Loading...
1983 06 21 I I I REGULAR CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 21, 1983 Mayor Hamilton called the meeting to order with the following members present: Councilwomen Swenson and Watson, Councilman Geving. Councilman Horn was absent. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Geving moved to approve the agenda with the following-'nclusions: Sale of Bonds, Clean up around Colonial Center, Semi-Trailers. Motion seconded by Councilwoman Swenson. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Swenson and Watson, Councilman Geving. No negative votes. Motion carried. CONSENT AGENDA: Item (d) was removed from the Consent Agenda to be discussed separately. Councilwoman Watson moved to approve the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations: a. Minnewashta Manor Homeowner's Association Maintenance Proposal, Sandpiper Trail. b. Construction Plans and Specifications, Phase I, Near Mountain. c. Control Panel and Electrical Maintenance Agreement, City Well System. e. Cable Service Territory Application, Minnesota Cable Communications Board. Motion seconded by Mayor Hamilton. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Swenson and Watson, Councilman Geving. No negative votes. Motion carried. SALE OF BONDS: Andy Merry, Juran and Moody, discussed the pending sale of bonds during-the month of July. RESOLUTION #83-29A, B & C: Councilman Geving moved the adoption of Resolution 83-29A requesting the extension of the qualification period of MBIA insurance coverage for the not to exceed $5,185,000 General Obligation Tax Increment Refunding Bonds of 1983 and the not to exceed $4,350,000 General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bonds of 1983; Resolution 83-29B Authorizing the Sale of $5,185,000 General Obligation Refunding Tax Increment Bonds of 1983; and Resolution 83-29C Authorizing the Sale of $4,345,000 General Obligation Refunding Improvement Bonds of 1983. Resolutions seconded by Councilwoman Watson. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Swenson and Watson, Councilman Geving. No negative votes. Motion carried. MAPLE LEAF AWARD: Bill Gullickson, former HRA Chairman, was presented with a Maple Leaf Award for his outstanding work and dedication to the City. MINUTES: Councilwoman Watson moved to note the May 25, 1983, Public Safety Commission minutes. Motion seconded by Mayor Hamilton. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Swenson and Watson, Councilman Geving. No negative votes. Motion carried. Councilwoman Watson moved to note the June 7, 1983, Park and Recreation Commission minutes. Motion seconded by Councilman Geving. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Swenson and Watson, Councilman Geving. No negative votes. Motion carried. BILLS: Councilman Geving moved to approve the bills as presented: Checks #14587 through 14661 in the amount of $2,788,281.63 and checks #18965 through #19073 in the amount of $428,813.85. Motion seconded by Mayor Hamilton. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Swenson and Watson, Councilman Geving. No negative votes. Motion carried. ~ FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT, NEAR MOUNTAIN: Dennis Mulvey, representing Lundgren Brothers, was present seeking final development plan amendment approval in order to construct 31 single familly homes on 7.8 acres located at the Council Meeting June 21, 1983 -2- southwest corner of Town Line Road and Chanhassen Road. The Planning Commission recommended approval with the following conditions: 1. That the roadways be constructed to City standards. 2. That the model unit to be constructed not be occupied until prOV1Slon of full public improvements to the site have been initiated. 3. That proposed covenants and restrictions are subject to City Attorney approval. I Mayor Hamilton moved to approve a final development plan amendment for Near Mountain PRO, Planning Case 79-2 P.U.D., with the stipulations that the roadways be constructed to City standards, that the model unit be constructed and not be occupied until provision of full public improvements to the site have been initiated, that proposed covenants and restrictions are subject to City Attorney approval, and including the City Engineer's memorandum of June 6, 1983. Motion seconded by Councilwoman Watson. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Swenson and Watson, Councilman Geving. No negative votes. Motion carried. REPLAT OF OUTLOTS H AND I, CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK: Opus Corporatlon is proposing~he replat Outlots H and I into three building sites and three outlots. Councilwoman Swenson moved to approve the replat of Lots H and I, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park for Opus Corporation with the conditions that: 1. The applicant dedicate all drainage and ponding easements as required by the City Engineer. 2. That individual lots within the plat are not eligible for development I until such time as extension of full sewer, water, and street improveme s have been initiated. 3. No change in the wetlands be permitted until such time as approved by the City Council. Motion seconded by Mayor Hamilton. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Swenson and Watson, Councilman Geving. No negative votes. Motion carried. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW ADAPTIVE REUSE OF VACANT SCHOOL BUILDINGS FOR NON-EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES: Mr. Wallace-McKay, Minnetonka School District, was present. Councilwoman Swenson moved to place on first reading an ordinance amending Section 7.04 of Ordinance 47. Motion seconded by Councilwoman Watson. