Loading...
CC Minutes 1998 11 23CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 23, 1998 Mayor Mancino called the meeting to order at 6~35 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Mancino, Councilman Berquist, and Councilman Senn COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: Councilman Mason and Councilman Engel STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Roger Knutson, Kate Aanenson, Anita Benson, Todd Gerhardt, Todd Hofknan, Scott Hart and Para Snell APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Senn seconded to approve the agenda as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Senn seconded to approve the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations~ b. Approve 1999 Meeting Schedule. c. Approve Wetland Alteration Permit to Expand the Beach at Minnewashta Regional Park, Carver County. d. Approve 1998 Bike Trail Easement, Lionel P. Adouklheir and Claudia Hess-Courdavauk. e. Approval of Private Redevelopment Agreement, Century 2000 Partners LLP, Arboretum Business Park. g. Resolution #98-105; Accept Street and Storm Drainage and Street Improvements in North Bay 2nd Addition-Project No. 95-20. h. Approve License Agreement with MCES for Septage Disposal Site. i. Approval of Bills. j. City Council Minutes dated November 4, 1998 City Council Minutes dated November 9, 1998 Park & Recreation Commission Minutes dated October 27, 1998 All voted in favor and the motion carried. City Council Meeting - November 23, 1998 F. BRENDEN PONDS 3~ ADDITION, GESTACH AND PAULSEN. Mayor Mancino: Let's go to l(f), Brenden Ponds 3rd Addition, Gestach and Paulson. We have a final plat approval and approval of development contract and construction plans, Project No. 97-7. Those that are here tonight, if you'd like to come up. State your name and address and give any public comment you would like to at this time. Darin Vogel: Darin Vogel, 6693 Brenden Court. My issue is the same one that I spoke of a couple meetings ago and then I also sent in a letter stating the same points. Do you want to reiterate? Mayor Mancino: If you would like to for the public record. Darin Vogel: The lot next to us, which was originally the initial Phase I of Brenden Ponds was 139 feet width and when we purchased our lot we based our selection on the fact, you know looking at all the lots and what was next to it that knowing that that was a wider lot, that was appealing to us. Because we figured proximity wise there wouldn't be a house you know that much closer to our house. What we're finding now is that they want to rework that lot and going from 139 feet to 90 so, which would be about a 35% decrease in width size. My feeling is it's going to mean probably a house just that much closer to our house. And I feel like you know I'd like to come to some compromise. Maybe the developer to possibly, I brought up a point, maybe put some trees in. A buffer. Some trees that, to kind of compromise the situation so I'm not sure who would rule on something along that line. And then just in general, all the lots going down to the street and basically all the new lots are considerably smaller than the rest of the lots that were plotted in Phase I. So I mean I guess just the whole integrity of the neighborhood. You know keeping the lot size consistent. The new eight lots, there's only one lot and the other 18 lots that are smaller than the new proposed eight lots so I guess that's my main concern. And the lot directly next to mine. Thanks. Mayor Mancino: Okay. And you also understand that the city, they still meet the city requirement ordinance requirement for lot size. Darin Vogel: Yeah, no I realize that but I feel like when we purchased our lot and our house, I mean their marketing material you know presented the lot next to us in a certain fashion and a certain size and you know, I mean what's fair is fair. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Erin Raden: Mayor Mancino, council members. My name is Erin Raden. I live at 2237 Lake Lucy Road. Also adjacent to the Brenden Ponds development and this phase. And I just wanted to mention that we've discussed these issues previously at a city council meeting and the council did ask that the builder go back and redraw the plans and submit them. Now I've looked at the new plans that are proposed and there are no changes to the plan and it seems to me the basis of our discussion last time was speaking to the fact that in the advertising of the Gestach-Paulson development, that there was a minimum lot size. There was a drawing. There was a representation. I understand that the council doesn't rule on laws related to truth in advertising but I think there's an obligation here that the City Council has to take a look at what developers are doing, what they are advertising to the future residents who will have a permanent stake in not only the natural woodlands here but also property values from an economic standpoint. So if we set a precedent City Council Meeting - November 23, 1998 here that builders can advertise one lot size, come back and redraw another one and after being asked by the city council to redraw, resubmit the same plans, I find that it's either a waste of everyone's time or we're not looking at the real issues here. So I ask you to consider that you've asked the builder to resubmit plans which are basically the same lot size, which has a serious economic impact on those of us who plan to be here for a very long time. So thank you, that's all. