Loading...
1j Approval of MinutesCHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING DECEMBER 28, 1998 Mayor Mancino called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Maneino, Councilman 'Senn and Councilman COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: Councilman Mason STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Pam Snell, DonAshworth - CONTINUATION OF ADOPTION OF THE PROPOSED 1999 BUDGET. Mayor Mancino: Now out tax certification levy for 1998, that's the sheet that you had distributed on Wednesday, was $6,487,202.00. The tax certification levy for 1999, which is the part that's important for the taxpayer because it is the one that sets our city tax rate. That levy proposed for 1999 would be how much? Pam Snell: $6,358,650.00. It's on the fifth page .in your packet. The comparison of the proposed levy that staff and council spoke about on Wednesday. Mayor Mancino: So the actual levy amount for 1999 would be what percentage lower than 19987 Para Snell: In dollar. Mayor Mancino: In dollar amount it's how much? Let's see, I've got a calculator here. $128,552:00 lower. Pam Snell: It would be approximately a 2% decrease if you take your total levy as compared to 1998. Mayor Mancino: Okay. And that is due to number one, the general fund taxes to 'be levied in 1999 would remain the same as 1998. It was proposed to have a 15% increase. In that line item under general fund. Pam Snell: Yes. That's staff's prior recommendation. Mayor Mancino: Okay, was a 15% increase. Now it will be the same as 1998. The special revenue fund will stay the same between 1998 and 1999. Equipment funding, which is also referred to as internal, the service fund will stay the same at $430,000.00. Our G.O. debt will go up approximately 4%. It will be on the same bond that we bonded in 1998 though. We have not increased the G.O. debt, the principal. It's the Same principal that we had in 1998. Now there's a 4% increase on what the interest payment that we'll be making on those G.O., that G.O. debt. How come we have that 4% increase for 19997 Don Ashworth: Schedule. Those are like 20 year bonds so however they were laid out from before. G.O. bonds are different than your... Special City Council Meeting - December:28,1998 ".' · ' ' - MayOr Mancino: And do we know what tl~y ~vill be next year? Dowehave thatall-theway out.to_ tl~ 20 year of the bond. ' · : .. · ' - Don Ashworth: When those were soldi let s aSsume I0-15 years ago,, We-enteredinto- that the same that you did foryour home and soit's' a ~fixed schedule. It does not ihangiunless you refunding which generally brings the amount.do'.~ .. .' - · '-- - - Mayor Mancino: Okay. And just so evoryone'knoWs~tha[G.O-debt is basedonthree~bond~issUes--O'~? was in 1991. Original City Hall building, one. was 1988.-Fire equipmentbond whiokbuilt~the fire station and we also bought a truck., in t 989 park bond'whiCh Was/f~rBandimere park; thepurch'a~fe of~ that land. So those arethe three O.O. bonds ~hat~are'under general bonded debt. N~X{ We l~ave,Under ~ levy the special assessment b°nded.debt. Andlhatpaynienttast year in !998 waS$858;688.00. Th~s' year it is $900, I'm sorry. Last year it was$49I,!2~.00~ This year againthat:total SP~c~ialassessment debt is $550,147.00 ~d that has~gone up 13%. 3md againDor~hat is because ofag~in.the schedulec~ schedule and payment. ' .' - ' Don Ashworth: Exactly. That's committed paym. ents. Staffhas in no w_aychangedthe~schcdul~e_d_~b_ti~- ortion so that is solely the principle-and interest~hat we agreedto pay whenever4ve soid~those bon~ds~.~ he be'91 or '95 ' whether t y · . Mayor Mancino: And those again, thereis no new special asse~ssm~t bondeddel~t foff1999. Thos~az~ ones that were issued from 1993 and 1995 Okay, thank you Thenwe have thepark referenduml-e'V~; As'you all know that we passed. The levy amountin '~8 was for$375;O00.00~ q':his:ye~ar it,s $246,837.00. That is a decrease of 34% fOrth~parkreferendktm levy. And can yoti-explairi'that Don Ashworth: When the citylevied for the park referendurn one year ago. We were n~ot totall¥:aurel~s-- tothe amount that would be · in the process of being sold. We contacted Springstedandwe asked them for theirbest what that amount would be.and they gaveusthe$375,000.00, whichis Whal : ?. thatpoint in time' sold thos paid in 1999 is the $240,837.00so thati,, - Mayor Mancino: The _ property tax statement there Southwest Metro. Southwest Metro-i~lg~8~e.~?~ied $504:, which is a, represents a 12.6% - . talked about is really' city line that I've -._ gone down in can you explain Don Ashworth'. _ district funding which-is one of the' money necessary tc by which they came up - ': · 'and so there was a general decrease Mayor Mancino: So how much is that a decrease from lastyear? . ' ~ ~ - ' . - Special City Council Meeting - December.28, 1998 Don Ashworth: $242,000.00. Mayor Mancino: So again, I will repeat this as we Went through the levy amount for 1999. The levy amount for 1998 was $6,487,202.00. This year for 1999 it will be $6,358,650.00 which represents a 2% decrease on the city's levy. Would you like us to make a motion? Todd Gerhardt: Well before you do that we do have one issue. If you turn to the next page that shows the 1999 budget, all funds. We have a revenue over and under expenditure. Right now our budget still is not balanced. There's $225,565.00 and at this point staffw0uld recommend that we increaSe the general fund dollar amount to make that budget balance. Changing the $3,260,796.00. Increasing that by $225,565.00. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Any discussion on this? Councilman Senn: As far as the 225 goes and the primary reason that the 225 is there is in the internal service fund we're funding for...authorizing expenditures of 250. So that's kind of the difference from where we. Councilman Berquist: 180 of the two and a quarter. Councilman Senn: Yeah. That's basically about the two and a quarter difference that we were looking at the other day. Don Ashworth: Mayor? Mayor Mancino: Okay, yes Don. Don Ashworth: Again, right now we're at the $6,500,000.00 versus, that's last year's versus the current $6 million 3. So really if you were just to bring your total levy to where it was last year, we're really only out of balance by $100,000.00 and so following Todd's suggestion to increase by the $225. Mayor Mancino: That would give us the flat tax still? Don Ashworth: Well no. It would put you with an increase of about 2%. An increase of 2% over last year. You figure roughly 1% per $50,000.00. Pam Snell: And that's an increase in property tax revenue. Don Ashworth: Correct. What Pam is Saying is, we saw an increase of between 6% and 8% in the overall growth in the community and so, I know that you have. Mayor Mancino: I still have 4.7%. Don Ashworth: I'I1 go with your 4.7%. Soifyou were to take and increase 2%, that should still produce a 3% decrease in property taxes associated with the city portion of your property tax bill. Todd Gerhardt: And that's without a valuation increase. Don Ashworth: That's correct. 3 Special City Council Meeting - December 28, 1998 Councilman Senn: With the $225,000.00 differential at this point, would it be correct to say that there is one of several avenues to go at this point. One would be to simPly raise the taxes to fund the $225. The other would be to fund it out of the '98, $700 to $800,000.00 reserve. The other would be to use the internal service funds that we haven't allOcated for expenditure in '99 even though we've included it as revenue, or any combination of the above. Is that a fair statement? Don Ashworth: That's correct. The only thing I would Caution the Council on is unless you find one time expenditures, which you've already gone through and said Certain things like Lake Ann Park you've cut out of there. You're going to...a problem for yOUrself for next year. That's the only thing I'd caution you on with either of the last two alternatives that you stated. Mayor Mancino: But also last year we had revenues surplus of between $700 and...dollars due to... knowing that we may be experiencing a special,.. I would like some discussion around using that surplus that was generated to fund the unbalanced part of it. Councilman Senn: Yeah, I mean I'd like to see the surplus used to fund that because we're still going to have a good surplus and then the question becomes, where do we sit for '99 as far as surplus goes and we don't know that. I mean that's something we won't know until we get in, get well into the year but even if you use the reserve at this point for that~ we're still going to have over halfa million in surplus. We're going to have a halfa million in surplus from '98 plus again don't forget we have that 200 and some thousand in reserve from internal service. That's kind of holding for what we may need... You know and this has absolutely nothing. I mean the other thing that is, we haven't even finished our an analysis of the other funds yet in the reserves and all that sort of stuff so I mean that's still an open ended issue that we have to deal with after January 1st so the more I think about it I think I'd be comfortable with just taking that out of the reserve and. Mayor Mancino: Well I'd like to keep the internal service fund, I would like to keep that at our...whether it's a fire truck, whether it's you .know some piece of equipment. So we don't have the peaks and valleys of taxing. So I would like to keep that... So I saw that last year at the end of 1998 we...have a good reserve. I don't feel uncomfortable using... Councilman Berquist: I understand the anxiousness to minimize the tax bite to the community. The only thing that I will offer is, every audit session that I've sat in for four years, the auditors had continuously talked about the shifting of expenses from the feds and the state and the county... I would prefer, contrary to popular public opinion perhaps, I would prefer to keep it as high as practical. Councilman Senn: Yeah, well we are. We're keeping the reserves beyond that of $2 ½ million. I mean again that has nothing to do with any of the special funds. That's purely general fund that we're keeping at $2 1/2 million. Plus now the new half million if we use the 200, then that number's even going to go up more. Don Ashworth: Mayor? If I could clarify what I'm hearing the council say and that is that you want to take and see a zero percent increase in general property taxes. Mayor Mancino: Yes. Don Ashworth: And to, the sheet as presented would show that last year was $6 million, roughly 5. This year's right now at $6 million 4. It's a difference of about $130,000.00. 4 Special City Council Meeting - December 28, 1998 Mayor Mancino: So you're saying take part of it from there and the other part from the surplus? Don Ashworth: If I'm hearing you correctly, then I'm hearing you say that you'd balance these two which means the amount coming out of reserves would be approximately $100,000.00. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Councilman Senn: That'd be using the combination of the tho then right? Mayor Mancino: That'd be using the combination of 1 and 2. 'To set the levy as the same last year's. Instead of a 2% decrease, plus use the surplus, which is a good...and keep the internal service the same. Councilman Senn: Okay. We have had a public hearing and it is closed but you may come forward Bob. Bob Ayot: Did some, I don't know if I'm going to need this thing but do you think there, I'm a little concerned about infrastructure. You didn't talk about that. And Councilman Berquist probably has a pretty good handle on what has been going down.., big eXPense. I'm also concerned about the reserve. Because our department of public works is involved primarily with...don't have a good handle I don't think, and tell me if I'm wrong, a good handle on where the hiccups might be. It's a big concern. I'll go back to my favorite, and I'm sure you folks...lift stations. We've got such a large number of them. Some percentage of those are going to go down...I had to worry about that so in terms of analyzing where we stand there, I have a very, very big concern. This is not an independent concern. I've talked to a number of people about it. The second area is parks and rec. There's three. Public... It's a review based on Mr. Ashworth's recommendation...one of the things that concerns me, 23.4% of total revenue... We are at about...and again that might be somewhat skewed. I might be off... I talked with Todd. He said your concerns will go away... The question is, is there an advantage to accelerating the servicing of that debt. Is there an advantage in any way, or how could we do it? Mayor Mancino: Using some of the surplus to reduce debt. Bob Ayot: ...paying now versus later. Is there a gain in something...? Don Ashworth: That would be contrary to what you're trying to fight with right now which is to keep property taxes down. Bob Ayot: I know that. I hope someone's here to quote me but I've got to ask the question. Mayor Mancino: Sure. Don Ashworth: There's absolutely no question, and the city council's fully aware of this, that the city of Chanhassen's debt per capita is much higher than many, many cities. But as has been reported continuously by two different auditing firms, both of which are highly recognized, 70% to 80% of that debt is not really general obligation debt but in fact is debt that's either. Mayor Mancino: Special assessment. Don Ashworth: Special assessment or tax increment. .5 Special City Council Meeting - December 28, i998 Mayor Mancino: Tax increment debt. Don Ashworth: And sO if you factor those in~ and we took a bigger hit now with passage of this park referendum but you know prior to that point in time if you factored all of those others out you'd be way below the average' city. The Second question Bob has asked is one that is constantly looked at by your auditors, or I mean by your debt experts and that is an analysis of what we're currently paying versus what the market is. And as you're fully aWare, we constantly bring back potential refundings where we're able to save potentially 3, 5,700,000. And that's an activity that they carry out on a continuous basis. I don't want to say monthly but I would Say quarterly at a minimum and so I'm confident in telling you right now...6 months so as I'm saying this they may be 'doing the analysis and maybe next week they'll come back saying yes, we should do a refunding of the bonds of 91A. But I can confidently state to you that it is not in the best interest 0fthe city to accelerate payments or to do anything other than just move ahead with the... Todd is correct on 2003, 4. Bob Ayot: ...follow-up with another question. Another thing that was kind of interesting and you've got to forgive me because I'm just looking at, you know I've just barely scratched the surface looking at this and a few other things. But take a look at the document we just received. It validates a trend. In 1996 we, along with Burnsville...double the area of parks and recreation. Mayor Mancino: You mean the proportion of spending? Bob Ayot: Yes. Not just proportion in terms of percentage but also the actual dollars. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Bob Ayot: And then the figures in this document, we had a capital investment of about 600K. Something like that. So, and that's part of the referendum. The thing I'm noticing in this budget, and what's true here so it says that the trend is continuing. 