CC Minutes 1998 03 09CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
MARCH 9, 1998
Mayor Mancino called the meeting to order at 6:40 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the
Flag.
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Mancino, Councilman Berquist, Councilman Mason and
Councilman Senn
COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: Councilman Engel
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Anita Benson, Kate Aanenson, Sharmin A1-Jaff, Don Ashworth,
Roger Knutson and Todd Hoffman
APPROVAL OF AGENDA; Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Berquist seconded to approve the
agenda as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None.
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the
following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations:
Ordinance Amending City Code Sections 19-21, 23,27, 43, 46 and 49; Terms and Criteria for
Establishing Number of Hookup Units; Final Reading; Including Summary Ordinance for
Publication Purposes.
Springfield 3rd Addition; Lundgren Brothers as amended by Councilman Berquist.
1) Final Plat Approval amending page 17, item 3. Amending the last sentence to read, "The
developer shall dedicate to the City Outlot A." by striking out the phrase "a trail easement and
over".
2) Approve Construction Plans & Specifications and Development Contract/PUD Agreement
amending page SP-4, item 9(c). Amending the last sentence to read, "The developer shall
dedicate to the City Outlot A." by striking the phrase "a trail easement over".
e. Approve Amendment to Resolution No. 98-01, Establishing Council Rules of Procedure.
f. Approval of Bills.
City Council Minutes dated February 23, 1998
Planning Commission Minutes dated February 18, 1998
Public Safety Commission Minutes dated February 12, 1998
h. Remaining 1998 Equipment Acquisition, File PW-16fff.
Request for a Lot Split on Lot 2, Block 4, Highover Addition for Development of a Well Site;
Located North Longacres Drive on the East Side of Highway 41, West of Highover Drive and South
of Lake Lucy Road; City of Chanhassen.
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS:
Linda Janson: My name is Linda Janson. I'm at 240 Eastwood Court here in Chanhassen. I've had a
chance to speak with each of the members of the Council and I'm here anyway.
Mayor Mancino: You wanted to come back again?
Linda Janson: You didn't scare me off, and I would have to say that after hearing all of the DNR and, I
mean MnDot statistics on the congestion and why Coulter extension should happen, I had to sit back and
do exactly what all of you did. Why? Why is there even a question about putting Coulter extension
through? Why am I wanting to go down there tonight and again raise it as an issue to say, can you come
back? Can you re-open this? Can you re-address it? Well I know what's motivating me and it's living in
the community of Chanhassen and it's the set of values that I embraced and so appreciated seeing the
community embrace when they passed the parks and open spaces and trail referendum and I keep coming
back to that. Because with everything that you read that's going on in all of the other communities, and I
mean no disrespect to our neighbors on our east when I say, I wouldn't want to live in Eden Prairieless.
When you look at what has happened there, there's a reason why we have all gravitated to these burbs.
They're beautiful. The natural resources that we all have to appreciate are right here. We don't have to go
anywhere. And yes, it's this little piece of property and we have all this money that we've been given by
the community to go out and purchase more open space. Why do we keep coming back to this little piece
of property? Well, it's a green way. There are all kinds of studies that are now being shown that they're
all interconnected. As we eliminate each one of these little islands that exist out in the community for our
natural resources to survive and thrive, for the wildlife to live with us. As we eliminate those in one area,
we're eliminating that greenway for those things to exist. They're slowly getting killed back and pushed
into smaller and smaller areas, and this is one of those. And I can appreciate it because I happen to be
sitting on a piece of property that no matter how corny it sounds, more than once a week we, my husband
and I comment on how fortunate we are to be living where we are. And yes it sounds corny but as, we've
lived there now for 4 years and we have slowly taken the time to realize what we have around us. It's
inspiring. I volunteer time out at the Lowry Nature Center and every week during the school week the
buses pull up out there and 80 to 100 children every day pile off those buses and they come into that nature
center and they experience things for like the first time in their lives. They've just, wow. They've just
walked into the wilderness. They're out in Carver Park. They're practically in our backyard. They're out
there seeing for the first time what we have in our back yard and they're like besides themselves. These
kids go, well for one they think it's dangerous. I mean they are out in the wilderness. But they have these
wonderful naturalists that are opening their eyes to what they have around them. Imagine 100
kindergartners coming through the nature center going chickidee-dee-dee, chickidee-dee-dee. They
probably make their parents nuts by the time they get home. But they've never seen a chickadee. They've
never identified tracks in the snow. And I'm sorry, we all go nuts over the geese and the mess that they
make and you learn to appreciate them when the two geese that have adopted the nature center come
honking into the back yard and these kids just think it's the best thing. That's the closest they've ever seen
a bird. So I come back to that little piece of land that's sitting in our back yards and yes. We're looking at
the statistics from MnDot and we're saying, are we going the right thing for our community allowing for
the congestion on TH 5 ? Well, as a community don't we come back to, are we doing the right thing by
eliminating and effecting, and you eliminate it. You know there's no doubt that once that industrial
boulevard goes through that property, you will have eliminated a portion of what lives there. Whatever has
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
to crawl is going to get crushed as it goes across the road. You're going to have all salt spray from off of
that road going into the water effecting the quality. It's going to make an impact. And it can't be park
friendly. That type of a road. I mean it just, it is not. It is not habitat friendly and once that's gone, it's
gone. Well, if alternatives can come up in the future for the traffic at those intersections, by the time we've
affected that wetlands, it's over. We can't go back and say okay. We're going to pull the road out. Okay,
come back to the habitat. It's just not going to happen. And the facts are there that tell us that and I don't
know how much conversation you want me to have at this podium tonight because I know you can't do
anything about it tonight and I have all my little you know things that I could say but I guess to save your
time this evening, I'm just hoping that maybe someone would just bring us back again because it's my
understanding from the people that are living closest to this area. They for one thought that there could be
no more conversation. That they had like talked themselves to the point that they could talk no more. They
will come back to this issue. It's spring break right now I gather so there are people that aren't aware of
the article that ran in the Villager. That's what got me going. Watching the Council meeting last Thursday
evening so it's not as though, I mean I'm reacting from last you know Thursday being able to hear the
arguments and what was going on. I would love to see this come back up and for what it's worth, on our
little piece of property we have some of the most wonderful wildlife and if these are examples that will
show you what in fact we're talking about trying to save, it makes an impact. They're for instance were
nesting great horn owls on this particular property that we're talking about. They haven't been seen in
three weeks. Now whether or not it's because of the construction that's already gone on out there with the
utilities, it's an indication of how little it takes to impact this area. We're at the intersection of Pioneer
Trail and 101. We've got the traffic but the big trees, the mature trees were left. The wetlands are there to
support again the habitat that they need. So you've got, we've got the barn owls. The great blue herons.
They've got them in that wetland. They won't stay. Once that's disturbed, they're gone. The wood ducks.
They'll get crushed. They can't fly at a point where they're having their ducklings, and the industrial park
that is there right now, it so warms my heart. I did. I drove through that area to see what was going on in
the existing industrial park. In the wetlands that are back there amongst those businesses, they have wood
duck boxes out in the water. They too are reaching out to this natural setting and as they're working, you
know on their lunch breaks I can imagine in the spring time, they're out there watching what's going on out
in these wetlands and it's all going to go away as we start running traffic through it. So it's not just for the
residential that we should be preserving this. You've got the people that are working in that industrial area.
They're going to learn an appreciation for it too. It's not that we're saying you know, thumb our noses at
the industrial piece of it. But why don't we leave this buffer and both areas are going to get the benefit of
what is left there. You've got the pileated woodpeckers. I mean you talk about feeling like you're stepping
back in time. All of these are in Chanhassen, and I have to tell you that any time anyone has seen these, it's
where do you live? Well in Chanhassen. Where in Chanhassen can you get these kinds of creatures? And
it's no. I'm shooting out my back window. All of these are just sitting in my house shooting out the back
window. We're not supposed to have red headed woodpeckers. Red headed woodpeckers. They take
cavities in the old growth trees to be able to nest and as we eliminate these trees, they're gone. The kids
will not see these, and again I keep coming back to the kids because they won't see these, and of all things
bob whites. Quail came wandering into our yard. Again in Chanhassen. And I come back to the Starring
Nature Center in Eden Prairie. They don't see these things. The naturalist there said where? Where are
you located? Well, we're right up the road but we have all this natural habitat that's still around us.
Whether it will remain there or not, I don't know. It will around the area that we're in because those lots
were left as acreage lots and the mature trees are going to stay. So we have this, knock on wood. We are
so fortunate. But to know that around us, in spite of the fact that the city or the community has a natural
resource value that they committed and said, we're going to put our money where our mouths are. And
they passed that referendum. And they said to all of you, and I don't know how we translate that. It's
almost as though, as a community we need to say, here's the all encompassing value that please make these
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
decisions based upon. Take our strength of conviction with you as MnDot is throwing all of these statistics
at you and you're trying to make the right community decision. Remember that we're all back here saying,
this is why we're living here. This is why we're living here and we all stepped forward and we passed our
votes and a majority said, maintain it. And I know that this property is not being purchased under this
referendum, but what a wonderful gift. What a wonderful addition to all the things that all of you are
doing, and I commend you for the things that you've stepped up to with the Bluff Creek. With the whole
wetland restoration project that Elkin is going to be doing out here by the Applebee's. Show the
community how we can help by reconstructing these things, or not adversely affecting them on our own
properties and we're going to get that much farther. There's still people out there that don't understand the
affect their grass clippings or whatever have on these wetlands and the education really starts here. And as
we demolish these areas, that's the standard that more of them are seeing and it's right by the school. I
keep coming back to that school and I look at the location of this beautiful wetland to that school and think
of the education that we can give those kids. All they have to do is walk across the street to see what
nature has for them in that wetland. They don't have to get on a bus and go tooting out to Carver Park to
see it and they don't have half of what I showed you out at Carver Park. It takes certain habitat and so it's
not like we can recreate this and put these things in the different locations and say, ah. They'll just go
someplace else. You know they leave or they're completely destroyed as we make these changes. But I'm
just asking you if you will come back to this one, re-address it and again, I can't help but say to you, find
the strength in the value that was expressed by the community in passing that referendum. No, it doesn't
affect this property but look at what it said and they weren't, we weren't necessarily saying that 6 years
ago or whenever these plans ended up being put together. It should have more to do with the decision now.
Thanks.
Mayor Mancino: Thank you very much. Anita, what are the next steps for Coulter Boulevard? So Linda
knows and if it, when that comes back to the City Council.
Anita Benson: Currently you've authorized preparation of plans and specifications. We will be coming
back asking for your approval of those plans and specifications and authorization to advertise for bids.
That would happen probably April-May.
Mayor Mancino: Okay. And Roger, to reconsider what has already been passed would take what?
Roger Knutson: I'd have to go back and look and see what all the approvals have been but basically
you've approved that the project out there, the development out there.
Councilman Berquist: ... hiring of the consulting engineer to prepared plans and specifications...
Roger Knutson: If you haven't made any commitment to the developer, then no. You wouldn't have to, all
you'd have to do is say no to the plans and specifications. If that's all it is. My concern is whether there's
been some prior tie in's or commitments based upon something. If there's not, then you just have to say no
to plans and specifications. Don't build it.
Anita Benson: Roger, I believe that in the Arboretum Business Park, it was a phased project and the, with
the feasibility study I believe the project was ordered. Whether that has any bearing as a commitment to
the developer.
Mayor Mancino: No, because we hadn't decided whether we were going to build a road at that time or not.
It wasn't until two weeks ago. At that point it was still up in the air. Nobody had made a commitment.
