1l. Minutes .1
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
JULY 23, 1990
Mayor Chmiel called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. . The meeting was opened
with the Pledge to the Flag.
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Boyt, Councilman Workman,
Councilwoman Dimler and Councilman Johnson
STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Roger Knutson, Gary Warren, Todd Gerhardt, Paul
Krauss and Dave Hempel
' APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Johnson moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to
approve the agenda amended as follows: Councilman Johnson moved item 10(a) to
the first item under Unfinished Business; Councilman Workman wanted to discuss
' Zipcodes under Council Presentations. All voted in favor of the agenda as
amended and the motion carried.
' CONSENT AGENDA: Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to
approve the following Consent Agenda item pursuant to the City Manager's
recommendations:
a. Final Plat Approval, Market Square.
b. PMT Addition:
' 1. Final Plat Approval
2. Development Contract Approval, PMT Addition
' c. Resolution *90-80: Accept Feasibility Study for Park Place Phase II
(Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 5th) Improvement Project No. 85-13B; Call
for Public Hearing.
' g. Resolution *90-81: Accept Street and Utility Improvements, Curry FArms 2nd
Addition, Project 88-5.
h. Resolution *90-82: Approve Plans and Specifications and Authorize
Advertising for Bids for Lake Susan Park Expansion Improvement Project 89-3.
' i. Resolution *90-83: Approve Eurasian Water Milfoil Inspection Proposal.
j. Final Plat Approval, Sathre Addition.
' k. Approval of Accounts.
' 1. City Council Minutes dated July 9, 1990
Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated June 26, 1990
m. Resolution *90-84: Approve Contract Amendment No. 1 for Lake Drive East
' Improvement Project No. 89-6.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
t1
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990 IF
D. APPROVE CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO. 1 FOR COUNTRY HOSPITALITY SUITES IMPROVEMENT I
PROJECT 89-25.
Councilwoman Dimler: I was just wondering if we could send that to the HRA. Put
it on the HRA agenda. I don't know if they've had an opportunity to look at it.
Don, could you explain that procedure?
Don Ashworth: Is Todd here? I'm not sure if they have looked at this or not. I I
know they have gone through the overall project and the amount proposed to be
assessed. I'm not sure on the change order. Are you aware?
Gary Warren: I don't believe it went to them. It's part of the assessment
portion of the project which is why it came to the Council. The costs are to be
totally assessed against the partnership. '
Don Ashworth: And as such, there really is no HRA participation in that area.
Councilwoman Dialer: Okay, but they don't need to approve the amendment then? '
Mayor Chmiel: It's basically because of soil conditions that they had that they
checked on that too.
Councilwoman Dimler: Alright. Do you want to know why they're doing it that
way? Okay. Then I move approval of item (d). ,
Councilman Johnson: Second.
Resolution *90-85: Councilwoman Disler moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to
approve Contract Amendment No. 1 for Country Hospitality Suites Improvement
Project No. 89-25. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
E. 1) APPROVE TRUNK HIGHWAY 5 CONSTRUCTION PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR
HENNEPIN COUNTY SEGMENT AND RAILROAD BRIDGE EMBANKMENT. CITY PROJECT
NO. 88-28A.
2) APPROVE COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT.
Mayor Chmiel: Whenever I read something in here, it says trust me on this one.
What you've said here, just make me feel a little more comfortable with this.
Even though you're fully comfortable as you indicated. '
Gary Warren: On the plans themselves Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
Gary Warren: Basically the elements, this phase of the plans is the Hennepin
County piece so it's a smaller piece in the city of Chanhassen and we've been
working with them and coordinating the storm water drainage and intersection
configuration at Dell Road which is probably the biggest piece of the puzzle out
here and in the construction of Dell Road to the south to hook up with our Lake II)
Drive East from the McDonald's site. Those are the real key elements that we
worked with MnDot to get some understanding of the common elements in the road
2
1
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
section and everything else so there aren't any, what should I say, hidden
agendas as far as special treatments, planting programs or any of that in this
' phase of the project. I don't know what else I could tell you.
Mayor Chmiel: I guess that sort of answers that part of it. The other part was
' regarding the contract when available in detail any exceptions or concerns with
the contract at Monday night's meeting that you were talking about in here. The
cooperative agreement on this for the Dell Road is going to come up to
$77,399.00? Now is that part of Eden Prairie's cost incurred in this as well or
is that strictly ours?
Gary Warren: Strictly Chanhassen's share. Eden Prairie has a little larger
' piece actually. I think it's $99,000.00 or something because there's more work
obviously in Eden Prairie on this piece of it. Again, it's reflecting the
percentage of storm water drainage that we are conveying. Some of the culverts
have been sized to accommodate some of our drainage from the Press area and
' such. The watermain extension to the south along Dell Road, that's strictly a
city project improvement. Those specific things. Sidewalk on the west side of
Dell Road connect with the Lake Drive East sidewalk.
' Mayor Chmiel: That 20 foot berm up there?
' Gary Warren: Right.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, I move that item 1(e), 1 and 2. Is there a second?
' Councilman Johnson: Second.
Resolution #90-86: Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to approve
' the following:
1. Approve Trunk Highway 5 Construction Plans and Specifications for Hennepin
' County Segment and Railroad Bridge Embankment, City Project No. 88-28A.
2. Approve Cooperative Agreement.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
F. AUTHORIZE MNDOT TO PERFORM SPEED STUDY IN PHEASANT HILL ADDITION.
' Councilman Boyt: Gary, this is an item from Dave Hempel to you on speed study?
' Gary Warren: That's correct.
Councilman Boyt: Can you cite any example where a speed study has reduced the
speed limit in Chanhassen in a residential area?
' Gary Warren: I cannot speak specifically to every speed study that's been done
in the City but ones that we have done, I can't recall any reductions that have
' occurred.
Don Ashworth: TM 101 I believe.
' 3
I
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
Councilman Boyt: I'm talking about a residential area Don. You can call TH 101
a residential road if you want but I don't think so. ,
Gary Warren: I'm sorry, prior to my time a speed study was done on Pleasant
View Road west of TH 101. The first hairpin turn there. That was reduced to 25
mph to the west and that was due to the geometrics.
Councilman Boyt: Well, living on Frontier Trail and having the State cone in
and say you've got, you know the first big hill that comes down when you're
coming from town and heading north on Frontier Trail? That has an advisory
limit on it of, I think it might have been 15 mph. They wouldn't change the
speed limit. All they'd let us do is put an advisory sign up which has no, you
can't enforce it. There's two other major turns in there which also had a
reduced advisory. I think what this is doing is delaying a decision that the
neighborhood would undoubtedly like to have something done and we're just
putting it off. MnDot isn't going to be out there tomorrow if we pass this to
do that speed study and when they do, having walked that road several times and
comparing it to Frontier Trail, you don't have enough traffic on there to
warrant, you know that whole business, you're not going to be able to put stop
signs in there according to MnDot. And I'll bet that MnDot will not come back
with anything other than that's a residential street and the minimum for a
residential street's 30 mph and there's probably nobody in the room here that
thinks that 30 mph is the right speed for in front of their house. So I just
think this is delaying a decision that the City should be making. I'd like to
see this directed to the Public Safety Commission instructing them to come up
with the best way to reduce the speed. They want to get this done quickly.
MnDot is not going to do that.
Mayor Chmiel: What is the timeframe on that Gary? '
Gary Warren: It's strictly up to MnDot. I haven't been informed exactly what
their timing would be on it. Usually this time of the year is probably a little
bit better than others for them to do them. The weather cooperates a little bit
more but it could be a month. Could be more. Could be less. I guess our
initiative in having a speed study done was to at least have that done so that
we had the answer from MnOot was not to circumvent anything else that the
Council or whatever chose to initiate in this area. But certainly from a legal,
enforceable speed standpoint, this is a step that has to be done if you're going
to be able to have something out there that's enforceable. It was not meant to
be the only project or effort that was going to be done for the neighborhood.
Councilman Boyt: Well you say something that's enforceable. Tell me just a
little bit more about that. If MnOot doesn't reduce the speed limit, we can't
reduce the speed limit and enforce it.
Gary Warren: That's correct. '
Councilman Boyt: So that's not one of our options. Unless they do it.
Gary Warren: Well you're saying, you're presuming that MnOot will not reduce '
the speeds. '1
' t
4
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
Councilman Boyt: Well I can support the study if we're doing something else at
the same time because in 4 years I haven't seen that happen and I'm living right
next to an excellent example of where the speed should be reduced and it wasn't.
' So I'd like to see us move ahead with other avenues rather than waiting for
MnDot to come back with.
' Councilman Workman: Bill, what are the other avenues? I mean we know that
MnDot is a nepotent on this subject aren't they and so what are we going to be
able to do? What is public safety going to be able to discuss? The problems
been recognized by engineering. What's public safety going to be able to do in
the interim?
Councilman Boyt: Well my guess, having worked through this in Near Mountain and
' a few others. Fox Hollow. A few other developments. What we'll end up being
faced with is do we put stop signs out there or don't we? If we put them out
there, we know that that's not going to be supported by MnDot but we have the
' right to do it. We've done it all over town. And so what I'd like to know is,
before we make that decision, is there anybody that's creative enough to come up
with a better plan? I think folks that that's what it's going to come down to.
' Does' the Council support stop signs in here or do we not. And there isn't going
to be any engineering support for them and MnDot isn't going to support them.
So that's why I would suggest referring it to public safety and seeing if they
can work out some reasonable solution.
' Councilman Workman: So Gary we can put stop signs wherever we want but we can't
decrease speed limits?
' Gary Warren: We can put stop signs where we want. Roger may want to address
the legality of somebody contesting a stop sign that is not justified from the
Uniform Manual on Traffic Control Devices for example. The Commissioner of
' Transportation, State Legislature has ruled that that manual is the book as far
as what's right and what's wrong about placing signs. If you're placing
something that blatantly goes against that criteria, then the enforceability of
that I would think gets suspect. Roger, am I correct?
Roger Knutson: Yes, generally. Although we have no control over speed limits,
' basically no. On stop signs and other kind of signs, we have more discretion.
There is the Uniform Manual and if you don't follow that to some extent, it
could result in some problems but you have a lot more discretion with stop signs
than you do with speed limits. You have none with speed limits basically.
Councilman Boyt: And if you use the criteria that the State will give you, we
don't have, there might be 1 or 2 stop signs in Chanhassen that are justified
' but most of them don't have the cross traffic that would warrant the stop sign.
We've been through this, I don't know how many times in 4 years? So all I's
asking is, I can support going to MnDot as long as we don't wait for that to
' happen before we start thinking about what are we going to do because I'd like
to see this thing get solved pretty quick. I'm sure the neighborhood would. I'm
sure you would.
Councilman Johnson: So you want to refer it to Public Safety and send the
request to MnOot at the same time?
' 5
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
Councilman Boyt: Yes. I
Councilwoman Dimler: Is there a cost to this study Gary?
Gary Warren: No, not from MnDot.
Councilman Workman: I think we know that stop signs aren't the fix all either.
But I don't have a problem with public safety looking at this at all.
Mayor Chmiel: No, I don't either. I think that's probably the way it should
go. Refer it back and then also pursue it with the State. With MnDot.
Councilman Boyt: Then I would move amendment of 1(f) to include referral to the
Public Safety Commission. I guess we have to vote on the amendment?
Councilman Workman: Second.
Councilman Boyt moved, Councilman Workman seconded to amend item 1(f) to include ,
referring the item of a speed study in the Pheasant Hill Addition to the Public
Safety Commission. All voted in favor of the amendment and the motion carried. ,
Councilman Boyt: I'd move approval of item 1(f) as amended.
Councilman Johnson: Second. ,
Resolution *90-87: Councilman Boyt moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to
authorize MnDot to perform a speed study in Pheasant Hills Addition and to refer
the item to the Public Safety Commission for review. All voted in favor and the
motion carried unanimously.
VISITORS PRESENTATIONS:
A. PETITION FOR ENFORCEMENT OF WATER SURFACE USEAGE ORDINANCE, LOTUS LAKE ,
HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.
Don Ashworth: The staff this past week received a petition to have the Council
look at enforcement for the Water Surface Useage Ordinance. That petition was
put into your packet. I'm assuming that there are representatives here. In the
meantime or I should say prior to that date, Councilman Johnson had asked that
this item be placed on the agenda and he was looking for information regarding
age restrictions, registration for the Jet Skis themself. What type of
information or other procedures we could put in place for our gate attendants to
insure that illegal Jet Skis did not get onto the lake. That item was included
as item 10. As I understand it, the Council now has kind of merged these and
put them as item 7.
Councilman Johnson: No. We didn't merge them. This was, they were asking for '
something different than what's in at 7. And here's the actual petition that I
was just handed. '
6 1,
11 City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
Don Ashworth: So I would assume that the residents would like to present this
petition at this time.
Mayor Chmiel: Fine. Would you please state your name and your address please?
' J.C. Hurd: My name is J.C. Hurd. My address is 6695 Horseshoe Curve. We would
be happy to merge the two but if they're different.
Councilman Workman: What is the difference Jay between the two?
Councilman Johnson: This particular petition asks to make some modifications to
' our ordinance to change the definition of water craft and the other one talks
more specifically on noise issues on the lake and regulations of watercraft. I
think what they're getting at is the same thing. This is just one way.
J.C. Hurd: Right. They're just different ways of approaching it.
Councilman Johnson: As you read through the definition of watercraft, it's so
broad. Jet Skis are actually now covered. What they're asking with the
petition is kind of, it doesn't do it. But I think the thrust of the petition
is noise and we've moved that item.
J.C. Hurd: Safety.
' Councilman Johnson: And safety, yeah. I'll let them tell us what the thrust of
the petition is but there it is as it's read.
J.C. Hurd: On behalf of the Lotus Lake Homeowners Association, I'm submitting a
petition signed by 99 Lotus Lake users asking for diligent enforcement of the
Surface Water Use Ordinance No. 73 to promote safety and reduce noise
distrubance. The petition also requests that personal watercraft be included in
' the definition of motorboats. Now on July 19th I had a meeting with Jim Chaffee
discussing these concerns. Jim has agreed to ask the Sheriff's Department to
actively enforce the Water Surface Use Ordinance, particularly during peak lake
' useage times. Particularly on weekends. We agreed that the current definition
of motorboats does include personal watercraft and they would therefore be
subject to the same rules. Although Jim thought it would be too involved to
formally deputize citizens to help enforce the ordinance, we would like to
' reiterate that we are more than willing to help enforce in any way we can. In
order to help educate lake users of the existence and-contents of the rules
governing Lotus Lake, we are suggesting that a summary of the ordinance be sent
city wide. In order that the proper people receive the mailing, we recommend
that they be addressed to watercraft operators as opposed to residents whereby
getting the 16 year olds as opposed to their parents. We agree that diligence
' by staff at the boat launch verifying registration of watercraft, ages of
operators, as well as signage at the launch describing the forward, counter
clockwise travel requirement would help promote overall water safety. We are
also asking that they talk about the 100 feet offshore minimum wake rule and
' enforce the parking down there as well. Boat launch staff should also hand out
a summary of the ordinance and advise watercraft operators that violators will
be cited. All copies of the ordinance or a summary thereof should point out
that Jet Skis are included as motorboats. I know that the definition does
include them but to specifically spell it out I don't think would hurt. Just as
7
I
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
I
a postscript, I talked to Scott Harr this afternoon and he agreed to order a
sign for the boat launch tomorrow if we could get some action tonight. So if we
want to include, I guess it's real vague as to whether or not it should be
included with your item 7. I think they are all basically the same. One is,
the approach is a little different.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I guess I just have one question of Roger. Legality of
the City. What would be the position of the City for any recourse it could have
from this? I
Roger Knutson: We're authorized by State Statute to have a water surface useage
ordinance. We have that and as long as it's on the books and we've been
enforcing it, I'm sure that's what public safety intends.
J.C. Hurd: Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Does anybody have any questions?
Councilman Boyt: Well I do. I think that if we're going to get something done
it really hinges upon enforcement of what we already have. The whole character
of the lake changes when they County Sheriff's boat is out there and they have
been, at least when I've been on the lake to observe, the County folks are
pretty good about checking on everybody. So I don't think a sign is going to do
much. There's already so many signs at the boat launch that I think people just
ignore them but I think if we could get for the remaining couple months of the
summer, if we could get a public safety person out there patrolling, once the
word got out, that'd be the end of it. Not the end of Jet Skis but it would be
the end of what you see out there now in terms of the general sort of cavalier
approach. As a resident this will tell you, that's got to be one of the most
dangerous lakes around. Especially on a weekend. So I'd like to see us go
about trying to identify a public safety part time person that we could put out
there on the weekends and maybe other high use times that would tell them. If
they didn't change, would have them removed from the lake. Could always call
the County. They're pretty good about responding when they get a specific call
but they'll be real quick to tell you that with, do they have two boats now or
one? ,
Mayor Chmiel: The County?
Councilman Boyt: Yeah.
Mayor Chmiel: I've seen one.
Councilman Boyt: Well I know they have one. I think they have two but we have
7 lakes alone and they have a lot bigger area than Chanhassen to deal with so
they've been responsive but I think they're overwhelmed and I think for probably
somewhere in the neighborhood of $500.00 or $600.00, we could get the word out
that Lotus Lake wasn't a place to go if you wanted to be careless on your Jet
Ski.
Councilman Johnson: One of the main things we need there of course is a boat
which brings in some of the homeowners. The boat our Fire Department has is not
going to exactly impress anybody. Or chase anybody down. I think that's a good
8
I
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
idea but I'm not sure if this is the proper place to actually discuss it since
1 I want to take action on this item tonight and in Visitor's Presentation we
don't.
' Mayor Chmiel: No, we can't on this particular part right now.
Councilman Boyt: Okay. Are you proposing we wait until 7(a)?
' Councilman Johnson: Right. It's fairly quick stuff inbetween hopefully.
Mayor Chmiel: I know what you're saying. I sat on the lake a week ago last
' Sunday and just coincidentally the Sheriff's patrol came over to our boat and
checked for life preservers, fire extinguisher. Everything.
' Councilwoman Dimler: Is this Lake Lucy?
Mayor Chmiel: Pardon?
' Councilwoman Dimler: On Lake Lucy? On your lake, Lake Lucy?
Mayor Chmiel: Oh no. On Lotus. I did that specifically. And I did watch the
action on that lake. There were a lot of skiers that had been going. There
weren't any Jet Skis on it that particular day but just as we were leaving,
there was a Jet Ski coming on so I'm aware of some of it and of course previous,
' last year in going down and requesting a few of the people that were using Jet
Skis to be in conformance with what our ordinances basically are and they
weren't aware. And I think as I'm mentioned, they were from Excelsior and
Minnetonka so they had no idea as to what it is and what it consistented of. SO
' I would suggest then as mentioned already, that we hold off on this until item
7.
B. PETITION FOR COMPLETION OF BIKE PATH BETWEEN SADDLEBROOK AND MEADOW GREEN
PARK.
Colleen Murphy: My name is Colleen Murphy. I live at 910 Saddlebrook Pass.
' When my husband and I bought our house 2 years ago we were told that a bike path
would be going in that would link our neighborhood with Meadow Green Park. I
and many of our neighbors looked forward to that because there was no paved
' access to get to the park. No way for kids on bikes or mothers pushing
strollers to get to the park and that's why I brought forth a petition with 44
signatures asking that we can move this forward. That's all I have to say.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Any questions?
Councilman Johnson: Does anybody know the status of this path?
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, I don't.
Councilman Johnson: When it's scheduled to be put in?
Mayor Chmiel: Or where at all?
' Councilwoman Dimler: Was it on the original plans, yes.
9
1
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
Councilman Boyt: I'm sure it was.
Mayor Chmiel: There were 44 signatures on that petition too.
Councilman Johnson: This particular subdivision went in just after Bill and I
had finished a fight to get paths put to a city park from a neighborhood where
the developer wanted to not put the paths in. That was before we were on the
Council and now that we're here, we've been pretty diligent to let people have
access to their parks.
Councilman Workman: Where specifically does this trail run because I know Gary, '
he's still not here now. Where's Gary?
Councilman Johnson: He's good at slipping out at the right time.
Councilman Workman: We've got the whole map here and I imagined it off of.
Councilman Johnson: I think it's where Trotter's Circle comes into Saddlebrook
Pass going out to Outlot A?
Councilman Workman: Okay, there it is. I noticed in the Adminstrative Pack '
that we just got done paying for sidewalk construction in there in the amount of
about $20,000.00. Wasn't this supposed to be a part of that whole thing?
Don Ashworth: That was for the sidewalks along the streets. A decision was
made initially that the developer was to build those and later that came back as
a petition for concrete and then there were cost differentials and it literally
has taken the 2 year period of time for billing that out. The trail as it would
go from the neighborhood back over to the park area, I left a call in to both
Mark Koegler and to Rick Murray. I'm sorry, I don't have an answer regarding
that particular piece. They did not return my calls.
Councilman Workman: Is this something that we should be referring to the Park
and Rec to find where they're going to come up with the money to do so?
Don Ashworth: Right.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, I agree. ,
Councilman Boyt: Well when this went in, the reason it went from bituminous to
concrete was the price difference was almost nothing at that particular time.
This was a sidewalk/trail system that was to be put in as part of the
development contract. As I recall there's so many lots in there, I think that
the trail assessment on these lots made it a wash to the City. This is we're
talking something was done 4 years ago so I'm a little sketchy on all the
details but this is the development where we learned a little bit about the
timing of when you put sidewalks in. In terms of driveways and people moving
into their houses. Certainly it makes sense to have Park and Rec confirm all
that but I'm pretty sure that all of this is in the development contract and I
won't say more. I'll just get in trouble.
Councilman Workman: You're saying it should already be paid for?
10 ,
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
Councilman Boyt: Yeah. Now where those funds went, that's a different matter.
We have built a fair chunk of expensive trail.
Mayor Chmiel: I think that's what should be done. Refer this back to Park and
Rec and have them come up with some kind of an answer. See where the dollar
' allocation is or where it's gone or where it's at. Thank you.
C. PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION, PUBLIC SAFETY DIRECTOR'S RESIGNATION.
Bill Bernhjelm: My name is Bill Bernhjelm. I live at 9380 Kiowa Trail and I'm
the Chairman of the Public Safety Commission. I want to make sure that
' everybody knows that many of the other Public Safety Commissioners are here.
Craig Blechta, Barb Klick, Dave [Wilmer and also some of the department
employees. At our last meeting on the 12th we discussed some issues that had
occurred. Obviously the resignation of Jim Chaffee as Public Safety Director
has occurred and a public notice of that in the media and we expressed a concern
that we had not been formally advised of the resignation and felt that perhaps
some things were not being properly attended to. We drafted a letter to Mr.
' Ashworth and sent copies to the Council. I'm assuming that you all have seen
them. I won't go into the exact wording of the letter. I won't read the
letter. Our concerns primarily are, is the Public Safety Commission being
' ignored? Is this resource that we have in the community being properly
utilized? Tonight I understand we'll be getting an issue that needs some
attention and that's one of the few that has come back to us from Council and
' I'm glad to see that. A major concern again is rumoring and that kind of thing
that takes place when a position opens. Is the position going to be refilled?
Who's going to fill it? Those kinds of things. I don't want to get into the
personnel issues here. That's clearly the perview of Mr. Ashworth and you
' folks. However, what we're looking for is to make sure that we have some
continuity here before Jim does leave. He's leaving the State. Going to
California. I think we need to see some strong leadership in the department.
,' It's grown to a department of 12 full time employees at this point. Public
Safety we feel is very important in the community at this juncture especially in
the developing years. We think that the basis and the foundation for a good
' public safety department has been created and we'd like to see that continue.
Primarily again, we understand that there are some concerns amongst employees
about communication issues. Are they being ignored? Again, these people are
dealing with the public on a daily basis and they talk to probably 20 times the
' number of folks that you do as Council people and I'm sure they have a lot of
insight on what's really going on in the nuts and bolts of this operation and we
feel again that they should be listened to. At least given an opportunity to
' speak about changes that may be on the offing. We again want to offer our
services. We have people with military background. We have people with fire
background. We have police background. Medical services background. We feel
we were appointed because of our varied backgrounds and we want to be able to
contribute to the community in the way that we are best qualified. We want to
be involved. If there is going to be reorganization or some changes going on,
we want to be involved in that and promote some open discussion about what's
' going on and what the future of Chanhassen's Public Safety is going. That's
all I have.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay Bill. Thank you. I think at least from my standpoint, I
don't feel that we're trying to ignore anybody. In fact, I would suggest that
11
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
we probably sit down at some time as we've done before, with the Council, with
the Public Safety Commission and at least understand where we're coming from
with what we're looking at right now. The replacement for Jim is already in the It
right now. Whether that particular position's going to be replaced, that's
something we have to review and scrutinize that a little bit too. And so I
guess that's probably where I'm really coming from. Hopefully the communication
problem should be much better between staff to the employees and understanding
what their concerns are as well and I think that's already being addressed as
well. So hopefully we can take care of much of those items.
Bill Bernhjelm: Okay. We're going to meet tomorrow evening. We're still ,
planning on meeting tomorrow evening to again discuss anything that may come up
tonight. I don't think that we're probably ready to go for a joint meeting.
Maybe when some proposals are put forward. Maybe we'll get together then.
Thank you.
Councilwoman Dimler: I could make a comment too. I wanted to say that, you
know that you mentioned you have not been formally advised. Well I have to tell
you I haven't either. I read it in the paper.
Mayor Chmiel: That's pretty much all of us. '
Councilwoman Dimler: So if you're thinking that we tried to hide something, we
didn't. We're just waiting for the formal announcement as far as I'm concerned.
I think the openness has been there. The avenues have been there. They just
need to be used.
Councilman Boyt: Didn't we get a letter from Jim Chaffee?
Councilman Johnson: Didn't we get a letter of resignation? ,
Don Ashworth: The City did.
Councilwoman Dimler: I didn't. '
Don Ashworth: The City did receive Jim's resignation. That has not gone back
to City Council so to the best of my knowledge, no Council member has seen Jim's
resignation. The interim period I have talked with Scott Harr. He has been
offered the interim director position. He is currently deciding as to whether
or not he wishes to accept that.
Councilman Johnson: That we have been copied on because I remember seeing that.
Don Ashworth: I don't think so. All of this is relatively recent. '
Mayor Chmiel: No, it's probably what you read in the paper.
Councilman Johnson: No. A memo from Don. Maybe I was the only one on the '
Council he copied. I don't know. I feel priviledged here.
Don Ashworth: Without question that has been the statements made through this '
office but I'm sure you have not seen Jim's resignation.
12 '
IICity Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
Councilman Johnson: No, I haven't seen Jim's resignation. I saw something
Iwhere it stated that we're offering Scott the interim position.
Don Ashworth: And again, Scott is currently considering that.
ICouncilman Johnson: Yeah. I think that was in our Adminstrative Packet for
this week or something. I'm not sure where I saw it. What I hear is a group
II saying here we are. We're ready. We're able. We're willing. Give us the
green flag and we're going to go start working for you on evaluating the needs
of this position. Whether this position should be refilled. Reorganized at
this time or whatever. I think we ought to give them the green flag here pretty
IIquick and get the race going.
Councilwoman Dimler: I guess my comment would be, I think we should follow the
I proper procedure that's always been followed and if that's been hiring through
Don, then he should look at it. I see the commission as being advisory and not
the elite organization for the decision.
I Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, that's basically a personnel problem that should be
addressed and it will. And the commission will be advised accordingly as I said
because I think the communication is there. At least between us and appreciate
II it.
Willy Molnau: I don't know, this might be out of order but I'd like to ask a
Iquestion.
Mayor Chmiel: Why don't you come up and state your name, although we know who
you are.
IIWilly Molnau: I'm Willy Molnau. I live at 8541 Audubon Road and I come to
Chanhassen quite often and something baffles me. For 65 years I thought a stop
II sign was a stop sign. But on the west end of main street it says complete stop
required.
IMayor Chmiel: Right.
Councilman Johnson: It's required everywhere.
I Willy Molnau: Well if you make a complete stop at that point, you'll be there
the rest of the week. I always thought that a stop sign as long as the safety
council is here now, why does it say complete stop required on that one sign?
IIMayor Chmiel: Supposedly Willy there was going to be two signs at both stop
signs. The encroachment of people not stopping is a problem. Of course that's
I not our problem per se. It's the police enforcement issue. But people were not
stopping for that stop sign at all. You could sit at those intersections and
it's just an automatic right or an automatic left without even stopping fully.
That's what the stop sign basically says is stop.
IIWilly Molnau: There used to be in Wisconsin a right turn no stop.
IIMayor Chmiel: That's right. That's right.
II 13
II
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
Willy Molnau: Maybe that's the way it should be. A right turn no stop because
a complete stop at that point, and you're locked there for the rest of the week.
Mayor Chmiel: Hopefully you'll move at some time.
Councilman Johnson: One of the problems there I think was the left turn no stop
that was being taken there. Or the left turn no slow down. '
Mayor Chmiel: As we see that, it's a real problem and I think the reason that
that was put there was.
Willy Molnau: Well they say that laughing is good for the soul.
Mayor Chmiel: You bet.
Willy Molnau: We got everybody laughing. Maybe if they could all get up and
stretch now, they'd feel good too. ,
Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussion?
Councilman Boyt: Yeah. Go ahead Tom. 1
Councilman Workman: Yeah, you know it is difficult Bill. I read the letter and
everything and the only place I have officially heard about Jim Chaffee's
resignation is in the newspaper. The only place I've officially heard about
Bill 8oyt leaving the City Council is in the newspaper. I'm hoping Bill's going
to tell us tonight when he's leaving. We don't know that yet. Bill hasn't told
me as much as he's told Chris Burns and I'm not going to respond to Chris Burns.
Or the newspapers because that's the way, it's a two way street. So you guys
feel left out. Sometimes I do too. And certainly we don't have causing
problems for Public Safety in mind with this whole issue. It's a topsy turves
situation but I need to be informed on a lot of this stuff too and I know Jim's
a good guy and sometimes Bill can be but you know, I don't have all this
information and I can't beat it out of people either. And so I have to take
things as they come to me too and there's an awful lot of things going on. So,
do you have an announcement to make?
Councilman Boyt: No. I have not resigned so that's why you haven't received
notification of that. Although I'm willing to talk about it if you want. I
would, let's see suggest, well first. You mentioned something's going on so
far. What's going on so far on this? Who can fill me in on Jim Chaffee's
replacement? You said something's in progress. What's in process?
Don Ashworth: I have offered to Scott Harr interim director's position. That '
was offered at the middle of last week. As of Friday Scott was considering that
and would let me know today. We have not caught up with each other today.
Councilman Boyt: Alright, is there anything else that's gone on up until now?
Don Ashworth: Well, we have Jim's resignation.
Councilman Boyt: Anything else? IIF
14 ,
' City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
Don Ashworth: Not that I'm aware of.
Councilman Boyt: Okay. So the current status is that we haven't begun a search
for a person. Right?
Oon Ashworth: That's right.
Councilman Boyt: Okay, and we have offered the interim position to Scott Harr?
Don Ashworth: That's correct.
Councilman Boyt: I would suggest that the, since Public Safety is meeting
tomorrow night, that the Council direct them to prepare their recommendation for
' a job description for the Public Safety Director.
Councilman Workman: We've already got one.
Councilman Boyt: That they review it. That it would be a good function to
involve the citizens in the community in. Saying this is sort of a
transitionary opportunity. What do we want that job to look like? The Public
Safety Commission was originally formed to perform what then later became Jim
Chaffee's position. When Jim was hired he was, I believe interviewed by Dick
Wing and the Mayor at that time so the Public Safety Commission had a very
' active role in hiring Jim. I would like to see them have a similar kind of, you
mentioned advisory. Certainly it's advisory but it can be an active advisory
role. I would like to hope that when it comes time to interview candidates for
the job, that like when we hired Paul, that we would offer the Public Safety
.' Commission the opportunity to come in and participate in the interview. It
makes a good start and I think you want to hire someone that's going to be
accepted by not only staff. I think it goes without saying staff would probably
11 accept any qualified person you hire, but that the citizens have as much input
as possible. I think we can begin that by asking this group to review and if
they seem fit, to suggest modifications to the job description and the
qualifications for that job.
' Mayor Chmiel: Okay, anything else? If not we'll move on.
' Carol Dunsmore: Carol Dunsmore, 730 West 96th Street and I'm a secretary in
the Public Safety Department. I'm here on behalf of the staff of the Public
Safety Department that whatever discussion is going on about any possible
reorganization or whatever replacement of the Assistant Public Safety Director
or the Public Safety Director, that staff is advised and is asked for their
input. I've worked with Jim and Scott now for over a year and a half very
closely and those two positions I feel are very well needed positions and Jim
' and Scott have done an excellent job in those positions. It really is sad to
see Jim go and I know there's some rumors possibly going around at this time
against the Public Safety Department and I just ask that the Council and the
' Public Safety Commission and any personnel staff, do address the Public Safety
staff and ask for their opinion also because I know one side of the story is
going around at this time and no one has come forward to ask for the other side
of the story. So of course there is a two sided street for everything but I'm
just asking that the staff of the Public Safety Department keep well informed
and have their input asked for I think is very important. Thank you.
' 15
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
Councilman Workman: Carol, what's the rumor?
Councilwoman Dialer: I haven't heard it.
Carol Dunsaore: I don't feel this is the place to talk about it.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, we'll talk later. '
Councilman Boyt: Does it require a motion to have the Public Safety Commission
review that job description? '
Councilwoman Dimler: Well you would have to. ..
Mayor Chmiel: No, it's under Visitor's Presentations and I'd say that it should '
come back later.
Councilman Boyt: We're meeting tomorrow night. '
Councilman Workman: But you're referring it to the Public Safety?
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. '
Councilman Workman: Just like we did (b). Park and Rec we didn't vote on it.
Councilman Boyt: But we can refer it to them. I was just simply asking if it
needs a motion. If it doesn't and you're in support of referral, we've
accomplished that.
Mayor Chmiel: Right.
Councilman Boyt: Okay. ,
Mayor Chmiel: Alright. Anyone else for visitor's presentation?
PUBLIC HEARING: STREET VACATION REQUEST TO VACATE AN UNUSED PORTION OF OLD LAKE
LUCY ROAD BETWEEN WHITETAIL RIDGE AND WOOD DUCK LANE, PAUL PALMER.
Mayor Chmiel: I'll open this public hearing. This is for a street vacation
request to vacate an unused portion of old Lake Lucy Road between Whitetail
Ridge and Wood Duck Lane. Paul?
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, we received a petition from the owner of Lot 6 to
vacate a small portion of old Lake Lucy Road right-of-way. It's now called
Whitetail Ridge Court. The old Lake Lucy Road right-of-way of course has been
surplanted by new Lake Lucy Road which runs to the south. We no longer need
that area for roadway purposes. Therefore we are recommending that the vacation
be approved. We are however recommending that an easement for utilities which
happen to be in there, you can see where the sewer line runs, be maintained and
also that the park board reassess whether or not that a trail easement is needed
in there and pending the outcome of that, that a trail easement be required if
they do recommend such. With that we are recommending that the vacation be
approved.
16 '
I
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Is there anyone wishing to address this
specific item?
Paul Palmer: I am Paul Palmer, 1930 Whitetail Ridge Court in Excelsior, 55331.
I as the developer of all of Whitetail Ridge and this is the final lot to be
sold at the end of the cul-de-sac. It really has no further need as a road and
I think all the neighbors to the east of me would be joyous in hearing that
' there isn't going to be a road in their backyards. Because the vacation hasn't
been completed through the entire stretch of Lake Lucy Road, which is part of
what engineering and staff and everyone anticipated doing as a part of new
' Lake Lucy Road redevelopment. As a part of that, the City had planned to vacate
this portion and commence the process. Through repeated telephone calls and
contacts, we were not able to convince the City to of course move ahead with
this when your time requirements and your budgets and your staff needs are
' always pressing and of course then you have people resign and go on to other
things or whatever they do. Which only puts more strain on the entire process.
As a concerned citizen for Chanhassen I feel it is my duty to bring this
' vacation to head because as you know, the rest of the property sits out there
producing no revenue for the very city that we need to support. So as a good
citizens, the City should from a business standpoint, vacate the rest of that
' portion and put it back on the tax rolls where it can pay for itself. In the
process we are able to generate revenue for the park system which is badly
needed in that quadrant up there. The only question that I have for Council is
whether or not you feel that the trail system should become a part of this
overall plan because I would recommend it on the south portion of the old
Lake Lucy Road. That portion only adds additional land to really unuseable
portions of their lots so these people on a tax basis become burdened by this.
So if we put the trail on the south side, we could tie that trail right into the
park that I think is still in the works to the east of us. Then all of the area
to the west can funnel down Galpin and down Lake Lucy Road and to the park and
all the school kids and everything else can have a path in which to stay off of
' the county roads which just keeps our traffic accidents in hand. So with that,
I'm open to questions.
' Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Are there any questions? Is there a motion?
Councilman Boyt moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to close the public hearing.
' All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Mayor Chmiel: Discussion?
' Councilman Johnson: I don't remember why we didn't vacate this in the first
place when we did this subdivision.