'As we put more into parks and rec, we drive up recurring services .... investment to get the parks and rec going. You know you put a new road in, what have you. Now you have the service activities that are generated from that. My suggestion, if there's any way that we can take a look at that. But I also know, based on the discussion I've had with the Mayor in the past and the analysis I've done, our facilities...(a), way under utilized, and (b), more expensive than it needs to be in terms of utility rate and so on. So on one...we were to force the issue of the parks and rec becoming self sustaining or if we can somehow stop the investment at this point, slow it down, the 410 per recurring services. Is that possible? Can we slow that down, the capital investment to...service activity to maybe marry it up with...2 Because I want to keep more reserve around because I think, especially in my neighborhood, that we're going to have an issue with infrastructure. We're still building to code better than requirement. That's another subject that I want to bring up. Don Ashworth: I'm guessing that that's an area that the ~ity council will probably take a look at during the course of the 1999. You've already identified ihat there's a fair reserve under 410. You've already stated that certain things like the Lake Ann Park 'road should maybe be something that would be looked at in 1999 and made a decision as to whether or not to Pay for it out of that reserve fund. Mayor Mancino: Yes, and we have asked to pay for it out of the reserve fund. Don Ashworth: And you've already said that, you've recognized that as new properties come on board, they pay into that park fund which has really been set up to insure that as a new neighborhood park is Special City Council Meeting - December 28, 1998 -- needed in that area, that we have the money to pay fo~ thht. It also recognizes that, and as the houses then are built, because I mean you don't get the money until after the house is built and now you put the money in the bank and you've been able to buy and bfiiI~l the park. The houses are already there too to ensure that the operating cost associated with it. get paid. My only statement in regards to ours being higher is that I think if you were to look at the out rin~g"~6mmunities that are gr°Wing, you would find the same kind of phenomenon. Meaning that they are ~effihg dollars in and they are, So that reports shows the capital expense. So as we purchase the neighborhood Parks in the past year, that's gone in that report as just a gross amount. One million dollars. Which then when you make a comparison to Chanhassen for 1996 expenses in comparison to let's'say Hopkins or Crystal, it looks like we'r'e Spending a lot more money. We're really not. Bob Ayot: But there is some advantage to consider how We can slow it down and,.. Councilman Senn: Well Bob if you took at what we've done With 410 activity this year, it's precisely what you're saying. There's not a lot of new capital investment in it. It's more taking care of existing capital investments that we have. Bob Ayot: Is there much of a penalty fee if We were to maybe... (There was a tape change at this point in the discussion.) Mayor Mancino: Yes. We're starting on that but what I'd like to do is make sure that you are notified when we have those meetings. For you to come and listen with us and comment with us. Okay? So we'd like to have you do that. Thank you. May I suggest that we go ahead and adopt the budget. That we, the tax certification levy be set at the same as last year, which is $6,487,202.00. That there is no increase. Therefore we will raise approximately $128,552.00 with setting up the same and we will use $97,013.00 out of the reserves to fund to balance the budget. Councilman Senn: I would move that we adopt the levy equal to the 1998 amount of levy and authorize a general fund spending budget as presented here with the difference to come out of the 1998 reserves. And not part of that motion but separate from it, the other funds will be acted on or reviewed separately as we get into January then. Mayor Mancino: I'i1 second that motion. Councilman Senn moved, Mayor Mancino seconded to adopt the 1999 levy to equal the amount of the 1998 levy and authorize a general fund spending budget as presented with the difference to come out of the 1998 reserves. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Mayor Mancino adjourned the meeting at 9:30 a.m. Submitted by Todd Gerhardt Acting City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim CHANIIASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 11, 1999 Mayor Mancino calied the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m.- The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Mancino,' Councilman Senn, Councilman Engel, Councilman Labatt, and Councilwoman Jansen STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt; Roger Knuts0n, Anita Benson', Todd Hoffman, and Phil Gravel APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Engel seconded to approve the agenda deleting item 1 (g), appointment of the Fire Chi&because this position is a two year appointment. All voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None. ~-- OATHS OF OFFICE: Roger Knutson administered the Oaths of Office for Mayor Nancy Mancino, Councilmember Linda Jansen and Councilmember Steve Labatt. The following list of people were present for all items on the agenda. Public Present: Name Address Marcia & John Hull Bill Jansen Dan Modzynski Bob & Sherry Ayotte Craig Blechta Patsy Bernhjelm Leah Hawke Jacob & Samuel Esch Jim Sloss Carol Dunsmore Leslie Michel Colleen Dockend0rf Michael O'Kelly Lirth Huynh ORGANIZATIONAL ITEMS: 1421 Lake Susan Hills Drive 240 Eastwood Court 6213 Cascade Pass 31 Sandy Hook Road 9380 Kiowa Trail 7444 Moccasin Trail 7444 Moccasin Trail 9360 Kiowa' Trail 730 West 96th Street 2840 Washta Bay Road 2061 Oakwood Ridge 685 Carver Beach Road 720 West Village Road #102 Mayor Mancino: Are there any organizational items, one, that we need to pull and number two, let's go through this first..Are there any that need to be pulled for councilmembers to talk about later. Councilman Senn: I'd like tO pull l(b). City Council Meeting - January 11, 1999 Mayor Mancino: l(b), official newspaper.. · _ ' councilman Senn: Right. And then I'd like to just PUt aclarifiCation°n (d)and 0).' !(d), bOnd consultant will be bid in July and l(j),' official depositoryl.Wili be bid out and decided during thefirst · Mayor Mancino: First quarter of '99 .... · Councilman Senn: Right. - ' Mayor Mancino: Okay. Then with that, let's go to l(e), Acting Mayor. Is there anyone who Would to volunteer to be Acting Mayor? Are there any nominations for Acting Mayor7 Councilman Engel: I nominate Mark Senn. ' ': - :: - -' ' ' - - ' Mayor Mancino: Any other nominations forActing Mayor? Would you accept the nomination tO be Acting Mayor? . Councilman Senn: Okay. Mayor Mancino: So Councilman Senn willaccept Acting Mayor. Then may I have a motion for organizational items l(a), l(c), l(d), l(e), l(f), l(h), l(i), l(j). And remember Fire Chief, l(g), becau that's a two year term we don't need to do that again. So mayI have a motion please? Councilman Engel: Move approval of organizational items i(a),(c);(e),(f),~h) and (i)_ And (j),'exeus~ Councilman Senn: And (d) -Councilman Engel: And (d), bond consultant MayorMancino: AndmaYlhavea-Secon_dPlease?---' i'i')-~-- ' Councilman Engel, moved,-COuncll .~ln:an Senn seCondedto approve the it. Health Officer i. City Auditors City Council Meeting - January 11, .1999 jo Official Depository to be bid and decided in first quarter of 1999 All voted in favor and the motion carried. Mayor Mancino: 1 (b) you pulled. Councilman Senn: Yeah, I Would like to make a motion on l(b) tO temporarily appoint the Chanhassen Villager the official newspaper for 30 days and ask the City Attorney to research some of the questions we asked him in the work session and also get the back:up financial information as to being suggested in the change in rates or how it compares to previous years', etc. So we could revisit this issue at hopefully our next meeting. .. Mayor Mancino: Okay, and that is because we have both the Chanhassen Villager and the Lakeshore Weekly News that are both asking to be the official newspaper. Councilman Senn: Correct. Mayor Mancino: Okay. May I have a second to that motion? Councilman Engel: Second. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Engel seconded to appoint the Chanhassen Villager as the Official Newspaper for Chanhassen for 30 days and ask that the City Attorney research the questions asked by the Council and discuss this issue at the next work session. All voted in favor and the motion carried. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Senn mOved, Councilman Engel seconded to approve the · following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations: Approval of Temporary On-Sale Beer License, FebrUary Festival, Chanhassen Lions Club. City Council Minutes dated December 7, i998 City Council Minutes dated December 12, 1998 City Council Minutes dated December 14, 1998 City Council Minutes dated December 21, 1998 ' Planning Commission Minutes dated December 2, 1998 All voted in favor and the motion carried. Mayor Mancino: We will discuss 2(a) and 2(e) at the end of the agenda. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS:.' Colleen Dockendorf: Good evening. Colleen Dockendorf, 2061 Oakwood Ridge. Hi. I come before the council tonight to ask what the status &the public safety department and public safety director position is. Since all of, the bombshell was dropped in late November regarding the reorganization and since the forced resignation of our public safety director,' there has been some conflicting information as to the status and precious little direct communicatiom During the late December budget meetings the position, the funding for the position was cut and yet the Mayor expressed that if the position were filled, the City Council Meeting - January 11, 1999 funding could be found. And then last week in your article Nancy you indicated that the decision regarding the position would be made in early 1999. And then I talked to Todd last week and he said that he thought that perhaps a decision would be held offuntil the new city manager were in place. So I'm asking for a response tonight as to what is the plan for'making a decision regarding the position and the departmental structure. And if the answer to 'th~it, I m6an.this is your first meeting of 1999 so I can appreciate that you haven't gotten to it yet and if thehh~er is we d°n't know yet, then I would, that's a completely appropriate response and if the decisiOn ~fil! is in the air, then allow me to please suggest a process that I think would be fair to all. I think it's pretty evident from the number of people that showed up at the December 14th meeting that there's a lot of concern by our citizens about what's going on with respect to the department and the position. And at that December 14th meeting only 13 citizens were allowed to express their opinion, either for or against th~ position or the structure. I think it would be prudent given the concern out there, to 'have another publiC' hearing on the isSUe where all people can be heard as to what they would like to see with respect to'public safety coverage in our city. Additionally I would ask that you look to your public safety commission. That is the place where citizens can also express their opinion and the public safety commission obviously is a little closer to the issue and has some experience and background as to what maY be 'apPropriate for the citizens. We are the sounding board. Please use us. Further, we'd ask that you talk.to your neighboring cities. I know that Eden Prairie and Chaska particularly have opinions on this issue and would be happy to provide some input if you would ask them. Find out what works for them. Find out how they interact with our city with respect to public safety. Finally I'd ask that you ask the professionals. Ask the people in the agencies that provide coverage for Chanhassen. That means the Carver County Sheriff's Department, the DNR, the State Patrol. I'm sure I'm forgetting several but please, get input from the professionals as to what's appropriate. They know the topics very well. Find out what they need from us to provide adequate coverage for Chanhassen. Please don't make this decision in a vacuum. Let's do our research before we go forward. So tonight I'm asking if you have an answer, please tell us what it is. What is going to be your process for making a decision regarding the position and when will we know and how will you communicate that to us? Thank you. Mayor Mancino: Anyone else? Conrad Fiskness: Mayor Mancino, members of the CounCil. I'm Conrad Fiskness from the Riley- Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District and I'm here to make a presentation of a check. It'S a check for $14,545.94 and just a word of explanation, particularly for the benefit of the two new council members, ifI may take just a moment to explain what we're doing. One of the provisions that the Watershed has at it's disposal is a maintenance fund for stream and lakes and we can levy for, not a lot of money but we have been doing it for a few years so we have a little bit of a kitty where we can use for correcting problems that directly affect the public waters in either the streams or the lake. And within the last year or so Lotus Trail presented a challenge. With' ihe big rains there'd be a lot of erosion and the aggregate that would be put into fill in the gullies that Washed with each storm Would find it's way into Lotus Lake and so together with the engineering department from the City of Chanhassen and the help of Phillip Elkin also, a plan was put together to improve 'the L0tus Trail and that has been completed and the cost was around $29,000.00 and so the way We like ti) aPproach in our policy on-these type of projects is to set if one of the municipalities has a Project that needs to be worked on, we'd like to have them share in part of the cost but we are willing to share in half of it." And so I'd like to present you, Mayor Mancino with this check and thank the city and the staff for helping us solve what Was a problem that was aggravating to the residents and to anybody who was concerned about Lotus Lake. Mayor Mancino: Thankyou. Thank you very much Conrad. Let's go, anyone else then I'll come back Colleen. Anyone else wishing to address City Council?'