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Anyone else? Roger let me ask you. Do we have any authority in truth in advertising and etc, what developers do tell or put in the printed material for... Roger Knutson: I think the resident said it well. No. Or not well but accurately. We do not, the city does not enforce consumer protection advertising issues. We're not involved in that area. Mayor Mancino: Before we go on to voting, any comments that, or questions council members have. Councilman Berquist: The only question I have Roger would be in the municipalities you represent, is there anything that, any municipality other than Chanhassen that does take the responsibility on behalf of those... For instance the gentleman that the lot next to his lot is being down sized. Roger Knutson: You mean as far as advertising? Just in general or. Councilman Berquist: I'm not so certain that I'd want to go as broad based as advertising.., particularly towards development and lot sizing. It's preliminary versus final. Roger Knutson: It's discussed a lot and this is an issue that a lot of cities have and there have been attempts in various cities to address it. This city looked at the issue 10 years ago I'd guess and we talked about what was then referred to as a blending ordinance and trying to make lots, new lots consistent with the lots next to them and things like that and that was studied by planning staff. I don't know whether it went to Planning Commission or not. And it was, it was studied and I don't know if it was decided it wasn't a good idea or for whatever reason didn't come forward. At least I know it was done. Some cities attempt to do things like that. Some cities try various techniques to do it. But regardless, so there may be some things you possibly could do. You might not like the affect it would have. It might solve this problem and create other problems, with any ordinance you have to look at. But as far as what we have here tonight, you don't have any of those things in effect. So it may be possible to do something. But you might not like it. Councilman Senn: What about separating the issues between the, like we tried to do in some of the initial discussions? I mean you know, to me there was a marked difference here between replatting something that had already been platted and approved you know to something else which people were effectively relying on and now going to the new part and meeting ordinances. Roger Knutson: I know of one city, small city and I can't tell you the name of it but I know I read about it that I can find it for you. Who has done that. Has essentially tried to say once land has been platted, you can't replat it. I think it's questionable but I know one city that has done it. Mayor Mancino: So it's platted in perpetuity. Roger Knutson: Yeah. You can't change the lot size. I know one city that has an ordinance on the books that, I'll get you the name. I don't remember it as I'm sitting here. Not a city we represent. City Council Meeting - November 23, 1998 Councilman Senn: But was there a basis for their authority to do that or was it simply by action? Roger Knutson: An ordinance that said so. They have an ordinance in effect. Councilman Senn: So by your basic definition though we have no more authority over that replatting effectively as long as it meets ordinances than we do over a new plat. Roger Knutson: That's correct. It's just like it's a metes and bounds, under our ordinances and the way it is in every place I work, a metes and bounds or a replat is treated the same. It's land. Because when you go out there and look at it, you can't tell the difference between a metes and bounds and a plat. Mayor Mancino: Then may I have a motion please. Councilman Berquist: I'll move approval of the final plat of this subdivision #94-10 as detailed in the staff report with conditions 1 through 17. And I'll also move approval of the development contract with an amended page 10, paragraph (t) regarding storm sewer maintenance. Mayor Mancino: Is there a second? I'll second it. Councilman Berquist moved, Mayor Mancino seconded to approve the final plat for Brenden Ponds 3rd Addition as presented; approve the development contract amended on page 10, paragraph T regarding storm sewer maintenance, and construction plans for Project 97-7. All voted in favor, except Councilman Senn who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 2 to 1. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: Colleen Dockendorf: Good evening. Colleen Dockendorf, 2061 Oakwood Ridge. The reason I'm here this evening is I, less than an hour ago read a memo prepared by the City Manager, the Acting City Manager regarding the reorganization of city government and forgive me for not being prepared but a couple of concerns come to mind. My understanding from the memo is that there are basically three things that are going to happen. The newly created community services department is going to have some, finally the role of that department and that director has been outlined and my understanding is that the public safety department will be dissolved and those responsibilities will be, come under the community services department. Along with that the public safety director position is being terminated and the public safety commission is being dissolved. I have several concerns with all of those changes. First of all is that we are currently in the process of looking for a new city manager and it seems a little backwards to reorganize government before we have someone in charge. Someone new in charge. It seems to me that it's more prudent to get a new city manager and he or her can decide how to organize their respective team within city government. My second concern is that there is a new council coming on board January 1. Two of the members of the current council will turn over and two new members will be in place. It is my understanding that these new council members are unaware of this proposed change and the structure of city government. My third concern is about the limitation or the further limiting of citizen input into city government. When you dissolve a commission that's 5, 6, 7 less people that you have involved in the decisions and the workings of city government. And my fourth and last concern is that it appears that the trend, at least in the communities surrounding us, are to keep public safety as it's own distinct department with inspections reporting to that looking at it as a whole public safety department. My concern is that public safety in this community will get lost under a broader based department. So what I'm asking for City Council Meeting - November 23, 1998 this evening is that we do have some public debate on this new reorganization insofar as we have a new council coming in. We have a new city manager coming in so I would respectfully request a public debate with public notice on that. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Anyone else? Don Ashworth: Mayor? Maybe if I could jump in. Colleen is correct. I have prepared a report. I think we should back up a little bit. Approximately two months ago I notified the City Council that I would be retiring in two years. City Council suggested that the city manager selection process should commence to insure that I would be on board during the transition period. The intent was to basically separate out the existing duties for the city manager, and the economic development director and how that would be kind of accomplished. It would be left as a recommendation basically back for myself. I was prepared tonight to distribute a copy of the report that I've completed. The recommendation that I'll be making to the City Council and so I guess I would like to do that at this point in time. Additionally for anyone else who would like to read that report, I've made extra copies and put it on the table in the front there. So if you would like a copy of that feel free to take a copy. It might make it easier with discussion. The recommendation, again recognizing that the city manager does have significant duties and responsibilities under existing state law in terms of the organization itself. I've debated, my recommendation is really extensively and the conclusions were not that easily drawn. But the intent was to then take the report, go back to the fire department. Attempt to get input from them as to whether or not this made sense and whether or not the transition could occur in the fashion that I've outlined it. Similarly we have a new sheriff. I was proposing to do that. I do have a meeting set with the Villager for 11:00 tomorrow morning at which time I was going to give a copy of this to the Villager but I think that it is reasonable to try to bring some closure. Make some decisions and so I have set kind of an ending time frame for me to receive input to be approximately 10 days from now. So I'm, and you know I may need to talk to Dean and see whether or not that's a reasonable time frame. And again I think, a lot of these decisions are under Minnesota Statute back to myself. There... in regards to the public safety commission and I basically was questioning the necessity for that group, especially if I'm merging in public safety into a new department called community services. And again realizing that it will be probably several months before a new city manager would take over, we need to continue to have city government operate during the next 3-4 month period of time. That doesn't change the fact that when he or she would take, come on board, that further changes may occur at that point in time. I think some economic issues that are in with this whole process but, and the decision was not an easy one. I