' Mayor Chmiel: They probably should have but they didn't so now it's time to do
it.
' Councilman Johnson: I remember there was a reason.
Resolution 890-88: Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to
approve Vacation No. 89-10 for that portion of Lake Lucy Road within Lot 6,
Whitetail Ridge with the following conditions:
' 17
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
1. A 20 foot permanent utility easement over the sanitary sewer on Lot 6, t
Whitetail Ridge.
2. Provisions of any trail easement as requested by the Park and Recreation r
Commission.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. '
Paul Palmer: How's the park coming to the east of us? All the neighbors kind
of want to know. '
Councilwoman Dimler: So would we.
Mayor Chmiel: We'll let you know. '
Councilman Boyt: Don, do you know more about the development there?
Don Ashworth: You're talking about the Carrico property? 1
Councilman Johnson: Don't we have an option to buy it now?
Don Ashworth: Yes. The City has entered into an option to purchase. Koegler's
in the process of sending out a hearing notice to the neighborhood to invite
them in to show them the alternative plans. To receive their comments as to
whether or not the City should exercise it's right to purchase that property or
not. I can't recall the date for when that proposed meeting between staff and
the neighborhood is to occur. My recollection was towards the end of July, like
the 28th. Somewhere in there. So it should be very soon.
Councilman Boyt: This is a good example of where, and this happened prior to
anybody who's currently on the Council but when a development comes in of that
size and the City doesn't put any park space in there, then we come back and we
have to buy a piece at a great deal more money. So we've learned.. .
Mayor Chmiel: It's less than what they wanted but.
Councilman Boyt: But still. Oh yes, it's dramatically less than what they
started out asking for.
PUBLIC HEAIRNG: PROPOSED VACATION OF STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY AND UTILITY EASEMENTS,
WEST 78TH STREET AND PICHA DRIVE, MARKET SQUARE CENTER PROJECT.
Mayor Chmiel: Who's going to address that, Dave or Gary?
Councilman Boyt: Can we dispense with the staff report on this?
Mayor Chmiel: We can. Is there anyone who would like to address the issue?
Don Ashworth: I was going to say, I did distribute earlier a map. It shows a
revision and there's an additional easement that is proposed to be vacated. It's
the area that's x'ed out. With the total surface area we do have the other
easement now shown on the new plats so this particular easement is not required
as a part of the existing plat and is proposed to be vacated as a part of the
18 I
I
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
action you're taking tonight and a description for that is behind there.
Councilman Johnson: I suspect that without any public comment we're going to
pass this thing unanimously very quickly.
Mayor Chmiel: It would appear as though unless someone wishes to address it.
John, did you want to?
' John Rice: No. Is here to answer questions but I wouldn't think of delaying
your vote.
' Councilman Workman moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to close the public
hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was
closed.
' Mayor Chmiel: Any discussion?
Councilwoman Dimler: I guess I just had one question of is it Dave or Gary
here. It says that you would have no problems with this if Market Square goes
ahead and develops as proposed. Well what happens if they don't? Does that
cause a problem?
Gary Warren: Market Square has a reconfiguration of a watermain and such in the
plat so if the plat does not go, then the vacation needs to stay in place to
' cover the existing.
Councilwoman Dimler: So it's the same either way? Okay, thank you.
' Resolution .90-89: Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Disler seconded to
approve vacation of a portion of West 78th Street, Picha Drive and Monterey
Drive and the underlying utility and drainage easements as described on the
attached exhibits contingent upon satisfaction of the following conditions:
1. A trail/sidewalk easement shall be provided to the City to accommodate the
proposed trail/sidewalk along West 78th Street.
2. The applicant shall receive final plat approval and site plan approval for
Market Square and record the plat with the County.
' All voted in favor and the motion carried.
' PUBLIC HEARING FOR COUNTY ROAD 17 UPGRADE FROM TH 5 SOUTH TO LAKE DRIVE WEST;
AUTHORIZE PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS.
' Gary Warren: Gary Ehret can give a brief presentation at your discretion.
Mayor Chmiel: Fine. Thank you.
' Councilman Boyt: We've been over this so many times. Do we really?
' Mayor Chmiel: Well let's just see, in case there's someone who wants to get
their memory refreshed.
19
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990 II
Gary Ehret: Mayor, members of the Council. The project that we're addressing li
tonight, we brought to you a feasibility study approximately a month ago. It
looks at upgrading CR 17 from TH 5 on the north down past the intersection of
It
Lake Drive which was built last fall. It also includes a small portion of Lake
Drive in this area which is currently being surcharged through that project.
County Road 17 as it exists today consists of a rural divided section through II this area and two lanes in each direction and left hand turn lanes. It does not
have right turn lanes. It has kind of gravel shoulders and it has just a ditch
and two catch basins structures and there's only a couple of storm crosses.
There is no pathway system along that route either. The project that has been
II
proposed again...south of Lake Drive. The project would upgrade the roadway.
Add curb and gutter. Redo the bituminous surface. Adding bituminous pathway on
the east side of the project. Add storm sewers throughout and make appropriate II other corrections. The facilities, with the exception of storm sewer are fairly
well complete. There's a major city watermain that's down the west ditch line
of the roadway. Sanitary sewer is provided to the adjacent parcels through the II adjacent roadways. This project would have to add storm sewer throughout the
length of the project. The storm sewer would tie into the pond that was built
as a part of the Lake Drive project last fall. In addition, there is a short
piece of 18 inch watermain which we are proposing to be reconstructed primarily II due to the conditions that have changed over that watermain. That watermain was
constructed at a depth of 7 feet approximately back in 1978. With the new
alignment of Lake Drive and filling that has occurred with the Empak site in I
this area, that watermain is now buried at a depth of about 20 feet. We're
concerned about proposed that that stretch be reconstructed to the normal depth
of 7 feet in the roadway. If you refer to Alternate A, the cost for this
project, totals about 1.1 million dollars. A little bit less than that. That
consists of primarily a little bit of watermain construction. $160,000.00 for
storm sewer. Clearly the bulk of the cost would be in reconstruction of the
roadway of about $600,000.00 and then the appropriate...adminstrative costs,
etc. . The schedule at this time for the project, this should be July 23rd. II
Tonight's meeting. We'd have plans and specifications returned to the City
Council either in late winter or early spring. The primary intent would be to II coordinate improvements with the TH 5 improvements. The schedule is a little
bit undefined at this time other than the current direction would be to have the
plans and specifications for the project ready for construction next spring. I
think with that I would conclude. I do have charts that I can put up on the
II
assessments. How they relate to different properties, etc..
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Is there anyone wishing to address this issue II at this time?
Jules Smith: My name is Jules Smith and I'm here representing Victory Envelope, II United Mailing, Carlson and Beddor who own a corner lot and Intant Webb. As you
know, we had been aware of this project since it was initially talked about a
couple years ago when part of it was done on the north side and so we're not
here opposing the curb, gutter, etc., etc.. Just a few questions were raised. II One, we're curious about the pond on the lot that's shown there. Whether that
is going to be in any way changed as part of this project. The lot isn't
exactly shown correctly there. It shows a pond below it. That'd be in the II southeast corner of that intersection. That pond is actually on that lot.
There's been a lot of discussion about that. When it was first put in, whether
when they put storm drainage in. That pond currently has an outflow to the
(
20 II"
1
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
storm drainage that currently, the ditch that goes down the road so we're just
kind of curious what's going to happen to that. And the second part of our
interest is the cost. We really would like to see the assessment roles as
proposed and we've just had discussion with City staff about that and we'd just
like to get some clarification on how that's proposed to be paid for. Other
than that, that's all we have. Thanks.
11 Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Anyone else? Don, before you start, if I could, I
have several questions that I have asked of Gary which he has a list of and he
will address each of those. Go ahead.
' Don Patton: Okay. My name is Don Patton. I'm representing the Lake Susan
Partners and although the project as it's proposed does not affect us, there are
a couple of things that I am concerned about and I did talk to Gary. There is a
' mistake in the report that he agreed to correct. Some of the nomeclature as to
outlots and PID's that do pertain to Lake Susan are incorrect in the report and
do need to be corrected. The other thing that I'm concerned about and I think
it's probably the same thing that the previous speaker was. According to one of
the alternates that was in the report, the amount of the assessment against the
two parcels south of Lake Drive are greater than the cost that the land is for
' sale and there is a legal issue in here. Assessments can only be in the amount
of improvements to property. Certainly the assessments being equal or greater
than the cost of the land doesn't add that value so that does have to be dealt
with if the other alternative, or if in the future that would happen so it 's
' more of a registering of that caution concern in the way the assessments are put
in place.
' Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Anyone else? If not seeing any, I would ask for a
motion to close the public hearing.
' Councilwoman Disler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to close the public
hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was
closed.
Mayor Chmiel: I guess some of the things that I have, I provided Gary a list
and I'd some answers to each of those specifics and if you would, just pose the
question and give your answer to those.
' Gary Warren: Okay. Question 1. Who pays for assessments north of Lake
Susan Hills Drive? The assessment methodology which has been prepared in the
feasibility study is based on our typical approach as far as 50% of the storm
sewer and such and a certain portion of tax increment monies have also been
incorporated to be looked in here. There are, and Mr. Patton is correct, that
any assessments would have to stand the test of benefit as far as we can't
' assess more than the benefit to the property so that hasn't been looked at in
detail as far as doing any appraisals on the property to see what burden they
can accommodate. That's a part of the assessment process which we know has a
separate hearing in itself but utilitization of tax increment funds and such,
this is incorporated in the redevelopment district plan and the percentage of
the dollars and the split on that as far as assessments really are some crude
estimates right now but there will be some assessments proposed against the
fronting property as laid out in the report. Question 2. Why the need for
relocating storm sewer at a cost of $40,000.00? I believe you meant the
II • 21
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
watermain. That's what's being relocated. Gary went through that. Was that an
okay explanation on that?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes. I think he explained that.
Gary Warren: Why are we ripping up County Road 17? Why not just overlay?
There are several elements to that logic. County Road 17 does have some areas
that are poor. There are other areas obviously that are okay but we are
constructing a storm drainage system now which is going to tear up a lot of the
pavement and put the pipe underground. We've got some changes in the laneage
out there. We have left turns and right turn lanes now that would be added to
the road section to accommodate the traffic projections for the area so we're
beefing up the road width out there. The current roadway has super elevation on
it which makes drainage improvements a little more expensive to accommodate
because of the super elevation. We try to avoid super whenever possible because
of the added cost so the grades and such just don't really work with the
existing pavement section out there. So those are the basic concepts that we
looked at as far whether indeed it could be overlaid or not but there's just so
much construction utilities and adding of lanes and such to the section that
would really require it to be redone. '
Mayor Chmiel: What tonage road is that going to be?
Gary Warren: We would be designing for a 9 ton road section. Like TN 5. Mayor '
and Councilmembers want a thorough review of bid proposal for project. Afraid
of unbalanced bid. That certainly is done when we come to request authorization
for bidding. Plans and specifications. The bid proposal are a part of that
package and I didn't get a chance to talk to you about the specific concern on
unbalancing of bids but that is one of the things that we scrutinize before we
make a recommendation for award is to see that that doesn't happen. It's
certainly one of the items on our checklist. Is Carver County picking up any
assessment for County Road 17? Carver County has been involved with and is
fully aware of the City's intentions on County Road 17. They have verbally
indicated to me, the County Engineer Mr. Gustafson, that the County does not
have funds for rebuilding this section. They are working with Lake Susan Hills
Partnership to provide fill about 100,000 yards, although I think that number is
shrinking, of fill for the future extension of CR 17 so there's some
participation from the County on the grading and fill that's needed for the road
section to the south but they have not volunteered any outright participation at
this point in time. If we are paying for improvements and assessments and if ,
so, where are funds coming from? I don't know if I touched on that earlier
here. Accommodation of assessments and tax increment. Was engineering contract
just given to BRW and why? This is an update of the original feasibility study
that was done by BRW for the West 78th Street detachment back in 1987. Now this
went through a couple of biderations relating to the Burdick right-in/right-out
issue so BRW has, this initial report covered both the north and the south side
of the improvements. So BRW had all the background. All of the plates and all
the material to sufficiently update the report for this project so yes, it was
basically negotiated with them to continue to upgrade it for this step.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Any other questions? 111
22 1-
11 City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
Councilman Workman: I guess maybe reflecting some of the concerns, it does seem
like, when was this originally updated Gary? It seems like not too long ago.
Gary Warren: The original report was done in July of '87 and Council
reinitiated the report August 28th of '89.
Councilman Workman: So the construction of the service we have out there now
was when?
Gary Warren: On Powers Blvd.?
Councilman Workman: Yeah.
' Gary Warren: 1979.
Gary Ehret: 1978-79.
' Councilman Workman: Okay, it seems like it wasn't even that long ago so it
seems like it's kind of quick and like we're redoing something but we're really
not I guess. I am concerned about the County's participation. I know the
legislature wasn't kind to them either as far as and the coming next year.
They're not going to have, they're going to have less next year aren't they for
funds? A sunset clause there for the funding that they're going to be getting?
' Gary Warren: .. .I know that's a sunset in their participation may be shrinking
as a result.
Councilman Workman: It would appear as though, and certainly the Burdick or the
West 78th detachment was a situation where they seemed to have agreed with us on
the right-in/right-out after some anguish but they wanted to kind of tell us
what to do and we paid for it pretty much and we're doing the same thing on the
south side and so they are going to maintain and clear this road?
Gary Warren: Maintenance? Snow plowing and such?
Councilman Workman: Right.
Gary Warren: That would remain. The City has a cooperative agreement with the
County that exists right now that was passed I believe it was even through this
Council, for the work that we're doing on the north side with the West 78th
' Street detachment. In that agreement it spells out that it's still the County's
road for maintenance and such. The County requires that the road, they have
final approval of the plans and specifications is another reason I meant to
mention for why the need for the road to be reconstructed. They require the
' road to be built to State Aid standards and that also changes the picture as far
as some of the geometrics out there but they would still be responsible for
maintaining it. The signage. The striping. The plowing. The repairing of it.
1 Roger Gustafson has provided me recently, and I haven't had a chance to get it
before the Council with his long range capital improvement program which he
currently, the way I understand it, is trying to work with the County
Commissioners to see about, I guess it's an eye to the future which we need to
have as well on how to fund some of the long range construction programs such as
this on County roads. He not only has problems here in Chanhassen but
1 23
1.
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
throughout the county trying to get funds shook loose because it's not coming
from the State Legislature. So I intend to get that to the Council here in the
near future just to see the package that he is up against. I would not want to
leave the impression that the County is not interested in trying to help us out.
It's just that they're trying to balance priorities like we are obviously.
Councilman Workman: It's just, you know sometimes it appears as though, to me
anyway, that there's a perceived ability to pay in Chanhassen maybe versus maybe
some other area or other end of the County and I want to make sure that.
I don't know where we're getting some of the highway funding. I know Roger's
getting probably 300 more projects than he does funds down there but does
Chanhassen receive a portion of some of those? I'm not asking you for specific
figures but there does seem to be a growing east end of the County and there are
needs out on the western side but are we able to defer some of the assessments
that are happening here? I hope I'm making myself clear.
Gary Warren: I understand what you're saying. In fact one of the points that
we're anxious, we're still anxious Paul and I to get out of our Eastern Carver
County Transportation study and this is an important thing for Roger himself and
the County Commissioners to look at, is a combined capital improvement program
for the County that would not only highlight City needs but also County needs in
a coordinated plan so that we aren't upgrading Powers Blvd. up to a certain
point and the County isn't going to deal with the rest of it for 50 years so
that it's a more coordinated approach. I can't speak for the County but I
would expect, at least the way Roger's indicated to me that with that tool in
hand and with his own CIP that he hopes to get from the County, to start getting
some commitments to the City's on their priority list at any rate and the
County's priorities so that you can deal with these questions a little bit more
comfortably as far as well can they or can't they and who is getting the money
if we aren't and it's fairly distributed. I don't think you will see that it be
fairly distributed on a per acre basis because the needs sometimes are not that
way.
Councilwoman Dimler: I guess I had a question on the State Aid standards. If
this was built in 1978, why wasn't it built to standards at that time?
Gary Warren: I don't know. Gary, do you know the deficiencies that are out
there?
Gary Ehret: It was built to standards at that time but the standards have 1
changed. An example of that would be in 1979 a 10 foot left turn lane was
acceptable. It's no longer acceptable. They require 14. Those standards were
changed in 1983.
Councilwoman Dimler: That's the only thing though? Is there any other in the
construction itself? The courses you have? Did you take some shortcuts? 1
Gary Ehret: The other problem would be in the curves. This curve right here,
as Gary referred to was designed for 50 mph in 1978-79 and they could achieve 50
mph design if they super elevated the roads. You cannot do that today. Today's
standards cannot post that for 50. Since it was built and constructed then,
it's not required to be changed until such time as you upgrade the road but now
the 45 mph speed through that curve is not acceptable so it's a combination of a 11:
24
' City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
1 left turn lane, super elevation. Those are the two biggest.
Don Ashworth: Well Gary, if I could add to that. I see Jules Smith. Maybe
remind him of the meeting that Jerry Carlson and Jules and I had in my office.
'. There was a desire I think at that point in time to see that section of the
roadway up to a full urban section but what it really came down to is without TN
S in place, being able to run a storm sewer system through there, we really
' couldn't put the curbs on as you might ordinarily have them so we ended up then
with the rural ditch design which currently exists in there which then precluded
our being able to put any street lights in. Again, the storm sewer system. Any
' type of a sidewalk system, etc. and back at that time we talked about well, how
soon can these things occur. How can we bring this thing up into a typical
street or a street as it matches within the business park and I think we were
' talking about 2 or 3 years and now it's 5-7 years later and we're finally
getting the thing done. But my point there is that some of those original
improvements were done knowing that that was the only way we had to do them at
that point in time and that at some point in time, that it would have to change
as that area changed from a rural section to an urban section.
Councilwoman Dimler: Were they assessed at the time it was done in 1978?
Don Ashworth: No, there were no assessments for the roadway section. I believe
there were assessments associated with the sanitary sewer and water lines. Jules
is shaking his head so I must be close.
Councilwoman Dimler: I do have one more question and it's on I think it's page
- 7 when we're talking about alternative A. I guess I don't understand why the
' tax increment has no share in the roadway costs there. Can you explain that
Gary? Todd? One of you.
t Gary Warren: Okay, the roadway cost. It was again, consistent with what we've
done in the past on some of these things. I think there's a lot of discretion
yet to be worked out as far as...
' Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, I was going to bring up the point if we want to, at
some point you have a tool to lower the assessment. Is that a possibility?
' Gary Warren: Right. This again is just to give an idea what the funding would
look like and that could be manipulated any of several ways.
' Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: I guess there's still one question that was asked by Jules
regarding that small pond that hasn't been addressed.
' Gary Warren: We are very anxious to accommodate and work with that property.
We also have a pond on the east of the building that I think we've improved on
' here. It will be improved when the West 78th Street project is re-routed
because we'll be taking a lot of the Burdick drainage out of that pond so that
should help you there. On the other pond, we definitely as a part of the
' detailed design will be working with that to see what makes sense. We will not
stop it obviously. We will probably be making that an inlet for it and
conveying the drainage as it is today. We have, the problem with the Empak
' 25
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
property that we're anxious to resolve as well with the storm sewer because of
the runoff, that there is a lot of water that comes through that drainage swale.
So we'll be working with Jules and the people out there as we come up with the
design of it. '
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Anyone else? I'll entertain a motion.
Councilman Workman: I'd move to authorize preparation of plans and
specifications for County Road 17.
Councilwoman Disler: Second. '
Resolution #90-90: Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Disler seconded to
accept the feasibility study and authorize preparation of plans and
specifications for County Road 17 upgrade south of Trunk Highway 5 and that a
public hearing be called for July 23, 1990. All voted in favor and the motion
carried unanimously.
AWARD OF BIDS: UPGRADE OF AUDUBON ROAD FROM SOO LINE RAILROAD TO LYMAN BLVD.,
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 89-18.
Gary Warren: Mr. Mayor, bids were advertised for the project as noted in the
staff report and we received four competitive bids on the project. We've
reviewed them and are satisfied that there was a competitive bidding climate.
The low bidder, Imperial Developers has had several projects in the City and the
base bid, which includes the trail element, is for $617,684.52. Very close to
the engineer's estimate. At the request of Council, we did include alternatives
within the bid. One was to, Alternative 1 was to delete the trail paving. To
actually do the grading for the trail but to delete the paving of the trail at
this time. Imperial's offered a deduct of $45,742.50 for that. The second
alternative was to delete totally the trail. Grading and the entire works and
that net resulted in a deduct of $84,854.50. That was the direction that we had
to get the alternatives for you to consider as far as what do we want to build
out here. I guess we can report that we have a competitive bid with Imperial,
whichever way you want to go. There's a manager's comment. Don, you wanted to
elaborate?
Don Ashworth: Potentially if I could. I did add manager's comment and that is
to the effect that we've completed a number of sidewalks as they would lie
within the downtown area. The ability to interconnect sidewalks through Market
Blvd. or to Rosemount and the Lake Susan Park. As a part of Lake Drive, we can
look to a sidewalk system that will get us from the easterly edge of the
community over to Audubon Trail. We'll look to approximately 3 touchdowns with '
sidewalks in terms of Park Drive, Lake Drive and I forgot the name of our new
street in that area, with Audubon. If we are to look to being able to have a
trail that would connect with our school system, specific Chaska Schools, there
really are only two areas that that could occur. One is off of CR 17. The
other is off of Audubon. I think that the residents would have a good point in
bringing out or stating that by building this trail at this point in time,
you're interconnecting nothing. The trail basically ends on either end.
However, we have in progress right now the interconnects as they're being
constructed on the northerly end and I personally do not believe that it will be
26
I
/
ICity Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
IIthat long before we'll see an interconnect in the form of an upgrade off of
Lyman and CR 17 to the school. I would hope that the Council would very
li strongly look at the Alternative A which would ensure that the grading would be
complete for a future sidewalk but would not necessarily have to construct it at
this point in time. If you were so inclined and would construct it, I think
that that would be good as well but I think to miss the opportunity and not have
I it graded in would put us into a situation very similar to what you have on TH
101. I think everyone supports the desire to have a sidewalk along TH 101 but
if you drive that section of roadway, there is absolutely nowhere where you can
I put it in. I mean between ditch sections, swamps and everything else, it would
be a very costly project. Here we have an opportunity as part of a construction
project to ensure that the future grades for where that sidewalk trail would go
are in place and at a relatively nominal cost be able to have that installed 2,
I 3, 4, 5 years from now when in fact the true interconnects on the south side
would be in place. Staff, at least this office would really recommend that
Council strongly consider Alternative A.
IMayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there anyone wishing to address this?
I Doug Barinsky: Mr. Mayor, my name is Doug Barinsky. I live at 8731 Audubon
Road. I think because of our previous meeting the Council has heard some of my
concerns but I think everyone is aware from the previous meeting that may
property in particular is significant and environmental impacts depending on
II which one of these alterantives the Council should select tonight. As an
example, we had the City consultant, a landscape architect out there the other
evening and he said depending on what you do and if there was not a trail graded
I for it at this point in time, we have the possibility to save our two 75 foot,
80 year old Austrian Pine trees which are pretty valuable to us anyway. At the
June 4th City Council meeting when the Audubon Road improvements were proposed,
II there was a large group of Audubon Road residents that appeared before the
Council and expressed their concern as to why the City stall would propose
spending a large, but at that time, unknown amount of money to build a sidewalk
trail through their properties when none of these residents neither wanted the
I trail nor could see a purpose for it. After learning that the total actual cost
of this trail is almost $100,000.00 and if you were wondering how I'm adding
that up, you need to take the Alterantive A deduct and add at least $12,000.00
Ito it for the retaining wall which would not be necessary in front of my
property without the trail. We feel that the facts are even now clearer that
this is an unwise use of taxpayer dollars in Chanhassen. We are still appalled
that the City staff would still propose sending over $50,000.00 at this time to
IIbuild something that may connect to something in the future. Some other facts
need to be brought out. Two weeks ago I attended the City Council meeting when
the subject community center was thoroughly discussed by the Council. I was
II pleased to see that the Council decided that the taxpayers should decide whether
they want a community center. That was a good decision. What we don't
understand is that Chanhassen taxpayers have voted several times that they did
I not want to spend additional tax revenues for a comprehensive trail plan. In
spite of those votes, city staff continues to push ahead for trails on every
improvements project including Audubon Road. One should be asking the question,
when is the city staff going to listen to the voters on the issue of trails?
I The major justification for the Audubon Road trail by the City manager is that
the Chanhassen needs to connect to a Chaska trail. The actual fact is that the
current Chaska trail plan does not have a trail coming north of Pioneer Trail on
I27
1 -_--
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
the east side of TH 41. We have a copy of that plan. I'll be glad to share it
with anyone that hasn't seen it from Chaska. It is stated that the Audubon Road
is the only alternative. We also do not feel that that's a clear fact. The
proposed current new land use plan has a continuous strip of land from the 111
Chanhassen Business Park to the Chaska Industrial area along the current Soo
Line Railroad. Since the cost of putting sidewalks and streets into that area
will be paid for by the developers, this will be a very good alternative for
Chanhassen to get the sidewalk connection to Chaska that it's looking for at no
additional cost to the taxpayers. Based on these facts, the Audubon residents
feel that the Chanhassen City Council should accept the Alternative to deduct
without a trail on Audubon Road south. This will save our taxpayers in total
almost $100,000.00 and the residents along Audubon will have less damage to
their trees and frontage property. We thank you for your consideration on the
entire issue and we're sorry we keep bringing it up but you can see it's a
pretty key issue to some individuals personally as well as we think the amount
of money that came out of this bid process was a pretty wise decision to look at
it. I do have a suggestion that didn't get brought out. The City continues to
battle the concept of trails and public access along connector type roads. I
really think what the City of Chaska has done along Pioneer Trail merits some
consideration because they have been faced with the same problem and at a
relatively low cost have decided to put an 8 foot paved strip along the road and
it appears to be working out fine. I think that that's the type of thing that
might be under consideration for some of the roads. Maybe that's something that
should have been looked at on Audubon. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thanks Doug. Is there anyone else?
Tom Michel: My name is Tom Michel. I live at 8941 Audubon. Now, since this
thing has started, it has been objected to pretty well by all of the residents
involved. The thing is going down to terminate in a cornfield at the present
time. But what interests me is the amount of property that they plan as it
pertains to my personal property. In the past the City as I understand now,
claims they have 33 foot right-of-way which I don't think was ever designated or
how that applies to the law. However, when that was an original farm, there
must be, I didn't measure it, must be 200 feet of property they took off that
land to upgrade that road when they did back probably in the early 50's. And
they took all of that where they cut the hill. They put it all in the fill down
at the bottom of the hill which encompasses an awful lot more feel than what
we're talking about here. Now, I have seen probably 4 different plans of what's
going to happen down there. The last person that was out, that Softsoap artist,
whoever came out with the bill of goods says, no. This is not going to be this.
It's going to be this. I haven't seen anything. I have practically all the
trees I have protecting myself from the road are involved in this and I'm not
proposing to give them up and I'm not proposing to put either a permanent or
temporary easement for that purpose through the area that involves the house
itself. I'm not too concerned below that or above that because it's not
pertinent but right there, I'm not going to have to give up any extra number of
feet of property for the purpose of putting fill in there. I'm not prepared to
do that. Now, as I understand it, this is a State subsidized road or whatever
you want to call it. Now, I understood that the slope where it pertains in
front of my place, that the State requires 3:1 slope. I'm sure Gary can expound
on that. However, I was told they would put in a 2:1 slope in order to minimize
this distance. Now as I said, I haven't seen anything since then. They're
28
111
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
putting this down there. Now, if they want to take whatever you're talking. An
8 foot shoulder and a 6 foot something else thing here and they're going to cut
this down, now in my opinion I don't know what the laws are but I would say that
if they cut that to a 1 1/2 or 2:1 ratio, they would have to put barricades or
something up there because that would be pretty dangerous and I'm just not
prepared to do that right now and I just want to let everybody to know that.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Tom. Anyone else? If not we'll bring it back to
Council. Any discussion or any questions that you might have? Tom, how many
' trees to you have there that you're talking about?
Tom Michel: I suppose there's probably, oh 20 or 30 that might be involved.
What they do is they shield, they kind of shield the dirt from the road so to
' speak that come down. Now the person that came there said they wouldn't even
touch the tree. Maybe they'd take 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 or something and they
wouldn't have to come to the bottom of that grade to get in there. Now I don't
' see how anybody could get in there and do anything from way up there to come
down this far down the hill that goes clear down here. They're not going to get
any equipment in there as I can see it.
' Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Anyone else? Any discussion.
Councilman Johnson: Actually my concerns on the trail issue is more on the
north side of the project than the south side of the project. Again, I'm not. . .
informed of what the plans are towards Chaska High or whatever but letting the
Lake Susan Hills folks that live on the west side have an access to the north up
' towards Park Drive was more of a priority to me between their development and
Park Drive so they'd have a continuous path to Lake Ann through our industrial
park. That's the part of the path that I was most concerned with and that we
preserve that part of the path. Once you get past Park Drive, the path doesn't
' make a whole lot of sense. It runs up to Prince's studio and that's about it.
That does have, for some employees of the lots that are along there, it may be
helpful for walking but in going to the south, it didn't seem to make a lot of
' sense. South of Lake Susan Hills subdivision. But I'm still concerned
from Lake Susan Hills subdivision up to Park Drive where it will interconnect
with the other city pathways that will get the people to Lake Ann without having
' to go all the way over to CR 17. Somebody says yeah, they can go over to CR 17.
Well, we know what's going to happen. They're going to go down and cut across
the railroad tracks. That's the last thing we need the kids doing is cutting
across the railroad tracks and through the back of the industrial park. Somehow
' I'd like to see us preserve just that one stretch of the trails. I'm not
totally convinced at this point that the southern side of it is necessary. So
we will be getting trails on CR 17 eventually all the way down to Lyman and that
' would be a connection between our downtown and Chaska.
Councilwoman Dimler: I agree. I think that I still would like to see us save
those trees if possible. I'm not real sure, I think the interconnect to Chaska
and to the school site is a great idea but I'm not real sure it's practical at
this point. If you would take a look, I don't think Chaska's going to put
trails in on CR 17 and 18. It's pretty rural there yet and I suspect they have
' other priorities and I think that we do have other alternatives. Like we talked
about CR 17. Going down to Lyman and that could be the connection to the
schools if at some point that gets to be. I like the idea of just having it on
' 29
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990 1
the northern part only. I think that would solve most of our problems. I
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Tom?
Councilman Workman: Yeah, the Chaska High School connect. Like I said, I used
to ride from Sandy Acres to the drug store in Chanhassen. ,
en. Sandy Acres down in
Chaska when I was a kid and a lot of hills. The only trail I can envision from
Chanhassen to the High School would be let's say down Audubon Road, onto Lyman,
up CR 17 which is steep and kind of down. Then down the big hill and then up
Engler which is another really steep hill and then if you've got to come back,
going up CR 17 is one of the biggest hills in the area. So it doesn't seem like
a real easy way. There's not a real straight, pleasant way to get there even on
a trail and from my understanding of Chaska, they're not going bonkers with
trails other than on TH 41 now and they're spending, it looks like 2 million
dollars on a trail along the side there. For Comp Plan sake, I think it would
be ideal for us to have something designated along here eventually for a trail.
I'm convinced that the people at the bottom of the hill that own the farmland,
the Degler's, aren't going to budge for a very long time. My daughter will be
on the Council and for these long stretches of trail that we're thinking of,
Doug's idea. Chaska's idea about the 8 foot wide shoulder with a strip which is
to me is a safety nightmare but it certainly is cheaper and easier. I don't
know if that would even save his trees because it's still going to be wide
there. I guess I was prepared this evening to say I at least don't want,
wouldn't be concerned with it being paved all the way down as a necessity
because I don't think it's something that's going to be used in the near future
heavily. Certainly not to a school. So yeah, I guess I'd agree with Jay's and
Ursula's comments.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Bill?
Councilman Boyt: Well I can tell you Doug the 8 foot strip doesn't work and
Chaska won't have it for long. We had it on Kerber Blvd.. Cars just cut
through it. It might be reasonably acceptable for an adult on a bicycle but you
wouldn't want to put your kids out there. So we have this super wide road that
goes almost nowhere. And I read the manager's comments. It see all kinds of
things that say we better protect this. The Park and Rec Commission, the
current Park and Rec Commission reviews this and says Audubon Road is an
integral part of their plan. I don't want to get into the referendum because
that's always a hot issue but what we've never looked at, sidewalks only on the
major corridors and whenever we've talked about that, it seems like that makes
sense to people until it goes through their yard, which is a struggle. And
certainly cutting down 80 year old trees is not something that I would want to
encourage but I would sure like to see us do Alternative 1 at minimum and if you
guys can figure out some way that paving part of it makes sense. The question I
had about holding on the paving is then who's going to pay for it in the future?
If we don't pave it now, are we ever going to have a better funding opportunity?
Don Ashworth?
Don Ashworth: Assuming that the interconnects were built and that they were
built prior to 1998, the current funding source would still be available through
1998 to carry out that construction.
30
11 City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
•
Councilman Boyt: Okay, so that makes Alternative 1 more acceptable. But are
you saying that the, I guess one can extrapolate here that the funding would
also be available through the end of the 90's to do the grading.
Don Ashworth: That's correct.
' Councilman Boyt: What do we gain by doing it now?
Gary Warren: The economies of scale I guess would be one thing as far as it
being integrally a part of the grading work that the contractor will be doing on
' the site so we have probably a better unit than if we come back and just grade
for the trail.
' Councilman Boyt: Let's look at how we can complicate this a little bit. What
if we grade except where it would involve taking out the trees. Do we gain
anything by that or do we really need to do the whole string? Or nothing?
Gary Warren: From a dollar standpoint, if that's what you're asking I guess,
the toughest part of the construction is by the trees and maybe that's the whole
issue of the trail itself. So if you build a trail up to the trees, I guess
' that probably says that in the future there's a pretty good sign that at some
time the Council's going to want it to go through the trees. So maybe that
issue is laid to rest. The balance of material, just to speak from the
' engineering standpoint of grading of a site is also a factor because we are
taking the hill down 5 feet to get the site distance issue resolved. A lot of
that material will go on the south side. The Michel's property as was mentioned
earlier, will be taking some of it. Our latest balance is 10,000 yards. We
' need 10,000. So if you don't grade onto the Barinsky property at this time,
then we will need more fill.
' Councilman Johnson: How much more? If we need 10,000, we need another 1,000 or
are we going to need another 100?
' Chet Harrison: Are you talking without the trail?
Councilman Johnson: Yeah.
' Gary Warren: How much material is coming off of the Barinsky property would you
estimate for the trail?
' Chet Harrison: It isn't a lot because of the wall. We're going to do the
wall.. . 1,000 yards maybe.
' Gary Warren: Less than 5 for sure.
Councilman Boyt: So it's possible that we could grade for the trail except
where it involved removing significant trees. We've got that done. We've
' demonstrated that someday if the whole interconnect system goes in, we'll
probably have to either go deeper into the yard or sacrifice those trees.
Something will have to happen. So we've laid the groundwork for it and we have
' the economies of scale to justify it but yet we haven't taken the trees out.
Gary Warren: Our position, and I have not had the benefit yet to talk with Gene
31
I
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
Ernst who's the landscape architect that we had visit with the Barinsky's here I
recently, I haven't had the benefit of his comments on it but our position all
along has been that the trees are suspect for survival no matter whether you do
the trail or not. The side slope grading. The trees. The branches hang out
quite a ways already into the roadway. There'd have to be extensive trimming at
least in the lower portions of the trees. That's where the root zone is as we
know. Maybe we're conservative but we're trying to paint the worse picture
there that those trees even without the trail are going to be suspect for
survival.
Councilwoman Dimler: That does lead me to the question. Do we need to have a
trail system both on CR 17 and Audubon going to Lyman? I think we can make a
clear choice. I don't think both roads need to have it. We will have that
route to 'interconnect if we do it on CR 17 and to me CR 17 seems like a more
logical choice because the northern part, it is industrial and also, to my
knowledge, there aren't any large trees along there and the driveways don't come
directly, the residents' driveways don't come directly except for a few, don't
come directly onto CR 17.
Gary Warren: There's a few, did you say?
Councilwoman Oimler: There's a few but there's no large trees there that they
would be concerned about so CR 17 to me is the route of choice there and we can
leave Audubon alone. i
Councilman Boyt: Unless you're coming from Lake Minnewashta and then CR 17
isn't your road of choice.
Councilwoman Dimler: Then they go TH 41.
Councilman Boyt: The Park and Rec Commission said they can... ,
Councilwoman Dimler: They can go TH 41 Bill.
Councilman Boyt: If I read them right, sidewalk is currently envisioned as part
of the Minnewashta State Aid project and that this is a connect to that?
Gary Warren: Minnewashta Parkway? ,
Councilman Boyt: I don't know exactly if I read that sentence right or not.
Councilwoman Dimler: Why can't Minnewashta people use TH 41? That would be
much easier.