.' City Council Meeting - January 11, 1999 Kenneth Durr: Madam Mayor and.Council. My name is Kenneth Durr. I live at 4830 Westgate Road, Minnetonka. I'm the developer and owner ora subdivision called Minnewashta Landings, which is on the northwest end of Lake Minnewashta, bordered by.Highway 7 and Minnewashta Parkway. Right. across from the Fire Station. During the development of the property and subsequent to it's development I had a fair amount of problem Wi[h tresp.assing in the way of snowmobilers. The first year that we had the problem I talked to the snowmobile club and Mr. Littfin, one of the other gentleman in the club were as helpful as they could be. They put up lathe and binder twine and flags and some signs but the snowmobilers continued just to completely ignore this .and would continue trespassing, ruining evergreens and shrubs and crisscrossing the property. At one point I was behind the berm on Highway 7 on a Sunday afternoon with a client putting markers in the snow for their house when a snowmobilers came over the berm, nearly hitting the three of us. And immediately behind him another one nearly hitting us from the other side. It is a hazard and a real problem as far asthis invasion of the property. Subsequent to that first year when the snowmobile club put UP the lathes and twine, which was not sufficient at all, we purchased 65 steel fence posts, over a 1,000 feet of half inch yellow rope and it takes two men a day to put it up and a day for two men to take it down. Plus the cost of the materials and we put up 30 signs. After the first year, I think we had 10 of the signs left. They were just completely destroyed. The ropes were cut. Fence post pulled and in'one case along the lakeshore where we attempted to block off the access from the lake, the fence posts were even hurled up into the trees and hanging there for the balance of the winter. It has cost me about $1,024.00 each year to put up and take down the roping and the fence posts and they still cut the rope and proceed to go through. We put those up for the last two years. This year we hope that with the trail going in, and I talked to Mr. Hoffman about that and my hope was that with the trail going in, that that would prevent the snowmobilers from being up on the property, but stay down in the roadway ditch. Well contrary to my thinking, it's just the opposite. Now the trail becomes a challenge to them as well as the side of the berm and now they're beginning to go through the property again. They're crisscrossing the new walking trail which is a big hazard. Last week, not right in front of my property but a little further east from there, there was a lady and two children walking the trail. Snowmobilers crisscrossing around them. In their frustration they left the trail, crossed the ditch and went up and walked the edge of the highway. So it's not just a problem of property being damaged and invasion there, but I think it's only a matter of time before someone is either going to be injured or worse on the trail if that's allowed to continue. I don't know what more I can do as a property owner. We pay taxes them. Over $200,000.00 a year, which is a fair amount and then have to spend another $1,000.00 plus a year to put up fencing and posts. One snowmobiler that I stopped indicated to me that the posts that I had up there last year were a hazard. He said that some snowmobiler's going to get hurt and that I'd be sued. Now I don't know if that could be a possibility. I guess anything's possible when someone hits something on your property. But the question in my mind is, if that were the case, what if any responsibility does the city have once they have put in a trail to maintain a safe condition for those people using the trail. I don't think it's a matter if somebody's going to be injured on that trail. I think it's only a matter of when. And this year I did not put up the posts or the rope and of course the snowmobilers are all over it. I talked to Mr. Littfin of the snowmobile club. He said he and his people would be ou~ and put up lathe but I know that's not going to do the job. Last year Mr. Littfin and one of his people came out at my request to observe firsthand what was happening. While we were there snowmobilers were completely ignoring where they should be. They were up on the property so we got in my Jeep. Dri~,e down the highway. Stopped them at a cross street and Mr. Littfin and his other man got out to talk toTthe snowmobilers. They just completely .ignored him. Hopped back on their machines and just wheeled right around us. So even the snowmobile club admits they cannot control the situation. Now I dori"t have any suggestions. I'm just here for some help. It's been sort of a desperation really and I don't lm0w that we should have to continue to spend that City Council Meeting - January 11, 1999 . kind of money and effort and then still to no avail to keeP'the snowmobilers from the property. Thank you. - ~' · Mayor Mancino: Well before you Sit dOwn Mr. Durr. ii~y don't Todd Gerhardt, our City Manager, give you a call and let's set up a time to get together and disbuks it and look for some possible solutions. I don't know if anybody on council right now has a particular solution but let's get together and talk about it and figure out what We can do. Kenneth Durr: Thank you. Mayor Mancino: Bob, if you could wait just one Second so that I can answer Colleen's. I didn't expect to just leave your question out there. The City Manager and I met and were starting to talk about this morning some of the work sessions or upcoming work sessions because as you said we have not gotten together as a council. This is our first meeting' and we really haven't talked about it, but we are going to bring it up as far as procedure and what we want to do at our work session on the 19*. So it will be on the agenda. Other than that you know We haven't come to any conclusions or gone forward at all but to bring it to the entire council on the 19t~. The 184 is a holiday so it will be on Tuesday the 19~ of January. And we will probably have a schedule as far as timing. I don't have that tonight but we can certainly give that to you. Okay? Anyone else wishing to approach the council? Well if he wants to come back and say something, we'll let him. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR AN ON-SALE BEER AND WINE LICENSE~ THE GREAT WALL RESTAURANT~ 566 WEST 78~}~ STREET (FORMERLY ANH LE ORI~NTAL CUISINE). Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, councilmembers. The Great Wall Restaurant is requesting a wine and beer sale license. They are looking at moving into the Anh Le Restaurant. They have purchased that restaurant from Anh Le so it will now be called the Great Wall Restaurant and the Great Wall is from North Mankato. A background check on them showed up negative. No outstanding warrants or fines that they received in North Mankato. With that staffwould recommend approval of the wine and beer license for Great Wall Restaurant. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Any questions for staff at this point? Councilman Senn: Todd just one quick one. Anh Le had the same thing, correct? TOdd Gerhardt: Correct. Councilman Senn: Okay. Mayor Mancino: This is open. for a public hearing. Is there anyone tonight wishing to make comments on this for City Council tonight? Okay, the public hearing is closed. Bring it back to council. Any other comments or questions? May I have a motion please? Bob Ayotte: I'm sorry, you're not talking loud enough mayor so I'm afraid I didn't hear you. May I approach to ask a question? Approach the bench. Mayor Mancino: Excuse me, Bob this is on the on-sale beer and wine license. Yes, okay. City Council Meeting - January 11, 1999 Bob Ayotte: Thank you. First I'll make a comment. I have tickets to the game this Sunday. Mayor Mancino: Name and address please. Bob Ayotte: Bob Ayotte, 6213 Cascade Pass in Chanhassen. And I'll rub it in again. I have tickets to the game this Sunday. Councilwoman Jansen: So do I. Bob Ayotte: Councilwoman, where are your-seats? Councilwoman Jansen: You can't have them. Bob Ayotte: With respect to what the gentleman was just talking about outside and with the beer and liquor license issue, I don't know the specifics of it but I'm going to request and ask if there was a risk assessment made regarding both safety issues and impact on an economic basis. Rather than have, and you know your point's well taken. When you're going through the budget process, everything should have the basis of estimate. Everything should have a rationale. Everything should have a pro and con statement. Okay. Does one exist for the liquor license and did one previously exist before this path was put in for this guise with the snowmobilers? Two different issues. Mayor Mancino: Let's just do the liquor license first. Bob Ayotte: Okay, swell. Mayor Mancino: So your question on the liquor license is what? Bob Ayotte: Has there been a risk assessment with respect tO impact On public safety, traffic ability and so on? Two, economic impact. Three, response from the community with respect to other interest groups, i.e. church groups, so on. Has there been a risk assessment? I'm sure we have something like that that's a process in the city. I hope. Mayor Mancino: Has there been? Todd Gerhardt: Well we do background checks on every applicant to see if there are any outstanding warrants or any other incidents individually and/or with their present location in North Mankato. All that search has come up negative. And it's a public hearing. We notified all residents within 500 feet of the restaurant. No comments were received. It was advertised in the Villager... Bob Ayotte: Well that satisfies part of the question.' Thank you. But the part with respect to assessment. Objective assessment. Public safety. Where it's being position: Traffic. Things along that line. I appreciate the fact that the individual that you've inquh~¢d on may not have a felony background. However, has there been an assessment with respect t6 ~he impact of the introduction of a liquor license' in the city? I'm not saying it's good or bad. I don't knoTM. Mayor Mancino: Bob, there was one there before. ":':. ~. Bob Ayotte: Oh there was a liquor store before? ' ' 7 City Council Meeting ~ January 11, 1999 Mayor Mancino: Yes. Right there. B°b Ayottei Okay. Councilman Senn: It's not a liquor store. Mayor Mancino: It's not a store but. Councilman Senn: A wine and beer license. Mayor Mancino: A wine and beer license. Bob Ayotte: Oh good. So there's a basis of estimate? Mayor Mancino: Yes. Bob Ayotte: And what's the result of that basis of estimate? Has there been an analysis? Any imperical data associated with any problems associated with the previous liquor store? Does that exist? Todd Gerhardt: It's not a liquor store. It's a Wine and beer license, Mayor Mancino: For a restaurant. Bob Ayotte: I'm sorry. Todd Gerhardt: And in the eight years I believe that Anh Le Was in that location, the City of Chanhassen has no incidents at that location. I'm not aware of any traffic concerns in that area. So based on that we recommended approval. Bob Ayotte: What I'm going to request is that the council consider a formalized risk assessment process. ...but we've got what, 18,000 folks now? 19,0007 Okay. When we get to 25,000 or 35,000, trust me. Minneapolis does not know everyone and they have a specific process. And we don't have to recreate it, it exists. So I know that we have a need for one, and a good example, and I'll go back. Although you want me to impose some measure of self constraint, but the gentleman that just came up did in fact indicate his concern. I'm wondering if a risk assessment was done there on a formalized basis. Sometimes no. Sometimes go. But if we have a formalized process that may assist in making sure that we do not allow a hiccup to occur with one of these actions, okay. And there probably should be a set series of questions that we always ask with the collection of data and so forth. And then we can start getting to the imperical data that you've been asking for, which I think is a good point. So if you would consider a risk assessment process. Is that possible?, ' Mayor Mancino: Certainly that that is possible..NOw you said there is one existing? BOb Ayotte: I can't hear you. Mayor Mancino: You said there one existing Bob? Bob Ayotte: In other cities... City Council Meeting - JanUary 11, 1999 Mayor Mancino: In other cities. Bob Ayotte: Minneapolis employs one. I don't kr~)w. Mayor ManCino: Do you know Roger, does Plym0uih Or other cities that you work for have a risk assessment for the on-sale been or liquor? Roger Knutson: They don't use that name but that's essentially what yoU're going to do when you have an ordinance which has Criteria and you have to meet the criteria to be approved. Then you have an application form, which requests the information you want so you can evaluate whether granting a license is appropriate. You do all that and then you. mal~e your assessment as to whether they meet the ordinance requirements. If they meet .ordinance requirements and you approve 'them. If they meet ordinance requirements. So your criteria are in your' ordinance. Mayor Mancino: And we are looking at a new liquor ordinance. We will be, is it at our next work session on the 19~? Are we reviewing one? ~ Todd Gerhardt: That's correct. Mayor I just wanted to add one point. That these are annual licenSes that you approve. So if we do have problems with any eStablishment during that period, council has the sole discretion of approving the liquor licensing annually. So that is another measurement tool. Mayor Mancino: Okay. We will be looking at a liquor license ordinance on January 19~' during that work session also. Bob Ayotte: Thank you. Mayor Mancino: You're welcome. Councilman Senn: I'll move approval of item 3. Mayor Mancino: Second please. Councilman Engel: Second. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Engel seconded to approve the request for an on-sale beer and wine license for The Great Wall Restaurant at 566 West 78th Street contingent upon receipt of the license fee, the surety bond, and liquor liability insurance. All voted in favor and the motion carried. APPOINTMENT OF COUNCIL MEMBER TO THE SOUTHWEST METRO TRANSIT COMMISSION. Mayor Mancino: Is there a staffreport with this? "' Todd Gerhardt: No. Basically what we need is one council member to be apPointed to the Southwest Metro Transit. I believe Mark Senn, Councilmembe-r Se~nn served in that capacity last year... City Council Meeting - January 11, 1999~' Councilman Senn: Do We need to do it tonight? I' mean is there a reason why we need to do it tonight? Because at our work session I thought we were going to kind of go through the different things that we need to have representation on. .- . MayOr Mancino: Oh, do it on the 19~? Councilman Senn: Yeah, do it on the 19th. It might make more sense unless there's a reason it has to be done. Mayor Mancino: I think that would be fine if you wouldn't mind going to the one in January that falls before the 19~. Okay. Then we will just go ahead and may I have a motion to table this to the 19th? Councilman Engel: Move t° table. Councilman Senn: Second. Councilman Engel moved, Councilman Senn secOnded to table appointment of a council member to the Southwest Metro Transit Commission to the work session on January 19, 1999. All voted in favor and the motion carried. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: None. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: None. CONSENT AGENDA: Mayor Mancino: So let's go back to the two pulled items from the consent agenda. 