1k. Minutes 1
1k
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
�.' OCTOBER 8, 1990
Mayor Chmiel called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m.. The meeting was opened
with the Pledge to the Flag.
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Workman, Councilwoman Dicier
and Councilman Johnson
STAFF PRESENT:. Don Ashworth, Gary Warren, Paul Krauss, Todd Gerhardt, Jo Ann
Olsen, Scott Harr, Roger Knutson and Sharmin Al-Jaff
' APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilwoman Dicier moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to
approve the agenda with the following changes and additions: Councilman Johnson
wanted to pull items 7 and 8 off the agenda as they had been approved by the
Board of Adjustments and Appeals and discuss placing the items from the Board of
Adjustments and Appeals on the City Council Agenda under Council Presentations;
Mayor Chmiel wanted to move item 9 to after Visitor's Presentations; and Don
Ashworth wanted to add under Public Announcements the presentation of a Maple
Leaf Award to Senator Schmitz and discuss the Community Center brochure under
Administrative Presentations. All voted in favor of the agenda as amended and
the motion carried.
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS:
rLetter Sent to Election Judges.
Mayor Chmiel: The first one that I'd like to take is the letters that I had
sent to all the election judges on behalf of City Council thanking them for
serving as an election judge in our city and want to at this particular time
recognize their willingness to volunteer for this election judge duty. Really
sincerely appreciate their dedication to our community for doing this and each
of those people did receive a personal letter from me. The next item on our
agenda is a presentation to Senator Bob Schmitz and I'd like, Bob if you would
come down to the front here.
Presentation of Maple Leaf Award to senator Bob Schmitz,
Mayor Chmiel: At this time I would like to thank you for all the assitance that
you've given to the city. We're worked very closely together in getting
accomplishments done as far as our TH 5 is concerned and TH 101. We really
appreciate that. With this I'd like to present to you from the City of
Chanhassen the Maple Leaf Award presented to Bob Schmitz, State Senator, 1974 to
1990. In recognition of 15 years of dedicated service to District 36 including
Chanhassen. Chanhassen City Council, Don Chmiel, Jay Johnson, Tom Workman, Bill
Boyt and Ursula Dicier. On behalf of the City once again thank you Bob for your
public service.
Bob Schmitz: Thank you very much. I can assure you that retiring is a lot more
fun than starting out. These things come along and certainly I will be
grateful. . . Chanhassen was one of the precincts or one of the areas that I
11 represented all 16 years. .. .Carver County and I can tell you that the work for
1
I
11
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
you people and with you people was indeed challenging.
Something that took a
little extra effort I'll admit but when we were successful, you folks were very
cooperative in supporting the challenge that was before you. I hope at least
that we have accomplished.. .your tremendous responsibilities of guiding a new
community along it's way. Something that all suburbs have experienced.
Certainly probably not as such as some of those in my district and yours is
certainly one of them. My district in 1982 had 60,100 people and now there's,
from the numbers from Met Council that gives us slightly over 100,000 so my
hands are full as well to keep up with everything. Certainly the item you
mentioned with the extension of the tax financing district was indeed very
difficult. You helped me a lot and Don Ashworth was very much involved in it
and it was quite a challenge and most rewarding to see that come through. We
11 had to probe all the County Commissioners, friends that we had there and get
them together to support this. It was really scarey at one time when I read in
the Minneapolis paper that one of the commissioners said it was a million dollar
IIrip off in Hennepin County. Well that didn't make our job much easier. I don't -
believe it was a million dollar rip off. The natural benefit that Chanhassen
has gotten. ..Thank you again. I really appreciate it.
11 CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Johnson moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to
approve the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's
recommendations:
I/ '
b. County Suites Improvement Project No. 89-25:
1. Resolution 890-125(a): Approve Contract Amendment No. 2.
2. Approve Retaining Wall Contract
e. Resolution 190-126: Approve Contract Amendment No. 2 for Downtown
Redevelopment, Phase II Improvement Project 86-118.
f. Resolution A90-127: Accept Streets in Timberwood Estates, Project 87-17.
g. Resolution A90-128: Accept Street and Utility Improvements in Chanhassen
Hills 3rd Addition, Project 89-5.
h. Approve Construction Plans from Carver County for County Road 17 fill,
located between TH 5 and Lyman Boulevard.
j. Approval of Accounts.
k. City Council Minutes dated September 24, 1990
Planning Commission Minutes dated September 19, 1990
Park & Recreation Commission Minutes dated September 25, 1990
1. Accept Carver County Recycling Bin Grant.
m. Set Special Meeting Date, Canvass City Election Results.
n. Resolution 890-129: Resolution Authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to
Execute Quit Claim Deed from the City to the HRA.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
11 2
11
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
AUTHORIZE PLAN MODIFICATION TO ONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 2 FOR THE
A U �C
CONSTRUCTION OF AUDUBON ROAD FROM LYMAN BOULEVARD TO THE RAILROAD TRACKS.
Councilwoman Dimler: Item 1(a) has to do with the modification of TIF District
No. 2-1 and calling for a public hearing. I guess my question on this one
was, I wasn't quite sure whether the amount that we authorized for upgrading it
Audubon Road, $532,830.02 on July 23rd had to do with Phase 1 or Phase 2. Gary,
can you answer that? Or Todd?
Todd Gerhardt: That would be Phase 2, the $532,000.00. • I
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. So if it's Phase 2, we're increasing the amount by
$227,170.00. What is included or what does this pay for?
•
Todd Gerhardt: There had to be some additional land acquisitions that we had to
put in there. We had engineer fees. Attorney fees and there was a change
order.
Mayor Chmiel: Do you remember what the land costs were off the top?
Gary Warren: The land costs weren't that substantial. They're like $1,000.00
for easements from the Stockdale property.
Mayor Chmiel: I thought that may have covered it but I guess not. I
Gary Warren: There are fees in there for the Barinsky property for the tree
replacement which amounted to about $12,000.00 but that was actually in the 11
planting type fees.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, so I've heard about $13,000.00. Where's the other? I
Mayor Chmiel: Of course there were attorney fees in there. Excuse me Roger.
Councilwoman Dimler: That's quite a difference from $227,000.00. I
Roger Knutson: I didn't get that check yet Don.
Don Ashworth: Correct me if I'm wrong but we had originally established the
program which would include both Phase 1 and 2. Over a period of time and
actually doing Phase 2, the actual costs appeared to be greater than the
original program costs and that's what necessitated this change. Is that not
correct? I mean it's not really, I mean if there were an error there, it's the
original program costs that were just a swag at that point in time. I
Gary Warren: In the Phase 2, and I apologize because I didn't get the question
originally but in the Phase 2 we are building an urban section as you recall
down to future Lake Drive West and we've extended the watermain and sanitary
sewer so we've gone from what was in the original scope here of just basically
an overlay project to actually building a 44 foot urban section in that
northerly piece including street lights and such and then the southerly piece,
�,• that is basically an overlay project with some grade correction down by the
Barinsky's. So I would say that that probably, and as you said, the original
cost was pretty much a guesstimate was the biggest part of the cost factor.
3
I
11
11 City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Don Ashworth: So we established, originally establishing the district we had a
good estimate as to what costs would be north of the railroad tracks and had
included that as a part of the original program. The original program also said
that there would be some work done to the south. As we get finished and this
' would have been upwards of 2 to 3 years ago. Now as we're moving in to actual
construction, the items as Gary is mentioning produces a cost factor of the
$532,000.00 which no longer is in conformance with that original plan so Ron
11 Beatty, Holmes and Graven's suggested that we modify the plan to ensure that the
original plan versus actual expenditures, that the two parallel each other.
Councilwoman Oimler: I guess I brought it up because it seemed like an
excessive amount of increase and it just seemed unbelieveable to me that we
wouldn't have estimated the administrative expenses and attorney fees to be off
that far. Will we get a documentation of this for the public hearing of the
expenses? A more deatiled?
Todd Gerhardt: You'll get the modified plan laying that out.
Councilman Johnson: I think part of what you're seeing is there wasn't an
estimate of $532,830.02. That's what the bid was.
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, right.
Councilman Johnson: Then on top of the bid you have your land acquisition
1 costs, your administrative expenses. Now whenever our building inspector goes
out there and all that, all those costs go in. Isn't there a percent that we
charge a project.
Gary Warren: 30%c.
Councilman Johnson: So 30% of that $532,000.00 is part of that difference so
' that would be $150,000.00 right there of the City's administrative cost for
running this project. So that's part of that difference between the 532 and the
760 so the attorney fees weren't actually $150,000.00 on this.
Todd Gerhardt: It's staff time and. . .
Councilwoman Dimler: Alright. I'll move approval and looking forward to the
actual and more detailed account on October 22nd.
Councilman Johnson: Second.
Resolution $90-130: Councilwoman Dimler moved. Councilman Johnson seconded to
approve a Resolution calling for a public hearing on October 22, 1990 to
consider the plan modification to Development District No. 2 and Tax Increment
Financing District No. 2-1. All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously.
11 C. ACCEPT PAVEMENT INVENTORY PROPOSAL FROM OSM.
Councilman Workman: Gary, was the pavement inventory and then back on item (o),
11 the water supply system analysis, those two were budgeted items? Or where did
those come from? They both seem to have some merit and although I don't know if
r 4
r
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
I
I have enough information to make that decision, they seem rather simple. Don't
our employees, engineering staff and street crew staff, don't they keep some
Ifsort of an inventory on the roads? I mean they're on those roads every day.
Isn't there a system that we have that can monitor this or what is OSM going to
go for us that, it just doesn't seem like.
Gary Warren: Are you ready for the answer?
Councilman Workman: Yeah, go ahead. I
Gary Warren: No, our crews and such that travel the roads and such, their
duties are not keeping an inventory per se, at least any sort of a manageable
inventory that we can digest at this point in time unless they happen to see
something that, if we have a road failure of some serious magnitude here that
they will actually mention it to Jerry Schlenk and they'll go about their duty.
We're talking here a little more sophisticated program. The pavement management
system and such that each of the roads will be looked at and we will actually
measure, take measurements for width and things of this nature to build this
data base. This is funded out of 211-233 as I noted in the staff report. We do
have $50,000.00 that we had set aside, a portion of which was dedicated to
getting the pavement management program up and running so we could address the
Frontier Trail need so to speak in relation to the total system needs. We are
looking to take advantage of some software that we've looked at. That is pretty
minor. It's a $35.00 package but to help us with getting the base established
and to go forward from here. The consultant route seemed to be the best as far
as bringing our staff up to speed on it so yeah, we do have talent in this
regard but specific to this software package and such, we're looking to augment
that at this time.
Councilman Workman: But are you saying we're going to have flexible pavement ,
management system, we're going to have that software package and we're going to
use it so we're now going to have our own? OSM's going to help us get up and
running on this? I
Gary Warren: Right.
Councilman Workman: The feeling is that the best way to tell if a road is not
in good shape is to see it and I guess I don't understand what predicting, you
know certainly we want to manage our budget but we basically have an idea in our
minds what roads. You and I talked about Chan Estates the other day and the
roadways there. Don't we have kind of a mental idea about what needs to be done
on a major basis anyway?
Gary Warren: Were it that simple, I wish it were. Yeah there are the obvious I
roads and unfortunately those are the roads that have failed and probably are
beyond salvaging to the point where you need to do a reconstruction like on
Frontier Trail. We found in looking at America Public Works data and other
research data as far as pavement management programs are concerned, that a road
goes through a life cycle and if you catch the road early enough in it's life
cycle of deterioration before it hits this critical break point, you can do
effective maintenance on the road with a sealcoat or crack sealing or some spot
repairs and you can extend it's life considerably but once it goes over this
break point to the point where you visually see alligator cracks and the actual 11
5
r
11
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
1
failures, like we see in Chan Estates, then you've gone too far. And there are
1 some subtleties that are in road flexible pavement such as we have that you need
to basically walk the roads, inspect them, look at them physically to look for
some of the key signs as far as what the age of the road is. Some communities
actually go to the point where they'll do borings periodically through a road
section. That is why, as we noted in the report here, we're looking to do an
inspection of our pavements each year for the first 3 years to see how they're
changing so we can slot each of the segments and where they are in their life
cycle. Then we can do some appropriate preventive maintenance hopefully so that
we don't have to deal with a large cost associated with total upgrade.
Councilman Johnson: This is a small cost upfront to prevent a big cost down the
road.
Gary Warren: Specifically the cost here for OSM is to just get us started one
time. They would not be involved. It would be totally city staffed from here
out. As far as the actual rehabilitation is concerned, that also is to try to
get to the road's before they totally fail so that we can spend less dollars
maintaining them on a periodic basis than one big lump every 20 years so to
speak.
Councilwoman Dimler: I have one question too Gary. Does this in any way insure
that we will reduce the portion that is assessed to the property? Benefitted
property owners. Isn't that what we're aiming at?
11 Gary Warren: Well I guess there is some benefit in the program in that if the
City has a consciously applied annual maintenance program, that what we are
trying to do is extend the longevity of the pavements so that we .don't get them
I • failing and doing total failures early on in their life cycle so there is some
benefit in that. As far as the relation to the actual percentage assessed, we
are doing this to get a handle on the total system need. Where are our roads
right now? The 90 miles or so that we have out here as far as if we were going
to next year bring them all up to 50 year life let's say or 20 year life, how
many dollars are we going to have to spend to do that? Once we have the total
system need, then we can take a look at a Frontier Trail or 5 year capital
I/ improvement program for the roads and decide what percentage the City feels
comfortable in dealing with from say the general fund or from other pavement
funds and likewise what then would be assessed as far as each project is
concerned.
Councilwoman Dimler: Will you have this in place before the Frontier Trail
assessments come out?
' Gary Warren: That specifically is why we've been trying to get this underway is
to be able to do that so when the Frontier Trail assessment roll will be coming
11 to the Council next summer basically and this material will be in our hands at
that time.
Councilwoman Dimler: But you're not guaranteeing it's going to bring down the
assessment?
Councilman Workman: You can't bring down those assessments from this point.
6
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Gary Warren: Well we haven't established the assessment rate yet as you recall
on Frontier Trail.
Councilwoman Dimler: Right, we still have to do that: Will we have money
available at that time to take that into consideration?
Gary Warren: Will we have money at that time to take?
Councilwoman Oimler: Yeah. So we could reduce the assessment to the property I
owners.
Councilman Workman: But this isn't like a utility. I
Councilwoman Dimler: I understand that but I mean that's what we're leading up
to here with this inventory.
Gary Warren: Currently the avenue which is available for deferring or
minimizing, reducing the assessment roll on Frontier Trail is to take funds out
of- some other source such as the general fund. This hopefully will give you a
better understanding of what the total need is out there so that you can decide
if you're going to commit to Frontier Trail, how many other Frontier Trails are
there out there and should we be funding them 20%, 80%, 90%, what percent. ,
Councilman Johnson: Frontier Trail will set the precedent. If that precedent's
going to break the City's budget, we want to know about it before we set it.
Councilman Workman: So everything we're going to want to know about our 70
miles of roads is going to be in this package? I mean because we have a seal
coating program right now and we do a lot of preventative maintenance. I
guess I'm still not convinced what, like that utility thing that we're going to
talk about . I'm not quite convinced what we're doing here because.
Gary Warren: You're correct Tom. We do have an annual seal coating program but
it has been basically a program of geez, this road is 7 years old. Typically
you sealcoat a road every 7 years so let's sealcoat this one. It doesn't relate
to the subtleties of the actual deterioration of the roads that are going on.
That needs to be factored in here. Sealcoating is not the only, I mean that is
an important step but that is not the only repair technique that needs to be
applied. Crack sealing, the City does not do crack sealing for example. I
Councilman Workman: You did it on Red Cedar Point last year.
Gary Warren: Well, special requests we do. We do do some sealcoating, or I'm
sorry, crack sealing with the seal coating and some leveling.
Mayor Chmiel: Any further discussions on this? I
Councilwoman Dimler: I did have one more question. Are you absolutely sure
that we can't handle this in house? I would prefer to see it done that way. I
Gary Warren: Yeah, absolutely sure.
Councilwoman Dimler: You're absolutely sure? We don't have the expertise? I
7
i
I
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
1
Gary Warren: We don't have the time.
1 Councilwoman Dimler: Okay.
Councilman Johnson: I move approval.
Councilman Workman: Second.
• I Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Workman seconded to accept Alternative No.
1 of the OSM proposal for street inventory assistance in the amount of
$4,830.00. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
0. ACCEPT PROPOSAL FOR WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM ANALYSIS.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. Good thing we're on the same criteria for item (o).
I just thought that $13,000.00 plus dollars was too much for what we're getting.
Some of the criteria or what we're reviewing here seems to me that it's
excessive at $75.00 an hour for an engineer for 24 hours to review the existing
records. Somebody here should be on top of that already. Assessing our future
needs also you know. Reviewing the population projections and growth patterns.
Those two seem to be, I mean it just seems there's too many hours at too high a
cost in here for what we're actually doing. Especially since the company that
I/ we're recommending has done the updating up to the present and they should be
very familiar with what our needs are. Right now with the current usages anyway
and we already know or this report states that we're going to need Well Number 6
11 so I don't know wh we have to identify inadequacies of the existing system if we
already know we're going of need Well Number 6. You see what I'm saying? It
just seems too excessive.
Gary Warren: I guess there are a lot of items brought up there. $75.00 per
hour is the going rate for a registered engineer.
Councilwoman Dimler: I'm talking about reducing the hours.
Gary Warren: Well the hours that it would take are basically, this is not a
lump sum contract here. We'd be proposing to go and pay for the hours that they
actually spend on the project. We're not guaranteeing them that we would spend
the $13,300.00. We're just identifying the scope elements that need to be
undertaken. This relates to the Comp Plan Section that we're trying to fill the
blanks in on and if it takes 12 hours to digest some of the existing data,
that's all that we'll pay for. Liesch has done some good work with us from the
preliminary report that they did in locating this drift well for us right now
which the City is seeing I think some good benefit from and for them to extend
to do this, we're not just looking at wells. We're also looking at siting the
next water tower and when is the right time to bring the next water tower on
site. That takes a little bit of computer analysis which we don't have in house
at this point in time.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, on this one I can see where we couldn't do it in
house but I'm wondering, you're saying that the cost may be less?
Gary Warren: I'm saying that we certainly.
11
8
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Councilwoman Dimler: That the $13,300.00 is the absolute top?
a Gary Warren: It's the best guess. f
Councilman Johnson: Did we bid this at all?
Gary Warren: Did we what?
Councilman Johnson: Did we ask any more than one? '
Gary Warren: No.
Councilman Johnson: What is the threshhold where we put this out for bid? '
I know we asked this last week.
Gary Warren: Professional services, so there's no threshhold. I
Councilman Johnson: Yeah. But we should have some kind of threshhold. At some
dollar cut off we want to go out for bid unless there's some reason because
truthfully my experience Liesch is not real well known on, at least my knowledge
of Liesch is that they're more into the siting of wells and the hydrogeology
side of it. System analysis is.
Mayor Chmiel: Jay, he's well known.
Councilman Johnson: He is in there? Okay. I've only used him on the
hydrogeology side of things.
Councilman Workman: Yeah, me too. I
Gary Warren: He is augmented with staff, Jim Bollard who in particular works on
this stuff with us is from McCombs-Knutson and has extensive experience in these
types of studies and he's the one who's handled the mechanical part of our
wells. Because of Liesch's background and the work that they had done on our
preliminary analysis, we felt, I feel that they have the quickest route to
getting to the solution here from a dollar standpoint. I
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, any further discussion? If not.
Councilwoman Dimler: I move approval. 1
Councilman Johnson: Discussion, can we move this as a not to exceed $13,300.00
versus an open estimate of $13,300.00? I
Councilwoman Dimler: Right.
Gary Warren: Fine.
Mayor Chmiel: Motion's on the floor. Is there a second?
Councilmanb Workman: Second.
Councilman Johnson: With the understanding it's a not to exceed? I
9
I
I
11 City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
IIMayor Chmiel: Right. Not to exceed $13,300.00.
Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to accept the September
II 21, 1990 proposal from Bruce A. Liesch Associates, Inc. for preparation of a
water supply system analysis report at an estimated amount not to exceed
$13,300.00. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
IIVISITOR PRESENTATIONS:
Al Klingelhutz: I know I've gotten help from some of you Council and Mayor in
I two previous meetings we had on Pioneer Trail and TN 101 intersection. We did
have the Department of Transportation out and they seem to be amendable to doing
something with that intersection but what I'm going to ask you for tonight is to
pass a resolution from the Chanhassen City Council to the Department of
II Transportation stating some of the hazards of that intersection and I will get
the County to do the same thing and I think we have to keep the pressure on to
get some things done on that intersection. That's my only request.
IIMayor Chmiel: Thank you Al. We can't do it this evening because of procedures
unless we.
IICouncilwoman Dimler: We can waive the procedures.
Mayor Chmiel: We can waive the procedures.
IICouncilwoman Dimler: I move that we waive the procedures.
IICouncilman Workman: Second.
Mayor Chmiel: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion?
I Councilman Workman: Maybe Don you can explain, did you explain last week what
we were doing a little bit?
IIMayor Chmiel: Yes.
Councilman Johnson: Do we have the data to make a resolution tonight? It
11 sounds like we need a resolution written up.
Councilwoman Dimler: Do you have a resolution written up Al?
II Al Klingelhutz: I don't have one.. . It came up when Don mentioned to me before
the meeting that there was another major accident there just a few days ago and
we've had 3 of them now in the past 3 weeks at that intersection and all we're
Iwaiting for is somebody to get killed.
Mayor Chmiel: Right. I agree. It's been termed as a very dangerous
II intersection. Many accidents have occurred at that particular location and
we've discussed this for the past couple of weeks and have had discussions
with MnDot on early morning meetings at 7:00 at the Prairie House and they, as
Al mentioned, they seemed amenable to it but I think by adopting a resolution
IIfor this and Roger are you writing one fast?
II 10 4
II
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
I
Roger Knutson: I'm writing as fast as I can.
Councilman Workman: Al, when does it need to be done? I
Al Klingelhutz: Well the sooner the better. I'm going to get the County Board
to adopt one tomorrow. I
Mayor Chmiel: You have a Board meeting tomorrow right? Okay.
Councilman Johnson: You're going to write one up between now and tomorrow for 1
the Board meeting?
Al Klingelhutz: The thought came to me that it could be very helpful to getting ,
something done there soon.
Councilman Johnson: We have a 6:00 meeting tomorrow. Can we have a resolution
before us before our 6:00 meeting tomorrow?