Councilman Boyt: Is there a trail on TH 41? ,
Councilwoman Oimler: There will be. Much easier.
Councilman Workman: Gary, if this 8 foot or the wide shoulder concept came into
play at the Barinsky place all the way down to Lyman because that is a slope.
Tom's concerns are real with that slope there going towards the bottom. Do we
lose anything? Trees, if we do that? Again, you said yeah, it's suspect
whether they'd survive or not but are we seriously coming back from all of this
32 1
I
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
if we keep it closer to the road for that stretch?
Gary Warren: We looked at the Michel's property. The current side slope out
there, my recollection and Mr. Michel's can correct me if I'm wrong, is that we
currently have a pretty steep side slope there. 2:1 or there abouts and we were
shrinking that shoulder to a 6 foot wide shoulder in that area to try to
' minimize the amount of easement basically necessary on his property. Now
I don't know, do you recall the tree issue as far as the Michel's? I know Mr.
Michel's had mentioned he was concerned about trying to improve the drainage
problem on the property where it currently cuts sort of diagonally across his
' property and our plans did address trying to, with the storm sewer pull that in
and try to take care of actually getting him back some of his drainage area
there but the trees, I don't believe that we were proposing taking any major
' trees.
Chet Harrison: The point I was trying to make with the resident was that there
' would probably be 3 trees of 6 or 8 inches in size that might be lost. It's
questionable. We'll do what we can to save them and stay away from them but we
are filling along this. The bottom of the existing slope where it was before,
they raised the road to where it is today has a stand of trees and he wants to
' protect that particularly and of course some wild trees, I guess if that's the
right word to use, start growing in the embankment coming down the slope and of
course those are going to be lost during construction but they're not big.
1 They're relatively small but the trees at the bottom of the slope are 6-8
inches. Maybe a little bit bigger some of them and we may wind up losing those
because we're going to going right down to the bottom of the existing slope.
' Based on cross sections that we've done, we shouldn't go beyond the bottom of
the slope used to construct the road originally.
Mayor Chmiel: What are those small trees? What size? What height?
Chet Harrison: Oh, probably 10 or 12 feet high. Maybe 15 feet, 3 inches
probably the biggest.
' Gary Warren: What are they?
' Chet Harrison: What are they? I think they're elm if I remember right. Maybe,
Tom do you know what they were? What kind?
Tom Michel: Those are elm. Now you're talking coming, to me you're talking
' coming this far down the slope before you hit the trees and I've got this such
down below there where the trees are and I fail to see how you can get in there
and do the job that is proposed without having to do something from the bottom
' which is my biggest concern because that's where my trees are and I've got some,
probably 40-50 year old, maybe older than that trees in there and that's just
about all the trees that I have on that side of the property and that's what I'm
concerned about. We're talking about 4 or 5, probably 3 inch trees. 2 to 3
' inch trees that are along the slope that we discussed in addition to possibly 1
or 2 of the larger trees at the top. My point is, how is that bank going to
go? Is it going to go straight down and how are you going to protect the
' motorist if it goes straight down? If it comes down the slope it is now, which
is already steep and if you're going to increase that distance, then you're
going to increase that distance at the bottom right into my front yard in
33
1
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
addition to wiping out all of those trees because you can't possibly do it t
anymore.
Chet Harrison: We did look at those cross sections and it doesn't show that
we're going to go beyond the bottom of what I call the first slope because '1
what's happen now is there's an embankment and then there's also a ditch for
drainage water at the bottom of that embankment. We're now taking that drainage
water and putting it up near the road in a swale and carrying it down through
the new.. .we're building. Push the water in there so we are in fact not, this
slope down at the bottom is going to probably remain about the way it is but we
are not going to encroach on that based on our cross section that we drew up for
that area. We're staying at the bottom of that first slope. The one he's
talking about.
Tom Michel: Can I also add something else real quick?
Mayor Chmiel: Go ahead Tom. '
Tom Michel: The project is to run the drainage and it runs down to Bluff Creek
where it's supposed to go. However, there's quite a bit of hill left and that
water when it gets to the bottom is going to dump right onto my property where I
already have a drainage problem from previous road stuff on Lyman. All that
dumps in there and pools. In addition to what we've already discussed where the
existing drainage right now dumps right out into the middle of my pasture and it
can't get to Bluff Creek. It sits out there. You get down to Lyman then the
rest of the water, I don't think there's even anything on the plans that deters
any water from Bluff Creek to Lyman. If there is, when it gets down there now,
it's on the east side of the road and it comes down to Lyman. .. Now I've got
drainage from the west side of Audubon that cuts through down by Lyman onto my
property and I also have drainage from the west side of Audubon coming by my
upper driveway that drains right through onto my property on the existing
drainage. Now I don't know how come that water isn't going down on it's own
side of the road. It's all coming over to my way and I think that has to be
addressed. '
Mayor Chmiel: Thanks Tom.
Councilman Workman: Don, with my initial question about the 8 feet that wasn't '
quite answered yet. How much more, I mean I'm assuming that on Tom's property
the trail's supposed to be moved over and not against the road so if we move the
road over, or the trail over, 8 foot wide shoulder. Whatever, from the top of
the hill down to the bottom, do we save trees? The large older trees, etc.. Do
we still get our trail and I guarantee you if I was on my bike and I was going
down that hill, I won't be on that trail going down that hill. I mean it's not
going to, I don't know how much that trail's going to be used by bicycle riders
and I don't know how far people are going to walk out there. Currently anyway
but does that save us some, do we still maintain the integrity of our trail plan
while saving the trees, etc.?
Gary Warren: Specifically as it relates to Mr. Michel's property?
Councilman Workman: And Barinsky.
34 1
IICity Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
11 Gary Warren: When we get to the Michel's property, because the slope is
dropping off in that location, we do not have to include a drainage swale
anymore so we're able to build a trail right next to the shoulder of the road
I and then we don't have to do our 3:1 drainage swale because the water's is
shutting off so that saves us from having to take a larger swath of property
like we do on the northerly part of the project. So that we still need to get
the 6 foot shoulder and the trail in there which does push out our side slope
Isomewhat on the bottom and that's what we're trying to minimize with the 2:1
slope. The trees that he's addressing I guess as we negotiate with Mr. Michel's
on the easements that are needed out there, that's certainly something we'll
I have to work with him on as similarly with Mr. Barinsky on it. But the saving
of the trees, I don't know. I'm not answering your question I guess but I don't,
they're in jeopardy either way. With or without the trail.
IICouncilman Workman: What I'm saying is, okay. We're building the road. And
now we're going to run that 8 foot trail right along side the road on the road
like Lake Lucy Road.
IIGary Warren: If you would do that option?
I Councilman Workman: Right. So if we do that option, are we doing no more than
we otherwise would with the road not a trail?
II
Gary Warren: If we would take the 12 foot travel lane okay and you're saying
1 put an 8 foot?
Councilman Workman: Well we're already going to have a shoulder there right?
IGary Warren: We're proposing right, a 6 foot shoulder in that area.
I Councilman Workman: So we're adding 2 feet onto this thing rather than moving
the trail over even further?
I Gary Warren: We would move the trail. We still need the shoulder area because
we're dealing with the clear zone. We're still trying to get the clear zone as
best as we can out there. To plop the trail right on the edge of the roadway is
something we're not recommending.
IMayor Chmiel: Okay, any other questions? I guess I basically agree with 4 of
us here with this. I guess I don't want to see any trees lost really. I don't
I know whether that road is going to be actually utilized that much is another
concern. With CR 17 being a trail system, whether Audubon would be there. So I
guess I rather than to go through and reiterate everything everyone else has
said, I'd like to call a question.
ICouncilman Workman: Don, can I ask one more question because I want to
make
sure about this 8 foot. You're not recommending it because why?
IGary Warren: We're not recommending putting the trail on the roadway system?
ICouncilman Workman: Well 8 feet alongside of yes.
Gary Warren: Because it's basically an on-street trail which is.
I35
II
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
Councilman Workman: Well what did they do on Pioneer in Chaska? Isn't it the
same thing?
Gary Warren: Well I don't know the specifics about that one.
Councilman Boyt: I can tell you that Park and Rec, and they probably say the
same thing, does not recommend those.
Councilman Workman: Well yeah. I understand that but we've got an issue
between 80 year old trees and.
Councilman Boyt: Why not just avoid the trees? If in 2 years they die from the
stress created from the road, which I hope they don't do. But if they do, it's
a different issue and you've got everything up to that point.
Councilwoman Oimler: We still don't need it. '
Mayor Chmiel: No, that's my opinion.
Councilman Boyt: Your commission is recommending that you do this.
Councilwoman Dimler: But they have an alternative on CR 17 which they maybe
haven't considered. I don't want to cut the Park and Rec Commission out without
any system but I think they have two alternatives and CR 17 is one of the good
ones. TH 101 is another possibility south.
Mayor Chmiel: I agree. CR 17 is much flatter and it's a well utilized area and
not having as many hills.
Councilman Johnson: TH 101's out of range of all of Lake Susan Hills people. ,
Councilwoman (limier: Yeah it is but I mean for the school. You could go TH 101
over to 18. '
Councilman Johnson: We've got to think about the new middle school too. That
would be going a different direction altogether. ,
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Anyone willing to make a motion?
Councilwoman Dialer: I'd make a motion that we adopt Alternative 2 with no
trail or pavement. The reduced cost of $84,000.00 whatever.
Councilman Johnson: What about the north side? ,
Councilwoman Dimler: If that's possible. I haven't heard any on how that would
be possible.
Councilman Johnson: That'd have to be rebid that alternative.
Gary Warren: Well at Council's direct we could negotiate with the contractor or
the low bidder for a change order to consider constructing whatever piece that
you want and bring that back for your approval. You will recall the Lake
36 11 )
IICity Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
1 Susan Hills 3rd Addition has a trail segment already to be built there. In fact
they're ready to do it anytime we say go but we've held them off because of this
so there is that increment there that is planned to be.
IICouncilwoman Dimler: They're going to connect up to the northern section?
II Gary Warren: No, they would go just to the north where the pond is right now.
Within the confines of their frontage for the subdivision. It would not go all
the way to the north.
ICouncilman Johnson: Yeah, it only goes to Audubon Road.
Gary Warren: To the drainage pond basically.
IICouncilwoman Dimler: So they can still go ahead and do that?
IGary Warren: Yeah. We were only waiting to see where we were going.
Councilman Boyt: Which side of the road it was going to be on.
IIGary Warren: That was one of the questions.
Councilman Workman: Gary, visualize this for me in 3 segments. Okay, from TH 5
to Park. Okay? It's on the west side. Okay, from Park to Lake Drive it's on
which side?
Gary Warren: The east side.
II
Councilman Workman: Okay. And then now we're talking about this segment. No,
now you've got another segment to Heron which is on.
IGary Warren: The east side.
I Councilman Workman: The east side and now we're talking about basically this
next segment. Maybe moving it to the east side.
I Gary Warren: That's currently designed for the east side.
Councilman Workman: So the west side potential.
II Gary Warren: We initially started with the whole thing on the west side and
then because of the crossing issue of pedestrians, we went to the east side.
ICouncilman Workman: But we're not going to get a sidewalk on Prince's side?
Gary Warren: Sidewalk on Prince's side, no.
ICouncilman Johnson: From TH 5 to Park Drive.
Gary Warren: The thinking, at least that we followed through and at your
I discretion was that the pedestrian traffic coming from the south was primarily
oriented to Lake Ann Park entrance so keep them on the east side. Cross the
bridge. Get them to Park Road. They'll go east on Park Road to Park Place.
I37
II
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
Park Drive. North on Park Drive and when TH 5 improvements come through we
would work with MnOot to get an overpass or whatever pedestrian structure we
wanted so that that was, if you brought them up to TH 5 by Prince, you dropped
them with no place to go.
Councilman Workman: And then the bridge crossing is on which side?
Gary Warren: East. The bridge crossing goes to Park Road.
Councilman Johnson: From Lake Drive. ,
Mayor Chmiel: We have a motion on the floor. Is there a second?
Councilman Workman: Could you repeat the motion?
Mayor Chmiel: The motion is to use Alternate $2 which is $84,854.00 less.
Councilman Workman: With absolutely no trail?
Councilwoman Dimler: It has no trail. ,
Mayor Chmiel: Right.
Councilwoman Dimler: No trail or pavement. '
Don Ashworth: As I understood you, you did leave the option for staff to
negotiate? '
Councilman Johnson: No.
Don Ashworth: Oh, you're not?
Councilman Johnson: She isn't. I would.
Councilwoman Dialer: Well I didn't, if it's feasible. I mean I said first that
it's okay with me on the northern section if the engineering department thinks
it's feasible. '
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, you mentioned that in one of her previous comments.
Councilman Workman: You're leaving it open for the west side? '
Councilman Johnson: No, east.
Councilwoman Dimler: We've already determined east in a previous meeting.
Councilman Johnson: The trails on the west side are for the industrial park. '
Councilwoman Dialer: But I didn't want to confuse this motion.
Councilman Johnson: If you'll confuse it and include that section of trail from '
Lake Susan Hills, Heron Drive to Park Drive, I'll second your motion.
38 I
IICity Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
•
IICouncilwoman Dimler: Okay. That's fine with me.
Councilman Workman: So then what are we leaving open as an option to Lyman?
Anything?
Councilwoman Dimler: No. CR 17 would be my, for the Park and Rec to consider.
I Councilman Johnson: I kind of liked Bill's idea of avoiding the trees this time
and doing Option 1 in that area up until you get to Barinsky's property or the
lower property where it cause effects.
I Councilwoman Dimler: It sounds reasonable to me but I'll tell you what I don't
like about it. It's too piecemeal and it leaves for the future Council a big
mess or decision. I don't like to do that.
ICouncilman Boyt: Well, why don't we refer this back to the Park and Rec
Commission since they've recommended that we include Audubon Road in their trail
I plan. Shouldn't we give it back to them and ask them to reconfirm that that's
the best plan?
Councilwoman Dimler: No. I think we should make a decision and tell them what
IIwe've decided and then have them look at CR 17.
Councilman Boyt: We don't even have the Comp Plan in front of us.
IIMayor Chmiel: What is your construction start date on this? Yesterday?
1 Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, we don't have the time on this?
Mayor Chmiel: We are bumping up the construction season.
1 Councilman Johnson: So they would build this this year yet?
Councilman Boyt: If this goes like Frontier, you're not getting it built this
II year.
Gary Warren: Like I say, we're up against it.
II Mayor Chmiel: Okay, we have a motion on the floor. Clarify your motion again
Ursula?
I Councilwoman Dimler: Alright. I'd move that we approve Alternate #2 at this
time which does not include a trail or pavement at the reduced cost of
$84,854.50 with the option open that if engineering department can come up with
1 a feasible way to put in the northern portion that does not affect the residents
on the south and will preserve the trees, that that would be acceptable.
Gary Warren: Point of clarification? _
IIMayor Chmiel: Go ahead.
1 Gary Warren: We know we can build the trail on the east side. It would really
be to negotiate a change order with the contractor to nail down the dollars for
II39
II
N.
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
that segment. I think that's what you're. I
Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, why don't you work that out with them.
Gary Warren: Because that's in the plans and it's just a matter of saying,
instead of building it to here, build it to here.
Councilman Johnson: I think that's the most reasonable compromise. As such, I
I'll second it.
Willy Molnau: Park Drive and Park Road doesn't have a sidewalk or a trail. ,
You'd be walking right on the street. Is that what you folks are saying?
That 's going to be part of the trail system to get to Lake Ann? There's no
trail or sidewalk on either of those roads.
Councilman Johnson: At this time.
Don Ashworth: Right.
Willy Molnau: Well, they're established businesses. You can't move a building
in order to put in a sidewalk.
Don Ashworth: The capital program for the Housing and Redevelopment Authority
has those two sidewalks as being constructed. I doubt that they will be
completed this summer but they will be done this next summer.
Willy Molnau: Well, if they do it on Frontier Trail and have 8 feet of roadway
for a trail, they could do that on Audubon too. Keep the trail right on the
road. All you have to do is put a retainer there and you wouldn't have to build
a trail out in the middle of my farm or Barinsky's land. Put it right on the
road width. Widen the road. ..
Councilwoman Dimler: We're not going to.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, we're not going to.
Councilwoman Dimler: See we're saying north of you. You won't be affected. '
Mayor Chmiel: North of your location is what we're discussing.
Willy Molnau: It's not going on my place at all? i
Mayor Chmiel: Right.
Resolution 190-91: Councilwoman Disler moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to 1
award the bid to Imperial Developers using Alternate 82 with a deduct cost of
$84,854.50 to upgrade Audubon Road from the Soo Line Railroad to Lyman Blvd.
with no trail or pavement except from Heron Drive to Park Road. All voted in
favor except Councilman Boyt who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 4
to 1. 1
40 ,"
11 City. Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
AWARD OF BID: KERBER BLVD. STREET LIGHTING EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 87-9A.
Gary Warren: I think this is relatively straight forward. This is the
extension of the Kerber Blvd. lighting program up to Big Horn Drive and bids
were advertised and we received a low bid from Killmer Electric who was very
experienced with our downtown lighting system on a $37,460.00. It's a little
' bit above the engineer's estimate but we've added one light that wasn't
accounted for in the engineer's estimate so we feel we have a good bid
from Killmer and funding is available through the Kerber Blvd. improvement
' project 87-9.
Councilman Johnson: I move approval.
' Mayor Chmiel: There's a motion on the floor. Is there a second?
Councilman Workman: Second.
Resolution $90-92: Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Workman seconded to
award the bid for Kerber Boulevard street lighting extension project No. 87-9A
' to Killmer Electric in the amount of $37,460.00. All voted in favor and the
motion carried unanimously.
UPDATE ON WATER JET SKIS, ASSISTANT PUBLIC SAFETY DIRECTOR.
Don Ashworth: I think I made notes back on, was it item 2?
' Councilman Johnson: 1.5(b).
I Don Ashworth: Actually, if I heard the Council discuss this item from earlier
in the agenda, it appears as though that there were various positive type of
activities that the Council and residents appeared to feel would be workable.
Specifically some type of signage at the boat launch. Personnel to check
registration, age. Also, to check water ski jets for water milfoil as well as
the ski jets. I'm not sure if I had missed anything that you had Jay.
Mayor Chmiel: There was also some discussion, I think Bill made this, that we
have a staff person.
Councilman Johnson: Yeah, public safety to do additional patrols on the lake
like they do on park patrols.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, but can't that same person who we're hiring, watching all
these things going in, look at that lake from the vantage point of view that
they have. From where they're at. They can see much of that lake and if
there's a problem, they have a phone there. They can call for that assistance
' if they need it. I just don't see putting another person on.
Councilman Johnson: Well I don't think that would be a full time person. I'd
see that as our CSO working something with the Homeowner's Association to get a
1 0 ride doing some patrolling. As I sat here reading some of the information that
was provided this evening, it sounds like we may not have any legal jurisdiction
on the lake. That only the County Sheriff and the ONR have, looking at the
41
I
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
11
State law that was in here, it seems that they specifically stated that the DNR
and County Sheriff are to enforce water. Well we can enforce our own I guess
over the DNR's. I thought it was interesting that watercraft have to have a
state required noise limit too. What we can do to measure noise from these jet
skis and see if they meet the State required 82 decibels at 50 feet.
Councilman Boyt: They do.
Councilman Johnson: They do? 1
Councilman Boyt: Yeah. That's a lot of noise.
Councilwoman Dimler: We've already checked that out once. '
Councilman Workman: So what are you proposing Jay?
Councilman Boyt: Snowmobiles meet it.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Anything else Jay? I
Don Ashworth: So if I understand, one of the items would be checking to verify
that our CSO would be able to be assigned certain timeframes where they would
actually carry out patrol of the lake? Is that what the Council wants?
Mayor Chmiel: I don't know. I don't think the CSO has any real jurisdiction
does he? That 's my first question. '
Councilman Johnson: That's what we need to research.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. The second thing is, it has to be a certified police
officer I think.
Councilman Johnson: No. '
Councilman Boyt: We run, the CSO's currently do park patrol Don and this is the
same thing. All they're doing is they're out there asking people to be
reasonable and it's usually effective because one, they're a third party. They
look official and they get it done. And when they don't, they've got a radio
and the County has been pretty good at responding when they get a specific call.
I think we need sort of a show of determination and that will make the point.
If you're out there now and again, maybe it doesn't but if you're out there for
the whole weekend, it won't take very many weekends and people will go to
Minnetonka.
Councilman Johnson: If the CSO pulls somebody over and gets on the radio and
calls up the County Sheriff and says meet us over at the boat dock and asks that
person to come to the boat dock, more than likely they'll come along and then
the County Sheriff can act accordingly. Or maybe not be able to act. Who knows
but at least it's a show you know like you say in the blue uniform.
II. II
Councilman Workman: How do you, Bill I heard you say the word reasonable. How
do we, jet skis are not reasonable. They're not made to be reasonable. They're
not made for old, older women. I mean my grandma at 87 is not going to get on 11i
42
11 City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
this but she'll get on a pontoon you know. You know so they're not, they're
made for a younger, generally a younger minded set and so I don't so you can't
really ask these things to be, they're meant to be very, very active and how do
' you make that reasonable? If you're going to ask jet skiers to just go around
in a little circle at about 10 mph, it's never going to happen and although I do
agree, I don't agree with trying to get our problems and put them on somebody
else's lake. Is this the only lake that we have the problem? Are we going to
have to enforce this on Minnewashta or Susan or Lucy because we're not going to
have the manpower, person power to do this and so, if we can do it in a couple
weekends, I don't disagree there's a problem but short of banning them on the
lake, I think we're going to have a continuous problem.
Mayor Chmiel: I guess I look at the speed boat requirements on Lotus, if
' I remember right in looking in the ordinance book. 15 mph at certain specific
hours and then you can go 40 mph.
' Councilman Boyt: 45.
Councilman Workman: Yeah, see that seems just out of.
Mayor Chmiel: And how do you distinguish the differences between the two? How
can we do this and enforce it properly if we were to?
' Councilman Boyt: I think that what, Lotus is unique in that it's so narrow
which is the reason we have special regulations for it. I think that jet ski
people will be reasonable if someone approaches them and says your behavior
' isn't appropriate like, you know there are crazy people out there in 150 hp
outboards too so it's not limited to just the jet ski and I agree with you Tom.
The jet ski probably appeals to somebody who wants to make a lot of tight
circles and jump wakes and do those kinds of things which these do. I'd like to
see us try some enforcement activity out here and I don't have any confidence in
the signs. I launch over there at the boat launch all the time. I know what's
on those signs but I sure don't stop and read them everytime I go in the lake.
t You know you're interested in getting your boat in the water. Getting it out.
You're trailer out so somebody else can do the same thing.
' Councilwoman Dimler: I have a question. Do the CSO's work on weekends?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
' Don Ashworth: Yes. Deb works primarily during the week. Bob works evenings
and some weekends.
' Councilwoman Dimler: So that would not increase any hours or we wouldn't need
any other people?
' Don Ashworth: Well, you'd be trading off. Right now where they placed a
priority for weekends and evenings in the park patrol, you would be giving up a
portion of that park patrol or requiring one of the other CS0's to do some
additional trading.
Councilman Boyt: Maybe there's somebody in the community that would let us use
their jet ski to do the patrol.
' 43
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
II
•
Mayor Chmiel: You can use my boat. II
Councilman Workman: I don't know, you know. I think all sorts of good ideas.
Councilman Boyt: What seems to be the worst time? Is it evenings or is it? I
Y 9
Councilwoman Dimler: Around dinner time I would think. I
J.C. Hurd: .. .I work during the day so I'm not there during the day during the
week... I
Resident: You mentioned weekends. All day Saturday and Sunday and almost every
evening. Tonight when I got into my car to come over here, there was one out II there.
J.C. Hurd: Yeah, there was one when I was getting. . . In fact my 2 year old
daughter was imitating the sound.
II
Councilman Johnson: Lucy is a unique lake not only in it's width but also the
topography around it being almost in a bowl. The noise is just about amplified
II
into the sides.
Resident: My house is about 150 yards from the lakeshore and those things can II be halfway out in the lake and you're right. It is a bowl and we all know that
sounds carry, especially when the wind is blowing towards you. And I can have
all my windows closed and the air conditioning on and I can hear those things.
Councilman Johnson: Well I tell you, if they started getting popular on Lake II
Lucy, that 's another lake that the noise travels real well on.
Mayor Chmiel: I think any of them really. I
Councilman Boyt: Can we try this for like 2 weekends and see what response we II get?
Councilman Workman: Well can we be specific about what specifically is being
violated. I
Councilman Johnson: There may be persons less than 13 years of age operating
without a license.
II
Councilman Boyt: I think it's 16.
Mayor Chmiel: It has to be 16. I
Councilman Boyt: The Statute we have is maybe a revision that's proposed rather
than the actual.
II
Mayor Chmiel: It is 16.
Councilman Johnson: In the back here they've put a thing and it talks age of
II
operators and it's a DNR publication. On page 23 of that it says persons less
than 13 years of age must be accompanied by someone at least 18 years of age to
44 II
II
IICity Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
•
IIoperate a motorboat of more than 24 horsepower.
Resident: These are 45 and higher.
IICouncilman Johnson: These have 45 horsepower? You can see my ignorance of
these things. I don't even have a rowboat.
IResident: Some of them can pull waterskiers. ..see them pulling waterskiers.
Councilman Boyt: Yeah, well they have this new edition where you don't have
IIsomebody on the jet ski. Just have the waterskier behind it.
Councilman Johnson: Yeah that thing on the Mountain Dew commercial or whatever.
IIResident: I've seen them with 2 people that weren't a boat, because I call them
jet skis too but the 2 people on them and pulling a waterskier. That's
powerful. And a regular clip with no problem.
II
Councilman Boyt : We have a couple things. Maybe the age can be enforced.
Certainly within 100 feet of shoreline can be attempted to be enforced and one
II of the biggest issues on Lotus is direction of travel. That's what will
probably havoc with the jet ski folks because you're going to have a little
trouble consistently going counter clockwise.
II: Mayor Chmiel: Do we have to have a sign where the perspective person is at the
entrance of it? All vehicles stop. Right now, presently they just go right
past there if they're going down to the lake without stopping so you're going to
II have to implement something up on top so they can review this and make sure that
all those vehicles stop.
ICouncilman Boyt : Well on the weekends we've got our attendant .
Mayor Chmiel: Right. That's what I'm saying. The attendants, the shack that
IIthey sit in.
Resident : Excuse me. I live directly adjacent to this city access. I thought
the signs at first were going to be a good idea years ago when we first built
II the access but no one pays any attention to it at all. The attendant, if
they're awake and I know they're young kids. . .somebody's got to do it.
II Mayor Chmiel: I know what you're saying. They're reading a book and never
looking up.
I Councilman Boyt: I think they're pretty good this year. At least when I use
it, the attendants have stopped me and said do you know the rules for the lake
and have you checked for Eurasian Water Milfoil.
IResident: That's never happened to me.
Mayor Chmiel: On two different occasions that I've used it in the last couple
Iweeks.
Councilman Boyt: They just don't trust me I guess.
I45
r
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990 •
J.C. Hurd: What about handing out o t a summary of the rules. . .
Resident: It will all end up in my yard.
Mayor Chmiel: I don't think people take the time, as was mentioned before.
Their real urgency is getting into the lake. Getting their vehicle out of there
with the trailer and boat will come in.
Councilman Johnson: What are our grounds for prosecution if we have no signs
informing somebody from Bloomington of what our lake rules are? You know,
somebody comes in and they don't know you have to drive counter clockwise on
there, there's no way that they're going to know if they're not from Chanhassen.
Even if they are from Chanhassen they're not going to know unless there's some
rules posted. Even though they don't read the rules, that does not mean that. . .
Councilman Boyt: Are there even any posted down there?
J.C. Hurd: Sort of. I don't think they're all posted though.
Councilman Johnson: I know there's some rules posted.
Councilman Boyt: Well first that's not, our community has not gone out to see
how many tickets we can write on anything that I can recall and a CSO officer
isn't trained to do that anyway. They're trained to tell people that we expect
them to behave differently and they're usually pretty successful.
Mayor Chmiel: CSO can't write a ticket.
Councilman Boyt: Yeah, so I'm sure that they're going to warn them and if they
get some sort of ridiculous response, they'll probably get a hold of the
Sheriff.
Councilwoman Dimler: I was going to ask if anybody knows the hours on the
weekend that the Sheriff is out there because when we were out there July 8th,
it was a Sunday, I was surprised. There was an accident and they were there
immediately so they were on the lake. Apparently they patrol quite well.
Mayor Chmiel: They're there. In fact that day they checked our boat. I asked
them how often was he out there and he was out there Friday, Saturday and
Sunday, the day that I was there so they are out there. '
Councilwoman Dimler: And then if we're going to have extra patrol, I would
suggest that they coordinate the hours so they're not both out there at the same
time.
Councilman Johnson: Of course, once Carver County hears that we're going to be
patrolling there, they might cut back too.
Councilwoman Dimler: Well that would be the danger. I would hope that that
doesn't happen. I
46 if
' City .Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
' Mayor Chmiel: They may take the opposite standpoint and try to do a little bit
more than what they're doing.
' Councilman Workman: I would move this.
Councilman Johnson: They may coordinate with. Where they're both there at the
' same time.
Councilman Workman: I would move enforcement of said conversation for 3
' weekends?
Councilman Boyt: Sure.
' Councilman Workman: And then at that point have Zydowsky or Rand report to us
or Public Safety.
' Mayor Chmiel: What about handouts? Do you want to try that too?
Councilman Workman: Sure.
Mayor Chmiel: Something just printed up saying these are the requirements of
operation of your specific powered boat or jet skis on this lake.
Councilman Boyt: They already do that. At least they did with when I went
through.
' Councilman Workman: And then we can move ahead with another alternate plan
after that but try first for say 3 weekends.
' Mayor Chmiel: Okay, let's do it.
Councilwoman Dimler: Second it.
' Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to direct the Community
Service Officers to patrol Lotus Lake for three (3) weekends regarding
registration, age, etc. and report back to the Public Safety Commission and
' Council with it's findings. All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously.
Henry Sosin: Mr. Mayor, can I make a suggestion?
' Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
' Henry Sosin: That you notify the Sheriff's office that you're doing this and
they can expect phone calls from your officers?
' Mayor Chmiel: We certainly will.
Henry Sosin: I would like to.. .in one certain area. You have an ordinance and
we have parking laws, etc. and the Sheriff does go there occasionally. That
' doesn't mean that they enforce the law. You can see them, and I have seen this
myself, drive right past 2 rigs, meaning a car and trailer, not parked in a
parking area but parked along the grass on the side with the boat in the water
47
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990 t
and the people out enjoying the lake and did not cite either of those cars and ,
trailers.
Mayor Chmiel: Well they should be cited. ,
Henry Sosin: If a little noise came from the City Council, if you tell them you
want the law upheld and write a few tickets, they might do it. '
Mayor Chmiel: I know I did this just last Saturday. Drove down there to see if
there's any cars parked in the handicapped area and there was and I couldn't say
anything to them but as I left that area, I was going back on TH 101 going
north. I just happened to see the County Sheriff coming towards me and I
flashed my light and I did ask him to go there and ask them to remove that.
There is a $500.00 fine for parking in a handicapped spot and so I asked him to
go there and not to issue the ticket but to make sure that that person remove
that vehicle and understood what those regulations are. But I've been down
there many times that cars are there without a handicapped sticker or license
plates on.
Councilman Johnson: I'd ask them to give the ticket. That's the one thing.
Mayor Chmiel: Well if you warn them, I don't think they'll come back Jay but I
think if it's a persistent one, then something has to be done. Okay.
RECONSIDERATION OF TH 101 ALIGNMENT RELATIVE TO THE FINAL PLAT OF GREAT PLAINS ,
GOLF ESTATES, HALLA NURSERY PROPERTY, 10000 GREAT PLAINS BLVD., DON HALLA.
Gary Warren: On June 25th, after some discussion of the issue, staff was
directed to take another look at the easement required by the right-of-way
requirements that were in the plat approval for the Great Plains Golf Estates
plat and basically the point was brought out, concern by the Halla's that the
provision to have an additional 27 feet of right-of-way along TH 101 in the
vicinity of the Halla Nursery buildings, they're well within that 27 foot area
and they were requesting of us to take another look at it here to see if it
really made sense because if the road was ever going to be realigned, it
certainly wouldn't go further to the west. Well, it was a good point and we did
impose on MnDot one more time to give us a little bit, a look at the curvature
here through the roadway and albeit, we have significant crossing of the
structure that will be needed for the road over Bluff Creek in this area. We
put together a concept here that shows a 45 mph super elevated curve through
here and the right-of-way that would be necessary to accomodate that being a 100
foot width. So indeed we could say I guess that the condition to continue, take
27 feet along this portion of existing TH 101 doesn't really seem to make any
sense because if we do, at some point in time realigned that road and get this
bottleneck out of the road, this is closer to the alignment that would be taken.
So we are comfortable with modifying that condition to state that the 27 foot
requirement would be still necessary on the east side of TH 101 as shown on the
figure here in dark and on the southerly west side here along the Halla
frontage. With that, where the tangent points of the revised curvature that we
have from MnDot connect, that instead would dedicate 100 foot right-of-way
through this outlot area shown on the map. This is consistent with what was 111
done on the preliminary platting phase that we anticipated that this proposed
lot was going to be impacted. . .so right now we would say that we would look to
48 '
I
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
' have that dedicated as 100 foot right-of-way and not require it along the
frontage here as was the concern. That was a major point of concern that we
looked into. As a result of some of our looking at this, we also have been
dealing with drainage, washout problems along Creekwood Drive across from Lot 1
and started scratching our heads and said well, we currently have a 33 foot
right-of-way on Creekwood Drive along the southerly property here and this plat
is proposing to dedicate a matching right-of-way from our site but it leaves out
this exception here, Outlot 0 as it's shown. And it didn't make any sense to us
why that wouldn't also be dedicated or shouldn't be dedicated to the City for
right-of-way since we would only have about a 33 foot dimension here for
' right-of-way if it was not acquired and we are looking to secure that for
maintenance standpoint. A lot of the drainage from this area does come across
the culvert. We had a road washout there in 1987. We have been doing grading
' work in there to keep it stabilized and we're also recommending that Outlot D be
dedicated to the City for right-of-way purposes. Anything else you wanted?
Also condition 3 of the staff report should have been modified as well to say
' that the provisions of the 20 foot trail easements for the off-street trails, it
should follow what we're showing here as the future alignment for TH 101. In
other words, you would need to dedicate a 20 foot trail easement through this
area on and on the bend it would be only in the future areas consistent with
' future proposed right-of-way taken so item 3 would be modified then to
acknowledge that as well.
' Councilwoman Dimler: Do you want them on both sides still Gary?
Gary Warren: On both sides of that 100 foot stretch, that's correct.
Councilman Johnson: So we'd be looking to officially map then this little
section for future purposes?
Gary Warren: It's at Council's discretion but I don't know whether it'd be
necessary.
' Councilman Johnson: Well the other half, we won't have anything.
Gary Warren: The southern half you wouldn't have anything.
' Councilman Johnson: That's the part I'd be concerned about mapping.
Gary Warren: If he wants to subdivide or build on that, I mean most of that is
a drainageway. The bluff creek. There isn't anything really going to be built
there. So the expense of the official mapping and surveying it, I don't know.
Mr. Halla's here.
Mayor Chmiel: Do you wish to say something?
Don Halla: Thank you Mr. Mayor. Ladies and gentlemen of the Council. I have
no problem with this at all except for Outlot D. The only reason this outlot
has come up is because the City has done several things without our permission
and we started finally rattleing swords against them and I don't know if you
' want me to address that in this forum but there has been specific reason for
that. It is something that's being added after the fact. It was not in the
original. I don't believe that it can be added at this point to request
49
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990 1
•
additional land that was not in the original. If it can be, then I'd like to ,
air the exact reasons for it. After the big flood, the City came in and filled
that property. They never asked us whether they could do so. They have
continued to fill that property even when we, at that time I said if you are
going to fill it, it is against our agreement. You only need to fill it so far.
They filled it considerably more than what was necessary to preserve the road.
That they had to extend our draintile areas and so forth which they did but they
did not keep them in repair and they are broken up as of today. They came back
to us and said they had the permission of the property owner to the south and
they thought that he owned this land and so they could do with what they wanted.
A couple of months ago you approved some grading rules and regulations for
various people of the city. We in fact have had to make application to preserve
a dam that is in dire need of repair and could break at any time and we did get
finally a permit to backfill that with a 1,000 yards of soil, although it could
take 100,000 yards to do it properly so it doesn't wash out in the deep ravine
in the other side of the property. In any case, the City came out and has been
dumping loads of soil and not grading them over for long periods of time on our
property without permission and we objected to that and said that we didn't feel
that was proper. That they should at least grade it off and that we didn't
really want them to do it anymore because they weren't doing it. They just left
the piles there that they don't let the average citizen do laying next to the
road. They were using it for their city dump to dump excess soil. Because of
these requests on our part and because of our objections, now they have
requested Outlot D. We didn't have a problem with them filling it originally if
it was done for a purpose and maintained and done properly but now they felt
that they could just dump the piles there. Leave them sit for a month or two.
