6. Final Median Alternatives Klingelhutz Property CITY OF
63.
_ 1
:" CHANHASSEN
.t. . .
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 Action by C'tty Admtnistratdt
MEMORANDUM Endorsed
Modified
TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager Rejected
Date—al l9 0
Date Submitted to Ccmmission
FROM: Gary Warren, City Engineer r
DATE: February 8 , 1990
Date Sebm tied to Councit
2. /n e. /1 ,
SUBJ: Review Final Median Alternatives for Klingelhutz Property,
Great Plains Boulevard at Soo Line Railroad Tracks
Project No. 88-28B-2
This office has recentl y bee n p r ovided with th a preliminary set of
' MnDO'P' s plans for the Trunk Highway 5 reconstruction from the
Hennepin County line to County Road 17. The Great Plains
Boulevard portion of these plans from West 79th Street to the
Dinner Theatre entrance has prompted questions from the State and
' staff relative to the final median configuration for the State to
include in their plan set.
The attached memorandums from BRW provide a summary of the
discussions on this matter and as noted in the most recent
February 7, 1990 memorandum, the item had been reviewed by the
HRA but had not been brought back to the City Council for final
' decision.
The concern all along has been to provide a safe design for the
1 turning movements into the Dinner Theatre while accommodating as
best as possible the Klingelhutz-Cravens Realtors building
driveway access. As noted in the attachments, several
' alternatives have been reviewed since last February. The HRA has
voiced their preference for Alternative 2B which is shown in the
February 7 , 1990 memorandum which provides a median with a curb
cut for the Klingelhutz driveway and protected left turns in both
' directions. I do not believe the BRA had available to them the
turning movement projections contained in this staff report when
their decision was made.
The peak hour left turn movements into the Dinner Theatre at this
location is estimated to be 200 vehicles/hour. Design standards
' call for a storage capacity of 5 to 7 vehicles (buses will
obviously pose additional needs) or approximately 125 to 175 feet
of turn lane to properly accommodate these movements. The 2B
I
11
I
Don Ashworth
February 8, 1990
Page 2
' alternative provides storage for one, maybe two vehicles at best
since the storage area is only 30 feet long. I am concerned that
construction of this alternative would be short-sighted in
' favoring access to five parking stalls (Klingelhutz-Cravens )
while compromising the safety of turning movements to the 300
stalls to the Dinner Theatre.
It is apparent that even with a median cut to the
Klingelhutz-Cravens driveway, the Theatre vehicle turning
movements will block the median cut by stacking into the
northbound through lane . The potential exists for congesting the
Dinner Theatre intersection at Great Plains Boulevard with
southbound Klingelhutz-Cravens traffic although these southbound
movements are insignificant relative to the Dinner Theatre peaks .
The Dinner Theatre has parking available for approximately 300
' vehicles. The Klingelhutz parking lot accommodates 5 vehicles .
I do not wish to appear insensitive to the needs of the
Klingelhutz-Cravens property, but it is apparent to me that the
inclusion of a median cut as proposed in Alternative 2B for the
' Klingelhutz property disproportionately compromises the road
safety at this location in a significant manner, forsaking the
safety of 200 turning movements in favor of the access to 5
' parking stalls .
It would be different if no alternative access were available to
the Klingelhutz-Cravens building; however, as is noted in the
attachments, access is available through the City ' s parking lot
to the property. Further, right-in and right-out movements would
still be permitted at the existing driveway. It may be
appropriate to construct approximately 50 feet of sidewalk along
the southerly side of the Klingelhutz-Cravens building to better
facilitate pedestrian access to the front door from the City ' s
parking lot. Selective signage might also be appropriate
although the existing two signs are quite visible. The City
Attorney has advised that the construction of a closed median
through this area should not impose any taking on the part of the
' City since right-in/right-out access would still be available and
the close proximity of the nearby intersection and the City
parking lot.
It is therefore the conclusion of this office that the City
should adopt the original proposed median plan as shown in the
' February 7 , 1990 BRW memo ( i .e. no median cut) for this area and
thereby maximize the northbound left turn lane. Similarly, City
staff shall work with Mr. Klingelhutz to adjust/add signage and
approximately 50 feet of sidewalk if desired to help direct
traffic to the business entrance. It is further recommended that
the approved layout be forwarded to MnDOT for inclusion in their
Trunk Highway 5 plans .
i
I
I
Don Ashworth
February 8, 1990
Page 3
Attachments: 1. February 8, 1990 memorandum from BRW. '
2. September 26, 1989 memorandum from BRW.
3. February 22, 1989 memorandum from BRW.
4 . City Council minutes dated March 27 , 1989 .
c: Al Klingelhutz
Gary Ehret, BRW
Dave Warzala, Barton-Aschman
Manager 's Comments: Three points which may or may not be ,
germane:
- Streets/Sewer/Water Assessments: As the new roadway starts '
to curve at the railroad tracks, additional land was needed
from Messrs. Klingelhutz/Barnes. Our appraiser found
that the value of such approximated the proposed special
assessments and , accordingly, roadway assessments were
deleted; and
- Public Parking Lot: As the Klingelhutz property has suf- '
ficient parking for their offices/guests, no special
assessments were placed against the Klingelhutz property
for the parking lot itself. From an actual usage
standpoint, it appears as though the northerly users of the
building prefer parking in the public lot as such is much
closer than the private lot; and '
- Authority: The issue of who has responsibility within the
downtown area has surfaced several times. Although some
issues may be gray, others are fairly straightforward.
Specifically, the HRA has the responsibility to negotiate/
pay relocation/purchase properties within the downtown
area. By contrast, the Council authorized the roadway
improvements, let the contract, pays the bills and assessed
the costs associated with the road/sewer/water construction.
Accordingly, the HRA's preference on this issue is solely
advisory.
1
1
r
I
• .
i
IIItW PLANNING
YRANSPORTAlON
ENGINE¢iING
AN DESIGN
BM INC THRESHER MARE THIRD STREET SOUTH • ' MINNEAPOLIS,MINNESOTA 55415 • PHONE' 3T2/370A700 FAX:812/371)-1373•
_
I
I MEMORANDUM
II
-DATE: February 8, 1990
IITO: Mr. Gary Warren, PE
FROM: Gary A. Ehret, PE
IIRE: TN 101lGreat Plains Boulevard
Median Cut to Klingelhutz/Cravens Realtors
II
As you are aware, we have examined this issue on several occasions with staff, .
I City Council and HRA. As of this date, our records do not indicate that a final,
determination has been made.
II In February 1989, we provided staff and the City Council with a report which
outlined four alternatives, solutions and provided pro's and eon's Of each. The
City Council reviewed this report and requested consideration of additional
alternatives.
Our September 1989 correspondence provided three additional Alternatives 2A, B,
and C, which provide a median cut to the Klingelhutz property while maintaining
11 turn lane alternatives. These were reviewed with the HRA in September. My
notes indicated that the HRA unanimously approved Alternative 2B. To my ,
knowledge, these alternatives have not been reviewed with the City Council as of
II . this date.
Alternative 28 provides a protected left turn into the Dinner Theatre ,,=,'
II northbound, and a protected left turn into the Klingelhutz property southbound.
