Loading...
1n. Minutes CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL II SPECIAL MEETING OCTOBER 2, 1989 I Mayor Chmiel called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. . The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. I COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Boyt, Councilman Workman, Councilwoman Dimler and Councilman Johnson II STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Paul Krauss, Dave Hempel, Todd Gerhardt and Jim Chaffee I LAND SALE AGREEMENT, SOUTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 41 AND WEST 82ND STREET, GLEN PAULS. I Mayor Chmiel: We were to have some additional discussions this past week. Have those taken place? IICouncilwoman Dimler: Yes. Mayor Chmiel: Who'd like to update me? IDon Ashworth: Tom or Todd or Ursula? Councilwoman Dimler: I guess I can. I'm surprised. I guess I don't know, ths II was just handed to me. I don't know what the new proposal is that we met was, I believe it was Wednesday or was it Thursday in Chaska. Chaska City Hall with Jake Pokorney and at that point Mr. Glen Pauls was there and he indicated to Todd, myself and Tom that the offer had been withdrawn. IMayor Chmiel: The offer has been withdrawn? 1 Councilwoman Dimler : At that point it was, yes. So whatever is here before us this evening is new information to us. t Councilman Workman: The offer had been withdrawn on Monday night he stated at the Council meeting. Don Ashworth: He came in late today. Handed me what I gave you. The purchase I agreement and said, the Council asked that we submit this as a final offer. So I don't know what that means. That's all he had said to me. II Councilwoman Dimler: After our last meeting it was my understanding that the offer was withdrawn and there was nothing coming forth and we did not ask for another offer that I recall. Councilman Boyt: Can't we clear this up? Mr. Pauls is standing right here. Glen Pauls: Glen Pauls, Nordic Track. I guess they asked me at Chaska to put II one more offer. I don't know, I forget if we talked about that when you were there or after you guys left but they wanted me to basically try to get. I guess Chaska wants it resolved. They would like it resolved I should say and II they wanted us to put in one offer being that we are interested. Obviously we're interested in getting the land but we just weren't interested at that II 1 City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 price so just to get something done tonight we thought we'd put in one more offer just to see where it goes. ' Councilman Boyt: What is the offer? Glen Pauls: I think you have copies. ' Councilman Boyt: Maybe you could explain it. Glen Pauls: It's $60,000.00 offer I guess. Councilman Boyt: Why the difference? Glen Pauls: Fran the $100,000.00? Councilman Boyt: Yes. Glen Pauls: Like I explained to the 3 that were, I guess you weren't there, at the meeting. We went over it. We decided the $100,000.00 was way more than we really wanted to pay. I guess I should clarify, the way the $100,000.00 worked ' out was we never actually offered the full $100,000.00. Chaska was offering $15,000.00. We were offering $85,000.00 and they were offering $15,000.00 to make it up so the highest we ever went personally, NordicTrack ever went was ' $85,000.00. Where we're at now is we thought that was way too much. We decided not to. I should say we decided to withdraw the offer last Friday. We had to give you a chance obviously to take it because we had offered it but after that we just decided it wasn't worth that. We are willing to go the $60,000.00 just because of the convenience of the whole operation. It would be kind of a mess in front of there but we've had sane discussions about roads and the whole thing but basically this is just kind of a last attempt type deal. Chaska really ' wanted us to try and resolve it. Councilman Boyt: How much of this $65,000.00 or whatever is money from Chaska? ' Glen Pauls: The $60,000.00 offer is money, that's completely from us now. That's just what we would offer. I don't know, did Don Ashworth call you Todd today? Todd Gerhardt: I talked to Dave Pokorney today and there still would be an additional $15,000.00 added to the $60,000.00 offer. If I could clarify what the $15,000.00 would be for would be for roadway easements for the upgrading of 82nd Street is what Chaska's interest in this property would be. Councilman Boyt: Before on Monday it seemed to me that you mentioned or a week ago, that this was going to be in a tax increment district? Is that correct? Todd Gerhardt: It's in an economic development district in the Chaska city boundaries. Councilman Boyt: How is that different? Todd Gerhardt: Economic development? It is a tax increment district. Councilman Johnson: This acreage isn't? 2 City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 1 I Todd Gerhardt: Not ours, no. Glen Pauls: The piece behind it was. ' Councilman Johnson: The acreage behind is? Councilman Boyt: So if I understand it correctly, then of course our piece can't be in their tax increment district but because it's not in the tax increment district, then it's really a different kind of financial commitment than the development you're making on your own property. Is that right? If your current property is in a tax increment district, then the money you are spending to improve that is, I assume you have a Housing and Redevelopment Authority that's really handling that expenditure. Isn't that correct? Todd Gerhardt: The roadway improvements, the monies to pay for those roadway improvements would be assessed back against the benefitting properties but those dollars can't be expended outside the district so somehow they would have to put a boundary outside that roadway so they could spend those monies on that roadway.boundary haven't seen their maps to show where their district boundaries are Bill so I can't... Councilman Boyt: Well wasn't there discussion a week ago that basically Chaska would be looking to annex this piece of property once the City had sold it? Todd Gerhardt: That is a possibility. Councilman Boyt: It would create a bit of a difficulty to have part of a building in Chaska and another part of the building in Chanhassen wouldn't it? Or maybe not. ' Glen Pauls: The parking lot is the only thing that would be affected by this. It's just a corner of the parking lot that it affects. The only problem would be for us is we would have to pay taxes to two different cities. Todd Gerhardt: This would have it's own Parcel Identification Number. Glen Pauls: I guess from what I heard from Chaska, they didn't really mind that much if you left it in Chanhassen. It didn't really bother than either way. Is that what you got out of it? I guess they never said definitely. ' Todd Gerhardt: Bill brings up a good concern is that can an economic development district boundary encompass another municipality go into another municipality? Don Ashworth: I think that Chaska would look to trying to annex the property. One of the things I did on this, cost benefit sheet in the back. Councilman Johnson: Oh that's yours? Don Ashworth: That's mine. The Mayor shared this document with me that they use at NSP. But I'm gone through some of the property tax implications and I've made the assumption in here that the parcel would go over to Chaska. In either case, whether it stayed in Chanhassen or Chaska, the yearly taxes would be , 3 City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 $288.00 and that was from the Assessor's Office. The benefits, whether Chaska or Chanhassen, to the County would be an additional $90.00 per year. From the ' school, $264.00 so we'd see net property tax savings for Chanhassen people of $354.00 but I think the biggest costs are the costs associated with maintaining 82nd Street. If that roadway or if the parcel is in Chaska, Chaska would become responsible for maintenance of that entire roadway. I'm estimating right now ' that our cost to maintain that half mile is $3,500.00 per year. So all of the items you see on that right hand side or under annual benefits are all reduced costs or gain to the City of Chanhassen through this potential transaction. ' Councilman Boyt: What does a 3 to 4 something or other? ' Don Ashworth: That represents reduced costs. What I'm saying there is right now that facility is used for off season storage and according to Mike and Jerry, we would send 3 to 4 men for 3 days, twice a year, and during that time frame we have 9 trucks so they take sanders off and stored. Plows off and ' stored. 5 pick-ups. Plows off, stored. Grader V-plow removed and stored. That work takes about 3 to 4 days. We do that twice a year. Councilman Johnson: You still do that in a different place. Don Ashworth: That's correct but this calculation only takes into account the additional hour that's taking place out there. ' Councilman Johnson: The additional hour to drive out there? Don Ashworth: The additional time required to go out there. Mayor Chmiel: Drive there and drive back? Don Ashworth: Right. Councilman Boyt: If we take 4 people and we send them down there for 6 days, it costs us $3,000.00? Councilman Johnson: For 24 man hours? Don Ashworth: Twice a year. ' Councilman Johnson: 3 days and you're saying it's only 1 hour extra per man. Mayor Chmiel: 3 or 4 men. What do they make per hour? Don Ashworth: Okay. Councilman Johnson: I would like a job. If for 24 man hours you spend ' $3,000.00, I'd put my application in. That's a little over $6,000.00 a week. Councilwoman Dialer: Don, I'll do it. ' Mayor Chmiel: I think what you did was take the, taking them off the equipment and putting than back on which probably should not have been in there. Don Ashworth: But this was from. 4 City- Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 1 Mayor Chmiel: Whether they would be there or would have it done at public works. Councilman Johnson: If it's 24 man days. Don Ashworth: Actually what I did was I multiplied 4 x 3 x 2 x 16 which would ' be roughly $12.00 to $14.00 per hour and with overhead, you would have an average of $16.00 per hour. But you're right. That's the total cost regardless of where you do it. ' Councilman Johnson: I think you want 8 in there also for 8 hours? Don Ashworth: Oh, you've got an 8 in there for 8 hours a day. So you take 4 x 3 x 2 x 8 x 16. Councilman Johnson: That works out to about $384.00. Instead of $3,000.00 it's $384.00. Councilman Workman: I don't know if that's the issue here. Councilman Johnson: When we got to the bottom, $9,000.00 isn't that much of a savings. Still trying to figure it out huh? Councilman Boyt: Well the advantage of that is if your costs of the move are $8,500.00-$8,600.00 and your benefits are $9,000.00, well then that would tell you to make the move. But in fact our benefits are not $9,000.00 apparently so maybe out costs do exceed the benfits. Although same of the benefits might be a little hard to measure. It might be an interesting discussion as to how we got... Councilman Johnson: What's this $2,000.00 down here? Regular maintenance. Maintenance on the building? Don Ashworth: No. Regular maintenance involves, Mike tells me we have a light boom truck out there we use to replace the lights. Anytime you have like one of the signals is out. He estimates that that's 5 times per month. This one here really should be just the 1 additional hour instead of going from the maintenance building to have to go out to TH 41 and TH 5 so let's try that. 5 x 10 is 50 x 40 is $2,000.00. That number is correct. I still think that other one is higher. I'm still trying to figure out how to do it because you can't take 3 to 4 men, if they're on the same site and doing that work it's a lot different than 3 to 4 men for 3 days where they have to take and go out to a remote site to do that same work. I will admit that there is something wrong with my calculations. Councilman Johnson: You see one thing you could do at this garage is have somebody else be doing. You could drop the truck off so people could go someplace else. All the mechanic, in his spare time does it or something. Mayor Chmiel: 96 hours and 96 hours would make that 192 hours is what you're ' saying per year. 1 5 11 ' City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 11 Don Ashworth: On that one there? Like I said, I got that from Mike and as we're going through it, I will admit that that should represent the full cost but on the other side, it should be higher because you are doing it at one site so maybe's it, instead of having the 8 hour days, maybe they should be you know, 1 or 2 instead of multiplying them by 8. 11 Mayor Chmiel: You come out pretty close. $3,072.00 is what you cane up with. Don Ashworth: Yeah, I think it is and this is at the reduced number of hours. Councilman Boyt: What we're back to is, so you are saying that it costs $3,000.00 to go out and take the plows off and put the plows back on those ' trucks? That's $3,000.00 above and beyond what it would cost us to do it if they were in one central location. Don Ashworth: That still seems high but the Mayor just verified it. Mayor Chmiel: I just came up with the same total number that he has here. Councilman Johnson: But did you say 3 men 8 hours a day? Mayor Chmiel: 3 men 8 hours a day. Councilwoman Dimler: Each one of us probably has an opinion on whether that number is ridiculous or right. ' Councilman Boyt: It's kind of important. If the benefits outweight the costs, this deal looks attractive in spite of the lower offer. If the benefits don't outweigh the costs... Councilman Johnson: The costs go up with the lower offer though. Councilwoman Dimler: It takes 4 men to go out there and clean that road? ICouncilman Boyt: This is a cost of $130,000.00 over 15 years. That's an $8,600.00 cost. Don Ashworth: Another factor there is I've used 15 years. You put a cinder building up like that, it's going to last longer. At a minimum you'd have a mortgage for 30 years. Councilman Boyt: Can you produce at sane point the information to substantiate that this is still in the City's best financial interest to accept the existing offer that's, what is it, $25,000.00 less than the first offer? Are you saying that economically it's in the City's best interest to accept this offer? ' Don Ashworth: I'm not sure as to the motivation in the withdrawal of the offer. I think that we as a group should, if we're going to consider this, that potentially myself, the Mayor be authorized to at least get the offer that was on the table from before back. IICouncilman Boyt: How are you going to do that? I mean I don't expect you to reveal all your negotiating strategy if you have one but I mean the gentleman IIwas here. He said very clearly this is my offer a week ago. He's now cane back 11 6 City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 1 and said, now this is m_v offer and it doesn't look the same to me. You can have 1 my vote if you can get it at $100,000.00. As I said a week ago, this is a deal we ought to make. At $75,000.00 I'm not so sure that that still holds true. Councilwoman Dimler: Do you want sane discussion on it? Mayor Chmiel: Yes, I'd like to open it up for discussion. One of the things I keep coming back to is looking at these cost benefits comparisons to what we're costing per square foot. Talking with different contractors, we're looking at about a 5,000 square foot building at $23.00 per square foot and that would provide us with a cinder block building, openers on the door, insulation in that building, foundations with grid on slab. Councilman Johnson: Floor drainage. I Mayor Chmiel: And floor drainage and a few lights. Cost on that would just be alone anywhere from $115,000.00 on up. If you take 5,000 square feet times $23.00 you'll come up with $115,000.00. Councilwoman Dimler: I have a few comments too. Mayor Qiniel: Not yet. Just a second. What I see it is this is still going to cost the City extra dollars. It's going to cost the entirety of the city some more money. My concerns are, what we have there presently is servicing us I properly. It would be nice to consolidate to bring it back down to the public works area but I don't think we should have to have the City's people pay for those additional costs. It's just my feelings as I look at it right now. 1 Councilwoman Dimler: I guess I would like to add to that, on this agreement here that's dated 10-2-89 that the buyer wants to have the sale from the Council by 10-6-89 and the equipment has to be, around the building must be removed by 10-10-89. I just think that's really too soon. We don't have anywhere to go with it and again the additional costs in getting a facility. Also, the buyer had indicated at an earlier meeting that if there's any soil contamination, that Chanhassen would be responsible to clean it up and I'd just hate to see us spend the whole $60,000.00 on cleaning it up possibly. Councilman Johnson: Of course if there is any, we're responsible to clean it up anyway. Councilwoman Dimler: That's true but then you've got to, you don't want to 1 spend the whole $60,000.00. Councilman Johnson: Don? Do we have an underground tank or anything at that place? Fuel? Don Ashworth: It was removed several years ago. Councilman Johnson: Was it underground or above ground? Don Ashworth: I know we had an above ground but did we also have an underground? Mayor Qvtiel: Was that one diked with the above ground at the time? 7 I City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 Todd Gerhardt: I think that was before. I know there was an underground that was taken out or is still existing. I just know there was one out there. ' Councilman Johnson: One or the other. Don Ashworth: I'm sure that it was removed. The overhead was the gasoline and the underground I think was for heating. Like kerosene fuel oil. Todd Gerhardt: I'd like to, if I could, make one comment that Mr. Pokorney had ' also informed me that Mr. Pauls is intending to access onto West 82nd Street. Their facility with an estimated 100 employees and that would stay a gravel base as the existing West 82nd is right now. If they were to came in and make the improvetients on that road, M$Dot would require that the buildings be taken out of there. Councilman Johnson: Just for right-of-way access? Todd Gerhardt: Easements, right-of-way and just the amount of grading and cutting in that area makes that site almost unaccessible. Councilman Workman: They can't really improve that road unless we decide. Do we own both sides of that road? Don Ashworth: Yes. We own both sides of that section. That's why are maintenance costs are higher. ' Glen Pauls: Could I add something here? Mayor Chmiel: Yes. ' Glen Pauls: With that fuel contamination, Dave Pokorney was saying that it's possible from what experience he's had that if we cut out the 14 feet we have to cut there, if we get the lot, that we could possibly take care of all that on ' site without having to have any additional expenses so you might be able to avoid hauling away contaminated ground. I guess what they do with this ground, from what he was saying, is just spread it on the surface. We're doing enough ' dirt work there that we could do that right on site. Councilwoman Dimler: Well that sounds real good but we'd have to have assurance of that. Glen Pauls: Yeah, possibly. Councilman Johnson: Is there any reason to believe there's contamination at that site? ' Don Ashworth: In fact, I would say just the opposite. If there would have been anything when they dug up the tanks and what not, we would have had it reported at that point in time. ' Councilman Johnson: You don't just spread it out and put grass seed on it. You've got to go in and plow it a couple times a year for a while until all the fuels go out of it. It's not like you just... 8 I City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 I Glen Pauls: It's got to be turned? 1 Councilman Johnson: Yeah, it's got to be turned a couple times. You don't just lay it out. Councilwoman Dimler: See and I think they want to have their parking lot there. Councilman Johnson: They could put it in the back. ' Glen Pauls: We could put it in the back part. It would have to be looked into. Councilman Boyt: As I understand it, the building we have there is 30 years ' old? At least. I thought I read 30 years somewhere. Don Ashworth: 30 years is the number I used for amortizing the new building. I'm sure those buildings were there at the time the merger, township and city. Councilman Boyt: I guess the better question is, what's the life expectancy of those buildings for what we're using than for? When are we going to have to start putting sane money in maintaining those buildings? Seriously. Don Ashworth: That should have been one of the numbers that should have gone in this form. Unfortunately I was unable to get. I passed along to Mike and he was going to try to get it from Jerry and Jerry didn't get back. I'm sure that each year we have a certain amount of vandalism that occurs out on that site just because people think there's something in there and it's not well secured. On the other side, I'm sure in repairing that vandalism, we put very little money into it. Go back out, they put a lock back on and hinges and a door and that type of thing. Councilman Boyt: In our other public works building, is there roan there to build a 5,000 square foot expansion? 1 Don Ashworth: Yes. Councilman Boyt: So we don't have to buy land? What we have to do is provide a building. Mayor Chmiel: And we already discussed that last time. ' Councilman Boyt: Yeah. I guess I'm just getting clear on these. Has anybody investigated whether or not Chaska would store our equipment for us? ' Councilman Workman: Yes. Councilman Boyt: What was their answer? ' Councilman Workman: Possibly down in Chaska. Councilman Boyt: So they could very easily, I mean it's possible that they would agree to store that equipment for us? Todd Gerhardt: FOr temporary. i 9 11 City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 Councilman Boyt: Right. Until we get our building built. Mayor Chmiel: Open storage? Todd Gerhardt: Closed. ' Councilman Boyt: There seems to be some possibility that maybe the offer could be expanded. I'd eventually like to see a motion that this be approved contingent upon whoever the negotiating party is representing the City reaching ' a better financial agreement with Mr. Pauls and the City of Chaska. However they can work that out between them. ' Don Ashworth: Ideally from a City standapoint, since they're going to be doing major grading associated with TH 41 and 82nd Street, to have the site graded which means buildings removed at that point in time and the grading done by the City in 1990 allowing us to keep materials on the site through the end of this ' year and into 1990 would be the best alternative. As I understand it, that was not a very warmly received suggestion. Correct? Glen Pawls: We wanted to have the lot graded by, well they are grading now... The idea was to get it graded in the fall so we could get a good compaction... because we've got bad floors in our building right now. We just don't want to ' get into that again. It's not worth it. Don Ashworth: But I mean this would be a parking area right? Glen Pauls: That part there yeah. The trouble is, we're...so what's caning off of there is planning to fill other areas. We have to decide now what the grade's going to be. Do we let it go? We have to leave it a little bit lower ' if we don't your lot, you know grade around it. We'd have to go maybe another 6 inches the entire lot higher. We have to kind of come up with a final grade. Either that or leave a big pit somewhere. Then if we don't ever get your lot, we're stuck with a big pit. So that's why we have to decide now. They were supposed to be grading last week. I don't know they had some problems. Councilman Johnson: They're doing something out there. I drove by this II evening. Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussion? ICouncilman Workman: I don't know. I'm a little nervous about this. We met last week for really no reason. Only to find out that, I don't know. I suspect that from the meeting we had last week that even if we had approved what we II approved last week, we probably wouldn't have had $100,000.00 either. This purchase agreement here says something about $60,000.00. It doesn't say anything about Chaska's $15,000.00. If I was nervous about selling it at $100,000.00, I sure an now at $60,000.00. I think I was looking at some of these costs of driving out there. Those are some hidden costs that I don't know that we're going to be able to recognize too well. I don't know. Mr. Pauls ' stated at his meeting that he wouldn't mind this thing sitting in front of his 4 million dollar project and I think it's going to be pretty close to the front door of it and he didn't mind if his couple hundred employees were using a gravel road and then proceeded to reduce his offer by $25,000.00. I don't know. 10 City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 I think we're going to have a building that's going to be expensive no matter which way you look at it and we're going to have to came up with an awful lot of 11 money to put one up. I know in these frugal times what the people of Chanhassen are telling me. Possibly increased taxes with school referendums, etc. and everything else holding the line and everything else, I do not feel comfortable. Mayor Chmiel: Jay? Councilman Johnson: Can I just say ditto? , Councilman Boyt: So what you're saying is, if the offer was at $100,000.00, if it was back to that, that for $15,000.00 you wouldn't want to build a brand new public works building next to our existing one? ' Councilman Workman: If it was back at $100,000.00? Councilman Boyt: I would propose that we make a motion that we accept this ' offer if it can be negotiated at that rate. Councilwoman Dimler: Then he'd have to came with another offer and I think he'd have to initiate that. Councilman Boyt: Let me just make the motion that we would accept it if he or he and Chaska cane up with that offer? Councilman Johnson: In other words, you're counter-offering? ' Councilwoman Dimler: We would look at it. Councilman Johnson: So you're saying we would accept a counter-offer? i Councilwoman Dimler: But we've already been through that Bill. Mayor Chmiel: The counter-offer of $100,000.00 is what he's basically saying. Councilwoman D mler: We've already been through that. ' Mayor Chmiel: Okay, but if that motion were to go through, the decision would not have to be made at this particular time either. A counter-offer... Councilwoman Dimler: But to make it real clear, we must reject the one that be's giving us. Mayor Chmiel: Well that's true. I agree. ' Councilwoman Dimler: And then encourage him to put another offer on the table at $100,000.00. Councilman Boyt: Everybody's fighting, well Mr. Pauls anyway and our deal, are fighting time. , Mayor Chmiel: We realize that Bill. 11 1 City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 Councilman Boyt: I think if you like an offer of $100,000.00 total, then it would sure saije everybody a lot of time if we went ahead and accepted that offer contingent upon the storage of the equipment until we can get our building built but the basic dollar thing is really a chance to turn that piece of property into an opportunity for the City to come up with a better situation overall. But to miss that opportunity. ' Councilman Johnson: Basically what you're saying is to reject the $60,000.00 offer, authorize Don to accept an offer at the rate of $100,000.00? ' Councilman Boyt: That's right. Don Ashworth: If that were to be considered, I would suggest a couple of adds to that. Those would be, that it would also be contingent on us negotiating with Chaska temporary storage at no cost to the City for 1989 or late 1990. Additionally, if there would bean eventual annexation, that the property could not be in a tax increment district therefore assuring the taxes off of the site would go to the County and school. Councilman Johnson: Could they improve the road without that being in a tax ' increment district? Don Ashworth: Yes. Councilman Boyt: But Don, if we're talking, I don't know exactly how the assessment on this property would work but if it's a parking lot, it's not going ' to be assessed at that tremendous amount of money. Don Ashworth: $30,000.00. ' Councilman Boyt: If it would allow the City of Chaska to increase their off or their ability to underwrite this to same extent, it seams like to me that it would be money well spent so I would like to not put other conditions on them if ' we can avoid it other than the one, we certainly have to have someplace inside to store our trucks and plows and such. Mayor Chmiel: What we should do then is look for a motion to reject the II $60,000.00. Councilman Workman: So moved. ICouncilwoman Dialer: Second. ' Mayor Chmiel: It's been moved and seconded to reject the $60,000.00 offer for purchase agreement from Nordic Track Incorporation to the City of Chanhassen. Then if we could put it back on the table to make a recommendation or... ICouncilwoman Dialer: Can we vote on that first and then make a recommendation? Mayor Chmiel: Yes but before we get into that, I just want to make sure we have ' it all covered. Zb then request the initial $100,000.00 offer for that property. Okay, does everyone understand that? Councilwoman Dialer: With the understanding that we can find some more... 12 City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 , 1 Mayor Chniel: Yes, we have to get final approval on this and we have a motion and a second now. Councilman Boyt: So really we're doing this in two pa rts. The second part is going to be accepting $100,000.00 offer with? Mayor CYrtiel: Correct. Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to reject the offer of ' $60,000.00 fran Nordic Track for the property located at the southwest corner of TH 41 and 82nd Street. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Councilman Johnson: I move that we authorize Don to negotiate and accept on the behalf of the Council an offer of $100,000.00 for the timing purpose of this rather than wait a week. Councilman Boyt: And storage. , Councilman Johnson: And the condition that Chaska, at no cost to the City of Chanhassen, provide storage until our building is completed in 1990. What other? ' Don Ashworth: That's it. Mayor ( iniel: Without any additional contingencies? , Councilman Johnson: Yeah. Councilman Workman: Second. Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Workman seconded to authorize the City Manager to accept an offer of $100,000.00 for the property located in the southwest corner of TH 41 and 82nd Street contingent on the City of Chaska, at no cost to the City of Chanhassen, provide storage until the new public works building is completed in 1990. All voted in favor and the motion carried. AUTHORIZE EXTENSION OF AMENDED CURBSIDE RECYCLING CONTRACT. Paul Krauss: On August 14th the Council approved an increase in the household charge for the recycling contract. Approval was granted through October with a 30 day cancellation period incorporated. We're recamnending that the City Council act either to extend or cancel the contract as soon as possible so we can attempt to arrange for service until the end of the year if you so wish. We are reccinending that the Council extend the contract until the end of December. The Recycling Commission is preparing a draft requesting proposals on the contract that's going to be sent out in the very near future that gives sane options for the caning year. With that again we are recommending that the contract be extended to the end of the year. 13 ' City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 Mawr Chmiel: Through December? More specifically, what the legislation that has just been passed. Don Ashworth: I don't know if it's signed yet. ' Mayor Chmiel: Well it's there. All recycling is to be done and that will be mandatory. ' Councilman Boyt: What part of it's mandatory? Mayor Chmiel: The recycling. ' Councilman Johnson: Curbside collection. Mayor Chmiel: Curbside recycling. Councilman Johnson: In what 1992 for this city, it will be mandatory? Mayor Chmiel: No, 1991. Councilman Boyt: That's controlled by the County or the City? Mayor Chmiel: That is controlled by the State mandating those requirements to the County for the County to deal with them or to make sure that the cities do that. ' Councilman Johnson: Any town in excess of 5,000 people in the metropolitan area has to have curbside recycling by 1991. ' Councilman Boyt: Handled by the County right? Councilman Johnson: No. Any town must have it. The money goes to the County. IIPaul Krauss: If I could add something too. That the bill also includes a funding source for part of that which is a 6% tax on trash hauling. We called I the County today to see if they had any idea about what kind of revenues that might generate and if so, what we might expect to have out of that. They really didn't have any information to give us but I...that just on household trash alone it probably generates $40,000.00 in Chanhassen. ICouncilman Boyt: That's not enough. ICouncilman Workman: Where's that $40,000.00 going to really come from though? Mayor Chmiel: Everybody that's paying their. Paul Krauss: It's a 6% tax on trash hauling fee. Councilman Workman: But where are the trash haulers going to get that? IIMayor Chmiel: The trash haulers will be charging their clients. You bet. You're the guy. Everybody sitting in this roan that has garbage. 14 City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 ' Councilman Boyt: I would really have liked to have seen the legislation to understand who has the responsibility. I'll take for granted that it's the City for a minute. It's going to cost of $30,000.00 to extend this contract to the end of the year. That's ridiculous. We're hauling newspaper for $30,000.00. The County is irresponsible in saying that the City should keep curbside recycling. They're not doing it and they won't be doing it in 1991 either. There's no way they can afford it. ' Councilman Johnson: Chaska will be. Councilman Boyt: Maybe the City will be but the County won't be and if the City of Chanhassen does this next year, it's $100,000.00. Don Ashworth: But you've got to give your committee a chance to make a ' recommendation. Councilman Boyt: It's not worth, I'll tell you right now, it's not worth $30,000.00 to me to have those people sit around for 3 months and try to come up with a plan. I said it 2 months ago and I'll say it again. It's irresponsible on our part I think. Mayor Chmiel: To sit around? Councilman Boyt: To cane up with a plan that says we're going to continue our , current program is financially irresponsible. We don't have anything else outside of public safety where we're spending anything like that amount of money and to haul basically newspaper. ' Mayor Chmiel: Bill, in public safety you don't have state laws that are dictating what you're going to do, what you're not going to do. Councilman Boyt: They do. They require us to have a certain number of hours of coverage right? Mayor C oriel: Yes, that's true but on the same token, this is something that you and I have taken for granted for so many years. You take your garbage and you put it out on the a curb and let it sit there. Not even thinking where it's going or what's going to happen with it. Well it's gotten to that point now where by going into the ground it's causing the ground water contamination. It's causing and could cause given problems for our drinking water. What other recourses do we have with much of the waste that is generated? They're mandating, the MPCA is mandating that the operators of those facilities are required to have 3 foot of clay plus the 60 mil poly liner, which is supposedly the state of the art kind of facility. It's just going to cost us more money whichever way we turn. There's no way we can try to eliminate it. It's just an automatic. Don Ashworth: We've gone through same mathematics tonight in each of the issues , but I don't think it'd be that much money Bill. We're talking about giving our committee an opportunity to come back with a recommendation to us. We're talking about trying to insure that we don't have curbside and then we pick it back up within less than a 30 or 60 day period. The numbers were from 90 cents per household per month to $1.40 which is a 50 cent increase. 3,000 households should be $1,500.00 per month. 3 months. $4,500.00. , 15 ' City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 Councilman Boyt: That's not per month. every ' pe That's ever_ other week isn't it? Wait a minute. You have 3,800 households. You're talking $1.40 per household every other week. Councilman Johnson: This isn't a $1.40 increase. ' Councilman Boyt: No, no. I'm talking about how much money we're spending to pick up newspapers. Don Ashworth: I said $.90 to $1.40 so it's about the same difference. Councilman Boyt: That's a monthly charge? Okay. So a $1.40 a month times 3,800. How much is that? That's not $30,000.00 so I was wrong there. Don Ashworth: But I mean it's the increase isn't it? Councilman Boyt: No, I'm talking about the, I'm saying that certainly we've got to recycle. There's no question that we have to recycle. I'm saying curbside recycling is a cadillac service that this city cannot afford. If the County can ' cone up with same way to fix that bill but Tam Chaffee put in the budget for next year $100,000.00 just for curbside pick-up and I'll keep saying it, we're basically picking up newspaper. Mayor Qriiel: Well that's one of the things I think the committee is working on this trying to get a better participation by the residents within the city. One out of every 4 is recycling. They have to shoot for 4 out of 4 to recycle. ' Councilwoman Dimler: Am I understanding here that you think that if we ' n9 don't go with this here that the recycling committee will no longer meet? Mayor Qmiel: Not necessarily. ' Councilwoman Dimler: They can still go ahead. They can work out. Councilman Johnson: We're still required to have recycling. But the recycling committee will have to come up with a different idea rather than curbside. We ' ought to start a collection center. We don't have a building for a collection center. There's one down on 82nd Street. Mayor Qmiel: We did do it at Public Works. Councilwoman Dimler: Good idea. They'll sell that property, I mean they'll ' want it real bad once we start that. Councilman Johnson: Do the leaf composting out back. ' Councilman Workman: We can play that game too. Councilwoman Dimler: Let me ask you something Don. That bill that just passed. II When is that going to go into effect? That doesn't go into effect right away that they require us to recycle right away? Don Ashworth: I think it's 1991 right? 16 11 City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 Mayor Chmiel: In the 7 county metro area, outstate 1992. Councilwoman Dimler: By wham? The State? Councilman Johnson: Yes. ' Councilwoman Dimler: I thought this bill just passed. Councilman Johnson: No, older bills prior to this. There's other recycling ' bills that have required. Now this is by County. Our County was supposed to be at what, 15% recycling this year and every year the goal goes up. Now the goal's going to go up to 31% recycling with this new bill. I think it's 31%. Mayor Chmiel: 30. Councilman Johnson: 30. Close. So Carver County's going to have to hit a goal of 30% recycling. Councilwoman Dimler: Is some money going to be available from the County once , this gets instituted? Mayor Chmiel: Yes. 1 Councilman Johnson: Don and I are on the County Solid Waste Committee. Each year it's about $100,000.00 and same thousand dollars should be brought to the County from the first year. Of that, I don't think the City's going to see that much. $20,000.00-$30,000.00 at the most if that. I mean Chanhassen/Chaska is where most the money's coning from. That's where most the money should go but they also have to get programs going in all these little towns and they all run a cost. Councilman Workman: We're the only ones with curbside in Carver County aren't we? Councilman Johnson: That's right. ' Councilman Workman: And how much are we getting now? Councilman Boyt: We're not getting anything. I Councilman Johnson: The County hasn't done real good at getting grants and stuff from the state. Same of the outstate counties seem to do a lot better. Councilwoman Dimler: Don, did you get us the cost of what it would actually be if it's not $30,000.00. Did you figure out what it would be? Don Ashworth: Just to extend it? Councilwoman Dimler: Yes. Councilman Johnson: Hopefully there's going to be more competition in the recycling so sane of these costs for the future may be coming down for curbside as it gets mandatory. There's a lot of people looking at different ways to get 17 1 City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 rid of a lot of their recycleables as we increase the markets. Right now there's no markets. ' Don Ashworth: I'd say $5,400.00 is the additional cost over and above what we had approved before at basically $.90 and going up to $1.40. ' Councilman Boyt: Yeah, but give us the cost of what it actually costs to pick up newspapers on the curb. Not the increased cost. I thought we should have cancelled this thing 2 months ago and so what we're really talking about is do we want to continue curbside recycling until the County comes up with same money for us and I would say no. Don Ashworth: The cost per month is basically $5,200.00 per month for having ' curbside recycling. Over and above what we had approved before, it's going to cost us $5,400.00 more than what we had set aside as of May, June of last year. Councilwoman Dimler: And how much was that? Don Ashworth: That was at $.90 per household per month so basically let's just say $1.00 would be. When we started this it was $3,500.00 per month. ' Councilwoman Dimler: And now you're increasing it? Don Ashworth: It increased now to $5,200.00. $5,300.00 per month. Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. Councilman Boyt: So you're talking $15,000.00. Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, and the future. Come December, what do we do? Mayor Cfimiel: That's 3 additional months. Don Ashworth: Correct. Three additional months would be basically $16,000.00. $15,900.00. Somewhere in there. ' Councilwoman Dirtier: Okay, and in December we go through this process again? Don Ashworth: Let me finish on Bill's if I may. We're really talking about one month because we have to get 30 day notice for cancellation. ' Councilman Boyt: So that's October? ' Don Ashworth: Well we're into October. Councilman Boyt: 30 days is the end of October then. Councilman Johnson: So we've got 2 months. November-December. In Ashworth: If you give notice right now, you basically are carrying out a ' contract through November. Councilman Boyt: We extended the contract until the end of October. That was it. 18 City- Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 1 1 Don Ashworth: But the item was on the agenda but the Council didn't act on it so we did not take and send a notice at the end of September which would have said we're cancelling this in September and after October there will be no service. If you send a notice today, they would say alright. You've given us notice. We'll carry out through the end of November. Councilwanan Dimler: By the fact that we only extended until October 31st, doesn't that tell them? Paul Krauss: I had some conversations about that before the meeting started. I We believe that the contract could be amended so that it was 30 days from the date of notice that it could be cancelled. Whenever that notice was given. So at this point we'd be obligated to November 2nd. Don Ashworth: But that's a modification. I mean that's being a more liberal position than what it literally says. Mayor Chmiel: Can we hear from Waste Mangement? Did you want to say something? Lynn Morgan: ...it'd be best if I just read this short paragraph. Either party ' may cancel this agreement at any time upon 30 day written notice to the other party. In such event of termination, the contractor shall be entitled to reimbursement for those expenses incurred up to the termination date provided the expenses have been incurred by providing the services in Section 3. I'm no lawyer but I would interpret that to mean that either party could give a 30 day notice at any time and that the service would discontinue and payment for the service would discontinue 30 days after that written notice. Councilman Johnson: So it'd be November 1 if we do it tonight. Mayor Chmiel: If we so choose. Councilman Johnson: What are you looking for in January for your cost? I Councilman Hoyt: $2.02. $2.05. That's the cost I was given. Lynn Morgan: I don't know what the costs would be. I think, you know the 1 proposed increase is $1.35. To go from $.87 per household per month to $1.35. The marketplace price for the service that Chanhassen is receiving is actually higher than that. However, we have a very strong interest in staying in this community and continuing to serve it and I don't know that in the bidding process where exactly we would be. There may be an attempt to actually go for an increase beyond the $1.35. Councilman Johnson: What if we went to once a month? What's the market for once a month? I Lynn Morgan: Once a month? We only have a couple of programs that are once a month and the only one that canes to mind and I'd want to confirm it but I believe that Greenwood or Deephaven or perhaps both are once a month at $1.00 per household. But that participation is lower than the kind of program that you have. 19 1 City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 Paul Krauss: The R and P that's going to go out is going to list a series of options and prices coming back for alternative services. Once a month I think was one of the ones that we discussed. Erery week was discussed. Lynn Morgan: I believe every week and every other week. ' Paul Krauss: And if it wasn't in there, if you'd like to see what monthly services is, we can certainly add that. Lynn Morgan: We're meeting tomorrow night so anything that the Council would like to communicate to the committee. Councilman Boyt: Didn't you say last time you were here that a good program had about a 30% participation rate? Lynn Morgan: For a program like yours, that's correct. We would look at a 30% to 35% participation rate as being the norm. And I'd like to clarify for everyone as well. I think one of the things that's happened here is that you've taken your stop counts, which is the number of counts. The number of households ' the driver actually serves. He has a stroke counter in his cab. It's something we started recently and everytime he gets out of his truck to pick up a container of recycleables, when he hits the brake, he hits that counter. That information is now being included on your monthly recycling reports. We do know however that in communities that have low population density in the housing. That is, they have a small number of people per dwelling, that there are households out there that are not going to put their recycleables out every 1 week. They're not going to put then out every other week. They're going to put them out once a month. Only when they're full. Your stop counts don't actually reflect that so I would have to say that your participation is actually higher than 25% because we know that there are a few households out there that are doing that. Putting out their materials once a month. Councilman Boyt: Okay, but you mentioned last time that for a community like us, 30% participation would be a good target. Lynn Morgan: 30% to 35% participation would be a good number. Councilman Boyt: Then do you know where Ti a Chaffee got his number of $2.05 per household per month because that's what he quoted me when I asked him why we'd ' have $100,000.00. Lynn Morgan: I didn't talk to him. He may have surveyed some communities. There are communities out there at $2.05. Councilman Boyt: But he didn't talk to you or your company? Lynn Morgan: Not to me personally. If he talked to someone else in my company, I'm not aware of it. Councilman Johnson: I think that number was here last time too back in August when we were discussing this. I thought at that time they said it was going to go up in January to around $2.00 a household. Lynn Morgan: For an every other week program? 20 City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 1 Councilman Johnson: Right. , Lynn Morgan: I don't have a lot of authority but I can definitely say that that would be very high in pricing and I can definitely promise you that it would not be $2.05. Councilman Johnson: Would that be more like a weekly service then? Lynn Morgan: I don't know because I haven't worked on a proforma for this City but for $2.05 I would say that yes, absolutely. You'd have to be looking at least a weekly service. Councilman Boyt: Well that's a relief. Lynn Morgan: In fact, I would suspect that a number like that would probably reflect not only weekly service but perhaps provision of containers for recycleables. r Councilman Workman: I use the monthly myself. I don't put it all out there every week. Mayor Cxmiel: Every other. Councilman Workman: I put it out once a month because I can't win anyway. Even though I am a winner and I have a house full of winners. Mayor Qmiel: Don say yes you can. I Don Ashworth: You can win. Councilman Workman: Can I? 1 Don Ashworth: Sure. I mean that's the reason we do the thing with Dave to insure that... 1 Councilman Workman: Oh we can win now? Councilman Johnson: I thought ours had been removed out of there. 1 Councilman Workman: Geez, this is getting depressing. In these times of we should be neighborly so we should give away our shed. We're always got the guilt. We should not be throwing this stuff in the hole so we should spend the macho dollars to do it. I think Bill's absolutely correct. I go on record as saying that. You know there's a film out right now. It was done by McDonald Corporation who's a large corporation and they've had their own problems but this stuff does not biodegrade. Nothing biodegrades in a hole down there. They're finding 30 year old sirloin steaks that they know are medium rare in these landfills. Nothing's biodegrades unless it has water, air, elements and so we're getting all excited about biodegradeables and it's not going to biodegrade anyway. If we decide to go with this, we need to get something a little bit from you folks. A little bit. We need timeliness I think on the pick-ups. I myself have a problem with every other Wednesday or whenever. I'd like it if it were, the only reason I show up at these Council meetings on time is because I know it's the second and the fourth Monday but if it was every 21 - City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 other Monday, I'd have serious problems because I know what the second and the fourth are. rCouncilwoman Dirtier: How cane you're here today then? ' Councilman Workman: I'm leaving myself wide open. One day you'll cane in the morning very early. I'll help the guy throw it in the truck. The next day I'll cane hate, it will still be out. I'll get home at 6:30 or sanething. It will still be out. My neighbors, who's the first person they see coming up the walk and they ask me, what the heck's going on. Is this the day? Is this another false alarm? Did the guy on the corner put his stuff out? Then everybody else followed and it's all sitting out but it's littering. The second thing I think 11 we need, if we're going to go with something, we're going to need to go with sane sort of approved container because cans, no less than a thousand cans on my little street this past time. I don't think that's your fault but I think it's poeple their cans are blowing all over town. After the guys leave, then the kids go through with their wagon and they're hauling than somewhere to get cash. Mayor Chmiel: Maybe Paul can address that. Paul, how are we doing with that ' application to the Met Council? Paul Krauss: We're in the process of preparation and we've been in contact with their staff and have been putting it together. Last we heard is they weren't incredibly receptive to using that grant for containers but we're still trying. Councilman Workman: Number three and finally. We need smiles from these guys I that are hauling. Tell you what. A dirty, greasy job. Not fun. If you don't do sanething right I've noticed, they get kind of, this guy was cussing under his breath and he didn't look happy. Somebody put magazines in with their newspapers. He yanked them out and they're all over my yard. So we do in fact need this recycling committee because we need a lot more education on this so I ended up taking the magazines, picked then all up and put than in my garbage and hauled than out the next day. So again, I again have no solutions. I have same strong suggestions. I guess we need to keep doing this at least through December but I think there's all sorts of ways we can run this thing more efficiently and leaner and everything else. Lynn Morgan: I appreciate your comments and I'm sorry that you've had these concerns and I will take than back to the company. To be very honest, this is the second comment I've heard about an employee attitude so we'll get on that tomorrow. Anything you can bring to us about what's happening out there on the street is appreciated because we do have supervisors out there and we do have ' excellent employees but that public feedback is taken very seriously. Cbuncilman Workman: What you need to do is you need to get a couple of UPS employees. Lure than away and get those guys working them. Lynn Morgan: We do have better trucks so that shouldn't be hard. On the subject of coming by, the time of day though. I'd like to clarify on that. I know that it's convenient for the public when they can predict the time of day when the driver will cane down the street. However, the reason that we promote to people that they need to have their recycleables out on the street by 6:30 or 7:00 a.m. is because things can happen during the day that change the schedule of when the guy canes through. We may reroute for efficiency. A truck may 22 City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 1 break down and delay the route into the afternoon. That's why we really try to get people to put them out in the morning and we try to be as predictable as we can when we came by but we don't like to have the public depending on that time frame. They should be able to count on us coming that day. Does that make sense? Councilman Workman: I guess my neighbor was frustrated. I begged her please , don't throw it in the trash because Wednesday's recycling day. Thursday's trash day so they get frustrated. I'll just put it in the trash. The next day. They don't have to look at it. I said I'll take it. I'll take it out of your garage but I'll let you guess which neighbor that is. So I understand all that. It's just same of the things I've noticed that we need to... Lynn Morgan: I appreciate that. ' Councilman Workman: I think this program has created a lot of new trash and it's blowing around. Newspapers and magazines and cans. , Lynn Morgan: From not having containers? Councilman Workman: Right. , Mayor Chmiel: Any further discussion? ' Councilman Boyt: Using the new figures Don, it's still $72,000.00 a year. I cna't imagine that we're going to end up, if we go over 12 months without charging an average of $1.50 a household a month. If we're at $1.30 something now. Councilman Johnson: $1.35. If somebody invents a real worthwhile use for newspapers and starts paying big bucks for newspapers. Councilman Boyt: This is a technology or process that would be very helpful to let a few other groups lead and figure out how to do it right. It's a very expensive process for us to be leading on. We've got to recycle. I'm glad the recycling committee is out there but this isn't the way Chanhassen should be recycling. It's too expensive. So I would make a motion that we give them 30 days notice. Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second? I Councilwoman Dimler: I'll second it. Councilman Workman: Maybe just a little bit of discussion. Maybe Ursula you ' can tell us... Councilwoman Dimler: I guess I agree with what Bill's been saying. I do want to see the committee continue. I think it's a really important project and I think we're going to have to do more and more and more of it but I think until we can do it cost effectively, I don't think we've got the participation. i think the committee needs to educate people first. Increase participation and I don't think we have our ducks in order to go ahead with spending the amount of money that we've been spending. 23 ' City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 11 Mayor Chmiel: I think we've been, the committee's been meeting now for the past month every Tuesday of the month and I think they are getting their ducks in order. Hopefully they will be able to give proper directions to the citizens within Chan to participate in this. If the participation is there, then of course the cost could, as we discussed before, could very possibly decrease sage because of the additional aluminum and your tin and glass that you maybe ' getting. I know the newspapers aren't really there yet. Some dollars for that. In fact, I don't know if you've done any discussions with Carver County at all with your newspapers that I believe that you have. That you still do have a source for your newspapers. Lynn Morgan: I haven't personally talked to Carver County. Someone else from our company may have. We're not using them for newspaper currently and they ' haven't extended that offer. If the participation were to increase significantly and if the other factors were to hold steady, we could revisit the cost issue. I honestly don't know exactly what the impact would be. I do know that if we can get better participation here, what that will mean is that you're recycling dollars will yeild a better value for you. Right now you recycle about 30 tons per month. At your current pricing, that's well over $100.00 per ' ton. However, if we look at the cost of picking up and disposing of a ton of garbage, the ton of recycleables is really in the range of figures for managing a ton of garbage but if we could get the participation higher, that would mean that your cost per ton and the value of your service would be greater for you. Councilwoman Dimler: I guess I'd like to clarify something too. I didn't mean to say that the committee didn't have their ducks in order. I'm saying that the II City and the County and the State really don't have their ducks in order yet and one of the things that Chanhassen has got going for it is that one of the ducks we have in order is that we have the committee. I think with their results and their findings, that we'll be going with them but at this time I just can't see II justifying the cost to continue this and especially if we don't know what we're going to do and ccme December you'll probably be before us again and we'll have this same dilemma again. IILynn Morgan: As I understand it, probably in December you'll have the results back from the bid that the committee is sending out. 1 Councilwoman Dimler: Perhaps they'll have a cheaper way of doing it. Lynn Morgan: Or they could have an alternative. If I could, no one would be II surprised to hear me fight for the 2 month extensive I think so I'll go ahead and do it. I think that there's another reason to go ahead and grant this 2 month extension. If you want to communicate to this committee, which is an excellent committee by the way, that they need to look at discontinuing curbside because of the pricing. Tell them what the budget is or what range of numbers is acceptable, I think you still need to really get the word out to the people II that curbside recycling is being discontinued and you need to do that in such a fashion that everybody that recycles right now is well aware of it because you really wouldn't want to disappoint them by turning off the curbside and then try to fire them up again for something else in a couple of months. It'd be better II to make sure they know that curbside is discontinuing and here's what's going to be put in place. That's just a suggestion. IICouncilwoman Dimler: Yes, I think that's a good one. 24 7- City Council Meeting - October 2; 1989 i Mayor Chmiel: Just a little more discussion. Jay. We talked with the County. What was their guesstimate that they thought they may come up with from the State? Councilman Johnson: I think in the range of $120,000.00-$150,000.00 if I renaiber right. Mayor Chmiel: And they were saying something of Chanhassen would get what? They threw out a figure there too. Was it between $30,000.00 and $40,000.00? I Councilman Johnson: Yeah, I think so. This city has really helped. Carver County was the only county in the metropolitan area to make it's goal and largely that was based on the businesses in this city and the successful recycling center in Chaska going. Now with our curbside recycling, they're going to make their goal again this year it looks like based a lot on our participation. We are helping the County make the goals that they have to make. I think we have to make a point to the County that we are committed to recycling and that we realize that we are helping the County make it's goals. That we are a major factor in this county making it's goals and therefore we expect the County to look to us. If they want to continue curbside recycling in 1990, we can't do it on our own. There is no way in the world. If they want to make their goal, this curbside recycling's one of the important because if we stop curbside, we've got to put something else in. That's going to be expensive too. Because what we did, that little temporary thing out at the public works, we need something more like what, if we're not going to do curbside, we need something more like Chaska's doing with the actual manned center and that costs 1 a lot of money to run too. Chaska runs a very nice. Councilman Workman: The hours are terrible. 1 Councilman Johnson: Well, they're very effective in comparison to a lot of centers. Councilman Hoyt: I think Shoreview is running it through their churches. At least the one that I go by has got a big dumpster out there with aluminum cans on the outside of it and I don't know what the other thing is that they're collecting in the other dumpster. Hopefully the recycling committee will identify these options but are we going to spend what looks like about $10,000.00 plus dollars to run this out through the rest of the year that we don't have budgeted? That we're pulling out of who knows where to buy that extra 2 months. I don't think we should. I've taken enough time. Councilman Johnson: I think that's about $1.00 per citizen and I think that's a reasonable cost. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, we have roughly about $30,000.00 as was indicated in here that has been levied for this and I keep looking at what we have coming and what we're able to get back from the State through the County. If we're able to get anywhere between another $30,000.00-$40,000.00, that would give us either $60,000.00 or $70,000.00. You mentioned a figure before Bill of $72,000.00 per year. We're still pretty close. 25 1 City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 Councilman Johnson: I think also next year's contract on this, we've got to do some negotiating. We're got to set same market indicators to where if the price of aluminum goes back up to $.60 a pound rather than the $.29 a pound it is now. When it was at $.65 a pound at $.87, Waste Management was making good money but when it dropped from $.65 a pound down to $.29 a pound, that really hurt their contract. That's why they had to renegotiate with us. I think the same thing should be in there. If that price of aluminum goes up, that should reflect in our contract. I'm looking at kind of a cost plus contract to where we can take their cost to provide the service and give them adminstrative fees and profit over that but if they start bringing in extra money because of market conditions, we should see that money directly back to the city and the citizens. Not Waste Management see it. That's just talking about next year's contract and ' my theory on the contract. Councilman Boyt: May I ask Don a question? Mayor Chmiel: Sure. Councilman Boyt: Your comments on the maio of the 20th Don says that we're going to apparently take in $30,000.00 in 1990 that's earmarked for this sort of operation. Is that correct? Don Ashworth: 1989. Councilman Boyt: Well it says 1989 is going to close with a deficit. 1990 will take in approximately the same amount of which we'll have to pull our deficit ' out of. Is that correct? Don Ashworth: That's correct. ' Councilman Johnson: If you levy at the rate, yes. Councilman Boyt: Well if we don't increase taxes right? rDon Ashworth: Right. Councilman Boyt: And we're going to use $10,000.00 additional dollars for the next 2 months for that November-December time period. Does that mean in reality in 1990 we're going to have only $15,000.00? ' Don Ashworth: December was, we had sufficient monies to get us through November even with the higher $1.38. We did not have enough money for the December timeframe so we potentially will close the books for $8,953.00 in the hole. The cost for the month of December which I'm saying would be $5,300.00. Councilman Boyt: Okay. We can afford, if I hear the Mayor and Jay correctly. II If the City gets $30,000.00, we have no assurance that we will from the County but if we do and we collect a levy amount of $30,000.00 than then we're $60,000.00 into this $72,000.00. And we actually want to spend all that money to pick up newspapers? Granted aluminum plays a key part in funding it but in II terms of what we're taking out of our landfills, we're taking basically newspapers out of there. IICouncilman Johnson: Tonage wise, yeah. 11 26 City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 ' Mayor Chniel: Presently that's what you're doing but yeah. The thing that you're trying to do is extend the life of the landfills basically and recycle these items. Councilman Boyt: But these recycleables aren't contributing at all to ground water contamination except maybe leeching lead out of the funnies or something. Mayor Chmiel: The newspaper. Former newspapers. Councilman Workman: Doesn't newspaper take up about 15% of what's in the landfill or sanething? Lynn Morgan: It's a large percentage of what's in a landfill. I don't believe ' it's quite as high as 60. Councilman Boyt: Disposable diapers are the... I Councilman Johnson: There's also some legislation which will be coning up which may force this county to build it's own landfill at a site to be selected by the ' State. It could be in Chanhassen. It could be anywhere without any local control over where it is. The world of solid waste is getting real confusing and very costly. The next 3 years everybody should expect their garbage bills to double. Very easily. ...also is the tax that you'll be getting on it. The recycling money. Mayor Chniel: I'd like to keep this going. We do have a motion on the floor to terminate our agreement within 30 days. It's been seconded. Councilman Boyt moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to give 30 day cancellation notice to Waste Management Inc. for curbside recycling in Chanhassen. Councilman Boyt, Councilwoman Dimler and Councilman Workman voted in favor. Councilman Johnson and Mayor Chniel voted in opposition and the motion carried with a vote of 3 to 2. FINANCIAL ADVISOR DESIGNATION. Don Ashworth: The Council had tabled this item to allow staff to meet with Springstead and try to clarify their proposal. They had sent a letter to the Council regarding hourly service fees. We did that and in fact Councilman Workman and Councilwoman Dimler and I met with Springstead and through that process there was an agreement reached that they would look at the contractual fees section of the proposal in terms of a retainer and they would guarantee to us 50 hours of service from their firm at no cost to the City and they would maintain an accounting of that. In light of the fact that many of our projects, as I see it will probably be reducing, the 200 hours that had been used for canparison purposes for 1988, probably was high. I don't see where we would be to that level again. I don't see that many supermarkets, Rosemounts, whatever around the corner and in all likelihood, 50 hours would probably be a more reasonable number. I redid the cost and basically, and I don't have than right in front of me but if I remember right, it was about $59,000.00 for Springstead and $56,000.00 for Andy and I think PSS was far under that. In addition, 27 I City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 Councilmanber Johnson had asked for a tabulation of the bids from the last time around. I did not have that information at the time we had met with Springstead and so I did include that in the Council packets. Councilman Johnson: There's something that's hard to read. Can you shed some light on that? Don Ashworth: At the time that we had met, and I'm talking about with Councilman Workman, Councilwoman Dimler and myself and Springstead, I had made a ' statement that it's very difficult to make an apples to apples comparison on bids. From that listing, it typically would be. The difference in days. How an issue is weighted. Comparable ratings. Insured. Not insured. There's a lot of factors that will go into a particular bid. Ironically two of 1 Springstead's cities did bid at almost the same time that we had taken bids in September and November of last year and I tried to highlight those two. I must say that the City did receive a better quote in that September-November timeframe. Councilman Workman: Which other cities were those? Don Ashworth: Eagan and Coon Rapids. Councilman Johnson: Eagan's on the first page, the very first one. ' Don Ashworth: I tried to highlight then. Maybe I didn't do a very good job of it. Councilman Johnson: What's really interesting in there is Eagan, the first one on the list, is an A-1 and the third one is a comparable or GO bonds where we're A-AA which is a lesser rating. However when you go down to what the coupons ' went for, overall we're even if not ahead of what we're paying for those coupons over the 14 years. Both financing the same amount of years. We just started paying than earlier. ' Don Ashworth: One of the reasons I made the recommendation and if we do go with Springstead, I think it's clear that we want to insure that they make sure that ' we have at least 3 or 4 bidders to insure each sale and that we receive at least 3 to 4 bids from buyers. I went through a group of other conditions with people from Springstead. They did not object to any of those. Were willing to do then. For example, bidding the paying agent fee. There's two in there but IIanyway, they didn't have a problem in doing that. Councilman Workman: I guess same of those, in July of 1986, Chanhassen only Ireceived one bid on our 44.6 million dollar GO. Councilman Johnson: '86? IICouncilman Workman: July of '86. Councilman Johnson: That was before I was on the Council. 1 Don Ashworth: The condition on like the 3 to 4 bids, what I'm making the assumption there is that that represents the current market. If you look in that timeframe, I'm willing to bet that Sprinstead was receiving one bids. 28 City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 1 Councilman Workman: Well in June of 1987 we received 3. Springstead's received 10. , Councilman Boyt: Where did you get this information? Councilman Workman: From Springstead. Comparison bond sellers off our last ' four. Councilman Boyt: You got the information from Springstead? i Councilman Workman: Yes. This is all public information. Likewise in Jay's comments as far as where ours were in relation to others. The bond buyer index previous five years to present show that our rates were right with where the national market average was anyway. Our market position was pretty much in flow with what the national trends were. I guess I'm ready to make a bit of a change with this. I have a lot of confidence in Springstead. I did before we even thought about making a switch with they have same sort of a newsletter that they send out and that I read. Councilman Johnson: They've done a good job of marketing. They appear to have 1 done everything right. They have the marketers telling me what I'm supposed to be doing. Getting this information out to you. I don't know, they haven't given me any of this information. Councilman Workman: Well this information that I requested. Councilman Boyt: There's an interesting thing here about this information because it says we're, right in the request of information, that these people are to have no contact with the City Council. , Councilman Workman: I initiated the contact. Councilman Boyt: Well it would seem to me that the logical response for them ' would have been to point out to you that they were to have no contact directly with you. It said that right in the request from the city for information. Councilman Workman: I initiated it and any kind of decision, any kind of , questions that came up were being used against this firm I thikn have been satisfactorily answered. I would move to approve Springstead. I Councilwoman Dimler: I second that. Mayor Q niel: Just to reiterate a little bit of what Tom has said and the questions that you're raising Bill. I guess if a Council person feels he wants to delve into something a little more...and acquire that information, I think it's initiative on his part to do that. , Councilman Johnson: Then he should do it with both bidders. Mayor Ctmiel: That may be very well. - 1 Councilman Johnson: Because Andy could probably came up with the same information that shows he's done a very good job. I 29 1 City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 Councilwoman Dimler: No Jay. I think what we did was, the information that was presented to us that was negative towards Springstead, that's the questions we wanted answered and had nothing to do because there was no negative on Mericor. Councilman Workman: And I have nothing against Mericor or Andy Merry in that regards but when it looks so lopsided as it did in our auditors, I went after to find out if in fact that could be possible. With Springstead, and they are doing a booming business and if you're saying that they're fooling an awful lot of communities in the Metro, you can go ahead and say that but they're doing II something right somewhere and it appeared to me that it was again, like in the auditor's situation. I wanted to find out some of the particulars of why it looked like Springstead cost double what Andy Merry could do it for. I think I did that and I'm very happy that if I, I think it's my right to go ahead and research the issue. They've given me what Chanhassen has done in the ratings and the bonds and everything else like that. I don't think this stuff is disputable. Primarily I'd like to see it changed. I'm not going to be embarrassed for that. Councilman Johnson: I like to see change in things too and I'm sure you're going to be supporting change all night tonight. Councilman Workman: Am I? Councilwoman Dinaer: Not necessarily. I seconded it because I think it's time for a change as well. I like Springstead's rates. I think they would do an II excellent job for us and I'm also concerned about a one man show. I prefer to see other people involved. There's a better check and balance when there's more than one man involved. IIMayor Chmiel: Any discussion? Councilman Johnson: I like small businesses. I like big businesses. I do both. Andy's done a good job and what he specializes in, you don't have to be a big. Same of the best financial consultants in the country are one man shows. That's what they do because they've got the brains and the talent to do it. It doesn't take a whole bunch of junior partners whipping around. I think this is IIone of the cases where when it ain't fixed we ought to leave it alone. Councilwoman Dimler: That's good Jay. Let's leave it broken. Councilman Boyt: I can certainly sense that this is a done deal so I won't take long. I think it is significant when people who are responding to a bid in an II area as technical as this wouldn't call to Tan's attention that he was asking than to step outside of that bid. Now I don't care if that would be Andy or if that would anybody else. That bothers me. The other part is that I'd be real interested in getting to the bottom of these comparisons because going strictly II through the City Manager, which is how I understood is how we were supposed to be doing this, the figures that we were given were on our 2 most recent bidded bond issues which just happened as he mentioned, to fall amazingly close in time and size to Coon Rapids and Eagan and there was a $50,000.00 difference between whether you happen to be Chanhassen or whether you were Coon Rapids and Eagan. As I understand that figure, that $50,000.00 is very conservative. It depends a lot on how you interpret what's going on in the payback procedure and clauses of 30 City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 1 the bond that at minimum Chanhassen saved $50,000.00. Springstead in proposing their bid, dramatically underestimated or at least presented, given the City's past history, a proposal that required much less consulting hours and they even said they'd throw than in for free which was an interesting approach given that ' the apartment complex agreement was 3 years of work by Andy in this case but whoever our bonding person was. Rosemount was 50 hours of work. Consulting hours of work which is as much as they're proposing for a whole year and maybe we'll find that that's true. Mericor has given us very good service. I am quite willing to, I understand that the 3 of you can choose any person you want. But it's going to be more expensive if we go on the last two. ' Councilman Johnson: Yeah. Personally if there was a reason to make a change, I'd go with PFS and save $20,000.00. The third bidder there is a $39,000.00 versus $59,000.00. I Councilwoman Dimler: I guess Jay what we're saying is, I'm not buying the negatives on Springstead. I think they will do as good a job and as cheap as or at the same rate of Mericor would do. We've heard Don address the fact that we don't have any Rosemounts and those kinds of things where we're going to be using 218 hours. 50 sounds reasonable and I think that again, I'd like to reiterate the point that I think for accountability and for checks and balances, I prefer to see more people on the job. Mayor Qrtiel: I did a little checking on my own too Bill with respective cities ' and counties and asking then, who have engaged Springstead and what they thought of Springstead. They thought they were a very reputable company. They had a lot of confidence in them. They didn't think their costs were any different than anybody elses. They thought they did an exceptional job for them, specifically Ramsey County. I guess that was one of the things that I had looked at. I too au for changes within but I wanted to find out too what other people thought of then. They should know. So if there's no more discussion, I'll call a question. Councilman Workman: I guess just in defense of myself. When we were discussing auditors and maybe I showed same inclination towards Panell-Kerr versus DeLoitt. DeLoitt was made out to be this Big 8 firm that was the Cadillac firm. In fact the word was used, that my support for Panell-Kerr was indefensible. How could I do that? I think Springstead's a Cadillac firm and I think not to go with them is indefensible. Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to appoint Springstead the City's Financial Consultant. Councilman Workman, Councilwoman Dimler and Mayor Qmiel voted in favor. Councilman Hoyt and Councilman Johnson voted in opposition and the motion carried with a vote of 3 to 2. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: I HOW TO SHORTEN AGENDAS, MAYOR CHMIEL. Mayor Qmiel: Let's just look, hopefully everybody had an opportunity to take a look at the item 12 which we had last Monday. How to shorten agendas and we went to midnight again. What we'll do is just hold that. Shorten agendas ' 31 ' City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 because Ursula mentioned the fact that I didn't see Jim came in here. Although there are same other people here. I guess there isn't. On the committee on the school district. Councilman Workman: Are we under council presentations now? Mayor Chmiel: Yes, right now. But we have same additional items here where Jim is here which is on item 14. Is that going to be a discussionary item this evening? Don Ashworth: I was hoping that we would have an opportunity to discuss that but as noted, this item is in court and I would propose that the Council move into an executive session when we get into that portion. We would continue to record that part of the meeting but until the court process is over with, Roger was concerned that you might have information out in the newspaper or potential television at the same time that it's being tried. ' Mayor Chmiel: So I think we best leave that until item 14 until we come to the end. Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. That's fine. Jim Burdick: Unfortunately for us, this matter's not in court. It was in court week after week for 6 months. It's not the court. It's not going to be in court for quite same period of time. We're arguing should be days. ...is saying it should be months. That fella claims he's sick is the latest thing. It's not in court and isn't going to be... Mayor Chmiel: It's not in court. Don Ashworth: It had gone in today and Jim is correct. This past week Mr. Farrell did have a setback. We do not know how major that will be. It does not change the fact that the item is before the Court. Hopefully we can settle out. II I'd like to see it settled out but I don't think that the settling out of that court case should occur through the newspapers. It should occur through a presentation to the Council. Potential instructions from the Council as to what we might pursue in terms of a settlement and if that fails, then we will continue with the court portion. But again, I don't think that the thing should be tried in this type of a forum. At least that's Roger's recommendation and it I was anticipated that all parties were in agreement with that. Mr. Krass would not be present tonight representing Mx. Burdick. Roger would not be present tonight representing the City. Mr. Burdick would be given an opportunity to make a presentation but it would be in an executive session format. IICouncilman Johnson: ...nice presentation would be in an executive also? IDon Ashworth: His presentation would be yes. Councilman Boyt: I don't know exactly how the Sunshine Law works but if this is in court, I don't think we should be holding executive sessions. ICouncilman Johnson: If it is before the courts. IIMayor Chmiel: Yeah, it's not in the court. 11 32 City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 11 Councilman Workman: If it's simply a presentation? Councilman Johnson: I saw a subpoena today so I mean the courts are working on this one. One of my fellow managers at work got subpoenaed on this case. Don Ashworth: Again, I can only repeat what Roger stated to me and that was that Don I would highly recommend that you close the session. He does not want to see again the item, you might say tried, in this type of a forum. ' Councilwoman Dimler: Is the presentation then would be not, we wouldn't be able to act upon it tonight anyway? Mayor Chmiel: No, we couldn't. Don Ashworth: Well, what I mentioned to Jim before was he would be given an opportunity to make his presentation. We would record that so the press could take a look at it when this issue is settled out. We would then ask Mr. Burdick to leave the roan after his presentation which would give the Council an opportunity to instruct staff as to how you'd like us to proceed. What portions of the presentation you would like additional information on or whatever other. Not knowing what might come out of this form of a presentation, it's hard for me to second guess how you night be instructing us but that's what we had ' anticipated anyway. Councilman Boyt: I could see if the Council was meeting with it's attorney but personally I guess I'm not very comfortable going into an executive session. We ought to be real careful when we do that I think. Councilman Johnson: Why can't Roger be here tonight? He couldn't make it? , Don Ashworth: Well two reasons. One is that he had met with Mr. Krass today and Mr. Krass is in a meeting over in North St. Paul and there was an issue as to whether or not Mr. Krass could be here and a question as to whether or not, if we had an attorney here should not Jim have one and vice versa and they came to the conclusion that allow Mr. Burdick to simply make a presentation as to his areas of concern. I said that the Council could hear those but do that as a part of an executive session. I guess I don't know how otherwise to respond to Councilman Boyt's question. Councilwoman Dimler: I'm going to make a motion that we go back to item 12(a) , how to shorten agendas because this is getting to be a long discussion. Mayor Q niel: Okay. Bringing it back to item 12 which is 12(a) . How to I shorten the agendas. An issue I'm sure all have had an opportunity to read. Rather than going through each one of these specific items, hopefully this is sanething that we can all follow. More specifically with the consent agendas. , Reviewing those with staff and doing the opportunity to go by there on Friday or Monday to determine whether or not it should be a discussionary item or it should be pulled and to take that additional time. The reason for the consent ' agenda is as such to they're non-controversial kinds of items and they should be approved with clarifications that anyone may have or questions from staff regarding that specific item. I think what we want to do is to try to handle our meetings most expeditiously and in the best way we know how in having a 33 11 ICity Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 guidelines as to what to go by and I think much of these are here. If you've had the streamlining meetings and going through same of this information, it's rather informative. They specifically spell out what sane of the cities do themselves and how they try to resolve given problems so if you have an opportunity to look at it, let's try to practice it and go from there. Cbuncilman Johnson: I think one thing everybody has to keep in mind. When the horse is dead, we should quit beating it for the next hour. Mayor Chniel: You've got it. Councilman Johnson: A dead horse around here doesn't have a chance. ' Councilwoman Dimler: I have two suggestions. One would be that, I think that the adminstration needs to organize a complaint system so that complains from the public and from staff can all be handled through that complaint system and only those that can't be satisfied there should came before the Council. So if there's a neighbor to neighbor dispute, I don't see why it needs to come to Council. ' Councilman Johnson: We don't get many of those. Councilwoman Dimler: Well the dog barking one is the one that I remember. Councilman Johnson: That's one that's been before us for 3 years. That's one that staff couldn't handle. 1 Councilwoman Dinner: Well okay but that's just a suggestion. Also then, another one would be that all the council members keep their comments to 2 minutes per issue and can talk on one issue only twice. Then we go to the vote. Councilman Boyt: I thought we were trying to work out quality decisions? Councilwoman Dinner: Well absolutely but this forces you to have same fore- thought and then you work that out at have and you cane with your comments prepared and then we don't waste time talking about unnecessary things or things we've hashed over in the past over and over and over and over and over again. Mayor Chmiel: I think we should have limitations. 2 minutes is pretty hard to stress. That's a little short I think. 11 Councilwoman Dinner: You think so? 2 minutes per person. 2 times per issue. That's 4 minutes per issue really. Mayor Cimiel: Yeah, I think you could limit it to 3. Cbuncilwanan Dimler: Also I have a comment on the first one. As Don very well knows, I came in every Monday morning that there's a council meeting and we spend 2 to 3 hours talking over the consent agenda so it isn't that it hasn't been done. It's just that a lot of things get stuck on the consent agenda that II really shouldn't be there and I think that adminstration has to be a little bit more careful as to what they stick on there and then there won't be that many things to pull. 1 34 i City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 ' Councilman Boyt: If you look back at the meetings before Jay and I got on the Council, before we started having 300 new hones a year being built. They spent a lot of time, I mean a good bit of time going through the Minutes correcting commas, words here and there. Their consent agenda was pretty short. The chapter that was included here by Don. I think we do almost every one of these items but if you take and we deal with a fair amount of controversy. You take the TH 101/Dakota Avenue relocation item. I agree with all of you that sometimes it's hard to get off a dead horse. I would much rather have the discussion here than in the newspaper but we're all quite willing to go to the newspaper to hold our discussions. I'd just as soon not have to do that. ' Councilwoman Dimler: Not me. I'd rather not do it too. Councilman Boyt: I think that one of the reasons that I'm on the council and I suspect it's true for the others of you, is because you want to voice an opinion about critical issues to the City. Some of these things take time. If you're going to have 30 items on an agenda and some of those items, maybe all of them, are going to affect people for years if not the rest of the time they live in Chanhassen, it takes time and they deserve time and I think that's just the nature of the beast. Councilman Workman: I think one of the things we have to do is get staff to get 9 g q that stuff off the agenda. About half and then just make provisions or put in our rules that we meet the next night or we meet next Monday night or whatever and that's an incentive. I agree in talking shorter. I bet if you go through and add up all the words, I'd cane up with the least. Sure they're quality. Councilwoman Dimler: That's what I was saying. Quality, not quantity. 