Finally when we requested they push them over, they did. I wish to plant that
area in widlflowers and put it into that type of an area. It's not being
preserved. The City is not doing their back sloping requirements as far as the
putting on grass and maintaining erosion controls. They require that of us in
our permits but they're not required to do in their own areas when they're
dumping. So I would prefer to put it into wildflowers. As you may or may not
know, we've received wildflowers seeds from the State to do both sides of TH 101
adjacent to our property. We are following their guidelines for planting those
and for redoing both the roadway areas there, the ditches and so forth, to
accommodate that area and it will be one of the first ones, at least in the City
to get wildflowers. We will also would like to be able to plant wildflowers in
this area and frankly control the City from using it as their local dump.
That's why I choose not to want to give up control of Outlot D.
Councilman Johnson: Tonight we're only approving a reconsideration or did we
already reconsider and this is the action?
Councilwoman Dimler: No. '
Councilman Johnson: We have not voted to reconsider?
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, no. '
Councilman Johnson: So we won't be actually taking action on this tonight.
We'll only be voting whether to or not to reconsider the issues and Outlot 0 I II would come up at a future meeting if we vote to reconsider this which to me only makes sense that we should vote to reconsider this and when you do reconsider an
50 it
wCity Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
item, you open up the whole item. You don't just open up a part of it . You
open up the whole thing. That's why Outlot D I think is fair game at this point
but we'll need some more information, especially in light of what I just heard.
Councilman Workman: I guess I am told that the neighbors are here but there's a
home that we're moving. I'd like to hear about that.
' Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, that was one of my concerns that I asked before, was this
sent out to all the adjacent property owners saying what was being proposed and
' it's my understanding they had been. Is there anyone wishing to address that?
Paul Graffunder: Paul Graffunder, 1001 Great Plains Blvd. . I'm really not
prepared to give any type of a speech but I am a little concerned. I don't know
' how much consideration we've been given. I was just notified in a real plain
letter a couple of weeks ago. The way the road looks, it's going to go right
through my garage there. If it has to happen, it's going to happen but I don't
' know if I've been given real good consideration.
Mayor Chmiel: Paul, how much closer is that to your house where the garage is?
' Paul Graffunder: 60 feet. 70 feet. I've got a detached garage. I don't know
exactly of the measurements but I can show you where.
Councilman Johnson: We've got an aerial photograph here.
Paul Graffunder: My property is just to the west . The house is located right
about there. The detached garage is here.
' Councilwoman Dimler: That brings it real close to Y ou.
' Gary Warren: The aerial photo in the staff report shows you his property.
Paul Graffunder: If that's where the new road goes and everybody's told me
nobody knows where it's going to go, my house is going to go.
Councilman Boyt: It misses your house and your garage according to the aerial
' photograph.
Gary Warren: That's the center line that's shown on the staff report so 50 feet
roughly.
Mayor Chmiel: 50 feet either side.
' Councilman Johnson: It'd be pretty close to your garage.
Gary Warren: We've got a detached garage that'd be in jeopardy. I think it's,
' I mean we're talking about maybe many years down the road. Not to be
unsympathetic, maybe never and if indeed TH 101 was upgraded and we'd all love
to see that I'm sure, we would follow whatever procedures are appropriate at the
time for right-of-way acquisition and everything else and any impact to the
' property would have to be settled out with the owner here but this is, if TH 101
and this is a severe bottleneck on TH 101 as far as traffic and speed, this is
about the only alternative you have for obtaining or for correcting this
51
I
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990 1
situation and for acquiring this portion of right-of-way. I
Paul Graffunder: Well you can take a corner off of this site. There's no
ravine to cross either. Just straighten out the corner there and I'm sure you
could get a 45 mph that way. I'm not the one asking for the change. . . I never
asked to subdivide or anything. I'm not asking for...and not I'm being
affected.
Gary Warren: Well we're not taking it from your property at this point in time
nor are we planning to build the piece that's shown right there.
Paul Graffunder: No but you are planning to remove some of my property in the
future. The person who wants to make the changes I would assume, being he wants
to make the changes, maybe he should give some of his. '
Councilman Johnson: I don't know how you could do it at 45 mph.
Councilman Workman: Gary, I don't know how realistic it is for us to get this '
done. Are you saying 50 feet of your side of the center line?
Gary Warren: Yeah. We're saying 100 foot right-of-way. 50 feet either side of
that center line.
Councilman Workman: Okay. Because you know realistically this is not the
optimum path. The optimum path is through his bedroom I think probably so
I mean realistically the optimum path would be like this right?
Gary Warren: If you try to do a straight. I
Councilman Workman: Even further over.
Councilman Johnson: Straight from Pioneer. f
Gary Warren: Sure. We could start from TH 212 and just build it straight all
the way up to TH 5 too. I mean you're trying to work, the road section north
and south from a design standpoint is within reason of being okay so we're
trying to salvage I guess, and I'm speaking for down the future whenever it
would be done, salvage as much as of the existing road right-of-way as possible
to economize on the construction.
Councilman Workman: I was just saying, if we're going to cause such detriment
here, and I didn't catch your name completely.
Councilman Johnson: Graffunder.
Councilman Workman: Okay. You know if we're going to cause such detriment to
his property and his home, I mean we should almost make, make either sense to
either take the whole thing and compensate him correctly or not do it. I guess
you and I have had long discussions on this intersection up here and this still
creates a problem at that intersection. If we're going straight through, maybe
not. I don't know. '
t
52 1
I
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
1 Gary Warren: You still have the sight distance from the bluff on the southwest
corner there.
Paul Graffunder: I have to admit the road's not good. Everybody knows it all
the way from Chanhassen to Shakopee. There's a problem but what is that going
to do to the resale valud of my home if I want to sell in 2 years? I'd have to
' tell them they're going to put TH 101 through there. I can't say anything
different. It's going to bring the road that much closer to my house which it's
already bad. We chose to live there and I like it. If that's where it has to
go, that's where it has to go but I don't know that it's fair that I give and I
didn't ask to have any changes made.
Councilman Johnson: Actually what's up for consideration is whether we're going
to reconsider this.
Councilman Boyt: It's on the table so if you're doing it, you'd actually be
' voting to take it off the tabling and then vote on it. It's tabled according to
the staff report.
Councilman Workman: So what's our options?
Councilwoman Dimler: It's been tabled to this meeting. Now we've gotten the
information.
' Councilman Johnson: The reconsideration was tabled?
Mayor Chmiel: Well, as it indicates here at our 25th meeting in June, that we
table discussion on the conditions of the final plat approval.
Councilwoman Dimler: Until we got this information.
' Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, and now we have this particular information that we have.
' Councilman Johnson: So we're not doing a reconsideration so it's a misnomer.
Mayor Chmiel: I think it is. Go ahead Paul.
' Paul Krauss: When this was on 2 meetings ago it was one because Mr. Halla had
requested a reconsideration of conditions that had been applied in the original
plat.
Councilman Johnson: So we tabled the reconsideration until we got this data?
' Paul Krauss: Right.
Councilman Johnson: So we're just taking up where we left off 2 meetings ago?
' Paul Krauss: Right.
Councilman Johnson: So it is a vote for reconsideration?
Councilwoman Dimler: But we don't need to reconsider correct?
' 53
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990 L
Mayor Chmiel: That's true. You don't have to reconsider. I
Councilwoman Dimler: And then the previous conditions would stay in effect .
Gary Warren: If nothing is changed, including the right-of-way. '
Councilman Johnson: Yeah. We would be taking easements that make no sense in
the future.
Councilman Boyt: We don't know if they will or not.
Mayor Chmiel: Let me ask the 64 billion dollar question. Who's cost is all '
this going to be?
Gary Warren: When TH 101 is built? If and when. Currently it's a temporary
State trunk highway.
Mayor Chmiel: I know. They've been trying to give it to us. Been trying to
give it to the County. Nobody wants it.
Gary Warren: They're trying to pass it onto the County and then the City or
however it would go down. It's certainly going to be a political football some
time in the future and what's probably going to be the driving force will be the
traffic demands and accidents and hazards that come with it and TH 212 will
probably be the timing that will kind of bring it more and more to a point. So
it's going to be like any road. Whoever has the jurisdiction is going to have
to field the complaints and the concerns and start looking at how they're going
to address it.
Councilwoman Dimler: How about leaving it as it is and then if they don't build
the road the way and we don't need the easement, then we vacate it at that time?
Gary Warren: That is always a possibility. All that we've ever tried to do
from the start of the preliminary plat with this was to say that hey, this looks
like an area that might sometime be an area for correction but not to guarantee
that it would ever happen. We can't.
Councilman Johnson: Paul, who voted in favor of the easements the last time? '
Paul Krauss: The last time being several years ago?
Councilman Johnson: Yeah.
Paul Krauss: I'm afraid I don't know.
Gary Warren: You were here.
Councilman Boyt: I was here. I don't recall.
Councilwoman Dimler: Look in the Minutes.
Councilman Boyt: I don't recall it being very controversial. I think we were
getting into some sort of discussion about to the west of this particular
54
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
' development and were we going to have a thru street. Remember that discussion?
Gary Warren: To the east.
' Councilman Boyt: East, well there was a question of a thru street.
' Councilman Johnson: This was a lesser issue at that time. But I think it
deserves reconsideration.
Councilwoman !limier: Who called for the reconsideration?
' Councilman Johnson: Mr. Halls.
Councilwoman Dimler: Doesn't that have to come from one of the Councilmembers
that voted on the prevailing side?
Paul Krauss: If I can clarify that. We received a request from Mr. Halla to
' change the conditions of approval. As you know, staff is not in a position to
do that so we put it on your agenda for reconsideration of your final plat
approval so it was based upon a request from Mr. Halla.
Councilwoman Dimler: Are you saying the final plat approval was never given?
Paul Krauss: No, it was given. It was never submitted to the County by the
owner. We would never release the plat because Mr. Halls wouldn't give us the
easements that were required to satisfy it.
' Councilman Johnson: It's been almost a year now.
Councilwoman Dimler: As far as I know, reconsideration has to come from a
.' councilmember that voted on the prevailing side.
Councilman Johnson: A year ago on the final plat. Was it a unanimous vote?
' Councilman Boyt: Well, what we've got here, I think you could make a
parlimentary argument at least that this doesn't require a reconsideration.
Since the final plat wasn't filed, what's the life of that final plat? A couple
' years?
Roger Knutson: 2 years.
' Councilman Boyt: 2 years? So what Mr. Halla may be really proposing is a new
final plat.
' Don Halls: We have one year yet to file that final plat per our restrictions
which gives us 2 more years after that so you're talking 3 years down the line
from where we are at this point in time. What I requested is this 27 foot
' easement on the left hand side goes through our well and through basically two
of our buildings and you add the other 20 feet to it and it didn't appear that
that would be anything really feasible now or in the future in that area so
' that's why I brought everything forward for discussion.
Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, but we didn't know that when it first came through.
' 55
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
II
Don Halla: It never came up either in our presentation because not seeing the II
surveys or Council putting them on the plats and seeing that they actually had
the 27...and that's why I said I didn't think it was really the right way to do
it. The cost of putting in a new well and. . .so when we realized that, that's why II!
I asked to bring it back for discussion.
Paul Graffunder: A well is cheaper than a bridge. I'm sorry for being so nasty I
but he wants to replat for his benefit but it appears refiguring the road that
way is going to take. . .
Councilman Johnson: We're not configuring the road at this point. We're trying I
to decide whether we want to take the 27 foot easement and the 20 foot
additional trail easement along the east side of this road. Whether in the II future TH 101, we're trying to decide whether we have to reconsider this.
Councilwoman Dimler: I don't think you can do that.
Councilman Johnson: We shouldn't even be discussing it at this point . II
Councilman Workman: In light of the opening concerns of Outlet D and the II legality and everything else like that, could we refer this back to Don Ashworth
and come back to this?
Councilman Johnson: It's already final platted. If we don't say we want to I
reconsider it, then no, I'd say it's a done deal.
Councilwoman Dimler: Well, because of nobody knows about the highway, like I
It
said, we can always vacate the easement later on. I don't think we need to
reconsider at this point.
Councilman Johnson: And they are only easements. It's not like we're going to I
come out and, we're not going to expand TH 101 another 27 feet wide and throw a
trail in there tomorrow. Especially on that alingment. If TH 101's going to II get straightened out, it's probably not going to have a whole lot to do with
this plat. The straightening of TH 101 but TH 101's going to straighten itself
eventually as one of our major north/south intersectors and that's when Paul's
property is going to get affected. I
Don Halla: We do have reserved that half, just about where that line is. That's
been reserved by a previous Council. . . That already is showing the alignment. . . I
and nothing can be built on that for future possible alignment.
Councilman Johnson: Yeah. That was part of the preliminary plat 3 years ago. II Gary Warren: I would like the opportunity to look further at the right-of-way
as it relates to the Creekwood Drive, Outlot D area. I guess I have to disagree
somewhat with Mr. Halla. I know there's been a lot of confusion on the fill out
II
there and such and we've been limited by weather conditions as far as being able
to grade out there when everybody wanted us to grade because of the rain and
such but we haven't had a close look at how that right-of-way matches up with II)
the Creekwood Drive as it goes through the Bluff Creek Greens proposed plat and
right now it looks like it's going to be deficient in right-of-way and I'd like 1
56 I.
II
IICity Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
1 an opportunity to take another look at that.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay.
II' Councilman Boyt: Shouldn't we have erosion control up when we have loose dirt?
Gary Warren: Erosion control, I guess it depends on the impact of the loose
1 dirt. How much and what. Putting erosion control up there, when we intitially
did the work on that, the drainage culverts and we've been having a battle there
with the drainage and trying to maintain that. Those side slopes. The culverts
1 as he mentioned, I don't know if they've failed. Have they failed actually?
Don Halla: They're actually eating out underneath. They've washed. The soil
was never stable in the first place.
II
Gary Warren: It's very difficult to stabilize the side slopes when you're
dealing with 30 to 40 foot vertical drops out there. It all points to the
1 reason and it's not an alterior motive on our part but we are concerned that
that is an area. The road failed in the storm of 1987 and it washed out and we
were out there having to maintain that area just points like we take side slopes
Ion any of our roadways when we have stability questions, that's our motivation
on this. If there's sight line concerns or planting concerns or grading
concerns, I'm sure the City can write some restrictions as far as that's
II concerned to address some of those issues but I don't know if that's part of it
or not but I would like a chance to look at that outlot again.
Councilman Workman: I move to table.
IIMayor Chmiel: Is there a second?
1 Councilman Workman: Leave it tabled?
Mayor Chmiel: We just leave it as it is.
1 Councilman Johnson: Somebody needs to move to deny the reconsideration.
Councilwoman Oimler: I'll move that we deny the reconsideration at this time.
1 Councilman Boyt: If you do that, you have to take it off the table.
1 Councilwoman Dimler: It's not tabled anymore. It was tabled only until this
meeting when the information became available.
Councilman Boyt: If no one has moved reconsideration, then you can't very well
1 move not to reconsider.
Mayor Chmiel: That's right. By all rules you have to go through the
1 reconsideration portion first. And if it's been tabled, it stays tabled so
there's no movement. Is that correct Roger?
II Roger Knutson: Yes.
1 57
I
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
Councilman Johnson: We tabled it until this data was presented to us. The ,
data's now presented to us so that tabling's over right?
Councilwoman Dimler: Do we need to table it again?
Councilman Johnson: It doesn't need to be tabled anymore but nobody moves
reconsideration. '
Roger Knutson: Maybe the easiest thing to do would be just to continue it until
your next meeting.
Don Halla: Ladies and gentlemen, may I withdraw my request to reconsider in the
first place and solve the whole problem?
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you.
Gary Warren: I don't know if that solves the whole problem. We still have
Outlot D I think that needs to be looked at.
Mayor Chmiel: That's something that you're going to have to look at.
SHORELINE SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A DECK AND 3-SEASON PORCH WITHIN
75 FEET OF A CLASS 8 WETLAND, 491 TRAP LINE LANE, ALAN PEHRSON.
Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Boyt came up to me after the meeting and
indicated that he wished to appeal the decision of the Board of Adjustment on
this one.
Councilman Boyt: It doesn't surprise you does it?
Mayor Chmiel: It didn't surprise me at all. '
Paul Krauss: What we have here is a series of errors that were committed
apparently by the City that led to a situation where a home was built on a lot
that probably shouldn't have been created in the first place because the
buildable area is quite small. Buildable area being outlined by those dotted
lines. The home was allowed to get a building permit even though it was in
violation of setback standards so the existing home violates the wetland setback
standard. And now we have a request for a deck which for all intensive purposes
appears to be a reasonable deck consistent with this home and adjoining homes
but since the home already has a setback variance, obviously this is going to
make the setback variance worse. We tried to figure out you know through the
chain of errors how this might have come about and we've seen occasionally
things like this in the past so we think we made changes in the procedures and
policies and ordinances so that hopefully this won't happen again in the future.
There are some neighboring lots that have similar situations and we had an
exhibit on that that I seem to be missing at the moment. It's in your packet.
That shows I believe at least 2 of the existing homes have similar variances and
not as great as the 30 foot variance. The variance down to 30 feet that's being
requested here but they are similar and this is the last home on this wetland or
the last one that is probably going to be experiencing this problem. I would
note too that in the most recent addition in this subdivision, you may recall
when Jo Ann was working on it, that she worked with Lundgren to get larger,
58 '
11
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
' deeper lots by some of the wetlands so there was a replat of the final addition
and it was specifically to avoid problems such as this. So hopefully this is
not the kind of thing that will happen before but again they are requesting a
variance for the deck. In our view this is not a self made hardship. The
' people who own this lot or built the home, built it thinking that everything was
consistent with Code. The hardship here comes from a series of activities that
frankly are the City's. When we looked at the adjoining area, we think it's
' consistent with adjoining properties and therefore we are recommending that the
variance be approved. The Board of Adjustment did approve the variance
unanimously and as you heard earlier, it's being appealed to the Council.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you.
' Councilwoman Dialer: I move approval.
Councilman Workman: I'll second it.
Mayor Chmiel: It's been moved and seconded. Discussion.
Councilman Johnson: The only thing I see on this one was the design of the deck
could be slightly modified to minimize the variance. The stick out portion
there and I guess it'd be the west, northwest corner of the deck could be
re-angled more westerly and decrease the amount of this, I mean a slight.
Paul Krauss: Yeah. Sharmin and I were looking at that earlier this evening but
what you get here is that this is a 30 foot setback here. This corner over here
is 32 feet. If you swung this at a more.
Councilman Johnson: You'd gain only 2 foot. It looks like you'd gain more but
you don't.
' Councilman Boyt: I have a question about, we have it looks like a registered
land survey from June 30, 1988. Was that what you submitted to get your
' building permit?
Alan Pehrson: I didn't submit the building permit.
Councilman Boyt : Oh, okay. It was built by Lundgren Bros.?
Alan Pehrson: Yes.
Councilman Boyt: Paul, is that what they submitted to get their building
permit?
Paul Krauss: I don't know. I believe it was but.
Councilman Boyt: So we've got the owner who thinks they submitted it but we
' don't know?
Paul Krauss: I couldn't tell you for certain. I believe it is but I couldn't
tell you for certain.
Councilman Johnson: The deck was added afterwards.
59
I
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990 L
Paul Krauss: The deck is not there. '
Councilman Johnson: But the drawing of the deck is done differently than all
other drawings on there. It was done almost freehand.
Paul Krauss: Well yeah. I think that might have been an older survey, right,
where the deck was drawn in. ,
Councilman Johnson: The deck is just drawn in over the top of this survey which
should be noted that it's a modified survey and all this as far as legalities of
doing something over Mr. Berquist's signature and modifying his drawings is kind
of illegal. Whoever did that.
Councilman Boyt: Well, there's something here that shows, I don't know really
point to point but it looks like the proposed house.
Mayor Chmiel: It should be the existing. At that time it was probably. . .
Councilman Boyt: Okay, so it's the existing house. How many square feet is it
excluding the garage? On one floor.
Alan Pehrson: It's a two story. The first floor is 1,400 square feet .
Councilman Boyt: Okay, that 's all I need to know. So one of the errors made
here was that the building, it was granted a building permit in error?
Alan Pehrson: Yes.
Paul Krauss: Well point of fact. I think the original error was in the Ir
creation of a lot that really wasn't deep enough to accomodate the types of
homes that they were building in there. '
Councilman Boyt: We can only keep them from, if they have a lot that's big
enough to allow a 900 square foot house to be built, it's buildable. We can't
tell them they can't make that lot.
Paul Krauss: Well except that when we review plats these days and we see
something that only provides for a marginal house, we ask for a deeper lot and
we're successful generally in getting it.
Councilman Boyt: Well, we are forceful askers but it's a little different from
being able to say you can't do it.
Councilman Johnson: This is a POO.
Councilman Boyt: Then we're unclear as to whether the building permit was
appropriate or inappropriate? Given the lot was there.
Paul Krauss: As I understood, in looking back through the records. You see
that it says edge of wetland 8-9-85. That was not on the permit on the plat or
the survey rather that was submitted for the building permit. The building
permit was issued without checking to see where the wetland was.
60 '
1
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
1 Councilman Boyt: For this house.
Paul Krauss: And apparently the neighboring homes as well but that's
speculation on my part.
Councilman Boyt: Okay, so we suspect that an error was made when the house was
' built in this particular location. Am I right?
Paul Krauss: Yes.
Councilman Boyt: Alright. That 's our suspicion. Now, if we turn and look at
our recently revised variance ordinance, how many homes out there within 500
feet currently have a deck? I counted it but I'd be curious as to what your
count was.
Paul Krauss: We didn't use that rationalization for this. Sharmin checked it
in terms of what the setback was. Existing setbacks and that's the exhibit that
you see there.
Councilman Boyt: Okay, well as I count that, there are 5 houses that currently
have a deck?
Paul Krauss: Yes.
' Councilman Johnson: Against that wetland.
' Councilman Boyt: Against that wetland?
Paul Krauss: Right.
' Councilman Boyt: Okay. And of those 5 houses, 2 of them through errors by the
City have been allowed to build a deck that extends into the wetland setback.
Paul Krauss: Right .
Councilman Boyt: Our ordinance in which we tried to build some flexibility in
' by defining reasonable use, says the majority of comparable property. Well, 2
of 5 isn't the majority. I'm just reading from your staff report. I suspect
it's what you're going to find in there.
Councilman Workman: But the other 5 homes have decks. This house would not be
able to build a deck.
' Paul Krauss: That's the other point. That we're looking at a standard of
development in that neighborhood and this proposal is fully consistent with the
standard of all other homes backing on the wetland.
' Councilman Boyt: Oh, I see. So what you're saying to me is because other homes
have a deck, this home has a right to have a deck?
Paul Krauss: That's our belief, yes. And that's certainly, the error is made
on behalf of the City shouldn't compromise their use of their property.
61
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990 1
Councilman Johnson: So it's reasonable use, not reasonable variance. 1
Mayor Chmiel: Do you want to get to the point Bill.
Councilman Boyt: I'm trying to get to the point Don. I believe the point is ,
that what you're saying here is that if we've made an error, let's continue to
make it.
Councilwoman Dimler: Let's not hold the other party responsible for an error
that the City has made.
Councilman Boyt: Well if that's the case, then we can throw out the setback '
variance.
Paul Krauss: If there were a way to rectify the situation that was reasonable
and plausible and we could carry them out on the other lots, we'd certainly
recommend that. I mean when we first looked at this our first reaction was what
can we do to minimize this. It seemed as though the damage was already done.
You could probably, and you could check with your City Attorney. I'm sure it's
within your right to deny the variance. There would be a penalty on the
property owner to do that of course but I think you probably could uphold that.
Again, we attempted to try to minimize damage to a property that was probably
caused by decisions that the City undertook. That in itself does not obligate
you to approving a variance.
Councilman Boyt: I don't see how the City's decisions have impacted this
property one way or the other so far. We're about to make a decision that will
impact it but the fact that 2 out of the 5 houses have a deck that extends into
the wetlands because the City made a mistake does not now say to this piece of
property you have the right to a similar decision and that's what you're
proposing here.
Paul Krauss: What we're saying is that right now we have a homeowner that was
fairly innocent in this whole procedure. They didn't develop the property and
they didn't approve the development of the property. They didn't pull the
building permit on the home nor did they approve the building permit of the
home. We did and the developer did. They now have a home, their only home on
that side of the block that does not have a deck. They are not damaging the
wetland. We checked with that. If there was going to be wetland damage we
would have very serious reservations about that. We're only talking about
encroaching into the setback. The wetland is still physically some distance
away.
Councilman Boyt: Your last statement Paul would suggest then that we should
change our wetland setback ordinance to say that it's alright to build decks
into the setback.
Mayor Chmiel: No. I think this is a special case in itself of what's existing. '
Councilman Boyt: It may be a special case but it's not a special case because
it doesn't do any damage to the wetland because if you're going to use that
rationale, then we don't need the setback when it comes to decks. ,y
62
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
Paul Krauss: Well we wouldn't ask you to change the wetland ordinance based on
a single case although we would like you to re-examine the whole wetland
ordinance at some time in the near future. We've been asking for that for some
time. We think that the wetland setback should be upheld and that circumstances
on this one that make that impossible.
' Councilwoman Oimier: I call a question.
Mayor Chmiel: We have a motion on the floor with a second. I'll call a
question.
Councilman Boyt: There is, you're about to go ahead and do this but what's
going to happen is you've just extended. . .
' Councilwoman Dimler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve Variance No.
90-4 with the following condition:
1. The applicant uses Type III erosion control along the edge of the wetland.
All voted in favor except Councilman Boyt who opposed and the motion carried
with a vote of 4 to 1.
Councilman Boyt: That's not appropriate. What you just did isn't in Robert's
' Rules.
Mayor Chmiel: Well, maybe it 's not but you're going around in circles and you
' haven't come to any basic conclusion so I thought I'd move the question.
Councilman Boyt: Well, you either run a meeting by Robert's Rules or you don't
' and apparently you don't.
CONSIDER AUTHORIZING FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR WATERMAIN EXTENSION TO JOHN
KLINGELHUTZ PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 24 NEAR LAKE RILEY.
Councilwoman Dimler: I move approval.
' Mayor Chmiel: Gary, do you want to just touch on that rather quickly.
Gary Warren: Another good report.
' Councilman Workman: I'll second it.
Councilwoman Dimler: It was very excellent. If he's paying for it, why not.
Mayor Chmiel: Total amount of $10,000.00. Is that right?
Gary Warren: Right. That's the security we're asking for. It may not cost
that much but.
Mayor Chmiel: Alright, but that's what you're requesting and he's willing to
pay it.
Gary Warren: That's what he says.
t 63
i
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990 t
Mayor Chmiel: Okay.
Resolution $90-93: Councilwoman Disler moved, Councilman Workman seconded to
authorize the preparation of the feasibility study to evaluate the extension of
sanitary sewer and watermain to the John Klingelhutz property as described in
the attachments and that the cost of the study is to be reimbursed by Mr.
Klingelhutz. Mr. Klingelhutz is to provide the City with a cash escrow or
letter of credit in the amount of $10,000.00 to guarantee payment of these
expenses. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS:
Mayor Chmiel: Tom. Zip codes.
Councilman Workman: Congress is getting kind of active with the Zipcode
question and I think it might shed some new light on some things. I did request
information on the activity. Where I really heard about it was the.
Councilman Johnson: Could you be more specific? What is Congress doing with
Zipcodes?
Councilman Workman: What they would do is they would require that the Zipcode
for a unit of government be the same.
Councilman Johnson: Well let's let them do it and let's keep quiet.
Councilman Workman: That's right. What I'm going to do is I'm going to make
sure that I get through all of this and make sure everybody gets the
information. I think it's a good idea and might be coming but it's something
that I'm promoting with my friends in Congress. I think it's a good idea,
particularly in this city where we have numerous Zipcodes, etc.. I don't think
it means changing too much and it'd be up to the Post Office to get your mail
delivered to the right place.
Councilman Boyt: I encourage you to talk to Dale Geving before you push this
very hard.
Councilman Johnson: Or you could borrow Todd's red sweater he wore one night.
It made a very good target. ,
Councilman Workman: Anyway, it's not an issue or situation that people are real
anxious about but if Congress does it, it's moving.
Councilwoman Dimler: I have a question. On the joint meeting, we never got to
the 1990 budget update and I just wondered if we wanted.
Mayor Chmiel: I think we'll probably have to carry that over.
Don Ashworth: I'll just very quickly let the Council know that I'm very
concerned with our revenue projections, especially as they deal with permits.
We're looking, we started this year looking at a reduction in the budget as a
64
i
City Council Meeting - July 23, 1990
11 result of State Aid cuts. That amounted to what we thought would be $32,000.00
at that point in time. Current projections or the actual distribution shows
that that amount is $44,000.00. I would not be concerned about that with an
approximate 2 1/2 million dollar general fund budget. In other words, that's
less than 2% but what the statistics show that I distributed to Council is that
the building permit revenues could be down by $200,000.00, maybe $250,000.00 to
' $300,000.00. I'm having our financial people put together updates on the whole
revenue projection updates as to potential expenditure cuts. Again, I was not
worried earlier in the year when the amount was $30,000.00 but now as we're
looking to $44,000.00 and then an additional $200,000.00 or $250,000.00 on top
of that, it now becomes a very, what's the word I'm looking for, critical
number.
Mayor Chmiel: Scarey.
Don Ashworth: Scarey so it will be a part of a future Council packet but be
aware that I am very concerned at this time.
Councilman Johnson moved, Councilwoman Dialer seconded to adjourn the meeting.
All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 11:00
p.m..
' Submitted by Don Ashworth
City Manager
Prepared by Mann Opheim
1
1
I
65
I
- •
IIFT,1 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
I AUGUST 1 , 1990
Chairman Conrad called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. .
I MEMBERS PRESENT: Steve Emmings , Annette Ellson , Ladd Conrad, and Jim
Wildermuth . Tim Erhart arrived after the first item .
MEMBERS ABSENT: Brian Batzli and Joan Ahrens
STAFF PRESENT: Paul Krauss, Planning Director ; Jo Ann Olsen, Senior
Planner ; Sharmin Al-Jaff , Planner One; and Charles Folch , Asst . City
IEngineer .
' PUBLIC HEARING:
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A LIBRARY/ANNEX/RESEARCH
CENTER, EXPANSION OF THE EDUCATION CENTER AND A RETIREMENT COMPLEX ON
I PROPERTY ZONED IO, OFFICE AND INSTITUTIONAL DISTRICT AND LOCATED NORTH OF
WEST 78TH STREET AND EAST OF GREAT PLAINS BOULEVARD, ST. HUBERT CHURCH.
Public Present:_
' Name Address
I Father Barry 7707 Great Plains
Cheryl Guscyensie 7152 Ticonduoga
Richard & Millie Lundahl 5509 Eden Prairie Road
Judy Schmieg 220 West 77th Street
Ursula Dimler 7203 Kiowa Circle
Chuck & Betty Naber 409 Del Rio Drive
IISharmin Al-Jaff and Paul Krauss presented the staff report . Chairman
Conrad called the public hearing to order .
' Richard Lundahl : Ladies and gentleman , my name is Richard Lundahl . I 'm
the architect for St . Hubert 's and in attendance we also have Father Barry ,
I the pastor and several other members of the church and we'll try to answer
any questions you have . One thing I would like to say that there are not
20 classrooms . There are 6 per floor for a total of 12. The setbacks that
you just discussed apply only to the housing and right now the way we've
' laid it out , the housing coincides with the setbacks of the existing houses
there . The school is set back another 12 feet from that Let 's see , what
else? The materials of construction , we were going to try to continue the
' breakoff block materials that we had used on the existing church which was
done in 1976 rather than the red brick on the school . We feel that the
school at some time or other , whether it gets done during this project or
another , deserves to be updated in the whole architecture of it. The side
' facing the south and the side facing the city and of course you won't see
the side facing the other side if we do this development because it will be
enveloped by the development and a court . The height of the buildings ,
I none of them are as high as the existing church but in order to get 2
stories of course we do have to have a little height . The height was
dictated probably by not just the fact that it 's 2 stories but by the fact
that we 're parking underneath and we raised the first floor up 4 feet in
•
IIPlanning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 2
I
order to provide a ventilation space so that we wouldn 't have to ventilate
it mechanically and so therefore it's 4 feet higher than it would normally
be in the housing area . And we 've tried to coincide the roof lines of the
school and the housing development . The atrium , actually we consider it as
only having one atrium area and that 's the area at the entrance to the
church . You could possibly call it an atrium where you enter the school
too but it really is just a large sky lit area which may have some
' greenhouse function in it and so we really don 't call it an atrium but the
new entrance to the church and that area is called an atrium . We think
that it would blend well with what 's there as far as the church goes and I
think it will blend well with what's in Chanhassen now . So I 'd be happy to
I answer any questions architecturally and Father Barry would be happy to
answer any questions conceptually about how this kind of a project fits
together for him .
IIConrad: The current parking lot is adequate?
Richard Lundahl : It 's adequate except on certain days . We would like to
I enlarge it too and it will be enlarged at a later date when properties
become available to the north . All of those properties have been offered
to the church and I think Father Barry can talk more to this than I can but
I we would increase the parking then but right at this point those are not in
this project .
IFather Barry: There 's some reasons that parking . . .
Richard Lundahl : Actually only one mass does the parking lot overflow , is
that correct?
IIFather Barry: Well it overflows on more than one mass on occasions but the
Sunday morning popular mass at 9:30 . . .and the other time might be on a
I Saturday night if there 's a wedding or something over at the old church by
the Colonial Church of Edina when they utilize our parking lot not
knowing . . .they should park elsewhere and then our 's overflow. Or on Sunday
I mornings sometimes we have to address , when we have hospitality after one
mass and hangovers from one mass into the next mass so then we have
overflow problems there . So people staying to visit may create some
overflow and if that is a problem , then we may have to stop hospitality
I which we surely don 't want to . I have a few other things . . .that have come
up in the presentation that need to be addressed. There are actually two
garages that would be removed . We 're hoping to sell these for removal
II rather than tear them down because they 're in pretty good condition . The
houses too . I did a study on the parking stalls that would be needed by
the first applicant for the retirement dwelling and out of those , there
would be only 18 parking stalls needed . The others don 't have automobiles
I
or are contending to have one which they 're going to get rid of . We have
one of the couples for example who don 't like to drive now and specifically
want to be that close so they don 't have to drive . There are actually the
I possibility of 24 classrooms . You were right in your presentation. by
saying double amount because on Wednesday nights we have smaller classes
for our religious instruction . These are children that do not attend day
I school so we are partitioning each class with a divider that will allow
each classroom to become two on Wednesday nights . That does not create a
I
Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 3
I
parking problem because the parents drop off the children and then leave . '
I 'm wondering about the parking taking up that island space because that
destroys some more grass which I 'm hoping and pleading that we can retain
along with the trees . The trees , there is some error in identification of
the trees and we will correct that when we stipulate for you how many trees"
and the size and so forth but there is some error in the identification of
the trees . As you saw the presentation here , the maples all along the
front of the retirement dwelling will be retained . Those mature maples . I'
don 't think the construction will take those out as I see . They will be
there plus some of the other trees . We are also a tree planting community .
The stipulation to the architects when we first met with them was to design'
to save as many trees as possible because we hurt destroying trees . We 're
nature people but we are planting trees all along . We 've planted 3 new
maples in the cemetary . A spruce . I 've put up 3 pines in the back yard .
A cedar . A double birch . Some sumac if you want to call them trees but well
are tree planting people and do plan to plant more trees . The housing is a
question for people and that is a new development in Christian Community
thought . That the elderly need in those years of their life to be in close'
contact with the church and I 've worked with the elderly specifically and
now visiting them of my community can find that they need to be close to
church . We have any number who when it gets icy or stormy cannot make it
to services and they live on that . That is a solice for their older years
so we are not into providing blank elderly housing . We 're not getting into
the elderly housing business . We 're getting into special type of provision
for our elderly . Connected to the church on one end and to the children II
because national studies have shown that where elderly are around children III
it revitalizes their lives . Does something and it does something for
children also , national studies . There are 5 parishes in our diocese that
do have elderly housing units but they are not connected to the church .
And just yesterday and today I was attending a Upper Midwest gathering of
priests in various parishes and I 'm being congratulated now for having the
vision and the foresight to connect it to the church and those specifically'
who did not say we wish we had done that so I 've become more well known now
among Clergy even because of that specific project . It 's a vision . It 's a
new vision and new things are kind of hard for some people to accept but I
it 's a dream and it 's going to be extremely popular . I know it . I know
it . Both from experience in the previous city I was which was Nashville ,
Tennessee and from the gut feeling that I have about this . Some of our I
community think we are not going big enough with it . We had intended in
the beginning going 3 floors but because of city ordinances and so forth
we 're going to start with 2 and hopefully , maybe expand in that other
property if it becomes available but these are the visions that include our
hopes for the future . The school is necessary . Not because we have that
many more students but because the students that we have now are cramped .