Of significant concern to us is the left turn into the Dinner Theatre. To
construct this, as shown on Exhibit 2B, provides for a left turn into the Dinner
Theatre with storage capacity of about two vehicles. We feel that during peak •
II theatre hours this is definitely inadequate. Based upon a peak theatre occu- ,
pancy of 1,000 people, we have estimated 270 peak hour vehicles entering the
Dinner Theatre from this driveway. Of this peak hour volume, we have estimated '
Iapproximately 200 left turns per peak hour from Great Plains Boulevard.
i
. . .
•
I {
MINNEAPOLIS DENVER PHOENIX TUCSON SL PETERSBURG
r
I ,•
II
Mr. Gary Warren
February 8, 1990
II
Page 2
From these facts we have estimated a desired left turn length of II
about 125-175 feet which will accommodate from 5-7 vehicles.
This is significantly greater than the available storage of one II vehicle that Alternative 2B will provide.
The resultant will be turning vehicles stacking in the northbound
through lanes of Great Plains Boulevard.
II
I hope this update meets your needs.
GAE/sk 1
II
II
II
II
I
II
1
II
II
I
II
II
I
•
I
I Y
J
a Y I
a
0 ,54
1
i 10 .
O Z
4 V O V O a 4
z
w N 0 2 ..I C.)
a
EC v O Y w
a '� o _r`I z oc
r , LL C °°.a.. p, a
a
Y
•• , 1-
.714 p Y 1
I ti
b 3 • m — Z
a
to
w
•
ig
~ O OY awe m p
U 0 W a W
o
I N Z m 1 0 Z
J G
28• C3 Q
r :. t4 ',
S39 dS to {�'; X W
V d S C 1 ///,...11.:1:,;:r';''.4411'11?-liwil.:4';...,,(i) L1J
I
? ,;_�:.tidy,?.,
S30tldS OL ''ht!a U
ItJ ::; V;f(?lu
(r 4L . - pG\ \
Q \
N \ //-.\ -. -
r w \\
o
a
N W \ G�5
1 y
el
II
\ 9 Iv
c\ - , / z/ ,r
- // /,<
I Gi5 \ % /
QP \\
.�\ \I - ,/
>d4,s°°s \
I �� \\ P°
I / /.
C `V
C"C
r
ORIGINALLY PROPOSED PLAN
r
0
P-
\ 15 SPACES
\../
B SPACES . \ .
Ox,
r \Z
\ z/z ()riS)
Z(..) N
I
. Z ' el p.
(.1) •
..
, 1"-5 0
.
.
-- ..
cn .
______ i:
9 •"" /
0
0
0 la •
..
.
.
•
c,w_ ..1;......1,...2:•• 5' CONC. WALK
\C9 ___. ..•••
\\O ,
:.
6 .-' fr.— TURF AREA-------A
\ PUBLIC LOT ••••
•• :K J
. \i„.
\ \ I
.. KL1NGLEHUTZ BLDG.
\ •
\ \ Z 0.4.
\ Z IQ
Z;41 ....
,1/41\ ::: r:, p:...,.., , 4' CONC. WALK
-. TURF AREA 15' DOOR
41 1.1:,-,, :.: " GS' BIT.. LOT In
''T''' Ilr'
r ,•Qt, ..,
\ ,, i41_1•11.,;1,11,1, BIS. DRIVEWAIYTuRsPAARREKA11.4G1
-----------_ •
1111.1
0\
.,`<s` ' ....''' ,,„■•TV.1`1!7W*41#'
Irn
EXISTING DRIVEWAY
\\ t.
> \ ,--, •
< te..
m \\ \ N. CO RETE / PLANTED MEDIAN
\ \1'
ht) \ \
CO
\
WIN EN am ENI Ns ni. ism INN OIN NS Mie Ns NE mil ONI ein 11111 MO
# =
PLANNING
TRANSPORTATION
ENGINEERING
URBAN DESIGN
BRW INC. THRESHER SQUARE 700 THIRD STREET SOUTH • MINNEAPOLIS.MINNESOTA 55415 PHONE 612.'370-0700 FAX 612!370-1378
September 26, 1989
CITY o '.� `€ r,f tufty
Mr. Gary Warren, PE !k
City Engineer '"' 'l
' City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive SEP 27 1989
Chanhassen, MN 55317
' RE: Median Cut to Klingelhutz Property � $ � :`
Great Plains Boulevard
Dear Gary,
As you requested, we have examined the possibilities of a left turn lane from
southbound Great Plains Boulevard into the Klingelhutz property. We have looked
at three possibilities, none of which can be considered preferred design prac-
tice. Each of these will encourage drivers to use this driveway and not the
public parking lot entrance. The three alternatives are described and
illustrated in the attached sketches.
#1 Alternate #2A
' In its current lane configuration, Great Plains Boulevard is not wide
enough to accommodate side by side left turn lanes. The median, as shown,
is only about twelve feet wide. In order to provide the side by side turn
' lanes, the southbound through lane would have to be shifted at least four
feet, but preferably six feet west from the Dinner Theatre south. This
would make for a relatively awkward transition for the southbound traveler.
' See Exhibit 2A.
#2 Alternate #2B
Back to back left turn lanes could be provided, but they would be very
short (approximately one car length) since there is only ninety feet bet-
ween the edge of the Dinner Theatre and Klingelhutz driveways. This alter-
, -- native, while undesirable, may be better than left turns from a through
lane. See Exhibit 2B.
#2 Alternate #2C
If the Klingelhutz driveway were moved further south, it would allow us to
increase the Dinner Theatre left turn lane. Unfortunately, the available
room to the south is almost non-existent due to the sign monument that is
currently in place. This alternative also eliminates the possibility for a
left turn lane for West 79th Street as proposed by Mn/DOT. See Exhibit 2C.
AN AFFILIATE OF THE BENNETT,RINGROSE.WOLSFELD.JARVIS.GARDNER.INC. GROUP
' DAVID J BENNETT DONALD W RINGROSE RICHARD P WOLSFELD PETER E JARVIS LAWRENCE J GARDNER THOMAS F CARROLL CRAIG A AMUNDSEN DONALD E HUNT
MARK G SWENSON JOHN B McNAMARA RICHARD D.PILGRIM DALE N BECKMANN DENNIS J SUTLIFF JEFFREY L.BENSON RALPH C BLUM DAVID L GRAHAM
MINNEAPOLIS DENVER PHOENIX TUCSON ST. PETERSBURG
I
I
Mr. Gary Warren
September 26, 1989
Page 2
I
Either Option 2A or 2B seem to have the most possibilities. On Thursday,
September 21, 1989, when I reviewed this with the HRA, they were fairly unani-
mous in their selection of 2B as the alternative. What you must remember is
that by considering these alternatives, we are in effect, guaranteeing that this
median cut will remain in the future. By considering Alternate 2B, we are dimi-
nishing
the storage capacity of the northbound left turn lane into the Dinner
Theatre more than we recommend.
Please review this matter further and let me know what you think. In any case, 1
I believe it is fairly imperative that you talk to Todd Gerhardt and pass this
information along to the City Council and HRA.