had not had an opportunity to share this with Mr. Harr until mid afternoon and I felt as a courtesy that he should be the first one to receive that with again the intent of distributing that to the City Council this evening. I guess I would take exception with Colleen in terms of insuring that we start the new year and everyone knows what their roles are, that we start the year already having thought about relationship with the new sheriff. Whatever other type of changes or things that would need to be done back with the fire department and some of the other activities that I outlined in this report. So with that, I think maybe we're going to take other questions. Mayor Mancino: Anyone else have any comment? Thank you. John Esch: John Esch. I'm at 7444 Moccasin Trail. From the sounds of this Mr. Ashworth it sounds like this has not been given to the City Council. Don Ashworth: You just saw me distribute it. John Esch: Okay. What is the cost of doing this? And should this. City Council Meeting - November 23, 1998 Don Ashworth: Probably more what is the cost of not doing it is probably a better question. John Esch: Okay. Either way, shouldn't that be given to the City Council and a chance for them to discuss it and. Don Ashworth: We're in the midst of budgetary process right now and I would anticipate that as they finalize that document, that they will take that into consideration, yes. Mayor Mancino: Actually we're just going back up after this meeting tonight and going through more budget discussion so we are in the middle of budget. That's a good point to make. Leah Hawke: I'm Leah Hawke and I'm at 7444 Moccasin Trail and I guess my question would be if we haven't looked at the impact on the budget right now, how can we go ahead and implement some of these changes. We don't know the overall affect that this is going to have and I would support Colleen Dockendorfthat I believe the members of this community have the right to give their input on such a significant change as this one where we're talking about separating out different functions within the city. I think we should look at what communities surrounding us do and look for consistency. I mean to me, I may sound not prepared and I'm not because this frankly came as such a surprise for me. I always thought that in order to dissolve a public safety commission, there needed to be some sort of process through which the City Council opened it up for input from the community. And I guess my question is, it sounds like we're going to potentially go with pieces of this and not others until city council has had the opportunity to review it. But I'll just float it out there that in a corporation you'd never do something like that. What you would do is you would look at the overall impact and you wouldn't implement before you knew what that would mean. So I'm here supporting Colleen that we hold off on this and we give the community a chance to give their input on something like this. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Don Ashworth: Again if I might. I have not finalized numbers but if you look at the current year budget compared to what would probably occur next year, you're probably looking at a savings of $100,000.00 to $150,000.00. And the other point was that you can't dissolve a public safety commission without it going to the City Council. What I've put in here was my observation that in creating a new community services department, it was my belief that that department would be acting much more closely to the roles played by financed or public works or engineering who do not have specific commissions that they work with. Other commissions are required to take and carry out required public hearings. Planning Commission as it deals with the comprehensive plan. Variances, Board of Adjustment. Well Board of Adjustments is variances. And some of our other commissions where those kinds of hearings are required but under this proposal, as a community services department that would encompass the old public safety department plus GIS plus economic development. Which was really the charge that you had given me. You know how, with this transition thing and creating basically two, city manager and economic development director, how do we do this and how do we move into 1999, attempting to take and provide services in for those two functions and that's what this report is all about. Mayor Mancino: We'll be looking at it from a budget standpoint and we also will be looking at it from organizationally, what other cities our size and bigger are doing too. Organization charts. Anyone else? Thank you for coming. City Council Meeting - November 23, 1998 AMENDMENT TO HALLA STIPULATION AGREEMENT. Kate Aanenson: Thank you. Mr. Halla appeared on October 26th to request on a visitor presentation extension or expansion of the peacock barn that you had recently granted him. This expansion is approximately 54 feet by 54 feet. At that time the Council was reluctant to amend that without going through the formal process. We have included the revised site plan