Loading...
1981 08 17 I I I REGULAR CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 17, 1981 Acting Mayor Neveaux called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. with the following members present: Councilwoman Swenson and Councilman Horn. Councilman Geving came late. Mayor Hamilton was absent. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilwoman Swenson moved to approve the agenda as presented with the following additions: Hanus permit, Sorenson acquisition, report on Baltic and change regular meeting date of September 7. Item 8a. of the Consent Agenda was deleted. Motion seconded by Councilman Horn. The following voted in favor: Acting Mayor Neveaux, Councilwoman Swenson and Councilman Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING CARVER BEACH DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Acting Mayor Neveaux called the hearing to order with the following interested persons present: Foster Janich, 750 Carver Beach Road Russell G. Tenney, 725 Kemball St. NE, Fridley Andy Borash, 6725 Nez Perce Robert and Gloria Wiest, 840 Carver Beach Road George and Melvin Herrmann, 795 Carver Beach Road Kermit Johnson, 777 Carver Beach Road Lewis Woitalla Steven and Bonnie Oien, 6780 Lotus Trail Len and Nancy Orloski, 841 Carver Beach Road Mike Brue, Carver County Herald Bill Monk explained the scope of the project. The proposed improvement includes construction of concrete curb and gutter and catch basins on Carver Beach Road to collect the runoff from the west. This water will then be piped to Lotus Lake. The estimated total cost of the project is $27,079. It is proposed that the entire drainage area tributary to the piped system be assessed on an area type basis. He recommended several options to reduce the cost of the proposed project. 1. Use city maintenance forces to perform as much work as possible on the project. 2. Apply for whatever funds are available from the Watershed District and SCS to reduce the assessments. 3. Fund the extension of all existing culverts from the east side of Lotus Trail to the lake as a park cost since this work was included to stabilize and improve the park. This amount totals $15,448, and would reduce the project assessment. The hearing was opened for comments from the floor. Kermit Johnson - When did the problem start? Bill Monk - It is my understanding that the erosion problem in that area has existed for quite some time. Kermit Johnson - When they put in sewer and water and paved the streets, why wasn't it taken care of then and the assessment spread over the whole Carver Beach area rather than coming down to just a few people when Carver Beach Road is the main thoroughfare in to that almost everybody uses which creates the majority of the problem. I question your map as to how you have got it drawn out. In a heavy rain I would say that a lot more people are included in this than what is drawn out. The park would be contributing water to it. Bill Monk - I don't know exactly why it was not handled when the rest of Carver Beach was done. Carver Beach was handled as a series of partial culvert extensions and drainage ditches and whatever. No extensive storm sewer systems were put in when the sewer and water went through. I don't know the reasoning behind that except probably to keep costs down and that type of thing. Craig Mertz - In any event, if it had been done with the Carver Beach Project the City could have only spread the storm sewer costs against the drainage Council Meeting August 17, 1981 -2- area anyway. Not against the entire neighborhood. Kermit Johnson - I contend that the problem mustn't have been very large before some contractor carne in and put housing down below and changed I the natural flow of how water would go which creates the problem. I sympathize with the people down there but I don't feel I should be paying so that their lots become a heck of a lot more valuable than what they are now. You are asking us to take and put our money in to make those lots buildable when the City of Chanhassen was remiss in not having the contractor do something at the time that they constructed and relandscaped that lower area down there and I don't feel that I should be paying anything towards a problem that is created by God. He makes water go down hill, I don't. I don't think I contribute that much to it. Acting Mayor Neveaux - Typically this kind of public improvement project is the most difficult of any that I am sure anyone on the Council or on staff can deal with because it's the guy at the bottom of the hill who has got the problem. The guy at the top of the hill doesn't have the problem~ doesn't believe that he is contributing to the problem and doesn't feel that he should have to take care of it. These kinds of drainage projects and they are all alike~ it's difficult but in fact the drainage area, the water does run down hill and everyone has got to pitch in to take care of it. Kermit Johnson - Why isn't all of Carver Beach included seeing that this is the main road coming into Carver Beach and because it is a tar road the road will not absorb any water. We are footing the bill for the whole neighborhood of Carver Beach for that stretch of road because it drains down hill. Why isn't the whole neighborhood I included because that road you have to have. It's not like a side street that you don't have to actually have. Acting Mayor Neveaux - In this kind of project you need to assess it based upon benefit and perhaps the attorney can give a better definition. Kermit