Sincerely,
BRW, INC,
f ,t k ,
Gary A. ret, PE
Project Manager
GAE/sk
Attachments
File 7-8706 /'
(�li - T o L7�-� T
I
I
I
•
` Jam.
/ 4. \'\\:-` . 1
\ N6:\41/4 (\:-.....)-Thi." . l
\ PUBLIC LOT'
I \\\ti\
\ Iirt;!!..:011
fillealaVii
!!
•.;;i;r.�•t;i:ii!:!!:!i:�:,iii
Na DRIVEWAY\--•-• •
\ /
I \\� '1 CO RETE / PLANTED MEDIAN
I ____________\
I100/#14
N
I 1=30'
ALTERNATE #2-A
IAUGUST, 1989
I
I
r
r
\ C-------/}.‘1.. I
I 1
I
\ \ - kie:ownr:r:„ 7
• PUBLIC LOT'
III
f.Ga!tii�li%i.lhiiji:`�:pi.iijii•"
+i`ikli&iiliii+.jii.r k'i i,
.+If'fji;,�;t. ',:y�;iiifia$,k0' _-1 I
'7ju7+irsy�ijr;j!;' C
::..,.•_j!j!'liij iliiiii.i;:i;i J
\• `y cl .t,•u•�!''„iiiiih`i:iii'i;i:,ip,:
if:ii!i:!!ii!i1)1::jifil!
\ �iiij5..i;j:.;
\ ^iii!.!
` DRIVEWAY
. . \ •
1
CO RETE / PLANTED MEDIAN 1
\
1
IIIIIIIIIIIIIPIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
N
1
1=30'
I
ALTERNATE #2-B
1
AUGUST, 1989
I
I
1
I, .
1
1 '
1
C..:-) 1
I \\,a..
x....
\ PUBLIC LOT'
1 alr .�i'j!i,.ol:...., 1'ii�tF(I�lr oflii:'Nip
,h,i"'t!!firini!j=',ri x',11;!!1ii.
,. . 'tit C mh. ,,.. n
• :,, i�i�`s:;11.ili':!',!E! .. r tY it
• •■■••••••••••1
. '! l!�r�' jt!!,•
;i�i;1;vf +it
DRIVEWAY :::......44•
I . \ ►•• •.
0i•i�i�i•44 5 NEW DRIVEWAY %%%%
\\ CO RETE / PLANTS :+: $f N
I ii •ii•i•i•'•.i�i� i�i�ii•.'
, _ ■-------3' \ 4 4,4,4,******* •
i$••••�♦
. \ \ ,. 4****• *,••••
us
II ,,.�1.4
I N
1=30'
IALTERNATE #2-C
I
1 AUGUST, 1989
I
I
•
•
I
°•"
I a FLAI1JtTHR ON 0tt1RJtIC7__ _ L
11 I_ --
_ :cc
N. ,_. c„,o,
..„,
-,
....'"%.2 •
A`s
`G0 tf(`� I '- 1180 j '-'...; --i
I
* ___„:"s \ AIO •
N. .. , 1 I
PAINTED 'BUBBLE'j +` = —'r- -' /�'
-- PAINTED 'BUBBLE' -� ; I SOX�` '��•'
—�-- \ \ ° "°......./'� /'�_`
' -791 ST-
_/ - -
L
I
—� % rl r NOTE: OFFSET 14 FEET FROM
..------ 1 INPLACE CURB TO ESTABLISH
L— I 1 4 I 'I 1 S.B.Q TANGENT
1 2 I ss,pr1l3 u" 1 SN L A .
5 I
i
r -------- (---20, V \I •,R oN 1
�' I I I 111 le i•
I
_ 4 4_ °
• J �" 30'R, G /
1-11'30rc. �!� i -
I i°p,os. co‘''''‘.
�
■
1
2 1 HOLIDAY / k
5,1. • N
. 1 iiii,p,...• .,..- „..7;7„-- ,::,z,
ii ii 3 l ?° 0%%� �'r / 1 ° I
,r,/ I L PT.24'RT.1
I
�/ ♦ 41.s. S S• _ I I ./1 e� I
.--•-.-.' _.- •-•''.•■■•o'll 1 / I I L
12yEF 'A,�. / 10'°.0. i; Nla,0 ` -�-; I
�' I 1 I 1
I
` - -/ 11 1 20'R� \\\
�
I
10'SHLD.TYP. : 11 1 I
ADJACENT TO FREE
° RIGHT ISLANDS -. )r \\
mJ 'I 2.R__ I
•
1 • y:
ETi3IIRV PLANNING
TRANSPORTATION
ENGINEERING
URBAN DESIGN
BRW. INC. • THRESHER SQUARE • 700 THIRD STREET SOUTH • MINNEAPOLIS.MINNESOTA 55415 • PHONE: 2!370.0700 FAX. 612 1370.1378
11 February 22, 1989
fr 2
City of Chanhassen '(�`�a Ai
II 690 Coulter Drive u
Chanhassen, MN 55317 j11 ��+�
I
• Mr. Gary Warren, PE
Attn: y ,
City Engineer
RE: Median Cut Alternatives
Klingelhutz Property
(7811 Great Plains Boulevard)
IDear Mr. Warren:
The Chanhassen City Council at their January 23, 1989 Council meeting, asked
I that the proposed roadway design for TH 101/Great Plains Boulevard be reviewed
relative to access to the Klingelhutz property. We have revisited this issue
keeping in mind the current design of West 78th Street, and the proposed design
of Great Plains Boulevard south of the tracks. Figure 2, attached, illustrates
IIthe design of these areas.
In light of the Council request to review this issue, we have considered four
II alternatives which provide varying degrees of access to the Klingelhutz proerty.
In the text below, we will recap advantages and disadvantages of each of the
alternatives.
II ALTERNATIVE 1 (Current Design)
Advantages - The design is consistent with the design of the rest of
I - . west 78th Street and Great Plains Boulevard (to TH 5).
- The design is the safest possible alternative because left
II turns from West 78th Street/Great Plains Boulevard can only
be made from a left turn lane.
II - The Klingelhutz property has direct right in/out access
(which meets the letter of the law) and indirect left turn
access via the driveway to the public parking lot adjacent
to Klingelhutz property.
11 - The level of access is consistent with the needs of the
present land use and future zoning.
IIDisadvantages - The Klingelhutz property does not have direct left turn
access. (However, left turn access is not a legal require-
!' • and it isn't necessary for the present land use or
future zoning.)
AN AFFILIATE OF THE BENNETT.RINGROSE.WOLSFELD.JARVIS.GARDNER.INC..GROUP
I DAVID J.BENNETT DONALD W.RINGROSE RICHARD P WOLSFELD PETER E.JARVIS LAWRENCE.1 GARDNER THOMAS F CARROLL CRAIG A AMUNDSEN DONALD E.HUNT
MARK G.SWENSON JOHN B.McNAMARA RICHARD D.PILGRIM DALE N BECKMANN DENNIS J.SUTLIFF JEFFREY L.BENSON RALPH C BLUM DAVID L.GRAHAM
MINNEAPOLIS DENVER PHOENIX TUCSON ST.PETERSBURG
I
Mr. Gary Warren
February 22, 1989
Page 2
I
ALTERNATIVE 2
Advantages - Provides complete in and out access at the Klingelhutz ,
driveway.