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
Roger Knutson: And that's all there is, even though you've technically ordered the project. By not
approving the plans and specifications, it's not going out to bids, it doesn't get built.
Councilman Berquist: I've got a related question. So far as we have ordered plans and specifications, that
specifications be prepared and insofar as it's a Minnesota State roadway. If we chose to re-examine the
decision to have the plans and specifications done, that would be one thing. But in the event that we
allowed them to continue, the costs have been incurred.., as part of the State aid program and plans and
specifications are reimbursable, is that correct?
Don Ashworth: They are if the roadway is built. If you make a decision to not proceed, and I need to
verify this. But I am 99% believe it to be true. We would eat those costs.
Councilman Berquist: So, okay. Good, thank you.
Mayor Mancino: So in essence we would need to know.., later about that and if I, if the Council would like
to reconsider. Now to reconsider at this point would take those who voted to go ahead to bring it up for
reconsideration.
Roger Knutson: Yes, except technically, that's under Roberts. You can only reconsider it the next meeting
after you've granted approval. I think that was some time ago. I don't remember which meeting it was.
Mayor Mancino: Well we just approved it at the last meeting.
Roger Knutson: I don't recall the last meeting but.
Mayor Mancino: I don't know. I can't remember. So it has to be at the next meeting.
Roger Knutson: To reconsider, yes.
Don Ashworth: Well an entirely different motion basically related to the same issue could occur at any
time. So if this City Council wants to make a decision to not consider the extension to Coulter Boulevard,
it has nothing to do with the plans and specifications. And if they put that on the next agenda and they
voted on it, in effect they've killed.
Roger Knutson: Yes. Oh yes. You could kill the project.
Mayor Mancino: Okay.
Don Ashworth: I do not remember the cost of the roadway. We're talking about basically 7% of the cost
of the roadway. So I'm guessing probably a good guess is somewhere between $50,000.00 and
$100,000.00 is at stake.
Mayor Mancino: Okay. So again, sooner rather than later. Thank you. Anyone else wishing to address
the Council tonight during Visitor Presentation? Seeing none, we'll go forward.
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
PUBLIC HEARING:
RESOLUTION REQUESTING TO PARTICIPATE IN THE 1998 URBAN HENNEPIN
COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM~ PLANNING
ALLOCATION REQUEST OF $50~000 FOR HOUSING REHABILITATION.
Kate Aanenson: Thank you. As you're aware, we have a $50,000.00 allocation so we are.., consolidated
pool. Staff is recommending that we still try to receive a grant and go for $50,000.00. We're
recommending rehabilitation. I've attached a list of high priorities that Hennepin County has for Block
Grant money. We believe that we would have a favorable chance going with the rehabilitation. We're
recommending some spot areas in the city that we would be targeting buyers and trying to get
encouragement to do some rehabilitation. Again this is to keep our housing stock.., whether it be a new
furnace, roofing,.., deck foundations so we are recommending a resolution for your consideration of
approval and $50,000.00.
Mayor Mancino: Great. Thank you. Any questions for staff at this point? Councilman Senn?
Councilman Senn: Kate then, is the entire $50,000.00 going into the housing rehab?
Mayor Mancino: Correct.
Councilman Senn: Okay. And what was the, there's a notation above that in the staff report the senior
center remodeling. What's? Is that a comment left over from?
Kate Aanenson: It could be. That's what we spent the money on.
Mayor Mancino: Previously.
Kate Aanenson: Right. And last year we did.
Councilman Senn: ... okay. Alrighty.
Mayor Mancino: Any other questions? Then may I have a motion please.
Councilman Berquist: I move approval of the grant as outlined.., staff report.
Mayor Mancino: I'll second that.
Resolution #98-22: Councilman Berquist moved, Mayor Mancino seconded to approve a resolution
approving the submittal request and allocating $50,000.00 for housing rehabilitation. All voted in
favor and the motion carried.
CHANHASSEN CINEMA SIGN PLAN~ BOB COPELAND.
Sharmin A1-Jaff: Thank you. Brief background. On January 22, 1996 you approved the site plan for the
entertainment center. Basically dealing with the cinema portion of the entertainment center, you approved a
marquee sign.
Mayor Mancino: Yes. And this was back in '96?
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
Sharmin A1-Jaff: Correct.
Mayor Mancino: The Minutes that I've got.
Sharmin A1-Jaff: Correct. You approved a marquee sign. The intent of the marquee sign was to carry
temporary, individual letters and numbers to display current and/or coming attractions, ratings and show
times and dates. You also approved framed poster display area along the south wall. Posters of the
coming attractions or current movies. The applicant is requesting an amendment to the sign plan. The first
one deals with the marquee sign. The area of the marquee sign is 520 square feet. As mentioned earlier it
was intended to carry the names of the features playing at the theater. Now the applicant is requesting that
it carries the letters, well the word cinema. There are shooting stars off the side. It is a flat surface. There
is a fabric material behind it. It is back lit illuminated. Again the size of this sign is 520 square feet. The
size of the letters, each individual letter is approximately 4 feet high. Our ordinance prohibits panel signs.
Should the City Council decide that this is an acceptable sign, then staff would recommend that the sign be
designed so you have the individual letters and shooting stars would be more dimensional rather than a flat
surface. I would also need to point out that the 520 square feet already exceeds what is permitted by
ordinance as far as square footage on a sign. The second sign that the applicant is requesting deals with
wall mounted signs. The ordinance, and there's a mistake that I have made. When I calculated the wall
area I was under the impression that they had 1,600 square feet. The applicant pointed out that they have a
larger wall area. Based upon that they should get a larger sign. The ordinance allows a maximum sign
area of 240 square feet. The applicant is proposing 171 square foot sign along this south wall. If we add
up the size of the marquee sign to the wall mounted sign, we will arrive to a 676 square feet of total sign
area. Again, the ordinance allows a maximum of 240 square feet. We also believe that the posters are
typically associated with theaters so if you have the posters out there, people will know that this is a
theater. Third sign deals with a free standing pylon sign. As mentioned earlier, and as mentioned in the
staff report, this project was phased. The cinema came ahead of the rest of the entertainment center. Based
upon that, the pylon sign that the applicant is requesting is also in two phases. The sign that they are
proposing has a total area of 120 square feet. It's 15 feet high and it's supposed to carry the names of the
features that will be shown at the theater. With phase 2 the total sign height will be 24 feet and the area is
240 square feet. Issues that deal with the marquee sign. First of all it's off site and would need to be
located on city property. The size of the sign, if approved, this will be the largest sign in the City of
Chanhassen. We had spoken to the applicant and indicated that we will present a development sign to the
City Council. However, the materials of the sign, as well as the size are of concern. And we also believe
that if the features were on the marquee sign, then this will be very repetitious in service. As far as, do you
want me to go through the recommendations?
Mayor Mancino: Sure.
Sharmin A1-Jaff: Okay. As far as the marquee sign. We recommend that the applicant build what was
originally approved, which is basically a marquee sign that carries the names of the features, the times and
the rating. If you decide to approve the word cinema, then we recommend individual lettering as well as
more dimensional shooting stars. As far as the wall mounted sign. If you approve it then, based upon the
correction that we made as far as the size of the lettering and that would be acceptable. However, staff is
recommending that it be eliminated. As far as the pylon free standing sign.
Mayor Mancino: Now are you recommending that because of the original posters that were?
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
Sharmin A1-Jaff: Correct. As far as the free standing sign. If you decide to approve it, we recommend a
different design be submitted as well as the materials be changed.
Mayor Mancino: 24 feet is higher than our ordinance for anybody.
Sharmin A1-Jaff: Correct.
Mayor Mancino: Let alone a pylon sign that abuts a state highway, correct? Give me a little bit of
background also Sharmin, I'm sorry. Are you done?
Sharmin A1-Jaff: I'm done.
Mayor Mancino: I'm sorry about that. Give me a little bit of background for a second. When this was
originally brought in front of Council back in '96, did we pay attention to signage at that point and
etcetera? Some of the minutes that I've read have some very, the variances that were given at that time.
The signage package was very well covered when we looked at this whole entertainment complex at that
time. It's not something that was skimmed over.
Sharmin A1-Jaff: There were some signs that were approved such as the sand blasted signs. These are not
permitted by ordinance. There were also projecting signs. What we're trying to achieve with the theme of
old town, basically bringing in that flavor of old town entertainment center. There is a detailed sign plan
that was approved. It is part of the development contract. Site plan agreement that the City Council
approved. It basically details size of signs, type of lettering used and again it's all part of the package that
the City Council approved.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you. Is the applicant here and would you like to address Council please?
Bob Copeland: Good evening. My name is Bob Copeland and I'd like to say a few things about our sign
program that we're proposing for the new cinema. First of all I think a little more background might be
appropriate. This project has been discussed and in the planning stages for many, many years, as most of
you know. And when we first started talking about it, 8 screens was a pretty big deal, and that would have
been a real large cinema but by today's standards it's small. The industry has changed since we first
proposed this project and got it approved by the City. Today a modem cinema is more like 16 screens.
Also today you don't see very many marquees with titles on them. It's become a thing of the past. Further,
there are other things that have happened in the industry like stadium seating and so on that are becoming
the current way that cinema's are being built. So things have changed a lot since this project was approved
and we think we need to change with it, at least to some degree. Our sign program consists of basically
three signs. And the first one would be the marquee. The southeast comer of the building. The next one
would be... south wall. The third would be... boulevard. The marquee sign we feel, the purpose of the
marquee sign should be to identify the entrance to the cinema and to be entertaining. And the sign that
we're proposing we think accomplishes those two requirements. The material that we're proposing is a 3M
product that's called penaflex. I'll pass this around...
Mayor Mancino: So what do you do, back light it?
Bob Copeland: Right. There would be a fluorescent fixtures, light fixtures behind the.
Mayor Mancino: So there's no 3 dimension to it? It's just a flat piece of canvas?
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
Bob Copeland: Right.
Mayor Mancino: Okay.
Bob Copeland: We think this is a colorful sign. We think it will be an interesting sign. We think it will
attract attention and fit in very well with the idea of an entertainment center. The sign at that location also
proposes to have four neon strips at the bottom of the marquee. This sign faces southeast and toward the
parking lot and away from Highway 5 and away from Market Boulevard so it also is just not an
appropriate location to have titles of the movies. To see those titles a person has to be already committed
to be driving in the parking lot and go out of their way so it's not going to serve a purpose of informing the
public of what's playing and helping them make a decision of whether they want to see a movie or not that
might be playing there. The next sign is the sign on the south wall of the building and this sign, the main
purpose of this sign is to be seen from Highway 5. And we think it's important that the building be
identified from Highway 5. You can see the building but you don't really know what it is without a sign
like this. The three posters that were proposed before really won't be visible from Highway 5. They
probably won't be visible from the parking lot either. To see what's on three posters you'd have to be up
on the elevated walk and you'd have to be right up next to the building. So the three posters really aren't
going to do anything for us. Further, this sign would be within the current sign ordinance. The sum of the
square footages of the marquee sign and the south wall sign is 691 square feet. If you take that as a
percentage of the total wall area, it's only 6.7% of the total wall area for the building and that's a very low
percentage. The last one is a sign out on the boulevard and we are proposing that this sign be something
that would identify the other businesses that are planned for the area as well as the cinema business. It's
the logical place to have titles. It's really the only place to have movie titles that will do any good for
anybody. Either from our standpoint or from the public standpoint to see what's playing. We are not set
on the architecture of the sign. If the city or the council or the staff or somebody would like to suggest a
different architecture, that'd be fine with us. We really don't know what's going to happen next door and,
on either side of us and so we picked a somewhat generic type of architecture that we thought might be
compatible with whatever happens there. But we would certainly go along with recommendations or
stipulations that this be of a, made of different materials or different style. That would be fine with us.