2(a). AUTHORIZE PREPARATION OF WELLHEAD PROTECTION PLAN. Councilman Senn: I had a quick question on that. Anita. I don't know if it's a question for you or Phil or whatever but, essentially I understand what you're doing. I don't have a problem with what you're doing. As far as the wellhead protection plan from Northern Environmental, if I'm understanding what's presented here, I mean it's essentially over a $30,000.00 contract. Did we take bids? If not, why haven't we taken bids or at least got an alternate pricing from more than one party? Anita Benson: Northern Environmental is a Subsidiary of Bonestroo. You may recall back'in 1996 a well field study was conducted at that time. ~ As part of that Well field study, some work was done bY Northern Environmental which identified components of well field features, well head protection plan.' As you're aware a consultant, or professional services are not required to be competitively bid. Northern Environmental is, in reviewing their references, highly qualified. Has done work in several communities. Is in the process in seven communities within the metro area, conducting wellhead protection plans. So in reviewing those and in light of the fact that they have previous experience in the city of Chanhassen, and we have an established working relationship wi~h Bonestroo, that is my rationale behind not formally going out and requesting proposals from several consulting firms. Councilman Senn: Are you suggesting effectively that because of the previous work that was completed and the data in the files and stuff, that Bonestroo has, that it would make this the best deal or the cheapest or the best way to go? Is that, am I underStanding that right? 10 L City Council Meeting - January 11, 1999 Anita Benson: Correct. Correct. Northern Environmental was very involved. They did geologic exploration with the 1996 study. Yes, and having that background information, they are ahead of any firm right now as far as if we brought a different firm in tO start on this. They are ahead as far as work hours would be required to do that. Mayor Mancino: But there are other suppliers, vendors wh'o do this? Anita Benson: Correct. There are other firms that. Mayor Mancino: So we could still go and get a cOUPle other bids and hopefUlly that Would prove that. Councilman Senn: I don't care if you go through formal request for proposal but it would be nice if you at least did a phone, some phone contacts and do a quick run over of what the scope of work is and get some pricing back so at least we find out you know if we're within the range. I think we really ought to be doing that on any contract of this size. Anita Benson: Correct. Councilman Senn: Even though we have a lot of confidence in Bonestroo, you know who's done a good job for us. I think it's just a check we should be automatically doing. Anita Benson: Correct. But the wellhead protection plan is Specialized work and if in reviewing the proposal you'll see that the scope is not 100% clearly defined and that is because the scope, there are items in the scope of work that can't be determined until: some other work items have been completed. So it isn't necessarily where I can go to another, to several consulting firms and request, provide them with a clear scope of work as far as services required because frankly we don't know what those are until we have gotten into the study. Especially for the group two activities. Councilman Senn: Well as I'm understanding what's been submitted here is this covers what's known and it's open ended on what's not known. Anita Benson: Not so much oPen ended. Councilman Senn: Or is this a not to exceed? Anita Benson: Right now we will be monitoring these costs as we go. If there's an issue that comes up in the group two work items that expand upon the work scope that we anticipate at this time, we will be notified immediately and we will negotiate any additional fee for that service. Councilman Senn: Well then I mean it sounds to me like you've got at least enough, let's call it the base scope of work and we have enough information based 'on the base scoPe of work to just go get some quick check pricing at least from another vendor ifn°t a couple more just so we don't. Anita Benson: Correct, we could certainly do that. Councilman Senn: Okay. I'd like to move to table this item and have staff do that and return to us next meeting with the results of it. 11 City Council Meeting - January 11, 1999 Councilman Labatt: I'll second that. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Labatt seconded to table to authorize preparation of Wellhead Protection Plan and direct staff to return with the information requested. All voted in favor and the motion carried. APPROVAL OF BILLS. Councilman Senn: I pulled this item also. Our general way of dealing with bills is to simply kind of go ahead and approve them but if we have qUeStions on them, give a list to staff of those questions and have them get back to us. As I reviewed this list of bills to pay, I just caWt, at least personally go with that this time. The only thing I can see doing With this groUP of bills is not approving it and hopefully not paying them and in fact if we have paid any of them, look at possibly even returning some of the stuff and getting our money back. This is the biggest end of the year shopping list I have ever seen in my life pertaining to just using up whatever funds are left. There's a whole list of capital .improvement items in here that are not even in the capital improvement budgets or specified in the capital improvement budgets of the various departments. And on top of that, like I say, it's just, this thing is so loaded with everything from new tool sets to new whatever that it's obviously a let's spend it because we've got it at the end of the year list. And it's quite a chunk of money and I pulled it because I have no intention in voting for it and would hope that we would do a little more review of it before we do allow the orders or make the payments. Because I don't think that everybody would be prepared to go through and do that tonight. If you'd like to, I'd be more than happy to but I have pulled this and so that's my comments on why I pulled it. Mayor Mancino: Any other discussion? Councilwoman Jansen: I had actually also gone through and earmarked quite a few things. Not being as familiar with the bills, I've yet to see a packet quite this large so I also reacted to some of the things that were in here. There are some sizeable expenditures. If this isn't the typical, we could walk through it. I know I would appreciate it for the size of it. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Any other? Councilman Labatt: I had some earmarked too. Mayor Mancino: Okay, you had some earmarked. Councilman Labatt: No, I had questions also. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Todd, your suggestion? Would you like to sit down and do this prior to, to not go ahead and approve these and then to take some time to walk through...work session and go over that? Have these checks gone out? Todd Gerhardt: No. They're ready to. So I'd kind of like to...resolution as quickly as possible. Mayor Mancino: You probably don't have everything tO answer right here and right now. Todd Gerhardt: No. No, not right now but if I could...is that a possibility with members maybe during the week or something... City Council Meeting - January 11, 1999 Mayor Mancino: And then can we go ahead and have a motion next Monday night during our work session? Hold the checks for a week. Roger Knutson: You can call it, what you'd call a regular meeting or a speCial meeting so you can get the job done. It takes a little difference with the notice you pOst for the meeting. But yes, we have to treat it a little differently. · Councilman Senn: we Could just continue this meeting until then? Roger Knutson: Yes, that's one way of doing it. Councilman Senn: We could just continue this meeting until next Monday at our work session at 5:00. Roger Knutson: That's certainly appropriate. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Does that work for everyone to continue? Councilman Engel: Before we do I just want to know that the total for the month was $483,964.00 or... Can we have a month by month breakdown of every month last year? Todd Gerhardt: Well you know everything gets pushed out. There's a lot of year end items on there. Councilman Engel: You can note those? Todd Gerhardt: Like to go back to the December bills...do have more items at year end and we haven't met... Councilman Senn: Well there's two groupings here too. I mean there's. Mayor Mancino: Yes. But I'd like to give you some time and Anita? Anita Benson: Mayor Mancino, members of the council. IfI could I would like to respectfully request that the contractor payments on my capital improvement projects be approved here tonight. They are significant payments and the contractors are due the money on those projects. Projects being the Well 8 project, the water tower and then some of the projects inthe Arboretum Business Park. Closing those out. Making the final pay requests for '98. I know that the contractors would certainly appreciate that. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Councilman Senn: And just to correct something so it's not misunderstood but essentially what we're looking at here, if I'm understanding this correctly, is payouts of over $1.5 million for the mOney. There are two different Sets ofpayouts in here. So it's. · ' Mayor Mancino: It's more than the $483. Councilman Senn: Yes. Yes. There's several sets in here so. Okay. Mayor Mancino: So then let's have a motion. 13 City Council Meeting - January 11, 1999 Councilman Engel: What about the... Mayor Mancino: To continue and let's go ahead and have a motion to go ahead and make those payments. Councilman Senn: What are specifically the ones you're asking about Anita? Mayor Mancino: Well they're Bonestroo. Anita Benson: Primarily what I'm concerned with, the water tower project, Well 8 and I believe there were payments due here. Councilman Senn: Progress payments that are due to the contractors. Anita Benson: Contractor progress payments. Just request that those would be approved this evening. Councilman Senn: Okay. So it's essentially the water tower and what was the other one, I'm sorry? Anita Benson: The water tower, the contractor payment. Well 8. Several projects in the Arboretum Business Park. 97-1A. 97-1D. 97-1B2 and also Lake Lucy Road 98-1. Councilman Senn: Okay, just to get it on the floor I'll move approval of that list. Todd Gerhardt: ... Mayor Mancino: The flex payments? Todd Hoffman: In addition we have Fairfax Asphalt which completed all of the asphalt work for all of our 18 neighborhood park improvements projects over the summer months and this is a single billing for all of those projects in the amount of $103,651.00. Councilman Senn: And that's within the contract price within the budget and all that? Todd Hoffman: Yeah, it's below the contract price for the referendum. Councilman Senn: And that's out of the referendum funds? Okay. Okay, well again just to get it on the table for discussion I would move approval ofthat'list as presented. Mayor Mancino: I'll second that. Councilman Senn moved, Mayor Mancino seconded to approve the bills requested by the City Engineer, Fairfax Asphalt in the amount of $103,651.00 and the city employee flex plan payments. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Councilman Senn: I would move that the balance of the payables be moved to a continuation of this meeting at the work session of January 19th. Mayor Mancino: At 5:00. · 14 City Council Meeting - January 11, 1999 Councilman Senn: At 5:00. Mayor Mancino: A second please? Councilman Engel: Second. Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Engel seconded to table the balance of the accounts payable until the city council work session on January 19, 1999 at 5:00 p.m. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Mayor Mancino: And in-between tonight and the work session on the 19th would councilmembers talk to our city manager Todd Gerhardt. Bob. Bob Ayotte: I tried to get the question in before you voted but was contract award, I know in this case it was, that the budget was approved prior to contract award for the past. But are any of the approvals that you just made, was contract award made prior to the approval of budget? Mayor Mancino: No, I don't think so, was it Anita? Bob Ayotte: Well if have progress payments being made, right. Progress payments are made against a contract award. And as the director for parks and rec pointed out, the contract award for what he had asked to pay for was made last summer. So obviously his budget was in place prior to the payment. The question is, was the award of any contract and the approval that you just made prior to budget approval? Mayor Mancino: I'm assuming not. Anita? Anita Benson: Prior to 1999 budget approval? Councilman Senn: Approval for the project I think is what he's asking. Mayor Mancino: Yeah, City Council had to approve every single budget. Councilman Senn: Ail those projects were approved. Bob Ayotte: Just as a matter of record because we're checking. Thank you. Mayor Mancino: Okay. Thank you. I think that's the end of tonight's meeting. Thank you for coming. Mayor Mancino adjourned the meeting at 7:25 p.m. Submitted by Todd Gerhardt City Manager ·. Prepared by Nann Opheim -' 15 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 6, 1999 Chairm~ Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Craig Petcrson, Ladd Conrad, Alison Blackowiak, Kevin $oyce and LuAnn Sidney MEMBERS ABSENT: Matt Burton and Allyson Brooks STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director and Cynthia Kirchoff, Planner I PUBLIC HEARING: AMENDMENT TO THE SITE PLAN #96-4 FOR HI-WAY 5 CENTER FOR THE INSTALLATION OF A WALL SIGN~ .LOCATED AT 463 WEST 79~'H STREET~ GIANT PANDA RESTAURANT Cynthia Kirchoff presented the staff report on this item. Peterson: Questions of staff. Blackowiak:' Mr. Chair, my question is, there are some, there's a sign or actually a painting, window painted. What's the City's policy on having windows painted...there now. I mean could that be left or what's the city's position on that? Kirchoff: Okay, the sign ordinance permits window signage that is, it can go up to 50% of the window area. So they can have a sign on the window. Blackowiak: Okay, so it could be painted and left as it is right now? That's kind of what I'm curious about because it is kind of painted in the window right now. Kirchoff: 'That may be that clinging sign. Those cling signs. Zong-ming Cheng: Could I...? Blackowiak: So they can be up to 50%? Kirehoff: Yes, they can have window signage and they don't require, we don't require a permit for that. Blackowiak: Okay, thank you. Joyce: Kate, when we reviewed the site plan for this thing, what consideration was given for the south elevation? To be left barren like that? Planning Commission Meeting - January 6, 1999 Aanenson: Actually we intended to put more landscaping along that back side. If you recall, ~.e thought that would be a patio area and more intensively landscape that in theback side of the ~S: · station so... ' Joyee: But I'm saying on the top, where we're putting it, where they're considering it or.wher~ they're requesting or asking rather for the sign. I'm relat[ng it back to the Gold Medal where i the north side, the south side it just seems barren and that s how we felt that that we were goin ~ - to leave it barren like that. Aanenson: Yes. Kirchoff: Yes. Peterson: Why don't we just wait. We'll do a presentation by you and then we'll have questJ/~ns for you too. ~ Zong-ming Cheng: Thank you very much. 