Johnson - I don't see any benefit to me. Acting Mayor Neveaux - Obviously, you are on the top of the hill. Kermit Johnson - I am not denying that I am contributing to their problem but I am saying the problem has arisen, there was no drainage problem till somebody put housing down there and the City of Chanhassen should have known, they could look up the hill and see that there is a culvert there is going to be a lot of runoff down there. Something should have been done at that time. Acting Mayor Neveaux - It also is a question of timing as to when these projects are going to be done. We could go out and repair and correct every drainage problem within the City before it's really creating a "probleml1 but there would not be enough folks out there to be able to afford to pay for it so typically we do them as problems develop. The water, I am sure, has always run down that hill and over that piece of property. Kermit Johnson - Right now I got a spot in my lawn that didn't get enough fill so now I can come up to the City of Chanhassen and have all my neighbors because the neighbors live up higher than me are contributing to water that comes in my low spot that I got I to wait to dry up after every half decent rain. The contractor who built these homes down there, obviously he didn't landscape properly because he did not take into consideration that there was a water run down that way. Councilman Horn - I got the impression that you indicated that there are portions of the road other than the people who are here that run into this I I I Council Meeting August 17, 1981 -3- area. Kermit Johnson - You look at the park. You look at a heavy rain. That park is contributing to the water. Councilman Horn - Everybody whose water runs into that street that ultimately goes into this is being assessed aren't they? Bill Monk - We sent a survey team to run a quick line around the area that is tributary to the problem and the map that is included in the feasibility is a result of that survey. There are properties along Carver Beach Road that slope drastically away and do not drain onto Carver Beach Road. When we ran the topo we found that the park land ran down toward County Road 17. I cannot deny though in a very heavy rain that some of the water may spillover into this area but the result of the survey is as you see on the map. Councilman Horn - I would also think that as in other areas if a portion of a property runs into this that any portion of the property that runs into it would be assessed. Craig Mertz - If they are on the notice for the initial hearing. Foster Janich - My property does not drain into the road or any part of it and yet I am being assessed for it. My property all drains down hill. I can prove it by looking in my front yard, it's full of water after every rain and the only reason is it doesn't go out on the road it comes down into my yard. I am not complaining about it. I am taking care of that myself and I don't see why I should help pay for somebody elses. Lewis Woitalla - I want to know how you come to the conclusion that this drainage is improving my property? Craig Mertz - In case of storm water projects the legal principle is that everyone that contributes water to the improvement is benefited by the removal of the problem when the construction takes place. Lewis Woitalla - I talked to my attorney and he said that the law states you cannot assess any property unless this drainage is improving my property which raises the value of my property which it is not doing because to do that I would have to have a puddle in my property and this would have to drain my puddle. I have never had a problem with water on my property. Acting Mayor Neveaux - It gets back to the top of the hill folks versus the bottom of the hill folks and the top of the hill folks never have a problem. The folks up on top are contributing to the problem and should have a hand in clearing it up. Lewis Woitalla - We are not contributing just because we own this property. It's an act of God that this water comes on his property and runs down. These people have a problem. I feel sorry for them because what should happen here is that the contractor is liable for that because he built in a natural water drain which a permit should not have been issued for that. The inspector should have caught that when he inspected the footings and now these poor people, they can get stuck for that unless they can come back and get this contractor. We are sticking money in to improve his property which isn't his fault. I know for a fact that the builder is going to be putting another house in Carver Beach very shortly. The permit that was issued on this house is no different that if the village would have issued a guy a permit to build a house in a dry creek bed which is activated after every rain, after snow melt or anything like that and that's identical to this because it's been there for years. It will never change. If you check with an environmental people you cannot put a steel culvert all the way down there and drain this into the lake because you are taking all the dirt off the road and tar and salt and it takes it directly to the lake. The DNR isn't going to approve that. Acting Mayor Neveaux - We have been in contact with the DNR, Watershed District and Soil Council Meeting August 17, 1981 -4- Conservation Service for appropriate permits . Lewis Woitalla - We can fight this because we don't want stuff like that going into our lake. Craig Mertz - The dilemna that the