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Swenson and Watson, Councilman Geving. No negative votes. Motion carried. REAR YARD SETBACK VARIANCE, 6230 FIR TREE: Mr. Martin Beukhof is seeking a 3~ fo~ear yard setback variance-to-construct a porch and deck onto his residence. The Board of Adjustments and Appeals recommended approval of the request. Councilwoman Swenson moved to approve the 3~ foot rear yard setback variance request at 6230 Fir Tree as recommended by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Motion seconded by Councilman Geving. The I following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Swenson and Watson, Councilman Geving. No negative votes. Motion carried. LOT AREA VARIANCE, LOTS 3177-3182, CARVER BEACH: Mr. Paul Pokorny is seek~a 3,000 square-foot lot area variance to construct a home at 599 I I I Council Meeting June 21, 1983 -3- Broken Arrow Road. The Board of Adjustments and Appeals recommended appro- val of the request. Councilman Geving moved to approve a 3,000 square foot lot area variance as recommended by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Motion seconded by Mayor Hamilton. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Swenson and Watson, Councilman Geving. No negative votes. Motion carried. LAKE ANN/LAKE VIRGINIA FORCEMAIN: BTTT Moore - I am an Engineer with the Waste Control Commission. We also have several other representatives out here tonight and I would like to introduce them. Bill Moeller from our Operations Department. Ken Bombach and Ray Ode from our Engineering Department. Bob Schunicht from our con- sulting engineer and John Barowski from Barr Engineering. The reason that we are here tonight is to discuss and answer some of the questions that were raised by the City at the public hearing that the Met Council had on the amendment to the Water Resources Management Development Guide. You are aware of that from our last presentation that, that change came as a result of the commissions re-evaluation of their planning efforts for the southern Lake Minnetonka interceptor system. That system has some very severe capa- city problems and it was our intent to resolve those issues by our planning effort. In order to address the issues raised by the City tonight we are going to have the alternatives that were investigated in that report pre- sented to you by our consultant. There are also some issues raised con- cerning construction of the project and Ken Bombach will address those construction related issues and some specific questions that were raised at that public hearing. We would like to be open to any questions you might have on the project and that's why we brought all these people. With that I would like to have Mr. Schunicht present the alternatives that were eva- luated in our report. Bob Schunicht - I went through this presentation with you last December. we-talked basically about our primary alternative, the Lake Virginia Forcemain connecting Lake Virginia Lift Station over to Purgatory Creek Interceptor and then the Lake Ann Interceptor coming down to Chanhassen Lift Station and then the forcemain over to Purgatory Creek Interceptor or over to Riley Creek Interceptor and those were basically the alternatives that were considered and presented in the report. At the Metropolitan Council meeting in March we were asked to come back and look at some addi- tional alternatives and work with Bill Monk to try and see if there was another cost effective alternative that was different than the one that we recommended. We provided Bill with detailed cost estimates that we went through in the report so he has all our worksheets and everything. He sub- mitted some correspondence to Ken Bombach with his opinion and pretty much the statement of the City of Chanhassen about the project and I suppose it's really no surprise to any of you that we still don It agree on what should be done out there but at least I will let you know what we looked at and then we will respond to any questions that you may have. Obviously in looking at a very preliminary look at the report, the first thing we looked at was a parallel forcemain to the existing route. This is the Lake Virginia Lift Station here. It comes through the Shorewood Interceptor to the Excelsior Lift Station and then continues over to Purgatory Creek Interceptor. That was one of the alternatives that we looked at during the very preliminary evaluations in this report but, I am sure you are all familiar with Excelsior and the built-up parts of Council Meeting June 21, 1983 -4- Shorewood and trying to get another facility through there is almost impossible. It might be possible but it's probably physically to do because of the built-up condition of the area and to do so would be exorbitantly expensive so we looked at that, we drove in the field and said, no, this is just not something that we can do because when you look at the Lake Virginia Forcemain it's about the same distance and we know, for the most part, this route is pretty wide open. There are some areas that are not wide open but for the most part it's pretty wide open. We looked at paralleling the existing facility. We said, no, it just wouldn1t work. The other thing that we looked at and I guess I should say that dealing with all these lakes around here there are only certain corridors that we can go through to get from this point over to here, go north at Christmas Lake, you can go between Christmas and Lotus, you can come around Lake Ann in through here and go back along Highway 5 or you can come down all the way down to the Minnesota River or you can do something, come through a corridor around the Red Rock Lake area and we looked at that in quite a bit more detail than we did this facility up here as a preliminary evalulation and actually come up with cost estimates and reviewed this whole thing with the Waste Control Commission and we eliminated the Red Rock Interceptor from further consideration because first of all it's very, very expensive to build and secondly, the timing didn't coincide with the timing or the timing was premature for the area as far as development was concerned. Really, in looking at a preliminary valuations, we looked at all the corridors we could find to get from the Lake Virginia Lift Station over to the Purgatory