Incredibly cramped. We are having tutoring going on in corridors and nooks'
and crannies . In the chair room . Next to the boiler room and that has to
be corrected so that is essential . And the old space of classrooms will
provide meeting space and office space that we vitally need right now also .
We 're terribly cramped . We just don 't have the room . I think that 's all I'
need to add to the presentation .
Conrad: Thank you . Other comments? '
JPlanning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 4
Ursula Dimler : Hi . I 'm Ursula Dimler . I reside at 7203 Kiowa Circle . I
' am a member of St . Hubert 's parish and have been so for 20 years . My
husband 's family has been there almost since it began . I think his
ancestors helped build the church . I just want to express one concern that
I had and that was that , all my four children have gone to St . Hubert 's
school . The enrollment is now up over 200 students and in this plan , we 've
always had trouble with enough playground space and in this plan I see none
or even less and I would like to have that addressed .
Conrad: Thanks Ursula .
' Father Barry: There is playground space . Sorry it 's not on the plan . I
asked Mr . Lundahl . . .to make sure there's an area in the back . I 'm not sure
whether it would be . . .to what we have now . I think with that . . .there is a
proposal to put portable posts and so forth in the parking lot for
volleyball and so forth . The older children . . .if we get volleyball courts
and also lines on the parking lot for volleyball , then the students can
utilize their time playing volleyball . . . .and this is all playground .
That 's all playground area . It is now and it will be .
Ursula Dimler : Could you show us where the relationship . . .
Father Barry: Way away from it . Right there .
' Krauss: The apartments are over here so some of them will actually look
out , well I guess they 'd be looking out from here . The closest apartments
are right about there .
11 Ursula Dimler : Is there a buffer zone? I 'm concerned that the noise might
disturb the people in the apartments .
Krauss: Well , they 're around the corner and they are located right about
80 to 100 feet away .
Father Barry: There is actually very little noise once school is out and
' during school , it 's like an hour and a half . And in the evenings now , you
know. . . There isn 't very much playground activity . . . Very few people use
this and those that do , it 's not like a mob of kids out there . In Chicago
' the city built 2 elderly housing units . . .around a football field
specifically so that the elderly could watch kids play football . They put
one up one year and 3 years later put another one up and those balconies
' were full of the elderly watching the kids play football . I personally
don 't think the noise from the. . .
Ursula Dimler : I 've supervised playing out there and they can get rather
rowdy .
Father Barry: Yeah , I suppose if somebody wants to take a nap in the
afternoon . . . It 's going to be further away than it is now . . .
Conrad: Okay , are there any other public comments? Anything? Any
' neighbors here?
I
Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 5
Father Barry: We had a number of neighbors wanting to come tonight and I
told them I didn 't think they had to . They thought they should come and
speak in favor of it . We were wondering were they needed and so forth. I
said you know if you 've got other things you want to do , don 't bother . If
it 's essential for neighbors to come and speak in favor , they 'll come at
the next meeting . I don't know what the Planning Commission feels about
that . Would you like that input from neighbors? •
Conrad: They usually show if they 're irritated so it doesn 't take a whole I
lot of prodding if they have a concern. If there 's controversy , it 's good
to have both sides represented and therefore it would be good to have your
supporting neighbors in attendance but I don 't hear any antagonistic
comments tonight . I think Ursula brought up a good point . The playground
and proximity to the residential community in my mind is an issue , as is
parking an issue and maybe I 'll get into that a little bit but apparently I
the neighbors and the notice was sent out and we sent the notice to those
within 500 feet . Okay . Any other comments? Is there a motion to close
the public hearing? '
Emmings moved, Wildermuth seconded to close the public hearing. All voted
in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Conrad: Now we 'll get into a round where we get some Planning Commission
comments or questions . Jim , start at your end .
Wildermuth: I like the idea of carrying through the theme on the church I
material through on the new construction . One thing I guess I would like
to see is more underground parking . I think when the new construction that
is now being contemplated , you have the opportunity to put in additional
underground parking . Once that 's completed , that opportunity will be lost .
From a city standpoint , is there going to be parking allowed on Frontier
Trail? '
Krauss: At this time we 're working with the City Engineer investigating
the possibility of reconstructing the curb . Bumping it out like the
parkway system in Minneapolis .
Wildermuth: Or a denting into the boulevard so that .
Krauss: Right . So we could provide additional parking area . Of course we
don 't want to lose any trees in doing that so we' ll have to work on that
but we are looking into that . '
Wildermuth: The height of the new construction , how does that compare with
the houses across the street on Frontier Trail? I guess I 'd direct that
question to the architect .
Richard Lundahl : I 'm sure it 'd be higher . I 'm not sure if there 's going
to be 2 story houses across the street . I don't recall so I can 't answer
you but I 'm sure it 's higher .
Wildermuth: By 5 feet? 10 feet? ,
1 Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 6 Fp
I
Richard Lundahl : Are there 2 story? There are 2 story .
Wildermuth: So it 'd be roughly comparable?
' Richard Lundahl : Plus there will be some mature trees . . .that are a lot
higher than that .
Wildermuth: Yes . I really like the idea of incorporating the elderly
housing into the school and church setting . I think that probably along
would qualify the project as a PUD . Other than that , I don 't really see
that the project would qualify as a PUD but I think that in itself is
certainly sufficient to do that . At this point , what is the percent
impervious surface coverage?
Al-Jaff: 72% .
Wildermuth: 72% . What would our ordinance normally limit?
IIKrauss: As of which district? The OI?
Wildermuth: In the OI , right .
IConrad: Probably 70 .
' Wildermuth: I thought it was 50 .
Krauss: 65% .
' Wildermuth: Well that 's not too far out of the way I guess. From a
concept standpoint , it looks like a good project .
IConrad: Annette .
Ellson: In general I think it 's wonderful . I had a question on something .
We 're talking about a 15 foot wide landscape buffers proposed to the north
I
to separate an existing house . Where is that? Could you help me?
Al-Jaff: This is the . . .The church does not own this parcel yet .
IFather Barry: Could I address that please?
' Ellson: Sure .
Father Barry: We are in very close contact with that family and I don 't
think that they would like a buffer of any height or anything . We 're open
Ispace people .
Ellson: I was wondering if that neighbor was here , which it doesn 't sound
I like any of the neighbors are here but if it 's something that the church
plans on purchasing anyway and we normally like to protect the neighbors
from development . I was wondering if this was even necessary . I didn 't
11 know if you were 1 year away from taking it over and if this was necessary .
I
Planning Commission Meeting It
August 1 , 1990 -- Page 7
Father Barry: Well in all frankness , had we pressured them they would have
looked for other housing . They own the property and I have . . .that when
they sell , if they sell , we will have a first rights , almost total rights
that we would purchase it . So they have no aversion , in fact they thought
in this building we would move right up to their patio and we assured them
that we would not . In fact I have fussed at the architect about getting
too close because I 'm a grass person too . I don 't want all kinds of
blacktop back there . That 's my backyard also . We sort of flow into one II
another . So if there is some buffer required, I think I would prefer to
talk to them and have them say what they would like because our yards are
shared. '
Conrad: The buffer is grass?
Father Barry: Oh yeah . There 's a good buffer there . '
Richard Lundahl : There 's 15 feet and we were planning on planting
additional landscaping there but in the staff report they recommended that II
we cut it down so we would add another parking space to that .
Krauss: If I could explain that . The parking there does not meet our I
requirements for manuevering room . You've got a couple of different flows
coming in over there. You 've got the 3 stalls at the end over here . Right
here you 've got 2 stalls , one. of which backs right out into the right-of-
way which we don't allow plus you 've got the cars entering the underground
parking through here . We frankly just felt it was too tight to work
comfortably and that the only place there is to fix it really is to shorten
up on that buffer yard . We would still anticipate it being a buffer yard II
because the church doesn 't own it yet but I think we can work something
out . Now in doing that we thought we could get another space in there . We
want to eliminate that space that goes right onto Frontier but this is a ,
detail I think we can work out .
Ellson: Okay . That was a detail I was totally confused about . You 're not
adding anything onto the church itself? '
Richard Lundahl : Not to the sanctuary, no. The atrium. . .that is a church
entrance which will be also a narthex . We 've never had a narthex so it
will allow for overflow from the sanctuary which is . . .and the narthex which,
involves the removal of a library that 's there , will flow into the atrium
but that 's generally just a looping around. . .area already existing. But it
is new coverage . I
Ellson: Yeah. I know that it can be real crowded. . .so I was thinking,
what? You 're not going to add any more places for people to stand and it 's'
growing . My first thought was is this enough? I think we need to do all
the kinds of more things but I know that you do things in steps of course .
Krauss: Well you know we were working with a plan that Father Barry
brought to us but you people have touched on the parking issue . One of the
things we were concerned about in the parking issue , we acknowledge there's
a problem there now on occasion . Cars park in the lot across the street
which I believe the City has an ownership position in anyway and some of
I
.1 Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 8
the other lots in the area which have . We certainly wanted to make sure
' that whatever was done here didn 't make the problem any worse and that it
accommodated it 's own need and I think this concept plan has accomplished
that . Longer range , we 'd certainly like to work with the church to expand
' their parking if we could but we did set the guideline that we certainly
didn 't want to exasperbate the problem .
Ellson: I love the idea of the whole interconnecting and I think we
' couldn 't ask for anything better there . I think it 's a wonderful way to
keep the church , which has always been a cornerstone in the downtown and
we 're doing a good service to limit the number of seniors . Granted I 'd
' like to think that the whole thing could be doubled or whatever but I think
that it looks good and I 'm usually the one up here saying now .save the oak
trees . I could tell from the plan that it was really looked at and taken
seriously which is something that I really commend you on because it 's one
of my pet peeves and I always say , now have you really tried everything to
save them and it looks like you are saving quite a few mature trees . So I
like it . I think it's a good idea and again , I 'd like to have seen it
bigger and more but with the limited space I can see you 've done a really
good job .
' Emmings: The living accommodations are for the elderly and I 'm wondering
how that 's being defined here . What are we talking about?
' Father Barry: Age 55 and we will have a panel that will determine when
they have to leave . It 's definitely not a nursing home . Anyone needing
nursing care , there would be a single person would be advised to have . . .
That again would be a community problem for a lot of people .
Emmings: Sure . So basically the way you 're looking at it , it 's for people
who are capable of living independently but who are over 55?
Father Barry: Right .
' Emmings: Has somebody looked at the plan in terms of it 's being accessible
to wheelchairs and other people with special needs?
Krauss: Certainly Commissioners Emmings , we've worked closely with our
Fire Marshall and our building official . Now the plans , the detailed plans
haven 't been developed yet but there's been a dialogue started between the
architect and our people to accomplish all those things .
Wildermuth: The detailed plan will incorporate an elevator I would guess?
Richard Lundahl : Yes .
Emmings: Well , this is a general concept plan at this point . I just want
to make sure that somebody 's thinking about it and if that 's going on , I 'm
sure we 'll look at it in more detail later .
Al-Jaff: There is an elevator proposed from the lower ground parking up
' through it .
I
Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 9
Emmings: I think this qualifies as a PUD to me . It feels right in that it
combines uses that we don 't normally see combined in a kind of a creative
and interesting and very positive way . I think that it provides a nice
transition between what exists and the neighboring area . I think the idea
of , do you do any daycare? Is
Father Barry: No . At this stage we didn 't want to get into it . We have ,
the closest we come is nursery on Sunday . '
Emmings: Okay , but I suppose because you 're so crowded with the school ,
maybe there isn't room for daycare .
Father Barry: If we had , moved out to some acreage , we would consider
daycare because of the need . . .and it 's something that society needs and we
surely would provide it but at the present time , I think we need to wait
for further land and for the development and it 's difficult to establish a
good daycare .
Emmings: My son attended a daycare that was in a facility that housed the II
elderly and there was a lot of interaction between the two groups on site .
It was obvious to me that both groups benefitted enormously from the , or
benefitted mutually . It was just a wonderful situation . He was happy .
The kids were happy because they get a lot of attention . A lot of real
positive attention and the folks that were living there enjoyed the
interaction with kids . It clearly brighten their day and their time so I II
think this is a wonderful plan . I like it very much . I 'm not particularly•
concerned about the parking because it seems to me that it 's primarily a
problem for a very small duration of time . It seems to me that everybody's"
being sensitive about it and doing the best they can under the
circumstances that are here . And while it may not be ideal , I think it 's
alright . When you were talking about that other house that 's still on the
property . I think it 's essential that you eventually acquire that property"
if not other adjoining property the way you seem to be growing there . If
those people are dedicated to the idea of selling that property to the
church , it would certainly be a small step to enter into an agreement with II
them so you have a right of first refusal on that property in writing
because people can change their minds and a lot of funny things can happen .
It would be good to get that in writing . Other than that , I don 't have any'
comments .
Conrad: Is the play area smaller than it is today?
Krauss: Yeah , it 's relocated slightly and it is smaller . ,
Father Barry: Consider that the whole front parking lot which has a
basketball backboard and so forth , is also play area . This is a special
play area for play construction . I don't know if you 've been down there so
you know what we 're talking about . That structure there . The new site
I 've asked Mr . Lundahl , will not accommodate the whole bit but it will
accommodate quite a bit of it . And a lot of it , as it is there now, is not
used . Some of that play structure is hardly ever used and some of it I
would like to see not be used . For example girls crawling up on a chain II
and I 'm thinking of them slipping and. . .
Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 10
Conrad: It just seems to me it 's a small , out of the whole site and I do
' like a lot of what I see here . I think there 's a lot of neat things
incorporated but in general the impervious surface or the percent of lot
coverage , even though your light green is higher than we 'd normally like .
' We'd like more green . We 'd like to preserve it . It really stands out to
me that the play area is , and I hadn 't thought about that . How parking lot
constitutes play area . That doesn 't seem like a mix to me . Cars , kids can
be and I know it 's used that way but for some reason that just seems
inconsistent . But it seems like a glaring deficiency but again , I guess
nobody 's bringing that up . Nobody is concerned . Well Ursula , you 're
concerned . It just , as I compare the recreation sites of other schools ,
this just seems like a real , it just seems like we 're really , we 're doing a
lot of neat things in there but still , for the kids , there is not space .
There 's not safe space for them or a lot of space . I 'm not an expert in
' that area but staff , Paul you don 't seem to , that doesn 't bother you from a
staff standpoint?
Krauss: Well , I raised the issue in our discussions . I asked if State
licensing set a minimum requirement for green area and apparently they do
not . They are maintaining a green area for those kinds of activities . In
going past the site I frequently see the kids out playing in the parking
' lot during the day and the fact of the matter is , unless there 's services
going on , there 's nobody in that parking lot .
' Conrad: But how does that mesh?
Wildermuth: I think it 's a good mixed use for a parking lot . The grade
school that I went to , I grew up was completely paved .
Conrad: Very definitely . I 'm not worried about the paved . I 'm just
worrying about the fact that a car can go into that paved area . That
Idoesn 't mean it 's a recreation area there .
Wildermuth: Maybe some provision has to be made there to close off part of
that lot during the week or something .
Krauss: Right now actually the situation is somewhat more hazardous than
it 's going to be in the future . Now you could take a more aggressive
' stance and put some sort of a barricade there so when the kids are there ,
the cars can 't come but right now the school buses have to line up in there
and the parents have to drop off in there because they don 't have the
' advantage of having another drop off on TH 101 . So the new configuration
removes some of that conflict but if it is a concern , we could be somewhat
more aggressive in controlling access to the parking lot .
' Father Barry: With that play area green , once they start playing on that
it won 't be very long before all the grass and the green we have will be
gone and then when it rains it all ends up in the parking lot anyhow .
' Conrad: Yeah , I 'm not suggesting that we need more grass for kids to kill .
I just want to make sure there 's enough area for kids period. If we
sanction this as a PUD , it 's a chance to look at the entire site to make
sure that it all works and make sure that works for senior citizens even
I
Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 11 '
though I 'm not sure that the play area is perfect right next to the senior
citizens area but it may be okay . But I just have a real negative feeling
in terms of the play area and how we 've designed it . I guess I 'd like a
more aggressive approach in terms of how we utilize . I think it 's a good '
use of a parking lot to use it for kids . The church 's not in session
weekdays . Good time to use the parking lot for kids . Yet on the other
hand , I want to have a sense that there 's , it 's not a parking lot on those
days and I don 't know what that means . I don 't know how we do that . The II
other question Paul . Have we had any complaints from the neighbors?
Parking wise on Sunday? Anything? Have you looked at any of the logs that
may register complaints?
Krauss: No I haven 't . I 'm not aware of any complaints but I didn 't try to
delve into it that far either . We circulate these things in house and
typically if there 's a problem , Public Safety will tell us .
Conrad: So Sunday is just not an issue day with the neighbors? It just
nothing . ,
Krauss: I don 't want to dismiss it as a problem because clearly they 're
parking all over the place but it seems to be one that the community 's
become alert to since it 's been going on for so long .
Conrad: How do you know that the parking is acceptable for the senior
citizen , for the new underground ramp? What ratio? What rules did you use l
to say , hey it 's okay?
Krauss: Well I 've worked on a number of senior citizen projects and
they 're widely varied and on this one we 've been talking to Father Barry
and he knows who he 's got moving in there but you look at some things . The
guidelines are you have to be over 55 . Now obviously 55 is not elderly all
the time and many people might have 2 cars . When you look at the mix of
the apartments . The apartments are relatively small for the most part . A
lot of them are single bedroom units . Those are not the kind of things
that somebody who just wants to be free from the worries of mowing their
lawn moves into . They move into a larger townhouse or condominium type
situation so the design of the building helps to enforce the parking
limitation . You typically , when you move up from active elderly to
somewhat less active you tpically go for a 1 to 1 ratio . Many of the
buildings I know have been designed like that . If you look at some of the
buildings in Richfield or Edina where you can walk to a lot of things , they
have 1 to 1 ratios and parking lots are not too often full because they can'
take buses . That doesn't necessarily apply here except that this is in the
downtown Chanhassen . People can walk and the church itself by means of
this unique plan is going to provide for a lot of the day to day activities'
for these people that they might otherwise drive to . So it 's really a
subjective call is what it boils down to . The 1 to 1 ratio is one that
I 've worked with . It works. I
Conrad: You say it 's best judgment at this time that you think is
acceptable . What do we do , what 's the City policy in terms of church
visitors parking in city property across the street? Do we need to look all
that? Is that , you know that seems like an easy solution for parking ,
1
IPlanning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 12
I
especially on Sunday if we have overflow problems but what is our policy?
IKrauss: Well it 's public parking to the extent that it 's under public
ownership and can be used . I could be wrong , it predates my time with the
I City but that all used to be a private parking lot and was used during
services anyway . We became involved with the north side improvements and
rebuilt the whole thing and took a more aggressive posture . We put in a
parking lot south of the old church off of TH 101 in there . Those lots
IIwere available to whomever needs to use it whenever they need to use it .
Conrad: So the City is comfortable that the church can use it?
IWildermuth : Probably a few spots are reserved for Kenny 's .
I Krauss: Well , you want to be careful . You don 't want to have 4 or 5
operations determining that they 're going to use that space at the same
time . But since church services are generally off peak . Kenny 's would be
an example of one where there might be a conflict but of course that 's over
I on the west side and then you have access to the parking that 's all behind
there . All you have to do is park behind Medical Arts so the situation ,
while not ideal is certainly getting better , tremendously better I think
' over the last 12 months .
Wildermuth: I still would like to see the underground parking expanded . I
' mean now 's the time to do it . Now when the opportunity is .
Ellson: How much expanded?
Wildermuth: Well as much as possible under the new construction .
Ellson: To give you what? 5 , 10 more?
' Wildermuth According to the plan it looks as though the underground
parking could almost be doubled . You 've got the school right?
I Richard Lundahl : Underneath the housing , unless you went underneath the
school .
' Conrad: Yeah , I think that 's it .
Emmings : And Ladd you know maybe one way to address the fear that the
residents parking is going to be a problem would be to say that all
residents must park beneath the , in the underground garage . Put a
condition on it like that and then that way , if some people have 2 cars and
some people have no cars , it would still work out but leave it to them to
I handle it internally with the condition that all resident parking be
underground .
' Krauss: I think that would be very appropriate since there really is very
little latitude in visitor parking . They need to have access to all the
outdoor stalls that are available .
I
I
Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 13
Wildermuth: The footprint of the underground parking lot really represents'
what? Is that all the new construction is going to be?
Krauss: No . What it represents is the outside limits of the apartment
which sits over it . The new construction goes beyond that .
Wildermuth: If the new construction goes beyond that , then there would be
enough area to expand the underground parking right? '
Krauss: What you 've got over here is , Frontier runs out here and TH 101 is
over there . The new construction comes up to something like that . This
portion here being school . This is the outside limit of the apartment so
you 've got this space over here where theoretically .
Wildermuth: It seems like it would make some sense . '
Krauss : I 'd really leave that up to the architect . From a layout
standpoint , it seems to be a continuance of the same corridor . Floor
elevations might be a problem .
Richard Lundahl : You 'd have to raise the floor of the school . '
Father Barry: Assessing the people that are looking to utilize it , I think
you ' ll get a lot of stalls empty . There aren 't any of them that have 2
cars now that, I know of . ,
Wildermuth: I 'm not so much thinking of the elderly housing. What I 'm
thinking about really is maybe your school staff . People like that could II
park down there during the week rather than using .
Father Barry : We have that huge parking lot and they use just that one end
and we don't have that large of a staff for the school . We have probably a,
dozen cars in there at the most . That 's why the parking lot can be used as
a playground because there 's no other cars during the day .
Conrad: Okay so Paul , City staff is real comfortable that the , I 'm not
even talking necessarily about the apartment parking . I think I 'm
satisfied with Paul 's feeling in terms of the use that will have adequate
parking for those that move in . I think with Steve 's suggestion that will 11
control that . As we look at this as a PUD , I 'm trying to get my arms
around the whole site and that 's where I go back to the parking lot but
basically I 'm hearing a couple things . One , We 're not getting any
complaints from neighbors . Two, that if we do have overflow parking
problems on Sunday at 9:30 , that is handled by city lots . We don 't have a
problem to deal with . That 's what I 'm hearing . '
Krauss: Basically that 's true but I don't want to overstate the case .
There is a parking shortfall but the situation seems to be one that 's being"
dealt with .
Conrad: But the City is comfortable we can make up for that shortfall with
other sites in the neighborhood? I
I
Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 14
1
Krauss: Yeah, we 're certainly improving that situation , yes . You know I
' can 't tell you that there is no parking problem . That every car is parked
where it should be because I don 't know that to be the case but it 's
getting better than it was and this proposal is certainly not making it any
' worse .
Conrad: Okay , you 've relieved my anxiety Paul . Then I 'm stuck with the
' last issue and that goes back to playground and I think I 'd like to have ,
when the applicant , when the church comes in to the City Council , I 'd
really like them to present something more than what I 've seen tonight in
terms of helping them understand the playground needs and the recreation
needs for the children that are going to school . Maybe that 's , in my mind
it may be some creative way of using that parking lot and landscaping the
parking lot with , maybe taking a few stalls away but cording off a portion
' with , I hate to say it , a berm or something but at least on the weekdays
there 's a way to keep cars out of the playground area in the parking lot .
On weekends there 's a way to shoot those cars through so that they
accommodate the church goers but anyway , I guess my recommendation is we
take another look at how we handle the recreation needs of the kids and any
creative use we can . If you can do that , you 'd certainly have my support
on this as a PUD and this as a sketch plan or whatever we 're calling the
' plan to present to City Council . Any other comments? Is there a motion?
Emmings: Sure . I 'll move that the expansion of St . Hubert 's church , we
recommend approval for it to be given PUD concept plan approval subject to
the conditions set forth in the staff report .
Ellson: I 'll second it .
Conrad: Discussion .
Emmings moved, Ellson seconded that the Planning Commission recommend to
approve the PUD Concept Plan for the expansion of St. Hubert's Church
subject to the following conditions:
1 . Revise parking and access plans as requested .
2 . Provide final landscaping and tree preservation plans responding to
' issues that have been raised .
3. Provide final engineering plans including utility , grading and storm
drainage data:
a . The applicant 's engineer shall provide the City with calculations
verifying storm drainage and water and sanitary sewer service
' design .
b . The applicant shall provide a grading plan showing proposed
contours over the stie including all pavement areas . The grading
plan shall also include erosion control .
c . The applicant shall modify the parking arrangement adjacent to the
bus loading area .
I
Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 15
d . The applicant shall provide the necessary easement area for the
existing sanitary sewer crossing the northwest corner of the site .
e . The applicant shall acquire and abide by all necessary agency '
permits , including a MnDot driveway access permit .
4 . Submit a concurrent subdivision application to combine underlying lots I
into a single tax parcel .
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO AMEND SECTION 20-263 OF THE RECREATIONAL I BEACHLOT ORDINANCE TO ALLOW FOR PORTABLE CHEMICAL TOILETS ON RECREATIONAL
BEACHLOTS , MINNEWASHTA CREEK HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. (*ITEM DELETED*)
Conrad: I should have done this before as an adminstrative matter . The II
second item on the agenda tonight , which is a zoning ordinance amendment toll
amend the Recreational Beachlot for portable chemical toilets , that has
been deleted from the agenda as has a site plan review for the retail mall
in downtown Chanhassen . Those two , if anybody 's here for those two public 11
hearings or those discussions , those have been deleted from the agenda .
Emmings: Ladd , could I ask why that second item was deleted . Just out of II
curiousity .
Krauss: It 's being deleted because we concluded that it should be
processed as a variance . In the ordinance right now it says no chemical
toilets as a standard for recreational beachlots so as a standard in the
ordinance it can be varied or the request can be made that it be varied so
the Board of Adjustments will hear that .
Emmings: See , I don 't like that . I really am opposed to that .
Krauss: Well , we in fact are opposed to it as well but that
adminstratively is the way we believe it should be handled .
Emmings: Yeah , but I 'm opposed to it for a whole different reason . I
think , originally they came in and asked for a variance . Then it was
switched to a zoning ordinance amendment and I liked that because it seems in
to me that by a zoning ordinance amendment , if there 's any sentiment to
allow these things at all , we 've got a chance to put some conditions on
them . I don 't want to see them as variances and I don 't know , who decides
whether it should be processed as a variance or as a zoning ordinance
amendment?
Wildermuth: How are you going to deny it or on what basis are you going to
accept it as a variance?
Olsen: It 's a tough one . I started talking to those people last year and
explained that if they went through the variance process it would most
likely be denied. Then they were going to pursue it and what I had Shaming
1
Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 16
I
relay to them that if you 're going to go for the variance and if it was
' going to be approved , we would be recommending a ordinance amendment so
that 's where they got back . Okay , if you 're going to pursue this , we
propose to amend the ordinance and that 's where Sharmin was doing some
' research on it and we couldn 't even justify amending the ordinance .
Krauss: I think clearly though , I mean when the ordinance provides a
' standard setback , where you want to deviate from that standard you get a
variance . You don 't rewrite the ordinance and now we may recommend that if
the City Council desires to change how you deal with these things , if they
do change the ordinance as Jo Ann suggested but right now , the way this
thing procedurally should be handled ,, is they 're asking for a deviation
from an existing standard in the ordinance and that 's a variance .
Emmings: But can 't a citizen or the Planning Commission or the City
Council say we want to amend this ordinance and change that?
Krauss: Oh sure .
Conrad: Yes .
Emmings: Then I don 't see why , well I think we should look at it as a
zoning ordinance and I 'll tell you why . Number one , there are two of these
things , two of these chemical toilets in recreational beachlots on my lake
this summer . Yeah . And I think that , I 've talked to all my neighbors and
they find them very , no problem . But they 'd like to make sure it 's not ,
they worry about things like setback and screening and they don 't want it
up against the .
Wildermuth: And that 's the very thing that you want to have some control
over .
' Emmings: You 've got a situation here where people are coming from way off
the lake with a lot of little kids and stuff . They 're coming down to use
' the lakeshore and they need to have bathroom facilities . They do . It 's
just kind of barbaric in a way not to allow these things I think . So I
think we ought to look at a zoning ordinance amendment and make sure that
we 've got a lot of conditions . Maybe we want to limit the time during the
year . You know , these beachlots are used heavily for about a month and a
half . It isn 't a big deal and we could set the time the thing can be
there . Maybe require , I was thinking even , I don 't know . Have them on an
' annual basis , have them permitted on an annual basis and they 'd have to
show that they 've got someone , they 've contracted with someone to manage
the thing . To pump it or whatever gets done with it but I think there are
a lot of controls you could put on to make them very unobtrusive and I 'd
In
like to be working on it from that end .
Conrad: Today they 're not allowed right?
' Emmings: Right .
Conrad: And there were some good reasons . I 'm not , you stated the pros
and cons real clearly and the cons are , if you put that 10 feet from a
t
Planning Commission Meeting -
August 1 , 1990 - Page 17
bordering residential property , that 's offensive . Also , if that beachlot
is 100 feet wide , which I think is permittable .
Emmings: On my lake there are some 25 feet .
Conrad: And so therefore there are a whole lot of circumstances where
they 're just not acceptable at all and to try to figure those acceptable
situations out in an ordinance I think is real tough . We probably tried
100 years ago to try and figure that out so it's not to discount what
you 're saying because I think there 's a need . Yet on the other hand , the
protection of the neighbors was the primary thing and I don 't believe that
people could figure out enough of those restrictions to protect in all
cases . Therefore in this case , I 'm not unopposed to the variance situation
because it gives you a chance to look at the particulars of that particular
setting. r
Emmings: Under a variance how would you ever get this because it 's
obviously self imposed . r
Conrad: Well yeah .
Emmings: There are a lot of little kids suffering out there because of your
Ladd .
Conrad: Yeah , they probably are . There are so many other people that
don 't like what I 'm doing .
Wildermuth: Let 's make it a conditional use . r
Conrad: But anyway , that 's the other side . Paul , did you have something
too? ,
Krauss: Well no . I don 't want to digress into something that 's not on the
agenda but one 'of the concerns we had was environmental . I 've been in
situations where these things have been vandalized and kicked over and have
polluted swimming beaches for the remaining of the season . It 's happened.
It would continue to happen and I guess we 're concerned about that
potential impact as well . r
Conrad: Do you feel Steve that , basically your posture is that it should
be allowed in this particular site and you 'd like to make it allowable on
other sites because you see the need? r
Emmings: I think it should be allowable on any site where it 's not going
to have , I think there are clearly some beachlots I 've seen in the City
where I don 't think there should be one . I can think of one on my lake
where I don 't think there can be one because I can't think of anyway they
can do it and if that 's the case , that 's just too bad . But I think there
are several of them where they already have them . The two that already
have them , it is not a problem . They don 't have them rightfully but
there 's some experience to go by that it probably can be done in a way
that 's all right . r
1
IIPlanning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 18
1
Wildermuth: Did they get variances?
IEmmings: No . They 're operating illegally . But anyway , if anything 's
going to happen on it , it ought to be done as a zoning ordinance amendment
to me and I 'm certainly interested in enough in it so I wouldn 't mind
working on it .
Krauss: Well we can make that sentiment clear at the Board . That there is
1 some desire to consider it as an ordinance and we 'll make them aware of
that .
1 Conrad: Make sure the word is some desire .
Emmings : Because if they make it a variance they can put it anyplace they
want to . Where are the controls then? I don 't like this .
Conrad: The controls would be imposed based on the stipulations of that
variance .
' Ellson: It would be done case by case .
I Conrad: It would be done case by case . See I 'm of the position that I
really have a tough time with it period . I 'm not sure that I find it
acceptable but I haven 't looked at all the unique circumstances . A whole
lot of beachlots have survived for a whole long time with a whole lot of
II kids and haven 't created any controversy and it hasn 't brought any issues
up in the neighborhood .
IWildermuth: What has it done to the lake?
Emmings: Yeah .
IConrad: I just don 't see that as a problem .
Ellson: It 's something that could be looked into I guess .
IIConrad: Can look into it and I think we should put it on the work agenda
for us as obviously Paul a low priority. No , I don't mean that .
' Emmings: Even though it 's deleted , sorry .
I ( Tim Erhart arrived for the meeting at this point . )
PUBLIC HEARING:
WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A WALKWAY PATH THROUGH A CLASS A
WETLAND TO ACCESS A DOCK LOCATED AT 7016 SANDY HOOK CIRCLE, CHRIS ENGEL FOR
LOTUS LAKE BETTERMENT ASSOCIATION.
Public_Pr ese.n t:_
Name Address
IIPat Lynch 1200 Warner Road , DNR Representative
I
Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 19
Mr ./Mrs . Robert Pfankuch 100 Sandy Hook Road
Debbie Engel 7016 Sandy Hook Circle
Conrad: Is this a public hearing or not?
Olsen: You closed the public hearing last time .
Conrad: Okay , so now tonight was really a time to discuss it with . I
Olsen: Right . It was tabled because there were a lot of different
opinions brought up . So what I did was to have some of the other governing
bodies submit letters on their opinions and one was just verbally over the '
phone and then also Pat Lynch is here from the DNR to kind of get his side
of the story . We 're still recommending that the boardwalk be what is
pursued as our policy and even go as far as amending the ordinance to make II
that clear and that we are still recommending that the boardwalk be what is
permitted on this recreational beachlot versus the fill . But Pat Lynch is
here to have him speak . 1
Conrad: We sure would .
Pat Lynch: My name is Pat Lynch. I 'm the Area Hydrologist with the DNR
for Dakota and Scott Counties . I was helping out in Carver County for a
while . A year and a half ago I guess it is already . I guess this whole
matter came before me in January of 1989 when I received 3 applications foil
wetland alteration from the City and I responded to those with some written
comments that it appeared to me some of the fill proposed was below what we
call our ordinary - high water elevation out at Lotus Lake . What I had heard
back then from the City was that in fact these applications where after the,
fact or the work had already been done. From there I met on the site that
spring with 3 contiguous property owners there . Mr . Frost , Mr . Pfankuch I
and Chris Engel from the Colonial Grove Association. I also had been out
there with the representative from the Army Corps of Engineers . An
enforcement individual and after a lot of discussion and. time we determined
where the DNR 's area of jurisdiction was out there on all 3 of those
properties and I staked that line on the properties and there was
commitment by the property owners to comply with the removal of the
material that was filled waterward of that ordinary high water mark that I
established and staked . All three property owners again had expressed
willingness to restore to those dimensions . I guess I made it clear that
in addition to the DNR 's approval , there were other approvals that may have
to be met namely the Corps of Engineers , Watershed District and any local II
approval . In this case the City of Chanhassen . I know the Corps didn 't
have a problem with what the DNR had proposed for restoration and they
pretty much stayed out of it . From there I guess if I can just jump ahead II
several months , from what we had originally proposed for restoration , therell
were some changes . Some slight modification on the two properties . I
don 't know if that 's west of the Colonial Grove properties but on the Frost"
and Pfankuch properties we adjusted the stakes so that there wasn 't an
obtrusive pipe sticking out into the lake waterward of the fill to be
removed . We thought that that was a reasonable approach so that that would
blend a little more naturally . Have a little curve around that pipe . I
think that was reasonable and a good idea . Also in that timeframe I had
' Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 20
some discussion with a Dr . Charles Hirt and Chris Engel regarding leaving a
small access strip to the docking facility so that they could access their
dock . I had written a letter saying that the DNR didn 't have a problem
with that and that I would allow that to remain provided the rest of the
' material was removed from the site and I stressed again that that was
contingent upon any other local , state and federal or local approvals .
That 's about where we 're at now. I just as soon open it up to questions
from you folks . I guess the impetus behind allowing them to leave a path
' was that our permit rules would actually allow that lot to have a 12 foot
wide concrete ramp poured down there without a permit from us if that 's
what they would choose to pursue . My contention was that yeah , they filled
' in violation . Yeah , they had cooperated without any problems and were
willing to remove the stuff and that I thought it was reasonable and
practical to leave a strip in to access the dock given the fact that it 's a
' multiple use area . The activities are consolidated on one small area . In
my professional judgment , the impacts to the wetland area will be nominal
once it 's restored by leaving that strip in . 80% of that lot will still go
back to a natural state over time with the re-establishment of the
vegetation in there . Like I say , the impacts to that particular area I
didn 't feel were that severe given the fact that there 's a rather intense
infestation of purple loosestrife there . Like I say , as far as the DNR
' rules are concerned and I 'm not saying that they 're the best but they could
have had a 12 foot wide ramp and 12 feet of sand across there without a
permit from us anyway so I think what they 're doing is again , in the DNR 's
perspective is reasonable and practical .
Emmings: Can I ask you a question?
Pat Lynch: Certainly .
Emmings: When you say they could have had a 12 foot wide ramp , concrete
' ramp or whatever , and it wouldn 't have gone against any of the DNR 's
regulations , are we talking about that ramp being in a place that 's
landward of the ordinary high water mark?
Pat Lynch: Waterward of .
Emmings: Waterward of?
Pat Lynch: 10 or 12 feet waterward . I don 't have that . 10 feet waterward
of the ordinary high water elevation . It could be concrete , crushed
gravel , an earthen ramp , planks .
' Emmings: Now just so I get my thinking straight on this , the path that
we 're talking about whether or not they 're going to leave it or remove it ,
is that all landward of the ordinary high water mark?
