Loading...
1982 03 01 I I I REGULAR CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 1, 1982 Mayor Hamilton called the meeting to order with the following members present: Councilwoman Swenson, Councilmen Neveaux, Geving, and Horn. Carol Watson and Ladd Conrad were also present. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Geving moved to approve the agenda as presented with the addition of discussion on a letter from the Carver County Auditor regarding the County Assessor. Motion seconded by Councilman Horn. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwoman Swenson, Councilmen Neveaux, Geving, and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM Mayor Hamilton called the hearing to order at 7:40 p.m. Carol Watson and Ladd Conrad were present. No comments were received. Councilwoman Swenson moved Horn. The following voted Neveaux, Geving, and Horn. to close the public hearing. Motion seconded by Councilman in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwoman Swenson, Councilmen No negative votes. Motion carried. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM: Mayor Hamilton explained that the objective of the program is to provide a decent, affordable housing in a suitable living environment and expanded economic opportunities for primarily low and moderate income persons. In 1981 the City received $42,918 and in 1982 the City will receive $37,000. The City has spent none to date. The Community Development Director recommended activities for the Council to consider. 1. Preparation of a housing needs assessment study to determine if there exists a real need for new senior citizen housing and low/moderate income family housing. 2. Rehabilitation grant program for private owner-occupied homes. 3. If either or both of the above activities are funded, remaining grant funds should be placed in reserve for covering program administration costs and for future senior citizen housing site improvements and/or senior center development. A letter was received from Charles Hodge, Chairman Citizen Advisory Committee stating: "The committee strongly encourages the City to closely evaluate the market/need for elderly housing within the community's service area, to determine whether it is necessary to continue the reservation of Community Development Block Grant funds for development assistance. In that no CDBG funds are currently available for housing rehabilitation load or grants, and the success these programs have had throughout the Urban County program, the City is encouraged to give consideration to using a portion of the CDBG to support such a program locally." The Community Development Director recommended the Council table action on this item as some new information has been received on the use of these funds. Councilwoman Swenson moved to table action to March 15, 1982. Motion seconded by Councilman Geving. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwoman Swenson, Councilmen Neveaux, Geving, and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. MINUTES: Councilwoman Swenson moved to note the January 27, 1982, Planning Commission minutes. Motion seconded by Councilman Horn. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwoman Swenson, Councilmen Neveaux, Geving, and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION COMMITTEE: Mayor Hamilton - I have two comments (Planning Commission minutes January 27, 1982) Council Meeting March 1, 1982 -2- on the second page towards the bottom where it says Lake Study Committee it notes that"Waibel explained that the Lake Study Committee has been disbanned. The City Council would like to start an Ecological Committee." That is not the way this Council has suggested that item be handled. As I recall when we met to discuss the Lake Study Committee this City Council said that that is the sub-committee of the Planning Commission and it was up to the Planning Commission whether or not they wanted to disband the Lake Study Committee and start an Ecological Committee or they could continue with the Lake Study Committee. It is their committee to do with as they wanted. We did not, as a City Council, tell them that they should disband nor did we tell them that we wanted them to start an Ecological Committee. It was suggestion. That is the Planning Commission's sub-committee. We didn't tell them what to do and the way that it was handled I think by both the staff and the Planning Commission, is very poor. No letters were sent out informing the people who are on the Lake Study Committee of what the City's intent was nor did anybody ask for any input from them. Apparently from Clark and the people I have talked to most of them found out from God only knows who, somebody, I guess, called them and told them that you are not on the Lake Study Committee anymore and there isn't a Lake Study Committee. Scott Martin - There was a letter sent out to them. What exactly the letter said I don't know. There was a letter sent out to all memuers stating that the future of the committee was in doubt and there would be no meeting held until such time it was decided to establish a Lake Study Committee or an Environmental Protection Committee. I don't think the minutes do justice as to how that was represented. Councilman Horn - Could we have a copy of the letter? Mayor Hamilton - I think the thing that bothers me the most is that this Council never said that that group should be disbanded. I certainly bothers me when Waibel explains that the Lake Study Committee has been disbanded. It's up to the Planning Commission to disband that committee not for Waibel to make that