Disadvantages - Safety would be compromised because the design is different '
from the rest of West 78th Street which could cause driver
confusion and violate drivers expectations. Also, the
southbound to eastbound left turn from West 78th Street to
the driveway would be made from a through lane and this is
inherently unsafe compared to the expected accident fre-
quency of left turns made from an exclusive left turn lane.
- This design could also establish a dangerous precident
regarding design modifications.
ALTERNATIVE 3
Advantages - More closely resembles the design of the rest of West 78th
Street than Alternative 2 or 4.
- Provides complete in/out access at the Klingelhutz
driveway.
Disadvantages - Still would result in left turns from a through lane which
is more dangerous than left turns from an exclusive left
turn lane.
•
- The design is still slightly different than for the rest of
West 78th Street, and has the same disadvantages discussed
in Alternative 2 above.
ALTERNATIVE 4 1
Advantages - Provides complete in/out access to Klingelhutz driveway.
- Provides opportunity for left turns from West 78th Street I
to be made from an exclusive left turn lane.
- Would provide a design that is similar to the proposed sec- '
tion of Great Plains Boulevard south of TH 5.
Disadvantages - Still not entirely consistent with the design of the rest I
of West 78th Street.
- Because of heavy left turns northbound to westbound into
the Chanhassen Dinner Theater, southbound left turners
could be struck in the southbound through lane.
II' •
Mr. Gary Warren
February 22, 1989
Page 3
I
Analysis of the alternatives and the advantages and disadvantages asso-
' ciated with each indicates that the current plan (Alternative #1) is the
preferred alternative. This design is the safest of all the alternatives
because left turns from West 78th Street can only be made from an exclusive
left turn lane. In addition, the design is consistent with the design of
' the rest of the roadway and will not result in any violations of driver's
expectations. None of the other alternatives would be as safe because the
design features are not consistent with the rest of West 78th Street and
because some or all of the left turns from West 78th Street would have to
be made from a through lane.
' It should also be noted that the access to the Klingelhutz property, direct
right in/out at the driveway and indirect full access via the adjacent City
parking lot driveway, meets the letter of the law regarding access to one
direction of a roadway and should more than adequately serve both the
existing and planned use of the site.
We hope that this has provided the additional information you need to address
the concerns of the City Council . If we can be of further assistance, please
let me know.
Sincerely,
BRW, INC.
1 • ��
Howard Preston, PE
II . Project Manager _ . .
HP/sk
Attachment
File 7-8807
I
1
1
I
I
I
r
, :H-
\ ....)
\.\•.. I
1
I .
\� PUBLIC LO
/ -i\ \\ \ 1
i
`1 DRIVEWAY
I
1
CO RETE / PLANTED MEDIAN....-------7\ze , \ •_ 1
1 •
i
Wow-
-_
I
Y ALTERNATE *1- I
CURRENT DESIGN :
• FEBRUARY, 1989 1
i 1
1
__ • _ , 1
. ,
. . .
. . .
I .
N■
I \ . 1■\1
1 J s
'
t
\e‘
1 li"•ii,:&A$,
\ •
I • PUBLIC LOT'
I I
I 4/•\1/4
I • if
• /-' .,.:,__„_,.4,4,- , n
_v-E4M-Ir
. _-,f ---=,-0-----
• \ ,..„-F.J., -,,..:r:
• -iN-;-,.,,-..
\
,...,,,
4AV
\-... DRIVEWAY
I \ „
I . \
\
Co RETE / PLANTED MEDIAN ..:
I .
____------
.--------
I _
_----------- .
: -
.
I . 00011011111111111
• ,
•01111.11111111111.111111111511.- ' 111111111111111 :
111 _
I t
ALTERNATE #2
OPENING IN MEDIAN
•
I . - FEBRUARY, 1989 .
,
.
I .
' .
I .
1 ._ . .vi.- ..
V i
. . I I
. .
..
• ..
. .
\ .1 .1 ,
.1 . .
. ,
• ,
\\,. KLi .
1
0.
`\ PUBLIC LOT
__T.___..._ , __-
Jr
i 'Z 'H---• :--ir-7-' I
DRIVEWAY
\ \kill'ki .
I
4=
. NI
r-1 i-‘
C• CRETE / PLANTED MEDIAN
I
_
-rte
. • I
ALTERNATE 3
r
PAINTED MEDIAN
FEBRUARY, 1989 I
1
.. .
. _,. . l'''' . . .-......- , . ... „ i
I .
I .
r
\\a„ .As Pi:1-,'.r;'..2
r
\ `:x''' Y
PUBLIC LOT ''`g`: `--'}s
I \\
4/0i-47,, -;-*.f .----.
3 a X1;0;
\ T-''-,. 1..x�443,..way.:
LLTrIg rvACiy., L'I'
\1j DRIVEWAY
I \ .
\
1 -
CO RETE / PLANTED MEDIAN
I ---------- --------- ;5-7\* _ -
• 101101111r' e�
ION"
508111°Iw°
I ALTERNATE *4
PAINTED TWO—WAY LEFT TURN LANE
•
IFEBRUARY, 1989
I
I
I
City Council Meeting - March 27, 1989 89
REVIEW MEDIAN CUT PROPOSAL FOR KLINGELHUTZ PROPERTY, 7811 GREAT PLAINS BLVD. r
f Gary Warren: Basically Council had asked staff to investigate the curb cut. As
crude as this sketch is, and I apologize for that, this is to show the existing I
construction plans that were approved with the downtown Phase 1 improvement
project. North being up. The railroad tracks through here. The Klingelhutz
property in this outline form shown here and the medians as proposed in the
construction plans for the downtown are darkened in here. The driveway access
which is maintained as a part of the downtown improvement project is in this
location and also a curb cut here into the municipal parking lot with a drive
thru into the driveway access to the Klingelhutz property. We asked BRW to take
a look at this to address the concern that Mr. Klingelhutz had expressed to
wanting a left turn into the property from southbound West 78th Street.
Basically the staff report that you have in your hands shows the four alternates
that they have put together and I'll just briefly run through than for you.
Again, the Klingelhutz property here. The current driveway access there. This
is Alternate 1 which is again, that just shows the current design scenario.
Alternate 2 is basically to construct the median with the exception of a curb
cut in the median to allow southbound traffic to make a free left. Make the
left into the Klingelhutz driveway. It manages obviously to give southbound
access to the property without having to come through the City, the public lot. ,
The disadvantages are that you have a left turn movement being made from a
through lane which can cause, it's not a protected left turn. The protected
left turn being the most safe but conditions such as we have here, as an '
example, is the safest. So here we have same potential conflicts and also the
potential of crossing movements across the northbound lanes in an unanticipated
{ area. Typically when a driver's coming through, he doesn't see your typical
intersection configuration which alerts than to crossing traffic. He has to be
a little bit more perceptive to kind of notice if there's a car maybe here
waiting to cross or, in the worse event, where somebody's going to try to hot
foot it through. But it does give the access. It also provides us the median
separation consistent with the downtown scenario which is especially important
at the railroad crossing here where we have crossing arms that need to honor the
design for those crossing arms. This also continues with a channelization of
traffic coming from the south and north so that we don't have a void in the
median scenario. Alternates 3 and actually Alternate 4 are some modifications
of that which actually get to be a little bit more wide open scenario.