Pat Lynch: No .
IEmmings: It 's all waterward from the ordinary high water mark?
Olsen: No . There 's a portion that goes just above the ordinary high water
I mark .
1
Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 21
Emmings: Okay . How much of it is above and how much of it is below the
ordinary high water mark?
Pat Lynch: We guessed roughly 40 feet below as a guess.
Olsen : Well that included the waterward part so I think it was about 10
feet that you had them remove so it 's about 30 . Rough estimate .
Emmings: Alright., now what 's 30? 1
Olsen: About 30 feet landward .
Emmings: Okay . So there 's 30 , approximately and I think 25 is the number
I remember us talking about last time but we 're saying there 's 25 or 30
feet of this walkway that 's above the ordinary high water mark going down 1
to the ordinary high water mark , correct?
Olsen: Yeah , approximately that . I
Emmings: And then part of it is, beyond and you told them that , at least
with regard to what 's below the ordinary high water mark , that was okay
with the DNR in this case?
Pat Lynch: Well the only , the DNR jurisdiction begins at the ordinary high
water elevation and is waterward . 1
Emmings: Exactly , but as far as what was there under your jurisdiction it
was okay with you? Is that what I understood?
Pat Lynch: Not what 's there today . What they proposed to leave the 5 foot
wide path .
Emmings: So as long as they removed everything except that 5 foot wide
path , you were satisfied?
Pat Lynch: Correct . That would mean removing about 80% of the material 1
below the ordinary high water elevation .
Emmings: Apart from the fact that we 're also looking at the part that 's II
above the ordinary high water mark and aside from the fact that I recognize
that that 's not an area where you have jurisdiction , do you feel that
there 's any impact to that area? If we assume it 's a wetland, do you think"
there 's any impact , adverse impact to that from this walkway that would be
alleviated by removing it and requiring a boardwalk? Can you shed any
light on that for us? 1
Pat Lynch: I 'm sorry , I 'm not sure I follow the question . I 'm sorry .
Emmings: Right now there 's a rock path that leads from 25 or 30 feet above l
the ordinary high water mark down to the ordinary high water mark and a
little bit beyond . In that situation in the past we have always required
elevated boardwalks through a wetland to get to the ordinary high water
mark so people could have access to the lake . In this case , there 's an
' Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 22
existing rock trail and the question was , the question that came up was , is
' that just , is that as good? Is that alright in terms of it 's impact on
that wetland? That 's what we 're struggling with and we don 't have any
expertise up here to know and that 's the question I 'm asking .
11 Pat Lynch: I won't argue that . If you compare the two , a boardwalk will
have less impact . I don 't think anybody could argue with that as far as
the impacts . I mean if you 're not placing any foreign material , and I 've
' read through the Minutes that Jo Ann had faxed to me . Someone , I think Mr .
Engel said that he hadn 't placed fill but he had placed rock . Well , that
is fill . Fill , whether it 's sand , rock , what have you is fill . Sod . So
yeah , a boardwalk has less impact . I wouldn 't argue that but the
significance on a site like that , I don 't know if it 's what I would
consider a measureable impact .
Emmings: Okay , so in this particular case you think it 's probably pretty
negligible?
' Pat Lynch: I would say so , yeah . I mean there are ways to lessen the
impact of leaving the strip down there by , if I remember right I think it 's
gravel or unvegetated clay path down to the existing dock . If that were
'
revegetated to grass and it just had a grass hill walking down to the lake ,
that would offset some of the impacts of having a gravel strip out there
and what that would tend to do would be to filter any kind of runoff that
comes from the upper reaches by the tennis courts , etc . so there are ways
I
to somewhat offset the shortfalls that a gravel path has over a boardwalk .
And again I stress , that although our rules would allow it and deem it a
reasonable access option , they 've got to get your approval too and if you
Idon 't like it .
Emmings: No , we understand . I think we finally understand that .
IPat Lynch : Okay . There 's nothing wrong with being more restrictive . I 'm
not knocking that .
Conrad: Did we get two conflicting opinions Jo Ann from the DNR? Was that
one of our concerns or not?
11 Olsen: No , I think what was happening was that the applicants were
stating , possibly misquoting Pat in saying that fill would even be
preferred over a boardwalk and that the City didn 't have the right to go
I that far and then it just got out of hand . So no , we really didn 't get
'conflicting quotes from the DNR .
Pat Lynch: There are some benefits to be had by gravel and again I 'm not
I trying to sell the idea of a gravel path . I 'm just stating that when that
gravel , I 've seen the water level today and it 's up quite a bit from the
last few times I 've been out but when the water 's up over that gravel ,
I there are some benefits to it as far as runoff coming down that hill .
Gravel would tend to filter some of the more course grain material and
granted , if you had vegetation in there it would be a better job but
I there 's also a lot of benthic organisms and what not that inhabit the nooks
and crannies of a gravel area and you 'll find wading birds pecking through
1
Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 23
gravel . So it 's not as bad as it may appear is all .
Emmings: Where is the water today in relation to the line you staked as
the ordinary high water mark?
Pat Lynch: Oh geez . Boy , I 'm sorry . I didn 't walk to the corner of the II
property where the stake was . I was over on Mr . Frost 's property .
Emmings: Okay . Have you got a feel at all for whether it 's about there? I
Pat Lynch : It 's got to be close because it was soggy down on the fill area
on the adjacent property . I suspect it 's real close .
Erhart: Pat , isn 't your rules that you apply essentially intended to be
used as a statewide rules and applied generally to lakes throughout the II state whether they be in an urban area or whether they be in a rural area
and that the reason why there 's local jurisdiction is that you don 't intend
to micromanage the environmental controls on the lake . You tend to have a I
broad , statewide point of view . Would you say that 's accurate?
Pat Lynch: Yeah , I 'd agree with that . Our standards are statewide
standards .
Erhart: Yeah , and that it really works in a case where someone owns 25
acres . It works best when someone owns 25 acres and several hundred feet II
of lakeshore and he wants to put his own boat launch in . Isn't that what
that concrete pad allowance is?
Pat Lynch: No , no . Not at all . If you go out , there 's plenty of lakes in'
the cities where an individual lot owner , several on the lake will have an
access pad in his backyard .
Erhart : Not in Chanhassen .
Pat Lynch: Well I don 't work in Chanhassen . I 'm in Scott and Dakota
County . If you go out on Prior Lake , you ' ll see them .
Erhart : You 'll see them in Prior Lake? When were those put in?
Pat Lynch: I don 't know . That predates me .
Erhart: You find actually every lot 's got?
Pat Lynch: No , not every lot , no . I 'm saying that , I wouldn't say that
that 's more so for the out greater Minnesota than it is in the cities .
I guess I wouldn 't agree with that statement .
Erhart: You wouldn 't agree with that?
Pat Lynch: Not in terms of the access ramp , no . As a matter of fact , I 'd I
almost go the other way and say that on new construction on lake lots in
the cities , you 'd probably see an increase in that . '
IPlanning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 24
I
Erhart: You 're seeing new construction on lakes where people individually
put boat landings in their yard .
Pat Lynch: Boating pressure is getting such that you can 't even , at some
places the parking lots are so full , they don 't want to mess with it and
it 's easier .
Erhart: Give us an example of a lake in the metropolitan area where
individual property owner can put their own boat launching pad in the lake .
Pat Lynch: Any lake in Minnesota . If they can conform to the standards .
Erhart : No , no , no . Correct me if I 'm wrong Paul . You can 't do that here
in Chanhassen .
IIPat Lynch: I 'm saying as far as the statewide standards go you can .
Emmings: If he 's saying they can do it .
IIErhart: But our ordinance doesn 't allow it .
' Emmings: Oh , we can 't control it . It 's in their jurisdiction .
Wildermuth: But you can 't do it on the beachlot right?
IIPat Lynch: Your ordinance may address it , I don 't know .
Krauss: If they 're not putting it through a wetland and you 're not on a
IIbeachlot , it really falls back to DNR .
Erhart: So we 're saying our ordinance , really someone can do that even
though I haven 't seen anybody since I 've been on here . As long as it
I
doesn 't go above the ordinary high water mark .
Olsen : Our Shoreland Ordinance is the DNR Shoreland Ordinance .
IEmmings: Right . Well , are we pre-empted? From the ordinary high water
mark lakeward , are we pre-empted?
1 Olsen: No , because remember .
Emmings: We can have stricter standards than the DNR?
IPat Lynch: You bet .
IOlsen: That 's clear we can .
Pat Lynch: I think that 's where there 's a lot of hang-up right now .
IIEllson: Is that those people don 't like that . If I recall the situation ,
that 's what it was about .
1
Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 25
I
Pat Lynch: So again , I 've gotten commitments from the property owners to
restore it to what the DNR would find satisfactory and if you ask for more ,
that 's not for me to say .
Elison: I think we were more concerned about the precedence that it was I
setting and we had never allowed it previous and whereas yes , this one is
probably negligible , it just opens up everybody we said no to prior and
everybody we 'd like to say no to further . It wasn 't us picking on one
group necessarily . We just have consistently never done it .
Pat Lynch: . . .Chanhassen because I 'm not familiar with the lakes in your II community but again , going back to the area that I do work , a lot of the
prime lakeshore properties are developed already and now what you 're seeing
is the marginal stuff that you 've got to go through wetland or you 've got
to excavate or dredge a channel . That 's what 's being developed now because'
that 's all that 's left . You may be having to address the issue again .
Ellson: Well , I think the biggest thing is what Paul said . Is it true I
. . .and we felt that it wasn 't and we got a little uneasy that maybe it is
necessarily but I think you 've cleared that up for us so I really
appreciate that .
Pat Lynch: I think there 's two issues . I think there 's access to their
dock and then there 's the issue of putting small boats in and out . ' I think
through something like this they could probably accommodate both in my
opinion .
Conrad: Any more questions of Pat?
Emmings: No . I appreciate your coming . It helps .
Erhart: Don 't leave yet . Just kidding . We may have some more questions . 1
Pat Lynch: I just want to see the thing resolved as quickly as everyone
else does .
Conrad: It 's not a public hearing but I 'm curious if there's any comments
from those in the audience tonight based on what they heard .
Debbie Engel : I just want to make one comment. I 'm Debbie Engel and I 'm
here on behalf of Chris basically just to listen . . . I 'm not sure that
Mr . Lynch did touch on that but there is a gravel road down within I would
say within 100 feet of this put in by the City because there 's a pumping
station there and I think that 's what he was eluding to the fact that
there 's not grassland coming down the hill and it is all downhill from the
tennis courts to filter so it 's not natural vegetation to filter that and I'
think that 's why the continuity of the rock path and that 's why it was
chosen . So it 's not , there's no grassy area . It's that wide to handle a
city truck . . . I 'm not good on judging distance but I would say within 100 II
feet of the present water level .
Conrad: Okay , thanks Debbie . Any other questions?
IPlanning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 199.0 - Page 26
I
Emmings: I 'd like to ask Paul . If a landowner , we 've heard Mr . Lynch say
that if a landowner , on any individual lot in Chanhassen wanted to
construct a concrete and let 's take a worse case , a concrete ramp to put
boats in and out on his property . If he started that at the ordinary high
water mark and just went waterward with it would he , he 'd obviously be
building a structure . Would he have to come to the City for a permit for
that?
Krauss: Not unless he 's crossing a wetland to do it .
Emmings : Well I think he should have to . I think we should find out if
our ordinance covers it . It would seem to me that the building of any
structure in the water ought to require a city permit if we can have
stricter standards than the DNR has . If our ordinance doesn 't provide that
now , it ought to .
1 ' Krauss: That would put you in the position of having to review every dock .
Emmings : No , it does not . We have an ordinance that tells what you can
have for a dock and so does the DNR so docks are not an issue .
Conrad: You 're talking about a permanent structure?
Emmings: Permanent structure , yeah .
' Conrad: I think we could regulate a permanent structure . I thought we
already did .
11 Olsen: Again , we use the DNR . We 've adopted word for word the DNR
regulations .
Emmings: I don 't care if we adopt their regulations but all we 've got to
do is say if you 're 'going to build a structure in the water , in any water
in Chanhassen , you 've got to come to the City for a permit . I don 't think
frankly that it 's that many . I don 't know of any on my lake . On
' Minnewashta . There might be some but I don 't know . I think that 's a hole
that ought to be plugged .
Conrad: We 've got to get back into this thing . Is there confusions and
maybe some wording problems with the ordinance and I think we spend 2 hours
every other Wednesday night talking about' this . We better revisit it
quickly . Actually we don 't need to revisit it in time for this year but I
' think in time for next year we really should have , we should really monitor
and see what we 're doing with our wetland protection ordinances because
there seem to be exceptions and confusions .
Emmings: Well , maybe you throw lakeshore in there too as well as wetland .
Conrad: It becomes a big process . It 's not easy to get your hands around
because you obviously affect people . . There 's a lot of different
circumstances that have to be incorporated into the ordinance and tough to
do . Tim , any other comments on tonight 's , Pat Lynch 's conversation?
I
Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 27 1
Erhart: No , not on that specific although I agree with Steve . You know , II
and I don 't know if we should be regulating land but when you weigh it
against everything else that we regulate in this city regarding wetlands
and lakes and what not , it does seem like a loophole in the context of how II
everything else we 're so rigid on so I agree that we ought to be throwing
in that too because it kind of pretty much lies in the face of what we 're
talking about here tonight . Somebody could do that and yet we 're worrying II
about a 4 foot wide strip of gravel so it doesn 't make a lot of sense . Arell
you looking for some direction on this thing at this point?
Conrad: Just comments . You know I think we brought this back because one , "
the applicants , the Engel 's were concerned that we may not have the right
standard and from what I 'm hearing , it may not be the right standard but
it 's a standard that 's more acceptable based on what we heard than maybe '
what has been done with the applicant 's wetland permit .
Erhart: Let me throw something out that 's been haunting me I guess in the
last year since I heard a speech by someone over at the Fresh Water
Institute at a meeting I attended and then I was intrigued by it and
discussed it with him later and I can't remember the name of the gentleman
but he felt strongly that a community should essentially decide what a
lake 's purpose is . I 'm really opening this up so stop me if you think I 'm
getting dangerous .
Emmings: It 's to hold water isn 't it?
Erhart: Well you know we get into this environmental thing and wetland
preservation and trying to filter water and like that but then you say when"
you go onto Lake Minnetonka and they 're constantly dredging and doing
everything that we wouldn't allow in this city . That 's how the discussion "
got going and his basic feeling was you 've got to decide what the lake 's
for . If it 's a recreational lake , then maybe you have different rules on a
recreational lake than you do on a lake that you might designate a wild
lake or wilderness lake or something like that . Because on one hand I 'm II probably the most pro environmental and wetland preservation and creation
guy here but on the other hand , I can see where if I owned a lot on the
lake and I had some , what we term as wetland and what is that? Is it 2
foot wide? How do you know that a guy , what's the difference between the
guy that 's got a 2 foot strip of wetland and can't build a dock through it
or the next guy who 's got 40 foot . Where do we draw the line? Well , we
don 't really draw the line here . You know you look at the types of growth II
you 've got there but there 's I 'll bet you half the lots in this city , if
you really were to look , really cut it fine , that there 's a wetland between
his lot and the water . I don't know if you want to start , I mean some
people have sandy beaches but other people have weeds growing out on the
lake and so if you 're going to open, for a future meeting discuss whether
we have outhouses and Satellites and docks and landings and things , maybe
that 's something to think about . Whether we ought to have two different
types of lakes and two different standards depending on what we designate a
lake .
Conrad: There are different classifications of lakes . In fact , I think "
your point is well taken Tim but there are designations . Different
"
Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 28
designations of lakes based on DNR standards I believe which the City has
classified certain things in . A lot of the things that you find , and I 'm
playing with really old memory here is the DNR has a whole bunch of control
that I don 't know that we can get into . Yet those , I 'm not sure that we
have the power in some cases to do some of the regulating that we may want
to and that 's frustrated a lot of people who were on the committees that we
formed , I don't know 7 years ago or whenever . How many years ago it was . A
lot of different circumstances and you listed a couple . A 2 foot strip
versus a 40 foot strip and it 's really arbitrary . There 's so many
arbitrary things that , that 's why we bring the ONR in and some of the
experts in to take a look at certain lots on a site specific basis . I
think what Pat 's telling us in the particular case that brought him in here
is probably that wetland over there and probably the issue is not a big one
as compared to some other major ones that we 're probably letting it go or
haven 't addressed in terms of water quality . Yet on the other hand we
just , you know you 've just got to have a standard and kind of live up to
that standard as arbitrary as that is . So I guess I 'm not answering it
very specifically but if we want to get back into this Tim , it 's almost a
separate committee where do we want to bring back the lake study committee
or the environmental protection committee and have them take a look at 5
years later . What 's happened? What was the intent? What were the
problems? Take a look at the variances . Not the variances but wetland
alteration permits that were processed . Take a good look at it and see if
there are interested people in the city and therefore try to update the
ordinance and incorporate some .
Erhart : Are you suggesting we should?
Conrad: It may not be a bad idea . It 's like anything . You put any laws
in or you put any regulations or you have any kind of plan , it 's always
kind of fun to go back , especially because there 's nothing magic about what
that ordinance . That ordinance was a mish mash . It was a politically
derived, I 'm not going to say it was a mish mash . The people on the
committee were not happy with it because it was watered down significantly .
It was watered down to , it was simply not as strong as what they wished and
I think it would be interesting to go back and see if we 've accomplished
anything with it other than making more paperwork .
Erhart: Your response to my discussion was that yeah , we have different
categories of lakes. What I was trying to point out , even though there 's
different categories of lakes , we treat them all the same in terms of our
standards and that 's what I 'm saying is that maybe life isn 't that simple .
I 'm not suggesting that we open up this thing to review again . That 's a
lot of work .
Conrad: You know I really buy what you 're saying . As you know I live on
Lotus and Lotus is long and narrow and the ONR has certain restrictions in
terms of safety . Safety is 11 boats can be out on that lake at one time
and I 'll guarantee you that on a long narrow lake , that 's not an effective
restriction or guideline . I think in a round lake that 's big , 40 acres per
boat and whatever , may be an acceptable standard but I think there are just
exceptions all over the board and I agree with you Tim . I just think it 's
just something that we probably as a smaller city can 't get our hands
Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 33
cost per space are lower . The curb stops , one of the concerns was driving
into and exiting but the curb stops will prevent that . Clarification from
the memo . Runoff is actually lower with a gravel surface than a paved
surface . Erosion with clean fill will be less because of no fines and the
gravel can be striped. Something else in the recommendations , it refers to
restoring to original . The original needs to be defined . Is that as
currently or as compatible with the owner 's planned use . That will need to
be defined a little bit better than it is . And another consideration is
would the Planning Commission consider a variance to the front of the
-Redmond site setback for permanent parking in the future .
Conrad: Thank you . Any other comments? Okay . Tim , we 'll start at your
end .
Erhart: Did you say you could stripe gravel?
Randy Patzke: Yeah .
Erhart : Can you explain that one to me .
Randy Patzke: Get a can of spray paint and paint .
Erhart: How long does that last?
Randy Patzke : Depending on weather conditions , the surface will . . .so it 's •
going to be a compacted surface .
ID'
Erhart: Let me understand what 's being proposed here . Is this one of the
new temporary conditional use permits?
Olsen: The way we 're processing it is actually a site plan amendment for
Lotus Lawn and Garden for a parking area on the site which will be used by
Redmond . No , we 're not doing it as a temporary use .
Erhart: This is no different than if my company came in and put a gravel
parking lot for my employees .
Olsen: If you wanted to expand your parking lot , yeah. No different .
Erhart: I cannot imagine why we 'd even consider this sort of thing . I see `
no difference between this and any other company that has parking for
employees in this city . As far as Jay , I hope he's there for 3 years from
now but I don't think you can base something like an exception like this
based on the assumption that Jay , if Jay does well he 'll move to a bigger
spot and so forth and the idea of basing on that is not to me a valid
argument because I don 't think you know that that 's going to be used for
that purpose 3 years from now. I don't have a lot of questions . Yeah , I
do have one more question . The 2 inch bituminous mats that you 're
proposing , what 's our standards for parking lots?
Folch: That is a 2 inch mat .
I
Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 34
' Erhart: It is a 2 inch mat . That 's why they always break up . Okay , I
thought that seemed less than our normal .
Folch: I believe that 's correct .
Erhart: That seems odd because I just put in a driveway and they put in 4
' 1/2 compressed . It 's 4 compressed to 3 1/2. I was told that that was
average or that was typical for a private drive .
Folch: A lot of it will also depend on how much crushed rock you put in as
a base too . It can vary .
Erhart: Well anyway , as long as I understand . That 's the only question I
had and as I pointed out , maybe some of the other questions can change my
mind but I don 't see it .
' Emmings: I 'm wondering how we got into a situation where we have a
business in town that doesn 't have adequate parking for it 's employees .
Olsen: Their site plan met the zoning ordinance . I think the problem is
that they 're overlapping shifts .
Emmings: But isn 't that something that our parking ordinance takes into
' account?
Krauss: The way the parking ordinance standard is worded , but that 's the
' way they went in there . The wording is kind of , it 's a tough one to
enforce . There 's two way of figuring it . You figure it on gross square
footage or you figure it on I think it 's employees on a major shift . What
we 've got now because of their operational constraints and Bob Cordell can
explain it better than I but they have equipment that they can 't
II effectively turn off so they wind up having to overlap shifts which is like
Christmas at Southdale . I mean you 're doubling your requirement when you do
Ithat and no , it was never designed to accommodate that .
Emmings: That 's something we maybe better look at if we 're going to
continue to build industrial and commercial . •
IEllson: They overlap for what , a half hour period of time? I mean if you
could have moved the cars and things like that it could get done so maybe
it could be solved another way or something like that too .
Emmings: Well how?
IIEllson: Parking attendant that takes your key and when the other person
comes , takes your spot or who knows what .
IEmmings: Where do you put the car in the meantime? He drives around?
Ellson: Like a parking attendant where the thing is all filled .
IIEmmings: If we 've got a hole in our ordinance , I think we ought to address
it because this could be a real mess if it happens someplace where there 's
Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 35
no land to expand to .
Krauss: It could . It 's a very tough thing to address though because we 're!'
not talking about physical changes to the building that trip a building
permit . We 're talking about operational changes that we have no control
over or effective knowledge of unless something like this crops up .
Emmings: Well what would we do for example if a business down in the
industrial park with no land to expand to came in with an operation like
this? What would be done?
Krauss: In fact we had problems like this with United Mailing . Whereby
they were parking on the street and were required to build additional
parking and people were told they 'd be cited if something wasn 't resolved . II
So it has happened . It has been effectively dealt with .
Erhart: Permanent parking lot? I
Krauss: It was a permanent parking lot , yeah .
Olsen: And then we do allow off site parking lots in the industrial office,
park too .
Emmings: Then you think that our parking ordinance is adequate and that 1
we 're going to have these crop up from time to time and that 's okay or
we 'll have to deal with it when it does?
Krauss: We 'll have to deal with them as they do . '
Emmings: Alright . We 're talking about either what he 's proposed, which I
don 't understand . Some kind of a rolled and compacted gravel surface on
the one hand and 2 inches of bituminous mat on the other hand. Are those
all the alternatives? Is it one or the other?
Randy Patzke: There 's one other alternative and that would be just a
standard Class V which would be comparable to sand and small fines .
Emmings: That would be horrible I guess . '
Randy Patzke: Right . That 's why the 2 inch mat with the 2 inch clear fill
was proposed after . . .with Charles .
Emmings: So the only alternatives here are the two that have been set
before us? 1
Randy Patzke: Correct .
Emmings: Well , if it comes down to that I guess from my point of view ,
it 's an engineering issue . I don 't know how to resolve it and I 've got to
go with the City Engineer . If they can 't convince the engineer to go along
with them , they can 't convince me either .
I
Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 36
Elison: The first thing I thought of is , is there another way to solve
this parking problem and I 'm not sure if Redmond 's looked at everything or
if they were to come to us with not necessarily the variance idea . That
I wouldn 't even actually probably come to us but I don 't know . It seems like
a 45 minute thing every day , maybe at the max that you have this back up
and if it 's just shifts overlapping or something , or are you saying that
you really need this much parking all day long? I picture that the first
shift goes in there . The second shift comes . They park in Lotus and then
the first shift leaves and you 've got half a parking lot empty until the
third one comes and they , that 's what I 'm picturing . It seems weird that
somehow these open spaces are going to be there . Maybe I 'm wrong .
Bob Cordell : Maybe I can help clarify some of the thinking we have done .
We have grown considerably since we 've been here and we have done some
redesign of the parking in the back to accommodate additional cars . We
looked at this for 2 reasons . It was a very temporary solution to the
problem . There 's some things we can do in the front that we also proposed
but not necessarily for this many because we thought it 'd be a further step
which would give us approximately 80 spaces in the front of the building
but would require a variance inasmuch as we 'd have to come in to that what
we have in front of the plant . If we did that however , it creates a
certain period of time when there 's total disruption of that lot so we felt
that going into the one on the Lotus property would provide a place for at
least some of our cars to go . We currently have 9 spaces out there right
now and even with the dense parking next door , we 'd only get 76 . But at
least to have that overflow should we elect to go to that next step . It
isn 't true that it 's just during this overlap , although that has become a
major problem with this . Shutting those machines down and getting them
started , and the time to come back up to speed is quite a bit more than 45
minutes and gets quite expensive to do that . We are studying as you
! probably all know how to handle our growth . We 're trying to stay here as
long as we possible can . There 's some things that we can do within the
plant that will increase our productivity and so forth but one of the major
problems is where do we put our people . We 've looked at renting space from
Filly 's Nightclub and trucking people back and forth . Of course in the -
winter that 's a pretty difficult situation and this being very close to us ,
seemed to be the most logical especially in consideration of getting this
facility and there were some . . .benefits to both parties . I can foresee the
place where parking may become the limiting factor of our longevity at the
plant . We currently have about 180 spaces . We have 245 employees . If we
extend the production facility , although there 's going to be a trade-off in
efficiency versus the number of people , it 's still exceeding the number of
spaces we have . I would foresee having to move into that front area but
requiring that that area on the side as a temporary area to help us in the
short term and also to help us . . .remodeling of that front lawn . Certainly
when we do front lots and so forth, we would do a class job . What we
always strive to do is first class company .
Elison: Okay, so I guess it is bigger than just a few minutes everyday .
Thank you . The other thing that I was trying to picture is how much more
is it? How much cheaper is the gravel per square foot than the
bituminous? Everyone says it 's cheaper . Is it like 5x you 're going to be
Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 39
purposes for curb and gutter .
Erhart: Well yeah, that 's my next question.
Olsen: Why not?
Erhart: Why isn 't it? I 'm not saying it 's not a good idea . I 'm just
saying how do we , I was trying to figure out why you .
Olsen: Because we were trying to make it work .
Krauss: We are accepting the premise that it 's temporary .
Olsen: And we 've got a condition to guarantee that .
Erhart : Somehow in my mind these things don 't end up temporary . That 's
the problem .
Krauss: But we did recommend conditions that would help to enforce that
including the financial guarantees .
d
Erhart : Okay , that 's my only comment . Thanks .
Conrad: It seems to me that if it was bituminous , the oil and gas would ,
talk to me about bituminous excepting oil and gas which it obviously
doesn 't would run off in a rain versus gravel would sink in . Is there any
benefit one way or another? See I 'm not sure . Oil sinking into the earth
no matter what is not good .
Folch: I think from the standpoint of you 're looking at like oil that may
be dripping from engines and it 's a fairly small spots of oil that you
would get on either surface , you probably aren 't going to get a whole lot
of runoff from that . If you 're talking a much larger puddle of oil of
course , the blacktop is going to send it down off into the pond of course s
whereas the gravel may tend to hold it but eventually it probably would
percolate and the water would carry it into the pond . But I don't think
it 's a problem that should raise any concern just from spots that maybe
drop from cars and things like that .
Conrad: Okay , any other? I don 't know if , yeah they did ask at one point
in time if we would consider a variance in terms of impervious surface on
the current site . Are there any comments on that?
v
Emmings: How can we comment on it without the staff looking at it?
t6rauss: We did initially explore some of those options with Mr . Cordell
and had problems with it . You lose the , one of the things that 's nice
about that building is the quality of landscaping that 's in front of it .
Chew into that setback , you lose a lot of that . Yes , you can make up some
of the difference with more intensive plantings but you not only have
setback variances , you had hard surface coverages and we expressed Ls
relunctance to proceed along that manner and expressed an interest in
working with them in fact on this temporary parking lot as an alternative .
I
Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 40
IConrad: Yeah , I like the staff recommended solution. I hope it works for
Redmond . Obviously it doesn 't totally work for them based on their
comments but I would hope that it wasn 't that much pricier solution but I
Ido like staff comments . Anything else?
Randy Patzke: Did you address the mass parking . . .
IConrad: Yeah , we really haven 't talked mass parking in terms of the
stacking . Any opinions?
IWildermuth: If you can make it work , fine . It 's your parking lot . Your
employees .
1 Conrad: Why do we , as a city , why do we care Paul?
Krauss : Well you care for several reasons . One of the issues that brought
this about was there 's problems with cars parking in fire lanes on the
site . The mass parking scheme has only , we 've never used it in town . The
examples where it has been used are fully manned parking lots in
Minneapolis or in St . Paul where people know exactly when they 're going to
leave and if not , the attendant can shuffle cars around . I don 't know how
many of you have visited the Metro Council but they have a parking lot
where they will block you in . You might be 2 cars in but you tell the
attendant which car you want and they shuffle the cars around and get you
out . That 's not the case here . Once your car is stuck in the middle with
this proposal , it 's there until the shift changes .
Conrad: And why do we care?
Krauss: Why do we care? We see people trying to jump medians to get out
of there . If you had to leave in an emergency , you 'd find a way to get
out . We see problems with cars shuffling . I mean there 's going to be
manuevering is tough . I mean does everybody start their engines at the
same time? How do you coordinate this? Is there going to be a flag man
there saying , like at the State Fair saying it 's your turn over here .
Ellson: You could .
Wildermuth: That becomes an employee satisfaction issue though. I mean
that problem only has to come up 2 or 3 times and Redmond has got , the
management and Human Resources people at Redmond have a problem on their
hands and they 've probably have to address it .
Krauss: When landscaping is trashed . When cars are entering and leaving
where they shouldn 't . When cars are stacking up in public right-of-way
because the internal circulation is jumbled up , yeah then it becomes our
problem . If it was all internal . I mean if they had 40 acres and we 'd
never see it , I don 't think we 'd care.
Wildermuth: I don 't know . If they can make it work , fine . If they can 't ,
they 're going to have to stripe the lot or put some concrete berms down
there for aisle guides or something .
Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 43
Wildermuth: The most immediate thing is going to be to hop into his
parking lot .
Emmings: And so I suppose if people are trying to bust out of that parking I
lot , they're going to go over his property . Maybe he can , if he 's not
worried about it or feels like Redmond. I
Jay Kronick: I 'll protect myself .
Emmings: Have Jay patrolling his lot line with a shotgun you know but , so 1
maybe it's not a problem .
Krauss: There 's one last thing I 'd ask you to consider though . If you do
consider the mass parking, and we 'll of course abide by your decision with
that . It should be understood that if it fails , there 's not an implied
responsibility on the part of the city to grant variances elsewhere on the
site to provide an equivalent number of stalls . If it fails , the
experiment fails and you revert back to the original recommendation . And
ultimately if it 's impossible to park everybody on the site , well maybe the
site 's overdeveloped .
Emmings: What if we approve this with the striping that 's on the plan , the
way the City has recommended doing it and then allow them to do an
experiment with mass parking? Then if it doesn't work , what they 're
approved for is what 's on here . They 'd have to recoat it and restripe it '
and do it the way we told them they had to do in the first place .
Krauss: Bob has always worked with us quite well . I mean I would accept a
letter from him basically stating concurrence with some sort of agreement
to that effect .
Emmings: We agree not to enforce the , this particular condition pending
their experiment to see whether it works and that if it has any impact on
the City or a neighboring property owners .
Conrad: That sounds real , I like that .
Randy Patzke: Some of the businesses that you have here . . . You 've got
Rosemount out here and McGlynn Barkery , those are some big buildings that
are already standing . They may get into the situation too where they want
to look at it in the future . You 've got a perfect opportunity with RedmondO
on a small lot who is willing to try it and allow a learning experience for
the Planning Commission and City Council .
Conrad: I 'm not sure that that 's the rationale I 'd buy . I think just
trying to be ameniable with Redmond as a good neighbor , I think that 's what
we're trying to do here . We 're certainly not setting any , that 's not what
I want Chanhassen to be a forerunner in is creative parking . We do have a
significant amount of space . If we were in downtown Minneapolis maybe but
I liked what Steve said because it may give us the leverage to go back to a
secure plan but also possibly give the company a chance to try this . I like
that and I still , I 'm just not persuaded that this is hurting Chanhassen . I
think it 's up to Redmond and that 's their business . Not ours .
Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 44
Erhart: Why do we have an ordinance then?
Conrad: You 're absolutely right . Yeah, your ordinances should be there to
guide . Here we 're saying that we 've got a temporary , we 've got a problem
is what we 've got here and the applicant . . .
Erhart: Who 's got a problem?
Conrad: Redmond does . And the applicant doesn 't want to buy anymore land
' so I think that 's , we could be real hardball about this and just said put
in curb and gutter , buy some more land and take care of your needs . That 's
possible Tim .
II . Erhart: I 'll put my comments in after we take a vote .`
Emmings: I guess we know how he 's voting .
IIErhart: I suggest you go ahead and vote on that .
Krauss: I still remain unclear though on how we would handle the variance
aspect of it . We changed the ordinance so you guys do the recommendations
on variances such as this and City Council has to approve it . A variance
is forever .
Emmings: No variance .
II Ellson: We 're not . We 're approving the way you guys have written it with
an experimental period of time or whatever .
Olsen: What they 're doing , we would actually have to , they 're not doing
what was approved and they 're not meeting the ordinance .
Emmings: That 's right . I don 't know why we can 't decide on an informal
' basis to approve it this way and decide on an informal basis we 're going to
allow them to conduct an experiment with .
Ellson: And then after 3 months or 2 months when they come back and then
you give them an official variance . Is that what you 're saying Jo Ann?
How do you let them do it year after year?
II Olsen: Or if it doesn 't work , what do we do then? I call them up and say
it 's not working or do they come back and they can argue in front of the
Planning Commission and Council?
IConrad: Yeah . I think yes , if we get complaints that it 's impacting the
City and I think we should, the City Council has to decide what those would
be . If one complaint is not a big deal , maybe 2 or 3 over a short period
of time . If there are impacts , then I think then it 's going to be real
clear that they have to go back to the 65 stalls or whatever it is .
I Krauss: I think your intent is clear . What I 'd like to do , if you want to
approve it that way , go ahead and let us consult with the City , well
. whatever .
1 •
1
Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 45
Emmings: But see we 're not going to say anything about it in the approval II
and I think what should happen here is we should , I think it should be
approved the way the staff has recommended and then I think , and you can II
check with the City Attorney but I think there should simply be a letter of
understanding between the City and that as long , that will allow them to
conduct an experiment with mass parking on that lot if they want to . But
if it impacts any neighboring property or if at the discretion of the City
the City feels that it 's got any negative impacts for the City , aesthetic
or otherwise , we 're going to jerk the rug out from under their feet and
they 're going to have to go , we 're going to go back and enforce . ,
Ellson: But do you say the experiment is for x period of time and then if
it flies you then recommend something different?
Conrad: I think the experiment could last for 3 years .
Emmings: Sure . As far as I 'm concerned it could .
Krauss: Well that 's where I 'd like some, see that 's .
Conrad: Yeah , you 've got to talk to the right folks . And the Redmond 1
folks , they 're taking a little bit of risk . I don 't know if they 're taking
a risk . Anytime you deal with the City , I guess that 's kind of a risky
deal .
Ellson: I think it should have an ending . The experiment should have a
start and an end and then if it proves to be something , then we do look at
the possibility of mass parking .
Krauss: I think if you 're really going to do that you really need to
consider that variance .
Olsen: Just to approve it . Put a condition if it doesn 't .
Emmings: Then I won 't go for it .
Krauss: Because I don 't think I really can in good conscience know what
the Code requires . Know what you approved and then say okay we 'll look the
other way .
Emmings: Are you German? I
Krauss: Half , yeah .
Emmings: That 's the problem . So am I but I fight against it . Fight it
Paul . You can do anything you want to do . There 's always a way to do
something . Always . If you want to . If you don't want to , you don't want I
to .
Ellson: I pictured it that it was an experiment for x period of time . If ,
it came through that it was good , then they 'd come through and ask for a
variance and we could have proven that it works and therefore granted .
I
Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 46
Conrad: Okay . Is there a motion? Steve .
Emmings: I 'll move the Planning Commission recommend approval of Site Plan
Review Amendment #85-1 with the conditions as contained in the staff
report .
Ellson: And I 'll second it .
Conrad: Any discussion?
