash: Changing the word "team ball" to "tee ball" ,
and a statement by Jan Lash, changing the word "Grandale" to "Brandondale" _
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
APPROVAL OF THE 1991 MINNESOTA PARK AND RECREATION ASSOCIATION AGENCY
MEMBERSHIP_
Hoffman: Really this item is brought to you more just for your
information . It wouldn 't necessarily have to be but it has been in the
past . As an agency , the City does retain it 's membership in the MRPA ,
Minnesota Recreation and Parks Association for this Board as a recommending
or advisory authority . As you can see from the MRPA 's brochure pamphlet ,
there are a number of different categories under there . Professional ,
' retired , Board recommending advisory , that type of thing . Minnesota
Recreation and Parks Association is our State professional affiliation .
They throw some weight or have some weight in the political arena as far as
funding and those types of things and our grant programs which we
participate in. . .the membership you receive publications from them and
also have the opportunity to go to the annual conference . It is
recommended that we accept , or go ahead and join as an association . . . for
the Minnesota Parks Association again in 1991 .
Schroers: Are you looking for a motion on this?
Hoffman: Yes .
Schroers: I would move to once again be a member . Is there a second?
Andrews: I 'll second that .
Pemrick: I 'll second that .
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting I
January 22 , 1991 - Page 5
Schroers moved, Andrews seconded to renew the Commission's MRPA membership II
for 1991 . All voted in favor and the motion carried.
VISITOR PRESENTATION: '
PRESERVING OPEN SPACE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A GOLF COURSE, JOAN AHRENS,
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSIONER.
Hoffman: Joan isn 't here .
Schroers: Should we just move to item 7 and come back to it when Joan
comes?
Lash: Is this Joan? 1
Ahrens: Yes . Ready for me?
Hoffman: Basically what Joan is interested in is , she had talked to Paul
Krauss the Planning Director for the City about the possibility of
preserving open space . We 're in the development stage , the City is where II
land developers are coming in and trying to pick up available pieces of
land at a pretty astounding rate and at this point in our development it 's
a good time to take a look at any of those future and long range land use
plans . That 's one reason you review the comprehensive plan . You have a
chance to take a look at that . In talking with Paul , Paul was . . .kind of
start some dialogue if this would be a reality or a feasible concept that
we could go ahead and maintain or preserve some open space through the
development . . .golf course . So Joan if you want to go ahead and talk to thell
Commission about your thoughts .
4
Joan Ahrens: I 'm Joan Ahrens and I 'm on the Planning Commission . I 'm herell
on behalf of the Planning Commission tonight and I guess I would just like
to clarify that it wasn 't exactly a , this didn 't come out of a conversation "
between Paul Krauss and me . It came out of our last Planning Commission
meeting . I guess the reason that we 'd been talking about a golf course is
because , as you know over the last year we've been doing the Comprehensive
Plan . Talking to a lot of residents and we 've had a lot of public
hearings . First and foremost on everybody 's mind is preservation of open II
space in Chanhassen . It 's the reason most people moved here and they want
to not only see open space preserved but they want to have access to it . II So the idea of a golf course came up at our last meeting. I relunctantly
agreed to be the one to present it to you because I wasn't sure how good of
an idea it was but doing a little research I have found that I think it
would be a great idea for the city and I was talking to Tom outside , he
thinks a great idea too so it 's nice to know we have more support here .
What I did , and I guess in general I 'm here to talk about golf courses .
Specifically what I 'm here for is to ask you to amend your section of the II
Comprehensive Plan to include a study area or study areas for golf course
development . We don 't have anything like that and we certainly have a lot
of space right now . We could look into it . Now is the time to do it .
I know it would be a very large project for the City and I think that there r
probably would be some concern that we don 't have the population base to
get a big project off the ground . And I 'm talking about a municipal
course , not a private course . My idea was to develop one, to acquire land II
and develop it from square one . Tom was talking about the possibility of
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 6
acquiring the existing course . But anyway a lot of people I think would
say that maybe we don 't have the population base out here yet but by the
time you get a large population base , of course you don 't have any open
space left which is what happened to the City of Minnetonka . -They 've been
trying to get a golf course going there and they don 't have any land left .
They have one bit of land in Purgatory Creek but it 's a nature preserve and
people don 't want to turn a nature preserve into a golf course . I don 't
know why but anyway . I have some little outline here I 've prepared for
' you . This is based on some conversations I 've had in the last couple of
weeks . This isn 't a formal presentation on all of the aspects of
development of a golf course . This is , I 'm throwing ideas out to you and
I hope to have some dialogue here with you on this . I was relunctant at
first because I wasn 't sure this was going to be a good idea to pursue . I
have talked to a number of cities who have municipal courses and every
single one of them said they thought it was a great idea for their city .
They 've all been very profitable from the first day of operation . You ' ll
see on here that the Edinburgh Golf Course is going to see revenues of
$150 ,000 .00 this year from a golf course alone . They figure that their
' golf course has generated over a hundred million dollars in economic
development for the City which is outstanding . One of the reasons , they
have probably the biggest and most expensive development here but they
planned it that way because that 's what brings in money . They also , I
' think the beauty of their course and some of the other municipal courses
was that it 's not just a golf course . It 's an open area for all the
residents throughout the year . They use the golf in the wintertime for , or
' a number of cities do , for crosscountry skiing and sledding and whatever
outdoor activities the city wants to use it for . They use club houses for
community centers and meeting places and for rental areas and restaurants
so it really is a development that 's used by the city . I 've listed on the
bottom some financing options and these are very sketchy ideas and they
aren 't , each idea isn 't exclusive . They can be combined to come up with a
good financing plan and the only reason I list these is because the first
' thing that comes to everybody 's mind is how do we pay for something like
this? A big development like this and there are options . In Brooklyn Park
they , a developer came in and purchased all the land necessary for the golf
' course and then they wanted to build , part of Brooklyn Center , part of
their problem is they had an image problem up there . The people who lived
up there were mostly working class . As they got better jobs and made more
money , they wanted to stay in Brooklyn Park but there was no upper bracket
housing for them so they thought of the idea of a golf course and building
upper bracket housing around the golf course . This has been a big success
for them up there . At any rate , okay . The land was purchased by the
' developer and then the developer gave the City , which doesn 't happen very
often , but gave the City all of the land for the golf course . It was a tax
write off for the developer and they figured that was the only way they
could get their residential development going out there . It 's the largest
plat ever recorded in Hennepin County which tells you how big a project
this is and how big a project it continues to be out there . But that was
just one idea of how they did it but every city has their own story and
I have a lot more information if any of you want to talk about it at some
other time but , do you have any questions? Any ideas?
Koubsky : Joan , does the Planning Commission have any area in mind off hand?
Joan Ahrens: No . This was an idea that was brought up at the last
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting i
January 22 , 1991 -- Page 7
Commission meeting . We know that there is a lot of open space left in
Chanhassen . We didn 't pinpoint any study areas at all .
Andrews: I have some questions and comments I guess . I 've always been a II
proponent on the Board here of open space so I 'll start with that statement
and then I 'll kind of work down from there . I guess I question the II feasibility of a golf course knowing what the economic climate of the day
is and also the competitive situation with Edenvale , Bluff Creek , Island
View , Deer Run and I know there 's other courses nearby . I know Edenvale
has really struggled as a course to be economically viable and I guess
I look at this and we talk about , we want to preserve open space but yet
the comment about Edinburgh was look at all the development it caused. To
me that 's sort of a paradox . I would think that perhaps a better idea II might be to designate an open space as open space and let it be nature and
not a commercially developed project . I also question how our business
owners like the owner of Bluff Creek would respond to being in competition
with the City . My experience with some of the things I 'm involved in ,
which would include some like the Hyland Hills Ski Area , that it 's very
difficult for private business to compete with a publically funded
operation . They usually , the public operation typically will have the best "
equipment and the lowest prices and that can drive a private venture out of
business and I look at that and wonder is that really a fair thing to do to
somebody that 's struggled to have a business in Chanhassen .
Ahrens: Do you want me to respond to that?
Andrews: Sure , go ahead . ,
Ahrens: Your first concern that this is a bad business climate to start
talking about development of a golf course . You 're right . Our economy is II
in terrible shape but it takes 5 to 7 years to get an idea like this off
the ground and hopefully we 'll be in better shape in the future when this
comes to fruition , a golf course. Secondly , there 's never been, I think II that the City does have to be sensitive to the needs of private businesses
but there 's never been a shortage of golf courses in this area . The
western suburbs of the Twin Cities has the highest number of golfers
anywhere in the metropolitan area . Edenvale was in trouble and they II probably still are . They 've been trying to sell their course to the City
of Eden Prairie . The City of Eden Prairie wants the course but Edenvale 's
asking 7 .2 million dollars for it , and it 's not worth it . So there are II some private courses that may be in trouble but I don 't think that , and I
think that the numbers would be real easy to get our hands on . I don 't
think that a municipal course would threaten private courses by any stretch '
of the imagination and I think that your concern that it would bring more
development also to the City of Chanhassen . We 're going to have
development one way or another . It 's how we 're going to plan for the kind
of development we want . I think the idea of having open space just for the '
sake of open space is great but I think if the city can make money off of
that I think , and still have it be open space and have it desireable and
attractive and everything else , I think that the City should think about
that .
Schroers: Anyone else have any particular thoughts?
I
iPark and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 8
Lash: When I think of open space , I don 't picture a tailored , landscaped
golf course . When I 'm thinking of open space out in Chanhassen , I 'm
thinking of the woody areas and the marshy areas and the lakes and all of
that but I certainly wouldn 't want to say that I wouldn 't want to get more
information on this . I think we should certainly explore it . If we get
I more information and it looks like it 's something that would be viable
sometime in the future , the least we can do is .
I Andrews: I have a couple more questions too on that . Is what you 're
saying that one of the ways that we would be able to obtain land is through
a golf course , and from what I can tell , at least from our park board the
way it stands right now , maybe the only way we could obtain a large tract
of land and at least preserve it in something other than buildings or
houses, I guess I would look at that as yes , as a better alternative than
blacktop and buildings but I guess I still would look at either a
I combination of totally undeveloped land and a golf course or , my personal
preference would be wild land I mean which is probably the most valuable
asset that we will have . But it may be economically impossible to preserve
I that as a city without some way creating some sort of revenue so I
understand both sides of the issue here . I guess idealistically , I would
like to see a large tract of land that we could just leave as is . Leave it
wild . Maybe have a few trails on it but be lucky enough so that 20 years
from now there could be a 200 acre piece of land surrounded by city that is
just wild forest or whatever .
Pemrick: Well I 'm in favor of a golf course . I think it 's a great idea to
have . I 've always been in favor of any lifelong sports or activities .
Tennis is a major one and golf is a major one . Golf is just exploding and
there are enough public golfers , public course golfers . I think it would
II be well attended you know . Private courses are pretty exclusive to the
majority of everybody and I 'd like to see further study done . I think
there 's a future for a golf course in Chanhassen . Has there been any
I approach by any private sectors like a Deer Run type thing coming into
Chanhassen?
I Ahrens: Not that I 'm aware of but I haven 't talked to any private
developers who are interested in developing another private course because
the private courses are really in competition with each other and there are
a lot of private courses around .
IPemrick: Don 't they have both though? I mean a private course also allows
the public to play , it 's just that you get first .
Ahrens: Some of them do . Right , some of them do .
Pemrick: Not like Hazeltine .
Ahrens: No . Some of them do allow the public to play also but municipal
courses generally , some of the courses pulled in something like 70% of the
I people who play golf there are local residents and they offer lower prices
to residents to offer a service to them . So there 's more of an incentive
for people to stay in the community and spend their money .
I
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 9
11
Koubsky: They can also have local memberships . Being a public course , you
can also be a member of the course which will give you a discount or some
option .
Pemrick: Most of them seem to fill up rapidly when they do offer
memberships . ,
Ahrens: Well I heard an interesting statistic and I don 't know if this is
just from a golfer or what but they said that every 4 days there 's enough
people starting golf in the United States to support a new golf course .
Schroers : Well evidentally there 's a lot of people that think it 's a good
idea because there are brand new golf courses going up all over all the
time . I think that it would be nice for Chanhassen to have a municipal
course and it would be nice to be city owned and operated and open for the
public but I think that whether it 's city or private , golfing is still a
business and whether or not you do well with it depends on what type of
facilities you have and how well you manage them . Just because it 's going
to be a municipal course doesn 't mean it 's going to be a major success .