Creek Interceptor. We eliminated the Red Rock Interceptor and paralleling the Shorewood Interceptor for, just because of the costs and the timing of the development and then we looked at the Lake Virginia Forcemain as opposed to the Lake Ann Interceptor as the two primary alternatives. We looked at these from three standpoints. First of all we looked it from cost, an overall system cost which means that the costs that would be incurred by the City of Chanhassen and the Waste Control Commission so we want to make sure that the entire system, when it's done, costs the least for everybody involved. Secondly, we looked at liability the ability to maintain this thing to make sure that we have a good reliable system that will last for a long period of time and the third factor we took into consideration was the environmental considerations. Cost considerations, you have the summary in front of you, we talked to you about that before. The Lake Virginia Forcemain is the lowest cost ini- tially and also the lowest cost on an annual basis looking at it over a 20 year period which is what we must do in order to comply with the Environmental Protection Agency requirements. That really hasn't changed. We have not come up with a more cost effective alternative than we recom- mended in the first place. The Lake Virginia Forcemain is still about $4 million cheaper initially and several hundred thousand dollars a year cheaper on an annual basis over the next 20 years. That really hasn't changed. We looked at it from a liability standpoint. The Lake Virginia alternate includes a single lift station and a forcemain directly connected to Purgatory Creek Interceptor. The Lake Ann Interceptor includes the Lake Virginia Forcemain, the Lake Virginia Lift Station, Chanhassen Lift Station, and coming over here to Purgatory Creek Interceptor. Under that alternative, there are two lift stations, somewhat less reliable because we have to pump the sewage again, we have got twice as much equipment to main- tain and worry about breaking down, although we do have about 10,000 more feet of forcemain on the Lake Virginia Forcemain as opposed to a com- bination of this forcemain up here and the forcemain going to Purgatory Creek. When you look at the other alternative of coming down the Riley Creek Interceptor, we again have a lift station at Lake Virginia and also a I I I I I I Council Meeting June 21, 1983 -5- lift station at Riley Creek and this is a forcemain going all the way over here so, again, under the Lake Ann Interceptor you have two lift stations no matter which way you go you have got to pump it twice and you have still got a considerable length of forcemain with both alternatives. From a reliability standpoint we feel that the Lake Virginia Forcemain/Lift Station combination is as reliable or even more reliable than the other alternatives because of the fact that there is one less lift station, a little more forcemain but the lift station is where you have most of the liability problems as far as maintaining a pumping facility. Environmentally, John Barowski from Barr Engineering walked all these roµtes and in a report pointed all the details of the environmental con- cerns that we have had, the places we should be looking at for environmen- tal concerns. He found that on the Lake Virginia Forcemain, the Lake Ann Interceptor, the Red Rock Interceptor and the Chanhassen Forcemain there are no real pressing or real hazardous environmental concern. There are some sensitive areas and he made recommendations for dealing with those sensitive areas but he didn't find any real serious environmental problems. Our recommendation to the board is still that we construct the Lake Virginia Forcemain. There were some other questions that came up. One of the questions that came up at the public hearing was dealing with the Cloquet. Do you know what happened in the Cloquet area? Should I explain what happened up there? Essentially it's a facility that's similar to what we are proposing out here, it1s a lift station and forcemain combination and that forcemain essentially blew up. There was a big hole in the for- cemain and the reason for that was it's a phenomenon that occurs hydraulically in both forcemains and watermains called a hydraulic transient and it essentially means that when you change the movement of water in this pipeline, you shut off the pump, it's a shock to it and it sends a pressure wave back and forth through the water and you have to dissipate this pressure wave somehow in the water and the way that you dissipate this pressure wave that's running through the forcemain causes a hydraulic transient and a water hammer is a form of transient although that's not as serious a transient, water hammer, any pipe, any forcemain, watermain that you have in town can have a water hammer pressure without a problem. What happens is when you get a more serious transient when you get a real severe stoppage of flow or change in direction of flow you can create a vacuum in the pipe and what happens when this pressure wave from the pump shutting off or a valve being closed or some change in the system, when it hits this vacuum it brings these two columns of water together and creates a pressure and in the instance of the Cloquet forcemain was something like 450 lbs per square inch which is about three time what you design the forcemain for and about double it1s bursting strength. What you do to take care of these things, you do two things, you make sure you have no sudden stoppages or starting pumps by valving the system properly and secondly you put on the high points of the system you put a vacuum release valve that relieves this vacuum out of the pipe before the pressure wave hits the vacuum so you essentially bring the column of water back together again by a vacuum release valve. Neither one of those were done in the case of the Cloquet Forcemain. Either one of them would probably take care of the transients were done in our preliminary