City Council was in at the time was we knew there were drainage problems with the particular lot. When you get a building permit application your choice is basically to grant the permit and hope for the best or else buy the lot and turn it into a drainageway and if you buy the lot and turn it into a drainage way arguably that cost could be assessed against the drainage area. Lewis Woitalla - My question wasn't answered, how this drainage system is improving my property. Craig Mertz - If you have drainage problems in the area and we have a house falling into the lake, that type of thing has a depressing affect on property values in the entire neighborhood. If there are drainage problems in an area, they are unsightly and would have a depressing affect on the neighborhood. Lewis Woitalla - I don't have a drainage problem. Craig Mertz - You do. You are in the drainage area that contributes to the problem. Acting Mayor Neveaux - You don't have a "problem" but you are contributing to a problem within the drainage area. I would like to hear the attorney's interpretation of benefit as it applies to this type of project. Craig Mertz - The City's appraiser, in previous court cases, has following the line of reasoning that when there are drainage problems in a neighborhood they are unsightly and that has a depressing affect on the property values in the drainage area and once those problems are removed you can demonstrate a resultant increase in market value on the houses in the drainage area. I Russell Tenney - I own the land right where the culvert goes under the road and I blame the city for draining all that water down on my property, into the culvert, down the hill. I don't know just when the culvert went in but I know the culvert wasn't there 25-30 years ago. I consider development, black top. That all drains down and it all goes right into a catch basin on my property and through the culvert and dmvn the hill. Craig Mertz - My understanding is that there was a culvert there at the time we dug up the road in connection with the Carver Beach Sewer and Water Project. This was a replacement rather than a new installation. I Foster Janich - I have lived out there close to 50 years and that culvert has been under that road ever since I have been there. It was different earlier because we had ditches. When they came in to put in the roads and paving they eliminated the ditches and put in paving as run way for the water so they have increased the flow of water by their paving the roads considerable over what it used to be. That made a difference, in the old days when it followed the ditches you lost some of it by absorption in the ditches and the dirt. You lost some of it going down the hill. It cut a groove five or six feet deep down that hill. It was obvious it had been there. Acting Mayor Neveaux - The reason for this improvement is that conditions have changed somewhat over the years. I Foster Janich - The only thing that has changed is you let a building permit where one should never have been given and your inspectors never corrected it when they were out there. That's the biggest mistake. Steve Oien - Everybody makes mistakes, I guess, but it seems to be a big problem right now and I think we should take care of the problem. What can we I I I Council Meeting August 17, 1981 -5- do? Tear down the house? Foster Janich - Go after your contractor. Nancy Orloski - I want to know the legality behind who is assessed for the problem that does exist? I seem to feel that the problem is caused because of the roadway and that roadway is the only route in to Carver Beach area therefore, should be shared by all the residents. Craig Mertz - The answer is, the Engineer determined the project area on the basis of the drainage boundaries. That is the traditional way to assess storm sewer projects. Acting Mayor Neveaux - If you received an assessment and felt that you were not within that drainage area you would have good reason to go to a court of law and say, they put me into this drainage area but I do not contribute to it and hence I should not be assessed. Nancy Orloski - I just feel it's a problem that should be shared by all the residents not only the ones that happen to live there. Craig Mertz - It would be hard in court to justify assessing beyond the boundaries of the drainage area. You should keep in mind that if the City Council disregarded that bit of advice and assessed the project neighborhood wide that you would be exposed then on every other drainage problem in Carver Beach that comes before the City Council on a similar improvement issue. You may aggravate your potential liability rather than diminish it. Lewis Woitalla - About a month ago there was the same thing that happened in a different county. It was a trailer court that was involved same like situation as we are. They were going to assess this trailer court for drainage that they didn't need because they were up higher and the drainage was down below and it went to court. The trailer court won because the people didn't need this drainage. It was the people beyond it that needed the drainage. Craig Mertz - I am not prepared to comment on it because I am not familiar with the facts of that particular case. Acting Mayor Neveaux - In every drainage project that I have been involved with at the City Council level, they have all been looked at with this same "benefit" that in fact if you are contributing to that watershed of the way the runoff of your property goes, you will be assessed