1 Councilman Workman: And that's the incentive. My incentive tonight is to go relax with my family. Like I told Dave over there. I left Alf and a warm fire in the fireplace to came here tonight. My incentive would be to get home and enjoy same of that yet tonight. Mayor Ctmiel: Alright, let's go to 12 (b) then. Councilman Workman: Okay. I'm bring this up is in regards to our past disagreement with the Contract. What I'm going to propose hopefully this evening is to have staff rescind instructions to in fact search out neighboring communities to look into supplying us with a contract. That portion of my motion was a friendly amendment by Bill. I no longer see it as friendly and so I would like to withdraw that portion of it since it was in face my motion and let me back that up with a few points. That the public safety commission members, the sheriff's department and Officer Chaffee all agree that it is redundant to do so. In fact to paraphrase Jim, he would perhaps be embarrassed to go back and ask because they simply are not in that business to provide us with those services. So I would like to save staff sane time on what was perhaps a bad idea by me since it was my motion to do so and since we have statistics from years past, which I was not completely aware of, to withdraw that portion. It may perhaps have to be on the next Council meeting. If we want to take action on that. If that's in fact what we have to do. Councilman Johnson: Wye can move for reconsideration. That's the procedure. And then it will go onto the next Council meeting. I think a whole lot more has 35 ' City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 been made of this than was ever intended to be made of it. Public Safety Commission got upset. I got the impression they thought they were being pushed to the side on this. There's no way I want than involved all the way through. I think part of it is this extremely weak contract we have. My objective is to get that contract renegotiated to where it's a good two part contract. Councilman Workman: This is a Council presentation. It's not discussion. I just presented it. That's all. Councilman Johnson: Are you going to move for reconsideration? Councilman Workman: Yes. I will move to reconsider. Councilwoman Dimler: Do I have to withdraw my second from that portion? Councilman Workman: No. Just second my move to reconsider. ' Councilwoman Dirtier: Okay. I will second the move to reconsider. 11 Councilman Johnson: Now it's open for discussion. Councilman Workman: Refer to 12(a) . ' Councilwoman Dimler: It's a dead horse. We've beat it enough. Councilman Hoyt: I'll save my 2 minutes. Councilman Johnson: Is what you're asking is to reconsider only to look at other areas? Are we still going to be instructing that they look at. I mean ' for 2 years we've been asking to have this contract looked at and it hasn't been done. That we go in and we start negotiating this contract. Councilman Workman: I think it has and I think it's favorable if not comparable to most others. Councilman Johnson: When you say it's favorable and comparable to somebody who gets 2 to 3 hours of service, it's not the same contract. I won't write the same contract to buy a lollipop at the grocery store or buy a Cadillac. I mean it's two different contracts. ' Mayor Chmiel: Jim, do you have anything to just throw a little light on this so everybody... Jim Chaffee: How much time do I have? Mayor Chmiel: About 2 minutes. Jim Chaffee: I guess I really- don't have anything to say. We'll follow whatever Council's wishes are. Al Wallin and I were directed last year, or the beginning of this year, to look at a long range plan for police services for the ' City of Chanhassen. We will do that. I think we've bought same time with the signing of the 1980 contract. I feel comfortable doing it. I think Sheriff Wallin feels comfortable doing it and we'll just abide by the wishes of the iCouncil. 1 36 City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 Councilman Johnson: What's your progress on that? Jim Chaffee: We've got a time frame that Al Wallin shot out when we first met and we're working on that right now but we're still in the preliminary stages of it. 1 Councilman Johnson: 10 months and still in the preliminary stages. What about the issue of, have you ever talked to the County Attorney on this contract? Jim Chaffee: Yes I have. Councilman Johnson: And the County Attorney says that they will not, that this is the one, the only possible contract? Jim Chaffee: Well he didn't say it in such strong terms but because of the lawsuit with Chaska, I'm under the understanding or I'm of the understanding that we are locked into that because of the language in the settlement and changes made to that contract can be made by letter agreement with the City of Chanhassen and the Sheriff's Department through the County Attorney but yeah, I have talked to Mike Fahey on that. Councilman Workman: Jim, what kind of response would you or have you gotten from Eden Prairie or Shoreview or whoever? Jim Chaffee: Just off the record, they won't consider it. I've talked to Chief Keith Wall. I talked to Chief Dick Setter. Certainly I've talked to Chief Richard Young from South Lake Minnetonka and they just, it's too much of an endeavor for them to come out of County and service Carver County. Councilman Workman: So it's kind of a cooky idea? , Councilman Johnson: No, it's not a cooky idea but you've done some preliminary work on it and it does not look feasible as your preliminary work has shown. Jim Chaffee: That is correct. Councilwoman Dimler: Didn't you study this in 1987? Jim Chaffee: I have not studied it no. I've just done the preliminary research. Councilwoman Dimler: I was under the impression that Dick Wing said that it was studied two years ago. Councilman Johnson: Yeah, he said that but who did the study? Councilwoman Dimler: The Commission. Jim Chaffee: I'm not aware of any study that was done in 1987 anyway. , Councilman Boyt: The document that he presented and maybe this can be put in the staff packet so you can read it for the reconsideration, talked about the study that was done in 1981 and that Dick had done same updating on that over I 37 City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 the years. I think it would be helpful if you had that information before we discussed it. ' Councilman Johnson: ...so you've almost completed what you need to do. Councilman Workman: No Jay. I think this part of it is just simply who might else. What I'm attempting to take out of my motion is who else would want to supply us with a police contract. I say nobody and I think Jim is leaning towards that. I think the study that we directed the earlier with Al and Jim and everybody after the so called breathalyzer fiasco, was to give us maybe a date or what is our long range plan going to be? When are we going to do it? I think that takes, if this Council could arrive at possibly because I don't think anybody on this council believes that having our own police department is ' adverse to the County Contract. I think everybody's in agreement on that but if we could take and figure out a date. Systematically, financially and everything else, we'd take the air out of this thing. The newspapers wouldn't have a darn ' thing to write about. Councilman Johnson: No, what I'm saying is what we directed them last week or 2 weeks ago, or whenever this was. That part of it. It appears he's pretty much through with what you're asking him to reconsider. It still has to go and look at that 5 year or whatever plan. I'd like than to increase the speed on that. What I'm saying is by the time we work the reconsideration, he's going to be through because he's going to came back to us and give us a quick little report saying nobody wants to do it. It's infeasible. As far as looking at neighboring cities. It sounds like he's almost finished. He's looked around and he's... Councilman Workman: No. I don't think we've started that process did you? It had already been done. Jim Chaffee: That had already been done. The only thing I haven't done is formally request these cities to provide us with a bid for the services. Councilman Johnson: How long ago did you talk to all these chiefs? Jim Chaffee: A year and a half ago. Councilman Johnson: So you were aware of that when we made that motion the other day? ' Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thanks Jim. We had a motion and a second to have reconsideration of the police contract by Councilman Workman. There's a second. Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dueler seconded to reconsider the police ' contract on a future agenda. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Mayor Chmiel: Next item on the agenda is Statement of Values, School District #112. Don? ' Don Ashworth: This it appeared and not appeared and published and not published and I think it's finally back onto your agenda and can be taken care 11 of. 38 City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 1 i Councilman Johnson: I move approval. Councilwoman Dimler: Second. 1 Resolution #89-108: Councilman Johnson moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to adopt the Statement of Values from School District #112 as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Mayor Qriiel: Item 13(b) , City Council asks that city goals be included so we could discuss if and how much should be pursued. Don Ashworth: I really think this should be part of same type of special session. Work session. Future. I thought I would put those back out again and start the thought process. I don't know when we'll get to it since our next efforts are really going to be budget. At least for the next month. If you want to hold onto those and be looking at them. It's something we should do. Councilman Johnson: I'd like to see next time an update as to how many of these I have had anything done to them. Don Ashworth: In fact I was looking back through my own and I told Karen, I I don't even know if I want to put those on there. We're getting into September. The year's almost done. Mayor Chmiel: The one thing about TH 101 relocation. Tell the good word. , Don Ashworth: We got it. The State has included it in the bill. That's about 4 to 5 million dollars state funding that will wime to Chanhassen to assure the realignment of TH 101 becomes a reality. The suit with Abby Bongard can be dismissed which Roger has pursued or I mean has notified the Court of so condemnation can be started there. I'm very, very happy that we were able to ' get that through the legislature. Mayor Chmiel: Me too. A lot of time. I Don Ashworth: The mayor has spent a lot of time and it required getting votes from Hennepin County which was very difficult. If you recall, Mr. Johnson had been quoted as saying I bet Chanhassen must be laughing all the way to the bank about 2 to 3 years ago and through the work of the Mayor, we were able to change. Not change but obtain his vote in getting Darius and Jude were also very important and of course then the legislature itself. ' Mayor Qmiel: That was most important. If they didn't approve it, we wouldn't have gotten it. Okay. Let's move onto item 14. ' Councilwoman Dimler: Are we going to go into executive session now? Mayor Qmiel: No. You know what I'm thinking really? Maybe I'm wrong but tell ' me, at least it's my feeling. Maybe what there should be is sort of a committee of Jim, someone from the city and even myself or someone on Council if they'd like to sit on it, to just sit down and cane up with same of the conclusions. I 39 IFCity Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 guess my major concern is or was at the time that this not go into the court systems that we could save a few dollars by coming up with a resolution of what the cost differences are between what Jim is selling for and his appraisal as ' opposed to what the City. I know that we've already spent about x number of dollars and I'm sure Jim has too and as I look at it, it's still more money for the City, for our Attorney to spend and what I'd like to see done is that we try ' to reach a solution if we can. If we can't, well then we can't and it has to go to the courts but at least to sit down and try to work something out. Come up with same conclusions as to where we're at. iCouncilman Workman: We have in our midst also another gentleman who is also in a situation, threatened condemnation and I don't know that we've seen any movement there either. He's kind of hanging. There's a lot of threaten ' development coming up around him. He's going to be forced to move pretty soon and doesn't really have an idea about what's going on there. Does that figure into any of this? ' Don Ashworth: So you'd like to have the committee potentially- meeting with both Mr. Burdick and Bernie? Councilman Workman: I think the sooner the City gets out of the courts and we get the carcases of our long lost businesses in this town buried, given proper burials, we get on with a more positive tone in our development in our city that we're all going to be a little happier. I don't myself appreciate these court situations. I don't know. There's more than 10 sides to each of these issues and the way I hear it, I would just as soon get this, what I kind of call a dark ' period of our city here and what we had to do to redevelop. I know there's some positive aspects of all this and downtown's starting to look a little better but there are same people that have been lost in the cracks I think and I just wish we could get this over with. If we could find someway as a committee to help resolve this cheaper and quicker and more friendly, than by all means. Don Ashworth: Staff would really appreciate having one or more council members in meetings let's say with Jim or even with Bernie. I'm hoping that the meetings with Bernie aren't going to take that much. I hope there's nothing that has came up here recently that, in other words, I thought we were pretty ' close to home Bernie but your being present maybe I'm wrong. But anyway, I think that the Mayor's suggestion is a good one. Mayor Chmiel: I'd be willing to sit in and try to came up with some ' resolvetient. Does anyone else wish to? Councilman Boyt: if you'd hold than in the evening, I'd be real interested but I can't time out of the work day to came. Mayor Chmiel: Do like I do. Take a day of vacation. ' Councilman Johnson: How many days of vacation do you get a year Don? Mayor Qiniel: Just 32. Don Ashworth: I don't think Bernie or Mr. Burdick would mind a meeting in an evening. I don't want to speak from either of those two. I 40 i City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 1 Councilman Workman: Would meeting at Pauly's be appropos? Mayor Ch iel: No, I don't think so. Not if we want a successful completion. Whichever. We'11 get a feeling from you either now or you can get back to Don and tell than when you'd like to sit down and give us a couple dates on each side so we can sit down and come up with those conclusions. But I'd be willing either during the day or in the evening. ' Councilman Johnson: I'd like to then move that we assign Don and Bill to get together some evening because I do believe this is not in the courts but before the courts, that we really shouldn't give onto details outside of an executive session tonight. Mayor Chmiel: I don't think we should even go into it. Just get going with the cainittee meetings and go from there. Councilman Johnson: I think that's a good idea. Do we need a motion to do ' that? To make a cotmtittee? Don Ashworth: I think it'd be appropriate. i Mayor CIviiel: Okay, we have a motion on the floor. Councilman Johnson: Should the committee also include somebody from HRA since this is all HRA stuff? Mayor Cmiel: I think we should, yes. Have somebody from HRA and staff. ' Councilman Johnson: We can't put you on there because that would make 3 from the Council and we can't have 3 from the council on the committee. ' Mayor Chmiel: Okay, we have a motion on the floor. Councilman Workman: What is the motion? I Councilman Johnson: The motion is to assign Don and Bill and somebody from the HRA to be a committee. 1 Councilman Workman: Well I'd like to know Bill's position on... Councilwoman Dimler: Do you have to assign members or can you leave it open? ' Don Ashworth: From HRA you mean? Councilwoman Dimler: From anybody... Councilman Johnson: We don't want a 12 person committee. I'm thinking of the two Don's, Bill and somebody from the HRA. Maybe 5 people at the most on this. I don't have a second on this anyway do I? Councilman Workman: Second. ' I 41 1 City Council Meeting - October 2, 1989 1 Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Workman seconded to appoint Mayor Chmiel, Councilman Hoyt, a member from HRA and the City Manager to form a corunittee to meet with Jim Burdick and Bernie Hanson. All voted in favor and the motion ' carried. 1 Councilwoman Dimmer moved, Councilman Workman seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m.. Submitted by Don Ashworth City Manager 1 Prepared by Nann Opheim 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 42 1 1 I I I I I t I 1 I I I I I r I I I CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION ' LINIERITIED REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 4, 1989 ' Chairman Conrad called the meeting to order at 7 : 35 p.m. . ' MEMBERS PRESENT: Tim Erhart, Steve Emmings, Annette Ellson, Ladd Conrad , Brian Batzli and David Headla MEMBERS ABSENT: Jim Wildermuth STAFF PRESENT: Paul Krauss , Director of Planning and Jo Ann Olsen, Senior Planner 1 Conrad: I'm going to start out with just an item of interest . Did everybody receive a copy of Dave Headla' s note of resigning. He has sent that to the City Council and myself. He said it was effective October 15th. I always feel there' s a loss when somebody resigns Dave because when you've been around and you have some experience, I think it is a loss to the community but you' ve talked to me about reasons and I sure know why you're doing it. I thank you for the time. I don ' t know what ' s the right date for your resignation. As you said, there is some flexibility. I ' ll ' talk to you about that . Thanks for your time. You always seem to bring up different perspectives and I don' t know what Jo Ann' s going to do without you around here. SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR AN INDUSTRIAL/OFFICE/WAREHOUSE FACILITY ON 3. 95 ACRES OF PROPERTY ZONED IOP AND LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF PARK ROAD AND PARK COURT, ROME CORPORATION. Paul Krauss presented the staff report . Conrad : Roman, do you want to present your proposal or react to the staff report? It was pretty clean. We haven ' t heard one this clean for a long time. Roman Roos : Well a little history basically. The site , as Paul eluded to, is a 4 acre site. Originally was two lots but when they put in Park Place, ' which is a cul-de-sac to the north. . .they reconfigured that general area and made that into one. . . What I 'm proposing to do is much like I did on the last building in Chanhassen that I did in 1985 . The lot is large ' enough to sustain two buildings. The second building about 17,500 and the reason I 'm leading you into this is having to do with that curb cut. My option would be downstream to build a second building on that site. At � that point in time I could have put a curb cut in just for that building so ' instead I shifted it to make it a common easement for both lots at such time as I might split that property into two. The building is a multi- tenanted building. Therefore the amount of parking on the eastern side as ' you see. . . The distance from the corner to here is approximately 65 foot. I did want to say in terms of the industrial park, there are quite a few curb cuts. . . (Roman Roos stepped away from the microphone and was not picked up on the tape.) I Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 2 Roman Roos : . . I 'm not aware of any situation in the park now that has that type of situation that has created a hazard. The other thing in ' consideration would be a cul-de-sac. . .The building will bring probably about 40 new employees into Chanhassen. . . .As far as the staff report, the picture that I have, the landscaping . We went a little heavy on the landscaping with intent also and I guess I 'm pretty open for questions that you people might have regarding the overall site plan. Conrad: Good. Thanks Roman. Anybody else have comments? ' Batzli : Do we have to close the public hearing? ' Conrad: It' s not a public hearing. We' ll start Dave down at your end. Headla : Any particular reason you chose those kind of apple trees? Crab apple trees . Roman Roos ' answer was not picked up on tape. ' Headla: The reason I , and I 'm going to dwell on it a little bit, some crab apple trees will keep their apples over the winter and the birds will feed on them. ' Emmings: These do. Headla : And I should have been able to tell you the name of those trees ' but I can't but I 'd like to see if you can do that. I think that would help. . . Then the other one, you have junipers and red cedar . When one' s next to the other, I was hoping to get some information on this today but I wasn' t able to but whenever you see apple trees , you never see red cedar by them because you've got. . . from the tree and that becomes quite objectionable. If you go to the crab apple tree, I think you need some expert advice on it. If you can look at it to see if the Junipers could ' affect those apple trees . The other comment is , Jo Ann did you talk to the fire department again? Olsen: Yes . Headla : How do they feel about that coming down on the eastern side of the building? ' Olsen: They had no objection to that. They had reviewed it and they were comfortable with it. They felt that they had the access points on both streets and that ' s what they needed and the circulation. Headla: Okay. That' s all I had . rConrad: What' s your comment on the access? That' s the bone of contention that staff has. The 3 curb cuts versus 2. Any comments? Headla : I think I ' ve got a 51% preference to see the access there. I could be swayed awful easy. I think the staff has got some good arguments I Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 3 but the other party has some good arguments too and I think it' s real close. Batzli : Curb cuts first . I actually think I like the plan better with till 2 curb cuts. I'm not a traffic engineer though but it makes sense to me t� have them there. Conrad: To have two? ' Batzli : To have the two. Well the two on the south. Those two. Ellson: Leave it as it? Batzli : It makes sense with the future expansion and everything else to have that access in there so you don' t need another one for the future expansion. Otherwise we' re going to get into a situation where we just put it in on West 78th where they have to redo it so they can get the internal flow. Or else you're leaving yourself open because you' re going to end up with another one in the future expanded lot. I would rather have it planned at this point than down the stream having to force one in there. A couple of questions of Paul I think. I think just for clarity sake, don' t we normally include in the motion the plans dated stamped received whatever?normally whoever makes the motion may want to include that as part of the motion. Something that I 'd like to see in I guess I brought up before Whenever we see a future expansion on a site plan, potential future expansion, I would actually like to see it become a condition that we' re not approving the future expansion and I don't know how the other commissioners feel about that but I 'd like to see it. I think the City from time to time has maybe regretted that they were somehow tacitedly approving future expansion when in fact nobody' s really looking at it that hard but I think the applicant gets a false sense of security that the future expansion is, since nobody said anything bad about it, it' s a go at ' a later date. I 'd like to hear some comments on that. The only other thing I had was the drainage to the north I think. Is that currently into a wetland or where is that going to? • Roman Roos: There' s a storm sewer along the property line. Batzli : But what was the holding pond or something? ' Krauss: It was an area that was created or utilized with our industrial ' park and was designed to receive all the water. Now it does have some wetland characteristics which may have occurred over the recent years. It ' s located entirely off site. Batzli : So they' re not within 75 feet or whatever the heck? They' re not II going to need that type of approval? There's not going to be any kind of requirement for a skimmer or anything else draining off of the blacktop or " anything like that? Krauss : We didn't include that. It certainly could be and the other poin is they have to get Watershed District approval as well . 1 Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 4 Batzli : You know I don' t know. There was no discussion of that in here but it appeared that they weren't going to initially drain into the storm sewer system. It looked like it was going to be draining into a holding ' retention pond or something. Krauss: No , it does go into the system. What' s temporary though is the improvement on Park Place right now are only there temporarily. There's no storm sewer in Park Place. When you rebuild the street next spring , it will have curb and gutter and storm sewer and we' re asking that the system be designed so when we put in the final line, that they all hook together ' and run into that retention area. Batzli : I guess I 'd like engineering or whoever to look at just to make ' sure that they' re engineering it properly. That' s the only questions I have. Roman Roos ' comments were not picked up on tape. ' Batzli : So it' s really not even being subdivided as an outlot? Roman Roos : No. Absolutely not. . . Conrad : I kind of like seeing the thought of the direction and to me it' s more persuasive in terms of allowing the 2 curb cuts on Park Road. Now I ' think if Roman conies back in and when he subdivides and wants an additional curb cut, I think it depends what we do here tonight, how many we allow but I think on my part , if we allow 3 now, there'd be a terrific amount of resistance to add an additional one when he subdivides later on so I really like seeing an overall plan like this . ' Batzli : I agree . My only point was that we' re not approving this building or that particular location or configuration. I mean the setbacks . Whatever hasn' t really been studied by staff or us. Ellson: Right. There's an assumption that might go along with it that you just want to protect yourself against . I like the plan. I like the rear loading and I like the landscaping. It was so refreshing to see a lot of ' landscaping for a change versus always asking to add a little more and things like that. I think it's a good use of that area and like Ladd said, I like the idea of seeing the idea of the expansion. One of my pet peeves is just seeing the word outlot and you have no idea what the whole, you know here we are planners . We like to see the whole plan even though it's not an approval like that. I don' t really have a problem with the extra curb cuts now that I 've heard the explanation and again the plan of ' what he's seeing in the future. I think then it's natural that people from that building would go in that way and the people in this one would go in that way. In that context it makes sense so I don't think I would have a problem with allowing that there. It sounded like there would be about 40 additional people that would be in this case now splitting up these two which would pretty much stagger how busy it would be. I can' t imagine it'd be too busy. But I like it. Do you have tenants? You said this one's going to be a multiple tenant. I Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 5 Roman Roos : We have one tenant and we're working on the other . ' Ellson: What kind of company? I 'm just kind of interested. Roman Roos' answer could not be heard on tape. ' Emmings: I 'd like to ask on page 5. In that little table you've got unde lot coverage. Just the line that says lot coverage ordinance 70%, propose 75%. I know there' s that note under there. I wasn' t clear about what that line was telling me. Krauss: What that was telling you is we took a look or I asked the developer' s architect to take a look at what the total site coverage would be with both buildings that they' re showing on the concept and it exceeded " the requirement. Then we discussed how you could bring that into compliance and it' s a relatively simple task since the site is so over parked. There is no variance now since that entire concept future phase i going to be a vacant lot. Emmings: But the actual lot coverage with what is being proposed. Krauss: Is considerably less. Emmings: Do we know what that number is? Krauss: No, I have not worked that out . Emmings: But it' s certainly well within? ' Krauss: It's probably 40%. Emmings: Alright. As far as the curb cuts are concerned . This looks like" a real reasonable and natural way to have the curb cuts and I guess I like it there. You' re not getting too much support from us tonight on this but I tell you one thing I 'm concerned about is when we talked about last II week, the last time we met, about that infamous Lot A and the PUD for the supermarket. I think I or somebody asked what the regulations are in terms of how close you can have a driveway to a corner and the number 3001 feet stuck in my mind. Didn' t I hear that? Olsen: That was on West 78th Street that we used with Charlie James' property. Emmings: So that doesn' t apply to this situation? Olsen: That was a busier intersection. Emmings: Now is there a standard in this area for how close a driveway call be to a frontage? Krauss: No. 1 Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 6 ' Conrad: Why don' t you just talk to us about this. I 'm going to ask the same questions so I ' ll jump in here. It sounds like so far we're pretty receptive to the 3 curb cuts so Paul tell us the other side of the coin. Give us some negatives. Krauss : The negatives fall into a couple categories . Basically you have, everytime you introduce a new curb cut, you introduce turning movements because obviously people are going to stop their cars and turn out . The more turning movements you have, the more places you have to look for oncoming cars as you're driving down the street. More places there are for potential interaction between cars going in different directions. There' s no firm rule about how many there should be or how far they should be apart from one another typically except that the general rule of thumb is you want to minimize them and I can ' t argue that there aren' t a lot of curb ' cuts on that road right now. There are and there's probably, is my opinion, more than are warranted given the levels of traffic . Having 40 employees or how ever many employees sounds innocuous enough, except you have to realize it ' s an industrial park and they all tend to arrive and leave at the same time. I 'm not going to tell you that there's definitely a traffic accident in the making here with the proposal the way it sits ' right now. It' s really a matter of normally accepted practices and rules of thumb. ' Emmings: The Red Splendor Crab is the one that holds it' s apples . The Red Splender Crab is the one that holds it' s apples all winter . That happens to be the one that holds it longer I think than any other one. Ellson: Did you just look that up or you knew that? Well good for you. Ernmings: And I like it. I agree with Brian ' s notion and I agree it' s good ' to see what people are planning to do in the future on the balance of the lot but I think it is important that we have some kind of a statement in there that we' re not giving any consideration to that even though it ' appears here and that there ' s to be no approval , implied or otherwise for approving a plan that' s in front of. I think it' s nice to make that real clear . Those are all the comments I have. Otherwise I think it' s a real nice plan. I keep thinking this Lot 2, if it didn' t have Park Place over ' here, you'd certainly have an access on each side of your building and I wouldn't see any reason to treat it differently just because he has that other access opportunity way up Park Street. I think it' s an advantage to having the corner and I 'd leave the accesses the way they are. Erhart: I think it' s a real nice plan . I think the additional landscaping overcomes my concern for the reputation of the developer . Roman Roos : I love you too Tim. 1 Erhart: It' s a good plan. Regarding the curb cuts . I understand the issue of the curb cuts close to the intersection. We' re obviously, our business is right across the street and down a bit . Yeah, you do get some people running into each other. We had one the other day. Some guy ' scraped a car a little bit. We' re right in the middle of the street so I don't know how these things happen. Essentially it' s a four lane road. I I 1 Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 7 mean it's wide enough so if someone makes a left turn, you can pass on the right. If someone's slowing down to make a right turn, they can pass on the left. I guess my feeling is the nuisance factor of not having a curb cut outweighs the potential danger of it so I guess I would tend to lean 1 allow the curb cuts . I also agree with Brian' s idea of adding a 10th recommendation so that' s it. Conrad: I 'm persuaded to allow that curb cut only because I see the future" expansion. Property only having one and I would be real critical if the next subdivision came in and had 2 so I would only grant the 3 this time if I felt real comfortable that the future expansion was only going to use" the one curb cut. Other than that it looks like a good one. Good project I like it. Anything else? Is there a motion? Erhart: I ' ll move that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the II City Council of Site Plan Review #89-8 dated 9-6-89. Ellson: 9-8 . ' Emmings: Received 9-8. Erhart: Received 9-8-89 with all the staff recommendations except for ' number 3. We delete the first sentence and change the second sentence to start, redesign curb cuts as required as it remains. Add item 10. Site plan approval does not include approval of the building designated on the plans as future expansion. Ellson: I ' ll second that. ' Conrad : Discussion. Batzli : Do you want to talk about the rust on the trees? ' Conrad: My concern hasn' t been incorporated . Emmings: Oh , the future expansion. Erhart: You wanted. . . Conrad : The only reason I 'd vote for the 3 right now is if I 'm convinced that that' s all we' re going to have on this 4 acre property. Krauss : Mr . Chairman, one of the reasons why we encouraged Roman to include that development concept was for this very reason. So we could assess those sorts of impacts . At such time, it isn' t one parcel right noll and through the subdivision process, if it' s ever subdivided off in the future, we can always whip this concept out and say this is what we intended to do. ' Ellson: Would that be typical to remember to do that or is that just automatic to do that? JOEL Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 8 I ' Krauss : It's automatic to look at background and to actions associated with the property and that would be one of them. Conrad : See we' re kind of over-riding your staff report which I don' t like doing typically on technical issues but I feel we' re getting something or I think in the future. ' Krauss : No, I 'm saying it' s fine. I 'm not disputing that point but your concern I think was to ensure that there isn' t another access in the future and I think we can do that adequately through the subdivision process and by having this concept and your hearing on this item tonight . ' Conrad : So Roman can come back and say I want to subdivide this 1. 5 acres off without a site plan. He could do that couldn' t he? Krauss : He could subdivide it off. At that time we would recommend that a cross access easement to serve both properties be recorded against it. ' Conrad : But wouldn' t he have the right to come back in and have a second access to that? ' Krauss : Theoretically. Roman Roos : Ladd , can I address that a little bit? ' Conrad: Go ahead . ' Roman Roos : From the day I conceived the project , the intent was I wanted the truck traffic behind both buildings. That' s the reason for this curb cut here in order to service this building and this building . Now the purpose of the second curb cut is exactly what you' re eluding to. I wanted ' to not have a lot of curb cuts in the front of the property on the building so with this servicing the truck traffic, hoping the truck traffic can go back out that way. . .this should be car traffic and it was my intent , as I ' already told you, to eventually probably split that property line. I have no problem with the green space. I have no problem with. . . ' Conrad: I hear what you' re saying . Roman Roos : So I did have intent from day one. I don' t have a crystal ball and I can' t tell you what's going to happen 5 years downstream or 2 ' years downstream but my intent at this point in time is to do that such that this would be a cross over easement. That' s all I can say about it. ' Conrad : But you're also telling me, you would have a tough time getting a second access in on the subdivided. . . Roman Roos : I guess if at that point I needed a second access, it would hurt me on this building , the width of the building. Okay, that' s number one. Number two, if I needed a second access, I would probably have to sell my soul to get both Council and Planning Commission to agree to that but I think if that did, there would be some logical reasons behind it and probably would not, should not be denied based on every other type of. . . r I Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 9 ' and office in the industrial park. My intent at this point in time is not ' to do that. Conrad: I think I 'm persuaded he can' t do it so I don' t need the language" Erhart moved, Ellson seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Site Plan Review #89-8 dated "Received 9-8-89" for the Rome Office Building without variances subject to the following stipulations : 1. Provide trash storage enclosure built with materials compatible with I the building or store all trash internally. 2. Roof mounted HVAC equipment should be provided with a screen constructed of materials compatible with the building exterior . Details should be prepared for staff approval prior to City Council review. 3. Redesign the remaining curb cuts as required to facilitate truck turning movements. Reduce the grade on the remaining Park Road and curb cut from 10+% to less than 5% . 4. Revise the landscaping plan to illustrate seeding or sodding of the Phase II building area . This area is to be kept in a maintained condition until construction occurs . 5. Project approval by the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District" 6. Utilize concrete curb and gutter and design it to connect to improvements in Park Place that will be installed by the City. Add an additional catch basin at the Park place curb cut. All storm sewer I located in public easement or ROW shall be reinforced concrete pipe. 7. Erosion controls are to be in place prior to start of work on the site and maintained until site restoration is completed . Additional erosion' control may be required along the south property line by staff to prevent erosion into Park Road. ' 8. Add a fire hydrant on the parking lot island located off the northwest corner of the building . 9. Providing lighting and signage details for staff review. 1 10. Site plan approval does not include approval of the building designate on the plans as future expansion. All voted in favor and the motion carried. 