The other thing too is that we proposed a pylon because we thought it would be better for sight lines to look
underneath it but if height is an issue, we're certainly willing to make it a monument sign and have it down
lower to the ground. We are proposing that this sign be done in two phases. Initially it would just be
dealing with the cinema and it's titles for the upcoming movies or the movies rather that are playing at that
time. And it would be designed and constructed in such a manner that additional signage could be added on
top of it and anywhere from 1, 2, or 3 or 4 additional businesses or activities at the entertainment center
could be advertised on the sign the way we've proposed it. And we would suggest that that would go on at
the time that these other businesses get renovated and whatever activities are going to take place there,
actually happen. The size of this sign is dictated largely by the necessity to get the titles on the sign. I
would suggest to you that we have good reasons for the signs that we're proposing and, but if you disagree
and if you would not approve any or all of these signs, I would ask you to tell us what you would approve.
In other words, tell us what you'll approve this but only if it's this way or that way or a different size or a
different configuration or whatever it might be. So that would be very helpful so that we wouldn't have to
take your time again to go over it. So at this point I'll answer any questions that you might have.
Mayor Mancino: Any questions from council members?
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
Councilman Berquist: In the newspaper a number of weeks ago there was an article on a theater project in
Lakeville I believe, and I don't remember the number of screens but I think it was more than 18 and less
than 24.
Bob Copeland: I think it's 18 initially and they plan to go to 30.
Councilman Berquist: As I recall the picture of the gentleman and the development in the background,
there was a marquee sign that denoted that building. Do you remember that?
Bob Copeland: Yes.
Councilman Berquist: So they start out as 24? I mean that's the initial phase is 24 theaters and they're
using a marquee sign.
Bob Copeland: They don't have the titles out there though. They have a marquee sign, and we're
proposing a marquee sign to identify the building and the entrance.
Councilman Berquist: A changeable copy sign...
Bob Copeland: They don't have the titles on.
Councilman Berquist: I thought I remembered that.
Mayor Mancino: They do in Columbus, Ohio. The new Lennox Theater that's a 24... has the original,
what you think of as a marquee sign.., the plexi with the channel black lettering and it says what movies are
on and timing and everything.
Bob Copeland: Yeah, many of the new ones do not. It's not totally one way or another situation but the
Showplace 16 in Coon Rapids doesn't have the titles out at the marquee. I think that the Mann Theater
with 12 titles, they do have it on a marquee. But our situation is a little different in that our marquee faces
southeast, away from any traffic.
Councilman Berquist: Do you mind if I mix questions with the developer and the staff Mayor? Or pass
down the line here and see...
Mayor Mancino: ... when we give comments. Any other questions? Thank you very much.
Bob Copeland: I'll leave this up for now and then we'll take it down when we're done.
Mayor Mancino: This is not a public hearing so we will go ahead and take comments from council
members. This is something normally that in our process would go what, back to Planning Commission at
this point?
Kate Aanenson: If there was a variance required, the Planning Commission has to hold a hearing for a
variance.
Mayor Mancino: So on this there are variances required for, yes.
10
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
Kate Aanenson: Correct. Variance on the type of fabric over.., we don't allow that type of signage. And
then again there's still a question on the size on the wall sign. We believe that that, while the.., it's still a
cap of 240 square feet that we would require.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, and obviously the pylon sign is a variance, etc.
Kate Aanenson: That'd be the third one.
Mayor Mancino: Yep. So what I'd like council members to comment on is, number one. Should we just
send this back to Planning Commission for their review? Number two. If we know how we are going to
vote anyway, let's be done with it and let Mr. Copeland know as a council how we feel. Just not to allow
this to lag on. Councilman Senn.
Councilman Senn: Given the request for tonight, the main thing I want to do I guess was go back and look
at the history which has been rather long on this project. The project was originally approved around 1994
and started to take form and was approved pretty specifically in January, I think it was, 1996. Part of what
I wanted to look at also on the history was the city commitment that was made to the project and what we
were making that commitment for. The history, as far as the Council actions go is pretty clear that the City
did choose to subsidize the entertainment complex project which the cinema is a major component of. But
our really first and only reason for doing that was to achieve effectively a facade on the buildings along
down there which was terrible at least I guess to start with, and we wanted to achieve something very nice
and meaningful and something that would fit in with the old town character, which was the theme down
there. In addition we also committed a lot of dollars to achieve the pedestrian you know circulation
situation and the parking and landscaping improvements that are supposed to go along with the project.
Major component of the project was also effectively the signage as part of the facade. In fact at least from
what I was going to say was defined, we gave $30,000.00 to accomplish.., marquee sign that was in
keeping with effectively what we ended up approving as part of that $30,000.00 contribution to that.
Looking at the issues on the signage and what's being requested, I guess it would be my preference not to
fall back on process in this case and send it back to the Planning Commission unless the applicant wants to
choose that route, but it seems to me that you know, depending on what the Council feels, that might be
kind of a waste of time but that's I think for everybody to kind of say what they feel. In my mind I would
like to see the signage that was originally proposed, that was originally approved and that we effectively
bought off on through, not only as a package of finances or money that went along with it, but we also
bought into with a package of already a significant variances to our normal signage policy. We did give
three variances already to the whole center, including this part of the center to bring, or to allow to proceed
even with that signage system which required three variances. Separate for a moment I guess I'd like to
speak to the off premises signage. I know one issue that's been raised is that it's city property and we can
decide what we'd like to do because it's city property and I really don't think that's the issue. I think the
issue is, do we now want to... I don't think that would be a very prudent decision because I would guess
we'd have somewhere in the neighborhood of 50 to 100 commercial establishments at our doorstep almost
overnight asking for some more presence on Highway 5. That's not taking anything away from them but...
people would be a prudent request. Thereby, I don't know what it is now out there, 50,000 cars a day or
whatever Don? I don't know. I think that's certainly I would guess far more preferable from an
advertising basis than not being out there but I don't think that's a decision we would either want to open
the door to or advocate any steps forward in the future so from that issue very specifically I, everything
here.., or I should say more strongly than.., not consider that type of a change in our ordinance at this point.
Likewise, at least from my perspective, I'd really like to see what we were effectively promised as part of
that...
11
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
Mayor Mancino: ... could see it from Highway 5 very visibly. Now obviously there isn't a building...
Councilman Senn: Well I think it's very visible from TH 5. Maybe it's my problem because of my age but
I doubt if I could read it anyway. Because I have my contacts in my eyes and my reading glasses on to
cover every angle but still probably couldn't read it. But I mean quite honestly, and maybe I look at it
uniquely that way but to me the canopy and the.., on the marquee is part of, in my mind, establishing a
motif. I don't know what the right word for it is, but an ambience of the theater. You know again the
ambience we're trying to achieve down here was an old town, old town configuration and this marquee
element, at least in my mind at the time, that was part of it. I don't think anybody makes a decision on
going to a movie by movie posted along the road. At least I don't know of too many people who are
effectively dashing down the road and kind of make that sudden right mm and.., hours or more of your time
to watching a movie on a moment's notice. Most people make that decision long before, I mean movie
theaters in my mind's a very destination orientated place and people, they see an advertisement on a movie,
or they want to see a certain movie or product, they'll look up in the paper where it is and they'll decide
which theater they're going to...that sign when it gets there in my mind is more a matter of the reminder of
the specific show time and again to me creates more of this ambience than it is actually creating, I'm going
to say an advertising message that's going to create .... so that's just the way I look at it.
Mayor Mancino: Before we go on I just have one more question for Sharmin. Looking at the sign plan
that was approved, again with this whole development. One of them says the letters shall be restricted tot
the approved building sign band so they're actually in the development. There was an area where there
would be signage. It was incorporated into the design of the building.
Sharmin A1-Jaff: Correct. Although it's not that easy to see, but it's basically...
Mayor Mancino: Councilman Mason.
Councilman Mason: I think Councilman Senn's comments are right on the mark on this. I concur with off
premise signage is just a huge issue and that, and I would certainly have to go through Planning
Commission. I also have to admit to not going to as many movies as I'd like to but I do check the
newspaper as opposed to seeing what's on the marquee so I, the only place where Councilman Senn and I
might differ a little bit on is I think if, regardless of my current feelings about what's proposed before us
here which I think it's kind of obvious that by the end of this I'm not real in favor of it, I still would want to
hear what Planning Commission had to say about it. So if in fact variances are requested here, I guess I
would think it should go through Planning Commission but certainly my feeling right now is we do have
what I think is a pretty good sign package in place and I quite honestly can't imagine the City agreeing to
off premise signage to that extent. To any extent at this point.
Councilman Berquist: Working backwards, the off premise sign is not one that I'm very fond of. Not all
people get the newspaper and I've, although I do get the newspaper, there have been times when I've driven
by the monument sign or the pylon sign at Highway 7 and saw oh, that's playing there. Therefore we'll go
there. So it's not a matter of choosing to take a right and go spend two hours in a movie, but if you're
planning one this weekend perhaps. I'm not in favor of off site signage. However, I'd like there to be some
other method.., can be accomplished. One question that I do have for Bob is that, this building has always
faced southwest and we approved the marquee sign with the building facing southwest and with the 8, it
was 6 theaters originally and then it got changed to 8. I went along with that. I understand your concern
about visibility. However I also agree with Councilman Senn and Councilman Mason regarding
12
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
destinations and the original concept of the whole area was the boardwalk. The old town boardwalk.
Destination in itself. Strolling area. Something that was very user friendly. Very pedestrian friendly.
Very citizen friendly, and that's one of the reasons that we, that I chose to vote in favor of it and commit
tax increment dollars to the construction of the outside. Now let me just play devil's advocate for a
moment. You talk about the current trend in theaters going to more and more screens. How could a
marquee sign as originally approved, be amended, if it could be, to address an additional 5, 6, 8 screens? Is
that possible? Or practical. Or does the appearance to the original 520 square foot marquee sign in effect
limit the expansion of the theater? The same question that I have for the applicant perhaps as well as staff.
Mayor Mancino: But we're not talking about expansion of the theater.
Councilman Berquist: I know we're not but I'm trying to look beyond just this particular issue at hand.
We did approve marquee signs, and I mean if I had to make a decision right now without, well I would vote
that we adhere to what we originally approved. We go along with the marquee sign. I like the idea of the
movie posters along the side of the building. I'm not in favor of off site parking. Any other modifications
from that I would just as soon that it go back to the Planning Commission.
Roger Knutson: Mayor? Just to point out the obvious. When you have 14 screen theaters, you're not
showing 14 different movies. You might only be showing 8 or 9 movies, or less. You have multiple
showings of the same movie on different screens.
Councilman Berquist: It may be obvious to you but it wasn't to me.
Roger Knutson: That's why I said it.
Mayor Mancino: Thank you. I really don't need to say much because I think I feel the way the other
Council members feel. I, as I was not part of the Council at the time when this was approved. As I've
gone back and looked at the concepts that were approved and studied them and studied the Minutes, and
read them a couple times. The original plan was very good. It was, the detail was there. It was thought
out and I think that that's what the Council at the time decided when they gave TIF financing to it, etc.