Councilman Workman: Who's got a 6:00 meeting?
Councilman Johnson: You do.
•
Mayor Chmiel: We do. Budget. I
Councilman Workman: Not me.
Councilman Johnson: Budget workshop meeting. I
Councilman Workman: I don't have that meeting.
Councilwoman Dimler: Was it 5:00? I thought it was 5:00.
Mayor Chmiel: 5:00? 1
Councilman Johnson: I got it at 6:00.
Councilman Workman: Maybe the City Attorney can get something together before I
the end of the meeting.
Mayor Chmiel: I would just as soon move on it right now if we could. ,
Councilman Johnson: I'll move approval of a resolution then to be drafted by
City Staff by tomorrow night for review at the meeting tomorrow night.
Councilwoman Dimler: Second.
Councilman Johnson moved, Councilwoman Disler seconded to approve a resolution I
regarding the intersection of Pioneer Trail and TH 101 being drafted by City
Staff to be presented to the City Council at the budget workshop meeting on
Tuesday, October 9, 1990. All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there anyone else who has any more Visitor Presentations? I
11
1 City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
II PRESENTATION OF THE SENIOR NEEDS STUDY, CONSIDER ESTABLISHMENT OF A SENIOR NEEDS
COMMISSION.
Judy Marshek: Judy Marshek. I've been a consultant to the Task Force that's
II been looking at a needs assessment of seniors for Chanhassen. You all should
have received the report in ample time in advance of this meeting. I assume
you've all had a chance to review the report. I'd simply like to point out to
II you that we do have some task force members with us tonight. We have 3 of the
members of the task gorce sitting over here, Betty Bragg in the black sweater,
Jane Kubitz in the middle and Selda Heinlein on the end. We did have some
II gentlemen on the task force and they were commenting that it was funny that none
of them had shown up. That the dedicated women are here.' Any questions that
you'd have they'd be happy to answer those. I think the main issue or the main
recommendation that we are hoping that you will approve this evening is a
II recommendation from the task force that in light of the findings of the study
which showed that Chanhassen has second only to Eden Prairie in this area, the
most rapidly growing population of seniors and the largest population of seniors
I and we were defining senior adults or mature adults as people over age 55, that
the task force is recommending the establishment of a senior commission which
could provide applicacy and advice to you about the needs of senior adults and
II there were many other recommendations in this detailed report but that would be
of course key to some of these other recommendations being implemented.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. This is something that I've felt that we need to do
I and I would like to commend all members of that task force before the City
saying thank you. You've done a great job. In just watching the dedication
that you did give to it and being at all the meetings that you did, on behalf of
IIthe Council and myself, thank you very much. Any other discussion or questions?
Councilwoman Dimler: I did have a question as to there were 7 members on the
task force I believe. Did you want to keep that number of commissioner members
IIas well?
Judy Marshek: We hadn't really gotten into specifics for the commission. We
I felt that it needed to be a group large enough to assure representation but
small enough to be workable and we had talked about between 7 to 10. We also
think it's very important to represent some of the different parts of Chanhassen
II because part of our study showed that people that live in the north and people
that live in the south have access to different types of services so geographic
representation becomes important too.
l Krauss: If I could touch on that Mr. Mayor? We've had a lot of 7 member
commissions and that number seems to work reasonably well. The senior needs
task force people indicated a desire to continue to serve on this commission
Ishould one be created.
Judy Marshek: Some of them did.
11 Krauss: Some of them did. Well, there were more than 7 members of that
commission but there were 7 .very active members and it was Betty Bragg, Emma St.
John, Barb Montgomery, Selda Heinlein, Dick Neiland, Floyd Tapper and Jane
II Kubitz. For the sake of continuity, I guess our position would be, we'd
advocate rolling over into those 7 if you're comfortable with that and they're
' 12
I
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
comfortable with that.
Mayor Chmiel: I am.
Krauss: When we had the senior needs task force, we advertised in the paper
twice for volunteers for the commission, or for the task force and really didn't I
get a great response from that. Most of our members came from the Mayor's
asking through the churches to get people involved. But once it's up and
running we'll probably have more success in generating volunteerism but there's
a lot of projects waiting on the back burner as you can see from the report for
them to get their teeth into and we'd like to keep the ball rolling if we can
now that some momentum has built up.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, I agree. Do you have a By-law example that we can
go by or do you have By-laws?
Mayor Chmiel: I think that's something that they would have to.
Krauss: I've never set up a commission before but I. would gather that they
would have to draft one up for your approval and that would be one of their
first acts.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay that would not be done by staff, that would be done I
by them?
Krauss: Well we would work with them on that. '
Councilwoman Dimler: Alright.
Councilman Johnson: Some of the people that did respond from the newspaper '
advertising weren't put on the task force because they weren't seniors. One
person in particular, Kathy Dorfner who is a provider of services to seniors and
she's a resident of this town and active volunteer in several ways. People like
• this are still valuable for the seniors commission because of their professional
knowledge of the work that will be done. I think you don't have to, I don't
think we should restrict it to only seniors on this commission. That even a
member of the Council could be, as we are on several commissions. Or other
people and as we have done and has been our policy, that we've advertised every
commission opening for the last several years. That we probably should
advertise it and I don't think we should restrict it only to somebody 55 or
older. That's actual age discrimination sort of. Reverse.
Mayor Chmiel: I question that but that's alright Jay. ,
Councilman Johnson: Now that you've hit the big 6 0.
Mayor Chmiel: You bet. I
Councilwoman Dimler: I think Judy already indicated that some of the task force
members, maybe don't want to serve on the commission so I think it's good to
open it up to the process.
Mayor Chmiel: Oo you have anything more? I
13
I
t
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
11
Krauss: If you would like us to advertise it, we'll do so promptly. We have
11 our newspapers reporters in the audience tonight. Hopefully we can bring that
back to you within the next.
1/
Mayor Chmiel: 2 weeks?
Krauss: Well you'd probably want, if we can get an ad in the paper by then but
it might be 4 and we can bring you the results of that and we can get confirmed
' from the task force those who would like to be on it.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, good. Thank you.
Judy Marshek: You're welcome.
Krauss: Would it be proper, I'd defer to the City Attorney, would it be proper
to consider telling us or asking staff to bring back a resolution?
Mayor Chmiel: Well yes. That's already been decided that a resolution should
' be prepared accordingly. Should there be a motion?
Councilman Johnson: Should we be approving the report? We got the summary
Ireport.
Mayor Chmiel: We already had the report at our previous meeting.
' Councilman Johnson: Yeah, we had the summary report. That was the draft.
Should we be approving the entire report and giving it out to the newspapers and
stuff at this point? Would that be an active we need to take?
Mayor Chmiel: I think we should probably do that. Can there be a motion on the
floor?
' Councilman Johnson: I'd like to get a copy of the whole report.
Mayor Chmiel: I think that should be available.
Councilman Johnson: So I move approval of the senior needs study report and
instruct staff to start the process of forming a seniors commission.
1 Councilman Workman: Second.
Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Workman seconded approval of the Senior
' Needs Study Report and instruct staff to begin the process of forming a Seniors
Commission. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
wil
1
1
14
i
I
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER COLLECTION OF PLASTICS FOR RECYCLING.
Public Present:
Name Address
Kevin Crist Woodlake Sanitation
Bill Loebl 7197 Frontier Trail
Craig Mertz Recycling Committee member I
Jo Ann Olsen: With the success of our curbside recycling, the Recycling
Commission has been reviewing how to expand upon that and to add plastics which
we've been getting requests for. We've had several meetings with the commission
that have been open to haulers and we have not gotten too much response from the
haulers. We did have 3 of the larger firms represented who stated that they
could provide the plastic collection. What we wanted to do was to hold the
public hearing in front of the Council. Have the first reading held for adding
to the targeted recycleables. Beverage plastic containers and we wanted to
start with something real simple and we do have a couple of the recycling ,
commission members here if they wish to speak. Other than that we just wanted
to take back any comments to the commission and then bring back any changes
necessary for second and final reading.
Mayor Chmiel: Anyone wishing to address it at this particular time?
Kevin Crist: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. My name is Kevin Crist and I'm
the district manager for Woodlake. We're one of the haulers in the community
and we're ready to do plastics and we will be geared up to do plastics. My only
concern about it is that the timing of when it would start. I think there's
some things within the industry yet that need to be worked out and my concern
would be for the actual start up date. We're geared up as a company to do it.
I'm not sure how geared up some of the other haulers are as far as their
processing facilities and their collection methods. We've been involved in some ,
of the pilot programs and we're just working out some of the bugs as far as our
collection methods so. The other thing that we're facing is the `time of the
year coming up. In the wintertime with hard cold plastics, it's kind of hard to
work with those so, and especially getting started in a new process, it would be
good to give the haulers some time to work this into their schedule. I think
the big thing that we as haulers have to face is getting rid of the material at
this point. The recylmation centers are just, they haven't committed to us yet
but they're getting close to coming out with who will handle the plastics and
who will not so my only concern there is the timing of adding the plastics
collection to the routing. As far as we're concerned, we're ready to go. It's
just a matter of getting our trucks geared for it. Thank you.
Councilman Johnson: How much of a market do you have at this time? '
Kevin Crist: Pardon me?
Councilman Johnson: Market. I
Kevin Crist: The market for plastics? It's getting better. We've had 3 or 4
people approach us so far as far as willing to accept them. The problem that we
15
I
11 City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
face is that some of them have to be separated. Some can be taken in a comingle
state but at this point that's one of the things that we're trying to get worked
out with the recylmation points.
' Councilman Johnson: What kind of start date would you recommend?
Kevin Crist: Well we're geared up to start January 1 with a couple of cities
' but I guess my concern again is that time of the year with the cold weather and
working with plastics. My preference would be to start either March 1 or April
1, in that vicinity there. That will just give us a little more time to get our
' trucks ready and take on with the spring.
Mayor Chmiel: All we do is lose out on 3 months of good plastic recycling. I'm
just kidding.
Councilman Johnson: It gives us more time to work with our community to educate
them on plastic recycling.
Mayor Chmiel: Jo Ann, did we notify all the haulers in regards to this?
Jo Ann Olsen: Yes we did. Once it is adopted, if it is, there's a 90 day
period before it can go into place so you do have that 3 months.
Kevin Crist: I think the other key to the whole thing is, as Councilman Johnson
11 says, is that the education out to the people and letting people know we're
doing it I think is a real key to the whole thing.
Jo Ann Olsen: Roger just said it's 120 days so you have 4 months.
Mayor Chmiel: 120? That would probably put it right in the ballpart to where
you're looking.
Kevin Crist: Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you.
Councilman Workman: You'd think that, and it'd be nice if plastics, I know
' plastics are not uniform in any sense but it'd be nice if the person who was
picking it up and hauling it could sort it himself and throw it through a
shredder or something in the back to make it easier to haul or something. I'm
pattoning this idea. But I mean that would take the bulk out of it somehow, I
don't know.
Kevin Crist: The problem with that is the reclaimers then have a problem with
shredded plastic. . .
Councilman Workman: Yeah, I'm just thinking that if the person that was picking
' it up could throw all milk cartons. Are all milk cartons created the same?
Kevin Crist: Pretty much.
Councilman Workman: I mean if they're all the same you could shred them into
one spot and I don't know. This meeti'ng's going to end too early tonight so I
1 16
I
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
thought I'd just drag it out.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Anyone else? Anyone from the Commission? I
Bill Loebl: Bill Loebl, 7197 Frontier Trail. I speak •on behalf of the
collection of plastics and I would like you to know that as a resident I would ,
favor it. I've been a plastics engineer for about 25 or 28 years and I know
that plastics per se are a valuable product, particularly in view of the fact
that most of them are derived from crude oil and with crude oil at $40.00 a
barrel, they become quite valuable. Plastics industry as a whole is working to
improve the reuse of plastics and ultimately they could be used as a fuel for
power plants for example to generate electric power so the idea of collecting
plastics is a good one and I have to agree with Mr. Crist, winter is not the
time to start because some of the plastics are very sensitive to very cold
temperatures and they shatter when it gets a few degrees below zero and then
they won't be able to identify them. So his idea to start in the spring is a
good one. That's all I have to say.
Councilwoman Dimler: Does that mean then we have to quit it in the wintertime
in succeeding years?
Bill Loebl: Well hopefully by next winter the collection will have proceeded to
the point where the householders have been educated to separate the plastics
that are susceptible to cold and not put them in the garbage you know. Or put
them in the garbage but not in the collection.
Mayor Chmiel: Good point. Thank you. Anyone else? I
Councilman Johnson: I think we just found a new member for our Recycling
Committee here.
Craig Mertz: I think we'll ask him in. Craig Mertz. I'm a member of the
Recycling Commission and on the staff report it indicates that or implies that ,
the commission's taking somewhat of a position and I think the primary concern
of the people on the commission was what harm, if any, would this cause to the
existing haulers and we were hoping that by having this public hearing we would
hear whatever objections that the haulers might have to this because one of our
concerns was we didn't want to cause any of the existing haulers to go out of
business because of something the commission did.
Councilwoman Dimler: I have a question of Mr. Mertz. You're indicating here
that you're limiting it at present to beverage containers such as pop, milk and
water bottles. What is the reason that you won't accept detergent bottles,
shampoo bottles, etc.? Those types of things.
Craig Mertz: Jo Ann can listen and correct me if I get this wrong. Some of
those types of bottles are of different plastic types that are not readily
adaptable to recycling and we were going down the list in attempting to start
with the items that we thought the householders would readily be able to
identify as clearly being recyclable and the beverage containers seemed like the
items that we could have people pick out with a minimum of education and then
see how this goes and then work up something else.
1
17
i
I
11 City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Councilwoman Dimler: Is there a possibility in the future that we'd be
recycling those as well?
' Craig Mertz: Yes.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, thank you.
Councilman Workman: Are diapers in the future?
Mayor Chmiel: Bill, you are right with the plastics burning in power plants.
They do have what they call RDF facilities which do source separation of the
garbage and the light fraction plastics with the papers are burned. They called
that refuse derived fuel and they can be burned in generating plants. Is there
' anyone else?
Councilman Johnson moved, Councilwoman Disler seconded to close the public
hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was
closed.
Mayor Chmiel: I'd like to go by staff's recommendation that the City Council
' open the public hearing for comment and approve the first reading. Approval
should include requesting commission and staff to incorporate public hearing
comments into the draft prior to resubmittal for the final adoption. City
Council approves first reading of the amendment to Ordinance 113, Section 1,
definition of "targeted recyclables" to include plastic beverage containers.
Is there a second?
' Councilwoman Dimler: I'm all in favor. Second.
Councilman Johnson: Should we time our approval to where the 120 days hits
' about March 1st?
Mayor Chmiel: That's just an automatic to what Roger said.
' Councilman Johnson: Yeah, but see if we approve this in October, 120 days hits
February 1st. If we approve it the first of December, 120 days is March 1st.
' Mayor Chmiel: Well when it comes back here for the second reading, it'd still
be towards the end of this month so we'd still be in February.
Jo Ann Olsen: I'm sure we can add something to it to set the date for it to
start. It doesn't have to be 120.
Craig Mertz: Could the Council state a delayed effective date?
' Mayor Chmiel: Sure.
I Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilwoman Dialer seconded to approve the first reading of
an amendment to Ordinance 113, Section 1, definition of 'targeted recyclables'
to include plastic beverage containers. All voted in favor and the motion
carried unanimously.
18
I
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
I
PUBLIC HEARING: REINITIATE WEST 78TH STREET DETACHMENT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO.
87-2.
Public Present: I
Name Address ,
Charlie James T.F. James Company
B.C. Jim Burdick Excelsior, Minnesota '
Gary Warren: Mr. Mayor, the West 78th Street detachment project was originally
initiated in 1987 to deal with the recommended separation of West 78th Street
from TH 5 to get the proper stacking distance and better traffic continuity in
this area. Due to various reasons, changes in development plans and other
delays here, the project has actually gone through a series of revisions and
reinitiations and at this point in time, one of the main driving forces is the
necessity to have the City's portion of this project completed to serve as a
by-pass route for the TH 5 improvements scheduled for next year in this area.
There also have been a number of plattings that have happened in the area. The
subdivisions and such and in working closely with MnDot, our engineers and
others, we have needed to modify some of the grades and some of the elements of
the plan so we've updated the feasibility study to address these changes. We
also settled on two important elements. One was the right-in/right-out access
to the Burdick property which is the currently adopted plan and secondly was the
construction of storm sewer alternate A which basically is the Eckankar pond
which the City is currently in the process of finalizing the land acquisition in
that regard. So with the time that it's taken here, we fortunately have been
able to better define the scope to where we are confident now of what the final
scenario for the improvements is so we therefore have updated the project costs
which are contained in BRW's report which is attached and also the assessment
roll which is a preliminary roll as we all know until the final assessment
hearings after the project but we have taken a concept look as far as the
methodologies and the costs which may be appropriated to each ofthe benefitting I
properties. So this is a public hearing to receive public input on the
feasibility once again as updated by this report and as required by law to
reinitiate the project so that we can proceed to get into construction in the
spring. Mr. Ehret is here as well from BRW if there are any specific questions.
Mayor Chmiel: As I mentioned this is a public hearing. Those wishing to
address this at this time, please come up to the podium and indicate your name
with your address. Anyone wishing to address this?
Charlie James: My name is Charlie James. I'm with the T.F. James Company. ,
Just a couple of questions here. I didn't get any notice, any prior notice of
this meeting other than just a note. I mean I didn't get any materials or
handouts that went with it so it was difficult for me to study all this in
advance. I've just been doing a quick study in the back here but I just had some
questions. I guess first of all I wanted to make, I haven't been following this
whole tax increment thing as it pertains to the City of Chanhassen. I've heard
and read things in the newspaper about some concerns at the State Legislature
and I guess my question to the Council this evening is, in addition to the
assessments that we're already paying on the property which are approximately I
think $30,000.00 a year, we're going to be looking at assessments, or I'm going 1
19
I
11 City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990 19
to be looking at assessments of half a million dollars on this property and I
guess what I'm curious to know is tax increment going to be there when we need
it. What is the latest status of tax increment in the City of Chanhassen here
and is there going to be any money left in the fund?
Don Ashworth: Can I respond?
Mayor Chmiel: Do you want to respond to that?
Don Ashworth: You're correct. State legislature did make some changes but as
it deals with existing programs and existing debt, they made no changes. This
roadway was actually included in the bonds of 1988 and accordingly it's in
pretty safe shape. The State is not really in a position to affect projects
such as the West 78th Street Detachment. I feel that that's a pretty safe
' project as far as the State being able to in some way change. They would have a
very difficult time doing it because you have bond holders out there which gets
back to the widows and orphans and those types of things and legislatures just
do not change a law that would affect so many people.
Charlie James: Don, are you saying that the bonds to finance this project have
already been placed? So the money's just being arbitraged then in the meantime?
Don Ashworth: Well hopefully it's in arbitrage danger meaning the difference
between interest earned versus the interest paid is subject to arbitrage rebate.
And of course we're currently having our auditors look at that but yes, the
bonds have been sold.
Charlie James: Will that shorten then the time that's available for payment?
In other words, if the bonds were issued in 1987, were they going to be paid in
full in 8 years or was the length of assessment. Because the project's delayed
now, is the whole project going to be assessed over a shorter period of time and
11 do you have an idea of what the interest rate is on these now that they've
already been placed?
' Don Ashworth: No, I do not recall what the interest rate was and yes, it could
have the result of shortening the number of years.
Charlie James: Because if this was an 1987 project and it doesn't get built
until 1991 and then you have the assessment hearings and everything else, I mean
we could be caught looking at about a 4 year fuse on this thing.
Don Ashworth: I don't think it's that bad but, do you recall Gary?
Gary Warren: Which, the assessment?
Don Ashworth: Yeah, the assessment. The number of years that we looked at.
Gary Warren: I think we had 8 or 10. I believe that we were looking at
' assessing the project in the earliest would be 9 and I would think that with
this track that we're on we would be able to assess and levy the project, next
year would be our goal.
' 20
1
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Don Ashworth: I was thinking when we looked at that, wasn't it
I thought it
came on line in 1990 for collection in 1911 so hypothetically we would be 1 year
behind schedule but that the original hack looked to the thing literally being 2
years forward. That's my recollection. Anyway it's not as severe as that.
Councilman Johnson: The property, Charlie's property would be eligible for
special assessment reduction program under the TIF if you build anything out
there?
Don Ashworth: Right. Mr. James is concerned I think, he has to generate '
something.
Councilman Johnson: He has to get somebody to come in and build first.
Charlie James: You got it.
Councilman Johnson: I know you're trying hard on that too. I
Charlie James: Well, not as hard as I could be trying but. Let's see. Also we
donated an 80 foot right-of-way and excavated the bad soil under the proposed
roadway and placed a compacted subbase there in preparation for paving and I'm
wondering there was some talk when this Target thing was being proposed, whether
or not that type of cross section would be adequate. Is there any plans afoot '
to ask for additional right-of-way in that area?
Gary Warren: We just received late last week, and I haven't had a chance to
fully digest it but the information we received from our latest analysis on the
traffic is that a 4 lane road section should be satisfactory to accommodate the
need and that's what we have designed out there at this point so I need to study
the numbers a little bit more but at this point in time, it looks like we should
be able to work within the existing or the platted right-of-way.
Charlie James: Gary, is my understanding correct that the scope of the project
at this point involves nothing on CR 17? That the State is going to build the
County Road 17 segment's north and south so there won't be any assessments from
that?
Gary Warren: The State is building the segment from TH 5 up to the
P West 78th
Street detachment interchange. The new intersection. The City will still have
the County Road 17 project from there to the north to the crest of the hill
roughly so we do have a portion of the County Road 17 project still in our
scope.
Charlie James: Is that contemplated in this project or will that be a '
subsequent project?
Gary Warren: That is in this project. That would go with this set of plans. 1
Charlie James: I guess that's it. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you Charlie. Is there anyone else?