report and included in the costs that we have in building the Lake Virginia Forcemain. In addition, Barr Engineering has a computer program that evaluates hydraulic transients which is something that1s going to be done during final design. We essen- tially have already taken care of the problem that occurred in Cloquet. Councilman Geving - Do you think that the Lake Ann Interceptor portion will ever be built? Council Meeting June 21, 1983 -6- Bob Schunicht - There would be a Lake Ann facility built coming north from Highway 5~ a local trunk some day when the Council elected to put it in and the people out there could afford to pay for it. Councilman Geving - This really provides nothing for the City of Chanhassen in terms of either the immediate or short range future for Chanhassen development. I Bob Schunicht - There is nothing that you can hook up to, yes. You have already got your facilities in place to last you until the year 2000. It's taking the waste water from the western part of Lake Minnetonka. Councilman Geving - Even with the anticipated growth that's been projected for Chanhassen, the portion of Chanhassen east to Purgatory Creek Interceptor, what's the status of that forcemain? Bob Schunicht - For about the next 15 years the combination of capacity, the existing capacity of this lift station and the ability to temporary storage of really high peaks, Chanhassen has a lot of inflow/infiltration in the system to get really high peaks, not a large of volume of water but it's a real high rate, so you can efficiently store this in there for a short period of time and pump it out at a lower rate so for about the next 15 years you will be able to work that system by pumping it over to Purgatory Creek Interceptor then in about 15 years you can increase the capacity of that lift station by about 1/3 again and use the same system forcemain to get it over to the Purgatory Creek Interceptor. You are good with this system based on projections of your comprehensive plan until about the year 2000. Councilman Geving - What impact financially will this have on the City of Chanhassen?------ I Bob Schunicht - If you were to build a trunk system to serve this area right here, it's about $1.7 million. Councilman Geving - I understand that we are part of a district and you are increasing the construction costs by puting in this forcemain through Chanhassen, some how or another those are going to come back to this district, who is going to pay for it? Ray Ode - The normal manner in which the commission allocates costs back to a-community is, of course, through the user charge based on volume and through a service availability charge. Debt service that we incur when we make improvements, what we do is we put our capital improvements into the seven pools that we have and six service area pools. The capital invest- ment that we make in this facility would be a service area four pool as a capital investment increasing the capitalized investment for that area. Councilman Geving - Have you given us any benefit as a result of doing that? Itls going to be billed back to debt service for District Four and Chanhassen is a part of that. It was stated earlier that that Lake Virginia Forcemain is going to go through Chanhassen. It1s not going to I benefit in any way. We can't hook up to it. You are going to make a capi- tal investment thatls going to be billed back to us. Really the people to the west of us and to the north of us really are the only ones who will benefit from this whole District. I I I Council Meeting June 21, 1983 -7- Ray Ode - Well, that's true. What we are developing is a system what we call-regional service and payment is made based on the use of the system. Chanhassen is perhaps 5% of the whole system. They incur about 5% of the operating maintenance costs for the Service Area Four system and they incur about 5% of the debt service costs. Keep in mind when we take debt service capitalized investment in the interceptor system we have out here is about 30% used, 70% of the debt service goes into the reserve capacity which will be paid by future users. Councilman Geving - The largest single billing that we get in this City for anyone thing is the Metropolitan Waste Commission's costs which we have no control over. It's one of the biggest problems that we have and the City Manager is trying to keep that cost down and we have no control over it. If this thing goes through we are going to suddenly see another increase that we will also have no control over and no benefit. You have got to understand these cities, like Chanhassen, are getting stuck with a lot of problems. You talk about service, I don't see any service here. We did get service when we Riley/Purgatory went in because we benefitted from that. You are going across our land. We are going to have a lot of homeowners objecting to this. Ray Ode - Admittedly the kind of system that became necessary to serve the system of lakes and wide spread water drainage areas with a limited number of people here has become very expensive. The charges are higher in Service Area 4 than they are in any other service area. Councilman Geving - That was the statement that I was trying to get from you that we are probably paying higher charge for our district than any other district. Ray Ode - You have the most complex system of, in effect, moving the waste from drainage area and bringing it to another drainage area. That was a requirement that the commission was faced with by virtue of the policy that was adopted for Lake Minnetonka. It's no secret that this area has a substantially higher flow per residential equivalent connection. That translates into dollars, more flow, more bucks and I feel you can do something about it. You can reduce inflow and infiltration. That is cer- tainly a possibility. The flows here are probably 40% higher than they are in St. Louis Park. Councilman Geving - We have got a dozen lakes in this community and we have 24 square miles of territory. We