decision. Scott Martin - I don't think that's what occurred. It was very clear to the Planning Commission that the Environmental Protection Committee was to be a sub-committee and the only question was whether or not that appointment would come directly to the City C6uncil or from the Lake Study Committee so that's why as a part of your agenda tonight is confirming the appointments. Mayor Hamilton - I realize why it's there but the way the whole thing came is not the way we want to conduct business in this City. that we are not going to have anybody volunteering to do That's a perfect way to shove people aside and tell them just not interested. Scott Martin - They were all invited to Mayor Hamilton - I realize that but they should have been invited a little more socially than that. Then the very next paragraph, it says "Partridge indicated that he would like to see some interest from the farmers and contractors from the City." I think that's fine that he should make that statement but I understand now that they want to specifically advertise in the paper for a farmer. I am sorry but I think that anybody who applies ought to be considered and I don't care if you are a farmer or a dentist, it doesn't make a rip to me what you do for a living. Certainly farmers have some ecological interest and perhaps have knowledge of that but to hold up a committee to say specifically that you want to have a farmer on there I think is asking for trouble. Then on about If we do anything. we are I I I I I I Council Meeting March 1, 1982 -3- the next page, "It was suggested that the Ecological Committee make up their own work schedule." It seems to me that when you have a sub-committee irregardless of who's sub-committee it is, you had better give them a pretty strong charge for what their responsibilities are going to be. There should be an outline given to them of what is expected of that committee. How often they are supposed to meet. Something laid out for them completely so there is no question about what they are supposed to do. I don't see that. There is no indication of that kind of thing. Councilman Horn - I think there is also a question about whether the existing Lake Study Committee would have to re-apply. Carol (Watson) indicated at the beginning of the meeting that the existing members would not have to re-apply and still the minutes state that the current members would have to re-apply to be in the form of a recommitment. That's what the minutes reflect. Carol Watson - They didn't have to fill out an application because we have an application on file from when they were on the Lake Study Committee. They just have to get an appointment. Councilman Neveaux - It says on my copy of the January 27 minutes that these minutes were approved on February 11 and amended on February 11 but we did not get copies of what amendments were made. Perhaps some of these items that the Mayor is talking about were in the amendments. Was it explained to you by Mr. Waibel that in fact the City Council had disbanded the Lake Study Committee? Carol Watson - I believe that was the way it was stated at the time. Last meeting after we got our minutes from the meeting where we did put the committee together they were most incomplete and last meeting we brought them up to date and did discuss the fact that they should meet specific nights, we didn't pick it out for them, and how often and what some of the things were that they would be discussing besides wetlands. Industrial pollution, clear cutting, sanitary landfill sites, this sort of thing. That there should be attendance standards and we did advertise specifically for someone from the rural area. Unfortunately this committee is pretty much Lotus Lake. Councilman Geving - But on the other hand they are the only ones that have really come forward and asked to be on the committee. Ladd Conrad - Being a resident I guess I don't see a problem with that. I think a lot of these people are really dedicated. The individuals that have applied for the committee are very strong individuals. It would be hard to come up with a better group of people than one that is currently on that. I would like to reinforce some of the things that have been said. I think because of a variety of reasons I think the old Lake Study felt slighted like they didn't really hear why they were being dissolved. They thought they had done a good job and I guess I have talked to a few of them and tried to re-assure them that there was a reason for the transition or change but there was a feeling on the Planning Commission that it was City Council dictate to absolve the old committee and bring back the old environmental protection committee. One thing that I can lay out and I think there is a difference, I am a little bit more aware of what the City Council has done as far as wetlands and the different projects the Derrick project, I don't think the rest of the Planning Commission has been that brought up to date with a lot of the presentations that you have heard and there probably haven't been with the same awareness as the City Council has with all the different types of environmental issues. I think there is a gap. I think that is a problem as far as urgency, as far as a lot of things between what you see and what the Planning Commission sees. I wasn't at the last meeting but I assumed that this disparity is starting to be a little bit less than it has in the past. Council Meeting March 1, 1982 -4- Councilwoman Swenson - This has been the ever present problem we have had. It is one of the reasons why I got involved some odd years ago. We just are having