21
1
I
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
IIB.C. Jim Burdick: B.C. Jim Burdick from Excelsior. Good evening. I have some
of the same concerns that Charlie James ti-0 and there's two other points I'd
II like to make and this is on the assessment. The east half of this project of
course is going to abut my property and I'm agreeable to working on the
assessments there and accept an assessment but not on the west half. I just
want it known ahead of time because there, one thing it doesn't benefit my
IIproperty. The road isn't going to touch my property. In fact, the whole thing
hurts me a bit but I've agreed not to claim anything for the damage in view of
the right turn in, right turn out and so forth. So I just wanted to make that
I point so there wouldn't be, I didn't want somebody, some engineering firm or
something to think they're going to assess me for anything on the west half. And
I say I will go along with the east half as long as they don't go wild and plant
I a half million dollar worth of trees that cause accidents. It's a refuge for
our shoplifters and then they die anyway. And the second one is, if we do this,
let's go right ahead. Like you asked if Charlie James had what going down
there. I've had things going for about 3 years but the thing that kills it time
I after time is the highway construction. By highway I mean both TH 5 and 78th
Street. There's just fear of the unknown. The rest of the businesses down
there, the TH 5 construction's going to cost them 20% of their business so why
1 don't we wait instead of operating at the best break even because, as they
compute it, they'll lose 20% business due to TH 5. Then they find out about
78th Street being moved in addition, it really kills it so I sure hope we do
I stay with this time schedule. I don't know if it was fortunate that past year
when Target came up just about the time they were going to let the contract. So
I just had those two points.
•
II Mayor Chmiel: Good. Thank you Jim. Gary, addressing the question that Jim had
on that west half. Can you address that?
II Gary Warren: Mr. Mayor, Mr. Burdick and I had talked earlier on the phone
briefly about the issue and I indicated to Jim that the preliminary assessment
roll does indeed show the frontage across his total property as having a
preliminary assessment calculated. We're strictly talking about the roadway
11 assessment . There's no storm sewer or watermain assessment or sanitary sewer
for his property. It's something that we are cognizant of. We will be looking
at that, reviewing that as a part of the assessment methodology when the roll is
I prepared. By extracting the westerly half of his property out of the roll, that
has a net impact of increasing the assessment rate because we're still talking
about the same dollars that would be assessed so there would be some kick back
II to the easterly half of the property where those might increase but it certainly
is something that we intend to look at. It may be that we will need to do an
appraisal of the properties to see if those lots on the westerly half indeed
would receive a benefit from the road project. I guess that will be the final
II test. With the private drive in there, I guess it is conceiveable in some
thinking that West 78th Street does provide benefit to this entire property. It
is the roadway that surrounds it but it is something that we certainly are
II cognizant of. We have Mr. Burdick's comments here on record and we certainly
will be taking a good look at it when we prepare the final position as far as
the assessment roll.
IIMayor Chmiel: Okay. Jay?
•
II
II
22
1
II
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
I
Councilman Johnson: Something you just said, private drive. Will the street
r that's being, the old West 78th Street, there's going to be a right-in/right-
out. Is that going to turn into a private drive that's going to be half owned
by Mr. Burdick and half by Mr. James now?
Gary Warren: That is correct. I
Mayor Chmiel: The right-in/right-out?
Councilman Johnson: The right-in/right-out. It's currently West 78th Street. '
That will no longer be a city street?
Gary Warren: That's correct. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, any other? Charlie?
Charlie James: I'm sorry. Just one more thing. I guess this is something that
I wanted to say to Gary but I might as well have it on the record. Gary, I need
to get together with you and look at the exact sewer and water service plans
because originally we contemplated that we'd be ahead of the city and we were
going to service our lots in certain areas because we had anticipated and we had
that whole plan out for temporary driveway accesses and we were going to build
this building way in advance of this project and then after a near disasterous
situation very analogous to this out in Eagan where we were building a center
with a road around us at the same time, we decided that wasn't a good idea and
so I guess we need to re-examine those service plans because some things that
you anticipate that we have already installed or something, may not be there so
I need to get together.
Gary Warren: Yeah, we've taken a shot at updating the plan somewhat but we 1
certainly need to have your input at this point in time and if you want to just
give me a call Charlie we'll set up a schedule.
Charlie James: Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there anyone else? I
Don Ashworth: Yes, to Mr. James' questions he had requested information for.
Yes, those were sold as part of bonds of 1988. That was scheduled then for
1990-91 in that original roll so we'll be off by approximately a year but it's
not going to jeopardize the project and we're looking at approximately 8% as the
assessment rate and that was scheduled over through 1998.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you.
Councilman Workman: I move we close the public hearing. '
Councilwoman Dimler: Second.
Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dialer seconded to close the public ,
hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was
closed.
23
I
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Resolution 190-131:- Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Disler seconded to
reinitiate West 78th Street Detachment Improvement Project No. 87-2 for
construction in 1991. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
AWARD OF BIDS: REJECT BIOS. AUXILLIARY TURN LANES ON TH 101 AT CHOCTAW CIRCLE
AND SANDY HOOK ROAD.
' Councilman Johnson: I move approval.
Councilwoman Dimler: Second.
Mayor Chmiel: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion?
Councilman Workman: Yeah, Gary then Cheyenne looks like we will be able to get
' Cheyenne in there?
Gary Warren: We intend to include Cheyenne as well as Pleasant View Road.
' MnDot's funding for this project requires submittal of candidate projects by
May of each year and you won't find out until August so we've got, I mean if
it's awarded in August, we still could construct both of those next year as
well. In fact I guess I was going to ask with Council's authorization we would
proceed to design those two with this whole package so that, I mean the logic
that prevailed for MnDot to include Choctaw and Sandy Hook in here would prevail
also for Pleasant View and Cheyenne.
Councilman Workman: You used the month August. What do you mean?
Gary Warren: August, we would not know until August of next year that Mn0ot has
agreed to find Cheyenne and Pleasant View if we ask for that. So we'd be on a
fast track for those two pieces but we believe that if they agreed with the
previous logic, that they should also be with those so we would like to have
authorization to internally design those as well and get that package out too.
Councilman Workman: Does that need approval also?
Mayor Chmiel: I don't believe it does.
Gary Warren: Pardon me?
Mayor Chmiel: No motion is involved in that portion?
Gary Warren: No. We requested the cooperative agreement and I guess that does
bring up a point. We have not requested a cooperative agreement to include
Pleasant View Road which that would be appropriate to add to the resolution
I here.
Councilman Workman: On this?
Gary Warren: Yeah.
Councilman Workman: I would amend that. Who seconded that? Did you second it?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes, Ursula seconded it. Do you accept his friendly amendment?
i24
I
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah I do.
Resolution 190-132: Councilman Johnson moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to
reject the bid received for the construction of the auxilliary turn lanes on
Trunk Highway 101 at Choctaw Circle and Sandy Hook Road and authorize
re-advertising of bids in March, 1991 for May, 1991 construction including
Cheyenne Trail and Pleasant View Road in the project. All voted in favor and
the motion carried unanimously.
SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR ON-SITE PARKING IMPROVEMENTS, REDMOND PRODUCTS.
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, on September 24th City Council reviewed two proposals
aimed at increasing parking for the Redmond facilities. The two proposals. . .
Lotus Garden and on site one on the Redmond property itself. The off site
parking was largely resolved. Staff had a concern about two variances. The
City Council recommended approval of that temporary parking lot without any
variances. However, the future increment parking on the Redmond property itself
was I guess continued. Staff and the applicant were directed to discuss it
further and hopefully bring back some possible means to resolve the matter.
Since that time we've met with the applicant several times. There's two options
that have been explored actively to deal with this issue. The first concern was
an offer by representatives of Redmond to acquire a 1.6 acre city owned wetland
that's immediately adjacent to the property. What that does is, if Redmond
acquires that, they will not convert that wetland to anything. It will stay
exactly the way it is. It's used for city storm water system as well. However,
it eliminates the hard surface coverage variance. The second option being
considered was suggested by Councilman Johnson which is a performance oriented
approached to parking lot setbacks rather than a straight 30 foot requirement
that currently exists. Staff is in a little bit of a dilemma regarding the
proposal to acquire the wetland from the city. It is protected by the City.
Will continue to be protected by the city. It would only change, it's kind of a
paper transaction if you will. The land would change hands in the Courthouse
and Redmond would be able to state honestly that there is no hard surface
coverage variance. We think it satisfies the letter of the ordinance at any
rate. We tried to work with Redmond to determine a price of the property and
were unable to agree to specific terms, basically the City Manager became
involved. We came up with a solution that if the City Council who is acceptable
in selling the land in the first place, a solution would be to use a series of
appraisers. One appointed by the City, one by Redmond and a third appointed by
both of them to decide on a price with the City and Redmond agreeing ahead of
time that they would accept whatever terms came down. In reviewing some recent
sales of what we think are similar properties on TM 5, there's been sale prices
all over the board so it is kind of tough to get a handle on it. We also had a
question if the City Council proceeded along these lines, what would happen to
the proceeds. Whatever dollar amount that happened to be. There are several
tuggestions and we just offer them to the City Council to discuss and really
it's your call. They could be used to acquire additional wetlands or open space
or dedicated to some sort of a special fund possibly such as the Old St.
Hubert's rennovation which was mentioned. That would resolve one of the two
main variances. We did ask the applicants to...on several occasions. We think
that for the dollars spent, that the Lotus Garden site represents a much more
valid expenditure in that that land could actually be used by Redmond physically
to locate new parking whereas the wetland property is basically off limits.
25
r
I
11 City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
11 They did indicate that they contacted Mr. Kronick who owns that property on
several occasions and just could not reach anything close to acceptable terms on
it. We've also contacted Southwest Metro. Southwest Metro is going through a
II staff change but they are going to contact Redmond to try to work out a program
for them if they're receptive to that but Redmond still maintains I think that
they'll probably be willing to do that but they'll have a problem that needs to
be resolved with additional parking in any case. The setback variance for
I parking, as I noted earlier, Councilman Johnson suggested that the City consider
a performance oriented approach to establishing parking setbacks rather than
rely on the strict setback standard. We support that proposal in concept for
II several reasons. The Chanhassen ordinance is somewhat unusual in my experience
that it establishes parking setback as the equivalent setback for the building.
Many communities have a different and much lower degree setback for parking. 15
or 20 feet is usually standard. But another thing about the performance
Ioriented approach that we support is that what you're doing with that is you're
establishing the goal and the goal is that you're not going to be looking at the
parking lot . And we think that that's an acceptable goal and probably provides
I better definition for a developer than saying that we just want 30 feet and 1
tree every 40 feet. And we think that Redmond's proposed parking plan that you
saw last meeting achieves what we would find acceptable as a performance
II oriented plan. Essentially the Redmond proposal is that the site would look no
different from TH 5 than it does today. The berm would be smaller but you
wouldn't see it unless you went behind it. So we support that in concept.
However, we've not had an opportunity to propose a revised parking ordinance to
I you and note that if this were to go through channels, which it would have to do
eventually, it would take a fair amount of time, probably up to 2 months to
advertise it for legal notice and to get it on the Planning Commission and bring
I it up to you. Redmond's asked that we expedite this matter and bring it to your
attention as soon as possible because they have a need to resolve this situation
ideally before the ground freezes. And so we're bringing it to you with
I basically the concept for your consideration. Now if you're comfortable with
the concept, if you wanted Redmond to proceed it would require that you grant
them a variance from the ordinance to allow them to do that. Now that would be
one variance remaining on this one and the grounds for that is that if your
I intent is to change the ordinance, the ordinance itself is sort of becoming the
hardship because it no longer represents what you'd like it to be. So we're
requesting that you provide us direction in how to proceed in this matter. We
I think it's possible for Redmond to proceed as outlined above without placing the
effectiveness of the zoning ordinance in serious jeopardy. We were quite
concerned with that with the four variance requests that was originally brought
II to you and we think that's largely been resolved. If you wish to allow Redmond
to proceed tonight, you could approve their site plan contingent upon posting
financial guarantees which is the usual condition for the landscaping and
I believe realignment of that curb cut, the eastern curb cut which we were
1 concerned about. You should also, if you're going to proceed with that, grant
them a variance to allow a 10 foot parking setback. And with that we are
recommending, well we're recommending approval but we're leaving open. There's
II a lot to discuss here that's a little bit different or out of the ordinary and
we need your guidance.
Mayor Chmiel: Very good. Thank you Paul. Is there anyone who would like to
I address this before we start our discussion? By the way I do Paul like the idea
of getting 3 appraisers. i would much prefer doing that than setting a
II26
II
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
specific price on that property. As you say, they're all over the ballpark and
I think it'd probably be best for the City as well as Redmond to come up with
that specific way with the appraisers.
ILCouncilman Johnson: Don?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes Jay. 11
Councilman Johnson: Can I make a few comments so they know where I'm coming
from on this. One thing on the appraisers, I think that all the circumstances
surrounding the wetland should be known to the appraisers so they're not
appraising a wetland and what is the value of this wetland. If this is a
wetland out on some guy's farm or whatever it'd have a totally different value
than this wetland so it's just the circumstances that, the market circumstances
of this wetland are slightly different than it was a year ago. The City was out
putting this on the market trying to sell this wetland a year ago it'd be one
thing. A little different market there. From a marketing standpoint. I
believe the proceeds of any sale should go to this watershed. Stay within this
watershed for improvements within this watershed. Whether it's acquisition of
land to put up another wetland or whatever.
Mayor Chmiel: I don't know if we should establish that at this particular time
Jay. That's something we'll have to talk about as we proceed.
Councilman Johnson: Yeah, but before we make the sale we need to make that
establish that. '
Mayor Chmiel: I think we'll come up with an establishment on that once.
Councilman Workman: The appraisers might eat the profit. '
Councilman Johnson: That's true. Then on the variance, is the two month
timeframe for doing the ordinance, could we get this done before January 1st? ,
Paul Krauss: Certainly.
Councilman Johnson: So it would be this Council hearing it? '
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah.
Councilman Johnson: And it takes a four-fifths vote on, in our case a unanimous
vote I guess to approve the zoning.
Mayor Chmiel: Depending upon how the election goes, I'd like to see us appoint
whoever one of the Council people are to fill the position.
Councilman Johnson: For the last month? I
Mayor Chmiel: Right.
Councilman Johnson: That's a good idea.
Councilman Workman: What's that?
27
I
11 City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Councilman Johnson: Fill Bill's position after the election for the remaining
meetings in December and November. But to give them a variance at this point
because we think the ordinance is going to be changed before we know, I mean -
it 's only 2 months off to change the ordinance, I'm not sure the huge need is
going to be there. If we can break ground on the additional parking lot on the
other, we can do everything. We can get a lot more spaces to get you through
' the winter and then in the spring go without a variance. If I can avoid a
variance I'd rather avoid a variance. That's the part I wanted you to hear
before you had a chance to speak so you can convince me otherwise but I'm
' against variances when in 2 months time period the variance is not going to be
necessary. I don't want to see this thing ripped half apart and then the frost
comes and it's left all winter halfway ripped up either. Which happens with
construction projects that get started too late in the construction season which
' they're talking frost tonight.
Mayor Chmiel: That's just on the top level.
' Councilman Johnson: That's just the top level, I'm sure. I hope so. Not real
heavy cold weather until after November 6th. That's my quick thoughts on that.
' Councilwoman Dimler: I did have, something here about the letter of the
ordinance and not the intent in selling this. I'm not real sure that I always
agree with going along with the letter of the intent. To me the intent is more
important than the letter of the law. It always has been and I guess always
will be. If we do go ahead with the sale, does anybody have any idea what the
proceeds are likely to be?
Paul Krauss: I guess I could defer that to Mr. Gerhardt. We came up with a
number that we were using on our side of discussions but clearly that's open to
a lot of discussion.
Councilwoman Dimler: Right but a ballpark figure?
' Councilman Johnson: What were the two numbers that both sides were using?
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. That looks good.
' Councilman Workman: Would it be based on like Eckankar ponding site.
Councilwoman Dimler: The Mayor just gave me a figure. It looks excellent.
' Don Ashworth: I think the extremes of that meeting were 30 versus 200 and I
don't know that either of the two sides were. . .
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, somewhere inbetween there. If we do decide to go
ahead I would recommend, if there is a proceed.
' Councilman Johnson: How many acres is this?
Councilwoman Dimler: 1.6. My concern would be that it is valuable land to the
City as we're using it for water drainage and water quality. Somebody would
need to maintain it if we no longer own it, I'm sure the City would still be
1 28
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
maintaining it isn't that correct Gary?
Gary Warren: We would still keep an easement over it so we can still use it. f
Councilwoman Dimler: Right. So if we're going to be maintaining it, I would
recommend that if the proceeds would go to the storm water utility. I like the
idea of the Old St. Hubert's Church too but I think probably the storm water
utility is more in conformance with the intent here. If we go with the other
proposal, I haven't made up my mind yet but just some thoughts on it. I think
with the amending of the ordinance there would be other businesses in town that
would also benefit from this change in the ordinance and we would be however
setting a precedent so I think we need to take a look at that. That's all I
have at this point.
Mayor Chmiel: Thomas, do you have anything?
Councilman Workman: I was hoping I could hear from the applicant. Maybe you're
not going to say anything. Maybe you'd prefer that.
Mayor Chmiel: Would you like please state your name? '
Larry Perkins: Larry Perkins, Chief Operating Office of Redmond and we do
appreciate being here again. We appreciate working with your staff. We'd just
like to say that we support what we came up with with the staff. We support
really the staff's recommendation. I think each of the issues that you talked
about, they're probably talked about in depth over a number of discussions but
we agree that the appraisers, we're not looking for anything that's not fair.
Whatever the panel comes up with and I think the staff especially, Don Ashworth,
that recommendation is a good one. It's fair. We'll pick ours. You pick yours.
They'll pick another one and that's probably the best way because it is a
difficult piece of property to appraise. One, our side could say well it's just
a swamp and you could say, but it allows you to do this so it's worth pie in the
sky you know. Somewhere inbetween they'll establish a value and I think it's
best for all of us because who could argue with a panel of respected appraisers.
We want to start construction right away and it's not just the parking area,
which will run about $150,000.00. It's the 6 1/2 million dollars that we want
to get started on. We want to start design work. We have numerous
modifications to the inside of the building and so it's not just the parking and
we don't want to start. It's a comprehensive project as we were talking before
so we don't want to start without all of the issues being solved so we'd hope
that we could get something from you tonight per the staff's recommendation so
we could get going. We'd like to, we don't care what you do with the money. We
do support the St. Hubert's project. If you want to put it in wetlands,
whatever you want to put it in, that's up to you folks. The only other thing I
guess I'd like to mention is that there are approximately SO jobs involved.
There's approximately $50,000.00 in increased taxes to the City. That's the
City's portion of the real estate tax increase. And we're talking increase here
and I didn't fully understand it before but if this were part of an HRA district
which I'm familiar with working with or a TI district, this would probably be
something that we'd be wooing each other over substantially in trying to get
this thing off the ground so I'd be happy to answer any questions. We just
would like it to take the staff recommendation. Thank you.
29
I
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
' Mayor Chmiel: Tom?
Councilman Workman: Paul, is this 30 foot setback causing businesses in town
1 problems or is it going to cause people problems, parking wise?
Paul Krauss:. You've often managed to get around it by, I mean in the central
business district by having things go PUO. Where they've used 15 or 20 foot
' setback's. 25 foot setbacks.
Councilman Workman: Well, as we go out to Audubon Road and down TM 5 there.
Paul Krauss: Well see Audubon Road's a different situation Tom and in fact I
had a discussion with the City Attorney on that. The Comprehensive Plan is
proposing that buffer yards be established. 50 to 100 foot wide buffer yards
where nothing will happen because that's where the industry kind of bumps up
against the single family and we need to put that in the ordinance that there's
a buffer yard that those property owners have to maintain.
' Councilman Workman: The property owners and the roadway?
Paul Krauss: It'd be measured, you have like Audubon Road and then you'd have
50 feet where nothing could be done and then you'd have the parking lot setback.
Councilman Johnson: That's if you have residential on the other side of the
road but if it's industrial on the other side of the road.
Paul Krauss: Than this standard that we're talking about tonight would be the
one that would be applied.
Councilman Johnson: You're talking about getting your greater setback from
residential?
Councilman Workman: 80 foot setback.
' Paul Krauss: Along Audubon Road where you have single family homes across the
street, that's what we had envisioned, yeah.
' Councilman Workman: Expensive setback. So in relationship to that, where does
our changing this ordinance, what kind of soup does that put us in?
Paul Krauss: This would apply inside Chan Lakes Business Park. You know as I'm
' conceptualizing the ordinance. It would apply possibly, if we really changed
all the districts which I think we should, in the central business district you
establish a 10 or 15 or 20, whatever is the standard setback for those
' properties that are not developed as PUD. The only difference, the only place
you deviate from that is when you have single family property adjacent to that
and right now our ordinance does increase the parking lot setback when you're
adjacent to single family homes to I believe 50 feet.
Councilman Workman: Yeah, I'm a little unsure about the pond and the
appraisers. Mr. Perkin's desire to jump in so quickly makes me, but I
' understand the impervious rule but I'm not hard core with it I don't think and
if we can accomplish this that way I'd be more than happy. In regards to the
' 30
1
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
I
use of the money, I might be running for Council in 2 years. I might need the
cash so. I think the church idea is an outstanding one. However, I think that
could draw some criticisms from areas of the community that unless the City
owned it. I don't know if that's really going to happen. Jay, as far as your
variance, if we're going to do this, I think a variance is something we should
go ahead and do and I take the exact opposite of you. You can get a pretty good
feeling from the Council that we're going to pass something in 2 months anyway,
why not give the variance versus you saying well if we're going to do it in 2
months, well why don't you wait. I don't see the value in waiting if we're
going to get it done. Get the construction going. I don't think Redmond wants
all those wealthy U.S. Open people coming by and saying hey, there's that
company we want to invest in or other. So I think they want their place to look
good as soon as possible. I am finally nervous about changing the ordinance in
this fashion but if we feel that this is going to be popping up all over the
place and we're going to still get what we want as far as aesthetics, then I'm
for it also. '
Councilman Johnson: My concern on the variance was that the rules, when we go
to public hearing and go before the Planning Commission, somebody comes up with
a real good argument why not to do it and we end up not making the rule change
but we've already given the variance saying that we'll give you the variance
because we think the rule change is going to happen. But public hearings and
Planning Commissions can change things. That's why I get nervous on us trying ,
to predict what's going to happen before the public hearing occurs. On this one
it seems fairly non-controversial. Especially since it was my idea, it must be
a good idea.
Councilman Workman: I'd like to rethink this. I would stick my neck out as far
as to say that our prediction rate is 100% on these things. I'm serious. When
we voted to change an ordinance like this and grant a variance, I would say that
100% of the times it's come back, the ordinance has been changed and that's the
way it's happened.
Councilman Johnson: It's a pretty good message to Planning Commission saying
hey, it's already going to happen. Please do it. You know it kind of by-passes
the system by which rules are supposed to be established. We're establishing
the ordinance by granting the variance almost without holding the public
hearings or anything else.