'i ' - Peterson: Other questions of staff?. With that, would the applicant like. to come forwardan~ state your name and address please. .Zong-ming Cheng: I'd like to give you this card because I don't come here veryoften and 14 me across here four hours from Fargo...present this case to you... I'd like to thank you very muei the opportunity. My name is Zong-ming Cheng and however before I present_this I'd like to ~1i~ ' you a little bit about ourselves so that you know our intentions and stuff. Wec0me here, let ne to the United States about 13 years ago. I got my masters and Ph.D. degrees from Comell University in New York and I was offereda job at North Dakota State University to teachar ~dO. research there. And when we come to Fargo we found there was no good Chinese restaurant i: there so we inspired, becausethe peoplei~ North Dakota, in Fargo offered us' OpP0rmnitdeS~ ~ we want to offer some back to the community. ),nd so we established this restaurant-in Fa/go:m B'' we set new standards right now in Fargo ~md thebusines§,the Chinese restaurant has ~ '~ -i~ dramatically increased the standard of service and the food andquality forthepeople inform.,_ And after that we want to .expand opportunity and we invested this Twin-Cityareas and W.e__ ~ und - it unbelievable information thatnone of the restaurants here is even close to ours'~inFargo_:. :~'1 ad~- ' so we wanted to expand the business tothis area and we searched, ed q,uite( a bit and ~we decide' ~_d[' come to Chanhassen and we find this a very good neighborhood.-. I~: s verYdynamic and so ~,.. ~ · yon know we talked to the Chamber of ConuTnerCe on, they said thisis a ~i~ pla~ing` .$.'~ committee...very nice. Very pro business with our kind ofattitude and. so we .decide to.,f'md~ ' - space in this city and that's thelocation we founded. And so when wegetint°the lJuiid~ng~_~_.e:" · tenant already had a two sets of signs made there, ofie . ' find the previous W~t°ok it for-graate-~.:~i' there would be twosets ,of signs allowed in the wall and theone that facet° the-west and th{ i . ' face to the south. If that s, and then we checked our realtor and he said that blueprint have ~- ' already been approved.by Ihe-city andso, but because our realtor is out.of tom ~o we coul~ot ' get the officml letter. If we check your archives we might be able to find that but we don t l~ave .. Planning Commission Meeting - January 6, 1999 the conclusive information right now regarding the approval of two wall signage for the previous tenant. But after we met.., and I studied your signage criteria and also the letter we got from the committee and reviewed a studied by the staff of this committee and I have a few, if I call that discussion or argument or rebuttal to make. First of all, if I look at these signage criteria and the number one is (a) is all business should share one monument sign. My understanding is that that's a pylon sign, if my understanding is correct. And the second one, wall signage are permitted on no more than two street frontage. Based on this standard or this criteria, we are actually entitled to have two signs on the two sideS of the building or the walls. And so we are entitled, this right to have this, have the two signs on the two side of the wall. And also the landlord has already have the signage in two sides. One on the western side and one in the north side. So we should be able to, and we are entitled to have two wall signs on no more than two frontages and we are asking for that according to the signage criteria set up by this committee by the city of Chanhassen. When I studied this document sent by this committee, studied by the staff and one issue was raised regarding the fairness of the signage for other tenants in this, on this plaza and I would argue that, I would discuss this issue in the three areas. First of all the landlord had three signs including one pylon sign and he had two wall signs on the two frontages so it isn't fair to us to have signage on two side of the building. So we are asking the fairness of this committee to permit us to put signs on the two sides. And also, according to the staff study, this committee speculates that other tenants may request the same variance request and I feel strongly that according to the city's signage criteria, we have that right, we are entitled that and actually those tenants are also entitled for that right and if they choose to request. So in terms of fairness and we should be treated fairly and equally as the landlord was treated in the past. And also this committee worried about that this allowance or this permit must set the precedent for the future for other tenants in the plaza to request two signs. And I don't think that's a valid reason to reject our request because according to the city criteria the two, the wall signs are allowed in the two streets and they are entitled our right and I don't think that this committee or the staff reviews should worry that setting that precedent and this committee is paid and employees are paid by the business by the city's involved, these city and is working for the business and pro business and help the business so I don't think the worrying about setting the precedent for others is a valid reason for the future. And if the committee worries about that, and I don't think we should be in business to review any of those. And another reason argued by this staff review is whether we causing the hardship and they asked us to demonstrate the hardship we may cause if we don't put the signage there. I would argue other way around. If we have to demonstrate the hardship that it was causing the business difficulty and that would be certainly, would be too late for us and we come here wanting to establish a successful business. We're not coming here to demonstrate hardship and we don't want us to fail. We don't want we set a precedent as a failing business in this community. Actually the coffee shop next to ours have already changed ownership twice and one of the reasons we called, talked to them was that they don't have a signage, good signage and to show the people. And also according to this review on the page number 4, number d, the staff believes that this hardship was created by the applicant. And I feel that it's sort of unfair for us. We request this signage for the city and because it's entitled for this right and said the applicant created this hardship by proposing to install a wall sign that does not meet the requirements of the site plan review. And we are entitled this right and if we are considered, we are creating a hardship for this committee and I would have a little bit difficulty to accept that. Just like my students in the university complain that a teachers are Planning Commission Meeting - January 6, 1999 not doing good job and we cannot complain the students causing our hardship to us as a faculty so I request that we should be allowed for this information. So as a conclusion and we come here and we found this committee and we found this city was very nice and pro business and according to the city criteria for signage and we are entitled this right and we are just asking the fair treatment to give us permit for this signage. And we will design and put the signs according to the other criteria set by the signage criteria. And thank you very much for allowing me to make this case and I hope you will give us favorable consideration. Thank you. Peterson: Questions of the applicant? Fellow commissioners. Ladd you came in late so you get to go first. Conrad: That's the penalty. That's fair, isn't it? Well I welcome you. I hope you do come here. Zong-ming Cheng: Thank you. Conrad: I think our ordinance is clear and I think the building owner had the right to do what he wanted in terms of selecting two elevations, two sides to put signage on. I think if I were you I'd be here. I think you've got great highway visibility and it's a little bit ora shame not to have that. There is, yet the ordinance is there. ~ think the staff report is proper. I would have a hard time going against the staff report. Although I can empathize a great deal with wanting to put a restaurant in front of 20,000 people every day. I would do exactly the same as the applicant is requesting. I think, and I can't speak for anybody else. I think the southerly elevation, or the northerly elevation is rather insignificant for street, for building signage. I think your issue is really with the building owner and you know I think if Gold Medal Sports wants to give up their sign, I think they can talk to us about putting it on the south side of the building. May upset some folks. It wouldn't upset me but the ordinance says two sides and I think we're fairly clear in that so nothing else Craig. Peterson: Alison? Blackowiak: Yeah I agree pretty much with what Ladd has said. It does appear that the owner knowingly agreed to give up signage along the southern elevation in exchange for the west elevation signage so he has frontage on two sides. North and west. I must tell you though my husband saw those letters that said Chinese Buffet and he's rather excited about it so I think that the window letters are really good and if there's no reason that you can't keep them, I would strongly suggest you leave that in your window. Zong-ming Cheng: Well we...so the sign in the window is not very professional...signage on the wall was not causing any problems...customer sits by the window, the windows are blocked. I personally don't feel it's very nice to... Blackowiak: No, I certainly understand what you're saying but I mean in terms of visibility, he noticed it right away and t think that's really what you're looking for right now is get the people knowing where you're going to be. 4 Planning Commission Meeting - January 6, 1999 Zong-ming Cheng: ...why we should... Blackowiak: Well what I'm saying is that if it does not work out for the southern elevation, that the windows are an opportunity for you to have exposure on the southern side and that's, that alone with the pylon I think is what you were looking for. Zong-ming Cheng: I would prefer to have letters on the wall and... Blackowiak: Yeah I understand. I do think maybe you need to speak to the owner. I don't know that there's going to be anything there but. Zong-ming Cheng: The owner has no objection at all for the signage. Blackowiak: Well if he wants to give up the north side then you know I think that that's, because the building only can have two sides. That's what the ordinance reads so. Zong-ming Cheng: ...according to the sign ordinance... Peterson: I think let's get through with the rest of the comments. We may have more questions for you. Zong-ming Cheng: Thank you. Peterson: Kevin. Joyce: I'm afraid you made my, at this point your argument was kind of persuasive in the fact that in all fairness everyone should have a street sign.., that I've got a problem with is you having that but then the coffee shop asking for it. Blimpie's and everything else and I guess...obligated to allow them to do that. And you do have a sign on the monument sign. You know that was the agreement, as I read it, the agreement with the owner...street front sign. The monument sign and a west facing sign. In actuality you do have a sign there on the monument sign. Now I'm going to say this. I think Ladd brought up a real good point. I would have absolutely no problem whatsoever if they took that Gold Meadow sign down and put a sign up on the other side. I have no problem with that whatsoever because I think that's a point that you, I think that's something that you should work something out with... I will say Kate though, I don't tike that blank wall. I guess maybe food for thought the next time we have something. That was a weird, I understand it was kind ora strange building to put there but after looking at that it's like ah man. I mean I can see a tenant, all those tenants having a problem with it. It doesn't look like it's being occupied at all. So I sure wish the owner would make a, you'd work with the owner and pull the Gold Medal thing off the north side and come back to us and see if we can't work something out. But I can't see us setting a precedent where we allow you to put a sign in and the coffee shop saying wait a second. We want to put a sign up there because they're going to want the same exposure you have and you can answer after but that's my feeling...at this time. 5 Planning Commission Meeting - January 6, 1999 Peterson: LuAnn. Sidney: Yeah, I agree with other Commissioners. I understand the applicant's desire for a sign on the south exposure. However the site plan and the sign plan has been approved for just two elevations so I agree with comments that have been made on that. Peterson: My comments are also not dissimilar. I think that a little bit additional background for you. I think our Highway 5 corridor, which is on both north and south side of Highway 5. We put a great deal of time and effort into the ordinances surrounding that, both the sign ordinances and building styles and the whole concept behind that corridor so we have pretty consistently, and I can't even remember a variance we've made to the sign ordinance in that corridor. So in trying to recommend something that we have consistently turned down, because we have put a great deal of time and effort into the ordinance. And I appreciate the fact that you may not agree with that and there is a certain rationale that would support that and I can see that. However, we're obligated to align ourselves with what the ordinances are and unless there's a compelling reason to change that, more infon'nation and/or pre-conditions that have changed, but none of that is really being presented tonight. So I think that although I can appreciate the frustration, we're obligated to follow what the ordinances are and that means that you have two fronts and right now they're on the north elevation and the west for the building so it really does go back to working with the landlord and convincing them to change the sign. Zong-ming Cheng: First of all, according to your sign criteria that you are allowed two wall signs on two frontages. And a pylon sign is a monument sign. Not the wall sign. So we are entitled to... Peterson: No. Let me clarify that. It really is not, it's not the tenant. It's the building owner that when they presented it to us, they had the option of where to put the sign and they chose two elevations for all of the tenants and that was the west elevation and north elevation, right Kate? Zong-ming Cheng: And we pay much higher rent than the others...because we have the opportunity to put the sign on the south side. That's the reason why we requested this location. We pay the higher rent.., so we already pay a much higher rent... Peterson: Kate. Aanenson: If I could just clarify a couple things. Mr. Roos, the owner or the lessee of the building did contact us. He made a decision. We're not privy to the discussions that went on between this applicant and Mr. Roos but obviously there's, it appears there's some miscommunication of what was permitted and what wasn't. Told Mr. Roos that we're going with what was approved with that building. The applicant certainly has a right to appeal that interpretation or decision, in which he's doing tonight, but he understands that we are going with what was original approved package so whatever agreement they've worked out, or whatever was told to him, we can't respond to that. But there was a sign package approved and he made that clear to the tenants. Planning Commission Meeting - January 6, 1999 Zong-ming Cheng: When we... Aanenson: How that was communicated to you, I mean that was a