And I think the marquee sign is extremely important to that feeling that, that old town feeling which the
architect and the architecture, the architect drew, really wanted in that area. So I would like to see it go
back to the original concept and Bob, I don't know if we can be more specific with you on it. I certainly do
have a copy of the Edina Theater and the marquee here and what's been done but I think it pretty well says
it in the, in what was approved on January 22, 1996. The site plan review. It talks about the poster. The
cinema shall be permitted framed poster displays for current and/or coming attractions at the south
elevation only. It talks about at the cinema marquee and restaurant sign bands, lettering on a Plexiglas face
shall be permitted and that the cinema marquee, temporary individual letters and numbers may be used to
display current and/or coming attractions, ratings and show times and dates. So I think it's pretty well
spelled out here and I think that staff has, and I guess I'm asking staff, has a clear idea of what was
represented for signage that we wanted. May I have a motion?
Councilman Berquist: I will move that.
Mayor Mancino: I think you can take maybe the first.
Councilman Berquist: Do we really even need to make a motion? I'll move that, well.., motion that we
stand by our original approvals on...
13
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
Councilman Senn: We reaffirm our previous action on approval on the...
Councilman Berquist: Pick that up Nann? I so move that.
Councilman Mason: Second.
Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Mason seconded that the City Council reaffirm their
previous action related to the signs for the cinema project per the TIF requirements. All voted in
favor and the motion carried.
Roger Knutson: Mayor, so the record's clear. That's based upon the Findings in the planning report and
the fact that you have given prior approval and this is a TIF financed project and that you have discretion
under your TIF documents as to what the front of this building is going to look like. Am I understanding
correct?
Mayor Mancino: Yes.
Roger Knutson: Thank you.
Mayor Mancino: Thank you.
1998 TRAIL PROJECT~ APPROVAL PLANS & SPECIFICATIONS~ RECEIVE
AUTHORIZATION TO BID.
Todd Hoffman: Thank you Mayor Mancino, members of City Council.
Councilman Senn: ... I thought you were the parks department. We've got enough paper on this now it
must have killed at least 100 trees.
Todd Hoffman: Putting it all to good use.
Mayor Mancino: Did you put front and back?
Todd Hoffman: Maybe we'll bury it in the trails.
Councilman Senn: I have a separate pile in my home. I'm about ready to expand the room to take care of
the project.
Councilman Mason: Use it for mulch.
Todd Hoffman: Since June of 1997 when this project was approved, staff has been working to bring us to
this point with the Council, the Park Commission, the Park Task Force and the citizens to approval of the
project. It was just a couple of weeks ago on February 23rd that Dave presented to you the proposed plans
and specifications. Since that time we have continued meeting with residents to refine these plans to a point
that we feel comfortable presenting them to you tonight requesting your approval. The Park and
Recreation Commission and the Planning Commission have reviewed the project a total of five times. Both
commissions have recommended that construction of all six segments as designed be completed. As
14
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
Council is aware, there has been some modifications over that period of review that have deleted sections
and added those sections back. In order to accomplish that, additional dollars above the original $1.24
million budget will be needed. The commission struggled with this decision but on January 27th they
recommended that the City Council allocate up to $300,000.00 from the reserves, from the park and trail
acquisition and development fund to accomplish the 1998 trail project. That budget amendment would
raise the total budget estimate to $1.54 million. Their reasoning in making that recommendation is that the
general reserve of the park and trails acquisition and development fund was established for just such a
purpose. When a project came along that was in the best interest of the community but the full amount of
the project budget was not available, this fund could then be accessed to accomplish the project. So tonight
it is my recommendation, and you certainly will hear from Dave and members of the audience, but that the
City Council approve the plans and specifications for the City's 1998 trail project and authorize bidding
and then concurrent with that you would make the budget adjustments necessary.
Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Any questions for staff, for Todd at this point? Councilman Senn.
Councilman Senn: Todd, I just want to understand it correctly. The park and trail acquisition and
development fund is our trail fund that as development occurs and houses are built and the contributions
are made, that is where the money goes, correct?
Todd Hoffman: Correct.
Councilman Senn: City wide?
Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you.
Dave Nyberg: Thank you. Mayor Mancino, members of the Council. I think what I'll do is go through
the plans in a very similar fashion to last time. Just give you a brief update on what changes have occurred
since we were before you two weeks ago and then we'll allow audience members to discuss or ask any
questions or provide any comments by segments.
Mayor Mancino: No, I never allow anyone to speak at these.
Dave Nyberg: There have been very few changes to the plans. As Mr. Hoffman said, we have met with
some staff members. We've met with your engineering staff last week. Received some good comments
from them. We received a letter from Carver County dated March 6th where they indicated that the plans
include all of their revisions that they requested, basically giving their blessings to the plan set. Their only
stipulation was that we work on and complete these agreement with the County for mm back of Galpin
Boulevard at some time in the future. And we're continuing to work on that agreement at this time. As far
as MnDot, we've continued to work with Mr. Bill Warden. The will be issuing a limited use permit to the
City at some time in the future. As of yet we do not have any written correspondence from MnDot.
However, we've talked to Mr. Warden on the phone a couple times last week and his comments that the has
to date are very minor. He said himself that it was nothing that couldn't be addressed during construction
just by simple agreements by a letter or something similar to that that we would adhere to as policies. And
I'll provide a couple other comments on MnDot issues.
Mayor Mancino: I was going to say, explain what limited use. Does that mean MnDot says we can only
walk on them but we can't ride on them or you know?
15
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
Dave Nyberg: It will be in their stipulations of the permit but yes, it means you can use their right-of-way
for a limited purpose that in this case they would designate for a non-motorized vehicle trail.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you.
Dave Nyberg: And with that I think I'll go through the plans.
Mayor Mancino: Dave, do you want to go through all trails and just for modifications that have been made
and then we'll, people who want to say something can just do it in any order.
Dave Nyberg: Yeah.
Mayor Mancino: Okay.
Dave Nyberg: You mean go through all the, just all at once? Okay. Yeah, it won't take very long, like I
said, I'll just briefly touch on them and I'll use this index sheet for each segment, unless there's any
questions from the Council to direct me to individual sheets. Sheet 2 is the summary or the index sheet for
the Highway 7 trail. Very few modifications to Highway 7 as far as the alignment is concerned. We added
crosswalks at all road crossings and that's per City Engineer, staff recommendation. We've added a zebra
crosswalk at Minnewashta Parkway, and we are continuing to discuss the addition of a couple changes on
the trail crossings on future road closings for Highway 7. We may do that as part of this contract. We
may not. That's going to be before you I believe at the next Council meeting. And as far as MnDot's
concerned, we've had good cooperation from them on what we're proposing to do. In several locations the
trail will meet their proposed slope, coming down from the road so that the trail will not have to be
reconstructed when Highway 7 is rebuilt. The only issue outstanding at this point for them is whether they
would require us to install a portion of the guardrail near the border states. There's a guardrail that exists
there today and as part of their project they will be extending that to the west maybe 200 feet or so.
They're considering having that be part of this contract as well. And they have not provided feedback on
that other than to say that they are discussing it.
Councilman Berquist: Is that one of their minor, relatively minor incorporated into the project changes
during construction items?
Dave Nyberg: No. That would be something, if they were to direct us to do that, I would want to get that
in this bid package. However, the big question there would be, who's going to pay for that. Obviously we
don't have a problem putting it on this project but we would look to them to provide the money now to fund
that rather than later through probably a cooperative agreement or something. Any questions on Highway
7? I believe most, if not all of the residents here to discuss the project are from the Galpin Boulevard
segment so I could talk about that last maybe. So it's all fresh in our minds when we talk about it. So why
don't we just jump ahead to Powers Boulevard. Sheet 46. We had very little change on Powers Boulevard.
Again we've added crosswalks at all road crossings. Along the alignment. Not zebra crosswalks but a 6
inch white stripe, either side of the crosswalk just to designate those pedestrian ways. We've added a few
trail stop signs to warn pedestrians that even though the crosswalk is striped, they should stop and look
both ways before crossing. We have changed the name of the street, that was incorrect previously at our
meeting on the south end to Saddlebrook Curve, and other than that we really haven't changed much on
Powers. That remains pretty much the same as when we were here two weeks ago.
Mayor Mancino: Are we going to have to remove telephone poles on Powers?
16
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
Dave Nyberg: Move, yes.
Mayor Mancino: Can we make sure that when we move them, talking to Mr. Hennessy last night, that they
can, you know they can make them taller. They can arch them more so they don't get in the way of the
trees that we're saving. So I mean there is a way to do that and I can tell you very generally, I know that
John Hennessy on Galpin talked, there are things they can do.
Dave Nyberg: Yeah, what they install the pole with an ally arm coming off the side so that it basically
holds the wires out where the wires may be now, but the pole can be moved back.
Mayor Mancino: Yep.
Dave Nyberg: I will say NSP's been very cooperative and they are planning on doing all the pole relocates
prior to award or construction of this project. They think they can have everything taken care of and out of
the way, except for a few poles here and there where they'll just be holding poles or it has to be done during
construction.
Councilman Berquist: And is that something, that's something that we pay for?
Dave Nyberg: Actually no. They've agreed, as long as the poles can be moved within reason, and we're
not requesting every pole to be moved, they will move those requested to date anyway at no charge to the
City. Sheet 69 is the index sheet for the Bluff trail project. Again this trail was basically the same as last
time we came to you. We have made some minor modifications on the north end by the Nelson residence.
Lot 6. We've added a couple of culvert crossings underneath the trail for drainage purposes. We met with
them last week and received some input from them on removing their wire fence. There's an old wire fence
that's going to come down. They just wanted to make sure that would get taken off the project limits and
scraped. There's a pile of debris we're going to take out of the project area. Other than that, Bluff Creek
remains the same as two weeks ago.
Mayor Mancino: So what we walked, or what some of us walked two weeks ago is the same?
Dave Nyberg: Yes. Sheet 80 of 112 is the connection trail. Again this trail remains virtually the same.
We've made a slight change to the crosswalk on 86th Street showing a 6 inch stripe, either side of the walk
across 86th. A zebra crosswalk remains. We've shown a zebra crosswalk painted on the highway at the
existing crossing towards the north end of our project limits. And based on comments and what we've seen
in the field there is some signage that's already installed there so we've deleted the signage that we
proposed to only show the stop signs marking the trail crossings. Any questions on the connection trail?
Of I should mention one other thing. In response to, or on the same issue of guardrail on Highway 7 of
MnDot requesting it, they have asked that we take off the guardrail at the comer of the Klingelhutz
property on this trail and their feeling is that, that's really more of a hazard than a safety feature, primarily
because we still have to have an opening for the driveway that's quite wide. And the real danger with
guardrails is not the guardrail as such, or as much as it is the impact itinuaters on the ends. Those are
what really pose a hazard because a car can impact those head on and they do have more impact resistant
attenduators. Now they're more the stem that comes off the guardrail with kind of a round section at the
end. However, those are still kind of a hazard and you actually have those either side of the driveway as we
proposed before so we have taken that guardrail off of this plan set. We can certainly add it back on but
17
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
the City can probably save about $20,000.00 by removing that stretch of guardrail and in reality it
probably doesn't pose that much of a help for safety in that area.
Mayor Mancino: The connection trail is Highway 101 ?
Dave Nyberg: Yes. Yes ma'am. Any questions?
Mayor Mancino: No. The crossing is still just...
Dave Nyberg: Yes. Well it's actually, it's on Sheet 83. I'm not sure, it's kind of confusing what east,
west, north and south are at that location but.
Mayor Mancino: But it's where the entrance to Mission Hills is.