Ahrens : Oh absolutely . It depends on how it 's maintained . Dwan . I don't
know how many of you are familiar with that course . It 's in Bloomington
and it 's a short course . It 's not , I think they have 9 holes . . .35 acres
that are developed by a golf course so it 's a small course and they
projected their revenues based on 27 ,000 rounds a year and they thought
that they could make it on that . They have from the beginniing had a II minimum of 50 ,000 rounds a year out there and that 's the way it is . Most
of them have a minimum of 50 ,000 rounds a year . It seems like when a golf
course springs up , people go to it You know they are amazingly successful
and cities are making good money off of them , but they do have to be run
exactly like a business . You 're right . Some cities have developed golf
courses and run the golf courses and then sold the club houses to private
developers so there are private people running club houses . It depends on II
what the City wants , what kind of business they want to be in .
Lash: So Todd , would you be able to pull this information together for us
or who would be , who would need to do this?
Hoffman : That would be worked out amongst staff at what staff level that
the job would be taken on . It would also then , to start any type of a
serious consideration or study we 'd need approval and funding at the
Council level as well .
Ahrens: We have the opportunity to Brooklyn Park , they offered to even
come out here and talk to us . They also have , they paid for a feasibility
study several thousand dollars of a feasibility study done for their golf II course and they offered to hand that over to us which was very generous I
thought . It would be interesting to document . . .
Schroers: Well I think that your request is very reasonable . That we take '
a look at it . At the comprehensive plan and consider areas that would be
suitable for a golf course . I can say however that we have been looking
for large tracts of land within the city of Chanhassen to be used as parks, "
both active and passive parks and there is still some open land but a lot
of it is not very affordable or attainable it seems like so it may be a
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 10
little bit harder to come up with an area that large without private
development or without private interests to help them .
' Hoffman: As you know , the Deer Run golf course is basically a trend which
is taking place in other parts of the country and initially in hearing
' those folks speak , the developers speak about how they came about depicting
that location , they were just looking at a location anywhere west of Eden
Prairie . Chanhassen , Victoria , anywhere out here and that piece of land
became available so per chance we missed an opportunity there but the trend
in the housing around the golf course and a private developer developing
the golf course and then another developing group developing the house
seems to be one trend which is fairly popular in golf course development in
this day and age . And Larry , to fall back again on your speaking of
dollars spent . Just in raw land value , if we tack on a $15 ,000 .00-
$20 ,000 .00 per acre raw land value to start at 100 or 150 acres , we 're into
' the 1 .5 plus million dollar range just to acquire the land so it is a
substantial amount of money and that 's why it is a 5 to 7 year process to
even get something like this off the ground because it is such a large
project .
Andrews: I have a question of how this works with the comprehensive plan .
If we were to , would we be designating a part of Chanhassen to say this is
' our open space/golf course area and then if present owners had that
property and tried to sell it , they could only sell it for use as a golf
course like we were looking at with the trails situation?
Hoffman: Basically if it came to the point where a study area or an area
would be designated as open space for a golf course , you don 't have
exclusive rights to that but you have the wherewithal then to if that land
becomes up for purchase , that it is labeled as in the comprehensive plan
and you have first shot at it to purchase it or condemn it .
' Ahrens: It 's a tough situation though once you start identifying specific
parcels as golf course and the owners say wow , my land could become the
next golf course and the price goes up considerably . I don 't know how
' you 're going to .
Lash: That was my next question was , does that turn around and bite us
back in the market by people jacking the price up? Is that a real typical?
Hoffman: It 's a real mouse/cat game , sure .
Ahrens: But that 's the way it is with all development out here . You know
everybody you talk to who owns land out here says that their values have
gone way up just since we 've been talking about the comprehensive plan and
expanding the MUSA line .
Lash: But if people think that government is interested in it .
Ahrens: Yeah , it goes way up .
Lash: . . .bottomless wallet .
IAhrens: I think that truthfully it could be said that it 's an idea for not
just a public course but maybe a private/public venture or something like
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 11
11
that . Probably is what the City would be looking at anyway .
Schroers: I 'm wondering if there would be a possibility of wording this a II
little bit different and instead of saying looking at specific study areas
for development of golf course , would be just kind of looking city wide as
to where it would lend itself and not actually identify a specific area
that we would be looking at .
Ahrens: I don 't know if within your section of the comprehensive plan if II
you have to do that . Identify some certain areas for certain activities .
Hoffman: If you choose to do that , it lends some credibility and to keep
things going in the same direction as go on 5-6 years down the line , to say
you have that area designated . At this point in these initial discussions,
you know talking about designating a certain area in the comprehensive plan
is premature basically . We 're at a level where we 're just trying to start II
some dialogue in the subject and obviously you need , you don 't just need
commission or council or city support . It needs to be a community support
type function or it's just not going to be viable . '
Andrews: I wasn 't suggesting we were going to designate it tonight but I
just want to understand what the implications were of the idea .
Lash: What kind of a feel do you have Todd for the idea and have you had I
input from people that are interested in something like that?
Hoffman: Previous to speaking with Paul and the events that took place at II
that meeting and in conversation with Joan , I have had some background in
it in the cities of Mankato and North Mankato . They were battling to be
the first city to , they both acquired the land and then the first city to II
develop their golf course and North Mankato finally beat out Mankato and is
going ahead with a development . The City of Mankato has been in the
process for over 10 years now and they 've owned the land throughout that
entire time so the process to get it going can be a lengthy one for a
municipal golf course .
Lash: Do you have a feel for , you said you thought that it might be
thought that our population now wouldn 't , what kind of a population number
do you think would?
Ahrens: I don 't have any numbers of mine . I don 't believe that 's a valid
argument anyway . I 'm just thinking in our last election we had our
community center on a referendum lost because people didn 't feel we had II enough population to support a community center and I think these are very
different ideas . The important thing is getting the correct information to
people and how golf courses pay for themselves and community centers don 't . '
It 's just something the city buys and pays for and it sits there . An
expensive asset for the city . They're two very different ideas . But
I imagine that argument will come up .
Koubsky: I guess I 'd just like to express my interest in , I think it 's a II
pretty good idea . I think it's one that should be considered and worked
out . At least thought about and not tabled .
IIPark and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 12
I
Schroers: Todd , is it going to take a motion to amend the Comprehensive
' Plan? e
Ahrens: Tom- wants to make a comment .
Tom Workman: I know this isn 't a public hearing . Do we have a new
Chairman yet? I was out . Okay , Mr . Chairman and Commissioners .
I introduced myself to Dave before I had to tell him I was Tom Workman or
I anything else , I forgot to introduce my own self . 7233 Pontiac Circle for
those for the record . I started thinking about a golf course idea when
what was going to be the Workman/Chanhassen Municipal is now the Eckankar
property over there and I think you need about 140-150 to do a golf course
properly or something and there 's 174 there . We could make a great big
totlot out of the rest of it or something . So I started thinking about you
know I mean rather wildly obviously about that but last spring in thinking
' about how our city appears to people , the recurring comment to me from
friends , family and enemies alike was every spring and summer that darn
Bluff Creek . What kind of a reputation Bluff Creek throws off and then of
' course is the impression that it gives the City of Chanhassen . The course
is laid out poorly . They don 't rake traps . They don 't water very well .
They don 't do things properly . The course is jammed . Don 't get me wrong .
The course is jammed and the guy is making money but golfers like myself ,
' friends , family and enemies alike , avoid it if we can because it 's not that
good of a course . But what I did was with Scott Harr spent last summer and
fall trying to find out what we could do about that club house that was
half built because it stands there , I don 't know if you 're familiar with
it , but it 's this big brick clubhouse . I think about 4 Minnesota Vikings
in the late 80 's , late 70 's , early 80 's got in and gave their money to
somebody in the venture and then he ran off with the money and now we 've
got this thing half built and everything else . It 's been standing there so
he makes a lot of money selling beer and Twinkies out of a tin shed and
people golf there . There 's no doubt about it . I think if we had 3 golf
courses in this town it would fly because of the demand . Joan 's comments
were correct . It 's really becoming more popular but Scott and I , through
contacting the owner , there 's no code violations on that golf course or
' with the club house . You can 't tear the club house down . Can 't do
anything . Well it continues to be king of a sore spot with me that this
thing is kind of , this impression that people are getting . The only thing
they get , oh Chanhassen , Bluff Creek . Oh yeah. And so I 've always thought
11
about how could the City turn that into a municipal golf course . Obviously
condemnation . That kind of thing is kind of frightening , etc . . Well at
the League of Cities Conference in Houston this year , 'there 's some
Irepresentatives from a firm , well the PGA is there and the LPGA 's there at
• all these places because cities are doing big municipal golf business . But
I made a contact with a fellow from what they call First Golf . But to back
up . When I saw Joan 's comments in the agenda tonight , I thought somebody
else is on a tract that I may be on and we should get together . But First
Golf is basically a financing outfit and I 've got an awful lot of
information here that I 'll give to Todd and I should have had maybe for you
guys tonight . They basically finance these deals . If it 's an existing
golf course , we 'll help you finance it . You pay for it through the
receipts . Through people golfing . That 's the difference between having a
large open space that has no turnstile on it . It 's very expensive and it 's
not going to be paid for unless it 's a bond referendum or something . It
becomes a large open space that 's paid for . If you don 't make a profit ,
Park and Rec Commission Meeting 11
January 22 , 1991 - Page 13
I
big deal . The profit is the open space . I 've always said the City
shouldn 't be in the business of making a profit off of it 's citizens , etc .
but municipal golf course is a way to preserve the open space and have it
paid for by people all around . Not just in the City , and certainly not
through taxes which we all know doesn't work out real well . And this is
just one financing idea and Joan came up with some more and I think 7 to 1011
year idea is kind of , it 's too long for me to think that far out and I
certainly wouldn 't hope that something like that would have to happen . I
don 't know . I 've heard rumor and there certainly is some platting going on
around the Bluff Creek area and they could at any time turn that into 2 1/2 '
acre or 10 acre lots and I don't know if you 've stood on that bluff up
there but you can see everything from up there down in the valley and it is
some really pretty land out there that would be perfect for preserving . Do
we preserve it just for golfers? I don't know . Burnsville , the City of
Burnsville is currently going through something of a battle on this so we
might want to check with them or watch what they 're doing . I know that
there 's the proponents of , we just want this open space for trails and
hiking . We don 't want it for golfing because apparently the hiking people
don 't like the golfing people or something . They are _two different people '
I think . But that certainly can be looked at . The hiking people would
just have to hike when it 's dark . I don 't know . Like I emphasized before ,
people want to play golf here . They don 't want to go somewhere else but
they will and they do and for the 30 or 40 times a summer that I play golf , "
I ' ll play Bluff Creek once and yet it 's still packed . I can be selective
apparently and other people don 't care to be . That 's about all I had to
say . I didn 't mean to bore you on and on here but I 'll get this I
information to Todd . I had a conversation with a gentleman . He called me
up from Denver and they want to sell golf courses and sent these packages
up . Obviously there 's money in it for them too and I don 't know nearly
enough about any of it but I do know that there 's a million and one options "
and ways to go about something like this and I think we 're at a good point
to do it so I 'm glad the Planning Commission thought to bring this up . I
was going to bring this up at the City 's , the Mayor was going to get us II together and do some planning ourselves . Some goal setting but I thought
it 'd be a good time to do it now. And lastly , I did bring up to Todd , how
could the City get some botchy ball courts in the City . Rather cheap and ,
inexpensive . You 'd think an Eagle Scout could probably handle it if given
the instructions so there you go .
Schroers: Is there any other commission members have any further response
on that?
Lash: I feel about the information already provided about the different II options and financing , I guess just looking at this thing , I feel like I 'm
stuck between a rock and a hard place because I don't think we 'd ever go
for a referendum on this with the climate that we 've had referendums lately !'
but yet it seems like it 's sort of sneaky way around it to do it without
letting people know or letting them have input into how they see the money
being spent . But there are different options of having it , of getting the
money from someone else and paying them back from the revenues or those II kinds of things, I 'd be comfortable with that . I don 't know enough about
all these different bonds and these different options that you explained
but I wouldn 't feel comfortable with anything that I thought was something
that we were doing without voter approval . Yet I don't think we 'd ever get
voter approval so I guess I would , if we 're looking for a motion I 'd be
•
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 14
ready to make a motion that we , do you want to look for an amendment to the
Plan now or do you want to come up with a way of wording it yourself or
what do you think we should do?