are a big community. We are spread out and we are sparcely populated. Ray Ode - I agree that this particular doesn't in itself render any direct benefit to the City of Chanhassen. In fact the only reason that we really have a need to do this is to relieve a system that was constructed ten or 12 years ago with really only a ten year life. This was a system that the district actually already developed when we took over. Councilwoman Watson - Basically, you said that we are getting it in Chanhassen because Shorewood has houses and the people that are actually going to be using the system are too developed and so 'they came down into Chanhassen because there aren't as many people here. Bob Schunicht - Shorewood already has their system and this system will remain intact and will serve Shorewood itself. The Lake Virginia Forcemain Council Meeting June 21, 1983 -8- will serve the people on the western side of Lake Minnetonka. It's more economical to go where there are fewer houses at the present time than to go where there are already houses. Councilwoman 'Watson - We have zero percent of the City of Chanhassen gaining benefit and when you talk about the costs you are talking about how we are all paying for everybodys systems, the problem is that nowhere in these lovely figures that you are able to put down on a piece of paper is the fact that we get no benefit, we will pay for it and having that thing going through our city is not necessarily a beautification project. If there is a break, it is our problem. You don't show the fact that people here have no use for this thing and are going to suffer the consequences and the problems. Bob Schunicht - The benefit to Chanhassen will come in when the Chanhassen Lift Station capacity is exceeded then you build the Riley Creek Interceptor and the Red Rock Interceptor or build something else going over into Eden Prairie so Eden Prairie will take the waste water from Chanhassen. That happens throughout the whole system, the sewage flows downstream to the Purgatory Creek Interceptor, that's where everything has to go and what we are trying to do is come up with a path of least resistence to that waste water so that we spend the least amount of money to get the whole overall system in for the whole area surrounding Lake Minnetonka. Councilwoman Watson - I have trouble understanding that. You manage to take the whole thing, dump it in our City and run it out the other side and you wrote endless pages telling us how this is the only way. I read page and knew what the conclusion was going to be. Bob Schunicht - No matter what you do it IS going to have to go through Chanhassen because there simply isn1t room between Chanhassen and Lake Minnetonka to get through there. Councilwoman Watson - I simply can't buy that. I honestly can1t believe that the only way to do it is to run it down our streets and down our roads and inconvenience the people in our City for no value and at their expense. I have read this thing and I knew from page 1 where you were going to end up and I am no engineer. I can't believe that this is the only way. Sure, it works out fine. You can run it through there and sure there is nobody there so you can run it down the street. I I Mayor Hamilton - Part of what might make a sewer system like this more palatable, if there was more planning involved and not just saying that this is going to solve somebodys need for the next 15 to 20 years and at some point when the Chanhassen Lift Station has to be increased and something done at that point then you are going to have another group of people saying, why in the heck didn't those people 20 years ago plan ahead a little bit and instead of spending $6 million spend $14 million as suggested. Put in a system that1s going to last so you don1t have to come back to the drawing board every 20 years and look at some alternative to a problem that we knew existed 20 years ago. You are trying to correct a I problem that was put in the ground 12 years ago. That1s pretty lousy planning. You are proposing a system that will last 20 years, that1s only eight years longer than the one that was put in and doesn't work now. Even if the Lake Virginia Forcemain were to be the most workable solution, I can't buy it without a lot of other planning going on here, looking ahead I I I Council Meeting June 21, 1983 -9- into the future and saying, getting agreements from whoever you have to have them from and saying, the Red Rock Interceptor is going to be built, they agree to it so that in 20 years or 30 years from now they know that that interceptor is going to have to be built, you don It have to go back and fight all these wars again and say, well, we didn't think about that, we kind of conceptualized that 20 years ago but now we can It do because there are too many houses in there. I just don It see this as long range planning. Twenty years, to me, is not long range planning. I don It think you are solving the problem. You are putting it off onto somebody elses shoulders and if we are to accept this and buy it, we are just dumping it onto the next Council and saying, you have got the problem. Bob Schunicht - The system itself is designed for 40 years. The financing period that we look at is a 20 year period and that's criteria that's been setup by EPA and adopted by the waste control commission and the Metropolitan Council. Ray Ode - I can appreciate what you are saying that it seems like a short period of time, I think if you look back in the southwest area study that was generated by the Southwest Suburban District, prior to the commission, developed the Purgatory Creek Interceptor routing and also laid out in a conceptual pattern service through the Bluff Creek Interceptor, Riley Creek Interceptor with no commitment as to how or which one of these interceptor systems would be developed. Of course at that time communities like St. Bonifacius, Victoria, and Waconia were not part of the system either. Actually the Shorewood system bought