and have been assessed. That's the way we have done it previously and it has been the fairest. Kermit Johnson - What I have got from the gist of this meeting is anytime I want to go out and contract a home to be built and through my contractor's mistakes; the landscaping, whatever, not looking at all the problems and the City not looking at all the problems, I can come back to the City Council and say my neighbors land is draining on my property. So what if it's my fault or so what if it's the contractor who built the house, let my neighbors pay for it. That's what in fact I have got from the gist of the meeting. Acting Mayor Neveaux - The issue is in fact the drainage area. If there is some damage to the property that the Oien's are suffering, they have a civil litigation potential against their developer and/or against the City. We are looking right now at a storm water improvement project that has a lot of history behind it as to fault and blame and I hope we have got it all out of our system tonight about who's at fault. We have gored enough oxes and crucified enough people. The fact of the matter is we have a very serious problem that we need to get resolved. It is no different than any other drainage project that I have seen in this City. We have got water running from the top of the hill down to the bottom of the hill. Council Meeting August 17, 1981 -6- Craig Mertz - At the time the Oien building permit application was in the City Office the choice was either issue the permit or buy the lot. You have got to remember that the City is nothing more than the taxpayers I and you are the source of funds and to say that the Oiens ought to sue the municipality is no solution. Even if the Oiens did sue the municipality and they may well do that, the restoration and repair work will still have to be done and the only decision is are you going to spread the costs city wide or are you going to spread it only as far as the boundaries of the drainage district. That's a policy decision. Andy Borash - It seems to me at the first meeting we had here the homeowner that the builder had agreed to fix that and he didn't do it. there been anything done about going after the contractor? I want to pay for this either. Why should the City be involved in the first place? Don Ashworth - The permit was issued by the building department. The Council had reviewed each of the lots in that area. The choice, if you are not going to allow a person to build on a lot which has been assessed and which is a buildable lot under your zoning ordinance, the only other option is literally to purchase the lot. Acting Mayor Neveaux - If in fact there were some conditions placed upon the permittee as far to correct drainage problems and if in fact there were and he didn't do it, why has not someone pursued that individual to make him make some kind of repairs or restitution to contribute to this project? Don Ashworth - At the time the Council reviewed those they did establish conditions similar to those used in Trolls-Glen and that is that there was a concern that the house might literally fall into the lake and the applicant would put a statement into writing as to responsibility for that potential homesite and again recognition of a problem that may be created. Whether or not that can or cannot be interpreted to mean that that builder is responsible for upstream drainage, I can't answer. Acting Mayor Neveaux - Did he not sign the permit that said that he would make some changes to the lay of the land so that there would not be a building problem and relieve the City of liability for or in the event that the house tumbled down into the lake that the City would be resolved. Don Ashworth - That's correct. Whether or not that statement, in other words the type of correction that would be required on the lot itself, is in fact a waiver of responsibility to correct upstream drainage, I couldn't answer that. Acting Mayor Neveaux - To the best of your knowledge, is that person that signed the contract or permit available? Craig Mertz - I believe the gentleman is in the area, however, the company that built the Oien's house claimed that they don't know the gentleman who signed the agreement. The focus of the agreement was whether or not the house was going to fall down the hill into the lake. That was the area of concern not the drainage problems occurring because of water being concentrated at the culvert at the top of the hill. Lewis Woitalla - Actually you guys knew this problem was there. Craig Mertz - We knew there was a problem with the hill. The choice ,vas buy the property or issue the building permit and if we buy the property it's the taxpayers who buy it. Lewis Woitalla - It still would have been cheaper if all the taxpayers would have bought it. Say the whole Chanhassen Village then just a few of us pay. Craig Mertz - You are assuming that the decision would have been to spread the cost said Has don't in this I I I I I Council Meeting Ausust 17, 1981 -7- city wide. The decision could have been the other way to spread the cost drainage district wide. Acting Mayor Neveaux - I would be very, very prone not to spread that kind of cost city wide but in fact include that into a project to clear up the problem. The problem is there now. It has been there for some time. Melvin Herrmann - It's been the natural waterway. You have got swamps and low spots all around there. We've got one coming up on the northeast section by Derrick. They want to drain the swamps and everything, are