Especially it will probably cause a little more concern. Alternate 3, the whole
median has been removed and we would be using a painting scheme basically to
mark out the median area which obviously anybody could take any kind of a
turning movement through here unrestricted to get into the property.
Disadvantages are similar to what I mentioned earlier as far as crossing
movements. Also here your left turn lane, especially in the wintertime there
would be a lot of adjustment on the part of this left turn here as to really
where the left turn lane is, to the point where he could actually encroach out
of this area and have some potential conflicts with southbound traffic. So
it's a lot more wide open scenario. We do get back to the median section here
before we hit the railroad tracks and the crossing here so we do meet that. The
final version that was presented is to show specifically what I call suicide
lanes almost but it's the left turn scenario for both southbound and northbound
traffic. It has a lot of potential I think for congestion between the turning
traffic, especially when we have Dinner Theater traffic and the more congested
periods. Again reinforcing that this median really needs to be a part of the
21 1
99
City Council Meeting - March 27, 1989
rsystem. All of our alternates really are dealing with this extension of the
median. Fram a safety standpoint, I believe there's no question that Alternate
1, or the current design alternate I should say, is the safest. It provides
protected left turn movement for the traffic that we anticipate in here and
channelizes that traffic properly to make that movement. No unexpected cutting
through the medians. All the movements are at the intersection. Legality wise,
I guess the access to the property still meets the legal requirements as far as
access to it because he does have right-in/right-out access on the laneage.
It's just the left turn movements have been anticipated that if you want to get
into the Klingelhutz property, the public parking lot is the location for it.
Out of the other alternates, if the median or left turn movement is desired, I
guess I would conclude, as did BRW, that the curb cut, Alternate 2 is probably
the second best option there because it does provide for definition up here and
the left turn, northbound movements at this intersection so we can't get
encroachment in the southbound lanes and it does allow traffic to get into the
Klingelhutz property fram southbound. Recognizing that there are going to be
'
some conflict potentials there depending on the magnitude of traffic and the
perception of the northbound drivers. If an alternate such as this were decided
on, I think that it should definitely be conditioned on the review depending on
warrants and traffic experience. If we for example go ahead with this and end
up having lots of conflicts that amount to traffic accidents, I don't think
anybody would want to see that continue. Likewise, if a more intense use is
planned for this property at sometime in the future, this curb cut should be
looked at at that time to evaluate the traffic demands and the impacts on these
movements.
Mayor Chmiel: Gary, have we checked with the Fire Department for the
accessibility in through the public lot? For instance, with our new engine that
we're going to get, is that accessible to that? I see that probably by putting
in that new drive with that new cut in between the median would probably give it
a little better accessibility into that facility.
Gary Warren: I haven't specifically talked with Chief Gregory about it. The
turning radius in here, I don't know what the new turning radius is. I think it
was like around 50 feet, at least the specs were looking at that. Maybe Jim
knows. I would imagine that there will be difficulty although the curbing in
here could be mounted by the vehicle to get in and then to make a left turn to
get back in here. I'm not a fire fighter. I don't know how close they need to
get to this building. They certainly can get to this point to fight that fire.
Even with this movement I would imagine with the turning radius, they will have
to to up on the curb to make the full turn but I think it's makeable.
Councilman Johnson: Go down to Market, come around 79th and came back up if
they knew they had to came in that side.
Gary Warren: They apparently do, at least in talking with Dale and Mark
Littfin, when we were working on the north side parking lot, they do work
through in their minds what's the best way to access same of these properties.
By necessity they do that so if they know there's a fire call in a certain area,
they do have a preferred route which recognizes same of these challenges.
Councilman Johnson: Not only in their mind but they actually sit down and
pre-plan.
22
City Council Meeting - March 27, 1989 91
1/
Gary Warren: Right. I know Al is here as we recognized in good health. I
Councilman Boyt: Why is the curb in the road there further down, further toward
the south on Alternative 2 than it is on Alternative 1? In both of those.
That's interesting because on this one, you'll note that it stops right where
the curb starts and on your two transparencies it extends into the turn. Do you
know what I'm talking about?
Gary Warren: No I don't.
Councilman Boyt: Okay, up further north. Right there. See where that comes
across? It canes across to the second side of your. Oh maybe that's it. The
twist is different because as it's lined up on our drawing, it's right even with
the northern most side curbing. On your drawing it's definitely not. It's much
further down in there. Which one is right?
Gary Warren: February '89 is on both of them.
Councilman Boyt: Yours doesn't make a lot of sense actually. The way it's
lined up there, you'd make it almost impossible for the person trying to go
across and take... I
Gary Warren: Fran here to here?
Councilman Boyt: Yes. Wnat about caning out of that lot? ,
1 Gary Warren: The nose here, the turning radius, maybe the rendition is improper
but like any of the other noses that we have, to establish this arc line, the
turning radius is established.
Councilman Boyt: But don't you want the cars to go in that entrance? Why would
you put that nose of that all the way down to the south side curb? You have to
turn backwards to get in. It's a sharp angle.
Gary Warren: It's the extent of... ,
Councilman Boyt: Co the drawing here it comes out level with the north curb.
Mayor Chmiel: I think your transparency might be off a little bit. The print I
that we have on Alternate 1 and 2 are consistent.
Gary Warren: Wz would actually plot the design standards for that. That's a
standard nose and maybe this schematic just doesn't show it accurately. Their
emphasis was down here obviously.
Al Klingelhutz: I haven't too much of a problem with number 2. I have a big
problem with number 1. In the first place, the entrance to the parking lot
would not let a semi or a large fire truck get into my lot from either the south
or to the north because the driveway is only about 12 feet of blacktop. The
problem is showing itself already caning in through the parking lot. For some
reason when two trucks went out the access into our property from the parking
lot and ruined a sidewalk already and there was four 12 x 12 posts put up
through the inside of the sidewalk which was part of the driveway which made it
another foot narrower. That's a pretty good indication that the width of the
23
fg,y Council Meeting - March 27; 1989
driveway and the direction of the curb was not very well established prior to
the time it was constructed. One of my major reasons for objecting, having to
go through the parking lot because of the fact, you came in the parking lot, the
driveway going into our place turns out toward the road and you've got to make a
wide turn into our parking lot. The only way we can get into it is from the
south. You know, if you make a perfectly safe road, you wouldn't have any
intersections. But when you've got a business in a town, I think you have to
leave access to those businesses to make than a viable business. We've got a
rather old building on the property which we try to maintain in good historical
condition. It isn't saying that that's all that's going to be on that 3/4 acre
of land there. Right now the value of the land is far in excess of what the
land capacity can use as far as a business in Chanhassen. To take a driveway
access away from that property would depreciate the value, in my business, I
think I have the knowledge to know what that would do, would depreciate the
value of that land approximately 50%. One question I have, you've got alternate
2 up there. Your concern is about thru traffic here. You've got a wide median
here. Isn't there some way of just putting a curb cut down the center of this
and leave this as a left turn lane just like you've got it up here. Have the
left turn this way then. Left turn this way with an obstacle inbetween to
assure that traffic wouldn't cross over. So there wouldn't be any hazard as far
as obstructing all the thru traffic coming south to make this turn in.