Hoffman: Yeah , I don 't believe at this time we need to go to an amendment
of the Comprehensive Plan . We have 10 years to amend that piece of work
and we can certainly start the discussion and move forward with staff
discussion and discussion with the Manager and the Council and the Planning
Commission members and the input from other people out there prior to
' starting those types of actions.
Schroers: That 's exactly what I was thinking . If you could start the
research on it into some of the funding and to see how actually realistic
it was , there would always be time to amend the Comprehensive Plan and to
look for areas so I think if the funding is available , that will make it an
' awful lot easier to find a suitable area . I think it 's very interesting .
I certainly wouldn 't be opposed to seeing a golf course come in the city
and be anxious to see how this develops .
' Hoffman: Okay . Again , no motion is necessary .
Schroers : Okay . Then if there 's nothing further on that , then I 'd like to
move along to item 7 on the agenda .
HERMAN FIELD PARK ACCESS AND INITIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN .
Public Present:
Name Address
Tom Schoenecker 2820 Sandpiper Trail
Betty Lang 2631 Forest Avenue
Hoffman: Herman Field Park access and initial development plan . I believe
we have both of you here for that item? Yep . And we also have , many of
you can see Scott here in the audience . You all know him but I 'd also like
' to introduce Bruce Chamberlain . New person with the firm of Van Doren ,
Hazard and Stallings so he ' ll be working with , he works with Scott and
works with Mark Koegler so we have those people now as well and Dick Wing
as well is in the audience from the Council . This item as the report
states , has been talked about and re-talked about over the past 8 to 10
years and then the past 3 years , some intensive study work has been done to
begin the process of developing the 11 acre Herman Field Park which was
initially donated to the City along with $30 ,000 .00 to develop that . Last
March I believe it was when the Minutes are in here . Last April was the
last time the Commission discussed this item . At that time we were still
wrestling with the issue of access through an easement . The Commission
left it that evening with staff to go ahead and investigate the need to
purchase or acquire easements . Just during the initial stages of that
process when we were taking a look at that , a road vacation request , as
noted in the report , resurfaced and through that opportunity of vacating
that portion of Forest Avenue , we were able to acquire that easement as a
trade-off so we did not have to go ahead and purchase that easement . That
was just a windfall action of that Forest Avenue/Oriole Lane vacation
request that came through so as stated in the report there , the two
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 -- Page 15
conditions of approval for that vacation were the 40 foot easement for the
gravel trail or gravel road access to Herman Field Park and then as well to
maintain the easement off of Oriole coming down into the northeast corner II
of Herman Field Park to maintain a viable way to get a trail into that
park . That approval of the vacation was , and with those conditions was
then granted in November of 1990 by the City Council . Previously we have
talked about the park plan or the master park plan in the year '88
I believe in the forefront . The master park plan with the design of the
park . What facilities did the Commission and the residents in that area ,
would they like to see in the park through neighborhood involvement . Having
those residents down to these meetings and with commission support , a
master park plan was developed . That was revised again in I believe it was
1990 and so we have all the components in hand to go ahead and start
initial development . We did go ahead and budget $50 ,000 .00 for this first
phase of development . That was approved by the City Council so along with,
we have the dollars available . We have the means of gaining access finally "
to Herman Field Park and we have in hand a master park plan . The
direction I 'm looking for tonight is we did send the notification out to
the residents to have them down to answer any last questions they had prior
to going out and taking a look at acquiring bids or specifications and -
plans for this project and then eventually taking those to the City Council II
for their "approval and going out for bid within the next 2 months .
Comments from the commission .
Lash: How much of this do you think we can get for $50 ,000 .00?
•
Hoffman: The most recent estimate we had was $31 ,000 .00 to have the access II
road put in . That 's about a year old so it will be in the neighborhood of ,
guessing $35 ,000 .00 plus to have the access road put in and then we 're left '
with $10 ,000 .00-$12 ,000 .00 for park development .
Schroers: The development of Phase 1 consisted of very little besides
mowing what would be a couple of trail areas for nature walking and we were II
going to put in some , an active use , open space with some picnic tables and
how much grading were we going to be doing? Were we going to do any
grading on Phase 1?
Hoffman: As long as the contractor is there doing the road project , it
would be favorable to go ahead and do the grading portion to whatever
extent is necessary in that active area of the park to level that area out II
so it can be seeded and mature into turf prior to being used as a ballfield
or an open space area .
Schroers: We 're not going to get too far with grading on $10,000 .00 or
$12 ,000 .00 are we?
Hoffman: No . The $50 ,000.00 is increased $20,000 .00 from the $30,000 .00 II
which was originally donated but again this will be a multi year project .
We ' ll have to come back with some more dollars in 1992 to potentially put
in the totlot or finish other things inside the park so again we 're in the II
initial cost estimates but the $50 ,000.00 is not going to create
everybody 's vision of what they want to see that park be in this first
year . '
Lash: So we could get the access road and maybe an open play area?
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 16
Hoffman: Yes .
' Lash: We can put a couple of picnic tables in. there . Maybe a grill .
Garbage can .
Hoffman: Yeah . Obviously as we 've seen in other parks , once you go in and
' you start construction that first year , it 's not a real beautiful place to
go ahead and take a look at anyways . It's a bare dirt field and so we need
to get in there and do the seeding and grooming . The vision is on this
' park to , about 20% or thereof is going to be groomed or maintained . Mowed
so there is an active area , a pleasant area to go and visit and picnic and
take your children in and that type of thing . Then as well there will be
the mowed trails through the natural area taking into concern the location
adjacent to wetlands and those types of things so it will be , in the next
coming years we 'll have to set aside some additional dollars if it 's
available to acquire those other facilities .
' Schroers: Does staff have any feeling as to whether all of the excess that
there is from the entrance road be used on grading or did we want to get a
1 portion of the park useable as far as not an active area but just something
that can be used for a passive use?
Hoffman : The trails . Getting the trail component in , cleared , grubbed out
would be a high priority and if that could be at all fit into Phase 1 , that
would be a good component to include in that . Other than that you know the
cost estimates at this time are so vague that I can 't forecast what other
' things we could go ahead and put in there . But again , as long as the
contractor is there doing the grading right up to that area , until we have
a grading plan and some estimates on how much dirt we 're going to have to
I actually move , I can 't give you an estimate . , A dollar figure but as long
as they 're there , it 's much easier for them to complete that project at
that time . Bringing in a contractor or we can possibly take a look at , if
we can 't feasibly get that done on the money we have this year , that next
1 spring we could do it with our own crew or even later on this fall by
renting equipment and then having the City maintenance personnel do that
grading work themselves .
1 Koubsky: Did the residents express a similar way that they 'd like to see
it moved forward with the extra money?
I Hoffman: Obviously they 've expressed , they 'd like to see it developed and
turn into the park that it 's going to be eventually . However the access
road is the first thing we need to do . After that they 've expressed
interest in the play area and in the trails so they can have a destination
for a walking area as well .
Lash: I know there was a concern . . .Lang regarding some kind of a gate
system . Is that something that we 'll be able to?
Hoffman: Taking a look at the system , I have talked to another resident
1 today on the phone on that same issue and the situation being , we have
gates at some other parks within the City . Lake Ann Park for one which is ,
it 's not closed and opened every day because we do not have a personnel
I component on hand that can do that . We do not have our own police force .
You know we contract with the Carver County people who , if you ask them to
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting I
January 22 , 1991 - Page 17
do it will do that when they 're available . So even though the gate is 11
there , we do not have the personnel to open it and close it at 10:00 p .m .
and 6:00 a .m . every morning so my recommendation would be to leave the gate /
out of the initial phase and if it becomes a situation where we do need to
solve some type of entry problem to the park , to go ahead and add it . A
gate system . Our park maintenance people can build those but then we also
have to wrestle with the situation of who 's going to open and close it .
Schroers: Also a gate doesn 't do a whole lot of good without a fence and
fencing is very expensive and what gates and fence do is keep the
non-troublesome type of people out but the people that are going to go in II
the area to cause a problem really aren 't going to be deterred by a gate or
a fence . If they want to get in , they ' ll get in . Is there any other
comment or questions on the commission before we open it up to the
audience? Okay then , at this time . . .
Tom Schoenecker : My name is Tom Schoenecker and I live at 2820 Sandpiper II
Trail which is a block away from Herman Field . I was on this Commission
for about 5 years about 5 years ago when all of this started to take place
and about 4 years ago the land across the street from our house and
adjacent to Herman Field , land that was always owned by Randy Herman was
developed . The people in the neighborhood at that time thought that was
part of the park plan . . . At the time I was on the Commission and we did I
get this commission to ask the City Council to make the developer provide
an easement to that property through the park for our neighborhood . I do
know that that easement was written into the contract for development of
the property . However , I don 't see anything in the neighborhood that looks "
like an easement . The houses are so close together , I don't know how there
could be an easement for park access through there but I believe it is in
there and I would ask this commission to investigate that and develop that II
easement from our neighborhood into that park . The people in the
Minnewashta Manor area would have to go about maybe 5 or 6 blocks to walk
into the park if they had to go around where just an easement through the I
new development would just be a matter of walking . . .
Schroers: Are you asking for a pedestrian easement?
Tom Schoenecker : Just a pedestrian easement , yes .
Lash: Is that off a cul-de-sac? '
Tom Schoenecker : It 's off a cul-de-sac . The new cul-de-sac going up .
( The quality of the recording was very poor at this point in the meeting I
and was not picking up the discussion very well . )
Schroers: We 've gone and looked at that and talked to residents in the II area and their general feeling was something that didn 't necessarily have
to be formally developed by people in that area because they just wanted to
access the park . . . '
Tom Schoenecker : The thing that I 'm concerned with basically is the
indication of where that easement is . Right now who knows where it is and I
we should have some way of indicating to the people in the neighborhood
il '
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 18
IIthat is an easement . That it is an easement and that we do have access
that way .
IIPemrick: There wouldn 't be any way without . . .
I Hoffman : Correct . In addressing the , not developing it per se but just
allowing people to use that area , the hill there would have to have some
development . If you wanted to make use of that easement and you took a
connection off of one of the trail loops on the west side of the park and
I extended that to the base of the hill , you then would have to literally
build steps to bring the back yard of this person and if you 've gone that
far , you almost may as well continue that trailway so it is designated .
I The easement is there between the two homes which are right at the end of
the cul-de-sac . I believe about 2 years back that a portion of the
commission did go out and visit the Piper Ridge development to take a look
I at that area . To speak to the neighbors and obviously the two adjoining
neighbors would not like to voice their opinion against that development
. . .easement . It 's a . . .small area inbetween those two homes so it would be
fairly tight through there .
IAndrews : Have we had that surveyed . . .
IHoffman: Yeah . It 's platted .
Lash: . . .and it would be very close to a home .
II Schroers: The houses are close together and if the easement is in the
middle between the two houses , it would affect both of the property
owners . . .public access to the park there and I think that they would offer
IIa lot of resistance .
Hoffman: It is one of the questions which is on the survey which the
II Friends of Herman Field went ahead and took of the neighborhood and you 'll
see both responded in both ways on that . That many of the people would
like to see it and others didn't care either way .
II Andrews: I 've got a comment here . We 're talking about two property owners
that are . . .the question is , I think the easement was put there for the use
of a neighborhood , I think that the comment about if it was designated
II I think the people , if it 's going to be used , would feel comfortable using
it and not be concerned about being challenged by a property owner that
they 're not on their property .. And also as time goes by and ownership
I changes the property , some of these battles on what the easement . . .or what
used to be an easement becomes a bigger and bigger issue . I think if the
easement is there and it is City property , even if we don 't develop it , I
think it should at least be staked so if a person decides to walk down that
I hill , they are comfortable knowing that they 're not on somebody 's private
property and nor would the private property owner feel like they 're having
their property trespassed on.
ITom Schoenecker : That would be my concern is that as the neighborhood , or
as a neighbor there , I walk that area quite a bit . I walk around right
now . Well I would like to walk through but I don 't know where it is and
II 'd be afraid of going on somebody's private property and being kicked off
II
Park and Rec Commission Meeting I
January 22 , 1991 - Page 19
so if there was an area that was designated someway of staking or something "
just so I could go through .
Lash: If we have , if and when we have . . . I
Tom Schoenecker : Would it be possible just to send a letter and one of
these site plan to the neighbors there and designate where that easement is '
so we would know where it was? Would it be possible to get something like
that?