showing the location of that and we also did renotify the neighbors to explain to them the expansion. We have included, if you do choose to approve it, we have included the conditions of approval again specifying the dimensions of the building. The number of game birds to be limited to approximately 75 feet, the signage and that the landscape buffer remain at all times along the south side of the new structure. I'd be happy to answer any questions that you may have. Mayor Mancino: Any questions for Kate at this time? Councilman Berquist: We had notified the neighbors regarding the increased size and we... Kate Aanenson: No. No, we did not. Mayor Mancino: Mark, would you like to come up. Mark Halla: I'll be really brief. I'm Mark Halla for Halla Nursery. I'm at 770 Creekwood in Chanhassen. I just want to say that you guys have been really generous in approving the original building size and that it was totally my mistake in representing that size to you. I didn't become aware of the mistake until after I had purchased the forklift and realized that my aisles now needed to be 14 foot wide instead of 6 foot wide. That's the reason that we're asking for this additional 54 foot. And I apologize for that and I appreciate your time considering it. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Any questions? Comments from councilmembers. One question I have under recommendation. The landscape buffer remains at all times to the south off the new structure. Do we have some detailed drawings on that landscape buffer and what it would be because there is platted already an existing plat for a subdivision to go in south of this area. And I think we were all concerned, as I have said to Mark of subdivision and homes being near there and the peacocks and the noise and everything. Kate Aanenson: It's my understanding that there's a tree line there and that we were concerned that that remain there. Wouldn't take those trees down. Mark Halla: No, we would choose to leave them. Any of the trees that are on the property there, on the platted property. Of course there's the homeowner. At that point we have no control over it. Mayor Mancino: Oh, okay. But that's very specific. It's drawn out as far as what trees. How long it is. How wide it is. City Council Meeting - November 23, 1998 Kate Aanenson: If you want to modify that to clarify that it be shown on the plan, I think that that might be a good idea. That those trees be marked and clearly identified. That they not be removed. Mark Halla: There's only one row of trees along that property.., and the rest is on the adjacent lot. Kate Aanenson: Do we add something like identify and mark which trees are to remain to that condition number 3? Yeah. Mayor Mancino: Before we go on, I'm sorry. Is there anyone here tonight that would like to speak to this issue? Sir, are you here on this issue? Okay, thank you. Okay, go ahead. Councilman Berquist: I'd move we approve the building of 54 x 154 and limit the birds to 75. That we have a sign permit taken out for the greenhouse sign and limit it to one 8 foot by 4 foot sign. The existing landscape/tree buffer remain to the south of the structure. Kate Aanenson: We were just going to add and identify and mark trees to remain on plan. Councilman Berquist: And identify and mark trees to remain on the plan, yeah. Mayor Mancino: Is there a second? I'll second it. Councilman Berquist moved, Mayor Mancino seconded that the City Council approve the Halla Stipulation Agreement amended specifying the following: The size and location of the barn be limited to 54' x 154' as shown on the site plan and the number of peacocks (game birds) be limited to approximately 75. 2. A sign permit be taken out limiting the greenhouse to one sign 8' x 4'. A landscape/tree buffer remain at all times to the south off the new structure, and identify and mark trees to remain on the plan. All voted in favor, except Councilman Senn who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 2 to 1. RESCUE TRUCK REPLACEMENT - ACCEPTANCE OF BID. Scott Harr: Mayor, members of the Council, Mr. Ashworth. We're here tonight to request that Council accept the recommended bid by your fire department truck committee. This is for the scheduled replacement of our front line rescue truck used for medical, personal injury accident calls and fire rescue support calls. Just to give you a quick idea of the importance of this vehicle, last year this truck responded to 420 medical calls and 80 personal injury accident calls. Next year we're estimating 560 calls for this rescue truck. Just to give you another comparison. In 1977 our fire trucks responded to about 150 fire calls so this front line truck is used for the majority of calls for emergency service from the community. This $100,000.00 budgeted amount has been saved for over the course of years, included in each year's budget and it is such a conservative amount that over the last three years the truck committee has actually had rebid this truck three times to get it down close enough to $100,000.00 to make it happen. Even then