one heck of a time with communications between the City Council and the commissions. I Either staff is not properly reporting this, I personally I don't know who wrote these minutes but I think they are lousy. Excuse me, but I really do. I think they are poorly expressed, grammatically they are horrendously bad but the point remains that the communication, we can't sit down with the Planning Commission every time we all meet and say, now this is what we mean. For one thing we didn't say anything about an ecological committee. It's the Environmental Protection Committee. Do I understand from what you are saying that the Planning Commission appointed people for this new committee already? Ladd Conrad - He interviewed and made a recommendation. Councilwoman Swenson - We have got to do something about getting staff to communicate between these commissions. I don't know how this is going to be done but doggone it, some way or another we are going to have to do it because this keeps happening over and over and over again. We all, I know, are very interested, we have got to have close communication with the Planning Commission and with every other committee because this is the life blood of the City. I think there is something extremely wrong when we are going to have a volunteer party, this is the first year in the five years that I have been involved in this City that we haven't hadiust one whiz bang of a volunteer dinner and 30 people say they want to I come. We are doing something wrong. I guess that's all I have to say except that I think we all better, in addition to doing our homework, as far as these minutes are concerned we had better sit down and think about how we are going to take care of that because until we take care of that we are not going to successfully administer the City. Thank you. Mayor Hamilton - I was wondering what the heck was going on here. All kinds of things run through my mind when I see this kind of stuff being stated, specifically what the Council said to do something that we did not state that at all. I lust can't put up with it. There has got to be some corrections made. Something has got to happen to improve that and I haven't really found a solution to that yet. There is no way that this can continue. We have enough problems without creating more for ourselves and whether it's Waibel or somebody else it's, I hate to point fingers but God dang it you have got to at some time get this whole process straightened out and this is a real good time to start. Scott Martin - The only foolproof method is to have you approve your minutes and those minutes would be the record that you accepted as being what actually happened. Unfortunately the minutes for the Council meetings aren't done for quite some time after the meeting and it doesn't make sense to wait that long. Councilman Horn - But I think certain excerpts can be given especially when there is a charge to one of the other committees. An excerpt should be I given and read to that committee even if the total minutes are approved or not. Scott Martin - Except that excerpt may not be exactly what you felt occurred at that meeting either so the excerpt might be in error. There is certainly no attempt by staff or by any of the planning commissioners attending your meeting to misrepresent what goes on here. We I I I Council Meeting March 1, 1982 -5- represent what we think has occurred. I don't think these minutes do justice as to what actually occurred at that meeting. One example is that I don't recall at that meeting the cOmmittee ever being referred to as the ecological committee except possibly by a slip of the tongue because that was the former name of that committee and we have always referred to it as the Environmental Protection Committee. I think when you see the February 11 meeting minutes you will find that those are more, the Planning Commission spent more time talking about that committee and its charge and that's when they interviewed the candidates. Bob was convinced that the Council was going to make the appointments. I thought, how can that be, if the Council has said the committee should be a sub-committee of the Planning Commission. Mayor Hamilton -- I apologize to the Council for getting out of line on this particular item. Councilman Geving - I think you have got a good point Mayor and you know we can have these differences of opinion between the City Council and the Planning Commission but when it gets beyond that point and letters have gone out to our citizens who served on committees then I think it's gone beyond the point where~we have to step in and take a look at what damage this might have done to some of the good people who have worked on these past committees and I would like to personally see a copy of that letter if there was one that went to those people. Who wrote it? What did it say? Have they been more or less replaced on the Lake Study Committee? We should have at least given them a thank you. Let's look at it from that angle to see what damage has been done and get this thing back into shape because it certainly does not reflect my feeling of what went on that night when we tried to reinstitute the Environmental Protection Committee. SIGN PERMIT APPLICATION, IVAN'S SINCLAIR SERVICE STATION: Mr. Ivan Johnson is requesting approval to erect a wall-mounted sign on the front of the building at 7910 Dakota Avenue. The sign is proposed to be 2' x 16' stating "Complete Auto Repair". Staff recommended approval with the condition that the applicant remove the three portable signs located in the front yard of the property. Councilman Neveaux moved to approve the application for Ivan Johnson at his Sinclair Station at 7910 Dakota Avenue, Planning Case 82-2, incorporation the recommendation of the Community Development Director. Motion seconded by Councilman Horn. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwoman Swenson, Councilmen Neveaux, Geving, and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. SIGN PERMIT APPLICATION, NORTHWESTERN MUTUAL LIFE: Mr. Russell Keller is requesting approval to erect a 2' x 14 foot business identification sign for an insurance office located at 440 West 79th Street. The sign to be mounted on a fence-like structure located on the building canopy. Staff recommended approval. Councilman Neveaux moved to approve the sign application as shown on Exhibit A. Motion seconded by Councilman Geving. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilmen Neveaux, Geving, and Horn. Councilwoman Swenson voted no. Motion carried. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO ORDINANCE 28 AND PLANNING COMMISSION BY-LAWS: Councilman Horn moved to delete the last sentence in Section 2, subsection 2.01: One Commission member may be chosen by the Council from among its own members. Motion seconded by Councilman Geving. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwoman Swenson, Councilmen Neveaux, Geving, and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. Council Meeting March 1, 1982 -6- Council members suggested that a subsection by added in Section 7 of the Planning Commission By-Laws relating to sub-committees of the Planning Commission and permitting the Planning Commission to recommend appointments to the sub-committees. I Council members suggested a change to Section 4, subsection 4.2 of the By-Laws. The Chairman or in his absence, the Vice-Chairman, shall preside at meetings, appoint committees from its own membership, and perform other such duties as ordered by the commission. Council members suggested a change in Section 3, subsection 3.1 of the By-Laws. The Commission shall consist of 7 voting members. Seven members shall be appointed and may be removed by the Council. Councilman Neveaux moved to place Ordinance 28A on first reading. Motion seconded by Mayor Hamilton. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwoman S~venson, Councilmen Neveaux, Geving, and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS: Mayor Hamilton - I would like to suggest that establishing a nine member committee is a little excessive. The reason I heard that they appointed eight is because there were eight applicants. At some point you have got to take a stand and for whatever reason you have to say that something is unreasonable, that seven or five or some other number is more workable than nine. I think that has to be rethought out. They ought to reconsider the size and the make up and they ought to have some very specific directions to give to the Environmental Protection Committee as to what this I is what we want to have. The nine people are going to go off in nine directions. I think they need some specific direction. Councilman Geving - I think nine is far too many. Seven at the very most. Councilwoman Swenson - Yes. Councilman Neveaux - I agree. Councilman Horn - I agree. Mayor Hamilton - In the interest of time I suggest that this be sent back to the Planning Commission for reconsideration by them and that our comments tonight that they should rethink the whole process, that nine is excessive and it should not exceed seven members and that there should be some very specific guidelines drawn up prior to establishing that committee or there are alternatives to establishing that. You may even want to say, alright we know that there are a couple of people that we really want to have on this committee, make them a subcommittee of two or as we just talked about in the By-Laws, appoint a committee of three persons off of the Planning Commission to develop exactly what it is they want to do with this Environmental Protection Committee and then come back to the whole body of the Planning Commission and say, these are our findings, these are the number of people that we think we ought to have, this is the direction we want take, now let's proceed with that and,hopefully, we will get a much better committee established. Councilman Neveaux - Even the minutes of the Planning Commission of January 27 I state; The Planning Commission concurred that seven members is a good size. Councilwoman Swenson - May I address the Planning Commission members? When the Lake Study Committee was disbanded, did you send a letter to them at all? Bob Waibel - We made phone inquiries to them if they were interested in serving I I I Council Meeting March 1, 1982 -7- on the newly recreated committee. Councilwoman Swenson - They were invited, is that correct? Bob Waibel - They were invited by both letter and phone. Councilwoman Swenson - To re-apply? Were they going to have to re-apply? Bob Waibel - We were saying that if they want they can send in a new application. Councilwoman Swenson - Were there any responses to that? Bob Waibel - Ellen Chilvers responded and Court McFarland. Those were the only two. Councilwoman Swenson - How many people were on that Lake Study Committee? Bob Waibel - There were seven members. At the time we re-activated the committee for this wetland protection ordinance there were only five active members. Councilwoman Swenson - My recollection was that I understood that upon completion of the recreational beachlot ordinance their charge was completed and they themselves said their job had been done. Is that