Councilman Workman: Maybe they're wowed by your legislativeness. I think what '
we've been trying to do and it hasn't come up in our discussion tonight. There
was some in the memo about, and maybe we should send this to HRA to have them
talk about the economics of it all but I think we'd prefer to, I think we've
whittled this thing down to where we're not doing, we're not sticking our necks
so far out. We're accommodating. They're accommodating. For the past 2 years
this Council has been I think really compromising. I think we've whittled it
down to where we all feel comfortable with a compromise and this thing isn't
going to hurt us or our city or our Code book and I would make a motion to that.
Councilwoman Oimler: Which one? A change in the ordinance or the. .. .land? '
Councilman Workman: Well that's really two separate ones.
1
31
I
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Paul Krauss: What you would be making a motion on is approval of the Redmond
' site plan as drafted with a variance for front yard setback down to 10 feet
conditioned on acquisition of the land and merger of it with the Redmond site,
completion of landscaping, posting of the landscaping bond and resolving a
location of the eastern driveway cut relative to traffic safety concerns.
Mayor Chmiel: Very well put .
Y Y P
' Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, so we need both of them.
Larry Perkins: . .by the 3 appraisals?
Paul Krauss: Yeah.
' Mayor Chmiel: that was in there.
Councilman Johnson: Acquisition of the pond by method of 3 appraisers.
' Councilman Workman: In my mind I was thinking the setback and then the
impervious but so, yeah. That's my motion.
' Councilwoman Dimler: I'll second that motion.
Mayor Chmiel: We have a motion and a second on the floor. Any further
' discussion?
Councilwoman Dimler: Do you want to talk about what we're going to do with the
money? Or determine that later.
Mayor Chmiel: I think that can be determined at a later time.
' Councilwoman Dimler: Alright.
Mayor Chmiel: I don't think that's appropriate at this time to include that in
there. Motion on the floor with a second.
' Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Disler seconded to approve the Redmond
site plan as drafted with a variance for front yard setback down to 10 feet
' conditioned on acquisition of the land and merger of it Jith the Redmond site,
completion of landscaping, posting of the landscaping bond and resolving a
location of the eastern driveway cut relative to traffic safety concerns. All
' voted in favor except Councilman Johnson who opposed and the motion carried with
a vote of 3 to 1.
Councilman Johnson: I think it's a good deal but I don't like the variance part
of it.
A. APPROVE RATE STRUCTURE FOR SURFACE WATER UTILITY DISTRICT.
' B. APPROVE SUMMARY ORDINANCE FOR PUBLICATION.
Councilman Johnson: I move the staff recommendation.
' Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, but which one?
. ]
32
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Councilwoman Dimler: I want to discuss it. I
Councilman Johnson: There's two staff recommendations but they're both the
same. I
Mayor Chmiel: Let's just hold this one and then can we just move on to the next
item and bring this one up towards the last in case there's anyone else here for
some of the other things? Well, we'll keep it right where it's at. Let's go
with this one right now.
Gary Warren: Briefly Mr. Mayor, I thought I could make it through without '
making a mistake this year but I have to admit that I did make one mistake and
it happens to be in this report. On the 18 cents per month. That was a
quarterly rate divided by 12 months. Actually t-he difference in the rates would
be 72 cents per month between the 100% funding and 60% funding. Just start with
that so you know I wasn't trying to slip one by you here. At your discretion
staff did proceed forward after adoption of the ordinance to run various
scenarios for the program and to relook at the CIP as it was presented to see if
it was appropriate. Basically our position has been and it continues to be that
the program, the estimates that we've done, we've put together with our best
thoughts in mind and we think that they are reasonable for the water quality
plan, the 509 plan and the wetland mapping elements which are the key elements
that we are saying that start the program. We have looked at the scenarios
which are summarized in the report for the financial impact of going from the
100% program which would be $5.37 per quarter down to the 60% funding level of
$3.22 per quarter. And the annual revenue projections which you see ranging
from $346,800.00 down to $208,080.00. As you can see from the program, this 5
year CIP is, the studies which need to be initiated which sort of kick off the
program are totaling 300 some thousand dollars so we have basically continued to
support the fact that without being arbitrary, which from our discretion I guess
we can say that we believe that the 100% program is the fiscally responsible
level to fund the program at. Also we acknowledge that there's about $30,000.00
worth of staff level which because of the participation that people such as
Paul, myself, Jo Ann, Dave, Sharmin, etc. do spend in dealing with the wetland
issue and with the storm water issue in the city, and water quality issue, that
there is approximately about $30,000.00 of staff labor and overhead which by
rights should be allocated to this fund. That presently is effort which is
being funded out of the general fund. So while it is only $30,000.00 out of the
$300,000.00 shortfall per se, it is a step in that direction and we think that
it is appropriate for this fund similar to the sewer and water utility funds •to
carry that burden. The program, each element of the program, water quality
plan, storm water management 509 plan, etc. are elements that if we proceed on
them would be elements that would be specifically brought back after proposals
are solicited and the cost would then be refined so the funding would be,
there'd be another opportunity for the Council to also adjust and say yes or no
as to each of those elements. So there is no commitment here to any of those
elements. They are only as concepts with our best estimate. • So staff has
recommended and I apologize for the mathematical error but we continue I guess,
or I do to support the 100% funding of the program which would be the $5.37 rate
for the residential single family and which totally is broken down in the
Attachment 1 in the handouts.
33
r
I
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you Gary.
Councilman Workman: The 18 cents gives a difference, it's not 18 cents? It's
18 cents per quarter?
Gary Warren: What I did is I took the quarterly rate. The difference in the
quarterly rate divided by 12 months instead of 3.
' Councilman Johnson: It's a very long quarter.
Gary Warren: Watershed burnout. It's 72 cents a month is the difference
between 60% funding and 100% funding. 27 cents per month is the difference
between 85% and 100% and 45 cents per month is the difference between 75% .and
100% funding.
' Councilman Johnson: I also did it on an annual basis. At $8.60 a year at 60%.
$5.36 a year at 75% and a whole $3.24 less per year at the 85% level.
Gary Warren: Utility mailing would be a buck.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Is there anyone wanting to talk about this one? If
not, we'll bring it back here to Council. Tom?
Councilman Workman: How's the ag property classified done?
Gary Warren: Ag property, based on the modified ordinance is placed in there
strictly as a residential single family parcel.
Mayor Chmiel: One unit.
Councilwoman Oimler: Big break.
' Councilman Workman: That's a big break I'd say because I think there's an awful
lot going on on that big parcel versus.
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, it's soaking in.
Councilman Workman: Breaking it up and plowing it up. I don't know. That's
getting by pretty easy I think. I have a feeling for land that is just sitting
you know. That I think in more ways than one, idle land just sitting is doing
nothing to deserve a whole lot in regards to all this but farmers are doing an
' awful lot on their property. There's no doubt about it. And so I've got a
little problem with that. I think it should be a little more fair in that
regard. Then my only other comment is I'm willing to go with the 100% at this
' point.
Councilwoman Dimler: I have some comments too. I guess what we've established
is that I need a car and now I'm going to ask you to make it a Cadillac. That's
' kind of the way i see this. We've established that we need this utility. It is
my experience that everything keeps going up instead of ever coming down. I
would recommend that we start at the lower level and as the years go by I'm sure
' that it will be going up as we see and assess the needs so I would start with
the 60%.
34
I
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Mayor Chmiel: That's a ditto. I think I mentioned that last time at the
meeting where I felt we should come from and that was to start at 60% and if the
costs are such that we have to increase it, then increase it accordingly as we
go. And I'll just drop it there because I think we had enough discussion on it
before. But I did talk to a lot of residents in the community and they
concurred with that particular position. ,
Councilman Johnson: I think an amazing amount of recycling that our citizens
are doing show how environmentally sensitive our citizens are in this town. I
believe that there'd be a lot of people backing this and aren't going to sqwack
a lot about the proposal here. I do not think we should start by underfunding
and then have to increase it in the future and make up for the loss of funds
that we don't pay now. This is pay me now or pay me later and pay me later a
little more. Here I'd like to establish and get the funds going. When you look
at what they're looking at, $300,000.00 worth of work next year on the fund in
the first year and we're talking about funding it at $200,000.00 per year? And
we're going to be $100,000.00 behind in the first year if we funded it at the
60% level. We won't be able to achieve the first year's goals as I was reading
this. So I would want to go at least the 85% which gets $294,000.00 in the
first year's revenue if we're predicting to spend $300,000.00 in the first year.
I just can't see that we should fund it at $100,000.00 under what we're going to
spend. We can't do deficit financing.
Councilwoman Oimler: Well we could cut the project scope for the first year
which is what I would recommend.
Councilman Johnson: That's taking the project out at the knees. This is the 1
planning stage. This is one of the most important stages of the project. If we
really want to do something about water quality and protection of the
environment here, this is our opportunity. I would go with Tom on 100% but I
would be willing to compromise and go down to 85% if we have to but I'd like to
get as much of the work done so we can. You know we're not getting the work
done because we don't have the money and if we don't give ourselves the money,
we're not going to ever have it and we're not going to get, we're not going to
find out what it's really going to cost us so I will argue for 100% but looking
at we've got 2 to 2 deadlock, I'll compromise.
Councilwoman Oimler: Jay, I'm uncomfortable with collecting a utility and then
talking about using that money to reduce a deficit in some other part of the
budget,. That is my concern of what will happen and that's why I want to start
at 60%. Use it only for water quality and wetland maintenance and street
sweeping and whatever we've decided we need it for and then move from there. It
says in here that are deficit, we could use the money to cut our deficit by
getting salaries out of it and so on and so' forth.
Councilman Johnson: That's correct.
Councilwoman Oimler: Yeah. I'm not real sure that I agree with that. That's
why I'd like to see us start low and I can guarantee you that in years to come
it will go up. ,
Mayor Chmiel: It's the old pay me now or pay me later or pay me more now and
pay me more later.
35
11
I
11 City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Councilman Johnson: The argument that we're going to, we are taking money right
now and spending it on water issues and not billing it against water issues and
it is going against the general deficit or the general funds and is part of the
deficit problem that we have right now. We're spending money this year on water
projects. Next year that same money will be spent, Jo Ann and Paul and Gary,
their time working on water quality projects would be billed against this money,
not against the general fund. That is not abuse. That is exactly what the
utility is for.
Councilwoman Dimler: But we haven't worked on the budget yet though. Are we
going to reduce the general fund then by that salary? I mean we haven't talked
about that. That 's coming up in our upcoming budget sessions. That has not
been established.
' Councilman Johnson: Exactly but to say that we're already.
Councilwoman Dimler: But so why are you saying it's a fact already? It's
isn't. I mean we can continue to keep some of their funds coming out of there
as well. We don't have to shift it all in one year.
Councilman Johnson: Well we're not shifting it all. They're only predicting
$30,000.00. That is not the full salary of Jo Ann and Paul and Gary, as much as
we'd like that to be their full salary. $30,000.00 between the three of them.
11 But I think they're worth more than that.
Councilwoman Dimler: I'm not arguing that. That's not the point here. I'm
saying that make this change slowly. Seeing what the actual is instead of
projections.
Councilman Johnson: I think they've got some good estimates. They've been
coming, these people have been very good at estimating some costs. They're
generally a little high, yes but not 60%. They are not 40% above. That's
why I'm thinking that we may be able to compromise at the 85 but I think their
first year work plan, they're planning to, the plans here for the first year of
over $300,000.00 is appropriate for the work that has to be done.
Mayor Chmiel: She's saying the scope of that project doesn't necessarily, it
could be that total amount for that first year. That's the point she's trying
to make. I really basically agree with Ursula and I feel strongly that 60%
should be there and as you were saying, either pay me now or pay me later. Let
' us see where it goes and if that's necessitated that we do have to have that
increase, fine. We'll make that increase. But let's not over go the total
amount of dollars. The 85% or 100%. I'm saying let's move from a low medium to
moving up accordingly. This is something we're starting. This is something
that we have to have. We all know that but let's start at that particular point
and that's where I'm coming from.
' Councilwoman Dimler: Plus it's up for Council review at any time we feel we
need an increase.
Councilman Johnson: Well the way I see it is we're building a house here and
the builder's told us it's going to cost us so many dollars and we're saying
well, I'll give you 60% of that. You give me what I'm going to get so that's
1 36
I
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
what the Council's saying here is we want 60% of the product. Let's give the
citizens of Chanhassen 60% of it. I
Councilwoman Dimler: We're saying the cost of the house is too expensive to
begin with is what I'm saying. I do that all the time. I don't pay. . .do you?
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, any other discussion? Tom?
Councilman Workman: Well you guys all have very good comments. I don't think
Don and Ursula are trying to be detrimental to the environment. My ears go up
when somebody says you must not be very environmental if you're not going to do
this. I have fears about raising that kind of money and as I discussed with
Ursula earlier Today, hey we can take a real hard look at Gary's engineering
budget here in the next month and we can decide whether or not that's a.
duplicate of charges and other things. I guess I arrived at the 100% and big
ear because the staff has said that's what they need. I'd prefer to shoot high
in the first year than to shoot low for many of the reasons that Jay had. I
think we can get a real good idea about what we're going to need and what we're
not going to need. Don and Ursula as well as myself and maybe Jay have the
strong concern that city government or any government spends exactly as much as
they have and so that's a big concern. I think we can look at, we are unable to
at this point look at all the specific costs and all the detail that Gary's
going to spend this money on this year but we'll be able to next year because I
will be here and Ursula, you will be here and it's at that point that this thing
is going to get our best and most educated look at this thing. And so Gary
knows that he's going to have to make this thing perform and produce and I think
he's ready to give the money back if.
Councilwoman Dimler: Oh sure. That's my point. It never goes down. I
Councilman Workman: But I'm convinced that Gary's not trying to create an
enormous slush funds for raises and all sorts of other bells and whistles. You
know, what are we going to have, 25 segidisks? A new bass finder boat? So I'm
convinced that Gary's going to be frugal with our dollars and I'm anxious to see
how this thing pans out. I know that we've all got the lakes and the quality of
water in mind. We've all been through the Lake Lucy scenario and whatever we
can do. I think we've been leaders in recycling. We're going to be leaders in
the plastic recycling. We're leaders on this in the County and I'd like to do
it well if we're going to do it and not kind of wait and see and then underfund
it as Jay would say and then try to figure out how, it just delays the process
out a little bit. But I am concerned about the size of the money and it is a
tax and it is raising money, more money from people who don't want to give any
more money. But as Jay says, yes. I think the residents are above average in
their concern for this area and I'd like to see us get it done. Get what we
need done in the first year and then we can sake the best decision next year.
So that's why I was willing, because I don't have a lot of the details on how
60% is going to work, I've had to put my faith in staff to say I'm from
Missouri, show me.
Councilman Johnson: Like you said, you two will be here next year if there's a
big slush fund and the predictions are there, it's up to you.
Councilwoman Dimler: It's hard to take money away though I'll tell you that. I
37
I
I
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Councilman Johnson: We're already doing it.
Councilwoman Dimler: I know we have but it's hard to do that .
Mayor Chmiel: Don, did you have something?
Don Ashworth: Yes, one quick comment and that is. There's a danger in funding
a program at too low of a level. Sometimes you can never get out of there. A
year from today you find that the figures were right and potentially there's
whatever additional cost of living and you come back and say well, we'll look to
a 20% increase. It really becomes difficult to go back to citizens and say, pay
that 20% more. And now you're still 20% behind the total program and in fact
with the cost of living has gone up, you're potentially at that point in time
25% so then the following year you do another 20%. You never really catch up.
' Do you follow what I'm saying? You finally agree, well let's just do it at 10%.
You have 10% over 4 years but you've had 6% cost of living. You never get up to
the 100% level.
Mayor Chmiel: But the residents are at the same point of having it at a lower
figure. They know it's there. They don't mind putting that additional increase
and eventually you will get there I feel.
Don Ashworth: Sometimes you just end up with less grief doing it once. Getting
it over with rather than having to look at it every year.
Councilwoman Dimler: Are you saying there will never be any increases in the
future?
Don Ashworth: No.
Councilwoman Dimler: So our 100% level moves.
' Don Ashworth: From the standpoint of the City budget in terms of the amount of
money that we extract from each individual parcel, we've not increased in the
last 6 years. I mean we've had that many additional homes that has created that
many additional dollars that we have not had to go back and look to a mil rate
increase. Our overall dollars, yes have increased. There's no question about
that. We have not asked for additional money in terms of a mil rate increase.
I won't tell you that that won't happen with, or I mean that we will not have to
have an increase but it may not be required. I mean if we bring in 300 more
parcels and it brings in $20,000.00 more, that may be sufficient.
' Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other discussion? If not, I'd ask for a motion.
Councilwoman Dimler: I move approval of the 60% rate.
Mayor Chmiel: I would second that. Any other discussion?
Councilman Johnson: I think there's a lot of room to compromise. Let's go for
a vote.
Councilwoman Dialer moved, Mayor Chmiel seconded to approve the rate structure
for the Surface Water Utility District at 60%. Councilwoman Dialer and Mayor
38
I
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Chaiel voted in favor. Councilman Workman and Councilman Johnson voted in
opposition and the motion was tied at 2 to 2.
Councilman Johnson: Exactly between 60 and 100 is 80. You know it's not on our
list but 80% is exactly between where Tom and I want to be and you all want to
be so we can sit here and argue all night. I move 80%. I
Councilman Workman: Second.
Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve the rate 1
structure for the Surface Water Utility District at 80%. Councilmans Johnson
and Workman voted in favor. Councilwoman Dialer and Mayor Chaiel voted in
opposition and the motion was tied at 2 to 2. I
Councilman Johnson: Well, the Council in January could decide it too or we
could wait until after November when we have a fifth Council member.
Mayor Chmiel: My suggestion is that we table this and get further discussions
going and reconsider and bring it up at the next meeting.
Councilwoman Dimler: Second.
Councilman Workman: But what can we discuss? It's only quarter to 10:00. 1
Mayor Chaiel moved, Councilwoman Dialer seconded to table action on the rate
structure for the Surface Water Utility District until the next Council meeting.
All voted in favor except Councilman Workman who opposed and the motion carried
with a vote of 3 to 1.
Councilman Johnson: There's no huge hurry. I
Mayor Chmiel: No.
Councilman Johnson: Staff can still go about creating this system for financing '
and whatever.
Councilwoman Dimler: We're not going to start the utility until January anyway
right?
Mayor Chaiel: Right. 1
Gary Warren: We need to know the rates in order to get the billing.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. We still have time though. 1
Gary Warren: Any direction you'd care to give staff for the next go around?
Mayor Chmiel: No, but we're sure going to talk.
Councilwoman Dimler: Can you cut the project scope somehow in the first year? I
Councilman Workman: See Gary you should have really played it up.
39 '
I
I/
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Councilwoman Dimler: He did.
Gary Warren: There's something to be learned from that.
Don Ashworth: Take out the bass boat.
Councilman Johnson: Yeah, take out the bass boat. That will do it.
Gary Warren: Hempel would resign. I can't do that.
' Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve the Summary
Ordinance for publication for the Surface Water Utility District. All voted in
favor and the motion carried unanimously.
•
CONSIDER REVISIONS TO THE MARKET SQUARE SITE PLAN.
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, last October, as you're aware, the City Council
approved the development stage plans for the PUD for Market Square. Since that
time the development hasn't occurred. There's been a lot of restructing and the
Target issue came up in the meantime. As you've also heard, the project is now
on the front burner again. There's an HRA or a City Council deadline to come in
and get the project going. There's been a transfer in or a change in who is
going to build the supermarket and at this time they're asking for a revised
site plan approval. Basically the original Super Value store which was a 20,000
square foot store with 8,000 square foot expansion is being replaced by a
Festival Foods Market which is quite a bit larger. It's 35,000 square feet with
initial construction with an additional 10,000 square foot building addition.
In the process some of that addition's been happened by replacing some of the
retail tenants in the shopping center but the balance of that's been done by
expanding the size of the square footage in the shopping center itself. The
proposal basically went from 91,000 square feet to 97,900 so there was a need to
expand the parking on site accordingly to provide sufficient parking for the
expanded square footage. That's been accomplished largely without changing the
site plan in any significant way. In fact the site plan is only different in
' terms of the building footprint. Drainage utilities, parking, everything else
is virtually identical. More parking stalls were put into the site basically by
using a parking stall that was I believe 9 feet versus the 10 feet that was
' originally proposed. City ordinances only require 8 1/2 so there's plenty of
parking. Staff is recommending approval of the amended site plan subject to a
few conditions. One is that a revised landscaping plan be prepared to
accommodate the new building footprint. Second is that there's a raised
' concrete platform, a display platform being proposed out in front of what will
become the lawn and Sports Center. This is a new addition and staff has some
concern with this and city ordinances prohibit the outdoor display of
' merchandise. We have two retail tenants in town who currently display
merchandise outdoors. There has not been an attempt to bring this into
compliance however both those individuals are looking to moving into the
shopping center and we'd rather not see the problem perpetuated so we're
recommending that the exterior display platform be removed. The third condition
is that the replacement of the Super Value with the Festival is going to alter
the building elevations somewhat and they do not have a final plan in yet for
the building elevations. That's got to be approved by the Festival Market plus
by the developer and then by the City. We think that we can keep the
40
11
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
architectural consistency with the shopping center intact. The developer's
aware that that's our goal and is their stated goal as well. So what we'd like
to do in the building elevations is that if staff believes the plans are
consistent with the architectural theme of the original shopping center, then
we'd like to be in a position to administratively approve it so we can issue a
building permit and break ground. If however there's a substantial question in
our mind as to whether or not the building is consistent with the original
approvals which you and the Planning Commission spent a lot of time on, then
we'd like to bring back those revised elevations to the Planning Commission and
City Council. With that we do think that this is a relatively minor change to
the site plan and we are recommending that it be approved.
Councilman Workman: Gary, what about the segment between what's supposed to be
the Lawn and Sport and the grocery store?
Gary Warren: You mean Paul?
Councilman Workman: Did I say Gary?
Paul Krauss: Well it's all going to be retail expansion. You probably heard
that there was a plan afoot at one point to make a hole in the building?
Councilman Workman: Right.
Paul Krauss: That's now eliminated and the building is going to resemble what
it used to. In fact it's going to be bigger. There will be no hole in the
building. I don't know who that tenant space is for. Is that the drug store? 1
Councilman Workman: Insurance agency?
Brad Johnson: I've got, if you want to look, a comparison between the two I
plans. I've drawn a circle around where the changes are taking place.
Basically the previous plan, the area you're looking at is in this are right
here. Previously we had a 22,000 square foot supermarket expandable to 30,000.