Hoffman: It certainly is but I would be somewhat tentative just inviting II
the neighborhood to use an easement because it just is there . Just because
it exists . I would be more comfortable with inviting the neighborhood to
use the access that park if it was maintained or developed or marked in
some manner . If we want to promote the use of it , then we should go ahead
and take the responsibility for marking it and making it known to not only
the neighborhood but all the public that would use that park as that is a II
viable means of gaining access from that cul-de-sac to the park .
Schroers: I think it would be reasonable to include pedestrian access . . . II
development .
Andrews: I think you 're missing the point here . We 're not talking about ,
developing a trail . I didn 't write your name down but if a citizen would
like to use an easement which already exists , they have a right to do so
I understand it . What we 're asking for is just for now is where that
easement is . To say that we don't want somebody to use an easement that 's II
there , then I guess would imply that the easement should be vacated :
Schroers: No .
Andrews: Development is a separate issue .
Schroers: . . .City Engineer just place the stakes for marking purposes. ,
I know they came through where I live and cut some trees and other things
to mark where some manholes were . . .and that was on the end of the easement .
Lash: I can 't understand why , from looking at it , why anybody would want I
to move it . I mean you 'd walk to the end of the people 's yard and sort of
fall into a bunch of woods . It 's a really steep hill from what I saw and I '
didn 't go through their yard but from looking at the map and stuff before ,
you 'd have to be a goat to .
Tom Schoenecker : Some of us are . '
Andrews: I guess my personal feeling is that the least we should do is put
a metal stake that 's visible at each end of the easement line and that can
be adequate . We don't have to talk about developing of an easement nor any 11
unnecessary connections but I think at least . . .those neighbors should be
aware of where this easement is located so that there is no conflict or
difficulty between neighbors . And if we don 't want the neighborhood to use II
the easement , if that 's what our . . .ought not to be used , then I think what
we should do is look at the vacation of this easement and deeding it to the
property owners . I think you 've got to go one way or the other and be fair II
I
IPark and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 20
IIto everybody . Not just the people that , who their property is directly
adjacent to the easement .
Hoffman: . . .Jim that we battle in a number of situations . . .
Andrews: I know it 's not easy but I guess I look at it , you know if it
were my property and I purchased it and I was adjacent to the easement , I
guess I would say that it 's my responsibility as a purchaser to be aware of
what easement 's I 'm located next to and to come to the Council and say ,
I it 's not fair because there's an easement on my property is not an excuse .
The easement was put there for the greater good and not necessarily for the
convenience of the one person who happens to live next to it . I think we
I have to be fair to all concerned . I think we should at the very least , put
something to identify where this easement is so that we eliminate the
difficulty . Development could be dealt with at a later time . We don 't
have to make it easy for people to use it but those that wish to use it
Ishould be aware of who 's property they 're on .
Schroers: . . .just put in a request to the . . .to mark that eaesment?
Hoffman: It would be something that I 'm not , the City has not done before
but I can certainly investigate that possibility . What type of marker
I would be placed there . What type of permanent marker would be placed
there . I do not know whether it 'd be the City placing an extended metal
post is running into a liability issue as well but extending and installing
a flush mounted type of marker of some sort is certainly viable .
' Schroers: . . .find a way to alert the residents where the marker is?
I Hoffman : Again , it 's an issue where the easements are put there for a
purpose for access to that park but traditionally it 's been two different
issues . The easement is there but then the discussion comes with a second
round of discussions come . . .when it is developed similar to a situation
II over in Saddlebrook to Butte Court . That 's a situation where you talked
about the adjoining residents out of courtesy but then you also talk to a
neighborhood that because the adjoining residents , because they have a
' right as well to use that public easement so it is a , it 's a situation
where you don 't want to make enemies on any one side .
IBetty Lang: How many residents have you talked to . . .?
Tom Schoenecker : Oh there 's probably , I think there 's probably about 60 or
70 homes up in that area . In Minnewashta Manor I believe there 's about 35
I and these are the people that I 'm concerned about and were concerned at the
time . I believe as citizens we have a right to know where that easement is
and that 's all we 're asking for is to know where it is .
IHoffman: But again to express my concern Jim , if you understand I have a
concern that we should be marking this easement and publicizing it if it
does not lead officially as an entrance to the park . Just having it lead
to the border of the park and then you find your way into the park from
there on is in my opinion not the manner in which to approach that .
1 Lash : . . .from a liability?
Park and Rec Commission Meeting '
January 22 , 1991 - Page 21
Hoffman: Liability and it 's an area of the park which is sensitive . It 's
a steep grade . It 's very treed in that area . Certainly you know as a
nature walk area , to a person that enjoys that type of walk , he can
traverse that but for the normal person to be aware that that is an access II
for us to say that that is an access to the park and then they walk through
that backyard and come to the top of that hill and wonder what is taking
place .
Schroers: I was just going ask if there was a problem entering from the
Forest Avenue , from the dead end down there? I
Tom Schoenecker : No , there really isn 't a problem entering that way but in
going walking , it 's nice if you can go in one area and then walk around and '
come out the other way and go back home . Basically you get kind of a
circle route and that 's kind of what we 're looking for .
Andrews: . . .I guess , I don 't think this is a park issue we 're talking
about here in the first place . I think this is a city clerk or city office
project here . You 're not talking about park land the way I understand it .
It 's City land . I would think the information of where the property is is II
something.that is public information available at the City office . At the
very least , I mean if we can 't , decide what we want tonight , I think at the
very least you should do is request from the City Office for a detailed
plat showing where that easement is . I don 't know who would have that , who II
would designate if we 're going to send out notices to the property owners
within the 5 houses . . .we need to do that but I think the city offices
should be approached to get the information initially .
Hoffman: . . .Tom I could certainly send you that but then mailing it out to
the residents for whatever reason would raise some issues which we I
currently don 't have answers for .
Andrews: I think at least we should send something to the two property
owners who are adjacent to that easement just for their own information
that there was an inquiry about where the easement was located . For your
own information here 's a copy of the plat showing where it is . I think at
this point maybe that 's all the farther we have to go . ,
Tom Schoenecker : Thank you very much.
Schroers: Anyone else have comments on Herman Field?
Betty Lang: My name is Betty Lang and I live at 2631 Forest Avenue . II I have one comment and I have one question . First of all about the gate .
I understand your thinking that it 's not going to stop anyone on foot but
what I 'm concerned about are the cars once that 's graded back there and
there 's a parking area because just at the dead end we had a lot of beer
parties and teenagers that were congregating and that was the reason I
wanted the gate . Second point it says in the letter that I received is to
complete the access road , Forest Avenue will be extended a short distance II
from where it currently stops . Does that mean you 're going to blacktop?
And if you are , are we going to be assessed?
Hoffman: You will not be assessed . The portion of the extended Forest I
Avenue will be blacktopped but it will not be an improved road . It will be
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 22
an aggregate base with a . . .blacktop surface but no assessments will be
charged to the adjoining neighbors .
Betty Lang: How about the gravel road to the parking lot area? Now how
about down the road if you decide to blacktop that? Are we going to be
assessed for anything that runs along our property?
Hoffman : No . Not whatsoever . The gravel road which is going in to access
the park and the parking lot is being put in there . Initially it 's gravel
for cost saving measures . Two to three years down the line from an
aesthetic standpoint as well as from a maintenance standpoint , when our
public works crews are out doing street patching and that type of thing in
the spring , we 'll schedule that in as a work function to have that
blacktopped but none of that work , that would be in the interior of the
park and that would be paid for out of the park development and acquisition
fund .
Betty Lang: So we don 't have to worry about that?
Schroers: I think that you 're concerned Betty about the teenage parties
that are back there . One reason that they 're back there is because it 's
not developed and it 's not an area that 's watched or supervised . The more
that it gets developed , the more often patrol cars come into the area , the
less of that sort of problem is going to exist .
Andrews: I have one more question . Is there a light plan for the parking
area there?
Hoffman: No there is not . The extension of utilities which include
electrical is not included .
Lash: It is going to be kind of a . . . I can see where it could potentially
be a problem and I 'd like to make sure that Mrs . Lang feels perfectly free
to call and . . .we 'll know if it 's a problem and then we can address it .
Hoffman: Parks in general have that stigma attached to them . They are a
public place where teenagers feel fairly comfortable going to and if they
have access to them at times , they will make use of them and we just have
to take the appropriate measures to try to curb that .
Schroers: Is there anyone else that we want to hear from on Herman Field?
Hoffman: Nobody here needs to speak . What I 'm looking for tonight is
approval to move forward with the project . Taking this to the City Council
for their approval and then go ahead and have the specifications and plan
developed and then move on with the process to have that road construction
process bid and get the construction started . It will probably be in June
of this year . -
Lash: I 'll move . . .
Pemrick: I ' ll second it .
i
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 25
continue to get older , they need repair and eventually replacement as well .
Schroers: There was some talk about changing the format of the hockey
situation to make it a little bit more conducive to snow removal and
proper maintenance . Would that be included in there?
Hoffman: I believe what drove that discussion was the access problem .
Maintenance really , currently they dump the snow every side which plugs up
any you know pedestrian trails around the outside of the rink where it 's t
tight so you have to cross rink number one . Go through a game or a
practice or whatever is taking place to get your players over on rink
number two . The general issue there was how can we realign these rinks so
you can access each rink separately . The tough question there becomes one
of that the light poles are in and are permanent and they would have to be
a major redesign and replacement of light poles there in order to realign
the rinks so they would face more down to the warming house . The other
possibility could come up with some design work to have a separate access
altogether for the second rink and that should be taken a look at as part
of the master park plan .
Andrews: We 've got $28 ,000 .00 to spend then and about 168 things that we
have to do . $40 ,000 .00 for the playground and $20 ,000 .00 for the tennis
courts?
Hoffman: Yeah . The tennis court , again it was not targeted specifically
but it 's , in my opinion , it is the highest , second highest priority for
this location . The use that they receive and as well as the comments and
the feedback that we receive back from the users would say that that would
be the best investment right at this time .
Lash: . . .we also talked about . . .under the master plan of . . .where the
ballfields are so we will be looking at that?
Hoffman: Yep . In discussions with Mark over the phone , taking a look at
possibly where the track could be located in reference to those two
balifields and where we can fit some additional soccer fields in and how
that design layout would work would be incorporated . That stemmed off of
the . . .major earth moving projects which would take place . I don't think
we 're in a situation to take on some large grading operations to improve
City Center Park . We 've already put in over a third of our budget in there
this year and it 's getting a substantial investment but we don 't have the
additional dollars to go ahead and do any grading . But as much redesign
work as we can get for the balifields at a reasonable cost will be taken
into consideration as well . In a master plan you should identify and bring
back concept plans that potentially this is how you could reconfigure it in
years down the line to get better use out of your land .
Andrews: I guess I 'm wondering what it is that you 're asking for here .
Perhaps you 're asking for specific direction of how to spend $8 ,000 .00 or
just for a go ahead to come back with a plan of how various alternatives
that we could then look at at that time?
Hoffman: Yes . I 'm looking for your approval to go ahead and what you feel
are the major , the priorities in your opinion and then we move forward .
I
II '
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 26
Andrews: I was just trying to figure out exactly what it is we need to do
next here .
Koubsky: I guess I think one of the main priorities is , besides a tennis
' court and playground is the hockey rink area there . Chanhassen has really
only two hockey rinks as I know it and for the kids to have to cross one
rink to get to another is real restricting .
' Andrews: Disruptive .
Koubsky: Yeah . Especially at game time . I can imagine how the scheduler
feels . I don 't know what' the best option is here . If it 's a path to go to
the middle for access points to the rink and then they 'd have to figure out
how to remove the snow differently . I haven 't spent a lot of time up there
' yet . I think it 's something I will do but I guess that would be an
interest of mine to do that hockey rink area .
Lash: Did you say Todd how much you think it would cost to reroof the
warming house?
Hoffman: $1 ,000 .00 .
' Andrews: Now the warming house sits right between the two hockey rinks?
ILash : No . It 's over by the City Center field .
Hoffman: The dark building there .
IAndrews: Okay .
Lash: Well , that would certainly be money well spent to prevent future
I problems if we ignore that . How much do you think it will take to do
something? What can be done to the hockey rinks for $5 ,000 .00-$6 ,000 .00-
$7 ,000 .00?