the bid that the truck committee is recommending is the second bid from the lowest and is slightly over City Council Meeting - November 23, 1998 $4,000.00 above the $100,000.00 but because of changes that have been approved by the City Attorney's office, and also the City Attorney's office has approved going with a second bid for reasons outlined in the memo from the truck committee. Staff would like to ask that the Council accept the bid from North Central Ambulance and that staff be authorized to proceed with the purchase of this vehicle for a total amount to exceed $100,000.00. I want to comment that I've never seen a truck committee in the 4 or 5 trucks that I've submitted to Councils over the years work as hard to get one down to the budgeted amount. This has been difficult because it's such a specialty vehicle that's been designed to fit into our needs for our city and they have spent countless hours as a group. The fire truck committee is made up of members of the department. I think they deserve a lot of credit for their effort. Greg Geske, one of our senior fire fighters is here tonight. He's on the truck committee should there be any questions and of course Chief Wolf is here as well. Thank you. Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Questions. My gosh, you've answered every possible question I could have. It's a well written, well done report as far as I'm concerned. Any questions? Councilman Berquist: The only question I had was the point that taken, the low bidder has taken exception to the interior cabinet coating specs. What's, tell me about it. Just out of curiosity. Greg Geske: We specified a rhino guard similar to a box liner. A spray on rhino guard that you have, which is a rubberized material. The equipment that we carry in there, our homatro or our extraction tools and stuff, sometimes do come loose. It's in our best interest to have that rhino guard because it protects along the equipment which is very expensive and number two, the box itself. Our current truck that we have now is getting dents and scratches on the inside of that so we thought it was good to have the rhino guard to protect our equipment and the box. They chose to quote just a spackle paint on the inside rather than rhino guard so we took exception to that. Councilman Senn: Is that better than a liner? Greg Geske: Is that better than what? Councilman Senn: A liner. Greg Geske: A box liner? Councilman Senn: Yes. Greg Geske: What it is, they can't put a box liner. This is for inside the cabinetry where we store our equipment and it's sprayed on the inside. Councilman Senn: Oh so, okay. It's sprayed inside the enclosure is what you're, okay. Greg Geske: it's sprayed on the inside...they do the same thing with a box... Councilman Senn: Now I understand. Mayor Mancino: I'd like to move for approval. Councilman Berquist: Second. City Council Meeting - November 23, 1998 Mayor Mancino moved, Councilman Berquist seconded to approve the purchase of the rescue truck from North Central Ambulance and that the Public Safety Director be authorized to proceed with this purchase this year. All voted in favor and the motion carried. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: None. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: None. ADMINISTRATIVE SECTION DISCUSSION: Mayor Mancino: Any questions in the Admin section? Councilman Senn: I had a couple. Now where were they? I would like to see a discussion on the funding of the southwest corridor transportation coalition rather than just an approval by. Mayor Mancino: Certainly we can do that during the budget process. Councilman Senn: Yep. And I would also like to see a discussion, rather than just a tacit approval through the administrative section on the continuation of the child care program at the Rec Center. Mayor Mancino: The what? Councilman Berquist: You'd like to see what? Say that again. Councilman Senn: I said, the same as in the case of the funding for the southwest coalition, I would like to not just see a tacit approval of the child care program continuation through approving the administrative section. I would rather see a specific discussion on council's part as to the validity of continuing that program and if so, on what basis. Mayor Mancino: And we can certainly bring that up during our park and rec budget discussion. Councilman Senn: No, I understand. I just want it understood that. Mayor Mancino: But that will be, it's your responsibility to kind of bring it up during those budget discussions. Councilman Senn: Yep, no problem. Mayor Mancino: Okay, good. Councilman Berquist: And I simply wanted to bring up that I was glad to see that the child care program, at least like at first blush seems to be to a point where it's break even. Mayor Mancino: Yes. Yes, that was good to see that. Anything else and we will adjourn up to more budget discussions. Mayor Mancino adjourned the City Council meeting at 7:18 p.m. 10 City Council Meeting - November 23, 1998 Submitted by Don Ashworth City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim 11