Dave Nyberg: Yes. Yeah, just south of that 86th Street actually. Sheet 91 is the index for Pioneer Trail,
Great Plains Boulevard trail or Lake Riley trail as we've called it also. Very few changes on this segment
with the exception of the change through the Schott property. You may remember that Mr. Schott
appeared at the Council meeting prior to this one. The property is shown on Sheet 93 and 94. We met
with Mr. Schott last week and discuss different options with him, or the lack of options really, depending
on how you look at it. But what we've done is we've removed a retaining wall, which will save the City
considerable amounts of money and we've shown the trail closer to Pioneer Trail and then graded out with
an embankment slope off the trail, matching into the existing slope down from the road. The area of hatch
pattern through his tree row on Sheets 93 and 94 shows generally what the impacts to this property will be.
The called Friday I guess and yeah, it was Friday, and asked for an update on this. He called again this
morning. I left him a voice mail around noon explaining that, or actually I should back up. What he had
requested when we talked was, to try and minimize tree removal even within the trail easement if at all
possible without sacrificing the safety of the trail. And what we've been able to do, and you can see that
from the hatch pattern is that on the east and west ends of the encroachment through his trees.., we staked
the trail. Center line stake and then back of permanent and temporary easements. For construction
purposes we'll have to stake offset stakes so that they're not in the middle of the construction work zone.
Some of these areas may not even be staked. They may be benchmarks painted on the pavements. You
know a little nail with a circle around it or some kind of stationing and elevation and then our inspector will
use those benches, probably at 50 or 100 intervals to tie in where the trail actually will be built. Once
those benches are established we can virtually tell anybody how the trail is going to look.
Mayor Mancino: And you're going to let people know or we are going to let people know when we're
going to be staking and when we're going to start construction?
Dave Nyberg: Yeah, what I've suggested to Todd is to do a mailing in the form of some kind of a
construction bulletin or a construction newsletter. We've got a list of 700 or so addresses. We'll send out
a mailing to everyone so that everyone on the project knows where the contractor is in the city. What order
the trails may be completed in and then we'll just update that as the contractor moves around, about every
3-4 weeks or so.
Mayor Mancino: Okay. Another thing that would be helpful on that letter Todd is to have, you know the
contact person so if I go down and see something I don't like, I get to call that contact person.
Dave Nyberg: Actually my phone number will be there, along with our inspector's phone number.
18
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
Councilman Mason: And the Mayor's phone number is on that too isn't it?
Dave Nyberg: We'll put that on there. At least on Galpin Boulevard, right?
Mayor Mancino: Nobody lives on Galpin Boulevard, are you kidding. Okay.
Dave Nyberg: If there aren't any questions on Pioneer, I can go back to Galpin Boulevard. Galpin
Boulevard index sheet is Sheet 21. Again very little changes on this segment. We've shown crosswalks at
all the crossing streets, as you're coming up Galpin from the south end to the north. Some just minor
modifications to some drainage issues pointed out to us by staff. We've added a catch basin on the north
end near the mm lane area, just north of Lake Lucy Road. And we have added a sign at the pedestrian
crossing. Actually we've added signage at all three crossings associated with the trail project where there's
a zebra crosswalk across the high speed area with no stop sign showing. A reflection of the change
legislation about not only yielding to pedestrians in a crosswalk but actually stopping for pedestrians in a
crosswalk, we're proposing to post those crossings with a sign that says stop for pedestrians in crosswalk.
It's the same size almost as a speed limit sign. It's like, well not quite that big but it's a regulation sign.
White sign with black letters.
Councilman Berquist: Where's that going... ?
Dave Nyberg: On Galpin Boulevard it's actually in two locations.
Councilman Berquist: By Brinker?
Dave Nyberg: Yeah. Sheet 23. The other one's at the very north end near Pheasant Drive.
Councilman Berquist: And wasn't there also some talk, and maybe you al ready talked, said this while I
was looking through this... Also some talk about moving the thing further up.
Dave Nyberg: Sheet 30 shows the signage, stop for pedestrian in crosswalk. Along with an advanced
warning pedestrian sign. Just about 300 feet up the road.
Mayor Mancino: And towards the bottom of dead man's curve.
Councilman Berquist: Right by the northwest comer of the Sand property is that initial crosswalk sign?
Dave Nyberg: Yes.
Councilman Berquist: And that's 300 yards?
Dave Nyberg: Feet.
Councilman Berquist: 300 feet?
Dave Nyberg: Yeah actually.
Councilman Berquist: How far is that pedestrian.., pedestrian crosswalk?
19
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
Dave Nyberg: Probably about 100 feet. Actually even shorter than that.
Councilman Berquist: That's far enough, given the topography of that... ?
Dave Nyberg: The sign distances from the walkway are at the regulatory established distances based on
the design speed through that area.
Councilman Berquist: Well that's assuming everybody's going the speed limit, is that what you're saying?
Dave Nyberg: Yeah we could, at the last meeting we talked about additional signage. Something at the
top of the hill. Pedestrian crossing ahead.
Mayor Mancino: Too much and people just won't even look at them.
Councilman Berquist: Yeah, I don't want that.
Dave Nyberg: Yeah I mean you could really do, we could move the advanced warning sign farther up the
hill. Yeah, you could really I'd say do anything but.
Councilman Berquist: When I go down that road, especially in the winter time, that is just, that's a curve
that makes you wonder.
Dave Nyberg: One other change we have done is, and you can see it on your plans on Sheet 30. Across
from the trail at Pheasant Drive we've added almost a little triangular shaped island area with curb and
gutter. Before we had a crosswalk at this location but it really crossed pedestrians to nowhere. So they
couldn't get up, get going into Pheasant Drive so we provided a small landing there just to get them out of
the street. If they're crossing westward, they'll be able to stand there and look both ways. Otherwise, if
they're coming back, they can stand there before they move up Pheasant Drive.
Councilman Berquist: A sidewalk up Pheasant Drive there, is there?
Dave Nyberg: No.
Mayor Mancino: Any questions at this time on any of the trails?
Dave Nyberg: Thank you.
Mayor Mancino: ... ask you to answer questions...
Dave Nyberg: Certainly.
Mayor Mancino: Anyone who isn't from Galpin Boulevard that would like to address the City Council at
this time, please do so. Anyone from, that lives on Galpin Boulevard, please come forward and if you have
any questions for us or explanations or want to know where we live.
Gary Nyberg: Mayor, members of the Council. My name is Gary Nyberg and I live at 6410 Galpin
Boulevard and Dave and I are not related at all, at least as far as we know. Actually I wanted to come here
20
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
tonight to kind of tell you a little bit about our plate and that we do support the trails throughout the city
but we do have some specific concerns about our property. I think that you can see from some of the maps
that, and the details on them and I'm not sure if Dave has, I think the does have the same section on.
There's not a lot of detail in that map that's easy to figure out exactly what's going on. This is Melody
Hill in here and this is our property right along here and actually off this map a little bit.
Mayor Mancino: Hold on. David, can you help us get to where the Nyberg property is?
Gary Nyberg: It's actually, we taped a couple things together.
Mayor Mancino: 20 and 30.
Dave Nyberg: Yeah, they're right almost on, well they are on the dividing line between the sheets.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, thank you.
Gary Nyberg: And we purchased our property in about 1990 and it stayed pretty much that way. As you
can tell we took some pictures to bring along just to kind of give you the impact of what that is. Now this
is Galpin Boulevard/Melody Hill right here. The intersection, and this is the drive into the property right
here and these are the trees all along the edge which are fairly close and are fairly significant trees. Some
of them being, there's a couple about 20 foot tall Colorado Blue Spruce and there's other probably 10 foot
tall arborvitae, some of which during the time that we've owned the property have, there are a few that
have been, that have perished in that zone. But what that, I don't know if you can tell from this photo but it
really does afford a fair amount of privacy, both visual and acoustic for our property and as it stands right
now, most of those arborvitae will be taken out by this trail and possibly one of the Colorado Blue Spruce,
the larger ones. There are two spruce that flank the entry to the driveway and those are definitely in
jeopardy. The arborvitae that extend along here are on the adjacent landowner's property. We also have
further on, this is a view actually looking north towards Excelsior and you can see the arborvitae in this
zone again. Again, fairly significant trees. And further down the property here is our other trees which
you can see are actually very tall pine trees, some of which are in jeopardy based on the specific location of
this trail. As I said, we supported this trail and it was based on our initial understanding that where this
trail was going to be located, that a number of these trees would have to be relocated but at least our initial
understanding was that that was not at our own personal cost. It's as things have been revised, actually
there was a petition as this segment was dropped from consideration, there was a petition that was
circulated and we did sign that petition. Again with the understanding though that the trees that were going
to be taken on our property would somehow be replaced, not at our cost, and in some manner. Whether it's
a new tree or whether they would be relocated. Actually a couple weeks ago I think both Todd and Dave
came out to the house and we walked the property and looked at things specifically and that was really the
first time that I had the understanding that it was going to impact us financially and we anticipate that just
the removal of the trees, or moving of the trees could impact us by as much as $1,000.00 to $2,000.00 for
this section of the trail. And we base that on conversations we've had with tree movers who actually have
told us that as opposed to the $40.00 that we were initially told to move a tree, it was more like $175.00 for
a tree of that magnitude that we have along there and that's just for the arborvitae. And we also spoke with
the city forester and the city forester told us that you really don't have very good luck moving arborvitae
and that the success rate was really very low for survival, which is obviously we wouldn't want to pay for
moving the trees at the year later they would die anyway. So this is part of our concern. The other part was
that we really didn't know where this trail was going to go. We wanted to know, it also does impact the
way our driveway works. It really isn't evidence from these maps but the driveway splits off and goes in
21
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
two directions right as you enter the property and it's not very deep where it's a flat portion of the
driveway. And the intersection of the pathway and the driveway gets to be fairly complicated. We're not
sure that that's going to be able to remain that way without us having to somehow reconfigure our
driveway, which again would be a cost above and beyond just moving the trees. What we requested after
the visit from Todd and Dave was that we asked that maybe along our property the specific location of the
path would be staked so that we could understand the full impact of what was going to happen there and we
could understand where the retaining wall was. The retaining wall construction is going to probably affect
some of those very large pine trees and probably cause them not to survive. And we were told that that was
not possible. That we could not see exactly where it was staked and again we just want to get, we want to
get an understanding for where that is and I think we have some concerns about the total impact. We had
some solutions too for, if it was that we were going to have to pay, our solution I guess was that we felt
that the moving of the trees was something that should be considered under the project cost and that as an
example, the width of the pathway being 8 feet plus a 2 foot buffer, I believe seems, you know that at all
points it may not need to be exactly that wide and the cost savings that could be reached by narrowing that
pathway even one foot perhaps along this piece of property could be used to compensate us for the loss of
the trees. Again our biggest concern is that with the loss of those trees, there will be considerably loss in
privacy and they are significant trees which are going to be difficult to replace. I think that's it.
Mayor Mancino: Thank you. Any questions? Anybody else wishing, and then we'll come back to that
and ask both David and Todd questions because I think we kind of understand that. I do, living there.
Anybody else that would like to come in front of the Council and ask any questions? Provide moral
support.
Councilman Senn: It might be easier to maybe kind of give us their response.
Mayor Mancino: I mean is there anybody else who has anything to say tonight on this, on the trails?
Okay, then we'll close it and. So tell us what, what are the options here? And how did you come up with
them? I mean are all the trees and what we're seeing right now are all the trees going? How many? Etc.
Actually it might be helpful to have the pictures. And what are the options David and? Yeah, if you can
kind of put, thank you. Because most of them starting from the south are arborvitae, aren't they?