IHoffman: Again we initially looked at the berming which takes place on the
north side of the rink . It prevents a real accessible path alternate . The
people that use the rinks are so intuned to just skating out onto the open
I rink and zipping down a little ice ramp there and right across to the
second ice rink or hockey rink that it would be hard to change . To remedy
it , to remedy the problem in it 's entirety you should shut off that side
I access and then create an access on the north end inbetween the two rinks
where they then could get into that point . You 'd also have to take the
maintenance access points over there as well which is not real desireable
because currently it works well for the maintenance folks .
Lash: There 's nothing that can be temporary that could be in place when
it 's being used but be removed to access it to?
IHoffman: To maintain it?
Schroers: Is that something that staff could look at with maintenance and
see what alternatives there could be?
Hoffman: Yeah .
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 27
Schroers: We could research that a little further and see if we could come
up with something that might work at a reasonable dollar amount .
Hoffman: We certainly can . Those doorways or those entryways to the
hockey rinks are , you know the boards are available where they just drop II them in the slot and they can close it off . It 's just a time factor that
they 're never there so to have maintenance remove them and put them back in
every morning would just be an addition to their time but it solves a major
problem in accessability and interruption of games , then you know there 's I
those trade-offs which you measure . .
Lash: Are there games every day? Every night? I
Hoffman: No . Basically , at the current time , we don't have any games
taking place there . It 's just practices .
Lash: On Saturday?
Ruegemer : It 's roughly probably 2 hours , 4 days a week . 2 hours a night . II
Possibly 3 on some nights but it 's nothing real major .
Lash: I was just wondering , if it wasn 't scheduled , then it wouldn 't be
necessary to put the portion back in . Maintenance wouldn 't have to do
that .
Hoffman: Yeah , if you recall it was a request from one of the persons in 1
the Hockey Association that initially you generated that in discussion to
alter or change the layout of the hockey rinks.
Andrews: Is the grade of the land such that an area could be flooded to
the north of the rinks where people could skate around to the other rink?
Hoffman: Not at the time . Berms are there . t
Lash: Well , why don 't we leave it up to you guys to come . . .
Andrews: Punt . I
Lash: Well , they 're the ones who have to do it every day . I certainly
don 't know what they have to do to remove the snow . . . They would be the
best ones to come up with some good alternatives .
Hoffman: Okay . I
Schroers: I think that they would appreciate that also . Speaking from a
maintenance point of view , it 's kind of nice if somebody will let you come II
up with an idea that might work . Give you the freedom- to at least express II
an opinion . It 's kind of nice .
Andrews: I have some more questions on the ballfields . Are there 3 fields "
that are shown here , are these heavy use for the leagues that we run all
summer long?
Hoffman: They 're heavy use for the Chanhassen Athletic Association T-ball , '
Ragball , Pee Wee leagues from May until July 4th .
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 28
Andrews: Are the monies we 're looking at here , are these monies that would
be in addition to our regular maintenance fees of keeping the fields , you
know the grass green and in useable shape or are we looking at things that
need to be done to keep these in the inventory?
' Hoffman: No .
' Lash: Are we looking at losing a season?
Hoffman: No .
' Lash: So you 're not talking about ripping the whole thing out and
reseeding?
Hoffman: That 's correct .
Schroers: Does the lady from the school have anything that they would like
' to add? I had difficulty hearing that time .
Kitty Sitter : Do you have a timeframe? Do you know when you might start
this sort of project?
Schroers: I don 't actually . I would hope that we would start as soon as
the frost was out in the spring and we could get the equipment in to work .
Hoffman: With the size of the project being that we need to bid , require
proposals for a $40 ,000 .00 play structure and we need to . . .what type of
components should go in there and once those types of . . .is know , then going
out to actual suppliers and . . . We need to speed that process up and get it
right on line so in the month of June or the month of May is what sits in
your mind all the time . . .
' Kitty Sitter : It just makes it a little easier when you have an idea so we
can keep the kids away from that place . . .blacktop that area as well so that
' would be another site . . . Remove the one on the parking lot on the north
side . . .
Lash: Do you have a preference Kathleen?
Kathleen Macy: We know we want some on the south side as well as the north
side . The south side is where our older kids play and there 's nothing out
there . We want a basketball hoops , at least a half court . If we could
have one , maybe two where you take on the whole length and then four square
areas because kids use them all the time . During school and it 's something
that they can use that 's good play for them . I don 't know how far over we
go but that would depend . . . Do I have a preference? . . .but I don 't want a
basketball on the north side because that 's where it was before and the
kids weren 't the problem . It was the cars and the vehicles that came . . .
They backed into the hoop and it got bent . . . We 're willing to do almost
anything to . . .make it better for the kids that are there every day and then
in the summertime use is great too .
Lash: Really what I meant was as far as the actual work as far as
installing the playground equipment and all of that . Would it be . . .
II
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 29
Kathleen Macy: . . .after the kids are out would just make it safer because
you 're going to work during the daytime . . .so we have to put them out to the '
other end . It makes it easier for us if you start with the planning and
then the day school is out , start digging up the field and taking out . . .
That 's the easiest but we can work around it Jan. This is such an
advantage to the kids that . . .
Hoffman: In the current time schedule , I don 't foresee that we , it would II be a far shot to be anywhere a month ahead of that schedule so I 'd advise
to go ahead and wait until school is out and then start the work .
Lash : I just don 't want it to drag out until school starts again . 1
Hoffman: No .
Kathleen Macy: How do you see the south area construction fitting in to
what you 're . . .
Hoffman: They 're two separate projects totally . The stipulation which are '
attached to the north playground project is the funding program and the
Development Block Grant money for the 1991 fiscal year which I believe
becomes available in June so we don 't even know . . .funding source until
June . Obviously some of the planning can start prior to that . When we
receive that confirmation that the funding is there , we can go ahead but I
would see that following somewhat behind the other projects that could
start .
Kathleen Macy said something which wasn 't picked up on the tape .
Hoffman : No , I would certainly like to complete both of those prior to the I
start of school so we can have some sort of grand opening .
Kathleen Macy: Both playgrounds? '
Hoffman: Both playgrounds , correct .
Lash: I had one question . . .basketball and she asked something about
the . . .and she was wondering , that was a pretty busy spot during some of the
T-ball and Ragball people parking there and she 's wondering where . . . '
Hoffman: I had a meeting with the City Manager today . We spoke about that
and the signs come about part way down , No Parking signs and I 'm not
totally familiar with the situation . If it 's been no parking always or
just during school . Do you know Kathleen? And the parking lots are full
you know during that time period . It 's a two month time period . I 'm not
sure if the road , Coulter Drive in front of the City Hall is absolutely
full during that time . The situation being , if your peak periods for
parking , you have overruns but they can 't be so substantial that it 's such
a headache to find a parking spot and then the rest of the time the parking II
is sufficient so we don 't want to go ahead and pin point an area to
blacktop inside the park if we don 't have to . The most appropriate area
would be just inside the back parking lot . To take another swipe at that . ,
That would take out the one ballfield which is there and we 'd have to move
it to some other area which we currently don 't have . It's so convenient to
park on Kerber , that 's why they do it . I 'm not sure if the school parking
II
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 30
lots are full or filling up during that time .
Lash: The south one does . . .but why would the no parking signs go up there?
IHoffman: Oh , for the school crossing zone?
Lash: Oh!
I Hoffman: To go from the school path across to the apartments and then
eventually to the other units which go over there .
Lash: So is it possible to establish the no parking only during school?
Hoffman: There are strict State guidelines which go with those school
I crossings . I 'll have to speak with the engineering department on what
those guidelines are .
Schroers: Let 's . . .proposal to go ahead with the tennis court .
Hoffman: Sure . Just need your approval to go ahead and start the
investigation for completing that project .
Schroers : Okay , and _do you want this in a motion form?
Hoffman: Uh-huh .
Andrews: Do you need this to be just a motion of priority? You know A , B ,
C , D , E? Is that what we 're looking for here?
IHoffman: It sure can be , yeah . An overall motion of approval . You can
give me the complete go ahead or you can set some guidelines in there .
ISchroers: What are you looking for that you don 't have up to this point?
We 've got the tennis courts and the hockey rink and shingling the roof for
the skating rink .
IHoffman: That 's going to spend the money .
ILash: More than spend the money .
Hoffman: Yep .
I Schroers: Okay , is someone interested in entertaining a motion to that
effect?
I Andrews: I move that we allocate and prioritize with the tennis courts
being first , the improvement of hockey rink and roofing of the warming
house being second. And that the playground and other equipment being
Iproceeded with as originally planned before .
Lash: Should we put the shingling?
IAndrews: I talked about that .
. I II
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 31 ,
Lash: Yeah but should that be separate from the hockey? The shingling and
then whatever is left over goes to the hockey? I
Andrews: I would consider that a friendly amendment .
Schroers: Okay , is there a second? I
Lash: Second . II Andrews moved, Lash seconded to recommend that the following improvements
for the City Center .Park receive priority in the order listed: preparation
of master park plan, installation of play equipment, repair of tennis
courts, shingling of warming house and work on the hockey rinks. All voted
in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
Lash: When do you feel that you 'll be coming back? I
Hoffman: Next meeting .
Andrews: Todd I wanted to mention , I mentioned to Wendy that last year we II
had quite a delay between the time of ordering equipment to receiving it .
I hope we can do better this year . We ordered it , I think it was in March II
and didn 't get it until mid-summer and hopefully we won 't have that . . .
Lash: That is the standard delivery time though , 6 to 8 weeks .
II
Hoffman: It depends on when your order goes in . Obviously February ,
March , April gets to be their busiest time . About a month and a half turn
around is standard on playground equipment . So we do need to get that
II
pushed forward.
SOUTH LOTUS LAKE BOAT ACCESS - SITE AND DRAINAGE STUDY.
II
Hoffman: Along with the report , you did have the attached study itself
that was prepared by Van Doren-Hazard-Stallings . This study was initiated II originally sometime last spring by the engineering department dealing with
the drainage issues that were occurring down at South Lotus Lake Park . How
to correct those problems . The park never initially developed into the
facility that it should be . The grass never grew properly . The storm of ,
'87 or '88 , whatever it was , came in and wiped out the retaining structure
at the bottom of the park itself there and then the drought years never let
the vegetation establish so the engineering department took a look at this .
Started working with Scott Harri from Van Doren-Hazard-Stallings in getting 11
a plan initiated . At that time it was anticipated that the funding
sources , the outside funding sources available there to do the soil
correction , service grant and then the environmental trust fund would be
II
sufficient dollars to complete this project . But taking a look at the
extent of the measures which were necessary to correct the problems which
were taking place there with the additional runoff coming from the adjacent II
developments and those types of things , and the drainage structure , the
flow rate not being correct , the dollar amount started to build and as the
study indicated , their total was $40 ,587 .00 is projected to correct the II problems which currently exist and then to get that park looking into the
state that we all wish it would be . As stated , this park was not addressed
as part of the 1991 budgeting . We did not talk about an additional
I
•
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 32
I
$20 ,000 .00 being spent at South Lotus Lake Park for this project . I was
aware of the project prior to the budget discussions but again at that time
the project was fully in the hands of the engineering department and I was
not kept abreast of the funding situation with the transfer of my position
and then as well the leaving of Gary Warren . Scott then called me one day
and said , you know we need to move forward and talk about how this project
is going to progress . We met with the City Manager and discussed the
funding options so it is my recommendation that we go ahead and approve the
' alteration of our 1991 budget to include a maximum $20 ,000 .00 for this
project . The initial budget figure of $40 ,587 .00 only necessitates that we
spend $11 ,409 .00 initially but would be such a project if there 's any add
on 's or additions as we get into the project , it could be necessary to
spend additional dollars so we just need to have those available for that
type of project . Scott is here and can address any specific questions you
have on the study itself or how it has progressed over the past 6 or 7
months .
Schroers : Well , it just so happens that I recently attended a Clean Water
seminar and there was a ponding section and it was maintained that most of
the ponding that goes on in municipalities , it 's basically just a hole dug
out for water retention . It 's the feeling of the people who were putting
on the seminar that the configuration of the pondings were changed somewhat
to represent more of a funnel shape , the actual hole for the water . If it
was deeper in the center but then coming up and expanding out a little bit
more and be more gradual so as to promote more water vegetation . Plant
life which would help to purify the water and also it tends to make the
area more aesthetic and develop a small area for wildlife around the
ponding and it 's also kind of a safety factor in that cattails on marshy
areas are kind of a deterrent for children and also that they shallowness
around the edges which promotes the plant life and the growth is also safer
from the aspect of a kid falling in to a deeper , steeper area that he
wouldn 't be able to climb out of . Are any of those considerations in your
' current plan to redo it?