what we call ten years of service to accomodate the needs of St. Bonifacius which needed sewers and would have discharged into Six Mile Creek and then indirectly into Lake Minnetonka. That was not permissable. Victoria had to have service and phase out their plant which was indirectly discharging into Lake Minnetonka. We had to provide a facility to get to Mound and when we added up all these com- ponents for providing service, we really bought 15 years of good service from the Shorewood facility. If we really look long range down the line I suppose you could say it's more consistent to go down and eventually deve- lop the Riley Creek Interceptor system. I guess Metro Council is saying that we will not develop interceptor systems to serve the rural areas. Part of the reason, of course, is that growth hasn't occurred as fast. There are just planning guides here that to make necessary for us to have an outlet to the Lake Virginia Lift Station at this time to the Purgatory Creek Interceptor. Purgatory Creek Interceptor from Town Line Road in Minnetonka and Eden Prairie boundary, any place below that has capacity in it to make this accomodation. Mayor Hamilton - If you look at the letter than Bill Monk has written, that a system could be built today for $14 million that would take care of the needs for the next 80 to 100 years rather than spending $6 million to solve the problem for 20 years. I don't think that your approach is the least expensive by a long shot. You may end up doing the same that he is pro- posing some day and it's going to cost you a lot more than $14 million. I don't see this as the least expensive. Even planning wise, we might as well just throw out the whole comprehensive plan that all the cities have worked on over the last four or five years and have been approved by the Metro Council. Your plan here has definitely nothing to do with that and goes absolutely opposed to all the planning this City has done. Our plan was approved and now we are faced with this kind of thing. Councilwoman Watson - It was approved just prior to the sudden panic to Council Meeting June 21, 1983 -10- develop this project. When did your planning on this Lake Virginia Interceptor begin? I Bob Schunicht - We started in September 1982. Councilwoman Watson - You knew when you bought that system from Shorewood or whoever yoU-bought it from, that you were buying a temporary system 12 years ago, correct? Why did it take this long? Why the panic? It seems to me that to begin planning something and then somehow think that nine months later you should be doing something of this magnitude, I am surprised that if we are so into planning, if we think we are doing something for 20 years or 40 years and all of a sudden after 12 years. The Commission started their facility back in 1977 for the whole metropolitan area. When Bob says they started last September, this is just a continuation of the planning that was done in 1977. We have re- evaluated all our planning prior to implementing the design. Councilwoman Watson - Prior to last September which was only nine months ago, what did you show to relieve the system? You knew you had a temporary system 12 years ago, what did you show prior to this report? The Lake Ann Interceptor. Bob Schunicht - Last year when our report came out that's when the emphasis changed from Lake Ann Interceptor to the forcemain. One of the main reasons was that the original planning that said the Lake Ann Interceptor should be built was based on a substantial reduction of inflow/infiltration in Chanhassen and all the rest of the areas going all the way around Lake Minnetonka. That allowed them to do some temporary pumping in Chanhassen and delay construction of the Riley Creek Interceptor until about the year 1988. With all the I/I studies that were done, Chanhassen did one, the people that worked on our report with us are the same people that did the Chanhassen I/I study so they were very familiar with this area. When they looked at all that I/I coming down through the system, it changed drasti- cally the design flows that were used in the report that came up with the Lake Ann Interceptor which meant that you couldn't do anything temporary here. We had to find some way of getting all this flow that was coming from the west side of Lake Minnetonka over to Purgatory Creek Interceptor. That's the main reason. The Waste Control Commission has not seen a reduc- tion in I/I that was anticipated. Repair projects have been done and I/I programs have been initiated but simply have not worked that well and com- munities have not followed through and there is more flow coming to this area so we had to do something to get rid of this flow immediately, we couldn't delay it. I Councilwoman Watson - It wasn1t long ago that we were told that our lift station down here was not going to be adequate and in our comprehensive plan, in our decision about where our MUSA Line was, it was all revolved around the fact that we had a lift station that just couldn't deal with it so we had better move our MUSA Line up and curtail our development and now all of a sudden our lift station has improved. It's difficult to understand how it got better. Bob Schunicht - The lift station hasn't changed. The flows to the lift station haven't changed. The fact that all this waste water that was pro- posed to be running down through the Lake Ann Interceptor to this lift sta- tion are going to be diverted. I I I I Council Meeting June 21, 1983 -11- Councilwoman Watson - I see, since you changed your mind, our lift station is good. Bob Schunicht - Your lift station is fine for Chanhassen. Councilwoman Watson - Since you changed your mind last September and decided you didn't want our 12 year Lake Ann Interceptor, now our lift sta- tion is suddenly adequate because, you see, when we did our comprehensive plan, I was on the Planning Commission, and it said that that was not good. That our lift station was not good and that1s why our MUSA Line