Dave Nyberg: Yeah, the smaller trees in the fore ground are the arborvitae that, we're not sure when they
were planted. Both Gary and his wife Sarah said they were planted before they moved into the house, so
they've been there for quite some time. The key for us here is that they're in the right-of-way and project
wide we have not made a promise to anyone about transplanting trees or compensating people for trees that
are in the right-of-way. Mr. Schott was here two weeks ago and although his trees aren't in the right-of-
way, they're in a trail easement.., in a sense for the purposes of this project, can just as easily be considered
right-of-way. And that's really why we proposed what we've proposed as far as having some of these trees
removed. We certainly don't like to see these taken down. They'd be a nice amenity to the trail if we could
fit the trail in without removing them. Some of them, the arborvitae's are very close to the boundary of the
trail but given what impact you'd have the tree by putting the trail so close to it and trying to maintain a 2
foot clear zone between the edge of the trail and any brush or branches or shrubbery or anything like that,
in a sense they may pose some kind of hazard. None of the trees we're proposing to remove at this time are
on private property.
Mayor Mancino: Even the big spruce?
22
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
Dave Nyberg: Well we're not necessarily proposing to remove those. There is one tree at the driveway, I
think it's shown on the plans, is within the right-of-way. Some of the others that are, it's difficult to tell or
gauge any depth perception on these photos but there are some on the site that are on private property that
will most likely remain in place. I mean they'll be virtually undisturbed. We're not proposing any
easements from this property at this time, temporary or permanent to do the work. So we have to really
complete all the work within the right-of-way anyway.
Councilman Berquist:...
Dave Nyberg: Yeah, I think so here for sure.
Mrs. Nyberg:...
Dave Nyberg: Well I guess I'm not sure what big one we're talking about.
Mrs. Nyberg: There is one very large tree. Very large. The largest tree. The trail seems to be underneath
the drip line...
Mayor Mancino: Seems to be, yeah.
Mrs. Nyberg: And if they do that...
Councilman Berquist: ... because we're getting to that point.
Mayor Mancino: A couple questions. First of all, when are we going to get them staked? I mean can't we
do a final staking now? On that property.
Dave Nyberg: You could but my fear would be you'd have many requests for the same information. I
mean basically it would be a lot easier for us to stake the trail. Easier for the residents to visually see
what's going to happen. It'd be easier for us to tell the same thing. I mean given my druthers and if we
had free rein of city finances, we'd go ahead and stake the whole thing.
Mayor Mancino: But I'm saying...
Councilman Senn: Didn't we already do one?
Dave Nyberg: Yeah, you already did one, that's correct. In December. That staking was different than the
one you're going to have for construction but yeah. You have paid for a staking.
Mayor Mancino: Eventually we're going to have to do a second, final staking anyway.
Councilman Senn: Part of our big contract increase, which was for that second staking.
Dave Nyberg: Yeah, actually the first one was in the contract increase. The original staking, or the
original budget always included construction staking.
Mayor Mancino: What happens, do you know exactly which trees will come down?
23
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
Dave Nyberg: No. I'd be lying to you ifI said I did. You know and frankly.
Mayor Mancino: Tell me a lie.
Councilman Mason: Oh go ahead and lie.
Dave Nyberg: I can't do that. I could tell you.
Mayor Mancino: No seriously, thank you. I mean that in all seriousness.
Dave Nyberg: You know when we go out and start doing this project, this will not be the only property
where we're looking at this issue. When we're right out there, we're down to the few inches between
things. We're involving Jill Sinclair to talk about roots and tree damage and all that for trees in the right-
of-way or wherever.
Mayor Mancino: You're going to hear from us all again?
Dave Nyberg: No. Hopefully not. If we're doing our job properly, we're going to work with residents and
they're not going to be before you with issues like this. I mean these plans are the final plans. We're
asking for your approval of those but the project isn't complete until we're completely done with the project
and hopefully everybody's trees that are still there are flourishing and some trees are down and gone but
everybody was aware of it. There were no surprises. We even saved a few.
Mayor Mancino: Well you've done a good job. I mean that's why we have one person here tonight. What
about narrowing the trail a little bit there, and again I don't know how we looked at all these options
without knowing where the trail's going there. I mean can we wait and when we see final staking or close
to final staking, make some revisions?
Todd Hoffman: I guess I'd like to respond to that question and then a few more that were raised during
Mr. Nyberg, Gary Nyberg's presentation. The trail width is established largely by the uses you see on
these trails. The combination of uses. The variety. You'll have cyclists of certain skill levels on these
trails. Inline skates on these trails and you need to allow for that passing activity to occur on the trail.
Secondly, we follow these with a V-plow which is about 7 ½ feet wide and mounted on the front end of a
pick-up truck and so we narrow those trails down and we take away the ease of maintenance if you would
have to drive off of that trail and then go back on it at other points so narrowing it in certain segments has
been requested numerous times along the entire segment, but again we have stayed clear of that option. As
far as cost savings on that, they would be very, very marginal if you would narrow it up. The rock's there.
The pavers are there and so there's really not a cost savings so I can't advocate narrowing this trail in any
segment. Have not done that to date.
Mayor Mancino: There's always a first time.
Todd Hoffman: Always a first time. Back to the understanding of compensation. I clearly do not know
where that would ever have come from. If it was an assumption, then that's something different but again,
I don't believe I ever gave that understanding. Dave would have to speak for himself. When we met on
site and I referred to the cost or the investment to move those trees, we wanted to find options. We wanted
to explore options as we have done with all the other landowners that are in this same situation. Those
trees are in the right-of-way but you know they feel like they're part of our property. How can we bring
24
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
them out of the right-of-way and onto our property? And the quotes I gave Gary that day are completely
accurate from past experience that I've had with the movers which I informed him about and said I would
provide him on a sheet and once they're on site, we have moved many trees for about $40.00 per tree.
Once they're on site and can just go from one site to the next, back and forth and back and forth, they can
complete that very quickly. Move half a dozen trees in an hour and they're paid you know $240.00 an
hour to move trees which is doing good work for, and the homeowners. As far as restaking, I spoke at
length with Sarah about that and this is one location where you can actually get a pretty accurate idea of
what's going on because we're going just off of the back of the white line that's on the road. And so we're
going off of that 2 feet to the curb and then you would measure from that curb line back 2 feet which is a
bituminous boulevard if you will, and then the 8 feet trail. And so anywhere along that alignment that you
would take those measurements, you know 2 feet, 2 feet, 8 feet, 12 feet, you can get an accurate delineation
of where the back side of that trail is going to be. And so again we have stayed away from staking people's
yards again as a part of this to explain where this trail would go to save those costs. That's all I have.
Mayor Mancino: Again, you're making it very clear. If they take from the edge of Galpin, or where the
white line is on the edge and go 12 feet, that's where the back of the trail will be.
Dave Nyberg: Yeah, actually the better way, that would probably work but a better way to do it would be
to take a measurement from the center line, provided you can watch for traffic. The base of the curb will
be 14 feet from center line. And then the back of the curb will be, or the back of the trail, excuse me, will
be 10 feet beyond the face of the curb. And the reason for that is the pavement and striping out there may
be irregular. I mean when they're striping a shoulder line like that, they may.
Mayor Mancino: Now you said 14 feet then 107
Dave Nyberg: Yeah, that's correct.
Mayor Mancino: 24 feet, okay.
Dave Nyberg: It's actually on the plans in the typical sections. If you mm back to Sheet 21.
Mayor Mancino: Have you guys done that?
Gary Nyberg: We talked to the County and...
Dave Nyberg: That's, what that is is that's the back line of their right-of-way.
Mayor Mancino: That's where the right-of-way goes all the way. It isn't your property. That's what the
County owns.
Gary Nyberg: Not for this project.
Mayor Mancino: Only 24 feet. You don't want to plant again in that 33 feet. But the trail will go, the
furthest the trail will go is 24 feet.
Dave Nyberg: Yeah, plus the small, there's a 6 inch dimension for the width of the curb itself in the middle
of that so really 24 1/2 feet.
25
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
Mayor Mancino: So I would think that that would.., and measure that...they're doing that .... any
comments?
Councilman Senn: About what? The thing overall or this specifically? No, no great ideas. It's the same
problem we experience time and time again. I mean it's really all you can say about it. I mean people
plant in the right-of-way.., had no idea it was in the right-of-way.
Councilman Berquist: ... trails in areas that have been developed for years and it's definitely a learning
curve on this one.., but it's still painful.
Mayor Mancino: I'd like to see the markings after, you know they're done... Is there a retaining wall that's
got to be built?
Dave Nyberg: Yes, there's a short retaining wall on the south end of their property. If you know the
property, I don't know if, it's real bushy.
Mayor Mancino: Where the woody area is?
Dave Nyberg: Yeah. On the south end by, there's a power pole there that's just kind of embedded in the
mass of growth. Real, it's just grown wild. That's actually shown on the plans I believe. Yeah it's
actually, there's a note on Sheet 29. Retaining wall station 85 to 86 and then the middle of all that, it's
shown on the plans but it's difficult to see, or difficult to see the retaining walls because there's so many
lines on the page but that note above, number 2 under notes refers to the retaining wall. It's also shown in
the cross section of the plan too. Without that wall we would have to get an easement from them to grade
that slope into their property.
Councilman Berquist: That's how many feet? 85 to 86?
Dave Nyberg: 100 feet.
Mayor Mancino: Let me ask one last question. Is there any way Todd and Anita, when you say 4 feet.
Does that 4 feet have to be there? I mean can we come a little closer to Galpin at all? You know 4 feet
then 8 feet? What's the 4 feet for?
Dave Nyberg: You mean 2?
Mayor Mancino: 2, oh okay... I understand that.
Dave Nyberg: The clear zone, yeah. And really the, you know the street acts as a clear zone along with
the curb but in the winter time when you're plowing, the plow...the snow towards Galpin and the County
plows, pushes it back on the trail. I mean that's what that 2 foot zone gives you is somewhere to pile the
snow basically, and I doubt whether that trail will be 8 feet wide in the dead of winter.
Mayor Mancino: It already hits the arborvitae on their property. The east side of a lot of the arborvitae is
bare. Boy I wish I had a good solution. And we don't know how many are going so.
Dave Nyberg: I think it's going to be very difficult to save any of the arborvitae's. Just because they're so
close. Most of those, the actual truck of the arborvitae is very close to that 10 foot, or the edge of the path.
26
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
Mayor Mancino: ...help to come out and see where it is but I sure would like to come out and see the
markings. Where it is and I certainly hope we can save the spruce... Sure, you can come forward. You
have to come up to the podium. State your name and address.
Jane Schlangen: I'm Jane Schlangen and I live exactly on the opposite side of the road and I know many
times with all the meetings and stuff we've been talking about moving it to that east side, which would be
on our property and we have arborvitae's there too but we planted them and we thought the easement was
15 feet. Well, 33 on a county road which we thought, we didn't even know that. But ours are young
enough to move. Now the people on the east side, beyond us, or a lot of them, have you know...then you
wouldn't need that crossing at the bottom of the hill. But after our property it's basically the crest of the
hill and then it goes where you could cross at the top of the hill, it would get to probably the point right
where is a shrub I think. Or it might run into a few of their arborvitae's, but not all of them. That might be
a solution. I don't know but. I know it's late in the planning.
Mayor Mancino: Yeah, it's kind of late. The other solution would be to get together as neighbors, as a
neighborhood and put some money into a pot and get some new arborvitae.
Jane Schlangen: We've thought of that but I mean, but another solution, I know it is late in the planning
and Todd...
Mayor Mancino: Does that work at all David?
Dave Nyberg: ... option or the other option?