all the people around there going to pay for that? Acting Mayor Neveaux - That's a land development. We are talking about a project specifically within a platted, essentially developed area. Melvin Herrmann - It's the same thing. Just because it's one or two houses or 100 doesn't make any difference. It's in a natural waterway. This doesn't make sense. Acting Mayor Neveaux - In essence you are spreading it out upon the affected lots but one developer is paying for it. Andy Borash - Evidentally the City has not gone after the builder or checked into it at all. Could there be something done about that rather than taking the easy way out and assessing. Craig Mertz - Our claim against the builder is very weak in view of the fact that the is either buy the property or issue the building permit. Andy Borash - According to the homeowner, the builder had agreed to do this. Acting Mayor Neveaux - That gets back to he has got an action between the builder/ developer and himself but that's a civil matter. It does not affect the city as such. Councilwoman Swenson moved to close the public hearing. Motion seconded by Councilman Horn. The following voted in favor: Acting Mayor Neveaux, Councilwoman Swenson and Councilman Horn. No negative votes. Hearing closed at 8:45 p.m. CARVER BEACH DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT: Councilman Horn moved to table action on this item to September 21, 1981 at which time the Council will consider the project and also consider awarding the bids. Alternate sources of funding be pursued and be available to the Council on September 21. Motion seconded by Councilwoman Swenson. The following voted in favor: Acting Mayor Neveaux, Councilwoman Swenson and Councilman Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. Councilwoman Swenson suggested that staff make sure the City has covered all the bases with the DNR, Soil Conservation Service, and Watershed District regarding sedimentation and the flow into Lotus Lake. PUBLIC HEARING LOTUS TRAIL STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Acting Mayor Neveaux called the hearing to order with the following interested persons present: Peter and Hermine Lustig, 6699 Mohawk Drive Foster Janich, 750 Carver Beach Road Andy Borash, 6725 Nez Perce Bob Wiest, 840 Carver Beach Road Steven & Bonnie Oien, 6780 Lotus Trail Len and Nancy Orloski, 841 Carver Beach Road Cyndee Newville, 6720 Lotus Trail Roger Byrne, 6724 Lotus Trail C. E. Favorite, 6680 Lotus Trail Robert Nygren, 6650 Lotus Trail Council Meeting August 17, 1981 -8- The purpose of the public hearing is to consider the improvement of Lotus Trail from Ponderosa Drive to Napa Drive to a 20 foot wide bituminous street at an estimated cost of $48,180.00. A recommendation was made that all piping of the I culverts from the east edge of Lotus Trail to the lake be picked up by the Park Fund as they will improve and stabilize the park property. This would reduce the assessment rate to $25.50 per foot. Councilman Geving came at this point in the meeting. Councilwoman Swenson - I would like to know if the City Manager's comments are still valid in the July 28, 1981, report. Don Ashworth - Yes. I believe those comments are still meaningful and those are, in the past the City has looked at determining whether or not the City should assume assessments against public property on a case by case basis. Although there have been assessments which the City has picked up for city owned property and every case there has been a direct relationship between that property and some type of service. For example, sewer and water, street. In terms of Lotus Trail it becomes very difficult to justify any type of assessment to the city as that represents a steep bank. If that were under private ownership we would not be assessing that because of the nature of the land. It would be very difficult to uphold some type of an assessment against it. The hearing was opened for comments from those in attendance. Roger Byrne - Everybody would like to see the road blacktopped but everybody looked at the feasibility study and said wow, who can afford this. The I thing is your City Manager just said the City doesn't benefit from that property so the City shouldn't take half the assessment. That's not true at all. The City has a boat launch down there. There is traffic up and down the road to the boat launch. There is a small beach down there. People from the neighborhood and other people from the new addition are starting to use that. I realize the City doesn't recognize that as a beach but still it is City park land and people do use it. People fish all along that shore down there. That land down there is used quite a bit. I would say it is used just as much as the public beach over on the other corner where the point is. The City should really consider paying half because they are on half and we are on the other half. Everybody down in that place, that is the access out of there. You have got "Devil's Slide" that has a sign there that it is not a public road. Everybody that lives down there essentially benefits from that road. They have to use it in and out. Maybe we should consider assessing everybody that lives down there that uses that road too. I was looking at the feasibility study and there is a whole bunch of stuff that we don't need. We petitioned just to get the road blacktopped. They have got $3,000 for sod and $1500 for mulch and this for seed. Everybody is happy with the weeds that we have now. I think the feasibility