couldn't be where it was supposed to be and since last September, when you made this decision, now it's alright. Councilwoman Swenson - This means we can move the MUSA Line back where it was. Are you going to put the MUSA Line back where it was before you made this error in judgment? Bob Schunicht - I can It do that. Councilwoman Watson - You can do this. You can take our plan and ignore the whole thing and put that system in, I am sure you can manage to move our MUSA Line. Ray Ode - The issue of the Urban Service Area is really an issue between the Metro Council and the planning and development of what we call space for growth. I don't know, you say, who told you that there was not capa- city? I guess I am not aware of that. I would like to know who. Councilwoman Watson - We received many communications. Our MUSA Line could not be where it was because we couldn1t possibly develop that much ground because our lift station wasn1t any good. It wasn't adequate. Ray Ode - The system here that affects the Chanhassen lift station and the interceptor that's upstream of it and, I believe, your trunk sewer are all sized sufficiently large to take care of your needs through 1990 and perhaps to 2000. Councilwoman Swenson - It's unfortunate you were not here last fall when we were trying to get an extension from the Metropolitan Council for a campus development. It cost the City a very large industrial development. Every time we deal with anybody from the council I have a feeling like I am getting my exercise for the next 60 years because it's an exercise in futi- lity. We are all sitting here tonight and we know very well what you are going to do anyway. The only thing that I have to point out is that, I may not be very bright but one thing I know and that is that you are not going to save money by putting or spending money to put a channel like this, a sewer line through an area that will never use it. There will absolutely never be any future use for that except for what you are doing right now. You go down and maybe 15 years from now this use is going to be there. You say, we will put this through, okay, this is regional, but when Chanhassen has to have the development around Lake Lucy and our turn comes to expand and these brilliant characters in St. Paul decide that maybe once or twice we can sell a house, then we are going to have to put in the money, our citizens are going to have to pay for the trunk line to go up to this monstrosity that you are going to put in there. It's just not fiscally responsible to spend the money for something that is only going to be used to take something from here to here and has no potential for additional Council Meeting June 21, 1983 - 1 2- use, other than our spending another $6 million for the privilege of hooking up to it, when you can do the same cotton-picking thing and come down here for very little more and have the eventuality for usage. It just doesn't make sense. How much more is it going to cost in 15 years to put in this trunk line? I Bob Schunicht - That's what we did. We took all the facilities that had to ~built by the Waste Control Commission, by Chanhassen, by Eden Prairie over the next 20 years and we are not saying that this is the most economi- cal, we are saying that this is the most economical for the whole area. Councilwoman Swenson - Oh, I believe what you are saying because I have seen the great~etropolitan Waste Commission spend dollars after dollars after dollars and you know everything is going broke down there. There is no more bonding which is why you are trying to economize now. You are putting a band-aid on a large sore. It just has not been a fiscally respon- sible program from the beginning. You can ask anybody who has ever had anything to do with this business. Mayor Hamilton - I am curious why you felt you needed to jog that forcemain around through Chanhassen in a residential area and screwing up a couple of lakes, when you could run the thing down Highway 7 as far as you want to go. Bob Schunicht - Once we get into Highway 7 here we just couldn't get through. You have bridges and existing development right up against the road. It's just cheaper to come through Chanhassen. Councilwoman Swenson - Except for Chanhassen. I Don Ashworth - Understand, from our standpoint that, we looked at the Lake Ann Interceptor in 1970 it was going to go in. The City went ahead with that first phase and that was a cost of somewhere between $1 and $2 million. You are now talking about, we are the smaller portion in Service Area 4, 5%, a major portion of that 70% might come through SAC charges but this area will collect a good portion of those SAC charges. We are looking to easily 2,000 units so you are talking in excess of $1 million going into the metro system for metro sewers that will come from this area that basi- cally this alternate alignment provides no benefit. Additionally, to extend it northward is no benefit. That will come totally at local dollar expense and those people who will be assessed for that trunk, instead of being an interceptor will now pay for that trunk as well as pay the SAC units that will pay for the red line. We look at it in terms of our total costs. We cannot agree with your position that that is cheaper. Councilwoman Swenson - You are so will ing to take our dollars, an indivi- dual city1s dollars, for the overall system, what's the difference. You are talking about a few dollars that are going to come up later on anyhow but you are saying it's alright for the citizens of Chanhassen to have to pay this additional money but it's not okay for the whole system. We have to protect our citizens and I think our citizens are getting the shaft. Ken Bombach - At the last meeting we had here there was concerns expressed I about the large trench that would be occurring as a result of this construction and I brought some pictures along of our most recent project up in Anoka where we installed a 14 inch forcemain through a residential area. I I