Scott Harri : I guess I can concur whole heartedly I guess with your
' perception and the information you received regarding what might be the
best way to design these types of storage facilities that both , I guess
clarify the water to a certain degree and also provide for a buffering of
' the rate of flow and so we don 't impact downstream properties . Most of the
time in urban settings , just the physical constraints of the property and
the space involved , you know people design these ponds with I guess the
maximum . . .you can put on things just due to the constraints of land and the
' developable property . In regards to specifically your question , the lower
pond provides I guess for the best opportunity to achieve the cattail
growth . The slower and flatter sloping areas and what exists right now as
part of our proposal is the north half of the pond from where the inlet
comes in from the upper pond and the storm sewer system toward the lake , we
propose on providing a boulder type wall along there to improve the
' aesthetics and to reduce the amount of maintenance required of weed cutting
and things . And as far as the bottom , we 're not really changing any of the
flatter areas . The area to the south or toward the hill , that area right
now has a lot of cattails growing in it . We propose really not on dredging
' or taking any of that sediment material that 's built up there . It 's got
some good nutrient and it does remove effectively a certain portion of the
nutrient loading that does come down with your smaller rainstorm washings
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 33 ,
so it is kind of providing for both but it doesn 't provide it entirely
around the perimeter of the pond itself . So we 're going to get some water II
quality improvement and they perhaps pointed out at the seminar that the
most harmful storm water event is when you have the light drizzle . The
first little flushes of stuff that cleans the street and gets in the storm
sewer . That 's where the most heavy nutrient from fertilizers and other
things , road salts and stuff get in there . It 's not your real gully
washers that tend to cause water quality problems . Okay . Because even the
smallest rainstorm collects the sediment and brings it down to your pond ,
and those happen quite frequently so it 's the frequency of these events and
having these shallower or flatter slopes makes a lot of sense . And this
information is evolving just every year . There 's more studies done on 11 urban ponds . Should they be deeper? Wider? How much time you want the
water to sit in there so you can settle out the sediments so it 's something
that 's not a science . It 's kind of imperically developed over time but I
would agree wholeheartedly and I guess half of the pond is going to serve
the purposes that at least we 're finding out in the seminar you went to .
Andrews : I just had a general comment about the ramp . I use it a lot
myself . I 'm a sailor and I go over there probably average almost once a
week and have a good idea of the kind of traffic you get . In the diagram ,
in the parking area near where it says Area #4 , that 's the area where
people when they come out off the ramp with their boat , they usually tend
to pull off to the side , tie their boats down , put covers down and so
forth . I think you need to expand an area and also curb it to keep people
off the grass there . That particular grassy area gets completed destroyed II
and I think you have to make sure that people know first of all where they
are limited to with their vehicles and secondly , to make sure they are
provided enough space so that one person can pull off and secure his boat II
to take up the road while another person would tend to back in there so
maybe you 've already allowed some additional room in there from previous
but it is tight .
Scott Harri : I 'll just put a little thing on the overhead here . I think
you bring up a very good point . Our specific proposal would be in this ,
we 're talking about this queuing area where people tend to tie up once they II
pull out and right now people are driving on top of this grass island area
and it 's becoming pretty thread bare if you will from lack of any better
term . Not a lot of vegetation there and what we 're proposing is to curb II this area in front of this island and put a berm in here . A planting berm
along with putting some of the salvaged rip rap from this berm area down in
this island area here .
Andrews: There are actually people going like this , pulling off to the
right . What people tend to normally do is pull off over here .
Scott Harri : Right here? '
Andrews: Yep . Going off in the grass there and it doesn 't survive very
well .
Schroers: Why are they doing that Jim? Just so other people can get
around them? '
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
9
January 22 , 1991 - Page 34
1
Andrews: Yeah . I think a person 's natural instinct is to pull to the
' right to get out of the way and let somebody else pull in .
Schroers: Versus going up the hill and putting their stuff together up on
top?
' Andrews: Well some boats , you know outboard motor boats or inboard/outdoor
boats or heavier sailboats , it 's dangerous to even take them up that little
' hill until they 're secure on the trailor . You can lose a boat off of a
trailer even up a trip that small so , and most people tend to probably do
90% of their tie down right there on the ramp and they do tend to pull off
to the right and I think we have to provide either enough room for them to
do it adequately or to make sure they know they shouldn 't do it there and
provide another space for them to do so .
Scott Harri : There 's about room for 2 cars and trailers to pull off on the
right hand side . About . You know you get somebody real long that doesn 't
pull up far enough , then it creates some problems but in general terms
there 's almost space for 2 cars to tie down which is just enough for that
one person 's tie down . . .somebody else is pulling out . And I 've been there
when it 's been real busy and it 's a zoo down there . You know people are
trying to launch while people are coming out at the same time . But you 're
right .
Schroers: Is there a boat launch that isn 't a zoo when it 's busy? _
Koubsky: What 's the south area on Number 4 used for? Is that just green?
Scott Harri : Yeah . Right now it was intended as a secondary collection
fo-r storm water runoff and it was hoped at one time to provide for some
additional ponding and storage in that area and it really didn 't work out
feasible from how fast the water kind of comes down that hill . It 's more
of a nuisance and a maintenance hassle down there . Maintenance , when we
met with them in conjunction with developing our recommendations , was in
favor of paving that area down there . Just blacktopping it right across
' and we felt that maybe a middle ground of using the salvaged rip rap from
the berm . . .
( There was a tape change at this point in the discussion . )
Lash: So we wouldn 't have any recourse back to the developer who 's
essentially caused a fair share of the problems isn 't it?
Scott Harri : Well yeah . I think it might be that you can only look
forward but I think it would behoove us to look at the development contract
that came about in it 's final form to see if there was some provision in
there for some cost sharings or for some rehabitation . The fact that
there 's problems , the biggest challenge was . . .by the fact that just as a
natural course of the design and development of that upper pond where the
parking lot was , that we were able to store most all of the additional
runoff that came through the Bloomberg development by just the physical
size of that existing pond and putting in a smaller say outlet pipe from
II that pond . So the impact to the City was in the destruction caused during
some of these heavier rain storms in '87 and '88 , '89 , '90 type of thing
and the erosion and that kind of stuff . Now with this improvement , there 's
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 35
a minimum cost to go ahead and make these improvements and their impact now
is being mitigated . So on the one hand they added a lot to the . . . '
Lash: But if they had to pay the $20 ,000 .00 instead of us , that would be
even better?
Scott Harri : That would be better , yes . Exactly .
Schroers: It would be quite difficult to put language into a contract like '
that and get a reasonable contractor to bid on it if he had to assume the
cost of something that he couldn 't control like a major rain storm causing
the erosion . I mean if you 're going to throw that back on the contractor , '
you probably wouldn 't get people submitting bids on something like that .
Hoffman: The arrangement to initially acquire the land for South Lotus
Lake Park did include a swap with that developer . Swapping the piece from II
north of North Lotus Lake Park , which we owned, for the piece for the boat
access as well so there was some cooperation on the part of the developer
to meet the City 's needs and request so there 's that aspect to look at as II
well .
Lash: The other thing I 'd be interested in is , you have an estimated time in
line that begins saying if everything went just great and I guess I 'd be
somewhat interested in us taking the direction of trying to set some kind
of realistic time lines of completion because I tend to get frustrated
when I see projects dragging on . I now some things are out of people 's
control . If it doesn 't rain and seed doesn 't take and all that kind of
stuff but I had some frustration with the completion at Lake Ann . It
seemed like it took a long time and there were a lot of delays .
Hoffman: You 're speaking specifically on the contract for the construction
job itself , the time line? Okay .
Lash: Just so we have a little more accountability . We know there is an II
end and just to kind of keep everybody on track . And then I looked at the
landscaping plan and I think it looks fine but I 'm not a landscaper and I II
guess I 'm a little gun shy about putting in lots of trees and shurbs so I
just want to make sure it 's not over kill and done tastefully .
Andrews: As far as the landscaping goes , right down on the lake frontage II
near the boat ramp we 've put a couple of picnic tables down and when people
are pulling their boats up on the sand . You know when they 're not taking
them out of the water but when they 're coming in for a break or whatever , II
there 's not enough room down there for that really . What I use is a
sailboard down there and there's only room for like two guys to pull a
sailboard up on the sand and then there 's the bush and the trees are right
there . I guess I 'd say that maybe we ought to look at less landscaping
right on the water rather than more . Especially toward , to the northwest
side of the ramp there . It 's heavily brushed and not very useable and
that 's where the picnic table was at least .
Hoffman: Scott 's comment is that the area to the west has been kind of
extended over time . Brushed it out a little bit so we can move the dock
down and gain a little bit more space over time but keeping the shurbs out II
of that area and not planting a tree right onto that waterfront area is
I
IIPark and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 36
very adviseable . It 's just such a tight location and there 's a lot of
1 activity there .
Schroers: In terms of landscaping and shurbs and planting and islands and
' parking lots , isn 't some of that even Code? I know that in the City of
Plymouth , if you 're going to build a parking lot , you have to have so much
islands per so many square foot of parking and there has to be some kind of
planting in it .
' Scott Harri : The size of the islands and percentage of green space within
the parking area is , at the time the upper parking lot was developed met
the City ordinance and was only through the budgetary constraints that a
full landscaping package that you 're seeing in your packet right now was
originally proposed but was cut back to a minimum to satisfy the bare
minimums at the time the project was initially constructed . What this
proposal does is it restores back to what this commission originally
approved back in 1985 .
' Schroers: Is there anything in here that anyone sees that they 're not
happy with?
I Andrews: One more thing . I know it 's getting late tonight but on the
upper parking lot it shows the Norway Maples and the two islands in the
parking area there . I would suggest those be removed . There 's so much
pressure up there for trailer parking space now , I guess if those were over
hanging and created any impediment to parking , you 're just reducing
available space to park and it typically is full by noon on Saturday as it
is . So if a person were to be concerned about a tree over hanging even 2
or 3 feet , that would probably eliminate one spot .
Scott Harri : Sap and all that stuff .
Andrews : Yeah , sap too on cars or boats .
Scott Harri : A quick landscaping observation . On the lower bottom you 've
got 6 Seedless Green Ash that evidentally the City has in their nursery . I
don 't know if the City has any pine trees . I was just wondering . There 's
two houses up on top to the south there that have to look down on this and
I 'notice they have decks and what not . Is there one reason other than the
cost that pine trees weren 't considered because eventually that would block
this whole boat access off from their view off their decks . I don 't know
if they ever had any input on the aesthetics of this park or not .
Hoffman: Sure . Yeah they have in the past . Those were put in there as a
cost saving measure . They are available . The pine trees which we have in
' our nursery are about this tall and so that 's the reasoning for it . If we
would plop it a 4 or 6 foot spruce tree , we 'd be looking at additional
couple thousand dollars at least in there .
Schroers : There 's been a lot of concerns and a lot of questions and I
think that that 's really good but it also sounds like most of them have
been answered sufficiently and it appears to me that a good amount of
II effort and good planning has gone into this and I don 't see a reason not to
approve this . Is anyone willing to make a motion?
I •
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 37
1
Lash: Do we want to , I 'm assuming that some of Jim 's concerns were put
down and they 'll be added?
Hoffman: Yep. Added or subtracted from the final plan .
Andrews: I would imagine that if that steep slope on the upper lot had to ,
be changed , that would be extremely expensive . If that were to be thought
necessary , I guess I would like to see this come back to us . Other than
that I think most of the other items are fairly minor in nature . '
Hoffman: If we can take a look at that and if that could be incorporated
with part of the 1 to 2 year grading project on the lower level which is
going to be to decrease that slope , if this potential problem could be
solved in that same vein .
Andrews: Maybe it needs nothing at all . I 'm not an expert but if it would II
need to be changed , then it would be probably add a considerable amount to
this project . I would be willing to move that we amend our budget for the
project as it 's suggested with the minor modifications -but I guess I would
feel that if the additional cost of a retaining wall system is needed on
the upper parking lot , I think I would prefer to have that come back for
further budgetary consideration.
Lash: That would almost have to wouldn 't it? It 'd be a whole different .
Hoffman: Project . 1
Schroers : Okay Jim , is that your motion then?