study should be looked at real closely. Bill Monk - The largest item is the wearing course estimated at $20,000. Additional cost for Class 5 crushed rock of $1250. The other costs must of them I are miscellaneous. They are estimates to cover how much land outside the paving that may actually be disturbed. The sodding, seeding, fiber blanket are nothing more than estimates on areas that may be disturbed as construction takes place. Some of the banks are steep and may be disturbed when the street goes in and we try to put in some items and costs that may be incurred. There is a recommendation that the cost of the culverts necessary to extend down to the lake to help I I I Council Meeting August 17, 1981 -9- stabilize the park land that they be taken out and that would include $7,600 from the overall cost and that is a staff recommendation. Acting Mayor Neveaux - Getting back to the sodding, seeding, mulching, filter blanket, when a project goes in like this you need to stabilize that disturbed earth and not just wait for the weeds to grow up. I am sure some of the approving agencies like the DNR and Watershed District would make those conditions of the project in their review if we didn't have them in there. Bill Monk - We also did not contemplate putting in catch basins in this area but instead to use the existing culverts and construct openings around the end of those culverts to act as a catch basins in an attempt to reduce the cost as much as possible. Over all the costs per foot do not seem high. The one problem is the park on one side and whether the park should participate. Hermine Lustig - Lotus Trail is getting much more than a local street. There is a lot of traffic from people who use the lake for boating. They launch their boats at the end of Napa. If the City did a traffic count there I am sure you would see that the traffic there is many times what can be expected from just a few local residents on that street and therefore we feel that the City should pay part of the costs. It is not like any of the other local streets that's just being used by the people that live there. Acting Mayor Neveaux - You are aware of the proposal to put in a boat landing in the north end of Lotus Lake on property that the City owns. If that does not go through there might be even more traffic down there than there is now if that's the access that the City finally decides on. Hermine Lustig - I think the City should assume a part of the cost in view of the fact that this road benefits the entire City and not a few residents whose property borders it. Roger Byrne - If we can't get the costs down where everybody is satisfied can we withdraw our petition? We were talking before we might just live with the dust for awhile and petition to have it oiled a couple times a year. Councilwoman Swenson - Does not the dirt road in itself absorb some of the water so that there will be more dxainage going into those culverts and does just the water now flow to the east across park property down into the lake and have a certain amount of percolation through that land before it hits the water? Bill Monk - The runoff coefficient between the existing gravel out there and the blacktop, there would be some difference but I would question the difference, whether it would be that significant. A lot of the water runs now along the west side away from the lake and erodes that ditch and funnels that through. That is one of the things that we would try and alleviate with paving would be to reduce the amount that actually' washes into the lake. Roger Byrne - There is probably 15 truck loads of gravel out in that lake right now. It just keeps washing out that road. Peter Lustig - I just want to reiterate Mr. Byrne's question, what would happen if we would rather not go through with this request? How would that be handled? Acting Mayor Neveaux - I guess we would decide not to proceed with the project. That's the purpose of the public hearing to get some imput to help out decision as to whether to proceed with the project and go ahead and let the bids and expend more time and effort of staff. Councilman Horn - I guess we ~n1y have one comment savine that so far and that's part of Council Meeting August 17, 1981 -10- tie public hearing process. If that's the general consensus of the people out there then we would like to hear that. Roger Byrne - How can we tell if we don't know what it's going to cost us? That's the whole problem. I want it if the City would pay half and they cut some of that stuff out. Acting Mayor Neveaux - You want it at $15 a foot but you don't want it at $31. Roger Byrne - It's a fair price at $15. There would be no problem. Acting Mayor Neveaux - I am hearing from staff that $7600 is a reasonable amount. If we are talking in terms of a $48,000 project where City participation would be half, where would be come up with $7600 or $24000? Don Ashworth - The City Council has to make a determination as to benefit. Under State Law you do have the authority to literally tax all of the people within the community the cost for that City share. Acting Mayor Neveaux - You are saying we don't have that kind of funds available. We don't have a fund to pull $24000 out of and apply it to this project. We would have to go out and assess it under general obligation I would guess so that everybody within the City gets bumped a little bit to pay for half of your road. asking me to put the road and for Acting Mayor You are half of either. Neveaux - up funds that I don!t have to