We had a 7,500 square foot drug store and then we had a vacant area which we
would fill in later. That was strictly a financing thing that we had to
accomplish. What we've done then, Gateway is by the way, there's some people,
Arnie Prevey who is the Vice President of Sales with Gateway. . .he's going to
address you and let you know just what kind of store we have. When Gateway came
to us, their biggest concern is that we be continuously competitive with any
other future development. As you know, there's a couple others planned for
other stores and stuff in the community, that this center would probably in the
next 20-25 years be able to accommodate a grocery store that will remain
competitive with the Cubs and the Rainbows and everything like that. So their
request to us that they felt at a 45,000 square foot store they could remain
competitive with most of the world for the next 20 years. Certainly as long,
you know short term. And therefore the center itself, who's tenants are
somewhat relying, at least initially for the next 20 years on the traffic
generated by here, would remain intact. So what we did is we went back to the
drawing board and talked to Paul and we went through the whole process with the
city to see if we could do it and what we did is we took out that vacant space
and moved the drug store over. Same drug store. And then we enlarged this this
way because we were able to move it over and then kept the same basic expansion
41
•
11
11 City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
area. I just showed this to somebody else. They couldn't tell the difference
until I showed them.
Mayor Chmiel: There's one square missing.
Brad Johnson: Yeah. And so what we were trying to do is do as little as
possible to make a major change. We end up with the same amount of parking
spaces per square foot of space in the center. We end up initially with more
parking spaces but we have a larger grocery store and we have expansion space
for another 44. . .and we cannot use the parking over here at the present time.
That is the message on that. And we will come back, we have to take some time
to try to incorporate the new grocery store's look into our front. And if I
may, I'd like to address a few things. I'd like to introduce Arnie Prevey. He's
the Vice President of Sales for Gateway Foods. I'd like to have him just
' explain what type of store this would be so you have a little feeling for what
we're trying to accomplish. Arnie, do you want to come up?
Mayor Chmiel: Welcome to Chanhassen.
Arnie Prevey: Thank you and good evening Mayor and Council members. Yeah, I'd
like to explain just a little bit about the Festival's Food. I'm sure that
probably there's a number of you who may not even have heard of the name before
and it is a new concept with our company. Our company, Gateway Foods has
Rainbow Food Stores and we come up with this concept based on the fact that we
think a lot of people do like to shop large stores but also there's a lot of
people out there that would prefer to shop somewhat of a smaller type unit and
still have all the facilities that a large store would have. So we come up with
the concept that we like to call an upscale mini-Rainbow. Has all the
facilities of the Rainbow and I'm sure you're familiar with the Rainbow we have
in Eden Prairie. And this would have all the facilities that that particular
store has but we'd have some extras. All of our Festival stores with the
exception of one, are independently owned so there again, we feel that being an
independent retailer gives it a little better flavor and especially for a
community that you have like here. And I just, we feel kind of good about
coming into Chanhassen because of the fact that we've looked at this city for
quite some time but we knew Super Value was here and had talked to you people so
at this time I'd like to answer any questions that you may have regarding the
' super market, whatever that may be.
Councilman Workman: Do you have an independent owner yet?
' Arnie Prevey: Yes. We have a father and a son. Lyle King is the father. His
son Bob. They have a Festival store over in Andover which was one of the first
Festival's we put in. That's been put in about 3 years ago. They have a store
in Champlin. It's an IG store and they have one on Chicago Avenue in
Minneapolis and of course they've been looking for another site. We also have
another site for them in Champlin which is going to be a Festival and that will
replace the IG out in that area. The IG store and that's, it's probably a year
away from right now.
Mayor Chmiel: I think that's great. I know what Rainbow is of course and I
just recently today had some discussions with some people and they were aware of
a Festival store and their indication to me is they like the store very much.
11 42
11
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Arnie Prevey: That's good.
Mayor Chmiel: So that was sort of encouraging to me. But I think you're right
in saying that sometimes the women don't like to go into larger stores and
that's my wife exactly. She would rather shop in a smaller one and I think what
you've got designed is going to make her go to that store on a constant basis.
Arnie Prevey: That's good. I'm glad to hear that. I might add also as far as
our pricing structure and that type of store, basically it's the same as a
Rainbow that you're familiar with or if you've shopped our competitor Cub. The
pricing structure is basically the same as what those are. And I would say
because of the fact that it's an independently owned type store, they always
seem to have, put a little different flavor into that type of unit. I don't
want to take anything away from our corporate Rainbow stores. Hopefully they're
doing a good job on service and everything else but there's just something about
when an independent owns a unit and he's got his hard earned money in it and
heart and soul in it. There's something that comes off a little bit better.
That's what we're pleased about. We have a corporate store in Moorehead that we
put in about, well let's see. We opened it in April. That store is 52,000
square feet and quite honestly I don't believe we'd ever put in one, a Festival
store that large anymore because it just doesn't quite fit the profile that
we're trying to come up with. The 35,000 comes, is excellent and with the
growth that I think you're going to have in this area, we definitely need the
10,000 square feet to bring it up to 45,000 at some time. I think the time table
as mentioned, did Brad say 20 years? I would hope that it's in 5 years that we
need that 10,000 and that would be our time table. More that sort. That in 5
years from now we're ready to add on the extra 10,000 square feet. So if
there's any other questions.
Councilman Johnson: How soon are we breaking ground? 1
Arnie Prevey: We've got the lease in our attorney's hands in LaCrosse right
now. They're going through the lease and Brad's camping at our doorstep.
Hopefully we're real anxious to get going on it. We just want to get moving on
it real quickly. Also, the retailer that we want to put in here is a very solid
retailer. So many times now days as a wholesale company we run into a lot of
people that want to go into business but they just do not have the operating I
capital to get into business and this fellow, Lyle King and his son, they have
very good backing. They're very, as we call them, very healthy retailers.
Mayor Chmiel: Great. Appreciate it. ,
Arnie Prevey: Thank you for your time.
Brad Johnson: I showed this plan to your City Attorney and he said he went in.
What you'd say to me? You were in one in, wherever up there and it looked, he
thought he was in a Rainbow so he had to go out and look at the sign. I
Roger Knutson: I walked outside and looked at the sign again.
Brad Johnson: So I think it'd be a good addition and probably solve some of the
needs. As far as timing is concerned, we are fast tracking it. Like any large
company there are beauracracies that we have to overcome at Gateway in getting,
43
1
11 City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
and not like here either. In getting the leases done and they have their
process and I would say we're getting the best possible cooperative from them in
trying to accomplish our goal which is. . .
' Councilman Workman: Can I interject? We had a great discussion, quickly drop
this in. We had a great discussion on this Council on cigarettes and cigarette
sales in stores and one of the things we've done, we were like the second city
in the nation to ban cigarette vending and we sort of dabbled in the whether or
not, what kind of a job a store could do to maybe keep cigarettes, etc. back
from minors and out of their hands and we're always told that well, we'd have to
revamp our whole store in order to do that. Would it be possible for, you're
' not going to give me an answer here but would it be possible for them to maybe
look ahead at maybe our community's sensitive smoking ideas perhaps and maybe
design a store with that in mind.
rMayor Chmiel: Just a little more control so it's not accessible for them to.
Arnie Prevey: You were correct at first when you said I wasn't going to give
you an answer. I'm not going to but I will say this. We have the same concerns
that a lot of you people have and it's more of a concern all the time. We're
working on it to quite some degree as to how we can control this and everything
else. We not only have a problem with cigarettes as far as getting them into
the hands of the minors and people that probably should not be sold them. I'm a
non-smoker and I could care less if they never sold cigarettes but be that as it
1 may, we also have to contend with the shoplifting of cigarettes. A carton of
cigarettes of an expensive item nowadays so we look at it from that standpoint .
Now can we protect this product from getting into whatever wrong hands. It's
something we're working on all the time.
Mayor Chmiel: Good. Thank you.
' Brad Johnson: Just one other thing. I might mention that we agree entirely
with the recommendation of staff. We have added however to our site plan, I
guess we ran it up the flag. One of our concerns on this particular location is
that we're having the Chanhassen Lawn and Sports move into a facility that
really doesn't allow for outside display of merchandise. We have talked about
it internally as to how to try to figure out to do it. I don't think we may
solve the problem here this evening but we wanted to address it and it is
' addressed in this particular plan. Because we feel, and this is my idea, not
Bernie's. I do feel that because of the nature of his business he needs some
ability to display the types of products that he has and he really doesn't have
a lot of window space in the back and that type of thing so we have proposed,
and also as the landlord we want to make sure that Bernie didn't have them all
over everywhere so we'd have to go find them, you know so we put in a display
area out in front of his store in the corner that would look like pyramids like
you do at the Olympics and stuff like that where we might have an opportunity
both to control the display and do that. Now this is in a BG area and I realize
under the PUD it may or may not be allowed but in the BG area it's allowed
through a conditional use permit. Display merchandise in the outside if it's
under some type of control. So we've asked for that here. I noticed that the
staff said they did not recommend it and it probably is correct in not
recommending it unless we came back in for a conditional use permit but I wanted
you to be aware that we're doing it. I don't know, Bernie do you want to say
11 44
I
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
anything about it other than what I've said?
Bernie Hanson: That addresses that I want. . . I
Brad Johnson: Yeah, and that's why that was in there. We were trying to figure
out how to solve it and it just ended up in the plan and probably a little bit
prematurely. We'll probably be back to the staff on that one so with that we'll
accept the staff's recommendation with the idea we'll come back over time and
try to figure out a solution to that. Thank you.
Councilwoman Dimler: I do have one question here and I don't think it was
addressed, at least I didn't see it. We were talking about moving that bus
shelter. Is that addressed? ,
Mayor Chmiel: That's already in process from my understanding is it not?
Brad Johnson: Yeah. 1
Councilman Johnson: We approved that at the last meeting didn't we?
Brad Johnson: Yeah. As part of the development agreement we've agreed to pay
for the relocation price and I think we have an agreement now that we have to
escrow the money so it's there when they do it. I think Todd, you'r working on
a plan?
Todd Gerhardt: We've got a plan already for relocation across the street.
Brad Johnson: So I think that's all in the process. Al
1 Councilwoman Dimler: So it's all incorporated?
Paul Krauss: That plan will be brought back before the Planning Commission and
City Council for specific approval. ,
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, any other discussion?
Councilman Johnson: It was before the Planning Commission at the last Planning '
Commission meeting. That's why I remembered it. That was at midnight.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, any other discussion? Hearing none, I'll ask for a motion? I
Councilman Johnson: I move for approval with the 18 conditions. I believe
there's 18. 19 conditions, I'm sorry, recommended by staff.
Councilman Workman: Second.
Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve the amended 1
Site Plan for PUD Development Stage Approval for Market Square subject to the
following conditions:
1. Submit a revised landscaping plan illustrating plant material in the future 1
expansion area of the Festival Foods Store and of the revised parking lot
island configuration.
45
I
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
2. Submit final building elevations to staff for administrative approval of, if
determined by staff to be inconsistent with the original plan, to be
returned to the Planning Commission and City Council for review.
' 3. Eliminate the outdoor display area from in front of the Lawn and Sports
Center. All outdoor display of merchandise in the shopping center is
1 prohibited. Merchandise contained in the screened outdoor storage area is
exempt from this requirement.
4. Enter into a PUO contract with the City that will contain all of the
conditions of approval and which will be recoreded against all lots platted
in the project. The PUD agreement should provide for a landscape bond as
outlined in the staff report.
5. The final plat shall reflect a 20 foot utility easement for the proposed
City water line over the southerly portion of the site.
6. The applicant shall enter into a development contract and provide the
necessary security.
7. The applicant shall enter into a PIED contract with the City.
8. Enter into a development contract with the City that required financial
' sureties with construction plans to be approved by the City Engineer and
City Council for all public improvements.
9. Revise architectural plans as needed to:
a. confirm that the Vet Clinic will have windows on the north and west
elevations;
' b. trash enclosures are to be constructed from rock faced block compatible
with the main building;
c. relocate the trash enclosure serving the dry cleaner to the west side of
the building or incorporate it into the structure;
d. outdoor storage areas are to be enclosed by a rock faced block wall;
e. the trash compactor is to be provided with a rock faced block screen
wall and relocated to the north to provide a 24 foot wide drive aisle;
and
f. the addition of any drive-up windows will require site plan approval
wherein it will be the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate that
internal circulation patterns and parking provisions will not be
impacted.
10. Outlot A is required to have buildings designed to utilize architecture
compatible with the shopping center. No additional access will be provided
' to serve Outlot A. Only one additional monument sign is to be allowed with
the outlot is developed. The site must be identical to monument signage
11 46
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
allowed elsewhere on the PUD. Until development occurs, the owner shall
establish ground cover over the site and keep it in a maintained condition.
Parking requirements for the outlot should be satisfied on it.
11. Modify and/or regulate access parking as follows:
a. provide a triangular traffic island in the West 78th Street curb cut;
b. delete the sidewalk south of the crosswalk that connects to the sidewalk
in front of the supermarket. A pedestrian crosswalk shall be installed
on Market Boulevard at a location determined by the City Engineer. The
crosswalk shall be painted and signed in accordance with the
requirements of Minnesota Manual on Traffic Controls;
c. eliminate the nine (9) northern stalls located on the east side of the
supermarket expansion and modify the Vet Clinic parking area to provide
a turning space at the end of the aisle;
d. all leases for the main building should require that employee parking be '
located at the rear of the center;
e. any restaurant proposed in the center are subject to a site plan review
procedure. It will be the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate
parking adequacy if it is to be approved. The restaurant spaces
illustrated in the two northern tenant spaces in the main building are
exempt from this requirement; and
f. all parking lot curbing shall be B-6/12 concrete.
12. The landscaping plan should be modified as follows: 1
a. increase the size of conifers along the south property line from 6' to
10-1t' ;
b. remove the snow storage area along Market Boulevard and landscape the
space; and
c. cooperate with City staff in providing a relocation plan for the
existing landscaping along Market Boulevard and West 78th Street.
13. Provide final grading and drainage plans for approval. The plans should 11 incorporate the following:
a. storm sewers shall be sized for a ten (10) year storm. Revised drainage
calculations shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval; I
b. the 72" storm sewer is to be installed by the developer;
c. installation of the line should be covered by the development contract . ,
The City can reasonably allow building permits to be issued with the
understanding that the 72" storm sewer, together with other public
roadway and utility improvements, will be installed simultaneously with
the construction of the buildings;
47
I
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
I
d. the existing catch basin adjacent to Manhole #21 in Market Boulevard
should be relocated into the new curb radius;
e. project approval by the Watershed District is required prior to building
permit issuance; and
' f. an erosion control plan acceptable to the City should be submitted prior
to requesting building permits.
' 14. Provide final roadway and utility plans for approval. The existing 10"
PVC sanitary sewer shall be placed in an oversized ductile iron casing
' acceptable to the City. Existing watermains to be abandoned shall be
removed. The applicant will submit detailed construction plans and
specifications for approval by the City Engineer and provide as-built mylar
plans upon completion of the construction.
II . 15. Provide written and graphic sign covenants consistent with the description
in the October 23, 1989 staff report. The covenants will be filed with the
' Planned Unit Development Agreement.
16. Review (OR REVISE??) the site lighting plan to use the ornamental fixtures
east of the supermark and between the two Market Boulevard curb cuts.
17. All conditions must be completed as a part of the general construction of
the project and shall not be left to tenants, i.e. rear outdoor storage
' areas, etc. .
18. The bus shelter and concrete curb located on Market Boulevard should be
' changed/moved to another location in order to accommodate future traffic on
Market Boulevard. The developer, at it 's expense, shall acquire and convey
to the City a perpetual easement for a bus shelter along Market Boulevard.
The location of the bus shelter shall be determined by the staff of the
Southwest Metro Transit Commission.
19. The developer shall construct and dedicate trails/sidewalks along West 78th
Street and Market Boulevard in accordance with plans and specificstion
approved by the City Engineer. The trails/sidewalks shall be constructed
when street improvements are constructed.
' All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO AMEND SECTION 20-409. GENERAL DEVELOPMENT
I REGULATIONS OF THE WETLAND ORDINANCE REGULATING ACCESS THROUGH CLASS A AND B
WETLANDS. FIRST READING.
' Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, there's been several cases reviewed before you and the
Planning Commission concerning the construction of a filled or an access on fill
through a wetland down to Lotus Lake in particular but it applies to all lakes
' in general. The Planning Commission's recommendation typically has been that
access through a wetland be provided by an elevated boardwalk and that's based
upon the best representations that we've gotten from the ONR and other
interested agencies. In reviewing these applications however, it was clear that
the ordinance did not specifically state what our goal was or what we were
48
1
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
trying to get. That elevated boardwalk had become a Planning Commission policy
to recommend to you and the City's done it frequently but as evidenced by these
recent cases it's not in the ordinance anyplace. Well this ordinance amendment
basically fixes that. It establishes what the City is looking for on those
access points through the wetland. It's a fairly simple amendment. The
Planning Commission reviewed it and recommended it's approval and we are doing
the same to you tonight.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, I just had one question Paul. On the Planning Commission
action, item number 7 where it reads access on fill material through a wetland.
It just doesn't read right and maybe it's the way I'm looking at it. I came up
with something. Fill material through a wetland access shall only be considered
when the access must be for vehicles. Does that make a little more sense than -
what's there or what's there you feel is alright?
•
Councilman Johnson: I think there's too many accesses.
Paul Krauss: It needs to be capitalized. • II
Councilman Johnson: There are too many accesses in the sentence. '
Mayor Chmiel: No.
Councilman Johnson: In his sentence. Not your's. 1
Mayor Chmiel: As you started out with access on fill material. That just
doesn't to me read exactly right in what I'm saying. Fill material through a
wetland access shall only be considered.
Councilman Johnson: How about fill material shall only be used in a wetland
when access must be for vehicles?
Mayor Chmiel: Didn't sound too bad. Say it again. What'd he say?
Councilman Johnson: Fill material shall only be used in a wetland when access
must be for vehicles. That's close. It was recorded over there. Read that
back to me. '
Councilman Workman: Why don't we just replace vehicular with an? An access on
fill material through a wetland shall only be considered when the access must be
for vehicles.
Paul Krauss: How about, is designed specifically for vehicles rather than must
be and then I think we've.
Mayor Chmiel: Designed for vehicles? That's fine.
Roger Knutson: This is the first reading. ,
Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to approve the first
reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendment by amending Section 20-409 as follows:
49
I
I
IICity Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
(6) The dock or walkway is elevated 6 to 8 inches above the ordinary high water
II mark and 6 to 8 inches above the ground level when above the ordinary high
water mark, and shall be a maximum of 6 feet in width.
II (7) An access on fill material through a wetland shall only be considered when
designed for vehicles. Private boat launches on fill material will not be
permitted through a Class A or B wetland if a public boat exists on the
Isubject lake.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS:
Councilman Johnson: This is real short. The Board of Adjustments and Appeals
1 has items just before the City Council meeting and then they're also put on the
agenda. The ordinance, as I remember it which I didn't grab it and look at it,
allows people 14 days to appeal or 10 working days to appeal the decision of the
Board of Adjustments and Appeals. If an appeal is made, then it goes to the
I City Council. In the past the reason for putting in on the City Council agenda
is more for when an item is rejected and then the applicant who is standing
there immediately appeals it to the City Council that same night. Well the City
1 Council then does not have the Minutes of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals
or anything on which to base their decision. What I would like to do is not
have the Board of Adjustments and Appeals and the City Council on the same night
I so that when there's going to be a protest, the staff can prepare a report for
the City Council saying what the Board of Adjustments and Appeals actions were
and we have a regular report on which to base our decision as a City Council.
That seems to be what the Ordinance requires anyway but we established a
' procedure before I got on the Council of doing it this other way and it never
made sense to me.
I Paul Krauss: If I could expand on that too. There's often times, I don't know
if you'd call it a hardship but it sort of is, in that the applicant comes to a
Board of Adjustment meeting at 7:00 and we preschedule this thing for City
I Council review. The City Council doesn't review it unless there's an appeal and
I know Councilman Boyt had somewhat of a difference of opinion on that, but the
fact is is that if the Board approves it, it's a done deal unless somebody
appeals it. If it's not appealed, it doesn't need to be scheduled for the City
I Council. However, the way you're doing it, somebody comes for a 7:00 meeting
and they might be until 11:00 at night before that item comes up and then just
to hear that it's no big deal and nobody cares about it. It would seem that the
II best way of doing it might be along what Jay's suggesting is that we not
regularly schedule these things for City Council review. We don't issue the
building permit after a variance is granted. If a variance is granted, we don't
issue that permit for 10 working days. If in that time we get an appeal from a
II resident or from a Council person who asks us to schedule it for a meeting, we
then will not issue that and we'll get it on the next available Council agenda.
IIMayor Chmiel: I like that.
Councilwoman Dimler: I agree except how do we find out? We never get the
I Minutes from the Board of Adjustments anyway. How would a Council member know
whether it was approved?
III
50
II
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Paul Krauss: If we schedule an item for you to consider, we give you the
Y 9 Y
original report, our recommendations and the Minutes of the meeting.
Councilwoman Dimler: I know but even to get it considered because once it's 11
passed, if nobody brings it up, it may never come before us.
Paul Krauss: You get the Board of Adjustment packet. ,
Councilwoman Dimler: We' do?
Paul Krauss: You should.
Councilman Workman: I've never. '
Councilwoman Dimler: I've never gotten one.
Councilman Johnson: You don't because it's always an item in our agenda so you ,
don't.
Paul Krauss: We'll make sure you get a copy of the Board of Adjustments. '
Councilman Johnson: What Ursula is saying is not before. She wants the results
of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals given to her. ,
Mayor Chmiel: Once it's done. Once it's completed.
Councilwoman Dimler: We don't ever know, if it's not ever put on the agenda for
us, we don't ever know.
Paul Krauss: So would you like their Minutes put in your packet? '
Councilwoman Dimler: Yes.
Mayor Chmiel: That would take care of it. • ,
Councilman Johnson: Now if it's not a unanimous decision of the board, then it
becomes a recommendation to the Council.
Mayor Chmiel: Right. That's an automatic.
Councilman Johnson: Right. So that's why I'd like to see the Board of
Adjustments meet one week before the Council so that we don't delay them a full
2 weeks if it's not a unanimous decision. It's delayed one week until the
Council gets it the following week.
Mayor Chmiel: I don't have any problems with that.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, let's do it Paul. Jay you'll report back to the Board of
Adjustments.
51
i
I
11 City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: TH 5 CONSTRUCTION COORDINATION/CITY PROJECT
IMPACTS, CITY ENGINEER.