Andrews: Yes . '
Schroers: Okay . Can I ask for a second on that?
Pemrick: I 'll second it .
Andrews moved, Pemrick seconded to recommend approval of the South Lotus
Lake Boat Access Site and Drainage study with the noted changes and to
amend the 1991 Capital Improvement Program to include expenditures up to
$20,000.00 as the Park and Recreation Department's share of the project .
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
LAKE ANN PARK COMMUNITY PARK SHELTER.
Hoffman: Again another Capital Improvement item which has been floating I
around for a number of years and has been discussed and plans have been
taken a look at and those types of things . It is a project which was
discussed as part of the CIP . City Council approved it and now we must
move forward with the plans and the design work which needs to be completed
prior to the construction sometime in the summer of 1991 . The attachments
you have available to you are the initial sketch plans which were done as
part of discussion approximately 3 years ago . 2 years ago . 2 to 3 years
ago and then as well a site location map which showed a proposed picnic
shelter location inbetween the lower parking lot to turn around and then
down to the beach area . Minutes from the March 27 , 1990 Park and
Recreation Commission meeting are also attached . That is the last time the
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 38
Commission addressed this issue with some concerns over the rental
I operations and storage and what specific facilities would be included as
part of this project were discussed . Those types of discussions should
continue tonight . What I 'm looking for -is some specific recommendations on
what type of facilities , what the exact make-up of the picnic shelter
I should include . The running water , restrooms , bathrooms , concession area .
Those types of things . Then we 'll take that information back and Mark or
Van Doren-Hazard will bring back an updated version of this plan and then
II we 'll go through that and take a look and see if that meets the needs and
the wants of the commission and then go further ahead with the approval at
the Council level and then on to the construction process .
IIAndrews: I think what you 're asking for is , there 's about half a night 's
worth of work here .
I Schroers: You know a lot of this we have addressed before . Jim , you were
here for one meeting I recall . I remember the discussion about the boat
rental and so forth . Wendy , were you?
IPemrick: Yes .
ILash: I was not here that night .
Schroers: I think that we have laid a lot of the ground work for this and
I don 't know how much we need to change it . You just want to get more
Ispecific Todd?
Hoffman: Basically we do have some , as these projects tend to carry on , I
' just want to reinstill in my confidence of what it is exactly we want . If
you haven 't changed your mind . That type of thing . Just to freshen up
everybody 's opinion and attitude on the project so when we go forth with it
I we have accurate , up to date information . So yes , tonight was a lengthy .
agenda . This is an item which is , it 's a major capital improvement and we
certainly want to do it , addressing all our concerns but ' we 've gone over it
in the past . We 've talked about the lifeguard station . The rental
' equipment . The potential for storage . But then no , we can 't have storage
into this building because of the cost factor . We could store the rental
boats up at the maintenance building . Obviously we want it to be
aesthetically pleasing . What type of materials potentially do you want to
take a look at? If we run into cost restrictions , should we take out the
fireplace or do you think that 's a real major item and those types of
concerns .
IISchroers: Instead of jumping back and forth and going all over the place ,
why don 't we start with like the upper floor of the building and do this in
II some organized form so we can get through it and hit all the areas and do
it in a reasonably efficient manner so we 're not here for the rest of the
evening but we still get our bases covered .
IILash: As far as the fireplace goes , which would be on the upper floor . I
thought we had talked about an outdoor fireplace and we had already
earmarked funding from the Lion 's or someone for that didn 't we?
IHoffman: I 'd have to review discussion previous to this on the picnic
shelter but I recall that , yes .
II
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 39 '
Lash: I believe there was $20 ,000 .00 coming from the Lion 's? Well we
decided to put a plaque on it and everything . Is it bringing back II memories? I do remember that so I wouldn 't feel comfortable unless you 're
talking about a fireplace inside and outside . It was a decision to use
that money for . '
Hoffman: From the Chaska Lion 's gambling fund . Okay .
Lash: It was on a letter saying I think we were going to do that so I
wouldn 't feel real comfortable just all of a sudden.
Hoffman: Changing it? '
Lash: Yes . Scrapping that whole idea .
Hoffman: I ' ll go ahead and review that . Take a look back in the Minutes II
to find out exactly what that all entailed .
Lash: Well from reading the discussion last year , it sounds like it was
pretty thoroughly covered and I wasn 't here but I guess I would say the
idea was to make this somewhat simple originally and with only $110 ,000 .00
it 's not going to end up being very fancy . I can 't imagine that it would 11
be for that amount of money so if we have a concrete floor that can be
hosed off by the maintenance guys when it needs it and if we can afford to
screen it in . I don 't even know if we can afford to do that but if it were
built in such a fashion that we could eventually screen it in or eventually "
glass it in if we ever wanted to do that , I guess that would be something
to look at . And as far as construction , I think we 've tried to stick with
a real natural looking things in that park . A lot of the playground II equipment has been timber style things and something that we would want to
stick with that . . .
Andrews: I see here the necessity to drill a well . Does that imply if we II
don 't do a well we have no water at the site?
Hoffman: Correct . ,
Andrews: Okay . I don't see how we could have any concession area without
water . '
Schroers: You 're not going to have a very well maintained facility without
water either because in this type of a thing , it 's an open atmosphere and '
everything gets spilled on the floor . Beans, watermelon , whatever and if
you don 't have some water to clean it up , it gets looking pretty bad in a
short time .
Lash: What about the idea Larry in your opinion , you work with this stuff II
all the time but could we put some type of just a floor drain system in it
so you could hose it and it would go down that instead of running off all
over or what would be the best?
Schroers: I think that 's certainly feasible . It 's just depends on how
sophisticated we 're going to get with the plumbing in the building . If
we 're going to have shower rooms and all that sort of stuff , then a floor
drain I think would be fine. Otherwise you 'd have just a border and just .
I
11
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 40
Lash: Like a gutter?
Schroers: Like a gutter and just flush it right out or into a corner and
clean it up and put it in a can with a liner .
Andrews: I have another question that pertains directly to this . There is
no available sewer hook-up on this property?
Hoffman: No .
Lash: So we can 't have toilets?
IAndrews: We can toilets but what I 'm driving at here is drainfield
capacity . If you 're going to have drains that you 're going to hose into
plus showers plus bathrooms and so forth , we 're looking at a lot of
drainfield .
Lash: There wasn 't ever showers was there?
Hoffman: No .
I Andrews: Okay . No showers . Pardon me . But I think that would almost
eliminate the ability to have a floor drain as a method of cleaning . That
would generate a tremendous amount of water volume for the drainfield to
Ihandle .
Hoffman: That 's correct . The drainfield or the treatment of that type of
system , the sewage system here is still being investigated . The location
is low enough and adjacent to the lake that a drainfield cannot be located
in the area between the shelter and the lake . It just won 't meet setbacks .
If a drainfield concept was used , we would have to install a pumping system
to pump that back up the hill and then back down into the drainfield . The
other situation being that there are ways to have the water effluent run
off the top and then be piped into an existing sewage system around the
lake at the Greenwood Shores where it can connect up into that area so you
still have a septic system type of system which is pumped periodically but
the water effluent runs off the top and heads out so there 's a variety .
Schroers : It goes into like a catch basin or something and then runs into
the existing system?
Hoffman: Depending on what grades you have and what elevations your
existing systems are at , if you can have it run . Otherwise you need to
install a pump system but the pipe for the water is something of this
I nature so it 's smaller so the installation could be feasible that way .
Then you would not have to pump the sewage system as frequently . Otherwise
you 'd just install a very large tank which fills up with both solid and
liquid waste and then you pump it periodically just as an enclosed system .
Andrews: Sounds like we 're spending money quickly when we talk about
systems like that .
Lash: Just see if I understood this . You say one of the options would be
running pipe all the way over to the other side of the lake and hook up to
1 the sewer?
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 41
Hoffman: The closest sewer line and what that would entail , you know not
the solid waste but just the liquid that runs off the top of a septic II system . You know everything sinks to the bottom and the effluent runs to
the top and then to pump that portion of it over to the closest existing
septic system or sewer .
Lash: That would have to be really expensive wouldn 't it?
Hoffman: You know the size of the pipe just to drain off the water is not II
a real huge , it 's a smaller pipe so the dredging in of that is not a huge
project .
Schroers: Well I think we 're getting a little out of our area here anyway . II
I think this is the sort of thing that the engineers are going to have to
decide what is going to be the best way to handle this . But basically how
many people are we trying to accommodate here Todd? Have we given any
thought to that?
Hoffman: At the last meeting I believe we spoke of , threw out figures of II
40 to 60 in the upper picnic area .
Lash: Were you talking about electricity up there?
Hoffman: Correct .
Lash: In the discussion before there was a point I believe where Larry or I
maybe Lori , I can 't remember . Somebody had said that you are the one who
formally dealt with the request for different facilities and asked if you
wanted to address it now or later and you said later . This is it . What II are the kinds of things that are requested the most? That 's what we need
to know .
Hoffman: We talked about the group picnics . The number of , we 've I
designated two areas at Lake Ann . Parkview , which is up at the top of the
hill near this location and then also Lakeside which is near the location
down in front of it . They 're being used on a weekend to weekend , they 're II
booked solid for they 're for groups up to 250 people so obviously we can
only serve a small group of people so to address it it 's going to be a
popular location for group picnics , family gatherings , weddings , that type
of thing and it will be extensively used so we need to try to develop it to
such a degree that it can be feasibily used. You need to have water ,
electricity , those type of things . Beyond that you don't have to get
really elaborate with carpet and paneling but you need to have the basic
functions available there and it 's going to be booked consistently .
Schroers: So you want to design it with 'hard use in mind? Do you see the II
way the facility down at Lake Susan has been treated and every day I see
the way our facilities are treated and we want to build it to withstand the
most rugged abuse you can imagine . We don 't want to put nice tables . We
don 't want to put carpeting . We don 't want anything that can easily be
destroyed because you can bet that it will be .
Lash: I guess the most maintenance free as far as , you know if there 's
graffitti or if there 's a lot of that kind of stuff that goes on .
Something that you 'd be able to either get that off or paint layers .
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 42
Schroers: I think that you 're going to find that there 's going to be
' larger groups also wanting to rent it out . If we build that for 60 , I know
somebody 's going to call you and say , well we 've got 75 . Can ''-t we squeeze
in there? And I don 't know what the Codes are and stuff here but I mean we
run into that all the time . I realize that building is bigger to
accommodate larger groups . The more square footage you 've got , the more
cost involved and we wouldn 't get anywhere for $110 ,000 .00 but anticipating
' that this is going to be used extensively would be a conservative
anticipation . These things are really going .
Pemrick: Could it be designed to be built on down the road? 5 years from
now add on?
Schroers : The modular system?
Lash: Or at least even in it 's location . If that 's looked at so it 's not .
Pemrick: So it 's conducive to it .
1 Schroers: In Europe they build whole modular parks that they can change
the theme of the park from year to year so they can generate interest in
' the same area and people don 't get bored with the same amenities in the
same area all the time . But here that 's not the trend . When we see that
something , that this facility here is being over used and that there 's more
' need , we just build another one somewhere else on the site .
Andrews: I 'll be brief here because it 's getting just so late . I 'm just
going to try to hit right down the line like is being requested . I think
II we need water . I think we ought to have the effluent should be stored and
piped off in the liquid fashion like Todd 's saying . I think it 's the
cheapest . We had talked about the need of perhaps a small storage/first
aid closest or room or whatever . I think that should be included . I think
it could be taken off the concession area or something like that but we
wouldn 't need much room but it could be done . I see nothing on the plan
I for any kind of maintenance or utility storage closet where you could keep
a broom or a squeegee or a hose or whatever you need there . I think that
would be helpful .
Schroers: I think that 's a necessity .
Andrews: The other question I would have is in the upper level , I would
think that on rainy days people are going to be very , very tempted to bring
their barbeques or their charcoal cookers , whatever inside trying to cook
and I don 't know what we 've thought about as far as fire protection . If
we're going to be sprinklered or if we 're just going to have signs that say
' you 'll be imprisoned if we catch you doing it or what but people by nature
will try to do that and I guess I 'm concerned that the construction should
be fire resistant on that upper level in particular . Other than that I
IIjust want to go home it 's so late .
Lash : Well if there was a fireplace up there , if it was made in the
I fashion that it was sort of a grill type so if they wanted to do that , they
could use that and it would be . . .