decision that was made by Mr. Roos. Peterson: That goes back to my other comment, it really is that the landlord made a decision prior to you, a year and a half ago when the building was being built, that he had two sides. It'd be the north side and the west side. And if he shared something different with you, that's really the issue between you and the landlord. Zong-ming Cheng.' The signage on the north side...if he has two signs, one on the north side and one of the west side, and we are... Peterson: No, the ordinance is written as such that the building has signage on two sides. Not an individual tenant but the building itself. Zong-ming Cheng: But according to the sign criteria... Peterson: ...policy, on numerous occasions these variances is that the building that has signage capability on two sides. It's unfortunate that that was interpreted like that or presented like that to you, but again I would offer that the real, the need is to go back to the landlord and discuss that with them. Because we have to follow what the ordinance says. Zong-ming Cheng: ...back to the landlord. That will create a lot of hardship... Peterson: Two questions I'I1 respond to. I think that what you've heard tonight is one of the primary concerns we have is setting precedent. We've already turned down numerous people for this variance, having more than two sides of the building with signage. So that is, we're obligated to at least respond to adhere to that. Our past decision so again we haven't heard tonight a compelling reason to go away from the current sign ordinance so again I can appreciate your position but we don't want you to go to court with the landlord. I guess what we're going back to is offering that. Go back and discuss it with him and we'll certainly try to entertain, resolving the issues. If you come back to us with another...ifwe can eliminate just the north and west side. Zong-ming Cheng: ... Peterson: Again it goes back to the ordinance specifically as this was approved by us and City Council. It was the pylon sign and two sides of the building. Zong-ming Cheng: How could the landlord has his own sign on one side, on the west side... Peterson: The landlord made that decision when he began leasing out the building is that the tenants would only have one side of the building to put their signs on. They knew that and they signed up for that and agreed to that so. Yes Kate. 7 Planning Commission Meeting - January 6, 1999 Aanenson: I just want to clarify too, whatever decision you made here, it still goes on to the City Council. Peterson: It is important. Not that I want you to drive back again but we are an advisory council to City Council and they make the ultimate decision based upon our recommendation and obviously their thoughts so that is your next step is when it goes to the council on the 25th of January to make your thoughts there also. Zong-ming Cheng: ...to allow to have the wall signs on two different... Peterson: I think you've heard that where we differ from that perspective is how the policy is written. We believe it's the building that is the dominant criteria for the ordinance so. We don't want you to come back. We'd love to have you back in town again but. Zong-ming Cheng: ... Conrad: Mr. Chairman, could I say something? No. What you're asking us to do, to validate our signage ordinance. Does that make sense? It doesn't make sense. I don't want a response. It doesn't make sense. It does not make sense. And we review signage all the time so we're pretty solid in what we're looking at. I do signage for a living. I understand what our ordinance reads and I don't think you have a very good case. If you come back you have to get the building owner to do something. It's not us. It's the building owner. It's between you and the owner. It's not a government deal. Our ordinance is pretty clear. We're interpreting the ordinance and right now we're probably not going to change the ordinance. You could come back and have us change the ordinance, but before you respond, we spent a lot of time looking at our ordinance recently. It's not outdated so I'm trying to give you a few comments. It's not real solid for what you're asking for. We all appreciate what you want to do. It's real clear that if I were the building owner and I wanted you in town, in my building and I would think because it's been vacant for a long time, he'd try to change the signage on that building. I would think he would try to do that. It's not taking down your name off the pylon sign. That doesn't count. It just doesn't count. The ordinance has been tested and I think that would be a waste of your time. Excuse me Mr. Chairman but I, you know, I just wanted to give him. I think you have some ways to solve your problem but it's not with city government right now. Zong-ming Cheng: ...Could I make a last comment before you make your recommendation? I thought...how we were misled...deal with the City Council...is that correct Mr. Chairman? Peterson'. Essentially that's what, the landlord had a decision whether or not they wanted to place their sign on one of the two sides of the building. They made that decision when they moved into the building and began leasing it out. Zong-ming Cheng: So could you give me...according to your ordinance...how should we talk to the landlord regarding this. That your committee can't...amendment. 8 Planning Commission Meeting -January 6, 1999 Peterson: I think if you call staff tomorrow or they can walk you through that more succinctly than we can tonight. Zong-ming Cheng: So the...committee before we can. Peterson: No, the landlord followed our sign ordinance and said that they can have signage on two sides. The landlord in this case took one of those two sides for their own business. Zong-ming Cheng: Now if the landlord took away his sign on the north side... Peterson: Correct. Joyce: It's not guaranteed. Peterson: Yeah, it's not guaranteed but that would go a long way in providing a compelling reason for us to make a variance, yes. Zong-ming Cheng: Can I make a last comment before I go back to Fargo? Peterson: This is your fourth last comment now. And when the ordinance...if we are not able to put the sign on the wall, we Zong-ming Cheng: are... Peterson: Correct. Zong-ming Cheng: 50% of the glass. ...thank you very much. Peterson: With that, may I have a motion and a second please. Joyce: I'll move that the Planning Commission denies the amendment to SPR #96-4 for the construction of a 40 square foot illuminated wall sign and a 4.7 square foot logo based upon the findings presented in the staff'report and condition number 1. Conrad: Second. Joyce moved, Conrad seconded that the Planning Commission recommends to deny the amendment to SPR #96-4 for the construction of a 40 square foot illuminated wall sign and a 4.7 square foot logo based upon the findings presented in the staff report and the following: 1. The applicant has visibility on TH 5 with the existing pylon sign. All voted in favor and the motion carried. 9 Planning Commission Meeting - January 6, 1999 Peterson: You can call staff tomorrow, Kate? Aanenson: Yes. Peterson: Call Kate directly and she can walk you through more specifically what we feel you need to do. And the other option is to go in front of the City Council on the 25th. You can either do it in person or present in writing as far as your issues you brought up tonight. So there's different options that Kate can walk through with you tomorrow. Zong-ming Cheng: ...we will do everything We can, make every effort we have to do... Peterson: We want you here too but we want to be fair to all the other businesses in the city also SO. Zong-ming Cheng: ...thank you very much. Good night. AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CODE TO SECTION 20-913 (C)~ LIGHTING~ TO REGULAR THE HEIGHT, SPACING AND TYPE OF LIGHT FIXTURES. Cynthia Kirchoff presented the staff report on this item. Peterson: Questions of staff. Sidney: Just only one comment and I mentioned I guess my concern about the definition of photometrics. If you could add that in. Kirchoff: Sure. Peterson: That was one of my questions. What is the definition of photometrics? Aanenson: I can show you. Kirchoff: One moment please. Aanenson: When we get a lighting plan they show the photometrics that shows how much light actually can pinpoint a location. It might be 5 feet on center. 10 feet on center. What we review to see what, it's hard to read but how much light is at each position. So that's where we get to, we get to the edge to see it's a half foot candle at the edge. And you can see how bight the brightest point is on that so that's a photometric plan. Joyce: Your saying that light trespass is not in the ordinance right now... Kirchoff: That's correct. It's not specifically stated in the ordinance so the City Attorney suggested that I remove that term from the ordinance amendment. 10 Planning Commission Meeting - January 6, 1999 Joyce: Why can't we add it to it? Aanenson: He thought it was a tough definition to defend. Joyce: I can understand that. I think this is important but I find a hard time trying to get my arms around it to make any sense out of it. Aanenson: He felt like trespass, he said light trespass is pretty ambiguous and it'd be difficult to try to defend that type of a term so he was, thought there was enough strength in the other parts of the ordinance that we could defend it that way. Joyce: The only other question I had was, as far as the park lighting. You said that this would not be part of the amendment to the ordinance but a policy statement. Are we going to have a policy statement on this? Kirchoff: Well that was mentioned at the November 18th meeting that the Planning Commission had concerns about park lights that exist in the city and instead of putting in ordinance amendment saying regulating park lights, what we can have is all the park lights that come through can be reviewed by the Planning Commission prior to them being installed. And like I said in the staff report, it usually takes place after the site plan has been approved. Joyce: Is that a ton of....for us or? Aanenson: I don't think so. I think it's important that you do look at it. It's been something that's probably been an oversight that we don't always see. For example Lake Ann has got additional lights going in now. That was just put in the capital improvements. You may not see that so we don't always see the implication and what the spillover is so I think that we would request that they do photometrics. You take a look at that and maybe give some recommendations as far as shielding or whatever. Joyce: ...park referendum and how many parks are going up. Conrad: Mr. Chairman, I know you haven't asked for my comments but this seems like a staff deal. I think policy is that we should have a policy that park lights don't spill over by the, I don't need to review it. It's pretty mechanical. I don't want to do it. It's their deal. Peterson: Well as long as... Conrad: Well it seems simple to me and that's naYve. But if you don't, if you shield the lights, I've got to say a couple things. If we've got a consultant that really feels that shielding the neighbors is important, the consultant should be fired because he's not doing it. Aanenson: Right, .and the problem is. 11 Planning Commission Meeting - January 6, 1999 Conrad: Very seriously. Aanenson: A lot of it's in the winter with the ice rinks. There's a lot of, that's when you're in the neighborhoods more and that is an issue for when they're on later and you don't review those but Ladd brings up a good point. That might be something that we should be saying that they're. Conrad: They're not doing it. And I got examples, a couple and I gave them before. I won't do it again, but they're not doing it and it seems' simple to me that we shield lights to not spill over the boundaries. I don't care if it's a 200 feet tall lighting fixture in a park. I don't care. I do care that it's not shining into neighbors. And my example was two blocks away. It's at you. That's not acceptable. So again I don't think I want to see individual things coming through Mr. Chairman. This is my personal feeling that I think that's a staff deal. That's part of an ordinance that probably should be tied, you know it's lighting. I don't know yvhy I need a separate ordinance. I don't know why I need a policy statement. I think we need the same ordinance saying park lights should, you know just another section in this ordinance says park lights will have shields so they don't do something. Whatever that is and I don't know what the magic words are. Peterson: I agree with you Ladd. I think my concern has been, will Park and Rec, if staff needs to use us to accomplish it, then I would be more amenable to putting it in there. Conrad: ...Mr. Chairman, if that's the way that works but then what do you want? Then we have to develop the criteria to manage it effectively. Because I don't know you manage, I don't know how you do that. I would think that the requirements should be in an ordinance and. Aanenson: We're fine with that. Conrad: This just seems like, Mr. Chairman, it seems like administrative. Like a staff deal and not a planning commission. Peterson: Part of the reason why I brought it up last time is it wasn't getting done and if it needs to be in the ordinance, if it needs to be a policy, I'm indifferent. If it takes a little bit of our time to get it, to accomplish it, then I would be amenable to doing that but if there's a better way to do it, you know so be it. But the problem is it hasn't been done to date so what's the best way to get it done. Kate, I'll return the question to you. We want to ensure as a group that it gets done. Whether we're involved in it is irrelevant. So I look to you to advise us as to what is the best way to you to get it done. Aanenson: Well I think if we leave it to say park lights are shielded, that's good. I think what is would be good is being back to say to the City Council we want it done and reiterate that fact to the park commission so they understand that that's part of their charge is to make sure that that's being dealt with when they're reviewing plans. Generally they do look at the plans too so I think just to send a strong message up to the council and have them send it back to the park commission would be good. 12 Planning Commission Meeting - January 6, 1999 Blackowiak: Kate I have a question. Now do the park lights have to meet the same half foot candle at the property line requirement? Aanenson: Yes. Blackowiak: Okay, so where is your.., for the lights that you're talking about way before any of this was ever. Conrad: ...this is direct shining. Blackowiak: So what's wrong? Aanenson: They're not shielded. They're not down cast. They're not shielded. They're not down cast, right. Exactly. Blackowiak: So do we have to change that? Aanenson: Right. That's what I'm saying. Go back to the council and have the park commission and then they should go back and correct that. Kirchoff: I was just going to comment. It does say in the ordinance that light fixtures should be shielded. That's something that yeah, it's in Section (c) and that's been in existence since. Joyce: Should it be changed to... Aanenson: Well part of it is...project and that's what I'm saying, these go up to the council. Kevin's right, as we're putting more parks in, it's going to be a bigger issue. Skating rinks. Parks. We're causing light to trespass and that's going to continue to grow. Peterson: Based upon what you just heard, what do we need to do tonight to most effectively... Aanenson: I think I'd just add a caveat to send up to the council. Motion or however you choose and then add that we would request...ensures that the city projects also follow this policy. Peterson: I can deal with that. Conrad: Mr. Chairman? So you're comfortable in your recommendations or in your staff report that a separate policy statement or an amendment or something. But we don't need, what you're telling me is we don't need that. Aanenson: No we don't. No. Conrad: We're saying this rule can apply to everything. Aanenson: That's what we should be doing, correct. 