Gary Warren: Mr. Mayor, we're having several meetings trying to coordinate the
' construction package for next year with the TH 5 work and I thought because some
of the information we have had before that you've been aware of and the changes
that are coming about that I want to bring Council up to speed on some of the
' coordination efforts and what the implications are for our construction time
next year. Basically I've tried to color code things here. The area in orange
are the projects that you basically have completed already so they're out of the
picture for the moment . The areas in blue are areas that right now we have an
' option on the south leg of CR 17 but after further discussion even this morning
I think they were looking at the north leg of TH 101 and CR 17 are most likely
going to fall into the 1992 construction season.
' Councilman Johnson: What's the delay?
Gary Warren: I'll get into that in just a second.
Councilman Johnson: Oh, okay.
Gary Warren: The areas in green would be projects that by necessity or
practicality would be constructed in 1991. The whole thing revolves around the
magnitude of construction on TH 5 and trying to coordinate with MnDot's
contractors. We reviewed the scenario here on the north leg project and the
fact that we don't have the rest of the picture here but our Park One business
park is just going to be impossible to tolerate traffic at this intersection
when MnDot has it tore up and if we're going to have it tore up with the
' railroad crossing on top of it without any easterly outlet. This year MnDot
should make great strides to completing, or I shouldn't say this year. The next
year they should make great strides on completing the Dell Road intersection and
with that we have an outlet for the park, business park that does not involve
the residential streets of Eden Prairie. Until that happens, everybody is
coming this way or they're violating the right in restriction which is very
hazardous. So we couldn't see a lot to be gained by forcing this issue and in
fact from a property acquisition standpoint, there are maybe some advantages to
the City in having some extra time to deal with that especially as it relates to
the leases on the Meadows Apartments and such. So we're looking at 1992 for
that project. We will still continue to proceed with the property acquisitions
and including the design plans here in 1991 but basically get set up for
construction in 1992 bidding.
Mayor Chmiel: How many additional parcels do we have to get yet on that north
leg?
Gary Warren: The north leg basically involves 6 parcels. We've got the Taco
Shop, AVR, the Meadows Apartment. We talked about the pond earlier north of the
Chanhassen Office Complex. We're acquiring a little triangle up there to add to
our pond and what did I miss?
Mayor Chmiel: Abby Bongard but that's completed.
1
52
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Gary Warren: Abby Bongard which we've already acquired. There's a possibility
of nicking another corner. Not the building not another corner of the second
apartment building. That's not going to impact the building itself so
basically. . . The West 78th Street detachment we touched on earlier tonight . I
updated the chart. I had a little error in what you have. That includes the
two elements here. Some on CR 17 and on West 78th Street . When MnOot starts
construction on CR 17, this has to be in place to serve as a by-pass. To get
traffic out of this location. They could be brought down Market Blvd. and would
then either continue down Market to TH 101 as we're showing completing this
element or they could also go on Lake Drive and take CR 17 down to here. That
is why we are saying that CR 17 should not be constructed until 1992 as well
because as I think we all recall we have our surcharge area here on Lake Drive.
That will come off when we redo this road here and if we start this construction
in 1991, we're going to box this as well. Again, it's not earth shattering. I
think it gives us a little bit better sequencing and availability on the detour
routes. MnDot will be working on finishing intersections of Market here so it's
going to be a real tap dance to keep things under control. So what we're saying
basically would be the blue is 1992 and green is 1991. From that perspective,
that's how we are proceeding forward unless you have some direction. '
Mayor Chmiel: That's looks reasonable.
Councilman Workman: What happened to the north leg of TH 101? I thought we
were talking about spring there.
Gary Warren: North leg of TH 101, the biggest impact is, well there's two
A- things. One we have the railroad crossing in here which has to happen and we
all know our experience with railroads. The second is that until the Dell Road
intersection is completed next year with the current TH 5 project, we have no
way out for the business park there without going through the Eden Prairie
residential subdivision. That is the biggest impact here. It also allows Mn0ot
and it's contractor to I think work with more freely at that intersection to. . .
more quickly. I
Mayor Chmiel: I would have liked seeing that north leg of TH 101 be done sooner
but it just seems like it's not feasible. I
Gary Warren: Yeah. Initially we were trying to them coincidentally. We
thought that would make sense but there are just too many things that are going
to have potential for causing a lot of access problems. We thought let MnDot
come in. Do their thing. They have a transition section that will allow
traffic in the interim and then we'll come in and complete our segment. I think
that will work out the best. One other quick comment. That is in the '
adminstrative packet you may have read Wednesday night we are having a meeting.
We've invited the 16 parcel owners that are on the TH 5 project. The next
element now that's scheduled for March 22nd. We've invited them to either
execute Right of Entry forms that we have sent them or if they have questions,
we'll be meeting Wednesday night to let us hopefully answer their questions so
that we can get the Right of Entry/Exits to them. If we are successful in
acquiring all the Right of Entries, this will guarantee that the project will
lr stay on the March 22nd, letting date. If not, if all the parcels have to go to
the Quick Take process with MnDot and full acquisition process, we are looking
at probably a 3 month delay in the letting date which would net out to a '
53
1
1
11 City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
11 construction start no sooner than late August of 1991 which means basically you
lose the whole 1991 construction season on this next element.
IIMayor Chmiel: Can't that proceed automatically Roger once that's?
Roger Knutson: Once you have your appraisals you can start that clock running.
It takes 90 days.
IIGary Warren: MnDot has a little more rigid approach. . . We walked through their
schedule last Thursday with their right-of-way agent Bob Lindahl and basically
I what happens is we lose a construction season if we can't get the right of
entries. We're actively, as you know we have agreed to take on this to help
MnDot . . .
IMayor Chmiel: Right.
Gary Warren: . . .Chanhassen of which we do own about 3 of the parcels so we
Iexpect to get good cooperation but right now I don't have any signed.
Mayor Chmiel: Good. Thank you. Don? Community brochure.
IIDon Ashworth: This may look long but it's really short .
Mayor Chmiel: I just looked at that right now I don't see a north arrow on
II there.
Don Ashworth: That was one that the Council had suggested I think right.
1 Mayor Chmiel: Right, but I still don't see a north arrow.
I Don Ashworth: I thought that I had distributed a copy of this to all Council
members. The plan was to have this, in fact we already do have it to the
Villager for inclusion in this week's edition correction Dave?
IICouncilman Johnson: Can we add a north arrow?
Don Ashworth: I mean I'd have to run the 4,500 again for all of them. At issue
IIthough and what I wanted the Council to be aware, on this cost.
Councilman Johnson: Just take this and add a north arrow to those 4,500.
IIDon Ashworth: The figures as you see them here are from the McGillavery study
and it's with contribution from school district. I met with the school district
and they felt that they still stand behind the project but until such time as we
I have agreement actually signed and recognizing the potential to lose tax
increment money, that the city would be in a better position or more
conservative position to use these other figures which is the circled ones. You
I can see the two that we'd be looking at. Both cases you're talking about 4.1
million. That's your base cost. In the top figures, that's without
contribution from the school district. The lower figures are with contribution.
II So this past week I had it changed. So in other words, the Council's looking at
an older brochure so where it shows the $25.00, the figures that have already
been given over to or run and given to the Villager in fact are the higher
II 54
II
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
numbers. So the ones given to them for an $80,000.00 home are the $36.00. The I
one for $100,000.00 is the $52.00. There is an alternative and that would be to
have an additional column that would take and be headed by if tax increment is
available and then continue to show the lower numbers in that column. I think
that that may cause more -confusion than it's worth but I thought I should make
sure that the Council knew what numbers are in here and where they came from. II
So the numbers that will go out to the public, as it stands right now are the
II
higher numbers without contribution of tax increment.
Councilman Workman: And that contribution is what Don? The million?
II
Don Ashworth: It was based on $224,000.00 per year over a 8 or 9 year period of
time so you were talking about a total of a million, roughly a million eight.
IICouncilman Workman: There's really no easy way to convey that to people because
they don't understand tax increment. I think it really confuses things
although, then they'll say well why don't we just do that? Or where is that
II
coming from or I would be a proponent for the use of it.
Councilman Johnson: It 's just a matter if the State allows us to do it . I
Councilman Workman: They will.
Councilman Johnson: They should unless they're trying to change their laws to
II
not allows us to do it. Then we have to give them the money or something
instead of. What they're trying to do is change the law I believe to where if
the school district uses that money, the State takes away that much money that
II
they give to the school district so then the school district ends up being a net
loser.. So then there's no reason for them to do that.
Don Ashworth: Then they become concerned. I
Councilwoman Dimler: That's already been passed hasn't it?
Councilman Johnson: No. II
Don Ashworth: Well it's been passed in terms of two different laws. One
dealing with declaration of surpluses by cities where it used to be that when II
that surplus would occur, those would become free dollars for the school
district to use. Now they've rolled that into the aid formula. The other is
when there's a cessation of a tax increment district. Those dollars used to go II
to the school district. Now those dollars first pay off the school aid. Go
under the school aid formula. There's only really the third method of
potentially getting dollars back to your school district which is through the '
excess levy referendum process. Where you make a calculation of how much money
they would have gotten under the excess levy and passed that amount to the
school district and then those dollars become available for whatever you jointly
II
use. School district's point is, two out of the three techniques that we used
to have have been shut off. They're already saying that they're going to shut
off the third of those techniques. Can we honestly put out a brochure like this
more or less guaranteeing that? I mean the school district is willing to make
II
the contribution. We're willing to accept it but how long will State
legislators allow 'us to do it?
55 II
11
City Council Meeting - October 8, 1990
Councilman Johnson: They want the money to balance their budget.
1 Don Ashworth: So no action is required.
Mayor Chmiel: Alright. Thank you. 1
Councilwoman Disler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to adjourn the meeting.
All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10:32
p.m..
' Submitted by Don Ashworth
City Manager
Prepared by Nann Opheim
I
I
I
i
1
1
I
1
56
11
1
4t/
CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION r - " '
REGULAR MEETING k -r E
SEPTEMBER 25, 1990
Chairman Mady called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m . .
MEMBERS PRESENT: Dawne Erhart , Jim Andrews , Wendy Pemrick , Curt Robinson ,
Jim Mady , Larry Schroers and Jan Lash
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Recreation Supervisor ; and Jerry Ruegemer ,
Program Specialist
APPOINT ACTING CHAIR: Andrews moved, Pemrick seconded to appoint Larry
Schroers as Acting Chair for the meeting. All voted in favor and the
motion carried unanimously .
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Mady moved , Andrews seconded to approve the Minutes
of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated August 21 , 1990 as
presented . All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously .
' RECONSIDER LOCATION OF PARK. LAKE RILEY HILLS.
Public Present:
Name Address
John Klingelhutz 350 East Hwy . 212 , Chaska
( The recording of the meeting was started at this point in the discussion . )
Mady: . . .we would have taken the land first and money second so . But this
looks like a good balance .
Schroers: Are there any other questions or input from the commissioners?
Lash: I have one . I guess it's a question and a comment . In the
recommendation Todd I didn't see anything, and I don't know if I just
missed it , about putting trail along Lyman Blvd . .
Hoffman: With the remainder of the pieces, part of the easement , it . . .
11 When Mark brought his recommendation last time, he talked about recording
the easement . That was omitted in here but we would require the trail
easement along Lyman Blvd . and then as additional pieces would be looked at
' and the park is starting to be developed in 4 or 5 years and we start
taking a closer look at each individual piece along Lyman Blvd. , try to
connect those trail segments so we can get that put in. Yes, that's
correct . We would want to require a trail easement on Lyman Blvd. as well
as over at Riley .
Lash: Okay , that was I guess my main concern and my understanding , when we
had some discussions about the Comprehensive Plan and how trails
specifically , how we were going to accomplish some of these things that we
wanted to try to accomplish when we were prioritizing , I guess I kind of
thought my understanding was that we'd try and take easements in a lot of
areas and collect as many fees as possible but then put them on the busier
roads . I was thinking this looked kind of backwards . I mean we weren't
asking for easements or trail on Lyman but then we were putting in the
4y,
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 25 , 1990 - Page 2
11
sidewalks on the two residential streets and I was thinking that that
seemed like it was backwards from the way I thought we were trying to head
with , take the easements on the residential and the trails on the County
Roads .
I/ Hoffman: Yeah . It 's the opinion of at least myself and the folks in
engineering that in a new subdivision when you're installing brand new
11 roads , going ahead and putting the sidewalks in at the same time , it 's a
cost saver . Let the people know up front who are moving in that there will
eventually be a sidwalk in their front yard because it 's there already when
they're looking at their lots and then again the piece on Lyman , we would
just take the easement at this time because it 's not a new road . It 's not
just being constructed and we don 't have the means to connect that piece in
a timely manner for a few years . You 're correct , we have talked about that
in the past in some of the other subdivisions . Not taking the money there
and putting it , or just banking it and taking a look at some larger
collector routes and possibly getting them trails first before we go ahead
' and put sidewalks in subdivisions . But as far as getting them in and
having the available for the future , at the time the subdivision was
initially , the ground was broken and the streets are laid in . . .that 's the
time to put those sidewalks in .
Schroers: Are you saying Todd that you want to add that easement to your
recommendation right now?
Hoffman: Correct . Along Lyman Blvd . to Lake Riley .
Mady : Did we not put those easements in last time around?
Hoffman: Yeah . They were put into that .
Mady: Our recommendation last month was they were already in there so now
all we 're really doing is re-evaluating the site of the park itself .
Hoffman : Correct .
Schroers: Do you want that wording in the recommendation to include the
easement?
Hoffman: Correct . . . Other questions from the commissioners?
Schroers: If not , is there anything Mr . Klingelhutz would like to add?
John Klingelhutz: Not really . I was a little surprised . . .
Mady: Between John and Todd , is it going to be possible for you guys to
attempt to straighten out that jag in the park boundary by moving a lot
line here or there? Will that be feasible? It 'd just make it I think
easier for the residents and everyone to do that .
Hoffman: That 's something we haven 't talked about . It 's fairly minor . . .
Schroers: If there isn 't any further discussion , would someone like to
entertain a motion on this?
I
11
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 25 , 1990 - Page 3
11
Mady : Okay , I 'll try . I 'll move to recommend that the City take Lots 21 ,
22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 as parkland in subdevelopment along with $90 .00 per lot II
park fee and that a sidewalk be constructed along North Road and West Road II
in lieu of trail fees . That a trail easement be taking along Lake Riley
Road and Lyman Blvd. .
Schroers: Is there a second for that?
Robinson: I 'll second it . I
Mady moved, Robinson seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
recommend that the City require Lots 21 , 22, 23, 24, 25 and 26, Block 3,
Parcel II be dedicated as parkland. As part of this dedication, the
applicant will prepare the site according to a grading plan provided by the
City . It is further recommended that the applicant construct a 5 foot wide
concrete sidewalk along North Road and West Road and provide a 20 foot
trail easement along Lake Riley Road and Lyman Boulevard. In return for
these requirements , the applicant will receive a $410.00 credit on park
dedication fees per lot and 100% credit on trail dedication fees. The
remaining $90 .00 per lot park dedication fee will be collected as part of
the Building Permit process. All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously . I
ACQUISITION OF HANDICAP ACCESSIBLE PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT.
Hoffman: Item 5 is kind of a neat item in the fact that we have an
opportunity to purchase the first ever handicap equipment which would be
installed in any city park in Chanhassen . As well we have the opportunity II
to purchase and install a handicap accessible fishing pier . . .Lake
Susan Park . As it states in the report , the amount that is available
through the Block Grant situation. . .available for housing rennovation and
that type of thing . The housing situation in Chanhassen . . .take advantage
of that money . The Council acted at their last meeting to reappropriate
that money to these two separate individual projects . The fishing pier at
Lake Susan and the handicap accessible equipment . In their conversation
that evening , they tried to decide which location would be best . At
Lake Susan , which is just an up and coming park or at Lake Ann Park which
is a proven park and generates a lot of activity and a lot of use and they
wanted to determine which park would be the most appropriate site for that
equipment . It 's my belief that Lake Susan Park , with space available
there . The facilities which are currently being installed at Lake Susan , 1
that that park would be , next summer and the few years after that will be
just as busy as Lake Ann Park is currently . It 's real close to the
industrial business and it 's going to get a lot of use from there . As well
we have the next park shelter , which. . .constant use by group picnics and
that type of thing and we have a lot of space there . If you 've been out
there recently you 've seen the addition to the playground area and there 's
a lot of space to the south and to the west of that . That area for
additional expansion which can be put in future years as more funds become II
available . I 'd still like the commission to discuss the pros and cons on
each . . .and once we decide the locations , we 'll work with the . . .Mark Koegler
is looking at different companies which purchases this type of equipment
from and probably go ahead and. . .
11
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 25 , 1990 - Page 4
11
Mady: Todd , not that these aren 't both excellent sites but one thought
11 came to mind when I read it was the , as more and more kids are being
mainstreamed in the schools , I 'm not sure if there are any physically
handicapped children that require this type of equipment at the school but
has City Center Park even been considered?
Hoffman: No , it was not considered and that 's .
Pemrick: Jay Johnson brought it up in the Minutes .
Lash: That was my question . And I did a little bit of checking today . I
talked with Kathleen Macy at Chan . I checked into this particular thing
last spring . I talked with Bob Ostlund from the School District . At that
time when we were talking about City Center and putting in new playground
equipment and Ed had been talking a lot about handicap accessible things
being added to the parks and I thought it would be nice if we could
coordinate with the school district . I called Bob Ostlund to ask him if he
knew of funding mechanisms that the school district could get so as we put
in our phase , they could put in a phase that would make the whole thing
nicer and he said there wasn 't any . So when I saw this come up in our
packet , I was kind of pleasantly surprised because I thought that would be
the perfect site . I worked last year with a little boy who next year will
be at Chan who is in a wheelchair and I watched him last year trying , at
the kindergarten center , to get to the playground equipment through
pearock . Well , I mean there 's no way you could take his wheelchair
' through there and we sat on the little deck and talked about what we were
going to do . He 's too heavy for me to carry and I said what do you think
we 're going to do . We have a problem here and he said , I don 't know but I
want to play over there . So I said , well we 'll have to think about it for
a minute and pretty soon I said , do you think you can get over there by
yourself? You ' ll have to crawl and he said I want to try and he crawled . I
mean he has no control from the chest down and he crawled all the way
through this pearock on his stomach and crawled up on the playground
equipment and went down the slide for probably the first time since he was
a baby if somebody carried him so it was really , for me it was a very
moving and it was a frustrating experience to see what a child like that
has to go through . I know he 'll be at Chan next year and I know from
working at Chan , that there are other kids with special needs there who
could definitely benefit from handicap accessible equipment . Kathleen Macy
said they 'd be thrilled if we 'd be able to do something like this and I
think if it 's at all possible , that should be our first site for
consideration because it would definitely get the most use . I don 't know
what all kind of criteria we have to meet and I don 't know if there 's a
time limit on when we have to order this or what all is involved but that
would definitely be my first choice as a site . And I also think with the
summer activities of the youth sports going on there , it would be get night
time use . So it would be 9 months of the year , daytime use every day and
almost every night during the week in the summers .
Hoffman: I did miss that in there . I just thought now that Jay mentioned
City Center Park . We would need to work on location , the most appropriate
location would probably be where the new equipment was installed . No?
Lash: No , I think behind the school where the old junky stuff is .
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 25 , 1990 - Page 5
It
Hoffman: Back in the corner?, Okay , because I haven 't talked to Kathleen
but some of that equipment is just real outdated . . . A month from now when I/
the outcome of the referendum on the community center so we could then go
forward with full force in creating a new plan for that area and working
with the school district .
Lash: Does this have to be ordered by the end of the year?
Hoffman: No . I
Lash: So maybe that 's something that we could work on even before we know
the results of the referendum so when we get the results we could just go
with it and not have to worry about things .
Mady: We just worry about actually it 's being built . . . That equipment can
fit anyplace actually .
Lash: And if we could combine with what we think we have in mind for our
plan for it , then we 'd have this super structure there that would be really"
nice .
Hoffman: $6,000 .00 , we 'll get about a three piece structure . A swing , a 11
slide with some sort of play apparatus .
Lash: But then the base has to be .
Hoffman: Hard surface .
Lash: Right . I
Hoffman: We need to take a look at the handicap parking at the school lot
and trailways and that type of thing to get to and from the equipment .
Mady: Larry? In Hennepin Parks , are you using any of the hard rubber
resilient surfaces or anything like that that would be wheelchair
accessible? I
Schroers: We do have an area that is a hard rubber surfacing material and
I believe that that would accommodate wheelchairs nicely . The one drawback
to that surface is that it 's expensive . It gets glued onto a concrete slab
so you have to pour a slab and then it 's glued and per square yard it is
considerably more expensive than fibar material or peacock but I think that
it is ultimately a better surface and it certainly would accommodate
handicap much better . Also , from experience I can say that it 's like
anything else . If you want to do it after the fact , you install equipment
and then go back and try to make it handicap accessible after that . You 've"
really gone the long way around and spent a lot of money so it 's real
important I think to get started with it right off the bat on a new project
• and that seems to be the direction that things are going in all sorts of
public areas and I wouldn't be surprised to see it become a requirement at
some point in time in the future so I would go with it .
Mady: Todd , this is an ongoing funding mechanism . I was wondering , would II
there be money available after the first of the year that maybe we could
buy the equipment now and then by February or March there might be
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 25 , 1990 - Page 6
I
additional funds available that we could gather for say the surfacing
material?
Hoffman: It 's not a guaranteed fund for us but in the opinion of Paul
Krauss , it will be , some money will be there available next year and if we
I make a good showing this time around , it will be available . . . We may be
somewhat surprised by what they cost to even come in for just that trailway
and the surfacing and the equipment . Remember also in the 1990 budget we
' had $4 ,000 .00 in there for new playground equipment at Chanhassen
Elementary . . .situation in the shortfall in housing starts . . .could be
added to that $6 ,000 .00 in this first phase in 1990 .
Lash: So you don 't have any idea what we can get for this $6 ,000 .00?
Hoffman : In the initial conversations with Mark , who was checking with the
' different. manufacturers . I also have to go through somewhat of a formal
bid process and you 'd have some type of idea on what type of equipment you
wanted and how much surface we 're looking at and that type of thing so we 'd
I get a bid estimates . But it 's going to be a fairly one piece structure
with some activities taking place on it . Probably a large piece for about
$6 ,000 .00 and . . .future years . As well , this equipment is . . .handicap
children .
11 Schroers: It 's modular type so it can be added to .
Lash : And are you talking about the surface material too?