1 Planning Commission Meeting ' October 4, 1989 - Page 10 SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A BANK AND OFFICE BUILDING ON PROPERTY ZONED BH, HIGHWAY BUSINESS AND LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF MARKET BOULEVARD AND WEST 79TH STREET, CROSSROADS NATIONAL BANK. Jo Ann Olsen presented the staff report. ' Tom Mork: Thank you. My name is Tom Mork. I 'm the President and CEO of Crossroads National Bank which perhaps you've heard is a national bank charter currently in organization. We have our charter approved. It was ' approved in March actually and we' re currently in the final stages of getting the bank actually organized. This is a project that' s been near and dear to my heart for about the last year, give or take a week or so. Although I 've been in this chamber on numerous occasions dealing with the HRA, I can't tell you how pleased we are to be here to present our plan for our building to the Planning Commission. I 'd be more than happy to answer any of your questions about the bank and the development of it but I know 1 that' s not really why you' re here tonight . I will answer any questions you might have afterwards but right now I 'd like to turn it over to David Shea , the principle of Shea Architects who has been doing our development work on the building. David Shea : Thank you. I' ll give just a brief overview of the building and the location and a little graphic. . . .temporary location. We' re planning the entire facility. Obviously the main building is from here , some sort of a. . .as well and trying to locate a temporary facility so that we can easily construct a building without creating problems on the site to the traffic flow around this. Provide parking and minimum disruption in the future so the temporary facility, all the curb cuts would be in place. Most of the paving . . .curb cuts , landscaping for that so we' ll be able to ' establish a presence. Signage idenity early and then discuss as staff has suggested that we have it taken down within a week after we get certificate of occupancy on the building itself. There' s no problem with that. The ' items that were discussed as far as landscaping and we agree with all of those and I think as part of the development process, with this additional curbing here, we maintain the. . .trees. We have a special condition along the railroad area there. We obviously want to have the public , customers focusing on the building so that we felt that a strong screening approach, a framing approach of the site on that side. The building itself, we've done a number of financial institutions and this is an excellent site for ' this kind of an institution. We have a strong parking area to the side to accommodate the customers to the back and we have expansion areas within the building itself that will be used for office space. Rental office ' space that will provide a future expansion area within the building itself for the growth of the bank and then as staff points out , the additional opportunity to add onto the building in a like manner out into this area with similar architectural treatment so we can maintain the integrity of ' the building and really complete the visual aspect of the mass of the building and we can accommodate the bank' s future growth. The site plan, as I mentioned, works out very well in that we separate the driving flow on this side from the main pedestrian and from the parking area. They' re different customers. A lot of people never go inside a bank. Maybe once at a bank once and then after that they use the drive in completely so a Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 11 1 very simple easy approach to that . I think the staff' s recommendation of II deceleration lane is important and I think it can be accommodated within the flexibility of the plan itself and I think we can work with staff too to be able to accommodate that. The materials on the building would be, II and it' s hard to tell from the model but it' s an all brick building . . .at the base of the front column in these areas here. We have a long roof that again picks up some of the gabled roof in making the building, it accomplishes a couple of things . It accommodates a high ceiling inside. III picks up some of the elements that are in town itself. The coloration of it. Browns. The bronze colors. Those are, as we've gone through the town and looked at a number of different structures in the town, this is a building of permanence and we have a limited maintenance building. I can' say maintenance free but. . .a limited maintenance building that will be here for a number of years. It' s a solid building. Insulated glass and metal frames and all the type of things that are necessary for a permanent building. The signage area to the side, we really extended the canopy out which is part of the building . We've tried very hard not to make a canopy and a lot of times you see this in a drive in bank that are really ' appendages to the building . Stuck onto the building . We felt very strongly that the architecture of the building has to be maintained from the end of the last drive-in unit , potentially a ATM unit on the outside. I Going in and becoming part of the same architecture for the building carrying from one side to the other . Than when the future addition comes on, you can see it outlined here, it's a relatively simply job of carrying ' that progression of the architecture down. The brick, the metal and the stone faces and all of those. Generally we believe we've worked with the bank's needs as far as internal layout. The orientation of the entrance. The orientation of the drive in area. Trash enclosures are screened off . With staff' s recommendations on landscaping . We' re going to look into the cedar rust question. There are a couple of crab trees and if there are spruce trees azound them, I ' ll have to look into that but we've spent a II great deal of time working from the inside of the building out and from the overall property so we get a good traffic flow and we feel that we've accomplished that. There are a number of items though on the staff report " that are beyond the architectural area that Tom would like to talk to. They expressed some concern about cross easements and future areas so Tom, if you'd like to do that and I ' ll be available for questions. Toni Mork: The questions or comments we have concerning staff' s ' recommendations have to do with some of the conditions and some of them are really comments but the first one relates to number 3. We have absolutely " no objection to a deceleration lane into our drive-up. In fact it' s my sense that as we are attempting to be as user friendly as possible, that a deceleration lane would actually work to our advantage and so the impact o that, in sliding the building over 13 to 20 feet is really an insignifican issue to us. Furthermore, the pedestrian sidewalk in place I think is als user friendly and we' re very supportive of the notion. My one question is, who pays for it and perhaps we can just get a clarification in terms of paying for it and also maintenance of it and so on. Conrad: Why don't we just talk about that. Tom Mork: Sure, okay. Planning Commission Meeting October 4 , 1989 - Page 12 I/ ' Olsen: We believe that the City would be paying for those improvements in Market Blvd. in the sidewalk. Tom Mork: Okay. That'd be part of the entire improvement process? Okay. Good. The next item of comment is number 4, regarding the cross easement issue. When David tells you that we've spent a great deal of time in financial resources to develop the plan that we do have, he' s not kidding . I 'm a banker and I 've never gone through the development of a building before and frankly I 'm appalled at how quickly you can spend money on developing a plan but we also are very jealous of our image and we covet ' the kind of image that we are attempting to create in putting up a very professional building and in building our own staff and our own corporate identify if you will . Our concern about kind of a carte blanche cross ' easement has to do with our limited knowledge of what will be developed on the site to the east of us. We would prefer that that cross easement be linked to a specific use of that property. Inasmuch as our sense is that if we are unable to control that cross easement and access to both properties , the presence of a tenant on that site that we find objectionable gives us some cause for concern. For example, if it' s a ' restaurant or some other kind of business that tends to create a problem of litter , it's our sense that we would like to segregate ourselves from that and so we would ask that that cross easement be linked more to a specific use of that piece of property than it is currently worded. Finally and also I think also in connection with the site to the east has to do with number 12 and that is, asking us to illustrate how the easterly parking lot will be modified . We have absolutely no problem in working with staff to try to clarify that as much as we can as soon as we can find out exactly ' what will be developed on that easterly site. We have a little bit of problem predicting what it' s going to look like and how exactly our parking will be treated . We have looked at it from an overall standpoint and we've I looked at some potential parking configurations but until a definitive plan is in place, we have a little bit of a problem giving more of a clarification or a commitment on that respect so those are the only ' comments that I had . You've already addressed one of them so. Conrad: Thanks Toni. Anything else from your group? Tom Mork: Not in terms of a presentation. I guess we'd welcome questions . Conrad: Okay, we' ll go around our group here and see what our comments are. Tim, we' ll start at your end. Erhart: On this slow down lane, I 'm a little curious on our desire to have a slow down lane. That means that actually this lane is going to be an additional lane to the east of the right-of-way. Is there something different about that that you wouldn't want a slow down lane then on the intersection of West 79th Street and Market Blvd. or is it because that ' street's wider? Olsen: Market is going to be a main entrance into and out of the city so ' that's why we felt it was necessary on Market because that's where you' re going to have the cars. I II Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 13 Erhart: Yeah okay but then why isn' t the same thought process require us II to have a slow down lane. If we want a slow down lane here, I 'm not objecting to that at all . I 'm just questioning , then don' t we need a slow' down lane for the same argument over here? Krauss : There is one. The way it's designed is that you have two lanes coming northbound from TH 5. One of those lanes drops out at the I intersection. It' s basically a turn lane. Olsen: Then there's a median here. That' s why one of the lanes is lost ull there. There are two. Erhart: Oh so it' s more than a single lane up there where down here it' s I two lane? Krauss : Right. Erhart: Okay. Just testing you. Secondly, it appears to me the cross I easement is a requirement due to the fact that you don' t own, the developer doesn' t own the property where the drive is isn' t it or do I misunderstand 11 Olsen: The drive is on top. It's over a property line. Erhart: So I mean a cross easement is not a function of you not controlling your property. It's because you have your driveway on somebod_ else' s property so I don' t understand why you feel , why you' re making this request. I David Shea : We very easily could maintain this line right here and have our entrance right over here. This had come up at an earlier discussion about trying to do this and where we feel we can contain and have a landscape barrier coming right down through here. Have a full intersectio entrance in off of here and maintain our space entirely separate from this over here. I guess we' re showing this because we' re talking aobut it I tonight and we do feel that we can maintain. . . Erhart: Who' s asking you to put that double wide entrance in there? I David Shea: Is it traffic engineering in the City or is it anyone else? Tom Mork: It's HRA. I David Shea : That talked about it before. Tom Mork: Part of the HRA's concern was that we develop a common entrance " to both sides of the site . I mean our preference would be that we could control our own access but it really does not make a lot of sense if we ca control our image. I guess that' s really what our concern is. We would prefer to have our own but this particular configuration I think is an accomodation to the HRA's concern initially. 1 II i Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 14 ' David Shea : They don' t even know if this entrance would be the right entrance for whatever facility they have here. I mean they may want it over here. They may want it right here so we' re sort of guessing . This ' building could be over here. We don't know that and we put it on that. We feel that we could very easily separate ourselves out that way as we have over here and here and maintain this as an entity. ' Erhart: Yeah, and I don' t even know how we should respond to that. Batzli : Who owns the land to the east there? Olsen: HRA also owns that and as Paul and I were just discussing , it' s fine with us if they just have the one entrance right on their property. Then that removes the cross easement . ' Krauss: When we first reviewed this, we looked at the P ossibility of eliminating one of those entrance points and coming up with a central access. We had always assumed from the start that we would have a shared access point there.always in fact that was going to be a segregated access , we wouldn't want it on the property line because then you wind up with the ' same situation you get when you drive into City Hall where there' s 3 driveways coming together and you' re never sure which is the street and which one you turn down. Erhart : Well it seems to me it' s , if you go in there and turn right or left, it seems to me it's going to be confusing traffic rather than the traffic intersection being on the street , it' s going to be right in there. David Shea: Frankly we feel very comfortable with doing that and then somebody else if they, I mean they want it here. They may want it over here. Batzli : What is the driveway setback? How far over would they have to move their driveway? Olsen: There is no setback for the driveway. If it' s going to be shared , which it might be in the future. Again, we don' t know, then there's no setback like for the parking area. Batzli : But if they were to move it to the west , how far would they have to go? Ellson: From each other you're saying? g ' Olsen: For a driveway, 10 at the most. If they' re going to separate them, they have to have a strip for the landscaping . David Shea: I think from the center to this we' re about 5 feet which provides you with a 5 foot barrier on the side and I guess when this property comes to staff and then we could go through the question about cross easements and that at that point and decide whether or not you want to combine this entrance but if we move this entrance down here, then it gets close to this separate turning areas and the set of things from here. I 1 Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 15 This one feels like it should be separated out and when and if this gets 1 developed in some fashion, then we could, these people come back and talk to staff and then come back to the bank and discuss a shared entrance at that point or maybe the entrance is here and we don' t have to concern ourselves with it at all . Maybe they only need one entrance onto this space. It's premature but we don't want to preclude. The bank does need that and does need that kind of a traffic flow inside here that can be separated out. Conrad: Yet on the other hand it restricts . If we allow a third access . Erhart: What's going to happen is there will be too many curb cuts . Conrad: Yeah. We' re restricting what' s happening to the property to the east because we' re not going to allow two curb cuts within 20 feet. We won't go over Paul ' s head again. Now twice in the same evening . Krauss: Whether you do or you don' t go over my head, that' s up to you but 1 this kind of a movement internally can be handled very easily with extension of the traffic islands down there to divert it. This is a fairly common design. I guess we feel sort of strongly that preserving that multiple use of that curb cut's an important factor . If that cross access 1 easement isn' t taken at the time the subdivision goes through, there is no leverage to get it in the future. If it' s not used in the future, it' s no used but this site over here is not that large and we've seen a few different proposals but there's nothing firm for what might happen here bu it may well be that this site needs two access points . The same as the bank. One over here, one over here. You've got a real problem with turning movements there. Both this site and if there' s retail use on the other site, generate fairly high volumes of traffic coming in and out. If you have traffic slowing down and turning and accelerating and leaving within close proximity to one another , you've really got a hazardous situation. Conrad : A problem I have though is you' ve got some cross traffic and the I scenario that I see, if you've got access coming from the property to the east trying to get to an exit, you've got some cross traffic there based on this particular design which is not good at all . 1 Krauss: But you've got to realize though that this is about 40 or 50 feet back in here before that turn occurs. There's quite a few entrances that are designed that way. 1 Batzli : The one that I can think of that' s poor is the one at 7 Hi Shopping Center coming across from the Cub. Straight across where you hall that type of a. . . Krauss: Yeah, that one did do it but the one I was thinking that was better is on the other side of the street going into where Cub 'is and Westwinds. Batzli : Yeah, that' s a good one. That' s designed much better . Okay, we' ll do one like that. I 1 Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 16 Conrad : Why do you need 3 curb cuts in this? ' David Shea: Let me explain. In a situation like this where you have very, very different types of traffic here you don' t want to mix the traffic flow. This is the drive in traffic. It comes in off of Market Blvd . . ' Separate use . Comes in here. Does their business and exits back out. There' s no need to blend that traffic and there' s no need to eliminate a great quantity of landscaping that does form the front of the building in this area here by having another roadway that comes across and then you end up with serious cross traffic on the street in the parking lot with cars come in, park, backing out and with these people are actually looking for more of an express approach. They' re in the drive in slot for a few minute ' and back out on the street and their business is done in a very short area . If you start bringing them through the parking lot, you' re starting to create more congestion in the parking lot. More potential difficulties for turning . This is a relatively narrow parking area here. If you further restrict it with a driveway that runs through it, it really damages the retail nature of the bank and the convenience nature of the bank and the customer parking right at the front. That's why when we do these types of ' facilities, it' s almost like two separate buildings. This is one flow. This is another flow and we try to keep those things separate. Conrad : You could separate those flows internally though however but I won' t belabor that point. I hear what you' re doing. Batzli : Is the road to the north of the bank, is that a one way a certain way there? That driveway. David Shea : This is 24 feet. This is two way back here. That gives essentially an escape hatch. . . .and back out to Market Blvd. here. Enmiings: You can' t. Krauss: That's a right-in. David Shea : Okay, I apologize. You can go into the drive-in and go around that way. Erhart : In listening to it, I think your perception of the problem is probably compounded by the fact that you' re showing a curb that turns to the left and that this double driveway appears to serve your whole space. I think if you redraw it and take that curb out there, then your entrance really becomes slightly to the north of that and I 'm not sure you' re concerned about people perceiving that you' re part of a McDonalds or something quite as much as you might think. But the other hand, I think staff has a legitimate concern that that business next door, whatever it might be, needs more than one access point. There' s no way you can get 4 access points. ' Tom Mork: We have allowed for whatever is developed here in the future is going to be part of an overall development. We understand how jealous the City is of this particular plan that it' s going to develop favorably. r 1 Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 17 ' However , over time needs change. . .and you may be right. We may be do over I react but we just tend to be real protective of our image. Erhart: The last thing is that you have the enter only and I don' t quite I understand why that would be. It seems to me that someone coming in and wanting to exit out onto Market Blvd. and go north , it just seems logical to me, you have 24 feet on the drive up to the north, that they would want ' to drive along the north boundary and turn right out that exit and go. What' s the purpose of the enter only there? It seems like a nuisance. Tom Mork: I think the initial concern was with the median being right I here, that having both in and out traffic it was going to confuse this particular intersection. Staff put a more technical term. Krauss: Market Blvd. over there, this goes back to one lane in each I direction. Southbound is actually sort of a lane and a half and there ' s actually going to be a turn lane built into the median to allow them to turn into this site . You' re very close to the railway tracks and we' re concerned with introducing a lot of turning movements and encouraging people to go out and sort of square out to the north through there. We'd rather they went through the legitimate intersection and got into the flow I of traffic before they head across the railroad tracks . We initially were concerned with having any access up there and basically worked this out as a best possible compromise and there' s been some design effort in going back and worth with BRW who's working on the roadway improvement project . Erhart : Is there going to be cross bars at that intersection? Your concern was that someone would go out of there and just accelerating where I they wouldn' t be watching? Krauss: There's just a lot going on there. I Batzli : So you said there will be a cross arm at the railroad track there? Olsen: There is going to be a crossing. 1 Tom Mork: I guess I 'd like to say that I think that staff has been very I sensitive to our needs and we fully expect that when the building is operational , 75% of our transactional volume comes through the drive up so it is a high traffic area and I think they were very supportive of our concern in that respect. I David Shea : And the best way of doing that is keeping the turning motions as simple as possible by leading people through a drive in. I think that we agreed that that' s the best way, the best compromise for that particular, area. Erhart: Your landscaping there, is that the same as the landscaping shown I here or is there a difference? David Shea : This is a little more schematic but we do have a landscaping II plan. It should be the same. r ANL Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 18 Erhart : I guess it' s the same. Tom Mork: The landscaping in the model , the model was done initially when ' the HRA was doing architectural approval and we had to put the model together and then we did the actual landscaping . David Shea: That does not relate to this but I think this should relate to your packets . Erhart: I see that. I was looking at the first page. That' s all my ' questions. Emmings: I guess on the cross easements , I think we should preserve that at this time. Number 6 talks about the pylon sign and I guess there will be no pylon sign. Is that right? Olsen : Yeah, they've now submitted a plan just for the monument right . Emmings: So when we say, have they provided detail on the pylon sign so can we essentially delete number 6? With respect to number 12, I guess I agree with the comments of the applicant. Is there any reason we have to review their plans for the parking lot now or couldn' t that be done as part of reviewing the expansion? Olsen : Right . Emmings: It really seems to make more sense so I 'd go with them on that. ' Then I have one more. On number 7, this is going to sound awfully cynical and I don' t mean it to sound that way. I know you've put a lot of time and effort into planning this and it' s very nice. Anytime I see anything ' that' s temporary, it scares the pants off me. I went to the University of Minnesota and went to temporary. . .for follow-ups for classes. Buildings that were supposed to last about 4 years and we' re still. there 25 years later . I guess what I would say is just put a cap on this temporary facility and say something like, add on the end , or 2 years from the date of approval of the site plan, whichever comes first. Tom Mork: I guess if you' re going to do that, what I would ask is you would go back and look at the purchase agreement that we have negotiated with the Housing and Redevelopment Authority. . . I think it is 2 years from ' the date of closing on the property that we commence construction and we have done that because we are under some potential constraints from a regulatory standpoint as to when we can actually put up the building. As of today we can do it right away. .We just aren' t in a position to do that as of right now. We'd like to but this is our best attempt to compromise. We share your sentiment 100% and we think spent a great deal of time convincing the HRA that it's not our intent to be in a modular building . Enmtings: I'm sure of that . ' Tom Mork: Our primary competition recently built a 2 million dollar building and we' re real sensitive to a competitive image as well so I guess if you're going to put a sunset on it, I would ask that it be done in sync 11 Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 19 with the. I would prefer that you not do it but if that' s the sense . I Emmings: Now I know I want to do it. Tort Mork: Then I would ask that you coordinate it with the purchase ' agreement. Emmings: Well this purchase agreement though, it sounds like it sets out time by which you must start construction of the permanent facility and I guess what I'm saying is, well I guess we could go. How long does construction take once it's started? , David Shea: 6 to 7 months . Emmings: Maybe we could go a year from. . . ' Batzli : Approval of the construction. What does the City enter into before they start the contract? The development contract? Olsen: This one wouldn' t have a development contract. They'd have to get a building permit. ' Emmings: I think what we should do is say that the temporary facility could be there for a maximum of one year after whatever the date is when they've got to start construction. Erhart: Why don't you just make it a maximum limit of how long a temporary facility can be there period? I Ellson: Right. Headla: Steve, I agree with your comments . I had 24 months maximum. ' Emmings: What? Headla: I had the same concerns and what do you think about just saying from the time the temporary building goes up, you've got x number of months and then it's got to go? I Erhart: Right. Headla : Because I was looking for the wording they had in here and that II was the key that said hey you've got to have a limit on it. Emmings: But my understanding is they're going to put the temporary , building is going to go up right away. Tom Mork: That's correct. A temporary building will be there in all likelihood 30 to 60 days before we even have an opportunity to open the bank for business . Emmings: And then they're saying they have 2 years to commence ' construction so it seems to me we've got to go. Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 20 i ' Ellson: That ' s if you want it tied in with that . How long do you want a temporary thing here? Conrad : How long do you want a temporary building? Elison: Do we want a mobile home kind of set up there? I mean it'd be nice if. . . I 'm not sure if I want to wait 20 years. Emmings: Well I don' t know. Tom Mork: I think there ' s probably some real strong misconception that we' re talking about in terms of a modular building. This is not a corregated metal side mobile home with a hitch on the front and wheels . It' s a permanent building. It' s really no different than a modular home. . . ' Emmings : I ' ll tell you, to be very honest with you since you raised the point. When I looked at the, I thumbed through the staff report at home ' and I saw this as the temporary building and I thought, what the hell are they doing? I thought that was your building . I hadn't opened the plans yet. That is grotestque . It may not be grotestque. It may not be bad and I don't mean to insult you but if you had come in with this as the plan for your bank, I don' t think we would have approved it. Tom Mork: We understand that entirely. With all due respect to your concerns, we have the same ones . I guess the one thing that I would like to emphasize is that we are not dealing in an environment where we are always totally afraid to do exactly what we'd like to do. We are severely governed by the control of the current state of the Department of Treasurey ' that may or may not have objections on when we actually start our building . As of now, there's nothing there but in light of the current turmoil in the financial institutional industry, with all the problems going on with the Savings and Loan Industry and the bailouts, frankly we have some concerns that the environment might change and I guess I do have a little bit of a problem in saying a 2 year sunset. I would much rather ask that you give us 9 months from the date of commencement of construction because it is our ' intent, and we don' t have any option, but to start construction on this building and I believe. . .and I guess I would just ask you to give us the. . . Emmings: I would think that assuming that what happens if they don't start construction in 2 years under the contract with HRA? Tom Mork: We forfeit the property. Emmings : Okay. Well that' s pretty strong. I guess if they have 9 months from the date they have to commence construction under their agreement with the HRA to get rid of this temporary building, that would be fine by me. Tom Mork: . . .is a 9 month time frame long enough? ' Emmings : Well 6 months is what they said when I asked the question before. ' David Shea: Sometimes you have landscaping and a few things like that that if we get the season wrong, you have to wait until May and June to do the Planning Commission Meeting October 4 , 1989 - Page 21 I landscaping. Emmings: Is that going to keep you from moving in the building there? Batzli : That' s not going to affect the Certificate of Occupancy though? II David Shea : No, but I think building completion sometimes, no that' s true. Emmings: What'd you say? You've got to take down the temporary building I within 9 months after you start construction of your permanent facility. Tom Mork: Aren't we accomplishing the same thing by doing this as saying I we' ll have the building on the site within one week of the Certificate of Occupancy? The thing I guess I 'm concern about is, a 9 month time frame may be realistic but what' s happen if weather conditions should extend thall or there are material shortages or something like that? Emmings: I think it's long enough. I think it' s too long for a temporary ' building but I 'm willing to go that long. Ellson: My biggest concern with the whole thing was the temporary. Why I are we allowing this? We don' t usually let people come in. I 've never seen, if someone wants to do a dry cleaner but they' ll set up a smaller facility. Why are we even doing a temporary thing? Is this typical? I 've never seen it in the couple years I 've been here and it makes me uneasy that normally we don' t let something in unless they' re ready. They've god' the money. They' re ready to develop. What have you and I 'm a little uneasy that we' re tied to the financial conditions and everything like that. Olsen: In just looking at the circumstances , I guess we really didn' t hay any great concerns with it I guess . We just had faith that they would be moving ahead with it. They have supplied the details of the facility. Th temporary facility to have the building department look at to see whether or not this was a halfway decent. Would it be safe. Things like that and ' everyone felt confident that it would be okay. Tom Mork: Maybe if I could add to this. We have from the date of our II project approval , 1 year to put together our capitalization so that takes us to next March 10th. From that point on we get another 6 months to get the bank actually up and running. I have never started a new bank and it' s something that isn' t done very often but I can assure you that there are a awful lot of details that I never imagined involved in starting a bank fro" scratch and frankly, what's most important to us is that we start getting. . .This is not an ideal approach to it. We recognize that but undell the timing constraints that we' re living under in terms of getting our charter operational . . .this is the best alternative. I hope that maybe that timing constraint that you' re not aware of. . . Krauss : I just want to add that in my experience, it' s not an uncommon practice for banks to do this. Health clubs will put a trailer out at the site as they build it to get membership rolls. Apartment projects will pull model homes on a site. It's a fairly common practice around the Twin Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 22 ' Cities. As long as it' s under control with a sunset, I haven' t had much problem with it. Olsen: And they are making all the necessary improvements to the site which is usually where staff doesn' t budget you know when it's just going to be gravel but they are going to be paving everything and putting all the utilities in and landscaping . Ellson: Well I guess I don' t have as much experience as many of the others but I 'm just uncomfortable I guess with that and the precedence that it might be setting for everybody who wants to go out and get going but they' re not quite ready yet but boy when I get up and moving, then I ' ll do it exactly what you want . We' re blessing it. I don' t know and I don' t like a time frame of like 3 years existing like that either . I guess I 'm ' trying to picture the whole city growing and that just doesn' t seem like a nice way to start it off and it' s so different than most the people coming through here. Like we got to get started and can we get moving . We want ' to break ground right away and this one is, is it okay if we don' t do the main stuff for 2 years, 9 months and that sounds like an awful long wait I guess to me. You can tell I 'm on the other side of the coin. ' Tom Mork: I guess I 'm concerned that we' re creating an image that we ' re not anxious to get in a more permanent building which is not at all the case . If things go the way that we would like them to, we hope to start I construction next year. Next summer . But by the same token, in dealing with the HRA, we asked them to consider some of the regulatory requirements that a dry cleaner doesn' t have for example. We are dealing with a national bank charter and federal regulator and it does sometimes impede progress as you deal with bureaucracy so I don't want to leave here tonight with the impression that we aren' t as anxious as you to be in a permanent home. IEfliflhingS If I can interrupt Annette. When you say that, what I hear anyway is that there is the possibility that things will not go the way yor plans are structured . That it will not allow you to start building the bank maybe when you want to start building the bank and I guess that's the possibility we' re trying to address by putting on a cap on the length of time you can be existing in a temporary building. ' Tom Mork: And I think that' s what the HRA was concerned about too and that' s why they put the forfeiture clause in there for a period of time . 1 Emmings: Now it' s our turn. ' Tom Mork: And I understand your concerns and I really don' t have any problem with them as long as it doesn't impose a time table that is contrary to what the HRA has asked us . ' Emmings: Well we don't want to do that. I don' t. Ellson: The only other comment I had was that we've got 2 of these next to our company also and I still wouldn' t like it as a bank but one other things is about the people next door . I don' t think that we really can do r Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 23 much to allow you to pick the type of tenant or approve the people next II door. I think that if you want to buy the land, that's probably as close as you come to being able to give it away to whoever you want but I don' t think we can put anything in there about the cross easements and who the neighbors would be. What are the hours going to be? A lot of times when II businesses will tell us their working hours, sometimes we' ll . . . Tom Mork: Well yeah. I'm looking around because I 'm not certain if our II competition is here. Batzli : They'll be watching the TV. Ellson: It's on television and I 'm sure they' re all tuned in. Tom Mork: Frankly right now we would expect the drive in to be open at least from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. and we' ll be open for full service banking at 7: 00 in the morning as well . The lobby, we haven' t established the closing time but it will be 5:00 or 6:00. Somewhere in there. Those I are some organizational details we haven' t quite worked out . Batzli: It was funny because when I first saw the temporary building, I thought of a little trailer that they had in the Bank Excelsior ' s parking lot there while they were remodeling. That's all I could think of was thi little, anyway. You had to be there to see it. I don' t have a problem with the two year starting period. I guess whether it' s 9 months or a year , whatever , I guess I 'd like to see some sort of sunset but I also think that they' re going to have a lot of red tape to go through to do a lot of things and I don' t know that us imposing some sort of time table that they' re going to have to be in here asking us for changes later . I don' t know what the point is of making it too compressed is. I don' t know what the difference is between 9 months and a year for instance. They say 6 months. We say 9 months . I mean what are we really trying to do? Are we trying to let them build a bank or are we trying to put a prod in their I back? Conrad: Well let's ask Jo Ann or Paul that same question. When we approv1 a site plan for any other company in town, are there limitations on that? Ellson: The approval lasts for x length of time? 1 Conrad: How long have we approved it for before they. . . Olsen: I believe it's unlimited. The building permit I know that that ' runs out in a year . Emmings: But this is not the same. They don' t have to start building . , Ellson: But we're talking about this precedent kind of thing. Conrad: So anybody who comes in here and gives us a site plan, Jo Ann, as " long as they own that land, that site plan lasts forever and we don' t say it runs out? If you don' t develop it the way we've agreed to. I Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 24 Ellson: I remember that David Stockdale. Didn' t he run out . . . ' Olsen: Well conditional uses have that limitation and variances have a limitation. I just can' t remember if site plans do. Conrad: What about in the downtown district? What zone are we? ' Olsen: Site plans don' t . Conrad : We' re in the general business district. We' re not in the CBD. ' Olsen: No. Conrad : If we were in the CBD, what would the restrictions be? Any? ' Olsen: Time limit? ' Conrad: Yeah. Olsen: It would all still be a site plan and that one doesn' t have a limitation. Emmings : No limit on what Ladd? ' Conrad: How long our approval lasts before something occurs? Before there is construction. Emmings: That' s a different question though. I don' t want to limit that. I don' t care about that. Batzli : That ' s already limited by the HRA. They have to start within 2 years of closing or such and such date. Emmings : I don' t care. ' Conrad : You don' t care? Because that really dictates how long your temporary facility stays . really Emmings: What I care about is how long, on this major entrance, this major new entrance to Chanhassen, how long these two temporary buildings sit out in the parking lot. That's what I care about . ' Conrad: Sure. I agree. Does that anything to do with the building? Emmings: Well yeah sure. I suppose they' re going to disappear when the ' building gets built. Conrad: They' ll take them down for sure. They don' t want them there for guarantee. They don' t want that building there so the question, in my mind, the question is how long do you want those there period regardless of when they built the building. Emmings: I don' t want them there at all but I think they've got needs. t Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 25 Conrad: And I 'm trying to dissect whether we have any standards for related type, not absolutely the same issue but I 'm concerned that we may have something up for 2 years and it doesn' t come back for review and I 'm not sure I want to review it but I do have concerns. Brian? Batzli : But really, what you said is true. They will be there in essence ' a minimum or a maximum of 2 years from closing. Temporary buildings because by that time. Well 2 years plus 6 months approximately. Or 9 months if they slip a little but I don' t know when that period begins either. When that 2 year period starts . 1 Emmings: When they sign their agreement with the HRA it sounds like. Batzli: When does that happen? ' Tom Mork: The 2 year period starts in May. Batzli: Last May or next May? Tom Mork: This coming May. 1 Conrad: So 2 years from May plus 9 months. Batzli : You' re into about what , 1994 there or something . 1993. Conrad: It's a long time. Tom Mork: In the worse case scenario, it would be 1993. Batzli : Well to get onto something else for a minute. I don't quite II understand this easterly parking lot and what the City is looking for in terms of the applicant illustrating proposed modifications. Would that parking lot have to be modified if the adjacent parcel is developed? Woul they share a parking lot? Is that what we' re envisioning? Olsen: Every plan that we have seen has shown that all of it acting as one site. We were just pointing that out that is that is going to be proposed that we would like to see exactly how that was going to work to see how th� circulation would work. Batzli : If they in fact shared a parking lot and the single entrance? ' Olsen: Yeah, so it might be premature to ask for that now. Batzli : But if we don' t ask for it now, in essence the bank controls whether or not they want to share parking or not so it would be up to the developer of the adjacent parcel unless that' s in their agreement with HRA II that that' s going to happen. Olsen: That it's going to be shared? a Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 26 Batzli : Unless it' s in the agreement with HRA, it' s totally at the discretion of the bank whether they want to share the parking lot. It sounds to me like the bank doesn' t want to. Tom Mork: I wouldn' t say that. I really wouldn' t. Batzli : The bank' s strong inclination is to potentially not want to share a parking lot with their next door neighbor from the sounds of it. Conrad: Why is it up to the HRA? Batzli : I 'm just saying if that' s part of their development agreement but it doesn' t sound like it is. ' Olsen: I don' t know if it is . Conrad: But they don' t have anything to do with site planning . ' Olsen: And the new site plan on the easterly lot, if that showed that they would be sharing the parking , then they could show how that' s going to impact. . . Batzli : Right. I'm just trying to tie in why are we asking them for this? Conrad: Only for flexibility in the future so we wouldn' t have to give the next property to the east 2 additional sites and curb cuts . This may save a curb cut. If they share parking. ' Batzli : Well that' s what we ' re asking for . To the entrance. I 'm just talking about this parking lot. Why are we asking for shared parking was my question. Olsen: I don' t think we ' re asking for shared parking . It' s just that everything we've seen has shown. ' Batzli : That it' s developed as, okay. It doesn' t. It says in 12, the easterly parking lot shall be modified when the adjacent parcel is developed . I 'm assuming the adjacent parcel is to the east. In any event 1 I guess I would rather go on and delete that particular paragraph 12. I 'd add a new paragraph 13 that the future addition designated on the plans isn't a part of this approval . The question, did public safety ever review ' the canopy and the height of the canopy? Olsen: Yes. They got all the plans. ' Batzli : Because on their checklist they just said something like we' ll monitor or I don't know what they said. They're supposed to have 14 feet. They say we' ll review building plans so that' s going to be reviewed at a later time? Olsen: When the details come in. Brian, I'm sorry to interrupt but 13, future addition, is not included in this? I Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 27 Batzli: Yeah . Then I was going to ask about the railroad track and this enter only. The distance from the railroad track but it sounds to me like you guys have reviewed that and thought about that pretty carefully. Those were my questions. Wait a minute. I wanted to bug Tim because he didn' t even say anything about deceleration and he' s an engineer and I just wanted to bug him about that. It should have been negative acceleration. Okay. Erhart: Duly noted. I Headla: I like their express lane. The way they handled the traffic. I don' t have any problem with the curb cuts there. When I look at Excelsior ' and the two banks together , I think those curb cuts make people make decisions before they get into a problem and then try to make a quick decision. I like the curb cuts for the express lane and I 'd support the curb cuts for your own property there. On your recommendations, there' s 3 11 memos there as attachments . That' s the question 4. Do those attachments go with the recommendations? In those memos are not included in your recommendations . ' Olsen: The building official , that all has to be, when they come through with the building permit, that' s when they meet all of those conditions . II Headla: Pardon? Olsen: The building official , from Ron Julkowski , that memo. What he points out, that is all verified and has to be met when they get the building permit. Same with the fire inspector . A lot of the things they can't address until they do get the detailed plans of the building. , Headla : How about the one from Julkowski where it said also plans must have Minnesota seal from State Inspection Department? Now is that part of !' the recommendations? Are you saying that the attachments are not part of the recommendations? Olsen: They have to submit that for the building permit. That' s part of II the submittal requirement. Headla: Oh, it's not part of the recommendation? It' s part of another process? Olsen: Right. Batzli : I think part of the confusion is that it seems to me that we used to have kind of a blanket statement that the things from a such and such memo dated a certain date are included as part of this approval process ani we're not really seeing those anymore. Olsen: Okay. 1 Batzli : Did something happen? Ellson: Different people come in and you want different. . . 1 I/ Planning Commission Meeting October 4 , 1989 - Page 28 Olsen: Right . Then you didn' t want those general conditions . Batzli : Did we say that? Olsen : I 've heard that. Batzli : Who said that here? Conrad : Everybody said that . Everybody. 11 Batzli : Well we've said we didn' t want as many conditions I thought . I don't recall saying we didn't want a general condition. Conrad : Anything that' s standard. If there are standard conditions we' ve always, the Planning Commission said don' t include them because they have to include them only if they really had to be highlighted . ' Batzli : Okay, I see what you' re saying. Conrad : I think Dave harped on this and now that he' s resigned , it doesn' t matter . Headla: You' re going to revert huh? Olsen: I ' ll give each person a different set of conditions . Batzli : So the conditions that are in these attached reports that aren' t ' in here are general conditions . They apply to everything that everybody comes through here does and that' s why they' re not in here. 11 Olsen: Right. And the specific things , when they come in with the building permit, that' s part of the building permit application and that ' s where the fire inspection. ' Conrad : You see you don' t know that . Only Jo Ann and Paul know that those are general conditions. We the lay folks don't know if they' re general and typical or if they' re special for this particular deal . That' s why sometimes it' s good to have 33 conditions out there because then we know they were incorporated from other memos . This way it' s saying to staff, we trust you. You know what you' re doing. 