incorrect? I guess maybe we really didn't call them up and say, hay we don't want you anymore. This job is done. Now there is a new one opening up, are you interested? So, in fact, they do know that their tasks were appreciated I assume. Basically, I wanted to clear up the fact that it was my understanding that they themselves felt that their task had been completed. Councilman Horn - I don't believe they felt their task had been completed. I think they were waiting for the next charge and one of the things that frustrated them to quite a degree was the length of time between the time they finished their ordinance and they heard anything else back. We only passed the surface water usage ordinance last month. They completed their work on that over a year ago. It took that long to get it here. They got no more word as to what they should be working on next. In the meantime this big issue arose on this development going on Lotus Lake which turned into an environmental thing and it turned out that that was then going to be the next charge for a group and there was a lot of question about adding new members to that group for this one particular cause and some people not wanting to join one of the established city committees because they were only concerned with one issue but they wanted this issue to be brought up and to be part of just settling a one issue thing. That's my concern. I don't like to see committees set up for one specific issue. I don't like to see special interest go into the make up of these committees. I like to see committees set up in a general sense that represent a lot of different points of view. I think that's the only way that you are going to have a good workable committee and that's my concern with this whole thing is that I think people are now coming forward for one specific issue and once this is over I am not going to be on that committee anymore. We had a committee established of people who discussed general issues of which lake use and the outlot situation were specifically addressed. To me that was the framework that should have been established to work out these other issues. There were many other issues, like runoff that were talked about to be brought forth as a further charge to that committee that never came around and they were searching for the next thing to work on. That's my impression of what happened. In talking to Wally (Coudron) I don't get the impression that he felt the committee's work was done at all. The impression that I got from him was that he wasn't aware that there was a thought to disband this committee until he found out that he could re-apply for the new committee. Mayor Hamilton - I agree with what you say. I guess that brings up another alternative for the Planning Commission could consider two committees. Maybe there should be an environmental protection committee. Maybe there should be a lake study committee dealing with those issues. Not necessarily cut and dried fact that there is going to be only one Council Meeting March 1, 1982 -8- sub-committee and that's going to be the environmental protection committee. I think you have a very valid point, perhaps they should be doing other things that don't necessarily deal with the environment and that is why you have got to give the environmental protection committee a specific charge and outline exactly what it is that they are going to do and maybe after you look at that you will say, this group does not address runoff, for instance, or sOme other particular item that the lake study group could be doing. I think the whole thing was fired prematurely and without enough consideration and I think it's unfortunate what's happened because we may have a difficult time undoing what damage that has been done. We discussed the minutes of the Planning Commission when this issue was brought up before them and it was noted that you (Bob Waibel) relayed to the Planning Commission that, it says,Waibel explained that the Lake Study Committee had been disbanded. There are a couple of things \rrong with that. Having not been there we have already agreed that these are very poor minutes and probably do not reflect exactly what was said but if in fact that's what happened, something is wrong. The City Council did not say that the Lake Study Committee was to be disbanded. We said that is a sub-committee of the Planning Commission. It was up to them to decide what is going to happen to that committee. It is not up to you to decide. You don't tell them that a committee has been disbanded, it's their committee, they decide what the disposition of that committee is going to be. You can relay the information to them, what the Council has said. We did not, at that meeting, say that that committee was going to be disbanded. We said it was up to the Planning Commission. It looks to me like things kind of got out of whack there. It might have been a misunderstanding on your part from what we were saying and that was carried over to the Planning Commission. Bob Waibel - The Lake Study Committee felt that it was their charge to complete the wetlands protection ordinance because when the draft was reviewed by the Council the order was to take it to the Lake Study Committee and then put it in final form and hold the necessary public hearings. When they found that this ecological committee was to take care of this in lieu of them they were quite confused about what their role was at that point. Mayor Hamilton - It is an Environmental Protection Committee. Ladd Conrad - I perceive a month delay between the time we go back and consider it and go back and review the