Gary Warren: It's quite possible that that could be narrowed up. I think
that's what you're suggesting. I think what's shown here was a typical 4 foot
section for your standard barrier median and we could take a look at coming up
with a narrower section but it still needs to be I guess somewhat insurmountable
if you will, in providing protection.
1 Al Klingelhutz: But that would leave your left turn lane away so that the thru
traffic, if there was that much traffic, would be a way to save the thru
traffic. I think there would be sufficient room there for a left turn lane.
Mayor Chniel: Thank you Al. Is there anyone else who would like to discuss the
issue? If not we'll bring it back to the Council. Is there any discussion?
(A tape change occurred at this point in the meeting.)
Councilman Johnson: That lot was very difficult to design. This whole section,
we went around and around and around on. The parking lot in here was an
extremely big issue two years ago when all of this was getting designed.
Councilman Workman: I guess this is a difficult, this is kind of a sad corner
over there. We've got one business kind of going out of business soon up there
and I know this is an older building with an older business resident in it, Al
Klingelhutz. I don't like the idea of shutting him off. I'm more concerned
about the intersection to the north with exiting Dinner Theater traffic going
north. Taking a left out of there. That's got to be a very high volume
II situation. In the evening hours after they've had same dinner and a few drinks
and they're coming out of there and that's a dangerous intersection. I think
with a median cut for the Klingelhutz property here, and I don't have any
figures to support this but I would assume it's very seldom used. It's not a
retail building but more of an office building but to provide the convenience
for the Klingelhutz customers with that cut and then review and monitor the
situation, just like we've done for the parking permits.
24
/
93
City Council Meeting - March 27, 1989 1
I
Councilman Hoyt: I would propose that it's going to be, it's awfully difficult
to crystal ball this. I remember all the times over the last couple years that
Al has come in here to champion somebody elses cause and done a very effective
job of it usually. When I look at this situation I imagine what's going to
happen when we encourage people look at a second access into the public parking
lot by putting that turn there. Maybe they see a few cars backed up ready to
make a left hand turn through what's now the entrance, Alternative 1. Say well
I'm not going to wait there. I'll just go down to the Klingelhutz turnoff and
cane in that way. I'm a little concerned. I agree when Tan says we may not be
generating very much traffic, or at least not a high volume of traffic into the
Klingelhutz Realty. Maybe that's not the big draw. Maybe the big draw is the
public parking lot. Especially as the city develops further. I just wonder how
we want to control access. We've got what BRW, and everybody knows they're not
my favorite engineering firm, has told us is the best traffic flow, safest
design. We've got the engineer who says that to go with any other alternative
is to compromise that safety and we've got a business owner who I think
legitimately points out that this certainly does restrict flow back to your
business to some degree. I have no way of even guessing what people's
preference would be. People may prefer to take the guaranteed left turn lane
and turn into a wider opening than try to go through a cut in the middle of a
median strip when they know there's thru traffic backing up behind them. I have
no idea. My inclination on this Al is to hang in here with the engineer. I'm
willing to hear more about it but I'm a little wary of creating a situation that
I think might draw more traffic than we want going through that route.
Councilman Workman: Could we shut off the south entrance to that public parking
lot?
Gary warren: The main reason that that access is there, was access to the
Klingelhutz. I guess that would be sanething for Al to comment on. If you're
provided with a left turn, southbound access of the property, what kind of
impact does that have on it? How necessary is that connection to the parking
lot to the property? I
Councilman Workman: There's a pile of dead shrubs in downtown that you could
probably transplant there. I
Al Klingelhutz: It really doesn't do much for any access out of there. I know
beer trucks have tried to make it and driven on the sidewalk and cracked the
sidewalk. Most of them put in on both sides and I guess it's impossible for
even a truck to get...
Mayor Chmiel: I guess I look at that alternative aspect of it as to what Gary
has indicated in here about the next best alternative would be Alternate 2,
opening in the median and I think that would be in agreement basically with Al
as well. This option would be conditioned however as a temporary median cut
conditioned on a re-evaluation to land use intensified on the Klingelhutz
propety and/or traffic accidents or safety considerations warrant a change. I
think that's sanething that we have to look at is from the safety aspects of the
people as well. I would have no problem in going with that Alternative 2
myself.
I
25
11 City Council Meeting - March 27, 1989
11 Councilman Johnson: I would have a big problem it personally. I hate to say it
but being a victim of a rear end accident and leaving with the back injury day
by day on that, that's inviting a rear end. Not having a protected left turn.
II This reminds me a lot of the TH 7 and Oriole Lane, which is what I was going to
bring up to Council on Council presentation. It could be a protected left turn
if they'd ever get the painting down the road and the signs up, but we've got a
II situation there where we've got a lot higher speeds but here, I just can't see
it. We've got access. He's got two accesses caning in. He's got more access
than we're planning for the medical center. The medical center is a far higher
II useage here. If you're going to put plantings in that one median cut there,
they better just be the little short stuff because...
Mayor Cizniel: Ground cover.
IICouncilman Johnson: Yes, ground cover. We've got some planting problems
already but in an unprotected left turn situation, you're not going to want to
II stay sitting out in the middle of the traffic waiting to take a left turn.
You're going to take the small opening and that's dangerous. I feel we've given
southbound, he's got two different access ways. Northbound he's got two ways to
get in there. One before, one after. Southbound he's got one before. That's
more than a lot of other properties downtown. I also feel that if we do
anything special, causing the city to incur extra money on this, that those
monies should be assessed back to the benefiting property owner, which is only
1 one in this case. So any cost incurred here, if we do vote for something, that
incurs more engineering or other changes, other than correcting, if he's got an
existing problem that has to be corrected that we're ruining same existing
I stuff, that's different. But I know that we've already got the final plans and
specs written on this so we're going to have to rewrite the final plans and
specs which is going to cost a couple thousand bucks. I don't think I'm willing
to pay our taxpayers money for this without it being assessed back to the
IIbenfiting property owner.
Al Klingelhutz: I wish same people would have been concerned about our
I taxpayers money a year or so ago when they put in main street with two single
lanes. Taking out a piece of concrete costs less money than leaving one in. I
can't quite understand your thinking on that one Jay.
tCouncilman Johnson: There's not significantly less concrete going to be put in
there.
Al Klingelhutz: All you would be doing is leaving out maybe a 12 or 16 feet
stretch of concrete that they wouldn't have to put in.
II Councilman Johnson: And then putting in two additional curb sections that you
wouldn't have to put in otherwise which are more expensive than street sections.
IAl Klingelhutz: Where's the curb sections going?
Councilman Johnson: Around the ends.
1 Al Klingelhutz: Well you'd have to put on the end anyway.
Councilman Johnson: Now you've got four ends instead of two. But it really
IIdoesn't matter. If there's no additional cost, it won't be assessed.