Emmings moved, Ellson seconded that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of Site Plan Review Amendment #85-1 with the following conditions:
I 1 . A revised site plan shall be submitted showing that the parking lot
shall be paved with a 2 inch bituminous mat .
2 . The parking lot will be permitted for three years ( 36 months ) until
October 31 , 1993 , and at which time the area must be restored to its
original condition . If the use of the parking lot is extended beyond
three years curb and gutter must be provided around the parking lot
perimeter and the site must connect to the storm sewer in West 78th
Street .
3 . A revised grading and lanscaping plan shall be submitted providing the
I required berming and landscaping .
4 . Type III reinforced erosion control shall be installed at all locations
shown on the plans prior to construction and maintained for the life of
the facility . A detail of Type III reinforced erosion control shall be
shown on the plans .
5 . A concrete driveway apron ( city standard ) shall be installed at the
entrance to the parking lot .
I6 . The applicant shall provide the City with a letter of credit in an
amount approved by the City Engineer to cover the cost to remove all of
the proposed improvements and restore the site back to it 's original
conditions .
All voted in favor except Erhart who opposed and the motion carried with a
vote of 4 to 1 .
Conrad: And the reason for your opposition?
Erhart : Number one , I think there must not have been enough on the agenda
for the Planning Commission tonight . Even to talk about this bhing . I
think we worked hard to make , to set down a document and standard that
would make our industrial parks meet a certain standard. I think we 've now
come up with another way to twist it around by calling this a temporary
parking lot and as a result , if this were to pass , quite frankly I think
f you 'd just make a shambles of the existing ordinance . There is no such
thing as a temporary parking lot . They;ll just come in 3 years and say
well , this building 's not going to leave in 3 years and there 's going to
I
Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 49
Ellson: To Eric .
Emmings: Yeah . I thought you did a nice job .
Erhart: Any other questions?
Ellson: I asked him before you guys came in if the Target is definitely
out because I noticed that Market Square is going to get going this month
and he basically said it seems like a dead issue . • I mean everyone I work
with is asking me about Target .
t!
ONGOING ITEMS:
Erhart: Ongoing Items , any questions from Commissioners?, I have one under I
other items . Reappraisal on wetland issues , ordinance and mapping in
conjunction with storm water management . I understand there was , is this
the same thing that we 're talking about here and I think we had an
informational meeting . Gary had it about assessing land owners for storm
water . What is the status of that? I missed that meeting . Is that part
of this?
Krauss: Oh , storm water utility fund . Gary and I have been working with a
consultant who has been also working with the City Council in laying out
the program in terms of getting a work program and what kinds of things we
might tackle in terms of understanding what kind of revenues it might
generate and how it might be operated . We held a public information
meeting on it in late June or early July . It 's scheduled to go before the nt
City Council for public hearing , not the next meeting . The one following t
that .
Erhart: What was the turn out at the first meeting?
Krauss: It was very slight but we had mailed out notices and surveys to
theoretically everybody in the city .
Erhart: I don 't recall getting it and I certainly would have .
Krauss: I know we mailed out about 5 ,000 . It not impossible we missed
some but we 've got the owner 's list through Carver County .
Erhart: Paul , what 's going to happen if this thing goes to a public
hearing at City Council and the attendance when you get to City Council
meetings , things are pretty much already set . It 's not a real environment
for people to talk pro or con on the subject . I really question whether
it 's ready for that . I 've talked with a couple of people that now have
heard about it and they've got strong feelings about , I don 't know if they
were here at that or not .
Krauss: The turn out really wasn 't very good at that meeting
unfortunately .
Erhart: Do people know this is going to cost them some money?
I
I
Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 50
Krauss: We had an article on it in the paper and I think the material that
Gary sent out with the survey described the program . Described what
anticipated costs would be per unit per acre .
' Erhart: Maybe I 'm getting off on a personal issue . I ' ll come talk to you
about it . Anything else on this?
OPEN DISCUSSION: SOUTHWEST METRO TRANSIT COMMISSION PRESENTATION OF
INTERIM AND LONG RANGE FOR PARK AND RIDE LOTS FOR ITS EXPRESS ROUTE SERVICE
TO DOWNTOWN MINNEAPOLIS.
Fred Hoisington presented an overview of the Southwest Metro Transit
Commission 's plan for interim and long range plans for park and ride lots
' in Chanhassen for it 's express route service to downtown Minneapolis . He
stated he was not necessarily looking for comments from the Planning
Commission at this meeting other than to ask questions so the Planning
Commission can understand what it is that the Southwest Metro Transit
Commission is planning for the southwest corridor . The main point the
report wanted to get across was that the City was the one agency that
interfaces during the development process with all aspects of the City ,
i .e . industry , private individuals , commercial , etc . to make sure that
transit is brought into the picture . Southwest Metro Transit Commission
really has no power but to operate the system once it 's in place . The
report first deals with park and ride lots . Secondly , it deals with travel
demand management . What they 're saying is that not every one of the three
communities is going to deal with that in the same fashion but each
' community should give it serious thought . The third thing is design for
transit which states that Chanhassen has to begin to establish transit
corridors . Within those corridors you have to begin to think about other
ways that development can occur . Need to begin shifting some thought from
not only the automobile users but to transit users and begin thinking about
how the City is going to accommodate for their needs . Fred Hoisington
pointed out to the Planning Commission possible locations for park and ride
' lots that they should begin thinking about where they want these sites
located .
Hoisington: I would appreciate if you have a chance , Paul I don 't know
how you want to deal with this or whether you 're going to make some
recommendations or just what but somehow or another we would like some sort
of response . If it 's support or things that you think ought to change or
Iwhatever .
Krauss= We can prepare a review and a response for your consideration and
Iask you back on that .
Erhart: Yeah, I think we 'd like to see it come from you with comments and
filter this down a little bit how it relates to feedback that you 're
I looking for . Overall I think the sense here of everybody is very
supportive of your effort there and feel that not enough has been done in
the past .
1 Ellson: We don't want to turn into Los Angeles .
11
I
Planning Commission Meeting
August 1 , 1990 - Page 51
Erhart : Well , Los Angeles is getting into mass transit so .
Hoisington: Well we thank you for the opportunity to be here and we 're
looking forward to comments .
Emmings moved, Ellson seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor II
and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 11:20 p.m. .
Submitted by Paul Krauss
Planning Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
•
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
11
srt
PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
' JUNE 26, 1990
Chairman Mady called the meeting to order at 7:36 p .m . .
MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Mady , Jan Lash , Larry Schroers , and Jim Andrews
MEMBERS ABSENT: Dawne Erhart , Curt Robinson and Wendy Pemrick
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman , Recreation Supervisor and Mark Koegler ,
Consultant
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Schroers moved , Lash seconded to approve the Minutes
of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated May 21 , 1990 as
presented . All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously .
' Hoffman: To appoint acting chair , do you want to keep doing that?
' Mady : We 'd have to amend the Rules . The meeting rules for the year if we
do . If we change it .
Hoffman: Change it to?
' Mady : Not do it .
Lash : Maybe that 's something we could discuss when everyone 's here and you
just figured you 'd do it for tonight right Jim?
' Mady : Yeah , since there wasn 't anybody . Usually if there 's a dash there
and the name .
Schroers: Tonight 's a real easy night if someone who hasn 't done it before
' wanted to do it , it 'd be a heck of a night to do it .
Mady: Without people here .
' Hoffman: My question is , I don 't know what Lori 's list was so I 'll just
start a new one .
Mady : That 'd be fine until such time as . . .
Andrews : You can put me on the rotation . I 'd like to be on the rotation .
Hoffman: Okay .
Mady: Jan , Dawne and Wendy said not to .
Lash: This is starting to sound sexist . I 'll have to give this some
' thought .
Mady: Not intentionally . You guys had your own choice .
Lash: I know but that 's the way the cards are going .
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 26 , 1990 - Page 2
RECREATIONAL PROGRAM FEES.
Hoffman: What you essentially have before you is a list of programs which II
the Department of Recreation Department sponsors and there 's also a list of
programs which we co-sponsor . Contractual agreement programs and then the
co-sponsor for . . . Hopefully so the Commission has a better idea what 's
going on in the programming aspect of the department , each year we 'll have
a year end evaluation report that shows the recreation programs non-self
supporting . What those programs were . What the expenditures were for each !'
of those programs and what the revenues generated . Then as well for the
146 recreation programs, self supporting programs we included numbers like
participants . Where those participants came from and the dollars generated .
and then the expenses as well the recreation programming aspect . As the
City grows , I think that will help the Commission in keeping you up to date
on what is going on .
Mady: Can I ask some questions Todd since I don 't know what some of these 1
• things are and I don 't have my booklet? What 's wingdings and super read
outs? Are those kid deals?
Lash: Yeah . Wednesdays?
Hoffman: Part of the summer discovery playground program . Then on
Wednesday afternoons we just have the zoo mobile here last week . This week
they 're watching a movie and eating popcorn . Then there will be super .
events as part of the summer discovery playground program . The first week
they learn to . . . They go to Fort Snelling . Those types of activities .
Lash: And Murphy 's Landing .
Mady: How about Operation Smart?
Hoffman: Operation Smart? That 's a new program which Jerry , when he was
brought in as the new program specialist brought some programs with .
Operation Smart is exploring the underwater world . Kids in the Kitchen .
Operation Smart is back to the , it 's a female or girls only program which
goes through a variety of activities . So it 's a program for girls .
Schroers: In general do these fees cover the expense of providing the
program? I
Hoffman: Again , it doesn 't break down recreation programs for either 146
which is self supporting which includes all adult sports and some of the II
youth sports . The other youth sports like the playground. That 's a
subsidized program that falls into the 145 recreation programs and that 's
self supporting . So some of these are subsidized and some generate costs .
Lash: Subsidized from who? By who?
Hoffman: By our annual Park and Recreation budget . ,
Mady: General revenue . Any other questions?
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 26 , 1990 - Page 3
Andrews: Does this come up for review in the late fall , early winter then?
Hoffman: The year end?
Andrews: Yeah , the year end figures and costs and revenues?
Hoffman : Yeah . Hopefully just after the first of year . That 's something
that 's not been done in the past . The programs such as the ones on the
' back which like Kellogg 's Body and . . .Dance , they generated a surprising
amount of revenue for us with very little work . Probably in excess of
about $1 ,000 .00 per year for those two programs . Some programs offset
' other ones .
Lash: Is this what we get or is this , like the Kellogg 's Le Body Shop ,
$3 .00 , is that what the fee is?
Hoffman: What they get , yeah . And then we get a good percentage , 10% for
. location . 10% for advertising and 10n if we take the registrations .
' Lash: So you get 90 cents per class per person?
Hoffman: Yeah .
Lash: Okay .
' DISCUSSION OF THE 1990 4TH OF JULY CELEBRATION.
Mady : Any request for volunteers?
•
Hoffman: That 's what this is , yeah .
Lash: When Dawns called me , she asked if there was anything of importance
' I don 't know how to say this , on the agenda tonight and I did mention that
you were looking for volunteers so she said I 'm supposed to volunteer her
for whatever I want .
' Hoffman: Great .
' Mady: That 's dangerous .
Hoffman: Glad to hear it . Basically we 're well under way . We start
Saturday with the events Sunday and again with the torch run . On Saturday
' the Co-Rec Softball Tournament is filled with 8 teams . On Sunday the Men 's
Softball Tournament is filled with 10 teams and then Tuesday night is the
street dance and community picnic where we need ample support to pull that
' event off as Wednesday for family day . So this item is brought to you
solely for your information and your opportunity to contribute your
volunteer .
' Mady: And this year again Todd , are you dangling .
Hoffman: Dangling these wonderful T-shirts .
Park and Rec Commission Meeting I
June 26 , 1990 - Page 4
Lash: Neon .
Hoffman: Did you take a look at these? I
Schroers= If we volunteer , we get a T-shirt , is that it?
Hoffman: You bet .
Lash: I didn't last year . I had to win mine . '
Mady: Well at least you got one .
Lash: Yeah I did . I wear it a lot too . Okay , should I volunteer? ,
Hoffman: Yep .
Lash: I 'm willing to serve food if I can do it , do you have it in shifts
or how does this work? I 'd like to do it early and be done with it .
Hoffman: Sure . 1
Lash: Okay . So could I do that like for an hour and then do games for
like an hour?
Hoffman: You bet . Whatever you want .
Lash: He 's easy . So like 6:00 to 7 :00 and then 7:00 to 8:00 . Okay , then I
I 'm done by the time the band starts right?
Hoffman: Yep . I
Lash: Good . Put Dawne down too . She said she 'll do it with me .
Mady: She said she 'd do clean-up too?
Lash: Oh yeah, she wants to clean-up also . ,
Andrews: I 'll do the same hours . 6:00 to 8:00 .
Hoffman: Jan , are you going to be able to help out with the family games? II
Lash: Yeah , and I think Dawne will do that too .
Andrews: This on Tuesday we 're talking about?
Hoffman: No , this is Wednesday . 1
Lash: Okay , 2:00 to 3:00 . Last year I did the hoola hoop and the limbo .
Remember that?
Hoffman: Yeah .
1
1 ,
IIPark and Rec Commission Meeting
June 26 , 1990 - Page 5
I
Lash: I could probably do that too . So if I do it from like , that 's 2
IIhours on , okay . I ' ll do that . Is that enough?
Hoffman: That 's great .
IIMady: I 'm going to pass . I 'm going to be out of town Tuesday through
Sunday .
IAndrews: Well cash contributions .
Mady: I think I 'll take out of some of the volunteer effort out of the
Ilast 5 years .
Lash: I 'll probably be over for the fishing contest anyway .
IHoffman: If I need you , I 'll grab you .
Mady: She 's got that 5 pound northern tied up .
ILash: But you know I 'm not going to pass for under 15 this year . I just
don 't like . I 'd like to . They were down there today , the DNR doing the
IIfish count . They said there 's none there just like I said .
Andrews: They 've got tame ones just for the kids .
I Mady: I was told upstairs today that they thought Lake Lucy may be had
froze out .
II Lash: Oh , I 'm sure . It does like every couple years . But there 's two
guys upstairs and the other guy said , no . He saw some sunfish in there .
Some small ones but he saw sunfish . And the -carp have been rolling where I
I was at over the weekend so if there are carp , they should have been very
evident this weekend .
Schroers: My 4th of July schedule is still up in the air . I may have to
I cover for a torch runner on Sunday and I 'm just not happy about that .
Having to go into work for 2 hours but .
IResident: Cover for a torch runner of Chan?
Schroers: Yes .
IIResident: Doug Mitchell?
Schroers: Yes . But he 's my main man now. But , then there 's another
I family deal going on so I 'm not sure what my schedule is going to be but I
will probably just show up and say where do you need me if that will work?
IHoffman: Tuesday night?
Schroers: Tuesday night or Wednesday . Both maybe if I can but I can 't
commit to any hours at this point .
•
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting r
June 26 , 1990 - Page 6
Hoffman: The carnival games and booths on Tuesday we 're going to need some
help . I
Schroers: And what time is that? 6:00 to 9:00 on Tuesday?
Hoffman: Yeah .
Schroers: Well I 'll do my best to make it but I don 't want to commit to
something and then not be able to . '
Hoffman: Okay . And family games this time , we 're going to have them down
on the beach so we 're off the hill . '
Lash: Oh , the family games? Okay . So it will be right in the same place -
as the other , the hoola hoop and stuff? ,
Hoffman: Yeah , it will be out by the big oak tree along the asphalt trail .
Lash: Okay . Do you have everything that you need for that so you sort of '11
know what you 're doing and you have it together and stuff?
Hoffman: Yeah , ready to go for it . We have the balloon toss , squirt gun
relay , the other relays .
Lash: The one where you tie your legs together and push the ball? That
one with your head . I
Hoffman: Okay . The members that are absent , I will sign them up .
Lash: Hey , do we have to volunteer to be in this dunk thing? t
Hoffman: Sure . I mean I told them to call the Park and Recreation
Commissioners . I know they got City Council and Mayor up there .
Lash: There are going to be a lot of people doing a lot of dunking . What
time is that supposed to go on? 1
Hoffman: I think that starts from 6:00 and goes until 9:00 .
Mady: I was told about 4 or 5 years ago that in Carver County dunk tanks II
were illegal . There 's a County ordinance against it and it had to do with ,
this is all hearsay but this is back when I was in the Jaycees and we were
trying to do those types of programs and it had to do something about in II
the past at some point in time Al Klingelhutz was involved with one and he
got dunked and hurt his back . Due to that , they made it a policy or , I
don 't know . Although it 's been up at St . Hubert 's all those years that
I 've been going there and Al 's always up there so I don 't think that 's
maybe the way it is .
Lash: If it 's not a State law , the police couldn 't enforce it anyway . If I
it 's just in the ordinance .
11 ,
11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 26 , 1990 - Page 7
II
Mady : I don 't know . I just thought it was kind of interesting . I had
I heard this when we were back in the Jaycees and yet St . Hubert 's does it
every year so obviously it either isn't or it 's just ignored .
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS:
IIMady: All that 's left is adminstrative packet . Any questions on the
Adminsistrative packet?
11 Hoffman: You might just want to go through that item by item .
II Lash: On this Bandimere thing . Obviously at our last meeting when we
brought up about the lady who thinks it should be preserved . That must
have . . .
IHoffman: We haven 't heard from her .
Lash : So you figure it 's okay to torch it then?
11 Hoffman: Well we haven 't heard from her after this letter went out so .
IILash : Oh , you sent a letter to her?
Hoffman: The notice went to Wendy and Wendy was her neighbor and the
1 person . . .
Mady : Wendy was going to talk to her about it .
IIAndrews: It 's a dangerous building . It needs to be burnt .
Lash : Well I just thought before we did that , it might be diplomatic to
II talk to her first so that the thing that she thinks should be historically
preserved , she doesn 't see the City just burn it down without totally . . .
Schroers: Well wasn 't that the lady that came to our meeting and when we
II told her about the condition of the place , what she really said that she
was concerned about were the' houses that were made out of Chaska brick .
ILash: That wasn 't her .
Mady: That wasn 't the same person but they were interested in the same
I thing .
Lash: But it wasn 't the same person . I just thought it might be kind of
callous if we ignored what she said and just went in there and burned the
IIhouse down .
Andrews: We could invite her to light the first match .
IIMady : Yeah , the ceremonial first match thrown . Okay . Lake Ann was
obviously seeded . Did they get the soccer field done too now?
II
Park and Rec Commission Meeting I
June 26 , 1990 - Page 8
Hoffman: Soccer field . They 're regrading . They 've resurveyed it and now
they 're regrading . The ballfields are coming along nicely . I
Mady: Yeah , the grass looked nice .
Schroers: If we can 't get them to come in this year , I don 't know . We 're
going to be in trouble . Growing conditions are ideal .
Hoffman: The first few hard rains after they just seeded it , took out some ,
gullys but they 'll have to do some hand seeding and grading and leveling
this fall and hopefully by this spring we ' ll be able to play . The
remainder of this park and the soccer field as of yet is still unseeded
though . Some of the issues which you've seen in here on the drainage
problems are being addressed back thrgugh . . .coming back to us with a
solution to try to move some of that water out of there more quickly and
that will be installed as part of the final product which we 're getting .
Schroers: I would recommend if they could to fill in the washouts and seed
right in the first of September . Last week of August or first week of
September because you want some time to get that established before the
freeze .
Mady: And from about now on , we 're pretty much going to hit the dry spell i
now so we might as well not do anything through July .
Hoffman: There 's the last remark in there that we really feel we 're
getting the solution . . .so Mark was asked to take a look at it and see what ,
just get a different viewpoint . So this is what they came back with so
through conversations with Gary Warren and Mark. . .and his input and this
letter from Mark , we should have a solution . The letter from . . .concerning
Curry Farms . . .keep you up to date . The site plans on here normally . Those
would be brought to the Park Commission as a regular agenda item . If you I
have any questions on any of these two , you can . . .
Lash: What about this thing to the Mayor of Victoria? There wasn 't
anything . I don 't remember seeing a letter previously from him so I guess II
I 'm confused what she 's asking about here .
Hoffman: Okay , the railroad which cuts just the northwest corner of
Chanhassen , the railroad tracks that come across . The city of Victoria has
that developed as a bith path throughout the City of Victoria . ' City of
Shorewood has it developed as a bike path through Shorewood and downtown
Excelsior . They 're just asking us if we will commit to finishing that , I
don 't know if that distance is in here . Less than a mile segment through
the City of Chanhassen .
Lash: Okay . I
Hoffman: Do you have any viewpoints on that? If that 's something that . . .
Schroers: I was on that trail on Sunday and that trail goes beyond
Shorewood all the way up into Minnetonka . Into Minnetonka Mills . There
are parts of it that are excellent . There are other parts of it that are II
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 26 , 1990 - Page 9
basically non-rideable unless you 're young with a strong mountain bike . It
would be really nice to see that trail finished all the way . To cover a
lot of distance and it 's something that people would use a lot and
I noticed that on the parts that were finished nice , there was a lot of
people using it and as soon as you get to a section that was unimproved ,
you may say there was practically nobody on it . So it really disrupts the
trail to have portions of it that are unimproved .
' Lash: What 's the difference between the improved and unimproved?
Schroers : Where it was really nice was in Minnetonka from you know where
those Little League baseball fields are on TH 101? From there east . It
was a very fine crushed aggregate and it was almost like cement . It was
smooth . It was flat . You don 't need ,a mountain bike . Just a regular road
bike goes down there really nice . Immediately west of TH 101 , it 's
' railroad rock . You can 't ride hardly anything on it . It 's not good to walk
on . It 's just really pretty much unacceptable for a trail .
Hoffman: The first segment that comes through downtown Victoria is
finished with the same type of small aggregate which packs down and is very
rideable . The last segment is that large railroad , that gray rock that
1 it 's sharp on the edges . Basically most of those segments are used for
snowmobile trails in the winter and if they 're covered with snow it 's
sufficient . But now the City of Victoria has budgeted enough monies to
improve the rest of that trail . Take off that railroad rock and put down ,
1 it 's almost like a pea rock on the baseball field . To continue that and
then they 're working with the City of Shorewood and see if they can 't get
that whole segment so they contacted us just to see if we can do our small
1 segment of trail in there .
Schroers: I would think if there was any funds available , I would
certainly be in favor of it .
Lash: So is that something we can remember to look at?
1 Hoffman: Someone should probably make a motion on it . Probably an
in-house project to go up there and take a look at that . Maybe the
maintenance folks in the City of Victoria would . . .park maintenance and get
an idea of how they 're going about it so they all sing the same tune and
next spring they get to that and they can go ahead and do that .
Mady: Don 't they set the ag lime right on top of the existing railroad
bed?
Schroers: No , not really because that rock doesn 't settle very well .
1 You 're looking for a motion Todd? What you would like is a motion of
intent or interest to meet with the City of Victoria to research the
possibilities or do you want a motion? Do you want approval to go ahead
with it?
Hoffman: Yeah .
Lash: We don 't have the money to do it do we?
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting I
June 26 , 1990 - Page 10
Hoffman: We can budget for it .
Lash: So we 'd have to make sure it 's in the budget? That's what I 'm
afraid we 're going to forget to do is get it in the budget . If we make a
motion now to do that , then is that going to reassure us that it will be in
the budget next year?
Hoffman: Sure . . .
Andrew: I second it . Who moved?
Lash: I think Larry did . ,
Mady: What is the motion exactly?
Schroers: The motion is to proceed with .
Lash: Investigating the possibilities? I
Schroers: No , not investigating the possibilities . The motion is to
proceed with budgeting and completing the segment of that particular trail
that runs through the City of Chanhassen .
Lash: And should we give some direction to get an amount figure? An
estimate so that when it comes budget time , we have an idea of what to put 11
in?
Mady: I 'm assuming they 'd meet with Victoria and they 'll know exactly what"
they 're doing so then they can estimate the number of yards .
Lash: Okay , make sure we get that so we know come budget time what we 're
doing .
Schroers moved, Andrews seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
proceed with budgeting and completing the upgrading of a segment of trail II
that runs through the northwest corner City of Chanhassen in 1991 . All
voted in favor and the motion carried.
1
SITE PLANS.
Mady: Any questions on the site plans? ,
Lash: What are you looking for?
Hoffman: Normally you recall when site plans are brought up before us for II
any commercial , industrial or residential developments , we look at things
like trail easements , park fees , accepting land or accepting park and trail
fees in lieu of land . Those types of things . So basically these two items
are obviously not in areas where we 're going to require parkland . Any
trail easements which would be necessary to be taken and we'll . . .park and
trail fees . ,
i
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 26 , 1990 - Page 11
Andrews: Do we have to allow for the trail along TH 5 or is that just
going to be . . .
Hoffman: That 's in the State .
Andrews: That 's in the State plan? Okay .
Mady: State highway plan . And they 're both on TH 5 .
Andrews: So I don 't think we need to do anything other than . . .
Mady: I think all we need to do is move to recommend the City accept park
and trail fees in lieu of development 'on both plans . I don 't know if you
need separate motions on each one or not but ditto them for both but I ' ll
move .
Schroers: I 'll second .
Mady moved, Schroers seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission
recommend to accept park and trail fees in lieu of parkland and trail
construction on the two site plans located on TH 5. All voted in favor and
the motion carried.
Schroers: Todd , while we 're talking about this trail business , there is a
washout just east of the Lake Ann entrance on that bike trail that could be
hazardous to someone .
Hoffman: That came out of the new park area there? Washed out of that?
Schroers: Yeah .
Hoffman: Did it take out the asphalt?
Schroers: Yeah . It took out the asphalt and what it is is it 's about a
foot wide and about a foot deep and someone could step in it if they were
jogging along there at night and break an ankle or someone could drop a
bicycle tire in there and go over the handle bars .
1 Hoffman: While we 're on park and trail fees , there 's a point of interest
that was discussed last night at the City Council meeting . In going
through the spring of 1989 , March of 1989 , remember when we went through
and reconstructed park trail fees and as part of that commercial/industrial
land , it was designated that land which costs over $12 ,500 .00 an acre , the
park fee would be determined at 10% of the land cost . McDonald 's came in
1 with a proposal to acquire an additional .921 acres at a cost of about
$160 ,000 .00 . That would put their trail fee , their park and trail fees at
about $21 ,000 .00 for less than an acre of land . So that did not seem
I reasonable and/or fair so that was discussed last night as an item that the
City Council when they approved , recommended to approve or actually
recommended that the City Council approved that we go back to the general
formula which is $1 ,200 .00 per acre on all commercial/industrial until we
IIcan take a look at that and find a better way of determining those fees .
Park and Rec Commission Meeting I
- June 26 , 1990 -- Page 12
So that plat came in at less than an acre at $21 ,000 .00 . Robert 's
Automated Products came in at 7 .5 acres at $22,000 .00 so you 've got over 5 II
times the amount of land and their park fees only about $1 ,000 .00 more and
it 's still quite high at $22 ,000 .00 . We have a survey . We 'll be bringing
this item back to the Park Commission at their next meeting . A survey of all
large portion of the communities , the Metropolitan communities and the
large percentage of them just acquire park and trail fees and the
commercial/industrial have a flat rate of per acre and the majority of them
are either above or below the $2 ,000 .00 mark per acre . So we 're just a
little bit behind in that . We need to get that corrected so we can get
ahead and go ahead with these building projects . Have anything further to
add to that Don?
Mayor Chmiel : You covered it well .
Hoffman: Is everybody understanding the idea to that? The intent was , if II
I recall correctly , when you 're dealing with . . .
( There was a tape change at this portion of the meeting. ) I
Schroers: . . .and that 's kind of too bad . That is supposed to be a handicap
access but the woodchips going from the parking lot to the pier are pretty
hard to negotiate a wheelchair over . Or hard to walk on for someone that
is somewhat immobile . So I don 't know what the answer is there .
Hoffman: That is part of our agreement. Upon receiving that here , the
next time the City , public works crew does asphalting , they will remove thell
woodchips that are there and install the aggregate base and asphalt I
believe so we make that entire trail from the parking lot where the
handicap stalls are down to the fishing pier and accessible by wheelchair . II
Or at least by hardpacked surface . The solution I would see to the drive
down there , the sleeve which is installed over by the beach , they 'll
install a sleeve in the middle of the asphalt trail of the same kind and
then put large wood bollards inbetween from the edge of the asphalt trail
and onto the lake . . .to cure that problem .
Mady: As long as we can do it with either that or I was suggesting a split 1
rail fence . Something that . . .just to cut it out .
Hoffman: Yeah , a split rail fence would eventually . . . 1
Mady: You can do them fairly inexpensively .
Lash: Then I just wanted to say , what kind of a turnout did you get for
Teen Night?
Hoffman: I think we had 60 . 1
Lash: So is that good?
Hoffman: That 's pretty good .
i
•
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 26 , 1990 - Page 13
Lash: From what I heard it was fun and I 'm sure it was appreciated . Then
another question I had . I saw and heard something when I was looking at
the fees about the canoe rack rentals . Has that been all done? No?
Hoffman: New racks were built . The sites were never finalized with the
park maintenance crew so they don 't know where they 're going so we have to
get together with Dale and determine , or we can talk about that .
Lash: I think we figured out where they were going at a meeting didn 't we?
Schroers: Generally .
' Hoffman: At Lake Susan and two at Lotus but the exact location of where
they would be for like the easiest access of the canoes and that type of
thing .
Schroers: We had decided at Lotus that one was going to be close to the
Carver Beach Park and the other one was going to be further down the trail
to more easily accommodate the neighbors that live closest to the lake .
Mady : The mini-beach .
1 Schroers: The mini-beach , correct .
Hoffman: I would foresee , that would be on the east of the mini-beach on
the flat?
Mady: Yeah . Not too far away though .
' Hoffman: Then the other one would be right in the park property itself and
then the third one would be installed at Lake Susan .
Lash: So did you get many calls from people interested?
Hoffman: We received 3 checks . It 's something new that people don 't know
about and they're certainly they 're not there so people aren 't seeing them .
The season 's obviously half over so I 've contacted those people and said do
you want to get a full refund this year and not use them or we 'll refund
' you half and you can use it for the remainder of the season . The park
maintenance crews is severely backlogged in their work . They'\ie got
project after project that they could be doing so it 's . . .
' Mady: They're spending all their time cutting grass. It 's got to stop
raining one of these days .
' Schroers: Speaking of which , what kind of a mower do they use for mowing
along the trail by Lake Ann?
Hoffman: Along the trail they use . . .
Schroers: Is it a Woodsmower type?
Lash: I think it 's the same one they use at the park isn 't it?
•
•
•
II
Park and Rec Commission Meeting 11
June 26 , 1990 - Page 14
II
Hoffman: They 've got two different types . It 's either the Woodsmower type
which mows underneath , which is a lawn tractor type of mower or else one of"
the Toro 's . I don 't know which one they use .
Lash: It 's got a big thing you know .
Schroers: A big thing? You mean a . . .
Lash: Yeah . I mean it doesn't look like a mower . It looks like it 's got . ,
Hoffman: A deck .
Lash: Yeah , a really big one in the front . II
Schroers: Well okay , if it 's got a big deck in the front , I guess I don 't II
see any reason to have that much grass all over the whole top of the trail .
They should mow it so it blows away from the trail one way . Turn around .
Come back and mow it so it blows away from the trail the other way . I means
it was like cut hay all over the trail .
Lash: It was . Yeah , it was .
Schroers: I mean it was really thick . Right on top of the pavement and II
there always seems to be quite a few branches and stuff down too and I .
don 't know if a sweeper is part of the equipment that the City has here or il
not . I totally understand what you 're saying about the maintenance being
over loaded but to operate a little bit more efficiency takes some of the
load off . You don 't have to go back and do things twice . So if they could
mow in a direction to blow the clippings away from the trail rather than on il
them , you 're going to end up with a much nicer trail .
Hoffman: Were they clippings or were they . . . I
Schroers: It looked to me like somebody when on it with a Woodsmower and a
Woodsmower is just a great big industrial thing that will chop down almost 11
anything . It does not do a neat job of cutting but what it's designed for
is rough cutting and that is basically rough cutting along there and I
thought that that 's what happened . Somebody just ran over it with a
Woodsmower and just chopped it up and it all landed on the trail . I
Hoffman: Okay. I 'll inquire with whoever . I 'll be having a chance to
travel either with Dale or Dean in marking the torch run route on Thursday 11
morning early so that's actually part of the trail that we go along there
so we 'll be marking that area and I 'll talk specifically about that a
little bit to see .
Mady: Are you still coming on Frontier Trail? Good . Most of us can 't II
drive on it either .
Lash: I have another question and it kind of ties in with something that II
Jim Andrews brought up one night . I just heard from someone today a little
grumbling about the over 35 league and the number of people that they think,
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 26 , 1990 - Page 15
are in or coming in that are not eligible as far as living or working in
'
Chan .
Mady: There are some new faces out there , that 's for sure .
Lash: And specifically I believe the team they were talking about was
Rosemount . That this is a brand new team this year and a lot of the guys
don 't live or work .
Hoffman: At Rosemount?
Lash: Well they work for Rosemount but they work in Eden Prairie . They
don 't work at this one but they 're coming . But they 're on this team . So
one night Jim you were bringing up something about fees and we were kind of
talking about if we 're always running short of money . This is not going to
be a popular idea with some people but maybe it 's something we can consider
as the fields are getting more and more crowded each year . If the person
does not live in Chanhassen but is still eligible to play . If they work
here or they 're grandfathered in or whatever , that their fee then would be
higher than a resident . The same as to get into Lake Ann . It 's twice as
much to get in for a non-resident . Maybe since they 're not contributing by
paying their real estate taxes for anything , then maybe we can charge them
more and that would be more of an incentive for them to go and play on
their own fields if they think we 're getting too expensive .
•
' Hoffman: Anybody that was here during that discussion a year and a half
ago?
Lash: I know . I said it wouldn 't be popular .
Mady: You don 't see me saying a whole lot .
Lash: No . And I know it will probably stir the pot a little bit . It 's
not telling them they can 't play .
Hoffman: That 's the exact position I took when we went through that is
that the field shortage was getting so bad and that we should eliminate the
outside players and or allow them to play , 3 players per team and then they
pay , in a number of cities they pay a non-resident fee so they pay . . .
Andrews: We should do the same thing here .
I Hoffman: I guarantee to that and that went through the Park Commission for
a number of meetings and it went to City Council .
Schroers: We compromised on that didn 't we and decided to allow 4 people
outside per team? But then we didn't charge an additional fee .
Hoffman: We compromised by grandfathering anybody who was playing in the
City of Chanhassen in 1988 is now a legal player and then after that they
can have up to 4 outside players as well .
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting I
June 26 , 1990 - Page 16
Schroers: But we did not charge a fee , an additional fee for the outside
players?
Hoffman: No .
Mady : We probably will be at some point in time . I
Schroers: Yeah . We ' ll just have to see what happens when the 3 new fields
at Lake Ann come in and where we 're at but I really think that if it 's
justified , we just have to cut down the number of outside players and
that 's it . The ones from 1988 are grandfathered in but from 1989 on they
should not be grandfathered in and I wouldn't see any problem with coming ,
back and saying okay , this year due to field shortages we 're only allowing
3 people per team or 2 people per team to live outside of the City . If we
justify that by our use , I certainly wouldn 't have a problem with it .
Hoffman: It 's a very difficult . Those types of rules are very difficult II
to deal with as well . We usually receive 65-70 rosters with 12 to 20
people per roster and trying to keep track of every individual player . If
you instate the live or work rule from the start and you can start fresh
which we attempted to do , then you can probably keep a handle on it . Right
now we 're really in a big gray area . A lot of that takes place out there.
It 's self policing to a certain point because the teams do talk amongst
each other and they 're . . .outside players on a league to league basis . . .
Lash: But how are you , I mean an average player on a team that you play II once or twice a year , how are you supposed to know how many of the guys on
their team are eligible?
Schroers: Oh , we know that . I mean we 've been out there playing for years"
and years and years and when you see a strange face . You pick it out right
away . Where 'd that guy come from? Haven 't seen him before . Is he old
enough? Does he live here? Those are the first questions everybody asks II
because everybody 's saying , well that 's not fair .
Mady: Especially when you 're getting beat . I
Schroers: Bringing in a brand new home run hitter that 's not legal , we 're
not going to go for that so Todd 's right , it 's self policing .
Lash: But do guys have the courage to make a stink?
Schroers: Absolutely . The 35 year old league does not , I don 't think
courage is the right word . I think an excuse to make a stink is better .
Mady: I don 't think it 's as bad as it used to be but in previous years
I know it was real bad . 3-4 years ago .
Schroers: Yeah , it 's was like shut up and play ball you know .
Lash: So how do you know when the team comes to register , how do you know II
how many of the guys?
11
•
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 26 , 1990 - Page 17
Hoffman: We do a comparison of their 1988 roster to their new roster . If
there are new folks on there , if they live or work in Chanhassen .
Lash: So how do you know if they live or work in Chanhassen?
Mady: Driver licenses .
Hoffman: No , we 're not even to that point yet . It 's just by what they
report on their roster .
Mady: If it gets to be a big enough stink , you can .