I Counci 1 Meeti ng June 21, 1983 - 1 3- Councilwoman Swenson - How do you propose to protect these citizens when this is going through as far as traffic is concerned and police service and fire service? Ken Bombach - There is only a narrow strip of road that is under construc- tion at anyone time so that you can get in from either side. Councilman Geving - This road is only 20 feet wide. Bob Schunicht - We are going to have to box a trench going through there and we will have to back-cast the material. We won't be able to put it on the side of the road because that would block the whole road. Councilwoman Swenson - I have lived in two neighborhoods when sewer has been installed and I have never lived through two more miserable summers in my life. The thing is torn up, you have got muck, mud, and mire and when it rains it is a mess and I think that that going through that magnificant piece of property up there it just makes me sick. Particularly when there is a more intelligent alternative. Councilman Geving - What will Lake Lucy Road look like when you are finished? Bob Schunicht - We have talked about a couple of things. We have got to fix what we tear up naturally. There are some high spots that should come down and we talked about trying to coordinate it with a small city project. Councilman Geving - We have tried that project and it has failed. There is only about eight to ten people out there. The people want it paved but they don't want to pay for it. Councilwoman Watson - You have got to understand, these people are going to watch a sewer go through and you are going to put a road down and say pay for it and they are going to say, oh yes, when the sewer goes through here I am going to get to buy myself a second street and they are not going to be interested. It is of no use to them and so why would they want to buy the road. Councilman Geving - That1s going to be a hard sell. I don1t want to be a part of that one. Bill Monk - It is plain to see where each side is coming from. I took a long time putting together my page and a half on what I think of the system and Chanhassen's position on the system. I am very frustrated. I feel for the engineer's from metro waste because I see they are trying to address a certain problem in the best engineering way and find the best and cheapest solution but I guess I get the feeling that there are things being dictated to metro waste from metro council that perhaps they don It even have control over and the biggest one that frustrates me is that if I could write it out right now what I thought would happen here would be that the Lake Virginia Forcemain would go through and in about 20 years the Highway 5 forcemain from Chanhassen will be upgraded to serve Chanhassen and the Lake Riley Interceptor will be deleted from the plan. Eden Prairie will basically be told to put in its own trunk because it serves only in Eden Prairie. That would be my guess. The frustrating thing to me is that we have two things working here it seems, overall cost and unwritten, perhaps I am being para- Council Meeting June 21, 1983 - 14- noid, but some type of overriding control that existing problems are to be solved but that under no circumstances are extensions to be put in to open up other areas for IIpremature developmentll. The City cannot argue that I point. It seems that all of the work on the compo plan may come back and haunt us and there are the recent met council staff dictate to us that our MUSA Line now looks like a MUSA Line that will control our destiny until 2005 comes at a strange time. I just get the feeling that I can It punch my way out of the box. I understand what is being proposed. It is a solution to a problem. I don1t think it is the solution to the overall problem. The item, I guess, is going to have to go back to metro council and we will both be arguing the same things. I don't think the City can continue to win but I do believe the City would be remiss to stop arguing at this point. Mayor Hamilton - I think you are going back knowing that you have a resounding no from this group. We do not think that's the proper alter- native. Bill Moore - I just want to thank you for the opportunity to at least have this dialogue. We don't want to go around your back. We want to try and get it straight and tell you what our thoughts are and try to answer your questions. I guess we appreciate the City's position. CLEAN UP AROUND COLONIAL CENTER:. Councilman Geving proposed that George Donnelly be aske~~pect around Kenny's Markets for all the trash and litter and give them a warning or whatever it takes to get it cleaned up. Mayor Hamilton noted that the Chamber of Commerce has discussed the possi- I bility of putting out some trash receptacles. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT, HOME OCCUPATION ORDINANCE: Amend the second to the last sentence in Section-,-Qf proposed Ordinance 47-AG to read: No accessory buildings, other than existing accessory agricultural structures on the effective date of this ordinance, shall be used for such home occupations. Mayor Hami lton moved to approve Ordinance 47-AG, Home Occupation Ordinance. Motion seconded by Councilman Geving. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Swenson and Watson, Councilman Geving. No negative votes. Motion carried. SEMI-TRAILERS: Councilwoman Swenson noted that a semi-trailer has been parked just east of Apple Valley Red-E-Mix for several days. She also requested that something be done with the hopper that is laying along the railroad tracks at the Apple Valley Plant. Councilman Geving asked that staff contact Apple Valley to remove the hopper. STATUS REPORT TEICH GRADING PERMIT APPLICATION: The City Engineer pre- sented a report on the status of the grading permit. Councilman Geving moved to adjourn. Motion seconded by Mayor Hamilton. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Swenson and Watson, Councilman Geving. No negative votes. Motion carried. Don Ashworth City Manager I