Schroers : The surface material? Yeah , you just extend the border and the
concrete base and expand on it .
Lash: But you think for $6 ,000 .00 we could do that and get a couple of , I
mean roughly what he 's got showing on the thing?
Hoffman: On the thing there? We didn 't talk about the surfacing material .
I do not know if Mark put that in the original . . . So again , once we find
out exactly what the . . .we 'll bring it back to the commission .
Robinson: I guess I 'd rather not use any additional money at this time .
I think if we do it with the idea that we can attach to it later as funds
become available . Again , I don 't know what we 're going to get for
$6 ,000 .00 .
Lash: What if we can only get the surface?
Robinson : Then I say we get the surface material .
Schroers : The last time I checked installed it was something like $17 .00 a
yard or something like that .
Lash: The other thing Kathleen said was that the APT has been earmarking
funds for replacing the old junky equipment behind the school too so maybe
that 's something we could try and coordinate with them . Although if they
think that we 're going to do it , they ' ll maybe use the money for something
else .
I
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 25 , 1990 - Page 7
Schroers: Do you want to modify your recommendation then Todd to just
state or to recommend to purchase the handicap accessible equipment but not
designate a site at this time?
Hoffman: Well , unless you want to designate the school site I
Robinson: Let 's designate a site . I think we can do that tonight .
Erhart : I think so . The school site first . 1
Robinson: I would say so .
Pemrick: I like the idea of that too . It would get the most use .
Schroers: Okay , is there anymore discussion on this? ,
Pemrick : I had a question . There is talk in here about a fishing pier . Is
that connected with those funds as well?
Hoffman: With the funds , correct .
Pemrick: But that would be included in the $6 ,000 .00 allotment? 1
Hoffman: No . We could , unfortunately these dollars are included with the
fishing pier which would be installed at Lake Susan Park .
Erhart : Part of the $17 ,000 .00 .
Pemrick: Okay . That would be taken out of that . Okay , page 34 . 1
Lash: Do we know how much the fishing pier 's going to cost? If there 'd be
. a little left over .
Pemrick : $18 ,750 .00 .
Lash: I 'm not saying that I want to do this but if we wanted to , could we 11
take the whole $17 ,000 .00 and use that at City Center?
Hoffman: That would need to go back to the Council and the Council at
their last meeting approved the reappropriation for these two separate
projects .
Mady: The pier at Lake Ann is accessible isn 't it? I
Hoffman: Correct . . .
Mady: I guess to me , we 're handling a need at Lake Ann that way . For 6
grand we 're not going to get a whole lot in a play structure , especially if
we have to buy expensive base . I 'd like to see us recommend maybe to the
Council to reapportion that money to handle the need that we 're not
addressing . We haven 't addressed yet and $6 ,000 .00 probably isn 't going to
address it very well . We 're handling the handicap fishing situation
with Lake Ann . Maybe we could use 2 , maybe we could use 3 or 4 of them bull
at least we have 1 . Right now we have no handicap accessible play
equipment and $6 ,000 .00 isn't going to buy us a whole lot . We know that .
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
9
September 25 , 1990 - Page 8
I
$ Hoffman: Only a portion of that $18 ,000 .00 is coming from this block
grant . Another half or two-thirds of that funding for, that pier is coming
from another source through Paul and the Planning Department so .
Erhart : Do we lose that then?
Hoffman: Yeah , we 'd lose that . . .
Schroers: Actually what we 'd be losing is a total fishing pier at Lake
Susan . Just because it 's designated handicap , it 's for everyone .
Mady: So we 're losing $9 ,000 .00 is what we 're losing . We 're ultimately
going to be putting in a fishing pier in at our own expense then .
' Hoffman: Not the City . . .
Mady : Bottom line .
Schroers: Alright. , if that 's the case , would we like to .
Lash: I 'd like to make a motion on this one . I would move that we
recommend to City Council that the City Center Park be the site for the
funding for the handicap accessible playground in the amount of $5 ,898 .00 .
Is that all I need to do?
Mady : I ' ll second .
Lash moved, Mady seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend
to the City Council that the City Center Park be the site for the funding
for the handicap accessible playground equipment in the amount of
$5 ,898.00 . All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously .
REVIEW SECTION OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IDENTIFYING PARKLAND NEAR LAKE ST.
JOE .
Public Present:
Name Address
Mark Malinowski 7250 Minnewashta Parkway
Terry Forbord Lundgren Bros . , 935 E . Wayzata Blvd . , Wayzata
Richard Wing 3481 Shore Drive
Hoffman: Mark was unable to attend tonight . . . As you can see , the . . .
comprehensive plan folks came in and said look at the area around Lake St .
Joe that is designated as park or open space , had concern with how that
would affect their . . .property in that area . Mark Malinowski is in the
audience here tonight . He is the particular property owner that contacted
the city in this regard . As you can see by Mark 's report , the property ,
the Malinowski property is east. of Lake St . Joe . . . The upcoming look at
Minnewashta Parkway , it will be upgrading that road and the addition of a
trail in that area . There is supposed to be a trail in that area along
Minnewashta Parkway whether it be on the east side of the road or the west
I
Commission Meeting
Park and Rec mm g
September 25 , 1990 - Page 11
Hoffman: Correct . A motion to approve Mark 's recommendations . . .that that
property be dropped from the comprehensive plan .
Andrews: Could I ask an odd question? Is the reason why we 're dropping
this from the Plan because it 's not suitable to be developed as an active
park? Is that why we 're making this request or decision? e
Hoffman : That would be one of the main . . .
tiAndrews: My point would be , why is that every park that we look at has to
be considered as an active park . Currently we do not have any , or very
little wild , natural areas in the city and I have been to one park where an
elevated wood walkway was built over a marshy area and it 's a very
beautiful way to walk through a marshy area . I guess I 'm hesitant to say
that this is unuseable land . Maybe unuseable as a balifield or a tennis
court but I guess I look at natural wild spaces as having a value on their
own .
Schroers: I don 't think that this is too much of a , I agree with what you
say Jim but I think this particular property is not a real natural area and
wild spaces . He stated there 's already a house sitting on it and there 's
neighborhoods . It 's all residential in that area .
man
Andrews: How acres is Lake St . Joe?
n Y
Hoffman: 33 . r
Andrews: 33?
Lash: I think this is kind of a , this is more of a two fold item in the
fact that Mr . Malinowski brought it to our attention but then Mark gave it
his attention and I think from his , looking at his opinion , it isn 't
something that would suit our needs in that particular area and then the
other half , I mean although I agree that you don't like to set a precedent
on these kinds of things and I also agree that maybe instead of being so
specific we should just sort of in the plan say in a certain area , you know I
near Lake St . Joe we 're looking for park property or something instead of
designating . If I looked at a map and on top of my house I saw that the
city had stamped it park/open space , it would make me real nervous that
something was going on that I didn't know about so I think this is kind of
two fold . I wasn 't aware of the fact that there was a home there and I
can 't imagine that we 'd ever go in and bulldoze down somebody 's house and
condemn their property and take it for a natural park . That just doesn 't
even make sense so you know Mark is recommending it 's not , it doesn 't fill
our needs out there . There 's a home there . It 's creating anxiety for the
property owner and you put it altogether and I guess I just think we need I
to reword or redesignate our site and maybe just put it in , like Jim said ,
in the verbage that in the Lake St . Joe area and then any time something
comes , a large scale development or something in that area , we 'd be able
to . Can we do that or not? Do we have to pick a specific site?
Hoffman: Again , we can put in the verbage but then the map or the diagram
is juEt put in there as an aid . If the comprehensive plan was all words ,
it 's fairly dry so . . .show the intent .
1
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 25 , 1990 - Page 12
ash: Or are you going to be specific , as specific as Mark was in saying
1 that the northwest area or the southern area didn 't he , would be the two
prime? I can 't remember where he had that now .
Mady: I think you 've missed the point though . Lake St . Joe area was put
in the map as a possible open space area by the Park Commission long before
I was here , back when they were very natural area oriented . The reason was
Lake St . Joe was a very natural type of setting , especially the back side
of it . This area is no different than what we 're trying to do , like
putting in the comp plan that we 'd like to gain all the property around
Lake Ann . There 's absolutely no difference between this and that . And we
all know that with Prince living there , it 's probably going to be , that
might be a pipe dream but it 's still nice to leave it in the plan , in the •
comp plan as a potential so it 's always there . So we always know about
it . Whether it happens or not in 20 years , we won 't know that but at least
Iwe have designated the areas as natural areas that should be looked at and
reviewed and this is an area that should be looked at and reviewed .
There 's no one saying we 're going to bulldoze the house and buy the
property but it 's still , an opportunity comes in that we should be aware of
it and future commissions should be aware of it and future staff should be
aware of it because as we 've seen , commission changes from year to year .
Staff changes and we 're not going to be here maybe 10 years from now to
remember that maybe that was the way it should have been .
1 Lash: So you 're saying that you think our goal would be to someday
eventually acquire all of the property . I mean all of this area that 's
shown around here on the map?
Mady : I don 't know if it 's a goal . I think it 's just something that we
should , it 's been designated as something we should be looking at if an
opportunity presents itself . That 's all it is . I guess I 'm on the nature
that, we haven 't done anything at this point in time . Taken no steps to
doing anything and until the owner or a developer comes in and does
somet.hina , we 're not going to be taking steps on it because we just simply
don 't do it that way .
Hoffman: We have somebody here that would like to give us an insight on
that issue .
Terry Forbord: I think I can answer a lot of your questions or at least
give you some insight . My name is Terry Forbord . I 'm Vice President of
Lundgren Bros . and this is kind of a hasty appearance for me because I just
found out you were meeting today when I met with Mr . Koegler . We own about
100 acres of land around Lake St . Joe , or we have the option to secure the
property for 3 years . We have met informally with city staff oh , probably
2-•3 times about properties that we do control in the area . We began the
assembly of some of these parcels about 2 years ago . We tend to try to
work as quietly as possible for a number of reasons but for those of you
who are familiar with the area , this is really one of the toughest areas
that I 've ever , ever tried to assemble land because from a land use
standpoint , there 's really a mish mash of development and small , really
oddly configured parcels and physical constraints that are very difficult
to work with from purely just a planning perspective . By physical
constraints I mean topography , wetlands . Now our company , maybe we 're
t masticistic but we tend to look for sites like that . The workload is twice
J
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 25 , 1990 - Page 15
Schroers: Yeah .
niLash: But TH 5 is below that . Is that what you 're thinking Larry?
Schroers: Well there 's quite a bit of agricultural land up in there isn 't
there?
Terry Forbord: In which part?
Schroers: It would be in the south part from TH 5 .
Hoffman: This area contains agricultural , wooded and lowland wetlands . ni
Terry Forbord : Yeah . It 's a real mix of different vegetation types .
There 's a lot of Army Corps , DNR regulated wetlands in there . That 's
abundant with it . And I 've already met with both agencies or we deal with
them all the time anyway so they know us real well but , they 're all aware
of what we 're doing . But like I say , the only reason I wanted to get up
and just let you know , because I could tell it was a concern for you and it 1
should be . I mean that 's what your charge is and it 's certainly a concern d
to us because we want to make any neighborhood , community that we create we
want _the people who live there to be able to have access to all the things
that, anybody that lives in the city should and that area is in need of some
type of area because they have to go up to Minnewashta Shores I believe now
is the closest park . The difficulty with this is trying to make it work
economically because the land value that the people have set on their
properties in that area , and I don 't know if any of you have looked , 'is
just phenomenal . It almost is to the point where that even if one was able
to subdivide , even if we are able to pull this off and who knows . Maybe we
won 't be able to , that who 'd be able to buy homes in there? I mean the t
lots may end up being $75 ,000 .00-$80 ,000 .00 lots and that certainly isn 't
the real world for everybody . What we 're trying to do is make some sense
out of it so that 's where , we 're fully cognizant of the fact that a park is I
guided to be in that area .
Can you provide Todd with a map or a little more defined area of the
property that you are working with? d+
Terry Forbord: . . .going to develop within 12 months . The earliest we 'd be
in there on the first phase would be probably the spring of 1991 .
Hoffman: 1992 .
Terry Forbord: My , it 's going by awfully fast isn 't it? But and that
would be for , or we tend to do small phases . We don 't just go in and blow
everything . We 're not like that so .
Lash : There 's no sewer and water out there is there?
-
Terry Forbord: There is sewer and water in Minnewashta Parkway . And there
is enough capacity , the preliminary estimates and until you actually get
into the hard , hard , hard work , the technical detail , the preliminary
estimates are there 's plenty of capacity there to service the area but I tl
mean I may be speaking a little too soon to guarantee that .
I
11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 25 , 1990 - Page 16
Lash: Do you have any idea on how many homes you 're thinking of?
11 Terry Forbord: No .
Lash: Or is this hard to say?
Terry Forbord: We tend to be a very low density builder . We 're probably
the least dense developer in the city . At least that 's what they tell us .
Pemrick: What would the approximate size of the lot be?
Terry Forbord: That 's too early to say . It 's real tough . The Shoreland
' District has certain requirements and the City 's adopted the DNR regs for
that area . The DNR regulations but the DNR 's in the process of changing
that because it was , what happens a lot of times is they pass regulations
and they find out the regulations don 't work so they end up taking a look
at it again and that 's what they 're doing now . It 's too early to say .
Mady: Are you looking at any property north of King 's Road? You don 't
' have to tell me if you 're not , if you 're in the middle of something I can
understand your situation but .
Terry Forbord: We do own property , we have an option on property north
of King 's Road .
Mady: I just wanted to get a feel for how far north we 're looking .
Terry Forbord: Yeah it goes , like I say , I think there 's 40 acres north of
King 's Road and there 's 67 acres south and around Lake St . Joe .
' Schroers : From what we 've looked at before as a commission , the area north
of King 's Road would probably lend itself better as an active park area .
11 Terry Forbord: From a physical standpoint , I mean a site standpoint ,
that 's correct . From an economic standpoint , I don 't know if it does and
so what we 're trying , and we 're cognizant of that . What we 're trying to
' figure out is how do we deliver to the City and the future neighborhood
that will exist there and the residents that live there , how do we deliver
to them what they need and still make it affordable . That's always the
biggest challenge on our park . I mean how do you do it? When you're
paying , I mean if the people realize what the raw land prices were , I mean
it 's impossible to just give land away for parks . It just doesn 't work .
No matter would it be Lundgren Bros . or anybody else . They 'd walk away
' just because the numbers don 't work so we 're trying to figure out a way and
we 're not quite there yet , to try to make this all work . But we 've done it
before . Hopefully it will work .
Hoffman: The commission did take a look at .that piece north of King's Road
so they are aware of it . . .
Mady: Yeah , and the price .
Schroers: From our point of view what you 're telling us tonight , or what
I 'm reading into it anyway , is that now there is at least a glimmer of hope.
of acquiring some parkland in that area . You know we know that there is a
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting I/
September 25 , 1990 - Page 17
large chunk proposed to be developed and we should be able to get some
g P P g
parkland . Before tonight the way it was looking, there were so many
smaller parcels owners that wanted to subdivide and these properties just
did not , according to the formula that we used to acquire parkland , we just
wouldn 't be able to get enough parkland to accommodate our needs out there
so it 's definitely some encouragement and we hope that you find a way to
make it work .
Terry Forbord: There are two things that , we're basically , what we 're
going to be doing as a city , we want to provide that too . I mean it helps II
us . I mean the parks , we don 't look at them as a negative . The key
driving force though is the economics . I mean if the numbers don 't work ,
it doesn 't work for you or us or the future people that live there so what II
we 're going to be trying to do , there's a couple sites that it would be
ideal for . If you 're familiar with the topography in the area , one of the
things that 's sensitive about this area , you don 't want to just go in and
pick any site and then just grade it flat like a pancake because then
you 're wrecking the land and the land 's beautiful just the way it is . You III
try to leave it as much as possible just the way it is but there is a
couple specific sites where a 3 acre play area would work just perfectly . II
Just perfectly and then there 's some passive area adjacent to it that would
accommodate what you were talking about Jim , the type of trails where one
can just walk through and enjoy it the way it is . Our studies , we find
that there 's more people that prefer that than people would realize . A loll
of people just like parks , just the raw land the way it is so what we 're
going to be doing is bringing something forward to the city and to you
folks and trying to get your help in helping us solve this problem as well I
because we 're trying to deliver what the city needs at the same time . So
if you could just bear with us here for the next few months and just
realize that there will be a park . That we 're trying to figure the best II
place to put it and we 're trying to accommodate all those needs . We just
don 't have our homework all done yet . Thank you .
Schroers: Thank you for your information . Okay , we need to get back to
Mr . Malinowski here . On his property and from what Todd said , that this is
going to have to come back to us again in the future at the time of 11 development , I don 't really see that we 're gaining anything at this point
in time to designate it as the park and open space or single family because
we 're going to have to address the whole issue again .
Andrews: I guess I feel that the appropriate thing to do would be to defer"
any action whatsoever until Lundgren Bros . has a chance to be successful or
unsuccessful in their whole planning. This present parkland may be
totally , could be totally released if Lundgren were to provide us with what"
we needed but their plan could still totally collapse if the economics
aren 't there and I would hate to take an action based on a possible outcome
rather than , and I 'd prefer to wait on something that was definite . I
Mady: Todd , we obviously have a lot of work to do on the Comp Plan so this
maybe is more appropriately dealt with in a final form with the whole comp
plan instead of doing it on a hodge podge style . This little site now and
then do the rest of it later .
Mark Malinowski : My concern initially when I called the city because I
read in the paper , there was need for parkland west of Lake Minnewashta .
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 25 , 1990 - Page 18
1 I looked at myself and said , my land sits right in there . I wonder what 's
on their mind and I called and I asked if there was any parklands anywhere .
1 I was told no . They really didn 't have much . They might like to buy some
land around Lake St . Joe but that 's no big deal to them . Then I came into
the planning meeting and looked at the land use plan and my God, I see all
of my land is in green . I said what does that mean? Mark Koegler who sat
over there at the time , well he explained that means parks and open space .
That 's when my concern became real . What I would like to see I guess is
with the new comprehensive land use plan comes out , that my property be
shown like it is which is single family residential . The rest of the
property around the lake , in the colored portion of the map , it shows it to
be like blue trees or whatever , around the perimeter of the lake . Then
1 where the actual lot is where the house would sit , would be yellow . That 's
where I have a concern . Something like this could affect the property
value . Very real concern . My personal intention is I love open space . My
intention , I don 't have any plans right now other than to live comfortably
on that property just as it is . I might want to add on to my house or
maybe build a new house there but my intention is not to cut down all the
timber or bulldoze the land flat . I have - a real love for open space and
that 's why I bought that property .
Schroers: You don 't have plans to develop it at some point in time?
Mark Malinowski : No . I don 't have any plans like that . I can 't say
they 're not going to change at some point . I 'm very happy in Chanhassen
and I 'm not a developer . I came from a farm background and when I looked
around at the city and all the small lots , I finally found a place where I
really and truly could live in and that 's what the 6 1/2 acres around Lake
St . Joe , I 'm very comfortable there . I might want to add one thing . Have
any of walked down by Lake St . Joe? What you 're going to do if you put a
trail through there , you 're going to move that wildlife right out of that
area . Right now there is deer around . I have deer tracks in my yard .
There are green herons that rest on my pier . There 's a wonderful natural
area . If you put a trail through that marshland , you 're going to move that
wildlife right . I guess I have no other comments other than that .
Mady: I guess no one else has maybe been through it but I 'll disagree with
you a little bit there . If your comment were true then the DNR would have
a real problem . Nature trails do impact a nature area . Obviously they do
1 that but they don 't become super highways in any stretch of the
imagination . Those deer are going to be there until something drastically
happens to the deer population in the whole state or until Victoria
develops to the extent of what is now an Edina . You 're still going to have
a large -deer population there .
Schroers: I work for Hennepin Parks and we have an extensive trail system .
It 's- very common to see a deer on the trail . There are times when the
geese and other wildlife on the trail are almost a hazard to the people
that are using the trail so it 's hard to say that it 's going to displace
the wildlife if you build a proper nature trail .
Mark Malinowski : I agree the deer can live anywhere . Deer is easily
adaptable . There 's no more loons on Lake St . Joe and if you talk to Mr .
Bailie , there used to be . The wildlife 's moving out . . .and I 'm sure that
everybody . . .no more green herons . Rest assured . I really don 't have a
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 25 , 1990 - Page 21
of use . We drove out into that area and Rice Marsh Lake is . . .type of 1
facilities that are there , there 's not a whole lot of space . As well
there 's the outdated playground equipment there in that location that we 've
talked about in the past . However , the . . . So it 'd be a project that
financially could be done with only a $1 ,000 .00 . Something of that nature .
. . .take out the outdated playground equipment which is there which has as
most recently as 2 years ago caused an injury which . . .so we should have
been pulling out that earlier than we are but the equipment now is gone .
The aggregate base is . . .for the pad for the new basketball court and this
item is strictly being brought to the commission tonight . It has an
outdtaed . . .
Schroers: Where it says existing play structure . Is that new stuff or is
that the old?
Hoffman: That 's a new piece which is somewhat similar to the pieces we 're
currently installing that was probably put in 6 years ago . It 's a wood
type structure which basically matches what we . . .
Schroers : Okay , so that 's going to stay?
Hoffman: Yep , that 's going to stay .
Lash: Did you just say that 's going to cost $1 ,000 .00? d`
Hoffman: For the backboard and that type of thing . The additional money f
for the , with the additional aggregate base , the gravel .
Lash: So where is that coming from?
Hoffman: Where is it coming from? Basically taking a look at the capital ^I
improvement budget for the 1990 year , we are somewhat behind in our
spending . It 's hard to believe .
Robinson: Coming from the tennis court up by the well .
Mady: . You know Curt 's tennis court he hasn't gotten for 3 years .
y
Lash: So coming from something we haven't spent . . .
Hoffman: Well the situation , taking a look at the $150 ,000 .00 which was
budgeted during the 1991 and 1990 budget . Taking a look at what projects
have been completed and what has not bee completed . Just take for instance
the $40 ,000 .00 for playground equipment at City Center Park . That 's not
going to take place . There was $15 ,000 .00 in there for a Boy Scout
project . I 'm not sure how that $15 ,000 .00 got in there . What it was going
to be used for but we had spent a fraction of what was budgeted in this
project so to take , to get this much benefit for $1 ,000.00, a couple
thousand dollars is just , it 's really .
Erhart: So we 're not taking from a project?
Hoffman: No .