Hoffman : Some cities , Eden Prairie , they collect a paycheck stub or driver
license and a number of players go to ,the driver license bureau to change
their address to an apartment number that does not exist in the City of
' Eden Prairie . Get a new license . Go register and go back and change the
address back . It 's incredible .
Schroers: I know that when you do go east of here they don't make any
exceptions . The Tule is pretty much hard and fast and there is also a
penalty if you have an illegal player on your team , that your team is
kicked out of the league .
Hoffman: Yeah , we attempted to instate that as well . To instate the
$100 .00 deposit from each team and if your team is found illegible , then we
keep the $100 .00 fine .
Schroers: I don 't think the $100 .00 deposit to a team isn't a big deal
because you can have 10 guys on a team , each chip in $10 .00 and they say
who cares? It 's only $10 .00 . But if you would say , if you have an illegal
player on your team , that your team is going to be banned from playing in
the league , that will be a deterrent .
Hoffman : If you get to that point , you need the support . . .
Andrews: A city ordinance to arrest them .
Schroers: That 's why those Council members get all that pay .
Hoffman: Any other commission presentations?
Mady: As long as we 're talking about softball , at Lake Ann now that we
have new parking areas out there , I 'd like to see us start enforcing the no
parking in the driveways and grass . Now I realize we probably can 't
enforce it this year but we 've got to begin that education process of
I telling those guys you can't park there . There are places to park and by
golly if you can 't walk that extra half a block to park in a legal spot ,
then you shouldn't even be playing out here . I 'm tired of trying to drive
through some of these areas . It 's just ridiculous . I mean you 've got
about a 10 foot opening . If we had a problem out there and try to get an
ambulance in , it 's just a mess . I would like to see us begin that
education process with letters out to each one of the teams this year
asking to inform their people . Telling them that next year they 'll be
Park and Rec Commission Meeting 11
June 26 , 1990 - Page 18
i
informed at the league meetings , the pre-season league meetings and then in
the first 2 weeks of the season the public safety individuals will do II warnings and from that point forward they will be ticketed period . We 've
got to get this place cleaned up . We 're been talking about it for 5 years
and now we 've got adequate parking out there . We should at least be making
them park where they belong instead of on the grass and the driveways . It 's ,
ridiculous . Thank you .
TRAIL PLAN, MARK KOEGLER . I
Mady: Okay , the last thing is the trail plan with Mark Koegler unless
anyone else has anything else . I
Koegler : If I may, you recall there was a joint meeting 4 weeks ago or
there abouts with City Council and at that session I think some good
comments were heard about some potential changes . What we 're going to do II
this evening was take a little agenda time and maybe a little more than 3
minutes and focus on , if you have comments specifically on what changes you
would like to see made . We will make those and then bring a draft of the 11
plan back to you for a comprehensive review . At that meeting there was
discussion of trails be appropriate along major thoroughfares in the city .
There was also discussion that there might be some interest in obtaining II easements in certain areas . Not that they would be developed now but that
they would be available in the future . That kind of brings to mind a
question that if you 're going to take easements , where do you take them?
What governs where you take them which begins to say , do you have maybe a II
plan that 's phase I that is major thoroughfares and do you have an ultimate
kind of plan that says this is what we 'd like to achieve in 20 years or 30
years so you know where you 're getting your easements . Some of the other II
things that were talked about . Questions I guess that I have back to the
Commission regarding nature trails . Should those be designated on the plan
and if so , where? I think there 's a couple of philosphies that you could 11
look at there . There seemed to be major corridors that at least from my
perception there was pretty much unanimous agreement that someday warranted
a nature trail and Bluff Creek corridor was one of those . Beyond that I
think there 's a couple philosophies that you can support . One is that
maybe nature trails are appropriate in other areas and you designate them.
The other would be that nature trails are appropriate within the boundaries
of parks such that targeting hypothetically Lake St . Joe . If there 's ever II
park property acquired out there , there 's on the west side of that lake
there 's wonderful opportunities for nature trails . If you 've ever been in
, that area . You could argue that those trails should be in the park rather
than around the lake impacting private property and so forth so I think
that 's another philosophy you may want to give some thought to. And then
finally I guess I elude to maybe the plan needs to be a little bit more
specific with regard to what the City 's policy is on trails and II particularly on the placement of trails . In many areas it serves well to
have access points off cul-de-sacs to allow people to get into parks where
you have extremely long block situations . Presumably if there's adequate
notice and the people know what they 're buying when they buy the lot , that
works well . If they don't know , then they come and see you afterwards and
they 're not happy campers . That is a common subdivision technique in any
community you go into that many times the only way to get into a park for all
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 26 , 1990 - Page 19
half mile area , whatever is with one of these access points . So is that an
' acceptable solution still? I think in general the tone was let 's try to
avoid in all cases trails that go between private lot lines . It causes
friction with people using their backyards and wanting to add decks and
whatever it might be . So I think all we 're really after tonight is a
fairly brief discussion on some of your general philosophical thoughts .
Where do you want to go with this? It 's clear that there needs to be a
scaling down of what was envisioned as a first phase . In my own mind it's
' a little less clear as to what you want to do . Do you still want an
ultimate plan? And that could be totally explained in the text that that
is a long range plan . Whether that 's 20 years . What direction do you want
to proceed and we ' ll set about to revise that and bring that back to you .
Andrews: I think we should still retain the ultimate goal . There was a
lot of discussion about the joint meeting that we should or should not . I
think it is important to have an ultimate goal so that we do have a puzzle
where all the pieces do fit together as developments proceed in our
community . I also agree that we should look at perhaps a smaller Phase I
that 's doable in a length of time that , at least for me personally , I think
for some of the other members of the commission here that we can deal with
a project that 's small enough to see it from beginning to end so it 's not
constantly in a state of change and state of planning but it gets into a
state of actual construction . I think it 's going to be difficult to
prioritize because in a lot of the areas that we desperately want trails
are also areas that are the most difficult to acquire the property . I
don 't know how we 're going to deal with that . To have a trail along TH 101
which is an area that we desperately need is a great idea but from what
I 've been told , it 's basically a physical impossibility that it 's going to
' happen until TH 101 is dramatically improved and there is apparently no
even wild guess as to when that might happen . So it 's a very difficult
problem of wishing what we want and making happen what's possible .
1 Mady: I had a couple thoughts . Kind of taking off on Jim 's thought there
on TH 101 is I 'd like to see on TH 101 north and I think that 's where the
big problem is really is north . South isn 't bad in most places because it
' isn 't developed yet but in north, I 'd like to see us do in the next year ,
do a feasibility study on the north because there may be an opportunity in
some areas . What I 'm thinking specifically is in the farthest north area
' maybe where we could at least poll a couple blocks on either side of .
Andrews: Kurvers?
1 Mady: Not Kurvers . Further down . Where you can get people into the park .
North Lotus Lake Park . That might be doeable . I know where you get on the
curve up here , a skyhook is about the only way it works and they haven 't
' invented those yet . So I think we need to find out if there are pieces
that are doable and how much and how that all impacts . I think we can
learn that . A Phase I concept is great . Something that 's , Phase I
probably , the way we 're going now , a 5 year plan type of deal and a 5 year
plan means the points of Minnewashta , CR 17 , TH 101 north and south .
Really only about 4 , maybe 4 or 5 , 6 roads .
' Andrews: Collectors . . .
Park and Rec Commission Meeting I
June 26 , 1990 - Page 20
1
Mady: When we get into the 20 year or the forever future plan , I think
still the whole concept , the whole deal still works . It doesn 't II necessarily mean it 's going to be done now . It doesn 't mean it 's going to
be done 15 years from now . It 's just as opportunities are presented , they
should be reviewed and it 's still an ultimate goal for the City and I don 't
think that 's a bad idea . On new development , we may have been more
aggressive than we needed to be . I think what happens there is we took a II
look at the survey 3 years back and saw that 78% of the people , whatever it
was wanted trails badly and geez thought maybe we need them . We need them I
all over the place and we need them now . We jumped all over . Maybe what
we need is what we built , similar to what we 've built and I 'm thinking of
streets such as Carver Beach Road and Laredo here that are , I 'm not sure
what the term is on the traffic plan but they 're kind of a collector type
of street . They 're not , just because they 're not a thru street but they 're
more than a thru street . They 're more , I don 't know what the term is but
there is a term for them I 'm sure . I would see that in new development ,
those are the type of streets where we 'd need to build them right away
because that 's where all your traffic is and then the thru streets that are
more residential quiet streets , well if there 's a park on them , then I see
where we need to but if there 's not , I can see where we don 't need to do
something maybe initially anyway . Maybe easements is the route to go with
some areas but I think there's still important areas to be actively
pursuing .
Schroers: I think that it is important that we do have a master plan laid
out for what we would like to see . In the past we were pretty firm in our II
belief that all the trails should be off road trails and we should be
consistent and I think that is the ideal situation . Unfortunately we don't
live in an ideal work and I think it 's maybe unreasonable to expect that well
can accommodate that . What I would like to see us do is try and be more
reasonable and where it is just too expensive to put in off street trail ,
look at putting on street trail and to prioritize our progress or our Phase
I according to it 's feasibility . I guess what I 'm saying is that I would I
like to see us go to work on something that we can get accomplished .
Taking advantage of utility easements and road improvements. As long as
it 's going to make a connection in our overall plan . If it's reasonable
and affordable to do it , let 's prioritize and make those types of areas
Phase I so that we get on with the construction and get the trails going
rather than continually being in a planning stage . Did I lose anyone
there?
Lash: Is this getting any less gray or is this just , this isn 't getting a
lot clearer for me . I
Koegler : I 've got a couple of specific follow-up questions.
Lash: Okay . I guess I can agree with some of the things that , some of the,
points brought up here . I think some of them were very good . I tend to
disagree Larry with your on street . I 'm just not comfortable with those . II To me I feel like , and I 've walked on Lake Lucy Road you know where the
line is painted there and it 's sort of like it gives people a false sense
of security because there 's this line painted there . You 're suppose to
figure you 're a little safer and you won 't get run over and that 's not
I
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 26 , 1990 - Page 21
going to stop somebody from running over the line or running you over . I
mean I would personally , if we 're going to have them off street , like you
said would be the first choice but if we can't get it off street , I 'm just
not comfortable .
Schroers: Can I respond to that?
Lash: Yeah .
' Schroers: I ride bicycle and jog a lot and I would just rather have that
on street than nothing because people are going to try to get to where they
want to go to anyway and when you have nothing , then instead of having the
I cars come 3 feet from you , they 're coming 6 inches from you and all you 've
got is a loose gravel area if you 're riding your bicycle and you 're going
off in there and you could conceiveably fall down and fall into the path of
' a car where at least you have that much more space if it 's off street .
What I 'm saying is , an on street trail is better than no trail .
Lash: But you like the off street a lot better?
Schroers: Oh yes , definitely . But the cost involved with off street trail
is just going to prohibit us from having trails in some places so it 's kind
' of like settling for second best but it 's definitely safer having a bike
lane than not having a bike lane in an area where people use it . If you
get to , you go down to where the county line is or a little bit beyond 'and
' then it stops and there is no bike lane up past the Catholic Church there
in Excelsior and it gets a lot more uncomfortable as soon as you get out of
that bike lane .
Lash: Okay . And then I think we did talk about a feasibility study on TH
101 didn 't we?
Mady: Yeah , but we 've been bouncing it around .
Lash: Yeah . I think we 've discussed that and agreed that that 's something
' we need to pursue . . . I mean I think it was at the meeting it was fairly
clear that I think we were all in pretty general agreement that we want to
try to pursue the major corridors but I think that 's where we need to have
everybody sit down and figure out what they think are the major corridors
and prioritize the order you 'd like to see them done and then get back
together and see how much we can agree on . On which ones they are and
within how many years we 'd like to see that accomplished and I have
' somewhat of a problem with some of these things because if it 's a 20 or a
15 or 50 year or forever year plan , I have a problem with some of these
because how are we going to know in 50 years what's going to be there and
if that 's where we want to have the trail or if that 's where the road is
still going to be in 50 years or if it 's going to be 2 blocks over or
whatever and then our plan is all messed up and we 've taken easements maybe
where we didn't need them and don't have them where we do need them so
I have a problem with having it be a 50 year forever lifetime kind of plan .
Jim , I was following what you were saying as far as in neighborhoods taking
easements on what you consider to be a collector , whatever . Like on Laredo
out here by the school , that makes sense . You have kids walking to and
Park and Rec Commission Meeting t
June 26 , 1990 - Page 24
for a trail but it 's probably one of the most expensive areas we could pick
to try to put a trail in . If we prioritize it as the biggest need for the I
most expensive , it may not , it 's not feasible . Economically feasible . So
we have a dilemma between the trails that are the highest demand but the
least economically feasible versus the trails that are in less of a demand
but more economically feasible . We 'll have to balance that as a commission
as to really being which ones are most important from an overall
feasibility .
Koegler : Part of what we 'll come back to you along with graph text will be
some budget information in terms of what funds are available now based upon
what we 're projecting for building permit growth . What 's going to be
happening in the next 5 years . I think that ties into that . Another thing
that we 're playing with is trying to break out TH 101 is maybe not a good
example . Minnewashta Parkway is a very good example . One that 's going to
be rebuilt in the near future . What 's the cost of trail there if it 's done
in conjunction with the street project? Or if the street project doesn 't
happen for some reason , what 's the cost of putting the trail in? Looking
at it both ways because that has a big impact as you pointed out . TH 101 I
is another area where ideally if you regrade the road and built a road to
another standard and put a trail in simultaneously . I like Jim 's idea and
I don 't know that it 's been really explored before . You know is there a I
northern segment that makes sense that is a piece of it that will connect
at least to the segment. that Eden Prairie has going off of Duck Lake Trail
area . To at least get some movement along TH 101 for as many people as is I
practical to do so .
Andrews: From what Kurver 's point northward there 's not a lot of property
owners to deal with . Once you get down close to town , you 've got about 87 I
property owners .
Mady: All within 30 feet .
Andrews: Yeah , they have like a 30 feet of frontage and about 50 feet
between their picture window and the highway .
Koegler : And they have 5 driveways and 13 mailboxes .
Mady: All within 100 feet of each other . '
Koegler : And the grade down there is extremely difficult .
Andrews: We could always put in a subway . Maybe that would be cheaper . III
was just thinking , it would probably be a lot cheaper just to have a full
duty city bus thing and people could call for rides . It would probably
cost us less money to do that than to build a trail . '
Lash: A lot of exercise too .
Mady: Maybe Hennepin County will want to put one of their . I
Andrews: Light rail transit . That 's what we need .
1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 26 , 1990 - Page 25
1
Lash : Another thing I should say is , when Dawne called me I mentioned that
this was on too and I asked her if she had any input that she wanted on and
she said that she would definitely be in favor of continuing to keep this
nature trail along Bluff Creek . She thinks that's something that you know
really important and she 'd like to see that remain . Then do we want to
discuss nature trails more than that?
Mady : Does anybody have any ideas outside of the circles on here of other
nature trails?
Lash: You know , I guess if we 're looking at this , some of these that we
have that are around lakes and in some of those areas , I guess I don 't
know . I wouldn 't have a problem with some of those being nature trails .
Andrews: Part of my problem is , I just , personally I don 't have enough
familiarity with the whole city to know what 's out there . Maybe what we
could do is maybe divide among ourselves a certain area to go out and look
around . I don 't have the time nor the memory to look at the whole city to
' think well this might be a good spot or this might not be but maybe as part
of our committee work or work group we could carve this up into sections
and say well you take this area . You go out and see if you see any new
' ideas or new areas for trails or walkways . A lot of these things you guys
talk about . I can 't envision them at all . I have no idea what you 're
talking about . I think it 's a great idea .
Lash: That 's why we live in different areas .
Schroers : I see a lot of potential for multi-use trail on the whole ,
pretty much the entire new service area that they just put in and I don 't
know why those trails can 't serve as nature trails as well as a cross
country ski trail .
Lash: What are you talking about the new service area?
Schroers : The new major sewer collector that they put in . The one that
runs there . There 's no reason that they couldn 't be designated nature
trail/cross country ski trail and just multi-purpose trail . I mean it goes
through the countryside .
Mady: This one?
Schroers: Well this one here and then where it goes down past Lake Susan
' and Rice Marsh and down in there . That trail could serve a lot of
different functions .
' Lash: See that 's something that we could hopefully get because if you 're
not , what 's the major expense of doing something like that?
Koegler : Doing the nature trails versus?
Lash: Yeah .
. 1
Park and Rec Commission Meeting 11
June 26 , 1990 - Page 26
I
Koegler : Just establishing grade and some kind of appropriate walking
turf . Whether that 's to be a mowed area or whether that 's to be whatever
surfacing but obviously is much , much less costly than putting in a
bituminous ribbon to ride bikes on and skate on and whatever else .
Lash: So maybe one of our things we should kick around a little bit is on 1
major collections go for off street bituminous things that get people off
of the road but in a lot of the other areas , try to opt for a nature trail
at least to get us started so we 've got some collectors . You 're not going
to be going on collectors all over town you know and it 's not going to be
all handicapped accessible but if you 're walking or jogging or something ,
you could make connections and if it 's not a paved trail , that would be
okay too .
Schroers: On a turf trail you can ride horses . You can ride mountain
bikes . You can walk . You can cross country ski on it in the wintertime .
You could designate a portion of it for snowmobiling . Snowmobiling and
cross country skiing do not go well together but you know , some places you
can designate certain areas where it 's for cross country skiing only and
for other areas where it would fit into , the snowmobile route . A portion II
of it could be used for snowmobiling .
Andrews : I ' ll say one thing . If we as a commission and as a city were
able to construct some trail along one of these major busy thoroughfares , I
think it 'd make it a lot easier to secure future funding . Right now so
little of this trail system is really obviously visible from high traffic
areas . If we came back for a referendum for future funding of a larger
project , it would sure be nice to say look it . We did this . It was a
success . 'There it is . People are using it . Now let 's expand on it . I
get frustrated because it seems like this is a project that has no
beginning and no middle and no end . I think by breaking into these smaller
sections , maybe we could have some small successes and get the backing that
we need to get a little bit more ambitious .
Koegler : The construction of TH 5 will help the cause eventually also .
When that has a trail all the way through as much of Chanhassen as they get"
done and then on through Eden Prairie . That will be a very visible link
obviously .
Lash: It will be a connector to any of the others that we can get going '
north and south .
Koegler : Yeah and the advantage of that is right now that TH 5 really is II
the major east/west feed that really pretty well goes through the middle of
the developed area of the city . What 's likely to be the developed area of
the City through at least the year 2000 so you 've got that spine running II right through the middle that you can connect to and at least have eastern
access if nothing else .
Schroers: At what point Mark do you include signage? I mean does that go II
in right along with the construction or is that something that you have to
budget for separately? Signage does help a lot in defining , letting peoples
know that there is a trail there and where it goes .
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 26 , 1990 - Page 27
Koegler : It should be part of any construction . One of the project
Y project
just as is the grading for the trail and the restoration and
' everything else should be signage . It clearly should be part of it when it
goes in and get people to use it as fast as possible I would think is your
primary goal so that you can promote safe useage .
' Schroers: So you normally just include signage in the cost of the
construction of the trail?
Koegler : Yes . It 's one of the cost items in the project . Just as street
signs are in any road improvement project . There are signage manuals that
are involved in that too . Absolutely .
Lash: I guess another thing we need to make sure we keep in mind , going
back to your comments earlier tonight 'about the trail by Lake Ann and they
mowed it and it was all full of grass and it was a mess . And Todd 's
commetns about the maintenance people being swamped and back logged
already . You know I think we really need to try and keep in mind what
we 're doing here and what maintenance costs are going to be to the City, in
the end . I mean it 's not only the cost of the trail and putting it in but
it 's forever then the commitment to having a bunch of guys maintaining them
and figuring out how much of a cost that 's going to be to the City than no
mowed trail .
Koegler : That is the drawback . Unless it gets heavy enough useage that
the turf stays down to some degree , mowing those if you get miles of trails
obviously is quite time consuming .
Schroers : What seems to be happening along with prioritizing sections of
trail and that sort of thing is also prioritizing work projects for the
maintenance . We 're dealing with that , the exact same issue . We have got
more to do than we can possibly do so we just have to hit the high spots .
Pick out what 's important . Do that and other things have to wait until you
have the time or until budgets are adjusted and more people are put on to
deal with it .
Lash: Yeah , but you hate to spend the money doing the grading and all of
that to make it nice and have enough guys to mow it at the beginning of the
season and then that 's it . Nobody can use it for the rest of the year . I 'd
hate to see us get into a spot like that .
Schroers: It doesn 't have to be mowed like your grass every week . You can
' get by with mowing it like once every 3 weeks and it still looks like a
trail . You can still see that it 's been mowed and you can still walk
through it reasonably well if you want to and there certainly would be no
problem riding a horse through it or mountain bikes can go through it . It
doesn 't have to be meticulously manicured but the most important thing on
the turf trail is the initial preparation . What we feel works the best is
just going over it with farm implements . Farm machinery and run a plow
through it . Plow it . Then disc it . Then drag it . Then you run your
seeder over that and by the time you get done with like those 4 processes ,
you have a reasonably level , flat surface and it works out pretty well .
But if you just go out and mow it as it is , that 's not really acceptable .
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 26 , 1990 - Page 28
You get a pretty rough course .
Hoffman: A newest note as far as the bright spot in our park maintenance II
division is that on this Monday Charlie Siegel started as a new full time
maintenance person . As a 6 month park maintenance full time during the
summer months and 6 month mechanic for the public works department during II
the winter . So now we do have Dale , Dean and Charlie Eiler who's doing the
majority of the downtown maintenance and then now Charlie Siegel who will
be the third full time staff person for the park maintenance as well as the 11
three part time summer maintenance . People that do the majority of the
ballfield grading and park . . . Good news huh Larry?
Schroers: Yes . I
Lash: Mark , maybe what you 're talking about coming back with an updated
map here . Is that what you said earlier?
Koegler : Yeah , updated map and text as well as some cost data . That will 11
be , we did that quite some time ago and there was a fair amount of cost
estimation that went into the original Phase I plan but it was all tied to II
the fact that this pot of money was there in the referendum which obviously
almost made it but didn 't . Now no effort has been made since then to say II
okay here 's what these costs are . Here 's more realistically what our
resources are . Here 's what we can do in 5 years . Here 's what we can do in
maybe 1 year so we can show people we 're making progress .
Andrews: My biggest problem is I 'm a little bit ignorant of how funds
could be raised . I mean I look at the north TH 101 project and I have no
concept of the money but I know from kind of a sense that that 's got to be II
incredibly expensive to consider that as a stand alone project . I look at
something like Lake Minnewashta . There we 've got much more of an economic
opportunity . Like I said before , it's the need versus feasibility and you II
made a comment earlier about how we will have an existing east/west spine
really fairly quickly in our overall plan . I mean it will be here probably
the first thing will happen really and it would be important for us to look'
at those north/south linkages . The key ones and if we could get those in
place , it will look good because we can show something that we 've
accomplished something and then we can start expanding off of those key
north/south connections then later . I guess I feel like what 's next . How II
are we going to make progress although I feel like we 're treading water and
not going anywhere . Are we in the position now where we 're going to hear
back or are we supposed to take some action ourselves here?
Koegler : Well it generally is easier to get discussion on items if I bring
you something to critique . By all means if you want to divide up and take
a piece and look at an area of the community, do so as that would be
helpful but I think probably taking these comments that I 've noted plus thell
comments from the previous meeting and let us come back with a draft
revised plan that maybe is a Phase I tied to some resources and what they II
can be accomplished . You may disagree and you may change our priorities
but that may not change the budget a whole lot . If we move it from CR 17
to Galpin , that probably doesn 't have a major impact necessarily on the
budget . If we move it from CR 17 to TN 101 , obviously it does . But let us,
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 26 , 1990 - Page 29
take a shot at it perhaps .
' Andrews: I look at the map here and I think well , there 's probably what , 5
or 6 potential north/south major routes and more than likely ultimately
we 'd want to have something on almost every one of those over a 20 year
' plan at least so we could probably look at , I guess I look at that as let 's
prioritize those 6 or 7 potential north/south routes as our Phase I plan . I
don 't know if anybody else agrees with that or not . The other comment I
' had was we 're talking about the trails versus , I get confused here . Trails
versus paths . And we talk about so many different types of uses for nature
trails , I wonder if we 're trying to make them a feature that 's so versatile
that it 's impossible to provide, to go ahead and provide a nature trail . I
mean if it 's going to be horses and snowmobiles and , is it possible to have
a trail that can really suit all those needs or are we more in a position
where a certain set of nature trails is going to be designated as horse
' trails and another section would be horses would not be allowed? Is it
feasible to have a nature trail that really can suit all those uses at
once?
Lash: Generally I wouldn 't think any nature trails that would be north of
Tom? 5 would be suitable for horses because most people don 't have horses
north of TH 5 so you 'd have to drive , trailer your horse up north of TH 5 .
Mady: You do have in the Minnewashta area and in Lake Lucy there 's some
still but .
Lash: Yeah , but very few . I think the majority of them are south of TH 5
down closer to Lake Riley .
' Schroers: You know just because you have a multi-purpose trail , you don 't
have to designate it for something specifically and it certainly can , a
multi-use trail certainly can serve as a nature trail . If it runs in the
area cf town , if you take this , what do you call that?
Lash: Interceptor?
Schroers: That sewer line . Mark , do you have a name for that?
Koegler : Lake Ann Interceptor .
Schroers: The Lake Ann Interceptor , okay . Between TH 41 and Lake Ann , if
you had mowed trail through there , there's all kinds of vegetation , birds ,
animals that you could see walking on that trail early in the morning or
late in the evening and of course the plants are there all day long that
anyone can see if they want to . You can observe all kinds of nature
walking along there and that wouldn't be harmed in any way by someone going
through there on cross country skis or on a mountain bike or even if it was
snowmobiled on . You can go on any snowmobile trail around and walk down it
and you 're not going to go very far without seeing deer tracks . I mean the
wildlife just more or less adjusts . You don 't chase them out of the area
just because a trail 's there . In fact sometimes they 're drawn to the trail
because it 's kind of an open area where they 'll come to graze and get away
from insects and that sort of thing . Then on the other hand , if the turf
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 26 , 1990 - Page 30
trail goes right through a residential neighborhood where it 's all
developed around it , then it wouldn 't lend itself much to being a nature
trail but where it runs . Between TH 41 and Lake Ann and down along Lake
Susan and along past Rice Marsh there , that would suit just about any need
that you want to use it for .
Andrews: I guess the main thing is if we 've got the easement , we can do
something with it . If we don 't have it , it 's a waste .
Schroers: Do we have any kind of easement along that interceptor? '
Koegler : I am not sure . I don't believe at the present time there is an
easement . It would have to be secured . I 'm not 100% sure on that though .
We ' ll have to check .
Mady: Mark , did you have any specific questions? You had mentioned you
had some .
Koegler : I think you got into those . I had some questions on nature
trails and I think you kind of led discussion into that because that was
one of the areas of concern I had as to how that was to be handled . Some
of that to a certain degree is going to be self policing . If you look at
that extreme southern Bluff Creek area . You put a nature trail in there
and the hardy souls are the only ones that are going to make it up those
grades . That 's not going to be a ski trail and it 's probably not going to
be horse accessible in many of those areas . It's really pretty rugged . As"
you get up further north , yes . There 's mixed , probably mixed opportunity
there .
Schroers: Also , if you just have a 2 foot wide path that 's designated as all
nature trail , you 're going to get very little use on it . Very little use .
There 's going to be a few people that are going to go out there and want to
look at the plants and the birds and that sort of thing but most of the I
people that are looking for recreation are not going to use it and I think
that would be a waste of a trail .
Andrews: I agree . I think you need about 30-40 feet . It 's pretty wide toll
get any , 20 feet at minimum I would say .
Schroers: Yeah . I
Mady: Okay , is there anything else?
Lash: When you bring this back , is there a way then like the little circle!'
things show nature trail and then the other one is off street which to me
says bituminous .
Koegler : I think we need some obviously refined categories in there also
because you know , some of these are realistically we can peg some of these II
off street and some of them probably can 't be as your discussion has
pointed out tonight . I think it becomes an issue then of do we try to do
that eventually as a lower priority so there 's something that 's better than
nothing . Yeah , we 'll look at breaking that down .
Park and Rec Commission Meeting
June 26 , 1990 - Page 31
Lash: And when you 're saying nature trail , when we were talking about a
mowed trail , is that a nature trail?
Koegler : Yes .
Lash: We talked about 17 different , we call them 17 different things and I
don 't know for sure . . .
Schroers: It would probably be easier if we were talking about concrete ,
bituminous and turf . Those are the three . . .most categorized . Where
concrete is in development and bituminous would be along major collectors
and turf .
Lash: Maybe those would be the three different things that you could show
there .
Mady: Standardized trails .
Koegler : The only place I would assume we 'll probably show concrete is
clearly in areas where it 's warranted yet it tends to be more urban . I 'm
assuming that we 're not going to get to the degree of detail that every
sidewalk , lineal foot of sidewalk in the city shows up on this plan because
I don 't think , this is more promoting a larger scale , higher useage areas .
Not walks that are in place or might be in place in front of somebody 's
house .
' Mady: Especially in new development . We handle that through your verbage
as to where you put them in a development and then when a development comes
in , when they lay their streets out for the development plan , they know
what they have to do .
Andrews: What I 'd like to see are the high traffic , the collectors and the
' connectors I guess is what I 'd call them . You 're right , you don 't need
every neighborhood . It 'd just be such a tangled mess it 'd look like
somebody dropped spaghetti on the map .
Mady: It does already but .
Koegler : We 'll put together some revised language . Revised maps for you
to review and then try to get some dollar figures together for a real world
scenario .
Mady: I just have 2 comments that kind of go along with the trail idea .
Over the last 3 years whenever we 're talking about trails and sidewalks ,
for winter we 've told people that the City would not require you to shovel
your sidewalk that went by your house . It has been made known to us that
the City has on the books an ordinance that requires you to if you have a
sidewalk out in front of your property , you have to shovel it . Since we 've
been saying for the last 3 years , the City as a whole has been saying that
no , that 's not the case . I think the City needs to address that ordinance
soon and my thoughts on it are , you don 't shovel it unless it 's maybe in
front of commercial property or it is a particular segment that is going to
be named specifically in the ordinance .
11
Park and Rec Commission Meeting I
June 26 , 1990 - Page 32
I
Lash: I would think that most of the places where there are sidewalks ,
they were put there specifically for a reason and then if they 're not
shoveled , then you can 't use them . My prime example would be Laredo by thell
school . That 's there so kids can walk on the sidewalk to school and then
it 's not shoveled .
Mady: The City shovels that .
Lash: The City does that all the way along? '
Mady: Yeah . The comment was made specifically about the downtown area .
So I think the area should state that in those areas , and maybe it 's and
this is just brainstorming but in front of commercial establishments . If II
there 's a sidewalk , then the commercial establishment is responsible for it
which is kind of how it 's usually handled . In front of residential areas , '
if the City deems they 're important enough to be shoveled , then the City
takes care of it which is how the City does it now anyway .
Schroers: I guess I don 't see a problem with asking people to shovel the II
sidewalk in front of their house .
Mady : I don 't either but we 've already told people for the last 3 years
that we 're not going to require it and now we find the ordinance has been
on the books for how many years . Who knows . It 's an old ordinance so we
just need to get consistent .
Andrews: Perhaps what we need is something in the paper in the fall
advising of the ordinance , if it doesn 't get changed .
Mady: Yeah , I think people should be informed of what it is . 1
Schroers: Everybody wants something done but they all want somebody else
to do it for them you know . Get out and shovel your walk .
Andrews: What 's that little thing, don't tax me . Tax the guy behind the
tree . '
Mady: A couple other items. Somebody mentioned skateboarding . Everybody
has read all 'the letters to the editor in the Minneapolis paper concerning , "
there are a number of suburbs who 've banned skateboarding . Just to make
you guys aware , if we ever think of doing that , you 'll have this place just
as full as you did with the softball teams so don 't do it while I 'm going
to be here .
Schroers: Skateboarding, roller blading , we tried. We can 't stop it .
Lash: They tried that in Chaska . '
Mady: Did they really? I don't see it as that big of a problem yet . Then"
Lake Lucy Road trail being on street . Maybe we need to talk about someday,
and I 've talked about this before , having an asphalt curb installed on that
line painted and then with openings wherever the sewers are so the water
can get off the street into there but otherwise there is some bituminous I
11
Park and Rec Commission Meeting •
June 26 , 1990 -- Page 33
t
curb along that whole thing that separates the road and it 's painted so
there 's a little bit more safety in there . I don 't know if that 's
important or not but it 's an idea to throw out .
' Schroers: I think that would be a hazard to bikers .
Andrews: What about putting in these raised reflectors that they can flop ,
fold down?
Mady: I don 't know if it 's a problem or not but I know I would hate to be
out there .
Lash: You know those dots they have in California on the freeway?
Mady : I know the problem is in Minnesota that always gets pulled up from
the snowplows . That 's why we don 't have them .
' Koegler : With an extra maintenance guy , you can put them back every year
light .
Mady : Hopkins is putting those in though . The kind Jim 's talking about .
' The ones that fold down . They put some of those in on their streets . I
just looked at them and was amazed . Maybe they have some real super
cement . Those were my only comments . If anybody has anything else for
' discussion otherwise we can go home .
Lash : Will you check on that fire lane thing for me Todd?
' Andrews: I want to make one comment about Lori . I 'm going to miss the
hard work she put in and appreciate what she did .
Schroers moved, Lash seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor
and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. .
Prepared by Nann Opheim
1
1
I
I
1
f
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES
JULY 12 , 1990
' PRESENT: Bill Bernhjelm Dave Bummer
Wayne Wenzlaff ABSENT: Bill Boyt.
Barb Klick Craig Blechta
Brian Beniek
' STAFF PRESENT: Jim Chaffee , Public Safety Director
Scott Harr , Assistant Public Safety Director
Bob Zydowsky, Community Service Officer
VISITORS : Sgt . Bob VanDenBroeke
Larry Johnson
The meeting was called to order at 7 P.M. by Chairman Bill
Bernhjelm.
The minutes of the June meeting were accepted as written with the
addition of Brian Beniek present .
No visitor presentations .
' No Carver County Sheriff ' s report .
Brian Beniek mentioned the 4 week training class that has begun for
the firemen on the aerial ladder truck .
Discussion was held regarding the status of the Public Safety
Department and the appointment of Jim Chaffee ' s replacement . The
' Commission came up with four statements that they will ask the City
Council and City Manager :
1 . Why were they (the Public Safety Commission) not formally told
of the position opening?
2 . What is the City ' s intention in filling this position - short
' term and long term?
3 . What role does the Commission have pertaining to input in the
process?
4 . The Commission ' s availability for the Council and City Manager
to address and question .
The Commission will compose a letter to the Council and City Manager
and also address the Council at the July 16th meeting.
Wayne Wenzlaff motioned, Bill Bernhjelm seconded, to commend Jim
Chaffee for his contribution to the Public Safety Department for the
past 3 1/2 years .
The next meeting will be Tuesday, July 17th, at 8 P.M. to address
the replacement issue in the Public Safety Department .
' Brain Beniek motioned, Dave Dummer seconded to adjourn the meeting
at 9:30 P.M.
I
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION MINUTES
JULY 24 , 1990
PRESENT: Bill Bernhjelm ABSENT: Craig Blechta
Dave Dummer Wayne Wenzlaff
Bill Boyt Brian Beniek
' Barb Klick
STAFF PRESENT: Scott Harr , Assistant Public Safety Director
VISITORS : Dave Pedersen, Villager
Don Chmiel , Mayor
' Al Wallin, Sheriff
Jim Castleberry, Chief Deputy
Mike Bierlein, 681 Bighorn Drive
Chairman Bill Berhnjelm opened the meeting at 8 p.m. and
gave the Commission an update on the City Council meeting of
7/23/90 . Discussion followed concerning the Public Safety Direc-
tor ' s position . Chief Deputy Castleberry gave a brief background
of his appointment as Public Safety Director and his term in that
position from 1984 to 1987 . Jim also mentioned he would like to
see more administrative control of the Fire Department . Barb
Klick mentioned the difficult position the Commission is in
because a definite plan is non-existent . Dave Dummer stated
that minor modifications need to the made but as for a time line
he felt. 2-3 months is enough time for the decision process .
Bill Boyt suggested taking time , plan and keep the interim posi -
tion of Public Safety Director filled for 6 months . Commissioner
Klick mentioned the possibility of staff burn-out during this 6
month time span.
' Asst . Director Harr stated the possibility of adding part-time
staff to handle code enforcement until a decision is made .
Bill Boyt motioned , Barb Klick seconded, that the Public Safety
Commission resolve to have a plan presented and approved by the
City Council for the direction and future of the Public Safety
' Department befire the hiring of the Public Safety Director . A
time table will be set up. All voted in favor and the motion
passed.
' Sheriff Wallin suggested that staff come back to the Commission
with a time table.
The next meeting will be Thursday, August 9 , 1990 , at 7 p.m. in
the Public Safety Conference Room.
Barb Klick motioned, Dave Dummer seconded, to adjourn the
meeting.
11
I
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1