Mayor Mancino: No, the neighborhood option works and that can certainly be done and those of us who
are arborvitae lovers would participate but the other option, well the east side is just a no. I mean you did
the fiscal impact on both sides and how it would work and we have...
Dave Nyberg: Yeah, actually across from Melody Hill it's probably more hazardous for vehicles that are
traveling northbound because it's closer to the crest but it is on the down side of the crest.
Audience...
Dave Nyberg: Oh, okay. So not at Melody Hill but at the crest itself. Okay. I misunderstood you.
Mayor Mancino: We've gone down a long road to get here.
Dave Nyberg: If you do that, then you have another crossing that's not at an intersection and we try to
keep those at intersections just so people are aware of vehicles turning out. Kind of be aware of
pedestrians crossing there as well. And the power poles were really the probably the big issue as some
council members asked you earlier about moving power poles. NSP told us if we put the trail on the east
side of Galpin, north of Lake Lucy, we'd have to pay for those poles to be moved. Because the west side is
a viable option. There are I think 17 poles. It was $4,000.00 a pole.
Councilman Berquist: I will move that we approve the plans and specifications...the 1998 trail project and
authorize bids. And I'm also recommending that we allocate $300,000.00 from the park and trail
acquisition and development fund to accomplish the project.
27
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
Mayor Mancino: Is there a second?
Councilman Mason: Second.
Councilman Senn: Discussion if I could.
Mayor Mancino: Yes.
Councilman Senn: I'm sorry, we just took kind of a big jump there from doing plans to, I thought we were
going to talk about the overall issue but.
Mayor Mancino: What overall issue?
Councilman Senn: I have a problem with allocating $300,000.00 from the reserve to pay for the increased
cost of this project. There was $300,000.00 put in 1998 fund reserve but this eats up the whole
$300,000.00 and when we sold the referendum and this project, I mean the costs were to be contained
within the referendum. I'm not sure I would agree with or feel that it's fair at this point to effectively go
into the park and trail reserves. To take funds out of there to balance the budget on the referendum. We
have other funds in the referendum that could do the same thing without taking funds out of that fund which
has committed for trail and park development of which many people have paid into who do not have their
trail or park development yet. Maybe it's just kind of a fairness issue in my mind but it's one that I think
comes into play and I don't think it is fair to go in and take the funds out of those reserves. People have
paid into them and are waiting for their trails and stuff and now we're going to deplete and not have funds
to even think of addressing it by using those funds to balance this project. Or to balance the referendum
project, which was supposed to be... self contained and self funding for the scope of this project.
Mayor Mancino: A couple of things that you said. I mean it's a good... Number one, the reserves weren't
just put in there in '98. The reserves have been accumulating over the years, correct? And we have the
recommendation of the Park and Rec Commission obviously made the recommendation to us to what to do
with those funds. So they haven't.., over many years and it's their recommendation at this point seeing that
the trails that.., and obviously we couldn't do all this work.., the trails were going to cost prior to the
referendum because we would never have allowed us to spend the cost, spend the money that it would cost
to figure out.., prior to the referendum because we wouldn't have wanted to spend those dollars to have all
this logistical work done and if the referendum would have failed, all we would have done was to know the
specific cost of the trail. So they, at this point we think we're going over to some degree but we don't know
specifically how much. Don't we have a range? And that range is from?
Todd Hoffman: Yeah, from about $1.3 to $1.5 million.
Mayor Mancino: Okay. So is this the average? Kind of the $300 or is that in the upper end?
Todd Hoffman: Top end.
Mayor Mancino: The top end that we would. So we may be actually using less of the reserves.
Councilman Senn: All that's in the reserves is 300. I mean you've got to understand that.
28
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
Mayor Mancino: That's the whole thing? I thought there was 400 in the reserves.
Todd Hoffman: $300,000.00 in the current reserves. What the Park Commission would like to do with the
Council then for the next 2 or 3 years is just build that back up. Their thinking again is that the community
is investing $4.9 million in parks and recreation in 1998, plus some so over the next 4 or 5 years there's
going to be a big void in the park development budget so they can make up some of these reserves very
quickly over the next 2 or 3 years.
Mayor Mancino: That's what we've always done and.., cost to finish the trail. I mean obviously there's
going to be some places without trails but now most of our major thoroughfares will have, I mean what
more is there to put on? There's 101 that you're talking about, but are there any major areas that need
trails?
Todd Hoffman: Lyman Boulevard which is being scheduled as a part of the road upgrade. These trails
were selected.
Mayor Mancino: But we've never had enough money to do them all this time. That's what, wouldn't you
say that was what the reserves were going for anyway. I don't know. I'm just saying.
Todd Hoffman: These were selected to bring the comprehensive trail plan up to where it should be to touch
most every.., or every sector of our community and we believe strongly that that's the reason the
referendum was approved, or one of the reasons.
Don Ashworth: Mayor? It should also be noted that the two projects you just mentioned that aren't going
to be currently completed, both 101 and Lyman are both tax increment districts where the trails have in fact
been scheduled as anticipated projects to be paid for by those dollars.
Councilman Senn: Well I thought there was question even as to whether we could...
Don Ashworth: There are some questions as it deals with north, yeah 101 north of Highway 5. Especially
if it's done as a stand alone project. If it's done as a part of a roadway project, there's no question...
Mayor Mancino: But by having the reserves you know.., add to our comprehensive trail plan to the city.
One of the things I would...be happy that it would be going for. Plus we're getting the City Center Park.
We' re getting...
Councilman Berquist: Well Mark's very sensitive to... north TH 101 trail and while I'm not as sensitive as
the is... Looking at the bigger, overall community development picture.., with this project as we can and
also know that there would be... ideally in a perfect world that north TH 101 trail... That hasn't happened.
There are methods by which we can... I understand. You wanted it done 5 years ago and it hasn't happened
and it's not going to happen within the next year. It's not going to happen within the next 18 months.
However, baby steps are being made towards...
Mayor Mancino: Councilman Mason?
Councilman Mason: No.
29
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
Councilman Senn: Well I mean, I guess I'll just make the statement now. I mean effectively when we put
this referendum on the table, in it's written publication and every other form, we effectively committed to
the people along TH 101 that there was going to be a trail there on a similar timeline as these trails. You
have adequate dollars in the referendum to pay for these overages out of the referendum. Dollars replaced,
no. You have adequate dollars in the referendum. Non committed dollars to pay for these additional or
overages in the trail portion of the referendum, okay. You can always go later and take funds out of the
park and trail reserves which are uncommitted, unspecified dollars. Use them wherever you want to use
them. To me it's not a good idea to take that whole reserve out at this point. Throw it into this and have
absolutely no options as it relates to other things. I think it's very poor planning. I think it's very poor
foresight. In a sense, especially when we've already been told that the primary funding mechanism we were
talking about for the TH 101 trail out of all probability will not be able to... as it relates to any type of a
temporary trail or whatever. Which may be our only choice in the foreseeable future. And so on that
basis, as long as this funding mechanism is, how would I say, in this way. In this action, then I will be
voting against it even though I support the trails. I just don't think that's fair with what you told the
people.
Councilman Berquist: Let's talk briefly about this. Originally we were looking at doing...
Mayor Mancino: And we still have that option.
Don Ashworth: I have not received a legal opinion from the, from our bonding.., as to whether or not if it
was completed as a stand alone project that it could be paid for with tax increment dollars. There's no
question it can be paid for if it is part of roadway costs. But again as a stand alone project, Councilman
Senn is correct. It's very questionable, and in fact I'm almost certain that the final opinion that we will get
will be that it could not be... as a stand alone project that solely sat in Carver County using Hennepin
County dollars. I might go stronger.
Mayor Mancino: Okay. Now Hennepin County has gone to the legislature to try to get that trail. I mean
they have done a bond, and I haven't heard for two weeks but they have gone to the State legislature and
have put that in their plan for a proposed trail independent of the proposal... I don't know yet.
Councilman Berquist: Logistically from a bookkeeping perspective, if we were to...
Don Ashworth: That's solely a City Council decision. There's no legal requirement that X dollars go to
one part of it versus Y to the other.
Councilman Senn: And the second part of that is, if we so desire later, we could transfer park and trail
reserve funds into the acquisition or we could just use them out of the joint funds to accomplish acquisition
anyway. But the referendum funds have strings attached to them. The park and trail acquisition funds do
not have strings attached to it.
Don Ashworth: I have to clarify but my recollection is, the question posed to the community was general in
terms of park purposes and therefore you have significant discretion as to your determination as to park
purposes. Trail, park, whatever. Couldn't use them to be buying equipment and stuff but.
Todd Hoffman: The strings for either of those pots of money are just about the same. They're to build
parks or trails. The question is more philosophical for the task force and the Park and Recreation
Commission than anything else. We discussed, that was our first option was to divert funds from one of
30
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
the other tasks identified in the referendum to pay for these trail overages. And they strongly opposed that
action based on the original intent or the original idea behind this referendum was for open space
acquisition and so you know shuffle the money around how you like, but it's just, the appearance you know
of what you're doing that is important to the Park Commission and Park Task Force.
Mayor Mancino: Well and the open space acquisition could come in under budget. There is that, not like
much in life but it... come in under budget. Good discussion point. May I have a vote.
Councilman Berquist: Well what I'd like to do, if I may. Todd... pots of money can be moved around in
any.., by action leaving the $300,000.00... that I would like to be committed, we as a council would like to
be committed to finding a method by which we can accomplish that north TH 101 trail. If we can send that
message by simply reallocating... I will withdraw the motion that I made if Councilman Mason will go
along with.., and restate it.
Mayor Mancino: It was seconded, wasn't it?
Councilman Mason: Yes it was.
Roger Knutson: Under Robert's, once a motion has been made and seconded and stated by the Chair, it
belongs to the assembly and cannot be withdrawn.
Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the plans and specifications
for the city's 1998 trail project as amended within the new documents and authorize bidding.
Concurrent with this action, to allocate up to $300,000.00 in reserves from the Park and Trail
Acquisition and Development Fund to accomplish the project. This amendment would raise the total
budget estimate to $1.54 million. Councilman Mason voted in favor and the rest of the Council voted
in opposition. The motion failed with a vote of 1 to 3.
Mayor Mancino: Okay, I want to hear what your second motion is.
Councilman Berquist: My second motion is to, for us to approve the plans and specifications for the 1998
trail project as amended within the new documents and authorize bidding and concurrent with this action,
I'd like us to allocate up to $300,000.00 in additional dollars received through the park and trail revenue to
accomplish the project and this amendment would raise the total budget for trail acquisition and
construction to $1.54 million leaving the existing park and trail development fund intact.
Councilman Senn: I'll second that.
Mayor Mancino: And tell me...
Councilman Berquist: The difference in my opinion only.., in my own mind and to have someone else, is
the fact that...possibly using those dollars, those $300,000.00...
Mayor Mancino: And not continuing... ?
Councilman Berquist: No absolutely. The motion is to get all these trails done now. If it's practical.
However, we are going to include the.., is to get these done now. The philosophical change, almost a
principle change...
31
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
Mayor Mancino: Well in principle you're saying that that $300,000.00 that's in the reserve fund right now
is also...
Councilman Berquist: No. If that's, well. Perhaps that's what I said.
Mayor Mancino: That's what the implication is. Is that all of the reserve fund then, because you don't
want to spend anything out of the $300 reserve.., only goes to the TH 101 trail.
Councilman Berquist: No...
Mayor Mancino: There are other uses...
Councilman Mason: Well I'd like to hear that motion over.
Roger Knutson: Maybe I can, if I understand what you're saying councilmembers. You're saying you
want to fund the whole $1.54 million out of the referendum money?