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 25 , 1990 - Page 22
11 Robinson: I guess , and I was going to say maybe Jan is saying . I guess
what I 'm saying is , it says no action is necessary . I guess I would have
rather , if we were going to do something like this , that it be brought up
to us and we agree to spend that thousand bucks down there .
•
Hoffman: We certainly can do that .
' Mady: This also comes Todd where we 've been doing recently with , when the
residents from Centex Homes came in here not too long ago and the ongoing
parade of new developments would come in asking well gee , can 't you give us
a little bit more . Well this one 's only a thousand bucks. Sometimes it 's
like $5 ,000 .00 . Sometimes $10 ,000 .00 . We have been saying it 's not in the
budget . We 've got everybody else asking for it . It just can 't get done .
' I 'm concerned that because this one 's cheap and easy it 's going to get done
when we 've got all these other things that might take a little more effort
to do but they 're going to get put on the back burner . This one all of a
' sudden came out of nowhere and got put right to the head of the class when
in the scheme of things , maybe it 's real important . Maybe it isn 't real
important but from where I 'm looking at this one , all of a sudden it just
came up out of nowhere and it 's going to , it sounds like it 's going to get
done in the next couple of weeks .
Lash: And we didn 't know anything about it .
Mady: We didn 't know anything about it and we 've been fighting and trying
to get this tennis court over here and we can 't get it done and play
' structures are getting delayed and not being installed and it just , I don 't
know . It makes us look bad .
Lash: I hate to give a message that we don 't want to get anything done .
Todd 's making some initiative to get something done for a change and I like
that so I don 't want to act like we 're sloshing the pans and telling
him . . .but I guess I was just curious with knowing what a tight budget we
have , where the money came from . That 's what started it .
Erhart : And Todd 's all red in the face .
' Robinson: For getting something done for a change .
Lash: No , there was a complaint that we never get anything , it seems like
we never get anything done and now we get something done and all of a
sudden we 're jerking the reins .
Mady: We 'll be patting him on the back in about another 15 minutes .
Schroers: Maybe a good way to put this would be that spending this
proposed thousand dollars to get this basketball court in here is not going
to be preventing us from accomplishing something else that we want to do .
Mady: It makes good sense from a public safety standpoint too .
11 Hoffman: The situation was , walked down there with Dale and we said , that
area which the current playground structure is on is an appropriate size
for the playground area . That equipment should have been ripped out of
I/
Park and Rec Commission Meeting I
September 25, 1990 - Page 23
there 2 years ago when we had the suit against us for the . . .that occurred 11
there . . .
Mady: We may be , or the comment earlier about City Center Park and the
cage . We 've talked about how bad some of that equipment is for the 5 years
I 've been up here anyway . Maybe we should look for , instead of a thousand II bucks , maybe another $200 .00 and buy some pearock to put underneath that
cage so the next kid who drops 10 feet from the top of it and there are
more than one broken arm a year up there , that maybe we can prevent one of
those . '
Hoffman: I thought about that . The situation there is , at what point do
we start admitting it is on school property . We want to be cooperative in ,
the spirit of things . . .
Pemrick: What gets done with the old equipment? The outdated equipment .
Where does that go? I
Hoffman: Basically , they 'll probably cut that slide in two .
Pemrick : It 's destroyed , yeah . ,
Mady: If it 's unsafe for us , it 's unsafe for everyone .
Schroers: Well , if we 're not going to take any action on this at this
time , let 's move on to item 8 .
Mady : I just wanted to let you know Todd that I planned on saying this is I
a good idea but I thought we should do some staff bashing when we had the
opportunity .
Hoffman: Thank you for that .
Mady: Besides I knew about 2 items later I was going to be patting you on II
the back so I figured I should humble you up first .
Hoffman: I did get that comment though from the City Manager . Where 's the,
money coming from?
SITE PLAN REVIEW, TROENDLE ADDITION.
Hoffman: Item number 8 is a fairly simple site plan review which basically
is just brought before the Commission as an informational item to let you
know what 's taking place in the city . We continue to fill up and those
types of things . It 's a subdivision of 8.7 acres into 15 single family
lots . If you 're familiar with this area . . . Frank Beddor purchased this
property from the Troendle 's over there . Nez Perce Drive is a new road
that has gone through the area just recently , within the past year the
commission has reviewed the Vineland subdivision which is just off to the
south of this site . The park needs are being met by the adjacent parks .
The Carver Beach Park , the playground and the Curry Farms Park is across
the major road there so it is somewhat close as well . . .
Andrews: Is it intentional that they 're trying to make access for the
people on the north side of Lotus Lake as long and difficult as possible
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 25 , 1990 - Page 24
for Carver Beach? There seems to be a lot of obvious choices here for a
connection and it isn 't going to happen .
' Hoffman: Yeah Nez Perce , this piece will eventually , this will continue
through and eventually hook up . . .so this will be a connection road between
Pleasant View Road and then down all the way back to Kerber .
Schroers: It must be almost right underneath the water tower the way it
looks .
Hoffman: It basically is east of the water tower .
Andrews: By North Lotus on top of the hill?
Hoffman: This site?
11 Andrews: Yeah . There 's a little pond there that they filled in .
Hoffman : . . . It 's like one piece over .
' Andrews: It 's one piece to the east of that water tower?
Hoffman: Yeah .
' Andrews: That 's got to be it then .
' Hoffman : There 's one big piece in there that 's . . .
Mady: Are they going to develop Nez Perce in the flavor of the rest of the
road and make it only 12 feet wide?
Hoffman: No . The initial . . .nicely curved and quite wide .
' Lash: So do you need a motion on this?
Hoffman: Yes .
Lash: Okay . I make a motion that we accept park and trail fees in lieu of
dedication of land .
Mady: Second .
Lash moved, Mady seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend
' to accept park and trail fees in lieu of parkland and trail construction.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
' PARK DEVELOPMENT UPDATE:
A. LAKE SUSAN PARK
B . SADDLEBROOK TRAIL
' Hoffman: This is a fairly exciting item . If you 've been to Lake Susan
Park , it has . . .
Mady: It 's fantastic .
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 25 , 1990 - Page 25
Hoffman: . . .at an unbelieveable rate . After what we went through at Lake
Ann but what we did in 2 years at Lake Ann and what we 've done in 3 years
at Lake Susan . 1
Mady: 2 weeks at Lake Susan .
Hoffman: Yeah , it 's just incredible . As stated in here , the seed is in
the ground . It 's been in the ground approximately one week . They seeded
it last Saturday . They mulched the outfield . The infield was sodded .
It 's elevated . The baseball and large backstop is there . It 's a legal
baseball field . You 've got all the distance requirements . The irrigation
system is in . It 's running on a Monday , Wednesday , Friday schedule right
now and there 's 7 different districts to the watering system. It goes on
at night and shuts off at 6:00 a .m . in the morning so the field is getting
watered constantly throughout the week . With this warm weather that we
had , we should see some tremendous growth out there at that park . If you
do have a chance to take a look at it , you 'll see just the initial phase is,
going to be completed this fall including the tennis courts , the parking
Jot . The parking lot improvements to the lot which is there and placement II of the play structure . The replacement of the volleyball court which was
moved . The baseball field being done as well as the sight where the
archery is being molded to fit somewhere down behind the baseball field . . .
Schroers: I 'm glad you brought that up because I missed that item in there,
and I was going to say , there was one very important item there that 's
missing .
Hoffman: It 's been addressed and it will be there as well as an additional
item which was not included . It was electricity run out to the backstop so
the baseball association can have access to that for their pitching machine
and that type of thing and any concession activities that would take place
in the interim between the time when it 's initially developed. . .but there
will be electricity there as part of that project . Then they 'll wind down '
this spring or this fall . The last thing which will be completed , the
light pole will be delivered about the first of December and those will all
be concreted in and wired and install those . . .sedimentation which is taking
place following . . . Installation of the trail segment there down by the ,
Jake . Lake Susan Hills West neighborhood which has their trail segment
just running to the west side of Lake Susan and then they 'll complete the
clean-up probably sometime in June . 1
Mady: Todd , I couldn 't remember , we are putting lights on the ballfield?
Hoffman: No . ,
Mady: No , we 're not . I couldn 't remember and somebody from the baseball
association asked me and I told them I thought we were not and he said we II
were and I said it 's been a couple years . It 's very possible .
Andrews: What lights were you talking about? Parking lot lights? ,
Hoffman: Parking lot lights , correct . Parking lot and roadway lights .
It 's minimal lighting in the parking lot . Along the roadway down to the I
boat access and that type of thing .
11
11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 25 , 1990 - Page 26
Mady: The road , Lake Drive is lit anyway .
Lash: I remember from the Minutes last time where Jim talked about the
' warning track . Is that what you called it? Were you able to achieve that?
Hoffman: Yes .
Mady: It 's in .
' Lash: And I 'm not trying to sound negative here . Really I 'm not but
I find this kind of contradictory where it says the trails have not been
started yet . Work on the boat access , fishing pier and lake dredging will
not be done this fall as initially programmed . In summary , the work is
proceeding on schedule . So it 's on schedule for it not to be completed
like it was supposed to?
Mady: I know the boat access wasn 't going to be started until next year .
Next spring .
' Hoffman: It 's on schedule .
Lash : It is on schedule?
Mady : It 's got to be way ahead of schedule .
Hoffman : We pushed , we tried to get started this fall and the whole
' authorization and approval of plans and specs . . .we really have a fine
contractor . . .
' Mady: It 's amazing . I was out there 2 weeks ago . I drove by just to see
what was happening . If anything was happening because I knew the contracts
had been let at the City Council meeting somewhere around the 20th of
August . Maybe the 15th . Somewhere around there and I was amazed and I
' called Todd the next Monday and said what 's going on? These guys have got
huge earth moving equipment . They 've obviously got it all done . The
backstop 's in place . They 've just got a little bit of screening to do .
1 said what happened? This is supposed to be done for 3 years .
Andrews: Is the electrical work all done? You 're all done with the
electrical work out there already?
Hoffman: No .
' Andrews: Is there enough service out there to put lights on the field at a
later date without having to run a major electrical project again?
' Hoffman: We talked about that . People go in and develop a field and
there 's talk about running the service right up to the field already and
running inground wires in there and possibly even putting in the standards
but you find , in the time lag between when that work gets done and 5 to 8
' years later lights are put in, you end up having some problems with
deterioration of the equipment which is there . It is so close , the
electricity would be coming out of the pump house which is a couple hundred
yards from the fields so 5 , 6 , 4 more years , whatever . . .
i
Park and Rec Commission Meeting I
September 25 , 1990 - Page 27
Andrews : So you have plenty of service in the general site?
Hoffman: Yes .
Andrews: I guess that 's what I was driving at .
Schroers: How much pressure do you feel that this is going to take off of II
Lake Ann? A noticeable amount? Is it going to .
Hoffman: I believe so because the use of Lake Ann is going to be so much II
different . It is the beach use is still going to be just as intensive .
Schroers: No , I meant the ballfields: '
Hoffm&n: Essentially it won 't be used until 1992 so Field #1 will be able
to be used somewhat more for the softball programs but who knows where the
baseball program will be by that time . We 're over double from last year II
and the fields at Lake Susan will be used for the Legion teams , the Babe
Ruth teams , the AAU teams , those divisions which . . . They can get one game
of practice in in an evening and . . .so it 's not going to be noticeable . 1
Mady: Without lights we aren 't doing a whole lot . With the increase in
the number of teams . The Little League program has just taken off
unbelieveable .
Hoffman: We 'll take a look at eventually , we 'll probably take a look at
creating a town team again . Adult baseball team for the city of Chanhassen,
for that type of facility there and neighboring communities . . .that have
that type of team . I wouldn 't be surprised to see that type of use .
Schroers: Okay , what about Saddlebrook? '
Hoffman: The trail at Saddlebrook . Again , just an update to let you know
that the construction is taking place . The aggregate is in . The neighbors,
have been met with on site there . They 're the ones that had concern about
how the grading was going to take place and how . . .property and that type of
thing . I 'm not sure if I mentioned it , I believe I did . The barrier post II
similar to the one they had at Lake Ann Beach will be installed there .
Schroers: There 's going to be one post in the center of the trail?
Hoffman: Yes . To deter that type of activity hopefully .
Schroers: Okay . Are there any commission presentations? 1
COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS:
Andrews: I 'll make one coment and that was the wind brace on the tennis II
courts and winter coming sooner . It will be ripped to shreds by the first
of December so . . . There 's 1 ,000 square feet of sail sitting up there and
I I
know what it 's like at North Lotus Lake . The fences are literally been
pulled out of the asphalt somewhat by the wind blowing on those things so
that 's what happens .
1
I
11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 25 , 1990 - Page 28
Hoffman: Just to clarify , it 's my opinion that we 're going to make use of
the wind screen which we currently have and not purchase additional wind
screens . Look to putting in plantings and those types of things and just
make do without .
Lash: Did we talk one time about taking them down at North Lotus and
' putting them at City Center?
Robinson: Yes we did .
Lash: Inside and out?
Hoffman: Yes . This fall when they come down , they 'll evaluate what they
have out at the- storage barn . Put it away and then if we have enough to do
anything in the spring , we 'll do that and then we 'll take a look at
starting initial plantings at the tennis courts so eventually we 'd have
some natural screening .
Andrews: I mentioned last time too about how the one volleyball net was
' gone . It must have been stolen I assumed . Somebody took it so .
Mady: Somebody needed it worse than we did .
' Andrews : It 's pretty sad because those things don't get that much use up
there as it is and for someone to take one .
' Robinson: And I also am told that the lights aren 't working over here on
the tennis courts .
Hoffman: I 've been informed of that also .
' Schroers: Anything else in Commission Presentations? What about the
Administrative Section?
' ADMINISTRATIVE SECTION:
Hoffman: Just a couple of comments on the Administrative Packet . You 'll
be happy to see that the park and trail dedication fees were approved by
Council . The senior survey there is . . .commission take time to look at that
if you haven 't . Those folks spent a lot of time in evaluating their needs ,
' In the past , they 're somewhat . . . We talked to the folks that meet over
here at the elementary school . They want to play cards and they don 't . . .
We try to reach them in our publication by advertising the other activities
which they place at the Excelsior Senior Center . . .
Mady: That was kind of interesting seeing that where you actually saw it
in print where they started , you 've got to realize we 're a group from 55 to
105 and we don't all , because none of us have gotten there yet so you look
at what your parents are and you can 't think of them in that respect and
the only active seniors group you ever see in town are the ones that are
playing cards at the school so that 's what you think of .
Andrews: I want to make one comment about that just to kind of tie it back
to that Lake St . Joe Park and that is that , more and more we concentrate on
our active park uses . Playground equipment , ballfields , volleyball fields ,
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 25 , 1990 - Page 29
and tennis courts and so forth and looking at our population and how it 's II
changing in age , I think you 're going to see more and more , or less use of
those active facilities and more and more appreciation of passive
facilities . I think it 's not too soon to consider that in our allocation II
of funds in the land that we do acquire .
Lash : I don 't see the active use getting less and less but I certainly
think we could strive more at maybe more of a balance .
Andrews : I think you do see less and less . I mean tennis was a sport that
a few years back was just absolutely bonkers . I mean you couldn 't get on
tennis courts and now tennis courts typically , at least that I 've seen
aren 't used that often. Look at the growth of golf . They attribute that ,
to the aging of America . They say more people play golf now because the
population has aged somewhat so I think there will be a decline in use and
I think we should consider that . .I mean we have a need right now that we
dc: have to fulfill but maybe look at how a piece of property that maybe is II
set up for a ballfield could be returned to a passive state if possible or
minimize the impact on the passive use areas .
Schroers: I think your point is well taken and there are a lot of people ,
T think the majority of people on this commission are not , definitely not
opposed to passive use and natural areas . As a matter of fact , from the on
�
set that Lake St . Joe area has been looked at as just exactly that . That
type of an area . We had discussed several possibilities there . One of
which was a boardwalk and other things like that . I guess I personally am
not in favor of cutting right through the heart of the habitat . I think it,
makes more sense to , if we 're going to have a natural trail , to put it out
around the habitat a little bit more and have something that 's a little
easier to maintain and that sort of thing and destroy as little of the
natural area as possible and blend it in but I think that that 's pretty
much what everyone is thinking for that area . We 're not planning on
looking at building a ballfield at Lake St . Joe . I
M .dy: It 's kind of cyclacle the nature of the commission. When I came on
5 vea_rs ago , we had just really gotten off of , the commission had been real
nature oriented . I mean they did everything nature . This is right when
Curt came on and they started turning the corner and we kind of went away
from there and focused so much on active uses because we didn 't have any
and so now we 're trying to hit that balance and it's tough to hit it
because we 're kind of gearing off the active but yet we 've got all these
new places coming in so .
Andrews: The citizens , the taxpayers of today are demanding active uses . I
Our ballfields are just overrun with players and when Todd talks about
doubling the program in one year , that 's incredible growth. Faster than
the rate of the population growth by far so we have an obligation to
fulfill that I realize but just look at , and I 'm not saying that what we 're
doing is wrong . When you see a natural area like Lake St . Joe , you just
can 't afford to let it get away because you 're never going to get it back
again .
Robinson: That 's a good comment and Jim 's right .
11
11
11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting
September 25 , 1990 - Page 30
11 Schroers: That 's like Lake Ann also . The gentleman referred to Lake
St . Joe as a jewel . If it 's a jewel , Lake Ann is a mega jewel . Lake Ann
' is really special .
Andrews: . . .the plans of maintaining a park perimeter around Lake Ann and
potentially maybe Lake Lucy in the future and those are going to be the
center pieces of a really beautiful city .
Mady: Tom Hamilton said it about 3 years ago . He said it 's something
like , the lakes in Chanhassen make it a great community but it also makes
it's biggest headache . Having natural areas because what 's great for one
is not so great for somebody else and they 're just always going to be
clashing . To strike that balance is not easy .
Andrews: Look what the City of Minneapolis went through with their lakes .
They were natural . They were developed and they tried to take them , go
'ack in the direction with park perimeters so , Lake Phalen the same way
in St . Paul . That 's gone through . . .
Mady: You look at the history of the Minneapolis and St . Paul park systems
and what the commissions and the park superintendents went through in the
early late 1800 's and the literal tar and featherings that were done and
things of that nature . People didn 't like the Minneapolis park system and
the St . Paul park system . I believe somebody was actually killed in the
St . Paul because of what they tried to do or what they actually did so it
-gay not , and now it 's looked at as probably one of the best park systems in
' the whole county for a city wide park system but it doesn 't always meet
with acceptance in the residents at the current time .
' Schroers : Is this all on record? Is Nann going to have to?
Hoffman: Yes . . . Some comments on Oktoberfest . We 're lucky enough , our
department is coordinating the physical aspect , the layout . . . We 're lucky
' enough to have the HRA providing the majority of the funding for that . As
well we 're lucky enough to have the Lion 's , the Rotary , the Jaycees . . .who
are doing the bulk of the work instead . . . We just went in with an
' additional 8 ,000 flyers in the Sailor this week . The flyer went out last
week in the Villager and more ads in the news of this week . We 're hoping
for fair weather . Hope to see you there .
' Lash: You don 't need us to work?
Mady: Clean-up .
Hoffman: You could certainly help with clean-up . . . Other than that , feel
free to enjoy this one on your own .
' Mady moved, Robinson seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor
and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 9:23 p.m . .
Submitted by Todd Hoffman
Recreation Supervisor
Prepared by Nann Opheim
I
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS MINUTES
OCTOBER 8, 1990
MEMBERS PRESENT: Carol Watson, Willard Johnson and Jay Johnson
STAFF PRESENT: Paul Krauss, Planning Director.
Willard Johnson opened the meeting.
Krauss asked the Board if the procedure could be amended for
' variances so that when there is an appeal for a variance by the
applicant after the Board has given it's decision, the applicant
does not have to wait for the entire City Council agenda before a
' decision is made.
Roger Knutson, City Attorney, agreed that the procedure could be
amended and would require an ordinance amendment.
Watson added that it is normally the City Council that appeals a
variance and not one of the neighbors.
' FRONT YARD AND SHORELAND SETBACK VARIANCE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, 8408 GREAT PLAINS BOULEVARD, LARRY PAUMEN
' Paul Krauss presented the staff report.
Watson agreed with the staff recommendation indicating that the
' proposal was consistent with the variance that had previously been
approved. She noted that the Board would not look favorably on any
additional variance requests for the parcel should any be requested
in the future.
Watson moved, seconded by Jay Johnson to approve the variance
request (#87-12) for a 5 foot front yard setback and a 33 foot
' shoreland variance as shown on the site plan dated June 24, 1988,
with the following conditions:
' 1. No alteration to the site will be permitted below the proposed
886 ' contour.
' 2. Screening will be maintained between the single family
residence and Lake Susan. A tree preservation plan is to be
approved by staff prior to issuance of any building permits.
' 3. No additional structures shall be permitted on the site
without a variance.
4. The applicant shall provide an individual water well on the
property.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
I
•
SIDE YARD VARIANCES FOR A TWO CAR GARAGE AND ADDITION AND VARIANCE
TO THE SHORELAND SETBACK, 3605 RED CEDAR POINT, RON ANKENY
Paul Krauss presented the staff report. I
Jay Johnson asked if the hedges to the east would be removed and if
so, will they be replaced.
The applicant stated that if the Board wishes, the hedges will be
replaced.
Watson added that there better not be any more variances granted I
for this lot. She stated that a variance, in the first place,
should be granted only for a hardship not to intensify a non-
conforming
use.
Jay Johnson stated that with the addition of the garage, the house
located to the west will be very close to the garage and asked if
that met building codes and fire protection.
Krauss stated that the building and fire codes apply to both
commercial and residential buildings.
Jay Johnson moved, seconded by Watson, to approve Variance Request
#88-11 as shown on the site plan dated September 13, 1990, for a
4 foot (east) side yard variance for the construction of a 2 car
garage, a 2 foot (west) side yard for entrance intensification and
2nd floor bedroom expansion, and a 26 foot variance to the 75 foot
shoreland setback. These variances were approved with the
following conditions:
1. That Type III erosion control be maintained during the
construction season along Lake Minnewashta.
2. No additional construction be permitted without a variance '
application.
3 . Building inspection shall confirm that the new construction
complies with building codes in light of limited building
setbacks to adjoining property.
4. If hedges at east side of home are removed due to
construction, they shall be replaced to buffer the adjoining
parcel.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Approval of Minutes: Waton moved to- approve the minutes dated
August 13, 1990, Johnson seconded the motion. All voted in favor.
Willard Johnson closed the public hearing.
Willard Johnson moved to adjourn the meeting. Jay Johnson seconded
the motion. All voted in favor.
11