1 Olsen: We usually just point out ones that apply to the site plan. Conrad: But we are the ones who are harping on keeping the number of those ' things minimal . Batzli : Paul looks like he really wants to say something. ' Krauss: Well I don' t really. The stuff from Ron Julkowski for example is more informational than conditional as to something that you would view. ' It's an informational resource for these people that when they prepare the plans , he' s going to be looking for those items so it' s just a useful thing I Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 29 for them. It' s not really consideration for the Planning Commission specifically. Headla: That ' s a good explanation on that one. I was going to come back II with plans must have Minnesota seal but you' re giving them information thall this is what you' re going to expect. Fine. I don' t have a problem with that then. Then let's go to the September 12th memo to Jo Ann. At the bottom on the page. Those time tables may be further affected by site preparation difficulty, the bank's growth, weather conditions, or factors beyond the control of the bank. In any event, it appears to us that the bank will occupy it' s modular facilities and so on. When I read those words it says you've got to put a time limit on it. There's no reason whyll we shouldn't put a time limit on it. Give them 24 months or whatever but put a time limit for that facility to be gone. The modular one. I 've got ' no problem with keeping the feet to the fire. Also, if you really ru0n into like severe weather conditions . Something totally out of your control . I don' t believe that Council 's going to be unreasonable but they've got to do something to keep your feet to the fire to get the job 1 done otherwise what' s your incentive. You could leave it up there a lot longer . Tom Mork: Well we do have incentive. We' ll forfeit the land if we don' t II build the building within the time frame. Headla : You've got to get that building removed. I really thing we shoull have a time limit on it. You've covered everything else. Batzli : What do you think about the easement? The cross easement. Do yo think they need it? Headla : My point was that I don ' t object to the curb cuts in that location. I referenced Excelsior and I think those curb cuts are good because it forces people to make a decision before they get in there and they can put in a curb cut that will serve their purpose. Conrad : Tom, did you have you had the charter? Tom Mork: Yes. The charter's been approved. I Conrad : So really it' s a financing deal right now? Just going to make some comments as I go through here sequentially in the staff report. I do like the cross easement that the staff has recommended. Not that I agree that we' re going to do it. I like the flexibility to be able to do it if necessary. It makes sense to me on the eastern property line. Question o staff. The time and temperature sign are permitted without a permit. How come? Olsen: It' s in our ordinance. Conrad : So it says anybody can put a time and temperature sign up and there' s no permit required where all other signs require a permit? Olsen: Yeah, it' s under the signs without a permit. Garage sale signs . Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 30 Conrad : That' s real interesting because I think that type of a signage can be more objectional than others so I find that, I don' t know if we care right now. We' ve got enough stuff to look at . Olsen: It's always more than time and temperature. ' Ellson: That' s right . Conrad : They're really consumer oriented . I like them but I just find that we control every nit and nat and we' re really restrictive except for something that' s really, it can be very obtrusive and it just seems like it should be under the same guidelines as any other signs that we have. In terms of the temporary facility, I didn' t see anything about lighting in your recommendations. Olsen: Parking lighting? Conrad : Parking lighting yeah . The word temporary says well they' re not going to do much yet so we don't have to worry about it yet I feel real uncomfortable. We are granting occupancy to that site yet in the plans, in the presentation there' s nothing on lighting and I 'm worried we' re treating temporary as if it' s, ah, maybe something will happen and then we' ll really review them when they put up the real building so what have we seen about ' lighting in there? Olsen: They have to supply all the parking lights that are going to be required for the permanent structure. Conrad : Don' t you normally report to us on lighting htin or do you wait until it gets to City Council? Olsen: Whether or not they' re shielded? ' Conrad: Yeah, shielded types . Olsen: We' ve looked at that but anything that doesn' t meet it, then I usually point it out. Conrad : Okay. Have they presented the lighting to you? Olsen: It's on the plan. The actual detail of the lighting, no. Do you have that on? David Shea : We can supply that to staff . A shielded lighting fixture. Conrad: I 'm not worried about it. I guess my deal is, there's a mentality we' re working on a temporary structure here but really it' s a permanent ' occupant. You' re in business. You've got traffic there. So if you can make a note that City Council should be reviewing that or making sure. Or at least review the reviews by the time it gets to City Council . I don' t want to see it because I know you've got it under control . I I Planning Commission Meetin g October 4, 1989 - Page 31 Olsen: As far as that sign, I had read that wrong . It ' s under prohibited" signs. It' s excepted. It says motion signs or flashing signs except time and temperature signs and barber poles. Emmings: What section are you reading from? ' Olsen: That's Section 20-1259. Conrad: So this is not a motion sign? ' Olsen: Well it's a motion sign but it' s an exception to it. ' Krauss: It's an exception to the motion sign and would require a permit . Olsen: I think we put that in the ordinance with the first bank. With Chanhassen Bank. Conrad : Under temporary facility. Temporary facility. Has anybody from 1 Public Safety, we have a check list in here that they've gone through and it deals with fire and hydrants and stuff like that but it really didn' t talk about security. When a bank moves into town. Do we care? What is public safety care about threats of situational deals with the bank? I II see anything in any report saying we' re concerned with a temporary facility so staff says we' re not concerned and it's governed by the governing forces that govern financial institutions and we don' t have any specific cares about a temporary facility as a bank for security for theft and robbery? Nothing? Olsen: They do review it at their public safety meeting . They always holl one on every Friday and they didn' t point that out. Conrad : But it's a standard checklist that's associated in here. ' Olsen: That's specifically more with fire, that checklist but they do, the whole public safety department. Public Safety Director also reviews the II plans. Tom Mork: Excuse me. Are you specifically concerned about the impact tha burglary calls might have on local law enforcement agencies or our own security devices within the building itself? Conrad: Again, I 'm working with this word temporary. You know, have we II really thought out, are we applying the standards that, I don' t think we have any standards because nobody's told me about them for a bank moving into town, that are different than a grocery store moving into town. I 'm I just raising the question just to make sure that the staff is not treating this as a temporary facility. That it' s a real bank moving into town and has the Public Safety Department given us their feedback on it and I didn' see it here so I don' t know that I have a concern with what you' re doing that's more. . . Tom Mork: I can assure you that we' re under some pretty stringent requirements in terms of security and we wouldn' t get a bond in compliancell Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 32 Conrad: I guess my only other comment is the time frame. I think everything else I 'm comfortable with. There's some adminstrative stuff but the time frame and I ' ll let somebody make a motion and I 'm not going to steer that motion but it seems like the applicant has 3 1/2 years to build this and I don' t know. It seems kind of loose . I think it' s good to have another bank in town. Sometimes when you hear us talk it seems real ' critical and anti new stuff but that' s certainly not the point . I think Chanhassen's growing and consumers will benefit by that but I do have a problem with the time frame for building . I don' t have a solution for that. I think it should be in sync with what the HRA said yet my personal ' opinion is saying that I 'd really like to see that bank up in 2 years. Emmings: From? Conrad : Now. But I 'm looking for the negatives and I don' t know that we set a precedent. Who else is going to come in and ask for a temporary site and use this as, if you put a modular home or a mobile home in a neighborhood, the neighbors would be in here immediately. They wouldn' t allow it for a day. Well , in the business community, it may be a little bit different and this is more permanent in nature. That' s not a typical ' mobile home with wheels on it but, I 'm looking for negatives to say we should put a definite 2 year limitation or something on it and I 'm not sure we set a precedent because I can' t think of another business that ' s going to come in and ask for that. Batzli : You can' t do it that way because you can' t judge in the future what' s going to come through the door . The question is, what would happen if another one did regardless of who it is that comes in and asks for it. We give it to them. Conrad : And based on tonight we'd have to give them 3 1/2 years to build the structure . Emmings : No you don' t . Conrad: Why not? 1 Emmings: Because . Just because 3 1/2 years seems appropriate for this applicant, you always get to consider the facts. You don' t have to automatically do this time what you did lats time if the facts are ' different. The next one isn' t a bank. The next one doesn' t have problems with satisfying federal regulations. The next one, you know you can, believe me, be able to distinguish. The point to me here Ladd is this . ' We've dealt with this same issue on temporary conditional use permits . Anytime anybody says temporary, I want to know what the end is. Temporary means forever unless there' s a cap and I think we ought to, I think they should be accommodated because I think there should be a second bank in ' town too and I don' t want to discourage them but there' s got to be some reasonable limit out there beyond which they' re just got to take that temporary building off that property. Conrad: Do you see any other negatives? I II Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 33 II Emmings: No. I Conrad : Having this less than attractive building . Were those your words Emmings: A little stronger than that . Conrad : Is that a negative to the downtown community at all? I Emmings: I don't know. Conrad : Is it a negative? I Headla: I think their temporary building looks very reasonable. If you look at the way it' s constructed, it' s appearance. They try to fit it in. ' Conrad : Any other negatives with letting it be out there for 3 1/2 years? Enunings: At the longest. Conrad : At the longest . I Ellson: I see a precedence. The one next door will start putting up his while he' s building his. 11 Batzli : This is going to be, I mean you don' t just put these up. I mean there' s a cost involved. Ellson: I know but you could actually be, starting to make a lot of money with very little expense because you' re in a really small building. You've saving up to do what you really want and Chanhassen is literally giving yo that option to help you finance the building you always wanted in the firs place. We would never the let site plan come in with that modular building and so you' re basically saying we will take second rate for how long? Because it would never have been approved to be a building on it' s own as it is so we' re automatically taking a major concession for the city for th applicant's benefit. Conrad : Is it going to detract from neighboring property values right now" Probably not. I don' t know. I like a cap but I 'm looking for some real negatives that would say there' s a reason to put a different time frame onil it and to be honest, I just can't. As much as I don' t like temporary facilities, I don' t know a good way to set a time frame and probably the best is to tie into the HRA which I 'm not really convinced of but I don' t have a better . 1 Tom Mork: I guess I 'd like to add one thing and that is, I don' t know what you have in your minds as to what the economics of a modular building are i but I can assure you that to acquire this building is about $120,000.00 building. We're looking at putting a minimum of $80,000.00 of improvements into the site just to get it, or at least that' s our preliminary estimates just to get the temporary site prepared so we' re talking about a couple hundred thousand dollar outlay of capital so. 1 Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 34 I Ellson: Versus a 2 million dollar bank or something like that . I don' t know. Emmings: I 'd like to add something on another issue here. Batzli : Do we need a motion here? ' Conrad: Not yet. Emmings: I wanted to address the sign. I do not agree that you can have a time and temperature sign without a permit. Headla : They agree with you. ' Emmings: Oh, I 'm sorry. Did I hear wrong? I thought you said that they didn' t need to have a permit. ' Olsen: Right . That ' s where it had come out wrong . It was under the prohibited signs as an exception and I meant that, to put it in that it didn' t need a permit but it does still need a permit. 11 Emmings: Okay, fine. ' Conrad: Any other discussion on the length that we' re talking about? If not, I ' ll ask for a motion. Are you going to make a motion? Tom Mork: On the approval of the addition to the building . We' re talking about a 4,000, potential 4,000 square foot addition here that would be in snyc architecturally with the rest of the building . Do you view that in the same light as you do with the previous applicant? That it' s something ' you wanted to look at into the future? I guess I 'd just like clarification. Ellson: That we ' re not approving that right now. Is that what you mean? Batzli : We would want to see it again because it may have an affect on impervious surface coverage and some other things. Conrad: What would trigger that Jo Ann? Just automatically on the building extension or addition, anything triggering that to come back to us ' other than the fact that we said we would want it to come back? Olsen: If they hadn' t shown the addition at all , even to us and then had come in and wanted to do it, we would make them go through the site plan review. Conrad : But now they have said that there might be one and basically, because they did, it would be kind of up to your discretion as to whether . If it met all the ordinances, you really don' t need to bring it back to us . Olsen: In the calculations I thought they had included, they did include the addition so that' s why we were saying that we would feel comfortable I Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Pag 35 ' with allowing the addition without coming back for the site plan. ' Conrad: I don't know that we want to see it but I think Brian' s point is, we have not approved it and therefore it' s going to be a staff decision on' whether to bring it back to us in the future. David Shea: That's fine. We' re working on the idea that the hard surface coverage and work with staff to make sure we get a master plan for this site and it'd be up to staff' s discretion to bring it back. Conrad: Is there a motion? Batzli : I move that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Site Plan Review #89-6 for Crossroads National Bank as shown on the plan dated September 22, 1989 subject to the following conditions . Conditions 1 thru 5. Delete 6. Condition 7 with the following added at the end , notwithstanding the foregoing , such temporary facility shall be removed within 9 months of the issuance of the building permit for the permanent I bank facility. Conditions 8, 9, 10, 11 as written in the staff report. Delete 12 and a new 13. Future addition designated on the plans are not part of the site plan approval . ' Emmings: Second. Batzli moved, Enimings seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Site Plan Review #89-6 for Crossroads National Bank as shown on the plan dated September 22, 1989 and subject to the following conditions : 1 1. The property shall be platted and recorded with Carver County. 2. The City shall process a rezoning of the property as part of the platting procedure. 3. The site plan shall be revised to include a right turn deceleration lane on Market Boulevard and a 6 foot wide concrete sidewalk on the east side of Market Boulevard. The site plan shall be revised to reflect additional right-of-way necessary for the deceleration lane anli sidewalk and to maintain required setbacks . 4. The applicant shall provide cross easements for the joint access on West 79th Street . 5. The applicant shall provide revised landscaping plan providing necessary landscpaing on the berm between the parking area and West 79th Street. 6. The temporary facility will have to be removed within one week of the permanent bank facility receiving a certificate of occupancy, notwithstanding the foregoing , such temporary facility shall be remove within 9 months of the issuance of the building permit for the permanent bank facility. ' 11 Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 36 1 ' 7. The applicant shall comply with any and all Watershed District requirements . 8. The City will monitor the site for erosion control problems and if ' deemed necessary, additional erosion control may be required in the future. ' 9. Exact storm sewer connections and design shall be verified in the field and approved by the City's Engineering Department prior to construction . ' 10. The exit on West 79th Street shall be moved a minimum of 100 feet from the West 79th Street/Market Boulevard intersection. 11. Future addition designated on the plans are not part of the site plan approval . ' All voted in favor except Annette Ellson who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 5 to 1. Conrad : And your reason? Ellson : I guess I 'd like to see if they can begin building in May, I 'd ' like to see it start in May to be built. I don't think we' re getting that sort of guarantee . Conrad : Okay, that goes to City Council October 23rd. Krauss : Mr . Chairman, we had indicated with the applicant that we would attempt to work with them on getting that facility. If you approved it ' tonight, getting that facility up yet this year . Consequently we were going to try and take it to the City Council next Monday. Conrad: Ah. Next Monday? Okay. Paul , just a quick point. When they put that temporary facility up, the site has been approved. The landscaping is in. The curb cuts are in. Obviously sewer , water , everything is there. The only difference is, we don' t have the building but everything else is in. You will not let them go in until . . . Krauss : What we would have is we would have the modular building up. There would be pavement around that modular building. There'd be landscaping around that but the rest of the site would be graded , presumably graded flat and seeded and just left undisturbed. The rest of the site is where they' re going to be building so there' s really no way to be planting around there. Olsen : Or put the curb and gutter in. Conrad: So we have a temporary landscaping plan? ' Krauss : Well actually, the way they have it situated , it' s a permanent landscaping plan. The building fit in there so they could put in the I Planning Commission Meetin g October 4, 1989 - Page 37 permanent landscaping and curbing around it. 1 Conrad: Don, why don't you tackle that when you, you've heard what we' re talked about tonight. Olsen : They can also do some of the perimeter landscaping too. 111 They P p 9 Mayor Chmiel: Did you say it' s going to be on the 9th? , Krauss : We talked to Karen about it yesterday. 1 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Batzli moved, Emmings seconded to approve the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated September 20, 1989 up to page 40. All voted in favor and the motion carried. CITY COUNCIL UPDATE: Conrad : Paul , do you want to lead us through on that? Do you want to go through your particular minutes or notes to us? 1 Krauss: Yes Mr . Chairman . I don' t know if there' s anything specifically that warrants any discussion except for possibly the Vineland Forest ' status . As I indicated , the Vineland Forest plat went to the Council several times for consideration since you saw it. We tried to clarify the road access issue . After reviewing the alternatives, the Council ultimately settled on an alternative option for access that was developed by staff that ran from the southeast Nez Perce, Lake Lucy Road to the northwest over to Peaceful Lane up to Pleasant View as the optimum way. It's not an ideal way but the optimum way that' s remaining to us to serve 11 the entire area. The applicant was then directed to prepare a plat in consideration of that alignment . That was brought to the Council and there were some other issues that cropped up resulting from engineering details with how that access is going to be made. We think that their resolveable l Their engineer is getting some more topographic data and we' re talking to different property owners that would be impacted so we expect to go back to the Council with that. One thing though that warrants pointing out though " is in reviewing this I came up with a couple of potential problems or at least issues of concern with the way the ordinance is structured. There were two factors that probably warrant some consideration on your part and " some work on my part to see if we can resolve them. One is that the ordinance allows for reduction of front yard lot width or lot width at right-of-way on cul-de-sacs and it's not specific as to where on cul-de-sacs and how you apply that. In working with Jo Ann, it' s apparent ' that the City in the past has allowed reductions of lot width on outside curves as well whether or not they're on cul-de-sacs. I think it 's a worthy thing to do. If you have the straight 90 foot frontage everyplace, " you wind up with a grid system and that' s just not how the City' s developed. I think what we need to look at though is some flexibility in the lot width standard to account for that so we clear up the anomaly in the ordinance and don't have a variance situation. Related to that is there was another variance that was created for a lack of frontage at I Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 38 ' right-of-way for a neck lot . The lot had 30 foot of frontage on Pleasant View. Because of how we aligned the road , there was a sufficient area stranded between the new street being proposed in Van Eeckhout' s division and Pleasant View. There was sufficient area for 3 lots but it didn't have frontage. They were proposing to use a neck lot configuration that only had 30 feet of right-of-way on Pleasant View. The subdivision ordinance says that' s fine . The subdivision ordinance says you can have up to 4 homes on a private driveway. The RSF district doesn't say you can have any. It says you need 90 foot of frontage for every lot. You can' t have it both ways and what I 'd like to bring back to you is a proposal to look ' at some sort of proposal for some sort of neck lot configuration or some standards that we might use if we' re going to use private drives to access properties that couldn' t otherwise be accessed by a public street. Those are the two issues that I think evolved out of the Van Eeckhout decision that really warrants some further investigation on your part. Conrad: Sounds reasonable. My only reaction is sometimes when we, and I ' think we should and we should put it onto this list that we have of all the projects that are out there so we can make sure it' s someplace. The only comment I have quickly on that is sometimes when we do these things it' s, we're assisting a developer to squeeze out the maximum amount of lots out of a piece of property. In general I think I support some of what you' re talking about but my only concern would be, I 'm really not too interested ' in letting the developer really manipulate that land to the point where he's just squeezed every possible square inch into a building so that would be my only comment but let' s add it to the list and address it. That' s another thing we should do Paul , as we build up that list and I don't know ' where it is right now or I ' ve got a copy of an older one. We should sort of prioritize those for you so we've got you working on the things we really care about or you should persuade us that it' s a significant issue that you should work on before other items. Is staff satisfied with Van Eeckhout because we had problems with it . It seemed like a simple deal when it first came in. Are you satisfied that it's being solved adequately? Krauss : Pending resolution of the techincal aspects of making the connection, I think we are satisfied. We looked at all the options for ' serving that property. I mean we really expanded the study area and did an overall access concept plan and there's about 6 ways of serving it. Some of them are really. . . ' Olsen: Two cul-de-sacs . Krauss : Well , yeah the one with two cul-de-sacs. There' s the one to the ' east that runs into a 20 foot retaining wall at the bottom of a 70 foot bluff and obviously that had some problems but we really tried to develop a plan that served all the remaining vacant land there in a reasonable way and then provided some cross access through the neighborhood for public safety reasons. Like I say, it' s not the ideal way. If all the property was vacant right now you'd probably do it a little differently but given the remaining options, it's the best. 11 Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 39 1 OPEN DISCUSSION: DISCUSSION OF AESTHETIC ASPECTS OF THE HIGHWAY 5 AND 10111 CORRIDORS, FRED HOISINGTON. Hoisington: Mr . Chairman and members of the Planning Commission. We are getting very near the end of a study of the TH 101/TH 5 corridor. The study really had three purposes . We' ve already satisfied some of the purpose for the first one and the one that really percipitated the study t begin with, had to do with the official mapping of the right-of-way of TH 101. As you know, we took that through a series of alternatives, four different alternatives. We were here. You recommended an alternative and we went to the City Council and they have selected the alternative that yoll see here and I believe it' s in the process now of being officially described and recorded, I hope, at the County Courthouse because that's the ultimate final step for official mapping . The second purpose , that one already having been accomplished, was land use and we have been here . We've been talked a little bit about land use with you but that ' s to be considered as part of your comprehensive planning program and all we' re doing in this case is recommending certain land uses and the idea being that you can change them and incorporate them in any manner you feel is appropriate when you do the comprehensive plan. The third purpose though is one that was really begun by the Planning Commission and that had to doll with the aesthetics of especially the TH 101 corridors and the entry into downtown Chanhassen. What we did was develop a corridor aesthetic concept really for TH 101 and TH 5 and the two are very different. I 'm not going to spend a lot of time on TH 5 but I think it' s important that you understand the differences between the two. I have sections here. You can also see them. Maybe we can lay them out. I won't put them up there this evening . The concept for TH 5 is one where we have a rather polished II appearance. One where the theme is already sort of begun in Eden Prairie or it will when that stretch of roadway is completed and we see that as sort of the transition area from the entry to Chanhassen into downtown Chanhassen and we expect that to be planted with trees on both sides that will essentially define the roadway. Define the views that people have. In some cases screen the uses that are there but to kind of create openings. Openings and closures as you go along the highway. We' re talking about some berming along TH 5 and there' s a plan that' s more detailed than this and by the way, this extends all the way out to 184th. In the median in TH 5 is, for the most part, depressed . The only places will not be depressed will be at intersections and at the intersections we will have curb and those are all required pretty much by MnDot because some of those areas are very small so it will be curbed. Have turn lanes and s forth for TH 5. Now. One of the most important parts of TH 5 I guess is also that the legislature did with the tax bill, pass the City' s funding request which is for the extension of the tax increment district which als will provide the funding for construction of this intersection of TH 101 and TH 5. A very critical part of the whole plan and one we were very concerned would not be approved but it has been so things are going quite well in that respect. Do you have any questions on TH 5? I know you don' ll want to spend a lot of time. Ellson: When you're saying depressed , you' re just saying. . . Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 40 I Hoisington: We' re trying to drop it out of sight. That' s really what MnDot is doing on the remainder of the stretch. One of the things we are doing however on TH 5, MnDot had not recommended, was we' re suggesting that it be an urban section with curb and gutter on the outside. Not on the ' inside. The idea is that if we do it on the inside, we end up with sort of a flat surface. We talked about this before. Really what you end up with is grass in there and then you have a maintenance problem. One that requires mowing. One that normally will result in weeds at some point in time. It doesn' t mean we' re going to escape that. There will be some grass. It will be grass medians but it will be depressed. We' re trying to drop it out of sight in that case. Erhart: Are you saying the edges are going to be ditch or curbs? ' Hoisington : No. What we' re proposing is essentially it will be curbs on the outside, ditch in the median. The median I think is 24 feet. Now TH 101 which is really another reason why this whole plan was begun, we ' re talking about two concepts. Two different alternatives. The primary ' alternative was one that had a median, a 24 foot median throughout the entire stretch from TH 5 down to TH 212 or the alternative to that is to have no median but have turn lanes of course at all the intersections . ' There hopefully will be a very limited number of intersections along this roadway. They will be limited on the points that we' re showing on this plan. In other words, there will be no others than that. One of the ' advantages of having no median at all is that you will not have a maintenance problem. There will have to be no extraordinary costs associated with that and you will also be able to have a variable width right-of-way where you can move in and out as you need right-of-way to ' accomodate the roadway and you will save some space. What we' re suggesting to you is that even what you' ll save isn't space or right-of-way so much as you will save the landforms to a greater extent, along the roadway than you can if you would have a median in the center. Now if you do, you still have turn lanes of course at each one of the intersections but you have those choices and you' ll have those choices throughout the period of time ' it takes to get this built and of course we know that ' s not going to be built for another perhaps, there's more funding coming along for TH 212 so maybe this will be built sooner than I think but I still think it will not be built until the timeframe 1995 to the year 2000. So you've got a lot of ' time to make that decision. Erhart : If it' s 24 feet , what is it? Concrete? Grass? Hoisington: No. Tim, think of this as polished for the most part. Think of this as rural . It is today. It will not have commercial along it or at least a very limited amount of commercial and our thinking is that everything that' s done through here ought to represent a more prairie or open, non-landscaped type of environment. Erhart: Why? I mean that' s going to be all developed by the time the road. . . ' Hoisington: It will be residential . Almost all residential . Everything from here, with the exception of the open space, to here will be I Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 41 I residential and of course commercial and office up near the highway itselfil Now it doesn't mean we're not going to have landscaping. We have fill sections and berming and in the areas where, let me just explain to you what happens. The road comes down a hill , drops down into this area where the creeks goes through, comes back up and then comes up and flattens out II here at the top and then begins to go back down again. The area where we have a significant fill is here and a fairly good cut is in here. Actually right here at A and B it's just about flat. Just about where the brown is at that point. Because of it going up and down and because of, it require more right-of-way to accommodate the roadway so we end up with 200 feet. Erhart: And the scenario with the 24 foot median, what does that mean? Hoisington: Okay, what we' re doing in the case of that median as well is trying to drop it out of view. It ' s going to be prairie grasses and flowers and things of that nature both in the median and on the side slopes. The median will be depressed again . Now again, the edges , one of the things we tried to struggle away from in this case, because we wanted to look more rural , we wanted curb and gutter but we can' t do that because ' we add at least another 50 feet to the right-of-way if we have a rural section. If we have ditch sections in other words. We have to accommodate not only the inside slopes but the back slopes as well . ' Erhart: And what' s the disadvantage of having curb and gutter on the outside? Hoisington: No disadvantage except that we' ll not, it isn ' t as much in keeping with the rural kind of environment that we would expect to carry out with the rest of the development. It ' s much more than urban city kind ' of street. There's nothing wrong with it. It's just not entirely consistent . Erhart : If that' s all going to be residential , what' s driving you to make I it look rural if it' s residential? Hoisington: Well , I 'm not sure that maybe rural isn' t exactly the best term to use. It is not to be polished. It will have berming in the areas where we can accommodate berming . It will include plant materials on the berms and in areas where there are residential homes and because of that, there will be stretches through here that will be landscaped and bermed an it will look rather urban. Again, I don't see that the curb and gutter is a significant department but I guess if you were a purist and you were trying to achieve things with prairie grasses and flowers and so forth, yoll would do so in it' s entirity and not have curb and gutter because really that's not the type of thing you'd see there. I don't have a serious problem because we' re saving a lot of space. We' re saving a lot of trees and we're saving a lot of cuts and ditches and so forth by putting it in so I can. . . Headla: Before you go on, let me ask a question. You talked about a lot I of fill and a lot of heavy cut in there. Why did you, what's the rationale for doing that? Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 42 Hoisington: The rationale is the grade itself. The present road , as you know, PH 101 it went where it went because it was easy to go there. It didn't have to go up and down so what it did was it went this way instead . Cars don' t drive very well in those kinds of streets anymore and the only way we could avoid cuts and fills would be to use the old alignment where ' it was relatively flat. When you do across some of the contours, for example the hill comes down here which requires in order to keep the slopes from being too steep, or the grade from being too steep, you have to fill ' to balance it out so you have this coming down to a low point which is in here and then coming back up again so you have a certain amount of fill in this area in order to accommodate. . . Headla: What kind of grade are you talking about? Is it 7%? Hoisington : What we' re doing here now? I think the maximum is 4%. 1 Headla: No. You want to change it to 4%. What is it now? If you were to put that road in without the cut and fill . Hoisington: Oh, if you were to put no cut and fill in, you'd end up probably with some 10% or more on a major roadway which would be ' unacceptable. Headla: I didn' t realize it was going to be that steep. Alright . ' Hoisington: So some of the things we' re trying to represent here. Again, berming with some plantings on the berms and we've had some people in here who live in some of these areas who have been very concerned about that and that we show some concern for them in light of the road going where it goes. In addition to that, we have a number of things that are happening along the alignment in the way of natural features that we' re trying to 11 incorporate and preserve wherever we can. All of them don' t relate to the roadway itself but as you know there is a wetland that' s right out on TH 5 which is a Type 7 wetland. A wooded wetland . Not the highest quality but nonetheless a wooded wetland and a certain percentage of that will need to ' be preserved . No matter that it' s not of the highest quality. One that we already had some questions about happens to be the one that would be in the southeast quadrant of Lake Drive and TH 101 where we actually move Lake Drive to the north to avoid it and that is a very high quality Type 7 wetland. Most all of that will be preserved and you don' t replace Type 7 wetlands, at least not good quality ones because you don' t grow trees. Again, a wooded wetland once gone is gone. Of course we have the wetland that is located here which is a substantial open space and the Wards and the people that are working with them in terms of developing the property are agreeable to having a large area of that land set aside for open space and that is a Type 3. All of this is and of course the creek corridor comes through here as well . Then we have wetlands down here on 86th. A very good Type 3 that perhaps was created , according to Al Klingelhutz, ' because of the blockage of drainage but it looks like a very good Type 3 wetland and of course then we have the big Type 2 wetland which is located down here at the freeway interchange will go through and another Type 3 is located further to the south and we' re treating all of those , the idea being to preserve them. Perhaps some shaping of them but nonetheless , Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 43 protecting and incorporating them with the development rather than to 11 destroy them. One of the goods things about dealing with it upfront and early, I think all the people who own land along here know and understand what the program is and all of them basically agree that that' s the way those wetlands are going to have to be treated in the future. Erhart: On the berms that you' re putting on there. What are you putting on top of the berms? Are you just going to leave them grass or are you going to put evergreens up? Hoisington: No, there will be evergreens in those cases . We can' t get th berms high enough to do the entire job of screening. Erhart: I don' t think we should try to do that. Hoisington: I don't either so in all the cases where we' re berming , we' ll have landscaping on top. Erhart: Yeah. I think that's really required because I think there' s ' nothing worse than an empty berm. Emmings: I can think of things worse. How about your clothes being on fire for example? Erhart: So even though you're not showing it here, you' re going to have II some evergreens and hardwood trees like on TH 5. Hoisington: Sections . , Erhart: Sections so it will be an in and out kind of thing depending on where houses are located to screen them exactly. Hoisington: And we also want to support that with. . . All of that we' ll II address. Caring for those properties that are affected by this roadway and that was one of the commitments we made when we put it there. Selected that alignment was those kinds of things. One of the things of course that' Tim had really percipitated was this discussion of even a wider median. We really struggled with that and there are a number of things and we've gone " through this before. One of the determining factors is the road to the north. Market Blvd. that's under construction right now which has a very limited. Really what it has is nothing there in the way of a median because of the turn lanes and so forth. I think there's a very narrow one proposed which means we have to transition into that on this side. The only place that we could probably go slow enough or control speed well enough so we could do something in the median and perhaps in the way of J- I1 barriers or something like that built up with plant materials in them, would be in this first stretch because most of the rest of this roadway will be designed for 50-55 mph speed limit and at a later date, probably will operate at about 45 mph. I think we should expect that it' s going to when development is fully completed here, operate at about that speed whic means you really can' t do much in the median. You can' t build a median wide enough to accommodate trees or fixed objects but what we proposed to do is not to build anything in this median, this 24 foot median. If that' 1 Planning Conrtiission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 44 what you elect to do, that in fact represents an impediment or a danger to ' drivers should they happen to go into the median in the course of not driving . So everything in there will be plant materials of a more native variety. Wetter materials in wet lowlands and drier high ground plants and ' flowers and grasses in areas that are very high built and don' t require very much moisture. Very low maintenance. The idea is to have a minimum amount of maintenance on this roadway and MnDot now is very much on a kick of using the kind of treatment that we' re proposing here and while I have ' in the past had some misgivings about it, if MnDot is willing to make a commitment to it, to control it and do what needs to be done to manage it, then that can be a very appropriate treatment we think for this stretch of ' roadway into Chanhassen. Erhart: What are we doing where you have long large sidecuts? ' Hoisington: . . .This is natural ground right now and these are the cut slopes . Curb and gutter on the outside. Dropping the median as much as we can out of sight and then at the tops of the slopes we do have plant materials . Erhart : So you are showing a curb there? Hoisington: On the outsides , curbs . Erhart : Is that what you have here is the outside curbs? Oh I misunderstood you. I thought you were having ditches. Hoisington : No , no ditches . We can' t. What we' re saying is if we have ' ditches, then you have to come down, ditch and then back out here. Erhart: Okay. That ' s what I was trying to get to earlier . Hoisington: No ditches . ' Erhart : Again, I guess what I don' t like to see is a big long open sidecut which is grass. I think you ought to break them up with trees. Some are sidecuts with grass , some trees . I still think if you take 35 going from, or 494 where they've mixed in clumps of trees and stuff. It really, really looks nice . Hoisington: There are some things that can be done in some of these areas ' here in the way of sumac and all of those things have turned gold in the fall . That' s red in the fall . The gold plants that also turn in the fall and are just beautiful and some of those are at 494. We can do any of that in there . The closest we must stay away from with these trees are these ' clear zones. They have to be maintained open but other than that, yes , something could be done in there with that respect. Bikeway, we' re going to let you decide where it goes. It will go on either side but we couldn' t ' conclude which side. Conrad : I like the wildflowers. I think that' s neat. I I Meetin Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 45 Ellson: I 've never seen that. Is it someplace right now? I know I was all a place. . .wildflowers, I didn't see a wildflower in there. Hoisington : Sometimes you don' t even recognize what you' re looking at. Emmings: I drive by a place regularly where they just don' t cut where there are wildflowers . Ellson: Like what? The daisy looking kind of things? Emmings: Sure. Ellson: That's what I picture as wildflowers but I was by this golf course and the little things that are wildflowers . . . ' Headla : Fred , can I make a suggestion? You mentioned sumac to accentuate the fall colors. Why don't you accentuate some winter colors like dogwood which has a beautiful red bark all winter long . ' Emmings: And yellow. The yellow dogwood too. Headla: Yeah. If you put some of that in because we have so much ' beautiful fall color here and if you'd kind of help winter along. Hoisington : I think we would probably tend to use the dogwood , the red assure down in the fill slope area and the seed. One of the places I 'm most concerned about. I'm not quite so concerned about the cuts as I am about the fill because you literally can't put anything of woody nature in ' the fill slopes but you could put dogwood , and it' s an appropriate species for that particular location as well . We' ll give some consideration of that. I think maybe we should. . . Conrad : If we didn' t have the ditch there, was that a choice that we had? We did have a choice? Hoisington : You could either have a ditch or you could build it up with all curb and simply just have it flat. Conrad : And that would be a grass? Hoisington: A grass . You could do the same thing that we' re doing here but it would call more attention I think to the flatness of. . . Conrad : But we couldn' t do anything on that. There would be no plantings basically because of the speed? ' Hoisington: No. The only thing you could put in there would be things that would tend to be higher maintenance in nature. Evergreen type of materials would not grow large enough. . . 