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 -- Page 43
Andrews: We talked about materials . Natural looks nice but costs the
most . I know it 's basically somewhat not eye appealing but it can be done 'II
with painting and perhaps texturing . Sometimes tip up concrete can be very
cheap . It 's very , very resistant to weather , vandalism . That might be a
consideration plus there 's local companies that provide it that we could
perhaps get a little more bang for our buck with tip up versus frame and
wood .
Koubsky: Tip up? You mean like pre-cast? ,
Andrews: Pre-cast tip up concrete , yeah .
Lash: I 'd like to see a telephone in there too . ,
Schroers: There 's something else to be considered also . What 's the policy
going to be with the upper level when it 's not reserved? Is it going to be '
open to the general public? Are you going to let people just wander in and
out of there all the time?
Hoffman: It 's originally designed for that type of function , yes .
Lash: So how do people know if it is reserved? Will there be signs up?
Hoffman: Yeah , there will have to be some sort of implementation of a
system .
Andrews: See if it 's going to be open to the daily use , that just to me
reinforces the idea of fire resistant construction .
Schroers: . . .to maintain that every single day . Somebody 's going to have I
to be there to clean it up if you have it that way . If it can 't be locked
and for reservations only , it 's going to be a daily maintenance problem .
Andrews: Another thing about tip up concrete would be that it could
support a concrete deck easily versus if you had frame or wood again . The
loads of that , you know the concrete deck on the upper level for
maintenance would be I think much more expensive and difficult to
construct . You could always trim that with some brick veneers or something
to give it more of a natural look but we 're only looking at what , a 1 ,200
square foot building . This isn 't that big . I think we had visions I think
here of some sort of monsterous building here. We 're talking of something
that 's quite small .
Lash: I 'd be interested in some drinking fountains in there also as long
as we have water .
Schroers: And the downstairs is never going to be reserved? That 's always ,
the lower level is always just open to the public?
Hoffman: Concession rental . Restrooms . Maintenance . The storage building !'
will be incorporated in there and then also a lifeguard storage area .
Lash: Would it be able on the upper level , just getting back to the idea II
of future possible expansion . Would it be able to be cut into the hill
someway that the lower level would be level with the top of the hill so if
II
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 44
we just wanted to extend it out to the top of the hill , we 'd just add more
' picnic . A roof over a picnic area there , if we could do that?
Hoffman: The currently designed level is a walkout on the upper level and
a walkout on the lower level . Other thoughts being that eventually on the
large picnic area or parkview picnic area , that concrete slab , large picnic
shelter just post and roof construction . Picnic shelter would be
constructed on top of the hill to accommodate groups of 200-300 people .
' That type of thing so adding additional facilities to Lake Ann for group
picnics so it will be addressed as well in the future .
Koubsky: Are you going to have toilets in this thing? The space allocated
for the toilets versus changing area . I 'm not sure which is more important
but when you have 200-300 people and you 've got a beach , these are going to
be the only flush toilets in the park . . .but all 3 toilets for the women 's
bathroom , I don 't know if that 's .
Hoffman: Just like the Target Center . We 'll fit as many in as we can with
the constraints in budget .
Lash: Well you don 't really if the changing area , I think that 's a really
good point Dave . I looked at that but I didn 't bring it up because I
thought most people when they go have already changed before you get there .
Most people I don 't think are going to want to change once they 're there .
I would rather just see more toilets put in and if you need to change
there , you could always change in one of the toilet stalls .
Schroers: That 's a good point . We have a very active beach with 4
changing rooms and they are the least used or any of our facilities . You
could probably cut those changing areas in half .
' Hoffman: Okay .
Schroers: Or cut it in half and have the storage space in the closets
because that 's something that we 're in shortage of everywhere and every
' building that we have . The stuff that you tend to accumulate , lifeguard
equipment and all this other stuff , you can 't have too much storage . It 's
hard to sell storage space because everybody says it 's not useable . You
can 't but it 's sure nice to have .
Hoffman: Great . That 's a lot of good input . Between myself and Bruce
we ' ll relay that back and get some of the design changes and an updated
sketch plans back to the commission .
Schroers: Can we move on to item 11 now? Is there anything else you
' wanted to cover on this one Todd?
Hoffman: On the community shelter , no . We 're relying on , I really wanted
to just get updated because I was relying on some old information so with
this new input we can go ahead and initiate the design stage and then right
onto construction . Big summer we 're going to have here .
Schroers : Sounds good . I bet Jerry 's ready to just jump right in .
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 45
APPROVAL OF THE 1991 FOURTH OF JULY CELEBRATION BAND CONTRACT - HI TOPS.
Ruegemer : You bet I am . Starting to prioritize the events for the 4th of
July . I have been in contact with the booking agent for the Hi Tops and
they have expressed interest in playing again for the annual 4th of July II celebration . I stated in the memo , they are quite a bit cheaper in price
than other bands of that size and popularity . Basically it just stated ,
you know the dates . The rain out dates . Compensation . The set . The
length of the set . I 'd just like to get your feedback . Is there any
questions regarding?
Andrews: My only comment was , they were great last year and I think we
just approve this and go with it .
Schroers: Everything about it is good Jerry . You 've got it . 1
Andrews : Need a motion for that?
Lash: I move we accept the contract for the Hi Tops for the 4th of July
dance .
Andrews: I second . ;
Lash moved, Andrews seconded to approve the performance contract with the
Hi-Tops as written in the amount of $1 ,400 .00 for the 1991 4th of July
Celebration. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
SITE PLAN REVIEW, VALVOLINE INSTANT OIL.
Schroers: Do you want to do wait for Todd or do you want to do this Jerry? 11
Ruegemer : I think we 'll have to wait for Todd on this one . I
Hoffman: Very straight forward basic site plan review . It is located ,
take a look at the map there . Just to the east of the car wash and up to II
northeast of Brown 's Amoco . The new station there . 79th Street is a
cul-de-sac . A dead end street so the designation of a sidewalk along that
street was not included in this . Thus we can still obtain our trail
dedication fees in lieu of sidewalk construction . As well it 's commercial I
property . We 're not looking at acquiring or taking a piece of this land
for park property but it does lie within the fringe useage district of
South Lotus Lake , City Center Park and Rice Marsh Lake so it is the
recommendation of staff to accept park and trail dedication fees in lieu of 11
land dedication or trail or sidewalk construction .
Schroers: So moved . Is there a second? ,
Andrews: Second .
Schroers moved, Andrews seconded to accept trail and park dedication fees II
in lieu of land dedication and trail construction for the Valvoline Instant
Oil site. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 46
COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS:
Lash: I 'll be very brief . It 's not a presentation . I 'd just like to
comment . I said this earlier before most of you were here to Todd and
Jerry but I thought this was the most exciting , positive packet I 've seen
in 2 years . I think we 're starting on a great foot . A great note . We 're
getting a lot of old projects done that have been hanging over our heads . I
like to see that . I really think we 're going forward and I feel great
' about it and I 'm going to just thank Todd and Jerry . I think they 're doing
a great job .
Schroers: I will second that .
Pemrick: Do you need a motion for that?
' ADMINISTRATIVE SECTION:
Schroers: Any concerns or anything from the Administrative Section?
Hoffman: There is one point of interest in the Administrative Section that
needs some input and that is the first cover letter there . The memo from
myself to the commission as it relates to a joint meeting possibly with the
Public Safety Commission . Scott Harr has expressed interest in meeting to
deal with some of these issues . My direct response back to them that a
' majority of them did deal with the enforcement side of snowmobiling . - Of
those types of things but as well , obviously snowmobiling falls into the
realm of recreation so at times they would like your input on what your
feelings are on snowmobiling within the city .
Lash: Do the same regulations , do they apply to 3 and 4 wheelers and
mini-bikes or are those all different?
Hoffman: Separate .
Lash: It 's all separate? Because I think that 's something that needs to
be addressed too . If there 's damage being done to park property by those
types of vehicles and I think there is . If we decide to meet with them , I
would like that to be addressed .
' Schroers: I guess I would be in favor of having a joint meeting and like
Jan says , go ahead with some of these issues that have been haunting us for
a while and just make some progress .
Hoffman: Again , the Jet Ski issue as mentioned there is another one . Most
of these are seasonal in use and this season was good for snowmobiling so
' we had some complaints coming in on snowmobiling . Noise levels . Damage to
property . Driving along the roadway and that type of thing . And then all
of a sudden the season 's over with so the complaints go away . The problems
go away to the following year so to effectively attack these situations ,
you want to address them prior to the season and keep the ongoing work
going and regulations to at least provide the accessibility for this type
of recreation but then as well to guide it 's use .
Andrews: I need to ask a question . Didn 't the City , well the City has now
been putting out sort of an informative news or pamphlet doing with park
1
II
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 - Page 47
and rec issues as well as many other city issues . How many times a year
are we trying to do that?
Hoffman: Quarterly and just a side note on that . The format currently
existing is almost strictly park and recreation related . In our next issue "
we will switch to a city newsletter format where the park and recreation
will be an insert and then the remainder will be general city news .
Andrews: Okay , would it possible to put something in there larger than the I
microscopic print that goes in the local paper that would deal with the
ordinances that are on the books regarding snowmobiles in a seasonal
appropriate format? I 'm not aware of the rules until I read these and I 'm II
sure most of our citizens have no idea what the rules are .
Pemrick: And Jet Skis , didn 't they just come out with some new guidelines
last year?
Hoffman : Correct .
Lash: Maybe it could even be written somewhat in layman terms .
Andrews : Well you 've got to be careful of that but my comment of being a
board sailer on Lotus Lake is it 's craziness down there with , sometimes you ,
feel like you 're a target on that lake .
Koubsky: I think it 's important not only reiterating the rules but tell
the public what the problems are because like when I was reading this with
snowmobiles I said , well my first question was , what are the current
problems? 1
Andrews: Why do we need these rules?
Koubsky : Right . '
Lash: People can get defensive about those things too because they moved
here 20 years ago to snowmobile and all of a sudden . . .cracking down on what '
they can do .
Andrews: I think there is a local snowmobile club if I read correctly .
I 'm sure they may want to put something in the pamphlet -about their
activites and how to become involved too so it doesn 't have to be all a
hammer over somebody 's head . It can also be a carrot thrown in with it .
Hoffman: We take that , we include that information .
Lash: Will they also be included? '
Hoffman: Snowmobile Club? Not in that joint meeting , no . We did meet
with those folks on an informal setting . The memo you see there back to
Dave and Leroy and myself and Steve Walter and Jim Castleberry .
Lash: So you 'll be able to relay . '
Hoffman: Their feelings .
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
January 22 , 1991 -- Page 48
Lash: I 'd like to just bring up that I 'd like .to thank Todd for following
' up on this . I don 't think this is something he was directed to do but he
just picked up on it from the meeting and followed through on. it and I just
I appreciate that happening .
Schroers: Is this something that we 're going to need a whole separate
entire meeting that 's going to take some time or did you want to include it
like a before a normally scheduled meeting for either the Public Safety or
for us and put a time limit on it so we just hit it and get down to
business or do we want to talk about this all night?
Hoffman: I would foresee that it 's probably going to take a couple hours
and it should be scheduled on a separate night .
' Andrews : Pick a neutral night .
Schroers: Okay , why don 't you proceed on that .
1 Hoffman: And then get out an agenda or something of that nature to you so
you know what 's being discussed so if you have questions on it , you can
contact either myself or Scott .
Andrews: You may have already done this in the past but if you could
provide the Board members with a roster of names , addresses and phone
' numbers to contact each other because I know Larry and I are probably going
to occasionally have to get a hold of each other and that would be
appreciated .
Schroers: Yep , our rosters are definitely outdated now aren 't they?
Hoffman : Yeah . They 're just being updated and we ' ll present them to you .
As well the 1991 budget and any of those types of materials that are of
interest to you once those are published . We 'll get them back out to you .
Schroers: Okay , I 'm looking for a motion to adjourn .
Lash : Don 't we need a motion on a special meeting?
' Hoffman: Yeah , you can formalize that in a motion .
Lash : I make a motion that Todd proceed with scheduling a joint meeting
1 between Park and Rec and Public Safety .
Andrews: Second .
' Lash moved, Andrews seconded to direct staff to schedule a joint meeting
between Park and Recreation Commission and the Public Safety Commission.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Andrews moved, Koubsky seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor
and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10:50 p.m. .
Submitted by Todd Hoffman
Park and Recreation Coordinator Prepared by Nann Opheim