Councilman Berquist: That's correct.
Councilman Mason: Well at what expense now by saying that? What are we losing on this now? What
other park and trail referendum stuff are we losing by that motion?
Todd Hoffman: Open space acquisition. $300,000.00 was reduced which has been implied by the council
that that could be brought back through reallocating of the reserve.
Councilman Senn: And my point was, that you can, Mayor you can.
Mayor Mancino: ... dollars could be used for open space.
Councilman Senn: Yeah, the reserve could later be allocated to the open space acquisition if you needed it.
It would be very difficult for you to go back under the referendum when you already have a trail project of
$300,000.00 over budget and say we want to take more money for trails out of there because you have
another trail even after you've expended the reserves. All I'm saying is that we have more options by doing
it that way than by the other way.
Councilman Mason: I don't see how that gets us more options. What I'm hearing out of the motion is we
just took $300,000.00 out of the...
Mayor Mancino: ...open space...
Councilman Mason: Yeah.
Councilman Senn: We're not doing that. A later action.
Mayor Mancino: We don't know if we're going to have to use this $300,000.00 so as long as...
32
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
Councilman Berquist: I move that we as a city council authorize the plans and, approve the plans and
specifications for Chanhassen's 1998 trail project and authorize the bid process. I further authorize our
commitment out of the referendum dollars, by up to $300,000.00, to complete this project.
Mayor Mancino: Out of what?
Councilman Mason: I don't understand.
Mayor Mancino: All those in favor.
Councilman Berquist moved, Councilman Senn seconded city council authorize the plans and,
approve the plans and specifications for Chanhassen's 1998 trail project and authorize the bid
process. I further authorize our commitment out of the referendum dollars, by up to $300,000.00, to
complete this project. Councilman Berquist and Councilman Senn voted in favor. Mayor Mancino
and Councilman Mason voted in opposition. The motion failed with a tie vote of 2 to 2.
Mayor Mancino: So we need a fifth person here. Okay, I move that we allocate 1 point, what is it Todd,
$1.54 to be used for the trail development and that the money that is needed to be able to meet that, the
$1.24 from the referendum and be taken from either additional monies can be taken from either money that
is left over from the referendum from open space, because we haven't used it all, or from park and trail
reserve fund...
Councilman Mason: Okay, alright. I'll second that.
Councilman Senn: Can we do what she said?
Don Ashworth: I was thinking about, are you prepared to respond?
Roger Knutson: I'll try. The only issue I would have with it, at some point people with the eye shades are
going to have to move money from one column to another column and when they reach your decision here,
they're going to say do it from this or that. Does that mean, what is this person supposed to do at that
point?
Don Ashworth: I guess I didn't fully listen to the Mayor motion. My mind was thinking.
Mayor Mancino: ...
Don Ashworth: Well, it sounds to me as though we do have four people who are in support of approving
plans and specifications. There is no requirement this evening to finalize this financial issue. And you do
have a fifth person who is missing and should we move ahead with the plans and specs? We may lose a
little bit of money in the next two weeks if we up and decide we're not going to do this at all. I don't think
you folks are going to do that. So I would recommend that you consider authorizing approval of plans and
specifications and put the funding issue on for the next meeting. We vote on it at that point.
Councilman Mason: And I have a real concern that we're going to lose part of that based on what's going
on tonight and that's my concern.
Councilman Berquist: I'm committed to building all those trails. To getting all these trails done.
33
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
Councilman Senn: Nothing I have said is any different from that.
Councilman Mason: Alright, alright.
Councilman Senn: So we can go with your motion as stated if you added a caveat that when the decision is
made as to where the money would come from, it comes back to Council.
Mayor Mancino: It would have to.
Councilman Senn: No, because if your motion authorizes them to take it either or without coming back to
Council, they don't have to come back to Council.
Councilman Mason: There is a motion and a second on the floor. I happen to concur with the City
Manager so I'd be happy to vote against this motion and state the motion such as Don said. Because I did
second your motion so we have to vote on that one.
Roger Knutson: I would just editorialize and say, both motions have the same identical affect. If you use
the Mayor's motion with the added language that it has to come back for deciding which side of the column
it comes out of, or if you just don't decide the issue and postpone it for two weeks, it has the same effect.
So either way works.
Mayor Mancino: I like the first one. Let's go with it comes back in front of the Council to decide which
pot it come out of.
Councilman Senn: So you accept that friendly amendment?
Mayor Mancino: Yep, I sure do.
Councilman Mason: And the second does as well.
Mayor Mancino moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the plans and specifications for the
City's 1998 trail project as amended by Howard R. Green Company, and authorize bidding. The
financial issue relating to where the additional money to fund the project will come from will be
brought back at a future City Council meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 24~638 SQ. FT. OFFICE/WAREHOUSE ADDITION TO
WAYTEK, INC.; LOCATED SOUTH OF THE TWIN CITIES RAILROAD AND WEST OF
DELL ROAD~ 7660 QUATTRO DRIVE~ SWEDENBORG-SHAW CONSTRUCTION.
Sharmin A1-Jaff: Thank you. Briefly, in July of 1988 the City approved the construction of a 25,000
square foot office/warehouse facility on Lot 3, Block 1, Park One 3rd Addition. The proposal before you
today is basically putting on an addition to double the size of this building. The site is zoned industrial
office park. The applicant owns Lots 3 and 4 of Park One 3rd Addition. In order to put on this addition
they will need to consolidate those two parcels. Last Thursday we received confirmation from Hennepin
County that the lots have been consolidated already. The expansion is proposed to utilize identical
materials to those currently being used and I have some pictures here of the existing building. I'll be
passing that out. The materials consist of pre-cast insulated concrete panels for the warehouse portion and
34
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
rock face for the office portion. The architecture of the building is compatible with the surrounding area.
The north portion of the site contains a 20 foot wide preservation easement. Mature trees. None of those
trees are being impacted. Currently there are two curb cuts into this site. One of them is rather steep and
is closed during the winter. It is also an exit only. That curb cut is being closed off and the new one is
being introduced. We believe overall the site plan is very sensitive to the surrounding area in the site and
we are recommending approval with conditions outlined in the staff report. Thank you.
Mayor Mancino: Is the applicant here? Do you wish to address? Just let us know where the money's
coming from and we're okay.
Jack Shaw: My name's Jack Shaw and I'm with Swedenborg-Shaw Construction. We're the general
contractor for the project. I'm accompanied here this evening with Mr. Bob Lamereau, the principle of
Waytek and available for any questions or comments you may have.
Councilman Senn: A question for staff if I could Mayor. Sharmin. Okay, the existing catch basin. Okay.
Is the existing catch basin going to remain adequate in size to handle the additional, effectively.., or hard
surface coverage area that's being created. I mean I saw on your conditions of approval that they needed to
protect it but I guess my question is, is it already sized to accommodate the additional development or does
it need to be sized to accommodate it?
Sharmin A1-Jaff: Well condition number 21, on page 11 states, depending on storm sewer calculations, an
additional catch basin may be required. Does that answer? Okay.
Jack Shaw: We've minimized that and we're going through some further design on the quantity...that will
be required on that back side. And we realize that there is also an ordinance that says that any light
fixtures that are put on the building you cannot exceed more than .5 foot candles at the property line. So
we're designing in with that parameter, as well as trying to avoid putting any doors on the back of the
building at all.
Mayor Mancino: I would like to go one step further...
Sharmin A1-Jaff: Shielded lighting?
Councilman Mason: Lighting that points down, yeah.
Councilman Senn: Down lighting.
Mayor Mancino: Okay... okay, the down lighting. Because there are many warehouses...
Councilman Berquist: I don't have any questions?
Councilman Mason: Nope.
Councilman Senn: Move approval.
Councilman Mason: Second.
35
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
Councilman Senn moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve Site Plan Request #88-2 for a
24,683 square foot addition (Waytek, lnc.) as shown on the plans dated received January 16, 1998,
subject to the following conditions:
The existing catch basin on Quattro Drive shall be protected with rock filter dikes until all disturbed
areas on the site have been restored.
Storm sewer calculations for a 10 year, 24 hour storm event shall be submitted to the City
Engineering Department for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit.
The haul routes for exporting material from the site shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to
issuance of a building permit.
The grading plans shall be revised to include an erosion control fence detail, revised Chanhassen
Standard Detail Plate for an industrial driveway (No. 5207) and rock construction entrance detail
No. 5301. In addition, erosion control fence shall be installed adjacent to Quattro Drive once the
existing driveway is abandoned.
Sanitary sewer and water hookup charges shall be applied to the building permit. The charges shall
be based upon the number of SAC units determined by the Metropolitan Council Environmental
Services.
The applicant shall obtain the necessary construction access easement to perform grading on the
adjacent property prior to any issuance of a building permit.
The applicant and/or contractor shall be responsible for adjusting the existing water service proposed
in the easterly driveway access.
The contractor and/or developer shall contact the City's Engineering Department for inspection of
the driveway apron and curb/street restoration prior to pouring the concrete. A 24 hour notice is
required to schedule an inspection.
Plans for trash enclosure and rooftop screening shall be submitted to staff for approval. All rooftop
equipment shall be screened from views.
10. The applicant shall enter into a Site Plan Agreement. Financial guarantees for landscaping shall be
submitted to the City at the time of building permit application.
11. The applicant must install tree protection fencing prior to construction. Fencing must be inspected
by city staff before work is allowed to begin.
12.
The applicant shall add 7 trees to the landscape plan. Four shall be planted on the east side of the
new parking lot and three shall be planted at the southeast comer of the property. The trees shall be
a mix of oak and sugar maple.
13. The light fixtures may not exceed 0.5 foot candles of light from fixtures at the property and attempt
to have similar lighting to the remaining existing development.
36
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
14. The applicant shall install tree protection fencing around all preserved trees (within construction
limits) before site grading can commence.
15. The applicant shall comply with the conditions of the conservation easement located on the northerly
20 feet of the property. No trees will be allowed to be removed within the easement.
16. Fire Marshal recommendations:
a. Regarding the new access off of Quattro Drive, submit grade dimensions to the City Engineer
and Fire Marshal for approval. Pursuant to 1991 Uniform Fire Code Section 10.204(f).
b. ~No Parking Fire Lane" signs shall be installed. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact
location. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policy #06-1991.
c. Submit utility plans to the City Engineer and Fire Marshal for approval.
17. Park and trail fees shall be paid at the time of building permit.
18. Approval of this site plan is contingent upon consolidation of Lots 3 and 4, Block 1, Park One 3rd
Addition (provide proof of single Parcel Identification Number).
19. Building Official recommendations:
a. The developers and/or designers should meet with a representative of the Inspections Division as
early as possible to discuss commercial building permit requirements. Principals should be
aware of many of these requirements before the project is bid.
20. The parking lot drive aisles shall meet City Code Section 20-1101.
21. Depending on storm sewer calculations, an additional catch basin may be required in the easterly
parking lot to intercept runoff prior to draining onto Quattro Drive.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: None.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: None.
ADMINISTRATIVE PACKET DISCUSSION:
Mayor Mancino: Admin section. Any questions from the admin section?
Councilman Berquist: When are we expecting to get Minnewashta, or Highway 7 back?
Mayor Mancino: The 23rd.
Councilman Berquist: The 23rd.
37
City Council Meeting - March 9, 1998
Councilman Mason: That should be an interesting night. Are you coming to that one Kathy?
Mayor Mancino: That will be on the 23rd and.., so with that, we're adjourned.
Mayor Mancino adjourned the City Council meeting at 9:20 p.m.
Submitted by Don Ashworth
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
38