1 Conrad: So Tim, is this the vision you have for the new entrance to Chanhassen? I 1 Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 46 1 Erhart: Well yeah , I like this . The landscaping where you' re breaking it up with a series of varying clumps of grass and then evergreens and maybe a few hardwoods and varying . Yeah, I like it. Batzli: You say that you' re talking about putting some prairie grasses in there. Are you talking about the type of grass that' s in front of the old CPT plant where most people look at it and they just think it' s not mowed . Hoisington : I don' t know what CPT has . Batzli : The natural prairie grass . They spent millions of dollars to plant it and then everybody thought they just didn' t mow their lawn . Conrad: As much as I like prairie grass, that really does look. ' Hoisington : We worked on and we' re still working on a project in Vandais Heights for H.B. Fuller . We' re doing their master plan for the corporate ' headquarters. We did not do the master plan the first time around but the architects decided that there would be priairie grasses in the parking lot. Prairie grasses aren' t there today. They were planted . They died . They do not work very well in those kinds of corporate settings. You have to ' manange them carefully. They' re going to have to mow this material periodically to keep it down. Ideally it should be burned but it' s going to be very difficult for them to burn it adjacent to the roadway and they ' wouldn't want to spend the time for the City to control it in that manner but they do have to commit to mow. They or the county, whoever ends up the owner of this roadway in the future. Erhart : What the difference here Fred is that on TH 5 they' re just going to plant standard grasses along the side? ' Hoisington : What we' re suggesting to them here but what they are proposing is some application of wildflowers and so forth here but we' re suggesting that they not do much of that. Another plant material of course that is becoming very popular are these ornamental grasses. These sort of hybrid grasses and if you go out to the Arboretum you see some of those . They' re really neat stuff. Conrad : The tall grass? Hoisington: Just beautiful things. The flags on them. Wonderful things ' and what we like to see are some of those perhaps along here but not so much wildflowers and not so much the tall grasses where we don' t think those are necessarily appropriate on TH 5. We think they' re going to use more of the main priaire than we expect or hope. We expect to see a ' change. When they get to Chanhassen, we expect to see a change. Conrad : Does this become drainage down here? Hoisington: Yes . Conrad: Is it appropriate, and I think you' re trying to create, I think we're telling you to put different trees in there which may sort of tamper I ' Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 47 with a vision of a priarie or with wildflowers but would cattails work int ' here? Is that just something that would not be visually pleasing? Hoisington: If you can get down low enough so cattails can live, yes . Cattails would be compatible with this. In most cases you won' t have any II places that are quite low enough Ladd to keep, cattails like a little water. What you' ll end up with are, there are different kinds of grasses that grow down low than grow high on the contour but cattails are lower ye what these grasses will be and so I don't think you' ll see any but I have seen them growing right next to those where the water ' s available in the median to do it. The only place we can think of would be right down this, the lowest part of the site but even then I don' t think the median will be that low. I think it 's going to still be suspended because of the fill . ' Emmings: You know that spot where there are cattails. . .TH 7 and then you turn to go into Excelsior? There are cattails there in the median on TH 7 But when you stop there, you can not see the oncoming traffic . They get tall enough so they can' t be close to the intersection. You cannot see. They took them out of there. Hoisington: They aren't unusual to have in median settings. In fact there'll are some on TH 5 along the ditch section on TH 5 and as long as they' re not on the curb or in an intersection condition, they' re just fine. They' re wonderful to have. Conrad : They can be pretty. Hoisington: We' ll give some consideration to what we can do to supplement ' this in the fall and winter with materials . Conrad : In the creek area, Jo Ann, you know the creek area that we've got ' down here. Is that a resource that we' re, how does the Park and Rec treat that area? It' s really pretty. We don' t have access to it and to my knowledge Park and Rec doesn' t have any plans to use it as a trailway. Anything. Olsen : Is that the one that goes into Rice Marsh Lake? ' Conrad: Right. Olsen: Because they do have a trail around Rice Marsh Lake as part of Hidden Valley POD but whether or not they have a trail planned to go along there, I'm not sure. Ed Hasek: Jo Ann, it's supposed to extend from the top of the lake. . . it' s I supposed to follow that creek. Conrad : So does that impact this design in any way? ' Olsen: But that would be going through the open space. Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 48 ' Conrad: You' ve got to get there . Do you want parking there? Do you want to be able to get people to this as a trail head that' s leading you in? That' s the only thing I 'm thinking of. Hoisington: I don' t think we would want to have it as a trail head . Ed Hasek: It' s between two other points . Probably Marsh Lark and . . . ' Conrad: So where do you park to get on the trail? ' Ed Hasek: Either of those two areas . . .this would just be a crossing . Conrad: It would start from the park. Ed Hasek: I can' t imagine that you wouldn' t to interrupt the travel . We'd certainly like to take a look at it. Hoisington : There might be some grade separation opportunities there to get that all the way through so that really should be looked at and we do have some fill there and I 'm not sure just what the total will be . It' s ' going to be a long pipe if we ever did that with an actual trail but. Ed Hasek: It may not be necessary. It may be able to be accommodated in that grade if there' s a means for doing it. If it' s not on a curve or ' anything . If you' ve got the appropriate sight lines and all those things. Certainly cross country skiing, snowmobiling is still considered to be something that we' re looking at. Horse trails. Whatever else. I don' t ' recall exactly. . . Conrad : How much of this was guided by financial concerns? Hoisington: I don' t think we really. I think the only thing that really gave us any concern at all was the additional right-of-way cost and I 'm still concerned about that, associated with trying to get a sufficient ' median more than what we' re proposing to do. I don' t think it was done because it's cheap. I think it was done because we thought it made sense to do this . You still have landscaping . What you do is you enhance the edges. You really are doing things along the edges rather than in the ' median in this case and we' re using the median efficiently. It' s reasonably low maintenance and we think it has the potential to look more attractive than a typical roadway looks . If you look at freeways and look ' at the medians in freeways, what do you see? I mean you see open spaces . You see a lot of weeds. You see some low areas where water ponds. More than they'd like them to. It' s not a very attractive environment at all . Batzli : St. Paul ' s not bad . Hoisington : There are some areas and people have used that as an example a number of times. It is a very attractive roadway. There are others. It isn' t that all of them. . . Batzli : It had to have cost a fortune. 1 Planning Commission Meetin g October 4, 1989 - Page 49 Hoisington: I don' t think cost really was the thing that determined it. 11 think we were working on the basis, what makes sense on this. What represents a reasonably attractive entrance to the city and we think this does that pretty well . Conrad: So what you presented was one lane in each direction with turn lanes? Hoisington: One lane in each direction? ' Conrad: Two lanes? Hoisington: This is a four lane road . Two lanes north, two lanes south. Conrad: And are there turn lanes in addition? I Hoisington: Turn lanes , that' s correct . Whether or not you have a median, you have to have turn lanes . ' Conrad : Okay. Anything else? Hoisington: Thank you much for your time. The only thing I 'm having concern about now is until such time as the legal descriptions are filed with the County Clerk, you don' t have that authority to withhold building permits. You're on kind of shaky grounds so that has to be done. If it I hasn ' t been done, it has to be done. Erhart: Has Council approved it? Krauss : The official mapping has been approved but it has not been filed with the County. Hoisington: Well do it tomorrow. It does take formal legal descriptions , ' meets and bounds or whatever . . . POTENTIAL ORDINANCE MODIFICATIONS TO REQUIRE FINANCIAL GUARANTEES FOR LANDSCAPING AND OTHER SITE IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED AS A CONDITION OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL. Krauss: I can do that real briefly. It falls into the context of another amendment to the City Zoning Ordinance that I see as being something to consider . Basically in the short time I 've been here it' s become apparent ' that the city has something of a problem insuring that landscaping is installed as we anticipated when the thing was improved and in a timely I manner. Landscaping is generally the last site improvement to go in and you know, the architects that were here earlier indicated the usual problem in that oftentimes you' re pushing a building season to finish up a buildin and you're into October-November . You reasonably can' t install the landscaping. What I 'd like to propose and what is normally done in most suburban areas that I 'm familiar with, is requiring a landscaping , financial guarantee independent of anything else. Either a bond or letter ' of credit. The existing development contracts that we have don' t cover 11 Planning Commission Meeting October 4 , 1989 - Page 50 ' landscaping very well . In fact they really don' t cover it at all . Development contracts are only done with subdivisions and they basically cover public improvements and landscaping is a private improvement . Now, there's no question that when you approve a site plan, you have every expectation that exactly what you approve is going to be installed and we can use the court system if need be, if it goes that far , to insure that but it ' s a rather clumsy process . What we'd like to have is a financial ' guarantee that we have their money in the bank and if they don' t install it in a timely manner , we' ll use their bond or letter of credit and install it ourselves. As I say, this is not an unusual requirement. It's not a real stretch for Chanhassen. It' s something that most developers expect that ' develop elsewhere and what we'd propose is something on the order of a financial guarantee that' s 120% of the estimated cost of the landscaping and that we'd want to withhold that for one full growing season past the ' date of installation because if anything ' s going to die, it dies in the first year . If we get the go ahead from you to investigate it further , we'd come back with a drafted ordinance for you to look at. iConrad : Any discussion? It makes sense to me. ' Batzli : I like it. The only question is, who determines the estimated value? Krauss : There' s a couple ways of doing that . At various times I ' ve had Bachman' s catalogues and you figure it yourself. The easier thing to do is to have a reputable landscape architect give you an actual cost estimate . You know they can go out for a contract and they give you a bid sheet. ' Conrad : Do it. Krauss : We' ll add it to the list . I LAND USE MAP DISCUSSION - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. Krauss : The notice is a little misleading because in the memo that I handed out, we indicated that we'd be working on the land use plan but we' re not prepared to give that to you yet so what we' ve done in the interim is try to refine the policy statements or goal statements that we looked at a few weeks ago. Most of them, well , the first four of them I guess are either revised or new based on direction that you gave us. Item 1 or policy 1 was changed. I forget the exact wording we had before but we talked about natural amenities and we were asked to use the terminology natural assets . The original policy also I think focused on preserving ' them in residential areas. The direction that we got from you was that it doesn' t necessarily have to be preserved in a residential area as long as it's preserved and incorporated reasonably into their development, it could be anywhere. We tried to make that change. Item 2 or policy 2, we were given some direction that seemed to imply that the, you were wondering about the career? Conrad : They're just making fun over there. I Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 51 • Krauss: Oh yeah, that ws, I don' t know if that was a Freudian slip or what. Jo Ann and I saw that. Conrad : I kept thinking , what could they have meant. I kept substituting different letters. Olsen: We think creeks . Krauss : We think creeks . It's a stretch I grant you. Item 2, you indicated that you could accept a lot of intermixing of development as lon as the development controls were stiff enough to guarantee that you had high quality development. We' re not proposing changes to the ordinance here but we tried to focus in on development controls that promote, review the development controls basically to make sure they either promote high II standards or that they' re changed to make sure that we have those high standards and can achieve them. I think that will become critical because you' re going to have some, what you formerly considered incompatible land uses. Possibly industrial office against residential interfacing and your' going to want to make sure that they become compatible or that they' re forced to become compatible. Policy 3, we got at some of the existing make-up of the town in the original set of policies and I don't know if I this responds to it exactly but what we did is Mark Koegler and I came up with the existing development breakdown. A little bit is a devil 's advocate but basically it says if you' re content with the feel or the imagil or how you react to the town now, if we perpetuate that percentage breakdown of land uses as the rest of the City's developed, then we have a reasonable shot at making that you know what the community' s going to become because that' s what it is now. In essence it would just be larger . " Batzli : Did you include agricultural? Krauss : No. We only included the developed property and the recreational property and wetland weren't included either. Batzli : What happened to that then? Krauss : It was just factored out . These are just the land that has been developed. ' Batzli : But my point I guess is that when I looked at this I was just kind of amazed. You know I was kind of shocked that if you developed it by thill you would change the entire feel of this community because of the fact tha so much of it is agricultural. This would become a bedroom community based on this kind of a mix eventually. If this is your long range plan. Erhart: Why not just insert the word developed? I hear what you' re saying . Just correct this item 3, solve that problem by adding , Chanhassen' s current developed land use mix consists of the following. Sell so you' re narrowing it down to that. Conrad: But this is a direction. We' re not talking about a historic . This is setting a goal and what Paul is saying is this is a mix that makes, I think part of this was from things that I was talking about whenever we 11 Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 52 were talking about it. I want a mix that is economically sound and that potentially pays for itself so we' re not over extended in multi-family because that might be a drain and that we have enough industrial commercial to compensate for that. ' Ellson : And I thought we had decided we didn' t have enough. I mean I thought we had discussed that we didn' t feel there was enough? Conrad : I took it that Paul changed . If this is historic, then I don' t agree with the numbers. But if it' s the future, you know, is this historic? ' Krauss : This is what it is today. Ellson: If you like what it is now, let' s try to keep it and I thought we all somewhat discussed that if we kept it, the numbers showed that it' s going to be a burden . Emmings : Plus you need flexibility because now in the legislature that screws around with property taxes, you' re going to want to change your mix from time to time as they change what revenue you can get from those uses . ' So I don't think, you sure don' t want to cast it in percentages. I don' t know. It seems like a big mistake. Conrad: What would you do? Emmings : The goal is to have a community, a healthy community where driving adequate revenue from it's property tax base to support itself . Now what that means from year to year , who knows . Batzli : But you can' t change it once it' s developed. You have to have some sort of plan , you' re right . That' s a good goal but the question is, as you're developing, you' re not going to be able to develop at RSF and then the legislature' s going to change and say oops , we want industrial , let' s change it. ' Emmings : No , but this year we may be promoting commercial and we may be busy setting aside commercial because commercial is paying for itself or ' industrial and we may want to change that later . Batzli : I guess I keep on looking at this as . . . ' Conrad : But we can. Ellson: If the intent right now to change it to commercial is because of that and we see that that has changed, that would be good logic to change it. I don' t know. Emmings: I don' t really see any reason to put numbers down. Erhart: I agree with Steve . 1 I Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 53 Emmings: We're going to determine it. We can encourage it but the developers are going to decide how it' s going to develop. Batzli : But we can influence it greatly by how we zone the city too. Ellson: I think we can decide how we want it developed . Conrad : My biggest concern, you know we have a concern that we have enougil land zoned for conme rcial . Zoned for industrial and you' re just saying Steve, well the builders will figure that out . Emmings: No, we do have to have a map of the zoning . , Conrad : But what' s going to guide that other, than . . . Emmings: It's arbitrary except to the extent it seems to me that you have. You know you have to have some land set aside for industrial for example and that's an important issue now because our property' s going up and so 1 we' ve got to figure out , if we need more industrial land , where is it. Let's zone some but you do it according to some mix of numbers whether they' re these or any others is absolutely arbitrary. You have no idea but ' you still have to do it. But when you talk about it being guided by what exists, that doesn' t make any particular sense to me. Conrad: Paul is saying it' s sort of worked. 1 Emmings: No. Krauss : No. We put these numbers in here. A little bit is a devil ' s advocate and also a little bit to give you information of where we' re at and now so you can compare it relative to what you presented within a few weeks in the form of a map. Emmings : This Ladd is what developers have done to us so far . Krauss: But you know, this is also the natural development of the city. I This is what's happened to date. We've influenced this . Developers have influenced this. Natural factors influenced it but that' s what you've got " There's a risk I think in regulating land use based on revenues that you might generate or what you' re expectations might be. I can recall in the late 70 's when the land planning act was first out that a lot of towns sal well, gee we have no industry now. We need some tax base so they make 35% of their town industrial . They never really thought much further than that. They just assumed it was on a map. Sooner or later it would fill u and it just didn' t work that way. You know 15%-20% industrial , that' s not an unreasonable number but again, we basically threw this in here more so that you know what you've got now and can compare it. Enunings: This is real hard. I don't know how. . . 1 Conrad : .. . I know Steve what you' re saying as far as percentages but on the other hand, you've got to set some guidelines. The multi-family residential , we have found that they may not pay for themselves and we hay 1/ iPlanning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 54 1 another obligation is to make sure we have enough commercial industrial land from now until the year whatever so how do you guide that? What is it? Do we just sort of draw stuff on the map and say let it go that way? Emmings: It seems to me it goes that way. Look at the map Fred put up here tonight. It would be nice if he were here now so we could ask him. What guided you in making, I guess maybe it had to do with what' s around it. There ' s a road here so there are some of the land you designate for ' uses because it had access to an arterial or whatever but as far as the mix goes, boy I have no idea . I don' t know. You've done this more often than I have. What's guided it in the past? Conrad : Not a thing . We' re trying to take, and maybe it doesn' t work and maybe the numbers are not there. Elison: I don' t think it' s possible to make it into a pie and necessarily hold to it but I think you should have a goal in mind or a guidelines of some kind . That' s why I like the idea . Headla: How do you specify the goal or guideline? ' Elison : That ' s why I 'm saying , the numbers don' t, it' s like oh, we' re at 75%, stop. I don't know if we'd necessarily do that but it might throw up a flag to tell yourself, remember what you wanted. Now, do we really want to do this now that someone wants to rezone it and it makes us go back and ' think again and maybe then we find out the property values aren' t there and then we think back and say okay, back when we decided we didn't want to go more than 75 single family was detrimental . Now it' s not but it' s just a ' mechanism for the flag to go up is what I 'm thinking so you can bring it back to their attention as you' re looking at things. ' Conrad: I think some key, single family is what' s left over after you look at the other things. You can do a lot of stuff . We can look at it in different ways. One issue. How much multi-family residential do you want? Seriously. That' s an issue . Do you want to just let it happen and ' everytime we let it happen, there are problems with letting it happen . Enm►ings: If it doesn' t pay for itself, do you want it in here? Conrad: Absolutely. I think that' s a big question because and I don' t have a whole lot of answers and I 'm not trying to zone people out of the community but on the other hand, I 'm not trying to subsidize them either . ' I have no reason to subsidize anybody else to move out here. I personally don't have that need. ' Enmings: Could we have a policy to provide a good mix of housing opportunities for people that might want to work and live in Chanhassen. Conrad : That 's fine as long as I don' t have to pay for their street improvements. Seriously. Ellson: And that' s a mix but we can decide how much of a mix. Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 55 Conrad : I don' t have to make that sacrifice. I can find that mix in Excelsior. I ' ll just move over there and talk to. . . Erhart: Get rid of the multi-family completely then in that case. ' Conrad: In that case, yeah which I don't think is right but on the other hand, I'm not crusading for a 80% multi-family. Batzli: You're conservative but not that conservative. Is that what you' re telling us? Conrad: I think there are sound reasons to have multi-family, especially 1 around the downtown area. Especially for certain segments of our population . I have no reason to go out and try to lure that. I think I I want that to take care of a market need. In other words, if there is demand internally, I think that' s just fine to satisfy that need . I don' t need to go out and create, bring in multi-family developers because they can make money on it. , Erhart: . . .when I first got on the Planning Commission I thought yeah, we can make plans and by golly that' s just the way this city' s going to develop but in reality what happens is you set plans and then all of a sudden the market then goes it's way and a few years later you've looked at your plan compared to what the market did and you realize that well , it went fairly close but now we need to adjust it because that market is telling us we' re getting more industrial or the tax base requires . What you do is you sort of set a plan and then you monitor it and you compare i and you adjust. You don' t really dictate what the City' s doing. It works hand in hand with the marketplace. I think you can set out and say hey this is what the land use mix is to date and then go on with another paragraph that says this has worked for the City today but we' ll attempt 1 kind of follow this but maintain flexibility depending on what revenue. Depending on what happens to revenue, taxes and the market for land and kind of keep it a little bit nebulous but I agree with Steve and I really ' don't believe anymore that we dictate 100% what happens in this city. I just don' t believe it. Conrad: I don' t think we ever have. , Erhart: But when you set these numbers and these hard percents and say we're going to maintain this mix of use, you' re fooling yourself into thinking that we do dictate this mix . I don' t think we do. Batzli : We could dictate this mix tomorrow if we wanted to by rezoning th entire city industrial . Erhart: It won't stick. Batzli : No. I agree with you. We' re not going to do it but the point is1 if we go out and try and rezone everything that' s going to be along TH 212 . Everything that' s going to be along TH 101. Everything on TH 5 industrial office, whatever we want to do, you can definitely influence this. I 'm no i' saying you' re going to control it but we have it, and so I don' t want to Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 56 I come up with an exact number but I want to come up with some kind of, it' s not even a percentage so much. It' s kind of where Ladd' s coming from where it's a mix and make sure we've got enough that we' re bring in. Conrad: It's more philosophy than numbers . Emmings: I have no trouble with that at all . I agree with that. ' Erhart: I agree with that. If we can somehow state this in philosophy terms. ' Conrad : We want enough light industrial that does this , that and the other thing but I don' t know what the numbers are but I think, I 'm comfortable with that and not numbers . Emmings: The influencing comes when you have a developer or a business is looking for a place to locate and they come to your community and they say what have you got that you' ve put on your map as office/industrial? Then ' they go look in those areas. That' s how you get to influence what happens I think. ' Ellson: Or else people go to a corner that ' s not that and come back and ask you to make it whatever they want . Erhart: Change it. Ellson: Right . Like TH 7 and TH 41. ' Emmings: That' s okay. This is supposed to be a. . .process . I guess I can live with that. I 'm real uncomfortable with, when I saw these numbers on here and then I saw it said we should attempt to maintain this mix , then I really disagree with that. Conrad : But by staff putting that down to stimulate or whatever , what I ' want to be assured of. By taking the numbers out I want to be assured by somebody that we have the right mix. That we have enough land to guide us to the future for the things that are going to offset maybe some drains. I don' t want to just say philosophically well I want to do it. I want to put ' somebody on the line to say we think that there's a real good chance that if we maintain this kind of balance, your taxes aren' t going to go up. Batzli : Yeah, but we asked for that. Conrad : And that' s probably impossible. ' Batzli : We asked for a study of economic impact of various uses and we got something but you' re not going to get something that' s better than that are you? Do you think you' re going to get something better than what that study was? Conrad : No. But are you convinced that we have the right, if our city. Brian like you said, if our city continued to develop with this mix , is that good or bad? Is that economically a good direction or bad I 1 Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 57 , direction? Does it keep the industrials secondary to the single family or " do we become an industrial community? Batzli : If you tell whether Chanhassen is going to get their own school system or continue to be split. If you tell me what the state and nationa economies are going to do and the legislatures are going to do. If you tell me how quickly they move the MUSA line, then I ' ll let you know. Emmings: I know. Batzli : There' s a lot of factors that you can' t control so you don' t know' what the optimum mix is going to be. Conrad : I think Ladd ' s got the best idea though. What he started out and ' he said residential is everything else because I think, the central business district, we know where that is . If you add in where you want a little commercial. Maybe taking into consideration TH 212. If you say, where are we going to go for more industrial stuff? Plot all that out on II map and probably what's left is residential . I think that' s true . Emmings: And that may be the way to do it . Go after the small ones first" to make sure that you've got those so you don' t wind up being totally one thing which is residential and that could happen . It' s possible. It wouldn't be a good result. Conrad: Well , I don't agree with that statement. There' s nothing wrong II with a residential community. Nothing wrong with it. You get the mix of people. All the things that you like in a residential town. And a lot less headaches. Enmiings: No . Without the mix of commercial and industrial in there, that. would really add to your tax base and you' re in a lot of trouble. Conrad : Right. Batzli : I think you just waffled on that one . ' Conrad: Okay. Let's go onto 4. Krauss : 4 we also modified a little bit. There was a more direct statement that industrial development should only occur, well basically it says that now, that should only occur on collector or arterial streets I II believe it was the first time around. And there was an implied cap on how much development we should allow based on highway capacity. This changes the focus of that a little bit based on the discussions that we heard. Still saying that higher intensity development should occur where you havell an adequate transportation system but also it tends to shift the responsibility a little bit with the developer that if they want to develo in an area that has an inadequate system, that they should work with the City to correct that. That it' s not entirely our obligation. That we' ll work with them but that' s it a cost of development and should be resolved. 11 11 ' Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 58 Batzli : What does the words higher intensity add to this as a goal? Krauss: The persumption is that a single family development being lower density scattered over a larger area doesn ' t focus on traffic problems. Doesn' t create traffic problems to the magnitude that an office park or a series of apartment buildings or commercial development will . Batzli: Even though collectively they will have the impact on it? Krauss : Collectively they will . Erhart: That number 4 there is almost so vague it ' s, you almost have to wonder what it says. Should we get more specific? Are we talking about 2 things? One, truck traffic and two, traffic associated with like a high density condos where you' re talking about just a lot of cars and maybe make a statement in that paragraph about each. Batzli : But you' re getting back to our original discussion on this is I ' would prefer that this is even made broader and then if you want to implement it with various procedures to get specific about truck traffic here. This there. The general goal should be, development should occur ' only in areas having adequate transportation support system period. That' s the ultimate goal . Then you want to implement it by talking about truck traffic and improving impacted roads as a condition to approval and that type of thing . I thought that' s where we were kind of going to go with this whole thing. Headla : Why did you say that' s the ultimate goal? If someone has an area and they want to pay for their road development, what do you care? ' Erhart : Yeah but individuals don' t pay for road development. Headla: Well look at the bakery down here. Didn' t they help pay for that road improvement? ' Olsen: Audubon? Emmings : Didn' t that come out of the tax increment? Conrad: My impression was that they got money to do that. Emmings: I think we did that. Olsen: We did part of it but I think they were also assessed some of it. Headla: But anyway, if a corporation puts in money to improve the road, I don't see anything wrong with that. Batzli : No, I don' t either . If they want to improve the road . If the goal is that having an adequate transportation support system, if they make it adequate, then it would be right for development. Headla: True. r Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 59 Batzli : If they want to put it in and it ' s inadequate and they' re not going to improve it, then it shouldn't go in. Headla: That' s right. ' Erhart: That' s fine if it really works that way. I wasn' t aware that we actually asked people to pay for improvements to public roads . ' Olsen: We don' t ask them to pay. It' s just through assessments is all . Headla: We should ask them to pay for fire trucks too when they have big II buildings. Conrad: Tim, I think you've seen Steve' s format for working that. I 'm II sort of holding Steve back here because he's got some ideas on how he woulll reformat some of these goals. So why don' t we wait in terms of how you see number 4 because I think when Steve talks about what he'd like to have us I do, I think it will solve your concern. Emmings: I ' ll tell you what I did on transportation. This is really half baked and I ' ll try and get a little more work done on it and get some copies out for review but my notion was for each area we' re interested in, to state the subject. Have a real short statement of the goal . Have a very short description of what exists now so you know what you' re talking II about. Have an intent statement and then have, list a few examples of things we think are important at the time so it kind of gives, flushes out what you' re talking about. I' ll tell you what I did on transportation, ' since we' re talking about that right now. I stated the goal there as provide a variety of systems for safe and efficient movement of people and vehicles. It seems to me that' s what we' re trying to do. We want to move people around . We want to move vehicles around. We want that to be efficient and we want it to be safe. And for a description, I put down Chanhassen ' s transportation system consists of State and County roads, city streets, sidewalks, trails, mass transit with potential for light rail and " parking facilities . I arbitrarily described that as a transportation system. I had trouble with the intent. Now Tim's given me some ideas here. For examples I just put down, pedestrians should have safe access via sidewalks and trails to schools, parks and other areas of the city. Commercial traffic should have access to industrial and commercial areas from arterials without having to use residential streets. Local and thru traffic systems should not obstruct each other . Just enough, I don' t know " how many other examples you'd want to have but that way, the thing I want to do is have real big broad statements of intent and then a few examples to flush it out so we don't get cornered. I don't ever want anybody to think that it' s exclusive. Then the other thing you have to say of course " is all your policies have to be considered together . You can' t talk about transportation without talking about natural environment or natural assets because everytime you build a road you' re taking them away. You've got to balance them all together too. That was another thing but I don' t think w have to write them in that many areas. I 've written one for the natural environment . I 've written one for transportation and I was starting to work on one for land use and I don't know how many other areas there reall r . Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 60 are. The land use one is going to be hard and it ' s oin to be kind of g 9 long. Conrad : There' s a lot of merit to what I saw that you wrote. Paul , I think what I 'd like you to do is take a look. Steve' s going to type this up and if you could take a look at it and then just sort of react to it. Does that work for what we' re trying to do? There's a lot of good logic. It may break down and be a mish mash. I 'm not sure if we can pull it through all the different areas that we've got. It does work for a couple. I know that but I 'm not sure what kind of exercise it ' s going to be to work it through all of our goal statements. But anyway Steve, if you could type that up and especially the first page. I think the first page I felt ' pretty comfortable with. Erhart : I might add , I think one of the problems you've got in trying to figure what intent is, I think intent and goal is the same thing . Emmings: Well it is . ' Erhart : Therefore , trying to make it two separate is words. I like the format . I would just eliminate one or the other . ' Emmings: Really when I worked out intent on this one, it sounds the same and so maybe that' s just unnecessary. ' Headla: In theory, that' s excellent but if it' s so good, why hasn' t another city taken it up? Batzli : We' re just naturally good . ' Ellson: Because he works for us , that ' s why. ' Headla: Is there anyway you can search out to see if somebody else has followed this philosophy? I 'm sorry. Which one specifically now? Erhart: The format here. Headla: The format he' s suggesting. Krauss: Oh, that format frankly is what they taught us in Planning School . ' Emmings: Another successful effort at reinventing the wheel . Headla : I 'd like to see if the city has used it. Krauss: Sure. I think some of the existing goals and policies are set up in that format. They may not be as specific . ' Emmings: That' s the problem with them I think. Headla : I 'd like to see if the City' s used it and how successful it is. MINN I Planning Commission Meeting II October 4, 1989 - Page 61 II Conrad: Dave, if you lay out a goal that gets demonstrated , it seems like II it would be workable doesn' t it? Headla: But if it' s so good , then other people should have used it alreadll right? Conrad : Not necessarily. No, I don' t buy that. What would be the negatives of laying out goals? You like goals and objectives and standard il of performance and that' s what he' s doing . Headla: Absolutely and I said, I think it's an excellent idea. However , ' if it' s so darn good, why hasn' t someone else done it? Erhart: I'm sure they have. I Headla : Okay. Let' s see what success they' ve had with it. Let' s identify one or two and see what success they've had. Emmings: You know Dave, success . Whenever you've got a goal or a policy I g 9 g or a contract or anything else, it' s only as good as the people that are working on it to implement it. The words mean nothing . I Ellson: You' re basically saying how did you write the goal . Not how well they get implemented. I Headla : I'm not going to disagree with a statement like that Steve. Ernmings: Words don' t mean a thing. It' s the people who are doing it . I Headla : So what we've got is adequate because we've got excellent people here. I Emmings: Yeah. You could go right on with what we' ve got. There' s no reason to change it if you look at it that way. Or you could have nothing ' at all . The problem is that the people change and I guess it ' s a way to try and transmit what you are doing to the new people that come. Headla : If you think about restructuring , I think you can learn an awful lot by looking at what someone has done and see the success and maybe lean from that. Erhart: You'd like to get through some of these tonight? I Conrad: I guess I 'd like to go through the balance of these real briefly to see if we have a reaction to them. I 'd like Steve to type up what he' s got. Give it to Paul and Jo Ann and then I think rather than having them come up with this magic stuff, trying to read our minds, I think we have to come back and spend an hour and a half or something really putting those I philosophies, those goal statements down. That' s us . I just can' t say it's city staff doing it. I think it' s us. I could see Paul and Jo Ann actually taking it once we get past that original statement. That origina11 1 1 • Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 62 r goal but I don' t know that I want them trying to outguess us on what we' re thinking. Erhart: Have we decided on a format? Conrad: We're having them review what Steve is suggesting . Batzli : Can we have that distributed to us right away after he, I 'd like to see it and think about it a little too. Emmings: I think the more creative part might be in thinking of good examples to illustrate the goal because I don't think it matters that much what you say for the goal but if we can think of good examples of things that have happened in the past that we liked and illustrate the goal with those examples, those specific examples, then we' ll really be giving it ' some life. Conrad : But did anybody come up with any new goals other than what Paul and Jo Ann listed here? ' Batzli : Yeah . 