pay for your my part of the road too. That!s not right Roger Byrne - Roger Byrne - My point is that it's so easy sometimes for us to say, well, gee, let's let the City pay for it. Why doesn't the City do that. We don't have the monies to do it unless we get it from you. If the City can't maintain their land why don't they liquidate it? It's the City!s property, if they can't maintain it or if they can't handle it, sell it and make some money out of it. I am sure you could get plenty of buyers for that land. If I can!t come up with the money to pay for mine I have got to sell and get out. Foster Janich - I also own property on Lotus Trail, quite a good sized strip and I didn't know anything about this petition that came until I was sent something in the mail notifying me of this meeting. I had no voice in choosing to say yes or no to the project. Personally I would have to say no because I am trying to live on social security $280 a month. It's impossible and to pay the assessments that I would have to pay on those lower lots of mine, forget it, I couldn't do it. Hermine Lustig I wanted to add something to my previous statement, because of the frequent traffic by people who do not live on Lotus Trail there is the dust problem for the residents there. If the other City residents woundn't use that road I doubt it would be so urgent for the residents to have this road paved. It is a public area. Peter Lustig - I still think that Mr. Byrne's statement is correct. maintain the park even though you can't build there, perfectly willing to buy a share of it and I am sure find others likewise. If you cannot I would be that we can Councilman Geving moved to close the public hearing. Motion seconded by Councilwoman Swenson. The following voted in favor: Acting Mayor Neveaux, Councilwoman Swenson. Councilmen Horn and Geving. No negative votes. Hearing closed at 9:25 p.m. I I I I I I Council Meeting August 17, 1981 -11- LOTUS TRAIL STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT: Councilman Geving moved to reject the feasibility study because the petitioners feel the costs are far too high and that they would like to withdraw their petition. Motion seconded by Councilwoman Swenson. The following voted in favor: Acting Mayor Neveaux, Councilwoman Swenson and Councilman Geving. Councilman Horn voted no. Motion carried. Councilman Horn - I would like to raise the issue of consistency in light of protecting the lake. I feel that by not acting on this is going to contribute to sedimentation running into the lake even if we fixed it up we probably wouldn't solve any of the nutrient runoff problems but we certainly would solve some of the sedimentation runoffs. At some point we are going to have to bite the bullet on this thing whether it's today or tomorrow. AWARD OF BIDS, AMERICAN LEGION SEWER AND WATER PROJECT 81-5: Three bids were received ranging from $26,380 to $38,037.50. RESOLUTION #81-29: Councilwoman Swenson moved the adoption of a resolution accepting the low bid from Encon Utilities of Burnsville in the amount of $26,380 for construction of sewer and water improvement project 81-5 in concurrence with the recommendation of the City Engineer and Schoell and Madson. Resolution seconded by Councilman Geving. The following voted in favor: Acting Mayor Neveaux~ Councilwoman Swenson, Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW, WALDRIP ADDITION: The Planning Commission and Council reviewed plans earlier this year and voted to disapprove the plan primarily for traffic circulation, land use, and density. This revised plan changes the overall land use by reducing the overall density to 2.2 units per acre. The City Planner recommended that Lot 10 should gain access from Moline Circle instead of Steller Drive. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the preliminary plan with the following conditions: 1. Extensive trimming of existing vegetation along County Road 117 will be required to allow proper sight distance on the Melody Hill Road extension. 2. To minimize disturbance of vegetation and eliminate the possibility of a hidden drive, the drive for Lot 10 should access to Moline Circle. 3. Both cul-de-sacs shall be constructed to City standards for a 28' wide urban section. 4. Moline Circle will have a steep grade and will require extensive site granding. 5. That the applicant work with City Planner in order to resolve the issues raised in the June 20 and 21, 1981, Planning Reports for incorporation into a Final Development Plan. The City Planner recommended approval of the Preliminary Development Plan subject to the following issues: 1. The setback for the parking area between the apartment building parking and lot 2. 2. The realignment of the access for Lot 10 onto Moline Circle. 3. The adjustments of the lot lines for Lots 4 and 16 to provide for adequate frontage on a public street. 