13 Planning Commission Meeting - January 6, 1999 Conrad: Okay. Joyce: Without reading through this again, do we have a consultant go to each of these lighting consultants is it? What I read in here that they hire somebody to go to the park in setting up lights and looks at the photometrics and all that. Kirchoff: The consultant looks at the use, if it's a soccer field, a baseball field and determines the light intensity as well as the lamp light. Aanenson: Which is the same thing that's done on a parking lot or whatever, right. Joyce: ...they have this thing on the exterior light...was more than most auto dealerships. ...50% more than auto dealership. So I think definitely that... Peterson: One other question going back to parks. If we limit the fixture height to 30 feet, isn't that going to be a killer? Aanenson: You would have to exempt that. I mean it's, it's not going to work for adult softball league or yeah. Yeah. Conrad: That seems logical. So what do you want us to do tonight? Because the rules really don't totally apply to parks. Peterson: Is that the only one that wouldn't? Kirchoff: Parks? Yeah, I would think so. Yeah. Peterson: So put that into the policy. Excluding parkland lights or something that is more... Well it's a matter, let's put it in there so we acknowledge the fact that it's there. Blackowiak: Okay or else just make it, instead of making an exclusion, say all fixtures are 35 feet. Park fixtures can go up to 65 or whatever the magic number is .... Lake Ann and there were some, some of the examples that go up to 80. I don't know if they necessarily need to or not. I don't know. Maybe we say that park fixtures can go up to x number of feet so that kind of'makes it, not an exclusionary thing right away but addresses two separate issues and puts it more positive light so to speak. Peterson: I agree. Other comments? Questions? Hearing none, is there a motion and a second please. Conrad: I'd make a motion Mr. Chairman that Planning Commission recommend approval of the ordinance amendment in staff report dated January 6 to Section 20-913 on lighting with the comments of the staff report (a) through well, slash that. With all the comments in the staff report with the two changes. One that is recommended by the city attorney in the staff report are 14 Planning Commission Meeting - January 6, 1999 again in the memorandum on January 6th and also to Section 20-913, (c)(1) where it says fixture heights shall not exceed 30 feet. With a clause that said, except in parks where the maximum could be up to 65 feet. And then with a note to City Council that we, the Planning Commission strongly recommends that this ordinance applies to parks. Joyce: I'll second. Conrad moved, Joyce seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of the amendment to Section 20-913. Lighting to regulate the height, spacing and type of fixtures and the amendment to Section 20-1 to include definitions of glare, light trespass and shielded light fixture as follows: Section 20-913. Lighting. (a) Glare, whether direct or reflected, as differentiated from general illumination shall not be visible beyond the limits of the site from which it originates. (b) No light which is flashing, revolving or otherwise resembles a traffic-control signal shall be allowed in any area where it could create a hazard for passing vehicular traffic. (c) Lighting fixtures should be of a design consistent with fixtures used in surrounding developments and municipal street lighting. Shielded high pressure sodium fixtures are required. (1) Fixture height shall not exceed thirty (30) feet, except in parks ~vhere it shall not exceed sixty-five (65) feet. (2) Ail fixtures must be shielded and have a total cutoff angle equal to or less than 90 degrees. (3) Photometrics shall incorporate existing light fixtures, public or private, that may impact the site. (4) All outdoor light fixtures existing and legally installed prior to (ordinance adoption date) are exempt from the requirements of this article, unless work is proposed in any one (1) year period so as to replace fifty (50) percent or more of the existing outdoor light fixtures, or to increase to the extent of fifty (50) percent or more the number of outdoor light fixtures on the premises. Section 20-1. Definitions. Glare: Light emitting from a luminare with an intensity great enough to reduce viewers' ability to see and, in extreme cases, causing momentary blindness. 15 Planning Commission Meeting - January 6, 1999 Shielded Light Fixture: A light fixture with cutoff optics that allows no direct light emissions above a vertical cutoff angle of 90 degrees. Note: The Planning Commission strongly recommends that this ordinance apply to city parks. All voted in favor and the motion carried. NEW BUSINESS: Aanenson: I was just going to bring up that on the January 20th meeting you do have a subdivision, or site plan for a Quick Trip gas... Right now I'm planning on just doing some general training planning on issues that you'd like us to talk about. Otherwise we'll probably be... That's all I had. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Alison Blackowiak noted the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated December 2, 1998 as presented. ONGOING ITEMS: Aanenson: We do have our comp plan up to the Met Council. We got back a couple comments of things that are missing but we're pretty close to getting it back... It will go back to City Council for final approval. That is contingent upon the Met Council approving it so hopefully... end of the month, first part of February. Peterson: Do you want to talk about the vice chair and chair? Aanenson: Oh, yeah. We do have two planning commissioners that are up too. Craig being one of them and Allyson Brooks too so we will be discussing it at a work session with the City Council...but then also it's this time of year. Selecting a new chairman. I don't know if you want to do it this meeting. We can put it on the next agenda if you'd like. Peterson: I'd like to put it in the record that if anybody would like to volunteer for either of them. Contact either Kate or I and we'll put it on next. Aanenson: And I'll put the by-laws back in too. The schedule. Peterson: Anything else? Chairman Peterson adjourned the Planning Commission meeting at 8:05 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Plmming Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 16 CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 15, 1998 Chairwoman Lash called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Jan Lash, Jim Manders, Ron Roeser, Fred Berg, Mike Howe, Rod Franks and Dave Moes MEMBERS ABSENT: None. STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Director; Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation Supervisor (Taping of the meeting began at this point in the discussion.) FOX CHASE/CARVER BEACH PEDESTRIAN TRAIL CONNECTION. Berg: ...What happened? How come it didn't get done back in '83? ...all these other different things that got lost? Hoffman: Didn't get it done, yeah. It's an important connector. If you use these trails as you come down through Lotus and then the new one that goes between the end of Carver Beach and the big one and then the trail around Kerber Pond. This is kind of the interior connector between here and downtown versus Kerber Boulevard. A lot of people are finding that they can go Kerber on one half of their route and... Lash: So are you looking for a motion? Hoffman: No. We're going to table it until January. I'll send out notices and we'll bring residents in and see what they want to do. PROGRAM REPORTS: A. 1998/99 OUTDOOR SKATING. Ruegemer: Just to give the commission a quick update as to where we're at at this point. All the, in hopes of some colder weather, if that's a good hope, we're going to be delivering the warming house trailers tomorrow. We'll be having four trailers this year with the, as you know the City Center warming house was demolished and burned this last summer here so we will be having a portable trailer at that location. A portable trailer at North Lotus, Chanhassen Hills and Round House Park this winter. Those will be delivered tomorrow and park maintenance crews then will hook up the power. Make sure all the phones and that are working. Get those up to Park and Rec Commission Meeting - December 15, 1998 speed and we'll be ready to go by the time We do start working. We're going to be doing sta~ training next Monday night, the 21sL Just to get everybody familiarized, as familiar with ho~:to turn on the lights. You know policies and procedures. Those types of issues will be resolve~ that night. Depending on when the weather,s gOing to be getting cold and the park maintenafiee crews start, it will probably be at least a week of heavy flooding before we would open I wood imagine at this point so. Will we have ice by Christmas? It's hard to say, but we'll eertainly~o everything we can to get that up and going~ Since I wrote this memo we have hired some additional people to work. We're at about I0 to 11 kids now, which is my comfort zone. I f~el lot better than I have in the past years so we'll get those, the new employees in for our staff training next Monday night so they're set to go. Up to speed and ready to go so, basically ri~t now it's just kind of a wait and see game. Trying'to see where we're going to end up here. There's not a whole lot of frost in the ground yet but the cold. weather, I'm sure that_will be coming soon so. It's nice to have some extra time to have some phone lines we needed to g~ m yet into the park so with the cold weather that's helped us, or with the warm weather that hel_~ed us a lot. Does anybody have any questions? TREE LIGHTING EVALUATION,: Hoffman: Thanks to those who worked. It was kind of a drizzly nightbut nevertheless. Berg: Good tumout for that kind &night. Ruegemer: The bonfire was nice. Berg: It sure was... RECREATION CENTER. Hoffman: ...I think one area we warn to continue to...the commission on is that the room ~nta!s are having difficulty making money duoto all the free community activities that are taking~lace so that's a negative. It's simply a real reality and all the groups have been.kind of-boiled~n. The where you get in free? At what level and for community groups that are taking advant~ge of it and I think that's wonderful. But we just have tO realize that it costs us approximatelya ~ quarter of a million dollars to keep the doors open on an annual basis andwe earn app.roxi~.e, ly $150,000.00 so we run that center at a $100,000.00 deficit. You could change that. You¢.~uld, you probably could not break evenno matter what you did but we would also,then simply~ more acting more as a business, not as a community facility tbelieve so. We re comf~rtab~as staff at this time. Operating guidelines and I think flae con~rnunity appreciates the valueth~'re receiving in that building. ~ · Lash: How about the City Council? Are they comfortable with the financial? Hoffman: I don't know. I don't know. Park and Rec Commission Meeting - December 15, 1998 Lash: I think initially when we started this whole thing, and our rentals and our philosophy, it was this whole thing was pursued because we needed a space where people could have meetings and do things that a community needs to do and we didn't have that and we looked at this as an opportunity to provide that. However, we didn't want to make everybody have to pay for it too where before they had been using the lunchroom at the school or whatever. They weren't having to pay for some of those kind of things so we've really been I think torn as a commission too. As much as we'd like to see it be a break even operation for the city, where do we look at it as who's providing a place for the residents when they need it and where we break even you know. Audience: ... Lash: I think staff has you know over the years looked at different ways of trying to have incentives and have some strong. They've tried quite a few different things and I think lots of things work but room rental overall I think would be the biggest money maker there so if every time it was used someone was paying a fee, that would be a big impact but I think. Audience... Hoffman: Less than a third. There's some big ones that pay that book in and then we move the free ones around. Around those. We track the in time payments. I don't allow them to book those, they just want to book them against the balance sheet but I said no. That's... Audience:... Hoffman: Government, go ahead and look at the policies. They're pretty simple but government, community based, etc., etc .... Lash: Non profit kind of organization, wouldn't you say? Hoffman: Yes. Non-profit. Government. Berg: Girl Scouts, Brownies. Lash: Neighborhood groups. CAA. Berg: Wasn't January 1st when we were going to take a hard look at the daycare also? They were going to give us some six month data or whatever. Hoffman: It's improved. No doubt about it. Lash: So we'll see that in January then? Good. Anything else on the rec center? ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS: 1999 MEETING SCHEDULE. Park and Rec Commission Meeting - December 15, 1998 Hoffman: No real big surprises. Unless any commissioners have concerns, comments, or suggested other dates. We will look to the fourth Tuesday of each month with the exception of December which is the second Tuesday, the 14th. Lash: Berg: Ruegemer: This year? Berg: Yeah. Ruegemer: February 6th. Hoffman: It's always the first Tuesday in February. Or the first Saturday in February. Ruegemer: Yes. Lash: No, because it fell on Valentine's Day last year. Berg: This is the new policy. Lash: Oh! It's going to be the new tradition. Hoffman: It will always be. It will always be the first Saturday in February. Lash: Okay. Do you need a motion to adopt the schedule? Hoffman: Please. Lash: Is there a motion to adopt this? It was moved and seconded to adopt the 1999 Park and Recreation Commission meeting schedule. All voted in favor and the motion carried. COMMISSION MEMBER REPORTS-RACE COMMITTEE. Howe: Rod and I met with Sheila, the manager of the Americlnn last night about a possible race sometime next year. I was very impressed with her. She's done her homework. She talked to a number of other race sponsors in the area. Had a big, thick notebook full of names, phone numbers. We gave her a few suggestions. She liked the Dave Huffman idea. You could tie that in as we talked about, and Rod feel free to fill in here if I miss something. But you could possibly get the Vikings, the media, a charity. I think we need to somehow, do we need to ask Dave Huffman's estate or his wife if we can do this, his name? I think that would be proper. Okay. Does anyone have a problem with any of those dates? I have a question Jerry. When is February? When did we decide the February Festival is? Park and Rec Commission Meeting - December 15, 1998 Just what if, what would his birthday be. If we could get that. If there's a way we could come close here. I think Sheila was thinking a race date sometime in September. Franks: Right. Howe: However I thought you may get more Vikings if you had it later in the summer. But see then it has to mesh with the existing western metro race schedule. What's available out there. We didn't talk money or anything yet. We said we had to come back to the commission and kind of get a feeling for what was happening here. But I think she's committed. The owner of this whole chain lives in Victoria. I didn't know that and this is the. Franks: ...hotel, it's their flagship. One of the four corporate hotels out of like 160. Howe: Yeah, so this guy's right down the road and he wants to, apparently he said he wanted to give back to the community. He'd like to be a part of it so there's still a lot of work to be done. Franks: What they're looking for from us I think is one, some cooperation. Making sure we can get the permit and set up traffic control and get the streets blocked off and to facilitate working around all those type of technical issues. And then also some financial involvement on the city's part too... And there were no set dollar amounts talked about. Howe: We didn't talk about that. Franks: They said now the Marsh, she was comparing what we would be doing to more like what the Marsh does over Thanksgiving with the Turkey Trot. About the same scale of race. They've got a few hundred runners that show up and they actually now are making money but it's taking them a number of years to actually show any kind of profit. So it's, you know it's potentially not a money loser for us but it will require maybe a few years of investment on our part before we recoup. Lash: To show my ignorance about all this stuffbecause I have no clue, but do people actually pay to come and do this? Franks: A lot to do this. Howe: People pay. But you've got to give them a t-shirt. Franks: You'd be surprised what people will pay for that t-shirt. Howe: You've got to give them a t-shirt. Franks: And water stuff. Lash: Okay so like how much? Park and Rec Commission Meeting - December 15, 1998 Hoffman: $10.00 to $30.00. Franks: Yeah, 10 to 30. 30 gets you a sweatshirt. 10 gets you a t-shirt... Howe: And some that, some of the races downtown, the big ones they have a charity that's a co- sponsor too so the charity's taking some of that money but if you get you know a charity, the media, the Vikings, that's just three more outlets you have and that's a lot more people who are going to get the word so I think you try to broaden the scope as wide as you can. I don't know what charity Dave Huffman worked with, if any. Maybe there isn't one but that, yOu know. Franks: They were looking to have a race in September of '99. That'd be a pretty tight countdown between now until doing the first race in '99, so I was a little surprised to hear that but. I mean it could be done. Lash: I heard from a friend of mine who used to work out at Waconia Hospital and they have a thing right there...Anyway, she said she still knows some of the people and she said there's some one at the clinic who's been trying to get something like this going and that Waconia would be very interested in participating possibly. Franks: Well you brought that up, the Ridgeview Medical Center. Lash: And if you're interested in the person...I don't know. I mean I'd have to ask her. Howe: Would you ask her and I'll give you a call later on. Franks: It also sounds like the Chamber is really behind this kind of thing...Vernelle Clayton I assume probably will be part of the committee too. Howe: I thought Sheila had covered all the bases. She was prepared. Manders: What kind of runner or race are you considering? Franks: Probably a 5K. Howe: No more than 1 OK. Franks: It's the most popular. The one that draws the largest number of participants. Instead of going to the longer race, because you really start limiting who's going to show up. Lash: So an iron man is out. Howe: The iron man is out. Franks: The iron man is out. Park and Rec Commission Meeting - December 15, 1998 Lash: How about, see I mean you're just thinking, Dave Huffman. Iron man. You know. Franks: We can call it the... Lash: How about modified? Berg: The eight people that show up will like the name. Hoffman: Dave could do, he could do a 5K and not an iron man. Lash: Well can't you make your own iron man? I mean just redo everything?... Berg: I bet you we could get Channel 11 and KFAN involved. Franks: Right. We talked about that too. Hoffman: Yeah, Ridgeview sponsors the Lake Waconia Triathlon race. That's a big endeavor for those folks. Lash: See maybe they already did that then. I don't know, maybe they wanted to do it here and it ended up out there. Hoffman: Yeah, they do it on an annual basis. Out there in Waconia. Howe: They get a lot of people for that. That's really well done. Hoffman: It's a big event. They had to cancel it two years ago due to lightning threat. Lash: If it was iron man, nobody would... Franks: So I guess what we were kind of left thinking, is this something that, considering that there's a very strong likelihood that we'd have to pony up some money for this, is that something that we want to continue to pursue? Roeser: Are you talking Park and Rec or the Council? Franks: Well the city somewhere has got to cover it. Roeser: I think the city council's going to have to... Lash: How much pony? Franks: Well we don't know. Lash: Just a little pony or like a... 7 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - December 15, 1998 Hoffman: I tossed around $3,000.00 to $4,000.00. Franks: It depends on what package it serves... Lash: What would we have to pay for? Franks: Well you would have to, usually you contract with a company to provide the bib numbers and then you contract with a company that does the timing. Howe: We may have to play the police overtime to stop traffic. Franks: Yeah, then you have to pay for traffic control. Howe: Satellite toilets and just thinks like that. Hoffman: T-shirts. Advertisement. Lash: Okay, but I expect their registration fee will pay for the shirts. Franks: Typically. But there's like the other types of overhead that the registration fee is not going to cover. Hoffrnan: There's a risk that you expect 400 and you get 40. Franks: That's why in the first years, you know races become really popular word of mouth and then people repeat the same races again and again and again and they...so that's why the first few years of the race you really don't expect to make money. Howe: Well I know dam well we'd get 11 people. I know that from sitting here. Audience: ... Franks: Well if the Chamber's involved, especially with their retail committee's heavily involved so it's my guess that they'll be working that angle pretty hard. Lash: I mean it grew into you know something that's huge, I mean people buying gas and. Hoffman: Yeah, the $4,000.00 wouldn't be the full tab. They'd be seeking out names. You know title sponsors would also pay. Americana would have to kick in $3,000.00-$4,000.00. The big sponsors would have to kick in a couple thousand apiece. Howe: So do we have your permission just to keep talking with her, and see where we go? I mean we're not talking money yet. Park and Rec Commission Meeting - December 15, 1998 Lash: I think we have to contact Dave's family first just to make sure we can use the name. That's the first, and I don't really look at that as much of a hurdle, do you? Hoffman: I don't know. Lash: I don't know. I mean I'd be kind of flattered. Franks: The second thing that we'd like to look at and maybe Todd you can assist with this is, the cost of the law enforcement angle and what that would run. Hoffman: Okay. I'm pretty sure that's where they're looking for our involvement is just to deal with all Franks: of that. Roeser: Franks: bridge. This all comes down to one day right? One day. Few hours actually. And they want the bridge involved so we have to use the The pedestrian bridge. Berg: It would be appropriate if it's named after Dave. Roeser: I think so too. I think if it starts there and, I was thinking they should start it at the bottom of TH 101. Berg: Are these typically run on a Saturday or Sunday? Franks: Yes. Usually on Saturday. Some are on Sunday. Mornings. Early... Roeser: So by 2:00 in the afternoon you're done with it... Audience:... Franks: That's one thing we talked about too is highlights. Howe: We were going to tie it up with the downtown. Roeser: Well 5K now, that isn't really long is it? Franks: 3.1 miles. Lash: That's not bad. Howe: So I said, 11 people. I'm serious. 9 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - December 15, 1998 Lash: I could walk it. Franks: A lot of people do walk 5K. There's some people who walk 5K who actually finish before some people who are trying to run it. Berg: You and I will walk. Howe: We didn't even talk about a course. I think that's, you know we have to get the groundwork laid and then talk about where does this go and how it will be... Manders: What is the American Inn there. What's their angle on this? Franks: Promotion. Lash: People spending the night. Manders: If they're kicking $3,000.00-$4,000.00, that's like piddlely for what they're getting out of it. It seems to me that they want to make a bigger splash unless they're just kind of. My guess is that they would be a primary sponsor. Howe: They are thinking of being one of the primary sponsors. Franks: Yeah. They are thinking about being one of the primary sponsors. That's why this Sheila is doing all the work and I think she's been directed to do this work. Because she was busy that day we were there and then she was doing this on top of it and it's like, she being directed to do this. Berg: So are you questioning their motives? Manders: I just want to understand it. I think it's great but. Franks: We were guessing that maybe they have a grand plan that sooner or later there'd be the ultimate marathon where you run from Americlnn to Americlnn .... and you stay over night and go onto the next one. Kind of like that cross country skiing they do along the north shore... Lash: Well I say we check with, yes first. Howe: Todd, can you do that? Hoffman: Sure. Howe: Could you call and see his birthday and if there was a charity...he ever worked with. Franks: And she would also like to know what the permit process would be or you know what we need to do to close roads or utilize the trails for something like this. 10 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - December 15, 1998 Hoffman: Okay. Yes. This has been talked about for 10 years. And staffing levels, we did not see it as an obligation of the city to sponsor a race in town. There needs to be another entity and the Chamber is a good one. But traditionally over the years the Chamber, you know it starts well we'll help but we've provided a great deal of support as well on the city level not only from staffing, the rec staff but public works and park maintenance and public safety. If you added up all the contribution of what the city entails to make it work, it starts to be the largest slice of the pie and we just can't take on event after event after event so. We need to make sure that that other half of the equation is there, attached so there's labor and all those things. Lash: So what kind of things could they do back and tell her that, other than the money, that we'd be able to provide. What else? They want permits. They want to help coordinating the traffic control and, so is this something that staff, somebody on staff can help with? Hoffman: Not right now. Lash: Okay. Hoffman: We don't know where we're going to land with staffing in 1999. Once we know that, then we'll be better able to let you know. Berg: What did we spend on the fall festival when we had it? Remember? Hoffman: $8,000.00. Ruegemer: No, a little bit more than that. Probably 10 to 11. Lash: So does that mean here that we don't know what's going to happen with Patty's position or? Hoffman: Oh yeah, I hope to fill Patty's position but we don't know where that's going to land and we have an intern that we may or may not get. Some rec center issues to deal with. Lash: So when are we supposed to... Franks: Well we'll tell her what we know. Howe: Just keep talking and say. Franks: We're going to operate, I think we'll just keep operating with the idea that we're going to, at this point shoot for a race sometime you know in mid September and see what we can do. Howe: Go start training. 11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - December 15, 1998 Hoffinan: And then the dollar thing, you know we can loosen up $3,000.00 or $4,000.00 somewhere in the rec budget. We just need to let the council know where we would want to do that and receive authorization to do that sometime in January. Franks: And the other thing to think about too is once there enough monies coming in through registration to cover, and contributions to cover cost, how the city is able also to cover some of it's costs instead of those just being lost. And so we talked with Sheila about all of that being set up ahead of time. Even though it's not likely that we would even be in the break even proposition for a couple years but all those guidelines would be set up ahead of time. Especially if a charity is involved. How the donations to charity would all take place based on what the costs. So I'll be attending law school. Hoffman: Thanks both to you Mike and Rod for picking up on that and meeting with Sheila. We appreciate it. Howe: She gave us a bunch of free rooms too. Lash: Any other commission member reports? Howe: I don't have anything? Lash: Dave? Moes: Nothing. Franks: No. Lash: Jim? Manders: One thing. Not intentionally jumping ahead to administrative section but you probably noticed a little graffiti down at Lake Ann. Lash: Where was that? Manders: The pavilion. Hoffman: It's been a tough year. There's a couple of restitution issues in this packet. I met with parents and a youth on...as much of an irritant as it is. It also costs us a good deal on money on an annual basis and said the number one cause of damage against our parks on an annual basis. Franks: That restitution money, where does that go? When it comes to the city. Hoffman: Right back to Fund 410. Park acquisition and development. It costs us dearly to get it. 12 Park and Rec Commission Meeting - December 15, 1998 Lash: Anything else Jim? No? Okay. ADMINISTRATIVE SECTION. Lash: Anything under administrative section? Hoffman: We plan to go back early in the summer, the ones that are in here, picnic tables. Howe: Those were the ones that were throwing the picnic tables out of. Hoffman: Yes. Out of the pavilion. Lash: Jerry, did you need help with the bowling party? Ruegemer: I lined up some girl scouts. About 8 to 10 girl scouts have volunteered for that. Did you have some people in mind? Lash: No, but last year... Ruegemer: Are kids out of school that day? Lash: Yes. Okay, anything else? Anything else under the administrative section? Manders moved, Howe seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Submitted by Todd Hoffman Park and Rec Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 13