1 Conrad : Did you? What is it? Batzli : They don' t say anything about preserving open spaces . I still ' don't like the natural assets . They didn' t include my open spaces. Conrad : Okay, he ruined by point. I think it' s real critical thinking ' about what are those 6 or 8 goals for the City. I think we could go along with this. Again, they' re trying to read our minds. I just want to make sure that we. I didn't see anything about people movement in here and maybe we don' t have that as a goal . It ' s something that we've got to talk 1 out. In terms of park space and park, even though it' s Park and Rec, do we have a philosophy for recreation for the community? I see those two . ' Batzli : That' s open spaces too. Conrad : Yeah. So I see those two things but I guess I really want to challenge us to think. I 'm not, a lot of these are more technical . Where ' you develop first . That seems, I don' t know what I think about those . I 'm not sure. You service obviously the gravity, the places that can be served by gravity first. Is that a goal statement? Enmiings: No, that' s an example of an implementation of the goals to me. Erhart: It' s a policy. Krauss : Wherever it fits in though, it' s a real important directive for how the plan gets structured because that's one of the critical factors. ' Conrad : Right but when you say okay, I 'm moving out to, or somebody comes into Chanhassen and wants to see where we' re going, that seems more adminstrative to me. Yet I can understand why you' re saying that that ' s 1 Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 63 1 really going to guide where we put that site. Elison: But if you did it like Steve had said , you'd be tying it in to a broader goal . Erhart: To make my point clear . I like Steve' s format but for us to get something done here, we ultimately got to get a list of policies that say specific things like we' re going to develop gravity flow areas before non-gravity flow. We've got to get there. We've been struggling with format now for two meetings and I like format starting out with goals so when you get to policies, policies are consistent with each other and when staff and City regulate the city to those policies , you achieve your goals , but you cannot avoid getting done having policies by the time we get done here. If we' re going to be so generic that all we' re going to put down is goals, we're not going to get anything accomplished . ' Batzli : We' re going to put down examples and some of those examples may well be written in a policy format. Emmings: But this zoning ordinance, that ' s loaded with policies. Batzli : But to develop a gravity flow area certainly isn' t within the I zoning regulations as they currently exist . I mean that is a grand large scale philosophy of how do you want to develop the city in what order and you' re talking about developing that portion of the city first . That' s certainly not regulated by the Code. Emmings: Why do you want to develop those areas first? Erhart: What? Emmings: Which one are you talking about? Gravity flow? ' Erhart: I 'm talking about gravity flow. Errmiings: Okay, let's talk about that one. Why do you want to do that? Erhart: Because it is a minimum impact on cost to the city so your goal i to maintain, or reduce taxes while allowing people to move into your city. The goal is, to get the highest economic value out of the land at the minimal cost to the city. That' s the goal . Emmings: Develop the land in such a way that the cost of the improvements , to the City, the necessary improvements to the city is. . . Erhart: Is minimized so the policy is, you develop it. So as we go through this and I think we' re going to spend 3 or 4 hours doing this but for every policy that you come up with, we can come up with a goal and whe you get all done, all the policies, you' ll have 5 or 6 or 7 goals and all the policy statements you've got, you' ll be able to insert then in those goals. And that' s Steve' s format that he' s working on. I ' Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 64 I Emmings: I'm just calling them examples I guess . I didn' t want to put them down as examples because I don't want anybody to take this and say, okay here are all of the policies in the city of Chanhassen and if I follow those I 'm in because our policies will change over time. I want to give ' them examples of what we mean because their specific case may or may not be in there or we may want to change our policies and I don' t want to be cornered . My fear is being cornered. ' Erhart : I would suggest in addition to Steve typing his format up, I would suggest that we have staff develop a list of goals. Not policies but the next time we discuss this so we' ve got something on the table to work on so we can make some progress . Try to come up with a list of pure goals. Emmings: I disagree with you. I agree with Ladd . I think we' re starting over and asking them. They' re sitting there wondering what the hell we want and I think we ought to do it ourselves . Batzli : Well , it might be the kind of thing where everybody goes home and ' thinks of like what are the 10 goals you want to see. Ellson: General , general terms . Emmings: I don' t think there' s even that many. Batzli : I know but if that' s what it takes. Because some people will have different goals obviously. Conrad : Are we going to have time at our next Planning Commission meeting to have a work session for us? Krauss : I don ' t know. ' Olsen: You have Oak View Heights . Krauss : What we were hoping to do was have a special meeting in about 3 ' weeks to actually, hopefully show you the first draft, the first cut at the plan . Olsen : I think we need to do this first . Krauss: I think we can do it in tandem a little bit. Maybe keep getting more and more guidance as to what should be in there and maybe that will help to gel the conversation. Conrad : That might be real tough. Then we' ll water it down and it won' t be any different. Here's what I 'd like us to do. Let's see if we can get some time in the next meeting for a work session. Even if it' s an hour . Try to keep the agenda down if we can. Olsen: Well it' s just those two items. Conrad: So Oak View Heights will be a piece of cake. Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 1989 - Page 65 I Erhart: If we can limit it to just say, on the next meeting let' s try to II all agree on just goals so when we get out of that meeting, we've got our goals. Ellson: We' re all bringing in like 6 so get your highlight . ' Conrad: Go through the comprehensive plan that we have, that you should have at home and take a look at the goals that were laid out there and II think about what your neighbors would like to have as goals and Dave, I 'd sure like you to come back to represent, well no, Steve represents the western fringe. You should come back anyway. And then we' ll crank through that and Steve will get your . You' re going to type that up and give it toll staff. Staff should really show it to, you' ll get it out in our packet fo the next meeting so everybody can see what the format is and then even you can see what he' s talking about . ' Krauss: Is a special meeting , if it occurs in about 3 weeks , going to be acceptable? Conrad: Probably. In terms of interviewing , what direction did City Council give you in terms of interviewing? Any direction? I noticed they received Dave' s letter of resignation. Krauss: I haven't had any opportunity to speak to the mayor about that. Conrad : Have we listed the vacancy? Have we published the vacancy? Let' I do it as quickly as we can but I would like you to talk to the mayor and see what he'd like because over the past time, we' ve had difference . Just talk to Don. See if he wants us interviewing. Treating candidates up as I normal . Krauss : Is that the normal process? Conrad: Yeah, but they've also had some other ideas. I don' t want to wait . In fact the next meeting we should have, if we could get it published, we should be interviewing candidates real quickly. Batzli moved, Ellson seconded to adjourn the meeting . All voted in favor I and the motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 11: 10 p.m. . Submitted by Paul Krauss ' Director of Planning Prepared by Nann Opheim ( 4/FD/TW CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 10, 1989 Vice Chairman Boyt called the meeting to order . MEMBERS PRESENT: Dawne Erhart, Jan Lash, Sue Boyt, Curt Robinson, and Ed ' Hasek MEMBERS ABSENT: Jim Mady and Larry Schroers ' STAFF PRESENT: Lori Sietsema, Park and Rec Coordinator and Todd Hoffman, Recreation Supervisor . APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Robinson moved, Lash seconded to approve the Minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated September 12, 1989 as submitted . All voted in favor except Sue Boyt who abstained and the motion carried. ' REVIEW APPRAISAL FOR CARRICO PROPERTY. Public Present: Carl Carrico Frank Cardarelle Sietsema : Basically you have the information in your packet of the three appraisals that were done. At this point what we need to decide is whether we' re going to make a recommendation to City Council to proceed with condemnation proceedings or not to. One way or the other. We need to make recommendation. Carl Carrico is in the audience. Do you have any comments that you want to make? Carl Carrico : I haven' t seen all the appraisals. ' Sietsema: Well you saw the first one for $58,000.00. Carl Carrico: Yeah but he agreed that wasn' t an appraisal . I haven' t seen ' the one. Sietsema: The second one came in at $85,000.00. Carl Carrico: Okay. Sietsema: Jim isn' t going to be here tonight. He asked me to make a couple comments. Basically he feels we should go for it. There's not other property really available that's going to serve this purpose. It's the luck of the draw as far as what your condemnation commission is going to consist of but he feels that it's a worthwhile piece to pursue. Erhart: Do we have to, at the time of condemnation then, have the money to purchase it? 11 Sietsema: Yes. I 11 ' Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 2 I Boyt : Will the money be available? Sietsema: It depends on, we may have to ask the Council to kick in out of the general budget if it were more than what our fund could afford . Robinson: My opinion is, I started reading this 85 page document and I got to where it was talking about the price and I quit. My opinion is that it' s too expensive and I think we should drop it now. ' Lash: I 'm not real familiar with this whole thing and the whole process but I tried to come up with what I thought would be, I don' t know how this court or whatever it is operates, but if they came up with a mid-price between the City' s appraisal and the owner ' s appraisal , you'd come up with ' about $195,000. 00 which is like way more than I guess I 'm comfortable paying so I would agree with Curt to drop it although I 'm wondering if there' s the posibility of just acquiring a portion of it and not getting the whole 11 acres . Getting as much as we think we could afford or otherwise back in the packet there' s somewhere they have a real estate picture of another piece. Maybe you guys looked at this . I don' t know but it had Lot 11, Block 1 in Lake Luch Highlands. 2.5 acres. Of course it' s a lot smaller than what we' re looking at but that' s $47 , 500. 00. That would be something for the neighborhood. . . In all good conscience, I don' t think I could go for that one. ' Boyt : Are we discussing the Carrico property and whether or not we want to recommend condemnation? ' Hasek: . . . I think we need a park but I don' t think we need it that bad though. I think just looking over the prices and talking about it with Mark a little bit , first of all the appraisal that they got. . .they' re all in Eden Prairie. We' re in Chanhassen. The simple fact is that currently it is outside the MUSA line and . . .but I don' t see the point in going through the hassle. . .and I don' t think we need to let this particular ' landowner . . . Erhart: I would go along with that. I don' t feel comfortable with the ' property. I 'd like to earmark something. I realize we don' t have anything in the area but I 'd like to find another piece of property or a few different pieces of property and where they join in the middle, I 'd like to earmark that and at the time of development, ask for those land dedications and we won' t have to pay for something. Get it through dedication at the time of development. Hasek: I think we can do exactly that if we go across CR 117. Between there and CR 42. Spot a park in there, a decent size park, I think we can cover the radius for a neighborhood park in that area. Have a trail down the side of CR 117 , if it' s not taken away. A trail on Lake Lucy Blvd . . .so we should have a way to get in there if that doesn' t disappear. Boyt : I 'm not thrilled with the piece of property. I don' t think it' s a wonderful piece of property for a park so I 'm not going to recommend condemnation. 11 IIPark and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 3 1 rSietsema : I need a recommendation one way or the other . It' s ultimately up to the City Council . They authorized the appraisals to be done. ' Robinson: Based on the opinion of the Commissioners , I would recommend that we drop pursuing the Carrico property. Hasek: Why don' t we extend that just a little bit if we can to. . .we spot another park in another location and have staff investigate that. Make that a part of this so it doesn' t look as though, it doesn' t seem as though we' re just dropping the issue because I don't think we are. We' re still looking . Is that alright? Robinson: Sure. I think we' ve got to do that anyway. I don' t think we' re going to drop it because we don't want a park there. Sietsema : So the motion was made by Curt to drop pursual of the Carrico property and to continue to look for a neighborhood park property in the area of Lake Lucy Highlands and Pheasant Hills. Hasek: Second . Robinson moved , Hasek seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend to drop pursuing the Carrico property and to continue to look for a neighborhood park property in the area of Lake Lucy Highlands and Pheasant Hills. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Carl Carrico: Thank you for making a decision. I 've been fooling with g g this piece of property since 1971 and I 'm tired of fooling with it. I know the price seems high to everybody but it' s something that I have offers from people that will buy the property for that so I 'm not trying to, I don' t have a mask on or a gun but I appreciate you at least giving, let ' s get rid of it. Thank you. PLACEMENT OF ARCHERY RANGE. Hoffman: Two weeks ago I said this was more near and dear to my heart but I have to let you know, Lori did most of the footwork but was nice enough to let me bring the report back to you just to make us look like we' re working together here. We sat down with Scott Harri of Van Doren, Hazard and Stallings and Lori asked him to look into a site in both Lake Ann and Lake Susan to see which would be the best potential site. The map was not included in your packet but there's one at your desk there now this evening . The original site we talked about for the most part was behind ' the barn at Lake Ann. This large of archery range just wouldn't fit in that area and it seemed to be more appropriate in Lake Susan. Larry did stop by today and we drove out there to take a look at the area. That temporary access road does go right through there at the present so you ' can't see exactly what the lay of the land is but you can get a good idea of how it would look and it does allow for open visibility. There' s I Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 4 ' parking fairly close by but it does put the archery range off on it' s own away from the major areas of activity in the park allowing for that safety factor . As I indicated there, the time frame for development would be sometime early summer to mid-summer next year and be finished by that time when most of the bow hunters want to get out and practice. Robinson: Will Dale put that berm in there when they' re landscaping or doing the grading? Hoffman : Correct . Yeah. If we make a decision to go ahead with it, we ' can have them put that in. It would be a minor adjustment. Hasek: The question I have is, I know that when you' re hunting deer the ' object is to get within, you'd like them right off the end of the bow. Hoffman: We do not need a 100 yard range. It will be 50 yards allowing for 40 yard shots would be about the maximum that we would build for . ' Hasek: Would you want to leave it against the wetland then and away from the lake as far as possible? In other words, leave the berm in place and take 50 yards? Hoffman : Yeah , we'd take a look at it. Have Scott take a look at it to see what would be the best position in there for a range half that length. ' Hasek: The other question I have is, is there any ball activity on this field that might conflict with somebody wanting to be out here? Because I 've shot bow before and I know that it doesn' t take a whole lot to deflect that arrow and the new bows they' ve got now have a heck of a lot more punch than the old ones that I used to shoot and that arrow may go a ways. It' s a 100 yards here and that' s probably unlikely but it looks like it' s a little closer than maybe it could be or should be. Hoffman: Sure . That may be one reason to take the archery range and pull it back towards the lake as far as possible because there would be many times when both that ballfield and the archery range would be used simultaneously. ' Lash: You should you put some signage up so people know what' s going on? Hoffman: Yes. The design for it would be to sign the area there. On the ' top of the hill and if you walk to the edge of the hill and look down, there's still considerable distance that allows for open viewing and then you can sign the area and also put up a, not a chainlink fence but a ' bollard with a swing chain in the middle of it just to designate that area . I also believe there ' s the memo from Jim Chaffee attached . One of his first concerns would be city ordinance not allowing this without being amended . It ends up that there' s somewhat just a minor loophole in our park ordinance that does not specifically list weapons. It lists firearms, bb guns, explosives, anything of that nature but it does not list a weapon which a bow is defined as so we don' t have to go through the process. 11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 5 Sietsema: Staff has recommended that this go to the Public Safety Commission though just for their review and to make sure that they don' t have a problem with it too as long as it is public safety involved . ' Hasek: Does that mean that I could discharge a bow in downtown Chanhassen? Hoffman: In a park. This is under a park. ' Sietsema: If it would have been at Lake Ann, it would have been north of TH 5 and then there would have been a problem. But it' s south of TH 5 and ' so the rules are more loosely defined. Hasek: Do you have to get a permit to hunt with a bow in the city of Chanhassen? ' Sietsema: I think so . Hasek : Even if it' s south of TH 5 because it' s not a firearm? I mean it' s a good idea to get a permit from the owner but I know that in some areas of the city you need a permit period . You have to go to the City to get a ' permit. Erhart : They do whenever they come over to us with their permits . Hoffman: Have you sign it. Sietsema : I believe that you do but I wouldn' t swear by it. 1 Hasek: That's just a question that came up after reading through this stuff . Lash : So we don' t have to do anything about the ordinance then right because it doesn' t say. . . ' Hoffman: Correct . Sietsema: Right. Boyt: Do we have a motion? ' Robinson: I make a motion that we go for the archery range as proposed in the map. Do we make it 50 yards? I don't know a thing about this. Do you want that part of the motion? Should that be part of the motion? ' Boyt: Maybe staff can recommend . Sietsema : I think that the design standards of it can be left open and ' before anything is formally done, we' ll come back with a final design plan for it so you don' t have to include that. You may want to include that you want to send it to Public Safety. Robinson: Yes . So moved. 11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 6 ' Lash: Second. ' Robinson moved, Lash seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend to place an archery range at Lake Susan Park and to refer the issue to the Public Safety Commission for their input . All voted in favor and the motion carried. DISCUSSION OF LAKE ANN PARK SHELTER. ISietsema: The next item is the Lake Ann Park shelter and as you recall , we had recommended that $100,000.00 be set aside in the reserve fund for a park shelter at Lake Ann Park. Although that hasn' t been formally approved by the City Council , I wanted to bring it up to your attention. If we want to have that done and be able to start that next year , we need to make the design plans and get going on the process now. As soon as the budget is ' approved , if that' s in there. Todd is in charge of handling all the group reservations and he' s had a number of calls wanting a facility like that. Hoffman: Every call . Sietsema: Every call wants a facility like that and we feel that that may be revenue generating as well . When you get something that nice in there, ' you should be able to charge something and bring some money in for it too so if this is something we want to do, we've been talking about it since I 've started here which is about 6 years ago and I think that it' s probably due if we want to do it. Hasek : I 'd like to see us go ahead with it because it' s the one thing I think that' s really lacking out there is a. . . facility. . .it'd be nice to have a building to go along with that . . .Arboretum are magnificant . Boyt: Oh Lake Lucy is much nicer . Sietsema: Lake Susan . ' Boyt: Oh yeah, Lake Susan. Sietsema: What this one was originally planned when we were submitting it for the LAWCON grant application, it was a two leveled walkout type facility that would have concession and restrooms or bath house in the basement with like boat rental if we were to choose to get paddleboats or canoes and have that kind of rental out of the bottom and the upper portion would have an overlook of the lake screened in and then walk out the back and have a fireplace. You could use it in the winter for snowmobiling . A snowmobile stop off place or cross country skiing area. It would make this ' park more multi-seasonal as well as having a lot of use in the summer . Hasek: How much would you rent that thing out? By the table or by the group? Hoffman: By the group. I IIPark and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 7 1 ' Hasek: If a group came in and wanted only a quarter of that, they'd pay the whole price and you'd give it all to them? Hoffman: It would be the top picnic area portion, yeah. You'd just rent it by the group per time. 1 Boyt: Or it'd be one thing if it was just you and your family went there and it was open and you just use it? Hasek: Yeah but if somebody did rent it for a Saturday afternoon or whatever then they'd have the full use of it? Hoffman : Correct . 1 Hasek: I 'm wondering if there isn' t a way it can be designed so it can be broken into two parts in case you have small groups so there' s no conflict. Boyt : You could talk to the designer . 1 Sietsema: The architect, yeah. I 'm sure something like that could be designed into that . That might make it more useable too. Boyt: Any questions? Robinson: Are we talking placement of it yet? Have we determined where it would go? Sietsema: The way the plan was, that we came up with before that we submitted would be built into the hill just to the west of the turn around area . There' s almost a little opening in the trees right there and it would be built in there. That way it' s away from the beach but still close enough to it so that you' re close enough to all of the main activities of the park and then you could put the boat rental right out in front there. ' Robinson: But away from the ballfields? Sietsema : Right. It'd be definitely down by the beach. Down by that turn around area. Robinson: So it would be built into the hill so it would be facing north building it into there. Hoffman : Yes. It'd be a lower level that would come out to the bottom for the concession area, bathrooms, lifeguard station and that would be an upper area that would come out . You'd want out the top part of the hill so it'd be a walkout . Lash: So what are we talking? Like $100, 000.00 in the budget or something? ' Sietsema: Right . We have $30,000. 00. 11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 8 Lash: That sounds like a lot. Sietsema: The revenue potential is really there and you know, with the decrease in the entrance fee to Lake Ann Park and not charging the ball players anymore , we' re not making any money. We haven' t got it all tallied up for the 1989 season but. ' Hoffman : Less than half of last year . Sietsema: It' s really minimal. Last year it was astronomical because it ' was so hot , everybody wanted to be by the water . This year it was a more moderate season and. Hoffman : The fee was cut . Softball players didn' t pay. ' Sietsema : And that had an effect on, we get our donations for the 4th of July from the businesses and with the fee only $2. 00, they didn' t need as ' many tickets or we didn' t as much money so that whole thing is questionable whether that ' s going to be even worth paying a person at the gate to have a fee to go into the park anyway. And a fee for a structure like this could bring in the revenue that we' re missing there to help offset the cost of the beach program. Lash : So how much of this do you think you could from. . . ' Sietsema: About $100,000. 00 is what the estimated cost 2 years was for this facility so it just depends on how many other things. If we want to make any additions, we just need to update the cost estimate and look at a ' more detailed plan . That' s what with this motion to proceed with this , that' s what I will be doing. Bringing back a more details in not only the design of it but in the cost of it as well and the location. Hoyt: Okay. We need a motion to proceed . ' Sietsema: After the budget is approved. Robinson: You said that earlier . We submitted something in August? Sietsema: Right. Robinson: Was it early? ' Sietsema: The legislation has been really weird this year on how the budget is to be prepared and to be adopted. I really don't understand all of the details of it but we were supposed to have had it done early only they didn' t give us enough of the details to know how we were supposed to have prepared it so the budget preparation meetings for the City Council that they' re going to be cutting and adding and amending to what staff and the commissions have recommended, is going to happen I think on Monday night. So it's a month or two down the road before it will actually be amended but I wanted to get this to you before it got lost in the shuffle because as soon as that budget is approved, if the $100,000.00 in the reserve stays in there, then we can be ready to just go and with this it I Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 9 1 also makes the Council realize that this is a priority for us as they are preparing the budget. Hasek: What kind of a motion do you need? ' Sietsema : Just a motion to proceed with detailed plans for the park shelter at Lake Ann Park as soon as the budget is formally adopted . Hasek: So moved. Robinson : Second . Lash: Are you looking at electricity in there? ' Sietsema : Yes . Lash : And running water? ' Sietsema: Yes . ' Boyt : . . .drinking fountain along the way. Erhart: I like the idea of. . . so we can rent it out to more than one party because not everybody' s going to be big groups . Lash: Do you have some kind of idea of the size? I mean capacity. Sietsema: I can give you a guys a copy of that plan . I 've got some upstairs and we will look at those again before we go any further with it to make sure that' s what you want . I should have had it included in this . Hasek: Wasn' t it like 20 x 40? Like a double garage. Sietsema: No, it was bigger than that. tHoffman: Larger than this room. ' Hasek: Wider than this room is the question. Hoffman: Larger than this room yeah. Capacity of a couple hundred people probably. We have large company picnics anywhere from 100 to 400 people out there each summer . Sietsema: Each weekend. Hasek moved , Robinson seconded to direct staff to proceed with detailed ' plans for the park shelter at Lake Ann Park as soon as the budget is formally adopted . All voted in favor and the motion carried . I 1 II ' Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 10 1 ACCEPT CHASKA LIONS CLUB DONATION AND IDENTIFY POTENTIAL PROJECTS. Sietsema: The next item is the Chaska Lion' s Club donation and I was going ' to just send this onto the City Council for their approval to accept the donation and I got to thinking that perhaps this should do something significant with, we' ve got a significant amount of money from the Lion' s and we've put it into the reserve fund to match LAWCON grant funded ' projects . But there isn' t anything that' s identifiable that we can say, yeah Lions this is what you guys have contributed to. We can say that we' ve put it toward the huge project at Lake Susan Park which was very ' beneficial and we did get points for their contribution but there' s nothing that specifically they can point to that they can say that they've done. I was going to try and add up how much we've gotten from them and it' s a lot. I Hoffman: $61,000. 00. Hasek: How about some. . .out at the park. Dugouts out at the ballpark? The Legion ballfield. Can we get them to hang a sign on some of those? Do ' those for us . I mean that' s the kind of things they like to do. Put a little sign that says, this is built by the Lion's club. Sietsema: I put some ideas in there just to start , get some thought processes going. Running water up to the ballfield park shelter and we could put a plaque up there. We also need to put a plaque and do some kind of dedication ceremony for the Legion shelter up there. We have never done that and I think that we. . . Hasek made a comment that wasn' t audible on the tape. I ' Boyt: I see the need this year that, our kids are playing soccer in Chaska . Even though we tried to share fields in Chanhassen , we don' t have any lighted soccer fields. I 'd like to see lights on the soccer field in ' Chanhassen sometime. I know they' re real expensive. Maybe at Lake Ann. Hoffman: The soccer field at Lake Ann would be the best one to go at there. The new soccer field . Boyt : Curt wanted lights for some tennis courts that haven' t gone in yet. Robinson: I 'd just be satisfied with tennis courts . Hasek: Maybe they could do some grading for a single court over there for ' him. A flat area where. . . Robinson: There' s no water in that ballpark shelter you' re saying? Hoffman: No water or electricity. 1 11 ' Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 11 I ' Sietsema: I would think that we'd be able to get water out there pretty easily for that amount of money. Hoffman : Water , electricity and a pay phone would be wonderful . Lash: What amount are you talking about? ' Sietsema: $15,000. 00 with the donation that we got this time. We could do it a couple of different ways. We could put it in a fund. . .probably not a pay phone . I was thinking at the shelter by the ballfields for $15,000 . 00 I think we'd be able to do that. ' Lash : Are you talking about Lake Susan? ' Sietsema: Lake Ann. Hasek: The only problem I see with that is identifying the difference between the Legion struction and the Lion' s improvements. If I were to want a project from either the Legion Club or the Lion' s Club or any other group, I would want something that would really kind of stand out. Something like the dugouts would be one thing that would work. Bleachers ' would obviously be another thing you could do or the boards for a hockey rink or something really obvious like that . ' Boyt: That you can stick a plaque on. Hasek: Yeah. If you do the improvements to Lake Ann, I think they' re absolutely needed out there but I think it's kind of unfair to spend their ' money to improve a building that really somebody else put up. Boyt: They did have a picnic shelter down in the park on the marsh. ' Wasn' t that a Lion' s? Sietsema: That was a Chanhassen Lion' s that there used to be here in town but that doesn' t exist anymore. There' s a new Chanhassen Lion' s . Boyt : We always looked at warming houses . Hasek: A warming house would be another nice, a quality warming house. Robinson : Maybe you could ask them because I know they like specific things. Hasek: I think the trick is to give them a list of things. ' Sietsema: Or if you wanted to continue to save that money. Start a fund to build a concession shelter at the new facility down at Bandimere. On the Bandimere farm site on the youth complex . By the time 4 years goes by, if we get these donations twice a year . Hasek: That could do it. I I Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 12 Sietsema: They've been donating money for 2 or 3 years and we've had $60,000. 00. By the time that happens, we could have a significant amount of money built up in a fund to do something significant down there. Boyt: We had a facility I belonged to down in Florida. Their concession .stand was two story with one story for storage and Little League equipment and a meeting space and downstairs was the full concession with a kitchen. ' Hasek: They also use it for , like to announce the games and stuff. I 've seen that. Especially when they put in a 4 or 5 ball complex. ' Sietsema: Or we could purchase the furniture or equipment we need for the park shelter that was planned to be built next year . We could put in the fireplace or buy the tables or do something to equip that facility with the money that they' ve donated and that would be something that would be quicker . Get the project done sooner . ' Boyt: I 'd rather use some of it now. Something we can see and starting a fund to work towards. . . ' Lash : Maybe a fireplace and that' s something that would look nice with a plaque on it. Sietsema: At the park shelter? Lash: Yes . . . Sietsema: Because whatever we decide, any of these things probably won' t get done until next year anyway. It won' t be constructed until the 1990 season so now that we've decided that we want to build the Lake Ann shelter t in the 1990 season, we could easily incorporate the furnishing of a nice fireplace or something with that and again, a plaque on the wall done nicely could be incorporated. Hasek: What ' s the best way to orchestrate that for us to pick a project and them make them aware of what is our intention with the money and then get their approval and consent? ' Sietsema: Well what I would need is a recommendation to accept the money. To identify a project that we wanted to go towards and send that ' recommendation to City Council and also to direct staff and to contact the Lion's Club and let them know what our plans are for the money. They've never asked us to do anything specific with the money. The only thing they asked us is not to spend it on maintenance or adminstrative costs. They want us to put it toward projects . That' s the only stipulation that they've put on the money and they haven' t really watched us to see how we' re using it but we have been putting it toward LAWCON grant projects. Robinson: When you write them a thank you note, do you typically tell them what we' re going to use it for then? ' Sietsema: I usually put it that we put it in the LAWCON grant fund to be a contribute to the local share of the LAWCON grant and on the last one I let I Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 10 , 1989 - Page 13 ' them know that we received the Lake Susan grant project. We received the grant for the Lake Susan project and those monies were spent for that project. Lash : Maybe there should be some sort of plaque put up there anyway saying some. . . ' Sietsema: That' s true too . We could hang something on the backstop of the Babe Ruth field or something. That donations from the Lion' s Club helped to contribute to this. ' Robinson: I would like something to do with this new shelter . If we could really make that a heck of a nice place with a big fireplace or whatever with this extra money. I think that'd be neat . Boyt: Do you want to make a motion? I 'd like included in the motion that we start affund for soccer lights . ' Robinson: Maybe we set aside a percentage. If it' s going to go on and keep growing like it has, I think this last year , the year before was $10, 000. 00. ' Hasek: Soccer lights . That ' s like 30 or 40 good sized flashlights . . . Erhart: How much are soccer lights for one field? Hoffman: $60,000. 00. Sietsema: The ballfield lights that you see on Field 1 out at Lake Ann were $60,000.00 2 years ago and it would be similar to that. ' Hasek: They'd probably cost us $65, 000. 00. . . Boyt: So we'd have money left over . $60,000. 00. . .available money coming ' in. Lash : Wait, I 'm not following what you' re saying. Boyt: If we recommend spending the $15,000. 00 for the fireplace and putting $60,000.00 towards lights . Lash: What $60,000. 00. Boyt : Don' t we have $60, 000. 00? ' Sietsema: No. ' Boyt : You spent it on Lake Susan? Sietsema: We've been spending money right along on LAWCON grant projects . ' Boyt: We don' t always spend it so I didn't know. 1 Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 14 ' Sietsema: It' s gone into the reserve. That ' s part of the reserve chunk. There's already some. ' Boyt : It has to be. . . Sietsema: Right. So what we've done in the past is put it into the reserve fund and it' s gone toward LAWCON grant projects. Boyt : And we. . . ' Sietsema: Right. So now we have $15,000.00 that' s not allocated for anything. $15,850. 00. Robinson: So if we gave a percentage, all I 'm saying is let' s take a ' percentage of that and put it towards certain projects and leave a percent in a kitty to build up for the big project. Lash: So say we spend. . . Sietsema: $10,000.00 on the park shelter and $5 , 000. 00 put in the south. Lash: And then took the remainder . . .percentage like 50-50 and start to build up the funds or something? ' Hasek : I think rather than setting them up, or giving it to the shelter , I think what we ought to do is earmark a project and whatever it takes to get that project done. Then whatever is left over . . .otherwise you' re going ' to try and spend $10,000. 00 on a fireplace that may only cost $6, 000. 00. We might as well just set it up that way to start with. Earmarking whatever the cost to build the fireplace or whatever it is we decide to do. Lash : I think you were just throwing that out as an example. Boyt: Does someone want to make a motion for that? ' Hasek: I make a motion that we earmark a portion of the Lion' s Club contribution from pulltabs to a fireplace facility at Lake Ann for the facility we' re proposing out there and to set aside the rest in a fund to be earmarked for soccer lights at Lake Ann. Lash : So like 50% in soccer lights and 50% for some other future. . . Hasek: Oh, is that what you want to do? You want to split what' s left over into two things? Not just stick it into one? Boyt: Yeah, we were talking about future funding that comes in. Hasek: Do you want to start with future funding that comes or do you want to just start? Boyt : Okay. We' re dealing with money we have right now. Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 15 Robinson: But then are you saying next year_ we also put 50% into the soccer lights and 50% to another project? Boyt : That ' s what we' ll discuss next year . Robinson: What the percentage is going to be or . . . Hasek: I didn' t put it all in percentages. I just said let's build a fireplace and stick the rest into a fund for soccer lights . When the next one comes through, we' ll decide whether we want to put it all in a fund for ' soccer lights or think of another project. Boyt: Is there a second? I ' ll second it. ' Sietsema: Do you want me to read the motion? Boyt: No . Sietsema: Okay, the motion was to recommend that the money be accepted and that a portion of the funds be set aside for the fireplace at the Lake ' Ann Park shelter and set up a fund for soccer lights at Lake Ann with the intention that a portion of future donations goes into the soccer light fund . Hasek moved , Boyt seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend that the money be accepted from the Chaska Lion's Club and that a ' portion of the funds be set aside for the fireplace at the Lake Ann Park shelter and set up a fund for soccer lights at Lake Ann with the intention that a portion of future donations goes into the soccer light fund . All voted in favor and the motion carried. Lash : So you' re sending them a nice letter right? Sietsema: I will be sending this onto City Council upon their approval . I ' ll send a letter with what we' re doing . SITE PLAN REVIEW, OAKVIEW HEIGHTS. Public Present : Dean Johnson Mary McCawley Sietsema: I think that we' re all aware of most of the history of this item. This item' s come before us on at least 2 or 3 other occasions. The changes in the proposal basically are that they are increasing the size of the development to 27. 10 acres and are proposing to develop 11 high density townhouses which amount to 200 total units. As can be seen on the site plan, 5.4 acres is to be dedicated for park. They' re proposing that 5.4 be 11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 16 dedicated for parkland in the northeast corner of the site. Robinson: 5. 04 instead correct? Sietsema: 5.04. Yeah . 200 units creates the need for 5 to 7 acres of parkland and the reason that's such a wide range is because there isn' t a people per unit figure standard that we have for multi-family so that' s based on either between 2 to 2. 8 people per unit in the multi-family dwelling . The 5 acres the developer is proposing to dedicate currently contains some severe topography including a ravine. He' s proposing that with the amount of grading that needs to be done on this site, that that ' ravine could be filled in to bring the useable parkland or developable parkland to roughly 3 acres. Dean, do you want to make any of your comments now? Dean Johnson: Yeah . We' ve got a transparency presentation. ' Sietsema: He' s got some designs on how that can work on the site. Mary McCawley: This is the site . The original site was this rectangular shape that was the original 18.9 acres. Mr. Johnson has acquired this ' property in addition, 5 acres of which will be dedicated to park. The balance will be added onto this part of the project which will go for density for the apartment units that will be in the future. So these are ' the 8 acres that Lori was speaking with that are the additional purchase that was different than the last proposal . The ravine that Lori was speaking with is this area in here and our proposal is to take grading that will need to be done in this area and fill this ravine and part of this bermed area that you see along Kerber as you drive here. This would yeild about 2 1/2 contiguous acres . 2. 7 contiguous acres of relatively flat land and this has been graded for the uses that would be proposed for this area . This is a possible design for the parks . There'd be a ballfield in this area and there' s adequate space. There' s a tennis court in this area that would be from off the cul-de-sac of the proposed townhome development . ' This area for totlot, parking and half court basketball court and there'd be additional space there. There'd be open skating area in this pond area and the slopes would yeild sledding hills and because of the contiguous ' area with the wetlands and open space here, there could be other winter sports such as cross country skiing and so on. There's presently as you know there' s public land across the street that could be used as a compliment to the other public school property on the other side of Kerber . So that' s what we' re proposing for the park area . With that there' s three- fifths of the area that could be developed. Boyt : I have a question. Does staff feel that filling in the ravine would be allowed? Are you going to kill every tree? ' Mary McCawley: No. If you go along Kerber and look up here, the trees down in this lower part, this is really pretty open. It looks like it was probably being filled at one time but this area here. The trees, there' s a few right along here and then down by the wetlands which is actually, this ' is the whole site . There' s more trees here along Powers Blvd . , if you look from this way, along this wetlands here but if you go down Kerber , this I Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 17 area is really quite open . It looks like it' s been. . . Boyt: Who on staff would recommend that this be, is that Gary' s job or Jo Ann' s job? ' Sietsema: I think both Jo Ann and Gary would look at it to see . Jo Ann has and I haven' t heard from her that that would be a problem one way or the other . Mary McCawley: This was a proposal done by a consultant to the City for looking at equipment on Dean' s original proposal and in our proposal we used the same types of use to show that they could fit on this new plan. ' Sietsema: Show them where this is located though on the overall site. Mary McCawley: Okay. I think you can tell by the topography that this area here. This is their original . This area that Lori is pointing out is the area that was really the only natural flat area of the property. Sietsema: When the Planning Commission looked at this, they had the ' recommendation from the Park and Recreation Commission to acquire 4 acres of parkland and they asked Mark to come up with a concept of how 4 acres could work. This is the flatter area up in the north, the original northeast corner . It does not include what they' re proposing now. Mary McCawley: But it does speak for the additional 4 acres . This area took 3 of the townhouse units, the larger units . Hasek: So this site is 4 acres? The outline of this site is how many acres? ' Mary McCawley: It' s a little more isn' t it? Sietsema: 4.08 acres. These boundaries here. ' Hasek: So what you' re proposing is to take 4 acres of facilities and put it into something under 3 acres? Boyt: 2. 