4. Revision of the proposed covenants and restrictions to adequately provide for the long term maintenance of the landscaping and exteriors of the proposed structures and delete the provision for the stabling of horses. Mr. Waldrip suggested that Lots 2 and 3 be combined and also Lots 8 and 9 to insure adequate frontage on a public street. The City Engineer discussed the proposed sewer and water extensions throughout the development. Mr. Waldrip asked that the City extend the sewer and water and construct the streets and assess the costs to the benefitted properties. Council Meeting August 17, 1981 -12- Councilwoman Swenson moved to approve the Prelimina¡y Development Plan with regard to overall land use, density, and transportation circulation incorporating the Planning Commission recommendations 1-5 in the Planning Report of August 13, 1981, I and the Planning recommendations 1-4 in the Planning Report of August 13, 1981, as shown on Exhibit 2B dated May 27, 1981. The Developer shall not infer from the approval that the City will build the streets, sewer and water as a Chapter 429 project. Lots 2 and 3 and 8 and 9 be combined. Staff and the developer are directed to work on a phasing plan and the next step in development approval. The Council reserves the right to review the architectural renderings. Motion seconded by Councilman Geving. The following voted in favor: Acting Mayor Neveaux, Councilwoman Swenson, Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. WATER PRESSURE, GREG BERNHARDT: Mr. and Mrs. Bernhardt were present asking the City to reimburse them for the expenses involved in installing their house pump. The Utility Department has adjusted the valves in the pressure reducing station to increase the water pressure in the Trolls-Glen area. The City Engineer stated that this house will require a pump because the house is so high above the street that the Bernhardt's will not get proper pressure without a pump. The Engineer recommended that the City not pay for the pump. Councilman Geving moved to deny the request by Mr. and Mrs. Bernhardt to reimburse them for the installation of the water pump in their home. Motion seconded by Councilman Horn. The following voted in favor: Councilwoman Swenson, Councilmen Geving and Horn. Acting Mayor Neveaux voted no. Motion carried. Acting Mayor Neveaux - I believe that the individual suffered some damages as a result of this. To have us sit up here and quibble over $700 is absolutely ridiculous. We have spent $700 worth of I staff time in the past six months working on this. I just feel we really blew it on this one. I think we could have discussed splitting the cost with him for his inconvenience. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, TENNIS COURT FENèE, THOMAS MORGAN: Mr. Morgan is seeking a conditional use permit to construct a 10 foot high fence on the perimeter of a tennis court located at 3411 Shore Drive. Mr. and Mrs. Morgan and Marion Posthumus were present. Mrs. Posthumus voiced objection to the tennis court and the fence. She feels a tennis could should be considered a structure. Councilman Horn moved to approve the conditional use permit request for a ten foot fence. Motion seconded by Councilwoman Swenson. The following voted in favor: Acting Mayor Neveaux, Councilwoman Swenson, Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. Councilwoman Swenson requested that the zoning ordinance be clarified to define a tennis court as a structure. MINUTES: Councilwoman Swenson moved to approve the July 27, 1981, Council minutes. Motion seconded by Councilman Horn. The following voted in favor: Acting Mayor Neveaux, Councilwoman Swenson, Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carred. Councilman Horn moved to approve the August 3, 1981, Council minutes. seconded by Councilman Geving. The following voted in favor: Acting Councilwoman Swenson, Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes. carried. Motion Mayor Neveaux, Motion I Council members requested attendance records for all commission members during 1981. I I I Council Meeting August 17, 1981 -13- BILLS: Councilman Geving moved to approve the bills as presented; checks #12850 through #12935 in the amount of $124,529.70, checks #16840 through #16946 in the amount of $247,078.97, and checks #16779 and #16780 in the amount of $50,320.00. Motion seconded by Councilman Horn. The following voted in favor: Acting Mayor Neveaux, Councilwoman Swenson, Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. CONSENT AGENDA: Acting Mayor Neveaux asked if any council member wished to discuss any item on the consent agenda. There being no additional comments, Councilwoman Swenson moved to approve the following items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations b. Establish shooting permit fee. $3.00 Resolution #81-30 c. Conditional Use Permit, Beach Lot, Lotus Lake Estates. Motion seconded by Councilman Horn. The following voted in favor: Acting Mayor Neveaux, Councilwoman Swenson, Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried. SEPTEMBER MEETING DATE: Due to the first Monday in September being a holiday the regular council meeting will be held September 14. HANUS PERMIT: Councilwoman Swenson and Councilman Geving will meet with Don Hanus on Saturday, August 22 at 9:00 a.m. MIKE SORENSON ACQUISITION: Councilman Horn explained that Mr. Sorenson feels he should be compensated for monies expended while trying to get approval to construct a liquor store on his property at the corner of West 79th Street and Great Plains Blvd. Mr. Sorenson does not disagree with the appraisal done on his property for HRA acquisition. Council members generally felt this was an HRA consideration. 1981 HRA ATTENDANCE RECORD: Council members are concerned with the attendance of some of the HRA commissioners. METROPOLITAN INTER-COUNTY ASSOCIATION: Councilwoman Swenson will attend the August 19 meeting. Councilman Horn moved to adjourn. Motion seconded by Councilman Geving. The following voted in favor: Acting Mayor Neveaux, Councilwoman Swenson, Councilmen Geving and Horn. No negative votes. Meeting adjourned at 1:00 a.m. Don Ashworth City Manager