26
City Council Meeting - March 27, 1989 95
Al Klingelhutz: Have you taken a look at the driveway that they've put into our
property? I'd like to have you meet me coming into that driveway. It's
actually a one lane driveway.
Councilman Johnson: Maybe that's the problem. If we have poorly designed that
existing driveway, that driveway needs to be...
Al Klingelhutz: You're talking about costs of designing Jay. Take a look at
what you did there. A truck coming out drives over the sidewalk and the City
has to put in 12 x 12 posts in order to keep the truck from driving on the
sidewalk.
Councilman Johnson: Now that's on your south side driveway?
Al Klingelhutz: That's on the south side and they put a couple of them on the
north side. I think I talked to Don about that last fall. Then he puts up a
sign that completely hides my sign. There's absolutely no place for me to put
up a sign for my real estate office. It's all hidden by brush and trees and the
City of Chanhassen...sign. Now don't tell me you didn't hurt my property when
you did all these things. Now you want to take my access away. An access going 11 through somebody elses parking lot. It just don't add up at all. It seems the
long time landowner and business owner in Chanhassen has been getting the shaft
and the new ones are being kissed. I think I've heard that from a dozen
different old time businesses in Chanhassen. Why is Pauly's closing? Leaving
an opening there, maybe it's my butt that I'll get rear end but I'm not afraid
of that but I think if you just put in a center abutment between those two,
you'd have a left turn lane as good as you have for the Bloomberg properties.
ttt
Councilwoman Dimler: I guess I'd just like to make a comment and Al hit upon
it. I would like to say that earlier that we are hearing now a lot about safety
concerns and I think certainly safety is a top priority but when the
intersection there, just north of there was built and I thought too, my gosh
this looks unsafe. This looks terrible and now it probably isn't as bad as
I feared it would be. How many accidents have there actually been? I'm sure
there's been some but is it really as bad as some of us feared it would be? So
I think maybe in this case here we're now starting to react in fear of being
rear ended when in fact the danger isn't as big as we're making it. So I would
go and support Alternative 2 because I also believe that when we do new
development we should take the concerns of the citizens into consideration.
That's one of my main points. If we can make it easier for even just one
citizen that has been there a long time and that has run a respectable business,
I/
then we ought to do that.
Councilman Boyt: I guess I will respond. BRW designed the corner of TH 101 and
Great Plains and we've lived with the results of that. They've cane in here,
and it looks to me like the problem is the island. The problem is the shortage
of parking. That's why we put the island in there, I gather. The island makes
it hard to access from the north side of the parking lot. It prevents people I/
from caning in and driving over to the real estate building. Why should we
compromise safety to protect parking. We need to do something with the parking
lot apparently. Maybe we redesign it. Maybe we lose sane parking spots but I'd
rather do that than encourage people to make an unprotected left turn when we've
got protected left turns throughout the city. Now we're going to have a
27
IIy Council Meeting - March 27, 1989
II unprotected left turn. Why start that? Why not just design the parking lot so
people can access the realty building? If that's going to be our priority,
let's do it that way.
IICouncilwoman Dimler: Bill, were you on the Council when they approved that
intersection on TH 101?
IICouncilman Boyt: Ursula, we don't have enough time to talk about that.
Councilwoman Dimler: Did you approve that though?
IICouncilman Boyt: The HRA approved that intersection.
ICouncilwoman Dimler: Did it ever cane to Council?
Councilman Boyt: It came to Council for comment. Council made comment. The
Council raised questions about, do you think that's going to be safe? Do you
IIthink people are going to be able to drive through there? But that was built
with HRA money by the way.
IIAl Klingelhutz: It's our money too.
Councilman Boyt: It's your money because you're part of that tax increment
district and I don't think we want to get off on that topic but if we do, we can
spend the afternoon discussing it.
Councilwoman Dimler: That's right but I'm just saying, you're concerned about
11 safety and we should have been all along.
Councilman Johnson: That was one of our biggest discussions on the entire
' downtown was that intersection and would that intersection work. Can we take a
fire truck through it? All that kind of stuff. Same kind of discussion we're
having on this.
ICouncilman Workman: Why don't we ask Al if Bill Boyt's comment about pulling
that median and rearranging that parking lot is a viable option and we can go
from there.
IIAl Klingelhutz: I think it's a more costly option than just putting in a narrow
center island down the road and leaving the left turn lane into my property. I
forgot to make this comment. The total center island project on TH 101 and the
four lanes across the railroad tracks, down TH 5 was proposed 3 years ago, 2 1/2
years ago. When TH 101 was supposed to be located at it's present site and not
moved over to Market Blvd.. I think that could have a big effect in traffic
II generated coming into town when the future main entrance into Chanhassen is
going to be from TH 101 over onto Market Blvd.. Would we even need a four lane
if there's not going to be a TH 101 south of TH 5 where it is at the present
IItime? We talk about if it was designed for the traffic coming into town when
TH 101 south was supposed to stay exactly where it is and be the main entrance
into the downtown. That has been changed within the last year and was replaced
over to Market Blvd.. That's going to be the main entrance into downtown. Are
you going to have four lanes there and four lanes here? Fbur lanes are nice but
someday in the future it's going to be very important. Another thing, on our
piece of land, if ever the old building goes, I guess I wouldn't have any
28
r 97
City Council Meeting - March 27, 1989 I
problem moving our parking lot to the north side of our land along side of the
cemetery and including it with the parking lot that's already there. But at the
present time it doesn't work that way. The building is setting on the wrong 11
place for that. I think Don and I discussed this a year and a half ago. Why
don't you build a new building and move it to the south and make more parking to
the north? It would help the businesses that are there now and it would be
parking for our place. The building is where it is now and I'd sure like to
keep a complete approach to it.
Mayor Ciniel: I think it's time to call a question on this. 1
Councilman Boyt: I would make a motion that we send the parking lot design to
the City thgineer to try to come up with a proposal that would make more direct
access to Mr. Klingelhutz' property.
Councilman Johnson: I'll second that. '
Councilman Workman: Gary, when's this median got to be approved?
Gary Warren: This spring is when we would anticipate putting it in. As soon as
the railroad gets their act together. I had a call from then today in response
to my phone call but I haven't made contact with then to find out if they're
still honoring their second quarter construction schedule for that intersection.
Lance that work is done, then we could came in and finish up our median. So I
jt would think in reality we're probably 2 to 3 months yet away.
Councilman Johnson: Did they say if they were still were going to hit the
second quarter?
Gary Warren: We passed messages so I'm going to try them again tomorrow. ,
Relating to the median in the parking lot, if you recall, sometimes these things
go through subtly but the trash collectors are not located in the median. That
was the result of considerable negotiations and discussion with the Kallsted
property and the rest of the businesses there. They Pony, Pauly's, Pryzmus and
we were hard press to locate that trash collector and that was the alternate
that we came up with so it's not only just the transportation access issue,
we're going to be looking for another trash location which has already been
difficult to find in that area.
Councilman Johnson: I think if you lose one parking spot in that parking area,
I/
you're going to have all those businessmen in that building plus the...saying
where's our parking going because that was one of the other real hot issues in
the design of downtown was that parking lot and how we can maximize parking in
that. Put the church and old City Hall at an angle and whatever to get us more
parking in there, which I've gotten used to after all these years.