7. ' Hasek: No . Because that says 4 acres of site that' s fairly flat and the flat part of this site is now 2.7 acres . Dean Johnson: 3. Sietsema: What they' re saying is, if this represents 4 acres being used in this area. . . Mary McCawley: This is a different configuration. Hasek: Between this area right and this area which is now going to be skating . There ' s 3. 1 acres . r IIPark and Rec Conmiission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 18 ' Mary McCawley: This is 2. 7 and there' s an area down here where the pond area. ' Hasek: So you've got 3. 1 instead of 4 basically with the same facilities . Sietsema: There' s a conservation easement in that lower area on those wetlands so . Dean Johnson: That conservation easement is 75 feet. . . Sietsema: Pardon me? Dean Johnson: I read that in your report about the conservation easement . That conservation easement is farther to the west. It' s not even, that easement, even 75 feet from that easement would not be within any of this . Sietsema: But those are considered wetlands and there' s a 75 foot setback. Dean Johnson : The wetlands are. . . Sietsema: These aren' t considered wetlands? These ponds? Dean Johnson : No . ' Mary McCawley: Those are retention ponds. They' re man-made. Sietsema: I understand that but they, it was my understanding that they became wetlands and therefore protectable and there was a 75 foot setback on those. ' Mary McCawley: No. It wouldn' t be wetlands with vegetation. It' s for retention purposes. This is the natural wetlands and it' s all on the parking side . ' Erhart : Lori , can you explain the setbacks from the wetland . That big area that is wetlands. What kind of a setback do we need there? ' Sietsema: There would be a 75 foot setback that nothing could be constructed or developed or altered within 75 feet of a wetlands area. They' re telling me I 'm wrong but it was my understanding that these other ponding areas were now considered wetlands and they also had a 75 foot setback. Hasek: There is an easement line drawn across the plan. What is that? Sietsema: That' s an utility easement. Hasek: Utility? Okay. Dean Johnson: Could I state one more thing about the wetland? These wetlands are Class B wetlands and consequently they can be altered to any shape . They' re not considered to be crucial in form. In fact, in the initial site, the plan for that wetland has already been looked at by staff ,, Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 19 and recommended for approval although it hasn' t been approved yet, is that we take it and we remake part of that wetland into a retention pond with water coming off of the 18. 9 acres that' s going to come off of the hard ' surfaces and drain down into that. They wanted that part of the site altered into a retention pond and then dumped into the wetlands after that so that is all going to be altered and work be done on a Class B alteration permit by the DNR. Staff has no problem with that. It' s not. . .or has been done or looked at by your staff and they reconunend. . . so these are not things that cannot be worked with . This is not a type of a wetland that cannot be touched. I have worked around those types of wetlands . . .but this is not that case. Lash: So when we start filling in this ravine, what kind of a grade are you talking about. . .? What the grade is going to be ultimately? . . .they start filling in, it obviously would make a much steeper grade wouldn' t it? Mary McCawley: No. This is 4: 1 slope which is really more gradual than ' the 3 : 1 slope that is generally, the ultimate . You can see the grades there. These are 10 foot contours. Existing grades are extended and they' re not anymore severe than they are now but there' s nothing proposed ' greater than 4: 1 which is very acceptable as far as erosion and you know those concerns . Dean Johnson : I don' t know what ' s allowed or Chanhassen' s minimum grade but I know Plymouth is 3: 1. 3: 1 is Plymouth's . Mary McCawley: But these are even gentler than what would be the maximum. Hasek: I think what has a lot to do with those slopes though is where they' re located and what their function is going to be. If you leave a 3: 1 slope alone and grass it in and mowing it, it's fine but if you' re going to ' put it some sort of an active use , we' ll have to look at something other than that. Dean Johnson : If Plymouth they allow you to take what will allow you an area where you mow frequently. In the townhouses. . . I have such a bank. But this isn ' t that. This is 4: 1. This is a good sliding hill . Hasek: Just a general question. Where do we stand with the tree ordinance? Has anything been done about that at all? Sietsema: I don' t believe so. Hasek: Nothing has been talked about at Council? Sietsema: I think that the ordinance is being worked on but I don' t believe that it' s in place yet . Hasek: Do we have it within the ordinance, the requirement that we are showing where existing vegetation is. . . For example, when they bring the topo in, do they have to show some of the general tree masses and stuff? Sietsema: I don't know. I think they usually do. I Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 20 Hasek: Do we have an aerial photograph section map? Sietsema: Yes. I can go up and get it . Boyt : Dawne and I have some questions of other staff . . .that you don' t have expertise to answer . I think Dawne has questions about the wetland. I have questions about whether or not this would be allowed . . .and I think we'd like to have some of the questions answered before we spend a lot of time. ' Sietsema : Why don' t you give me a list of your questions. ' Boyt: Well my question was, if the filling won' t be allowed, then we' re not even dealing with this as parkland because to me it ' s not useable. I guess what it comes down to for me is it still is not a useable piece of property to meet the needs of those people. Erhart: We upped it from 182 units to 200 units . Boyt : And less useable space. Mary McCawley: If you took these 4 acres , there wouldn' t be 130 units . If you took these 3 units away for this amount of parkland, it would. . .the project unuseable and then there would a lot less units . Boyt: . . .4 acres but if we took 4 acres and reduced the number of people in the development . . . is the minimum amount for this site. The amount of ' people. Mary McCawley: . . .this project but you can see there' s a big corner here of grading that' s well above the, well a lot steeper than the 5% so we would actually do the grading to make this workable. You wouldn' t get 4 acres of flat land in this proposal either. ' Lash : . . .we wanted a minimum of 4. Boyt: Developable acres . Lash : We didn' t pick the location. We just said what we wanted so. Robinson: So what you' re saying is this has nothing to do with the park? ' Boyt: Developable acres? Dean Johnson : Why isn' t slope developable acres? Boyt: I guess I 'm not interested in the ravine. Dean Johnson : But a sliding hill? Oak View Heights isn ' t a park? Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 21 ' Lash : If we take in the sliding hill and stuff, what do we have? Dean Johnson: 5. ' Lash: But we've also increased the number of units? Dean Johnson: If you would take your 4 acres that you wanted and divide that into the 182 in the 4 acres , because that' s the original amount of units and then you take and you use that number , that differential , then multiply it by the 200 units that are now there, you come up with that 4.4 acres is what you want for park. In other words, I 'm over what y already required . Do you understand what I 'm saying? you've Hasek: I guess my concern was lies really with two areas. One, if the ' facilities that are being shown are adequate . My question is, is 185 football field adequate? I don' t know that it is . I think it' s drawn on there simply because that' s what fit . I 'd like to see one that ' s a little ' larger than that if possible. Perhaps we don' t need all the facilities that are on there but we've got a real sketchy plan before us . I 'd like to see something a little bit more typed up than that. I don't have any concern about , I mean a sliding hill is fine with me. We've got active and passive uses. That doesn' t bother me so much but if we' re being shown some facilities , I 'd like to know that they' re going to work and I can' t believe that a 195 foot ballfield, even though it is for kids, we' re still going to ' get some high school kids out there playing ball with a totlot dead center field so I 'd like to see things I guess tighten up. Show us a plan that makes some real good logical sense. Show us a ballfield that can be used ' by all the potential users out there. I 've got a kid in 6th grade and he can hit the ball 185 feet so if you get older kids, it' s going to travel farther than that. Mary McCawley: It' s 230 foot . Hasek: 230 is probably reasonable but you've also got it backed up against ' the property line here about 10 feet on the south side here, and it' s about 182 feet to this one line so some things need to be cleaned up. ' Mary McCawley: Is it the developer ' s responsibility to design the park? Hasek: No , but you' re showing us something and if you want us to believe it, I would say that it's probably your responsibility to make us believe it and I just don' t believe it right now so that' s my opinion. I don' t believe this one either . This number right here I don' t believe and what I 'm telling you is that I think this was drawn this way because it' s ' something that worked on the plan. Not necessarily that it would work in reality. ' Mary McCawley: . . . Hasek: Who did that plan? Mary McCawley: Mark. Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 22 I ' Hasek: He ' s not the developer so. I do this for a living and I personally wouldn' t bring a plan in this sketchy form and expect somebody to believe it. I 'd go in and put the grades in. I 'd put the planting plan on it. I'd do everything just ' to make sure that it got passed. I 'd take the responsibility upon ourself as the designer to make sure the plan is ready to go. What the heck? For a few extra dollars , it just takes a little time and effort to try and convince us , the commission, that is really what you want to do with this. Mary McCawley: Are you giving an outline of equipment you do want to see? Is that the types that you want to see? Hasek: I think that' s probably 'w to you to work with staff to figure out if we have some specific for sizes that we'd typically like to see and that ' s up to you to work out with them. It' s not our job I don' t think to tell you what sizes . . . I 'm just reacting to 185 foot on the ballfield. That ' s a pretty big lot for very young kids. If you get a high school kid out there on that softball field, he' s going to hit it 250-280-300 feet that ' s worth his weight in gold and I don' t know that that ' s necessarily what we design all of our parks but it's something you can anticipate that' s going to happen so the point that I 'm making is that, the totlot at the end doesn' t make any sense. . .rearrange things. That's what I 'm saying. Sietsema: 200 foot baseline is typical in a neighborhood park. ' Dean Johnson: We did get that from staff. . .because we did work with staff. I guess you know, the thought that I have at this point is , you know we didn' t expect to design this for you. In our talkings with everybody at the city here , not only Lori but others, we didn' t expect to. We were expecting to show you that things could go on here and that' s why this is as it is . If we had known that we were supposed to bring in more design, ' we would have. I guess though we' re going in front of Planning Commission and the public here. If the ravine can be filled and if we can work with that. . .is it something that'$ feasible. Is that something that' s . . . We need a little, I mean, I appreciate your comments back. That we need a little bit more direction than what we' ve got here just by virtue of the process . Sietsema : In all fairness to Dean, I think that if this is something that there' s no way in God's green earth that this commission is ever going to put their stamp of approval on and you know that now, it'd be nice for him ' to know that now going into it. Or if he can revise it and do some work on it and bring back a better plan and there' s a chance that you' re going to approve it, then he needs to know that. Boyt: The only thing I need to know is, I love that ravine and I 'd like to see it used as parkland, is he can fill part of the ravine. I 'd like to see it, rather than a totlot when the development happens, have the playground equipment going down the hill . There's a lot of near things that can be done out there and I would. . . if we can find out from staff . Dean Johnson: Again, getting back to, you know I mean we' re donating the land and you guys are going to be putting the equipment on it. We don' t Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 23 I mind help designing you know but you' ve got to give us direction which way. I would have never thought of putting park on the slope because I would have never thought that you guys would have watned that . Boyt: I think we just work with Dean on the grading. Isn' t that it? Isn' t that what it comes down to? Sietsema: Right. Dean Johnson: So I guess the question is, I've got extra dirt. I mean ' I 've got quite a bit of extra dirt. I can fill the ravine. I can do that. If the ravine can be filled , is this something that you guys see as feasible? I mean I ' ll work with you beyond the fact of putting the dirt in, I' ll work with you trying to get, you know the thing designed to something you know that you guys want. I don' t mind as long as I 've got room for the dirt, where did you want the dirt but is this something you can live with because obviously I 've got to take it from here and go before Planning and tell them that basic concepts you know if something that looks like it' s going to be workable but we do have to iron out the details or design the park or do whatever you want us to do. Boyt : There are some nice parks built on hills like Starry Lake Park and I saw a few in Japan that are beautiful that are built on the hillside and that' s what I have imagined as I ' ve passed through the ravine. What it would be and I 'd love to see it parkland and if you could fill part of the ravine so we have 3. 1 acres , that would satisfy me. ' Dean Johnson: Let' s take it one step farther here too. I 'm going to be putting up this apartment building sometime. It won' t be until after the townhouses are pretty much up and going but I plan on using the ravine as an amenity for the apartment building . What I mean by that is some kind of a walking trail , that type of thing. I would not mind at that point in saying I ' ll give you an easement so that this trail could go from Powers Blvd. say up and through this park. I have no problem with doing something like that either so I wouldn' t mind if you guys want to go with that direction. Hasek: You' re talking about the easement down by the slope? Dean Johnson: Well see the majority of the trees aren't on this site. In fact there are very few trees in this site until you get on the slopes where it says cross country skiing. Once you get into that area and start going into the original park of my ground of 18.9 acres, that' s where you really hit the trees and trees are between the 980 and the 940 contour . That' s why the City planning staff wants us to put the easement in at 980 because then at that point they can protect those trees. Since I 'm not building down into the 980 contour , that' s fine with me. So that' s where the trees are. What I was planning on doing is putting a path in amongst, just above or just below the trees and that would be I think walking through the parkland . ' Lash : I have another question. I don' t know what your , the apartments that are going in, is that included in there too? The total units? 11 Park and R Commission Rec Con►n►z on Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 24 Dean Johnson : Yep. ' Lash : So without the apartment what is it? Dean Johnson: 110. ' Hasek: I 'm sorry, what were those number? 110 and 200 even? Dean Johnson: Yes. There' s 90 apartments. But we need to design for the ' whole site now. Hasek : Did you talk about trails at all? Sietsema: We talked about that at earlier meetings and that recommendation would still hold true with the trail going along Powers Blvd. and a sidewalk along Jenny Lane. Dean Johnson : But that' s already been discussed and accepted so what I 'm talking about is an extra walking path through the trees . Hasek: And that would be a trail separate from the road? Separated from the road surface? Sietsema : Which? Hasek: The trail on Jenny Lane? Sietsema : Yes . Sidewalk. ' Hasek: And that would be installed at the time the road went in? Sietsema: Yes . Hasek: Which is something we' re going to start doing? Sietsema: Right . Dean Johnson : Are you guys having trouble with things not being done? 11 Sietsema: That piece of property that they just acquired and included in this proposal , the comprehensive trail plan does call for a trail connection to go there that would connect Chanhassen Pond Park over to Powers so you could go from Chan Pond Park over to Lake Ann Park so that ' easement. . . Boyt : Isn' t that where there used to be a cow path? ' Sietsema: Yes. In that area somewhere yeah. Boyt : That' s not there anymore? ' Sietsema: That's not there anymore. r Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 25 ' Erhart : So in other words what it boils down to is if we can make this workable, is the commission satisfied with 5 acres for the 200 units? Dean Johnson : I 'd say 5 acres plus the easement. Erhart: What's what it boils down to? Hasek: Staff is telling us 5 acres is a minimum and 7 acres is kind of a maximum based on their estimates so 5 acres , 5. 01 acres is there, it' s ' there. I think the lines can be changed a little bit to accommodate maybe even a little bit more. . . The question in my mind is useable acreage. If we can accommodate facilities that we think will provide for the residents ' of this particular project within that 3. 1 or 2.7 acres of high ground above and include some of the recreational activities on that side slope plus the trail , I don't see any problem with it. I 'm not comfortable with what we see yet is my problem. I need somebody to tell me, yeah I think ' this will work and I guess I 'm looking to staff a little bit more to give us that direction. ' Hoyt : Same here. Do we need Mark to look at the 2. 7? Sietsema: We could have him look at it. ' Hasek: Part of my situation is , we don' t have a really good definitive grading plan with this thing. There certainly is nothing wrong with putting some of the uses on the side of the hill . I think that' s a fantastic idea. I just spent my first weekend out at Chutes and Ladders last weekend . I think it' s a dangerous spot. Kind of built in a. . .but I think it's exciting for the kids and I think it' s going to. . . I think that the potential is there. Sietsema : Really the only problem that I have with this whole thing is including a ballfield on this site. I think that it can be used. If the ' original recommendation was that there should be 4 acres that would accommodate a ballfield and I want to get a reiteration from the Commission that that ' s really what they want. I don' t think that a ballfield' s going ' to work on this site. And I think the only way it' s going to work is if you cut into the more developable, the area that the townhouses are sitting in. The ballfield with the other facilities that you want in there, I don' t think is going to work. I think that if you go into a facility or a park design that' s going to be more of your Chutes and Ladders and more using the slope and some original ideas and that kind of thing, I think you can have a very nice park on this site but I 'm just not really, I 'm not sold on the fact that a ballfield ' s going to work on it. Boyt: I think we wanted a large open space. Sietsema : I think that the large open space is fine for whatever pick-up games but to actually put a backstop with bases and a skinned infield, is just . . . Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 26 ' Boyt : Originally we were just seeing pieces of playgrounds in different areas in the development and we wanted a larger space for kids . Sietsema: Right . But this makes me real uncomfortable to see a ballfield with the totlot there. I 'm(iOComfortable with a totlot that close to a ballfield even if it' s on the sideline. ' Lash: But this area is flat . Sietsema: Right and I think there' s other ways to, I just question whether we need a ballfield within this area or if the grassy open space is going ' to be used for your frisbee, your pick-up games or your baseball , football or whatever kids happen to be doing just in open space to work on but it' s not going to be a place that you can do anything organized on. ' Boyt: There' s some neighborhood parks, they put up just a mesh backstop and that' s it. Nothing else . That' s it. And it just provides kind of a ' feeling of baseball but that's good for pick-up games . Dean Johnson : Usually a little over 2. Not quite as high. Nothing as ' massive as . . . Sietsema: Yeah, the typical . ' Dean Johnson: Can I make one more point that I asked earlier? I wanted to try and get Mark Koegler to work with this site. I called Lori and I don' t know how that, did you ever talk to Don on that? Sietsema: No, I never got to talk to Don until today and I didn' t talk to him about this . Dean Johnson : Okay. I guess what I 'm thinking here is , if the site looks like it has some promise, I would be. I have talked to Mark. He will not work for me because he is under retainer for you guys , which you know I can ' understand I guess. Maybe can we get him to take a look at this too and have this thoughts to this thing? ' Hasek: That was the question I was just going to ask. Dean Johnson : I was willing to have him do a quick sketch of the thing. I guess I wouldn' t like sharing in the cost if we' re getting into some great detailed plans . Hasek: You typically do a conceptual plan too but it' s my understanding that when Mark does a conceptual plan, he has a real good feeling of whether the grading ' s going to work when he puts that together . Now. . .has a grading plan or not, I don' t. . . When I do this type of thing , ' I intuitively know that it' s going to work and I don' t have to do all the grading to accommodate it but I don't know what our arrangement is with Mark. ' Dean Johnson: We would have no problem. My engineer , Mary, is a landscape architect. I guess what I 'm saying here is, we can work with Mark to make 11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 27 sure that the grading plan works like he' s proposing or it doesn' t work, that he can rearrange that type of thing . I have no problem. . .assistance for doing this . ' Hasek: Do we have some kind of consensus here? Do we have to make a motion? Boyt : I don' t know. Do you have anymore questions? Erhart: Well I 'd be interetsed to see if it can work. Then the way I look ' at it, if you accommodated us , what we asked for before. Lash: I 'm not comfortable with it. I don't know exactly why. I can' t quite put my finger on it but I 'm not . Boyt: It doesn' t feel right . ' Hoffman: Another thing to consider as we talk about the possibility of a potential sliding hill . That is a facility that is often requested and we do not have at this time to provide and if this would indeed become that ' community sliding hill . Sietsema: We have one across the street from Chan Pond . Boyt: . . .across the street as soon as they take down the erosion control barriers . ' Hoffman : But are they going to park on street for that? Sietsema: No, they' re putting in parking. Parking' s included in the plan for Chan Pond . ' Erhart: I couldn' t take a vote on this now. ' Boyt: They need more information. Robinson: I know I 'd feel more comfortable if Mark looked at it. . . ' Sietsema: I don' t think that Mark will have a problem with it if you tell him what you want to see in it. This is the piece of property. It ' s 5.04 acres and you want to include what facilities and he' ll come back with ' something the best and he' ll make a recommendation if something won' t work. You know just can' t but he needs some guidelines set up before he can go to work at it. He needs to know what we want. Hasek: I guess I personally think that the guidelines are going to be based upon the fact that this is really supposed to be providing for a ' multi-family use. That' s got to be targeted for a market of some sort. Some age group and the facilities that should go in there should be most appropriate for that age group. That range or whatever the breakdown of that might be. I have to believe that there' s going to be elderly people ' living in there so there should be some very passive uses of some sort. Perhaps picnic areas or I don' t know what else it could be. I think an 11 Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 28 open field space is appropriate . I think a large totlot is appropriate . Tennis never seems to want to die so I can see where that would be and. . . for appropriate parking spaces . I think that perhaps a little different ' design of the parking areas is necessary. Can you just show me. . .parking . Sietsema : And half court basketball . ' Dean Johnson: That was in the original request when we were looking at it. Can I make one other point that maybe should be thought of. This isn' t my ground . I don' t even know who owns it but there is that little triangle ' that it comes up and it hits Kerber Blvd. . The townhouse, rental townhouses that line that same behind the diamond there, that goes straight out to Kerber Blvd. so that leaves a triangular piece there. That maybe should be looked at to see who actually owns that because it' s really undevelopable for any building. It's too small to do anything with. There' s no type of building that can be done and I guess the reason I bring it up is that we. . .parking spot there. ' Boyt : Do we need to direct staff to contact Mark? Sietsema: Yes . Boyt : With our ideas now? Sietsema: Yes . Boyt : So Ed ' s given you quite a few. Hasek: Do we want to give him a . . .of some sort so he' s got some level of comfortability or is that something we don' t do? ' Sietsema: Dean you mean? Hasek: Yeah. 1 Boyt : If this motion passes to go to Mark. . . Sietsema: That should be an indication that you' re looking at accepting this based on what Mark finds the useability of the piece of property. Robinson: I also like you idea of taking that official looking ballfield out of there and make it an open area or just a backstop or a green area or something. ' Hasek: I think that will discourage that type of a use for sure. Mary McCawley: Are there facilities on the school grounds for organized baseball? Boyt: Yes. Mary McCawley: So is there a real need for . . . I Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 29 Sietsema: That's saturated. Boyt: There still is a need . Dean Johnson : There' s a need . You just need a bigger area . Hasek: This is just not an appropriate spot for it. Sietsema: See my point is that I don' t think that the balifield works with the topography on this site. Anywhere on this site. No matter where you ' put it really. Robinson : It takes up a lot of space that may or may not be used . ' Lash: I 'm having a flashback here in my mind to previous meetings and there was something in there about monetary amount for totlot equipment. Is that still a part of this? What happened to that? ' Sietsema: No . Because now you're asking for land and before we were asking for recreational facilities on their property and a dedication of park dedication fees . Now we' re talking about land and no fees . Lash: This is not a PUD? ' Sietsema: No . Boyt : Are you ready for a motion? Erhart: Have we bought Banidmere' s property yet? Sietsema: No. Not yet. ' Erhart : That' s going to have a little bit to do with ballfields. ' Sietsema: Well the type of use that Bandimere is going to get and that would be a community park and this would be considered a neighborhood park so you don' t plan for the same types of intensive uses in a neighborhood ' park. Hasek: I think we' ve had the overflow of some of those planned activities into the neighborhood parks just simply because of we were. . . Boyt : But Dawne was talking about, originally we asked for a balifield because we needed more ballfields. ' Erhart: . . . I was just wondering what the status was on the Bandimere' s property. Sietsema: Well the status of it is that there' s some problems with, there were some things that the attorney had problems with the title and clearing the title and he was not comfortable with this closing on the property ' until those things were cleared up so he's presently working on that and we should be closing as soon as that takes place. As soon as he gets those Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 30 I ' things cleaned up. Boyt : Does anybody want to make a motion? Ed? Hasek: If nobody else wants to. I guess what I would like to do is to send this particular piece of property into our consultant, Mark Koegler and have him give us his expertise and input into what kinds of programs ' perhaps would be appropriate for a development of this nature and if they can in fact be accommodated on the piece of property that' s proposed. Does that make sense? ' (There was a tape change at this point in the meeting .) ' Hasek moved, Boyt seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission direct staff to prepare a conceptual plan for the proposed park plan with facilities including open play field, large totlot, tennis , basketball ' court, parking and area for senior citizens or to render a recommendation if such cannot be accommodated . All voted in favor and the motion carried . ' Dean Johnson: . . .the reason is I 've got to make a decision now whether we should hold off for another meeting with Planning before continuing on. Sietsema: The way I would interpret this is that if it can be comfortably be, if the facilities they want to see on the site can be comfortably accommodated on that 5 acre site, they' re going to be okay with it. ' Dean Johnson: I guess my thing is, do I bring it . The decision I make is do I bring it to Planning like that or do I just bring it 2 more weeks . . . Mary McCawley: When do you meet? Every 2 weeks? Sietsema: We' ll meet on the 24th. If Mark can work on it within that time ' frame and get it back to us by the 24th, it will be on the next agenda . As far as whether you should go to Planning, I really can' t tell you that. Maybe you talk to Jo Ann . you ' Dean Johnson: I ' ll see what she says about that too. Maybe if you can talk to her too you can put your heads together . ' Sietsema: I will and I ' ll clear up some of the questions that we had about the wetlands and the ravine. DISCUSSION OF PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION MISSION STATEMENT. Hasek: My comment is, I asked around about mission statements and the ' feedback that I got was there isn' t a mission statement. There' s a primary goal for various parts of the comprehensive plan and that serves along with the zoning ordinance and our obligations as kind of direction. I wasn ' t ' discouraged from putting together a mission statement but I was encouraged at the same time to keep it to one paragraph . If you can' t say it in a Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 31 I ' paragraph, then you might as well let the comprehensive plan stand still . There was some comment in here about a page or less and I think if we can' t keep it to a paragraph or less . ' Lash : Mine is short . The page that they had, was just a couple of sentences and then they had . . . It wasn' t like it was a whole page of typed . Boyt : Mine is to provide quality facilities and recreational programs for all ages that will encourage a wholesome and fun leisure time experience. Lash : I had underlined under the Brooklyn Park. . . Boyt: I have problems with some of our activities that aren't wholesome. Robinson : Yeah, South St. Paul also has wholesome and maybe that means we don' t need to provide a beer drinking facility for the ball players. I ' mean that' s not a wholesome thing . Boyt : After being involved in youth sports where I guess it' s the parents that aren' t acting very wholesome, it' s something that I would like to ' encourage. It is a strange word . It sounds like bread . Hasek: The thing I liked about both of them is they talked about providing facilities for all of their residents as opposed to some of their residents. ' Hoffman: Baseball players . Hasek: Softball players . . .and I liked that. Sietsema: I think there are some age groups that get left out. Hoffman: And activities. Archery. ' Lash : I 've got the basic goal of the Chanhassen Park and Recreation Commission is to provide a high quality and large variety of recreational facilities taking into concerns the needs, wants and concerns of all our ' citizens now and in the future. Our aim is to provide the services in a safe and financially responsible manner while keeping an . . .of preservation and protection of our natural amenities. That' s a little bit longer but I ' wrote small . Robinson: The purpose of this , the mission statement; is really to keep us focused is that right? Sietsema: Right. Hoffman : And to provide something for the people to read out there that we' re serving . Lash : Kind of a purist . I II Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 32 Robinson: I guess I 'd like something like Sue' s which is comparable to the South St. Paul . I thought that was. . . I thought Brooklyn Park' s was much too long . ' Hoffman : They won a lot of awards with that one however . Boyt: It sounds fine. Lash : It is short but it doesn' t really sound like it covers everything that, you know if you look at our notes, the brainstorming we did. When I ' looked through that, you could just go through and pick out which ones were Larry' s and which ones were Dawne's and which ones were mine so I tried to include something that I knew was an important thing to each person. That they had contributed . I guess that' s why I had the preservation and protection and the future. That was Jim' s. Hasek: I think that the. . .primary goals is in here. I tell you I went through this goals and policies again. That ' s a job in itself. Boyt: Maybe we could, I don't think we have to have this finished. Maybe we could have yours printed , and mine printed and we can try and send it home with each of us next time and see what we can do with it. Lash : Curt, you said you had one too didn' t you? Robinson: No, I just said cross out South St. Paul and put Chanhassen in there. Hoffman: No reason to reinvent the wheel right Curt? Boyt: Do you want to print up Jan's and mine? Hasek: The one thing that I did was to take just the goal statement out of the recreational part of the comprehensive plan and just rewrite it and 1 just use it. The City of Chanhassen will provide recreational opportunities which will reasonably meet the recreational needs of the community' s present and future residents . Boyt: Do you want to print up all of those? Just put them in the Minutes so we can look at them and try and work on it one more time. Sietsema: It' s in there. Boyt : Do we need to do anything more then? Sietsema: No. Hasek: I did happen to notice though that the first , it' s something I 've asked Lori to look at and I assume she' s still working on it. Sietsema : Accessibility. ' Hasek: The first policy, provide parks and open space facilities and I II Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 33 ' emphasize accessibility and use by Chanhassen residents . Sietsema: You know I was looking at that again because I got all this ' handicap information and then I got to thinking , is it handicap accessibility that you' re talking about or just accessibility to the parks? Hasek: Good question. What does this mean to you? It means something entirely different to me. This means not only the handicap. Sietsema: Do you want me to put that on the agenda so we can hash it out? ' I don't know what kind of background information to get. Hasek: Maybe we should . Sietsema: Then I can get direction from the Commission. Hasek: It might be interesting to even throw it at Council to see what ' they think about it . Erhart : Also make a copy of the original one we wrote. Sietsema: Wasn' t that in there? Erhart : Yes it is but when you put them all together . . .because this is still my favorite. Because I wrote it. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS : Hasek : I mentioned something to Lori that really I think I brought up ' before but I 'd really like to start seeing it. When we see these projects , can we please get a topography. A copy of the aerial photograph to look at and maybe what we should start doing as part of the zoning ordinance is to ask the application to provide a reduction of all of their graphics so we ' get the full development with the topography on it. The full development. The development shown on it. The full development so we know what' s around what the zoning is . . . This is one of the few cities that we work in that ' doesn ' t ask for that. Almost every city that we go to, they want an 8 1/2 x 11 reduction of every graphic that we turn in so they can make copies and have in the packet for everybody that they give it to . Not everybody likes to look at those huge drawings . Sietsema: I believe that is a requirement. We just don' t always get them. So it just needs to be enforced more. Demanded more strongly. ' Hasek: I see. The other thing is, pretty soon we' re going to have topography for most of the city correct? Sietsema: Yes. Hasek: It would be nice to be able to get , if it' s not available, at least see what the section topography looks like and that's another tool that' s really going to be helpful I think when we start looking at parkland . I r Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 34 don' t know what , I have to assume it' s the north part of town that they' re doing first because that' s where development is tending to occur . Sietsema : They should have some of it in already. Hasek: The end of October is what I was told. Sietsema: Yeah, I 'm waiting for them to get Bandimere done. Hasek: I think the aerials and topos will be an invaluable tool to us. ' Sietsema: We have better aertial photos now. We have new ones that are better now too. Boyt : I have one thing I forgot I wanted to bring up. We need to have some of inspection of our conservation easements in town on maybe a yearly basis but they' re being abused right now. Lash: Did I hear you didn' t get your packet last night? Ed , and you didn' t get one, a packet a couple times before that and Dawne didn' t get one one time. I 'm trying to figure out if there' s a problem in the distribution system for those things or what. Hasek: Part of the reason why I didn' t get mine is because it was put in my front door and I don't use my front door . It was delivered by a policeman . Sietsema: And you don' t get your mail as fast either . Hasek: That' s because I live in Victoria. On the other side of Minnewashta . Sietsema: He gets them in Todd delivers them. And on Dawne' s, it was the CSO didn' t deliver it on time. I got a note on my desk. That was the time ' that I was going to have them all delivered so you'd get them early and the CSO left me a note and said, with them, and said I forgot to deliver these. ' Lash : That kind of puts us in a bind you know. Even getting it, for me, on Saturday. I mean if you go out of town for the weekend, you get back late Sunday night and here you've got 100 pages of stuff to read because Monday night and that's it to read. I guess I kind of expected last week since it had been a month since our other meeting, that we would get them by Thursday or something and then it still didn' t come until Saturday. ' Sietsema: Well my packet has to go out after the City Council packet so I can' t run anything on Thursday because City Council 's going out so that means all my stuff gets run and put together on Friday and it goes out in the mail on Friday. Boyt : Maybe we could stop and pick it up on Friday. Sietsema: Yeah. They are here. Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 35 ' Erhart: Are they available on Friday? Sietsema: Yes. Usually by 3: 00. ' Hasek: The problem with that. . . Boyt: For those that it' s convenient for . Like if Jan ' s going to drive by ' on her way home, maybe it'd be easier . If Bill ' s up here, he can pick mine up. Hasek: Does Planning Commission have the same problem do you think? ' Sietsema: Planning gets their delivered by CSO. ' Hasek: The same deal so there' s is right at the last minute too . Erhart: No it isn' t. ' Sietsema: No, they get theirs on Friday because the CSO delivers them on Friday but ours go out in the mail . What I could do is ask that the CSO' s deliver ours on a regular basis . Boyt : I 'd rather see, rather than CSO, I 'd rather you hire someone like a newspaper carrier . Just some person that you pay $4. 00 an hour to deliver these rather than taking up the CSO' s time. They just do it a couple times a week. Hasek: Is that possible? Lash: Except if they' re driving around anyway. ' Sietsema: Well they have other things to do. Boyt: Lots of other things to do. ' Hoffman : I don' t know that you can secure somebody dependable for $4 . 00 an hour to do this twice a week. Boyt: I don ' t know how much you pay them but I think you can pay less than you pay a CSO to drive around. Hasek: Could they all go out the same time Planning Commission' s go out? Sietsema: No, because they' re on the off week and I can't run stuff before City Council because their packets are four times thicker than yours and they have priority on the copying machine. Now when we get another copying machine, I may be able to get it out on Thursday. But they are available. I usually have your packets done by 2:00 on Friday afternoon so if you want to pick them up. Erhart : That in itself Lori is a big help because if you do go out of town for the weekend, I 'd like to know that I can drive up here and pick it up. IIPark and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 36 ' Sietsema: If you' re going to, let me know in the morning and I can make sure that I have it done but there' s very few times that I don' t have that done by 2: 00 or 3 : 00 in the afternoon on Friday. ' Robinson: So let's leave it at that. That we continue the way it is except if you want to pick it up, you call Lori and tell her you' re going to stop and pick it up. Otherwise she mails them all. The burden should ' be on us , not her to wonder who ' s going to stop and who' s not. Sietsema: Yeah, the mail goes out at quarter after 4: 00. It gets taken ' over to the Post Office. Lash : It' s goes at quarter after 4 :00 and we get them on Saturday? Sietsema: Yes. Except Ed. Lash : What time do you guys close here? Sietsema: 4: 30. Hasek: I supposed mine has to go through another post office. Sietsema: If you haven't picked it up by quarter after 4:00, I ' ll stick it in the mail . ' Lash : Because otherwise we won' t be here in time to get it anyway. ' Sietsema: Right . Unless you call me and tell you' re going to be later than that. Lash : But we only have an extra 15 minutes . Sietsema: In the case of Sue's, it was a wild, wild Friday because the City Council didn' t get out on Thursday so we were both running packets at ' the same time and I had at least 1 zillion mailings between the Council packet and the Park and Rec because that was the night that the packet that Curry Farms was on so they all had to be notified. ' Boyt: I had no idea you guys were meeting . I hadn' t been to the meetin before that so I had no idea. Sietsema : Well it was the second or fourth Tuesday. Boyt: I know but I spaced out Lori . ' Hasek: That' s what happened to me with the one. My packet was there and we had started not meeting regular and I thought well maybe if there' s not a packet there' s not a meeting . Boyt: Okay, do you need anyone for this? ' Sietsema: Yes . Everyone. Park and Rec Commission Meeting October 10, 1989 - Page 37 1 Boyt: In costume? Hoffman: Yes . Big set-up this year . ' Sietsema: We need to know if you' re going to be a mean, dangerous spooky costume or a nice, good nature costume. Boyt : When should we tell you? ' Hoffman: Tonight' s the night. When's our next meeting . Boyt : Well they can call you. They all have phones. ' Hoffman: Okay. Lash : I ' ll donate a costume but I can ' t be here. I have a scarey costume ' so if somebody wants to be a scarey, and they don' t have a costume. Sietsema : Ed , will you be there? Hasek: I want you to know that the last month I 've had least 2 night meetings a week. Usually they fall on Tuesday and Wednesday. Lash: This is my third one . Robinson moved , Lash seconded to adjourn the meeting . All voted in favor g and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 9: 58 p.m. Submitted by Lori Sietsema Park and Rec Coordinator Prepared by Nann Opheim I