committee members. Maybe there are ways we can expedite it. That is a big concern. I think these people have applied. I think everybody on the Planning Commission felt really confident about the applicants and very seldom do you see eight good applicants come into the room. We would be happy \vith any of them. We felt that the scope of their knowledge was going to be beneficial and that the detriment of having a larger than normal committee was overridden by the fact of the knowledge that they would be bringing in representing, in some cases, different points of view. My real point, Mr. Mayor, is that I am concerned that we are talking about a delay and I just want to make sure that you feel comfortable that the issues are that significant that it's worth the delay. Mayor Hamilton - I think the issue is very important and I think it's unfortunate that what has happened has happened and put us two months behind. We best take the time right now and do it right. Councilman Geving - I have got eight applicants here for a committee that we said probably would not exceed seven and it would behove me to I I I I I I Council Meeting March 1, 1982 -9- determine just one of these eight would be chopped off this list. There is no rationale. Normally what we get from the Planning Commission is a list of people ranked the way you interviewed them and how you saw them so that we at least have a choice. Mayor Hamilton - I think it wouldn't hurt to have a special meeting to just review one item such as this to get started in the right direction. Councilman Geving - I particularly like the idea of giving them a work assignment. I think thatts the most important. Carol Watson - I agree completely. I really don't know all the jobs that should be encompassed within that committee. Maybe when this does come back staff can provide us with the information as to what is covered in environmental ordinance. What are all the issues. Counci~man Neveaux - That's what staff is for. Mayor Hamilton - Staff should help you and also you have got to consider the possibility of creating a sub-committee within your commission to get this thing moving and then it won't take up so much time of the total commission body. Bob Waibel - Should the Planning Commission at the same time work up a program for the Lake Study Committee to continue on? Mayor Hamilton - That is something they have to consider. If the Planning Commission feels that there ought to be two committees then I think they should review that. It's up to them to decide. Councilman Horn - Some of this, I believe, we have to layout too. This reclassification of lakes, I know, is being addressed by the Park and Recreation Commission because I have gotten calls from Park and Rec. Commission members about my statement saying that all the lakes should be environmental and protected lakes. Somewhere we have to set up guidelines as to who is responsible for what. I guess the initial reason that the Lake Study was a sub-committee of the Planning Commission was the zoning ordinance type of thing for outlots. Maybe we want to think about that. Councilman Neveaux - I thought a couple of months ago we had directed it to the Lake Study Committee to research that specific issue about the classification of the lakes within the City that DNR did back in 1977 or whenever. Councilman Horn - I am wondering if we should have been doing that. Maybe we were confused as to who the Lake Study Committee was reporting to and what their function was because, is that a Planning Commission function? Councilwoman Swenson - Absolutely. This is one of the sad situations of this poor Lake Study, Ecological, Environmental, you have never seen a more dedicated group of people in each committee but somehow along the line anything that they come up with gets shuffled to the bottom of the pile. You can't keep shuffling one committee or two committees to the bottom of the pile to make room for more "important" things. I realize that it's perhaps very difficult for staff to determine which is what. On the other hand we do have a group of dedicated people who are continually trying to do a job. Like you say Clark, we have a problem. Maybe they should report to the Park and Rec. and maybe it should come up from there. Park and Rec., I think, feels very slighted about a lot of these things because a lot of recommendations they make never come up here. Mayor Hamilton - They better be coming up to us. If they make recommendations they better come up. Councilman Horn - I think this whole issue of charters needs to be resolved. I think we need a special session so at least it is clear in our own mind and if staff is clear as to what our intent is. Mayor Hamilton - I think the By-Laws that we are seeing tonight for the Planning Commission are really good. It's a step in the right direction. Council Meeting March 1, 1982 -10- PLANNING COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS: Councilman Geving moved to appoint Bill Swearengin and the Planning Commission representative and Mike Thompson as Alternate to the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Motion seconded by Councilman Neveaux. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, I Councilwoman Swenson, Councilmen Neveaux, Geving, and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. POLICE ADVISORY COMMITTEE: Councilman Horn moved to appoint Mayor Hamilton, Dick Wing, Brian Erickson, and Candy Takkunen to the Police Advisory Cotl@ittee. Motion seconded by Councilman Geving. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton Councilwoman S~venson, Councilmen Neveaux, Geving, and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION APPOINTMENT: Councilman Neveaux moved to accept the Park and Recreation Commission recommendation and appoint Brian Foltz to the commission. Motion seconded by Councilman Horn. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwoman Swenson, Councilmen Neveaux, Geving, and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. ALARM USERS ORDINANCE: Larry King and Al Wallin, Sheriff's Office, and Jack Kreger, Fire Chief, were present. Officer King explained the purpose of the proposed ordinance is to encourage alarm users to keep their systems in good working order to eliminate a great number of false alarms. He asked the Council to delay action on the proposed ordinance until after the County Board of Commissioners has acted. At that time the Council could act on the ordinance. This would insure coverage for that portion of Chanhassen in Hennepin County. The City Attorney recommended that the Council adopt an alarm users ordinance which would allow the city to prosecute. This would extend into the Hennepin County portion of Chanhassen. He further noted that if a charge is made under a city ordinance they the city would get a portion of the fine. Officer King noted that the fines collected would be split the same way that traffic citations are split with Carver County. I Council members generally agreed that an ordinance is needed but felt the fee schedule should be revised. Staff was directed to prepare an ordinance using the county ordinance as a foundation. Councilman Neveaux moved to table action until such time as comments are received from Carver County Board and allow staff time to research how the proposed ordinance would fit within the City system. Motion seconded by Councilman Geving. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwoman Swenson, Councilmen Neveaux, Geving, and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. 1982 MTC PASSENGER SHELTER PROGRAM: A letter was received from MTC asking if the City is interested in participating in the passenger waiting shelter program. Participation ~vould require the city to participate in the cost of the shelter's construction by either paying 10% of the cost of the shelter installation (not to exceed $600) or supplying the necessary concrete base and assuming responsibility for routine maintenance. Councilman Neveaux moved to prioritize the following sites in 1. The southwest corner 9f the intersection of Dakota Avenue 2. HRA property (formerly Instant Web). 3. Vicinity of the intersection of Highway 212 and Highway Motion seconded by Councilman Horn. The following voted in Councilwoman Swenson, Councilmen Neveaux, Geving, and Horn. Motion carried. Chanhassen: and Trunk Highway 5. I 169. favor: Mayor Hamilton, No negative votes. I I I Council Meeting March 1, 1982 -11- SOLID WASTE ABATEMENT PROGRAM: Virginia Harris, Carver County Planning and Zoning Office, was present to review potential programs to be instituted by Carver County in collection with solid waste abatement. Discussion centered on community composting, recycling, public education, and long range alternatives to land fills. AGRICULTURAL PRESERVES, CERTIFICATION OF ELIGIBLE PROPERTIES: RESOLUTION #82-06: Councilman Horn moved the adoption of a resolution certifying property owned by Clayton Freeburg, Vendor/ George C. Dorsey, Jr., Contract for Deed Vendee as eligible land. A public hearing will be held by the Planning Commission as soon as possible. Direct staff to prepare proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance, if necessary. The application fee to be $50.00. Resolution seconded by Councilman Geving. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwoman Swenson, Councilmen Neveaux, Geving, and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. The City Attorney and Community Development Director were directed to come to an agreement as to whether an ordinance amendment is necessary or if Ordinance 45 is sufficient. CONSULTING ENGINEERING FIRMS: Councilman Neveaux moved to accept the Engineer's recommendation to select the following four firms to work with the City. Orr-Schelen-Mayeron & Associates, Inc. Consulting Engineers Diversified, Inc. Schoell and Madson, Inc. McCombs-Knutson Associates, Inc. Motion seconded by Councilwoman Swenson. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwoman Swenson, Councilmen Neveaux, Geving, and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. CONSENT AGENDA: Mayor Hamilton asked if Council members wished to discuss any item on the consent agenda. There being no further comments, Councilman Neveaux moved to approve the consent agenda pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations. a. DayCo Concrete Company, Amend Sign Permit. b. Baltic Litigation Cost, Authorize City Attorney to proceed pursuant to his letter of February 23, 1982. c. Ordinance 47 Amendment, Central Business District. d. Ordinance Establishing Reviewed Development Application Fees. Motion seconded by Councilman Horn. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwoman Swenson, Councilmen Neveaux, Geving, and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. COUNTY ASSESSOR: The City Attorney discussed a letter from Richard Stolz, County Auditor, regarding appointment of an assessor for the City of Chanhassen. Councilwoman Swenson moved to adjourn. Motion seconded by Councilman Horn. following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwoman Swenson, Councilmen Geving, and Horn. No negative votes. Meeting adjourned at 11:15 p.m. The Neveaux, Don Ashworth City Manager