Councilwoman Dimler: I guess my question is, does it really, is further study
going to cane up with any solutions or is it about time that we move on this? I
like the idea of Alternate 2 with the attachment there that we will study it as
it's being used and if there are any problems; that we will then correct then.
t And that's really even better than what we've got for the intersection up north
of there. We don't even have that we can correct the problems on that one.
1
29 1
y Council Meeting - March 27, 1989
11
II Councilman Boyt moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to send the parking lot
design to the City Engineer to try to come up with a proposal that would make
more direct access to Mr. Klingelhutz' property. Councilman Boyt and Councilman
Johnson voted in favor; Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Workman and Councilwoman Dimler
voted in opposition and the motion failed with a vote of 2 to 3.
Mayor Chniel: I'll entertain another motion.
IICouncilman Johnson: Do you know what the cost? If this turns out to where we
decide then to close this, do you know what that cost is going to be?
IIMayor Chmiel: Who says we're ever going to have to close it though?
Councilwoman Dimler: That's right. We'll deal with that when it comes along.
Councilman Boyt: I assure you that it's going to be next to impossible to close
it once you open it up.
IICouncilman Johnson: That's right. No matter what your study says. Your study
could say we're killing people every other day and it's going to be tough to
' close it. If somebody does die there, we'll probably get it closed but at great
expense to the citizens of Chanhassen. I don't know if HRA, would that be under
HRA then to make that closing or does that come back against the general
populace?
IIDon Ashworth: How far into the future? The HRA does have a closing off period
of time. Generally, once something is put in and it turns back to general
IImaintenance and that's exactly it. It becomes general maintenance of the City.
Councilman Johnson: Let's say it's probably 1 or 2 years.
IDon Ashworth: 1 or 2 years, the project is still open and still occurring, it
could be paid out over as long as the project stays open. Usually a project
does not stay open longer than a 3 year period. Given the size of this project,
IIit probably will be open 4 years.
Councilman WWorkman: Are we discussing the cost that it might cost to build a
cap there someday?
Councilman Johnson: Yes, because that was part of the study to see if, to put
IIit in and then study it to see if it was the right idea of put it in. Then if
it's not, then you take that action and correct it. I'm saying, we have to look
not only at today's cost but we're responsible for all the money. We're
gambling that we're not going to spend taxpayers money 3 years down the road for
IIthis project if we put this in now.
Councilman Workman: What is that, about a 12 foot median? I don't think
Ithat's that big of a deal.
Gary Warren: 6 maybe.
I
Councilwoman Dimler: I would be in favor of crossing that bridge when we get to
it. I would make the motion that we accept Alternate 2.
11
30
99
City Council Meeting - March 27, 1989
Councilman Workman: What would be the estimated cost on that? On filling in
the median?
Mayor Chmiel: I think it would be minimal.
Gary Warren: Less than $10,000.00.
Councilman Johnson: That's minimal. $10,000.00. '
Councilman Boyt: I have a question Don on funding of this road surface. How is
this paid for? ,
Don Ashworth: This was assessed back to abutting property owners. The roadway
itself was assessed back on a front foot basis. Landscaping. A certain portion
of the costs were paid by HRA. Generally the roadway itself was assessed back
to abutting property owners on a per lineal foot basis.
Councilman Johnson: And that's already been assessed? '
Don Ashworth: Correct.
Councilman Boyt: So this is a city project? The roadway? Okay.
Councilwoman Dimler: I'd like to make a motion that we accept Alternative 2
with the option that we study it, re-evaluate it and at that time make any
changes necessary.
Ma r Chmi l: '
yo e I'll second that.
Councilman Workman: I guess I would just amend it to say, just approve it as it
sits with number 2. I think it goes without saying that we'd monitor any
situation in the city.
Mayor C2miel: I think that probably should be in there too then just to clarify
it.
Councilman Boyt: There has to be a better plan than the one in front of us. We
don't want traffic stopping in a traffic lane. I
Gary Warren: If I could suggest following through on the discussion that Al had
presented here, we would take a look to see if we can not get a left turn in
that median and shrink it down as a part of that action which would, I think
address everybody's concern for the rear ending situation. If possible we will
do that. Also, I think that it is important that the motion call it a temporary
cut if you will with the caveats that we've commented here on. Intensified land
use and such. If there's a site plan that comes in, if the Council wants to
look at leverage for being able to work, if that needs to be closed off as a
part of a site plan review process, that could be a condition of the developers
to do that and possibly to even pay for that closing. One other thing that Al
had commented on that I also think might make sense here. If Al is agreeable to
closing off that access from the public parking lot, it's probably a way to get
two more parking spaces in the parking lot.
1
31
1O()
IICity Council Meeting - March 27; 1989
11 Mayor Chmiel: You indicated we still have a couple of months. If we included
that in with the balance of the motion?
1 Councilman Johnson: Are you going to call this temporary too? In your motion
so you don't handcuff the future?
IIMayor Chmiel: I think we should.
Councilwoman Dimler: That's fine with me.
1
Councilwoman Dimler moved, Mayor Chmiel seconded to accept Alternative 2 with
I the option that we study it, re-evaluate it and at that time make any changes
necessary. Councilwoman Dimler, Councilman Workman and Mayor Chmiel voted in
favor. Councilman Boyt and Councilman Johnson voted in opposition. The motion
carried with a vote of 3 to 2.
1
Councilman Johnson: I'd like to state, according to our procedures, I don't
believe it's a safe design. That's the reason for my negative vote on this.
APPROVAL OF 1989/90 LIQUOR LICENSES.
Don Ashworth: City Council previously established the license fees. You have
attached the person who have applied for the specific licenses and the amount of
1 such for each using the new fee schedule. All applicants have submitted all of
the information required under the ordinance and we have verified that it is in
conformance. The only applicant who is not really aware of the procedures and
I what was required was the Anh Le Restaurant and as of today Karen tells me that
his application is nearly complete. Approval of the licenses as listed is
recommended.
IICouncilman Johnson moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve the following
liquor licenses for 1989/90:
RIVIERA CLUB, INC. - On-Sale Intoxicating, Sunday Sales
BLOOMBERG COMPANIES - On-Sale Intoxicating, Sunday Sales
KALLSTED ENTERPRISES - On-Sale Intoxicating, Sunday Sales
PAULY'S INC. - On-Sale Intoxicating, Sunday Sales
CHANHASSEN BOWL, INC. - On-Sale Intoxicating, Sunday Sales
CHANHASSEN LEGION POST - Club License, Sunday Sales
1 MGM LIQUOR WAREHOUSE - Off-Sale Intoxicating
KENNY'S SUPERMARKET - Off-Sale Non-Intoxicating
SUPERAMERICA - Off-Sale Non-Intoxicating
1 HOLIDAY STATIONSTORES - Off-Sale Non-Intoxicating
BROOK'S SUPERETTE - Off-Sale Non-Intoxicating
BLUFF CREEK GOLF ASSOCIATION - On-Sale Non-Intoxicating
ANH LE RESTAURANT - Beer and Wine License
ST. HUBERT'S CHURCH - Temporary On-Sale Non-Intoxicating
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
1
1 32
•